.-.■*•■'«'  ii. 
 
 pLlwy.  «r  HUiM-iMw 
 
7  /^ .  ^ 
 
 Srom  t^e  £t6rarg  of 
 
 Q^equeaf^e^  6g  ^im  to 
 t^e  feifirarg  of 
 
 (Princeton  tkoM^f  ^eminarg 
 
 /87C 
 
* 
 
 •,'^--:- 
 
 i' 
 .# 
 
A   Cyclopcedia  of  Biblical  Literature 
 
 VOLUME  11. 
 
^ 
 
A 
 
 CYCLOPEDIA 
 
 OF 
 
 BIBLICAL    LITERATURE 
 
 BY   JOHN    KITTO,    D.D.,    F.S.A. 
 
 THIRD    EDITION 
 EDITED    BY 
 
 WILLIAM  LINDSAY  ALEXANDER,   D.D,  F.S.A.S.,  Etc. 
 
 ASSISTED  BY  NUMEROUS  CONTRIBUTORS 
 
 IN  THREE    VOLUMES 
 WITH  BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTICES  AND  GENERAL  INDEX 
 
 VOLUME    11. 
 
 EDINBURGH  :   ADAM  AND  CHARLES  BLACK 
 
 MDCCCLXXVI 
 
Printed  by  R.  &  R.  Clark,  Edinburgh. 
 
LIST    OF    CONTRIBUTORS    TO    VOL.    IL 
 
 INITIALS.  NAMES. 
 
 W.  L.  A.  OR  t....  Alexander,  William  Lindsay,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Theology  to  the  Congrega- 
 tional Churches  of  Scotland,  and  Member  of  the  Edinburgh  University  Court, 
 Editor. 
 
 J.  R.  a.  Beard,  J.  R.,  D.D.,  Member  of  the  Historico-Theological  Society  of  Leipzig. 
 
 C.  H.  F.  B BiALLOBLOTZKY,  CHRISTOPHER  Heinrich  Friedrich,  Ph.D.,  Gottingen. 
 
 J.  B Brown,  John,  D.D.,  late  Professor  of  Exegetical  Theology  to  the  United  Presby- 
 terian Church  of  Scotland. 
 
 H.  B Browne,  Henry,  M.A.,  Vicar  of  Pevensey. 
 
 J.  G.  C Cowan,  J.  Galloway,  M.A.,  IncurabeHt  of  St.  John's,  Hammersmith. 
 
 W.  J.  C Cox,  William  J.,  Leith. 
 
 K.  A,  C Credner,  Karl  August,  D.D.,  late  Professor  of  Theology  at  Giessen. 
 
 S.  D Davidson,  Samuel,  D.D.,  LL.D. 
 
 J.  F.  D Denham,  Joshua  Fred.,  M.A.,  F.R.S. 
 
 E.  D Deutsch,  Emanuel,  of  the  University  of  Berhn,  M.  Ger.  Or.  Soc,  etc.,  British 
 
 Museum. 
 
 J.  D Donaldson,  James,  M.A.,  one  of  the  Masters  of  the  Edinburgh  High  School. 
 
 J.  E Eadie,  John,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Biblical  Literature  to  the  United  Presby- 
 
 ^terian  Church  of  Scotland. 
 
 F.  W.  F. Farrar,  Frederic  W.,  M.A.,  LL.D.,  F.R.S.,  Canon  of  Westminster,  Author 
 
 of  "  The  Life  of  Christ,"  etc. 
 
 C.  D.  G GiNSBURG,  Christian  D.,  LL.D. 
 
 W.  IL  G GooLD,  William  Henry,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Theology  to  the  Reformed  Presby. 
 
 terian  Church. 
 F.  W.  G Gotch,   F.    W.,   D.D.,   President  of  the  Baptist  College,   Bristol;  Examiner  in 
 
 Hebrew  to  the  London  University. 
 A.  T.  G. Go  wan,  Anthony  T.,  D.D,,  Professor  of  Theology  to  the  Congregational  Churches 
 
 of  Scotland. 
 
 H.  C.  G Groves,  Henry  Charles,  M.A.,  of  Trinity  College,  Dubhn. 
 
 R.  H Halley,  Robert,  D.D.,  Principal  of  New  College,  London. 
 
 H.  A.  C.  H Havernick,  Heinrich  August  Christ.,  late  Professor  of  Theology  at  Kbnigs- 
 
 berg. 
 
 M,  H Hawtrey,  Montague  J.  G.,  M.A.,  Prebendary  of  WeUs,  Rector  of  Rimpron,  etc. 
 
yn 
 
 LIST  OF  CONTRIBUTORS. 
 
 INITIALS.  NAMES 
 
 E.  W.  H Hengstenberg,  Ernst  Wilh.,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University  of 
 
 Berhn. 
 
 P.  H. 
 
 J.  V.  H 
 R.J.  .. 
 
 I-  J 
 
 J.  K.  .. 
 S.  L.  . . 
 F.  W.  M 
 F.  W.N 
 
 S.  N. . 
 J.  N.  . 
 W.  A.  N. 
 R.  S.  P. 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 J.  E.  R. 
 W.  S.  ... 
 C.  H.  S. 
 A.  T.  ... 
 J.  P.  T. 
 E.  V.  ... 
 L.  W.  ... 
 
 W.  W. 
 
 ....Holmes,  Peter,  D.D.,  F.R.A.S.,  of  Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford;  Domestic  Chaplain 
 to  the  Right  Hon.  the  Countess  of  Rothes  ;  late  Head-Master  of  the  Grammar 
 School,  Plymouth. 
 
 ....Horn,  Johann  von,  D.D. 
 
 ....Jamieson,  Robert,  D.D.,  Minister  of  St.  Paul's,  Glasgow. 
 
 ....Jennings,  Isaac,  Kelvedon. 
 
 ....KiTTO,  John,  D.D.,  F.A.S.     Original  Editor. 
 
 ....Leathes,  Stanley,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Hebrew,  King's  College,  London. 
 
 ....Madden,  Frederic  W.,  M.R.S.L.,  British  Museum. 
 
 ....Newman,  Francis  W.,  late  Fellow  of  Baliol  College,  Oxford  ;  Professor  of  Latin 
 in  the  University  of  London. 
 
 ....Newth,  Samuel,  M.  A.,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  New  College,  London. 
 
 ...Nicholson,  John,  B.A.,  Oxford;  Ph.D.  Tubingen. 
 
 ....Nicholson,  W.  A.,  M.D. 
 
 ....Poole,  Reg.  Stuart,  British  Museum. 
 
 ....Porter,  J.  Leslie,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Sacred  Literature,  Assembly's  College, 
 Belfast. 
 
 ....ROYLE,  J.   F.,   M.D.,   F.R.S.,   F.L.S.,   F.G.S.,   Member  of  the  Royal  Asiatic 
 
 Societies  of  Calcutta  and  London,  etc. 
 
 ....Ryland,  J.  E.,  M.A.,  Northampton. 
 
 ....Skae,  William,  M.A.,  Edinburgh. 
 
 ....Smith,  C.  Hamilton,  Lieut. -Colonel,  K.H.  and  K.W.,  F.R.S.,  F.R.L.S.,  etc. 
 
 ....Tholuck,  August,  D.D.,  Professor  ol  Theology  in  the  University  of  Halle. 
 
 ....Thompson,  Joseph  P.,  D.D.,  New  York. 
 
 ....Venables,  Edmund,  M.A.,  Bonchurch. 
 
 .  ..Woods,  Leonard,  D.D.,  late  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  Andover  Theological 
 Seminary,  U.  S. 
 
 .   .Wright,  William,  M.A.  and  LL.D.  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
 
CONTENTS, 
 
 General  subjects  in  ordinary  Roman  type.     Biographical  Notices  in  Italics. 
 a  Signifies yfrj-^  or  left-liand  column  ;  b,  second  ox  right. 
 
 Faber,    George   Stanley^ 
 
 B.D.  I  a 
 Faber,    Johann   Ernst, 
 
 I  a 
 Faber,  Johann  Melchior, 
 
 I  a 
 Fable,  I  b 
 Fabriciiis,  John  Albert, 
 
 I  b 
 Fabricy,  Gabriel,  2  a 
 Face,  2  a 
 Fair  Havens,  2  b 
 Fairs,  3  a 
 Fall,  the,  3  b 
 Fallow  deer,  3  b 
 Famine,  3  b 
 Fa  rissol  or  Farizol,  A  bra  - 
 ham  b.  Mordecai,  4  b 
 Far77ier,  Hicgh,  4  b 
 Farthing,  5  a 
 Fasts,  5  b ;  annual  na- 
 tional, 6  b ;  periodi- 
 cal and  individual,  6  b 
 Fat,  7  b 
 Father,  8  a 
 Feasts,  9  a 
 Feasts,  religious,  9  a 
 Felix,  9  a 
 /(?//,  ^(?/z«,  10  a 
 Fell,  John,  li  a 
 Ferguson,  James,  1 1  a 
 Ferme,  Charles,  lib 
 Ferret,  11  b 
 Festivals,    11    b ;    pre- 
 exile  or  Mosaic,  1 1  b  j 
 post-exile,  13  a 
 Festus,  13  b 
 Fetters,  14  a 
 Fever,  14  a 
 Figs,  fig-tree,  14  b 
 Figures,  14  b 
 Findlay,  Robert,  D.D  , 
 
 14  b 
 Fir,  14  b 
 Fire,  14  b 
 Firepans,  14  b 
 Firmament,  16  a 
 First-bom,  16  b 
 First-bom,  redemption 
 of  the,  l^\ 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 First-fruits,  18  a 
 
 Fischer,  Johann  Fried., 
 19  b 
 
 Fish,  fishes,  fishing,  20  a 
 
 Fitches,  25  b 
 
 Flach  or  Flaciiis,  Illy- 
 ricus,  25  b 
 
 Flag,  26  a 
 
 Flagons,  26  a 
 
 Flatt,  Johann  Fried., 
 26  a 
 
 Flax,  26  b 
 
 Flea,  26  b 
 
 Flesh,  26  b 
 
 Fleiiry,  Claude,  26  b 
 
 Flint,  27  a 
 
 Flocks,  27  a 
 
 Flood,  27  a 
 
 Flour,  27  a 
 
 Flowers,  27  a 
 
 Flute,  27  a 
 
 Flux,  bloody,  27  a 
 
 Fly,  27  a 
 
 Fold,  27  a 
 
 Food,  27  a 
 
 Fool,  30  a 
 
 Foot,  30  b 
 
 Footmen,  31a 
 
 Forces,  Patrick,  of  Corse, 
 31  a 
 
 Ford,  31b 
 
 Forehead,  31b 
 
 Foreskin,  32  b 
 
 Forest,  32  b 
 
 Fornication,  33  a 
 
 Forskal,  Peter,  33  b 
 
 Forster,  Johann,  33  b 
 
 Forster,  Johanft,  2,2,   b 
 
 Fortifications,  34  a 
 
 Fortunatus,  36  a 
 
 Fountain,  36  a 
 
 Fowl,  36  b 
 
 Fowling,  36  b 
 
 Fox,  37  b 
 
 Francke,  Augustus  Her- 
 mann, 37  b 
 
 Frankfurter,  Moses  b. 
 Simeon,  37  b 
 
 Frankincense,  38  b 
 
 Franz,  Wolfgang,  38  b 
 
 Fraser,  James,  38  b 
 French  versions,  38  b 
 Friedldnder,  David,  41a 
 Fringes  or  fringed  gar- 
 ments, 41  a 
 Frog,  42  b 
 Frontlets,  42  b 
 Fraits,  42  b 
 Fulke,  William,  43  a 
 Fuller,  43  b 
 Fuller,  Andrew,  44  a 
 Fuller,  Nicholas,  44  b 
 Fuller,    Thomas,  D.D., 
 
 Fuller's  field,  45  a 
 Fuller's  fountain,  45  b 
 Fuller's  soap,  45  b 
 Funerals,  45  b 
 Fumace,  45  b 
 
 Gaal,  46  a 
 
 Gaash,  46  b 
 
 Gaba,  46  b 
 
 Gabbatha,  46  b 
 
 Gabish,  47  a 
 
 Gabrias,  47  b 
 
 Gabriel,  47  b 
 
 Gabriel  Sionita,  48  a 
 
 Gad,  48  b 
 
 Gad,  49  b 
 
 Gad,  50  a 
 
 Gadara,  50  b 
 
 Galante,  Abraham  b. 
 Mordecai,  52  a 
 
 Galante,  Moses  b.  Mor- 
 decai, 52  a 
 
 Galatia,  52  b 
 
 Galatians,  Epistle  to  the, 
 53  b 
 
 Galbanum,  55  b 
 
 Galgala,  55  b 
 
 Gallicho,  Elisha  b. 
 Gabriel,  55  b 
 
 Galilee,  56  a 
 
 Galilee,  Sea  of,  58  b 
 
 Gall,  59  b 
 
 Gallery,  60  a 
 
 GaUim,  60  a 
 
 Gallio,  66  b 
 
 Gamal,  60  b 
 
 Gamaliel,  60  b 
 Gavialiel  I.,  60  a 
 Gamaliel  II.,  b.  Simon 
 
 11,  62  a 
 Games,  63  a 
 Gammadim,  67  b 
 Ganach,  67  b 
 Garden,  67  b 
 Gareb,  70  a 
 Garizim,  70  a 
 Garlic,  70  a 
 Garment,  70  a 
 Garnett,    John,    D.D., 
 
 70  a 
 Garrison,  70  a 
 Gataker,  Thomas,  B.D. 
 
 70  a 
 Gatam,  70  b 
 Gate,  door,  70  b 
 Gates  of  towns,  71a 
 Gath,  75  a 
 Gath-Hepher,  76  a 
 Gath-Rimmon,  76  b 
 Gaulonitis,  76  b 
 Gaza  or  Azza,  76  b 
 Gazam,  78  a 
 Gazara,  78  a 
 Gazelle,  79  a 
 Gazer,  79  a 
 Gazez,  79  a 
 Geba,  79  a 
 Gebal,  79  b 
 Gebal  and  Giblites,  79  b 
 Geber,  80  a 
 Gebim,  80  b 
 Gebirol,  80  b 
 Gedalia,  fast  of,  80  b 
 Gedaliah  or  Gedaliahu, 
 
 80  b 
 ■  Geddes,  Alexander,  81  a 
 Gedeon,  81  b 
 Geder,  81  b 
 Gederah,  81  b 
 Gederoth,  81  b 
 Gederoth,  81  b 
 Gederothaim,  81  b 
 Gedi,  82  a 
 Gedor,  82  a 
 Gehazi,  82  a 
 Gehenna,  82  b 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Gder,  Martin,  82  b 
 Geliloth,  82  b 
 Gemara,  83  a 
 Gemariah,  83  a 
 Gems,  83  a 
 Genealogy,    83     a  •,     of 
 
 Jesus  Christ,  92  a 
 Generation,  10 1  a 
 Genesis,    the    Book  of, 
 
 102  a 
 Geneva  Bible,  105  a 
 Gennesareth,    Lake    of, 
 
 105  a 
 Gennesareth,   the  Land 
 
 of,  105  a 
 Gentiles,  105  b 
 Genubath,  106  b 
 Geography,  106  b 
 Geon,  109  b 
 Georgi,    Christian   Sieg- 
 
 nmnd,   109  b 
 Georgian  language,  1 10  a 
 Georgian   version,    the, 
 
 no  a 
 Gephen,  1 1 1  a 
 Gera,  1 1 1  a 
 Gerah,  ma 
 Gerar,  ma 
 Gerard,   Gilbert,  D.D., 
 
 m  b 
 Gerasa,  m  b 
 Gergesa,  112  b 
 Gergesenes,  112b 
 Gerhard,  jfohn,  112  b 
 Gerizim,  1 13  a 
 Gerlach,  Otto  von,  114  a 
 German  versions,  114  a 
 Gerrhenians,  1 16  a 
 Gershom,  1 16  a 
 Gershon,  116  b 
 Gerson,    John    Charlier 
 
 de,  1 1 6  b 
 Gersonidcs,  117  a 
 Gerzites,  117a 
 Gcsenius,  Wiihebn,  117a 
 Geshem,  1 1 8  a 
 Geshur,  1 1 8  a 
 Gether,  1 1 8  b 
 Gethsemane,  118  b 
 Gezer  artel  G  azar,  1 1 9  a 
 Gezrites,  119  b 
 Giants,  119  b 
 Gibbethon,  122  a 
 Gibea,  122  a 
 Gibeon,  123  a 
 Giblites,  123  b 
 Giddalti,  123  b 
 Gideon,  123  b 
 Gidom,  125  a 
 Gier-eagle,  125  a 
 Gift,  125  a 
 Gihon,  128  a 
 Gikatilla,  Isaac,  129  a 
 Gikatiha,     b.     Satnuel, 
 
 129  a 
 
 Gilboa,  130  a 
 Gilead,  130  b 
 Gilgal,  132  a 
 I  Gill,  John,  Dr.,  132  b 
 Giloh,  133  a 
 Gimzo,  133  a 
 Gin,  133  a 
 Gir,  133  a 
 Girdle,  133  b 
 Girgashites,   133  b 
 Gittaim,  133  b 
 Gittites,  133  b 
 Gittith,  134  a 
 Glass,  134  a 
 Glassius,  Salomon,  135  a 
 Gleaning,  135  b 
 Glede,  135  b 
 Gloss,  glossary,  135  b 
 Gnat,  137  a 
 Gnostic,        Gnosticism, 
 
 137  a 
 Goad,  140  b 
 Goat,  141  a 
 Goat,  scape,  141  a 
 Goath,  143  b 
 Gob,  144  a 
 Gob,  144  a 
 Goblet,  144  a 
 God,  144  b 
 Godwin,  Thomas,  D.  D. , 
 
 148  b 
 Goel,  149  a 
 Gog,  149  a 
 Golan,  149  a 
 Gold,  149  b 
 Golgotha,  149  b 
 Goliath,  151  a 
 Gomar,  Francis,  151  a 
 Gome,  151  a 
 Gomer,  152  b 
 Gomorrah,  153  a 
 Gonach,  153  a 
 Good,      John      Jllason, 
 
 M.D.,  153  a 
 Goodzuin,  Thomas,D.  D. , 
 
 153  b 
 Gopher  wood,  153  b 
 Gophrith,  153  b 
 Gordon,  James,  153  b 
 Gorgias,  154  a 
 Gortyna,  154  a 
 Goshen,  155  a 
 Gospels,    the,    156    b  ; 
 
 spurious,  160  b 
 Gothic  version,  164  a 
 Gourd,  164  a 
 Governor,  164  a 
 Gozan,  167  a 
 Grade,    John    Earnest, 
 
 \(i'j  b 
 Gramberg,  Karl  P.  IV., 
 
 168  a 
 Grape,  168  a 
 Grass,  168  a 
 Grasshopper,  168  a 
 
 Grave,  168  a 
 
 Graves,  Richard,  D.D., 
 
 168  a 
 Gray,     Robert,     D.D., 
 
 168  a 
 Greaves,  168  b 
 Greece,  168  b 
 
 Greek  language,  biblical, 
 
 169  b 
 
 Greek  versions,  172  a 
 Green,  William,  178  b 
 Greenfield,  William,  178 
 
 b 
 Greenhill,  William, 
 
 M.A.,  179  a 
 Gregory  the  Great,  179  a 
 Gregojy,  John,  179  b 
 Gregory,  John,  179  b 
 Gregory  of  Nyssa,  179  b 
 Greyhound,  180  a 
 Griesbach,   Johann    Ja- 
 kob, 1 80  a 
 Grimtn,    Heinr.    Adolf, 
 
 D.D.,  180  b 
 Grinding,  180  b 
 Grot  ins,  Hugo,  180  b 
 Groves,  181  a 
 Guard,  181  a 
 Guest,  181  a 
 Gulloth,  181  a 
 Guni,  181  b 
 Gur,  181  b 
 Gur-Baal,  181  b 
 Gutbir,  Giles,  181  b 
 Guyse,Joh7i,D.D.,\%\'h 
 Gymnasium,  182  a 
 
 Habakkuk,  182  a 
 Habazzeleth,  183  b 
 Habergeon,  183  b 
 Habor,  183  b 
 Hachilah,    the    hill    of, 
 
 184  b 
 Hachmonite,  186  a 
 Hachspan, Dietrich,  1 86a 
 Hadad,  186  a 
 Hadad,  186  b 
 Hadadezer,  187  a 
 Hadad-Rimmon,  187  a 
 Hadar,  187  b 
 Hadas,  187  b 
 Hadashah,  188  b 
 Hadassah,  188  b 
 Hadattah,  188  b 
 Hades,  189  a 
 Hadid,  189  a 
 Hadoram,  189  b 
 Hadrach,  189  b 
 Hagada,  190  a 
 Hagar,  190  a 
 Ha-Gaon,  191b 
 Hagarite,  the,  191b 
 Hagarites,  192  a 
 Haggai,  194  a 
 Haggeri,  195  a 
 
 Hagi,  195  a 
 Haggith,  195  a 
 Hagiographa,  195  a 
 Hai,  195  b 
 
 Hai  or  Haja,   Gaon  b. 
 Sherira  Gaon,  19S  b 
 Hair,  196  a 
 Hakkoz,  198  a 
 Halacha,  198  a 
 Halah,  198  a 
 Halak,  the  mount,  198  b 
 Haldane,  Robert,  Esq., 
 
 198  b 
 
 Hales,  William,  D.D., 
 
 199  a 
 Halhul,  199  b 
 Hali,  200  a 
 Hallicamassus,  200  a 
 Hall,  200  a 
 Hallel,  200  a 
 Hallelujah,  201  b 
 Hallett,  Joseph,  201  b 
 Hallohesh,  201  b 
 Ham  or  Cham,  202  a 
 Ham,  they  of,  2 1 1  b 
 Ham,  212  a 
 Hamaker,  H.  A.,2.i2\, 
 Haman,  213  a 
 Hamath,  213  b 
 Hamath-Zobah,  215  a 
 Hamiltoft,  George,  215a 
 Hammath,  215  b 
 Hammath-Dor,  216  a 
 Hammedatha,  216  a 
 Hammelech,  216  a 
 Hammer,  216  a 
 Hammoleketh,  216  a 
 Hammon,  216  a 
 Hammond,  Henry, 
 
 D.D.,  216  a 
 Hamor,  Chamor,  216  b 
 Hamuel,  216  b 
 Hamul,  Chamul,  216  b 
 Hamutal,        Chamutal, 
 
 216  b 
 Ha-Nagid,  217  a 
 Hanameel,  217  a 
 Hanan,  Chanan,  217  a 
 Hananeel,  the  tower  of, 
 
 217  a 
 
 Hanani,  Chanani,  217a 
 Hananiah,  217  b 
 Hand,  218  a 
 Handicraft,  218  b 
 Handkerchief,  221  a 
 Hanes,  221  b 
 Hanging,  penal,  222  a 
 Hanging,  222  a 
 Hangings,  222  a 
 Hdnlein,     Hein.     Karl 
 
 Alex.,  222  a 
 Hannah,  222  a 
 Hanun,  222  b 
 Haphraim,  222  b 
 Haphtara,  222  b 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Hara,  228  a 
 Haradah,  228  b 
 Haram,  228  b 
 Haran,  228  b 
 Haran,  228  b 
 Hararite,  the,  229  a 
 Hardt,    Hennaiiii    von 
 
 der,  229  b 
 Hare,    Francis,    D.D., 
 
 229  b 
 Hare,  the,  230  a 
 Harenberg,  John  Christ. , 
 
 231  a 
 Hareth,  231  a 
 Hareits,  Franciscus,  23 1 
 
 a 
 Harim,  231  a 
 Harlot,  231  b 
 Harmer,  Rcv.  Thomas, 
 
 232  b 
 Harmonies  of  the  Gos- 
 pels, 232  b 
 
 Harod,  235  b 
 
 Harodite,  236  a 
 
 Harorite,  236  a 
 
 Harosheth  of  the  Gen- 
 tiles, 236  a 
 
 Harp,  236  b 
 
 Harris,  Samuel,  D.D., 
 236  b 
 
 Harris,  Thad.  Mason, 
 D.D.,  236  b 
 
 Harris,  William,  D.D. , 
 
 236  b 
 Harrow,  237  a 
 Hart,  237  a 
 Hartmajin,   Anth. 
 
 Theod.,  237  a 
 Harwood,  Edward, Dr., 
 
 237  a 
 Hashabiah,  237  b 
 Hashmannim,  238  a 
 Hashmonah,  238  a 
 Hashub,  238  a 
 Hattush,  238  b 
 Hauran,  238  b 
 Havilah,  239  b 
 Hiivernick,  Heiti.  Andr. 
 
 Christ.,  240  b 
 Havoth-Jair,  240  b 
 Hawk,  241  a 
 Hay,  241  a 
 Hays,  Charles,  241  a 
 Hazael,  241  b 
 Hazar-Addar,  242  a 
 Hazar-Enan,  242  a 
 Hazar-Gaddah,  242  b 
 Hazar-Hatticon,  242  b 
 Hazar-Maveth,  242  b 
 Hazaiinaveth,  242  b 
 Hazar-Shual,  242  b 
 Hazar-Susah,  242  b 
 Hazel,  243  a 
 Hazeroth,  243  a 
 Hazezon-Tamar,  243  a 
 
 Hazo,  243  a 
 Hazor,  243  b 
 Head,  244  a 
 Head-dress,  244  b 
 Heart,  244  b 
 Hearth,  244  b 
 Heath,  Thomas,  244  b 
 Heath,  244  b 
 Heathen,  244  b 
 Heaven,  heavens,  244  b 
 Heber,  250  a 
 Heber,  250  a 
 Hebrew,  250  a 
 Hebrew  language,  252  a 
 Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews, 
 
 257  a 
 Hebrews,  Epistle  to  the, 
 
 257  a 
 Hebrews,  the,  264  b 
 Hebron,  264  b 
 Hebron,  265  a 
 Hedge,  266  a 
 Heduosmon,  266  b 
 Hagai,  267  a 
 Heidegger,     yokann 
 
 Hein.  267  b 
 Heidenheim,     Wolf   B. 
 
 Simsort,  267  b 
 Heifer,  268  a 
 Heifer,  red,  268  a 
 Heinrichs,  Johann  Hein- 
 
 rich,  268  a 
 Heinsiits,  Daniel,  268  a 
 Heir,  268  a 
 Helam,  268  a 
 Helbon,  268  a 
 Heldai,  269  a 
 Helem,  269  a 
 Heleph,  269  a 
 Heli,  269  a 
 Heliodorus,  269  b 
 He%ath,  270  a 
 Helkath-Hazzurim,  270 
 
 a 
 Hell,  270  a 
 Hellenists,  the,  275  b 
 Helmet,  277  a 
 Helps,  277  a 
 Hem  of  the    garment, 
 
 278  a 
 Heman,  278  a 
 Hemdan,  278  a 
 Hemlock,  278  b 
 Hemseft,  Johann  Tych- 
 
 sen,  278  b 
 Hen,  278  b 
 Hen,  278  b 
 Hena,  278  b 
 Henadad,  278  b 
 Hendersott,       Fbenezer, 
 
 D.D.,  278  b 
 Henoch,  279  a 
 Henry,  Matthew,  279  a 
 Hepher,  279  b 
 Hephzibah,  279  b 
 
 Herakles,  279  b 
 Herald,  280  a 
 Herder,    Johann   Gott., 
 
 280  b 
 Herdman,  281 
 Herds   and   flocks,  281 
 
 a 
 Heresy,  282  b 
 Hermas,  283  a 
 Hermes,  284  a 
 Hermes,  284  a 
 Hermogenes,  284  a 
 Hermon,  284  b 
 Herodian  family,  286  a 
 Herodians,  292  a 
 Herodias,  292  b 
 Heron,  292  b 
 Heshbon,  292  b 
 Heshmon,  293  a 
 Heth,  293  a 
 Hethlon,  293  a 
 Heydenreich,  Aug.  Lud. 
 
 Christ.,  293  a 
 Hezekiah,  293  b 
 Hezel,  J.  W.  F.,  297  a 
 Hezion,  297  a 
 Hiddekel,  297  b 
 Hiel,  298  b 
 Hierapolis,  299  a 
 Hieronymus,  299  b 
 Hieronymus,  300  a 
 Higgaion,  300  a 
 High  places  and  groves, 
 
 300  a 
 High-priest,  303  a 
 Hilali,  or  Helali  Codex, 
 
 303  a 
 Hilarins,  303  a 
 Hilarius,  Diaconiis,  303 
 
 b 
 Hilkiah,  303  b 
 Hillel    I.,    Ha-  Saken, 
 
 303  b 
 Hillel  II.,    b.   Jehndah 
 
 III,  305  b 
 Hills,  306  a 
 Hin,  306  a 
 Hind,  306  a* 
 Hinge,  306  b 
 Hinnom,  306  b 
 Hippolytus,  Fort II.  ,307a 
 Hippopotamus,  308  a 
 Hiram  or  Huram,  308  a 
 Hircanus,  308  b 
 History,  309  a 
 Hittites,  312  a 
 Hivites,  314  b 
 Hobab,  315  b 
 Hobah,  315  b 
 Hobnim,  315  b 
 Hodges,    Walter,  D.D., 
 
 317a 
 Hodgson,     Bernard, 
 
 LL.D.,  317  a 
 Hodiah,  317  b 
 
 Hodijah,  317  b 
 Hody,  Humphrey,  D.  D. , 
 
 317b 
 Hoffmann,  Imm.,  318  a 
 Hofmann,   Karl   Gott. , 
 
 D.D.,  318  a 
 Holmes,    Robert,  D.D.. 
 
 318  a 
 Holofernes,  318  a 
 Holon,  319  a 
 
 Holy  of  Holies,  319a 
 Homam,  319  a 
 Ho7)ibergk     Zu      Vach, 
 
 319  a 
 Homer,  319  b 
 Honey,  319  b 
 Hook,  hooks,  320  b 
 Hophni    and    Phineas, 
 
 321  b 
 Hophra,  321  b 
 Hor,  321  b 
 Horeb,  323  a 
 Horem,  323  a 
 Hor-Hagidgad,  323  a 
 Hori,  323  b 
 Horites,  Horim,  323  b 
 Horn,  323  b 
 Home,    George,    D.D.^ 
 
 324  b 
 Home,   Thomas  Hart., 
 
 324  b 
 Hornet,  324  b 
 Horonaim,  325  a 
 Horonite,  325  a 
 Horse,  325  a 
 Horse-leech,  325  a 
 Hor  sky,  Sam.,  325  a 
 Hosanna,  325  a 
 Hosea,  325  b 
 Hoshea,  330  a 
 Hospitality,  330  a 
 Hottinger,  Jfohn  Henry, 
 
 331  a 
 Hour,  331  b 
 House,  332  b 
 Huet,Peter Daniel,  339  a 
 Hiifnagel,  With.  Fried., 
 
 339  b 
 
 Hug,  yohn Leon.,  340  a 
 Hugo,    A.    S.     Victor e, 
 
 340  a 
 
 Hugo   de  Sancto   Caro, 
 
 340  b 
 Hukkok,  341  a 
 Hul,  341  a 
 Huldah,  341  a 
 Humtah,  341  a 
 Hunt,    Thomas,    D.D., 
 
 341  a 
 Hunting,  341  b 
 Huppim,  342  b 
 Hur,  342  b 
 Huram,  343  a 
 Hurd,  Richard,  D.D., 
 
 343  a 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Hnrdis,   James,   D.D., 
 
 343  b 
 Hushah,  343  b 
 Hushai,  343  b 
 Hushathite,  the,  344  b 
 Hushim,  345  a 
 Husks,  345  a 
 Hutcheson,  George,  345  a- 
 Hutchinson,  John,  345  b 
 Htdter,  Elias,  346  a 
 Huzzab,  346  b 
 Hyacinth,  346  b 
 Hyaena,  346  b 
 Hydaspes,  346  b 
 Hymenaeus,  346  b 
 Hymn,  347  a 
 Hyperbole,  348  a 
 Hype7-ius,  Andr.     Ger., 
 
 349  a 
 
 Ibhar,  349  b 
 
 Ibleam,  349  b 
 
 Ibn  Adonia,  349  b 
 
 Ibn  Aknin,  349  b 
 
 Ibn  All,  350  a 
 
 Ibn  Balaam  Jeh. ,  350  a 
 
 Ibti     Bartich,    Bariich, 
 
 351  a 
 Ibji     Caspi    or     Caspe, 
 
 351  b 
 
 Ihn      Chajim,      Aaron, 
 
 352  b 
 
 n»i  Danan,  352  b 
 Ihn  Band,  Jch.,  352  b 
 Ibn  Djanah,  352  b 
 Ibn  Ezra,  352  b 
 Ibn  Ganach,  354  b 
 Ibn  Gebirol  or  Gabirol, 
 
 356  a 
 
 3n  Giath,  356  b 
 Ibn  Gikaiilla,  356  b 
 Ihn  jfachja,  356  b 
 Ibfi  Jaish,  357  a 
 Ibn  Kastor,  357  a 
 Ibn  Koreish  Jeh.,  357a 
 Ibn  Librat,  357  b 
 Ibn  Saktar,  357  b 
 Ihn  Saruk,  357  b 
 Ibn    Sergadah,    Aaron, 
 
 357  b 
 
 Ibn  Shocib,  Joel,  358  a 
 Ibn  Sitia,  358  a 
 Ibn  Tibbon,  358  a 
 Ibn      Tibbon,     Samuel, 
 
 358  b 
 Ibzan,  358  b 
 I-Chabod,  358  b 
 Iconium,  358  b 
 Idalah,  359  b 
 Iddo,  359  b 
 Idolatry,  359  b 
 Tdum?ea,  373  b 
 Igal,  376  b 
 Jgdaliah,  376  b 
 Igeal,  377  a 
 
 Ikre,  Johann  von,  '^TJ  ^ 
 lim,  377  a 
 Ijeabarim,  377  a 
 Ijon,  377  b 
 Iken ,    Kon  rad,     D.D., 
 
 377  b 
 Ikriti,   She?n.  h.  Eliah, 
 
 377  b 
 Ilai,  377  b 
 Ilgen,      Karl     David, 
 
 D.D.,  378  a 
 lUescas,  Jacob  de,  378  a 
 Illyricum,  378  a 
 Immanuel,  378  b 
 I)Hmaniiel  b.  Sal.  Romi, 
 
 3«3a 
 Immer,  383  b 
 Incense,  383  b 
 Inchantments,  385  b 
 India,  385  b 
 Inheritance,  386  a 
 Ink,  inkhom,  388  b 
 Inn,  388  b 
 Inspiration,  388  b 
 Interpretation,  Biblical, 
 
 and       Hermeneutics, 
 
 395  b 
 Introduction,     Biblical, 
 
 402  a 
 Ionia,  405  b 
 Iota,  405  b 
 Iphedeiah,  406  a 
 Ira,  406  a 
 Iram,  406  a 
 Ir-Haheres,  406  b 
 Ir-Hattemarim,  407  a 
 Ir-Nahash,  407  a 
 Iron,  407  a 
 Irpeel,  407  a 
 Ir-Shemesh,  407  a 
 Isaac,  407  a 
 Isaac  b.  Elia  b.  Sam.  ,410 
 
 a 
 Isaac  b.  Aloses,  410  a 
 Isaac  Blitz,  410  b 
 Isaac  b.  Gikatilla,  410  b 
 Isaac  b.  yehudah,  410  b 
 Isaac  Piilgar,  410  b 
 Isaacus,  Jfohn,  410  b 
 Isaiah,  410  b 
 Iscah,  427  b 
 Iscariot,  427  b 
 Ishbah,  427  b 
 Ishbak,  427  b 
 Ishbi,  428  a 
 Ish-Bosheth,  428  a 
 Ishi,  428  b 
 Ishmael,  428  b 
 Ishmael  b.  Elisa,  43 1  b 
 Ishtob,  433  b 
 Isidorus,  Hisp.,  434  a 
 Isidorns,  Pelu.,  434  a 
 Isle,  island,  434  b 
 Israel,  435  a 
 Issachar,  439  a 
 
 Isshiah,  439  b 
 Issue,  437  b 
 Italian  versions,   440  a 
 Italy,  440  b 
 Ithamar,  441  a 
 Ith-k'k,  441  a 
 Ithnan,  441  b 
 Ithra,  441  b 
 Ithream,  441  b 
 Ithrite,  the,  441  b 
 Ittah-Kazin,  442  a 
 Ittai,  442  a 
 Itursea,  442  b 
 Itzchaki,  443  a 
 Jtzchaki,  Solomon,  443  a 
 Ivah,  443  a 
 Ivory,  443  b 
 lyar,  444  a 
 lyim,  444  a 
 Izhar,  444  b 
 Izrahite,  444  b 
 Izri,  444  b 
 
 Jaakan,  444  b 
 Jaare  Oregim,  444  b 
 Jaazaniah,  445  a 
 Jaazer  and  Jazer,  445  b 
 Jaaziah,  446  a 
 Jaaziel,  446  a 
 Jabal,  446  a 
 Jabbok,  446  a 
 Jabesh-Gilead,  447  a 
 Jabez,  447  b 
 Jabez,  Isaac,  447  b 
 Jabin,  448  a 
 Jablonski,  Daniel 
 
 Ernst,  448  b 
 yablonski,  Paul  Ei-nst, 
 
 449  a 
 Jabneel,  449  a 
 Jabneh,  449  b 
 Jachin  and  Boaz,  449  b 
 Jacinth,  449  b 
 Jacob,  449  b 
 Jacob  b.  A  slier i,  452  b 
 Jacob  b.  Chajim,  453  a 
 Jacob  b.  Eleazar,  454  a 
 Jacob  b.  Meier,  454  a 
 Jaddua,  454  a 
 Jael,  454  a 
 Jagur,  455  a 
 Jah,  455  a 
 Jahath,  455  a 
 Jahaz,  455  a 
 Jahaziel,  455  b 
 Jahdai,  455  b 
 Jahn,  Johann,  456  a 
 Jair,  456  b 
 Jairite,  456  b 
 Jairus,  456  b 
 Jaish,  457  a 
 Jakan,  457  a 
 Jakeh,  457  a 
 Jambres,  457  b 
 Jambri,  457  b 
 
 James,  457  b;  the  son 
 of  Zebedee,  457  b ; 
 the  son  of  Alphseus, 
 458  a;  the  Lord's 
 brother,  458  a  ;  the 
 Epistle  of,  459  a 
 
 Jannes  and  Jambres, 
 464  a 
 
 Janoah,  464  b 
 
 Janohah,  464  b 
 
 Japheth,  465  a 
 
 Japheth,  b.  Ali-Ha- 
 Levi,  466  a  ;  //. ,  b. 
 Said,  466  a 
 
 Japhia,  466  a 
 
 Japhleti,  466  b 
 
 Japho,  466  b 
 
 Jareb,  466  b 
 
 Jarha,  467  a 
 
 Jarmuth,  467  a 
 
 Jashen,  467  b 
 
 Jasher,  Book  of,  467  b 
 
 Jashobeam,  470  b 
 
 Jashub,  470  b 
 
 Jashubi-Lehem,  471  a 
 
 Jason,  471  a 
 
 Jasper,  472  a 
 
 Jaspis,  Gott,  Siegmund, 
 472  a 
 
 Jattir,  472  a 
 
 Javan,  472  b 
 
 Javelin,  473  a 
 
 Jaziz,  473  a 
 
 Jearim,  mount,  473  a 
 
 Jebb,John,D.D.,^Tia 
 
 Jeberechiah,  473  b 
 
 Jebus,  473  b 
 
 Jebusite,  474  a 
 
 Jecamiah,  474  b 
 
 Jeconiah,  474  b 
 
 Jedaiah,  474  b 
 
 Jediael,  475  a 
 
 Jedidiah,  475  a 
 
 Jeduthun,  475  a 
 
 Jeezar,  475  b 
 
 Jegar-Sahadutha,  475  b 
 
 Jehiel,  476  a 
 
 Jehiel,  476  a 
 
 Jehizkiah,  476  a 
 
 Jehoahaz,  476  b 
 
 Jehoash,  477  a 
 
 Jehohanan,  477  a 
 
 Jehoiachin,  477  a 
 
 Jehoiada,  477  b 
 
 Jehoiakim,  478  a 
 
 Jehoiarib,  479  a 
 
 Jehonadab,  479  a 
 
 Jehonathan,  479  a 
 
 Jehoram  I.,  479  a 
 
 Jehoram  11. ,  479  b 
 
 Jehoshaphat,  479  b  ; 
 valley  of,  481  b 
 
 Jehoshebah,  482  a 
 
 Jehoshua,  482  a 
 
 Jehovah,  482  a ;  Jireh. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 486  b;  Nissi,  486  b; 
 
 Shalom,      486      b  ; 
 
 Shammah,      487     a ; 
 
 Tsidqenu,  487  a 
 Jehozabad,  487  a 
 Jehozadak,  487  a 
 Jehu,  487  b 
 Jehud,  489  a 
 JeJmdah  b.  Balaam,  489a 
 Jehudah  b.  David,  489  a 
 Jehudah      b.      Koreish, 
 
 489  a 
 Jehudah  (Arje  Loeb)  b. 
 
 Zebi,  489  a 
 Jehudah      de    Modena, 
 
 489  b 
 Jehudah  Ha- Levi,  489  b 
 Jehudijah,  490  b 
 Jekabzeel,  490  b 
 Jekuthiel,  490  b 
 Jekuthiel  b.  Isaac  Blitz, 
 
 491  a 
 Jekuthiel  b.  Jehud.    Co- 
 hen, 491  a 
 Jemima,  491  b 
 Jennings,  David,  D.D., 
 
 491  b 
 Jephthah,  492  a 
 Jephunneh,  494  b 
 Jerah,  494  b 
 Jerahmeel,  495  a 
 Jered,  495  a 
 Jeremiah,  495  a;  others 
 
 bearing  name  of,  499 
 
 b ;    the    Epistle    of, 
 
 499  b 
 Jeremoth,  500  a 
 Jericho,  500  b 
 Jerimoth,  503  a 
 Jerioth,  503  a 
 Jeroboam  I.,  503  b 
 Jeroboam  II.,  504  a 
 Jeroham,  504  a 
 Jerome,  Ensebius  Hier. 
 
 Soph.,  504  b 
 Jerubbaal,  505  a 
 Jerubbesheth,  505  a 
 Jeruel,     wilderness     of, 
 
 505  a 
 Jerusalem,    505  b ;  the 
 
 modern  city  of,  513; 
 
 as  seen  from  Olivet, 
 
 520 
 Jeshaiah,  540  a 
 Jeshanah,  540  a 
 Jeshimon,  540  a 
 Jeshua,  540  b 
 Jeshua,  540  b 
 Jeshurun,  540  b 
 Jesse,  540  b 
 Jesus  Christ,  541  a 
 Jesus,    Son   of  Sirach, 
 
 591  b 
 Jether,  Jethro,  592  a 
 Jetheth,  593  a 
 
 Jethro,  593  a 
 
 Jetur,  594  b 
 
 Jeush,  594  b 
 
 Jew,  Jews,  the,  594  b 
 
 Jewel,  596  a 
 
 Jewell,     John,     D.D., 
 
 596  a 
 Jewry,  596  a 
 Jezaniah,  596  a 
 Jezebel,  597  a 
 Jezreel,  597  b 
 Jiphtah,  599  a 
 Jiphthah-El,  599  a 
 Joab,  599  b 
 Joachim,  600  b 
 Joacim,  601  a 
 Joah,  601  a 
 Joanna,  601  b 
 Joash,  601  b 
 Job,  the  Book  of,  603  a 
 Job's  disease,  613  a 
 Jobab,  613  b 
 Jochebed,  613  b 
 Joel,   614  a;  Book  of, 
 
 614  b 
 Jogbehah,  615  b 
 Johanan,  615  b 
 Johlsohn,    J.     Joseph, 
 
 616  a 
 John,  616  b 
 John,  the  apostle,   616 
 
 b ;  Gospel  according 
 
 to,     617    a  ;     First 
 
 Epistle   of,    621    b ; 
 
 Second    and     Third 
 
 Epistles  of,  623  a 
 John  the  Baptist,  624  b 
 John  the  Presbyter,  627 
 
 b 
 Joiada,  628  b 
 Joiakim,  628  b 
 Jokd«am,  628  b 
 Jokim,  628  b 
 Jokmeam,  628  b 
 Jokneam,  629  a 
 Jokshan,  629  a 
 Joktan,  629  b 
 Joktheel,  629  b 
 Joiniob  Lipmann  Milhl. 
 
 629  b. 
 Jona  b.  Ganach,  629  b 
 Jonadab,  629  b 
 Jonah,  630  a 
 Jonathan,  633  b 
 Jonathan  b.  Uzziel,  635  a 
 Jones,  Jeremiah,  636  a 
 Joppa  and  Japho,  636  a 
 Jorah,  638  b 
 Joram,  638  b 
 Jordan,  639  a 
 Jorkoam,  644  b 
 Josabad,  644  b 
 Joseph,  644  b 
 Joseph,  Mary's  husband, 
 
 648  a 
 
 Joseph    of    Arimathea, 
 
 649  a 
 Joseph  called  Barsabas, 
 
 649  b 
 Joseph  b.  Chij'a,  650  a 
 Joseph  b.  Gorion,  650  b 
 Joseph  b.  Shemtov,  650  b 
 Joseph  Joel,  651a 
 Joseph  Taitatzak,  651  a 
 Josephus,  Flavius,  651  a 
 Joses,  653  a 
 Joshua,  653  a;  Book  of, 
 
 654  a 
 Joshua  b.  Jehuda,  659 
 
 b 
 Josiah,  659  b 
 Josippoji  b.  Gorion,  660 
 
 b 
 Jot  and  tittle,  662  b 
 Jotapata,  663  a 
 Jotbah,  663  b 
 Jotbath,  663  b 
 Jotham,  663  b 
 Jozabad,  664  a 
 Jozachar,  664  a 
 Jubal,  664  a 
 Jubilee,    the    year     of, 
 
 664  b 
 Jubilees,  book  of,  668  b 
 Juda,  671  b 
 JudcE,  Leo,  671  b 
 Judaea  and  Judea,  671  b 
 Judah,  673  a;  tribe  and 
 
 possessions  of,  673  b  j 
 
 kingdom  of,  675  a 
 Judas,  677  b 
 Jude,  Epistle  of,  680  b 
 Judges,   683    a ;    Book 
 
 of,  688  a 
 Judgment-hall,  691  b 
 Judith,  692  b  ;  the  Book 
 
 of,  692  b 
 Julia,  696  a 
 Julius,  696  a 
 Junias,  696  a 
 Jumper,  696  b 
 Junius,     Fran<^ois      du 
 
 Jon,  696  b 
 Junius,  Francis,  697  a 
 Jupiter,  697  a 
 Jurieii,  Pierre,  698  a 
 Jushab-Hesed,  699  a 
 Justi,  Karl  Wilh.,  699 
 
 a 
 Justus,  699  a 
 Juttah,  699  b 
 
 Kab,  699  b 
 Kabbalah,  699  b 
 Kabzeel,  703  a 
 Kades,  703  b 
 Kadesh,  703  b 
 Kadkod,  705  a 
 Kadmiel,  705  b 
 Kadmonites,  705  b 
 
 Kalamos,  706  a 
 Kali,  706  a 
 Kanah,  707  a 
 Kaneh,  707  a 
 Kaneh  Bosem  and  Hat 
 
 tob,  708  b 
 Karcom,  710  a 
 Karem,  711a 
 Karkaa,  7 il  a 
 Karkor,  711a 
 Karpas,  711a 
 Kartah,  712  a 
 Kartan,  712  a 
 Kattah,  712  a 
 Keach,  Benjamin,  7123 
 Kedar,  712  b 
 Kedemoth,  713  a 
 Kedesh,  713  b 
 Kedron,  714  a 
 Keeper,  714  a 
 Kehelathah,  714  b 
 Keil,  Karl  Aug.  Gottl., 
 
 714  b 
 Keilah,  714  b 
 Keleb,  715  a 
 Kemuel,  715  b 
 Kenath,  716  a 
 Kenaz,  716  b 
 Kenite,  716  b 
 Kenezite,  717  b 
 Kentticott,  Benj.,  D.D., 
 
 717b 
 Kerach,  719  a 
 Kerchiefs,  719  a 
 Keren-Happuch,  719  b 
 Keri  and  Kethiv,  719  b 
 Kerioth,  Kirioth,  726  a 
 Keseph,  727  a 
 Kesitah,  727  a 
 Kethem,  727  b 
 Kettle,  728  a 
 Keturah,  728  a 
 Ketzach,  728  b 
 Ketzioth,  729  a 
 Keuchenius,  Petrus,  729 
 
 b 
 Key,  730  a 
 Keziz,  valley  of,  730  a 
 Kibroth-Hattaavah,  730 
 
 b 
 Kibzaim,  730  b 
 Kid,  730  b 
 Kiddah,  730  b 
 Kidder,  Richard,  D.D, , 
 
 731  a 
 Kidron,  731  b 
 Kikayon,  733  a 
 Kimchi,  David  b.  Jos., 
 
 734  a 
 
 Kimchi,   Joseph  b.  Is., 
 
 735  a 
 
 Kimchi,   Moses  b.  Jos., 
 
 735  a 
 Kimmosh,  73$  b 
 Kinah,  735  b 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Kindred,  735  b 
 
 Kine,  736  b 
 
 King,  736  b 
 
 Kings,  Books  of,  740  a 
 
 King's  Dale,  745  a 
 
 Kinnamon,  745  a 
 
 Kinnim,  746  a 
 
 Kinsman,  747  b 
 
 Kiplmg,  Thomas,  748  b 
 
 Kipped,  749  a 
 
 Kir,  749  b 
 
 Kir-Haresh,  750  a 
 
 Kirjath,  750  a  " 
 
 Kirjathaim,  750  b 
 
 Kirjath- Arba,  750  \> ; 
 Baal,  751  a;  Huzoth, 
 751  a;  Jearim,  751 
 a  ;  Sannah,  75"  ^ 
 
 Kir-Moab,  751  b 
 
 Kish,  751  b 
 
 Kjsliion  and  Kishon, 
 751  b 
 
 Ivislion,  the  river,  751 
 b 
 
 Kisliuim,  752  b 
 
 Kiss,  753  a 
 
 Kissos,  753  b 
 
 Kite,  754  a 
 
 I^thlish,  754  a 
 
 Kitron,  754  a 
 
 Kittim,  754  a 
 
 KUto,  John,  754  a 
 
 Kleiiker,     Joh.    Fried., 
 
 754  b 
 
 Knapp,  George  Christ, 
 
 755  a 
 Kiiatchbjcll,  Sir  Norton, 
 
 Bart.,  755  a 
 Kneading-trough,  755  a 
 Knife,  755  b 
 A'liittel,   Franz  Antojt, 
 
 756  a 
 Knop,  756  b 
 Koa,  756  b 
 
 Koecher,    Joh.    Christ., 
 
 D.D.,  757  a 
 Kohath,  757  b 
 Koph,  757  b 
 Kopher,orCopher,759a 
 Koppe,  Joh.  Benj.  759  b 
 Korah,  760  a 
 Korahite,  761  a 
 Kotz,  761  a 
 Krausc,     Fried.     Aug. 
 
 With.,  761  b 
 Krause,     Joh.     Fried., 
 
 D.D.,  761  b 
 A'reh,  Joh.  Fred.,  761  b 
 Krehs,  Joh.  Tobias,  761b 
 Krinon,  762  a 
 Krochnial,      Nach.      b. 
 
 Shal.  763  a 
 
 Kuinoel,     Christ.     The- 
 
 oph.,  763  a 
 Kussemeth,  763  a 
 Kiisier,  Ludolph,  764  b 
 Kypke,     Georg    David, 
 
 76s  a 
 
 Laanah,  765  a 
 Laban,  765  b 
 Laban,  767  a 
 Labour,  767  b 
 Lachish,  768  a 
 Lachmann,  Karl  Konr. 
 
 Fr.  Wilh.,  769  a 
 Ladder  of  Tyre,  769  b 
 Lahai-Roi,  769  b 
 Lahmam,  770  a 
 Lahmi,  770  a 
 Laish,  770  a 
 Lakes,  770  b 
 Lakum,  770  b 
 Lamb,  771  a 
 Lamech,  77 1  a 
 Lamentations,  Book  of, 
 
 772  a 
 Lamp,  777  b 
 Lampe,  Fried.   Adolph, 
 
 779  b 
 Lamy  or  Lami,  Bernard, 
 
 779  b 
 Language,  780  a 
 Laniado,  Abra.  b.  Isaac, 
 
 780  a 
 
 Laniado, Sam.  b.  Abra., 
 
 780  b 
 Lantern,  780  b 
 Laodicea,  781  b 
 Lapide,  Corn.,  782  a 
 Lapidoth,  782  b 
 Lapwing,  783  a 
 Lardner,  Nath.,  D.D., 
 
 783  a 
 Lasea,  783  a 
 Lasha,  783  b 
 Lasharon,  784  a 
 Lasthenes,  784  a 
 Latchet,  784  b 
 Latinisms,  784  b 
 Latin  versions,  7 85  a 
 Lattice,  793  b 
 Laurence,  Richard, 
 
 D.C.L.,  793  b 
 Laver,  794  a 
 Law,  794  b 
 Lawyer,  795  b 
 Law     and      Prophets, 
 
 reading  of,  796  a 
 Lazanis,  796  a 
 Lead,  799  a 
 Leaf,  leaves,  799  b 
 Leah,  799  b 
 Leather,  799  b 
 
 Leaven,  799  b 
 
 Lebanon,  800  b 
 
 Lebaoth,  806  a 
 
 Lebbaeus,  806  a 
 
 Lebonah,  806  b 
 
 Lebonah,  806  b 
 
 Lecah,  807  a 
 
 Le  Clerc,  Jeaii,  807  a 
 
 Lee,Sainicel,D.D.,  807  b 
 
 Leech,  808  a 
 
 Leek,  808  a 
 
 Lees,  808  a 
 
 Le  Fevre,  Jacques,  808  a 
 
 Legion,  808  a 
 
 Lehabim,  808  b 
 
 Lehi,  809  a 
 
 Leighton,  Robert,  809  b 
 
 Lejay,  Guy  Michel,  809  b 
 
 Le  Long,  Jacques,  809  b 
 
 Le  Maistre,  810  a 
 
 U  Empereur,     Cons  tan- 
 
 tine,  810  a 
 n Enfa7it,yacques,  810 a 
 Lemuel,  810  a 
 Lentiles,  810  b 
 Leo  JudcB,  810  b 
 Leo  di  Modena,  8 1 1  a 
 Leopard,  811  b 
 Leprosy,  812  a 
 Leshem,  816  b 
 Leshem,  816  b 
 Letaah,  816  b 
 Letushim,  817  a 
 Leummim,  817  a 
 Leusden,  John,  817  a 
 Levi,  818  a 
 Levi  b.  Gashon,  8 1 8  a 
 Leviathan,  818  a 
 Levirate,  819  b 
 Lez'ison,  Mord.  Gumpel, 
 
 819  b 
 Levita,  819  b 
 Levites,  819  b 
 Leviticus, Book  of,  829  a 
 Le\'dckl!a;        Mekhior, 
 
 '813  a 
 Libanus,  831  a 
 Libertines,  831  a 
 Libnah,  831  b 
 Libnath,  832  a 
 Libneh,  832  a 
 Libya,  832  b 
 Libyans,  832  b 
 Lice,  832  b 
 Light,  832  b 
 Lightfoot,  John,  833  b 
 Lign  aloes,  834  b 
 Ligure,  834  b 
 Lilith,  834  b 
 Lily,  835  a 
 Limborch,     Philip    A., 
 
 835  a 
 
 Lime,  835  a 
 Linen,  835  b 
 Lintel,  835  b 
 Linus,  836  a 
 Lion,  836  a 
 Lipman,  Jomtob,  837  t 
 Litter,  838  a 
 Liver,  839  a 
 Lizard,  840  a 
 Loan,  840  a 
 Loaves,  841  b 
 Lock,  841  b 
 Locust,  842  a 
 Led,  842  a 
 Lo-Debar,  843  a 
 Loesner,  Christ.   Fried.  .^ 
 
 843  a 
 Log,  843  a 
 Lois,  843  a 
 
 Lombroso,  Jacob,  843  a 
 Longevity,  843  b 
 Looking-glasses,  845  a 
 Lord,  845  b 
 Lord's  Day,  845  b 
 Lord's  Supper,  845  b 
 Lot,  852  b 
 Lot,  854  a 
 Lots,  feast  of,  854  b 
 Love-feasts,  854  b 
 Lowe,    Joel   b.     Jehiid. 
 
 Loeb,  854  b 
 Lo7uth,  Robert,  855  a 
 Lowth,  William,  D.D., 
 
 856  a 
 Lubim,  856  a 
 Lucas,  857  a 
 Liccas,  Franciscus,  857  a 
 Lucifer,  857  a 
 Lucius,  858  a 
 Lud,  859  b 
 Ludim,  860  a 
 Luecka,    Gottf.     Christ. 
 
 Fried.,  860  a 
 Luhith,  860  b 
 Luke,    860   b ;  Gospel 
 
 according  to,  86 1  b 
 Lunatic,  868  a 
 Luther,  Martin,  868  a 
 Luz,  868  b 
 Luz,  869  a 
 Lycaonia,  869  a 
 Lycia,  869  b 
 Lydda,  869  b 
 Lydia,  869  b 
 Lydia,  869  b 
 Lydia,  869  b 
 Lyra,  Nicholas  de,  86g 
 
 b 
 Lysanias,  870  b 
 Lysias,  871  b 
 Lysimachus,  872  b 
 Lystra,  872  b 
 
 SUPPLEMENT. 
 Gaius,  873.         Gothic  Version,  873.        Judicature,  877.         Lice,  Plague  of,  877. 
 
CYCLOPEDIA 
 
 OF 
 
 BIBLICAL    LITERATURE. 
 
 FABER 
 
 FABER,  George  Stanley,  B.D.,  was  born  at 
 Calverley  in  Yorkshire,  25th  (Jet.  1773,  and  died 
 at  Sherborn  27th  Jan.  1854.  He  was  educated  at 
 O.vford,  where  he  was  elected  a  fellow  and  tutor  of 
 Lincoln  College  before  he  had  completed  his  21st 
 year.  He  was  successively  vicar  of  Stockton-on- 
 Tees,  vicar  of  Redmarshall.  rector  of  Long  New- 
 ton, and  master  of  Sherborn  Hospital.  He  held 
 also  a  prebendial  stall  in  Salisbury  Cathedral.  His 
 writings  are  very  numerous  ;  and  are  all  marked  by 
 copious  learning,  exact  and  close  reasoning,  and  a 
 zeal  for  established  truth,  combined  with  a  dan- 
 gerous love  of  hypothesis.  In  Biblical  literature 
 his  chief  works  are  his  Bampton  lecture,  entitled, 
 Horce  Mosaica,  a  Dissertation  on  the  Credibility  and 
 Theology  of  the  Pentateuch,  2  vols.  8vo,  Lond. 
 1800,  a  new  and  greatly  improved  edition  of  which 
 appeared  in  1818  ;  A  Treatise  on  the  Genius  and 
 Object  of  the  Patriarchal,  the  Levilical,  and  the 
 Christian  Dispensations,  2  vols.  8vo,  Lond.  1S23  ; 
 The  Sacred  Calendar  of  Prophecy,  3  vols.  l2mo, 
 1844;  Eight  Dissertations  on  certain  connected  Pro- 
 phetical passages  of  H.  S.,  bearing  on  the  promise  oj 
 a  mighty  Deliverer,  2  vols.  8vo,  1845. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FABER,  JoHANN  Ernst,  was  born  at  Sinimer- 
 shausen  in  the  year  1746,  and  studied  at  Coburg 
 and  Gottingen.  He  was  professor  of  Oriental  lan- 
 guages at  Kiel,  and  from  the  year  1772  at  Jena, 
 where  he  died,  April  14th,  1774.  The  following 
 are  the  most  important  of  his  Biblical  writings  : — 
 Descriptio  Comnientarii  in  LXX.  interpretes,  pars 
 i..  Getting.  1768,  4to  ;  pars  ii.,  Gotting.  1769; 
 Disp.  de  animalibus  qnoricm  fit  mentio  Zephan.  ii. 
 14,  1769  ;  Historia  ManttiE  inter  Hebrceos,  pars  i. , 
 Kilon,  1770;  pars  ii.  Jense,  1773  ;  Noznan  de  Mes- 
 sia  exactis  CCCCXC.  annis  post  exiliiun  Jitda- 
 oriim  Babylonicwn  nascituro  ex  Zach.  Hi.  8,  9,  10, 
 repetitiim  vaticiniicm,  spatio  LXX.,  hebdomadutn 
 Dan.  ix.  24,  Kilon,  1771,  4to  ;  Jesus  ex  natalium 
 opportunitate  Messias,  Jense,  1772,  8vo  ;  Archce- 
 ologie  der  Hebrcer.,  i  th.,  Halle,  1773,  8vo. — S.  N. 
 
 FABER,  JoHANN  Melchior,  was  bom  Jan. 
 iS,  I743>  at  Simmershausen,  in  the  neighbour- 
 hood of  Hildburghausen,  and  was  probably  the 
 brother  or  cousin  of  J.  E.  Faber.  In  1768  was 
 appointed  professor  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  lan- 
 guages at  Thorn,  West  Prussia;  in  1770  he  be- 
 came professor  of  Greek  and  Rhetoric  at  Coburg  ; 
 and  in  1774  rector  of  the  gymnasium  at  Ansbach. 
 He  died  Jan.  31,  1809.  The  larger  part  of  his 
 writings  were  published  in  the  form  of  programmes, 
 VOL.  II, 
 
 FABRICIUS 
 
 issued  In  accordance  vnth  the  duties  of  his  office  as 
 professor  or  rector.  The  most  important  of  these 
 in  relation  to  Biblical  literature  are  his  Program- 
 niata  sex  super  libro  Sapientia;,  Onold.  (Ansbach), 
 1776-77,  4to,  and  of  which  he  afterwards  published 
 a  second  part,  in  four  sections,  in  the  years  1786- 
 1789.  His  other  Biblical  progi-ammes  were — In 
 2  Reg.  xxiii.  4-7,  Thoran,  1769;  In  loca  quadam 
 Haboicuci  Prophetce,  Onold.  1779  ;  In  Malachiam 
 Prophetam,  1779;  Ilarmonia  Alaccabaorum,  see, 
 i.  1794;  sec.  ii.  1797. — S.  N. 
 
 FABLE.     [Parable.] 
 
 FABRTCIUS,  John  Albert,  a  very  learned 
 scholar  and  bibliographer,  was  bom  at  Leipzig, 
 nth  November  1668.  In  1684  he  was  sent  to  the 
 gymnasium  at  Quedlinburg  to  study  under  Samuel 
 Schniid,  and  complete  his  preparatory  academical 
 studies.  Returning  to  Leipzig  in  1686,  he  was 
 made  bachelor  in  philosophy.  In  1688  he  became 
 a  member  of  the  philosophical  faculty.  In  1694 
 he  went  to  Hamburg  to  see  some  of  his  relatives, 
 and  while  there  was  received  into  the  house  of  J. 
 F.  Mayer,  a  celebrated  theologian,  became  his 
 librarian,  and  was  liberally  treated.  With  this 
 patron  he  repaired  to  Sweden  in  1696.  In  1699 
 he  received  the  chair  of  eloquence  and  practical 
 philosophy  at  Hamburg.  In  170S  he  became 
 rector  of  the  Johanneum  in  addition  to  his  profes- 
 sorship, but  resigned  it  in  1711.  He  died  at  Ham- 
 burg, April  30th  1736.  His  adopted  city  had 
 reason  to  be  proud  of  him  ;  for  he  refused  many 
 tempting  offers  from  various  universities.  Fabri- 
 cius  was  a  scholar  of  immense  erudition  and  un^ 
 wearied  industry.  He  studied  and  wrote  incessantly. 
 Hence  his  published  works  are  very  numerous, 
 amounting  to  upwards  of  forty.  The  most  import- 
 ant of  them  all  is  the  Bibliotheca  Gracca,  sive  nofi- 
 tia  scriptornni  veterum  Graecorum,  qiiorumcumqui 
 monumenta  Integra  ant  fraginenta  edita  extant,  tutn 
 pleronimque  e  manuscriptis  et  deperditis,  14  vols. 
 4to,  Hamburg,  1705- 1728.  A  new  edition  of  it 
 was  published  by  Harles,  Hamburg,  1790,  and 
 following  years.  The  index  did  not  appear  till 
 1838.  Fabricius  also  published  Bibliotheca  Latina, 
 sive  notitia  ajutorum  veterum  Latinorum,  quorum- 
 ctcmque  scripta  ad  nospei-venenmt,  Hamburg,  1697, 
 Svo.  A  new  edition  was  published  by  Ernesti  at 
 Leipzig,  1773,  3  vols.  8vo.  Other  works  are 
 Bibliographia  Antiqiiaria  sive  introductio  in  noti- 
 tiam  scriptorum  qui  antiquitates  hebraicas,  graecas, 
 romanas,  et  Christianas  scriptis  illustrarunt,  1713, 
 
FABRICY 
 
 FAIR  HAVENS 
 
 4to,  second  edition,  1716.  Codex  Pseudeptgraphns 
 veietis  Teslanienti  collediis,  castigatus,  testimoniis- 
 que,  censiiris  et  aAiniadvenionibus  illustratus,  1713, 
 8vo.  Codex  apocryphus  Novi  Tesla»ienii  collectiis, 
 castigatus,  testimoniisque,  censuris  et  aniiiiadver- 
 sionibus  illustratus,  1 703,  8vo,  2  vols. ;  1 7 19,  3  vols. 
 8vo.  Bihliothcca  ecclesiastka,  etc. ,  Hamburg,  1 7 1 8, 
 folio.  He  also  edited  the  works  of  Hippolytus 
 (1716,  1718,  2  vols,  folio)  and  Philastrius  (1721). 
 See  H.  S.  Reimarus,  De  Vita  et  scriptis  joaniiis 
 Albert  Fabricii  coDunentarius,  1737,  8vo,  Ham- 
 burg.—S.  D. 
 
 FABRICY,  Gabriel,  a  Dominican  father  and 
 celebrated  bibliographer,  was  born  near  Aix  in 
 Provence,  about  1725.  Having  gone  to  Rome 
 about  1 760,  on  account  of  his  being  elevated  to  the 
 rank  of  a  provincial,  he  was  appointed  reader  in 
 theology  ;  and  was  subsequently  elected  one  of  the 
 theological  doctors  of  the  famous  library  of  Cas- 
 anata.  From  that  time  he  was  chiefly  employed 
 in  making,  along  with  Audifredi,  the  magnificent 
 catalogue  of  that  library,  of  which  only  four  volumes 
 were  published.  He  died,  A.  D.  1800,  at  Rome. 
 The  only  work  of  his  which  concerns  us  here,  is 
 Des  litres  primitifs  de  la  7-evelation,  on  cotisidei-a- 
 tions  critiques  sur  la  purete  et  finttgrite  dii  texte 
 otigi7ial  des  livres  saitits  de  Pancien  Testament,  2 
 vols.  8vo,  Rome,  1772.  This  is  an  important  and 
 useful  book  on  the  text  of  the  O.  T.— S.  D. 
 
 FACE,  in  Scripture,  is  often  used  to  denote 
 i>resence  in  the  general  sense,  and,  when  applied 
 to  the  Almighty,  denotes  such  a  complete  mani- 
 festation of  the  divine  presence,  by  sound  or  sight, 
 as  was  equivalent,  in  the  vividness  of  the  impres- 
 sion, to  the  seeing  of  a  fellow-creature  '  face  to  face.' 
 The  '  face  of  God '  therefore  denotes  in  Scripture 
 any  thing  or  manner  by  which  God  is  wont  to 
 manifest  himself  to  man.  Thus,  when  it  is  said 
 that  Adam  and  Eve  hid  themselves  from  '  the  face 
 of  Jehovah,'  we  understand  that  they  hid  them- 
 selves from  his  j^resence,  however  manifested  ;  for 
 QiJQ  peiiim,  not  only  signifies  presence,  as  well 
 as  (literally) /?rt',  but  it  is  the  very  word  for /;-,?- 
 sence,  however  manifested.  There  is  no  other 
 word  to  denote  presence  in  the  Hebrew  language. 
 Whenever  '  presence '  occurs  in  our  translation, 
 the  word  in  the  original  is  the  same  which  is  ren- 
 dered '  face  '  in  other  places.  This  is  very  proper;  j 
 and  the  respective  terms  '  face  '  and  '  presence '  are 
 usually  applied  in  the  A.  V.  with  much  propriety 
 and  discretion  ;  the  latter  term  being  employed 
 wherever  the  effect  of  the  word  '  face  '  might  have 
 seemed  harsh  or  unseemly. 
 
 It  was  a  very  ancient  and  common  opinion 
 that  our  mortal  frame  could  not  survive  the 
 more  sensible  manifestations  of  the  divine  pre- 
 sence, or  '  see  God  face  to  face  and  live '  (Gen. 
 xxxii.  30).  Hence,  in  this  passage,  the  gratitude 
 and  astonishment  of  Jacob,  that  he  still  lived  after 
 God  had  manifested  himself  to  him  more  sensibly 
 than  by  dreams  and  visions.  This  impression  was 
 confirmed  to  Moses,  who  was  told,  '  Thou  canst 
 not  see  my  face :  no  man  can  see  my  face  and  live' 
 (Exod.  xxxiii.  20)  ;  wldch  clearly  signifies  that  no 
 one  can  in  this  present  state  of  being  endure  the 
 view  of  that  glory  wliich  belongs  to  Him.  The 
 ancient  heathen  entertained  the  same  notion,  which 
 'is  remarkably  expressed  in  the  celebrated  mytholo- 
 gical story  of  Semele,  who,  having  prevailed  on  the 
 reluctant  Jove  to  appear  to  her  in  his  heavenly  splen- 
 
 dour, was  struck  dead  by  the  lightnings  of  his  pre- 
 sence (I  Cor.  xiii.  12  ;  i  John  iii.  2  ;  Rev.  xxii.  4). 
 It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  God  is  usually  re- 
 presented  to  us  in  Scripture  under  a  human  form  ; 
 and  it  is  indeed  difficult  for  even  more  spiritualized 
 minds  than  those  of  the  Hebrews  to  conceive  of 
 Him  apart  from  the  form  and  attributes  of  the 
 highest  nature  actually  known  to  us.  The  Scrip- 
 ture sanctions  this  concession  to  the  weakness  of 
 our  intellect,  and  hence  arise  the  anthropomor- 
 phous phrases  which  speak  of  the  face,  the  eyes, 
 the  arm  of  God.  The  appearances  of  the  angels 
 in  the  O.  T.  times  were  generally  in  the  human 
 form  (Judg.  xiii.  6,  etc.)  ;  and  from  this  cause 
 alone  it  would  have  been  natural,  in  the  imagina- 
 tion, to  transfer  the  form  of  the  messengers  to  Him 
 by  whom  they  were  sent  [Anthropomorphism]. 
 -J.  K. 
 
 FAIR  HAVENS  (KaXoi  At^^m),  a  port  on 
 the  southern  side  of  the  island  of  Crete.  Its  exact 
 position  was  for  a  long  period  a  matter  of  doubt ; 
 but  recent  researches  have  identified  it  beyond  the 
 possibility  of  question,  and  have  also  contributea  to 
 throw  much  light  on  a  portion  of  the  Apostle 
 Paul's  perilous  voyage.  From  Myra  on  the  south- 
 ern coast  of  Asia  Minor,  where  the  Apostle  em- 
 barked *in  a  ship  of  Alexandria  sailing  into  Italy,' 
 the  true  course  would  have  been  due  west,  passing 
 close  by  Rhodes.  The  wind,  however,  which 
 generally  blows  in  that  region  during  the  autumn 
 from  the  west  or  north-west,  was  unfavourable, 
 and  they  were  compelled  to  steer  north  as  far  as 
 Cnidus.  There,  also,  the  wind  was  contrary,  and 
 did  not  permit  them  to  go  on  their  right  course,  ^^ 
 TTpofftuivTos  7]iuLds  Tou  dvffiov  (Acts  xxvfi.  7).  They 
 were  therefore  forced  to  turn  southward,  and  after 
 rounding  Cape  Salmone,  the  most  easterly  point  of 
 Crete,  to  pursue  the  voyage  along  the  lee  of  that 
 island  (Conybeare  and  Howsori's  Li/e  0/ St.  Paul, 
 ii.  326).  Owing  to  the  direction  and  force  of  the 
 gale,  it  was  with  much  difficulty  they  made  Sal- 
 mone —  /J,6\is  T€  Trapa\ey6pL€i'oi  avTi]v  (ver.  8). 
 The  southern  coast  of  Crete  runs  west  by  south 
 for  about  half  its  length,  as  far  as  Cape  Matala.  So 
 far  the  ship  would  be  in  a  great  measure  sheltered 
 from  the  fury  of  the  north-west  wind  ;  but  at  Cape 
 Matala  'the  coast  bends  suddenly  to  the  north,' 
 and  the  ship  could  not  pass  that  point  so  long  as 
 the  wind  continued  west  or  north-west  (Smith's 
 Voyage  and  Shipnu7-eck  of  St.  Paid,  2d  ed.  p.  75), 
 
 About  four  miles  east  of  Matala  is  a  good  road- 
 stead, still  called,  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  Luke, 
 KaXoi  Kiixeves.  The  name  is  appropriate.  It  is 
 shut  in  on  the  west  by  a  bold  headland,  on  whose 
 summit  are  tlie  ruins  of  an  ancient  convent  dedi- 
 cated to  St.  PauL  On  the  south  it  is  sheltered  by 
 two  little  islands  ;  and  between  these  and  the  shore 
 is  safe  anchorage.  The  roadstead,  however,  is 
 open  to  the  east  ;  and  we  can  thus  see  the  truth  of 
 Luke's  statement,  that  it  was  'incommodious  (av- 
 evOirov)  to  winter  in '  (See  Smith,  pp.  80,  and 
 256).  This  circumstance  appears  to  have  deter- 
 mined the  master  of  the  ship,  contrary  to  the  advice 
 of  Paul,  to  leave  Fair  Havens,  and  taking  advan- 
 tage of  a  southern  breeze,  to  try  and  reach  the  har- 
 bour of  Phenice,  near  the  western  end  of  the  island. 
 When  they  had  rounded  Matala,  they  were  again 
 caught  by  a  north-westerly  gale  (EvpoKKvhuiv),  and 
 the  residt  is  well  known  (Acts  xxviL  9-16). 
 
 Luke  is  the  only  ancient  writer  who  mentions 
 
FAIRS 
 
 FAMINE 
 
 Ka\ol  AifJiives.  Early  commentators  generally  sup- 
 posed that  it  was  identical  with  the  KaX-ij  'Aktt?  of 
 Stephen  of  Byzantium  (See  Kiiitiodi  Comm.  in 
 loc. )  The  latter,  however,  lay  on  the  western 
 coast  of  Crete,  and  it  was  a  toivn  as  well  as  a  har- 
 bour (Smith,  p.  80).  At  Fair  Havens  there  was 
 no  town,  for  Luke  describes  it  as  &  i'y'yvs  fjv  Tr6\(s 
 Aaaaia.  The  ruins  of  Lasea  were  discovered  a 
 few  years  ago,  about  five  miles  east  of  Fair 
 Havens,  and  thus  the  chain  of  evidence  was  com- 
 pleted (Lasea). 
 
 Fair  Havens  is  incidentally  mentioned  by  Rau- 
 wolf,  who  touched  at  this  port  in  his  voyage  to  Pales- 
 tine in  the  i6th  century.  He  calls  it  Calisfuene 
 {Reiss  in  die  JMorgenlander.)  Pococke  is  the  first 
 who  identifies  and  describes  it.  He  says,  '  it  is  a 
 small  bay  about  two  leagues  east  of  Matala,  which  is 
 now  called  by  the  Greeks  the  Good  or  Fair  Havens 
 (Ai/xewj'fs  KaXov%)  ; '  and  he  adds,  '  they  have  a  tra- 
 dition that  St.  Paul  sailed  from  that  place '  {De- 
 scription of  the  East,  vol.  ii.  pt.  i.  p.  250).  A  good 
 sketch  of  Fair  Havens  was  taken  by  Signor 
 Schranz,  the  artist  who  accompanied  Mr.  Pashley 
 in  his  tour  through  Crete.  It  is  copied  in  Smith's 
 excellent  work  (p.  81),  and  also  in  Conybeare  and 
 Howson's  Life  of  St.  Paid  (ist  ed.  ii.  329).  To 
 both  these  works  the  student  is  recommended  for 
 fuller  details  ;  and  in  them  he  will  find  charts  of 
 the  roadstead,  and  of  the  whole  southern  coast  of 
 Crete.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 FAIRS.  This  is  the  rendering  in  the  A.  V.  of 
 the  Hebrew  D''pi2Tj;  in  Ez.  xxvii.    12,    14,  16,  19, 
 
 22,  27.  In  ver.  33  of  the  same  chapter  it  is  ren- 
 dered '  wares,'  and  this  is  held  by  Fiirst,  Hit- 
 zig,  and  others,  to  be  the  proper  rendering  of  the 
 word  throughout.  The  LXX.,  however,  give 
 Si.yopa,  and  the  Vulg.  nundincs  and  forum  as  the 
 equivalent ;  and  this  Gesenius  considers  to  be  the 
 primary  sense  of  the  term,  from  2Ty,  to  let  go  for  a 
 price,  to  sell.  It  is  impossible,  however,  to  carry 
 this  meaning  through  the  chapter  ;  'and  hence,  in 
 order  to  suit  verses  27  and  33,  Gesenius  (arbitra- 
 rily) gives  the  second  meaning,  gains,  profits.  This 
 throws  doubt  on  his  explanation  of  the  word  ;  and 
 this  is  strengthened  by  the  consideration  that  the 
 phrase  p3fy3  JflJ  cannot  without  violence  be  ren- 
 dered to  expose  iii  the  ?>iarket  for  sale.  On  the  other 
 hand,  the  meaning  '  wares  '  can  as  little  be  carried 
 through  the  chapter ;  for  to  translate  |niy2  jnj 
 to  pay  for  wa^-es,  is  very  arbitrary.  The  only  in- 
 terpretation which  can  be  carried  through  the 
 chapter  is  that  suggested  by  Gousset  (Coinmentarii 
 Li)ig.  Hcb.  p.  594),  and  adopted  by  Havernick 
 {Comment,  iib.  Ezech.  p.  464),  viz.,  exchanges  or 
 eqinvale/it,  '  id  quod  alicui  relinquis  pro  alia  re 
 tibi  ab  ipso  tradita  in  contractu  permutationis,"= 
 goods  given  in  barter.  The  construction  differs 
 throughout  this  section.    "We  have  T'JIQTy  l^flJ,  ver. 
 
 12,  "tyn  l^nj  nD33,  ver.  16,  and  ^p^  1^03  "ty2, 
 ver.  19.  The  first  simply  expresses  the  fact  that 
 they  gave  an  equivalent ;  the  second  expresses  the 
 equivalent  they  gave,  viz. ,  precious  stones,  etc.  ;  the 
 third  indicates  that  they  reckoned  for  an  equivalent 
 with  iron,  etc.  This  last  construction  is  peculiar. 
 In  ver.  15  for  the  expression  we  have  been  con- 
 sidering we  have  I^^^K  ^^K'n,  which  signifies  to 
 return  or  render  a  price ;  and  the  expression  jriJ 
 :nyD  also  occurs  in  this  section  (Hitzig,  Comment. 
 inloc.)— W,  L.  A. 
 
 FAITH.  [James,  Ep.  of,  vol.  ii.  p. 462.;  Philo 
 SOPHY,  vol.  iii.  p.  530.] 
 
 FALL,  The.     [Adam.] 
 
 FALLOW  DEER.     [Jachmur.] 
 
 FALSE   PROPHETS.     [Prophecy,  vol.  iii. 
 p.  589-] 
 
 FAMINE  (lyi).  Considermg  the  early  period 
 in  the  history  of  the  world  to  which  the  Biblical 
 records,  especially  the  oldest  of  them,  refer  ;  and 
 considering  also  how  small  a  proportion  to  the 
 world  at  large,  or  even  to  the  inhabited  part  of  it, 
 the  population  bore  in  the  primitive  ages,  we  should 
 not  antecedently  expect  to  find  frequent  mention 
 of  famines.  Yet  does  it  appear,  from  the  testimony 
 of  these  records,  that  mankind  suffered  greatly  from 
 dearth  of  food  in  the  earliest  periods  of  which  we 
 have  any  account ;  and  the  Scriptural  history  in 
 this,  as  in  other  particulars,  will  be  found  interest- 
 ing and  valuable  to  the  economist  and  philosopher, 
 as  well  as  to  the  divine.  In  truth  famine  appears  to 
 depend,  not  on  the  extent  of  cultivable  or  of  culti- 
 vated land,  nor  on  the  proportion  which  such  land 
 bears  to  the  actual  population — though,  doubt- 
 less, both  these  elements  enter  into  the  influences 
 which  determine  the  question  of  abundance  or 
 scarcity — but  rather  on  human  forethought  and 
 thrift  so  applied,  as,  in  the  actual  circumstances, 
 whatever  they  are,  to  make  a  suitable  provision  in 
 all  cases  against  such  contingencies  as  may  occa- 
 sion dearth.  In  the  almost  entire  absence  of  this 
 forethought,  barbarous  and  half-civilized  nations 
 have  been  found,  scanty  though  the  population 
 may  be  in  relation  to  the  tracts  of  land  over 
 which  they  roam,  to  be  most  frequently  on  the 
 verge  of  destitution,  and  not  seldom  to  suffer  the 
 greatest  privations  from  dearth  and  famine.  \  ain 
 is  the  almost  unlimited  opportunity  which  Nature 
 spreads  around  them  for  the  supply  of  their  animal 
 necessities,  since  they  want  either  the  intelligence 
 and  skill  which  are  necessary  to  turn  these  oppor- 
 tunities to  account,  or  the  moral  qualities  which 
 would  spare  something  from  actual  abundance  in 
 order  to  provide  against  coming  wants. 
 
 Since  the  Bible  gives  its  unquestionable  evidence 
 to  shew  that  dearth  was  by  no  means  an  unfrequent 
 or  an  inconsiderable  evil  in  the  early  ages,  it  sup- 
 plies a  very  cogent  proof,  in  answer  to  those  who 
 maintain  either  that  the  world  is  worse  or  no  better 
 than  it  was  in  ancient  times,  that  at  least  in  those 
 moral  quaHties  on  which  man's  physical  well-being 
 depends,  mankind  have  made  unquestionable  ad- 
 vances. Indeed,  if  any  large  portion  of  the  earth 
 now  suflfer  from  famine,  the  cause  may  be  looked 
 for  not  so  much  in  the  want  of  forethought  and 
 savingness  as  in  the  operation  of  passions  and  pre- 
 judices a.rising  from  misconceived  self-interest, 
 which  prevent  the  free  interchange  of  the  bounties 
 of  divine  Providence, — passions  and  prejudices 
 which  characterize  not  mankind  at  large,  but  only 
 certain  small  portions  of  society,  and  which,  in 
 consequence,  how  powerful  soever  they  may  for  a 
 time  be,  have  not  the  vitality  of  vices  of  character 
 that  belong  to  a  semi-barbarous  age,  and  must,  in 
 a  day  like  the  present,  soon  disappear  before  the 
 generous  and  dissolving  ardour  of  enlightened 
 Christian  love. 
 
 The  first  mention  of  a  famine  which  occurs  in 
 Scripture  is  in  Gen.  xiL  10,  where  we  read  that  so 
 
FAMINE 
 
 FARMER 
 
 early  as  the  days  of  the  patriarch  Abraham  'there 
 was  a  famine  in  the  land,'  which  is  described  as  so 
 grievous  as  to  compel  the  father  of  the  faithful 
 to  quit  Canaan.  The  country  to  which  he  resorted 
 was,  as  we  might  expect,  the  land  of  Egypt,  the 
 early  and  lasting  fertility  of  which  is  a  well- 
 known  historical  fact.  In  Gen.  xxvi.  I,  this 
 famine  is  designated  as  '  the  first,'  that  is,  the  first 
 known,  or  of  which  there  was  any  record.  The 
 same  passage  informs  us  of  another  famine,  which 
 afflicted  'the  land'  in  the  days  of  Isaac,  who 
 seems  to  have  contemplated  a  descent  into  Egypt ; 
 but  who,  being  instructed  of  God,  removed  to  a 
 part  of  Arabia  Petraea  (Gen.  xxvi.  17)  named 
 Gerar,  a  city  of  the  Philistines,  whose  monarch's 
 name  was  Abimelech. 
 
 Even  Egypt,  however,  was  not  exempt  from  the 
 desolations  of  famine  (Gen.  xli.  30).  The  ordi- 
 nary cause  of  dearth  in  Egypt  is  connected  with  the 
 annual  overflow  of  the  Nile.  If  the  rise  of  the 
 waters  is  in  any  year  below  a  certain  standard,  the 
 country  affords  scanty  supplies  of  food,  and  may  for 
 the  greater  part  remain  a  desert.  But  more  than 
 local  causes  must  have  been  in  operation  in  the 
 case  before  us  ;  for  we  are  told  that  '  the  famine 
 was  sore  in  all  lands,'  that  '  the  famine  was  over 
 all  the  face  of  the  earth.'  By  the  foresight  and 
 wisdom  of  Joseph,  however,  provision  against  the 
 evil  had  been  made  in  Egypt,  while  other  countries 
 were  left  to  suffer  the  unmitigated  consequences  of 
 their  neglect.  The  provision  made  by  Joseph  must 
 have  been  of  a  most  abundant  nature,  since  the 
 period  during  which  the  dearth  lasted  was  no  less 
 than  seven  years,  and  the  people  of  other  parts 
 sought  and  received  supplies  in  Egypt — '  all  coun- 
 tries came  into  Egypt  to  buy  corn.'  Among  other 
 lands,  Canaan  suffered  from  the  famine  ;  which  was 
 the  immediate  occasion  of  Jacob's  sending  his  sons 
 down  into  Egypt,  of  the  discovery  which  they  made 
 of  their  lost  brother,  and  of  the  settlement  in  that 
 land  of  the  descendants  of  Abraham  :  an  event  of 
 the  highest  consequence  in  the  sequel,  and  serving 
 to  illustrate  the  benignity  and  wisdom  of  divine  Pro- 
 vidence in  the  evils  with  which,  under  its  influence, 
 the  world  is  afflicted. 
 
 This  famine  was  made  by  Joseph  the  occasion  of 
 one  of  the  greatest  social  revolutions  which  history 
 records.  The  details  may  be  found  in  the  book  of 
 Genesis  ;  and  it  is  enough  to  say  here  that,  as  the 
 special  administrator  of  the  affairs  of  the  country, 
 Joseph  got  into  his  hands  all  the  property  of  the 
 kingdom,  including  the  land  (excepting  that  which 
 belonged  to  the  priests),  and  gave  the  same  back 
 to  the  people  as  tenants  at  will,  on  condition  of 
 their  paying  to  the  king  'the  fifth,'  probably  of 
 the  annual  produce. 
 
 From  these  statements  it  appears  that  three  suc- 
 cessive generations  were  in  these  early  days  visited 
 by  famine.  The  Scriptural  narrative  (the  details  of 
 which  may  be  easily  ascertained  by  the  help  of  a 
 Concordance)  shews  that  in  after  ages  famines 
 were,  in  ancient  times,  more  frequent  than  they  are 
 now  ;  and  this  justifies  the  use  which  is  made  of  so 
 terrible  a  scourge  by  the  sacied  writers,  and  espe- 
 cially the  prophets  and  our  Lord  himself,  in  the 
 highly  figurative  language  which  they  employ  in 
 their  righteous  endeavours  to  turn  wicked  men  and 
 wicked  nations  from  the  evil  of  their  ways  (Ezek. 
 vi.  II  ;  Matt.  xxiv.  7).  In  Amos  viii.  11,  s^.,  a 
 heavier  woe  than  even  the  want  of  bread  is  appro- 
 priately spoken  of  under  the  appellation  of  a  fa- 
 
 mine;  'Behold,  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord 
 God,  that  I  will  send  a  famine  in  the  land  ;  not  a 
 famine  of  bread  nor  a  thirst  for  water,  but  of  hear- 
 ing the  word  of  the  Lord  ;  and  they  shall  wander 
 from  sea  to  sea,  and  from  the  north  even  to  the 
 east,  they  shall  run  to  and  fro  to  seek  the  word  of 
 the  Lord,  and  shall  not  find  it :  in  that  day  shall 
 the  fair  virgins  and  the  young  men  faint  for  thirst.' 
 The  ensuing  verse  shews  that  idolatiy  was  the 
 moving  cause  of  this  hea^y  punishment. — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 FARISSOL  or  FARIZOL  (^VIQ),  Abraham 
 b.  MORDECAI,  a  distinguished  geographer,  polemic, 
 and  commentator,  was  born  at  Avignon,  in  Italy, 
 about  145 1.  He  left  his  native  place  about  1470, 
 went  to  Mantua,  and  thence  to  Ferrara,  where  he  be- 
 came minister  of  the  Jewish  community,  which  office 
 he  held  till  1520.  Whilst  ministering  to  the  spiritual 
 wants  of  the  synagogue,  Farissol  most  diligently  em- 
 ployed his  time  in  the  elucidation  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures,  and  as  the  result  of  his  labours,  in  1500, 
 finished  a  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  entitled, 
 D'»Jt^''|{i>  "TlISi  the  floiver  of  lilies.  This  was  followed 
 by  his  great  apologetic  and  polemic  work  called  pj3 
 Dn~l3N,  the  shield  of  Abraliam,  consisting  of  three 
 parts,  the  first  of  which  is  occupied  with  an  apo- 
 logy for  Judaism,  the  second  is  directed  against 
 Mohammedanism,  and  the  third  against  Chris- 
 tianity. Shortly  after  this  (circa  15 16)  he  pub- 
 lished an  excellent  commentary  on  Job  (py  {J'lT'S 
 2VK),  and  in  the  autumn  of  1524  he  gave  to  thf 
 worldhis  famous  cosmography,  called  JTimiii  mjN 
 
 DPiy,  Itinei-a  Miindi,  in  which  he  describes  the 
 abodes  of  his  independent  brethren,  the  ten  tribes, 
 the  Sambation  [Eldad],  and  the  garden  of  Eden, 
 which  he  places  in  the  mountains  of  Nubia  (comp. 
 chaps,  xviii.  and  xxx. )  Twelve  months  after  the 
 appearance  of  this  marvellous  production,  Farissol 
 finished  a  commentai-y  on  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes 
 
 (nbnp  "IDD  ^IT'S),  and  died  about  the  end  of 
 1526.  Of  his  exegetical  works  the  commentary  on 
 Job  only  is  printed  in  the  Rabbinic  Bible,  pub- 
 lished at  Venice,  1518,  and  in  the  famous  Rabbinic 
 Bible,  edited  by  Frankfurter,  4  vols.  fol. ,  Amster- 
 dam, 1724-1727.  His  cosmography,  which  is  inter- 
 spersed with  curious  matter  well  worthy  of  the  at- 
 tention of  the  Biblical  student,  has  been  published 
 no  less  than  six  times.  One  edition  was  published 
 in  England  by  Thomas  Hyde,  the  celebrated  Ori- 
 ental scholar,  under  the  title  D^y  JTimiN  JlliN, 
 id  est  Itinera  Mmtdi,  Oxonii,  1691,  with  a  Latin 
 translation,  and  very  elaborate  and  learned  notes, 
 which  is  ahke  an  honour  to  English  Oriental 
 scholarship  and  typography  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
 tury.—C.  D.  G. 
 
 FARMER,  Hugh,  a  learned  dissenting  mini- 
 ster, was  bom  near  Shrewsbuiy,  17 14,  and  received 
 the  rudiments  of  his  education  in  Llanegrin,  Meri- 
 onethshire. He  was  afterwards  placed  under  the 
 care  of  Dr.  Charles  Owen,  at  Warrington,  and 
 in  1730,  under  Dr.  Doddridge,  at  Northampton. 
 Having  finished  his  collegiate  course,  he  became 
 private  chaplain  to  William  Coward,  Esq.,  and 
 minister  of  a  congregation  in  Walthamstow,  which 
 increased  under  his  pastoral  care  from  a  mere 
 handful  to  a  numerous  and  influential  community. 
 In  1761  he  was  appointed  afternoon  preacher  at 
 Salter's  Hall,  and  afterwards  Tuesday  lecturer  in 
 the   same   place.     In  the  following  year  he   re- 
 
FARTHING 
 
 FASTS 
 
 linquished  the  former  of  these  two  offices ;  eight 
 years  subsequently,  the  latter  ;  and  finally,  his  pas- 
 torate. He  died,  1787,  in  the  seventy-third  year 
 of  his  age.  He  was  a  diligent  and  laborious  stu- 
 dent, and  acquired  vast  stores  of  information  on 
 Biblical  and  other  subjects.  His  viforks,  which 
 deserve  and  will  repay  perusal,  are  characterised 
 by  great  ability  and  learning,  independent  thought, 
 and  clearness  of  style.  The  principal  of  them 
 are  : — (i.)  An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  and  Design 
 of  Christ''s  Te?nptatio7t  in  the  Wilderness,  8vo, 
 1761 ;  designed  to  prove  that  the  temptation  of 
 ■^ur  Lord  was  not  a  real  occurrence,  but  a  '  divine 
 vision.'  (2.)  A  Dissertation  on  the  Miracles,  de- 
 signed to  shew  that  they  are  Arguments  of  a  Divine 
 Interposition,  and  absolute  Proofs  of  the  Alission 
 and  Doctrine  of  a  Prophet,  8vo,  1761  ;  in  which 
 questions  relating  to  the  Magicians  of  Egypt,  the 
 Witch  of  Endor,  etc. ,  are  ably  discussed,  while  it 
 IS  maintained  that  diabolical  agency  has  never,  and 
 can  never  perform  a  miracle.  (3.)  An  Essay  on 
 the  De/noniacs  of  the  Neiu  Testa fnent,  8vo,  of  which 
 a  third  edition  appeared  1818;  and  in  which  he 
 maintains  that  the  demoniacs  were  either  epileptic 
 persons  or  madmen.  (4. )  77^^?  Genei-al  Prevalence 
 of  the  worship  of  Human  Spii'its  in  the  Ancient 
 Heathen  Nations  asserted  and  proved,  8vo,  1783. 
 A  clause  in  his  will  required  that  all  his  MSS. 
 should  be  burned.  Accordingly  there  perished  in 
 the  flames,  among  the  rest,  a  volume  on  the 
 '  Demonology  of  the  Ancients,'  '  A  Dissertation  on 
 the  Histoiy  of  Balaam,'  and  a  second  edition  of 
 his  treatise  on  '  Miracles.' — I.  J. 
 
 FARTHING.  This  word  occurs  four  times  in 
 the  A.  V.  of  the  N.  T,  Two  names  of  coins  are 
 rendered  by  it. 
 
 1.  KoSpdz'TTjs,  qicadrajts  (Matt.  v.  26  ;  Mark  xii. 
 42),  a  coin  current  in  Palestine  in  the  time  of  our 
 
 Lord.  According  to  St.  Mark,  it  was  equal  to 
 two  lepta  (XeTTTo,  bvo  8  iari  KodpdvTrjs,  Mark,  /.  c.) 
 The  qimdrans  was  originally  the  fourth  part  of  the 
 as,  or  a  piece  of  three  ounces,  called  tciuncius,  and 
 was  marked  with  three  balls  to  denote  its  value 
 (Plin.  xxxiii.  3,  13).  It  was  already,  in  the  time 
 of  Cicero  (as  recorded  by  Plutarch  in  the  story  of 
 the  impiety  of  Clodius,  circa  B.C.  62),  the  smallest 
 Roman  brass  coin  {rh  Xe-KTOTaTov  rod  xo-^kov  vo/xla- 
 liaros  KovadpdvTTjv  eKoKovv,  Plut.  /n.  Cic.  xxix. 
 26),  though  in  the  earlier  times  of  the  Republic 
 there  were  the  sextans  or  sixth  part  of  the  as,  the 
 uncia  or  twelfth  part,  and  the  semiuncia  or  half- 
 ounce  (Cohen.  Med.  Imp.,  Introduction,  p.  xii.) 
 The  leptum  was  the  smallest  Greek  copper  coin, 
 and,  according  to  Suidas  (s.vv.  rdXavTov  and 
 oBoXos),  was  the  seventh  part  of  the  x'^^'^o'^s. 
 [Mite.]  In  the  Roman  copper  coinage  current  in 
 Palestine  at  the  time  of  our  Lord,  the  smallest 
 coin  seems  to  have  been  the  as  [dacrdpLov,  vid.  ififra), 
 but  there  was  also  another  currency,  the  Grseco- 
 Roman  or  Greek  imperial.  The  Kodpdur-rjs  and 
 XiTTTov  may  have  belonged  to  the  latter.  If  so,  the 
 former  would  be  the  quarter  of  the  daadpiov,  and 
 the  latter  the  eighth. 
 
 2.  'Aaa-dpiov  (Matt.  x.  29  ;  Luke  xii.  6)  the  Greek 
 name  of  the  Roman  as  or  assarius.  The  Vulg.  in 
 Matt.  X.  29  renders  it  by  as,  and  the  daffdpia 
 Svo  in  Luke  xii.  6  by  dipondius.  The  dipondius  or 
 dupondius  was  equal  to  two  asses.  From  the  fact 
 that  the  Vulg.  substitutes  dipondius  for  two  assaria, 
 it  is  probable  that  a  single  coin  only  is  intended  by 
 
 this  latter  form.  This  statement  Is  partly  corro- 
 borated by  our  findijng  copper  Greek  autonomoiis 
 coins  of  Chios  (viz.,  coins  slnick  during  the  Im- 
 perial period,  though  without  an  Imperial  head) 
 having  on  tliem  the  words  ACCAPION,  ACCA- 
 PIA  ATO  or  ATQ  and  ACCAPIA  TPIA.  We 
 also  have  copper  coins  of  Chios  with  the  words 
 HMTACCAPION  (sic)  and  OBOAOS,  this  latter 
 being  properly  the  name  of  a  Greek  silver  coin, 
 though  it  was  used  at  Metapontum  in  Lucania  for 
 a  copper  coin.  From  the  beauty  of  the  work  of 
 this  piece  it  cannot  be  later  than  B.C.  300,  and  the 
 obolus  at  this  period  was  certainly  of  silver.  It  has 
 been  suggested  that  it  was  struck  in  a  time  of  ex- 
 treme public  distress,  but  this  is  doubtful  (Millin- 
 gen.  Num.  de  PAncienne  Italie,  pp.  25,  26).  In 
 later  times  the  obolus  of  copper  seems  to  have  been 
 of  common  occurrence  (oTSa  70.^  rhv  x^^'^'o*')  <5i3o- 
 X6;',  (is  olffda,  irapd  tQi'  KaTairXebvTWv  eKdarov  iK- 
 Xeywv,  Lucian,  Contempt.,  Didot.  ed.,  p.  133  ; 
 cf.  Vitnivius  iii.  l).  The  HruTACCAPION  (sic), 
 half-assarius,  was,  according  to  Polybius,  the  sum 
 given  by  travellers  in  Italy  for  a  day's  living,  and 
 the  same  writer  adds  that  it  was  equal  to  the  fourth 
 part  of  the  obolus  {-rj/XLaffcTaplov,  tovto  5'  icrri  rirap- 
 Tov  ixipos  o^oXov,  Polyb.  Hist.  ii.  15,  6).  The 
 assai-ius  would  thus  be  equal  to  half  the  obolus. 
 In  another  passage  he  states  that  the  daily  pay  of 
 a  foot  soldier  in  his  lime  was  two  oboli  (Polyb. 
 Reliq.  vi.  39,  12).  At  this  time  the  attic  drachm 
 and  denarius  were  identical  [drachm],  and  a  de- 
 narius in  paying  the  soldiers  was  estimated  at  ten 
 asses  (Plin.  xxxiii.  3,  13).  The  obolus  being  the 
 sixth  part  of  the  drachm,  two  oboli  a  day  would  be 
 equal  to  3^  asses.  In  this  case  the  assarius  would 
 be  equal  to  rather  more  than  half  the  obolus.  The 
 ratio  instead  of  being  I  to  5  would  be  i  to  6,  but 
 the  discrepancy  is  so  small  as  to  be  of  no  material 
 importance. — F.  W.  M. 
 
 FASTS,  consisting  both  of  self-imposed  and 
 enjoined,  total  or  partial  abstinence  from  food, 
 have  existed  among  the  Jews,  as  among  all  other 
 nations,  from  time  mimemorial. 
 
 I.  The  import  of  fasting. — The  idea  which  the 
 Jews  attached  to  fasting  was  to  afflict,  weaken,  and 
 humble  the  soul  by  withholding  from  it  the  neces- 
 sary food  in  order  to  aid  man,  thus  brought  low, 
 to  give  himself  more  entirely  to  serious  devotion, 
 repentance,  and  communion  with  God.  This  is  evi- 
 dent from  the  phrase  ^ttl  njj?,  to  afflict  or  hitmblt 
 the  soul,  well  rendered  by  the  Septuagint,  raweivovf 
 T7]v  tpvxnv  ;  being  the  shorter  form  of  D"lV3  n^y 
 K-'D3,  to  afflict  the  soul  by  fasti7ig  1^^.  xxxv.  13),  used 
 to  express  fasting  on  the  most  solemn  and  only 
 occasion,  i.e.,  the  day  of  atonement,  in  which  it  is 
 commanded  in  the  law  of  Moses  (comp.  Lev.  xvL 
 29,  31  ;  xxiii.  27,  32;  Num.  xxix.  7).*  The  ex- 
 pressions D1V,  fast  (2  Sam.  xii.  16  ;  i  Kings  xxi. 
 9,  12  ;  2  Chron.  xx.  3  ;  Ezr.  viii.  21  ;  Is.  Iviii.  5, 
 6,  al.);  and  n''3J/n, /aJ/  (Ezr.  ix.  5),  wrongly  trans- 
 
 *  Ibn  Ezra  on  Lev.  xvi.  29  rightly  refers  to  tJ'DJ 
 yaiJ^n  njyj  (is.  Ivill.  lo),  and  the  opposite 
 phrase  Vt^l  Jt^'^3  33ynn  {ibid.  Iv.  2)  to  shew  that 
 tJ'DJ  njy  denotes  abstinence  from  food,  and  very 
 justly  remarks  that  the  use  of  this  short  phrase  on 
 the  part  of  the  lawgiver  to  express  fasting  unques- 
 tionably implies  that  it  was  a  well-known  old  cus- 
 tom among  the  Jews,  and  did  not  therefore  require 
 any  further  explanation. 
 
FASTS 
 
 6 
 
 FASTS 
 
 lated  heaviness  in  the  A.V.,  are  still  shorter  forms 
 of  this  phrase.  This  idea  of  fasting  is  also  seen  in 
 the  case  of  Moses  himself,  where  it  is  evident  that 
 his  total  abstinence  from  food  <"or  forty  days  was 
 intended  as  a  spiritual  discipline  to  wean  him  from 
 earth  and  fit  him  for  his  more  immediate  commu- 
 nion with  God  (Exod.  xxxiv.  28),  and  from  the  re- 
 mark that  '  the  nobles  of  Israel,'  who  had  no  such 
 intimate  communion  with  God,  saw  Him  without 
 fasting  (ibid.  xxiv.  11). 
 
 2.  Fasts  from  the  giving  of  the  Law  to  the  Baby- 
 lonish captivity  .—Thowgh,  as  has  already  been  re- 
 marked, the  day  of  atonement  was  the  only  fast 
 enjoined  in  the  law  of  Moses,  yet  it  was  not  the 
 only  occasion  when  the  pious  Israelites  endeavoured 
 to  crucify  the  flesh  and  the  lusts  thereof  by  total  or 
 partial  abstinence  from  food.  From  the  enact- 
 ments in  Num.  xxx.  2-16,  we  see  that  husbands 
 and  wives,  and  parents  and  children  of  both  sexes, 
 not  unfrequently  voluntarily  took  upon  themselves 
 vows  to  abstain  from  food  as  an  act  of  humiliation 
 in  the  sight  of  God,  believing  to  conciliate  thereby 
 the  favour  of  heaven.  Occasions  for  fasting  rapidly 
 increased  with  the  course  of  events.  Monarchs  re- 
 garded impending  calamities,  and  the  defeat  which 
 their  armies  sustained,  as  punishments  from  heaven 
 for  some  national  sin,  and  proclaimed  a  national 
 fast  ( Judg.  XX.  26  ;  i  Sam.  vii.  6 ;  I  Kings  xxi.  ; 
 2  Chron.  xx.  3),  and  the  people  beheld  in  any 
 humiliation  to  which  they  were  subjected  by  their 
 enemies,  and  in  every  affliction  to  which  flesh 
 and  blood  are  heir,  the  chastisement  of  God  for 
 some  secret  transgression,  and  imposed  private 
 fasts  upon  themselves  (i  Sam.  i.  7  ;  xx.  34  ;  xxxi. 
 13  ;  2  Sam.  i.  12  ;  iii.  35  ;  xii.  16  ;  i  Knigs  xxi. 
 27).  Still  up  to  the  time  of  the  Babylonish 
 captivity,  the  great  day  of  atonement  was  the 
 only  annual  fast  which  the  Jews  as  a  nation 
 kept 
 
 3.  From  the  Babylonish  captivity  to  the  destruc- 
 tion of  the  second  Temple. — This  ascetic  mode  of 
 piety  shews  itself  more  especially  in  and  after  the 
 Babylonish  captivity.  As  long  as  the  Temple  of 
 the  Lord  stood  upon  Mount  Moriah,  and  the  altar 
 ■was  blazing  with  the  ever  burning  fire,  the  pious 
 Israelites  endeavoured  to  serve  God  and  conciliate 
 His  favour  by  frequent  offerings  of  sacrifices.  But 
 when  the  Temple  was  destroyed,  and  the  people 
 carried  into  captivity,  the  sacrifice  of  the  body  and 
 one's  own  fat  and  blood  was  substituted  for  that  of 
 animals.  Hence,  that  touching  prayer  recorded  in 
 the  Talmud,  which  the  Jews  offered  on  their  fast- 
 days,  '  Lord  of  the  Universe  !  Thou  knowest 
 that  when  the  Temple  existed,  the  man  that  sinned 
 brought  a  sacrifice,  and  though  only  the  fat  and 
 blood  thereof  were  offered,  yet  he  was  forgiven. 
 Now  that  I  fast,  and  my  own  fat  and  blood  are 
 consumed,  let  it  please  Thee  to  accept  this  sacrifice 
 of  my  fat  and  blood,  as  if  offered  ujjon  Thine 
 altar,  and  be  merciful  unto  me'  {Berachoth  17,  a). 
 With  such  a  view  of  their  importance,  fasts  of  all 
 sorts,  private,  public,  and  annual,  were,  as  a  matter 
 of  course,  rapidly  multiplied.  Days  on  which 
 national  calamities  occurred,  were  as  eagerly  seized 
 as  fitting  opportunities  for  creating  annual  fasts,  in 
 order  to  sacrifice  '  the  fat  and  blood  of  the  body,' 
 as  the  occasions  during  the  time  of  the  Temple  to 
 offer  animals  upon  the  altar.  In  the  following  list, 
 the  annual  and  periodical  fasts  which  originated 
 during  this  period,  and  which  are  observed  by  the 
 Jews  to  the  present  day,  are  enumerated,  and  the 
 
 particulars    of    those    fasts   given    which    are    not 
 noticed  in  separate  articles  of  this  Cyclopaidia. 
 I.  Annual  National  F.-vsts. 
 
 1.  The  fast  of  the  fourth  mo7ith  05^•J;  nV2^ 
 T1Dn3),  which  is  kept  on  the  17th  of  Tamuz,  be- 
 cause— I.  On  this  day  the  Jews  made  the  Golden 
 Calf;  2.  Moses  broke  the  tables  of  the  Law,  as 
 appears  from  a  comparison  of  Exod.  xxiv.  with 
 xxxii. ;  3.  On  it  the  daily  sacrifices  ceased  for  want 
 of  cattle,  when  the  city  was  closely  besieged ;  and 
 4.  On  it  Jerusalem  was  stormed  by  Nebuchadnez- 
 zar, comp.  Zech.  viii.  19;  Jer.  Iii.;  Mishua Taanith, 
 iv.  6  ;  St.  Jerome  on  Zech.  viii.  19. 
 
 2.  The  fast  of  the  fifth  month  (3X2  ^yC^•n), 
 which  is  kept  on  the  9th  of  Ab,  because — i.  On 
 this  day  God  decreed  that  those  who  left  Egypt 
 should  not  enter  the  Land  of  Promise  (Num. 
 xiv.  27,  etc.);  2.  On  it  the  first  temple  was  de- 
 stroyed by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  second  by 
 Titus  ;  3.  On  it  the  city  of  Bethar  was  taken  by 
 the  Emperor  Adrian,  and  580,000  Jews  were 
 massacred  ;  and  4.  On  it  the  site  of  Jerusalem 
 was  ploughed  up  like  a  field,  as  predicted  by  Jer. 
 xxvi.  18,  comp.  Zech.  vii.  3,  4;  viii.  19;  Mishna 
 Taanith,  iv.  6 ;  St.  Jerome  on  Zech.  viii.  19 ;  Jost, 
 Gcschichte  d.  Israeliten,  iii.  p.  240.  . 
 
 3.  The  fast  of  the  seventh  month  {\VT\^  01^*). 
 vii.  5 ;  which  is  kept  on  the  3d  of  Tiskri,  to  be- 
 wail the  murder  of  Gedaliah  at  Mizpah,  comp. 
 Zech.  vii.  5  ;  viii.  19 ;  Jer.  xli.  i  ff  ;  2  Kings 
 XXV.  25;  Seder  01am  Rabba,  c.  xxvi.;  Megillath 
 Taanith  c.  xii. 
 
 4.  The  fast  of  the  tenth  month  (n2L33  illCJ?)  ; 
 comp.  Zech.  viii.  19,  which  is  kept  on  the  loth  of 
 Tebcth,  to  commemorate  the  commencement  of  the 
 siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  which  took 
 place  on  this  day ;  comp.  Zech.  viii.  19  ;  2  Kings 
 x.\v.  I.  These  four  fasts  have  been  Christianized  ; 
 and  tradition  tells  us  that  their  transfer  into  the 
 Christian  Church  was  made  by  the  Roman  Bishop 
 Callistus  (fl.  223).  To  deprive  them,  however, 
 of  their  Jewish  appearance,  the  whole  year  was 
 divided  into  four  seasons  [qziatuor  tempo>-a),  and  a 
 fast  was  appointed  for  one  week  of  each  season  ; 
 comp.  Herzog,  Real.-Encyllop.,  iii.  p.  336. 
 
 5.  The  fast  of  Esther  ("iriDX  n''JJ?n),  which  is 
 kept  on  the  13th  of  Adar ;  comp.  Esther  iv.  16, 
 17;  ix.  31.    [Esther,  fast  of.] 
 
 II.  Periodical  and  individual  Fasts. 
 
 I.  The  bi-weekly  fast  CC^VOHI  ""JD'),  kept  every 
 Monday  and  Thursday  between  Pcsach  and  At- 
 screth,  and  between  Siiccoth  and  Chaniica,  making 
 in  all  twenty-eight  days.  On  these  days  of  the 
 respective  weeks,  the  first  chapter  of  the  section 
 of  the  Pentateuch  forming  the  lesson  for  the  fol- 
 lowing Sabbath,  is  read,  when  three  persons  are 
 called  to  the  reading,  and  a  special  prayer  for 
 mercy  (□"im  SIH")),  composed  for  these  days,  is 
 introduced  into  the  daily  service  (comp.  Megilla 
 31,  a;  Taanith  12,  a;  Sopherim  xxi.  3  ;  Kol  Bo, 
 Hilcholh  Taanith,  Ltike  xviii.  12).  The  cause  ot 
 these  bi-weekly  fasts  is,  as  we  are  told,  that  Moses 
 went  up  to  Mount  Sinai  to  receive  the  second  tables 
 of  the  law  on  a  Thursday,  having  broken  the  first 
 on  account  of  the  golden  calf,  and  came  down  on 
 a  Monday  (comp.  Baba  Katna  82,  a,  and  Rashi  on 
 this  passage).  It  is  to  these  frequent  fasts  that  the 
 disciples  of  John  referred  when  addressing  the 
 Saviour  (Matt.  ix.  14),  and  it  is  the  abuse  of  these 
 fasts  which  the  Saviour  exposes,  ibid.  vi.  16.  Comp. 
 also  Mark  ii.  18 ;  Luke  v.  2,Z  >  -A-cts  x.  30.     This 
 
FAT 
 
 FAT 
 
 bi-weekly  fasting  has  also  been  adopted  in  the 
 Christian  Church  ;  but  Monday  and  Thursday  were 
 changed  into  Wednesday  and  Friday  (feria  qiiai'ta 
 et  sexla),  as  commemorative  of  the  betrayal  and 
 crucifixion  of  Christ. 
 
 2.  First-born  sons'  fast  ("1133  n^JJ'Tl)  on  the  day 
 preceding  the  feast  of  Passover,  in  commemoration 
 of  the  fact,  that  whilst  God  on  that  occasion  smote 
 all  the  first-born  of  the  Egyptians,  he  spared  those 
 of  the  house  of  Israel  ;  comp.  Exod.  xii.  29,  etc., 
 Sopherim  xxi.  3.     [First-born.] 
 
 Passing  over  many  other  private  fasts  which 
 are  of  a  later  origin,  we  come  to  the  mode  in 
 which  these  fasts  were  observed. 
 
 4.  The  manner  in  which  these  fasts  were  kept. — 
 All  these  fasts  have  been  and  still  are  kept  very 
 rigidly  and  solemnly.  At  the  annual  fasts,  during 
 the  time  of  the  Temple,  public  demonstrations  of 
 penitence  and  grief  were  made  in  the  streets. 
 Comets  and  trumpets  were  blown  in  Jerusalem, 
 whilst  in  other  places  only  one  such  instrument 
 was  employed  ;  the  pulpits  of  the  ministers  were 
 brought  out  of  the  temple  and  synagogues  into  the 
 
 streets  (liy  ~)EJ>  n^im),  where  all  the  people  as- 
 sembled wrapped  in  sackcloth,  strewing  ashes  upon 
 their  heads.  Then  one  of  the  people  also  strewed 
 ashes  upon  the  heads  of  the  president  or  prince 
 (N''C'3)  and  the  judges  ;  another,  who  was  the  oldest 
 among  them,  addressed  the  assembly  in  heart- 
 moving  terms — '  My  brethren,  remember  that  it  is 
 not  written  respecting  the  repentance  of  the  Nine- 
 vites  that  God  regarded  their  outwardly  wrapping 
 themselves  in  sackcloth,  and  for  this  cause  ac- 
 cepted their  fast  days,  but  that  He  saw  their  acts, 
 and  that  they  had  turned  from  their  evil  ways' 
 (Jonah  iii.  10).  Moreover,  the  teaching  of  the 
 prophets  also,  is,  '  Rend  your  hearts,  and  not  your 
 garments'  (Joel  ii.  13)  ;  whereupon  another  of  the 
 elders  of  the  congregation,  who  had  a  pious  and 
 well-regulated  family,  stood  up  with  all  the  people 
 and  prayed,  introducing  into  the  regular  daily  ser- 
 vice the  penitential  Psalms  (viz.,  cxx. ,  cxxi. ,  cxxx. , 
 and  cii. )  All  the  prayers  and  benedictions  used 
 on  these  occasions  are  most  appropriate  and  touch- 
 ing. In  Jerusalem,  where  these  solemn  services 
 were  held,  at  the  east  gate,  the  whole  congrega- 
 tion called  out  to  the  priests,  after  each  benediction 
 pronounced  by  the  minister,  '  Sound  the  loud 
 trumpet.'  This  took  place  seven  times.  At  the 
 close  of  the  service  the  people  in  every  place  went 
 to  the  cemeteries,  where  they  continued  their  lamen- 
 tations and  prayers.  The  whole  of  the  service, 
 with  the  exception  of  the  few  modifications  which 
 have  been  made  in  consequence  of  the  altered  cir- 
 cumstances of  the  nation,  is  used  to  the  present 
 day  ;  and  the  Jews  still  look  anxiously  for  the  rising 
 of  the  stars,  when  their  fasts  terminate,  a  circum- 
 stance to  which  St.  Jerome  already  refers. 
 
 5.  Literature. — Mishna  Taanith,  and  the  Tal- 
 mt(d  Taanith;  Maimonides,  Jod  Ha-Chezaka,  Hil- 
 choth  Taanioth,  vol.  i.  p.  315,  seqq.  ;  Lightfoot, 
 HorcB  Hebraica,  Luke  xviii.  12  ;  Schoeltgen,  LLorce 
 EbraiccB  on  Luke  xviii.  12  ;  Reland,  Antiquitates 
 Saa-cs  Veto'uni  HebrcBorum,  1717,  p.  538,  seqq.  ; 
 Bloch,  in  Gei£;er^s  Wissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift  fiir 
 iiidische  Theologie,  iv.  p.  205,  seqq.  ;  Fink,  i)i  Ersch 
 tend  Gnibers  Encyklopddie,  s.  v.  Fasten ;  Jost, 
 Geschichte  desjndenthums  und seiner Secten,  Leipzig, 
 1857,  vol.  i.  p.  184,  seqq. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 FAT.     [Vat.] 
 
 FAT  was  regarded  among  the  Jews,  as  araur.g 
 all_  other  nations  of  antiquity,  as  the  richest  part  of 
 animals,  and  therefore  became  synonymous  with 
 the  first,  the  best,  the  prime  of  anything.  Thus  the 
 best  produce  of  the  land  is  called  '  the  fat  of  the 
 earth'  (Gen.  xlv.  18),  '■  the  fat  of  wheat'  (Deut. 
 xxxii.  14;  Ps.  Ixxxi.  17;  cxlvii.  14)  ;  the  choicest 
 oil  and  wine  are  termed  '  the  fat  of  oil,  and  the  fat 
 of  wine'  (Num.  xviii.  12)  ;  the  first  and  greatest 
 heroes  are  denominated  '//^f^Jz/of  the  mighty'  (Judg. 
 iii.  29  ;  2  Sam.  i.  22  ;  Is.  x.  16)  ;  and  the  magnates 
 and  most  distinguished  of  the  earth  are  designated 
 '  thefaf  (Ps.  xxii.  30).  Now,  as  by  virtue  of  its 
 being  the  best  and  prime  part,  fat  represents  the 
 whole  animal ;  therefore,  like  the  first-born,  the 
 first-fruits  and  the  first  and  best  of  everything,  it 
 belongs  to  God.  It  was  in  accordance  with  this 
 natural  feehng  that  most  of  the  ancient  nations  pre- 
 sented the  fat  to  their  God.  Thus  the  Egyptians, 
 when  sacrificing  a  pig  to  the  full  moon,  burnt  the 
 tail,  spleen,  caul,  and  all  the  fat  about  the  belly  of 
 the  animal,  and  eat  the  flesh  themselves  [Herod,  ii. 
 47)  ;  the  Persians  lay  a  piece  of  caul  of  the  sacri- 
 ficed animal  upon  the  fire  (Strabo,  xv.,  c.  iii.  sec. 
 13)  ;  and  the  Greeks  used  to  cut  out  the  thigh 
 bones  of  victims,  wrap  them  up  in  two  folds  of  fat, 
 also  lay  slices  of  fat  upon  them,  lay  upon  the  altar, 
 and  burn  them  (comp.  Liddell  and  Scott's  Greek- 
 English  Lexicon,  s.  v.  ii.ii\pia.)  ;  and  Abel,  who 
 brought  the  first  animal  sacrifice,  not  only  presented 
 to  the  Lord  '  the  firstlings  of  his  flock,'  but  '  tht 
 fat  thereof,'  which,  by  virtue  of  its  being  the  best 
 part,  was  as  much  the  firstling  of  the  animal  itself 
 as  the  animal  was  the  firstling  of  the  flock. 
 
 The  parts  of  the  fat  or  suet  of  the  victims,  which 
 belong  to  God,  and  are  especially  to  be  appro- 
 priated to  the  altar,  are  given  in  Exod.  xxix.  13-22, 
 and  Lev.  iii.  3-5,  as  follows  : — 1.  The  fat  which 
 
 covers  the  entrails  (aipH  T.S  HD^On  3^^!)  =  iiri- 
 7i.\oi/s,  as  Josephus  rightly  has  it  (A?itiq.  iii.  9.  2) ; 
 the  omentum,  which  is  only  to  be  found  in  man 
 and  mammals,  and  is  very  fat  in  ruminants  (comp. 
 Arist.  Hist.  Aniin.  i.  16;  Plin.  Llist.  Nat.  xi.  80). 
 
 2.   The  fat  which  accumulates  around  entrails  07n 
 
 31  pn  7V  "lt^'X),  and  is  easily  separated  therefrom, 
 i.e.,  the  reticular  adherings  to  the  colon.  3.  The 
 two  kidneys,  with  the  fat  on  them,  at  the  internal 
 
 muscles  of  the  loins  (jH^y  3^nni  nXI  nV^3n  "DB' 
 
 DvD3n  7y  "ItJ'N),  as  the  most  fat  accumulales 
 near  the  kidneys  (Deut.  xxxii.  14  ;  Is.  xxxiv.  6), 
 and  to  such  an  extent  in  sheep  that  they  some- 
 times die  of  it  (ot  pecppol  /xaXLara  tGiv  aTrXd-yx"'^^ 
 'ixovcri  TTLixek-qv,  Arist.  De  Pai-t.  Anim.  iii.  9,  and 
 Hist.  Anim.  iii.  17  ;  Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  xi.  81)  ;  and 
 4.  The  mnV,  which  is  taken  by  the  Sept.  and 
 Josephus  [Antiq.  iii.  9.  2)  to  mean  6  Xo/36s  tov 
 rjiraros,   the  greater  lobe  of  the  liver,  similarly  the 
 
 Syriac  and  Chaldee  ^133  hv^  X"lVn  ;  and  is  ex- 
 plained by  Talmud  [Chitlin.  xlix.  6),  Rashi,  Kim- 
 chi,  Solomon  b.  Melech,  etc.,  J>5E'S"lt3  =  rpd- 
 Trefa,  whereby  the  Greeks,  according  to  Hippo- 
 crates, understood  the  greater  and  thickest  of  the 
 five  Xo/3oi  TOV  iJTraTos,  and  which  is  also  called  0 
 X6/3oy  TOV  TJiraTos  (Bahr  Symb.  ii.  p.  354).  This 
 meaning  of  mm''  is  ably  defended  by  Bochart 
 _  [Hieroz.  lib.  ii.  c.xlv. ),  and  followed  by  Le  Clerc,  J. 
 I).  Rosenmiiller,  Kalisch  (on  Exod.  xxix.  13),  and 
 others.      But   the   Vulgate,   Luther.  Tyndal    the 
 
FATHER 
 
 8 
 
 FATHER 
 
 Bishops'  Bible,  the  Geneva  Bible,  the  A.  V.,  Pis- 
 cator,  Dc  Wette,  Knobel,  Fiirst,  etc. ,  take  it  to 
 denote  omcfitinn  mimes,  whicli  is  preferable,  for  the 
 lobes  have  no  accumulation  of  fat.     And  5.  The 
 
 tail  of  a  sheep  (iT'^K),  which,  in  certain  species  {ovis 
 laticaudata),  contains  a  great  quantity  of  fat  [Sheep]. 
 It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  eating  of  fat  is  forbid- 
 den (Lev.  iii.  17).  The  opinion  of  Maimonides, 
 that  it  is  prohibited  because  it  is  tinwhoksome  (More 
 Nebochim,  part  iii.  c.  xlviii.)  is  most  appositely  met 
 by  Bahr's  striking  question  (Symb.  ii.  382)  :  Soil 
 Jekovak  bekommen,  was  der  Mensch  nicht  brattckcn 
 kann,  womit  er  sick  den  Mageti  verdirbt?  Still 
 more  preposterous  is  the  opinion  that  the  fat  that 
 covereth  the  inw^ards,  which  was  consumed  in  the 
 fire,  '  signified  the  taking  away  of  our  corruption  by 
 the  Spirit  of  Christ'  (Ainsworth) ;  or  that  it  '  de- 
 noted Christ,  the  fatted  calf,  whose  sacrifice  is  the 
 best  and  most  excellent'  (Gill) ;  that  '  the  kidneys' 
 denote  '  the  seat  of  lust,  and  were  likewise  burned 
 to  teach  mortification  of  our  members  which  are  on 
 earth'  (Ainsworth);  or  that  '  they  signify  the  burn- 
 ing zeal  and  flaming  love  and  affections  of  Christ 
 for  his  people,  which  instructed  him,  and  put  him 
 upon  offering  himself  a  sacrifice  of  peace-offering 
 for  them'  (Gill). 
 
 It  remains  to  be  added  that  the  Jews,  regarding 
 the  prohibition  in  Lev.  iii.  17  as  absolute,  to  this 
 day  abstain  from  eating  some  parts  of  the  suet, 
 and  the  Rabbinic  rule  for  distinguishing  between 
 
 the  lawful  and  prohibited  fat  is  DJTlD  "llilD  3?n 
 
 DDID  '13''K  SuiJ  that  the  former  is  easily  detached 
 from  the  flesh,  and  comes  under  the  category  of 
 
 3?n,  whilst  the  latter  is  intermbced  with  the  lean, 
 and  is  designated  |D1tJ'.     The  tail    of  the    sheep 
 
 (n  vX)  is  a  matter  of  dispute.  The  Rabbinic  Jews 
 maintain  that  the  prohibition  of  it  is  restricted  to 
 sacrifices,  whilst  the  Karaite  Jews  regard  the  eat- 
 ing of  the  tail  as  absolutely  forbidden. 
 
 Z//^ra/«;r.— Maimonides,  yod  Ha-Chezaka  Hil- 
 choth  Maachaloth  Astiroih,  cap.  vii. ,  sec.  5,  vol.  ii., 
 p.  175  j  Ramban  on  Lev.  iii.  9 ;  Bochart,  Hierozoicott, 
 lib.  ii.,  cap.  45  ;  Biihr,  Syi7iboHk  des  Mosaischen 
 Cultus,  Heidelberg,  1839,  vol.  ii.,  p.  352  ff.,  381  ff. ; 
 Knobel,  Exodus  und  Leviticus  erkldrt ;  Exeget. 
 Handbuch  z.  A.  T.,  part  xii.,  p.  373  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 FATHER.  This  word,  besides  its  obvious  and 
 primary  sense,  bears,  in  Scripture,  a  number  of 
 other  applications,  most  of  which  have,  through 
 the  use  of  the  Bible,  become  more  or  less  common 
 in  all  Christian  countries. 
 
 I.  The  term  Father  is  very  often  applied  to 
 God  himself  (Exod.  iv.  22 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  6 ;  2 
 Sam.  vii.  14  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  27,  28  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  16  ; 
 Ixiv.  8).  It  is  strongly  contended  by  Dr.  Lee  that 
 it  is  only  applied  to  God  as  having  adopte  ]  the 
 chosen  peo|3le  as  his  children  ;  and  he  denies,  with 
 some  harshness,  that  it  is  applied  to  him  in  the 
 general  sense  as  the  Creator,  and  thence  the  Father 
 of  all  mankind  (Lex.  s.  v.  3X).  Nevertheless,  he 
 admits  that  man's  creation  is  occasionally  mentioned 
 vn  connection  with  this  use  of  the  word  ;  and  this, 
 coupled  with  the  clearer  intimations  of  the  N.  T., 
 leaves  little  room  to  question  that  it  is  the  intention 
 of  the  sacred  record  to  set  God  before  us  as  the 
 Fatlier  of  all  men,  in  the  general  sense  of  creator 
 nnd  preserver  of  all  men,  but  more  especially  of 
 Ijclievers,  whether  Jews  or  Christians.     Indeed  the 
 
 analogy  of  language  would  point  to  this,  seeing 
 that  in  the  O.  T.,  and  in  all  the  Syro-Arabian 
 dialects,  the  originator  of  anything  is  constantly 
 called  its  father.  To  the  same  effect  is  also  a  pas- 
 sage in  Josephus's  paraphrase  of  the  law  (Deut. 
 xxi.  18-21),  respecting  rebellious  sons,  koI  avrds 
 (Qebs)  iraT7]p  tov  iravrbs  dvdpdnruv  yivovs,  '  because 
 he  (God)  is  himself  the  father  of  the  whole  human 
 race '  {Antiq.  iv.  8.  24). 
 
 Without  doubt,  however,  God  is  in  a  more 
 especial  and  intimate  manner,  even  as  by  covenant, 
 the  Father  of  the  Jews  (Jer.  xxxi.  9  ;  Is.  Ixiii.  16 ; 
 Ixiv.  8  ;  John  viii.  41  ;  v.  45  ;  2  Cor.  vi.  18) ;  and 
 also  of  Christians,  or  rather  of  all  pious  and  be- 
 lieving persons,  who  are  called  '  sons  of  God ' 
 (John  i.  12;  Rom.  viii.  16,  etc.)  Thus  Jesus,  in 
 speaking  to  his  disciples,  calls  God  their  Father 
 (Matt.  vi.  4,  8,  15,  18  ;  x.  20,  29  ;  xiii.  43,  etc.) 
 The  Apostles,  also,  for  themselves  and  other 
 Christians,  call  him  '  Father '  (Rom.  i.  7  ;  I  Cor. 
 i.  3  ;  2  Cor.  i.  2 ;  Gal.  i.  4 ;  and  many  other 
 places). 
 
 2.  Father  is  applied  to  any  ancestor  near  or  re- 
 mote, or  to  ancestors  ('fathers  ')  in  general.  The 
 progenitor,  or  founder,  or  patriarch  of  a  tribe  or 
 nation,  was  also  pre-eminently  its  father,  as  Abra- 
 ham of  the  Jews.  Examples  of  this  abound.  See, 
 for  instance,  Deut.  i.  II  ;  I  Kings  viii.  21  ;  Matt, 
 iii.  9  ;  xxiii.  30 ;  Mark  xi.  lO ;  Luke  i.  32,  73  ; 
 vi.  23,  26  ;  John  vii.  22,  etc. 
 
 3.  Father  is  also  applied  as  a  title  of  respect  to 
 any  head,  chief,  ruler,  or  elder,  and  especially  to 
 kings,  prophets,  and  priests  (Judg.  xvii.  10 ;  xviii. 
 19  ;  I  Sam.  x.  12  ;  2  Kings  ii.  12  ;  v.  13  ;  vi.  21 ; 
 xiii.  14 ;  Prov.  iv.  I  ;  Matt,  xxiii.  9  ;  Acts  vii.  2  ; 
 xxii.  1  ;   I  Cor.  iv.  15,  etc.) 
 
 4.  The  author,  source,  or  beginner  of  anything 
 is  also  called  the  Father  of  the  same,  or  of  those 
 who  follow  him.  Thus  Jabal  is  called  '  the  father 
 of  those  who  dwell  in  tents,  and  have  cattle  ;'  and 
 Jubal,  '  the  father  of  all  such  as  handle  the  harp 
 and  the  organ '  (Gen.  iv.  20,  2 1  ;  comp.  Job 
 xxxviii.  28;  John  viii.  44;  Rom.  iv.  12).  This 
 use  of  the  word  is  exceedingly  common  in  the  East 
 to  this  day,  especially  as  applied  in  the  formation 
 of  proper  names,  in  which,  also,  the  most  curious 
 Hebrew  examples  of  this  usage  occur  [Ab]. 
 
 The  authority  of  a  father  was  very  great  in  patri- 
 archal times  ;  and  although  the  power  of  life  and 
 death  was  virtually  taken  from  the  parent  by  the 
 law  of  Moses,  which  required  him  to  bring  his 
 cause  of  complaint  to  the  public  tribunals  (Deut. 
 xxi.  18-21),  all  the  more  real  powers  of  the  pater- 
 nal character  were  not  only  left  unimpaired,  but 
 were  made  in  a  great  degree  the  basis  of  the  judicial 
 polity  which  that  law  established.  The  children 
 and  even  the  grandchildren  continued  under  the 
 roof  of  the  father  and  grandfather  ;  they  laboured 
 on  his  account,  and  were  the  most  submissive  of 
 his  servants.  The  property  of  the  soil,  the  power 
 of  judgment,  the  civil  rights,  belonged  to  him  only, 
 and  his  sons  were  merely  his  instruments  and  as- 
 sistants. If  a  family  be  compared  to  a  body,  then 
 the  father  was  the  head,  and  the  sons  the  members.^ 
 moving  at  his  will  and  in  his  service.  There  were 
 exceptions,  doubtless  ;  but  this  was  the  rule,  and, 
 with  some  modifications,  it  is  still  the  rule  through- 
 out the  East. 
 
 Filial  duty  and  obedience  were,  indeed,  in  the 
 eyes  of  the  Jewish  legislator,  of  such  high  import- 
 ance that  great  care  was  taken  that  the  paternal 
 
FEASTS 
 
 9 
 
 FELIX 
 
 authority  should  not  be  weakened  by  the  with- 
 drawal of  a  power  so  liable  to  fatal  and  barbarous 
 abuse  as  that  of  capital  punishment.  Any  outrage 
 against  a  parent — a  blow,  a  curse,  or  incorrigible 
 profligacy — was  made  a  capital  crime  (Exod.  xxi. 
 15,  17  ;  Lev.  XX.  9).  If  the  offence  was  public  it 
 was  taken  up  by  the  witnesses  as  a  crime  against 
 Jehovah,  and  the  culprit  was  brought  before  the 
 magistrates,  whether  the  parent  consented  or  not  ; 
 and  if  the  offence  was  hidden  within  the  paternal 
 walls,  it  devolved  on  the  parents  to  denounce  him 
 and  to  require  his  punishment. 
 
 It  is  a  beautiful  circumstance  in  the  law  of  Moses 
 that  this  filial  respect  is  exacted  for  the  mother  as 
 well  as  for  the  father.  The  threats  and  promises 
 of  the  legislator  distinguish  not  the  one  from  the 
 other  ;  and  the  fifth  commandment  associates  the 
 father  and  mother  in  a  precisely  equal  claim  to 
 honour  from  their  children.  The  development  of 
 this  interesting  feature  of  the  Mosaical  law  belongs, 
 however,  to  another  head  [Woman].  See  Celle- 
 rier,  Esp7-it  de  la  Legislation  Mosaiqice,  ii.  69,  122- 
 129. 
 
 FEASTS.     [Hospitality  ;  Banquets.] 
 
 FEASTS,  Religious.  [Agape  ;  Festivals.] 
 
 FELIX  (■I'^Xt^),  a  Roman  procurator  of  Judsea, 
 before  whom  Paul  so  '  reasoned  of  righteousness, 
 temperance,  and  judgment  to  come,'  that  the  judge 
 trembled,  saying,  '  Go  thy  way  for  this  time  ;  when 
 I  have  a  convenient  season  I  will  call  for  thee' 
 (Acts  xxiv.  25).  The  context  states  that  Felix  had 
 expected  a  bribe  from  Paul  ;  and,  in  order  to  pro- 
 cure this  bribe,  he  appears  to  have  had  several  in- 
 terviews with  the  apostle.  The  depravity  which 
 such  an  expectation  implies  is  in  agreement  with 
 the  idea  which  the  historical  fragments  preserved 
 respecting  Felix  would  lead  the  student  to  form  of 
 the  man. 
 
 The  year  in  which  Felix  entered  on  his  office 
 cannot  be  strictly  determined.  From  the  words  of 
 Josephus  {Antiq.  xx.  7.  i),  it  appears  that  his  ap- 
 pointment took  place  before  the  twelfth  year  of  the 
 Emperor  Claudius.  Eusebias  fixes  the  time  of  his 
 actually  undertaking  his  duties  in  the  eleventh 
 year  of  that  monarch. 
 
 Fehx  was  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  elevation 
 to  distinguished  station  of  persons  born  and  bred  in 
 the  lowest  condition.  Originally  a  slave,  he  rose 
 to  little  less  than  kingly  power.  For  some  un- 
 known, but  probably  not  very  creditable  services, 
 he  was  manumitted  by  Claudius  Ctesar  (Sueton. 
 Claud.  28  ;  Tacit.  Hist.  v.  9) ;  on  which  account 
 he  is  said  to  have  taken  the  prjenomen  of  Claudius. 
 In  Tacitus,  however  {loc.  cit.),  he  is  surnamed 
 Antonius,  probably  because  he  was  also  a  freedman 
 of  Antonia,  the  emperor's  mother.  He  was  a 
 brother  of  Pallas,  who  had  also  been  set  free  by 
 Antonia,  and  had  great  influence  with  Claudius  ; 
 speaking  of  whom,  in  conjunction  with  another 
 freedman,  namely.  Narcissus,  the  imperial  private 
 secretary,  Suetonius  {Claicd.  28)  says,  that  the  em- 
 peror was  eager  in  heaping  upon  them  the  highest 
 honours  that  a  subject  could  enjoy,  and  suffered 
 them  to  carry  on  a  system  of  plunder  and  gain  to 
 such  an  extent,  that,  on  complaining  of  the  poverty 
 of  his  exchequer,  some  one  had  the  boldness  to  re- 
 mark that  he  would  abound  in  wealth  if  he  were 
 taken  into  partnership  by  his  two  favourite  freed- 
 men. 
 
 The  character  which  the  ancients  have  left  of 
 Felix  is  of  a  very  dark  complexion.  Sueton.us 
 speaks  of  the  military  honours  which  the  emperor 
 loaded  him  with,  and  specifies  his  appointment  as 
 governor  of  the  province  of  Judaea  [Claud.  28); 
 adding  an  innuendo,  which  loses  nothing  by  its 
 brevity,  namely,  that  he  was  the  husband  of  three 
 queens  or  royal  ladies  (trium  reginarum  maritum). 
 Tacitus,  in  his  History  (v.  9),  declares  that,  during 
 his  governorship  in  Judsea,  he  indulged  in  all  kinds 
 of  cruelty  and  lust,  exercising  regal  power  wdth  the 
 disposition  of  a  slave  ;  and,  in  his  Annals  (xii.  54), 
 he  represents  Felix  as  considering  himself  licensed 
 to  commit  any  crime,  relying  on  the  influence  which 
 he  possessed  at  court.  The  country  was  ready  for 
 rebellion,  and  the  unsuitable  remedies  which  Felix 
 applied  served  only  to  inflame  the  passions  and  to 
 incite  to  crime.  The  contempt  which  he  and 
 Cumanus  (who,  according  to  Tacitus,  governed 
 Galilee  while  Felix  nded  Samaria  ;  but  see  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  XX.  7.  i)  excited  in  the  minds  of  the  people, 
 encouraged  them  to  give  free  scope  to  the  passions 
 which  arose  from  the  old  enmity  between  the  Jews 
 and  Samaritans,  while  the  two  wily  and  base  pro- 
 curators were  enriched  by  booty  as  if  it  had  been 
 spoils  of  war.  This  so  far  was  a  pleasant  game  to 
 these  men,  but  in  the  prosecution  of  it  Roman 
 soldiers  lost  their  life,  and,  but  for  the  intei-vention 
 of  Quadratus,  governor  of  Syria,  a  rebellion  would 
 have  been  inevitable.  A  court-martial  was  held  to 
 inquire  into  the  causes  of  this  disaffection,  when 
 Felix,  one  of  the  accused,  was  seen  by  the  injured 
 Jews  among  the  judges,  and  even  seated  on  the 
 judgment-seat,  placed  there  by  the  president, 
 Quadratus,  expressly  to  outface  and  deter  the 
 accusers  and  witnesses.  Josephus  [Antiq.  xx.  8. 
 5)  reports  that  under  Felix  the  affairs  of  the  country 
 grew  worse  and  worse.  The  land  was  filled  with 
 robbers  and  impostors  who  deluded  the  multitude. 
 Felix  used  his  power  to  repress  these  disorders  to 
 little  purpose,  since  his  own  example  gave  no 
 sanction  to  justice.  Thus,  having  got  one  Dineas, 
 leader  of  a  band  of  assassins,  into  his  hands,  by 
 a  promise  of  impunity,  he  sent  him  to  Rome 
 to  receive  his  punishment.  Having  a  grudge 
 against  Jonathan,  the  high-priest,  who  had  expos- 
 tulated with  him  on  his  misrule,  he  made  use  of 
 Doras,  an  intimate  friend  of  Jonathan,  in  order 
 to  get  him  assassinated  by  a  gang  of  villains,  who 
 joined  the  crowds  that  were  going  up  to  the  temple 
 worship, — a  crime  which  led  subsequently  to 
 countless  evils,  by  the  encouragement  which  it 
 gave  to  the  Sicarii,  or  leagued  assassins  of  the. 
 day,  to  whose  excesses  Josephus  ascribes,  under 
 Providence,  the  overthrow  of  the  Jewish  state. 
 Among  other  crimes,  some  of  these  villains  misled 
 the  people  under  the  promise  of  performing  mi- 
 racles, and  were  punished  by  Felix.  An  Egyptian 
 impostor,  who  escaped  himself,  was  the  occasion 
 of  the  loss  of  life  to  four  hundred  followers,  and 
 of  the  loss  of  liberty  to  two  hundred  more,  thus 
 severely  dealt  with  by  Felix  (Joseph.  Antiq.  .xx.  8. 
 6;  De  Bell.  Jt/d.  ii.  13.  5  ;  comp.  Acts  xxi.  38). 
 A  serious  misunderstanding  having  arisen  between 
 the  Jewish  and  the  Syrian  inhabitants  of  Cassarea, 
 Felix  employed  his  troops,  and  slew  and  plun- 
 dered till  prevailed  on  to  desist.  His  cruelty  in 
 this  affair  brought  on  him,  after  he  was  superseded 
 by  Festus,  an  accusation  at  Rome,  which,  however, 
 he  was  enabled  to  render  nugatory  by  the  influence 
 which  his  brother   Pallas  had,   and  exercised  tc 
 
FELL 
 
 JO 
 
 FELL 
 
 the  utmost  with  the  emperor  Nero.  Josephus, 
 in  his  Life  (sec,  iii.),  reports  that  'at  the  time 
 when  Fehx  was  procurator  of  Judaea  there  were 
 certain  priests  of  my  acquaintance,  and  very  excel- 
 lent persons  they  were,  whom,  on  a  small  and 
 trifling  occasion,  he  had  put  into  bonds  and  sent 
 to  Rome  to  plead  their  cause  before  Csesar.' 
 
 While  in  his  office,  being  inflamed  by  a  passion 
 for  the  beautiful  Drusilla,  a  daughter  of  King 
 Herod  Agrippa,  who  was  married  to  Azizus,  king 
 of  Emesa,  he  employed  one  Simon,  a  magician, 
 to  use  his  arts  in  order  to  persuade  her  to  forsake 
 her  husband  and  marry  him,  promising  that  if 
 she  would  comply  with  his  suit  he  would  make 
 her  a  happy  woman.  Drusilla,  partly  impelled  by 
 a  desire  to  avoid  the  envy  of  her  sister,  Bernice, 
 was  prevailed  on  to  transgress  the  laws  of  her 
 forefathers,  and  consented  to  a  union  with  Felix. 
 In  this  marriage  a  son  was  born,  who  was  named 
 Agrippa  :  both  mother  and  son  perished  in  an 
 eruption  of  Mount  Vesuvius,  which  took  place  in 
 the  days  of  Titus  Cresar  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  7.  2). 
 With  this  adulteress  was  Felix  seated  when  Paul 
 reasoned  before  the  judge,  as  already  stated  (Acts 
 xxiv.  24).  Another  Drusilla  is  mentioned  by 
 Tacitus  as  being  the  wife  (the  yzrji"  wife)  of  Felix. 
 This  woman  was  niece  of  Cleopatra  and  Antony. 
 By  this  marriage  Felix  was  connected  with  Clau- 
 dius.    Of  his  third  wile  nothing  is  known. 
 
 Paul,  being  apprehended  in  Jerusalem,  was  sent 
 by  a  letter  from  Claudius  Lysias  to  Felix  at 
 Cjesarea,  where  he  was  at  first  confined  in  Herod's 
 judgment-hall  till  his  accusers  came.  They  ar- 
 rived. Tertullus  appeared  as  their  spokesman, 
 and  had  the  audacity,  in  order  to  conciliate  the 
 good-will  of  Felix,  to  express  gratitude  on  the  part 
 of  the  Jews,  'seeing  that  by  thee  we  enjoy  great 
 quietness,  and  that  very  worthy  deeds  are  done 
 unto  this  nation  by  thy  providence'  (Acts  xxiii., 
 xxiv. )  Paul  pleaded  his  ;ause  in  a  worthy  speech  ; 
 and  Felix,  consigning  the  Apostle  to  the  custody 
 of  a  centurion,  ordered  that  he  should  have  such 
 liberty  as  the  circumstances  admitted,  with  permis- 
 sion that  his  acquaimance  might  see  him  and 
 minister  to  his  wants.  This  imprisonment  the 
 Apostle  suffered  for  a  period  of  two  years,  being 
 left  bound  when  Felix  gave  place  to  Festus,  as  that 
 unjust  judge  '  was  willing,'  not  to  do  what  was 
 right,  but  'to  shew  the  Jews  a  pleasure'  (C.  W. 
 F  Walch,  Diss,  de  Felice  '7ud.  procHr.,]en.  1747). 
 -J.  R.  B. 
 
 FELL,  John,  was  the  son  of  Dr.  Samuel  Fell, 
 Dean  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  and  was  born  at 
 Longworth,  in  Berkshire,  in  1625.  He  was  re- 
 moved at  the  early  age  of  eleven  from  Thame 
 school  to  a  st.identship  ot  Christ  Church,  where, 
 while  his  father  was  Dean,  he  took  his  degrees  of 
 B.A.  in  1640,  and  of  M.  A.  in  1643.  Like  his  father 
 he  was  an  ardent  royalist  during  the  troubles  of 
 that  time.  After  the  Restoration  he  was  made 
 prebendary  of  Chichester  and  canon  of  Christ's 
 Church  in  1660  ;  in  the  November  of  the  same 
 year  he  succeeded  to  the  deanery  of  which  his 
 father  had  been  deprived  a  dozen  years  before, 
 being  then  D.D.  and  chaplain  in  ordinai-y  to  the 
 king.  Between  1666-1669  he  was  Vice-Chancellor 
 of  the  University,  and  in  1676  was  advanced  to  the 
 bishopric  of  Oxford,  retaining  the  deanery  iti  com- 
 meudam.  He  was  also  master  of  St.  Oswald's 
 Hospital.  Worcester.     He  died  in  1686.     He  was 
 
 extremely  munificent  and  vigorous  in  every  one  of 
 his  eminent  oftices.  He  was  also  (as  Antony  a 
 Wood  said  of  him,  in  A/ken.  Oxoji.)  'a  learned 
 divine,  and  excellently  skilled  in  the  Latin  and  Greek 
 Languages. '  We  must  pass  over  his  miscellaneous 
 works,  in  biography  (such  as  the  life  of  Dr.  H. 
 Hammond,  and  that  of  Dr.  Richd.  Allestree)  ;  in 
 logic  and  philosophy  (such  as  his  Instiintio  Logica, 
 and  Alcinoi  in  Platoiiicam  Pliilosophiam  inti-odiic- 
 tid) ;  and  in  patristic  divinity  (such  as  his  edition  of 
 St.  Clement's  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  in 
 Greek  and  Latin,  with  notes  ;  and  of  St.  Cy- 
 prian's works,  with  notes) ;  and  confine  our  notice 
 to  two  works  of  some  name — the  one  in  criti- 
 cal, and  the  other  in  exegetical  divinity.  The 
 former  had  for  its  title  :  '  T'^s  Ko.wrj'i  5LadriK7)s 
 airavra — N^ovi  Testamenti  libri  omiies ;  accessertiiit 
 Parallela  Scriphu-a  loca,  necuon  variantes  lectiones 
 ex  phis  100  MSS.  codicihus  et  antiq nis  versio7tibus 
 collectcE,^  1675,  8vo.  This  work,  which  was  an  ad- 
 vance in  critical  editing  of  the  N.  T.  on  every  pre- 
 vious publication,  was  twice  reprinted  at  Leipsic,  in 
 1697,  and  again  in  1702  ('Oxoniensi  accuratior  ac 
 pra^fatione  Angiisti  Hermanni  Frajickii  copiosa  ac 
 perutili  ornata');  it  was  also  reproduced  at  Ox- 
 foi-d  in  1703,  by  John  Gregor)',  in  splendid  folio. 
 [Gregory.]  This  edition  is  more  valuable  for  the 
 impulse  it  gave  to  subsequent  investigators  tlian  for 
 the  richness  of  its  owxi  stores  of  fresh  materials  ; 
 notwithstanding  the  statement  of  its  title-page. 
 '  Bishop  Fell  did  not  give  extracts  from  the  Fathers 
 or  cite  them  as  authorities,  because  he  undervalued 
 their  authority  '[testimony?],'  not  apprehending 
 how  they  might,  by  the  union  of  their  evidence 
 with  that  of  MSS.  and  versions,  be  of  the  greatest 
 use,  shewing  as  they  often  do,  what  the  reading  is 
 in  whose  favour  the  evidence  preponderates.  The 
 use  of  versions,  indeed,  Fell  clearly  perceived  ;  yet 
 of  those  which  were  available  at  that  time,  he  only 
 attends  to  the  Gothic  and  Coptic  as  revised  by  Dr. 
 T.  Marshall,  Rector  of  Lincoln  College  ;  his  list 
 of  hitherto  untouched  MSS.  is  very  scanty.  To 
 those  which  Walton  had  hitherto  used  in  the  last 
 vol.  of  his  Polyglot,  we  can  add  only  R,  the  Bar- 
 berini  readings,  then  just  published ;  B,  twelve 
 Bodleian  codices,  '  quorum  plerique  intacti  prius,' 
 in  nowise  described,  and  cited  only  by  the  num- 
 ber of  them  which mav  countenance  each  variation; 
 U,  the  two  Usher  MSS.,  Evang.  63,  64,  as  collated 
 by  H.  Dodwell ;  three  copies  from  the  library  of 
 Petavius  (/".  Act.  38,  39,  40)  ;  a  fourtli  from  St. 
 Germain's  {Ger.  Paul.  E),  the  readings  of  which 
 four  were  furnished  by  J.  Gachon'  (Tregelles, 
 Printed  Text.,  p.  40;  and  Scrivener,  Introduction 
 to  the  Crit.  of  N.  T.,  pp.  314,  315).  This  edition 
 of  Bishop  Fell,  and  the  encouragement  which  he 
 gave  to  the  more  extensive  critical  labours  of  Dr. 
 John  Mill,  were  of  great  importance  in  fur- 
 thering sacred  criticism.  This  latter  scholar  was 
 liberally  assisted  by  the  munificent  Bishop,  whose 
 intention  of  defraying  the  entire  cost  of  Mill's  Tes- 
 tament was  frustrated  by  his  unexpected  death, 
 when  the  publication  had  advanced  no  further  than 
 the  24th  chap,  of  St.  Matthew.  [Mill.]  The 
 exegetical  work  with  which  the  name  of  Bishop 
 Fell  is  associated,  is  entitled  :  '  A  paraphrase  and 
 annotations  upon  all  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paid.^  This 
 work  was  first  printed  in  1675.  The  title-page  of 
 the  fourth  edition  of  170S  revealed  the  names  of 
 the  contributors  and  editor,  thus  :  'A  parajihrase, 
 etc.  [as  above],  by  Abrahsai  Woodhead.  Richd. 
 
FELL  11 
 
 AUestrey,  and  Obadiah  Walker.  Corrected  and 
 improved  by  the  late  Right  Rev.  and  learned  Dr. 
 John  Fell,  Bishop  of  Oxford.'  It  is  doubtful 
 whether  Fell  had  any  actual  share  in  the  work  ;  yet 
 his  influence  as  editor  over  the  contributors  was 
 likely  to  be  very  great  from  his  commanding 
 character  :  he  was  very  fond  of  short  notes,  and 
 has  imparted  his  taste  to  his  fellow-labourers 
 in  this  paraphrase.  Nor  is  their  brevity  the  only 
 recommendation  of  these  '  annotations  ; '  many 
 difficult  passages  of  the  holy  Apostle  have  re- 
 ceived a  careful  elucidation  at  the  hands  of  these 
 competent  scholars  ;  and  Dr.  Doddridge  has  more- 
 over commended  the  collection  of  parallel  passages 
 as  judicious,  and  the  amended  translation  as  in 
 many  instances  elucidating  the  sense  of  the  origi- 
 nal. This  valuable  work  was  handsomely  reprinted 
 in  1S52  at  the  Oxford  University  Press,  under  the 
 careful  supervision  of  the  present  Regius  Professor 
 of  Divinity,  Dr.  Jacobson. — P.  H. 
 
 '  FELL,  John,  born  at  Cockermouth  in  1735, 
 died  at  London  in  1797,  was  for  some  time  pastor 
 of  a  dissenting  congregation  at  Thaxted  in  Essex, 
 from  which  he  removed  to  become  teacher  of 
 Greek,  Latin,  and  Hebrew  at  Homerton  college, 
 near  London.  He  is  described  as  one  who  rose 
 '  by  native  talents  from  an  obscure  station  to  be- 
 come one  of  the  first  scholars  of  the  day'  (Bogue 
 and  Bennett,  Hist,  of  Disseiitcrs,  ii.  518).  He  en- 
 gaged in  the  controversy  excited  by  Farmer's  work 
 on  Demoniacs,  with  the  following  works  :  Dcvio- 
 niacs ;  an  inquiry  into  the  heathen  and  Scripture 
 doctrine  of  Demons,  in  which  the  hypothesis  of  Dr. 
 Farmer  and  others  is  particularly  considered,  Lond 
 1779;  The  idolatry  of  Greece  and  Ro7ne  distin- 
 guished frotn  other  heathen  nations,  in  a  letter  to 
 Rev.  Hugh  Farmer,  Lond.  1785.  These  works  are 
 marked  by  learning  and  acuteness,  but  are  dis- 
 figured by  personalities  and  scommatism.  He  was 
 dismissed  from  his  office  in  Homerton  college,  it 
 is  said,  for  reading  the  newspapers  on  Sunday.  An 
 annuity  of  ^100  having  been  purchased  for  him  by 
 some  of  his  friends,  he  was  asked  to  deliver  a 
 course  of  lectures  on  the  Evidences  of  Christianity 
 at  the  Scots  church,  London  Wall.  He  had  de- 
 livered four  of  these  with  great  applause  when  he 
 was  cut  off  by  death.  These  were  published  with 
 eight  others  by  Dr.  Hunter  in  1798. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FERGUSON,  James.  Little  more  is  known  of 
 this  expositor  than  that  he  was  a  minister  of  the 
 Church  of  Scotland  in  Kilwinning,  and  that  he 
 died  about  1670.  He  published  in  his  lifetime,  A 
 brief  Exposition  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul  to  the  Philip- 
 pians  and  Colossians,  1656  ;  A  brief  Exposition  of 
 the  Epistles  to  the  Galatians  and  Ephesians,  1659  ; 
 and  after  his  death,  Mr.  Hutcheson  edited  another 
 commentary  which  he  had  left  ready  for  the  press — ■ 
 A  brief  Exposition  of  the  First  and  Second  Epistles 
 to  the  Thessalonians,  1674.  His  commentaries  are 
 sententious  and  analytical,  with  occasional  odd 
 phrases  that  may  be  commended  to  the  attention 
 of  any  future  Richardson,  as  when  he  talks  of 
 '  polypragmatic  spirits  who  do  importunately  in- 
 gyre  themselves  upon  the  affairs  of  others. '  There 
 is  much  lucid  and  vigorous  writing  nevertheless  in 
 these  volumes,  justifying  the  remark  of  Hutcheson, 
 that  '  he  was  a  man  of  deep  reach,  and  well  fitted 
 for  giving  of  advice  in  perplexed  and  intricate 
 -ases.'  His  works  have  recently  been  republished 
 in  one  volume. — W.  H.  G. 
 
 FESTIVALS 
 
 FERME,  Charles,  or  FAIRHOLME.     Bom 
 
 at  Edinburgh,  and  educated  at  its  university,  he  rose 
 to  the  position  of  principal  of  the  College  of  Fraser- 
 burgh. For  his  share  in  the  proceedings  of  the 
 assembly  at  Aberdeen  in  1605,  he  was  imprisoned 
 in  the  Castle  of  Doune  for  some  years.  He  was 
 ultimately  restored  to  Fraserburgh,  where  he  died 
 in  1617;  'aTydeus,'  according  to  Adam.son  'in 
 body,  a  Hercules  in  spirit.'  Among  other  works, 
 which  appear  to  have  perished,  he  left  behind  him 
 A  Logical  Analysis  of  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the 
 Romans,  published  by  Principal  Adamson  in  165 1. 
 Discovered  by  Dr.  Lindsay  Alexander  on  an  old 
 bookstall  at  Newcastle,  it  was  brought  under  the 
 notice  of  the  Council  of  the  Wodrow  Society,  and 
 given  to  the  world  as  one  of  their  publications.  It 
 is  characterised  by  the  editor  as  '  a  sagacious,  ex- 
 act, and  perspicuous  commentary  on  the  epistle.' 
 It  fully  justifies  its  title  as  a  '  logical  analysis.'  By 
 the  clear  method  in  which  he  puts  the  steps  of  the 
 argument  he  sometimes  sheds  more  light  on  a  pas- 
 sage than  a  diffuse  commentary  would  supply. — 
 W.  H.  G. 
 
 FERRET.     [Anakah.] 
 
 FESTIVALS. — As  each  festival  is  described  in 
 its  proper  place,  we  confine  ourselves  here  to  some 
 general  remarks  upon  the  development  of  the  fes- 
 tivals, the  relationship  which  they  sustain  to  each 
 other,  as  well  as  to  the  whole  cycle,  the  rites  and 
 ceremonies  which  are  common  to  all,  and  the 
 changes  which  they  suffered  in  the  course  of  time. 
 
 The  fact  that  all  the  festivals  celebrated  from  the 
 Exodus  to  the  Babylonish  captivity  belong  to  the 
 Mosaic  institutions,  and  that  the  additional  ones 
 originated  after  the  captivity  naturally  divides  them 
 into  pre-exile  and  fost-exile  festivals. 
 
 I.  Pre-exile  or  Mosaic  Festivals. 
 
 Their  general  designation  and  classificatioil. — 
 All  the  festivals  in  the  Mosaic  law  are  designated 
 by  one  common  name,  niiT'  HyiD  or  □''lyiD 
 (comp.  Lev.  xxiii.  2,  4,  44 ;  Num.  xxviii.  2,  29). 
 As  "lyiO,  from  ly  to  appoint,  signifies  meeting,  a 
 coming  together,  niH^  ''lyVO  denotes  the  tneetings  of 
 Jehovah,  i.e.,  with  His  people  ;  and  these  festivals 
 therefore  are  as  much  special  occasions  appointed 
 by  God  for  meetings  with  the  children  of  Israel  as 
 
 the  Tabernacle  was  lyiD  pnx  a  special  place  ap- 
 pointed by  the  Lord  to  meet  /lis  'worshippers  (comp. 
 Exod.  xxv.  22  ;  xxvii.  21  ;  xxviii.  43  ;  xxix.  42-46; 
 XXX.  6 ;  Num.  xviii.  9).  Under  this  common 
 name,  however,  are  comprised  two  classes  of  fes- 
 tivals, viz.,  annual  2s\di^ periodical. 
 
 A  I.  Annual  Festivals,  their  names,  numbers 
 etc. — The  annual  festivals  are  as  follows  : 
 
 i.  The  Feast  of  Passover,  or  of  Unleavened  bread 
 (riDSn  jn,  niVOn  jri),  which  extends  from  the  15th 
 to  the  22d  of  N'isan.  The  first  day  and  the 
 seventh,  however,  are  real  festival  days  (S"lpD 
 Cf'"lp,  holy  convocation),  as  the  five  intervening  days 
 
 are  the  week  days  of  the  festival  (lyiD  pin)  comp. 
 Exod.  xii.  6  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  5,  8;  Num.  xxviii.  16-25; 
 Deut.  xvi.  1-8. 
 
 ii.  77/1?  Feast  of  Pentecost,  of  weeks,  or  of  the 
 harvest,  or  of  the  day  on  which  were  offered  the 
 loaves  made  of  the  new  wheat  (D''"lD3ri  D1* 
 myntJ*  jn,  T'ifpn  Jin),  which  is  the  6th  oiSlvan, 
 comp.  Exod.  xxxiv.  26;  Lev.  xxiii.  9-12;  Num. 
 xxviii.  26-31. 
 
 iii.    The  Feast  of  Trjtmpets  (nypn  DV).  called 
 
FESTIVALS 
 
 12 
 
 FESTIVALS 
 
 by  the  Jews  MwVear  (m^n  K^HI),  which  is  on 
 the  1st  of  Tishri  (comp.  Lev.  xxiii.  23-25  ;  Num. 
 xxix.  1-6). 
 
 iv.  The  Day  of  Atonement,  or  The  Great  Sab- 
 bath 01D3  DV,  pnn*k^  nnC'),  which  is  on  the  loth 
 of  Tishri  (comp.  Lev.  xvi.  I -34;  xxiii.  26-32; 
 Num.  xxix.  7'li)- 
 
 V.  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  or  of  Ingathering 
 of  the  Harvest  (mblDH  JH,  I^DXH  JH),  which  ex- 
 tends  from  the  15th  of  Tishri  to  the  22d.  The 
 first  day  alone,  however,  is  the  real  festival  day 
 (tjnp  X"lpD,  holy  convocation),  as  the  six  fol- 
 lowing days  are  the  week  days  of  the  Festival  (pin 
 lyiDil)  ;  comp.  Gen.  xxiii.  16  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  33-43 ; 
 Num.  xxix.  12-39;  Deut.  xvi.  13-15. 
 
 vi.  The  concluding  Festival  of  the  whole  cycle 
 (niVy  •'^''Dt^'),  which  is  on  the  23d  of  Tishri,  fol- 
 lowing immediately  upon  or  continuing  the  Feast 
 of  Tabernacles,  and  requiring  distinct  sacrifices 
 (Comp.  Lev.  xxiii.  36;  Num.  xxix.  35-37). 
 
 2.  77^1?/;'  connection  and  adaptation. — The  organ- 
 ic connection  of  these  festivals  is  seen  from  the  fact 
 that  the  collective  number  of  the  holy  convocations 
 (viz. ,  two  Passover,  one  on  Pentecost,  one  on  Trum- 
 pets, one  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  one  on  the 
 Feast  of  Tabernacles,  and  07te  on  tlie  concluding 
 Feast),  amounts  to  the  sacred  number  seven  ;  and 
 that,  as  in  the  seven  days  of  the  week,  six  cluster 
 round  the  Sabbath,  so  in  these  seven  festival-days  six 
 gather  round  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement  (D^C 
 pnit^),  which  is  the  Festival  of  the  Feasts.  Equally 
 striking  is  the  fact,  that  in  all  these  annual  festivals 
 no  two  days  demanding  entire  suspension  of  ordin- 
 ary labour  and  devotion  to  holy  service  (X"lpD 
 B^ip),  follow  each  other.  If,  as  is  the  case  with 
 the  Feast  of  Passover  and  Tabernacles,  two  days 
 are  to  be  celebrated  in  this  manner,  one  is  put  at 
 the  beginning  and  the  other  at  the  end  of  the  festi- 
 vals, and  a  number  of  days  are  made  to  intervene, 
 on  which  cessation  from  public  service  and  the  re- 
 suming of  business  and  social  intercourse  are  al- 
 lowed. This  arrangement  is  evidently  adapted  to 
 the  circumstances  of  man,  and  is  designed  to  pre- 
 vent tediousness  and  fatigue,  as  well  as  to  afford 
 all  the  pilgrims  who  went  up  to  Jerusalem  to  cele- 
 brate the  Festivals  time  for  recreation  and  social 
 intercourse.  Moreover,  owing  to  the  same  benign 
 regard  for  the  convenience  of  the  people,  we  see 
 that  no  festival  was  to  be  celebrated  in  the  winter, 
 when  every  thing  is  dreaiy  and  joyless,  and  travel- 
 ling is  difficult,  but  that  one  was  appointed  for  the 
 spring  and  one  for  the  summer,  since  the  people 
 could  not  conveniently  celebrate  more  during  these 
 seasons,  whilst  four  are  ordained  for  the  autumn, 
 two  of  a  serious  and  two  of  a  joyful  character,  in 
 harmony  with  the  season,  which  partakes  of  both 
 these  features. 
 
 3 .  Hie  obse!~vances  cotnmon  to  all  these  Festivals. 
 — All  these  days  of  holy  convocation,  I.  Are  like 
 the  weekly  Sabbath  declared  Sabbaths  (finC'))  i-^-, 
 days  on  which  there  must  be  an  entire  suspension 
 of  all  ordinary  labour  (comp.  Lev.  xvi.  29  ;  xxiii. 
 7,  8,  21,  24,  25,  28,  35,  36).  2.  On  all  of  them 
 special  sacrifices  were  offered  in  addition  to  the 
 daily  offerings,  which,  however,  varied  according 
 to  the  character  of  the  festival  (comp.  Num.  xxviii., 
 xxix.)  3.  On  all  of  them  the  trumpets  were 
 blown  whilst  the  burnt-offerings  and  the  peace- 
 offerings  were  sacrificed  (comp.  Num.  x.  10)  ;  and 
 A.  They  are  all  holy  co7tvocations  (t/Tp  N"lpD),  i.e.. 
 
 as  is  evident  from  Num.  x.  2,  days  on  which  the 
 worshippers  are  to  be  called  together  by  the  sound 
 of  trumpets  to  the  sanctuary  (comp.  Lev.  xxiii.  ; 
 Num.  xxviii.)  The  three  pilgrimage  festivals, 
 however,  viz.,  the  Feast  of  Passover,  Pentecost, 
 and  Tabernacles,  form  a  circle  within  the  circle  of 
 the  annual  festivals,  and  are  distinguished  by  the 
 special  appellation  JH  (from  Jjn  to  dance,  to  be 
 Joyful),  because  of  their  doubly  joyful  character ; 
 for,  besides  being  commemorative  of  national 
 events,  they  had  an  agricultural  significance.  The 
 Passover  is  connected  with  the  commencement  of 
 the  harvest,  and  hence  the  offering  was  of  the 
 firstling  sheaf  of  barley ;  Pentecost  with  the  com- 
 pletion of  the  same,  and  hence  the  offering  was 
 loaves  made  from  the  neiu  wheat ;  and  whilst  these 
 festivals  represented  the  joy  of  the  people  after  the 
 gathering  in  of  the  bread,  which  is  the  staff  of  life, 
 the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  which  was  connected 
 with  the  conclusion  of  the  entire  agricultural  year, 
 when  all  the  fruits,  the  wine,  and  the  oil  were  col- 
 lected, expressed  the  gratitude  of  the  people  at 
 having  safely  brought  in  the  wine,  which  cheereth 
 the  heart  of  man. 
 
 4.  77^1?  cha7tges  which  these  Festivals  have  suf- 
 fered.— Though  all  these  festivals  are  most  rigidly 
 observed  by  the  Jews  to  the  present  day,  yet  their 
 integrity  and  beautiful  symmetry  were  destroyed, 
 towards  the  end  of  the  second  Temple  as  it  is 
 supposed.  We  do  not  refer  to  the  circumstance 
 that  in  celebrating  these  festivals  in  the  present 
 day,  some  of  them  are  necessarily  deprived  of  their 
 agricultural  significance,  as  well  as  of  the  offerings 
 connected  therewith,  and  are  merely  made  com- 
 memorative of  national  events,  but  we  allude  to 
 the  fact  that  the  original  festival  day,  or  days 
 of  holy  convocation,  were  nearly  doubled  at  a 
 very  early  period,  and  instead  of  the  collective 
 number  being  seven,  the  Jewish  calendar  has 
 thirteen,  as  follows — four  on  Passover,  two  on 
 Pentecost,  tivo  on  the  Feast  of  Tnampets,  one  on 
 the  Day  of  Atonement,  and  four  on  Tabernacles 
 and  the  concluding  festival.  The  origin  of  these 
 additions  was  this.  The  commencement  of  the 
 festivals  was  fixed  in  Palestine  according  to  the 
 appearance  of  the  new  moon,  which  was  watched 
 in  Jerusalem,  and  communicated  from  the  metro- 
 polis to  all  the  Israelites  throughout  the  country 
 by  messengers.  As  these  messengers,  however, 
 could  not  reach  the  parts  most  distant  from  Jeru- 
 salem before  some  days  had  elapsed,  and  as  the  in- 
 habitants of  these  parts  could  therefore  not  know 
 at  once  how  the  beginning  of  the  new  month  was 
 fi.xed,  and  on  what  day  the  festival  began,  it  was 
 determined  that  they  should  double  the  day  of  the 
 festival,  so  as  to  be  sure  that  one  day  would  be  right. 
 
 B  I.  The  periodical  Festivals. — The  periodical 
 festivals  are  as  follows  :— 
 
 i.  The  weekly  Sabbath,  which  begins  the  cycle 
 of  the  festivals.  Comp.  Num.  xxviii.  9,  10;  Lev. 
 xxiii.  1-3. 
 
 ii.  The  feast  of  the  Neiu  Moon  (K'Tin  K'Nl), 
 which  is  always  kept  at  the  beginning  of  the  month 
 when  special  sacrifices  were  offered.  Comp.  Num. 
 X.  10;  xxviii.   11-15. 
 
 iii.  The  Sabbath  year,  or  The  year  of  Remission 
 (I1^2t^'  nJt^',  ntSnii^'n  n:C),  which  was  kept  every 
 seventh  year.  Comp.  Exod.  xxiii.  1 1 ;  Lev.  xxv. 
 1-7;  Deut.  XV.  I. 
 
 iv.  The  year  of  Jubilee  (73',>  njK'),  which  was 
 celebrated  at  the   end  cf  everv  seven   Sabbath- 
 
FESTIVALS 
 
 13 
 
 FESTUS 
 
 years,  beginning  on  the   loth  of  Tis/iri.     Comp. 
 Lev.  XXV.  8-18. 
 
 2.  Their  connection  with  the  cycle  of  Festivals. — 
 The  organic  connection  of  these  periodical  festivals 
 with  the  annual  ones,  is  seen  in  their  gradual 
 rising  in  the  scale,  each  forming  as  it  were  a 
 stepping  stone  to  the  other.  Beginning  with  the 
 weekly  celebration  of  the  Sabbath,  they  advance 
 to  the  monthly,  then  again  to  the  annual,  then  to 
 septennial,  and  then  to  quinquagintennial  festivals. 
 Moreover,  the  sacred  jiumber  seven,  or  the  Sabbath, 
 underlies  and  combines  all  the  festivals.*  Thus 
 there  are— i.  A  Sabbath  of  days;  2.  A  Sabbath  of 
 weeks  [the  seventh  week  after  the  Passover  is  the 
 Sabbath-week,  inasmuch  as  the  first  day  of  it  is 
 the  festival  of  weeks) ;  3.  A  Sabbath  of  months 
 (the  seventh  month  has  both  a  festival  and  a  fast, 
 and  on  its  first  day  is  the  festival  which  begins  the 
 year) ;  4.  A  Sabbath  of  years  (the  seventh  is  the 
 Sabbath-year) ;  and  5.  A  Sabbath  of  Sabbath- 
 years,  i.e.,  the  year  of  Jubilee. 
 
 3.  Observance  of  these  Festivals. — Of  these  four 
 periodical  festivals,  two  only — viz.,  the  weekly 
 Sabbath  and  the  New  Moon — are  still  observed 
 among  the  Jews,  and  their  practices  on  these  occa- 
 sions are  noticed  under  the  respective  names  of 
 these  festivals.  The  Sabbath-year  and  the  year  of 
 Jubilee  are  no  longer  kept,  because  of  their  ex- 
 clusively local  character,  which  renders  them  inap- 
 plicable to  the  present  circumstances  of  the  Hebrews 
 away  from  Palestine. 
 
 n.   Post-exile  Festivals. 
 
 I.  Character  and  order  of  these  Festivals. — All 
 the  festivals  which  were  instituted  from  the  Baby- 
 lonish captivity  to  the  advent  of  Christ  are  annual. 
 In  treating,  therefore,  upon  these,  no  classification 
 is  necessaiy  beyond  enumerating  them  according 
 to  the  regular  order  of  the  months. 
 
 i.  Th.'  Feast  of  Acra,  which  was  instituted  by 
 Simon  Maccabteus,  141  B.C.,  to  be  celebrated  on 
 the  23d  of  the  second  month  (T'S),  in  commemora- 
 tion of  the  capture  and  the  purifying  of  Acra,  and 
 the  expulsion  of  the  Hellenists  from  Jerusalem 
 (comp.  I  Maccab.  xiii.  50-52). 
 
 ii.  The  Feast  of  Wood-carrying  (n''^*yn  \'r\'\>  ; 
 r\  tCiv  ^v\o(popiixiv  'Fjoprrj),  which  has  been  cele- 
 brated on  the  15th  of  the  fifth  month  [-\t'V  r^Z^OU 
 3X2)  ever  since  the  return  from  the  Babylonish 
 captivity  (comp.  Neh.  x.  35  ;  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud. 
 ii.  17.  6  ;  Megillath  Taanith,  c.  v.  p.  32;  Mishna, 
 Taanith,  iv.  8  a). 
 
 iii.  The  Feast  of  Water- drawing  ij\''1  JinOC^ 
 ^3X1t^'),  which  was  held  on  the  22d  of  the  seventh 
 month  (^"ItJTl),  the  last  day  of  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
 nacles (comp.  John  vii.  37  ;  Mishna,  Succa,  iv.  9  ; 
 V.  1-3)- 
 
 iv.  The  Feast  of  Dedicatioft  (n^'lifl ;  to^  ey- 
 KaivLa),  which  was  instituted  by  Judas  Maccabieus, 
 B.C.  164,  in  commemoration  of  the  purification  of 
 the  Temple,  and  is  celebrated  eight  days,  com- 
 mencing on  the  25  th  of  the  eighth  month  (V^DS) 
 (comp.  I  Maccab.  iv.  52-59  ;  John  x.  22  ;  Mishna, 
 Taanith,  ii.  10  ;  Noed  Katon,  iii.  9  ;  Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xii.  7.  7.  ;  Contr.  Apion.  ii.  39). 
 
 v.    The  Feast  of  Nicanor,   instituted   by  Judas 
 
 *  This  is  beautifully  pointed  out  in  the  Mldrash 
 in  the  passage  which  treats  upon  the  festivals,  with 
 
 the  remark  ohj)!'   pT^n   DT^'kiTI  b.     Comp. 
 Midrash  Rabba  on  Lev,  xxiiL  24. 
 
 Maccabseus,  to  be  celebrated  on  the  13th  of  ihf. 
 twelfth  month  (IIX),  in  commemoration  of  the  vic- 
 tory obtained  over  Nicanor  (comp.  i  Maccab.  vii. 
 49  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  10.  5  ;  Megillath  Taanith, 
 xii.  ;  Jerusalem  Taanith,  ii.  13 ;  Josippon  ben 
 Gorion,  iii.  22,  p.  244,  ed.  Breilh). 
 
 vi.  The  Feast  of  Piirim  (D^"1"12),  which  was  in- 
 stituted by  Mordecai,  to  be  celebrated  on  the  14th 
 of  the  tivelfth  month  ("llX),  in  commemoration  of 
 the  deliverance  of  the  Jews  from  the  destruction 
 planned  by  Haman  (comp.  Esther  iii.  7  ;  ix.  24, 
 sq.  ;  2  Maccab.  xv.  36). 
 
 2.  Observance  of  these  Festivals. — Three  out  of 
 these  six  festivals,  viz..  The  Feast  of  Wood-carrying, 
 of  Dedication,  and  oi  Puriin,  have  continued  to  lae 
 observed  among  the  Jews,  with  some  modifica- 
 tions, however,  which  are  duly  noticed  in  the 
 separate  articles  treating  upon  these  festivals.  It 
 only  remains  to  be  added  that  several  more  festi- 
 vals were  instituted  in  the  Maccabsean  period, 
 which,  owing  to  their  unimportance  and  short 
 existence,  must  be  passed  over. 
 
 Literature. — Joseph.  Antiq.  ii.-iii. ;  xiii. -xvii.  ; 
 Bell.  Jnd.  ii.  3.  i  ;  and  many  other  places  ;  Philo, 
 De  Septenario  et  Festis  diebns  ;  the  Mishna,  the 
 Talmud,  ani  Maimonides  ;  Tracts  Respecting  the 
 Festivals,  or  HyiQ  "ITD  ;  Spencer,  De  Legibus  He- 
 bneoriim  Ritualibus  et  eartun  rationibits,  Cantabri- 
 gise,  1727  ;  Bahr,  Symbolik  des  Mosaischen  Cultns, 
 vol.  ii.  Heidelberg,  1839,  p.  525,  ff.  ;  Ewald, 
 Die  Alterthiimer  des  Volkes  Israel,  Gottingen,  1854, 
 P-  379)  ff-  j  Saalschiitz,  Arcluiologie  der  Hebrdcr, 
 Konigsberg,  1855,  p.  207,  ff.  ;  Herzfeld,  Ge- 
 schichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  Nordhausen,  1857,  vol. 
 ii.  p.  106,  ff.  ;  Jost,  Geschichte  des  Jtidenthwyis, 
 Leipzig,  1857,  vol.  i.,  p.  158,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 FESTUS.  Porcius  Festus  was  the  successor  of 
 Felix  as  the  Roman  governor  of  Judaea,  to  the 
 duties  of  which  office  he  was  appointed  by  the 
 Emperor  Nero  (Joseph.  Atttiq.  xx.  8.  9  ;  De  Bell. 
 Jiid.  ii.  14.  i)  in  the  first  year  of  his  reign  (Winer, 
 Handwbrterbiich,  in  voc.)  One  of  his  first  official 
 acts  was  hearing  the  case  of  the  apostle  Paul,  who 
 had  been  left  in  prison  by  his  predecessor.  He 
 was  at  least  not  a  thoroughly  corrupt  judge  ;  for 
 when  the  Jewish  hierarchy  begged  him  to  send  for 
 Paul  to  Jerusalem,  and  thus  afford  an  opportunity 
 for  his  being  assassinated  on  the  road,  he  gave  a 
 refusal,  promising  to  investigate  the  facts  at  Cassa- 
 rea,  where  Paul  was  in  custody,  alleging  to  them, 
 '  it  is  not  the  manner  of  the  Romans  to  deliver  any 
 man  to  die  before  that  he  which  is  accused  have 
 the  accusers  face  to  face,  and  have  licence  to  answer 
 for  himself  concerning  the  crime  laid  against  him ' 
 (Acts  XXV.  16).  On  reaching  Ctesarea  he  sent  for 
 Paul,  heard  what  he  had  to  say,  and,  finding  that 
 tlie  matters  which  '  his  accusers  had  against  him ' 
 were  '  questions  of  their  own  superstition,  and  of 
 one  Jesus  which  was  dead,  whom  Paul  affirmed  to 
 be  alive,'  he  asked  the  apostle  whether  he  was 
 willing  to  go  to  Jerusalem  and  there  be  tried,  since 
 Festus  did  not  feel  himself  skilled  in  such  an  affair. 
 Paul,  doubtless  because  he  was  unwilling  to  put 
 himself  into  the  hands  of  his  implacable  enemies, 
 requested  '  to  be  reserved  unto  the  hearing  of 
 Augustus,'  and  was  in  consequence  kept  in  custody 
 till '  Festus  had  an  opportunity  to  send  him  to 
 Caesar.  Agrippa,  however,  with  his  wife  Bemice, 
 having  come  to  salute  Festus  on  his  new  appoint- 
 ment, expressed  a  desire  to  see  and  'hear  the  man.' 
 
FETTERS 
 
 14 
 
 FIRE 
 
 Accordingly  Paul  was  brought  before  Festus, 
 Agrippa,  and  Bernice,  made  a  famous  speech,  and 
 was  declared  innocent.  But  having  appealed  to 
 Cffisar,  he  was  sent  to  Rome. 
 
 Festus,  on  coming  into  Judasa,  found  the  country 
 infested  with  robbers,  who  plundered  the  villages 
 and  set  them  on  fire  ;  the  Sicarii  also  were  nume- 
 rous. Many  of  both  classes  were  captured,  and 
 put  to  death  by  Festus.  He  also  sent  forces,  both 
 of  horse  and  foot,  to  fall  upon  those  that  had  been 
 seduced  by  a  certain  impostor,  who  promised  them 
 deliverance  and  freedom  horn  the  miseries  they 
 were  under  if  they  would  but  follow  him  as  far  as 
 the  wilderness.  These  troops  destroyed  both  the 
 impostor  and  his  dupes. 
 
 King  Agrippa  had  built  himself  a  splendid 
 dining-room,  which  was  so  placed  that,  as  he  re- 
 clined at  his  meals,  he  commanded  a  view  of  what 
 was  done  in  the  Temple.  The  priests,  being  dis- 
 pleased, erected  a  wall  so  as  to  exclude  the  mo- 
 narch's view ;  on  which  Festus  took  part  with 
 Agrippa  against  the  priests,  and  ordered  the  wall 
 to  be  pulled  down.  The  priests  appealed  to  Nero, 
 who  suffered  the  wall  to  remain,  being  influenced 
 by  his  wife  Poppsea,  '  who  was  a  religious  woman' 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  8.  ii).  Festus  "died  shortly 
 afterwards.  The  manner  in  which  Josephus  speaks 
 is  favourable  to  his  character  as  a  governor  {De 
 Bell.  Jiid.  ii.  14.  i).— J.   R.  B. 
 
 FETTERS.  In  the  A.  V.  this  term  is  used  in 
 translating  three  Hebrew  words  : — 
 
 1.  Q^ncnj  ;  Tredai  x^XKai     This  word  indicates 
 
 the  material  of  which  fetters  were  often,  though  not 
 invariably,  made.  In  2  Sam.  iii.  34  ;  2  Chron. 
 xxxiii.  1 1  ;  xxxvi.  2,  it  is  translated  fetters ;  in 
 Judg.  xvi.  21  ;  2  Kings  xxv.  "],  fetters  of  brass ;  in 
 other  passages,  Jer.  xxxix.  7;  lit.  11,  chains  ;  the 
 dual  form  seems  to  restrict  its  application  to  chains 
 for  confining  the  hands  or  feet. 
 
 2.  ^23,  Ps.  cv.  \%,  fetters;  Ps.  cxlix.  8,  ''|?3D 
 ?n3)  xnpoiriZa.i's  aitr\pal%,  fetteis  of  iron. 
 
 3-  D^pT,  Xf'P<"'"f5'")  Job  xxxvi.  8,  fetters ;  Ps. 
 cxlix.  8  ;  Is.  xlv.  14  ;  Nahum  iii.  lO,  chains.  In 
 the  Apocrypha  the  word  fetters  occurs  in  Ecclus. 
 vi.  24  ;  vi.  29  ;  xxi.  19,  for  ■Keoo.i.  Manacles  for 
 the  feet  and  hands  are  represented  in  the  Assyrian 
 monuments  (Layard,  A^ineveh,  ii.  376;  Kitto,  D. 
 B.  Illustrations,  ii.  437). — J.  E.  R. 
 
 FEVER.  By  this  term  the  A.  V.  renders  the 
 Heb.   nn^p  (Deut.  xxviii.  22),  and  the  Gr.  irvp^- 
 
 Tos  (Matt.  viii.  14;  Mark  i.  30;  Luke  iv.  38; 
 John  iv.  52  ;  Acts  xxviii.  8).  Both  the  Plebrew 
 and  Greek  words  are  derived  from  the  association 
 of  burning  heat,  which  is  the  usual  symptom  of  a  fe- 
 brile attack  ;  the  former  coming  from  the  verb  HTp, 
 to  Imrn,  the  latter  from  Tvvp,  fire:  comp.  Aram. 
 NntS'X  from  ti'X,   Goth,  brinno,  from  bri^man  to 
 
 burn,  Lat.  yi'/'m,  and  our  ovfn  fever  from  fervere. 
 In  Lev.  xxvi.  16  the  A.  V.  renders  nmp  by 
 burning  ague,  but  the  rendering yt'?'^;-  seems  better, 
 as  it  is  not  necessarily  the  intennittent  tvpe  of  the 
 disease  which  is  thus  designated.  In  all  eastern 
 climates  febrile  diseases  are  common,  and  in  Syria 
 and  Palestine  they  are  among  the  commonest  and 
 severest  inflictions  under  which  the  inhabitants  suf- 
 fer (Russell's  Aleppo,  bk.  v.  ch.  3).  The  fever 
 under  which  Peter's  wife's  mother  suffered  is  called 
 
 by  Luke  irvperbs  fJ-^yas,  and  this  has  been  regarded 
 as  having  reference  to  the  ancient  scientific  distri- 
 bution of  fevers  into  the  great  and  the  less  (Galen, 
 De  diff.  febr.  see  Wetstein,  in  loc),  and  as  an 
 instance  of  Luke's  professional  exactitude  in  de- 
 scribing disease.  His  use  of  irvperol  in  the  plural 
 in  describing  the  disease  under  which  the  father  of 
 Publius  laboured  (Acts  xxviii.  8),  has  also  been 
 adduced  as  an  instance  of  the  same  kmd,  inasmuch 
 as  that  disease  was,  from  its  being  conjoined  with 
 dysentery,  not  a  continuous,  but  an  intermittent 
 fever.  To  this  much  importance  cannot  be  at- 
 tached, though  it  is  probable  that  Luke,  as  a 
 physician,  would  naturally  use  the  technical  lan- 
 guage of  his  profession  in  speaking  of  disease.  In 
 Deut.  xxviii.  22,  besides  nriTp,  two  diseases  of  the 
 
 same  class  are  mentioned,  Dp?!  (A.  V.  inflamma- 
 tion), and  imn  (A.  V.  extreme  burning).      The 
 
 LXX.  renders  the  former  of  these  by  pLyos,  shiver- 
 ing, and  the  latter  by  epedcap-bs,  a  word  which  is 
 used  by  the  Greek  writers  on  medicine  to  designate 
 '  quodvis  Naturae  irritamentum,  quo  soUicitata  na- 
 tura  ad  obeundas  motiones  excitatur'  (Foes,  Oecon. 
 Ilippoc.)  The  former  is  probably  the  ague,  a  dis- 
 ease of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  East ;  and  the 
 latter  probably  dysentery,  or  some  species  of  in- 
 flammatory fever.     The  Syr.  version  renders  it  by 
 
 jA  .  omX  »j  burning,  which  fa\-ours  the  latter 
 suggestion.  Rosenmiiller  inclines  to  the  opinion 
 that  it  is  the  catarrhus  suffbcans,  but  this  is  with- 
 out probability.  There  is  no  ground  for  supposing 
 it  to  be  erisypelas. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FIGS.     FIG-TREE.     [Teenah.] 
 
 FIGURES.     [Types.] 
 
 FINDLAY,  Robert,  D.D.,  born  1721,  and 
 educated  at  Glasgow  and  Leyden,  was  appointed 
 one  of  the  ministers  of  Glasgow  in  1756,  and  was 
 elected  to  the  professorship  of  divinity  in  the  uni- 
 versity of  that  city  in  1782.  He  died  in  1814. 
 He  wrote  Two  Lette7-s  to  Dr.  Kennicott,  by  Phila- 
 lethes,  Loud.  1762  ;  Vindication  of  the  Sacred 
 Books  and  of  Joseplius,  from  various  misrepresenta- 
 tions  and  cavils  of  Voltaire,  Glasg.  1770 ;  The 
 Divine  Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  O.  T. 
 asserted  by  St.  Paul,  2  Tim.  iii.  10 ;  and  Dr. 
 Geddes's  reasons  against  the  tenor  of  his  words  ex- 
 amined, Lond.  1804.  'Dr.  Findlay,'  says  Orme 
 (Bib.  Bib.  187),  '  is  a  learned  but  not  an  interest- 
 ing writer.  The  above  works  contain  much  solid 
 critical  disquisition.  The  reply  to  Dr.  Geddes  is 
 a  most  satisfactory  one  ;  and  both  vindicates  the 
 common  reading  of  2  Tim.  iii.  16,  and  supports 
 the  generally  received  views  of  inspiration.' — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 FIR.     [Berosh.] 
 
 FIRE.  Besides  the  ordinary  senses  of  the  word 
 '  fire,'  which  need  no  explanation,  there  are  other 
 uses  of  it  in  Scripture  which  require  to  be  discrimi- 
 nated. The  destructive  ene(;-gies  of  this  element, 
 and  the  torment  which  it  inflicts,  rendered  it  a  fit 
 symbol  of — i.  Whatever  does  damage  and  con- 
 sumes (Prov.  xvi.  27  ;  Is.  ix.  18).  2.  Of  severe 
 trials,  vexations,  and  misfortunes  (Zech.  xii.  6  ;  i 
 Cor.  iii.  13,  15  ;  i  Pet.  i.  7).  3.  Of  the  punish- 
 ments beyond  the  grave  (Matt.  v.  22  ;  Mark  Lx.  44; 
 Rev.  xiv.  10  J  xxi.  8).     [Hell.] 
 
FIRE 
 
 15 
 
 FIREPANS 
 
 '  Fire  from  heaven,'  '  fire  ot  t'lo  Lord,'  usually 
 denotes  lightning  in  the  O.  T. ;  but,  when  connected 
 with  sacrifices,  the  '  fire  of  the  Lord  '  is  often  to  be 
 understood  as  the  fire  of  the  altar,  and  sometimes 
 the  holocaust  itself  (Exod.  xxix.  iS  ;  Lev.  i.  9  ;  ii. 
 3  ;  iii.  5,  9  ;  Num.  xxviii.  6  ;  I  Sam  ii.  28  ;  Is  xx. 
 16  ;  Mai.  i.  10). 
 
 The  uses  of  fire  among  the  Hebrews  were 
 various  :— 
 
 1.  The  domestic  use  for  cooking,  roasting,  and 
 baking  [Bread  ;  Food]. 
 
 2.  In  winter  they  warmed  themselves  and  their 
 apartments  by  '  a  fire  of  coals '  (Jer.  xxxvi.  22,  23  ; 
 Luke  xxii.  55-6).  In  the  rooms  it  would  seem  that 
 a  brazier  with  charcoal  was  usually  employed,  as 
 is  still  the  case  in  western  Asia,  although  the  ovens 
 and  fire-places  used  in  baking  bread  might  have 
 been,  and  doubtless  were,  as  now,  often  employed 
 to  keep  rooms  properly  warm  [Bread  ;  Coal]. 
 
 3.  The  religious  use  of  fire  was  for  consuming 
 the  victims  on  the  altar  of  burnt-offerings,  and  in 
 burning  the  incense  on  the  golden  altar  :  hence  the 
 remarkable  phrase  in  Is.  xxxi.  9 — '  the  Lord,  whose 
 fire  is  in  Zion,  and  his  furnace  in  Jerusalem.' 
 
 4.  In  time  of  war  torches  were  often  carried  by 
 the  soldiers  ;  which  explains  the  use  of  torches  in 
 the  attack  of  Gideon  upon  the  camp  of  the  Midian- 
 ites  (Judg.  vii.  16).  This  military  use  of  torches 
 was  very  general  among  ancient  nations,  and  is  al- 
 luded to  by  many  of  their  writers  (Statius,  Thcb. 
 iv.  5.  7;  Stobteus,  Senn.  p.  194;  Michaelis,  in 
 Symbol.  Liter.  Bremeiis.  iii.  254. ) 
 
 5.  Burning  criminals  alive  does  not  appear  to 
 have  been  known  to  the  Hebrews  ;  but  as  an  ad- 
 ditional disgrace  the  bodies  were  in  particular  cases 
 burnt  after  death  had  been  inflicted  (Josh.  vii.  25  ; 
 compare  verse  15)  ;  and  it  is  in  this  sense  that  the 
 allusions  to  burning  as  a  punishment  are  to  be 
 understood,  except  when  the  reference  is  to  a 
 foreign  usage,  as  in  Dan.  iii.  22,  24,  sq. 
 
 6.  In  time  of  war  towns  were  often  destroyed  by 
 fire.  This,  as  a  war  usage,  belongs  to  all  times 
 and  nations  ;  but  among  the  Hebrews  there  were 
 some  particular  notions  connected  with  it,  as  an 
 act  of  strong  abhorrence,  or  of  devotement  to 
 abiding  desolation.  The  principal  instances  histo- 
 rically commemorated  are  the  destruction  by  fire 
 of  Jericlio  (Josh.  vi.  24)  ;  Ai  (Josh.  viii.  19)  ;  Hazor 
 (Josh.  xi.  11)  ;  Laish  (Judg.  xviii.  27)  ;  the  towns 
 of  the  Benjamites  (Judg.  xx.  48)  ;  Ziklag,  by  the 
 Amalekites  (i  Sam.  xxx.  i)  ;  Gezer,  by  Pharaoh 
 (i  Kings  ix.  i6)  ;  and  the  temple  and  palaces  of 
 Jerusalem,  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (2  Kings  xxv.  9). 
 Even  the  war-chariots  of  the  Canaanites  were  burnt 
 by  the  Israelites,  probably  on  the  principle  of  pre- 
 cluding the  possibility  of  recovery  by  the  enemy  of 
 instruments  of  strength  for  which  they  had  them- 
 selves no  use.  The  frequency  with  which  towns 
 were  fired  in  ancient  warfare  is  shewn  by  the  very 
 numerous  threats  by  the  prophets  that  the  towns  of 
 Israel  should  be  burned  by  their  foreign  enemies. 
 Some  great  towns,  not  of  Israel,  are  particularly 
 named  ;  and  it  would  be  an  interesting  task  to 
 trace,  as  far  as  the  materials  exist,  the  fulfilment 
 of  these  prophecies  in  those  more  marked  ex- 
 amples. Among  the  places  thus  threatened  we 
 find  Damascus  (Is.  xliii.  12,  13),  Gaza,  Tyre,  Te- 
 man  (Amos  i.  7,  10,  12).  The  temples  and  idols 
 of  a  conquered  town  or  people  were  very  often 
 burned  by  the  victors,  and  this  was  enjoined  as  a 
 
 duty  to  the  Israelites  (Dent.  vii.  5,  25  ;  xii.  3  ,  xiii. 
 16  ;  Is.  hi  12,  13). 
 
 There  were  some  special  regulations  respecting 
 the  use  of  fire  among  the  Israelites.  The  most 
 remarkable  of  these  was  the  prohibition  to  light  a 
 fire  on  the  Sabbath  (Exod.  xxxv.  3).  As  the  pri- 
 mary design  of  this  law  appears  to  have  been  to 
 prevent  the  proper  privileges  of  the  Sabbath-day 
 from  being  lost  to  any  one  through  the  care  and 
 time  required  in  cooking  victuals  (Exod.  xvi.  23), 
 it  is  doubted  whether  the  use  of  fire  for  warmth  on 
 the  Sabbath-day  was  included  in  this  interdiction. 
 In  practice,  it  would  appear  that  the  fire  was  nevei 
 lighted  or  kept  up  for  cooking  on  the  Sabbath- 
 day,  and  that  consequently  there  were  no  fires  in 
 the  houses  during  the  Sabbaths  of  the  greater  part 
 of  the  year  ;  but  it  may  be  collected  that,  in  win- 
 ter, fires  for  warming  apartments  were  kept  up 
 from  the  previous  day.  Michaelis  is  very  much 
 mistaken  with  respect  to  the  climate  of  Palestine, 
 in  supposing  that  the  inhabitants  could,  without 
 much  discomfort,  dispense  with  fires  for  warmth 
 during  \\'inter  {Mosaischcs  Rccht,  iv.  195).  The 
 modern  Jews,  although  there  is  no  cooking  ir; 
 their  houses,  have  fires  on  the  Sabbath-day,  which 
 are  attended  to  by  a  Christian  servant  ;  or  a  char- 
 woman is  hired  to  attend  to  the  fires  of  several 
 houses,  which  she  visits  repeatedly  during  the  day. 
 
 Another  law  required  the  damage  done  by  a 
 conflagration  in  the  fields  to  be  made  good  by  the 
 party  through  whose  incaution  it  had  been  kindled 
 (Exod.  xxii.  6).  This  was  a  most  useful  and 
 necessary  law  in  a  country  where  the  warmth  and 
 drought  of  summer  soon  render  the  herbage  and 
 underwood  highly  combustible,  so  that  a  fire  once 
 kindled  often  spreads  most  extensively,  and  pro- 
 duces disastrous  consequences  (Judg.  ix.  15  ;  xv. 
 5).  This  law  was  calculated  to  teach  caution  in 
 the  use  of  fire  to  the  herdsmen  in  the  fields,  who 
 were  the  parties  most  concerned.  And  it  is  to  be 
 remembered  that  the  herdsmen  were  generally  sub- 
 stantial persons,  and  had  their  assistant  shepherds, 
 for  whose  imprudence  they  were  made  responsible. 
 Still  no  inference  is  to  be  drawn  from  this  law 
 with  regard  to  fires  breaking  out  in  towns,  the  cir- 
 cumstances being  so  very  different. 
 
 In  the  sacerdotal  services  no  fire  but  that  of  the 
 altar  of  burnt-offerings  could  lawfully  be  used. 
 That  fire  was  originally  kindled  supernaturally, 
 and  was  ever  after  kept  up.  From  it  the  fire  used 
 in  the  censers  for  burning  incense  was  always 
 taken  ;  and  for  neglecting  this  and  using  common 
 fire,  Nadab  and  Abihu  were  struck  dead  by  '  fire 
 from  heaven'  (Lev.  x.  i,  2;  Num.  iii.  4,  xxvi. 
 61). 
 
 Respecting  '  passing  through  the  fire,'  see  Mo- 
 loch ;  and  for  the  '  pillar  of  fire,'  see  Exodus. 
 -J.  K. 
 
 FIREPANS.  This  is  the  rendering  in  the 
 A.  V.  of  nirinp   (Exod.  xxvii.  3,  Sept.   vvpCiov^ 
 
 xxxviii.  3  ;  2  Kings  xxv.  15  ;  Jer.  Iii.  19),  else 
 where  rendered  snuff-dishes  (Exod.  xxv.  38,  Sept. 
 virodeixaTa,  xxxvii.  23  ;  Num.  iv.  9,  Sept.  ewapva- 
 rpidas),  and  censers  (Num.  xvi.  6,  Sept.  trvpeta  ;  in 
 the  sing.  nnnD,    Lev.    x.    i  ;  xvi.   12  ;  Sept.  ttu- 
 
 pelou).  These  do  not  seem  to  have  been  different 
 kinds  of  vessels,  but  only  the  same  vessel,  of  pro- 
 bably different  sizes,  and  applied  to  different  uses. 
 It  was  a  metal  dish  used  sometimes  to  convey  fire 
 
FIRMAMENT 
 
 16 
 
 FIRST-BORN 
 
 to  the  altar,  sometimes  to  burn  incense  on,  and 
 sometimes  to  receive  the  snuff  from  tlie  lamp,  and 
 perhaps  to  hold  the  snuffers. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FIRMAMENT.  By  this  word  the  A.  V.,  fol- 
 lowing the  Vulg.,  translates  the  Heb.  ypi  (Gen.  i. 
 
 6,  7,  8,  etc.)  The  original  word,  from  yp"l,  to 
 stamp,  beat  out,  expand,  simply  means  the  ex- 
 panse;  and  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  how  the 
 Greek  translators  came  to  render  it  by  aTepiLotxa., 
 a  word  which  is  commonly  used  to  designate  some 
 compact  solid,  such  as  the  basis  of  a  pillar,  or  a 
 pillar  itself,   and  which  is  used  elsewhere  by  the 
 
 LXX.  as  equivalent  to  the  Heb.  J?7D,  a  rock  (Ps. 
 xviii.  2),  and  by  Symmachus  and  Theodotion  as 
 the  rendering  of  the  Heb.  PIDD,  a  staff.  Basil 
 [Hexaem.  Hom.  3)  explains  the  term  as  not  in- 
 tended to  describe  what  is  naturally  hard,  and 
 solid,  and  weighty,  wliich  belongs  rather  to  the 
 earth  ;  but  says  that  because  the  nature  of  the  ob- 
 jects above  it  is  fine  and  thin,  and  not  perceptible 
 by  sense,  it  is  called  arepiw/j-a,  by  a  comparison 
 between  things  of  extreme  rarity  and  such  as  can 
 be  perceived  by  sense  [avyKplaei  tQv  XeTrroxdrwi' 
 Kal  TTJ  aiaOr^ffet  KaraK7)irTQiv).  It  is  not  very  clear 
 what  his  meaning  here  is,  but  probably  he  in- 
 tended that  as  a  solid  extension  would  be  pro- 
 perly called  a  crepiwixa,  so  this  mass  of  light  and 
 vapoury  substances  might  by  analogy  receive  this 
 name.  Others  have  suggested  that  this  tenn  was 
 employed  to  indicate  that  the  yp"!  is  the  '  univer- 
 sitas  tG)v  XeTTTOfxepQu  in  regionem  superam  con- 
 globata  et  firmata,'  along  with  the  idea  that  this 
 '  nihil  habet  uspiam  inanitatis,  sed  omnia  sui  gene- 
 ris naturse  plena'  (Fuller,  A//sc.  Sac.  Bk.  i,  c.  6). 
 Fuller  thinks  also  that  the  LXX.  selected  arep^w/ia 
 rather  than  Treraa/jLa  or  ■jrepiiriTacrfj.a,  in  order  to 
 convey  the  idea  of  clej>l/i  as  well  as  superficial  ex- 
 pansion. A  very  general  opinion  is  that  the  LXX. 
 adopted  this  term  rather  than  one  exactly  equiva- 
 lent to  the  original,  because  it  conveys  what  was 
 the  Hebrew  belief  concerning  the  upper  atmo- 
 sphere or  visible  heavens,  which  they  regarded  as 
 a  solid  expanse  encircling  the  earth.  That  such 
 was  a  common  notion  in  ancient  times  is  probable  ; 
 the  Greek  ovpavb's,  like  our  heaven,*  signifying  that 
 which  is  heaved  up  or  elevated,  and  the  Latin 
 ccelum,  corresponding  to  the  Greek  kolXov,  signify- 
 ing that  which  is  hollowed  out  ('cavernas  coeli,' 
 Lucret.  iv.  172;  comp.  Pott,  Etymol.  Foi'schiingen, 
 i.  23,  27),  have  their  source  in  such  a  notion  ;  while 
 such  epithets  as  (jioripeov  {Odyss.  xv.  328  ;  xvii. 
 565),  x^'^^'^o"  {il-  xvii.  425  ;  Find.  Pyth.  x.  42  ; 
 Nein.  vi.  6),  and  iroKuxaXKov  {II.  v.  504  ;  Odyss. 
 iii.  2),  plainly  enunciate  it.  It  is  remarkable,  how- 
 ever, that  only  two  of  the  ancient  philosophers 
 seem  to  have  formally  taught  this.  Empedocles 
 described  the  heavens  as  (xrepeixvLov  and  KpvcrraX- 
 XoetSTjs,  composed  of  air  glacialised  by  fire  (Plut. 
 Plac.  Phil.  ii.  1 1  ;  Stobseus,  Eclog.  Phys.  i.  24  ; 
 Diog.  Lasrt.  viii.  77  ;  Lactant.  De  Op?f.  Dei.  c. 
 17  ;  cf.  Karsten,  Phil.  Gr.  Vet.  Opci-uni  Reliquicc 
 ii.  422)  ;  and  Artemidorus  taught  that  '  summa 
 loeli  era  solidissima  est,  in  modum  tecti  durata ' 
 
 *  If,  indeed,  it  be  true  that  the  Anglo-Saxon 
 heofon  is  derived  from  hea/an,  and  does  not  rather 
 stand  in  relation  with  the  Latin  cav  in  caviis. 
 The  A.  S.  equivalent  for  the  Lat.  ca  is  hea,  as 
 caput,  heafod. 
 
 (Senec.  Nat.  Qmrst.  vii.  13).  But  that  the  same 
 view  was  entertained  by  the  Hebrews  is  by  no 
 means  certain.  It  is  hardly  competent  for  us  to 
 take  such  highly  poetical  descriptions  as  those 
 in  which  the  heavens  are  compared  to  a  mirror 
 of  shining  metal,  or  to  a  tent,  or  to  a  curtain 
 stretched  out  (Job  xxxvii.  18  ;  Ps.  civ.  2  ;  Is.  xl. 
 22),  and  interpret  them  as  scientific  statements  ; 
 nor  can  we  lay  any  stress  on  the  fact  that  the 
 sacred  writers  speak  of  the  doors  and  windows  of 
 heaven,  of  its  pillars,  or  its  foundations  (Gen.  vii. 
 II  ;  Is.  xxiv.  8;  Mai.  iii.  10;  Job  xxvi.  11  ;  2 
 Sam.  xxii.  8)  ;  for  these  may  be  mere  poetical  or 
 pictorial  forms  of  speech,  such  as  even  v>t  with 
 our  exact  scientific  knowledge  might  delight  to 
 use.  The  descriptions  in  Exod.  xxiv.  10,  and  in 
 Ezek.  i.  22-26,  have  been  adduced  as  proving  that 
 the  Hebrews  conceived  the  visible  heavens  as  a 
 solid  though  pellucid  floor  on  which  a  person 
 might  stand,  or  a  solid  object  rest ;  but  in  the 
 former  of  these  passages  '  the  paved  work,'  on 
 which  Jehovah  appears  standing,  exists  only  in  our 
 version,  the  original  simply  stating  that  under  his 
 feet  was    '  a  sort  of  work  of  glittering  sapphire' 
 
 (T'San    T\y^   TWV'O'Z),   without   determining  of 
 
 what  kind  the  work  was  ;  and  in  the  latter  pas- 
 sage, though  it  is  said  that  the  throne  of  God  was 
 above  the  rakiah,  it  is  not  said  that  the  throne  was 
 resting  on  it.  There  is  more  apparent  force  in  the 
 argument  derived  from  the  purpose  which  the 
 rakia  was  designed  to  serve,  viz.,  the  support- 
 ing of  the  waters  which  were  above  it,  and  the 
 holding  of  the  heavenly  luminaries,  both  of  which  j 
 
 would  seem  to  require  a  solid  substance.  But  the 
 waters  above  the  rakia  are  merely  the  clouds, 
 which  need  no  solid  support  (Delitzsch  on  Gen.  i. 
 6  ;  Kurz,  Bible  and  Astronomy,  Hist,  of  the  Old 
 Covenant,  i.  30)  ;  and  the  Jixing  of  the  heavenly 
 bodies  in  it  is  due  to  the  imagination  of  the  com- 
 mentator ;  it  has  no  sanction  from  the  text,  which 
 merely  says  they  were  set  or  placed  in  it,  without 
 saying  how  (Gen.  i.  14-18).  There  seems  no  rea- 
 son, then,  for  thinking  that  the  sacred  writers  con- 
 ceived of  the  rakia  as  a  solid  substance  ;  they  seem 
 rather  to  have  thought  of  it  as  a  wide  expansion, 
 in  which  the  clouds,  and  winds,  and  heavenly 
 bodies  had  their  place,  and  from  which  the  rain 
 came  down.  That  they  would  not  have  applied 
 to  it  such  terms  as  we  have  cited  from  the  Greek 
 poets  is  evident  from  Deut.  xxviii.  23,  where  a 
 metallic  heaven  is  spoke  of  as  abnomial,  and  the 
 result  of  a  curse.  The  cosmography  of  the  He- 
 brews was  far  from  being  scientifically  exact,  but 
 we  need  not  make  it  less  so  than  the  exigences  of 
 a  just  exegesis  demand. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FIRST-BORN.  The  privileges  of  the  first- 
 bom  son,  among  the  Hebrews,  are  indicated  under 
 Birthright. 
 
 FIRST-BORN,  Sanctification  and  Re- 
 demption OF  THE  ("1133  nt^^^p,  pn  iins),  males 
 
 of  human  beings  and  animals  were  strictly  enjoined 
 to  perpetuate  the  remembrance  of  the  death  of 
 Egypt's  first-born,  whereby  the  liberty  of  the 
 Israelites  was  secured,  and  of  the  presei-vation  of 
 Israel's  first-born.      Comp.  Exod.  xiii.  2,  Ii-i5- 
 
 I.  Sanctijication  0/  the  first-born,  its  signification, 
 etc. — The  fact  that  the  first-born  of  Egypt  were 
 selected  to  be  smitten  down  for  the  hard  heart ed- 
 ness  of  Pharaoh,  and  that  their  death  was  regarded 
 
FIRST-BORM 
 
 17 
 
 FIRST-BORN 
 
 as  the  greatest  calamity,  sJiews  ot  itself  that  a 
 peculiar  sanctity  had  already  been  attached  to  the 
 first-bom  of  both  man  and  cattle.  The  cause  of 
 this  is  easily  traced  in  the  Scriptures.  The  power 
 of  procreation  was  declare.^  liy  God  himself  to  be  a 
 special  blessing  (Gen.  i.  22,  28;  ix.  i;  xvii.  16; 
 xxix.  31),  and  was  granted  as  a  reward  to  those 
 who  were  well  pleasing  in  his  sight  (Gen.  xv.  4  ; 
 Ps.  cxxviii.  4).  This  was  fullv  appreciated  by  the 
 Jews  ;  for  the  possession  of  children,  especially  of 
 the  male  sex,  was  esteeme(l  the  climax  of  social 
 happiness  (Gen.  xvi.  2  ;  xxix.  31 ;  Deut.  vii.  13, 
 14 ;  Ps.  cxxviii.  3,  4),  and  (he  absence  of  them 
 was  considered  a  reproach  (nDTH),  since  it  implied 
 divine  displeasure  (Gen.  xxv.  23),  and  no  other 
 earthly  blessing  could  compensate  it  (Gen.  xvi. 
 1-5).  Moreover,  the  first-bom  of  newly-married 
 young  people  (□''"liy^n  p,  I's.  cxxvii.  4)  was  be- 
 heved  to  represent  the  prime  of  human  vigour 
 (|1N  TT'CXI)  being  born  before  the  strength  of  the 
 father  began  to  diminish  (Gen.  xli.x.  3  ;  Deut. 
 xxi.  17;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  51 ;  cv.  36).  It  was  there- 
 fore natural  that  the  first  instalment  of  God's 
 blessing,  and  the  prime  of  man's  strength,  should 
 be  regarded  with  peculiar  affection,  and  have  spe- 
 cial sanctity  attached  to  him,*  and  that  by  virtue 
 of  the  claim  which  God  has  to  what  is  most  loved 
 and  held  sacred  by  us,  and  gratitude  on  the  part 
 of  man,  the  first-born  males,  both  of  man  and  ani- 
 mals, should  be  consecrated  to  the  giver  of  all  good 
 things  ;  the  one  as  a  priest,  representing  the  family 
 to  which  he  belonged  (Exod.  xix.  22,  24),  t  and  the 
 other  as  a  sacrifice  (Gen.  iv.  4),  just  as  the  fat  of 
 sacrifices  was  devoted  to  God  because  it  was  re- 
 garded as  the  prime  part  of  the  animal.  [Fat.] 
 This  explains  the  fact  why  the  plague  of  the  first- 
 born of  the  Egyptians  was  so  terribly  felt ;  it  was 
 the  destruction  of  the  objects  most  dear  and  sacred 
 to  them,  whilst  the  first-born  of  the  Hebrews,  i.e., 
 their  priests  and  sacrifices,  were  spared.  More- 
 over, it  shews  the  import  of  the  consecration  en- 
 joined in  Exod.  xiii.  I.  Hitherto  it  was  optional 
 with  the  Hebrews  whether  they  would  devote  the 
 first-born  to  the  Lord,  but  now  God,  by  virtue  of 
 having  so  signally  interposed  for  their  deliverance, 
 claims  the  public  consecration  of  the  first-born  of 
 man  as  his  priests,  and  of  the  first-born  of  animals 
 as  sacrifices. 
 
 2.  Origin  of  the  Redemption  of  the  first-born. — 
 After  the  building  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  intro- 
 duction of  the  extensive  sacrificial  service,  which 
 required  a  special  priestly  order,  as  well  as  a  sepa- 
 rate staff  of  servants,  who  could  exclusively  devote 
 themselves  to  the  ministry  of  the  sanctuary,  the 
 offices  of  the  first-bom  were  superseded  by  those  of 
 the  Levites  (Num.  iii.  1 1-13),  +  and  it  was  ordained 
 
 *  Hence  the  prerogatives  of  the  first-bom,  de- 
 scribed in  the  article  BIRTHRIGHT. 
 
 +  That  the  D"'~iyj,  who  in  this  passage  officiate 
 as  priests,  are  the  first-born,  as  the  Chaldee  para- 
 phrases of  Onkelos,  and  Jonathan  ben  Uziel, 
 Mishna  Sebachim,  xiv.  4,  Saadia,  Rashi,  Rash- 
 bam,  Ibn  Ezra,  etc.,  have  it,  is  evident  from 
 Exod.  xix.  22,  24,  where  C^HD,  priests,  are  dis- 
 tinctly mentioned  before  the  institution  of  the 
 Aaronic  order.      Comp.  Exod.  xxviii.  i. 
 
 %  This  substitution  of  the  Levites  in  the  place  of 
 the  first-born,  and  the  creation  of  a  new  order  of 
 priests  were  no  easy  task,  as  may  be  seen  from 
 Korah's    rebellion    (Num.    xvi.    i,    2 ;   xxvi.    5-7) 
 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 that  the  first-born  of  the  other  tribes,  as  well  as 
 the  first-born  of  the  animals  which  could  not  be 
 sacrificed,  should  hencelorth  be  redeemed  {ibid. 
 xviii.  15). 
 
 3.  Redemption  of  the  fint-bot  n  ofvian. — The  re- 
 demption of  a  child  is  to  take  place  when  it  is  a 
 month  old,  when  the  father  is  to  give  to  the  priest 
 tliirty  silver  shekels  of  the  sanctuary,  i.e.,  about 
 eleven  or  twelve  shillings  as  the  maximum.  Il 
 the  child  was  sickly,  or  appeared  otherwise  to  be 
 inferior  to  children  generally,  the  priest  could  esti- 
 mate it  at  less  than  this  sum  (Num.  iii.  46,  etc. ; 
 xviii.  16).  The  priest  had  to  come  to  the  house  of 
 the  infant  as  the  mother  could  not  appear  with  it 
 it)  the  Temple  because  her  days  of  purification,  ac- 
 cording to  the  law  (Lev.  xii.  2,  4),  were  not  as  yet 
 accomplished.  No  bargaining  was  allowed,  but  if 
 the  priest  saw  that  the  parents  were  poor,  he  could, 
 if  he  chose,  return  the  money  when  the  ceremony 
 was  over.  When  the  mother's  days  of  purification 
 were  accomplished,  and  she  could  appear  in  the 
 Temple,  she  then  brought  the  child  to  the  priest  to 
 be  presented  publicly  to  the  Lord  (Luke  ii.  22). 
 The  Jews  still  observe  this  law  of  redemption. 
 When  the  first-born  male  is  thirty  days  old,  the 
 parents  invite  to  their  house  their  friends  and  a  priest 
 (jriD)  to  a  meal  for  the  following  day.  The  priest* 
 having  invoked  God's  blessing  upon  the  repast,  and 
 offered  some  introductory  prayers,  etc.,  looks  at  the 
 child  and  the  price  of  redemption  presented  unto 
 him,  and  asks  the  father  which  he  would  rather  have, 
 the  money  or  the  first-born  child.  Upon  the  father's 
 reply  that  he  would  rather  pay  the  price  of  redemp- 
 tion, the  priest  takes  the  money,  swings  it  round  the 
 head  of  the  infant  in  token  of  his  vicarious  authority, 
 saying,  '  This  is  for  the  first-born,  this  is  in  lieu  of 
 it,  this  redeems  it  !  and  let  this  son  be  spared  for 
 life,  for  the  law  of  God  and  for  the  fear  of  Heaven ! 
 May  it  please  Thee,  that,  as  he  was  spared  for  re- 
 demption, so  he  may  be  spared  for  the  Law,  for 
 matrimony,  and  for  good  works.  Amen.'  The 
 priest  then  lays  his  hand  upon  the  child's  head 
 and  blesses  it,  as  follows  : — 'The  Lord  make  thee 
 as  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  ! '  etc.  It  is  to  this 
 that  the  Apostle  Peter  refers  when  he  says  '  Ye 
 were  not  redeemed  with  corruptible  thuigs,  as 
 silver  and  gold,'  etc.  (l  Peter  i.  18).  When  the 
 first-born  son  is  thirteen  years  of  age,  he  fasts  the 
 day  before  the  feast  of  Passover,  in  commemora- 
 tion of  the  sparing  of  the  first-born  of  the  Hebrews 
 in  Egypt.     [Fasts.] 
 
 4.  Redemption  of  the  first-born  of  clean  animals. — 
 The  first-born  of  every  clean  animal  {i.  e.,  ox,  sheep, 
 goat,  etc.),  from  eight  days  to  twelve  months  old, 
 had  to  be  taken  to  Jerusalem  every  year  (Deut.  xii. 
 6,  etc.)  ;  and  delivered  to  the  priest,  who  offered  it 
 as  a  sacrifice  to  Jehovah,  sprinkled  its  blood  upon 
 the  altar,  burned  the  fat,  and  eat  the  flesh  (Exod. 
 xiii.  13  ;  xxxiv.  20 ;  Num.  xviii.  15-17).  In  the  mean 
 time  the  animal  was  not  to  be  used  for  any  work, 
 for  it  belonged  to  the  Lord  (Deut.  xv.  19)  ;  but  if 
 
 which,  as  it  is  justly  regarded  by  Ramban  and  Ibn 
 Ezra,  was  a  protest  of  the  first-born. 
 
 *  The  assertion  in  Herzog's  Rcal-Encycklopddie 
 (s.v.  Erstgeburt,  p.  145),  that  it  is  the Rabbiwho  re- 
 deems the  child,  by  taking  the  appointed  sum,  is 
 incorrect.  The  Rabbi  has  no  right  to  do  it,  the 
 performance  of  the  rites  of  redemption  belongs  ex- 
 clusively to  the  priest  (jna),  who  is  the  only  legal 
 person  to  do  it 
 
FIRST-FRUITS 
 
 18 
 
 It  had  any  blemish  it  was  not  to  be  sacrificed,  but  j 
 eaten  up  at  home  [ibid.,  xv.  21,  22).      If,  however, 
 the  man  whose  cattle  had  first-born  lived  at  too 
 great  a  distance    from    Jerusalem   to    carry  tlieni  j 
 thither,  he  was  commanded  to  sell  tliem,  and  take 
 the  money  to  tlie  sanctuary  (Deut.  xiv.  24,  25).     _   j 
 
 5.  Redemption  of  the  first-borti  of  unclean  ani- 
 mals.— The  first-born  of  unclean  animals,  not  j 
 being  allowed  to  be  offered  as  sacrifices,  were  , 
 either  to  be  redeemed  according  to  the  valuation  of 
 the  priest,  with  the  addition  of  one-fifth  of  the 
 value,  and  then  remain  with  their  owner,  or  be 
 sold,  and  the  price  given  to  the  priests  (Lev.  xxvii. 
 11-13,  27),  to  be  redeemed  with  a  lamb,  or  else  be 
 put  to  death  (Exod.  xiii.  13). 
 
 6.  Literature.— ]o%&^\\.  Anfiq.  iv.  4.  4;  Mishna, 
 Bechoroth  ;  Maimonides,  Mishna  Thora,  vol.  iii. 
 p.  241  ;  Hikhotk  Bechoroth  ;  Ibn  Ezra,  his  valu- 
 able comments  on  the  different  jiassages  of  the 
 Hebrew  Scriptures  quoted  in  this  article;  The 
 Hebreiu  Prayer-Book,  published  by  Knopflmacher, 
 Vienna,  1859,  with  all  the  laws  respecting  the 
 Jewish  rites  and  ceremonies,  entitled,  Derech  Ha,- 
 Chajini,  p.  407  ;  Der  Israelitische  Volkslehrer,  vii. 
 41,  ff.  ;  ix.  13S,  ff.  ;  212,  ff.  ;  248,  ff.-C.  D.  G. 
 
 FIRST-FRUITS.  The  same  natural  feeling 
 which  at  first  led  man  out  of  gratitude  to  conse- 
 crate to  the  giver  of  all  good  things  the  first- 
 born of  both  man  and  animals,  and  the  prime 
 parts  of  sacrifices,  because  they  were  regarded  as 
 the  first  instalments  of  his  blessings,  and  which 
 afterwards  led  to  the  legalizing  of  these  offerings 
 [Fat  ;  First-korn],  also  gave  rise  to  the  offering 
 of  the  first-fruits  and  to  its  becoming  law. 
 
 1.  The  Character  and  Classification  of  the  First- 
 Fridts. — Besides  the  offering  of  the  sheaf  of  the 
 new  barley  (JT'tt'^^l  "lOy)  on  the  Feast  of  Passover, 
 and  of  the  two  loaves  of  the  new  wheat  (Qn? 
 D''"l133)  on  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  which  were  the 
 grateful  acknowledgment  of  the  whole  nation  for 
 the  blessings  of  the  harvest  (Lev.  xxiii.  10-20),  and 
 which  are  duly  noticed  in  their  proper  places 
 [Festivals  ;  Passover  ;  Pentecost],  the  Law  also 
 required  every  individual  to  consecrate  to  the  Lord 
 a  part  of  the  first-fruit  of  the  land  (comp.  Exod. 
 xxii.  29  ;  xxiii.  19  ;  xxxiv.  26  ;  Num.  xv.  20,  21 ; 
 xsviii.  12,  13;  Deut.  xvhi.  4;  xxvi.  2-11).  The 
 first-fruits  to  be  offered  are  restricted  by  Jewish 
 tradition  to  the  seven  chief  productions  of  Palestine, 
 viz.,  wheat,  barley,  grapes,  figs,  pomegranates, 
 olives,  and  honey,  mentioned  in  Deut.  viii.  8  in 
 praise  of  the  land  (comp.  Mishna,  Bilmrini,  i.  3  ; 
 Berachoth,  35,  a;  Maimonides,  Jod  Ha-Chezaka, 
 Hilchoth  Biknrim,  ii.  2),  and  are  divided  into  two 
 classes — i.  The  actual  produce  oi  the  soil,  the  raw 
 material,  such  as  corn,  fruits,  etc.,  wliich  are  de- 
 nominated □''"1133,  ■7rpiaToyevvriix.aTa,prit?iitiva;  and 
 2.  Preparations  of  the  produce,  as  oil,  flour,  wine, 
 etc.,  and  are  called  riDliD,  dTrapxa-l,primitiie (comp. 
 Midrash  Ixabba,  the  Chaldee  Paraphrases  of  Onke- 
 los  and  Jonathan  ben  Uziel,  and  Rashi  on  Exod. 
 xxii.  29). 
 
 2.  7 he  Quantity  and  Time  of  Offering. — The 
 quantity  of  first-fruits  to  be  consecrated  to  the 
 Lord  has  neither  been  fixed  by  the  law  nor  by  tra- 
 dition ;  it  was  left  entirely  to  the  generosity  of  the 
 people.  '  Yet,'  says  Maimonides,  '  it  is  implied 
 that  a  sixtieth  part  is  to  be  consecrated,  and  lie 
 who  wishes  to  devote  all  the  first  fruits  of  his  field 
 may  do  so '  {Hilchoth  Bikurirn,  ii.  1 7).     Tiie  way 
 
 FIRST-FRUITS 
 
 in  which  a  proprietor  fixed  which  first-fruit  he 
 should  offer  was  this,  as  the  Mishna  tells  us, 
 '  when  he  went  into  his  field  and  saw  a  fig  ripen- 
 ing, or  a  buach  of  grapes,  or  a  pomegranate,  he  tied 
 
 a  ru-h  about  it,  and  said  '  Lo,  this  is  first-fruit'  (1/X  '•"IH 
 D*"11jD,  Bikurirn  iii.)  All  the  first-fruits  tluis  de- 
 voted to  the  Lord  had  to  be  delivered  at  Jerusalem 
 between  the  feasts  of  Pentecost  and  Dedication 
 (n3]n  lyi  niVyO,  Exod.  xxiii.  16;  Lev.  xxiii.  16, 
 17;  Biknrim,  i.  36);  any  offering  brought  after 
 this  time  was  not  received. 
 
 3.  77^1?  manlier  in  which  these  offerings  were  taken 
 to  Jeriisalein. — The  law  tliat  every  one  should  take 
 up  the  first-fruits  to  Jerusalem  was  soon  found  im- 
 practicable, since  even  the  most  pious  Israelite 
 found  it  very  difficult,  in  addition  to  his  appearing 
 at  the  three  great  festivals,  to  have  to  go  to  tlie 
 temple  with  every  newly  ripened  fruit.  Nor  was 
 it  found  convenient  for  every  one  to  go  up  with  his 
 firet-fruits  separately.  Hence  the  custom  arose, 
 that  when  the  first-fruits  were  ripe,  ah  the  inhabi- 
 tants of  one  district  who  were  ready  to  deliver 
 them  assembled  together  in  the  principal  town  of 
 that  locality  where  their  representative  lived,  with 
 a  basket  containing  the  ripe  fruits  of  the  seven 
 several  kinds,  arranged  in  the  following  manner — 
 '  The  bailey  was  put  lowermost,  the  wheat  over  it, 
 the  olives  above  that,  the  dates  over  them,  the 
 pomegranates  over  the  dates,  and  the  figs  were 
 put  uppermost  in  the  basket,  leaves  being  put  be- 
 tween every  kind  to  separate  it  from  the  other, 
 and  clusters  of  grapes  were  laid  upon  the  figs  to 
 fomi  the  outside  of  the  basket'  (Maimonides, 
 Hilchoth  Bikurirn,  iii.  7  ;  Tosifta  Bikurirn,  ii.) 
 With  this  basket  all  the  pilgrims  stayed  up  all  night 
 in  the  open  market  place,  because  they  were  afraid 
 to  go  into  houses  to  sleep  lest  any  inmate  of  them 
 .should  die,  and  thus  cause  pollution.  Early  in  the 
 morning  the  representative  of  the  district,  who  was 
 the  official  ("tQ^O)  and  ex  officio  the  leader  of  the 
 imposing  procession,  summoned  them  with  the 
 words  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah —  '  Arise,  and  let 
 us  go  up  to  Zion,  to  the  house  of  Jehovah  our 
 God '  (x.xxi.  6).  The  whole  company  were  then 
 ready  to  start.  We  cannot  do  better  than  give 
 literally  the  description  which  the  Mishna  and  the 
 Talmud  give  of  this  imposing  procession—'  An  ox 
 [destined  for  a  peace-offering]  went  before  them 
 with  gilded  horns  and  an  olive  crown  upon  its 
 head,  and  a  piper  who  played  before  them,  whilst 
 the  air  rang  with  the  song  of  the  people,  '  I  was 
 glad  when  they  said  unto  me  :  Let  us  go  into  the 
 house  of  the  Lord'  (Ps.  cxxii.  l).  On  approaching 
 Jerusalem  a  messenger  was  sent  forward  to  announce 
 their  arrival,  and  the  first-fruits  were  tastefully  ar- 
 ranged. The  officiating  priest,  the  Levites,  and 
 the  treasurers,  went  out  to  meet  them,  the  number 
 of  officials  who  went  out  being  in  accordance  with 
 the  largeness  of  the  party  that  arrived,  and  con- 
 ducted them  into  t'^.e  holy  city,  singing,  as  they 
 entered,  '  Our  feet  stand  within  thy  gates,  O  Jeru- 
 salem' (Ps.  cxxii.  2),  whilst  all  the  workmen 
 [who  plied  their  craft]  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem, 
 stood  up  before  them  and  welcomed  them,  saying, 
 '  Brethren  of  such  and  such  a  place,  peace  be  with 
 you. '  The  piper  continued  to  play  before  them  till 
 the  procession  came  to  the  mount  of  the  Temple. 
 Here  eveiy  one,  even  the  king,  took  his  own 
 basket  upon  his  shoulders,  and  went  torward  till 
 thev  all  came  to  the  court  of  the  Temple,  singing, 
 
FIRST-FRUITS 
 
 19 
 
 JISCIIER 
 
 '  Praise  ye  the  Lord,  praise  God  in  his  sanctuary,' 
 etc.  [through  the  whole  of  Psahn  cl.]  ;  whereupon 
 the  Levites  sang,  '  I  will  extol  thee,  O  Lord  !  be- 
 cause thou  hast  lifted  me  up,  and  hast  not  made 
 my  foes  to  rejoice  over  me'  (Ps.  xxx.)  Then  the 
 pigeons  which  were  hung  about  the  baskets  were 
 taken  for  burnt-offerings,  and  the  pilgrims  gave 
 to  the  priests  what  they  brought  in  their  hands. 
 With  the  baskets  still  upon  their  shoulders  every 
 one  repeated,  '  I  profess  this  day  unto  the  Lord  thy 
 God,'  etc.,  till  he  came  to  the  words,  '  A  wandering 
 Syrian  was  my  father'  (i.e.,  from  Deut.  xxvi.  3-5), 
 when  he  took  the  basket  off  his  shoulders  and  laid 
 hold  of  it  by  its  brim  ;  the  priest  then  put  his  hands 
 under  it  and  waved  it,  whilst  the  offerer  continued 
 to  recite  from  the  words  'A  wandering  Syrian,' 
 where  he  bad  left  off,  to  the  end  of  the  section  [i.e., 
 fo  Deut.  xxvi.  10),  then  put  the  basket  by  the  side 
 of  the  altar,  threw  himself  down  on  his  face,  and 
 afterwards  departed,'  Mishna,  Bikurim,  iii.  2-6  ; 
 Jeriisalem  Bikurim,  65  ;  Maimonides,  Hilclioth 
 Bikurim,  iv.  16,  17).  These  first-fruits  then  be- 
 came the  property  of  the  priests  who  ofSciated  dur- 
 ing that  week. 
 
 4.  Exemptions  from  the  offering;  or  the  service 
 co7i7iected  therewith. — Those  who  simply  possessed 
 the  trees  and  not  the  land  were  exempted  from 
 the  offering  of  first-fruits,  for  they  could  not  say 
 '  the  land  which  thou  \\^^i  given  me^  (Maimonides, 
 Hilchoth  Biknrim,  ii.  13).  Those,  too,  who  lived 
 beyond  the  Jordan  could  not  bring  first-fruits  in 
 the  proper  sense  of  the  libation,  inasmuch  as  they 
 could  not  say  the  words  of  the  service,  from  '  the 
 land  that  floweth  with  milk  arid  honey'  (Deut. 
 >L\vi.  15)  ;  comp.  Mishna,  Bikurim,  i.  10.  A  pro- 
 selyte, again,  though  he  could  bring  the  offering, 
 was  not  to  recite  the  service,  because  he  could  not 
 use  the  words  occurring  therein  (Deut.  xxvi.  3),  '  I 
 am  come  to  the  country  which  the  Lord  sware 
 unto  our  fathers  to  give  its'"  [Bikurim,  i.  4).  Stew- 
 ards, servants,  slaves,  women,  sexless  persons, 
 and  hermaphrodites,  were  also  not  allowed  to  re- 
 cite the  service,  though  they  could  offer  the  liba- 
 tion, because  they  could  not  use  the  words,  '  I 
 have  brought  the  first-fruits  of  the  land  which  thou, 
 0  Lord,  hast  given  me'  [Ibid.  xxvi.  10),  they 
 having  originally  had  no  share  in  the  land  [Biku- 
 rim, i.  5). 
 
 5.  The  offering  of  the  prepared  p7vduce. — In 
 this,  too,  the  quantity  to  be  offered  was  left  to  the 
 generosity  of  the  people.  But  it  was  understood, 
 says  Maimonides,  that  '  a  liberal  man  will  give  a 
 fortieth  part  of  his  first-fruits,  one  who  is  neither 
 liberal  nor  illiberal  will  give  a  fiftieth  part,  and  a 
 covetous  man  will  give  a  sixtieth  [Hilclioth  Thenc- 
 ma,  iii.  2).  They  had  to  be  presented  even  from 
 the  produce  of  Jewish  fields  in  foreign  countries, 
 and  were  not  allowed  to  be  taken  from  the  portion 
 mtended  for  tithes,  nor  from  the  corners  left  for 
 the  poor  [Theruma  i.  5  ;  iii.  7),  and  were  not  re- 
 quired to  be  delivered  in  the  I'emple,  but  might 
 be  given  to  the  nearest  priest  [Ibid.  iv.  3  ;  Bikurim 
 ii.   2). 
 
 6.  The  first-fi-uit  of  the  dough.  —  Besides  the 
 offering  of  the  first-fruits  themselves,  the  Israelites 
 were  also  required  to  give  to  the  Lord  a  cake  made 
 of  the  first  corn  that  was  threshed,  winnowed,  and 
 ground  (Num.  xv.  18-21).  Tradition  resfricts  this 
 to  wheat,  barley,  casmin,  or  rye,  fox-ear  (bailey), 
 and  oats(Chalai.  i ;  Maimonides,  Bikurim,  vi.  i), 
 of  which  a  twenty-fourth  part  had  to  be  given,  but 
 
 the  baker  who  made  it  for  sale  had  to  give  a  forty 
 eighth  part  (Maimonides,  Hilchoth  Bikuiim,  v.  2. 
 3).  This  was  the  perquisite  of  the  priest,  and  it  is 
 to  this  that  the  Apostle  refers  in  Rom.  xi.  16. 
 
 7.  The  firstfruits  of  fruit-trees. — According  to 
 the  law,  the  fruits  of  every  newly  planted  tree  were 
 not  to  be  eaten  or  sold,  or  used  in  any  way  for  the 
 first  three  years,  but  considered  'uncircumcised'  or 
 unclean.  In  the  fourth  year,  however,  the  first- 
 fruits  were  to  be  consecrated  to  the  Lord,  or,  as 
 the  traditional  explanation  is,  eaten  in  Jerusalem, 
 and  in  the  fifth  year  became  available  to  the  owner 
 (Lev.  xix.  23-25).  The  three  years,  according  to 
 Rabbinic  law,  began  with  the  first  of  Tishri,  if  the 
 tree  was  planted  before  the  sixteenth  of  Ab.  The 
 reason  of  this  is  that  the  fruits  of  those  three  years 
 were  considered  imperfect  ;  such  imperfect  fruit 
 could  not,  therefore,  be  offered  to  God  ;  and  as 
 man  was  not  allowed  to  partake  of  the  produce 
 before  he  consecrated  the  first  instalment  of  God's 
 blessings  to  the  giver  of  all  good  things,  the 
 planter  had  to  wait  till  the  fifth  year.  Comp. 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  iv.  8.  19  ;  and  Ibn  Ezra  on  Lev. 
 xix.  23. 
 
 8.  Literature. — The  Mishna,  tracts  Bikurim, 
 Theruma,  Chala  and  Orla  ;  Maimonides,  Jod Ha- 
 Chezaka,  Hilchoth  Bikurim,  vol.  iii.  p.  121 ;  Lewis, 
 The  Antiquities  of  the  Hebreru  Republic,  vol.  i.  p. 
 145,  etc.,  London,  1724  ;  Saalschiitz,  Mosaische 
 Recht,  p.  343  ff.,  416  ff.,  433  ff.  ;  Herzfeld,  Ge- 
 schichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  ii.  p.  128  ff.  ;  Jost, 
 Geschichte  des  'Judenthiims,  vol.  i.  p.  172  ff. — • 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 FISCHER,  JoHANN  Friedrich.  This  eminent 
 philologist  was  born  at  Coburg,  October  10,  1724. 
 In  1 75 1  he  was  appointed  rector  of  St.  Thomas's 
 School,  Leipzig  ;  and,  1767,  Principal  of  the  Fi.irs- 
 ten  Collegium  in  the  same  city.  He  died  October 
 II,  1799.  In  addition  to  a  large  number  of  works 
 on  various  departments  of  classical  philology,  he 
 made  numerous  contributions  to  Biblical  literature. 
 He  was  the  editor  of  the  Ijest  edition  of  Stochius's 
 Clavis,  of  Leusden  de  dialectis  N^ovi  Testamenti, 
 and  of  other  works  then  valued  as  aids  to  the 
 critical  study  of  the  original  Scriptures.  He  also 
 superintended  the  publication,  from  a  Greek  MS. 
 in  the  libraiy  of  St.  Paul's,  Leipzig,  of  a  portion 
 of  the  O.  T. ,  including  Leviticus,  Numbers,  and 
 parts  of  Exodus  and  Deuteronomy.  Of  his  original 
 works,  the  following  are  the  most  important  : — ■ 
 Prolusiones  xxxiii.  de  vitiis  Lexiconim  N.  T.,  iTji- 
 1790;  afterwards  published  in  a  collected  form 
 with  the  title  Prolusiones  de  vitiis  Lexicoi-um  Novi 
 Testame7iti  sepa7-atim  antea  nimc  co7iJ7mctce  editcz, 
 multis  pa7iibus  auctce,  multisque  in  locis  e7ne7uiatce. 
 Lips.  1791?  8vo  ;  Prolusio7ies  de  ve7'sionibus  g7'cecis 
 librorii77i  V.  T.  Iitte7-arui7i  heb7-aicar7C77i  77iagistris ; 
 accessit prolusio  qua  loci  7io7i7iulli  Ve/ss.  G7-r.  07-acu- 
 lorum  Malachite  illustra/itur.  Lips.  1772,  8vo ; 
 Pivgr.  quo  loci  7io7i7t7illi  librorum  N.  T.  e  ve/'sio7ii- 
 bus  GrcBcis,  tnaxi/7ieque  Alexandrina,  orac7iloru7n. 
 AlalachicE  illusti'a7itur,  1773  ;  P7Vgr.  de  Cha'daicis 
 07iquelosi  'Jo7iathivque  versionibus  V.  T.  liite/-a- 
 ru7Ji  hebraicarimi  scie7itiLE  i7ttellige7iti:£que  librj7-um 
 divinoru77i  adjutricibus.  Lips.  1774,  4to;  Piolicsio 
 I.  de  versio7ie  libro7'U77i  divino7-U7n  V.  T.  vdgata 
 ve7-cB  legiti77tceque  rationis  heb7-(Bi  ir.  latinutn  con- 
 vertendi  magistra,  1775,  4to  ;  Prolusiones  V.  in 
 q7iibus  varii  loci  librorum  divi7iO'um  iitriusque 
 Testamenti  eorumque  versionum  veteriwt,  maxime 
 
FISH 
 
 FISH 
 
 GrcECorum  expUcantiir  atqiie  ilhistrantiir.  Accessit 
 CGmnientatio  super  loco  qiiodam  epistola  qncE  inscri- 
 bitur  ad  Hebraos,  Lips.  1779,  8vo. — S.  N. 
 
 FISH  ;  FISHES  ;  FISHING.  —  Various  and 
 interesting  are  the  statements  of  iclitliyological 
 facts  scattered  througliout  tlie  Scriptures.  We 
 propose  to  collect  these,  not  in  the  order  of  their 
 occurrence,  but  in  a  method  which  seems  to  us 
 best  to  illustrate  the  Biblical  aspect  of  the  subject. 
 The  creation  of  fish  is  described  in  Gen.  i.  20-22 
 as  occupying  a  prominent  portion  of  the  divine 
 work  of  the  fifth  day.  This  account  is  remarkable 
 for  the  terms  employed  by  the  sacred  historian. 
 There  is  an  absence,  not  only  of  all  specific  names 
 of  fishes,  which  was  to  be  expected  in  the  narrative 
 of  a  general  fact  like  the  creation,  but  also  of  all 
 ^fneric  phrases,  such  as  are  usually  employed,  even 
 in  Scripture,  to  designate  the  animal  tribes  which 
 inhabit  the  sea.  This  absence,  however,  is  com- 
 pensated by  the  use  of  language,  simple  but  most 
 effective,  which,  while  it  picftcres  to  the  mind  the 
 grand  event  with  a  vividness  which  no  translation 
 can  express,  is  yet  singularly  consistent  with  scien- 
 tific accuracy.  '  God  said.  Let  the  waters  bring 
 forth  abundantly  the  moving  creature  that  hath 
 life.'  This  is  but  a  faint,  though  not  an  incorrect 
 rendering  of  the  original,  {i;SJ  pt^  D>)3n  ^y^t^''' 
 
 rrri  (verse  20).     The  neuter  verb  pg;  combines 
 
 the  ideas  of  swari7iing  and  o-eeping,  and  is  here 
 accompanied  with  its  cognate  noun,  to  add  inten- 
 sity to  the  meaning  ;  so  that  the  Almighty's  fiat 
 impregnated  the  waters  and  made  them  '  teem  and 
 move  with  the  writhing  [ '  7c;7^_o-//';/o- '  is  the  expres- 
 sive old  word  of  Holland,  Plinie  xxxii.  2]  swarms 
 of  beings  endowed  with  hfe  [literally,  the  soul  of 
 life].'  *  In  the  next  verse  follows  the  creative  act, 
 '  God  created  great  whales  and  every  living  creature 
 that  moveth,'  etc.  Here  occur  the  same  terms, 
 with  the  exception  of  the  word  which  expresses  the 
 motion  of  the  creatures  [nti^D^n  palpitans,  moti- 
 
 tans ;  Rosenmiiller],  again  without  any  specific  or 
 generic  phrases ;  but  we  notice  two  important 
 points  in  the  statement :  (i.)  A  distinction  between 
 
 the  great  whales  [CPlJn  D3''jnn]   and  the  other 
 
 aquatic  animals.  This  distinction  is  not  only 
 compatible  with  the  simple  classification  of  the 
 Jewish  zoologists  (either  David  or  Solomon  [comp. 
 I  Kings  iv.  33],  or  probably  some  later  writer  in 
 Psalm  civ.  25)  +  into  great  and  sjiiall  animals  of  the 
 sea  ;  but  makes  room  for,  and  anticipates  the  more 
 elaborate  characteristics  of  modern  science,  which 
 distinguishes  between  {ex.  gr.)  the  warm-blooded 
 viviparous  whale  and  other  cetaceans  ;  and  the 
 cold-blooded  oviparous  shark  and  other  fishes, 
 properly  so  called.  (2.)  The  provision  made  to 
 keep  the  myriads  which  crowd  the  deep  specifically 
 distinct  amid  their  multitudinous  association.  The 
 command  of  God,  that  aquatic  animals  should 
 generate  '  afiter  their  kinds''  [Dnj'')07,  i.e.,  pro  variis 
 
 *  This  phrase,  n'n  5723,  is  perhaps  the  best  ex- 
 planation of  ti^DJ  in  the  sense  of  "■  fish,^  in  Isaiah 
 xix.  10. 
 
 _t  '  This  Psalm  was  doubtless  written  during  the 
 reign  of  either  Josiah  or  of  one  of  his  successors.' 
 — CThnipp  on  the  Psalms,  vol.  ii.  p.  174). 
 
 eoriiin  speciebus,  according  to  Gesenius,  who  in- 
 cludes the  idea,  likewise,  of  fiorin  in  the  word  ; 
 Thes.  778],  is  as  a  wall  that  separates  their  natures. 
 Nor  does  that  '  Word  of  the  Lord  return  to  Him 
 void;'  It  still  keeps  unmixed  the  species  which 
 haunt  the  waters  as  purely  and  potentially  as  when 
 first  spoken.  This  perpetuity  is  the  effect  of  the 
 blessing  which  the  Creator  originally  pronounced 
 on  this  part  of  His  work.  '  God  blessed  them, 
 saying  :  Be  fruitful  and  multiply,  and  fill  the  waters 
 in  the  seas'  (verse  22).  In  the  brief  but  effica- 
 cious paronomasia,  !|3~i^  !)  1,  lies  the  germ  of  that 
 
 fertility  which  has  made  the  vast  realm  of  waters 
 instinct  with  fife.* 
 
 In  the  next  passage  which  bears  on  our  subject, 
 we  first  meet  with  the  generic  word,  fish  [113^].+ 
 
 In  verses  26,  28,  the  Almighty  confers  on  man  his 
 supremacy  over  animate  nature ;  one  of  the  express 
 ])rerogatives  of  that  dignity  is  '  dominion  over  the 
 fish  of  the  sea.' — This  was  renewed  to  Noah, 
 Gen.  ix.  2.  St.  James  seems  also  to  speak  of  it  in 
 his  epistle,  when,  in  chap.  iii.  7,  he  refers  to  man's 
 subjugation  of  ''things  in  the  sea''  [IlScra  (pvcris 
 .  .  .  .  ivoKiwv  da/xd^iTai  Kal  dedd/JiacrTai  rjf  (pvcrei 
 ry  df'StpwTrli'rj]  as  a  prerogative  still  unrevoked. 
 
 In  the  legislation  of  Moses  on  the  subject  of 
 '  clean  and  unclean  '  animals,  we  find  a  more  parti- 
 cular classification  of  the  various  tribes  of  the 
 animal  kingdom,  so  far  at  least  as  they  fell  under 
 the  notice  of  the  sacred  writer  in  a  somewhat  limited 
 district.  The  portion  pertaining  to  aquatic  animals 
 is  contained  in  Lev.  xi.  9-12,  and  Deut.  xiv.  9,  lO. 
 A  distinction  is  here  drawn  between  salt-water  and 
 fresh-water  fish,  and  between  such  as  are  clean  and 
 unclean  in  each.  The  distinction  is  a  simple  one  ; 
 '  Whatsoever  hath  fins  and  scales,  etc.,  ye  shall 
 eat ; '  and  '  All  that  have  not  fins  and  scales, 
 etc.,  shall  be  an  abomination  unto  you.'  No 
 particular  fishes  are  named,  J  and  this  is  the  more 
 
 *  The  ancients  observed  the  extreme  fecundity 
 of  fishes.  The  early  Hebrews  formed  the  verb 
 njl,  to  7nnltiply  exceedingly,  from  JT  a  fish.     See 
 
 Gen.  xlviii.  18,  where  Jacob's  blessing  literally 
 means,  '  let  them  increase  like  the  fish.'  Onkelos 
 renders  the  phrase  in  teiTns  equivalent  to  ut  pisces 
 maris  fnultiplicentitr.  Compare  Pliny,  Hist.  Nat. 
 ix.  50,  and  Aristotle,  Hist.  Animal,  vi.  31.  For 
 some  modern  notices  of  this  fecundity  of  fishes,  see 
 Kitto,  Bible  Illnstr.  i.  34. 
 
 +  In  most  instances  T\T\  differs  from  the  other 
 
 generic  word  J'l,  in  having  a  collective  sense,  as  in 
 
 the  passage  mentioned  in  the  text;  whereas  the  latter 
 has  rather  an  individual  meaning,  as  in  I  Kings 
 iv.    33.     In  the  book  of  Jonah,  however,   the  ^ 
 
 of  i.    17,   and  the   nj'H  of  ii.    1,   are  undoubtedly 
 
 synonymous.  (See  Gesenius  Thes.  320,  who  com- 
 pares njT  with  the  collective  riD^D  =  ^  iinros, 
 cavalry;  comp.  Fiirst,  Hebr.  H'drterb.  i.  286). 
 
 +  In  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  c.  x.,  the  writer, 
 with  express  reference  to  this  law  of  Moses,  men- 
 tions certain  fishes  as  prohibited  by  name — KaJ  ov 
 fjiT]  (pdyrjs,  077crt,  ajxipcLLvav,  ovSe  woXviroda,  ov5i 
 crrjirlav  :  Thou  shalt  not  eat  of  the  latnprey,  the  poly- 
 pus, nor  the  cuttle-fish  (Hefele's  Patres  Apost. 
 [ed.  2],  p.  21).  This  addition  appears  in  no 
 existing  copy  of  the  Pentateuch,  nor  does  it  even 
 occur  in  the  quotation  from  Barnabas,   made  b^ 
 
FISH 
 
 21 
 
 FISH 
 
 remarkable,  because  the  context  before  and  after 
 the  two  passages  mentions  many  individual  names 
 of  birds  and  beasts.  A  similar  distinction  of  fishes 
 with  and  without  scales  as  fit  and  unfit  for  offer- 
 ings [or,  as  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ed.  Leusden,  p.  42) 
 says,  for  food  at  the  sacrificial  feasts],  seems  to 
 have  been  early  made  in  the  sacred  rites  of  Rome. 
 Pliny  quotes  from  Cassius  Hemina  an  old  law  of 
 Numa,  '  ut  pisces  qui  sqiianiosi''  7ion  essent  ni  [ne] 
 ■pollucerent  {Hist.  Nat.  xxxii.  2,  10).  In  ancient 
 Egypt,  the  sanctity  and  the  wholesovieness  of  fishes 
 were  incompatible  qualities.  '  The  most  effectual 
 method  of  forbidding  the  use  of  any  fish  was  to 
 assign  it  a  place  among  the  sacred  animals  of  the 
 country'  (Wilkinson's  A Jicioit  Egyptians,  iii.  58). 
 On  this  principle  the  kpidotus,  a  scaly  fish,  was 
 deemed  both  sacred  and  unfit  fur  use.  The  reason 
 of  the  law  lies  perhaps  in  the  nature  of  things  ;  the 
 terms  of  the  prohibition  would  exclude  all  aquatic 
 animals  which  are  not  fishes  (strictly  so  called), 
 such  as  the  saurians  and  the  serpents,  which  would 
 be  accounted  as  an  abomination  and  unclean. 
 Sanatory  considerations  would  have  weight  in  such 
 legislation.  *  In  Egypt,  fish  which  have  not  scales 
 are  generally  found  to  be  unwholesome  food.  One 
 of  the  few  reasonable  laws  of  the  Caliph,  El- Hakim, 
 was  that  which  forbade  the  selling  or  catching  of 
 such  kinds  of  fish  (Lane's  Modern  Ej^yptians,  i. 
 136,  note;  De  Sacy's  Chrestomathie  Arabe\^<\.  2] 
 i.  98  ;  Knobel,  on  Lev.  xi.  9).  Maimonides,  with 
 less  reason,  sees  in  the  Levitical  distinctions  oi fins 
 and  scales  among  fishes  '  marks  whereby  the  more 
 noble  and  excellent  species  might  be  distinguished 
 from  those  that  were  inferior  '  (Townley's  More 
 Nevochim,  p.  305).  In  no  ordinance  of  the  laws 
 of  Moses  do  we  find  Jishes  prescribed  as  religious 
 offerings.  In  this  respect,  as  well  as  many  others, 
 these  laws  were  opposed  to  the  heathen  rituals, 
 which  appointed  fish-offerings  to  various  deities. 
 Besides  the  lepidotus,  the  oxyrkincus,  the  phagrus 
 [eel,  '  from  its  unwholesome  qualities  not  eaten  by 
 the  ancient  Egyptians,'  Wilkinson  v.  251],  /atus  and 
 mtrotes  were  held  sacred  t  in  various  parts  of  ancient 
 
 Clement  of  Alex.  {Stromat.  2  [ed.  Sylb.],  p.  168. 
 It  is  no  doubt  an  inference  drawn  by  Barnabas 
 himself  from  the  general  language  of  the  legislator. 
 Similarly  is  St.  Athanasius  [in  Synops.  in  Lev.  1.  c.) 
 to  be  understood  when  in  reference  to  this  law  he 
 sa^s — TaOra  Xiyei.  elvai  Ka^apa,  8cra  ^xec  irrepvyia 
 Kai  XeirLdas,  old  iffri  TpiyXa  (mullet),  CKapos,  yXav- 
 <cos,  Kearpeiis,  Kal  to.  S/jlom  avroh  "  rot  5^  Xe(.w6fj.eua 
 'iv  Ti  TOVTUiv  cLKa^apra,  Kai  ov  Spuria,  old.  iart. 
 aijiria  {cuttle-fish).  So  St.  Jerome  ;  '  Ne  gusta- 
 veritis  carnem  sepiarum  et  loliginum  (a  species  of 
 cuttle),  muraense,  et  anguillas,  et  universorum 
 piscium  qui  squamas  et  pinnulas  non  habent.' 
 {Epist.  151,  quaest.  10;  and  comp.  Tertullian, 
 adv.  Marcion,  ii.  20). 
 
 *  'This  law  of  Moses  may  have  given  rise  to 
 some  casuistry,  as  many  fishes  have  scales,  which, 
 though  imperceptible  when  first  caught,  are  very 
 apparent  after  the  skin  is  in  the  least  dried.'  (C. 
 H.  S.  in  first  edition  of  this  work). 
 
 +  And  similarly  in  the  heathen  observances  of 
 other  nations  ;  thus,  'Apua  [c^x&rj ,  Anchovy'X  Veneri 
 erat  sacra  ;  Concha  [perhaps  Pearl-oyste?^  Veneri 
 Stat ;  Mullus  Dianse  ;  pisces  omnes  Neptuno  ; 
 Thunnus  Neptuno.'  (Beyer,  Addil.  ad  Seldeni 
 Syntag.  de  Diis  Syriis.  Ugolini,  Thes.  xxxiii.  338. 
 Vossius,  in  Hoffmanni  Lexicon,  iii.  771,  has  a  much 
 
 Egypt  (Clem.  Alex. ;  Plutarch  ;  Strabo  ;  Athen- 
 sens,  are  the  authorities  referred  to  by  Sir  G.  Wil- 
 kinson, V.  125).  In  the  Ordinances  of  ]\Ienu,  chap. 
 V.  {on  Diet,  Purification,  etc.),  sects.  15,  16,  'the 
 twice-bom  man  is  commanded  diligently  to  abstain 
 ixoxtifish  ;  yet  the  two  fishes  called  pdC hina  and 
 rShita  may  be  eaten  by  the  guests,  when  offered  at 
 a  repast  in  honour  of  the  gods  or  manes  ;  and  so 
 may  the  rdjiva,  the  sinhatunda,  and  the  sasalca  * 
 of  every  species.'  (Sir  W.  Jones'  La'tvs  of  Menu, 
 by  Haughton,  p.  146). 
 
 Taking  fishes  in  the  scientific  sense  of  'oviparous, 
 vertebrate d,  cold-blooded  animals,  breathing  water 
 by  means  o[  g\\\sox  branchice,  and  generally  provided 
 with  fins,'  none  are  mentioned  by  jianie  tliroughout 
 the  O.  T.  and  N .  T. ;  but  regarded  in  the  popular 
 and  inexact  sense  of  aquatic  animals,  inhabitants 
 more  or  less  of  the  water,  we  meet  with  eleven  in- 
 stances, which  require  some  notice  here,  (i.)  That 
 well-known  Batrachian   reptile,   the  frog  (yTlQV, 
 
 LXX.  Bdrpaxos,  Vulg.  J?ana),  which  emerges 
 from  a  fish-like  infancy,  breathing  by  gills  instead 
 of  lungs,  and  respiring  water  instead  of  air,  is  often 
 mentioned  in  Exod.  viii. ,  but  only  in  two  passages 
 else,  Ps.  Ixxviii.  45,  and  cv.  30  [Tsephardea].  (2.) 
 The  Annelid,  horse-leech,  whose  name  occurs  on!) 
 
 once,  Prov.  xxx.  15  (npvy>  LXX.   BbeWrj,  Vulg. 
 
 Sanguisuga).  '  It  would  appear  that  the  blood- 
 sucking quality  of  this  useful  little  animal  is  a  direct 
 and  exclusive  ordination  of  Providence  for  man's 
 advantage.  That  blood  is  not  the  natural  food  of 
 the  animal  is  probable  from  the  fact  that,  in  the 
 streams  and  pools  which  they  inhabit,  not  one  in 
 a  hundred  could  in  the  common  course  of  things 
 ever  indulge  such  an  appetite ;  and  even  when 
 received  into  the  stomach,  it  does  not  appear  to  be 
 digested ;  for  though  it  will  remain  there  for  weeks 
 without  coagulating  or  becom.ing  putrid,  yet  the 
 animal  usually  dies,  unless  the  blood  be  vomited 
 through  the  mouth'  (Gosse's  Zoology,  ii.  374).  Of 
 course  it  is  the  smaller  species,  the  Hiriido  Mcdi- 
 cinalis,  that  is  here  referred  to.  But  the  larger 
 species,  the  HcBi?iopsis  sanguisuga,  or  ^horse-leech,'' 
 has  a  still  greater  voracity  for  blood.  Bochart 
 {Hieroz.  ii.  796-802),  and  Schultens  (Prov.  in  lac), 
 give  another  turn  to  Prov.  xxx.  15,  by  identifying 
 
 npl?y  with  the  Arabic     •;»!.£,  and  making  fate 
 
 or  destiny,  instead  of  the  horse-leech,  the  insatiable 
 exacter.  The  ancient  versions,  however,  must  be 
 deemed   to  outweigh  their  learned   speculations ; 
 
 added   to   which    the    Arabic    iJjiLc,    the    Syriac 
 
 "jjDoXii,  and  the  Chaldee  and  Talmudic  Npi'y 
 or  Xpvy,  all  designate  the  leech,  which  is  as  abun- 
 dant in  the  East  as  it  ever  was  in  our  Western 
 
 longer  list  of  fourteen  fishes,  '  a  veteribus  pro  Diis 
 habiti?  Consecrated  fishes  were  kept  in  reservoirs, 
 with  rings  of  gold,  or  silver,  or  brass,  attached  to 
 them.      So  Sir  J.  Chardin  in  Harmer,  iii.  5^)- 
 
 *  We  add  the  names  of  these  fishes  as  known 
 to  us ;  the  pat'hi'na  is  the  sheat-fish  (Siluras  pelo- 
 rius)  ;  the  rohita  is  the  rShi-fish  (cyprinus  denticu- 
 latus)  ;  the  rajiva,  a  large  fish  (cyprinus  niloticus) ; 
 the  other  two  sorts  are  probably  shrimps  and 
 prawns.     (Haughton's  note,  p.  441). 
 
FISH 
 
 22 
 
 FISH 
 
 countries.  The  blood-appetite  of  this  animal  made 
 it  suitable  to  point  a  proverb ;  Horace  says,  non 
 tnissuro  cuiem,  nisi  plena  crtwris,  hirudo  (De  Arte 
 Poet,  476).  With  which  compare  Plautus,  Epi- 
 dicus  ii.  2,  4,  5 ;  and  Cicero  ad  Atticum,  lib.  i. 
 epist.  13.  (3).  The  testaceous  mollusk  \ostrm 
 marina,    Gesenius    Thes.    1263],    called    by    the 
 
 Hebrews  p3"lX;   by  Avicenna  ^^^\   {Alar- 
 
 oiawan) ;  by  Galen  QaXaaaia  <pop(pvpa,*  is  the 
 murex  trnnculiis  of  zoology,  from  which  the 
 renowned  Tyrian  dye  used  to  be  obtained.  This 
 shell-fish  (and  not  the  "■  pttrple''  extracted  from  it), 
 is  with  good  reason  supposed  by  Gesenius  to  be 
 
 referred  to,  'in  the  Canticles  vii.  5,  TjE^K")  T\T\ 
 (D31ND-'  This  in  A.  V.  is  '  the  hair  of  thine  head 
 tike' purple.''  But  in  the  view  of  Gesenius  (which 
 is  favoured  by  the  context,  where  the  other  points 
 of  comparison  are  derived  from  palpable  objects), 
 it  should  run — in  allusion  to  the  convolute  wreaths 
 of  the  beautiful  shell —  The  tresses  of  thine  head  are 
 like  the  -wrrathed  shell  of  the  pitrple-fish  ;  reminding 
 us  of  the  ancient  head-dresses  of  the  Athenians, 
 described  by  Thucydides,  i.  6.  3  ;  ^pvcrCov  reTTiywv 
 ivipaei  Kpw^vXoi'  duaSoij/J.evoL  twv  iv  ttj  KecpaXrj 
 rpix^v  (comp.  the  conical  head-tuft  of  the  Roman 
 7'utnlus  [Varro,  de  ling,  latin,  vii.  3.  90],  and 
 Virgil's  Crines  nodantur  in  aiiriim).  A  second 
 reference  to  this  shell-fish  probably  occurs  in  Ezek. 
 
 xxvii.  7,  where  the  prophet  mentions  }JD3"1S  Tb'27\ 
 XW'h'^  '"XO  ( A .  V. ,  '  Blue  and  pnrple  from  the 
 Isles  of  Elishah'').  The  Tyrians  seem  to  have 
 imported  some  viurices  from  the  Peloponnesus  (the 
 same  as  "■  Elishah''  according  to  Heeren,  Researches, 
 Asiatic  Nations  [Oxford  trans.],  i.  361) ;  and 
 Gesenius  supposes  that  these,  the  material  out  of 
 which  the  celebrated  dye  was  procured,  are  referred 
 to  by  the  prophet  in  his  enumeration  of  the  Tyrian 
 merchandise.  That  these  fishes  were  supplied 
 from  the  coast  of  Gj'eece  we  learn  from  Horace, 
 Od.  ii.  18.  7  {Laconiciv  piirpurai) ;  from  Pausanias 
 iii.  21.  6;  and  from  Pliny  ix.  36.  (For  other 
 coasts  which  yielded  these  fishes,  see  Winer  B.  R. 
 W.  ii.  290,  291.  (4.)  The  other  word  used  by 
 Ezekiel  in   this  passage,  n?Dn,   is   described  by 
 
 Gesenius,  Thes.  1503,  as  'a  species  of  shell-fish 
 (Conchyliinn,  Helix  ianthince  \conchc€\),  found 
 cleaving  to  the  rocks  in  the  Mediterranean  Sea, 
 covered  with  a  violet  shell  (Forskal,  Descript- 
 anirnal,  p.  127),  from  which  was  procured  a  dark 
 blue  dye.'  In  the  many  other  passages  where 
 these  two  words  occur,  they  undoubtedly  desig- 
 nate either  the  colours  or  the  material  dyed  in 
 them.  The  phrase,  'treasures  hid  in  the  sand,' 
 Deut.  xxxiii.  19,  is  supposed  to  refer  to  the  abun- 
 dance of  the  rich  dyes  afforded  by  the  nPSn  and 
 other  testaceous  animals  found  in  the  sand,  on  the 
 Phoenician  coast,  assigned  to  Zebulon  and  Issachar. 
 (Targum  of  Jonathan  b.  Uziel,  Walton,  iv.  387, 
 and  Gesenius,  Thes.  1503).     (5.)  The  p3n  (plur. 
 
 D'"J''3n  or  D3''3n)  must  be  carefully  distinguished 
 
 from  D^liri,  the  plural  of  the  unused  word  jn  a 
 
 jackal,  according  to  Gesenius,  Lexicon  [by  Robin- 
 son], p.  1 138.  'The  sea-monsters,'  which  are 
 described  by  Jeremiah  (Lament,  iv.  3),  as  'suck- 
 ling their  young,'  used  to  be  regarded  as  the 
 mammiferous  whales  or  other  larger  cetacea  (Calmet 
 by  Taylor,  '  Fragments '  on  Natural  History,  No. 
 xxvi.)  They  are  by  Gesenius  (/.  c.)  supposed  to 
 be    rather    D''3n,  jackals ;  this  is  the    reading   of 
 
 some  of  the  MSS.  (Kennicott,  ii.  546),  and  Ge- 
 senius accepts  the  Masorete  text  as  an  Aramaic 
 form  of  it.  In  Ezek.  xxix.  3  ;  and  xxxii.  2,  the 
 textual  reading  D"'3ri,  which  is  represented  usually 
 
 as  an  anomalous  singular  noun,  should  no  doubt 
 be  piH)  the  regular  singular,  which  may  well  bear 
 
 (what  the  other  word  could  not)  the  suitable  sense 
 of  crocodile;  the  MS.  authority  in  favour  of  the 
 latter  word  is  overwhelming  (Kennicott,  ii.  212). 
 For  a  description  of  the  pjD,  see  Crocodile; 
 Tanneen;  Whale.    (6.)  DtoHB,  Behemoth.    (7.) 
 
 in''p,  Leziiathan;  for  descriptions  of  these  aquatic 
 
 animals  see  the  respective  articles,  and  Crocodile. 
 
 (8.)    'The  great  fish,'   ^iia  J^,    of  Jonah  i.   17 
 
 [nj^  in  ii.  i],  was  probably  some  species  of  shark, 
 
 such  as  the  Zygcena  malleus,  or  the  Carcharias 
 vidgaris  (the  white  shark),  therefore,  strictly  a 
 fish.*  The  difficulty  that  in  the  LXX.  of  Jonah, 
 and  in  the  Greek  Testament  (Matt.  xii.  40),  Kijtos 
 is  the  word  by  which  the  fish  is  designated,  is 
 removed  by  the  fact  that  this  Greek  term  does  not 
 specifically  indicate  -whales  only,  as  the  objection 
 supposes,  but  any  of  the  larger  inhabitants  of  the 
 deep.  (Wesseling's  Herodot.,  Eragiu.  de  Incre- 
 mento  NUi,  p.  789,  as  quoted  in  Valpy's  Stephani 
 Thes.  s.  V.  KtJtos;  here  '■  pisces,^  as  well  as  ''  Bellucs 
 qucclihel  ingentes,  veluti  crocodilus  et  hippo]  o- 
 tamus,'  are  included.  Accordingly  K^ros  stands 
 in  the  \JY^.,  passim,  for  i"l,  as  well  as  for  p-jH. 
 
 (See  Schleusner,  Lex.  V.  T.  s.  v.  K^ros).  For  more 
 on  the  subject  of  this  fish,  see  Kitto,  Bible  Illustr. 
 vi.  399-404,  and  Jonah;  Tanneen.  Admiral 
 Smyth,  in  the  chapter  on  Icththyology,  in  his  Afedi- 
 terranean,  p.  196,  says  the  white  shark  has  been 
 called  ''fonce  piscis''  from  its  transcendent  claim 
 '  to  have  been  the  great  fish  that  swallowed  the 
 prophet,  since  he  can  readily  ingulf  a  man  whole.' 
 (9.)  Of  Tobit's  fish,  O.  F.  Fritzsche,  in  his  Com- 
 mentary on  the  passage  [Tobit  vi.  passini]  enumer- 
 ates nine  or  ten  speculations  by  different  writers. 
 According  to  Bochart  and  Helvigius,  the  Silurus 
 has  the  best  claim.  This  the  former  describes  as 
 '  being  very  large,  of  great  strength  and  boldness, 
 and  ever  ready  to  attack  other  animals,  even  men, 
 an  inhabitant  of  the  rivers  Euphrates  and  Tigris.' 
 C.  H.  S.,  in  the  first  edition  of  this  work,  combats 
 Bochart's  conclusions,  and  suggests,  '  the  Seesar  of 
 the  Indus,  a  crocodile,  probably  of  the  genus 
 Gavial,  which  grows  to  a  great  size,  is  eaten,  and 
 
 *  In  I  Maccab.  iv.  23,  this  phrase  ^purple  of  the 
 sea^  has  the  force  of  unadulterated  pur[)le,  as 
 extracted  from  the  fiih.  So  Diodor.  Sicul.  (xvii. 
 70),  uses  the  phrase  ecrS^^Tes  ^aXarTiais  iropipvpaii 
 ir<:Tro(,KiKiiivai.     (C.  L.  W.  Grimm,  //;.  loc.) 
 
 *  Of  the  same  kind  of  huge  fish,  av'^pwwo'paryoi., 
 does  Amos  speak  in  prophecy,  ix.  3,  '  I  will  com- 
 mand the  serpent  from  the  bottom  of  the  sea,  and 
 he  shall  bite  them.'  Bochart,  Hiejvz,  1.  c.  4c.  I 
 40. 
 
FISH 
 
 23 
 
 FISH 
 
 has  a  gall  bladder,  still  used  to  cure  obstinate 
 wounds  and  defluctions.'  (But  see  Winer,  B.R.  W. 
 i.  187,  note  i).  Glaire  suggests  the  sturgeon,  but 
 this  is  more  suitable  to  northern  rivers.  Pennant 
 mentions  the  capture  of  one  in  the  Esk  weighing 
 464  lbs.  {British  Zoology,  iii.  127).  See  more  in 
 Bochart,  Hieroz,  v.  14 ;  Glaire,  Introdiictioit  de 
 VA7icien.  et  du  N.  T.  ii.  91  [ed.  3],  Paris,  1S62, 
 and  TOBIT.  (10.)  If  Dr.  French  and  Mr.  Skin- 
 ner, in  their  Translation  of  the  Psalms,  are  right 
 in  rendering  Ps.  civ.  26,  '  There  swimmeth  the 
 nautilus  and  the  whale,''  etc.  (as  if  the  sacred  writer 
 meant  to  indicate  a  small,  though  conspicuous,  as 
 well  as  a  la7-ge  aquatic  animal,  as  equally  the  ob- 
 ject of  God's  care),  we  have  in  the  ni'JS  an  un- 
 expected addition  to  our  Scripture  nomenclature  of 
 fishes,  in  what  Lord  Byron  calls — 
 
 '  The  tender  Nautilus  who  steers  his  prow. 
 The  sea-born  sailor  of  his  shell  canoe. 
 The  ocean  Mab,  the  fairy  of  the  sea.' — The  Island. 
 
 In  their  note  the  translators  say  ;  '  The  ftautihis — 
 This  little  creature  floats,  at  pleasure,  upon  the 
 surface  of  the  sea.  Its  shell  resembles  the  hull  of 
 a  ship,  whence  it  has  its  name.'  Mr.  Thrupp  ac- 
 cepts the  new  rendering  as  having  '  much  apparent 
 probability'  [Introduction  to  the  Psalms,  ii.  178).* 
 We  may  add  that  it  gives  greater  fitness  to  the 
 27th  verse,  which  at  present  is  hardly  compatible 
 with  the  25th  and  26th,  owing  to  the  intrusion  of 
 the  clause,  there  go  the  ships.  Replace  this  by  the 
 nautilus,  and  the  coherence  of  the  27th  verse  with 
 the  two  preceding  is  complete  in  all  its  terms. 
 (11.)  Our  last  specific  fish  is  xViCwtx  suggested  \h2iVi. 
 named  in  Ezek.  xxix.  4,  where  the  prophet  twice 
 mentions  '  the  fish  of  the  rivers  which  cleave  to  the 
 scales'  [of  the  crocodile].  This  description  seems 
 to  identify  this  fish  with  the  Echeneis  Rcmora,  so 
 remarkable  for  the  adhesive  or  sucking  disc  which 
 covers  the  upper  part  of  the  head,  and  enables  it 
 to  adhere  to  the  body  of  another  fish,  or  to  the 
 bottom  of  a  vessel.  (Its  fabulous  powers  of  being 
 able  even  to  arrest  a  vessel  in  her  course  are  re- 
 corded by  Pliny,  Nat.  Hist,  xxxii.  i  ;  it  is  men- 
 tioned by  Aristotle,  Hist.  Anitn.  ii.  14,  ly^vhibv 
 Ti,  8  KoXovai  Tives  ixevfjtda.  It  is  also  mentioned 
 by  Forskal  as  seen  at  Gidda,  and  by  Hasselquist 
 at  Alexandria).  The  lump  -  sucker  [Cyclopterus 
 lumpus)  is  furnished  with  ventral  fins  which  unite 
 beneath  the  body  and  form  a  concave  disc,  by 
 which  the  fish  can  with  ease  adhere  to  stones  or 
 other  bodies.  Either  in  the  remora,  with  its  ad- 
 hesive apparatus  above,  or  in  the  lump-sucker  with 
 a  similar  appendage  belota,  or  in  both,  we  have  in 
 all  probability  the  prophet's  fishes,  which  cleave  to 
 the  monster  of  the  Nile.  So  much  for  the  specific 
 instances  of  aquatic  animals  mentioned  in  the 
 Scriptures. 
 
 We  proceed  to  suggest,  in  general  terms,  what 
 were  the  fishes  which  frequented  the  Syrian  waters, 
 
 *  Another  recent  expositor  of  the  Psalms,  Dr. 
 Justus  Olshausen  (page  402),  remarks  that  '  the 
 introduction  of  ships  amongst  the  living  creatures 
 of  the  sea  has  always  presented  [et7vas  auffallendes\ 
 an  obstacle '  to  the  understanding  of  the  sentence. 
 The  paper  nautilus  (Argonattta),  frequents  the  Me- 
 diterranean. The  verb  |^D5n%  to  proceed,  to  walk, 
 very  well  describes  the  stately  progress  of  the  nau- 
 tilus as  it  floats  upon  the  wave. 
 
 and  supplied  the  ancient  inhabitants  with  food 
 abridging  for  this  purpose  the  remarks  of  C.  H.  S, 
 in  the  Art.  Fish,  in  the  first  edition  of  this  work  ; 
 — ['The  species  which  were  known  to  the  He 
 brews,  or  at  least  to  those  who  dwelt  on  the  coast, 
 were  probably  veiy  numerous,  because  the  usual 
 current  of  the  Mediterranean  sets  in,  with  a  great 
 depth  of  water,  at  the  Straits  of  Gibraltar,  and 
 passes  eastward  on  the  African  side  until  the  shoals 
 of  the  delta  of  the  Nile  begin  to  turn  it  towards 
 the  north  ;  it  continues  in  that  direction  along  the 
 Syrian  shores,  and  falls  into  a  broken  course  only 
 when  turning  westward  on  the  Cyprian  and  Cretan 
 coasts.  Every  spring,  with  the  sun's  return  to- 
 wards the  north,  innumerable  troops  of  littoral 
 species,  having  passed  the  winter  in  the  offings  of 
 Western  Africa,  return  northward  for  spawning, 
 or  are  impelled  in  that  direction  by  other  unknown 
 laws.  A  small  part  only  ascends  along  the  Atlan- 
 tic coast  of  Spain  and  Portugal  towards  the  British 
 Channel,  while  the  main  bocUes  pass  into  the  Me- 
 diterranean, follow  the  general  current,  and  do 
 not  break  into  more  scattered  families  until  they 
 have  swept  round  the  shores  of  Palestine.']  Lists 
 of  species  of  the  fish  frequenting  various  parts  of 
 the  Mediterranean  may  be  found  in  Risso  [Ichthyol. 
 de  Nice),  who  describes  315  species  he  had  ob- 
 served at  Nice  ;  and  in  Adm.  Smyth's  Mediter- 
 ranean, where  in  the  chap,  on  Ichthyology  he  gives 
 a  list  of  about  300  fishes  haunting  the  waters  of 
 Sicily,  besides  240  ci-ustacea,  testacea,  and  mollusks. 
 Admiral  Smyth  remarks  generally  of  the  Medi- 
 terranean fish,  that,  '  though  mostly  handsomer 
 than  British  fishes,  they  are  for  the  most  part  not 
 to  be  compared  with  them  in  flavour '  (pp.  192- 
 209).  Professor  E.  Forbes  (in  his  Report  on 
 ^Hgean  Invertebrata)  divides  that  part  of  the  East 
 Mediterranean,  in  which  for  many  years  he  con- 
 ducted his  inquiries,  into  eight  regions  of  depth, 
 each  characterized  by  its  peculiar  fauna.  '  Certain 
 species,'  he  says,  '  hi  each  are  found  in  no  other  ; 
 several  are  found  in  one  region  which  do  not  range 
 into  the  next  above,  whilst  they  extend  to  that  be- 
 low, or  v'ce  versd.  Certain  species  have  their 
 maximum  of  development  in  each  zone,  being 
 most  prolific  in  individuals  at  that  zone  in  which 
 is  their  maximum,  and  of  which  they  may  be  re- 
 garded as  especially  chai-acteristic.  Mingled  with 
 these  true  natives  are  stragglers,  owing  their  pre- 
 sence to  the  secondary  influences  which  modify  dis- 
 tribution.' C.  H.  S.  supposes  the  Syrian  waters  to 
 be  not  less  prolific.  ['The  coasts  of  Tyre  and  Sidon 
 would  produce  at  least  as  great  a  number.  The 
 name  of  tJie  latter  place,  indeed,  is  derived  from 
 the  Phoenician  word  fish '  (see  Gesenius,  s.  v. 
 jiT'V,    Sidon:    the   modern   name   has    the   same 
 
 meaning,    ^j^,,^,   Saida;    Abulfar.    Syria,  p.    93. 
 
 See  Winer,  ii.  535,  and  Sidon)  ;  '  and  it  is  the 
 oldest  fishing  establishment  for  commercial  pur- 
 poses known  in  histor)'.  .  .  .  The  Hebrews 
 had  a  less  perfect  acquaintance  with  the  species 
 found  /;/  the  Red  Sea,  whither,  to  a  certain  extent, 
 the  majority  of  fishes  found  in  the  Indian  Ocean 
 resort.  Beside  these,  in  Egypt,  they  had  anciently 
 eaten  those  of  the  Ni^  (for  the  fish  of  the  Nile,  see 
 Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  ii.  119-121,  and,  more 
 fully,  Wilkinson's  Ancient  Egyptians,  iii.  58,  and 
 V.  248-254)  ;  '  subsequently,  those  of  the  lake  oj 
 Tiberias  and  of  the  rivers  falling  into  the  Jcirdan' 
 (Von    Raumer,   Paldstina,  p.    105,  after    Hassel- 
 
FISH 
 
 24 
 
 FISH 
 
 quist,  mentions  the  s/<arns  galilccus,  '  a  sort  of 
 bream,'  the  sihinis  and  nii/gil ;  and  Reuchlin,  in 
 Herzog,  after  Dr.  Earth,  adds  the  labnis  Nilotkiis 
 as  inhabiting  this  lake,  which  Dr.  Stanley,  Sinai 
 and  Palestine,  p.  375,  represents  as  '  abounding  in 
 fish  of  all  kinds  [comp.  St.  John  xxi.  11,  with  St. 
 Matt.  xiv.  17  and  xv.  34].  From  the  earliest  times 
 — so  said  the  Rabbinical  legends — this  lake  had  been 
 so  renowned  in  this  respect'  [see  Reland,  p.  260, 
 who  quotes  the  Bava  Bathra,  of  the  Babylonian 
 Gemara],  'that  one  of  the  ten  fundamental  laws 
 laid  down  by  Joshua  was,  that  any  one  might  fish 
 with  a  hooic  in  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  Two  of  the 
 villages  on  the  banks  derived  their  name  from  their 
 fisheries,  the  west  and  the  east  Bethsaida,  '  house 
 of  fish' '  [cf.  the  modern  name  of  Sidon  just  men- 
 tioned]. The  numerous  streams  which  flow  into 
 the  Jordan  are  also  described  by  Dr.  Stanley  as 
 full  of  fish,  especially  the  Jabbok,  p.  323) ;  '  and 
 they  may  have  been  acquainted  with  species  of 
 other  lakes,  of  the  Orontes,  and  even  of  iht  Euphrates. 
 The  supply,  however,  of  this  article  of  food,  which 
 the  Jewish  people  appear  to  have  consumed  largely, 
 came  chiefly  from  the  Mediterranean.  From  Neh. 
 xiii.  16  we  learn  that  Phoenicians  of  Tyre  actually 
 resided  in  Jerusalem  as  dealers  in  fish  ;  which 
 must  have  led  to  an  exchange  of  that  commodity 
 for  com  and  cattle.']  C.  H.  S.  proceeds  to  enu- 
 merate the  most  nutritious  and  common  of  the 
 fishes  which  must  have  filled  the  Jewish  markets 
 ['there  were  genera  of  Percadce  (perch  tribes); 
 ScicEnidcE  (much  resembling  the  perches)  ;  and 
 particularly  the  great  tribe  of  the  Seoviberid^B 
 (mackerel),  with  its  numerous  genera  and  still 
 more  abundant  species,  frequenting  the  Mediter- 
 ranean in  prodigious  numbers,  and  mostly  excellent 
 for  the  table  ;  but  being  often  without  perceptible 
 scales  they  may  have  been  of  'questionable  use  to 
 the  Hebrews.  All  the  species  resort  to  the  deep 
 seas,  and  foremost  of  them  is  the  genus  Thynniis, 
 our  tunny'],  a  fish  often  mentioned  with  honour 
 by  the  ancients,  from  Aristotle  downward ;  a 
 specimen  taken  near  Greenock,  in  1831,  was  nine 
 feet  in  length.  Its  flesh  is  highly  prized,  and  from 
 its  great  solidity  it  partakes  much  of  the  character 
 of  meat.  Although  repeatedly  taken  on  the  Eng- 
 lish coast,  it  is  really  a  native  of  the  Mediterranean, 
 where  it  abounds,  not  only  in  Sicilian  waters,  but, 
 in  three  or  four  species,  in  the  Levant.  The  fol- 
 lowing complete  C.  H.  S.  's  catalogue  ;  the  Mitgili- 
 diE  family  (the  sea  mullets,  nmgiles,  being  valuable 
 in  every  part  of  the  Mediterranean)  ;  the  Labrida: 
 (or  Wrasse  of  Pennant)  ;  and  CyprinidcE  (carps), 
 particularly  abundant  in  the  fresh  waters  of  Asia. 
 ['  After  these  maybe  ranged  the  genus Mof mynts, 
 whereof  the  species,  amounting  to  six  or  seven,  are 
 almost  exclusively  tenants  of  the  Nile  and  the  lake 
 of  Tiberias,  and  held  among  the  most  palatable 
 fish  which  the  fresh  waters  produce'  .  .  .  Cat 
 or  Sheat-fish  [Siluridcc)  are  a  family  of  numerous 
 genera,  all  of  which,  except  the  Loricarice,  are 
 destituteof  a  scaly  covering,  and  are  consequently  un- 
 clean to  the  Hebrews  ;  though  several  of  them  were 
 held  by  the  ancient  Gentile  nations  and  by  some  of 
 the  modern  in  high  estimation,  such  as  the  black 
 fish,  probably  the  shilbeh  [.Siluriis  Schilbe  Niloticiis) 
 of  the  Nile  and  others.  Of  salmons  (Salmonid<e), 
 the  Mydetes  dentex  or  Hasselqiiisti,  belongs  to  the 
 most  edible  fishes  of  the  Egyptian  river  ;  there 
 were  also  Cliipeida  (herrings)  and  the  Gadidcv  (or 
 cod),  these  last  being  present  about  Tyre ;  Pleui-o- 
 
 necies  (or  flat  fish)  are  found  off  the  Egyptian 
 coasts,  and  eel-shaped  genera  are  bred  abundantly 
 in  the  lakes  of  the  Delta.']  A  comparison  of  this 
 list  of  (."ol.  H.  Smith,  with  the  enimieration  of  the 
 ancient  E!g}'ptian  fish  given  by  Strabo  (xvii.  823), 
 or  by  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  in  his  Ancient  Egyptians 
 (iii.  58),  will  shew  us  that  some  of  the  fisti  which 
 have  to  the  present  day  preserved  their  excellent 
 character  as  wholesome  food  (such  as  some  species 
 oi  \.\\Q  Fercadie  [the  'gisher,'  to  wit]  and  the  Za- 
 bridcz  [e.g.,  the  'bulti'],  and  the  Cyprinidcc  [e.g., 
 the  'benni;'  'the  carpe  is  a  dayntous  fisshe,' 
 wrote  old  Leonard  Maschal  in  15 14,  when  he  in- 
 troduced the  fish  into  England] ),  were  the  identi- 
 cal diet  which  the  children  of  Israel  '  remembered ' 
 so  invidiously  at  Taberah,  when  they  ungratefidly 
 loathed  the  manna  (Num.  xi.  5). 
 
 The  extreme  value  of  fish  as  an  article  of  food 
 (our  Lord  seems  to  recognise  it  as  sharing  with 
 bread  the  claim  to  be  considered  as  a  prime  neces- 
 sary of  life,  see  St.  Matt.  vii.  9,  10)  imparted  to 
 the  destruction  of  fish  the  character  of  a  Divine 
 judgment  (see  Is.  1.  2  ;  Hosea  iv.  3  ;  Zeph.  i.  3, 
 comp.  with  Exod.  vii.  18,  21  ;  Ps.  cv.  29;  and  Is. 
 xix.  8).  How  fish  is  destroyed,  largely  in  the  way 
 of  God's  judgment,  is  stated  by  Dr.  E.  Pococke  on 
 Hosea  iv.  3,  where  he  collects  many  conjectures  of 
 the  learned,  to  which  may  be  added  the  more 
 obvious  cause  oi  death  by  disease,*  such  as  the  case 
 mentioned  by  Welsted  {Travels  in  Arabia,  i.  310) 
 of  the  destruction  of  vast  quantities  of  the  fish  of 
 Oman  by  an  epidemic,  which  recurred  nearly  every 
 five  years.  Certain  waters  are  well  known  to  be 
 fatal  to  life.  The  instance  of  the  Dead  Sea,  the 
 very  contrast  +  of  the  other  Jordan  lakes  so  full  of 
 life,  is  well  described  by  the  Rabbi  J.  Schwarz 
 {Descriptive  Geography  of  Palestine,  pp.  41-45),  and 
 by  Dr.  Stanley  {Sin.  and  Palest.,  pp.  290-294), 
 and  more  fully  by  De  Saulcy  {Dead  Sea  and  Bible 
 Lands  [passi7n'\).  But  there  are  other  waters 
 equally  fatal  to  fish  life  though  less  known,  such  as 
 
 the  lake  called  Canouda7t  in  Armenia  (  \,\.\  '^ 
 Avicenna,  i.  q.  d.yovov,  ivithottt  life),  and  that  which 
 
 *  Aristotle  {Hist.  Anim.  viii.  19)  mentions  cer- 
 tain symptoms  of  disease  among  fish  as  known  to 
 skilful  fishermen  ;  but  he  denies  that  epidemics  such 
 as  affect  men  and  cattle  fall  upon  them  ;  v6<T7]ij.a 
 di  XoijUtDSfs  fih  iv  ovbevl  rots  iy^vai  (paiverai 
 eixir'nrTov,  olov  iirl  tQiv  dv^pdnruv  crvfipaivei  iroWaKts, 
 K.  T.  X.  In  the  next  section  he  mentions  the  mul- 
 lein plant  {jjerbascum,  trXofios)  as  poisonous  to 
 fresh  water  and  other  fish. 
 
 f  Contrast  the  present  condition  of  this  Sea  of 
 Death  with  the  vitality  which  is  predicted  of  it  in 
 the  vision  of  Ezekiel  (xlvii.  9,  10).  Its  healed 
 waters  and  renovated  fish  'exceedmg  many,'  and 
 '  the  fishers  which  shall  stand  on  it  from  Engedi 
 even  unto  Eneglaim,'  and  '  the  places  on  its  coast 
 to  spread  forth  nets' — all  these  features  are  in  vivid 
 opposition  to  the  present  condition  of  '  the  As- 
 ])haltite  lake.'  Of  like  remarkable  import  is  2 
 Esdras  v.  7,  where  the  writer,  among  the  si^ns  oj 
 the  times  to  come,  predicts  '  The  Sodomitish  sea 
 shall  cast  out  fish.'  For  ancient  testimonies  of  the 
 death  which  reigns  over  this  lake,  see  St.  Jerome 
 on  Ezekiel,  lib.  xiv.  ;  Tacitus,  Hist.  v.  6  ;  Diod. 
 Sicul.  ii.  48,  and  xix.  98 ;  and  the  Nubian  Geo- 
 grapher, iii.  5,  as  quoted  by  Bochart,  Hieroz,  i.  4c. 
 
FISH 
 
 FLACH  OR  FLACIUS 
 
 i^lian  in  his  Hist.  Animal.,  iii.  38,  thus  mentions  : 
 y\  S^  iv  ^evei^  \i/xvr]  ix^i"^"  dyovoi  ecrriv.  This 
 epithet  dyovos  is  appHed  to  the  Dead  Sea  itself  by 
 Josephus,  /•t-//.  ')iid.  v.  4  (Bochart,  Hie>'oz,  i.  40). 
 The  copious  supply  of  fish  in  the  waters  of  Pales- 
 tine CJicouraged  the  art  of  fishing,  to  wliich  fre- 
 quent allusions  are  made  both  in  the  O.  and  in  the 
 N.  T.  The  most  prevalent  method  of  catching 
 their  fish,  in  use  among  the  Hebrews,  was  by  nets, 
 of  various  kinds  and  sizes.  Four  of  these  are 
 mentioned  (Winer,  B.  R.  W.  i.  374).  Two  in 
 Habak.  i.  15,   16,  D"in  (LXX.  a.iJ,<pi^\r]ffTpou :  no 
 
 doubt  in  v.  16  this  word  and  aayi^vr)  have  been  by 
 some  means  transposed;  verse  17  compared  with 
 verse  15  makes  this  evident),  the  cast!Jis;-net 
 Matt.  iv.  18  {hiKTvov),  and  Mark  i.  16  ;  and  n"i03p 
 
 (LXX.  (Tay-qvri),  the  dm^-net  [a  larger  kind],  see 
 Matt.  xiii.  48.  The  third  occurs  Eccl.  ix.  12, 
 miSfD  (LXX.  ducpipXTja-Tpov),  a  casting  net.     The 
 
 fourth  Dttn  (LXX.  7ra7is),  a  fowler's  net  as  well  as 
 
 a  fisher's.  In  Ps.  xxxv.  7,  8  the  nCH,  net,  is  used 
 with  nnC',  a, pit  ['They  have  hid  for  me  their  net 
 
 in  a  pit '],  the  allusion  would  seem  to  be  to  that 
 mode  of  winter-fishing  which  Aristotle  describes 
 as  practised  by  the  Phcenicians  ;  ^Opurrovcn  rd- 
 ^pov  els  rbv  iroTaixov  Sta  ^yjpov  •  etra  TavTTjv  Kara- 
 (TTeydcravTes  X^P^V  '^'^^  XtS-otj,  <pco\e6v  iroLOvaiv 
 iK^vaiv  ixovra  e/c  tov  iroTap-ou  Kal  HiTav  irdyos  9j, 
 iK  TOVTOV  Kvpru)  (a  fishing  basket)  ^ripevovai  tovs 
 t'xS-Os  {Hist.  Animal,  viii.  20).  Net-fishing  is  still 
 used  on  the  lake  of  Tiberias  (Dr.  Pococke,  De- 
 scrip,  of  the  East,  ii.  69 ;  '  We  went  on  the  lake  /;/ 
 a  boat,  and  diverted  ourselves  by  fishing  with  cast- 
 ing-nets, which  they  use  here  :'  sometimes  the  net 
 is  thrown/;'^;;;  the  shore,  ox  from  a  rock  [/wV/.  ]). 
 
 This  mode  of  fishing  prevailed  in  Palestine,  and 
 is  a  prominent  feature  of  the  piscatorial  associations 
 in  the  Gospel  history  to  the  very  last  (see  St.  John 
 xxi.  6,  8,  11).  It  is  certainly  less  characteristic  of 
 Egyptian  fishing  of  which  we  have  frequent  men- 
 tion in  the  O.  T.  The  instruments  therein  em- 
 ployed, were  the  HSn  (LXX.  dyKlcrpov,  comp.  St. 
 
 Matt.  xvii.  27),  ang-ling-hooh,  for  smaller  fish  ;  Is. 
 xix.  8  ;  Hab.  i.  15.  These  hooks  were  (for  dis- 
 guise) made  to  resemble  thorns  [on  the  principle  of 
 the  fly-fishing  instruments,  though  not  in  the  same 
 manner ;  for  the  Egyptians,  neither  anciently  nor 
 now,  seem  to  have  put  winged  insects  on  their  hooks 
 to  attract  their  prey  ;  Wilkinson,  iii.  54],  and  were 
 thence  called  niT'D,  Amos  iv.  2  (from  their  resem- 
 blance to  thorns,''  Gesenius,  Lex.  s.  v.);  and  (in 
 the  case  of  the  larger  sort)    nsb*,  A.V.    ^barbed 
 
 twits' ;  Job  xli.  7  [xl.  31].  Another  name  for 
 these  thorn-like  instruments  was  pSl^,  Amos  iv.  2 
 [a.  generic  word,  judging  from  the  LXX.,  SirXa]. 
 nin  was  either  a  hook  or  a  ring  put  through  the 
 
 nostrils  of  fish  to  let  them  down  again  alive  into 
 the  water  (Gesenius) ;  or  (it  may  be)  a  crook  by 
 which  fishes  were  suspended  to  long  poles,  and 
 carried  home  after  being  caught  (such  as  is  shewn 
 in  plate  344  [from  a  tomb  near  the  Pyramids]  in 
 Wilkinson,  iii.  56).  The  word  is  used  in  Job  xli.  2 
 [Hebr.  Bib.   xl.    26]  with  ji^JX,  a  cord  of  rushes 
 
 ((TXOLvos).  Rosenmiiller,  in  loc,  applies  these  two 
 words  to  the  binding  of  larger  fish  to  the  bank  of 
 the  river  until  wanted,  after  they  are  captured,  and 
 
 quotes  Bruce  for  instances  of  such  a  practice  in 
 modern  Egyptian  fishing.  Though  we  have  so 
 many  terms  for  the  hook,  it  is  doubtful  whether  any 
 have  come  down  to  us  denoting  the  line;  jiDJX  and 
 
 ^Hn,  though  the  most  nearly  connected  with  pisca- 
 torial employment,  hardly  express  our  notion  of  a 
 line  for  ang'ting  (see  Gesenms,  s.w.)  ;  while  t2^n 
 
 and  pTlQ  [thread,  twine)  are  never  used  in  Scrip- 
 ture for  fishing  purposes.  The  large  fish-spear,  or 
 harpoon,  used  for  destroying  the  crocodile  and  hip- 
 popotamus was  called  t^T\  ^iTi  (Job  xli.  7  {Hebr. 
 Bib.  xl.  31],  comp.  with  Wilkinson,  iii.  72,  73). 
 7V?V  means  a  cymbal  or  any  clanging  instrument, 
 
 and  this  seems  to  have  led  to  the  belief  of  fishes 
 being  attracted  and  caught  by  musical  sounds  ; 
 stories  of  such,  including  Arion  and  the  dolphin, 
 are  collected  by  J.  G.  Schelhom  in  his  Dissertation 
 
 on  the  U''T\  h'^h^  of  Job  (Ugolini,  Thes.  xxix.  329, 
 etc.)  '  The  Egyptian  fishermen  used  the  net ;  it  was 
 of  a  long  form,  like  the  common  drag-net,  with 
 wooden  floats  on  the  upper,  and  leads  on  the  lower 
 side  ;  though  sometimes  let  dovi^n  from  a  boat, 
 those  who  pulled  it  generally  stood  on  the  shore 
 and  landed  the  fish  on  a  shelving  bank'  (Wilkin- 
 son, ii.  21).  This  net  is  mentioned  in  Is.  xix.  8, 
 under  the  name  miO^O-      It  is,  however,  doubtful 
 
 whether  this  be  anything  more  than  a  frame,  some- 
 what between  a  basket  and  a  net,  resembling  the 
 landing  «,?/ represented  in  Wilkinson,  iii.  55.  The 
 Mishna  (vi.  76,  116)  describes  it  by  the  word  ppX, 
 
 nassa,  corbis  piscatoria,  a  basket.  Maillet  (Epist. 
 ix. )  expressly  says  that  '  iiets  for  fishing  are  not  used 
 in  Egypt.''  If  this  be  so,  the  usage  has  much 
 altered  since  the  times  which  Wilkinson  has  de- 
 scribed. Frames  for  fishing  attached  to  stakes 
 driven  into  the  bottom  were  prohibited  in  the  lake 
 of  Tiberias,  '  because  they  are  an  impediment  to 
 boats'  (Talmudic  Gloss,  quoted  by  Lightfoot, 
 Hone  Hebr.  on  Matt.  iv.  18).  No  such  prohibition 
 existed  in  Egypt,  where  wicker  traps,  now  as  an- 
 ciently, are  placed  at  the  mouths  of  canals,  by 
 which  means  a  great  quantity  of  fish  is  caught 
 (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  232,  note).  The  custom  of 
 drying  fish  is  frequently  represented  in  the  sculp- 
 tures of  Upper  and  Lower  Egypt  (p.  127,  7wtc) 
 On  the  west  side  of  Jerusalem  was  the  fish-gate, 
 which  is  mentioned  in  Neh.  iii.  3,  and  three  other 
 passages.  This  probably  derived  its  name  from  a 
 fish-market  there.  According  to  Aristotle  {Hist. 
 Aiiim.  viii.  19)  comp.  with  St.  Luke  v.  5,  the 
 7iighi  was  the  best  time  for  fishing  operations  :  bXla- 
 Kovrat  di  fidXiara  ol  I'x^i^es  'rp6  ijXiov  dvaroXrjs  Kal 
 IxtTo,  TTjv  Mcnv — '  before  sunrise  and  after  sunset.' — 
 P.  H. 
 
 FITCHES.     [Qetsach.] 
 
 FLACH  or  FLACIUS,  sumamed  Illyricus, 
 a  celebrated  theologian  of  the  1 6th  century,  was 
 born  at  Albona  in  Istria,  A.D.  1520,  and  died  at 
 Frankfurt  on  the  Maine,  1575.  In  1539  he  went 
 to  Basel,  where  he  was  greatly  aided  in  his  studies 
 by  Simon  Grynaeus  and  others.  From  Basel  he 
 repaired  to  Tubingen  in  1540.  In  1541  he  went 
 to  Wittenberg,  and  heard  there  Luther  and  Melanc- 
 thon.  In  1544  he  was  appointed  professor  ol 
 Hebrew  at  Wittenberg.     In  consequence  of  the 
 
FLAG 
 
 26 
 
 FLEURY 
 
 war  he  was  obliged  to  fly  to  Brunswick,  but  he 
 returned  and  resumed  his  functions  in  1549. 
 Having  differed  with  Melancthon,  he  left  Witten- 
 berg, and  established  himself  at  Magdeburg,  where 
 he  soon  found  himself  at  the  head  of  the  rigid 
 Lutherans.  In  1557  he  was  appointed  professor 
 of  theology  at  Jena.  In  1562,  being  deprived  of 
 his  place,  and  ordered  to  leave  the  states  of  the 
 Duke  of  Weimar,  he  retired  to  Ratisbon.  In 
 1566  he  was  invited  to  Antwerp,  along  with  others, 
 to  take  the  direction  of  the  evangelical  church 
 newly  formed  there  ;  but  as  it  was  soon  persecuted, 
 he  was  obliged  to  flee  to  Strasburg.  Thence  he 
 withdrew  to  Frankfurt,  where  he  died.  Flacius 
 was  a  learned  theologian  ;  but,  like  most  of  the 
 rigidly  orthodox,  fiery,  bitter,  and  intolerant  in 
 spirit.  He  wrote  a  great  deal :  most  of  it  was  con- 
 troversial. The  only  works  of  his  that  belong  to 
 our  department  are,  Clavis  Scripinra:  Sacnr,  Bale, 
 1567,  folio  ;  Glossa  compendiaria  in  Novum  Testa- 
 vientiim.  Bale,  1570,  folio  ;  Ecclesiastica  Hisioria, 
 integmm  ecdesiae  Christi  ideam  seatndmn  singiclas 
 ceiiturias  perspicuo  ordine  coinp/ectens,  Bale,  1559- 
 1574,  folio,  13  vols.— This  is  the  celebrated  work 
 known  as  the  Magdeburg  centuries.  Flacius  was 
 assisted  by  various  others  in  its  composition. 
 Baronius's  Annales  ecdesiastici  (1588-1607)  were 
 undertaken  to  refute  it.  See  Twesten's  Matthias 
 Flacius  Illyricus,  eiiie  Vorlesung,  1844. — S.  D. 
 
 FLAG.    [AcHU.] 
 
 FLAGONS.  The  Hebrew  tenn  which  is  thus 
 translated  in  the  A.  V.  in  all  the  passages  where  it  oc- 
 curs, excepting  one,  is  nE^''Lf;S;,  which,  according  to 
 the  best  modern  lexicographers,  means  a  flat  cake  of 
 pressed  grapes.    Gesenius  distinguishes  it  from  pTOV, 
 
 a  bunch  of  dried  grapes,  and  from  P./^'H,  a  lump  or 
 cake  of  figs.  The  meaning  flagon  (sextarius)  is 
 founded  on  an  erroneous  derivation  from  the  nume- 
 ral fi)t!.     It  occurs  in  2  Sam.  vi.  19,  \'i'^o.vov  dirb 
 
 T-nydvov;  siniilain  frixam  oleo ;  where  the  words  0/ 
 -wine,  in  the  A.V.,  are  an  addition;  i  Chron.  xvi. 
 3,  dfMopLTTiv,  frixam  oleo  similani ;  Cant.  ii.  5,  h 
 ij.vpoi^,  fioribiis ;  Hosea  iii.  I,  TriiJ-ixara  /xera  ara- 
 (piSos,  vinacia  tivarum  ;  the  word  D''3jy,  translated 
 
 in  the  A.  V.  wine,  uniformly  means  grapes,  as  in 
 the  marginal  reading. 
 
 In  the  A.  V.  of  Is.  xxii.  2\,  flagon  is  used  for  the 
 
 Hebrew  ^33,  which  sometimes  means  a  bottle  or 
 
 vessel,  but  often  a  musical  instrument,  probably 
 from  its  shape  [Ahime  eines  bauchigen  Ton-Instrn- 
 vients,'  Fiirst,  H.  W.  B.,  s.  v.),  as  in  the  marginal 
 reading,  instnmienis  of  viols ;  the  Vulg.  has  omiie 
 vas  viusicortan.  On  the  terms  used  by  the  LXX., 
 Schleusner  may  be  consulted  with  advantage. — 
 J.  E.  R. 
 
 FLATT,  JoHANN  Fried.  Von.  D.D.,  prelate 
 and  professor  of  theology  at  Tubingen,  was  born 
 20th  Feb.  1759,  and  dW  24th  Nov.  1821.  His 
 contributions  to  Biblical  literature  consist  chiefly 
 of  some  volumes  of  exegetical  lectures  published 
 from  his  notes  after  his  death.  We  have,  in  this 
 form,  from  his  pen,  Voriesuugcn  lib.  d.  Br.  an  die 
 Ga later  tind  Ephesier,  Tiib.  1823  ;  Varies,  iib.  die 
 Br.  an  die  Pkilipper,  A'oloss.  Thessal.  und  an  PJii- 
 iem,  Tiib.  1829,  both  edited  by  Kling  ;  Forles.  iib. 
 d.  Br.  an  d.  Rorner,  Tiib.   1825  ;   Vorles.  iib.  die 
 
 Br.  an  d.  Korinther,  Tub.  1833,  both  edited  by 
 Hoffmann  ;  Voi-les.  iib.  die  Br.  an  den  Tim.  tmd 
 Tit.  nebst  einer  allge?)i.  Einleitiing  iiber  die  Br. 
 Paiili,  edited  by  Kling,  Tiib,  183 1.  The  notes 
 in  these  works  are  generally  brief;  but  they  are 
 marked  by  sound  learning,  clearness,  and  good 
 sense. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FLAX.      [PiSHTAH.] 
 
 FLEA.     [Par'osh.] 
 
 FLESH  {^K'^).     This  word  bears  a  variety  of 
 
 significations  in  Scripture  : — 
 
 1.  It  is  applied,  generally,  to  the  whole  ani- 
 mated creation,  whether  man  or  beast ;  or,  to  all 
 beings  whose  material  substance  is  flesh  (Gen.  vi. 
 13,  I7>  19  ;  vii.  15,  etc.) 
 
 2.  But  it  is  more  particularly  applied  to  '  man- 
 kind ; '  and  is,  in  fact,  the  only  Hebrew  word 
 which  answers  to  that  term  (Gen.  vi.  12  ;  Ps.  xlv. 
 3  ;  cxlv.  21  ;  Is.  xl.  5,  6).  In  this  sense  it  is 
 used  somewhat  figuratively  to  denote  that  evil 
 principle  which  is  opposed  to  the  spirit  and  to 
 God,  and  which  it  is  necessary  to  correct  and 
 subdue  (Gen.  vi.  3  ;  Job  x.  4  ;  Is.  xxxi.  3  ;  Matt 
 xvi.  17  ;  Gal.  i.  :6,  etc.) 
 
 3.  The  word  '  flesh '  is  opposed  to  ti'QJ  nep/iesh, 
 '  soul,'  or  'spirit,'  just  as  we  oppose  body  and  soul 
 (Job  xiv.  22  ;  Prov.  xiv.  30  ;  Is.  x.  18). 
 
 4.  The  ordinary  senses  of  the  word,  namely, 
 the  flesh  of  men  or  beasts  (Gen.  xli.  2,  19  ;  Job 
 xxxiii.  25),  and  flesh  as  used  for  food  (Exod. 
 xvi.  12  ;  Lev.  vii.  19),  are  both  sufficiently  ob- 
 vious ;  and  with  respect  to  the  latter,  see  Food. 
 
 5 .  The  word  '  flesh '  is  also  used  as  a  modest 
 general  term  for  the  secret  parts,  in  such  passages 
 as  Gen.  xvii.  1 1  ;  Exod.  xxviii.  42  ;  Lev.  xx.  2  ; 
 Ezek.  xxiii.  20  ;  2  Peter  ii.  7,  8,  10  ;  Jude  7.  In 
 Prov.  v.  1 1  the  '  flesh  of  the  intemperate '  is  de- 
 scribed as  being  consumed  by  infamous  diseases. — 
 J.  K. 
 
 FLEURY,  Claude,  was  bom  at  Paris,  Dec.  6, 
 1640.  He  was  educated  in  the  Jesuit's  College 
 at  Clermont.  His  father,  who  was  an  advocate, 
 wished  him  to  follow  the  same  profession,  but  his 
 preference  for  the  clerical  vocation  was  so  strong, 
 that  after  nine  years'  practice  in  the  law,  he  took 
 priest's  orders.  In  1672  he  became  tutor  to  the 
 Prince  of  Conti,  who  was  brought  up  with  the  Dau- 
 phin, and  aftenvards  to  the  Count  de  Vermandois, 
 a  natural  son  of  Louis  XIV.,  who  died  in  1683.  In 
 1689  Fleuiy  was  appointed  sub-preceptor  (with  the 
 illustrious  Feni-'lon)  to  the  Princes  of  Burgimdy, 
 Anjou,  and  Berri,  and  on  the  completion  of  their 
 education,  was  made  Prior  of  ArgenteuiL  Louis 
 XV.  chose  him  for  his  father  confessor  on  account 
 of  his  moderation  in  reference  to  the  Jansenist 
 controversy,  and  this  office  he  held  till  his  death, 
 July  14,  1723.  His  works  are  numerous.  The 
 first  was  his  '  Catcchistne  historiqitc,  Paris,  1679  ; 
 translated  into  Spanish  1707,  and  into  German 
 1 71 8.  W'e  may  also  mention  his  Moeiirs  des 
 Israelites,  Paris,  1681,  of  which  there  is  an  English 
 translation  by  Dr.  Adam  Clarke ;  Mocurs  des 
 Chretiens,  Paris,  1662  ;  Instittitio7i  an  droit  ecclesi- 
 astiquc,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1687  ;  translated  into  Latin 
 by  Grubcr  1724- 1733.  But  his  great  work  is  his 
 Histoire  Ecch'siastiqtte  ixo'm.  the  Ascension  to  A.  D. 
 1414  ;  Paris,  1691-1720.  A  continuation,  written 
 with  very  uiferior  ability,  by  Claude  Fabre,  a  priest 
 
FLINT 
 
 FOOD 
 
 of  the  Oratoiy,  and  La  Croix,  a  Carmelite  monk, 
 brings  the  history  down  to  1778.  Pleury's  own 
 work  is  written  in  a  devout  and  hberal  spirit,  with 
 a  constant  protest  against  the  corruptions  of  the 
 Church,  and  the  union  of  the  secular  with  tlie 
 spiritual  power.  A  Latin  translation  (including 
 the  continuation)  appeared  at  Augsburg,  1757- 1793, 
 and  a  German  translation  at  Frankfort-on- Maine, 
 14  vols.  4to,  1752.  The  ^  Abn'ge  de  Vhistoire 
 ecclesiastiqiie  de  Flettry,''  Bern,  1766,  is  ascribed  to 
 Frederic  the  Great.  His  '  Discours  stir  les  liberth 
 de  Peglise  Gallicaiie''  was  published  soon  after  his 
 death,  Paris,  1724.^ — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 FLINT.     [Rock.] 
 
 FLOCKS.    [Pasturage.] 
 
 FLOOD.     [Deluge.] 
 
 FLOUR.     [Bread;  Mill;  Offerings.] 
 
 FLOWERS.    [Palestine.] 
 
 FLUTE.     [Musical  Instruments.] 
 
 FLUX,  BLOODY,  a  disease  under  which  the 
 father  of  Publius,  the  govei^nor  of  Melita,  laboured 
 at  the  time  of  Paul's  visit  to  that  island  (Acts  xxviii. 
 8).  Luke,  with  professional  accuracy,  describes 
 the  disease  as  Trvperol  Kal  ovaevrepia.  Dysentery  is 
 always  accompanied  with  febrile  symptoms,  and 
 frequently  with  intermittent  fever,  the  presence  of 
 which  in  the  case  of  the  father  of  Publius,  Luke 
 intimates  by  the  use  of  the  plural.  [Fever.] 
 Dysentery  is  a  common  disease  in  all  warm  cli- 
 mates, and  is  frequently  epidemic ;  it  is  a  disease 
 at  once  painful  and  dangerous,  and  it  often  assumes 
 a  chronic  form,  which  is  very  difficult  to  cure.  It 
 has  been  suggested  that  it  was  of  chronic  dysenteiy, 
 followed  by  prolapsus  ani,  that  King  Jehoram  died 
 (2  Chron.  xxi.  15,  19) ;  but  the  manner  in  which 
 the  historian  speaks  of  Jehoram's  disease,  as  a 
 special  and  awful  judgment  inflicted  by  God,  ren- 
 ders it  improbable  that  it  was  a  disease  so  fami- 
 liar to  the  Jews  as  dysentery  must  have  been. — 
 \V.  L.  A. 
 
 FLY.     [Arob  ;  Zebul.] 
 
 FOLD.     [Pasturage.] 
 
 FOOD.  Under  this  head  we  shall  consider — 
 I.  The  materials  of  food  mentioned  in  the  Bible  ; 
 and  II.  The  methods  of  preparing  them  for  use; 
 referring  for  the  customs  connected  with  the  con- 
 sumpt  of  them  to  the  article  Banquets. 
 
 I.  The  original  grant  of  the  Creator  made  over 
 to  man  the  use  of  the  vegetable  world  for  food 
 (Gen.  i.  29),  with  the  exception  of  the  tree  of  the 
 knowledge  of  good  and  evil  (Gen.  ii.  17),  and 
 apparently  also  the  tree  of  life  (iii.  22).  So  long 
 as  man  continued  in  Paradise,  he  doubtless  re- 
 stricted his  choice  of  food  within  the  limits  thus 
 defined ;  but  whether,  as  is  commonly  stated,  we 
 are  to  regard  this  as  characteristic  of  the  entire 
 period  between  the  creation  of  Adam  and  the 
 grant  of  animal  food  to  Noah  after  the  flood  (Gen. 
 ix.  3),  admits  of  doubt.  It  is  doing  no  violence  to 
 the  passage  last  cited  to  view  it  rather  in  the  light 
 of  an  ordinance  intended  to  regulate  a  practice 
 already  in  use,  than  as  containing  the  first  permis- 
 sion of  that  practice  ;  and  when  we  consider  that 
 man  is  by  his  original  constitution  omnivorous, 
 that  there  are  special  adaptations  in  his  frame,  as 
 
 made  by  God,  for  the  use  of  animal  food,  that  from 
 the  beginning  he  was  acquainted  with  the  use  of 
 fire,  that  from  the  beginning  there  was  a  distinction 
 known  to  him  between  clean  and  unclean  animals 
 (Gen.  vii.  2,  8),  corresponding  apparently  to  a  dis- 
 tinction between  animals  good  for  food  and  ani- 
 mals not  so,  and  that  the  pastoral  was  as  early  as 
 the  agricultural  occupation  among  men  ;  it  seems 
 more  probable  than  otherwise  that  the  use  of  ani- 
 mal food  was  not  unknown  to  the  antediluvians 
 Perhaps  some  fierce  or  cruel  custom  connected  with 
 the  use  of  raw  flesh,  such  as  Bruce  found  in  his  day 
 among  the  Abyssinians,  and  such  as  Moses  glances 
 at  (Exod.  xii.  9),  may  have  prevailed  among  the 
 more  barbarous  and  ferocious  of  the  antediluvians  ; 
 and  it  may  have  been  in  order  to  check  this  that 
 the  communication  recorded  Gen.  ix.  2-5  was 
 made  to  Noah.  It  is  not,  however,  to  be  over- 
 looked that,  in  the  traditions  of  antiquity,  the  early 
 age  of  the  world  was  represented  as  one  in  which 
 men  did  not  use  animal  food  (Diod.  Sic.  i.  43  ; 
 ii.  38  ;  Ovid,  Metam.  i.ioi,  ff.  ;  xv.  96,  ff.  ;  Fast. 
 iv.  395,  ff.) 
 
 In  the  Patriarchal  age  the  food  of  the  ancestors 
 of  the  Hebrews  comprised  the  flesh  of  animals 
 both  tame  and  wild,  as  well  as  the  cereals.  We 
 read  of  their  using  not  only  cakes  of  fine  meal,  but 
 also  milk  and  butter,  and  the  flesh  of  the  calf,  the 
 kid,  and  game  taken  by  hunting  (Gen.  xviii.  6-8  ; 
 xxvii.  3,  4).  They  used  also  leguminous  food,  and 
 a  prepartion  of  lentiles  [Adashim]  seems  to  have 
 been  a  customary  and  favourite  dish  with  them 
 (Gen.  XXV.  34).  They  made  use  also  of  honey 
 (tJ'in,  either  honey  of  bees  or  syrup  of  grapes), 
 spices,  nuts  [Botnim],  and  almonds  [Shaked], 
 (Gen.  xliii.  11). 
 
 During  their  residence  in  Egypt  the  Israelites 
 shared  in  the  abundance  of  that  land  ;  there  they 
 '  sat  by  the  flesh-pots,  and  did  eat  bread  to  the  full' 
 (iLx'od.  xvi.  3) ;  and  amid  the  privations  of  the 
 wilderness  they  remembered  with  regret  and  mur- 
 muring '  the  fish  which  they  did  eat  in  Egypt 
 freely  ;  *  the  cucumbers  and  the  melons,  and  the 
 leeks  and  the  onions,  and  the  garlic'  (Num.  xi.  5). 
 These  vegetable  products  have  always  formed  an 
 important  part  of  the  food  of  the  people  of  Egypt ; 
 and  the  abundant  use  also  of  animal  food  by  them 
 is  sulficiently  attested  by  the  monuments  (Wilkin- 
 son,, A71C.  Egypt,  ii.  367-374). 
 
 In  their  passage  through  the  wilderness,  the 
 wunt  of  the  ordinary  materials  of  food  was  miracu- 
 lously supplied  to  the  Israelites  by  the  manna. 
 [Man,  2.]  As  it  was  of  importance  that  their 
 flocks  and  herds  should  not  be  wholly  consumed 
 or  even  greatly  reduced  before  their  entering  on 
 the  promised  land,  they  seem  to  have  been  placed 
 under  restrictions  in  the  use  of  animal  food,  though 
 this  was  not  forbidden  (Lev.  xvii.  3,  ff. ) ;  and  when 
 their  longing  for  this  food  broke  out  into  rebellious 
 murmurs,  a  supply  was  sent  to  tliem  by  means  of 
 large  flocks  of  a  species  of  partridge  [Selav]  very 
 much  in  use  in  the  East  (Exod.  xvi.  II-13  ;  Num. 
 xi.  31 ;  comp.  Diod.  Sic.  i.  60). 
 
 When  they  reached  the  promised  land,  '  the 
 land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey,'  abundance  of 
 all  kinds  of  food  awaited  the  favoured  people. 
 The  rich  pasture-lands  of  Palestine  enabled  them 
 
 *  The  abundance  of  fish  in  Egypt  is  attested  by 
 Diod.  Sic.  L  34,  36 ;  a;id  Aelian,  De  Nat.  Anim. 
 X.  43. 
 
FOOD 
 
 28 
 
 FOOD 
 
 to  rear  and  maintain  large  flocks  and  herds  ;  game 
 of  various  kinds  was  abundant  in  the  more  moun- 
 tainous and  uninhabited  districts  ;  fish  was  largely 
 supplied  by  the  rivers  and  inland  seas,  and  seems 
 to  have  been  used  to  a  considerable  extent  (2 
 Chron.  xxxiii.  14  ;  Neh.  iii.  3  ;  Matt.  vii.  10 ;  xiv. 
 17  ;  XV.  34;  Luke  xxiv.  42  ;  John  xxi.  6- 14),  so 
 that  the  destruction  of  it  was  represented  as  a 
 special  judgment  from  God  (Is.  1.  2  ;  Hos.  iv.  3  ; 
 Zeph.  i.  3)  [Fish].  In  the  Mosaic  code  express 
 regulations  are  laid  down  as  to  the  kinds  of  animals 
 that  may  be  used  in  food  (Lev.  xi. ;  Deut.  xiv.) 
 Those  expressly  permitted  are,  of  beasts,  the  ox, 
 the  sheep,  the  goat,  the  hart,  the  roebuck,  the 
 fallow-deer,  the  wild  goat,  the  pygarg,  the  wild 
 ox,  the  chamois,  and  in  general  every  beast  that 
 parteth  the  hoof  and  cleaveth  the  cleft  into  two 
 claws  [that  is,  where  the  hoof  is  completely  parted, 
 and  each  pari  is  separately  cased  in  bone],  and 
 cheweth  the  cud  ;  oi  fish,  all  that  have  scales  and 
 fins  ;  oi  fowls,  all  clean  birds,  that  is,  all  except 
 the  carnivorous  and  piscivorous  birds  ;  of  insects, 
 the  locust  [Arpeh],  the  bald  locust  [Saleam],  the 
 beetle  [Chargol],  and  the  grasshopper  [Chagab]. 
 Whether  the  Hebrews  attended  to  the  rearing  of 
 gallinaceous  fowls  remains  matter  of  doubt  [Bar- 
 BURiM  ;  Birds;  Cock.] 
 
 Besides  animals  declared  to  be  unclean,  the 
 Israelites  were  forbidden  to  use  as  food  anything 
 which  had  been  consecrated  to  idols  (Exod.  xxxiv. 
 15)  ;  animals  which  had  died  of  disease  or  been 
 torn  by  wild  beasts  (Exod.  xxii.  31  ;  Lev.  xxii.  8  ; 
 comp.  Ezek.  iv.  14),  and  certain  parts  of  animals, 
 viz.,  the  blood  (Lev.  xxvii.  10 ;  xix.  26;  Deut. 
 xii.  16-23),  t^^  f^t  covering  the  intestines,  the  kid- 
 neys, and  the  fat  covering  them,  the  fat  of  any 
 part  of  the  ox,  or  sheep,  or  goat,  especially  the  fat 
 tail  of  certain  sheep  (Exod.  xxix.  13-22  ;  Lev.  iii. 
 4-9,  10 ;  ix.  19).  They  were  also  forbidden  to 
 use  any  food  or  liquids  occupying  a  vessel  into 
 which  the  dead  body  of  any  unclean  beast  had 
 fallen,  as  well  as  all  food  and  liquids  which  had 
 stood  uncovered  in  the  apartment  of  a  dead  or  dying 
 person  (Num.  xix.  15).  The  eating  of  a  kid  boiled 
 in  the  milk  or  fat  of  its  mother  was  also  prohibited 
 (Exod.  xxiii.  19  ;  xxxiv.  26  ;  Deut.  xiv.  21).  These 
 restrictions  rested  chiefly,  doubtless,  on  religious 
 and  theocratic  grounds  [Fat],  but  for  some  of 
 them  reasons  of  a  sanitary  kind  may  also  have 
 existed.  It  belonged  to  the  essence  of  the  theocra- 
 tic system  that  the  people  should  be  constantly 
 surrounded  by  what  reminded  them  of  their  se- 
 paration to  Jehovah,  and  the  need  of  keeping 
 themselves  free  from  all  that  would  level  or  lower 
 the  distinction  between  them  and  the  nations 
 around  them.  For  this  reason  specific  restric- 
 tions were  laid  upon  their  diet,  which  were  not 
 attended  to  by  other  nations,  nor  were  in  every  case 
 insisted  on  in  the  case  of  strangers  dwelling  with- 
 in their  bounds  (Deut.  xiv.  21).  This  does  not, 
 however,  preclude  our  admitting  that  reasons  of  a 
 social  or  political  kind  may  have  also  conspired  to 
 render  these  restrictions  desirable.  In  warm  cli- 
 mates the  importance  of  avoiding  contagion  ren- 
 ders the  utmost  caution  necessary  in  handling  what- 
 ever may  have  been  exposed  to  the  influence  of  a 
 corpse  ;  and  it  is  well  known  that  the  use  of  adi- 
 pose matter  in  food  requires,  in  such  climates,  to 
 be  restricted  within  narrow  limits.  The  peculiar 
 prohibition  of  a  kid  boiled  in  its  mother's  milk 
 was  ordained  piobably  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding 
 
 conformity  to  some  idolatrous  usage,  or  for  the 
 purpose  generally  of  encouraging  humane  feelings 
 on  the  part  of  the  Israelites  towards  their  domesti- 
 cated animals  (Winer,  R.  IV.  B.,  art.  Speisegesetze  ; 
 Spencer,  £>e  Lege;.  Hebr.  RitualL,  bk.  ii.  ch.  8; 
 Michaelis,  Mos.  Rccht,  iv.  200). 
 
 Subject  to  these  restrictions,  the  Israelites  were 
 free  to  use  for  food  all  the  produce  of  their  fer- 
 tile and  favoured  land.  'Thou  shalt  bestow  thy 
 money,'  said  God  to  them,  '  for  whatsoever  thy 
 soul  lusteth  after,  for  oxen,  or  for  sheep,  or  for 
 wine,  or  for  strong  drink,  and  thou  shalt  eat  there- 
 of before  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  thou  shalt  re- 
 joice, thou  and  thy  household'  (Deut.  xiv.  26). 
 And  in  the  enumeration  of  blessings  conferred  by 
 God  on  Israel,  we  find  '  honey  out  of  the  rock,  and 
 oil  out  of  the  flinty  rock,  butter  of  kine,  and  milk 
 of  sheep,  with  fat  of  lambs,  and  rams  of  the  breed 
 of  Bashan,  and  goats,  with  the  fat  of  kidneys  of 
 wheat,'  specified  as  among  his  free  gifts  to  his 
 people  (Deut.  xxxii.  13,  14).  Though  allowed 
 this  wide  range,  however,  of  animal  food,  the 
 Hebrews  do  not  seem  to  have  in  ordinary  life 
 availed  themselves  of  it.  The  usual  food  of  the 
 people  appears  to  have  consisted  of  milk  and  its 
 preparations  [Milk  ;  Cheese],  honey,  bread,  and 
 vegetables  of  various  sorts ;  and  only  at  the  royal 
 table  was  animal  food  in  daily  use  (i  Kings  iv.  23  ; 
 Neh.  V.  18).  The  animals  commonly  used  for 
 food  were  calves  (Gen.  xviii.  7  ;  I  Sam.  xxviii.  24 ; 
 Amos  vi.  4)  ;  these  were  fattened  for  the  purpose, 
 and  hence  were  called  fatlings,  or  fatted  calves 
 {fj.6(Txos  (Tirevrds,  Luke  xv.  23  ;  criTicrTd,  Matt. 
 xxii.  4)  ;  lambs  (2  Sam.  xii.  4 ;  Amos  vi.  4)  ; 
 s/teej)  (i  Sam.  xiv.  34;  xxv.  18;  i  Kings  iv.  23)  ; 
 oxen  stall-fed,  or  from  the  pastures  (l  Kings  i.  9  ; 
 iv.  23  ;  2  Chron.  xviii.  2  ;  Matt.  xxii.  4)  ;  fat  cattle 
 (X"'"ID,  a  particular  kind  of  the  bovine  genus  pecu- 
 liar to  Bashan,  supposed  by  some  to  be  a  species 
 of  buffalo  or  ure-ox,  but  not  to  be  confounded  with 
 the  fatling  or  fatted  calf  above  mentioned,  2  Sam. 
 vi.  13  ;  I  Kings  i.  9  ;  Amos  v.  22  ;  Ezek.  xxxix. 
 18);  kids  (i  Sam.  xvi.  20)  ;  and  various  kinds  of 
 game,  such  as  the  ajil,  the  tsehi,  and  the  jachmiir 
 (I  Kings  V.  3  [iv.  23,  A.  V.])  The  articles  brought 
 by  Abigail  to  David  were  bread,  sheep,  parched 
 [roasted]  corn,  raisins,  and  figs  (l  Sam.  xxv.  18); 
 when  Ziba  met  David  on  his  flight  from  Absalom 
 he  brought  to  him  bread,  raisins,  and  summer 
 fruits  [Fruits]  (2  Sam.  xvi.  i)  ;  and  the  present 
 of  Barzillai  to  the  king  consisted  of  wheat,  barley, 
 flour,  roasted  com,  beans,  lentils,*  honey,  butter, 
 sheep,  and  cheese  (2  Sam.  xvii.  28).  We  may  pre- 
 sume from  this  that  these  formed  the  principal 
 articles  of  food  among  the  Jews  at  this  time. 
 Besides  raisins  or  grapes  dried  in  the  sun,  they 
 used  grapes  pressed  into  cakes  (nt>"'EJ'N)  ;  they  had 
 
 also  fig-cakes  (Dv2*l)-     On  special  occasions  they 
 
 probably  indulged  in  more  costly  viands  ;  in  times 
 of  famine  they  resorted  to  even  very  vile  food  ;  in 
 seasons  of  affliction  they  abstained  from  all  deli- 
 cacies, and  even  sometimes  from  all  food  ;  and  to 
 
 *  The  text.  rec.  repeats  "'I'p  twice  in  this  pas- 
 sage ;  in  the  former  instance  the  A.  V.  renders  it 
 by  '  parched  corn,'  in  the  latter  by  '  parched /z</o-ir. * 
 De  Wette  translates  the  latter  "■  aiich  gerostet.* 
 It  is  wanting  in  the  LXX.,  Syr.,  Arab.,  and  is 
 probably  to  be  omittecL 
 
FOOD 
 
 29 
 
 FOOD 
 
 prisoners  the  food  allowed  seems  to  have  been  only 
 bread  and  water  (i  Kmgs  xxii.  27  ;  Jer.  xxxvii.  21). 
 Besides  the  vegetables  above  mentioned,  the 
 Jews  were  acquainted  with  the  melon,  the  cucum- 
 ber, the  mallow,  the  leek,  the  onion,  garlic,  and 
 bitter  herbs  [Abattichim;  QlSHUlM;  Malluach; 
 Chatzir;  Betzal;  Shumim;  Merorim].    In  Job 
 
 vi.  6  mention  is  made  of  niD^n  "l"""),  which  Ge- 
 
 senius  would  translate  purslain-slime,  or  purslaiit- 
 broth  =  something  extremely  insipid  ( T/ies.  p.  480). 
 The  reasons  he  gives  for  this  are  not  without  force, 
 but  cannot  be  held  conclusive.  The  A.  V.  follows 
 the  Rabbinical  interpretation,  which  Rosenmiiller, 
 Ewald,  etc.,  also  approve  ;  Lee  (hi  loc)  and  Fiirst 
 prefer  understanding  it  of  the  whey  of  curdled  milk  ; 
 Renan  translates  it  le  jits  de  la  ftiauve. 
 
 The  drinks  of  the  Hebrews  were,  besides  water, 
 which  was  their  ordinary  beverage,  milk,  wine, 
 and  '^2t;^',  which  in  the  A.  V.  is  rendered  strong 
 drink  [Shechar].  To  give  the  water  a  greater 
 rehsh,  they  probably  sometimes  dissolved  a  por- 
 tion of  fig-cake  in  it,  according  to  the  fashion  of 
 the  A'abs  at  the  present  day  (Niebuhr,  Arab.  p. 
 57)-  t'he  wines  used  were  of  various  sorts,  and 
 sometimes  their  effect  was  strengthened  by  ming- 
 ling different  kinds  together,  or  by  the  mixture 
 V/ith  ihem  of  drugs  (Ps.  Ixxv.  9  ;  Prov.  ix.  23,  30 ; 
 Is.  V.  22).  A  species  of  delicacy  seems  to  have 
 been  furnished  by  '  spiced  wines,'  that  is,  %vines 
 Bavoured  by  aromatic  herbs,  or  perhaps  simply  by 
 the  juice  of  the  pomegranate  (Song  viii.  2).  No 
 mention  is  made  in  Scripture  of  the  mixing  of  water 
 with  wine  for  the  purpose  of  drinking  it ;  the  refe- 
 rence in  Is.  i.  22  bemg  to  the  adulteration  of  wine 
 by  fraudulent  dealers  ;  but  the  habit  was  so  com- 
 mon in  ancient  times  (comp.  Odyss.  i.  iio;  ix. 
 208  ff. ;  Hippocrates  De  Morb.  iii.  30  ;  Lucian 
 Asin.  vii.  ;  Phn.  Hist.  Nat.  xxiii.  22)  that  we  can 
 hardly  doubt  that  it  was  known  also  among  the 
 Hebrews  [Wine].    Vinegar,  J'Dh,  was  also  used  by 
 
 them  as  a  means  of  quenching  thirst  (Ruth  ii.  14 ; 
 Num.  vi.  3)  ;  mixed  with  oil  this  is  still  a  favourite 
 in  the  East,  and  mixed  with  water  it  was  drunk 
 by  the  Roman  soldiers  and  poor  under  the  name  of 
 posca  (Plin.  N.  H.  xix.  29 ;  xxii.  58 ;  Plaut.  Mil. 
 Glor.  iii.  2,  23). 
 
 The  Hebrews  made  use  of  condiments  to  heighten 
 the  flavour  of  their  dishes  as  well  as  of  spices  to  in- 
 crease the  effect  of  their  wines.  Besides  the  gene- 
 ral condiment  salt,  they  used  cummin,  dill  [Ane- 
 thon],  mint  [Heduosmon],  coriander  [Gad], 
 rue  [Peganon],  mustard  [Sinapis],  and  the  seeds 
 of  an  herb  to  which  they  gave  the  name  of  HVp 
 
 [Qetsach].  Sometimes  their  made  dishes  were 
 so  richly  flavoured  that  the  nature  of  the  meat  used 
 could  not  be  discovered  (Gen.  xxvii.  9,  25).  Be- 
 sides myrrh,  with  which  they  flavoured  their  wines, 
 the  Hebrews  used  various  odoriferous  products 
 [Ahalim  ;  Kopher  ;  Qetzia  ;  Qiddah  ;  Qin- 
 NAMON]  ;  but  whether  they  used  any  of  these  with 
 food  is  uncertain. 
 
 II.  The  early  acquaintance  of  the  race  with 
 the  use  of  fire  renders  it  probable  that  from  the 
 beginning  men  used  some  process  of  cooking  in 
 the  preparation  of  their  food,  except  in  the  case 
 of  such  products  as  are  more  agreeable  to  the 
 palate  in  a  crude  than  in  a  concocted  state. 
 The  cereals  were  sometimes  eaten  raw  (Lev. 
 xxiii.  14 ;  Deut.  xxiii.  25  ;  2  Kings  iv.  42  ;  Matt. 
 
 xii.  l)  ;  but  from  an  early  period  it  was  custo- 
 mary to  roast  the  grains,  and  so  prepare  them  for 
 food  (Lev.  ii.  14 ;  comp.  Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  394). 
 
 This  received  the  name  of  ""pp,  more  fully  2^2i< 
 
 E'N  ''pp  and  Xvp,  A.  V.    'parched   com;'   and 
 
 was  eaten  either  dry  or  formed  into  a  sort  of  por- 
 ridge, perhaps  something  after  the  manner  of  the 
 pilaiv  in  the  East  at  the  present  day.  This  was 
 not  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews  ;  even  as  late  as  the 
 time  of  Virgil  roasting  was  a  recognised  method  of 
 preparing  corn  for  use  (Geo7-g.  i.  267),  though  this 
 may  have  been  only  preparatorj'  to  bruising  it 
 (comp.  Servius  on  Aen.  i.  179  ;  Plin.  N.  H.  xviii. 
 18,  23).  For  the  preparation  and  kinds  of  bread  in 
 use  among  the  Hebrews,  see  Bread  and  Mill. 
 
 Vegetables  were  cooked  by  boiling,  and  seem  to 
 have  been  made  into  a  pottage  (H^TJ,  the  niph. 
 
 part,  of  I^T,  to  boil.  Gen.  xxv.  30,  34 ;  2  Kings 
 i^-  38)  39),  probably  strengthened  by  the  addition 
 of  some  oily  substance,  such  as  butter  or  fat,  or  by 
 having  bones  and  gristles  boiled  down  with  them 
 as  is  still  customary  in  the  East  (Shaw,  Travels. 
 p.  125,  cited  by  Jahn,  Arclueol.  I.  ii.  p.  190). 
 
 When  animal  food  was  to  be  used,  the  animal 
 was  killed  in  such  a  way  as  to  allow  all  the  blood 
 to  leave  the  carcase,  in  order  scrupulously  to  ob- 
 serve the  prohibition,  Exod.  xxii.  31.  Among  the 
 modem  Jews,  this  is  accomplished  by  cutting  the 
 throat  of  the  animal  quite  through,  and  then  sus- 
 pending the  carcase  so  as  to  allow  all  the  blood  to 
 run  out;  the  entrails  with  the  fat  are  removed,  the 
 nerves  and  veins  extracted,  and  strict  search  is 
 made  lest  any  drop  of  blood  should  be  allowed  to 
 remain  in  any  part  (Buxtorf,  Syn.  Jud.  c.  xxvii.) 
 The  flesh  thus  prepared  for  cooking  was  com- 
 monly boiled  in  water  (PE/3  Pih.  of  PK'B),*  pro- 
 bably also  sometimes  in  milk  as  is  still  the  case 
 among  the  Arabs.  Before  being  put  into  the  pot, 
 the  flesh  freed  from  the  skin  appears  to  have  been 
 cut  into  small  pieces,  or  perhaps  this  was  done 
 during  the  process  of  cooking  (Mic.  iii.  3,  comp. 
 Hitzig,  in  loc.)  The  broth  and  the  flesh  were 
 served  up  separately  (Judg.  vi.  19),  and  both  were 
 eaten  with  bread.  Salt  was  used  to  season  the 
 food,  spices  were  also  occasionally  introduced,  and 
 highly  flavoured  dishes  were  sometimes  prepared 
 (Ezek.  xxiv.  10 ;  Gen.  xxvii.  4;  Prov.  xxiii.  3). 
 For  boiling,  the  caldron  or  pot  was  used  [Caldron]; 
 and  the  fuel  was  commonly  wood,  especially  thorns 
 (Eccles.  vii.  6;  Ps.  Iviii.  9;  Is.  xliv.  16;  Ezek. 
 xxiv.  10),  sometimes  the  dried  excrement  of  ani- 
 mals (Ezek.  iv.  15),  a  species  of  fuel  still  much 
 used  in  the  east  (Irby's  and  Mangles'  Travels,  p. 
 172;  Rae  Wilson's  Ti'avels,  ii.  156;  Hue's  Travels, 
 passim).      Food   was   also    prepared   by   roasting 
 
 (np^*).     This  was  regarded  as  the  more  luxurious 
 
 mode  of  preparation,  and  was  resorted  to  chiefly 
 on  festive  occasions.  The  paschal  lamb  was  to  be 
 roasted  whole  (Exod.  xii.  4,  6),  but  it  does  not 
 appear  that  this  was  the  usual  method  of  roasting 
 flesh ;    it  is  more  probable  that  the  ancient   He- 
 
 *  The  radical  meaning  of  this  word  seems  to  be 
 the  bringing  of  anything  to  a  fit  state  for  food; 
 hence  it  is  used  of  the  ripening  of  grain  (Joel  iv. 
 [A.  V.  iii.]  13),  and  of  cooking  generally  by  what- 
 ever meaiis  done  (Ezek.  xxiv.  5  ;  Deut.  xvi.  7). 
 
FOOL 
 
 30 
 
 FOOT 
 
 brew,-s,  like  the  modern  Arabs,  roasted  their  meat 
 In  small  portions,  by  means  of  short  spits  of  wood 
 or  metal  placed  near  the  fire,  and  turned  as  the 
 ]j)rocess  of  cooking  required  (comp.  Odyss.  iii.  461-2 
 f/  saepe;  II.  i.  465,  etc.)  Birds  were  roasted 
 whole  on  such  a  spit.  The  Persians  roast  lambs 
 and  calves  entire,  by  placing  them  in  an  oven 
 (Tavernier  i.  269;  Chardin  iii.  88),  and  this  may 
 also  have  prevailed  among  the  Hebrews.  Among 
 the  poor,  locusts  were  eaten  roasted,  as  is  still 
 common  among  the  Arabs,  whose  method  of 
 cooking  them  is  as  follows :  the  feet  and  wings 
 having  been  plucked  off,  and  the  entrails  taken 
 out,  the  body  is  salted,  and  then  roasted  by  means 
 of  a  wooden  spit,  on  which  a  row  of  bodies  simi- 
 larly prepared  are  stnmg.  Fish  were  usually 
 broiled  (Luke  xxiv.  42;  John  xxi.  9),  but  it  would 
 seem  that  they  were  sometimes  cured,  or  at  least 
 brought  into  a  state  in  which  they  could  be  used 
 without  further  cooking  (Matt.  xiv.  17,  19;  xv.  34, 
 36).      In  either  case  they  were  eaten  with  bread. 
 
 In  primitive  times,  the  mistress  of  the  house 
 presided  over  the  cooking  of  the  food,  as  the 
 master  of  the  house  charged  himself  with  the 
 slaughtering  of  the  animals  required  (Gen.  xviii.  6, 
 8;  Judg.  vi.  19;  comp.  //.  xxiv.  622,  and  Odyss. 
 ii.  300).  Among  the  Egyptians,  servants  who 
 were  professional  cooks  took  charge  of  preparing 
 the  food  (Wilkinson  Anc.  Ei;ypt.,  ii.  382  ff )  ;  and 
 in  later  times  among  the  Hebrews,  similar  func- 
 tionaries were  employed,  both  male  and  female 
 (nnp,  I  Sam.  ix.  23,  24;  nnSD,  l   Sam.  viii.  13). 
 
 The  cuHnary  utensils  were  "ITiS,  a  deep  pan  (Num. 
 xi.  8;  Judg.  vi.  19;  i  Sam.  ii.  14);  T'DilH; 
 nnpi2  [Caldron];  IVS,  a  basin  or  pan  (Exod. 
 XXX.  18;  I  Sam.  ii.  14);  ^rjD;  r\rh^;  f]D  [Dish]; 
 n^nO,  an  iron  pan;  nC^mJO,  a  frying  pan 
 (Lev.  ii.  5-7;  vii.  9);  D'^riDn,  pans  (i  Chron.  ix. 
 31)  ;  J?t^,  a  _;&;-/' or7?fj/^-/zi7^Z' with  which  flesh  was 
 drawn  from  the  pot  (i  Sam.  ii.  13,  14),  and  per- 
 haps the  flesh  separated  from  the  bones  in  the  pot 
 (Mic.  iii.  3) ;  Dn'':],  a  word  of  doubtful  signifi- 
 cancy,  rendered  by  the  LXX.  xi^-^/O'^'roSes  (Lev.  xi. 
 34),  by  the  Syr.  ]  t  "^^  %  A  .  O  place  of  pots,  by 
 Qe.'i&m.wi  range  for  pots,  by  Fiirst  hearth  for  cook- 
 ing, consisting  of  two  rows  of  stones  meeting  at  an 
 angle,  by  Rosenmiiller  a  place  in  the  hearth  under 
 which  was  fire,  and  on  tlie  surface  of  which  were 
 orifices,  ovei  which  pots  were  placed,  and  by  Kno- 
 bel  an  earthenware  stew-pan  (Ravius,  De  re  cibana 
 vet.  Heb.,  Traj.  ad  Rhen.  1768;  Y^^xh^m  Antiqititas 
 Plebr.  p.  38S  ff".;  Jahn  Archaologie,  i  Th.,  Bd.  ii. 
 p.  167  ff".  ;  "Wilkinson,  Ancient  Egyptians,  II.  ch. 
 5-7).-W.  L.  A. 
 
 FOOL.  The  fool  of  Scripture  is  not  an  idiot, 
 but  an  absurd  person  ;  not  one  who  does  not 
 reason  at  all,  but  one  who  reasons  wrong;  also 
 any  one  whose  conduct  is  not  regulated  by  the  dic- 
 tates of  reason  and  religion.  Foolishness,  therefore, 
 is  not  a  condition  of  privation,  but  a  condition  of 
 wrong  action  in  the  intellectual  or  sentient  being, 
 or  in  both  (2  Sam.  xiii.  12,  13;  Ps.  xxxviii.  5). 
 In  the  Proverbs,  however,  '  foolishness '  appears 
 to  be  sometimes  used  for  lack  of  understanding, 
 although  more  generally  for  perverseness  of  will.      I 
 
 FOOT.  Of  the  various  senses  in  which  the  word 
 'foot'  is  used  in  Scripture,  the  following  are  the 
 most  remarkable.  Such  phrases  as  the  'slipping' 
 of  the  foot,  the  'stumbling'  of  the  foot,  'from  head 
 to  foot'  (to  express  the  entire  body),  and  '  foot- 
 steps' (to  express  tendencies,  as  when  we  say  of 
 one  that  he  walks  in  anotlier's  footsteps),  require 
 no  explanation,  being  common  to  most  languages 
 The  extreme  modesty  of  the  Hebrew  language, 
 which  has  perhaps  seldom  been  sufficiently  appre- 
 ciated, dictated  the  use  of  the  word  'feet'  to 
 express  the  parts  and  the  acts  which  it  is  not 
 allowed  to  name.  Hence  such  phrases  as  the 
 '  hair  of  the  feet,'  the  '  water  of  the  feet,'  '  be- 
 tween the  feet,'  'to  open  the  feet,'  'to  cover  the 
 feet,'  all  of  which  are  sufficiently  intelligible,  ex- 
 cept perhaps  the  last,  which  certainly  does  not 
 mean  'going  to  sleep,'  as  some  interpreters  sug- 
 gest, but  'to  dismiss  the  refuse  of  nature.' 
 
 'To  be  under  any  one's  feet'  denotes  the  subjec- 
 tion of  a  subject  to  his  sovereign,  or  of  a  servant  to 
 his  master  (Ps.  viii.  6;  comp.  Heb.  ii.  8  ;  I  Cor. 
 XV.  25)  ;  and  was,  doubtless,  derived  from  the  sjrm- 
 bolical  action  of  conquerors,  who  set  their  feet  upon 
 the  neck  or  body  of  the  chiefs  whom  they  had  van- 
 c[uished,  in  token  of  their  triumph.  This  custom 
 is  expressly  mentioned  in  Scripture  (Josh.  x.  24), 
 and  is  figured  on  the  monuments  of  Egypt,  Persia, 
 and  Rome.     See  an  instance  in  the  cut  No.  215. 
 
 In  like  manner,  '  to  be  at  any  one's  feet,'  is  used 
 for  being  at  the  service  of  any  one,  following  him, 
 or  willingly  receiving  his  instructions  (Judg.  iv.  10). 
 The  passage  (Acts  xxii.  3)  where  Paul  is  described 
 as  being  brought  up  'at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel,'  will 
 appear  still  clearer,  if  we  understand  that,  as  the 
 Jewish  writers  allege,  pupils  actually  did  sit  on  the 
 floor  before,  and  therefore  at  the  feet  of  the  doctors 
 of  the  law,  who  themselves  were  raised  on  an  ele- 
 vated seat. 
 
 '  Lameness  of  feet'  generally  denotes  aflfiiction  or 
 calamity,  as  in  Ps.  xxxv.  15  ;  xxxviii.  18  ;  Jer.  xx. 
 10  ;  Micah  iv.  6,  7;  Zeph.  iii.  19. 
 
 'To  set  one's  foot'  in  a  place  signifies  to  take 
 possession  of  it,  as  in  Deut.  i.  36  ;  xi.  34,  and  else- 
 where. 
 
 '  To  water  with  the  feet'  (Deut.  xi.  10)  implies 
 that  the  soil  was  watered  with  as  much  ease  as  a 
 garden,  in  which  the  small  channels  for  irrigation 
 may  be  turned,  etc.,  with  the  foot.     [Garden.] 
 
 An  elegant  phrase,  borrowed  from  the  feet,  oc- 
 curs in  Gal.  ii.  14,  where  St.  Paul  says,  '  When  I 
 saw  that  they  walked  not  uprightly' — literally,  'not 
 with  a  straight  foot,'  or  '  did  not  foot  it  straightly.' 
 
 Nakedness  of  feet  expressed  mourning  (Ezek. 
 xxiv.  17).  This  must  mean  appearing  abroad  with 
 naked  feet  ;  for  there  is  reason  to  think  that  the 
 Jews  never  used  their  sandals  or  shoes  within  doors. 
 The  modern  Orientals  consider  it  disrespectful  to 
 enter  a  room  without  taking  oft'  the  outer  covering 
 of  their  feet.  It  is  with  them  equivalent  to  un- 
 covering the  head  among  Europeans.  The  prac 
 tice  of  feet-washing  impHes  a  similar  usage  among 
 the  Hebrews  [Feet,  Washing  of].  Uncovering 
 the  feet  was  also  a  mark  of  adoration.  Moses  put 
 off"  his  sandals  to  approach  the  burning  where  the 
 presence  of  God  was  manifested  (Exod.  iii.  5). 
 Among  the  modern  Orientals  it  would  be  regarded 
 the  height  of  profanation  to  enter  a  place  of  wor- 
 ship with  covered  feet.  The  Egyptian  priests  offi- 
 ciated barefoot ;  and  most  commentators  are  of 
 opinion  that  the  Aaronite  priests  seiwed  with  bare 
 
FOOTMEN 
 
 31 
 
 FOREHEAD 
 
 feet  in  the  tabernacle,  as,  according  to  all  the  Jewish 
 writers,  they  did  afterwards  in  the  temple,  and  as 
 the  frequent  washings  of  their  feet  enjoined  by  the 
 law  seem  to  imply.     [Sandals]. 
 
 The  passage,  '  How  beautiful  upon  the  moun- 
 tains are  the  feet  of  him  that  bringeth  glad  tidings, 
 that  publishetli  peace'  (Is.  Hi.  7),  appears  to  signify 
 that,  although  the  feet  of  messengers  and  travellers 
 are  usually  rendered  disagreeable  by  the  soil  and 
 dust  of  the  way,  yet  the  feet  of  these  blessed  mes- 
 sengers seemed,  notwithstanding,  even  beautiful, 
 on  account  of  the  glad  tidings  which  they  bore. 
 
 Respecting  the  '  washing  of  feet,'  see  Ablution 
 and  "Washing.  —J.  K. 
 
 FOOTMEN.     This  is  the  rendering  in  the  A. 
 
 V.  of  two  distinct  Hebrew  words,     i.   D'Pil,  the 
 
 pi.  of  "i^JJI,  from  ?y\,  a/00/,  used  as  a  military  term 
 
 to  designate  the  infantry  of  an  army  (i  Sam.  iv. 
 10  ;  XV.  4  ;  2  Sam.  x.  6  ;  Jer.  xii.  5)  [Army],  or 
 those  simply  who  journeyed  on  foot,  whether  sol- 
 diers or  not  (Exod.  xii.  37  ;  Num.  xi.  21).  In 
 this  latter  case  the  word  probably  indicates  the 
 ma/e  portion  of  the  company,  those  who  walked 
 
 whilst  the  females  rode,  like  the  Arabic  i\s>~p 
 
 rajiil,  a  matt.  Sometimes  the  word  is  joined  with 
 K^'S,  as  in  Judg.  xx.  2. 
 
 2.  Cyi,  pi-   ofp,   the  part,  of  J*^"l,  to  rtm  (i 
 
 Sam.  «xii.  17).  In  this  passage  the  word  desig- 
 nates the  body-guard  or  messengers  of  a  king  ;  and 
 so  also  in  2  Sam.  xv.  i  ;  i  Kings  i.  5  ;  2  Kings  x. 
 25;  xi.  4,  6,  II,  13  [A.  V.  'guard'].  Whether 
 these  Katsim  were  the  same  as  the  Peldhites  in 
 David's  guard  admits  of  doubt ;  at  any  rate  there 
 is  no  direct  evidence  that  they  were.  In  the  book 
 of  Job  }^"l  is  used  to  designate  a  sivift  messenger 
 (ix.  25),  and  hence  a  weaver''s  shuttle  (vii.  6).  In 
 Esther  iii.  13,  15,  viii.  14,  it  is  used  to  designate 
 the  messengers  of  the  Persian  kings. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FORBES,  Patrick,  of  Corse,  in  Aberdeen- 
 shire, was  born  in  15  61,  and  died  in  1635.  He 
 studied  at  Glasgow  and  St.  Andrews  under  the 
 illustrious  Andrew  Melville.  On  the  death  of  his 
 father  he  succeeded  to  the  family  property,  and  in- 
 tending to  lead  the  life  of  a  country  gentleman,  he 
 took  up  his  abode  at  Corse.  Having  been  induced, 
 however,  by  his  friends  to  take  orders,  he  was 
 ordained  in  his  48th  year,  and  became  episcopal 
 minister  of  Keith.  In  161 8  he  was  consecrated 
 bishop  of  Aberdeen,  in  which  office  he  conducted 
 himself  in  such  a  manner  that,  to  use  the  words  of 
 Burnet,  he  'greatly  allayed  and  almost  conquered 
 the  distempered  judgments  and  perverse  and  turbu- 
 lent humours  of  divers  in  his  diocese.'  As  chan- 
 cellor of  King's  College,  he  did  much  to  restore  that 
 ancient  institution  to  vigour.  He  wrote  Exercita- 
 tiones  de  Verbo  Dei ;  Dispittatio  de  versionilms  verna- 
 culis ;  and  a  Commentary  on  the  Rei'elation,  pub- 
 lished in  1613  (2d  ed.  1614),  and  a  translation  of 
 which  into  Latin  appeared  at  Amsterdam  from  the 
 pen  of  his  distinguished  son,  John  Forbes,  in 
 1646.  The  author  follows  the  historical  scheme  of 
 interpreting  the  Apocalypse,  desiring,  '  in  all  sin- 
 gleness and  sound  affection,'  to  '  contribute  his 
 sparkle'  to  the  illustration  of  that  book.  Like  all 
 the  literary  productions  of  his  family,  it  displays 
 learning,  research,  and  ingenuity ;  but  it  cannot  be 
 
 regarded  as   affording   any  very  material  aid   to< 
 wards  the  understanding  of  ihe  book. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FORD  (mayO;  Sept.  5td/3a£ns).  The  ori- 
 ginal word  (from  "I^Vi  to  pass  over,  cross)  signifies 
 simply  a  passage,  and  is  used  both  in  the  singular 
 and  in  the  plural  in  reference  to  the  mountain  pass 
 at  Michmash  between  Seneh  and  Bozez  (i  Sam. 
 xiv.  4,  and  Is.  x.  29).  Most  frequently  it  is  used 
 in  the  plural  to  denote  a  place  of  passage  across  a 
 river  or  ford.  Mention  is  repeatedly  made  of  the 
 fords  of  Jordan  (Josh.  ii.  7  ;  Judg.  iii.  28  ;  xii.  5,  6 
 [passages,  A.  V.]).  These  were  evidently  in  an- 
 cient times  few  in  number,  and  well  known ; 
 though  now  the  Jordan  is  fordable  in  hundreds  of 
 places  (Smith's  Diet,  of  Geogr.,  art.  Palastina,  p. 
 521).  Of  these,  that  named  Bethaliarah  was  pro- 
 bably the  most  noted  [Bethabarah].  Mention  is 
 made  also  of  the  ford  ("l3y?D).of  the  Jabbok  (Gen. 
 xxxii.  22),  and  the  fords  of  Arnon  (Is.  xvi.  2). 
 Why  Fiirst,  Knobel,  and  others,  should  suppose  the 
 word  in  this  last  passage  to  indicate  the  banks  of 
 the  Arnon,  including  tlie  surrounding  country, 
 does  not  appear.  The  nrQyjD  of  the  Euphrates 
 (Jer.  li.  32)  were  probably  the  bridges  across  that 
 river  built  by  Nitocris,  as  the  Euphrates  was  not 
 fordable  at  Babylon  (Hitzig,  Exeg.  Hb.,  in  loc.)  — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 FOREHEAD.  Marks  upon  the  forehead,  for 
 the  purpose  of  distinguishing  the  holy  from  the 
 profane,  are  mentioned  in  Ezek.  ix.  4,  and  again  in 
 Rev.  vii.  3.  These  passages  may  be  explained  by 
 reference  to  the  customs  of  other  nations.  Thus 
 the  Rev.  J.  Maurice,  speaking  of  the  rites  which 
 must  be  performed  by  the  Hindoos  before  they  can 
 enter  the  great  pagoda,  says,  'an  indispensable 
 ceremony  takes  place,  which  can  only  be  performed 
 by  the  hand  of  a  Brahmin  ;  and  that  is,  the  impress- 
 ing of  their  foreheads  with  the  tiliik,  or  mark  of 
 different  colours,  as  they  may  belong  either  to  the 
 sect  of  Veeshnu  or  Seeva.  If  the  temple  be  that  of 
 Veeshnu,  their  foreheads  are  marked  with  a  longi- 
 tudinal line,  and  the  colour  used  is  vermilion.  If 
 it  be  the  temple  of  Seeva,  they  are  marked  with  a 
 parallel  line,  and  the  colour  used  is  turmeric  of 
 saffron.  But  these  two  grand  sects  being  again 
 sub-divided  into  numerous  classes,  both  the  size 
 and  the  shape  of  the  tiliiJz  are  varied  in  proportion 
 to  their  superior  or  inferior  rank.  In  regard  to  the 
 tilnk  I  must  observe,  that  it  was  a  custom,  of  very 
 ancient  date  in  Asia,  to  mark  their  servants.  It  is 
 alluded  to  in  these  words  of  Ezekiel,  where  the 
 Almighty  commands  his  angels  to  '  Go  through  the 
 midst  of  the  city,  and  set  a  mark  on  the  foreheads 
 of  the  men  who  sigh  for  the  abominations  com- 
 mitted in  the  midst  thereof  (be.  4). 
 
 The  classical  idolaters  used  to  consecrate  them- 
 selves to  particular  deities  on  the  same  principle. 
 The  marks  used  on  these  occasions  were  various. 
 Sometimes  they  contained  the  name  of  the  god ; 
 sometimes  his  particular  ensign,  as  the  thunderliolt 
 of  Jupiter,  the  trident  of  Neptune,  the  ivy  of  Bac- 
 chus, etc.  ;  or  else  they  marked  themselves  with 
 some  mystical  number  whereby  the  god  was  de- 
 scribed. Thus,  the  sun,  who  was  signified  by  the 
 number  608,  is  said  to  have  been  represented  by 
 the  two  numeral  letters  XH. 
 
 If  this  analogy  be  admitted,  the  mark  on  the 
 forehead  may  be  taken  to  be  derived  from  the 
 analogous  custom  among  the  heathen  of  bearing  on 
 
FOREHEAD 
 
 32 
 
 FOREST 
 
 their  forehead  the  mark  of  the  gods  whose  votaries 
 they  were.  Some,  however,  would  rather  under- 
 stand the  allusion  to  refer  to  the  custom  of  marking 
 cattle,  and  even  slaves,  with  the  sign  of  ownership. 
 There  has  been  much  speculation  respecting 
 the  mark  itself.     It  was  a  Jewish  no'^ion  that  it 
 
 was  the  letter  J),  because  that  was  the  first  letter 
 of  the  Hebrew  word  min,  '  the  law,'  as  if  it 
 pointed  out  those  who  were  obedient  to  the  sacred 
 code  ;  or  because  it  was  the  first  letter  of  the 
 word  fTTin,  'thou  shalt  live.'  It  is  indeed  al- 
 leged that  the  angel  had  orders  to  write  this  mys- 
 terious letter  with  ink  upon  the  foreheads  of  the 
 righteous,  and  with  blood  upon  the  foreheads  of 
 the  wicked  ;  in  the  one  case  signifying,  '  thou 
 shalt  live,'  and  in  the  other,  'thou  shalt  die.'  The 
 early  Christian  conmientators  readily  adopted  the 
 notion  that  the  mark  was  the  letter  fl,  but  alleged 
 that  its  form  was  that  of  a  cross  in  the  old  Samari- 
 tan alphabet  which  was  used  in  the  time  of  Ezekiel. 
 Indeed  both  Jerome  and  Origen  distinctly  allege 
 that  the  letter  still  bore  that  form  in  their  time: 
 and  although  the  letter  does  not  retain  that  form 
 in  the  present  Samaritan  alphabet,  there  is  cer- 
 tainly evidence  of  its  being  represented  on  old  coins 
 by  the  character  t  ;  and  another  proof  arises  from 
 
 the  fact  of  its  being  represented  by  T  in  the  Greek 
 alphabet,  which  is  derived  from  the  Phoenician. 
 It  having  been  thus  settled  that  the  character 
 marked  on  the  forehead  was  the  letter  n  in  its  an- 
 cient cruciform  shape,  it  was  easy  to  reach  the  con- 
 dusion  that  the  mark  on  the  forehead  denoted 
 salvation  by  the  cross  of  Christ. 
 
 This  is  very  ingenious  ;  but  there  is  no  proof 
 that  the  mark  was  the  letter  D,  or  any  letter  at  all. 
 The  word  employed  is  in  ta?/,  and  means  simply  a 
 mark  or  sign  (not  a  letter),  and  is  so  rendered  in 
 the  Scptuagint,  the  Targum,  and  by  the  best  Jewish 
 commentators.  The  nawe  of  the  letter  n  is,  how- 
 ever, probably  from  this  word,  and  in  this  fact  we 
 have  perhaps  the  source  of  the  conjecture.  It  is, 
 however,  a  curious  circumstance  that  the  analogous 
 
 Arabic  word  ,_5»j"  denotes  a  mark  in  the  foiin  of  a 
 cross,  which  was  branded  on  the  flanks  or  necks  of 
 
 hoi-ses  and  camels  (Freytag's  Lex.  Arab.  s.  v.) 
 See  Hiivernick's  Coinntenlar.  iiber  ILzekiel,  and 
 Gill's  Exposition,  on  Ezek.  ix.  4. — ^J.  K. 
 
 FORESKIN,  the  prepuce,  which  was  taken  off 
 in  circumcision.     [Circumcision.] 
 
 FOREST  is  used  in  the  A.  V.  as  the  equivalent 
 of  three  Hebrew  words.  In  this  article  it  is  pro- 
 posed to  define  the  true  meaning  of  these  several 
 terms,  and  to  identify  and  describe  the  more  im- 
 portant localities  to  which  the  name  forest  is  ap- 
 plied in  Scripture'. 
 
 tjhh.     This  word  appears  to  be  derived  from  a 
 
 Chaldee  root,  K'ln,  '  to  be  entangled,'  and  would 
 therefore  signify  '  a  thicket '  of  trees  or  bushes, 
 such  as  might  afford  a  safe  hiding  place  (cf  I  Sam. 
 xxiii.  15),  and  such  as  is  now  often  seen  in  Pales- 
 tine on  the  sites  of  ruined  cities  (cf  Is.  xvii.  9). 
 Others  think   it  comes  from  ti'in,   'to  cut  into.' 
 
 The  term  occurs  seven  times  in  Scripture,  but  is 
 only  once  rendered yor^j-/ — '  In  \h&  forests  (Sept.  iv 
 rots  dpufj-oh)  he  built  castles  and  towers '  (2  Chron, 
 xxvii.  4).  The  locality  here  referred  to  appears  to 
 be  the  south  of  Judah,  where  the  mountains  were 
 formeily,  and  are  in  places  still,  clothed  with 
 dwarf  oaks  and  tangled  shrubberies. 
 
 DTlQ   is  found   only  three  times  in  the  Bible, 
 
 and  is  once  translated  yi;;rj/.  In  Neh.  ii.  8  Asaph 
 is  called  '  the  keeper  of  the  king's  forest '  (Sept.  toO 
 
 irapadeicrov).   DTID,  like  the  Arabic  /  u».,t)  Jj  and 
 
 the  Greek  TrapaSeiaos,  means  <?;/  enclosed  garden  or 
 plantation  attached  to  a  palace,  intended  either 
 for  ornament  or  for  containing  animals  of  the  chase 
 (Eccles.  ii.  5  ;  Cant.  iv.  13  ;  Xenoph.  Cyrop.  i. 
 3.  12). 
 
 1j;i  and  my.     This  term  occurs  very  often,  and 
 
 is  usually  rendered  forest,  though  occasionally 
 luood  (Deut.  xix.  5).  It  signifies  redundancy  or 
 luxuriance,  such  as  is  seen  in  the  growth  of  forest 
 trees.  It  is  the  name  given  to  all  the  great  prime- 
 val forests  of  Syria,  where  the  stately  trees  grew 
 (Eccl.  ii.  6  ;  Is.  xliv.  14),  and  where  the  wild 
 beasts  had  their  homes  (Jer.  v.  6  ;  Micah  v.  8). 
 Hosea  appears  to  use  it  as  equivalent  to  the  Ara- 
 bic   f:,,  a  rugged  and  desolate  place  (ii.  12),  '  I  will 
 
 destroy  her  vines  and  her  fig-trees  ....  and  I 
 will  make  them  a  forest,  and  the  beasts  of  the 
 field  shall  eat  them.' 
 
 The  following  are  the  most  noted  forests  men- 
 tioned in  the  O.  T. : — 
 
 1.  '  The  y<';YJ'/ of  Hareth  '  ( I  Sam.  xxii.  5).  The 
 Sept.  gives  this  passage  kv  rfj  irdXei  'Apidd,  having 
 doubtless  mistaken  "ly  for  T*)?.  The  precise  loca- 
 lity of  Hareth  is  not  mentioned.  It  was  some- 
 where in  the  south  of  Judah  ;  and  a  comparison 
 with  I  Sam.  xxiii.  15  would  seem  to  indicate  that 
 it  was  near  Ziph,  a  few  miles  south-east  of  He- 
 bron. 
 
 2.  '  The  forest  (wood)  of  Ephraim '  (2  Sam. 
 xviii.  6  ;  Sept.  dpv/x(p).  It  was  here  the  army  of 
 Absalom  was  defeated,  and  he  himself  slain.  It 
 lay  near,  probably  a  little  to  the  west  of,  the  tovim 
 of  Mahanaim,  where  David  had  his  head-quarters, 
 and  where  he  received  the  first  tidings  of  the  fate 
 of  his  son  (xvii.  26  ;  xviii.  24).  Why  a  forest  east 
 of  the  Jordan  should  bear  the  name  Ephraivt  can- 
 not now  be  determined  ;  but  one  thing  is  certain, 
 
FORNICATION 
 
 FORSTER 
 
 in  the  noble  oaks  wliich  still  clothe  tlie  hills  of 
 Gilead  north  of  the  Jabbok,  we  see  the  remnants 
 of  '  the  Wood  of  Ephraim,'  and  the  representa- 
 tives of  that  '  great  oak  '  in  or.e  of  whose  branches 
 Absalom  was  strangely  imprisoned  (xviii.  9  ;  See 
 Handbook  for  Syria  and  Palestine,  pp.  311,  314). 
 
 3.  '  The  fo7-est  of  Carmel.'  This  phrase  is  used 
 in  2  Kings  xix.  23,  and  Is.  xxxvii.  24,  in  reference 
 to  the  same  event,  the  ravages  committed  by  the 
 army  of  Sennacherib  on  the  land  of  Israel — '  I  am 
 come  up  to  the  height  of  the  mountains,  to  the 
 sides  of  Lebanon  ;  and  I  will  cut  down  the  tall 
 cedars  thereof,  and  the  choice  fir-trees  thereof ; 
 and  I  will  enter  into  the  height  of  his  border,  tlie 
 forest  of  his   Carmel.^     The   real  meaning  of  the 
 
 last  clause,  170~i3  "lyS  seems  to  be  its  garden 
 forest;  that  is,  the  garden-hke  cedar  forests  of 
 Lebanon,  to  which  reference  is  made  (See  Keil  on 
 Kings,  and  Alexander  on  Isaiah,  in  loc.) 
 
 4.  '  In  the  forest  in  Arabia '  occurs  in  Is.  xxi. 
 13.  The  phrase  is  remarkable,  because  Arabia  is 
 a  country  singularly  destitute  of  trees.  In  no 
 part  of  it  are  there  any  traces  of  forests.  The 
 Sept.  translates  the  passage  ev  ti2  8pv/x(^  eairepas  ; 
 and  Lowth  and  others  adopt  it  ;  but  the  Masore- 
 tic  reading  is  preferable.  The  meaning  of  the 
 word  "ly  in  this  place  is  probably  the  same  as  that 
 
 of  the  Arabic    r,,  a  ragged  region,  whether  wooded 
 
 or  not. 
 
 5.  'The  house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon'  is 
 several  times  mentioned.  It  appears  to  have  been 
 a  part  of  the  royal  palace  built  by  Solomon  at 
 Jerusalem,  and  used  as  an  armoury  (l  Kings  vii. 
 2,  S(/.;  X.  17-21  ;  2  Chron.  ix.  16-20).  The  house 
 had  '  four  rows  of  cedar  pillars,  with  cedar  beams 
 upon  the  pillars,  and  it  was  covered  with  cedar 
 above  upon  the  beams.'  Hence,  in  all  probabi- 
 lity, its  name  (See  Keil,  in  loc.) 
 
 6.  In  Zech.  xi.  2  there  is  a  singular  expression  : 
 
 '  Howl,  O  ye  oaks  of  Bashan,  for  the  forest  of 
 the  vintage  is  come  down.'  The  Hebrew  "ly 
 "llii'^n  rather  signifies  '  the  fortified  forest '  (Vul- 
 gate, saltits  vnniitits),  and  it  is  probable  that  Jeru- 
 salem is  thus  figuratively  alluded  to,  the  houses 
 of  which  are  close  together  as  the  trees  of  a  forest 
 (cf  Micah  iii.  12.  Henderson  on  the  Minor  Pro- 
 phets, in  loc. )  The  word  forest  is  frequently  used 
 symbolically  to  denote  a  city,  kingdom,  or  govern- 
 ment, as  in  Is.  x.  18  ;  xxxii.  19  ;  Jer.  xxi.  14,  etc. 
 There  are  still  some  remnants  of  ancient  oak 
 forests  on  the  mountains  of  Bashan,  Gilead,  Her- 
 mon,  and  Galilee.  One  solitary  grove  of  cedars 
 exists  on  Lebanon  ;  but  fir  trees  are  there  abund- 
 ant. The  other  forests  of  Palestine  (2  Kings  ii. 
 23  ;  I  Sam.  xiv.  25  ;  vii.  2,  etc.)  have  almost  dis- 
 appeared. Yet  here  and  there  one  meets  with  a 
 solitary  oak  or  terebinth  of  huge  dimensions,  as  at 
 Hebron,  valley  of  Elah,  Shiloh,  and  Dan.  These 
 are  the  last  trees  of  the  forests,  and  serve  to  mdicate 
 what  the  forests  of  Palestine  once  were.  See  Stan- 
 ley, S.  and  P.,  pp.  121,  314,  354,  1st  ed.;  Handbook 
 for  .S.  and  P.,  pp.  70,  31 1,  322,  444,  512,  etc.; 
 Eurckhardt's  Travels  in  Syria ;  Lord  Lindsay's 
 Travels. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 FORETELLING  FUTURE  EVENTS.  [Pro- 
 phecy, vol.  iii.  p.  585.] 
 
 FORNICATION.       In    Scripture   this  word 
 occurs  more  frequently  in  its  symbolical  than  in  its 
 ordinary  sense. 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 In  tlie  Prophets  woman  is  often  made  the  sym- 
 bol of  the  cnurch  or  nation  of  the  Jews,  which  is 
 regarded  as  affianced  to  Jehovah  by  the  covenant 
 on  Mount  Sinai.  In  Ezek.  xvi.  there  is  a  long  de- 
 scription of  that  people  under  the  symbol  of  a 
 female  child,  growing  up  to  the  stature  of  a  woman, 
 and  tlien  wedded  to  Jehovah  by  entering  into  cove- 
 nant with  him.  Therefore  when  the  Israelites  acted 
 contrary  to  that  covenant,  by  forsaking  God  and 
 following  idols,  they  were  very  properly  repre- 
 sented by  the  symbol  of  a  harlot  or  adulteress, 
 offering  herself  to  all  comers  (Is.  i.  21;  Jer.  ii.  20; 
 Ezek.  xvi.;  Hos.  i.  2;  iii.  11).  And  thus  forni- 
 cation, or  adultery  (which  is  fornication  in  a 
 married  state),  became,  and  is  used  as,  the  sym- 
 bol of  idolatry  itself  (Jer.  iii.  8,  9 ;  Ezek.  xvi.  26, 
 29  ;  xxiii.  37).  See  Wemyss's  Clavis  Symb.,  art. 
 '  Woman. ' 
 
 FORSKAL,  Peter,  born  1736,  was  educated 
 at  Gottingen,  and  after  residing  for  some  tinie 
 at  Upsala  and  Stockholm,  became  professor  at 
 Copenhagen.  His  knowledge  of  Oriental  lan- 
 guages, and  his  eminence  as  a  naturalist,  led  to 
 his  being  appointed  by  the  King  of  Denmark  ta 
 be  one  of  those  sent  by  him  in  1761  to  visit  Ara- 
 bia, and  report  on  its  inhabitants,  productions, 
 geography,  etc.  He  died  at  Jerim,  a  town  of 
 Yemen,  nth  July  1763.  His  companion,  H. 
 Niebuhr,  pubUshed  from  his  papers,  after  his 
 death,  his  Descriptiones  aniinalinm,  avium,  etc., 
 qua-  in  itinere  Orient,  observavit,  Kopenh.  1775  5 
 and  Flora  .-Egvft.-Arab.,  etc..  Ibid.  1775.  These 
 works  furnish  valuable  helps  to  the  elucidation  of 
 the  natural  histoiy  of  the  Bible. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FORSTER,  JOHANN,  was  bom  at  Augsburg 
 in  1495,  and  died  at  Wittenberg,  December  8,  1556. 
 He  was  the  intimate  friend  of  Luther,  Melanc- 
 thon,  and  Reuchlin,  and  was  a  warm  advocate  of 
 the  reformed  doctrines.  He  was  Professor  of 
 Hebrew  in  the  University  of  Wittenberg,  and  en- 
 joyed a  high  reputation  as  a  teacher  of  that  lan- 
 guage. He  was  the  author  of  a  Hebrew  lexicon, 
 which  claims  to  be  mentioned  with  i-espect  on  ac- 
 count of  the  service  it  rendered  in  emancipating 
 the  study  of  this  language  from  the  fetters  imposed 
 by  Rabbinical  authority.  A  full  description  of 
 this  work  is  given  by  Orme,  Bibl-Bibl,  and  long 
 extracts  from  the  preface  may  be  found  in  Buddeus, 
 Isagoge,  p.  145 1.  Its  title  is,  Dictionariicm  Hebrai- 
 cjtm  A^ovuni,  non  ex  Rabbinorum  Coinmentis  nee 
 nostratium  Doctorum  stulta  iniitatione  descriptwn 
 sed  ex  ipsis  thesaiiris  Sacroriwt  Bihlioruni,  et  eornn- 
 dem  accnrata  locorum  collatione  dep7-omptnni,  cum 
 phrasihus  Scriptiirae  Veteris  et  Novi  Testamenti  di 
 ligentcr  annotatis  ;  Basil,  1557,  fol. — S.  N. 
 
 FORSTER,  JoHANN,  Professor  of  theology 
 at  Wittenberg,  and  Superintendent-General  of  the 
 county  of  Mansfeld,  and  who  died  in  1613,  was 
 the  author  of  the  following  commentaries  : 
 
 I.  Di  exodus  exodi,  auslegung  des  andern  Buchs 
 Mose  in  hundert  nnd  vierzehn  predigten,  Witt. 
 1614,  fol,  and  1625,  4to.  2.  Commentarius  in 
 Esaiam;  Witteb.,  4to,  1620,  1664,  1699.  3. 
 Co7n>uentariiis  in  pi'ophetam  Jeremiam  in  quo  non 
 ta7itum  adciirata  afialysis  textus  et  conspicua  totius 
 contextus  exegesis  sed  etiam  varius  singulorum  capi- 
 tum  et  omnium  in  iisdem  prophetiantm  nsus  exhi- 
 henfur.  This  last  was  published  by  J.  Deutsch- 
 mann,  1772  and  1799,  4to. — S.  N. 
 
FORTIFICATIONS 
 
 34 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS.  'FENCED  CITIES.' 
 Inventions  for  the  defence  of  men  in  social  life  are 
 older  than  history.     The  walls,  towers,  and  gates 
 
 i-epresented  on  Eg>'ptian  monuments,  though  dat- 
 ing back  to  a  period  of  fifteen  centuries  before  the 
 Christian  era,  bear  evidence  of  an  advanced  state 
 of  fortifications — of  walls  built  of  squared  stones,  or 
 of  squared  timber  judiciously  placed  on  the  summit 
 of  scarped  rocks,  or  within  the  circumference  of  one 
 or  two  wet  ditches,  and  furnished  on  the  summit 
 with  regular  liattlements  to  protect  the  defenders. 
 All  these  are  of  later  invention  than  the  accumula- 
 tiort  of  unhewn  or  rudely  chipped  uncemented 
 stones,  piled  on  each  other  in  the  form  of  walls,  m 
 the  so-called  Cyclopean,  Pelasgian,  Etruscan,  and 
 Celtic  styles,  where  there  are  no  ditches,  or  towers, 
 or  other  gateways  than  mere  openings  occasionally 
 left  between  the  enormous  blocks  employed  in  the 
 work.  As  the  three  first  styles  occur  in  Etruria, 
 they  shew  the  progressive  advance  of  military 
 architecture,  and  may  be  considered  as  more  primi- 
 tive, though  perhaps  posterior  to  the  era  when  the 
 progress  of  Israel,  under  the  guidance  of  Joshua, 
 expelled  several  Canaanitish  tribes,  whose  system 
 of  civilization,  in  common  with  that  of  the  rest  of 
 Western  Asia,  bore  an  Egyptian  type,  and  whose 
 towers  and  battlements  were  remarkably  high,  or 
 rather  were  erected  in  very  elevated  situations. 
 When,  therefore,  the  Israelites  entered  Palestine, 
 we  may  assume  that  the  '  fenced  cities'  they  had  to 
 attack  were,  according  to  their  degree  of  antiquity, 
 
 243.     [a.  Wet  ditches.] 
 
 fortified  with  more  or  less  of  art,  but  all  with  huge 
 stones  in  tlie  lower  walls,  like  the  Etruscan.  In- 
 deed, Asia  Minor,  Armenia,  Syria,  and  even  Jeru- 
 
 salem, still  bear  marks  of  this  most  ancient  system, 
 notwithstanding  that  this  region,  the  connecting 
 link  between  Asia  and  Africa,  between  the  trade  of 
 the  East  and  the  West,  and  between  the  religious 
 feelings  of  the  whole  earth,  has  been  the  common 
 battle-field  of  all  the  great  nations  of  antiquity,  and 
 of  modern  times,  where  ruin  and  desolation,  often- 
 times repeated,  have  been  spread  over  every  habit- 
 
 able place.  Stones  from  six  to  fifty  feet  in  length, 
 with  suitable  proportions,  can  still  be  detected  in 
 many  walls  of  the  cities  of  those  regions,  wherever 
 
 quarries  existed,  from  Nineveh,  ^^-here  beneath  the 
 surface  there  still  remain  ruins  and  walls  of  huge 
 stones,  sculptured  with  bas-reliefs,  originallypainted, 
 to  Babylon  and  Bassorah,  where  bricks,  sun-dried 
 or  baked,  and  stamped  with  letters,  are  yet  found, 
 as  well  as  in  all  the  plains  of  the  rivers  where  that 
 material  alone  could  be  easily  procured.     The  wall, 
 
 %i 
 
 HDin  choma,  was  sometimes  double  or  triple  (2 
 Chron.  xxxii.  5),  successively  girding  a  rocky  ele- 
 vation ;  and  '  building  a  city'  originally  meant  the 
 construction  of  the  wall. 
 
FORTIFICATIONS 
 
 Before  wall-towers,  niPlJD  vtigdaloth,  were  in- 
 troduced, the  gate  of  a  city,  originally  single, 
 formed  a  kind  of  citadel,  and  was  the  strongest 
 part  of  all  the  defences  :  it  was  the  armoury  oflhe 
 community,  and  the  council-house  of  the  authori- 
 ties. '  Sitting  in  the  gate'  was,  and  still  is,  synony- 
 mous with  tlie  possession  of  power,  and  even  now 
 there  is  commonly  in  the  fortified  gate  of  a  royal 
 palace  in  the  East,  on  the  floor  above  the  doorway, 
 a  council-room  with  a  kind  of  balcony,  whence  the 
 sovereign  sometimes  sees  his  people,  and  where  he 
 may  sit  in  judgment.  Hence  the  Turkish  govern- 
 ment is  not  unfrequently  termed  the  Porte,  and  in 
 this  sense  allusion  to  gates  often  occurs  in  the 
 Scriptures.  The  tower,  PinV  tsaroc/i,  was  another 
 fortification  of  the  earliest  date,  being  often  the 
 citadel  or  last  retreat  when  a  city  was  taken  ;  or 
 standing  alone  in  some  naturally  strong  position' 
 was  intended  to  protect  a  frontier,  command  a 
 pass,   or  to  be  a  place  of  refuge  and  deposit  of 
 
 35 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS 
 
 treasure  in  the  mountains,  when  the  plain  should 
 be  no  longer  defensible.  Some  of  these  are 
 figured  among  the  Egyptian  monuments,  and  in  the 
 west  of  England  the  round  towers  of  Launceston, 
 Restormel,  Trematon,  and  Plympton,  shew  that 
 smiilar  means  of  defence  were  once  employed  by 
 the  Celtre  of  this  island,  who  may  have  derived 
 their  knowledge  from  Phrenician  or  Carthaginian 
 traders.  Watch-towers,  HSID  mhpa/t,  and  HT'O 
 tera/i,  DI'T'D  terotk,  used  by  shepherds  all  over 
 Asia,  and  even  now  built  on  eminences  above  some 
 city  m  the  plain,  in  order  to  keep  a  look-out  upon 
 the  distant  country,  were  already  in  use  and  occa- 
 sionally converted  into  places  of  defence  (2  Chron. 
 XXVI.  10 ;  xxvii.  4).  The  gateways  were  closed 
 by  ponderous  folding  doors,  "ly:;*  shaer,  W~\V\y 
 shaenm  the  valves  or  folds,  D^D^T  delefJiim,  being 
 secured  by  wooden  bars  :  both  the  doors  and  bars 
 were  in  after  times  plated  with  metal.  A  ditch,  ^n 
 yn  /w/  where  the  nature  of  the  locality  required 
 1  ,  was  dug  in  front  of  the  rampart,  and  sometimes 
 there  was  an  mner  wall,  with  a  second  ditch  before 
 It.  As  the  experience  of  ages  increased,  hure 
 counter  forts,'  double  buttresses,  or  masses  of 
 sohd  stone  and  masomy  (not  bulwarks*)  were  built 
 in  particular  parts  to  sustain  the  outer  wall,  and 
 atioi-d  space  on  the  summit  to  place  military  engines 
 (2  Chron.  xx\i.  15).  ^      '^ 
 
 As  there  was  no  system  of  constraction  strictly 
 
 *  Bulwark,  from  the  Dutch  bohve?-/;,  anciently 
 called  a  mound,  and  m  the  i6th  century  always 
 relerable  to  bastion.  Buttresses  of  the  kind  above 
 mentioned  still  exist  in  the  Celto-Roman  walls 
 at  Pevensey  in  Sussex. 
 
 so  called,  but  simply  an  application  of  the  means 
 of  defence  to  the  localities,  no  uniformity  of  adan 
 tation  existed,  and,  therefore,  we  refer  to  No  242 
 of  our  illustrations,  representing  some  primeval 
 fable  of  the  rats  besieging  the  cats  in  their  strone 
 tower,  where  regular  hewn  courses  of  stones  in  the 
 walls  shew  skill  in  structure,  and  the  inclined 
 jambs  of  the  door,  with  double  impost,  experience 
 m  obviating  a  too  great  pressure  from  above.     In 
 
 24S. 
 
 the  following  cut  (No.  249),  taken  from  another 
 Egyptian  work,  we  have  a  series  of  towers,  that  in 
 the  middle  being  evidently  the  citadel  or  keep,  and 
 a  gateway  indicating  that  the  wall  is  omitted,  or  is 
 intended  by  the  lines  of  the  oval  surrounding  the 
 whole.     In  No.  242  there  is  a  scaling-ladder.     In 
 JNo.  249  we  see  a  regular  labarum,  the  most  an- 
 cient example  extant  of  this  form  of  ensign,  and 
 the  towers  are  manned  with  armed  soldiers.      In 
 No.  243,  another  towered  fortress,  garrisoned  with 
 troops,  is  surrounded  by  a  double  ditch,  and  ap- 
 proached by  bridges,  both  in  front  and  rear.     This 
 representation  refers  to  a  city  in  Asia,  attacked  by 
 one  of  the  Eg>'ptian  conquering  kings,  anterior  to 
 the  rise  of  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonish   power 
 No    245  IS  taken  from  a  seal,  and  is  a  symbol  of 
 Babylon,  where  the  city,   sustained  by  two  lions, 
 IS  shewn  standing  on  both  sides  of  the  Euphrates, 
 having  an  outer  wall ;  the  inner  rampart  is  flanked 
 by  numerous  elevated  and  embattled  towers.   There 
 IS  another,  but  less  antique  representation  of  Baby- 
 lon, with  Its  lions  and  towers,  etc.  ;  but  the  battle- 
 ments are  squared,  not  pointed,  as  in  the  first.    Not 
 very  different  from  these  doul)le  walls  are  those  re- 
 presented in  the  Egyptian  painting  copied  in  No.  246. 
 I  he  towers  are  here  crowded  \vith  soldiers,  some 
 of  whom,  from  the  form  of  their  shields,  are  ob- 
 viously Egyptians.     These  are  sufiicient  to  give  a 
 
 general  idea  of  cities  fenced  entirely  by  art ;  but  in 
 No.  247  ^^■e  give  the  Tsaroch  tower,  taken  from 
 one  still  extant  in  Persia,  shewing  a  ditch  and  gate- 
 way below  in  the  mound  or  rock,  its  double  outer 
 walls  and  inner  keep,  veiy  like  Launceston  castle. 
 This  was    the   kind    of   citadel    which    defended 
 
FORTUNATUS 
 
 3& 
 
 FOWLING 
 
 >veir  or  'pit,'  from  1X3,   Arab.    .\j. 
 
 p'osses,  and  in  the  mountains  served  for  retreat  in 
 times  of  calamity,  and  for  tlie  security  of  the  royal 
 treasures ;  and  it  was  on  account  of  the  confined 
 s;:ace  within,  and  the  great  elevation  of  the  ram- 
 jiarts,  that  private  houses  frequently  stood  upon 
 their  summit,  as  was  the  case  when  the  harlot 
 Rahab  received  Joshua's  spies  in  Tericho  ( Tosh.  ii. 
 i).-C.  H.  S. 
 
 FORTUNATUS  {^ovpTowdTos),  a  disciple  of 
 Corinth,  of  Roman  birth  or  origin,  as  his  name 
 indicates,  who  visited  Paul  at  Ephesus,  and  re- 
 turned, along  with  Stephanas  and  Achaicus,  in 
 charge  of  that  apostle's  first  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
 thian church  ;  B.C.  59  (i  Cor.  xvi.  17). 
 
 FOUNTAIN.  A  greater  uniformity  in  the 
 ti-anslation  of  Hebrew  terms  would  have  con- 
 tributed much  to  the  clearness  of  many  passages 
 in  the  A.  V.  This  remark  is  especially  applicaljle 
 to  the  word  /ou/i/a/u.  For  example  the  term  "lis 
 or  "^12,  is  rendered  '  fountain '  in  Jer.  vi.  7 ;   '  As  a 
 
 fou7itain  (Sept.   \6.kko%),   casteth   out  her  waters.' 
 
 Its  literal  meaning,  like  its  cognate  Arab.   ^.<,  is 
 
 •to  dig.' 
 
 It  may  have  lixang  water  or  not;  but  it  does  not 
 convey  the  idea  of  water  at  all. 
 
 ypp  is  also  translated  fountain,  in  Eccl.  xii.  6 
 (Sept.  TT-n'yi)).  In  the  two  other  places  where  it  is 
 ased,  the  A.  V.  has  '  spring '  (Is.  xxxv.  7 ;  xlix. 
 10).     It  signifies  a  'source'  or  'spring'  of  water, 
 
 from  the  root  yilj,  Arab.  ^_^\,  'to  gush  or  bub- 
 ble forth.' 
 
 ■)ipD,  from  the  root  -);ip,  '  to  dig  a  well,'  is  ren- 
 dered/('/////rt/;/  in  many  passages,  but  mostly  in  a 
 figurative  sense  ;  as  '  fountain  of  hfe  '  (I'rov.  xiii. 
 14);   'fountain  of  wisdom'  (xviii.  4),  etc. 
 
 V.V  °''  rVP  '^  ''''^  °"b'  proper  equivalent  for  our 
 word  fotiii/ain.  Its  original  signification  is 'eye;' 
 and  so  it  is  used  in  the  vast  majority  of  cases  in 
 Scripture;  but  it  is  also  frequently  employed  to 
 denote  a  fountain  of  living  water  (Gen.  xvi.  7). 
 Its  force  and  meaning  are  unfortunately  sometimes 
 obscured  by  the  rendering  in  the  A.  V.,  'well;' 
 as  in  Exod.  xv.  27;  in  Elim  'were  twelve  7vells  of 
 water;'  that  is,  not  artificial  wells,  but  nat7iral 
 Fountains,  as  still  seen  in  Wady  Ghurundel  (Bart- 
 lett's  Forty  Days  in  tlie  Desert,  p.  43). 
 
 Some  of  the  fountains  of  Palestine  are  of  great 
 size    and  beauty.      All    the  perennial  rivers    and 
 streams  in  the  country  have  their  sources  in  foun 
 tains,  and  draw  comparatively  little  strength  from 
 surface    water.       Such    are    the   fountains    of  the 
 Jordan   at    Dan   and    Ban^as ;    of  tiie    Abana   at 
 Fijeh  and  Zebedany;    of  the  Leontes   at  Chalcis 
 and  Baalbek ;  of  the  Orontes  at  Ain  and  Lebweh  ; 
 of  the  Adonis  at  Af  ka,  etc.     Palestine  is  a  country 
 of  mountains  and  hills;  and  it  abounds  in  foun-  • 
 tains  of  lesser  note.     The  murmur  of  their  waters 
 is  heard  in  every  dell;  and  the  luxuriant  foliage  | 
 which   surrounds    them   is   seen   on   every   plain. 
 They  have  given  names  to  many  of  its  cities  and 
 villages;  as  j5'«-shemesli,  and  En-gtd\,  and   En-  \ 
 tappuah,   and   Enon.      Advantage  was    taken  of 
 these  fountains  to  supply  some  of  the  great  cities 
 of  Palestine  with  water.     An  aqueduct  some  ten 
 miles  in  length  brought  water  to  Jerusalem  from 
 a  fountain  near  Solomon's  Pools.     A  much  longer  ■ 
 
 one  conveyed  an  abundant  supply  to  Damascus, 
 from  the  great  fountain  at  Fijeh.  But  perhaps 
 the  most  remarkable  works  of  this  kind  are  at 
 Tyre,  where  several  copious  springs  were  sur- 
 rounded with  massive  walls,  so  as  to  raise  the 
 vv'ater  to  a  sufficient  height.  Aqueducts,  sup- 
 ported on  arches,  then  conveyed  it  to  the  city, 
 (See   Haiuibook  for  S.    and   P.,    pp.    142,    555, 
 
 390)- 
 
 Palestine  can  also  boast  of  several  warm  foun- 
 tains, famous  from  time  immemorial  for  their 
 medicinal  properties.  They  are  confined  to  the 
 volcanic  valley  of  the  Jordan.  The  most  celebrated 
 are  those  of  Tiberias  (or  Hammath,  Josh.  xix.  35), 
 Amatlia,  near  the  ruins  of  Gadara,  and  Callirhoe, 
 on  the  north-eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.  They 
 are  all  strongly  impregnated  with  sulphur.  The 
 temperature  of  that  of  Tiberias  is  144°  Fahr. 
 {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  pp.  310,  320,  423;  Plin. 
 Hist.  N'at.,  V.  15  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  2.  3 ;  Bell, 
 jud.  i.  33.  5;  Lightfoot,  0pp.  ii.  224). 
 
 Fountains  are  much  more  rare  on  the  eastern 
 side  of  the  Jordan,  than  on  the  western.  There 
 are  a  few  among  the  mountains  of  Gilead ;  but  in 
 the  great  plateaus  of  Moab  on  the  south,  and 
 Bashan  on  the  north,  they  are  almost  unknown. 
 This  arises  in  part  from  the  physical  structure  of 
 the  country,  and  in  part  from  the  dryness  of  the 
 climate.  Huge  cisterns  and  tanks  were  constructed 
 to  supply  the  want  of  fountains. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 FOWL.     [Bird;  Cock.] 
 
 FOWLING.  The  act  of  taking  birds  by  means 
 of  nets,  snares,  decoys,  etc.,  is  frequently  alluded 
 to  in  Scripture,  mostly  in  a  figurative  and  moral 
 way.  Birds  of  various  kinds  abound,  and  no 
 doubt  abounded,  in  ancient  times,  in  Palestine. 
 Canon  Stanley  speaks  of  '  countless  birds  of  all 
 kinds,  aquatic  fowls  by  the  lake  side,  partridges 
 and  pigeons  hovering,  as  on  the  Nile  bank,  over 
 the  rich  plains  of  Genesareth'  {Sinai  and  Palestine, 
 p.  427).  The  capture  of  these  for  the  table  or 
 other  uses,  would,  we  might  expect,  form  the  em- 
 ployment of  many  persons,  and  lead  to  the  adop- 
 tion of  various  methods  to  effect  it.      Hence 
 
 We  read  of  the  ^  snare,^  DS,  Ps.  xci.  3  ;  cxxiv. 
 
 7  ;  Hos.  ix.  8  :  and  of  the  '  net,'  flti'"),  Prov.  i.  17; 
 
 Hos.  vii.    II:    'of  the   fowler,'   tipii    or   t^pV  = 
 
 snarer.  In  Hos.  v.  I,  both  net  and  snare  are 
 mentioned  together.     The  mokesh  (C'piJD)  is  used 
 
 synonymously  with  the  pack,  Amos  iii.  5-  This 
 was  employed  for  taking  either  beasts  or  birds.  It 
 was  a  trap  set  in  the  path,  Prov.  vii.  23  ;  xxii.  5  : 
 or  hidden  on  or  in  the  ground,  Ps.  cxl.  6  ;  cxlii.  4. 
 '  The  form  of  this  springe,  or  trap  net,  apiiears  from 
 two  passages,  Amos  iii.  5,  and  Ps.  Ixix.  23.  It  was 
 in  two  parts,  which,  when  set,  were  spread  out 
 upon  the  ground,  and  slightly  fastened  with  a 
 stick  (trap-stick),  so  that  as  soon  as  a  bird  or  J| 
 beast  touched  the  stick,  the  parts  flew  up  and  in-  •■ 
 closed  the  bird  in  the  net,  or  caught  the  foot  of  the 
 animal.  Thus  Amos  iii.  5,  '  Doth  a  bird  fall  into  a 
 snare  upon  the  ground,  when  there  is  no  trap-stick 
 for  her  ?  doth  the  snare  S]3ring  from  the  ground 
 and  take  nothing  at  all  ?  i.  e. ,  does  anything  hap- 
 pen without  a  cause?'  [But  here  the  Mokesh, 
 rendered  '  trap -stick,'  is  synonymous  with  the 
 pack,  or  snare.]     Ps.  Ixix.  23,  'Let  their  table  be- 
 
FOWLING  i 
 
 fore  tliem  become  a  snare ; '  here  the  \r\pU  is  the 
 
 Oriental  cloth  or  leather  spread  upon  the  ground 
 like  a  net  (Robinson's  Ges.)     The  riti^l  was  a  net 
 
 spread  or  cast  over  the  bird  or  beast  to  be  caught. 
 '  Afy  fid  also  ivill  I  spread  upon  him,  Ezek.  xii.  13  ; 
 see  also  Ezek.  xvii.  20 ;  xix.  8  ;  xxxii.  3.  Con- 
 siderable dexterity  must  have  been  required  in  the 
 management  of  it. 
 
 There  seems  to  be  a  reference  to  the  decoy  in 
 Jer.  V.  27 — '  As  a  cage  full  of  birds,  so  are  their 
 houses  of  deceit ' — tame  birds  being  placed  in  the 
 trap  cage  to  entice  the  wild  which  were  caught  by 
 this  stratagem. 
 
 We  do  not  read  of  any  other  mode  of  fowling 
 spoken  of,  or  referred  to,  in  the  Bible  ;  yet,  most 
 probably,  the  Egyptian  method,  described  by 
 Wilkinson,  was  not  only  known,  but  employed  by 
 fowlers  in  Palestine  : — '  Fowling  was  one  of  the 
 great  amusements  of  all  classes.  Those  who  fol- 
 lowed this  amusement  for  their  livelihood  used  nets 
 and  traps  ;  but  the  amateur  sportsman  pursued  his 
 game  in  the  thickets,  and  felled  them  with  the 
 throw-stick,  priding  himself  on  his  dexterity  in  its 
 use.  The  bow  was  not  employed  for  this  purpose, 
 nor  was  the  sling  adopted,  except  by  gardeners  and 
 peasants,  to  friglilen  the  birds  from  the  vineyards 
 and  fields.  The  throw-stick  was  made  of  heavy 
 wood,  and  flat,  so  as  to  offer  little  resistance  to  the 
 air  in  its  flight ;  and  the  distance  to  which  an  ex- 
 pert arm  could  throw  it  was  considerable  ;  though 
 they  always  endeavoured  to  approach  the  birds  as 
 near  as  possible,  under  cover  of  the  bushes  and 
 reeds.  It  was  from  one  foot  and  a  quarter  to  two 
 feet  in  length,  and  about  one  and  a  half  inch  in 
 breadth,  slightly  curved  at  the  upper  end  ;  but  in 
 no  instance  had  it  the  round  shape  and  flight  of  the 
 Australian  Boomerang. 
 
 '  On  their  fowling  excursions  they  usually  pro- 
 ceeded with  a  party  of  friends  and  attendants, 
 sometimes  accompanied  by  the  members  of  their 
 family,  and  even  by  their  young  children,  to  the 
 jungles  and  thickets  of  the  marsh-lands,  or  to  the 
 lakes  of  their  own  grounds,  which,  especially  dur- 
 ing the  inundation,  abounded  with  fowl ;  and 
 seated  in  punts  made  of  the  papyrus,  they  glided, 
 without  disturbing  the  birds,  amidst  the  lofty  reeds 
 that  grow  in  the  water,  and  masked  their  approach. 
 The  attendants  collected  the  game  as  it 
 fell,  and  one  of  them  was  always  ready  to  hand  a 
 fresh  stick  to  the  chasseur  as  soon  as  he  had 
 thrown.  They  frequently  took  with  them  a  decoy- 
 bird,  and,  in  order  to  keep  it  to  its  post,  a  female 
 was  selected,  whose  nest,  containing  eggs,  was  de- 
 posited in  the  boat' 
 
 '  A  favourite  cat  sometimes  attended  them  on 
 these  occasions,  and  perfonued  the  part  of  a  re- 
 triever, amidst  the  thickets  on  the  bank'  {Pop. 
 Acct.  of  tlie  Ancient  Egyptians,  i.  234-8). 
 
 A  word  must  be  added  on  a  Mosaic  regulation 
 as  to  birds.  In  Deut.  .xxii.  6,  7,  whoever  finds  a 
 bird's  nest  is  permitted  to  take  the  eggs,  or  the 
 young,  but  forbidden  to  take  the  dam  with  them. 
 This  law  breathes  a  spirit  of  wisdom  and  benevo- 
 lence ;  being  obviously  designed  to  prevent  the 
 extermination  of  any  species  of  birds,  which  would 
 be  an  injury  in  a  country  where  annoying  and  de- 
 structive insects  abound  ;  and,  at  the  same  time, 
 supplying  a  check  to  their  undue  increase,  which 
 would  itself  prove  an  evil, — a  regulation  which  ig- 
 norance and  stupid  prejudice  have  often  overlooked 
 
 ■  FRANKFURTER 
 
 or  violated,  with  the  natural  disastrous  results  (See 
 Kitto's  Pict.  Bib.  in  loc.)— I.  J. 
 
 FOX.    [Shual.] 
 
 FRANCKE,  Augustus  Hermann,  a  zealous 
 philanthropist  and  learned  theologian,  founder  ol 
 the  celebrated  Oiphan  House  at  Halle,  was  born 
 at  Llibeck,  1663,  and  carefully  and  religiously  edu- 
 cated by  his  parents.  At  Gotha  he  passed  through 
 tlie  gymnasium,  and  in  1679  visited  the  university 
 of  Erfurt,  where  he  applied  himself  to  the  study  of 
 Hebrew.  Six  months  afterwards  he  visited  the 
 university  of  Kiel,  prosecuting  with  renewed  vigour 
 his  favourite  studies.  At  Hamburgh  he  enjoyed 
 for  two  months  the  instructions  of  the  celebrated 
 Hebraeist,  Esra  Edzardi,  who  urged  him  to  read 
 the  Hebrew  original  in  course  ;  in  compliance  with 
 which  advice  he  read  through  the  Hebrew  Bible 
 seven  times  in  one  year.  In  1684  he  accompanied, 
 as  companion  and  Hebrew  teacher,  a  young  man 
 to  the  university  of  Leipsic,  where  he  had  further 
 opportunity  of  enlarging  his  stores  of  knowledge, 
 and  acquired  the  Italian  and  Rabbinic  languages. 
 Soon  afterwards  he  enjoyed  the  privilege  of  receiv- 
 ing the  instructions  of  C.  H.  Sandhagen  in  Scrip- 
 ture interpretation  at  Liineberg,  where  his  mind 
 passed  through  a  deeper  spiritual  change  than  he 
 had  before  experienced  ;  religion  gained  an  entire 
 influence  over  him,  and  he  consecrated  himseli 
 wholly  to  God.  On  his  return  to  Leipsic,  he  lec- 
 tured on  the  epistles  of  Paul  with  distinguished 
 success,  until  envy  raised  an  outcry  against  him, 
 and  his  lectures  were  prohibited  by  the  Theological 
 Faculty,  1690.  The  same  year  he  was  appointed 
 to  the  Diaconate  of  the  Augustine  Church  at 
 Erfurt,  and  by  his  earnest,  fervent  discourses,  at- 
 tracted crowds,  but  envy  and  malice  again  prevailed. 
 The  enemies  of  truth  clamoured  against  him,  and 
 he  was  ordered  by  an  Electoral  rescript  to  quit  the 
 city.  In  1 69 1  he  was  appointed  Professor  of  the 
 Greek  and  Oriental  languages  in  the  university  of 
 Halle,  to  which  the  pastorate  of  the  Church  of  St. 
 George,  in  a  suburb  of  Halle,  was  added.  In  169S 
 he  became  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  same  uni- 
 versity, in  which  office  he  continued  till  his  death 
 in  1727,  in  the  64th  year  of  his  age.  His  labours 
 as  pastor,  professor,  and  philanthropist,  were  in- 
 cessant, and  at  length  wore  him  out.  But,  esti- 
 mated by  his  works  in  his  Master's  service,  his  life 
 was  a  long  one.  His  principal  productions  in  the 
 department  of  biblical  science  are  as  follow  : — I. 
 Mannductio  ad  Lectionem  Scriptune  Sacra:,  Halae, 
 1693,  etc.,  translated  into  English  by  Mr.  Jacques 
 under  the  title  of,  A  guide  to  the  reading  of  the 
 Holy  Scriptu7-es,  London,  1813.  2.  Prcrlectiones 
 HermeneuticcB  ad  viam  dextre  itidagattdi  et  expon- 
 endi  Sensuni  Scriptures  Sacra:,  etc.,  Halae,  1717- 
 3.  Commentatio  de  Scopo  Libroi'um  Veteris  et  P/ovi 
 Testamenii,  Halae,  1724.  4.  Christiis  S.  Scrip- 
 turcB  Nucleus,  etc.,  translated  from  the  German 
 into  Latin  by  H.  Grischovius,  Halae,  1 724.  5. 
 Introductio  ad  Lectionem  Propheta7-um,  i.  Gene- 
 ralis ;  II.  Specialis  ad  Lectionem  JoncB  qua  in  reli- 
 quis  exemplo  esse  possit :  Utrdqtie  directd  ad  Co>?i- 
 pa?-andum  i  prophetis  agnitionem  Jesu  Christi, 
 Halae,  1724. — I.  J. 
 
 FRANKFURTER,  Moses  b.  Simeon.  This 
 distinguished  Hebraist  flourished  between  170c 
 and  1762,  was  judge  of  the  Jewish  community, 
 and  a  celebrated  typographer  in  Amsterdam,  and 
 
FRANKFURTER 
 
 88 
 
 FRENCH  VERSIONS 
 
 wrote  glosses  on  the  Pentateuch,  which  he  called 
 njtip  nn^D,  a  small  offering  ;  on  Joshua,  Judges, 
 I  and  2  Samuel,  I  and  2  Kings,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
 Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  and  Jonah,  which  he  de- 
 nominated n^nj  nnJO,  «  great  offermg;  and  on 
 the  Psalms,  Song  of  Songs,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
 Chronicles,  which  he  called  liyH  Jin^D,  an  even- 
 ing offering.  The  work,  however,  which  immortal- 
 ized Frankfurter's  name,  is  The  Great  Rabbinic  Bible, 
 over  which  he  spent  the  greater  part  of  his  life,  and 
 which  he  edited  with  the  utmost  care.  The  scholar- 
 ship, the  perseverance,  and  the  fortune  required  to 
 edit  this  work,  and  its  great  utility  to  the  Biblical 
 student,  may  be  judged  of  from  the  following  analy- 
 sis of  its  contents.     This  gigantic  work  is  called 
 
 \Wy^  n^Tlp,  the  Congregation  of  Moses,  and  was 
 published  in  Amsterdam  in  1724-1727,  four  volumes 
 royal  folio. 
 
 The  first  volume,  embracing  the  Pentateuch 
 (min),  begins  with  an  Index  Remm,  and  a  Trea- 
 tise on  the  design  of  the  Law  by  Obadiah  Sephorno  ; 
 a  general  Introduction  ;  an  Index  of  all  the  chap- 
 ters, and  another  of  all  the  sections  of  the  O.  T. , 
 giving  the  commencement  of  the  verses  ;  Intro- 
 ductions by  Chaskuni,  Levi  b.  Gershon,  Sephorno, 
 and  Ibn  Ezra.  Then  follow  the  five  books  of 
 Moses  in  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  by  Onkelos,  in 
 two  parallel  columns,  surrounded  by  the  Massora, 
 Commentaries  of  Rashi,  Ibn  Ezra,  Levi  b.  Ger- 
 shon, Jacob  b.  Asher  [Baal  Ha-Turim),  Chas- 
 kuni, Jacob  de  Illescas  (Dyj  """ItON),  Sephorno, 
 and  Frankfurter  (HJ^i'D  fDIp),  the  editor.  _ 
 
 The  second  volume,  comprising  the  earlier  Pro- 
 phets (D''J1K^N"1  D''X''33),  i.  e.,  Joshua,  Judges, 
 Samuel,  and  Kings,  begins  with  Prefaces  of  David 
 Kimchi,  Levi  b.  Gershon,  Samuel  b.  Laniado, 
 Frankfurter,  etc.  Whereupon  follow  the  Hebrew 
 and  the  Chaldee,  with  Commentaries  by  Rashi, 
 D.  Kimchi,   Levi  b.  Gershon,  Samuel  b.  Laniado 
 
 ("Ip''  'h'2).  Frankfurter  (HJ^p  iinjO),  and  notes  on 
 Judges  and  Samuel  by  Isaiah  de  Trani.  At  the 
 end  of  Judges  (p.  97,  etc.),  are  added  the  notes  of 
 
 Aaron  b.  Chajim,  called  J"l"inX  3?,  the  heart  of 
 Aajvti,  on  Joshua  and  Judges  ;  and  at  the  end  of 
 Samuel  (p.  278,  etc.),  are  Meier  Arama's  notes  on 
 Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  called  □'•Dim  D^"n^?,  light  and 
 perfection. 
 
 The  third  voh(7ne,  comprising  the  later  Prophets 
 (D'^JIIDi^  n''X''2:),  i.e.,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel, 
 and  the  twelve  minor  Prophets,  begins  with  Pre- 
 faces by  a  grandson  of  Laniado,  Frankfurter,  and 
 Be-Rab,  then  follow  the  Plebrew  text  and  the 
 Chaldee  Paraphrase,  surrounded  by  the  Massora 
 and  the  Commentaries  of  Rashi  and  D.  Kimchi, 
 which  extend  over  all  the  books  in  this  volume  ;  of 
 Ibn  Ezra  on  Isaiah  and  the  minor  Prophets  ;  Be- 
 Rab  (D''JtJ'1K'  ''D'p?)  fn  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  the 
 minor  Prophets  ;  Meier  Arama  (D'Oim  CIIN)  on 
 
 Isaiah  and  Jeremiah ;  Samuel  Laniado  (|S  Pv3)  on 
 
 Isaiah  ;  Frankfurter  (nPIIJ  iinjO)  on  Isaiah,  Jere- 
 miah, Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  and  Jonah  ;  Almosino 
 on  Hosea,  Habakkuk,  and  Micah  ;  and  Sephorno 
 on  Jonah,  Habakkuk,  and  Zechariah. 
 
 The  fourth  volume,  comprising  the  Hagiographa 
 (D"'3'in3),  i.e.,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job,  the  Five 
 Megilloth,  Uaniel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Chro- 
 nicles, begins  with  Prefaces  of  Ibn  Ezra,  Frank- 
 furter, Ibn  Jachja,  and  then  follow  the   Hebrew 
 
 text  and  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase,  with  Comment 
 aries  of  (l.)  Rashi  on  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job; 
 Song  of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes, 
 Esther,  Daniel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Chronicles ; 
 (2.)  Ibn  Ezra  on  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job,  Song 
 of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  Esther, 
 Daniel,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  ;  (3.)  Ibn  Jachja  on 
 the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job,  Song  of  Songs,  Ruth, 
 Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  Esther,  Daniel,  Ezra, 
 Nehemiah,  and  Chronicles  ;  (4.)  Sephorno  on  the 
 Psalms,  Job,  Song  of  Songs,  and  Ecclesiastes ; 
 (5.)  Jaabez  ("1011  Tr\\T\)  on  the  Psalms,  Job,  Song 
 of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  Daniel, 
 Ezra,  Nehemiah,  Chronicles  ;  (6.)  Levi  b.  Gershon 
 on  Proverbs,  Job,  Song  of  Songs,  Ruth,  Esther, 
 Daniel;  (7.)  Franlffurter  (mj?  nnJO)  on  Pro- 
 verbs, Ruth,  Esther,  and  Chronicles  ;  (8.)  D. 
 Kimchi  on  Daniel  and  Chronicles  ;  (9.)  Menachem 
 Ha-Meieri  on  Proverbs  ;  (10.)  David  Ibn  fachja 
 (^pJ"l  3p)  on  Proverbs;  (il.)  Nachmanides  on 
 Proverbs;  (12.)  Farissol  on  Job;  (13.)  Simon 
 Diiran  (JOQtJ'D  DITlJ^)  on  Job;  (14.)  Meier  Arama 
 on  the  Song  of  Songs;  (15.)  Saadia  on  Daniel; 
 and  (16.)  Samuel  Alepo  on  Psalms  cxix. -cxxxiv. 
 
 Whereupon  follow  the  Great  Massora,  the  various 
 readings  of  the  Eastern  and  Western  Codd. ,  a  Trea- 
 tise upon  the  Accents,  and  the  differences  between 
 Ben-Asher  and  Ben-Naphthali.  This  work,  as  will 
 be  seen  from  its  contents,  constitutes  in  itself  a 
 libraiy  of  Biblical  literature  and  exegesis,  and  is  in- 
 dispensable to  the  historico  -  critical  expositor. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 FRANKINCENSE.     [Lebonah.] 
 
 FRANZ  or  FRANZIUS,  Wolfgang,  a  theo- 
 logian of  the  1 6th  centuiy,  was  born  at  Plauen  in 
 Saxony,  1564.  He  studied  at  Frankfurt  on  the 
 Oder,  attended  the  university  of  Wittenberg  for 
 several  years,  where  he  took  his  degrees,  and  was 
 appointed  professor  of  history  there,  1598.  In 
 1 601  he  became  superintendent  at  Kempsberg. 
 He  returned  to  Wittenberg  in  1605,  was  elected 
 professor  of  theology,  and  died  there  of  apoplexy, 
 1620.  He  was  a  voluminous  writer  on  tlieolog)'. 
 Among  other  books,  he  wrote  Tractatus  thcologicus 
 de  interpretatione  S.  S.  Scriptnraruin  fnaxit?ie  legi- 
 tima,  Wittenberg,  1634,  4to  ;  Animaliiim  historia 
 sacra,  1612,  8vo,  Wittenberg,  a  work  often  re- 
 printed, and  very  valuable.  The  best  edition  is 
 that  of  Frankfurt,  1 712,  five  parts  in  four  vols. 
 4to.  This  contains  Cyprian's  continuation.  The 
 work  was  translated  into  English  (1670),  as  well 
 as  into  German  and  Dutch. — S.  D. 
 
 ERASER,  James.  Born  1700,  he  became 
 eventually  minister  of  Alness,  and  died  1769.  His 
 work  appeared  under  the  title  of  77ie  Scripture 
 Doctrine  of  Sanctification,  but  is  in  truth  a  '  Criti- 
 cal Explication  and  Paraphrase  of  the  sixth  and 
 seventh  chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
 and  the  four  first  verses  of  the  eighth  chapter.' 
 The  work  was  edited,  for  it  appeared  posthumously, 
 by  Dr.  Erskine  of  Edinburgh,  who  spoke  of  Era- 
 ser, and  with  justice,  '  as  a  learned  and  ingenious 
 author.'  The  commentary  is  marked  by  close  and 
 careful  reasoning.  He  holds  and  argues  that  chap, 
 vii.  14-25  is  descriptive,  not  of  a  state  of  unregene- 
 racy,  but  of  a  state  of  grace.  It  is  perhaps  the 
 ablest  argument  in  support  of  this  view. — W.  H.  G. 
 
 FRENCH  VERSIONS.  There  is  every  rea. 
 son  to  believe  that  researches,  judiciously  and  per. 
 
FRENCH  VERSIONS 
 
 39 
 
 FRENCH  VERSIONS 
 
 severingly  directed,  would  be  rewarded  by  the 
 discovery  of  a  large  amount  of  activity  expended  on 
 the  translation  of  the  Scriptures  into  the  language 
 of  the  people  of  France  from  a  very  early  period. 
 What  is  really  known,  however,  on  this  subject 
 anterior  to  the  period  of  the  Reformation,  is  very 
 partial,  and  in  some  instances  of  doubtful  authen- 
 ticity. We  may  gather  from  the  conciliar  edicts 
 prohibiting  the  use  of  translations  of  the  sacred 
 books  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  that  such  existed  as 
 early  as  the  beginning  of  the  13th  century  (Ar/a 
 Concil.  Tolas.  1229,  c.  14,  ap.  Mansi  xxiii.  197  ; 
 comp.  those  also  of  the  Synod  of  Tarragona  in 
 1234,  and  Beziers  in  1246),  and  even  as  early  as 
 1 199,  Pope  Innocent  III.  had  heard  that  'evan- 
 gelia,  epislolas  Pauli,  moralia  Job,  et  plures  alios 
 libros  in  Gallico  sermone,'  were  in  use  among  the 
 Albigenses  {Epist.,  ed.  Baluz.  i.  432);  but  we  are 
 very  much  in  the  dark  as  to  the  character  of  these 
 translations,  or  the  source  whence  they  emanated. 
 Writers  on  the  Waldensian  Church  assert  the  exist- 
 ence of  translations  in  the  Romance  dialect  pos- 
 sessed by  that  church  anterior  to  the  I2th  century 
 ^'Monastier,  Histoiy  of  the  Vaiidois,  p.  73  ;  Hen- 
 derson, The  Vatidois,  p.  248  ;  Gilly,  The  Ro- 
 maiint  Version  of  the  Gosfel  of  St.  Joint,  etc., 
 Lond.  1848)  ;  but  the  evidence  on  which  this  is 
 advanced  does  not  stand  the  test  of  a  thorough 
 scrutiny.  In  the  N'obla  Leyezon,  which  contains 
 the  religious  belief  of  that  church,  there  are  several 
 citations  of  Scripture,  but  there  is  no  evidence  that 
 these  are  made  from  any  extant  version  ;  and  at 
 any  rate  this  work  cannot  be  placed  earlier  than 
 the  end  of  the  12th  or  beginning  of  the  13th  cen- 
 tury (Hallam,  Hist,  of  Literature,  i.  26).  Walter 
 de  Mapes  says,  that,  during  the  Pontificate  of 
 Alexander  III.  (1159-I181),  he  was  present  at  a 
 synod  at  Rome  where  certain  Waldensians  pre- 
 sented to  the  Pope  a  book  written  in  the  Gallic 
 tongue,  'in  quo  textus  et  glossa  Psalterii  pluri- 
 morumque  legis  utriusque  librorum  continebatur' 
 (^De  Ntigis  CiiriaL,  p.  64,  Camden  Society  ed.  ; 
 Usher,  De  Chr.  Eccles.  .Success.,  0pp.  ed.  Elring- 
 ton,  ii.  244)  ;  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  part 
 of  this  was  in  the  vernacular  except  the  gloss, 
 which  in  a  translation  would  be  of  little  use.  That 
 Peter  Valdo  himself  possessed  a  vernacular  transla- 
 tion of  the  Scriptures  has  been  asserted  ;  but  when 
 examined  th.s  tradition  resolves  itself  into  the  fact 
 that  he  requested  a  grammarian,  Stephanus  de  Ansa, 
 to  supply  him  with  a  translation  of  the  Gospels  and 
 other  books  of  the  Bible,  '  et  auctoritates  sanc- 
 torum ;'  but  whether  it  was  a  '  textus  cum  glossa,' 
 or  '  sententias  per  titulos  congregatas,'  the  wit- 
 nesses leave  uncertain.  From  what  Reiner  says 
 (ap.  Usher,  I.e.),  'Cum  esset  [Valdus]  aliquan- 
 tuhim  literatus,  Novi  Testamenti  textum  docuit  eos 
 vulgariter,'  the  presumption  is  that  no  vernacular 
 version  existed,  laut  that  Valdo  in  preaching  trans- 
 lated for  his  hearers,  i.e.,  probably  gave  them  the 
 glosses  which  Stephanus  had  collected  for  him. 
 Trithemius,  however,  expressly  says,  '  libros  sacrse 
 Scripturos  maxime  Novi  Testamenti  sibi  in  linguam 
 Gallicam  fecit  transferri'  {Annal.  Hirsaugiens.  ann. 
 1160,  voL  i.  p.  442).  The  MSS.  of  the  Walden- 
 sian versions  preserved  at  Ziirich,  Grenoble,  Dublin, 
 and  Paris,  are  not  of  an  earlier  date  than  the  1 6th 
 century,  nor  can  the  version  they  present  claim  any 
 high  antiquity.  That  vernacular  versions  of  the 
 N.  T. ,  and  portions  of  the  Old,  existed  among  the 
 so-called  Sectaries  of  the  south  of  France  from  an 
 
 early  period  does  not  admit  of  doubt ;  but  we  are 
 not  in  circumstances  to  say  anything  definite  con- 
 cerning them.  Dr.  Gilly  (p.  xxii.)  has  called 
 attention  to  the  curious  fact  that  an  English  eccle- 
 siastic in  1345  disposed  by  will  of  a  copy  of 
 the  Romance  Bible,  '  Bibulam  (Bibliam?)  in  Ro- 
 manam  linguam  translatam'  {Publications  of  Sjir- 
 tees  Soc.  for  1836,  vol.  ii.  p.  10).  In  the  library  of 
 the  Academic  des  Arts  at  Lyons,  there  is  a  codex 
 containing  the  N.  T.  in  Romance,  to  which  is  ap- 
 pended the  liturgy  of  the  Cathari,  indicating  its 
 origin  among  them  (Gieseler,  Church  Hist.  iii.  409). 
 In  the  north  of  France  also  we  have  some  clear 
 traces  of  vernacular  copies  of  the  Scriptures. 
 A  translation  of  the  four  books  of  Kings  in  the 
 dialect  of  the  north  of  France  {langue  d'  Oil)  has 
 been  published  (Paris  1841,  4to)  by  M.  Leroux  de 
 Lincy,  who  attributes  it  to  the  12th  century.  M. 
 Reuss  has  examined  and  described  in  the  Rruue  dt 
 Strasbourg,  iv.  i  ff.,  a  codex  preserved  in  the  library 
 of  that  city,  which  contains  in  the  same  dialect, 
 somewhat  varied,  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua,  and 
 Judges,  with  the  Glossa  ordinaria  et  iiiterlinearis 
 [Glosses],  and  the  rest  of  the  historical  books  of 
 the  O.  T.  with  the  Psalter  without  the  gloss.  As 
 respects  the  translation  said  to  have  been  executed, 
 cir.  125c,  for  Saint  Lewis,  that  of  Du  Vignier  (cir. 
 1340),  that  of  De  Sy  (1350),  and  that  of  Vaudetar 
 (1372),  we  can  say  nothing  more  than  that  tradition 
 asserts  that  such  did  once  exist. 
 
 Of  translations  of  parts  of  Scripture,  chiefly  the 
 Psalters,  into  the  more  modern  French,  a  large 
 number  exist  in  MS.,  of  which  a  copious  list  is 
 given  by  Le  Long  in  his  Bibliotheca  Sacra.  About 
 the  year  1380  a  translation  was  undertaken  by 
 command  of  Charies  V.  of  France  by  Raoul  de 
 Prailles,  of  which  more  than  one  copy  exists.  Le 
 Long  gives  a  description  of  a  codex  containing  it, 
 with  some  extracts,  by  way  of  specimen,  of  the 
 language  ;  and  there  is  another  MS.  of  it  in  the 
 British  Museum,  of  which  a  full  description  is  given 
 in  the  Bibliotheca  Lansdowiiiana,  p.  284,  ff.  The 
 version  in  these  codices  does  not  go  beyond  Pro- 
 verbs. 
 
 Emerging  from  these  obscurer  regions  of  inquiry 
 we  come  to  those  versions  which  have  been  printed, 
 and  of  which  it  is  possible  to  give  a  certain  account. 
 
 I.  That  of  Guiars  des  Moulins,  an  ecclesiastic  of 
 Picardy.  Taking  as  his  basis  the  Historia  Scholas- 
 lica  of  Peter  Comestor,  a  digest  of  the  Bible  His- 
 tor)'  with  glosses,  he  freely  translated  this  ;  adding 
 a  sketch  of  the  history  of  Job,  the  Proverbs,  and 
 probably  the  other  books  ascribed  to  Solomon ; 
 substituting  for  Comestor's  history  of  the  INLicca- 
 bees  a  translation  of  this  from  the  Vulgate  ;  and  in 
 general  conforming  the  whole  more  closely  to  the 
 text  of  the  Vulgate  than  Comestor  had  done.  The 
 Psalms,  Prophets,  and  Epistles,  were  not  in  the 
 work  as  first  issued  ;  and  it  is  uncertain  whether 
 the  Acts  was  not  also  omitted  ;  all  these,  however, 
 were  added  in  later  copies.  Many  MSS.  of  this 
 work  exist,  the  most  important  of  which  is  at  Jena. 
 An  edition  of  this  Bible,  as  completed  by  different 
 hands,  was  issued  from  the  press  by  order  of 
 Charles  VIII.  al^out  the  year  14S7,  edited  by  the 
 king's  confessor,  J.  de  Rely,  and  printed  by  Verard, 
 Paris,  2  tomes,  fol.  Twelve  editions  of  this,  some 
 at  Paris  and  some  at  Lyons,  appeared  between  1487 
 and  1545.  This  is  called  La  Grant  Bible,  to  dis- 
 tinguish it  from  a  work  entitled  La  Bible  pour  les 
 simples  gens,  which  is  a  summary  of  the  histoiy  of 
 
FRENCH  VERSIONS 
 
 40 
 
 FRENCH  VERSIONS 
 
 the  O.  T.,  and  of  which  several  undated  editions 
 have  been  examined.  Previous  to  the  edition  of 
 1487,  an  edition  of  the  N.  T.,  of  the  same  transla- 
 tion as  that  found  in  the  completed  work  of  Guiars, 
 but  not  by  Guiars  himself,  was  printed  at  Lyons  by 
 Earth.  Buyer,  fol.,  and  edited  by  two  Augustinian 
 monks,  Julien  Macho  and  Peter  Farget  ;  it  is  vni- 
 dated,  but  is  referred  to  the  year  1478,  and  justly 
 claims  to  be  the  Editio  Princess  of  the  French 
 Scriptures. 
 
 2.  In  the  year  1523,  appeared  at  Paris,  from  the 
 press  of  Simon  De  Colines,  an  anonymous  transla- 
 tion of  the  N.  T.,  which  was  often  reprinted,  and 
 to  which  in  1525  was  added  the  Psalter,  and  in 
 1528  the  rest  of  the  O.  T.  (together  7  vols.  8vo), 
 the  last  portion  being  issued  at  Antwerp,  in  conse- 
 quence of  attempts  on  the  part  of  the  French  clergy 
 to  prevent  its  appearance.  Tradition  ascribes  this 
 version  to  Jacques  Le  Fevre  d'  Etaples,  who  had 
 before  this  distinguished  himself  by  a  Latin  trans- 
 lation of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  and  by  exegetical 
 works  on  the  Gospels  and  Epistles ;  and  there  is 
 no  reason  to  question  the  justice  of  the  ascription. 
 This  version  is  made  from  the  Vulgate  with  slight 
 variations  in  the  N.  T. ,  where  the  author  follows 
 the  Greek.  The  complete  work  appeared  in  one 
 vol.  foL,  at  Antwerp,  in  1530,  and  again  from  the 
 same  types  in  1532.  It  was  placed  in  the  Papal 
 Index,  in  1546;  but  in  1550  it  was  re-issued  at 
 Louvain  in  fol.,  edited  by  two  priests,  Nicolas  de 
 Leuze,  and  Franz  van  Larben,  who  corrected  the 
 style,  and  struck  out  all  that  savoured  of  what  they 
 deemed  heresy.  Of  this  corrected  version  many 
 editions  have  been  issued. 
 
 3.  The  first  French  Protestant  version  was  pre- 
 pared by  Pierre  Robert  Olivetan,  a  relation  of 
 Calvin,  and  was  printed  at  Serrieres  near  Neufcha- 
 tel  in  Switzerland,  in  1535,  fol.  Of  this  edition 
 very  few  copies  survive.  It  was  reprinted  at 
 Geneva  in  1540,  at  Lyons  in  1541,  and,  with  a  few 
 emendations  from  the  pen  of  Calvin,  again  at 
 Geneva  in  1545.  In  1551,  a  thoroughly  revised 
 edition,  with  the  addition  of  some  of  the  Apo- 
 cryphal books  by  Beza,  and  a  new  translation  of 
 the  Psalms  by  Bude,  was  issued  at  Geneva.  It 
 has  been  often  reprinted  since.  An  edition  for  the 
 use  of  the  Vaudois,  and  for  which  they  subscribed 
 1500  golden  crowns,  was  printed  at  Neufchatel  in 
 1556.  This  translation  was  made  for  the  O.  T., 
 from  the  Latin  version  of  Santes  Pagninus,  and  for 
 the  N.  T.  after  the  versions  of  Lefevre  and 
 Erasmus.  In  its  first  form  it  was  very  imperfect, 
 and  even  after  the  revisal  of  Calvin,  and  the 
 emendations  of  subsequent  editors,  it  remained 
 behind  the  requirements  of  an  authorized  version. 
 
 4.  To  remedy  the  defects  of  Olivetan's  version 
 and  produce  one  more  suited  to  the  wants  of  the 
 age,  the  Venerable  Company  of  Pastors  at  Geneva 
 undertook  a  thorough  revisal  of  tlie  work  with  the 
 special  aid  of  Beza,  Goulart,  Fay,  etc.,  and  under 
 the  editorial  care  of  Cornelius  Bertram.  This  ap- 
 peared in  1588.  In  this  revision  n"in\  which, 
 in  all  the  other  Protestant  versions  is  rendered  by 
 a  word  equivalent  to  Lord,  is  throughout  trans'- 
 lated  V El^>■)lel.  Revised  editions  have  been  issued 
 by  the  Venerable  Company  in  1693,  1712.  1726, 
 1805,  and  of  the  N.  T.  in  1833  ;  the  two  last  very 
 modernized  in  style.  This  claims  to  be  the  most 
 elegant  of  the  French  versions,  but  it  is  far  from 
 being  an  adequate  rendering  of  the  original. 
 
 5.  The  Bible  of  Diodati,   Gen.    1644;  of  Des- 
 
 marets,  Amst.  1669  ;  of  Martin,  Utr.  (N.  T.)  1696, 
 (Bible)  1707,  2  vols.  fol.  ;  of  Roques,  Basle  1744  j 
 Osterwald,  Neufch.  1744,  are  revisions  of  Olivetan's 
 text  undertaken  by  individuals.  Of  these  Oster- 
 wald's  is  the  most  thorough,  and  may  be  viewed  as 
 occupying  the  place  in  the  French  Protestant 
 Church  of  an  authorized  version,  though  Martin's 
 is  the  one  most  esteemed  by  the  more  orthodox  of 
 its  members,  while  that  of  Desmarets  is  sought  by 
 those  who  attach  value  to  fine  paper  and  printing. 
 A  care  fully  revised  edition  of  Osterwald's  Bible,  with 
 parallels  by  the  Rev.  W.  Mackenzie,  has  just  been 
 issued  by  the  French  Bible  Society,  Par.  1S61. 
 
 6.  Of  avowedly  new  translations  from  the  origi- 
 nal by  individuals  may  be  mentioned  that  of 
 Seb.  Chastillon  (Castalio)  2  tomes  fol.,  Bas.  1555, 
 in  which  the  translator  aimed  to  impart  classical 
 elegance  to  the  style,  but  which  was  universally 
 regarded  as  neither  conveying  the  just  sense  of  the 
 original  nor  being  in  accordance  with  French 
 idiom  ;  that  of  Le  Clerc,  2  vols.  4to,  Amst.  1703, 
 in  the  interests  of  Arminianlsm  ;  that  of  Le  Cene, 
 published  after  his  death  in  2  vols,  fol.,  Amst. 
 1 741,  deeply  marked  by  Socinian  leanings;  and 
 that  of  Beausobre  and  L' Enfant,  2  vols.  4to,  Amst. 
 1718.  This  last  is  by  much  the  best,  and  has  been 
 repeatedly  reprinted  [Beausobre]. 
 
 7.  Of  Roman  Catholic  versions  of  the  Bible  the 
 first  is  that  of  Rene  Benoist,  a  member  of  the 
 theological  faculty  at  Paris,  which  appeared  in 
 1566.  It  was  condemned  by  Pope  Gregoiy  XIII. 
 in  1575,  and  involved  the  author  in  much  trouble 
 because  of  its  supposed  Protestant  leanings.  It  is 
 in  fact  only  a  slightly  altered  transcript  of  the 
 Geneva  Bible.  A  revised  edition,  conformed  to  the 
 Vulgate,  was  proposed  and  issued  by  the  divines 
 at  Louvain.  Four  translations  of  the  N.  T.  had  ap- 
 peared before  this,  viz.,  that  of  Claude  Deville, 
 1613  ;  that  of  Jaques  Corbin,  an  advocate  of  Paris, 
 1643  ;  that  of  Michel  de  MaroUes,  Abbe  of  Ville- 
 loin,  1649  ;  and  in  1666  that  of  Denys  Amelotte, 
 a  priest  of  the  oratory,  whose  hatred  of  the  Jansen- 
 ists  and  desire  to  damage  their  version,  then  in  the 
 press,  prompted  him  to  a  work  for  which  he  was 
 wholly  unfit,  and  the  blunders  of  which  drew  down 
 on  him  the  unsparing  criticism  of  Richard  Simon,  a 
 priest  of  his  own  order.  Marolles  had  begun  a  trans- 
 lation of  the  O.  T.,  but  it  was  suppressed  after  the 
 printing  had  proceeded  as  far  as  Lev.  xxiii.  A 
 translation  of  the  N.  T.  by  the  Theologians  of 
 Louvain  appeared  in  1686  ;  of  this  only  a  few  copies 
 exist.  All  these  are  made  from  the  Vulgate.  So 
 also  is  the  famous  Jansenist  translation  begun 
 by  Antoine  Lemaitre,  and  finished  by  his  brother 
 Isaac  Louis  Lemaitre  de  Sacy,  aided  by  Antoine 
 Arnauld,  P.  Nicole,  etc.  The  N.  T.  was  first 
 published  in  2  vols.  8vo.  in  1667,  and  subsequently 
 tlie  O.  T.,  nominally  at  Mons,  but  really  at  Am- 
 sterdam. It  is  variously  styled  the  Version  of 
 Mons,  the  Version  of  Port  Royal,  but  now  com- 
 monly the  Version  of  De  Sacy.  Many  editions  of 
 it  have  appeared,  with  and  without  notes  ;  the 
 best  is  that  of  Fosse  and  Beaubrun,  Par.  1682,  3 
 vols.  8vo  ;  a  beautifully  illustrated  edition  was 
 issued  at  Paris  in  1789- 1804,  in  12  vols.  8vo.  It 
 was  with  an  edition  of  this  version,  altered  so  as 
 to  be  more  conformed  to  the  Vulgate,  that  Ques- 
 nel  published  his  Refections,  1671-80.  The  trans- 
 lation of  Calmet,  in  his  Commentaire  Litfe}-al  et 
 Critique,  Paris,  1724,  may  be  also  viewed  as  a  re- 
 vised edition  of  the  Mons  Bible.  Antoine  Godeau. 
 
FRIEDLANDER 
 
 41 
 
 FRINGES 
 
 Bishop  of  Grasse,  published  a  translation  made 
 from  the  Vulgate,  in  2  vols.  8vo,  Paris,  l668.  It 
 holds  a  middle  place  between  a  literal  version  and 
 a  paraphrase.  The  translation  of  Nic.  Legros  was 
 published  anonymously  at  Cologne  in  1739,  and 
 afterwards  with  his  name  in  several  editions.  Of 
 the  N.  T. ,  a  translation,  from  the  pen  of  Richard 
 Simon,  appeared  anonymously  in  1702  at  Trevoux. 
 This  version  was  charged  by  Bossuet  with  Socinian 
 leanings,  and  was  condemned  by  Cardinal  de 
 Noailles.  Of  the  translation  by  Hure,  1702,  and 
 that  by  the  Jesuits  Bouhours,  Tellier,  and  Bernier, 
 between  1697  and  1703,  it  may  suffice  to  make 
 mention. 
 
 8.  In  our  own  day  several  versions  of  the  Psalms 
 have  appeared  in  France.  A  translation  of  the 
 vv'hole  Bible  from  the  Vulgate,  by  Eugene  Ge- 
 ronde,  in  23  vols.  Svo,  appeared  at  Paris  between 
 1820  and  1824.  This  has  been  frequently  re- 
 printed, and  has  excited  much  attention,  some  of 
 the  journals  vehemently  commending  it,  while  by 
 others  it  has  been  no  less  severely  criticised.  The 
 latest  appearance  in  this  department  is  the  transla- 
 tion of  the  Gospels  by  La  Mennais,  1S46,  the 
 style  of  which  is  admirable,  but  the  notes  a))- 
 pended  to  it  are  in  the  interest  of  Socialism.  But 
 the  most  important  work  of  this  kind  is  undoubt- 
 edly the  translation  from  the  Hebrew  of  the  O.  T. 
 by  S.  Cahen,  La  Bible :  Traduction  Nojivelle  avec 
 r  Hebreii  en  regard,  etc.;  18  vols.  Svo,  Par.  1832-39 
 [Cahen].  (Le  Long,  Bibliotheca  Sacra;  Simon, 
 Hist.  Crit.  die  N.  T.,  liv.  ii.  ;  Brunet,  Manuel  du 
 Libraii-e ;  Home,  Intivdnction,  vol.  ii.  pt.  2; 
 Reuss,  Geschichte  des  V.  T.,  sec.  466,  etc.,  and 
 art.  Romanische  Bibeliibersetzungen,  in  Herzog's 
 Encyclopcedie). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FRIEDLANDER,  David,  was  bom  in  Kcinigs- 
 burg  in  1749.  Attracted  by  the  great  reformation 
 in  Judaism,  and  the  revival  of  Hebrew  literature, 
 which  were  carried  on  by  Mendelssohn  and  his  as- 
 sociates in  Berlin,  Friedlander  came  to  the  metro- 
 polis of  Prussia  in  1770,  where  he  at  once  lent  his 
 powerful  influence  to  the  aid  of  the  Society  for 
 the  promotion  of  Biblical  hterature.  His  con- 
 tribution to  the  great  Bible-work  started  by  Men- 
 delssohn, is  npnp.  Das  Buck  KoJieleth,  im  Ori- 
 gittal,  Tnit  deiu  hebr.  Cominentar  Alendelssohns  n. 
 die  Uebei-setziing  David  Friedliinders,  Berlin,  1770. 
 [Mendelssohn.]  He  died  in  1834  m  Berlin.— 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 FRINGES,  or  FRINGED  GARMENTS  (m^'V, 
 /cpdo-ireSa,  Sept.  and  N.  T.)  The  law  respecting 
 fringes  is  contained  in  Num.  xv.  38-41,  and  Deut. 
 xxii.  12.     Here  the  children  of  Israel  are  enjoined 
 
 to  append  fringes  or  tassels  (nV''V,  Dv^J),  con- 
 sisting of  several  threads,  to  the  four  corners 
 (ni23a  ymX)  of  their  outer  garment  pn,  niD3), 
 put  one  distinguishing  thread  of  deep  blue  in  each  of 
 
 these  fringes  (nbn  ^^DD  fj^Sn  n^'"'V  h>V  13nJ1),* 
 
 *  The  A.  v.,  following  the  Vulg.,  Coverdale, 
 Matthew's  Bible,  the  Geneva  Version,  and  the 
 Bishops'  Bible,  renders  ^J-tJia  here  by  ribband, 
 which  entirely  mars  the  sense  of  the  passage.  It 
 needs  hardly  to  be  remarked,  that  the  Sept.,  the 
 Chaldee,  and  all  the  Jewish  interpreters  who  knew 
 from  practice  what  it  meant,  rightly  render  it 
 thread. 
 
 and  constantly  look  at  them  (inX  DJT'X"!"!),  in  ordei 
 to  be  put  in  mind  thereby  (Qm^n)  of  God's  com- 
 mandments, to  keep  them.  What  number  of 
 threads  each  of  these  symbolical  fringes  is  to  have 
 besides  the  said  blue  one,  of  what  material,  or  how 
 they  are  to  be  made,  tlie  injunction  does  not  say  ; 
 like  most  of  the  Mosaic  laws,  it  leaves  the  particu- 
 lars to  be  determined  by  the  executive  powers  ac- 
 cording to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  time. 
 
 Guided  by  the  fact  that  they  are  symbolical, 
 tradition,  in  determining  the  manner  in  which  these 
 fringes  are  to  be  made,  endeavoured  to  act  in  har- 
 mony with  their  spiritual  import,  and  hence  fixed  that 
 each  of  these  four  n''^*''i»  =  fringes  or  tassels,  for  the 
 four  corners  of  the  garment,  should  consist  of  eight 
 threads  of  white  wool,  the  emblem  of  purity  and 
 holiness  (Is.  i.  18) ;  that  one  of  these  threads  is  to 
 be  wound  round  the  others,  first  seven  times,  and 
 then  a  double  knot  to  be  made  ;  then  eight  times, 
 and  a  double  knot  (15  =  H') ;  then  eleven  times 
 (=  ni),  and  a  double  knot ;  and  finally  thirteen 
 times  (=  ^^S),  and  a  double  knot,  so  as  to  obtain 
 from  the  collective  number  of  times  which  this 
 thread  is  wound  round,  the  words  inX  nin\  con- 
 stituting the  creed  which  was  the  distinguishing 
 mark  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  and  which  was  in- 
 scribed on  their  banners,  whilst  the  five  knots 
 represent  the  five  books  of  the  Law.  As  the  Law, 
 however,  is  said  to  contain  613  commandments 
 [Education],  and  as  the  design  of  these  fringes  is 
 to  remind  the  Jews  of  all  these  commandments 
 
 (rilVO  ?3  nx),  tradition  has  so  arranged  it,  that 
 the  word  rT'V'V,  which  is  numerically  600,  with  the 
 8  threads  and  5  knots,  should  exactly  comprise 
 this  number,  and  thus  constitute  a  perfect  symbol 
 of  the  Law. 
 
 Originally,  as  we  have  seen,  this  fringed  or 
 tasseled  gannent  was  the  outer  one.  It  was  more 
 like  a  large  oblong  piece  of  cloth,  with  a  hole  in 
 the  centre  through  whicl:  the  head  was  put,  thus 
 dividing  it  into  two  halves,  one  covering  the  front, 
 and  the  other  the  back  of  the  body,  like  a  tunic. 
 
 But  when  the  Flebrews  began  to  mix  with  other 
 nations,  and  especially  when  they  were  dispersed 
 and  became  a  byeword  and  a  hissing,  this  ancient 
 badge  of  distinction  which  God  conferred  upon 
 them  became  the  signal  of  persecution,  inasmuch 
 as  it  indicated  that  t'ne  wearer  of  it  was  a  Jew,  on 
 whom  Christians  thought  they  ought  to  avenge  the 
 blood  of  Christ.  Hence  the  Israelites  found  it 
 necessary  to  discard  the  fringed  garment  as  an 
 outer  dress,  and  to  wear  it  in  a  smaller  size,  and  a 
 somewhat  altered  form,  as  an  under  garment,  in 
 order  to  conceal  it  from  their  persecutors. 
 
 This    under   fringed  -  garment    is   called   J?3"li? 
 
FRINGES 
 
 42 
 
 FRUITS 
 
 niQ3D,  the  foiir- cornered  dress,  or  simply  JT'V'V, 
 fringes  or  tassels,  and  is  worn  by  every  orthodox 
 Jew  to  the  present  day. 
 
 But  though  the  Jews  have  been  compelled  to  re- 
 linquish the  large  outer  fringed-garment  as  a  per- 
 manent article  of  apparel,  they  still  continue  to 
 wear  it   in   a  somewhat   modified  form,   at  their 
 
 morning  prayers,  and   call  it  HvD,    Talith, 
 cover  or  ivraf<per. 
 
 This  Talith,  or  fringed  wrapper,  is  generally 
 made  of  a  white  woollen  material ;  the  wool  must 
 be  spun  by  Jews  for  this  express  purpose.  It  has 
 three  or  more  blue  stripes  running  in  parallel 
 lines  across  the  whole  garment,  at  the  right  and 
 left  side.  In  some  cases,  however,  the  Talith  is 
 also  made  of  silk.  Every  married  Jew  must  wear 
 it  at  morning  prayer  ;  a  single  man  can  do  what  he 
 likes.  When  putting  it  on,  the  following  prayer  is 
 offered  :  '  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Lord,  King  of  the 
 universe,  who  hast  -sanctified  us  with  thy  com- 
 mandments, and  enjoined  us  to  array  ourselves 
 with  fringes.'  The  Jews  attach  the  utmost  import- 
 ance to  the  fringed  garment.  Thus  it  is  related  in 
 the  Talmud,  that  '  R.  Joseph  asked  R.  Joseph  b. 
 Rabba,  which  commandment  has  your  father  ad- 
 monished you  to  observe  more  than  any  other? 
 He  replied,  the  law  aljout  the  fringes.  Once  when 
 my  father,  on  descending  a  ladder,  stepped  on  one 
 of  the  threads  and  tore  it  off,  he  would  not  move 
 from  the  place  till  it  was  repaired'  (Sabbath, 
 II 8,  b).  Some  of  the  rabbins  go  so  far  as  to  say, 
 that  the  law  respecting  the  fringes  is  as  important 
 
 as  all  the  other  laws  put  together  (comp.  Rashi  on 
 Numb.  XV.  41).  It  was  for  this  reason  that  the 
 woman  with  the  issue  of  blood  (Matt.  ix.  20),  and 
 the  inhabitants  of  Gennesaret  {ibid.  xiv.  36),  were 
 so  anxious  to  touch  a  fringe  of  our  Saviour's  gar- 
 ment (Kpacfirebov  tov  IfxaTiov).  This  superstitious 
 reverence  for  the  external  symbol,  with  little  care 
 for  the  things  it  symbolised,  led  the  Pharisees  to 
 enlai-ge  their  fringes,  believing  that  the  larger  they 
 made  the  tassels,  the  better  they  did  God's  service ; 
 and  this  it  was  that  our  Saviour  rebuked  :  comp. 
 Matt,  xxiii.  5. 
 
 Literature. — Maimonides,  "Jod Ha-Chezaka,  Hil- 
 choth  Tzitzith,  vol.  i.  p.  lOO,  a,  etc.  ;  Orach  Cha- 
 jiin,  sect.  viii.  ;  the  Hebrew  Prayer  Book,  with  all 
 the  laws  respecting  the  Jewish  ritual,  called  Dercch 
 Ha-Chajii)i,  Vienna,  1S59,  p.  21,  a,  etc.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 FROG.       [TSEPHARDEA.] 
 
 FRONTLETS.    [Phylacteries.] 
 
 FRUITS.     """IS  feri,  fruit  in  general,  vegetable 
 
 or  animal  (Deut.  vii.  13,  his;  xxviii.  5I)  ^'A-  It 
 originated  the  English  word  '  fruit,'  by  the  2  being 
 sounded  as  ph,  and  subsequently  converted  into  f. 
 The  Hebrews  had  three  generic  terms  designating 
 three  great  classes  of  the  fruits  of  the  land,  closely 
 corresponding  to  what  may  be  expressed  in  Eng- 
 lish as,  I.  Corn-fruit,  or  field  produce,  pT  ;  2.  Vint- 
 
 age-friiif,  L'^HTl ;  3-    Orchard-fruit,  in^\ 
 
 Referring  to  the  separate  articles  under  these 
 heads,  we  shall  here  simply  exhibit  their  relative 
 positions. 
 
 a.  They  are  found  mutually  associated  in  nine- 
 teen places.  Dagan  occiu"s  with  tirosh  alone  eleven 
 times  ;  with  yayin  only  once,  and  there  (Lam.  ii. 
 12)  yayin  is  used  for  grapes.  Tirosh  occurs  thirty- 
 eight  times  ;  in  thirty  places  it  is  associated  with 
 the  confessedly  generic  word  daoan  ;  in  twenty- 
 one  with  yitzhar ;  and  it  is  found  only  six  times 
 without  either  dagan  or  yitzhar. 
 
 b.  Tirosh  occurs  seven  times  with  rayshyth  or 
 biccowr,  '  first-fruits  ; '  ten  times  with  teroohhah, 
 '  offerings,'  or  magnasayr,  '  tithes,'  which  were 
 mainly  the  first  of  gathered  fruits  and  grain  in 
 their  natural  state. 
 
 c.  Tirosh  is  connected  with  yayin  in  three  pas- 
 sages only  twice  by  way  of  climax  merely  (Hos.  iv. 
 II  ;  Is.  xxiv.  7-10),  and  once  (Mic.  vi.  15)  as  the 
 yielder  of  wine,  not  wine  itself. 
 
 d.  Tirosh  is  not  directly  united  with  shemen 
 (oil)  in  a  single  place. 
 
 e.  The  three  terms  are  constantly  and  closely 
 connected  with  expressions  indicating  increase  of 
 vegetable  produce,  or  the  spontaneous  growth  of 
 the  fruits  of  the  earth,  or  the  increase  of  objects  of 
 culture,  esjjecially  the  fruits  of  the  field  and  the 
 vineyard  :  they  also  occur  in  connection  with  terms 
 expressive  of  fruital  or  animal  produce,  sometimes 
 with  the  vine,  olive,  fig,  or  palm  tree,  but  scarcely 
 ever  with  their  specific  fruit,  or  with  particular 
 articles  of  diet  ;  still  more  rarely  are  they  con- 
 nected with  terms  evincing  the  process  of  prepar- 
 ing or  preserving  them,  or  the  vehicle  or  mode  of 
 their  consumption.  In  all  these  respects  they  pre- 
 sent a  complete  contrast  to  terms  denoting  specific 
 products  or  artificial  preparations,  as  zayith  (olive), 
 shemen  (oil),  yayin  (wine),  or  lehhein  (food  or 
 bread). 
 
 f  In  the  very  rare  instances  in  which  they  do 
 
FULKE 
 
 43 
 
 FULLER 
 
 occur  in  connection  with  specific  articles  or  cir- 
 cumstances, special  reasons  obviously  exist  for  tlie 
 fact,  confirmatoiy  of  the  view  advanced  as  to  their 
 generic  signification.  Tlie  exceptions  prove  the 
 rule. 
 
 g.  Lastly,  though  the  three  terms  are  employed 
 throughout  a  period  of  one  thousand  years  (Num. 
 xviii.  12,  B.C.  14S9,  to  Neh.  xiii.  12,  B.C.  409)  by 
 a  series  of  fourteen  authors,  the  bulk  of  whom  also 
 v&t.  yayin  and  shemen,  occasionally  in  conjunction, 
 yet  not  in  one  instance  have  they  crossed  iirosh 
 with  shemen,  or  yayin  with  yitzhar.  On  the  con- 
 trary, the  triad  of  generic  terms  have  been  cau- 
 tioiisly  and  correctly  discriminated  from  words 
 merely  denoting  some  of  their  species,  or  artificial 
 preparations  from  them. 
 
 The  term  pp  kayils,  '  summer-fruits,'  appears 
 to  denote  those  less  important  species  of  fruit 
 which  were  adapted  only  to  immediate  consump- 
 tion, or  could  not  be  easily  or  conveniently  con- 
 served for  winter  use  (Jer.  xl.  lO,  12).  Kay  its 
 may  have  been  included  as  a  species  under  the 
 head  of  Orchard-fruit  :  it  would  seem  to  indicate 
 either  the  existence  of  some  contrasted  term,  as 
 '  winter- fruits,'  or  to  imply  that  the  products  of 
 the  class  under  which  it  ranked  as  a  species  were 
 generally  distinguished  by  their  capability  of  being 
 presers'ed  throughout  the  year.  It  is  conceived 
 that  the  products  denoted  by  the  third  qf  the  gene- 
 ric terms  above  noticed  were  chiefly  characterized 
 by  their  capacity  of  being  stored  up  and  prese)-vcd 
 like  our  own  orchard-fruit  ;  and  thus  their  generic 
 name  might  be  inclusive  of  kayits,  '  summer-fruits,' 
 though  mainly  and  originally  referring  to  '  winter- 
 fruits.' — F.  R.  L. 
 
 FULKE,  William,  was  born  about  the  year 
 1538,  probably  in  London.  Of  his  parentage 
 and  early  life  nothing  is  certainly  known.  From 
 Christ's  Hospital,  where  he  is  supposed  to  have 
 received  the  rudiments  of  his  education,  he  re- 
 moved to  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  in  the 
 year  1555.  After  taking  his  B.  A.  degree,  he 
 spent  six  years  in  the  study  of  the  law  at  Clifford's 
 Inn  ;  but  preferring  divinity,  he  was  admitted  to 
 holy  orders  ;  he  took  his  M.A.  in  1564,  in  which 
 year  he  was  elected  to  a  fellowship  of  his  college. 
 To  the  study  of  theology  he  added  an  accomplish- 
 ment which  was  rare  at  that  time,  a  sound  know- 
 ledge of  the  Oriental  languages.  He  proceeded  to 
 his  B.D.  degree,  but  was  shortly  afterwards  ejected 
 from  his  college  for  too  strong  a  leaning  to  the 
 principles  of  puritanism.  Upon  this  he  commenced 
 a  course  of  lectures  and  disputations,  which  were 
 attended  by  a  numerous  class  of  students.  It  was 
 not  long  before  he  experienced  a  favourable  turn 
 in  his  affairs,  having  attracted  the  friendly  notice 
 of  Queen  Ehzabeth's  favourite,  the  Earl  of  Leices- 
 ter. Through  his  means  he  was  presented,  Aug. 
 10)  157I1  to  the  rectoi-y  of  Warley  in  Essex,  and 
 soon  afterwards,  March  1573,  to  that  of  Benning- 
 ton in  Suffolk.  Fulke  obtained  an  honoraiy  D.D. 
 on  being  appointed  chaplain  to  the  Earl  of  Lincoln, 
 when  that  nobleman  went  to  Paris  as  British  am- 
 bassador. The  same  influence  probably  contri- 
 buted to  Dr.  Fulke's  advancement  to  the  master- 
 ship of  Pembroke  College,  Cambridge,  in  1578. 
 Having  filled  the  office  of  Vice-Chancellor,  and 
 governed  his  college  for  eleven  years,  he  died  in 
 August  1589.  No  less  than  twenty-six  treatises 
 were  published  by  him,  besides  some  works  known 
 
 to  exist  among  the  Harleian  MSS.  The  charac- 
 teristic  of  all  his  writings  was  polemical  zeal  in  de- 
 fence of  the  Protestant  cause,  of  which  he  was 
 one  of  the  most  able  apologists  of  his  time.  Al- 
 though controversy  was  his  calling,  three  of  his 
 works  deserve  to  be  mentioned  here  from  their 
 Biblical  character.  We  mention  them  in  the  order 
 of  their  publication,  (i.)  In  sacram  Divi  Johan- 
 iiis  Apocalypsim  prceh'ctiones,  London,  1573,  4to. 
 Translated  into  English  by  George  Gyfford,  Lon- 
 don, 1573,  4to.  (2.)  The  text  of  the  Neio  Testa- 
 ment of  Jesiis  Chjist,  translated  out  of  the  Vulgar 
 La  tine  by  the  Papists  of  the  trait erous  Seniinarie  a', 
 Rhemes,  -with  arguments  of  bookes,  chapters,  and 
 annotations,  pretending  to  discoiter  the  corruptions 
 of  diicers  translations,  and  to  clear  the  controuersies 
 of  these  days.  IVhereunto  is  added  the  translation 
 out  of  the  original  Greeke,  commonly  itsed  iti  the 
 Chitrch  of  England,  etc.,  by  William  Fulke,  D.D., 
 London,  15S0,  15S9,  1601,  1617,  1633,  folio. 
 This  work  may  be  said  to  embody  the  whole 
 popish  controversy  respecting  the  Scriptures,  and 
 as  it  gives  in  parallel  columns  the  Rhemish  trans- 
 lation of  the  Vulgate,  and  the  Bishops'  transla- 
 tion, it  enables  the  reader  to  make  an  easy  com- 
 parison of  their  respective  merits.  Fulke  was 
 a  very  able  man,  and  his  work  is  entitled  to  a 
 place  in  every  critical  library.  Mr.  Charles  But- 
 ler, though  a  Romanist,  candidly  commends  it  as 
 very  curious  and  deserving  of  attention.  This 
 polemico-biblical  work,  which  is  a  good  voucher 
 of  the  advanced  learning  of  the  Elizabethan  di- 
 vines,, has  been  lately  reprinted  at  New  York, 
 without  the  two  rival  versions.  By  the  help  of  a 
 close  but  clear  type,  however,  the  whole  of  Dr. 
 Fulke's  unanswered  and  unanswerable  confutation 
 is  comprised  in  a  convenient  8vo  volume.  (3.)  A 
 Defence  of  the  sincere  and  true  tinnslations  of  the 
 Holy  Scriptures  into  the  English  tongue,  against 
 the  cavils  of  Gregory  Martin,  by  William  Fulke, 
 D.  D. ,  master  of  Pembroke  Hall,  Cambridge.  This 
 is  the  title  (slightly  abridged  by  being  weeded  of 
 some  vituperative  epithets)  of  a  work  which  has 
 done  good  service  in  the  Romish  controversy  since 
 its  first  publication  in  the  year  1583,  and  which' 
 may  still  be  read  with  interest,  for  the  proofs  it 
 affords  of  the  existence  of  a  sound  and  vigorous 
 criticism  in  the  age  of  the  leai-ned  author.  Fulke's 
 book  is  rendered  the  more  interesting  by  incor- 
 porating in  its  pages  the  attacks  on  our  early  trans- 
 lations of  the  Scriptures,  made  by  one  of  the  most 
 learned  controversialists  of  the  time,  Gregory  Mar- 
 tin, one  of  the  divinity  professors  in  the  English 
 [Romanist]  College  of  Rheims.  The  Parker  So- 
 ciety reprinted  Fulke's  defence,  including  Martin's 
 assaults,  in  1843,  with  great  care  and  accuracy, 
 under  the  superintendence  of  the  Rev.  C.  H. 
 Hartshorne,  who  enriched  the  edition  with  some 
 valuable  notes,  and  a  revision  of  the  numerous 
 quotations.  Fulke's  work  seems  to  have  settled 
 the  controversy  until  the  time  of  our  James  II., 
 when  a  Romish  writer,  named  Thomas  Ward,  re- 
 vived it  by  the  pubhcation  of  what  was  little  more 
 than  an  abridgment  of  Gregory  Martin's  volume, 
 entitled.  Errata  of  the  Protestant  Bible.  This 
 work  of  Ward's  has  been  often  reprinted  in  Ire- 
 land in  the  present  century  ;  but  has  called  forth 
 able  refutations  by  the  Rev.  Drs.  Ryan  and  Grier. 
 —P.  H. 
 
 FULLER.      At   the   transfiguration,    our    Sa- 
 
FULLER 
 
 44 
 
 FULLER 
 
 •/iour's  robes  are  said  to  have  been  white,  '  so  as 
 no  fuller  on  earth  could  white  them '  (Mark  ix.  3). 
 Elsewhere  we  read  of  '  fullers'  soap'  (Mai.  iii.  2), 
 and  of  '  the  fullers'  field  '  (2  Kings  xviii.  17).  Of 
 the  processes  followed  in  the  art  of  cleaning  cloth 
 and  the  various  kinds  of  stuff  among  the  Jews,  we 
 have  no  direct  knowledge.  In  an  early  part  of 
 the  operation  they  seem  to  have  trod  the  cloths 
 with  their  feet,  as  the  Hebrew  Am  Rogel,  or  En- 
 rogel,  literally  Foot-fountain,  has  been  rendered, 
 on  Rabbinical  authority,  '  Fullers'  fountain,'  on 
 the  ground  that  the  fullers  trod  the  cloths  there 
 with  their  feet.      A  subsequent  operation  was  pro- 
 
 bably that  of  rubbing  the  cloth  on  an  inchned 
 plane,  in  a  mode  which  is  figured  in  the  Egyptian 
 paintings,  and  still  preserved  in  the  East. 
 
 FULLER,  Andrew,  was  born  at  Wicken,  near 
 Ely,  Cambridgeshire,  Feb.  6,  1754.  He  became 
 pastor  of  the  Baptist  Church  at  Soham,  in  1775, 
 and  removed  to  Kettering,  in  Northamptonshire, 
 in  1782.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the 
 Baptist  Missionary  Society,  and  acted  as  its  secre- 
 tai-y  from  its  formation,  Oct.  2,  1792,  to  his  death, 
 May  7,  1815.  His  education  was  extremely 
 limited,  and  his  early  associations  were  very  un- 
 favourable to  enlarged  views  of  religion,  or  to 
 mental  improvement  in  general.  But  the  native 
 vigour  of  his  mind  surmounted  every  obstacle,  and 
 raised  him  to  be  one  of  the  ablest  theologians  of 
 his  day ;  while  the  sagacity,  finnness,  and  energy 
 of  his  character,  admirably  fitted  him  for  his  posi- 
 tion in  relation  to  the  cause  of  missions.  His 
 writings  are  numerous;  but  his  reputation  as  an 
 author  is  chiefly  founded  on  Tlie  Gospel  its  oivii 
 witness ;  and  The  Calvinisiic  and  Sociniait  systems 
 compaivd. 
 
 The  only  other  productions  of  his  pen  that  de- 
 mand special  mention  in  the  present  work  are  his 
 Expository  Discoiiises  on  the  Book  of  Genesis, 
 (1806,  2  vols.  8vo),  and  a  similar  volume  On  the 
 Revetation  (181 5).  For  learned  criticism  he  was 
 wholly  unfitted;  but  for  questions  not  involving 
 scholarship,  he  possessed  some  of  the  most  valu- 
 able qualifications  of  a  Biblical  expositor,  masculine 
 sense  and  acuteness,  independence  in  forming  his 
 opinions,  combined  with  a  profound  reverence  for 
 divine  truth.  An  uniform  edition  of  his  works  ap- 
 peared soon  after  his  decease,  edited  by  his  most 
 intimate  friend  Dr.  Ryland,  with  a  copious  bio- 
 graphy ;  a  second  edition  was  published  by  his  son 
 Andrew  Gunton  in  1857,  5  vols.  8vo,  including  a 
 numljer  of  miscellaneous  pieces  collected  from 
 various  periodicals ;  a  third  edition  in  one  vol. 
 royal  Svo  was  issued  in  1S50.  His  works  on  Deism 
 and  Socinianism  have  also  been  reprinted  by  Mr. 
 JBohn  in  his  Standard  Library, — J.  E.  R. 
 
 FULLER,  Nicholas,  was  born  in  1557  at 
 Southampton  ;  and  was  educated  first  at  the 
 Grammar  School  of  that  town,  and  afterwards 
 at  Hart  Hall,  Oxford.  To  ripe  scholarship  in  tlie 
 ordinary  learning  of  the  time,  he  added  the  unusual 
 acquirement  of  a  thorough  knowledge  of  Hebrew 
 and  its  cognate  languages.  His  attainments  have 
 been  commended  by  many  eminent  authorities,  and 
 his  writings,  though  not  voluminous,  procured  for 
 him  the  respect  of  the  learned  at  home  and  abroad 
 (comp.  Bochart.  Hieroz.  [ed.  Leusden]  p.  17,  and 
 passim  ;  Grotius  on  Luke  ii.  49 ;  Poole,  Synopsis 
 on  Exod.  xxix.  13  ;  Wood,  Athen.  Oxon.;  Orme, 
 Biblioth.  Bibl.,  etc.)  Our  author  is  one  instance, 
 out  of  not  a  few,  which  have  occurred  and  do  still 
 occur,  of  high-minded  men,  who  toil  on  amidst 
 poverty  and  neglect,  sustained  by  the  confidence 
 that  the  labour  which  they  bestow  on  a  good  pur- 
 suit, though  it  fail  to  requite  them  beyond  the  plea- 
 sure it  inspires,  may  be  not  in  vain.  Fuller,  to 
 defray  the  expenses  of  his  '  education,  was  amanu- 
 ensis or  scribe  to  Dr.  Home,  bishop  of  Winchester, 
 afterwards  he  attended,  as  tutor  servant,  on  Sir 
 Heniy  Wallop  to  Oxford ;  and  returning  thence,  was 
 made  minister  of  AUington,  near  Salisbury,  where 
 he  had  a  benefice  rather  than  a  living,  so  small  were 
 the  revenues  thereof  (Fuller's  Wo7-thies  of  England 
 [by  Nnttall],  vol.  ii.  p.  19).  It  was  here  that,  in 
 the  houi-s  he  could  spare  from  tuition,  to  which  he 
 resorted  to  supplement  the  insufficiency  of  his  cleri- 
 cal income,  he  wrote  his  six  books  of  Miscellanea 
 Sac7'a,  or  disquisitions  of  various  extent  but  of  un- 
 vaiying  acumen  and  learning,  in  which  (as  Thomas 
 Fuller  quaintly,  but  correctly  says  of  him),  '  he  was 
 happy  in  pitching  on  not  difficult  trifles,  but  useful 
 difficulties,  tending  to  the  understanding  of  Scrip- 
 ture.' The  first  three  books  of  this  work  were  pub- 
 lished at  Heidelberg,  8vo,  1612,  with  a  dedication 
 addressed  to  Sir  H.  Wallop.  The  author,  who  seems 
 to  have  resorted  to  a  foreign  publisher  because  of  his 
 poverty,  was  sadly  disappointed  at  the  miserable 
 manner  in  which  his  book  was  given  to  the  world. 
 A  second  edition,  with  the  addition  of  a  fourth 
 book  and  a  dedication  to  his  friend  Lake,  after- 
 wards bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  appeared  at 
 Oxford,  161 5  ;  this  was  reprinted  in  London  and 
 at  Heidelberg  in  161 8  :  two  more  books  were  added 
 in  the  next  edition,  with  a  dedication  to  Bishoj* 
 Andrews,  in  whom  Fuller  had  found  a  Maecenas  ; 
 and  reprints  of  this  appeared  at  Leyden,  in  1622, 
 and  Strasburg,  1650,  with  the  title  Miscellanea 
 Theologica  in  place  of  M.  Sacra.  This  change  (for 
 which  the  author  was  not  responsible)  was  not  a 
 happy  or  correct  one  ;  for  the  work  is  not  theologi- 
 cal in  its  character,  though  full  of  J^cn'^  subjects. 
 In  the  one  hundred  and  twenty  articles  or  treatises, 
 of  which  the  entire  work  consists,  the  author  illus- 
 trates and  comments  on  many  passages  and  promi- 
 nent words  of  Holy  Scripture,  involving  inquiries  of 
 natural  history  and  archaeology,  as  well  as  of  sacred 
 criticism  and  exegesis.  He  seems  to  have  furnished 
 his  mind  with  information  derived  from  many  varied 
 sources.  The  entire  Misc.  Sacra  is  i^eprinted  in 
 the  Critici  Sacri  among  the  dissertations  in  the 
 8th  volume.  Poole  has  also  transferred  to  the 
 pages  of  his  Synopsis  the  substance  of  Fuller's 
 treatises. 
 
 Besides  his  learning,  which  has  been  often  com- 
 mended for  its  '  acan-acy,^  there  is  much  good 
 sense,  kindly  manner,  and  modesty  in  Fuller's 
 writings,  which  he  humbly  describes  as  '  a  widow's 
 
FULLER 
 
 43 
 
 FURNACE 
 
 mite  thrown  into  the  treasury  as  an  offering  to 
 God,  and  for  the  use  of  the  studious.'  His  modest 
 volume,  which  was  in  general  so  well  received,  ex- 
 cited the  jealousy  of  Drusius,  the  Belgian  critic,  who 
 accused  him  of  plagiarism.  To  this  Fuller  replied 
 in  the  Appendix  Apologetica,  subjoined  to  his  Mis- 
 cellanea Sacra,  which  is  the  very  model  of  a  refuta- 
 tion. His  answer  to  Drusius  is  as  gentle  as  it 
 is  effective  ;  firmly  vindicating  his  own  character  as 
 his  dearest  possession,  but  most  sorry  that  it  must 
 needs  be  against  the  aspersions  of  a  man  whom  his 
 labours  in  the  same  field  had  made  him  so  greatly 
 to  respect.  Bishop  Andrewes  lost  no  time  in  re- 
 warding the  long  neglected  but  most  meritorious 
 scholar  who  had  been  thrown  in  his  way  ;  he  gave 
 him  the  valuable  living  of  Bishop's  Waltham  in 
 Hampshire— but  it  was  too  late.  Fuller  lived 
 only  a  year  or  two  to  enjoy  this  with  a  prebendal 
 stall  in  the  neighbouring  cathedral  of  Salisbury, 
 which  had  been  previously  bestowed  upon  him. 
 He  died  about  the  year  1626  (Fuller's  Worthies,  ii. 
 20).  Li  the  last  of  his  published  writings  he  ex- 
 presses an  intention  (eavrrep  iTnTpiir-g  6  Qeos)  of 
 completing  certain  other  '  Opnsciila '  for  the  press 
 — these  probably  are  the  two  MSS.  which  are  said 
 to  be  still  extant  in  the  Bodleian  Library  (see  A.  a 
 Wood's  ^///^«.  Oxon.  by  Bliss.)— R  H. 
 
 FULLER,  Thomas,  D.D.,  was  born  at  Ald- 
 WMnkle  in  Northamptonshire,  in  June  1608,  and 
 died  in  London  i6th  Aug.  1661.  He  was  suc- 
 cessively curate  of  St.  Benet's,  Cambridge,  pre- 
 bendary of  Salisbury,  rector  of  Broadwindsor, 
 Dorsetshire,  lecturer  at  the  Savoy,  London,  and, 
 daring  the  Commonwealth,  for  a  time  perpetual 
 curate  of  Waltham,  and  afterwards  vicar  of  Cran- 
 ford.  After  the  Restoration,  he  returned  to  the 
 Savoy,  and  was  restored  to  his  prebend.  Though 
 his  life  was  comparatively  short,  and  was  cast  on 
 troublous  times,  not  many  authors  have  been  so 
 remarkable  for  the  number  and  elaboration  of  the 
 works  they  have  produced.  His  claims  to  be 
 numbered  among  Biblical  scholars  rest  chiefly  on 
 his  Pisgah-sight  of  Palestine,  and  confines  thereof ; 
 •with  ike  history  of  the  O.  and  N.  Testaments  acted 
 thereon,  fol.,  Lond.  1662.  Perhaps  no  work  was 
 ever  written  on  such  a  subject  so  sparkling  with  wit, 
 and  so  full  of  quaint  and  humorous  remark  as 
 this ;  at  the  same  time  preserving  so  much  of  faithful 
 adherence  to  the  subject  of  which  the  author 
 professes  to  treat.  The  work  is  not  confined  to 
 Biblical  topography,  but  handles  many  [joints  of 
 history  and  archceology  ;  it  is  also  illustrated  by 
 maps  and  engravings,  which  are  as  quaint  in  their 
 way  as  the  text  they  are  meant  to  illustrate.  Fuller 
 published  also  A  Comt7ieni  on  the  book  of  Ruth, 
 Lond.  1654,  being  the  substance  of  lectures  de- 
 livered at  St.  Benet's  twenty-four  years  before  ;  A 
 Comment  on  the  first  eln-en  chapters  of  Alatthew's 
 Gospels,  concerning  Christ's  temptations,  Lond. 
 1652;  and  Notes  on  Jonah,  appended  to  a  volume 
 of  sermons,  Lond.  1656.  His  fame  rests  chiefly 
 on  his  Holy  and  Profane  State,  his  Holy  IVar,  his 
 Church  History  of  Britain,  and  his  History  of  the 
 Worthies  of  England. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 FULLER'S  FIELD  (D3b  nnb* ;  Sept.  6.ypos 
 
 rod  7va(/>^ws).  This  place  is  three  times  mentioned 
 in  the  Bible,  and  always  in  the  same  connection. 
 '  The  conduit  of  the  upper  pool  which  is  in  the  high- 
 way of  the  fuller's  field'  (2  Kings  xviii.    17  •  Is. 
 
 vii.  3  ;  xxxvi.  2).  Its  position  is  not  defined  ;  but 
 we  can  gather  that  it  was  on  one  of  the  leading 
 roads,  to  which  it  also  gave  its  name  ;  that  it  was 
 on  the  '  conduit '  or  canal  connected  with  the 
 'upper  pool,'  and  that  it  was  near  Jerusalem.  The 
 heralds  of  the  king  of  Assyria  spake  in  the  hearing 
 of  the  people  on  the  wall  from  '  the  highway  of  the 
 Fuller's  Field'  (2  Kings  xviii.  17,  26).  There  can  be 
 little  doubt  that  the  'upper  pool'  is  the  cistern  now 
 called  Birket  el-Mamilla,  at  the  head  of  the  valley 
 of  Hinnom,  a  short  distance  west  of  the  Yafa  gate 
 {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  99,  136.)  Hezekiah 
 conveyed  the  waters  from  it  by  a  subterranean  aque- 
 duct to  the  west  side  of  the  city  of  David  (2  Chron. 
 xxxii.  30).  The  natural  course  of  this  aqueduct 
 was  along  the  ancient  road  to  the  western  gate 
 beside  the  castle  ;  and  this  was  the  road  by  which 
 the  Assyrian  ambassadors  would  doubtless  ap- 
 proach the  city,  coming  as  they  did  from  Lachish. 
 The  position  of  the  Fuller's  Field  is  thus  indicated. 
 It  lay  oh  the  side  of  the  highway  west  of  the  city. 
 The  fullers'  occupation  required  an  abundant  sup 
 ply  of  water,  and  an  open  space  for  drying  the 
 clothes.  We  may,  therefore,  conclude  that  their 
 '  field'  was  beside,  or  at  least  not  far  distant  from 
 the  upper  pool. 
 
 Dr.  Williams,  and  some  others  who  follow  him, 
 affirm  that  the  Fuller's  Field,  and  the  fountain  or 
 pool  of  Gihon,  were  somewhere  on  the  plateau 
 north  of  the  Damascus  gate,  and  near,  if  not  in  the 
 upper  part  of  the  valley  of  the  Kidron.  But 
 this  view  is  opposed  to  2  Chron.  xxxii.  30  ;  and  no 
 amount  of  reasoning  can  get  over  the  plain  state- 
 ment of  that  passage,  that  Hezekiah  '  stopped  the 
 upper  outfiow  (or  spring  NVIO)  of  Gihon,  and 
 brought  it  straight  dowji  to  the  west  side  of  the  city 
 of  David'  Now  this  would  be  a  physical  impossi- 
 bility if  we  place  Gihon  elsewhere  than  on  the  west 
 side  of  the  city.  (See,  however,  Wilham's  Holy 
 City,  ii.  471,  sq.;  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  s.  v. 
 Gihon  and  Jerusalem ;  Barclay's  City  of  the  Great 
 lung.)-].  L.  P. 
 
 FULLERS'  FOUNTAIN.    [En-Rogel.] 
 
 FULLERS'  SOAP.     [Borith.] 
 
 FUNERALS.    [Burial;  Mourning.] 
 
 FURNACE.  The  furnaces  mentioned  in  the 
 Bible  were  of  various  kinds,      i.   JIFIX,  according 
 
 to  Ges.,  for   J^UnX,  fi'om   the  root   pn,   to  smoke, 
 
 with  }<  as  a  formative  prefix.  But  Fiirst  says, 
 non  ex  i^lJOS  oi-tum,  sed  ex  radice  flK,  addita  ter- 
 
 minatione  nominali  UN  .  .  .  Somnia7tt,  qui  hujus 
 modi  vocabula  e  duobus  coaluisse  arbitrantur  {Con- 
 cord. Vet.  Test.  Heb.  et  Chal.)  Dan.  iii.  6,  11,  15. 
 A  large  kind  of  furnace  having  a  wide  open  mouth 
 above,  with  an  openmg  near  the  bottom  to  allow 
 the  metal,  or  other  material,  to  run  out.  The  em- 
 ployment of  the  furnace  as  an  instrument  of  punish- 
 ment seems  to  have  been  a  favourite  method  with 
 the  King  of  Babylon,  as  it  has  continued  to  be  in 
 Persia  down  to  recent  times.  '  During  the  dearth 
 of  1662,'  says  Chardin,  '  I  saw  such  ovens  heated 
 in  the  royal  square  at  Ispahan  to  terrify  the  bakers, 
 and  to  deter  them  from  deriving  advantage  from 
 the  general  distress  '  (quoted  by  Kitlo).  References 
 to  the  same  mode  of  punishment  are  found  in  Jer. 
 xxix.  22,  and  Hos.  vii.  7. 
 
GAAL 
 
 46 
 
 GABBATHA 
 
 2.  JE'^S,  from  the  root  'C'2^,  to  subdue,  so  called 
 
 from  its  subduing  metals  or  other  materials  thrown 
 into  it  (Gen.  xix.  28  ;  Exod.  ix.  8,  10  ;  xix.  18). 
 From  the  occurrence  of  this  word  in  Exod.  ix.  it 
 seems  to  denote  a  furnace  or  kiln  for  baking  bricks, 
 although  it  may  have  been  also  used  for  smelting 
 iiietals. 
 
 3.  "1^3,  from  the  verb  of  the  same  form,  meaning 
 to  boil  iijy,  although  Fiirst  takes  it  in  the  sense  of 
 boring,  or  hollowing  out,  '  a  profiinditate  vd  cavi- 
 tate,^  a  furnace  for  smelting  metals  certainly.  Thus, 
 Ezek.  xxii.  20,  22,  '  the  house  of  Israel  are  brass, 
 and  tin,  and  iron,  and  lead  in  the  midst  of  the  fur- 
 nace,' 113  ;  Prov.  xvii.  3;  xxvii.  21,  'the  furnace,' 
 1^3,  'for  gold.'  See  also  Is.  xlviii.  10;  Deut.  iv. 
 20 ;  where  the  word  is  used  metaphorically. 
 
 4.  "113ri  =  a  furnace  of  fire,  compounded,  ac- 
 cording to  Ges.,  of  jn,  i.  q.,    NJXD,    or  J^lflX,   an 
 
 oven,  and  "1^3,  Chal.,  a  fire;  to  which,  however, 
 Fiirst  objects,  maintaining  that  '  ex  "I^IJ,  crcbro  illo 
 Substa7itivoncm  additamento  rite  formatuni^  pro- 
 perly, an  oven  for  baking  bread,  although  it  seems 
 to  have  been  used  for  other  purposes.  In  its  wider 
 acceptation  it  occurs  Gen.  xv.  17  ;  Is.  xxxi.  9  ; 
 Mai.  iii.  19  (iv.  i).  In  its  special  reference,  it  is 
 found  Ex.  vii.  28,  (viii.  3)  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  26  ;  Hos. 
 vii.  4.  '  The  Tawiur  is  a  large  round  pot  of 
 earthen  or  other  matei'ials,  tv/o  or  three  feet 
 high,  narrowing  towards  the  top  ;  this  being  first 
 heated  by  a  fire  made  within,  the  dough  or  paste 
 is  spread  upon  the  sides  to  bake,  thus  forming  thin 
 cakes.'  Of  the  Gr.  KXi^avos,  '  by  which  the  LXX. 
 render  this  word,'  Jerome  says,  on  Lam.  v.  10, 
 Clibaniis  est  coquendis  panibus  aeni  Vasculi  diduc- 
 ta  rotunditas,  quae  sub  urentibus  fiammis  ardet  in- 
 trinsecus  '  (Ges.  in  Verb.)  '  The  tower  of  the  fur- 
 naces,' D''"l13nn    ?\)!0,  upon,  or  near  the  walls  of 
 
 Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  11  ;  xii.  38),  should  perhaps 
 rather  be,  tower  of  the  ovens,  if  not  taken  as  a 
 proper  name,  Migdol-Hattanmmm. 
 
 5.  Kd/xij-os,  by  which  the  first  three  of  the  pre- 
 ceding words  are  usually  rendered  by  the  LXX., 
 (/ccurs  in  the  Apocrypha  and  N.  T.  to  denote  fur- 
 naces of  different  sorts,  e.  g.,  the  Potter'' s  furnace 
 (Sirach  xxvii.  5  ;  xxxviii.  30).  The  Egyptian  pot- 
 ter's furnace,  as  represented  in  Wilkinson's  Ancient 
 Egyptians,  resembled  a  chimney  in  shape,  and  was 
 about  six  feet  high  (ii.  108).  It  is  also  used  of  the 
 .S'/w/Z/^'j  furnace  (Sirach  xxxviii.  28;  Apoc.  i.  15). 
 The  word  is  used  indefinitely  (Apoc.  ix.  2),  where 
 there  is  a  reference  to  Gen.  xix.  28  ;  and  in  Matt. 
 xiii.  42,  50,  where  there  is  an  obvious  reference  to 
 Dan.  iii. — I.  J. 
 
 G. 
 
 GAAL  (Py3  miscm-riage ;  Sept.    Tad\),   son  of 
 
 Ebed.  He  went  to  Shechem  with  his  brothers 
 when  the  inhabitants  became  discontented  with 
 Abimelech,  and  so  engaged  their  confidence  that 
 they  placed  him  at  their  head.  At  the  festival  at 
 which  the  Shechemites  offered  the  first-fruits  of 
 their  vintage  in  the  temple  of  Baal,  Gaal,  by  ap- 
 parently dranken  bravadoes,  roused  the  valour  of 
 the  people,  and  strove  yet  more  to  kindle  their 
 wrath  against  the  absent  Abimelech.  It  would 
 seem  as  if  the  natives  had  been  in  some  way  inti- 
 
 mately connected  with,  or  descended  from,  the 
 original  inhabitants ;  for  Gaal  endeavoured  to 
 awaken  their  attachment  to  the  ancient  family  of 
 Hamor,  the  father  of  Shechem,  which  ruled  the 
 place  in  the  time  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xxxiv.  2,  6), 
 and  which  seems  to  have  been  at  this  time  repre- 
 sented by  Gaal  and  his  brothers.  Although  de- 
 prived of  Shechem,  the  family  appears  to  have 
 maintained  itself  in  some  power  in  the  neighbour- 
 hood ;  which  induced  the  Shechemites  to  look  to 
 Gaal  when  they  became  tired  of  Abimelech. 
 Whether  he  succeeded  in  awakening  among  them 
 a  kind  feeling  towards  the  descendants  of  the  an- 
 cient masters  of  the  place,  does  not  appear  ;  but 
 eventually  they  went  out  under  his  command,  and 
 assisted  doubtless  by  his  men,  to  intercept  and  give 
 battle  to  Abimelech,  when  he  appeared  before  the 
 town.  He,  however,  fled  before  Abimelech,  and 
 his  retreat  into  Shechem  being  cut  off  by  Zebul, 
 t?ie  commandant  of  that  place,  he  went  to  his  home, 
 and  we  hear  of  him  no  more.  The  account  of  this 
 attempt  is  interesting,  chiefly  from  the  slight  glimpse 
 it  affords  of  the  position,  at  this  period,  of  what  had 
 been  one  of  the  reigning  families  of  the  land  before 
 its  invasion  by  the  Israelites  (Judg.  ix.  26-48)  B.C. 
 1026. — ^J.  Iv. 
 
 GAASH  (t;'J?3,  shaking,  eaj-thq^iake ;   Sept.   Fa- 
 
 \a.6.o.  Facts),  the  name  of  a  hill  ("IH),  part  of  the 
 Ephraim  range,  on  the  north  side  of  which  Joshua 
 was  buried  (Josh.  xxiv.  30 ;  Judg.  ii.  9).  In  2 
 Sam.  xxiii.  30,  and  i  Chron.   xi.    32,    mention  is 
 
 made  of  the   '^'^1  ''Pn3,    the   ravines,  valleys,    or 
 
 wadys  running  down  from  Gaash  (A.  V.  'biooks  of 
 Gaash  '),  as  the  designation  of  the  locality  whence 
 came  Hiddai  or  Hurai,  one  of  David's  heroes.  The 
 hill  has  not  been  identified. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GABA.     [Geba.] 
 
 GABBATHA  occurs  John  xix.  13,  where  the 
 Evangelist  states  that  Pontius  Pilate,  alarmed  at 
 last,  in  his  attempts  to  save  Jesus,  by  the  artful 
 insinuation  of  the  Jews,  '  If  thou  let  this  man  go, 
 thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend,'  went  into  the  pra;- 
 torium  again,  and  brought  Jesus  out  to  them,  and 
 sat  down  once  more  upon  the  ^rj^xa  or  tribunal,  in 
 a  place  called  Aid6<jTpu}Tov,  but  in  the  Hebrew 
 Gabbatha.  The  Greek  word,  signifying  literally 
 stone-paved,  is  an  adjective,  and  is  generally  used 
 as  such  by  the  Greek  writers  ;  but  they  also  some- 
 times use  it  substantively  for  a  stone  pavement, 
 when  ^oacpos  may  be  understood.  In  the  Septua- 
 gint  it  answers  to  112^'^  (2  Chron.  vii.  3  ;  Esther 
 i.  6).  Jerome  reads  '  Sedit  pro  tribunali  in  loco 
 qui  dicitur  Lithostrotos.'  The  Greek  word,  as 
 well  as  the  Latin,  is  frequently  used  to  denote  a 
 pavement  formed  of  ornamental  stones  of  various 
 colours,  commonly  called  a  tesselated  or  mosaic 
 pavement.  The  partiality  of  the  Romans  for  this 
 kind  of  pavement  is  well  known.  It  is  stated  by 
 Pliny  {Hist.  Nat.  xxxvi.  64)  that,  during  the  time  of 
 Sylla,  the  Romans  decorated  their  houses  with 
 such  pavements.  They  also  introduced  them  into 
 the  provinces.  Suetonius  relates  that  Julius  Caesar, 
 in  his  military  expeditions,  took  with  him  the 
 materials  of  tesselated  pavements,  ready  prepared, 
 that,  wherever  he  encamped,  they  might  be  laid 
 down  in  the  pr^torium  (Casaubon,  ad  Stieton.  p. 
 38,  etc.,  edit.  1605).  From  these  facts  it  has  been 
 inferred  by  many  eminent  writers,  that  the  jbiroi 
 
GABISH 
 
 47 
 
 GABRIEL 
 
 Ki06a-TpwTos,  or  place  where  Pilate's  tribunal  was 
 set  on  this  occasion,  was  covered  by  a  tesselated 
 pavement,  which,  as  a  piece  of  Roman  magnifi- 
 cence, was  appended  to  the  prsetorium  at  Jerusa- 
 lem. The  emphatic  manner  in  which  St.  John 
 speaks  of  it  agrees  with  this  conjecture.  It  further 
 appears  from  his  narrative  that  it  was  outside  the 
 praetorium  ;  for  Pilate  is  said  to  have  '  come  out ' 
 to  the  Jews,  who,  for  ceremonial  reasons,  did  not 
 go  into  it,  on  this  as  well  as  on  other  occasions 
 (John  xviii.  28,  29,  38 ;  xix.  4,  13).  Besides 
 which,  the  Roman  governors,  although  they  tried 
 causes,  and  conferred  with  their  council  (Acts  xxv. 
 12),  within  the  praetorium,  always  pronounced 
 sentence  in  the  open  air.  May  not  then  this  tesse- 
 lated pavement,  on  which  the  tribunal  was  now 
 placed,  have  been  inlaid  on  some  part  of  the  ter- 
 race limning  along  one  side  of  the  praetorium, 
 and  overlooking  the  area  where  the  Jews  were  as- 
 sembled, or  upon  a  landing-place  of  the  stairs,  im- 
 mediately before  the  grand  entrance  ? 
 
 It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  pavement  in 
 question  was  no  other  than  the  one  referred  to  in 
 2  Chron.  vii.  3,  and  by  Josephus,  De  Bell.  Jiid.  vi. 
 I.  8,  as  in  the  outer  court  of  the  tenipk;  but  though 
 it  appears  that  Pilate  sometimes  sat  upon  his  tri- 
 bunal in  different  places,  as,  for  instance,  in  the 
 open  market-place  {De  Bell.  Jiui.  ii.  9.  3),  yet  the 
 supposition  that  he  would,  on  this  occasion,  when 
 the  Jews  were  pressing  for  a  speedy  judgment,  and 
 when  he  was  overcome  witli  alarm,  adjourn  the 
 whole  assembly,  consisting  of  rulers  of  every  grade, 
 as  well  as  the  populace,  to  any  other  place,  is  very 
 unlikely  ;  and  the  supposition  that  such  place  was 
 any  part  of  the  temple  is  encumbered  with  addi- 
 tional difficulties.  The  word  Gabbatha  remains 
 to  be  considered.  It  is  not  certain  that  St.  John 
 intends  Kidbarpwros  as  a  translation  or  interpreta- 
 tion of  Gabbatha  ;  he  may  simply  mean  that  the 
 same  place  was  called  by  these  two  names  in  Greek 
 and  Plebrew  respectively.  Yet  it  may  be  said  that 
 the  names  jHiX  and  AiroWvicv,  which  he  intro- 
 duces in  a  similar  way  (Rev.  ix.  11),  are  synony- 
 mous ;  and  if  the  word  Gabbatha  be  derived,  as 
 Lightfoot  suggests  [in  loc),  from  311,  'a  surface,' 
 it  may  correspond  to  the  idea  of  a  pavement  ;  but 
 if,  as  is  usual,  it  be  derived  from  T\'2l,  '  to  be  high 
 or  elevated,'  it  may  refer  chiefly  to  the  terrace,  or 
 uppermost  landing  of  the  stairs,  which  might 
 have  been  inlaid  with  a  tesselated  pavement. 
 Schleusner  understands  an  elevated  mosaic  pave- 
 ment, on  which  the  ^Tjixa.  was  placed,  before  the 
 praetorium.  The  most  natural  inference  from  St. 
 John's  statement  is,  that  the  word  Gabbatha  is 
 '  Hebrew, '  or  rather  Aramaic.  The  Syriac 
 version,    instead    of    Gabbatha,     reads    Gepiptha 
 
 [|Z\'^  1  '^  i«i  lorica,  peribolus.     The  double  b  in 
 
 Gabbatha  is  an  objection  to  its  being  derived  from 
 n33  ;  it  is  more  properly  derived  from  3J  in  the 
 sense  of  back,  or  top.  The  Aramaic  and  Greek 
 words  are  different  names  of  the  same  place.]  [Dis- 
 sert. DekLdo(jTpihTLg,  a  Conrad  Iken,  Bremae,  1725; 
 Lightfoot's  Works,  vol.  ii.  pp.  614,  615,  Lond.  16S4 ; 
 Hamelsveld,  Bibl.  Geogr.  ii.  129  ;  Seelen,  Mcditt. 
 Ex£g.  i.  643  ;  Jahn's  ArchcBol.  Bib.)—].  F.  D. 
 
 GABISH  (C33).  This  word  occurs  Job  xxviii. 
 18,  where  it  is  translated  in  the  A.  V.  'pearls.' 
 The  LXX.  retains  it  untranslated  •^a.^h,  while  the 
 
 Vulg.  renders  it  by  eminentia — a  rendering  which 
 rests  on  its  supposed  derivation  from  n33,  to  be  high. 
 
 The   Targum   represents    it  by   pP"l"1^2,    but  this 
 
 probably,  like  the  Arab.   ,-l_i,  which  is  the  same 
 
 word  slightly  transposed,  denotes  not  merely  beryl 
 but  also  ch7jstal.  This  last  is  what  most  modern 
 scholars  are  agreed  upon  as  the  proper  equivalent 
 of  ti'''3J.      Gesenius  and  Fiirst  derive  it  from  ti'33, 
 
 ■tofree::e,  congeal;  hence  5^''3JPX,  hail  ['Ez.  xiii.  11); 
 and  hence,  from  the  similarity  of  chrystal  to  ice, 
 the  meaning  chrystal;  comp.  KpuaraWos  and  Plin. 
 //ist.  A^at.  xxxvii.  2.  It  must  be  confessed,  how- 
 ever, that  the  conclusion  here  rests  on  somewhat 
 precarious  grounds.  The  only  authority  for  the 
 verb  V2i  is  in  its  supposed  derivatives ;  and  of  not 
 one  of  these  is  the  meaning  even  tolerably  certain, 
 as  all  are  ctTra^  Xeyd/Meva.  The  reasoning,  in  fact, 
 is  throughout  in  a  circle  ;  the  verb  is  held  to  con- 
 vey the  idea  of  congelation,  because  the  derivatives 
 contain  it,  and  this  meaning  is  ascribed  to  these 
 derivatives   because  it  is   contained  in  the  verb. 
 
 Gesenius  adduces  also  the  Arab.  jajJc*-?  lo  freeze, 
 
 but  this  sense  is  of  dubious  legitimacy,  the  verb 
 properly  meaning  to  raze  or  crop.  Dr.  Lee  {Book 
 of  Job,  in  loc.  ;  and  Hcb.  Lex.  in  v.)  takes  it  to 
 mean  heazy,  and  hence  precious  ;  and  understands 
 it  of  some  valuable  metal.  Some  of  the  Rabbins 
 understood  by  it  a  valuable  garment ;  see  Castell, 
 Lex.  Lleptagl.  in  voc. — W.  L.  A.. 
 
 GABRIAS  {Ta^pias,  LXX.  ;  Taipei,  FA.) 
 According  to  Tobit  i.  14,  the  brother  of  Gabael, 
 the  person  with  whom  Tobit  left  in  trust  (Trape- 
 S-e^Tji-)  ten  talents  of  silver;  but  in  iv.  20,  Gabael 
 is  said  to  be  the  son  of  Gabrias.  No  light  is 
 thrown  on  this  discrepancy  by  the  various  readings 
 and  versions  of  this  book.  The  Vulg.  in  both 
 passages  differs  widely  from  the  LXX.  The  old 
 Latin  has  in  the  first  passage,  £t  cofuniendavi 
 Gabelo  fratri  meo  filio  Gabahel,  and  in  the  second, 
 Gabelo  filio  Gabahel.  See  Fritzsche,  Exegetisches 
 Handbuch  zu  den  Apocryphen. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 GABRIEL  (^N"'"l3a,  the  mighty  one  [or  hero'l  of 
 
 God),  the  heavenly  messenger  who  was  sent  to 
 Daniel  to  explain  the  vision  of  the  ram  and  tlie 
 he-goat  (Dan.  viii.),  and  to  communicate  the  pre- 
 diction of  the  Seventy  Weeks  (Dan.  ix.  21-27). 
 Under  the  new  dispensation  he  was  employed  to 
 announce  the  birth  of  John  the  Baptist  to  his  father 
 Zechariah  (Luke  i.  11),  and  that  of  the  Messiah  to 
 the  Virgin  Mary  (Luke  i.  26).  Both  by  Jewish 
 and  Christian  writers,  Gabriel  has  been  denomi- 
 nated an  archangel.  The  Scriptures,  however, 
 affirm  nothing  positively  respecting  his  rank, 
 though  the  importance  of  the  commissions  on 
 which  he  was  employed,  and  his  own  words,  '  I 
 am  Gabriel,  that  stand  in  the  presence  of  God' 
 (Luke  i.  19),  are  rather  m  favour  of  the  notion  of 
 his  superior  dignity. 
 
 In  the  Book  of  Enoch,  '  the  four  great  arch- 
 angels, Michael,  Raphael,  Gabriel,  and  Uriel,'  are 
 described  as  reporting  the  corrupt  state  of  mankind 
 to  the  Creator,  and  receiving  their  several  com- 
 missions. To  Gabriel  he  says,  '  Go,  Gabriel, 
 against  the  giants,  the  spurious  ones,  the  sons  of 
 fornication,  and  destroy  the  sons  of  the  watchers 
 from  among  the  sons  of  men'  {Greek  FragmeJtt  of 
 
GABRIEL  SIONITA 
 
 48 
 
 GAD 
 
 the  Book  of  Enoch,  preserved  by  Syncellus  in  Scali- 
 ger's  notes  on  the  Chronicon  of  Eusebius,  Amstel. 
 165S,  p.  404).  In  the  rabbinical  writings  Gabriel 
 is  represented  as  standing  in  front  of  the  divine 
 throne,   near  the  standard  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
 
 (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talmud,  s.  v.  ^t^^lX)-  The  rabbins 
 also  say  that  he  is  the  Prince  of  Fire,  and  appointed 
 to  preside  over  the  ripening  of  fruit ;  that  he  was 
 the  only  one  of  the  angels  who  understood  Chaklee 
 and  Syriac,  and  taught  Joseph  the  seventy  lan- 
 guages spoken  at  the  dispersion  of  Babel ;  that  he 
 and  Michael  destroyed  the  host  of  Sennacherib, 
 and  set  fire  to  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  (Eisenmen- 
 ger's  Entdecktes  Jude7ithii7n,   th.   ii.   ss.   365,   379, 
 
 380,383)- 
 
 By  the  Mohammedans  Gabriel  is  regarded  with 
 profound  veneration.  To  him,  it  is  affirmed,  a  copy 
 of  the  whole  Koran  was  committed,  which  he 
 imparted  in  successive  portions  to  Moliammed. 
 He  is  styled  in  the  Koran,  the  Spirit  of  Truth,  and 
 the  Holy  Spirit.  In  his  hands  will  be  placed  the 
 scales  in  which  the  actions  of  men  will  be  weighed 
 at  the  last  day  (Sale's  Korafi ;  D'Herbelot's  Biblio- 
 Iheque  Orientale). — J.  E.  R. 
 
 GABRIEL  SIONITA,  a  Maronite,  born  m 
 1577  at  Edessa,  a  village  m  the  Lebanon:  when 
 seven  years  old  he  was  sent  to  Rome,  and  there 
 received  his  first  instruction  at  the  Maronite  College. 
 He  then  devoted  himself  chiefly  to  the  study  of 
 Oriental  languages,  and  by  some  of  his  writings 
 came  under  the  notice  of  the  then  French  ambas- 
 sador in  Rome,  Savary  de  Breves.  The  latter,  at 
 the  instance  of  Cardinal  Perrone,  and  the  librarian 
 at  the  Royal  Library  in  Paris,  De  Thou,  who 
 were  both  anxious  to  cany  out  their  favourite  plan 
 of  printing  a  new  comprehensive  Polyglott  Bible, 
 secured  the  services  of  both  Gabriel  and  another 
 Maronite,  Johannes  Esronita,  for  the  new  work. 
 Gabriel  arrived  in  Paris  in  1 6 14,  and  was  forth- 
 with appointed  Professor  of  Arabic — his  mother- 
 tongue — at  the  College  de  France,  and  endowed 
 with  a  rich  salary.  The  two  Maronites  commenced 
 their  Biblical  labours,  which  chiefly  consisted  in 
 their  i-evising  all  the  Oriental  texts,  and  adding 
 Latin  translations  to  them.  In  the  meantime  the 
 Cardinal  and  De  Thou,  who  had  taken  the 
 greatest  interest  in  the  proposed  Polyglott,  died, 
 and  the  scheme  was  abandoned.  Gabriel,  who 
 had  finished  his  share  of  the  work,  addressed  him- 
 .self  to  the  synod  assembled  at  Blois,  in  1619, 
 asking  for  a  subsidy  which  should  enable  him 
 either  to  print  the  entire  Polyglott,  or  at  least  to 
 publish  the  Oriental  texts.  The  synod'  immedi- 
 ately granted  his  prayer,  and  assigned  8000  livres 
 for  the  purpose  of  furthering  his  undertaking  ;  but 
 somehow  the  money  never  reached  his  hands,  and 
 he  not  indistinctly  hints  at  its  having  gone  into  the 
 wrong  pocket.  After  this  he  was  involved  in  a 
 series  of  troubles  and  vexatious  dis])Utes  with  Le 
 Jay,  the  editor  of  the  Polyglott,  which  ended  in 
 his  being  sent  for  six  months  to  Vincennes. 
 From  this  he  was  released  only  on  the  condi- 
 tion that  he  would  now  unremittingly  work  at 
 the  Polyglott  until  it  should  be  completed.  He 
 kept  his  word  most  conscientiously,  but  three 
 years  after  it  was  finished  he  died,  in  1648,  a  broken 
 old  man,  at  Paris,  which  he  had  hardly  ever  leit 
 since  he  had  first  arrived  there.  His  exact  share 
 in  the  work  (contained  in  vol.  vii.  ff  of  the 
 Polyglott)   consists  in  the  collation  of  the  various 
 
 Arab,  and  Syi.  MSS.,  in  the  revision  of  the  printed 
 texts,  and  in  the  addition  of  Latin  translations  tc 
 all  the  Biblical  books  save  Ruth  (done  by  A.  Ec- 
 chellensis)  and  the  four  Gospels,  which  he  merely 
 revised  from  Raymundus.  The  judgments  on  his 
 achievements  vary  ;  but  it  would  appear,  both  from 
 the  mistakes  he  corrected  as  from  those  he  left  (Cf. 
 Eichh.  Intr.),  that  neither  the  high-flown  praise 
 nor  the  exaggerated  blame  bestowed  upon  them 
 are  deserved  ;  but  that  Gabriel  did  just  what  would 
 be  exfiected  from  a  man  possessed  of  a  fair  know- 
 ledge of  Arabic  and  Syriac,  but  only  partiaUy  ac- 
 quainted with  Hebrew  and  Latin,  and  whose  ac- 
 quirements generally  were  on  a  par  with  the  good 
 scholars  of  the  time.  He  has,  in  three  small  pamph- 
 lets, told  the  whole  story  of  his  appointments  and 
 disappointments,  his  squabbles  and  successes.  Be- 
 sides his  contributions  to  the  Polyglott  may  be 
 mentioned  the  following  works,  some  of  which  he 
 published,  together  with  Joannes  Ezronita  and 
 Victor  Szialac, — Liber  Psalmorum  Davidis  ex  ara- 
 bko  idiomate  i)i  Latimmi  translatus,  Rome,  1614; 
 Grammatica  Arabica  Jlfaroiiitaruin  hi  libros  V. 
 divlsa,  Paris,  1616,  which,  however,  contains  only 
 one  book  of  reading-lessons ;  Geographia  A^nbi- 
 aisis,  etc. ,  a  very  faulty  Latin  translation  of  a  still 
 more  faulty,  abridged  text  of  Edrisi  (published  in 
 Rome  in  1592),  Paris,  1619.  Nor  is  there  much  tc 
 be  said  for  the  appendix  of  their  own,  which  the 
 translators,  Gabriel  and  Joannes  Ezronita  added  tc 
 this  last  work,  entitled,  De  jioiuiidlis  Orientalium 
 7irbibns,  etc. — Liber  L^'salmonini  ex  idiomate  Syrc 
 in  Latinum  translatits,  Paris,  1625  ;  Veteris  philo- 
 sophi  Syri  de  sapicntia  divina,  poema  ccnigviaticiim 
 Syr.  et  Lat.  —  Testameittttm  et  pactiones  inter  Mo- 
 Jiamvtedem  et  Christiance  fidei  ciiltores,  Paris,  1634, 
 etc.— E.  D. 
 
 GAD  (na  ;  Sept.  FdS).   i.  The  son  of  Jacob  and 
 
 Zilpali,  Leah's  maid.  His  name  is  explained  in 
 the  story  of  his  birth,  and  the  explanation  is  con- 
 firmed by  a  subsequent  allusion — '  Zilpah  bare 
 Jacob  a  son,  and  Leah  said  a  troop  cometh,  and 
 she  called  his  name  Gad''  (Gen.  xxx.  11).  The  pas- 
 sage is  rendered  somewhat  obscure  by  the  fact  that 
 tlie  J\ctiv  has  133,  which  the  Sept.,  Vulg.,  and 
 some  modern  commentators  render  '■  in  felicity ;'' 
 whereas  the  Masoretic  A tv/ gives  IJ  113  as  the  true 
 reading,  and  is  followed  by  our  A.  V.  That  the 
 latter  reading  is  the  true  one  may  be  seen  by  com- 
 paring the  passage  with  Gen.  xlix.  19,  where  the 
 word  "73  must  bear  the  signification  of  'a  troop.' 
 Of  the  personal  history  of  this  patriarch  no  details 
 are  given.  His  name  is  not  once  mentioned  except 
 in  those  hsts  where  the  sons  of  Jacob  are  all  enu- 
 merated. All  we  know  of  him  is  that  he  had  seven 
 sons  at  the  time  Jacob  and  his  family  migrated  to 
 Eg}'pt  (xlvi.  16). 
 
 The  materials  for  the  history  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  are 
 very  scanty.  In  Jacob's  prophetic  blessing  there 
 is  a  characteristic  jilay  upon  the  name,  and  one  of 
 the  most  remarkalile  examples  of  paronomasia 
 in  the  Bible  I^V  IJ"*  XIHl  IJT1:''  inj  13  (Gen. 
 xlix.  19).  No  translation  can  do  justice  to  it. 
 Stanley's  rendering  approaches  the  force  and  point 
 of  the  original  :  '  Gad  is  a  troop  of  plunderers ; 
 a  troop  of  plujiderers  shall  plunder  him,  but  he 
 shall  plunder  at  the  last'  {S.  and  P.,  320).  The 
 troops  destined  to  plunder  him  were  the  wild 
 hordes  of  Arabs  and  Ammonites  by  whom  his  bor- 
 ders were  infested,  whose  incursions  were  frequent, 
 
GAD 
 
 49 
 
 GAD 
 
 and  whose  defeat  and  slaughter  were  signal  (Jndg. 
 X.,  xi.)  The  tribe  numbered  45,650  fighting  men 
 at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  ;  and  during  the  wilder- 
 ness journey  it  decreased  to  40,500  (Num.  i.  25  ; 
 xxvi.  18).  The  Gadites,  like  their  brethren  of 
 Reuben  and  Manasseh,  had  retained  while  in 
 Egypt  their  old  pastoral  habits,  and  were  very  rich 
 in  cattle  (xxxii.  i).  When  the  Israelites  approached 
 Canaan  after  the  long  pilgrimage  through  the  rugged 
 defiles  of  Sinai,  and  across  the  arid  plains  of  Western 
 Arabia,  the  rich  pasture  lands  of  Gilead,  with  its 
 forests,  streams,  and  glorious  scenery,  immedi- 
 ately attracted  the  attention  of  these  tribes ;  and 
 they  'came  and  spake  unto  Moses  .  .  .  saying 
 ,  .  .  (this)  country  ...  is  a  land  for  cattle, 
 and  thy  sei"vants  have  cattle  ;  wherefore  ...  let 
 this  land  be  given  unto  thy  servants  for  a  possession' 
 (xxxii.  2-5).  Their  request  was  granted  ;  and  the 
 two  tribes  and  half  settled  east  of  Jordan.  They 
 had  probably  an  additional  object  in  making  this 
 choice.  The  country  west  of  the  river  was  of 
 narrow  limits.  It  was  not  so  well  suited  for  the 
 freedom  and  nomad  habits  of  pastoral  life.  The 
 Gadites  and  their  brethren  wished  a  wider  range 
 for  their  vast  flocks  than  Palestine  afforded ;  and 
 they  saw  the  great  eastern  plains  open  to  them. 
 At  one  period  this  tribe  occupied  the  country  as  far 
 east  as  Salchah  (i  Chron.  v.  11-16). 
 
 The  territory  which  fell  to  the  lot  of  the  Gadites 
 is  one  of  the  most  beautiful  in  Syria.  On  the 
 south  it  was  bounded  by  the  valley  of  Heshbon  ;  on 
 the  west  by  the  Jordan  ;  and  on  the  east  by  the 
 plain  of  Arabia  (Josh.  xiii.  24,  sij.)  Its  northern 
 boundary  is  somewhat  more  difficult  to  define. 
 Gad  possessed  the  whole  Jordan  valley  as  far  as 
 the  sea  of  Galilee  (xiii.  27) ;  but  among  the  moun- 
 tains eastward  the  territory  extended  no  farther 
 north  than  the  river  Jabbok.  The  border  seems  to 
 have  run  diagonally  from  that  point  across  the 
 mountains  by  Mahanaim  to  the  southern  extremity 
 of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Josh.  xii.  1-6  ;  xiii.  26,  30, 
 31  ;  Deut.  iii.  12,  13  (see  Porter's  Damascus,  ii. 
 252).  As  seen  from  the  west  this  region  is  a  con- 
 tinuous range  of  purple-tinted  mountains,  rising 
 abruptly  from  the  chasm  of  the  Jordan,  intersected 
 oy  deep  ravines,  and  partially  clothed  with  oak 
 forests,  and  jungles  of  evergreen  shrubs.  When 
 viewed  from  the  east  the  appearance  is  altogether 
 different.  It  is  a  low,  irregular  ridge,  in  some 
 places  not  rising  more  than  a  hundred  feet  above 
 the  high,  bleak  plateau  of  Arabia.  The  soil 
 among  the  mountains  and  in  the  picturesque  glens 
 is  fertile,  and  the  pastures  are  more  luxuriant  than 
 in  any  part  of  Syria.  The  territoiy  also  embraced 
 a  number  of  places  remarkable  in  the  sacred  and 
 civil  history  of  the  patriarchs,  judges,  and  kings ; 
 such  as  Mahanaim,  Peniel,  Ramoth-Mizpeh,  Galeed, 
 Succoth,  and  Rabbath-Ammon. 
 
 The  Gadites  were  a  warlike  race,  and  they 
 bravely  aided  their  brethren  in  the  conquest  of 
 Canaan.  Leaving  their  women  and  children  in 
 their  strongholds  east  of  the  Jordan,  they  crossed 
 over  armed,  and  with  Reuben  and  Manasseh  led 
 the  van  in  the  long  campaign  under  Joshua  (Josh, 
 iv.  12,  13;  xxii.  1-4).  The  position  of  their  terri- 
 toiy  compelled  them  to  keep  up  their  warlike 
 spirit  and  training  in  after  ages.  The  Ammonites, 
 whose  country  they  possessed,  hung  upon  their 
 eastern  border  (Judg.  x.  17)  ;  and  the  wild  hordes 
 of  the  Arabian  desert  made  periodical  raids  upon 
 their  pastures  and  flocks  (chaps,  vii. ,  viii. )  Though 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 often  sorely  pressed  by  these  fieice  plunderers,  yet 
 they  nobly  defended  their  countiy,  and  more  tl'ian 
 once  bore  back  the  tide  of  conquest  on  their  as- 
 sailants. One  of  their  greatest  victories  was  that 
 gained  over  the  descendants  of  Ishmael,  the  tribes 
 of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab,  from  whom  they 
 took  enormous  booty  (i  Chron.  v.  19-22).  The 
 Gadites  were  well  described  at  that  time  as  '  valiant 
 men,  men  able  to  bear  buckler  and  sword,  and  to 
 shoot  with  bow,  and  skilful  in  war'  (ver.  18). 
 This  country  too  produced  many  eminent  men. 
 Jephthah  the  Gileadite  ranks  high  among  the 
 heroes  of  Israel ;  and  '  Elijah  the  Tishbite  of  the 
 inhabitants  of  Gilead,'  was  one  of  the  grandest 
 characters  the  world  ever  saw.  It  may  be  that  he 
 owed  some  of  those  qualities  for  which  he  was  dis- 
 tinguished to  the  habits  and  state  of  his  native 
 country  —  his  wonderful  physical  strength;  his 
 powers  of  enduring  fatigue,  hunger,  and  thirst  ; 
 his  dress  in  every  respect  resembling  that  of  a 
 modern  inhabitant  of  Gilead  ;  his  wandering  mode 
 of  life  ;  and  his  apparent  dislike  to  the  restraints  of 
 society.  Gilead  was  a  land  of  roving  shepherds, 
 and  moving  camps,  and  mountain  castles,  and  wild 
 adventure  (Gilead). 
 
 The  Gadites  were  devotedly  attached  to  both 
 Saul  and  David.  Some  of  their  mighty  men  fol- 
 lowed the  fortunes  of  the  latter  in  their  darkest 
 period — men  of  whom  it  is  said  that  they  were 
 '  men  of  war  for  the  battle,  that  could  handle  shield 
 and  buckler,  whose  faces  were  the  faces  of  lions, 
 and  who  were  swift  as  the  roes  upon  the  moun- 
 tains' (i  Chron.  xii.  8).  The  taking  down  the 
 bodies  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  from  the  battlements 
 of  Bethshean  was  an  act  of  noble  daring  and 
 grateful  recompense.  Among  the  Gadites  David 
 afterwards  found  an  asylum  when  he  fled  from 
 Absalom  ;  and  in  their  territory  the  battle  was 
 fought  which  regained  him  his  throne  (2  Sam.  xvtt., 
 xviii. )  The  Gadites  suffered  much  during  the 
 ascendancy  of  the  warlike  monarchs  of  Damascus. 
 At  length  the  whole  country  was  overrun  by  the 
 armies  of  Tiglath-pileser,  king  of  Assyria,  and  the 
 people  carried  away  captive  (2  Kings  xv.  29). 
 Soon  afterwards  the  Ammonites  appear  to  have 
 taken  possession  of  the  land  ;  and  Jeremiah  was 
 then  commissioned  to  pronounce  that  prophetic 
 doom  which  we  now  see  so  fearfully  executed  on 
 the  cities  and  villages  of  Gilead  (Jer.  xlix.  i,  seq.) 
 In  addition  to  those  already  named,  the  following 
 works  may  be  consulted — Reland,  Pal.,  p.  162, 
 seq. ;  Stanley,  Sin.  and  Pal.,  p.  319  ;  Kalisch  on 
 Gen.  xlix.  19;  Handbook  for  Syr.  and  Pal.,  295, 
 308,  seq.  ;  Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Synia,  345, 
 seq.  ;  Irby  and  Mangles'  Travels. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 2.  A  prophet  contemporary  with  David,  and 
 probably  a  pupil  of  Samuel,  who  early  attached 
 himself  to  the  son  of  Jesse  (i  Sam.  xxii.  5).  In- 
 stances of  his  prophetic  intercourse  with  David 
 occur  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  il,  seq.  ;  i  Chron.  xxi.  9, 
 seq.;  2  Chron.  xxix.  25.  Gad  wrote  a  history  of 
 the  reign  of  David,  to  which  the  author  of  the  Second 
 Book  of  Samuel  seems  to  refer  for  further  informa- 
 tion respecting  that  reign  (l  Chron.  xxix.  29),  B.C. 
 1062-1017. 
 
 GAD   (la  ;    Sept    Saifidv.ov,   or,    according   to 
 
 the  reading  of  Jerome  and  of  some  MSS.,  tvxv) 
 is  mentioned  in  Is.  Ixv.  1 1.  The  word  admits  of 
 two  different  significations.     If  it  be  derived  from 
 
GAD 
 
 50 
 
 GADARA 
 
 mj  in  the  sense  oi  to  cut,  it  may  mean  a  lot,  and, 
 
 by   a   combination  with  the  Arabic  J>j>-,  which 
 
 means  to  be  neiv,  to  occur,  to  be  fortunate,  may  be 
 legitimately  taken  to  Aeno\.efortH7te.  Indeed,  some 
 find  this  '  fortune,'  although  not  as  an  idol,  in  Gen. 
 XXX.  II,  where  the  Sept.  has  rendered  the  Kethib 
 nj^  by  ev  Tvxv^  which  is  approved  by  Selden,  and 
 especially  by  Tuch,  who  does  not  even  wish  to 
 change  the  punctuation,  but  ascribes  the  Qametz 
 to  the  influence  of  the  pause  (Cowmeut.  iiber  die 
 Genesis,  ad  loc.)  This  is  the  sense  in  which  Ges- 
 enius,  Hitzig,  and  Ewald  have  taken  Gad  in  their 
 respective  versions  of  Isaiah.  All  render  the  clause, 
 'who  spread  a  table  to  Fortune.'  This  view, 
 which  is  the  general  one,  makes  Fortune  in  tliis 
 passage  to  be  an  object  of  idolatrous  worship. 
 There  is  great  disagreement,  however,  as  to  the 
 power  of  nature  which  this  name  was  intended  to 
 denote  ;  and,  from  the  scanty  data,  there  is  little 
 else  than  mere  opinion  on  the  subject.  The  majo- 
 rity, among  whom  are  some  of  the  chief  rabbinical 
 commentators,  as  well  as  Gesenius,  Miinter,  and 
 Ewald,  consider  Gad  to  be  the  form  under  wliich 
 the  planet  Jupiter  was  worshipped  as  the  greater 
 star  of  good  fortune  (see  especially  Gesenius,  Com- 
 ment, iiber  den  lesaia,  ad  loc.)  Others,  among 
 whom  is  Vitringa,  suppose  Gad  to  have  repre- 
 sented the  Sun  ;  and  Movers,  the  latest  writer  of 
 any  eminence  on  Syro-Arabian  idolatry,  takes  it 
 to  have  been  the  planet  Venus  {^Die  Phonizier,  i. 
 650). 
 
 On  the  other  hand,  if  Gad  be  derived  from  mj 
 in  the  sense  of  to  press,  to  crowd,  it  may  mean  a 
 troop,  a  heap  (to  which  sense  there  is  an  allusion  in 
 Gen.  xlix.  19)  ;  and  Hoheisel,  as  cited  in  Rosen- 
 miiller's  Scholia,  ad  loc. ,  as  well  as  Deyling,  in  his 
 Obsen'at.  Miscell.  p.  673,  have  each  attempted  a 
 mode  by  which  the  passage  might  be  explained,  if 
 Gad  and  Meni  were  taken  in  the  sense  of  t)-oop  and 
 mtniber. — ^J.  N. 
 
 GAD  (13)  occurs  in  two  places  in  Scripture,  in 
 
 both  of  which  it  is  translated  c^'r/rt^^/t-r,  viz.,  Exod. 
 xvi.  31,  Num.  xi.  7.  The  manna  which  fell  in 
 the  desert,  and  on  which  the  Israelites  were  fed 
 during  their  sojourn  there,  is  usually  described, 
 from  a  collation  of  the  different  passages,  in  which  it 
 is  mentioned  as  white,  round,  and  like  gad,  which 
 last  has  almost  universally  been  considered  to  mean 
 '  coriander'  seed,  though  some  prefer  other  seeds. 
 The  chief  and  indeed  only  proof  of  gad  signify- 
 ing the  coriander,  has  been  adduced  by  Celsius 
 (Hierobot.  vol.  ii.  p.  81):  '  TotS,  quod  Africanis 
 coriandrum  est,  ut  docet  auctor  ignotus  sed 
 utilissimus,  qui  Dioscoridem  synonymis  exoticis 
 auxit  et  illustravit.  Kl-yvtttiol,  inquit,  oxiov, 
 ^A<ppoi  yoiS :  coriandrum  /Egyptii  ochion  appel- 
 lant, Afri  goid.''  This  passage  Sprengel  incorpo- 
 rates with  the  text  of  Dioscorides  as  well  as  the 
 other  synonyms,  which  are  supposed  by  others,  as 
 above,  to  be  additions  by  another  but  unknown 
 ancient  autlior.  Rosenmiiller,  referring  to  this 
 passage,  observes :  '  the  Africans,  i.  e.  Cartha- 
 ginians, whose  language,  tire  Punic,  was  cognate 
 with  the  Hebrew,  called  the  coriander  FotS,  whicli 
 word  is  not  at  all  different  from  the  Wthxew  gad? 
 Celsius  states  that  the  coriander  is  frequently  men- 
 tioned in  the  Talmud.  It  was  known  to  and  used 
 medicinally  by  Hippocrates :    it  is  mentioned  by 
 
 Theophrastus,  as  well  as  Dioscorides,  under  the 
 name  of  Khpiov  or  Kopiavvov ;  and  the  Arabs,  in 
 their  works  on  Materia  Medica,  give  korion  as  the 
 Greek    synonym    of    coriander,    which   they   call 
 
 iJ^j^   kuzeereh,   the    Persians  kushneez,   and  the 
 
 natives  of  India  dhmtya.     It  is  known  throughout 
 
 254.   Coriandrum  sativum. 
 
 all  these  countries,  in  all  of  which  it  is  cultivated, 
 being  universally  employed  as  a  grateful  spice,  and 
 as  one  of  the  ingredients  of  currie-powder.  It  is 
 also  common  in  Egypt  (Prosper  Alpinus,  De 
 Plantis  y-Egypfi,  c.  xlii.  p.  61).  Pliny  also,  long 
 before,  mentioned  'coriandrum  in  yEgypto  prseci- 
 puum. '  It  is  now  very  common  in  the  south  of 
 Europe,  and  also  in  this  country,  being  cultivated, 
 especially  in  Essex,  on  account  of  its  seeds.  The 
 coriander  is  an  imibelliferous  plant,  the  Corian- 
 drum sativum  of  botanists.  The  fruit,  commonly 
 called  seeds,  is  globular,  greyish-coloured,  about 
 the  size  of  peppercorn,  having  its  surface  marlced 
 with  fine  stride.  Both  its  taste  and  smell  are  agree- 
 able, depending  on  the  presence  of  a  volatile  oil, 
 which  is  separated  by  distillation. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 GADARA  (FaSapd).  A  city  of  Persea,  and  one 
 of  its  ancient  capitals.  It  stood  on  the  northern 
 end  of  the  mountains  of  Gilead,  five  miles  east  of 
 the  river  Jordan,  and  about  six  from  the  Sea  of 
 Galilee.  It  is  only  mentioned  in  Scripture  in  con- 
 nection with  the  miracle  performed  by  our  Lord  on 
 the  demoniacs.  The  story  is  told  by  three  of  the 
 Evangelists.  IMatthew,  according  to  the  I'extus 
 Receptus,  says  it  occurred  in  the  country  of  the 
 Geigesenes  {Tepyea-rjvwv ;  viii.  28)  ;  while  Mark 
 (v.  i)  and  Luke  (viii.  26)  call  it  the  country  of  the 
 Gadarencs  {TaSaprjvQv).  We  shall  first  endeavour 
 to  remove  this  apparent  contradiction.  The  name 
 of  the  place  must  be  ascertained  before  an  attempt 
 is  made  to  identify  and  describe  it. 
 
 On  examining  the  MS.  authorities  for  the  text  of 
 Matthew's  gospel,  we  find  them  strangely  divided 
 about  this  word.  Seven  Uncials  have  VepyecTTii'Qv, 
 the  reading  of  the  71  A'.,  but  none  of  these  is  older 
 than  the  eighth  century.     One,  the  Cod.  Bez.,  has 
 
GAUARA 
 
 51 
 
 GADARA 
 
 Tipo-o-qvOiv ;  four  have  Ta^apr^vCcv  ;  but  those  in- 
 clude tlie  most  ancient  and  valuable  extant,  B.  and 
 C.  ;  and  the  Sinaitic  MS.,  according  to  Tischen- 
 dorf,  has  Va^ap-qvCov,  manifestly  a  corruption  of  the 
 same  reading  {Notitia  Edit.  Cod.  Bib.  Sinait,  p. 
 15).  The  weight  of  MS.  evidence  is  thus  decidedly 
 in  favour  of  Fadap-qvuiv.  The  ancient  versions  are 
 nearly  equally  balanced ;  the  Syriac  having  Gada>-a, 
 and  the  Latin  Gerasa.  Origen  is  the  first  writer 
 who  mentions  the  reading  rep7e(n;«'uii'.  He  states 
 that  the  common  reading  was  Fepacrd  ;  but  that  in 
 a  few  (iv  6\iyois)  he  found  FaSapd.  He  thought, 
 however,  that  both  these  cities  were  too  far  dis- 
 tant from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to  meet  the  require- 
 ments of  the  narrative,  and  consequently  he  con- 
 /ec/ures  that  Gergesa,  which  he  says  lay  upon  the 
 shore,  must  be  the  place  referred  to  (Comme?it.  in 
 jfok.)  Now  in  a  question  of  this  kind  conjec- 
 ture cannot  be  admitted.  We  must  implicitly  fol- 
 low the  most  ancient  and  credible  testimony,  which 
 clearly  pronounces  in  favour  of  Vabap-qvGiv.  This 
 reading  is  adopted  by  Tischendorf,  Alford,  and 
 Tregelles  (see  their  Greek  Testaments,  in  loc.) 
 
 In  Mark  v.  i,  ancient  authorities  are  nearly 
 equally  balanced  between  the  readings  V e.pa.a-r]v!hv 
 and  Va.'&api]v!hv.  The  former  is  the  reading  of  the 
 Vatican  and  Sinaitic  MSS.,  and  of  the  Latin  ver- 
 sions ;  while  the  latter  is  that  of  the  Alexandrine 
 and  seven  other  Uncials,  and  of  the  Syriac  versions 
 (Tregelles'  Accoicfit  of  the  Piitited  Text,  p.  192  ; 
 Tisch. ,  Notitia,  tit  stip. )  The  same  is  the  case  in 
 reference  to  Luke  viii.  26  ;  and  all  the  best  critics 
 adopt  there  also  the  reading  VepaarjVbiv,  as  that  of 
 the  highest  authority  (See  Alford's  Greek  Test. ,  vol. 
 i.  ;  Prolegomena,  p.  95,  4th  ed.  ;  Kuinoel,  Com- 
 mentar.  in  loc.) 
 
 Whatever  may  be  the  true  reading  in  these  two 
 passages,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  city  (7r6\ts) 
 out  of  which  Luke  says  the  demoniac  came  was 
 Gadara.  Matthew  and  Mark  represent  him  as 
 coming  out  of  the  tombs  {fxpTj/xeiwu),  and  Gadara 
 has  a  large  number  of  rock-hewn  tombs.  Origen 
 indeed  affirms  that  the  demoniacs  were  natives  of 
 Gergesa,  which  was  situated  on  the  shore  of  the 
 lake  ;  but  we  do  not  hear  elsewhere  of  any  such 
 city,  for  though  Josephus  mentions  the  Gergashites 
 (Antiq.  i.  6.  2),  yet  it  appears  that  their  towns  had 
 been  all  destroyed  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  of 
 Palestine  by  the  Israelites  (Deut.  vii.  i ;  Josh. 
 xxiv.  1 1  ;  see,  however,  Gergesa). 
 
 Gadara  was  a  large  and  splendid  city,  for  a  time 
 the  capital  of  Peraea  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  iv.  7. 
 3).  Eusebius  describes  it  as  situated  opposite  to 
 Scythopolis  and  Tiberias,  on  a  mountain,  at  whose 
 base,  three  miles  distant,  are  warm  springs  ( Ono- 
 niast.  s.  V.  Aetham  and  Gadara).  Pliny  says  it 
 was  on  the  banks  of  the  Hieromax  [H.  N.  v.  18) ; 
 and  Josephus  adds  that  it  was  sixty  stadia  distant 
 from  Tiberias  {Vit.  65).  With  such  clear  data, 
 we  can  have  no  difficulty  in  identifying  it  with  the 
 modem  ruins  of  Um  Keis. 
 
 _  Gadara  does  not  appear  to  have  been  a  city  of 
 high  antiquity.  It  is  not  mentioned  either  in  the 
 O.  T.  or  Apocrypha ;  and  Josephus  calls  it  a 
 Grecian  city  (:r6\is  'EXXt/v^s).  Another  ancient 
 writer  referred  to  by  Reland  {Pal.  1013),  terms  it 
 TdSapa  ^ kaavpia.  These  statements,  when  con- 
 nected with  the  fact  that  it  was  one  of  the  chief 
 cities  of  the  Decapolis,  seem  to  indicate  that 
 Gadara  was  founded,  and  mainly  inhabited  by 
 foreign  and  probably  Grecian  colonists.     The  first 
 
 historical  notice  we  find  of  it  is  in  a  quotation  by 
 Josephus  from  Polybius,  to  the  effect  that  when 
 Antiochus  the  Great  conquered  Scopus,  the 
 general  of  Ptolemy  (B.C.  19S).  he  obtained  pos- 
 session of  Gadara  {Afttiij.  xii.  3.  3).  At  a  lono- sub- 
 sequent period  the  city  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
 Jews,  and  was  destroyed  by  them,  but  rebuilt  by 
 Ptolemy  in  B.C.  63  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  i.  7.  7). 
 When  Gabinius  was  appointed  pro-consul,  he 
 changed  the  government  of  Judaea  by  dividing 
 the  country  into  five  districts,  in  each  of  which  he 
 created  a  superior  council.  Gadara  was  capital 
 of  one  of  them  (i.  8.  5).  Augustus  gave  the  city 
 to  Herod  the  Great;  but  after  Herod's  death,  it 
 was  separated  from  the  government  of  Archelaus, 
 and  annexed  to  the  province  of  Syria  (Antiq.  xvii. 
 II.  4).  It  was  captured  and  sacked  by  the  Jews, 
 in  revenge  for  the  massacre  of  their  brethren  at 
 Cjesarea  (Bell.  Jiid.  ii.  18.  i).  At  the  commence- 
 ment of  our  era  it  contained  a  small  Jewish  com- 
 munity (ii.  18.  6),  who  increased  so  much  in 
 wealth  and  power,  that  they  attempted  to  defend 
 the  town  against  Vespasian ;  but  he  captured  it, 
 and  reduced  it  and  the  surrounding  villages  to 
 ashes  (iii.  7.  i).  It  was  captured  a  second  time 
 by  him  (iv.  7.  3).  At  a  later  period  it  rose  to 
 considerable  importance,  and  became  one  of  the 
 most  beautiful  towns  of  Syria.  It  was  for  several 
 centuries  the  seat  of  a  bishopric  {Geogr.  Sac.  S. 
 Paul.  p.  307  ;  Reland  Pal.  776).  It  fell  to  ruins 
 soon  after  the  Mohammedan  conquest,  and  has 
 now  been  deserted  for  centuries,  with  the  excep- 
 tion of  a  few  families  of  shepherds,  who  occasion- 
 ally find  a  home  in  its  rock-hewn  tombs. 
 
 The  above  historical  sketch  will  serve  to  illus- 
 trate the  narrative  of  the  Demoniacs.  Christ 
 crossed  the  Sea  of  Galilee  'to  the  territory  of  the 
 Gadarenes,'  which  extended  down  to  the  shore. 
 It  will  be  observed  that  there  is  nothing  in  the 
 Gospels  to  indicate  that  the  city  itself  wms  near  the 
 lake.  If  the  reading  Gerasenes  be  the  true  one  in 
 Mark  and  Luke,  it  is  still  geographically  accurate. 
 In  the  time  of  our  Lord,  Gerasa  was  capital  of 
 northern  Peraea,  and  its  province  included  that  of 
 Gadara  (Gerasa).  The  Demoniacs,  we  are  told, 
 had  their  dwelling  'in  the  tombs'  [ev  rdls  p.vr]- 
 fj.aaiv),  which  abound  in  the  immediate  neighbour- 
 hood of  the  ruins.  The  herds  of  swine  were 
 either  the  property  of  the  Gentile  inhabitants,  or 
 were  kept  by  the  Jews  for  their  use.  It  is  not 
 stated  where  the  swine  were  feeding,  but  it  was 
 near  the  scene  of  the  miracle,  and  most  probably 
 on  the  high  point  of  land  which  separates  the 
 ravine  of  the  Hieromax  from  the  lake.  From 
 that  there  is  a  long  and  'steep'  descent  to  the 
 shore,  and  down  this  the  swine  may  have  rushed. 
 
 The  ruins  of  Gadara  occupy  a  narrow  and  high 
 ridge,  which  projects  from  the  mountains  of 
 Gilead.  On  its  northern  side  is  the  deep  valley 
 of  the  Hieromax,  now  called  Sheriat  el-Mandhur; 
 on  the  west  is  the  Jordan  valley;  and  on  the  south 
 is  a  glen  called  Wady  el-Arab,  running  parallel  tc 
 the  Hieromax.  The  ruins  crown  the  ridge,  and 
 as  it  declines  in  elevation  towards  the  east,  the  site 
 is  strong  and  commanding.  The  space  occupied 
 by  the  city  is  about  two  miles  in  circuit ;  and 
 there  are  traces  of  the  ancient  wall  all  round.  On 
 the  northern  slope  is  a  large  theatre,  a  view  of 
 which  is  given  in  Traill's  Josephus  (i.  145).  Gadara 
 had,  like  Palmyra,  Damascus,  and  other  eastern 
 cities,  a  via  recta,  or  '  straight  street,'  lined  with 
 
GALANTE 
 
 52 
 
 GALATIA 
 
 colonnades.  Many  of  the  bases  remain  in  situ, 
 though  the  shafts  have  fallen.  A  sketch  of  this 
 street  is  given  in  the  same  work,  shewing  the 
 theatre  and  acropolis  in  the  background  (ii.  l6). 
 The  buildings  of  the  city  are  all  in  ruins.  Not  a 
 house,  nor  column,  nor  wall,  remains  standing; 
 though  the  old  pavement  of  the  streets  is  almost 
 perfect,  shewing  the  marks  of  the  chariot  wheels 
 in  the  stones,  as  at  Pompeii.  The  necropolis  is 
 on  tlie  north-east  declivity.  The  tombs  are  exca- 
 vated in  the  limestone  rocks,  and  consist  of  cham- 
 bers of  various  sizes,  some  above  twenty  feet  square, 
 with  deep  recesses  in  the  sides  for  bodies.  The 
 doors  are  made  of  heavy  slabs  of  stone,  like  those 
 in  the  ancient  houses  of  Bashan  (Porter's  Damas- 
 cus, ii.  54).  A  few  of  them  are  in  their  places, 
 and  are  ornamented  with  panels.  There  are, 
 besides,  many  beautifully  sculptured  sarcophagi 
 scattered  over  the  surrounding  heights. 
 
 The  identity  of  Um  Keis  and  Gadara  has  been 
 disputed  by  some  writers ;  but  the  clear  description 
 of  Euiebius,  Josephus,  and  Pliny,  and  especially 
 the  existence  of  the  celebrated  warm  springs  at 
 the  base  of  the  mountain,  beside  the  river  Hiero- 
 max,  remove  all  possibility  of  mistake.  Full 
 descriptions  of  Um  Keis  are  given  by  Burckhardt, 
 Buckingham,  and  Irby  and  Mangles.  The  stu- 
 dent may  also  consult  Reland's  Pahvstiiia,  Traill's 
 Josephus,  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  and  Lord 
 Lindsay's  Travels, — J.  L.  P. 
 
 GALANTE,  Abraham  b.  Mordecai,  a  cele- 
 brated Kabbalist  and  commentator  of  the  sixteenth 
 century,  and  disciple  of  Moses  Cordovera.  His 
 father's   name    was    originally    Mordecai    Angelo 
 
 (V'^JJX),  but  he  received  the  appellation  Galante, 
 or  rather  GalanCuomo,  in  Rome,  where  he  resided, 
 because  of  his  beautiful  appearance  and  manners, 
 and  when  his  family  afterwards  emigrated  to  Safed, 
 in  Upper  Galilee,  they  retained  this  name.  Abra- 
 ham Galante  wrote  (i)  a  commentary  on  the  Sohar, 
 entitled  "Ip"'  m\  extending  over  the  whole  Pen- 
 tateuch, of  which  the  first  part,  embracing  Genesis, 
 was  published  under  the  title  nOD  '•"IHT,  Venice 
 1655,  and  (2)  a  commentary  on  the  Book  of  La- 
 mentations, called  D'^iriD  T\l'^\>,  which  was  pub- 
 lished with  additions  by  Ibn-Shoeb  under  the  title 
 
 U^yO.  ?1p,  Venice  1589,  of  which  a  second  edition 
 appeared  in  Prag,  1621.  Galante  died  about  1600. 
 — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GALANTE,  Moses  b.  Mordecai,  brother  of 
 the  preceding  commentator,  and  president  of  the 
 celebrated  Rabbinic  College  at  Safed.  The  works 
 of  this  author  which  relate  to  the  Bible  are  (i) 
 imin  nriDD,  an  index  to  the  Sohar,  in  which  are 
 given  all  the  passages  of  the  O.  T.  explained 
 in  the  Sohar.  This  work  is  extremely  useful 
 to  those  who  are  engaged  in  writing  Christolo- 
 gical  treatises,  inasmuch  as  it  enables  them  to  see 
 how  the  Messianic  passages  are  treated  in  the 
 Talmud  of  the  Kabbala.  It  was  first  published  in 
 Venice,  1666,  and  then  at  Frankfort-on-Maine, 
 1681  ;  and  (2)  a  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  en- 
 titled npj?""  n^np,  published  in  Safed,  1578,  which 
 is  profusely  illustrated  with  passages  from  the 
 Sohar.  Galrnte  died  between  1596  and  1608. 
 Rtibinson  {Biblical  Researches  in  Palestine,  London 
 1856,  vol.  ii.  p.  430)  places  his  death  iu  loiS, 
 which  is  too  late.     Comp.   Steinsclmcidcr,  Cata- 
 
 logus  Lib.  Heb,  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  Col.  1S16. 
 — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GALATIA  (FaXar^a).  This  name  is  employed 
 in  two  senses  by  ancient  writers.  First,  to  denote 
 the  country  inhabited  or  possessed  by  the  eastern 
 Gain ;  TT]v  TaXaTiKrjv  x^po-v,  as  St.  Luke  calls  it 
 (Acts  xvi.  6).  And  second,  as  the  name  of  the 
 later  Roman  province.  It  will  be  necessary  here 
 to  consider  each  in  succession,  as  the  word  is  evi- 
 dently used  in  both  senses  in  the  N.  T. 
 
 The  Gain,  ox  Kelta:  (Ke'Xrat,  Celts),  for  the  names 
 are  identical,  originally  emigrated  from  Gallia.  In 
 the  fourth  century  B.C.,  sections  of  three  tribes  of 
 Galli,  the  Tcctosages,  whose  home  was  near  the 
 Pyrennees,  the  Trocini,  and  the  Tolistobogii,  left 
 their  native  country,  crossed  to  the  banks  of  the  Dan- 
 ube, and  then  struck  southward  into  Greece.  After 
 some  fierce  contests  with  the  Greeks  at  Thermo- 
 pylae, at  Delphi,  and  other  places,  they  were  forced 
 to  retire  to  the  shores  of  the  Hellespont  (Strabo  iv. 
 p.  129,  sq.  ;  Pausan.  i.  16;  .x.  19;  Justin  xxiv.) 
 One  of  their  tribes  crossed  the  straits  in  boats  ob- 
 tained from  Antipater  of  Macedonia  ;  and  the 
 others  were  carried  across  by  Nicomedes  I.,  king 
 of  Bithynia,  on  condition  they  should  aid  him 
 against  his  enemy  Zyboetas  (Memnon,  ap.  Phot. ; 
 Liv.  xxxviii.  16;  circa  B.C.  270).  Having  thus 
 obtained  a  footing  in  Asia  Minor,  tl'.ey  led  a  wan- 
 dering life  for  many  years.  At  one  time  we  find 
 them  employed  as  mercenaries  by  the  native  princes 
 in  their  wars  against  each  other  ;  at  another  we  find 
 them  warring  on  their  own  account,  and  living  on 
 plunder.  They  soon  became  the  terror  of  the 
 whole  peninsula,  marching  from  city  to  city,  and 
 from  province  to  province,  and  leaving  desolation 
 and  death  in  their  track.  They  were  at  length  op- 
 posed and  defeated  by  Antiochus,  king  of  Syria, 
 who,  in  consequence  of  the  victory  over  them,  ob- 
 tained the  name  Soter,  or  '  Saviour '  (Appian, 
 Syriac.  65).  Soon  afterwards  they  sustained  a  still 
 more  signal  defeat  from  Attalus,  prince  of  Perga- 
 mum ;  and  they  were  then  compelled  to  retreat  to 
 the  mountainous  region  in  the  centre  of  Asia  Minor, 
 between  the  rivers  Sangarius  and  Halys,  where 
 they  settled  about  B.C.  230  (Liv.  /.  c.  ;  Strabo,  xiii. 
 p.  429).  Here,  however,  they  still  followed  their 
 old  habits,  plundering  all  within  their  reach  ;  and 
 it  was  not  until  the  Roman  rule  was  extended  over 
 western  Asia  that  they  were  completely  subdued. 
 The  pro-consul  Manlius  attacked  them  in  their 
 strongholds,  defeated  the  tribes  in  succession,  sum- 
 moned their  chiefs  to  meet  him  on  the  shores  of  the 
 Hellespont,  where  he  dictated  his  own  terms,  and 
 sent  them  back  to  their  mountains  humbled  and 
 submissive  (B.  C.  189  ;  Liv.  xxxviii.  40). 
 
 The  country  now  colonized  by  these  warlike 
 tribes  was  called  Galatia,  or  Gallog7-a:cia.  Its 
 boundaries  cannot  be  accurately  determined,  as  it 
 embraced  portions  of  several  provinces.  The  Tcc- 
 tosages made  the  strong  city  of  Pessinus  their  capi- 
 tal, and  occupied  the  region  on  the  borders  of 
 Phrygia  and  Bithynia.  The  Tohstobogii  settled 
 around  Ancyra,  and  extended  as  far  east  as  the  banks 
 of  the  Halys.  The  Trocmi  seized  the  fertile  region 
 along  the  east  side  of  the  Halys.  Tavium  was 
 their  chief  city,  and  they  encroached  considerably 
 on  the  provinces  of  Pontus  and  Cappadocia  (Mem- 
 non. ap.  Phot.)  Phny  says  the  Galli  were  divided 
 into  peoples  and  tetrarchies,  numbering  195  (v. 
 42).   '  Each  tribe  had  four  tetrarchies ;   and  the 
 
GALATIA 
 
 53 
 
 GALATIANS 
 
 twelve  tetrarchies  had  a  council  of  300  membeis, 
 who  exercised  supreme  authority  over  the  nation  ; 
 but  Strabo  tells  us  that  in  his  days  the  wliole  power 
 devolved  first  on  three  men,  then  on  two,  and 
 finally  on  one,  who  was  proclaimed  king  (xii.  p. 
 390).  Their  first  monarch  was  Deiotarus,  who, 
 having  espoused  the  cause  of  Pompey,  was  stripped 
 by  Ccesar  of  his  tetrarchy  and  kingdom.  Cicero 
 defended  him  in  a  noble  speech,  which  is  stiU  extant 
 {Jiro  Deiot.  13). 
 
 Though  the  Galli  were  the  dominant  race  in 
 Galatia,  they  were  mixed  with  Phrygians  and  other 
 native  tribes.  A  large  number  of  Greeks,  also, 
 who  had  followed  the  conquests  of  Alexander, 
 settled  among  them — hence  the  name  Gallogrcicia. 
 Greek  soon  became  the  common  language  of  all ; 
 but  the  Galli,  as  we  learn  from  Jerome,  retained 
 their  own  language  even  down  so  late  as  the  fourth 
 centuiy, — '  Galatos  excepto  sermone  grseco,  quo 
 omnis  oriens  loquitur,  propriam  linguam  eandem 
 habere  quam  Treviros'  {Hieron.  Prol.  in  Epist  Gal. ) 
 The  Galli  were  fierce,  restless,  and  warlike.  They 
 were  impatient  of  all  foreign  restraint,  and  eagerly 
 seized  on  every  opportunity  to  throw  off  the  yoke  of 
 Rome.  They  appear  to  have  had  little  religion  of 
 their  own  ;  and  they  adopted  the  superstitions  of 
 the  Phrygians  and  the  mythology  of  the  Greeks 
 with  an  easy  indifference.  The  character  given  to 
 them  by  Thieriy  strikingly  illustrates  many  passages 
 in  Paul's  epistle — '  Une  bravoure  personelle  que 
 rien  n'egale  .  .  .  .  un  esprit  franc,  impetueux, 
 ouvert  a  toutes  les  impressions,  eminemment  intel- 
 ligent ;  mais,  a  cote  de  cela,  une  mobilite  extreme, 
 point  de  Constance,  une  repugnance  marquee  aux 
 idees  de  discipline  et  d'ordre '  {Histoirc  des  Gaulois, 
 Int.  iv.) 
 
 When  Galatia  was  constituted  a  Roman  province 
 under  M.  Lollius  {circa  B.C.  22  ;  Eiitrop.  vii.  10), 
 its  boundaries  were  greatly  enlarged.  They  are 
 given  by  Ptolemy  (v.  3).  It  had  Bithynia  and 
 Phrygia  on  the  west ;  Pamphylia  on  the  south  ; 
 Cappa,docia  and  Pontus  on  the  east ;  and  the 
 Euxine  on  the  north.  Its  line  of  coast  reached 
 from  Cytorus  in  Bithynia  to  the  mouth  of  the 
 Halys.  It  thus  included  the  whole  of  Paphlagonia, 
 with  large  sections  of  Phrygia,  Lycaonia,  and  Cap- 
 padocia.  It  extended  from  the  Black  Sea  to  the 
 range  of  Taurus. 
 
 Luke  records  two  visits  of  the  Apostle  Paul  to 
 Galatia  ;  and  in  a  previous  missionary  tour  he  had 
 passed  through  the  southern  border  of  the  Roman 
 province  to  Iconium  and  Antioch  (Acts  xiv.  21). 
 Silas  accompanied  him  on  his  first  visit  to  Galatia 
 proper,  which  Luke  terms  rr\v  YaXa.TiKy]v  xaipai', 
 that  is,  '  the  region  of  the  Galli,'  not  including  those 
 districts  which  were  now  politically  united  with  it 
 (Acts  xvi.  6 ;  Conybeare  and  Howson,  i.  292). 
 No  town  is  mentioned ;  but  the  probability  is  he 
 visited  Ancyra,  the  capital,  and  numerous  other 
 places,  for  it  appears  he  founded  '  churches.'  He 
 was  received  everywhere  with  readiness  and  hospi- 
 tality (Gal.  iv.  15).  He  was  evidently  suffering  at 
 the  time  from  sickness  ;  and  he  bears  grateful  tes- 
 timony to  the  kindness  of  the  people  (verses  13,  14). 
 The  changeableness  of  their  character  and  views 
 was  soon  exhibited,  however,  in  abandoning  the 
 sound  doctrine  of  the  apostle,  and  adopting  some 
 new  one  (i.  6).  When  among  them,  he  tells  us, 
 they  received  him  '  as  an  angel  of  God  ; '  but  no 
 sooner  had  he  departed  than  they  were  led  to  re- 
 gard him  'as  an  enemy'  (iv.  14- 1 6).   Of  his  .second 
 
 missionary  journey  to  '  the  region  of  Galatia,'  -ive 
 have  no  details  farther  than  that  '  he  went  over  all 
 the  region  of  Galatia  and  Phiygia  in  order'  (Acts 
 xviii.  23).  It  would  seem  from  tliese  facts  that  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  addressed  to  those 
 churches  which  Paul  had  established  among  the 
 Galli,  and  the  Greek-speaking  population  of  Ga- 
 latia proper.  Peter's  first  epistle  is  addressed  '  to 
 tiie  strangers  scattered  throughout  Pontus,  Galatia, 
 Cappadocia,  Asia,  and  Bithynia'  (i  Pet.  i.  i). 
 Eveiy  place  named  is  a  Roman  province  ;  and  we 
 may,  therefore,  conclude  that  the  Apostle  refers  to 
 the  extended  province  as  described  by  Ptolemy. 
 
 The  best  work  on  the  Galli  is  that  of  Thierry, 
 Histoire  des  Gaiilois.  For  the  geography  of  Ga- 
 latia consult  Livy,  xxxviii ;  Ptolemy,  v.  4  ;  Strabo, 
 xii.  and  xiii.  ;  Conybeare  and  Howson's  Life  and 
 Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  i.  261,  sq.  ;  Hamilton's  I\d- 
 searches  in  Asia  Mi7ior. — ^J .  L.  P. 
 
 GALATIANS,  Epistle  to  the.  The  Pau- 
 line origin  of  this  epistle  is  attested  not  only  by  the 
 superscription  which  it  bears  (i.  i),  but  also  by 
 frequent  allusions  in  the  course  of  it  to  the  great 
 Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  (comp.  i.  13-23;  ii.  1-14), 
 and  by  the  unanimous  testimony  of  the  ancient 
 church  (Lardner,  Works,  vol.  ii.  8vo).  It  is  cor- 
 roborated also  by  the  style,  tone,  and  contents  of 
 the  epistle,  which  are  perfectly  in  keeping  with 
 those  of  the  apostle's  other  writings. 
 
 The  parties  to  whom  this  epistle  was  addressed 
 are  described  in  the  epistle  itself  as  '  the  churches 
 of  Galatia'  (i.  2;  comp.  iii.  i).  Into  this  dis- 
 trict the  Gospel  was  first  introduced  by  Paul 
 himself  (Acts  xvi.  6;  Gal.  i.  8;  iv.  13,  19). 
 Churches  were  then  also  probably  formed ;  for 
 on  revisiting  this  district  some  time  after  his 
 first  visit  it  is  mentioned  that  he  'strengthened 
 the  disciples'  (Acts  xviii.  23).  These  churches 
 seem  to  have  been  com]3osed  principally  of  con- 
 verts directly  from  Heathenism,  but  partly,  also, 
 of  Jewish  converts,  both  pure  Jews  and  proselytes. 
 Unhappily,  Judaizing  teachers  had  visited  these 
 churches,  and  had  succeeded  in  infecting  them  with 
 a  zealous  desire  to  incorporate  the  rites  and  cere- 
 monies of  Judaism  with  the  spiritual  truths  and 
 simple  ordinances  of  Christianity.  So  active  had 
 this  party  been  in  disseminating  their  views  on  this 
 head  through  the  churches  of  Galatia,  that  the 
 majority  at  least  of  the  members  had  been  se- 
 duced to  adopt  them  (i.  6;  iii.  i,  etc.)  To  this 
 result  it  is  probable  that  the  previous  religious 
 conceptions  of  the  Galatians  contributed ;  for, 
 accustomed  to  the  worship  of  Cybele,  which  they 
 had  learned  from  their  neighbours  the  Phrygians, 
 and  to  the  theosophistic  doctrines  with  which  that 
 worship  was  associated,  they  would  be  the  more 
 readily  induced  to  believe  that  the  fulness  of 
 Christianity  could  alone  be  developed  through  the 
 symbolical  adumbrations  of  an  elaborate  ceremo- 
 nial (Neander,  Apostol.  Zeitalter,  s.  400,  2te  Aufl.) 
 From  some  passages  in  this  epistle  {e.  gr.  i.  11-24; 
 ii.  I -21)  it  would  appear  also  that  insinuations 
 had  been  disseminated  among  the  Galatian  churches 
 to  the  effect  that  Paul  was  not  a  divinely-com- 
 missioned apostle,  but  only  a  messenger  of  the 
 church  at  Jerusalem;  that  Peter  and  he  were  at 
 variance  upon  the  subject  of  the  relation  of  the 
 Jewish  rites  to  Christianity;  and  that  Paul  himself 
 w.^s  not  at  all  times  so  strenuously  opposed  to  those 
 rlle»:  as  he  had  cho.sen  to  be  amon'^  the  Galalians. 
 
GALATIANS 
 
 54 
 
 GALATIANS 
 
 Of  this  state  of  things  intelligence  having  been  con- 
 veyed to  the  apostle,  he  wrote  this  epistle  for  the 
 purpose  of  vindicating  his  own  pretensions  and  con- 
 duct, of  counteracting  the  influence  of  these  false 
 ^ews,  and  of  recalling  the  Galatians  to  the  simpli- 
 city of  the  Gospel  which  they  had  received.  The 
 importance  of  the  case  was  probably  the  reason 
 why  the  apostle  put  himself  to  the  great  labour 
 of  writing  this  epistle  with  his  own  hand  (vi.  ii). 
 
 The  epistle  consists  of  three  parts.  In  the  fiist 
 part  (i.  -ii. ),  after  his  usual  salutations,  Paul  vindi- 
 cates his  own  apostolic  authority  and  independence 
 as  a  directly-commissioned  ambassador  of  Christ  to 
 men,  and  especially  to  the  Gentile  portion  of  the 
 race  ;  asserting  that  the  Gospel  which  he  preached 
 was  the  only  Gospel  of  Christ — expressing  his 
 surprise  that  the  Galatians  had  allowed  themselves 
 to  be  so  soon  turned  from  him  who  had  called 
 them  to  a  different  Gospel — denouncing  all  who 
 had  thus  seduced  them  as  troublers  of  the  church, 
 perverters  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  and  deserving, 
 even  had  they  been  angels  from  heaven,  to  be 
 placed  under  an  anathema  instead  of  being  fol- 
 lowed— maintaining  the  divine  origin  of  his  apos- 
 tolic commission,  which  he  illustrates  by  the  histoiy 
 of  his  conversion  and  early  conduct  in  the  service 
 of  Christ— and  declaring  that,  so  far  from  being 
 inferior  to  the  other  apostles,  he  had  ever  treated 
 with  them  on  equal  terms,  and  been  welcomed  by 
 them  as  an  equal.  Having  in  the  close  of  this  part 
 of  the  epistle  been  led  to  refer  to  his  zeal  for  the 
 great  doctrine  of  salvation  by  the  grace  of  God 
 through  faith  in  Christ,  he  enters  at  large,  in  the 
 second  part  (iii. -iv.),  upon  the  illustration  and  de- 
 fence of  this  cardinal  truth  of  Christianity.  He 
 appeals  to  the  former  experience  of  the  Galatians 
 as  to  the  way  in  which  they  had  received  the  Spirit, 
 to  the  case  of  Abraham,  and  to  the  testimony  of 
 Scripture  in  support  of  his  position  that  it  is  by 
 faith  and  not  by  the  works  of  the  law  that  men  are 
 accepted  of  God  (iii.  1-9).  He  proceeds  to  remind 
 them  that  the  law  has  brought  a  curse  upon  men 
 because  of  sin,  a  curse  which  it  has  no  power  to 
 remove,  and  from  which  the  sinner  can  be  re- 
 deemed only  through  the  substitutionary  work  of 
 Christ,  by  whose  means  the  blessing  of  Abraham 
 comes  upon  the  Gentiles.  And  lest  any  should  ob- 
 ject that  the  law  being  of  more  recent  origin  than 
 the  covenant  must  supersede  it,  he  shews  that  this 
 cannot  be  the  case,  but  that  the  covenant  must  be 
 perpetual,  whilst  the  law  is  to  be  regarded  only  in 
 the  light  of  a  temporary  and  intercalary  arrange- 
 ment, the  design  of  which  was  to  forward  the  ful- 
 filment of  the  promise  in  Christ  (10-29).  The 
 relation  of  the  Jewish  church  to  the  Christian  is 
 then  illustrated  by  the  case  of  an  heir  under  tutors 
 and  governors  as  contrasted  with  the  case  of  the 
 same  person  when  he  is  of  age  and  has  become 
 master  of  all  ;  and  the  Galatians  are  exhorted  not 
 willmgly  to  descend  from  the  important  and  dig- 
 nified position  of  sons  to  that  of  mere  servants  in 
 God's  house — an  exhortation  which  is  illustrated 
 and  enforced  by  an  allegorical  comparison  of  the 
 Jewish  church  to  Ishmael,  the  son  of  Hagar,  and 
 of  the  Christian  to  Isaac,  the  son  of  Sarah,  and 
 the  Child  of  Promise  (iv.  1-31).  The  third  part  of 
 the  epistle  (v. -vi.)  is  chiefly  hortatory  and  admoni- 
 tory :  it  sets  forth  the  necessity  of  steadfast  adher- 
 ence to  the  liberty  of  the  Gospel  in  connection 
 with  obedience  to  the  moral  law  as  a  rule  of  duty, 
 the   importance  of  mutual  forbearance  and   love 
 
 among  Christians,  and  the  desirableness  of  main- 
 taining a  firm  adherence  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ 
 and  Him  crucified.  The  epistle  concludes  with 
 benedictions  and  prayers. 
 
 Respecting  the  time  when  and  the  place  where 
 this  epistle  was  written,  great  diversity  of  opinion 
 prevails.  Marcion  held  this  to  be  the  earliest  of 
 Paul's  epistles  (Epiphanius,  Adv.  Hares,  xlii.  9) ; 
 and  Tertullian  is  generally  supposed  to  favour  the 
 same  opinion,  from  his  speaking  of  Paul's  zeal 
 against  Judaism  displayed  in  this  epistle  as  charac- 
 teristic of  his  being  yet  a  neophyte  {Adv.  Marc. 
 i.  20) ;  though,  to  us,  it  does  not  appear  that  in 
 this  passage  Tertullian  is  referring  at  all  to  the 
 writing  of  this  epistle,  but  only  to  Paul's  personal 
 intercourse  with  Peter  and  other  of  the  apostles 
 mentioned  by  him  in  the  epistle  (ii.  9-14).  Michaelis 
 also  has  given  his  suffrage  in  favour  of  a  date  earlier 
 than  that  of  the  apostle's  second  visit  to  Galatia, 
 and  very  shortly  after  that  of  his  first.  Koppe's 
 view  {Nov.  Test.,  vol.  vi.  p.  7)  is  the  same,  though 
 he  supposes  the  apostle  to  have  preached  in  Galatia 
 before  the  visit  mentioned  by  Luke  in  Acts  xvi.  6, 
 and  which  is  usually  reckoned  his  first  visit  to  that 
 district.  Others,  again,  such  as  Mill  {Proleg.  in 
 Nfov.  Test.,  p.  4),  Calovius  {Bihlia  Illust.,  t.  iv. 
 p.  529),  and,  more  recently,  Schrader  {Der.  Ap. 
 Paulus,  Ih.  i.  s.  226),  place  the  date  of  this  epistle 
 at  a  late  period  of  the  apostle's  life  :  the  last,  in- 
 deed, advocates  the  date  assigned  in  the  Greek 
 MSS.  and  in  the  Syriac  and  Arabic  versions, 
 which  announce  that  it  was  '  written  from  Rome' 
 during  the  apostle's  imprisonment  there.  The 
 majority,  however,  concur  in  a  medium  view  be- 
 tween these  extremes,  and  fix  the  date  of  this 
 epistle  at  some  time  shortly  after  the  apostle's 
 second  visit  to  Galatia.  This  opinion  appears  to 
 us  to  be  the  only  one  that  has  any  decided  support 
 from  the  epistle  itself  From  the  apostle's  abrupt 
 exclamation  in  chap.  i.  6,  'I  marvel  that  ye  are  so 
 soon  removed  from  him  that  called  you,'  etc.,  it 
 seems  just  to  infer  that  he  wrote  this  epistle  not 
 very  long  after  he  had  left  Galatia.  It  is  true,  as 
 has  been  urged,  that  ovrio  rax^ws  in  this  verse  may 
 mean  'so  quickly^  as  well  as  'so  soon;''  but  the 
 abruptness  of  the  apostle's  statement  appears  to  us 
 rather  to  favour  the  latter  rendering  :  for,  as  a 
 complaint  of  the  quickness  of  their  change  re- 
 spected the  7nanner  in  which  it  had  been  made, 
 and  as  the  apostle  could  be  aware  of  that  only  by 
 report,  and  as  it  was  a  matter  on  which  there  might 
 be  a  difference  of  opinion  between  him  and  them, 
 it  would  seem  necessary  that  the  grounds  of  such  a 
 charge  should  be  stated  ;  whereas  if  the  complaint 
 merely  related  to  the  shortness  of  time  during 
 which,  after  the  apostle  had  been  among  them, 
 they  had  remained  steadfast  in  the  faith,  a  mere 
 allusion  to  it  was  sufficient,  as  it  was  a  matter  not 
 admitting  of  any  diversity  of  opinion.  We  infer, 
 then,  from  this  expression,  that  this  epistle  was 
 written  not  long  after  Paul  had  been  in  Galatia. 
 The  question,  however,  still  remains,  which  of  the 
 two  visits  of  Paul  to  Galatia  mentioned  in  the  Acts 
 was  it  after  which  this  epistle  was  written  ?  In 
 reply  to  this  Michaelis  and  some  others  maintain 
 that  it  was  thejirst;  but  in  coming  to  this  conclu- 
 sion they  appear  to  have  unaccountably  overlooked 
 the  apostle's  phraseology  (iv.  13),  where  he  speaks 
 of  circumstances  connected  with  his  preaching  the 
 Gospel  among  the  Galatians,  t6  ■Trpdrepov,  the  for- 
 mer time,  an  expression  which   clearly  indicates 
 
GALATIANS 
 
 55 
 
 GALICnO  OR  GALIKO 
 
 that  at  the  period  this  epistle  was  written,  Paul 
 had  been  at  least  hvice  in  Galatia.*  On  these 
 grounds  it  is  probable  that  the  apostle  wrote  and 
 despatched  this  epistle  not  long  aiter  he  had  left 
 Galatia  for  the  second  time,  and,  perhaps,  whilst 
 he  was  residing  at  Ephesus  (comp.  Acts  xviii.  23  ; 
 xix.  I,  sqq)  The  reasons  which  Michaelis  urges 
 for  an  earlier  date  are  of  no  weight.  He  appeals, 
 in  the  first  place,  to  chap.  i.  2,  and  asks  whether 
 Paul  would  have  used  the  vague  expression,  '  all 
 the  brethren,'  without  naming  them,  had  it  not 
 been  thai  the  parties  in  question  were  those  by 
 whom  he  had  been  accompanied  on  his  first  visit 
 to  Galatia,  viz.,  Silas  and  Timothy,  and,  'perhaps, 
 some  others.'  The  answer  to  this  obviously  is, 
 that  had  Paul  referred  in  this  expression  to  these 
 individuals,  who  were  known  to  the  Galatians,  he 
 was  much  more  likely  on  that  very  account  to  have 
 named  them  than  otherwise  ;  and  besides,  the  ex- 
 pression 'all  the  brethren  that  are  with  me'  is 
 much  more  naturally  understood  of  a  considerable 
 number  of  persons,  such  as  the  elders  of  the  church 
 at  Ephesus,  than  of  two  persons,  and,  '■perhaps, 
 some  others.'  Again,  he  urges  the  fact  that,  about 
 the  time  of  Paul's  first  visit  to  Galatia,  Asia  Minor 
 was  full  of  zealots  for  the  law,  and  that  conse- 
 quently it  is  easier  to  account  for  the  seduction  of 
 the  Galatians  at  this  period  than  at  a  later.  But 
 the  passage  to  which  Michaelis  refers  in  support  of 
 this  assertion  (Acts  xv.  i)  simply  informs  us  that 
 certain  Judaizing  teachers  visited  Antioch,  and 
 gives  us  no  information  whatever  as  to  the  time 
 when  such  zealots  entered  Asia  Minor.  In  fine, 
 he  lays  gi-eat  stress  on  the  circumstance  that  Paul, 
 in  recapitulating  the  history  of  his  own  life  in  the 
 first  and  second  chapters,  brings  the  narrative  down 
 only  to  the  period  of  the  conference  at  Jerusalem, 
 the  reason  of  which  is  to  be  found,  he  thinks,  in  the 
 fact  that  this  epistle  was  written  so  soon  after  that 
 event  that  nothing  of  moment  had  subsequently 
 occurred  in  the  apostle's  history.  But  even  ad- 
 mitting that  the  period  referred  to  in  this  second 
 chapter  was  that  of  the  conference  mentioned 
 Acts  XV.  (though  this  is  much  doubted  by  many 
 writers  of  note),  the  reason  assigned  by  Michaelis 
 for  Paul's  carrying  the  narrative  of  his  life  no 
 further  than  this  cannot  be  admitted  :  for  it  over- 
 looks the  design  of  the  apostle  in  furnishing  that 
 narrative,  which  was  not  certainly  to  deliver  him- 
 self of  a  piece  of  mere  autobiographical  detail ;  but 
 to  shew  from  certain  leading  incidents  in  his  early 
 apostolic  life  how  from  the  first  he  had  claimed 
 and  exercised  an  independent  apostolic  authority, 
 and  how  his  rights  in  this  respect  had  been  ad- 
 mitted by  the  pillars  of  the  church,  Peter,  James, 
 and  John.  For  this  purpose  it  was  not  necessary 
 that  the  narrative  should  be  brought  down  to  a 
 lower  date  than  the  period  when  Paul  went  forth 
 as  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  formally  recognised 
 as  such  by  the  other  apostles  of  Christ.  This  fact, 
 then,  is  as  little  in  favour  of  Michaelis's  theory  as 
 
 *  Prof.  Stuart  says,  in  bar  of  this  conclusion, 
 that  Wpdrepov  means  only  a  time  a7itecede]it  to 
 that  in  which  he  (Paul)  wrote.'  {Notes  to  Fosdick's 
 Translation  of  Hug's  Introd.,  p.  748).  Usteri 
 also,  and  Fritzsche,  adopt  the  same  view.  But  if 
 Paul  had  been  only  once  in  Galatia  before  writing 
 this  epistle,  he  would  not  have  used  irpdrepov  at  all ; 
 in  such  a  case  this  would  have  been  a  superfluous 
 addition. 
 
 any  of  his  other  arguments.  Conyheare  and  How- 
 son  have  advocated  the  opinion  that  this  epistle 
 was  written  from  Corinth  at  the  same  time  as  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Romans  ;  but  as  they  rest  this  almost 
 exclusively  on  the  improbability  that  two  epistles 
 so  closely  resembling  each  other  in  subject  should 
 have  been  written  at  a  long  interval  from  each 
 other,  their  suggestion  cannot  be  allowed  to  have 
 much  weight,  in  opposition  to  the  reasons  which 
 sustain  the  commonly  received  opinion.  There  is 
 certainly  no  reason  in  the  nature  of  things  why  Paul 
 should  not  have  written  twice  on  the  same  subject 
 at  distant  periods  ;  and  when  the  Epistle  to  the 
 Galatians  is  compared  with  that  to  the  Romans,  the 
 similarity  between  the  two  is  such  as  rather  to  sug- 
 gest that  the  latter  is  the  development,  at  a  latet 
 period,  and  in  a  more  systematic  form,  of  thoughts 
 more  hastily  thrown  out  to  meet  a  pressing  emer- 
 gency, in  the  former. 
 
 Comtnentaries. — Augustine  {0pp.,  ed.  Benedict., 
 tom.  iii.  ;  ed.  Erasm.  torn.  iv.  p.  121 1);  Jerome 
 {0pp.,  ed.  Vallars.,  torn,  vii.,  ed.  Francof.  ad 
 Moen.  1684,  tom.  ix.,  p.  280)  ;  Luther  {0pp.  Jen. 
 tom.  i.  iii.);  Baumgarten,  1767;  Semler,  1779; 
 Koppe  {A'OV.  Test.  Kopp.  vol.  vi.)  1791,  2d  ed.  ; 
 Morus,  1795  ;  Borger,  1807 ;  Winer,  1821,  3cl 
 ed.  1829;  von  Flatt,  1828;  Riickert,  1833;  Us- 
 teri, 1833;  Matthies,  1833;  Brown,  1S53  ;  EUi- 
 cott,  1854,  2d  ed.  1S59  ;  Bagge,  1856  ;  besides 
 the  more  general  commentaries  of  De  Wette,  Ols- 
 hausen,  Meyer,  Bloomfield,  andAlford. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GALBANUM.     [Chelbenah.] 
 
 GALGALA  {J^iXyaXa).  In  i  Maccab.  ix.  2, 
 the  army  of  Demetrius  is  said  to  have  gone  by  the 
 way  leading  to  this  place,  on  their  march  to  Jeru- 
 salem, when  they  besieged  Maseloth,  which  is  in 
 Arbela.  Were  we  sure  of  these  places,  it  would  help 
 us  more  certainly  to  determine  the  site  of  Galgala ; 
 but  this  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  the  case.  Ewald 
 {Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  2,  p.  370,  note  2)  thinks  that  the 
 village  Dshildshilija  (Jilgilija),  west  of  Bethel  and 
 north  of  Jerusalem  (Robinson,  B.  R-,  iii.  81),  is 
 the  place  meant ;  but  in  order  to  sustain  this  view 
 he  is  obliged  to  .suppose  the  operations  of  the 
 campaign  to  have  been  confined  to  Judaea,  con- 
 trary to  the  express  statement  of  Josephus,  who 
 places  them  in  Galilee  {Antiq.  xii.  11.  i).  If 
 Arbela  be  the  modern  Irbid,  Galgala  is  probably 
 the  Gilgal  near  Jericho.  In  the  margin  of  the 
 A.  v.,  for  Galgala  is  substituted  Galilee;  and  this, 
 Michaelis  holds  for  the  true  reading.     In  Josh.  xii. 
 
 23,  it  is  supposed  that  ^pj  is  for  p'lpj,  and  so  the 
 LXX.  give  it  in  the  Vat.  text,  which  would  shew 
 that  these  two  words  were  sometimes  confounded. 
 If  this  reading  were  adopted,  it  would  remove  all 
 difficulty.      VaX'^oXa,   however,   is  the  invariable 
 
 representative  of  the  Hebrew  7J7J,  in  the  LXX. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 GALICHO  OR  GALIKO  (•!p''f3vS:i  =  Gallaeus) 
 Elisha  b.  Gabriel,  a  Jewish  commentator  who 
 lived  about  1552  to  1583,  and  was  president  of  the 
 Rabbinic  College  at  Safed  in  Upper  Galilee.  His 
 exegetical  works  are  (i)  a  commentary  on  Ecclesi- 
 
 astes  rhr\\>  hn  TI5<3,  published  in  Venice,  1578, 
 in  which  he  divides  the  book  into  tiventy-seven  sec- 
 tions, according  to  the  number  of  the  letters  in  the 
 Hebrew  alphabet,  including  the  finals.  An  analysis 
 and   specimen   of  this  commentary  are  given   by 
 
GAIJLEE 
 
 56 
 
 GALILEE 
 
 Ginsburg,  Historical  and  Critical  Ccmmoitary  on 
 Ecclesiasies,  Longman,  iSoi,  p.  67,  etc.  Tlie  edi- 
 tion of  Galiko's  Commenlaiy,  published  in  1548, 
 mentioned  by  Bartolocci  [Bibl.  Magna  Ral-ii?ii:a, 
 vol.  i.  p.  118),  is  not  extant;  (2)  a  Cvimmencary 
 
 on  the  Book  of  Esther  "IflDX  hv  "l1^53,  published 
 in  Venice,  1583,  which  is  very  diffuse  and  Kabba- 
 listic  ;  and  (3)  a  commentary  on  the  Song  of  Songs, 
 D'''l"'5^n  'y'^  ti'lT'D,  with  the  Hebrew  text  and 
 points,  also  published  in  Venice,  1587.  In  this 
 commentary  Galiko  had  an  excellent  opportunity 
 of  displaying  his  genius  for  allegorical  exposition. 
 
 — c.  d.'g. 
 
 GALILEE  ^'hl  and  rh'hl ;  Sept.  and  N.  T. 
 
 •     T  T     •    T 
 
 VaXiKala).  In  the  O.  T.  this  name  is  given  to  a 
 small  '  circuit '  among  the  mountains  of  Naphtali ; 
 and  in  the  N.  T.  to  a  large  province  embracing  the 
 whole  of  Northern  Palestine.  It  is  first  mentioned 
 by  Joshua,  who  describes  Kedesh  as  '  in  Galilee  in 
 Mount  Naphtali '  (xx.  7).  Its  limited  extent  is  indi- 
 cated in  2  Kings  xv.  29,  where  the  historian  detail- 
 ing the  conquests  of  Tiglath-pileser  states  that  '  he 
 took  Ijon,  and  Abel-Beth-Maachah,  and  Janoah, 
 and  Kedesh,  and  Hazor,  and  Gilead,  and  Galilee, 
 all  the  la)id  of  Naphtali.''  Galilee,  therefore,  did 
 not  extend  beyond  the  bounds  of  Naphtali ;  and  a 
 comparison  with  other  passages  shews  that  it  em- 
 braced only  the  northern  section  of  that  tribe,  or  at 
 least  that  the  name  was  at  first  confined  to  that 
 district  (Josh.  xx.  7  ;  xxi.  32  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  v.  I. 
 18).  The  region  thus  lay  on  the  summit  of  a  broad 
 mountain  ridge.  Here  were  situated  the  towns 
 which  Solomon  offered  to  Hiram  as  payment  for 
 his  services  in  procuring  timber  and  stones  for  the 
 temple.  Hiram,  however,  whose  great  want  was 
 grain  for  his  island  city,  and  who  doubtless  expected 
 a  portion  of  some  of  the  rich  plains  of  central  Pa- 
 lestine, could  not  conceal  his  disappomtment  when 
 he  saw  the  mountain  towns  and  their  rugged  en- 
 virons, and  declined  them  as  useless  (Cabul;  comp. 
 I  Kings  ix.  11,  and  2  Chron  viii.  2).  At  this 
 period  Galilee,  though  within  the  allotted  territory 
 of  Naphtali,  does  not  appear  to  have  been  occu- 
 pied by  the  Israelites.  It  was  only  after  Hiram 
 had  declined  the  towns  that  Solomon  rebuilt  and 
 colonized  them  (2  Chron.  /.  c)  Hazor,  the  great 
 stronghold  and  capital  of  the  northern  Canaanites, 
 lay  within  or  near  Galilee  ;  and,  though  Joshua  had 
 captured  and  burned  it  (Josh,  xi.),  yet  during  the 
 rule  of  the  Judges  it  was  possessed  by  a  kingjaban, 
 whose  general,  Sisera,  dwelt  in  the  neighbouring  Ha- 
 roshetli  of  the  Gentiles  (Judg.  iv. )  The  presence  of 
 these  powerful  and  warlike  tribes,  and  the  natural 
 strength  of  the  countiy,  sufficiently  account  for  the 
 continued  occupation  of  the  old  Gentile  inhabitants. 
 David  subdued,  but  did  not  expel  them.  Solomon, 
 as  has  been  seen,  took  some  of  their  towns ;  but 
 they  remained  among  these  rugged  mountains  in 
 such  numbers,  that  in  the  time  of  Isaiah  the  district 
 was  called  '  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles'  (Is.  ix.  i). 
 
 The  word  ptpj  signifies  a  'circuit'  or  'ring,'  and 
 may  at  first  have  been  given  to  one  of  the  little  cir- 
 cular plains  among  the  mountains  of  Naphtali. 
 There  is  such  an  one  just  beside  Kedesh.  After- 
 wards, as  was  the  case  with  other  names,  this  was 
 extended  to  a  wider  and  wider  region.  There  is 
 some  indication  in  Scripture  that  it  was  used  in  a 
 more  extended  sense  in  the  time  of  Tiglath-pileser 
 than  in  that  of  Joshua.     May  it  not  be  that  in  the 
 
 days  of  Isaiah  the  name  had  come  to  be  applied, 
 perhaps  somewhat  vaguely,  to  the  country  extend- 
 ing south  of  Naphtali,  and  that  the  ancient  te-ri- 
 tory  was  therefore  distinguished  by  him  as  '  Galilee 
 of  the  Gentiks.''  In  I  Maccib.  v.  15  and  17,  this  dis- 
 tinction appears  to  be  made.  '  Galilee  of  the  Gen- 
 tiles '  had  then  a  large  heathen  population  (i  Mac- 
 cab.  V.  21-S3  ;  3trabr>)  xvi.  p.  523).  Josephus  makes 
 the  same  distinction  though  under  g  slightly  different 
 name.  He  divides  Galilee  into  Upper  and  Lo7vei-, 
 Tj  dvw  Kal  7)  KOLTW  ToKiXaia  ;  and  in  one  place  he 
 seems  to  consider  the  former  as  constituting  the 
 whole  of  Galilee  proper  (Reland,  I'al.  182  and  306  ; 
 Euseb.  Ono?)iast.,  s.  v.  Galilcca;  Lightfoot,  0pp.  ii. 
 48S,  scq.) 
 
 In  the  beginning  of  our  era  Palestine  was  divided 
 into  three  provinces ,  Judaea,  Samaria,  and  Galilee. 
 Josephus  thus  describes  Galilee, — 'There  are  two 
 Galilees,  the  Upper  and  the  Lower,  which  are  en- 
 vironed by  Phcenicia  and  Syria.  They  are  bounded 
 on  the  west  by  the  territory  of  Ptolemais  and  Car- 
 mel,  a  mountain  belonging  formerly  to  the  Galileans, 
 but  at  present  to  the  Syrians.  On  the  south  Samaria 
 and  Scythopolis,  as  far  as  the  Jordan,  form  their 
 limits.  Towards  the  east  Hippene  and  Godaris, 
 Gaulanitis  and  the  frontiers  of  Agrippa's  kingdom  ; 
 while  Tyre  and  its  dependencies  constitute  their 
 northern  border.  Lower  Galilee  extends  in  length 
 from  Tiberias  to  Zabulon,  adjacent  to  which,  on 
 the  sea-coast,  is  Ptolemais.  In  breadth  it  stretches 
 from  a  village  called  Xaloth,  lying  in  the  Great 
 Plain,  to  Bersabe ;  conmiencing  from  which  is 
 measured,  also,  the  breadth  of  Upper  Galilee,  as 
 far  as  the  village  of  Baca,  which  bounds  the  land  of 
 the  Tyrians.  In  length  it  runs  from  a  village  in  the 
 vicinity  of  the  Jordan  to  Meroth'  [Bell.  Jitd.  iii.  3. 
 l).  A  comparison  of  this  with  some  other  passages 
 enables  us  to  fix  the  boundaries  still  more  accu- 
 rately. The  western  border  ran  along  the  narrow 
 strip  of  coast  land  belonging  to  Phoenicia.  The 
 southern  border  is  marked  by  Carmel,  the  northern 
 range  of  Samaria  and  the  towns  of  Scythopolis  , 
 for,  though  he  says  Xaloth,  which  lies  near  the  base 
 of  Tabar,  is  on  the  border,  yet  in  another  passage 
 he  states  that  Ginrea  (now  Jenin)  lay  between  Sa- 
 maria and  Galilee  [Antiq.  xx.  6.  l).  Galilee  thus 
 included  the  whole  plain  of  Esdraelon.  The  Jordan 
 was  its  eastern  border,  separating  it  from  the  pro- 
 vinces named.  Its  northern  limits  are  uncertain. 
 Perhaps  a  line  drawn  from  Banias  westward  to 
 the  angle  formed  by  the  Litany,  and  then  along  the 
 banks  of  that  river  to  the  Phoenician  plain,  would 
 mark  its  boundary  with  a  near  approach  to  accu- 
 racy. 
 
 The  province  of  Galilee  is  thus  about  fifty  miles 
 long  by  twenty-five  wide.  Its  northern  division, 
 called  '  Upper  Galilee,'  and  '  Galilee  of  the  Gen- 
 tiles,' consists  of  a  broad  mountain  ridge,  a  con- 
 tinuation of  the  Lebanon  range.  On  the  summit 
 is  a  tract  of  undulating  table-land,  diversified  by 
 wooded  heights  and  smooth  green  plains.  In  the 
 centre  of  this  table-land  stood  Kedesh-Naphtali. 
 Among  its  rich  pastures  Heber,  the  Kenite,  so- 
 journed, when  Sisera,  fleeing  from  the  carnage  on 
 Esdraelon  to  his  home  at  Harosheth,  took  refuge 
 in  the  tent  of  Jael  and  was  slain  (Judg.  iv.)  On 
 the  east  the  mountains  break  down  abruptly  into 
 the  deep  basin  of  the  upper  Jordan.  On  the  west 
 the  slopes  are  more  gradual,  and  long  ravines  of 
 singular  beauty  and  wildness  wind  down  to  the  sea- 
 coast  and  the  plain  of  Acre.     These  western  decli- 
 
GALILEE 
 
 Ot 
 
 GALILEE 
 
 vities,  once  the  possession  of  Asher,  who  '  dipped 
 his  foot  in  oil'  (Ueut.  xxxiii.  24),  are  still  celebrated 
 for  their  olive  groves.  The  town  of  Safed,  perclicd 
 on  the  culminating  point  of  the  mountain  chain  to 
 the  south,  is  one  of  the  four  sacred  cities  of  the 
 Jews.  It  is  the  centre  of  a  wide  volcanic  region, 
 and  has  frequently  been  the  scene  of  most  destruc- 
 tive earthquakes.  The  last  occurred  in  I  S3  7,  when 
 nearly  five  thousand  of  its  inhabitants  were  buried 
 in  the  ruins  of  the  town  (Robinson's  B.  R.  ii.  420- 
 32;  Hand-book  for  S.  and  P.  438). 
 
 The  southern  slopes  of  the  mountain  range, 
 from  the  castellated  heights  of  Safed  to  the  broad 
 plain  of  Esdraelon,  afford  some  of  the  richest 
 and  most  picturesque  scenery  in  Palestine.  Forests 
 of  evergreen  oak  sweep  round  the  flanks  of  the 
 bills  in  graceful  belts,  and  line  the  sides  of  t-lie 
 valleys,  leaving  open  glades,  and  undulating  ex- 
 panses of  green  grass,  such  as  are  seen  in  English 
 parks.  Here,  too,  are  upland  plains,  like  vast 
 terraces,  with  rich  soil  and  rank  vegetation.  The 
 largest  is  now  called  el-Battauf ;  and  on  its  north- 
 ern border  lie  the  rains  of  Cana  of  Galilee,  while 
 on  its  southern  are  those  of  Sepphoris.  There 
 are  others  to  the  eastward,  along  the  brow  of 
 the  hills  that  encircle  Tiberias,  and  extending 
 down  to  Tabor.  These  are  separated  from  the 
 great  plain  of  Esdraelon  by  a  line  of  rocky  but 
 picturesque  hills,  which  culminate  on  the  east  in 
 the  dome  of  Tabor.  Esdraelon  stretches  out  be- 
 yond them  like  a  sea  of  verdure,  laving  in  the  dis- 
 tance the  base  of  Carmel  and  the  mountains  of 
 Samaria, 
 
 Lower  Galilee  was  a  land  of  husbandmen,  famed 
 for  its  corn-fields,  as  Upper  Galilee  was  for  its 
 olive  groves,  and  Judjea  for  its  vineyards.  The 
 rich  soil  remains,  and  there  are  still  some  fields  ; 
 but  its  inhabitants  are  few  in  number,  and  its 
 choicest  plains  are  desolated  by  the  wild  Bedouin 
 [Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  355).  Galilee  was,  and 
 is,  also  remarkable  for  the  variety  and  beauty 
 of  its  wild  flowers.  In  early  spring  the  whole 
 country  is  spangled  with  them,  and  the  air  is  filled 
 with  their  odours.  Birds,  too,  are  exceedingly 
 numerous.  The  rocky  banks  are  all  alive  with 
 partridges  ;  the  meadows  swarm  with  quails  and 
 larks,  '  the  voice  of  the  turtle '  resounds  through 
 every  grove,  and  pigeons  are  heard  cooing  high  up 
 in  the  cliffs  and  glen-sides,  and  are  seen  in  flocks 
 hovering  over  the  corn-fields.  The  writer  has 
 travelled  through  Galilee  at  various  seasons,  and 
 has  always  been  struck  with  some  new  beauty — 
 the  delicate  verdure  of  spring  and  its  blush  of 
 flowers  ;  the  mellow  tints  of  autumn,  and  the  rus- 
 set hues  of  the  oak  forests  in  winter,  have  all 
 their  charms  (Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  363,  416, 
 420,  424;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  355,  sq.;  Van  de 
 Velde,  ii.  403,  sq. ;  Robinson's  B.  P.  iii. ) 
 
 The  northern  tribes  inhabiting  Galilee  were 
 taken  captive  by  the  Assyrians  ;  but  a  large  num- 
 ber returned  with  their  brethren  of  Judaea  in  the 
 time  of  Cyrus.  Galilee  had  a  dense  Jewish  popu- 
 lation at  the  commencement  of  our  era,  yet  the 
 foreigners  settled  among  them,  and  their  continual 
 intercourse  with  Greeks  and  Phoenicians,  produced 
 a  marked  effect  both  on  their  language  and  habits, 
 and  tended  also  to  allay  those  feelings  of  pride 
 and  fanaticism  which  were  so  characteristic  of  the 
 Jewish  race,  and  which  were  so  strongly  deve-  j 
 loped  in  Judsea.  '  Galilean '  was  a  term  of  re-  ! 
 proach  among  the  southern  Jews  (Matt.  xxvi.  73  ;  I 
 
 John  vii.  52  ;  Buxtorf's  Lexicon,  s.  v.  7>^J  ;  Light- 
 foot,  Oj>p.  ii.  492,  sq.)  On  tlie  death  of  Herod 
 the  Great,  the  province  of  Galilee  was  given  by 
 Cresar  to  his  son  Antipas  (Joseph.  Pell.  Jud. 
 ii.  6.  3).  It  was  at  that  time  the  most  densely 
 peopled  part  of  Palestine.  Josephus  tells  us  that 
 it  contained  more  than  200  cities  and  villages,  so 
 crowded  with  men  that  the  smallest  of  them  con- 
 tains above   15,000  inhabitants  {Bell.  Jud.  iii.  3. 
 
 I  hese  -facts  all  tend  to  illustrate  the  writings  of 
 the  Evangelists.  Galilee  was  the  home  of  Jesus, 
 His  mother  dwelt  in  Nazareth.  To  it  she  re- 
 turned again  from  Egypt,  and  there  she  lived  with 
 Jesus  till  he  began  to  be  about  thirty  years  of 
 age  (Matt.  ii.  22,  23  ;  Luke  ii.)  After  his  bap- 
 tism and  temptation  Jesus  came  back  to  Galilee  ; 
 and  though  he  frequently  visited  other  provinces, 
 this  was  emphatically  his  own  country,  where 
 the  greater'  part  of  his  public  life  was  spent,  and 
 most  of  his  miracles  were  perfonned.  Ilere,  also, 
 he  appeared  to  his  disciples  after  the  resurrection 
 (See  Well's  Sacred  Geography,  ii.  143).  When 
 our  Lord  entered  on  his  public  ministry,  and  de- 
 clared his  divine  mission,  he  was  met  with  the  in- 
 dignant and  insulting  remark,  '  Search  and  look  ; 
 for  out  of  Galilee  ariseth  no  prophet'  (John  vii. 
 52).  In  Galilee  his  mission  was  successful.  Thou- 
 sands from  its  teeming  population  followed  him 
 wherever  he  %\'ent,  and  hung  eagerly  upon  his 
 lips.  In  no  other  part  of  Palestine  could  he  have 
 found  such  a  sphere  for  his  works  and  words  of 
 mercy.  The  villages  were  filled  with  industrious 
 peasants  ;  the  towns  were  ci'owded  with  a  manu- 
 facturing population  ;  the  sea  swarmed  with  busy 
 fishermen.  He  had  a  word  for  all.  By  parables 
 and  illustrations  suitable  to  the  circumstances,  and 
 pleasing  to  the  tastes  of  each  class,  he  sought  to 
 rivet  their  attention,  enlighten  their  minds,  and 
 touch  their  hearts.  The  Gospel  was  likened  to 
 '  seed  '  sown.  Some  fell  on  stony  ground,  such  as 
 is  seen  on  every  bank  ;  some  fell  on  those  hard, 
 beaten  paths  that  wind  through  the  open  fields  of 
 Galilee  ;  some  fell  among  thorns,  which  spring  up 
 so  rankly  on  the  plains.  The  wild  birds  that 
 hover  over  the  fields,  and  the  tares  (Arab,  zmvdn) 
 that  may  still  be  seen  in  them,  were  pressed  into 
 the  service  of  the  Gospel.  Thus  did  our  Lord 
 teach  the  husbandmen.  Turning  to  the  commer- 
 cial towns-folk,  he  likened  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
 to  '  a  merchantman  seeking  goodly  pearls  ; '  and 
 then  to  the  fishermen  on  the  lake  he  likened  it  to 
 '  a  net  cast  into  the  sea.'  The  minds  of  these 
 people  were  more  free  from  prejudice,  and  more 
 open  to  conviction,  than  the  self-righteous  Phari- 
 sees and  rationalistic  lawyers  of  the  capital.  Hence 
 most  of  our  Lord's  disciples  were  Galileans  (See 
 Rohr's  Hist.  Geographical  Account  of  Palestine,  in 
 Biblical  Cabinet,  p.  94,  sq.;  Stanley,  ^S".  and  P., 
 418;  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  424,  sq.)  The  first 
 three  Gospels  are  chiefly  occupied  with  the  histoiy 
 of  our  Lord's  teachings  in  Galilee,  and  many  of 
 their  peculiarities,  as  contrasted  with  the  Gospel 
 of  John,  are  owing  to  this  fact  (Alford,  Proleg.  to 
 Matt.)  The  features  of  the  country,  its  scenery 
 its  products,  the  character  and  occupations  of  its 
 people,  had  all  their  influence  upon  the  teachings 
 of  our  Lord,  and  come  out  strikingly  in  the  Gos- 
 pel narratives. 
 
 Herod  Antipas,  tetrarch  of  Galilee  in  the  time 
 of  our  Lord,   was  a  weak  but  crafty  voluptuary. 
 
GALILEE,  SEA  OF 
 
 58 
 
 GALILEE,  SEA  OF 
 
 His  incestuous  intercourse  with  his  brother's  wife 
 brought  upon  him  the  stern  rebuke  of  the  Baptist. 
 He  was  present  at  Jerusalem  during  the  trial  of 
 Jesus,  but  declined  to  interfere  (Luke  xxiii. )  An- 
 tipas  was  the  founder  of  Tiberias,  and  there  he 
 chiefly  resided.  In  Galilee  the  Jews  made  an  ob- 
 stinate resistance  against  the  Romans.  Their 
 leader  was  Josephus  the  historian,  and  he  for- 
 tified the  principal  cities  and  natural  strong- 
 holds, as  Tiberias,  Tarichsea,  Sepphoris,  Joto- 
 pata.  Mount  Tabor,  etc.  [Vita,  xxxvii.  2;  Bell. 
 Jud.  ii.  20.  6).  But  after  a  long  and  harassing 
 campaign  the  province  was  completely  subdued 
 by  Titus  {Bell.  Jud.  iv.  2.  5).  At  a  subsequent 
 period,  when  Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  and  the 
 Jewish  nation  scattered,  the  Sanhedrim  was  re- 
 established at  Tiberias  ;  and  from  the  2d  to  the 
 6th  century  Galilee  was  the  chief  seat  of  Jewish 
 learning.  It  contained  a  large  and  wealthy  Jewish 
 population.  Traces  of  their  splendid  sacred  edi- 
 fices still  exist  at  Tell  Hum,  Irbid,  Kedesh,  Kefr 
 
 Birim,  and  other  places  {Handbook  for  S.  and  P. , 
 pp.  428,  432,  443,  etc.;  Robinson's  B.  R.  iii.  71- 
 74).  The  fairest  and  richest  parts  of  Galilee  are 
 now  utterly  waste  ;  its  greatest  cities  are  heaps  of 
 ruin,  and  the  miserable  remnant  of  its  population 
 are  oppressed  and  spoiled  by  the  Eastern  Arabs, 
 who  make  their  periodical  raids  as  their  fore- 
 fathers did  3000  years  ago  (Judg.  vi.;  see  Hand- 
 book, 355).-J.  L.  P. 
 
 GALILEE,  Sea  of  (17  OdXaaaa  ttjs  Ta\i\aias) ; 
 also  called  '  T/ie  Sea  of  Tibeiias''  {tt\%  Tt/3e- 
 ptdSos),  and  ''The  Lake  of  Gennesaret''  (7/  W-fj-vr) 
 Tevurjaaper),  and  emphatically  '  The Sea^  (i)  ddXaaaa, 
 Matt.  iv.  15).  In  the  O.  T.  the  only  name  given 
 to  this  lake  is  '  The  Sea  of  Cintiereth '  (ri~33"D\ 
 
 or  ni"l]13)-     It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  in  the 
 
 whole  of  the  O.  T.  it  is  only  mentioned  three 
 times;  and  then  incidentally  in  giving  the  boun- 
 daries of  the  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan  (Num.  xxxiv. 
 
 255.  Sea  of  Galilee. 
 
 II;  Josh.  xii.  3;  xiii.  27);  while  it  forms  one  of 
 the  most  prominent  names  in  N.  T.  history.  The 
 prophets  never  allude  to  it.  It  would  almost  seem 
 as  if  they  had  been  ignorant  of  its  existence. 
 Their  attention  was  directed  to  other  scenes  and 
 localities. 
 
 The  ancient  name  Cinnereth  was  derived  from 
 a  fenced  city  situated  somewhere  on  its  western 
 shore;  adjoining  this  city  was  a  little  territory  of 
 the  same  name  (Cinnereth).  By  a  change  in 
 the  pronunciation,  and  a  corruption  therefrom, 
 this  became  among  the  later  Jews  TDJJ,  Genesar. 
 
 Hence  the  Greek  Y^vv-qadp  of  the  Apocryphal 
 writers  and  Josephus  (i  Maccab.  xi.  67  ;  Joseph. 
 Bell.  Jtid.  iii.  10.  8),  and  the  Tevv-rjcrapeT  of  the 
 Evangelists.  The  theories  of  the  Rabbins  regard- 
 ing the  origin  of  this  name  are  given  by  Lightfoot 
 {0/'/>.  i.  498),  and  are  elsewhere  referred  to  (Gen- 
 nesaret). The  lake  got  its  other  names  from  the 
 province  of  Galilee,  which  extended  along  its  whole 
 western  shores ;  and  from  the  city  of  Tiberias 
 founded  by  Herod  Antipas. 
 
 The  Sea  of  Galilee  is  described  particularly  by 
 
 Pliny  and  Josephus.  The  former  says,  the  Jordan 
 discharges  itself  into  a  lake,  by  many  writers  known 
 as  Gcnesera,  sixUen  miles  long  and  six  wide ; 
 which  is  skirted  by  the  pleasant  towns  Julias  and 
 Hippo  on  the  east,  of  Tarichea  on  the  south  (a 
 name  which  is  by  many  persons  given  to  the  lake 
 itself),  and  of  Tiberias  on  the  west'  (v.  15). 
 Josephus  refers  to  other  features.  '  The  lake  of 
 Gennesareth  derives  its  appellation  from  the  adja- 
 cent district.  It  is  40  furlongs  (five  Roman  miles), 
 broad,  by  140  (174  miles)  long.  Its  waters  are 
 sweet,  and  extremely  pleasant  to  drink,  as  they 
 flow  in  a  clearer  stream  than  the  muddy  collections 
 of  marshes,  and  they  can  be  drawn  free  from 
 impurities,  being  throughout  confined  by  abrupt 
 and  sandy  shores.  They  are  of  a  medium  tempera- 
 ture, milder  than  those  of  the  river  or  the  fountain ; 
 yet  uniformly  colder  than  might  be  expected  from 
 the  expanse  of  the  lake  ....  The  kinds  of  fish  found 
 here  differ  from  those  elsewhere  met  with '  {Bell. 
 Jud.  iii.  10.  7). 
 
 Recent  measurements  have  shewn  that  the 
 dimensions  of  the  lake  have  not  been  quite  cor- 
 rectly given  by  either  writer.     Its  extreme  length 
 
GALILEE,  SEA  OF 
 
 59 
 
 GALL 
 
 is  124  geographical  miles,  and  its  breadtn  6;  equal 
 to  about  16  by  74  Roman  miles.     It  is  of  an  oval 
 shape,  or  rather  the  form  of  an  egg,  with  the  large 
 end  to  the  north.     The  Sea  of  Galilee  has  none  of 
 those  picturesque  or  sublime  features  for  which  the 
 lakes  of  Italy  and  Switzerland  are  justly  celebrated ; 
 it  has  not  even  the  stern  grandeur  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
 The  shores  are  singularly  uniform.     There  are  no 
 bold  cliffs  jutting  far  out  into  deep  water;   there 
 are  no  winding  bays  running  away  inland.     The 
 bed  of  the  sea  is  like  a  huge  basin.     Along  its 
 eastern  and  western  sides   the  banks  rise  steep, 
 bare,  and  rugged,  to  the  height  of  nearly  2000  feet ; 
 and  their  tops,  especially  those  on  the  east,  are  as 
 level  as  a  wall.     At  the  north  and  south  ends, 
 where  the  Jordan  enters  and  passes  out,  there  are 
 wide  openings,  through  which  views  are  gained  up 
 and  down  the  valley.     Yet  nature  has  not  left  this 
 scene    altogether    destitute    of    ornament.       The 
 scenery  is  not  quite  so  dreary,  nor  are  the  hues  of 
 the  landscape  so  dead  and  sombre  as  Dr.  Traill 
 would  have  us  imagine  (Traill's  tOj^-ZZ/zw,  ii.  p.  cvi.) 
 True,  when  the  sun  is  high  and  the  sky  cloudless, 
 and  when  the  pilgiim  looks  down  from  the  top  of 
 the  mountains,   there  is  a  dreariness  in  the  land- 
 scape, and  a  uniformity  of  cold  gray  colour,  wlrich 
 wearies  the  eye ;  but  let  him  go  down  to  the  shore 
 and  wait  till  the  sun  declines,  and  he  will  be  en- 
 chanted with  the  deep  ethereal  blue  of  the  smooth 
 water,  and  the   tints,    '  rose-coloured,   pearl-gray, 
 and  purple,  blended  together,'  and  thrown  in  soft 
 shades  over  the  sides  of  the  encircling  hills.      The 
 pale   blue   cone   of   Hermon,    with   its   glittering 
 crown   of  snow,    forms    a    glorious   back-ground 
 (Van    de  Velde,  ii.  388;  Robinson,   ii.    380,  sq.; 
 Stanley,    362;    Handbook  for   S.    atid  P.,   418). 
 Round  the  whole   shore,    with   only  one  or  two 
 short    interruptions,    there   is   a   broad   strand   of 
 white    pebbles,    mixed   with    little    shells.      The 
 Jordan  enters  at  the  extreme  northern  end  of  the 
 lake,  and  leaves  again  at  the  southern.     The  utter 
 loneliness  and  absolute  stillness  of  the  scene  are 
 exceedingly  impressive.      It  seems  as  if  all  nature 
 had  gone  to  rest,  languishing  under  that  scorching 
 heat.    How  different  it  was  in  the  days  of  our  Lord  ! 
 Then  all  was  life  and  bustle  along  the  shores;  the 
 cities  and  villages  that  thickly  studded  them  resound- 
 ed with  the  hum  of  a  busy  population ;  while  from 
 hill-side  and  corn-field  come  the  cheerful  cry  of  shep- 
 herd and  ploughman.     The  lake,  too,  was  dotted 
 with  dark  fishing-boats,  and  spangled  with  white 
 sails.     Now,  a  mournful  and  solitary  silence  reigns 
 alike  over  sea  and  shore.     The  cities  are  in  ruins. 
 Capernaum,  Chorazin,  the  two  Bethsaidas,  Hippo, 
 Gamala,  and  Tarichea,  are  completely  deserted. 
 Tiberias  and  Magdala  are  the  only  inhabited  spots; 
 and  for  several  miles  inland  in  every  direction  the 
 country  looks  waste  and  desolate.      The  inhabi- 
 tants— merchants,    fishermen,    and   peasants — are 
 nearly  all  gone.      The   few  that   remain   in   the 
 shattered  houses  of  Tiberias,  and  the  mud  hovels 
 of  Magdala,  and  the  black  tents  of  the  wandering 
 Bedawin,  seem  worn  and  wasted  by  poverty  and 
 sickness.      When  the  writer  last  visited  it  (1858), 
 the  Sea  of  Galilee  could  just  boast  of  one  small 
 boat,  and  it  was  so  rotten  and  leaky  as  not  to  be 
 sea-worthy.     The  fish,  however,  are  as  abundant 
 as  ever ;  for  though  only  little  hand-nets  are  used, 
 a  considerable  sum  is  paid  to  the  government  for 
 the  privilege  of  fishing   (Burckhardt,    Travels  in 
 Syria,  332 ;  Robinson,  ii.  3S6).     It  was  observed 
 
 by  Hasselquist  that  some  of  the  same  specii  of  fish 
 are  found  in  the  Sea  of  Galilee  as  in  the  Nile 
 {Travels,  p.  1 58);  the  same  fact  had  been  noted 
 by  Josephus  {Bell.  Jiid.  iii.  10.  8).  The  kinds 
 referred  to  are  Cyprimis  Betini,  Sihmis,  Mor- 
 tnyrics,  etc.  (See  Wilson's  Lands  of  the  Bible,  iL 
 113;  Robinson,  ii.  386). 
 
 The  most  remarkable  fact  in  the  physical  geo- 
 graphy of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  is  its  great  depression. 
 Its  surface  is  about  650  feet  (some  make  it  as  much 
 as  S45)  below  the  level  of  the  ocean  !  (Van  de 
 Velde's  Memoir  of  Map  of  Paltstine,  p.  181). 
 This  has  a  marked  effect  on  the  temperature, 
 climate,  and  natural  products.  The  heat  is  intense 
 during  the  summer  months.  The  harvest  on  the 
 shore  is  nearly  a  month  earlier  than  on  the  neigh- 
 bouring high  lands  of  Gahlee  and  Bashan.  Frost 
 is  unknown,  and  snow  very  rarely  falls.  The  trees, 
 plants,  and  vegetables,  are  those  usually  found  in 
 Egypt;  such  as  the  palm,  the  lote-tree  {Zizyplms 
 lotus),  and  the  indigo  plant,  etc.  (Robinson,  ii. 
 388;  Josephus,  Bell.  Jiid.  iii.  10.  7  and  8). 
 Though  the  whole  basin  of  the  lake,  and  indeed 
 the  Jordan  valley,  is  of  volcanic  origin,  as  evidenced 
 by  the  thennal  springs  and  the  frequent  earth- 
 quakes, yet  the  main  formation  of  the  surrounding 
 wall  of  mountains  is  limestone.  A  large  number 
 of  black  stones  and  boulders  of  basaltic  tufa  are 
 scattered  along  the  slopes  and  upland  plains,  and 
 dykes  of  basalt  here  and  there  burst  through  the 
 limestone  strata  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Tiberias 
 and  along  the  northern  shore  (See  Robinson,  /.  c; 
 Hasselquist,  p.  283  ;  Wilson's  Lands  of  the  Bible, 
 ii.  112,  151).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 GALL.  Two  distinct  Hebrew  words  are  ren- 
 dered by  this  term  in  the  A.  V.  i.  t;'N~|  (once 
 tjii",  Deut.  xxxii.  32)  ;  LXX.,  x^^'n-,  6i'fj.6s,  iriKpos, 
 dypojaTii,  the  name  of  a  bitter  plant,  classed  with 
 wormwood  (Deut.  xxix.  17  (18)  ;  Lam.  iii.  19  ; 
 Amos  vi.  12)  of  an  intensely  disagreeable  taste 
 (Ps.  Ixix.  22  [21])  ;  and  described  as  growing  up 
 quickly  and  luxuriantly  (Hos.  x.  4).  It  is  used  to 
 denote  extreme  bitterness  (Deut.  xxxii.  32),  also 
 poison  (Deut.  xxxii.  33  ;  Job  xx.  16)  ;  in  both 
 which  places  it  expresses  the  poisonous  and  destruc- 
 tive nature  of  sin,  which,  however,  is  swallowed 
 down  by  the  wicked  as  if  it  were  wine.  Thus  the 
 word  is  always  used  in  a  figurative  sense.  For  the 
 plant  itself,  see  RosH.  \^'ii'\  never  denotes  the 
 animal  secretion  called  gall. 
 
 2.    miD  and  mho  ;  LXX.  X°^V>  kuko,,  Staira  ; 
 
 T  ••  :  1      : 
 
 literally  bitteriiess  {e.g.,  Deut.  xxxii.  32  ;  Job  xni. 
 26).  Plence  it  is  used  for  the  gall  of  the  human 
 body,  a  substance  of  extreme  bitterness  {e.g..  Job 
 xvi.  13  ;  XX.  25),  and  for  the  poison  of  serpents  (Jot) 
 XX.  14). 
 
 In  the  N.  T.  the  word  gall,  x"^''?;  occurs  twice  : 
 once  in  connection  with  the  crucifixion  of  jesus 
 (Matt,  xxvii.  34),  '  They  gave  him  vinegar  to  drink 
 mingled  with  gaW  (in  Mark  xv.  23,  '  wine  mingled 
 with  myrrh'),  where  it  denotes  the  juice  of  a  bitter 
 herb,  which,  being  mingled  with  vinegar  or  sour 
 wine,  formed  a  drink  intended  to  produce  stupe- 
 faction and  insensibility  to  pain,  but  which  Jesus, 
 desiring  to  endure  the  full  bitterness  of  death  for 
 us,  having  tasted,  would  not  drink  (see  Words- 
 worth and  Alford,  in  loc.)  In  the  second  case 
 the  word  is  used  respecting  Simon  the  magician 
 (Acts  viii.  23),  '  I  perceive  that  thou  art  in  the  gall 
 
GALLERY 
 
 6C 
 
 GAMALIEL  L 
 
 of  bitterness,'  els  xoX7)j' Trk-piaj — '  fallen /;//«?  the  gall  ' 
 of  bitterness,'  where  it  expresses  the  poisonous 
 moral  condition  into  which  the  sorcerer  had  sunk, 
 in  allusion  to  the  notion  of  the  ancients  that  the 
 poison  of  the  serpent  existed  in  the  gall — x°^V 
 dcnridos  iv  yaarpi  avrov  (Job  xx.  14). — I.  J. 
 
 GALLERY.     Three   Hebrew  words   are  thus 
 translated  in  the  A.  V.      I.   p''rlS,  Ezek.  xli.    15, 
 
 16 ;  xlii.  3,  5.  The  proper  meaning  ui  this  word 
 is  very  doubtful ;  even  Jarchi  says,  'I  know  not  what 
 this  is,'  and  Kimchi  leaves  the  explanation  of  the 
 whole  passage  in  which  it  occurs  to  be  given  '  in 
 the  future  time  by  Elias.'  The  LXX.  render  it 
 in  the  one  chapter  by  to,  dir6\oi.Tra,  and  in  the  other 
 by  TO,  TrepiarvXa ;  the  Targ.  gives  i<nn^1''T,  '  its 
 comers,'  as  the  equivalent ;  and  the  Syr.  QSLxL, 
 
 which  Castell  says,  means  balaustia  a:dificioriu7i. 
 Modern  opinions  are  divided  between  pillars  or 
 columns  (Villalpandus,  Cocceius),  and  gallery  or 
 terrace  (Gesen.,  Fiirst,  Havernick,  Hitzig.) 
 
 2.  DTI"!  (Song  i.    17,  in  the  marg.  of  A.   V.) 
 
 This  is  the  textual  reading  for  which  the  K'ri  is 
 t3Tn!   a  reading  which  many  codices  also  give. 
 
 The  meaning  of  this,  however,  as  well  as  of  the 
 other,  is  doubtful.  Some,  tracing  it  to  the  obso- 
 lete   root    uni    '"-"tained    in    the    Aram.    Dm, 
 
 *^0n5),  to  ritn,  renu^-  'Ji  by  rafters,  '  qui  no- 
 men  habent  a  currendo  quod  de  trabe  in  trabem 
 incurrunt '  (Vatablus,  L.  Capellus) ;  while  others, 
 comparing  it  with  D'^LDH"!,  Gen.  xxx.  38  ('gutters,' 
 
 A.  v.),  Exod.  ii.  16  ('troughs,'  A.  V.),  render  it 
 by  laqueai'e,  lacutiar,  because  the  lacunae  are  like 
 canals  (Gesenius,  Heiligstedt).  Hengstenberg 
 makes  it  das  l>tlaufe>ie,  the  betrod  or  walked  over, 
 and  understands  it  of  the  floor  which,  in  the 
 temple,  was  made  of  cypress  wood  (i  Kings  vi. 
 15) ;  but  to  run  is  not  the  same  thmg  as  to  be  run 
 tcpon,  and  though  DH"!  signifies  the  former,  it 
 does  not  signify  the  latter ;  besides,  there  is 
 nothing  about  the  temple  here.  Ewald  adheres 
 to  the  textual  reading,  which  he  takes  to  be 
 a  plural,  and  consequently  to  be  read  ^3U''n"l,  or 
 
 ^JtJTl"!;    and   he    traces   it    to    the    Arab.    U  ,-^ 
 
 ;•   •-  -J^ 
 
 Kharat,    dolare,  whence    comes   U.   .U^.,    turned 
 
 or  carved  work  ;  but  this  labours  under  the  objec- 
 tion of  requiring  us  to  suppose  a  transposition  of 
 the  initial  letters  in  the  Hebrew  word.  The  LXX. 
 gives  (parviJjfiara,  and  the  Vulg.  laquearia.  We 
 incline  to  adopt  the  K'ri  with  Ewald's  suggestion, 
 that  it  is  plural  and  not  singular ;  which  produces 
 an  accordance  between  the  Hebrew  text  and  the 
 versions. 
 
 3.  Dm  (Song.  vii.  6  [A.  V.   5]).     From  con- 
 founding this  word  with  D''m,  our  translators  have 
 
 rendered  it  by  gallery.  It  signifies  here,  citrled 
 or  crisped  hair,  locks :  '  Rex  captus  est  cincinnis, 
 i.e.,  pulchritudine  cincinnorum  tuonim,  etc.,' 
 Heiligstedt,  in  loc. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GALLIM  (0-^3 :  Sept.  TaXXeZ/t).     We  read  in 
 
 I  Sam.  XXV.  44  that  Saul  gave  his  daughter  Michal, 
 '  David's  wife,  to  Phalti,  the  son  of  I^sh,  which 
 was  of  Gallim.''  Isaiah  shews  the  position  of  this 
 ancient  place  wlien  describing  in  prophetic  vision 
 
 the  advance  of  Sennacherib's  army  upon  Jerusalem. 
 Every  stage  of  the  conqueror's  march  is  portrayed 
 with  such  clearness,  that  any  traveller  can  even  now 
 follow  the  line,  as  the  writer  has  done  (Is.  x.)  The 
 army  is  supposed  to  leave  the  main  road  near  Bethel, 
 and  to  diverge  to  the  eastward.  Michmash,  Geba, 
 Ramah,  and  Gibeah,  are  passed  in  succession.  Then 
 follow  Gallim,  Laish,  and  Anathoth,  so  close  to- 
 gether that  the  cry  of  the  one  could  be  heard  in  the 
 others.  Gallim  must,  therefore,  have  been  situated 
 on  the  brow  of  one  or  other  of  those  rocky  glens 
 which  run  down  into  the  wilderness  east  of  Gibeah 
 and  north  of  Anathoth.  It  was  probably  a  very 
 small  village  or  castle.  Its  site  was  unknown  to 
 Eusebius  and  Jei'ome  {Onomast.  s.  v.);  and  recent 
 researches  have  failed  to  discover  it.  The  little 
 village  of  Hizmeh  would  suit  the  circumstances  of 
 the  narrative  so  far  as  situation  is  concerned  ;  but 
 there  is  nothing  else  to  indicate  identity  (See 
 Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  p.  214  ;  Stanley  .5'.  and  P.; 
 p.  202  ;  Reland,  p.  784). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GALLIC  {VaW'iwv).  Junius  Ann?eus  Gallio, 
 elder  brother  of  Seneca  the  philosopher.  His 
 name  was  originally  M.  Ann.  Novatus,  but  changed 
 to  Jun.  Ann.  Gallio  in  consequence  of  his  adoption 
 by  Jun.  Gallio  the  rhetorician  ('pater  Gallio,' 
 Quintil.  Inst.  Orat.  iii.  i,  sec.  21  ;  ix.  2,  sec.  91). 
 Seneca  dedicated  to  him  his  treatise  De  Vita  Beata, 
 and  in  the  preface  to  the  fourth  book  of  his  A'atn- 
 rales  Qiiccstiones  describes  him  as  a  man  universally 
 beloved  ('nemo  mortalium  uni  tarn  dulcis  est,  quam 
 hie  omnibus');  and  who,  while  exempt  from  all 
 other  vices,  especially  abhorred  flatter}'  ('inexpug- 
 nabilem  virum  adversus  insidias,  quas  nemo  non  in 
 sinum  recipit').  According  to  Eusebius,  he  com- 
 mitted suicide  before  the  death  of  Seneca  ('Junius 
 Gallio,  frater  Senecfe,  egregius  declamator,  propria 
 se  manu  interfecit,'  Thesaurus  Te?nporum,  etc.,  p. 
 161,  Amstel.  1658)  ;  but  Tacitus  speaks  of  him  as 
 alive  after  that  event  [Annal.  xv.  73),  and  Dion 
 Cassius  states  that  he  was  put  to  death  by  order  of 
 Nero.  He  was  Proconsid  [dvOvrrarevovTos,  Tex. 
 rec.  avdvirdrov  6ptos,  Lachmann)  of  Achaia  (Acts 
 xviii.  12)  under  the  Emperor  Claudius,  when  Paul 
 first  visited  Corinth,  and  nobly  refused  to  abet  the 
 persecution  raised  by  the  Jews  against  the  apostle. 
 Dr.  Lardner  has  noticed  the  strict  accuracy  of 
 Luke  in  giving  him  this  designation,  which  is  ob- 
 scured in  the  A.  V.  by  the  use  of  the  term  deputy 
 (Credibility,  part  i.  book  i.  ch.  i.  ;  Works,  L  34). 
 —J.  E.  R. 
 
 GAMAL  (^DJ).  [Camel.]  From  this  comes 
 the  pr.  n.  Gemalli  (""pOS,  ca?nel-t?tan.  Num. 
 xiii.  12). 
 
 GAMALIEL  (^t^/i^^S;  Sept.  VatJ.a\i-f,\ ;  re- 
 ward of  God,  Gesen. ;  El  is  rjivarder,  Fiirst).  A 
 descendant  of  Joseph  and  leader  of  the  tribe  of 
 Manasseh  (Num.  i.  lO ;  ii.  20 ;  vii.  54,  59 ;  x. 
 23).— t. 
 
 GAMALIEL  L  (^iS''^»J,  Pa^aXt^X,  i.e.,  the  gift 
 or  benefit  of  God),  son  of  Simon,  grandson  of 
 Hillel  of  the  royal  family  of  David,  and  the  cele- 
 brated teacher  of  the  Apostle  Paul  (Acts  xxii.  3)- 
 
 He  was  called  Gamaliel  the  elder  (JpiH  ^t<''^OJ),  to 
 distinguish  hJm  from  his  grandson  Gamaliel  II., 
 and  became  president  of  the  Sanhedrin  (X''EJ'3), 
 A.D   30,  which  shews  that  he  must  at  least  have 
 
GAMALIEL  L 
 
 61 
 
 GAMALIEL  I. 
 
 been  born  in  the  first  year  of  the  Christian  era, 
 since  he  could  hardly  have  succeeded  to  so  emi- 
 nent and  responsible  a  position  under  thirty  years 
 of  age.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  it  is  now 
 utterly  impossible  to  form  au  adequate  estimate  of 
 the  character,  religious  sentiments,  and  intellectual 
 endowments  of  the  Rabbi  who  educated  the  great 
 Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  and  so  much  contributed 
 to  the  development  of  his  character.  For  since 
 the  separation  of  Shammai  from  Hillel  I.,  and  his 
 formation  of  a  distinct  school  [Education],  the 
 theological  disquisitions  and  opinions  of  the  dif- 
 ferent heads  of  these  colleges  have  mostly  come 
 down  to  us  in  the  collective  name  of  the  school  of 
 Shammai  and  the  school  of  Hillel  ;  so  that  it  is 
 not  stated  whether  the  conclusions  reported  as 
 having  been  arrived  at  in  the  school  of  Hillel 
 belong  to  the  presidency  of  Simon  I.,  Gamaliel 
 1.,  Simon  II.,  or  to  the  days  of  Hillel  himself. 
 Hence  it  is  very  hazardous  to  say  which  of  the 
 maxims  of  the  school  of  Hillel  belong  to  Gama- 
 liel. From  the  fragments,  however,  which  have 
 his  name  attached  to  them,  we  see  that  Gamaliel 
 was  endowed  with  great  intellectual  powers,  a 
 fondness  for  study  and  for  definitely  settling  every 
 point  of  difficulty,  refined  taste,  and  good  judg- 
 ment, that  he  was  humane,  anxious  to  ameliorate 
 the  condition  of  the  helpless,  a  strict  Pharisee, 
 yet  liberal-minded,  and  averse  to  persecute  those 
 who  differed  from  him,  and  that  he  had  a  very 
 high  opinion  of  his  office.  His  mental  powers, 
 tastes,  and  liberal-mindedness,  may  be  seen  from 
 the  fact  that  he  extended  his  studies  to  Greek 
 literature,  and  infused  into  the  minds  of  his  dis- 
 ciples a  taste  for  the  Greek  poets  (Acts  xvii.  28  ;  i 
 Cor.  XV.  33  ;  Tit.  i.  12).  His  liberal  sentiments 
 may  also  be  seen  from  the  law  which  he  passed 
 with  regard  to  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath. 
 Though  it  had  been  determined  since  the  days  of 
 Judas  Maccabaeus  that  it  was  allowable  to  carry  on 
 defensive  war  on  the  Sabbath,  yet  it  was  still  a 
 matter  of  doubt  whether  the  soldiers  who,  at  the 
 termination  of  the  war,  were  more  than  a  Sabbath- 
 day's  journey  {i.e.,  2000  paces),  from  their  homes, 
 might  return  home  and  cany  their  weapons  on  the 
 Sabbath.  Gamaliel  decreed  that  all  persons  called 
 to  assist  either  at  hostile  invasions,  or  inundations, 
 or  fires,  or  at  the  falling  down  of  houses,  or  even 
 at  childbirth,  might  walk  2000  paces  in  any  direc- 
 tion (Erub.  45,  a).  Far  in  advance  of  his  times 
 were  his  humane  laws  that  the  poor  heathen  should 
 have  the  same  right  as  the  poor  Jews  to  gather  the 
 gleanings  after  the  hai-vest,  and  that  the  Jews  on 
 meeting  heathen  should  greet  them — 'Peace  be 
 with  you,'  even  on  their  festival  days,  when  they 
 are  mostly  engaged  in  worshipping  their  idols.  It 
 was  owing  to  these  laws,  which  redound  to  the 
 honour  of  Gamaliel,  that  it  afterwards  became 
 customary  to  make  equal  provisions  for  the  poor 
 heathen  and  Jews,  to  attend  to  the  sick  heathen, 
 to  bestow  the  last  honours  upon  their  dead,  and 
 to  comfort  their  mourners,  in  towns  which  were 
 inhabited  by  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  (Gittin,  59 
 b,  61,  ff. ;  Jerusalem  Gittin,  c.  v.)  This  contrasts 
 veiy  strikingly  with  the  conduct  of  Christians  to- 
 wards the  Jews,  and  towards  each  other,  even  in 
 the  present  day,  and  accounts  for  the  humane, 
 prudent,  and  liberal  advice  which  he  gave  to  the 
 Sanhedrin  respecting  the  treatnaent  of  the  follow- 
 ers of  Christ  (Acts  v.  34,  ff.)  Gamaliel  also 
 exerted  himself  for  the  relief  of  wives  and  widows 
 
 from  the  abuses  to  which  they  were  exposed  on 
 the  part  of  unprincipled  husbands  and  children. 
 Thus,  up  to  his  lime  a  husband  who  had  sent  a 
 bill  of  divorce  to  his  wife  could  recall  it  at  the 
 first  court  of  justice,  and  thereby  subject  the 
 woman  and  the  family  to  great  inconvenience. 
 Gamaliel  declared  this  recall  as  nugatory  (Gittin, 
 32).  Owing  to  the  several  names  by  which  indi- 
 viduals were  called  in  those  days,  some  Hebrew 
 and  some  Greek,  a  designed  or  undesigned  omis- 
 sion of  one  on  the  part  of  a  witness,  or  the  husband 
 when  signing  the  bill  of  divorce,  not  unfrequently 
 exposed  the  woman  to  the  mercy  of  unprincipled 
 men,  inasmuch  as  the  divorce  in  such  a  case  might 
 be  invalid.  Gamaliel  ordered  that  the  clause, 
 '  and  eveiy  other  name  which  describes  the  per- 
 son,' should  be  added  to  the  signature  (Gittin, 
 34).  He  also  passed  a  law  which  protected 
 widows  against  unscrupulous  children  who  might 
 wish  to  rob  her  of  the  portion  due  to  her  from  the 
 
 Kethuba  (nain^)- 
 
 Gamaliel  had  so  exalted  an  opinion  of  his  office 
 that  he  would  not  delegate  to  any  one  the  power 
 of  declaring  the  year  intercalary.  Thus,  when  he 
 on  one  occasion  went  to  Syria,  the  members  of  the 
 Sanhedrin  had  to  declare  the  year  intercalary,  sicb- 
 ject  to  his  approval ;  and  when  Gamaliel  returned, 
 he  said,  '  I  am  satisfied  therewith  :  and  the  year 
 was  intercalary'  (Mishna,  Edujoth,  vii.  7  ;  Sanhe- 
 drin, ii.  6).  The  decrees  on  such  occasions  Gama- 
 liel would  write  from  the  temple,  a  specimen  of 
 which  is  given  Sanhed.  Tosifta,  c.  1 1 ;  Jerusalem 
 Sanhedrin,  18  a  : — 'To  our  brethren  the  exiles  in 
 Babylon,  Media,  Greece,  and  all  other  exiles  of 
 Israel,  greeting  !  We  make  known  unto  you  that 
 the  lambs  of  this  year  are  still  tender,  the  pigeons 
 are  not  yet  fledged,  the  spring  is  altogether  late ; 
 it  hath,  therefore,  pleased  me  and  my  companions 
 to  lengthen  the  present  year  by  thirty  days.'  No 
 wonder  that  he  was  the  first  who  was  honoured  by 
 his  brethren  with  the  title  of  Rabbaii  (pi),  i.  e., 
 our  master,  which  henceforth  became  the  appella- 
 tion of  all  the  presidents  (CXti'J),  and  that  the 
 national  homage  was  expressed  in  the  hyperboli- 
 cal saying,  '  With  the  death  of  Gamaliel  the 
 reverence  for  the  law  ceased,  and  purity  and  absti- 
 nence {Pharisaism)  died  away'  (Mishna,  Sota,  ix. 
 15).  Gamaliel  died  about  50  A. D.  That  he  was 
 a  secret  believer  in  Jesus,  and  was  openly  baptised 
 before  his  death  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  is  now  re- 
 jected as  fabulous  by  all  writers  who  are  acquainted 
 with  Jewish  history  (comp.  Thilo,  Codex  Apocryphiis 
 Novi  Test.,  Lipsise,  1832,  p.  501,  and  the  elaborate 
 footnote  ;  Neander,  History  of  the  Planting  and 
 Training  of  the  Christian  Church,  ed.  Bohn,  voL 
 i.  p.  46,  ff. )  The  'well-known  prayer  against 
 Christian  heretics,'  which  we  are  told  by  Cony- 
 beare  and  Howson  was  'composed  or  sanctioned 
 by  him,'  i.e.,  Gamaliel,  and  the  story  about 
 '  Onkelos,  the  author  of  the  celebrated  Targum, 
 raising  a  funeral-pile  of  rich  materials,'  etc.  {The 
 Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paid,  Lond.  1854,  vol.  i., 
 p.  62,  ff.),  are  now  acknowledged  to  refer  to  Gama- 
 liel II.,  the  grandson  of  the  Apostle's  teacher  (comp. 
 Graetz,  in  FrankePs  Monatschrift,  vol.  i.  p.  320, 
 ff.  ;  Geschichte  der  Jiiden,  Leipzig,  1856,  vol.  iii. 
 p.  289,  ff.  ;  vol.  iv.  pp.  114,  152  ;  Jost,  Geschichtt 
 des  yudenthnms,  Leipzig,  1857,  vol.  L  p.  281,  ff.  ; 
 and  especially  the  masterly  work  of  Frankel,  en- 
 titled, Hodegetica  in  Mischnam,  Lipsise,  1859,  p. 
 57,   ff.,   where  aU  the  fragments  about  GamaheJ 
 
GAMALIEL  IL 
 
 62 
 
 GAMALIEL  IL 
 
 have  been  studiously  collected.     See  also  the  ar- 
 ticle Gamaliel  II.) — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GAMALIEL  II.  b.  Simon  IL,  also  called 
 Gamaliel  of  Jabne,  or  the  younger,  to  distin- 
 guish him  from  his  grandfather  Gamaliel  I.,  was 
 born  about  A.  D.  50,  succeeded  to  the  presidency  or 
 patriarchate  about  A.D.  So,  and  died  about  116 
 [Education]  .  He  was  the  teacher  of  both  Aquila, 
 the  Greek  translator  of  the  O.  T. ,  and  Onkelos, 
 the  Chaldee  translator  of  the  Pentateuch  ;  and  we 
 have  records  of  his  encounters  with  Christians  and 
 infidels,  which  shew  the  state  of  Biblical  interpre- 
 tation in  the  Apostolic  age.  The  great  maxim 
 which  he  propounded  to  his  disciples  was,  '  Get 
 thee  a  teacher,  eschew  that  which  is  doubtful,  and 
 do  not  multiply  uncertain  tithes'  (Aboth.  i.  16), 
 and  this  lesson  of  being  well  grounded  in  the  word 
 of  God  by  the  aid  of  regular  teachers,  had  its 
 desired  effects,  as  may  be  seen  even  from  the  con-  ! 
 duct  of  his  daughter.  Thus,  on  one  occasion  a 
 heathen  philosopher  derided  the  Biblical  account 
 of  the  creation  of  Eve,  remarking  to  Gamaliel, 
 '  Your  God,  in  the  creation  of  the  woman,  went  to 
 work  like  a  thief,  inasmuch  as  he  secretly  abstracted 
 a  rib  from  the  man ; '  whereupon  Gamaliel's  daugh- 
 ter begged  him  to  secure  her  redress  against  rob- 
 bers who  had  robbed  her  of  a  silver  pitcher,  and 
 left  behind  a  golden  one.  The  heathen  philoso- 
 pher remarked,  '  I  should  not  mind  if  such  a  mis- 
 fortune were  to  befal  me  every  day.'  '  This  being 
 the  case,'  said  Gamaliel's  daughter,  '  Adam  ought 
 to  be  glad  that  God  took  a  rib  and  gave  him  a  wife 
 for  it.'  '  But  why  did  God  do  it  secretly  ? '  '  That 
 Adam,'  said  she,  '  might  not  see  the  rough  mate- 
 rial, but  be  surprised  with  the  perfected  beauty ' 
 (Sanhedrin,  39).  On  another  occasion  a  heathen 
 philosopher  remarked  to  him,  '  Your  Law  says, 
 '  God  is  a  jealous  God.'  Why,  then,  does  he 
 manifest  his  jealousy  against  idolaters,  and  not 
 against  the  idols  ? '  Whereupon  Gamaliel  spake  a 
 parable.  'There  is  a  king  who  has  a  son  that 
 delights  in  calling  his  dog  by  the  name  of  his  own 
 royal  father.  Now,  with  whom  will  the  king  be 
 angry,  with  the  dog  or  with  his  son  ?'  Then  said 
 the  heathen  philosopher,  'Why  does  not  God 
 destroy  these  idols  if  they  are  such  worthless 
 things?'  Quoth  R.  Gamaliel,  'If  the  heathen 
 simply  worshipped  useless  things,  God  might  do  it, 
 but  they  worship  the  sun,  moon,  the  water,  etc., 
 and  shall  God  destroy  the  world  because  of  fools? ' ' 
 (Aboda  Zara,  54  a,  55  a).  On  another  occasion, 
 again,  '  a  Christian  believing  that  '  life  and  immor- 
 tality are  brought  to  light  in  the  Gospel'  {2  Tim. 
 i.  10),  extolled  the  doctrines  of  the  N.  T.  by 
 questioning  Gamaliel,  '  How  do  you  know  [with- 
 out the  N.  T.]  that  the  dead  will  rise?'  To  this 
 Gamaliel  replied :  '  From  the  words,  '  the  land  which 
 the  Lord  sware  unto  your  fathers  to  give  them' 
 (Deut.  xi.  21),  but  as  the  fathers  were  dead,  the 
 promise  must  have  premised  a  resurrection  when 
 alone  the  land  could  be  given  to  these  fathers' 
 (Sanhedrin,  90  b).  This  shews  the  force  of  the 
 interpretation  and  argument  used  by  Christ  in 
 Matt.  xxii.  32.  These  frequent  attacks  upon 
 Judaism  by  Christians,  and  the  rise  of  different 
 heretical  sects  among  the  Jews,  caused  to  a  great 
 extent  by  heathen  philosojihers  who  were  now 
 enabled  to  read  the  Jewish  Scriptures  in  tlie  Greek 
 version,  made  this  Gamaliel  sanction  the  famous 
 prayer  against  -ill  heretics  which  has  wrongly  been 
 
 ascribed  to  Gamaliel  I.  The  vigorous  measures, 
 however,  which  Gamaliel  adopted  to  establish 
 uniformity  of  faith  and  practice  greatly  embittered 
 the  Jewish  community,  and  resulted  in  his  tem- 
 porary deposition  from  the  presidency,  and  tlie 
 election  of  R.  Eleazar  b.  Azzariah  in  his  stead 
 [Education].  This  circumstance,  as  we  shall  see, 
 deeply  affects  the  history  of  the  O.  T.  Canon. 
 
 About  twenty  years  before  Christ,  Shammai, 
 a  disciple  of  Hillel,  and  others,  who  entertained 
 opinions  upon  several  subjects  adverse  to  those  of 
 their  master,  founded  a  separate  school,  which 
 went  by  the  name  oi  the  School  of  Sha7n7nai\n  oppo- 
 sition to  the  School  of  Hillel.  The  interpretations  of 
 Scripture,  and  the  decisions  peculiar  to  each  school, 
 were  orally  transmitted  by  the  respective  members. 
 This  was  all  the  more  easy  in  the  school  of  Hillel 
 since  its  presidency  became  hereditary.  When, 
 however,  the  direct  lineal  descendant  was  deposed, 
 and  Eleazar  inducted  as  president,  the  Sanhedrin 
 determined  to  re-examine  all  the  opinions  which 
 Gamaliel  affirmed  to  belong  to  his  ancestral  school. 
 For  this  purpose,  the  college,  which  then  consisted 
 of  the  unusual  number  of  seventy-two  members, 
 took  down  most  carefully  the  depositions  of 
 upwards  of  twenty-two  persons  who  were  in  pos- 
 session of  traditions,  and  according  to  these  deposi- 
 tions decided  which  opinions  were  in  haiTnony  with 
 the  most  ancient  traditions  irrespective  of  schools ; 
 and  to  their  honour  be  it  said  that  in  the  course  of 
 this  examination  the  Sanhedrin  not  unfrequently 
 abandoned  some  of  their  own  opinions  for  those 
 of  the  school  of  Shammai,  which  they  found  more 
 in  harmony  with  the  oldest  traditions.  This  col- 
 lection of  depositions  is  called  Edajoth  (mnj?  col- 
 lection of  ivitness)  or  Bechirah  (mTlIl.  selection'). 
 Among  the  decisions  reconsidered  was  the  opinion 
 about  the  book  of  Ecclcsiastes  and  the  Song  of  Songs, 
 which  constituted  one  of  the  differences  between 
 the  school  of  Shammai  and  that  of  Hillel,  the  for- 
 mer excluded  them  from  the  Canon  as  not  emanat- 
 ing from  the  Holy  Ghost  ({J'Tlpn  miD)  but  from 
 Solomon's  own  wisdom,  whilst  the  latter  included 
 them  in  the  Canon  as  being  inspired  productions ; 
 and  after  a  minute  investigation  of  the  evidence  it 
 was  found  that  according  to  the  most  ancient  tradi- 
 tions these  books  were  regarded  as  inspired,  and 
 hence  the  former  decisioti  of  the  school  of  Hillel 
 was  confirmed,  viz.,  that  the  said  books  should  be 
 7'etaincdva.  the  Canon  (Jadjim,  iii.  5  ;  Edajoth,  v.  3). 
 If  we  bear  in  mind  that  this  investigation  took  place 
 almost  in  the  apostolic  age,  that  the  said  books 
 were  theii  in  the  Canon,  that  the  question  was  whe- 
 ther they  should  be  retained,  and  that  it  was  then 
 found  necessary  to  retain  them  in  harmony  with  the 
 ancient  traditions,  few,  if  any,  will  doubt  that  Ecclc- 
 siastes and  the  Sotig  of  Sotigs  were  in  the  Canon  ante- 
 rior to  the  Christian  era. 
 
 Gamaliel  soon  became  reconciled  with  those 
 whom  he  had  offended  by  his  mistaken  zeal  for 
 uniformity  of  faith  and  practice,  and  was  reinstated 
 in  his  office  as  president  of  the  Sanhedrin.  It 
 must  not,  however,  be  supposed  that  he  was  an 
 intolerant  bigot.  The  fact  that  he  cultivated  Greek 
 literature  and  that  he  had  free  intercourse  with 
 both  heathen  philosophers  and  Jewish  Christians 
 would  of  itself  be  a  sufficient  proof  that  he  was  libe- 
 ral in  his  sentiments.  He  even  went  so  far  as  tc 
 bathe  at  Ptolemais  in  a  bath  which  was  adorned 
 with  a  statue  of  the  beautiful  goddess  Aphrodite  ; 
 and  when  a  philosopher  (/.^.,  a  Jewish  Christian) 
 
GAMES 
 
 GAMES 
 
 asked  him  how  he  could  reconcile  il  vAVa  his  reli- 
 gion, Gamaliel  replied  that  the  statue  was  not  to 
 be  worshipped  but  to  adorn  the  building-,  as  is  evi- 
 dent from  tlic  lil'Jc  regard  paid  to  it,  that  it  had 
 been  made  for  the  bath  and  not  the  bath  for  it,  and 
 that  it  would  be  absurd  to  be  prevented  thereby 
 from  using  the  enjoyments  of  nature  (Aboda  Zara, 
 iii.  4).  The  last  deed  of  Gamaliel  beautifully  illus- 
 trates his  character.  It  was  customaiy  among  the 
 Jews  to  bury  their  dead  in  costly  apparel,  and  to 
 such  an  extravagant  extent  was  this  practised  that 
 it  became  a  most  serious  matter  when  a  burial 
 occurred  in  a  family.  Gamaliel  ordered  in  his 
 last  will  and  testament  that  he  should  be  buried  in 
 simple  white  linen.  This  had  its  desired  effect,  and 
 did  away  with  the  obnoxious  practice,  as  no  family 
 could  henceforth  feel  it  a  degradation  to  have  their 
 dead  buried  in  a  simple  manner  when  the  highest 
 functionaiy  of  the  Jewish  people  was  interred  in 
 such  inexpensive  shrouds  (Kethuboth,  8,  b  ;  Tosifta 
 Nidda,  towards  the  end)  ;  and  the  Jews  to  the 
 present  day  bury  all  their  dead,  high  and  low, 
 rich  and  poor,  in  shrouds  made  of  the  same  inex- 
 pensive white  linen.  Gamaliel  died  about  A.  D.  116, 
 and  though  he  was  buried  in  the  simple  manner 
 which  he  desired,  yet  so  great  was  the  regard  m 
 which  he  was  held,  that  Onkelos,  his  disciple,  and 
 Chaldee  translator  of  the  Pentateuch,  shewed  him 
 royal  honours,  and  burned  at  his  funeral  costly  gar- 
 ments and  furniture  to  the  amount  of  seiienty  Tyrian 
 viincE  CIIV  njO  □'"yHi/),  i.(.,  about  twenty-one 
 pounds  sterling,  such  a  funeral-pile  as  was  raised  at 
 the  burial  of  a  king  (Aboda  Zara,  1 1  a  ;  Sema- 
 choth,  c.  viii.  ;  Tosifta  Sabbath,  c.  viii. )  This  inci- 
 dent, as  well  as  several  others  ascribed  to  Gamaliel 
 I.  in  Conybeare  and  Howson's  Life  and  Epistles 
 of  St.  Paul  (vol.  i.  p.  61,  etc.,  London  1856),  refers 
 to  Gamaliel  II. ,  comp.  Landau,  in  Franker s  Mo- 
 natschrift,  vol.  i.  p.  273  ff. ,  323  ff.  ;  Graetz  Ge- 
 vhiclite  derJuden^voX.  iv.  p.  31  ff.,  152  ff.  ;  Jost, 
 Geschichte  dcs  Judcidhuins,  vol.  ii.,  Leipzig  1858, 
 p.  25  ff.,  45  ff.  ;  Frankel,  Hodegeiica  in  Mischnam, 
 Lipsiae,  1S59,  p.  69,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GAMES.  If  by  the  word  are  intended  mere 
 secular  amusements  which  are  the  natural  expres- 
 sion of  vigorous  health  and  joyous  feeling,  fitted,  if 
 not  designed,  to  promote  health,  hilarity,  and 
 friendly  feeling,  as  well  as  to  aid  in  the  develop- 
 ment of  the  corporeal  frame,  we  must  look  to  other 
 quarters  of  the  globe,  rather  than  to  Palestine,  for 
 their  origin  and  encouragement.  The  Hebrew 
 temperament  was  too  deep,  too  earnest,  too  full  of 
 religious  emotion,  to  give  rise  to  games  having  a 
 national  and  permanent  character. 
 
 Games,  however,  are  so  natural  to  man,  especi- 
 ally in  the  period  of  childhood,  that  no  nation  has 
 been  or  can  be  entirely  without  them.  Accordingly 
 a  few  traces  are  found  in  the  early  Hebrew  history 
 of  at  least  private  and  childish  diversions.  The 
 heat  of  the  climate  too  in  Syria  would  indispose 
 themature  to  more  bodily  exertion  than  the  duties 
 of  life  imposed,  while  the  gravity  which  is  charac- 
 teristic of  the  Oriental  character  might  seem  com- 
 promised by  anything  so  light  as  sports.  Dignified 
 ease  therefore  corresponds  with  the  idea  which  we 
 form  of  Oriental  recreation.  The  father  of  the 
 family  sits  at  the  door  of  his  tent,  or  reclines  on 
 the  housetop,  or  appears  at  the  city  gate,  and  there 
 tranquilly  enjoys  repose,  broken  by  conversation, 
 under  the  light  and  amid  the  warmth  of  the  bright 
 
 and  breezy  heavens,  in  the  cool  of  the  retiring  day, 
 or  before  the  sun  has  assumed  his  burning  ardours 
 (Deut.  xvi.  14 ;  Lam.  v.  14).  Even  among  the 
 active  Egyptians,  whose  games  have  been  figured 
 on  their  mural  tablets,  we  find  little  which  suggest? 
 a  comparison  with  the  vigorous  contests  of  the 
 Grecian  games.  One  of  the  most  remarkable  is  the 
 following  (No.  256),  shewing  what  appears  to  be 
 play  with  the  single-stick. 
 
 Zechariah  (viii.  5)  alludes  to  the  sportiveness  Ov 
 children  in  the  streets  as  a  sign  and  consequence  of 
 that  peace  and  prosperity  which  are  so  free  from 
 alarm  that  the  young  take  their  usual  games,  and 
 are  allowed  entire  liberty  by  their  parents  : — 'and 
 the  streets  of  the  city  shall  be  full  of  boys  and  girls 
 playing  in  the  streets  thereof  (comp.  Jer.  xxx.  19). 
 An  interesting  passage,  illustrative  of  these  street- 
 amusements,  is  found  in  Matt.  xi.  16  : — 'This  gene- 
 ration is  like  unto  children  sitting  in  the  markets 
 and  calling  unto  their  fellows,  We  have  piped  unto 
 you  and  ye  have  not  danced,  we  have  mourned  unto 
 you  and  ye  have  not  lamented.' 
 
 That  the  elegant  amusement  of  playing  with 
 tamed  and  trained  birds  was  not  unusual  may  be 
 learnt  from  Job  xli.  5  : — 'Wilt  thou  play  with  him 
 (leviathan)  as  with  a  bird  ? '  Commenting  on  Zech. 
 xii.  3,  Jerome  mentions  an  amusement  of  the  young, 
 which  we  have  seen  practised  in  more  than  one 
 part  of  the  north  of  England.  'It  is  customary,' 
 he  says,  '  in  the  cities  of  Palestine,  and  has  been 
 so  from  ancient  times,  to  place  up  and  down  large 
 stones  to  serve  for  exercise  for  the  young,  who, 
 according  in  each  case  to  their  degree  of  strength, 
 lift  these  stones,  some  as  high  as  their  knees,  others 
 to  their  middle,  others  above  their  heads,  the  hands 
 been  kept  horizontal  and  joined  under  the  stone.' 
 
 Music,  song,  and  dancing  were  recreations  re- 
 sen'ed  mostly  for  the  young  or  for  festive  occasions. 
 From  Lam.  v.  16,  '  the  crown  is  fallen  from  our 
 head,'  it  might  be  inferred  that,  as  among  the 
 Greeks  and  Latins,  chaplets  of  flowers  were  some- 
 times worn  during  festivity.  To  the  amusements 
 just  mentioned  frequent  allusions  are  found  in  holy 
 writ,  among  which  may  be  given  Ps.  xxx.  1 1  ;  Jer. 
 xxxi.  13;  Luke  XV.  25.  In  Is.  xxx.  29,  a  passage 
 is  found  which  serves  to  shew  how  much  of  festi- 
 vity and  mirth  was  mingled  with  religious  obser- 
 vances ;  the  journey  on  festival  occasions  up  to 
 Jerusalem  was  enlivened  by  music  if  not  by  dan- 
 cing : — '  Ye  shall  have  a  song  as  in  the  night  when  2 
 holy  solemnity  is  kept ;  and  gladness  of  heart,  as 
 when  one  goeth  with  a  pipe  to  come  into  the 
 mountain  of  the  Lord,  to  the  mighty  one  of  Israel.' 
 A  passage  occurs  in  2  Sam.  ii.  14,  which  may  indi- 
 cate the  practice  among  the  ancient  Israelites  of 
 
GAMES 
 
 64 
 
 GAMES 
 
 games  somewhat  similar  to  the  jousts  and  toiinia- 
 meats  of  the  middle  ages.  On  the  subject  of 
 dancing  see  Michaelis  {Mos.  Rccht,  art.  197).  No 
 trace  is  found  in  Hebrew  antiquity  of  any  of  the 
 ordinary  games  of  skill  or  hazard  which  are  so  nu- 
 merous in  the  western  world. 
 
 The  Grecian  inlluence  which  made  itself  felt  after 
 the  exile,  led  to  a  great  change  in  the  manners  and 
 customs  of  the  Hebrew  nation.  They  were  soon 
 an  almost  different  people  from  what  we  find  them 
 in  the  days  of  their  national  independence  and 
 primitive  simplicity.  In  Mace.  i.  14,  we  find  evi- 
 dence that  the  Grecian  games  were  introduced  ; 
 and  that  a  gymnasium  was  built  under  Antiochus 
 Epiphanes : — 'They  built  a  place  of  e.xercise  at 
 Jerusalem,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  heathen.' 
 Comp.  2  Maccab.  iv.  12,  13,  14,  where  special  men- 
 tion is  made  of  the  prevalence  of  '  Greek  fashions,' 
 and  '  the  game  of  Discus  ; '  though,  as  appears 
 clearly  from  the  last  passage  (v.  17),  these  prac- 
 tices were  considered  contrary  to  the  Mosaic  insti- 
 tutions, and  were  hateful  to  pious  Israelites.  The 
 Herodian  princes  had  theatres  and  amphitheatres 
 built  in  Jerusalem  and  other  cities  of  Palestine,  in 
 which  were  held  splendid  games,  sometimes  in 
 honour  of  their  Roman  masters.  We  cite  a  re- 
 markable passage  to  this  effect  from  Josephus 
 (Antiq.  XV.  8.  i) : — '  Herod  revolted  from  the  laws 
 of  his  country,  and  corrupted  the  ancient  constitu- 
 tion by  introducing  foreign  practices,  while  those 
 religious  observances  which  used  to  lead  the  multi- 
 tude to  piety  were  neglected.  He  appointed  solemn 
 games  to  be  celebrated  every  fifth  year  in  honour 
 of  Caesar,  and  built  a  theatre  at  Jerusalem,  as  also 
 a  very  great  amphitheatre  in  the  plain — both  costly 
 works,  but  contrary  to  Jewish  customs.  He  also 
 called  men  together  out  of  every  nation  ;  wrestlers 
 and  others,  who  strove  for  prizes  in  these  games, 
 were  invited  by  the  ho[)e  and  reward  of  victory. 
 The  most  eminent  were  got  together,  for  the  re- 
 wards were  very  great,  not  only  to  those  that  per- 
 formed their  exercise  naked,  but  to  musicians  also. 
 He  moreover  offered  no  small  rewards  to  those  who 
 ran  for  prizes  in  chariot-races,  when  they  were 
 drawn  by  two,  three,  or  four  pairs  of  horses.  He 
 made  also  great  preparation  of  wild  beasts  and 
 even  of  lions  in  great  abundance,  and  of  such  other 
 beasts  as  were  either  of  uncommon  strength  or 
 rarely  seen.  These  fought  one  with  another,  or 
 men  condemned  to  death  fought  with  them.  Above 
 all  the  rest  the  trophies  gave  most  displeasure  to 
 the  Jews,  who  imagined  them  to  be  images.'  (See 
 also  Antiq.  xvi.  5.  I  ;  xix.  7.  4;  xi.x.  8.  2;  Eich- 
 horn,  De  Jnd<Bor.  re  scenica,  in  the  Commait. 
 Goetting.  Rec.)  The  drama  does  not  appear  to 
 have  been  introduced,  but  Jews  were  in  foreign 
 countries  actors  of  plays  (Joseph.  Vita,  sec.  3). 
 The  passage  already  cited  (see  the  original)  is  full 
 of  evidence  how  distasteful  these  heathenish  games 
 were  to  the  more  sound-minded  part  of  the  nation. 
 
 The  fact  that,  as  we  have  seen,  the  games  of  the 
 amphitheatre  were  celebrated  even  in  Jerusalem, 
 serves  to  make  it  very  likely  that  Paul  in  i  Cor.  xv. 
 32 ;  iv.  9,  alludes  to  these  detestable  practices,  though 
 it  is  not  probable  that  the  apostle  was  himself  ac- 
 tually exposri  to  the  fury  of  the  raging  animals. 
 Contrary  to  the  opinion  of  some  writers,  the  refer- 
 ence to  these  combats  appears  to  us  veiy  clear, 
 though  it  was  only  metaphorically  that  Paul 
 '  fought  M'ith  beasts  at  Ephesas.'  The  word  which 
 the  apostle  (i  Cor,  xv.  32)  uses  is  emphatic  an-"' 
 
 descriptive,  id-qpioixaxn^a..  The  dripioixaxi-o-  01 
 beast-fight  [venatio  in  Latin)  constituted  among  the 
 Romans  a  part  of  the  amusements  of  the  circus  or 
 amphitheatre.  It  consisted  in  the  combat  of  human 
 beings  with  animals.  The  persons  destined  to  this 
 barbarous  kind  of  amusement  were  termed  dyjpio- 
 fj-dxoi,  bestiarii.  They  were  generally  of  two  classes 
 — I.  Voluntary,  that  is,  persons  who  fought  either 
 for  amusement  or  for  pay  :  these  were  clothed  and 
 provided  with   offensive   and   defensive  weapons. 
 
 2.  Condemned  persons,  who  were  mostly  exposed 
 to  the  fury  of  the  animals  unclothed,  unarmed,  and 
 sometimes  l)ound  (Cic.  Pro  Sext.  64  ;  Ep.  ad  Quint. 
 Frat.  ii.  6  ;  Senec.  De  Benef.  ii.  19  ;  Tertull. 
 Apol.  9).  As  none  but  the  vilest  of  men  were  in 
 general  devoted  to  these  beast-fights,  no  punish- 
 ment could  be  more  shameful  and  cruel  than  what 
 was  frequently  inllicted  on  the  primitive  Christians, 
 ^^'hen  they  were  hurried  away  '  to  the  lions '  (as  the 
 phrase  was),  merely  for  their  fidelity  to  conscience 
 and  to  Christ,  its  Lord.  Ephesus  appears  to  have 
 had  some  unenviable  distinction  in  these  brutal  ex- 
 hibitions (Schleusner,  in  voc),  so  that  there  is  a 
 peculiar  propriety  in  the  language  of  the  apostle. 
 
 Of  these  beast-fights  the  Romans  were  passion- 
 ately fond.  The  number  of  animals  which  appear 
 to  have  been  from  time  to  time  engaged  in  them, 
 is  such  as  to  excite  in  the  reader's  mind  both  pity 
 and  aversion. 
 
 The  N.  T. ,  in  several  places,  contains  refer- 
 ences to  the  celebrated  Grecian  Games,  though 
 it  may  be  allowed  that  some  commentators  have 
 imagined  allusions  where  none  were  designed.  As 
 might,  from  his  heathen  learning,  be  expected,  it 
 is  Paul  who  chiefly  supplies  the  passages  in  ques- 
 tion ;  comp.  Gal.  ii.  2,  v.  7  ;  Phil.  ii.  16  ;  Heb. 
 xii.  I,  xii.  4  ;  Phil.  iii.  14  ;  2  Tim.  i:  5  ;  and  espe- 
 cially in  I  Cor.  ix.  24-27.  In  the  O.  T.  two 
 passages  contain  a  clear  reference  to  games ;  Ps. 
 xix.  5  ;  Eccl.  ix.  11. 
 
 As  tending  to  illustrate  these  scriptural  allusions, 
 we  shall  describe  some  of  the  exercises  in  which 
 the  competitors  engaged  in  the  great  games  of 
 Greece  : — 
 
 I.  The  Gymnasti:  Exercises. — These  were  laid 
 down  in  a  well-planned  systematic  series,  begin- 
 ning with  the  easier  (/coC^a),  and  proceeding  on  to 
 the  more  difficult  (^ap^a).  Some  of  these  were 
 specially  fitted  to  give  strength,  others  agility ; 
 some  educated  the  hands,  others  the  feet.  Among 
 the  lighter  exercises  were  reckoned  running  {dp6/j.os), 
 leaping  (&\p.a),  quoiting  (dicTKos),  hurling  the  jave- 
 lin (a.K6vTiov).  When  skill  had  been  obtained  in 
 these,  and  the  consequent  strength,  then  followed 
 a  severer  course  of  discipline.  This  was  two-fold — 
 I,  simple  ;  2,  compound.  The  simple  consisted  of 
 wrestling  (irdXri),  boxing  {iriiy/j,-^)  :  the  compound 
 wc  find  in  the  Pentallilon  (the  five  contests),  and  the 
 
GAMES 
 
 65 
 
 GAMES 
 
 Pankration  (or  general  trial  of  strength).  The 
 Pentathlon  was  made  up  of  the  union  of  leaping, 
 running,  quoiting,  wrestling,  and  hurling  the  spear; 
 
 the  Pankration  consisted  of  wrestling  and  boxing. 
 It  is  not  necessary  here  to  speak  in  detail  of  the 
 
 distinctions  which  Galen  makes  between  the  ordi- 
 nary motions  of  the  body  and  those  which  were 
 
 required  in  these  exercises,  since  the  names  them- 
 selves are  sufficient  to  make  manifest  how  manifold, 
 
 severe,  long,  and  difficult  the  body  discipline  was, 
 and  the  inference  is  easy  and  unavoidable  that  the 
 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 effect  on  the  bodily  frame  must  have  been  of  the 
 most  decided  and  lasting  kind. 
 
 In  I  Cor.  ix.  26  Paul  speaks  of  fighting  not  as 
 one  who  beateth  the  air  ;  alluding  to  the  preludial 
 exercises,  trials  of  individual  and  of  comparative 
 strength,  which  took  place  in  the  course  of  train- 
 ing. These  runnings  and  boxings  had  no  imme- 
 diate aim  or  result,  and  implied  no  real  competi- 
 tor ;  hence  the  propriety  of  the  terms  which  the 
 sacred  writer  employs.  Statius  (  Theb.  vi.  587)  has 
 given  a  lively  picture  of  some  of  the  practices  by 
 which  the  runners  endeavoured  to  give  suppleness 
 and  agility  to  their  limbs  : 
 
 tunc  rite  citatos 
 Explorant,  acuuntque  gradus,  variasque  per  artes 
 Exstimulant  docto  languentia  membra  tumultu. 
 Poplite  nunc  flexo  sidunt,  nunc  lubrica  forti 
 Pectora  collidunt  plausu  ;  nunc  ignea  tollunt 
 Crura,  brevemque  fugam  necopino  fine  reponunt. 
 
 After  the  herald  had  called  the  competitors  into 
 the  lists,  they  sometimes  tried  their  strength  and 
 exercised  their  frojiies,  by  running  out  and  back  on 
 the  course.  Virgil  {/Eii.  v.  376)  represents  Dares 
 as  displaying  the  size  and  flexibility  of  his  arms 
 prior  to  his  combat  with  Eryx  : 
 
 Ostenditque  humeros  latos,  alternaque  jactat 
 Brachia  protendens,  et  verberat  ictibus  auras, 
 
 where,  in  verberat  ictibus  auras,  we  have  even  a 
 verbal  agreement  with  the  apostle's  phraseology. 
 (Compare  ^-En.  v.  446).  Among  the  proprieties 
 of  language  for  which  the  passage  in  i  Cor.  ix.  is 
 distinguished,  may  be  placed  the  term  which  Paul 
 employs  to  describe  the  prize.  It  is  the  specific 
 word  used  in  the  case,  namely  ^pa^elov  :  this  was 
 the  customary  term,  the  employment  of  which 
 was  rendered  proper  from  the  name  of  the  officers, 
 ^pa^evrai,  who  gave  the  conqueror  his  crown.  The 
 entire  passage  indeed  is  singularly  happy  in  its 
 phraseology,  thereby  adding  confirmation  to  the 
 grounds  on  which  the  authority  of  the  epistle  rests. 
 We  cannot,  however,  think  one  word  well  ren- 
 dered in  our  English  version,  adoKi/xos,  '  castaway  ;' 
 or,  if  this  be  a  good  rendering,  the  apostle  has  at 
 least  failed  in  strict  verbal  propriety  ;  for  who  were 
 they  in  connection  with  the  games  who  were,  or 
 were  termed,  castaway  ?  AoKifxaaia  was  the  temi 
 employed  to  describe  the  severe  scrutiny  which 
 candidates  for  office  underwent  at  Athens.  Per- 
 sons who  were  found  unfit  were  termed  dSoKi/jioi, 
 and  as  this  decision  was  a  declaration  of  civic  and 
 social  incapacity,  not  to  say  of  moral  tui-pitude,  the 
 word  came  to  mean  '  dishonoured.'  This,  or  the 
 word  rejected,  seems  the  proper  rendering  in  the 
 last  verse  of  the  ninth  chap,  of  i  Corinthians.  The 
 apostle's  fear  evidently  was,  lest,  after  having  put 
 othere  on  this  noble  undertaking,  he  himself  should 
 be  at  last  found  unfit  to  engage  therein  ;  for  the 
 allusion  seems  to  be  derived  from  the  preparatory 
 exercises  of  which  he  is  immediately  sj-eaking,  ard 
 not  from  the  issue  of  the  contest  ;  and  at  the  end  of 
 these  preparatory  exercises,  a  veiy  severe  examina- 
 tion had  to  be  undergone  by  such  as  wished  to  '  run 
 the  race.'  This  interpretation  may  perhaps  serve 
 to  set  the  apostle's  humihty  in  a  strong  light  ; 
 since  he  expresses  his  fear  lest  he  should  not  be 
 even  admitted  to  enter  the  lists  for  '  the  glorious 
 prize.'  If,  however,  any  one  prefers  referring  the 
 word  to  the  final  issue  of  the  contest  of  life,  then 
 the  same  meaning  remains,  and  the  apostle  says. 
 
GAMES 
 
 66 
 
 GAMES 
 
 that,  after  all  his  striving,  he  may  lose  the  crown, 
 proving  at  last  unequal  to  the  achievement  of  the 
 victoiy. 
 
 In  writing  to  the  Christians  at  Corinth  there  was 
 a  special  propriety,  on  the  part  of  the  apostle,  in 
 making  allusions  to  the  public  games.  Corinth 
 was  the  place  where  one  of  the  four  Greek  national 
 games  was  celebrated,  namely,  the  Isthmian. 
 These  games  were  so  called  from  being  held  on 
 the  isthmus  which  joins  northern  with  southern 
 Greece — a  spot  of  land  most  celebrated  in  Grecian 
 history,  alike  in  martial  and  commercial  matters. 
 
 2.  Racing  may  be  traced  back  to  the  earliest 
 periods  of  Grecian  antiquity,  and  may  be  regarded 
 as  the  first  friendly  contest  in  which  men  engaged. 
 Accordingly  the  Olympic  and  Pythian,  probably 
 also  the  other  games,  opened  with  foot-races.  Foot- 
 racing, perfected  by  systematic  practice,  was  divided 
 into  different  kinds.  If  you  ran  merely  to  the  end 
 of  the  course  {uTohiov),  it  was  called  stadium  ; 
 if  you  went  thither  and  back,  you  ran  the  double 
 
 ~^^^?1 
 
 course  (SkuXos).  The  longest  course  was  the 
 SoXtxoS)  which  required  extraordinary  speed  and 
 power  of  endurance.  What  it  involved  the  ancients 
 have  left  in  no  small  uncertainty.  It  is  sometimes 
 given  as  seven  times  over  the  stadium  ;  at  others, 
 twelve  times  ;  at  others  again,  twenty  ;  and  even 
 the  number  of  four-and-twenty  times  is  mentioned. 
 These  lengths  will  give  some  idea  of  the  severity  of 
 the  trial,  and  serve  to  illustrate  the  meaning  of  the 
 apostle  when  he  speaks  of  running  with  patience 
 the  race  set  before  him  (viro/j-ovr},  patience,  sus- 
 tained effort).  Indeed,  one  Ladas,  a  victor  at 
 the  Olympic  games,  in  the  S6\txos  or  long  race, 
 was  so  exhausted  by  his  efforts  that,  immediately 
 on  gaining  the  honour  and  being  crowned,  he 
 yielded  up  his  breath  :  a  fact  which  also  serves 
 to  throw  light  on  Scriptural  language,  as  shewing 
 with  what  intense  eagerness  these  aspirants  (5oXt- 
 Xodp6/j.ot,  long-runners)  strove  for  perishing  chap- 
 lets  {(pdaprbv  ar^cpavou).  In  tlie  preparatory  dis- 
 cipline everything  was  done  which  could  conduce 
 to  swiftness  and  strength.  The  exercises  were  per- 
 formed with  the  body  naked  and  well  oiled.  Minute 
 directions  were  established  in  order  to  prevent  foul 
 play  [KaKOText^lci,  KUKovpyla)  of  any  kind,  so  that 
 all  the  competitors  might  start  and  run  on  terms  of 
 entire  equality — illustrating  the  words  of  Paul  on 
 the  necessity  of  running  lawfully.  The  contest 
 was  generally  most  severe  ;  to  reach  the  goal 
 sooner  by  one  foot  was  enough  to  decide  the  vic- 
 tory. How  true  and  graphic  then  the  descriptions 
 given  by  Paul  :  it  was,  as  the  apostle  states,  iu 
 (jTad'uj},  in  the  race-course,  that  the  contests  took 
 place  ;  every  one  striving  for  the  victory  was  tem- 
 perate in  all  things  ;  nay  more,  he  kept  under  his 
 body  and  brought  it  into  subjection.  A  passage  is 
 found  in  the  Etichiridion  of  Epictetus  [cap.  29], 
 which  shews  with  what  propriety  the  terms  which 
 
 the  apostle  employs  were  chosen  by  him  :  '  You 
 wish  to  conquer  at  the  Olympic  games  ?  so  also  do 
 I  ;  for  it  is  honourable  ;  but  bethink  yourself  what 
 this  attempt  imphes,  and  then  begin  the  undertak- 
 ing. You  must  subject  yourself  to  a  determinate 
 course  ;  must  submit  to  dietetic  discipline  {ava-^- 
 KOTpo(pe'iv)  ;  must  pursue  the  established  exercises 
 at  fixed  hours  in  heat  and  cold  ;  must  abstain  from 
 dainties  ;  must  not  drink  cold  water  or  wine  at 
 pleasure  ;  yield  youi^self  unreservedly  to  the  control 
 of  the  president  as  to  a  physician,  then  go  into  the 
 struggle  ;  you  will  have  to  throw  out  your  hands, 
 twist  your  ancle,  swallow  much  dust,  sometimes  be 
 flogged ;  but  so  you  will  conquei'. ' 
 
 263. 
 
 It  may  well  be  supposed  that  the  competitors 
 employed  all  their  ability,  and  displayed  the 
 greatest  eagerness  to  gain  the  prize.  The  nearer, 
 too,  they  approached  to  the  goal,  the  more  did  they 
 increase  their  efforts.  Sometimes  the  victoiy  de- 
 pended on  a  final  spring  ;  happy  he  that  retained 
 power  enough  to  leap  first  to  the  goal.  The  spec- 
 tators, also,  used  every  encouragement  in  their 
 power,  these  favouring  one  competitor,  those 
 another  : — 
 
 'Verbaque  dicentum,  nunc,  nunc  incumbere 
 
 tempus, 
 Hippomene,  propera.  Nunc  viribus  utere  totis. ' 
 
 All  these  remarks  go  to  shew  how  wisely  Paul 
 acted  in  selecting  the  figure,  and  how  carefully  he 
 has  presei-ved  the  imagery  \\hich  belonged  to  it.  A 
 word  employed  in  the  Common  Version,  i  Cor. 
 IX.  27,  '  Lest  when  I  have  preached  to  others  I 
 myself  should  be  a  castaway' — namely,  preached, 
 mars  the  figure.  The  original  is  Krjpv^as — '  acted 
 the  part  of  herald,'  whose  business  it  was  to  call 
 the  competitors  to  the  contest  and  proclaim  their 
 victoiy,  functions  which  Paul  spent  his  life  in  per- 
 forming. 
 
 3.  At  the  Olympic  games  the  prize  was  simply 
 a  chaplet  made  of  wild  olive.  The  crowns  were 
 laid  on  a  tripod,  and  placed  in  the  middle  of  the 
 course,  so  as  to  be  seen  of  all.  On  the  same  table 
 there  were  also  exposed  to  view  palm-branches, 
 one  of  which  was  given  into  the  hand  of  each  con- 
 queror at  the  same  time  with  the  chaplet.  The 
 victors,  having  been  summoned  by  proclamation, 
 wei'e  presented  with  the  ensigns  of  victory,  and 
 conducted  along  the  stadium,  preceded  by  a 
 herald,  who  jjroclaimed  their  honours,  and  an- 
 nounced their  name,  ]iarentage,  and  country. 
 
 The  real   reward,    however,    was  in  the   fame 
 
GAMES 
 
 67 
 
 GARDEN 
 
 which  ensued.  A  chaplet  won  in  the  chariot-races 
 at  Olympia  was  the  highest  of  earthly  honours. 
 What  congratulations  from  friends  ;  how  was  the 
 pubhc  eye  directed  to  the  fortunate  conqueror ; 
 what  honour  had  he  conferred  on  his  native  city, 
 and  for  what  office  was  such  an  one  unfit !  Wliat 
 intense  and  deep  dehght  must  his  bosom  have 
 been  filled  with  when  the  full  acclaim  of  as- 
 sembled Greece  fell  upon  his  ear,  coming  in  loud 
 salutations  and  applauses  from  every  part  of  the 
 crowded  course !  Then  came  the  more  private 
 attentions  of  individual  friends.  One  brought  a 
 chaplet  of  flowers  ;  another  bound  his  head  with 
 ribbons.  Afterwards  came  the  triumphal  sacrifice 
 made  to  the  twelve  gods,  accompanied  by  sump- 
 tuous feasting.  The  poet  now  began  his  office, 
 gaining,  in  some  cases,  both  for  himself  and  the 
 happy  victor,  an  unexpected  immortality.  Music 
 also  lent  her  aid,  and  his  name  was  sung  wherever 
 the  noble  accents  of  the  Greek  tongue  asserted 
 their  supremacy.  In  order  to  perpetuate  the  me- 
 mory of  these  great  men,  their  names  and  achieve- 
 ments were  entered  into  a  public  register,  which 
 was  under  the  care  of  suitable  officers.  A  no  less 
 privilege  was  that  of  having  a  statue  of  them- 
 selves placed  either  at  the  expense  of  their  country 
 or  their  friends,  in  the  sacred  grove  of  Jupiter. 
 A  perhaps  still  greater  honour  awaited  the  victor 
 on  his  return  home.  The  conquerors  at  the  Isth- 
 mian games  were  wont  to  be  received  in  their 
 chariots,  superbly  attired,  amid  thronging  and  jubi- 
 lant multitudes. 
 
 One  or  two  other  privileges  belonged  to  these 
 victors,  such  as  immunity  from  public  offices,  and 
 a  certain  yearly  stipend.  If  to  all  this  be  added 
 the  strict  scrutiny  which  competitors  were  obliged 
 to  undergo  (in  the  best  ages),  so  that  none  could 
 enter  the  lists  but  such  as  were  of  pure  Greek 
 blood,  and  incorrupt  in  life,  none  but  such  as  had 
 undergone  the  required  disciplinary  training,  and 
 (in  the  case  of  the  chariot  and  horse-races)  none 
 but  those  who  could  afford  to  possess  and  train 
 horses  in  a  country  in  which,  as  in  Greece,  horses, 
 particularly  m  the  earlier  ages,  were  very  scarce 
 and  dear  ;  it  will  be  seen  that  the  distinction  of 
 the  prize  was  not  over-rated,  when  it  was  com- 
 pared with  a  Roman  triumph,  nor  that  the  de- 
 scription of  Horace  is  too  highly  coloured — 
 
 palmaque  nobilis  1 
 
 Terrarum  dominos  evehit  ad  Deos.  | 
 
 j 
 
 At  the  Isthmian  games  the  pnze  was  parsley  ' 
 
 during  the  mythic  periods.     In  later  ages  the  vie-  I 
 
 tor  was  crowned  with  a  chaplet  of  pine  leaves.  ' 
 
 Parsley,  however,  appears  to  have  been  also  em- 
 
 ployed. If  the  conqueror  had  come  off  victorious 
 in  the  three  great  divisions — music,  gymnastics, 
 and  racing— he  was  in  the  P^^thian,  as  well  as  in 
 
 the  other  sacred  games,  presented  also  with  a 
 palm-branch.  The  names  of  about  seventy  per- 
 sons are  preserved  who  gained  honours  at  the 
 Isthmian  games,  among  which  occurs  that  of  the 
 emperor  Nero,  who  is  recorded  to  have  gained 
 the  victoiy  in  the  character  of  harper  and  that  of 
 herald.  On  the  subject  here  treated  of  see  West's 
 Odes  of  Pindar,  2d  edit.;  Potter's  Antiquities  of 
 Greece.  By  far  the  best  work,  however,  is  Krause's 
 Die  Gyninastik  und  Agonistik  der  Hellencn  ;  and 
 his  Die  Pythien,  Nemee)i  und  Isthviicn,  Leipzig, 
 1 841. —J.  R.  B. 
 
 GAMMADIM  (nnSJ).  This  word  occurs 
 I  Ezek.  xxvii.  11,  and  various  interpretations  have 
 '  been  given  of  it.  The  LXX.  render  it  by  (pvXaKes, 
 and  with  this  agree  the  Syr.  (__if_^0  ei  custo- 
 diebafit),  and  the  Arab.;  the  Vulg.  again  renders 
 it  by  Pygmai,  and  this  Rashi,  Kimchi,  and  others 
 adopt.  Fiirst  prefers  the  former  of  these,  tracing 
 the  word  to  an  obsolete  root  1733,  to  place  or  vmJce 
 
 to  stand,  allied  to  the  Arab.  ,\\^^,  to  be  hard  or 
 
 firm,  and  translates  by  Besatzung  (garrison).  Lu- 
 ther also  follows  this,  and  gives  wdc/iter  as  the 
 rendering.  The  interpretation  of  the  Vulg.  rests 
 on  the  supposed  derivation  of  the  word  from  lE'a, 
 
 a  span;  or  cubit;  and  this  Michaelis  also  follows, 
 suggesting  that  these  warriors  were  so  called 
 because  at  the  height  at  which  they  stood  they 
 seemed  pigmies  to  those  below  !  Theodoret 
 defends  the  rendering  of  Aquila,  Trvynaiovs,  deriv- 
 ing it  diro  TTJs  TTvyfM^s,  and  more  rationally  explaining 
 it  as  denoting  persons  skilled  in  fight.  The  Targ. 
 regards  it  as  an  ethnological  term,  and  gives  ''{<pt212p 
 Cappodocians,  reading  probably  D''"1?0J  for  D'^IOJ- 
 Fuller  {Misc.  Sac.  vi.  p.  6gS)  suggests  that  they  may 
 be  the  inhabitants  of  Gamala  (Plin.  N'.  H.  v.  14); 
 and  Grotius  thinks  the  inhabitants  of  Ancon  ('  nam 
 Ancon  est  n»3 ')  are  intended.  All  this  is  purely 
 arbitrary.  Havernick  {in  loc),  adopts  the  mean- 
 ing  brave,    daring   ones,    from    Syr.     { I^Vno  ..  ; 
 
 Hitzig  prefers  the  sense  of  deserters  from  neigh- 
 bouring countries,  or  exiles  (the  D''"!1~10  of  Is. 
 Iviii.  7),  comparing  the  Syr.   ],lDQ_ii  as  applied 
 
 to  the  obstinacy  of  the  horse  or  mule,  and  identi- 
 fymg  it  with  the  Arab.  -\xs>-  warrior;  Gesenius 
 
 contends  for  'bellatores  fortes  hostes  arborum 
 instar  caedentes,'   deriving  the  word  from  Arab. 
 
 Jc^^i-  amputant;  and  Lee  thinks  it  means  sho)-t- 
 
 szuordsmen,  deriving  it  from  HO-I,  which  he  traces 
 
 to  the  same  Arab.  root. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GANACH.     [Ibn-Ganach.] 
 
 GARDEN  [J3,  r\ll,  TMl,  Sept.  and  N.  T.  /c^ttos]. 
 
 Several  gardens  are  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures, 
 as  the  garden  of  Eden  (Gen.  ii.  8,  9,  10,  15), 
 Ahal^'s  garden  of  herbs  (i  Kings  xxi.  2),  the  royal 
 garden  near  the  fortress  of  Zion  (2  Kings  xxi.  iS; 
 XXV.  4),  the  garden  of  Solomon  (Eccl.  ii.  5),  the 
 royal  garden  of  the  Persian  kings  at  Susa  (Esther 
 i.  5;  vii.  7,  8),  the  garden  of  Joseph  of  Arimathea 
 (John   xix.   41),   and  the   garden  of  Gethsemane 
 
GARDEN 
 
 68 
 
 GARDEN 
 
 (John  xviii.  l).  It  is  clear,  from  Is.  v.  2,  and 
 Lara.  ii.  6,  that  gardens  were  generally  hedged  or 
 walled,  as  indeed  Josephus  expressly  states  respect- 
 ing the  gardens  near  Jerusalera  {De Bell.  Jiid.  v.  7). 
 In  Jobxxvii.  18  ;  Prov.  xxvii.  18  ;  Cant.  i.  6  ;  viii. 
 II  ;  and  John  xx.  15,  gardeners  and  keepers  of 
 gardens  by  occupation  are  indicated.  [They  made 
 use  also  of  a  species  of  scarecroto  (wpo^affKafiov, 
 Bar.  vL  70)]. 
 
 Gardens  were  planted  not  only  with  fragrant 
 and  beautiful  plants,  but  with  various  fruit-bearing 
 and  other  trees  (Gen.  ii.  9 ;  Jer.  xxix.  5 ;  Amos  ix. 
 14).  Thus  we  find  mention  of  nut-gardens  (Cant, 
 vi.  11),  pomegranate-gardens  (Cant.  iv.  13),  olive- 
 gardens  (Deut.  viii.  8;  I  Chron.  xxvii.  28),  vine- 
 gardens  (Cant.  iv.  2;  viii.  8),  a  garden  of  cucum- 
 bers (Is.  i.  8).  Here,  however,  we  are  not  to 
 suppose  that  the  gardens  were  exclusively  occupied 
 by  these  fruits,  but  that  they  were  severally  pre- 
 dominant in  the  gardens  to  which  they  gave  name. 
 The  distinction,  for  instance,  between  a  vine-garden 
 and  a  vine-yard  would  be,  that,  in  the  latter,  the 
 vine  was  cultivated  solely  for  use,  whereas  in  the 
 former  it  was  planted  for  solace  and  ornament,  to 
 cover  walls,  and  to  be  trained  in  arbours  and  on 
 trellises.  [We  read  also  of  a  'garden  of  herbs' 
 (Deut.  xi.  10;  I  Kings  xxi.  2);  in  these,  vegetables 
 for  the  table  were  reared,  including  such  aromatic 
 herbs  as  were  used  for  seasoning  (.See  Food)]. 
 
 Gardens  were,  when  possible,  planted  near 
 streams,  which  afforded  the  means  of  easy  irriga- 
 tion. This  explains  such  passages  as  Gen.  ii.  9, 
 sf.,  and  Is.  i.  30.  But  streams  were  few  in  Pales- 
 tine, at  least  such  as  afforded  water  in  summer, 
 when  alone  water  was  wanted  for  irrigation  :  hence 
 rain-water,  or  water  from  the  streams  which  dried 
 up  in  summer,  was  in  winter  stored  up  in  re- 
 servoirs spacious  enough  to  contain  all  the  water 
 likely  to  be  needed  during  the  dry  season.  In 
 fact  many  of  our  own  large  nurseries  are  watered 
 in  the  same  manner  from  reservoirs  of  rain-water. 
 The  water  was  distributed  through  the  garden  in 
 numerous  small  rills,  which  traversed  it  in  all 
 directions,   and  which  were  supplied  either  by  a 
 
 265.  Watering  Garden.' 
 
 continued  stream  from  the  resen'oir,  or  had  water 
 poured  into  them  by  the  gardeners,  in  the  manner 
 
 shewn  in  the  Egyptian  monuments.  These  rilla 
 being  turned  and  directed  by  the  foot,  gave  rise  to 
 the  phrase  'watering  by  the  foot,'  as  indicative  of 
 garden  irrigation  (Deut.  xi.  10).  The  representa- 
 tion (No.  265)  very  clearly  shews  the  way  in  which 
 water  was  raised,  by  a  balanced  lever,  from  the 
 stream  or  reservoir,  and  poured  into  a  trough, 
 whence  it  flowed  into  the  various  canals  for  irrigation. 
 This  method  is  still  in  use.  There  is  a  curious  ac- 
 count of  ancient  garden  irrigation  in  Pliny  {Hist. 
 Nat.  xix.  4),  which  the  reader  may  consult  with 
 advantage. 
 
 Gardens  were  dedicated  to  various  uses  among 
 the  Hebrews,  such  as  we  still  find  prevailing  in 
 the  East.  One  most  essential  difference  between 
 them  and  our  own  is  that  they  are  not  attached  to 
 or  in  any  way  connected  with  the  residence,  but 
 are  situated  in  the  suburbs.  We  have  known 
 gardens  from  half  a  mile  to  a  mile  distant  from 
 the  houses  of  the  persons  to  whom  they  belonged. 
 It  is  manifest  that  all  the  gardens  mentioned  in 
 Scripture  were  outside  the  several  towns.  This  is, 
 however,  to  be  understood  of  regular  gardens,  for 
 shrubs  and  flowers  were  often  planted  in  the  open 
 courts  of  the  dwelling-houses. 
 
 People  repair  to  their  suburban  gardens  to  take 
 the  air,  to  walk,  and  to  refresh  and  solace  them- 
 selves in  various  ways.  For  their  use  there  is 
 mostly  in  each  garden  a  kind  of  summer-house 
 or  pavilion,  fitted  up  with  much  neatness,  gaily 
 painted  and  furnished  with  seats,  where  the  visi- 
 tants may  sit  and  enjoy  themselves.  Here  some- 
 times banquets  were  and  are  still  given,  attended 
 by  singing  and  music,  to  which  there  may  be  an 
 allusion  in  Is.  Ii.  3.  The  custom  of  burying  the 
 dead  in  gardens  is  indicated  in  Gen.    xxiii.    19, 
 
 266.  Garden-houses. 
 
 20 ;  2  Kings  xxi.  26  ;  i  Sam.  xxv.  i ;  Mark  xv.  46 ; 
 John  xix.  41,  42  ;  and  still  occurs  sometimes  in 
 the  east,  but  is  not  very  prevalent.  We  find  it  also 
 among  the  Greeks  (Heliodorus,  ALthiop.  i.  2,  p. 
 35),  and  the  Romans  (Suetonius,  Galha,  20). 
 
 It  is  evident  that  the  gai-dens  of  the  Hebrews 
 were  in  a  very  considerable  degree  devoted  to  the 
 culture  of  medicinal  herbs,  the  preparation  of  which 
 
GARDEN 
 
 69 
 
 GARDEN 
 
 in  various  ways  was  a  matter  of  much  solicitude 
 with  them  (Jer.  viii.  22).  This  is  still  the  case 
 in  the  East,  where  vegetable  simples  are  as  much 
 employed  in  medicine  as  they  were  in  this  country 
 in  the  times  of  Gerarde  and  Culpepper. 
 
 It  would  seem  that  the  Jews  were  much  in  the 
 habit  of  performing  their  devotions  in  gardens 
 (Gen.  xxiv.  63 ;  Matt,  xxvi.  36 ;  John  i.  48 ; 
 xviii.  I,  2).  This  interesting  practice,  however, 
 was  idolatrously  abused ;  for  the  worship  of  idols 
 in  these  shady  seclusions  was  not  of  unfrequent 
 occurrence,  and  is  often  mentioned  in  Scripture 
 (i  Kings  xiv.  23;  2  Kings  xvi.  4;  xvii.  10 ;  2 
 Chron.  xviii.  4  ;  Is.  Ixv.  3  ;  Ixvi.  17  ;  Jer.  ii.  20  ; 
 iii.  6  ;  Ezek.  xx.  28). 
 
 The  Jews,  in  their  ceremonial  treatises,  have  fre- 
 quent occasion  to  mention  gardens,  chiefly  for  the 
 purpose  of  shewing  what  plants  or  seeds  might 
 or  might  not  be  planted  or  sown  together  under 
 the  law  against  heterogeneous  propagations  (Lev. 
 xix.  19  ;  Deut.  xxii.  9,  li).  For  that  law  various 
 reasons  have  been  given,  on  which  we  are  not 
 required  to  pronounce  any  judgment :  but  it 
 appears  to  us  that  the  economical  grounds  which 
 may  be  collected  from  the  effects  which  appear  to 
 result  from  the  interdicted  practices,  are  quite 
 sufficient  in  themselves,  whether  others  exist  or 
 not.  Thus  we  find  enumerated  among  the  radical 
 defects  of  Hindu  husbandry — 'the  barbarous 
 system  of  sowing  two  or  three  species  of  grain  in 
 one  field  ....  The  mode  of  reaping  is  equally 
 defective ;  if  two  or  three  species  of  grain  are  sown 
 in  the  same  field,  the  Indian  husbandman  treads 
 down  a  great  pai't  of  his  crop  in  order  to  collect 
 each  kind  separately  ;  indeed,  so  fond  is  he  of  this 
 method  of  proceeding  that  he  pursues  it  even  when 
 the  crop  is  all  of  one  kind,  that  he  may  select  what 
 he  deems  the  ripest '  (Tennant's  Indian  Recreations, 
 in  Edinb.  Revieiv,  iv.  320). 
 
 The  gardens  of  the  Holy  Land  have  been  men- 
 tioned by  travellers  in  terms  too  vague  and  general 
 to  afford  the  basis  of  a  satisfactory  description. 
 Dr.  Olin  seems  to  have  paid  most  attention  to 
 them.  Of  the  gardens  near  Shechem  he  says, 
 '  Upon  turning  an  angle  in  the  steep  gorge  we 
 found  ourselves,  as  if  by  enchantment,  in  the  midst 
 of  fruitful  gardens,  filled  with  vegetables,  flowers, 
 and  fruit-trees,  and  all  in  the  highest  perfection  of 
 luxuriance  and  beauty.  Olives,  vines,  acacias, 
 pomegranates,  figs,  mulberries,  and  several  species 
 of  trees  which  I  did  not  recognise,  are  crowded 
 together  in  small  enclosures,  forming  an  imper- 
 vious shade  as  well  as  an  impenetrable  thicket, 
 and  yet  the  capabilities  of  the  soil  seem  not  to  be 
 overburdened.  Each  separate  tree  and  plant 
 thrives  to  admiration,  and  seems  rather  to  profit 
 than  suffer  from  the  thick  dark  canopy  of  branches 
 and  foliage,  which  entirely  excludes  the  sun's  rays 
 from  the  tangled  huddle  of  trunks  and  roots.  A 
 beautiful  mountain  stream  runs  through  the  midst 
 of  this  forest  of  gardens,  in  a  channel  mostly  arti- 
 ficial and  sometimes  covered ;  but  the  water  often 
 rises  into  small  fountains,  and  forms  several  cascades' 
 ( Travels  in  the  East,  ii.  350).  The  orange  and  citron 
 trees  which  abound  in  these  gardens  near  Shechem 
 (see  Schubert,  Reise  ins  Morgenlande,  ii.  116)  were 
 probably  those  not  recognised  by  Dr.  Olin,  from 
 their  not  being  in  fruit  at  the  time  of  his  visit. 
 
 The  mural  paintings  of  the  ancient  Egyptians 
 afford  us  much  information  respecting  their  gardens 
 and  processes  of  gardening.     Put  the  difference  of 
 
 climate,  soil,  and  produce,  in  Egypt  and  Palestme, 
 was  too  material  to  justify  us  in  expecting  much 
 information  from  this  source  respecting  the  gardens 
 of  the  Hebrews.  As,  however,  some  notions  on 
 this  head  must  have  been  common  to  both  coun- 
 tries, we  subjoin  the  observations  of  Mr.  Wathen 
 on  the  gardens  of  Egypt  {Arts,  etc.,  of  Ancie?it 
 Egypt,  p.  loS). 
 
 'The  ancient  plans  of  gardens  shew  that  the 
 Egyptians  were  not  less  fond  than  our  ancestors  of 
 mathematical  figures,  straight  walks,  architectural 
 decorations,  and  vegetable  avenues  ;  and  that  they 
 as  thoroughly  entered  into  the  idea  of  seclusion  and 
 safety  suggested  by  enclosures  within  enclosures. 
 It  has  been  remarked  that  in  some  old  English 
 places  there  were  almost  as  many  walled  compart- 
 ments without,  as  apartments  within  doors  ;  and 
 the  same  may  be  said  of  Egyptian  country-houses. 
 This  principle  of  seclusion,  and  an  excessive  love 
 of  uniform  arrangement,  are  remarkably  displayed 
 in  the  plan  of  a  large  square  garden  given  in  Pro- 
 fessor Rosellini's  great  work  (/  Momcmenti  delf 
 Egitto).     Here — 
 
 '  Grove  nods  at  grove,  each  alley  has  a  brother, 
 And  half  the  platform  just  reflects  the  other.' 
 
 The  royal  garden  must  have  formed  a  most  envi- 
 able retreat  from  '  the  intolerable  day'  of  an  Egyp- 
 tian summer.  The  whole  was  shut  in  by  an  em- 
 battled wall.  On  one  side  a  canal  runs  along  just 
 without  the  walls.  In  the  centre  of  the  enclosure 
 is  an  oblong  walled  vineyard  ;  the  vines,  planted  in 
 rows  or  avenues,  are  trailed  above  on  trellis- work 
 forming  shady  arched  walks.  The  space  on  one 
 side  this  central  vineyard  exactly  corresponds  to 
 that  on  the  other.  In  each  there  is  a  row  of  palms, 
 an  oblong  tank  with  water-fowl,  four  flower-beds 
 on  a  lawn,  and  an  open  summer-house  on  the 
 margin  overlooking  the  pool ;  an  oblong  walled 
 compartment  of  trees  ;  a  second  tank  with  water- 
 fowl and  flowers  ;  and  all  along  within  the  wall  of 
 circuit  a  row  of  trees  of  three  kinds  in  regular  alter- 
 nations. At  one  end  of  the  garden  next  the 
 entrance  is  a  building  containing  apparently  one 
 large  room,  perhaps  for  the  royal  entertainments  ; 
 at  the  other  end  or  back  is  a  house  of  three  stories, 
 which  commanded  a  view  of  the  whole.  This 
 garden,  with  its  sheltered  walks,  its  groves  and 
 tanks  of  water,  its  seclusion  and  privacy,  reminds 
 us  of  the  '  fair  garden'  of  Joacim  at  Babylon,  with 
 its  baths,  its  deep  shady  coverts,  and  its  '  privy 
 gate,'  in  the  apocryphal  story  of  Susannah. 
 
 '  Obelisks  and  pylons,  with  flagstaffs  and  stream- 
 ers, seem  to  have  been  occasionally  introduced  as 
 garden  decorations.  In  the  parched  climate  of 
 Egypt  a  large  supply  of  water  is  absolutely  neces- 
 sary for  a  thriving  vegetation  ;  hence  tanks  and 
 canals  form  a  chief  feature  in  these  villa  scenes. 
 With  rows  of  palms  laden  with  fruit  on  their  mar- 
 gin, they  recall  Jeremiah's  poetical  comparison  ol 
 '  the  man  that  trusteth  in  the  Lord'  to  a  '  tree 
 planted  by  the  waters,  and  that  spreadeth  out  her 
 roots  by  the  river,  and  shall  not  see  when  heat 
 Cometh,  but  her  leaf  shall  be  green  ;  and  shall  not 
 be  careful  in  the  year  of  drought,  neither  shall 
 cease  from  yielding  fruit,'  contrasted  with  '  the 
 man  who  trusteth  in  man,'  who  is  'like  the  heath 
 in  the  desert,  and  shall  not  see  when  good  conieth; 
 but  shall  inhabit  the  parched  places  in  the  wilder- 
 ness, in  a  salt  land  and  not  inhabited'  (Jer.  xviL 
 5-8).'-J.  K. 
 
GAREB 
 
 70 
 
 GATE,  DOOR 
 
 GAREB  p"l3,  reviler).  i.  The  name  of  one  of 
 David'sworthies(2Sam.  xxiii.  38;  i  Chron.  xi.  40). 
 He  is  called  '  the  Ithrite'  ''"iril^n,  i.e.,  a  native  of 
 Jathir.  The  rendering  Jethrite,  Vulg.  ipse  Jethrites, 
 qu.  son  of  Jether,  is  opposed  to  the  punctuation,  to 
 the  Syr.  version  (in  the  former  clause  of  the  verse) 
 
 0 
 ;_»Aj,    to   the    Targ.,    and  to   the   fact    that  m 
 
 notices  of  this  sort  it  is  usually  the  birth-place  and 
 not  the  descent  that  is  mentioned.  The  Syr.  reads 
 in  the  latter  clause  ^  Arab  from  Lachish. 
 
 2.    The  name  of  a  hill  near  Jerusalem  (0^33 
 
 213,  Sept.  Bowoi  Tapij/S,  Jer.  xxxi.  39).   As  the  root 
 
 213  signifies  to  scratch.,  and  the  Syr.   H^i-U  is  the 
 
 name  for  leprosy,  this  hill  is  supposed  to  have  been 
 the  place  to  which  lepers  were  sent  out  of  the  city. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GARIZIM.     [Gerizim.] 
 
 GARLIC.     [Shoom.] 
 
 GARMENT.     [Dress.] 
 
 GARNETT,  JOHN,  D.D.,  successively  Fellow 
 of  Sidney  Sussex  College,  Cambridge,  and  Lady 
 Margaret's  preacher ;  Bishop  of  Ferns,  1752  ; 
 Bishop  of  Clogher,  1758.  He  died  in  1782.  His 
 principal  work  is  entitled  A  Dissertation  on  the 
 Book  of  Job,  its  nature,  argument,  age,  and  author; 
 wherein  the  celebrated  text,  ch.  xix.  25,  is  occasion- 
 ally considered  and  discussed ;  to  which  are  added 
 four  sermons,  4to,  Lond.  1749.  In  this  work  the 
 author  '  contends  that  the  Book  of  Job  is  an  alle- 
 gorical drama,  designed  to  represent  the  fall  and 
 restoration  of  a  captive  Jew,  and  with  a  view  to 
 recommend  the  virtue  of  patience.  The  author  he 
 supposes  to  have  been  Ezekiel,  and  the  period  of 
 its  production  subsequent  to  the  Babylonish  capti- 
 vity.' (Orme,  Biblioth.  Bib.  p.  200).  The  disser- 
 tation is  ably  written  and  ingeniously  reasoned,  but 
 the  hypothesis  it  is  designed  to  support  is  a  mere 
 fancy,  and  the  author  adds  nothing  to  our  resources 
 for  understanding  the  book  to  which  it  relates. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 GARRISON.  This  term  is  used  in  the  A.  V. 
 as  an  equivalent  for  four  Hebrew  words,  all  derived 
 from  the  same  root  2^3,  or  2^*^ ;  namely  (i.)  n2^*D  ; 
 (ii.)  2\'0;  (iii-)  2''>*3  and  (iv.)  n2m  As  to  the 
 correctness  of  so  rendering  the  first  and  second, 
 there  has  been  no  difference  of  opinion.  In  i 
 Sam.  X.  5 ;  xiii.  3,  2''V3  has  been  thought  to  mean 
 
 a  memorial  pillar  or  monument  (Thenius  Exeget- 
 ischcs  Handbuch) ;  but  Winer,  Gesenius,  and  Fiirst, 
 regard  it  as  synonymous  in  these  passages  with 
 2VD,  as  appears  from  comparing  I  Chron.  xi.  16 
 with  the  parallel  passage  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  14.  It 
 may  also  be  obsei-ved  that  the  verb  riDH  in  I  Sam. 
 xiii.  3  is  very  frequently  employed  in  the  sense  of 
 slaughtering  or  putting  to  flight ;  and,  to  express 
 the  demolition  of  a  pillar,  several  other  words 
 would  be  more  appropriate,  such  as  ]-*n3, 12t5',  )*1D, 
 or  «)"iy.  The  fourth  word,  n2VD,  translated  garri- 
 sons in  Eiek.  xxvi.  II,  probal)ly  means  in  that 
 passage  pillars ;  it  is  very  frequently  used  for 
 idolatrous  images,  Deut.  vii.  5 ;  2  Kings  iii.  2 ;  x. 
 27,  etc. ,  but  never  for  garrisons. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 Gataker,  rector  of  St.  Edmund's,  Lombard  Street, 
 was  born  in  London,  Sept.  4,  1574.  In  1611  he 
 was  appointed  to  the  rectory  of  Rotherhithe,  having 
 filled  for  ten  years  previously  the  office  of  preacher 
 to  the  society  of  Lincoln's  Inn.  He  was  a  member 
 of  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines,  and  was 
 held  in  high  esteem  by  his  contemporaries  for  his 
 great  learning.  He  died  July  27,  1654.  While  at 
 Lincoln's  Inn  he  preached  a  series  of  sermons  upon 
 the  use  and  abuse  of  lots,  and  upon  the  kindred 
 topics  of  games  of  chance  and  divination.  The 
 substance  of  these  he  subsequently  published  under 
 the  title,  A  Discourse  of  the  Nature  and  Use  of  Lots, 
 a  treatise  historical  and  theological,  Lond.  1619, 
 4to.  His  more  important  literary  labours  were 
 undertaken  at  a  later  period  of  his  life,  and  after  he 
 had  become  incapacitated  by  illness  for  the  dis- 
 charge of  his  pastoral  duties.  Amongst  these  were 
 —  I.  Annotations  on  Isaiah,  yeremiah,  and Lamen- 
 tatio7is,  included  in  the  so-called  Assembly's  anno- 
 tations, and  of  which  it  is  by  far  the  most  valuable 
 portion.  It  forms  nearly  one-fourth  of  the  entire 
 work.  2.  De  Novi  Instrumenti  Stylo  Disseitatio, 
 Lond.  1648,  4to,  which  inform  is  a  criticism  of  the 
 treatise  of  Seb.  Pfochen  twiiilsA  Diatribe  de  linguae 
 Grcrcce  N'.  T.  puritate,  and  in  matter  is  a  defence  of 
 the  views  of  the  Hebraists  against  those  of  the 
 Purists.  Bound  up  with  this  volume  is  a  transla- 
 tion into  Latin  of  the  Jerusalem  Targum  on  the 
 Pentateuch  by  Francis  Tayler,  which  was  published 
 at  Gataker's  instigation,  and  has  his  commendation 
 prefixed.  3.  Cinnus,  sive  Adversaria  miscellanea, 
 Lond.  1 65 1,  4to.  This  contains  two  only  out  of 
 the  six  books  which  it  was  the  author's  intention  to 
 publish  '  Deo  favenle.'  A  further  portion  was  pub- 
 lished after  his  death  by  his  son  Charles  Gataker, 
 and  the  nature  of  the  work  is  sufficiently  set  forth 
 in  the  title  of  this  volume.  Adversaria  Miscellanea  in 
 qibus  [sic]  Sacrcc  Scriptural  primo  deinde  aliorum 
 Scriptoriim  locis  aliqam  tnulfis  Lux  redditur,  Lond^ 
 1659,  fol.  The  last  three  works  are  included  in 
 an  edition  of  Gataker's  critical  works  published  by 
 Hermann  Witsius,  T.  Gatakeri  Opera  Critica, 
 Traj.  ad  Rhen.  169S,  fol.— S.  N. 
 
 GATAM  (Driy3_,  Ga'eiam  ;  Sept.  TodiiiJ. ;  Alex. 
 
 ToOofjL,  Todd),  a  descendant  of  Esau  and  head  of 
 one  of  the  Edomitic  tribes,  or  the  name  of  the 
 (tribe  itself  Gen.  xxxvi.  11-16).  Fiirst  derives  the 
 word  from  DDy  and  ^i,  and  translates  it  burnt  or 
 parched  vale,  regarding  the  tribe  as  taking  its  desig- 
 nation from  its  locality.     Gesenius  identifies  it  with 
 
 the  Avd.h.  '\x^^,  puny  or  thin  one.  Knobel,  re- 
 ferring to  the  LXX.  representation  of  the  word, 
 compares  it  Avith  ^li<p^y<v//^rtw,  the  name  of  a 
 
 tribe  inhabiting  the  Hisma,  a  part  of  Mount  Sherah. 
 The  omission  of  the  J?  is  an  objection  to  this,  but 
 not  a  fatal  one,  a^s  this  sometimes  takes  place 
 (Gesen.    Thes.  p.    976).      Rodiger    {Ibid.    iii.   80) 
 
 cites  from  Ibn  Duraid,  i,y%j.jfs>'^  j^''l^ie'^nah,  as  the 
 
 name  of  an  Arab  tribe. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GATE,  DOOR  \^W ;  Chald.  yiri  ;  Sept.  tt^t; 
 
 ai\r],  "^vpa  ;  ?1,  TVI,  valve  or  folding-door ;  DTlP'n, 
 
 folding-doors  or  gates ;    nflS,  an  opening,  a  door, 
 
 6'upa,  irvKrj ;  ID,  sill  or  threshold,  aiXr],    (TTadfids], 
 
 GATAKER,   Thomas,  B.D.,  son  of  Thomas    the  entrance  to  enclosed  gi-ounds,  buildings,  dwell 
 
GATE,  DOOR 
 
 GATE,  DOOR 
 
 hig-hoiises,  towns,  etc.  Thus  we  find  mentioned — 
 I.  Gates  of  cities,  as  of  Jerusalem,  its  sheep-gate, 
 fish-gate,  etc.  (Jer.  xxxvii.  13  ;  Neh.  i.  3  ;  ii.  3  ; 
 vii.  3)  ;  of  Sodom  (Gen.  xix.  i)  ;  of  Gaza  (Judg. 
 xvi.  3).  2.  Gates  of  royal  palaces  (Neh.  ii.  8).  3. 
 Gates  of  the  Temple.  The  temple  of  Ezekiel  had 
 two  gates,  one  towards  the  north,  the  other  towards 
 the  east ;  the  latter  closed  (Ezek.  xliv.  i,  2),  the 
 other  must  have  been  open.  4.  Gates  of  tombs 
 (Matt,  xxvii.  60).  5.  Gates  of  prisons.  In  Acts 
 xii.  10,  mention  is  made  of  the  iron  gate  of  Peter's 
 prison  (xvi.  27).  Prudentius  (Ileptcrre^.  Hymn. 
 V.  346)  speaks  of  gatekeepers  of  prisons.  6.  Door 
 (opening)  of  a  cavern  (i  Kings  xix.  13).  7.  Gates  of 
 camps  (Exod.  xxxii.  26,  27;  see  Heb.  xiii.  12).  The 
 camps  of  the  Romans  had  generally  four  gates  ;  of 
 which  the  first  was  caWed  porta  pnrton'a,  the  second 
 decinnana,  the  third  principalis  dextra,  the  fourth 
 principalis  sifiistra  (Rosin.  Antiq.  Rom.  x.  12  ;  Liv. 
 iii.  5  ;  X.  32  ;  xl.  27).  The  camp  of  the  Trojans  is  also 
 described  as  having  had  gates  (Virgil,  ALn.  ix.  724). 
 We  do  not  know  of  what  materials  the  enclo- 
 sures and  gates  of  the  temporary  camps  of  the 
 Hebrews  were  formed.  In  Egyptian  monuments 
 such  enclosures  are  indicated  by  lines  of  upright 
 shields,  with  gates  apparently  of  wicker,  defended 
 by  a  strong  guard. 
 
 267.   Egj'ptian  Camp-gate. 
 
 Gates  of  Towns.- — As  the  gates  of  towns 
 served  the  ancients  as  places  of  security  [Fortifi- 
 cations], a  durable  material  was  required  for 
 them,  and  accordingly  we  find  mentioned — i. 
 Gates  of  iron  and  brass  ^%.  cvii.  16;  Is.  xlv.  2; 
 Acts  xii.  10).  It  is  probable  that  gates  thus  de- 
 scribed were,  in  fact,  only  sheeted  with  plates  of 
 copper  or  iron  (Faber,  ArcJuvol.  p.  297)  ;  and  it  is 
 probably  in  this  sense  we  are  to  interpret  the  hun- 
 dred brazen  gates  ascribed  to  the  ancient  Babylon. 
 Thevenot  ( Voyage,  p.  2S3)  describes  the  six  gates 
 of  Jerusalem  as  covered  with  iron  :  which  is  pro- 
 bably still  the  case  with  the  four  gates  now  open. 
 Other  iron-covered  gates  are  mentioned  by  tra- 
 vellers, such  as  some  of  the  town  gates  of  Algiers 
 (Pitt's  Letter,  viii.  p.  10),  and  of  the  towers  of  the 
 so-called  iron  bridge  at  Antioch  (Pococke,  vol.  ii. 
 pt.  I,  p.  172).  The  principal  gates  of  the  great 
 mosque  at  Damascus  are  covered  with  brass  (Maun- 
 drell,  p.  126).  Gates  of  brass  are  also  mentioned 
 by  Hesiod  (  Theog.  732),  by  Virgil  {Mn.  ii.  480-81), 
 and  by  Pliny  {H.  N.  xxxiv.  3),  and  of  iron  by 
 Plautus  {Pers.  iv.  4,  21). 
 
 2.  Gates  of  stone,  and  of  pearls,  are  mentioned 
 in  Is.  liv.  12,  and  Rev.  xxi.  21,  which,  _^ it  has 
 jiistly  been  supposed,  refer  to  such  doors,  cut  out 
 of  a  single  slab,  as  are  occasionally  discovered  in 
 ancient  countries.  At  Essouan  (Syene),  in  Upper 
 Egypt)  there  is  a  granite  gateway  bearing  the  name 
 
 of  Alexander,  the  son  of  Alexander  the  Great 
 (Wilkinson,  iii.  403).  The  doors  leading  to  the 
 several  chambers  of  the  so-called  '  Tombs  of  the 
 Kings,' near  Jerasalem,  were  each  formed  of  a  single 
 stone  seven  inches  thick,  sculptured  so  as  to  re- 
 semble four  panels  :  the  styles,  muntins,  and  other 
 parts  were  cut  with  great  art,  and  exactly  re- 
 sembled those  of  a  door  made  by  a  carpenter  at  the 
 present  day — the  whole  being  completely  smooth 
 and  polished,  and  most  accurate  in  their  propor- 
 tions. The  doors  turned  on  pivots,  of  the  same 
 stone  of  which  the  rest  of  them  were  composed, 
 which  were  inserted  in  corresponding  sockets  above 
 and  below,  the  lower  tenon  being  of  course  short. 
 This  is  one  of  the  modes  in  which  heavy  doors  of 
 wood  are  now  hung  in  the  East.  One  of  these 
 doors  was  still  hanging  in  Maundrell's  time,  and 
 '  did  not  touch  its  lintel  by  at  least  three  inches.' 
 But  all  these  doors  are  now  thrown  down  and 
 broken  (Monconys,  p.  308  ;  Thevenot,  p.  261  ; 
 Pococke,  ii.  21  ;  Maundrell,  sub  March  28th  ; 
 Wilde,  ii.  299  ;  Robinson,  i.  530).  Similar  doors 
 are  described  by  Dr.  Clarke  ( Travels,  pt.  ii.  vok  i. 
 p.  252)  in  the  remarkable  excavated  sepulchres  at 
 Tehnessus,  on  the  southern  coast  of  Asia  Minor  ; 
 and  others  were  noticed  by  Irby  and  Mangles 
 {Travels,  p.  302)  in  the  sepulchres  near  Bysan 
 (Bethshan).  There  are  stone  doors  to  the  houses 
 in  the  Ilaouran  beyond  the  Jordan  (Burckhardt, 
 p.  58)  ;  and  the  present  writer  has  repeatedly  seen 
 in  the  north  of  Persia  the  street  doors  of  superior 
 houses  composed  of  a  single  slab  of  a  kind  of  slate. 
 In  the  ancient  sepulchre  recently  discovered,  as  de- 
 scribed by  Dr.  Wilde  {N'arrative,  ii.  343),  the  otiter 
 door  is  formed  by  a  single  slab,  and  moves  on 
 horizontal  pivots  that  run  into  sockets  cut  in  the 
 pilasters  at  the  top,  in  the  manner  of  a  swinging 
 hinge. 
 
 3.  Gates  of  wood. — Of  this  kind  were  probably 
 the  gates  of  Gaza  (Judg.  xvi.  3).  They  had  gene- 
 rally two  valves,  which,  according  to  Faber's 
 description  (Archccol.  p.  300),  had  sometimes 
 smaller  doors,  or  wickets,  to  afford  a  passage  when 
 the  principal  gate  was  closed — a  fact  which  he 
 applies  to  the  illustration  of  Matt.  vii.  13. 
 
 Gates  were  generally  protected  by  some  works 
 against  the  surprises  of  enemies  (Jer.  x.xxix.  4). 
 Sometimes  two  gates  were  constructed  one  behind 
 another,  an  outer  and  inner  one  ;  or  there  were 
 turrets  on  both  sides  (2  Sam.  xviii.  24,  33  ;  see 
 Faber's  Archaol.  p.  301).  The  gates  of  the 
 ancients  were  generally  secured  with  strong  heavy 
 bolts  and  locks  of  brass  or  iron  (Deut.  iii.  5  ;  i 
 Sam.  xxiii.  7  ;  I  Kings  iv.  13  ;  2  Chron.  viii.  5  ; 
 Jer.  xiv.  2  ;  xlix.  31  ;  Ps.  cxlvii.  13).  This  was 
 probably  done  with  a  view  to  the  safety  of  the 
 town,  and  to  prevent  hostile  inroads  (Harmer's 
 Observations,  vol.  i.  p.  1 88).  The  keys  of  gates, 
 as  well  as  of  dooi^s,  were  generally  of  wood  ;  and 
 Thevenot  observes  that  gates  might  be  opened 
 even  with  the  finger  put  into  the  keyhole — from 
 which  Harmer  elucidates  the  passage  in  the  Song 
 of  Solomon,  v.  4. 
 
 The  gates  of  to^vns  were  kept  open  or  shut  ac- 
 cording to  circumstances  ;  in  time  of  war  they 
 were  closed  against  the  inroads  of  the  enemy  (Josh, 
 ii.  5),  but  they  were  opened  when  the  enemy  had 
 been  conquered.  On  festive  occasions  they  were 
 also  throwm  wide  open  ;  to  which  Ps.  xxiv.  7 
 alludes.  This  opening  of  the  gates,  as  well  as  closing 
 them,  was  done  by  means  of  keys.     That  near  the 
 
GATE,  DOOR 
 
 GATE,  DOOR 
 
 gates  towers  were  often  constructed,  serving  for 
 defence  against  attacks  of  the  enemy,  rnay  be  in- 
 ferred from  Deut.  iii.  5  ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  24  ;  Judg. 
 ix.  35,  comp.  with  52.  So  Juvenal  (&/.  vi.  291) 
 puts  the  towers  of  the  gates  for  the  gates  them- 
 selves. Virgil  (.^"w.  vi.  554)  represents  the  infer- 
 nal gate  as  having  a  tower.  Enemies,  therefore, 
 in  besieging  towns  were  most  anxious  to  obtain 
 possession  of  the  gates  as  quickly  as  possible  (Deut. 
 xxviii.  52  ;  Judg.  ix.  40  ;  2  Sam.  x.  8  ;  xi.  23  ; 
 I  Kings  viii.  37  ;  Job  v.  4  ;  Is.  xxii.  7  ;  xxviii.  6)  ; 
 
 26S.  Gate  of  Konieh. 
 
 and  generally  the  town  was  conquered  when  its 
 gates  were  occupied  by  the  invading  troops  (Deut. 
 xxviii.  57  ;  Judg.  v.  8).  This  observation  is  made 
 also  by  several  Greek  and  Roman  authors  (Hero- 
 dia.n,//isfor.i.  12,  sec.  14;  Virgil,  y^fi.  ii.  802,  ser/.) 
 In  or  near  the  gates,  therefore,  they  placed  watch- 
 men, and  a  sufficiently  strong  guard,  to  keep  an 
 eye  on  the  movements  of  the  enemy,  and  to  defend 
 the  works  in  case  of  need  (Judg.  xviii.  16  ;  2  Kings 
 vii.  3  ;  Neh.  xiii.  22  ;  see  Herodian,  Histor.  iii.  2, 
 sec.  21  ;  Virgil,  ALii.  ii.  265  seq.^  335)- 
 
 We  read  that  some  portions  of  the  law  were  to 
 be  written  on  the  gates  of  towns,  as  well  as  on  the 
 doors  of  houses  (Deut.  vi.  9  ;  xi.  20)  ;  and  if  this 
 is  to  be  literally  understood,  it  receives  illustration 
 from  the  practice  of  the  Moslems  in  painting  pas- 
 sages of  the  Koran  on  their  public  and  private 
 gates.  Various  artificial  figures  and  inscriptions 
 were  engraved  on  their  gates  by  the  Romans 
 (Virgil,  Georg.  iii.  26,  seq.) 
 
 Criminals  were  punished  without  the  gates  (l 
 Kings  xxi.  13  ;  Acts  vii.  58),  which  explains  the 
 passage  in  Heb.  xiii.  12.  The  same  custom  ex- 
 isted among  the  Romans  (see  Plant.  Milit.  Glorias. 
 act  ii.  sc.  iv.  6,  7).  At  Rome  executions  took 
 place  without  the  Porta  Metia  or  EsquiUna.  As  to 
 the  gate  through  which  Chnst  was  led,  before  his 
 crucifixion,  opinions  differ;  some  taking  it  to  have 
 been  the  dung-gate  (Lamy,  Apparat.  Geograph., 
 c  13,  sec.  3,  p.  321)  ;  others,  following  Hottinger 
 {Cipp.  Ilebr.  p.  16)  and  Godwyn,  understand  it  of 
 
 the  gate  of  judgment.  But  for  all  that  concerns 
 the  gates  of  Jerusalem,  we  must  refer  to  the  article 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 Gates  are  often  mentioned  in  Scripture  as  places 
 at  which  were  holden  courts  of  justice  to  administer 
 the  law  and  determine  points  in  dispute  j  hence 
 judges  in  the  gate  are  spoken  of  (Gen.  xix.  I  ;  xxiii. 
 10,  18;  xxxiv.  20;  Deut.  xvi.  18;  xvii.  8;  xxi. 
 19;  XXV.  6,  7;  Josh.  XX.  4  ;  Ruth  iv.  I  ;  I  Sam. 
 iv.  18  ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  24;  xix.  8  ;  l  Kings  xxii.  lO; 
 Job  xxix.  7 ;  Prov.  xxii.  22 ;  xxiv.  7  ;  Lam.  v. 
 14;  Amos  v.  12;  Zech.  viii.  16).  The  reason  of 
 this  custom  is  apparent,  for  the  gates  being  places 
 of  great  concourse  and  resort,  the  courts  held  at 
 them  were  of  easy  access  to  all  the  people  ;  wit- 
 nesses and  auditors  to  all  transactions  were  easily 
 secured  (a  matter  of  much  importance  in  the  ab- 
 sence or  scanty  use  of  written  documents) ;  and 
 confidence  in  the  integrity  of  the  magistrate  was 
 ensured  by  the  publicity  of  the  proceedings.  There 
 was  within  the  gate  a  particular  place,  where  the 
 judges  sat  on  chairs,  and  this  custom  must  be  un- 
 derstood as  referred  to  when  we  read  that  courts 
 were  held  under  the  gates,  as  may  be  proved  from 
 I  Kings  xxii.  10 ;  2  Chron.  xviii.  9.  Apart  from 
 the  holding  of  courts  of  justice,  the  gate  sei-ved  for 
 reading  the  law,  and  for  proclaiming  ordinances, 
 etc.  (2  Chron.  xxxii.  6;  Neh.  viii.  I,  3).  We  see 
 from  Prov.  xxxi.  23,  Lam.  v.  14,  that  the  inferior 
 magistrates  held  a  court  in  the  gates,  as  well  as 
 the  superior  judges  (Jer.  xxxvi.  10) ;  and  even 
 kings,  at  least  occasionally,  did  the  same  (l  Kings 
 xxii.  10,  comp.  with  Ps.  cxxvii.  5).  The  gates  at 
 Jerusalem  served  the  same  purpose  ;  but  for  the 
 great  number  of  its  inhabitants  manyplaces  of  justice 
 were  required.  Thus  we  find  that  JSJehemiah  (iii. 32) 
 calls  a  particular  gate  of  this  city  the  counsel-gate,  or 
 justice-gate ;  which  seems  to  have  had  a  preference, 
 though  not  exclusive,  since  courts  must  have  been 
 holden  in  the  other  gates  also.  After  the  erection  of 
 the  second  temple,  the  celebrated  great  Sanhedrim, 
 indeed,  assembled  in  the  so-called  conclave  ciesitra: 
 \^Gazith\  of  the  temple  ;  but  we  find  that  one  of  the 
 Synedria  of  Jerusalem,  consisting  of  twenty-three 
 members,  assembled  in  the  east-gate,  leading  to  the 
 court  of  Israel,  the  other  in  the  gate  looking  to  the 
 temple  mount.  The  same  custom  prevails  to  the 
 present  day  among  other  Oriental  nations,  as  in 
 the  kingdom  of  Morocco,  where  courts  of  justice 
 are  holden  in  the  gate  of  the  capital  town  (Dopter, 
 Theatriim  pcenarum,  p.  9,  sq.)  Respecting  the 
 Abyssinians  and  inhabitants  of  Hindostan,  we  are 
 likewise  assured  that  they  employed  their  gates  for 
 courts  of  justice.  Homer  {Iliad,  iii.  145,  ff.)  states 
 of  the  Trojans,  that  their  elders  assembled  in  the 
 gates  of  the  town  to  determine  causes,  and  Virgil 
 {^■En.  i.  505)  represents  Dido  as  dispensing  justice  at 
 the  gates  of  a  temple.  We  may  refer  to  J.  D.  Jacobi's 
 Dissert,  deforo  in  p07tis,  Leipzig,  17 14,  where  the 
 custom  of  holding  courts  in  the  gates  of  towns  is 
 explained  at  large  (See  also  Grtevius,  Thesaurus 
 Antiq.  Roman,  tom.  x.  p.  179. 
 
 In  Palestine  gates  were,  moreover,  the  places 
 where,  sometimes  at  least,  the  priests  delivered 
 their  sacred  addresses  and  discourses  to  the  people  ; 
 and  we  find  that  the  prophets  often  proclaimed 
 their  warnings  and  prophecies  in  the  gates  (Prov. 
 1.  21  ;  viii.  3;  Is.  xxix.  21;  Jer.  xviL  19,  20; 
 xxvi.  10 ;  xxx\n.  10. 
 
 Among  the  heathen  gates  were  connected  wth 
 sacrifices,  which  were  offered  in  their  immediate 
 
GATE,  DOOR 
 
 73 
 
 GATE,  DOOR 
 
 vicinity  ;  in  which  respect  the  hills  near  the  gates 
 are  mentioned  (2  Kings  xxiii.  8).  Ln  Acts  xiv.  13, 
 the  gates  of  Lystra  are  referred  to,  near  which 
 sacrifice  was  offered  ;  in  which  passage  Camerarius, 
 Dedien,  and  Heinsius  take  wvXQvas  to  mean  the 
 town-gate. 
 
 The  gate  was,  further,  a  public  place  of  meeting 
 and  conversation,  where  the  people  assembled  in 
 large  numbers  to  learn  the  news  of  the  day,  and  by 
 various  talk  to  while  away  the  too  tedious  hours 
 (Ps.  Ixix.  12).  It  was  probably  with  this  view  that 
 Lot  sat  under  the  gate  of  Sodom  (Gen.  xix.  i)  ; 
 which  is  more  probable  than  the  Jewish  notion  that 
 he  sat  there  as  one  of  the  judges  of  the  city. 
 
 Under  the  gates  they  used  to  sell  various  mer- 
 chandises, provisions,  victuals,  e.  g.,  at  Samaria  (2 
 Kings  vii.  I ) ;  and  for  this  purpose  there  were 
 generally  recesses  in  the  space  under  them  (see  Hero- 
 dian,  vii.  6,  sec.  6).  The  same  is  stated  by  Aris- 
 tophanes {Eqidt.  1245,  ed.  Dind.)  of  the  gates  of 
 the  Greeks.  But  with  respect  to  the  markets  at 
 gates,  the  present  writer  would  note  what  has  often 
 occurred  to  his  own  notice  in  different  parts  of  the 
 East,  which  is,  that  the  commodities  sold  at  the 
 gates  are  almost  exclusively  country  produce,  ani- 
 mal or  vegetable,  for  the  supply  of  the  city,  and 
 not  manufactured  goods,  which  are  invariably  sold 
 in  the  bazaars  in  the  heart  of  the  town.  The  gate- 
 markets  also  are  only  held  for  a  few  hours  early  m 
 the  morning. 
 
 On  an  uproar  having  broken  out  at  Jerusalem, 
 the  heads  of  the  people  met  under  the  New-gate 
 (Jar.  xxvi.  10),  where  they  were  sure  to  find  insur- 
 gents. The  town-gates  were  to  the  ancient  Orien- 
 tals what  the  coffee-houses,  exchanges,  markets, 
 and  courts  of  law,  are  in  our  large  towns  :  and 
 such  is  still  the  case  in  a  great  degree,  although  the 
 introduction  of  coffee-houses  has  in  this  and  other 
 respects  caused  some  alteration  of  Eastern  man- 
 
 269.     Palace-Gate. 
 
 ners.  In  capital  towns  the  quidnuncs  occasionally 
 sat  with  the  same  views  near  the  gate  of  the  royal 
 palace,  where  also  the  officers  and  messengers  of 
 
 the  palace  lounged  about  ;  and  where  persons  hav- 
 ing suits  to  offer,  favours  to  beg,  or  wishing  to  re- 
 commend themselves  to  favourable  notice,  would 
 wait  day  after  day,  in  the  hope  of  attracting  the 
 notice  of  the  prince  or  great  man  at  his  entrance  01 
 coming  forth  (Esth.  ii.  19,  21  ;  iii.  2). 
 
 Gates  are  put  figuratively  for  public  places  of 
 towns  and  palaces.  The  gates  of  a  town  are  also 
 put  instead  of  the  town  itself  (Gen.  xxii.  17  ;  xxiv. 
 60  ;  Deut.  xii.  12  ;  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  2). 
 
 The  gates  of  death,  and  of  hell,  occur  in  Job 
 xxxviii.  17  ;  Ps.  ix.  13  ;  cvii.  18.  Doors  and 
 gates  of  hell  are  chiefly  introduced,  Is.  xxxviii. 
 10  ;  Matt.  xvi.  18  ;  Rev.  i.  18  ;  and  the  Jews  go  so 
 far  in  their  writings  as  to  ascribe  real  gates  to  hell 
 (Wagenseil,  Sota,  p.  220).  Virgil  {ALn.  vi.  127) 
 also  speaks  of  the  '  atri  janua  Ditis.'  The  origin  of 
 this  metaphorical  expression  is  not  difficult  to  ex- 
 plain ;  for  it  was  very  common  to  use  the  word 
 gates  as  an  image  of  large  empires  (Is.  xxvi.  2)  ; 
 and  in  pagan  authors  the  abode  of  departed  souls  is 
 re])resented  as  the  residence  of  Pluto  (see  Virgil, 
 Aiii.  vi.  417,  sq.)  In  the  passage,  then,  Matt, 
 xvi.  18,  by  'gates  of  hell'  must  be  understood  all 
 aggressions  by  the  infernal  empire  upon  the  Chris- 
 tian church. 
 
 Doors  of  Houses. — Among  the  ancient  Egyp- 
 tians doors  were  frequently  stained  so  as  to  imitate 
 foreign  wood.  They  were  either  of  one  or  two 
 valves,  turning  on  pins  of  metal, .and  were  secured 
 within  by  bars  and  bolts.  Some  of  the  bronze  pins 
 have  been  discovered  in  the  tombs  of  Thebes,  and 
 two  of  them,  after  Wilkinson,  are  figured  in  No. 
 270,  figs.  2,  3.     They  were  fastened  to  the  wood 
 
 27a 
 
 with  nails  of  the  same  metal.  The  stone  lintels 
 and  floor  behind  the  threshold  of  the  tombs  and 
 temples  still  exhibit  the  holes  in  which  the  pins 
 turned,  as  well  as  those  of  tlie  bolts  and  bars,  and 
 the  recess  for  receiving  the  opening  valves.  The 
 folding-doors  had  bolts  in  the  centre,  sometimes 
 above  as  well  as  below  ;  a  bar  was  placed  across 
 from  one  wall  to  the  other  ;  and  in  many  cases 
 tJifiK  were  secured  by  wooden  locks  passing  over 
 
GATE,  DOOR 
 
 74 
 
 GATE,  DOOR 
 
 the  centre  (No.  271,  fig.  4)  at  the  junction  of  the  two 
 folds.  '  It  is  difficult  (remarks  Sir  J.  G.  Wilkin- 
 son) to  say  if  these  last  were  opened  by  a  key,  or 
 merely  slided  backward  and  forward  like  a  bolt  ; 
 but  if  they  were  really  locks,  they  were  probably 
 
 upon  the  principle  of  those  now  used  in  Egypt, 
 which  are  of  wood,  and  opened  by  a  key  furnished 
 with  several  pins  answering  to  a  smaller  number 
 that  fall  down  into  the  hollow  movable  tongue, 
 into  which  the  key  is  introduced  when  they  open 
 or  fasten  the  lock.'  For  greater  security  they  are 
 also  occasionally  sealed  with  a  mass  of  clay.  This 
 was  also  a  custom  of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  as  ap- 
 pears from  Herodotus  (ii.  121);  from  tombs  actu- 
 ally so  closed  at  Thebes  ;  and  from  the  sculptures, 
 as  in  No.  271,  fig.  3,  where  the  door  is  thus  closed 
 and  sealed.  To  this  custom  there  is  an  allusion  in 
 Job  [Clay].  At  a  later  period,  when  iron  came 
 into  general  use,  keys  were  made  of  that  metal, 
 of  the  shape  shewn  in  No.  270,  fig.  4.  Of  the 
 kind  thus  indicated  were  probably  the  lock  and 
 key  which  fastened  the  summer-parlour  of  King 
 Eglon  (Judg.  iii.  23,  25).  In  this  case  Ehud 
 locked  the  door,  and  took  away  the  key;  but  when 
 the  servants  became  alarmed,  they  easily  opened  it 
 with  another  key  ;  which  suggests  that  the  lock, 
 as  in  ancient  Egypt  or  the  modern  East,  was 
 nothing  more  than  a  peculiarly  constructed  open 
 bolt  of  wood,  which  the  wooden  or  metal  key  was 
 adapted  to  raise  and  thrust  back.  The  forms  of 
 the  Egyptian  doors  may  be  seen  from  the  cuts. 
 Fig.  I,  No.  270,  is  from  a  curious  ancient  model, 
 in  the  British  Museum,  of  a  small  ancient  Egyp- 
 tian house,  and  may  serve  to  shew  very  clearly 
 how  the  doors  of  small  houses  were  formed,  hung, 
 and  secured.  The  elegant  cornice  of  the  door,  fig. 
 2,  No.  271,  will  not  escape  observation;  fig.  i  is 
 a  remarkable  instance  of  a  folding-door.  The  chief 
 entrance  to  houses  was  through  a  pyramidal  pylon 
 on  a  projecting  porch  of  columns,  whose  capitals 
 were  often  ornamented  with  ribbons.  Over  the 
 doorway  was  sometimes  a  brief  hieroglyphical 
 legend  (Wathen,  p.  loi).  This  last  circumstance 
 reminds  one  of  the  writing  on  their  doors  recom- 
 mended to  the  Israelites,  as  already  noticed. 
 
 A  comparison  of  the  ancient  Egyptian  doors  with 
 those  now  used  in  the  East  will  probably  suggest 
 no  incorrect  notion  of  the  provision  among  the 
 ancient  Hebrews  in  this  respect.  A  sort  of  inter- 
 mediate idea  arising  from  this  comparison  will  be 
 found  to  furnish  very  satisfactory  illustrations  of 
 most  of  the  passages  of  Scripture  which  relate  to 
 the  subject.  The  present  cuts  require  little  expla- 
 nation.    No.  272  is  a  very  usual  form  of  the  street- 
 
 door  of  a  private  house.  The  inscription  on  the 
 central  compartment  is  usually  painted  in  white  or 
 black.  It  means,  '  He  (i.e.,  God)  is  the  Creator,  the 
 Everlasting,'  and  brings  strongly  to  mind  the 
 Hebrew  custom  to  which  we  have  more  than  once 
 alluded.     In  No.  273  (fig.  2)  is  another  street-door 
 
 i?= 
 
 gi      i- 
 
 ==? 
 
 j;i 
 
 X 
 
 1 
 
 '       <: 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 '^ 
 
 is 
 
 of  a  more  simple  character.  Doors  are  generally 
 unpainted  throughout  Western  Asia  and  in  Egypt. 
 The  other  doors  shewn  in  the  cuts  belong  to  the 
 
 internal  front  of  the  houses,  and  not  to  the  external 
 frontage  or  screen.     Fig.  2,  No.  273,  has  an  open 
 
GATH 
 
 75 
 
 GATH 
 
 lattice  over  the  door,  and  the  elegant  proportion  of 
 the  whole  entrance  claims  attention.  No.  274 
 shews  (different  forms  of  common  doors,  and  the 
 whole  piece  afl'ords  an  interesting  illustration  of  the 
 basement  of  an  Eastern  house,  with  the  stone  steps 
 leading  to  the  gallery,  into  which  all  the  state  rooms 
 and  family  rooms  open.  In  conclusion,  we  intro- 
 duce an  engraving  intended  to  illustrate  the  highly- 
 enriched  doorways  used  in  ornamental  buildings, 
 such  as  garden-houses,  summer-houses,  etc. 
 
 In  the  interior  of  houses  it  is  not  unusual  to  see 
 curtains  instead  of  doors,  especially  in  summer. 
 This  helps  to  keep  the  apartment  cool,  and  also 
 enables  servants  to  enter  without  noise.  This  cus- 
 tom originated  in  the  use  of  tents.  Accordingly 
 we  find  that  all  the  entrances  of  the  tabernacle  had 
 curtains,  although  the  framework  was  of  wood 
 (Exod.  xxvi.  31-33,  36,  37)  ;  and  even  in  the  temple 
 a  curtain  or  'vail'  formed  the  separation  between 
 the  Holy  and  the  Most  Holy  place. — ^J.  K. 
 
 GATH  (n3;  Ted  and  Teddd).     One  of  the  five 
 
 royal  cities  of  the  Philistines  (Josh.  xiii.  3).  It  is 
 first  mentioned  by  Joshua  as  one  of  the  few  places 
 in  Palestine  in  which  the  giant  race  of  Anak  were 
 left  after  the  conquest  of  Palestine  (xi.  22).  Goliath, 
 the  champion  of  the  Philistines,  was  a  Gittite,  and 
 of  the  Anakim  (i  Sam.  xvii.  18).  Another  remark- 
 able man  of  the  same  race  is  mentioned  in  2  Sam. 
 xxi.  20-22.  When  the  Philistines  captured  the  Ark 
 of  the  Covenant  they  carried  it  first  to  the  temple 
 of  Dagon  at  Ashdod,  thence  to  Gath,  and  finally 
 to  Ekron  (i  Sam.  v.)  Among  the  most  singular 
 episodes  in  the  history  of  David  was  his  adventure 
 at  Gath,  whither  he  fled  from  Saul.  He  thought 
 he  would  not  be  recognised,  and  that  as  a  refugee 
 from  the  Israelitish  court  he  would  be  welcomed. 
 But  he  was  at  once  recognised  as  the  conqueror  of 
 Goliath,  and  his  ftite  appeared  to  be  sealed.  How- 
 ever, 'he  feigned  himself  mad  in  their  hands,' 
 and  acted  so  successfully  that  he  deceived  Achish 
 the  king,  and  was  dismissed  (xxi.  10,  j-cy).  To  this 
 romantic  incident  we  owe  one  of  the  most  beautiful 
 odes  in  the  Bible,  the  56th  Psalm.  A  few  years 
 later  David  returned  to  Gath,  and  was  well  received 
 by  prince  and  people,  probably  because  they  were 
 now  fully  informed  of  the  deadly  hostility  which 
 
 existed  between  him  and  Saul  (xxvii.)  He  appears 
 to  have  succeeded  in  attaching  so  devotedly  to  his 
 person  and  cause  some  of  the  brave  Gittites,  that 
 they  ever  afterwards  constituted  part  of  his  body- 
 guard, and  were  his  staunchest  friends  (2  Sam. 
 vi.  10;  XV.  18-22,  etc.)  When  David  came  to  the 
 throne  he  captured  Gath ;  but  it  does  not  appear 
 to  have  remained  in  possession  of  the  Israelities 
 (i  Chron.  xviii.  i;  i  Kings  ii.  39).  Gath  was  the 
 scene  of  many  a  fierce  contest  during  his  reign  and 
 those  of  his  two  successors  (2  Sam.  xxi.  20).  It  was 
 captured  by  Hazael,  King  of  Syria,  during  the 
 reign  of  Jehoash  (b.c.  856).  The  most  signal  vic- 
 tory ever  gained  by  the  Israelites  over  the  Philis- 
 tines was  under  the  youthful  king  Uzziali,  who 
 dismantled  Gath  with  their  other  principal  fortresses 
 (2  Chron.  xxvi.  1-7).  The  city  appears  to  have 
 been  in  ruins  in  the  time  of  Amos  (vi.  2);  and  with 
 the  exception  of  an  incidental  allusion  to  it  in  a 
 proverb  (Mic.  i.  10),  we  hear  no  more  of  it  in 
 history.  It  is  not  enumerated  by  the  later  prophets 
 with  the  other  royal  cities  of  Philistia  (Zeph.  ii.  4 ; 
 Zech.  ix.  5,  6). 
 
 The  site  of  Gath  has  long  been  a  subject  of  diffi- 
 culty and  controversy  among  sacred  geographers. 
 Its  exact  position  is  not  indicated  in  Scripture. 
 There  are,  however,  some  incidental  references 
 which  point  with  tolerable  definiteness  to  the  dis- 
 trict in  which  it  must  have  stood.  From  its  having 
 been  the  scene  of  such  frequent  contests  between 
 the  Israelites  and  Philistines,  we  conclude  that  it 
 lay  upon  the  border;  that  is,  in  the  plain,  close 
 to  the  foot  of  the  hills  of  Judah.  This  is  corrobo- 
 rated by  the  words  of  I  Sam.  vii.  14;  'The  cities 
 which  the  Philistines  had  taken  from  Israel  were 
 restored /row  £hvn  zt;ify  Gath.''  The  former  city 
 we  know  was  upon  the  north-east  border  of  Philistia; 
 and  Gath  was  thus  farther  south,  on  the  border 
 also.  Again,  in  i  Chron.  viii.  13  it  is  said  that 
 '  Beriah  and  Shemah  were  the  heads  of  the  inhabi- 
 tants of  Aijalon,  ivko  drcve  away  the  inhabitants  of 
 Gath.''  Aijalon  lay  at  the  foot  of  the  mountains 
 near  the  north-east  angle  of  Philistia ;  and  it  would 
 seem  that  Gath  was  not  far  distant  from  it.  In 
 2  Chron.  xi.  8,  Gath  is  mentioned  in  connection 
 with  Shochoh  and  Adullam,  which  were  a  few 
 miles  south  of  Bethshemesh.  Josephus  places  Gath 
 within  the  tribe  of  Dan,  which  did  not  extend  much 
 south  of  Bethshemesh  (Autiq.  v.  i.  22;  Josh.  xx.  40). 
 We  may  also  infer  that  it  lay  on  or  near  the  road 
 leading  from  Shochoh  to  Ekron  ;  for  when  the 
 Philistines  fled  on  the  death  of  Goliath,  Saul  pur- 
 sued them  by  '  the  way  of  Sharaini,  even  ttnto  Gath 
 and  unto  Ekron'' — the  same  way  led  to  both  cities 
 (l  Sam.  xvii.  52). 
 
 These  various  notices  point  to  one  district  as 
 that  in  which  Gath  must  have  been  situated — ■ 
 namely,  to  the  confines  of  Philistia,  lying  north- 
 west of  Shochoh,  and  south-west  of  Bethshemesh. 
 There  is,  however,  one  very  distinct  statement  of 
 Jerome  which  appears  to  be  altogether  at  variance 
 with  this  view.  In  his  commentary  on  iMicah  he 
 says,  '  Geth  una  est  de  quinque  urbibus  Palres- 
 tinte,  vicina  Judses  confinio,  et  de  Eleutheropoli 
 enntibiis  Gaza?n,  nunc  usque  vicus  vel  maximus ' 
 {0pp.  V.  1 159,  Migne's  edition).  This  would 
 locate  it  on  the  extreme  south  of  the  Philistines' 
 territory.  But  in  another  place  Jerome  writes  : — • 
 '  Ostenditur  vicus  (Geth)  in  quinto  milliario  ab 
 Eleutheropoli  enntibns  Diospolim  '  ( Otiafnast.  s.  v. 
 Geth) ;  and  to  the  same  effect  he  writes  in  his  note 
 
GATH-IIEPIIER 
 
 76 
 
 GAZA 
 
 on  Jer.  xxv.  20  {0pp.  iv.  838).  Boiifrerius  sug- 
 gests that  there  were  several  places  of  the  same 
 name,  and  this  may  account  for  the  discrepancies. 
 Eusebius  mentions  a  Gath  (or  TtQdd),  between 
 Antipatris  and  Jamnia  {Onomasi.  s.  v. )  ;  and  the 
 Crusaders  identified  Gath  with  Jamnia  {Gesta  Dei, 
 p.  886).  Thomson  ( The  Land  and  the  Book,  p. 
 565)  tries  to  shew  that  Gath  was  the  ancient  name 
 of  Eleutheropolis  ;  but  his  arguments  are  far  from 
 being  conclusive. 
 
 The  writer  of  this  article  made  a  journey  to 
 Philistia  in  1858,  one  object  of  which  was  to  iden- 
 tify, if  possible,  the  site  of  this  ancient  city.  After 
 a  careful  examination  of  the  country,  he  was  led  to 
 the  conclusion  that  Gath  stood  upon  the  hill  called 
 by  the  Crusaders  Alba  Specula,  and  now  Tell  es- 
 Safieh.  Its  position  answers  in  eveiy  respect  to 
 the  notices  above  referred  to.  It  is  about  seven  miles 
 from  Bethshemesh,  eight  from  Shochoh  towards 
 Ekron,  and  six  north  of  Eleutheropolis.  The  site 
 is  a  most  commanding  one,  and  would  form,  when 
 fortified,  the  key  of  Philistia.  It  is  close  to  the 
 mountains  of  Judah.  The  Tell  is  about  200  feet 
 high,  with  steep  sides,  now  in  part  terraced  for 
 vineyards — Gath  signifies  a  'wine-press.'  On  the 
 summit  are  the  foundations  of  an  old  castle,  pro- 
 bably that  built,  or  rebuilt,  by  the  Cnisaders  ;  and 
 all  round  the  hill  are  great  quantities  of  old  build- 
 ing stones.  On  the  north-east  is  a  projecting 
 shoulder,  and  the  declivities  below  it  appear  to 
 have  been  scarped.  Here  stands  the  modern 
 village  Its  houses  are  all  composed  of  ancient 
 materials,  and  around  it  are  ruins  and  fragments 
 of  columns.  In  the  sides  of  the  hill,  especially 
 towards  the  south,  a  great  number  of  cisterns 
 have  been  excavated  in  the  limestone  rock.  They 
 are  generally  large  square  chambers  with  circular 
 openings  about  three  feet  in  diameter.  There  can 
 be  little  doubt  that  this  is  the  site  of  the  long  lost 
 city  of  Gath  (Hajidbook  fo)-  S.  atid  P.,  1^2.;  See 
 Reland,  Pal.  785).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 GATH-HEPHER  {"iSrin  712,   Gath-hahepher ; 
 
 Sept.  TaOaxo^tip)  ;  also  written  (in  Josh.  xix.  13) 
 Giltah-hepher  (isn  iinj,  with  H  local ;  Sept.  VeO- 
 
 dae(p^p),  a  town  on  the  north-eastern  border  of 
 Zebulun,  situated  between  Japhia  and  Ittah-kazin 
 (Josh.  xix.  13).  There  is  only  one  other  reference 
 to  it  in  Scripture,  where  Jonah  the  prophet  is  said 
 to  be  'the  son  of  Amittai,  of  Galh-hepher'  (2 
 Kings  xiv.  25).  A  very  clear  topogi-aphical  notice 
 of  Jerome  in  his  preface  to  the  book  of  Jonah, 
 connected  with  a  local  tradition,  enables  us  to 
 identify  this  ancient  town.  Jerome  says,  '  Porro 
 Geth  in  secundo  Saphorim  milliario,  quce  hodie 
 appellatur  Diocsesarrea,  euntibus  Tyberiadem  hand 
 grandis  est  viculus,  ubi  et  sepulchrum  ejus  ostendi- 
 tur'  (0pp.  V.  p.  1 1 18,  Migne's  edition).  About 
 three  miles  north-east  of  Nazareth,  and  nearly  the 
 same  distance  east  of  Sepphoris,  stands  the  little 
 village  of  A/ashhad.  It  is  on  the  top  of  a  rocky 
 hill,  and  is  divided  by  a  wady  from  Kefr  Kenna, 
 the  traditional  Cana  of  Galilee.  Beside  it  is  an 
 old  tomb,  said  by  both  Muslems  and  Christians  to 
 be  that  of  Jonah  the  prophet.  The  name  Masli- 
 had  is  always  given  in  Syria  to  the  tomb  or 
 shrine  of  a  saint  or  prophet,  where  people  are 
 accustomed  to  assemble  for  worship,  and  this 
 may  probably  have  supplanted  the  ancient  name 
 Gath-hepher.      (See   Thomson,    The  Land  ajii 
 
 the  Book,  p.  425  ;  Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  350). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 GATH-RIMMON    (jisn    T\\;    Sept.   Fe^pe/i- 
 
 yttcii').  I.  A  town  of  Dan,  apparently  situated  in 
 the  northern  part  of  the  plain  of  Philistia.  It  was 
 one  of  the  cities  allotted  out  of  that  tribe  to  the 
 Eevites  (Josh.  xix.  45  ;  xxi.  24  ;  i  Chron.  vi.  69). 
 Both  Eusebius  and  Jerome  describe  it  as,  in  their 
 day,  a  large  village,  twelve  miles  from  Diospolis 
 (Lydda),  on  the  road  to  Eleutheropolis  (Ofiomast. 
 s.  V.  Gethremmon).  Robinson  suggests  that  it 
 may  be  identified  with  the  town  of  Geth,  which 
 Jerome  places  five  miles  from  Eleutheropolis  on 
 the  way  to  Diospolis,  and  with  the  modern  village 
 of  Deir  Dubban,  where  there  are  some  remark- 
 able caverns  (Bib.  Pes.  ii.  67  ;  Ononiast.  s.  v. 
 Geth).  Deir  Dubban,  however,  is  more  than 
 twenty  miles  from  Lydda,  and  is  consequently 
 much  too  far  south  for  either  the  notices  of  the 
 Bible,  or  the  statement  of  Jerome.  The  site  of 
 Gath-Rimmon  has  not  yet  been  discovered.  Jt 
 must  be  sought  for  near  the  base  of  the  moun- 
 tains east  of  Ramleh. 
 
 2.  Another  town  of  the  same  name  (but  in  the 
 Sept.  'lejSa^d,  Alex.  Bai^crd),  is  mentioned  in  Josh. 
 xxi.  25.  It  was  assigned  out  of  the  tribe  of  Ma- 
 nasseh  to  the   Levites.     The   parallel  passage   in 
 
 I  Chron.  vi.  70  reads  Dy^3  instead  of  pDI  JIJ  ; 
 and  some  have  hence  inferred  that  the  latter  is  an 
 error,  having  crept  into  the  text  through  oversight 
 from  the  preceding  verse  (See  Keil  on  Joshua,  in 
 loc. ;  Winer,  Reahvorlerhudi,  s.  v.)  It  is  much 
 more  probable,  however,  that  these  were  both 
 names  of  one  place.  In  a  wine  producing  country 
 it  was  natiu'al  to  give  the  name  Gath,  '  wine-press,' 
 to  a  number  of  places.  Bileam,  or  Ibleam,  was 
 situated  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  near  Megiddo 
 (Ibleam). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GAULONITIS.     [Golan.] 
 
 GAZA,    or  AzzAH   (nty ;  Sept.  Fafd),  one  of 
 
 the  most  ancient  towns  of  Palestine,  and  the  capi- 
 tal and  stronghold  of  the  Philistines.  It  is  situated 
 in  a  sandy  plain  three  miles  from  the  sea,  on  the 
 southern  frontier  of  Palestine,  in  lat.  31°  29',  and 
 long.  34°  33'  (Van  de  Velde,  Alemoir,  66). 
 
 Gaza  was  an  important  city  even  before  the  time 
 of  Abraham.  We  are  told  in  Gen.  x.  that  the 
 border  of  the  Canaanites  '  was  from  Sidon,  as  thou 
 comest  to  Gerar,  7tnto  Gaza.''  Its  earliest  inhabi- 
 tants of  whom  we  find  any  mention,  though  pro- 
 bably not  the  aborigines,  are  the  Avim,  who 
 appear  to  have  lived  in  a  semi-nomad  state,  roving 
 over  the  neighbouring  plain  and  desert.  They 
 were  attacked  and  driven  northward  by  '  the  Caph- 
 torun,  who  came  forth  out  of  Caphtor,  and  they 
 dwelt  in  their  stead'  (Dent.  ii.  23,  with  Josh.  xiii. 
 2,  3.  See  Keil's  note  on  the  latter  passage).  The 
 Caphtorim  and  Philistines  were  identical,  or  at 
 least  different  families  of  the  same  tribe  who  after- 
 wards amalgamated  and  formed  the  powerful  nation 
 of  whom  we  read  so  much  in  the  Bible  (comp. 
 Deut.  ii.  23  ;  Amos  ix.  7  ;  Gen.  x.  14  ;  Jer.  xlvii. 
 4.  Caphtorim  ;  Philistines).  The  time  of  the 
 conquest  of  Gaza  by  the  Philistines  is  not  known. 
 It  must  have  been  long  before  Abraham's  time  ; 
 for  they  were  then  firmly  established  in  the  coun- 
 try, and  possessed  of  great  power  (Gen.  xxi.  32). 
 Gaza  was  from  the  first  their  principal  stronghold. 
 
GAZA 
 
 77 
 
 GAZA 
 
 It  was  the  key  of  Philistia,  and  was  exposed  to  the 
 attack  of  every  hostile  invader  from  Egypt,  and 
 from  the  warlike  Amalekites  who  roamed  over  the 
 desert  of  Tih.  Gaza  formed  the  limits  of  Joshua's 
 conquests  on  the  south-west.  Whether  he  cap- 
 tured the  city  itself  is  uncertain,  though  it  would 
 seem  from  chap.  xi.  22  that  he  did  not.  Both  city 
 and  territory  fell  to  the  lot  of  Judah,  and  were 
 taken  by  that  powerful  tribe  ;  but  the  Philistines 
 even  at  that  remote  period  had  chariots  of  iron, 
 and  the  Israelites  were  unable  to  withstand  the 
 assaults  of  these  in  the  open  plain,  and  were  thus 
 forced  to  retire  to  the  mountains  (Judg.  i.  18,  19). 
 (jaza  never  afterwards  came  into  their  possession. 
 Gaza  is  sometimes  employed  in  Scripture  to  denote 
 the  limits  of  the  Israelitish  territory  in  this  direc- 
 tion, just  as  Dan,  and  Beersheba,  and  Kadesh  were 
 ill  other  directions  (Judg.  vi.  4  ;  Josh.  x.  41,  etc.) 
 Samson  visited  Gaza  in  one  of  his  adventurous  in- 
 cursions in  Philistia.  The  story  of  the  attempt  to 
 imprison  him  in  the  city,  and  his  escape,  canying 
 with  him  'gate,  posts,  bar,  and  all,'  is  well  known. 
 The  tradition  still  lingers  on  the  spot.  A  venera- 
 ble Muslem  pointed  out  to  the  writer  the  site  of 
 Samson's  gate,  and  the  hill-top  to  which  he  carried 
 it.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  latter  is  cor- 
 rect. It  is  the  highest  point  of  a  ridge  of  hills,  a 
 mile  east  of  the  town,  and  commands  a  wide  view 
 over  the  vv^hole  plain  away  to  the  distant  mountains 
 that  encircle  Hebron  (Judg.  xvi.  I,  se//.)  It  was 
 to  Gaza  the  Philistines  took  Samson  when  Delilah 
 betrayed  him  ;  and  the  tragic  close  of  his  eventful 
 life  has  given  to  the  city  an  imperishable  fame. 
 Gaza  was  always  included  in  those  terrible  judg- 
 ments pronounced  by  the  later  prophets  on  the 
 great  cities  of  Philistia  ;  and  which  are  deserving 
 of  such  special  notice  from  the  remarkable  minute- 
 ness with  which  they  have  been  fulfilled  (.See 
 Keith  on  the  Prophecies,  37th  ed.  ;  Hajidbook  for 
 Sin.  and  Pal.)  'Baldness  is  come  upon  Gaza' 
 (Jer.  xlvii.  5)  ;  '  I  will  set  a  fire  upon  the  walls  of 
 Gaza,  which  shall  devour  the  palaces  thereof 
 (Amos  i.  7)  ;  'The  king  shall  perish  from  Gaza' 
 (Zech.  ix.  5).  A  single  glance  at  the  modern 
 tov/n  is  sufficient  to  shew  how  completely  its  glory, 
 and  its  power,  and  its  strength,  have  departed. 
 
 After  the  capture  of  Tyre,  Alexander  the  Great  be- 
 sieged Gaza.  It  must  have  been  at  that  time  a  place 
 of  great  strength,  for  his  Greek  engineers  acknow- 
 ledged their  inability  to  invent  engines  of  sufficient 
 power  to  batter  its  massive  walls.  Alexander  him- 
 selt  was  severely  wounded  in  a  sortie  of  the  garri- 
 son ;  and  it  was  only  after  a  five  months'  siege  the 
 city  was  taken  (Arrian,  Exped.  Alexand.  ii.  26, 
 37  ;  Quintiis  Curt.  iv.  6,  7).  Strabo  states  that 
 A  exander  destroyed  Gaza,  and  that  it  remained 
 deserted  until  his  day  {Geogr.  xvi.  p.  522).  This 
 however  is  an  error,  for  the  city  is  often  referred  to 
 during  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees.  It  was  visited 
 by  Jonathan,  and  successfully  withstood  his  assault, 
 though  he  did  it  much  damage  (i  Maccab.  xi.  61). 
 It  remained  during  these  troublous  times  the  princi- 
 pal fortress  of  southern  Palestine  (xiii.  43  ;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xiii.  5.  5).  About  B.C.  96  it  was  captured 
 by  Alexander  Jannreus  after  a  year's  siege,  and 
 razed  to  the  ground  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  13.  3). 
 Gabinius,  governor  of  Syria,  rebuilt  it  (xiv.  5.  3)  ; 
 and  Augustus  gave  it  to  Herod  the  Great  ;  but  at 
 his  death  it  was  annexed  to  the  province  of  Syria 
 fxv.  7.  3  ;  xvii.  1 1 .  4).  About  A.  D.  65  Gaza  was 
 laid  in  ruins  by  the  Jews,  in  revenge  for  the  mas- 
 
 sacre of  their  brethren  in  Ccesarea  {Bell.  Jud. 
 ii.  18.  i).  It  soon  recovered  again  ;  and  was  one 
 of  the  chief  cities  of  Syria  during  the  reigns  of 
 Titus  and  Adrian  (Reland,  p.  797 ;  Robinson's 
 B.  R.,  ii.  41). 
 
 In  the  N.  T.  there  is  only  one  reference  to  Gaza, 
 and  it  has  given  rise  to  much  controversy.  The 
 angel  said  to  Philip  :  '  Arise,  and  go  toward  the 
 south,  unto  the  way  which  goeth  down  from  Jeru- 
 salem unto  Gaza,  which  is  desert''  —  auxTj  iarlv 
 ^prifxos  (Acts  viii.  26).  The  pronoun  aiixTj  may 
 either  relate  to  bZov  {way)  or  to  Gaza.  If  the  for- 
 mer, then  it  is  the  way  which  is  '  desert ; '  if  the 
 latter,  it  is  the  city.  If  we  apply  it  to  the  city  it  is 
 difficult  to  reconcile  the  statement  with  the  facts  of 
 history  ;  except  we  regard  the  phrase  '  which  is 
 desert'  as  a  parenthetic  exjilanation  of  Luke's,  writ- 
 ten soon  after  the  destruction  of  Gaza  by  the  Jews 
 in  A.D.  65.  Some  refer  ^p7]fj.os  to  ihe  ancient  city 
 destroyed  by  Alexander,  and  affirm  that  the  new 
 city  occupied  a  different  site.  This,  however, 
 affords  no  real  solution  of  the  difficulty,  for  the  two 
 sites  could  not  have  been  so  far  apart  that  it  be- 
 came necessary  for  the  angel  to  specify  which  was 
 meant  (See  Alford,  ifi  loc.)  Whatever  may  be 
 said  about  the  removal  of  the  city  from  one  site  to 
 another,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  words 
 a\jTT}  eariv  ^prj/jLos  were  intended  to  describe  the 
 road  on  which  Philip  should  find  the  eunuch. 
 There  were  then,  as  now,  several  roads  leading 
 from  Jerusalem  to  Gaza.  Two  traversed  the  rich 
 plain  of  Philistia  ;  but  one  ran  to  Beit  Jibrin,  and 
 thence  direct  through  an  uninhabited  waste  to 
 Gaza.  The  note  of  Dr.  Robinson  on  the  point  is 
 most  important : — '  When  we  were  at  Tell-el-Hasy, 
 and  saw  the  water  standing  along  the  bottom  of 
 the  adjacent  wady,  we  could  not  but  remark  the 
 coincidence  of  several  circumstances  with  the  ac- 
 count of  the  eunuch's  baptism.  This  water  is  on 
 the  most  direct  route  from  Beit  Jebrin  to  Gaza, 
 I  on  the  most  southern  road  from  Jerusalem,  and  in 
 I  the  midst  of  the  country  now  'desert,'  i.e.,  with- 
 I  out  villages  or  fixed  habitations'  {B.  R.  h.  515)- 
 Though  Christianity  was  early  introduced  to 
 Gaza,  the  city  long  remained  a  stronghold  of  idola- 
 tiy.  In  the  beginning  of  the  5th  century  its  bishop 
 received  authority  to  demolish  its  temples,  and  build 
 a  large  Christian  Church  (Sozomon,  H.  E.  ii.  5). 
 In  A.D.  634,  Gaza  was  taken  by  the  Muslems  ;  its 
 splendid  church  turned  into  a  mosque  (Elmakin, 
 Hist.  Saracen,  cap.  ii.  p.  20).  From  this  period 
 it  gradually  declined  under  the  blight  of  Islamism  ; 
 and  the  Crusaders  found  it  deserted.  They  built  a 
 castle  on  the  hill,  which  became  the  nucleus  of  a 
 new  town  {William  of  Tyre,  xvii.  12). 
 
 The  modern  town  is  called  Ghuzzeh,  and  contains 
 about  15,000  inhabitants.  It  resembles  a  cluster  of 
 large  villages.  The  principal  one  stands  on  the  flat 
 top  of  a  low  hill,  and  has  some  good  stone  houses, 
 though  now  much  dilapidated.  The  others  lie  on 
 the  plain  below  ;  their  houses  are  mean  mud  hovels, 
 and  their  lanes  narrow  and  filthy.  The  hill  appears 
 to  be  composed  in  a  great  measure  of  the  acccumu- 
 lated  ruins  of  successive  cities.  We  can  see  frag- 
 ments of  massive  walls,  and  pieces  of  columns 
 cropping  up  everywhere  from  the  rubbish.  The 
 great  mosque  crowns  the  hill ;  and  can  be  distin- 
 guished in  the  distance  by  its  tall  minaret  and 
 pointed  roof.  The  town  has  no  walls  or  defences 
 of  any  kind.  Its  inhabitants  have  been  long  known 
 as  a  fierce  and  lawless  set  of  fanatics.     Between 
 
GAZAM 
 
 GAZARA 
 
 Gaza  and  the  sea  there  is  a  broad  belt  completely 
 covered  with  mounds  of  drifting  sand.  A  mile 
 east  of  the  town  a  long  ridge  of  low  hills  runs 
 parallel  to  the  coast  line.  Between  the  sand  and 
 the  hills  the  ground  is  very  fertile,  and  supplies  the 
 town  with  abundance  of  the  choicest  fruit  and 
 vegetables.  A  large  olive  grove  covers  the  section 
 to  the  northward  ;  while  orchards  of  fruit  and  palm 
 trees  encompass  the  suburbs. 
 
 Some  have  affirmed  that  ancient  Gaza  stood 
 nearer  the  sea  than  the  modem  town,  and  that  the 
 site  was  changed  after  the  destruction  of  the  city  by 
 Alexander.  Traces  of  ruins  have  been  discovered 
 at  various  places  among  the  sandhills  to  the  west, 
 which  are  supposed  to  be  those  of  primeval  Gaza. 
 There  is  nothing  improbable  in  this  theory ;  though 
 the  proofs  of  it  are  not  conclusive,  and  it  is  not 
 necessary  to  a  sound  interpretation  of  any  prophecy 
 or  statement  in  Scripture.  The  ruins  among  the 
 sand-hills  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that 
 Gaza  had  a  harbour,  at  which  a  town  called  Ma- 
 juma  stood  ;  and  there  would  be  buildings  of  vari- 
 ous kinds  on  the  road  between  the  two.  See, 
 however,  Keith  on  the  Prophecies  (1.  c. )  The  stu- 
 dent may  consult  the  following  works  :  Reland, 
 PaLvstina,  7S7-800 ;  Le  Quien,  Oricns  Christ,  iii. ; 
 Raumer's  Pahrstiiia;  Ritter's  Pahvstiua  iindSyrien, 
 iii.  45,  sq.  ;  Van  de  Velde,  ii.  179-1SS  ;  Thomson, 
 The  Land  and  the  Booh,  549,  si^. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 GAZAM    (DT2  ;    Sept.    /cct/iTr?? ;    Vulg.    ernca)  ; 
 
 Joel.  i.  4  ;  ii.  25  ;  Amos  iv.  9  ;  in  all  which  the 
 A.  V.  renders  by  palmerworm.  Bochart  observes 
 that  the  Jews  derive  the  word  from  T1J  or  TT3,  '  to 
 shear'  or  'clip,'  though  he  prefers  DM  'to  cut;' 
 because,  he  observes,  the  locust  gnaws  the  tender 
 branches  of  trees,  as  well  as  the  leaves.  Gesenius 
 urges  that  the  Chaldaic  and  Syriac  explain  it  as  the 
 young  unfledged  bruchus,  which  he  considers  very 
 suitable  to  the  passage  in  Joel,  where  the  DM  be- 
 gins its  ravages  before  the  locusts  ;  but  Dr.  Lee 
 justly  remarks  that  there  is  no  dependence  to  be 
 placed  on  this.  Gesenius  adds  that  the  root  DM 
 in  Arabic,  and  the  Talmud,  is  kindred  with  DDD, 
 'to  shear' — a  derivation  which,  however,  applies 
 to  most  species  of  locusts.  INIichaelis  follows  the 
 Sept.  and  Vulg.,  where  the  word  in  each  most 
 probably  means  the  caterpillar,  the  larvse  of  the 
 I'jpidopterous  tribes  of  insects  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.,  p. 
 290,  compared  with  Rcciieil  de  Quest.,  p.  63).  We 
 have,  indeed,  the  authority  of  Columella,  that 
 the  creatures  which  the  Latins  call  enicce,  are 
 by  the  Greeks  called  KdfnraL,  or  caterpillars  : — 
 '  Animalia  quse  a  nobis  appellantur  erucK,  grcece 
 autem  KcifXTrai  nominantur  '  (xi.  3)  ;  which  he  also 
 describes  as  creeping  upon  vegetables  and  devour- 
 ing them.  Nevertheless,  the  depredations  ascribed 
 to  the  DM  in  Amos,  better  agree  with  the  charac- 
 teristics of  the  locust,  as,  according  to  Bochart,  it 
 was  understood  by  the  ancient  versions.  The  Eng- 
 lish word  '  palmerworm,'  in  our  old  authors,  means 
 properly  a  hairy  caterpillar,  which  wanders  like  a 
 palmer  or  pilgrim,  and  from  its  being  rough,  called 
 also  'beareworm'  (Mouffet,  Insectorum  Theatrimi, 
 p.  186). 
 
 GAZARA  (•^rdfapa;  to.  rdjapa  ;  Gazara),  the 
 name  of  a  town  of  importance  in  tlie  histoiy  of  the 
 wars  of  the  Maccabees.  Its  site  is  placed  near 
 Azotus  {Fcifapa  ivl  ruiv  opiwv  'A^wrov,  I  Maccab. 
 ^v.  34),  and  it  is  nearly  always  mentioned  in  con- 
 
 nection with  Joppa  and  Jamnia  (i  Maccab.  xiv.  34 
 XV.  28,  35  ;  iv.  15  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  7.  4 ;  xiii.  6. 
 6 ;  9.  2  ;  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  2.  2).  The  Gaza  in  i  Mac- 
 cab. (xih.  43)  and  the  Gadara  in  Josephus  {Antiq. 
 V.  I.  22  ;  xii.  7.  4)  should  doubtless  be  read  Ga- 
 zara (cf  Prideaux,  Connection,  lib.  iv.  p.  267,  7iote ; 
 Reland,  Pahest.,  s.  v.  Gadara).  It  may  perhaps  be 
 identified  with  the  Gadaris  of  Strabo  (xvi.  2,  Didot. 
 ed.,  p.  646),  also  described  by  him  as  a  to\\Ti  not 
 far  from  Azotus  (Reland,  Palccst.  1.  c;  Cellarius, 
 Geog.,  vol.  ii.  p.  530).  Gazara  was  the  scene  of 
 many  battles  in  the  Maccabaean  period,  and  was 
 alternately  possessed  by  each  of  the  opposing 
 parties.  When  Gorgias,  general  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
 phanes,  was  defeated  by  Judas  Maccabceus,  his 
 forces  were  pursued  '  unto  Gazara,  and  unto  the 
 ])lains  of  Idumaaa,  and  Azotus,  and  Jamnia'  (?ws 
 Va'£-r]p(hv,  etc.,  I  Maccab.  iv.  15  ;  /*exP'  PaScipwi', 
 etc.,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  7-  4)  >  Nicanor  was  also 
 defeated  by  Judas,  and  pursued  from  '  Adasa  to 
 Gazara'  (et's  V&^-qpa.,  i  Maccab.  vii.  45).  After  the 
 defeat  of  the  Idumasans,  Judas  went  against  Timo- 
 theus,  who  fled  to  Gazara  for  refuge.  Judas,  after 
 several  days' siege  took  the  city  (2  Maccab.  x.  32-37  ; 
 cf.  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  8.  1-4)  ;  many  of  its  towers 
 were  burnt,  and  Timotheus  himself  killed  (2  Mac- 
 cab. /.  c.)  When  Bacchides  returned  to  Jemsalem, 
 after  the  defeat  of  Jonathan,  he  fortified  several 
 cities,  and  among  them  Bethsura  and  Gazara,  and 
 the  tower  (S^pa)  of  Jerusalem  (i  Maccab.  ix.  52  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  i.  3),  and  it  was  again  fortified 
 by  Simon,  when  it  had  been  recovered  by  the  Jews 
 (l  Maccab.  xiv.  7,  33,  34;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  6. 
 6;  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  2.  2).  Simon  built  himself  a  house 
 at  Gazara,  and  also  made  it  the  abode  of  his  son 
 John,  the  captain  of  all  his  hosts  (i  Maccab.  xiii. 
 53;  xvi.  I,  19,  21).  It  is  described  as  being  'a 
 very  strong  hold'  (px^'P'^l'-o-,  2  Maccab.  x.  32; 
 rdfapa  .  .  .  Qli(sa.v  oxvpav  (pvcrei,  cf.  Joseph.  An- 
 tiq. viii.  6.  i).  Gazara  is  mentioned  with  Joppa  ir 
 the  treaty  of  friendship  between  Hyrcanus  and  the 
 Romans  after  the  death  of  Antiochus  VII.,  Sidetes, 
 i;.C.  circa  128-9  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  9.  2;  cf. 
 Clinton,  F.  H.  iii.  332). 
 
 It  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  [Onomasticon,  s.  v. 
 Ta^ip)  as  being  four  miles  from  Nicopolis  [Em- 
 MAUs],  but  it  was  more  probably  nearer  the  sea- 
 coast,  as  in  the  Maccabees  and  Josephus  it  is  nearly 
 always  coupled  with  Joppa,  Azotus,  and  Jamnia 
 (see  passages  above  cited),  and  again  in  distinct 
 language  as  bordering  upon  Azotus.  (i  Maccab. 
 xiv.  34).  It  appears  to  have  been  the  same  place 
 with  Gazer  or  Gezer,  a  town  frequently  men- 
 tioned in  the  O.  T.  As  David  chased  the  Philis- 
 tines from  Geba  to  Gazer  (2  Sam.  v.  25  ;  i  Chron. 
 xiv.  16 ;  fix/oi  TroXews  Va'^apiov,  Joseph.  Antiq.  vii. 
 4.  l),  so  Judas  defeated  Gorgias  at  Emmaus  and 
 pursued  him  to  Gazara  (l  Maccab.  iv.  15).  Pha- 
 raoh, the  father-in-law  of  Solomon,  took  Gazer  (Fe- 
 ^kp,  I  Kings  ix.  16  ;  Td^ep,  17),  then  a  Canaanitish 
 city,  burnt  it,  slew  the  Canaanites  that  were  in  it, 
 and  gave  it  in  dowiy  to  his  daughter,  Solomon's 
 wife  (i  Kings,  /.  c. ;  Ta^^p,  LXX.,  Josh.  xvi.  xo;  cf. 
 Judges  i.  29  ;  Pafapd  rriv  ttjs  IlaXaiffTLvuv  X'^P°-^ 
 vwdpxovaav,  Joseph.  Antiq.  viii.  6.  i).  This  must 
 have  occurred  during  the  reign  of  David,  or  early  in 
 that  of  Solomon,  and  it  seems  out  of  the  question  to 
 suppose  that  Pharaoh,  when  the  Israelite  kingdom 
 was  so  powerful,  could  have  advanced  far  into  the 
 interior  of  the  countiy.  The  site  near  the  sea-coast 
 is  therefore  conhrme'd  by  this  circumstance. 
 
GAZELLE 
 
 79 
 
 GEBAL 
 
 (Jazara  may  be  identified  with  the  modem  village 
 of  Yaziir,  three  miles  and  a  half  to  the  east  of  Joppa, 
 though  as  a  coast-town  and  a  place  of  strength  in 
 the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  it  is  unlikely  that  it 
 should  have  so  entirely  lost  its  importance  (cf 
 Kitto,  Palestine,  vol.  i.  p.  695,  note).  It  must 
 however  be  remembered  that  names  sometimes 
 linger  in  the  neighbourhood  of  sites. — F,  W.  M. 
 
 GAZELLE.    [Antelope.] 
 
 GAZER.     [Gezer.] 
 
 GAZEZ  (TT3  ;  Sept.  Ve^ovi),  the  son  of  Haran 
 
 and  grandson  of  Caleb.  He  is  first  called  the  son 
 of  Caleb,  and  then  more  definitely  the  son  of  Haran 
 (l  Chron.  ii.  46). — t. 
 
 GEB A  (j;32 ;  Sept.  Va^a.6.) .  Considerable  confu- 
 sion has  arisen  from  the  close  similarity  in  the  names 
 of  three  towns  of  Benjamin;    Geba  (y32),  Gibeah 
 
 (nj?32),  and  Gibeon  (|iy33).     It  would  even  appear 
 
 that  the  names  were  regarded  as  interchangeable  ; 
 for  in  Judg.  xx.  10  and  33,  we  find  Geba  where 
 Gibeah  is  meant,  and  in  i  Chron.  xiv.  16  Gibeon  is 
 given  instead  of  Geba  (comp.  2  Sam.  v.  25  ;  2 
 Kings  xxiii.  8).  Still  more  confusion  has  been 
 caused  by  a  want  of  uniformity  in  our  E.  V.  Thus 
 the  Hebrew  y33  is  rendered  in  different  passages 
 Geba  (Josh.  xxi.  17),  Gaba  (xviii.  24^33,  on  account 
 
 of  the  pause  accent),  and  Gibeah  (i  Sam.xiii.  16 ;  xiv. 
 5).  Geba,  Gibeah,  and  Gibeon,  are  shewn  to  be 
 distinct  places  in  Is.  x.  29  and  Josh,  xviii.  24,  25. 
 
 The  position  of  Geba  is  so  clearly  indicated  in 
 several  passages  of  Scripture  that  we  have  no  diffi- 
 culty in  identifying  it  with  the  village  of  Jeba, 
 which  stands  on  the  top  of  a  rocky  ridge  overlook- 
 ing the  whole  eastern  declivities  of  the  mountains 
 of  Benjamin.  It  is  about  six  miles  north  of  Jeru- 
 salem, and  a  mile  south  of  Michmash.  The  latter 
 occupies  another  ridge  ;  and  the  wild  glen  of  Su- 
 weinit  separates  it  from  Jeba.  Jeba  is  a  small 
 village,  and  most  of  its  houses  are  half-ruinous.  A 
 few  remains  of  antiquity  can  be  traced  in  the  large 
 hewn  stones  that  appear  in  the  foundations  and 
 walls  of  the  modern  houses. 
 
 The  story  of  Geba  is  soon  told.  It  was  allotted 
 to  Benjamin  and  given  to  the  priests  (Josh,  xviii.  24). 
 It  was  held  for  a  time  by  the  Philistines  ;  but  Jona- 
 than, the  son  of  Saul,  took  it ;  and  the  Philistines  soon 
 afterwards  assembled  in  great  force  at  Michmash  (i 
 Sam.  xiii.  3,  16).  The  Israelites  under  Saul  took 
 up  a  strong  position  at  Geba.  The  two  armies 
 were  separated  by  the  deep  ravine  called  the 
 '  passage  of  Michmash,'  This  difficult  pass  be- 
 came the  scene  of  Jonathan's  daring  and  successful 
 adventure.  Accompanied  only  by  his  armour- 
 bearer,  he  went  down  into  the  ravine,  clambered  up 
 the  northern  cliff  '  on  his  hands  and  on  his  feet,' 
 and  attacked  the  enemy.  They  were  taken  by 
 surprise.  The  shock  of  an  earthquake  occurring  at 
 the  moment  increased  their  terror.  Saul  from  the 
 opposite  ridge  saw  the  turmoil,  and  heard  the  cries 
 of  distress.  The  Philistines  fled  in  confusion,  and 
 were  driven  from  the  mountains  (i  Sam.  xiii.  17- 
 xiv.  23).  The  writer  was  greatly  struck  on  visiting 
 Jeba,  and  crossing  the  ravine  to  Michmash,  with 
 the  minute  topographical  accuracy  of  the  Scripture 
 narrative  (see  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  215).  Geba 
 lay  on  the  northern  border  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah, 
 and  hence  we  can  understand  why  it  was  fortifica 
 
 by  Asa  (2  Kings  xxiii.  8  ;  I  Kings  xv.  22).  It  is 
 one  of  those  towns  mentioned  by  Isaiah  in  describ- 
 ing the  march  of  Sennacherib  on  Jerusalem  (Is.  x. ) 
 The  topography  of  the  district  throws  some  light 
 on  that  beautiful  passage.  When  the  army  reached 
 Michmash  they  left  their  baggage  there ;  and  the 
 troops,  thus  disencumbered,  were  able  to  cross  the 
 ravine  and  bivouac  on  the  heights  of  Geba.  The 
 town  was  occupied  by  the  Benjamites  after  the 
 captivity  (Ezra  ii.  26).  It  appears  to  have  been 
 unknown  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome  [O nomas',  s.  v. 
 Gaba  and  Geba ;  Reland,  Pat.  7G8,  sg.  See 
 Robinson,  B.  P.  i.  440,  sr/.;  and  Stanley,  6".  and 
 P.,  pp.  210,  489,  sg.)—J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEBAL  (^aa  ;  Sept.  Te^dX),  a  province  only 
 
 once  mentioned  in  Scripture,  and  in  connection  with 
 Moab,  Amalek,  and  the  Hagarenes  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  7). 
 This  shews  that  it  is  distinct  from  the  Gebal  of 
 Lebanon  (z'id.  infra).  It  was  evidently  situated  in 
 the  south-eastern  border  of  Palestine ;  and  there 
 can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  identical  with  Gebalene,  a 
 district    embracing   the    northern    section    of   the 
 
 mountains  of  Edom.  Its  name  (733,  'mountain') 
 is  descriptive  of  its  character.  The  Jerusalem  Tal- 
 mud reads  Mount  Gabla  {rhlT^  NIILD)  instead  of 
 Monnt  Seir ;  so  also  does  the  Samaritan  in  Deut. 
 xxxiii.  2.  Seir,  however,  was  the  ancient, name  of 
 Edom ;  whereas  Gebal  was  only  a  part  of  it. 
 Josephus  calls  it  Gobolitis  {To^oXiris),  and  Eusebius 
 Gabalene  (FajSaXijv??).  These  writers,  with  Jerome 
 and  Stephen  of  Byzant.,  agree  in  locating  it  around 
 or  beside  Petra  [Antiq.  iii.  2 ;  Orzomast.  s.  v. 
 Idnm(2a,  Mabsar ;  Reland,  p.  84). 
 
 To  the  accurate  observations  of  Burckhardt  and 
 Robinson  we  are  chiefly  indebted  for  our  know- 
 ledge of  this  ancient  province.  The  latter  says  ; 
 '  This  tract  of  mountains  south  of  the  district  of 
 Kerak  (the  ancient  country  of  Moab),  and  sepa- 
 rated from  it  by  the  Wady  el-Ahsy,  is  at  the  present 
 day  spoken  of  as  divided  into  two  districts.  The 
 northern  bears  the  name  of  Geb&l,  '  mountains  ;'  be- 
 ginning at  Wady  el-Ahsy,  and  temiinating  towards 
 the  south,  according  to  Burckhardt,  at  Wady  el- 
 Shuweir.  Yet  the  southern  boundary  would  seem 
 not  to  be  very  definitely  assigned  ;  for  esh-Shobek, 
 although  it  lies  south  of  that  Wady,  was  some- 
 times spoken  of  to  us  as  belonging  to  Jebal'  {B.  R. 
 iii.  154;  Burckhardt,  Travels  in  ;S^r;-.  410).  The 
 chief  towTis  in  Gebalene  were  Tophel,  Bozrah, 
 Arindela,  and  Shobek  (the  Mons  Pegalis  of  the 
 Crusaders).  For  fuller  notice,  see  Idum^a. — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEBAL  AND  GIBLITES  (ij^S  and ''^33;  Sept. 
 
 VaXidQ,  Alex.  Ta/SXt  ^vKiGTidii).  A  very  ancient  city 
 of  Phoenicia,  situated  on  the  coast,  at  the  foot  of  Le- 
 banon, 24  Roman  miles  north  of  Beyrout.  Joshua 
 speaks  of  '  the  land  of  the  Giblites'  (xiii.  5)  in  such  a 
 way  as  to  shew  that  the  territory  then  attached  to  the 
 city  was  large,  apparently  including  the  whole  ridge 
 of  Lebanon  north  of  Sidon.  The  Giblites  were  cele- 
 brated for  their  skill  in  architecture,  and  they  were 
 employed  by  Solomon  in  building  the  temple, 
 probably  on  the  recommendation  of  Hiram,  king 
 of  Tyre,  whose  subjects  they  were.  In  I  Kings  v.  18 
 the  word  D''^a2n,  '  The  Giblites,''  is  wrongly  trans- 
 lated '  stone-squarers.'  Ezekiel,  in  describing  the 
 glories  of  Tyre,  says,  '  The  ancients  of  Gebal,  and 
 ihe  wise  men  thereof,  were  in  thee  thy  calkers 
 
GEBER 
 
 8U 
 
 GEDALIAH 
 
 (xxvii.  9);  from  which  it  appears  that  the  Gibhtes 
 were  also  famous  as  naval  architects. 
 
 The  Greeks  changed  the  name  Gebal  into 
 Pyhlos,  HipXos  (Bt''/3Xos,  Stephan.  Byz. );  hence  the 
 Septuagint  give  in  i  Kings  v.  18,  and  Ezek.  xxvii.  9, 
 Bl^Xloi..  Among  the  heathen  the  town  was  noted 
 as  the  birth-place  and  principal  sanctuary  of  Adonis 
 (Strabo,  xvi.  p.  520;  Lucian,  i/e  Dca  Syria,  c.  6  ; 
 Reland,  269).  In  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great 
 it  possessed  a  fleet  of  war  vessels  (Arrian,  Exped. 
 Alex.  ii.  20).  It  continued  to  flourish  for  many 
 centuries  (Pliny,  H.  N.  v.  17  ;  Ptolemy,  v.  15), 
 and  became  the  seat  of  a  bishop  in  the  early  ages 
 of  Christianity  (Car.  S.  Paul.  Geog.  Sacr.  p.  293). 
 Under  Arab  rule  it  resumed  its  ancient  name,  but 
 soon  lost  all  its  ancient  power  and  splendour.  The 
 modern  \\2LVi\s.yebeil  is  the  diminutive  of  the  Hebrew 
 Gcbal. 
 
 Jebeil  stands  on  a  spur  of  Lebanon,  close  to  the 
 shore.  Below  it  is  the  ancient  harbour,  now  so 
 choked  up  with  sand  and  ruins  as  to  be  only  cap- 
 able of  sheltering  a  few  fishing-boats.  The  old 
 ramparts  are  in  ruins  ;  but  the  castle  or  citadel  is 
 still  an  object  of  special  interest.  Its  substructions 
 are  formed  of  massive  bevelled  masoniy,  and  afford 
 one  of  the  best  specimens  of  mural  architecture 
 extant,  well  worthy  the  fame  and  skill  of  the 
 ancient  Giblites.  Some  of  the  stones  are  nearly 
 20  feet  long.  The  traces  of  a  Roman  theatre  re- 
 main ;  and  great  numbers  of  granite  columns  are 
 strewn  thi-ough  the  streets  and  ruins,  and  even  over 
 the  surrounding  fields,  shewing  how  splendid  the 
 city  once  was.  Now  a  poor  village,  of  some  600 
 inhabitants,  is  its  only  representative  (Maundrell,  in 
 Bohn's  ^(7;'/j'  Travels,  p.  410;  Pococke's  Travels, 
 ii.  98;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  in  Syr.,  I'jg  ;  Biblio- 
 theca  Sacra,  vol.  v.,  p.  6,  seq.;  Wilson,  Lands  of  the 
 Bible,  ii.  400,  seq. ) — ^J.  L.  P 
 
 GEBER    (-123;    LXX.    Ta^ip;   Vulg.    Gaber ; 
 
 Joseph.  Ya^dp-qs,  Antiq.  viii.  2.  3),  son  of  Uri, 
 and  one  of  the  twelve  officers  (^''^'fj)   appointed 
 
 by  Solomon  to  superintend  the  supply  of  provi- 
 sions for  his  table  and  household  (i  Kings  iv.  7, 
 19,  27).  These  officers  probably  correspond  to 
 the  twelve  t^^3"l^  ''"lb',  riders  of  the  substance,  of 
 
 the  preceding  reign  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  25-31),  but 
 with  a  more  orderly  distribution  of  service,  and  an 
 enlarged  jurisdiction.  It  may  be  inferred  from  i 
 Kings  iv.  5,  that  they  were  placed  under  the  direc- 
 tion of  a  superior  officer,  one  of  the  chief  ministers 
 of  the  king.  To  each  a  distinct  district  was  as- 
 signed ;  but  we  are  not  told  whether  they  drew 
 their  supplies  from  the  royal  flocks  and  demesnes, 
 as  appears  to  have  been  the  case  in  the  reign  of 
 David,  I  Chron.  xxvii.  31 ;  or  from  levies  on  the 
 inhabitants,  as  is  suggested  by  i  Sam.  vii.  11-17. 
 The  district  over  which  Geber  presided  is  described 
 (i  Kings  iv.  19)  as  the  country  of  Sihon,  king  of 
 the  Amorites,  and  of  Og,  king  of  Bashan,  that  is, 
 the  whole  of  the  East-Jordanic  division  of  Pales- 
 tine. A  difficulty  has  hence  arisen  in  connection 
 with  the  concluding  clause  of  the  verse  just  cited. 
 As  rendered  in  A.  V.,  it  reads,  'and  he  was  the 
 only  officer  which  was  in  the  land;'  whereas  parts 
 of  the  same  district  were  assigned  to  two  others  of 
 the  twelve  officers,  viz.,  Ben-Geber,  or  the  son  of 
 Geber  (whether  of  this  Geber  or  of  some  other,  is 
 not  known),  M'hose  head-quarters  were  in  Ramoth 
 Gilead,    and    Ahinadab,    who   was    stationed    at 
 
 Mahanaim  (w.  13,  14).  It  is  not,  however,  easy 
 to  determine  the  exact  meaning  of  the  clause.  As 
 there  is  nothing  in  the  Hebrew  corresponding  to 
 the  words  '  he  was,'  Abarbanel  and  others  after 
 him  have  explained  the  clause,  '  there  was  also  a 
 superior  officer  in  the  land.'  Against  this  lies  the 
 objection,  that  the  inferior  officer  would  be  men- 
 tioned by  name,  whilst  the  superior  was  nameless, 
 and  mentioned  only  incidentally.  The  explanation 
 of  Grotius  appears  a  better  one,  'unus  procurator 
 regis  in  terra  quae  fuerat  duorum  regum,'  under- 
 standing by  '  the  land,'  all  the  country  of  Sihon 
 and  Og  except  the  parts  which  had  been  pre- 
 viously mentioned. — S.  N. 
 
 GEBIM  (Caan;  LXX.  TiiSiSe//) ;  Vulg.  Gabijii), 
 
 a  town  or  village  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jeru- 
 salem, mentioned  only  in  Is.  x.  31.  Eusebius 
 {Onomast.  Trj^elv)  and  Jerome  wrongly  identify  it 
 with  Geba,  a  village  five  miles  from  Gophna,  on 
 the  road  to  Neapolis.  The  passage  in  Isaiah  is  a 
 vivid  description  of  the  approach  of  the  king  of 
 Assyria  towards  Jerusalem,  and  the  several  places, 
 as  far  as  they  can  be  identified,  are  named  in  the 
 order  of  their  increasing  proximity  to  the  city.  It 
 is  therefore  scarcely  possible  to  avoid  the  conclu- 
 sion that  the  same  rule  applies  to  the  rest,  and  as 
 Gebim  is  the  last  but  one  in  the  series,  its  site 
 must  be  placed  about  two  or  three  miles  from  Jeru- 
 salem towards  the  north-east,  between  Anathoth 
 (Anata)  and  Nob  (el-Isawiyeh),  (Robinson,  B.  R., 
 ii.  149,  iii.  81).  The  village  appears  to  have 
 derived  its  name  from  its  proximity  to  some  wells 
 or  cisterns  (D^31in  =  the  wells,  see  Jer.  xiv.  3). — ■ 
 
 S.  N. 
 
 GEBIROL.     [IBN  Gebirol.] 
 GEDALIAH,  Fast  of.     [Fasts.] 
 GEDALIAH  or   GEDALIAHU    (H^ha, 
 
 ^IT'P^ia,    God-educated;     Sept.    FoSoXias),    son    of 
 
 Ahikam,  appointed  by  Nebuchadnezzar  governor 
 of  Judaea  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  He 
 was  probably  of  the  number  of  those  who  quitted 
 the  city  at  the  instance  of  the  prophet,  justly 
 despairing  of  the  successful  defence  of  a  place 
 which  God  had  abandoned.  Gedaliah  had  in- 
 herited his  father's  respect  for  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xl. 
 5,  sq^,  and  was  moreover  enjoined  by  Nebuzara- 
 dan  to  look  to  his  safety  and  welfare.  Gedaliah 
 was  in  every  way  worthy  of  the  difficult  post  he 
 had  to  fill ;  and  he  adopted  as  the  principle  of 
 his  conduct  that  submission  to  existing  circum- 
 stances which  was  requisite  in  one  who  believed  that 
 Judah  had,  according  to  the  declared  will  of  God, 
 been  justly  doomed  and  punished  for  her  iniqui- 
 ties, and  who  yet  believed  that  his  loving-kindness 
 had  not  utterly  departed  from  her.  He  established 
 the  seat  of  his  government  at  Mizpeh  in  the  tribe 
 of  Benjamin  ;  and  there  the  Jews,  who  had  fled  at 
 the  advance  of  the  Chaldcean  annies,  or  when  the 
 troops  of  Zedekiah  were  dispersed  in  the  plains  of 
 Jericho,  quitting  their  retreats,  began  to  gather 
 around  him.  Gedaliah  wdsely  counselled  them  to 
 submission  and  quietness ;  and  he  promised  on 
 that  condition  to  ensure  them  the  undisturbed  en- 
 joyment of  their  possessions,  and  of  the  produce  of 
 the  ground.  In  this  hope  the  laboui-s  of  the  field 
 were  resumed,  and  the  extraordinary  returns  of 
 that  season  secured,  as  if  .specially  given  to  rena'i 
 
GEDDES 
 
 81 
 
 GEDEROTHAIM 
 
 the  recent  injuries  of  war.  But  this  calm  was  of 
 short  duration.  Among  those  who  returned  was 
 a.  member  of  the  royal  family,  named  Ishmael, 
 who  had  taken  refuge  with  Baalis,  king  of  the 
 Ammonites.  He  appears  to  have  been  irritated 
 at  seeing  one  who  was  not  of  the  house  of  David 
 seated  upon  even  the  shadow  of  David's  throne  ; 
 and  some  of  the  friends  of  Gedaliah  believed  him 
 to  be  in  a  plot  with  Baalis  to  take  away  his  life. 
 But  the  noble-minded  governor  refused  to  enter- 
 tain such  a  suspicion,  and  rejected  with  horror  the 
 proposal  of  an  over-zealous  friend,  who  offered  to 
 assassinate  Ishmael.  The  suspicion  which  he  thus 
 generously  repelled  was,  however,  correct.  He 
 was  murdered  in  the  midst  of  a  repast  by  tliis  very 
 Ishmael,  whom  he  had  received  as  a  friend.  This 
 event  happened  about  two  months  after  the  destruc- 
 tion of  Jerusalem,  and  byit  the  present  ruinof  Judssa 
 seemed  to  be  consummated,  B.C.  58S  (2  Kings  xxv. 
 22-26;  Jer.  xxxix.  14;  xl.  5;  xli.  18). — J.  K. 
 [Four  others  of  this  name  are  mentioned  in  the 
 O.  T.,  viz.,  I.  The  son  of  Jeduthun,  who  played  the 
 harp  in  the  service  of  God  (i  Chron.  xxv.  3,  9) ; 
 
 2.  A  priest   in   the   time  of  Ezra  (Ezra  x.    18)  ; 
 
 3.  The  son  of  Pashur  (Jer.  xxxviii.  i)  ;  4.  The 
 grandfather  of  Zephaniah  the  prophet  (Zeph.  i.  l)]. 
 
 GEDDES,  Alexander,  was  born  in  the  parish 
 of  Ruthven,  Banffshire,  Scotland,  1737.  He  was 
 first  educated  in  a  private  family  at  Aberdeen,  and 
 next  at  the  Roman  Catholic  seminaiy  of  Scalan .  At 
 the  Scotch  College  at  Paris  he  studied  six  years 
 (1758- 1 764)  ;  and  returning  to  his  native  land  be- 
 came apriest  at  Dundee,  and  after\^'ards  in  Banffshire. 
 Being  suspended  by  Bishop  Hey  for  liberality,  he 
 left  Scotland  in  disgust,  and  went  to  London,  1779. 
 The  University  of  Aberdeen,  to  its  honour,  con- 
 ferred on  him  the  title  of  LL.D.  In  London  he 
 found  a  generous  and  kind  patron  in  Lord  Petre. 
 He  died  the  26th  February  1802,  aged  sixty-five. 
 
 Geddes  published  a  translation  of  the  O.  T.  in 
 two  volumes  4to,  1792,  1797,  containing  the  books 
 from  Genesis  to  Ruth.  In  1800  appeared  the  first 
 volume  of  Critical  Remarks  on  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
 tures. Death  prevented  him  from  finishing  what 
 he  had  begun.  His  version  of  the  Psalms,  printed 
 as  far  as  Psalm  cxviii.  at  his  death,  was  not  pub- 
 lished till  1807. 
 
 The  Bible,  as  edited  by  Geddes,.  contains  a  new 
 translation,  with  a  corrected  text  of  the  original, 
 various  readings,  explanatory  notes,  and  critical 
 observations.  The  work  itself  was  preceded  by  a 
 Prospectus,  151  pages  4to,  1786  ;  by  a  supplement 
 to  the  prospectus  in  the  form  of  a  letter  to  the 
 Lord  Bishop  of  London,  87  pages,  4to,  17S7  ;  by  a 
 general  answer  to  the  queries,  counsels,  etc.,  which 
 had  been  offered  to  him,  etc.,  1790.  An  address 
 to  the  public,  25  pages  4to,  was  issued  in  1793,  in 
 consequence  of  the  severe  remarks  made  upon  his 
 work  and  himself.  In  1794  he  publislied  a  reply  to 
 the  pastoral  letter  of  the  vicars  apostolic  who  had 
 condemned  his  translation,  in  the  form  of  a  letter  to 
 Bishop  Douglas,  55  pages  4to.  It  is  necessary  to 
 read  these  pamphlets  in  order  to  form  a  just  estimate 
 of  the  man,  and  the  way  in  which  he  was  treated. 
 
 The  work  by  which  he  is  known  shews  great 
 learning,  taste,  and  ingenuity.  Besides  being  an 
 excellent  Greek  and  Latin  scholar,  as  numerous 
 publications  attest,  Geddes  was  familiar  with  the 
 Italian,  French,  German,  and  Spanish  languages. 
 He  was  well  versed  in  Hebrew,  knew  the  princi- 
 VOL.  n. 
 
 pies  of  Biblical  criticism,  and  was  able  to  apply 
 them.  His  character  was  that  of  a  warm-hearted, 
 independent,  honest  man,  who  followed  truth,  as 
 far  as  he  thought  he  saw  it,  with  a  fearless  mind. 
 It  is  matter  of  regret  that  he  should  have  in- 
 dulged here  and  there  in  remarks  which  betray  a 
 levity  and  scepticism  calculated  to  wound  the  feel- 
 ings of  others.  His  own  church  persecuted  him 
 as  a  heretic.  Protestants  looked  upon  him  in  the 
 same  light  and  stood  aloof;  or  they  attacked  a 
 man  far  their  superior  in  attainments.  His  life 
 was  written  by  Mason  Good,  1803,  8vo. — S.  D. 
 
 GEDEON.    [Gideon.] 
 
 GEDER  Cin-t ;  S  ept.  Va5ip) ,  one  of  the  ancient  cities 
 
 of  Canaan  captured  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  13).  It 
 appears  to  be  identical  with  Gederah  or  Gederothaim 
 (rmS  and  D''ri'n2),  situated  in  the  Shephelah,  and 
 
 allotted  to  Judah  (xv.  36).  It  probably  stood  in  or 
 near  the  valley  of  Elah,  as  it  is  joined  with  Socoh; 
 but  the  site  has  not  been  identified.  It  would 
 seem  also  to  be  the  same  place  written  Gedor  ("nj) 
 in  I  Chron.  iv.  39,  and  Gederoth  (ni"llj)  2  Chron. 
 xxviii.  1,8.  Eusebius  mentions  Gedur  (FeSoi;/))  a 
 large  village  ten  miles  from  Diospolis  on  the  road 
 to  Eleutheropolis  (Onomast.  s.  v.)  This,  however, 
 is  too  far  north.  It  may  be  that  which  he  speaks 
 of  in  the  region  of  Aelia  (Jerusalem),  '  at  the  Tere- 
 binth.' If  we  interpret  this  with  Raumer  '  Vallis 
 Terebinthi,''  'Valley  of  Elah,'  the  situation  will 
 agree  exactly  with  that  of  Geder.  See,  however, 
 Kfiil  on  Josh.  xv.  36. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEDERAH,  properly  THE  GEDERAH 
 (miiin  ;  Sept.  rd5r;/)a),  a  town  in  the  low  country 
 
 of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  36),  probably  the  place  de- 
 scribed in  the  Onomast.  (s.  v.  Gahedur)  as  '  hodie 
 vocatus  Gedrus,  vicus  pergrandis  in  decimo  millia- 
 rio  Diospoleos  pergentibus  Eleutheropolim  ; '  for 
 all  the  other  cities  mentioned  in  the  context,  the 
 site  of  which  has  been  discovered,  stand  between 
 Diospolis  and  Eleutheropolis.  The  Gentile  name 
 from  this  is'^mia,  Gederathite  {\  Chron.  xii.  4). — t 
 
 GEDEROTH  (nil^a  ;  Sept.  PeSSw/)),  a  city  in 
 the  plain  country  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  41),  and  one 
 of  those  which  the  Philistines  took  from  king 
 Ahaz  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  18).— J.  K. 
 
 GEDEROTH  (DiinS  ;  Sept.  FaSr/pci^).   A  town 
 
 of  Judah  in  the  Shephelah,  but  lying  south  of  the 
 preceding,  and  probably  not  far  from  Eleuthero- 
 polis. Josabad  the  Gederathite  was  one  of  David's 
 followers;  but  he  was  a  Benjamite,  and  could 
 scarcely  be  from  this  place  (i  Chron.  xii.  4).  The 
 site  is  unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEDEROTHAIM   (n''_rii']3),    a  town   in    the 
 
 low  country  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  36).  The  LXX. 
 regard  the  word  as  connected  with  the  preceding 
 word  Gederah,  and  render  it  by  koX  ai  iiravXeis 
 aiiTTJs.  Winer  looks  on  it  as  an  ancient  gloss,_  on 
 the  ground  that  the  number  of  the  cities  is  given 
 as  fourteen,  whereas,  if  Gederothaim  be  reckoned 
 one,  the  number  will  be  fifteen  ;  but  the  same  dis- 
 crepancy occurs  elsewhere  (comp.,  for  a  glaring  m- 
 stance,  ver.  32),  and  is  best  explained  by  suppos- 
 ing that  some  names  were  added  by  a  later  hand 
 without  a  corresponding  change  being  made  in  the 
 number  (Keil  on  Joshua,  p.  379). — t 
 
GEDI 
 
 82 
 
 GELILOTH 
 
 GEDI  Cnj),  the  young  of  the  goat,  a  kid.  The 
 
 name  is  denved  by  Fiirst  from  the  obsolete  verb 
 mj,  to  cast  forth,  so  that  it  is  equivalent  to  the 
 Latin  foetus,  but  was  afterwards  restricted  to  one 
 kind,  that  of  the  goat.  Gesenius  traces  it  to  mj, 
 to  crop,  and  supposes  the  name  was  given  to  it 
 from  its  cropping  the  herbage.  Both  etymologies 
 are  purely  conjectural.  The  phrase  D''TJ?n  HJ,  f^id 
 of  the  goats,  is  frequently  used.  The  reason  of 
 this  Kimchi  finds  in  the  generic  sense  of  ""IJ,  as 
 apphcable  originally  to  the  young  either  of  the 
 sheep  or  goat,  so  that  it  required  the  addition  of 
 D"'Tyn  to  specialise  its  meaning,  until  it  came  by 
 usage  to  denote  only  the  latter.  Ibn  Ezra  thinks 
 the  addition  was  made  because  the  gedi,  being  yet 
 tender,  could  rot  be  separated  from  its  mother. 
 The  flesh  of  the  kid  was  esteemed  a  delicacy  by 
 the  Hebrews  (Gen.  xxvii.  9,  14,  17;  Judg.  vi.  19; 
 xiii.  15,  etc.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 GEDOR  ("lina  ;  Sept.  TeSci/j).     A  town  in  the 
 
 mountains  of  Judah,  grouped  with  Halhul  and 
 Bethzur  (Josh.  xv.  58).  Its  site  is  doubtless  marked 
 by  the  ruined  village  of  Jedtir,  situated  on  the  top 
 of  a  bleak  ridge,  eight  miles  north  of  Hebron,  and 
 about  two  west  of  the  road  leading  to  Jerusalem. 
 This  was  the  native  place  of  some  of  David's  fol- 
 lowers (i  Chron.  xii.  7).  It  seems  doubtful  whetherit 
 be  the  Gedor  of  i  Chron.  iv.  39 ;  for  it  is  there  said 
 that  some  Simeonites  '  went  to  the  entrance  of  Gedor, 
 icnto  the  east  side  of  the  valley  (X''3) ;  but  there  is  no 
 valley  at  Jedur  [Geder].  See  Robinson's  B.  R., 
 ii.  13;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  313. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEHAZI  CTHJI,  vision-valley;  Sept.  Tu^i),  a  ser- 
 vant of  Elisha,  whose  entire  confidence  he  enjoyed 
 [Elisha].  He  personally  appears  in  reminding 
 his  master  of  the  best  mode  of  rewarding  the  kind- 
 ness of  the  Shunamite  (2  Kings  iv.  14)  ;  he  was 
 present  at  the  interview  in  which  the  Shunamite 
 made  known  to  the  prophet  that  her  son  was  dead, 
 and  was  sent  forward  to  lay  Elisha's  staff  on  the 
 child's  face,  which  he  did  without  effect  (2  Kings 
 iv.  31)  ;  and  when  Elisha,  with  a  noble  disin- 
 terestedness, declined  the  rich  gifts  pressed  upon 
 him  by  the  illustrious  leper  whom  he  had  healed, 
 Gehazi,  feeling  distressed  that  so  favourable  an 
 opportunity  of  profiting  by  the  gratitude  of  Naa- 
 maan  had  been  so  wilfully  thrown  away,  ran  after 
 the  retiring  chariots,  and  requested,  in  his  master's 
 name,  a  portion  of  the  gifts  which  had  before 
 been  refused,  on  the  ground  that  visitors  had  just 
 arrived  for  whom  he  was  unable  to  provide.  Hav- 
 ing deposited  his  spoil  in  a  place  of  safety,  he 
 again  appeared  before  Elisha,  whose  honour  he 
 had  so  seriously  compromised.  His  master,  knowing 
 what  had  happened,  denounced  his  crime,  and 
 passed  upon  him  the  terrible  doom,  that  the  leprosy 
 of  which  Naaman  had  been  cured,  should  cleave  to 
 him  and  his  for  ever  (2  Kings  v.  20-27)  !  ^-C.  894. 
 
 We  afterwards  find  Gehazi  recounting  to  king 
 Joram  the  great  deeds  of  Elisha,  and,  in  the  pro- 
 vidence of  God,  it  so  happened  that  when  he  was 
 relating  the  restoration  to  life  of  the  Shunamite's 
 son,  the  very  woman  with  her  son  appeared  before 
 the  king  to  claim  her  house  and  lands,  which  had 
 been  usurped  while  she  had  been  absent  abroad 
 during  the  recent  famine.  Struck  by  the  coinci- 
 dence, the  king  immediately  granted  her  applica- 
 tion (2  Kings  viiL  1-6).    As  lepers  were  compelled 
 
 to  live  apart  outside  the  towns,  and  were  not  al. 
 lowed  to  come  too  near  to  uninfected  persons, 
 some  difficulty  has  arisen  with  respect  to  Gehazi's 
 interview  with  the  king.  Several  answers  occur. 
 The  interview  may  have  taken  place  outside  the 
 town,  in  a  garden  or  garden-house  ;  and  the  king 
 may  have  kept  Gehazi  at  a  distance,  with  the 
 usual  precautions  which  custom  dictated.  Some 
 even  suppose  that  the  incident  is  misplaced,  and 
 actually  occurred  before  Gehazi  was  smitten  with 
 leprosy.  Others  hasten  to  the  opposite  conclu- 
 sion, and  allege  the  probability  that  the  leper  had 
 then  repented  of  his  crime,  and  had  been  restored 
 to  health  by  his  master  [Lepers]. — ^J.  K. 
 
 GEHENNA.     [Hinnom,  Valley  of.] 
 
 GEIER,  Martin,  a  Lutheran  theologian,  was 
 bom  at  Leipzig,  April  24th,  1614.  He  was  edu- 
 cated at  his  native  place,  and  at  the  universities  of 
 Strasburg,  Jena,  and  Wittenberg.  In  1639  he 
 became  professor  of  Hebrew  at  Leipzig,  and  sub- 
 sequently pastor,  S7(peri>ite?ide?tt,  and  professor  of 
 theology.  In  1665  he  reluctantly  removed  to  Dres- 
 den as  Oberhof-prediger  and  Kirchenrath.  He 
 died  at  Freyburg,  August  22d,  1681.  Geier  pub- 
 lished a  Co?nmenta7'y  on  the  Psalter,  1666,  4to,  2 
 vols.  ;  on  Daniel,  1660,  4to  ;  on  Provei-bs,  1663, 
 4to  ;  and  07i  Ecdesiastes,  1665,  4to.  De  bictn 
 Hebra:o7-um  appeared  at  Lei]izig,  1656,  Svo.  These 
 works  are  now  forgotten,  having  been  superseded 
 long  ago  by  briefer  and  better  treatises. — S.  D. 
 
 GELILOTH  (ni^''^;!,  ph  of  rbhl,  literally  cir- 
 cles or  circuits,   from   the   root  p?2,  to  roll).     It 
 
 occurs  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  five  times  (the  sing, 
 form  once  besides),  twice  in  reference  to  the  Philis- 
 tines, Josh.  xiii.  2,  A.  V.  '  borders  of  the  Philistines,' 
 LXX.  opi<x  ^vKiaTidjj. ;  Joel  iv.  3  [A.  V.  iii.  4], 
 ^  coasts  oi  Palestine,'  LXX.  TakCKala.  aWorfyvKwv — 
 where  Henderson  remarks  that  the  Geliloth  '  were 
 propei'ly  provinces,'  i.e.  the  five  of  the  Philistines ; 
 — twice  in  relation  to  the  Jordan,  Josh.  xxii.  10, 
 II;  A.  v.,  '■borders  of  Jordan;'  LXX.,  PaAaaS 
 Tov  'lo/sSdi'ou  ;— once  absolutely.  Josh,  xviii.  17; 
 where  alone  the  word  appears  in  the  A.  V.  ;  the 
 border  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  '  was  drawn  from 
 the  north  and  went  forth  to  En-Shemesh,  and  went 
 forth  toward  Geliloth,  which  is  over  against,  niji 
 
 the  going  up  of  Adummim.'  The  LXX.  has 
 here  TaXiXwd ;  the  Vulg.  ttimidos.  As  in  the 
 description  of  the  northern  boundary  of  Judah, 
 which  was  identical  at  this  part  with  the  south  of 
 Benjamin,  Gilgal  is  substituted  for  Geliloth,  with 
 the  same  specification  as  over  against,  njj,  Ad- 
 ummim (Josh.  XV.  7)  ;  and  as  Geliloth  never 
 occurs  again  in  this  locality  (?)  it  has  been  con- 
 cluded by  some  that  Gilgal  is  the  correct  reading 
 (See  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible).  But  Canon  Stan- 
 ley remarks  :  '  A  place  called  Geliloth  is  men- 
 tioned (Josh,  xviii.  17),  which,  as  far  as  the  imper- 
 fect indications  of  the  text  allow,  seems  to  be  close 
 to  the  Arabah  or  Jordan  valley'  {Sin.  and  Pal., 
 4S9,  3d  ed. )     The  singular  form  of  the  word  occurs 
 
 Ezek.  xlvii.  8 — '  These  waters  flow  forth  n?  v2n  vX, 
 
 towards  the  circle,  or  border,  the  eastern  (namely, 
 of  the  Jordan),  and  descend  on  the  Arabah,  and 
 come  to  the  sea,  and  having  come  into  the  sea,  its 
 waters  shall  even  be  healed'  [Arabah].     Here  we 
 
GEMARA 
 
 83 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 gladly  avail  ourselves  of  Dr.  Stanley's  aid  : — '  Cic- 
 car  and  Geliloth.  These  two  curious  terms  (in  the 
 E.  V.  rendered  '  plain,'  or  region,  though  occa- 
 sionally vi'ith  a  wider  application),  usually  denote 
 the  Jordan  valley,  applied  respectively  to  its  lower 
 and  upper  stage.  It  is  tempting  to  derive  this 
 usage  (with  Reland,  p.  274)  from  the  windings  of 
 the  stream  ;  and  it  is  not,  at  any  rate,  impossible 
 that  this  may  have  suggested  or  confirmed  the  in- 
 variable use  of  'ciccar'  for  the  circular  oasis  of 
 Jericho  and  the  five  cities.  In  later  times,  no 
 doubt,  the  words  were  taken  merely  as  provincial 
 terms  for  'region,'  and  as  such  were  translated  in  the 
 LXX.,  and  in  the  N.  T. ,  ij  Treplxupos,  '  the  sur- 
 rounding neighbourhood"  {S/>i.  and  Pa/.,  p.  2S4). 
 '  Geliloth  is  distinguished  from  Ciccar,  which  will 
 rather  mean  the  circle  of  vegetation  or  dwellings, 
 gathered  round  the  bends  and  reaches  of  the  river. 
 The  word  may  perhaps  find  an  analogy  in  the 
 Scotch  term  'links,'  which  has  both  the  meanings 
 of  Geliloth,  being  used  of  the  snake-like  windings  of 
 a  stream,  as  well  as  with  the  derived  meaning  of 
 a  coast  or  shore'  {S:u.  and  Pa/.,  p.  4S9).— I.  J. 
 
 GEMARA.     [Talmud.] 
 
 GEMARIAH  (Hnoa,  God-perfeded ;  Sept.  Ta- 
 
 ixapias),  the  son  of  Shaphan,  and  a  scribe  of  the 
 temple  in  the  time  of  Jehoiakim.  Baruch  read 
 aloud  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  to  the  people  at 
 the  official  chamber  of  Gemariah,  which  was  at- 
 tached to  the  new  gate  of  the  temple  built  by  king 
 Jotham  (Jer.  xxxvi.  10  ;  comp.  2  Kings  xv.  35). 
 Gemariah's  son  Michaiah  having  reported  this  to 
 his  father,  Baruch  was  invited  to  repeat  the  read- 
 ing at  the  scribes'  chamber  in  the  palace,  before 
 Gemariah  and  other  scribes  and  councillors,  who 
 gave  an  account  of  the  matter  to  the  king  (Jer. 
 xxxvi.  10-26).      B.C.  607. 
 
 2.  Gemariah,  son  of  Hilkiah,  who,  with  Ela- 
 sah,  son  of  Shaphan,  was  sent  to  Babylon  by 
 king  Zedekiah  with  his  tribute-money  for  Nebu- 
 chadnezzar. He  also  took  charge  of  a  letter  from 
 Jeremiah  to  the  Jewish  captives  at  Babylon,  warn- 
 ing them  against  the  false  prophets  who  deluded 
 them  by  promises  of  a  speedy  return  to  their  own 
 land  (Jer.  xxix.  3,  4).     B.C.  599. —J.  K. 
 
 GEMS.     [Stones,  Precious,  vol.  iii.  p.  1171.] 
 
 GENEALOGY.  A  thread  of  genealogy  runs 
 through  the  Bible,  beginning  from  Adam  and  end- 
 ing in  Jesus  Christ.  But  while  this  principal  line 
 through  God's  Providence  has  been  preserved 
 entire,  the  branches  which  spread  out  from  it  are 
 for  the  most  abruptly  cut  off,  and  although  we 
 often  find  several  such  threads  nmning  parallel 
 to  each  other  for  a  time,  their  connection  with  the 
 principal  line  is  often  invisible,  and  their  order 
 in  many  places  is  tangled  and  disturbed,  so  that, 
 generally  speaking,  we  must  be  content  to  gather 
 some  notion  of  the  genealogy  of  the  Hebrews 
 from  a  broken  and  imperfect  tissue. 
 
 That  such  an  acknowledgment  should  be  made 
 respecting  matter  contained  in  the  Bible  may  seem 
 surprising,  but  the  compilation  and  preservation  of 
 genealogical  tables  is  a  matter  which  God  has 
 evidently  been  pleased  to  leave  in  the  hands  of 
 man  ;  as  He  has  invested  him  with  various  powers 
 for  his  personal  preservation  and  comfort,  so  He 
 has  endued  him  with  a  disposition  to  keep  a  record 
 of  the  lines  of  ancestry  from  which  he  is  descended. 
 
 and  He  has  made  this  disposition  subservient  tc 
 His  gi-eat  purpose  of  mercy  towards  mankind,  by 
 letting  it  afford  proof  of  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy 
 in  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ,  but  we  have  no  reason 
 to  believe  that  He  has  made  these  matters  the  sub- 
 ject of  a  special  revelation  or  interfered  miracu- 
 lously to  preserve  them.  If,  however,  we  make 
 allowance  for  the  errors  which  may  have  intro- 
 duced  themselves  into  these  records,  the  occasional 
 ambiguity  of  their  form,  and  their  liability  to  muti- 
 lation and  displacement,  holding  with  some  of  the 
 most  pious  and  respected  commentators  *  that  these 
 are  things  which  the  Holy  Spirit  allowed  theinspired 
 penman  to  '  take  as  he  found  them,'  and  if  we  bring 
 to  bear  upon  them  those  principles  of  criticism  which 
 we  apply  to  other  ancient  documents,  we  may  find 
 in  their  study  much  to  interest  and  enlighten  us. 
 
 The  subject  presents  itself  to  our  consideration 
 in  two  great  divisions.  The  one  reaching  from  the 
 creation  to  the  settlement  of  Jacob's  sons  in  Egypt, 
 the  other  from  the  settlement  in  Egypt  to  the  birth 
 of  Christ. 
 
 First  Division.  Thematter  of  the  first  division 
 is  full  and  complete,  and  remarkably  confirmed  by 
 general  history  and  the  present  state  of  the  world. 
 But  we  notice  in  limine  a  wide  difference  between 
 the  Septuagint  and  the  Hebrew  Bible  in  one  im- 
 portant particular:  viz.,  the  length  of  the  ^enera- 
 tions,i  both  of  the  antediluvian  and  the  postdiluvian 
 patriarchs,  the  Hebrew  text  making  six  of  the  ante- 
 diluvians, and  seven  of  the  postdiluvians,  one  hun- 
 dred years  younger  than  the  Septuagint  at  the  birth 
 of  their  respective  sons,  the  effect  of  which  curtail- 
 ment of  the  generations  is  to  shorten  the  whole 
 time  from  Adam  to  Terah  by  1300  years.  Without 
 entering  upon  the  discussion  of  the  question,  it  may 
 be  stated  that  although  the  reckoning  of  the  Hebrew 
 Bible  is  the  one  adopted  in  our  A.  V.,  the  best 
 modern  authorities  concur  with  Eusebius  and  other 
 Fathers  of  the  Church  in  holding  that  the  Septua- 
 gint expresses  what  was  originally  recorded  by  the 
 inspired  penman,  and  that  the  text  of  the  Hebrew 
 Bible  was  purposely  altered  within  the  first  century 
 after  the  death  of  Christ.  Whatever  other  reasons 
 there  may  be  for  accepting  the  longer  in  preference 
 to  the  shorter  generations,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
 that,  viewed  with  reference  to  the  long  lives  of  the 
 patriarchs,  they  are  the  more  naiura/.  The  longer 
 the  life,  the  longer  would  be  the  period  of  attaining 
 to  maturity,  and  it  would  seem  as  unlikely  for  a 
 man  whose  natural  duration  of  life  was  900  years, 
 to  have  a  son  at  90,  as  for  one  whose  natural  dura- 
 tion of  life  is  80  to  have  a  son  at  8.  If  this 
 principle  holds  good,  the  Septuagint  account  must 
 be  preferred,  especially  in  reference  to  the  post- 
 diluvian patriarchs,  as  the  disproportion  between 
 their  ages  at  begetting  sons,  and  the  length  of  theii 
 lives  is  still  greater,  according  to  the  Hebrew  text, 
 than  in  the  case  of  the  antediluvians.  Viewed  in 
 relation  to  the  usefulness  of  the  study  of  genealogy 
 this  is  an  important  consideration,  for,  if  a  reason- 
 able time  is  fixed  as  the  probable  length  of  a 
 generation,  it  supphes  us  with  a  rough  but  very 
 useful  time-measure  to  settle  on  the  one  hand  the 
 probable  number  of  years  between  one  event  and 
 another,    if  we    know  the  number  of  generations 
 
 *  See  Matthew  Henry  on  I  Chron.  viii.  I  ; 
 Thomas  Scott,  Acts  xiii.  20;  Adam  Clarke,  J 
 Chron.  vii.  6. 
 
 +  See  article  Generation. 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 84 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 Generations  of  the  Patriarchs  according  to 
 Dr.  Hales,  following  the  Septuagint  and 
 Josephus,  but  omitting  the  second  Cainan. 
 
 1487 
 
 B.C. 
 
 5500 
 
 Generations  of  the  Patriarchs  according  to  A.  V, 
 following  the  Hebrew  and  Samaritan  texts. 
 
 2696 
 
 3128 
 
 2657 
 
 2787 
 
 3258 
 
 3026 
 
 3149 
 
 3197 
 
 ~'  3378 
 3433 
 
 987 
 
 687 
 
 874 
 
 1056 
 
 1558 
 
 1658 
 
 2096 
 
 1693 
 
 2158 
 
 1787 
 
 1819 
 
 b 
 P 
 
 1996  2026 
 
 1651 
 
 16,56 
 
 2006  1997 
 
 2083 
 
 2187 
 
 «i83 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 8» 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 between  them,  or  on  the  other,  to  form  a  probable 
 opinion  as  to  the  number  of  generations  if  we  know 
 the  number  of  years. 
 
 The  fact  of  highest  importance  which  the  Bible 
 records  in  reference  to  the  antediluvian  race, 
 besides  the  death  of  Abel,  the  translation  of  Enoch, 
 and  the  inventive  genius  of  the  sons  of  Lamech,  is 
 the  grand  contrast  between  the  families  of  Seth  and 
 of  Cain,  the  one  being  called  children  of  God,  the 
 other  children  of  men  —  a  contrast  which  runs 
 through  the  whole  history  of  man,  and  is  the  great 
 subject  matter  of  divine  revelation.  It  also  gives 
 us  the  account  of  the  moral  degeneracy  of  the  sons 
 of  God  in  consequence  of  the  alliances  which  they 
 formed  with  the  daughters  of  men.  But  we  obtain 
 some  interesting  traditions  respecting  this  time 
 from  Arabian  and  other  sources,  as,  for  instance, 
 that  the  family  of  Seth,  under  the  name  of  Egregori 
 or  Watchers,  inhabited  the  mountainous  regions 
 of  Armenia;  that  Enos,  the  son  of  Seth,  in  whose 
 time  men  began  to  call  themselves  by  the  name  of 
 the  Lord  (Gen.  i.  26,  marg.)  was  a  great  philo- 
 sopher and  astronomer,  and  forbade  the  mixture 
 of  his  race  with  that  of  Cain;  that  Cainan  his 
 grandson  was  a  king,  sage,  and  prophet,  who  fore- 
 told the  flood,  and  left  his  prophecy  written  on 
 tables  of  stone ;  that  Mahaleel,  the  next  in  descent, 
 made  his  children  swear  by  the  blood  of  Abel 
 that  they  would  not  descend  from  their  mountain- 
 ous abode  to  form  alliances  with  the  posterity  of 
 Cain,  who  dwelt  in  the  plains  of  Chusistan  or 
 Susiana,  and  that  about  1070  years  after  the  creation, 
 in  the  days  of  Jared,  and  in  spite  of  his  remon- 
 strances, icx)  Sethites  descended  from  their hiUs,  and 
 by  their  union  with  the  female  Cainites,  became  the 
 fathers  of  that  violent  and  heaven  defying  race* 
 which  was  eventually  swept  away  by  the  deluge. 
 
 We  have  also  various  statements  respecting  this 
 early  time  in  the  fragments  of  Sanchoniathon  and 
 Berosus.  The  former,  whose  writings,  however, 
 are  of  doubtful  authenticity,  tells  us  that  Genos,  the 
 Cain  of  Scripture,  with  Genea  his  wife,  used  in 
 seasons  of  drought  to  raise  their  hands  to  the  sun 
 as  Lord  of  Heaven,  thus  indicating  the  existence 
 among  the  antediluvians  of  that  idolatrous  worship 
 of  the  heavenly  bodies,  the  revival  of  which  not 
 long  after  the  flood  Job  regarded  with  such  abhor- 
 rence (Job.  xxxi.  26).  lie  also  speaks  of  the  cor- 
 ruption of  manners,  the  birth  of  giants,  and  the 
 adoration  of  the  images  of  deceased  heroes,  but 
 takes  no  notice  of  the  deluge.  Berosus,  whose 
 authenticity  is  undoubted,  and  who  drew  the  mate- 
 rials of  his  history  from  archives  preserved  in  the 
 temple  of  Belus,  being  himself  priest  of  Belus  in 
 the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  gives  an  account 
 of  the  creation  and  the  early  ages  of  the  world 
 corresponding  with  that  of  Moses  ;  and  after  enume- 
 rating a  dynasty  which  reigned  in  Babylonia  before 
 the  deluge,  and  which  some  recognise  as  the  race 
 that  sprang  from  the  union  of  the  sons  of  God  with 
 the  daughters  of  men,  tells  of  the  building  of  an 
 enormous  ark  by  the  pious  Xisuthrus,  who,  with  a 
 few  companions,  was  preserved  alive,  while  the  rest 
 of  the  world  perished  in  the  waters.  Berosus,  like 
 Moses,  makes  the  ark  rest  after  the  deluge  on  the 
 mountains  of  Armenia,  from  whence  the  com- 
 panions of  Xisuthrus  descended  again  by  his  direc- 
 
 *  Gigantes  autem,  quid  aliud  fuisse  credendum 
 est,  quam  hominum  quandam  impiajn  gentem  Deos 
 negantes. — Macrobius 
 
 tion  to  Babylonia,  he  himself  being  taken  up  tc 
 dwell  with  the  gods. 
 
 The  lOth  and  nth  chapters  of  Genesis  carry  on 
 the  patriarchal  genealogies  from  the  deluge  to  the 
 call  of  Abraham.  The  first  of  these  chapters,  which 
 the  reader  should  have  before  him  in  studying  this 
 page,  is  called  Toldoth  B'nei  Noach,  a  wonderful 
 historical  record,  which  has  extorted  the  admiration 
 of  all  modem  ethnologists,  who  continually  find  in 
 it  anticipations  of  their  greatest  discoveries. 
 
 1.  For  instance,  in  the  first  generation  of  the 
 sons  of  Japhet,  eldest  son  of  Noah,  the  lapetus  ol 
 Greek  mythology,  we  find  Gomer,  whence  th« 
 Cimmerii,  Cimbri,  and  Cymry  or  Welsh,  whence! 
 also  the  names  Cambria  and  Cumberland ;  and 
 according  to  many  great  authorities  citetl  by  Faber, 
 the  whole  Celtic  race — Magog  the  probable  ances- 
 tor of  the  Moguls — Madai  of  the  Medes — ^Javan  of 
 the  lonians  or  early  Greeks,  as  well  as  of  the 
 Hindu  Yavanas.  In  this  conjunction  of  the  Medes 
 with  the  Cimbri  and  the  Greeks,  we  have  a  suffi- 
 cient indication  of  the  great  discovery  of  Schlegel, 
 expressed  in  the  word  Indo-Etcropean,  regarding 
 the  affinity  of  the  principal  nations  of  Europe  with 
 the  Aryan  or  Indo-Persic  stock.  Tubal  has  been 
 recognised  in  Tobolsk,  Mesheck  in  Muscovy  ant? 
 Moscow,  Tiraz  in  Thrace. 
 
 The  name  of  Ashkenaz,  the  eldest  son  of  Gomer, 
 has  been  traced  in  Sacagena,  or  Sacassena  (a  pro- 
 vince of  Armenia),  whence  perhaps  Saxons — in  the 
 Ascanitici  of  the  Palus  Moeotis  —  in  Axenus,  the 
 ancient  name  of  the  Euxine  —  in  Scandia  or 
 Scandinavia — and  in  Scania,  a  modern  province  of 
 Sweden.  It  may  also  be  observed  that  Germany 
 is  now  called  Ashkenaz  by  the  Rabbis.  Elishah,  the 
 eldest  son  of  Javan,  may  have  given  his  name  to 
 Elis,  a  city  of  the  Peloponnessus,  Tarshish  to  Tarsus 
 of  Cilicia,  or  Tartessus  in  Spain.  The  Kittim,  or 
 Chittim,  were  the  inhabitants  of  the  coasts  of  Greece 
 and  Italy,  the  Dodanim  were  perhaps  the  Dardani. 
 
 2.  Ham  is  the  next  mentioned  son  of  Noah.  It  has 
 been  usual  to  consider  all  his  descendants  as  affected 
 by  the  curse  pronounced  on  his  youngest  son 
 Canaan,  but  neither  the  facts  of  history  nor  the 
 words  of  Scripture  bear  out  this  view.  Cush,  his 
 eldest  son,  settled  in  Ethiopia,  from  whence  his 
 descendants  spread  through  the  south  of  Arabia 
 upwards  to  Chusistan  or  Susiana.  This,  which 
 has  always  been  the  traditional  belief  respecting  the 
 descendants  of  Cush,  has  received  the  fullest  con- 
 firmation from  the  recently  discovered  cuneiform 
 inscriptions,  which  clearly  establish  an  ethnic  con- 
 nection between  the  Ethiopians  or  Cushites,  who 
 adjoined  Egypt,  and  the  primitive  inhabitants  ol 
 Babylonia.  The  names  of  the  sons  of  Cush,  Seba, 
 Havilah,  etc.,  and  of  his  grandsons  Sheba  and 
 Dedan,  may  be  traced  in  Ethiopia,  Arabia,  and 
 Idumea,  and  fall  in  with  the  discovery  that  there 
 are  two  races  of  Arabs,  the  one  Cushite,  which 
 colonised  Arabia  from  Ethiopia,  and  were  known 
 in  after  ages  as  the  Homerites  or  Himyerites,  the 
 other,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  descended  from 
 Shem.  Cush  is  also  believed  to  be  the  progenitor 
 of  the  Goths,  the  Scyths,  and  the  Scots.  Mizraim, 
 or  Mizr,  the  second  son  of  Ham,  was  the  ancestor 
 of  the  Egyptians,  and,  in  the  names  of  his  sons, 
 Ludim,  Anamim,  etc.,  we  recognise  the  inhabitants 
 of  various  parts  of  Egypt  or  the  adjoining  regions 
 of  Africa,  following  a  general  direction  frorn  the 
 Mediterranean  southwards.  Themostrecentopinion 
 respecting  the  descendants  of  Phut  is  that  they  were 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 86 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 the  Budii  of  Herodotus,  a  distinct  Median  tribe  of 
 Scyths,  the  Putiya  of  the  Persian,  and  the  Budu  of 
 the  Babylonian  inscriptions.  Among  the  sons  of 
 Canaan  we  recognize  as  well  the  names  of  places 
 on  the  coast  of  Syria  as  of  the  tribes  with  which 
 the  people  of  Israel  were  brought  into  conflict  after 
 they  entered  the  promised  land,  and  some  of  them 
 appear  to  be  rather  local  designations  than  names 
 of  persons.  The  general  direction  of  these  settle- 
 ments is  from  south  to  north. 
 
 The  only  names  of  men  given  in  the  third  gene- 
 ration of  Ham's  posterity  are  Sheba  and  Dedan, 
 the  sons  of  Raamah,  and  the  object  of  naming 
 them,  according  to  Dr.  Hales,  was  to  introduce 
 Nimrod,  who,  he  doubts  not,  was  the  son  of 
 Sheba,  and  great-grandson  of  Cush,  and  supports 
 his  opinion  by  the  testimony  of  Abulfaragi.  He 
 also  supposes  the  name  Nimrod  (meaning  the 
 rebel),  to  be  a  parody  on  his  true  name  Nin, 
 which  we  recognise  in  Ninus  and  Nineveh,  of 
 •which  he  was  the  builder,  according  to  the  mar- 
 ginal reading  of  Gen.  x.  ii.  He  appears  to  have 
 subdued  in  succession  the  descendants  of  Ar- 
 phaxad,  settled  in  Babylonia,  and  the  descendants 
 of  Asshur,  settled  in  the  country  which  afterwards 
 became  the  centre  of  the  Assyrian  empire.  He  is 
 considered  to  be  the  Orion  of  Greek  mythology, 
 tlie  Belus  of  histoiy,  and  the  Bala  Rama  of  the 
 Hindus.  This  coincides  with  the  viev/  taken  above 
 of  his  descent  from  Raamah. 
 
 We  also  class  with  this  generation  the  Philis- 
 tim,  said  (Gen.  x.  14)  to  have  come  otd  of  the 
 Casluhim.  But  they  are  also  said  to  have  come 
 from  Caphtor  (Amos  ix.  7))  and  are  called  Caph- 
 torim  (Deut.  ii.  23).  Hence  it  has  been  supposed 
 that  there  may  have  been  a  transposition  of  the 
 words  Casluhim  and  Caphtorim  in  Gen.  x.  14. 
 But  there  is  nothing  in  any  of  these  passages  which 
 implies  lineal  descent  either  from  Casluhim  or 
 Caphtorim,  and  if  the  seat  of  the  Casluhim  were, 
 as  is  commonly  supposed,  to  the  east  of  the  Isth- 
 mus of  Suez,  the  Philistim  would  necessarily  pass 
 through  and  '  come  out  of  them,'  in  coming  from 
 Caphtor  into  Palestine.  Hales  tells  us  that  Pales- 
 line  in  the  Sanscrit  is  Pali-sthan,  and  signifies 
 shepherd-land,  and  he  argues  from  Herodotus, 
 Manctho,  and  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hindus, 
 that  the  Philistim  were  a  branch  of  the  Palibothri 
 (the  name  given  by  Pliny  to  the  Paliputras  of  the 
 Hindus),  who  passed  from  India  through  Arabia 
 into  Egypt,  where  they  established  a  dynasty,  and 
 were  called  Hycsos  or  shepherd-kings,  but  were 
 eventually  expelled  a  short  time  before  the  settle- 
 ment of  Jacob's  family  in  Goshen. 
 
 3.  The  sons  of  Shem  are  also  enumerated  in  geo- 
 graphical order,  the  first  named  being  Elam,  who 
 gave  his  name  to  Elymais,  a  district  on  the  Choas- 
 pes  to  the  east  of  the  Tigris,  whose  chief  city, 
 Susa,  was  aftenvards  the  head  of  the  Persian  em- 
 pire. One  of  his  descendants,  Chedorlaomer  (the 
 Kudur  Mabbuk,  ravager  of  the  west,  of  the  re- 
 cently discovered  inscriptions),  conquered  Canaan 
 — Lightfoot  says,  in  reliance  on  the  prophecy  which 
 made  Canaan  the  sei-vant  of  Shem — and  was  him- 
 self conquered  by  Abraham.  Asshur  occupied  the 
 country  which  became  the  nucleus  of  the  Assyrian 
 empire,  and  the  testimony  of  the  inscriptions  con- 
 firms the  reading  of  the  text  (rather  than  the 
 margin)  of  Gen.  x.  11,  that  Lower  Babylonia 
 having  been  the  original  seat  of  Semitic  power,  it 
 spread  northwards   and  westwards,   Asshur  going 
 
 ]  forth  out  of  Shinar  to  build  Nineveh,  Abraham 
 passing _//-(?;«  Ur  l>y  Charran  into  Syria.  Arphaxad 
 occupied  the  plain  of  Shinar  east  and  west  of  the 
 Tigris.  Bochart  recognises  the  name  in  the  Assy- 
 rian district  of  Arrapachitis.  Josephus  says  the 
 Chaldees  were  anciently  called  after  him  Arphaxa- 
 deans  {i  e.,  their  old  name  Chasdiin  is  derived  from 
 the  final  letters  of  Kx^-Bxhshad).*  This  appears 
 more  reasonable  than  to  derive  their  name  from 
 Chesed,  the  ttepheiv  of  Abraham.  Lud  is  supposed 
 to  have  given  his  name  to  Lydia ;  Aram  certainly 
 gave  his  to  the  high  table-land  extending  eastward 
 from  the  Jordan  to  the  Euphrates,  which  was 
 afterwards  the  seat  of  the  kingdom  of  Syria.  His 
 son  Uz  was  the  founder  of  Damascus,  and  Gether 
 is  supposed  to  be  the  father  of  the  Itureans. 
 
 The  nth  chapter  of  Genesis  gives  the  lineal 
 descent  of  the  patriarchs  from  Shem  to  Abraham. 
 In  this  line  the  LXX.  inserts  a  second  Cainan  be- 
 tween Arphaxad  and  Sala.  Here,  however,  the 
 Hebrew  text  is  generally  preferred,  though  that  of 
 the  LXX.  is  adopted  by  St.  Luke.  In  the  days  of 
 Peleg,  fourth  in  descent  from  Shem,  '  the  earth 
 was  divided '  by  that  great  migratory  movement 
 which  took  place  in  consequence  of  the  confusion 
 of  tongues,  and  the  results  of  which  are  given  in 
 the  loth  chapter,  and  it  is  argued,  in  favour  of  the 
 longer  generations  of  the  Septuagint,  that  the  in- 
 habitants of  the  world  could  hardly  have  been 
 numerous  enough  to  require  this  dispersion  so 
 soon  as  1 00  years  after  the  deluge,  and  also  that 
 the  influence  of  Noah  and  Shem,  who,  according 
 to  the  Hebrew  account,  were  both  alive  in  Peleg's 
 days,  must  have  been  sufficient  to  restrain  their 
 posterity  from  that  godless  conduct  which  brought 
 upon  them  the  confusion  of  tongues. 
 
 The  first  thing  to  notice  in  the  genealogical  table, 
 extending  from  Abraham  to  the  sons  of  Jacob,  is 
 the  age  of  Terah  at  Abraham's  birth.  It  is  stated 
 in  Gen.  xi.26  that  'Terah  lived  seventy  years,  and 
 begat  Abram,  Nahor,  and  Haran  ;'  afterwards,  at 
 verse  32,  it  is  said,  'the  days  of  Terah  were  two 
 hundred  and  five  years,  and  Terah  died  in  Haran  ;' 
 and  again  (Gen.  xii.  4),  'and  Abram  w&s  seventy  and 
 five  years  old  when  he  departed  out  of  Haran.' 
 Now  we  collect  from  Acts  vii.  4  that  Abram 
 did  not  leave  Haran  till  after  the  death  of  Terah, 
 when,  had  he  been  bom  when  Terah  was  70,  he 
 must  have  been  135  years  old.  But  this  difficulty 
 disappears  at  once,  if  we  adopt  the  solution  of  it, 
 which  has  been  universally  received  by  the  best 
 commentators  since  it  was  first  pointed  out  by 
 Archbishop  Usher,  viz.,  that  Abraham  was  nut 
 the  eldest,  but  in  all  probability,  as  is  acknow- 
 ledged by  several  of  the  Rabbis,  the  youngest  son 
 of  Terah,  and  born  when  he  was  130  years  old, 
 and  possibly  by  another  wife.  This  is  quite  in 
 accordance  with  the  opinion  of  many  of  the 
 earliest  Rabbinical  and  Christian  expositors  that 
 Sarah  was  the  same  as  Iscah  (the  ^;-fl;z(/-daughter 
 of  the  father  of  Abraham,  Gen.  xx.  12).  Another 
 point  of  interest  is  the  time  of  Jacob's  marriage 
 with  Leah.  If  we  suppose  with  some  that  this 
 marriage  did  not  take  place  till  after  the  expiration 
 of  his  first  seven  years'  servitude,  it  would  be  im- 
 possible for  him  to  have  had  great-grandchildren 
 (Gen.  xlvi.  12,  17)  at  the  time  of  his  going  down 
 into  Egypt.  Hence  those  who  hold  this  opinion 
 have  imagined  that  he  remained  at  Padan-Aram 
 
 *  The  marginal  reading  for  Arphaxad,  Gen.  x.  22. 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 87 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 for  two  periods  of  twenty  years  (see  Adam  Clarke  on 
 Gen.  xxxi.  38).  There  is,  however;  no  sufficient 
 authority  for  this  supposition,  and  we  infer  that  he 
 married  both  Leah  and  Rachel  in  the  first  year  of 
 
 his  residence  at  Padan-Aram,  and  that  his  wives 
 were  given  to  him  in  consideration  of  an   engage- 
 ment to  serve,  not   of  service  done.     This  gives      o««- 
 fifty-three  years*  from  the  time  of  his  marriage  till      |'|  g 
 
 «!> 
 
 Oa" 
 
 2300 
 
 Genealogy  of  Patriarchs,  with  Chronology  of  Principal  Events,  from  birth  of  Terah,  B.C.  2283,  to 
 death  of  Levi,  B.C.  1774,  according  to  the  views  of  Archbishop  Usher  and  Dr.  Hales  respecting 
 
 2283 
 
 the  time  of  the  birth  of  Abraham  and  the  marriage  of  Jacob.      With  the  exception  of  the  date  of 
 
 2283 
 
 Levi's  birth,  given  on  the  authority  of  Abulfaragi,  no  dates  are  inserted  which  may  not  be  deduced 
 
 from  data  contained  in  the  Bible.     The  dates  B.C.  are  those  adopted  by  Dr.  Hales. 
 
 223c 
 
 < 
 
 70   - 
 
 2213 
 
 ,2200 
 
 Pi 
 
 130 
 
 < 
 
 2150 
 
 H      - 
 
 1       ! 
 
 2153 
 
 W 
 
 2143 
 
 < 
 
 2100 
 
 H 
 
 0 
 
 < 
 
 u 
 
 60 
 
 0 
 
 2093 
 
 Abraham  goes 
 
 from  Ur  to  Charran. 
 
 205 
 
 h4 
 
 0 
 
 75 
 
 Charran  to  Canaan. 
 
 hJ 
 
 Pi 
 0 
 
 2078 
 
 207S 
 
 S 
 
 86 
 
 Routs 
 
 2067 
 
 Chedorlaomer;  visits  Melchizedek. 
 
 t3 
 
 2070 
 
 tion 
 
 OfC„^„n 
 
 1 
 
 90 
 
 100 
 
 Oi 
 
 K 
 
 'A 
 
 2054 
 
 2050 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 < 
 
 J 
 
 Sacrifice 
 
 20S3 
 25 
 
 2028 
 
 , of  Isaac. 
 
 •z 
 
 w 
 
 < 
 
 W 
 
 — !_ 
 
 m 
 
 0 
 
 1  " 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 40 
 
 - 
 
 2013  - 
 
 < 
 
 ^ 
 
 2016 
 
 IS 
 
 2000 
 
 0 
 
 w 
 
 K 
 
 U 
 
 < 
 
 Z 
 
 S 
 
 ^ 
 
 <; 
 
 175 
 
 w 
 
 1993! 
 
 <: 
 < 
 
 CJ 
 0 
 
 1993 
 
 < 
 ffl 
 
 Ol 
 
 1  w    1 
 
 <5 
 
 1978 
 
 P3 
 W 
 
 03 
 0 
 U 
 
 hj 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1950 
 
 ' 
 
 t3 
 < 
 CO 
 
 I— 1 
 
 K 
 
 137 
 
 < 
 
 K   < 
 
 Jacob  goes  to  Padanaram  and  marries  Leah  and  Rachel.              I93° 
 
 W 
 
 77 
 
 - 1916 
 
 u  a 
 - 1916  - 
 
 <1  -^ 
 
 ' 
 
 1916 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 1               1               1               1               1          1 
 
 "1     1 
 
 1             1             1 
 
 1900 
 
 « 
 
 0 
 
 191 1 
 
 X 
 
 < 
 3 
 
 < 
 
 H 
 
 Oi 
 
 4 
 sons 
 
 1 
 
 < 
 X 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 ^86^ 
 
 Returns 
 
 to  Sich. 
 to  Heb. 
 
 97 
 104 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 N 
 
 1889 
 
 1 
 
 S5 
 
 1 
 1902 
 
 2 
 
 sons 
 
 1 
 1889 
 
 10 
 
 1895 
 1889 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 sons 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 I  dr. 
 
 •Ues.  into  Egy. 
 
 130 
 
 S 
 
 sons 
 
 1863 
 
 1S50 
 
 sons 
 
 sons 
 
 sons 
 
 > 
 
 2gr. 
 sons 
 
 Q 
 
 son 
 
 sons 
 
 sons 
 
 Q 
 
 2gr. 
 sons 
 
 4 
 sons 
 
 3 
 sons 
 
 147 
 1846 
 
 L. 
 
 w 
 0 
 
 <; 
 
 0 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 0 
 
 w 
 
 <; 
 
 in 
 
 R. 
 
 1— > 
 
 iSoo 
 
 Leah 
 
 1 
 
 L. 
 
 L. 
 
 L. 
 
 Bil. 
 
 B. 
 
 Zil. 
 
 z. 
 
 L. 
 
 L. 
 
 1792 
 
 Rac. 
 
 1774 
 
 1 
 
 *  This  supposes  Judah  to  be  about  47  years  old  when  he 
 came  into  Egypt,  a  supposition  partly  based  on  the  autho- 
 rity of  Abulfaragi,  who  places  Levi's  birth  in  the  Jifth  year 
 of  Jacob's  servitude,  and  consequently  Judah's  not  before 
 the  sixth.  But,  if  we  dispense  with  the  autnority  of  Abul- 
 faragi, we  may  suppose  Judah  to  be  born  in  the  fourth 
 year  of  Jacob's  servitude  (Gen.  xxi.x.  31),  in  which  case  he 
 would  be  49  at  the  descent  into  Egypt,  and  there  would  be 
 two  years  more  for  the  occurrence  of  the  events  above 
 stated.  It  is  necessary  to  direct  attention  to  this  point  on 
 account  of  the  severe  attack  which  Bishop  Colensn  has  just 
 made  on  the  Pentateuch,  and  which  he  has  grounded, 
 among  other  things,  on  the  assumption  that  Judah  was 
 only  42  years  old,  and  that  therefore  Hezron  and  Hamul 
 could  not  possibly  have  been  born,  at  the  time  of  the  de- 
 scent into  Egypt.  This  assumption  is  grounded  by  Bishop 
 Colenso  on   the  supposition  that  Joseph   was  born  in  the 
 
 seventh  year  of  Jacob's  double  marriage  (Critical  Exa- 
 viination,  p.  18),  whereas  the  simplest  mference  from  the 
 passages  to  which  he  refers  is  that  he  was  born  in  hs/our- 
 teenth  year,  as  it  is  there  stated  that  immediatel)'  after 
 Joseph's  birth — 'when  Rachael  had  borne  Joseph'  (Gen. 
 .\,\.\.  25,  26) — Jacob  applied  for  leave  to  return  to  his  own 
 country  as  having  fulfilled  his — '  fourteen  years' '  (Gen.  x.x.xi. 
 41)  —service.  The  sum  of  the  time  from  Jacob's  marriage 
 to  the  descent  into  Egypt  is  thus  made  up  according  to  our 
 theory  : — From  marriage  to  birth  of  Joseph  14  years,  from  Jo- 
 seph's birth  to  his  becoming  Governor  of  Egypt,  30  years  (Gen. 
 xli.  46),  7  years  of  plenty  and  2  years  of  famine,  9  years,  in 
 al'l,  53  years.  Bishop  Colenso  shortens  this  time,  as  we  have 
 seen,  by  7  years,  and  makes  it  46.  Therefore,  ifjudah  was  born 
 in  the  fourth  year  of  Jacob's  marriage,  he  was,  according  to 
 our  theory,  49,  and,  according  to  Bishop  Colensos,  42,  when 
 Hezron  and  Hamul  are  stated  in  Genesis  to  have  been  born. 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 88 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 his  migration  to  Egypt,  and  allows  his  sons,  Judah 
 and  Ashei",  to  have  grandchildren,  but  only  on  the 
 supposition  that  Judah  was  not  more  than  fifteen 
 at  the  birth  of  his  son  Er,  nor  Er  more  than  fifteen 
 at  his  marriage  with  Tamar,  nor  Pharez  more  than 
 fifteen  at  the  birth  of  Hezron  and  Hamul.  Asher 
 and  his  son  Beriah  must  also  have  been  under 
 twenty  at  their  respective  marriages.  It  has  been 
 argued  from  this  that  the  period  of  maturity  could 
 not  have  been  later  in  the  days  of  the  patriarchs 
 than  it  is  at  present.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
 that  a  very  considerable  and  rapid  diminution  in 
 the  length  of  human  life  had  taken  place  by  this 
 time,  and  this  may  have  been  accompanied  by  a 
 corresponding  change  in  the  period  of  maturity. 
 The  total  number  of  Jacob's  issue  that  came  with 
 him  into  Egypt  was  sixty-six,  add  to  this  four,  for 
 himself  and  Joseph  and  his  two  sons,  and  we  have 
 seventy  (Gen.  xlvi.  27),  add  to  it  nine  for  the  sur- 
 viving wives  of  himself,  and  the  eleven  sons  that 
 accompanied  him,  and  we  have  seventy-five  (Acts 
 vii.  14)  for  the  whole  number  that  went  into 
 Egypt. 
 
 We  must  now  glance  at  the  great  offshoots  from 
 the  patriarchal  line.  I.  The  western  and  southern 
 regions  of  Arabia  were  colonized  by  the  thirteen  sons 
 ofJoktan(Gen.  x.  26).  Ofthis  there  is  ample  evidence 
 both  in  the  traditions  of  the  Arabians  themselves 
 and  in  the  names  of  places  in  their  country.  Uzal 
 and  Sheba  were  two  of  Joktan's  sons,  Azal  and 
 Sheba  were  the  ancient  names  of  Sana  and  Mareb, 
 the  two  chief  cities  of  Yemen.  In  another  of  its 
 cities,  Zafari,  or  possibly  in  Dhafar,  on  the  south- 
 west of  Arabia,  we  recognize  Sephar,  one  of  their 
 boundaries.  According  to  the  sacred  historian— 
 '  their  dwelling  was  from  Mesha  as  thou  goest  unto 
 ,  jephar,  a  mount  of  the  East'  (Gen.  x.  30).  The 
 position  of  Mesha  has  not  been  settled,  though 
 some  have  thought  it  to  be  Mecca.  Sheba  was 
 probably  the  ancestor  of  the  rulers  of  the  kingdom 
 of  Sheba  (the  modern  Yemen),  whose  queen  came 
 to  hear  the  wisdom  of  Solomon.  Hazarmaveth, 
 Joktan's  third  son,  gave  his  name  to  the  province  of 
 Hadramaut,  and  the  district  of  Khawlan  in  the 
 Yemen  preserves  an  evident  trace  of  Havilah,  his 
 twelfth.  His  eldest  son,  Almodad,  must  have  been 
 the  original  of  the  Mudads  of  the  Arabian  genealo- 
 gists, one  of  them  being  reputed  seventh,  and  the 
 other  ninth  in  descent  from  Joktan. 
 
 2.  A  daughter  of  this  second  Mudad  is  said  by  the 
 Aral;s  to  have  been  the  wife  of  Ishmael,  and  there 
 is  evei7  reason  to  believe  that  the  Egyptian  given 
 to  him  by  his  mother  Hagar  was  not  his  only  wife, 
 for  his  daughter  Mahalath,  who  became  the  wife  of 
 Esau,  is  called  the  sister  of  Nebaioth,  Gen.  xxviii.  9, 
 which  seems  to  intimate  that  his  other  sons  were  by 
 a  different  mother.  Thus  a  matrimonial  connection 
 between  the  first  and  second,  as  well  as  between  the 
 second  and  third  offshoot  from  the  patriarchal  line 
 is  not  improbable.  The  Nabatheans  who  at  one 
 time  occupied  the  country  about  Petrawere  probably 
 descended  from  Nebaioth,  as  their  neighbours  the 
 Cedrcans  were  from  Kedar.  His  twelve  sons  (Gen. 
 XXV.  13)  'dwelt  from  Havilah  unto  Shur,  which  is 
 before  Egypt,  as  those  goest  toward  Syria,'  i.  e., 
 across  the  Arabian  desert  from  the  north  shore  of 
 the  Persian  Gulf  (Havilah)  to  the  north  point  of  the 
 Gulf  of  Akaba  (Shur).  The  descendants  of  two  of 
 them,  Jetur  and  Naphish,  occupied  that  part  of  the 
 desert  bordering  on  the  Jordan,  and  were  in  the 
 course  of  time  defeated  with  great  slaughter  and  dis- 
 
 possessed by  the  tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half 
 Manasseh  (i  Chron.  v.  18). 
 
 The  sons  of  Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  2)  by  Abraham 
 were  sent  by  their  father  with  gifts  '  eastward  into 
 the  east  country.'  In  a  desert  600  miles  across  there 
 was  room  both  for  them  and  the  children  of  Ishmael, 
 and  there,  like  the  children  of  Ishmael,  they  led 
 the  half-warrior  half-shepherd  life  which  has  ever 
 characterised  the  sons  of  the  desert.  Zimram,  the 
 eldest,  may  perhaps  be  recognised  as  the  ancestor 
 of  theZamaremians  of  Pliny.  Jokshan,  the  second, 
 had  two  sons,  Dedan  and  Sheba,  the  same  names 
 as  the  sons  of  Raamah.  It  has  already  been  stated 
 as  probable  that  Nimrod  was  the  grandson  of 
 Raamah,  and  there  is  evidence  of  a  migration  of 
 Cushites  about  his  time  from  Ethiopia  to  the 
 neighbourhood  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  There  are 
 also  indications  of  the  names  Dedan  and  Sheba 
 both  in  the  Persian  Gulf  and  in  the  neighbourhood 
 of  Idumea,  whence  it  has  been  conjectured  that 
 Jokshan,  the  son  of  Keturah,  when  he  went  '  east- 
 ward into  the  east  country'  may  have  intermarried 
 with  a  daughter  or  descendant  of  Dedan,  the  son 
 of  Raamah,  thus  the  recurrence  of  the  names  Dedan 
 and  Sheba  would  be  accounted  for  as  well  as  the 
 existence  of  places  called  by  these  names  both  on 
 the  borders  of  Idumea  and  in  the  Persian  Gulf. 
 The  sons  of  Dedan  are  said  to  have  been  Ashurim, 
 Letushim,  Leummim,  which  Onkelos  interprets  as 
 persons  dwelling  in  camps,  tents,  or  islands,  and  it 
 may  be  noticed  in  connection  with  this,  that  the 
 traces  of  the  names  Sheba  and  Dedan  are  to  be 
 found  in  two  islands  of  the  Persian  Gulf. 
 
 3.  We  pass  on  to  the  family  of  Esau,  the  third  off- 
 shoot from  the  patriarchal  line.  While  Abraham 
 and  Isaac  were  wanderers  in  the  land  of  Canaan, 
 the  descendants  of  Seir  were  occupying  the  heights 
 and  cultivating  the  fertile  glens  and  terraces  of 
 Mount  Seir,  a  lofty  highland  that  stretched  away 
 to  the  east  from  the  side  of  the  valley  of  Akaba. 
 This  chief  and  his  people  were  called  Horites  from 
 their  dwelling  in  caves,  and  one  of  his  descendants, 
 Aholibamah,  became  a  wife  of  Esau.  By  another 
 wife,  Adah,  the  daughter  of  Elon  the  Hittite, 
 Esau  had  a  son,  Eliphaz,  who  afterwards  became 
 the  father  of  Amalek  by  Timna,  the  daughter  of 
 Seir.  It  is  a  singular  thing  that  the  son  should 
 have  taken  Seir's  daughter  for  his  concubine 
 (Gen.  xxxvi.  12),  when  the  father  had  married  his 
 great-granddaughter  (ver.  2);  but  it  may  probably  be 
 accounted  for  by  the  long  lives  of  men  at  that  time. 
 And  Timna,  who  is  called  the  sister  of  Lotan, 
 and  was  therefore  probably  not  by  the  same  mother 
 as  Seir's  other  sons,  may  have  been  the  daughter 
 of  his  old  age,  while  the  grandfather  of  Aholibamah 
 was  the  child  of  his  youth.  One  of  the  sons  of 
 Eliphaz,  by  another  wife,  was  Teman,  whence  we 
 may  infer  that  Eliphaz  the  Temanite  was  his  de- 
 scendant. The  seven  sons  of  Seir,  the  Horite,  are 
 called  '  dukes'  in  our  translation.  Each  probably 
 dwelt  in  some  mountain  fastness,  and  was  the  chief 
 or  shiekh  of  a  particular  tribe ;  and  we  see  how 
 completely  the  old  Horite  power  was  displaced  by 
 that  of  Esau,  in  the  fact  that  seven  of  Esau's 
 sons  and  six  of  his  grandsons  (nine  of  them 
 sprung  from  females  of  Seir's  house)  had  this 
 title  when  it  was  no  longer  borne  by  Seir's  male 
 descendants.  This  is  technically  called  the  first 
 aristocracy  of  dukes,  and  is  followed  in  the  Bible 
 by  a  list  of  eight  elective  kings,  who  are  said 
 to  have  reigned  in  Edom  '  before  there  was  any 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 89 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 king  in  Israel.'  If  this  enumeration  of  kings  is  in 
 its  right  place,  the  king  of  Israel  at  whom  the 
 statement  points  must  have  been  Moses,  and  the 
 whole  dynasty  must  have  come  to  an  end  before 
 the  Exodus.  Some  are,  however,  of  opinion  that 
 this  passage  was  not  originally  in  Genesis,  but  was 
 copied  into  it  from  Chronicles.  After  the  list  of 
 kings  there  follows  another  list  of  dukes,  apparently 
 descended  from  the  former  ones,  as  there  is  a  re- 
 currence of  three  of  the  names  of  the  earlier  family. 
 This  has  been  called  the  second  aristocracy  of 
 dukes,  and  is  supposed  to  have  succeeded  the  kings 
 in  order  of  time.  The  better  opinion,  however, 
 seems  to  be  that  the  dukes  or  heads  of  tribes  were 
 contemporaneous  with  the  kings  or  paramount 
 chiefs  of  the  collective  body. 
 
 Second  Division.  Up  to  the  settlement  of  the 
 Israelites  in  Egypt  under  Joseph,  the  genealogical 
 records  of  their  ancestry,  and  of  mankind  in  gene- 
 ral, are  very  complete.  The  descent  from  father 
 to  son  is  fully  given,  and  the  chronology  of  the 
 several  descents,  if  not  minutelystated,  may  be  easily 
 inferred.  But  at  the  settlement  in  Egypt  there  is  a 
 great  break  in  the  continuity  of  these  records,  a  cir- 
 cumstance not  unlikely  to  occur  among  a  people 
 who  so  soon  fell  into  a  state  of  oppression  and  servi- 
 tude, and  continued  in  it  so  long. 
 
 We  are  not,  however,  to  suppose,  because  these 
 records  are  not  inserted  in  the  sacred  volume,  tliat 
 the  knowledge  of  their  descent  was  not  committed 
 to  memory  or  to  writing,  and  transmitted  either 
 orally  or  in  written  documents  from  father  to  son 
 in  their  respective  tribes  and  families,  both  during 
 their  servitude  in  Egypt  and  during  the  heroic 
 period  of  their  history  after  they  had  settled  in 
 Canaan.  Indeed  we  may  imagine  such  details  to 
 have  formed  the  chief  subject-matter  of  their  tradi- 
 tional knowledge.  And  we  have  an  interesting 
 example  of  the  careful  maintenance  of  such  genea- 
 logical records  in  modem  times  among  the  New 
 Zealanders,  whose  chiefs  to  this  day  can  each  trace 
 their  descent  to  the  commander  of  one  of  the 
 canoes  which  brought  their  ancestors  from  Hawaiki 
 about  400  years  ago,  and  who  in  the  social  system, 
 and  in  the  geographical  distribution  of  their  tribes, 
 bear  a  considerable  resemblance  to  the  condition  of 
 the  children  of  Israel  after  their  settlement  in 
 Canaan.  But  interesting  as  these  documents  would 
 be  to  the  several  tribes  and  famihes  of  Israel,  and 
 important  as  they  would  be  for  civil  use,  as  registers 
 of  rights  of  inheritance,  they  would,  except  in  the 
 particular  instance  of  the  genealogy  of  the  Messiah, 
 have  little  bearing  on  that  great  scheme  for  the 
 regeneration  and  salvation  of  mankind  which  is 
 revealed  to  us  in  the  Bible. 
 
 The  first  instance,  indeed,  of  anything  like  a 
 genealogical  sketch  of  the  whole  people  is  that 
 which  occurs  in  the  first  chapters  of  the  Book  of 
 Chronicles,  and  it  has  every  appearance  of  being 
 a  collection  of  fragments  more  or  less  perfect, 
 gathered  together  from  a  great  variety  of  different 
 sources,   public  and  private,*  portions  of  records 
 
 *  The  several  numberings  of  the  people,  two  of 
 which  were  made  in  the  wilderness  and  one  by 
 David,  would  give  an  opportunity  for  recording  the 
 genealogies  of  the  chief  houses  (determined  either 
 by  primogeniture  or  by  descent  from  some  '  mighty 
 man  of  valour'),  as  well  as  the  number  of  the  whole 
 people.  Besides,  we  read  of  '  the  book  of  Iddo 
 the  seer  concerning  genealogies'  (2  Chron.  xii.  15), 
 
 easily  intelligible  perhaps  at  the  tmie  when  they 
 were  written,  and  when  tire  names  which  they 
 recorded  were  household  words  in  the  mouths  of 
 their  contemporaries,  but  now,  and  probably  also  at 
 the  time  when  they  were  collected,  presenting  the 
 appearance  of  a  mass  of  fossil  remains,  which  it  has 
 baffled  the  skill  of  the  ablest  genealogical  analysts, 
 from  the  earliest  times,  to  arrange  in  perfect  form. 
 
 Nor  is  it  very  surprising  that  this  should  be  the 
 case  when  we  consider  the  time  and  circumstances 
 under  whicli  this  collection  was  made.  The  com- 
 plete dissolution  of  the  whole  social  system  which 
 had  taken  place  in  the  kingdoms  of  Judah  and 
 Israel  at  the  time  of  their  respective  captivities,  the 
 national  ruin  which  had  preceded  them,  and  the 
 evident  design  of  their  conquerors  utterly  to  destroy 
 and  blot  out  their  nationality  (a  design  attended 
 with  such  complete  success  in  the  case  of  the  king- 
 dom of  Israel),  makes  it  surprising  that  even  these 
 fragments  of  tribal  history  should  have  reniained, 
 while  their  collection  and  embodiment  in  a  portion 
 of  sacred  history  immediately  after  the  return  of 
 the  Jews  from  their  captivity,  indicates  the  high 
 importance  which  was  attached  to  them,  as  testify- 
 ing their  connection  with  the  patriarchs,  and  was 
 probably  the  beginning  of  that  perfect  system  of 
 genealogical  registration  which,  according  to  the 
 testimony  of  Josephus,  prevailed  at  the  time  of  our 
 Lord's  nativity.  In  this  collection  we  find  here  a 
 pedigree  of  seven  or  eight  individuals  without  any 
 visible  connection  with  the  ancestors  of  their  tribe, 
 there  a  few  great  names  designated  as  the  heads  or 
 chiefs  of  their  respective  houses,  in  some  instances 
 individuals  named  as  the  fathers,  not  of  men  and 
 families,  but  of  towns  and  districts,  and  veiy  plainly 
 suggesting  the  inference  that  enrolment  in  the 
 sacred  genealogy  did  not  in  all  cases  involve  a  blood 
 relationship  between  the  individual  named  and  the 
 ancestor  of  the  house  among  whose  members  he 
 was  classed.  Thus  a  resemblance  is  established 
 between  Bible  genealogy  and  the  principle  which 
 prevails  among  the  Highland  clans  and  in  the  New 
 Zealand  Hapus.  Many,  it  is  well  known,  use  the 
 name,  and  are  reckoned  in  the  clan  of  the  High- 
 land chief,  who  are  not  actually  descended  from  his 
 stock,  so  in  New  Zealand  the  captives  taken  in  war 
 enter  as  slaves  into  the  victorious  tribe,  and  are  in- 
 corporated with  it  ;  nor  can  it  be  doubted  that 
 many  English  names  are  more  widely  spread  than 
 they  would  be  had  not  nameless  retainers  assumed 
 in  early  times  the  names  of  the  lords  of  whom  they 
 held.  And,  besides  all  this,  there  are  evident  mis- 
 takes and  inconsistencies, — mistakes  and  inconsis- 
 tencies which  a  very  little  more  knowledge  of  facts 
 and  of  the  style  and  manner  of  the  genealogist 
 might  enable  us  to  rectify  and  reconcile,  but  which 
 leave  the  modern  commentator  in  a  state  of  hope- 
 less uncertainty. 
 
 We  shall  not,  then,  attempt  to  set  forth  the  con- 
 tents of  the  various  genealogies  to  be  found  in  the 
 book  of  Chronicles  and  other  parts  of  the  O.  T.  ,* 
 but  merely  give  some  instances  in  illustration  of 
 
 and  there  is  a  reference  in  i  Chron.  v.  7  and  1 7  to 
 a  reckoning  by  genealogies  which  was  made  in  the 
 reigns  of  Jeroboam  II.  and  Jotham,  kings  of  Israel, 
 and  which  were  probably  something  similar  to  our 
 heralds'  visitations  of  the  i6th  and  17th  centuries. 
 
 *  An  interesting  display  of  Bible  pedigrees  may 
 be  seen  in  Anderson's  Royal  Genealogies,  and  the 
 subject  is  minutely  and  elaborately  treated  in  Bar 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 90 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 the  foregoing  general  views,  and  of  the  use  which, 
 notwithstanding  their  imperfect  state,  may  be  made 
 of  these  records. 
 
 We  have  an  instance  of  the  way  in  which  men  of 
 one  tribe  might  be  reckoned  as  belonging  to 
 another,  in  consequence  of  a  possession  or  inheri- 
 tance coming  to  tliem  within  the  district  of  that 
 other,  in  the  case  of  Jair,  the  grandson  of  Hez- 
 ron,  the  head  of  one  great  branch  of  the  tribe  of 
 Judah.  His  grandfather  had  married  a  daughter 
 of  Machir,  the  grandson  of  Manasseh  ;  and  Jair 
 had  assisted  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  in  their  conquest 
 of  Gilead  on  the  east  side  of  Jordan  before  the  en- 
 trance of  the  great  body  of  the  Israehtes  into  the 
 Promised  Land.  He  consequently  obtained  as  his 
 possession  the  towns  which  he  had  conquered,  and 
 which  he  called  Havoth-Jair,  and  was  reckoned  as 
 of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  and  was  called  the  son  of 
 Manasseh  (Num.  xxxii.  40 ;  Deut.  iii.  14),  though 
 by  paternal  descent  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  That 
 of  which  we  here  see  a  special  instance  may  very 
 well  have  happened  in  many  other  cases,  and  pro- 
 bably did  happen  in  the  case  of  Caleb,  the  son  of 
 Jephunneh,  otherwise  called  the  Kenezite.  We 
 read  that  Joshua  appointed  him  an  inheritance  in 
 tlie  tribe  of  Judah  :  from  this  expression  it  is  rea- 
 sonable to  infer  that  he  did  not  actually  belong  to 
 the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  we  are  confirmed  in  this 
 opinion  by  noticing  that,  in  the  pedigree  of  the 
 tribe  of  Judah,  where  the  name  of  Caleb  frequently 
 occurs,  there  is  no  statement  which  distinctly  con- 
 nects Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh  by  paternal 
 descent  with  that  tribe,  no  mention  of  Kenaz 
 his  grandfather,  or  of  Jephunneh  his  father,  as  so 
 connected.  A  very  probable  inference  is,  that 
 Caleb  was  not  by  birth  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  or  of 
 any  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  at  all,  but  one  of  those 
 men  of  Esauite  or  Ishmaelite  descent  who  mar- 
 ried Israelitish  women  (as  Ithra  the  Ishmaelite, 
 who  married  Abigail  the  sister  of  David  ;  and 
 Jarha  the  Egyptian,  who  married  the  daughter  of 
 Sheshan,  i  Chron.  ii.  17-35),  and  so  became  incor- 
 porated with  the  tribe  of  their  wives.  Here,  then, 
 would  be  a  source  of  ambiguity  in  consequence  of 
 the  double  genealogy  of  such  persons — the  one  con- 
 necting them  with  their  paternal  ancestiy,  the  other 
 
 rington's  genealogical  tables.  There  is  also  a 
 small  edition  of  the  Bible,  Prayer-book,  Psalter, 
 etc.,  printed  at  Edinburgh  in  1636,  containing  a 
 curious  and  interesting  set  of  tables  of  '  The  genea- 
 logies recorded  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures  according 
 to  every  tribe  and  family.' 
 
 A  learned  and  valuable  collection  of  genealogies 
 illustrative  of  sacred  history  and  prophecy,  by  the 
 Rev.  Fred.  Martin,  M.A.,  rector  of  South  Somer- 
 cotes  and  prebendary  of  Lincoln,  has  been  printed 
 at  the  University  press,  Cambridge,  1855.  The 
 first  four  tables  contain  genealogies  taken  from  tlie 
 Bible,  and  exliibit  continuously — '  I.  Adam,  Noah, 
 Terah  ;  II.  Abraham,  Job,  Rutli,  and  Judges  ; 
 III.  The  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  (including  our 
 Lord's  descent  according  to  the  flesh),  with  the 
 contemporary  prophets,  and  Tobit,  Damascus, 
 Tyre  ;  IV.  The  high-priests  till  the  Maccabees, 
 with  Asaph,  Heman,  and  Ethan  or  Jeduthun.' 
 The  other  five  tables  give  from  general  sources  the 
 genealogies  of  the  ruling  families  of  various  coun- 
 tries connected  with  Bible  history.  The  work  also 
 contains  tables  of  parallel  years,  and  other  useful 
 and  interesting  matter. 
 
 classifying  them  with  the  tribe  to  which  they  had 
 become  affiliated,  and  with  which  they  might  be 
 really  connected  by  marriage  or  maternal  descent. 
 There  would  be  no  doubt  about  the  matter  if  the 
 fact  of  such  marriage  or  maternal  connection  were 
 stated ;  but  where  grandsons  or  great-grandsons  are 
 recorded  as  sons,  and  mothers'  names  omitted, 
 there  is  no  security  against  mistake. 
 
 Another  source  of  uncertainty  is  the  manifest 
 corruption  of  the  text,  and  dislocation  of  the  order 
 of  the  genealogies.  A  most  remarkable  instance 
 of  this  is  to  be  seen  in  I  Chron.  vi.  That  chapter 
 contains  several  pedigrees  of  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
 but  on  examination  it  becomes  perfectly  evident 
 that  the  longest  of  these  (ver.  33-38),  is  made  up 
 of  two  of  tlie  others  (ver.  22-28),  and  yet  contains 
 particulars  which  are  not  to  be  found  in  either  of 
 them.  Here,  then,  is  room  and  necessity  for  the 
 exercise  of  criticism,  and  such  criticism  has  been 
 exercised  with  great  ingenuity  by  Lord  Arthur 
 Hervey,  to  whose  labours  we  are  indebted  for  a 
 great  deal  of  light  on  this  difficult  subject.  We 
 cannot  better  shew  the  use  that,  can  be  made  of 
 the  kindred  studies  of  chronology  and  genealogy 
 for  clearing  doubtful  points  of  history,  than  by 
 laying  before  our  readers  one  or  two  of  his  valu- 
 able and  instructive  suggestions. 
 
 One  of  the  great  difficulties  which  beset  this 
 subject  is  the  apparent  contradiction  between  St. 
 Paul's  assertion  (Acts  xiii.  20) — after  that  he 
 gave  them  judges  for  the  space  of  450  years — and 
 the  small  number  of  generations  recorded  as  oc- 
 curring in  the  family  of  David  during  this  long 
 period  of  time.  Nahshon  was  '  the  Prince  of 
 Judah'  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus,  and  between 
 him  and  David  there  intervene  but  four  genera- 
 tions, those  of  Salmon,  Boaz,  Obed,  and  Jesse. 
 This,  which  would  give  from  100  to  120  years  to 
 each  generation,  is  impossible.  Hence  some  have 
 thought  that  several  names  have  dropped  out  in 
 the  list  of  David's  ancestors  between  Salmon  and 
 Boaz.  But  the  genealogy  is  given  in  four  places 
 without  variation  in  the  names,  and  St.  Matthew 
 says  particularly  Salmon  begat  Boaz  of  Rachab. 
 Moreover,  this  genealogy  of  David  is  not  the  only 
 one  by  which  we  may  judge  of  the  time  that 
 elapsed  between  the  Exodus  and  Samuel.  We 
 have  the  genealogies  of  seven  of  David's  contem- 
 poraries traced  up  to  Jacob,  and  the  number  of 
 generations  in  the  longest  of  them  only  exceeds 
 the  number  in  David's  line  by  four.  Thus,  from 
 Jacob  to  David  there  are  1 1  generations,  to  Zadoc 
 14,  to  Heman  14,  to  Ahimoth  15,  to  Asaph 
 (leaving  out  one  name,  which  seems  inserted  by 
 mistake)  15,  to  Ethan  14,  and,  as  nearly  as  can 
 be  calculated,  to  Abiathar  14,  and  to  Jonathan 
 II.  All  this  seems  to  indicate  that  we  have  no 
 reason  to  suspect  the  loss  of  any  links  in  David's 
 pedigree,  especially  considering  that  David,  Obed, 
 and  Pharez  were  each  born  in  the  old  age  of  their 
 respective  fathers. 
 
 Everything,  therefore,  points  to  a  curtailment  of 
 the  time  allotted  to  the  rule  of  the  Judges.  The 
 period  of  450  years  named  by  St.  Paul  is  nowhere 
 given  in  so  many  words  in  the  O.  T.,  but  it  is 
 made  up  of  the  several  periods  of  sei"vitude  and 
 rest  wliicli  are  enumerated  in  the  book  of  Judges 
 and  the  beginning  of  the  1st  book  of  Samuel.  It 
 is  also  supported  by  Jephtha's  statement  to  the 
 King  of  Ammon,  that  the  Israelites  had  been  in 
 possession  of  certain  towns  and  cities  in  Heshboa 
 
GENEALOGY 
 
 91 
 
 GENEALOGY 
 
 and  Aroer,  and  along  the  coast  of  Arnon,  '  three 
 hundred  years'  (Judg.  xi.  26).  Now,  not  to 
 speak  of  the  frequent  substitutions  of  one  number 
 for  another  in  the  Masoretic  text,  from  the  great 
 similarity  of  the  letters  by  which  the  numerals 
 are  expressed  (Kennicott),  it  is  impossible  to  doubt 
 that  many  of  the  events  which  are  recorded  one 
 after  another  in  the  book  of  Judges  occurred 
 simultaneously  in  different  parts  of  the  land,  and 
 the  3CK)  years  of  Jephtha  are  logically  and  gram- 
 matically inappropriate  to  the  connection  in  which 
 they  stand,  while  the  sense  would  be  rendered 
 clear  and  consistent  with  history  by  reading  300 
 cities.  This  reading,  then,  is  adopted,  and  en- 
 ables us  to  place  Jephtha  where  the  general  course 
 of  the  sacred  narrative  would  make  him  stand. 
 In  Judg.  xi.  I  it  is  said  Gilead  begat  Jephtha. 
 This  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  supposition  that 
 he  may  have  been  the  grandson  of  Gilead  ;  but  it 
 is  irreconcileable  with  the  view  that  he  was  a 
 much  more  remote  descendant,  when  we  consider 
 that  his  immediate  predecessor  in  the  Judgeship 
 was  Jair  of  Havoth  Jair,  who  was  the  grandson  of 
 Gilead's  sister.  We  find  a  further  genealogical 
 argument  for  giving  a  shorter  time  to  the  book  of 
 Judges,  and  for  supposing  the  order  of  its  narra- 
 tive to  have  been  disturbed,  in  the  facts  that  the 
 Levite  who  acted  the  part  of  priest  first  to  Micah 
 and  then  to  Dan,  was  the  grandson  of  Moses  (the 
 correct  reading,  and  not  Manasseh,  Judg.  xviii.  30. 
 See  Adam  Clarke's  commentary  and  Lord  A. 
 Hervey  on  the  Genealogies,  pp.  234,  257)  ;  that 
 Phineas  the  son  of  Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron,  was 
 a  sharer  in  the  transactions  recorded  in  the  20th 
 chapter,  and  that  no  high-priest  is  mentioned  dur- 
 ing the  whole  of  the  time  from  the  entrance  into 
 Canaan  till  the  birth  of  Samuel,  except  Eleazar, 
 Phineas,  and  Eli.  If  we  are  led  by  these  and 
 other  considerations  to  shorten  the  period  assigned 
 to  the  Judges  by  about  200  years,  reading  2S0  in- 
 stead of  480  years  in  i  Kings  vi.  i,  and  assenting 
 to  the  testimony  of  the  MSS.  which  omit  St. 
 Paul's  statement.  Acts  xiii.  21  (Wordsworth), 
 we  not  only  make  Scripture  consistent  v/ith  itself, 
 but  clear  away  some  of  the  difficulties  which  em- 
 barras  its  relations  with  profane  history  (Sir  Gard- 
 ner Wilkinson,  Manners  and  Customs  of  Egyp- 
 tians;  Dr.  Lepsius,  Letters  from  Egypt). 
 
 The  genealogy  of  Joshua  given  in  i  Chron.  vii. 
 2C  represents  Ephraim  with  only  one  of  the  three 
 sons  who  are  assigned  to  him  in  Numbers — Shuthe- 
 lah.  From  him  descends  a  single  line  of  six  indi- 
 viduals, terminating  in  another  Shuthelah,  with 
 whom  are  named  Ezra  and  Elead,  who  may  be 
 ei;her  his  sons  or  brothers,  more  probably  the 
 Litter.  The  historian  then  states  that  one  or 
 both  of  these  was  slain  by  the  men  of  Gath, 
 '  because  they  came  down  to  take  away  their 
 cattle,'  indicating  at  first  sight  a  hostile  foray 
 on  the  men  of  Gath  by  the  posterity  of  Eph- 
 raim, in  which  the  Ephraimites  were  repulsed 
 and  put  to  death.  He  then  goes  on  to  say  that 
 after  this  event  the  brethren  of  Ephraim  came 
 to  condole  with  him  in  his  sorrow,  and  that  in  pro- 
 cess of  time  he  had  another  son,  Beriah,  from 
 whom  sprung  a  second  line  of  eight  descendants — 
 nine,  reckoning  Beriah — terminating  in  the  great 
 hero,  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun.  Here  is  a  strange 
 tissue  of  anachronisms  and  incongruities.  The 
 Jewish  commentators  say  that  the  Ephraimites, 
 reckoning  the  time  appointed  for  their  occupation 
 
 of  Canaan  from  the  sacrifice  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xv. 
 10),  not  from  the  birth  of  Isaac,  went  out  of  Egypt 
 in  a  body  of  two  hundred  thousand  men,  under  the 
 conduct  of  their  leaders,  30  years  before  the  right 
 time,  and  that  after  their  slaughter  by  the  Philis- 
 tines of  Gath,  Ephraim  had  a  son  whom  he  called 
 Beriah  ( =  in  einl),  because  he  was  born  in  the 
 time  in  which  this  evil  happened  to  his  house.  But 
 they  say  nothing  of  the  incongruity  of  Ephraim, 
 having  a  son  after  the  death  of  his  descendant  in 
 the  seventh  or  eighth  generation,  or  of  the  still 
 greater  incongruity  of  making  Joshua  descend  by 
 a  line  of  eight  generations  from  an  ancestor  born 
 30  years  before  the  Exodus.  Indeed,  it  must  be 
 considered  that  the  record,  as  an  exact  enumera- 
 tion of  descents,  is  utterly  valueless. 
 
 On  this  assumption,  which  is  obviously  correct, 
 Lord  A.  Hervey  has  approached  the  text  with  a 
 bold  and  skilful  hand.  The  first  two  descendants 
 of  Shuthelah's  line,  Bered  and  Tahath,  he  makes 
 sons  of  Ephraim,  corresponding  and  identical  with 
 the  Becher  and  Tahan  of  Numbers,  instead  of 
 being  his  grandson  and  great-grandson.  He  then 
 sliews  that  the  name  of  the  great-great-grandfathei 
 of  Joshua,  as  given  in  Chronicles  (Laadan),  bears, 
 when  written  in  the  Hebrew  character,  so  strong 
 a  resemblance  to  that  of  Ephraim's  grandson  by 
 Shuthelah  as  given  in  Numbers  (Eran),  that  the 
 names  may  be  considered  identical  with  one 
 another,  while  they  are  also  nearly  identical  as 
 written  in  Hebrew  with  Eladah  (who  appears  as 
 Shuthelah's  son  in  Chronicles,  when  Bered  and 
 Tahath  are  made,  as  above,  sons  of  Ephraim),  and 
 with  Elead  the  hero,  slain  by  the  men  of  Gath. 
 He  makes  the  two  Shuthelah's  of  the  first  line  of 
 descent  from  Ephraim,  and  the  Telah  of  the 
 second,  stand  for  one  and  the  same  individual, 
 Ephraim's  eldest  son,  according  both  to  Numbers 
 and  to  Chronicles,  while  Eran,  Shuthelah's  son, 
 according  to  Numbers,  is  the  Eladah,  the  Elead, 
 and  Laadan  of  Chronicles,  and  consequently  at  one 
 and  the  same  time  the  great-great-grandfather  of 
 Joshua,  the  grandson  of  Ephraim,  and  the  indivi- 
 dual after  whose  death  by  the  hands  of  the  men  of 
 Gath,  Ephraim  had  another  son  whom  in  memory 
 of  the  event  he  named  Beriah.  On  a  remark  by 
 Dr.  Lepsius,  that  the  march  of  the  men  of  Ephraim 
 to  Gath  could  not  have  been  f-om  Egypt,  since 
 they  went  down,  he  grounds  the  important  sugges- 
 tion, which  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  text^  that 
 the  attack  was  made,  not  upon,  but  by  the  men  of 
 Gath,  who  came  down  from  Palestine  to  Egypt  to 
 steal  the  cattle  of  the  Ephraimites  as  they  fed 
 their  flocks  in  Goshen.  This  would  account  for 
 the  terror  felt  for  the  Philistines  by  the  people  of 
 Israel  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus,  their  long 
 circuitous  journey  to  avoid  them,  and  the  dismay 
 which  was  spread  by  the  unfavourable  report  of 
 the  spies.  Thus,  by  the  aid  of  some  very  reason- 
 able conjectures,  a  little  displacement  of  names, 
 and  a  few  bold  alterations  of  a  text  manifestly 
 corrupt,  he  brings  out  of  its  obscurity  a  most 
 interesting  fact  of  the  early  history  of  Israel,  and 
 gives  to  Joshua  his  natural  place  among  his  con- 
 temporaries, instead  of  making  him  live  some 
 hundreds  of  years  after  his  true  time. 
 
 (Dr.  Yi?i}L&%\  Analysis  of  Chronology ;  Dr.  Adam 
 Clarke's  Covimentaiy  on  the  Bible;  Bochart's 
 Geographia  Sacra;  Lord  Arthur  Hervey's  Genea- 
 logies of  our  Lord  ;  Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lecture  ; 
 Rawlinson's  Herodotus). — M.  H. 
 
GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 92 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 GENEALOGY  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.  Im- 
 portance of  the  subject. — There  is  an  observable 
 difference  in  tlie  genealogical  documents  of  the  two 
 Testaments.  While  the  O.  T.  abounds  in  pedi- 
 grees of  every  extent  and  variety,  the  Christian 
 Scriptures  contain  but  one  lineage.  This,  how- 
 ever, bears  on  its  surface  such  signs  of  complete- 
 ness as  to  present  at  the  very  threshold  of  the 
 N.  T.  a  strong  presumption  of  the  finality  and 
 perfection  of  its  sacred  revelation.  It  is  impos- 
 sible to  overrate  the  importance  of  the  genealogy 
 of  our  Lord — indicating  as  it  does  the  connection 
 and  fulfilment  of  many  prophecies,*  and  binding 
 together  in  closest  union  and  interest  the  most 
 separate  and  various  dispensations  of  men  in  the 
 evidence  which  it  affords  of  the  Redeemer's  relation, 
 not  only  to  the  human  race  as  a  whole,  but  to  its 
 successive  +  generations,  'up  to  the  fulness  of 
 time.' 
 
 Various  objections  and  theories. — Proportioned 
 to  its  importance  has  been  the  attention  bestowed 
 on  the  subject.  From  Celsus,  in  the  2d  century, 
 to  Strauss  in  the  present  one,  the  manifold  objec- 
 tions of  hostile  critics  have  elicited  learned  defences, 
 which,  by  various  methods  and  processes,  have 
 solidly  vindicated  the  sacred  record.  The  objec- 
 tions of  the  Epicurean  philosopher  were  rather 
 external;  he  charged  the  two  genealogists  of 
 Christ  with  having  fabricated  their  records.  The 
 Manichean  Faustus,  and  the  apostate  Julian,  after- 
 wards attacked  them  for  '  the  inconsistency '  i^Dis- 
 sonantium  Evangelistariiin  ;  S.  Hieronymi  Opera, 
 Comment,  in  Matt.  i.  i6)  in  their  two  lines  of  our 
 
 *  Dr.  South  {Sermons  [Ox.  ed.],  vol.  ii.  p.  2ii), 
 by  no  means  exaggerates  the  importance  of  this 
 subject,  when,  in  reference  to  it,  he  says ;  *  That 
 the  Christian  religion  be  true  is  the  eternal  con- 
 cernment of  all  who  believe  it,  and  look  to  be 
 saved  by  it ;  and  that  it  be  so,  depends  upon  Jesus 
 Christ's  being  the  true  promised  Messias ;  (the 
 grand  and  chief  thing  asserted  by  Him  in  His 
 Gospel) ;  and  lastly,  Christ's  being  the  true  Messias 
 depends  upon  his  being  the  son  of  David,  and 
 king  of  the  Jews.  So  that  unless  this  be  evinced, 
 the  whole  foundation  of  Christianity  must  totter 
 and  fall.' 
 
 +  If  we  accept  Tischendorf 's  important  reading, 
 
 ibv    vl6s,    us    ivopLl^^TO,    TOV   ^liacrri(p,    tou    'HXei, 
 
 K.  T.  X.,  in  Luke  iii.  23,  the  much  derided  inter- 
 pretation of  this  passage  which  connects  Jesus 
 directly  with  each  preceding  link  of  His  ancestry 
 as  '  the  son '  of  the  patriarch  of  each  several  gen- 
 eration, becomes  not  only  not  a  fanciful  and  far- 
 fetched speculation,  but  the  true  and  gramma- 
 tical explanation  of  the  Evangelist's  words.  The 
 vouchers  for  the  reading,  according  to  T. ,  are 
 B.  H.  r.  I.  33.  118.  131.  209.  c^"-;  Euseb.2; 
 Athanas  (Serm.  mai.  de  fid) ;  Epiphan.'*  (n.  10. 
 29.  n.  31.  10.  sqq.);  Cyr.  (ad.  4,  22.  d  Kal  vi,  ^v 
 ws  ivo/xi^,  TOV  lojcr.).  The  influence  of  this  reading 
 on  this  construction  of  Luke  iii.  23,  which  was 
 advocated  by  F.  Gomar  {de  Genealogid  Christi, 
 p.  45),  by  Lightfoot  {Horn  Hebr.  [ed.  Gandell], 
 vol.  iii.  p.  54),  and  by  G.  J.  Vossius  {de  Jesu 
 Christi  Gen.,  p.  30),  as  well  as  by  Yardley  {on 
 the  Genealogies  of  Christ),  may  be  inferred  from 
 the  remarks  of  Dr.  W.  H.  Mill  (on  the  Genealo- 
 gies, in  Pantheistic  Principles,  p.  185).  See  also 
 De  Wette  {Kiirze  Erkldrtmg,  Lukas  iii.  23). 
 
 Lord's  descent.  Strauss's  objections  are  a  com- 
 bination of  both ;  he  charges  the  genealogy  with 
 both  mythic  fabrication  and  discrepancy.  Reserv- 
 ing the  details,  we  proceed  to  state  the  two  leading 
 interpretations  by  which  it  has  been  sought  to 
 reconcile  the  discrepancy,  and  vindicate  the  correct- 
 ness of  the  two  genealogical  tables,  of  St.  Matt. 
 i.,  and  St.  Luke  iii.  Lord  Arthur  Hervey  {Genea- 
 logies of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  fesus  Christ,  and 
 art.  Genealogy  of  J.  C,  in  Smith's  Dictionary  oj 
 the  Bible)  propounds  one  of  these  interpretations. 
 Closely  resembling  his  statement  is  that  of  Dr.  W. 
 H.  Mill,  the  late  Professor  of  Hebrew  in  the 
 University  of  Cambridge  {Observations  on  Pan- 
 theistic Principles  [section  on  the  Genealogies'^,  and 
 that  of  the  learned  F.  X.  Patritius  {De  Evangelt's, 
 lib.  iii.  diss.  9).  The  first  of  these  authors  thus 
 states  the  salient  points  of  his  system — (i.)  The 
 genealogies  in  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  are  both 
 the  genealogies  of  Joseph;  i.e.,  of  Jesus  Christ  as 
 the  reputed  and  legal  son  of  Joseph  and  Mary. 
 (2.)  The  genealogy  of  St.  Matthew  is  Joseph's 
 genealogy  as  legal  successor  to  the  throne  of 
 David;  i.e.,  it  exhibits  the  successive  heirs  of  the 
 kingdom,  ending  with  Christ,  as  Joseph's  reputed 
 son.  St.  Luke's  is  Joseph's  private  genealogy, 
 exhibiting  his  real  birth  as  David's  son,  and  thus 
 shewing  why  he  was  heir  to  Solomon's  crown  ;  so 
 that  in  St.  Matthew  we  have  only  legal  descent,  in 
 St.  Luke  '  the  true  stem  of  birth,'*  or  //;/fa/ pedigree. 
 (3.)  On  the  failure  of  issue  to  Jechonias  in  Solo- 
 mon's line,  the  succession  is  replenished  from  the 
 collateral  line  of  Nathan  in  the  person  of  Salathiel. 
 (4.)  Abiud,  the  third  below  Salathiel,  had  two 
 children  ;  the  elder  of  whom  stands  in  St.  Matthew 
 at  the  head  of  six  generations,  which  fail  in  Eleazar ; 
 while  the  younger  in  St.  Luke  was  the  ancestor  of 
 Matthan,  who  becomes  the  second  instance  of 
 restoring  the  failing  line  of  the  other  branch,  by 
 transferring  to  it  his  eldest  son  Jacob,  who  how- 
 ever occasions  a  third  interruption  to  the  line  of 
 St.  Matthew,  by  himself  dying  childless,  leaving 
 his  inheritance  to  his  brother  Heh's  son,  Joseph, 
 the  husband  of  the  Virgin  Mary.  (5. )  Mary  the 
 mother  of  Jesus  was,  in  all  probability,  the  daugh- 
 ter of  Jacob,  and  first  cousin  to  Joseph  her  hus- 
 band. So  that  in  point  ol  fact,  though  not  of 
 foi-m,  both  the  genealogies  are  as  much  hers  as 
 her  husband's.  In  these  five  theses  lies  the  sub- 
 stance of  a  theory  for  which  its  advocates  claim 
 the  support  of  an  uninterrupted  tradition  from  the 
 earliest  times  (Dr.  Mill,  p.  182  ;  Lord  A.  Hervey, 
 The  Genealogies,  p.  9,  note  ;  Patritius,  Dissert,  ix. 
 p.  92).  This  scheme,  in  its  main  features,  has 
 been  adopted  by  Dr.  Wordsworth  {Greek  Test.), 
 who  has  given  a  remarkably  perspicuous  statement 
 of  the  details  in  a  short  space,  in  his  note  on  Matt, 
 i.  I.  Dean  Alford  {G>-eek  Test.,  vol.  i.  p.  444) 
 and  Bp.  Ellicott  {Historical  Lectures  on  the  Life  oj 
 Christ,  p.  96)  express,  without  fresh  argument, 
 their  concurrence. 
 
 Our  own  Theory — agreeable  to  Primitive  Opiniofi. 
 — Notwithstanding  the  suffrages  of  so  many  learned 
 men,  we  cannot  shake  off  t4ie  impression  that, 
 while  apparently  representing  the  literal  Scripture 
 of  the  Genealogies  with  greatest  fidelity,  this 
 scheme  does  great  violence  in  iict  to  both  it  and 
 
 *  Julius  Africanus  succinctly  expresses  the  dis- 
 tinction by  ^vaei,  natural  descent;  and  vd/xif,  le^Ct- 
 succession.     Rouih^s  Pell.  Sacr.,  vol.  ii.  p.  231. 
 
GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 93 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 other  passages  ;  nor  can  we  concede  to  its  zealous 
 defenders  the  traditional  support  of  the  Fathers  to 
 anything  hke  the  extent  they  claim  for  it.  It  will 
 clear  the  way,  and  at  the  same  time  illustrate  the 
 subject,  if  we  briefly  examine,  first,  the  patristic 
 opinions  on  the  genealogies.  It  will  lighten  the 
 invidiousness  of  our  task  in  venturing  (in  the  face 
 of  so  much  learned  opposition)  to  contend  for  the 
 theory,  which,  while  assigning  St.  Matthew's 
 genealogy  to  Joseph,  gives  that  of  St.  Luke  to  the 
 Blessed  Virgin — a  theory  which,  it  is  admitted,  has 
 been  maintained  by  many  eminent  men  since  the 
 Reformation — if  we  shew  that  it  was  very  far  from 
 being  unknown  to  the  early  writers  of  the  Church, 
 that  m  fact  it  is  sustained  by  earlier  testimony  of 
 Fathers  than  the  rival  theory  which  has  been  lately 
 recovering  ground  amongst  us.  Though  Celsus 
 was,  we  believe,  the  earliest  impugner  of  the 
 genealogies  of  the  Gospel  whose  name  we  know, 
 there  seem  to  have  been  yet  earlier  gainsayers, 
 whom  Origen  taunts  his  adversary  for  being 
 ignorant  of.  These  had  brought  against  the  evange- 
 lists even  then  the  censure  of  incoherence  and  dis- 
 ci epancy,  which  was  afterwards  revived  by  Faustus, 
 Julian,  and  others  [h-Kh  tlvicv  ws  iyKK-qfxaTa  -rrpoaa- 
 yofxeva  rfj  diacpoivig^  tCov  yeveaXoyiQv,  ovdafiQis  div6- 
 fjLaaev,  Origenis  Opera,  De  la  Rue,  vol.  i.  p.  413). 
 Celsus  then  derides  the  notion,  that  through  so 
 lowly  a  woman  as  the  cm'pentei's  wife  (•^  TO\i 
 TiKTouos  yvvri)  Jesus  should  trace  his  lineage 
 through  the  Jewish  kings  and  up  to  the  first  man ! 
 Does  not  this  indicate  that,  even  in  the  former 
 part  of  the  2d  century,  the  opinion  that  St.  Luke's 
 genealogy  [for  that  of  course  is  alluded  to  by  Celsus] 
 was  assigned  to  the  mother  of  Jesus,  and  i/iat, 
 commonly  enough,  to  reach  the  observation  of  this 
 rude  detractor  of  Christianity  ?  And  Origen's  re- 
 ply, so  far  from  correcting  this  idea  of  Celsus, 
 confirms  it  :  '  Does  it  follow,  then,  that  Jesus 
 cannot  be  derived  from  the  first  man  and  those 
 ancient  kings  of  the  Jews  because  of  his  mother's 
 low  estate  ?  Does  Celsus  think  that  the  poor 
 must  needs  have  poor  ancestors,  and  kings  royal 
 ones  ?  Is  it  not  even  in  our  own  day  a  patent  fact 
 that  persons  poorer  than  Mary  have  had  wealthy 
 and  illustrious  ancestors  in  their  pedigree?'  (Con- 
 tra Celsum,  ii.  32.)  We  claim  this  as  unquestion- 
 able evidence,  all  the  stronger  because  of  its  popular 
 and  informal  cast,  in  favour  of  the  position  we  mean 
 to  defend,  that  St.  Luke  gives  us  the  lineage  of 
 the  Virgin  mother  of  Christ.  It  tends  to  the  same 
 conclusion  that,  later  in  the  same  century,  Irenseus 
 (Ach/.  HcEi-es,  lib.  iii.  c.  29  [G.  W.  Harvey])  when 
 arguing  against  the  Cerinthians,  who  alleged  that 
 Jesus  was  the  son  of  Joseph,  contended  that  then  He 
 would  not  be  a  king.  And  he  used  an  argument 
 which  destroys  one  of  the  bases  on  which  Dr. 
 Mill  and  Lord  A.  Hervey  found  their  theory  ;  'If 
 [esus  were  Joseph's  son  He  would  be  neither  king 
 nor  heir,  according  to  Jeremiah.  For  Joseph  is 
 plainly  shewn  by  Matthew  in  his  genealogy  to  be 
 the  son  of  Jehoiakim  and  Jechoniah.  Now,  these 
 princes  and  all  their  descendants  were  shut  out 
 from  the  throne  by  the  prophet's  denunciations 
 (Jer.  xxii.  24,  25  ;  28-30  ;  xxxvi.  30,  31).'  We 
 regard  Irenreus,  then,  as  a  competent  witness  to 
 the  opinion,  that  in  the  2d  century  the  genea- 
 logy contained  in  the  first  gospel  was  held  to  record 
 Joseph's  li7ieal  descent  from  David  through  Solo- 
 mon ;  and  it  is  difficult,  in  an  unstrained  interpre- 
 tation of  other  passages  of  the  same  ancient  writer. 
 
 not  to  gather  that,  in  his  view,  the  genealogy  of  St. 
 Luke*  represents  the  lineal  ancestors  of  the  Virgin 
 (See  especially  lib.  iii.  c.  32 ;  where  the  compari- 
 son between  Eve  at  one  end  of  the  list,  and  Mary 
 at  the  other,  would  be  unmeaning  on  any  other 
 principle).  The  only  alternative  open  to  him,  of 
 supposing  St.  Luke  to  trace  the  legal  descent  of 
 Joseph,  is  quite  at  variance  with  Irenceus's  argu- 
 ment and  tone  of  thought.  We  might  add  Ter- 
 tullian  [De  Came  Christi,  capp.  21,  22),  for  though 
 not  expressly  bearing  on  the  genealogies,  still  such 
 language  as  '  An  quia  ipse  est  flos  de  virga  profecta 
 ex  radice  Jesse,  etc.:'  and  'Jam  nunc  carnem 
 Christi  non  tantum  Mariie,  sed  et  David  per 
 Mariam,  et  Jesse  per  David,  etc. :'  and  again, 
 '  Utique  non  aliain  qiiam  Abi-aham,  nee  aliam 
 qnam  Jesse,  nee  aliam  quatn  David,  nee  aliam 
 qiiam  ex  Alaria,  et  adhuc  siiperiiis,  nee  aliam 
 quant  Adatn,  etc.:''  does  most  naturally  seem 
 to  connect  Christ  with  His  remotest  ancestry 
 by  means  of  his  mother,  precisely  as  we  have 
 said  the  genealogy  of  St.  Luke  does.  Before  we 
 proceed  to  consider  the  case  of  those  later  fathers, 
 who  are  quoted  as  a  catena  of  testimony  in  favour 
 of  the  theory,  which,  we  have  just  seen,  was  cer- 
 tainly not  the  primitive  one,  we  will  advert  to  some 
 remarkable  words  of  St.  Athanasius,  which  are 
 best  explained  on  the  supposition  that  in  the  third 
 gospel  the  Virgin  Mary's  descent  is  given,  and  her 
 husband's  in  the  first  ;  Mapt'as  /x^i^t;?  ^k  tov  'AdafM 
 KaTayo/j,ivi]s,  Kai  iK  toO  'A/3paa/x.  Kal  eK  rod  Aaj3i5 
 yeveaXoyovjjLeurjs  aiiv  ti^  ^luiarifp  t(j3  /xefivrjaTev/j-evci) 
 avTr)v.  .  .  .  yevvarai  ovv  6  Xpicrros  iv  Btj^- 
 Xe^fj.  TTJs  'lovSaias,  tov  ^IisJcrr}(p  warkpa  koKlov, 
 Tavrbv  rfj  Mapla  rvyxdvovra  toD  Aa/3i5.  Here  is  a 
 clear  declaration  (i)  that  'Mary  alone  has  her  de- 
 scent deduced  from  Adam'  [i.e.,  St.  Luke's  register 
 belongs  to  her  only] ;  while  (2)  in  that  genealogy, 
 which  is  traced  both  from  Abraham  and  from 
 David  [and  what  is  this  but  Matthew's  list  ?]  she 
 shares  her  descent  with  Joseph,  her  betrothed  hus- 
 band ;  (3)  Jesus  accordingly  is  born  at  Bethlehem, 
 calling  Joseph  His  father,  inasmuch  as  he  had  one 
 and  the  same  origin  as  Mary  from  David  [as  the 
 union  of  the  two  pedigrees  simply  shews].  How 
 plain  is  this  sentence  in  the  light  of  the  theory  we 
 have  as  yet  but  adumbrated  !  How  tortuous  its 
 interpretation  on  the  terms  of  the  rival  opinion  (see 
 S.  Athanasii  Opera,  ed.  Benedict,  vol.  ii.  p.  738,  in 
 the  tract  Contra  Apollinariiuji  i.  4). 
 
 How  opposed  by  later  Fathos.  — With  respect  to 
 the  support  which  this  rival  opinion  receives  from 
 ancient  writers,  we  cannot  but  think  that  it  is 
 accepted  at  more  than  its  worth  by  modern  com- 
 mentators. We  claim  some  diminution,  on  the 
 strength  of  the  quotations  we  have  just  adduced. 
 And  if  we  admit  that  among  the  later  fathers  who 
 have  noticed  the  question  (for  the  majority  of  those 
 we  have  consulted  omit  its  discussion),  there  is  an 
 undoubted  agreement  to  assign  the  genealogical 
 
 *  Some  have  seen  in  the  words  of  the  primitive 
 St.  Ignatius  [Epist.  ad  Ephes.  vii.),  Kai  kK  Mapias 
 Kal  iK  Qeou  .  .  .  'Irjaovs  XpiarSs,  an  allusion 
 to  St.  Luke's  genealogy  in  its  proximate  and  ulti- 
 mate steps  :  but  we  think  this  construction  too 
 strained  for  the  simple  style  of  the  venerable  martyr. 
 It  is  worth  observing,  however,  that  neither  in  him 
 nor  any  other  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  occurs  a 
 trace  of  the  complicated  theory  which  we  in  this 
 article  oppose. 
 
GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 94 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 lists  of  both  evangelists  to  Joseph  alone,  we  think 
 it  not  unreasonable  to  suggebt  a  ''urther  diminution 
 from  the  weight  of  their  authority  on  two  grounds — 
 (i)  Because  it  is  doubtful  whether  they,  in  all  cases, 
 really  meant  to  exclude  Mary  from  the  possession 
 of  one  of  the  genealogies,  when  they  assigned  both 
 nominally  to  her  husband.  St.  Chrysoslom,  for  in- 
 stance, in  his  fourth  homily  on  St.  Matthew,  says 
 that  the  two  evangelists  make  out  their  lives  both 
 in  the  name  of  Joseph,  because  Jewish  usage  ex- 
 cluded the  names  of  women  from  such  documents 
 [this  is  strongly  insisted  on  by  many  writers  (Hil- 
 ary of  Poitiers,  St.  Jerome,  and  Theophylact  o?i  St. 
 Matt.  i. ;  St.  Augustine,  Sermo  de  Concord.  Matt, 
 et  Luc.  ;  Theodoret,  on  Romans  ix.  ;  Bede,  on  St. 
 Luke  in.,  etc.)]  ;  but  he  adds  these  significant 
 words  :  EtVcbj'  roivvv  tovs  Trpoydvovs  aTravras,  Kal 
 rekevTrjcras  eh  tov  'Io}ixrj(p,  ovk  iarrj  H^XP'-  tovtov, 
 aXXa  wpoffi'ifqKev,  ''lijxj'qcp  tov  dvdpa  MapLas  '  deiKviis, 
 &Ti  dC  iKeivTjv  Kal  tovtov  eyeveaXhyTjaev,  as  much  as 
 to  say  that,  although  from  Jewish  usage  the  evan- 
 gelist inserted  the  name  of  Joseph,  he  yet  con- 
 structed the  genealogy  for  the  Virgin's  sake  [Opera 
 [ed.  Bened.]  vii.  48).  (2)  There  is  an  avowed  de- 
 ference on  the  part  of  some  of  the  Fathers  to  the 
 conclusions  of  Julius  Africanus,  who  in  the  3d 
 century  constructed  an  elaborate  scheme  of  recon- 
 ciling the  genealogies  of  SS.  Matthew  and  Luke 
 (see  fragments  of  Africaniis/.  ad  Aristid.  dc  Geneal. 
 Servatoris,  in  Routh's  Rcl.  Sacr.  ii.  228-237). 
 This  deference  appears  in  St.  Augustine,  who 
 changed  his  view  on  the  subject*  and  ascribed  the 
 change  to  the  work  of  Africanus,  which,  he  says, 
 '  he  had  not  read  when  he  wrote  his  own  work 
 against  Faustus'  [Retract,  lib.  ii.  c.  7).  Other 
 Fathers  express  like  deference  to  the  treatise, 
 which  seems  to  have  been  accepted  for  several  cen- 
 turies as  having  settled  the  question.  (Hujus 
 nodum  quaestionis  Africanus  de  consonantia  evan- 
 geliorum  scribeus  apertissime  solvit.'  Bede,  /.  c.  ; 
 Eusebius  i.  7  ;  vi.  31  ;  St.  Ambrose's  explanation  is 
 given  in  almost  the  words  of  Africanus  [Exposit.  in 
 Luc,  lib.  iii.  c.  15)  ;  St.  Jerome  refers  to  the  same 
 authority  for  his  own  views  [in  Matt.  i.  16) ;  and 
 so  Theophylact  [in  Matt.  i. )  ;  John  Damascene 
 in  the  Sth  century  reproduced  the  scheme  of 
 Africanus  with  slight  modifications  [De  Ortho- 
 doxa  Fide,  iv.  14).  We  shall  have  occasion  to 
 refer  to  this  scheme  again  ;  we  here  remark  that 
 the  author  put  it  forth  as  a  well-meant  contribution 
 towards  solving  a  Biblical  difficulty  ;  frankly  avow- 
 ing that  though  it  was  the  best  explanation  he  could 
 offer,  he  was  not  sure  of  his  data  (Routh,  ii.  237  ; 
 Lord  A.  Hervey,  44).  To  us  the  whole  facts  of 
 the  case  detract  considerably,  it  may  not  be  in- 
 deed from  the  mental  character  of  the  Fathers, 
 who  in  the  mass  of  their  subjects  accepted  the 
 help  on  a  knotty  point  which  was  close  at  hand, 
 but  at  least  from  the  value  of  that  patristic  catena 
 
 *  We  might  claim  St.  Augustine  in  support  of 
 our  view,  if  the  remark  of  the  Rev.  Is.  Williams 
 (Nativity,  p.  120)  be  well  founded  ;  he  says — 
 '  Indeed  St.  Augustine  mentions  it  as  an  opinion, 
 which  he  did  not  disajjprove  of,  that  Heli,  recorded 
 by  St.  Luke,  was  the  father-in-law  of  St.  jfosepk  and 
 the  father  of  the  blessed  Virq-in.''  We  have,  how- 
 ever, searched  in  vain  for  this  passage  ;  Mr.  Wil- 
 liams gives  no  reference.  We  may  safely  gather 
 that  St.  Augustine's  opinion  of  the  point  varied  at 
 different  times. 
 
 which  has  been  lately  recommended  so  warmly 
 to  us. 
 
 Effects  of  our  Theory. — We  proceed  to  consider 
 that  explanation  of  the  two  genealogies  of  our 
 Lord  which  appears  to  us  most  closely  coincident 
 with  the  various  portions  of  Holy  Scripture  con- 
 nected with  the  subject.  We  have  already  stated 
 it  to  be  our  thesis  that  in  St.  Matthew  lue  have  the 
 genealogy  of  Joseph,  and  in  St.  Luke  that  of  the 
 blessed  Virgin  Mary.  The  effect  of  this  is  to  con- 
 nect Jesus  Christ  (i)  with  his  royal  ancestor  David 
 by  the  tie  of  natural  descent  [^vcei)  through  His 
 only  human  parent  Mary  ;  and  by  legal  succession 
 [v&pi.ip)  by  means  of  his  reputed  father  Joseph,  the 
 last  lineal  heir  of  Solomon  ;  (2)  with  the  great 
 patriarch  of  the  Jewish  nation,  Abraham — a  con- 
 nection which  St.  Matthew  especially  developes,  as 
 suited  his  purpose,  in  writing  his  gospel  for  Jewish 
 readers  ;  (3)  with  the  father  of  the  human  race, 
 Adam — as  St.  Luke  alone  demonstrates,  consist- 
 ently with  his  character  as  the  friend  of  St.  Paul 
 and  the  evangelist  of  the  Gentiles. 
 
 The  structure  of  the  two  lines  both  ending  in  foseph, 
 who  is  the  terminus  ad quet?i  in  Matthew  and  i\ie.  ter- 
 minus a  quo  in  Luke,  is  accounted  forby  both  Jewish 
 and  Christian  writers,  on  that  most  prominent 
 maxim  of  Israelite  law,  that  genealogies  must  be 
 reckoned  by  fathers  and  not  mothers  ('E/c  Traripdiv 
 yap,  dXX'  OVK  iK  p-r^ripusv  ^S-os  yeveaXoyeiv  rfj  delq, 
 ypaipfj,  Theodoreti  Opera,  by  Sirmond,  iii.  23).* 
 
 On  St.  Matthew's  Genealogy. — In  the  first  gospel 
 Joseph  is  related  to  his  predecessor  by  birth  ;  in  the 
 third  by  law.  This  distinction  is  evident  from  the 
 language  of  the  two  documents,  'Ia/cw/3  eyivvriat 
 TOV  lojcTTj^  ['Jacob  begat  Joseph,'  Matt.  i.  16),  and 
 'IwcTjcp,  Tou  RXt  (literally,  Joseph  of  Heli ;  Luke 
 ill.  23).  To  all,  who  have  no  theory  to  serve,  it 
 must  be  clear  that  the  former  statement  connects 
 Jacob  with  Joseph  in  a  parental  relationship.  The 
 words  are  precise  :  with  all  deference  to  the  learned 
 men  who  take  a  different  view  (see  Dr.  Words- 
 worth, Or.  Test.  vol.  i.,  p.  I,  note  2;  Lord  A.  Her- 
 vey, Genealogies,  etc.,  pp.  48-56;  and  Dr.  W.  H. 
 Mill,  p.  173),  we  must  demur  to  their  including 
 under  the  word  iyivvrjcre  any  relationship  but  that 
 which  arises  from  lineal  descent,  whether  of  the 
 first  degree  (which  is  by  far  the  most  usual)  or  a 
 remoter  one  (as  in  Matt.  i.  8,  'lupap.  5^  iyivv-qae 
 Tbv  'O^iav,  where  tlie  descent  is  strictly  lineal). 
 We  have  examined  the  usage  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
 tures, the  LXX.,  and  the  Greek  Testament,  and  we 
 cannot  but  deem  that  criticism  worse  than  precari- 
 ous, and  absolutely  rash,  which  is  for  extending  the 
 
 verb  yevvq.v  and  its   Hebrew  equivalent  IP''   [or 
 
 Hiphil  Ivin]  to  mere  legal  connection.      We  have 
 
 *  Hence  comes  the  oft-repeated  maxim  of  the 
 
 Talmudists^^Dt^'n  n-'inppx  nxn  nnst/'o  (juchas, 
 
 fol.  55-2).  The  7nother' s  family  is  not  to  be  called  a 
 family;  that  is,  it  has  not  the  force  of  a  civil  family 
 in  property  succession.  See  R.  Bechai,  ad  N^u- 
 meros,  fol.  193,  col.  2  ;  Jarchi,  ad  Judie,  xvii.  7  ; 
 and  Jacob  Bar  Solomon,  in  Oculo  Lsrael,  p.  ii. ,  fol. 
 89,  col.  I.  The  same  thing  is  meant  by  the  dictum 
 of  the  very  ancient  author  of  the  Siphri,  fol.  23, 
 
 col.  92.    nnx  nnN'  m^^n  ninDL"»,  FamHi.e 
 
 seu  cognationes  seqziuntur  patres.  Such  maxims 
 are  constantly  occurring.  Selden,  de  Successio7ii' 
 bus  ad  leg.  Eb^ieor,  c.  xii. 
 
GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 patiently  gone  through  the  long  columns  of  Bruder, 
 Trommius,  and  Wigram,  and  have  examined  the 
 copious  references  of  Stephen's  Thesaurus,  and 
 cannot  discover  the  slightest  trace  of  a  usage 
 which  justifies  such  extension.*  Throughout  St. 
 Matthew's  genealogy,  then,  eyeyvrjae  indicates  natu- 
 ral descent  ;  hence  we  can  at  once  accept  the  I2th 
 verse  in  its  literal  sense  ('  After  they  were  brought 
 to  Babylon,  Jechonias  begat  Salathiel'),  as  strictly 
 parallel  with  I  Chron.  iii.  17  ('The  sons  of  Je- 
 choniah  in  his  captivity,  or  a  captive^  T'DX  [not 
 'Assir' — a  proper  name;  see  Luther's  Version  of 
 0.  T.,  I.  c.  ;  Abarbanel,  in  Haggaum,  ii.  23  ; 
 Surenhusius,  Concil.  de  Geneal.  J.  C.  Bt/SX.  Ka- 
 toXK.  ;  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.,  in  loc.  ;  and  Hug's 
 Inti-oduction,  by  Wait,  vol.  ii.  268]  '  Salathiel,  his 
 son,  etc.')  By  the  help  of  these  literal  and  plain 
 statements,  we  assign  to  the  denunciation  of  Jer. 
 xxii.  30,  the  sense  which  it  will  bear  without  vio- 
 lence, namely,  that  the  burden  put  upon  Jechonias 
 by  the  Lord  was  (1)  the  loss  of  his  present  children, 
 if  he  had  any  (like  the  case  of  Zedekiah,  2  Kings 
 XXV.  7,  or  of  Hiel  in  i  Kings  xvi.  34) ;  hence  we 
 read  not  of  his  cliildren,  but  only  of  his  mother  and 
 his  wives  accompanying  him  to  Babylon,  2  Kings 
 xxiv.  15  ;  (2)  the  loss  of  his  own  royal  '  prosperity' 
 or  power  ;  and  (3)  the  deposition  oi  his  seed,  which 
 might  be  bom  to  him  in  captivity,  from  the  throne 
 of  David  for  ever  [comp.  the  remarkable  words  of 
 Irenjeus,  which  we  have  quoted  above]. t  To  in- 
 sist that  Jechonias  was  childless,  on  the  strength  of 
 a  prophetical  passage  of  dubious  meaning,  and  in 
 the  face  of  two  clear  historical  statements,  is  an  un- 
 safe method  of  handling  Scripture  ;  and  yet  this  is 
 the  main  prop  on  which  the  theoiy  rests,  which 
 makes  St.  Matthew's  genealogy  nothing  more  than 
 
 Joseph's  legal  descent  [j'6|Uy  oh  (p\)C!eC\  in  spite  of  the 
 requent  repetition  of  the  expressive  i-yevvTicre  and 
 the  emphatic  e-yevvrj^ri  with  which  the  apostle  con- 
 cludes his  line.  Surely  this  weighty  word  at  the 
 end,  and  the  twice  told  v'l6%  at  the  beginning  must 
 be  held  to  afford  a  strong  clue  to  the  author's  mean- 
 ing suggested  by  himself,  as  intending  to  furnish 
 
 *  The   metaphorical  uses    of   'yevvq.v   and      \T, 
 
 such  as    2  Tim.  ii.    23    (et5u)j   6'rt  '^ewwai  fxaxas, 
 
 'gender  strifes'),  and  Prov.  xxvii.  I  (D'l''  "IP'TIO, 
 
 'what  a  day  may  bring  forth'),  or  Zeph.  ii.  2  (Q~)D3 
 
 pn   rn?,   'before   the   decree   bring   forth'   [like 
 
 Euripides'  "Oiruis  ^reKev  Sc  .  .  .  Atjtui  roaavTTjv 
 d/j-a^iav,  Iphig.  Taur.  386]),  and  the  spiritual  sense 
 of  such  expressions  as  i  Cor.  iv.  15  (kv  yap  XpLcrrw 
 Irjcrov  dia  tov  evayyeXiov  eyu  vfids  eyevvrjcra — '  I 
 have  begotten  you  through  the  gospel ')  hardly  come 
 into  consideration  here  ;  they  do  not,  however,  at 
 all  weaken — but  rather,  analogically,  confirm — our 
 view  of  the  literal  meaning  of  the  words. 
 
 t  The  advocates  of  the  theory  under  examination, 
 ought,  as  it  seems  to  us,  to  have  taken  warning 
 from  the  prophecy  about  Jehoiakim,  the  father  of 
 Jechonias  (Jer.  xxxvi.  30),  instead  of  adducing  it  in 
 corroboration  of  their  explanation  of  Jer.  xxii.  30. 
 They  cannot,  as  is  stated  in  the  text  "above,  educe 
 absolute  childlessness  of  Jechonias  from  the  latter  pro- 
 phecy in  the  face  of  i  Chron.  iii.  1 7  and  Matt.  i.  1 2, 
 nor  can  they  predicate  a  like  doom  of  Jehoiakim  in 
 the  face  of  2  Kings  xxiv.  6. 
 
 95  GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 his  readers  with  the  stem  of  Joseph's  progenitors* 
 from  David  through  Solomon. 
 
 This  is  the  place  to  notice  the /;ww;w«/ position 
 which  has  been  assigned  to  Solomon,  as  an  indis- 
 pensable link,  binding  Jesus  with  David,  and  with 
 the  great  cluster  of  promises  which  God  was  pleased 
 to  hang  around  him.  '  Whoever  expunges  Solo- 
 mon from  Christ's  genealogy,'  says  Calvin  [Hartn. 
 Ei'ang.  on  the  Genealogies),  'does,  at  the  same  time, 
 obliterate  and  destroy  those  promises  by  which  he 
 must  be  acknowledged  to  be  the  son  of  David.' 
 (See  also  the  less  emphatic  indeed,  but  equally 
 eminent  use  of  Solomon's  name  in  the  modern  ad- 
 vocates of  the  theoi7  ;  Lord  A.  Hervey,  Geneal. 
 ch.  iii.  sec.  i ;  Smith'' s  Diet.  vol.  i.  p.  666  ;  Patri- 
 trius.  Dissert,  ix.  cap.  9).  This  view,  as  it  appears 
 to  us,  is  not  consistent  with  the  entire  case  which 
 Holy  Scripture  presents  to  us.  Between  the  great 
 promise  made  to  David  (2  Sam.  vii.  11,  16)  and  so 
 frequently  referred  to  afterwards  (i  Kings  xi.  34, 
 38  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  20-37  ;  Is.  Iv.  3  ;  Acts  xiii.  34)  and 
 so  beautifully  described  by  the  szveet  Psalmist  of 
 Israel  himself,  as  '  an  everlasting  covenant  ordered 
 in  all  things  and  sure '  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  5) ;  and  the 
 promise  made  to  Solomon  (i  Kings  iii.  14)  and  re- 
 newed to  him  afterwards  more  impressively  (l 
 Kings  ix.  4-9),  and  alluded  to  by  David  (i  Kings  ii. 
 4) ;  there  is  this  great  difference,  that  the  former 
 was  absolute,  partaking  of  the  unconditional  cha- 
 racter of  the  protevangelic  assurances  made  in  Eden 
 (Gen.  iii.  15)  and  to  the  patriarchs  (Gen.  xvii.  7  ; 
 xviii.  18  ;  xxii.  18  ;  xxvi.  4  ;  xxviii.  14;  Ps.  cv.  8)  ; 
 whereas  the  latter  was  strictly  conditional,  resem- 
 
 *  It  may  be  worth  while  to  remark,  that  Afri- 
 canus  and  the  Fathers  which  follow  him  (men- 
 tioned above),  with  the  remarkable  exception  of 
 St.  Ambrose  [loc.  cit.),  do  all  hold  with  us  in  the 
 opinion  that  St.  Matihew  gives  the  natural  line 
 of  Joseph.  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen  {Ca7-mit2a  [ed. 
 Bened.  ]  vol.  ii.  p.  268),  succinctly  states  the  tra- 
 ditional view  on  this  point;  'EvayyeKiaTCiv  5'  6s  p-h 
 elwe  TTjV  (pvffLv,  Mar^atos,  6s  5'  'iypaxj/e  Aovkus  tov 
 vd/uLov.  Inrespect  of  patristic  opinion,  the  only  subject 
 on  which  it  approaches  to  an  influential  unanimity  is 
 this  very  point  of  the  purport  of  St.  Matthew's  gene- 
 alogy— a  point  in  which  Lord  A.  Hervey  {Geneal. 
 and  Smithes  Diet. )  differs  from  the  whole  catena, 
 except  St.  Ambrose.  Calvin,  who  is  usually  so 
 exact  in  his  exegesis,  is  singularly  uncertain  here. 
 '  Matthew,'  he  says,  '  departing  from  the  natural 
 lineage  of  Joseph,  which  is  followed  by  Luke, 
 reckons  up  the  legal  genealogy'  [in  spite  of  the 
 perspicuity  of  the  iyevvrjae,  etc.  !]  He  then  adverts 
 to  the  opinion  of  Africanus  and  Eusebius  as  differ- 
 ing from  his  own,  and  placidly  adds:  '  £ut  it 
 amounts  to  the  same  thing — for  he  means  nothing 
 more  than  this,  that  the  kingdom  which  had  been 
 established  in  the  person  of  Solomon  passed  in  a 
 lawful  manner  to  Salathiel ;  only  it  is  more  conect 
 and  appropriate  to  say  that  Matthew  has  exhibited 
 the  legal  order'  (I)  How  astonishing  is  such  laxity 
 in  a  writer  who  is  so  peremptory  in  another  thesis 
 of  his  context :  '  If  Solo77ion  is  struck  out  of  Mary  s 
 genealogy,  Christ  will  bt  no  longer  Chrisf  (!)  _  One 
 would  have  thought  that  a  point  deemed  so  indis- 
 pensable would  not  have  admitted  the  slightest 
 weakness,  vacillation,  or  uncertainty  in  its  mode  of 
 defence  and  proof.  [But  touching  this  opinion  of 
 th«  paramotmt  place  of  Solomon  in  the  line  ;  see 
 the  text  above.] 
 
GENEAL.   OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 96 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 bling  that  which  God  made  to  Jeroboam  through 
 Ahijah  the  Shilonite  (i  Kings  xi.  3S),  and  that 
 which  is  mentioned  in  i  Sam.  ii.  30  respecting  Eli 
 and  his  family,  and  again  that  referred  to  in  Judg. 
 ii.  1-2,  20,  21. 
 
 The  promise  of  perpetuity  was  only  made  to  the 
 house  of  David,  who  is  eminently  the  father  of 
 Christ ;  not  to  the  particular  brancli  wliich  imme- 
 diately inherited  the  throne,  whose  iniquity  might 
 suspend  or  forfeit  the  promise  ;  accordingly,  the 
 writer  of  the  Psalm  Ixxxix.  most  pathetically  la- 
 ments, in  the  stanza  between  verses  38  and  45,  the 
 too  sure  accomplishment  of  that  wrath,  which  the 
 dynasty  of  Solomon  provoked,  by  those  impieties 
 of  which  Solomon  had  himself  set  the  first  example 
 (see  I  Kings  xi.  6-10).  To  us,  therefore,  there  ap- 
 pears a  wonderfully  minute  exactness  in  the  fulfil- 
 ment of  prophecy  on  the  house  of  David.  Solomon 
 himself  is  nmuhere  included  in  the  direct  ancestry  of 
 Messiah.  Great  things  are,  doubtless,  said  of  him  ; 
 but  the  utmost  issue  of  them  was,  that  he  was  near 
 to  David,  and  near  to  Christ,  in  his  last  lineal  de- 
 scendant, the  blessed  Virgin's  husband.  But  he 
 attained  not  to  the  glory  of  his  elder  brother 
 Nathan,  who,  through  his  '  highly  favoured '  (Luke 
 i.  28)  daughter,  became  the  link  which  connected 
 the  royal  David  with  David's  Lord  and  Son  (Matt. 
 xxii.  45,  etc.)  We  disparage  not  the  dignity  and 
 privilege  of  the  excellent  Joseph,  the  foster-father 
 and  legal  father  of  Christ  ;  on  the  contrary,  we 
 believe  that  in  a  great  and  real  sense,  as  the  hus- 
 band of  His  only  parent,  the  lowly-conditioned 
 but  high-souled  carpenter  of  Bethlehem  did  (in 
 strict  and  unrepealed  Hebrew  law)  convey  to  Christ 
 the  residuary  legacy  of  the  '  diadem  and  crown,' 
 which  had  remained  unworn  since  the  days  of 
 Ezekiel's  '  profane  wicked  prince  of  Israel,'  waiting 
 for  '  Him  to  come,  whose  right  it  is '  (Ezek.  xxi. 
 25-27).  But  great  as  was  the  prerogative  of 
 Joseph,  he  could  not  impart  to  his  foster-son  that 
 '  right,''  for  there  is  a  complete  hiatus  and  separa- 
 tion in  descent  between  him  and  Jesus  Christ.  St. 
 Matthew  must  be  understood  to  intimate  such  when 
 he  adds  to  the  name  of  Joseph  the  words  which 
 give  weight  and  validity  to  his  preceding  genealogy, 
 Tov  &v5pa  Maptas,  i^  ^s  iyewlf^T]  'IijeroOs  6  Xeybfiivos 
 'X.piaTos  (Matt.  i.  16).  We  look  on  this  sequel  as 
 itself  suggesting  an  answer  to  the  question,  which 
 has  been  (in  ancient  times  especially)  often  asked  : 
 Why  is  there  a  second  genealogy  of  our  Lord  in  the 
 N.  T.  ?  Since  Joseph's  lack  of  parental  relation 
 to  Christ  incapacitated  him  from  so  connecting 
 Christ  with  His  royal  ancestor  David  as  to  satisfy 
 the  great  prophecies  *  which  made  Him  his 
 son,  as  St.  Paul  says,  kn  crTr^p/xaros  AawS  ko-t'o. 
 uapKO.  ('  of  the  seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh,'' 
 Rom.  i.  3)  ;  or,  as  St,  Peter  says,  in  perhaps  still 
 stronger  terms,   kK  KapvoO  ttjs  dacpvos  avroC  [i.e., 
 
 *  Nothing  short  of  natural  descent  can  satisfy 
 such  expressive  prophecies  as  Is.  xi.  i,  interpreted 
 by  St.  Paul  to  the  Jews  of  Antioch  (Acts  xiii.  22, 
 23  ;  Rom.  XV.  8s  12),  and  by  Christ  Himself,  Rev. 
 xxii.  16 — also  Jer.  xxiii.  5,  6  ;  and  xxxiii.  15,  ap- 
 plied by  St.  Paul  to  Jesus  Christ  in  such  passages 
 as  Rom.  i.  3 — also  [which  we  think  conclusive]  St. 
 Luke  i.  32,  as  if  the  Evangelist  would  sound  a 
 key-note  of  interpretation  to  his  own  genealog}%  so 
 soon  to  be  given.  The  common  expectation  of  the 
 Jews  looked  for  Christ  to  be  naturally  sprung  from 
 David  (John  vii.  42) 
 
 Tov  TTarpidpxov  AajBld]  rb  Kara  ffdpKa  ('ofthefruii 
 of  his  [David's]  loins  according  to  the  flesh,'  Acts 
 ii.  30)  ;  it  was  required  (in  order  to  complete  the 
 proof  which  the  N.  T.  was  designed  to  give  of  the 
 exhaustion  of  the  promises  of  the  O.  T.  in  Jesus 
 Christ,  Rom.  xv.  8,  9  ;  2  Cor.  i.  20)  that  another 
 genealogical  record  should  be  added  which  should 
 indicate  our  Saviour's  lineal  descent  {<p\iaei  oi 
 php-iij)  from  David  ;  hence  the  genealogy  of  the 
 third  Gospel. 
 
 On  St.  Ltikis  Genealogy. — If  it  be  objected 
 that  this  table  is  made  out  as  literally  as  the  other, 
 in  Joseph^ s  7iame,  and  that  we  violate  the  literal 
 statement  of  the  Evangelist  if  we  transfer  the  line 
 to  Maiy ;  we  answer  that  as  Joseph  cannot  have 
 had  two  fathers  [which  yet  the  genealogies  seetn 
 literally  to  assign  to  him  (Matt.  i.  16  ;  Luke  iii. 
 23)]  j-i?;«f  explanatory  accommodation  is  necessary 
 to  all  theories.  Lord  A.  Hei"vey  makes  Joseph 
 Jacob's  7tephezv,  and  so  violates  St.  Matthew,  i.  16. 
 Dr.  W.  H.  Mill  seems  to  agree  with  Africanus  and 
 his  copiers  ;  and  not  only  makes  Jacob  and  Heli 
 uterine  brothers,  thus  deviating  from  the  letter  of 
 Matt.  i.  14  and  Luke  iii.  24,  but  adds  a  second 
 explanatory  accommodation  by  making  Joseph  the 
 son  of  Heli,  against  the  letter  of  Matt.  i.  16  ;  St. 
 Ambrose,  on  the  other  hand,  while  closely  embrac- 
 ing the  uterine  theory*  of  Africanus,   inverts   the 
 
 *  Africanus'  theory  is  that  Jacob  and  Heli  were 
 brothers  by  the  same  mother,  '  Estha  '  (Euseb.  H. 
 E.  i.  7),  who  was  successively  married  to  Matthan 
 and  Melchi  [the  names  which  precede  their  own 
 on  the  two  genealogies],  so  as  to  make  room  for  a 
 levirate  marriage  [Levirate  Law],  whereby  the 
 survivor,  Jacob,  on  the  death  of  his  brother,  '  raised 
 up  seed '  to  Heli,  even  Joseph  the  husband  of 
 Mary.  To  say  nothing  of  the  error  of  Africanus 
 in  accounting  'Joseph  the  son  of  Jacob,'  instead  of 
 making  him  the  son  of  Heli,  according  to  the  ex- 
 press provision  of  the  levirate  statute  (Deut.  xxv.  6), 
 he  is  no  doubt  wrong  on  the  general  principle. 
 The  levirate  law  was  inadmissible  in  the  case  of 
 uterine  brothers,  for,  as  they  might  be  of  different 
 tribes  even,  through  their  fathers,  it  might  happen 
 that  through  them  the  very  purpose  of  the  statute 
 might  be  defeated.  Maimonides  (Jabom  Vecha- 
 litza,  c.  l)  has  succinctly  stated  the  Jewish  law; 
 
 he    says,  p''jj;^  pni<  p31K'n  I^N  Dt^n  1»  pHK 
 
 3X^3  i<!5J<  mnK  P^<t^'  (pnt?),  i.e.,  ' brothers  only 
 on  the  mother's  side  [uterine]  are  not  regarded  as 
 brothers,  either  in  the  matter  of  inheritance,  or  in 
 that  of  marrying  the  widow  of  a  deceased  brother 
 and  loosing  of  the  shoe.  They  are,  indeed,  just 
 as  if  they  were  not  (brothers)  at  all.  For  that  consti- 
 tutes net  f-aternity  which  proceeds  not  from  the 
 father's  side.'  Selden,  from  whom  this  quotation 
 is  taken  {De  Successionibus,  etc.,  c.  14),  confirms 
 it  by  the  authority  of  the  Babylonian  Gemara,  c. 
 II,  tit.  Jabimoth,  fol.  17,  b. ;  also,  tit.  Baba  Bathra, 
 c.  8,  fol.  no,  b;  Hilcoth  gedaloth,  num.  31  ;  and 
 Moses  Cotzensis,  prcecept.  affirm.  51,  and  many 
 other  Talmudic  authorities.  We  cannot  but  regard 
 Dr.  W.  H.  Mill's  laboured  effort  to  evade  the  force 
 of  this  legal  objection  {Pantheistic  Principles,  Genea- 
 logies,Y>'p.  I9l-202)as  the  weakest  part  of  hislearned 
 and  valuable  treatise.  Lord  A.  Hervey,  who  re- 
 jects the  details  of  Africanus'  theory  while  accept- 
 ing its  conclusion,  gives  full  weight  to  the  objection 
 
GENEAL.   OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 97 
 
 application  of  it  to  Jacob  and  Heli,  and  so  still 
 incrre  stroni^ly  violates  the  text  of  the  evangelists, 
 inasmuch  as  he  affirms  Joseph  to  be  the  true  son 
 of  Heli,  and  only  son-in-law  of  Jacob,  contrary 
 again  to  the  letter  of  Matt.  i.  i6.  Any  way, 
 then,  some  violence  must  be  done,  and  is  done,  to 
 the  literal  statements  of  the  evangelic  stems.  Our 
 proposal  involves  the  very  least  amount  of  explana- 
 tory accommodation,  for  we  only  make  Joseph  the 
 son-in-law  of  HeK  ;  and  can  this  indeed  be  regarded 
 as  any  deviation  at  all  from  (he  iMer  of  the  original, 
 ^Iujar}<p  rod  ' B.\l,  Joseph  of  Helil  We  think  not. 
 How,  then,  is  Joseph  son-in-law  oiYi€(\'i  Simply 
 by  marrying  the  daughter  of  Heli — the  blessed 
 Virgin.*  No  brothers  are  mentioned  in  Scripture 
 as  belonging  to  the  Virgin  ;  and  this  silence  (the 
 more  remarkable  because  the  name  of  her  sister  is 
 given  ;  see  John  xix.  25)  has  led  to  the  reasonable 
 opinion  that  Maiy  was  an  heiress  (iwlKXripos 
 7rap&e;'os),t  and  as  such  came  under  the  law  of 
 Num.  xxxvi.  8,  which  she  complied  ^^'ith  by 
 marrying  her  kinsman  Joseph,  the  heir  of  the  col- 
 lateral branch  of  her  own  most  illustrious,  though 
 now  much  reduced  family. 
 
 The  opinion  that  Mary  was  an  heiress  is  strongly 
 corroborated  by  the  circumstance  that  she  found 
 it  necessary,  contrai-y  to  the  custom  of  women,  to 
 travel  to  Bethlehem  to  be  registered  (Luke  ii.  5). 
 She  must,  therefore,  have  had  an  inheritance  at 
 Bethlehem,  although  it  may  have  been  mortgaged 
 till  the  year  of  jubilee  ;  and,  consequently,  her 
 husband  Joseph  must  have  belonged  to  the  same 
 tribe  with  herself,  and  probably  been  of  the  very 
 same  family,  i.  e.,  a  descendant  of  David's  (Michae- 
 lis,  Laias  of  Moses,  art.  78).  The  effect  of  Joseph's 
 manying  his  kinswoman,  the  heiress  Mary,  would 
 legally  be  just  what  the  genealogy  of  St.  Luke 
 discloses  ;  those  who  fnarricd  heiresses  were  obliged 
 fo  pass  into  the  family  of  their  fathers-in-law,  and 
 let  themselves  be  reckoned  their  sons.  The  principle 
 of  inheritance  among  the  Israelites  implied  as 
 much  ;  for  the  inheritance  was  given  to  daughters 
 in  order  that  the  name  of  their  father  might  not 
 become  extinct  in  the  tables  of  succession,  and, 
 consequently,  the  sons  of  such  7narriages  were  ne- 
 cessarily connected  with  the  name  of  their  maternal 
 grandfatherX  (Michaelis,   ut  anted).     It  is  some- 
 
 (which  we  have  insisted  upon,  after  Maimonides) 
 founded  on  the  inapplicability  of  the  levirate  law  to 
 uterine  brothers  {Oeneal.  p.  47). 
 
 *  Mr.  Greswell  ( Dissertations  07i  the  Harmony, 
 vol.  ii.  p.  85  [2d  edit.] )  puts  this  very  well,  thus  : 
 '  The  genealogy  of  Christ  as  descended  from  Mary 
 would  not  be  formally  exhibited  as  His  genealogy 
 through  Mary  [because  of  Jewish  usage  excluding 
 female  names] ;  but  rather  as  His  genealogy  through 
 some  one  most  closely  connected  with  Mary  ;  that 
 is  to  say,  through  some  one  who  stood,  or  might  be 
 considered  to  stand,  in  the  same  relation  to  the 
 father  of  Mary  as  Mary  herseK  Now  this  could 
 be  none  but  her  husband  Joseph  ;  to  whom  she 
 was  already  contracted  before  the  birth  of  Christ  ; 
 and  to  whom  she  was  actually  united  in  marriage 
 at  the  time  of  it.' 
 
 t  So  designated  in  Athenian  law.  An  Athenian 
 heiress  was  required  to  marry  her  nearest  kinsman 
 (see  Smith's  Dictio7iary  of  Greek  and  Roman  A  ntiqq ., 
 s.  V.  Epi clems). 
 
 +  In  this,  as  in  several  other  particulars,  the 
 Athenian  law  on  the  rights  and  duties  of  heiresses 
 vol.  II. 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 times  said  that  the  laws  of  Moses  had  by  this 
 time  fallen  into  desuetude.  This  might  have  been 
 often  the  case,  but  we  believe  that  a  conscientious 
 observance  of  the  still  unrepealed  Mosaic  institu- 
 tions was  precisely  that  which  distinguished  from 
 their  laxer  countrymen  such  worthy  characters  as 
 the  members  of  '  the  Holy  Family,'  from  whom 
 was  so  soon  to  spring  He  whose  delight  it  was  to 
 '  fulfil  all  righteousness '  (comp.  Matt.  i.  19;  Luke 
 i.  6,  28,  30;  Matt.  iii.  15).  We  cease  to  wonder, 
 then,  with  this  view  of  Hebrew  law,  at  the  ap- 
 pearance of  Joseph's  name  as  the  son  of  Heli,  as 
 well  as  the  putative  father  of  jfesiis,  for  he  was 
 thus  the  legal  link  between  Jesus  and  Heli,  and  all 
 his  ancestry  (Luke  iii.  23).  In  every  respect  but 
 one  the  register  is  drawn  up  with  legal  precision  ; 
 and  the  one  exception  does  not  vitiate  the  usage, 
 but  arises  ex  abundanti  canteld,  and  from  the 
 special  nature  of  a  unique  case.  We  refer  to  the 
 inserted  parenthesis  ws  ivofil^ero.  The  sacred 
 writer  thereby  leaves  roo?n  for  the  miraculous  con- 
 ception of  onr  Lord,  which  it  is  very  remarkable 
 the  Evangelists  of  the  genealogies  alone  describe, 
 thus  stuUifying  emphatically  the  objection  of  Cel- 
 sus  and  Strauss,  who  asked  tauntingly,  in  the 
 unity  of  the  same  unbelief,  how  Christ  could  be 
 both  the  son  of  Joseph  and  the  object  of  an  im- 
 maculate conception  ?  The  same  clause,  u)s  ivo- 
 ixigero,  serves  (as  it  seems  to  us)  another  import- 
 ant purpose.  As  the  iy^vvTjae  of  St.  Matthew 
 gave  us  the  clue  of  our  interpretation  there,  and 
 assured  us  of  Joseph's  fiatnral  connection  with 
 that  ancestry,  so  here  the  cbs  evopLi^ero  colours,  as 
 it  were,  the  entire  pedigree,  and  gives  to  Joseph 
 nothing  but  a  legal  relation  both  to  Jesus  and  the 
 long  line  which  follows.  And  this  suggests  an 
 argument,  which  in  our  view  is  irresistible,  in 
 proof  that  St.  Luke  gives  us,  in  fact,  the  Virgin's 
 lineage,  although  under  the  name  of  her  husband. 
 For  as  the  parenthesis  sets  forth  our  Lord  to  be 
 merely  the  reputed  and  not  the  actual  son  of 
 Joseph,  it  thereby  clearly  impHes  that  the  genea- 
 logy which  ensues  cannot  be  the  natural  genealogy 
 of  both  Jesus  and  Joseph  ;  in  other  words,  if  it 
 be  a  real  genealogy  in  respect  of  either  of  them, 
 it  can  only  be  an  imputed  one  in  respect  of  the 
 other.  But  the  clause  cbs  ivo/xi^^ero  impresses  a 
 putative  character  on  Joseph's  place  in  it.  Christ's, 
 then,  must  be  a  real  one ^  i.e.,  the  genealogy  must 
 be  his,  connecting  him  naturally  with  all  the 
 names  (except  the  single  expressly  putative  one), 
 which  compose  the  stem.  Now,  how  this  natural 
 connection  with  His  ancestors  is  effected,  no  reader 
 of  St.  Luke's  two  preceding  chapters  can  fail  at  a 
 glance  to  see.  The  real  link  is  Mary,  and  her 
 genealogy  in  chap.  iii.  is,  in  fact,  nothing  else  than 
 a  document  strictly  correlative  with  the  foregoing 
 record  of  the  immaculate  conception. 
 
 Convergence  of  the  two  Genealogies. — The  fifth 
 of  Lord  A.  Hervey's  theses  given  above  we  ac- 
 cept in  its  conclusion,  though  of  course  not  in  its 
 premiss.  'In  point  of  fact^  [he  says],  '  though  not 
 oi  form,  both  the  genealogies  are  as  much  Mary's 
 as  her  husband's.'  Only,  instead  of  inferring  this 
 from  conjecture,  we  would  conclude  it  from  the 
 facts  of  the  genealogies  themselves.  In  all  the 
 great  names  of  the  Lord's  ancestry,  the  two  lines 
 
 (irepl  tO)v  eiTLKKrjpuv)  closely  resembled  the  He- 
 brew provisions  (comp.  Michaelis,  /.^.,with  Smith's 
 G7'eek  and  Latin  Antiqq.,  Art.  Epiclerits). 
 
GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 98 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 converge — in  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  and  all  the 
 Fathers  down  to  David,  and  again  very  remark- 
 ably in  Salathiel  and  Zorobabel,  and  ultimately  in 
 Christ.  The  case  of  Salathiel  we  regard  to  be 
 similar  to  that  of  Joseph.  The  son  of  Jechonias 
 by  birth  (i  Chron.  iii.  17  ;  Matt.  i.  12),  he  is  yet 
 called  the  son  of  Neri  by  St.  Luke  (iii.  27),  in  a 
 legal  sense,  as  having  married  the  daughter  of 
 Neri.  The  two  Evangelists  represent  Zorobabel 
 as  the  son  of  Salathiel.  They  herein  are  agreed 
 with  Ezra  iii.  2  ;  Hagg.  i.  14,  and  ii.  2.  An  un- 
 necessaiy  difficulty,  as  it  seems  to  us,  has  arisen 
 from  the  fact  that  in  i  Chron.  iii.  a  Zerubbabel  is 
 mentioned  as  the  son  of  Pedaiah,  and  conse- 
 quently nephew  of  Salathiel,  who  was  Pedaiah's 
 elder  brother.  Lord  A.  Hervey  supposes  Salathiel 
 had  no  son,  but  adopted  his  nephew  ( Genealogies, 
 p.  100)  ;  others  apply  the  expedient  of  a  levirate 
 marriage,  as  if  Pedaiah  '  raised  up  seed '  to  his 
 deceased  elder  brother  (Dr.  W.  H.  Mill,  p.  165). 
 But  what  need  is  there  of  any  such  indirect  inter- 
 pretation ?  It  cannot  be  unreasonable  to  take  the 
 literal  scriptures  concerned,  and  to  assign,  as  they 
 do,  sons  of  the  same  name  to  the  brothers  Salathiel 
 and  Pedaiah.  Surely  you  will  not  dim  the  lustre 
 of  the  great  '  governor  of  Judah  '  by  entertaining 
 the  very  simple  and  natural  supposition  that  he 
 had  a  first  cousin  called  after  his  own  name  !  How 
 often  family  names  run  alike  in  proximate  branches 
 of  a  family  is  clear  to  any  student  of  the  genealo- 
 gies, both  of  the  Chronicles  and  the  Gospels  [the 
 cases  of  the  two  Jehoram's  and  the  two  Ahaziah's, 
 of  the  allied  families  of  Ahab  and  Jehoshaphat, 
 are  some  illustration  of  the  tendency  to  repeat 
 family  names  among  near  connections].  But  a 
 convincing  evidence  that  two  Zerubbabel's  do  oc- 
 cur in  these  passages  arises  from  the  completely 
 different  names,  not  only  of  their  fathers,  but  also 
 of  the  children,  attributed  to  them  (comp.  i  Chron. 
 iii.  19,  20,  with  Matt.  i.  13  and  Luke  iii.  27),  and 
 again  of  the  remoter  descendants  (comp.  i  Chron. 
 iii.  21-24  with  Matt.  i.  13-15,  and  Luke  iii.  24- 
 26).*  St.  Jerome  {Qiiast.  Hebr.  in  lib.  Faralip), 
 resorts  to  the  expedient,  which  is  as  violent  as  it  is 
 unnecessary,  of  making  Salathiel  and  Pedaiah  one 
 and  the  same  person — a  vir  binominis.  The  di- 
 vergence of  the  descent  into  the  hnes  of  Abiud  (in 
 St.  Matt.  i.  13),  and  of  Rhesa  (in  St.  Luke  iii. 
 27),  carries  with  it,  to  our  mind,  greater  difficulty 
 than  the  last  point.     Lord  A.  Hervey  {Genealogies, 
 
 *  Elaborate  efforts  are  made  by  Dr.  Mill  [Panth. 
 Prin.  pp.  151-154),  and  Lord  A.  Plervey  {Genea- 
 logies, pp.  1 15-127),  to  identify  the  proper  names 
 of  the  two  families  which  occur  in  the  passages 
 respectively  of  the  Chronicles  and  the  Evangelists 
 referred  to  in  the  text.  These  efforts  seem  to  us 
 to  be  failures.  Pedaiah's  '' obsciire''  line,  as  Dr. 
 Mill  calls  it,  is,  after  all,  undoubtedly  a  different 
 line  from  the  illnstrions  one  of  Salathiel.  St. 
 Augustine  (Qiicrst.  xlvi.  in  Deut.),  and  Walafrid 
 Strabo,  suggest  two  Zorobabels  also.  Hottinger 
 {De  Geneal.  fesu  Christi,  Dissert,  jiost. ,  c.  xx. ), 
 makes  three  Zorobabels.  We  think  this  equally  re- 
 pugnant to  the  plain  statements  of  the  Scripture 
 which  relates  to  this  subject.  Since  writing  the 
 above  we  find  our  view  substantially  corroborated 
 in  a  carefully  argued  Dissertation  of  Natalis  Alex- 
 ander {H.  E.  Vet.  Test,  ad  yEtat.  V.,  Diss,  ix.), 
 who  cites  Tostatus  and  Cajetan  as  agreeing  with 
 wliat  we  have  advanced  above. 
 
 p.  in),  supposes  tliat  Phesa  is  not  a  proper  name, 
 but  a  designaiion  of  Zorobabel  as  ^  head,''  or  prince 
 
 of  the  captivity  [SUvJil  K'X")],  and  thus,  by  iden- 
 tifying the  Abiud  of  Matt.  i.  13  with  the  Juda 
 of  Luke  iii.  26,  and  by  supposing  Joanna  to  be 
 omitted  in  the  list  of  the  first  gospel,  he  effects  a 
 convergence  of  fo^tr  generations  [in  Salathiel, 
 Zorobabel,  Joanna,  Juda,  or  Abiud],  in  the  two 
 lines.  There  is  no  ground  for  this  but  the  in- 
 genuity of  the  writer,  which  is  fond  of  making  ex- 
 cursions among  the  Scripture  genealogies.  His 
 characteristic  weakness,  in  our  judgment,  is  the 
 readiness  with  which  he  seizes  on  like  or  identical 
 names  (or  even  elements  of  names),  and  thence 
 concludes  the  identity  of  persons;  forgetful  of  a 
 fact,  strongly  attested  in  the  genealogies,  that 
 similarity  or  sameness  of  names  by  no  means 
 implies  identity,  but  only  family  relationship  in 
 those  that  bear  them.  Rhesa  was  always  regarded 
 as  a  man's  name  by  such  of  the  ancient  writers 
 as  treated  of  the  details  of  this  subject.  It  occurs 
 in  St.  Jerome's  version  {Opera,  ed.  Bened.,  vol. 
 X. ),  and  in  St.  Gregoiy  Nazianzen  {Ca7-mina,  vol. 
 h.  p.  270,  ed.  Beued. ),  ToO  6'  avo,  SaXaS^tijX, 
 Zopo^d^eX,  'Pyjo-d,  'Iwrnv  ;  and  in  the  Syriac  ver- 
 
 sion  thus — \\«— i«^in1  .  «^  |mv  Resafilii  Zoro- 
 babel;  and  so  in  the  old  Gothic,  'Refins,  funaus 
 Zauraubilis,'  Massmann's  Ulphilas,  p.  200.  If 
 Y-r\ad  be  a  late  form  [Xt^n  or  Cjin]  of  the  He- 
 brew word  t^N"),  which  occurs  as  a  proper  name 
 in  Gen.  xlvi.  21,  it  may  possibly  indicate  here 
 that  the  bearer  of  this  name  was  the  eldest  son 
 of  Zorobabel,  the  head  of  the  family,  which  was 
 now  to  be  divided.  (In  Simonis  Onomast.  the 
 word  is  defined  hy  caput,  \.q.,  primariiis).  If  so, 
 he  fitly  hands  on  to  his  posterity  and  to  the  last  of 
 them,  '  Mary's  blessed  Son,'  the  inheritance  of 
 David's  elder  son  Nathan  (i  Chron.  iii.  5)  ;  leav- 
 ing to  his  younger  brother  Abiud  the  function  of 
 transferring  the  younger  Solomon's  heritage  to 
 Mary's  husband  Joseph.  According  to  a  recent 
 scheme  (Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  i.  66S)  the  genealo- 
 gies converge  in  the  third  name  above  Joseph, 
 which  occurs  in  St.  Matthew  (i.  15)  as  Mattlian, 
 and  in  St.  Luke  (iii.  24)  as  Matthat,  who  are  sup- 
 posed to  be  from  the  similarity  of  the  names  one 
 and  the  same  person.  We  dismiss  so  precarious 
 an  hypothesis  without  discussion,  and  observe  that 
 Africanus  {i)i  Epist.  ad  Aristid.  1.  c.)  and  Euse- 
 bius  {Hist.  Eccl.  i.  7)  omit  both  Matthat's  name 
 and  that  of  his  father  Levi,  and  make  Melchi  the 
 father  of  Heli  and  grandfather  of  Joseph  (KarA 
 KovKo-v  biMoius  Tp'iTos  dwb  T^Xovs  MeXxi,  od  vibs  6 
 'HXi  6  Tov  'I(jijaT]<p  TraTTjp).*     St.   Ambrose  agrees 
 
 *  These  two  names,  MarOaT  tov  Aevl,  occur 
 again  higher  up  the  line,  in  ver.  29,  and  have  been 
 by  some  supposed  to  have  passed  by  transcription 
 erroneously  from  one  place  to  the  other.  Pnt  ah 
 existing  MSS.  and  versions  read  them  in  both 
 places.  '  It  is  strange,'  says  Dr.  W.  H.  Mill  (p. 
 1 88,  note),  that  of  the  many  ancient  writers  who 
 follow  Africanus  and  make  Heli  the  son  of  Melchi, 
 none  before  Bede  should  have  remarked  the  omis- 
 sion :  but  that  this  did  not  proceed  from  their 
 copies  of  St.  Luke  M'anting  these  two  names,  we 
 know  for  certain  in  the  case  of  two  of  them  at 
 least  J  and  may,  therefore,  not  improbably  suppose 
 
GENEAL.   OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 99 
 
 GENEAL.  OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 with  Africaniis,  it  would  seem,  in  omitting  these 
 names  ;  for  he  says  (Hb.  iii.  in  Luc),  '  Lucas  vero 
 Joseph  fihum  Heh,  HeH  autem  filium  Melchi  esse 
 descripsit. '  Under  this  section  of  the  convergence 
 of  the  two  Genealogies,  we  cannot  but  mention  the 
 additmt  to  the  two  genealogies  of  SS.  Matthew  and 
 Luke  made  by  John  Damascene  (Orthod.  Fid.  iv.  15) 
 in  the  first  instance,  and  long  afterwards  modified 
 
 Solomon 
 
 by  Grotius  [Annot  in  Luc.  iii.)  Damascene, 
 omitting  Mattliat,  and  putting  Melchi  in  his  place, 
 gives  to  this  last  a  brother  called  Panther,  whose 
 son  Bar-Pa7ither  begat  Joakiin,  the  father  of  the 
 blessed  Virgin  Mary,  second  cousin,  according  to 
 this  view,  of  Joseph.  The  scheme  includes  the 
 name  Levi  (omitted  by  Africanus)  only  as  the 
 father  of  Melchi,  thus — 
 
 Nathan 
 
 Levi 
 
 Matthan  =  Estha 
 
 Jacob  (uterine  brother  of  Heli,  by  their  common 
 mother  Estha)  married  HeH's  widow,  and  by 
 the  law  of  levirate  raised  up  seed  to  his 
 brother. 
 
 Joseph,  the  natural  son  of  Jacob, 
 and  legal  son  of  Heli. 
 
 Grotius  makes  Matthan,  Estha' s  first  husband,  die 
 childless  ;  Melchi,  the  second  husband  of  Estha,  is 
 represented  as  the  father  of  Jacob,  Heli  and  Levi. 
 Jacob  the  eldest  is  reckoned  by  levirate  law  as  the 
 son  of  Matthan,  while  the  second  Heli  becomes  the 
 father  of  Joseph,  who  is  transferred  to  Jacob 
 (childless)  as  his  legal  son  and  heir.  Levi,  the 
 third  son  of  Melchi,  has  a  son  called  Barpanther, 
 who  is  the  father  of  Panther  [strange  perversion  of 
 names  !],  whose  son  Joakim  is  the  father  of  the 
 Virgin  Mary.  Notwithstanding  the  high  authority 
 of  Grotius  with  the  promoters  of  the  theory  we 
 have  throughout  been  opposing,  and  in  spite  of 
 our  respect  for  his  learning,  we  cannot  help  cen- 
 suring this  genealogical  scheme  of  his  as  a  fantastic 
 conceit.  We  derive,  however,  from  both  it  and 
 that  of  which  it  is  a  parody  (Damascene's)  a  confir- 
 mation of  our  theoiy,  that  one  of  the  lines  is  un- 
 doubtedly Mary's — these  writers  prove  the  necessity 
 of  such  an  interpretation  by  actually  devising  a 
 supplemental  branch-genealogy,  in  order  to  include 
 the  mother  of  our  Lord.  How  much  more  simple 
 and  congruous  to  apply  to  her  at  once  one  of  the 
 sacred  originals  ! 
 
 Structitre  of  the  Genealogies. — St.  Matthew  for- 
 mally divides  his  table  into  three  sections,  each 
 containing  fourteen  names  (i.  17).     These  sections 
 
 of  all.  For  Nazianzen  gives  St.  Luke's  genealogy 
 complete,  its  last  line  being,  MeXxi  koX  Kevl  koX 
 MarS-ct;',  'HXei,  'Iwcr??^  {Carmina,  as  referred  to  in 
 the  text)  ;  .St.  Augustine  also  [Qucest.  46  in  Dfut., 
 0pp.,  torn.  iii.  p.  573)  equally  mentions  Matthat 
 and  Levi  as  the  second  and  the  third  progenitors  of 
 Joseph.'  Some  have  found  a  conjectural  authority 
 for  the  omission  of  these  two  names  from  Luke  iii. 
 24  in  Irenseus'  enumeration  of  only  seventy-two 
 generations  from  Adam  to  Christ,  which  can  only 
 be  verified  by  the  omission  of  three  names — these 
 two  and  the  post-diluvian  Cainan  (Iren.  adv.  LLcer. 
 iv.  15).  Though  the  two  names  occur  in  all  the 
 now  known  MSS.,  and  are  read  by  the  best 
 editors,  Bernard  Lamy  {Harm.  p.  28,  31),  as 
 quoted  by  Galland  in  his  great  Bibl.  Patru7n,  torn, 
 ii.,  supposes  that  the  MSS.  of  the  3d  century, 
 when  Africanus  lived,  did  not  contain  them.  This, 
 however,  is  precarious  conjecture. 
 
 Estha  —  Melchi 
 
 (widow  of  I 
 Matthan)   | 
 Heli  (uterine  brother  of 
 Jacob  and  childless  at 
 his  death) 
 
 -Panther 
 
 Bar-Panther 
 
 Joakim  =  Anna 
 
 The  Blessed  Virgin 
 
 are  really  chronological  marks  of  the  groauth, 
 poiver,  and  decline  of  the  Jewish  nation  ;  progress- 
 ing (i)  from  the  great  patriarch  Abraham,  to 
 whom  the  promises  were  first  made,  to  the  great 
 king  David,  to  whom  they  were  renewed ;  (2) 
 from  the  consolidation  of  tlie  royal  power  in  David 
 and  Solomon,  and  its  being  put  on  its  trial,  to  its 
 overthrow  by  the  Babylonians  in  the  days  of 
 Jechonias  (Jehoiachin)  ;  and  (3)  from  the  removal 
 of  the  captive  king  to  Babylon,  to  Jesus  the 
 Messiah,  the  fulfiller  of  the  promises  and  the  re- 
 storer of  the  kingdom.  There  are  two  ways  of 
 making  up  the  three  fourteens.  The  first  (see  the 
 table  in  Dr.  Robinson,  Harm,  of  Gosp.  [Tract  Soc. 
 ed.],  p.  197)  traces  the  first  fourteen  from  Abra- 
 ham to  David  inclusive,  the  second  fourteen  from 
 David  to  Josiah  inclusive,  and  the  third  fourteen 
 from  Jechonias  to  Jesus.  The  second  method 
 traces  the  first  fourteen  as  before,  but  heads  the 
 second  fourteen  with  Solomon,  and  ends  it  with 
 the  Jechonias  of  the  nth  verse  (whom  some  sup- 
 pose to  be  Jehoiakim*),  making  the  third  fourteen 
 commence  with  the  Jechonias  of  the  12th  verse 
 and  terminate  in  our  Lord  (For  the  list,  see  Dr.  A. 
 Clarke's  Commentary,  vol.  v.  p.  38).  'Because 
 from  Abraham  to  David  inclusive  the  number  of 
 recorded  names  in  the  O.  T.  genealogies  is  exactly 
 fourteen,  the  sacred  author,  parting  from  this  main 
 purpose  of  his  genealogy,  adopts  a  very  common 
 
 *  Though  the  great  mass  of  MSS.  gives  the 
 ordinary  reading  of  the  nth  verse  as  translated  in 
 our  A.  v.,  there  are  some  indications  that  a  verv 
 early  text  must  have  admitted  the  name  of  Jehoia- 
 kim previous  to  that  of  his  son  Jechonias  ;  for 
 Irenseus,  in  the  passage  we  have  already  referred 
 to  {adv.  Hares,  iii.  29),  seems  to  imply  that 
 Jehoiakim  was  inserted  in  his  copy  of  St.  Matthew ; 
 "'Joseph  enim  Joacini  et  Jechonise  filius  ostenditur, 
 qiiejnadmodum  et  Matthceus  generationem  ejus  ex- 
 ponit'  [Codex  D  in  Luke  reads  tov  'lexowou,  tov 
 'luaKei/jL,  K.  T.  X.].  Porphyiy  taunts  the  church  for 
 omitting  the  name  ;  Eusebius  says  of  Jechonias 
 and  Joacim,  eh  5i  ?>  /cat  6  avrbs  dt-ww/xig,  XP'^' 
 fievos ;  Hilary  read  the  name  of  Joacim,  and 
 codices  MU,  and  some  thirty  cursives  (See  Gries- 
 bach,  Tischendorf  [ed.  1859],  and  Alford  [ed.  4]). 
 
GENEAL.   OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 100 
 
 GENEAL.   OF  JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Hebrew  usage  ...  in  making  this  remarkable 
 double  hebdomad  of  generations  the  measure  of  the 
 period  that  follows  from  David  to  Christ — an 
 interval  which  is  twice  as  long  as  the  other,  and 
 which  divides  itself  into  two  periods,  each  equal  to 
 it.'  Dr.  W.  H.  Mill,  from  whom  this  last  sentence  is 
 quoted,  has  a  masterly  vindication  of  this  structural 
 character  of  St.  Matthew's  genealogy  from  the 
 aspersions  of  Strauss.  He  adduces  instances  of 
 the  Jewish  usage  of  abridging  and  regulating  pedi- 
 grees from  the  Scriptures  and  other  works  ;  and 
 well  argues  that,  as  the  omissions  in  genealogical 
 lines  have  no  tendency  '  to  deceive  or  to  presume 
 on  the  reader's  ignorance,'  they  cannot  be  objec- 
 tionable when  resorted  to  for  convenience,  symme- 
 try, or  even  graver  reasons*  {Faiitk.  Prin.  pp. 
 105-23].  Of  the  instances  he  adduces,  we  will  only 
 mention  the  abridged  table  of  his  own  descent 
 which  Ezra  gives  [comp.  Ezra  vii.  I -5  with  I 
 Chron.  vi.  3-15],  in  which  he  contracts  the  twenty- 
 two  generations  intervening  between  Aaron  and 
 himself  into  sixteen  ;  and  the  example  produced  by 
 Schoettgen  [Hoi-a  Hebr.  et  Tabu.  vol.  i.  p.  l]  thus  : 
 '  Synopsis  Sohar,  p.  132,  n.  18,  Ab  Abrahamo 
 usque  ad  Salomonem  xv  sunt  generationes  ;  atque 
 tunc  luna  fuit  in  plenilunio.  A  Salomone  usque 
 ad  Zedekiam  iterum  sunt  xv  generationes,  et  tmic 
 luna  defecit,  et  Zedekice  effossi  sunt  oculi.'  Here 
 we  have  the  compression  of  actual  generations 
 into  symmetrical  sections,  and  a  reason  alleged, 
 which,  though  fanciful,  was  meant  to  express  (his- 
 torically) a  moral  purpose.  St.  Matthew's  genea- 
 logy being  meant  only  to  indicate  Christ's  legal 
 
 descent,  is  not  compromised  by  any  omissions — 
 the  salient  points  of  the  line  as  developed  in  the 
 history  are  carefully  given,  and  they  suffice  to  trace 
 the  legal  connection  of  our  Lord  with  his  ances- 
 tors. St.  Luke's  purpose  being  'to  illustrate 
 Christ's  naticral  descent,  omissions  would  have 
 been  fatal.  This  evangelist,  therefore,  supplies  us 
 with  every  generation  in  the  ancestry  of  Jesus 
 Christ,  not  only  up  to  the  primordial  sources  of  the 
 Jewish  nation  and  its  royal  glory  in  Abraham  and 
 David,  but  up  to  the  veiy  origin  of  mankind,  thus 
 indicating  the  common  interest  of  all  in  Him  who 
 came  as  '  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles,  and  to  be 
 the  glory  of  His  people  Israel'  (as  Luke  himself 
 records  His  style,  ii.  32).  On  the  principle  of  this 
 (r<7w//i?/'(?  enumeration  required  in  the  third  gospel,  we 
 prefer  [with  Lord  A.  Hei-vey]  to  obviate  the  great 
 difficulty  of  the  period  between  the  Exodus  and 
 David  containing  but  four  generations,  Salmon, 
 Boaz,  Obed,  Jesse  (comp.  our  Geneal.  with  Ruth 
 iv.  18-22),  by  supposing  the  common  chronology 
 to  be  at  fault,  rather  than  [with  Drs.  Mill,  Hales, 
 and  Kennicott  and  other  writers]  by  assuming  that 
 the  genealogies  are  defective, — defectiveness  not 
 being  characteristic  of  St.  Luke's  register,  which, 
 in  this  period  of  more  than  400  years  (according  to 
 the  ordinary  chronology),  contains  no  more  names 
 than  St.  Matthew's  list.  (See  Lord  A.  H.'s  Gene- 
 alogies, chap.  ix.  pp.  204-276,  a  valuable  portion  of 
 his  learned  work  ;  comp.  therewith  Dr.  W.  H. 
 Mill,  pp.  123-137.)  The  following  scheme  repre- 
 sents the  genealogy  of  our  blessed  Lord  from 
 David,  after  whom  the  divergence  first  begins  : — 
 
 {^Matthew. ) 
 
 David. 
 
 ^Ltike.) 
 
 I 
 Solomon 
 
 I 
 Nathan 
 
 Jechonias, 
 {j^eal  father  of_ 
 
 .SalathieL 
 
 Neri 
 Jegal  father  of) 
 
 Zorobabel 
 
 Abiud 
 
 Rhesa 
 
 Jacob 
 
 I 
 
 Joseph 
 
 {'  Husband  of  Maiy,  of 
 
 whom  was  born 
 
 Jesus  called  Christ.') 
 
 Heli 
 
 I 
 Mary  (= Joseph) 
 
 Jesus  Christ. 
 
 The  descending  mode  of  St.  Matthew,  and  the 
 ascending  mode   of  St.   Luke,    have   parallels    in 
 
 *  For  example,  it  has  been  constantly  held  (See 
 St.  Jerome  on  Afatt.  i.,  and  Ebrard,  Wissens. 
 Kritik  d.  Ev.  Gesch.  p.  192,  as  instances  of  ancient 
 and  modern  authorities)  that  the  omission  of  the 
 three  generations  between  'Joram  and  Ozias'  in 
 Matt.  i.  7,  is  in  consequence  of  their  issuing  from 
 the  idolatrous  Athaliah  of  the  house  of  Ahab  ;  as 
 if,  on  the  principle  of  Deut.  vii.  3,  4,  and  Exod. 
 
 the  genealogies  of  the  O.  T.,  which  are  largely 
 enumerated  by  Surenhusius  (Bi/3\os  KaTaXXa7-^s, 
 Thesis  XXX.,  pp.  109,  no)  ;  one  instance  of  each 
 has  been  already  adverted  to  above.  The  sacer- 
 dotal line  in  i  Chron.  vi.  3-15  is  given  in  the  de- 
 scending form;  whilst  that  in  Ezra  vii.  1-5  is 
 recorded  in  the  ascending  method.     Surenhusius' 
 
 XX.  3,  the  sacred  genealogist  would  indicate  the 
 curse  to  the  third  and  the  fourtli  generations  bj 
 erasing  their  names  out  of  the  lineage  of  jMessialL, 
 
GENERATION 
 
 101 
 
 GENERATION 
 
 concluding  words  are  worth  quoting  here  :  '  Se- 
 cundum duphcem  huncce  modum  genealogia  Jesu 
 Christ!  quoque  recensetur  in  Nov.  Test,  a  Matthseo 
 deorstim,  a  Luca  auteni  siasitm.  Mattheeus  qui- 
 dem  deorsum  recensuit,  ut  Judseis  ad  qu^estionem 
 responderet,  qua  illi  qucerebant  an  Jesus  esset  ex 
 familia  Davidis  cui  promissiones  factre  erant,  quique 
 propterea  erat  veluti  basis  :  Lucas  vero  S2irs2i»i, 
 quia  persotia  Christi  erat  stibjectum  de  aijics  splen- 
 dore,  cap.  ii.  vers.  21-23,  magnifice  locutus  erat.' 
 On  the  import  (in  a  theological  sense)  of  the  posi- 
 tion of  the  Genealogy  [in  St.  Matthew,  before 
 Christ's  nativity  ;  in  St.  Luke,  at  the  threshold  of 
 his  ministry],  the  reader  is  referred  to  Origen, 
 Homil.  28  in  Lite.  {Opera  [ed.  Ben.],  vol.  iii.  pp. 
 965,  966),  among  the  ancients,  and  Bp.  Cowper, 
 Genealogie  of  Clmst  ( Works,  pp.  587-594),  among 
 the  moderns.  The  unique  word  a-yeveaXb'^riTOi 
 (Heb.  vii.  3),  and  the  equivalent  phrase,  /xt;  76^6- 
 aXoyov/xevos  (ver.  6),  describe  a  point  in  the  sacer- 
 dotal '  order  of  Melchisedec,'  which  is  intended 
 to  illustrate  one  element  of  the  superiority  of 
 Christ's  priesthood  over  that  of  Aaron.  These 
 phrases  mean  ivithoid  a  pedigree  [see  margin  of 
 A.  V.  ]  ;  q.  d. ,  not  sta?idi>ig  in  the  public  genealo- 
 gical registers  of  the  Levitical priests.  Hence  it  is 
 added  (ver.  14) :  '  It  is  evident  that  our  Lord  sprang 
 out  of  judah  ;  of  which  tribe  Moses  spake  nothing 
 concerning  priesthood.'  'The  Messiah  is  high- 
 priest,  and  yet  not  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  ;  conse- 
 quently the  Messianic  idea  as  such  [and  so  far] 
 involves  a  going  beyond  the  law.'  Ebrard  on  the 
 Hebrezus  [Clark],  p.  224.  Among  the  more  eminent 
 writers  of  recent  times  who  have  treated  on  this  im- 
 portant subject,  are — (i.)  on  the  side  of  the  theory 
 that  both  genealogies  belong  to  Joseph,  Calvin,  Gro- 
 tius,  Schleiermacher,  Hug,  Meyer,  Patritius,  De 
 Costa,  Mill,  Alford,  EUicott,  Lord  A.  Hervey; 
 while  (2.)  in  favour  of  the  opinion  which  we  have 
 advocated,  as  most  consistent  with  Holy  Scripture, 
 and  with  primitive  opinion  [Dr.  Mill's  reprobation 
 of  it,  as  '  a  modem  gloss,'  is  a  blot  in  his  valuable 
 treatise],  are  Luther,  J.  J.  Hottinger,  Calmet, 
 Spanheim,  G.  J.  Vossius,  South,  Lightfoot,  Suren- 
 husius,  Kidder,  Michaelis,  Kuinoel,  Bengel,  Ols- 
 hausen,  Wieseler,  Ebrard,  Kurtz,  Lange,  Auberlen 
 (in  Herzog),  Hales,  Greswell,  Kitto,  Robinson.^ 
 P.  H. 
 
 GENERATION.  Considerable  obscurity  at- 
 tends the  use  of  this  word  in  the  English  Version, 
 Avhich  arises  from  the  translators  having  merged 
 the  various  meanings  of  the  same  original  word, 
 and  even  of  several  different  words,  in  one  com- 
 mon term,  'generation.'  The  remark  is  too  just 
 that,  in  the  literal  translations  of  the  Scriptures, 
 the  word  '  generation '  generally  occurs  wherever 
 the  Latin  has  generatio,  and  the  Greek  'yeveci  or 
 y^vecTLs  (Rees's  Ency.,  art.  'Generation').  The 
 following  instances  seem  to  require  the  original 
 words  to  be  understood  in  some  or  other  of  their 
 derivative  senses — Gen.  ii.  4,  'These  are  the  ge- 
 nerations '     (nilPin  ;    Sept.    r\   pi^Xos   yeve(7£us ; 
 
 Vulg.  generationes),  rather  'origin,'  'history,'  etc. 
 The  same  Greek  words.  Matt.  i.  I,  are  rendered 
 'genealogy,'  etc.,  by  recent  translators  ;  Campbell 
 has  'lineage.'  Gen.  v.  i,  '  The  book  of  the  gene- 
 rations' (m^in  nSD  ;  Sept.  as  before  ;  Vulg.  liber 
 generationis)  is  properly  a  family  register,  a  his- 
 tory of  Adam.     The  same  wonls,  Gen.  xxxvii.  2, 
 
 mean  a  history  of  Jacob  and  his  descendants  ;  sc 
 also  Gen.  vi.  9,  x.  i,  and  elsewhere.  Gen.  vii.  i 
 'In  this  generation'  (Pltn  '^Vt1  ;  Sept.  iv  r-ff  yeveq. 
 rdvTTi,  Vulg.  in  ge/ieratione  hac)  is  evidently  '  in 
 this  age.'  Gen.  xv.  16,  'In  the  fourth  generation' 
 ("in  ;  Sept.  76ved  ;  Vulg.  generatio)  is  an  instance 
 of  the  word  in  the  sense  of  a  certain  assignea 
 period.  Ps.  xlix.  19,  '  The  generation  of  his 
 fathers'  (ITinN  "llTny,  Sept.  7ej'eas  Traripup 
 avTou),  Gesenius  renders  '  the  dwelling  of  his 
 fathers,'   i.e.,   the  grave,   and  adduces  Is.  xxxviii. 
 
 12,  Ps.  Ixxiii.  15,  'The  generation  of  thy  child- 
 ren '  (T'J3  "TiT  ;  Sept.  yivtq,  rG)v  viQv  aov)  is  'class,' 
 'order,'    'description;'  as  in  Prov.    x.xx.    11,  12, 
 
 13,  14.  Is.  liii.  8,  '  Who  shall  declare  his  gene- 
 ration?' (Iin  ;  Sept.  Triv  yeveav  avroO  rLs  hrfyr]- 
 aerai ;  Vulg.  generatio)  Lowth  renders  '  manner 
 of  life,'  in  translation  and  note,  but  adduces  no 
 precedent.  Some  consider  it  equivalent  to  i?"l7, 
 ver.  10:  7ei'ed  (Sept.)  answers  to  y~lT,  Esther  ix. 
 28.  Josephus  uses  -KoKkr^v  yevedv,  Antiq.  i.  10.  3 
 (Hengstenberg,  Christology  of  the  Old  Testament, 
 vol.  ii.  p.  290,  Edin.  1856 ;  Pauli,  Analect.  He- 
 braic, p.  162,  Oxford,  1839).  Michaelis  renders 
 it,  '  Where  was  the  providence  that  cared  for  his 
 life  ? '  Gesenius  and  Rosenmiiller,  '  Who  of  his 
 contemporaries  reflected?'  Seller,  '  Who  can  de- 
 scribe his  length  of  life  ?'  In  the  N.  T.,  Matt.  i. 
 17,  y^via.1  is  a  series  of  persons,  a  succession  from, 
 the  same  stock  ;  so  used  by  Josephus  {Antiq.  i.  7. 
 2)  ;  Philo  {Vit.  Mos.,  vol.  i.  p.  603)  ;  Matt.  iii.  7, 
 yivvrjixaTa  ext-Svwv,  is  well  rendered  by  Doddridge 
 and  others  'brood  of  vipers.'  Matt.  xxiv.  34,  rj 
 7ei/ea  aurr]  means  the  generation  or  persons  then 
 living  contemporary  with  Christ  (see  Macknight's 
 Har}nony  for  an  illustration  of  this  sense).  Luke 
 xvi.  8,  ets  Tr\v  yeveav  T7]v  eavrCiv,  '  in  their  genera- 
 tion,' etc.,  wiser  in  regard  to  their  dealings  with 
 the  men  of  their  generation  ;  Rosenmiiller  gives, 
 inter  se.  In  i  Pet.  ii.  9,  yivo's  eKkeKTbv,  is  a  '  cho- 
 sen people,'  quoted  from  Sept.  Vers,  of  Is.  xliii.  20. 
 The  ancient  Greeks,  and,  if  we  may  credit  Hero- 
 dotus and  Diodorus  .Siculus,  the  Egyptians  also, 
 assigned  a  certain  period  to  a  generation.  The 
 Greeks  reckoned  three  generations  for  every  hun- 
 dred years,  i.  e.,  333  years  to  each.  Herod,  ii.  142, 
 yiv^aX  rpeis  dvSpwv  eKarbv  'ired  icm,  '  three  genera- 
 tions of  men  make  one  hundred  years.'  This  is 
 nearly  the  present  computation.  To  the  same 
 effect  Clem.  Alexandrinus  speaks  {Strom,  i.  2) ;  so 
 also  Phavorinus,  who,  citing  the  age  of  Nestor  from 
 Homer  (//.  i.  250),  rip  S'  7^5??  Svo  fih  yeveai,  '  two 
 generations,'  says,  it  means  that  virepe^-q  to,  e^rj- 
 Kovra  irrj,  '  he  was  above  sixty  years  old.'  The 
 Greeks,  however,  assigned  different  periods  to  a 
 yevea  at  different  times  (Perizonius,  Orig.  ALgypt.^ 
 p.  175,  seq.  ;  Jensius,  Ferciil.  Literar.,  p.  6).  The 
 ancient  Hebrews  also  reckoned  by  the  generation, 
 and  assigned  different  spaces  of  time  to  it  at  dif- 
 ferent periods  of  their  history.  In  the  time  of 
 Abraham  it  was  one  hundred  years  (comp.  Gen. 
 XV.  16,  'in  the  fourth  generation  they  shall  come 
 hither').  This  is  explained  in  verse  13,  and  in 
 Exod.  xii.  40,  to  be  four  hundred  years.  Caleb 
 •wa.?>  fourth  in  descent  from  Judah,  and  Moses  and 
 Aaron  v/tie.  fottrth  from  Levi.      In  Deut.  i.  35,  ii- 
 
 14,  Moses  uses  the  term  for  thirty-eight  years.  In 
 later  times  (Banich  vi.,  in  the  Epistle  of  Jere- 
 miah, ver.  2)  7e^ed  clearly  means  ten  years.  In 
 Matt.  i.  17,  yevea  means  a  single  descent  from 
 father  to  son.     Homer  uses  the  word  in  the  same 
 
GENESIS 
 
 102 
 
 GENESIS 
 
 sense    (//,    i.    250)  ;    also    Herodotus    (i.    3). — 
 J.  F.  D. 
 
 GENESIS  (Sept.  TeWo-is),  the  first  book  of  the 
 Pentateuch  is,  in  Hebrew,  called  JT'EJ'X"!!,  from 
 the  word  with  which  it  begins.  This  venerable 
 monument,  with  which  the  sacred  literature  of  the 
 Hebrews  commences,  and  which  forms  its  real 
 basis,  is  divided  into  two  main  parts  ;  one  uni- 
 versal, and  one  special.  The  most  ancient  history 
 of  the  whole  human  race  is  contained  in  chapters 
 i.-xi.,  and  the  history  of  Israel's  ancestors,  the 
 patriarchs,  in  chapters  xii.  -1.  These  two  parts  are, 
 however,  so  intimately  connected  with  each  other 
 that  it  would  be  erroneous  to  ascribe  to  the  first 
 merely  the  aim  of  furnishing  a  universal  history. 
 The  chief  aim  which  pervades  the  whole  is  to 
 shew  how  the  theocratic  institution  subsequently 
 founded  by  Moses  was  rendered  possible  and 
 necessary.  The  book,  therefore,  takes  its  starting- 
 point  from  the  original  unity  of  the  human  race, 
 and  their  original  relation  to  God,  and  proceeds 
 thence  to  the  interruption  of  that  relation  by  the 
 appearance  of  sin,  which  gradually  and  progres- 
 sively wrought  an  external  and  internal  division  in 
 the  human  race  for  want  of  the  principles  of  divine 
 life  which  originally  dwelt  in  man  in  general,  but 
 which  had  subsequently  been  preserved  only  among 
 a  small  and  separate  race — a  race  which  in  progress 
 of  time  became  more  and  more  isolated  from  all 
 the  other  tribes  of  the  earth,  and  enjoyed  for  a 
 series  of  generations  the  special  care,  blessing,  and 
 guidance  of  the  Lord.  The  Mosaical  theocracy 
 appears,  therefore,  by  the  general  tenor  of  Genesis, 
 partly  as  a  restoration  of  the  original  relation  to 
 God,  of  the  communion  of  man  with  God,  and 
 partly  as  an  institution  which  had  been  preparing 
 by  God  himself  through  a  long  series  of  manifesta- 
 tions of  his  f)ower,  justice,  and  love.  Genesis  thus 
 furnishes  us  with  the  primary  view  and  notion  of 
 the  whole  of  the  theocracy,  and  may  therefore  be 
 considered  as  the  historical  foundation  without 
 which  the  subsequent  history  of  the  covenant 
 people  would  be  incomplete  and  unintelligible. 
 
 The  wtiiy  and  composition  of  the  work,  which  is 
 a  point  in  dispute  among  the  critics  in  regard  to  all 
 the  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  have  been  particu- 
 larly questioned  in  the  case  of  Genesis.  The  ques- 
 tion was  raised  whether  the  sources  from  which  the 
 tvriter  of  Genesis  drew  his  information  were  written 
 documents  or  oral  tradition.  Writers  as  early  as 
 Vitringa  {Obs.  Sac.  i.  4),  Richard  Simon,  Clericus, 
 and  others,  though  they  were  of  opinion  that 
 Genesis  is  founded  on  written  sources,  did  not  un- 
 dertake to  describe  the  nature  and  quality  of  those 
 sources.  Another  opinion,  advanced  by  Otmar, 
 in  Henke's  Magaz.  ii.,  that  Egyptian  pyramids  and 
 other  monuments  of  a  similar  nature  were  the 
 sources  of  Genesis,  was  but  transient  in  the  critical 
 world  ;  while  the  attempt  of  some  critics  not  only 
 to  renew  the  previous  assumption  that  Genesis  is 
 founded  on  written  sources,  but  also  to  determine 
 more  closely  the  character  of  those  sources,  has 
 gained  more  lasting  approval  among  the  learned. 
 Why  different  names  of  God  are  prevalent  in  dif- 
 ferent portions  of  Genesis  is  a  question  much  dis- 
 cussed by  early  theologians  and  rabbis.  Astruc,  a 
 Belgian  physician,  in  his  Conjectures  sur  les  Me- 
 moii-es  originaux,  etc.,  Bruxelles,  1753-58,  was  the 
 first  to  apply  the  two  Hebrew  names  of  God, 
 Jehovah  and  Elohini,  to  the  subject  at  issue.     As- 
 
 truc's  demonstration  had  many  feeble  points.  He 
 assumed  that  there  had  originally  existed  a  number 
 of  isolated  documents,  which  had  subsequently,  by 
 the  fault  of  transcribers,  been  joined  and  strung 
 together  in  the  present  form  of  Genesis.  Eich- 
 horn's  critical  genius  procured  for  this  hypothesis  a 
 favourable  reception  almost  throughout  the  whole 
 of  Germany.  Eichhorn  pruned  away  its  excre- 
 scences, and  confined  his  own  view  to  the  assump- 
 tion of  only  two  different  documents,  respectively 
 characterised  by  the  two  names  of  Jehovah  and 
 Elohini.  Other  critics,  such  as  Ilgen  {Urkunden 
 des  Jerusalem  Tempel-Archivs,  1798),  Gramberg 
 {Adumhratio  libri  Geneseos  secundum  fontes,  1828), 
 and  others,  went  still  farther,  and  pre-supposed 
 three  different  documents  in  Genesis.  Vater  went 
 much  beyond  Eichhorn.  He  fancied  himself  to  be 
 able  to  combat  the  authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch 
 by  producing  a  new  hypothesis.  He  substituted  for 
 Eichhorn's  'document-hypothesis'  his  own  'frag- 
 ment-hypothesis,' which  obtained  great  authority, 
 especially  on  account  of  its  being  adopted  by  De 
 Wette.  According  to  this  opinion  Genesis,  as  well 
 as  the  greater  part  of  the  Pentateuch,  consists  of  a 
 great  number  of  very  small  detached  fragments, 
 internally  unconnected  with  each  other,  but  tran- 
 scribed seriatim,  although  originating  in  very  dif- 
 ferent times  and  from  different  authors.  This 
 'fragment-hypothesis'  has  now  been  almost  gene- 
 rally given  up.  Even  its  zealous  defenders,  not 
 excepting  De  Wette  himself,  have  relinquished  it. 
 In  its  place  the  former  'document-hypothesis'  has 
 been  resumed  by  some  critics,  simplified  however 
 and  supported  by  new  and  better  arguments. 
 There  is  at  present  a  great  variety  of  opinion  among 
 divines  concerning  this  hypothesis.  The  leading 
 features  of  this  diversity  may  be  comprised  in  the 
 following  summary.  According  to  the  view  of 
 Stahelin,  De  Wette,  Ewald,  Von  Bohlen,  Tuch, 
 and  others,  Genesis  is  founded  on  two  principal 
 original  documents.  That  of  Elohim  is  closely 
 connected  in  its  parts,  and  forms  a  whole,  while 
 that  of  Jehovah  is  a  mere  complementary  docu- 
 ment, supplying  details  at  those  points  where  the 
 former  is  abrupt  and  deficient,  etc.  These  two 
 documents  are  said  to  have  been  subsequently  com- 
 bined by  the  hand  of  an  editor  so  ably,  as  often  to 
 render  their  separation  difficult,  if  not  altogether 
 impossible.  But  Ranke,  Hengstenberg,  Drechsler, 
 Hiivernick,  and  others,  maintain  that  Genesis 
 is  a  book  closely  connected  in  all  its  parts, 
 and  composed  by  only  one  author,  while  the 
 use  of  the  two  diff"erent  names  of  God  is  not 
 owing  to  two  different  sources  on  which  Genesis 
 is  founded,  but  solely  to  the  different  significa- 
 tions of  these  two  names.  The  use  of  each  of  the 
 two  names,  Jehovah  and  Elohim,  is  everywhere  in 
 Genesis  adapted  to  the  sense  of  the  passages  in 
 which  the  writer  has  purposely  inserted  the  one 
 name  or  the  other.  This  point  of  view  is  the  more 
 to  be  considered,  as  it  is  the  peculiar  object  of  the 
 author  to  point  out  in  Genesis  the  gradual  and  pro- 
 gressive development  of  the  divine  revelations. 
 The  opponents  have  in  vain  attempted  to  discover 
 in  Genesis  a  few  contradictions  indicative  of  diffe- 
 rent documents  in  it  ;  their  very  admission,  that  a 
 fixed  plan  and  able  compilation  visibly  pervade  the 
 whole  of  the  book,  is  in  itself  a  refutation  of  such 
 supposed  contradictions,  since  it  is  hardly  to  be 
 conceived  that  an  editor  or  compiler  who  has  shown 
 so  much  skill  and  an.xiety  to  give  unity  to  the  book 
 
GENESIS 
 
 103 
 
 GENESIS 
 
 should  have  cared  so  little  about  the  removal  of 
 those  contradictions.  The  whole  of  Genesis  is  per- 
 vaded by  such  a  freedom  in  the  selection  and  treat- 
 ment of  the  existing  traditions,  such  an  absence  of 
 all  trace  of  any  previous  source  or  documents  which 
 might  in  some  measure  have  confined  the  writer 
 within  certain  limits  of  views  and  expressions,  as 
 to  render  it  quite  impracticable  to  separate  and  fix 
 upon  them  specifically,  even  if  there  were  portions 
 in  Genesis  drawn  from  earlier  written  documents. 
 
 That  first  question  concerning  the  unity  of  the 
 book  is  closely  connected  with  another  question 
 respecting  its  authenticity,  or  whether  Moses  was 
 the  author  of  Genesis.  We  confine  ourselves  here 
 to  only  a  few  remarks  on  the  authenticity  of  Gene- 
 sis in  particular,  and  refer  the  reader  for  further 
 information  to  the  article  Pentateuch.  Some 
 critics  have  attempted  to  ascertain  the  period  when 
 Genesis  was  composed,  from  a  few  passages  in  it 
 which  they  say  must  be  anachronisnis,  if  Moses 
 was  really  the  author  of  the  book  (v.  ex.  gr.  Tuch, 
 Coinmentar  iiber  Genesis,  p.  Ixxxv.  sq.)  Among 
 such  passages  are,  in  particular,  Gen.  xii.  6 ;  xiii. 
 7;  'And  the  Canaanite  was  then  in  the  land.' 
 This  remark,  they  say,  could  only  have  been  made 
 by  a  writer  who  lived  in  Palestine  after  the  extirpa- 
 tion of  the  Canaanites.  But  the  sense  of  the  pas- 
 sage is  not  that  the  Canaanites  had  not  as  yet  been 
 extirpated,  but  merely  that  Abraham,  on  his  arrival 
 in  Canaan,  had  already  found  there  the  Canaanites. 
 This  notice  was  necessary,  since  the  author  subse- 
 quently describes  the  intercourse  between  Abraham 
 and  the  Canaanites,  the  lords  of  the  country.  Ac- 
 cording to  the  explanation  given  to  the  passage  by 
 the  opponents,  such  an  observation  would  be  quite 
 a  superfluous  triviality.  Also  the  name  Hebron 
 (Gen.  xiii.  i8;  xxiii.  2),  they  say,  was  not  intro- 
 duced till  after  the  time  of  Moses  (Josh.  xiv.  15  ; 
 XV.  13).  This,  however,  does  not  prove  anything, 
 since  Hebron  was  the  original  Hebrew  name  for 
 the  place,  which  was  subsequently  changed  into 
 Arba  (by  a  man  of  that  name),  but  was  restored 
 by  the  Israelites  on  their  entrance  into  Canaan. 
 The  opponents  also  maintain  that  the  name  of  the 
 place  Dan  (Gen.  xiv.  14)  was  given  only  in  the 
 post-Mosaical  period  (Josh.  xix.  47;  Judg.  xviii. 
 29).  But  the  two  last  passages  speak  of  quite  a 
 different  place.  There  were  two  places  called 
 Dan  ;  Dan-^aaw  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  6),  and  Dan-Zaw/^, 
 or  Leshem.  In  Genesis,  they  further  add,  fre- 
 quently occurs  the  name  Bethel  (xii.  8  ;  xxviii.  19  ; 
 XXXV  15);  while  even  in  the  time  of  Joshua  the 
 place  was  as  yet  called  Luz  (Josh,  xviii.  13).  But 
 the  name  Bethel  was  not  first  given  to  the  place  by 
 the  Israelites  in  the  time  of  Joshua,  there  being  no 
 occasion  for  it,  since  Bethel  was  the  old  patriarchal 
 name,  which  the  Israelites  restored  in  the  place  of 
 Luz,  a  name  given  by  the  Canaanites.  Another 
 passage  in  Genesis  (xxxvi.  31),  '  Before  there  reigned 
 any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel,'  is  likewise 
 supposed  to  have  been  written  at  a  period  when 
 the  Jews  had  already  a  king  over  them.  But  the 
 broachers  of  these  objections  forget  that  this  pas- 
 sage refers  to  those  promises  contained  in  the  Pen- 
 tateuch in  general,  and  in  Genesis  in  particular 
 (comp.  Gen.  xxxv.  11),  that  there  should  hereafter 
 be  kings  among  the  Israelites  as  an  independent 
 nation.  In  comparing  Israel  with  Edom  (Gen. 
 xxxvi.),  the  sacred  writer  cannot  refrain  from  ob- 
 serving that  Edom,  though  left  without  divine  pro- 
 mises of  poS:jessmg  kings,   nevertheless  possessed 
 
 them,  and  obtained  the  glory  of  an  independent 
 kingdom,  long  before  Israel  could  think  of  such  an 
 independence  ;  and  a  little  attention  to  the  sense  of 
 the  passage  will  shew  how  admirably  the  observa- 
 tion suits  a  writer  in  the  Mosaical  period.  The 
 passage  (Gen.  xv.  18)  where  the  land  of  Israel  is 
 described  as  extending  from  the  river  of  Egypt  (the 
 Nile)  to  the  great  river  (Euphrates),  it  is  alleged, 
 could  only  have  been  penned  during  the  splendid 
 period  of  the  Jews,  the  times  of  David  and  Solo- 
 mon. Literally  taken,  however,  the  remark  is  in- 
 applicable to  any  period,  since  the  kingdom  of  the 
 Jews  at  no  period  of  their  history  extended  so  far. 
 That  promise  must,  therefore,  be  taken  in  a  rheto- 
 rical sense,  describing  the  central  point  of  the 
 proper  countiy  as  situated  between  the  two  rivers. 
 The  historical  character  of  the  contents  of  Gene- 
 sis forms  a  more  comprehensive  subject  of  theolo- 
 gical discussion.  It  is  obvious  that  the  opinions 
 regarding  it  must  be  principally  influenced  by  the 
 dogmatical  views  and  principles  of  the  respective 
 critics  themselves.  Hence  the  grea!t  variety  of 
 opinion  that  still  prevails  on  that  subject.  Some, 
 such  as  Vatke,  Von  Bohlen,  and  others,  assert  the 
 whole  contents  of  Genesis  to  be  unhistorical.  Tuch 
 and  others  consider  Genesis  to  be  interwoven  with 
 mythical  elements,  but  think  that  the  rich  histori- 
 cal elements,  especially  in  the  account  of  the  patri- 
 archs, can  be  clearly  discerned.  Some,  again,  limit 
 the  mythological  part  to  the  first  two  chapters  only ; 
 while  others  perceive  in  the  whole  book  a  consis- 
 tent and  truly  historical  impress.  The  field  of  con- 
 troversy is  here  so  extensive,  and  the  arguments  on 
 both  sides  are  so  numerous,  that  we  must  content 
 ourselves  in  this  article  with  a  veiy  few  remarks  011 
 the  subject.  Genesis  is  a  book  consisting  of  two 
 contrasting  parts  ;  the  first  part  introduces  us  into 
 the  greatest  problems  of  the  human  mind,  such  as 
 the  Creation  and  the  fall  of  man  ;  and  the  second 
 into  the  quiet  solitude  of  a  small  defined  circle  of 
 families.  In  the  former,  the  most  sublime  and 
 wonderful  events  are  described  with  childlike  sim- 
 plicity ;  while  in  the  latter,  on  the  contrary,  the 
 most  simple  and  common  occurrences  are  inter- 
 woven with  the  sublimest  thoughts  and  reflections, 
 rendering  the  small  family  circle  a  whole  world  in 
 history,  and  the  principal  actors  in  it  prototypes 
 for  a  whole  nation,  and  for  all  times.  The  contents 
 in  general  are  strictly  religious.  Not  the  least  trace 
 of  mythology  appears  in  it.  Consequently  there 
 are  no  mythical  statements,  because  whatever  is 
 mythical  belongs  to  mythology,  and  Genesis  plainly 
 shews  how  very  far  remote  the  Hebrew  mode  of 
 thinking  was  from  mythical  poetry,  which  might 
 have  found  ample  opportunity  of  being  brought 
 into  play  when  the  writer  began  to  sketch  the  early 
 times  of  the  Creation.  It  is  true  that  the  narra- 
 tions are  fraught  with  wonders.  But  primeval 
 wonders,  the  marvellous  deeds  of  God,  are  the 
 very  subject  of  Genesis.  None  of  these  wonders, 
 however,  bear  a  fantastical  impress,  and  there  is 
 no  useless  prodigaHty  of  them.  They  are  all  pene- 
 trated and  connected  by  one  common  leading  idea, 
 and  are  all  related  to  the  counsel  of  God  for  the 
 salvation  of  man.  This  principle  sheds  its  lustrous 
 beams  through  the  whole  of  Genesis  ;  therefore  the 
 wonders  therein  related  are  as  little  to  be  ascribed 
 to  the  invention  and  imagination  of  man  as  the 
 whole  plan  of  God  for  human  salvation.  The 
 foundation  of  the  divine  theocratical  institution 
 throws  a  strong  light  upon  the  early  patriarchal 
 
GENESIS 
 
 104 
 
 GENESIS 
 
 times  ;  the  reality  of  the  one  proves  the  reality  of 
 the  other,  as  described  in  Genesis. 
 
 The  separate  accounts  in  Genesis  also  manifest 
 great  internal  evidence  of  truth  if  we  closely  examine 
 them.  They  bear  on  their  front  the  most  beautiful 
 impress  of  truth.  The  costnogony  in  Genesis  stands 
 unequalled  among  all  others  known  in  the  ancient 
 world.  No  mythology,  no  ancient  philosophy,  has 
 ever  come  up  to  the  idea  of  a  creation  out  of  tio/hhig. 
 All  the  ancient  systems  end  in  Pantheism,  Mate- 
 rialism, Emanation-theory,  etc.  But  the  Biblical 
 cosmogony  occupies  a  place  of  its  own,  and  there- 
 fore must  not  be  ranked  among,  or  confounded 
 with,  any  of  the  ancient  systems  of  mythology  or 
 philosophy.  The  mythological  and  philosophical 
 cosmogonies  may  have  been  derived  from  the  Bibli- 
 cal, as  being  later  depravations  and  misrepresenta- 
 tions of  Biblical  truth  ;  but  the  contents  of  Genesis 
 cannot,  vice  versd,  have  been  derived  from  mytho- 
 logy or  philosophy.  Moreover,  only  with  the 
 Biblical  fundamental  idea  of  the  relation  of  God  to 
 his  creatures,  ccmsequently  only  with  the  doctrine 
 of  creation  out  of  nothing,  is  it  possible  to  furnish 
 an  historical  representation  of  creation.  Eveiy  sys- 
 tem deviating  from  this  contains  an  internal  con- 
 tradiction against  histoiy,  because  it  necessarily 
 substitutes  tTie  idea  of  eternity  for  that  of  time  ; 
 and  consequently  does  not  admit  of  any  history, 
 but  only  of  either  mythology  or  abstract  reflection. 
 The  historical  delineation  also  of  the  Creation  and 
 of  the  fall  of  man  does  not  bear  the  least  national 
 interest  or  colouring,  but  is  of  a  truly  universal 
 nature,  while  every  mythus  bears  the  stamp  of  the 
 national  features  of  the  nation  and  countiy  where 
 it  originated  and  found  development.  All  mythi 
 are  subject  to  continual  development  and  varia- 
 tions, but  among  the  Hebrews  the  accounts  in 
 Genesis  stand  firm  and  immutable  for  all  times, 
 without  the  least  thing  being  added  or  altered  in 
 them  for  the  purpose  of  further  development,  even 
 by  the  N.  T.  What  a  solid  guarantee  must  there 
 be  in  this  foundation  of  all  subsequent  revelations, 
 since  it  has  been  admitted  and  maintained  by  all 
 generations  with  such  immovable  firmness  !  The 
 ancient  heathen  traditions  coincide  in  many  points 
 with  the  Biblical  accounts,  and  serve  to  illustrate 
 and  confirm  them.  This  is  especially  the  case  in 
 the  ancient  traditions  concerning  the  Deluge  (Gen. 
 vi.  9),  and  in  the  list  of  nations  in  the  loth  chap- 
 ter ;  for  instance  (Gen.  x.  4),  Tarshish  is  called  the 
 son  of  Javan.  This  indicates  that  the  ancient  in- 
 habitants of  Tarshish  or  Tartessus  in  .Spain  were 
 erroneously  considered  to  be  a  Phoenician  colony 
 like  those  of  other  towns  in  its  neighbourhood, 
 and  that  they  sprang  from  Javan,  that  is,  Greece. 
 That  they  were  of  Greek  origin  is  clear  from  the 
 account  of  Herodotus  (i.  163).  Also  (ver.  8), 
 Nimrod,  the  ruler  of  Babel,  is  called  the  son  of 
 Cush,  which  is  in  remarkable  unison  with  the 
 mythological  tales  concerning  Bel  and  his  Egyptian 
 descent  (comp.  Diodor.  Sic.  i.  28,  81  ;  Pausan,  iv. 
 23.  5).  SidoiL  alone  is  mentioned  (ver.  15),  but 
 not  Tyriis  (comp.  xlix.  13),  which  arose  only  in 
 the  time  of  Joshua  (Josh.  xix.  29)  ;  and  that  Sidon 
 was  an  older  town  than  Tyriis,  by  which  it  was 
 afterwards  eclipsed,  is  certified  by  a  number  of 
 ancient  reports  (comp.  Hengstenberg,  Z>e  Rebus 
 Tyrioiiiru,  pp.  6,  7). 
 
 With  the  patriarchal  history  (xii.  sqq.)  begins  an 
 historical  sketch  of  a  peculiar  character.  The  cir- 
 cumstantial details  in  it  allow  us  to  examine  more 
 
 closely  the  historical  character  of  these  accounts. 
 The  numerous  descriptions  of  the  mode  of  life  in 
 those  days  furnish  us  with  a  very  vivid  picture. 
 We  meet  everywhere  a  sublime  simplicity  quite 
 worthy  of  patriarchal  life,  and  never  to  be  found 
 again  in  later  history.  One  cannot  suppose  that  it 
 would  have  been  possible  in  a  later  period,  estranged 
 from  ancient  simplicity,  to  invent  such  a  picture. 
 
 The  authenticity  of  the  patriarchal  history  could 
 be  attacked  only  by  analogy,  the  true  historical  test 
 of  negative  criticism  ;  but  the  patriarchal  history 
 has  no  analogy  ;  while  a  great  historical  fact,  the 
 Mosaical  tlieocracy  itself,  might  here  be  adduced 
 in  favour  of  the  truth  of  Genesis.  The  theocracy 
 stands  without  analogy  in  the  history  of  the  human 
 race,  and  is,  nevertheless,  true  above  all  historical 
 doubt.  But  this  theocracy  cannot  have  entered 
 into  history  without  preparatory  events.  The  facts 
 which  led  to  the  introduction  of  the  theocracy  are 
 contained  in  the  accounts  of  Genesis.  Moreover, 
 this  preparation  of  the  theocracy  could  not  consist 
 in  the  ordinary  providential  guidance.  The  race  of 
 patriarchs  advances  to  a  marvellous  destination  ; 
 the  road  also  leading  to  this  destination  must  be 
 peculiar  and  extraordinary.  The  opponents  of 
 Genesis  forget  that  the  marvellous  events  of  patri- 
 archal history  which  offend  them  most,  partake  of 
 that  character  of  the  whole,  by  which  alone  this 
 history  becomes  commensurate  and  possible. 
 
 There  are  also  many  separate  vestiges  warranting 
 the  antiquity  of  these  traditions,  and  proving  that 
 they  were  neither  invented  nor  adorned ;  for  in- 
 stance, Jacob,  the  progenitor  of  the  Israelites,  is 
 introduced  not  as  the  firstborn,  which,  if  an  unhis- 
 torical  and  merely  external  exaltation  of  that  name 
 had  been  the  aim  of  the  author,  would  have  been 
 more  for  tliis  purpose. 
 
 Neither  the  blemishes  in  the  history  of  Abra- 
 ham, nor  the  gross  sins  of  the  sons  of  Jacob, 
 among  whom  even  Levij  the  progenitor  of  the 
 sacerdotal  race,  forms  no  exception,  are  concealed. 
 
 The  same  author,  whose  moral  principles  are  so 
 much  blamed  by  the  opponents  of  Genesis,  on  ac- 
 count of  the  description  given  of  the  life  of  Jacob, 
 produces,  in  the  history  of  Abraham,  a  picture  of 
 moral  greatness  which  could  have  originated  only 
 in  facts. 
 
 The  faithfulness  of  the  author  manifests  itself 
 also  especially  in  the  description  of  the  expedition 
 of  the  kings  from  Upper  to  Western  Asia  ;  in  his 
 statements  concerning  the  person  of  Melchizedek 
 (Gen.  xiv. )  ;  in  the  circumstantial  details  given  of 
 the  incidents  occurring  at  the  purchase  of  the  here- 
 ditary burial-place  (ch.  xxiii. )  ;  in  the  genealogies 
 of  Arabian  tribes  (ch.  xxv.)  ;  in  the  genealogy  of 
 Edom  (ch.  xxxvi.)  ;  and  in  many  remarkable  details 
 which  are  interwoven  with  the  general  accotmts. 
 In  the  histoiy  of  Joseph  the  patriarchal  history 
 comes  into  contact  with  Egypt ;  and  here  the 
 accounts  given  by  ancient  classical  writers,  as  well 
 as  the  monuments  of  Egypt,  frequently  furnish 
 some  splendid  confirmations.  For  instance,  the 
 account  given  (xlvii.  13-26)  of  the  manner  in  which 
 the  Pharaohs  became  proprietors  of  all  the  lands, 
 with  the  exception  of  those  belonging  to  the  priests, 
 is  confirmed  by  Herodotus  (ii.  109),  and  by  Dio- 
 dorus  Siculus  (i.  73).  The  manner  of  embalming 
 described  in  Gen.  1.,  entirely  agrees  with  the 
 description  of  Herodotus,  ii.  84,  etc.  For  otheJ 
 data  of  a  similar  kind,  compare  Hengstenberg  {Die 
 Biicher  Mosis  und  Aegyptcn,  p.  21,  sq.) 
 
GENEVA  BIBLE 
 
 105 
 
 GENTILES 
 
 For  the  important  commentaries  and  writ- 
 ings on  Genesis,  see  the  article  Pentateuch. — 
 H.  A.  C.  H. 
 
 GENEVA  BIBLE.     [English  Versions.] 
 
 GENNESARETH,  Lake  of.     [Sea.] 
 
 GENNESARETH,  The  Land  of  [t,  yy  Tev- 
 vriaapir  ;  Josephus,  TevfTja-dp  ;  later  Hebrew, 
 "1DJ2).     A   small  district  of  Galilee  lying  on  the 
 
 western  shore  of  the  lake,  near  Capernaum.  Its 
 situation  is  indicated  by  the  narratives  in  John 
 vi.  15-25,  and  Mark  vi.  45-56.  Jesus  sent  away 
 the  disciples  from  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Sea  of 
 Galilee  to  Capernaum.  When  on  their  passage  He 
 came  up  with  them  walking  on  the  sea ;  they  land 
 about  dawn  (the  fourth  watch)  on  the  plain  o/Geii- 
 ftesareth;  and  that  morning  the  multitudes  follow 
 him  in  boats  to  Capernaum,  and  find  him  there. 
 Josephus  gives  so  graphic  a  description  of  Gen- 
 nesareth  that  we  have  no  difficulty  in  identifying  it, 
 though  the  name  has  long  disappeared.  '  Extend- 
 ing along  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  and  bearing  also  its 
 name,  lies  a  tract  of  country  admirable  both  for  its 
 natural  properties  and  its  beauty.  Such  is  the  fer- 
 tility of  the  soil  that  it  rejects  no  plant,  and  accord- 
 ingly all  are  here  cultivated  by  the  husbandman ; 
 for  so  genial  is  the  air  that  it  suits  every  variety. 
 The  walnut  grows  lu.xuriantly,  together  with  the 
 palm;  and  here  there  are  figs  and  olives.  It  pro- 
 duces the  grape  and  the  fig  during  ten  months 
 without  intermission,  while  the  other  varieties  ripen 
 the  year  round ;  for  besides  being  favoured  by  the 
 genial  temperature  of  the  air,  it  is  irrigated  by  a 
 highly  fertilising  spring  called  Capernaum.  The 
 tract  extending  along  the  shore  of  the  lake  which 
 bears  its  name  is  thirty  furlongs  in  length  and  twenty 
 in  breadth  {Bell.  Jiid.  iii.  10.  8). 
 
 On  the  west  side  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  is  a  cres- 
 cent-shaped plain,  extending  along  the  shore  from 
 the  cliffs  at  Ain  et-Tin,  the  site  of  Capernaum,  upon 
 the  north,  to  the  hill  behind  Mejdel,  the  ancient 
 Magdala,  on  the  south,  a  distance  of  about  three 
 geographical  miles.  Its  greatest  breadth  is  nearly 
 two.  It  is  shut  in  by  a  semicircle  of  steep  and 
 rugged  hills.  Its  soil  is  of  extraordinary  fertility  ; 
 but  only  small  patches  of  it  here  and  there  are  cul- 
 tivated. The  rest  is  covered  with  tangled  thickets 
 of  lote-trees,  oleanders,  dwarf  palms,  and  gigantic 
 thistles  and  brambles.  The  melons  and  cucumbers 
 grown  on  the  plain  are  still  the  best  and  earliest  in 
 Palestine.  They  are  always  the  first  in  the  markets 
 of  Damascus,  Acre,  and  Beyrout.  This  may  be 
 accounted  for  by  the  great  depression  of  the  plain, 
 it  being  almost  on  the  level  of  the  adjoining  lake, 
 and  thus  more  than  600  feet  below  the  ocean. 
 (Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  400,  seq.;  "Wilson,  Lands  of 
 the  Bible,  ii.  136,  seq.;  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the 
 Book,  347  ;  Stanley,  ^.  and  P.  368). 
 
 Various  conjectures  have  been  made  regarding 
 the  origin  of  the  name  Gennesareth.  Some  affirm 
 that  it  is  a  corruption  of  the  ancient  Hebrew  Chiyt- 
 nereth  (m33),  the  3  being  changed  to  J,  and  D  in- 
 serted by  the  Chaldee  paraphrasts.  Hence  in  the 
 Targums  we  find  "1D''J!I  used  instead  of  n"133  (Light- 
 foot,  0pp.  ii.  222);  and  in  the  Apocryphal  books 
 and  Josephus  Vevvqaap  (i  Maccab.  xi.  67).  Others 
 derive  the  name  from  ti^J,  '  a  valley,'  and  "IVJ,  '  a 
 fiower  or  shoot ;'  and  it  would  thus  signify  '  valley 
 of  flowers'  (Hieronym.  0pp.,  vii.  p.  103,  ed.  Migne). 
 Others  again,  and  perhaps  with  more  probability, 
 
 derive  it  from  ""A  and  lb',  'the  gardens  of  the 
 prince'  (Lightfoot,  i.  498). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GENTILES    (Heb.    Qiia  ;    Sept.   m-r]).      The 
 
 word  ii3,  a  people,  is  derived  from  the  obsolete 
 verb  niJ,  cottjluxit,  and  was  originally  used  in  a 
 
 general  sense  of  any  nation,  including  the  Jews 
 themselves,  both  in  the  singular  (Gen.  xii.  2  • 
 Deut.  xxxii.  28  ;  Is.  i.  4),  and  in  the  plural  (Gen. 
 xxxv.  11).  It  is  also  used  poetically  (like  the 
 Greek  'iOv(.a,  Hom.  //.  ii.  87,  Od.  xiv.  73,  and 
 the  Latin  gentes,  Virg.  Georg.  iv.  430)  of  insects 
 and  animals  (Joel  i.  6  ;  Zeph.  ii.  14). 
 
 But  as  the  sense  of  a  peculiar  privilege  dawned 
 on  the  minds  of  the  Jewish  people,  they  began  to 
 confine  the  word  D^IJ  to  other  nations,  and  al- 
 though at  first  it  did  not  connote  any  unpleasant 
 associations,  it  began  gradually  to  acquire  a  hos- 
 tile   sense,    which    never    attached   itself    to    the 
 
 other  terms,  Di^iC'/',    'tongues'   (Is.  Ixvi.    18),   or 
 
 D^Dyn,  '  the  peoples.'     In  proportion  as  the  Jews 
 
 began  to  pride  themselves  upon  being  '  the  first- 
 born of  God'  (Exod.  iv.  22),  'the  peoj^le  of  the 
 covenant,'  'a  holy  nation,  and  a  kingdom  of 
 priests'  (Exod.  xix.  4),  they  learned  to  use  the  in- 
 different expression  'Goyim'  to  imply  that  all  other 
 nations  were  more  or  less  barbarous  (Ps.  ii.  i,  8  ; 
 ix.  6 ;  X.  16;  cvi.  47),  profane  (Jer.  xxxi.  10  ; 
 Ezek.  xxiii.  30),  idolatrous,  uncircumcised,  and 
 unclean  (Is.  Iii.  i  ;  Jer.  ix.  26).  So  that  age  after 
 age  the  word  became  more  invidious,  and  acquired 
 a  significance  even  more  contemptuous  than  that  of 
 the  Greek  Bdp^apos,  which,  being  an  onomatopoeia 
 to  imitate  the  strange  sound  of  foreign  tongues,  is 
 
 paralleled  by  the  Hebrew  ]]}?,  i]p,  '  a  stammerer,' 
 
 applied  to  foreigners  in  Ps.  cxiv.  i,  Is.  xxviii.  Ii, 
 xxxiii.  19.     The  word  D^i2  gains  its  last  tinge  of 
 
 hatred  as  applied  by  Jews  to  all  Christians.  Other 
 expressions,  intended  to  point  out  the  same  dis- 
 tinction, are  used  with  a  shade  less  scorn  ;  such, 
 for  instance,  as  D"'2')Vnn,  ot  ^^w,  'those  without,' 
 which  is  Hebraistically  used  in  the  N.  T.  (i  Tim. 
 iii.  9.  See  Otho,  Lex.  Rab.  p.  iii  ;  Schoettgen, 
 Hor.  Hebr.  in  i  Cor.  v.  12.  In  Mark  iv.  11  it  is 
 applied  to  the  incredulous  Jews  themselves)  ;  and 
 
 DiD^pp,  'kingdoms'  (l  Chron.  xxix.  30).  The 
 Jews  applied  the  terms  niVIN,  'lands,'  and,  ac- 
 cording to  some  Rabbis,  DTI  rU'^lJO,  'region  of 
 the  sea,'  to  all  countries  except  Palestine,  just  as 
 the  Greeks  distinguished  between  Hellas  and  t] 
 pdppapos  (2  Chron.  xiii.  9  ;  xvii.  ID  ;  Ezra  ix.  I  ; 
 Luke  xii.  30  ;  Lightfoot,  Centuria  Chorogr.  i.,  ad 
 inii.)  Although  the  Jews  thus  separated  between 
 themselves  and  other  nations,  they  hesitated  as 
 little  as  the  Romans  did  to  include  themselves  in 
 the  Greek  term  jSapjiapos  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xi.  7.  i; 
 cf.  Justin  Mar.  Apol.  i.  46.     See  Barbarian). 
 
 In  the  N.  T.  'iQv-r)  (although  sometimes  used  in 
 the  singular  of  the  Jewish  nation.  Acts  x.  22  ; 
 Luke  vii.  5)  is  generally  opposed,  rCo  Xaw  Oeou, 
 to  Israel,  God's  people  (Luke  ii.  32).  But  the 
 most  frequent  rendering  of  Cij  is  (not  ^dyrj,  but) 
 
 "EXKTjves,  which  is  distinguished  from  ''EWijyiaral 
 (Acts  vi.  i),  and  means  'Gentiles'  rather  than 
 Greeks  (except  in  Acts  xviii.  17  ;  Rom.  i.  14),  be- 
 cause of  the  general  prevalence  of  the  Greek  Ian- 
 
GENTILES 
 
 106 
 
 GEOGRAPHY 
 
 giiage  (Rom.  i.  i6,  and  passim ;  i  Cor.  i.  22  ; 
 Gal.  iii.  28,  etc.)  Thus  Timothy,  who  was  of 
 Lystra,  is  called  "'RW-qv  (Acts  xvi.  i,  3),  and  a 
 Syrophcenician  woman  ''E\\7)vLs  (Mark  vii.  26), 
 and  the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion,  r)  BLaawopa  tQv 
 ■EXX^?^'WJ'  (John  vii.  35).  This  usage  is  even  found 
 in  the  apocryphal  writings,  where  eWrji'La/.i.bs  is 
 made  a  synonym  to  d\\o<pv\iau6s  (2  Maccab.  iv. 
 13),  and  t6,  iXXTjviKo,  ijOr]  are  pagan  morals  (Id.,  vi. 
 9J  ;  and  even  so  early  as  the  LXX.  version  of 
 Is.   ix.    12,    ^XXyves  is  adopted  as  a  rendering  of 
 
 Cnt^'^Q,  'Philistines.'     In  the  Greek  fathers 'E\- 
 
 \rjvi(rfj.bs  is  used  for  the  Pagan,  in  contradistinction 
 to  the  Christian  world  (Justin  Mart.  Jvc'sp.  ad  Qiuvst. 
 42,  etc.),  and  they  call  their  Apologies  A6701  irph% 
 "EXXijms,  or  Kara  "^XX-qvixiv  (Schleusner,  Lex.  N. 
 T.,  ii.  759). 
 
 It  was  perhaps  impossible  for  the  Jews,  ab- 
 sorbed as  they  were  in  the  contemplation  of  their 
 own  especial  mission,  to  rise  into  any  true  or  pro- 
 found conception  of  the  common  brotherhood  of 
 all  nations.  Hedged  round  by  a  multitude  of 
 special  institutions,  and  taught  to  regard  the  non- 
 observance  of  these  customs  as  a  condition  of  un- 
 cleanness,  embued,  too,  with  a  blind  and  intense 
 national  pride, — they  often  seem  to  regard  the 
 heathen  as  only  existing  at  all  for  the  purpose  of 
 punishing  the  apostacy  of  Judnea  (Deut.  xxviii. 
 49  ;  I  Kings  viii.  33,  etc.),  or  of  undergoing  ven- 
 geance for  their  enmity  towards  her  (Is.  Ixiii.  6). 
 The  arrogant,  unreasoning  hatred  towards  other 
 nations  generated  by  too  exclusive  a  brooding 
 upon  this  partial  and  narrow  conception,  made 
 the  Jews  the  most  unpopular  nation  of  all  anti- 
 quity (Tac.  Hist.  V.  2  ;  '  gens  ieterrima,'  Id.  v.  8  ; 
 Juv.  Sat.  xiv.  103;  Quint.  Just.  iii.  7.  21  ;  Plin. 
 xiii.  9  ;  Diod.  Sic.  Eel.  34  ;  Dio  Cass.  68.  32 ; 
 Philostr.  Apolg.  v.  33  ;  Ammian.  Marcel,  xxii.  5, 
 \fcett'ntes  Juda^i,'  etc.,  '■contrary  to  all  men,''  i 
 Thes.  ii.  15  ;  see  Winer,  s.  v.  Jnden).  This 
 disgust  and  scorn  unfortunately  fell  on  the  early 
 Christians  also,  who  were  generally  confused  with 
 the  Jews  until  the  time  of  Bar  Cochba  (Tac.  Ann. 
 XV.  44  ;  Suet.  16  ;  Claud.  25).  To  what  lengths 
 the  Jews  were  carried  in  reciprocating  this  bitter 
 feeling  may  be  seen  in  the  writings  of  "the  Rabbis  ; 
 the  Jews  did  not  regard  the  Gentiles  as  brethren, 
 might  not  journey  with  them,  might  not  even  save 
 tliem  when  in  peril  of  death  (Maimon.  Rozeach. 
 c.  4,  12,  etc.),  and  held  that  they  would  all  be  de- 
 stroyed and  burned  at  the  Messiah's  coming  (Otho, 
 Lex.  Rabb.,  s.  v.  Gentes,  p.  231  ;  Eisenmenger, 
 Entdeckt.  Jiident.  ii.  206,  scqq.)  There  is  the  less 
 excuse  for  this  violent  bigotry,  because  the  Jews 
 not  only  held  that  all  nations  sprung  from  one 
 father  (Gen.  x.),  but  had  also  received  abundant 
 prophecies  that  God  was  but  leaving  his  heathen 
 children  in  temporary  darkness  (Acts  xiv.  16),  and 
 intended  hereafter,  in  His  mercy,  to  bring  them 
 under  the  Messiah's  sceptre,  and  make  them  '  one 
 fold,  under  one  shepherd  '  (Is.  Ix.  2,  and  passim  ; 
 Mic.  iv.  I  ;  Zeph.  iii.  9  ;  Ps.  xiv.  18;  ex.  i,  etc.) 
 The  main  part  of  the  N.  T.  history  is  occupied  in 
 narrating  the  gradual  breaking  down  of  this  ^ecr6- 
 Toixov  Tou  (ppay/jLoC  (the  strong  barrier  of  imme- 
 rnorial  prejudice  which  separated  Jew  and  Gentile, 
 Eph.  ii.  14),  first  in  the  minds  of  the  Apostles, 
 and  then  of  their  converts.  The  final  triumph 
 over  this  obstacle  was  mainly  due  to  the  inspired 
 ministry  of  him  who  gloried  in  the  title  of  5iddffKa- 
 
 Xos  tCji>  idvwv  (i  Tim.  ii.  7j  see  Conybeare  and 
 Howson,  i.  219,  seqq.),  who  has  also  given,  in  a 
 few  pregnant  sentences,  the  most  powerful  de- 
 scription of  the  blessings  which  God  had  granted 
 to  the  Gentiles,  the  means  of  serving  Him  which 
 they  possessed,  and  the  shameless  degeneracy 
 which  had  ensued  on  their  neglect  of  the  natural 
 law,  v/ritten  on  their  consciences  (Rom.  i.  18-32). 
 In  one  or  two  places  the  words  Cij  and  ^dvT) 
 
 are  used  as  proper  names.  Thus  we  have  '  Tidal, 
 king  of  nations,'  i.e.,  of  several  conquered  tribes 
 (Gen.  xiv.  i,  2  ;  Kalisch,  ad  loc.)  In  Josh.  xii. 
 23  we  find  '  the  king  of  the  nations  of  Gilgal,' 
 where  Goyim  is  possibly  the  name  of  some  local 
 tribe  {^acriXeds  Tra/j.<pvX[as,  Interpr.  Anon.)  In 
 Judg.  iv.  2,  '  Harosheth  of  the  Gentiles  '  probably 
 received  its  name  from  the  mixture  of  races  subju- 
 gated by  Jabin,  and  settled  in  the  north  of  Pales- 
 tine (Donaldson,  Jashar,  p.  263).  The  same  mix- 
 ture of  Canaanites,  Phoenicians,  Syrians,  Greeks, 
 and  Philistines,  originated  the  cc^mmon  expression 
 
 '  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles,'  D''ian  ^''^3,  VaXcXala.  dX- 
 
 Xo<pvXu}p,  LXX.  r.  tQv  Wvuv,  Is.  ix.  i  ;  Matt.  iv. 
 15  (Strabo  xvi.  760;  Joseph.  Vit.  12;  Euseb. 
 Onoin.  s.  v.,  Winer,  s.  v.  GalUaa). 
 
 On  the  various  meanings  of  the  phrase  '  Isles  of 
 the  Gentiles'  {W\IT\  '"X,  Gen.   x.  5  ;  Zeph.  ii.  ii; 
 
 Ezek.  xxvii.  15,  etc.),  see  Gesenius,  Thesaurus  i. 
 38,  and  Isle.  On  the  Court  of  the  Gentiles,  see 
 Temple,  and  Joseph.  De  Bell.  Jud.  vi.  3. — 
 F.  W.  F. 
 
 GENUBATH  (D^iJ  ;  Sept.   Vavq^iQ),  the  son 
 
 of  Hadad  the  Edomite,  by  the  sister  of  Tahpenes, 
 queen  of  the  Pharaoh  of  Egypt,  to  whom  Hadad 
 had  fled  when  but  a  child  to  escape  the  vengeance 
 of  Joab  (I  Kings  xi.  14-20).  [HAD.A.D.]  The  name 
 Genubath  has  been  variously  explained ;  some 
 connecting  it  with  the  Heb.  root  3JJ,  to  steal,  and 
 supposing  an  allusion  either  to  his  Ijeing  the  pro- 
 duct of  ^furtive  amour  (Clericus)  or  to  his  exist- 
 ence being  owing  to  his  father's  having  stolen  azoay 
 from  the  destructive  fury  of  the  Israelites  (Thenius); 
 others,  with  greater  probability,  finding  in  it  an 
 allusion  to  the  Egyptian  deity  Cneph  or  Cnuphis. 
 Genubath  was  weaned  in  the  royal  palace  by  the 
 queen  herself,  and  was  brought  up  as  one  of  the 
 royal  house.    He  is  not  again  mentioned. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GEOGRAPHY.  Every  student  of  God's  Word 
 will  acknowledge  the  importance  of  sacred  geo- 
 graphy. All  the  historic  narratives  of  the  Bible, 
 and  most  of  its  doctrinal  truths,  are  closely  con- 
 nected with  the  countries  in  which  they  were 
 enacted,  and  the  places  where  they  were  revealed. 
 Locality  has  given  a  peculiar  tone  and  colouring 
 to  the  vi'hole  literature  and  language  of  the  Bible. 
 Dr.  Stanley  has  well  said  that,  '  from  Genesis  to 
 the  Apocalypse  there  are — even  when  not  intend- 
 ing, nay,  even  when  deprecating,  any  stress  on  the 
 local  associations  of  the  events  recorded — constant 
 local  allusions,  such  as  are  the  natural  result  of  a 
 faithful,  and,  as  is  often  the  case  in  the  Biblical 
 narrative,  of  a  contemporary  history. '  Nor  is  this 
 all.  Many  statements  are  incidentally  made  in 
 Scripture  which  appear  to  indicate  that  the  authors 
 were  acquainted  with  the  leading  facts  of  geogra- 
 phical science,  both  physical  and  political.  While, 
 on  the  other  hand,  passages  have  been  cited  from 
 
GEOGRAPHY 
 
 107 
 
 GEOGRAPHY 
 
 Job,  Isaiah,  Psalms,  and  Proverbs,  wliich  it  has 
 been  tho'.ight  betray  a  total  ignorance  of  the 
 simplest  elements  of  geography.  How  are  we  to 
 uudci"stand,  and  how  are  we  to  reconcile  these 
 seemingly  conflicting  passages  ?  What  view  are 
 we  to  talce  of  the  geographical  knowledge  of  the 
 inspired  writers,  and  by  what  canons  are  we  to 
 interpret  their  words?  Are  we  to  believe,  as  some 
 affirm,  that  they  were  ignorant  of  even  the  elements 
 of  geographical  science,  and  are  we  to  interpret 
 their  statements  accordingly?  Or  are  we  to  be- 
 lieve, as  others  state,  that,  whatever  may  have 
 been  their  own  knowledge,  they  conformed  in 
 their  writings  to  the  popular  opinions  and  fallacies 
 of  their  age  ?  Or  are  we  to  believe  that,  under 
 the  teaching  of  the  Spirit,  they  embodied  scientific 
 truth  sometimes  in  popular,  sometimes  in  poetic, 
 and  sometimes  in  highly  figurative  language  ?  We 
 shall  best  prepare  the  way  for  a  satisfactory  answer 
 to  these  questions,  by  laying  down  one  or  two 
 general  principles. 
 
 It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  no  part  of  the 
 Bible  was  ever  intended  to  furnisli  a  systematic 
 treatise  on  any  of  the  physical  sciences.  The 
 object  of  revelation  is  to  convey  to  mankind  truths 
 which  they  could  not  of  themselves  discover,  and 
 which  are  essential  to  their  salvation.  In  revealing 
 these  truths,  the  facts  of  science  are  often  alluded 
 to.  Thus,  in  shewing  that  God  is  sole  Creator,  the 
 history  of  creation  is  given ;  in  shewing  the  origin 
 of  sin,  a  description  of  Eden  is  given  ;  in  shewing 
 that  God  is  a  iniiversal  and  just  ruler,  the  history 
 of  the  deluge,  of  the  dispersion  of  the  human 
 family,  of  the  destruction  of  Sodom,  and  of  the 
 Exodus,  is  given.  In  illustration  of  the  same 
 truth,  allusions  are  made  to  the  motions  of  the 
 heavenly  bodies,  to  the  changes  of  the  seasons,  to 
 the  formation  of  rain  and  dew,  to  the  clouds, 
 lightnings,  and  tempests.  Knowing  the  object  of 
 revelation,  we  should  not  expect  such  topics  to  be 
 introduced  in  a  purely  scientific  manner,  or  in 
 strictly  technical  language ;  but,  on  the  contrary, 
 in  a  popular  manner,  and  in  such  language  as 
 would  be  easily  intelligible  to  those  immediately 
 addressed. 
 
 It  must  further  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Bible 
 is  from  God,  and  that  every  sentence  of  it,  when 
 rightly  interpreted,  must  be  in  absolute  accordance 
 with  fact.  We  are  warranted  in  concluding  that 
 wherever  the  heavenly  bodies  are  spoken  of,  and 
 wherever  the  structure,  physical  convulsions,  and 
 topography  of  the  earth  are  alluded  to,  perfect 
 accuracy  is  observed.  It  will  not  do  to  say  that 
 because  the  first  principles  of  astronomy  and 
 geography  were  unknown  to  the  ancient  Hebrews, 
 the  inspired  writers  adopted  popular  fallacies.  It 
 will  not  do  to  plead  that  false  views  on  scientific 
 matters  were  permitted  in  the  Bible,  because  true 
 views  would  have  been  unintelligible.  It  will  not 
 do  to  argue  that  the  sacred  writers  were  inspired 
 on  points  of  doctrine,  but  not  on  points  of  science. 
 It  is  true,  they  used  popular  language,  just  as 
 scientific  men  use  it  now ;  and  we  must  interpret 
 such  language  in  the  Bible  as  we  interpret  it  in 
 popular  treaties  on  astronomy,  geography,  or 
 general  subjects.  It  is  true  the  ancient  Hebrews 
 may  have  attached  to  many  passages  meanings 
 widely  different  from  those  the  scholar  attaches  to 
 them  now — they  may  have  thought  that  the  sky 
 was  a  sohd  vault,  that  the  earth  has  foundations, 
 that  the  sun  rises  and  seti  ;  but  we  are  not  con- 
 
 cerned with  the  false  interpretations  of  ignorant 
 men ;  we  have  only  to  do  with  the  ideas  tlie  Spirit 
 of  God  intended  to  convey.  It  is  well  known  that 
 modem  science  has  corrected  the  opinions  of  men 
 in  regard  to  many  natural  phenomena.  The  term 
 which  conveyed  one  idea  in  former  times,  conveys 
 another  and  a  widely  different  one  now ;  and  yet 
 the  term  may  be  as  proper  and  as  definite  now  as 
 it  was  then. 
 
 These  principles  afford  the  key  to  passages  in 
 Scripture  often  misunderstood  and  misrepresented. 
 The  statements  in  the  Bible  bearing  upon  science 
 are  not  systematic,  or  technical ;  they  are  inciden- 
 tal, fragmentaiy,  and  popular.  We  can  interpret 
 them  all  in  accordance  with  true  systems  of  science  ; 
 but  we  could  not  construct  a  complete  system  out 
 of  them.  The  sacred  writers  set  forth  incidentally 
 some  of  the  leading  facts  of  geographical  science. 
 
 1.  The  foi-m  of  the  Earth. — In  one  or  two  pas- 
 sages the  true  form  of  the  earth  appears  to  be 
 indicated.  Thus,  in  Is.  xl.  22,  '  He  sitteth  upon 
 the  circle  (3"in)  of  the  earth '  (also  Prov.  viii.  27). 
 Rosenmiiller  [Biblical  Geography),  Kalisch  (on 
 Genesis),  Gesenius  {Thesatirtts),  and  others,  have 
 concluded  from  a  collection  of  sublime  images  from 
 the  Hebrew  poets,  that  they  believed  the  earth  to 
 be  circular,  rising  out  of  surrounding  ocean,  and 
 having  the  heavens  spread  over  it  as  a  canopy. 
 They  have  argued  that,  because  the  sacred  writers 
 sjieak  of  the  'rising'  and  'setting'  of  the  sun,  the 
 '  foundations '  of  the  earth,  tlie  '  pillars  '  of  heaven, 
 of  Jerusalem  being  in  the  midst  of  the  nations, 
 they  could  have  known  nothing  of  the  very  rudi- 
 ments of  geography.  Now  such  reasoning  as  this 
 is  opposed  to  all  canons  of  sound  criticism.  If 
 the  writings  of  our  own  poets  were  dealt  with  in  a 
 similar  manner,  what  would  be  the  result  ? 
 
 2.  The  cardinal  points. — Isaiah  terms  them 
 'the_/twr  corners  (niSJD)  of  the  earth'  (xii. 
 11);  Jeremiah,  the  'four  quarters  (DIVp)  of  the 
 heaven'  (xlix.  36).  Tlie  east  is  Qlp,  'before,'  or 
 □■"JS,  'in  front  of;'  because  the  person  is  repre- 
 sented as  facing  the  east.  Tlie  west  is  then  ^^X, 
 'behind;'  also  Q^,  'the  sea,'  because  the  sea  was 
 on  the  west  of  Palestine.  The  south  was  p^n, 
 'the  right;'  also  3J3,  'the  dry.'     The  north  w2iS 
 
 i?«Dty,  'the  left.' 
 
 3.  The  division  of  the  earth  into  land  and  sea. — 
 This  is  indicated  in  Gen.  i.  10.  The  ocean,  con- 
 taining great  monsters,  is  often  referred  to ;  as  in 
 Ps.  civ.  25,  26;  Job  xli.  I.  Continents  Z-ViA.  islands 
 are  distinguished,  Esther  x.  i  ;  Gen.  x.  5 ;  Ps. 
 bcxii.  10;  Is.  Ixvi.  19. 
 
 4.  The  great  physical  features  of  mountains, 
 valleys,  and  deserts.- — The  mountains  of  Ararat, 
 Lebanon,  and  Sinai,  are  specified;  the  valleys  of 
 Lebanon,  and  the  Jordan;  the  'great  and  terrible 
 wilderness'  (Deut.  i.  19). 
 
 5.  The  difference  of  climates. — Job  speaks  of  '  cold 
 out  of  the  north  '  (xxxvii.  9) ;  and  the  heat  of  the 
 south  is  alluded  to  by  Job  (xxxvii.  17),  and  by 
 Luke  (xii.  55). 
 
 6.  The  cradle  of  mankind  was  Central  Asia. — 
 The  situation  of  Paradise  is  not  known,  but  there 
 can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  spot  where  the  family 
 of  Noah  settled  after  the- flood.  The  ruins  of 
 Babylon  still  exist  (Gen.  xi.)  ;  and  the  seats  of  the 
 great  primeval  kingdoms  have  recently  been  iden- 
 tified (Gen.  X.;  See  Layard's  Nineveh,  etc.;  Lof- 
 tus,  Chaldcea,  etc.) 
 
GEOGRAPHY 
 
 JOS 
 
 GEOGRAPHY 
 
 7.  772^  division  of  vtankind  i7ito  three  branches, 
 and  the  colonization  of  the  various  countries  of 
 the  earth  by  them.—'Y\^&  loth  chapter  of  Genesis 
 shews  what  a  clear  and  comprehensive  view  Moses 
 obtained,  under  Divine  teaching,  of  the  political 
 geography  and  history  of  the  whole  ancient  world. 
 The  great  advances  recently  made  in  ethnography 
 and  comparative  philology  illustrate  at  once  the 
 completeness  and  the  accuracy  of  the  masterly 
 sketch  given  by  the  Hebrew  Lawgiver  (See  Mid- 
 ler's Science  of  Language  ;  Rawlinson's  Herodo- 
 tus). The  seven  families  of  the  Japhethites  who 
 peopled  Europe  and  Northern  Asia  have  been  iden- 
 tified (Kalisch  on  Gen.  x.)  Ham  is  the  ancestor 
 of  all  the  southern  nations  of  the  ancient  world. 
 The  numerous  tribes  that  spring  from  him  have 
 found  a  name  in  history  (Kalisch,  /.  c.)  The 
 Shemites  were  concentrated  in  Western  Asia, 
 chiefly  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Mediter- 
 ranean. 
 
 In  the  whole  compass  of  ancient  literature  there 
 is  nothing  to  be  compared  with  the  loth  chapter 
 of  Genesis.  The  most  extensive  research  in  the 
 world's  earliest  history,  and  among  its  earliest 
 monuments,  and  the  most  scientific  investigation 
 of  the  peculiarities  of  its  modern  nations  and  lan- 
 guages, alike  form  illustrative  commentaries  upon 
 that  remarkable  passage  (See  Bochart's  Geogr. 
 Sac;  Kenrick's  Phcenicia ;  Vaux's  A'inez'ch  and 
 Persepolis ;  Wilkinson's  Ancient  Egyptians ;  and 
 especially  Rawlinson's  Herodotus). 
 
 The  Bible  also  abounds  in  topographical  details 
 regarding  Palestine  and  the  countries  adjoining. 
 These  are,  in  many  instances,  minute  and  singu- 
 larly graphic.  Sacred  geography  may  be  said  to 
 embrace  the  whole  world.  It  belongs,  however, 
 especially  to  Mesopotamia,  Egypt,  Asia  Minor, 
 Greece,  and  Italy  ;  while  its  main  mterest  is  con- 
 centrated on  Palestine  and  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai 
 (Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  x.)  Those  Oriental  travellers 
 and  residents  who  have  had  the  fullest  opportuni- 
 ties of  judging,  and  who  have  become  distin- 
 guished for  their  powers  of  accurate  observ'ation, 
 have  repeatedly  testified  to  the  faithfulness  of 
 Bible  descriptions,  and  the  minute  accuracy  of 
 Bible  topography  (See  Robinson,  B.  R.,  preface  ; 
 Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  dedication  ;  Stanley, 
 S.  and  P. ;  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book, 
 preface).  The  writer  of  this  article  can  bear  per- 
 sonal testimony  to  the  same  facts  ;  and  as  he  has 
 visited  nearly  every  known  Scripture  site  in  Syria 
 and  Palestine,  and  most  of  those  in  Asia  Minor  , 
 and  Europe,  he  can  speak  with  some  degree  of 
 confidence.  For  fulness  of  detail  in  topography, 
 for  graphic  sketches  of  scenery,  for  minute  accu- 
 racy in  the  description  of  natural  products,  pecu- 
 liarities of  climate,  and  manners  and  customs,  no 
 history,  ancient  or  modem,  can  be  compared  with 
 the  Bible. 
 
 While  geographical  allusions  are  spread  over 
 the  whole  Bible,  there  are  a  few  books  which  de- 
 mand special  notice.  Genesis,  in  addition  to  the 
 narrative  of  creation,  sketches  the  establishment 
 of  the  primeval  empires  and  cities,  and  then  the 
 travels  of  the  patriarchs  in  Canaan.  In  Numbers 
 and  Deuteronomy  we  have  accounts  of  the  penin- 
 sula of  Sinai,  Edom,  Moab,  Gilead,  and  Bashan. 
 Joshua  is  geographically  one  of  the  most  remark- 
 able books  in  the  Bible.  '  Ten  chapters  of  it  are 
 devoted  to  a  description  of  Palestine,  in  which  not 
 only  are  its  general  features  and  boundaries  care- 
 
 fully laid  down,  but  the  names  and  situations  of  its 
 towns  and  villages  enumerated  with  a  precision  of 
 geographical  terms  which  invites  and  almost  com- 
 pels a  minute  investigation'  (Stanley,  Pref)  In 
 Daniel  we  have  a  few  notices  of  Babylon,  and  a 
 prophetic  allusion  to  the  Babylonian,  Pei^sian, 
 Grecian,  and  Roman  empires.  The  first  three 
 gospels  contain  notices  of  the  towns,  people,  and 
 products  of  Galilee.  The  topographical  notices 
 of  John  are  confined  chiefly  to  Judasa.  The  re- 
 ferences in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  extend  to 
 Northern  Syria,  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  and  Italy. 
 
 The  Hebrews  do  not  seem  to  have  devoted  any 
 attention  to  geography  as  a  science,  though  they 
 were  widely  scattered  at  the  commencement  of 
 our  era,  and  occupied  a  distinguished  place  in 
 literature.  The  Greeks  probably  led  the  way  in 
 systematic  geography.  The  first  map  is  said  to 
 have  been  constructed  by  Anaximander,  about 
 B.C.  600.  Nearly  a  century  later  Hecatseus  of 
 Miletus  wrote  a  geographical  work  entitled  ITept'o- 
 5os  YTjs  (Ukert,  Geographic  dcs  Hccat.  and  Darnas- 
 tes).  These  were  followed  by  Strabo  and  Ptolemy. 
 The  Phoenicians  and  Egyptians  were  likewise  dis- 
 tinguished as  geographers.  Ptolemy  acknowledges 
 that  his  great  work  was  based  on  a  treatise  writ- 
 ten by  Marinus  of  Tyre  (Heeren,  Coni7?ientatio 
 de  Fontibus  Geographicoriim  Ptolemcei,  etc.)  Pliny, 
 the  only  Roman  writer  deserving  of  special  men- 
 tion in  this  place,  was  a  mere  compiler.  As  a 
 geography  his  book  is  of  little  value  (See  Ukert, 
 Geographie  d.  Griech.  u.  Roiner ;  Mannert,  Geo- 
 gaphie,  etc.)  Sacred  geography  was  not  reduced 
 to  a  system  until  a  comparatively  recent  time.  The 
 Onomastico/t  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  is  an  alpha- 
 betic list  of  places,  with  brief  descriptions.  The 
 Tract  of  Brocardus,  written  in  the  13th  century,  is 
 little  more  than  an  itinerary.  To  Samuel  Bochart, 
 a  French  Protestant  minister  (born  1599),  belongs 
 the  honour  of  writing  the  first  systematic  work  on 
 Biblical  geography.  His  Geographia  Sacra  is  a 
 storehouse  of  learning  from  which  all  subsequent 
 writers  have  drawn  freely.  Well's  wrote  his  His- 
 torical Geography  of  the  O.  and  N.  T.  in  the 
 beginning  of  last  century.  Reland's  Palcestina, 
 published  in  1 7 14,  remains  to  this  day  the  stan- 
 dard classic  work.  Dr.  Robinson's  Researches 
 opened  a  new  era  in  Biblical  geography.  It, 
 however,  is  neitlier  complete  nor  systematic  ;  it  is 
 only  a  book  of  travels,  with  most  important  his- 
 torical and  geographical  illustrations.  Ritter's 
 Paliistina  und  Syrien  aims  at  system  and  com- 
 pleteness, but  it  is  too  diffuse.  It  gives  a  resume 
 of  everything  that  has  been  written  on  Bible  lands. 
 A  systematic  and  thorough  treatise  on  Biblical 
 geography  is  still  a  great  desideratum  in  our 
 country's  literature. 
 
 It  is  of  imjiortance  to  the  Biblical  student  to  have 
 placed  before  him  a  condensed  list  of  the  more  im- 
 portant works  bearing  on  the  subject  of  sacred  geo- 
 graphy. Such  a  list  will  now  be  given.  It  has 
 been  compiled  with  much  care.  To  enumerate 
 all  the  books  written  on  Bible  lands  would  be  prac- 
 tically useless.  Many  of  them  have  no  value  be- 
 yond the  entertainment  they  may  afford.  Many 
 are  mere  repetitions  of  their  predecessors.  The 
 works  given  below  are  such  only  as  the  writer  has 
 found  really  useful.  The  dates  attached  are  those 
 of  the  editions  in  his  possession,  and  to  which  refe- 
 rence is  made  in  the  geogmphical  articles  prepared 
 for  this  work.     More  extended  lists  may  be  seen  in 
 
GEOGRAPHY 
 
 109 
 
 GEORGI 
 
 Robinson's  B.  R.  ii.  ;  Kitto's  Physical  Geography 
 of  Palesti/ie.  For  facility  of  reference  the  list  is 
 divided  into  three  classes. 
 
 1.  Ancient  and  Median'al  writers  who  have  inci- 
 dentally furnished  i7iformatio7i  on  Sacred  Geog- 
 raphy. ( I )  'Jewish — The  ApocrypJia  ;  Josephus, 
 Opera,  ed.  Hudson,  2  vols.  fol.  1720;  Traill's 
 translation  of  the  Wars  (2  vols.  1851)  contains  im- 
 portant notes  and  illustrations.  (2)  Heathen — 
 Herodotus,  especially  Rawlinson's  translation,  4 
 vols.  1858-60;  Stralio,  Geographia,  ed.  Casaubon, 
 1587  ;  Pliny,  Historia  Naiuralis,  ed.  Sillig,  5  vols. 
 1831-36.  Dio  Cassius  (1752,  Hamburg)  gives  some 
 short  notes  on  Palestine.  The  few  remarks  in 
 Tacitus  and  Livy  are  of  little  value.  (3)  Christian — 
 Eusebius,  Socrates,  Sozomon,  and  Theodoret,  in 
 Historia:  Eccles.  Scriptor.  Grcrci,  3  vols.  fol.  1695  ; 
 Jerome,  Opera,  ed.  Mig:ie,  9  vols.  8vo  ;  Theodo- 
 ret, Opera,  ed.  Migne,  5  vols.  In  the  exegetical 
 writings  of  Jerome  and  Theodoret  are  some  useful 
 notes  ;  they  both  resided  in  Palestine.  William  of 
 Tyre,  Historia  Belli  Sacri ;  James  de  Vitry,  Histo- 
 ria Orien talis,  etc. — These  two  works,  with  several 
 others,  are  contained  in  Bonger's  Gesta  Dei  per 
 Francos,  fol.  1611.  Chronicles  of  the  Crusades,  ed. 
 Bohn,  1848,  containing  Richard  of  Devizes, 
 Geoffrey  de  Vinsauf,  and  De  Joinville. 
 
 2.  Geographical  Works  ajid Itineraries. — Ptolemy, 
 Geographia,  fol.  1535  ;  Tahida  Pentingeriana,  a 
 rude  chart  of  the  Roman  empire,  made  in  the  3d 
 century.  Reland  gives  the  part  including  Pales- 
 tine. Eusebius  and  Jerome,  Onomasticon  Urbium 
 et  Locoruin  S.  Sciiptunv,  ed.  Clerico,  fol.  1707 
 [last  ed.  by  Larsow  and  Parthey,  Ber.  1862]  ; 
 Vetera  Roinanorum  Itineraria,  ed.  Wesselingio, 
 1735,  containing  the  important  itineraries  of  the 
 Bourdeaux  pilgrim,  and  of  Antonine,  with  Synck- 
 demus  of  Hierocles  ;  Edrisi,  Geographia  Univer- 
 salis, in  Rosenmuller's  Analecta  Arabica,  1828  ; 
 Topographical  Index  in  Bohadini  Vita  et  Pes  Gestie 
 Saladani,  ed.  Schultens,  fol.  1732;  Brocardus, 
 Locorum  Tcitcb  San.  Descriptio,  ed.  Clerico,  ap- 
 pended to  the  Onomasticon,  fol.  1707;  Abulfeda, 
 Tabula  Syriaca,  1766;  Bochart,  Opera,  ed.  Leus- 
 den  et  Villemandy,  3  vols.  fol.  1712;  Sanson, 
 Geographia  Sacra,  ed.  Clerico,  fol.  1704  ;  Caroli  A. 
 S.  Paulo,  Geographia  Sacra,  ed.  Holsten,  fol.  1704; 
 Cellarius,  Notitia  Orhis  Antiqui,  2  vols.  4to,  1701- 
 5  ;  Wells,  Historical  Geography  of  the  O.  and  N. 
 7^,  2  vols.  1 819;  Reland,  Palcestina  ex  tnonumentis 
 veteribus  Illustrata,  2  vols.  4to,  1714  ;  Busching, 
 Erdbeschreibung  Palastina,  Arabien,  etc.,  1785; 
 Winer,  Biblisches  Reahvorterbuch,  2  vols.  1847-48; 
 Rosenmiiller,  Bib.  Geogr.  of  Central  Asia,  by 
 Morren,  2  vols.  1836;  'k.zxymtx,  Palastina,  1850 ; 
 Forster,  Historical  Geography  of  Arabia,  2  vols. 
 1844  ;  Rohr,  H istorico- Geographical  accou?it  of  Pal- 
 estine, 1843;  Ritter,  Die  Sinai- Halbinsel,  Palastina 
 und  Syrien,  4  vols,  in  six  parts,  1848-55  ;  Kitto, 
 Physical  Geography  of  Palestine,  2  vols.  1841  ; 
 Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  of  St.  Paul,  2  vols. 
 4to,  1855  ;  Smith,  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St. 
 Paul,  2d  ed.  1856;  Porter,  Handbook  for  Syria 
 and  Palestine,  2  vols.  1858  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir 
 of  Map  of  Palestine,  1858. 
 
 3.  Books  of  Travel. — Wright's  Early  Travels  in 
 Palestine,  1848,  containing  among  others  Arculf, 
 Ssewulf,  Benjamin  of  Tudela,  Maundeville,  and 
 Maundrell  ;  Cotovicus,  Itineraritun  Hierosolymi- 
 tanum,  1619  ;  Quaresmius,  Historia  Theologica  et 
 Moralis  Term  Sanctce Elucidatio,  2  vols,  fol.,  1639; 
 
 D'Arvieux,  Travels  in  Arabia  the  Desert,  1732  ; 
 Shaw,  Travels  in  Ba?-l>ary  and  the  Leiiant,  2  vols. 
 1808;  Pococke,  Descrip'tio7i  of  the  East,  2  vols, 
 fol.,  1743-45  ;  Hasselquist,  Travels  in  the  Levant, 
 1766;  Niebuhr,  Travels  through  Arabia,  2  vols. 
 1792;  Volney,  Voyage  en  Syrie,  etc.,  2  vols., 
 Paris,  1807  ;  Ali  Bey,  Travels  in  Morocco,  Egypt, 
 Syria,  etc.,  2  vols.  4to,  1816  ;  Seetzen,  Reisen 
 durch  Syrien  Palastina,  etc.,  3  vols.  1854-55  ; 
 Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria,  \\.o,  1822  ;  Travels 
 in  Arabia,  4to,  1829  ;  Notes  on  the  Bedouiti  and 
 Wahabys,  4to,  1 830;  Travels  in  Ntdiia,  i^X.o,  1822; 
 Buckingham,  Travels  in  Palestine,  4to,  1822  ; 
 Travels  atncrng  the  Arab  Tribes,  4to,  1825  ;  Irby 
 and  Mangles,  Travels  in  Egypt  and  Nidna,  Syria, 
 and  Asia  Minor,  etc.,  1822  ;  Laborde,  fourney 
 through  Arabia-Petnea  to  Sinai  and  Pet ra,  1838  ; 
 Lord  Lindsay,  Letters  on  Egypt,  Edoni,  and  the 
 Holy  Land,  2  vols.  1838 ;  Addison,  Damascus 
 and  Palmyra,  2  vols.  1838  ;  Bowring,  Report  on 
 Statistics  of  Syria,  1840;  Williams,  The  Holy  City, 
 2  vols.  1849  ;  Bartlett,  Forty  Days  in  the  Desert, 
 5  th  ed.  ;  Walks  about  Jerusalem  ;  ferusalem  Re- 
 visited, 1855  ;  Footsteps  of  our  Lord  and  his  Apos- 
 tles, 1852  ;,  Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  2  vols. 
 1847;  Tohler,  Bethlehe!?i,  1849;  Topographic  von 
 ferusalem  und  seinen  Umgebungen,  2  vols.  1853- 
 54  ;  Lynch,  Official  Report  of  Expedition  to  Explore 
 the  Dead  Sea,  etc.,  4to,  1852;  Nan-ative  of  Expe- 
 dition, etc.,  London,  1855  ;  De  Saulcey,  Narrative 
 of  Journey  roiuid  the  Dead  Sea,  etc.,  2  vols.  1853  ; 
 Van  de  Velde,  Narrative  of  fourney  through  Syria 
 and  Palestine,  2  vols.  1854;  Lepsius,  Discoveries 
 in  Egypt,  the  Penitisida  of  Sinai,  etc.,  1853 ; 
 Robinson,  Biblical  Researches  in  Palestine  in  1838- 
 52,  2d  ed.,  3  vols.  1856  ;  Porter,  Fi7>e  Years  in 
 DdJuascus,  Researches  in  Palmyra,  LebanoJi,  and 
 Bashan,  2  vols.  1855  ;  Layard,  Ninei^eh  and  its 
 Remains,  1849 ;  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  1853  ; 
 Loftus,  Chaldcca  and  Susiana,  1857  ;  Stanley, 
 Sinai  and  Palestine,  1856 ;  Thomson,  The  Land 
 and  the  Book,  Lond.  i860.  In  addition  to  the 
 above,  important  articles  on  Biblical  Geography  and 
 Topography  may  be  seen  in  various  numbers  of  the 
 An\e.nca.n  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  the  Journal  of  Sacred 
 Literature,  and  the  Jom-nal  of  the  Royal  Geographi- 
 cal Society,  by  Robinson,  Thomson,  Porter,  Rawlin- 
 son,  Layard,  Wallin,  Poole,  Ainsworth,  and  others. 
 Maps. — The  best  small  maps  are  those  in  Robin- 
 son's Researches  and  Porter's  Handbook ;  Van  de 
 Velde's  large  map  of  Palestine  is  the  most  com- 
 plete and  accurate  hitherto  published. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEON.     [GiHON.] 
 
 GEORGI,  Christian  Siegmund,  born  at 
 Luckau  in  1702,  was  professor  of  theology  at  Wit- 
 tenberg, where  he  died,  September  2,  1771.  He 
 took  a  prominent  part  in  the  controversy  between 
 the  Purists  and  the  Hebraists,  and  published  a 
 considerable  number  of  dissertations  in  support  of 
 the  views  maintained  Ijy  the  former  party.  Of  these 
 the  most  important  are  included  in  the  following 
 works: — i.  Vindiciarum  N.  T.  ab  eb?-aismis 
 libri  tres  qidbus  quidquid  ebraismi  a  Thomd  Ga-ta- 
 kero,  lo.  Vorstio,  lo.  Oleario  7-eliqids  g/urca:  7ioz>i 
 fade7-is  dictioni  est  adfctu?n,  ttun  aigui/ientis,  tu7/i 
 testi/noniis  ex  probatissima  antiquitate  g7-cEca  e/'utis 
 diluitur,  Francof.  et  Lips.  1732,  4to.  2.  Hie)-o- 
 criticus  N.  T  sive  de  stylo  N.  T.  libri  tres,  qidbus 
 dialectics  7iovi  fa:de7is  attica  a  PJnynichii,  Thoma 
 magist7-i,  CI.  Sali;iasii,  etc.,  reli quorum  depravati- 
 
GEORGIAN  LANGUAGE 
 
 no 
 
 GEORGIAN  VERSION 
 
 onthus  liheratur  afqtie  ab  idiotismis,  io7iismis,  doris- 
 mis,  ceolismis,  baoiismis,  syro-chaldaisinis,  rabbinis- 
 tnis  et  persismis  vindicatur,  Witt,  et  Lips.  1733, 
 4to.  3.  Hierocritici  novi  fixderis pars  seainda,  sive 
 controversiarum  de  Litinistiiis  N.  T.  libri  tres., 
 Witt,  et  Lips.  1733,  4to.  Of  his  other  Bibhcal 
 works  the  following  may  be  mentioned  :  4.  An  edi- 
 tion of  the  Greek  Testament  with  theological  and 
 philological  notes,  Witten.  1736,  8vo.  5.  Disser- 
 tatio  de  beati  Liitkeri  versione  biblioriim  gennaiiica 
 ofnnmi?t  optima,  Witt.  1737.  6.  De  corritptkme 
 ca7i07iis sacnimpossibili,  Witt.  1742,  4to.  7.  Appa- 
 ratus theologicHS,  philologiais  ad  Evangelia,  4 
 vols.  Lips.  Vol.  i.  1745;  ii.  1747;  iii-  1750 ; 
 iv.  1757  ;  4to.  This  work  is  highly  commended  by 
 Walch  {Bibl.  Theol.  iv.  p.  1043).— S.  N. 
 
 GEORGIAN  LANGUAGE.  The  Georgian 
 language,  which  is  also  spoken  by  the  Mingi-alians, 
 Lazians,  and  the  Suani,  belongs  to  the  Iberian 
 family.  The  chief  characteristics  of  it  are  as  fol- 
 lows. Its  alphabet  consists  of  thirty-five  letters,  it 
 has  no  articles,  the  substantives  have  eight  cases 
 and  no  genders,  the  adjectives,  when  associated 
 with  nouns,  are  indeclinable,  but  when  they  stand 
 by  themselves  are  declined  ;  the  comparative  is 
 foiTned  by  the  prefix  u  and  the  suffix  si,  and  car- 
 dinals are  obtained  by  prefixing  me  to  the  ordinals. 
 It  possesses  eight  conjugations  with  several  minor 
 subdivisions,  and  the  different  persons  are  indi- 
 cated by  terminations  and  personal  prefixes  ;  it 
 has  several  forms  for  the  prseterite  and  the  future 
 tenses,  and  only  one  form  for  the  present  tense  ; 
 three  modes,  viz.,  indicative,  imperative,  and  the 
 participle,  and  supplies  the  place  of  the  infinitive 
 by  a  7iomeii  vei-bale ;  it  has  postpositions  governing 
 different  cases,  in  addition  to  the  prepositions, 
 and  can  multiply  verbs  to  any  extent  by  the  ter- 
 minations eleba  and  ola,  form  abstracts  from  adjec- 
 tives by  the  terminations  oba  and  eba,  as  well  as 
 active  personal  nouns,  adjectives — both  active  and 
 passive — and  diminutives,  by  various  terminations 
 and  prefixes,  and  its  construction  allows  many 
 liberties.  From  the  venerable  old  Georgian  lan- 
 guage a  dialect  developed  itself,  in  the  course  of 
 time,  by  the  introduction  into  it  of  many  Arme- 
 nian, Greek,  Turkish,  and  other  foreign  words, 
 and  by  the  viciation  of  the  pronunciation  and 
 spelling  of  many  expressions.  The  two  dialects 
 have  distinct  alphabets,  the  alphabet  in  which  the 
 old  Georgian  is  written  is  called  Kiizii>-i,  i.e.,  the 
 sacred,  and  consists  of  the  letters  invented  by  Mies- 
 rob,  and  the  alphabet  of  the  modern  Georgian  is 
 called  Kediaili,  and  is  supposed  to  have  been  in- 
 vented by  the  Georgians  themselves  in  the  14th 
 century.  The  old  language  is  the  ecclesiastical  or 
 literary,  and  is  employed  in  all  sacred  and  literaiy 
 writings,  whilst  the  modern  is  the  civil  dialect,  or 
 the  dialect  of  common  life  {lingua  vulgaris)  ;  comp. 
 Ersch  U7id  GrubcT's  E/icyklopddie,  s.  v.  Ge07-gier, 
 p.  193  ;  Eichhorn,  Allgci/ieine  Bibliothek  der  bibli- 
 sckett  Liter atiir,  vol.  i.,  p.  156,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GEORGIAN  VERSION,  The,  is  one  of  the 
 oldest  versions  of  the  Bible  extant. 
 
 I.  Na}7ie,  date,  a/id  source  of  this  ve>-sio7t. — The 
 Georgians  call  their  Bible  by  different  names — i. 
 Bibbia,  i.e.,  the  Bible.  2.  Z/ni/ida  Zerili,  the 
 Holy  Scripture.  3.  Samkto  Zerili,  the  divine 
 Scriptures.  4.  Zig/nii  Ztielisa  da  akalio  ag/ilk77iisa, 
 the  books  of  the  O.  and  N.  T. ;  and  5.  Dabadeba, 
 Genesis,  after  the  first  book  of  the  Bible.     The 
 
 version  is  supposed  to  have  been  made  about  A..D, 
 570,  when  tne  Georgians,  stimulated  by  the  ex- 
 ample of  the  Armenians  [Armenian  Version], 
 sent  young  men  of  talent  to  Greece  to  study  the 
 Greek  language,  who,  on  their  return,  translated 
 the  Scriptures  and  liturgical  books  of  the  Greek 
 Church.  The  translation  of  the  O.  T.  is  made 
 from  the  Septuagint,  and  of  the  N.  T.  from  Greek 
 MSS.  of  the  Constantinopolitan  family,  and  is 
 composed  in  the  ecclesiastical  or  ancient  dialect 
 [Georgian  Language]. 
 
 2.  Text  a/id  cditio7is  of  the  versio7i.  —  This 
 venerable  version  has  shared  in  all  the  troubles  to 
 which  Georgia  has  been  subject.  The  entire  books 
 of  Maccabees  and  Ecclesiasticus  were  lost  in  the 
 many  revolutions  of  the  country,  passages  disap- 
 peared from  different  parts  of  the  volume,  and  the 
 whole  text  got  into  a  state  of  confusion.  It 
 was  only  in  the  beginning  of  the  iSth  century 
 that  Prince  Vaktangh  published  at  Tiflis  the 
 Psalms,  tlie  Prophets,  and  the  New  Testament,  and 
 split  up  the  text  into  chapters  and  verses.  Shortly 
 after  Prince  Arcil,  uncle  of  Prince  Vaktangh,  who 
 fled  from  Kartel  to  Russia,  undertook  a  revision  of 
 this  version,  making  it  conformable  to  the  Russian 
 translation  as  it  then  was,  and  divided  it  only  into 
 chapters,  because  the  Russian  translation  was 
 divided  into  chapters  only.  But  this  prince  only 
 lived  to  carry  through  the  revision  from  Genesis  to 
 the  Prophets,  and  to  translate  from  the  Russian 
 Bible  the  lost  books  of  Maccabees  and  Ecclesias- 
 ticus. His  son.  Prince  Vakuset,  was,  however, 
 induced  by  the  solicitations  of  his  brother.  Prince 
 Bachar,  and  the  Georgian  clergy  resident  in 
 Russia,  to  continue  the  work  of  revision.  He 
 made  the  text  conform  still  more  to  the  Russian 
 translation,  newly  revised  according  to  the  com- 
 mand of  Peter  the  Great,  supplied  from  this  trans- 
 lation all  the  passages  which  were  wanting  in  the 
 Georgian  version,  made  also  the  portions  which  his 
 father  had  published  conformable  to  this  transla- 
 tion, and  divided  the  whole  into  chapters  and 
 verses.  He  had  Georgian  types  cast  at  Moscow, 
 and  at  once  began  printing  in  that  city  ;  the  correc- 
 tion of  the  press  he  committed  to  four  native 
 Georgians,  and  the  first  edition  of  the  entire 
 Georgian  Bible  appeared  in  1743,  Prince  Bachar, 
 brother  of  the  editor,  defraying  the  entire  expense. 
 From  this  edition  the  Moscow  Bible  Society  re- 
 printed the  N.  T.  in  1816  under  the  superintend- 
 ence of  the  Georgian  Metropolitan  Ion  and  of 
 Archbishop  Pafnut,  with  types  cast  from  the  very 
 matrices  which  had  been  used  for  the  former  edi- 
 tion, and  which  had  escaped  the  conflagration  of 
 the  city  at  the  time  of  Napoleon's  invasion. 
 Another  edition  was  published  in  18 18  in  the  civil 
 character.  It  is  said  that  there  have  appeared 
 more  recent  additions  of  various  portions  of  this 
 version  both  at  Tiflis  and  in  Russia,  but  there  is  no 
 particular  account  of  them. 
 
 3.  C/-itical  value  of  the  version. — The  value  of 
 this  version,  in  a  critical  point  of  view,  has  been 
 greatly  impaired  by  the  corraptions  which  it  has 
 suffered  during  the  centuries  of  political  changes  to 
 which  the  country  has  been  exposed,  and  especi- 
 ally by  the  endeavour  of  its  editors  to  make  it  con- 
 form to  the  Russian  translation.  It  must  not, 
 however,  be  supposed  that  its  value  is  entirely 
 gone.  Both  Tischendorf  (N.  T.  Grccc.  ed.  2d, 
 prref  p.  Ixxviii.)  and  Mr.  Malan  regard  it  as  a  good 
 auxiliary  to  the  criticism  of  the  Greek  text.     In- 
 
GEPHEN 
 
 111 
 
 GERASA 
 
 deed  Mr.  Malan,  who  has  published  an  English 
 translation  of  the  Georgian  version  of  St.  John's 
 Gospel,  goes  so  far  as  to  say  that  '  it  differs  from 
 the  Slavonic  in  many  places  in  which  it  might  be 
 expected  to  agree,  it  has  a  character  of  its  own,  is 
 a  faithful  version,  and  valuable  for  criticism'  ( The 
 Gospel  according  to  St.  John,  translated fro7)i  the 
 eleren  oldest  versions,  etc.,  by  the  Rev.  S.  C.  Jllalan, 
 M.A.,  Lond.  1862,  p.  ix.  note  3). 
 
 4.  Literature. — A  very  interesting  treatise  on 
 this  version,  containing  a  brief  account  of  its  his- 
 tory and  publication,  from  the  preface  of  Prince 
 Vaktangh,  was  communicated  by  Professor  Adler 
 of  Copenhagen  to  Eichhorn,  who  published  it  in 
 his  Allgemeuie  Bihliothek  der  biblischeti  Litcrattir, 
 vol.  i.  p.  153  ff.,  and  afterwards  reprinted  it  in  his 
 Einleilung  in  das  A  He  Testametit,  vol.  ii.  sec.  318,  b, 
 etc.  Dr.  Henderson,  who  had  visited  both  Georgia 
 and  Russia,  could  do  no  more  in  his  Biblical  Re- 
 searches and  Travels  itt  Russia,  Lond.  1826,  p. 
 518,  etc.,  than  give  a  literal  translation  of  this 
 account.  A  valuable  work  has  also  been  pub- 
 hshed  by  Franz  Carl  Alter,  entitled  Ueber  Georgi- 
 anische  Literntur,  Wien,  1798,  in  which  is  given  an 
 extensive  ci'llation  of  the  various  readings  from 
 both  the  O.  and  the  N.  T.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 GEPHEN.     [Vine.] 
 
 GERA  (XnJ;  Sept.  Piypd),  one  of  the  B'ney-Bin- 
 
 ya9nin  enumerated  Gen.  xlvi.  21,  as  alive  at  the 
 time  of  Jacob's  going  down  into  Egypt.  In  this 
 list  he  appears  as  if  collateral  with  Bela,  but  from 
 I  Chron.  viii.  3  it  appears  that  he  was  Bela's  son, 
 and  so  the  LXX.  correct  it  here.  In  this  latter 
 list  the  name  Gera  occurs  three  times  among  the 
 sons  of  Benjamin  (ver.  3,  5,  7).  The  whole  pas- 
 sage is  somewhat  confused,  and  it  has  been  sup- 
 posed that  all  the  three  are  to  be  resolved  into 
 one,  the  son  of  Bela.  There  was,  however,  a 
 Gera  later  than  this  one  among  the  descendants  of 
 Benjamin,  Gera,  the  father  of  Ehud  (Judg.  iii.  15); 
 and  he  may  be  one  of  the  three  here  mentioned. 
 In  the  list  of  Benjamin's  posterity  given  (Num. 
 x.xvi.  38-40),  Gera  does  not  appear  ;  an  omission 
 which  some  have  accounted  for  on  the  ground  that 
 he  had  no  children,  others  on  the  ground  that  he 
 was  not  the  head  of  a  house,  and  so  is  included  in 
 the  Belaites,  both  of  which  reasons  may  be  co- 
 alesced into  one.  On  the  discrepancies  in  the  Ben- 
 jamite  rolls  see  art.  Becher. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GERAH  (mj;  Sept.  6/3oX6s),  the  smallest  piece 
 
 of  money  among  the  Hebrews.  Twenty  made  a 
 shekel  ;  one  of  them  would  therefore  be  worth 
 three  halfpence,  according  to  the  present  value  of 
 silver  (Exod.  xxx.  13). 
 
 GERAR  (-nj  ;  Sept.  Tipapa),  a  town  and  dis- 
 trict on  the  southernmost  borders  of  Palestine,  in 
 the  countiy  of  the  Philistines,  and  not  far  from 
 Gaza.  It  was  visited  by  Abraham  after  the  de- 
 struction of  Sodom  (Gen.  xx.  i),  and  by  Isaac 
 when  there  was  a  dearth  in  the  rest  of  Canaan 
 (Gen.  xxvi.  i).  The  incidents  of  their  sojourn 
 shew  that  the  district  was  very  fertile.  It  was  the 
 seat  of  the  first  Philistine  kingdom  we  read  of,  and 
 gave  name  to  it.  The  intercourse,  differences, 
 and  alliances  of  the  Hebrew  fathers  with  the  king 
 and  people  of  Gerar  form  a  very  curious  and  inte- 
 resting portion  of  patriarchal  history.     It  was  still 
 
 an  important  place  in  later  times,  as  we  may  gather 
 from  2  Chron.  xiv.  13,  14.  According  to'the  an- 
 cient accounts  Gerar  lay  in  or  near  a  valley,  which 
 appears  to  be.no  other  than  the  great  Wady  Sheriah 
 (or  one  of  the  branches  of  it),  that  comes  down 
 from  Beersheba  ;  besides  we  know  that  it  was  in 
 the  land  of  the  Philistines,  and  that  it  was  not  far 
 from  Beersheba  when  Isaac  resided  there  (Gen. 
 xxvi.  I,  20,  23  ;  26-33;  comp.  xx.  i).  The  name 
 continued  to  exist  (perhaps  as  a  matter  of  tradition) 
 for  several  centuries  after  the  Christian  era.  Euse- 
 bius  and  Jerome  (Onomast.,  s.  v.  Gerara)  place  it 
 twenty-five  Roman  miles  southward  from  Eleu- 
 theropolis  ;  and  Sozomen  {Hist.  Eccles.  vi.  32  ;  ix. 
 17)  reports  that  a  large  and  celebrated  monastery 
 stood  there  near  a  winter  torrent.  The  abbot  Sil- 
 vanus  resided  there  towards  the  end  of  the  4th  cen- 
 tury, and  the  name  of  Marcion,  bishop  of  Gerar, 
 appears  among  the  signatures  of  the  council  of 
 Chalcedon  in  A.D.  451.  The  name  seems  to  have 
 been  afterwards  lost,  and  Dr.  Robinson  was  unable 
 to  discover  any  traces  of  it  in  the  locality.  Some 
 local  information  respecting  it  may  be  seen  in  the 
 Chevalier  Van  de  Velde's  N'arrative  of  a  yourney 
 through  .Syria  and  Palestijie. — ^J.  K. 
 
 GERARD,  Gilbert,  D.D.,  was  a  native  of 
 Aberdeen,  and  received  his  education  there.  After 
 spending  some  time  as  pastor  of  the  Scotch  Church 
 at  Amsterdam,  he  became  Professor  of  Greek  in 
 King's  College,  Aberdeen,  and  in  1795  ^^  became 
 Professor  of  Divinity.  He  died  in  1815.  He 
 wrote  Institutes  of  Biblical  Criticism  ;  or  Heads  of 
 the  Course  of  Lectures  on  the  subject  read  iii  the 
 University,  King''s  College  of  Aberdeen,  2d  ed. 
 Edin.  1808.  The  greater  part  of  the  first  edition 
 of  this  work  was  lost  at  sea.  For  the  time  at 
 which  it  appeared  this  was  a  remarkable  work. 
 Bp.  Marsh,  says  ^  oi ge?ieral and  elenientajy  IreoXKts 
 there  is  none  which  is  more  to  be  recommended 
 either  for  perspicuity  or  correctness  than  the  Insti- 
 tutes of  Biblical  Criticism''  of  Dr.  Gerard  [Lectures, 
 p.  169).  A  still  more  recent  writer  ascribes  to  it 
 '  learning,  ability,  reflection,  and  research.  His 
 positions,'  it  is  added,  '  are  generally  sound  and 
 judicious,  the  arrangement  good,  the  examples  ap- 
 propriate' (Davidson,  Hermeneutics,  p.  710).  It 
 may  be  added  that  the  work  contains  very  nume- 
 rous references  to  authorities,  which  greatly  enhance 
 its  value. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GERASA,  now  Jerash  (not  named  in  the 
 Bible*),  was  in  the  Decapolis,  and  formed  the 
 eastern  boundary  of  Pertea.  It  lay  on  elevated 
 ground,  according  to  Ptolemy,  in  68°  I5'  =  3i°45'. 
 Its  inhabitants  were  mostly  heathen  (Joseph.  DeBcll. 
 Jud.  i.  4.  8  ;  iii.  3.  3  ;  comp.  iv.  9.  I  ;  ii.  18.  5. 
 Origen  speaks  of  it  as  a  city  of  Arabia  (Pfpacra  ttjs 
 'Apa/3tas  earlv  ttoXis),  which  arose  trom  the  fact  that 
 it  was  a  border  city  of  Perasa,  and  lay  ne.xt  to 
 Arabia.  After  the  Roman  conquests  in  the  East, 
 the  country  in  which  Garasa  lies  became  one  of 
 their  favourite  colonies,  and  ten  principal  cities  were 
 built  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  giving  the  name  of 
 Decapolis  to  the  land  in  which  they  stood.  Gerasa 
 was  one,  but  not  the  greatest  of  these.     The  place 
 
 *  [Some  codices  and  other  authorities  read  Vepa- 
 aTjvQv  in  Matt.  viii.  28  ;  and  so  it  stands  in  Lach- 
 mann's  text.  Scholz  and  Tischendorf,  however, 
 have  TaSaprji'wv ;  see  reason  for  preferring  this  in 
 Meyer,  JTj'it.  Exeg.  Commentar.  i.  p.  185.] 
 
GERASA 
 
 112 
 
 GERHARD 
 
 was  taken  by  storm  by  Alexander  Jannseus,  who 
 was  actuated  by  a  desire  of  gaining  a  large  treasure 
 (Joseph.  De  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  4.  8  ;  Antiq.  viii.  2.  3). 
 Alexander  died  near    it  while    besieging    Regaba 
 
 (Antiq.  xiii.  15.  5).  Before  the  place  had  time  to 
 recover  from  this  calamity,  it  was  included  among 
 the  number  of  those  cities  which  were  burnt  by  the 
 enraged  jews  in  their  vengeance  on  the  Syrians, 
 and  on  the  Roman  power  generally,  for  the  mas- 
 sacre of  a  number  of  their  nation  at  Caesarea 
 (Joseph.  De  Bell.'Jud.VL.  18.  l).  A  terrible  revenge 
 was  taken  by  other  cities,  but  Gerasa  is  honourably 
 excepted  [De  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  18.  5).  Annius,  gene- 
 ral under  Vespasian,  took  the  city ;  '  after  which 
 he  set  fire  to  their  houses,'  'and  what  was  remain- 
 ing was  all  burnt  down'  (De  Bell.  ynd.  iv.  9.  i). 
 Gibbon  enumerates  this  city  among  the  line  of  for- 
 tresses from  Bosra  to  Petra,  which  formed  the  fron- 
 tier of  the  Syrian  provinces  in  the  lower  empire. 
 Baldwin  II.  of  Jerusalem  destroyed  its  castle  in 
 the  year  1122  (Will.  Tyr.  p.  825  ;  Histor.  Hiero- 
 sol.  p.  615).  This  was  the  native  place  of  Nico- 
 machus  Gerasenus.  Coins  of  Gerasa  may  be  seen 
 in  Eckhel  (Num.  Vet.  iii.  350).  Its  ruins  were  first 
 discovered  by  Seetzen,  and  have  often  been  subse- 
 quently visited.  They  have  been  pronounced  su- 
 perior to  those  of  Palmyra. 
 
 On  approaching  Gerasa  on  the  southern  side, 
 Buckingham  first  saw  a  triumphal  gateway,  nearly 
 entire,  which  was  of  the  Corinthian  order.  Within 
 this  gateway,  on  the  left,  he  observed  a  fine 
 naumachia  for  the  exhibition  of  sea-fights,  the 
 channels  for  filling  which  with  water  were  still 
 visible.  Corn  was  growing  near  it.  Passing 
 on  amid  heaps  of  ruined  fragments,  he  came 
 to  a  second  gateway.  Entering  the  city  through 
 this  its  southern  gate,  he  came  into  a  large 
 and  beautiful  circular  colonnade  of  the  Ionic 
 order,  having  passed  a  peripteral  temple,  above 
 which,  on  the  left,  was  an  0).en  theatre.  A  long 
 avenue  of  columns  of  the  Corinthian  order  led 
 through  the  whole  length  of  the  city.  Climbing 
 over  huge  masses  of  falling  columns  and  masonry 
 he  noticed  four  columns  on  each  side  of  the  way  of 
 much  greater  size  and  height  than  the  rest.  Be- 
 yond this  he  came  to  a  square,  apparently  once 
 lined  on  both  sides  by  an  avenue  of  columns.  He 
 afterwards  came  to  a  portion  of  a  semi-circular 
 temple.  A  broken  altar  was  near  the  ruins,  on 
 which  was  made  out  the  name  of  Marcus  Au- 
 relius.      Beyond  this  again  were  temples,  colon- 
 
 nades, theatres,  bridges,  aqueducts,  etc.  These 
 remarks  will  give  an  idea  of  the  magnificence  of 
 these  ruins,  particularly  when  we  add  that  the 
 northern  exit  is  a  mile  apart  from  the  southern 
 entrance.  A  necropolis  lies  not  far  from  the 
 northern  wall,  in  which  were  found  nearly  a 
 hundred  sculj^tured  sarcophagi  above  ground,  hav- 
 ing the  appearance  of  having  been  ransacked  for 
 treasure.  Near  the  necropolis  were  the  remains 
 of  a  small  temple.  The  city  stood  on  the  facing 
 slopes  of  two  opposite  hills,  but,  from  the  neigh- 
 bouring heights,  it  appears  to  be  seated  in  the  hol- 
 low of  a  deep  valley,  encircled  on  all  sides  by  lofty 
 and  verdant  mountains.  Near  this  spot  is  the 
 modern  village  of  Aioode.  Some  inscriptions  found 
 on  the  ruins  may  be  seen  in  Buckingham's  Travels 
 in  Palestine,  p.  405. — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 GERGESA  (re/)7ea'd;  Vep'^e(jy)vb%).  The  read- 
 ing of  the  Textns  Receptus  in  Matt.  viii.  28  is  Fep- 
 ye(T7)vCov  ;  '  and  when  he  was  come  .  .  .  into  the 
 country  of  the  Gergesenes?  Origen  says  a  city 
 called  Gergesa  anciently  stood  on  the  eastern  shore 
 of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Opera,  ed.  De  la  Rue,  iv. 
 240)  ;  and  that  beside  it  was  shewn  the  precipice 
 down  which  the  swine  rushed.  The  nature  of 
 Origen's  argument  makes  this  statement  very 
 doubtful.  It  looks  like  a  bold  hypothesis  to  get 
 over  a  difficulty  (See  Alford,  in  loc.)  Gergesa, 
 however,  is  also  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome.  The  latter  thus  writes  :—' Hodieque 
 super  montem  viculus  demonstratur  Juxta  stagnum 
 Tyberiadis  in  quod  porci  prascipitati  sunt'  (Oiio- 
 mast.  s.  V.)  Thomson  thinks  he  has  discovered 
 Gergesa  at  a  iniin  called  Ke7'sa  or  Gersa,  on  the 
 bank  of  Wady  Semak,  east  of  the  lake.  He 
 describes  it  as  '  within  a  few  rods  of  the  shore,  and 
 an  immense  mountain  rises  directly  above  it,  in 
 which  are  ancient  tombs.  .  .  .  The  lake  is  so 
 near  the  base  of  the  mountain,  that  the  swine 
 rushing  madly  down  it  could  not  stop,  but  would 
 be  hurried  on  into  the  water  and  drowned'  (The 
 Land  and  the  Book,  p.  375)-  It  has  been  stated 
 above  (s.  v.  Gadara)  that  the  reading  TadaprjvCjv 
 has  the  highest  authority,  and  consequently  these 
 conjectures  are  very  doubtful  (see,  however,  Elli- 
 cott's  Lectjires  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord,  188,  note  ; 
 Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  3 1 1  ;  Reland,  502,  807). 
 -J.  L.  P. 
 
 GERGESENES.     [Gadaka.] 
 
 GERHARD,  John,  a  learned  Lutheran  theolo- 
 gian of  the  1 6th  century,  was  born  at  Quedlin- 
 burg,  the  17th  October  1582.  After  receiving 
 much  benefit  from  the  spiritual  instructions  of  John 
 Arndt  at  a  time  of  mental  depression  and  bodily 
 disease,  he  repaired  to  the  university  of  Wittenberg 
 in  1599,  where  he  studied  philosophy  and  attended 
 theological  lectures  ;  but  was  afterwards  induced  to 
 study  medicine  contrary  to  his  own  inclination. 
 His  decided  bent  towards  theology,  however,  soon 
 prevailed.  From  Wittenberg  he  went  to  Jena,  and 
 devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  the 
 fathers,  and  Hebrew.  Some  time  after  he  repaired 
 to  Marburg,  then  the  most  famous  university  for 
 Lutheran  theology.  Leaving  Marburg  he  returned  to 
 Jena,  and  was  appointed  superintendent  of  Heldburg 
 in  his  twenty-fourth  year.  In  1615  he  accepted  a 
 call  to  Jena,  where  he  lived  and  laboured  as  theolo- 
 gical professor  and  author  during  the  remainder  of  his 
 life.      Great  was  his  theological  activity,  and  distin- 
 
GERIZIM 
 
 113 
 
 GERIZIM 
 
 guished  the  leputation  he  acquired.  Kings,  princes, 
 and  dukes  did  him  honour,  consulting  him  on  all 
 matters,  ecclesiastical  and  others.  He  received 
 no  fewer  than  twenty-four  invitations  to  other 
 places,  but  declined  them  all.  His  death  took 
 place  on  the  20th  August  1637,  when  he  was  but 
 fifty-five  years  of  age.  His  health  was  never 
 good  ;  and  he  led  a  life  of  incessant  activity,  exer- 
 cising great  influence  over  the  religious  history  of 
 his  own  country.  Gerhard  was  a  modest,  pious, 
 peace-loving  man,  who  had  largely  imbibed  the 
 spirit  of  his  divine  Master.  Passing  by  his  works 
 on  doctrinal  and  practical  theology,  which  are  very 
 numerous,  we  may  mention  those  belonging  to  the 
 department  of  exegesis,  of  which  the  chief  is  his 
 Commentariics  in  harmoiiiani  hist,  evangel,  de  pas- 
 sione  et  resurredione  Christi,  1617,  4to,  a  completion 
 of  the  work  begun  by  Chemnitz  and  continued  by 
 Lyser.  His  Comineutariiis  in  Genesin  was  pub- 
 lished after  his  death,  1637,  4to;  hxs  Cominentariiis 
 ill  Dcitteron.,  1638,  4to  ;  Adnotationes  in  Epist.  ad 
 Romanes,  1666,  4to  ;  in  Epist.  ad  Colossenses, 
 1660,  4to  ;  ift  titramqtce  Epist.  ad  Timotli.  1643, 
 4to  ;  Adnotationes  in  evangeliiim  Mait/uei,  1663, 
 4to  ;  in  Acta  apostolorum,  1669,  4to  ;  Adnotationes 
 in  Psa  linos  v.  prioirs  et  in  prophetas  Amos  et  Jo  nam, 
 1663,  4to  ;  Adnotatt.  in  Epist.  yudcv,  Adnotatt.  in 
 Epist.  ad  Ilcbr.,  1641,  1661,  4to  ;  Comment,  super 
 I  et  2  Epistolam  Petri,  1641,  4to  ;  De  Sacra  Scrip- 
 tnrcB  interpretatione,  16 10,  4to  ;  Exegesis  locoruiti 
 ihcologicoruni,  1625,  4to.  He  collected  his  corre- 
 spondence with  scholars  and  royal  or  distinguished 
 persons  in  twelve  large  volumes. — S.  D. 
 
 GERIZIM  (DHia  ;  Sept.  Vapi^iv,  Alex.  Vapi£dv). 
 
 This  mountain  has  obtained  great  celebrity  from  the 
 fact  of  its  having  been  the  sanctuary  of  the  Samari- 
 tans from  about  the  fourth  century  B.C.  till  the  pre- 
 sent time.  In  the  O.  T.  it  is  only  referred  to  in 
 connection  with  two  events.  When  the  Israelites 
 entered  Palestine  the  tribes  assembled,  in  obedience 
 to  the  commands  of  the  Lord  given  by  Moses,  in 
 the  valley  between  the  mountains  of  Ebal  and  Ge- 
 rizim.  There  the  law  was  read  in  the  presence  of 
 the  whole  people,  with  the  blessings  and  the  curs- 
 ings attached  to  it.  Six  tribes,  ranged  along  the 
 slopes  of  Ebal,  when  the  curses  were  read,  pro- 
 nounced with  one  voice  the  response.  Amen.  Six 
 tribes,  ranged  along  the  slopes  of  Gerizim,  facing 
 the  former,  when  the  blessings  were  read,  responded 
 Amen.  Moses  had  said,  '  Thou  shalt  put  the 
 blessing  upon  Mount  Gerizim  and  the  curse  upon 
 Mount  Ebal '  (Deut.  xi.  29  ;  xxvii.  12  ;  Josh.  viii. 
 33).  The  difficulties,  geographical  and  topographi- 
 cal, connected  with  this  event,  have  been  stated 
 and  solved  in  the  article  Ebal  ;  and  there,  also,  a 
 description  of  the  features  of  the  mountain  is  given. 
 The  only  other  episode  in  O.  T.  histoiy  with  which 
 the  name  of  Gerizim  is  connected,  is  the  striking 
 parable  of  Jotham,  in  which  he  exposes  the  folly  of 
 the  Shechemites  in  choosing  Abimelech  for  their 
 ruler,  and  predicts  the  judgments  in  store  for  them 
 on  account  of  their  ingratitude  to  the  family  of 
 Jerubbael  his  father.  The  city  of  Shechem  stood 
 in  the  valley  close  along  the  iDase  of  Gerizim,  the 
 side  of  which  rose  over  it  in  bold  precipices  of  naked 
 limestone.  On  the  crest  of  one  of  those  cliffs 
 Jotham  took  his  stand  ;  and  there,  in  the  hearmg  of 
 the  people  below,  he  spake  his  parable.  The 
 ascent  is  so  difficult  that  ere  any  of  the  followers  of 
 Abimelech  could  climb  the  hill,  he  would  be  far 
 
 VOL.   II. 
 
 away  among  the  defiles  of  the  neighbouring  moun 
 tains  (Judg.  ix. ) 
 
 Canon  Stanley  and  others  have  attempted  to 
 prove  that  Gerizim  was  one  of  the  very  earliest 
 sanctuaries  in  this  countiy.  He  says,  '  It  is  in  the 
 highest  degree  probable  that  here,  and  not  at  Jeru- 
 salem, was  the  point  to  which  the  oldest  recollec 
 tions  of  Palestme  pointed  as  the  scene  of  Abra- 
 ham's encounter  with  Melchizedek,  and  the  sacri- 
 fice of  Isaac  '  [S.  and  P.  234).  His  arguments  in 
 favour  of  the  former  are  far  from  being  conclusive 
 The  traditions  of  the  Samaritans  have  little  weight ; 
 and  one  cannot  see  why  Abraham  should  have 
 brought  the  rescued  women  and  children,  flocks 
 and  herds,  and  heavy  plunder  of  the  cities  of  the 
 plain,  all  the  way  round  to  Gerizim.  His  natural 
 route  from  Dan  or  Damascus  was  along  the  east 
 bank  of  the  Jordan  to  the  plain  of  Sodom.  And 
 the  narrative  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  he  was 
 going  direct  towards  Sodom  when  the  king  '  went 
 out  to  meet  him. '  This  would  place  the  '  valley  of 
 Shaveh '  near,  or  in,  the  Jordan  valley  (Gen.  xiv. 
 17;  compare  2  Sam.  xviii.  18;  see,  however, 
 Stanley,  S.  and  P.  246). 
 
 That  Gerizim  was  the  mountain  in  '  the  land  of 
 Moriah,'  on  which  Abraham  was  commanded  to 
 offer  up  Isaac,  seems  to  be  simply  impossible. 
 Abraham  was  undoubtedly  at  Eeersheba  when  he 
 received  the  command  (compare  Gen.  xxi.  33,  and 
 xxii.  1-3,  19).  It  appears  from  the  narrative  that, 
 on  the  third  day,  he  reached  the  place,  offered  the 
 sacrifice,  and  returned  to  the  spot  where  he  had 
 left  his  servants.  The  distance  from  Beersheba  to 
 Gerizim  is  about  70  geographical  miles,  as  the  crow 
 flies  ;  which,  in  such  a  country,  will  give  90  of  ac- 
 tual travel.  Abraham's  servants  were  on  foot, 
 carrying  wood  ;  Isaac  was  also  on  foot,  and  Abra- 
 ham rode  an  ass ;  they  could  not,  therefore,  have 
 travelled  such  a  distance  {see  Moriah). 
 
 The  subsequent  history  of  Gerizim  is  intimately 
 connected  with  that  of  the  Samaritans  (Samari- 
 tans). The  circumstances  which  led  to  the  choice 
 of  this  mountain  as  a  holy  place  are  alluded  to  by 
 Nehemiah  (xiii.  28),  and  fully  stated  by  Josephus 
 {Antiq.  xi.  8.2).  Asonofjoiada  the  high-priest  had 
 married  a  daughter  of  Sanballet  the  Persian  Satrap, 
 and  was  consequently  excluded  from  the  priest's 
 office,  and  expelled  from  Jerusalem.  Sanballet 
 thereupon  built  a  temple  on  Gerizim,  and  made  his 
 son-in-law  high-priest  there.  He  thought  thus  to 
 divide  the  Jewish  nation ;  and  though  unsuccessful 
 in  that,  he  attached  the  Samaritans  to  Gerizim,  and 
 excited  a  lasting  enmity  between  them  and  the 
 Jews  {cir.  B.C.  420).  This  temple  was  destroyed 
 by  the  Jews  under  John  Hyrcanus  [Antiq.  xiii.  9.  i, 
 cir.  B.C.  129).  There  is  no  evidence  that  it  was 
 ever  rebuilt,  though  the  Samaritans  continued  to 
 worship  on  the  spot.  This  illustrates  our  Lord's 
 discourse  with  the  woman  of  Sichar  at  Jacob's  well. 
 The  well  is  situated  in  the  opening  of  the  valley 
 between  Ebal  and  Gerizim,  close  to  the  base  of  the 
 latter ;  and  from  its  mouth,  where  Jesus  sat,  the 
 ruins  of  the  temple  on  the  summit  were  visible. 
 How  natural  was  the  woman's  question  on  finding 
 He  was  a  prophet,  '  Our  fathers  worshipped  in  this 
 mountain,  etc.  ;'  pointing,  doubtless,  both  to  the 
 mountain  and  to  the  ruined  sanctuary  on  its  sum- 
 mit (John  iv.  20).  Gerizim  continued  to  be  both 
 a  stronghold  and  holy  place  to  the  population  of 
 Shechem  for  several  centuries ;  as  upon  the  coms 
 of  the  city  we  find  both  mount  and  temple  depicted 
 
GERMAN  VERSIONS 
 
 lU 
 
 GERMAN  VERSIONS 
 
 (Reland,  loo6).  In  A.  D.  487  the  Samaritans  were 
 driven  from  Gerizim,  and  a  Christian  church  was 
 erected  on  the  site  of  their  holy  place.  This  build- 
 ing was  frequently  attacked  by  the  enraged  people, 
 and  the  empeior  Justinian,  in  order  to  defend  it 
 against  them,  caused  it  to  be  surrounded  by  a  for- 
 tress (Procopius,  de  ALdific.  Justin,  v.  7  ;  Reland, 
 /.  c.)  It  appears  that  after  the  Mohammedan  con- 
 quest both  church  and  fortress  fell  to  ruin ;  and  the 
 Samaritans  were  permitted  to  return  to  their  old 
 sanctuary,  where  they  have  ever  since  continued  to 
 worship,  though  there  is  neither  temple  nor  altar 
 on  the  spot. 
 
 The  top  of  Gerizim  is  now  covered  with  massive 
 ruins,  at  one  corner  of  which  is  a  small  Moham- 
 medan Wely,  with  a  white  dome,  visible  over  a 
 large  section  of  central  Palestine.  The  ruins  are 
 evidently  those  of  Justinian's  fortress.  The  walls 
 are  thick,  the  masonry  massive,  and  at  the  angles 
 are  square  towers.  In  the  foundations  of  the 
 western  wall  there  are  some  ten  or  twelve  large 
 stones,  and  beneath  these  tradition  places  the 
 '  twelve  stones '  brought  up  by  the  Israelites  from 
 the  bed  of  the  Jordan  (Josh,  iv.)  A  little  to  the 
 south  of  the  ruins  is  a  smooth  surface  of  natural 
 rock,  oval-shaped,  and  declining  towards  an  exca- 
 vated pit.  This  is  the  Samaritan  '  Holy  of  Holies,' 
 toward  which  they  turn  in  prayer.  The  spot 
 ■where  they  assemble  to  eat  the  passover  is  about 
 200  yards  distant  down  the  western  slope  of  the 
 mountain.  The  writer  was  present  at  their  feast  in 
 1858.  The  whole  community  were  assembled. 
 The  lambs,  pre\iously  selected,  were  killed.  A 
 deep  circular  pit,  lined  with  rude  masonry,  was 
 then  heated  with  wood  like  an  oven.  The  lambs 
 were  taken  and  suspended  to  a  stick  laid  across 
 the  mouth  of  the  pit.  The  whole  was  then 
 covered  over  and  allowed  to  remain  so  till  the 
 flesh  was  roasted  (Exod.  xii.  9).  All  the  Samari- 
 tans, men,  women,  and  children,  except  such  as 
 are  ceremonially  unclean,  partake  of  the  flesh. 
 They  eat  it  '  in  haste,  with  their  loins  girded,  their 
 shoes  on  their  feet,  and  their  staves  in  their  hand 
 (ver.  n).  For  more  detailed  accounts  of  Gerizim, 
 consult  Reland,  Pal.  1004,  sq. ;  Robinson,  B.  R. 
 ii.  276,  s(]. ;  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  337  ;  De 
 Saulcey,  Journey,  etc.,  ii.  323  ;  Thomson,  The 
 Land  and  the  Booh,  476. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 GERLACH,  Otto  von,  born  at  Berlin  in 
 1801  ;  became  in  1S34  pastor  of  the  St.  Elizabeth 
 Church  in  the  suburlis  of  that  city  ;  was  advanced 
 to  be  Consistorialrath  and  Domprediger  in  1847  ; 
 and  died  24th  Oct.  1849.  His  energies  were  ex- 
 pended principally  on  the  practical  duties  of  his 
 office ;  but  he  found  time  also  for  some  literai-y 
 effort.  His  most  important  work  is  his  Heilige 
 Schrift  nach  Luther'' s  uehcrsetzung  niit  Einlcitun- 
 gen  und  erkldrenden  Aniuerkungen,  6  vols.  8vo, 
 '847-53,  of  which  tlie  4th  vol.,  concluding  the 
 O.  T.,  is  the  production  of  Dr.  Schmieder  of  Wit- 
 tenberg. This  work,  intended  cliiefly  for  lamily 
 use,  has  been  extensively  circulated  in  Germany, 
 and  a  portion  of  it  has  been  translated  into  Eng- 
 lish {Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  Edin.  1S60). 
 He  published  also  Vollstdndige  Aiiswahl der  Haupt- 
 schriften  Luther's  mit  Anmerhungen,  Einleitungen 
 and  Registern,  24  vols.  1848,  2d  edit. — W.  L.  X. 
 
 GERMAN  VERSIONS.  There  is  no  certain 
 trace  of  any  attempt  to  translate  the  Scriptures 
 Into  the  vernacular  dialects  of  the  German  people 
 
 previous  to  the  latter  half  of  the  ninth  century. 
 'J'hough  Charlemagne  enjoined  upon  his  clergy  the 
 study  of  the  Bible  and  the  delivering  of  expositions 
 of  it  to  the  people  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  there  is  no 
 evidence  for  the  assertion  hazarded  by  Ussher  [De 
 Script.  Vernac,  p.  109)  and  others  that  Gemian 
 versions  of  the  Bible  were  made  by  his  order  ; 
 nor  is  the  statement  that  a  Saxon  poet  had,  by  order 
 of  his  son  Lewis,  versified  the  whole  Bible  (Flacius 
 111.  Catal.  Test.,  p.  93)  better  supported.  It  is  to 
 the  poetical  naiTatives  of  the  life  of  our  Saviour 
 which  appeared  after  the  middle  of  the  9th  cen- 
 tury, that  the  beginnings  of  Biblical  translation 
 among  the  Germans  are  to  be  traced.  The  Krist 
 of  Otfried  of  Weissenburg  (ab.  860)  ;  the  Ileliand, 
 by  an  unknown  author,  and  perhaps  about  the 
 same  time,  are  the  earliest  documents  of  which  any- 
 thing certain  can  be  said.  Of  both  of  these  edi- 
 tions have  been  printed  ;  the  best  are,  of  the  Krist, 
 that  by  E.  G.  Graff,  Kbn.  183 1  ;  and  of  the 
 Heliand,  those  of  J.  A.  Schmeller,  with  a  glossary, 
 Mi.inch.  1840,  and  J.  R.  Kone,  with  a  translation, 
 Mlinst.  1855.  Some  fragments  of  a  very  ancient 
 translation  of  Matthew  have  been  published  by  St. 
 Endlicher  and  H.  Hoffmann,  1834,  and  by  J.  F. 
 Massmann,  1841,  from  a  codex  in  the  library  at 
 Vienna  ;  the  dialect  in  this  version  is  very  rude, 
 and,  if  not  provincial,  would  seem  to  point  to  an 
 earlier  date  than  the  ninth  century.  Versions  of 
 the  Psalter  seem  to  have  been  executed  in  consi- 
 derable numbers  in  the  tenth  century ;  one  of  these 
 by  Notker  Labeo,  abbot  of  St.  Gall,  is  given  by 
 Schilter  {Thes.  vol.  i. ),  and  others  anonymous  are 
 to  be  found  in  Grafi"'s  Deutsche  Interlinear  ver- 
 sionen  der  Psalmen,  Quad.  1839.  A  paraphrase 
 of  the  Song  of  Songs  in  Latin  verse  and  German 
 prose,  by  William  of  Ebersberg  in  Bavaria  (ab. 
 1080),  has  been  edited  in  Schilter's  Thes.  i. ,  and 
 separately  by  Merula,  Leyd.  1598,  Freher,  Wonns 
 1 63 1,  and  recently,  with  additional  fragments  of 
 other  parts  of  Scripture,  by  Hoffmann,  Ber.  1827. 
 This  scholar  has  also  edited,  in  the  2d  vol.  of 
 his  Fundgrid'cn,  a  metrical  translation  of  Genesis 
 and  part  of  Exodus,  belonging  to  the  same  period 
 or  a  little  later.  To  the  13th  centuiy  belongs 
 the  chronicle  of  Rudolf  von  Hohenems,  which  is  a 
 sort  of  poetical  version  of  the  historical  parts  of  the 
 O.  T.  ;  of  this  many  MSS.  exist,  and  an  edition 
 has  been  published,  but  from  a  bad  text,  by 
 Schiitze,  Hamb.  1779.  Several  works  of  a  similar 
 kind,  in  which  the  Biblical  narratives  are  set  forth, 
 sometimes  with  apocryphal  additions,  were  pro- 
 duced about  this  time  ;  of  these  one,  which  exists 
 in  various  dialects  and  in  numerous  codices,  is  a 
 version  of  the  historical  parts  of  Scripture  in  prose, 
 composed  partly  from  the  jioetical  versions  already 
 extant,  partly  translated  from  the  Vulgate  (Mass- 
 mann, Die  Kaiserchronik,  iii.  54).  Formal  trans- 
 lations from  the  Vulgate  began  now  to  be  multi- 
 plied ;  of  these  MSS.  exist,  though  the  names  of 
 the  authors  have  for  the  most  part  perished  (Reiske, 
 De  Verss.  Germ,  ante  Lutherunt,  1697  ;  Schoeber, 
 Bericht  von  altcn  Deutschen  geschriebenen  Bibcln, 
 1763  ;  Rosenmiiller,  Hist.  Interpr.  v.  174,  etc.) 
 Out  of  these,  though  by  what  process  we  are 
 unable  to  describe,  came  the  complete  version  of 
 the  Bible  in  German,  which  was  in  the  possession 
 of  the  people  before  the  invention  of  printing,  and 
 of  which  copies  were  multiplied  to  a  great  extent 
 as  soon  as  that  art  came  into  operation.  Before 
 1477   five  undated   editions,    the   four  earlier  at 
 
GERMAN  VERSIONS 
 
 115 
 
 GERMAN  VERSIONS 
 
 Mayence  and  Strasburg,  as  is  believed,  the  fifth  at 
 Augsburg,  as  the  boolc  itself  attests,  had  been 
 printed  ;  and  between  1477  and  1522  nine  editions, 
 seven  at  Augsburg,  one  at  Niiremberg,  and  one  at 
 Strasburg,  were  issued.  Several  editions  of  the 
 Psalter  also  ap]ieared,  and  one  of  the  Gospels,  with 
 the  PericopEe  from  the  Eijis'iles.  Collectors  tell 
 also  of  a  translation  of  Ruth  by  Boschenstayn, 
 1525  ;  of  Malachi  by  Hetzer,  1526  ;  of  Hosea  by 
 Capito,  1527,  and  other  similar  attempts  (Riederer, 
 Nachrichten  II.,  80,  ff.)  An  important  place  must 
 be  also  assigned  to  the  translation  of  the  N.  T. 
 into  Danish  Ijy  Hans  Mikkelsen,  Leips.  1524 ; 
 which,  though  avowedly  '  ret  effter  latinen  vdsat- 
 the,'  bears  numerous  traces  of  independence  of  the 
 Vulgate,  and  of  being  made  directly  from  the  Greek 
 (Henderson,  Dissertation  on  Hans  AIikkelsen''s  N. 
 T.,  Copenh.  1813).  Of  translations  into  low  Ger- 
 man one  was  printed  at  Cologne  1480,  another  at 
 Llibeck  1498,  and  a  third  at  Halberstadt  1522. 
 
 2.  Ltither^s  Versio^t. — The  appearance  of  this 
 constitutes  an  epoch,  not  only  in  the  histoiy  of  the 
 church,  but  also  in  that  of  German  literature  and 
 of  the  German  people.  Luther's  version  is  a  per- 
 manent monument  of  the  author's  ability  and  in- 
 domitable perseverance.  Luther  had  k\v  helps  in 
 his  arduous  work.  His  exegetical  aids  were  limited 
 to  the  LXX.,  the  Vulgate,  a  few  Latin  fathers,  the 
 N.  T.  of  Erasmus,  and  such  Hebrew  as  could  be 
 learned  from  the  imperfect  elementaiy  books  then 
 extant.  He  had,  however,  valuable  coadjutors  in 
 Melancthon,  Bugenhagen,  Jonas,  Aurogallus,  and 
 Creuziger,  whom  he  constantly  consulted,  espe- 
 cially when  any  difficulty  occurred.  He  had  access 
 also  to  the  rabbinical  expositions  through  some 
 learned  Jews.  But  the  main  burden  of  the  work 
 rested  with  himself,  and  it  was  to  his  own  resources 
 he  had  chiefly  to  trust  for  success.  Of  the  patient 
 toil  he  bestowed  upon  it  some  idea  may  be  formed 
 from  what  he  himself  says  of  his  labours  on  the 
 book  of  Job  : — '  On  Job,  M.  Philip,  Aurogallus, 
 and  I,  worked  so  that  sometimes  in  four  days  we 
 had  hardly  succeeded  in  accomplishing  three  lines.' 
 With  what  anxious  care  he  sought  to  perfect  his 
 work  may  be  seen  from  the  MS.  of  the  third  part 
 of  his  translation,  containing  Job,  Psalms,  and  the 
 writings  of  Solomon,  still  preserved  in  the  Royal 
 Library  at  Berlin,  written  in  his  own  hand,  and 
 exhibiting  the  corrections  which  he  made  in  the 
 style  and  expression  before  sending  it  to  press. 
 Not  unfrequently  as  many  as  three  forms  of  ex- 
 pression, and  sometimes  more,  occur,  between 
 which  he  hesitated  before  finally  fixing  on  the  one 
 which  he  would  print.  He  spent  on  the  work  in 
 all  twelve  years.  The  N.  T.,  completed  by  him 
 in  the  Wartburg,  appeared  in  1522  ;  the  five 
 books  of  Moses  (Das  Alte  Testament.  Deutsch. 
 Th.  I.)  in  1523  ;  the  other  historical  books  as  far 
 as  Esther  {Das  A.  T.  Deutsch.  Th.  II.)  in  the 
 close  of  the  same  year  ;  Job,  Psalms,  and  the 
 Solomonic  writings  {Das  A.  T.,  Th.  III.)  in  1524; 
 between  1526  and  1531  several  of  the  prophetic 
 writings  were  issued,  and  in  1532  appeared  the 
 collective  body  of  the  Prophets  as  Th.  IV.  of  Das 
 A.  T.  Deutsch.  The  Book  of  Wisdom  was  issued 
 in  1529,  and  the  rest  of  the  Apocryphal  books  in 
 1533  and  1534.  The  whole  Bible  was  thus  com- 
 pleted, and  appeared  undsr  the  title  Biblia  :  d.  i. 
 die  ,s:anze  heilige  Sch7-ift.  Deutsch.  Martin  Luther. 
 Wittenberg.  Gedrztckt  durch  flans  Lufft,  1534. 
 (Pischon,   Die  hohe  wichtiskeit  der  Uebersetz.  der 
 
 II.  S.  durch  Dr.  M.  Luther,  Berl.  1834).  Of  this 
 work  thirty-eight  editions  were  printed  in  Germany 
 before  15S0,  besides  seventy-two  of  the  N.  T.,  and 
 innumerable  reprints  of  other  smaller  portions 
 (Panzer,  p.  336). 
 
 3.  Ziirich  Bible. — This  is  a  combination  of 
 Luther's  translation  of  the  other  books  with  a  new 
 translation  of  the  prophetical  writings  by  Con. 
 Pellican,  Leo  Judre,  Theod.  Bibliander,  etc.  It 
 appeared  in  1524,  and  was  reprinted  in  1527,  and 
 twice  in  1530.  In  1531  another  edition  appeared 
 with  a  new  translation  of  the  poetical  books  (Pan- 
 zer, p.  260).  The  Worms  Bible,  1529,  is  a  work 
 of  the  same  kind  as  the  Ziirich  Bible. 
 
 4.  l^crsions  from  Luther'' s  Bible  in  the  other 
 Teutonic  dialects. — i.  Lozv  Gernmn,  by  J.  Hodder- 
 sen,  1533  and  often  ;  2.  Danish,  N.  T.,  1524, 
 Bible,  1550  ;  this  is  found  also  in  Hutter's  Poly- 
 glott  ;  3.  Szvedish,  N.  T.  1526,  by  Laurentius 
 Andreoe,  Bible,  1541,  by  Laurent,  and  Olaus  Petri; 
 4.  Islaudic,  N.  T.  1540,  Bible  1584,  by  Gudb. 
 Thorlakson,  Bishop  of  Holum  ;  Dutch,  N.  T. 
 1526,  Antw. ,  printed  by  Liesvelt,  whence  this  is 
 called  the  Liesvelt  N.  T.  ;  the  whole  Bible  was 
 translated  anew  after  Luther  into  Dutch  by  Ad. 
 Vischer  in  1648,  and  this  is  the  existing  authorised 
 version  for  the  Dutch  Lutherans  ;  5-  Pomeranian, 
 1588. 
 
 5.  Versions  of  the  Reformed  Church. — Of  these 
 the  first  was  the  production  of  David  Pareus,  and 
 appeared  in  1579.  It  was  superseded  by  that  of 
 J.  Piscator  in  1602,  of  which  many  editions  have 
 appeared.  A  translation  of  the  N.  T.,  by  Aman- 
 dus  Folanus,  appeared  in  1603.  In  1665  a  new 
 translation  for  the  use  of  the  Swiss  Churches  ap- 
 peared at  Zurich,  the  authors  of  which  were  Hot- 
 tinger,  Suicer,  Fiisslin,  and  others.  In  Holland 
 various  attempts  were  made  to  produce  versions 
 direct  from  the  originals.  In  1556  J.  Uitenhoven 
 issued  the  N.  T. ,  and  in  1562  the  whole  Bible ;  and 
 in  1587  appeared  the  Bible  translated  by  J.  Hackius, 
 which  chietly  follows  the  Geneva  [French]  Bible. 
 
 6.  Authorised  Fersions. — In  the  year  1618  the 
 Synod  of  Dort  appointed  a  commission  of  22 
 members  to  prepare  a  new  version  ;  this  appeared 
 in  1637,  and  received  the  authorisation  of  the 
 States  General.  This  is  the  authorised  Dutch 
 version.  The  Danish  version  was  completed  in 
 1607  by  P.  J.  Resen,  and  in  1647  appeared  with 
 the  royal  sanction,  after  it  had  been  carefully  re- 
 vised by  Hans  Svaning,  Archbishop  of  Zealand. 
 The  Islandic  version  received  its  permanent  form 
 in  1644  from  Thorlak  Skuleson,  the  grandson  of 
 Thorlakson,  and  his  successor  in  the  episcopate. 
 The  authorised  Sv/edish  version  was  completed 
 under  the  aus]")ices  of  Gustavus  HI.  ;  it  consists  of 
 a  revised  edition  of  the  work  of  Andrere  and  Petri, 
 and  appeared  in  1618. 
 
 7.  Roman  Catholic  Versions. — The  earliest  of  these 
 is  the  N.  T.  of  Emser,  'nach  lawt  der  christliche 
 Kirchen  bewerten  Text,  etc.,'  sine  loc.  1527)  foh, 
 Leipz.  1529,  8vo,  and  often  since.  In  1534  the 
 Bible  of  Dietenberger  appeared  at  Mayence  [DiE- 
 TENBERGEr]  ;  and  in  1537  that  of  Eck  at  Ingoldstadt 
 [EcK.]  Previous  to  these,  Casper  Ulenberg  had 
 translated  the  Bible  in  accordance  with  the  Sixtine 
 text  of  the  Vulgate,  and  this  translation,  revised  by 
 the  Jesuits  at  Mayence  in  1661,  appeared  as  Di^ 
 Catholische  Bibel.  Revised  editions  were  issued  by 
 Ehrhard  in  1722,  and  by  Cartier  in  1751  ;  and  it 
 has  been  often  reprinted  both  with  and  without  the 
 
GERRHENIANS 
 
 116 
 
 GERSON 
 
 Latin  text.  More  recent  versions  by  Roman  Catho- 
 lics are  those  of  Salzmann,  Lux.  1770  ;  Wittola, 
 Vien.  1775;  Weitenauer,  Augs.  1777;  Fleis- 
 chutz,  Fuld.  1778;  Rosalino,  Vien.  17S1;  Fischer, 
 Prag.  1784;  Braun,  Vien.  1786;  Lauber  17S6  ; 
 Mutschelle,  Mun.  1789  ;  Weyl,  May  1789  ; 
 Krach,  Augs.  1790  ;  Brentano,  Dereser  and 
 Scholz  1 790- 1 833  [see  these  names] ;  Babor  1S05  ; 
 Van  Ess  1S07  [Ess  L.  van]  ;  Schnappfinger 
 1807;  Widemann  1809  ;  Kistemalcer  1S25  ;  Scholz 
 1828.  Of  these  the  majority  are  confined  to  the 
 N.  T.  The  translations  of  Fischer,  Braun,  Van 
 Ess,  and  Scholz,  have  been  repeatedly  issued. 
 Gossner,  pastor  of  the  Bohemian  Church  in  Berlin, 
 published  a  translation  of  the  N.  T.  from  the 
 Greek  in  1815,  which  has  often  been  reprinted. 
 
 8.  Other  Versions. — In  1630  J.  Crell  issued  a  Ger- 
 man translation  of  the  Bible  in  the  interests  of  So- 
 cinianism  ;  and  in  1660  another,  in  the  interests  of 
 Arminianism,  was  published  by  Jer.  Felbinger. 
 The  Remonstrant  jiarty  in  Holland  published  a 
 translation  in  Dutch,  made  by  Chr.  Hartsoeker,  in 
 16S0.  In  1666  a  Jewish  translation  of  the  O.  T. 
 into  German  was  published  by  Joseph  Athias  ; 
 this,  along  with  the  versions  of  Luther,  Piscator, 
 Caspar  Ulenberg,  the  Dutch  A.  V.,  and  a  version 
 of  the  N.  T.  by  J.  H.  Reitzen,  printed  in  parallel 
 columns,  was  published  under  the  title  of  Biblia 
 Peiitapla,  in  3  vols.  4to,  Hamb.  171 1.  Of  German 
 versions  of  more  recent  date  there  are  many.  Those 
 of  TriUer  1703  ;  Reiz  1712  ;  Junkherrot  1732  ; 
 Heumann  1748;  Bengel  1753;  Michaelis  1769- 
 85  ;  Sillig  177S;  Seller  1783;  Stolz  1795;  the 
 Berleburg  Bible  1726,  etc.,  belong  to  the  Lutheran 
 Church  ;  those  of  Grynaeus,  3  vols.  8vo,  Bas. 
 1776,  and  Voegelin  Zi.ir.  1781,  to  the  Reformed. 
 Belonging  to  the  present  century  are  the  transla- 
 tions of  Preiss  1811  ;  Schsefer  1816  ;  Meyer  1829, 
 [Richter  and  Pleissner]  1830  ;  Boeckel  1832  ;  Alt 
 1837  ;  von  der  Heydt  i85"2  ;  chiefly  of  the  N.  T. 
 only.  But  all  these  yield  in  importance  to  the 
 work  of  De  Wette,  prepared  originally  in  con- 
 junction with  Augusti,  6  vols.,  Heidelb.  1809-14, 
 subsequently  wht)lly  by  himself,  3  vols.,  1831-33, 
 4th  edit.  1858.  The  Jewish  version  by  Arnheim, 
 Fiirst,  and  Sachs,  under  the  editorship  of  Zung, 
 Berl.  1838,  is  also  deserving  of  notice. 
 
 [Fritzsche  in  Ilerzog's  Real  Eneycl.,  iii.  334; 
 Reuss  Gesch.  d.  N.  T. ;  The  Bible  0/  Every  Latid, 
 eU.]-\\.  L.  A. 
 
 GERRHENIANS  {Vi^p-qvol).  The  inhabitants 
 of  a  town  which  is  mentioned  (2  Maccab.  xiii.  24)  as 
 one  of  the  limits  of  the  territory  over  which  Judas 
 Maccabeus  was  appointed  governor  by  Antiochus 
 Eupator.  As  the  other  limit,  Ptolemais,  is  in  the 
 extreme  north  of  Palestine,  it  seems  as  if  some  town 
 in  the  south  must  be  here  referred  to.  This  conjec- 
 ture is  confirmed  by  a  parallel  passage  in  i  Maccab. 
 xi.  59,  where  it  is  statetl  that  Simon  was  appointed 
 governor  from  the  Ladder  of  Tyre  (a  mountain  so 
 called  on  the  north  of  Ptolemais)  unto  the  borders 
 of  Egypt,  «'a!S  tQiv  dpiujv  AlyvTrrov.  The  require- 
 ments of  the  passage  seem,  therefore,  to  be  fully 
 met  by  the  town  between  Pelusium  and  Mount 
 Casius,  called  T^^pa  by  Strabo  (xvi.,  p.  760), 
 V^ppov  by  Ptolemy  (iv.  5,  p.  103),  Gerro  by  Pliny 
 (N.  H.  vi.  29),  and  Vipa.  by  Sozomcn  (//.  E.  viii. 
 19),  who  states  that  it  was  about  50  stadia  from 
 Pelusium.  Mr.  Grove  (Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bil>lc) 
 objects  to   this  identification  on  the  ground  that 
 
 Gerrha  and  the  neighbouring  coast  was  at  this  time 
 in  the  possession  of  Egypt.  To  this  it  may  be  re- 
 plied that  the  expression  'iw%  ruv  TeppTjvCoi' does  not 
 imply  that  the  Gerrhenians  were  included  in  the 
 district  described,  as  is  shewn  both  by  the  passage 
 already  referred  to  (i  Maccab.  xi.  59),  and  by  the 
 corresponding  passage  in  Josephus  {A >iti(/.  xiii.  5.4), 
 where  the  expression  used  is  ews  AiyvirTov. — S.  N. 
 
 GERSHOM  (Qbna,  a  stranger  here;  *  Pijpcrd/x). 
 
 I.  One  of  the  two  sons  (the  other  was  Eliezer)  who 
 were  born  to  Moses  in  the  land  of  Midian  by  Zip- 
 porah  (Exod.  ii.  22  ;  xviii.  3).  These  sons  of  the 
 great  lawgiver  held  no  other  rank  than  that  of 
 simple  Levites,  while  the  sons  of  their  uncle  Aaron 
 enjoyed  all  the  privileges  of  the  priesthood  (l 
 Chron.  xxiii.  14).  The  glory  of  being  the  children 
 of  such  a  father  doubtless  availed  them  more  than 
 the  highest  dignities ;  while  the  fact  of  Moses  mak- 
 ing no  public  provision  for  them  is  a  collateral  evi- 
 dence of  the  divine  authority  under  which  he  acted. 
 [It  is  the  same  Gershom  who  is  mentioned  Judg. 
 xviii.  30  as  the  father  of  Jonathan  ;  the  original 
 reading  there  is  Jonathan  ben  Gershom,  be7i  Moshe ; 
 the  substitution  of  Manasse  for  Moshe  is  accounted 
 for  in  the  Talmud  [Baba,  Bathra,  f.  109,  b)  on  the 
 ground  that  Jonathan  didtheworksof  Manasseh,  and 
 so  was  ranked  in  his  family.  2.  ^ripa^v;  Alex.  Ft/p- 
 crtoiu,)  The  descendant  of  Phinehas,  and  representa- 
 tive of  his  family  in  the  time  of  Ezra  (viii.  2). 
 
 GERSHON  (jiKhJ,    batiisher ;    Sept.    T-qpaJw, 
 
 Teaadov),  eldest  son  of  the  patriarch  Levi,  born  in 
 Canaan  before  the  going  down  into  Egypt.  He  is 
 only  known  from  his  name  having  been  given  to  one 
 of  the  three  great  branches  of  the  Levitical  tribe. 
 The  office  of  the  Gershonites,  during  the  marches 
 in  the  wilderness,  M'as  to  carry  the  vails  and  cur- 
 tains of  the  tabernacle,  and  their  place  in  the  camp 
 was  west  of  the  tabernacle  (Gen.  xlvi.  1 1  ;  Exod. 
 vi.  16  ;  Num.  iii.  17).  [In  several  passages  this  is 
 spelt  Gershom  (i  Chron.  vi.  16,  17,  etc. ;  xv.  7]. 
 
 GERSON,  John  Charuer  de.  One  of  the 
 most  celebrated  men  of  the  15th  century,  and  a 
 great  forerunner  of  the  reformation,  was  born 
 December  14,  1363,  at  Gerson,  a  small  village  in 
 the  diocese  of  Rheims.  He  was  the  eldest  of 
 twelve  children,  and  was  brought  up  by  his  parents 
 in  strict  piety.  Three  of  his  brothers  and  four 
 of  his  sisters  took  monastic  vows.  His  paternal 
 name  was  Charlier,  but  having  entered  at  fourteen 
 the  College  of  Navarre  in  Paris,  he  adopted  the 
 addition  de  Gerson,  in  memory  of  his  birth-place, 
 and  in  token  of  the  new  life  he  embraced.  He 
 soon  acquired  distinction,  and  rose  rapidly  in  the 
 church.  In  1392  he  received  from  Pierre  d'Ailly 
 the  degree  of  doctor;  in  1395  he  was  appointed 
 Bishop  of  Puy  ;  in  1396  he  became  Bishop  of  Cam- 
 bray,  and  subsequently  Chancellor  of  the  Univer- 
 sity of  Paris. 
 
 Gerson  took  an  active  part  in  most  of  the  con- 
 troversies of  the  troublous  times  on  which  he  was 
 cast,  for  the  most  part  aiming  at  promoting  peace 
 and  healing  the  divisions  of  the  church.  He  took 
 a  leading  part  in  the  council  of  Constance ;  and 
 
 *  [Gesenius  prefers  deriving  this  name  from  t^HJ,  io 
 drive  off,  thus  making  it  the  same  as  pCHl  But 
 surely  tlie  writer  of  Exodus  is  a  better  authority  in 
 such  a  matter.  ] 
 
GERSONIDES 
 
 117 
 
 GESENIUS 
 
 the  greatest  blot  on  his  character  is  the  share  he 
 had  in  the  condemnation  of  Huss.  At  the 
 close  of  the  council,  finding  his  efforts  at  reforma- 
 tion baffled,  and  disheartened  by  his  repeated 
 failures,  Gerson  retired  as  a  pilgrim  into  Bavaria 
 and  the  Tyrol,  and  finally  visited  Vienna,  where 
 Frederick  of  Austria  made  him  a  professor  in  the 
 university.  Here  he  wrote  his  treatise  De  Coiisola- 
 tione  Theologicv,  which  has  been  often  reprinted,  and 
 his  monotessaron,  a  harmony  of  the  gospels.  In 
 1419  he  quitted  Austria  and  returned  to  France, 
 on  the  death  of  the  Duke  of  Burgundy,  to  seek  an 
 asylum  in  the  monastery  of  the  Celestines  at  Lyons. 
 Here  he  wrote  his  commentaries  on  the  Psalms, 
 and  spent  his  time  in  the  education  of  young 
 children,  saying  that  it  was  with  little  children  that 
 the  reformation  of  the  church  should  commence. 
 He  instructed  them  in  the  rudiments  of  Latin  and  the 
 gospels,  and  taught  them  to  say  in  their  prayers, 
 '  O  Lord,  have  mercy  on  thy  poor  servant  John 
 Gerson.'  After  completing  a  commentaiy  on  the 
 song  of  songs,  he  died  July  12,  1429,  aged  66. 
 Sursttin  corda  was  engraved  on  his  tomb.  The  De 
 hnitatione  Chiistihas  been  ascribed  to  him  from  the 
 fact  of  its  first  appearing  appended  to  a  manuscript 
 of  his  De  Consolatioite  Theologice.  It  is  still  a 
 matter  of  dispute ;  and  France,  Italy,  and  Gemnany, 
 contend  for  the  authorship  of  this  famous  work. 
 Gerson  was  a  noble  character,  eloquent,  earnest, 
 and  of  deep  piety.  His  great  aim  was  the  reforma- 
 tion of  abuses,  discipline,  and  manners,  the  corrup- 
 tion of  the  clergy,  the  ignorance  and  venality  of  the 
 prelates.  The  infallibility  and  inviolability  of  the 
 Pope,  were  in  his  idea,  gross  superstition.  He 
 believed  that  the  power  to  bind  and  to  loose  be- 
 longed to  a  general  council,  not  to  the  Pope ;  he 
 condemned  the  self-flagellation  of  fanatics,  and 
 strove  to  abolish  annates,  and  extirpate  simony. 
 The  best  edition  of  Gerson's  works  is  that  by  Du 
 Pin,  in  5  vols,  folio,  Antwerp,  1706. — S.  L. 
 
 GERSONIDES.     [Levi  b.  Gerson.] 
 
 GERZITES.     [Gezrites.] 
 
 GESENIUS,  Wilhelm,  the  eminent  Hebrew 
 scholar,  was  born  at  Nordhausen,  in  Hanover,  3d 
 Feb.  1786,  and  died  at  Halle,  23d  Oct.  1842. 
 From  the  Gymnasium  of  his  native  town  he  passed  to 
 the  University  of  Helmstadt,  now  defunct,  and  sub- 
 sequently to  that  of  Gottingen,  where  he  studied 
 theology.  After  fulfilling  the  functions  of  a  Privat- 
 docent  at  Gottingen  for  three  years,  he  was  ap- 
 pointed in  1809  Professor  at  the  Gymnasium  of 
 Heiligstadt ;  and  in  the  following  year  he  was 
 elevated  to  a  theological  professorship  at  Halle, 
 where  he  continued  to  the  end  of  his  life.  He  de- 
 voted himself  with  great  zeal  to  the  duties  of  his 
 chair,  and  became  the  most  popular  teacher  of 
 Hebrew  and  O.  T.  exegesis  in  Germany.  He  con- 
 tinued to  prosecute  with  much  diligence  the 
 study  of  Hebrew,  and  directed  his  attention  to  the 
 preparation  of  works  adapted  to  promote  famili- 
 arity with  that  language.  His  earliest  aim  was 
 directed  to  the  improvement  of  Hebrew  lexico- 
 graphy ;  before  leaving  Gottingen  he  had  turned 
 his  mind  to  this  subject ;  and  he  was  no  sooner 
 settled  in  Halle  than  he  set  himself  in  earnest  to 
 accomplish  what  he  had  proposed.  In  1 8 1  o  appeared 
 the  first  volume  of  his  Hebrdisch-deuisches  Hand- 
 worterbiich  des  Alien  Tesiaments,  which  was  fol- 
 lowed by  the  2d  voL  in  1812.     This  work,  pro- 
 
 duced between  the  author's  22d  and  26th  year,  he 
 was  accustomed  himself  to  regard  in  later  years  as 
 a  juvenile  performance  ;  but  it  was  such  a  per- 
 formance as  secured  for  him  at  once  a  foremost 
 place  among  Hebrew  philologists,  and  its  appear- 
 ance constitutes  an  era  in  the  history  of  Shemitic 
 learning.  In  this  field  Gesenius  continued  to  labour 
 to  the  last ;  in  181 5  he  issued  his  Neues  Heb. 
 Dcjitsch.  Handwbrterbjich  fiir  sc/uiler,  of  which 
 new  editions  appeared  in  1823,  1828,  and  1834, 
 under  the  title  of  Heb.  U7id  Chald.  H.  W.  B. 
 tieber  das  A.  T.  ;  and  in  1833  appeared  \\\%  Lexi- 
 con Ma7iuale  Heb.  et  Chald.  iti  V.  T.  libros ; 
 but  his  great  work  in  this  department,  and  in 
 which  he  was  occupied  at  the  time  of  his  death,  is 
 the  Thesaurus  Philologiais  Criticus  Ling.  Heb.  et 
 Chal.  V.  T. ,  of  which  the  first  fasciculus  appeared 
 in  1829,  the  fifth  in  1842,  and  which,  completed 
 by  Rodiger,  who  added  a  sixth  fasciculus  (1853), 
 occupies  3  vols.  4to.  Of  these  works  the  first  has 
 been  translated  into  English  by  Christopher  Leo, 
 2  vols.  4to,  Camb.  1825,  the  second  by  J.  W. 
 Gibbs,  Andover  1824,  and  the  third,  with  correc- 
 tions furnished  by  the  author,  by  Dr.  E.  Robinson, 
 1 84 1.  To  the  improvement  of  the  grammar  of 
 the  Hebrew  also  Gesenius  set  himself  with  much 
 diligence  and  perseverance  ;  and  in  this  depart- 
 ment issued  the  following  works  : — Hebrdische 
 G7'ammatik,  Halle  1813,  13th  ed.  1842,  translated 
 from  the  nth  ed.  by  Prof.  Conant  of  New  York, 
 1839  (3d  ed.  1842,  reprinted  in  London  1840) ;  four 
 editions,  superintended  by  Rodiger,  have  appeared 
 since  the  author's  death,  from  one  of  which  the 
 translation  by  Mr.  Tregelles  is  made  ;  Heb.  Lese- 
 buch,  Halle  1814,  6th  ed.  1834;  Geschichteder  Heb. 
 Sprache  tind  Schrift  1815  ;  Lehrgebd2tde  der  Heb. 
 Sprache,  1817.  Gesenius  was  the  author  also  of  the 
 following  works  : — Versuch  ueb.  die  Maltesische 
 Sprache,  1810;  De Pentateuchi  Saviaritani Origine, 
 Indole  ei  Aucloritate,  1815;  Der  Prophet  Jesaia, 
 iibersetzt,  und  mil  Comment,  begleitet,  2  vols.  1820 
 21;  De  Samaritaftoriim  Theologia  ex  fo7itibus  inedi' 
 lis,  1822  ;  Carmi7ia  Sa7na>-itana  i7ite7-p.  Lat.  cum 
 comme7tt.  Must.  1824;  Palceographische  Studie7i 
 ueb.  Phd7iizische  U7td  Pu7iische  Schrift,  1835;  Scrip- 
 ttircE  Linguceque  Phoe7iicicE  Mo7tu>ne7tia  quotquot 
 superstcnt,  1837  ;  besides  many  articles  on  Biblical 
 subjects  in  the  Encyclopaedic  of  Ersch  and  Gruber. 
 Amongst  those  by  whom  service  has  been  rendered 
 to  the  cause  of  O.  T.  philology,  no  name  stands 
 higher  than  that  of  Gesenius.  All  he  has  written 
 bears  marks  of  careful  study,  is  characterised  by 
 sound  judgment  and  good  sense,  and  is  presented 
 in  a  style  remarkably  pellucid  and  simple.  It  may 
 be  objected  to  his  grammatical  system  that  it  is  too 
 artificial,  and  presents  rather  the  grammarian's  de- 
 vice than  a  scheme  of  the  actual  phenomena  of  the 
 language — his  multiplication  of  the  declensions,  for 
 instance,  to  nine,  and  his  distinction  between  mas- 
 culine and  feminine  declensions  is  without  support 
 from  the  actual  facts  of  the  language  ;  but  there 
 can  be  no  doubt  that  his  grammars  are  an  immense 
 improvement  on  all  that  preceded  them,  and  have 
 done  more  to  facilitate  and  encourage  the  study  of 
 Hebrew  than  any  that  have  appeared  since.  To 
 liis  lexicographical  works  the  only  objection  that 
 can  be  offered  is  that  they  are  confined  exclusively 
 to  the  Biblical  Hebrew,  and  so  still  leave  us  with- 
 out a  complete  Thesaurus  of  the  Hebrew  tong^ie. 
 As  an  exegete  Gesenius  is  strong  only  in  philo- 
 logy and  the  other  adjutorial  branches  of  interpre- 
 
GESHEM 
 
 118 
 
 GETHSEMANE 
 
 tation ;  he  affords  valuable  help  in  reaching  the 
 meaning  of  the  prophet's  words,  but  often  sadly 
 fails  in  apprehending  the  significance  of  his  thoughts. 
 During  his  later  years  he  gave  much  attention  to 
 palseography,  and  his  contributions  to  this  branch 
 of  inquiry  are  of  first-rate  excellence,  and  leave 
 behind  them  all  preceding  works  in  the  same  de- 
 partment.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 GESHEM  (DC'3,  carcase;  Sept.  TTjadfj.),  one  of 
 
 the  enemies  of  the  Jews  under  Nehemiah  (Neh.  vi. 
 i6).  He  was  probably  a  Samaritan,  although  on 
 some  accoun*'  or  other  designated  an  Arabian 
 (Neh.  ii.  19),  and  appears  to  have  been  a  subaltern 
 officer  at  Jerusalem.  He  opposed  the  designs  of 
 the  Jewish  governor,  talking  of  them  as  seditious, 
 and  turning  them  into  ridicule.  Eventually  he  took 
 part  in  the  plots  of  Tobiah  against  the  life  of  Nehe- 
 miah (Neh.  ii.  19;  vi.  2-9),  about  B.C.  445. — ^J.  K. 
 
 GESHUR    (llty'S  ;    Sept.    Tapyaal,    Tepyeal, 
 
 Teaipi,  Teffovpl,  Ttacrip,  and  TeSaovp),  a  small 
 kingdom  on  the  north-eastern  border  of  Pales- 
 tine beyond  the  Jordan.  The  inhabitants  are 
 called  Gcshtn-ites  and  Ges/iicj-i  CTlCJ).  The  posi- 
 tion of  this  little  principality  is  clearly  indicated 
 in  Scripture.  It  lay  within  the  kingdom  of  Ba- 
 shan  and  province  of  Argob,  and  was  at  the 
 northern  extremity  of  both  (Deut.  iii.  14  ;  Josh, 
 xii.  5).  It  was  independent  of  Og's  sovereignty; 
 and  the  Israelites  did  not  conquer  it,  though  they 
 appear  to  have  so  far  subdued  the  people  as  to 
 make  them  render  a  nominal  allegiance.  We  read 
 that  Machir,  the  Manassite,  'tookGeshur'  (i  Chron. 
 ii.  23),  '  nevertheless  the  children  of  Israel  ex- 
 pelled not  the  Geshurites ;  but  the  Geshurite  dwell 
 among  the  children  of  Israel  until  this  day'  (Josh. 
 xiii.  13).  This  may  account  for  the  fact  that  while 
 Geshur  was  geographically  within  Bashan,  politi- 
 cally it  was  reckoned  to  Aram  (2  Sam.  xv.  8).  It 
 seems  from  tlie  various  references  in  Scripture  that 
 the  Geshurites  occupied  a  territory  of  great  natural 
 strength  ;  and  that  thus,  though  small  in  number, 
 they  were  able  to  defend  themselves  against  all 
 assailants.  Reland  thinks  that  Geshur  of  Bashan 
 (Josh.  xii.  5)  was  distinct  from  the  Geshur  of  Aram 
 (2  Sam.  XV.  8).  For  this,  however,  there  is  no 
 authority  ;  and  the  whole  tenor  of  the  Scripture 
 narrative  seems  opposed  to  it  (Reland,  77,  sq.) 
 The  view  of  Keil  (on  Josh.  xii.  5),  Rosenmiiller 
 (/Ub.  Gcoi^r.  ii.  227),  and  Gesenius  (Thcsaunis,s.v.), 
 that  Geshur  lay  along  the  east  bank  of  the  upper 
 Jordan  is  opposed  to  the  topographical  details  of  the 
 Bible,  in  which  it  is  closely  connected  with  Argob. 
 Their  cliief  argument  is  that  Geshur  signifies  'a 
 bridge,'  and  there  is  a  bridge  on  the  upper  Jordan; 
 but  tliis  can  have  little  weight. 
 
 The  writer,  after  a  careful  survey  of  the  whole 
 countiy  was  led  to  the  conclusion  tliat  Geshur  em- 
 braced the  northern  section  of  the  wild  and  rocky 
 province  now  called  Lejah,  and  formerly  Trachoni- 
 tis  and  Argob.  It  probably  also  took  in  the  neigh- 
 l)ouring  jilain  to  tlie  north  as  far  as  the  banks^of 
 the  Pharpar,  on  which  there  are  several  ini|)ortant 
 bridges  ;  but  on  the  approach  of  the  Israelites,  the 
 people  may  have  concentrated  themselves  in  their 
 rugged  stronghold,  where  the  Israelites  deemed  it 
 more  prudent  to  leave  them  than  to  attempt  to  ex- 
 pelthem.  The  wild  tribes  that  now  occupy  that 
 •tgion  hold  a  somewhat  similar  position  ;  being 
 really  independent  but  nommally  subject  to   the 
 
 Porte  (Trachonitis  ;  see  Journal  of  Sac.  Lit., 
 July  1S54,  p.  300;  Porter's  Damascus,  vol.  ii.  ; 
 Burckhardt's  Trav.  in  Syr.,  105,  sq.) 
 
 The  Geshurites  appear  to  have  maintained 
 friendly  relations  with  the  Israelites  east  of  the 
 Jordan ;  probably  from  mutual  interest,  both 
 being  extensive  cattle  owners.  The  community  of 
 occupation  may  have  led  to  the  alliance  between 
 David  and  the  daughter  of  Talmai,  king  of  Geshur 
 (2  Sam.  iii.  3).  Absalom  was  the  frait  of  this 
 marriage  ;  and  the  wild  acts  of  his  life  were  doubt- 
 less to  some  extent  the  results  of  maternal  training. 
 After  murdering  his  brother  he  fled  to  his  uncle  in 
 'Geshur  of  Aram,'  and  dwelt  amid  its  rocky  fast- 
 nesses till  Joab  came  to  take  him  back  to  his 
 father  (2  Sam.  xiii.  37  ;  xiv.  23  ;  see  Handbook  for 
 S.  and  F.,  506). 
 
 2.  Gcshjcritcs,  a  people  who  dwelt  on  the  south- 
 western border  of  Palestine,  adjoining  the  Philis- 
 tines (Josh.  xiii.  2).  They  appear  to  have  been 
 nomads,  and  to  have  roamed  over  the  neighbouring 
 desert ;  though  occupying  permanently  a  portion  of 
 Philistia.  '  David  went  up  and  invaded  the  Geshu- 
 rites, and  the  Gezrites,  and  the  Amalekites  ;  for 
 those  nations  were  of  old  the  inhabitants  of  the 
 land  as  thou  goest  to  Shur,  even  unto  the  land  of 
 Egypt'  (i  Sam.  xxvii.  8).  Nothing  more  is  known 
 of  them. —J.  L.  P. 
 
 GETHER  ("ina;  Sept.  Varip),  the  name  of  the 
 
 third  of  the  sons  of  Aram  (Gen.  x.  23).  The  name 
 does  not  elsewhere  occur  ;  nor  have  we  any  infor- 
 mation as  to  the  tribe  that  descended  from  him.  Jose- 
 phus  {Antiq.  i.  6.  4)  makes  him  the  ancestor  of  the 
 Bactrians,    and  in   the  traditionary  legends  of  the 
 
 Arabs,  one  Ghathir  \'^sl)  appears  as  the  source  of 
 
 the  T/iannidifes  (^^..^j),  in  Hedjaz  and  the  Jadi- 
 
 sites   CjmJSst^)  in  Jemama  (Abulf  Hist.  Anteis/i, 
 
 p.    16).       The    Arab.   vers,  of  the    Polyglott  has 
 
 ^il^i -ajjl,   the  Geraniaqa,  a    tribe  which    in    the 
 
 time  of  Mohammed  must  have  inhabited  the  district 
 of  Mosul  (Winer,  i'.  z'.)  Bochart  asks  whether  the 
 river  Cenlrites,  mentioned  by  Xenophon  {Anab. 
 iv.  3,  i),  and  Diodorus  Sic.  (xiv.  27),  and  which 
 lay  between  the  Carduchians  and  Armenians,  may 
 not  have  derived  its  name  from  Gether  ;  and  Le 
 Clerc  finds  a  trace  of  the  name  in  Cathara,  a  town 
 on  the  Tigris  (Ptol.  v.  iS).  But  all  this  is  purely 
 conjectural. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GETHSEMANE  {Tie<!-np.o.v9]  and  VeBarip-avd), 
 a  garden  (k-^tfos,  John  x\iii.  i),  or  field  {xojpl-ov, 
 Matt.  XXVI.  36),  to  which  Jesus  retired  with  his 
 disciples  on  the  night  of  his  betrayal  (Mark  xiv. 
 32).  Its  name  is  mentioned  by  only  two  of  the 
 evangelists,  Matthew  and  Mark.  John  describes 
 its  situation — 'Jesus  went  forthwith  his  disciples 
 over  the  brook  Cedron,  ivhere  was  a  garden,  into 
 the  which  he  entered,  and  his  disciples  (xviii.  l). 
 The  Cedron  runs  m  the  bottom  of  a  deep  glen, 
 parallel  to  the  eastern  wall  of  Jerusalem,  and  about 
 200  yards  distant.  Immediately  beyond  it  rises  the 
 steep  side  of  Olivet,  now,  as  formerly,  cultivated  in 
 rude  terraces.  Somewhere  on  the  slope  of  this 
 mount  Gethsemane  must  have  been  situated.  The 
 name  Gelhsejniute  appears  to  be  derived  from  the 
 Aramaic  words,    XjDC  DJ.   an  'oil  press.'      The 
 
GEZER 
 
 119 
 
 GIANTS 
 
 garden  probably  contained  a  press  for  the  manufac- 
 ture of  oil  from  the  olives  of  the  mount.  Other 
 etymologies  have  been  suggested,  but  they  are  not 
 so  natural  as  the  preceding  {Poll  Synopsis,  in  loc.) 
 We  learn  from  Luke  that  our  Lord  had  been  in 
 the  habit  of  retiring  to  this  spot  for  prayer.  He 
 merely  calls  it  (xxii.  40)  6  rbiros,  '  the  place,'  in 
 allusion  to  kclto,  rh  iBos  of  the  preceding  verse. 
 John  tells  us  that  Judas  '  knew  the  place  ;  for 
 Jesus  ofttimes  resorted  thither  with  his  disciples' 
 (-wiii.  2).  We  may  conclude  from  this  that  it  was 
 a  retired  spot,  at  a  sufficient  distance  from  public 
 thoroughfares  to  secure  privacy,  and  yet  easy  of 
 access. 
 
 Proceeding  from  the  gate  now  called  St.  Stephens, 
 a  very  ancient  road  winds  down  the  bank  to  the 
 bottom  of  the  Kidron,  crosses  the  dry  bed  by  an 
 old  bridge,  and  then  branches.  One  branch  turns 
 to  the  right,  and  sweeps  round  the  shoulder  of 
 Olivet  to  Bethany  and  Jericho  ;  the  other  runs 
 straight  up  to  the  village  on  the  summit.  In  the 
 angle  fonned  by  these  roads  is  situated  the  tradi- 
 tional Gethsemane.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
 it  is  the  identical  spot  mentioned  by  Eusebius  in 
 the  4th  century,  as  '  a  place  of  prayer  for  the  faith- 
 ful;' and  by  Jerome,  as  lying  'at  the  roots  of  the 
 Mount  of  Olives,  with  a  church  erected  upon  it' 
 (Onomast.  s.  v.  ;  see  also  It  in.  Hieros.  ed.  Wessel., 
 p.  594  ;  Reland,  p.  587).  The  chia-ch  is  again 
 mentioned  in  the  7th  centmy  ;  and  the  garden  is 
 spoken  of  by  various  writers  during  the  middle 
 ages  (Robinson,  B.  R.  i.  235).  The  tradition  can- 
 not be  traced  back  beyond  the  time  of  Eusebius. 
 To  keep  up  the  memory  of  '  holy  places'  was  con- 
 trary to  the  spirit  of  the  apostolical  writers  and 
 their  immediate  successors.  There  is  room  for 
 doubt  whether  the  knowledge  of  the  exact  spot 
 would  be  retained  during  the  troublous  times  of  the 
 first  three  centuries.  It  was  perhaps  selected,  like 
 many  other  holy  places,  during  the  time  of  the 
 Empress  Helena.  The  site  is  not  even  a  likely 
 one — at  the  junction  of  two  public  roads  within  a 
 few  yards  of  each.  The  garden  has  recently  been 
 enclosed  with  a  high  wall.  It  is  nearly  square, 
 about  fifty  yards  on  each  side.  Within  it  are  eight 
 venerable  olive  trees,  whose  massive  trunks,  now 
 in  many  places  decayed,  and  knarled  arms,  and 
 sparse  foliage,  have  all  the  marks  of  great  age. 
 These  trees  have  been  referred  to  by  some  writers  as 
 evidences  of  the  genuineness  of  the  site  ;  but  there 
 are  others  a  little  farther  up  the  valley  of  at  least 
 equal  age.  The  garden  is  the  property  of  the 
 Latin  monks  ;  and  the  guardian  padre  unfortu- 
 nately thinks  it  requisite  to  shew  all  pilgrims  the 
 '  grotto  of  the  agony,'  the  spot  where  Judas  be- 
 trayed Jesus,  and  the  place  on  which  the  three  dis- 
 ciples slept  !  {Handbook  for  Syr.  and  Pal,,  176  ; 
 Geramb's  Pilg?'iinage  to  Palestine,  i.  63,  seq. ; 
 Stanley's  Sin.  and  Pal.,  450). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEZER  and  GAZER  0T2,  and  with  the  pause 
 
 accent,  ~IT2  ;  Sept.  Ta^ip  and  Taf^pd),  an  ancient 
 
 royal  city  and  stronghold  of  the  Canaanites.  When 
 Joihua  besieged  Lachish,  the  king  of  Gezer  came 
 to  aid  that  city,  but  was  defeated  (Josh.  x.  33), 
 and  apparently  slain,  as  his  name  is  among  those 
 enumerated  in  Joshua  xii.  (ver.  12).  The  situa- 
 tion of  Gezer  is  clearly  indicated  in  several  pas- 
 sages of  the  Biljle.  It  lay  on  the  northern  border 
 of  Beniamin,  between  Bethhoron-the-nether  and 
 
 the  sea ;  consequently  in  the  Shephelah  or  mari- 
 time plain  (Josh.  xvi.  3).  It  was  within  the  al- 
 lotted territory  of  E]-ihraim,  and  was  assigned  from 
 that  tribe  to  the  Levites  (xxi.  21).  The  Ephraem- 
 ites  were  not  able  to  expel  the  Gezerites  (xvi.  10)  • 
 and  the  city  remained  a  frontier  fortress  of  the 
 Philistines  for  some  centuries.  It  became,  like 
 Gath,  the  scene  of  many  a  fierce  contest  between 
 them  and  the  Israelities  (2  Sam.  v.  25  ;  i  Chron. 
 XX.  4) .  The  Philistines  were  usually  victorious  on 
 the  plain,  and  the  Israelites  in  the  mountains. 
 Gezer  thus  probably  stood  at  the  foot  of  the  hills. 
 We  find  David  smiting  the  Philistines  '  from  Geba 
 until  thou  come  to  Gezer '  (2  Sam.  v.  25)  ;  that  is, 
 till  they  got  into  the  plain.  At  length,  however, 
 Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt,  captured  and  burned 
 Gezer,  and  gave  it  '  for  a  present  to  his  daughter, 
 Solomon's  wife '  (l  Kings  ix.  15-17).  After  Solo- 
 mon rebuilt  it  we  hear  no  more  of  it  in  Scrip- 
 ture. 
 
 Gezer  is  sometimes  written  in  the  Septuagint  Td- 
 ^apa,  (Josh.  xxi.  21,  Cod.  Vat);  and  consequently 
 we  find  this  form  adopted  lay  the  Apocryphal 
 writers  and  Josephus.  The  city  is  frequently  re- 
 ferred to  in  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees.  In  one 
 place  it  is  connected  with  Joppa  (l  Maccab.  xv. 
 2S,  35)  ;  in  another  it  is  said  to  border  on  Azotus 
 (Ashdod ;  xiv.  34).  Josephus,  who  sometimes 
 calls  it  Ya.^o.pa  {Antiq.  xii.  7.  4),  locates  it  on  the 
 south-western  border  of  Ephraim  (v.  i.  22).  Euse- 
 bius and  Jerome  state  that  in  their  day  it  was  a 
 village  {KLo/j.rj),  four  miles  north  of  Nicopolis  (Ono- 
 mast., s.  v.  Gazer);  and  Van  Senden  has  sug- 
 gested its  identity  with  the  modern  village  of 
 Kubab,  which  stands'  on  the  top  of  a  rocky  tell. 
 There  is  no  ground  for  this  beyond  conjecture. 
 Van  de  Velde  thinks  the  royal  city  of  Gezer  must 
 have  been  much  farther  south  {Memoir,  315).  If 
 so,  there  must  have  been  tzvo  Gezers,  one  in  south- 
 ern and  the  other  in  northern  Philistia.  It  is 
 possible,  also,  that  the  Gazara  near  Azotus  may 
 have  been  distinct  from  the  Gezer  of  the  Bible, 
 for  Azotus  is  twenty  miles  south-west  of  Nicopolis. 
 No  village  or  ruin  has  hitherto  been  discovered 
 whose  name  would  suggest  identity  with  the  ancient 
 Gezer.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 GEZRITES.  This  is  now  the  reading  in  the 
 A.  V.  of  I  Sam.  xxvii.  8  ;  and  from  this  it  might 
 be  concluded  that  the  inhabitants  of  Gezer  were 
 alluded  to.  The  Hebrew  text,  however,  has 
 TlSn,  ^ the  Girzites ;''  and  the  context  states  that 
 
 the  Girzites,  with  the  Geshurites  and  Amalekites, 
 '  v/ere  of  old  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  as  thou 
 goest  to  Shur,  even  unto  the  land  of  Egypt.'  They 
 are  thus  located  on  the  extreme  southern  border 
 of  Philistia,  and  unless  we  suppose  that  the  royal 
 city  of  Gezer  stood  in  that  region,  the  Girzites 
 could  scarcely  have  had  any  connection  with  it 
 [Gezer].  The  spoil  which  David  took  from  them 
 would  seem  to  indicate  a  pastoral  people  (ver.  9) . 
 They  were  probably  a  small  nomad  tribe  who 
 roamed  over  the  southern  desert,  but  who  were 
 either  exterminated  or  dispersed  by  the  repeated 
 assaults  of  the  Philistines,  and  eventually  by  David. 
 -J.  L.  P. 
 
 GIANTS.  The  notices  in  the  Bible  of  persons 
 of  unusual  size  and  stature  respect  either  individuals 
 or  races.     We  shall  take  the  latter  first. 
 
 I.    The  Nephilim.     In  Gen.  vi.  4  it  is  said,  in 
 
GIANTS 
 
 120 
 
 GIANTS 
 
 reference  to  the  times  preceding  the  flood,  'And 
 
 there  were  giants  (D''^S3)   in  those   days.'      This 
 
 word  Nephihm  the  LXX.  render  by  7170^x65, 
 and  in  this  the  vast  majority  of  the  versions  concur. 
 Aquila,  however,  gives  ol  iirnrlTTTOi'Tes,  oi  ^iaioi, 
 and  Symmachus,  oi  dvalaroi,  (SlaioL,  as  the  mean- 
 ing ;  and  this  has  found  many  advocates  (See 
 Suicer,  T/ies.  Ecdes.  in  voc.  r/7as ;  Poole,  Synops. 
 in  loc,  etc.)  Those  who  adopt  this  interpretation 
 in  general  deny  that  the  Nephilim  were  remarkable 
 for  excessive  size  or  stature,  and  regard  them  simply 
 as  men  fierce,  bellicose,  lawless,  and  oppressive. 
 To  this,  however,  there  are  two  objections,  which 
 seem  decisive.  The  one  is  that  Moses  evidently 
 intends,  by  the  statement  in  question,  to  set  forth  a 
 peculiarity  of  the  times  of  which  he  writes.    '  In  those 
 
 days  were  the  Nephilim  (QvDjn,  the  well-known 
 race  so  called)  upon  the  earth  ;'  phraseology  which 
 would  not  have  been  used  had  he  merely  meant  to 
 state  that  there  were  rude,  ferocious,  overbearing 
 men  on  the  earth,  for  such  there  have  always  been. 
 The  other  objection  is  that  where  the  word  Nephi- 
 lim again  occurs,  Num.  xiii.  32,  33,  it  undoubtedly 
 designates  a  race  of  men  of  surpassing  stature  ;  so 
 that  this  seems  to  be  the  proper  sense  of  the  word. 
 In  adopting  this,  however,  the  other  is  not  neces- 
 sarily excluded ;  rather,  may  we  say,  that  the  pro- 
 bability is,  that  their  gigantic  stature,  their  strength, 
 and  their  pride,  conspired  to  render  them  overbear- 
 ing, crael,  and  lawless.  Nothing  decisive  can  be 
 gathered  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  word  from  an 
 appeal  to  etymology;  for  if,  with  the  majority,  we 
 
 trace  it  to  733,  to  fall^  it  remains  uncertain  with 
 which  of  the  meanings  of  this  word  it  stands  con- 
 nected ;  whether  that  of  falling  ttpon,  irruere  as 
 Aquila  takes  it,  or  that  of  fallitig  away,   apostate 
 
 (comp.   Syr.     (\g^  1)    or  that  of  causing  men  to 
 
 fall  (Ibn  Ezra,  Kimchi).  Havernick  {Einleit. 
 i.  2,  p.  264,  ff.  ;  E.   Tr.   p.   345,  ff)  proposes  to 
 
 connect  it  with  the  mutually  related  roots,  {siQ, 
 
 NPQ,  P7Q,  which  would  suggest  the  meaning  of 
 something  extraordinary  marvellous,  huge ;  and 
 with  this  Furst  substantially  concurs,  comparing 
 Sansc.  bal&,  strength ;  pdla,  Pers.  bald,  Lord;  pUu 
 the  elephant,  Arab.  J\j,  to  be  thick  or  fat.*   As  to 
 
 the  common  notion  that  these  Nephilim  were  the 
 fruit  of  the  intercourse  between  the  B'ney  Ha- 
 Elohim  and  the  B'noth  Ha-Adam,  it  may  suffice 
 to  say  that  nothing  of  this  is  asserted  by  Moses ; 
 on  the  contrary,  from  the  form  of  his  expression, 
 when  he  says  '  also  after  that  the  sons  of  God  had 
 come  in  unto  the  daughters  of  men,  etc.,'  he  would 
 seem  to  intimate  that  the  Nephilim  were  a  dis- 
 tinct race  from  the  children  of  such  intercourse, 
 
 *  In  Job  ix.  9  the  Targ.  gives  X^JSa,  Niphla, 
 as  the  rendering  of  the  Heb.  f)tD3,  and  this  has 
 been  held  to  support  the  meaning  of  giant  attached 
 to  the  word  is'^D:  (Gesen.)  But  this  proceeds  on 
 the  assumption  that  Kesil  there  designates  Orion, 
 which  is  more  than  doubtful  [Astronomy].  The 
 Syriac,  however,  uses  the  term    j \*~^  -  ■  1  gaboro, 
 
 giant,  in  this  verse,  though  the  order  of  the  names 
 is  not  the  same  as  in  the  Heb, 
 
 which  had  existed  before  them,  and  continued  to 
 exist  after  they  appeared  (see  Calvin,  in.  loc.) 
 
 The  progeny  of  these  marriages  the  sacred 
 writer  describes  as  D"'"li32n.  This  the  LXX.  ren- 
 der by  ol  'yl'yavTe's,  and  this  has  been  urged  as  a 
 reason  for  identifying  them  with  the  Nephilim. 
 But  the  meaning  which  the  LXX.  have  in  this  in- 
 stance attached  to  the  word  113J  is  not  the  true 
 meaning  of  that  word.  It  occurs  repeatedly  in  the 
 O.  T. ,  and  invariably  signifies  elsewhere  one  en- 
 dowed with  strength — a  hero,  a  strong  bold  war- 
 rior— with  the  implication  of  violence  or  fierceness 
 as  connected  with  strength  and  power  (comp.  Judg. 
 xi.  I  ;  Ps.  lii.  2  ;  cxx.  4,  etc. )  There  is  nothing, 
 therefore,  in  the  use  of  this  word  to  sustain  the 
 opinion  that  the  giants  were  the  fruit  of  intercourse 
 between  the  sons  of  God  and  the  daughters  of 
 men ;  the  historian  simply  states  that  their  children 
 were  the  heroes  of  antiquity,  men  of  violent  and 
 proud  spirit.  [For  the  meaning  of  B'ney  Ha- 
 Elohim  here,  see  God]. 
 
 2.  The  Kephaim  (D''XQ"I).    These  are  mentioned 
 
 along  with  the  Zuzim  and  the  Emim  as  among  the 
 inhabitants  of  Canaan  at  the  time  of  Abraham's 
 immigration,  and  as  having  their  principal  site  at 
 Ashteroth-Karnaim  (Gen.  xiv.  5).  By  the  time  of 
 Moses  the  race  was  hastening  to  decay,  for  Og, 
 king  of  Bashan,  is  mentioned  as  among  the  last 
 remnants  of  it  (Deut.  iii.  1 1  ;  Josh.  xii.  4  ;  xiii.  12). 
 In  the  second  of  these  passages  Edrei  is  mentioned 
 as  also  a  site  of  the  Rephaim.  This  once  mighty 
 race  embraced  different  families,  each  of  which  had 
 its  own  distinctive  name.  Thus,  though  in  the 
 earliest  notice  the  Emim  are  mentioned  as  if  dis- 
 tinct from  the  Rephaim,  we  read  subsequently  that 
 the  Emim  were  accounted  Rephaim,  though  called 
 Emim  by  the  Moabites  (Deut.  ii.  11);  we  read 
 also  of  the  Zamzummim  (Deut.  ii.  19-21),  probably 
 the  same  as  the  Zuzim  of  Gen.  xiv.  5  in  the  land 
 of  the  Ammonites,  as  Rephaim  ;  the  Anaqim,  also, 
 belonged  to  this  race  (Deut.  ii.  Il),  and  probably, 
 also,  the  A  vim  (Deut.  ii.  23  ;  comp.  2  Sam.  xxi. 
 15-22)  and  the  Horites  (Gen.  xiv.  6  ;  Deut.  ii.  12). 
 Or  these  may  be  only  different  names  of  the  same 
 race  viewed  under  different  aspects.  As  to  the 
 meaning  of  the  word  Rephaim,  if,  on  the  strength 
 of  Deut  ii.  11,  we  take  D^O"'N  as  a  dialectic  variety 
 
 having  the  same  signification,  we  shall  attach  to  it 
 some  such  meaning  as  awful,  terrible,  tremetidous. 
 The  word  D''D"'N  occurs  in  the  sense  of  terrific 
 object  (Ps.  Ixxxviii.  16),  hence  an  idol  as  an  object 
 of  dread  Qer.  1.  38),  and  for  the  same  reason  dis- 
 embodied spirits,  ghosts  (Job  xxvi.  5  ;  Is.  xiv.  9  ; 
 xxvi.  14,  19;  Prov.  xxi.  16).  In  this  case  D''N3"I 
 may  be  traced  to  a  root  nS"l,  to  terrify,  and  may 
 
 be  simply  a  designation,  as  applied  to  men,  of  such 
 as  are  from  any  cause  formidable  to  their  fellow- 
 men.  From  the  manner,  however,  in  which  they  are 
 referred  to  in  Scripture,  and  especially  from  theirs 
 being  ranked  along  with  other  national  or  tribal 
 appellations,  there  seems  little  reason  for  doubting 
 that  there  was  a  race  of  men  bearing  Rephaim  as 
 their  distinctive  name,  and  each  of  whom  was  a 
 Rapha    (PID"),   comp.  2   Sam.  xxi.    16,  ff.)     That 
 
 they  were  men  above  the  ordinary  stature  is  evi- 
 dent from  Deut.  ii.  10,  for  though  Q")  (A.  V.  '  tall') 
 there  used  may  be  taken  as  describing  mental 
 rather  than  physical  elevation — hauteur  rather  than 
 height — this  is  not  its  proper  meaning  ;  and  as  the 
 
GIANTS 
 
 121 
 
 GIANTS 
 
 Anaqim  were  undoubtedly  chiefly  remarkable  in 
 the  eyes  of  the  IsraeHtes  from  their  great  height 
 (comp.  Num.  xiii.  32,  33;  Deut.  i.  28;  ix.  2), 
 the  probable  inference  is  that  the  Rephaim  were 
 men  of  gigantic  stature  ;  though  it  does  not  follow 
 from  this  that  the  word  Rephaim  means  giants. 
 
 Referring  to  the  articles  under  the  names  of  these 
 tribes  respectively  for  ethnological  and  general  de- 
 tails, we  confine  ourselves  here  to  the  considera- 
 tion of  their  claim  to  be  regarded  as  giants.  This 
 claim  there  seems  an  unwillingness  in  many  quarters 
 to  admit,  chiefly  on  the  ground  that  the  existence 
 of  gigantic  races  of  men  has  not  been  sufficiently 
 established.  If  by  this  it  be  meant  that  no  evi- 
 dence exists  of  a  size  equal  to  that  ascribed  to 
 Og,  king  of  Bashan,  Goliath  of  Gath,  and  other 
 giants  mentioned  in  Scripture  being  possessed  by 
 entire  tribes,  and  propagated  from  generation  to 
 generation,  the  position  must  be  at  once  admitted. 
 But  in  asserting  that  the  Rephaim  were  giants,  it  is 
 not  needful  to  claim  for  them  a  height  and  size  ap- 
 proaching to  monstrosity.  A  man  six  feet  and 
 a  half  high  is  a  man  greatly  surpassing  in  height  the 
 average  of  mankind,  and  a  whole  community  of  men 
 ranging  from  this  height  to  that  of  seven  feet  would 
 be  universally  regarded  and  spoken  of  as  gigantic. 
 But  is  the  possibility  of  such  a  race  incredible  or 
 without  evidence  ?  That  tallness  may  be  propa- 
 gated from  father  to  son  no  one  can  doubt ;  and 
 that  if  tall  men  are  matched  with  tall  women  a  race 
 of  tall  persons  will  be  the  result  is  equally  certain  ; 
 indeed  it  has  often  been  remarked  as  one  of  the 
 wise  arrangements  of  Providence,  that  very  tall 
 persons  do  not  incline  to  intermarry,  so  that,  not- 
 withstanding individual  exceptions,  the  average 
 height  of  the  community  remains  steady.  Wher- 
 ever this  disinclination  is  either  by  compulsion  or 
 by  usage  and  family  pride  overcome,  a  race  sur- 
 passing ordinaiy  men  in  height  is  the  result  ;  as  is 
 seen  in  the  descendants  of  the  grenadiers  whom 
 Frederic  of  Prussia  took  so  much  pains  to  collect 
 and  to  marry  to  tall  wives,  and  in  the  chiefs  of  the 
 Polynesian  tribes  (Cook's  Voyages;  Williams's  South 
 Sea  Islands).  Tribes  of  men  exceeding  considerably 
 the  average  height  are  reported  by  travellers  and 
 naturalists  ;  the  Patagonians,  whose  height  varies 
 from  six  to  seven  feet,  the  Guayaquils  and  Para- 
 guas,  whose  height  is  six  feet  and  a  half,  and  the 
 Carabees  of  Cumana  (Prichard,  Researches,  vol.  i. 
 bk.  ii. ,  ch.  iv.  sec.  8  ;  vol.  v.  p.  489).  These  in- 
 stances sufficiently  prove  that  races  above  the 
 average  height  exist,  and  may  be  propagated  ;  so 
 that  there  is  no  ground  for  denying  the  Biblical 
 statement  concerning  the  Nephilim  and  the  Rephaim 
 as  physiologically  unsupported.  There  seems 
 truth  and  point  in  the  remark  with  which  Augus- 
 tine concludes  his  observations  on  this  part  of 
 Scripture  :  '  Nee  mirandum  est  quod  gigantes  nasci 
 potuerunt.  .  .  .  Quos  propterea  creare  placuit 
 Creatori  ut  etiam  hinc  ostenderetur  non  solum 
 pulchritudines,  verum  etiam  magnitudines  et  for- 
 titudines  corporum  non  magnipendendas  esse  sapi- 
 enti,  qui  spiritahbus  atque  immortalibus,  longe 
 melioribus  atque  firmioribus  et  bonoiiim  propriis, 
 nonbonorum  malorumque  communibus,  beatificatur 
 bonis'  {De  Civit.  Dei  xv.  23,  0pp.,  vol.  v.  col. 
 853,  ed.  Basil.  1569). 
 
 The  individual  giants   mentioned   in    Scripture 
 are  : — • 
 
 I.   Og  (3iy,  comp.  1;^,  king,  royal  in  'T/ccrws  ap. 
 Manethon. ),  king  of  Bashan,  one  of  the  last  (Deut, 
 
 iii.  II;  Josh.  xiii.  12)  of  the  Rephaim,  whose  bed- 
 stead of  iron  (or  rather  perhaps  his  sarcophagus  ol 
 ironstone  or  basalt)  was  preserved  at  Rabbath 
 Ammon,  and  measured  nine  cubits  in  length  by  four 
 in  breadth.  From  this,  however,  no  exact  measure  of 
 Og's  own  height  and  size  can  be  obtained,  as  these 
 sarcophagi  were  made  much  beyond  the  actual  size 
 of  the  body   they  were  designed  to  hold.     [Og]. 
 
 2.  Goliath  (n'l^J)  of  Gath,  of  the  tribe  of  the 
 
 Anaqim  ;  his  height  is  said  to  have  been  six  cubits 
 and  a  span,  and  the  staff  of  his  spear  like  a  weaver's 
 beam   (i  Sam.  xvii.  4 ;  2  Sam.  xxi.  19)  [David]. 
 
 3.  Lachmi  C'pn?),  the  brother  of  Goliath,  slain 
 by  Elhanan  (i  Chron.  xx.  5)  [Elhanan]. 
 
 4.  IsHBi-BENOB  (3J3-''3C'''),  whose  spear  weighed 
 
 300  shekels  of  brass,  and  who  was  slain  by  Abi- 
 
 shai  (2  Sam.  xxi.  16).  He  is  described  as  ''*T'p''3 
 nsin,  one  of  the  descendants  of  the  Rapha  (Ss  ' t\v 
 kv  Tots  eK-ydvoii  rod  'Vaipd,  Sept.),  i.  e.,  one  of  the 
 Rephaim. 
 
 5.  Saph  (f)D)  orSiPPAl  CQD),  also  of  the  Rapha 
 
 race,  slain  by  Sibbechai  in  a  battle  between  the 
 Israelites  and  the  Philistines  (2  Sam.  xxi.  18 ; 
 I  Chron.  xx.  5). 
 
 6.  A  Philistine  of  great  stature,  whose  fingers 
 and  toes  were  twenty  and  four,  six  on  each  hand 
 and  six  on  each  foot,  slain  by  Jonathan,  the 
 nephew  of  David  (2  Sam.  xxi.  20  ;  I  Chron.  xx.  6). 
 He  also  was  a  Rephaite. 
 
 All  these  are  mentioned  as  peculiar  cases,  indi- 
 cating that  though  the  Rephaites  had  continued 
 among  the  Philistines  down  to  the  time  of  David, 
 it  was  only  occasionally  that  the  original  type  of 
 the  family  showed  itself.  Such  occasional  mon- 
 strosities, both  in  individuals  and  in  families,  are 
 recorded  not  only  as  belonging  to  ancient  times, 
 but  even  down  to  our  own  day.  Porus,  the  Indian 
 king,  was  five  cubits  in  height  (Arrian,  Exped. 
 Alex.  v.  19)  ;  Columella  {De  Re  Rust.  iii.  8)  and 
 Solinus  (Bk.  I,  ch.  9)  tell  us  of  a  Jew  who  was 
 taller  than  the  tallest  of  the  Romans ;  Pliny  {Nat. 
 Hist.  vii.  16),  says,  '  our  age  has  seen,  during  the 
 reign  of  Claudius,  the  tallest  of  men,  an  Arab  of 
 
 the  name   of   Gabbara    [doubtless    .L\^-,  giant, 
 
 which  Pliny  mistook  for  the  man's  name],  who 
 was  nine  feet  and  as  many  inches  in  height ; '  and 
 he  goes  on  to  speak  of  some  still  higher,  whose 
 bodies  were  preserved,  '  ejus  miraculi  gratia,'  in 
 the  cemetery  of  the  gardens  of  the  Sallusts.  Jose- 
 phus  {Antig.  xviii.  5.  5)  mentions  a  Jew  named 
 Eleazer,  sent  by  Artabanus  to  Tiberius,  who  was 
 seven  cubits  in  height,  and  had  on  that  account 
 the  cognomen  of  Gigas.  Delrio  {Not.  ad  Senec. 
 CEdipMH,  p.  39)  says  he  saw  in  the  year  1572  a 
 man  from  Piedmont  whose  height  exceeded  nine 
 feet.  Parsons,  porter  to  James  I. ,  was  seven  feet 
 two  inches,  and  a  servant  of  Prince  Charles  at  the 
 same  time  was  seven  feet  seven  inches,  and  had 
 not  yet  reached  his  full  height  (Hakewill,  Apolo- 
 gie,  p.  189).  Many  similar  instances,  belonging  to 
 still  more  recent  times,  might  be  added  ;  so  that, 
 without  resorting  to  the  dubious  testimony  of  bones 
 which  have  been  disinterred,  but  which  may  have 
 belonged  to  some  of  the  larger  mammalia,  we 
 have  evidence  sufficient  to  corroborate  the  state- 
 ments of  Scripture  in  the  cases  it  adduces  of  indi- 
 viduals of  gigantic  stature  (Huet,  Deinonstr.  Evati' 
 
GIBBETHON 
 
 122 
 
 GIBEAH 
 
 ^el.  Prop,  iv.;  Heidegger,  Hist.  Patriarch,  xi. ; 
 Grotius,  De  Veritate  Rel.  Chr.  i.  i6  ;  Hakewill, 
 Apologie,  bk.  iii.  ch.  3,  sec.  2,  3  ;  Watson,  Apo- 
 logy for  the  Bible,  Lett.  iii. ;  Winer,  Realworterh. 
 s.  V.  Riesen  ;  Hamilton,  The  Pentateuch  and  its 
 assailants,  p.  189,  ff. ) — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GIBBETHON  (|in3J;  Sept.   Va^aO^ov),  a  city 
 
 of  the  Philistines  wliich  was  included  in  the  terri- 
 tories of  the  tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  44),  and  was 
 assigned  to  tlie  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  23).  It  was 
 still  in  the  hands  of  the  Philistines  in  the  time  of 
 Nadab,  king  of  Israel,  who  besieged  it,  and  was 
 slain  under  its  walls  by  Baasha,  one  of  his  own 
 officers  (i  Kings  xv.  27;  xvi.  15).  Nothing  is 
 known  of  its  site. — J.  K. 
 
 GIBEA  (syna;  Sept.  Tai^dX;  Ale.x.  Tai^ad), 
 
 is  mentioned  (i  Chron.  ii.  49),  along  with  Mac- 
 benah,  as  places  of  which  Sheva,  the  son  of  Caleb, 
 was  father  or  possessor  [Ab.]  This  is  probably 
 Gibeah  of  Judah,  the  modern  Jeb'ah  (Robinson, 
 B.  R.,  ii.  327).— t 
 
 GIBEAH   (ny33  ;  Sept.   Pa/Saa  and   Va^aJ:v  ; 
 
 also  written  J?33  in  Judg.  xx.  10,  33).     There  were 
 
 several  cities  of  this  name,  which  can  only  be  dis- 
 tinguished by  a  s]")ecific  title  added,  or  by  the  scope 
 of  the  context.  The  word  signifies  '  a  hill,'  and  is 
 always  descriptive  of  the  site. 
 
 I.  Gibeah  of  Saul ;  also  called  Gibeah  of  Ben- 
 jamin. The  attention  required  to  distinguish  this 
 city  from  two  others  in  the  territories  of  the  same 
 tribe,  whose  names  are  nearly  similar,  has  already 
 been  pointed  out  [Gera].  During  the  time  of  the 
 Judges,  when  the  country  was  almost  in  a  state  of 
 anarchy  (Judg.  xix.  i),  Gibeah  became  the  scene  of 
 one  of  the  most  abominable  crimes,  and  one  of  the 
 most  awful  tragedies,  recorded  in  Jewish  history. 
 Tlie  story  of  the  unfortunate  Levite,  the  siege  and 
 destruction  of  Gibeah,  and  the  almost  total  anni- 
 hilation of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  are  well  known 
 (xix. -xxi.)  The  city  soon  rose  again  from  its 
 aslies,  and  had  the  honour  of  giving  Israel  its  first 
 king.  It  was  the  native  place  of  Saul  (i  Sam.  x. 
 26  ;  xi.  4),  and  the  seat  of  his  government  during 
 the  greater  part  of  his  reign  (xiv.  2  ;  xxii.  6  ; 
 xxiii.  19)  ;  hence  its  appellation  'Gibeah  of  Saul' 
 (xv.  34).  It  was  in  Gibeah  the  Amorites  of  Gibeon 
 hanged  the  seven  descendants  of  Saul  in  revenge 
 for  the  massacre  of  their  brethren.  The  city  was 
 then  the  scene  of  that  touching  exhibition  of 
 maternal  love  and  devotion,  when  Rizpah,  the 
 mother  of  two  of  the  victims,  '  took  sackcloth  and 
 spread  it  for  her  upon  the  rock,  from  the  beginning 
 of  harvest,  until  water  dropped  upon  them  out  of 
 heaven,  and  suffc-red  neither  the  birds  of  the  air  to 
 rest  upon  them  by  day,  nor  the  beasts  of  the  field 
 by  night'  (2  Sam.  xxi.)  The  last  reference  to 
 Gibeah  in  the  Bible  is  by  Isaiah  in  his  vision  of 
 the  approach  of  the  Assyrian  army  to  Jerusalem 
 (x.  29).  Tlie  city  appears  to  have  lost'  its  place 
 and  power  at  a  very  early  period.  Josephus  men- 
 tions it  as  'a  village  named  Gabalh-Saul,  which 
 signifies  '  Saul's  hill,'  distant  from  Jerusalem  about 
 thirty  furlongs'  {Bell.  Jiid.v.  2.  i).  Jerome  sjicaks 
 of  it  as  'usque  ad  solum  diruta'  (0pp.,  ed.  Migne, 
 i.  883).  From  that  period,  until  discovered  by  Dr. 
 Robinson,  its  very  site  remained  unnoticed,  if  not 
 unknown. 
 
 Four  miles  north  of  Jerusalem  stands  a  bare 
 conical  hill  called  Tuleil  el- Fill  ('the  little  hill  of 
 Beans ').  It  is  made  conspicuous  over  the  whole 
 country  by  a  heap  of  ancient  ruins  forming  a  knob 
 upon  its  summit.  The  view  from  it  is  wide  and 
 wild,  embracing  the  rugged  table-land  lying  north 
 of  Jerusalem,  and  the  whole  eastern  slopes  ol 
 Benjamin  and  Judah.  Upon  this  hill  stood  Gibeah. 
 The  arguments  by  which  Dr.  Robinson  established 
 this  fact  are  given  at  length  in  his  Biblical  Re- 
 searches (i.  577,  seq.),  and  need  not  be  repeated 
 here.  The  ancient  road  from  Jerusalem  to  Bethel 
 and  Shechem  passes  close  along  its  western  base, 
 and  Ramah  is  in  full  view  on  another  hill  two 
 miles  farther  north  {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  325). 
 The  narrative  of  the  Levites  journey  is  thus  made 
 remarkably  graphic.  He  left  Bethlehem  in  the 
 afternoon  to  go  home  to  Mount  Ephraim.  Two 
 hours'  travel  (six  miles)  brought  him  alongside 
 Jerusalem.  Evening  was  now  approaching.  His 
 servant  advised  him  to  lodge  in  Jebus  ;  but  he  de- 
 clined to  stop  with  strangers,  and  said  he  would 
 pass  on  to  Gibeah  or  Ramah.  The  '  sun  went 
 down  upon  them  when  they  were  by  Gibeah,'  and 
 they  resolved  to  pass  the  night  there  (Judg.  xix.) 
 
 The  site  of  Gibeah  was  well  adapted  to  form  the 
 capital  of  Israel  during  the  troublous  times  of  Saul, 
 when  the  whole  countiy  was  overrun  by  the  hostile 
 bands  of  the  Philistines.  It  was  naturally  strong ; 
 it  was  on  the  very  crest  of  the  mountain  range,  and 
 it  commanded  a  wide  view,  so  that  Saul's  watch- 
 men could  give  timely  notice  of  the  approach  of  the 
 enemy. 
 
 2.  Gibeah  of  "Judah.  This  city  is  only  men- 
 tioned in  Josh.  XV.  57,  and  from  the  context  we 
 conclude  that  it  lay  north-west  of  Hebron.  We 
 may  then  identify  it  with  the  little  village  o{  Jeba., 
 situated  on  an  isolated  hill  in  the  midst  of  Wady- 
 Musurr.  Dr.  Robinson  suggests  that  it  may  be  the 
 Gabatha  mentioned  by  Eusebiusas  twelve  miles 
 from  Eleutheropolis  {Bib.  Rev  ii.  6;  Otiofnast., 
 s.  V. ) ;  it  is  more  probably  that  which  Jerome  refers 
 to  as  near  Bethlehem,  in  the  tribe  of  Judah  {Ono- 
 niast.,  s.  V.  Gabatho7i). 
 
 3.  Another  Gibeah,  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  is 
 spoken  of.  In  Josh,  xviii.  28,  it  is  joined  in  the 
 enumeration  with  Kirjath  ;  and  in  2  Sam.  vi.  3  we 
 read,  '  They  set  up  the  ark  of  God  upon  a  new  cart, 
 and  brought  it  out  of  the  house  of  Abinadab  that 
 was  in  Gibeah  (^33,  Geba  ;  Sept.  Pa/Saciy).  The 
 same  place  is  referred  to  in  i  Sam.  vii.  i,  where  it 
 is  said  the  men  of  Kirjath-jearim  brought  the  ark 
 from  Bethshemesh,  and  placed  it  in  the  house  of 
 Abinadab,  in  Gibeah  (nj;3J3,  A.  V.  'in  the  hill'). 
 The  context  shews  that  this  Gibeah  must  have  been 
 so  close  to  Kirjath-jearim  as  to  V>e  reckoned  part  of 
 it  (cf ,  ver.  3  ;  2  Chron.  i.  4).  Kirjath-jearim  stood 
 on  the  slope  of  a  hill,  and  probably  on  the  summit 
 there  may  have  been  a  suburb,  or  a  small  detached 
 village  called  from  its  position  Gibeah. 
 
 4.  Gibeah  of  Phi  nehas.  In  Josh.  xxiv.  33  we  read 
 that  '  Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron,  died  ;  and  they 
 buried  him  in  Gibeah  of  Pliiiiehas  (Dn3''S  0^333, 
 A.  V.  '  In  the  hill  that  pertaineth  to  Phinchas') 
 his  son,  which  was  given  him  in  Mount  Ephraim.' 
 The  Sept.  (cod.  Alex.)  renders  it  rightly^:'  Ta^aad 
 'i'Lveh.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  mention  a  Geba  five 
 miles  north  of  Gophna,  wrongly  identifying  it  with 
 the  Gebim  of  Is.  x.  31.  It  is  probably  the  Gibeah 
 of  Phinehas  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Gebin).  About  three 
 miles  north  of  Gophna  there  is  now  a  small  village 
 
GIBEON 
 
 123 
 
 GIDEON 
 
 called  Jibia,  situated  beside  a  glen  of  the  same 
 name.  It  is  doubtless  the  Geba  of  Eusebius,  and 
 perhaps  also  Gibeah  of  Mount  Ephraim  (Robinson, 
 B.  R.  ii.  265;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  315; 
 Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  489).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 GIBEON  (pyna  ;  Sept.  Ta^adip),  a  town  cele- 
 brated in  the  O.  T.,  but  not  mentioned  in  the  New. 
 It  was  '  a  great  city,'  as  one  of  the  royal  cities  ;  and 
 to  its  jurisdiction  originally  belonged  Beeroth, 
 Chephirah,  and  Kirjath-jearim  (Josh.  ix.  17  ;  x.  2). 
 It  is  first  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  decep- 
 tion practised  by  the  inhabitants  upon  Joshua,  by 
 which,  altliough  Canaanites  (Hivites),  they  in- 
 duced the  Jewish  leader  not  only  to  make  a  league 
 with  them,  and  to  spare  their  lives  and  cities,  but 
 also,  in  their  defence,  to  make  war  upon  the  five 
 kings  by  whom  they  were  besieged.  It  was  in  the 
 great  battle  which  followed,  that  '  the  sun  stood 
 still  upon  Gibeon'  (Josh.  x.  12,  1-14).  The  place 
 afterwards  fell  to  the  lot  of  Benjamin,  and  became 
 a  Levitical  city  (Josh,  xviii.  25  ;  xxi.  17),  where 
 the  tabernacle  was  set  up  for  many  years  under 
 David  and  Solomon  (i  Chron.  xvi.  39  ;  xxi.  29  ;  2 
 Chron.  i.  3),  the  ark  being  at  the  same  time  at 
 Jerusalem  (2  Chron.  i.  4).  It  was  here,  as  being 
 the  place  of  the  altar,  that  the  young  Solomon 
 offered  a  thousand  burnt-offerings,  and  was  re- 
 warded by  the  vision  which  left  him  the  wisest 
 of  men  (l  Kings  iii.  4-15  ;  2  Chron.  i.  3-13). 
 This  was  the  place  where  Abner's  challenge  to 
 Joab  brought  defeat  upon  himself,  and  death  upon 
 his  brother  Asahel  (2  Sam.  ii.  12-32),  and  where 
 Amasa  was  afterwards  slain  by  Joab  (2  Sam.  xx. 
 8-12).  None  of  these  passages  mark  the  site  of 
 Gibeon  ;  but  there  are  indications  of  it  in  Josephus 
 {De  Bell.  yiid.  ii.  19.  l),  who  places  it  fifty  stadia 
 north-west  from  Jerusalem  ;  and  in  Jerome  [Ep. 
 86  ad  Etistoch.) :  which  leave  little  doubt  that 
 Gibeon  is  to  be  identified  with  the  place  which 
 still  bears  the  name  of  El-Jib  ;  for  Jib,  in  Arabic, 
 is  merely  a  contraction  of  the  Hebrew  Gibeon.  The 
 name  Gahaoii  is  indeed  mentioned  by  writers  of  the 
 time  of  the  Crusades  as  existing  at  this  spot,  and 
 among  the  Arabs  it  then  already  bore  the  name  of 
 El-Jib,  under  which  it  is  mentioned  by  Bohaedin 
 {Vita  Saladin.  p.  243).  Afterwards  it  was  over- 
 looked by  most  travellers  till  the  last  century, 
 when  the  attention  of  Pococke  was  again  directed 
 to  it.— J.  K. 
 
 Addendum. — The  village  of  El-Jib  stands  on 
 the  top  of  a  low,  isolated  hill,  composed  of  hori- 
 zontal strata  of  limestone,  which  in  places  form 
 regular  steps,  or  small  terraces,  from  bottom  to 
 top.  At  other  points,  especially  on  the  east,  the 
 hillside  breaks  down  in  rugged  irregular  precipices. 
 Round  the  hill  is  spread  out  one  of  the  richest 
 upland  plains  in  central  Palestine — meadow-like 
 in  its  smoothness  and  verdure,  covered  near  the 
 village  with  vineyards  and  olive  groves  ;  and  send- 
 ing out  branches,  like  the  rays  of  a  star-fish, 
 among  the  rocky  acclivities  that  encircle  it.  The 
 houses  are  scattered  without  any  attempt  at  order 
 over  the  broad  summit  of  the  hill  ;  and  the  slopes 
 beneath  them,  where  not  too  steep,  are  formed 
 into  terraces  for  vines  and  fig-trees.  The  houses 
 are  almost  all,  in  whole  or  in  part,  ancient  ;  but 
 are  sadly  out  of  repair.  One  massive  building  re- 
 mains nearly  entire,  and  was  probably  a  castle  or 
 citadel.  The  lower  rooms  are  vaulted  ;  and  the 
 whole  workmanship  indicates  an  age  of  prosperity 
 
 and  architectural  skill.  At  the  eastern  base  of  the 
 hill,  beneath  a  cliff,  is  a  fine  fountain.  The  source 
 is  in  a  large  chamber  hewn  out  of  the  rock.  Not 
 far  below  it,  among  venerable  olive  trees,  are  the 
 remains  of  an  open  reservoir  or  tank,  into  which 
 the  surplus  waters  flow. 
 
 The  site  of  Gibeon  is  strong  and  imposing,  such 
 as  suited  the  warlike  tribe  originally  inhabiting  it, 
 and  such  as  subsequently  made  a  fit  gathering 
 place  for  the  tribes  of  Israel  (i  Kings  iii.)  In  the 
 plain  that  encircles  the  hill  the  Amorites  assembled 
 to  take  vengeance  on  the  Gibeonites  ;  and  from 
 among  the  defiles  on  the  east  the  Israelites  rushed 
 down  upon  them  with  the  first  beams  of  the  morn- 
 ing sun.  The  reservoir  among  the  olive  trees  is 
 doubtless  the  '  Pool  of  Gibeon'  where  Abner  and 
 Joab  met,  and  where  the  twenty-four  champions 
 fought  and  died  (2  Sam.  ii.  12-17).  On  the  summit 
 of  a  hill,  a  mile  south  of  Gibeon,  and  rising  some 
 500  feet  over  it,  is  the  site  of  Mizpeh  of  Benjamin. 
 It  is  probable  that  the  great  assemblies  of  the 
 people  referred  to  in  Judg.  xx. ,  i  Sam.  vii.  and  x., 
 took  place  on  the  slope  of  the  hill  between  Mizpeh 
 and  Gibeon. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GIBLITES.     [Gebal.] 
 
 GIDDALTI  Cn^^J;    Sept.    VohoWaQl;   Alex. 
 
 TeSoX\a$L),  one  of  the  sons  of  Heman  appointed 
 to  take  part  in  the  service  of  the  sanctuary  with 
 the  rest  of  his  brothers ;  their  office  was  to  sound 
 the  horn  (i  Chron.  xxv.  4).  This  was  a  Koha- 
 thite  family  (vi.  33).  Giddalti  was  at  the  head  of 
 the  22d  course  (xxv.  29). — t 
 
 GIDEON  (pyna,  destnyej-;  Sept.  Feoeau'),  sur- 
 named  Jeruebaal  or  Jerubbesheth,  fifth  Judge 
 in  Israel,  and  the  first  of  them  whose  history  is 
 circumstantially  narrated.  He  was  the  son  of 
 Joash,  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  and  resided  at 
 "Ophrah  in  Gilead  beyond  the  Jordan. 
 
 The  Midianites,  in  conjunction  with  the  Amale- 
 kites  and  other  nomade  tribes,  invaded  the  country 
 every  year,  at  the  season  of  produce,  in  great  num- 
 bers, with  their  flocks  and  herds.  They  plundered 
 and  trampled  down  the  fields,  the  vineyards,  and 
 the  gardens ;  they  seized  the  cattle,  and  plundered 
 man  and  house,  rioting  in  the  countiy,  after  the 
 manner  which  the  Bedouin  Arabs  practise  at  this 
 day.  After  Israel  had  been  humbled  by  seven 
 years  of  this  treatment,  the  Lord  raised  up  a  de- 
 liverer in  the  person  of  Gideon.  He  was  threshing 
 corn  by  stealth,  for  fear  of  its  being  taken  away  by 
 the  Midianites,  when  an  angel  of  God  appeared 
 before  him,  and  thus  saluted  him  : — 'The  Lord  is 
 with  thee,  thou  mighty  man  of  valour.'  Gideon 
 expressed  some  doubt  whether  God  was  stih  with 
 a  people  subject  to  such  affliction,  and  was 
 answered  by  the  most  unexpected  commission— 
 '  Go  in  this  thy  might,  and  thou  shalt  save  Israel 
 from  the  hand  of  the  Midianites :  have  not  I  sent 
 thee?'  Gideon  still  urged,  'Wherewith  shall  I 
 save  Israel  ?  Behold  my  family  is  poor  in  Ma- 
 nasseh, and  I  am  the  least  in  my  father's  house.' 
 The  '  Wherewith '  was  answered  by  '  Surely  I  will 
 be  with  thee.'  He  then  demurred  no  more,  but 
 pressed  his  hospitality  upon  the  heavenly  stranger, 
 who,  however,  ate  not  of  what  was  set  before  him, 
 but  directing  Gideon  to  lay  it  out  upon  the  rock  as 
 upon  an  altar,  it  was  consumed  by  a  supernatural 
 fire,  and  the  angel  disappeared.     Assured  by  this 
 
GIDEON 
 
 121 
 
 GIDEON 
 
 of  his  commission,  Gideon  proceeded  at  once  to 
 cast  down  the  local  image  and  altar  of  Baal ;  and, 
 when  the  people  would  have  avenged  this  insult 
 to  their  false  god,  their  anger  was  averted  through 
 the  address  of  his  father,  who,  by  dwelling  on  the 
 inability  of  Baal  to  avenge  himself,  more  than 
 insinuated  a  doubt  of  his  competency  to  protect 
 his  followers.  This  was  a  favourite  argument 
 among  the  Hebrews  against  idolatry.  It  occurs 
 often  in  the  prophets,  and  was  seldom  urged  upon 
 idolatrous  Israehtes  without  some  effect  upon  their 
 consciences. 
 
 Gideon  soon  found  occasion  to  act  upon  his  high 
 commission.  The  allied  invaders  were  encamped 
 in  the  great  plain  of  Jezreel  or  Esdraelon,  when  he 
 blew  the  tnnnpet,  and  thus  gathered  round  him  a 
 daily  increasing  host,  the  summons  to  arms  which 
 it  implied  having  been  transmitted  through  the 
 northern  tribes  by  special  messengers.  The  in- 
 quietude connected  with  great  enterprises  is  more 
 sensibly  felt  some  days  before  than  at  the  moment 
 of  action ;  and  hence  the  two  miraculous  signs 
 which,  on  the  two  nights  preceding  the  march, 
 were  required  and  given  as  tokens  of  victory. 
 The  first  night  a  fleece  was  laid  out  in  the  middle 
 of  an  open  threshing-floor,  and  in  the  morning  it 
 was  quite  wet,  while  the  soil  was  dry  all  around. 
 The  next  night  the  wonder  was  reversed,  the  soil 
 being  wet  and  the  fleece  perfectly  dry  (Judg.  vii.) 
 
 Encouraged  by  these  divine  testimonies,  Gideon 
 commenced  his  march,  and  advanced  to  the  brook 
 Harod,  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel.  He  was  here  at 
 the  head  of  32,000  men  ;  but,  lest  so  large  a  host 
 should  assume  the  glor}'  of  the  coming  deliverance, 
 which  of  right  belonged  to  God  only,  two  opera- 
 tions, remarkable  both  in  motive  and  procedure, 
 reduced  this  large  host  to  a  mere  handful  of  men. 
 First,  by  divine  direction,  proclamation  was  made 
 that  all  the  faint-hearted  might  withdraw  ;  and  no 
 fewer  than  22,000  availed  themselves  of  the  indul- 
 gence. The  remaining  10,000  were  still  declared 
 loo  numerous  :  they  were  therefore  all  taken  down 
 to  the  brook,  when  only  those  who  lapped  the 
 water  from  their  hands,  like  active  men  in  haste, 
 were  resei"ved  for  the  enterprise,  while  all  those 
 who  lay  down  leisurely  to  drink  were  excluded. 
 The  former  numbered  no  more  than  300,  and  these 
 were  the  appointed  vanquishers  of  the  huge  host 
 which  covered  the  great  plain  (Judg.  vii.  1-8). 
 
 The  overheard  relation  of  a  dream,  by  which 
 Gideon  was  encouraged  (Judg.  vii.  9-14),  and  the 
 remarkable  stratagem  with  pitchers  and  torches,  by 
 which  he  overcame  (ver.  15-23),  are  well  known. 
 
 The  routed  Midianites  fled  towards  the  Jordan, 
 but  were  pursued  with  great  slaughter,  the  country 
 being  now  roused  in  jnirsuit  of  the  flying  oppressor. 
 The  Ephraimites  rendered  good  service  by  seizing 
 the  lower  fords  of  the  Jordan,  and  cutting  off  all  who 
 attempted  escape  in  that  direction,  while  Gideon 
 himself  pursued  beyond  the  river  those  who  escaped 
 by  the  upper  fords.  Gideon  crossed  the  Jordan  a 
 little  below  where  it  leaves  the  lake  of  Gennesareth, 
 in  pursuit  of  the  Midianitish  princes  Zeba  and  Zal- 
 munna.  On  that  side  the  river,  however,  his  vic- 
 tory was  not  believed  or  understood,  and  the  people 
 still  trembled  at  the  very  name  of  the  Midianites. 
 Hence  he  could  obtain  no  succour  from  the  places 
 which  he  passed,  and  town  after  town  refused  to 
 supply  even  victuals  to  his  fatigued  and  hungry,  but 
 still  stout-hearted  troop.  He  denounced  vengeance 
 djion  them,  but  postponed  its  execution  till  his  re- 
 
 turn ;  and  when  he  did  return,  with  the  two  princes 
 as  his  prisoners,  he  by  no  means  spared  those  towns 
 which,  like  Succoth  and  Penuel,  had  added  insult  tc 
 injury  (Judg.  viii.  4-17). 
 
 In  those  days  captives  of  distinction  taken  in  war 
 were  most  invariably  slain.  Zeba  and  Zalmunna 
 had  made  up  their  minds  to  this  fate  ;  and  yet  it 
 was  Gideon's  intention  to  have  spared  them,  till  he 
 learned  that  they  had  put  to  death  his  own  brothers 
 under  the  same  circumstances  ;  upon  which,  as  the 
 avenger  of  their  blood,  he  slew  the  captives  with 
 his  own  hand  (Judg.  viii.  18-2 1). 
 
 Among  the  fugitives  taken  by  the  Ephraimites 
 were  two  distinguished  emirs  of  Midian,  named 
 Oreb  and  Zeeb,  whom  they  put  to  death.  They 
 took  their  heads  over  to  Gideon,  which  amounted 
 to  an  acknowledgment  of  his  leadership  ;  but  still 
 the  always  haughty  and  jealous  Ephraimites  were 
 greatly  annoyed  that  they  had  not  in  the  first  in- 
 stance been  summoned  to  the  field ;  and  serious 
 consequences  might  have  followed,  but  for  the  tact 
 of  Gideon  in  speaking  in  a  lowly  spirit  of  his  own 
 doings  in  comparison  with  theirs  (Judg.  vii.  14  ; 
 viii.  I,  sq.) 
 
 Gideon  having  thus  delivered  Israel  from  the 
 most  afflictive  tyranny  to  which  they  had  been  sub- 
 ject since  they  quitted  Egypt,  the  grateful  people, 
 and  particularly  the  northern  tribes,  made  him  an 
 offer  of  the  crown  for  himself  and  his  sons.  But 
 the  hero  was  too  well  acquainted  with  his  true 
 position,  and  with  the  principles  of  the  theocratical 
 government,  to  accept  this  unguarded  offer :  'I  will 
 not  rule  over  you,'  he  said,  '  neither  shall  my  son 
 rule  over  you :  Jehovah,  he  shall  i-ule  over  you.' 
 He  would  only  accept  the  golden  ear-rings  which 
 the  victors  had  taken  from  the  ears  of  their  slaugh. 
 tered  foes  [Ear-RINGs]  ;  and  a  cloth  being  spread 
 out  to  receive  them,  the  admiring  Israelites  threw 
 in,  not  only  the  ear-rings,  but  other  ornaments  of 
 gold,  including  the  chains  of  the  royal  camels,  and 
 added  the  purple  robes  which  the  slain  monarchs 
 had  worn,  being  the  first  indication  of  purple  as  a 
 royal  colour.  The  ear-rings  alone  weighed  1700 
 shekels,  equal  to  74  pounds  4  ounces,  and  worth, 
 at  the  present  value  of  gold,  about  ;[^33O0.  With 
 this  'Gideon  made  an  ephod,  and  put  it  in  his  city, 
 even  in  Ophrah;  and  all  Israel  went  thither  a 
 whoring  after  it,  which  became  a  snare  unto  Gideon 
 and  to  his  house.'  An  ephod,  at  least  that  of  the 
 high-priest,  was  an  outer  garment  like  a  sleeveless 
 tunic,  to  which  was  attached  the  oracular  breast- 
 plate, composed  of  twelve  precious  stones  set  in 
 gold,  and  graven  with  the  names  of  the  twelve 
 tribes.  Another  plainer  description  of  ephod  was 
 worn  by  the  common  priests.  The  object  of  Gi- 
 deon in  making  an  ephod  with  his  treasure  is  not 
 very  clear.  Some  suppose  that  it  was  merely  de- 
 signed as  a  trophy  of  Israel's  deliverance :  if  so,  it 
 was  a  veiy  strange  one.  It  is  more  probable  that 
 as  Gideon  had,  on  his  being  first  called  to  his  high 
 mission,  been  instructed  to  build  an  altar  and  offer 
 sacrifice  at  this  very  place,  he  conceived  himself 
 authorised,  if  not  required,  to  have  there  a  sacer- 
 dotal establishment — for  at  least  the  tribes  beyond 
 the  river  —  where  sacrifices  might  be  regularly 
 offered.  In  this  case  the  worship  rendered  there 
 was  doubtless  in  honour  of  Jehovah,  but  was  still, 
 however  well  intended,  highly  schismatical  and 
 irregular.  Even  in  his  lifetime  it  must  have  had 
 the  effect  of  withdrawing  the  attention  of  the  people 
 east  of  the  Jordan  from  the  Tabernacle  at  Shiloh, 
 
GIDOM 
 
 125 
 
 GIFT 
 
 and  thus  so  far  tended  to  facilitate  the  step  into 
 actual  idolatry,  which  was  taken  soon  after  Gideon's 
 death.  The  probability  of  this  explanation  is 
 strengthened  when  we  recollect  the  schismatical 
 sacerdotal  establishments  which  were  formed  by 
 Micah  on  Mount  Ephraim,  and  by  the  Danites  at 
 Laish  (Judg.  xvii.  5-13  ;  xviii.  29-31). 
 
 The  remainder  of  Gideon's  life  was  peaceable. 
 He  had  seventy  sons  by  many  wives,  and  died  at 
 an  advanced  age,  after  he  had  '  ruled  Israel '  for 
 forty  years  ;  B.C.  1249  to  1209.  He  is  mentioned 
 in  the  discourse  of  Samuel  (i  Sam.  xii.  11),  and 
 his  name  occurs  in  Heb.  xi.  32,  among  those  of 
 the  heroes  of  the  faith. 
 
 GIDOM  (oynj,  01(1'  om;  Sept.   Vthav,  Alex. 
 
 FaXaciS),  the  place  to  which  the  Benjamites  were 
 pursued  by  the  rest  of  the  Israelites  after  the  battle 
 of  Gibeah  (Judg.  xx.  45).     The  site  is  unknown. 
 
 GIER-EAGLE.     [Racham.] 
 
 GIFT,  or  Sacrifice  to  God.  \See  Offering.] 
 
 GIFTS,  SPIRITUAL.     ISee  vol.  iii.  p.  SS4.] 
 
 GIFT  (Present,  Blessing).  One  of  the  most 
 ancient  and  most  widely  prevalent  customs  is  that 
 of  bestowing  on  certain  occasions  some  object  of 
 real  or  imaginaiy  value  upon  superiors,  equals,  or 
 inferiors  :  as  a  token  of  respect  or  gratitude ;  as  a 
 jiropitiatory  or  conciliatory  offering ;  as  a  sign  of 
 grace  and  favour ;  as  a  reward  or  as  alms  ;  as  an  ex- 
 pression of  good-will  or  affection  ;  or,  finally,  as  a 
 fee,  abribe,  and  the  like.  Up  to  this  day,  presenting 
 gifts  is,  next  to  the  salutation,  the  highest  mark  of 
 honour  throughout  the  East.  The  origin  of  the  cus- 
 tom has,  gratuitously  it  would  appear,  been  traced 
 to  the  self-imposed  taxes  proffered  to  the  first  kings 
 who  were  in  indigent  circumstances,  by  their  sub- 
 jects (Cf  Jahn,  Bihl.  Arch.,  sec.  202).  Consider- 
 ing that  it  was  piuncipally  surpassing  prowess  in  the 
 hunting  and  battle-field,  both  pregnant  with  spoil, 
 which  raised  men  to  the  dignity  of  a  chief,  it  is  not 
 easily  seen  how  they  should  ordinarily  have  been 
 thrown  on  the  commimity  for  support.  It  seems 
 far  more  natural  to  trace  the  custom  to  the  innate 
 propensity  for  manifesting  sentiments  of  a  courteous 
 and  kindly  nature  by  the  spontaneous  offering  of 
 some  useful  or  ornamental  object  to  the  person  who 
 has  inspired  the  sentiment.  Accounts  of  presents, 
 var)'ing  according  to  the  relative  position  of  donor 
 and  receiver,  and  their  individual  circumstances, 
 as  well  as  to  the  occasion  which  called  them  forth, 
 are  very  numerous  in  the  Bible,  and  proportion- 
 ately great  is  the  number  of  different  terms  em- 
 ployed for  them  in  the  text.  In  some  few  cases 
 these  have  retained,  as  will  appear  in  the  following 
 list,  a  special  and  distinct  meaning,  indicating  not 
 only  the  respective  relation  of  giver  and  receiver, 
 but  even  the  spirit  in  which  the  gift  is  offered  ; 
 while  in  others  they  have,  in  the  course  of  time, 
 become  mere  synonyms. 
 
 Etymologically  nearest  to  our  own  word  Gift 
 (Luth.  Gahe)  come  the  following  four,  derived  from 
 the  root  jriJ,  to  give  : — 
 
 a.   jrUD,  Mattan;  Gen.   xxxiv.   12,  together  with 
 
 "inb,    Mohar,     dowry :  —  Sichem    to     the    irate 
 
 brethren  of  Dinah,  '  Ask  ye  never  so  much  dowry 
 
 and  gift''    Prov.   xviii.    16,  in   the  sense  of  ITVC, 
 
 i"-ihe,  '  A  man's  gift  (DIK  iflD)  maketh  room  for 
 
 him.  lb.  xxi.  14,  '  A  gift  in  secret  ("iriDS  (HO*) 
 pacifieth  anger.' 
 
 b.  n:nO,t  Mattana;  Gen.  xxv.  6,  the  ^portion'' 
 
 bestowed  by  Abraham  upon  the  children  of  his 
 concubines  ;  2  Chron.  xxi.  3,  by  Jehoshaphat  upon 
 his  younger  sons ;  a  reivard  or  bribe,  like  the 
 foregoing:  Prov.  xv.  27,  'he  that  hateth  gifts  shall 
 live;'  Eccles.  vii.  7,  'a  gift  dcstroyeth  the  heart;' 
 further,  an  offering  \.o  the  sanctuary  and  the  priests, 
 Exod.  xxviii.  38,  'which  Israel  shall  hallow  in 
 their  gifts '  (cf.  Lev.  xxiii.  38,  etc.)  ;  to  idols 
 (Ezek.    XX.    31),    '  When  ye  offer  your  gifts   you 
 
 pollute  yourselves;'  finally:  alms,  D''31''2XP  'D, 
 '  Gifts  to  the  poor'  (Esth.  ix.  22).+ 
 
 *  The  name  given,  in  a  different  sense,  to  the 
 charity-boxes  in  synagogues. 
 
 t  It  may  not,  perhaps,  be  out  of  place  here  to 
 give  \ad  voc.  H^nO]  a  striking  specimen  of  the 
 manner  in  which  the  Midrash  occasionally  makes 
 use  of  the  scriptural  words  for  its  poetical  homiletics. 
 In  the  passage.  Num.  xxi.  18,  20,  descriptive  of  the 
 wanderings  of  Israel  :  '  And  from  the  desert  ("13"1D) 
 tJuy  went  to  Mattanah  (lUriD)  ;  and  from  Mattanah 
 
 to  Nahaliel  (PSvPIi)  ;  and  from  Nahaliel  to  Ba- 
 moth  (m?02)  ;  and  from  Bamoth  in  the  valley,  that 
 is  in  the  country  of  Moab,  to  the  top  of  I'isgah, 
 which  looketh  toward  Jeshimon,'  —  the  proper 
 nouns  of  the  stations  are  taken  in  a  literal  sense, 
 and  njriD  is  assumed  to  refer  to  t/ie  Gift  Kar"  i^ox^v, 
 viz.,  the  Law.  This  was  bestowed  upon  Israel  in 
 the  desert,  because  there  they  were  all  equal,  and  no 
 trilie  could  hereafter  claim  any  preference  on  ac- 
 count of  the  Thorah  having  been  given  in  its  own 
 special  territory.  .  .  .  'Again,  why  was  the  Thorah 
 given  in  the  desert  ?  Because,  as  in  the  desert,  there 
 is  no  sowing  and  no  tilling  of  the  soil ;  so  he  who 
 takes  upon  himself  the  yoke  of  the  Divine  Law,  is 
 free  from  the  yoke  of  earthly  rule,  and  of  the  fetters 
 of  society.  And  as  in  the  desert  no  taxes  [pJTJ^, 
 lipavov^  are  raised,  so  are  the  Learned  (the  sons  of 
 the  Thorah)  free  in  this  world.'  .  .  .  'Another 
 explanation:  Who  fulfils  the  Thorah?  He  who 
 makes  himself  like  a  desert  by  himself,  apart  from 
 eveiy  one.'  .  .  .  Again,  the  three  stations  are  re- 
 ferred to  the  three  different  Courts  of  Law  in  Jeru- 
 salem ;  and  further  to  the  migrations  of  the  San- 
 hedrin  :  '  from  Mattanah  to  Nahaliel — these  are 
 the  Sanhedrin  on  the  Mount  of  the  Temple 
 (n''3n  nn3)  ;  from  Nahahel  to  Bamoth — these 
 are  the  Sanhedrin  in  the  Azarah  at  the  side  of 
 the  altar  (nnTDil  1^3) ;  and  from  Bamoth  in  the 
 valley,    in   the  country  of  Moab  —  these  are   the 
 
 Sanhedrin  in  the  'Paved  Hall'  (nTJn  TOth)-'' 
 [See  Sanhedrin.]  Another  allegorical  inter- 
 pretation refers  these  four  words  to  Moses,  who 
 complained  that  after  the  gift  had  been  bestow- 
 ed  in   the  desert  through  his   mediation,  in>  py) 
 
 (Pi^vPIJ  : — nmX  IPnj,  death  should  overtake  him, 
 niOn:— DID  X2,  ^z.-'MoW\\cot?ies deatli\.  .  .  .  'And 
 from  Bamoth  to  the  valley  which  is  in  the  field  of 
 Moab ' — that  is  Moses'  burial,  as  it  is  said  (Deut 
 xxxiv.  6),  '  And  he  buried  him  in  a  valley  in  the 
 land  of  Moab'  (Tanchuma,  Num.  xxi.,  cf.  Midr. 
 Rabba  ad.  loc.;  Gem.  Nedar.  58  a;  103  d,  ff.  ; 
 Erub.  54  a  ;  Jalkut  ad.  loc.,  etc.) 
 
 X  On  the  injunction  of  Mordechai  to  make  'these 
 days  [of  Purim]  days  of  feasting   and  joy,  and  ol 
 
GIFT 
 
 126 
 
 GIFT 
 
 c.  nnO,  Mattath  (niFlO),  reicmrd  or  fee;  I  Kings 
 
 xiv.  7,  offered  by  Jeroboam  to  the  man  of  God 
 for  the  heahng  of  his  hands  ;  '  a  false  gift,''  Prov. 
 XXV.  14;  a.  divine  gift,  Eccles.  iii.  13,  etc.,  T*  nriDj 
 Fz.ek.  xlvi.  5=T'  n^nO,  Deut.  xvi.  17,  'ac- 
 cording to  a  man's  means.''  It  may  be  observed 
 here  tliat  both  JJlD  and  flDO  occur  frequently  as 
 compounds  with  Jah  or  Jahu  (God)  in  the  sense 
 of  Theodoras  :  Mattanjah,  Mattithjah,  Mattith- 
 jalm  =  Jonathan. 
 
 d.  phJ,  Nathim;  (Pass.  part.  Kal  of  jflJ),  '  one 
 
 who  is  given  ; '  used  Num.  viii.  19,  etc.,  with  re- 
 spect to  the  Levites ;  '  given  (A.  V.  gifts)  to  Aaron 
 and  to  his  sons  from  among  the  children  of  Israel,' 
 i.e.,  specially  singled  out  and  consecrated  for  the 
 holy  service.  In  close  connection  with  this  word 
 stands  the  fliir.  tani.  D"'J"'riJ  or  pJTlJ,  the  designa- 
 tion of  the  lowest  menials  of  the  temple  (Josephus: 
 'Ieyo65ouXoi),  mentioned  together  with  the  Levites, 
 Ezra  ii.  34,  etc.,  who,  prisoners  of  war  perhaps, 
 had  \)e.&\\  presented  by  David  and  his  successors  (in 
 a  capacity  somewhat  similar  to  that  of  the  Gibeon- 
 ites  with  whom  they  are  often  confounded),  for  the 
 use  of  the  sanctuary  (cf.  Ezra  viii.  20). 
 
 The  sense  of  Oblatioti  is  chiefly  inherent  in  those 
 
 words  which  are  derived  from  Nti'J  (cf.  Ar.  UU, 
 «_«J,    Uj),  to  raise,  lift  up  :— 
 
 (I-  Nl-'O,  Massa ;  2  Chron.  xvii.  11,  P]D31  nnJD 
 
 'D  '  some  of  the  Philistines  brought  Jehoshaphat 
 presents a7id  ttibute-silver,  and  the  Arabians  brought 
 him  flocks,  etc'  hence  more  commonly  used  in  the 
 sense  of  regidar  tribute  or  taxes,  cf.  Hos.  viii.  10 ; 
 2  Chron.  xxiv.  27,  etc. 
 
 /a  DNbip,  Alass'eth,  honorary  gift,  Esth.  ii.  18, 
 
 '  Ahasverus  gave  gifts  according  to  the  state  of  the 
 king.'  The  word  is  further  used  for  the  'dish  cf 
 honour''  sent  to  guests  during  a  feast  (Gen.  xliii. 
 34)  ;  for  tax,  fixed  contribution  towards  the  sanc- 
 tuary, 2  Chron.  xxiv.  6,  etc.,  cf.  Exod.  xxx.  12, 
 ff. ,  also  for  first  fruits,  sacrificial  offerings,  Ezek. 
 XX.  40. 
 
 In  Phoenician  the  use  of  DNti'D  for  'sacrifice'  in 
 a  general  sense  (or  tax  from  a  sacrifice  to  be  given 
 to  the  priest  or  priests),  is  quite  common.  The 
 word  occurs  frequently  on  the  well-known  Sacri- 
 ficial Tablet  of  Marseilles ;  and  the  second  Sacri- 
 ficial Tablet  recently  found  in  Carthage— now  in 
 tlie  British  Museum — in  which  the  beginning  of 
 the  cpigra])h  is  preserved,  goes  far  to  shew  that  in 
 all  these  regulations  of  taxes  due  to  the  priests 
 from  the  single  offerings,  soine  such  words  as  T\'^1 
 nn^<t^'D^  (Phocn.  plur.  nn),  'At  the  time  of  the 
 sacrifices,'  and  X3D  L''X,  'which  fixed'  [certain 
 .Suffctes  scil.\  were  used  as  introductory  formulas. 
 
 sending  portions  (0130,  see  below],  one  to  another, 
 and  gifts  to  the  poor,  are  based  the  following  ordi- 
 nances (Orach  Chajim,  sec.  649) : — a.  '  Every  man 
 must  give  at  least  two  presents  to  two  poor  people 
 [in  accordance  with  the  two  plurals  of  DI^DD  and 
 D^3V3X].  h.  The  money  destined  for  Purim-alms 
 must  not  be  used  for  any  other  cliaritablc  purpose. 
 The  poor  themselves,  however,  are  at  liberty  to 
 use  the  money  received  according  to  their  own 
 pleasure,  c.  The  Purim-money  must  not  be  scrupu- 
 lously divided  ;  but  wliosoever  stretches  out  his 
 h.aiids  to  receive,  to  him  shall  be  given.' 
 
 The  first  line  of  the  Mars.  Inscr.  reads  : — 
 
 jn  DD:;'n  ^ya...ny  nn dd'x  nn-.n^.-.^ya  nn 
 
 ...nnpn^D 
 
 That  of  the  Brit.  Mus.  has  distinctly  (as  above)  : 
 
 ...XJD  cs  nn^<:^•o^  nya 
 
 [See  Phcenicia  ;    Offering.  . 
 
 c.  nNtJ'3,  Nisseth  (Part.  Niph.),  royal  gift,  2  Sam. 
 
 xix.  43.      '  Has  he  [the  king],  given  us  any  gift  ?' 
 To  our  word  '  Blessing'  corresponds  : — 
 n3"l3,  Berachali  (from']"l2,  ^J- J  1 ,  to  kneel  down, 
 
 to  pray,  to  bless  [cui-se],  to  favour  \vith  a  gift,  to 
 accompany  one's  good  wishes  by  a  present,  etc.), 
 originally  an  offering  from  an  inferior  to  a  superior, 
 from  a  client  to  a  patron,  a  conciliatory  or  propi- 
 tiatory gift.  Cf.  Gen.  xxxiii.  11,  Jacob  to  Esau, 
 '  Take  now  my  blessing,  which  has  been  brought 
 unto  thee;'  i  Sam.  xxv.  27,  Abigail  to  David, 
 '  Take  now  this  blessing  which  thy  handmaid  hath 
 brought  ;  Naaman  to  Elisha,  2  Kings  v.  15, 
 '  Take  now  the  blessing  from  thy  servant.'  [The 
 presents  of  popes  to  kings,  were  likewise  called 
 '  Benedictiones,'  cf.  Du  Cange  Lex.  ii.  mo;  ap. 
 Ges.  s.  V.  ]  Furtlier :  the  re.sults  of  the  Divine 
 blessing — presents  from  above,  in  the  sense  of  riches 
 
 lc\^j).  Gen.  xlix.  25:  Is.  xix.  24,  etc.;  cf. 
 n3"l2  tJ'SJ,  a  munificent  man,  Prov.  xi.  25. 
 
 From  the  cognate  roots  HJD  (obsoL;  ar. 
 
 ^J^'< 
 
 to  portion  out,  to  present  [not  from  iinj,  to  carry 
 near,  as  Kimclii,  or  HIJ,  to  rest,  cat/sat:  pacify  by 
 gifts,  as  others  would  have  it],  and  HJD,  to  divide, 
 count,  allot,  assign,  are  derived  the  following  two 
 words  respectively  : — 
 
 nn^JD,  Minha.  Chiefly  a  present  of  a  concilia- 
 tory or  propitiatoiy  nature,  as  that  with  which  Jacob 
 wished  to  pacify  Esau,  Gen.  xxxii.  14,  ff.  (see  above), 
 or  which  Joseph's  brethren  brought  to  Joseph, 
 Gen.  xliii.  1 1 ;  an  offering/i?  a  king; — Israel  to  Eglon, 
 Judg.  iii.  15  :  hence  also  a  tribute,  and,  '"0  ''Nl^'lJ. 
 'O  ''tJ^'^JD,  '  bearers  of  a  Minha,^  became  a  euphe- 
 mistic phrase  for '  tributary  subjects;'  Moab  to  David, 
 2  Sam.  viii.  2  ;  the  Philistine  kingdoms  to  .Solo- 
 mon, I  Kings  viii.  i.  Further,  an  offering  to  God, 
 CJen.  iv.  3  ;  Is.  i.  13.  In  the  Mosaic  books  this 
 word  is  chiefly  used  for  unbloody  sacrifices,  in  con- 
 tradistinction to  n3T  (LXX.  S-ucria,  S-uo-tacr/xa,  irpoc- 
 
 (popd)  ;  also  of  sacrifices  offered  to  idols.  Is.  Ivii. 
 6;  l.wi.  3.  [Offering.] 
 
 In  this  sense  of  sacrifice,  HnjO  occurs  also  on  the 
 Phoenician  sacrificial  tablet  of  Marseilles,  line  14  : 
 
 ...[nn]:oa  ni^  ms  t^'x  nar  b  bi})  -,  and  on  that 
 
 of  the  British  Museum,  line  10,  H^T  i^yi  nbfi  ^V 
 ...nnJD3. — From  l")]}  'ID,  '  the  evening  sacrifice,' 
 Dan.  ix.  21,  Ezra  ix.  4,  the  word  nnjD  has,  after 
 the  cessation  of  the  sacrifices,  gradually  come  to 
 signify  the  afternoon  prayer,  on  the  time  of  which 
 
 (and  the  divisions  of  HPnJ  'T2,  the  great  Minha, 
 and  n:Dp  "O,  the  small  Minha) ;  see  Orach  Cha- 
 jim, sec.  232. 
 
 n^O,  Manah;  ■a,  portion,  such  as  Elkanah  gave 
 
 on  the  occasion  of  his  annual  sacrifice  to  his  wives 
 and  children,  i  Sam.  i.  4,  5.  '  Send  portions  (of 
 eatables)  tothosewho  have  nothing  ready,'  Neh.  viii. 
 10  ;  cf.  Esth,  ix.  23. — The  custom  referred  to  in  the 
 
GIFT 
 
 127 
 
 GIFT 
 
 last  passage  of  sending  mutual  presents  of  eatables, 
 and  of  giving  alms,  on  the  Purim-festival,  has  been 
 adopted  by  the  Mohammedans  on  their  two  Eeds ; 
 principally  on  the  minor  festival,  which  follows 
 immediately  upon  the  Ramadan,  and  which  lasts 
 three   days.— In    I'hoen.    ilJO,  plur.    030   (Sidon. 
 
 Inscr.,  V.  iv.  viii.),  means  treasures,  riches   (=Ar. 
 yt)-    Perhaps  JOD,  fj.ajj.uvds  (money),  may  be  traced 
 
 to  the  same  root  as  njD. 
 
 We  have  further  to  mention  the  following  He- 
 brew equivalents  for  Gift : — 
 
 "'K',  ShaJ,  only  used  in  connection  with  ?''2in,  a 
 
 present  {'  respect')  offered  to  God,  Josh,  xviii.  7  ; 
 Ps.  Ixviii.  30  ;  Ixxvi.  12. — Five  different  derivations 
 
 have  been  proposed  for  this  word :  \^^U,  Ar.      ^, 
 
 to  will ;  S^t^*,  Ar.  1  ,^jl,,  to  desire  ;  HIK',  to  make 
 V 
 
 equal :   N"'i^'    Ar.       ^.,   to  flow  out  ;   and  ITC'   to 
 
 stretch  out — but  none  appears  completely  satis- 
 factory. 
 
 m^DFl,    TeshuraJi  ("IVC',   Ar.    ,';^,  offero),  ohla- 
 
 tioit :  a  present  to  a  '  man  of  God,'  i  Sam.  ix.  7  ; 
 Aram.  nzlT3J,  Dan.  ii.  6  ;  v.  17,  a  present  (to- 
 gether with  ^^nO)  to  a  diviner. 
 
 ^^t^^  Slwhad;  (Aram,  ^^1i^',  Syr.  j,_K»Q_»,  Talm. 
 X^'lt^'),  from  "inti',  to  make  a  present  for  the  pur- 
 pose of  buying  off  a  penalty,  Job  vi.  22  ;  chiefly  in 
 the  sense  of  a  bribe,  Exod.  xxiii.  8 ;  Deut.  x .  175 
 Ps.  xxvi.  10,  etc. 
 
 "l3t:^X,  Eshkor  r\yD,  Ar.    C-i  =  -I3b',  to  hire, 
 
 buy,  reward),  Price,  Tribute;  Ezek.  x.xvii.  15  to- 
 gether with  mnD,  merchandize — '  The  men  of  De- 
 dan  were  thy  merchants.  .  .  .  They  brought 
 thee  for  a  present  horns  of  ivory  and  ebony  ;'  Ps. 
 Ixxii.    10,    parall.    with  iinJO,    tribute. — [Hitzig's 
 
 derivation  from  "iQC't^,  a  certain  coin  (Aram.  As- 
 
 spar),  is  not  tenable.] 
 
 D''ni?u',  Shilluhim  (n?L^,  to  send  away),  presents 
 
 sent  away: — together  with  a  newly  married  daughter 
 ^ Dowry,  I  Kings  ix.  16.  'Pharaoh  had  taken 
 Gezer  .  .  .  and  given  it  for  a  present  unto  his 
 daughter,  Solomon's  wife.' 
 
 Words  of  an  entirely  special  signification  are  : — 
 
 n;^T,  'dowry'  (Gen.  xxx.  20). 
 
 iri?0,  '  dowiy,' — paid  by  the  bridegroom  to  the 
 
 parents  of  the  bride   {Uvov ;    Arab.  ^^^   ;    Syr. 
 
 ]5C7li^)   (Gen.  xxxiv.  12;  Exod.  xxii.  16). 
 
 nn3,  Nedeh,  'gift  to  a  whore'  (Ezek.  xvi.  35). 
 
 TheN.  T.  chiefly  employs  the  following  words:— 
 
 AiSpov  (jriH,  pT  in  Talmud  and  Midrash),  prin- 
 cipally a  <^ift  of  honour.  Matt.  ii.  n.  Sacrificial 
 offering  (cf  //.  vi.  293,  viii.  203),  Matt.  v.  23,  24; 
 viii.  4;  Mark  vii.  11  (pip);  etc.,  charily  (cast 
 into  the  poor-box  of  the  Temple),  Luke  xxi.  i,  ff 
 
 Awped  (n''~in,  Talmud,  Midrash)  (i-Kovp6.vio%), 
 Heb.  vi.4,  'heavenly  gift,'  Holy  Ghost;  scil.  rod 
 TTvev/xaTos,  Acts  ii.  38,  etc.;  rod  3-eoO,  John  iv.  10 ; 
 
 Acts  viii.  20,  etc.  (cf  yEsch.  Prom.  619;  Soph.  yJi 
 1032,  Plato,  Pef.  V.  468). 
 
 Aibprj/xa,  gift  of  life.  Jam.  i.  1 7,  riXeiot',  a  com 
 plete,  perfect,  because  Divine,  Gift  (cf  Soph.  Tr. 
 668 ;  Ar.  Nnbb.  305 ;  Xen.  Hier.  ii.  4). 
 
 Xdpij,  Xdpta/xa,  a ^y? bestowed  through  the  grace 
 of  God,  without  any  merit  on  the  receiver's  part 
 (like  the  Gnosis),  i  Cor.  i.  7;  vii.  7;  Rom.  v. 
 15,  16;  I  Tim.  iv.  14,  etc.;  a  special gijt,  Rom.  xi. 
 29 ;  xii.  6,  etc. 
 
 'Ara3-7;/xa=D"in,  a  gift  consecrated  to  God,  and 
 deposited  in  the  Temple  for  its  special  use  and 
 ornament  (Suid. ,  i^dv  rh  a.(pLepwiJ.ivov  S-ew),  Luke 
 xxi.  5.  (2  Mace.  v.  16;  3  Mace.  iii.  17,  etc.; 
 Joseph.  Bell.  fiid.  i.  2.  7;  Antiq.  xiii.  8;  xvii. 
 6,  etc.) 
 
 No  less  various  than  the  occasions  which  called 
 them  forth,  were  the  gifts  themselves.  Sometimes 
 consisting  of  the  simple  produce  of  the  soil  and 
 pastures,  or  prepared  food  (Gen.  xxiv.  53 ;  xxxii. 
 13;  I  Kings  X.  25  ;  2  Chron.  xvii.  11,  etc.),  they 
 at  other  times  took  the  more  convenient  or  ambi- 
 tious form  of  money,  silver,  gold,  jewels,  gannenls, 
 arms,  and  other  articles  of  use  and  ornament  (i 
 Sam.  ix.  8 ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  II;  I  Kings  x.  25 ; 
 Job  xlii.  II,  etc. ),— the  value  naturally  correspond- 
 ing to  the  respective  position  of  donor  and  receiver, 
 and  the  complimentary  or  interested  purpose  they 
 were  to  serve.  Thus,  while  I  Sam.  ix.  8,  .Saul's 
 present  to  the  prophet,  amounts  to  one-fourth  of  a 
 Shekel  only,  the  Philistines  promise  Delilah  for 
 the  capture  of  Samson  no  less  than  iioo  .Shekels 
 (Judg.  xvi.  5).  It  was,  and  still  is,  the  custom 
 among  friends  in  the  East  to  offer  a  present  to  each 
 other  on  the  occasion  of  a  visit ;  be  it  only  a  flower 
 or  a  fruit  (Lane,  Mod.  Egypt.;  Notes  to  Arab. 
 Nights;  Jahn,  Bibl.Arch.,  sec.  202).  On  feasts — 
 [nivate  or  religious — friends  send  each  other  eat- 
 ables, placed  in  a  dish  or  tray,  covered  with  a 
 richly  embroidered  handkerchief  or  napkin  {lb.) 
 Inferiors,  again,  pay  their  respects  to  their  supe- 
 riors, clients  to  their  patrons,  subjects  to  their 
 rulers,  the  conquered  to  the  conqueror  (l  Sam.  x. 
 27;  Judg.  iii.  15,  17;  2  Kings  xvii.  3,  ff ;  Ps.  xlv. 
 13,  etc.  ;  cf.  Cyrop.  v.  15,  12  ;  Buckingham  Mes. 
 iv-  39)>  by  offering  the  most  costly  gifts,  in  order  to 
 ensure  a  good  reception  (cf  Prov.  xviii.  16),  since  a 
 present  which  should  fall  short  of  the  receiver's 
 expectations  is  sent  back  and  a  better  one  asked 
 for  (Tavern,  i.,  p.  207;  Pococke,  iii.,  p.  481,  etc.) 
 [Cf  Mai.  i.  8.  '  Would  thy  governor  receive  such 
 unworthy  gifts  ! '].  The  presents  bestowed  by  kings 
 upon  those  they  wished  to  honour  (Gen.  xlv.  22, 
 etc.),  military  and  civil  officers  (Esth.  ii.  18), 
 ambassadors,  distinguished  strangers,  and  others, 
 consisted  of  money,  rings,  chains,  and  principally 
 garments  (Kaftan,  Chala),  Gen.  xlv.  22,  ff ;  Dan. 
 v.  16,  29  ;  Esth.  vi.  8,  15  ;  Zach.  iii.  4,  etc.  Cf, 
 Cyrop.  viii.  3  :  Cyrus  presenting  all  his  officers 
 with  Median  Robes.  //.  xxiv.  226  :  Priam  dis- 
 tributing garments  of  honour  to  his  guests  (Freytag, 
 Hist.  Hal.  33,  38 ;  ^lian.    V.  H  ;  II.  i.  32,  etc. ) 
 
 These  garments,  mSvIl,  npiin  ""DyO,  were  princi- 
 pally bestowed  before  a  feast  (Gen.  xlv.  22  ;  Is. 
 iv.  6  ;  Ii.  10  ;  Rev.  iii.  5),  it  being  a  great  breach 
 of  etiquette  not  to  appear  in  them  on  the  occasion, 
 Chard,  iii.,  p.  325.  Sometimes  to  enhance  the 
 value  of  hi«i  gift,  the  king  presents  his  favourite 
 with  the  garment  he  has  worn  himself  (i  .Sam. 
 xviii.  4;  Cyrop.  i.  4,  26;  v.   I,  i).     Distribution 
 
GIHON 
 
 128 
 
 GIHON 
 
 af  food  among  the  people  on  festive  occasions  is 
 mentioned  2  Sam.  vi.  19  (=  the  Roman  congiaria, 
 viscerationes,  Liv.  xxv.  2,  Cic.  Off.  ii.  16).  It  is 
 but  natural  to  the  East  that  the  greatest  pomp 
 and  circumstance  should  be  connected  with  the 
 presentation  of  gifts.  As  many  men  and  beasts 
 of  burden — each  perhaps  cariying  a  ridiculously 
 small  piece  of  the  offering— as  can  possibly  be 
 mustered,  are  pressed  into  the  dignified  procession 
 which  is  to  cany  it ;  thus  forty  [if  the  reading  be 
 correct]  camels'  load  of  presents  are  sent  by  Ben 
 Hadad  to  Elisha  (2  Kings  viii.  9).  Abundant 
 examples  of  this  often  gratuitous  show  are  fur- 
 nished by  the  Assyrian  and  Persepolitan  sculptures. 
 The  reception  of  the  present,  chiefly  from  a  supe- 
 rior, is  no  less  accompanied  with  all  the  customary 
 signs  of  reverence  and  respect,  such  as  kissing  it, 
 touching  it  with  the  forehead,  or  laying  it  upon 
 the  head  (cf  Jahn,  B.  A.,  sec.  203).  That  the  re- 
 fusal of  a  present  constituted  a  great  insult  need 
 hardly  be  added. — E.  D. 
 
 GIHON  (Jirr'a  andjina  ;  Sept.  Tawcand  Tewj/). 
 This  word  is  from  the  root  IT'J,  and  signifies  '  a 
 bursting  forth  ;'  and  hence  it  may  be  applied  either 
 io  2i  fountain  or  a  j^'mj-w  flowing  from  it.  In  the 
 Bible  it  is  used  as  a  proper  name. 
 
 1.  Gihon,  one  of  the  rivers  of  Eden,  Gen.  ii.  13 
 (Paradise).  Arab  geographers  apply  the  name 
 Gihon,      .,,;sj,^j^,  to  the  river  Oxus. 
 
 2.  Gihon,  2l  fountain,  stream,  and  valley,  beside 
 Jerusalem.  This  name  has  given  rise  to  not  a 
 little  controversy  among  topographers.  We  shall 
 first  state  the  several  theories  which  have  been  ad- 
 vanced regarding  it,  and  then  endeavour  to  shew 
 its  real  import  and  locality,  (i)  Some  affirm  that 
 Gihon  was  the  ancient  name  of  the  Valley  of  Jeho- 
 shaphat,  and  that  it  is  compounded  of  the  words  N''J, 
 '  a  valley,'  and  jPI,  '  beauty.'  The  Fountain  of  the 
 Virgin,  which  rises  at  the  bottom  of  the  valley,  had 
 originally  flowed  into  the  brook  Kidron,  but  was 
 artificially  carried  by  a  conduit  across  the  ridge  of 
 Sion  (?)  to  the  pool  of  Siloam.  This  was  the 
 lower  water-course  of  Gihon.  More  to  the  north 
 was  anciently  another  spring,  called  the  upper 
 water-course  of  Gihon,  which  was  stopped  or 
 sealed  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  and  conveyed  to 
 the  west  side  of  the  City  of  David  (Lewin,  jcricsa- 
 lem,  p.  1 1,  seq.)  It  will  be  seen  that  in  this  theoiy 
 the  '  City  of  David'  is  identified  with  Moriah.  (2) 
 Others  state  that  Gihon  was  the  old  name  of  the 
 Tyropoean  valley  ;  that  the  Pool  of  Siloam  was  the 
 '  lower  Gihon  ;'  and  that  the  '  upper  Gihon'  was 
 on  the  table-land  north  of  the  Damascus  gate 
 (Williams,  Holy  City,  i.  124,  supplement).  (3) 
 Others  state  that  Gihon  was  a  name  sometimes 
 given  to  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  and  that  the  '  upper 
 outflow'  was  at  the  head  of  that  valley  west  of  the 
 city  (Robinson,  B.  K.,  i.  346).  (4)  An  English 
 engineer,  recently  sent  out  to  survey  the  waters  of 
 Jerusalem,  has  reported  that  there  are  not,  and 
 from  the  position  of  the  city,  and  the  character  of 
 the  strata,  there  could  not  be  any  perennial  foun- 
 tain in  or  around  Je.'usalem.  The  so-called  Foun- 
 tain of  the  Virgin,  lie  says,  is  supplied  by  the 
 leakage  from  the  great  cisterns  under  the  temple 
 area  ;  and  the  peculiar  taste  of  its  water  is  occa- 
 sioned by  stagnation  and  filtli  (MS.  Report).  If 
 this  be  so,  then  Gihon  could  neither  be  a  fountain 
 nor  a  perennial  stream. 
 
 Gihon  is  first  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
 coronation  of  Solomon.  Its  direction  is  not  speci- 
 fied ;  we  only  leam  that  it  was  without  the  city, 
 and  that  there  was  a  descent  to  it  from  Mount 
 Zion.  David  said  "■  Bring  him  down''  (DDTlin)  to 
 Gihon  (i  Kings  i.  33).  The  natural  supposition 
 from  the  whole  of  this  narrative  would  be  that 
 Gihon  was  a  valley  in  which  the  people  were 
 accustomed  to  assemble.  Josephus  calls  it  a  foun- 
 tain {Antiq.  vii.  14.  5).  In  2  Chron.  xxxii.  30  we 
 read  that  Hezekiah  stopped  the  upper  fountain 
 (''D''0  XVIO)  of  Gihon,  and  brought  it  straight 
 down  to  the  west  side  of  the  city  of  Da\dd.'  This 
 is  evidently  connected  with  ver.  3.  He  took  coun- 
 sel '  to  stop  the  waters  of  the  fountains  (n'l3"'yn) 
 which  were  without  the  city'  .  .  .  and  they 
 '  stopped  all  the  fountains,  and  the  brook  that  ran 
 through  the  midst  of  the  land.'  From  these  pas- 
 sages it  appears  that  Gihon  was  a  fountain,  and 
 that  a  stream  from  it  originally  ran  through  a  valley 
 of  the  same  name ;  and  farther,  that  the  fountain 
 was  so  situated  that  its  waters  could  be  conducted 
 by  a  subterranean  channel  into  the  city  of  David 
 on  the  west  side.  The  position  of  the  city  of  David 
 has  been  disputed  (Jerusalem)  ;  being  convinced, 
 however,  that  it  stood  on  the  western  hill,  we  are 
 forced  to  conclude  that  the  fountain  of  Gihon  lay 
 at  the  head  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom  ;  because 
 from  no  other  place  could  water  be  brought  to  the 
 west  side  of  the  city  of  David.  It  would  seem, 
 from  a  comparison  of  the  above  passages  with  2 
 Kings  xviii.  17  ;  Is.  vii.  3  ;  xxxvi.  2  ;  xxii.  9,  that 
 there  was  also  an  '  upper '  and  a  '  lower'  pool  in 
 the  valley  of  Gihon.  There  is  one  passage  which 
 at  first  sight  appears  to  militate  against  the  above 
 conclusions,  as  it  would  bring  Gihon  within  one  of 
 the  city  walls — '  And  after  this  he  (Manasseh) 
 built  a  wall  without  the  city  of  David,  on  the  west 
 side  of  Gihon,  in  the  valley,  even  to  the  entering  in 
 at  the  fish-gate'  (2  Chron.  xxxiii.  14).  The  Hebrew, 
 however,  may,  with  equal  accuracy,  be  rendered, 
 '  He  built  an  outer  wall  to  the  city  of  David  on 
 the  west,  to  (or  'towards')  Gihon  in  the  valley, 
 and  to  the  entering,'  etc.  (See  Bertheau,  ifi  loc.  ; 
 Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  245).  The  son  of  Sirach  thus 
 refers  to  Hezekiah's  work  :  '  He  fortified  his  city, 
 and  brought  in  water  into  the  midst  thereof ;  he 
 digged  the  hard  rock  with  iron,  and  made  wells 
 (cisterns)  for  water'  (Ecclus.  xlviii.  17).  Josephus 
 also  speaks  of  water  brought  into  the  tower  of 
 Hippicus,  which  could  only  have  come  from  the 
 west  {Bell.  Jud.  v.  7.  3). 
 
 The  results  of  our  examination  of  authorities 
 may  be  thus  stated.  The  upper  fountain  of  Gihon 
 was  in  the  head  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  and  a 
 stream  from  it  ran  down  through  that  valley.  The 
 fountain  was  covered  by  Hezekiah,  and  the  water 
 brought  into  the  city  of  David  by  a  concealed 
 channel,  partly  hewn  in  the  rock.  There  was  an 
 'upper'  and  a  'lovi^er'  pool  in  this  valley.  A 
 close  examination  of  the  place  tends  to  confirm 
 these  views.  No  fountain  has  yet  been  discovered, 
 nor  could  it  be  without  extensive  excavations  ;  but 
 a  section  of  an  old  aqueduct  was  laid  bare  when 
 sinking  the  foundations  of  the  new  church  on  the 
 northern  summit  of  Zion.  It  was  20  feet  beneath 
 the  surface,  in  places  excavated  in  the  rock,  and  its 
 direction  was  from  west  to  east  (Bartlett,  Walks 
 about  Jerusalem').  This  may  be  a  portion  of  Heze- 
 kiah's aqueduct  from  Gihon ;  and  it  may  have 
 carried  the  water  to  the  temple  area  as  well  as  to 
 
GIKATILLA  or  GEKATILIA 
 
 129 
 
 GIKATILLA 
 
 Zion.  In  the  yalley  of  Hinnom  are  still  two  great 
 '  pools  ;'  one  at  its  head  called  Birket  el-Mamilla  ; 
 another  west  of  the  present  Sion  gate  in  the  bottom 
 of  the  glen,  called  Birket-es-Sultan.  The  above  is 
 the  only  place  that  can  be  assigned  to  Gihon, 
 unless  we  remove  the  City  of  David  to  the  Temple 
 Mount,  as  has  been  done  by  Williams,  Lewin,  and 
 others.  For  a  full  discussion  of  the  question,  the 
 reader  is  referred  to  the  article  Jerusalem,  and  to 
 ^he  following  works  : — Robinson,  B.  R.,  i.  345, 
 seq.  ;  n.  242,  seij.  ;  Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  466, 
 seq.  ;  Lewin,  pp.  11,  40,  52;  Fergusson,  yerusa- 
 lem  ;  Barclay,  City  of  the  Great  King. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GIKATILLA     or     GEKATILIA     {S''i5''t:pJ 
 
 n?£3p!l),  or  Ibn  Gikatilla,  Isaac,  a  distinguished 
 Hebraist,  poet,   and  philosopher,   who  flourished 
 
 about  A.D.  1020.  n?t3p3  is  the  Spanish  Chiqui- 
 tilla  for  the  Hebrew  appellation  JDpn  or  ~l"'y^n, 
 i.  e.,  parvus  or  junior,  which  the  Jews,  from  a  very 
 early  date,  affixed  to  their  names  as  an  expression 
 of  modesty  (comp.  Mark  xv.  40 ;  Eph.  iii.  8 ;  Jeru- 
 salem Sota,  iv.  9  ;  Megilla,  32  a ;  Steinschneider, 
 Jewish  Literature,  Lond.  1857,  p.  343,  note  24). 
 The  fact  that  he  was  the  teacher  of  the  celebrated 
 philologian  Ibn  Ganach,  whose  taste  for  lexico- 
 graphy he  helped  to  develope,  renders  Gikatilla 
 specially  interesting  to  the  student  of  Biblical  exe- 
 gesis, and  makes  us  all  the  more  regret  that  none 
 of  his  linguistic  treatises  have  as  yet  come  to  light. 
 His  pupil  Ibn  Ganach  quotes  his  rendering  of  ^ZT\ 
 (Ps.  Ixviii.  10),  and  of  the  difficult  expression  TlQJ 
 (Prov.  vii.  17),  by  to  ?noisten.  Kimchi  quotes  him 
 in  Michlal,  art.  p^^,  and  Ibn  Balam  refers  to  him 
 in  his  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch.  Comp. 
 Steinschneider,  in  Hechahitz,  Lemberg  1853,  vol. 
 ii.  p.  61 ;  Ewaldand  'D\x\it's  Beitrdge  zur  Geschichte 
 der  Aeltesten  Aiislegung,  etc.,  Stuttgart  1844,  vol. 
 L  p.  127,  note  I,  vol.  ii.  p.  167. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GIKATILLA,  Moses  Ha-Cohen,  b.  Samuel, 
 also  called  Ibn  Gikatilla,  of  Cordova,  flourished 
 about  A.D.  1070  to  1 100,  and  was  a  pupil  of  the 
 celebrated  Ibn  Ganach,  whose  liberal  spirit  he 
 largely  imbibed  in  his  expositions  of  Scripture. 
 Though  M.  Gikatilla  was  one  of  the  most  extensive 
 commentators  and  grammarians,  and  one  whose 
 liberal  criticisms  must  have  exercised  a  most  power- 
 ful and  salutary  influence  upon  interpreters  and 
 lexicographers,  yet  none  of  his  numerous  produc- 
 tions have  as  yet  come  to  light.  Aid  that  we  now 
 possess  of  his  exegetical  and  linguistic  labours  are 
 small  fragments  which  have  been  preserved  in  the 
 works  of  the  most  eminent  commentators.  But 
 these  fragments  are  too  precious  to  be  lost  sight  of. 
 For  the  sake  of  the  Biblical  student,  we  shall 
 therefore  give  the  places  where  they  are  quoted  in 
 the  enumeration  of  M.  Gikatilla's  works.  His 
 exegetical  works  are  as  follows  : — 
 
 1.  A  Covimentaiy  on  the  Pentateuch,  fragments  of 
 which  are  given  by  Ibn  Ezra  in  his  commentary  on 
 Gen.  i.  26 ;  xxxvii.  25  ;  xli.  48  ;  xlii.  25 ;  xlix.  6 ; 
 Exod.  ii.  4;  x.  12;  xii.  2;  xiii.  9,  17;  xiv.  4; 
 XV.  2  ;  xvi.  15  ;  xix.  i  ;  xxii.  30 ;  Lev.  iv.  23  ;  vi. 
 %o ;  Num.  viii.  7  ;  xiv.  45  ;  xx.  8  ;  xxi.  30 ;  xxii. 
 t3  ;  xxviii.  4,  II  ;  Deut.  viii.  8. 
 
 2.  A  Commentary  on  Isaiah,  fragments  of  which 
 are  given  by  Ibn  Ezra  on  Is.  i.  6,  22  ;  li.  6 ;  iv. 
 2;  vi.  9;  viii.  10;  ix.  17  ;  x.  3;  xi.  i,  11,  14; 
 xviii.    2,    7  ;    XXV.    I      xxvi,   20 ;  xxvil  I,   3,   5 ; 
 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 xxviii.  6,  15,  29;  xxx.  25,  28  ;  xxxiii.  8  ;  xxxiv.  2  ; 
 XXXV.  I,  3  ;  xL  I  ;  xliv.  19  ;  xlix.  8  ;  Ii.  2  ;  Iii.  i, 
 18  ;  liv.  I,  II  ;  Ivi.  i  ;  Ixi.  I  ;  Ixiii.  2  ;  Ixv.  11  ; 
 Ixvi.  5,  1 1 ;  by  Samuel  Ibn  Tibbon  in  his  DVOH  lip*, 
 ed.  Presburg  1839,  p.  44;  and  by  Joseph  Albo  in 
 his  Ikarim,  part  i.  sec.  I. 
 
 3.  A  Comtnejita7y  on  Ezekiel,  quoted  by  D. 
 Kimchi  ia  his  commentary  on  Ezek.  iii.  13,  and  by 
 Menasseh  ben  Israel  in  his  Nishmath  Chajim. 
 
 4.  A  Cojtimentary  on  the  Minor  Prophets,  frag- 
 ments of  which  are  given  by  Ibn  Ezra  in  his  com. 
 mentary  on  Hosea  viii.  13  ;  x.  8  ;  Joel  i.  19  ;  iv. 
 I  ;  Amos  vii.  i ;  Obad.  vers.  17,  20  \.  Jonah  i.  6; 
 Micah  iv.  9 ;  Nahum  ii.  4  ;  Habak.  iii.  14  ;  Zeph. 
 ii.  I  ;  iii.  I,  8,  18,  19,  20 ;  Hag.  i.  i  ;  ii.  9  ;  Zech. 
 i.  8;  viii.  10  ;  x.  9  ;  xiii.  I. 
 
 5.  A  Commentaiy  on  the  Psalms,  fragments  of 
 which  are  given  by  Ibn  Ezra  in  his  commentary 
 on  the  Psalms.  Comp.  comment,  on  Ps.  i.  I ; 
 ii.  12;  iv.  3  ;  vi.  3  ;  vii.  5,  7,  8,  9  ;  viii.  2,  3  ;  ix. 
 7 ;  X.  3,  5,  9  ;  xi.  7 ;  xvi.  2,  6  ;  xxiv.  3  ;  xxv.  i  ; 
 xxvi.  I,  9;  xxvii.  2,  8;  xxviii.  7,  8,  9 ;  xxbc. 
 7,  9 ;  xxxi.  6,  7 ;  xxxii.  7,  10 ;  xxxiii.  2,  7  ; 
 xxxiv.  9  ;  XXXV.  20 ;  xxxvi.  7  ;  x.xxvii.  3  ;  xxxviiu 
 23  ;  xl.  7  ;  xlii.  I  ;  xlvii.  I  ;  xlviii.  1 3,  15  ;  xlbc.  7, 
 15  ;  1.  10,  II,  21  ;  liii.  2;  liv.  6;  Iv.  9,  16,  23; 
 Iviii.  2  ;  Ix.  7,  1 1  ;  Ixv.  6,  9 ;  Ixviii.  5,  9  ;  Ixix.  3, 
 19,  27,  28 ;  Ixxii.  9  ;  Ixxiii.  4,  7,  10,  21,  25  ;  bcxiv. 
 3,  5,  13,  14  ;  Ixxv.  7  ;  Ixxvi.  4,  5,  10,  12  ;  Ixxvii. 
 2,  5,  9,  II,  17,  20;  Ixxviii.  20,  39,  57  ;  Ixxix.  II ; 
 Ixxx.  6;  Ixxxiv.  4;  bcxxix.  I ;  xc.  I,  2,  8,  II  ; 
 xciv.  20 ;  ci.  2  ;  cvii.  43  ;  cviii.  2,  3  ;  ex.  3,  4  ; 
 cxi.  ID;  cxiii.  5;  cxv.  12,  16;  cxvi.  10,  13; 
 cxvii.  I  ;  cxviii.  6,  14 ;  cxix.  7,  9,  96,  133  ;  cxxii, 
 I  ;  cxxxii.  6  ;  cxxxiii.  3  ;  cxxxvii.  2,  3  ;  cxxxviii. 
 7  ;  cxxxix.  3,  II,  20  ;  cxl.  9  ;  cxii.  3,  5,  10 ;  cxlii. 
 5  ;  cxlix.  6  ;  Kimchi  on  Ps.  viii.  3  ;  Ixxvii.  5  ; 
 cxxxii.  6  ;  and  Lexicon  under  *Viy  and  ~\'DU,  and 
 Samuel  Ibn  Tibbon  D"'Dn  lip''  p.  88. 
 
 6.  A  Comme7itary  on  Job,  the  MS.  of  which  is 
 in  the  Bodleian,  Oxford  [Uri,  p.  45],  i.  p.  75. 
 Ewald  has  given  extracts  of  this  commentary  in  his 
 Beitrdge  zur  Geschichte  der  Aeltesten  Auslegung, 
 Stuttgart  1844,  vol.  i.  p.  77,  ff;  fragments  of  it 
 are  also  given  by  Ibn  Ezra  in  his  commentary  on 
 Job  iv.  10 ;  V.  5,  12;  vii.  5;  xi.  17;  xvii.  12; 
 xxxvi.  3 1  ;  D.  Kimchi  in  his  Lexicon,  art.  31T,  and 
 by  Maimonides  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Resiirrection. 
 
 M.  Gikatilla  also  wrote  a  gra?n?nafical  work,  en- 
 titled nU''pJl  D''"13t  "IDD,  which  treats  on  the  use 
 of  the  gender  in  Hebrew  nouns,  and  which  is  fre- 
 quently quoted  by  Ibn  Ezra,  and  translated  from 
 the  Arabic  into  Hebrew  the  grammatical  work  of 
 Chajug,  called  mjn  niTlIX  "IDD.     [Chajug.]^ 
 
 From  the  fragments  preserved  of  his  exegetical 
 works,  we  see  that  Gikatilla  was  both  a  profound 
 and  liberal  critic.  Unlike  most  of  the  interpreters 
 of  his  time,  he  endeavoured  to  explain  away  all  the 
 Messianic  prophecies  of  the  O.  T.  (comp.  Ibn 
 Ezra  oti  Is.  xi.),  and  assigned  the  authorship  of 
 some  Psalms  to  the  Babylonish  captivity  (comp. 
 Ibn  Ezra,  Ps.  xlii.)  at  the  time  when  both  the 
 Synagogue  and  the  Church  believed  that  the  whole 
 Psalter  proceeded  from  David.  Like  Saadia  he 
 frequently  departed  from  the  Massoretic  division  ot 
 
 the  text.     Thus  T'aaiDi',  at  the  end  of  verse  31  in 
 
 Job  xxxvi.,  he  took  over  to  D''DD  bv  in  the  following 
 verse,  i.e.,  '  Hegiveth  meat  in  abundance,  covering 
 the  hands  with  light'  (comp.  also  Habak.  iii.  2. 
 The  influence  whijch  this  critic  must  have  exercised 
 
GILBOA 
 
 130 
 
 GILEAD 
 
 upon  his  contemporaiy  and  subsequent  expositors 
 of  the  Bible,  may  be  judged  of  from  the  fact  that 
 the  eminent  Ibn  Ezra  quotes  his  works  so  largely. 
 We  have  therefore  deemed  it  a  duty,  owing  alike 
 to  Biblical  exegesis  and  to  this  remarkable  inter- 
 preter, carefully  to  read  through  the  commentaries 
 of  Ibn  Ezra,  and  collate  the  fragments  of  Gikatilla 
 therein  preserved.  And  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
 passages  given  in  this  article  are  more  numerous 
 than  those  collected  by  the  learned  and  painstaking 
 Leopold  Dukes  in  the  Beitrdge  zur  Aeltesten  Aus- 
 legiing,  Stuttgart  1844,  vol  ii.  p.  180,  ff.  We 
 would  only  add  that  Ibn  Ezra  also  quotes  Gikatilla 
 in  his  Commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  v.  12  ;  ix.  15  ; 
 X.  17,  18,  and  it  is  therefore  probable  that  he  also 
 commented  upon  this  book.  He  is  generally  quoted 
 by  Ibn  Ezra  as  ''TlSDn  fHSn  ntTD'l,  R.  Moses 
 Ha- Cohen  Ha-Sefardi,  i.  e.  the  Spaniard,  or  HtJ'O'"! 
 in^n,  R.  Mose  Ha- Cohen,  '•TlSDn  nC'D'n,^?.  Mose 
 Ha-Sffardi,  or  simply  ^t^'0'"l,  R.  Mose.  These 
 different  appellations  must  be  borne  in  mind  by  the 
 student  of  Hebrew  exegesis  to  identify  this  cele- 
 brated commentator. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 GILBOA,   usually  Mount   Gilboa   (yh^jn  in  ; 
 
 Sept.  Ttt  tpt]  TeX^ovi),  a  ridge  of  hills  rising  at 
 Jezreel  in  the  eastern  end  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
 and  extending  to  the  brow  of  the  Jordan  valley. 
 Upon  Gilboa  Saul  collected  the  Israelites  to  oppose 
 the  forces  of  the  Philistines  assembled  at  Shunem. 
 The  result  of  the  battle  is  well  known.  Saul  and 
 his  three  sons  were  slain  upon  the  mountain..  The 
 news  was  carried  to  David,  and  he  gave  expre'^sion 
 to  his  grief  in  one  of  the  most  beautiful  and  pathetic 
 odes  in  the  Bible.  In  it  he  thus  apostrophizes 
 Gilboa — '  Ye  mountains  of  Gilboa,  let  there  be  no 
 dew,  neither  rain  upon  you,  nor  fields  of  offerings  ; 
 for  there  the  shield  of  the  mighty  is  vilely  cast 
 Eway,  the  shield  of  Saul,  as  though  he  had  not 
 been  anointed  with  oil'  (2  .Sam.  i.  21).  It  is  some- 
 what singular  that  Gilboa  is  never  once  mentioned 
 in  Scripture  except  in  connection  with  this  event ; 
 and  it  is  not  afterwards  alluded  to  in  histoiy.  The 
 incidental  references  in  the  Bible  narrative,  and  in 
 the  fuller  account  furnished  by  Josephus  (Antiq. 
 vii.  14)  leave  no  doubt  as  to  its  position.  Jerome 
 informs  us  that  Gilboa  lay  six  miles  south  of  Scy- 
 thopolis  ;  and  that  upon  it  was  a  large  village 
 called  Gellnis  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Gelbtie),  which  has 
 been  identified  with  the  modern  village  of  Jelbon 
 (Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  316).  Gilboa  was  known  to 
 the  Crusaders,  and  William  of  Tyre  mentions  a 
 noted  fountain  at  the  foot  of  the  range  (Histor. 
 xxii.    6 ;  Reland,    p.  863  ;  Robinson,  B.  R. ,  ii. 
 
 325)- 
 
 A  knowledge  of  the  topography  of  this  region 
 gives  great  vividness  to  several  of  the  Scripture 
 narrative^s  ;  but  especially  to  that  of  the  fatal  battle 
 in  which  Saui  fell.  About  six  miles  north  of 
 Gilboa  is  a  parallel  range  of  nearly  equal  elevation 
 and  length,  anciently  called  the  'hill  of  Moreh' 
 (Judg.  vii.  i),  but  now  Jebel-ed-Duhy  (and  by 
 travellers  'Little  Hcrmon').  Between  the  two 
 ranges  lies  the  beautiful  valley  of  Jezreel,  having  at 
 its  eastern  end,  overlooking  the  Jordan,  the  mound 
 and  ruins  of  Bethshean.  At  the  western  extremity 
 of  Gilboa  stood  the  city  of  Jezreel  ;  and  about  half 
 a  mile  east  of  it,  close  to  the  foot  of  the  hill,  is  the 
 large  fountain  of  Jezreel  or  Harod  (Judg.  vii.  1), 
 now  called  Ain  Jalud.  The  spring  may  perhaps 
 have  given  the  range  its  name  Gilboa  ('  Bubbling 
 
 Fountain;'  from  pj  and  J?"I2;  Gesenius,  Thesaurits, 
 s.  V.)  Opposite  these  on  the  other  side  of  the 
 valley,  and  near  the  base  of  Moreh,  stands  Shunem; 
 and  away  behind  the  latter  hill,  hidden  from  view, 
 is  the  village  of  Endor. 
 
 The  Philistines  encamped  on  the  north  side  of 
 the  valley  at  Shunem  ;  and  Saul  took  up  a  posi- 
 tion by  the  fountain  of  Jezreel,  at  the  base  of  Gil- 
 boa (i  Sam.  xxviii.  4  ;  xxix.  i).  From  the  brow 
 of  the  hill  above  the  camp  Saul  had  a  full  view  of 
 the  enemy,  and  he  was  struck  with  terror  at  their 
 numbers  (xxviii.  5).  The  position  he  had  chosen 
 was  a  bad  one.  There  is  a  gradual  descent  in  the 
 valley  from  Shunem  to  the  base  of  Gilboa  at  the 
 fountain,  while  immediately  behind  it  the  hill  rises 
 steep  and  rocky.  The  Philistines  had  all  the  ad- 
 vantage of  the  gentle  descent  for  their  attack,  and 
 both  front  and  flanks  of  the  Israelites  were  ex- 
 posed, and  retreat  almost  impossible  up  the  steep 
 hill  side.  On  the  night  before  the  battle  Saul 
 went  to  Endor.  The  battle  seems  to  have  beg-un 
 early  in  the  morning,  when  the  king  was  wearied 
 and  dispirited  (xxviii.  19).  The  Israelites  were 
 broken  at  once  lay  the  fierce  onset  of  the  enemy, 
 and  the  slaughter  was  terrible  as  they  attempted 
 to  flee  up  the  sides  of  Gilboa.  While  the  terror- 
 stricken  masses  were  clambering  up  the  rugged 
 slopes,  they  were  completely  exposed  to  the  arrows 
 of  the  Philistine  archers.  '  They  fell  down  slain 
 in  Mount  Gilboa'  (xxxi.  l)  ;  'The  Philistines  fol- 
 lowed hard  upon  Saul  and  upon  his  sons,'  pro- 
 bably when  they  tried  to  rally  their  troops.  The 
 three  sons  fell  beside  their  father  ;  '  and  the  battle 
 went  sore  against  Saul,  and  the  archers  hit  him ; 
 and  he  was  sore  wounded  of  the  archers '  (ver.  3). 
 David  has  caught  the  peculiarity  of  the  position  in 
 his  ode  :  '  The  beauty  of  Israel  is  slain  upon  the 
 high  places;'  and,  'Jonathan,  thou  wast  slain 
 upon  thine  high  places'  (2  Sam.  i.  19,  25).  The 
 stripping  and  mutilating  of  the  slain  is  characteris- 
 tic of  the  Arab  tribes  to  this  day,  and  the  writer 
 witnessed  some  fearful  instances  of  it  in  1858  near 
 this  same  spot  (Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  355). 
 The  Philistines  took  the  body  of  Saul  and  fastened 
 it  to  the  wall  of  the  neighbouring  fortress  of  Beth- 
 shean, from  whence  it  was  snatched  by  a  i&vr 
 brave  men  from  Jabesh  Gilead  (Stanley,  i^".  and 
 
 P;  330-37)- 
 
 The  ridge  of  Gilboa  is  bleak  and  bare.  The 
 soil  is  scanty,  and  the  gray  limestone  rocks  crop 
 out  in  jagged  cliffs  and  naked  crowns,  giving  the 
 whole  a  look  of  painful  barrenness.  One  would 
 almost  think,  on  looking  at  it,  that  David's  words 
 were  prophetic  (Van  de  Velde,  ii.  369).  The 
 highest  point  of  Gilboa  is  said  to  have  an  eleva- 
 tion of  about  2200  feet  above  the  sea,  and  1200 
 above  the  valley  of  Jezreel  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
 1 78)  .-J.  L.  P. 
 
 GILEAD  (TJ?i53  ;    Sept.  TaKadd),   a  mountain 
 
 range  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  extending  from 
 the  parallel  of  Rabboth-Ammon  on  the  south,  to 
 the  river  Hieromax  on  the  north.  The  same  name 
 was  given  to  the  province  lying  between  these 
 parallels.  With  the  exception  of  the  narrow  strip 
 of  plain  along  the  bank  of  the  Jordan,  the  moun- 
 tains cover  the  whole  region  ;  hence  it  is  some- 
 times called  'Mount  Gilead'  (Deut.  iii.  12;  Jer. 
 1.  19);  sometimes  'the  Land  of  Gilead'  (Deut. 
 xxxiv.  I  ;  Num.  xxxii.  i,  29  ;  Zech.  x.  10)  ;  and 
 sometimes  simply  '  Gilead '  (Num.  xxxii.  40  ;  Josh. 
 
GILEAD 
 
 131 
 
 GILEAD 
 
 xvii.  I  ;  Amos  i.  3).  The  inhabitants  were  called 
 'Gileadites'  (Judg.  x.  3  ;  2  Kings  xv.  25). 
 
 The  origin  of  the  name  is  doubtless  10  hs  sought 
 for  in  the  physical  aspect  of  the  country.     The 
 
 Hebrew  1i??J,    like  the  Arabic  iX»lj>->  signifies 
 
 'hard'  or  'rugged'  (Gesenius,  Thesaurus ;  Frey- 
 tag,  Lex.  Arab.,  s.   v.)  ;  and  the  whole  province 
 
 may  be  justly  termed  lypjn,  '  the  rugged.'  Some 
 liave  opposed  this  view  on  the  ground  that  a  dif- 
 ferent etymology  is  given  in  Gen.  xxxi.  47.  But 
 every  Oriental  scholar  will  see  how  easily  the  two 
 can  be   reconciled.     The   original  name   of    the 
 
 mountain  was  lypj  ;  'Jacob  set  his  face  toward 
 
 the  mount  Gilead'  (Gen.  xxxi.  21).  Laban  over- 
 took him  there.  They  made  a  covenant.  Jacob 
 thereupon   raised   a    heap    of   stones   and    called 
 
 it  Galeed ;  that  is,  'the  heap,'  73,  'of  witness,' 
 *1J? ;  thus  making  the  name  of  the  mountain  ap- 
 ply, by  a  slight  change  of  pronunciation,  to  the 
 heap  he  had  erected.  Such  a  play  upon  words  is 
 of  common  occurrence  in  the  East  even  yet ;  and 
 the  Arabs  delight  in  it.  The  exact  site  of  this 
 Galeed  is  not  known.  It  could  not  have  been  far 
 from  Mahanaim.  It  was  doubtless  on  one  of  those 
 rounded  eminences  to  the  northward,  which  over- 
 look the  broad  plateau  of  Bashan  (Gen.  xxxi.  25  ; 
 xxxii.  I,  2). 
 
 We  next  hear  of  Gilead  on  the  approach  of  the 
 Israelites  to  Palestine.  Its  rich  pastures  attracted 
 the  attention  of  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad, 
 who  had  'a  very  great  multitude  of  cattle.'  They 
 asked  Moses  to  give  them  their  inheritance  there, 
 and  he  consented  (Num.  xxxii.  I,  29,  sq.)  The 
 Amorites  under  the  rule  of  Sihon,  who  reigned  in 
 Heshbon,  then  possessed  Gilead  as  far  north  as 
 the  Jabbok  (xxxii.  33,  39 ;  Josh.  xii.  3),  The 
 northern  section,  'half-Gilead,'  as  it  is  called  in 
 the  Bible,  was  included  with  Bashan  in  the  king- 
 dom of  Og  (xii.  6),  and  was  divided  between  Gad 
 and  Manasseh  (Gad).  The  northern  boundary  of 
 Gilead  is  not  defined  by  any  ancient  writer.  All 
 we  leam  from  the  Bible  is  that  one  half  of  it  was 
 south,  and  the  other  half  north  of  the  Jabbok.  The 
 features  of  the  country  assist  us.  The  mountain 
 range  terminates  at  the  river  Hieromax.  North  of 
 it  is  the  plateau  of  Bashan,  the  side  of  which 
 rises  about  2500  feet  above  the  deep  Jordan  val- 
 ley, and  thus  appears  from  the  west  like  a  con- 
 tinuation of  the  Gilead  range.  Hence  the  error 
 of  Eusebius  in  stating  that  the  mountains  of  Gilead 
 joined  Lebanon  {Oiwmast.,s.  \.)  Josephus  states 
 that  the  city  of  Gadara  was  in  Gilead,  and  Gamala 
 in  Gaulanitis,  a  part  of  Bashan.  The  former  city 
 is  only  some  two  miles  south  of  the  Hieromax, 
 and  the  latter  about  four  north  (Joseph.  Aiitiq. 
 xiii.  13.  5  ;  Vita,  37  ;  Bell.  Jud.  m.  3,  5).  We 
 may  therefore  conclude  that  the  Hieromax  se- 
 parated the  ancient  provinces  of  Gilead  and  Ba- 
 shan. Reland  is  consequently  mistaken  when  he 
 says,  '  Initium  Basanis  ducitur  a  Machanaim '  {Pal. 
 200) ;  and  Bochart  is  still  more  mistaken  in  his 
 statement — '  Basan  ....  regio  est  trans  Jor- 
 danem  inter  torrefttes  Jabok  et  Arnon''  {Opera,  ii. 
 p.  305  ;  see  this  point  discussed  at  length  in 
 Kitto's  Jojirnal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  July  1854). 
 
 There  are  two  passages  of  Scripture  in  which  the 
 name  Gilead  seems  to  be  taken  in  a  wider  sense. 
 
 Thus,  in  Deut.  xxxiv.  i,  it  is  said  that  when  Moses 
 went  to  the  top  of  Pisgah,  '  the  Lord  shewed  him 
 all  the  land  of  Gilead  unto  Dan  ;'  yet  Gilead,  as  has 
 been  seen,  did  not  reach  to  within  thirty  miles  of 
 Dan.  It  is  evident  that  a  popular  mode  of  ex- 
 pression is  here  adopted,  the  name  of  the  principal 
 part  being  put  for  the  whole.  So  also  in  Josh. 
 XX.  8  ;  Judg.  V.  17,  etc. 
 
 The  physical  character  of  the  country  and  the 
 peculiarity  of  its  position  had  a  marked  effect  on 
 the  inhabitants  of  Gilead,  and  still  have  to  this  day. 
 The  Gadites  retained  their  old  pastoral  and  semi- 
 nomad  habits,  while  their  brethren  west  of  the 
 Jordan  settled  down  in  cities  and  farms.  Gilead 
 was  border  land  ;  exposed  along  the  eastern  fron- 
 tier to  the  unceasing  raids  of  the  desert  tribes,  and 
 on  the  north  to  the  amiies  of  Syria.  The  people 
 thus  situated  became  inured  to  fatigue,  danger,  and 
 war.  Jephthah,  the  Gileadite,  played  a  distin- 
 guished part  in  the  time  of  the  Judges,  leading  on 
 his  followers  after  the  manner  of  an  Arab  Sheikh 
 (Judg.  xi.)  ;  and  some  of  David's  noted  warriors 
 were  trained  amid  these  mountains  (i  Chron.  xii. 
 8,  15).  Ramoth-Gilead  became  the  gathering- 
 place  and  stronghold  of  the  tribes  beyond  the 
 river,  and  the  scene  of  many  a  fierce  conflict 
 (I  Kings  xxii.  4  ;  2  Kings  viii.  28).  The  Gilead- 
 ites sustained  the  first  onslaught  of  the  great  As- 
 syrian conqueror,  and  became  the  first  captives 
 (xv.  29).  Gilead  was  a  favourite  asylum  for  refu- 
 gees. When  Abner  rallied  the  Israelites  around 
 Ishbosheth,  he  brought  him  over  the  Jordan  to 
 Mahanaim  (2  Sam.  ii.  8)  ;  and  thither  David  fled 
 from  Absalom  (see  Stanley,  .S".  and  P.,  322).  The 
 reason  was  twofold — Gilead  was  a  great  natural 
 stronghold  where  invasion  and  apprehension  were 
 equally  difficult ;  and  the  Gileadites,  with  that 
 genuine  hospitality  which  characterises  the  Arab 
 tribes,  were  ever  ready  to  give  a  home  and  a  wel- 
 come to  the  stranger. 
 
 After  the  close  of  the  O.  T.  history  the  name 
 Gilead  is  seldom  mentioned.  It  seems  to-  have 
 soon  passed  out  of  use  ;  for  though  referred  to  a 
 few  times  by  the  apocryphal  writers  (i  Maccab.  v.  9, 
 20,  36),  by  Josephus  {Antiq.  i.  19.  11  ;  Bell.  Jiid. 
 ii.  3.  3),  and  by  Eusebius  {Onomast.  1.  c.)  ;  yet  it 
 seems  only  to  be  borrowed  from  the  Bible.  The 
 allusions  are  all  vague,  and  those  who  make  them 
 had  evidently  no  definite  knowledge  of  the  country. 
 In  Josephus  and  in  the  N.  T.  the  names  Peraa  and 
 TripavTov  'lopSdvov,  are  used  instead  of  Gilead  {Bell. 
 Jiid.  iii.  3.  3  ;  Matt.  iv.  15  ;  John  i.  28)  ;  and  the 
 country  is  sometimes  spoken  of  by  Josephus  as 
 divided  into  small  provinces,  called  after  their  capi- 
 tals, Gadara,  Bella,  etc.,  in  which  Greek  colonists 
 had  established  themselves  during  the  reign  of  the 
 Seleucidae  (Joseph.  Bell.  ftid.  iii.  3.  i). 
 
 Gilead  is  now  divided  into  two  provinces,  sepa- 
 rated by  the  Jabboc.  The  northern  is  called 
 yebel  Ajlun,  and  the  southern  Jebeljilad,  in  which 
 we  can  recognize  the  ancient  name.  The  inhabi- 
 tants, like  the  old  Gadites,  are  semi-nomads,  whose 
 wealth  consists  in  flocks  and  herds.  Like  them, 
 too,  they  are  harassed  by  the  desert  tribes,  they  are 
 inured  to  arms,  and  they  are  noted  for  their  hos- 
 pitality. The  capital  of  the  whole  countiy  is  es- 
 Salt,  which  occupies  the  site  of  Ramoth-Gilead 
 (Burckhardt,  Trav.  271  Syr.  ;  Buckingham,  Arab 
 Tribes;  Lord  Lindsay's  Travels;  Lr by  and  Mangles). 
 
 The  great  body  of  the  range  of  Gilead  is  Jura 
 limestone,  but  there  are  also  occasional  veins  of 
 
GILGAL 
 
 132 
 
 GILL 
 
 sandstone.  The  oak  and  terebinth  flourish  on  the 
 former,  and  the  pine  on  the  latter.  The  average 
 elevation  of  the  mountains  is  about  2500  feet;  but 
 as  seen  from  the  west  they  appear  much  higher, 
 owing  to  the  depression  of  the  Jordan  valley.  The 
 summit  of  the  range  is  singularly  uniform,  resem- 
 bling a  great  wall  ;  yet  the  sides  are  deeply  seamed 
 with  ravines.  The  pastures  are  everywhere  luxu- 
 riant ;  and  the  wooded  heights  and  winding  glens 
 clothed  with  tangled  shrubbery,  and  having  here 
 and  there  open  glades  and  flat  meadows  of  green 
 turf,  present  a  marked  contrast  to  the  general 
 bareness  of  western  Palestine.  '  In  passing  through 
 the  country  one  can  scarcely  get  over  the  impres- 
 sion that  he  is  roaming  through  an  English  park. 
 The  graceful  hills,  the  rich  vales,  the  luxuriant  her- 
 bage, the  bright  wild-flowers,  the  plantations  of 
 ever-green  oak,  pine,  and  arbutus  ;  now  a  tangled 
 thicket,  and  now  sparsely  scattered  over  the  gentle 
 slope,  as  if  intended  to  reveal  its  beauty  ;  the  little 
 rivulets  fringed  with  oleander,  at  one  place  running 
 lazily  between  alluvial  banks,  at  another  dasliing 
 madly  down  rocky  ravines.  Such  are  the  features 
 of  the  mountains  of  Gilead.  And  then,  too,  we 
 have  the  cooing  of  the  wood-pigeon,  the  hoarse 
 call  of  the  partridge,  the  incessant  hum  of  myriads 
 of  insects,  and  the  cheerful  chirp  of  grasshoppers 
 to  give  hfe  to  the  scene.  Add  to  all  the  crumbling 
 ruins  of  town,  village,  and  fortress,  clinging  to  the 
 mountain-side  or  crowning  its  summit,  and  you 
 have  a  picture  of  the  country  between  es-Salt  and 
 Gerasa'  (Handbook  for  S.  and  F.,  p.  310).  Such 
 a  picture,  too,  illustrates  at  once  the  fertility  as- 
 cribed to  it  by  Jeremiah  (xxii.  6  ;  1.  19),  and  the 
 judgments  pronounced  against  it  by  Amos  (i.  3,  13). 
 — J.  L.  P. 
 
 GILGAL  63^2  ;   Sept.   Vo\-^6\,   TaXydX,  and 
 
 Tak-yaXa),  a  place  in  the  plain  of  the  Jordan,  on  the 
 right  bank  of  the  river,  and  on  '  the  east  border  of 
 Jericho'  (Josh.  iv.  19).  It  was  the  first  encampment 
 of  the  Israelites  in  Palestine,  where  they  pitched 
 their  tents  immediately  after  the  miraculous  passage 
 of  the  river,  and  where  they  set  up  the  twelve  stones 
 brought  out  of  the  river's  bed.  It  would  appear 
 that  Gilgal  was  the  name  of  the  place  before  the 
 Exodus,  for  Moses  describes  the  Canaanites  as 
 dwelling  '  over  against  Gilgal '  (Deut.  xi.  30).  The 
 difficulties  connected  with  this  passage  have  been 
 already  explained  under  Ebal.  Keil  supposes 
 this  Gilgal  to  have  been  near  Shechem.  (See  Comm. 
 on  Josh.,  pp.  219,  232).  In  Josh.  v.  7  we  read 
 that  after  the  Israelites  had  been  circumcised  '  the 
 Lord  said  unto  Joshua,    '  This  day  have   I  rolled 
 
 away  ^T\h\)  the  reproach  of  Egypt  from  off"  you.' 
 Wherefore  tlie  name  of  the  place  is  called  Gilgal 
 unto  this  day.'  The  meaning  does  not  seem  to  be 
 that  a  new  name  was  given ;  but  rather  that  a  new 
 meaning  and  significancy  were  attached  to  the  old 
 name.  The  word  Gilgal  m&M\i,  a  'circle,'  and  also 
 a  '  rolling  away.'  A  similar  play  upon  a  word  was 
 noticed  in  the  case  of  Gii.ead  ;  and  Bethal  is  an 
 example  of  an  old  name  having  attached  to  it  a 
 new  significancy  (Gen.  xxviii.  19  ;  xxxv.  15).  This 
 explanation,  sim]>le,  natural,  and  in  full  accordance 
 with  the  genius  of  the  Oriental  languages  and  the 
 literary  tastes  of  the  pco]ile,  removes  at  once  the 
 hosts  of  infidel  objections  that  have  been  brought 
 against  the  passage  (Keil,  ifi  loc.) 
 
 The  camp  of  Gilgal  became  permanent;  and 
 
 probably  in  grateful  memorial  of  the  Lord's  mercy 
 in  bringing  them  into  the  land,  and  of  his  appear- 
 ance there  to  Joshua  as  '  captain  of  the  host '  (Josh. 
 V.  14),  the  people  made  it  for  centuries  the  great 
 gathering  place  of  the  tribes  (ix.  6  ;  x.  6,  43).  The 
 Tabernacle  remained  there  during  the  long  wars 
 in  the  interior,  and  until  it  was  removed  to  Shiloh 
 (xviii.  i).  Gilgal  was  one  of  the  three  assize  towns 
 in  which  Samuel  judged  (i  Sam.  vii.  16)  ;  and  in 
 its  sacred  groves  were  celebrated  the  solemn  as- 
 semblies of  Samuel  and  Saul,  and  of  David  on  his 
 return  from  exile  (Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  p.  302  ;  i 
 Sam.  X.  8;  xi.  14 ;  xiii.  4,  sq. ;  xv.  12,  sq.;  2  Sam. 
 xix.  15).  After  the  erection  of  the  temple  Gilgal 
 appears  to  have  been  neglected.  Probably  when 
 Jericho  was  rebuilt  the  traditional  sanctity  of  Gil- 
 gal was  transferred  to  it,  and  there  a  school  of  the 
 prophets  was  established  and  remained  until  a  late 
 period  (2  Kings  ii.  5 — ^Jericho).  Gilgal  was  de- 
 nounced by  the  prophets  because  of  the  sins  com- 
 mitted there  at  the  high  place  (Hos.  iv.  15  ;  Amos 
 iv.  4 ;  v.  5).  These  idolatrous  practices  are  spe- 
 cially mentioned  by  Epiphanius  and  others  (Reland, 
 p.  782,  sq.)  The  utter  desolation  of  its  site,  and 
 the  whole  surrounding  region,  shews  how  fearfuUy 
 the  prophecies  have  been  fulfilled. 
 
 The  site  of  Gilgal  is  fixed  by  Josephus  fifty  fur- 
 longs from  the  Jordan  and  ten  from  Jericho  (Atitiq. 
 v.  I.  4).  Jerome's  description  agrees  with  this  ; 
 and  he  farther  states  that  in  his  day  it  was  desert 
 [Onomast.,  s.  v.  Galgala).  These  specifications 
 shew  that  Gilgal  must  have  been  at,  or  very  near, 
 the  site  of  the  modern  village  of  Riha  {Handbook 
 for  S.  and  P.,  p.  196).  Arculf  locates  it  five  miles 
 from  Jericho,  and  says  a  church  stood  upon  the 
 spot  {Early  Travels  in  Pal.,  p.  7).  It  is  probable, 
 however,  that  the  ecclesiastical  architects  had  not 
 been  very  particular  about  topography  (Robinson, 
 B.  R.,  i.  557). 
 
 2.  Gilgal,  a  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites,  appears 
 to  have  been  situated  on  the  western  plain,  as  it  is 
 connected  with  the  '  region  of  Dor  (Josh  xii.  23). 
 Jerome  places  it  six  miles  north  of  Antipatris  (now 
 Kefr  Saba).  The  modern  village  of  yHj-flleh, 
 about  four  miles  south  of  Antipatris,  may  mark 
 its  site,  as  it  bears  its  name  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Gelgel, 
 Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  243). 
 
 3.  Gilgal  in  the  mountains.  A  Gilgal  is  men- 
 tioned in  2  Kings  ii.  i  ;  and  it  is  said  of  Elijah  and 
 Elisha  that  they  we7it  dotvn  from  it  to  Bethel.  It 
 must,  consequently,  have  been  different  from  the 
 Gilgal  in  the  plain  of  Jericho,  which  is  more  than 
 3000  feet  below  Bethel  (ver.  2).  Also  in  Neh.  xii. 
 29  we  read  of  Gilgal  in  connection  with  Geba. 
 These  may  perhaps  be  identical  with  the  Galgala 
 supposed  by  Jerome  and  Eusebius  to  be  near  to 
 Bethel  {Onomast.  s.  v. )  ;  Keil  {Commentary  on 
 Joshua,  p.  219),  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir,  316),  and 
 others,  would  identify  it  with  the  village  oi  Jiljilia, 
 six  miles  north  of  Bethel.  Keil  argues  that  this 
 was  the  site  of  the  permanent  camp,  and  the  place 
 where  the  tabernacle  was  set  up ;  but  his  proofs 
 are  not  conclusive  (See,  however,  Keil  on  Joshua, 
 pp.  219,  232).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 GILL,  John,  Dr.,  was  born  at  Kettering  in 
 Northamptonshire,  Nov.  23,  O.  S.  1697.  He 
 was  educated  at  the  grammar  school  in  his  native 
 town,  and  though  only  eleven  years  old  when  he 
 left  it,  was  distinguished  for  his  proficiency  in 
 classical  learning.     He  acquired  a  knowledge  ol 
 
GILOH 
 
 133 
 
 GITTITES 
 
 Hebrew  by  the  help  of  Buxtorf's  grammar  and 
 lexicon.  In  1716  he  joined  the  Baptist  Church  at 
 Kettering,  and  shortly  after  became  assistant 
 preacher.  In  1 7 19  he  was  chosen  pastor  of  the 
 church  at  Horsley  Down,  Southwark,  and  retained 
 that  office  till  his  death,  Oct.  14,  1771.  During 
 the  whole  of  his  life  he  was  an  indefatigable  stu- 
 dent. His  literary  reputation  is  founded  chiefly 
 on  his  Rabbinical  learning,  in  which  he  had  few 
 equals.  His  Exposition  of  the  Nno  Testament,  in 
 3  vols,  folio,  appeared  in  1746- 1748;  his  Exposi- 
 tion of  the  Prophets,  with  a  Dissertation  on  the  Apo- 
 cryphal Writings,  in  1 757-1 758;  and  the  Exposi- 
 tioii  from  Gettesis  to  Solomon'' s  Song,  4  vols,  folio, 
 1 763- 1 766.  He  had  previously  published  an  ex- 
 position of  Solomon's  Song  in  1728,  with  a  trans- 
 lation of  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase  ;  a  second  edition 
 appeared  in  1751,  and  a  third  in  1767,  with  many 
 additions,  but  without  the  Targum.  His  other 
 works  connected  with  Biblical  literature  are  :  The 
 Prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  respecting  the  Mes- 
 siah, 1728,  in  answer  to  Collins;  A  Dissertation 
 coticertting  the  afttiqiiity  of  the  Hebrew  LaJiguage, 
 Letters,  Vcnvel-points,  and  Accents,  1767;  A  disser- 
 tation on  the  Baptism  of  ye^vish  Proselytes,  ap- 
 pended to  his  Body  of  Divi?tiiy,  3  vols.  4to,  1 770. 
 His  miscellaneous  works,  including  sermons  and 
 several  tracts  relating  to  infant  baptism,  were  re- 
 published after  his  death  in  3  vols.  4to.  He  fur- 
 nished Dr.  Kennicott  with  a  collection  of  the  pas- 
 sages from  the  O.  T.  quoted  in  the  Talmuds  and 
 the  Rabboth.— J.  E.  R. 
 
 GILOH  (rii^a  ;  Sept.  TijXciM ;  Alex.  T-rikuv  and 
 FwXa),  a  town  of  Judah,  one  of  a  group  which  lay 
 on  the  declivities  of  the  mountain-range  south  of 
 Hebron  (Josh.  xv.  51).  It  was  the  native  place  of 
 Ahitophel.  Absalom,  when  meditating  rebellion, 
 asked  permission  to  go  and  sacrifice  in  Hebron. 
 Whilst  there  he  sent  for  Ahitophel  the  Gilonile, 
 David's  counsellor,  who  had  perhaps  been  banished 
 for  some  cause  from  the  court,  and  was  now  in  dis- 
 grace at  his  own  city  (2  Sam.  xv.  7,  sq.)  This 
 would  account  for  the  otherwise  inexplicable  fact 
 of  a  man  so  famed  for  his  sagacity  joining  the  wild 
 adventure  of  the  rebel  son,  and  recommending  such 
 an  abominable  line  of  conduct  (xvi.  21).  Giloli 
 was  the  scene  of  Ahitophel's  miserable  death.  Its 
 site  is  unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GIMZO  (iTOa;  Sept.  ro/ifc6),   a  town   of  the 
 
 Shephelah,  or  '  low  country'  of  Judah,  captured 
 by  the  Philistines,  with  Ajalon  and  other  places, 
 in  the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  18).  It  has 
 been  identified  with  the  large  village  of  Jimzu, 
 situated  on  an  eminence  four  miles  east  of  Ramleh, 
 on  the  road  to  Beth-horon  and  Jerusalem.  It  is 
 about  nine  miles  from  Ajalon.  The  only  traces  of 
 antiquity  in  it  are  large  caves,  hewn  in  the  lime- 
 stone rock,  along  the  sides  of  the  little  hill,  and 
 now  used  as  granaries  (Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  249  ; 
 Handbook  for  S.  attd  P.,  279). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GIN.     [Fowling.] 
 
 GIR  ("I"*!!  or  13).     This  word  is  used  Is.  xxvii. 
 
 9,  and  is  there  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  by  chalk 
 OJ  ""JaX,  'chalk  stones').  The  Syr.  supports  this, 
 
 giving  I  ■  N'^i  {Kel^Jio,  calx),  as  the  equivalent ; 
 so  also  the  Arab.  The  word  seems  to  be  derived 
 from  iy,  to  effervesce,  and  properly  to  designate  the 
 
 limestone  or  rock  ;  '  the  broken  gir-stones  '  of  the 
 passage  above  cited  are  the  fragments  of  limestone 
 prepared,  for  being  burnt  into  lime.  Limestone 
 abounds  in  Palestine  ;  indeed,  the  entire  geological 
 formation  of  the  country  is,  with  few  exceptions, 
 calcareous.  This  gives  occasion  to  many  of  the 
 peculiar  features  of  the  country,  and  has  not  been 
 without  historical  results  (See  Stanley,  Sin.  ana 
 Pal.,  p.  146,  ff.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 GIRDLE.     [Abnet  ;  Armour;  Dress.] 
 
 GIRGASHITES    ^tT\l  ;    Sept.    T^p-^eaaXoC), 
 
 one  of  the  families  of  Canaan,  who  are  supposed 
 to  have  been  settled  in  that  part  of  the  countrj 
 which  lay  to  the  east  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth 
 This  conclusion  is  founded  on  ihe  identity  between 
 the  word  Vep^eaaXoi,  which  the  Septuagint  gives 
 for  Girgashites,  and  that  by  which  Matthew  (viii. 
 28)  indicates  the  land  of  the  Gergesenes.  But  as 
 this  last  reading  rests  on  a  conjecture  of  Origen, 
 on  which  little  reliance  is  now  placed  [Gadara], 
 the  conclusion  drawn  from  it  has  no  weight,  al- 
 though the  fact  is  possible  on  other  grounds.  In- 
 deed, the  older  reading,  '  Gerasenes,'  has  sufficient 
 resemblance  to  direct  the  attention  to  the  country 
 beyond  the  Jordan. 
 
 The  Girgashites  are  conjectured  to  have  been  a 
 part  of  the  large  family  of  the  Hivites,  as  they  are 
 omitted  in  nine  out  of  ten  places  in  which  the 
 nations  or  famihes  of  Canaan  are  mentioned,  while 
 in  the  tenth  they  are  mentioned,  and  the  Hivites 
 omitted.  Josephus  states  that  nothing  but  the 
 name  of  the  Girgashites  remained  in  his  time  [An- 
 tiq.  i.  6.  2).  In  the  Jewish  Commentaries  of  R. 
 Nachman,  and  elsewhere,  the  Girgashites  are  de- 
 scribed as  having  retired  into  Africa,  fearing  the 
 power  of  God  ;  and  Procopius,  in  his  Uistoty  oj 
 the  Vandals,  mentions  an  ancient  inscription  in 
 Mauritania  Tingitana,  stating  that  the  inhabitants 
 had  fled  thither  from  the  face  of  Joshua  the  son  of 
 Nun.  The  fact  of  such  a  migration  is  not  un- 
 likely ;  but  we  have  very  serious  doubts  respect- 
 ing the  inscription,  mentioned  only  by  Procopius, 
 which  has  afforded  the  groundwork  of  many 
 wonderful  conclusions  ;  such,  for  instance,  as  that 
 the  American  Indians  were  descended  from  these 
 expelled  Canaanites.  The  notion  that  the  Girga- 
 shites did  migrate  seems  to  have  been  founded  on 
 the  circumstance  that,  although  they  are  included 
 in  the  list  of  the  seven  devoted  nations  either  to 
 be  dj-iven  out  or  destroyed  by  the  Israelites  (Gen. 
 xv.  20,  21  ;  Deut.  vii.  I  ;  Josh.  iii.  10  ;  xxiv.  11), 
 yet  they  are  omitted  in  the  list  of  those  to  be 
 utterly  destroyed  (Deut.  xx.  17),  and  are  probably 
 among  those  with  whom,  contrary  to  the  Divine 
 decree,  the  Israelites  lived  and  intermarried  ( Judg. 
 iii.  1-6).— J.  K. 
 
 GITTAIM  (D''ri3  ;  Sept.  re^af/i),  a  town  of 
 Benjamin.  It  would  seem  from  2  Sam.  iv.  3  that 
 the  ancient  Gibeonites  were  expelled  from  Beeroth, 
 and  either  built  or  colonized  Gittaim.  In  the  lists 
 of  Nehemiah  this  town  is  connected  with  Rameh 
 (Neh.  xi.  33) ;  but  its  site  has  not  been  identified. 
 -J.L.  P. 
 
 GITTITES   Cni;    Sept.   Teeaioi),    inhabitants 
 
 or  natives  of  Gath  (Josh.  xiii.  3).  Obed-edom. 
 although  a  Levite,  is  called  a  Gittite  (2  Sam.  vi. 
 10),   possibly  because  he   had  been  with  David 
 
GITTITH 
 
 134 
 
 GLASS 
 
 when  at  Oath,  but  much  more  probably  from  his 
 being  a  native  of  Gath-rimmon,  which  was  a  city 
 of  the  Levites.  There  seems  no  reason  for  ex- 
 tending this  interpretation  to  Ittai  (2  Sam.  xv.  19), 
 seeing  that  David  expressly  calls  him  '  a  stranger ' 
 (foreigner),  and,  what  is  more,  'an  exile.'  He 
 was  at  the  head  of  600  men,  who  were  also  Git- 
 tites,  for  they  are  called  (ver.  22)  his  'brethren.' 
 They  appear  to  have  formed  a  foreign  troop  of  ex- 
 perienced warriors,  chiefly  from  Gath,  in  the  pay 
 and  service  of  David  ;  which  they  had  perhaps 
 entered  in  the  first  instance  for  the  sake  of  sharing 
 in  the  booty  obtainable  in  his  wars.  We  can  con- 
 ceive that  the  presence  of  such  a  troop  must  have 
 been  useful  to  the  king  in  giving  to  the  Hebrew 
 army  that  organization  and  discipline  which  it  did 
 not  possess  before  his  time.  As  natives  of  Gath 
 they  were  of  course  Philistines,  and  the  Philistines 
 were  beyond  comparison  the  best  soldiers  in  Pales- 
 tine ;  and  although  they  were  nationally  enemies 
 of  Israel,  it  is  easy  to  conceive  various  partial  in- 
 fluences which  might  have  drawn  a  troop  of  them 
 into  the  service  of  the  most  renowned  general  and 
 successful  warrior  of  their  time. — J.  K. 
 
 GITTITH,  a  word  which  occurs  in  the  title  of 
 Ps.  viii.,  Ixxxi.,  Ixxxiv.     [Psalms.] 
 
 GLASS,  according  to  Pliny  {Hist.  Nat.  xxxvi. 
 26),  was  discovered  by  what  is  termed  accident. 
 Some  merchants  kindled  a  fire  on  that  part  of  the 
 coast  of  Phoenicia  which  lies  near  Ptolemais,  be- 
 tween the  foot  of  CaiTnel  and  Tyre,  at  a  spot 
 where  the  river  Belus  casts  the  tine  sand  which  it 
 brings  down  ;  but,  as  they  were  without  the  usual 
 means  of  suspending  their  cooking  vessels,  they 
 employed  for  that  purpose  logs  of  nitre,  their 
 vessel  being  laden  with  that  substance  ;  the  fire 
 fusing  the  nitre  and  the  sand  produced  glass.  The 
 Sidonians,  in  whose  vicinity  the  discovery  was 
 made,  took  it  up,  and  having  in  process  of  time 
 carried  the  art  to  a  high  degree  of  excellence, 
 gained  thereby  both  wealth  and  fame.  Other 
 nations  became  their  pupils  ;  the  Romans  espe- 
 cially attained  to  very  high  skill  in  the  art  of 
 fusing,  blowing,  and  colouring  glass.  Even  glass 
 mirrors  were  invented  by  tlie  Sidonians — etiam 
 speaila  excog-itavei'ant.  This  account  of  Pliny  is 
 in  substance  corroborated  by  Strabo  (xvi.  15),  and 
 by  Josephus  {DeBell.  Jiid.  ii.  10.  2).  Yet,  notwith- 
 standing this  explicit  statement,  it  was  long  denied 
 that  the  ancients  were  acquainted  with  glass  pro- 
 perly so  called  ;  nor  did  the  denial  entirely  dis- 
 appear even  when  Pompeii  offered  evidences  of 
 its  want  of  foundation.  Our  knowledge  of  Egypt 
 has,  however,  set  the  matter  at  rest  —  shewing 
 at  the  same  time  how  careful  men  should  be  in 
 setting  up  mere  abstract  reasonings  in  opposi- 
 tion to  the  direct  testimony  of  history.  Wilkin- 
 son, in  his  Ancient  Es^yptians  (iii.  88,  ^17.),  has 
 adduced  the  fullest  evidence  that  glass  was  known 
 to  and  made  liy  that  ingenious  people  at  a  very 
 early  period  of  tiieir  national  existence.  Upward 
 of  3500  years  ago,  in  the  reign  of  the  first  Osir- 
 tasen,  they  appear  to  have  practised  the  art  of 
 blowing  glass.  The  process  is  represented  in  the 
 paintings  of  Beni  Hassan,  executed  in  the  reign  of 
 that  monarch.  In  the  same  age  images  of  glazed 
 pottery  were  common.  Ornaments  of  glass  were 
 made  by  them  about  1500  y^ars  B.C.  ;  for  a  bead 
 Df  that  date  has  been  found,  being  of  the  same 
 specific  gravity  as  that  of  our  crown  glass.     Many 
 
 o-lass  bottles,  etc.,  have  been  met  with  in  the 
 tombs,  some  of  very  remote  antiquity.  Glass  vases 
 were  used  for  holding  wine  as  early  as  the  Exodus. 
 Such  was  the  skill  of  the  Egyptians  in  this  manu- 
 facture,  that  they   successfully   counterfeited    the 
 
 amethyst,  and  other  precious  stones.  Winckel- 
 mann  is  of  opinion  that  glass  was  employed  more 
 frequently,  in  ancient  than  in  modern  times.  It  was 
 sometimes  used  by  the  Egyptians  even  for  coffins. 
 They  also  employed  it,  not  only  for  drinking 
 utensils  and  ornaments  of  the  person,  but  for 
 Mosaic  work,  the  figures  of  deities,  and  sacred 
 emblems,  attaining  to  exquisite  workmanship,  and 
 a  surprising  brilliancy  of  colour.  The  art  too  of 
 cutting  glass  was  known  to  them  at  the  most 
 remote  periods  ;  for  which  purpose,  as  we  learn 
 from  Pliny  [Hist.  jYat.  xxxvii.  4),  the  diamond  was 
 used.  That  the  ancients  had  mirrors  of  glass  is 
 clear  from  the  above  cited  words  of  Pliny  ;  but  the 
 mirrors  found  in  Egypt  are  made  of  mixed  metal, 
 chiefly  copper.  So  admirably  did  the  skill  of  the 
 Egyptians  succeed  in  the  composition  of  metals, 
 that  their  mirrors  were  susceptible  of  a  polish 
 which  has  been  but  partially  revived  at  the  present 
 day.  The  mirror  was  nearly  round,  having  a 
 handle  of  wood,  stone,  or  metal.  The  form  varied 
 with  the  taste  of  the  owner.  The  same  kind  of 
 metal  mirror  was  used  by  the  Israelites,  who, 
 doubtless,  brought  it  from  Egypt.  In  Exod. 
 xxxviii.  8,  it  is  expressly  said  that  Aloses  'made  the 
 laver  of  brass  of  the  looking-glasses  (brazen  mir- 
 rors) of  the  women.' 
 
 It  would  be  justifiable  to  suppose  that  the  Ple- 
 brews  brought  glass,  and  a  knowledge  how  to 
 manufacture  it,  with  them  out  of  Egypt,  were  not 
 the  evidence  of  histoiy  so  explicit  that  it  was 
 actually  discovered  and  wrought  at  their  own  doors. 
 Whether  it  was  used  by  them  for  mirrors  is  another 
 question.  That  glass,  however,  was  known  to  the 
 Hebrews  appears  beyond  a  doubt.  In  Job  xxviii. 
 17,  n''313t  is  believed  to  mean  glass,  though  it  is 
 rendered  'crystal'  in  the  English  version;  a  sub- 
 stance, in  Winer's  opinion  {Hainhi'drterbitch),  sig- 
 nified by  ty'''3J,  which  occurs  in  the  ensuing  verse, 
 while  the  former  is  the  specific  name  for  glass  [Crys- 
 tal ;  Gabish].  In  the  N.  T.  the  word  employed  is 
 \io.\o%  (compare  Aristoph.  Nubes,  768).  In  Rev. 
 xxi.  iS,  we  read,  '  The  city  was  pure  gold,  like  unto 
 clear  j^/rtjj;'  ver.  21,  'as  it  were  transparent  glass' 
 (compare  iv.  6).  '  Molten  glass'  also  occurs  in  Job 
 xxxvii.  iS,  but  the  origmal  ''{<"|,  and  its  correspond- 
 
GLASSIUS 
 
 135 
 
 GLOSS,  GLOSSARY 
 
 ing  word  in  Exod.  xxxviii.  8,  authorise  tlie  transla- 
 tion 'mirror' — that  is,  of  some  metal.  Lideed 
 Winer,  referring  to  Beckman  {Beitrdge  zur  Gesch. 
 der  Erfindung,  iii.  319),  expressly  denies  that  glass 
 mirrors  were  known  till  the  thirteenth  century — 
 adding  that  they  are  still  seldom  seen  in  the  East. 
 Mirrors  of  polished  metal  are  those  that  are  mostly 
 used,  formed  sometimes  into  such  shapes  as  may 
 serve  for  ornaments  to  the  person.  In  the  East 
 mirrors  had  a  connection  with  the  observances  of 
 religion ;  females  held  them  before  the  images  of  the 
 goddesses,  thereby  manifesting  their  own  humility 
 as  servants  of  the  divinities,  and  betokening  the 
 prevalence  in  private  life  of  a  similar  custom  (Calli- 
 mach.  Hymn,  in  Pallad.  21  ;  Senec.  Ep.  95  ; 
 Cyril,  De  Adorat.  in  Spir.  ii.  64).  That  in  the 
 N.  T.  a  mirror  is  intended  in  James  i.  23,  'behold- 
 ing his  natural  face  in  a  glass,'  appears  certain  ; 
 but  the  signification  in  i  Cor.  xiii.  12,  in  which 
 the  word  'eaoiTTpov  occurs,  is  by  no  means  so  clear. 
 If  by  'iao-Kjpov  a  metal  mirror  is  to  be  understood, 
 the  language  employed  is  not  without  difficulties. 
 The  preposition  6id,  '  through,'  is  in  such  a  case 
 improper;  'face  to  face'  presents  an  equally  im- 
 proper contrast,  for  in  a  mirror  '  face  answers  to 
 face'  (Prov.  xxvii.  19).  So  the  general  import  of 
 the  passage  seems  to  require  a  medium,  and  an  im- 
 perfectly transparent  medium,  through  which  objects 
 are  beheld.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  words  iv 
 aiviyixari,  in  enigma,  that  is,  with  the  meaning 
 hidden  or  involved  in  outward  coverings  :  in  this 
 state  objects  are  seen  mediately,  not  immediately 
 (see  the  passages  quoted  by  Wetstein)  ;  in  the  next 
 the  veil  will  be  removed,  and  we  shall  see  them  as 
 they  are,  as  when  two  persons  behold  each  other 
 with  no  substance  intervening.  Hence  the  render- 
 ing in  the  common  version  appears  not  unsuitable, 
 and  the  statement  of  the  Apostle  corresponds  witli 
 fact  and  experience  ;  for  it  is  obscurely,  as  through 
 a  dim  medium,  that  we  see  spiritual  objects. 
 What  the  precise  substance  was  which  the  Apostle 
 thought  of  when  he  used  the  words  it  may  not  be 
 easy  to  determine.  It  could  not  well  be  ordinary 
 glass,  for  that  was  transparent.  It  may  have  been 
 the  lapis  speadaris,  or  a  kind  of  talc,  of  which 
 the  ancients  made  their  windows.  This  opinion 
 is  confirmed  by  Schleusner,  who  says  that  the 
 Jews  used  a  similar  mode  of  expression  to  describe 
 a  dim  and  imperfect  view  of  mental  objects 
 (Schottgen.  Hoi:  Heb.  in  loc.)  See  Michaelis, 
 Hist.  Vitri  ap.  Heb.  in  Com  men  t.  Soc.  Goetting. 
 iv.  57  ;  also  Dr.  Falconer  '  on  the  knowledge  of 
 the  Ancients  respecting  Glass,'  in  the  Mernoirs  of 
 the  Lit.  and  Phil.  Soc.  of  Manchester,  ii.  915. — 
 J.  R.  B. 
 
 GLASSIUS,  Salomon,  a  distinguished  theo- 
 logian of  the  17th  century,  was  born  at  Sonders- 
 hausen  in  1593,  and  educated  at  the  Gymnasium 
 ofGotha.  In  1612  he  went  to  the  University  of 
 Jena,  where  he  spent  three  years  in  the  philoso- 
 phical school  ;  and  in  1615  to  Wittenberg,  where 
 he  enjoyed  the  instructions  of  flutter  and  others. 
 After  spending  a  year  at  Wittenberg,  he  returned 
 to  Jena,  at  the  desire  of  his  parents,  and  studied 
 five  years,  chiefly  under  Gerhard.  Hebrew  and  the 
 cognate  dialects  were  his  favourite  subjects.  In 
 1619  he  was  appointed  adjunct  of  the  philosophical 
 faculty.  He  subsequently  became  professor  of 
 Hebrew,  then  superintendent  at  Sondershausen, 
 professor  of  theology  at  Jena,  and  finally  general 
 
 superintendent  and  consistorial  assessor  in  Gotha, 
 where  he  died  July  27,  1656,  sixty-three  years  of 
 age.  Glassius  laboured  much  to  promote  the  wel- 
 fare of  the  church  with  which  he  was  officially  con- 
 nected, entering  into  its  affairs  with  a  sincere  desn-e 
 to  rectify  abuses  and  further  the  interests  of  true 
 religion.  The  situation  he  occupied  was  an  influ- 
 ential one ;  and  he  justified  the  choice  of  his  patron 
 Duke  Ernest,  by  working  and  living  for  the  highest 
 good  of  the  people.  As  a  Biblical  theologian  he 
 was  inferior  to  none  of  his  contemporaries.  But  he 
 was  also  a  practical  man  of  deep  piety  and  tolerant 
 spirit,  unlike  Calovius.  His  fame  rests  principally 
 on  the  Philologia  Sacra,  1625,  4to,  a  book  evincing 
 an  extensive  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language 
 and  its  cognate  dialects,  if  judged  by  the  day  in 
 which  it  appeared.  Of  course  it  reflects  the  stifl 
 orthodoxy  of  the  time,  which  had  penetrated  even 
 into  the  region  of  the  vowel  points  ;  and  it  would 
 be  unjust  to  look  in  it  for  a  philosophical  insight 
 into  the  genius  of  the  Hebrew  language.  The  first 
 two  books  were  published  in  1623;  the  third  and 
 fourth  in  1634.  The  best  of  the  old  editions  was 
 that  superintended  by  Olearius,  1705.  The  first 
 and  second  books  contained  de  SacrcB  Scriptures 
 stylo  et  sensu ;  the  third  and  fourth,  Grammatica 
 Sacra  ;  the  fifth,  Rhetorica  Sacra.  Olearius  added 
 from  the  author's  MSS.  a  Logica  Sacra.  In  1776 
 Dathe  published  the  Gratnmatica  et  Rhetorica, 
 his  tcniporibus  accommodata,  which  work  was 
 completed  by  L.  Bauer,  who  added  a  Critica 
 Sacra,  1795,  and  Hermcncniica  Sacra,  I'J')'].  The 
 parts  re-edited  by  Bauer  have  been  severely  criti- 
 cised from  an  orthodox  stand-point.  The  book  is 
 still  useful  in  its  improved  form  ;  though  almost 
 superseded  by  later  works,  which  shew  an  ac- 
 quaintance with  Hebrew  and  its  peculiarities  that 
 no  man  of  Glassius's  period  could  pretend  to. 
 Other  publications  are  Gratnmatica  Ebrcta,  1623, 
 4to  ;  Exegesis  Evangeliorum  et  Epistolarum,  1664, 
 fol.  2  vols.  ;  Onomatologia:  MessicB  Prophetica, 
 and  Christologia  Davidica  et  Mosaica,  published  in 
 the  best  form  by  Crenius,  1700,  4to,  Ludgf.  Bat. 
 — S.  D. 
 
 GLEANING.  Two  Hebrew  words  are  thus 
 rendered  in  the  A.  V. ,  t^pp,  applied  to  the  gene- 
 ral produce  of  the  fields  (Lev.  xix.  9 ;  xxiii.  22), 
 and    ni??iy,    used    properly    of   grape -gleanings 
 
 (Judg.  viii.  2;  Is.  xvii.  6;  xxiv.  13,  etc.),  and 
 figuratively  of  a  small  remnant  ( Jer.  xlix.  9 ;  Obad. 
 i.  5;  Mic.   vii.  l).     This  latter  term  is  connected 
 
 by  some  of  the  Rabbins  with  7P1J?,  a  child,  '  quia 
 respectu  aliorum  botrorum  se  habet  ut  parvulus  re- 
 spectu  viri'  (Bartenora,  ap.  Surenhusii  Misluiam  i. 
 67).  What  fell  to  the  ground,  or  was  left  of  the 
 produce  of  the  vine,  belonged  to  the  poor.  Any  one 
 placing  a  vessel  under  the  tree  to  catch  the  falling 
 grapes  was  held  to  defraud  the  poor.  The  Bibli- 
 cal word  for  these  fallen  grapes  is  013  (Lev.  xix. 
 
 ID).     [Alms].— W.  L.  A. 
 
 GLEDE.     [Daah.] 
 
 GLORY,  SYMBOL  OF  DIVINE,    [Shekinah.] 
 
 GLOSS,  GLOSSARY.  A  gloss  is  a  note 
 xppended  to  any  word  or  phrase  for  the  purpose 
 jf  interpretation  or  illustration.  Sacred  glosses  are 
 iuch  notes  appended  to  words  or  phrases  occurring 
 
GLOSS,  GLOSSARY 
 
 136 
 
 GLOSS,  GLOSSARY 
 
 in  the  Scriptures.     A  glossary  is  a  collection  of 
 such  explanatory  notes  properly  arranged. 
 
 The  word  gloss  is  borrowed  from  the  'Greek 
 7Xw(ro-a.  But  in  the  sense  above  explained,  it  has 
 no  support  from  classical  usage.  The  process, 
 however,  by  which  the  word  passed  from  its 
 original  meaning  to  that  in  which  it  was  used  by 
 mediaeval  writers,  and  in  which  it  is  now  used,  may 
 be  traced.  The  Greek  word  y\Q><7aa,  meaning 
 tongue  or  speech,  came  to  be  used  by  the  Greek 
 grammarians  in  the  sense  of  a  word  requiring  to  be 
 explained.  In  process  of  time,  words  often  be- 
 come obsolete,  or  come  to  be  used  in  senses 
 different  from  those  in  which  they  were  originally 
 used ;  new  words  are  introduced ;  and  words  have 
 frequently  special  meanings  attached  to  them  of  a 
 professional  or  technical  character,  familiar  only  to 
 a  portion  of  the  community.  To  the  multitude, 
 such  words  need  to  be  explained ;  and  such  words 
 the  Greek  grammarians  called  yXwacrai.  Thus 
 Plutarch  speaks  of  certain  expressions  in  the  poets 
 which  were  not  commonly  understood,  and  which 
 belonged  to  the  idiotisms  of  particular  regions  or 
 tribes,  as  rots  Xeyo/jL^vas  yXwrras  {De  audiend.  poet. 
 c.  6) .  Galen  applies  the  same  name  to  the  anti- 
 quated words  of  Hippocrates,  and  explains  the 
 term  thus  : — Scrct  roivvv  tuv  ovofjidTCxjv  iv  /xiv  roh 
 irdXai  x/36cois  ffvurjOr]  ^v  vvv  5k  ovk  ^ti  (cttI,  rd  /J-kv 
 TOiavra  yXuxraas  KoXovcn  {Exeges.  Gloss.  Hippocrat. 
 Proevi.)  Aristotle  applies  the  same  term  to  pro- 
 vincialisms [De  arte  poet.  c.  xxi.,  sec.  4-6;  xxii.  3, 
 4,  etc.)  And,  not  to  multiply  quotations,  a 
 scholiast  on  Dion.  Halicarn.,  quoted  by  Wetstein 
 on  I  Cor.  xii.  10,  expressly  says  yXwcTcras' 
 (puvai  dpxo-l-ovs  Kal  diro^eviaixivovs  »}  dirox^pi-a.- 
 iovaa%  (?).  Quintilian  also  says  of  the  synonymous 
 word  glossemata,  '  id  est  voces  minus  usitatas ' 
 (Ifistit.  Oral.  i.  8,  15;  comp.  also  i.  i,  35). 
 
 The  next  step  was  from  calling  a  word  needing 
 explanation  a  gloss,  to  apply  this  term  to  the 
 explanation  itself.  These  explanations  at  first 
 consisted  merely  in  adhibiting  the  word  in  common 
 use  {hvop.a.  Kvpiov,  Aristot.)  to  the  obsolete  and 
 peculiar  word;  and  thus  the  two  viewed  as  one 
 whole  came  to  be  called  a  gloss ;  and  ultimately 
 this  name  came  to  be  given  to  that  part  which  was 
 of  most  interest  to  the  reader,  viz.,  the  explana- 
 tion. 
 
 These  explanations  constituted  the  beginnings  of 
 Greek  Lexicography.  They  did  not  continue, 
 however,  to  be  merely  lexical ;  they  often  em- 
 braced historical,  geographical,  biographical,  and 
 such  like  notices.  Nor  were  they  arranged  at 
 first  in  an  alphabetical  order ;  nor  did  they  embrace 
 the  whole  range  of  the  language,  but  only  such 
 parts  of  it  as  the  glossographer  was  interested  in 
 (hence  such  works  as  the  'ArrtKai  YXQicraai.  of 
 Theodoras,  etc.),  nor  were  the  words  presented  in 
 their  uninflected  forms,  but  in  the  form  in  which 
 they  occurred  in  the  course  of  the  glossographer's 
 reading.  More  methodical  collections  of  these 
 explanations  began  to  be  made  in  the  middle  ages, 
 and  such  as  have  been  preserved  to  us  in  the 
 works  of  Hesychius,  Suidas,  Phavorinus,  Zonaras, 
 Photius,  etc. 
 
 The  extant  Scriptural  glosses  comprise  two  dis- 
 tinct classes,  i.  The  first  of  these  consists  of 
 explanations  drawn  from  the  Greek  glossarists,  a 
 large  number  of  the  notes  collected  by  whom  are 
 on  words  occurring  in  Scripture.  Their  works 
 thus  become  valuable  as  exegetical  aids,  especially 
 
 as  they  convey  not  the  individual  opinion  of  the 
 collector  so  much  as  opinions  which  he  hatl 
 gathered  from  older  writers.  A  Glosmrmm  GrrP.- 
 cum  in  N.  T.,  collected  from  these  works,  wa.s 
 pubhshed  by  Alberti  in  1735.  Valcknaer  collected 
 from  Hesychius  the  explanations  of  scriptural  words 
 (0pp.  1.  173,  fif. )^  but  this  has  been  best  done  by 
 J.  Ch.  Gottl.  Emesti,  in  his  Glosses  Sacrce  Hesychii 
 Greece,  etc.,  Lips.  1785  5  which  was  followed  by  a 
 similar  collection  from  Suidas  and  Phavorinus, 
 with  specimens  from  the  Etymologicimi  Magnum, 
 Lips.  1786.  These  are  extremely  convenient  books 
 of  reference.  Comp.  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Grceca,  iv. 
 540,  ff. ;  Rosenmiiller,  Bistor.  I7iteipr.  iv.  356, 
 ff. 
 
 IL  The  second  class  of  glosses  is  due  to  the 
 habit,  as  old  perhaps  as  the  art  of  writing  itself,  of 
 readers  inscribing  on  the  margin  of  SlSS.,  or 
 books,  observations  of  their  own,  explanatory  or 
 othei-wise  of  the  text.  This  was  especially  the  case 
 with  the  sacred  books,  partly  because  after  the 
 establishment  of  Christianity  they  were  more  read 
 than  other  books,  partly  because  their  contents 
 gave  abundant  occasion  for  theological,  historical, 
 or  philological  annotation.  Hence,  from  an  early 
 period,  marginal  notes  intended  to  illustrate  in 
 some  way  the  text  came  to  have  a  place  in  the 
 codices  containing  the  sacred  books.  At  first  very 
 brief,  often  confined  to  a  single  word,  these  glosses 
 grew  into  more  extended  remarks,  written  in  a 
 smaller  hand  on  the  margin,  and  sometimes 
 between  the  lines  of  the  codex.  In  the  ancient 
 Hebrew  codices,  these  marginal  notes  were  the 
 source  of  not  a  few  of  the  K''7-i  readings  ;  and  the 
 glosses  on  the  margins  of  the  codices  of  the  LXX. 
 and  the  N.  T.  have  given  rise  to  many  of  the 
 various  readings  which  exist  in  both  of  these.  It 
 is  believed  also,  as  marginal  notes  are  apt  to  be 
 transferred  by  ignorant  or  careless  copyists,  into  the 
 text,*  that  some  such  interpolations  are  to  be  found 
 in  the  received  text  of  the  N.  T.,  and  it  is  con- 
 sidered to  be  one  of  the  problems  which  criticism 
 has  to  solve  to  detect  these,  and  eliminate  them. 
 The  exercise  of  a  sound  and  cautious  judgment, 
 however,  is  required  to  preside  over  this,  lest  rash 
 and  unauthorised  alterations  be  made  (Valcknaer, 
 Dissert,  de  Glossis  Sac7-is,  Franeq.  1737  ;  J.  A. 
 Ernesti,  De  vera  usu  et  indole  Glossariiim  Gr., 
 Lug.  Bat.  1742;  Tittmann,  De  Glossis  N.  T., 
 aestimandisetjudicandis,W\\.\..  1782 ;  Wassenbergh, 
 De  Glossis  N.  T.,  prefixed  to  Valcknaer's  Scholia 
 in  Libras  quosdafn  N.  T.,  Amst.  1795  ;  Bome- 
 mann  De  Glossematis  N.  T.  caute  dijiidicandis,  in 
 his  Scholia  ad  Luc.  Evang.,  1830).  It  has  been  pro- 
 posed to  restrict  the  term  gloss  to  the  marginal 
 annotations  as  such,  and  to  use  glosseme  to  desig- 
 nate those  which  are  supposed  to  have  been  intro- 
 duced into  the  text ;  but  the  usage  of  writers  is  not 
 uniform  in  this  respect. 
 
 The  longer  marginal  annotations  [Glosce  Margi- 
 nales),  were  made  principally  on  the  text  of  the 
 Vulgate.  These  were  of  various  kinds ;  some 
 grammatical,  some  historical,  some  theological, 
 some  allegorical  and  mystical.  The  most  famous 
 collection  of  these  is  that  made  in  the  9th  century 
 
 *  '  Miror  quomodo  e  latere  annotationem  nos- 
 tram  nescio  quis  temerarius  scribendam  in  corpora 
 putaverit,  quam  nos  pro  eruditione  legentis  scripsi- 
 mus.'  Hieron.  ad  Suniam  et  Fretelam,  torn.  iiL 
 p.  58,  ed.  Francof. 
 
GNAT 
 
 137 
 
 GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM 
 
 by  Walafrid  Strabo,  from  the  writings  of  Augustine, 
 Ambrose,  Jerome,  Gregory,  Isidorus,  Beda,  Alcuin, 
 and  Rhabanus  Maurus,  with  additions  by  himself. 
 This  became  tlie  great  exegetical  thesaurus  of  the 
 middle  ages,  and  was  known  as  the  Glosa  Ordi- 
 naria.  Of  notes  written  between  the  hnes  {Glosce 
 Interlinear es),  a  collection  was  made  by  Anselm  of 
 Laon  in  the  beginning  of  the  12th  century.  Both 
 tlese  works  were  printed  togetlier  about  the  end 
 of  the  15th  century,  4  vols.  fol. ;  they  have  often 
 been  reprinted  since,  witli  the  commentary  of 
 Lyra.  Other  glossaries  are  those  of  Peter  the 
 Lombard  on  the  Psalms,  Par.  1535;  of  Hugo  a 
 S,  Caro,  Postillce  in  icniversa  Biblia,  Ven.  14S7, 
 fol.     [Caro].— W.  L.  A. 
 
 GNAT  (kuvui^  ;  Vulg.  aelex ;  Order,  diptcra, 
 Linn.,  aclicidcs,  Latr. ;  occurs  Matt,  xxiii.  24). 
 The  word  Kwvwxp  seems  to  be  the  generic  term  for 
 the  gnat  among  the  ancient  Greek  writers,  under 
 which  they  inchided  several  species,  as  we  use  the 
 word  'fly,'  and  '  the  fly;'  though  they  give  distinct 
 names  to  some  species,  as  the  word  crep^os,  etc. 
 Rosenmiiller  observes  that  the  Kwvwires  of  the 
 Greeks  seem  to  be  the  ephemerce  of  Linnreus 
 (apud  Bochart,  vol.  lii.  p.  444,  4to,  Leips.  1793- 
 96),  Aristotle  gives  the  name  to  a  species  whose 
 larvae  are  bred  in  the  lees  of  wine,  which  is  then 
 called  the  ciilex  vinanus  {Hist.  An.  5,  19).  Pliny 
 also  refers  to  various  species  of  gnats  :  '  varia  sunt 
 culicum  genera''  {Hist.  Nat.  xi.  35).  'Alii  ex 
 ficis,  ficarii  dicti'  (ibid.)  '  Alii  ex  aceto  nascuntur' 
 (ibid.)  '  Sunt  etiam  qui  vocantur  mulioftes.  Alii 
 centrince''  (xvii.  27).  We  ourselves  recognise  se- 
 veral kinds  under  the  common  name,  as  gall  gnats, 
 horse,  wheat,  winter  (see  also  Linn.  Syst.  Nat., 
 Diptera,  Culex).  Our  Saviour's  allusion  to  the 
 gnat  is  a  kind  of  proverb,  either  in  use  in  his  time, 
 or  invented  by  himself,  '  Blind  guides,  who  strain 
 out  a  gnat,  and  swallow  down  {bolt,  as  we  say]  a 
 camel.'  He  adopts  the  antithesis  of  the  smallest 
 insect  to  the  largest  a?iimal,  and  applies  it  to  those 
 who  are  superstitiously  anxious  in  avoiding  small 
 faults,  yet  do  not  scruple  to  commit  the  greatest 
 sins.  The  typographical  error,  '  strain  at  a  gnat,' 
 first  found  its  way  into  King  James's  translation, 
 l6n.  It  is  'strain  out'  in  the  previous  transla- 
 tions. The  custom  of  filtering  wine,  among  the 
 Jews,  for  this  purpose,  was  founded  on  the  prohi- 
 bition of  'all  flying,  creeping  things'  being  used 
 for  food,  excepting  the  saltatorii  (Lev.  xi.  23). 
 The  custom  seems  alluded  to  by  the  Sept.,  which, 
 in  Amos  vi.  6,  reads  SivXia/nenov  dvov,  '  filtered 
 wine,'  a  passage  having  a  similar  scope.  Accord- 
 ing to  the  Talmud,  eating  a  gnat  incurred  scourg- 
 mg  or  excommunication. — J.  F.  D. 
 
 GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM.  The  religion  of 
 Jesus  Christ  appearing  as  a  Divine  message,  in 
 which  is  announced  God's  plan  of  reconciling  sin- 
 ners unto  Himself,  necessarily  assumes  a  position 
 of  exclusiveness.  It  is  not  one  religion  among 
 the  many,  the  religion  of  a  nation  or  a  class ;  it 
 is  the  only  religion  which  God  will  acknowledge, 
 or  by  which  men  can  be  benefited,  and  as  such 
 it  claims  the  submission  of  all  men  alike.  Such 
 pretensions  unavoidably  brought  it,  when  it  first 
 appeared,  into  direct  antagonism  with  all  existing 
 religious  systems — with  Judaism  as  well  as  with  the 
 various  forms  of  heathen  belief  and  worship.  Be- 
 tween it  and  them  there  could  be  no  peace — no 
 righteous  or  stable  compromise. 
 
 As  often  happens,  however,  though  the  funda- 
 mental and  formative  principles  of  the  opposing 
 systems  were  utterly  incapable  of  reconciliation, 
 the  boundary-line  between  them  came  ere  long  to 
 be  somewhat  obscurely  defined,  and  a  considerable 
 extent  of  border  territory,  so  to  speak,  arose,  on 
 which  it  was  attempted  to  effect  the  compromise 
 which  the  inherent  antagonism  of  the  systems  ren- 
 dered it  hopeless  to  attempt  in  the  interior.  Thus, 
 between  Judaism  and  Christianity  there  lay  a  border 
 land  which  was  occupied  by  the  Judaising  teachers, 
 against  whom  the  Apostle  Paul  so  frequently  and 
 energetically  writes  in  his  epistles,  and  at  a  later 
 period  by  the  Nazarenes  and  Ebionites.  The  bor- 
 der land  between  Christianity  and  Heathenism  was 
 chiefly  occupied  by  the  Gnostic  sects. 
 
 The  aim  of  Gnosticism  was  to  complete  Chris- 
 tianity so  as  to  render  it  a  perfect  solution  of  the 
 great  world-problem — the  relation  of  the  finite  to 
 the  Infinite,  of  the  relative  and  dependent  to  the 
 absolute  and  self-existent.  For  this  purpose  its 
 teachers,  borrowed  partly  from  the  speculations  ot 
 the  Western  schools  of  philosophy,  especially  that 
 of  the  later  Platonists,  and  partly  from  the  reveries 
 of  the  Eastern  theosophists  ;  and  these  elements 
 they  sought  to  incorporate  with  Christianity,  so  as 
 to  work  up  a  complete  and  congruous  scheme  of 
 religio  -  philosophic  speculation.  The  different 
 sources  from  which  these  speculatists  drew  their 
 materials  determined  their  division  into  two  great 
 classes, — the  Alexandrian  and  the  Syrian  Gnostics; 
 in  the  former  of  which  the  doctrines  of  the  Grecian 
 philosophy  predominated ;  in  the  latter,  those  of 
 the  Parsee  or  Dualistic  theosophy  prevailed.  Diffe- 
 rences of  a  less  general  kind  divided  them  into 
 many  subordinate  sects  (Mosheim,  De  rebus  Chris- 
 tianortmi  ante  Co7istantin.  Mag. ,  p.  333,  ff. ;  Matter, 
 Histoire  du  Gnosticisme ;  Neander,  Church  Hist., 
 ii.  42,  ff.  ;  Gieseler,  Church  Hist.  i.  134,  ff.  ;  Hase, 
 Hist,  of  the  Clutrch,  sec.  76  ;  Lewald,  Comment, 
 de  Doctr.  Gnostica,  Heidelb.  1818;  Art.  Gnosis 
 by  Jacobi  in  Herzog  Encycl.  v.  204 ;  Domer,  De- 
 velopme7it  of  the  Doctrine  concerning  the  person  cf 
 Christ,  i.  184,  ff.) 
 
 It  does  not  form  any  part  of  the  design  of  this 
 work  to  furnish  detailed  accounts  of  systems  of 
 speculative  opinion  ;  and  the  Gnostics  are  noticed 
 here  simply  because  the  question  has  been  mooted 
 whether,  and  to  what  extent,  their  doctrines  are  re- 
 ferred to  in  the  N.  T.  As  preparatory  to  this  in- 
 quiry, therefore,  it  may  suffice  to  state  briefly  the 
 fundamental  principles  common  to  all  the  Gnostic 
 sects,  and  by  which  they  were  distinguished  from 
 the  Christians  generally. 
 
 Gnosticism  rested  on  three  fundamental  data  : — 
 I.  The  existence  of  a  Supreme  Being  entirely  un- 
 connected with  matter  and  incapable  of  being 
 affected  by  it  ;  2.  The  existence  of  a  primal 
 matter,  CX??,  entirely  independent  of  God,  and  at 
 the  same  time,  as  the  principle  of  evil,  antithetic  to 
 him  ;  3.  The  existence  of  some  being  intermediate 
 between  these  two.  Given  these  data  the  problem 
 which  it  set  itself  to  solve  was  to  account  for  the 
 phenomena  of  the  universe,  and  especially  for 
 the  place  which  evil  holds  in  it.  This  problem  it 
 solved  after  the  following  fashion  : — The  interme- 
 diate being  reveals  God,  and  so  stands  related  to 
 him  ;  he  also  has  contact  with  matter,  and  so 
 becomes  the  Brj^iiovpyds,  or  world-creator.  As  the 
 world  thus  created  is  the  product  of  a  good  being, 
 but  is  made  out  of  the  evil  principle,   CXij,  it  is 
 
GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM 
 
 138 
 
 GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM 
 
 necessarily  a  mixture  of  good  with  evil,  and  that 
 under  the  condition  of  the  good  being  imprisoned, 
 cribbed,  confined,  by  the  evil  from  which  it  strug- 
 gles to  get  free.  This  struggle  suggests  the  idea 
 of  a  dehverance  by  a  higher  power,  and  that  of  a 
 redemption.  Here,  again,  the  agency  of  the  inter- 
 mediate being  comes  into  request  ;  but  the  diffi- 
 culty occurs.  If  the  Demiurge  could  not  at  first 
 make  a  world  free  from  evil,  how  can  he  extricate 
 the  good  from  the  evil  in  the  world  which  he  has 
 made  ?  To  meet  this  difficulty  the  intermediate 
 being,  ceasing  to  be  viewed  as  a  monad,  is  con- 
 ceived as  an  aggregate  of  beings,  of  which  the 
 Demiurge  is  the  lowest,  the  least  perfect,  the 
 feeblest ;  whilst  a  series  of  ascending  beings,  Ivva.- 
 fieis  or  alwves,  rise  up  to  the  X670S  and  the  i^ovs, 
 in  whom  are  found  the  revelation  of  God  and  the 
 redemption  of  the  good  from  the  evil,  and  espe- 
 cially of  human  spirits  from  the  tyranny  of  the 
 vXtj.  These  general  conceptions  peiwade  all  the 
 Gnostic  system,  though  they  are  very  differently 
 construed  and  compounded  by  different  sects, 
 according  as  emanistic  or  dualistic  notions  pre- 
 dominated, according  to  the  temperament  and 
 genius  of  the  founder  of  them,  and  according  as  he 
 stood  nearer  to  the  heathen,  the  Jewish,  or  the 
 Christian  point  of  view.  With  the  Christian 
 revelation  this  system  of  speculation  connected 
 itself  thus  : — It  accepted  the  view  given  in  the 
 Bible  of  God  as  One,  invisible,  unsearchable, 
 infinite,  eternal  ;  it  regarded  Satan  as  the  source  of 
 evil  embodied  in  the  vXtj  ;  it  represented  the  God 
 of  Judaism  as  the  Demiurge  by  whom  the  world 
 had  been  created  ;  and  it  recognised  in  Jesus 
 Christ  the  highest  of  the  Aeons,  by  whom,  along 
 with  another  Aeon,  the  irveu/jia,  the  soul  of  man  is 
 redeemed  and  restored  to  unity  with  God,  perfect 
 light  with  perfect  light.  It  is  in  the  school  of 
 Valentinus  that  we  find  the  most  complete  develop- 
 ment of  these  notions.  Those  who  accepted  them 
 boasted  that  they  had  found  the  true  yvi2:<jis  which 
 the  Christ  had  left  to  his  genuine  followers,  and 
 by  which  they  were  enabled  to  penetrate  into 
 divine  truth  far  beyond  the  reach  of  those  who 
 abode  by  the  mere  iricrrLs,  or  belief  of  the  written 
 word  ;  and  hence  the  name  they  assumed. 
 Gnostics. 
 
 Christianity  has  its  yvQcns  as  well  as  its  tfiV- 
 Tis,  but  it  is  not  of  the  sort  in  which  these  specula- 
 tists  and  dreamers  prided  themselves.  By  the 
 careful  and  well  directed  exploration  of  the  mean- 
 ing of  Scripture,  by  the  orderly  classification  of  its 
 doctrines,  by  the  due  development  of  the  system  of 
 truth  it  unfolds,  and  by  the  reconciliation  of  this 
 with  the  gi-eat  moral  truths  which  are  anterior  to 
 all  written  revelation  ;  a  real  and  legitimate  Chris- 
 tian Gnosis  may  be  evolved.  But  to  attempt  this 
 by  means  of  an  incorporation  of  Scriptural  truth 
 with  mere  human  theories  or  fancies,  is  to  pursue  a 
 sure  course  towards  a  real  dyvwcria,  a  state  of  intel- 
 lectual and  religious  confusion  in  which  there  can 
 be  nothing  Christian  but  the  name.  Against  such 
 an  attempt,  presuming  it  to  have  been  made  in 
 their  day,  we  may  be  sure  the  apostles  would 
 direct  their  strenuous  efforts.  But  7aas  such  an 
 attempt  made  in  their  day?  7cwr  such  speculative 
 perversions  of  Cliristian  truth  among  the  heresies  of 
 the  apostolic  age  ?  This  is  the  question  which,  in 
 the  interests  of  Biblical  Science,  we  propose  now 
 to  consider. 
 
 That  Gnostic  sects,  such  as  we  find  existing  in 
 
 the  2d  centur}%  existed  in  the  days  of  the  apostles, 
 or  that  Gnosticism  had  under  any  form  reached  that 
 point  of  systematic  development  which  it  exhibits 
 in  the  system  of  Valentinus  or  even  in  that  of  Ba- 
 silides  or  Saturninus  ;  are  positions  which  are  now 
 universally  abandoned  as  untenable.  Nor  is  the 
 opinion  that  any  of  the  N.  T.  books  was  written 
 especially  to  refute  Gnostic  doctrines,  and  prevent 
 their  growth  in  the  church,  maintained  by  any  who 
 hold  these  to  be  the  genuine  productions  of  those 
 whose  names  they  bear.  The  question,  however, 
 still  remains  open,  whether  there  may  not  be  in 
 the  sacred  writings  allusions  to  doctrines  of  the 
 same  kind  as  those  which  at  a  later  period  assumed 
 a  prominent  place  in  the  Gnostic  systems. 
 
 In  the  outset  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  occur- 
 rence of  such  allusions  is  not  an  improbable  thing. 
 We  are  unable  to  trace  Gnosticism  to  its  source  ; 
 but  the  tendency  which  it  represents  is  one  which 
 maybe  observed  both  in  heathenism  and  in  Judaism; 
 and  in  all  probability  speculations  of  this  sort  were 
 rife  in  many  quarters  where  Christianity  was  esta- 
 blished in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  If  so,  it  is  not 
 improbable  that  they  might  come  with  their  perni. 
 cious  influence  across  the  sphere  of  the  apostles' 
 working,  and  by  thereby  attracting  their  attention 
 call  forth  from  them  words  of  censure  or  warning. 
 When,  however,  we  pass  from  preliminary  pro- 
 babilities to  inquire  into  the  actual  facts  of  the 
 case,  it  must  be  confessed  that  considerable  doubt 
 hangs  over  the  position  that  the  N.  T.  writings 
 contain  any  allusions  to  Gnostic  speculations.  On 
 the  testimony  of  IreuKus  (C(?«/.  Hit}-,  iii.  11)  and 
 Theodoret  {Haret.  Fah.  ii.  3),  we  may  believe  that 
 Cerinthus  was  a  contemporary  of  St.  John,  and 
 propagated  his  erroneous  doctrines  in  Asia  Minor  ; 
 and  though  there  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  story  of 
 their  encounter  in  the  public  bath  at  Ephesus 
 (Iren.  iii.  3  ;  comp.  Lardner,  Credibility,  pt.  2, 
 ch.  vi..  Works,  ii.  86,  ed.  17SS),  it  is  not  impro- 
 bable that  the  apostle  may  have  known  Cerinthus, 
 and  may  have  encountered  some  that  were  affected 
 by  his  doctrines.  All  this,  however,  will  not 
 prove  that  either  in  his  Gospel  or  in  his  Epistles 
 the  apostle  has  directly  referred  to  these  doctrines. 
 Nor  can  this  be  proved  from  the  use  by  him  of 
 such  terms  as  X670S,  ^cDs,  txovoyhy\%,  etc. ,  terms  of 
 great  importance  in  the  systems  of  the  Gnostics  ; 
 for  these  terms  have  their  own  proper  significance 
 in  the  apostle's  writings  ;  they  are  repeatedly  used 
 by  him  in  a  way  not  only  different  from,  but  op- 
 posed to  that  in  which  the  Gnostics  used  them — ■ 
 as,  ex.  gr.,  in  the  case  of  \tiyo^  and  fiovoyevT)?, 
 both  of  which  terms  St.  John  applies  to  Jesus  (i. 
 18),  whilst  Cerinthus  taught  that  God  begot  the 
 Monogenes  and  the  latter  the  Logos ;  and  the 
 use  of  some  of  them  by  the  later  Gnostics  in  a 
 Tohannine  sense  is  much  more  probably  to  be 
 traced  to  their  having  borrowed  them  from  .St, 
 John  than  to  his  having  taken  them  from  them. 
 The  only  legitimate  proof  of  the  existence  of  direct 
 references  to  Gnostic  views  in  the  writings  of  the 
 apostles  is  furnished  by  the  adduction  of  passages 
 which  cannot  be  explained  without  supposing  such 
 a  reference,  or  which  are  better  explained  on  that 
 hypothesis  than  on  any  other.  The  former  gives 
 the  conclusion  a  very  high,  the  latter  a  very  con- 
 siderable degree  of  probability. 
 
 Applying  this  test  to  the  so-called  prologue  to 
 St.  John's  Gospel,  the  only  part  of  that  book 
 where  such  allusions  can  be  supposed  to  exist,  and 
 
GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM 
 
 139 
 
 GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM 
 
 CO  his  Epistles,  we  arrive  at  the  condusion  that  no 
 alhision  to  sentiments  properly  Gnostic,  as  distin- 
 guished from  such  as  are  simply  Doketic,  can  be 
 substantiated  as  occurring  in  the  writings  of  that 
 apostle.  In  the  Epistles  some  utterances  are  of  such 
 a  kind  as  to  constrain  us  to  believe  that  the  apostle 
 had  in  his  eye  some  who  were  seeking  to  spread 
 doketic  views  among  the  Christians  ;  comp.  i  Ep. 
 i.  I;  ii.  22  ;  iv.  2,  3  ;  v.  6;  2  Ep.  ver.  7.  It  cannot 
 be  proved,  however,  that  the  prologue  to  the  Gos- 
 pel has  any  polemical  reference.  It  is  true  that  its 
 statements  stand  opposed  to  many  of  the  Gnostic 
 doctrines  ;  but  they  stand  opposed  no  less  to  many 
 doctrines  which  are  not  Gnostic,  such  as  Arian 
 and  Humanitarian  representations  of  our  Saviour's 
 person  ;  and  it  might,  therefore,  be  as  reasonably 
 argued,  that  St.  John  had  the  followers  of  Arius 
 and  our  modern  Unitarians  in  view  when  he  wrote 
 his  prologue,  as  that  he  had  the  Gnostics.  The 
 obvious  truth  is,  that  all  parts  of  Scripture  which 
 set  forth  divine  verities  must  stand  opposed  to  the 
 doctrines  of  those  by  whom  these  are  denied.  In 
 Holy  Scripture,  consequently,  lies  the  confutation 
 of  all  heresy  ;  but  it  was  not  for  this  that  it  was 
 for  the  most  part  written.  Its  primary  design  is  to 
 set  forth  the  truth  for  the  salvation  of  men  and  the 
 edification  of  the  church  ;  and  if,  in  aiming  at 
 this  end,  its  writers  utter  what  is  found  to  condemn 
 opinions  held  by  men,  that  may  be  the  result 
 merely  of  the  essential  oppugnancy  of  truth  to 
 error,  and  cannot  of  itself  be  held  to  prove  that 
 the  writer  had  these  opinions  specially  in  his  view 
 when  he  wrote.  In  the  case  of  St.  John's  Gospel, 
 the  number  of  errors  its  statements  confute  is  such 
 that  there  is  hardly  a  heretical  sect  known  to  the 
 ancients  against  which  it  has  not  been  supposed 
 to  be  directed. 
 
 Much  stress  has  been  laid,  by  those  who  attribute 
 to  St.  John  an  anti-gnostic  polemic,  on  his  use  of 
 the  term  \670s  as  applied  to  our  Lord.  The  ar- 
 gument here  is  that  John  took  this  word  from  the 
 Gnostic  teachers  and  applied  it  to  Jesus  Christ, 
 whom  he  sets  forth  as  the  true  Logos.  But  is  it 
 certain  that  the  word  could  come  to  John  from  no 
 other  source  than  the  Gnostics  ?  We  know  that 
 it  occurs  constantly,  though  not  in  a  personal 
 sense,  in  the  writings  of  Philo  ;  and  what  is  of  still 
 more  importance,  we  know  that  the  Jews  did,  in 
 a  personal  sense,  speak  of  the  '"''T  X1D"'D  {Memra  de 
 
 Yeya),  or  Word  of  Jehovah  (Bertholdt,  Christologia 
 ytidccorttm,  p.  94-96).  Is  it  not  more  probable 
 that  the  term  found  its  way  among  the  Christians, 
 amidst  whom  John  wrote,  from  this  source,  than 
 from  heathen  speculation  ?  Besides,  is  it  credible 
 that  had  St.  Johii  borrowed  this  term  from  the 
 Gnostics  for  the  purpose  of  applying  it  in  a  very 
 different  sense  (for  the  concept  of  the  Logos  by  the 
 apostle  is  entirely  different  from  the  Gnostic  con- 
 cept of  the  Logos),  he  would  have  omitted  dis- 
 tinctly to  intimate  the  existence  of  such  difference  ? 
 Was  not  this  more  likely  to  mislead  than  to  in- 
 struct?— just  as  we  find  in  our  own  day  the  con- 
 verse course  followed  by  many  who  employ  N.  T. 
 phraseology  to  convey  opinions  which  the  N.  T. 
 does  not  teach  (Luthardt,  Das  Johann.  Evaitg., 
 etc.,  i.  221,  ff.  ;  Schott,  Isagoge,  p.  141). 
 
 Turning  to  the  writings  of  St.  Paul  we  are  met 
 by  several  passages  in  those  epistles  which  he  wrote 
 towards  the  end  of  his  life,  especially  those  to  the 
 Ephesians  and  the  Colossians,   aad  the  Pastoral 
 
 Epistles,  which  are  supposed  to  contain  direct 
 allusions  to  Gnostic  speculation.  That  the  writer 
 ot  these  epistles  had  in  view  certain  errorists  by 
 whom  the  Christians  were  in  danger  of  being  led 
 astray,  and  that  many  of  his  statements  were 
 directed  against  these,  cannot  be  called  in  question. 
 But  it  is  by  no  means  clearly  made  out  that  their 
 errors  belonged  to  parties  holding  what  may  be 
 called  Gnostic  views  in  the  sense  of  that  term  as 
 commonly  used.  Still  less  is  there  any  ground  for 
 the  assumption  on  which  some  have  sought  to 
 wield  an  argumeat  against  the  genuineness  of  these 
 epistles,  that  they  contain  sentiments  borroivcd 
 from  the  Gnostic  schools  of  the  2d  century.  The 
 utter  futility  of  this,  it  needs  only  a  glance  at  the 
 passages  adduced  in  support  of  it  to  show.  In 
 Eph.  i.  21  and  Col.  i.  16,  we  have  a  series  of  ex- 
 istences intermediate  between  God  and  the  world 
 that  bears  some  resemblance  to  the  Gnostic  repre- 
 sentation of  Sura/xfis  or  aitofes.  When  more  closely 
 looked  at,  however,  this  enumeration  will  be  found 
 to  have  more  of  a  Juda;istic  than  of  a  Gnostic 
 character  ;  if,  indeed,  it  be  not  a  mere  rhetorical 
 amplification  for  the  sake  of  emphasis  (comp.  Rom. 
 viii.  38,  39).  That  there  is  an  angelic  hierarchy 
 is  a  Biblical  doctrine  older  than  the  N.  T.,  and  one, 
 therefore,  which  may  be  referred  to  by  the  N.  T. 
 writers  without  supposing  them  to  allude  to  extra- 
 Christian  sects  or  speculations.  In  Eph.  ii.  7, 
 iii.  21,  the  apostle  uses  the  expression  aiajye?,  but 
 in  a  sense  which  has  no  connection  whatever  with 
 the  Gnostic  doctrine  of  intermediate  beings.  In 
 Eph.  ii.  2  the  aiicv  is  personified,  and  this  is  said 
 to  be  a  Gnostic  representation  ;  but  is  it  more  so 
 there  than  in  Rom.  xii.  2,  where  we  have  exactly 
 the  same  expression  ?  or  than  in  Luke  xvi.  8, 
 where  alwv  is  also  spoken  of  as  a  person  ?  or 
 than  in  i  Cor.  ii.  6  and  other  passages  ?  The 
 use  of  n\-qpw^a  (Eph.  i.  23  ;  Col.  i.  19  ;  ii.  9) 
 has  also  been  adduced  as  indicating  allusion  to 
 Gnostic  ideas ;  but  irXripw/jLa  is  a  genuine  Greek 
 word  which  was  as  free  to  the  apostle  as  to 
 the  Gnostics,  and  which  he  uses  in  these  pas- 
 sages to  express  a  purely  Christian  idea,  viz.,  the  ' 
 possession  by  Jesus  of  the  fulness  or  complement 
 of  the  divine  perfections ;  just  as  he  uses  it  else- 
 where in  the  former  of  these  epistles  (Eph.  i.  23 ; 
 hi.  19;  iv.  13)  to  denote  the  relation  of  the  church 
 to  Christ  or  the  completeness  of  the  blessing  which 
 believers  may  expect  through  Christ.  Another 
 Gnostic  allusion  has  been  found  in  the  relations  of 
 the  sexes  as  set  forth  in  Eph.  v.  22,  ff. ;  but  there 
 is  nothing  in  this  passage  which  may  not  be  gathered 
 from  the  whole  teaching  of  Scripture  on  this  head, 
 and  which  is  not  substantially  asserted  in  i  Cor. 
 xi.  3.  In  the  union  of  Christ  and  his  church  (Eph. 
 V.  24-33),  Baur  discovers  a  Gnostic  Syzygy ;  as  if 
 this  representation  did  not  pei-vade  Scripture  !  as 
 if,  beyond  the  mere  figure  of  marriage,  there  was 
 the  remotest  resemblance  between  the  union  which 
 the  apostle  sets  forth  and  the  Syzygiae  of  the 
 Gnostics !  As  respects  the  use  of  such  terms  as  aocpia, 
 /nvarripiov,  -yvQiais,  4>us,  ffKOTia,  etc.,  it  may  suffice 
 to  say  they  are  no  more  Gnostic  as  they  occur  in 
 these  epistles  than  as  they  occur  elsewhere  in  Scrip- 
 ture, and  that,  if  there  was  any  borrowing  in  the 
 case,  it  is  far  more  probable  that  the  Gnostics  bor- 
 rowed from  the  writer  of  the  epistles,  than  that  the 
 writer  of  the  epistles  borrowed  from  them. 
 
 The  chief  of  the  alleged  Gnostic  references  in 
 the  pastoral  epistles  are  to  be  found  in  the  iJ.\i6oi. 
 
GNOSTIC,  GNOSTICISM 
 
 140 
 
 GOAD 
 
 and  -yeveaXoylai.  of  I  Tim.  i.  4;  iv.  7;  Tit.  iii.  9; 
 in  the  ascetic  notions  referred  to  I  Tim.  iv.  3 ;  and 
 in  the  declaration  that  the  resurrection  was  past 
 already  (2  Tim.  ii.  18).  That  these  refer  to  some 
 speculative  and  theosophic  notions  by  which  the 
 simplicity  of  the  faith  was  endangered,  seems  clear 
 from  the  tone  of  the  apostles'  remarks ;  but  it  is 
 not  in  any  degree  made  certain  by  this,  that  these 
 were  such  as  afterwards  distinguished  the  Gnostic 
 schools.  It  is  not  probable  that  had  the  writer 
 had  in  view  such  speculations  as  those  of  Basilides, 
 Valentinus,  or  Marcion,  he  would  have  applied  to 
 them  such  a  term  as  ypawSeLs,  which  conveys 
 the  idea  not  so  much  of  error  as  of  imbecility. 
 When,  moreover,  we  advert  to  the  epithet  p6fj,LKai, 
 as  applied  to  the  /j.dxai  which  the  writer  denounces 
 (Tit.  iii.  9),  we  shall  probably  see  cause  to  attri- 
 bute a  Jewish  source  to  the  errors  by  which  the 
 Christians  were  assailed ;  especially  as  the  writer 
 expressly  describes  those  whom  he  opposes  as 
 '  they  of  the  circumcision,'  and  cautions  his  readers 
 against  Jewish  myths  (Tit.  i.  10,  14). 
 
 Drawing  our  information  from  the  epistles  them- 
 selves as  to  the  views  and  tendencies  by  which  the 
 false  teachers  (eTepoSiSac/cdXoi)  alluded  to  in  them 
 were  characterised,  it  appears  that  they  boasted 
 of  a  (pi\oao(pia,  which  the  apostle  stigmatises  as  a 
 K€P7)  dTroLTT],  an  empty  cheat  (Col.  ii.  8),  and  a 
 yvwcris,  which  he  denounces  with  equal  decisive- 
 ness as  \j/€vSwuv/j.os,  falsely  called  (i  Tim.  vi.  20). 
 This  they  pretended  to  have  derived  from  tradition 
 (Col.  ii.  8),  and  presented  in  the  form  sometimes  of 
 myth,  sometimes  of  speculative  discussion  (i  Tim. 
 vi.  3-5  ;  Tit.  iii.  9).  They  held  by  Jewish  rites  and 
 ordinances  (Col.  ii.  11,  16;  I  Tim.  i.  7);  followed 
 and  enjoined  ascetic  courses  (20-23  >  ^  Tim.  iv.  I-7), 
 and  propagated  their  errors  under  a  specious  guise 
 of  sanctity  (Col.  ii.  23  ;  I  Tim.  iv.  2  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  6). 
 They  pretended  to  a  superior  knowledge  of  God  (Tit. 
 L  16) ;  they  held  worship  to  be  due  to  angels,  and  pro- 
 bably assigned  to  Christ,  as  the  Logos,  the  place  of 
 dpxdyyeXos  ;  they  taught  that  the  resurrection  was 
 already  past  (2  Tim.  ii.  18) ;  and  they  may  also  have 
 held  doctrines  opposed  to  the  absoluteness  of  the 
 divine  essence,  the  universality  of  the  divine  scheme 
 of  redemption,  the  reality  of  the  person  of  Christ, 
 and  the  exclusiveness  of  his  mediatorial  office,  and 
 may  have  stigmatised  child-bearing  as  deriving  a 
 taint  from  standing  connected  with  matter,  the  es- 
 sentially evil ;  so  as  to  lead  the  apostle  to  make 
 such  pointed  statements  as  we  have  in  i  Tim.  i. 
 17;  ii.  4,  6,  15  ;  iii.  16;  iv.  lo  ;  vi.  15,  16,  etc. 
 Whether  we  conclude  that  they  held  an  emanation- 
 doctrine  similar  to  the  Gnostic  doctrine  of  yEons, 
 will  depend  very  much  on  the  meaning  we  attach 
 to  the  yeveaXor^iai  to  which  they  were  addicted. 
 By  some  these  are  held  to  be  the  Jewish  family 
 registers,  by  others  gradations  of  existences  like 
 the  .(Eons.  There  are  difficulties  attaching  to  both 
 views.  On  the  one  hand  there  is  the  entire  ab- 
 sence of  any  authority  for  understanding  7ej'ea- 
 Xoyla  in  the  sense  of  a  series  of  beings  of  different 
 grades  ;*  and,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  the  want 
 
 *The  language  of  Tertullian  {adv.  Valentianos,  sec. 
 3)  and  of  Irenaeus  [Hcsr.  i.  i,  sub  init.),  can  hardly  be 
 regarded  as  such.  It  is  doubtful  if  the  latter  intends 
 any  reference  to  the  Gnostic  ceons  at  all ;  and  the 
 former  simply  states  his  opinion,  that  one  looking  at 
 the  multitudinous  names  and  combinations  in  the 
 Gnostic  systems  would  be  constrained  to  believe 
 
 of  any  traceable  connection  between  the  genealogi- 
 cal rolls  of  the  Jews  and  doctrinal  errors  on  the 
 part  of  those  who  attached  importance  to  them. 
 In  this  uncertainty  no  help  can  be  obtained  from 
 the  application  by  the  apostle  of  the  epithet  d-Kep- 
 dvToi  to  the  yeveoKcyyiaL  of  which  he  speaks,  for 
 whether  we  take  this  in  the  sense  of  limitless,  end- 
 less, or  in  the  sense  of  useless,  profitless  (iJTOi  iripas 
 lx7]Mv  ^xovcrat  t)  ovbiv  xprjCLfiov,  Chrysostom,  in  loc), 
 it  will  apply  equally  well  to  the  Jewish  rolls  or  to 
 the  Gnostic  Dsonology.  On  the  whole,  the  prefer- 
 ence seems  due  to  the  latter  of  the  opinions  above 
 noted  (comp.  Neander,  Apost.  Zeit.,  p.  422,  Eng. 
 Tr.  i.  340). 
 
 It  is  impossible  to  overlook  the  predominant 
 Jewish  element  in  these  doctrines.  It  is  not,  how- 
 ever, of  the  same  type  as  the  Judaism  which  the 
 apostle  opposes  in  other  of  his  writings,  the  Epistle 
 to  the  Galatians  for  instance.  There  it  was  the 
 Jewish  ceremonial  tradition  which  occupied  the 
 foreground ;  here  it  is  philosophy  and  speculation. 
 In  the  one  case  what  the  apostle  resisted  was  the 
 attempt  to  force  upon  Christianity  the  '  beggarly 
 elements'  (Trrw^d  crrotxeia)  of  a  defunct  economy  ; 
 in  the  other,  what  he  resisted  was  the  attempt  to 
 mix  up  with  the  pure  truth  of  the  gospel  the 
 'worldly  elements'  ((TTOi%era  ro\j  k6(x/j.ov)  of  a 
 purely  human  theosophy.  In  the  latter  there  was 
 undoubtedly  a  mingling  of  the  ethnic  with  the 
 Jewish  speculation  (yvQcrLs) ;  and  probably  Nean- 
 der has  exactly  determined  the  position  of  these 
 heretics  when  he  describes  them  as  '  a  Judaizing 
 sect,  in  which  we  see  the  germ  of  the  Judaizing  Gnos- 
 ticism' {Apostol.  Zeitalt.,  p.  404;  Eng.  Tr.  i.325). 
 
 The  conclusion  to  which  this  inquiry  has  brought 
 us,  is,  that  whilst  there  is  no  evidence  that  Gnosti- 
 cism as  it  appeared  in  the  2d  century  was  known 
 to  the  apostles,  and  whilst  the  teachers  of  error 
 against  whom  they  had  to  contend  came  from  the 
 side  of  Judaism,  there  were  in  their  doctrines  the 
 germs  both  of  Doketic  and  Gnostic  speculation ;  so 
 that  when  these  systems  came  into  vogue,  the 
 Christians  found  in  the  writings  of  the  apostles  the 
 most  suitable  weapons  with  which  to  oppose  them 
 (Michaelis,  iS'/w/aA  2«j.  A^.  7^,  sec.  160;  Tittmann, 
 De  Vestigiis  Gnosticoriun  in  N.  T.  friistra  qua- 
 sitis.  Lips.  1773 ;  Scherer,  De  Gnosticis  qni  in 
 N.  T.  impug?iari  dieuntur,  Arg.  1841  ;  Hilde- 
 brand,  Phil.  Gftosticcz  origities,  Ber.  1839;  Bohmer, 
 Isagoge  in  Epist.  ad  Coloss.,  Ber.  1829;  Burton, 
 Heresies  0/ the  Apostol.  Age,  Worhs,  vol.  iii. ;  Baur, 
 £)ie  sogenannten  Pastoralbtiefe  des  Ap.  Paulus 
 Krit.  nntersiieht,  Tiib.  1835  ;  Schott,  Isagoge  Grit, 
 in  N.  T.,  plur.  locc.  ;  Matthies,  Erkldr.  der  Pas- 
 toralbr.,  Greifsw.  1 840 ;  Lange,  Apost.  Zeitalt.  i. 
 1 17-145). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GOAD.  Two  Hebrew  words  are  translated  by 
 this  term  in  the  A.  V. 
 
 (i-)  'yuTQ,  derived  from  ^J2?,  to  teach,  an  in- 
 strument to  guide  oxen  and  keep  them  in  the  right 
 track  ;  the  word  occurs  only  in  Judg.  iii.  31  ;  the 
 Septuagint  renders  it  dporpincoZi,  and  the  Vulgate 
 vo>?iere,  a  ploughshare.  Though  this  is  not  a  cor- 
 rect interpretation,  yet  doubtless  the  pointed  iron 
 which  armed  the  plough  might,  without  difficulty, 
 be  converted  into  a  formidable  weapon ;  and  this 
 
 •  has  esse  fabulas  et  genealogias  indeterminatas'  ol 
 the  apostle. 
 
GOAT 
 
 141 
 
 GOAT,  SCAPE 
 
 easy  adaptation  of  agricultural  implements  to  war- 
 like purposes  will  account  for  the  despotic  interdict 
 laid  upon  the  Israelites  by  the  Philistines,  I  Sam. 
 tiii.  19,  20  (Kitto,  Daily  Bible  Illustraiions,  ii. 
 341).  Maundrell  noticed  that  in  Palestine  and 
 Syria  the  goads  were  eight  feet  long,  and  at  the 
 larger  end  six  inches  in  circumference.  At  the 
 lesser  end  they  were  armed  with  a  sharp  point  of 
 iron  for  driving  the  oxen,  and  at  the  other  with  a 
 small  spade  or  paddle  of  iron,  strong  and  massy, 
 for  cleansing  the  plough  from  the  clay.  '  I  am 
 confident,'  he  says,  '  that  whoever  should  see  one 
 of  these  instruments  would  judge  it  to  be  not  less 
 fit,  perhaps  fitter,  than  a  sword  for  such  an  execu- 
 tion' as  that  related  in  Judg.  iii.  31  {yourney  from 
 Aleppo,  etc.,  Lond.  iSio,  p.  149).  Buckingham 
 gives  a  similar  description  ( Travels  in  Palestine, 
 Lond.  1822,  vol.  i.  91). 
 
 (2.)  plT  occurs  only  in  i  Sam.  xiii.  21  {Spiira- 
 
 vov,  LXX.  ;  stiniidn77i,  Vulg.)  and  Eccl.  xii.  1 1 
 {^ovKevrpa,  LXX.  ;  stimuli,  Vulg.)  Kimchi  and 
 other  Jewish  writers  consider  this  word  simply  to 
 
 mean  the  point  or  head  of  the  1UPT0  (Gesenius, 
 Thesaurus,  p.  349). — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 GOAT.    [Akko  ;  Attudim  ;  Ez;  Gedi  ;Yael; 
 
 Sa'iR  ;  TsAPHIIi.] 
 
 GOAT,  SCAPE.  A  reference  to  this  head  is 
 made  under  the  article  Azazel.  The  article  is  re- 
 tained as  presenting  the  view  of  Hengstenberg. 
 
 It  appears  to  flengstenberg  that  an  Egyptian 
 reference  must  necessarily  be  acknowledged  in 
 the  ceremony  of  the  Great  Atonement  day  ;  and 
 in  order  to  establish  this  reference,  he  first  en- 
 deavours to  substantiate  his  view  of  the  meaning  of 
 
 the  word  ?TSTy,  Azazel ;  which  is,  that  it  desig- 
 nates Satan.  But  this  notion  can  only  be  placed 
 in  a  right  point  of  view  by  taking  a  general  survey 
 of  the  whole  rite,  in  order  to  point  out  definitely 
 the  position  which  Azazel  holds  in  it. 
 
 The  account  of  this  remarkable  ceremony  is 
 contained  in  Lev.  xvi. 
 
 First,  in  verses  i-io,  the  general  outlines  are 
 given  ;  and  then  follows,  in  verses  li,  sq.,  the  ex- 
 planation of  separate  points.  It  is  of  no  small 
 importance  for  the  interpretation  that  this  arrange- 
 ment, which  has  been  recognised  by  few  interpre- 
 ters, should  be  clearly  understood.  Aaron  first 
 offers  a  bullock  as  a  sin-offering  for  himself  and 
 his  house.  He  then  takes  a  firepan  full  of  coals 
 from  the  altar,  with  fragrant  incense,  and  goes 
 within  the  vail.  There  he  puts  the  incense  on  the 
 fire  before  the  Lord,  and  '  the  cloud  of  the  in- 
 cense '  (the  embodied  prayer)  covers  the  mercy- 
 seat  which  is  upon  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  that 
 he  die  not.  Aaron  then  takes  the  blood  of  the 
 bullock  and  sprinkles  it  seven  times  before  the 
 mercy-seat.  After  he  has  thus  completed  the  ex- 
 piation for  himself,  he  proceeds  to  the  expiation 
 for  the  people.  He  takes  two  he-goats  for  a  sin- 
 offering  for  the  children  of  Israel  (xvi.  5).  These 
 he  places  before  the  Lord  at  the  door  of  the  ta- 
 bernacle (xvi.  7)-  He  casts  lots  upon  them  ;  one 
 lot  '  for  the  Lord '  and  one  lot  '  for  Azazel '  (xvi. 
 8).  The  goat  upon  which  the  lot  for  the  Lord  fell 
 (xvi.  9)  he  offers  for  a  sin-offering,  brings  the 
 blood  within  the  vail,  and  does  with  it  as  with 
 the  blood  of  the  bullock.  In  this  way  is  the 
 sanctuary  purified  from  the  defilements  of  the  child- 
 
 ren of  Israel,  their  transgressions,  and  all  their 
 sins,  so  that  the  Lord,  the  holy  one  and  pure,  can 
 continue  to  dwell  there  with  them.  After  the  ex- 
 piation is  completed,  the  second  goat,  on  which 
 fell  the  lot  for  Azazel,  is  brought  forward  (xvi.  lo). 
 He  is  first  placed  before  the  Lord  to  absolve  him 
 
 ("Ivy  "IDD?)-  Then  Aaron  lays  his  hands  upon  his 
 head,  and  confesses  over  him  the  (forgiven)  iniqui- 
 ties, transgressions,  and  sins  of  the  children  of 
 Israel,  puts  them  upon  his  head,  and  gives  him  to 
 a  man  to  take  away,  in  order  that  he  may  bear 
 the  sins  of  the  people  into  a  solitary  land  (xvi. 
 22),  into  the  desert,  for  Azazel  (xvi.  10).  Then 
 Aaron  offers  a  burnt-offering  for  himself,  and  one 
 for  the  people. 
 
 Now,  in  respect  to  language,  there  can  be  no 
 objection  to  interpreting  Azazel  as  meaning  Satan. 
 
 That  the  Hebrew  pfy,  Azal,  corresponds  to  the 
 Arabic  J  LC,  was  long  ago  asserted  by  Bochart 
 and  others,   and  is  now  generally  admitted  ;  and 
 
 7fj^|y,  Azazel,  belongs  to  the  form  which  repesls 
 the  second  and  third  radicals.  In  reference  to 
 this  form,  Ewald  remarks  {Gramm.  sec.  333),  that 
 it  expresses  general  intension,  and  that  the  idea 
 of  continual,  regular  repetition,  without  interrup- 
 tion, is  also  specially  expressed  by  the  repetition 
 of  nearly  the  whole  word.  The  Arabic  word 
 Azala  signifies  in  that  language  '  semovit,  dimovit, 
 removit,  descivit ; '  in  the  passive  it  signifies  '  re- 
 motus,  depositus  fuit  ; '  and  the  participle,  azul, 
 means  'a  cseteris  se  sejungens.'  In  like  manner 
 azal,  mazul,  denote  'semotus,  remotus,  abdicatus.' 
 From  this  two  explanations  of  Azazel,  as  relating 
 to  Satan,  may  be  educed  ;  either  '  the  apostate ' 
 (from  God),  or,  'the  one  entirely  separate.'  It  is 
 in  favour  of  the  latter  that  the  signification  '  desci- 
 vit '  is  only  a  derived  one,  and  that  it  is  appro- 
 priate to  the  abode  in  the  desert.  The  goat  is  sent 
 to  Azazel  in  the  desert,  in  the  divided  land  ('  terra 
 abscissa').  How  then  could  he  be  designated  by 
 a  more  appropriate  name  than  '  the  separate  one?' 
 
 And  this  explanation,  as  far  as  the  facts  of  the 
 case  are  concerned,  is,  in  Hengstenberg's  opinion, 
 equally  free  from  any  well  grounded  objection. 
 The  doctrinal  signification  of  the  symbolical  action, 
 as  far  as  it  has  reference  to  Azazel,  is  this,  that 
 Satan,  the  enemy  of  the  people  of  God,  cannot 
 harm  those  forgiven  by  God,  but  that  they,  with 
 sins  forgiven  of  God,  can  go  before  him  with  a 
 light  heart,  deride  him,  and  triumph  over  him. 
 
 The  positive  reasons  which  favour  this  explana- 
 tion are  the  following  : —  . 
 
 I.  The  manner  in  which  the  phrase  ?tKTyS  '  fof 
 Azazel,'  is  contrasted  with  mriv,  '  for  Jehovah,' 
 necessarily  requires  that  Azazel  should  denote  a 
 personal  existence,  and,  if  so,  only  Satan  can  be 
 intended.  2.  If  by  Azazel,  Satan  is  not  meant, 
 there  is  no  ground  for  the  lots  that  were  cast.  We 
 can  then  see  no  reason  why  the  decision  was  re- 
 ferred to  God  ;  why  the  high-priest  did  not  simply 
 assign  one  goat  for  a  sin-offering,  and  the  other 
 for  sending  away  into  the  desert.  The  circum- 
 stance that  lots  are  cast  implies  that  Jehovah_  is 
 made  the  antagonist  of  a  personal  existence,  with 
 respect  to  which  it  is  designed  to  exalt  the  un- 
 limited power  of  Jehovah,  and  to  exclude  al] 
 equality  of  this  being  with  Jehovah.  3.  Azazel, 
 as  a  word  of  comparatively  unfrequent  formation. 
 
GOAT,    SCAPE 
 
 H'J 
 
 GOAT,  SCAPE 
 
 and  only  used  here,  is  best  fitted  lor  the  designa- 
 tion of  Satan.  In  eveiy  other  explanation  the 
 question  remains,  '  Why,  then  (as  it  has  every  ap- 
 pearance of  heing),  is  the  word  formed  for  this 
 occasion,  and  why  is  it  never  found  except  here  ?' 
 
 By  this  explanation  the  third  chapter  of  Ze- 
 chariah  comes  into  a  relation  with  our  passage, 
 entirely  like  that  in  which  chap.  iv.  of  the  same 
 prophecy  stands  to  Exod.  xxv.  31.  Here,  as 
 there,  the  Lord,  Satan,  and  the  high-priest  ap- 
 pear. Satan  wishes  by  his  accusations  to  destroy 
 the  favourable  relations  between  the  Lord  and  his 
 people.  The  high-priest  presents  himself  before 
 the  Lord,  not  with  a  claim  of  purity,  according  to 
 law,  but  laden  with  his  own  sins  and  the  sins  of 
 his  people.  Here  Satan  thinks  to  find  the  safest 
 occasion  for  his  attacks  ;  but  he  is  mistaken.  For- 
 giveness baffles  his  designs,  and  he  is  compelled  to 
 retire  in  confusion.  It  is  evident  that  the  doctrinal 
 part  of  both  passages  is  substantially  the  same,  and 
 tliat  the  one  in  Zechariah  may  be  considered  the 
 oldest  commentary  extant  upon  the  words  of 
 Moses.  In  substance  we  have  the  same  doctrine 
 also  in  Rev.  xii.  10,  1 1  ;  '  the  accuser  of  our 
 brethren  is  cast  down,  who  accuses  them  before 
 our  God  day  and  night,  and  they  overcame  him  by 
 the  blood  of  the  Lamb.' 
 
 The  relation  in  which,  according  to  this  explana- 
 tion, Satan  is  here  placed  to  the  desert,  finds  ana- 
 logy in  other  passages  of  the  Bible,  where  the 
 deserted  and  waste  places  appear  as  peculiarly 
 the  abode  of  the  Evil  Spirit.  See  Matt.  xii.  43, 
 where  the  unclean  spirit  cast  out  of  the  man  is  re- 
 presented as  going  through  '  dry  places  ; '  also 
 Luke  viii.  27 ;  and  Rev.  xviii.  2,  according  to 
 wliich  the  fallen  Babylon  is  to  be  the  dwelling  of 
 all  unclean  spirits. 
 
 To  the  reasons  already  given,  the  Egyptian  re- 
 ference, which  the  rite  bears  according  to  this  ex- 
 planation, may  be  added — '  a  reference  so  remark- 
 able, that  no  room  is  left  for  the  thought  that  it 
 has  arisen  through  false  explanalion.' 
 
 Dr.  Hengstenberg  then  proceeds  to  meet  the 
 objections  which  have  been  brought  to  bear  against 
 the  view  adopted  by  him — '  adopted,'  for  this  ex- 
 planation is  by  no  means  a  new  one,  though  he 
 has  brought  it  forward  in  greater  force  than  be- 
 fore, and  with  new  illustrations. 
 
 The  most  important  of  the  objections,  and  the 
 one  which  has  exerted  the  greatest  influence,  is 
 this,  that  it  gives  a  sense  which  stands  in  direct 
 opposition  to  the  spirit  of  the  religion  of  Jehovah. 
 It  is  asked,  '  Could  an  offering  properly  be  made  to 
 the  Evil  Spirit  in  the  desert,  which  the  common 
 precepts  of  religion  in  the  Mosaic  law,  as  well  as 
 the  significance  of  the  ceremony,  entirely  oppose?' 
 To  this  Hengstenberg  answers — '  Were  it  really 
 necessary  to  connect  with  the  explanation  of 
 Azazel  as  meaning  Satan,  the  assumption  that 
 sacrifice  was  offered  to  him,  we  should  feel  obliged 
 to  abandon  it,  notwithstanding  all  the  reasons  in 
 its  favour.  But  nothing  is  easier  than  to  show  that 
 this  manner  of  understanding  the  explanation  is 
 entirely  ari:>itrary.  The  following  reasons  prove 
 that  an  offering  made  to  Azazel  cannot  be  sup- 
 posed :' — 
 
 I.  Both  the  goats  are,  in  verse  5,  taken  together 
 as  forming  unitedly  one  single  offering,  which 
 wholly  excludes  the  thought  that  one  of  them  was 
 brought  as  an  offering  to  Jehovah,  and  the  other  to 
 Azazel.     And  further,  an  offenng  which  is  made 
 
 to  a  bad  being  cau  never  be  a  sin-offering.  The 
 idea  of  a  sin-offering  implies  holiness,  hatred  of  sin 
 in  the  being  to  whom  the  offering  is  made. 
 
 2.  Both  the  goats  were  fii'St  placed  at  the  dooi 
 of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  before  the 
 Lord.  To  him,  therefore,  they  both  belong  ;  and 
 when  afterwards  one  of  them  is  sent  to  Azazel,  this 
 is  done  in  accordance  with  the  wish  of  Jehovah, 
 and  also  without  destroying  the  original  relation, 
 since  the  one  sent  to  Azazel  does  not  cease  to  be- 
 long to  the  Lord. 
 
 3.  The  casting  of  lots  also  shows  that  both  these 
 goats  were  considered  as  belonging  to  the  Lord. 
 The  lot  is  never  used  in  the  O.  T.  except  as  a 
 means  of  obtaining  the  decision  of  Jehovah.  So 
 then,  here  also,  Jehovah  decides  which  of  the  goats 
 is  to  be  offered  as  a  sin-oflering,  and  wliich  to  be 
 offered  to  Azazel. 
 
 4.  The  goat  assigned  to  Azazel,  before  he  is  sent 
 away,  is  absolved  (xvi.  21).  The  act  by  which  the 
 second  goat  is,  as  it  were,  identified  with  the  first, 
 in  order  to  transfer  to  the  living  the  nature  which 
 the  dead  possessed,  shews  to  wJiat  the  phrase  '  for 
 a  sin-offering,'  in  verse  5,  has  reference.  The  two 
 goats  (as  Spencer  had  before  observed)  became,  as 
 it  were,  one  goat,  and  their  duality  rests  only  on 
 the  physical  impossibility  of  making  one  goat  re- 
 present the  different  points  to  be  exhibited.  Had 
 it  been  possible,  in  the  circumstances,  to  restore 
 life  to  the  goat  that  was  sacrificed,  this  would  have 
 been  done.  The  two  goats,  in  this  connection, 
 stand  in  a  relation  entirely  similar  to  that  of  the 
 two  birds  in  the  purification  of  the  leprous  persons 
 in  Lev.  xiv.  4,  of  which  the  one  let  go  was  dipped 
 in  the  blood  of  the  one  slain.  As  soon  as  the 
 second  goat  is  considered  an  offering  to  Azazel,  the 
 connection  between  it  and  the  first  ceases,  and  it 
 cannot  be  conceived  why  it  was  absolved  before  it 
 went  away. 
 
 5.  According  to  verse  21,  the  already  forgiven 
 sins  of  Israel  are  laid  upon  the  head  of  the  goat. 
 These  he  bears  to  Azazel  in  the  desert.  But  where 
 there  is  already  forgiveness  of  sin,  there  is  no  more 
 offering. 
 
 The  other  objections  which  have  on  different 
 principles  been  made  to  this  view  are  of  less  weight. 
 
 One  of  them,  which  alleges  the  apparent  equality 
 given  under  this  explanation  to  the  claims  of  Jeho- 
 vah and  of  Satan,  is  answered  by  showing  that  it 
 is  rather  calculated  to  act  against  the  tendency  ol 
 an  ancient  people  to  entertain  that  belief  The  lot 
 is  under  the  direction  of  Jehovah,  and  is  a  means 
 of  ascertaining  his  will  ;  and  not  a  mediation  be- 
 tween the  two  by  an  independent  third  agency, 
 which  decides  to  which  the  one  and  to  which  the 
 other  shall  fall. 
 
 Another  objection,  founded  on  the  belief  that 
 Satan  nowhere  appears  in  the  Pentateuch,  will  not 
 in  this  country  be  deemed  to  require  much  answer. 
 It  is  entertained  chiefly  by  those  who  believe  that 
 the  presence  of  Satan  in  Scripture  is  owing  to  the 
 influence  of  a  foreign  (Babylonian  and  Persian) 
 theology  upon  Hebrew  opinions  ;  and  it  is  an- 
 swered by  a  reference  to  the  book  of  Job,  in  which 
 Satan  appears  distinctly,  while  even  the  objectors 
 admit  that  this  book  was  written  long  before  the 
 assigned  influence  existed.  And  if  it  were  indeed 
 necessary  to  refer  the  knowledge  of  Satan  to  a 
 foreign  influence,  it  might  be  perceived  that  quite 
 as  much  is  accomplished  by  referring  to  the  Egyp. 
 tian  Typhon  as  to  the  Persian  Ahreman.     Hengs 
 
GOAT,  SCAPE 
 
 143 
 
 GOATH 
 
 tenberg  also  points  to  the  intimations  of  the  doc- 
 trine of  Satan,  which  appear  in  Gen.  iii.,  and  re- 
 marks— '  From  a  theological  point  of  view,  as  well 
 as  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  it  will  be  found  al- 
 most impossible  that  a  dogma  which,  in  the  later 
 period  of  the  revelation,  holds  so  important  a  place, 
 should  not  at  least  be  referred  to  in  the  statement 
 of  the  first  principles  of  that  revelation. 
 
 After  exhibiting  the  positive  reasons  for  this  ex- 
 planation, and  disposing  of  the  objections  to  it, 
 Hengstenberg  subjects  to  examination  those  among 
 the  various  explanations  that  have  been  given, 
 which  are  now  current  ;  and  makes  out  that  they 
 are  either  philologically  untenable  with  reference  to 
 the  word  Azazel,  do  not  agree  with  the  context,  or 
 are  unsatisfactory  in  the  result  to  which  they  con- 
 duct us. 
 
 If  it  has  been  thus  established  that  Satan  is  to 
 be  understood  by  the  term  Azazel,  then,  argues 
 Hengstenberg,  an  allusion  to  Egypt  in  the  whole 
 rite  cannot  be  mistaken.  In  that  countiy  every 
 bad  influence  or  power  of  nature,  and  generally 
 the  bad  itself,  in  a  physical  or  ethical  respect,  was 
 personified  under  the  name  of  Typhon.  The  doc- 
 trine of  a  Typhon  among  the  Egyptians  is  as  old  as 
 it  is  firmly  established.  Representations  of  him 
 are  found  on  numerous  monuments  as  old  as  the 
 time  of  the  Pharaohs.  Herodotus  speaks  of 
 Typhon  (ii.  144,  156,  and  hi.  5).  But  Plutarch 
 gives  the  most  accurate  and  particular  account,  with, 
 indeed,  many  incorrect  additions. 
 
 The  barren  regions  around  Egypt  genei-ally  be- 
 longed to  Typhon.  The  desert  was  especially 
 assigned  to  him  as  his  residence,  whence  he  made 
 his  wasting  inroads  into  the  consecrated  land.  '  He 
 is,'  says  Creuzer,  'the  lover  of  the  degenerate 
 Nephthys,  the  hostile  Libyan  desert,  and  of  the 
 sea-shore.  There  is  the  kingdom  of  Typhon.  On 
 the  contrary,  Egypt  the  blessed,  the  Nile-valley 
 ghttering  with  f|^sh  crops,  is  the  land  of  Isis.' 
 Herodotus  ascribes  a  similar  dwelling  to  Typhon. 
 
 By  a  strange  but  very  natural  alteration,  the 
 Egyptian  sought  sometimes  to  propitiate  the  god 
 whom  they  hated,  but  feared,  by  offerings,  and 
 indeed  by  those  which  consisted  of  sacred  animals. 
 Sometimes,  again,  when  they  supposed  that  the 
 power  of  the  gods  was  prevalent  and  sustained 
 them  against  him,  they  allowed  themselves  in  every 
 species  of  mockery  and  abuse.  '  The  obscured 
 and  broken  power  of  Typhon,'  says  Plutarch,  '  even 
 now,  in  the  convulsions  of  death,  they  seek  some- 
 times to  propitiate  by  offerings,  and  endeavour  to 
 persuade  him  to  favour  them  ;  but  at  other  times, 
 on  certain  festival  occasions,  they  scoff  at  and  insult 
 him.  Then  they  cast  mud  at  those  who  are  of  a  red 
 complexion,  and  throw  down  an  ass  from  a  preci- 
 pice, as  the  Coptites  do,  because  they  suppose  that 
 Typhon  was  of  the  colour  of  the  fox  and  the  ass.' 
 
 The  most  important  passage  on  the  worship  of 
 Typhon  is  found  in  Dc  Is.  et  Osii:  p.  380  :  '  But 
 when  a  great  and  troublesome  heat  prevails,  which 
 in  excess  either  brings  along  with  it  destructive 
 sickness  or  other  strange  or  extraordinary  misfor- 
 tunes, the  priests  take  some  of  the  sacred  animals, 
 in  profound  silence,  to  a  dark  place.  There  they 
 threaten  them  first  and  terrify  them  ;  aiid  when  the 
 calamity  continues,  they  offer  these  animals  in  sacri- 
 fice there.' 
 
 Now,  the  supposition  of  a  reference  to  these  Ty- 
 ■phonia  sacra  Hilsius  considers  as  a  profanation. 
 But  it  is  seen  at  once  that  the  reference  contended 
 
 for  by  him  is  materially  different  from  that  adoptee 
 by  our  author.  The  latter  is  a  controversial  one. 
 In  opposition  to  the  Egyptian  view,  which  implied 
 the  necessity  of  yielding  respect  even  to  bad  beings 
 generally,  if  men  would  insure  themselves  against 
 them,  it  was  intended  by  this  rite  to  bring  Israel  tc 
 the  deepest  consciousness  that  all  trouble  is  the 
 punishment  of  a  just  and  holy  God,  whom  they, 
 through  their  sins,  have  offended  ;  that  they  must 
 reconcile  themselves  only  with  him  ;  that  when 
 that  is  done,  and  the  forgiveness  of  sins  is  obtained, 
 the  bad  being  can  harm  no  farther. 
 
 How  veiy  natural  and  how  entirely  in  accord- 
 ance with  circumstances  such  a  reference  was,  is 
 evident  from  the  facts  contained  in  other  passages 
 of  the  Pentateuch,  which  shew  how  severe  a  con- 
 test the  religious  principles  of  the  Israelites  had  to 
 undergo  with  the  religious  notions  imbibed  in 
 Egypt.  This  is  especially  exhibited  in  the  regula- 
 tions in  Leviticus  xvii.,  following  directly  upon  the 
 law  concerning  the  atonement-day,  which  prove 
 that  the  Egyptian  idol-worship  yet  continued  to  be 
 practised  among  the  Israelites.  The  same  thing  is 
 also  evident  from  the  occurrences  connected  with 
 the  worship  of  the  golden  calf. 
 
 The  assumption  of  a  reference  so  specially  con- 
 troversial might  indeed  be  supposed  unnecessary, 
 since  in  a  religion,  which  teaches  generally  the  ex- 
 istence of  a  powerful  bad  being,  the  error  here 
 combated,  the  belief  that  this  being  possesses  other 
 than  derived  power,  will  naturally  arise  in  those 
 who  have  not  found  the  right  solution  of  the  riddle 
 of  human  life  in  the  deeper  knowledge  of  human 
 sinfulness. 
 
 But  yet  the  whole  rite  has  too  direct  a  reference 
 to  a  prescribed  practice  of  propitiating  the  bad 
 being,  and  imphes  that  former  offerings  were  made 
 to  him — a  thing  which  could  never  be  the  natural 
 product  of  Israelitish  soil,  and  could  scarcely 
 spring  up  tSere,  since  such  an  embodying  of  error 
 contradicts  fundamental  principles  among  the  Israel- 
 ites respecting  the  being  of  Jehovah,  which,  indeed, 
 allows  the  existence  of  no  other  power  with  itself 
 
 And,  finally,  there  exists  here  a  peculiar  trait, 
 which  in  Hengstenberg's  opinion  makes  it  certain 
 that  there  is  an  Egj'ptian  reference,  namely,  the 
 circumstance  that  the  goat  was  sent  to  Azazel  into 
 the  desert.  The  special  residence  of  Typhon  was 
 in  the  desert,  according  to  the  Egyptian  doctrine, 
 which  is  most  intimately  connected  with  the  natu- 
 ral condition  of  the  country.  There,  accordingly, 
 is  Azazel  placed  in  our  passage,  not  in  the  beliet 
 that  this  was  literally  true,  but  merely  symbolically 
 (Hengstenberg,  Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses). 
 
 GOATH   (nya,    or  with   suff.,    nrij?2  ;    Vulg. 
 
 Goaika),  mentioned  only  Jer.  xxxi.  39,  where  it 
 apparently  denotes  some  prominent  object  which 
 served  to  mark  in  one  direction  the  boundaiy  of 
 Jerusalem  ;  but  whether  it  were  a  hill,  or  a  valley, 
 or  a  pool,  is  altogether  uncertain.  In  the  Targ.  of 
 Jonathan  it  is  rendered  rhiV  n3''^3>  the  heifer's  pool; 
 
 and  this  derives  some  slight  support  from  the  pro- 
 bable connection  of  the  word  with  nW  mugiit  (Ges. 
 
 s.  V.)  In  the  Sept.  the  clause  reads  irepiKVKXu'^jj- 
 aerai  kijkXu)  i^  eKXeKrQv  Xl^wv.  Equally  uncertain 
 is  the  position  of  the  place.  The  context  seems  to 
 favour  the  conjecture  that  it  was  on  the  southern 
 1  side  of  the  city. — S.  N. 
 
GOB 
 
 144 
 
 GOD 
 
 GOB.  2)i,  Is.  xxxiii.  4 ;  Sept.  d/c/oiSas  ;  Vulg. 
 is  deficient ;  Eng.  locusts  ;  Amos  vii.  i,  ewiyovri 
 d.Kpidwi' ;  Aquila,  ^opddwi'  (voratrices),  locustte, 
 grasshoppers;  Nah.  iii.  17,  drreXa/Sos,  or  drreXe- 
 /3os,  locusts,  grasshoppers.  Plere  the  lexicogra- 
 phers, finding  no  Hebrew  root,  resort  to  the  Arabic. 
 Bochart  derives  it  from  the  Arabic  X3J,  '  to  creep 
 out'  (of  the  ground),  as  the  locusts  do  in  sprmg. 
 But  this  applies  to  the  young  of  all  species  of  locusts, 
 and  his  quotations  from  Aristotle  and  Pliny  occur 
 unfortunately  in  general  descriptions  of  the  locust. 
 
 Castell  gives  another  Arabic  root  (i,     -^^)  2XJ, 
 
 seen  it ^  'to  cut'  or  'tear,'  but  this  is  open  to  a 
 similar  objection.  Parkhurst  proposes  2J,  any- 
 thing gibbous,  curved,  or  arched,  and  gravely  adds, 
 '  the  locust  in  the  eatcrpillar  state,  so  called  from 
 its  shape  in  general,  or  from  its  continually  Imiieh- 
 I'ng  out  its  back  in  moving.'  The  Sept.  word  in 
 Nahum,  drrfXe/Sos,  may  be  shewn  to  mean  a  per- 
 fect insect  and  species.  Accordingly,  Aristotle 
 speaks  of  its  parturition  and  eggs  {Hist.  Anini. 
 V.  29  ;  so  also  Plutarch,  De  Isid.  et  Osir.)  It 
 seems,  however,  not  unlikely  that  it  means  a  wing- 
 less species  of  locust,  genus  Podisma  of  Latreille. 
 Grasshoppers,  which  are  of  this  kind,  he  includes 
 under  the  genus  Tettix.  Hesychius  defines  the 
 drreXe/Sos  as  a.Kpl'i  fiiKpd,  'a  small  locust;'  and 
 Pliny  describes  them  as  '  locustanim  minimce,  sine 
 pennis,  quas  attelabos  vocant'  {Hist.  Auit.  xxix.  5). 
 Accordingly  the  Sept.  ascribes  only  leaping  to  it, 
 i^rjXaTo  d)s  drr^XeBos.  In  Nahum  we  have  the 
 construction  ^2)i  2)1,  locusta  locustarum,  which 
 the  lexicons  compare  with  D''t^^p  ly^p,  and  ex- 
 plain as  a  vast  multitude  of  locusts.  Archbishop 
 Newcome  suggests  that  '  the  phrase  is  either  a 
 double  reading  where  the  scribes  had  a  doubt 
 which  was  the  true  reading,  or  a  mistaken  repeti- 
 tion not  expunged.'  He  adds,  that  we  may  sup- 
 pose ''3'13  the  contracted  plural  for  C^IJ  {hnpi-oved 
 Version  of  the  Minor  Prophets,  Pontefr.  1809,  p. 
 188). 
 
 GOB  (3iJ),  a  place  mentioned  in  2  .Sam.  xxi.  18 
 and  19,  where  battles  were  fought  between  the 
 Philistines  and  Israelites.  The  Septuagmt  reads 
 in  one  verse  Fe'S-,  and  in  the  other  'Po/^,  Al.  Po/S  ; 
 but  the  parallel  passage  in  i  Chron.  xx.  4  reads 
 Gezer  [Gezer].  The  two  places  were  probably 
 close  together,  but  the  site  is  unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 GOBLET  (}2X  ;  LXX.  KpdT-qp,  dyav^hO).     This 
 
 ■word  is  only  once  used  in  the  A.  V.,  Song  vii.  2, 
 '  Thy  navel  is  like  a  round  goblet.'  The  Hebrew 
 word  |2S  also  occurs  in  two  other  places  (Exod. 
 
 xxiv.  6,  A.  V.  'basons,'  and  Is.  xxii.  24,  A.  V. 
 'cups.')  From  Exod.  xxiv.  6  it  is  clear  that  the 
 vessel  was  large  and  round,  or  it  would  not  have 
 been  adapted  to  hold  the  blood  of  the  sacrifices. 
 In  Song  vii.  2  the  adjective  "lilD  (round)  is  incor- 
 rectly rendered  ropevrbs,  although  these  goblets 
 may  of  course  have  been  occasionally  embossed. 
 From  the  third  passage  (Is.  xxii.  24),  it  appears 
 that  vessels  and  instruments  of  all  kinds  were  sus- 
 pended from  pegs  on  the  temple  walls.  The 
 Peshito  is  here  obviously  mistaken  in  rendering 
 |3X,  by  '  psaltery  ;'  a  rendering  which  is  the  more 
 
 strange  because  the  cognate  Syriac  word  is  used 
 to  render  vdpia  in  John  ii.  6,  7.  [See  Basons.] — 
 F.  W.  F. 
 
 GOD.  This  word  stands  in  the  A.  V.  as  the 
 invariable  representative  of  the  Hebrew  ?X, 
 r\Vii,   and  D^^PX.*     This  seems,   therefore,   the 
 
 proper  place  for  introducing  an  enquiry  into  these 
 terms. 
 
 I.  We  shall  commence  by  a  summary  of  the 
 usages  of  these  words. 
 
 I.   ?X.     This  term  is  used  in  the  most  general 
 
 way  as  a  designation  of  Deity,  whether  of  the  true 
 God  or  of  the  false  gods,  even  the  idols,  of  the 
 heathen.     In  the  latter  reference  it  occurs  Is.  xliv. 
 
 10,    15;    xlv.    20;    xlvi.   6;  and  in  the  pi.    Q'^pH, 
 
 Exod.  XV.  1 1 ;  Dan.  xi.  36 ;  though  in  both  these  last 
 instances  it  may  be  questioned  whether  the  word 
 is  not  used  in  the  sense  of  mighty  ones.  To  render 
 the  application  of  the  term  in  this  reference  more 
 specific,    such    epithets    as    inX,    other,  foreign 
 
 (Exod.  xxxiv.  14),  IT,  strange,  hoitile  (Ps.  Ixxxi. 
 10),  133,  strange  (Deut.  xxxii.  12).  When  used 
 of  the  true  God,  PX  is  usually  preceded  by  the 
 article  (bXH,  Gen.  xxxi.  13 ;  Deut.  vii.  9),  or  fol- 
 lowed by  such  distinctive  epithets  as  "''HE',  Ahnighly 
 (Exod.  vi.  3);  D?iy,  eternal  (Gen.  xxi.  33;  Is.  xl. 
 28);  jivy.  Supreme  (Gen.  xiv.  18);  Tl,  living 
 (Josh.  iii.  10) ;  i33,  mighty  (Is.  ix.  5) ;  or  such 
 qualifying  adjuncts  as  ^^33,  of  glory  (Ps.  xxix.  3) ; 
 nOX,  of  truth  (Ps.  xxxi.  6);  DvDJ,  of  retributions 
 (Jer.  li.  56) ;  i'NTl^n,  of  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxi.  13). 
 ^N"1E;\  of  Israel  (Gen.  xxxiii.  20) ;  \T\p']  (Deut. 
 xxxiii.  26).  In  poetry  ?K  sometimes  occurs  as  a 
 sign  of  the  superlative ;  as  7N""'"l"in,  hills  of  God, 
 
 very  high  hills  (Ps.  xxxvi.  7) ;  ^X'T'IN,  cedars  of 
 Co^  (Ixxx.  11).  The  phrase  Dv{<"''J3  occurs  Ps. 
 xxix.  I ;  Ixxxix.  7 ;  and  is  supposed  by  some  to 
 refer  to  angels;  but  others  take  D''5N  hce  for 
 D  v''N,  and  translate  So)is  of  the  mighty  (see  Rosen- 
 miiller,  in  loc.)     There  is  no  instance  of  bX  in  the 
 
 singular  being  used  in  the  sense  of  mighty  one  or 
 hero;  for  even  if  we  retain  that  reading  in  Ezek. 
 xxxi.  1 1  (though  thirty  of  Kennicott's  codices  have 
 
 the  reading  y^,   and   the  probability  is  that  in 
 
 those  which  present  7X1  the  '•  is  quiescent),  the 
 rendering  '  God  of  the  nations,'  may  be  accepted 
 as  conveying  a  strong  but  just  description  of  the 
 power  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  submission 
 rendered  to  him;  comp.  2  Cor.  iv.  4.     In  proper 
 
 names  PX  is  often  found  sometimes  in  the  first 
 
 *  In  a  few  places  where  the  combination  ""Jli? 
 niri'',  Ado7iaj  yehovah,  occurs,  our  translators  have 
 given  '  God '  as  the  rendering  of  mn\  They  have 
 done  this,  however,  merely  to  avoid  the  awkward- 
 ness of  such  a  combination  as  Lord  Lord.  These, 
 as  merely  exceptional  cases,  may  be  passed  over 
 here.     [JehovahJ. 
 
GOD 
 
 145 
 
 GOD 
 
 member  of  the  compound  word,  ex.  gr.,  11  vX 
 Elijah,  yh'&  Eldad,  etc.,  and  sometimes  a;;  the 
 last  member,  ex.  gr. ,  ^XIDt^'  Samuel,  ~)^\xh  Lemuel, 
 ^N3t3  Tabeel,  etc. 
 
 2.  HvXj  ph  D^'^?^5•  The  singular  form  occuis 
 only  in  poetry,  especially  in  Job,  and  in  the  later 
 books  such  as  Daniel,  Nehemiah,  and  Chronicles. 
 It  is  used  as  well  of  idol  deities  as  of  the  true 
 God  (Dan.  xi.  37,  38  ;  Habak.  i.  11 ;  Deut.  xxxii. 
 15  ;  Ps.  1.  22  ;  Habak.  iii.  3,  etc.)  ;  once  in  the 
 former  case  with  the  addition  of  ^^J  (Dan.  xi.  39), 
 and  in  the  latter  with  that  of  Dpy  (Ps.  cxiv.  7). 
 The  more  common  usage  is  that  of  the  plural. 
 This  pervades  all  the  books  of  the  O.  T.,  from  the 
 eaihest  to  the  latest.  The  word  is  used  principally 
 of  the  true  God,  and  in  this  case  frequently  with 
 the  article  prefixed  (Gen.  v.  22  ;  vi.  9,  1 1  ;  xvii. 
 18),  as  well  as  with  such  adjuncts  as  D''DC'n  (Neh. 
 i.  4),  or  with  the  addition  of  )-*"lXni  (Gen.  xxiv.  3) ; 
 ps  (Is.  Ixv.  16)  ;  plV  (Ps.  iv.  2)  ;  niSnVH  (Am. 
 iii.  13),  etc.     When  the  relation  of  Israel  to  God  is 
 
 to  be  indicated,  the  phrases  PSIE'''  TIPX  Elohe  Yish- 
 rael,  Hpy  "N  Elohe  Yaaqob,  D|■nn^^  "N  E.  Abra- 
 ham, are  used  (Ezek.  v.  i  ;  Ps.  xx.  2  ;  xlvii.  lO,  etc.); 
 and  in  this  case,  as  the  term  Elohim  is  equivalent  in 
 effect  to  Jehovah,  it  is  often  used  interchangeably 
 with  that  term  ;  thus  Moses,  who  is  designated  13y 
 mn^  Ebed-Jchovah  (Deut.  xxxiv.  5),  is  called  in  the 
 
 same  sense  D^^?X  "J?  Ebed-Elohim  (Dan.  ix.  11)  ; 
 and  the  same  object  is  designated  indifferently  mi 
 
 nirT"  Ritach-Jehovah,  and  DTl^X  "1  Rnach-Elo- 
 him  (comp.  Judg.  iii.  10,  and  Exod.  xxxi.  3, 
 etc.)  Not  unfrequently  the  two  terms  are  com- 
 bined (Lev.  xviii.  2,  4,  etc.  ;  xix.  2,  etc.  ;  2  Sam.  v. 
 10;  I  Kings  i.  36;  xiv.  13;  Ps.  xviii.  29,  etc.) 
 Most  commonly,  however,  they  are  used  distinc- 
 tively, with  respect,  probably,  to  the  difference 
 between  their  primary  meanings  (see  Hengsten- 
 berg,  Auth.  d.  Pent.  i.  181,  ff.)  In  the  Penta- 
 teuch this  discriminative  usage  has  given  ground 
 for  certain  hypotheses  as  to  the  composition  of 
 that  work  [Pentateuch].  In  the  earlier  histo- 
 rical books,  Jehovah  is  more  frequently  used  than 
 Elohim  ;  in  Job,  Jehovah  is  more  frequently  used  in 
 the  poetical,  Eloah  or  Elohim  in  the  prosaic  por- 
 tions ;  in  the  Psalms,  sometimes  the  one  sometimes 
 the  other  predominates,  and  this  has  been  thought 
 to  afford  some  criterion  by  which  to  judge  of  the 
 age  of  the  psalm,  the  older  psalms  bemg  those  in 
 which  Elohim  is  used  ;  in  Proverbs  we  have  chiefly 
 Jehovah ;  in  Ecclesiastes,  Daniel,  and  Jonah,  almost 
 exclusively  Elohim,  and  in  the  other  prophets 
 chiefly  Jehovah.  Elohim  is  also  used  of  idol  deities 
 or  false  gods,  because  these  are  worshipped  as  if 
 they  were  God  (Exod.  xbc.  20  ;  xxxii.  31  ;  Josh, 
 xxiv.  20;  Jer.  ii.  11  ;  Jonah  i.  5,  etc.)  ;  and  like 
 El  it  is  used  as  a  superlative  (Ps.  Ixviii.  16 ;  Ixv. 
 10,  etc.)  Kings  and  Judges,  as  the  vicegerents  of 
 Deity,  or  as  possessing  a  sort  of  representative 
 majesty,  are  sometimes  called  Elohim  (Ps.  Ixxxii. 
 I,  6  ;  Exod.  xxi.  6  ;  xxii.  8).  Whether  the  term 
 is  used  of  angels  may  be  made  matter  of  question. 
 
 This  is  tlie  rendering  given  to  DTl?^5  by  the 
 LXX.,  Vulg. ,  Targ.,  Syr.,  etc.,  in  Gen,  iii.  5; 
 Ps.  viii.  6  ;  Ixxxii.  1,6;  xcvh.  7  ;  and  cxxxviii.  I  ; 
 but  in  the  majority  of  these  instances  there  can  be 
 little  doubt  but  that  the  translators  were  swayed  by  | 
 VOL.  IL 
 
 mere  dogmatical  considerations  in  adopting  that 
 rendering ;  they  preferred  it  because  they  avoided 
 thus  the  strongly  anthropomoqihic  representation 
 which  a  literal  rendering  would  have  preserved. 
 In  all   these  passages  the  proper  signification  of 
 
 DTlPN  may  be  retained,  and  in  some  of  them, 
 such  as  Gen.  iii.  5  ;  Ps.  Ixxxii.  i,  6,  this  seems 
 imperatively  required.  In  Ps.  viii.  6,  also,  the 
 rendering  '  angels '  seems  excluded  by  the  con- 
 sideration that  the  subject  of  the  writer  is  the 
 grace  of  God  to  man  in  giving  him  dominion  over 
 the  works  of  his  hands,  in  which  respect  there  can 
 be  no  comparison  between  man  and  the  angels,  of 
 whom  nothing  of  this  sort  is  affirmed.  In  Ps. 
 xcvii.  7  the  connection  of  the  last  clause  with  what 
 precedes  affords  sufficient  reason  for  our  giving 
 Elohim  its  proper  rendering,  as  in  the  A.  V. 
 That  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
 should  have  adopted  the  LXX.  rendering  in  citing 
 these  two  passages  (ii.  7  ;  i.  6),  cannot  be  held  as 
 establishing  that  rendering,  for,  as  his  argiunent  is 
 not  affected  by  it,  he  was  under  no  call  to  depart 
 from  the  rendering  given  in  the  version  from  which 
 he  quotes.  But  though  there  be  no  clear  evidence 
 that  Elohim  is  ever  used  in  the  sense  of  angels, 
 it  is  sometimes  used  vaguely  to  describe  unseen 
 powers  or  superhuman  beings  that  are  not  pro- 
 perly thought  of  as  divine.  Thus  the  witch  of 
 Endor  saw  'Elohim  ascending  out  of  the  earth' 
 (i  Sam.  xxviii.  13),  meaning  thereby  some  beings 
 of  an  unearthly,  superhuman  character.  So  also 
 in  Zech.  xii.  8  it  is  said,  '  The  house  of  David 
 shall  be  as  Elohim,  as  the  angel  of  the  Lord,' 
 where,  as  the  transition  from  Elohim  to  the  angel 
 of  the  Lord  is  a  minori  ad  majus,  we  must  regard 
 the  former  as  a  vague  designation  of  supernatural 
 powers.  Hengstenberg  would  explain  Ps.  viii.  6 
 in  accordance  with  this  ;  but  the  legitimacy  of  this 
 may  be  doubted.  . 
 
 In  three  instances  the  phrase  D'^H/X  ''J3,  B'ney 
 Elohim,  occurs  (Jobi.  6;  ii.  i  ;  xxxviii.  7),  and  in 
 two  instances  (Gen.  vi.  2,  4)  "XH  ''J2,  B' ney  Ha- 
 Elohim,   occurs.      We  have   also   the  equivalent 
 
 phrase  7S  ""J^  in  Hos.  ii.  I  (A.  V.  i.  10).  In  the 
 book  of  Job  the  phrase  unquestionably  describes 
 the  angels,  who  are  called  sons  of  God  partly  as 
 immediately  created  by  him  (in  which  sense  Adam 
 is  called  'the  son  of  God,'  Luke  iii.  38),  partly  as 
 belonging  to  the  spiritual  world,  and  so  appearing 
 to  be  of  the  same  essence  as  God,  who  is  em- 
 phatically spirit  as  opposed  to  flesh  (Is.  xxxi.  3), 
 and  partly  as  characterised  by  that  holiness  which 
 is  the  distinctive  glory  of  God,  and  the  communi- 
 cation of  which  to  any  of  his  creatures  conveys  to 
 such  an  ethical  affinity  to  Him.  Of  these  ele- 
 ments the  last  is  the  most  important,  and  hence, 
 where  it  is  possessed,  divine  sonship  may  be  pre- 
 dicated of  the  possessor,  though  both  the  other  ele- 
 ments are  wanting.  It  is  on  this  ground  that  the 
 phrase  may  be  used  of  men,  as  it  is  in  the  passage 
 cited  from  Hosea,  and  frequently  in  the  N.  T.  As 
 used  in  the  passages  cited  from  Genesis,  the  phrase 
 is  confessedly  difficult,  and  has  called  forth  numerous 
 explanations.  Of  these  the  greater  part  are  purely 
 conjectural,  and  need  not  occupy  our  attention. 
 Our  choice  must  lie  between  that  which  takes  the 
 phrase  as  denoting  angels,  and  that  which  takes  it 
 as  denoting  men  standing  in  some  special  relation 
 to  God. 
 
 The  fciimer  of  these  is  the  older,  anrl  it  is  that 
 
GOD 
 
 146 
 
 GOD 
 
 whicli  the  usage  of  the  phrase  most  readily  suggests. 
 It  is  favoured  by  the  LXX.,  the  text  of  which 
 fluctuates  between  viol  rod  ^eov  and  dyyeXoi  tou 
 a-eoO  (Aug.  Be  Civ.  Dei,  xv.  23),  Josephus  \A71iiq.  i. 
 4.  l),  Philo  {De  Gigant.  sub  init.),  the  apocr}-phal 
 book  of  Enoch,  the  Testament  of  the  XII.  Patri- 
 archs, the  later  Jewish  Hagada,  and  the  majority 
 of  the  Christian  Fathers  from  Justin  to  Lactantius. 
 The  incongruity  however  of  the  supposition,  that 
 angels  could  have  carnal  intercourse  with  women, 
 is  so  strong,  that  many  have  on  this  ground  alone 
 rejected  the  interpretation,  some  with  strong  ex- 
 pressions of  contempt  and  mdignation.  Thus  Theo- 
 doret  speaks  of  it  as  i^jL^povrriTov  koI  dyav  riXidiov 
 (QiKzst.  ill  Genesin.  sec.  47) ;  Philastrius  denounces 
 it  as  a  heresy ;  and  Rabbi  Simeon  b.  Jochai  pro- 
 nounces an  anathema  on  all  who  adopt  it  (De- 
 litzsch.  Genes,  in  loc.)  The  Reformers  generally 
 repudiated  it  as  a  mere  fable,  which  is  refuted  by 
 its  own  absurdity  (Calvin,  iii  loc. ) ;  and  the  ma- 
 iority  of  more  recent  writers  have  followed  in  the 
 same  strain.  Unfortunately,  however,  they  have 
 not  succeeded  in  giving  us  any  tenable  explanation 
 in  its  place.  If  we  turn  to  the  hypothesis  that  the 
 phrase  sons  of  God  hei^e  is  used  of  men  standing  in 
 some  special  relation  to  God,  we  are  met  at  the 
 threshhold  by  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  rela- 
 tion supposed.  Some  would  class  the  phrase  with 
 tliose  in  which  Elohim  has  the  force  of  a  superla- 
 tative  [see  above],  and  would  render  '  men  of 
 power,'  or  '  eminence,'  the  high-born,  as  con- 
 trasted with  the  common  people,  or  '  men  of 
 great  height'  as  contrasted  with  men  of  ordinary 
 stature.  But  the  confusion  of  thought  here  is  suffi- 
 cient to  condemn  such  an  intei"pretation.  When 
 Elohim  is  used  to  express  a  superlative,  it  intimates 
 that  the  quality  expressed  by  the  word  to  which  it 
 is  appended  exists  in  that  particular  instance  in  the 
 highest  degree.  The  phrase,  for  instance,  '  Cedars 
 of  God,'  means  that  the  quality  common  to  all 
 cedars  exists  in  these  in  the  highest  degree  ;  these 
 are  cedars  of  surpassing  excellence.  But  plainly 
 this  is  inapplicable  in  the  case  of  words,  the  quality 
 denoted  by  which  does  not  admit  of  degrees ;  and 
 such  is  the  case  with  the  word  son.  There  are  no 
 degrees  in  sonship  ;  the  male  progeny  of  a  rich 
 man  are  no  more  his  sons  than  the  male  progeny 
 of  a  poor  man  are  his  ;  a  dwarf  is  as  much  the  son 
 of  his  father  as  a  giant  is  of  his.  Besides,  on  this 
 hypothesis,  who  were  the  daughters  of  men  with 
 whom  these  sons  of  God  had  intercourse?  The 
 two  designations  are  plainly  in  antithesis  to  each 
 other.  If  therefore  'sons  of  God'  mean  powerful, 
 great,  or  tall  men  ;  '  daughters  of  men'  must  mean 
 low-born,  poor,  dwarfish  women.  Why  it  should 
 be  morally  wrong  for  such  to  intermarry,  or  why  a 
 race  differing  from  other  men  should  spring  from  the 
 intercourse  of  such  does  not  appear,  and  seems  to 
 us  inexplicable.  Others  resort  to  the  ethical  im- 
 port of  the  phrase,  'sons  of  God,'  and  suppose 
 that  the  parties  so  designated  by  Moses  belonged 
 to  the  pious  race  the  descendants  of  Seth.  This  ex- 
 planation is  as  old  as  the  Clementines  :  '  Homines 
 justi  qui  angelorum  vixerant  vitam'  {Recognitiones, 
 i.  29),  is  found  in  many  of  the  later  Fathers,  from 
 Ephraem  to  Chrysostom,  is  followed  by  Luther, 
 Calvin,  and  their  associates  and  followers,  and 
 may  be  viewed  as  the  favourite  explanation  of  evan- 
 gelical commentators.  There  is  much  in  its 
 favour.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  phrase 
 *  sons  of  God'  may  be  used  of  men  m  an  ethical 
 
 sense  ;  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Cainites  and 
 the  Sethites  had  before  this  time  formed  two  sepa- 
 rate communities,  between  which  the  primary  dis- 
 tinction was  a  moral  and  religious  one  ;  and  the 
 course  of  the  narrative  is  not  opposed  to  the  sup- 
 position that  the  general  degeneracy  of  the  race 
 which  brought  on  the  flood  was  the  result  of  an 
 intermingling  of  the  two  communities  by  marriage. 
 But  though  the  phrase  7nay  have  an  ethical  mean- 
 ing, and  may  in  this  sense  be  used  of  men,  there 
 wants  evidence  of  its  ever  being  so  used  in  the  O 
 T.  (excepting  of  Israel  as  a  nation,  a  case  not  in 
 point  here)  ;  and  besides,  on  this  hypothesis,  what 
 are  we  to  make  of  the  phrase  '  daughters  of  men,' 
 as  applied  to  the  women  with  whom  these  pious 
 Sethites  intermarried  ?  We  cannot  without  the 
 greatest  violence  take  DIXH,  Ha-Adam,  here  as 
 designating  a  special  portion  of  the  human  race, 
 when  the  very  same  word  is  used  in  the  preceding 
 verse  to  designate  the  race  as  such  ;  nor  can  we, 
 on  any  just  grounds,  take  the  word  Adam  without 
 any  qualifying  adjunct  as  meaning  wicked  men. 
 Besides,  what  reason  is  there  for  supposing  that 
 the  union  of  men  who  worshipped  God  with 
 women  who  did  not,  would  specially  tend  to  the 
 procreation  of  a  progeny  marked  by  unwonted 
 strength  or  size  (D''"133)  ?  This  has  led  many*  to 
 adopt  the  oldest  interpretation  as  the  only  one  exe- 
 getically  tenable.  Now,  strange  as  it  may  appear 
 to  us,  that  such  a  thing  as  the  historian  is  thus  un- 
 derstood to  affirm  should  have  happened,  we  should 
 be  slow  to  assert  that  it  is  impossible,  and  therefore 
 incredible.  That  created  spirits  are  not  pure 
 spirits,  but  to  some  degree  partake  of  a  material 
 substance,  is  one  of  the  common-places  of  theology ; 
 that  such  spirits  can  act  on  our  bodies  must  also  be 
 believed  from  the  testimony  of  Scripture  ;  and 
 that  beings  of  angelic  nature  are  liable  to  be  en- 
 snared by  sinful  passion  is  involved  in  the  belief  that 
 the  fallen  angels  were  once  among  the  hosts  of  the 
 heavenly  world.  We  are  not,  therefore,  in  cir- 
 cumstances to  affirm  that  it  is  in  the  nature  of 
 things  impossible  that  in  some  of  these  lustful 
 passions  may  have  been  engendered  by  the  beauty 
 of  women,  and  that  they  may  have  been  able  to 
 assume  forms  in  which  these  passions  could  be 
 gratified.  Still,  in  the  face  of  the  general  state- 
 ments of  Scripture  concerning  angels,  and  espe- 
 cially of  such  a  statement  as  that  of  our  Lord 
 recorded  Matt.  xxii.  30,  it  must  be  felt  that  a  strong 
 degree  of  improbability  attaches  to  this  hypothesis; 
 and  that  we  are  entitled  to  demand  some  decisive 
 authority  from  Scripture  before  we  can  receive  it. 
 Such  authority,  it  has  been  supposed,  is  supplied 
 by  wliat  St.  Jude  says  in  the  7th  verse  of  his  epistle,  1* 
 where,  after  referring  to  the  angels  who  kept  not 
 their  first  estate,  he  proceeds  to  say,  tlis  265o/j.a 
 Kal  rifioppa  /cat  at  irepi  avras  it6\€ls  tov  6fj.oiov  Tp6- 
 TTov  TovTOLS  eKTTopvevcTaaaL,  K.  T.  X.  Here  the  apostle 
 is  understood  to  mean  that  the  crime  by  which  the 
 angels  referred  to  fell  was  that  of  fornication,  like 
 that  of  which  the  inhabitants  of  these  cities  were 
 guilty.  This,  however,  is  a  most  uncertain  exege- 
 sis ;  for,  in  the  first  place,  whatever  was  the  offence 
 
 *  See  Kurtz,  //isl.  of  the  Old  Covenant,  i.  sec. 
 25  ;  Baumgarten,  Theol.  Comment,  ziim  A.  T., 
 i.  p.  105  ;  Delitzsch,  Genesis,  in  loc. ;  Twesten, 
 Dogmatik  II.,  i.  p.  332,  etc. 
 
 +  See  De  Wette,  Huther,  and  Alford  on  the 
 passage. 
 
GOD 
 
 147 
 
 GOD 
 
 I 
 
 of  the  B'ney  Ha-Elohim,  of  whom  Moses  writes, 
 it  was  not,  certainly,  afic7-  the  same  manner  vi'i^  that 
 of  the  inhabitants  of  the  cities  of  the  plain  ;  there  is 
 no  reason  to  believe  it  was  ixopvda.  of  any  sort,  most 
 assuredly  it  was  not  of  that  unnatural  sort  which 
 drew  down  on  these  cities  the  special  wrath  and 
 vengeance  of  heaven.  *  Then,  secondly,  the  train 
 of  the  apostle's  thought  here  is  unfavourable  to  this 
 acceptation  of  his  words.  He  has  in  view  the  re- 
 proving of  two  evils,  the  one  that  of  proud  insub- 
 ordination, the  other  that  of  lascivious  indulgence ; 
 and  he  illustrates  by  examples  the  evil  of  both. 
 In  illustration  of  that  of  the  fonner,  he  adduces 
 first  the  case  of  the  rebellious  Israelites  who  fell  in 
 the  wilderness,  and  secondly,  the  case  of  the  rebel 
 angels  who  fell  from  heaven  ;  and  here  his  illustra- 
 tion of  the  first  of  the  two  sins  terminates.  With 
 verse  yth  begins  his  illustration  of  the  evil  of  the 
 second  of  these  sins,  and  the  case  he  adduces  is  the 
 memorable  one  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrha  and  the 
 cities  around  them.  Following  out  the  train  of 
 thought  in  this  way  we  are  naturally  led  to  connect 
 verse  yth,  not  with  what  precedes,  but  with  what 
 follows,  the  (I)s  introducing  the  protasis  and  the 
 o/uoi'ws  of  verse  8th  the  apodosis  of  one  complete 
 statement.  In  this  case  the  tovtoi^  of  verse  yth 
 does  not  refer  to  dyyeXoc  as  its  antecedent,  but  to 
 265o/ia  Kal  Touoppa,  or  rather,  by  enallage,  to  the 
 inhabitants  of  these  cities  ;  and  the  proper  render- 
 ing is  :  'As  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  and  the  cities 
 around  them,  which  after  the  like  manner  with 
 them  gave  themselves  to  fornication  .  .  .  are 
 set  forth  as  an  example  .  .  .  likewise,  also, 
 these  filthy  dreamers,'  etc.  As  to  the  difficulty 
 arising  from  the  use  of  the  masculine  tovtols,  in 
 reference  to  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  which,  as 
 7r6X£ts,  must  be  held  to  be  feminine,  that  need  not 
 deter  us.  Beza,  long  ago,  dissipated  that  by  the 
 remark,  '  neque  nos  ofifendere  debet  generis  muta- 
 tio,  urbium  enim  nomine  incolas  comprehendit.' 
 
 With  this  explanation  of  the  passage  in  Jude 
 vanishes  the  only  shadow  of  Scriptural  support 
 which  has  ever  been  adduced  for  the  hypothesis 
 that  the  B'ney  Ha-EIohim  of  Moses  were  angels — 
 an  hypothesis  in  itself  to  the  last  degree  improb- 
 able, and  which  Havernick  does  not  stigmatise  too 
 strongly  when  he  places  it  among  '  the  silliest  whims 
 of  the  Alexandrian  Gnostics  and  Cabbalistic  Rab- 
 bins' [Litrod.  to  the  Pent.,  p.  iii).  'It  is,'  says 
 Bunsen,  'in  itself  disagreeable,  and  being  mytho- 
 logico-physical,  is  thoroughly  unbiblical'  [Bibel- 
 werk,  V.  51). 
 
 In  the  absence  of  anything  more  satisfactory,  we 
 would  submit  a  modification  of  one  of  the  views 
 above  noticed,  that,  viz.,  which  identifies  the  parties 
 here  referred  to  with  the  Cainites  and  the  Sethites. 
 Instead  of  understanding  the  phrases  B'ney  Ha- 
 Elohim,  and  B'noth  Ha- Adam,  in  an  ethical  sense, 
 we  would  view  them  rather  as  party  designations  ; 
 and  instead  of  regarding  the  former  as  belonging 
 to  the  Sethites,  and  the  latter  to  the  Cainites,  we 
 would  reverse  the  application  and  regard  the  for- 
 mer as  belonging  to  the  Cainites,  and  the  latter  to 
 the  Sethites.     In  support  of  this  view  we  would 
 
 *  '  The  manner  was  similar,  because  the  angels 
 committed  fornication  with  another  race  than  them- 
 selves,' Alford,  in  loc.  What  does  this  mean? 
 With  what  other  race  than  themselves  did  the  men 
 of  Sodom  sin  ?  Did  not  \h.€\x  peculiar  sin  lie  kv  ttj 
 ioi^ei  aiiTwv  et's  dX\T]\ov5  ? 
 
 offer  the  following  suggestion.  In  Gen.  v.  3,  we 
 are  told  that  Adam  '  begat  a  son  in  his  own  like- 
 ness after  his  image.'  Now,  without  building  any 
 dogmatical  position  on  this,  it  is  hardly  possible  to 
 avoid  the  conclusion  that  the  writer  intended  to 
 place  this  statement  in  contrast  with  that  in  ver.  i, 
 where  he  says  that  '  Adam  was  made  in  the  like- 
 ness of  God,'  and  along  with  that,  to  convey  the 
 idea  that  man  was  no  longer  produced  in  the  like- 
 ness of  God,  but  merely  in  the  image  and  likeness 
 of  his  parent.  Farther,  in  stating  this  in  connec- 
 tion specially  with  the  birth  of  Seth,  may  not  he 
 mean  to  intimate  that  in  the  family  of  Seth,  this 
 fact  was  specially  recognised  and  acknowledged  ' 
 By  Cain,  on  the  other  hand,  we  know  that  this 
 fact  was  not  acknowledged.  His  great  sin  lay  in 
 his  claiming  to  come  before  God  as  an  unfallen 
 being,  who  had  no  guilt  to  be  expiated,  but  who 
 had  merely  an  acknowledgment  of  inferiority  and 
 dependance  to  make.  This  we  take  to  be  the  only 
 tenable  hypothesis  on  which  to  explain  the  trans- 
 action recorded  in  Gen.  iv.  3-y  (see  Magee  on  the 
 Atonement,  notes,  Nos.  58,  61,  62,  63  ;  Faber  on 
 Expiatory  Sacrijice,  p.  85,  ff. ;  Alexander,  Coniiec- 
 tion  and  Harmony  of  the  O.  and  N.  T.,  p.  339, 
 2d  ed.)  Now,  is  it  not  conceivable  that  the  pious 
 sons  of  Seth,  in  humble  acknowledgment  of  the 
 fact  of  men's  fallen  condition,  may  have  contented 
 themselves  with  the  name  of  B'ney  (B'noth)  Ha- 
 Adam,  while  the  Cainites,  claiming  to  retain  the 
 original  dignity  of  man  as  he  came  from  the  hands 
 of  God,  may  have  boastfully  called  themselves 
 B'ney  Ha-Elohim?  In  this  case,  the  term  '  Adam,' 
 and  the  phrase  'sons  of  Adam,'  though  actually 
 applicable  to  the  whole  race,  would  designate  a 
 portion  of  it  on  the  same  principle  on  which  the 
 descendants  of  Jacob  called  themselves  '  Israel,' 
 and  '  the  children  of  Abraham,'  though  they  were 
 not  the  only  race  that  could  claim  descent  from 
 that  patriarch.  If  this  suggestion  be  adopted,  the 
 narrative  we  have  been  considering  is  a  record  of 
 what  we  may  very  readily  suppose  to  have  hap- 
 pened, viz.,  that  the  descendants  of  Cain,  and 
 those  of  Seth,  who  had  hitherto  lived  apart,  came, 
 as  the  land  became  filled  with  people,  gradually  to 
 approach  each  other  ;  and  that  the  haughty  sons  of 
 Cain,  who  had  hitherto  probably  thought  of  the 
 Sethites  only  with  contempt,  being  in  this  way 
 brought  into  contact  with  the  daughters  of  Seth, 
 were  struck  with  their  superior  beauty,  and  so  after 
 their  own  high-handed  fashion,  '  took  them  wives 
 of  all  which  they  chose.' 
 
 We  now  pass  on  to  notice  the  peculiarity  con- 
 nected with  the  use  of  Elohim,  a  plural,  to  desig- 
 nate God.  This,  as  a  usage  in  the  language  of  a 
 people  of  all  others  the  most  tenacious  of  mono- 
 theism, is  a  remarkable  phenomenon;  and  the 
 peculiarity  becomes  still  more  noticeable  when  we 
 find  that  they  made  the  laws  of  language  bend  to 
 this  usage,  and  construed  this  plural  as  if  it  were  a 
 singular  with  singular  verbs  and  adjuncts.  Such  a 
 phenomenon  has  naturally  drawn  to  it  the  atten- 
 tion of  interpreters  and  giammarians,  and  various 
 solutions  of  the  difficulty,  some  resting  on  material, 
 others  on  purely  formal  grounds,  have  been  offered. 
 I.  An  old  opinion  is  that  the  peculiarity  in  ques- 
 tion was  determined  by  dogmatical  considerations  ; 
 that  as  God  has  revealed  himself  in  His  Word  as 
 subsisting  in  Trinity,  One  yet  Three,  it  is  as  corres- 
 ponding to  this  revealed  fact  that  a  plural  designa- 
 i  tion  uf  Him,  construed  as  if  it  were  singular,  is  em- 
 
GOD 
 
 148 
 
 GODWYN 
 
 ployed  in  Scripture.  2.  It  has  been  asseited  that 
 as  the  rehgion  of  the  Hebrews  may  be  supposed  to 
 have  grown  out  of  an  original  polytheism,  this 
 peculiarity  is  a  remnant  or  product  of  that  earlier 
 state  of  things.  3.  It  is  suggested  that  as  God  is 
 conceived  to  be  the  sum  of  all  perfections,  the 
 plural  was  used  along  with  singular  verbs,  etc., 
 to  indicate  this.  4.  It  has  been  maintained  that 
 this  usage  belongs  to  a  class  commg  under  the  law, 
 that  words  expressing  majesty  or  mastership  are  in 
 Hebrew  put  in  the  plural.  5.  It  is  regarded  as 
 an  instance  of  the  plural  used  to  denote  the  ab- 
 stract ;  in  this  case  the  to  ^eiov,  mimen  veneran- 
 dum.  6.  It  is  to  be  viewed  as  an  instance  of  the 
 plural  intensive.  Of  these  views  the  first  has  found 
 few  supporters  among  scholars,  and  has  been  formally 
 repudiated  by  several  who  were  strongly  attached 
 to  Trinitarian  views,  as  ex.gr.  Calvin,  Drusius,  Bel- 
 larmin,  Buxtorf,  Hottinger,  etc.  The  second 
 opinion  has  received  the  suffrages  of  some  learned 
 men,  but  has  been  rejected  by  the  majority  as 
 resting  on  assumptions  wholly  arbitrary,  and  as  in- 
 sufficient to  account  for  all  the  facts  of  the  case. 
 The  sixth  has  been  defended  with  much  ability 
 by  Hengstenberg  {Auth.  d.  Pent.,  i.  200),  and 
 has  received  very  general  assent.  Whilst,  how- 
 ever, it  suffices  to  account  for  several  of  the 
 usages  which  grammarians  have  placed  under 
 the  fiction  of  a  plural  is  majestaiicus*  it  will  not 
 account  for  all,  and  especially  for  Elohim.     For 
 
 whilst  in  such  words  as  Dvy2  Baalim,  CJlJ? 
 Adonim,  etc.,  the  concept  of  the  singular  may  be 
 intensified,  and  this  intensification  may  be  expressed 
 by  the  plural,  this  is  not  the  case  with  Elohim ;  in 
 this  case  the  plural  expresses  no  more  than  the 
 singular,  the  veiy  idea  of  intensified  deity  being 
 absurd.  Of  the  other  proposed  solutions,  the  only 
 one  which  will  bear  an  exi?,mination  is  the  third. 
 Ewald  {lib.  cit. )  has  adopted  this  view,  and  so  has 
 Fiirst  [H.  W.  B.,  in  verb.)  It  rests  on  a  principle 
 pervading  the  language,  viz.,  that  words  describing 
 objects  which  combine  plurality  with  unity  are  used 
 in  the  plural,  and  generally  with  verbs,  etc.,  in  the 
 singular  (comp.  Jer.  li.  58;  Ps.  Ixxii.  15;  Ps.  xviii. 
 15;  Is.  lix.  12;  Joel  i.  20,  etc.)  If  this  hypothesis 
 be  adopted,  it  remains  open  to  consider  whether 
 the  first  of  the  views  above  stated  may  not  find 
 ])lace  under  it.  If  the  plural  so  used  be  according 
 to  Ewald  the  idiomatic  expression  of  '  multitude 
 and  variety  existing  in  unity,'  there  seems  no  reason 
 why  we  may  not  regard  the  plurality  in  unity  ex- 
 pressed by  Elohim  as  a  plurality  oi persons,  as  well 
 as  a  plurality  of  attributes  (Hengstenberg,  book 
 cited;  Smith,  Scripture  Testimony  to  the  Messiah, 
 I.  30S;  Alexander,  Connection  and  Harmony,  etc., 
 p.  69,  ff. ;  2d  ed. ) 
 
 II.  We  now  come  to  consider  the  etymology  and 
 derivation  of  these  words. 
 
 The  opinion  which  here  most  naturally  presents 
 
 itself  is,  that  in  7^5  we  have  the  simple  primitive 
 form,  which  in  process  of  time  was  elongated  into 
 rli?X-  This  is  the  opinion  of  Gesenius  {Thes., 
 s.  v.j,  and  also  of  Fiirst  [H.  IV.  B.,  s.  v.),  though 
 both  admit  that  the  old  opinion  that  PX  itself  is  a 
 
 *  '  Nichts  ist  so  falsch  als  dass  die  jetzige  heb- 
 raische  sprache  fiir  cinen  sog.  plur.  majest.  sinn 
 hatte.'  Ewald,  Ausf.  Lehrbudi  d.  Heb.  Spr.,  sec. 
 if<i>,  6. 
 
 derivative  from  p'^\^^,  to  be  strong,  may  have  some 
 toundation.  In  this  case  £1  is  an  appellation  cf 
 God  as  the  Mighty  One,  and  Eloah  is  the  same. 
 By  others  the  relative  position  of  these  words  is 
 reversed ;  El  being  regarded  as  an  abbreviation  of 
 Eloah.      Those   who   take    this    view,   generally 
 
 derive  rl1?S,   from  rl?J?,   Ar.   J;]^   coluit,  adoravit, 
 
 ^\  stupiiit,  attonitus  est.     In  this  case  Eloah  is  the 
 
 numen  venerandum,  and  El  the  same.  By  many, 
 however,  who  regard  the  noun  and  the  verb  as 
 connected,  their  relation  is  reversed,  the  verb  being 
 supposed  to  have  come  from  the  noun. 
 
 Hengstenberg  has  strenuously  opposed  the  re- 
 garding of  7S  as  a  primitive.  He  contends  that 
 such  a  view  is  without  authority,  that  it  is  contrary 
 to  analogy  (the  name  for  God  in  all  languages 
 being  a  derivative  word  having  an  appellative 
 signification),  and  that  such  a  transition  as  that  of 
 
 75<  mto  niPi^,  is  wholly  unknown  to  the  language. 
 [Auth.  d.  Pent.,  I.  251).     He  accordingly  contends 
 
 for  the  derivation  of  niPK  fi-om  n?N)  coluit,  ado- 
 ravit, pavore  correptus  fuii,  and  of  7S  from  plj^. 
 
 HI.  It  may  be  useful  to  note  the  cognate 
 tenns  in  other  Shemitic  dialects.  Samaritan  :  El, 
 sometimes  Chilah  or  Chiulah,  potens  (cf.  Castelli 
 Animad.  Samar.  in  Pentateuch.,  p.  3,  ap.  Bibl. 
 Polyg.  t.  vi.)      Phcenician  :    El  (tjX  or  i\)  as  in 
 
 'En-el  C'EuvXos,   ^H.^])),   Gag-el  (Gagilus,  ^XJJ), 
 
 'EXoelfj,  (ap.    Sanchuniathon. )     Syriac :   ^_,|  Ilo, 
 
 \TL^Eloho.    Arabic:  J.>1,  Jl,  J>i!^,  ^Jl,  ail,  al, 
 
 allah. 
 
 (Besides  the  works  referred  to  in  this  article,  the 
 following  may  be  consulted  :  —  Gussetius,  Com- 
 mentarii  Ling.  Ebr.  s.  voce.  ;  Leusden,  Philologus 
 Hebr.  Diss,  xxxii.  ;  Hottinger,  Dissertt.  Theol. 
 Philol.  Diss.  iv.  ;  Ewald,  Die  Composition  des  Ge- 
 nesis, sec.  5,  ff. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GODWYN,  Thomas,  D.D.,  Mas  bom  in  15S7, 
 and  entered  as  a  student  of  Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford, 
 in  1602.  He  was  for  some  years  head  master  of 
 the  free  school  at  Abingdon,  Berks.  He  was  sub- 
 sequently presented  to  the  Rectory  of  Brightwell, 
 near  Wallingford,  where  he  died,  March  20,  1643. 
 His  reputation  rests  upon  the  valuable  aid  which 
 he  rendered  to  the  study  of  Hebrew  antiquities. 
 Two  works  upon  this  subject  were  published  by 
 him,  the  first  entitled  Synopsis  Antiquitatum  He- 
 braicarum  ad  explicationcm  utriusqiie  Testainenti 
 valde  necessaria,  etc..  Lib.  iii.,  Oxford  1616,  4to  ; 
 the  other,  which  is  more  generally  known,  has  the 
 title  Moses  and  Aaron,  Civil  and  Ecclesiastical 
 Rites  used  by  the  ancient  Hebrews,  obseived,  and  at 
 large  opened,  for  the  clearing  of  many  obscure 
 texts  throughout  the  whole  Scripticre,  Lond.  1625, 
 4to.  This  work  passed  rapidly  through  several 
 editions,  the  seventh  being  published  in  1655.  It 
 was  translated  into  Dutch  in  1629,  and  into  Latin 
 by  Reiz  in  1679,  by  Witsius,  Bremce  1694,  8vo ; 
 and  by  Hottinger,  Francof.  1710,  8vo.  It  was 
 very  generally  used  as  a  text-book  by  teachers  oi 
 theology;  amongst  others,  by  H.  Witsius,  and  by 
 Jones  of  Tewkesbury,  both  of  whom  wrote  annota- 
 tions upon  it.     It  also  formed  the  basis  of  Carp* 
 
GOEL 
 
 GOLGOTHA 
 
 zov'i  apparatus  historico-criticus,  and  of  Jennings' 
 Jewish  antiquities.  The  great  learning  and  gene- 
 ral accuracy  of  the  work  is  sufficiently  attested  by 
 these  facts. — S.  N. 
 
 GOEL.  [Kinsman.] 
 
 GOG  (Ji2).  I.  A  people  inhabiting  the  extreme 
 north,  and  by  metonomy  the  chief  of  that  people 
 (Ezek.  xxxviii.,  xxxix.  ;  Rev.  xx.  8  [Magog]).  2. 
 One  of  the  sons  of  Joel,  a  Reubenite  (l  Chron.  v. 
 4).  3.  In  Num.  xxiv.  7  the  Samaritan  codex  and 
 the  LXX.  read  31  J,  Tuy,  for  33 X,  ^^a^.  In  Gen. 
 xiv.  I  Symmachus  would  seem  to  have  read  313  for 
 "•13,  for  he  gives  ^Kvdujv  as  the  rendering. 
 
 The  word  313  has  been  connected  by  some  with 
 
 the  Pers.  ^X  Koh,  mountain  (comp.  Kok-JCaf  \.h.Q 
 
 Caucasus) ;  by  others  with  the  Pehl.  Koka,  the 
 moon.  A  shemitic  source,  however,  may  be  found 
 for  it.  From  X3,  to  be  Iiigh,  by  reduplication  K3X3, 
 whence  33,  a  roof,  may  come  313,  a  height,  a  moun- 
 tain.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 GOLAN    (I^Jia,    and  \'hl;    Sept.    Tav\(!iv    and 
 
 rwXdv),  an  ancient  city  of  Bashan,  allotted  to  the 
 Levites,  and  made  one  of  the  three  cities  of  refuge 
 east  of  the  Jordan  (Deut.  iv.  43 ;  Josh.  xx.  8 ;  i 
 Chron.  vi.  71).  The  name  does  not  occur  in  Bible 
 history  after  the  division  of  the  country  among  the 
 tribes.  Josephus  calls  it  TaiiXdvT]  [Atitiq.  xiii.  15.  3  ; 
 Bell.  jfud.  i.  4.  8);  and  its  province  TavkaviTL's 
 (Aniiq.  viii.  2.  3).  The  site  of  Golan  has  not  yet 
 been  identified.  Jerome  says  that  in  his  day  it 
 was  '  villa  praegrandis  in  Batancea '  [Onomast. 
 s.  V.) 
 
 The  province  of  Gaulanitis  took  its  name  from 
 the  city,  as  is  stated  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
 {Onomast.  1.  c.)  It  appears  that  after  the  Greek 
 conquest  of  Syria  the  kingdom  of  Bashan  was 
 divided  into  four  provinces,  Gaulanitis,  Tracho- 
 nitis,  Auranitis,  and  Batana^a  (Porter's  Damascus, 
 ii.  253).  The  three  last  weie  only  Greek  forms  of 
 the  names  of  ancient  principalities ;  while  Gaula- 
 nitis was  the  territory  attached  to  the  important 
 city  of  Golan.  The  boundaries  of  Gaulanitis  are 
 not  given  by  any  ancient  writer ;  but  they  may  be 
 ascertained  from  some  incidental  references  of 
 Tosephus.  On  the  south  it  was  separated  from 
 Gadaris  by  the  river  Hieromax  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud. 
 iii.  3.  I ;  journal  of  Sacred  Literatiii-e  for  July  1854, 
 p.  292).  The  Jordan  and  Sea  of  Galilee  fonned 
 its  western  border  from  the  mouth  of  the  Hieromax 
 to  Ceesarea  Philippi  (Joseph.  Bell.  fud.  iv.  I.  l). 
 On  the  north  it  had  Iturasa,  and  on  the  east 
 Auranitis  and  Trachonitis  (Porter's  Damascus,  ii. 
 257-259).  Gaulanitis  was  then  the  western  pro- 
 vince of  Bashan;   and  it  still  retains  its  ancient 
 
 name  under  the  Arabic  form  Jauldti  (Arab.   _  '^tp^  ', 
 
 Heb.  |ha)._ 
 
 Gaulanitis,  or  Jaulan,  is  about  40  miles  long  from 
 north  to  south,  by  20  broad.  The  greater  part  is 
 flat  table-land,  with  a  deep  soil  and  luxuriant  pas- 
 tures. The  western  side,  as  seen  from  Tiberias, 
 resembles  the  declivities  of  a  mountain  range, 
 furrowed  deeply  by  torrents  and  ravines.  This  is 
 occasioned  by  the  elevation  of  the  plateau  (about 
 2500  feet),  and  the  depression  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
 and  the  Jordan  valley.  On  the  north-west  a  spur 
 from  the  Hermon  range  runs  across  it  some   15 
 
 miles,  and  terminates  in  a  conical  peak  called  Tell 
 el-Faras.  Tne  scenery  of  this  ridge  is  picturesque 
 — graceful  conical  summits  clothed  with  evergreen 
 oaks,  long  winding  glens  filled  with  tangled  copse, 
 and  little  upland  plains  carpeted  with  green  grass 
 and  spangled  with  wild  flowers.  The  '  oaks  of 
 Bashan,'  of  which  prophets  wrote  and  psalmists 
 sung,  are  still  here  (Is.  ii.  13 ;  Zech.  xi.  2),  and 
 among  those  rich  pastures  roamed  in  ancient  days 
 the  herds  of  cattle,  the  pride  of  the  country — 
 'Strong  bulls  of  Bashan'  (Ps.  xxii.  12).  Flocks 
 too,  wandered  along  the  hill  sides,  and  spread 
 themselves  over  the  green  plateau — 'rams  and 
 lambs,  and  goats,  and  bullocks,  all  of  them  fat- 
 lings  of  Bashan'  (Ezek.  xxxix.  18;  Deut.  xxxii. 
 14).  The  province  was  once  densely  peopled. 
 The  ruins  of  no  less  than  127  towns  and  large 
 villages  are  known,  only  eleven  of  which  have  now 
 any  settled  inhabitants.  The  whole  country  is 
 overrun  periodically  by  the  wild  Bedawin  of  the 
 eastern  desert,  whose  vast  droves  of  camels  and 
 flocks  of  sheep  devour  the  pastures,  and  too  oftei. 
 trample  down  the  few  corn-fields  of  the  peasants 
 (Porter,  Damascus,  ii.  250,  seq. ;  Handbook  for  S. 
 and  P.,  ii.  461 ;  Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria, 
 ITI ;  Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  ii.  319,  seq.; 
 Thomson,    The  Land  and  the  Book,   364.  sea.)— 
 
 J.  L.  P.  .  i  4,    ^  ; 
 
 GOLD.     [Zahab.] 
 
 GOLGOTHA    (FoXyo^a ;  Heb.    rh'6i,    and 
 
 Chaldee  XTOPS,    'a  skull.')  In  considering  the 
 
 import  of  this  name,  and  the  situation  of  the 
 place,  it  is  necessary  to  distinguish  very  clearly  be- 
 tween what  is  purely  historical  and  what  is  legen- 
 dary and  hypothetical.  The  Hebrew  or  Aramaean 
 name  Golgotha  is  mentioned  by  three  of  the  evan- 
 gelists, and  the  Greek  equivalent  given  ;  thus  in 
 Matt,  xxvii.  33,  iX^hvres  els  Tbirov  \eybixevov  FoX- 
 7oS-a,  6'  i<TTiv  Kpaviov  rdiros  Xeyd/j-euos,  '  Having 
 come  to  the  place  called  Golgotha,  which  is  called 
 the  place  of  a  skull.''  John  (xix.  17)  gives  it 
 somewhat  differently  ;  '  Jesus,  bearing  his  cross, 
 went  forth  into  a  place  called  of  a  skull — els  rbv 
 Xey6/j.€vov  Kpaviov  Tbirov;  which  is  called  in  He- 
 brew Golgotha,  5  Xeyerai  'EppaLffrl  ToXyo'^S..' 
 Luke  gives  the  Greek  name  only,  '  And  when 
 they  were  come — iwl  tov  rbirov  top  KaXovfievov 
 Kpaviov  (xxiii.  33) — to  the  place  called  Kranion' 
 or  Calvary,  as  it  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  and  in 
 the  Vulgate.  It  seems,  therefore,  that  the  place 
 was  commonly  known  by  both  its  Hebrew  name 
 Golgotha,  and  its  Greek  name  Kranion.  Why 
 this  name  was  given  to  it  none  of  the  sacred 
 writers  state.  Three  etymologies  have  since  been 
 suggested — i.  Jerome  mentions  a  tradition  which 
 he  had  heard,  that  Adam  was  buried  in  Golgotha, 
 and  that  the  name  was  given  to  the  place  because 
 the  skull  oi  Adam  was  there  preserved  (Comtnent. 
 in  Ephes.  v.  14;  Epist.  xlvi. ;  De  Sane,  locis).  2. 
 Jerome  says  in  another  place,  'Outside  the  city 
 and  the  gates  are  the  places  in  which  those  that 
 have  been  condemned  are  beheaded,  et  Calvariie, 
 id  est,  decollatorum  sumpsere  nomen'  {Comment, 
 in  Matt,  xxvii.  33).  Against  this  it  has  been 
 argued,  that  if  this  derivation  were  correct,  Gol- 
 gotha would  have  been  called  Kpavlwv  rdvos,  and 
 not  Kpaviov,  or  Kpaviov,  as  Luke  has  it.  3.  It  has 
 been  maintained  by  Reland,  De  Wette,  and  others, 
 that  the  name  arose  from  the  skull-shaped  hill  on 
 
GOLGOTHA 
 
 150 
 
 GOLGOTHA 
 
 the  spot  (Reland,  Pal.  p.  860).  It  must  be  re- 
 membered, however,  that  neither  Eusebius,  nor 
 Cyril,  nor  Jerome,  nor  any  of  the  earhest  histori- 
 cal writers  ever  speak  of  Golgotha  as  a  hill.  Yet 
 the  expression  must  have  become  current  at  a  very 
 early  period,  for  the  Bordeaux  pilgrim  describes  it 
 in  A.D.  333  as  Moniiculiis  Golgotha  {Iiinerariw?i 
 Hierosol.,  ed.  Wessel.  p.  593).  Dr.  Robinson 
 suggests  that  the  idea  of  a  motint  originated  in  the 
 fact  that  a  rounded  rock  or  monticule  existed  on 
 the  place  where,  in  the  beginning  of  the  4th  cen- 
 tury, tradition  located  the  scene  of  the  crucifixion 
 {Bib.  Res.  ii.  376).  Golgotha  was  probably  the 
 place  of  the  public  execution  of  criminals. 
 
 The  situation  of  Golgotha  and  the  holy  sepul- 
 chre, which  must  be  connected  with  it,  has  formed 
 a  subject  of  keen  and  even  bitter  controversy. 
 Some  confidently  affirm  that  the  spot  is  now 
 marked  by  the  Church  of  the  Sepulchre  ;  others 
 as  confidently  deny  it.  The  former  was  the  almost 
 universally  accredited  tradition  down  to  last  cen- 
 tury ;  for  though  many  were  struck  by  the  singu- 
 lar position  of  the  church,  yet  they  got  over  that 
 difficulty  by  various  means  (Robinson,  Bib.  Res. 
 i.  408).  The  first  who  openly  opposed  the  tradi- 
 tion was  Korte,  a  German  traveller  who  visited 
 Jerusalem  in  1738.  He  was  followed  by  Dr. 
 Clarke  (Travels),  Scholz  (Reise,  and  De  Golgotha: 
 Situ),  Robinson,  Tobler  {Golootha),  and  others. 
 The  identity  of  Golgotha  has  been  maintained  by 
 Von  Raumer  (Palastina),  Krafift  {die  Topographie 
 yemsalems),  and  especially  Williams  in  his  //oly 
 City.  This  is  not  the  place  for  considering  the 
 subject  at  length.  All  the  information  the  Bible 
 gives  us  regarding  the  site  of  Golgotha  may  be 
 stated  in  a  few  words.  Christ  was  crucified  '  with- 
 out the  gate'  (Heb.  xiii.  12),  'nigh  to  the  city' 
 (John  xix.  20),  at  a  place  called  Golgotha  (Matt. 
 xxvil.  33),  and  apparently  beside  some  public 
 thoroughfare  (xxvii.  39)  leading  to  the  countiy 
 (Mark  xv.  21).  The  tomb  in  which  he  was  laid  was 
 hewn  out  of  the  rock  (Mark  xv.  46),  in  a  garden 
 or  orchard  (/ctjttos),  at  the  place  of  crucifixion 
 (John  xix.  41,  42).  Neither  Golgotha  nor  the 
 tomb  is  ever  afterwards  mentioned  by  any  of  the 
 sacred  writers.  No  honour  seems  to  have  been 
 paid  to  them,  no  sanctity  attached  to  them  during 
 the  apostolic  age,  or  that  which  immediately  suc- 
 ceeded it.  It  IS  not  till  the  beginning  of  the  4th 
 century  that  we  find  any  attempt  made  to  fix  the 
 position  of,  or  attach  sanctity  to,  Golgotha.  Euse- 
 bius then  informs  us  that  the  Emperor  Constan- 
 tine,  'not  without  divine  admonition,'  resolved  to 
 uncover  the  holy  tomb.  He  states  that  wicked 
 men  had  covered  it  over  with  earth  and  rubbish, 
 and  had  erected  on  the  spot  a  temple  of  Venus. 
 These  were  removed,  and  the  tomb  and  Golgotha 
 laid  bare.  A  magnificent  church  was  built  over 
 them,  and  consecrated  in  A.D.  335  {Vit.  Constant- 
 tin.  iii.  26-33).  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 
 present  church  of  the  sepulchre  occupies  the  site 
 of  that  built  by  Constantine  (See,  however,  Fer- 
 gusson.  Ancient  Topography  of  Jei-iisalem).  The 
 only  point  to  be  settled  is,  whether  the  church  of 
 Constantine  stood  on  the  real  Golgotha.  Euse- 
 buis  is  our  first  witness,  and  he  lived  300  years 
 after  the  crucifixion.  His  story  is  repeated  with 
 some  changes,  and  numerous  embellishments,  by 
 subsequent  writers  (Socrates,  H.  E.,  i.  17  ;  So- 
 zom,  H.  E.,  ii.  I  ;  Theodoret,  //.  E.,  i.  18).  It 
 must  be  confessed  that  a  critical  examination  of 
 
 the  narratives  does  not  impress  us  with  any  very 
 deep  sense  of  their  historic  accuracy. 
 
 The  topography  of  Jerusalem  is  decidedly  against 
 Eusebius,  and  far  outweighs  his  questionable  testi' 
 mony.  The  Church  of  the  Sepulchre  is  in  the 
 centre  of  the  modern  city,  though  we  know  that 
 Golgotha  was  'without  the  gate'  at  a  period  when 
 Jerusalem  was  at  least  five  times  its  present  size. 
 This  is  not  the  place  for  a  minute  examination  uf 
 the  topography  of  the  Holy  City.  It  is  enough  to 
 state  that  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  it  had  two  walls. 
 One  encompassed  Zion  only.  The  second  com- 
 menced at  the  gate  Gennath  in  the  first  wall,  en- 
 closed Acra,  and  terminated  at  the  Castle  of 
 Antonia.  Beyond  this  second  wall,  on  the  north 
 and  north-west,  were  large  suburbs,  and  these  the 
 elder  Agrippa  surrounded  by  a  third  wall  a  few 
 years  after  the  crucifixion.  The  advocates  of  the 
 identity  of  Golgotha  and  the  Sepulchre  attempt  to 
 prove  that  these  lay  without  the  second  wall. 
 Their  arguments,  though  put  forward  with  great 
 learning  and  great  skill,  are  far  from  being  con- 
 clusive. 
 
 A  third  theory  regarding  the  site  of  Golgotha 
 and  the  sepulchre  was  advanced  by  Mr.  Fergusson 
 in  his  Essay  on  the  Ancient  Topography  of  yeriisa- 
 leni  (London,  1847),  and  more  recently  in  Smith'' s 
 Dictionary  of  the  Bible  (s.  v.  Jerusalem).  He  as- 
 serts that  Golgotha  was  on  Mount  Moriah,  and 
 that  the  building  now  called  the  Mosque  of  Omar, 
 or  Dome  of  the  Rock,  is  the  church  erected  by 
 Constantine  over  the  Holy  Sepulchre.  Beneath 
 its  dome  is  a  projecting  rock  with  a  cave  in  it ;  this, 
 he  says,  is  the  real  tomb.  The  arguments  on  which 
 his  theory  rests  are  mainly  architectural,  and  are 
 unquestionably  v&ry  forcible  ;  were  they  supported 
 by  history  and  topography  they  would  be  conclu- 
 sive. His  historical  argument  is  a  complete  failure. 
 He  says  the  site  was  transferred  at  the  time  of  the 
 Crusaders ;  but  for  this  there  is  not  a  shadow  of 
 evidence.  Any  one  who  has  examined,  on  the 
 spot,  the  topography  of  Mount  Moriah,  and  who 
 has  closely  inspected  the  masonry  of  the  massive 
 wall  which  surrounds  the  whole  of  the  Haram  area, 
 must  see  that  this  theory  is  untenable. 
 
 The  writer  of  this  article  has  had  repeated  op- 
 portunities of  examining  the  topography  of  Jerusa- 
 lem. The  opinion  which  he  was  led  to  form 
 regarding  the  site  of  Golgotha  and  the  tomb  ot 
 our  Lord,  is  as  follows  : — The  palace  of  Pilate  and 
 the  judgment  hall  stood  at  the  north-west  angle  of 
 the  Haram  area,  where  the  house  of  the  pasha  still 
 stands.  There  Jesus  was  condemned,  scourged, 
 and  mocked.  Thence  the  soldiers  '  led  him  out ' 
 (Mark  xv.  20)  to  crucify  Him.  They  met  a  man 
 called  Simon  '  coming  out  of  the  country,'  and 
 compelled  him  to  bear  the  cross.  They  brought 
 Him  unto  Golgotha,  and  there  they  crucified  Him. 
 The  passers  by  reviled  Him.  His  mother  and 
 some  others  stood  by  the  cross  (John  xix.  25). 
 'AH  his  acquaintance  stood  afar  off  beholding 
 these  things '  (Luke  xxiii.  49).  Such  is  the  sub- 
 stance of  the  narratives.  It  would  seem  that  the 
 soldiers  had  not  far  to  go  from  the  palace  to  Gol- 
 gotha. The  gate  of  St.  Stephen  is  about  200 
 yards  from  the  palace,  and  leads  directly  into  the 
 country.  Without  the  gate  one  road  runs  eastward 
 across  the  Kidron,  another  northwards  along  the 
 narrow  brow  ot  the  hill.  Between  these  is  an  open 
 space,  rugged  and  rocky  ;  just  below  it,  in  the 
 shelving  bank  of  the   Kidron,    are   several   rock 
 
GOLIATH 
 
 151 
 
 GOME 
 
 tombs.  This  spot  would  seem  to  answer  all  the 
 requirements  of  the  narrative.  The  passers  by  on 
 both  roads  would  be  within  a  few  yards  of  Him  ; 
 and  his  acquaintance  could  stand  '  afar  off'  on  the 
 side  of  Olivet  and  see  with  the  utmost  distinctness 
 the  whole  scene. 
 
 The  traditional  Golgotha  is  now  a  little  chapel 
 in  the  side  of  the  church  of  the  sepulchre,  gor- 
 geously decorated  with  marble,  and  gold,  and 
 silver.  The  monks  profess  to  shew  the  hole  in 
 which  the  cross  was  planted,  and  a  rent  in  the 
 rock  made  by  the  earthquake  !  (See  Handbook 
 for  Syria  and  Pal.,  p.  l66  ;  Wilhams'  Holy  City, 
 ii.  226,  sq.^ — ^J.   L.  P. 
 
 GOLIATH.     [David;  Giant.] 
 
 GOMAR,  Francis,  celebrated  in  church  his- 
 tory as  the  leading  opponent  of  Arminius,  was 
 born  at  Bruges,  Jan.  30,  1563,  and  died  at  Gro- 
 ningen,  Jan.  11,  1641.  His  theological  education 
 was  carried  on  partly  in  England,  where  he  at- 
 tended the  lectures  of  Dr.  John  Rainolds  at  Oxford, 
 and  of  Dr.  William  Whittaker  of  Cambridge,  and 
 partly  at  Heidelberg.  In  1594  he  accepted  one  of 
 the  chairs  of  theology  at  Leyden,  in  which  univer- 
 sity James  Arminius  was  also,  in  1603,  appointed 
 a  professor.  Almost  immediately  a  warm  contro- 
 versy arose  between  the  two  professors.  On  the 
 death  of  Arminius  in  1609,  the  friends  of  Gomar 
 being  unsuccessful  in  their  opposition  to  the  ap- 
 pointment of  Vorstius  to  the  vacant  chair,  Gomar 
 resigned  his  office  and  retired  to  jMiddleburgh. 
 In  i6i4hebecameprofessorof  theology  at  Saumur, 
 and  four  years  afterwards  accepted  a  similar  ap- 
 pointment in  the  university  of  Groningen.  Gomar 
 was  one  of  the  members  of  the  synod  of  Dort 
 (16 1 8),  and  took  an  active  part  in  its  proceedings. 
 He  enjoyed  a  high  reputation  for  his  Hebrew 
 scholarship,  and  in  1633  assisted  at  Leyden  in  the 
 revision  of  the  translation  of  the  O.  T.  His  col- 
 lected works  were  published  at  Amsterdam  in 
 1644,  fol.  Those  which  relate  to  Biblical  topics 
 are  the  following — i.  Ex  Evangelic  Matthm  lo- 
 corum  explicatio.  2.  Selectoriim  Ev.  Ltic<E  locoriim 
 illustratio.  3.  Selectormn  Ev.  Johannis  locontrn 
 ilhistratio.  4.  Analysis  et  explicatio  epistolariim 
 Patili  ad  Rom.,  Gal.,  Philip.,  Coloss.,  Philem., 
 Hebraos.  5 .  Explicatio  epistclariim  Petri,  Johannis, 
 et  JiidcE.  6.  Explicatio  capititni  priorian  quinqtte 
 Apocalypsis.  7.  Dissertatio  de  Evans^elio  Matthm 
 qtianam  lingua  sit  Scripttim.  8.  Davidis  Lyra, 
 seu  nova  Ebrcea  ars  poetica  canonibns  sitis  descripta 
 et  exemplis  Sacris  Pindari  et  Sophoclis  parallelis 
 descripta.  The  commentaries  of  Gomar  are  highly 
 commended  bv  R.  Simon  {Hist.  Crit.  du  N.  T., 
 p.  761).— S.  N. 
 
 GOME  (Xpj),  translated  'rush'  and  'bulrush,' 
 
 is  mentioned  m  four  places  of  Scripture,  from  which 
 there  is  no  doubt  that  it  was  a  plant  growing  in 
 moist  situations  in  Egypt,  and  employed  in  the 
 construction  of  vessels  of  different  kinds,  intended 
 to  float  upon  the  water,  such  as  the  ark  in  which 
 Moses  was  hid,  and  vessels  for  transit  (Job  viii.  1 1 ; 
 Is.  XXXV.  7  ;  Exod.  ii.  3  ;  Is.  xviii.  2).  The  name 
 gome,  according  to  Celsius  (Hierobot.  vol.  ii.  p. 
 138),  is  derived  from  H'Di  gimme,  'absorbere,  bi- 
 bere,  quia  in  aqua  nascitur,  et  aquam  semper 
 imbibit.'  Though  other  plants  are  adduced  by 
 translators  and  commentators  as  the  g-ome  of  Scrip- 
 ture, yet  it  is  evident  that  only  the  papyrus  can  be 
 
 meant,  and  that  it  is  well  suited  to  all  the  passages. 
 Being  in  some  respects  so  obvious,  it  could  not 
 escape  the  notice  of  all  translators.  Hence,  in  the 
 Arabic  Version,  and  in  the  Annals  of  Eiitychiiis, 
 
 the  word  ^_c  J  ' ,  biirdee,  is  given  as  the  synonym  of 
 
 gome  in  Exod.  ii.  3.  The  Sept.  in  Job  (viii.  11) 
 gives  iraTTvpos,  in  Isaiah  (xviii.  2)  ^ifSXlvas,  and  the 
 Vulgate,  in  this  last  passage,  papyriim.  In  Arabic 
 authors  on  Materia  Medica,  we  find  the  papyrus 
 mentioned  under  the  three  heads  of  Fafeer,  Bur- 
 dee,  and  Chartas.  Fafeer  is  said  to  be  the  Egyp- 
 tian name  of  a  kind  of  bnrdee  (bur-reed)  of  which 
 paper  {charta)  is  made  ;  and  of  bnrdee,  the  word 
 fafuritrs  (evidently  a  corruption  of  papyrus)  is  given 
 as  the  Greek  synonym. 
 
 The  papyrus  is  now  well  known  :  it  belongs  to 
 the  tribe  of  sedges  or  cyperacecr,  and  is  not  a  rush 
 or  bulrush,  as  in  the  A.  V.  It  may  be  seen  grow- 
 ing to  the  height  of  six  or  eight  feet,  even  in  tubs, 
 m  the  hothouses  of  this  country,  and  is  described 
 by  the  ancients  as  growing  in  the  shallow  parts  of 
 the  Nile.  The  root  is  fleshy,  thick,  and  spread- 
 ing ;  the  stems  triangular,  eight  or  ten  feet  in 
 height,  of  which  two  or  so  are  usually  under  water, 
 thick  below  but  tapering  towards  the  apex,  and 
 destitute  of  leaves ;  those  of  the  base  broad, 
 straight,  and  sword-shaped,  but  much  shorter  than 
 the  stem.  This  last  is  terminated  by  an  involucel 
 of  about  eight  leaves,  sword-shaped  and  acute, 
 much  shorter  than  the  many-rayed  umbel  which 
 they  support.  The  secondary  umbels  are  com- 
 posed only  of  three  or  four  short  rays,  with  an  in- 
 volucel of  three  awl-shaped  leaflets.  The  flowers 
 are  in  a  short  spike  at  the  extremity  of  each  ray. 
 Cassiodorus,  as  quoted  by  Carpenter,  graphically 
 described  it  as  it  appears  on  the  banks  of  the 
 Nile,  '  There  rises  to  the  view  this  forest  without 
 branches,  this  thicket  without  leaves,  this  harvest 
 of  the  waters,  this  ornament  of  the  marshes.' 
 The  papyrus  was  well  known  to  the  ancients  as 
 
GOME 
 
 152 
 
 GOMER 
 
 E  plant  of  the  waters  of  Egypt.  '  Papyrum  nasci- 
 tur  in  palustribus  ^gypti,  aut  quiescentibus  Nili 
 aquis,  ubi  evagat^  stagnant'  (Pliny,  xiii.  Ii). 
 Theophrastus,  at  a  much  earher  period,  described 
 it  as  growing,  not  in  the  deep  parts,  but  where  the 
 water  was  of  the  depth  of  two  cubits,  or  even  less. 
 It  was  found  in  almost  eveiy  part  of  Egypt  inun- 
 dated by  the  Nile,  in  the  Delta,  especially  in  the 
 Sebennytic  nome,  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
 Memphis,  etc.  By  some  it  was  thought  peculiar 
 to  Egypt ;  hence  the  Nile  is  called  by  Ovid  '  am- 
 nis  papyrifer. '  So  a  modern  author,  Prosper 
 Alpinus  {De  Platit.  yEgypii,  c.  36) :— '  Papyrus, 
 quam  herd  ^gyptii  nominant,  est  planta  fluminis 
 Nili.'  By  others  it  was  thought  to  be  a  native 
 also  of  India,  of  the  Euphrates  near  Babylon,  of 
 Syria,  and  of  Sicily.  The  genus  cyperns,  indeed, 
 to  which  it  is  usually  referred,  abounds  in  a  great 
 variety  of  large  aquatic  species,  which  it  is  diffi- 
 cult for  the  generality  of  observers  to  distinguish 
 from  one  another  ;  but  there  is  no  reason  why  it 
 should  not  grow  in  the  waters  of  hot  countries,  as, 
 for  instance,  near  Babylon  or  in  India.  In  fact, 
 modem  botanists  having  divided  the  genus  cypcrus 
 into  several  genera,  one  of  them  is  called  papyrus, 
 and  the  original  species  P.  nilotica.  Of  this  genus 
 ■bapyriis  there  are  several  species  in  the  waters  of 
 India  (Wight,  Contributions  to  the  Botany  of  India, 
 Cypereffi,  p.  88). 
 
 A  brief  description  of  the  uses  of  this  plant,  as 
 given  in  the  works  of  the  ancients,  is  thus  summed 
 up  by  Parkinson  in  his  Herbal,  p.  1207  :  '  The 
 plant,  say  the  ancients,  is  sweete,  and  used  by  the 
 Egyptians,  before  that  bread  of  come  was  known 
 unto  them,  for  their  food,  and  in  their  time  was 
 chawed,  and  the  sweetnesse  sucked  forth,  the  rest 
 being  spit  out ;  the  roote  serveth  them  not  only 
 for  fevvell  to  burne,  but  to  make  many  sorts  of 
 vessels  to  use,  for  it  yielded  much  matter  for  the 
 purpose.  Papyms  ipse  (say  they),  that  is  the 
 stalke,  is  profitable  to  many  uses,  as"  to  make 
 ships,  and  of  the  barke  to  weave,  and  make  sailes, 
 mats,  carpets,  some  kinds  of  garments,  and  ropes 
 also. '  The  construction  of  papyrus  boats  is  men- 
 tioned by  Theophrastus  ;  so  Pliny  {Hist.  Nat.  vi. 
 24),  '  Papyraceis  navibus  armamentisque  Nili ; ' 
 and  again  (vii.  56))  '  Naves  primum  repertas  in 
 ^gypto  in  Nilo  ex  papyro.'  Plutarch,  as  quoted 
 by  RosenmiiUer,  says,  '  Isis  circumnavigated  the 
 marshes  in  a  papyrus  wherry  for  the  purpose  of 
 collecting  the  pieces  of  Osiris's  body.  From 
 Heliodorus's  account  it  appears  that  the  Ethio- 
 pians made  use  of  similar  boats  ;  for  he  relates 
 that  the  Ethiopians  passed  in  reed  wherries  over 
 the  Astaboras;  and  he  adds  that  these  reed 
 wherries  were  swift  sailing,  being  made  of  a  light 
 material,  and  not  capable  of  carrying  more  than 
 two  or  three  men.'  Bruce  relates  that  a  similar 
 kind  of  boat  was  made  in  Abyssinia  even  in  his 
 time,  having  a  keel  of  acacia  wood,  to  which  the 
 papyms  plants,  first  sewed  together,  are  fastened, 
 being  gathered  up  before  and  behind,  and  the  ends 
 of  the  plants  thus  tied  together.  Representations 
 of  some  Egyptian  boats  are  given  in  the  Pict07-ial 
 Bible  (ii.  p.  135)  ;  where  the  editor  remarks  that 
 when  a  boat  is  described  as  being  of  reeds,  or 
 rushes,  ox  papyrus  (as  in  Egypt),  a  covering  of  skin 
 or  bitumen  is  to  be  understood.  That  the  papyrus 
 was  employed  for  making  paper  is  also  well 
 known,  and  Wilkinson  mentions  that  from  ancient 
 paper  being  found  at  Thebes  and  elsewhere,  it  is 
 
 evident  that  this  application  of  it  was  much  anterioi 
 to  tlie  time  of  Alexander  the  Great. — J.  F.  R. 
 
 GOMER  (-103;   Sept.    IVep).       i.  A  son  ol 
 
 Japhet,  from  whom  descended  Ashkenaz,  Rip. 
 hath,  and  Togarmah  (Gen.  x.  2,  3). 
 
 2.  A  people  descended  from  him,  the  troops  cf 
 which  appear  along  with  those  of  Togarmah  in  the 
 army  of  Gog  (Ezek.  xxxviii.  6).  Bochart,  follow- 
 ing the  Targ.  Hierosol. ,  and  the  Midrash  Gen., 
 which  give  Np^ISS,  or  ''p^lQN  {i.e.,  Phrygia),  as 
 its  equivalent,  concludes  that  Gomer  was  the 
 stem-name  of  the  Phrygians  ;  and  this  he  endea- 
 vours to  confirm  by  an  etymological  parallel  be- 
 tween the  Aram.  TDJ,  to  consiwie,  and  (ppvyia, 
 from  (ppvyeLv,  to  roast  (Phrygia  being,  according  to 
 ancient  testimony  a  x^P'^  eveKTrvpwros,  and  part  of 
 it  bearing  the  name  of  KaraKeKav/uLivrj,  or  burnt; 
 Strab.  xiii.  p.  628  ;  Diod.  iii.  p.  138).  But  to 
 this  it  seems  a  fatal  objection  that  the  Phiygians 
 formed  only  a  branch  of  the  Togarmians  (Joseph. 
 Anliq.  i.  6.  1  ;  Hieron.  QucEst.  tn  Gen.  x.  3),  and 
 therefore  cannot  be  regarded  as  the  stem  whence 
 the  Togarmians  themselves  sprang.  The  same 
 objection  applies  to  the  suggestion  that  Gomer  is 
 the  German  race  (Talm.  Jo7na,  loa)  ;  for  this 
 comes  under  Ashkenaz,  a  branch  of  Gomer. 
 Much  more  probable  is  the  suggestion  that  Gomer 
 is  to  be  connected  with  the  Ki/xuepiot  of  Homer 
 {Od.  xi.  14)  and  Herodotus  (i.  6,  15,  103  ;  iv.  12), 
 or  the  Ci/nbri,  of  the  north  of  Europe,  described 
 by  the  classical  writers  sometimes  as  a  German, 
 sometimes  as  a  Celtic  race.  The  preponderance 
 of  authority  is  in  favour  of  the  latter  (Sail.  yug. 
 1 14  ;  Flor.  iii.  3  ;  Appian,  De  Reb.  III.  4  ;  Bell. 
 Civ.  i.  29;  iv.  2;  Diod.  v.  32;  xiv.  114;  Plut. 
 Cam.  15,  Ular.  25,  27 ;  Dion.  Cass.  xliv.  42  ;  Justin, 
 x.xiv.  8  ;  xxxviii.  3,  4)  ;  and  the  probability  is  that 
 tlie  Cimbri  were  Celtic,  and  of  the  same  tribe  as  the 
 Cymry  of  Britain  (Prichard,  Eastern  Origitt  of  the 
 Celtic  Natio7is,  by  Latham,  p.  142  ;  Latham,  Gei  • 
 vtatiia  of  Tacitus,  Epilegom.  p.  clxv.,  ft".)  By  the 
 ancients  the  Cimmerii  and  the  Cimbri  were  held  to 
 be  one  people  ;  an  opinion  which,  though  repu- 
 diated by  many,  is  still  regarded  with  favour  by 
 such  men  as  Bunsen  and  Knobel.  On  the  pre- 
 sumption that  they  were  different,  we  are  inclined 
 to  connect  Gomer  rather  with  the  Cimmerii  than 
 with  the  Cimbri.  From  the  place  Gomer  occu- 
 pies in  the  roll  of  nations  in  Genesis,  it  may  be 
 presumed  that  the  people  descended  from  him  was 
 one  of  the  oldest,  and  this  would  fall  in  with  the 
 half-mythic  character  of  the  Cimmerii  as  they 
 appear  in  Homer.  It  is  plain  also  from  Ezek. 
 xxxviii.  6,  that  the  race  of  Gomer  was  regarded  by 
 the  Hebrews  as  living  to  the  far  north  of  Palestine, 
 and  this  accords  exactly  with  the  site  assigned  to 
 the  Cimmerii  by  Herodotus,  who  places  them  on  the 
 Caucasus,  and  represents  them  as  skirting  the 
 Euxine  and  coming  down  on  Asia  Minor  by  way 
 of  Colchis,  and  across  the  river  Halys.  If  the 
 Cimmerii  and  the  Cimbri  are  identified,  and  the 
 latter  be  regarded  as  a  Celtic-speaking  people,  the 
 statement  of  Jerome  that  the  Galatse  spoke  a  lan- 
 guage not  greatly  differing  from  that  of  the  Treveri 
 {Proleg.  Lib.  ii.,  ad Ep.  ad  Galatas),  may  have  an 
 important  bearing  on  the  subject  of  the  migrations 
 of  the  original  Gomerian  stock.  Cf.  Joseph.  An- 
 tiq.  i.  6.  I . 
 
 3.  The  wife  of  the  Prophet  Hosea  (Hos.  1.  3).— 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
GOMORRAH 
 
 153 
 
 GORDON 
 
 GOMORRAH,  in  the  N.  T.  Gomorrha  (niD]}; 
 
 Sept.  N.  T.  T6;xoppa).  One  of  the  most  ancient 
 towns  of  Palestine,  situated  in  that  part  of  the 
 once  fertile  plain  of  the  Jordan  which  is  now 
 covered  by  the  Dead  Sea.  Sodom  appears  to 
 have  been  the  chief  city  of  this  region  ;  hence, 
 ancient  geographers  call  the  whole  plain  '  the 
 province  of  Sodom'  (XodofjuTwu  Xibpa) ;  and  Euse- 
 bius  describes  Gomorrah  as  '  one  of  the  five 
 cities  of  Sodom'  (fiia  ttjs  ireuTairdXeus  2o66- 
 /J.UV  ;  Onomast.  s.v.  ;  see  alsoi  Reland,  Pal.^  p. 
 815).  The  few  allusions  made  in  Scripture  to  the 
 'cities  of  the  plain'  appear  to  indicate  that  they 
 stood  close  togetlier  (Gen.  xiii.  10 ;  xiv.  8-ii),  and 
 that  they  lay  near  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
 present  lake,  for  Abraham,  on  going  out  to  the 
 brow  of  the  mountain  near  Hebron,  '  looked  to- 
 ward Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  all  the  land  of 
 the  plain;'  and  this  he  could  not  have  done  had 
 they  been  situated  farther  north  (Gen.  xix.  28). 
 Gomorrah,  with  the  other  cities,  was  completely 
 destroyed  by  fire  from  heaven.  It  has  been  ques- 
 tioned whether  the  cities  of  the  plain  were  en- 
 gulphed  after  their  destruction,  or  whether  they 
 stood  upon  the  shore  of  the  present  sea.  The 
 words  of  Gen.  xiv.  3  appear  to  favour  the  former 
 opinion.  The  battle  between  the  eastern  kings  and 
 the  people  of  Sodom  took  place  in  the  '  vale  of  Sid- 
 dim,  7o///t7i  ;> /'/it' .S'cr/Z.St'a.'  The  phrase,  however,  is 
 not  quite  decisive  ;  for,  as  Reland  says,  it  is  not 
 affirmed  that  '  the  five  cities  stood  in  the  vale 
 of  Siddim'  {Pal.  254).  The  name  Gomorrah 
 would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  popular  opinion  of 
 the  submersion  of  the  cities  is  correct.  The  He- 
 brew niDJ/  is  most  probably  derived    from    the 
 
 Arabic  root 
 
 j^. 
 
 '  to  cover  with   water.'      For 
 
 a  full  account  of  this  matter  see  Sodom  and  Salt 
 Sea  ;  Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  187-192  ;  Handbook  for 
 S.  and  P.,  i.  246,  sq.  ;  Stanley,  .S".  and  P.,2&l,  sq.) 
 M.  de  Saulcy  astonished  the  world  a  few  years 
 ago  by  the  announcement  that  he  had  discovered 
 the  sites  of  the  whole  Pentapolis,  and  he  gives  a 
 minute  description  of  what  he  calls  their  ruins 
 {Jour7iey  ro7ind  the  Dead  Sea).  Gomorrah,  he 
 locates  at  Ain  el-Feshkah,  on  the  north-west  shore 
 of  the  lake,  where  are  the  rums  of  a  small  tower 
 and  some  rude  walls,  apparently  field  fences. 
 Oriental  travellers  and  geographers  place  little 
 faith  in  M.  de  Saulcy's  discoveries  ;  indeed,  they 
 have  been  shewn  by  Van  de  Velde  and  others  to 
 be  a  series  of  delusions  (Van  de  Velde,  ii.  115,  sq,) 
 There  is  not  a  shadow  of  evidence  tending  to  fix 
 the  site  of  Gomorrah  at  the  place  indicated. — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 GONACH.      [IBN  GONACH.] 
 
 GOOD,  John  Mason,  M.D.,  was  born  in  1764 
 at  Epping,  where  his  father  was  pastor  of  a  Con- 
 gregational Church,  and  died  in  1827.  He  com- 
 menced practice  as  a  surgeon  at  Sudbury  in  1784, 
 but  removed  to  London  in  1793,  where  he  con- 
 tinued for  the  rest  of  his  life.  Besides  contributing 
 largely  to  the  literature  of  his  profession,  he  devoted 
 much  time  to  Biblical  studies,  and  produced  several 
 works  of  some  value  in  this  department.  In  1800 
 appeared  his  Translation  of  the  Song  of  Solo77ion, 
 with  notes  critical  attd  explanatory ;  and  in  1812  his 
 Translatioji  of  the  Book  of  Job,  with  notes  critical 
 and  illustrative,  and  an  Introductory  Dissertation- 
 
 Since  his  death  there  have  appeared  from  his  pen. 
 Historical  outline  of  the  Book  of  Psalms,  edited  by 
 the  Rev.  J.  M.  Neale,  Lond.  1852  ;  and  The  Book 
 of  Psalms :  a  nezu  translation,  with  notes  critical 
 and explanatoiy,  edited  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Henderson, 
 Lond.  1854.  Dr.  Good  was  a  man  of  extensive 
 knowledge  and  unusual  attainments  as  a  linguist, 
 and  he  has  in  his  notes  collected  much  that  may  be 
 of  use  to  the  Biblical  scholar  ;  but  he  cannot  be  as- 
 signed any  above  a  secondary  place  as  an  expositor 
 of  Scripture. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GOODWIN,  Thomas,  D.D.,  styled  by  An- 
 thony Wood  '  one  of  the  Atlasses  and  Patriarchs 
 of  Independency,'  was  born  at  Rollesby,  Norfolk, 
 Oct.  5,  1600.  He  was  sent  to  Cambridge  a  little 
 before  the  completion  of  his  13th  year,  and  when 
 only  in  his  20th  year  was  chosen  Fellow  and 
 Lecturer  of  Catherine  Hall.  In  1634,  through 
 dissatisfaction  with  the  terms  of  conformity,  he  re- 
 signed his  preferment  and  left  the  university.  In 
 1639  he  withdrew  to  Holland,  and  was  for  some 
 time  pastor  of  a  church  at  Arnheim.  He  returned 
 to  England  at  the  beginning  of  the  long  Parliament, 
 and  in  January  1650  was  appointed  President  of 
 Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  by  order  of  the  House 
 of  Commons.  On  the  Restoration  he  retired  to 
 London,  and  there  exercised  his  ministry  as  pastor 
 of  an  Independent  Church,  until  his  death,  Feb. 
 23)  1679,  His  collected  works  were  published  in 
 London,  5  vols.  foL,  16S1-1704.  They  include  an 
 Exposition  o?i  tJie  First  and  fart  of  the  Second 
 Chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesiafts,  and  also 
 an  Ex  posit  io7i  07i  the  Book  of  Revclatio7is.  The 
 criticism  of  Calamy  is  fairly  characteristic  : — '  He 
 was  a  considerable  scholar  and  an  eminent  divine, 
 and  had  a  veiy  happy  faculty  in  descanting  upon 
 Scripture,  so  as  to  bring  forth  surprising  remarks, 
 which  yet  generally  tended  to  illustration.' — S.  N. 
 
 GOPHER  WOOD.  [Etz-Gopher.] 
 GOPHRITH  (JT'lDa),  a  mineral  easily  inflam- 
 mable. The  LXX.  translate  the  word  by  ^^tov, 
 the  Vulg.  by  sulphur,  and  the  A.  V.  by  brimsto7ie. 
 The  Lexicons  connect  it  with  "IDJ,  the  name  of  a 
 tree,  probably  a  species  of  pine  that  exudes  resin 
 [Etz-Gopher]  ;  but  this  may  admit  of  doubt,  as 
 it  has  nothing  in  its  favour  except  the  identity  of 
 the  letters  composing  this  word  with  those  com- 
 posing the  first  part  of  Gophrith.  The  native 
 brimstone  or  sulphur  is  found  in  crystals  of  diffe- 
 rent forms,  and  in  almost  all  parts  of  the  world. 
 The  sacred  writers  make  frequent  references  to 
 brimstone  in  connection  with  the  inflictions  of  the 
 Divine  vengeance  on  the  guilty.  Comp.  Deut. 
 xxix.  23  ;  Job  xviii.  15  ;  Is.  xxx.  33  ;  xxxiv.  9  ; 
 Ez.  xxxviii.  22  ;  Rev.  xiv.  10  ;  xix.  20  ;  xx.  10 ; 
 xxi.  8.  These  references  undoubtedly  find  their 
 basis  in  the  fact  recorded,  Gen.  xix.  24,  25. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 GORDON,  James,  a  Scottish  Jesuit,  bom  at 
 or  near  Aberdeen  in  1553.  He  spent  his  life 
 chiefly  on  the  Continent ;  he  was  professor  in  the 
 colleges  of  Toulouse  and  Bourdeaux,  and  was  the 
 author  of  several  works  on  history  and  chronology. 
 He  published  also  Bihlia  Sacra  cum  Comme/itarits, 
 etc.,  Paris,  3  vols.  fol.  1632.  These  volumes,  ac- 
 cording to  Walch,  contain  many  things  which  may 
 be  read  with  profit  ;  they  are  also  commended  by 
 Dupin.     The  author  died  in  1641.— W.  L.  A. 
 
GORGIAS 
 
 154 
 
 GORTYNA 
 
 GORGIAS  (Topylas),  one  of  the  generals  of  An- 
 tiochus  Epiphanes,  who  is  called  in  i  Maccab. 
 and  in  Josephus  '  a  mighty  man  of  the  king's 
 friends '  (dvrip  Swarbs  tG>v  <pikwv  rod  ^aaiXiuv ; 
 I  Maccab.  iii.  38  ;  Joseph.  Aiitiq.  xii.  7.  3.)  He 
 was  chosen  by  Lysias,  the  general  and  minister  of 
 Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  at  this  time  in  sole 
 command  of  the  provinces  from  the  Euphrates  to 
 the  sea,  to  undertake  an  expedition  in  company 
 with  Ptolemy,  the  son  of  Dorymenes,  and  with 
 Nicanor,  agamst  Judsea,  B.C.  166  (i  Maccab.  iii. 
 38  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  7.  2,  3).  These  generals 
 were,  however,  totally  defeated  near  Emmaus  by 
 Judas  Maccaboeus  (i  Maccab.  iv.  i,  seq.  ;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.,  1.  c.)  In  B.C.  165,  Joseph,  the  son  of 
 Zacharias,  and  Azarias,  two  captains  in  the  service 
 of  Judas  Maccabceus,  anxious  to  get  themselves  a 
 name,  and  acting  without  the  orders  of  Judas, 
 attacked  the  garrison  of  Jamnia.  Gorgias,  the 
 governor  of  the  forces  at  Jamnia,  defeated  them 
 with  great  loss  (i  Maccab.  v.  56,  scq. ;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xii.  7.  6.) 
 
 The  account  of  Gorgias  in  2  Maccab.  is  very  con- 
 fused. In  one  passage  he  is  described  simply  as 
 '  a  captain,  who  in  matters  of  war  had  great  expe- 
 rience,' and  therefore  sent  with  Nicanor,  the  son  of 
 Patroclus,  one  of  the  special  friends  of  Ptolemceus, 
 the  governor  of  Coele-Syria  and  Phcenice  (cf  1 
 Maccab.  iii.  38  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  7.  3),  to  root 
 out  the  whole  nation  of  ihe  Jews  (2  Maccab. 
 viii.  9).  In  another  passage  he  is  represented 
 as  'governor  of  the  holds'  (aTpaTT]ybi  rwv  tSttojv 
 [rpd-irui'  A/ex.],  2  Maccab.  x.  14),  and  apparently 
 of  the  holds  of  the  Idumseans  (?)  (Acrabattene  ?  cf. 
 I  Maccab.  v.  3  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  8.  i  ;  see 
 Ewald,  Geschichte,  iv.  91,  358,  and  Smith,  Diet,  of 
 Bible,  vol.  i.,  p.  42,  note).  He  is  afterwards,  ac- 
 cording to  the  present  text,  described  as  '  governor 
 of  Idumasa'  (2  Maccab.  xii.  32). 
 
 Grotius  (see  Wernsdorff,  De  fid.  Lihi:  Mace,  sec. 
 73)  suggests  that  the  reading  '  governor  of  Idu- 
 msea'  is  an  error  for  'governor  of  Jamnia'  (as  at 
 I  Maccab.  v.  58).  Josephus  warrants  this  cor- 
 rection (6  Ti]%  ^la.fxveias  a-TpaTT]y6$,  Antiq.  xii.  8. 
 6).  From  the  epithet  applied  to  Gorgias,  he 
 seems  to  have  been  held  in  the  highest  detesta- 
 tion by  the  Jews  (A.  V.,  that  cursed  man  ;  tov  kolt- 
 dparov,  2  Maccab.  xii.  35).  The  description  of  his 
 flight  to  Marisa  and  his  defeat  by  Dositheus,  one  of 
 Judas'  generals,  is  given  at  some  length,  though  in 
 an  obscure  and  confused  manner  (2  Maccab.  xii. 
 34-38  ;  cf.  Joseph.  Atitiq.  xii.  8.  6).— F.  W.  M. 
 
 GORTYNA  (TdpTvva  A/ex.,  Vat.;*  in  classical 
 writers,  TSprvv,  Foprvva  ;  on  a  coin,  Kdpri'va 
 [KoprvvLcov]),  a  city  of  Crete,  and  next  to  Cnos- 
 
 *  We  can  find  no  authority  for  TSprvvai,  as  Winer 
 {Rea/woi'ttrbucJi,  s.  v.  Gortynce)  and  Howson 
 {Smith's  Diet,  of  t/ie  Bih/e,  s.  v.  Gortyna)  both 
 state.  We  have  carefully  examined  the  Alexandrian 
 MS.,  and  looked  at  the  text  of  that  of  the  Vatican 
 (ed.  Mai.)  In  the  former  the  reading  is  koX  els 
 Trjv  ^aat\ei8au  Kal  Tdprvvav,  in  the  latter  KaVApadov 
 Kol  VbpTvvav.  We  have  also  consulted  the  Vefns 
 Testamentiim  Graettm  (1798- 1827),  commenced 
 by  Holmes,  and  continued  by  Parsons,  which  pro- 
 fesses to  give  a  great  variety  of  readings.  The  only 
 variation  regarding  the  word  in  question  is  in  a 
 MS.  as  late  as  the  13th  century,  where  the  passage 
 reads  eis  Vboriva.. 
 
 sus,  the  most  important  in  the  island  for  power 
 and  magnificence.  At  one  time  Gortyna  and 
 Cnossus  in  union  held  the  whole  of  Crete  in  their 
 power  excepting  Lyttus  (Polyb.  iv.  53,  54).  In 
 later  times  they  were  in  a  continual  state  of  v/arfare 
 (Strabo  x.,  Didot.  ed.,  p.  410).  Gortyna  was 
 founded  by  a  colony  from  Gortys  of  Arcadia  (Plato, 
 Leges  \Y.,  Didot.  ed.,  p.  320).  It  was  of  very  con- 
 siderable size,  its  walls  being  fifty  stadia  in  circuit, 
 whilst  those  of  its  rival,  Cnossus,  were  not  more 
 than  thirty  (Strabo  x.,  Didot.  ed.,  pp.  409-411). 
 Homer  bestows  upon  it  the  epithet  '  walled '  (ret- 
 X'-becT(xa,  I/,  ii.  646).  It  was  situate  on  the  south 
 side  of  the  island  on  tlie  river  Lethaeus  {Messara), 
 and  at  a  distance  of  ninety  stadia  from  the  Libyan 
 Sea  (Strabo,  /.  c.)  In  the  Peloponnesian  war  Gor- 
 tyna seems  to  have  had  some  relations  with  Athens 
 (Thuc.  ii.  85).  Its  connection  with  Philopoemen 
 in  B.C.  201,  is  shewn  by  the  Gortynians  having  in- 
 vited him  to  take  the  command  of  their  army 
 (Plut.  Phi/op.  13).  When  the  Achasan  League  was 
 in  alliance  with  the  Romans,  B.C.  197,  against 
 Philip  V.  of  Macedon,  500  Gortynians  joined 
 Quinctius  Flamininus  when  on  his  march  to  Thes- 
 saly,  previous  to  the  battle  of  Cynoscephal^^  (Liv. 
 xxxiii.  3).  It  is  only  recently  that  a  coin  bearing 
 the  well-knowm  types  of  the  League  has  been  found, 
 struck  at  Gortyna.  The  late  Col.  Leake  has 
 shewn  that  the  coin  with  the  legend  KOPTTNIfiN 
 AXAIflN,  which  had  previously  been  assigned  to 
 Gortys  in  Arcadia  by  the  late  Mr.  Burgon  {Num. 
 Cliron.,  vol.  xix.  p.  235-36),  certainly  belongs  to 
 the  Cretan  Gortyna  {Snpp.  N^icm.  He//,  p.  no), 
 thus  proving  that  cities  beyond  the  continent  were 
 admitted  into  the  League  (R.  S.  Poole,  Num. 
 C/iron.,  N.  S.,  vol.  i.  p.  I73)'  About  the  same 
 period  there  are  evidences  of  an  alliance,  political 
 or  commercial,  between  Athens  and  several  of  the 
 Cretan  towns.  Some  of  the  coins  of  six  of  these — 
 Cnossus,  Cydonia,  Gortyna,  Hierapytna,  Polyr- 
 rhenium,  and  Priansus — are  tetradrachms  with 
 exactly  the  types  of  those  of  Athens  of  the  same 
 age,  but  distinguished  by  having  the  distinctive 
 badges  of  the  Cretan  towns.  They  were  probably 
 struck  by  the  Cretan  cities  of  the  great  alliance 
 against  Philip  V.  of  Macedon  about  B.C.  188 
 (Paus.  i.  36,  5,  6;  cf  Eckhel,  Doct.  Num.  Vet., 
 vol.  ii.  p.  221;  Leake,  Num.  He//.  Tnsu/ar  Greece, 
 p.  19  ;  R.  S.  Poole,  Num.  Cliron.,  N.  S.,  /.  c.) 
 As  Cnossus  declined,  Gortyna  rose  to  eminence, 
 and  became  the  metropolis  of  Crete.  About  A.  D. 
 200  a  brother  of  Septimius  Severus  held  at  Gor- 
 tyna the  office  of  proconsul  and  qusestor  of  the 
 united  provinces  of  Crete  and  Cyrene  (Boeckh, 
 No.  2591).  In  the  arrangement  of  the  provinces 
 by  Constantine,  Gortyna  was  still  the  metropolis 
 of  Crete  (Hierocl.  Synecd,  p.  649 ;  cf.  Leake, 
 St/pp.  Num.  He//.,  p.  157). 
 
 The  remains  of  Gortyna  near  Aghius  Dheka  (the 
 ten  Saints),  and  the  cavern  in  the  mountain,  have 
 been  described  by  Tournefort  {Re/ation  d'uit  Voyage 
 du  Levant)  and  Pococke  {Description  of  t/ie  East), 
 and  the  cavern,  more  recently,  by  Mr.  Cockerel! 
 (Walpole,  ii.  p.  402).  The  modern  Gortynians 
 hold  this  cavern  to  be  the  Labyrinth,  thus  claim- 
 ing for  themselves  the  honours  of  the  myth  of 
 the  Minotaur,  but  it  does  not  appear  from  the  Gor- 
 tynian  coins,  which  date  from  the  time  of  the 
 Persian  war  to  that  of  Hadrian  (and  there  are 
 none  later),  that  their  ancestors  ever  entertained 
 such  an  idea  (Leake,  Nutn.  He/l.  Insu/ar  Greece, 
 
GOSHEN 
 
 155 
 
 GOSHEN 
 
 p.  1 8).  The  famous  Labyrinth  is  represented  on 
 the  coins  of  Cnossus,  and  Col.  Leake  says  that  '  it 
 is  difficult  to  reconcile  this  fact  with  the  existence 
 of  the  Labyrinth  near  Gortyna,  for  that  the  excava- 
 tion near  Aghius  Dheka,  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Ida, 
 IS  the  renowned  Cretan  labyrinth,  cannot  be 
 doubted  after  the  description  of  Tournefort,  Po- 
 cocke,  and  Cockerell'  {Supp.  Num.  Hell.,  p.  156). 
 This  opinion  is  given  notwithstanding  the  assertion 
 of  Pausanias  (0  ev  Kywo-crc?  Xa^vpi-vdos,  i.  27,  9). 
 One  of  the  coins  of  Cnossus,  bears,  besides  the 
 Labyrinth  on  its  reverse,  the  Minotaur  on  the 
 obverse.  It  cannot  be  much  later  than  the  expedi- 
 tion of  Xerxes,  and  thus  affords  evidence  of  the 
 antiquity  of  the  tradition  of  the  Labyrinth,  if  not  of 
 its  real  existence  ;  whereas  Iloeck  (A'trla,  vol.  i. , 
 p.  56,  sec/.),  relying  on  the  silence  of  Hesiod  and 
 Herodotus,  and  the  assumed  silence  of  Homer — 
 though  the  Iliad  contains  what  looks  very  like  an 
 allusion  to  the  Cretan  wonder  (//.  xviii.  590,  sc^.) 
 has  supposed  it  to  have  been  an  invention  of  the 
 later  poets  borrowed  from  Egypt  (R.  S.  Poole, 
 Num.  C/iron.,  N.  S.,  vol.  i.  pp.  171-72).  A  full 
 account  of  the  remains  of  the  old  site  and  the 
 modern  place  is  given  in  the  Mttseitm  of  Classical 
 Antiquities  (vol.  ii.  pp.  277-286).  Mr.  Falkener 
 hera  describes  the  cavern  near  Gortyna  from 
 Sieber,  who  spent  three  days  in  examining  it,  and 
 says,  that  certainly  it  had  been  nothing  more  than 
 a  quariy,  which  probably  supplied  the  stone  for 
 building  the  city  {Reise  tiack  der  Fusel  Kreta,  vol. 
 i.  pp.  511-520).  Hoeck  seems  to  hold  similar 
 views  {Kreta,  vol.  i.  pp.  447-454). 
 
 The  only  Biblical  interest  attached  to  Gortyna 
 is  that  it  is  mentioned  in  the  Apocrypha  in  the  list 
 of  cities  to  which  the  Romans  sent  letters  on  behalf 
 of  the  Jews,  when  Simon  the  Maccabee  renewed 
 the  treaty  which  his  brothers  Judas  and  Jonathan 
 had  made  with  Rome  (i  Maccab.  xv.  23  ;  cf  i 
 Maccab.  viii.  i,  seq.;  xii.  i,  seq.)  There  is  no 
 doubt  that  the  Jews  were  settled  in  great  numbers 
 in  Crete  (Joseph.  A^itiq.  xvii.  12.  I  ;  Bell,  yud., 
 ii.  7  ;  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Caium.,  sec.  36),  and  Gor- 
 tyna may  have  been  their  chief  residence.  Ptolemy 
 Philometor,  who  treated  the  Jews  kindly,  and  who 
 had  received  a  numerous  body  in  Egypt  when 
 they  were  driven  out  of  Judaea  by  the  opposite 
 party  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  3  ;  Bell.  j^id.  i.  i.  i), 
 rebuilt  part  of  Gortyna  (Strabo  x.,  Didot.  ed. ,  p. 
 411).  When  St.  Paul,  as  a  prisoner,  was  on  his 
 voyage  from  Caesarea  to  Rome,  the  ship,  on  ac- 
 count of  a  storm,  was  obliged  to  run  under  the  lee 
 of  Crete,  in  the  direction  of  Cape  Salmone,  and 
 soon  after  came  to  a  place  called  Fair  Havens, 
 which  was  near  a  city  called  Las^A  (Acts  xxvii. 
 8)  [Crete].  Lassea  is  probably  the  Lasia  of  the 
 Peutingerian  Tables,  and  is  there  stated  to  be  six- 
 teen miles  east  of  Gortyna.  It  is  veiy  uncertain 
 how  long  the  vessel  was  detained  at  Fair  Havens, 
 though  '  much  time  had  been  spent'  (Acts  xxvii. 
 9),  not  since  they  had  sailed  from  Cassarea,  but  at 
 the  anchorage  (Alford,  in  loc.)  Doubtless,  the 
 sailors,  soldiers,  and  prisoners,  had  frequent  inter- 
 course with  LasDsa,  and  perhaps  Gortyna.  St. 
 Paul  may  then  have  preached  the  Gospel  at  one  or 
 both  of  these  places,  but  of  this  there  is  not  the 
 slightest  proof  (cf.  Conybeareand  Howson,  Life  0/ 
 St.  Fau/f  vol.  ii.  ^^p.  394-396). — F.  W,  M. 
 
 GOSHEN  (jn  ;  Sept.  Tea^v,  Peo-^/x),  a  province 
 or  district  of  Egypt  in  which  Jacob  and  his  family 
 
 settled  through  the  instrumentality  of  his  son 
 Joseph,  and  in  which  they  and  their  descendants 
 remained  for  a  period  of  430  years  (Gen.  xlv.  lo  ; 
 xlvi.  28  ;  xlvii.  27  ;  1.  8  ;  Exod.  viii.  22  ;  ix.  26). 
 The  Bible  does  not  present  any  definite  informa- 
 tion as  to  the  precise  locality  of  Goshen,  and  of 
 course  later  authorities  possess  only  an  inferior 
 value.  There  are,  however,  incidental  expressions, 
 allusions,  and  implications  in  the  Scriptures,  which 
 afford  aid  in  determining  the  spot.  That  Goshen 
 lay  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Nile  may  be  justi- 
 fiably inferred  from  the  fact  that  Jacob  is  not  re- 
 ported to  have  crossed  that  river  ;  nor  does  it 
 appear  that  the  Israelites  did  so  in  their  flight  out 
 of  Egypt.  With  this  inference  all  the  language 
 employed  (see  the  passages  as  given  above),  to  say 
 the  least,  agrees,  if  it  does  not  afford  an  indirect 
 evidence  in  its  favour.  By  comparing  Exod.  xiii. 
 17  and  I  Chron.  vii.  21,  it  appears  that  Goshen 
 bordered  on  Arabia  (see  Gen.  xlv.  10,  Sept.  Tea^fji. 
 ^Apa^ias)  as  well  as  Palestine,  and  the  passage  of 
 the  Israelites  out  of  Egypt  shews  that  the  land  was 
 not  far  removed  from  the  Red  Sea.  It  appears 
 probable  that  we  may  fix  the  locality  of  Goshen 
 in  Lower  Egypt,  on  the  east  side  of  the  Pelusiac 
 branch  of  the  Nile,  m  the  district  around  Heroo- 
 pqlis.  The  Septuagint  renders  the  words  H^DX 
 \^i,  'land  of  Goshen'  (Gen.  xlvi.  28),  KaO'  'Upcbuv 
 TrdXiv,  els  -yTJu  ''Bap.iaarj,  thus  identifying  Goshen 
 with  Rameses,  or  the  district  of  Pithom  or  Heroo- 
 polis.  (See  map.  No.  3,  in  Knight's  Illuminated 
 Atlas.)  This  would  make  Goshen  correspond  with 
 one  of  the  divisions  of  what  was  anciently  termed 
 the  Prsefectura  Arabica,  Ti-Arabia,  the  eastern  dis- 
 trict, lying,  that  is,  on  the  eastern  or  Arabian  side 
 of  the  Nile.  This  division  was  that  of  Heliopolis 
 or  On,  Matariyeh,  or  Ain-Shems.  An  attempt 
 has  been  made  to  define  it  accurately,  so  as  to 
 identify  Goshen  (Rosenm.  Allerihum.,  iii.  246) 
 with  the  Nomos  Arabije  (Ptol.  iv.  5),  or  the  coun- 
 try of  Esch-schar  Kijah  (the  eastern  land),  which 
 stretches  south  from  Pelusium  as  far  as  Belbeis 
 (north-east  from  Cairo),  and  to  ,  the  north-east 
 borders  of  the  desert  El  Dschefar.  Traces  are 
 found  here,  it  is  thought,  of  the  residence  of  the 
 Israelites,  in  large  heaps  of  ruins,  a  few  hours' 
 journey  to  the  north-east  of  Cairo,  which  the  Arabs 
 call  Tell  el  yhud  (]ews''  hills),  or  Tiirheh  el  Jhtid 
 (Jews'  graves)  (Niebuhr,  i.  100).  According  to 
 Bois  Ayme  {Descrip.  de  VEgypte,  viii.  ill)  Goshen 
 was  the  valley  of  Sabal-yar,  which  begins  in  the 
 vicinity  of  Belbeis,  and  embraces  the  district  of 
 Heroopolis.  Robinson  {Palestine,  i.  37)  makes 
 light  of  the  evidence  supposed  to  be  supplied  by 
 '  the  mounds  of  the  Jews,'  just  mentioned.  He 
 says,  '  If  there  is  any  historical  foundation  for  this 
 name,  which  is  doubtful,  these  mounds  can  only 
 be  referred  back  to  the  period  of  the  Ptolemies,  in 
 the  centuries  immediately  before  the  Christian  era, 
 when  great  numbers  of  Jews  resorted  to  Egypt  and 
 erected  a  temple  at  Leontopolis.'  This  opinion, 
 however,  appears  to  us  somewhat  arbitrary.  And 
 whatever  the  actual  origin  of  these  mounds,  the 
 ordinary  account  of  them  may  be  the  transmission 
 or  echo  of  a  very  ancient  tradition.  Robinson, 
 however,  does  not  deny  that  Goshen  is  to  be 
 found  about  where  the  best  authorities  ordinarily 
 place  it,  as  will  appear  from  the  following  quota- 
 tion ;  we  regret  that  the  wish  here  spoken  of  was 
 not  fulfilled :  'It  had  been  our  wish  to  take  a  more 
 circuitous  route  from  Suez  to  Cairo,   descending 
 
GOSHEN 
 
 156 
 
 GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 the  eastern  branch  or  canal  of  the  Nile  beyond 
 Belbeis,  as  far  as  to  the  province  of  Shur-kiyeh, 
 and  thence  along  the  valley  of  the  ancient  canal  to 
 the  head  of  the  gulf  of  Suez.  Our  object  in  taking 
 this  route  vi^ould  have  been  to  make  inquiries  and 
 observations  personally  in  relation  to  the  land  of 
 Goshen  and  the  Exodus  of  the  Israelites'  (i.  54)- 
 The  following  passage,  however,  will  serve  to 
 prove  that  even  the  desert  is  not  unsuited  to  pas- 
 toral purposes: — 'The  desert  which  we  were  now 
 crossing  is  not  sandy,  but  its  surface,  for  the  most 
 part,  is  a  hard  gravel,  often  strewed  with  pebbles. 
 Numerous  wadys,  or  shallow  water-courses,  inter- 
 sect its  surface.  In  all  these  wadys  there  are  usu- 
 ally to  be  found  scattered  tufts  of  herbs  or  shrubs, 
 on  which  the  camels  browse  as  they  pass  along, 
 and  which  serve  likewise  as  their  pasturage  when 
 turned  loose  at  night.  During  the  rainy  season 
 and  afterwards,  the  inhabitants  of  Belbeis  and  the 
 Shur-kiyeh,  as  probably  did  the  Israelites  of  old, 
 still  drive  their  mingled  flocks  of  sheep  and  goats 
 for  pasturage  to  this  quarter  of  the  desert.' 
 
 Laborde  {A>-abia  Fetnea,  p.  58)  fixes  Goshen  in 
 the  country  around  Belbeis,  on  the  eastern  side  of 
 the  Nile.  Speaking  of  his  journey  from  Cairo  by 
 Belbeis  to  Suez,  he  says,  '  This  plain  is  the  pro- 
 vince of  Goshen,  where  the  children  of  Egypt 
 settled  and  multiplied  :  it  was  here  that  the  meet- 
 ing occurred  between  Jacob,  the  patriarch,  and 
 Joseph,  the  minister  and  master  of  Egypt.'  La- 
 borde passed  the  banks  of  the  canal  which  formerly 
 united  the  Nile  with  the  Red  Sea,  and  which,  he 
 says,  Bonaparte  was  the  first  in  modem  times  to 
 observe.  M.  Quatremere  has  endeavoured  to  de- 
 fine the  locality,  and  by  comparing  several  pas- 
 sages collected  from  different  writers,  he  infers  that 
 the  Wady  Tumilat  (Wady  Tomlate  in  Laborde),  in 
 which  the  canal  of  Cairo  terminates,  is  the  land  of 
 Goshen  :  such  at  least  seems  to  have  been  the 
 opinion  of  Saadias  and  Abu  Said,  the  authors  of 
 the  earliest  Arabic  Versions  of  the  O.  T. — the  one 
 for  the  use  of  the  Jews,  and  the  other  for  that  of 
 the  Samaritans  [Mem.  Gi'ogr.  siir  f  Egypte).  J.  D. 
 Michaelis  was  of  opinion  {Spicil.  p.  371)  that  Go- 
 shen extended  from  Palestine  along  the  Mediter- 
 ranean as  far  as  the  Tanitic  mouth  of  the  Nile,  and 
 thence  inland  up  to  Heliopolis,  embracing  a  sweep 
 of  country  so  as  to  take  in  a  part  of  Arabia,  bor- 
 dering on  Egypt.  The  various  opinions  that  have 
 been  held  on  the  subject  may  be  found  classified 
 and  considered  by  Bellermann  in  his  Handb.  d. 
 Bibl.  Lit.  iv.  191-220  (see  also  Jablonsky,  Dissert. 
 viii.  de  Terra  Gose7i). 
 
 This  district  was  suitable  for  a  nomadic  people, 
 who  would  have  been  misplaced  in  the  narrow 
 limits  of  the  valley  of  the  Nile.  Children  of  the 
 desert,  or  at  least  used  as  they  were  to  wander 
 freely  from  one  fertile  plain  to  another  with 
 their  flocks  and  herds,  the  sons  of  Jacob  required 
 a  spot  where  the  advantages  of  an  advanced  civi- 
 lization could  be  united  with  unrestricted  freedom, 
 and  abundance  be  secured  without  the  forfeiture 
 of  early  and  cherished  habits.  The  several  opi- 
 nions which  we  have  given  substantially  agree  in 
 referring  Goshen  to  the  country  intervening  be- 
 tween the  desert  of  Arabia  and  Palestine  on  the 
 one  side,  and  the  Pelusiac  arm  of  the  Nile  on  the 
 other,  with  the  Mediterranean  at  the  base.  The 
 district  assigned  to  Jacob  and  his  family  was  chosen 
 for  its  superiority  (Gen.  xlvii.  6),  '  In  the  best  of 
 the  land  make  thy  father  and  brethren  to  dwell,  in 
 
 the  land  of  Goshen  let  them  dwell ; '  and  the  sub- 
 sequent increase  of  the  Israelites  themselves,  as 
 well  as  the  multiplication  of  their  cattle,  shews  that 
 the  territory  was  one  of  extraordinary  fertility. 
 Time  and  circumstances  have  doubtless  had  their 
 effect  on  the  fertility  of  a  country  in  which  the  de- 
 sert is  ever  ready  to  make  encroachments  so  soon 
 as  the  repelling  hand  of  man  is  i-elaxed  or  with- 
 drawn. But  Laborde  (p.  53)  represents  the 
 vicinity  of  Heliopolis  as  still  covered  with  palm- 
 trees,  and  as  having  an  enclosure,  comprehending 
 a  considerable  space  of  ground,  which  is  covered 
 every  year  by  the  inundation  of  the  Nile  to  the 
 height  of  five  feet.  We  are  not,  however,  to  ex- 
 pect evidences  of  luxuriant  fertility.  The  country 
 was  chosen  for  its  pre-eminent  fitness  for  shepherds. 
 If  a  nomadic  tribe  had  wide  space  and  good  pas- 
 ture-grounds, they  would  have  'the  best  (for 
 themselves)  of  the  land,'  and  these  advantages  the 
 district  in  which  we  have  placed  Goshen  abun- 
 dantly supplied  in  ancient  times,  when  the  waters 
 of  the  Nile  were  more  liberally  dispensed  than  at 
 present  to  the  eastern  side  of  the  country.  Nothing 
 is  needed  but  water  to  make  the  desert  fertile. 
 '  The  water  of  the  Nile  soaks  through  the  earth  foi 
 some  distance  under  the  sandy  tract  (the  neigh- 
 bourhood of  Heliopolis),  and  is  everywhere  found 
 on  digging  wells  eighteen  or  twenty  feet  deep. 
 Such  wells  are  very  frequent  in  parts  which  the  in- 
 undation does  not  reach.  The  water  is  raised  from 
 them  by  wheels  turned  by  oxen,  and  applied  to  the 
 irrigation  of  the  fields.  Whenever  this  takes 
 place  the  desert  is  turned  into  a  fruitful  field.  In 
 passing  to  Hehopolis  we  saw  several  such  fields  in 
 the  different  stages  of  being  reclaimed  from  the 
 desert  ;  some  just  laid  out,  others  already  fertile. 
 In  returning  by  another  way  more  eastward,  we 
 passed  a  succession  of  beautiful  plantations  wholly 
 dependent  on  this  mode  of  irrigation'  (Robinson's 
 Palestine,  vol.  i.  p.  36). — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 GOSPELS,  THE.  The  first  four  books  of  the 
 N.  T.  early  received  the  name  '  Gospels,'  not  as 
 historical  or  biographical  writings,  but  because  they 
 announce  the  glad  tidings  (61)077^:01')  concerning 
 Jesus  as  the  Messiah,  in  the  form  of  a  historical 
 demonstration  of  His  Messiahship  (Meyer).  They 
 are  ascribed  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John, 
 respectively ;  but  instead  of  the  genitive  of  author- 
 ship, the  preposition  Kara,  'according  to,'  is  used 
 in  the  inscription.  The  Gospel  is  properly  'the 
 Gospel  of  God'  or  'of  Christ;'  and  'the  Gospel 
 according  to  Matthew'  is  the  Gospel-message,  as 
 Matthew  delivered  it.  The  inscription  in  the 
 Peshito  (Syriac)  version  is,  'The  holy  Gospel,  the 
 preaching  of  the  Apostle  Matthew.' 
 
 The  integrity  and  genuineness  of  the  Gospels 
 admit  of  no  reasonable  doubt.  The  substantial 
 sameness  of  the  text  from  the  beginning  is  proved 
 by  the  agreement  among  the  numerous  manuscripts 
 extant  in  various  countries.  This  agreement,  evi- 
 denced by  a  careful  collation,  is  satisfactorily  ac- 
 counted for  only  when  we  admit  that  the  existing 
 copies  have  been  derived  from  the  same  common 
 exemplar  faithfully  copied.  The  various  readings, 
 however  numerous,  are  comparatively  unimport- 
 ant, and  do  not  affect  the  essential  sameness  of  the 
 books. 
 
 That  the  Gospels  have  been  rightly  ascribed  to 
 the  writers  whose  names  they  bear,  appears  from 
 the  undisputed  fact  that  they  were  regarded  with 
 
GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 157 
 
 GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 the  highest  reverence  as  genuine  and  sacred  boolcs 
 by  tlie  great  body  of  Christians  during  the  last 
 quarter  of  tlie  2d  century  (Norton).  In  support 
 of  this  statement,  Irenseus  of  Lyons,  Theophilus  of 
 Antiocli,  Tertullian  of  Carthage,  Clement  and 
 Origen  of  Alexandria,  might  be  cited  as  witnesses. 
 They  all  Ijear  testimony  to  our  present  Gospels, 
 although  living  in  countries  distant  from  each 
 other,  some  in  Asia,  others  in  Africa  and  Europe. 
 It  should  be  remarked,  further,  that  they  were  not 
 only  men  of  learning  and  ability,  but  that  they  re- 
 present the  great  body  of  Christians  for  whom  they 
 spoke,  a  circumstance  which  greatly  enhances  the 
 importance  of  their  testimony  in  favour  of  the 
 Gospels.  By  way  of  example  we  shall  quote 
 Irenseus  :  Contra  Hares,  iii.  i — '  Matthew  among 
 the  Hebrews  published  a  Gospel  in  their  own  lan- 
 guage, while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  the 
 Gospel  at  Rome,  and  founding  the  church  there. 
 After  their  departure  (death),  Mark,  the  disciple 
 and  interpreter  of  Peter,  himself  delivered  to  us  in 
 writing  what  had  been  preached  by  Peter.  And 
 Luke,  the  companion  of  Paul,  committed  to  writ- 
 ing the  Gospel  preached  by  him.  Afterwards, 
 John  the  disciple  of  our  Lord,  who  leaned  upon 
 His  breast,  likewise  published  a  Gospel,  while  he 
 dwelt  at  Ephesus  in  Asia.'  Irenaeus  elsewhere  (hi. 
 2,  8)  assigns  reasons  why  there  can  be  neither  more 
 nor  fewer  Gospels  than  four.  And  (iii.  2,  7)  he 
 says,  that  these  Gospels  are  so  sure  that  even  the 
 heretics  bear  testimony  to  them,  and  attempt  to 
 confirm  their  own  doctrine  from  them. 
 
 The  personal  relations  of  Irensus  strengthen  his 
 testimony.  He  was  born  in  the  first  half  of  the 
 2d  century,  and  died  at  the  beginning  of  the  3d. 
 He  had  listened  to  the  discourses  of  Polycarp,  who 
 had  been  a  disciple  of  John,  and  conversant  with 
 others  who  had  seen  the  Lord. 
 
 About  A.D.  175  or  I  So,  then,  or  within  a  hun- 
 dred years  of  the  period  when  the  Gospels  were 
 written,  they  were  generally  received  among  Chris- 
 tians. They  were  even  admitted  as  .genuine  by 
 Celsus,  the  opponent  of  Christianity,  and  the  here- 
 tics who  flourished  about  A.D.  140-150.  Now,  it 
 seems  impossible  to  account  for  the  early  and  gene- 
 ral reception  of  the  four  Gospels,  and  the  reverence 
 with  which  they  M'ere  regarded  in  all  parts  of  the 
 vi^orld,  except  upon  the  supposition  of  their  being 
 known  as  the  genuine  pi^oductions  of  the  writers 
 whose  names  they  bear. 
 
 Before  passing  from  our  brief  survey  of  the  direct 
 historical  evidence,  we  shall  refer  to  two  witnesses 
 still  earlier  than  those  already  mentioned.  Justin 
 Martyr  was  born  in  the  latter  part  of  the  1st  or 
 the  beginning  of  the  2d  century,  and  flourished 
 about  A.D.  150.  His  quotations  are  taken  from 
 '  Memoirs  by  the  Apostles,  which  are  called  Gos- 
 pels,' aiid  which  he  further  describes  as  'composed 
 by  Apostles  of  Christ  and  their  companions,' 
 a  description  exactly  applicable  to  our  Gospels. 
 Though  Justin  does  not  mention  the  names  of  the 
 writers  of  our  Gospels,  his  numerous  quotations 
 correspond  to  such  a  degree,  both  in  matter  and 
 words,  with  the  present  Gospels,  as  to  leave 
 scarcely  any  room  to  doubt  that  it  is  from  them  he 
 quotes.  It  is  admitted  that  he  did  not  always 
 quote  with  verbal  accuracy,  but  it  was  customary 
 with  most  of  the  early  fathers  to  quote  loosely, 
 as  if  from  memoiy,  and  too  much  stress  has  been 
 laid  upon  this  circumstance  in  the  case  of  Jus- 
 tin. 
 
 The  other  witness  is  Papias,  who  lived  during 
 the  first  quarter  of  the  2d  century,  and  was 
 acquainted,  as  he  tells  us,  with  many  of  the  dis- 
 ciples of  the  Apostles.  It  appears  from  his  testi- 
 mony, as  given  in  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39,  that  the 
 Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark  were  well  known 
 before  the  time  of  Papias. 
 
 On  the  whole,  it  may  be  concluded  that  the 
 historical  testimonies  in  favour  of  our  present 
 Gospels  are  not  merely  equal,  but  far  superior  to 
 those  which  can  be  adduced  for  any  other  writings 
 of  the  same  antiquity. 
 
 In  proceeding  to  consider  '  the  mutual  relations 
 and  peculiarities  of  the  Canonical  Gospels,'  we  are 
 struck  with  the  many  points  of  resemblance  or 
 correspondence  among  the  first  three  Gospels.  In 
 consequence  of  the  combined  view  and  harmony 
 which  seems  to  characterise  them,  as  contra-dis- 
 tinguished from  the  fourth  Gospel,  they  are  called 
 'the  Synoptic  Gospels.' 
 
 Before  inquiring  how  the  correspondences  among 
 the  first  three  Gospels  are  to  be  explained,  it  will 
 be  necessary  for  us  to  have  a  just  idea  of  the  pheno- 
 menon itself.  '  Many  portions  of  the  history  of 
 Jesus  (remarks  Mr.  Norton,  who  has  minutely 
 investigated  the  subject),  are  found  in  common  in 
 the  first  three  Gospels,  others  are  common  to  two 
 of  their  number,  but  not  found  in  the  third.  In 
 the  passages  referred  to,  there  is  generally  a  simi- 
 larity, sometimes  a  very  great  similarity,  in  the 
 selection  of  particular  circumstances,  in  the  aspect 
 under  which  the  event  is  viewed,  and  the  style  in 
 which  it  is  related.  Sometimes  the  language  found 
 in  different  Gospels,  though  not  identical,  is  equi- 
 valent or  nearly  equivalent ;  and  not  unfrequenlly, 
 the  same  series  of  words,  with  or  without  slight 
 variations,  occurs  throughout  the  whole  or  a  great 
 part  of  a  sentence,  and  even  in  larger  portions ' 
 [Geiiuiucjiess  of  the  Gospels,  i.  p.  240). 
 
 Mr.  Westcott  exhibits  the  proportion  of  corie- 
 spondences  and  peculiarities  in  several  numerical 
 tables : 
 
 '  If  (he  says),  the  extent  of  all  the  coincidences 
 be  represented  by  100,  their  proportionate  distri- 
 bution will  be,  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  53, 
 Matthew  and  Luke  21,  Matthew  and  Mark  20, 
 Mark  and  Luke  6.  .  .  .  Looking  only  at  the 
 general  result,  it  may  be  said  that  of  the  contents 
 of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  about  two-fifths  are  com- 
 mon to  the  three,  and  that  the  parts  peculiar  to 
 one  or  other  of  them,  are  little  more  than  one-third 
 of  the  whole. '  He  adds,  '  in  the  distribution  of 
 the  verbal  coincidences  a  very  simple  law  is  observ- 
 able ;  they  occur  most  commonly  in  the  recital  of 
 the  words  of  our  Lord  or  of  others,  and  are  com- 
 paratively rare  in  the  simple  narrative.  Thus,  of 
 the  verbal  coincidences  in  St.  Matthew,  about 
 seven-eighths;  of  those  in  St.  Mark,  about  four- 
 fifths  ;  and  of  those  in  St.  Luke,  about  nineteen- 
 twentieths,  occur  in  the  record  of  the  words  of 
 others'  [Introduction  to  the  study  of  the  Gospels, 
 p.  179). 
 
 The  following  instances  may  be  referred  to  for 
 illustration,  Matthew  viii.  2,  3  =  Mark  i.  40,  42  = 
 Luke  V.  12,  13;  Matthew  ix.  5,  6  =  Mark  ii.  9, 
 1 1  =  Luke  V.  23,  24 ;  Matthew  xix.  23,  24  = 
 Mark  x.  23-25  =  Luke  xviii.  24,  25.  The  amount 
 of  agreement,  however  remarkable,  ought  not  to 
 be  over-rated;  it  occurs  chiefly  in  reporting  the 
 words  of  Christ.  Norton  gives,  as  the  most  strik- 
 inc:  instance  of  verbal  coincidence,  in  the  case  of 
 
GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 158 
 
 GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 narrative,  Luke  ix.  i6  (comp.  Matt.  xiv.  19;  Mark 
 vi.  41). 
 
 Along  with  the  instances  of  correspondence, 
 there  are  also  many  instances  of  difference.  This 
 renders  the  problem  difficult  of  solution.  No 
 explanation  can  be  satisfactoiy,  which  does  not 
 account  for  both  the  correspondences  and  differ- 
 ences. 
 
 Such  is  the  phenomenon  which  has  provoked  so 
 many  attempts  at  explanation.  The  literature  of 
 the  subject  is  of  vast  extent,  and  the  question  is 
 regarded  as  still  unsettled.  Our  aim  in  the  pre- 
 sent article  is  to  inquire  how  near  the  principal 
 hypotheses  which  have  been  proposed  approach  to 
 a  solution  of  the  difficulty. 
 
 1.  In  order  to  account  for  this  singular  relation- 
 ship between  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  the  first  sup- 
 position is,  that  the  evangelists  copied  from  one 
 another,  or  that  one  evangelist  used  the  Gospels  of 
 his  predecessors,  making  such  extracts  as  he 
 thought  necessary,  with  alterations  and  additions 
 of  his  own.  It  is  a  curious  circumstance,  however, 
 that  the  supposition  of  any  one  of  the  evangelists 
 copying  from  the  others  is  attended  with  insuper- 
 able difficulty.  Whichever  of  them  we  suppose  to 
 be  the  original  evangelist,  and  whichever  we  sup- 
 pose to  be  the  last,  having  one  or  both  the  others 
 before  him,  we  are  unable  in  this  way  to  explain 
 the  phenomenon.  There  are  six  possible  ways  of 
 putting  the  case,  every  one  of  which  has  had 
 learned  advocates,  and  this  variety  of  opinion  itself 
 is  a  strong  argument  against  the  hypothesis.  Gries- 
 bach  thought  that  Mark  copied  from  Matthew  and 
 Luke,  and  this  opinion  is  still  held  by  some  ;  but 
 an  opinion  in  favour  of  the  originality  of  Mark  has 
 of  late  been  gaining  ground  (Thiersch,  Meyer, 
 Weiss).  It  must,  \V9  think,  be  evident  to  any  one 
 who  attentively  compares  the  Gospels  of  Matthew 
 and  Mark,  that  the  latter  cannot  with  any  pro- 
 priety be  called  a  copy  or  abridgment  of  the 
 former.  There  is  an  air  of  originality  and  fresh- 
 ness in  Mark's  narrative  which  proves  the  work  to 
 be  anything  but  a  compilation  ;  and  besides,  in 
 several  important  particulars,  Mark  differs  from 
 Matthew.  No  explanation  can  be  satisfactory 
 wliich  does  not  account  for  the  want  of  agreement 
 as  well  as  the  agreement  between  the  Gospels. 
 Indeed,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  what  object  Mark  or 
 any  other  of  the  evangelists  could  have  in  compiling 
 a  new  Gospel  oat  of  one  or  more  which  were 
 acknowledged  to  be  the  works  of  apostles  or  their 
 companions,  '  In  its  simple  form,'  says  Westcott, 
 'the  'supplemental'  or  'dependent'  theory  is  at 
 once  inadequate  for  the  solution  of  the  difficulties 
 of  the  relation  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  and  incon- 
 sistent with  many  of  its  details  ;  and,  as  a  natural 
 consequence  of  a  deeper  study  of  the  Gospels,  it  is 
 now  generally  abandoned,  except  in  combination 
 with  the  other  principle  of  solution'  (Westcott  on 
 the  Gospels,  p.  184). 
 
 2.  We  are  thus  brought  to  consider  Eichhorn's 
 famous  hypothesis  of  a  so-called  07-igmal  Gospel, 
 now  lost.  A  brief  written  narrative  of  the  life  of 
 Christ  is  supposed  to  have  been  in  existence,  and  to 
 have  had  additions  made  to  it  at  different  periods. 
 Various  copies  of  this  original  Gospel,  with  these 
 additions,  being  extant  in  the  time  of  the  evan- 
 gelists, each  of  the  evangelists  is  supposed  to  have 
 used  a  different  copy  as  the  basis  of  his  Gospel.  In 
 the  hands  of  Bishop  Marsh,  who  adopted  and 
 modified  the  hypothesis  of  Eichhorn,  this  original 
 
 Gospel  becomes  a  veiy  complex  thing.  He  sup- 
 posed that  there  was  a  Greek  translation  of  the 
 Aramsean  original  Gospel,  and  various  transcripts 
 with  alterations  and  additions.  But  when  it  is 
 considered  that  all  these  suppositions  are  entirely 
 gratuitous,  that  they  are  made  only  to  meet  the 
 emergencies  of  the  case  as  they  arise,  one  cannot 
 help  feeling  that  the  licence  of  hypothesis  is  carried 
 beyond  just  bounds.  The  grand  objection  to  this 
 original  Gospel  is  the  entire  want  of  historical  evi- 
 dence for  its  existence.  If  such  an  original  Gospel 
 ever  had  existed,  it  must  have  been  of  the  very 
 highest  authority,  and,  instead  of  being  tampered 
 with,  would  have  been  carefully  preserved  in  its  origi- 
 nal form,  or  at  least  in  its  Greek  translation.  The 
 alterations  and  additions  supposed  to  have  been 
 made  in  it  are  not  only  inconsistent  with  its  sacred 
 and  authoritative  character  as  the  original  Gospel, 
 but  also  with  the  habits  of  the  Jews.  Even  if  this 
 hypothesis  did  adequately  explain  the  phenomena 
 presented  in  the  first  three  Gospels,  it  is  far  too 
 artificially  contrived  to  be  true  ;  but  it  fails  of  its 
 aim.  The  original  work,  supposed  to  consist  of  the 
 sections  common  to  the  three  Gospels,  cannot  be 
 made  out  ;  and  the  individuality  of  character  be- 
 longing to  each  of  the  evangelists  is  irreconcilable 
 with  the  supposition  that  several  different  writers 
 contributed  materials.  Notwithstanding  the  iden- 
 tity of  subject  among  the  three  Gospels,  each 
 writer  is  distinguished  by  his  own  characteristic 
 style. 
 
 It  is  remarkable  that  Dr.  Weiss  of  Konigsberg 
 has  quite  recently  {Stud.  te.  Kritik,  Hefte,  i.  iv., 
 1S61)  propounded  a  theory  of  explanation  very 
 much  akin  to  that  of  Marsh.  He  supposes  that 
 the  first  evangelist,  the  writer  of  Matthew's  Gospel, 
 as  well  as  Luke,  used  a  copy  of  Mark's  Gospel, 
 and,  along  with  this,  a  second  more  ancient,  per- 
 haps immediately  apostolic  written  source,  which 
 Mark  also  had  already  made  use  of  in  the  composi- 
 tion of  his  Gospel.  In  this  way  he  thinks  all  the 
 phenomena  are  simply  and  easily  explained.  He 
 endeavours  to  establish  his  view  by  a  detailed  ex- 
 amination and  comparison  of  the  three  Synoptic 
 Gospels,  and  holds  that  these  results  of  criticism 
 are  confirmed  by  the  ancient  tradition  that  Matthew 
 wrote  his  Gospel  in  Hebrew,  whilst  there  is  no 
 trace  of  the  Hebrew  Gospel  itself  The  conclusion  is, 
 that  the  Hebrew  Gospel  of  Matthew  must  have  been 
 displaced  at  an  early  period  by  another  containing 
 its  essential  contents,  but  richer  and  more  generally 
 accessible  in  its  Greek  form.  Hence  the  later 
 Greek  Gospel  was  held  to  be  the  work  of  Matthew 
 the  apostle,  the  more  ancient  Hebrew  one  having 
 been  really  the  apostle's  work.  This  revival  in 
 the  present  day  of  what  is  substantially  the  hypo- 
 thesis of  Eichhorn  and  Marsh  is  significant  of  the 
 still  unsettled  state  of  the  question. 
 
 3.  That  our  present  Gospels  are  to  be  traced 
 mainly  to  the  oral  teaching  of  the  apostles  as  their 
 source,  was  the  opinion  of  Herder  and  Gieseler, 
 and  more  recently  of  De  Wette,  Guericke,  Norton, 
 Westcott,  and  others.  '  They  have  correctly  ap- 
 prehended (says  De  Wette)  the  spirit  of  Christian 
 antiquity  who  regard  the  oral  tradition  of  the  Gos- 
 pel (the  01-al  original  Gospel)  as  the  basis  and  source 
 of  all  the  Christian  Gospels,  and  who  endeavour  to 
 apprehend  the  history  of  the  origin  of  the  latter  in 
 a  definite  relation  to  the  former'  {Introd.  to  N.  T., 
 sec.  87). 
 
 The  Gospel  was  published  orally  before  it  was 
 
GOSPELS.  THE 
 
 159 
 
 GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 committed  to  writing,  and  the  preachmg  of  the 
 apostles  must,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  have 
 consisted  chiefly  of  a  narration  of  the  facts  recorded 
 in  our  present  Gospels.  It  is  naturally  supposed 
 that  very  soon  a  certain  agreement  or  unifomiity  of 
 narrative  would  be  the  result,  and  that  we  have  a 
 transcript,  as  it  were,  of  this  type  or  form  of  narra- 
 tive in  the  first  three  Gospels.  The  verbal  coinci- 
 dences in  the  Gospels  are  found  especially  in  those 
 cases  in  which  it  might  have  been  expected  that 
 the  first  preachers  of  the  Gospel  would  be  exact, 
 namely,  the  recital  of  the  words  of  Christ,  and 
 quotations  from  the  O.  T. 
 
 This  account  of  the  probable  origin  of  the  Gos- 
 pels is  not  only  in  accordance  with  the  character  of 
 the  period  as  an  age  of  oral  tradition  rather  than  of 
 writing,  but  is  also  substantially  the  same  as  that 
 which  Luke  gives  in  the  preface  to  his  Gospel 
 (Luke  i.  1-4).  While  Luke  refers  to  written 
 accounts  of  the  ministry  of  Christ  in  the  possession 
 of  some  Christians  at  that  time,  he  mentions  that 
 these  accounts  were  founded  directly  or  indirectly 
 upon  the  oral  accounts  of  the  apostles  (Kadus 
 vap^docrav  y^jjuv  ot  d7r'  dpx^5  avrbiTTai  koI  VTnjpirai 
 yevouevoL  tov  X6yov).  The  statement  of  Papias 
 respecting  the  origin  of  Mark's  Gospel  is,  that  it 
 was  derived  from  the  preaching  of  Peter,  and  we 
 have  already  quoted  the  important  testimony  of 
 Irenaeus  to  the  same  effect. 
 
 To  prevent  misapprehension,  however,  it  ought 
 to  be  observed  that  our  written  Gospels  date  from 
 the  latter  half  of  the  first  century,  and  that,  '  so 
 long  as  the  first  witnesses  survived,  so  long  the 
 tradition  was  confined  within  the  bounds  of  their 
 testimony  ;  when  they  passed  away  it  was  already 
 fixed  in  writing'  (Westcott,  p.  192). 
 
 The  theoi-y  of  the  oral  origin  of  the  Gospels, 
 while  it  has  much  evidence  in  its  favour,  cannot  be 
 accepted  as  a  complete  solution  of  the  problem.  It 
 does  not  explain  the  striking  instances  of  verbal  co- 
 incidence in  the  narrative  portions  common  to  the 
 three  synoptists,  or  to  two  of  them ;  nor  the 
 instances  in  which  either  two  or  all  the  three  evan- 
 gelists agree  with  each  other  in  their  quotations 
 from  the  Septuagint,  and  at  the  same  time  differ 
 from  the  Septuagint  itself  (Matt.  iii.  3  ;  Mark  i.  3  ; 
 Luke  iii.  4  ;  compared  with  Is.  xl.  3,  LXX.,  and 
 Matt.  iv.  10 ;  Luke  iv.  8,  compared  with  Deut.  vi. 
 13,  LXX.)  De  Wette  would  combine  '  the  two 
 hypotheses  of  a  common  oral  source,  and  of  the 
 influence  through  writing  of  one  evangelist  on 
 another.'* 
 
 There  is  a  striking  difference  between  the  fourth 
 
 *  Mr.  Roberts  (Discussions  on  the  Gospels,  p.  437) 
 '  ventures  to  offer  another  hypothesis  on  this  much- 
 vexed  subject'  'My  hypothesis,'  he  says,  'is 
 simply  this  : — The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  spoke  in  Greek, 
 and  the  evangelists  independently  narrated  His 
 actions  and  reported  His  discourses  in  the  same 
 language  which  He  had  Himself  employed.  This 
 theoi-y  I  propose  as  adequate  to  account  for  all  the 
 phenomena  presented  by  the  first  three  Gospels.' 
 
 It  may  be  allowed  that  the  difficulty  of  the  ques- 
 tion regarding  the  origin  of  the  Gospels  is  aggra- 
 vated by  supposing  that  our  Saviour  generally  spoke 
 Aramaic,  and  that  Matthew  wrote  his  Gospel  in 
 that  language  ;  but,  even  if  we  should  concede  to 
 Mr.  Roberts  the  truth  of  his  hypothesis,  we  could 
 by  no  means  accept  it  as  an  adequate  solution  of 
 the  problem. 
 
 Gospel  and  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  in  respect  both 
 to  contents  and  form  ;  but  with  all  this  difference, 
 there  is  a  general  and  essential  agreement.  John 
 relates  in  part  the  same  things  as  the  Synoptists, 
 and  in  a  similar  manner,  but  not  with  like  verbal 
 agreement.  The  following  are  parallel  : — The 
 purification  of  the  temple,  ii.  13-22=  Matt.  xxi. 
 II,  ff.;  the  feeding  of  the  multitude,  vi.  1-15  = 
 Matt.  xiv.  13-21  ;  the  walking  upon  the  sea,  vi. 
 16-21  =  Matt.  xiv.  22-36;  the  anointing,  xii.  1-8 
 =  Matt.  xxvi.  6-13  ;  the  entry  into  Jerusalem,  xii. 
 9-19=  Matt.  xxi.  i-li  ;  the  prediction  of  the 
 denial  of  Peter,  xiii.  36-38=  Matt.  xxvi.  33-35. 
 In  some  of  these  instances  the  expressions  ara 
 verbally  parallel  ;  also  in  the  following — xii.  25  = 
 Matt.  X.  39;  xiii.  20=  Matt.  x.  40;  xiv.  31  = 
 Matt.  xxvi.  46.  There  is  a  similarity  between  iv. 
 44  and  Matt.  xiii.  57  ;  between  xiii.  16  and  Matt. 
 X.  24,  and  Luke  vi.  40  (De  Wette,  Exeget.  Handb. 
 zum  N.  Test.)  On  the  other  hand,  however, 
 much  important  matter  has  been  omitted  and 
 much  also  added  by  John,  whilst  his  manner  of 
 narration  also  differs  from  that  of  the  Synoptists. 
 In  the  first  three  Gospels,  the  scene  of  our  Lord's 
 ministry  is  laid  chiefly  in  Galilee,  but  in  the  fourth 
 Gospel  it  is  chiefly  in  Judeea  and  Jerusalem.  This 
 may  partly  account  for  the  different  style  of  cur 
 Lord's  discourses  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  as  com- 
 pared with  the  Gospel  of  John  (Hug,  p.  433).  In 
 the  former,  Christ  often  makes  use  of  parables 
 and  proverbial  sayings  ;  in  the  latter,  John  records 
 long  and  mystical  discourses.  Yet  we  find  pro- 
 verbial maxims  and  parables  also  in  John  xii.  24- 
 26;  xiii.  16,  20;  X.  I,  ff.;  xv.  i,  ff. 
 
 Many  points  of  difference  between  the  fourth 
 Gospel  and  the  others  may  be  satisfactorily  ac- 
 counted for  from  the  fragmentary  character  of  the 
 narratives.  None  of  them  professes  to  be  a  com- 
 plete biography,  and,  therefore,  one  may  contain 
 what  others  omit.  Besides,  the  fourth  Gospel  was 
 composed  after  the  others,  and  designed  to  be  in 
 some  respects  supplemental.  This  was  the  opinion 
 of  Eusebius,  and  of  the  still  more  ancient  writers 
 whose  testimony  he  cites,  Clement  of  Alexandria 
 and  Origen  ;  and  the  opinion  appears  to  be  well 
 founded.  Whether  John  was  acquainted  with  the 
 works  of  his  predecessors  or  not  is  uncertain,  but 
 he  was  no  doubt  acquainted  with  the  evangelical 
 tradition  out  of  which  they  originated.  We  have, 
 then,  in  this  circumstance  a  very  natural  explana- 
 tion of  the  omission  of  many  important  facts,  such 
 as  the  institution  of  the  supper,  the  baptism  of 
 Jesus  by  John,  the  history  of  his  temptation  and 
 transfiguration,  and  the  internal  conflict  at  Geth.se- 
 mane.  These  his  narrative  assumes  as  already 
 known.  In  several  passages  he  presupposes  in 
 his  readers  an  acquaintance  with  the  evangelical 
 tradition  (i.  32,  45  ;  ii.  i  ;  iii.  24 ;  xi.  2). 
 
 It  is  not  easy  to  reconcile  the  apparent  discre- 
 pancy between  John  and  the  Synoptists  with  re- 
 spect to  the  day  on  which  Christ  observed  the  last 
 passover  with  his  disciples.  Liicke  decides  in 
 favour  of  John,  but  thereby  admits  the  discrepancy 
 to  be  real.  Again,  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  the 
 duration  of  our  Lord's  ministry  appears  to  be 
 only  one  year,  whereas  John  mentions  three  pass- 
 overs  which  our  Saviour  attended,  but  neither  the 
 Synoptists  nor  John  determine  the  duration  of  the 
 Saviour's  ministiy,  and,  therefore,  there  is  no  con- 
 tradiction  between  them  on  this  point. 
 
 It  has  been  alleged  that  there  is  an  irreconcil- 
 
GOSPELS,  THE 
 
 160 
 
 GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS 
 
 able  difTerence  between  the  Synoptic  and  the 
 Johannean  representation  of  Christ,  so  that,  as- 
 suming the  historical  reahty  of  the  former,  the 
 latter  must  be  regarded  as  ideal  and  subjective  ; 
 particularly,  that  the  long  discourses  attributed  to 
 Christ  in  the  fourth  Gospel  could  hardly  have 
 been  retained  in  John's  remembrance,  and  that 
 they  are  so  unlike  the  sayings  of  Christ  in  the 
 other  gospels,  and  so  like  John's  o\vn  style  in  his 
 Epistles,  that  they  appear  to  have  been  composed 
 by  John  himself 
 
 If  the  allegation  could  be  made  good  that  the 
 Christ  of  John  is  essentially  different  from  the 
 Christ  of  the  Synoptists,  the  objection  would  be 
 fatal.  On  the  contrary,  however,  we  are  per- 
 suaded that,  on  this  all-important  point,  there  is 
 an  essential  agreement  among  all  the  Evangelists. 
 We  must  remember  that  the  full  and  many-sided 
 character  of  Christ  himself  might  be  represented 
 under  aspects  which,  altliough  different,  were  not 
 inconsistent  with  each  other.  It  is  bv  no  means 
 correct  to  say  that  the  fourth  Gospel  represents 
 Christ  as  God,  while  the  others  describe  him  as  a 
 mere  man.  Yet  we  may  find  in  the  fact  of  his 
 wondrous  person  as  the  God-man,  an  explanation 
 of  the  apparent  difference  in  their  respective  re- 
 presentations. That  the  Synoptists  do  not  differ 
 essentially  from  John  in  their  view  of  Christ  is 
 shewn  by  Dorner  in  an  admirable  comparison 
 (Dorner,  Entivickdungsgeschkhtc,  i.  8l,  ff.  ;  E.  Tr. 
 i.  50,  ff.) 
 
 We  are  sorry  that  Liicke  and  Frommann,  as 
 well  as  De  Wette,  give  in  so  much  to  the  view 
 that  John  has  mingled  his  own  subjectivity  with 
 the  discourses  of  Christ,  which  he  professes  to  re- 
 late. That  the  Evangelist  does  not  transfer  his 
 own  subjective  views  to  Christ  appears  from  the 
 fact  that  while  he  speaks  of  Christ  as  the  Logos, 
 he  never  represents  Christ  as  applying  this  term  to 
 himself  We  may  also  refer  to  those  passages  in 
 which,  after  quoting  obscure  sayings  of  the  Re- 
 deemer or  remarkable  occurrences,  he  either  adds 
 an  explanation  or  openly  confesses  his  ignorance 
 of  their  meaning  at  the  time  (ii.  19-22  ;  vi.  70  ; 
 vii-  37-39  ;  xi.  II  ;  xii.  16,  32  ;  xiii.  27  ;  xx.  9). 
 
 The  susceptible  disposition  of  John  himself,  and 
 the  intimate  relation  in  which  he  stood  to  Christ, 
 make  the  supposition  reasonable  that  he  drank 
 so  deeply  into  the  spirit  of  his  master,  and  retained 
 so  vivid  a  recollection  of  his  very  words,  as  to  re- 
 produce them  with  accuracy.  Instead  of  transfer- 
 ring his  own  thoughts  and'  expressions  to  Christ, 
 John  received  and  reproduced  those  of  Christ  him- 
 self In  this  way  the  similarity  between  John's 
 language  and  that  of  Christ  is  accounted  for.  It 
 is  acknowledged,  even  by  Strauss  and  De  Wette, 
 that  the  most  characteristic  expressions  in  John 
 were  originally  used  by  Christ  himself  When  it 
 is  objected  that  John  could  not  retain  in  re- 
 membrance, or  hand  down  with  accuracy,  such 
 long  discourses  of  Christ  as  he  records  in  his  Gos- 
 pel, far  too  little  regard  is  paid  to  the  assistance  of 
 the  Holy  Spirit,  to  be  expected  especially  in  such 
 a  case  as  this,  according  to  the  Saviour's  promise, 
 '  He  shall  teach  you  all  things,  and  bring  all 
 things  to  your  remembrance,  whatsoever  I  have 
 said  unto  you,'  John  xiv.  26. 
 
 (Kirchhofer,  Qndlcnsamiiihinf;  ziir  Gesch.  d.  N. 
 T.  Canons;  Y^oxiovi  on  the  Geuttinctiess  of  the  Gos- 
 pels, 2  vols.;  Westcott,  Introduction  to  the  Study 
 of  the  Gospels ;  Hug,    Introduction  to  the  N.    T 
 
 (American  translation) ;  De  Wette,  Historico-  Criti- 
 cal Introduction  to  the  Canonical  Books  of  the  N. 
 T.  (American  translation)  ;  Reuss,  Die  Geschichti 
 der  heiligen  Schriften  Neuen  Testaments,  Zweiti 
 ausgabe ;  Guericke,  Gesammtgeschichte  des  N.  T.; 
 Thiersch,  Die  Kirche  ini  Apostolischen  Zeitalter ; 
 Weiss,  Zur  Etitstehungsgeschiclite  der  drei  syitoptis, 
 chcn  Evangelien  [Studien  u.  Krit,  1861) ;  H.  A- 
 W.  JMeyer,  Kommentar  iiber  das  N.  T.;  De  Wette. 
 Exeget.  Handbuch  zum  N.  T.;  Liicke,  Kommen- 
 tar iiber  das  Ev.  des  Johannes  ;  Frommann,  Der 
 yohanneische  Lehrbegriff. — A.  T.  G. 
 
 GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS  (Pseudepigrapha). 
 The  canon  of  the  N.  T.  having  been  finally  settled 
 before  the  close  of  the  4th  century  [Canon],  the 
 rejected  writings  which  bore  the  names  of  the 
 Apostles  and  Evangelists  soon  sunk  into  oblivion, 
 and  kvi,  if  any,  have  descended  to  our  times  in  their 
 original  shape.  From  the  decree  of  Gelasius  and  a 
 few  other  sources  we  have  the  names  and  a  few  de- 
 tached notices  of  a  good  many  of  these  productions. 
 We  shall  first  speak  of  those  which  are  still  extant.* 
 
 The  History  of  Joseph  the  Carpenter, 
 which  has  been  preserved  in  the  East  in  an  Arabic 
 translation,  was  first  made  kno\vn  in  Europe  in  the 
 commencement  of  the  i6th  centuiy  by  Isidore  de 
 Isolanis  in  his  Su7nma  de  donis  Sti.  Josephi.  He 
 observes  that  the  '  Catholics  of  the  East'  com- 
 memorate St.  Joseph  on  the  19th  March,  and  read 
 the  legend  of  the  saint,  omitting  certain  parts 
 which  are  not  approved  in  the  Roman  church. 
 This  work  was  first  published  by  Wallin,  at  Leip- 
 sic,  in  1722,  from  an  Arabic  MS.  of  the  13th  cen- 
 tury, in  the  Bibliothiq^ie  du  Roi,  accompanied  with 
 a  Latin  translation.  It  was  divided  by  Wallin  into 
 chapters  and  verses.  It  is  also  found  in  Coptic, 
 Sahidic,  and  Memphic.  It  is  highly  esteemed  by 
 the  Copts.  The  former  part,  to  chap.  ix. ,  appears 
 to  have  been  derived  from  an  ancient  Gospel  of 
 the  Infancy.  The  Latin  was  republished  by  Fa- 
 bricius. 
 
 The  Gospel  of  the  Infancy  was  first  pub- 
 lished by  Henry  Sike,  at  Utrecht,  in  1697,  from 
 an  Arabic  MS.  Sike's  Latin  version  was  repub- 
 lished by  Fabricius,  who  divided  it  into  chapters. 
 The  Arabic  was  divided  into  corresponding  chap- 
 ters by  Thilo,  in  1832.  There  are  several  MSS.  of 
 this  gospel  extant,  the  oldest  of  which  known  is 
 that  in  the  Medicean  Library,  written  in  1299. 
 The  narratives  which  it  contains  were  current  in 
 the  2d  century,  and  the  account  contained  in  this 
 gospel  respecting  Christ's  learning  the  alphabet  is 
 mentioned  by  Irenceus  {Adv.  Hares,  i.  20)  as  a 
 fabrication  of  the  Marcosians.  The  Gospel  of  the 
 Infancy  is  found  in  the  catalogue  of  Gelasius,  and 
 it  is  especially  remarkable  from  the  fact  that  it  was 
 most  probably  this  Gospel  which  was  known  to 
 Mohammed,  who  seems  to  have  been  unacquainted 
 
 *  [Of  these  pseudepigraphic  gospels  collections 
 have  been  made  by  Neander  (Na?-rationes de  Christo 
 ct  7-cbiis  Clirist.,  appended  to  Catechesis  Lutheri, 
 Gr.  et  Lat.,  Bas.  1567);  Fabricius  [Codex  Apocr., 
 N.  T.,  Hamb.  1703-43)  ;  Birch  {Auctarium  Cod. 
 Apoc.  Fabriciani,  Hafn.  1804) ;  Schmid  {Corpus 
 Apocryph.  extra  Biblia,  Had.  1804)  ;  Thilo  {Cod. 
 Apocr.  N.  T.  ColL  et  illust.,  1832);  Tischendorf 
 {Evangelia  Apocrypha,  Lips.  1853);  Grabe,  6)>;«- 
 hgiu7n  Patriim  et  Ilacret.  Saec.  i.,  ii.,  iii.  ;  Oxon. 
 169S.] 
 
GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS 
 
 IGl 
 
 GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS 
 
 with  any  of  the  canonical  Scriptures,  and  who  has 
 inserted  some  of  its  narrations  in  the  Koran.  The 
 Sepher  Toldoth  Jesii,  a  well-known  publication  of 
 the  Jews,  contains  similar  fables  with  those  in  this 
 gospel  (Wagenseil's  Sota).  This  work  was  re- 
 ceived as  genuine  by  many  of  the  Eastern  Chris- 
 tians, especially  the  Nestorians  and  Monophysites. 
 It  was  found  to  have  been  universally  read  by  the 
 Syrians  of  St.  Thomas,  in  Travancore,  and  was 
 condemned  at  the  Synod  of  Diamper,  in  1599)  by 
 Archbishop  Menezes,  who  describes  it  as  '  the  book 
 called  the  Gospel  of  the  Infancy,  already  condemned 
 by  the  ancients  for  its  many  blasphemous  heresies 
 and  fabulous  histories.'    Wherever  the  name  Jesus 
 
 occurs  in  this  gospel,  he  is  universally  entitled  t__J  i ), 
 while  Christ  is  called  Jk^.ijJl.      This  was  a  distinc- 
 
 /ion  introduced  by  the  Nestorians.  The  Blessed 
 Virgin  is  also  entitled  the  Lady  Mary.  The  Per- 
 sians and  Copts  also  received  this  Gospel  (De 
 la  Brosse's  Lexic.  Pers.  voc.  Tindoria  ars).  The 
 original  language  was  probably  Syriac.  It  is 
 sometimes  called  the  Gospel  of  Peter,  or  of 
 Thomas. 
 
 The  Gospel  of  Thomas  the  Israelite 
 (Greek),  a  work  which  has  flowed  from  the  same 
 source  with  the  former,  was  first  published  by 
 Cotelerius  {Notes  on  the  Constitutions  of  the  Apostles, 
 1.  vi.  c.  17,  torn.  i.  p.  348),  from  an  imperfect 
 MS.  of  the  15th  century.  It  was  republished  and 
 divided  into  chapters  hy  Fabricius.  The  most 
 perfect  edition  was  that  of  Mingarelli,  in  the 
 Niiova  Raccolta  a"  Opnsciili  scientifice  e  filosofice, 
 Venet.  1764,  from  a  Bologna  MS.  of  the  isth 
 century.  Mingarelli  (who  believed  it  to  have  been 
 a  forgery  of  the  Manichees)  accompanied  his  text 
 with  a  Latin  translation.  Thilo  has  given  a  com- 
 plete edition  from  a  collation  of  Mingarelli's  work 
 with  two  MSS.  preserved  at  Bonn  and  Dresden 
 [and  Tischendoi-f  has  given  it  in  three  different  re- 
 censions]. It  has  been  questioned  whetlier  this  is 
 the  same  work  which  is  called  the  Gospel  of 
 Thomas,  by  Origen,  Ambrose,  Bede,  and  others. 
 This  gospel  probably  had  its  origin  among  the 
 Gnostics,  and  found  its  way  from  them,  through 
 the  Manichees,  into  the  church ;  but  liaving  been 
 more  generally  received  among  the  heretics  it  was 
 seldom  copied  by  the  monks,  which  accounts  for 
 the  paucity  of  MSS.  Nicephorus  says  that  the 
 Gospel  of  Thomas  contained  thirteen  hundred 
 (TTt'xot.  This  pseud-epigi-aphal  work  is  probably 
 the  foundation  of  all  the  histories  of  Christ's  infancy, 
 but  it  is  supposed  to  have  been  recast  and  interpo- 
 lated. 
 
 The  Protevangelion  of  James  has  descended 
 to  us  in  the  original  Greek,  and  was  first  published 
 by  Bibliander,  at  Basel,  in  1552,  in  a  Latin  version 
 by  William  Postell,  who  asserted  that  it  was  pub- 
 licly read  in  the  Greek  churches,  and  maintained 
 that  it  was  a  genuine  work  of  the  Apostle  James, 
 and  intended  to  be  placed  at  the  head  of  St. 
 Mark's  Gospel.  These  commendations  provoked 
 the  wrath  of  the  learned  Henry  Stephen,  who  in- 
 sinuated that  it  was  fabricated  by  Postell  himself, 
 whom  he  calls  '  a  detestable  monster'  [Introduction 
 au  Traile  de  la  Confonnite  des  Men<eillcs  Anciennes 
 avec  les  Modenies,  1566).  It  was  reprinted  in  the 
 Orthodoxographa  of  J.  Herold,  Basil  1555;  and 
 again  .in  the  Orthodoxographa,  vol.  i.  (1569),  of 
 Jacob  Grynseus,  who  entertained  a  very  favourable 
 vol.  il 
 
 opinion  of  it.  Subsequent  discoveries  have  proved 
 that,  notwithstanding  the  absurdity  of  Postell's 
 high  pretensions  in  favour  of  the  authenticity  of 
 this  gospel,  Stephen's  accusations  against  him  were 
 all  ill-founded.  There  had,  even  at  the  time  when 
 Stephen  wrote,  been  already  a  Greek  translation 
 published  by  Neander,  of  which  Stephen  was  not 
 aware  ;  it  appeared  among  the  Apocrypha  annexed 
 by  Oporin  to  his  edition  of  Luther's  Catechism, 
 Basel  1564.  It  was  republished  by  Fabricius 
 (who  divided  it  into  chapters),  and  subsequently  by 
 Birch,  Thilo  [and  Tischendorf ;  a  separate  edition 
 by  C.  A.  Suckow  appeared  at  Breslau  in  1840]. 
 Thilo  collated  for  his  edition  six  Paris  MSS.,  the 
 oldest  of  which  is  of  the  loth  century.  From  the 
 circumstance  of  these  MSS.  containing  a  Greek 
 calendar  or  martyrolog}',  and  from  other  internal 
 evidences,  there  seems  little  doubt  tliat  this  gospel 
 was  formerly  read  in  the  Greek  Church  (Mont- 
 faucon,  Palccogr.  Gnu.  p.  304).  There  are  also 
 extant  versions  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Infancy  in 
 the  Arabic  and  other  languages  of  the  Eastern 
 churches,  among  which  they  appear  to  have  pos- 
 sessed a  high  degree  of  authority. 
 
 Although  this  work  is  styled  by  Postell  the 
 Protevangeliuvi,  there  is  no  MS.  authority  for  this 
 title,  nor  for  the  fact  of  its  being  ascribed  to  St. 
 James  the  Apostle.  It  only  appears  that  the 
 author's  name  is  James.  The  narrations  of  this 
 gospel  were  known  to  Tertullian  {Adv.  Gnost.  c. 
 viii.),  Origen  {Cotn.  in  RIatt.  p.  223),  Gregory 
 Nyssen  ( Oral,  in  diem  Nat.  Christ. ;  0pp.  vol.  iii. 
 p.  346),  Epiphanius  {Hcer.  79,  sec.  5),  the  author 
 of  \\\it  Imperfect  Work  on  Matt.  ;  Chiysost.  {0pp. 
 torn.  vi.  p.  24),  and  many  others  among  the  an- 
 cients [Suckow,  De  arg.  et  ind.  Protev.  yacobi, 
 BresL  1830.] 
 
 The  Gospel  of  the  Nativity  of  Mary. 
 (Latin).  Although  the  Latins  never  evinced  the 
 same  degree  of  credulity  which  was  shown  by  the 
 Greeks  and  Orientals  in  regard  to  these  fabulous 
 productions,  and  although  they  were  generally  re- 
 jected by  the  fathers,  they  were  again  revived 
 about  the  6th  century.  Notwithstanding  the  con- 
 temptuous rejection  of  them  by  Augustine  and 
 Jerome,  and  their  condemnation  by  Popes  Innocent 
 and  Gelasius,  they  still  found  readers  in  abundance. 
 Gelasius  expressly  condemns  the  book  concerning 
 the  Nativity  of  St.  Mary  and  the  Midzvife. 
 
 The  Gospel  of  the  Nativity  of  Mary,  which  most 
 probably,  in  its  present  form,  dates  its  origin  from 
 the  6th  century,  has  been  even  recommended  by 
 the  pretended  authority  of  St.  Jerome.  There  is 
 a  letter  extant,  said  to  be  written  by  the  Bishops 
 Chromatins  and  Heliodorus  to  Jerome,  requesting 
 him  to  translate  out  of  Hebrew  into  Latin  the  his- 
 tory of  the  Bii'th  of  Mary,  and  of  the  Birth  ana 
 Infancy  of  Christ,  in  order  to  oppose  the  fabulous 
 and  heretical  accounts  of  the  same,  contained  in 
 the  apocryphal  books.  To  this  Jerome  accedes, 
 observing  at  the  same  time  that  the  real  author  of 
 the  book  was  not,  as  they  supposed,  the  Evangelist 
 Matthew,  but  Seleucus  the  Manichee.  Jerome 
 observes  that  there  is  some  truth  in  the  accounts, 
 of  which  he  furnishes  a  translation  from  the  original 
 Hebrew.  These  pretended  letters  of  Jerome  are  now 
 universally  acknowledged  to  be  fabrications  ;  but 
 the  apocryphal  gospel  itself,  which  is  the  same  in 
 substance  with  the  Protevangelioji  of  James,  is  still 
 extant  in  Jerome's  pretended  Latin  version.  It  is 
 from  these  Gospels  of  the  Infancy  that  we  have 
 
 M 
 
GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS 
 
 162 
 
 GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS 
 
 learned  the  names  of  the  parents  of  the  Blessed 
 Virgin,  Joachim  (although  Bede  reads  Eli)  and 
 Anna.  The  narratives  contained  in  these  gospels 
 were  incorporated  in  the  Golden  Legends,  a  work 
 of  the  13th  centuiy,  which  was  translated  into 
 all  the  languages  of  Europe,  and  frequently  printed. 
 There  are  extant  some  metrical  accounts  of  the 
 same  in  German,  which  were  popular  in  the 
 era  of  romance.  These  legends  were,  however, 
 severely  censured  by  some  eminent  divines  of  the 
 Latin  church,  of  whom  it  will  be  sufficient  to  name 
 Alcuin,  in  his  Homilies,  in  the  9th,  and  Fulbert 
 and  Petrus  Damianus  (bishop  of  Ostia)  in  the 
 nth  century.  Eadmer,  the  monk,  in  his  book  on 
 the  Excellence  of  the  Virgin,  speaks  of  them  also 
 in  the  language  of  censure  (cap.  ii.  Anselm.  0pp. 
 p.  435,  Paris,  1 721).  Luther  also  inveighs  against 
 the  readers  of  these  books  {Hotnil.  ed.  Walch. 
 torn.   xi.  ;  and   7 able- Talk,  ch.  vii.   torn.  xxii.   p. 
 
 3y6)- 
 
 There  were  several  editions  of  Jerome's  pre- 
 tended translation  published  in  the  15  th  cen- 
 tury, one  of  them  by  Caxton.  It  is  printed  by 
 Thilo  from  a  Paris  MS.  of  the  14th  century, 
 and  divided  by  him  into  twenty-four  chapters,  after 
 a  MS.  of  the  15th  century  in  the  same  library. 
 One  of  the  chief  objects  of  the  writer  of  these  gos- 
 pels seems  to  be  to  assert  the  Davidical  origin  of 
 the  Virgin,  in  opposition  to  the  Manichees.  An 
 edition  was  also  published  by  Mr.  Jones,  who  con- 
 ceives that  the  first  author  of  these  legends  was  a 
 Hellenistic  Jew,  who  lived  in  the  2d  century, 
 but  that  they  were  added  to  and  interpolated  by 
 Seleucus  at  the  end  of  the  3d,  who  became  their 
 reputed  author  ;  and  that  still  further  additions 
 were  made  by  the  Nestorians,  or  some  late  Chris- 
 tians in  India.  Lardner  [Credibility,  vol.  viii.)  so 
 far  differs  from  Mr.  Jones  as  to  beheve  the  author 
 not  to  have  been  a  Jew. 
 
 The  Gospel  of  the  Nativity  of  Mary  was  received 
 by  many  of  the  ancient  heretics.  Thfe  Gnostics  and 
 Manichees  endeavoured  to  found  on  its  authority 
 some  of  their  peculiar  opinions  (such  as  that  Christ 
 was  not  the  Son  of  God  before  his  baptism,  and 
 that  he  was  not  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  but  of  that 
 of  Levi)  ;  as  did  also  the  CoUyridians,  who  main- 
 tamed  that  too  much  honour  could  not  be  paid  to 
 the  Blessed  Virgin,  and  that  she  was  herself  born 
 of  a  virgin,  and  ought  to  be  worshipped  with  sac- 
 rifices. 
 
 Although  the  Gospel  of  Marcion,  or  rather 
 that  of  St.  Luke  as  corrupted  by  that  heretic  in 
 the  2d  century,  is  no  longer  extant,  Professor 
 Hahn  has  endeavoured  to  restore  it  from  the  ex- 
 tracts found  in  ancient  writers,  especially  Tertullian 
 and  Epiphanius.  This  work  has  been  published 
 by  Thilo. 
 
 Thilo  has  also  published  a  collation  of  a  cor- 
 rupted Greek  Gospel  of  St.  John,  found  in  the 
 archives  of  the  Knights  Templars  in  Paris.  This 
 work  was  first  noticed  (in  1S28)  by  the  Danish 
 Bishop  Muenter,  as  well  as  by  Abbe  Gregoire, 
 ex-bishop  of  Blois.  It  is  a  vellum  MS.  in  large 
 4to,  said  by  persons  skilled  in  palaeography  to 
 have  been  executed  in  the  13th  or  14th  century, 
 and  to  have  been  copied  from  a  Mount  Athos 
 MS.  of  the  1 2th.  The  writing  is  in  gold  letters. 
 It  is  divided  into  nineteen  sections,  which  are 
 called  gospels,  and  is  on  this  account  supposed 
 to  have  been  designed  for  hturgical  use.  These 
 sections,  corresponding  in  most  instances  with  our 
 
 chapters  (of  which,  however,  the  twentieth  anj 
 twenty-first  are  omitted),  are  subdivided  into  verses, 
 the  same  as  those  now  in  use,  and  said  to  have 
 been  first  invented  by  Robert  Stephen  [Verse]. 
 The  omissions  and  interpolations  (which  latter  are 
 in  barbarous  Greek)  represent  the  heresies  and 
 mysteries  of  the  Knights  Templars.  Notwith- 
 standing all  this,  Thilo  considers  it  to  be  modern, 
 and  fabricated  since  the  commencement  of  the 
 1 8th  century. 
 
 One  of  the  most  curious  of  the  apocryphal  gos- 
 pels is  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  or  Acts  of 
 Pilate.  It  is  a  kind  of  theological  romance 
 partly  founded  on  the  canonical  gospels.  The 
 first  part,  to  the  end  of  ch.  xv.,  is  little  more  than 
 a  paraphrastic  account  of  the  trial  and  death  of 
 Christ,  embellished  with  fabulous  additions.  From 
 that  to  the  end  (ch.  xxviii.)  is  a  detailed  account 
 of  Christ's  descent  into  hell  to  liberate  the  spirits 
 in  prison,  the  history  of  which  is  said  to  have  been 
 obtained  from  Lenthius  and  Charinus,  sons  of 
 Simeon,  who  were  two  of  those  '  saints  who  slept,' 
 but  were  raised  from  the  dead,  and  came  into  the 
 holy  city  after  the  resurrection.  This  part  of  the 
 history  is  so  far  valuable,  that  it  throws  some  light 
 upon  the  ancient  ideas  current  among  Christians 
 on  this  subject.  It  is  therefore  considered  by 
 Birch  {Anctariimi,  Proleg.  p.  vi.)  to  be  as  valuable 
 in  this  respect  as  the  writings  of  the  Fathers. 
 
 The  subscription  to  this  book  states  that  it  was 
 found  by  the  emperor  Theodosius  among  the  pub- 
 lic records  in  Jerusalem,  in  the  hall  of  Pontius 
 Pilate  (A. D.  380).  We  read  in  chap,  xxvii.  that 
 Pilate  himself  wrote  all  the  transactions  from  the 
 relation  of  Nicodemus,  who  had  taken  them  down 
 in  Hebrew ;  and  we  are  informed  by  Epiphanius 
 that  the  Quartadecimans  appealed  to  the  Acts  0/ 
 Pilate  in  favour  of  their  opinions  as  to  the  proper 
 time  of  keeping  Easter.  It  was  written  in  these 
 Acts  that  our  Saviour  suffered  on  the  eighth  Kal. 
 of  April,  a  circumstance  which  is  stated  in  the 
 subscription  to  the  present  Acts.  It  is  uncertain, 
 however,  when  this  work  was  first  called  by  the 
 name  of  Nicodemus. 
 
 The  two  ancient  apologists,  Justin  Martyr  and 
 Tertullian,  both  appeal  in  confirmation  of  our 
 Saviour's  miracles  and  crucifixion  to  the  Acts  of 
 Pilate  (Justin  Martyr,  Apology,  pp.  76,  84  ;  Ter- 
 tullian, Apol.  c.  21,  or  English  transl.  by  Cheval- 
 lier,  1833).  From  this  circumstance  it  has  been 
 generally  held  that  such  documents  must  have 
 existed,  although  this  fact  has  been  called  in  ques- 
 tion by  Tanaquil  Faber  and  Le  Clerc  (Jones,  On 
 the  Canon,  vol.  ii.  p.  2S2,  pt.  iii.  ch.  29).  These 
 appeals,  however,  in  all  probability  first  furnished 
 the  idea  of  the  present  pious  fraud.  Mr.  Jones 
 supposes  that  this  may  have  been  done  in  order  to 
 silence  those  pagans  who  denied  the  existence  of 
 such  Acts.  The  citations  of  those  Fathers  are  all 
 found  in  the  present  work.  [Henke,  De  Pontii 
 Pilatiactis  in  causa  jf.  C.  ad  Tiber,  missis,  1784.] 
 
 We  have  already  seen  that  a  book  entitled  the 
 Acts  of  Pilate  existed  among  the  Quartadecimans, 
 a  sect  which  originated  at  the  close  of  the  3d  cen- 
 tury. We  are  informed  by  Eusebius  that  the 
 heathens  forged  certain  Acts  of  Pilate  full  of  all 
 sorts  of  blasphemy  against  Christ,  which  they  pro- 
 cured (a.D.  303)  to  be  dispersed  through  the 
 empire  ;  and  that  it  was  enjoined  on  schoolmasters 
 to  put  them  into  the  hands  of  cliildren,  who  were 
 to  learn  them  by  heart  instead  of  their  lessons. 
 
GOSPELS,   SPURIOUS 
 
 103 
 
 GOSPELS,  SPURIOUS 
 
 But  the  character  of  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus, 
 which  contains  no  blasphemy  of  the  kind,  forbids 
 ns  to  identify  it  with  those  Acts.  This  gospel  pro- 
 bably had  its  origin  in  a  later  age  From  the  cir- 
 cumstance of  its  containing  the  names  of  Lenthius 
 and  Charinus,  Mr.  Jones  conceives  it  to  have  been 
 the  work  of  the  celebrated  fabricator  of  gospels, 
 Lucius  Charinus,  who  flourished  in  the  beginning 
 of  the  4th  century.  It  is  certainly  not  later  than 
 the  5th  or  6th.  '  During  the  persecution  under 
 Maximin,'  says  Gieseler  {Ecdes.  Hist.,  vol.  i.  sec. 
 24,  note),  '  the  heathens  first  b  rought  forward  cer- 
 tain calumnious  Acts  of  Pilate  (Euseb.  ix.  5),  to 
 which  the  Christians  opposed  others  (Epiphan. 
 HcBr.  79,  sec.  i),  which  were  afterwards  in  various 
 ways  amended.  One  of  these  improved  versions 
 was  called  afterwards  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus.' 
 
 Beausobre  suspected  that  the  latter  part  of  the 
 book  (the  descent  into  hell)  was  taken  from  the 
 Gospel  of  Peter,  a  work  of  Lucius  Charinus  now 
 lost.  Thilo  [Codex  Apocryphics)  thinks  that  it  is 
 the  work  of  a  Jewish  Christian,  but  it  is  uncertain 
 whether  it  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew, 
 Greek,  or  Latin.  The  only  Greek  writer  who  cites 
 it  is  the  author  of  the  Synaxarion,  and  the  first  of 
 the  Latins  who  uses  it  is  the  celebrated  Gregory  of 
 Tours  {Hist.  Franc,  i.  20,  23). 
 
 The  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  (in  Latin)  was  one  of 
 the  earliest  books  printed,  and  there  are  subsequent 
 editions  in  1490,  1516,  1522,  and  1538,  and  in 
 1569  in  the  Orthodoxographa  of  GrynKus.  It  was 
 afterwards  published  by  Fabricius  {Cod.  Apoc), 
 who  divided  it  into  chapters.  Fabricius  gives  us 
 no  information  respecting  the  age  or  character  of 
 his  MS.,  which  is  extremely  defective  and  inac- 
 curate. Mr.  Jones  republished  this  with  an  Eng- 
 lish version. 
 
 The  Greek  Gospel  of  Nicodemus  was  first  pub- 
 lished from  an  incoiTCct  Paris  MS.  by  Birch  {Aiic- 
 tarium),  and  subsequently  from  a  collation  of 
 several  valuable  manuscripts,  the  most  ancient  of 
 which  are  of  the  13th  century,  by  Thilo,  with  the 
 Latin  text  of  the  very  ancient  MS.  at  Einsidl, 
 described  by  Gerbert  in  his  Iter  Aleinanniann.  It 
 has  been  shewn  by  Smidt  {Bibl.  fiir  Critik  und 
 Exegese)  that  the  present  MSS.  exhibit  in  their 
 citations  from  the  canonical  books  a  text  of  the  6th 
 century,  and  consequently  that  this  gospel  is  ex- 
 tremely useful  in  a  critical  point  of  view. 
 
 The  esteem  in  which  this  work  was  held  in  the 
 middle  ages  may  be  seen  from  the  number  of  early 
 versions  which  were  in  popular  use,  of  which  innu- 
 merable MSS.  have  descended  to  our  times.  The 
 earliest  of  these  is  the  Anglo-Saxon  translation, 
 printed  at  Oxford  in  1698,  from  a  Cambridge  MS. 
 (Thwaites's  Heptateuchus).  This  is  a  translation 
 from  the  Latin,  as  none  of  the  Greek  MSS.  con- 
 tain Pilate's  letter  to  Claudius.  There  are  also 
 MSS.  of  the  same  in  the  Bodleian  and  Canter- 
 bury libraries.  That  in  the  Bodleian  is  divided 
 into  thirty-four  chapters.  There  are  several  MSS. 
 of  the  English  version  in  the  Bodleian,  one  in  Sion 
 College,  and  one  in  English  verse  in  Pepys's  col- 
 lection. It  was  also  translated  by  Wickliffe  ;  and 
 there  were  versions  printed  in  London,  in  1507 
 and  1509,  by  Julian  Notary  and  Wynkyn  de 
 Worde,  which  ran  through  several  editions  (Panzi's 
 Anttals).  The  latest  published  before  Mr.  Jones's 
 work  was  by  Joseph  Wilson,  in  1 767.  The  regard, 
 indeed,  in  which  this  book  was  held  in  England 
 will    be  understood  from  the  fact  that,  in    1524, 
 
 Erasmus  acquaints  us  that  he  saw  the  Gospel  of 
 Nicodemus  affixed  to  one  of  the  columns  of  the 
 cathedral  of  Canterbury.  Translations  were  also 
 common  in  French,  Italian,  German,  and  Swedish. 
 In  the  French  MSS.  and  editions  it  is  united  with 
 the  old  romance  of  Perce/orest,  King  of  Great 
 Britain.  There  was  also  a  Welsh  translation 
 (Lhuyd's  Archtrologia,  p.  256),  and  the  'vork  was 
 known  to  the  Eastern  Christians,  and  has  been 
 even  supposed  to  be  cited  in  the  Coptic  liturgy  ; 
 but  this  has  been  shewn  by  Ludolf  to  be  a  mistake, 
 as  the  lesson  is  from  the  history  of  Nicodemus,  in 
 John  iii.  [Brunn,  De  indole  aetate  et  itsn  Evang. 
 Nicod.,  Ber.  1794;  Tischendorf,  Pilati  circa  Chr. 
 jiidicio  quid  lucis  afferatur  ex  Actis  Pilati,  Lips. 
 
 1855]- 
 
 Of  the  Gospels  no  longer  extant,  we  know  little 
 more  than  that  they  once  existed.  We  read  in 
 Irenseus,  Epiphanius,  Origen,  Eusebius,  and  other 
 ecclesiastical  writers,  of  the  Gospels  of  Eve  or  of 
 Perfection,  of  Barnabas  (ancient  and  modern),  of 
 Bartholomew,  of  Basilides,  of  Hesychius,  of  Judas 
 Iscariot,  of  the  Valentinians,  of  Apollos,  of  Cerin- 
 thus,  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  and  several  others. 
 Some  of  these  were  derived  from  the  Gnostics  and 
 other  heretics  ;  others,  as  the  Gospel  of  Matthias, 
 are  supposed  by  Mill,  Grabe,  and  most  learned 
 men,  to  have  been  genuine  gospels  now  lost.  Those 
 of  which  we  have  the  fullest  details  are  the  Gospel 
 of  the  Egyptians  and  that  of  the  Nazarenes.  This 
 latter  is  most  probably  the  same  with  that  of  the 
 Hebrews,  which  was  used  by  the  Ebionites.  It 
 was  supposed  by  St.  Jerome  to  have  been  a 
 genuine  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  who,  he  says, 
 wrote  it  in  the  Hebrew  language  and  letters.  He 
 copied  it  himself  from  the  original  in  the  library  ol 
 Cresarea,  translated  it  into  Greek  and  Latin,  and 
 has  given  many  extracts  from  it.  Grabe  conceived 
 this  gospel  to  have  been  composed  by  Jewish  con- 
 verts soon  after  our  Lord's  ascension,  before  the 
 composition  of  the  canonical  Gospel  of  St.  Mat- 
 thew. Baronius,  Grotius,  Father  Simon,  and  Du 
 Pin,  look  upon  it  as  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew — 
 interpolated,  however,  by  the  Nazarenes.  Baro- 
 nius and  Grabe  think  that  it  was  cited  by  Ignatius, 
 or  the  author  of  the  Epistles  ascribed  to  him. 
 Others  look  upon  it  as  a  translation  altered  from 
 the  Greek  of  St.  Matthew.  Mr.  Jones  thinks  that 
 this  Gospel  was  referred  to  by  St.  Paul  in  his 
 Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  It  is  referred  to  by 
 Hegesippus  (Euseb.  Eccl.  Hist.  iv.  22),  Clemens 
 Alexandrinus  {Strom,  ii.  p.  280),  Origen  {Comm. 
 on  John;  Horn.  viii.  in  Matt.),  and  Eusebius 
 {Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  25,  27,  39).  Epiphanius  {Hcer. 
 sees.  29,  30)  acquaints  us  that  it  was  held  in  great 
 repute  by  the  ancient  Judaizing  Christians,  and 
 that  it  began  thus  :  '  It  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of 
 Herod  king  of  Judsea  that  John  came  baptizing 
 with  the  baptism  of  repentance  in  the  river  Jordan.' 
 etc.  It  consequently  wanted  the  genealogy  and  the 
 first  two  chapters. 
 
 The  Gospel  of  the  Egyptians  is  cited  by 
 Clemens  Alexandrinus  [Strom,  iii.  pp.  445)  45^) 
 453,  465),  Origen  {Hofn.  in  Lnc.  p.  i),  Ambrose, 
 Jerome  [Prcef.  to  his  Com?n.  on  Matt.),  and  Epi- 
 phanius [Hceres.  Ixii.  sec.  2).  Grabe,  Mill,  Du 
 Pin,  and  Father  Simon,  who  thought  highly  of 
 this  Gospel,  looked  upon  it  as  one  of  the  works 
 referred  to  by  St.  Luke  in  the  commencement  of 
 his  Gospel.  Mill  ascribes  its  origin  to  the  Essenes, 
 and  supposes  this  and  the  former  Gospel  to  have 
 
GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 164 
 
 GOVERNOR 
 
 been  composed  in  or  a  little  before  A.D.  58.  It  is 
 cited  by  the  Pseudo-Clement  {Ep.  Sec.  ad  Cor. 
 ch.  12  ;  Cf.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  iii.  9),  who  is 
 generally  supposed  to  have  written  not  before 
 the  3d  centuty.  [See  Cave,  Hist.  Liter.,  and 
 Oudin,  Scripti.  Eccl.  passim ;  Mill,  Pt'olegg.  lit 
 N.  T.,  saepe ;  Ant.  v.  Dale,  De  orig.  idolol.  p. 
 253,  seq.;  Pritius,  Introduct.  in  N.  T.  p.  6,  58; 
 Ivleuker,  Ucb.  die  Apocr.  des  N.  T.,  Hamb.  1798; 
 Mosheim,  De  caiisis  sitpposit.  lib)-orut?i  inter  Chris- 
 tianos  Sac.  i.  et  ii.,  in  his  Dissertationes  ad  Hist. 
 Eccl.  Spect.  i.  217  ;  Nitzsch,  De  Apocr.  Ew.  in 
 explicandis  canonicis  usu  et  abusu,  Vit.  1808 ; 
 Tischendorf,  De  Evv.  apocr.  origine  et  usn.  Hag. 
 1851  ;  Reuss,  Gcsch.  der  H.  S.  neiien  Test.,  sec. 
 258,  seq.  ;  Hofmann,  Das  Leben  Jesu  nac/i  den 
 Apocryphen,  Leipz.  185 1. J 
 
 GOTHIC  VERSION.— The  Moeso-Goths  were 
 a  German  tribe  which  settled  on  the  borders  of  the 
 Greek  empire,  and  their  language  is  essentially  a 
 German  dialect.  Their  version  of  the  Bible  was 
 made  by  Ulphilas,  in  the  fourth  century,  after 
 Greek  MSS.  in  the  N.  T.,  and  after  the  Seventy 
 in  the  Old.  The  author  is  generally  regarded  as 
 an  Arian ;  but  his  peculiar  doctrinal  sentiments  do 
 not  seem  to  have  influenced  his  translation.  Of 
 the  O.  T.  portion,  nothing  but  a  fragment  of 
 Nehemiah  has  been  printed,  although  parts  of 
 other  books  have  been  discovered.  A  great  part 
 of  the  New  has  been  published  at  different  times 
 in  fragments.  The  four  Gospels  exist  in  the  very 
 celebrated  MS.  called  the  Codex  Argenteics,  now 
 preserved  in  the  library  of  the  university  at  Upsal, 
 and  minutely  described  by  Dr.  E.  D.  Clarke  and 
 Zahn.  This  MS.,  however,  has  considerable 
 chasms.  The  Gospels  have  been  several  times 
 printed  from  it,  but  not  very  correctly.  That  of 
 Uppstrom  is  the  most  exact  and  beautiful  (1854). 
 Knittel  discovered  fragments  of  Paul's  Epistle  to 
 the  Romans  in  a  codex  rescriptiis  belonging  to  the 
 Wolfenbiittel  library,  which  he  published  in  1762, 
 4to,  and  which  were  republished  by  Zahn  in  the 
 complete  edition  of  the  Gospels  issued  in  1 808,  410. 
 In  181 7,  Angelo  Mai  discovered  important  parts 
 of  the  Gothic  version  among  five  codices  rescripti  in 
 the  Ambrosian  library  at  Milan.  They  contain 
 for  the  most  part  the  Pauline  Epistles,  with  the 
 exception  of  that  to  the  Hebrews;  and  two  frag- 
 ments of  Mattliew.  Various  portions  were  printed 
 by  Mai  in  conjunction  with  Castillionjeus,  in  1819. 
 In  1829  the  latter  published  the  fragments  of 
 Paul's  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  In 
 1834  fragments  of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  the 
 First  to  the  Corinthians,  and  that  to  the  Ephesians ; 
 and  in  1835,  the  fragments  to  the  Pauline  Epistles 
 to  the  Galatians,  Philippians,  Colossians,  and  the 
 First  to  the  Thessalonians.  In  1839  the  same 
 scholar  published  the  fragments  of  the  Second 
 Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  to  Timothy,  Titus, 
 and  Philemon.  These  were  all  combined  in  the 
 edition  liy  Gabelentz  and  Loebe,  2  vols.  1836, 
 1847.— S.  D. 
 
 GOURD.   ■  [KiKAYON  ;  Pakkuoth.] 
 
 GOVERNOR,  a  term  used  by  the  A.  V.  to 
 denote  various  degrees  of  authority  and  power  : 
 absolute  and  limited,  acquired  by  birth  or  by 
 election,  military  and  civil.  The  numerous  and 
 mostly  vague  original  terms  are  found  in  other 
 passages  translated  by  '  ruler,  chief,  prince,  cap- 
 
 tain, one  who  reigneth,  holds  dominion,'  etc.; 
 LXX.,  H.px'J^v,  ijye/xujv,  SecnroTT]^,  arparriySs,  apxi-, 
 etc.  ;  Luther:  Regent,  Oberst,  Fiirst,  Bef^ehlshaber, 
 etc.  Yet  there  is,  m  some  cases  at  least,  a  distinc- 
 tive meaning  inherent  as  well  in  the  roots  as  in  the 
 peculiarformationof  the  respective  words  of  the  text. 
 So  that,  however  much  their  primary  significance 
 may  have  been  widened  in  the  course  of  time, — in 
 accordance  with  the  ever-shifting  circumstances  of 
 the  Jewish  commonwealth, — we  are  occasionally 
 still  able  to  trace  it  to  a  certain  degree;  aided 
 chiefly  by  comparisons  with  cognate  idioms.  In- 
 stances of  the  different  applications,  principally  of 
 the  Hebrew  terms,  in  the  Bible,  no  less  than  in 
 the  Rabbinical  writings,  will  further  illustrate  their 
 meaning  and  history. 
 
 We  shall  commence  our  list  with  those  words 
 of  the  O.  T.,  the  Katiil-  or  Katil-form  of  which 
 points  them  out  at  once  as  participles  passive  :  or, 
 in  other  words,  that  the  power  which  they  express 
 is  a  more  or  less  delegated  one — undoubtedly  the 
 first  form  of  dommion  and  rulership.  Next  we  shall 
 enumerate  those  formed  from  the  participle  active, 
 and  finally  speak  of  the  one  foreign,  probably  Per- 
 sian, equivalent  introduced,  together  with  the  cor- 
 responding dignity  and  office,  at  a  very  early 
 period,  into  the  Hebrew  language  and  community. 
 
 T'J:,  Nagfd;   Phoen.  1J3,  i<nj3  ;    Ar.    j^j^  ; 
 
 Syr.  pQ_.*_J,  from  "IJJ,  a  verb  only  used  in  Hiph. 
 
 and  Hoph.  in  the  signification  of    <X^,  to  tell. 
 
 The  original  meaning  of  this  verb  is  '  to  rise,  to 
 become  conspicuous,  visible,  to  be  in  front  (cf. 
 IJJ),  praesto,  vorstchen,  to  lead,  to  be  first ;'  {^Gertti., 
 
 Fiirst  =  Prince].     The   substantive  T^JJ  is  used  of 
 
 a  chief  or  prefect,  'governor'  of  the  royal  palace 
 
 (Azrikam)  ;    fT'nn'J,    2    Chron.    xxviii.    7    {=7JJ 
 
 jT'Sn,  I  Kngs  iv.  6  ;  D'^an  hv  "Iti'X,  Is.  xxii.  15  ; 
 oUdi'ofj.os,  chamberlain,  secretary  of  state),  whose 
 
 power  (riPli'OC)  seems  to  have  been  very  consider- 
 able, cf  Is.  xxii.  21,  ff.  ('Shebnah  ...  a  nail 
 to  the  throne '),  and  who,  it  would  appear,  was  dis- 
 tinguished from  the  other  court  officers  by  a  parti- 
 cularly brilliant  uniform,  (girdle  and  robe),  and  to 
 whose  insignia  belonged  a  key  worn  over  the 
 shoulder.  In  a  wider  sense  the  word  is  applied  to 
 the  chief  of  the  temple  :  Azariah,  the  high-priest, 
 'ruler  of  the  House  of  God,'  i  Chron.  ix.  11  (2 
 Chron.  xxxi.  13)  ;  Pashur,  'chief  governor  of  the 
 House  of  God'  (Jer.  xx.  i)  ;  further,  to  the  '  leader 
 of  the  Aaronites,'  Jehojadah  (i  Chron.  xii.  27). 
 Again,  it  is  used  of  the  keeper  of  the  sacred  treasury, 
 '  Shebuel,  ruler  of  the  treasures,'  i  Chron.  xxvi. 
 24  ;  of  the  chieftains  of  a  tribe,  '  Zebadiah,  the 
 ruler  of  the  house  of  Judah'  (2  Chron.  xix.  11)  ;  of 
 the  'captains'  of  the  army  (i  Chron.  xiii.  I;  2 
 Chron.  xxxii.  21)  ;  of  the  eldest  son  of  the  king, 
 the  heir-apparent  '  Abijah.  the  son  of  Maachah  [the 
 chief]  to  be  ruler  among  his  brethren'  (2  Chron. 
 xi.  22).  It  is  finally  applied  to  the  king  him- 
 self:— to  Saul  (A.  V.  'anoint  him  to  be  cap- 
 tain,' I  Sam.  ix.  16,  etc.),  to  Cyrus,  Ti^J  IT'C'D, 
 'Messiah  [the  Anointed],  the  Prince'  (Dan.  ix.  25, 
 etc.)  In  Plur.  the  word  occurs  in  the  more  gene- 
 ral sense  of  Aristocracy,  '  Nobles,'  (Prov.  viii.  16). 
 The  Targum  renders  OrT'UDIK',  '  their  judges,'  by 
 jiriT'JiO  ;  and  in  the  Talmud  K'T'33  is  used  para- 
 
GOVERNOR 
 
 165 
 
 GOVERNOR 
 
 holically  for  'leader  of  a  flock'   (cf.  Fj^pK  b'33)  ; 
 
 an'DD  xn^jj  nnj;  n^jy  ^y  n'V"^  nm::,  'When 
 
 the  shepherd  is  angry  with  his  flock  he  gives  it  a 
 bhnd  leader'  (Baba  K.  52) — a  corrupt  generation 
 to  which  God  appoints  a  bad  king.  How  far  the 
 Talmudical  use  of  1J3,  in  the  sense  of  'flagellate' 
 (Pes.  52)  and  of  '  extend'  (Baba  Mez.  74),  may  be 
 connected  with  the  notion  of  supremacy,  reign,  we 
 cannot  decide  here. 
 
 N''b'J,  Nasi;   from  Nt^'J,  to  carry,  lift  up;    lit. 
 
 Raised,  Exalted,  Elected;  LXX.,  ijyovfxevos,  &px'^v, 
 a  word  applied  to  the  chiefs  of  the  families  of 
 which  a  tribe  was  composed,  ^13^5^  n"'2  (''t^'N"l)  'j. 
 Num.  iii.  24,  30,  32,  35  ;  xvi.  2,  etc.  (as  many  as 
 250  on  one  occasion.  Num.  xvi.  2)  ;  and  who,  as 
 Deputies  (Commoners)  at  the  National  Assembly  are 
 also  called  myil  'J,  Nasis  of  the  congregation,  or  'j 
 
 PX'^t^•^  Nasis  of  Israel(elected,  called  to  the  assembly, 
 "li??D  "'X''"lp).  But  it  was  also  used  of  the  twelve 
 supreme  chiefs  of  the  tribes  themselves  D''N''tJ'J  ''^5''t^'J, 
 (nitODiT'K'X"!)  Num.  ii.  3,  ff.  ;  vii.  2,  ff.  ;  iii.  32, 
 etc.  Both  these  dignities,  the  chiefdom  of  a  family 
 as  well  as  that  of  a  tribe,  would  appear  to  have  been 
 elective  —  corresponding  to  the  word  X''Ji'J  —  not 
 hereditary,  as  Michaelis  and  Winer  hold.  The 
 Nasi  of  Judah  /  /. ,  Nahshon  b.  Aminadab,  does 
 not  descend  from  the  first  line  of  the  tribe  (Num. 
 ii.,  cf.  I  Chron.  ii.  9,  10).  The  Nasi  of  Issachar, 
 again,  is  called  Nathaniel  b.  Shuar,  a  name  not 
 found  among  the  eldest  sons  of  this  tribe  (i  Chron. 
 vii.  1-3.)  Finally,  in  the  table  of  the  Nasis — no  doubt 
 the  chiefs  of  the  tribes — to  whom  the  division  of 
 the  Promised  Land  was  entrusted  by  Moses  at  his 
 death,  no  son  of  the  Nasis  of  the  desert  occurs 
 (Munk  P.,  p.  194). — X^t^J  is  further  employed 
 for  generals,  under  a  head  (t^X"l)  i  Chron.  vii.  40 ; 
 
 of  Abraham,  DTI^S  'J,  a  Nasi  of  God,  a  mighty 
 Sheikh  ;  for  Nonisraelitish  'Princes  :'  of  the  Midian- 
 ites  (Josh.  xiii.  2i),  and  of  the  Hivites  (Shechem) 
 (Gen.  xxxiv.  2).    On  the  Maccabtean  coins  Shimeon 
 
 is  called  PXItJ'''  '3  '  Nasi  of  Israel. '  Nasi  was  also  the 
 official  name  of  the  president  of  the  Synedrium  (under 
 whom  stood  the  pT  n''20X,  '  father  of  the  tribunal, 
 or  vice-president'),  whose  seat  was  in  the  middle  of 
 the  71  members  (Maim.  jad.  Chaz.  xiv.,  Sym.  i. ) 
 1"'p3  Paktd ;  from  TpD,  to  appoint ;  an  officer, 
 
 official,  magistrate,  applied  to  the  ecclesiastical 
 delegate  ofthe  High  Priest  (t^*N"in  {113  'D)  who,  toge- 
 ther with  the  king's  scribe,  had  to  empty  the  chest 
 containing  the  contribution  to  the  Temple  (2  Chron. 
 xxiv.  1 1) ;  to  the  Levites  (Neh.  xi.  22) ;  to  the  'chief 
 of  the  Temple  T'JJ  T'pS  (Jer.  xx.  i,  2) ;  to  '  officers 
 in  the  House  of  the  Lord'  (Jer.  xxix.  26) ;  to  a  mili- 
 tary commander  (2  Kings  xxv.  19),  "|^^'JX  ?y  '2 
 nJOn'pO  (Jer.  Iii.  25),  and  to  his  adjutant  or  prin- 
 cipal manager  (Judg.  ix.  28).  Further,  to  the  offi- 
 cers whom  Joseph  suggested  that  Pharaoh  should 
 put  over  Egypt  during  the  years  of  the  famine 
 (Gen.  xli.  34)  ;  to  those  who  were  to  gather  all  the 
 virgins  unto  Shushan  for  Ahasuerus  (Esth.  ii.  3) ;  to 
 prefects,  'overseers,'  etc.  (Neh.  xi.  9;  xii.  42),  and 
 finally  to  the  nobles  or  '  princes'  of  the  king  (Jer. 
 XX.  I  ;  2  Chron.  xxxv.  8). 
 
 ^^^  Shalltt,  Hebr.  and  Aram,  [(from  D^B',  to 
 rule,  have  power,  Arab.  I2L-J  cf.  .\JaLj  Sultan). 
 'One  who  hath  power'   (Eccles.  viii.  8) ;   '  Arioch, 
 
 the  king's  captain'  (Dan.  ii.  15)  ;  'Joseph,  the 
 governor  over  the  land'  (Gen.  xlii.  6);  a  'mighty 
 man,'  or  hero  (Eccles.  vii.  19) ;  a  'king'  or  satrap 
 (Ezra  iv.  20);  Daniel,  the  third  'ruler'   (Dan.   v. 
 
 29),  etc.  The  vei-b  tOptJ'  is  also  used  in  later  He- 
 brew in  the  sense  :  '  to  have  power, '  of  evil  hours, 
 evil  spirits  ("l^*""  yiH),  etc. 
 
 ?11?X,  Alhlph  (from  S]^X ;  Arab.  i^_^\,  to  join, 
 
 etc. )  ;  Pesh.   \*^\  ;  originaUy,  one  who  is  put  over 
 
 a   '  thousand '   or  F]?N,  viz.   the  round  number  of 
 
 families,  ni3X  Tl^,  DinDC'lD,  which  constitute  a  clan 
 or  subdivision  of  a  tribe  (cf.  old  Saxon  '  Hun- 
 dred') ;  parallel  with  ''13,  Is.  Ix.  22  ;  and  3X  T^l  it- 
 self, Judg.  vi.  15.  First  used  of  the  chiefs,  'dukes' 
 of  Edom  (Gerv.  xxxvi. ;  i  Chron.  i.  51),  we  find  it  at 
 a  later  period  also  applied  to  Jewish  chiefs  (Zech. 
 i.x.  7 ;  xii.  5,  6).  This  word  is  not  to  be  con- 
 founded either  with  the  CDPX  U'X"1,  the  captain  of 
 a  body  of  thousand  men  (x'X'a/9X05>  LXX.)  or  with 
 
 the  '7X  "'"iCj  'rulers  of  thousands,'  a  kind  of  magis- 
 trates, selected  by  Moses,  on  the  advice  of  Jethro, 
 for  the  purpose  of  judging  the  smaller  matters  dur- 
 ing the  sojourn  of  the  Israelites  in  the  desert ;  and 
 who  were,  at  a  later  period,  superseded  by  the 
 regular  institution  of  the  D"'L3S"lti',  Judges.  The 
 further  use  of  the  word  in  the  sense  of  '  friend ' 
 (parallel  with  ^'~\,  companion,  Mich.  vii.  5,  Prov.  xvi. 
 
 28,  or  yT'O  acquaintance,  Ps.  Iv.  14)  ;  [cf.  Arab. 
 
 , ^-^U]  and  of  husband  (H^IW    'X),    'friend, 
 
 companion  of  her  youth '  must  be  traced  directly  to 
 the  root  (see  above),  since  our  P|1pK,  governor,  can 
 only  be  derived  from  the  derivative  f)?X,  a  thousand. 
 It  may  further  be  noticed  here,  that  Matt.  ii.  6 
 seems  to  have  read  the  passage  in  Micah  v.  2,  ''D?X3 
 min'',  '  among  the  thousands  [clans]  of  Judah,'  as 
 m^n''  ""DI^XS,  'among  the  princes  of  Judah.' 
 
 Derived  from  the  Partic.  Act.  (Kal  and  Piel)  are 
 the  following  four  : — 
 
 X>X^V\,  ppfiD,    Chokek,  Mechokek  (from  ppn),  lit. 
 
 an  engraver,  a  writer  (cf.  ypdcpeiv), — scil.  of  laws 
 
 (pn,  pi?n,  ppn, law,  decree;  ar.  ^^,     'i^^),  a 
 
 lawgiver.  Gen.  xhx.  10,  Deut.  xxxiii.  21  ;  one  who 
 decides  by  the  law:  a  judge.  Is.  x.  i,  parallel  with 
 D-ariDD,  '  they  that  write  ;'  with  DDCn  □''3^0, 
 "IDID,  '  they  that  handle  the  pen  of  the  writer,' 
 Judg.  V.  14  ;  'the  Lord  is  our  Judge,  the  Lord  is 
 our  Law-giver,  the  Lord  is  our  King'  (Is.  xxxiii.  22) ; 
 '  Princes  decree  justice'  (Prov.  viii.  15),  etc.  The 
 Talmud  has  retained  the  original  meaning  of  en- 
 graving, painting,  writing,  e.  g. ,  Hplpn  }^31^  Gem. 
 Pes.  I.  a,  is  explained  by  '"IDID:  'DVpinn  ''in  1D3,' 
 'of  the  engravers,  scribes,'  (Aruch,  s.  v.),  and  the 
 imitation  implied  in  the  notion  of  '  drawing'  has 
 become  fixed  in  the  word  Hpn,  Talm.  Chul.  41  b, 
 
 D"'p'nvn  nX  nprT"  X^E^,  '  that  he  shall  not  imitate 
 the  Sadducees.' 
 
 h^b,  Moshel;  t'^'O,  to  be  strong  =  ar.  J^) 
 
 one  who  reigns,  holds  dominion,  '  rules  :'  used  for 
 nearly  all  degrees  of  power  :  of  the  taskmaster  of 
 the  ant  (Prov.  vi.  7),   the  husband  who  rules  his 
 
GOVERNOR 
 
 166 
 
 GOVERNOR 
 
 wife  (Gen.  iii.  i6),  Eliezer,  who  has  the  manage- 
 ment of  Abraham's  house  (Gen.  xxiv.  2),  Joseph, 
 the    second    in   command    over  a  country,  Gen. 
 
 xlv.  8,  an  absolute  king  (^N1tJ>''3'D,  pN'O),  Ps. 
 cv.  20,  Is.  xvi.  I  ;  also  in  the  bad  sense  of  despot 
 (Is.  xiv.  5)  ;  of  the  Messiah  (Mic.  v.  i);  of  God 
 (i  Chron.  xxix.  12,  Ps.  ciii.  19),  etc.  No  less 
 is  the  word  applied  to  the  sway  which  sun  and 
 moon  hold  over  day  and  night.  Gen.  i.  18  [om- 
 nium moderator  et  dux  sol,  Cic.  Tusc.  i.  68  ;  sol 
 
 cceh  rector,  Plin.  ii.  4].    In  Treat.  Jad.  76,  7^)12  is 
 
 used  for  Pharoah  finz  Dt^Tl  DV  ^t^DH  DSpann. 
 ItJ'  ("nt^*,    to  rule,  reign),    [cf.    P/ioen.    HID, 
 
 "l''DX"ID  ;  Assyr.  ID,  king,  e.g.,  '  Nabukudurrusur 
 Sar  Babilu,'  Nebuchadnezzar,  King  of  Babylon, 
 Inscr.  Borsippa,  etc],  a  word  used  of  nearly  all 
 degrees  of  chiefdom  or  wardenship.  It  is  applied 
 to  the  chief  baker  of  Pharaoh  (Gen.  xl.  16),  to  the 
 chief  butler  {ik  xl.  2),  to  the  'ruler  over  the  cattle' 
 (id.  xlvii.  6),  to  the  keeper  of  the  prison  (il>.  xxxix. 
 21),  to  the  taskmaster  of  the  Israelites  (Ex.  i.  11), 
 to  the  '  prince  of  the  eunuchs'  (Dan.  i.  7),  to  the 
 'master  of  the  song'  (Chenanjah,  KJ^DH  'C)  (i 
 Chron.  xv.  27).  Further,  to  prefects,  civil  or  mili- 
 tary, of  very  limited  or  veiy  extensive  authority  : 
 Zebul,  the  '  ruler  of  Shechem'  (Judg.  x.  30) ; '  Amon, 
 the  governor  of  the  city'  (i  Kings  xxii.  26);  '^ 
 niyilDn,  prefects  of  the  provinces  (i  Kings  xx.  15); 
 m^V  '^,  'Decurion'  (Ex.  xviii.  21);  Wl^nV,  'a 
 captain  of  fifty',  TvevT-qKbvTapxo^  (2  Kings  i.  19); 
 mXD  '^,  captains  (judges)  over  hundreds  (Deut. 
 i.  15)  ;  over  a  thousand  (l  Sam.  xviii.  3),  over 
 many  thousands  (i  Chron.  xv.  25);  33"in  JT'VnD  'tJ*, 
 '  captain  over  half  of  the  chariots  of  war'  (i  Kings 
 
 xvi.  9  ;  ?^nn  '^,  '  captain  of  the  host'  (2  Sam. 
 xxiv.  2);  general-in-chief,  X^VH  '^  (LXX.  apxi-- 
 ffrpdrriyos  (Gen.    xxi.    22,    i    Sam.    xii.  9):  hence 
 
 used— after  mX3:f  "'H^N',  God  of  Hosts— of  God 
 Himself  (Dan.  viii.  11).  It  occurs  by  itself  in  the 
 Stat,  absol.  as  a  parallel  to  'judge:'  'who  has 
 made  thee  a  prince  [~\^]  and  a  judge  over  us?' 
 (Ex.  ii.  14),  to  '  elder'  (Ezra  x.  8),  to  '  counsellor' 
 (Ezra  viii.  25),  to  'king'  (Hos.  iii.  4).  The  merchants 
 of  Tyre  are  called  D''"lti'  [merchant-princes],  Is. 
 xxiii.  9  ;  the  same  term  is  applied  to  noble- 
 men and  courtiers,  '  the  princes  of  Pharaoh,' 
 Gen.  xii.  15;  'princes  of  Zoan,'  Is.  xix.  Ii,  13. 
 The  priests  are  called  5^'lp'tJ'  chiefs  or  princes  of 
 the  sanctuary  (Is.  xliii.  28,  i  Chron.  xxv.  5),  and 
 the  chief  priests  again  are  called  D''3n3n  'C^. 
 Gradually  the  word  came  to  be  used  of  angels,  as 
 patrons  and  representatives  of  special  nations 
 (guardian-angels) :  of  Persia,  Dan.  x.  13,  20  ;  of 
 Greece,  Dan.  x.  20;  of  Israel,  x.  21  :  Michael, 
 'the  great  prince,'  xii.  i;  the  chief  princes,  x. 
 13;  D''^C^'^  "It^,  'the  Prince  of  Princes  :' — God,  i/>. 
 Tiii.  25  (cf  LXX.  in  Deut.  xxxii.  8).  The  use  oi~\^ 
 as  guardian-angel  (ICi'V,  etc.)  is  retained  in  the 
 Midrash,  but  the  word  is  also  applied  in  the  Tal- 
 mud to  '  a  hero  at  the  table,  a  mighty  drinker'  (Nidd. 
 16,  etc.) — On  the  proper  noun  formed  from  this 
 word,  viz.  iTlK',  """It^,  Sarah,  Sarai,  we  need  not 
 enlarge. 
 
 Of  foreign  origin  is  : — 
 
 nnS  (nriQ,  nS),  Fcs/i.  v^Q-»,  Shultan;  Zui/ier: 
 
 Landpfleger,  Landvogt;  Joseph.  ^7ra/3xos(ofTatnai, 
 
 Antiq.  xi.  4,  4).  This  word  has  been  variously 
 derived  from  the  Persian  t,^-  ^  s.(.\.  'Magnates'  (Boh- 
 
 len)  ;  Pers.  .  JL^t ,  '  to  cook  '  (Ewald) ;  Pers. 
 t,j^iA).  '  Satelles,'  'Pedisequus'  (Gesenius);  from 
 the  Turk,  ^j^it ,  cJoo  >  '  General '  (Frahn) ;  from 
 the  Assyrian  Pakha  (Sanscr.  Pakhsha) ;  whence 
 \j^\j.    Pasha  —  friend    [of   the    king],    adjutant, 
 
 governor    of   a    province   (Benfey,    Stern) ;    from 
 J,  Pe,  'the  lower;'  and  iii,  gah,  '  royal  office,' 
 
 =  Pegah,  Sub -king  (Jul.  Flirst)  ;  from  '  the 
 Arab,  verb  IHS,  wal/en,''  (Jahn)  ;*  and  finally  from 
 the  Hebr.  nHD  =  ppH,  ra-yiui.  It  is  applied  to  a  sub- 
 prefect  of  a  province,  who  is  subject  to  the  autho- 
 rity of  ike  prefect  or  real  governor,  in  contradis- 
 tinction to  IlDinCJTIK,  a  satrap  (Esth.  viii.  9);  to 
 lEJ',    il>.   [see  above];   to  JJD,    'sagan'  (municipal 
 
 officer),  Jer.  Ii.  28;  to  \?'0,  'king'  (or  sub-king), 
 2  Chron.  ix.  14.  It  is  used  of  the  'chiefs'  of  pro- 
 vinces in  the  Assyrian  (2  Kings  xviii.  24  ;  Is.  xxxvi. 
 9)  ;  Babylonian  (Chaldee),  (jer.  Ii.  57  ;  Ezek.  xxiii. 
 6,  23  ;  Dan.  iii.  2)  ;  Median  and  Persian  Em- 
 pires (Jer.  Ii.  28;  Esth.  iii.  12;  viii.  9).  Pales- 
 tine stood,  while  under  Persian  dominion,  under 
 such  officers,  called  *inj  "I3y  'D,  '  P.  over  the 
 river  '  (Euphrates),  whose  official  residence  [SD3] 
 was  in  Jerusalem,  Neh.  iii.  7  ;  Ezra  v.  3  ;  vi.  6 ; 
 Neh.  ii.  7,  9.  They  were  also  called  HTlil''  '2,  P. 
 of  Jehudah  (Hagg.  i.  i)  ;  e.  g.,  Zerubabel  (Ezra  ii. 
 63  ;  Hagg.  ii.  2i,  etc.);  Nehemia,  who  succeeded 
 
 Sheshbazzar  (miPIv  N''K'jn,  'the  prince  of  Jehu- 
 dah'), (Neh.  v.  5,  14  ;  xviii.  12).  The  word  seems 
 to  have  been  adopted  into  the  Hebrew  idiom  at 
 an  early  period,  since  we  find  it  used  in  i  Kings 
 X.  15  (2  Chron.  ix.  14),  of  the  tributary  chieftains 
 '  of  the  country ' — together  with  the  '  kings  of 
 Arabia  ; '  further,  of  Spian  captains,  to  be  put  in 
 the  room  of  the  (vice-)  kings  at  the  time  of  Ben- 
 hadad,  i  Kings  xx.  24,  and  finally  it  passed  current 
 for  any  person  in  high  authority  svho  was  to  be  pro- 
 pitiated by  gifts,  Mai.  i.  8.  With  respect  to  the 
 'S  of  Judrea,  introduced  by  Persian  rule,  it  would 
 appear  that  their  remuneration  ('  Bread  of  the  go- 
 vernor,' Ezra  iv.  14),  consisted  partly  in  kind, 
 partly  in  money  ('  bread,  wine,  and  forty  shekels 
 of  silver,'  Neh.  v.  15),  chargeable  upon  the  people 
 (Neh.  V.  18:  'One  ox,  and  six  choice  sheep, 
 also  fowls,  and  once  in  ten  days  store  of  all  sorts 
 of  wine').  Their  office  seems  chiefly  to  have  con- 
 sisted in  collecting  the  taxes  of  the  province  (Ezra 
 vi.  8) ;  an  office  at  a  later  period  in  the  hands  of 
 the  high-priest,  and  later  still  let  out  on  lease 
 [Jud/Ea;  Rome]. 
 
 It  will  not  be  necessary  to  dwell  here  with  any 
 length  upon  the  Greek  terms  for  governor  met 
 with  in  the  N.  T.  and  the  Apocrypha,  since  those 
 will  be  found  for  the  most  part  treated  fully  in 
 other  articles  (Rome;  Jud.«a;  Feast;  House, 
 etc.)      We  shall,    therefore,    confine   ourselves   to 
 
 *  '  Xncnn  being  probably  the  Persian  denomi- 
 nation for  this  office,  Ez.  ii.  36  ;  Neh.  vii.  65, 
 70.  The  name  Nehemiah  seems  inserted  by 
 clumsy  copyists,  Neh.  viii.  9  ;  x.  2'  (Jahn,  Bibl. 
 Arch.) 
 
GOZAN 
 
 167 
 
 GRABE 
 
 name  them,  and  to  indicate  their  meaning  briefly, 
 as  far  as  necessary  for  our  present  purpose  : — 
 Of  a  military  and  public  capacity  are  : — 
 'E'^vdpxv^  (^S-J'os,  &px^)  '• — Liither :  Landpfle- 
 ger,  Fiirst ;  a  prefect  over  a  province  or  a  people, 
 without  either  possessing  the  authority  or  the  name 
 of  king.  Aretas,  a  prefect  of  the  Arabian  king, 
 stationed  at  Damascus,  2  Cor.  xi.  32.  Simon,  the 
 high-priest  (i  Maccab.  xiv.  47  ;  xv.  12).  Arche- 
 laus,  Herod's  son,  a  Roman  vassal  '  Ethnarch '  of 
 Idumaea,  Judsea,  and  Samaria,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii. 
 1 1.  4 ;  Bell.  Jiid.  ii.  6.  3.  The  seven  chiefs  be- 
 tween whom  Egypt  was  divided  during  the  Roman 
 dominion  are  called  Ethnarchs  (Strabo  xvii.  798.) 
 In  the  widest  sense  it  is  apphed  also  to  Jewish  chiefs 
 of  Jewish  communities  in  larger  cities,  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xiv.  7.  2 ;  xiv.  8.  5 ;  Bell.  yud.  vii.  6.  3,  the 
 duties  of  whose  office  may  be  learned  from  Strabo 
 in  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  7.  2. 
 
 ''ilyefid)v  (7]y^ofjLai),  'Leader'  [Talmud  pOjn 
 Sabb.  145,  Aboda  Sar.  ll={<D^n,  dux;  or 
 |ijm7tJ>,    rulership],    chief,    prince.     Matt.    ii.    6 
 
 [see  P|vS]  ;  more  especially  the  ambassador  (Le- 
 gatus)  sent  into  a  province  with  the  emperor's 
 authority.  Prefect,  Matt.  x.  18 ;  i  Pet.  ii.  14. 
 Procurator,  Matt,  xxvii.  2,  11,  etc.;  Luke  xx.  20; 
 Acts  xxiii.  24,  etc.  In  classical  Greek  the  word 
 is  also  used  for  king,  as  chief  of  the  land,  cf.  Soph. 
 O.  R.  103,  etc. — 
 
 Governors  in  a  domestic  capacity  are  : — ■ 
 ''Apx'-TpiKKivos,  John  ii.  9,  '  the  rttler  of  the 
 feast,'  '  the  ^OTW«(7r  of  the  feast '  (' Obertruchsess'), 
 the  man  who  has  the  chief  superintendence  of  the 
 table.  His  functions  (in  the  N.  T.  passage  quoted), 
 are  not  clearly  defined.  He  has  been  identified 
 with  the  Roman  '  arbiter  bibendi,'  with  the  Greek 
 (rvp.Troffiapxo's,  and  with  the  rpaive^oiroLbs  ;  but 
 neither  of  these  formal  offices  would  seem  in  accord- 
 ance with  the  somewhat  humble  marriage-feast  de- 
 scribed there.  He  is  much  more  likely  to  have 
 been  a  friend  of  the  bridegroom's  who  undertook 
 the  superintendence  of  the  feast  for  the  time  being 
 [See  Feast  ;  Table]. 
 
 O'lKovbixos  {oTkos,  viiLLw),  the  chief  butler  and 
 steward  of  the  house  (Xen.  Mem.  ii.  10,  etc.)  ;  in 
 the  N.  T.  more  especially  one  entrusted  with  the 
 management  of  the  property  (Luke  xvi.  i,  etc.)  of 
 the  heirloom  of  a  minor  (Gal.  iv.  2  ;  I  Cor.  iv.  2 ; 
 cf  Gen.  xxiv.  2  ;  i  Kings  iv.  6,  etc.)  Further,  a 
 '  chamberlain  of  the  city '  (Erastus),  (Rom.  xvi. 
 23),  cf.  Esth.  viii.  9 ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  4.  7, 
 etc. ;  a  '  dispenser '  of  the  gospel,  I  Cor.  ix.  17  = 
 'the  Lord's  steward,'  Tit.  i.  7. — E.  D. 
 
 GOZAN  (|Ti3 ;  Sept.  Fwfd^),  a  province  or  dis- 
 trict of  Assyria.  Ptolemy,  in  his  description  of 
 Media,  mentions  a  town  called  Gauzania  {Geogr. 
 vi.  2)  situated  between  the  Zagros  mountains  and 
 the  Caspian  Sea.  Bochart,  Rennell,  and  others, 
 have  attempted  to  identify  this  town  with  Gozan 
 (Bochart,  0pp.  i.  194).  Rennell  further  states,  that 
 the  river  Gozan  (i  Chron.  v.  26)  is  the  modern 
 Kizil  Ozen,  which  rises  near  Sinna  in  the  eastern 
 part  of  the  Zagros  chain,  and,  after  a  winding 
 course,  joins  the  Sefid-rud,  which  flows  into  the 
 Caspian  {Geography  of  Herodotus,  i.  p.  521,  2d 
 ed. ;  see  also  Ritter,  Erdkunde,  viii.  615  ;  Sir  Ker 
 Porter,  Travels,  i.  267).  This  theory,  however, 
 places  Gozan  too  far  east  for  the  requirements  of 
 the  Scripture  naiTative.     Dr.  Grant  supposes  that  ' 
 
 the  word  Gozan  signifies  'pasture,'  and  is  the  same 
 as  tne  modern  Gozan,  the  name  given  by  the 
 Nestorians  to  all  the  Highlands  of  Assyria  which 
 afford  pasturage  to  their  flocks.  He  thinks  that 
 the  ancient  province  of  Gozan  embraced  the 
 mountainous  region  east  of  the  Tigris,  through 
 which  the  Khabur  and  the  Zab  flow  {Nestormn 
 Christians,  p.  125,  sq.) 
 
 A  close  examination  of  the  notices  in  Scripture, 
 and  a  comparison  of  them  with  the  Geography  of 
 Ptolemy  and  modern  researches,  enable  us  to  fix, 
 with  a  high  degree  of  probability,  the  true  position 
 of  Gozan.  It  appears  from  2  Kings  xvii.  6  (also 
 xviii.  11),  that  Gozan  was  in  Assyria,  which  is 
 there  distinguished  from  Media;  and  that  Habor 
 was  a  '  river  of  Gozan.'  There  can  be  little  doubt 
 that  the  Habor  is  identical  with  the  Khabur  of 
 Mesopotamia  (Habor).  Gozan  must,  therefore, 
 have  been  in  Mesopotamia.  The  words  of  2 
 Kings  xix.  12  appear  to  confirm  this  view,  for 
 there  Gozan  and  Haran  are  grouped  together,  and 
 we  know  that  Haran  is  in  Mesopotamia.  (See 
 also  Is.  xxxvii.  12;  Rawlinson's  Ancient  Monar- 
 chies, i.  245,  sq.)  In  I  Chron.  v.  26,  Gozan  is 
 called  a  river,  and  is  distinguished  from  Habor. 
 The  explanation  seems  to  be,  that  in  this  passage 
 Habor  is  the  name  of  a  district,  probably  that 
 watered  by  the  lower  Khabilr ;  while  the  upper 
 part  of  the  same  river,  flowing  through  the  pro- 
 vince of  Gozan,  is  called  jHJ  "inj,  '■  the  river  of 
 Gozan. ' 
 
 Ptolemy  states  that  Gatisanitis  was  one  of  the 
 provinces  of  Mesopotamia  adjoining  Chalcitis 
 (Geogr.  V.  18).  The  same  province  Strabo  calls 
 ATygdonia  (xvi.  i),  which  may  probably  be,  as 
 suggested  by  Professor  Rawlinson,  another  form 
 of  the  same  name  {Ancient  Moiiarchies,  i.  245). 
 As  we  find  Halah,  Habor,  and  Haran,  grouped 
 together  in  Mesopotamia;  as  we  find  beside  them 
 a  province  called  Gausanitis ;  and  as  in  Scripture 
 Gozan  is  always  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
 above  places,  we  may  safely  conclude  that  Gozan 
 and  Gausanitis  are  identical.  Gausanitis  lay  along 
 the  southern  declivities  of  Mons  Masius,  and 
 extended  over  the  region  watered  by  the  upper 
 Khabur  and  Jerujer  rivers  to  the  ranges  of  Sinjar 
 and  Harama.  The  greater  part  of  it  is  an  undu- 
 lating plain,  having  a  poor  soil  and  scanty  vegeta- 
 tion. (Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  •^24.) — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 GRABE,  John  Earnest,  an  eminent  scholar 
 and  divine,  was  bom  at  Konigsberg,  July  10,  1666, 
 and  educated  at  the  university  of  the  same,  where 
 his  father  was  professor  of  divinity  and  history. 
 Having  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  the  Fathers, 
 he  was  led  to  question  the  validity  of  the  orders  of 
 the  clergy  of  the  Lutheran  church,  and  felt  dis- 
 posed to  join  the  Church  of  Rome.  Advised  to 
 visit  England  to  have  his  doubts  resolved,  he  was 
 well  received  there  by  William  HI.,  who  conferred 
 a  pension  on  him.  He  became  a  minister  of  the 
 Church  of  England,  and  was  made  D.D.  of  the 
 university  of  Oxford,  1706.  He  died  171 1,  in  the 
 forty-fifth  year  of  his  age.  His  theological  views 
 were  of  the  Anglo-Catholic  type.  He  was  the 
 author  of  many  learned  works,  of  which  those 
 relating  to  Biblical  science  are  subjoined : — i. 
 Epistola  ad  clarissinium  vii'tim,  yb.  MilUuvi ;  quA 
 ostendittir  Libri  yiidicum  Genuinani  LXX.  Interr- 
 prelum  Versionevi  earn  esse,  quam  MS.  Cod.  Alex- 
 
GRAMBERG 
 
 168 
 
 GREECE 
 
 andrinus  exkibet;  Rotnanam  autem  editionem,  qttoad 
 dictum  librtim,  ab  Hid  proisus  diversam,  atque  ean- 
 deni  cum  Hcsychiand  esse;  Siib7iexa  sunt  tria 
 Novce  rCiv  6  Editionis  Specwmia,  Oxonii,  1705, 
 4to.  2.  Vetjis  Testamentum  Grcecum  ex  Versiojie 
 LXX.  Interpretum,  ex  antiquissimo  MS.  Codice 
 Alexandrino  acctirate  descriptiwi,  et  ope  alioriun  ex- 
 emplarium  ac  priscorum  Scriptorum,  prcrsertim 
 vera  Hexaplaris  Editionis  Origeiiiauce,  emenddtu7n 
 atque  S2(pptdum,  etc.,  Oxonii,  1707,  1709,  1 7 19, 
 1720,  4  vols.  foL,  and  8  vols.  Svo.  The  whole  of 
 this  great  work  Dr.  G.  prepared  for  the  press,  but 
 only  lived  to  publish  the  first  and  fourth  vols. ;  the 
 second  vol.  was  edited  by  Francis  Lee,  M.  D.  ;  and 
 the  third  by  W.  Wigan,  L.L.D.  'The  prolego- 
 mena contain  a  treasure  of  sacred  criticism.'  3. 
 Disse7-tatio  de  Variis  Vitiis  Septuagiiita  luterpre- 
 turn  Versioni  ante  B.  Originis  arju?n  illatis,  et  reme- 
 diis  ab  ipso  iu  Hexaplari  ejusdem  Versions  Editione 
 adhibitis,  deque  hujus  editionis  reliquiis  tarn  Manu- 
 scriptis  quatn  prelo  excusis,  Oxonii,  17 10,  4to.  4. 
 Collatio  Codicis  Cottoniani  Geneseos  cum  Editione 
 Romana,  etc.,  edita  ab  Henrico  Owen,  Londini, 
 1778,  Svo. —I.  J. 
 
 GRAMBERG,  Karl  P.  W.,  a  Biblical  critic, 
 was  born  at  Seefeldt,  in  the  duchy  of  Oldenburg, 
 November  27th,  1797.  Having  lost  his  father 
 when  he  was  but  ten  years  of  age,  he  was  placed 
 at  Stoeden,  and  afterwards  at  Oldenburg,  where 
 he  studied  the  classical  and  modern  languages. 
 Subsequently,  with  a  view  to  preaching,  he  de- 
 voted himself  to  Hebrew  and  the  Oriental  tongues. 
 The  O.  T.  became  the  chief  subject  of  his  exa- 
 mination. After  being  master  of  the  school  at 
 Oldenburg,  he  became  a  professor  of  the  first 
 class  at  the  royal  institution  of  Ziillichau,  1822. 
 His  death  took  place  on  the  29th  March  1830. 
 His  Biblical  works  are — Libri  Geneseos  sectindum 
 fontes  ritedignoscendos  Aditmbratio,%MO,  1828;  Das 
 Buck  d.  Spriiche  Salotnds  neu  uebersetzt,  u.  s.  w., 
 Svo,  182S  ;  Kriiische  Geschichte  d.  Religionsidcen  d. 
 alien  7d'j'/aw«z/.r,  2  Theile  Svo,  1829,  1S30.  Gram- 
 berg  was  one  of  the  free  theologians  of  Germany. 
 His  critical  abilities  were  not  great ;  but  he  had  a 
 good  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  and  occupied  a  respect- 
 able place  among  the  critics  of  his  day.  Men  like 
 Gesenius  and  De  Wette  attached  some  importance 
 to  his  opinions  on  the  books  of  the  Bible. — S.  D. 
 
 GRAPE.     [Vine.] 
 
 GRASS.     [DESHt  and  Chazir.] 
 
 GRASSHOPPER.     [Chagal.] 
 
 GRAVE.     [Burial.] 
 
 GRAVES,  Richard,  D.D.,  Dean  of  Ardagh, 
 was  born  in  1763,  and  died  in  1829.  He  was  the 
 author  of  Lectttres  on  the  four  last  books  of  the  Penta- 
 teuch, desig>ted  to  shew  the  Divine  origin  ofthejfeiuish 
 Religion  chiefly  from  interiial  evidence ;  in  three 
 parts,  Lond.  1815,  2  vols.  Svo;  and  An  Essay 
 on  the  Character  of  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists, 
 designed  to  prove  that  they  were  not  Enthusiasts, 
 Dublin  1798,  Svo.  The  former  of  these  may  still 
 be  cons)dted  with  advantage,  although  on  many 
 points  it  is  necessarily  behind  the  requirements  of 
 the  present  day. — S.  N. 
 
 GRAY,  Robert,  D.D.,  bishop  of  Bristol,  was 
 born  in  1762,  and  died  Sept.  28th,  1834.  He  was 
 the  author  of  the  following  two  Biblical  works — I. 
 
 A  key  to  the  0.  T.  ajid  Apocrypha,  or  an  account 
 of  their  several  books,  their  contents,  and  authors, 
 and  of  the  time  in  which  they  were  respectively 
 written,  Lond.  1790,  Svo,  loth  ed.,  1S41,  Svo.  2, 
 The  connection  between  the  Sacred  Writings  and 
 the  Literature  of  Jetvish  atid  heathen  authors, 
 particidarly  that  of  the  classical  ages,  illustrated 
 principally  with  a  view  to  evidejice  in  confirmation 
 of  the  truth  of  rei'ealed  religion,  Lond.  1 81 6,  Svo  ; 
 2d  ed.,  2  vols,  1S19,  Svo.  The  former  of  these 
 works  had  for  many  years  a  considerable  reputa- 
 tion, but  is  now  superseded. — S.  N. 
 
 GREAT  SABBATH.  [Passover,  vol.  iii.  p.  425.] 
 GT.  SYNAGOGUE.  [Synagogue,  vol.  iii.  p.  909.] 
 GREAVES  (nnvp.  KPTjiu^es,  ocrece).     All  the 
 
 ancient  versions  and  Josephus  (Antiq.  vi.  9.  i) 
 agree  in  regarding  the  Hebrew  term  so  translated 
 in  the  A.  V.,  i  Sam.  xvii.  6,  as  a  defensive  armour 
 for  the  leg.     It  is  to  be  distinguished  from  }i5<D, 
 
 which  was  a  sort  of  military  shoe  like  the  Roman 
 caliga  ;  and  %vas  probably  similar  to  the  Kvt]^i%  of 
 the  Greeks,  or  the  greaves  of  the  Assyrians,  as 
 represented  m  their  sculptures,  which  not  only 
 protected  the  leg,  but  covered  the  upper  part  of 
 the  foot  like  our  gaiters  (Layard,  Nineveh  ii.  337).- 
 -J.  E.  R. 
 
 GREECE.  The  relations  of  the  Hebrews  with 
 the  Greeks  were  always  of  a  distant  kind,  until  the 
 Macedonian  conquest  of  the  East  :  hence  in  the 
 O.  T.  the  mention  of  the  Greeks  is  naturally  rare. 
 It  appears  by  Cruden's  Concoi'dattce  that  '  Tubal 
 and  Javan,'  in  connection,  are  named  four  times, 
 Dan  and  Javan  once  (Ezek.  xxvii.  19),  and  Javan, 
 translated  by  us  Greece  and  Greeks,  five  times,  of 
 which  three  are  in  the  book  of  Daniel.  Of  these 
 passages,  that  which  couples  Dan  and  Javan  is 
 generally  referred  to  a  different  tribe  [see  Javan]  ; 
 in  the  rest  Javan  is  understood  of  Greece  or  its 
 people.  The  Greek  nation  had  a  broad  division 
 into  two  races,  Dorians  and  lonians :  of  whom  the 
 former  seem  to  have  long  lain  hid  in  continental 
 parts,  or  on  the  western  side  of  the  country,  and 
 had  a  temperament  and  institutions  more  approach- 
 ing to  the  Italic.  The  lonians,  on  the  contrary, 
 retained  many  Asiatic  usages  and  tendencies,  wit- 
 nessing that  they  had  never  been  so  thoroughly  cut 
 off  as  the  Dorians  from  Oriental  connection.  When 
 afterwards  the  Ionic  colonies  in  Asia  Minor  rose  to 
 eminence,  the  Ionian  race,  in  spite  of  the  competi- 
 tion of  the  half  Doric  Cohans,  continued  to  attract 
 most  attention  in  Asia  ;  and  it  is  not  wonderful 
 that  the  Ionian  name  (for  Javan  is  the  same  word 
 as  'lawt-)  sliould  have  maintained  its  extensive  ap- 
 plication in  Oriental  usage.  Just  so  in  the  '  Persse ' 
 of  the  tragic  poet  .(^schylus  (178,  564),  the  Persians 
 are  made  to  style  all  the  Greeks  \a.ovtz,  i.e.,  Javan. 
 
 The  few  dealings  of  the  Greeks  with  the  He- 
 brews seem  to  have  been  rather  unfriendly,  to 
 judge  by  the  notice  in  Zech.  ix.  13.  In  Joel.  iii.  6, 
 the  Tyrians  are  reproached  for  selling  the  children 
 of  Judah  and  Jerusalem  to  the  Grecians  :  but  al 
 what  time,  and  in  what  circumstances,  must  de- 
 pend on  the  date  assigned  to  the  book  of  Joel  [see 
 Joel].  With  the  Greeks  of  Cyprus  or  Chittim, 
 the  Hebrews  were  naturally  better  acquainted  ;  and 
 this  name,  it  would  seem,  might  easily  have  ex- 
 tended itself  in  their  tongue  to  denote  the  whole 
 Greek  nation.  Such  at  least  is  the  most  plausible 
 explanation  of  its  use  in  I  Maccab.  i.  i,  and  viii.  9, 
 
GREECE 
 
 169 
 
 GREEK  LANGUAGE 
 
 The  Greeks  were  eminent  for  their  appreciation 
 of  beauty  in  all  its  varieties  :  indeed  their  religious 
 creed  owed  its  shape  mainly  to  this  peculiarity  of 
 their  mind  ;  for  their  logical  acuteness  was  not 
 exercised  on  such  subjects  until  quite  a  later  period. 
 The  puerile  or  indecent  fables  of  the  old  mythology 
 may  seem  to  a  modern  reader  to  have  been  the 
 very  soul  of  their  religion  ;  but  to  the  Greek  him- 
 self these  were  a  mere  accident,  or  a  vehicle  for 
 some  embodiment  of  beauty.  He  thought  little 
 whether  a  legend  concerning  Artemis  or  Apollo 
 was  true,  but  much  whether  the  dance  and  music 
 celebrating  the  divinity  were  solemn,  beautiful,  and 
 touching.  The  worship  of  Apollo,  the  god  of 
 youth  and  beauty,  has  been  regarded  as  charac- 
 terising the  Hellenic  in  contrast  with  the  older 
 Pelasgian  times  ;  nor  is  the  fact  without  signifi- 
 cance, that  the  ancient  temple  and  oracle  of  Jupiter 
 at  Dodona  fell  afterwards  into  the  shade  in  com- 
 parison with  that  of  Apollo  at  Delphi.  Indeed 
 the  Dorian  Spartans  and  the  Ionian  Athenians 
 alike  regarded  Apollo  as  their  tutelaiy  god,  who 
 was  'AttoWcov  irarpi^os  at  Athens,  and  'AttAXXu;' 
 Kapvelos  at  Amyclie.  Whatever  the  other  varieties 
 of  Greek  religious  ceremonies,  no  violent  or  fren- 
 zied exhibitions  arose  out  of  the  national  mind  ; 
 but  all  such  orgies  (as  they  were  called)  were  im- 
 ported from  the  East,  and  had  much  difficulty  in 
 establishing  themselves  on  Greek  soil.  Quite  at  a 
 late  period  the  managers  of  orgies  were  evidently 
 regarded  as  mere  jugglers  of  not  a  very  reputable 
 kind  (see  Demosth.  De  Corond,  sec.  79,  p.  313)  ; 
 nor  do  the  Greek  States,  as  such,  appear  to  have 
 patronized  them.  On  the  contrary,  the  solemn 
 religious  processions,  the  sacred  games  and  dances, 
 formed  a  serious  item  in  the  public  expenditure  ; 
 and  to  be  permanently  exiled  from  such  spectacles 
 would  have  been  a  moral  death  to  the  Greeks. 
 Wherever  they  settled  they  introduced  their  native 
 institutions,  and  reared  temples,  gymnasia,  baths, 
 porticoes,  sepulchres,  of  characteristic  simple  ele- 
 gance. The  morality  and  the  religion  of  such  a 
 people  naturally  were  alike  superficial  ;  nor  did 
 the  two  stand  in  any  close  union.  Bloody  and 
 cruel  rites  could  find  no  place  in  their  creed,  be- 
 cause faith  was  not  earnest  enough  to  endure  much 
 self-abandonment.  Religion  was  with  them  a 
 sentiment  and  a  taste  rather  than  a  deep-seated 
 conviction.  On  the  loss  of  beloved  relatives  they 
 felt  a  tender  and  natural  sorrow,  but  unclouded 
 with  a  shade  of  anxiety  concerning  a  future  life. 
 Through  the  whole  of  their  later  history,  during 
 Christian  times,  it  is  evident  that  they  had  little 
 power  of  remorse,  and  little  natural  firmness  of 
 conscientious  principle  :  and,  in  fact,  at  an  earlier 
 and  critical  time,  when  the  intellect  of  the  nation 
 was  ripening,  an  atrocious  civil  war,  that  lasted 
 for  twenty-seven  years,  inflicted  a  political  and 
 ".ocial  demoralization,  from  the  effects  of  which 
 they  could  never  recover.  Besides  this,  their  very 
 admiration  of  beauty,  coupled  with  the  degraded 
 state  of  the  female  intellect,  proved  a  frightful 
 source  of  corruption,  such  as  no  philosophy  could 
 have  adequately  checked.  From  such  a  nation 
 then,  whatever  its  intellectual  pretensions,  no 
 healthful  influence  over  its  neighbours  could  flow, 
 until  other  and  higher  inspiration  was  infused  into 
 its  sentiment. 
 
 Among  the  Greeks  the  arts  of  war  and  peace 
 were  carried  to  greater  perfection  than  among 
 any  earlier  psople.     In  navigation  they  were  little 
 
 behind  the  Tyrians  and  Carthaginians  ;  in  political 
 foresight  they  equalled  them ;  in  military  science, 
 both  by  sea  and  land,  they  were  decidedly  their 
 superiors  ;  while  in  the  power  of  reconciling  sub- 
 ject-foreigners to  the  conquerors  and  to  their  insti- 
 tutions, they  perhaps  surpassed  all  nations  of  the 
 world.  Their  copious,  cultivated,  and  flexible 
 tongue  carried  with  it  no  small  mental  education 
 to  all  who  learned  it  thoroughly  ;  and  so  sagacious 
 were  the  arrangements  of  the  great  Alexander 
 throughout  his  rapidly  acquired  Asiatic  empire, 
 that  in  the  twenty  years  of  dreadful  war  among 
 his  generals  which  followed  his  death,  no  rising 
 of  the  natives  against  Greeic  influence  appears  to 
 have  been  thought  of.  Without  any  change  of 
 population  adequate  under  other  circumstances 
 to  effect  it,  the  Greek  tongue  and  Greek  feeling 
 spread  far  and  sank  deep  through  the  Macedonian 
 dominions.  Half  of  Asia  Minor  became  a  new 
 Greece  ;  and  the  cities  of  Syria,  North  Palestine, 
 and  Egypt,  were  deeply  imbued  with  the  same 
 influence. 
 
 When  a  beginning  had  been  made  of  preaching 
 Christianity  to  the  Gentiles,  Greece  immediately 
 became  a  principal  sphere  for  missionary  exertion. 
 The  vernacular  tongue  of  the  Hellenistic  Christians 
 was  understood  over  so  large  an  extent  of  country, 
 as  almost  of  itself  to  point  out  in  what  direction 
 they  should  exert  themselves.  The  Grecian  cities, 
 whether  in  Europe  or  Asia,  were  the  peculiar  field 
 for  the  Apostle  Paul ;  for  whose  labours  a  superin- 
 tending Providence  had  long  before  been  provid- 
 ing, in  the  large  number  of  devout  Greeks  who 
 attended  the  Jewish  synagogues.  Greece  proper 
 was  divided  by  the  Romans  into  two  provinces, 
 of  which  the  northern  was  called  Macedonia,  and 
 the  southern  Achaia  (as  in  2  Cor.  ix.  2,  etc. )  ;  and 
 we  learn  incidentally  from  Acts  xviii.  that  the  pro- 
 consul of  the  latter  resided  at  Corinth.  To  deter- 
 mine the  exact  division  between  the  provinces  is 
 difficult  ;  nor  is  the  question  of  any  importance  to 
 a  Biblical  student.  Achaia,  however,  had  probably 
 veiy  nearly  the  same  frontier  as  the  kingdom  of 
 modem  Greece,  which  is  limited  by  a  line  reach- 
 ing from  the  gulf  of  Vole  to  that  of  Arta,  in  great 
 part  along  the  chain  of  Mount  Othrys.  Of  the 
 cities  celebrated  in  Greek  history,  none  are  promi- 
 nent in  the  early  Christian  times  except  Corinth. 
 Laconia,  and  its  chief  towm  Sparta,  had  ceased  to 
 be  of  any  importance  :  Athens  was  never  eminent 
 as  a  Christian  church.  In  Macedonia  were  the 
 two  great  cities  of  Philippi  and  Thessalonica  (for- 
 merly called  Thevme)  ;  yet  of  these  the  former  was 
 rather  recent,  being  founded  by  Philip  the  Great  ; 
 the  latter  was  not  greatly  distinguished  above  the 
 other  Grecian  cities  on  the  same  coast.  Nicopolis, 
 on  the  gulf  of  Ambracia  (or  Arta),  had  been  built 
 by  Augustus,  in  memoiy  of  his  victory  at  Actium, 
 and  was,  perhaps,  the  limit  of  Achaia  on  the 
 western  coast  (Tacitus,  Amial.  ii.  53).  It  had 
 risen  into  some  importance  in  St.  Paul's  days,  and, 
 as  many  suppose,  it  is  to  this  Nicopolis  that  he 
 alludes  in  his  epistle  to  Titus.  (See  further  under 
 Achaia  and  Nicopolis.) — F.  W.  N. 
 
 GREEK  LANGUAGE  (Biblical).  There 
 has  been  much  discussion  as  to  the  peculiar  nature 
 of  the  language  used  by  the  Septuagint  translators 
 and  by  the  writers  of  the  N.  T.  It  would  be  use- 
 less to  attempt  to  give  a  history  of  these  discus- 
 sions in  this  article.     We  shall  simply  indicate  the 
 
GREEK  LANGUAGE 
 
 170 
 
 GREEK  LANGUAGE 
 
 main  facts  which  have  come  out  in  the  course  of 
 investigation,  stating  at  the  same  time  the  theory 
 whiclr  seems  to  us  to  account  most  satisfactorily 
 for  the  peculiarities  of  Greek  which  these  writings 
 present. 
 
 In  the  earliest  stages  of  a  language  the  dialects 
 are  exceedingly  numerous,  every  small  district 
 having  peculiar  variations  of  its  own.  Such  we 
 find  to  have  been  the  case  with  Greek,  for  though 
 its  dialects  have  been  generally  reckoned  as  four, 
 we  know  that  each  of  these  was  variously  modified 
 in  various  places.  In  course  of  time,  however,  one 
 of  these  dialects,  the  Attic,  drove  the  rest  from  the 
 field  of  hterary  composition,  and  almost  all  Greeks 
 who  wrote  books  wrote  in  that  dialect  wherever 
 they  might  have  been  born.  The  Attic  which  they 
 used  underwent  some  changes,  and  then  received 
 the  name  of  the  'common  dialect.'  This  dialect 
 has  been  used  by  Greeks  for  literary  purposes  from 
 the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great  down  to  the  pre- 
 sent age. 
 
 While  Attic  thus  became  the  hterary  language, 
 the  various  communities  spoke  Greek  as  they  had 
 learned  it  from  their  parents  and  teachers.  This 
 spoken  Greek  would  necessarily  differ  in  different 
 places,  and  it  would  gradually  become  veiy  different 
 from  the  stationary  language  which  was  used  in 
 writings.  Now  it  seems  to  us  that  the  language 
 used  by  the  Septuagint  and  N.  T.  writers  was  the 
 language  used  in  common  conversation,  learned  by 
 them,  not  through  books,  but  most  likely  in  child- 
 hood from  household  talk,  or  if  not,  through  sub- 
 sequent oral  instruction.  If  this  be  the  case,  then 
 the  Septuagint  is  the  first  translation  which  was 
 made  for  the  great  masses  of  the  people  in  their 
 own  language,  and  the  N.  T.  writers  are  the  first 
 to  appeal  to  men  through  the  common  vulgar  lan- 
 guage intelligible  to  all  who  spoke  Greek.  The 
 common  Greek  thus  used  is  indeed  considerably 
 modified  by  the  circumstances  of  the  writers,  but 
 these  modifications  no  more  turn  the  Greek  into  a 
 peculiar  dialect  than  do  Americanisms  or  Scoti- 
 cisms  turn  the  English  of  Americans  and  Scotsmen 
 into  peculiar  dialects  of  English. 
 
 In  considering  a  language  we  have  to  look  at  its 
 inflections,  its  syntax,  and  its  vocabulary. 
 
 Inflections. — It  is  in  the  inflections  that  the  main 
 proof  of  our  theoiy  in  regard  to  the  N.  T.  Greek 
 lies.  Max  Miiller  justly  affirms  that  the  grammar 
 of  a  language  is  '  the  most  essential  element,  and 
 therefore  the  ground  of  classification  in  all  lan- 
 guages which  have  produced  a  definite  grammati- 
 cal articulation'  {Lectures  on  the  Science  of  Lan- 
 gnage,  p.  74).  Now  the  grammar  of  the  Septua- 
 gint and  N.  T. ,  in  very  many  of  its  departures 
 from  the  '  common  dialect,'  approximates  to  the 
 modern  Greek  of  Ptochoprodromus  in  the  12th 
 century,  and  to  the  modern  Greek  of  the  present 
 day,  both  of  which  are  simply  the  language  of  the 
 common  people.  The  modern  Greek  grammar  of 
 our  own  time  is  only  a  full  development  of  the 
 tendencies  which  shew  themselves  in  the  Septua- 
 gint and  N.  T.  Thus  the  N.  T.  and  modem 
 Greek  have  no  dual.  In  their  declension  of  nouns 
 we  find  a  mixture  of  dialects,  such  as,  for  instance, 
 a  in  the  genitive  singular  of  proper  names  in  as ; 
 and  Tjs  in  the  genitive,  and  r\  in  the  dative,  of 
 nouns  in  pa  {crirelptjs.  Acts  xxvii.  i  ;  ij.axa.ipri,  Rev. 
 xiii.  10,  etc.)  There  is  in  both  a  change  from  the 
 second  to  the  third  declension  in  the  words  vods, 
 ck6tos,  IXeos,  and  ttAoOtoj.     The  N.  T.,  however, 
 
 declines  some  of  them  occasionally  as  of  the  second 
 declension.  Both  display  great  peculiarities  in  the 
 forms  for  the  comparative  and  superlative  of  adjec- 
 tives, such,  for  instance,  as  fieL^oripav,  3  John  4. 
 In  modern  Greek  the  optative  mood  is  rare,  and 
 occurs  only  in  wishes.  It  is  rare  also  in  the  N.  T. , 
 and  in  some  of  the  books  it  does  not  occur  at  all. 
 The  modern  Greek  declines  the  second  Aorist  as 
 the  first.  This  is  the  case  frequently  in  the  N.  T. 
 also,  as  ^Trecra  for  ^ireaov.  The  N.  T.  sometimes 
 forms  the  imperative  by  means  of  acpiyjixi,  as  fi^es 
 iK^aXd},  d(p€s  idwfiev.  This  is  now  the  common 
 fomi  in  modern  Greek,  dcpes  being  contracted  into 
 ds.  The  second  person  singular  in  the  present 
 passive  or  middle  ends  in  modern  Greek  in  the 
 regular  crat  ;  so  in  the  N.  T.  Kavxaaat  and  Mvaaai. 
 The  third  person  plural  of  the  imperfect  active 
 of  contracted  verbs  in  modern  Greek  ends  in  aav  ; 
 so  in  Septuagint  and  N.  T.  ebokLovaav.  There 
 is  a  striking  similarity  in  the  conjugation  of  verbs 
 in  both.  Both  have  a  tendency  to  form  all  the 
 parts  regularly.  Both  also  deal  arbitrarily  with 
 augments.  Both  avoid  the  use  of  verbs  in  fu,  and 
 both  generally  strengthen  pure  verbs  by  the  inser- 
 tion of  a  V.  Sometimes  they  change  the  vowel  e 
 into  a,  as  iXedre,  in  Jude  23.  These  are  some  of 
 the  points  in  which  the  grammar  of  the  N.  T. 
 Greek,  and  that  of  modern  Greek,  agree.  Many 
 more  might  have  been  added.  Instances  of  several 
 of  these  peculiarities  may  be  found  in  our  texts  of 
 the  classical  writers,  and  a  still  larger  number  in 
 our  manuscripts  of  them  ;  but  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
 in  them  they  appear  as  rarities  ;  in  the  N.  T.  their 
 occurrence  is  more  frequent,  and  in  modem  Greek 
 they  have  passed  into  customary  forms.  Some  of 
 these  forms  have  been  set  down  as  Alexandrian 
 or  Macedonian,  but  Sturz  (De  Dialecto  Macedonica 
 et  Alexandrina  Liber,  Lipsice,  iSoS)  has  entirely 
 failed  to  prove  that  there  was  either  a  Macedonian 
 or  an  Alexandrian  dialect.  The  Macedonian  words 
 which  he  has  adduced  indicate  that  the  Macedonians 
 were  non-Hellenic.  And  there  are  no  forms  ad- 
 duced as  Alexandrian  which  are  not  to  be  found  in 
 some  earlier  dialect.  In  fact  there  is  nothing  in 
 any  of  the  statements  to  which  he  appeals,  to  con- 
 tradict the  opinion  that  Alexandrians,  like  other 
 Greek-speaking  people,  mixed  up  various  dialects 
 in  their  spoken  language.  The  written  language 
 of  the  Alexandrians,  as  we  know  from  the  works 
 of  Philo  and  other  residents  in  Alexandria,  was  the 
 so-called  '  common  dialect.'  Moreover,  the  Greek 
 of  the  N.  T.  is  to  be  found  not  in  writings  of  any 
 special  locality,  but  in  writings  which  made  no 
 pretensions  to  literary  excellence,  such  as  the  frag- 
 ments of  Hegesippus,  some  of  the  Apocryphal 
 gospels,  the  Apostolical  constitutions,  the  liturgies, 
 the  Chronicon  Paschale  and  Malelas. 
 
 Syntax.  In  the  syntax  the  peculiar  elements 
 that  mixed  themselves  with  the  common  spoken 
 language  m  the  N.  T.  writings,  make  their  ap- 
 pearance. The  Hebrew  element  especially  is  note 
 worthy.  The  translators  of  the  Septuagint  went 
 on  the  principle  of  translating  as  literally  as  possible, 
 and  consequently  the  form  of  the  sentences  is  essen- 
 tially Hebrew.  Some  of  the  writers  of  the  N.  T. 
 were  themselves  Jews,  or  derived  part  of  their  in- 
 formation from  Jews,  and  accordingly  the  form  of 
 portions  of  their  writings,  particularly  in  narrative, 
 is  influenced  by  Hebrew  modes.  At  the  same 
 time  too  much  stress  is  not  to  be  laid  on  this  He- 
 brew influence ;  for  the  writers  appear  sometimes 
 
GREEK  LANGUAGE 
 
 17] 
 
 GREEK  LANGUAGE 
 
 to  differ  from  the  classical  types,  not  because  they 
 were  Jews,  but  because  they  were  simple  plain- 
 speaking  (tt/i'  yXwTTav  ISiurevovTes,  Eus.  //isi.  Eccl. 
 iii.  24)  men,  who  cared  little  about  rounded  sen- 
 tences. The  Hebrew  element  shews  itself  in  par- 
 ticular phrases  and  constructions,  as  in  iroLelf  ^Xeos 
 IMerd  Tivos  ;  but  the  amount  of  this  Hebrew  ele- 
 ment is  not  so  great  as  it  has  often  been  supposed 
 to  be,  and  in  some  of  the  N.  T.  writers  it  is  scarcely 
 noticeable  at  all.  Generally  speaking,  the  syntax, 
 like  the  grammar,  is  a  tendency  towards  modern 
 Greek.  It  has,  like  it,  frequent  recourse  to  the  use 
 of  prepositions,  and  we  find  such  expressions  even 
 as  hbvTo.  eis  i-^ar,  I  Thes.  iv.  8.  After  the  com- 
 parative Trapd  is  used  frequently  instead  of  ■¥)  in  the 
 N.  T.  ;  in  modem  Greek  it  is  always  employed. 
 On  account  of  the  rareness  of  the  optative,  and  an 
 avoidance  of  the  infinitive  by  some  of  the  writers, 
 both  the  N.  T.  and  modern  Greek  abound  in  the 
 use  of  Iva.  with  the  subjunctive,  and  sometimes  even 
 with  the  indicative,  as  in  Revelations.  The  neuter 
 plural  is  more  regularly  joined  with  a  plural  verb 
 in  N.  T.  Greek  ;  it  is  always  joined  with  it  in  mo- 
 dem Greek.  Many  other  peculiarities  in  which  the 
 syntax  of  the  N.  T.  and  that  of  modern  Greek  agree 
 might  be  noted. 
 
 Vocahilary. — The  words  used  by  the  N.  T. 
 tvriters  shew  a  still  greater  variety  of  elements. 
 Here  we  notice  distinctly,  also,  the  tendency 
 towards  the  modem  language,  as,  for  instance,  in 
 the  use  of  xo/sT-dfw,  to  feed  men,  in  the  frequent 
 employment  of  diminutives,  in  attaching  a  weakened 
 sense  to  words  like  ^aWw,  which  had  originally 
 the  idea  of  vigour  in  them,  and  in  a  variety  of  ad- 
 .  verbs  and  conjunctions  rarely  used  by  the  classical 
 jWriters.  Some  of  these  peculiar  uses  have  been 
 assigned  to  the  supposed  Alexandrian  dialect ;  but 
 in  the  discussions  no  attempt  has  been  made  to  dis- 
 \tinguish  between  what  may  have  been  pure  Alexan- 
 drianisms,  and  what  may  have  been  common  in 
 Greek  conversation  though  not  in  Greek  writings. 
 In  the  words  we  find  a  Latin  element,  as  might 
 be  expected.  The  Latin  words  used  in  the  N.  T. 
 are  not  very  numerous,  but  they  show  plainly  that 
 the  writers  had  no  other  desire  than  to  call  things 
 by  their  common  names.  They  do  not  translate 
 them  into  Greek,  as  a  scholar  of  those  days  or  an 
 imitator  of  Attic  writings  would  have  done.  We 
 find  a  few  Greek  phrases  in  the  N.  T.  which  have 
 evidently  been  translated  from  Latin,  such  as  crv/j.- 
 ^ovXcov  Xa/3eic — consilium  capere. 
 
 There  are  also  several  Aramaic  words  used  in  the 
 N.  T.,  especially  by  Christ.  Most  of  these  words 
 and  expressions  are  of  a  peculiar  nature.  They  are 
 almost  all  of  them  utterances  employed  on  some 
 solemn  occasion.  They  were  at  one  time  appealed 
 to  as  proof  that  Jesus  regularly  used  the  Aramaic 
 in  his  addresses  to  the  people  ;  but  they  have  been 
 recently  adduced,  and  with  considerable  force,  to 
 prove  exactly  the  contrar}',  that  Jesus  frequently 
 used  the  Greek  language  in  his  public  conversa- 
 tions as  being  more  intelligible  to  all,  but  that 
 when  powerfully  moved  or  deeply  touched,  he  em- 
 ployed Aramaic  words  as  being  more  expressive 
 from  their  associations  (Roberts,  Discussions  on 
 the  Gospels,  pt.  I.  ch.  iv.)  Besides  this,  the  He- 
 brew or  Aramaic  has  exercised  an  influence  on  the 
 meanings  of  some  Greek  words,  as,  for  instance,  in 
 the  use  of  6<peL\yiixa,  for  a  sin.  In  several  in- 
 stances, however,  where  this  Hebrew  influence 
 has  been  set  down  as  existing,  a  more  satisfactory 
 
 explanation  is  given  in  another  way.  Thus  ^lkol- 
 0(Tvv7]  is  taken  by  some  to  mean  liberality  in  2  Cor, 
 ix.  9,  10,  because  they  suppose  that  ^p^V  has  this 
 
 't  T  ; 
 
 meaning  in  Ps.  cxii.  9,  where  the  Sept.  translates 
 diKaioavvT).  In  both  cases  it  may  be  doubted 
 whether  oiKaLoavvr)  ought  to  receive  this  meaning, 
 and  unquestionably  in  the  second  Epistle  to  the 
 Corinthians  it  is  much  simpler  to  suppose  that 
 Paul  looks  on  liberality  as  an  essential  part  of 
 righteousness,  and  righteousness  therefore  as  in- 
 cluding liberality. 
 
 There  is  also  another  element  in  the  vocabulary  of 
 a  peculiar  nature.  This  arises  from  the  novelty  of 
 the  teachings  combined  with  their  exalted  morality. 
 The  new  thoughts  demanded  new  modes  of  ex- 
 pression, and  hence  the  writers  did  not  hesitate  to 
 use  words  in  senses  rare  if  not  entirely  unknown  to 
 the  classical  writers.  This  fact  could  not  be  fully 
 illustrated  without  exhibiting  the  results  of  investi- 
 gation into  various  characteristic  words,  such  as 
 /j-var-fipiov,  diKaios,  dLKaioavfrj,  diKai6w,  ttIcttls,  i^cor), 
 ^dvaros,  dS^a,  oo^dj'w,  dpyri,  etc.  These  results 
 seem  to  us  to  fonn  no  inconsiderable  addition  to 
 the  proof  of  the  divinity  of  Christianity,  for  the 
 grand  moral  ideas  that  were  expressed  by  some  of 
 them  are  unique  in  the  age  in  which  they  were 
 uttered.  Thus  the  word  ^wrj  is  frequently  used  to 
 denote  an  entire  and  absolute  consecration  of  soul, 
 body,  and  spirit,  to  God,  for  it  is  this  entire  conse- 
 cration which  they  look  upon  as  the  life-principle 
 of  man.  Living  with  them,  if  it  be  not  living  to 
 God  in  Christ,  is  not  living  at  all,  but  death, — and 
 a  death  which  works  not  merely  in  the  soul,  but 
 necessarily  also  in  the  body.  Plato  and  the  Stoics 
 have  something  like  this  notion  of  i^urj,  but  with 
 them  it  is  a  speculation.  They  are  continually 
 reasoning  about  it.  The  writers  of  the  N.  T. 
 treat  it  as  an  unquestionable  realized  fact.  So 
 again  86^a  means  glory ;  but  the  writers  of  the 
 N.  T.  separate  from  it  every  notion  of  material 
 splendour  or  earthly  renown,  and  use  it  to  denote 
 that  spiritual  irradiation  of  the  whole  man  which 
 takes  place  when  God  reigns  in  him,  when  the 
 image  of  God  is  realized  in  him.  Thus  we  come 
 short  of  God's  glory  when  we  fail  to  present  the 
 purity  and  holiness  of  his  character  and  image  in 
 our  characters.  And  so  the  56^a  of  the  N.  T.  is 
 purely  spiritual  and  moral.  Then,  again,  it  is  re- 
 markable how  in  the  case  of  words  like  iidwp, 
 XovTpbv,  and  paTrri^w,  the  material  meaning  often 
 vanishes  entirely  out  of  sight,  and  the  writers  ex- 
 press by  them  the  spiritually  purifying  power  of 
 Christ,  which  really  and  entirely  cleanses  both  soul 
 and  body  (Alexander,  Anglo-Catholicism  not  Apos- 
 tolical, p.  293).  The  moral  fervour  of  the  writers  is 
 seen  also  in  their  omission  of  certain  words.  Thus 
 the  sensuous  kpav  is  never  used  to  express  the  idea 
 which  they  had  of  love.  The  words  ev8ai/j.wv  and 
 evTvxv^  are  also  unknown  to  the  N.  T.,  and  indeed* 
 the  writers  do  not  use  any  word  to  express  mere 
 happiness.  fxaKapios  is  used  several  times  to  de- 
 note something  more  than  mere  earthly  felicity. 
 They  avoid  all  words  connected  with  mythology, 
 such  as  the  compounds  of  8al./j.wv,  which,  with  its 
 diminutive,  is  used  in  a  peculiarly  Jewish  and 
 Christian  sense.  The  writers  of  the  N.  T.  are  also 
 remarkable  for  confining  a  word  to  one  meaning. 
 Thus,  /jLerdvoia  is  a  turning  of  the  whole  soul  from 
 evil  to  good,  and  no  other  compound  with  fierd  is 
 used  in  the  same  sense,  while  Justin  Martyr  uses 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 172 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 fi€TdpoLa  as  a  change  from  good  to  evil  as  well  as 
 from  evil  to  good,  and  he  employs  /xeTayiyvdjaKui  and 
 aeraTL^ea'^ai,  as  well  as  fieTavo^u  for  the  same  idea. 
 The  v/orks  on  the  subject  of  this  article  are 
 very  numerous.  They  are  enumerated  and  criti- 
 cised in  Winer's  Grajmnatik  des  NeutestamejilUchen 
 Sprachidicms,  Fiinfte  Auflage,  Leipzig  1844,  8vo  ; 
 and  Schirlitz's  Gru7idzuge  der  Netdeitamentlicheii 
 Grdcitdt,  Giessen  1861,  8vo.  Much  infoi-mation 
 will  be  found  in  works  that  discuss  later  Greek, 
 such  as  Lobeck's  Phrynichics,  and  Jacobs's^tZ/^/Zi-'j 
 Taiius,  and  especially  in  a  Glossary  of  Later  and 
 Byzantine  Greek,  by  E.  A.  Sophocles,  published  as 
 vol.  vii.  new  series  of  the  Memoirs  of  the  American 
 Acade?}iy,  Cambridge  and  Boston,  i860,  4to. 
 Much  interesting  and  instructive  matter  is  also  to 
 be  found  in  the  glossaries  and  articles  given  in  the 
 Pandora,  a  fortnightly  periodical  published  in 
 Athens.— J.  D. 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS.— I.  Septuagint.  The 
 oldest  version  of  the  O.  T.  in  any  language  is  the 
 Greek  translation  commonly  called  the  Septuagint, 
 either  because  it  was  approved  and  sanctioned  by 
 the  Jewish  Sanhedrim  consisting  of  seventy-two 
 persons,  or  rather  from  the  Jewish  account  which 
 states  that  so  many  individuals  were  employed  in 
 making  it.  The  history  of  this  version  is  obscure. 
 Few  notices  of  its  origin  are  extant ;  and  even  such 
 as  exist  are  contradictory. 
 
 The  space  allotted  to  the  present  article  will 
 only  allow  the  writer  to  toiich  tipon  the  chief  points 
 relating  to  the  Septuagint.  A  radical  and  minute 
 investigation  cannot  be  expected.  Results  alone 
 must  be  briefly  stated. 
 
 The  oldest  writer  who  makes  mention  of  the 
 Septuagint  is  Aristobulus,  an  author  referred  to 
 by  Eusebius  {Prapar.  Eva7tgel.  xiii.  12,  vol.  iii. 
 p.  310,  ed.  Gaisford),  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
 (Stromata,  1.,  v.,  vi.)  According  to  Eusebius, 
 he  was  a  Jew,  who  united  the  Aristotelian  with 
 the  Jewish  philosophy,  and  composed  a  commen- 
 tary on  the  law  of  Moses,  dedicated  to  Ptolemy 
 Philometor.  He  is  also  mentioned  in  2  Maccab.  i. 
 10.  Both  Clement  and  Eusebius  make  him  con- 
 temporary with  Philometor ;  for  the  passages  in 
 their  writings,  in  which  they  speak  of  him  under 
 Philadelphus,  must  either  have  been  corrupted  by 
 ignorant  transcribers,  or  have  been  so  written  by 
 mistake  (Valckenaer,  De  Aristobulo  yndiTo,  Philo- 
 sopho  Peripatetico,  Alexandrino,  etc.,  sees.  10,  11 ; 
 Daehne,  Geschichtliche  Darstelliing  der  yUdisch- 
 Alexandrinischen  Religions- Philosophie,  zweyte  Ab- 
 theilnng,  p.  73,  et  scq.)  His  words  relative  to  the 
 Septuagint  are  7]  5'  'oKr\  ipij.7]veia  tQiv  Std  tov  v6/j,ov 
 irdvTWv  iiri  tou  Trpoaayopevd^vros  $t\a5A^oi/  ^a- 
 ciX^ws — Ari/j.T]Tpiov  TOV  ^aXyjp^ojs  ■jrpayfj.arevcrafj-^i'ov 
 Tot  wepl  T0VT03V.  The  entire  passage,  of  which  the 
 preceding  words  fonn  a  brief  portion,  has  occasioned 
 much  conjecture  and  discussion.  It  is  given  by 
 Valckenaer,  Thiersch,  and  Frankel.  It  appears  to 
 us,  that  the  words  of  Aristobulus  do  not  speak  of 
 s.ny  prior  Greek  translatioti,  as  Hody  supposes,  or 
 indeed  of  any  translation  whatever.  They  rather 
 refer  to  some  brief  extracts  relative  to  Jewish  his- 
 tory, which  had  been  made  from  the  Pentateuch 
 into  a  language  commonly  understood  by  the  Jews 
 in  Egypt,  before  the  time  of  Demetrius.  7he  entif-e 
 law,  7]  5'  8\ri  ipfnjvela  tQv  Bia  rod  vdfMov  trd.vTwv, 
 was  first  rendered  into  Greek  under  Ptolemy  I. 
 Hody,  and  after  him  Eichhorn,  conjectured   that 
 
 the  fragments  of  Aristobulus  preserved  by  Euse- 
 bius and  Clement  were  written  in  the  2d  cen- 
 tury by  another  Aristobulus,  a  Christian  ;  and  that 
 Aristobulus,  the  professed  Peripatetic,  was  a 
 heathen.  But  the  quotation  of  Cyril  of  Alexandria 
 {contra  Jiilianum,  lib.  vi.),  to  which  they  appeal, 
 was  erroneously  made  by  that  father,  as  may  be 
 seen  by  comparing  it  with  Clement.  Richard 
 Simon  also  denied  the  authenticity  of  Aristobulus's 
 remains  [Histoire  Critique  du  V.  Z!,  p.  189).  But 
 Valckenaer  has  sufficiently  established  their  authen- 
 ticity. The  testimony  of  Aristobulus  is  corrobo- 
 rated by  a  Latin  scholion  recently  found  in  a  MS. 
 of  Plautus  at  Rome,  which  has  been  described  and 
 illustrated  by  Ritschl  in  a  little  book  entitled  '  Die 
 Alexa7idrinischen  Bibliotheke7t  luid  die  SaTru/ihmg 
 der  Ho77ierischen  Gedichte  7iach  Aiileitiaig  ei7ies 
 Plauti7iische7i  Scholiu77i's,''  Berlin,  183S.  From  the 
 passage  of  Aristobulus  already  quoted,  it  appears 
 that  in  the  time  of  Aristobulus,  i.  e. ,  the  beginning 
 of  the  2d  century  B.  C. ,  this  version  was  considered  to 
 have  been  made  when  Demetrius  Phalereus  lived, 
 or  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Lagi.  Hody  has  en- 
 deavoured to  shew  that  this  account  contradicts  the 
 voice  of  certain  history,  because  it  places  Demet- 
 rius in  the  reign  of  Philadelphus.  The  son  is 
 manifestly  confounded  with  the  father ;  Ptolemy 
 Philadelphus  with  Ptolemy  Lagi,  both  by  Aristo- 
 bulus and  in  the  schohon.  The  object  of  Demet- 
 rius in  advising  Lagi  to  have  in  his  library  a  copy 
 of  the  Jewish  laws  in  Greek,  is  not  stated  by  Aris- 
 tobulus ;  but  Aristeas  relates  that  the  librarian  re- 
 presented it  to  the  king  as  a  desirable  thing  that 
 such  a  book  should  be  deposited  in  the  Alexandrian 
 library.  Some  think  that  a  literary,  rather  than  a 
 religious  motive,  led  to  the  version.  So  Havernick. 
 This,  however,  is  improbable.  Hody,  Sturz, 
 Frankel,  and  others  conjecture  that  the  object  was 
 7-eligious  or  ecclesiastical.  Eichhorn  refers  it  to 
 private  if/ipulse ;  while  Hug  takes  the  object  to 
 have  heen political.  It  is  not  probable,  however, 
 that  the  version  was  intended  for  the  king's  use,  or 
 that  he  wished  to  obtain  from  it  information  re- 
 specting the  best  mode  of  governing  a  nation  and 
 enacting  laws  for  its  economic  well-being.  The 
 character  and  language  of  the  version  unite  to  shew- 
 that  an  Egyptian  king,  probably  ignorant  of  Greek, 
 could  not  have  understood  the  work.  Perhaps  an 
 ecclesiastical  motive  was  in  the  minds  of  the  Jews 
 who  were  originally  interested  in  it ;  while  De- 
 metrius Phalereus  and  the  king  were  actuated  by  a 
 political  design. 
 
 It  is  difficult  to  ascertain  whether  Aristobulus's 
 words  imply  that  all  the  books  of  the  O.  T.  were 
 translated  into  Greek  under  Ptolemy  Lagi,  or  simply 
 the  Pentateuch.  Hody  contends  that  v6iulos,  the 
 term  used  by  Aristobulus,  meant  at  that  time  the 
 Mosaic  books  alone ;  although  it  was  afterwards 
 taken  in  a  wider  sense  to  embrace  all  the  O.  T. 
 Valckenaer  thinks  that  all  the  books  were  com- 
 prehended under  it.  It  is  certainly  more  natural 
 to  restrict  it  to  the  Pentateuch.  The  Pentateuch, 
 therefore,  was  completed  under  Lagi. 
 
 The  next  historical  testimony  regarding  the  Sep- 
 tuagint, is  the  prologue  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach, 
 a  document  containing  the  judgment  of  a  Pales- 
 tinian Jew  concerning  the  version  before  us.  His 
 words  are  these:  ou  fxbvov  6^  ravra  dXXot  Kal 
 avrbs  6  vbfios  Kal  at  -n pocp7)Te7aL  Kal  to.  Xoltto,  tC>v 
 ^i^\lo3v  ov  fiiKpav  ^x^'  '^V^  dia(popav  iv  iavrols 
 XeySfiefa — '  and  not  only  these  things,  but  the  law 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 173 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 itself,  and  the  prophets,  and  the  rest  of  the  books, 
 have  no  small  difference  when  they  are  spoken  in 
 their  own  language.'  Supposing  that  these  words 
 refer  to  the  Septuagint,  it  is  not  easy  to  settle  the 
 time  when  the  writer  lived.  The  most  probable 
 opinion  seems  to  be  that  which  places  him  about 
 130  B.C.,  in  the  reign  of  Euergetes  II. 
 
 The  account  given  by  Aristeas  comes  next  before 
 us.  This  writer  pretends  to  be  a  Gentile,  and  a 
 favourite  at  the  court  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus 
 King  of  Egypt.  In  a  letter  addressed  to  his 
 brother  Philocrates,  he  relates  that  Philadelphus, 
 when  forming  a  librai-y  at  great  expense,  was 
 advised  by  Demetrius  Phalereus  to  apply  to  the 
 Jewish  high-priest  Eleazar  for  a  copy  of  the  book 
 containing  the  Jewish  laws.  Having  previously 
 purchased  the  freedom  of  more  than  a  hundred 
 thousand  captive  Jews  in  Egypt,  the  king  sent 
 Aristeas  and  Andreas  to  Jerusalem,  with  a  letter 
 requesting  of  Eleazar  seventy-two  persons  as  inter- 
 preters, six  out  of  each  tribe.  They  were  de- 
 spatched accordingly,  with  a  magnificent  copy  of 
 the  law  ;  and  were  received  and  entertained  by  the 
 king  for  several  days,  with  great  respect  and 
 liberality.  Demetrius  led  them  to  an  island,  pro- 
 bably Pharos,  where  they  lodged  together.  The 
 translation  was  finished  in  seventy-two  days,  having 
 been  written  down  by  Demetrius,  piece  by  piece, 
 as  agreed  upon  after  mutual  consultation.  It  was 
 then  publicly  read  by  Demetrius  to  a  number  of 
 Jews  whom  he  had  summoned  together.  They 
 approved  of  it ;  and  imprecations  were  uttered 
 against  any  one  who  should  pi^esume  to  alter  it. 
 The  Jews  requested  permission  to  take  copies  of  it 
 for  their  use  ;  and  it  was  carefully  preserved  by 
 command  of  the  king.  The  interpreters  were  sent 
 home,  loaded  with  presents.  Josephus  agrees  in 
 the  main  with  Aristeas  ;  but  Philo's  account  differs 
 in  a  number  of  circumstances.  Justin  Martyr  en- 
 deavoured to  harmonise  the  various  traditions  cur- 
 rent in  his  day,  but  without  success.  Exaggera- 
 tions and  glaring  falsehoods  had  been  added  to  the 
 story  of  Aristeas,  in  the  days  of  Justin  and  Epi- 
 phanius  ;  which  these  credulous  men  received  with- 
 out hesitation,  and  to  which  it  is  probable  they 
 themselves  contributed.  The  interpreters  are  said 
 to  have  been  shut  up  in  separate  cells,  where  they 
 made  separate  versions,  which  were  found  on  com- 
 parison to  agree  in  every  minute  particular.  Hence 
 they  were  looked  upon  as  inspired,  and  their  ver- 
 sion as  infallibly  correct.  Most  of  the  Fathers 
 received  this  tradition  ;  and  the  early  Jewish 
 Rabbins  equally  believed  it.  Even  Philo  regarded 
 the  translators  as  inspired  ;  but  it  is  evident  that  he 
 was  ignorant  of  Hebrew.  Jerome  seems  to  have 
 been  the  first  who  distinctly  rejected  the  story  of 
 their  inspiration  ;  although  he  did  not  doubt  the 
 veracity  of  Aristeas,  whose  simpler  narrative  makes 
 no  mention  of  inspiration.  Until  the  latter  half  of 
 the  17th  century,  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint  as 
 given  by  Aristeas,  was  firmly  believed  ;  while  the 
 numerous  additions  that  had  been  made  to  the  ori- 
 ginal stoiy,  in  the  progress  of  centuries,  were  un- 
 hesitatingly received  as  equally  genuine.  The 
 story  was  ■  first  reckoned  improbable  by  L.  Vives 
 (in  a  note  to  Augustine's  De  Civitate  Del)  ;  then 
 Scaliger  asserted  that  Aristeas's  letter  was  written 
 by  a  Jew ;  and  Richard  Simon  was  too  acute  a 
 critic  not  to  perceive  the  truth  of  Scaliger's  asser- 
 tion. Hody  was  the  first  who  demonstrated,  with 
 great  learning,   skill,  and  discriminationj  that  the 
 
 narrative  could  not  be  authentic.     It  is  now  uni. 
 versally  pronounced  fabulous. 
 
 The  work  of  Aristeas,  which  was  first  published 
 in  the  original  Greek  by  Simon  Schard,  at  Basel, 
 1561,  8vo,  and  several  times  reprinted,  was  also 
 given  by  Hody,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  in  his  book 
 entitled  De  Biblionim  tcxtilms  orig/nalilnis,  vcr- 
 sio7tibits  GrtEcis,  et  Latina  Vidgata,  Oxonii,  1705, 
 fol.  The  most  accurate  edition,  however,  is  that 
 by  Galland,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Vet.  Patriitn,  vol.  ii. 
 It  was  translated  into  English  by  Whiston,  and 
 published  at  London  in  his  Collection  of  Authentic 
 Records,  part  2  (London,  1728). 
 
 It  is  a  difficult  point  to  determine  the  extent  to 
 which  truth  is  mixed  up  with  fable  in  this  ancient 
 story.  However  absurd  the  traditions  may  appear 
 in  the  view  of  modern  criticism,  some  truth  must  lie 
 at  the  basis  of  them.  In  separating  the  true  from 
 the  fabulous,  it  appears  to  us  that  Hody  has  not 
 been  successful.  From  the  extreme  credulity  mani- 
 fested in  the  reception  of  the  fable,  he  has  gone  to 
 the  extreme  of  scepticism.  Yet  he  has  been  gens- 
 rally  followed.  He  thinks  that  the  Pentateuch  was 
 translated  a  considerable  time  before  the  prophets  ; 
 and  that  the  Jews  first  resorted  to  the  reading  of 
 the  prophets  in  their  synagogues  when  Antiochus 
 Epiphanes  forbade  the  use  of  the  law  ;  conse- 
 quently the  prophetic  portion  was  not  translated 
 till  after  the  commencement  of  Philometor's  reign. 
 It  is  wholly  improbable,  however,  that  Antiochus 
 interdicted  the  Jews  merely  from  reading  the  Pen- 
 tateuch (comp.  I  Maccab.  i.  41,  etc.  ;  and  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xii.  5  ;  Frankel,  pp.  48,  49).  The  interval 
 between  the  translating  of  the  law  and  the  pro- 
 phets, of  which  many  speak,  was  probably  short. 
 In  order  to  reconcile  conflicting  statements,  Hody 
 assigned  the  version  of  the  Pentateuch  to  the  two 
 years  duiing  which  Philadelphus  reigned  conjointly 
 with  his  father,  about  286-285  B.C.  We  prefer 
 assuming  that  it  was  begun  under  Ptolemy  Lagi, 
 the  son  and  father  having  been  confounded  by 
 Aristobulus  and  the  scholion  on  Plutarch ;  by 
 Aristeas  too,  probably  on  purpose.  Hody's  proof 
 that  the  book  of  Joshua  was  not  translated  till 
 upwards  of  twenty  years  after  the  death  of  Pto- 
 lemy Lagi,  founded  upon  the  word  yaiab^,  is  per- 
 fectly nugatory ;  although  the  time  assigned  cannot 
 be  far  from  the  truth.  The  epilogue  to  the  book 
 of  Esther  does  not  state  that  this  part  of  the  O.  T. 
 was  translated  under  Ptolemy  Philometor,  or  that 
 it  was  dedicated  to  him.  On  the  contraiy,  it  refers 
 to  the  apocryphal  additions  of  the  canonical  book 
 (Valckenaer,  pp.  33,  63).  It  is  a  fruitless  task  to 
 attempt  to  ascertain  the  precise  times  at  which 
 separate  portions  of  the  version  were  made.  All 
 that  can  be  known  with  any  degree  of  probability 
 is,  that  it  was  begun  under  Lagi.  Hody  supposes 
 that  the  book  of  Judges  was  not  translated  till  after 
 Christ,  but  his  proof  is  invalid.  The  same  may  be 
 said  of  the  assumption  made  by  Michaelis  and  Ber- 
 tholdt,  that  Daniel  was  not  rendered  into  Greek  till 
 after  Christ. 
 
 It  is  obvious,  from  internal  evidence,  that  there 
 were  several  translators  ;  but  certainly  not  seventy- 
 two.  Hody  has  endeavoured  to  parcel  out  their 
 version  into  small  portions,  assigning  each  part  to 
 a  separate  person,  and  affinning  that  they  were 
 put  together  in  one  cento  without  revision  ;  but  his 
 notions  of  rigid  uniformity  in  the  translators  are 
 such  as  exclude  perspicuity,  freedom,  variety,  and 
 elegance.      Internal  evidence  is  in  favour  of  the 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 174 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 Pentateuch  having  been  made  by  more  than  one. 
 Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Deuteronomy  are  better 
 rendered  than  the  other  two  books  ;  Leviticus 
 best  of  all.  But  Thiersch  and  Herschfeld  endea- 
 vour to  shew  that  one  translator  only  appears  in  the 
 Pentateuch.  The  whole  version  was  the  work  of 
 five  or  six  translators  at  least,  and  must  therefore 
 be  of  unequal  merit. 
 
 In  opposition  to  the  Pseudo-Aristeas,  we  cannot 
 but  maintain  that  the  translators  were  Alexan- 
 drian, not  Palestinian  Jews.  The  internal  charac- 
 ter of  the  entire  version,  particularly  of  the  Penta- 
 teuch, sufficiently  attests  the  fact.  We  find, 
 accordingly,  that  proper  names,  and  terms  pecu- 
 liar to  Egypt,  are  rendered  in  such  a  manner  as 
 must  have  been  unintelligible  to  a  Greek-speaking 
 population  other  than  the  Egyptian  Jews.  That 
 the  translators  were  Egyptians  has  been  proved 
 to  the  satisfaction  of  all  by  Hody  ;  although  some 
 of  his  examples,  such  as  the  words  '^heai^  and 
 l-mrdSpo/jios,  are  not  appropriate  or  conclusive. 
 Frankel  supposes  that  the  version  was  made  not 
 only  at  different  times,  but  al  different  places.  This 
 is  quite  arbitraiy.  There  is  no  reason  for  believing, 
 with  him,  that  different  books  originated  after  this 
 fashion,  the  impulse  having  gone  forth  from  Alex- 
 andria, and  spreading  to  localities  where  the  Jews 
 had  settled,  especially  Gyrene,  Leontopolis,  and 
 even  Asia  Minor. 
 
 Next  to  the  Pentateuch,  in  point  of  goodness, 
 is  the  version  of  Proverbs.  The  translator  of 
 Job,  though  familiar  with  the  Greek  poets,  and 
 master  of  an  elegant  diction,  was  veiy  imperfectly 
 acquainted  with  Hebrew.  The  Psalms  and  Pro- 
 phets have  been  indifferently  executed.  Jeremiah 
 is  best  translated  among  the  prophetic  books. 
 Amos  and  Ezekiel  stand  in  the  next  rank.  Isaiah 
 met  with  a  very  incompetent  translator.  The  ver- 
 sion of  Daniel  is  the  worst.  That  of  Theodotion 
 was  very  early  substituted  for  it.  Jerome  did  not 
 know  the  reason  of  the  substitution.  Most  of  the 
 historical  books  are  ill  interpreted. 
 
 With  regard  to  the  external  form  of  the  MSS. 
 from  which  this  version  was  made,  we  may  re- 
 mark that  the  letters  were  substantially  the  same 
 as  the  old  Samaritan  characters — that  there  were 
 no  vowel-points — that  there  was  no  separation  into 
 words  ;  no  final  letters  ;  that  the  letter  C'  wanted 
 the  diacritic  point ;  and  that  words  were  frequently 
 abbreviated.  The  division  into  verses  and  chapters 
 is  much  later  than  the  age  of  the  translators.  Our 
 present  editions  have  been  printed  in  conformity 
 with  the  division  into  chapters  made  in  the  I2th 
 century  ;  though  they  are  not  uniform  in  this  par- 
 ticular. Still,  however,  many  MSS.  have  separa- 
 tions in  the  text.  The  Alexandrine  codex  is  said 
 by  Grabe  to  have  one  hundred  and  forty  divisions, 
 or  as  they  may  be  called,  chapters,  in  the  book  of 
 Numbers  alone  {Prolegomena,  c.  i.  sec.  7). 
 
 The  titles  given  to  the  books,  such  as  Viviffis, 
 etc.,  could  hardly  have  been  affixed  by  the  trans- 
 lators, since  they  do  not  often  harmonise  with  the 
 version  of  the  book  itself  to  which  they  belong. 
 
 It  has  been  inquired,  whether  the  translator  of 
 the  Pentateuch  followed  a  Hebrew  or  Samaritan 
 codex.  The  Septuagint  and  Samaritan  harmonise 
 in  more  than  a  thousand  places,  where  they  differ 
 from  the  Hebrew.  Hence  it  has  been  supposed 
 that  the  Samaritan  edition  was  the  basis  of  the 
 version.  Various  considerations  have  been  ad- 
 duced in  favour  of  this  opinion  ;  and  the  names 
 
 of  De  Dieu,  Selden,  Whiston,  Hottinger,  Hassen- 
 camp,  and  Eichhorn,  are  enlisted  on  its  behalf 
 But  the  irreconcilable  enmity  subsisting  between 
 the  Jews  and  the  Samaritans,  both  in  Egypt  and 
 Palestine,  effectually  militates  against  it.  Besides, 
 in  the  prophets  and  hagiographa  the  number  of 
 variations  from  the  Masoretic  text  is  even  greater 
 and  more  remarkable  than  those  in  the  Penta- 
 teuch ;  whereas  the  Samaritan  extends  no  farther 
 than  the  Mosaic  books.  No  solution,  therefore, 
 can  be  satisfactory,  which  will  not  serve  to  explain 
 at  once  the  cause  or  causes  both  of  the  differences 
 between  the  Seventy  and  Hebrew  in  the  Penta- 
 teuch, and  those  found  in  the  remaining  books. 
 The  problem  can  be  fully  solved  only  by  such  an 
 hypothesis  as  will  throw  light  on  the  remarkable 
 form  of  the  Septuagint  in  Jeremiah  and  Esther, 
 where  it  deviates  most  from  the  Masoretic  MSS., 
 presenting  such  transpositions  and  interpolations 
 as  excite  the  surprise  of  the  most  superficial 
 reader.  How,  then,  is  the  agreement  between 
 the  Samaritan  and  Septuagint  to  be  explained  ? 
 
 Some  suppose  that  the  one  was  interpolated  from 
 the  other — a  conjecture  not  at  all  probable.  Jahn 
 and  Bauer  imagine  that  the  Hebrew  MS.  used  by 
 the  Egyptian  Jews  agreed  much  more  closely  with 
 the  Samaritan  in  the  text  and  forms  of  its  letters, 
 than  the  present  Masoretic  copies.  This  hypo- 
 thesis, however,  even  if  it  were  otherwise  correct, 
 would  not  account  for  the  great  harmony  existing 
 between  the  Samaritan  and  Septuagint. 
 
 Another  hypothesis  has  been  put  forth  by  Ge- 
 senius  {Cofnmentatio  de  Pent.  Samar.  orig.  indole, 
 et  atcctor.),  viz.,  that  both  the  Samaritan  and  Sep- 
 tuagint flowed  from  a  common  recension  (^kSoo-is) 
 of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  one  older  than  either, 
 and  different  in  many  places  from  the  recension  of 
 the  Masoretes  now  in  common  use.  '  This  sup- 
 position,' says  Prof.  Stuart,  by  whom  it  is  adopted, 
 '  will  account  for  the  differences  and  for  the  agree- 
 ments of  the  Septuagint  and  Samaritan.' 
 
 This  hypothesis,  more  ingenious  and  refined  than 
 the  others,  is  less  liable  to  objection.  Much  may 
 be  said  in  its  favour.  With  some  minor  improve- 
 ments and  modifications  we  should  not  oppose 
 it.  Taking  recensio?i  as  not  necessarily  equivalent 
 to  revision,  but  rather  in  connection  with  the 
 Samaritan  and  Septuagint  a  zvant  of  revision,  as 
 far  as  the  text  at  their  basis  is  concerned,  the  hypo- 
 thesis bears  a  very  plausible  character.  In  the  ab- 
 sence of  a  better  it  might  be  adopted.  But  it  is 
 not  probable  that  the  Samaritan  copy  was  subse- 
 quently corrected  and  interpolated,  as  Gesenius 
 supposes  ;  at  least  it  could  not  have  been  much 
 transcribed,  and  therefore  its  liability  to  interpola- 
 tion was  less.  Some  considerations  might  be  urged 
 as  adverse  to  the  hypothesis  ;  but  they  are  of  a 
 subtle  character,  not  patent  to  ordinaiy  apprehen- 
 sion. We  waive  all  mention  of  them  in  the  present 
 place,  especially  as  they  are  of  comparatively  little 
 weight  or  importance.  We  do  not  feel  at  liberty 
 to  adopt  the  hypothesis,  however  plausible  it  ap- 
 pears, believing  it  insufficient  to  account  for  all  the 
 phenomena.  We  admire  the  ingenuity  of  the  con- 
 triver, but  cannot  fully  coincide  with  him. 
 
 Dr.  Lee  {Prolegomena  to  Bagstej-s'  Polyglolt)  ac- 
 counts for  the  agreement  between  the  Septuagint 
 and  Samaritan  in  another  way.  He  conjectures 
 that  the  early  Christians  interspersed  their  copies 
 with  Samaritan  glosses,  which  ignorant  transcri- 
 bers afterwards  inserted  in  the  text.     But  he  has 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 175 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 not  shewn  that  Christians  in  general  were  ac- 
 quaimed  with  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  and  its 
 additions  to  the  Hebrew  copy  ;  neither  has  he 
 taken  into  account  the  reverence  entertained  by 
 the  early  Christians  for  the  sacred  books.  We 
 cannot,  therefore,  attribute  the  least  probability  to 
 this  hypothesis. 
 
 Another  hypothesis  has  been  mentioned  by 
 Frankel,  viz.,  that  the  Septuagint  flowed  from  a 
 Chaldee  version  which  was  used  before  and  after 
 the  time  of  Ezra  —  a  version  inexact  and  para- 
 phrastic, which  had  undergone  many  alterations 
 and  corruptions.  This  was  first  proposed  by  R. 
 Asaria  di  Rossi,  in  the  midst  of  other  conjectures. 
 
 Frankel  admits  that  the  assumption  of  such  a  ver- 
 sion is  superfluous,  except  in  relation  to  the  Samari- 
 tan Pentateuch,  where  much  is  gained  by  it.  This 
 Chaldee  version  circulated  in  various  transcripts  here 
 and  there  ;  and  as  the  same  care  was  not  applied  in 
 preserving  its  integrity  as  that  of  the  original  He- 
 brew, the  copies  of  it  presented  considerable  dif- 
 erences  among  themselves.  Both  the  Greek  version 
 and  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  were  taken  from  it. 
 Frankel  concedes  that  this  hypothesis  is  not  satis- 
 factory with  regard  to  the  Septuagint,  because  the 
 mistakes  found  in  that  version  must  have  fre- 
 quently originated  in  misunderstanding  the  Hcbreio 
 text.  There  is  no  evidence,  however,  that  any 
 Targum  or  Chaldee  version  had  been  made  before 
 Ezra's  time,  or  soon  after.  Explanations  of  the 
 lessons  ptiblidy  read  by  the  Jews  were  given  in 
 Chaldee,  not  regularly  perhaps,  or  uniformly  ;  but 
 it  can  scarcely  be  assumed  that  a  Chaldee  version 
 had  been  made  out  in  writing,  and  circulated  in 
 different  copies.  Glosses,  or  short  expositions  of 
 words  and  sentences,  were  furnished  by  the  public 
 readers  for  the  benefit  of  the  people  ;  and  it  is  by 
 no  means  improbable  that  several  of  these  tradi- 
 tional comments  were  incorporated  with  the  ver- 
 sion by  the  Jewish  translators,  to  whom  they  were 
 familiar. 
 
 In  the  present  state  of  the  question,  nothing 
 better  can  be  proposed  than  that  the  countries 
 where  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  originated  and 
 the  Jewish  MSS.  at  the  basis  of  the  Seventy  had 
 been  in  circulation,  were  much  less  favourable  to 
 the  preservation  of  a  pure  text  than  Palestine,  or 
 rather  its  metropolis,  Jerusalem.  The  people,  too, 
 who  possessed  the  Pentateuch  and  the  Jewish 
 MSS.  in  question,  were  less  careful  of  them. 
 They  lived  amid  less  conservative  influences  than 
 the  Palestinian  brethren.  The  Samaritan  Penta- 
 teuch suffered  in  its  text  from  the  hands  it  passed 
 through — not  from  any  bad  motive,  but  a  mis- 
 taken desire  of  making  it  more  intelligible,  regular, 
 and  full.  The  Alexandrian  Jews,  living  under  the 
 influence  of  the  philosophy  that  prevailed  in  Egypt, 
 had  little  superstitious  veneration  for  the  mere  text 
 of  the  sacred  volume.  The  translators,  too,  were 
 more  intent  on  giving  the  sense  than  adhering  to 
 the  literal  text.  They  were  inexperienced  ;  and 
 often  failed  in  the  difficult  task  they  had  under- 
 taken. But  why  the  agreement  of  the  one  docu- 
 ment with  the  other  should  be  so  extensive  ;  why 
 both  texts  should  harmonise  so  often  where  they 
 differ  from  the  Masoretic,  we  are  unable  to  ex- 
 plain. 
 
 Tychsen  {Tentamen  de  varus  codd.  Heh.  V.  T. 
 MSS.  ge7ier.)  thought  that  the  Septuagint  was 
 made  from  the  Hebrew  transcribed  into  Hebrew- 
 Greek  characters.     It  is  almost  unnecessary  to  re- 
 
 fer to  such  a  notion.  It  never  obtained  general 
 currency  ;  having  been  examined  and  refuted  by 
 Dathe,  Michaelis,  and  Hassencamp. 
 
 The  Septuagint  does  not  appear  to  have  obtained 
 general  anthority  as  long  as  Hebrew  was  under- 
 stood at  Alexandria.  It  is  remarkable  that  Aris- 
 tobulus  quotes  the  original,  even  where  it  departs 
 from  the  text  of  the  Seventy.  The  version  was  in- 
 deed spread  abroad  in  Egypt,  northern  Africa, 
 and  Asia  Minor ;  and  it  acquired  a  high  reputation 
 among  the  Hellenistic  Jews.  It  is  spoken  of  in 
 the  Babylonian  and  Jerusalem  Talmuds.  It  was 
 read  in  so7ne  synagogues  at  least  out  of  Egypt,  as 
 may  be  inferred  from  statements  in  Justin  Martyr 
 and  Tertullian.  Philo  and  Josephus  adopted  it ; 
 and  it  was  universally  received  by  the  early  Chris- 
 tians. 
 
 When  controversies  arose  between  Christians 
 and  Jews  ;  and  the  former  appealed  with  irresist- 
 ible force  of  argument  to  this  version,  the  latter 
 denied  that  it  agreed  with  the  Hebrew  original. 
 Thus  by  degrees  it  became  odious  to  the  Jews — 
 as  much  execrated  as  it  had  before  been  com- 
 mended. Hence  arose  the  Talmudic  statement  of 
 a  fast  on  the  eighth  day  of  the  month  Thebet.,  the 
 day  on  which  the  law  was  turned  into  Greek,  to 
 perpetuate  the  remembrance  of  an  event  so  in- 
 auspicious. The  Jews  had  then  recourse  to  the 
 translation  of  Aquila,  who  is  i??iagined  to  have 
 undertaken  a  new  work  from  the  Hebrew  with 
 the  express  object  of  supplanting  the  Septuagint 
 and  favouring  the  sentiments  of  his  brethren. 
 
 After  the  general  reception  of  the  Septuagint 
 version,  numerous  mistakes  were  made  in  the 
 transcription  and  multiplication  of  copies.  In  the 
 time  of  the  early  fathers  its  text  had  already  been 
 altered  ;  and  the  Jews,  in  argument  with  the 
 Christians,  commonly  said,  that  such  and  such 
 things  were  not  in  the  Hebrew  original.  This 
 affirmation  was  generally  sufficient  to  silence  the 
 professors  of  the  Christian  religion,  who  were  un- 
 able to  follow  their  critical  antagonists  into  the 
 Hebrew  text. 
 
 In  order  to  rectify  the  text  of  the  Septuagint, 
 and  to  place  Christians  on  even  ground  with  their 
 Jewish  opponents,  Origen  undertook  to  revise  it. 
 After  travelling  about  for  twenty-eight  years  in 
 quest  of  materials,  and  getting  six  Greek  transla- 
 tions—three belonging  to  Aquila,  Symmachus, 
 and  Theodotion  respectively,  and  three  anony- 
 mous —  he  began  his  great  work,  probably  at 
 Caesarea.  He  had  first  published  his  Tetrapla, 
 containing  in  four  columns  the  versions  of  Aquila, 
 Symmachus,  Theodotion,  and  the  Seventy.  Thus 
 the  Tetrapla  was  only  preparatory  to  his  projected 
 emendation  of  the  Seventy.  In  an  enlarged  edi- 
 tion, undertaken  after  he  had  found  the  three 
 anonymous  versions,  he  added  the  Hebrew  text  in 
 Hebrew  and  in  Greek  letters  ;  and  as  the  work 
 then  consisted  of  six  columns,  it  was  termed  Hexa- 
 pla.  Such  is  the  opinion  of  Hody,  Montfaucon, 
 and  Bauer.  But  Eichhom,  Eichstaedt,  and  Fran- 
 kel, think  that  the  Tetrapla  was  not  a  distinct 
 work  preparatory  to  the  Hexapla,  but  only  an 
 abridgment  of  the  latter.  In  some  parts  he  used 
 two  other  Greek  versions  made  by  unknown 
 authors,  and  occasionally  a  third  anonymous  trans- 
 lation. Hence  the  name  Octapla.  Thus  the  dif- 
 ferent appellations  by  which  the  work  is  distin- 
 guished refer  merely  to  the  number  of  columns. 
 The  following  is  their  order  : — i.    The  Hebrew 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 176 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 text  in  its  proper  characters ;  2.  The  same  in 
 Greek  letters  ;  3.  Aquila  ;  4.  Synimachus  ;  5. 
 Septuagint  ;  6.  Theodotion ;  7,  8,  and  9.  The 
 three  anonymous  Greek  versions  were  called  the 
 fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh,  in  relation  to  the  other 
 four  (see  a  specimen  in  Davidson's  Bib.  Criticism, 
 vol.  I,  p.  204). 
 
 Origen's  object  in  this  laborious  work  was  not 
 so  much  to  correct  the  Septuagint,  as  to  shew 
 where  and  how  it  differed  from  the  original  He- 
 brew. When  he  discovered  a  word  in  Hebrew, 
 or  in  the  Greek  versions,  which  was  not  in  the 
 Seventy,  he  inserted  it  out  of  Theodotion.  If 
 Theodotion  wanted  it  also,  he  made  up  the  defi- 
 ciency from  Aquila,  and  occasionally  from  Sym- 
 machus.  In  every  case,  he  put  the  name  of  the 
 translation  from  which  a  supplement  was  made, 
 with  an  asterisk  at  the  commencement,  and  two 
 dots  at  the  end,  to  show  the  extent  of  the  supplied 
 matter.  And  where  the  Septuagint,  as  compared 
 with  other  Greek  versions  and  the  original,  seemed 
 to  be  redundant,  he  did  not  expunge  the  super- 
 fluity, but  appended  marks  to  point  out  this  parti- 
 cular. His  recension  is  called  the  Hexapla7'ian 
 text,  to  distinguish  it  from  the  text  as  it  existed  be- 
 fore, which  has  been  styled  the  comnion  (kolvt])  or 
 ante-hexaplarian. 
 
 This  great  work,  consisting  of  nearly  fifty  volumes, 
 is  thought  to  have  perished  at  Caesarea,  when  the 
 town  was  sacked  by  the  Saracens,  A.D.  653.  It 
 was  never  transcribed. 
 
 In  the  beginning  of  the  4th  centuiy,  Pamphi- 
 lus  and  Eusebius  copied  the  column  containing  the 
 text  of  the  Seventy,  with  the  passages  and  scholia 
 out  of  the  other  translators,  and  the  critical  marks 
 used  by  Origen.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  this  copy 
 was  soon  extensively  conoipted.  The  Hexaplarian 
 text,  coming  through  such  a  transcript,  with  frag- 
 ments of  the  other  versions,  was  published  by 
 Montfau9on,  at  Paris,  1714,  2  vols.  fol.  ;  and  after- 
 wards reprinted  by  Bahrdt,  Leipzig,  1769-70,  2 
 vols.  8vo.  Subsequent  contributions  to  the  same 
 text  were  made  by  Doederlein,  Spohn,  Scharfen- 
 berg,  Matthaei,  Bruns  and  Adler,  Schleusner, 
 Vincentius  de  Regibus.  The  last-named  scholar 
 published  Ezekiel  in  this  text,  from  a  Chigian  MS. 
 Pomse,  1840,  Svo. 
 
 At  the  beginning  of  the  same  century,  Lucian, 
 a  presbyter  of  Antioch,  undertook  to  amend  the 
 text  of  the  Seventy  after  the  Hebrew  original.  This 
 recension  was  called  the  editio  zndgata  [koivi]  and 
 also  K.ovKLavb'i),  and  became  current  in  various 
 churches.  Another  revision  was  undertaken  about 
 the  same  time  by  Hesychius,  an  Egyptian  bishop, 
 which,  according  to  Jerome,  was  generally  used  in 
 the  churches  of  Egypt.  Hesychius  and  Lucian 
 probably  used  the  versions  of  Aquila,  Symmachus, 
 and  Theodotion,  not  the  Hebrew  Text ;  although 
 Hody  thinks  otherwise.  PVom  these  three  recen- 
 sions all  our  printed  editions  have  been  derived. 
 In  the  two  great  MSS.  of  the  Seventy,  the  Vatican 
 and  Alexandrine,  the  basis  of  the  former  is  the 
 common  or  earlier  text,  according  to  John  Morin ; 
 an  opinion  adopted  by  Holmes  only  so  far  as  the 
 Pentateuch  is  concerned.  The  Alexandrine  exhi- 
 bits more  of  the  readings  and  interpolations  of  the 
 Hexaplarian  text.  Both  have  not  been  always  kept 
 distinct.  The  Vatican  text  is  far  purer  than  the 
 Alexandrine.  It  is  free  from  the  asterisks,  obeli, 
 and  other  marks  used  by  Origen,  as  well  as 
 from  the  transpositions  he   made.     Besides,   the 
 
 Alexandrine  has  been  very  frequently  confonncd 
 to  the  Masoretic  text,  which  must  be  considered  as 
 
 a  corruption. 
 
 All  printed  editions  of  the  Septuagint  may  be  re- 
 duced to  four  ;  viz.,  the  Aldine,  the  Compluten- 
 sian,  the  Roman,  and  the  Grabian. 
 
 The  Aldine  or  Venetian  appeared  at  Venice  in 
 1 5 18,  fol.  The  editor  has  not  specified  the  MSS. 
 from  which  the  text  was  taken.  He  merely  affirms 
 that  he  collated  many  very  ancient  copies,  and  was 
 favoured  with  the  advice  of  some  learned  men. 
 According  to  Walton,  the  text  of  this  edition  is 
 purer  than  the  Complutensian,  and  resembles  most 
 the  Roman  text.  It  has  been  interpolated,  how- 
 ever, in  various  instances,  out  of  Theodotion, 
 Aquila,  and  the  N.  T. 
 
 The  Complutensian  was  printed  15 14-15 17,  but 
 not  published  till  1522,  as  a  column  of  the  Com- 
 plutensian Polyglott.  It  has  been  suspected  that 
 the  text  was  altered  by  the  editors  to  bring  it  into 
 agreement  with  the  Hebrew.  So  Ussher,  Walton, 
 Hody,  and  Frankel  suppose.  But  the  conjecture 
 is  unfounded.  The  text  was  taken  from  Greek 
 MSS.  containing  Origen's  improved  Hexaplaric 
 text,  as  Simon  believed. 
 
 The  Roman  edition  appeared  under  the  auspices 
 of  Sixtus  the  Fifth,  in  1587,  fol.,  superintended  by 
 Cardinal  Carafa  and  others.  The  text  follows  the 
 celebrated  codex  Vaticamis.  Yet  the  editors  made 
 alterations  in  the  orthography,  and  in  particulars 
 which  they  looked  upon  as  the  mistakes  of  copyists. 
 Other  MSS.  were  necessarily  used  ;  since  almost 
 the  entire  book  of  Genesis  is  wanting  in  cod.  B., 
 besides  from  Psalm  cv.  27  to  cxxxvii.  6,  and  other 
 parts. 
 
 The  Grabian  edition  appeared  at  Oxford,  in 
 1707  and  following  years,  4  vols,  fol.,  and  8  vols. 
 8vo,  being  prepared  for  the  press  by  Dr.  Grabe,  a 
 learned  Prussian,  and  published  in  part  by  himself. 
 This  edition  exhibits  the  text  of  the  Codex  Alex- 
 andrinus,  but  not  perfectly  ;  since  Grabe  altered 
 and  improved  many  places. 
 
 The  latest  and  most  splendid  critical  edition  is 
 that  begun  in  1 798  by  Dr.  Holmes,  and  finished 
 by  Parsons,  Oxford,  1798- 1827,  five  vols,  folio, 
 with  a  large  critical  apparatus.  The  continuator 
 appears  to  have  become  weary  of  his  task  ;  for  he 
 has  only  selected  the  readings  most  important  in 
 his  own  judgment.  The  text  is  that  of  the  Roman 
 edition,  not  a  critically  revised  one.  The  work  is 
 merely  a  storehouse  of  materials  for  such  an  edition. 
 The  Roman  edition  is  still  the  best  ;  though  no  one 
 edition  should  be  followed  absolutely  (see  Cred- 
 ner's  Bcitrdgc,  vol.  ii.  pp.  74-98). 
 
 In  1857  Cardinal  Mai  published  the  O.  and 
 N.  T.  from  the  Vatican  MS.  The  Old  is  in  4 
 vols.  4to.  Unfortunately  this  edition  offers  no 
 security  for  its  being  an  exact  and  faithful  repre- 
 sentation of  the  MS.  The  gaps  are  supplied  from 
 other  MSS.,  and  so  careless  was  the  Cardinal,  that 
 many  leaves  had  to  be  reprinted  before  publication. 
 Doubtless  many  errors  still  remain.  A  veiy  con- 
 venient manual  edition  is  that  of  Tischendorf,  2 
 vols.  Svo,  3d  edition,  i860,  with  a  good  selection 
 of  various  readings  taken  in  part  from  MSS.  which 
 he  published  for  the  first  time.  The  text  is  that  of 
 the  Vatican  MS. 
 
 The  proper  Alexandrine  version  of  Daniel  was 
 first  published  from  a  MS.  in  the  libraiy  of  Cardi 
 nal  Chigi,  at  Rome,  1772,  fol.  After  being  re- 
 printed St  Gottingen  (by  Michaelis),  and  at  Leydeij 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 177 
 
 GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 (by  Segaar),  it  was  critically  edited  by  Hahn 
 (1845)  ;  and  by  Tischendorf  in  his  edition  of  the 
 Seventy.  In  1S59  Tischendorf  found  a  MS.  in  the 
 convent  of  St.  Catherine  at  Mount  Sinai,  which 
 he  rightly  supposes  to  belong  to  the  4th  century, 
 and  to  be  more  valuable  internally  than  any  other 
 existing  one.  Besides  the  New  Testament  entire, 
 it  has  the  Old  imperfectly.  If  the  Codex  Frid- 
 erico  -  Augustanus,  previously  discovered  by  the 
 same  scholar,  be  part  of  the  Sinailic  one,  as  seems 
 to  be  the  case,  a  good  portion  of  the  O.  T.  is 
 thus  preserved.  The  text  of  the  MS.,  after  hav- 
 ing been  described  (see  Notitia  editioitis  codicis 
 Biblioruin  Sinaitici,  etc.,  by  Prof.  Tischendorf, 
 Lipsise,  i860,  fol.),  has  since  been  published  in 
 fac-simile  at  St.  Petersburgh,  at  the  expense  of  the 
 Emperor  of  Russia  (4  vols,  folio,  1862). 
 
 The  best  Lexicon  to  the  Septuagint  is  that  of 
 Schleusjier,  published  at  Leipzig,  in  1820,  1S21, 
 in  five  parts,  and  reprinted  at  Glasgow,  3  vols.  8vo., 
 1822.  The  best  Concordance  is  that  of  Trom- 
 mius,  published  at  Amsterdam,  2  vols,  fol.,  171S. 
 
 A  number  of  versions  have  been  founded  on  the 
 Seventy,  i.  The  old  Latin  or  Vefus  Itala  ;  1.  The 
 Coptic  and  Sahidic  ;  3.  The  Ethiopic  ;  4.  The 
 Armenian  ;  5.  The  Georgian  ;  6.  Various  Syriac 
 versions  ;  7.  Some  Arabic  versions  ;  8.  The  Sla- 
 vonic ;  9.  The  Gothic. 
 
 Great  value  unquestionably  belongs  to  this  ver- 
 sion. In  the  criticism  and  interpretation  of  the 
 O.  T.,  it  holds  a  conspicuous  place.  Yet  most 
 of  the  translators  were  incompetent.  They  often 
 mistook  the  sense  of  the  original  ;  and  indulged  in 
 many  liberties  with  regard  to  the  text.  They  in- 
 serted glosses,  and  paraphrased  with  unmeaning 
 latitude.  Their  errors  are  neither  few  nor  small. 
 It  must  be  recollected,  however,  that  the  text  is  in 
 a  state  of  irremediable  disorder.  The  labours  of 
 Origen,  however  laudable  the  motive  that  prompted 
 them,  introduced  great  confusion.  On  the  whole, 
 the  translation  \%frce  rather  than  litei-al.  Figures, 
 metaphors,  and  anthropomorphic  expressions  are 
 frequently  resolved.  Still  the  document  is  impor- 
 tant, both  in  the  criticism  and  exposition  of  the 
 O.  T.  It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  Palestinian 
 exegesis  had  an  influence  upon  Alexandrian  hernien- 
 eutics  ;  or  that  the  position  is  proved  by  the  charac- 
 ter of  the  Septuagint.  Frankel  has  endeavoured 
 to  establish  it,  with  great  learning  and  ingenuity. 
 But  Herzfeld  objects  ;  and  he  is  a  man  who  usually 
 can  give  a  good  reason  for  his  statements  {Ges- 
 chichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  iii.  p.  548,  el  seq.) 
 
 (For  a  more  copious  account  of  the  Septuagint, 
 the  reader  is  referred  to  Davidson's  Treatise  on 
 Biblical  Criticism ;  and  Text  of  the  O.  T.  Con- 
 sidered, etc.,  2d  edition  (1859).  On  the  Penta- 
 teuch part,  the  best  work  is  that  of  Thiersch,  De 
 Pentateuchi  Versione  Alexandrina,  libri  tres,  Er- 
 langEc,  1841,  8vo,  in  which  the  character  of  the 
 diction  employed  by  the  translator  is  minutely  and 
 admirably  investigated.  See  also  Toepler,  De 
 Pentateuchi  iiiterpretationis  Alexandrine^  indole 
 critica  et  hermeneutica,  Hal.  Sax.  183D,  8vo ; 
 Pliischke,  Lectiones  Alexandmtce  et  Hebraicix,  etc., 
 Bonn,  1837,  8vo.  This  writer  would  correct  the 
 present  Hebrew  text  by  the  Seventy  in  many  cases  ; 
 which  is  preposterous.  Vorstudien  zu  der  Septua- 
 ^inta,  von  Dr.  Z.  Frankel  ;  Leipzig,  1841,  8vo, 
 is  the  most  important  work  on  the  Septuagint  that 
 has  appeared  for  many  years.  It  was  followed 
 by  Ueber  den  Einjiuss  der  Palccstinischen  Exegese 
 
 VOL.  II, 
 
 anf  die  Alexandrinische  Hermeneiitik,  Leipzig^ 
 185 1.  The  prolegomena  to  Tischendorf 's  3d  edi. 
 tion  ;  Bleek's  Einleitung  in  das  alte  Testament,  p. 
 750,  et  seq.  Gfrorer,  Kritische  Geschichte  des  Ur- 
 clLristcnthnms,  Ersier  Band,  Zweite  Abtkeilung, 
 Stuttgart,  1 83 1,  8vo  ;  Diihne,  yndisch- Alexandri- 
 nische Philosophic,  Th.  ii. ,  Halle,  1834,  8vo  ; 
 Fabricii  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  ed.  Harless,  vol.  iii.  ; 
 Michaelis's  Oriental.  Bibliothek,  and  A^eue  Orient. 
 Biblioth. ;  Eichhom's  Allgem.  Bibliothek  and  Re- 
 pertoriiun  ;  Studer,  De  Versionis  Alexa7tdrin(B 
 origine,  historia,  iisu,  et  abnsii  critico,  Bernce,  1823, 
 Svo  ;  Grabe's  Prolegomena  to  his  edition  of  the 
 Seventy  ;  Holmes's  Pnvfatio  to  his  edition  ;  Cred- 
 ner's  Beitrdge  ziir  Einleitutig,  u.  s.  w.  ,vol.  ii.,  8vo, 
 Halle,  1838  ;  Amersfoordt,  Dissertatio  de  variis 
 lectionibiis  Holmesianis,  Lugd.  Bat.  181 5,  4to ; 
 Valckenaer,  Diatribe  de  Aristobulo  Jzidtno,  ed.  Joh. 
 Luzac,  Lugd.  Bat.  1806,  4to). 
 
 II.  Aquila.  Aquila  was  a  Jew  of  Pontus,  who 
 lived  in  the  reign  of  Adrian,  and  undertook  a  Greek 
 version  of  the  O.  T.  about  a.d.  160.  It  appears 
 from  Jerome  {in  Ezek.  iii. )  that  there  were  two  edi- 
 tions of  this  version,  the  second  more  literal  than 
 the  first.  It  was  very  highly  prized  by  the  Jews, 
 and  much  preferred  to  the  Septuagint,  because  the 
 latter  was  employed  as  an  authorized  and-  genuine 
 document  by  the  early  Christians  in  their  disputa- 
 tions with  the  Hebrew  opponents  of  the  new  reli- 
 gion. The  very  circumstance  of  its  being  adopted 
 and  valued  by  the  Jews  would  tend  to  create  a 
 prejudice  against  it  among  the  Fathers,,  indepen- 
 dently of  all  perversion  of  Messianic  passages. 
 Irenreus,  the  earliest  writer  who  mentions  Aquila, 
 pronounces  an  unfavourable  opinion  respecting  his 
 translation  {Adveis.  Hccres.  iii.  24,  p.  253,  ed. 
 Grabe).  So  also  Eusebius  [Ad  Psalm  xc.  4)  and 
 Philastrius.  Jerome  speaks  of  him  in  various  parts 
 of  his  writings,  sometimes  disparagingly,  and  again 
 in  terms  of  commendation  :  the  former,  in  allusion 
 to  his  doctrinal  prepossessions  ;  the  latter,  in  refer- 
 ence to  his  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language  and 
 exceeding  carefulness  in  rendering  one  word  by 
 another.  He  was  early  accused  of  distorting  seve- 
 ral passages  relating  to  the  Messiah ;  and  Kennicott, 
 in  modern  times,  has  re-echoed  the  censure.  There 
 is  some  ground  for  the  charge,  but  certainly  not  so 
 much  as  Kennicott  imagines.  A  polemic  tendency 
 may  be  detected  in  the  work,  yet  not  to  a  greater 
 degree  than  in  most  translations.     [Aquila.] 
 
 The  version  before  us  is  extremely,  and  even 
 unintelligibly,  literal.  It  adheres  most  rigidly  to 
 the  original.  So  highly  did  the  Jews  esteem  it  that 
 they  called  it  the  Hebrew  verity.  Its  use  in  criti- 
 cisin  is  considerable,  but  in  interpretation  it  is  com- 
 paratively worthless. 
 
 III.  Symmachus.  Symmachus  appears  to  have 
 been  an  Ebionite  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  vi.  17  ;  De- 
 monstr.  Evang.  vii.  i,  Jerome,  Prcef.  in  Ezram  ; 
 Assemani,  Bibl.  Orient,  ii.  278;  iii.  i,  17).  His 
 Greek  version  of  the  O.  T.  was  made  after  that  of 
 Theodotion,  as  may  be  inferred  from  the  silence  of 
 Irenasus,  and  the  language  of  Jerome  in  his  com- 
 mentary on  the  3Sth  chapter  of  Isaiah.  The  style 
 of  the  work  is  good,  and  the  diction  perspicuous, 
 pure,  and  elegant  (Thieme,  De  puritate  Syminachi; 
 Hody,  De  Bibl.  text.  Original).  It  is  of  less 
 benefit  in  criticism  than  that  of  Aquila,  but  of 
 greater  advantage  in  interpretation.  It  would  seem 
 from  Jerome,  that  there  was  a  second  edition  of  it 
 {Comment  in  yerein.  xxxii.  ;  /;/  A\ih.  iii.) 
 
 N 
 
GREEK  VERSIONS 
 
 178 
 
 GREENFIELD 
 
 TV.  Theodotion.  Theodotion,  like  Sym- 
 machus,  was  an  Ebionite.  Irenaeus  states  (Advers. 
 HcEres.  iii.  24)  that  he  belonged  to  Ephesus,  and 
 was  a  Jewish  proselyte.  His  Greek  version  of 
 the  O.  T.  appeared  during  the  fomier  half  of  the 
 2d  century,  and  is  first  mentioned  by  Irenreus.  He 
 follows  the  Septuagint  very  closely,  so  that  he  ap- 
 pears to  have  intended  to  make  a  revision  of  its 
 text  rather  than  a  new  version.  He  is  not  so 
 scrupulously  literal  as  Aquila,  nor  so  free  as  Sym- 
 machus  He  was  certainly  not  well  acquainted 
 with  Hebrew,  as  the  numerous  errors  iito  which 
 he  has  fallen  demonstrate.  It  is  probable,  if  credit 
 can  be  given  to  Jerome,  that  there  were  two  edi- 
 tions of  tlie  translation  {in  Jerem.  xxix.  17).  His 
 translation  of  Daniel  was  very  early  adopted  by  the 
 Christians  in  place  of  that  belonging  to  the  Sep- 
 tuagint. The  Jews  do  not  seem  to  have  had  much 
 regard  for  this  castigated  edition  of  the  Seventy  ; 
 although  Von  Lengerke  inclines  to  the  opposite 
 opinion. 
 
 v.,  VI.,  VII.  When  Origen  travelled  into 
 Eastern  countries  collecting  materials  for  his  Poly- 
 glott,  he  discovered  three  other  Greek  versions  not 
 extending  to  the  entire  O.  T.,  but  only  to  several 
 books.  These  are  usually  designated  the  fiftli, 
 sixth,  seventh.  The  authors  were  unknown  to 
 Origen  himself.  As  far  as  we  can  judge,  they 
 appear  to  have  translated  the  original  somewhat 
 freely  and  paraphraslically.  The  fifth  compre- 
 hended the  Pentateuch,  Psalms,  Song  of  Solomon, 
 and  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets,  besides  the  books 
 of  Kings.  Jerome  says  tliat  the  author  was  a 
 Jew,  meaning  probably  a  Jewish  Christian.  The 
 sixth  version  contained  the  same  books  as  the 
 fifth,  except  those  of  the  Kings.  The  author  ap- 
 pears to  have  been  a  Jewish  Christian  also.  This 
 inference  has  been  drawn  from  his  rendering  of 
 Habak.  iii.  13.  The  seventh  embraced  the  Psalms 
 and  minor  prophets.  Perhaps  the  author  was  a 
 Jew.  The  three  translations  in  question  were 
 made  subsequently  to  those  of  Aquila,  Symmachus, 
 and  Theodotion.  Very  iey^  fragments  of  them 
 remain.  (See  Epiphanius,  Z?<?.A'«rt'.  ^/i1/tvw.,  cap. 
 17;  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.m.  16;  Jerome,  Com- 
 ine>it  in  Tit.  cap.  3  ;  Apolog.  co)itra  Ritfin.  ii.  34  j 
 Hody,  p.  590,  et  seq.) 
 
 VIII.  Gr.«co-Veneta.  In  a  MS.  belonging 
 to  St.  Mark's  Library  at  Venice,  there  is  a  Greek 
 version  of  several  O.  T.  books.  Its  internal  cha- 
 racter proves  that  the  translation  was  made  directly 
 from  the  Hebrew.  It  is  more  literal  than  any 
 other  ancient  version,  even  that  of  Aquila,  adher- 
 ing with  slavish  scrupulosity  to  the  original  words. 
 In  the  Chaldee  portions  of  Daniel,  the  Attic  dialect 
 is  changed  for  the  Doric.  The  style,  however,  is 
 a  singular  compound.  Attic  elegancies  occur  along 
 with  barbarous  expressions  ;  high-sounding  words 
 used  by  the  best  Greek  writers,  by  the  side  of  others 
 contrary  to  the  genius  of  the  Greek  language.  The 
 origin  of  the  version  cannot  be  placed  higher  than 
 the  9th  century  ;  the  MS.  itself  was  written  in  the 
 14th.  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  author  was  a 
 Jew  or  a  Christian.  Michaelis  supposes  that  he 
 was  a  Jew.  With  Bertholdt,  we  believe  that  he 
 was  a  Christian.  It  is  probable  that  it  was  made 
 at  Byzantium  for  private  use.  The  text  seldom 
 differs  from  the  Masoretic ,  and  the  translator 
 consulted  the  Septuagint  and  other  Greek  ver- 
 sions, besides  adhering,  as  he  generally  does,  to 
 the  current  exegetical  tradition  of  the  Jews.     Criti- 
 
 cism can  never  derive  much  use  from  this  version. 
 Extracts  from  it  are  given  in  Holmes's  edition  of 
 the  Septuagint.  The  Pentateuch  was  published  by 
 Ammon,  in  three  volumes,  at  Erlangen,  in  the 
 yeai-s  1790-91.  Different  parts  of  the  Pentateuch 
 had  been  previously  published,  .-ilong  with  Pro- 
 verbs, Ecclesiastes,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Daniel, 
 and  Canticles,  by  Villoison,  at  Strasburg,  17S4. 
 (See  Eichhorn's  AUgem.  Biblioth.  iii.  p.  371,  et  seq.; 
 V.  p.  743,  et  s>].  ;  vii.  p.  193,  et  seq.  ;  Dahler,  Atii- 
 7nadversisnes  in  versionein  Gmcam  P7-overbb.,  Ar- 
 gentor.  1786  ;  the  Introductions  of  Eichhorn,  Ber- 
 tholdt, De  VVei  tc,  and  Havernick  ;  and  Davidson's 
 Treatise  on  Bib.  Crit.) — S.  D. 
 
 GREEN,  William,  rector  of  Ilardingham, 
 Norfolk,  and  fellow  of  Clare  Hall,  Cambridge. 
 He  took  the  degree  of  B.A.  in  1737,  and  of 
 M.A.  in  1741.  He  died  in  1794.  As  a  writer  he 
 devoted  himself  chiefly  to  the  translation  of  the 
 poetical  books  of  the  O.  T. ,  and  published  succes- 
 sively the  following  works — i .  The  Song  of  De- 
 borah reduced  to  metre,  with  a  tra7islation  and  com- 
 mentary, 1753,  4to.  2.  A  translation  of  the  Prayer 
 of  Habakkiik,  the  Prayer  of  Moses,  and  the  \y^th 
 Psalm,  7vith  a  commentary,  1755,  4to.  3.  A  new 
 Translatio7i  of  the  Psahns  from  the  Hebrew  o)i- 
 gi7ial,  with  7iotes,  critical  a7id  explanato7y,  to 
 which  is  added  a  dissertatio/i  07i  the  last  pi-ofheti^ 
 wo>-ds  of  Noah,  1762,  8vo.  4.  A  7iew  tra7islation 
 of  Isaiah  vii.  13  to  the  e7id  of  Hit.,  from  the 
 orig-i?ial  Hebj-eio,  with  7iotes  critical  a7id  explana- 
 t07y,  1776,  4to.  5.  Poetical  parts  of  the  O.  T, 
 newly  ty-auslated  from  the  Hebreiv,  with  /lotes  criti- 
 cal a/id  explauato)y,  1781,  4to. — S.  N. 
 
 GREENFIELD,  William,  was  boin  in  Lon- 
 don 1st  April  1799.  He  received  the  elements  of 
 his  education  in  .Scotland,  to  which  his  family  ori- 
 ginally belonged,  but  in  his  thirteenth  year  he  be- 
 came apprentice  to  a  London  bookseller.  Whilst 
 but  a  child  his  talent  and  desire  for  learning  lan- 
 guages shewed  itself,  and  whilst  engaged  in  his 
 duties  as  a  bookseller's  apprentice  he  found  means 
 to  gratify  this  tendency.  Beginning  with  Hebrew, 
 which  he  thoroughly  mastered,  he  proceeded  to 
 the  other  Semitic  dialects,  from  them  to  Greek  and 
 Latin,  and  then  to  French  and  other  modern 
 western  tongues.  These  acquirements  were  all 
 made  whilst  he  was  labouring  in  his  master's  service 
 from  six  in  the  morning  till  six,  and  sometimes  eight, 
 in  the  evening,  with  the  interval  of  meal  hours. 
 In  1822  he  submitted  to  an  eminent  publisher,  Mr. 
 Bagster,  the  prospectus  of  a  Pol3'glott  grammar,  of 
 nearly  thirty  languages,  on  the  principles  of  com- 
 parative grammar.  This  led  to  his  being  employed 
 to  edit  the  Comprehensive  Bible  issued  by  that  firm 
 in  1826.  In  1828-9  he  was  engaged  in  carrying 
 through  the  press  an  edition  of  the  Syriac  New 
 Testament  for  their  Polyglott  series,  and  in  1830 
 he  prepared  his  revised  translation  of  the  N.  T. 
 into  Hebrew.  He  now  became  regularly  engaged 
 in  connection  with  Messrs.  Bagster's  Biblical  pub- 
 lications ;  and,  besides  editing  several  works  for 
 them,  he  prepared  a  lexicon  of  the  Greek  N.  T., 
 followed  by  an  abridgment  of  Schmidt's  Greek 
 Concordance.  In  1830  he  was  appointed  editor  of 
 foreign  versions  to  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible 
 Society,  an  appointment  which  exposed  him  to 
 much  obloquy  on  the  part  of  some  who  sought  to 
 find  occasion  against  the  Society  by  attacking  the 
 notes  in  the  Comprehensiv/*  Bible  as  heretical  and 
 
GREENHILL 
 
 ]79 
 
 GREGORY 
 
 ricologian.  He  defended  himself  by  collecting 
 and  publishing  in  a  consecutive  form  the  notes  and 
 prefaces  of  the  book,  leaving  them  to  speak  for 
 themselves  ;  which  they  did  to  the  full  satisfaction 
 of  all  competent  judges.  To  the  Bible  Society  his 
 services  were  invaluable ;  but  the  excessive  labour 
 which  these  services  and  his  devotion  to  literature 
 imposed  upon  him  overmastered  his  strength,  and 
 he  sank  into  a  premature  grave  on  the  5th  Nov.  1831. 
 He  was  a  member  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society, 
 having  been  elected  to  this  honour  in  compliment 
 to  his  extensive  Oriental  acquirements. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GREENHILL,  William,  M.A.,  was  born  in 
 15S1,  and  died  27th  Sept.  1671.  He  was  educated 
 at  Oxford,  and  during  the  Commonwealth  held  the 
 vicarage  of  Stepney,  though  at  the  same  time  pas- 
 tor of  a  Congregational  Church  which  he  had  col- 
 lected at  Stepney  Meeting  House.  He  was  a 
 member  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines, 
 where  he  was  one  of  'the  Dissenting  brethren.' 
 After  the  execution  of  Charles  I.  he  was  appointed 
 chaplain  to  the  royal  children,  an  office  for  which 
 some  earlier  relations  with  the  royal  family,  and 
 his  own  polished  manners,  rendered  him  especially 
 eligible.  In  1654  he  was  appointed  one  of  Crom- 
 well's 'Triers.'  At  the  Restoration  he  was  ejected 
 from  his  vicarage,  and  from  this  time  till  his  death 
 lived  in  private,  officiating  as  opportunity  offered 
 to  his  special  flock  at  the  meeting  house.  His 
 Exposition  on  ike  28  Jii'st  chapters  of  Ezekiel, 
 which  is  his  principal  work,  was  delivered  in  lec- 
 tures to  his  congregation,  and  appeared  in  five 
 volumes  4to,  published  at  different  times.  The 
 first  volume  was  issued  in  1645,  and  is  dedicated, 
 in  courtly  terms,  to  the  Princess  Elizabeth,  with 
 whom  Greenhill  seems  to  have  been  well  ac- 
 quainted ;  the  fifth  appeared  in  1662.  A  new 
 edition,  in  one  vol.  imperial  8vo,  was  issued  by 
 Mr.  Sherman  in  1846.  This  commentary  is  much 
 prized  by  the  lovers  of  Puritan  theology  and  ex- 
 position. He  published  also  several  sermons  and 
 works  on  practical  divinity. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GREGORY,  sumamed  'the  Great,'  one  of  the 
 Popes  of  Rome,  and  the  first  of  that  name,  and  a 
 saint  in  the  Romish  Calendar,  was  bom  at  Rome 
 about  540,  was  made  Pope  in  590,  and  died  in  604. 
 He  was  descended  from  one  of  the  highest  patrician 
 families  of  the  city.  He  filled  the  office  of  prefect 
 of  the  city  for  a  time.  On  his  father's  death  he 
 gave  this  up  and  devoted  the  large  property  which 
 descended  to  him  to  the  establishment  of  several 
 monasteries.  Into  one  of  these,  at  Rome,  he  re- 
 tired, and  was  ordained  deacon .  He  was  employed 
 on  important  services  by  the  Pope  Pelagius  II.  ; 
 on  whose  death  he  was  elected,  against  his  wishes, 
 to  succeed  him. 
 
 Gregory's  theological  works  are  not  of  great 
 importance  to  the  interpretation  of  Scripture. 
 They  consist  of  (i)  A  Coniinentary  on  Job,  in 
 which  we  find  the  distinction  between  the  histori- 
 cal or  literal,  the  allegorical,  and  the  moral  or 
 spiritual  interpretation  ;  {2)  Hotnilies  on  the  Pro- 
 phet Ezekiel,  delivered  to  the  people  during  the 
 war  wath  the  Lombards  ;  (3)  Homilies  on  the  Evan- 
 gelists;  (4)  De  curd  Sacerdotali,  a  work  on  the 
 duties  of  bishops  ;  (5)  Dialogues.  Besides  these 
 we  have  a  valuable  collection  of  his  letters  during 
 iouneen  years.  He  was  the  author,  moreover,  of 
 great  alterations  in  the  ceremonies  of  the  Roman 
 Catholic  Church,  and  more  especially  of  improve- 
 
 ments in  the  music.     The  Gregorian  chant  derives 
 its  name  from  him. 
 
 The  best  edition  of  his  works  is  that  published 
 at  Paris,  1705,  in  4  vols.  foL,  by  the  Beiiedictines 
 of  Saint  Maur. — H.  W. 
 
 GREGORY,  John,  an  English  theologian,  was 
 born  in  Buckinghamshire,  November  10,  1607. 
 At  the  age  of  sixteen  he  went  to  Oxford  with  Sir 
 William  Drake,  where  he  studied  with  great  dili- 
 gence. About  163 1  he  entered  into  orders  in  the 
 Church.  In  1638  he  was  appointed  domestic 
 chaplain  to  the  bishop  of  Chichester,  his  patron  ; 
 and  was  subsequently  made  a  prebend.  From  his 
 being  a  loyalist  he  was  deprived  of  his  benefices, 
 and  reduced  to  great  straits.  He  died  of  gout  in 
 an  obscure  ale-house  near  Oxford,  March  13,  1646. 
 Gregory  was  an  excellent  scholar,  and  was  highly 
 esteemed  by  some  of  the  most  learned  and  distin- 
 guished men  of  the  age,  belonging  to  all  sects.  He 
 is  the  author  of  A'otes  and  Observations  on  some 
 Passages  of  Scripture,  1646,410.  These  notes  were 
 reprinted  four  times,  translated  into  Latin,  and  in- 
 serted in  the  Critici  Sacri.  His  posthumous 
 works,  edited  by  Gurgany,  appeared  in  i  vol.  4to, 
 1650.  Among  them  is  'a  discourse'  upon  the 
 Septuagint,  and  '  a  disproof  of  the  second  '  Cai. 
 nan'  in  Luke  iii.  36,  37. — S.  D. 
 
 GREGORY,  John,  bom  at  Wotton  near  Wood- 
 stock, and  educated  at  Cambridge,  where  he  be- 
 came a  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  was  subsequentlv 
 master  of  Gloucester  school  and  Archdeacon  of 
 the  diocese  of  Gloucester.  At  his  death  he  left  be- 
 hind him  a  collection  of  scholia  on  the  Greek  N.  T., 
 gathered  from  the  writings  of  the  Greek  fathers. 
 These  were  published  by  his  son  along  with  the 
 text  from  Fell's  edition  in  one  vol.  folio,  Oxford 
 1793.  This  is  a  splendid  book,  with  head  and  tail 
 pieces  from  the  burin  of  Vandergucht  and  Gribelin. 
 It  is  also  a  very  useful  book,  containing  in  narrow 
 compass  the  cream  of  v.'hat  the  Greek  fathers  have 
 offered  for  the  elucidation  of  the  N.  T.  The  editor 
 was  assisted  in  preparing  it  for  and  carrying  it 
 through  the  press  by  Dean  Aldrich  and  J.  E. 
 Grabe.  We  regret  that  we  have  not  been  able  to 
 recover  the  dates  of  Gregory's  life.  All  that  we 
 know  for  certain  is  that  when  he  was  ready  to  go 
 to  the  University  of  Oxford  he  was  prevented  by 
 the  circumstance  of  that  city  being  besieged  by  the 
 P;  'hamentary  forces,  and  that  it  was  at  the  Resto- 
 ration he  settled  at  Gloucester.  He  was  probably 
 bom  about  1630,  and  died  about  1700. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GREGORY  OF  Nyssa  was  born  at  Cresarea  of 
 Cappadocia  in  the  year  331  or  332.  He  was  or- 
 dained by  his  brother  Basil  the  Great,  and  became 
 Bishop  of  Nyssa  about  the  year  372.  He  took  a 
 leading  part  in  the  controversy  with  the  Arian 
 party,  to  whose  views  he  was  very  determinately 
 opposed.  The  date  of  his  death  is  uncertain,  but 
 probably  it  took  place  before  the  close  of  the  cen- 
 tury. His  works  consist  of  treatises  on  controver- 
 sial and  practical  theology,  homilies,  orations,  and 
 epistles.  His  principal  work  of  an  exegetical  kind 
 is  his  Hexaemeron  sivede  opem  sex  dieru/u,  intended 
 as  a  supplement  to  the  work  of  his  brother  Basil 
 on  the  same  subject.  He  wrote,  also,  eight  homi- 
 lies on-  Ecclesiastes,  an  exposition  of  the  Song  of 
 Songs,  homilies  on  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  on  some 
 of  the  Psalms.  As  an  expositor  he  follows  the 
 proper  rathe"-  <han  the  allegorical  method  of  inter- 
 
GREYHOUND 
 
 180 
 
 GROTIUS 
 
 pretation  ;  tliougla  his  desire  to  find  the  deeper 
 sense  of  Scripture  not  unfrequently  JDetrays  him  into 
 undue  spirituaUzing  of  tlie  text.  The  best  edition 
 of  his  works  is  that  pubhshed  at  Paris  in  1638,  3 
 vols.  foho. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GREYHOUND.     [Zarzik  ;  Keleb.] 
 
 GRIESBACH,  Johann  Jakob,  was  born  4th 
 Jan.  1745,  at  Butzbach,  a  small  town  of  Hesse 
 Darmstadt,  where  his  father  was  pastor.  Having 
 received  his  school  education  at  Frankfurt  on  the 
 Maine,  he  studied  theology  at  the  universities  of 
 Tiibingen,  Halle,  and  Leipsic.  Whilst  at  Halle 
 he  came  under  the  influence  of  Semler,  whose 
 methods,  opinions,  and  pursuits,  gave  a  powerful 
 bias  to  the  mind  of  the  young  student.  Having 
 finished  his  academical  career  at  Leipsic,  he  re- 
 turned to  Halle,  but  before  settling  himself  there, 
 he,  in  1769,  commenced  a  literary  tour  for  the 
 purpose  especially  of  examining  the  MSS.  of  the 
 N.  T.  in  the  principal  libraries  of  Germany, 
 Holland,  England,  and  France.  He  returned  to 
 Halle  in  1770  laden  with  materials,  and  set  himself 
 to  make  use  ©f  them  for  the  emendation  of  the 
 text  of  the  N.  T.  In  1773  he  was  appointed  extra- 
 ordinary professor  of  theology  at  Halle  ;  and  two 
 years  after  he  became  ordinary  professor  of  theo- 
 logy at  Jena.  Here  the  rest  of  his  useful  and 
 laborious  life  was  spent ;  and  here  he  died  on  the 
 24th  of  March  181 2. 
 
 Griesbach's  name  and  fame  stand  connected 
 with  the  textual  criticism  of  the  N.  T.  On  this 
 principally  he  spent  his  time  and  his  strength. 
 In  1771,  soon  after  his  return  from  his  extended 
 tour,  he  submitted  to  the  University  of  Halle  a 
 dissertation,  De  codicibus  quatuor  Evangelistarum 
 Origeniaiiis.  In  1774  he  issued  the  first  volume  of 
 his  N.  T.  containing  the  historical  books,  with  the 
 first  three  gospels  arranged  synoptically  ;  in  1775 
 appeared  the  second  volume,  containing  the  epistles 
 and  the  Apocalypse  ;  and  along  with  this  a  new 
 edition  of  vol.  i. ,  but  without  the  synoptic  arrange- 
 ment of  the  first  gospels.  Between  1777  and  1794 
 he  published  a  series  of  critical  works  on  the  text  of 
 the  N.  T.,  and  having  thus  prepared  the  way  for  his 
 great  work,  he  sent  forth,  in  1796,  the  first  volume 
 of  a  completely  remodelled  and  carefully  prepared 
 edition  of  the  N.  T. ,  v/ith  copious  apparatus  and 
 valuable  prolegomena;  followed,  in  1806,  by  vol. 
 ii.  This  edition  v/as  published  both  at  Halle  and 
 London.  A  sumptuous  edition  in  4  vols.  4to,  or 
 small  folio,  witii  copperplate  illustrations,  was 
 issued  in  1805- 1807.  Manual  editions,  containing 
 the  principal  various  readings,  but  without  the 
 authorities,  appeared  in  1805  and  in  1825.  A  third 
 edition  of  the  larger  work  was  commenced  by  Dr. 
 D.  Schulz,  of  which  only  the  first  volume  appeared, 
 Berol.  1827. 
 
 Griesbach's  labours  on  the  text  of  the  N.  T. 
 commenced  an  era  in  Biblical  criticism.  Not  only 
 were  his  collections  of  various  readings  more  ex- 
 tensive and  more  carefully  sifted  than  those  of  any 
 who  had  preceded  him  ;  not  only  did  he  carry  out 
 more  thoroughly  than  any  of  his  predecessors  the 
 principle  of  determining  the  value  of  a  reading  by 
 its  antiquity  and  its  source ;  but  he  contributed 
 more  than  any  of  them  to  place  textual  criticism  on 
 a  scientific  basis,  and  to  furnish  rules  for  the  guid- 
 ance of  the  critic  in  his  work.  His  system  of  re- 
 censions may  be  unsound,  and  he  may  have  been 
 hampered  or  misled  by  it  in  some  of  his  decisions  ; 
 
 but  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  important  bear- 
 ing both  of  the  facts  he  has  collected  and  the  theo- 
 ries he  has  offered  to  account  for  them,  on  the 
 subsequent  progress  of  Biblical  criticism.  Ever, 
 where  he  had  little  to  guide  him  but  his  own  judg- 
 ment, more  recent  investigations  have  generally 
 shewn  that  his  conclusions  were  correct.  He  was 
 the  first,  also,  who  ventured  to  print  the  text  as 
 the  principles  of  his  criticism  determined,  instead 
 of  retaining  the  Textus  Receptus  and  treating  the 
 readings  of  the  codices  simply  as  departures  from 
 that.  Griesbach's  Opuscida,  which  consist  chiefly 
 of  academic  programmes  and  addresses,  and  are 
 not  of  much  value,  were  collected  and  published 
 by  Gabler  in  2  vols,  Jena  1824. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GRIMM,  Heinr.  Adolf,  D.D.,  professor  of 
 theology  at  Duisburg,  v/as  born  i  Sept.  1747,  and 
 died  29th  Aug.  1S13.  He  was  a  distinguished 
 Oriental  and  Biblical  scholar.  His  works  are  : — 
 Der  Prophet  Jonas  iibers.  tend  mil  annierk.  hemusge- 
 gebcn,  1789;  Nahum  iibers.  mit  anmerk.  1790 ; 
 Exeget.  Aiifsdtze  ziir  aufkldrung  schwierige  stellen 
 d.  Sckrift,  1793  ;  Chald.  Chrestomathie  mit  Glos- 
 sariiun,  1801  ;  yonae  et  Ohadiae  oracida  Syriace, 
 ciuii  iiotis  pliilol.  et  crit.  1805. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GRINDING.     [Mill.] 
 
 GROTIUS  (Hugo  de  Groot).  This  great 
 mart,  prominent  among  the  leading  writers  of  the 
 17th  century  as  a  jurist,  a  scholar,  a  statesman, 
 and  a  theologian,  was  born  at  Delft,  in  Holland, 
 April  10,  1583.  He  was  so  precocious,  that  be- 
 fore he  arrived  at  the  age  of  sixteen  he  had  pub- 
 lished an  edition  of  Marcianus  Capella.  In  1598 
 he  accompanied  the  famous  Barnevelt  on  his  em- 
 bassy to  the  court  of  Henri  IV.,  and  won  the 
 esteem  of  that  monarch.  At  the  age  of  twenty- 
 four  he  was  made  advocate-general,  and  in  1613 
 settled  at  Rotterdam.  After  the  synod  of  Dort 
 having  warmly  espoused  the  views  of  the  Armi- 
 nians,  he  was  condemned  to  perpetual  imprison- 
 ment in  the  castle  of  Louvestein  (June  6,  1619), 
 wliere  for  a  year  and  a  half  he  suffered  great  hard- 
 ships, till  his  wife  enabled  him  to  effect  his  escape 
 in  a  book-chest.  He  retired  to  France,  where  he 
 was  well  received,  and  had  a  pension  assigned  to 
 him  by  Louis  XIII.  After  spending  eleven  studious 
 years  in  France,  during  which  he  still  suffered  per- 
 secutions from  his  unrelenting  enemies  the  Calvin- 
 ists,  he  returned  to  Holland,  from  which  he  was 
 once  more  driven  by  the  violence  of  his  theological 
 opponents.  In  1634  Christina,  Queen  of  Sweden, 
 ajipointed  him  her  ambassador  to  the  French  court, 
 where  he  again  resided  for  ten  years.  Being  per- 
 mitted to  resign  tliis  appointment,  he  intended  to 
 return  from  Stockholm  to  his  native  country,  but 
 was  shipwrecked,  during  his  voyage,  on  the  coast 
 of  Pomerania.  He  continued  his  journey  by  land, 
 but  died  of  fatigue  and  exposure  at  Rostock,  Aug. 
 28,  1645,  and  was  buried  at  Delft.  It  is  certain 
 that  he  died  in  the  faith  of  Christ,  although  the 
 same  furious  malice  which  had  embittered  his  life 
 strove  to  blacken  his  deathbed  by  the  assertion 
 that  he  had  died  a  Socinian.  He  was  frequently 
 accused  both  of  popery  and  Socinianism,  but  it  is 
 probable,  both  from  his  own  writings,  and  from 
 the  facts  adduced  by  J.  Clericus  at  the  end  of  his 
 edition  of  the  De  Veritate,  that  the  Anglican  church, 
 the  liturgy  of  which  he  specially  admired,  received 
 a  larger  share  of  his  approval  than  any  other. 
 
GROVES 
 
 181 
 
 GUYSE 
 
 As  a  theologian  Grotius  stands  very  high,  and 
 as  a  commentator  on  the  Bible  deserves  the  first 
 rank  among  his  contemporaries,  although  sectarian 
 animosity  caused  his  merits  to  be  for  a  long  time 
 depreciated,  and  almost  ignored.  He  was  particu- 
 cularly  successful  in  illustrating  the  meaning  of 
 various  passages  from  the  classical  parallels  sup- 
 plied by  his  immense  learning.  Simple  explana- 
 tion is  always  his  main  object,  and  he  makes  it 
 chiefly  depend  on  history  and  philology,  in  which 
 method  he  was  followed  by  Ernesti.  He  was  one 
 of  the  first  to  reject  altogether  the  irregularities 
 and  mysticisms  of  Patristic  and  mediaeval  exegesis  ; 
 and  (in  strong  contrast  to  his  fellow-countryman 
 Cocceius)  he  always  proceeds  on  the  maxim  that 
 the  inspired  writers  wrote  with  the  intention  of 
 being  understood.  His  clear  judgment  and  strong 
 good  sense  led  him,  on  this  ground,  to  acquiesce 
 for  the  most  part  in  the  primary  and  obvious 
 meaning,  which  he  learnedly  elucidates  by  the 
 ordinary  canons  of  criticism.  As  long  as  keen 
 acumen,  moderation,  liberality,  and  learning  are 
 valued,  so  long  will  the  commentaries  of  Grotius 
 be  read  with  a  respectful  appreciation,  as  having 
 been  among  the  first  to  recall  the  science  of  Bibli- 
 cal hermeneutics  into  the  domain  of  erudition  and 
 common  sense,  and  rescue  it  from  the  hands  of 
 superstitious,  arbitrary,  and  fanciful  allegorists. 
 
 His  chief  theological  works  are  the  De  Veritate 
 relig.  Christiana;,  1627,  which  has  been  repro- 
 duced in  a  vast  number  of  editions  and  transla- 
 tions ;  the  Defensio  fidei  catholiccB  de  satisfactione 
 Ch7-isti,  Leyden,  1617  ;  and  especially  the  Anjio- 
 (ationes  ad  Vetus  et  Novinn  Testameiitum,  first  pub- 
 blished,  in  various  parts,  at  Paris,  between  the 
 years  1 641  and  1650,  and  afterwai'ds  republished 
 by  Vogel  and  Doederlein.  There  is  an  edition  of 
 them  by  Moody,  2  vols.  4to,  Lond.  1727.  The 
 entire  theological  works  of  Grotius  were  published 
 under  the  title  Opera  Theologica,  Amsterdam, 
 1679,  and  Basle,  1731  (See  Bayle,  Diet.  vii.  270, 
 seqq.;  Herzog,  Encykl.  s.  v.;  Hallam,  Ltt.  of 
 Europe,  ii.  356,  etc.;  Home's  Iiitrod.  ii.  228; 
 Hagenbach,  Hist,  of  Doctrines,  Engl.  Tr.,  ii. 
 passifn  ;  Butler,  Life  of  Grotius,  Lond.  1827,  etc.) 
 — F.  W.  F. 
 
 GROVES.     [High  Places.] 
 
 GUARD.      I.   Wn^.'O  [Executioner].      2. 
 
 Cyn    [Footman].       3.^  "IDE^D,  nnOE'p,    words 
 
 which  primarily  denote  the  place  where  a  watch  or 
 giiard  is  posted  (Is.  xxi.  8  ;  Hab.  ii.  i  ;  2  Chron. 
 vii.  6),  and  came  afterwards  to  designate  the  per- 
 sons so  employed  (Neh.  iv.  3,  16  [A.  V.  22] ; 
 vii.  3)  [Captain]. — t. 
 
 GUEST.    [Hospitality.] 
 
 GULLOTH  (n1)J ;  LXX.  Vat.Porat^Xa;  Alex. 
 rwXdS-;  Onom.  roXaVcitAi=D^O  riSs)  occurs  only 
 in  Josh.  XV.  19  and  Judg.  i.  15,  where  it  refers  to 
 the  springs  granted  by  Caleb  to  his  daughter 
 Achsah.  These  springs  are  described  as  '  upper ' 
 and  'lower.'  The  same  epithets  are  applied  to 
 Betnnoron,  Josh.  xvi.  3,  5,  where  they  clearly  desig- 
 nate the  relative  positions  of  the  two  places.  It  is 
 therefore  most  probable  that  the  springs  in  ques- 
 tion were  situated  some  on  higher  and  some  on 
 lower  ground.  Their  exact  site  has  not  been  de- 
 termined. —  S.  N.      [Stanley  [Jewish  Church,  v. 
 
 263)  finds  Gulloth  in  a  stream  flowing  through  a 
 beautiful  green  valley  about  one  hour  south-west 
 of  Hebron.  The  spots  are  now  called  Ain-Nun- 
 kar  and  Deivir-Ban.\ 
 
 GUNI  CJilJ ;  Sept.  Vosvl,  Alex.  Ywvvi,  Gen.  xlvi. 
 24 ;  I  Chron.  vii.  13  ;  Vavvi,  Num.  xxvi.  48).  1. 
 A  son  of  Naphthali,  and  head  of  the  house  of  the 
 Gunites  CJISH  ;  Sept.  S^yuos  6  Vavvl).  2.  A  de- 
 scendant of  Gad  and  father  of  Abdiel  (i  Chron.  v. 
 15).  The  words  that  follow,  'chief  of  the  house 
 of  their  fathers,'  refer  to  Ahi  and  not  to  Abdiel. — + 
 
 GUR  ("l^J  ;  Sept.  rat).  The  name  of  an  ascent 
 (npyO)  where  Ahaziah  king  of  Judah  was  slain  (2 
 
 Kings  ix.  27).  This  ascent  was  at  or  near  Ibleam, 
 a  town  of  Western  Manasseh.  Neither  place  has 
 been  identified,  but  the  steep  pass  of  Gur  must 
 have  been  near  Megiddo,  and  formed,  probably, 
 one  of  the  ascents  from  the  plain  of  Esdraelon 
 to  the  higher  grounds.  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
 mention  a  Tat,  which  they  simply  describe  as 
 (pdpay^,  vallis  sive pmriiptttin. — t 
 
 GUR-BAAL  (^J^nnia ;  Sept.  t^s  ir^rpas),  the 
 site  of  certain  Arabians  against  whom  God  helped 
 Uzziah  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  7).  The  rendering  of  the 
 LXX.  probably  arose  from  their  thinking  of  the 
 chief  city  of  the  Edomites,  Sela  or  Petra  ;  but, 
 though  Uzziah's  conquests  may  have  lain  in  this 
 direction,  we  have  no  means  of  proving  this.  The 
 Targum  makes  it  the  well-known  Gerar.  This  is 
 probably  correct,  as  the  inhabitants  of  Gur-Baal 
 are  mentioned  along  with  the  D'^JI^D,  who  dwelt 
 by  Gerar  (i  Chron.  iv.  41  ;  comp.  Evvald,  Gesch. 
 V.  Israel,  vol.  i.  p.  322)  [Maonites] 
 
 GUTBIR,  Giles,  bora  at  Wirstensee  in  Thu- 
 ringia,  1617,  studied  at  Rostock,  Konigsberg,  and 
 Leyden,  and  after  visiting  Oxford  and  Liibeck,  be- 
 came, in  1652,  professor  of  Oriental  languages  at 
 Hamburg.  In  1660  the  University  of  Giessen 
 made  him  doctor  in  theology,  after  which  he 
 taught  logic  and  philosophy  as  well  as  Eastern 
 tongues.  He  is  chiefly  noted  for  his  Syriac  works. 
 He  printed  himself,  in  a  press  of  his  own,  the 
 Peshito  N.  T.,  with  the  vowels.  Ham.  1664,  also  a 
 Syriac  Lexicon,  containing  all  the  words  and 
 particles  of  N.  T.  Notce  Critics  in  N.  T.  Syri- 
 cEU7it  ;  Novetfi  Musa  Orientates  ;  De  Angel  is  ;  De 
 Controversia  rebaptizationis  ;  De  Sibyllis  et  eanun 
 oraculis.     Died  1667. — S.  L. 
 
 GUYSE,  John,  D.D.,  was  bom  at  Hertford  in 
 1680.  For  many  years  he  was  pastor  of  the  Inde- 
 pendent Church  in  his  native  town.  In  1 727  he 
 removed  to  London,  and  was  the  first  pastor  of 
 the  church  in  New  Broad  Street.  Here  he  con- 
 tinued until  his  death,  Nov.  22,  1 761.  His  chief 
 work  was  a  paraphrastic  exposition  of  the  N.  T., 
 the  first  volume  of  which  was  entitled  A  practical 
 exposition  of  the  four  Evmigelists,  in  the  form  of  a 
 pa?-aph7-ase,  with  occasional  notes  in  their  proper 
 places  for  further  explication,  and  serious  recollec- 
 tions at  the  close  of  every  chapter,  Lond.  1 739,  4to. 
 The  second  volume  was  published  with  a  similar 
 title  in  1747,  and  included  the  Acts,  and  the 
 Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Corinthians.  The 
 third  volume,  issued  in  1752,  included  the  remain- 
 ing books  of  the  N.  T.      The  work  is  inferior  to 
 
GYMNASIUM 
 
 182 
 
 HABAKKUK 
 
 Doddridge's  both  for  expository  and  for  devotional 
 purposes.  A  complete  list  of  Guyse's  other  works 
 may  be  found  in  Wilson's  Dissenting  Chujxhes,  ii. 
 240. — S.  N. 
 
 GYMNASIUM  (7i;/im(rtoj',Syr.^ajJ2Lli£L.), 
 
 a  large  unroofed  building  for  the  purpose  of  exercise, 
 consisting  usually  of  different  compartments,  or  a 
 set  of  separate  buildings  conjoined,  each  of  which 
 was  set  apart  to  some  special  sport,  as  the  Sph(Eris- 
 terio7t  for  playing  at  ball,  the  Palastra  for  wrestling 
 and  the  exercises  of  the  pancratium,  etc.  (Smith, 
 Diet,  of  Antiquities,  s.  v.)  This  was  almost  exclu- 
 sively a  Greek  institution,  and  there  was  hardly  a 
 Greek  town  of  any  size  that  had  not  its  gymnasium. 
 To  the  Jews  it  was  unknown  until  the  Hellenising 
 party  introduced  it  in  the  age  of  the  Maccabees 
 (l  Maccab.  i.  14).  Jason,  the  Hellenising  high-priest, 
 caused  one  to  be  erected  at  Jerusalem  (2  Maccab.  iv. 
 12,  fif. )  This  innovation  was  viewed  with  much 
 displeasure  by  the  strict  party  among  the  Jews. 
 Whether  Herod  the  Great,  when  he  introduced  the 
 theatre  and  the  amphitheatre,  restored  the  gym- 
 nasium does  not  appear,  but  the  probability  is  that 
 he  did  (Joseph.  Antiq.  15.  8.  i  ;  comp.  Bell.  Jud. 
 i.  21.  II).     [Games]. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 H. 
 
 HABAKKUK  (p^pZPI ;  'A^/SaKoiV),  a  distin- 
 guished Jewish  prophet  who  flourished  about  610 
 B.C.,  the  name  descending,  in  the  form  of  "lliyt^, 
 from  \>1V\,  anipleeti,  and  denoting,  as  observed  by 
 Jerome,  as  well  a  'favourite'  as  a  'straggler.' 
 Abarbanel  thinks  that  in  the  latter  sense  it  has  al- 
 lusion to  the  patriotic  zeal  of  the  prophet  fervently 
 contending  for  the  welfare  of  his  country  :  but 
 other  prophets  did  the  same ;  and  in  the  former  and 
 less  distant  signification,  the  name  would  be  one 
 like  Theophilus,  'a  friend  of  God,'  which  his 
 parents  may  have  given  him  for  a  good  omen.  The 
 Greeks,  not  only  the  Septuagint  translators  but  the 
 fathers  of  the  Church,  probably  to  make  it  more 
 sonorous,  corrupt  it  into  'ApajSaKovK,  ^Apa^aKovpu}, 
 or  as  Jerome  writes,  'A^aKovpco,  and  only  one 
 Greek  copy,  found  in  the  library  of  Alcala  in  Spain, 
 has  'A/3/3a\-o(5K,  which  seems  to  be  a  recent  correc- 
 tion made  to  suit  the  Hebrew  text.  Of  this 
 prophet's  birth-place,  parentage,  and  hfe,  we  have 
 only  apocryphal  and  conflicting  accounts.  The 
 Pseudo-Epiiihanius  {De  Vitis  Prophet.,  Opp.  torn, 
 ii.  18,  p.  247)  states  that  he  was  of  the  tribe  of 
 Simeon,  and  born  in  a  place  called  B^y5fo^-^;p 
 {al.  BiSfexa/o)  ;  tbat  he  fled  to  Ostrarine  when 
 Nebivchadnezzar  attacked  Jerusalem,  but  after- 
 wards returned  home,  and  died  two  years  before 
 the  return  of  his  countrymen.  But  rabbinical 
 writers  assert  that  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  and 
 name  different  birth-places  (Huetius,  Dem.  Evang., 
 Prop.  iv.  p.  50S).  In  the  apocryphal  appendix  to 
 Daniel,  in  the  stoiy  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  we  are 
 told  that  an  angel  seized  Habakkuk  by  the  hair, 
 when  he  was  in  Judaea  carrying  food  to  his  reapers 
 in  the  field,  and  transported  him  through  the  air  to 
 the  lions'  den  in  Babylon,  where  Daniel  then  lay ; 
 and  that,  ^.f^e^  having  provided  the  latter  with 
 \'ictuals,  he  was  the  same  day  carried  back  to  his 
 own   counti-y  in   like  manner.      Eusebius  notices 
 
 that  in  his  time  the  tomb  of  Habakkuk  was  shewn 
 in  the  town  of  Ceila,  in  Palestine ;  and  this  is  re- 
 peated also  by  Nicephoras  {Hist.  Eeeles.  xii.  48), 
 and  Sozomen  (vii.  29)  ;  still  there  are  other  writers 
 who  name  different  places  where,  according  to 
 common  opinion,  he  had  been  buried  (Carpzov, 
 Introd.  ad  libros  canonicos  K  T.,  p.  402). 
 
 A  full  and  trustworthy  account  of  the  life  of 
 Habakkuk  would  explain  his  imagery,  and  many 
 of  the  events  to  which  he  alludes ;  but  since  we 
 have  no  information  on  which  we  can  depend, 
 nothing  remains  but  to  determine  from  the  book 
 itself  its  historical  basis  and  its  age.  Now,  we  find 
 that  in  chap.  i.  the  prophet  sets  forth  a  vision,  in 
 which  he  discerned  the  injustice,  violence,  and  op- 
 pression committed  in  his  country  by  the  rapacious 
 and  terrible  Chaldasans,  whose  oppressions  he  an- 
 nounces as  a  divine  retribution  for  sins  committed  ; 
 consequently  he  wrote  in  the  Chaldsean  period^ 
 shortly  before  the  invasion  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
 which  rendered  Jehoiakim  tributary  to  the  king  ol 
 Babylon  (2  Kings  xxiv.  i).  When  he  wrote  the 
 first  chapter  of  his  prophecies,  the  Chaldeans  could 
 not  yet  have  invaded  Palestine,  otherwise  he  would 
 not  have  introduced  Jehovah  saying  (i.  5),  '  I  will 
 work  a  work  in  your  days,  which  ye  will  not  be- 
 lieve, though  it  be  told  you  ;'  (ver.  6)  '  for  I  raise 
 up  the  Chaldffians,  that  bitter  and  hasty  nation, 
 which  shall  march  through  the  breadth  of  the  land 
 to  possess  the  dwelling-places  that  are  not  theirs.' 
 From  ver.  12  it  is  also  evident  that  the  ruin  of  the 
 Jews  had  not  then  been  effected  ;  it  says,  '  the  Lord 
 ordained  them  for  judgment,  established  them  for 
 correction.'  Agreeably  to  the  general  style  of  the 
 prophets,  who  to  lamentations  and  announcements 
 of  divine  punishment  add  consolations  and  cheering 
 hopes  for  the  future,  Habakkuk  then  proceeds  in 
 the  second  chapter  to  foretell  the  future  humilia- 
 tion of  the  conquerors,  who  plundered  so  many 
 nations.  He  also  there  promulgates  a  vision  of 
 events  shortly  to  be  expected  ;  (ver.  3)  'the  vision 
 is  yet  for  an  appointed  time,  but  at  the  end  it  shall 
 speak,  and  not  lie  ;  though  it  tarry,  wait  for  it,  h&- 
 ca.Vise\i  7i'ill  surely  come ;  it  will  not  tarry.'  This 
 is  succeeded  in  the  third  chapter  by  an  ode,  in 
 which  the  prophet  celebrates  the  deliverances 
 wrought  by  the  Almighty  for  his  people  in  times 
 past,  and  prays  for  a  similar  interference  now  to 
 mitigate  the  coming  distresses  of  the  nation  ;  which 
 he  goes  on  to  describe,  representing  the  land  as 
 already  waste  and  desolate,  and  yet  giving  en- 
 couragement to  hope  for  a  return  of  better  times. 
 Some  interpreters  are  of  opinion  that  ch.  ii.  was 
 written  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiachin,  the  son  of  Jehoi- 
 akim (2  Kings  xxiv.  6),  after  Jerusalem  had  been 
 besieged  and  conquered  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  the 
 king  made  a  prisoner,  and,  with  many  thousands 
 of  his  subjects,  carried  away  to  Babylon  ;  none  re- 
 maining in  Jerusalem  save  the  poorest  class  of  the 
 people  (2  Kings  xxiv.  14).  But  of  all  this  nothing 
 is  said  in  the  book  of  Habakkuk,  nor  even  so  much 
 as  hinted  at ;  and  what  is  stated  of  the  violence  and 
 injustice  of  the  Chaldreans  does  not  imply  that  the 
 Jews  had  already  experienced  it.  The  prcphet 
 distinctly  mentions  that  he  sets  forth  what  he  had 
 discerned  in  a  vision,  and  he,  therefore,  speaks  of 
 events  to  be  expected  and  coming.  It  is  also  a 
 supposition  equally  gratuitous,  according  to  which 
 some  interpreters  refer  ch.  iii.  to  the  period  of  the 
 last  siege  of  Jerusalem,  when  Zedekiah  was  taken, 
 his  sons  slain,  his  eyes  put   out,  the  walls  of  thd 
 
HABAKKUK 
 
 18J« 
 
 HABOR 
 
 city  broken  doM'n,  and  the  temple  burnt  (2  Kings 
 XXV.  I- 10).  There  is  not  the  slightest  allusion  to 
 any  of  these  incidents  in  the  third  chapter  of 
 Habakkuk  ;  and  from  the  i6th  verse  it  appears 
 that  the  destroyer  is  only  coming,  and  that  the 
 prophet  expresses  fears,  not  of  the  entire  destruc- 
 tion of  the  city,  much  less  of  the  downfall  of  the 
 state,  but  only  of  the  desolation  of  the  country. 
 It  thus  appears  beyond  dispute,  that  Habakkuk 
 ]->rophesied  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jehoi- 
 akim,  about  the  year  stated  above.  Carpzov 
 {Introdiidio  ad.  libr.  canon.  V.  T.,  pp.  79j  4'°) 
 and  Jahn  {Introd.  in  libros  sacros  V.  T.,  ii.  sec. 
 120)  refer  our  prophet  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh, 
 thus  placing  him  thirty  odd  years  earlier ;  but  at 
 that  time  the  Chaldaeans  had  not  as  yet  given  just 
 ground  for  apprehension,  and  it  would  have  been 
 injudicious  in  Habakkuk  prematurely  to  fill  the 
 minds  of  the  people  with  fear  of  them.  Some  ad- 
 ditional support  to  our  statement  of  the  age  of  this 
 book  is  derived  from  the  tradition,  reported  in  the 
 apocryphal  appendix  to  Daniel  and  by  the  Pseudo- 
 Epiphanius,  that  Habakkuk  lived  to  see  the  Baby- 
 lonian exile  ;  for  if  he  prophesied  under  Manasseh 
 he  could  not  have  reached  the  exile  at  an  age  under 
 90  years ;  but  if  he  prophesied  early  in  the  reign 
 of  Jehoiakim  he  would  have  been  only  50  odd 
 years  old  at  the  time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
 and  of  the  exile.  He  was,  then,  a  contemporary 
 of  Jeremiah,  but  much  younger,  as  the  latter  made 
 his  first  appearance  in  public  as  early  as  B.C.  629, 
 in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah.  Ranitz  [Introdudio 
 in  Hab.  Vatic,  pp.  24,  59),  Stirkel  [Prolog,  ad 
 interpr.  tcrtii cap.  Hab.,  pp.  22,  27),  and  De  Wette 
 (Einieit.  Berlin,  1S40,  p.  338)  justly  place  the  age 
 of  Habakkuk  before  the  invasion  of  Judaea  by  the 
 Chaldceans. 
 
 The  style  of  this  prophet  has  been  always  much 
 admired.  Lowth  {De  Poesi  Hebi-cEor.  p.  2S7)  says  : 
 '  Poeticus  est  Habaccuci  stylus ;  sed  maxime  in 
 oda,  quje  inter  absolutissimas  in  eo  genere  merito 
 numerari  potest.'  Eichhom,  De  Wette,  and  Ro- 
 senmiiller  are  loud  in  their  praise  of  Habakkuk's 
 style ;  the  first  giving  a  detailed  and  animated 
 analysis  of  the  construction  of  his  prophecies 
 {Einleitiing  in  das  A.  T.,  iii.  p.  333).  He  equals  the 
 most  eminent  prophets  of  the  O.  T. — ^Joel,  Amos, 
 Nahum,  Isaiah  ;  and  the  ode  in  ch.  iii.  may  be 
 placed  in  competition  with  Ps.  xviii.  and  Ixviii.  for 
 originality  and  sublimity.  His  figures  are  all  great, 
 happily  chosen,  and  properly  drawn  out.  His  de- 
 nunciations are  terrible,  his  derision  bitter,  his  con- 
 solation cheering.  Instances  occur  of  borrowed 
 ideas  (ch.  iii.  19,  comp.  Ps.  xviii.  33  ;  ch.  ii.  6, 
 comp.  Is.  xiv.  4  ;  ch.  ii.  14,  comp.  Is.  xi.  9)  ;  but 
 he  makes  them  his  own  in  drawing  them  out  in  his 
 peculiar  manner.  With  all  the  boldness  and  fer- 
 vour of  his  imagination,  his  language  is  pure  and 
 his  verse  melodious.  Eichhom,  indeed,  gives  a 
 considerable  number  of  words  which  he  considers 
 to  be  peculiar  to  this  prophet,  and  supposes  him 
 to  have  formed  new  words,  or  altered  existing  ones, 
 to  sound  more  energetic  or  soft,  as  the  sentiments 
 to  be  expressed  might  require  ;  but  his  list  needs 
 sifting,  as  De  Wette  observes  [Einleitung,  p.  339)  ; 
 
 indeed  P1?p''D,  ch.  ii.  16,  is  the  only  unexception- 
 able instance.  The  ancient  catalogues  of  canoni- 
 cal books  of  the  O.  T.  do  not  mention  Habakkuk 
 by  name;  but  they  must  have  counted  him  in 
 the  twelve  minor  prophets,  whose  number  would 
 
 otherwise  not  be  full.  In  the  N.  T.  so.m-e  expres- 
 sions of  his  are  introduced,  but  his  name  is  not 
 added  (Rom.  i.  17;  Gal.  iii.  11  ;  Heb.  x.  38, 
 comp.   Hab.  ii.  4 ;  Acts  xiii.  40,  41,  c(}mp.   Hab. 
 
 i.  5)- 
 
 1.  Introductory  works:  T.  C.  Iriederich,  IJis- 
 tor!Sch-k)-itischer  Versuch  iiber  Hab.  Zeitaltcr  7ind 
 Schriften,  in  Eichhora's  Allg.  Biblioth.  des  Bibl. 
 Lit.  X.  379-400  ;  A.  C.  Ranitz,  Introdiictio  in  Hab. 
 Vaticinia,  Lipsiae  1808 ;  Hanlein,  Symb.  Crit. 
 ad Interp.   Vaticin.  Hab.,  Erlangje  1795. 
 
 2.  General  commentaries  :  Abarbanel,  Rabbini- 
 cus  Comment,  in  Hab.  Latine  redditus  a  Diderico 
 Sprechei'o,  Helmst.  1790;  D.  Chytrxi,  Lectiones  in 
 Proph.  Hab.  in  his  0pp.  t.  ii  ;  Kofod,  Commenta- 
 rins  crit.  atque  exegct.,  Gotting.  et.  Lips.  1792;  I. 
 A.  Tingstadii  ^/i/wa^/z'.  phil.  et.  crit.,  Upsal.  1795; 
 4. — F.  Delitzsch,  Der  Prophet  Habakkuk  aiisgelegt, 
 Leipzig  1853. 
 
 3.  Translations  with  notes,  explanatory  and  criti- 
 cal:  S.  F.  G.  Wahl  (Hanover,  1790),  G.  C.  Horst 
 (Gotha,  1798),  and  K.  M.  Justi  (Leipzig  1721). 
 
 4.  Commentaries  on  single  chapters  : — The  first 
 and  second  chapters  are  interpreted  by  G.  A.  Ru- 
 ]:)erti  in  the  Coin 771  entatt.  Theol.  ed.  Velthusen, 
 Kuinoel  et  Ruperti,  iii.  405,  sq.  The  third  chapter 
 is  explained  by  G.  Perschke  (Frankfort  i']']'j),  G. 
 A.  Schroeder  (Groning  17S1),  Oh.  F.  Schnurrer 
 (Tiib.  1 786  ;  also  in  his  Dissertat.  phil.  c7-it.  p.  342) . 
 and  by  Moerner  (Upsalae  1791). — ^J.  v.  H. 
 
 HABAZZELETH.     [Chabazzeleth.] 
 
 HABERGEON  (npK',  '^^-\t,  Xnnri)  [Arms  ; 
 Armour.] 
 
 HABOR  ("lUn ;  Sept.  'A/3c6p,  and  Xa^J^p).    A 
 
 river,  and  apparently  also  a  district,  of  Assyria,  to 
 which  considerable  interest  is  attached  in  connec- 
 tion wUh  the  first  captivity.  We  read  in  1  Chron. 
 V.  26,  that  Tilgath-pilneser  carried  away  '  the  Reu- 
 benites,  and  the  Gadites,  and  the  half-tribe  of 
 Manasseh,  and  brought  them  unto  Halah,  and 
 Habor,  and  Hara,  and  to  the  river  Gozan.'  About 
 seventeen  years  later  Shalmaneser,  the  successor  of 
 the  former  monarch,  'took  Samaria,  and  carried 
 Israel  away  into  Assyria,  and  placed  them  in 
 Halah,  and  in  Habor,  the  river  of  Gozan'  (A.  V., 
 '  (^i' the  river  Gozan,'  2  Kings  xvii.  6;  xviii.  11). 
 There  are  two  rivers  still  bearing  this  name,  and 
 geographers  are  not  agreed  as  to  which  is  here  re- 
 ferred to. 
 
 A  river  called  Khabtir  (Arab,  ^.j  \j>.  =  Heb.  "11311) 
 
 rises  in  the  central  highlands  of  Kurdistan,  flows  in 
 a  south-westerly  direction,  and  falls  into  the  Tigris 
 about  seventy  miles  above  Mosul  (Layard,  Nineveh 
 and  Babylon,  p.  56  ;  Schultens,  Index  Geogi'.  in 
 vita77i  Saladiiii,  s.  v.)  Many  suppose  this  to  be 
 the  Habor  of  Scripture,  for  the  following  reasons  : 
 I.  It  is  within  Assyria  proper,  which  Ptolemy  says 
 was  bounded  on  the  west  by  the  Tigris  (vi.  i).  2. 
 It  is  affirmed  that  the  Assyrian  monarch  would 
 place  his  captives  in  a  central  part  of  his  kingdom, 
 such  as  this  is,  and  not  in  the  outskirts  (Keil  on 
 2  Kings  xvii.  4-6).  3.  Habor  is  termed  'a  river 
 of  Gozan'  (JTIj  1113  "lUri)  ;  and  Goza7i  is  supposed 
 to  signify  'pasture,'  and  to  be  identical  with  the 
 word  Zozan,  now  applied  by  the  Nestorians  to  the 
 pasture-lands  in  the  highlands  of  Assyria,  where 
 the  Khabur  takes  its   rise  (Grant,    The  Nesto7-ian 
 
HABOR 
 
 184 
 
 HACHILAH 
 
 Ckristiam,  p.  124).  4.  Ptolemy  mentions  a  moun- 
 tain called  Chahor  {xa^wpas)  which  divides  Assyria 
 from  Media  (^d.  1)  ;  and  Bochart  says  the  river 
 Chabor  has  its  source  in  that  mountain  (Opfra,  i. 
 p.  194,  242,  362).  Some  have  supposed  that  the 
 modem  Nestorians  are  the  descendants  of  the  cap- 
 tive Jews  (Grant,  /.  c.) 
 
 Tlie  other  and  much  more  celebrated  river, 
 Khabar,  is  called  Ahorrhas  by  Strabo  ('A^Sppas, 
 xvi.  p.  514),  Chaboras  by  Ptolemy  (v.  iS)  and 
 Pliny  {H.  N.  xxx.  3).  'It  rises  about  lat.  36°  40', 
 long.  40°,  flows  only  a  little  south  of  east  to  its 
 junction  near  Koukab  with  the  Jerujer  or  river  of 
 Nisibis,  which  comes  down  from  Mons  Masius. 
 Both  of  these  branches  are  formed  by  the  union  of 
 a  number  of  streams.  Neither  of  them  is  fordable 
 for  some  distance  above  their  junction  ;  and  below 
 it  they  constitute  a  river  of  such  magnitude  as  to  be 
 navigable  for  a  considerable  distance  by  steamers. 
 The  course  of  the  Khabour  below  Kaukab  is  tortu- 
 ous, but  its  general  direction  is  south-south-west. 
 The  entire  length  of  the  stream  is  not  less  than  200 
 miles'  (Rawlinson,  Ancient  Monarchies,  i.  236  ; 
 Ainsworth,  Travels  in  the  Track  of  the  Ten  Thou- 
 sand, p.  79;  Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylo7t,  p. 
 304).  Winer  {Reahvmierbuch,  s.  v.),  Ritter  {Erd- 
 kiinde,  x.  p.  248),  Gesenius  (Thesaums),  Layard, 
 Rawlinson,  and  others,  maintain  that  this  is  the 
 ancient  Habor.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  As- 
 syria proper  was  confined  to  the  country  lying  along 
 the  banks  of  the  Upper  Tigris,  and  stretching  east- 
 ward to  Media.  But  its  territory  gradually  ex- 
 panded, so  as  to  include  Babylonia  (Herodotus,  iii. 
 92),  Mesopotamia  (Pliny,  H.  N.,  vi.  26),  and  even 
 the  country  westward  to  the  confines  of  Cilicia  and 
 Phoenicia  (Strabo,  xvi.)  At  the  time  of  the  capti- 
 vity the  power  of  Assyria  was  at  its  height.  The 
 Jewish  captives  were  as  secure  on  the  banks  of  the 
 western  as  of  the  eastern  Habor.  The  ruins  of  As- 
 syrian towns  are  scattered  over  the  whole  of  northern 
 Mesopotamia.  '  On  the  banks  of  the  lower  Khabour 
 are  the  remains  of  a  royal  palace,  besides  many  other 
 traces  of  the  tract  through  which  it  runs  having 
 been  permanently  occupied  by  the  Assyrian  people. 
 Even  near  Seruj,  in  the  country  between  Haran 
 and  the  Euphrates,  some  evidence  has  been  found 
 not  only  of  conquest  but  of  occupation'  (Rawhnson, 
 Ancient  Monarchies,  i.  p.  247  ;  Chesney,  Eu- 
 phrates Expedition,  i.  p.  114;  Layard,  Nin.  a)td 
 Bab.,  pp.  275,  279-300,  312).  There  can  be  no 
 doubt  that  the  Khabur  was  in  Assyria,  and  near 
 the  centre  of  the  kingdom,  at  the  time  of  the  capti- 
 vity. Further,  Ptolemy  mentions  a  province  in 
 Mesopotamia  called  Gazizanitis  (v.  18).  It  lay 
 around  the  Khabur,  and  was  doubtless  identical 
 with  Gozan,  hence  the  phrase,  '  Habor  the  river  of 
 Gozan'  (2  Kings  xvii.  6).  Chalcitis,  which  appears 
 to  be  identical  with  Halah,  mentioned  in  the  same 
 passage,  adjoined  Gauzanitis.  It  is  a  remarkable 
 fact  that  down  as  late  as  the  12th  century  there 
 were  large  Jewish  communities  on  the  banks  of  the 
 Khabur  (Benjamin  of  Tudela,  in  Early  Trav.  in 
 Pal.,  92,  sq.)  This  appears  to  be  the  Habor  of 
 the  Bible.  The  district  along  the  banks  probably 
 took  its  name  from  the  river,  as  would  seem  from  a 
 comparison  with  I  Chron.  v.  26.  Ptolemy  men- 
 tions a  town  called  Chabor  (v.  18).  It  seems 
 doubtful  whether  Habor  was  identical  with  the 
 river  Chebar  (133),  on  which  Ezekiel  saw  his 
 visions.  The  latter  was  perhaps  farther  south  in 
 Babylonia  (Ezek.  i.  3,  etc.)— J.  L.  P. 
 
 HACHILAH,  The  Hill  of  (n!3''3nn  Wll), 
 
 is  mentioned  three  times  in  the  history  of  David's 
 flight  from  Saul,  i  Sam.  xxiii.  19  ;  xxvi.  I  and  3. 
 The  Hebrew  is  the  same  in  all  the  passages  ;  buf 
 the  versions  vary  :  the  LXX.  reads  '0  Bow6s 
 Tov  'ExeXS  in  (i),  and  '0  Boi/y6s  6  [or  t6]  'ExeXd,* 
 as  apposition  nouns,  in  (2)  and  (3)  ;  the  Vulgate 
 has  Collis  Hachila  in  (i)  and  (2),  and  Gabaa  Ha- 
 chila  in  (3)  ;  the  Syriac  drops  Hachila  in  (i),  and 
 
 reads  ] n  V«^  »~i  only  \i.e.,  in  Gebaoth\  while  in 
 (2)  and  (3)  it  adds  to  this  word  a  second  proper 
 
 name,     t-'-»Q-»^^     Chevila,    thus    producing    the 
 
 compound  designation  '  Gebaoth  Hevila.''  Fiirst 
 [ffebr.  IV.  B.  s.v.)  supposes  the  name  to  mean 
 '  hill  of  ban-enness  ;'  Simon  (in  Onomast.,  p.  75), 
 and,  with  less  precision,  Gesenius  (in  Thes.  and 
 Lex.,  S.V.),  connect  '  Hachilah'  with  the  obsolete 
 
 root  73n,  to  be  dark,  and  call  it  the  dai'ksome  hill. 
 ['  Collis  obscuritatis,'  says  Simon,  'i.  e.,  umbrosus, 
 adeoque  absconsioni  commodus.']  This  is  pro- 
 bably the  correct  idea,  as  indicating  (like  the 
 Mount  Zalmon  of  Judg.  ix.  48)  the  woodland  cha.- 
 racter  of  the  hill  of  Hachilah  in  tlie  days  of  David. 
 One  of  the  most  remarkable  points  of  contrast 
 between  ancient  and  modern  Palestine  arises  from 
 the  entire  destruction  of  woods  which  once  covered 
 its  mountains  (see  Stanley,  Sin.  and  Palest.,  p. 
 120),  so  that  no  conclusion  can  be  drawn  of  its 
 ancient  condition  from  the  present  sterility  of  any 
 placet  Our  'hill  of  Hachilah'  is,  no  doubt,  the 
 '  mountain  of  the  wilderfiess  of  Ziph''  mentioned  in 
 I  Sam.  xxiii.  14;  and  'the  wood'  of  the  15th 
 verse,  which  aided  David's  concealment,  very  pro- 
 bably covered  its  slopes  and  crest,  and  so  gave 
 great  propriety  to  its  name  of  Hachilah,  or  '  hill 
 of  shade.'  So  much  indeed  seems  expressed  in 
 verse  19,  where  David's  'woody  fastness'  is 
 described  as  '  on  the  hill  of  Hachilah.      [nillf723  + 
 
 *  But  Cod.  Alex,  reads  6  powbs  rod  'Ax'Xa  in  I 
 Sam.  xxvi.  I,  and  6  jBovvbi  rod  'ExeXa  in  xxvi.  3. 
 
 +  '  Such  was  the  beauty  and  productiveness  of 
 these  elevated  plains  ['the  hill  country'  of  Judah], 
 that  the  estate  of  Caleb,  as  well  as  the  Israelitish 
 Goshen,  and  (at  no  great  distance  northwards)  the 
 rich  meadows  on  which  the  numerous  flocks  of 
 Nabal  browsed,  as  well  as  the  vineyards  of  Engedi, 
 all  lay  in  different  parts  of  the  hill  country.  In 
 short,  lofty  mountains,  on  which  the  light  sandy 
 soil  was  supported  by  terraces  almost  to  the  top, 
 spacious  plains  enriched  with  an  infinite  variety  of 
 springs,  small  lakes  and  rivers,  and  adorned  with 
 luxuriant  crops  of  grain  and  extensive  woods — 
 pastures  in  which  grass  of  the  loveliest  verdure 
 afforded  an  almost  inexhaustible  store  of  food  to 
 the  grazier,  and  gardens,  redolent  with  fruit  and 
 flowers  of  every  name,  composed  the  beautifully 
 variegated  landscapes  of  Judah  ;  a  few  bleak  spots, 
 such  as  at  Maon,  Ziph,  Zin,  valleys  which,  in  the 
 language  of  the  Hebrews,  were  called  '  deserts,'  but 
 which,  though  inferior  to  the  rest  of  the  tribe,  con- 
 tained too  good  pasturage  to  be  considered  barren 
 wastes,  were  all  that  detracted  from  the  general  and 
 extraordinary  fertility  of  the  country.' — Paxton's 
 Illustrations.  Sacred  Geography,  p.  469. 
 
 i  The  Sept.  rendering  of  this  passage  is  iv  Mf<r' 
 
HACHILAII 
 
 185 
 
 HACHILAH 
 
 n  ny-J3  nti'irijl  are  three  locatives  of  co-ordi- 
 nate descriptive  force,  indicating  that  '  the  strong- 
 holds' were  in  '  a  thicket-wood'  and  that  that  wood 
 was  on  '  the  hill  of  Hachilah.']  The  name  of  this 
 hill  does  not  survive,  so  far  as  research  has  yet 
 shewn,  in  any  modern  place  ;  it  is  not,  however, 
 difficult  to  discover  its  situation  by  help  of  the 
 names  mentioned  in  chapters  xxiii.  and  xxv. — 
 Ziph,  Carmel,  and  Maon.  These  names  have  been 
 identified  in  the  modern  Tell  Zif,  Kurniid  [7\innel 
 in  Seetzen],  and  Tell  Main  (See  Van  de  Velde, 
 Map  and  Memoir;  Robinson,  Bibl.  Res.  [ed.  i], 
 vol.  ii.  p.  200,  etc.  ;  Ritter,  Erdk.  [Pal.  u.  Syr., 
 ii.  636-640]  ;  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book, 
 p.  600;  Von  Raumer,  Paliistina,  183,  211).  We 
 will,  in  order  approximately  to  fix  the  site  of  our 
 hill,  quote  the  topographical  notes  of  R.  Jos. 
 Schwarz  {Descriptive  Geo^.  of  Palest.,  p.  106),  be- 
 cause of  their  succinctness  ;  '  Maon,  the  village 
 Maiin,  five  English  miles  south  of  Hebron  ;  Car- 
 mel is  the  village  Al  Kirmil,  situated  two  English 
 miles  north-north-west  o{  Maiin,  on  a  small  mount ; 
 it  has  an  excellent  water-course  called  Birkat  al 
 Airmil,  in  the  vicinity  of  which  is  a  small  fort 
 whence  the  Dead  Sea  can  be  seen  ;  Ziph,  the 
 village  Ziff,  two  English  miles  south-east  of  He- 
 bron, and  two  English  miles  north-east  of  Al 
 Kirmil.^  These  distances  are  substantially  cor- 
 rect, within  a  mile  or  two,  according  to  Van  de 
 Velde's  excellent  map,  with  which  that  of  Robin- 
 son and  Smith  [Bibl.  Res.,  vol.  ii. ,  ed.  i)  agrees. 
 Dr.  Thomson,  /.  c. ,  in  reference  to  the  sacred 
 history  which  mentions  the  subject  of  this  arti- 
 cle, observes  : — '  The  people  of  Ziph  obtained 
 an  odious  reputation  in  the  time  of  i)avid  by  be- 
 traying his  hiding-place  in  the  hill  of  Hachilah  to 
 king  Saul.  One  of  these  rough  hills  below  Ziph 
 must  doubtless  be  the  scene  of  that  venturesome 
 visit  of  David  into  the  camp  of  his  enemy  while  he 
 and  all  his  troop  were  asleep  (i  Sam.  xxvi.  1-12). 
 That  entire  region  is  now  almost  deserted,  except 
 by  Bedawin  robbers,  who  render  it  at  least  as  dan- 
 gerous to  honest  shepherds  as  it  seems  to  have  been 
 before  David  and  his  company  frequented  it.  The 
 men  of  Carmel  mention  it  as  something  remark- 
 
 aapk,  iv  tois  ffrevoLS,  iv  rij  Kati'j,  iv  t(2  ^owQ  tov 
 'ExeXS.  Here  ev  roh  crrevoh,  from  being  a  gloss  ex- 
 planatory of  Meo-fl-apd,  has  crept  into  the  text.  Meo-- 
 <Tapi  is  a  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  mi^Q,  the 
 double  sigma  representing  the  tsadi,  and  the  daleth 
 being  mistaken,  as  often  happens,  for  the  resh  (Stan- 
 ley, S.  and  P.,  appendix,  94).  Another  instance  of 
 mistaking  T  for  "1  curiously  happens  in  this  very  pas- 
 sage— for  the  LXX.  iv  ttj  Katv^  is  clearly  the  ren- 
 dering of  ti'lh,  '  New,'  instead  of  E'-lh,  '  a  wood.' 
 
 Josephus  has  the  same  version  as  the  LXX.  {An- 
 iiq.  vi.  13.  2).  It  will  be  observed  that  the  Masada, 
 so  famous  in  the  wars  of  Josephus  (vii.  8),  as  '  the 
 very  last  scene  in  the  tragedy  of  Israel's  destruc- 
 tion' (Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  p.  602),  more 
 correctly  retained  the  Hebrew  ITl^D,  fortress  or 
 
 stronghold.  Eusebius  and  St.  Jerome  {Onomast.) 
 give  the  form  of  the  LXX.  nearly,  Maaeped  and 
 Masereth  ;  but  they  express  their  doubt  whether 
 it  be  a  proper  noun  at  all  by  quoting  Aquila's  ren- 
 dering 'stronghold,'  Symmachus'  'retreat'  or  ';v- 
 /uge,'  and  Theodotion's  '  cave'  (Origen,  Hexapla, 
 in  loc.) 
 
 able  that  they  were  not  hurl,  neither  missed  any. 
 thing  as  long  as  they  were  conversant  wiih  them 
 in  the  fields.  '  They  were  a  wall  unto  us  niglit 
 and  day  all  the  while  we  were  with  them  keepmg 
 the  sheep'  (i  Sam.  xxv.  15,  16).  It  is  refreshing 
 to  read  such  a  testimony  to  David's  admirable 
 government  over  the  band  that  followed  him  ;  and 
 if  there  were  now  such  an  emir  in  that  same  region, 
 we  might  have  safely  extended  our  rambles  down 
 to  the  Dead  Sea,  etc'  Dr.  Robinson  {Bibl.  Res.,  li. 
 201)  refers  to  the  character  of  David's  outlaws  and 
 his  control  over  them,  and  adds  :  '  In  all  these  parti- 
 culars we  were  deeply  struck  with  the  truth  and 
 strength  of  the  Biblical  descriptions  of  manners 
 and  customs,  almost  identically  the  same  as  they 
 exist  at  the  present  day.'  The  additional  infor- 
 mation about  the  site  of  our  'hill  of  Hachilah,' 
 as  '  south  of  Jeshimon'  (xxiii.  19,  |iD''ti'\"]  X'^'^'^i 
 '  on  the  right  hand,'  i.e.,  of  one  facing  the  east ;  or 
 (as  it  is  in  xxvi.  I  and  3)  '^n  ""JS  7Vj  '  ^«  frotit  of' 
 
 or  '  before'  Jeshimon),  gives  us  no  assistance.  If 
 'Jeshimon'  be  a  proper  name,  as  the  LXX.,  the 
 Vulgate,  the  Syriac,  and  St.  Jerome  {Onomast. 
 s.  V.  Lsimoth)  make  it,  we  have  no  clue  of  its 
 ancient  situation.*  But  it  is  much  better  to  regard 
 it  as  an  appellative,  after  Aquila  and  Symmachus 
 and  Eusebius  (if  his  reference  to  these  two  transla- 
 tors in  his  Onomasticon  may  be  deemed  an  indica- 
 tion of  his  own  opinion  in  opposition  to  St.  Jerome, 
 who  simply  assumes  lsimoth  to  be  a  proper  name, 
 without  deference  to  Aquila  and  Symmachus),  to- 
 gether with  the  margin  of  our  own  A.  V.,  which, 
 in  I  Sam.  xxiii.  19,  instead  of  Jeshimon,  reads 
 '  the  'cvilderness.'  This  version,  which  is  corrobo- 
 rated by  those  of  Aquila  and  Symmachus,  is  ren- 
 dered extremely  probable  by  the  article  in  the 
 Hebrew  \Sty\^''T\  (in  Num.  xxi.  20  the  same  mar- 
 ginal note  occurs),  and  by  the  frequent  use  of  the 
 word  in  the  Psalms  {e.g.,  Ixxviii.  40)  and  Isaiah 
 {e.g.,  xliiJ.  19)  as  an  appellative,  parallel  to  "I^HD. 
 
 If  so.  the  local  note  about  the  site  of  the  hill  of 
 Hachilah  must  be  only  regarded  as  placing  it  on 
 the  soutli  edge  of  the  wilderness  and  facing  it,  as 
 if  the  heights  of  Hachilah  commanded  the  view  of 
 the  entire  wilderness  towards  the  north.  The  wil- 
 derness itself  seems  to  be  called  indifferently  by 
 the  names  of  the  towns  which  lay  on  its  northern 
 and  southern  borders — 'Ziph'  on  the  north,  and 
 'Maon'  on  the  south  (comp.  xxiii.  14  and  25). 
 Hachilah,  with  its  slopes  of  thicket-wood,  seems 
 to  have  been  the  chief  rising-ground  on  all  the 
 plain  ;  another  hill  is  mentioned  in  the  history 
 'afar  off'  (xvi.  13)  ;  this  agrees  with  the  modem 
 accounts  and  larger  maps  of  the  district  (See  that 
 of  Van  de  Velde).     'ExeXa,  the  form  of  Hachilah, 
 
 *  The  Bethsimuth  and  ^ifba.aijj.ov'ir  of  St. 
 Jerome  and  Eusebius  {Onomast. ),  ten  miles  south  of 
 Jericho,  which  some  have  identified  with  our 
 Jeshimon,  was  no  doubt  another  place.  There 
 can,  therefore,  be  no  ground  for  Dr.  Kitto's  con- 
 jecture that  our  hill  of  Hachilah  was  the  same 
 locality  as  the  subsequently  famous  stronghold 
 Masada  {Pictor.  Bible  on  I  Sam.  xxiii.  19  ;  and 
 comp.  Bonfrerius  on  Onomast.,  for  the  tnie  situa- 
 tion of  Jerome's  '  Bethsimuth,'  which  led  to  Kitto's 
 conjecture  ;  see  also  Kruse  and  Fleischer's  note  on 
 Seetzen,  Reisen,  iv.  405). 
 
HACHMONITE 
 
 186 
 
 HADAD 
 
 seems  to  have  misled  Eusebius  and  St.  Jerome  in 
 their  Onomast.,  for,  as  Reland  {Palczstitta,  745) 
 has  shewn,  they  have  described  both  'ExeXd  and 
 K^etXa  (Keilah)  as  seven  miles  from  Eleutheropo- 
 hs  in  the  same  direction  ;  this  distance  liolds  good 
 indeed  of  Keilah,  which  is  north-west  of  Hebron, 
 but  is  of  course  untrue  of  our  hill,  which  is  south 
 and  slightly  east  of  Hebron.  [The  existence  of 
 two  ancient  Ziphs  in  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  24,  55)>  and 
 the  mention  of  'the  wilderness'  of  Paran  (xxv.  i), 
 have  suggested  a  more  southern  situation  for  the 
 events  of  this  portion  of  David's  life  ;  but  the  argu- 
 ments in  support  of  that  view  do  not  invalidate  our 
 conclusion  that  the  site  of  the  hill  of  Hachilah  was 
 in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  northern  Ziph. 
 (Ziph)].— P.  H. 
 
 HACHMONITE.  This  is  the  rendering  in  i 
 Chron.  xi.  il  of  "'jifD^lTp,  more  properly  ren- 
 dered in  the  margin,  and  in  xxvii.  32,  '  son  of 
 Hachmoni.'  In  the  former  of  these  passages  this 
 appellation  is  used  of  Jashobeam,  one  of  David's 
 mighty  men  ;  in  the  latter  of  Jehiel,  who  'was  with 
 the  king's  sons,'  probably  as  their  tutor.  As 
 Jashobeam  was  the  son  of  Zabdiel  (xxvii.  2),  we 
 must  regard  Hachmoni  either  as  the  name  of  an 
 ancestor  who  founded  a  family,  or  as  a  title  of 
 Zabdiel  =  the  Hachmonite,  i.e.  the  wise  man,  from 
 DSn  (Jerome  renders  it  by  sapieiitissimits,  and  ap- 
 plies it  to  David,  QiicBst.  Jkbr.  ad.  loc.)  In  2 
 Sam.  xxiii.  8  he  is  called  '  the  Tachmonite,'  pro- 
 bably by  a  clerical  error  [Eznite]. — \V.  L.  A. 
 
 HACKSPAN,  Dietrich,  or,  in  the  Latinized 
 form  of  his  name,  Theodoricus  Hackspannus, 
 was  born  at  Weimar  in  1607.  He  early  devoted 
 himself  to  the  study  of  sacred  philology,  and  on 
 this  account  became  an  earnest  student  of  the 
 Oriental  languages.  He  studied  for  seven  years  in 
 the  theological  and  philosophical  schools  of  Jena, 
 then  at  Altorf  under  the  Orientalist  Schwenter, 
 and  subsequently  at  Helmstadt  under  G.  Calixtus. 
 In  1636  he  returned  to  Altorf,  and  became  profes- 
 sor of  Oriental  languages  in  that  university,  where 
 he  also  held  a  chair  of  theology.  He  was  reputed 
 to  be  the  first  scholar  of  his  age  in  Hebrew,  Syriac, 
 Chaldee,  and  Arabic.  He  died  Jan.  19,  1659.  His 
 most  important  Biblical  works  are — i.  Luaihra- 
 tioiies  FraukentJialeuscs,  sive  specimen  aliipiod  inter- 
 pretafioiitDn  ct  exposiiionum,  qitas  phiriDias  in  diffi- 
 cilliina  qtiaeqiie  iitriusgue  Tcstameuti  loca  vieditatiis 
 est  B.C.  Bertramits,  Altorf  1645,  8vo.  2.  Sylloge 
 dispiitationum  t/ieologicanoti  et philologicarum,  Alt. 
 1663,410.  3.  Miscdlaneorutn  sacrorzii7i,  libri  duo, 
 Alt.  1660.  4.  Notae philologico-theologicae invaria 
 et  difficiliora  Veteiis  et  Novi  Testamenti  loca,  Alt. 
 1664,  3  vols.  8vo.  5-  Ol'servationes,  Arabico- 
 Syriaca:  in  qiiacdam  loca  Veteris  et  Novi  Testa- 
 Dienti,  Alt.  1662,  4to.  Zeltner,  quoted  by  Bud- 
 deus  {Tsagoge,  p.  1476),  speaks  in  the  highest  terms 
 of  Hackspan's  skill  in  the  exegesis  of  the  O.  T. 
 R.  Simon's  onlv  complaint  is  the  absence  of  origi- 
 nality {Hist.  Ci-it.  du  N.  Z,  p.  721).— S.  N. 
 
 HADAD,  properly  Chadad  ("Iiri;  Se.pt.  ^..00- 
 
 Sav,  'Xovdav,  Alex.  Xo55a.5).  A  son  of  Ishmael 
 (Gen.  xxv.  15  ;  I  Chron.  i.  30).  The  textual  read- 
 ing in  the  former  of  these  passages  is  "HH,  but  the 
 Sam  ,  LXX.,  Josephus,  Gr.  Venet.,  Arab.,  etc., 
 read  ^TH,  and  this  is  held  to  be  the  correct  read- 
 L'lg.     On  the  border  of  the  Persian  Gulf  there  is  .1 
 
 district  called  by  Polybius  (xiii.  T.  iii.  205,  ed.  Lips. 
 1 764)  HaTTTfvia,  inhabited  by  the  Gerrhaeans ; 
 Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  15)  mentions  the  'Arraloi  to  the 
 south  of  the  Gerrhaeans  ;  Pliny  speaks  of  the 
 Chateni  along  with  the  Gerrhaeans,  and  has  Attene 
 as  the  name  of  a  district  there  {//.  N.  vi.  32)  ;  and 
 the   Arabians    celebrate  a  place   which   they  call 
 
 U-L  ChathtJi,  between  Oman  and  Bahrein.  It 
 is  here,  therefore,  we  are  probably  to  look  for  the 
 settlementof  the  descendants  of  Chadad. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HADAD    (Tin  ;  Sept.    'A5do)  is  equivalent  to 
 
 Adad,  the  name  of  the  chief  deity  of  the  Syrians 
 [Adad],  and  borne,  with  or  without  additions,  as 
 a  proper  name,  or  more  probably  as  a  title,  like 
 '  Pharaoh'  in  Egypt,  by  several  of  the  kings  of 
 Southern  Syria. 
 
 1.  A  king  of  Edom,  who  defeated  the  Midia- 
 nites  in  the  intervening  territory  of  Moab  (Gen. 
 xxxvi.  35  ;  I  Chron.  i.  46).  This  is  the  only  one 
 of  the  ancient  kings  of  Edom  whose  exploits  are 
 recorded  by  Moses.  Another  king  of  Edom  of  the 
 same  name  is  mentioned  in  i  Chron.  i.  50,  51. 
 
 2.  A  king  of  Syria,  who  reigned  in  Damascus  at 
 the  time  that  David  attacked  and  defeated  Hadad- 
 ezer,  king  of  Zobah,  whom  he  marched  to  assist, 
 and  shared  in  his  defeat.  This  fact  is  recorded  in 
 2  Sam.  viii.  5,  but  the  name  of  tlie  king  is  not 
 given.  It  is  supplied,  however,  by  Josephus  {An- 
 tiq.  vii.  5-  2),  who  reports,  after  Nicolas  of  Damas- 
 cus, that  he  carried  succours  to  Hadad-ezer  as  far 
 as  the  Euphrates,  where  David  defeated  them  both. 
 
 3.  A  young  prince  of  the  royal  race  of  Edom, 
 who,  when  his  country  was  conquered  by  David, 
 contrived,  in  the  heat  of  the  massacre  committed 
 by  Joab,  to  escape  with  some  of  his  father's  ser- 
 vants, or  rather  was  carried  off  by  them,  into  the 
 land  of  Midian.  Thence  Hadad  went  into  the 
 desert  of  Paran,  and  eventually  proceeded  to  Egypt. 
 He  was  there  most  favourably  received  by  the  king, 
 who  assigned  him  an  estate  and  establishment 
 suited  to  his  rank,  and  even  gave  him  in  marriage 
 the  sister  of  his  own  consort,  by  whom  he  had  a 
 son,  who  was  brouglit  up  in  the  palace  with  the 
 sons  of  Pharaoh.  Hadad  remained  in  Egypt  till 
 after  the  death  of  David  and  Joab,  when  he  re- 
 turned to  his  own  country  in  the  hope  of  recover- 
 ing his  father's  throne  (i  Kings  xi.  14-22).  The 
 Scripture  does  not  record  the  result  of  this  attempt 
 farther  than  by  mentioning  him  as  one  of  the 
 troublers  of  Solomon's  reign,  which  implies  some 
 measure  of  success.  After  relating  these  facts  the 
 text  goes  on  to  mention  another  enemy  of  Solomon, 
 named  Rezin,  and  then  adds  (ver.  25),  that  this 
 was  '  besides  the  mischief  that  Hadad  did  ;  and  he 
 abhorred  Israel  and  reigned  over  Syria.'  On  this 
 point  the  present  writer  may  quote  what  he  has 
 elsewhere  stated — '  Our  version  seeras  to  make  this 
 apply  to  Rezin  ;  but  the  Septuagint  refers  it  to 
 Hadad,  reading  DHX  Edom,  instead  of  D1X  Aram 
 or  Syria,  and  the  sense  would  certainly  be  im- 
 proved by  this  reading,  inasmuch  as  it  supplies  an 
 apparent  omission  ;  for  without  it  we  only  know 
 that  Hadad  left  Egypt  for  Edom,  and  not  how  he 
 succeeded  there,  or  how  he  was  able  to  trouble  Solo- 
 mon. The  history  of  Hadad  is  certainly  very 
 obscure.  Adopting  the  Septuagint  reading,  some 
 conclude  that  Pharaoh  used  his  interest  with  Solo- 
 mon to  allow  Hadad  to  reign  as  a  tributary  prince, 
 and  that  he  ultimately  asserted  his  independence. 
 
HADADEZER 
 
 187 
 
 HADAS 
 
 Josephus,  however,  seems  to  have  read  the  Hebrevi' 
 as  our  version  does,  '  Syria'  not  '  Edom.'  He  says 
 that  Hadad,  on  his  arrival  at  Edom,  found  the 
 territory  too  strongly  garrisoned  by  Solomon's 
 troops  to  afford  any  hope  of  success.  He  there- 
 fore proceeded  with  a  party  of  adherents  to  Syria, 
 where  he  was  well  received  by  Rezin,  then  at  the 
 head  of  a  band  of  robbers,  and  with  his  assistance 
 seized  upon  part  of  Syria  and  reigned  there.  If 
 this  be  correct,  it  must  have  been  a  different  part 
 of  Syria  from  that  in  which  Rezin  himself  reigned, 
 for  it  is  certain,  from  verse  24,  that  he  (Rezin)  did 
 reign  in  Damascus.  Carrieres  supposes  that  Hadad 
 reigned  in  vSyria  after  the  death  of  Rezin  ;  and  it 
 might  reconcile  apparent  discrepancies,  to  suppose 
 that  two  kingdoms  were  established  (there  were 
 mo'-e  previously),  both  of  which,  after  the  death  of 
 Rezin,  were  consolidated  under  Hadad.  That 
 Hadad  was  really  king  of  Syria  seems  to  be  rather 
 corroborated  by  the  fact,  that  every  subsequent 
 king  of  Syria  is,  in  the  Scripture,  called  Ben- 
 Hadad,  '  son  of  Hadad,'  and  in  Josephus  simply 
 Hadad  ;  which  seems  to  denote  that  the  founder  of 
 the  dynasty  was  called  by  this  name.  We  may 
 observe  that,  whether  we  here  read  Aram  or  Edom, 
 it  must  be  understood  as  applying  to  Hadad,  not  to 
 Rezin'  {Pictorial  Bible,  on  2  Kings  xi,  14). — ^J.  K. 
 
 HADADEZER  (ITyTin,  Hadad-helpcd ;  Sept. 
 
 'ASpaafctp),  or  Hadadrezer,  king  of  Zobah,  a 
 powerful  monarch  in  the  time  of  David,  and  the 
 only  one  who  seems  to  have  been  in  a  condition 
 seriously  to  dispute  with  him  the  predominancy  in 
 south-western  Asia.  He  was  defeated  by  the  Is- 
 raelites in  the  first  campaign  (B.C.  1032)  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  the  Euphrates,  with  a  great  loss 
 of  men,  war-chariots,  and  horses,  and  was  despoiled 
 of  many  of  his  towns  (2  Sam.  viii.  3  ;  i  Chron. 
 xviii.  3).  This  check  not  only  impaired,  but  de- 
 stroyed his  power.  A  diversion  highly  serviceable 
 to  him  was  made  by  a  king  of  Damascene-Syria 
 (whom  the  Scripture  does  not  name,  but  who  is 
 the  same  with  Hadad,  3),  who,  coming  to  his 
 succour,  compelled  David  to  turn  his  arms  against 
 him,  and  abstain  from  reaping  all  the  fruits  of  his 
 victory  (2  Sam.  x.  6,  scq. ;  I  Chron.  xix.  6,  seq.) 
 The  breathing-time  thus  afforded  Hadadezer  was 
 turned  by  him  to  such  good  account  that  he  was 
 able  to  accept  the  subsidies  of  Hanun,  king  of  the 
 Ammonites,  and  to  take  a  leading  part  in  the  con- 
 federacy formed  by  that  monarch  against  David. 
 Tlie  first  army  brought  into  the  field  was  beaten 
 and  put  to  flight  by  Abishai  and  Joab  ;  but  Hadad- 
 ezer, not  yet  discouraged,  went  into  the  countries 
 east  of  the  Euphrates,  and  got  together  the  forces  of 
 all  his  allies  and  tributaries,  which  he  placed  under 
 the  command  of  Shophach,  his  general.  To  con- 
 front so  formidable  an  adversary,  David  took  the 
 field  in  person,  and  in  one  great  victory  so  com- 
 pletely broke  the  power  of  Hadadezer,  that  all  the 
 small  tributary  princes  seized  the  opportunity  of 
 throwing  off  his  yoke,  of  abandoning  the  Ammo- 
 nites to  their  fate,  and  of  submitting  quietly  to 
 David,  whose  power  was  thus  extended  to  the 
 Euphrates. — ^J.  K. 
 
 HADAD-RIMMON   (pSIinn  ;  Sept.  KOTreris 
 
 poaii'os).  This  place  is  only  mentioned  in  one  pas- 
 sage of  Scripture,  and  there  it  is  introduced  inci- 
 dentally— '  In  that  day  there  shall  be  great  lamen- 
 tation in  Jerusalem,  as  the  lamentation  of  Hadad-  I 
 
 rimmon  in  the  valley  of  Megiddon'  (Zech.  xii.  ii). 
 Reference  is  manifestly  made  to  the  mourning  for 
 the  death  of  king  Josiah,  who  fell  in  battle  against 
 Pharaoh-Necho  (2  Kings  xxiii.  29  ;  2  Chron.  xxxv. 
 20-23)  ;  though  others  have  understood  it  differ- 
 ently (see  Poole,  Synopsis,  ad  loc. )  Jerome  says 
 that  in  his  day  Hadad-rimmon  was  called  Maxi- 
 inianopolis  ( Comment,  in  Zachariam,  ch.  xii.  11), 
 which  he  tells  us  was  in  the  plain  near  Jezreel 
 {Cointnent.  in  Osee,  ch.  i.  5).  The  ye?'usaleni  Itine- 
 rary locates  Megiddo  seventeen  miles  from  Cae- 
 sarea,  and  ten  from  Jezreel  (ed.  Wesseling,  p.  586). 
 This  would  indicate  a  site  at  or  near  Lejjiin,  which 
 accordingly  von  Raumer  would  identify  with  Maxi- 
 mianopolis  {Pahvstina,  p.  402,  3d  ed.)  But  Dr. 
 Robinson  has  shewn  that  Lejjun  is  the  Roman 
 Legio,  and  the  Hebrew  Megiddo  [Bib.  Res.  ii.  329, 
 sq.)  ;  and  the  same  city  could  scarcely  have  had 
 two  Roman  names  given  to  it.  One  great  road 
 from  Eg}']3t  to  northern  Syria  passed  through  the 
 low  ridge  which  separates  Sharon  from  Esdraelon, 
 and  enters  the  latter  plain  a  short  distance  to  the 
 east  of  Lejjian.  Here  Josiah  rashly  attempted  to 
 bar  the  progress  of  the  Egyptian  army  while  defil- 
 ing into  the  great  plain.  Hadad  and  Rimmou 
 were  both  names  of  Syrian  deities  ;  the  city,  there- 
 fore, appears  to  have  been  an  ancient  Syrian  strong- 
 hold, perhaps  intended  to  defend  the  road.  At  it 
 the  king  of  Judah  fell,  and  here  the  first  wail  of 
 that  lamentation  was  raised,  which  was  afterwards 
 renewed  at  Jerusalem  (Stanley,  i".  and  P.,  p.  339). 
 About  four  miles  south  of  Lejjun  is  a  small  village 
 called  RiintmAneh,  which  Van  de  Velde  identifies 
 with  Hadad-rimmon  [Memoir  of  Map,  p.  333) ;  but 
 its  position  among  the  hills,  and  a  considerable 
 distance  from  the  great  road,  does  not  accord  with 
 the  above  specifications. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HADARCnn;  Sept.  Xo55ay),  ason  oflshmael. 
 
 In  Chron.  i.  30  the  name  is  written  Hadad  (Tin  ; 
 
 Xo55d.5 ;  Xoi'Sdi').  The  former,  according  to  Ge- 
 senius,  is  the  correct  reading.  Hadar  was  the 
 eighth  of  the  twelve  sons  promised  to  Ishmael's 
 parents  long  before ;  and  though  all  became 
 'princes  according  to  their  nations'  (Gen.  xxv.  16), 
 and  the  progenitors,  it  is  believed,  of  the  great 
 Arabian  tribes,  only  the  slightest  traces  of  them 
 now  remain  (Burckhardt's  Notes  on  the  Bedouins ; 
 Pict.  Bible,  Gen.  xxv.)  The  mountain  of  Hadad, 
 on  the  borders  of  the  Syrian  desert,  is  supposed  to 
 indicate  the  district  of  the  tribe  of  Ishmaelites 
 sprung  from  Hadar — a  supposition  by  no  means 
 unhkely  ;  but  this  is  the  most  that  can  be  said  for 
 it.— W.J.  C.     [Hadad.] 
 
 HADAS    (mn),    always    translated    '  myrtle,' 
 
 occurs  in  several  passages  of  the  O.  T.,  as  in  Isaiah 
 xii.  19  ;  Iv.  13  ;  Neh.  vih.  15  ;  Zech.  i.  8,  10,  11. 
 The  Hebrew  word  hadas  is   identical   with   the 
 
 Arabic  ^  u;  JCbj  hadas,  which  in  the  dialect  of  Arabia 
 
 Felix  signifies  the  myrtle-tree  (Richardson's  Pers. 
 and  Arabic  Diet.)  The  myrtle  is,  moreover,  known 
 throughout  Eastern  countries,  and  is  described  in 
 
 Arabic   works  under  the  name   /vji,    As.     The 
 
 present  writer  found  the  berries  of  the  myrtle  sold 
 m  the  bazaars  of  India  under  this  name  [lllust. 
 Himal.  Bot.  p.  217).  Esther  is  supposed  by 
 Simoms  [Bibl.  Cabinet,  xi.  262)  to  be  a  compound 
 
HADAS 
 
 HAD ATT AH 
 
 of  As  and  (itr,  and  so  to  mean  a  fresh  myrtle  ;  and 
 hence  it  would  appear  to  be  very  closely  allied  in 
 signification  to  Hadassah,  the  original  name  of 
 Esther.  Almost  all  translators  unite  in  considering 
 the  myrtle  as  intended  in  the  above  passages  ;  the 
 Sept.  has  fj-vpa-ivij,  and  the  Vulgate  myrtiis. 
 
 The  myrtle  has  from  the  earliest  periods  been 
 highly  esteemed  in  all  the  countries  of  the  south  of 
 Europe,  and  is  frequently  mentioned  by  the  poets  : 
 thus  Virgil  (Eel.  ii.  54)— 
 
 Et  vos,  O  lauri,  carpam,  et  te,  proxima  myrte  : 
 Sic  positse  quoniam  suaves  miscetis  odores. 
 
 By  the  Greeks  and  Romans  it  was  dedicated  to 
 Venus,  and  employed  in  making  wreaths  to  crown 
 lovers,  but  among  the  Jews  it  was  the  emblem  of 
 justice.  The  note  of  the  Chaldee  Targum  on  the 
 name  Esther,  according  to  Dr.  Harris,  is,  '  they 
 call  her  Hadassah  because  she  was  just,  and  those 
 that  are  just  are  compared  to  my'f/t'<:.^ 
 
 The  repute  which  the  myrtle  enjoyed  in  ancient 
 times  it  still  retains,  notwithstanding  the  great  ac- 
 cession of  ornamental  shrubs  and  flowers  which 
 has  been  made  to  the  gardens  and  greenhouses  of 
 Europe.  This  is  justly  due  to  the  rich  colouring 
 of  its  dark  green  and  shining  leaves,  contrasted 
 with  the  white  starlike  clusters  of  its  flowers,  afford- 
 ing in  hot  countries  a  pleasant  shade  under  its 
 branches,  and  diffusing  an  agreeable  odour  from 
 its  flowers  or  bruised  leaves.  It  is,  however,  most 
 agreeable  in  appearance  when  in  the  state  of  a 
 shrub,  for  when  it  grows  into  a  tree,  as  it  does  in 
 hot  countries,  the  traveller  looks  under  instead  of 
 over  its  leaves,  and  a  multitude  of  small  branches 
 are  seen  deprived  of  their  leaves  by  the  crowding 
 of  the  upper  ones.  This  shrub  is  common  in  the 
 southern  provinces  of  Spain  and  Erance,  as  well  as 
 in  Italy  and  Greece  :  and  also  on  the  northern 
 coast  of  Africa,  and  in  Syria.  The  poetical  cele- 
 brity of  this  plant  had,  no  doubt,  some  influence 
 upon  its  employment  in  medicine,  and  numerous 
 properties  are   ascribed   to  it  by  Dioscorides    (i. 
 
 127).  It  is  aromatic  and  astringent,  and  hence, 
 like  many  other  such  plants,  forms  a  stimulant 
 tonic,  and  is  useful  in  a  variety  of  complaints 
 connected  with  debility.  Its  berries  were  formerly 
 employed  in  Italy,  and  still  are  so  in  Tuscany,  as 
 a  substitute  for  spices,  now  imported  so  plentifully 
 from  the  far  East.  A  wine  was  also  prepared  from 
 them,  which  was  called  myrtidanum,  and  their 
 essential  oil  is  possessed  of  excitant  properties. 
 In  many  parts  of  Greece  and  Italy  the  leaves  are 
 employed  in  tanning  leather.  The  myrtle,  possess- 
 ing so  many  remarkable  qualities,  was  not  likely  to 
 have  escaped  the  notice  of  the  sacred  writers,  as  it 
 is  a  well-known  inhabitant  of  Judasa.  Hasselquist 
 and  Burckhardt  both  notice  it  as  occurring  on  the 
 hills  around  Jerusalem.  It  is  also  found  in  the 
 valley  of  Lebanon.  Capt.  Light,  who  visited  the 
 country  of  the  Druses  in  1814,  says,  he  'again 
 proceeded  up  the  mountain  by  the  side  of  a  range 
 of  hills  abounding  with  myrtles  in  full  bloom,  that 
 spread  their  fragrance  round,'  and,  further  on, 
 '  we  crossed  through  thickets  of  myrtle.'  Irby  and 
 Mangles  (p.  222)  describe  the  rivers  from  Tripoli 
 towards  Galilee  as  generally  pretty,  their  banks 
 covered  with  the  niyrth',  olive,  wild  vine,  etc. 
 Savary,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Harris,  describing  a  scene 
 at  the  end  of  the  forest  of  Platanea,  says,  '  Myrtles, 
 intermixed  with  laurel-roses,  grow  in  the  valleys  to 
 the  height  of  ten  feet.  Their  snow-white  flowers, 
 bordered  with  a  purple  edging,  appear  to  peculiar 
 advantage  under  the  verdant  foliage.  Each  myrtle 
 is  loaded  with  them,  and  they  emit  perfumes  more 
 exquisite  than  those  of  the  rose  itself  They  en- 
 chant every  one,  and  the  soul  is  filled  with  the 
 softest  sensations.' — J.  F.  R. 
 
 HADASHAH  (r\U^r\  ;  Sept.  'Abacav ;  Alex. 
 
 'ASacra),  a  city  of  Judah  in  the  low  country  (Josh. 
 XV.  37).  Of  this  the  Talmud  says,  that  it  was  the 
 smallest  city  in  Judah,  and  contained  only  fifty 
 houses  (Reland,  Pal.  p.  701)-  It  is  in  all  proba- 
 bility the  place  which  is  called  'ASacra,  I  Maccab. 
 vii.  40,  45,  and  where  Nicanor  was  slain  by  Judas 
 Maccabaeus.  Josephus  places  this  thirty  stadia 
 from  Bethhoron  {Anliq.  xii.  10.  5)  ;  and  from  the 
 narrative  it  must  have  been  to  the  west  of  this 
 place  towards  Gezer.  Eusebius  calls  it  a  village 
 near  Gouphnae  {Otiom.  s.  v.)  By  this  he  cannot 
 mean  Gophna,  the  modern  Jifna,  which  lies  to  the 
 north-east  of  Bethhoron  ;  and  besides,  Jerome 
 corrects  Eusebius  for  placing  Adasa  in  Judah, 
 saying  it  was  in  Ephraim.  Both  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome  seem  to  have  known  the  place,  but  it  can- 
 not now  be  identified. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HADASSAH.     [Esther.] 
 
 HADATTAH  (nmn).     In  the  A.  V.  this  ap- 
 
 pears  as  a  town  in  the  southern  border  of  Judah, 
 between  Beersheba  and  Kedesh  (Josh.  xv.  25). 
 The  pointing  of  the  Hebrew  would  seem  to  indi- 
 cate that  it  is  to  be  taken  as  an  adjective  qualifying 
 "ll^n ;  and  that  Hazar  was  here  called  Hazor- 
 hadattah,  perhaps  to  distinguish  it  from  the  other 
 town  of  the  same  name  in  verse  23.  The  Vulg. 
 renders  it  Asor  nona  ;  and  both  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
 give  this  explanation  of  the  word,  but  err  in  locat- 
 ing the  town  near  Ascalon  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Asor). 
 —J.  L.  P.  [The  LXX.  omits  the  word  according 
 to  both  the  Cod.  Vat.  and  the  Cod.  Alex.  Bos 
 in  a  note  gives  At'acrw/)  Ty]v  KaivTjv,  but  without  any 
 reference.] 
 
HADES 
 
 185 
 
 EIADRACH 
 
 HADES.     [Heaven;  Heix.] 
 
 HADID  ('T'ln;  Vulg.  //aiM)  is  menlioned  in 
 
 Ezra  ii.  33  ;  Neh.  vii.  37,  and  xi.  34.  In  the  first 
 and  second  of  these  passages  it  is  combined  with 
 two  other  towns,  tlius  '  Lod,  Hadid,  and  Ono  ;'  the 
 LXX.  in  both  passages  makes  one  word  out  of  '  Lod, 
 Hadid' — AobaSid:  in  the  third  passage,  however, 
 where  Hadid  occurs  first,  and  separate  from  its 
 companions  by  two  otlier  names,  it  has  an  indepen- 
 dent designation  in  the  LXX.  [Cod.  Alex.]  under 
 the  form  of  '  ASciS.     Tlie  three  places  were  near  each 
 
 other  ;  and  the  version  AvdSa  for  'Lod'  [*lip],  in 
 Nell.  xi.  34,  ofters  a  clue  of  their  situation.  Ai'55a 
 is  unquestionably  the  Lydda  of  Acts  ix.  32.  This 
 Lydda  or  Disopolis  is  marked  on  Van  de  Velde's 
 map  94  miles  south-east  of  the  maritime  town  of 
 Y&fa  (Joppa).  It  agrees  very  well  with  the  close 
 association  of  the  towns  Lod  and  Adid  in  Ezra  and 
 Nehemiah,  that,  three  miles  due  east  of  the  modern 
 Ludd  [Lod,  Lydda]  occurs  the  village  el-Haditheh, 
 at  the  end  of  the  IVady  Miizeirah,  where  it  runs 
 into  the  IVady  Bildnis.  This,  no  doubt,  is  the 
 site  of  the  ancient  'Hadid.'  We  will  add  the  suc- 
 cinct notice  of  the  place  given  in  Van  de  Velde's 
 Memoir ;  '  Hadid  was  a  city  inhabited  by  the  Ben- 
 jamites  [on  their  return  from  the  captivity]  (Neh. 
 xi.  34) ;  near  Lod  and  Ono  (Ezra  ii.  33  ;  Neh.  vii. 
 37) ;  probably  the  same  which  is  called  Adida  (i 
 Maccab.  xii.  38  ;  xiii.  12  ;  Joseph.  Aiitiq.  xiii.  15.  2  ; 
 Bell,  jfiid.  iv.  9.  i) ;  and  identical  with  t7-//«a'/7/^d'/z, 
 a  village  at  the  foot  of  the  hills  of  Ludd  (Van  Sen- 
 den,  ii.  40  ;  Rabbi  Schwarz,  p.  134).'  R.  Schwarz, 
 however,  puts  the  village  '  on  t/ie  summit  of  a 
 round  hill,'  and  in  this  he  is  corroborated  by  E. 
 ha-Parchi,  an  Israelite  geographer  on  the  Holy 
 Land,  of  the  age  of  Abulfeda.  (See  Zunz,  in 
 Asher's  Bnij.  Tudel,  vol.  ii.  p.  439.)  If  Adida  be 
 the  same  place,  we  may  quote  Josephus  in  support 
 of  its  high  situation,  for  he  says  in  the  first  of  the 
 cited  passages  :  '  The  city  Adida  is  upon  a  hill, 
 and  beneath  it  lie  the  plains  of  Judrea'  (comp. 
 Gesenius,    s.    v.   T'TH).      The  alleged    site    ' /'« 
 
 Sephela'  (l  Maccab.  xii.  38)  induces  Mr.  Grove 
 (Did.  of  Bible.,  s.  v.)  to  doubt  the  identity  of  our 
 Hadid,  a  Benjamite  city,  with  the  Adida  of  the 
 Maccabean  history,  on  the  ground  that  the  plain 
 called  '  Sephela'  was  more  to  the  south.  But  ac- 
 cording to  R.  Schwarz  (with  whom  agree  Winer 
 and  Gesenius,  s.  v.  Sephela),  this  long  range  of 
 lowland  extended  as  far  north  as  Ludd  and  even 
 Yafa  ;*  beyond  which  it  was  called  '  The  plain  of 
 Sharon'  (see  also  Van  de  Velde's  map).  As  to 
 Josephus'  statement  that  '■  the  plaijis  of  yitdtza  lie 
 beneath  Adida,''  we  must  not  forget  that  the 
 '■Jiidaa''  of  the  N.  T.  and  later  times  stretched 
 much  further  north  than  the  ancient  tribe  oijiidah. 
 The  boundary-line,  in  fact,  of  Samaria  and  Judcea 
 would  include  the  whole  of  the  level  countiy  around 
 Yafa  and  Ludd  within  the  southern  province  of 
 Palestine,  and  so  justify  the  statement  of  the  Jew- 
 ish historian.     [Adida  ;  Sephela.] — P.  H. 
 
 *  There  is  nothing  in  the  Oiiomast.  of  Eusebius 
 and  St  Jerome  opposed  to  this  view  ;  '  Usque 
 hodie,'  says  the  latter,  somewhat  vaguely,  '  omnis 
 regio  juxta  Eleutheropolim  campestris  et  plana, 
 quae  vergit  ad  aqiiilonem  et  occidentem,  Sephela 
 dicitur. '     [irpos  poppdv  Kal  5vajj.ds,  Euseb.) 
 
 I      II ADORAM  (Q-Jinn ;  LXX. 'I5wpa,u,  KeSoiod/x, 
 
 'OSoppd;  'Vvi\^.  Adiiram,  Adoram  ;  Joseph,  'A5a'^- 
 a,uos).  The  name  of  one  of  the  B>  nei-lnklan  men- 
 tioned Gen.  x.  27  and  i  Chron.  i.  21  ;  but  wiielher 
 it  be  the  name  of  a  tribe,  or  of  the  chief  from  whom 
 the  tribe  was  named,  is  uncertam.  According  to 
 Gen.  .\.  30,  the  descendants  of  Joktan  settled  in 
 Arabia,  and  amongst  the  Arab  tribes  mentioned 
 by  Ptolemy  are  the  Adramitae  ('AS/sa/xirat),  whom 
 he  places  on  the  south  coast  between  the  Homeritae 
 and  the  Sachalitae  (vi.  7).  Pliny  also  (A^.  H.  vi. 
 28 ;  xii.  14)  refers  to  the  same  tribe  under  the 
 name  Atramitae,  and  tells  us  that  their  principal 
 city  was  Sabota.  There  is  little  doubt  that  this  is 
 the  tribe  referred  to  in  the  Scripture  narrative. 
 Some  writers  refer  to  the  modern  Hadramaiit  as 
 preserving  the  ancient  designation  of  this  tribe  ;  but 
 it  is  more  probable  that  this  name  is  the  represen- 
 tative of  Hazarmaveth,   Gen.  x.  26  (niDIVn),  the 
 
 "KaTpa/xuTTTLs  of  Ptolemy,  and  the  Chatramotitae 
 of  Pliny.— S.  N. 
 
 HADRACH     (l-nn  ;     Sept.    ^eSpdx).      The 
 
 meaning  of  the  only  passage  in  which  this  name 
 occurs  (Zech.  ix.  i)  is  obscure.  It  may  be  thus 
 rendered,  'The  announcement  of  the  Word  of  the 
 Lord  upon  the  land  of  Hadrach,  and  Damascus 
 shall  be  its  (the  word's)  resting-place,'  etc.  Adri- 
 chomius  says,  '  Adrach,  or  Hadrach,  alias  Adra 
 .  .  .  is  a  city  of  Coelesyria,  about  25  miles  from 
 Bostra,  and  from  it  the  adjacent  region  takes  the 
 name  of  Land  of  Hadrach.  This  was  the  land 
 which  formed  the  subject  of  Zechariah's  prophecy' 
 {Theatnun  Terrce Sanctcs,  p.  75).  Michaelissays — 
 '  To  this  I  may  add  what  I  learned,  in  the  year 
 1768,  from  Joseph  Abbassi,  a  noble  Arab  of  the 
 country  beyond  Jordan.     I  inquired  whether  he 
 
 knew  a  city  called  Hadrakh  Ti^J  .A-^)   .   .  .    He 
 
 replied  that  there  was  a  city  of  that  name,  which, 
 though  now  small,  had  been  capital  of  a  large 
 region  called  the  land  of  Hadrakh,''  etc.  (Hengs- 
 tenberg,  Chrisfology,  iii.  p.  372,  Edin.  1858). 
 The   two  names,    however,    are  entirely  different 
 
 ("Ilin,  Hadrach  ;   ^  ,j^j  Edhr'a),  and  there  is  no 
 
 historical  evidence  that  Edhr'a  ever  was  capital  of 
 a  large  territory  [Edrei].  Movers  suggests  that 
 Hadrach  may  be  the  name  of  one  of  the  old  deities 
 of  Damascus  (Die  Phonizier,  i.  478)  ;  and  Bleek 
 conjectures  that  reference  is  made  to  a  king  of  that 
 city  {Stndien  7ind  Kritik.  1852,  ii.  p.  258).  Hen- 
 derson supposes  it  to  be  only  a  corruption  of  "ITri, 
 the  common  names  of  the  kings  of  Syria  [Comment. 
 ad  loc.)  Jarchi  and  Kimchi  say,  '  Rabbi  Juda  in- 
 terpreted it  as  an  allegorical  expression  relating  to 
 the  Messiah,  Who  is  harsh  (1(1)  to  the  heathen,  and 
 gentle  ("]"!)  to  Israel.'  Jerome's  interpretation  is 
 somewhat  similar — '  Et  est  ordo  verborum  ;  as- 
 sumptio  verbi  Domini,  aaiti  in  peccatores,  mollis 
 in  justos.  Adrach  quippe  hoc  resonat  ex  duobus 
 integris  nomen  compositum  :  Ad  (TPl)  actitum, 
 RACH  ("I"l)  molle,  tenenimqne  significans'  (Com- 
 ment, in  Zach.  ad  loc.)  Hengstenberg  adopts  the 
 same  etymology  and  meaning,  but  regards  the 
 word  as  a  symbolical  appellation  of  the  Persian 
 empire,  whose  overthrow  by  Alexander  Zechariah 
 here  foretells.  He  says  the  prophet  does  not  men- 
 tion the  real  name,  because,  as  he  lived  during  the 
 supremacy  of  Persia,  such  a  reference  would  have 
 
HAGAD \ 
 
 190 
 
 1 1  AGAR 
 
 exposed  him  to  danger.  It  will  thus  be  seen  that 
 the  interpretations  of  the  word  are  almost  as  lumie- 
 rous  as  the  commentators  upon  the  passage. 
 
 Looking  at  the  passage  in  what  appeal's  to  be  its 
 plain  and  natural  meaning,  no  scholar  can  deny 
 that,  according  to  the  usual  construction,  the  i)ro- 
 per  name  following  J^"1X  is  the  name  of  the  '  land' 
 itself,  or  of  the  nation  inhabiting  the  land,  and  the 
 analogy  presented  by  all  the  other  names  in  the 
 section  is  a  sufficient  proof  that  this  must  be  the  case 
 here  (Hengstenberg,  iii.  375).  All  the  other  names 
 mentioned  are  well  known — Damascus,  Hamath, 
 Tyre,  Zidon,  Gaza,  etc.  ;  it  is  natural  to  infer  that 
 Hadrack  is  also  the  name  of  a  place,  known  to  the 
 prophet.  Its  position  is  not  accurately  defined. 
 The  words  of  the  passage  do  not  connect  it  more 
 closely  with  Damascus  than  with  Hamath.  It  is 
 remarkable  that  no  such  name  is  elsewhere  found 
 in  ancient  writers.  The  translators  of  the  Septua- 
 gint  were  ignorant  of  it.  So  was  Jerome.  No 
 such  place  is  now  known.  The  writer  can  affirm 
 that  there  is  no  town  or  province  near  Damascus 
 or  Hamath  bearing  a  name  at  all  resembling  Had- 
 rach.  Yet  this  does  not  prove  that  there  never  was 
 such  a  name.  Many  ancient  names  have  disap- 
 peared, as  it  seems  to  be  the  case  with  this  (see 
 Hengstenberg  I.e.  ;  Winer,  Realwcerterbiicli  s.v.  ; 
 Alpheus,  Diss,  de  terra  Chadrach,  etc.) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 H  AGADICor  Homiletic  Exegesis.  [Midrash,  iii.  167.] 
 
 HAGAR    ("Ijn,    a   stranger;    Sept.    "A7ap),    a 
 
 native  of  Egypt,  and  servant  of  Abraham  ;  but 
 how  or  when  she  became  an  inmate  of  his  family 
 we  are  not  informed.  The  name  Hagar,  which  is 
 pure  Hebrew,  signifying  stranger,  having  been  pro- 
 bably given  her  after  her  arrival,  and  being  the  one 
 by  which  she  continued  to  be  designated  in  the 
 patriarch's  household,  seems  to  imply  that  her  con- 
 nection with  it  did  not  take  place  till  long  after 
 this  family  had  emigrated  to  Canaan  ;  and  the 
 presumption  is  that  she  was  one  of  the  female  slaves 
 presented  to  Abraham  by  Pharaoh  during  his  visit 
 to  Egypt  (Gen.  xii.  16).  But  some  derive  the  name 
 from  "Ijy,  to  flee ;  and  suppose  it  to  have  been 
 applied  to  her  from  a  remarkable  incident  in  her 
 life,  to  be  afterwards  mentioned  ;  just  as  the  Mo- 
 hammedans call  the  flight  of  Mohammed  by  the  col- 
 lateral term  '  Hegira.'  Whatever  were  her  origin 
 and  previous  history,  her  servile  condition  in  the 
 family  of  Abraham  must  have  prevented  her  from 
 being  ever  known  beyond  the  limits  of  her  humble 
 sphere,  had  not  her  name,  by  a  spontaneous  act  of 
 her  mistress,  become  indissolubly  linked  with  the 
 ]iatriarch's  history.  The  long-continued  sterility 
 of  Sarah  suggested  to  her  the  idea  (not  uncommon 
 in  the  East)  of  becoming  a  mother  by  proxy 
 through  hei  iiandmaid,  whom,  with  that  view,  she 
 gave  to  Abriham  as  a  secondary  wife  [Abraham  ; 
 Adoption  ;  Concubine], 
 
 The  honour  of  such  an  alliance  and  elevation 
 was  too  great  and  unexpected  for  the  weak  and  ill 
 regulated  mind  of  Hagar ;  and  no  sooner  did  she 
 find  herself  in  a  situation,  which  made  her,  in 
 the  prospect  of  becoming  a  motlier,  an  object  of 
 increasing  interest  and  importance  to  Abraham, 
 than  she  openly  indulged  in  triumph  over  her  less 
 favoured  mistress,  and  shewed  by  her  altered  be- 
 haviour a  growing  habit  of  disrespect  and  insolence. 
 The  feelings  of  Sarah  were  severely  wounded,  and 
 she  broke  out  to  her  husband  m  loud  complaints 
 
 of  the  servant's  petulance.  '  My  wrong  be  upon 
 thee,'  she  cried — language  which  is  generally  con- 
 sidered an  impassioned  burst  of  temper,  in  which 
 she  unjustly  charged  Abraham  with  causing  or  en- 
 couraging, by  his  marked  attention  to  the  concu- 
 bine, the  ill  usage  she  met  with  ;  but  it  appears 
 susceptible  of  other  constructions  much  more 
 favourable  to  .Sarah's  character.    The  words  ^DOH 
 
 "l^^y  signify  either  '  My  wrong  be  sitper  te^  as 
 Cocceius  and  others  render  it,  i.e.,  lieth  upon  thee, 
 pointing  to  his  duty  as  her  protector,  and  solicit- 
 ing his  interference,  or  else,  '  My  wrong  is  prop- 
 ter te'' — on  your  account.  '  I  have  exposed  my- 
 self to  these  indignities  solely  out  of  my  intense 
 anxiety  to  gratify  you  with  a  son  and  heir.' 
 Whichever  of  these  interpretations  we  prefer,  the 
 exclamation  of  Sarah  expresses  bitter  indignation 
 at  the  misconduct  of  her  slave  ;  and  Abraham, 
 whose  meek  and  prudent  behaviour  is  strikingly 
 contrasted  with  the  violence  of  his  wife,  leaves  her 
 with  unfettered  power,  as  mistress  of  his  household, 
 to  take  what  steps  she  pleases  to  obtain  the  re- 
 quired redress.  In  all  Oriental  states  where  con- 
 cubinage is  legalized,  the  principal  wife  has  autho- 
 rity over  the  rest ;  the  secondary  one,  if  a  slave, 
 retains  her  former  condition  unchanged,  and  society 
 thus  presents  the  strange  anomaly  of  a  woman 
 being  at  once  the  menial  of  her  master  and  the 
 partner  of  his  bed.  In  like  manner  Hagar,  though 
 taken  into  the  relation  of  concubine  to  Abraham, 
 continued  still,  being  a  dotal  maid-servant,  under 
 the  absolute  power  of  her  mistress,  who,  after  her 
 husband  had  left  her  to  take  her  own  way  in  vin- 
 dication of  her  dignity  as  the  principal  wife,  was 
 neither  reluctant  nor  sparing  in  making  the  minion 
 reap  the  fruits  of  her  insolence.  Sarah,  indeed, 
 not  content  with  the  simple  exertion  of  her  autho- 
 rity, seems  to  have  resorted  even  to  corporal 
 chastisement,  the  word  njyn  conveying  such  a 
 meaning,  and  hence  Augustine  has  drawn  an  ela- 
 borate argument  for  inflicting  civil  penalties  on 
 heretics  [Epist.  xlviii.)  But  whether  she  actually 
 inflicted  blows,  or  merely  threw  out  menaces  to 
 that  effect,  cannot  be  determined,  as  the  two  ren- 
 derings, '  Sarah  aftlicted  '  and  '  would  afilict '  her. 
 have  received  equal  support  from  respectable  lexi- 
 cographers and  versions.  Sensible,  at  length,  of 
 the  hopelessness  of  getting  the  better  of  her  mis- 
 tress, Hagar  determined  on  flight ;  and  having 
 seemingly  formed  the  purpose  of  returning  to  her 
 relations  in  Eg}'pt,  she  took  the  direction  of  that 
 country  ;  which  led  her  to  what  was  afterwards 
 called  Shur,  through  a  long  tract  of  sandy  unin- 
 habited country,  lying  on  the  west  of  Arabia  Pe- 
 trnea,  to  the  extent  of  150  miles  between  Palestine 
 and  Egypt.  In  that  lonely  region  she  was  sitting 
 by  a  fountain  to  replenish  her  skin-bottle  or  recruit 
 her  wearied  limbs,  when  the  angel  of  the  Lord, 
 whose  language  on  this  occasion  bespeaks  him  to 
 have  been  more  than  a  created  being,  appeared, 
 and  in  the  kindliest  manner  remonstrated  with  her 
 on  the  course  she  was  pursuing,  and  encouraged 
 her  to  return  by  the  promise  that  she  would  ere 
 long  have  a  son,  whom  Providence  destined  to  be- 
 come a  great  man,  and  whose  wild  and  irregular 
 features  of  character  would  be  indelibly  impressed 
 on  the  mighty  nation  that  should  spring  from  him. 
 Obedient  to  the  heavenly  visitor,  and  having  dis. 
 tinguished  the  place  by  the  name  of  Beer-lahairoi, 
 "the  well  of  the  visible  God,'  Hagar  retraced  hei 
 
HAGAR 
 
 191 
 
 HAGARITE 
 
 steps  to  the  tent  of  Abraham,  where  in  due  time 
 she  had  a  son  ;  and  having  probably  narrated  this 
 remarkable  interview  to  Abraham,  tliat  patriarch, 
 as  directed  by  the  anj^el,  called  the  name  of  the 
 child  Ishmael,  '  God  hath  heard. ' 
 
 Fourteen  years  had  elapsed  after  the  birth  of 
 Ishmael  when  an  event  occurred  in  the  family  of 
 Abraham,  by  the  appearance  of  the  long-promised 
 heir,  which  entirely  changed  the  prospects  of  that 
 young  man,  though  nothing  materially  affecting 
 him  took  place  till  the  weaning  of  Isaac,  which,  as 
 is  generally  thought,  was  at  the  end  of  his  third 
 year.  Ishmael  was  then  a  lad  of  seventeen  years 
 of  age  ;  and  being  fully  capable  of  understanding 
 his  altered  relations  to  the  inheritance,  as  well  as 
 having  felt  perhaps  a  sensible  diminution  of  Sarah's 
 affection  towards  him,  it  is  not  wonderful  that  a 
 disappointed  youth  should  inconsiderately  give  vent 
 to  his  feelings  on  a  festive  occasion,  when  the 
 newly-weaned  child,  clad  according  to  custom  with 
 the  sacred  symbolic  robe,  which  was  the  badge  of 
 the  birthright,  was  formally  installed  heir  of  the 
 tribe  (see  Biblioth.  Bibl.  vol.  i.  ;  Vicasi,  Annot.  32  ; 
 Bush  on  Gen.  xxvii.  15).  Our  feelings  of  justice 
 naturally  lead  us  to  take  part  with  Ishmael,  as 
 hardly  dealt  with  in  being  so  unexpectedly  super- 
 seded after  having  been  so  long  the  acknowledged 
 heir.  But  the  procedure  of  Abraham  in  awarding 
 the  claim  to  the  inheritance  to  Isaac  in  preference 
 to  his  elder  son  was  guided  by  the  special  command 
 of  God  ;  and  it  may  be  remarked,  moreover,  that 
 it  was  in  harmony  with  the  immemorial  practice  of 
 the  East,  where  the  son  of  a  slave  or  secondary 
 wife  is  always  supplanted  by  that  of  a  free  woman, 
 even  if  born  long  after.  The  harmony  of  the 
 weaning  feast  was  disturbed  by  Ishmael  being  dis- 
 covered mocking.  The  Hebrew  word  pflVD, 
 though  properly  signifying  '  to  laugh,'  is  frequently 
 used  to  express  strong  derision,  as  in  Gen.  xix.  14; 
 Neh.  ii.  19  ;  iv.  i  ;  Ezek.  xxiii.  32  ;  accompanied, 
 as  is  probable  on  some  of  the  occasions  referred  to 
 in  these  passages,  with  violent  gestures  ;  and  in 
 accordance  with  this  idea  the  Chaldee  and  Septua- 
 gint  versions  render  it  by  '  I  play,'  which  is  used 
 by  the  latter  in  2  Sam.  ii.  '-J.-I7,  as  synonymous 
 ^vith  boxing,  whence  it  might  veiy  justly  be  charac- 
 terised as  persecution  (Gal.  iv.  29).  This  conduct 
 gave  mortal  offence  to  Sarah,  who  from  that 
 moment  would  be  satisfied  with  nothing  short  of 
 his  irrevocable  expulsion  from  the  family  ;  and  as 
 his  mother  also  was  included  in  the  same  condem- 
 nation, there  is  ground  to  believe  that  she  had  been 
 repeating  her  former  insolence,  as  well  as  instigat- 
 ing her  son  to  his  improprieties  of  behaviour.  So 
 harsh  a  measure  was  extremely  painful  to  the 
 affectionate  heart  of  Abraham  ;  but  his  scruples 
 were  removed  by  the  timely  appearance  of  his 
 divine  counsellor,  who  said,  '  Let  it  not  be  griev- 
 ous in  thy  siglit,  because  of  the  lad,  and  because 
 of  thy  bondwoman  :  in  all  that  Sarah  hath  said 
 unto  thee,  hearken  unto  her  voice  : '  '  for,'  adds 
 the  Targitm  of  Jonathan,  'she  is  a  prophetess.' 
 Accordingly,  what  she  said  is  called  the  Scripture 
 (GaL  iv.  30),  and  the  incident  affords  a  very  re- 
 markable instance  of  an  overruling  Providence  in 
 making  this  family  feud  in  the  tent  of  a  pastoral 
 chief  4000  years  ago  the  occasion  of  separating  two 
 mighty  peoples,  who,  according  to  the  prophecy, 
 have  ever  since  occupied  an  important  chapter  in 
 the  history  of  man.  Hagar  and  Ishmael  departed 
 early  on  the  day  fixed  for  their  removal,  Abraham 
 
 furnishing  them  with  the  necessary  supply  of  travel 
 ling  provisions.  Tlie  Septuagint,  which  our  trans- 
 lators have  followed,  appears  to  represent  Ishmael 
 as  a  child,  placed  along  with  the  travelling-bags  on 
 the  heavily-loaded  shoulders  of  Hagar.  But  a  little 
 change  in  the  punctuation,  the  obsei-vance  of  the 
 parenthetical  clause,  and  the  construction  of  the 
 word  'child'  with  the  verb  'took,'  remove  the 
 whole  difficulty,  and  the  passage  will  then  stand 
 thus  :  '  And  Abraham  rose  up  early  in  the  morn- 
 ing, and  took  bread,  and  a  bottle  of  water  (and 
 gave  it  unto  Hagar,  putting  it  on  her  shoulder), 
 and  the  child,  and  sent  her  away.' 
 
 In  spite  of  their  instructions  for  threading  the 
 desert,  the  two  exiles  missed  their  way.  Overcome 
 by  fatigue  and  thirst,  increasing  at  eveiy  step  under 
 the  unmitigated  rays  of  a  vertical  sun,  the  strength 
 of  the  young  Ishmael,  as  was  natural,  first  gave 
 way,  and  his  mother  laid  him  down  in  complete 
 exhaustion  under  one  of  the  stunted  shrubs  of  this 
 arid  region,  in  the  hope  of  his  obtaining  some  mo- 
 mentary relief  from  smelling  the  damp  in  the  shade 
 Tlie  burning  fever,  however,  continued  unabated, 
 and  the  poor  woman,  forgetting  her  own  sorrow, 
 destitute  and  alone  in  the  midst  of  a  wilderness,  and 
 absorbed  in  the  fate  of  her  son,  withdrew  to  a  little 
 distance,  unable  to  witness  his  lingering  sufferings  ; 
 and  there  'she  lifted  up  her  voice  and  wept.'  In 
 this  distressing  situation  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
 appeared  for  the  purpose  of  comforting  her,  and 
 directed  her  to  a  fountain,  which,  concealed  by  the 
 brushwood,  had  escaped  her  notice,  and  from  which 
 she  drew  a  refreshing  draught,  that  had  the  effect 
 of  reviving  the  almost  lifeless  Ishmael.  This  well, 
 according  to  the  tradition  of  the  Arabs,  who  pay 
 great  honour  to  the  memory  of  Hagar,  is  Zemzem, 
 near  Mecca. — R.  J. 
 
 [The  only  additional  fact  mentioned  concerning 
 Hagar  is,  that  she  took  a  wife  for  her  son,  with 
 whom  she  had  settled  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
 (Gen.  xxi.  21).  The  Apostle  Paul  (Gal.  iv.  22,  ff.) 
 allegorises  the  stoiy  of  Hagar,  for  the  purpose  of 
 elucidating  the  relation  of  the  Jewish  to  the  Chris- 
 tian dispensation.  Hagar  he  compares  to  the  former, 
 and  Sarah  to  the  latter  ;  and  in  order  to  strengthen 
 or  give  point  to  his  allegory,  he  lays  hold  of  the 
 fact  (ver.  25)  that,  among  the  Arabians,  Hagar  is 
 
 the  name  of  Mount  Sinai  (^5^2^,  a  stone).  Pro- 
 perly the  Heb.  "liH  corresponds  to  the  Arab,  -jsj^j 
 
 fiigit ;  but  where  a  general  resenihlaiice  of  one  word 
 to  another  existed,  the  sacred  writers  seem  to  have 
 deemed  that  enough  for  the  purpose  of  allegorical 
 identification ;  comp.  Matt.  ii.  23  ;  John  ix.  7 
 (Borger,  Meyer,  De  Wette,  in  loc.) 
 
 HA-GAON.     [Saadia.] 
 
 HAGARITE,  The  ClJnn),  is  used  twice  in  the 
 singular  number — (i)  In  i  Chron.  xi.  38  of  Min- 
 HAR,  one  of  David's  mighty  men,  who  is  described 
 as  ''Ijrrp,  i^ios  ^kyapL,  films  Agarai,  '  the  son  of 
 Haggeri,'  or  better  (as  the  margin  has  it),  'the 
 Haggerite,'  whose  father's  name  is  not  given. 
 This  hero  differs  from  some  of  his  colleagues, 
 '  Zelek  the  Ammonite'  (ver.  39),  for  instance  ;  or 
 '  Uriah  the  Hittite'  (ver.  41),  or  'Ithmah  the  Moab» 
 ite'  (ver.  46),  in  that,  while  they  were  foreigners,  ha 
 was  only  the  son  of  a  foreigner — a  domiciled  set- 
 tler perhaps.     (2)  In  I  Chron.  xxvii.   31  of  Jaziz, 
 
HAGARITES 
 
 192 
 
 HAGARITES 
 
 another  of  David's  retainers,  who  was  '  over  his 
 flocks.'  This  man  was  himself  an  '  Hagarite,' 
 0  'AyapLTTjs,  Agareits.  A  comparison  of  next 
 article  (i)  will  show  how  well  qualified  for  his 
 office  this  man*  was  likely  to  be  from  his  extrac- 
 tion from  a  pastoral  race.  One  of  the  effects  of 
 the  great  victory  over  the  Hagarites  of  Gilead  and 
 the  East  was  probably  that  individuals  of  their 
 nation  entered  the  service  of  the  victorious  Israel- 
 ites, either  voluntarily  or  by  coercion,  as  freemen  or 
 as  slaves.  Jaziz  was  no  doubt  among  the  former, 
 a  man  of  eminence  and  intelligence  amongst  his 
 countrymen,  on  which  account  he  attracted  the 
 notice  of  his  royal  master,  who  seems  to  have 
 liberally  employed  distinguished  and  meritorious 
 foreigners  in  his  service. — P.  H. 
 
 HAGARITES  (i  Chron.  v.  lo,  19,  20; 
 D''X''"ljnn  ;  Sept.  'Ayap-rjuoi  [v.  19],   ^Ayapaloi  [v. 
 
 20,  in  v.  10  deest]  ;  Vulg.  Agarei)  :  Hagarenes 
 (Psalm  Ixxxiii.    6   [7   Hebr.    Bib.]   D^JH  ;    Sept. 
 
 'A7ap97i'Oi  [Ixxxii.  6];  Vulg.  Agareni)  :  Agarenes 
 (Baruch  iii.  23  ;  0:  viol  "Ayap ;  Vulg.  Tv/zV  Agar). 
 Such  are  the  three  forms  in  which  occurs  the  de- 
 signation of  probably  the  same  Arab  people  who 
 appear  at  different  periods  of  the  sacred  history — 
 in  hostile  relation  to  the  Hebrew  nation. 
 
 (i.)  Our  first  passage  treats  of  a  great  war,  which 
 in  the  reign  of  King  Saul  was  waged  between  the 
 transjordanic  tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half  Ma- 
 nasseh  on  the  one  side,  and  their  formidable  neigh- 
 bours, the  Hagarites,  aided  by  the  kindred  tribes  f 
 of  'Jetur  and  Nephish  and  Nodab,'  on  the  other. 
 The  result  of  this  war  was  extremely  favouraijle 
 to  the  Eastern  Israelites  ;  besides  the  capture  of 
 immense  booty  from  the  enemy,  +  many  of  whom 
 
 *  '  A  Hagarite  had  charge  of  David's  flocks  and 
 an  Ishmaelite  of  his  camels,  because  the  animals 
 were  pastured  in  districts  where  these  nomadic 
 people  were  accustomed  to  feed  their  cattle'  [or 
 rather,  because  their  experience  made  them  skilful 
 in  such  employments].  Bertheau  07i  Chrojiiclds 
 [Clark's  tr.],  ii.  320. 
 
 \  Kmdred  tribes,  we  say,  on  the  evidence  of 
 Gen.  XXV.  15.  The  Arab  tribes  derived  from 
 Hagar  and  Ishmael,  like  the  earlier  stocks  de- 
 scended from  Gush  and  Joktan,  were  at  the  same 
 time  generically  known  by  the  common  patronymic 
 of  Ishmaelites  or  Hagarenes.  Some  regard  the 
 three  specific  names  of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab, 
 not  as  distinct  from,  but  in  apposition  with, 
 Hagarites  ;  as  if  the  Hagarites  with  whom  the  two 
 tribes  and  a  half  successfully  fought  were  the  clans 
 of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab.  See  Forster's 
 Geog.  of  Arabia,  vol.  i.  pp.  186-189. 
 
 +  '  Of  camels  50,000,  and  of  sheep  250,000, 
 and  of  asses  2000'  (ver.  21).  Rosenmiiller, 
 (Bibl.  Geog.  [tr.  by  Morren],  iii.  140),  following 
 LXX.  and  Luther,  unnecessarily  reduces  the  num- 
 ber of  camels  to  5000.  When  it  is  remembered 
 that  the  wealth  of  a  Bedouin  chief,  both  in  those 
 and  these  times,  consisted  of  cattle,  the  amount  of 
 booty  taken  in  the  Hagarite  war,  though  great, 
 was  not  excessive.  Job's  stock  is  described  as 
 '  7000  sheep,  3000  camels,  500  yoke  of  oxen,  and 
 500  she-asses'  (i.  3).  Mesha,  king  of  Moab,  paid 
 to  the  king  of  Israel  a  tribute  of  100,000  lambs 
 and  100.000  rams  (2  Kings  iii.  4).  In  further 
 illustration  of  this  wealth  of  cattle,  we  may  quote 
 
 were  taken  and  many  slain  in  the  conflict  (ver.  21, 
 22),  the  victorious  two  tribes  and  a  half  took  pos- 
 session of  the  country,  and  retained  it  until  the 
 captivity  (ver.  22).  By  this  conquest,  which  was 
 still  more  firmly  ratified  in  the  subsequent  reign  of 
 David,  the  promise,  which  was  given  as  early  as 
 Abraham's  time  (Gen.  xv.  18)  and  renewed  to 
 Moses  (Deut.  i.  7)  and  to  Joshua  (i.  4),  began  to 
 receive  that  accomplishment,  which  was  consum- 
 mated by  the  glorious  Solomon  (i  Kings  iv.  21). 
 The  large  tract  of  country  which  thus  accrued  to 
 Israel,  stretched  from  the  indefinite  frontier  of  the 
 pastoral  tribes,  to  whom  were  formerly  assigned 
 the  kingdoms  of  Sihon  and  Og,  to  the  Euphrates. 
 A  comparison  of  I  Chron.  v.  g-20  with  Gen.  xxv. 
 12-1S,  seems  to  shew  that  this  line  of  country,  which 
 (as  the  history  infomis  us)  extended  eastward  of 
 Gilead  and  Bashan  in  the  direction  of  the  Euphrates, 
 was  substantially  the  same  as  that  which  Moses 
 describes  as  peopled  by  the  sons  of  Ishmael,  whom 
 Hagar  bore  to  Abraham.  '  They  dwelt,'  says 
 Moses,  '  from  Havilah  unto  Shur,  that  is  before 
 Egypt,  as  thou  goest  towards  Assyria' — in  other 
 words,  across  the  country  from  the  junction  of  the 
 Euphrates  with  the  Tigris  to  the  isthmus  of  Suez ; 
 and  this  is  the  spacious  tract  which  we  assign  to 
 the  Hagarites  or  Hagarenes.  The  booty  taken 
 from  the  Hagarites  and  their  allies  proves  that 
 much  of  this  territory  was  well  adapted  to  pastur- 
 age, and  therefore  valuable  to  the  nomadic  habits 
 of  the  conquerors  (Num.  xxxii.  i).  The  brilhancy 
 of  the  conquest,  moreover,  exhibits  the  military 
 prowess  of  these  shepherds.  Living  amidst  races 
 whose  love  of  plunder  is  still  illustrated  in  the  pre- 
 datory Bedouins  of  Eastern  Palestine,  they  were 
 obliged  to  erect  fortresses  for  the  protection  of  theil 
 pastures  (Michaelis,  La-Jvs  of  Moses,  art.  xxiii. ),  a 
 precaution  which  seems  to  have  been  resorted  to 
 from  the  first.  The  sons  of  Ishmael  are  enumerated, 
 Gen.  xxv.  16,  'by  their  towns  and  by  their  castles f 
 and  some  such  defensive  erections  were,  no  doubt, 
 meant  by  the  children  of  Reuben  and  Gad  in  Num. 
 xxxii.  16,  17. 
 
 (2.)  Though  these  eastern  Israelites  became 
 lords  paramount  of  this  vast  tract  of  country,  it  is 
 not  necessai-y  to  suppose  that  they  exclusively  occu- 
 pied the  entire  region  ;  nor  that  the  Hagarites  and 
 their  kindred,  though  subdued,  were  driven  out ; 
 for  it  was  probably  in  the  same  neighbourhood 
 that  'the  Hagarenes'  of  our  second  passage  were 
 living,  when  they  joined  in  the  great  confederacy 
 against  Israel  with,  among  others,  Edom  and 
 Moab  and  Ammon  and  Amalek.  When  this  com- 
 bination took  place  is  of  little  importance  here ; 
 Mr.  Thrupp  [Psalms,  vol.  ii.  pp.  60,  61)  gives  ex- 
 cellent reasons  for  assigning  it  to  the  reigns  of 
 Jehoash  and  of  his  son  Jeroboam  II.  The  nations, 
 however,  which  constituted  the  confederacy  with 
 the  Hagarenes,  seem  to  confirm  our  opinion  that 
 tlicse  were  still  residing  in  the  district,  where  in  the 
 reign  of  Saul  they  had  been  subjugated  by  their 
 Israelite  neighbours.       Rosenmiiller    [Bibl.    Geog. 
 
 a  passage  from  Dr.  Stanley's  Je^vish  Cluirch,  i. 
 215,  216:  'Still  the  countless  flocks  and  herds 
 may  be  seen  [in  this  very  region  conquered  from 
 the  Hagarites],  droves  of  cattle  moving  on  hke 
 troops  of  soldiers,  descending  at  sunset  to  drink  ol 
 the  springs — literally,  in  the  language  of  the  pro- 
 phet, '  rams  and  lambs,  and  goats  and  bullocks, 
 all  of  them  fatlings  of  Bashan.' ' 
 
HAGARITES 
 
 193 
 
 HAGARITES 
 
 [trans.],  iii.    141)  and  Gesenius  {Thes.,  s.  v.  '•"Ijil) 
 
 suggest  that  the  Hagarenes  when  vanquished  mi- 
 grated to  the  south-east,  because  on  the  coast  of 
 the  Persian  Gulf  there  was  the  province  of  Hagar 
 
 o 
 
 or   Hadjar   (_;sjj5,).      This   is   the   district   which 
 
 the  Arabian  geographers  have  carefully  and  pro- 
 minently described  (comp.  De  Sacy's  direst.  Arabe, 
 ii.  123  ;  Abulfeda  [by  Reinaud],  ii.  I.  137,  who 
 quotes  Jakut's  Moschtarek  for  some  of  his  infor- 
 mation ;  and  Rommel's  Commentary  on  Abul- 
 feda,   De  Prarj.   Hagiar,    -jsjJb,    si'-Je   Bahhrain, 
 
 ^.'  >sv)Jl    PP-    87,    88,    89  ;    D'Herbelot,    s.  v. 
 
 Hagr).  We  will  not  deny  that  this  province 
 probably  derived  its  name  and  early  inhabitants 
 from  Hagar  and  her  son  Ishmael  (or,  as  Rabbi  D. 
 Kimchi  would  prefer,  from  Hagar,  through  some 
 son  by  another  father  than  Abraham)  ;  but  we  are 
 not  of  opinion  that  these  Hagarenes  of  the  Persian 
 Gulf,  whose  pursuits  were  so  different,*  were  iden- 
 tical with  the  Hagarenes  of  the  Psalm  before  us, 
 or  with  the  Hagarites  of  I  Chron.,  whom  we  have 
 identified  with  them.  The  fact  seems  to  be  that 
 many  districts  in  Arabia  were  called  by  the  generic 
 appellation  of  Hagarite  or  Ilagarciie,  no  doubt 
 after  Hagar  ;  as  Keturah,  another  of  Abraham's 
 concubines,  occasioned  the  rather  vaguely-used 
 name  of  Ketureans  for  other  tribes  of  the  Arabian 
 peninsula  (Forstcr,  Geog.  of  Arabia,  ii.  7).  In  the 
 very  section  of  Abulfeda  which  we  have  above 
 quoted,  that  geogi-apher  (after  the  author  of  the 
 Moschtarek)  reminds  us  that  the  name  Hadjar 
 (Hagar)  is  as  extensive  in  meaning  in  Arabia  as 
 Scham  (Syria)  and  Irak,  elsewhere  ;  in  like  man- 
 ner Rommel,  within  a  page  or  two,  describes  an 
 Hagar  in  the  remote  province  of  Yemen  ;  this, 
 although  an  unquestionably  different  place  (Rei- 
 naud, ii.  I-137,  note),  is  yet  confounded  with  the 
 
 *  Nothing  pastoral  is  related  of  this  maritime 
 tribe  ;  Rommel  quotes  from  two  Arabian  geo- 
 graphers, Taifaschi  and  Bakiu,  who  both  describe 
 these  Hagarenes  of  the  coast  as  much  employed  in 
 pearl-fishing  and  such  pursuits.  Niebuhr  ( Travels 
 in  Arabia  [Engl,  tr.],  u.  151,  152)  confirms  their 
 statement.  Gesenius  is  also  inexact  in  identifying 
 these  maritime  Hagarenes  with  the  ''k-^paloi  of 
 Ptolemy,  v.  19.  2,  and  Eratosthenes,  in  Strabo 
 xvi.  767,  and  Phny  vi.  28.  If  the  tribes  indicated 
 in  these  classical  authors  be  the  same  (which  is 
 doubtful),  they  are  much  more  correctly  identified 
 by  our  own  writer  Dr.  T.  Jackson  ( Works  [ed. 
 Oxon.J,  vol.  i.,  p.  220),  who  says  : — 'The  seat  of 
 such  as  the  Scripture  calls  Hagarens  was  in  the 
 desert  Arabia  betwixt  Gilead  and  Euphrates,  I 
 Chron.  v.  9,  10.  This  people  were  called  by  the 
 heathen  'Aypaioi,  Agraei,  rightly  placed  by  Ptolemy 
 in  the  desert  Arabia,  and  by  Strabo  in  that  veiy 
 place  which  the  Scripture  makes  the  eastern 
 bounds  of  Ishmael's  posterity,  to  wit,  next  unto  the 
 inhabitants  of  Havilah.'  Amidst  the  difficulty  of 
 identification,  some  modern  geographers  have  dis- 
 tribnted  the  classical  Agraei  in  various  localities. 
 Thus,  in  Forster's  maps  of  Arabia,  they  occupy 
 both  the  district  between  Gilead  and  the  Euphrates 
 in  the  north,  as  well  as  the  western  shores  of  the 
 Persian  Gulf, 
 VOL.  11. 
 
 maritime  Hadjar.  In  proof  of  the  uncertainty  ol 
 the  situation  of  places  in  Arabia  of  like  name,  we 
 may  mention  that,  while  Abulfeda,  Edrisi,  Giau 
 hari,  and  Golius  distinguish  between  the  Hagarenes 
 of  the  north-east  coast  and  those  of  the  remote 
 south-west  district  which  we  have  just  mentioned, 
 Nassir  Edin,  Olugbeig,  and  Busching  confound 
 them  as  identical.*  Such  being  the  uncertainty 
 connected  with  the  sites  of  these  Arab  tribes,  we 
 the  less  hesitate  to  place  the  Hagarenes  of  the 
 Psalm  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Edom,  Moab  and 
 Ammon  in  the  situation,  which  was  in  Saul's  time 
 occupied  by  the  Hagarites,  'near  the  main  road 
 which  led'  [or,  more  correctly,  in  the  belt  of 
 country  which  stretched]  '  from  the  head  of  the 
 Red  Sea  to  the  Euphrates'  (Smith's  Diet,  of  Geog., 
 s.  v.  Agrtei ;  see  also  Bochart,  Phaleg.  [ed.  Ville- 
 mandy],  iv.  11,  p.  225).  The  mention  both  of 
 Ishmaelites  and  Hagarenes  in  this  Psalm  has  led  to 
 the  ophiion  that  they  are  separate  nations  here 
 meant.  The  verse,  however  (7th  in  the  Hebrew 
 Bible)  is  in  the  midst  of  a  poetic  parallelism,  in 
 which  the  clauses  are  synonymous  and  not  anti- 
 thetic (comp.  w.  5- 11),  so  that  if  ''Edom  and  the 
 Ishmaelites''  is  not  absolutely  identical  in  geogra- 
 phical signification  with  '  Moab  and  the  Hagareties,'' 
 there  is  at  least  a  poetical  identity  between  these 
 two  groups  which  forbids  our  separating  them 
 widely  from  each  other  in  any  sense  (for  the  dis- 
 persed condition  of  the  Hagarenes,  see  also  Fuller, 
 Misc.  Sacr.,  ii.  12). 
 
 Combinations  marked  the  unrelenting  hostility 
 of  their  neighbours  towards  the  Jews  to  a  very  late 
 period.  One  of  these  is  mentioned  in  I  Maccab. 
 v.,  as  dispersed  by  Judas  Maccaboeus.  'The  chil- 
 dren of  Bean'  {viol  Baiav)  of  ver.  4  have  been  by 
 Hitzig  conjectured  to  be  the  same  as  our  Hagar- 
 enes ;  there  is,  however,  no  other  ground  for  this 
 opinion  than  their  vicinity  to  Edom  and  Ammon, 
 and  the  difficulty  of  making  them  fit  in  with  any 
 other  tribe  as  conveniently  as  with  that  which  is 
 tlie  subject  of  this  article  (see  J.  Olshausen,  die 
 Psalmen,  p.  345). 
 
 (3).  In  the  passage  from  Baruch  iii.  23,  we 
 have  attributed  to  '  the  Agarenes '  qualities  of 
 wisdom  for  which  the  Arabian  nation  has  been 
 long  celebrated,  skill  in  proverbial  philosophy 
 (Cf.  Freytag,  Arab.  Prov.,  tom.  iii.,  prsef.)  ;  in 
 this  accomplishment  they  have  associated  with 
 them  '  the  merchants  of  Meran  and  of  Tbeman.' 
 This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  the  site  of  Meran, 
 which  some  have  placed  on  the  Persian  Gulf  and 
 others  on  the  Red  Sea  ;  it  is  enough  to  observe  that 
 their  mercantile  habits  gave  them  a  shrewdness  in 
 practical  knowledge  which  rendered  them  worthy 
 of  comparison  with  '  the  merchants  of  Thf-man'  or 
 Edom.t     The  wisdom  of  these  is  expressly  men- 
 
 *  Winer,  R.  W.  B.,  s.v.  Hagariter,  mentions  yet 
 
 another    -sjs-,  Hhadjar,  which,   though  slightly 
 
 different  in  form,  might  be  written  much  like  our 
 word  in  Hebrew,   S^JH,  and  is  actually  identical 
 
 with  it  in  the  Syriac  r-il'^  (Assemanni,   Biblioth. 
 
 Orient.,  iii.  2.  753).  This  place  was  in  the  pro- 
 vince of  Hedjaz  on  the  Red  Sea,  on  the  main 
 route  between  Damascus  and  Mecca. 
 
 +  Forster  makes  these  Themanese  inhabitants  of 
 the  maritime  Balirain,  and  therefore  Hagarenes  (i. 
 
 C 
 
HAGGAI 
 
 194 
 
 HAGGAI 
 
 tioned  in  Jer.  xlbc.  7  and  Obad.,  ver.  S.  The 
 Agarenes  of  this  passage  we  would  place  among 
 the  inhabitants  of  the  shores  of  the  Persian 
 Gulf,  where  (see  l)  Gesenius  and  others  placed 
 •  the  Hagarites '  after  their  conquest  by  the  Lrans- 
 jordanic  Israelites.  The  clause,  '  that  seek  wis- 
 dom on  earth'*  [that  is,  '  which  acquire  experience 
 and  intelligence  from  intercourse  with  mankind'], 
 seems  to  best  fall  in  with  the  habits  of  a  seafaring 
 and  mercantile  race  (see  Fritzsche,  das  Bttch 
 Baruch,  p.  192  ;  and  Havemick,  whose  words  he 
 quotes  :  '  Hagareni  terram  quasi  perlustrantes 
 dicuntur,  quippe  mercatores  longe  celeberrimi 
 antiquissimis  jamjam  temporibus'). — P.  H. 
 
 HAGGAI   can ;  Sept.  and  Joseph.  'A77aioj ; 
 
 Jerome  and  Vulg.  Aggmis  or  Aggeus,  otherwise 
 Haggaus),  one  of  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  and 
 the  first  of  the  three  who,  after  the  return  of  the 
 Jews  from  the  Babylonian  exile,  prophesied  in 
 Palestine.  Of  the  place  and  year  of  his  birth, 
 liis  descent,  and  the  leading  incidents  of  his  life, 
 nothing  is  known  which  can  be  relied  on.  Some 
 assert  that  he  was  born  in  Babylon,  and  came  to 
 Jerusalem  when  Cyrus,  in  the  year  B.C.  536,  al- 
 lowed the  Jews  to  return  to  their  country  (2  Chron. 
 xxxvi.  23  ;  Ezra  i.  l), — the  new  colony  consisting 
 chiefly  of  people  belonging  to  the  tribes  of  Judah, 
 Benjamin,  and  Levi,  with  a  few  from  other  tribes. 
 [From  ch.  ii.  2  Ewald  conjectures  that  Haggai 
 may  have  been  of  the  number  of  those  who  had 
 seen  the  former  temple  ;  and  Ilavernick,  Keil,  and 
 Bleek,  accept  this  as  not  improbable.]  The  more 
 fabulous  traditions  of  Jewish  writers,  who  pass  him 
 for  an  Assessor  of  the  Synagoga  Magna,  and 
 enlarge  on  his  literaiy  avocations,  have  been  col- 
 lected by  Carpzov  {Introdudio  in  V.  T.  iii.  p.  426). 
 [Jerome  [Comnieut.    ad  Agg.    l)  says   that  some, 
 
 resting  on  the  words  mn*  ISpO  (i.  13),  held 
 Haggai  to  have  been  really  an  angel  doketically 
 incarnate.]  This  much  appears  from  his  prophe- 
 cies, that  he  flourished  during  the  reign  of  the 
 Persian  monarch  Darius  Hystaspis,  who  ascended 
 the  throne  B.C.  521.  These  prophecies  are  com- 
 prised in  a  book  of  two  chapters,  and  consist  of 
 discourses  so  brief  and  summary  as  to  have  led  some 
 German  theologians  to  suspect  that  they  have  not 
 come  down  to  us  in  their  original  complete  form, 
 but  are  only  an  epitome  (Eichhorn,  Einleitung  in 
 das  A.  T.  iii.  sec.  598  ;  Jahn,  Introdnctio  in  libros 
 sacros  Vet.  Feed.,  edit.  2,  Viennas  1814,  sec.  156). 
 Their  object  generally  is  to  urge  the  rebuilding  of 
 the  Temple,  which  had  indeed  been  commenced 
 
 303)  ;  but  in  this  he  is  flagrantly  inconsistent  with 
 his  own  good  canon  (i.  291)  ;  the  name  of  the  son 
 of  Eliphaz  and  of  his  descendants  [the  Edomites] 
 is  uniformly  written  Temaw  in  the  original  Hebrew ; 
 and  that  of  the  son  of  Ishmael  and  his  family  [the 
 Hagarenes  or  Ishmaelites]  as  uniformly  Tema 
 [without  the  n].' 
 
 *  The  LXX. ,  o\  iKi^TjTovvres  Trjv  avvecriv  ol  ivl 
 TTJs  yrjs,  is  surely  corrupt,  because  meaningless  : 
 by  the  help  of  the  Vulgate  and  the  Syriac  it  has 
 been  conjectured  by  some  (by  Havernick  and 
 Fritzsche,  in  loc,  for  instance)  that  instead  of  oi  eirX 
 we  should  read  t^v  iwl,  q.  d.,  '  the  wisdom  [or 
 common  sense]  which  is  cognisant  of  the  earth — its 
 men  and  manners  ;'  an  attainment  which  mercan- 
 tile persons  acquire  better  than  all  else. 
 
 as  early  as  B.C.  535  (Ezra  iii.  10),  but  was  after- 
 wards discontinued,  the  Samaritans  h.iving  obtained 
 an  edict  from  the  Persian  king  which  forbade 
 further  procedure,  and  influential  Jews  pretending 
 that  the  time  for  rebuilding  the  Temple  had  not 
 arrived,  since  the  seventy  years  predicted  by  Jere- 
 miah applied  to  the  Temple  also,  from  the  time 
 of  the  destruction  of  which  it  was  then  only  the 
 sixty-eighth  year.  As  on  the  death  of  Pseudo- 
 Smerdis,  and  the  consequent  termination  of  his 
 interdict,  the  Jews  still  continued  to  wait  for  the 
 end  of  the  seventy  years,  and  were  only  engaged 
 in  building  splendid  houses  for  themselves,  Haggai 
 began  to  prophesy  in  the  second  year  of  Darius, 
 B.C.  520. 
 
 [In  the  LXX.  the  name  of  Haggai  occurs  along 
 with  that  of  Zechariah  in  the  inscriptions  of  Ps. 
 cxxxvii.,  cxlv. -cxlviii.  ;  in  the  Vulg.  the  same  names 
 are  prefixed  to  Ps.  cxi.  and  Ps.  cxlv.  ;  and  in  the 
 Syr.  they  are  prefixed  to  Ps.  cxxv.,  Ps.  cxxvi., 
 and  Ps.  cxlv.  -cxlviii.  The  purport  of  this  is  not 
 that  these  prophets  were  the  authors  of  the  psalms 
 in  question,  but  only  that  they  introduced  them 
 into  the  service  of  the  Temple,  or  specially  adapted 
 them  to  the  circumstances  of  the  people  at  the 
 time,  or  themselves  conducted  the  chanting  of  them 
 in  the  service.  This  last  view  is  favoured  by  the 
 statement  of  the  Pseudo-Epiphanius  {De  Vit. 
 Proph.),  that  Haggai  'himself  first  sung  a  Halle- 
 lujah, which  is  interpreted  Praise  ye  the  Living 
 God,  and  Amen,  which  is.  Be  it,  Be  it ;  wherefore, 
 he  adds,  we  say  Hallelujah,  which  is,  the  hymn  of 
 Haggai  and  Zechariah.'  The  writer  cannot  intend 
 by  this  that  Haggai  and  Zechariah  i7itroditced  the 
 word  Hallelujah  into  the  Psalms  ;  he  can  only  mean 
 that  in  singing  the  Hallelujah  Psalms  these  prophets 
 in  some  way  took  the  lead  (Carpzov,  Introd.  in 
 Lihb.  V.  T.  ii.  4,  28  ;  Hamaker,  Commentatio  in 
 Libellnm  de  Vitis  Proph.  207.] 
 
 His  first  discourse  (ch.  i.),  delivered  on  the  first 
 day  of  the  sixth  month  of  the  year  mentioned,  fore- 
 tells that  a  brighter  era  would  begin  as  soon  as 
 Jehovah's  house  was  rebuilt  ;  and  a  notice  is  sub- 
 joined, stating  that  the  address  of  the  prophet  had 
 been  effective,  the  people  having  resolved  on  re- 
 suming the  restoration  of  the  Temple.  The  second 
 discourse  (ch.  ii.  1-9),  delivered  on  the  twenty-first 
 day  of  the  seventh  month,  predicts  that  the  glory 
 of  the  new  Temple  would  be  greater  than  that  of 
 Solomon's,  and  shows  that  no  fear  need  be  enter- 
 tained of  the  Second  Temple  not  equalling  the  first 
 in  splendour,  since,  in  a  remarkable  political  revo- 
 lution, the  gifts  of  the  Gentiles  would  be  brought 
 thither.  The  third  discourse  (ch.  ii.  IO-19),  de- 
 livered on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the  ninth 
 month,  refers  to  a  period  when  building  materials 
 had  been  collected,  and  the  workmen  had  begun  to 
 put  them  together  ;  for  which  a  commencement  of 
 the  Divine  blessing  is  promised.  The  fourth  and 
 last  discourse  (ch.  ii.  20-23),  delivered  also  on  the 
 twenty-fourth  day  of  the  ninth  month,  is  exclu- 
 sively addressed  to  Zerubbabel,  the  political  chief 
 of  the  new  Jewish  colony,  who,  it  appears,  had 
 asked  for  an  explanation  regarding  the  great  poli- 
 tical revolutions  which  Haggai  had  predicted  in 
 his  second  discourse  :  it  comforts  the  governor  by 
 assuring  him  they  would  not  take  place  very  soon, 
 and  not  in  his  lifetime.  The  style  of  the  discourses 
 of  Haggai  is  suitable  to  their  contents  :  it  is  pa- 
 thetic when  he  exhorts  ;  it  is  vehement  when  he 
 reproves  :  it  is  somewhat  elevated  when  he  treats  of 
 
HAGGERI 
 
 19& 
 
 IIAI 
 
 ftiture  events  ;  and  it  is  not  altogether  destitute  of 
 a  poetical  colouring,  though  a  prophet  of  a  more 
 vivid  imagination  would  have  depicted  the  splen- 
 dour of  the  Second  Temple  in  brighter  hues.  One 
 peculiarity  of  his  style  is  the  frequent  repetition  of 
 the  same  expressions  ;  e.  g.,  niiT'  "IDX  T\'2  (i.  2,  5, 
 7),  nin^  DNJ  three  times  in  one  verse  (ii.  4),  with 
 PTH  three  times  in  the  same  verse,  and  mi  three 
 times  also  in  one  verse  (i.  14).  Eichhorii  {Einlei- 
 tung,  sec.  599)  attributes  these  repetitions  to  nu 
 attempt  at  ornament,  rendering  the  writer  disposed 
 to  recur  frequently  to  a  favourite  expression.  Tlie 
 prophetical  discourses  of  Haggai,  nx^33  "'HH  riNIHj, 
 are  referred  to  in  the  O.  and  N.  T.  (Ezra  v.  i  ;  vi. 
 14 ;  Heb.  xii.  26  ;  comp.  Hagg.  ii.  6,  7,  22).  In 
 most  of  the  ancient  catalogues  of  the  canonical 
 books  of  the  O.  T. ,  Haggai  is  not,  indeed,  men- 
 tioned by  name ;  but  as  they  specify  tlie  twelve 
 minor  prophets,  he  must  have  been  included  among 
 them,  as  otherwise  their  number  would  not  be  full. 
 Josephus,  mentioning  Haggai  and  Zechariah  [Anti- 
 tptities,  xi.  4.  5),  calls  them  hvo  TrpocpfjTai. — J.  v.  H. 
 [Commentar/es  : — Abarbanel  (Heb.  cum  vers. 
 Lat.  a  J.  A.  Scherzio),  Lips.  1663  ;  Aben  Ezra 
 (Lat.  in  J.  G.  Abichti,  Select.  Rabbinico-Philol.  p. 
 278,  where  also  at  p.  79  is  a  Latin  translation  of 
 Abarbanel's  comment.),  Melanchthon  {0pp.  tom. 
 ii.  p.  527)  ;  Giynaeus,  Gen.  1581  ;  Mercer,  Par. 
 1551  ;  Pilkington,  Lond.  1560 ;  Reynolds,  Lond. 
 1649;  Hessian,  Lund.  1789;  Newcome,  Lond. 
 1785,  Pontefr.  1809,  Lond.  1836;  Ackermann, 
 Vien.  1830 ;  Hitzig,  Leipz.  1838 ;  Henderson, 
 Lond.  1845.] 
 
 HAGGERI  (^jn  ;  Sept.  'K^apl ;  Alex.  'Axayoai 
 
 [Hagarite]. 
 
 HAGGI,   prop.    Chaggi   ('•an  ;  Sept.  'A77tj ; 
 
 Alex.  'A77€rs),  second  son  of  Gad  (Gen.  xlvi.  16), 
 and  head  of  the  Sept  or  family  of  the  Haggites 
 (^2nn,  contracted  from  i«3n  ;  Num.  xxvi.  15). — f 
 
 HAGGITH,  prop.  Chaggith   (n'^an  ;  festive 
 
 Gesen.,  born  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  Fiirst  ; 
 Sept.  'Ayyid  ;  Alex,  ^evyid,  'Ayld,  'Ayyeid),  one 
 of  David's  wives  and  the  mother  of  Adonijah 
 (2  Sam.  iii.  4;  i  Kings  i.  5,  11  ;  ii.  13  ;  I  Chron. 
 iii.  2).     Her  son  was  born  at  Hebron. — t 
 
 HAGIOGRAPHA,  Sacred  Writings.  The  word 
 ayi6ypa<pa  is  first  found  in  Epiphanius  (Panarium, 
 p.  58),  who  used  it,  as  well  as  ypa(f}e'la,  to  denote 
 the  third  division  of  the  Scriptures,  called  by  the 
 Jews  D^^iriD,  or  the  Writings,  consisting  oi  five 
 books  [Megilloth],  viz.,  the  three  poems  (HDN), 
 Job,  Proverbs,  and  the  Psalms,  and  the  two  books 
 of  Chronicles.     [Canon.] 
 
 The  word  Hagiograpka  is  once  used  by  Jerome 
 in  a  peculiar  sense.  Speaking  of  Tobit,  he  asserts 
 that  the  Jews,  cutting  off  this  book  from  the  cata- 
 logue of  the  divine  Scriptures,  place  it  among 
 those  books  which  they  call  Hagiograpka.  And 
 again,  of  Judith  he  says,  '  by  the  Jews  it  is  read 
 among  the  Hagiographa,  whose  authority  is  not 
 sufficient  to  confirm  debated  points;'  but,  as  in 
 the  latter  instance,  the  greater  number  of  manu- 
 scripts read  Apocrypha,  which  is  doubtless  the 
 true  reading,  it  is  highly  probable  that  the  word 
 Hagiographa,  used  in  reference  to  the  book  of 
 Tobit,  has  arisen  from  the  mistake  of  a  transcriber. 
 The  two  words  were  in  the  middle  ages  frequently 
 
 used  as  sjiionyraous.  Hagiographa  has  been  also 
 used  by  Christian  writers  as  synonymous  with  Holy 
 Scripture. — W.  W. 
 
 HAL     [Ai] 
 
 HAI  (^S«n)  or  HAJA  (S'^KH),  Gaon  b.  Sherira 
 Gaon,  was  the  last  rector  of  the  renowned  college 
 at  Pumbadita  in  Babylon.  This  celebrated  Tal- 
 mudist,  jurist,  poet,  and  commentator,  was  bom 
 at  Pumbadita  A.D.  969,  and  displayed  at  a  very 
 early  period  such  extraordinary  talents  that  he 
 was  made  president  of  the  College  of  Law  (35* 
 pT  n^2)  at  Pumbadita,  at  the  age  of  18  (in  987), 
 at  20  (in  989)  lie  was  co-gaon  with  his  father,  and 
 at  30  (in  the  year  999)  was  elevated  to  the  dig- 
 nity of  sole  gaon,  i.  e.,  spiritual  head  of  the  Jewish 
 community  in  Babylon.  The  liberality  of  mind 
 and  frankness  whicli  he  manifested  in  his  exposi- 
 tions of  Scripture  have  hardly  ever  been  surpassed. 
 When  discussing  in  his  academical  lectures  a  difficult 
 passage  in  the  Psalms,  and  not  being  able  to  arrive 
 at  any  satisfactory  explanation,  this  spiritual  head 
 of  the  synagogue  sent  to  his  friend  Mar-Eliah,  the 
 spiritual  head  of  the  Eastern  Church  at  Bagdad, 
 to  ask  what  he  had  learned  about  it  ;  and  when 
 Mazliach  Ibn  Al-Bazak,  judge  of  Sicily,  one  of  the 
 audience  who  had  come  to  amass  Talmudic  lore 
 at  the  renowned  college  at  Pumbadita,  expressed 
 his  amazement  at  such  a  proceeding,  Hai  demon- 
 stated  to  him  that  according  to  the  Talmud  every 
 man  is  bound  to  learn  truth  from  any  one  (comp. 
 Steinschneider,  Jeivish  Literature,  Longman,  1857, 
 pp.  78,  125).  His  exposition  of  the  celebrated 
 declaration  in  the  Talmud  about  J-ob  is  of  great  in- 
 terest to  the  Biblical  student.  '  R.  Hai  writes  in 
 his  Theological  Decisions,''  says  Joshua  Ibn  Shoeib 
 (niJi'm,  Cracow  1570,  p.  77),  '  that  Job  has  actu- 
 ally existed,  and  that  no  one  [among  Israel]  has  ever 
 
 doubted  it.   When  it  is  said  in  the  Talmud  X?  3VS 
 
 rr-n  h^t2  vh^  Snna  xh  n\1  Baba  Bathra  15  a  ;* 
 the  meaning  is  that  he  is  to  be  an  example  to  all  the 
 children  of  men,  who  are  to  act  as  he  did,  and  are, 
 like  him,  to  confide  in  God,  who  will  recompence 
 their  losses  and  turn  their  chastisements  into  bless- 
 ings.    Hai,  moreover,  says  that  in  their  copies  of 
 
 the  Talmud  the  reading  actually  is  NP1  nTI  S/ 
 
 hvrh  ^^  t<12a,  and  not  -"•H  h^n,  for  Job  did 
 exist,  as  is  evident  from  Ezek.  xiv.  ii.' 
 
 Passing  by  his  extraordinary  productions  con- 
 nected with  the  Talmud  and  his  Theological  Deci- 
 sions, which  more  or  less  also  explain  the  lega' 
 portion  of  the  Scriptures,  we  shall  specify  his 
 labours  which  directly  bear  upon  the  Bible  and  its 
 language. 
 
 Hai  wrote  commentaries  on  the  Bible,  which 
 have  not  as  yet  come  to  light.  We  have,  however, 
 fragments  of  them  given  in  the  exegetical  and  lexi- 
 cal works  of  Rashi  (on  Judg.  iv.  19  ;  Hos.  iii.  4), 
 Ibn  Ezra  (Deut.  xxxii.  39  ;  Is.  xlvi.  8  ;  Amos  v. 
 22;  Ps.  Iviii.  10;  Job.  iv.  15;  vi.  10;  xiii.  27; 
 xxi.  32),  and  Kimchi  (Is.  v.  5  ;  xxxviii.  14  ;  Jer.  xii. 
 
 6  ;  Exek.  xix.  10) ;  Lexicon  under  Art.  t^'SD,  -TtK 
 
 *  The  passage  also  occurs  in  the  Jerusalem  Tal- 
 mud Sola  15  a,  where,  however,  the  reading  is  3T'X 
 rW'^rh  TTIJ?  ^\  ^^^  )h  J'^b  neither  did  nor  wilt 
 exist. 
 
HAIR 
 
 196 
 
 HAIR 
 
 njy,  npi  hn:,  mb^,  iid,  non,  an,  ana,  vhi, 
 
 TpEJ*,  DDE',  T/n,  TID,  11?")^.  and  the  supplement 
 on  the  Aramtean  expressions  and  N^Vn,  p.  417, 
 1*,  ed.  Biesenthal  et  Lebracht. 
 
 He  also   wrote  a   Hebrew  Lexicon  in  Arabic, 
 
 called  ''ISnPK,  which  Ibn  Ezra,  who  had  it  before 
 him  when  he  wrote  his  grammatical  treatise  en- 
 titled D'»:nNQ,  calls  1DX»n,  and  describes  as  X^O 
 
 *S1''  ?''P31  riDSn,  y}///  of  wisdom  and  perfect  in 
 beauty.  This  work,  too,  has  not  as  yet  come  to 
 light.  From  the  fragments  of  his  works  as  given 
 by  the  above-mentioned  commentators,  we  see  that 
 Hai  was  a  liberal  and  impartial  interpreter  of  the 
 Hebrew  Scriptures,  and  that  he  resorted  to  the 
 Koran  and  the  ancient  traditions  of  the  Moham- 
 medans for  aid  to  settle  the  meaning  of  archaic 
 expressions  and  peculiar  phrases  in  the  Bible.  If 
 we  bear  in  mind  the  extraordinary  esteem  in  which 
 he  was  held  by  Jews  throughout  I5abylon  and  else- 
 where, who   called  him  by  the  distinguished  title 
 
 '  the  Father  of  hraeV  (^SIK'"'  3N),  the  salutary  in- 
 fluence which  this  liberal  example  of  Hai  must 
 have  exercised  upon  the  development  of  Biblical 
 exegesis  will  easily  be  understood.  Hai  died  28th 
 March  1038,  after  holding  the  highest  office  among 
 the  Jews  for  39  years.  Comp.  Rapaport's  mas- 
 terly Biography  of  Hai,  Bikkure  Ha-Ittim,  x. 
 79-95  ;  xi.  90-92  ;  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Jitdaica,  i. 
 355-358  ;  Steinschneider,  Catal.  Libr.  Hebr.  in 
 Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  1026- 1030 ;  Graetz,  Ge- 
 schichte  der  Jiiden,  vi.  6-13  ;  Geiger,  Jiidische  Zeit- 
 schrift  fiir  IVissenschaft,  etc.,  Breslau  1862,206- 
 217;  312-314.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 HAIR  is  frequently  mentioned  in  Scripture, 
 and  in  scarcely  anything  has  the  caprice  of  fashion 
 been  more  strikingly  displayed  than  in  the  various 
 forms  which  the  taste  of  different  countries  and 
 ages  has  prescribed  for  disposing  of  this  natural 
 covering  of  the  head.  The  Greeks  let  their  hair 
 grow  to  a  great  length,  and  their  natural  fond- 
 ness for  this  attribute  of  beauty  has  been  perpetu- 
 ated not  only  by  the  frequently  recurring  epithet 
 of  Homer,  KapTiKoixdwi/Tes,  as  descriptive  of  the 
 'Axatoi,  but  by  the  circumstance  of  the  poets  and 
 artists  of  that  ancient  people  representing  even  the 
 gods  themselves  with  long  hair.  The  early  Egyp- 
 tians, again,  who  were  proverbial  for  their  habits 
 of  cleanliness,  removed  the  hair  as  an  incumbrance, 
 and  the  almost  unavoidable  occasion  of  sordid 
 and  offensive  negligence.  They  shaved  even  the 
 heads  of  young  children,  leaving  only  certain  locks, 
 as  an  emblem  of  youth,  on  the  front,  the  back,  and 
 the  sides.  In  the  case  of  royal  children  those  on 
 the  sides  were  covered  and  enclosed  in  a  bag, 
 which  hung  down  conspicuously  as  a  badge  of 
 princely  rank.  All  classes  amongst  that  people, 
 not  excepting  the  slaves  imported  from  foreign 
 countries,  were  required  to  submit  to  the  tonsure 
 (Gen.  xli.  14) ;  and  yet,  what  was  remarkable  in 
 the  inhabitants  of  a  hot  climate,  while  they  re- 
 moved their  natural  hair,  they  were  accustomed  to 
 wear  wigs,  which  were  so  constructed  that  '  they 
 far  surpassed,'  says  Wilkinson,  'the  comfort  and 
 coolness  of  the  modern  turban,  the  reticulated  tex- 
 ture of  the  ground-work  on  which  the  hair  was  fas- 
 tened allowing  the  heat  of  the  head  to  escape, 
 while  the  hair  effectually  protected  it  from  the  sun 
 Anc.   Egyptians,    iii.  354).     Different   from   the 
 
 custom  both  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Egyptians,  that 
 of  the  Hebrews  was  to  wear  their  hair  generally 
 short,  and  to  check  its  growth  by  the  application  of 
 scissors  only.  The  priests  at  their  inauguration 
 shaved  off  all  their  hair,  and  when  on  actual  duty 
 at  the  temple,  were  in  the  habit,  it  is  said,  of  cut- 
 ting it  every  fortnight.  The  only  eyreptions  tp 
 this  prevailing  fashion  are  found  in  the  Nazarites 
 (Num.  vi.  5),  whose  hair,  from  religious  duty,  was 
 not  to  be  cropped  during  the  term  of  their  vow  ; 
 of  young  persons  who,  during  their  minority,  al- 
 lowed their  hair  to  hang  down  in  luxuriant  ringlets 
 on  their  shoulders ;  of  such  effeminate  persons  as 
 Absalom  (2  Sam.  xiv.  26) ;  and  of  Solomon's 
 horse-guards,  whose  vanity  affected  a  puerile  ex 
 travagance,  and  who  strewed  their  heads  every  day 
 with  particles  of  gold-dust  (Joseph.  Antiq.  viii.  7.  3). 
 Although  the  Hebrews  wore  their  hair  short,  they 
 were  great  admirers  of  strong  and  thickset  locks  ; 
 and  so  high  a  value  did  they  set  on  the  possession 
 of  a  good  head  of  hair,  that  they  deprecated  nothing 
 so  much  as  baldness  ;  to  which,  indeed,  so  great 
 ignominy  was  attached  that,  whether  a  man  was 
 destitute  of  hair  or  not,  bald-head  became  a  gene- 
 ral term  expressive  of  deep  and  malignant  contempt 
 (2  Kings  ii.  23).  [Baldness.]  To  prevent  or 
 remedy  this  defect  they  seem,  at  an  early  period,  to 
 have  availed  themselves  of  the  assistance  of  art,  not 
 only  for  beautifying  the  hair,  but  increasing  its 
 thickness,  while  the  heads  of  the  priests  were 
 anointed  with  an  unguent  of  a  peculiar  kind,  the 
 ingredients  of  which,  with  their  various  propor- 
 tions were  prescribed  by  divine  authority,  and  the 
 composition  of  vifhich  the  people  were  prohibited, 
 under  severe  penalties,  from  attempting  to  imitate 
 (Exod.  XXX.  32,  ff.)  This  custom  spread  till 
 anointing  the  hair  of  the  head  became  a  general 
 mark  of  gentility  and  an  essential  part  of  the  daily 
 toilet  (Ps.  xxiii.  5  ;  xlv.  7  ;  Eccles.  ix.  8  ;  Mark 
 xiv.  3) ;  the  usual  cosmetics  employed  consisting  of 
 the  best  oil  of  olives  mingled  with  spices,  a  decoc- 
 tion of  parsley-seed  in  wine,  and  more  rarely  of 
 spikenard.  The  prevailing  colour  of  hair  among 
 the  Hebrews  was  dark;  '  locks  bushy  and  black  as 
 a  raven,'  being  mentioned  in  the  description  of  the 
 bridegroom  as  the  perfection  of  beauty  in  mature 
 manhood  (Sol.  Song,  v.  11).  Hence  the  appear- 
 ance of  an  old  man  with  a  snow-white  head  in  a 
 company  of  younger  Jews,  all  whose  heads,  like 
 those  of  other  Eastern  people,  were  jet  black — a 
 most  conspicuous  object — is  beautifully  compared 
 to  an  almond-tree,  which  in  the  early  part  of  the 
 year  is  in  full  blossom,  while  all  the  others  are 
 dark  and  leafless  (Eccles.  xii.  5).  Red  hair,  how- 
 ever, occasionally  appeared,  and  seems  to  have 
 been  regarded  as  ornamental  rather  than  otherwise. 
 The  word  ''J1DTK,  Adrnoni,  rendered  in  the  A.V. 
 '  of  a  ruddy  complexion,'  properly  means  red- 
 haired.  It  would  thus  appear  that  Esau  (Gen. 
 XXV.  25)  and  David  (i  Sam.  xvi.  12  ;  xvii.  42) 
 were  red-haired.  Red  hair  is  so  uncommon  in  the 
 East,  that  it  forms  a  particular  distinction,  as  in 
 the  Scriptural  instances ;  but  it  is  by  no  means  un- 
 known, especially  in  mountainous  countries.  The 
 writer  has  observed  it  in  Persia  repeatedly,  accom- 
 panied with  the  usual  fresh  complexion.  Such 
 hair  and  complexion  together  seem  to  have  been 
 regarded  as  a  beauty  among  the  Jews.  The  per- 
 sonal characters  of  Esau  and  David  appear  to  agree 
 well  with  the  temperament  which  red  hair  usually 
 indicates-     A  story  is  told  of  Herod,  that  in  order 
 
HAIR 
 
 197 
 
 HAIR 
 
 to  conceal  his  advanced  age,  he  used  secretly  to  dye 
 his  gray  locks  with  a  dark  pigment  (Joseph.  A7itiq. 
 xvi.  8.  i) ;  and  although  the  anecdote  was  probably 
 an  unfoj-inded  calumny  on  that  prince,  yet  that  it  was 
 customary  with  many  of  his  Roman  contemporaries 
 to  employ  artificial  means  for  changing  or  disguis- 
 ing the  silver  hue  of  age,  is  sufficiently  apparent 
 from  the  works  of  Martial  and  other  satirical  poets. 
 From  Rome  the  fashion  spread  into  Greece  and 
 other  provinces,  and  it  appears  that  the  members 
 of  the  church  of  Corinth  were,  to  a  certain  extent, 
 captivated  by  the  prevailing  taste,  some  Christians 
 being  evidently  in  the  eye  of  the  Apostle,  who  had 
 attracted  attention  by  the  cherished  and  womanly 
 decoration  of  their  hair  (i  Cor.  xi.  14-16).  To 
 them  the  letter  of  Paul  was  intended  to  administer 
 a  timely  reproof  for  allowing  themselves  to  fall  in 
 with  a  style  of  manners  which,  by  confounding  the 
 distinctions  of  the  sexes,  threatened  a  baneful  in- 
 fluence on  good  morals  ;  and  that  not  only  the 
 Christian  converts  in  that  city,  but  the  primitive 
 church  generally,  were  led  by  this  admonition  to 
 adopt  simpler  habits,  is  evident  from  the  remark- 
 able fact  that  a  criminal,  who  came  to  trial  under 
 the  assumed  character  of  a  Christian,  was  proved 
 to  the  satisfaction  of  the  judge  to  be  an  impostor 
 by  the  luxuriant  and  frizzled  appearance  of  his  hair 
 (Tertullian,  ApoL;  F\e\.iry,LesAfa;itrsdes  Chretietts). 
 
 With  regard  to  women,  the  possession  of  long  and 
 luxuriant  hair  is  allowed  by  Paul  to  be  an  essen- 
 tial attribute  of  the  sex — a  graceful  and  modest 
 covering  provided  by  nature ;  and  yet  the  same 
 Apostle  elsewhere  (l  Tim.  ii.  9)  concurs  with 
 Peter  (i  Pet.  iii.  3)  in  guarding  women  pro- 
 fessing godliness  against  the  pride  and  passionate 
 fondness  often  displayed  in  the  elaborate  decora- 
 tions of  the  head-dress.  As  the  hair  was  pre-emi- 
 nently the  'instrument  of  their  pride'  (Ezek.  xvi. 
 39,  margin),  all  the  resources  of  ingenuity  and  art 
 were  exhausted  to  set  it  off  to  advantage  and  load 
 it  with  the  most  dazzling  finery  ;  and  many  when 
 they  died  caused  their  longest  locks  to  be  cut  off, 
 and  placed  separately  in  an  urn,  to  be  deposited  in 
 their  tomb  as  the  most  precious  and  valued  relics. 
 In  the  daily  use  of  cosmetics  they  bestowed  the 
 most  astonishing  pains  in  arranging  their  long  hair ; 
 sometimes  twisting  it  round  on  the  crown  of  the 
 head,  where,  and  at  the  temples,  by  the  aid  of 
 gum,  which  they  knew  as  well  as  the  modern 
 belles,  they  wrought  it  into  a  variety  of  elegant  and 
 fanciful  devices — figures  of  coronets,  harps,  wreaths, 
 diadems,  emblems  of  public  temples  and  con- 
 quered cities,  being  formed  by  the  mimic  skill  of 
 the  ancient  friseur  ;  or  else,  plaiting  it  into  an  in- 
 credible number  of  tresses  which  hung  down  the 
 back,  and  which,  when  necessary,  were  lengthened 
 by  ribbons  .so  as  to  reach  to  the  ground,  and  were 
 kept  at  full  stretch  by  the  weight  of  various  wreaths 
 of  pearls  and  gold  fastened  at  intervals  down  to 
 the  extremity.  From  some  Syrian  coins  in  his 
 possession  Hartmann  [Die  Hebrderin  am  Putztishe) 
 has  given  this  description  of  the  style  of  the  He- 
 brew coiffure  ;  and  many  ancient  busts  and  por- 
 traits which  have  been  discovered  exhibit  so  close 
 a  resemblance  to  those  of  Eastern  ladies  in  the 
 present  day,  as  to  shew  that  the  same  elaborate 
 and  gorgeous  disposition  of  their  hair  has  been  the 
 pride  of  Oriental  females  in  every  age. 
 
 [As  illustrative  of  the  above  remarks  reference 
 may  be  made  to  the  seven  locks  in  which  Samson's 
 Uair  was  arranged,  these  being  probably  plaits  into 
 
 which  his  hair  was  divided.  This  also  is  probably 
 what  Josephus  intends  in  the  description  he  gives 
 of  the  style  in  which  Herod  dressed  his  hair  when 
 called  in  his  youth  before  the  Sanhedrim  ;  he  ap- 
 peared Tr\v  KecpaXi]!'  KeKocrnTji-'Jvos  rrj  avv6i(7ei  t^s 
 KOfxris  {Antiq.  xiv.  9.  4).  Wlien  Judith  was  about 
 to  go  to  the  camp  of  Holofernes  dura^e  tAs 
 Tpixas  'she  braided  her  hair'  (A.  V.)  On  the 
 Assyrian  monuments  figures  appear  witli  the  hair 
 parted  into  several  bands  or  plaits,  and  curled  at 
 the  extremities,  but  whether  the  hair  in  these  is 
 natural  or  artificial  remains  matter  of  doubt. 
 Writing  of  the  Turkish  ladies,  Lady  Mary  Wortley 
 Montague  says,  '  The  hair  hangs  at  its  full  length 
 behind,  divided  into  tresses,  braided  with  pearl  or 
 ribbon,  which  is  always  in  great  quantity. 
 In  one  lady's  head,'  she  adds,  '  I  have  counted  a 
 hundred  and  ten  of  these  tresses,  all  natural' 
 [Letters,  etc.,  edited  by  Lord  Whamcliffe,  i.  372). 
 This  style  of  dressing  the  hair,  and  the  practice  of 
 fixing  pearls  or  ornaments  of  precious  stones  or 
 metals  in  the  hair,  is  referred  to  by  St.  Paul  and  St. 
 Peter  as  a  thing  to  be  avoided  by  Christian  women 
 (i  Tim.  ii.  9  ;  1  Peter  iii.  3),  partly  perhaps  be- 
 cause of  the  undue  cost  of  such  modes  of  dressing 
 the  hair,  partly  also  because  the  practice  was  asso- 
 ciated with  usages  not  compatible  with  true  female 
 modesty  (comp.  with  the  irXiyfiaTo.  of  the  one 
 apostle  and  the  i/j-nXoKr]  of  the  other,  the  TrepiirXo- 
 Kai  iraiptKai  twv  rpix^jv  of  Clem.  Alex.  Pwdag  iii. 
 11).  It  is  to  this  style  of  dressing  the  hair  that 
 Isaiah  seems  to  allude  under  the  expression  nbyO 
 
 ^^P)P    (iii.     24)     'well-set    hair'    A.  V.,     rather 
 
 'braided  hair,'  i.e.,  'hair  artificially  made  up  into 
 braids  and  interwoven,  and  stiffened  with  ribbands 
 and  other  materials'  (Henderson,  /;/  loc.)  In  the 
 Song  of  Songs  are  various  allusions  to  modes  of 
 
 dressing  the  hair.   Thus  (ch.  v.  1 1)  we  have  D^^DaTI, 
 
 faniing,  waving  locks,  from  7^T\  to  vibrate  (Sept. 
 iXdrai  ;  Vulg.  dathcE  pahnaruni) ;  in  vii.  6  we 
 have  D'^tSm  =  locks  arranged  in  rows  like  channels 
 
 by  which  water  is  conveyed  (A.V.  'galleries,' by 
 mistake  [Gallery])  ;  and  in  the  same  verse  HpT 
 ('hair,'  A.V.)  xn&'a.-as  hanging  tresses  (Sept.  irX6Kioi>, 
 Syr.  jJOrHi  intorsiones,  cincinni),  from  HPT  to  hang 
 down,    be  pendulous;    comp.    Ar.  djlji,   dalya, 
 
 the  pendulous  filaments  at  the  top  of  the  lofty 
 palm.     Whether  il^V  (iv.    i,  3  ;  vi.   7)    and  pJJ? 
 
 (iv.  9)  refer  to  the  hair  is  doubtful  ;  the  former 
 probably  means  veil,  and  the  latter  necklace.  In 
 Ezek.   viii.    3  the  word  JIVV  occurs,   denoting  a 
 
 lock,  perhaps  a  forelock,  curling  roimd  the  fore- 
 head like  a  flower  (pV). 
 
 In  the  Talmud  frequent  references  are  made  to 
 women  who  were  professional  hair-dressers  for 
 their   own  sex,  and  the  name  applied  to   whom 
 
 was  n?niJ  'femina  gnara  alere  crines'  (Maimon. 
 in  Tr.  Shabbath  x.  6  ;  comp.  also  Wagenseil,  Sota  p. 
 
 137  ;  Jahn,  Archceol.  P.  I  vol.  2,  p.  1 14).   AsD^HIJ 
 
 is  formed  from  7"1J,  to  twine  or  plait,  it  may  be 
 presumed  that  the  principal  duty  of  these  artistes 
 was  to  plait  the  hair  into  locks  or  arrange  it  in 
 tresses.] 
 
HAKKOZ 
 
 198 
 
 HALDANE 
 
 From  the  great  value  attached  to  a  profuse  head 
 of  hair  arose  a  variety  of  superstitious  and  emble- 
 matic observances,  such  as  shaving  parts  of  the 
 head,  or  cropping  it  in  a  particular  form  ;  parents 
 dedicating  the  hair  of  infants  (TertuUian,  De 
 Anima)  to  the  gods ;  young  women  theirs  at  their 
 marriage;  wa-riors  after  a  successful  campaign  ; 
 sailors  after  deliverance  from  a  storm  ;  hanging  it 
 up  on  consecrated  trees,  or  depositing  it  in  temples ; 
 burying  it  in  the  tomb  of  friends,  as  Achilles  did  at 
 the  funeral  of  Patroclus ;  besides  shaving,  cutting 
 off,  or  plucking  it  out,  as  some  people  did  ;  or  al- 
 lowing it  to  grow  in  sordid  negligence,  as  was  the 
 practice  with  others,  according  as  the  calamity  that 
 befel  them  was  common  or  extraordinary,  and  their 
 grief  was  mild  or  violent. 
 
 Various  metaphorical  allusions  are  made  to  hair 
 by  the  sacred  writers,  especially  the  prophets. 
 *  Cutting  off  the  hair'  is  a  figure  used  to  denote 
 the  entire  destruction  of  a  people  by  the  righteous 
 retributions  of  Providence  (Is.  vii.  20).  '  Gray 
 hairs  here  and  there  on  Ephraim'  portended  the 
 decline  and  fall  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  (Hos.  vii. 
 9).  '  Hair  as  the  hair  of  women'  forms  part  of 
 the  description  of  the  Apocalyptic  locusts,  and  his- 
 torically points,  as  some  suppose,  to  the  prevailing 
 head-dress  of  the  Saracens,  as  well  as  the  volup- 
 tuous effeminacy  of  the  Antichristian  clergy  (Rev. 
 ix.  8).  And  finally,  '  hair  white  as  wool'  was  a 
 prominent  feature  in  the  appearance  of  the  glorified 
 Redeemer,  emblematic  of  the  majesty  and  wisdom 
 that  belong  to  him  (Rev.  i.  14). — ^J.  K. 
 
 HAKKOZ  (^pn,  Haqqots;  Sept.  6  Kcis ;  Alex. 
 
 'Akkcos),  a  priest  who  was  set  over  the  seventh  of 
 the  courses  in  the  service  of  the  sanctuary  by  David 
 (l  Chron.  xxiv.  10).  The  rendering  of  the  LXX. 
 raises  the  question  whether  the  H  here  is  not  the 
 definite  article,  in  which  case  the  name  would  be 
 Qots  or  Koz.  The  same  v/ord  occurs  Ezra  ii.  61 ; 
 Neh.  iii.  4,  21  ;  vii.  63  ;  where  the  A.  V.  gives 
 simply  Koz.  That  there  was  a  priestly  family 
 bearing  this  name  we  learn  from  i  Chron.  iv. 
 8.— t 
 
 HALACHA.     [MiDRASH.] 
 
 HALAH  (n^n  ;  Sept.  'AXa^  and  XaXd).  One  of 
 
 those  places  in  Assyria  in  which  Tiglath-pileser 
 placed  the  captive  Israelites  : — '  In  the  ninth  year 
 of  Hoshea  the  King  of  Assyria  took  Samaria,  and 
 carried  Israel  away  into  Assyria,  and  placed  them 
 in  HalaJt,  and  in  Habor,  the  river  of  Gozan,'  etc. 
 (2  Kings  xvii.  6  ;  xviii.  1 1  ;  I  Chron.  v.  26).  The 
 position  of  Halah  has  been  disputed.  Ptolemy 
 mentions  Calacene,  a  province  of  northern  Assyria 
 {Geogr.  vi.  i),  which  Bochart  would  identify  with 
 Halah  (0pp.  i.  194).  It  seems  to  be  the  same 
 place  which  Strabo  calls  Calachene,  and  describes 
 as  embracing  a  section  of  the  great  plain  of  the 
 Tigris  around  Nineveh  (xvi.  i).  The  name  is  pro- 
 bably derived  from  the  very  ancient  city  of  Calah, 
 whose  site  is  now  marked  by  the  mounds  of  Kalah 
 bhergat  [Calah].     This  city,  however,  is  distinct, 
 
 as  the  name  would  indicate  (Hpn,  Halah  ;  Tw"^, 
 Calah),  from  Halah.  Ptolemy  mentions  another 
 province  in  Mesopotamia,  beside  Gausanitis(G'(?2a«), 
 and  this  appears  to  be  the  true  Halah  [Geogr.  v. 
 18).  It  lay  along  the  banks  of  the  upper  Khabiir, 
 extending  from   its   source   at   Ras  el-Ain,  to  its 
 
 junction  with  the  Jerujer.  It  is  worthy  of  note 
 that  one  of  the  mounds,  marking  the  site  of  an 
 ancient  city,  on  the  side  of  this  river,  bears  the 
 name  of  Kalah.  Here,  as  in  most  other  places 
 in  central  and  western  Asia,  we  find  the  prime- 
 val name  clinging  to  the  ruins  of  a  primeval  city. 
 Halah,  Habor,  and  Gozan  were  situated  close  to- 
 gether on  the  left  bank  of  the  Euphrates  (Rawlin- 
 son.  Ancient  Monarchies,  i.  246  ;  Layard,  Nineveh 
 and  Babylon,  312,  note). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HALAK,  The  Mount   (p^HH  inri;  Sept.  fipos 
 
 T   T   V  T   T 
 
 ' K\ii.K,  and  tov  XeXx°')-  This  name  is  applied  to  a 
 mountain  on  the  southern  border  of  Palestine,  ap- 
 parently on  account  of  its  bare  or  bald  aspect.  It 
 is  used  by  Joshua,  as  Beersheba  was  used  by  later 
 writers,  to  mark  the  southern  limit  of  the  country — 
 '  So  Joshua  took  all  that  land  ,  .  .  From  the 
 Mount  Halak,  that  goeth  up  to  Seir,  even  unto 
 Baal-gad  in  the  valley  of  Lebanon,  under  Mount 
 Hermon'  (xi.  17  ;  xii.  7)-  The  situation  of  the 
 mountain  is  here  pretty  definitely  indicated.  It 
 adjoins  Edom,  and  lay  on  the  southern  border  of 
 Palestine  ;  it  must,  consequently,  have  been  in,  or 
 very  near,  the  great  valley  of  the  Arabah.     The 
 
 expression,  '  that  goeth  up  to  Seir'  ("l^ytj'  HPyn),  is 
 worthy  of  note.  Seir  is  the  mountainous  province 
 of  Edom  [Seir]  ;  and  Mount  Halak  would  seem 
 to  have  been  connected  with  it,  as  if  running  up 
 towards  it,  or  joining  it  to  a  lower  district.  About 
 ten  miles  south  of  the  Dead  Sea  a  line  of  naked 
 white  cliffs,  varying  in  height  from  50  to  150  feet, 
 runs  completely  across  the  Arabah.  As  seen  from 
 the  north  the  chffs  resemble  a  ridge  of  hills  (and 
 in  this  aspect  the  word  "IH  may  be  legitimately  ap- 
 plied to  them)  shutting  in  the  deep  valley,  and  con- 
 necting the  mountain  chain  on  the  west  with  the 
 mountains  of  Seir  on  the  east.  It  is  doubtless  this 
 riige  which  is  referred  to  in  Num.  xxxiv.  3,  4,  and 
 Josh.  XV.  2,  3,  under  the  name  '  Ascent  of  Akrab- 
 bim,'  and  as  marking  the  south-eastern  border  of 
 Judah  ;  and  it  might  well  be  called  the  bald  monn- 
 tain,  which  ascends  to  Seir.  It  was  also  a  natural 
 landmark  for  the  southern  boundary  of  Palestine, 
 as  it  is  near  Kedesh-barnea  on  the  one  side,  and 
 the  northern  ridge  of  Edom  on  the  other.  To  this 
 ridge  bounding  the  land  in  the  great  valley  on  the 
 south,  is  very  appropriately  opposed,  on  the  north, 
 '  Baal-gad  in  the  valley  of  Lebanon^  {Keil  07t  Joshua, 
 xi.  17).  The  cliffs,  and  the  scenery  of  the  sur- 
 rounding region,  are  minutely  described  by  Robin- 
 son {Bib.  Res.,  ii.  pp.  113,  n5,  120). — J.  L.  P. 
 
 HALDANE,  Robert,  Esq.,  a  Scottish  gentle- 
 man of  fortune,  who  devoted  himself  to  the  service 
 of  religion,  and  to  Biblical  and  theological  studies. 
 He  was  born  in  London  28th  Feb.  1 764,  and  died 
 at  Edinburgh  12th  Dec.  1842.  Having  resolved 
 to  establish  a  mission  for  preaching  the  Gospel  in 
 Bengal,  he  sold  his  paternal  estate  of  Airthrey, 
 near  Stirling,  intending  to  employ  the  proceeds  in 
 furthering  this  scheme  ;  but  obstacles  having  been 
 put  in  his  way  by  the  Government  of  the  day,  he 
 relinquished  the  attempt,  and  resolved  to  employ 
 his  efforts  and  resources  in  evangelistic  labours  at 
 home.  These  he  carried  on  to  a  large  extent  in 
 Scotland,  aided  by  his  brother,  Mr.  J.  A.  Haldane, 
 and  a  band  of  devoted  men  of  like  mind,  some  of 
 whom  had  been  clergymen  of  the  national  Church. 
 He  afterwards  devoted  himself  in  the  same  way  in 
 
KALES 
 
 199 
 
 HALHUL 
 
 the  south  of  France  and  Switzerland,  and  to  him 
 instrumentally  the  revival  of  religion  in  these  parts 
 is  primarily  and  chiefly  due.  When  at  Geneva 
 he  delivered  lectures  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
 in  French,  and  these  he  subsequently  published  (2 
 vols.  Paris,  18 19).  This  vi'as  the  commencement 
 of  a  work  which  occupied  much  of  his  time  and 
 thought  in  his  later  years,  and  which  he  at  length 
 issued,  in  its  completed  form,  in  1842,  under  the 
 title  Exposition  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  3  vols., 
 3d  edit.  He  published  also  Evidences  and  Autho- 
 rity of  Divine  Revelation,  2  vols.  8vo,  1834;  3d 
 edition,  3  vols.  i2mo,  1S43;  besides  many  contro- 
 versial pamphlets  and  books.  He  was  a  man  of  a 
 vigorous  intellect,  with  great  clearness  of  percep- 
 tion, power  of  reasoning,  and  force  of  expression. 
 His  exposition  of  the  Romans  is  a  masterly  work. 
 It  is  to  be  viewed  rather  as  a  theological  than  as  a 
 philological  or  strictly  exegetical  commentary ;  but 
 so  viewed,  it  may  be  pronounced  a  work  of  the 
 highest  order.  The  author's  stringent  Calvinism 
 is  somewhat  too  forcibly  enunciated,  and  an  occa- 
 sional air  of  dogmatism  pervades  the  work ;  but 
 most  competent  readers  will,  we  feel  persuaded, 
 confess  that  after  perusing  it  they  understand,  as 
 they  never  did  before,  the  train  of  the  Apostle's 
 thought  and  reasoning  in  that  epistle.  The  work 
 has  been  translated  into  French  and  German.  His 
 brother,  Mr.  J.  A.  Haldane,  also  published  an 
 Exposition  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  1848; 
 and  since  his  death,  which  took  place  in  Feb.  185 1, 
 an  Exposition  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  from  his 
 pen,  has  appeared.  Neither  of  these  works  approach 
 in  ability  the  Exposition  of  the  Romans  by  the 
 older  brother.  The  two  brothers  were  somewhat 
 differently  endowed ;  but  no  two  men  have  left  a 
 deeper  mark  on  the  religious  character  of  their  age, 
 both  at  home  and  on  the  Continent,  than  have  they. 
 {Memoirs  of  the  Lives  of  R.  Haldane  of  Airthrey 
 and  his  brother,  f.  A.  Haldane,  by  Alexander  Hal- 
 dane, Esq.,  1852). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HALES,  Wm.,  A.m.,  and  afterwards  D. D. ,  of 
 Trinity  College,  Dublin,  of  which  he  was  also 
 sometime  Fellow,  as  well  as  Professor  of  Oriental 
 Languages  in  the  University,  was  born  about  the 
 middle  of  the  last  century,  and  died  A.D.  1831,  at 
 his  Rectory  of  Killesandra,  in  the  county  of  Cavan, 
 and  diocese  of  Kilmore,  Ireland.  He  was  an  ac- 
 complished scholar  of  very  various  learning.  His 
 earlier  publications  related  almost  entirely  to  ma- 
 thematical science  and  were  written  in  Latin  ; 
 araong  them  occur,  '  Sofwrum  doctrina  ex  Neiv- 
 toni  scriptis,'  and  '' De motibns planetariini  secundum 
 theoriam  Neiutonianam  Dissertatio.''  Besides  these 
 he  was  the  author  of  sundry  works  connected  more 
 or  less  with  religious  politics,  such  as  a  Treatise 
 On  the  Political  Influence  of  the  Papers  Stipremacy . 
 In  the  year  1807,  he  issued  \\is,  Prospectus  of  an 
 analysis  of  Ancient  Chronology,  the  harbinger  of  a 
 work  which  he  had  been  some  time  preparing,  and 
 for  the  reputation  of  which  he  deserves  a  place  in 
 this  Biblical  Cyclopaedia.  In  the  interim,  how- 
 ever, between  the  issuing  of  this  prospectus  and 
 the  appearance  of  the  work  itself.  Dr.  Hales,  in 
 the  year  1808,  published  his  Dissertations  on  the 
 principal  Prophecies  respecting  the  divine  and  human 
 character  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Tlie  next  year 
 appeared  the  first  instalment,  in  a  4to  volume,  of 
 his  New  Analysis  of  Chronology ;  vols.  ii. ,  iii. ,  and 
 iv.,  completing  the  work,  were  published  respec- 
 
 tively in  the  years  1811,  1812,  and  1S14.  Are- 
 vised  and  corrected  edition  of  this  elaborate  treatise 
 was  published  in  the  year  1830,  in  four  volumes  8vo. 
 Dr.  Hales'  system  is  a  revision  of  the  longer  Bib. 
 lical  chronology,  based  upon  the  Septuagint,  in 
 opposition  to  the  usually  received  system  of  Arch- 
 bishop Ussher,  which  was  founded  upon  tlie  Maso- 
 retic  text.  In  accomplishing  his  scheme  the  author 
 relied  with  greater  confidence  than  is  deemed  safe,  on 
 the  aid  of  Josephus,  many  of  whose  leading  dates, 
 adulterated  as  he  thought  by  early  editors,  in  order 
 to  make  them  correspond  with  the  Jewish  system, 
 he  corrected  and  modified.  On  the  precarious 
 ground  of  this  part  of  Dr.  Hales'  labours  the 
 reader  will  find  more  information  in  vol.  i.  pp.  508, 
 509,  of  the  present  work.  Extravagant  commenda- 
 tion has  been  bestowed  on  Hales'  Analysis  (see 
 Dr.  A.  Clark's  Commentary  [Introd.] ;  Home's 
 Introduction  [ed.  9]  vol.  v.  p.  465  ;  Watt's  Biblio- 
 theca  Britan.  i.  45  70) .  Inherent  defects,  however, 
 arising  from  the  author's  system,  as  well  as  the 
 changes  which  subsequent  discoveries  have  occa- 
 sioned in  chronological  literature,  have  consider- 
 ably modified  critical  opinions  respecting  the  great 
 work  of  Dr.  Hales.  Its  title  in  full  runs  thus — '^ 
 nao  Aitalvsis  of  Chronology  and  Geography,  History 
 and  Prophecy,  in  which  their  elements  are  attempted 
 to  be  explained,  harmonized,  and  vindicated  upon 
 scriptural  and  scientific  principles  ;  tending  to  re- 
 move the  imperfection  and  discordance  of  preced- 
 ing systems,  and  to  obviate  the  cavils  of  sceptics, 
 Jews,  and  infidels.'  It  is  in  the  evolution  of  this 
 ambitious  complexity  of  purpose,  that  the  author's 
 work  is  most  valuable  to  the  general  student  ;  for 
 using  all  the  resources  of  his  undoubtedly  great 
 learning  he  has  thrown  much  light  upon  many 
 parts  of  Holy  Scripture.  Thus,  as  in  the  case  of 
 many  other  useful  writers,  Dr.  Hales  has  produced 
 a  work  which  will  be  more  valued  for  its  collateral 
 subjects  than  for  the  success  with  which  it  has  ac- 
 complished its  direct  purpose.  The  Geographical 
 portion  of  the  work  was  designed  by  the  author 
 '  to  remedy  the  imperfection  or  incorrectness  of 
 the  explanations  of  sacred  geography  as  given  by 
 Wells,  Cellarius,  Reland,  etc.,  in  several  material 
 points;'  audit  must  be  admitted  that  he  accom- 
 plished his  object  not  only  with  learning  and  great 
 resources  of  illustration,  but  witli  an  agreeable 
 luminousness  of  style,  which  will  long  secure  for 
 his  elaborate  treatise  the  favourable  attention  and 
 respect  of  the  Biblical  student. — P.  H. 
 
 HALHUL  (^^n^n ;  Sept.  AfXowd;  Alex.'AXoi^X). 
 
 A  town  of  Judah,  mentioned  in  a  group  of  six  lying 
 on  the  north  of  Hebron  ;  among  wliich  are  Gedor 
 and  Bethzur  (Josh.  xv.  58).  Jerome  describes  it  as, 
 in  his  day,  a  village  belonging  to  the  region  of  Aelia 
 (Jemsalem),  near  Hebron,  and  called  Alida  (Ono- 
 niast. ,  s.  v.  Elul).  Four  miles  north  of  Hebron,  and 
 about  a  mile  east  of  the  road  leading  to  Jerusalem, 
 an  old  mosque,  dedicated  to  Neby  Yemas  (Pro- 
 phet Jonah),  stands  on  the  top  of  a  hill ;  and  just 
 below  it  on  the  eastern  slope  is  the  village  of  Ilal- 
 hUl,  encompassed  by  fields  and  fine  vineyards. 
 This  is  unquestionably  the  ancient  Halhul,  and 
 both  Bethzur  and  Gedor  are  within  a  few  miles  of 
 of  it  to  the  north-west.  A  Jewish  traveller  of  the 
 14th  century  (J.  Chelo  in  1334,  Carmoly,  p.  242) 
 says  it  contains  the  tomb  of  Gad,  David's  seer  (2 
 Sam.  xxiv.  11  ;  Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  i.  216;  iii. 
 282,  seq. )     The  village  was  for  a  time  a  place  ol 
 
HALI  200 
 
 Jewish  pilgrimage  (Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  i. 
 384).  Themodemname,  J  ^.5jl->- ,  is  identical  with 
 
 the  Hebrew  ;  and  the  name  has  thus  remained  un- 
 changed for  more  than  3300  years  ! — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HALI  O^n  ;  Sept.  'h.\i<p  ;  Alex.  'OoXe/).    One 
 
 of  the  cities  mentioned  by  Joshua,  on  the  border  of 
 Ashur  (xix.  25).  Its  position  is  not  stated  in  Scrip- 
 ture, and  we  have  no  other  guide  to  its  site.  Van 
 de  Velde  suggests  its  identity  with  ''Alia,  a  ruin 
 about  five  hours  north-east  of  Acre,  '  where  the 
 rock-hewn  foundations  of  a  large   city  are  seen 
 
 {Memoir,  p.  3 1 8).     But  the  two  names,  Lir.  and 
 
 ipn,  though  somewhat  similar  in  sound,  are  radi- 
 cally distinct. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HALICARNASSUS  ('AXtrapmo-o-is),  a  large 
 and  strong  city  of  Caria,  situated  on  the  Ceramian 
 gulph.  In  1  Maccab.  xv.  25  it  is  mentioned  as  a 
 place  where  the  Jews  had  settled  ;  and  Josephus 
 has  preserved  a  decree  of  the  Romans,  by  which 
 the  Jews  at  Halicarnassus  are  allowed  the  free 
 exercise  of  all  their  sacred  rites,  according  to  their 
 own  laws,  and  the  privilege  of  rets  ■Kpo<jevxo.'i 
 iroi.e'iadai  irpbs  r-g  dakdacrri  kolto.  rb  Trdrpiov  kdos 
 (Antiq.  xiv.  10.  23  ;  comp.  Acts  xvi.  13).  Hali- 
 carnassus made  a  vigorous  and  pTotracted  defence 
 against  Alexander  the  Great,  which  so  enraged  him 
 that  when  he  at  length  became  master  of  it  he  de- 
 stroyed it  by  fire — a  calamity  from  which  it  never 
 recovered. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HALL.  This  word  occurs  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
 N.  T.  three  times  ;  twice  (Matt,  xxvii.  27  ;  Mark 
 XV.  16)  in  reference  to  the  Trpaniopiov,  praetorinjn, 
 or  residence  of  the  Roman  governor  at  Jerusalem, 
 which  was  either  the  palace  built  by  the  elder 
 Herod,  or  the  tower  of  Antonia  ;  his  usual  abode 
 was  at  Cassarea  (Acts  xxiii.  23).  Mark  uses  the 
 word  ouXtj,  but  adds,  as  he  is  wont  in  other  cases, 
 an  explanatory  phrase,  S  kcrri  Trpairibpiov,  atrium 
 praetorii,  Vulg.  In  Luke  xxii.  55,  avKi\  means  the 
 open  court  or  quadrangle  belonging  to  the  high- 
 priest's  house,  such  as  was  common  to  Oriental 
 dwellings.  It  has  the  same  meaning  in  Matt. 
 xxvi.  69  and  Mark  xiv.  66,  and  in  both  passages  is 
 incorrectly  rendered  Palace  in  the  A.  V.,  as  the 
 adverbs  ^^w  and  /cctrw  plainly  distinguish  the  avKi] 
 from  the  ol/cos  to  which  it  was  attached  (Luke  xxii. 
 54).  The  av\-f]  was  entered  from  the  street  by  a 
 trpoaxiXwv  or  vestibjile  (Mark  xiv.  68),  through  a 
 ■ni\u3v  Qx  portal  (Matt.  xxvi.  71),  in  which  was  a 
 'itvpa  or  wicket  (John  xviii.  16  :  Acts  xii.  13). — 
 J.  E.  R. 
 
 HALLEL   (/pHi   ip-vo^),    the   designation  of  a 
 
 particular  part  of  the  hymnal  service,  chanted  in  the 
 Temple  and  in  the  family  on  certain  festivals. 
 I.    Origin  of  the  name,  contents  of  the  service^  etc. 
 
 The  name  Hallel  PpH,  which  signifies  praise,  is  /car' 
 
 i^oxh'',  given  to  this  distinct  purtion  of  the  hymnal 
 service  because  it  consists  of  Psalms  cxiii.-cxviii., 
 which  are  Psalms  off  raise,  and  because  this  group 
 
 of  Psalms  begins  with  Hallelujah  n^vPH.     It  is  also 
 
 called  '"1»3n  ^J\,  the  Egyptian  Hallel,  because  it 
 
 was  chanted  in  the  Temple  whilst  the  Passover 
 lambs,  which  were  first  enjoined  in  Egypt,  were 
 
 HALLEL 
 
 being  slain.     There  is  another  Hallei  called  ??n 
 
 711511,  the  Great  Hallel,*  which,  according  to  R. 
 
 Jehudah  {Pesachim  118)  and  Maimonides,  com- 
 prises Psalms  cxviii.-cxxxvi.  (lod Ha-Chezaka,  Hil- 
 choth  Chamez  u.  Maza,  viii.  10).  Others,  how- 
 ever, though  agreeing  that  this  Hallel  ends  with 
 Psalm  cxxxvi. ,  maintain  that  it  begins  with  Psalm 
 cxx.  or  Psalm  cxxxv.  4  {Pesachim  1 18). 
 
 2.  Time  and  manner  in  ibhich  it  was  chanted. 
 This  hymnal  service,  or  Egyptian  Hallel,  was 
 chanted  at  the  sacrifice  of  the  first  and  second 
 Pesach,  after  the  daily  sacrifice  on  the  first  day 
 of  Passover  {Mishna,  Pesachim,  v.  7),  after  the 
 morning  sacrifice  on  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  the 
 eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  {Mishna, 
 Siicca,  iv.  8),  and  the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of 
 Dedication  {Mishna,  Taanith,  v.  5),  making  in  all 
 twenty  days  in  the  year.  '  On  twelve  days  out  of 
 the  twenty,  viz.,  at  the  sacrifice  of  the  first  and 
 second  Pesach,  of  the  first  day  of  Pesach,  of  the 
 Feast  of  Pentecost,  and  of  the  eight  days  of  the 
 Feast  of  Tabernacles,  the  flute  was  played  before 
 the  altar  when  the  Hallel  was  chanted'  {Mishna, 
 Pesachim,  ii.  3),  whilst  after  the  morning  sacrifice 
 during  the  eight  days  of  the  Feast  of  Dedication, 
 the  Hallel  v;z.s  chanted  without  this  accompaniment 
 of  the  flute.  The  manner  in  which  these  hymns  of 
 praise  were  offered  must  have  been  very  imposing 
 and  impressive.  The  Levites  who  could  be  spared 
 from  assisting  at  the  slaying  of  the  sacrifices  took 
 their  stand  before  the  altar,  and  chanted  the  Hallel 
 verse  by  verse,  the  people  responsively  repeated 
 every  verse,  or  burst  forth  in  solemn  and  intoned 
 Hallelujahs  at  every  pause,  whilst  the  slaves  of  the 
 priests,  the  Levites,  and  the  respectable  lay  people, 
 assisted  in  playing  the  flute  (comp.  Pesachim  64,  a ; 
 Erachi!7t  10,  a,  b  ;  and  Tosefta  on  Cap.  i.  ;  Sota, 
 27,  b  ;  Taanith  28,  a,  b).  No  representatives  of 
 the  people t  (IDJ^D  ^t^l^)  were  required  to  be  pre- 
 sent at  the  Temple  at  the  morning  sacrifices  on  the 
 days  when  the  Hallel  was  chanted  {Mishna,  Taa- 
 nith,  iv.  4). 
 
 The  Egyptian  Hallel  ^zs  also  chanted  in  private 
 families  at  the  celebration  of  the  Passover  on  the 
 
 *  So  called,  because  of  the  reiterated  response 
 after  every  verse,  '  For  thy  mercy  endureth  for 
 ever,'  in  Ps.  cxxxvi.,  which  is  part  of  this  Hallel. 
 
 \  The  fact  that  every  individual  who  brought  a 
 sacrifice  had  to  be  present  in  the  Temple  when  it 
 was  offered,  gave  rise  to  the  opinion  that  the  daily 
 morning  and  evening  sacrifices  which  were  brought 
 for  the  whole  congregation  of  Israel,  required  that 
 the  congregation  should  be  represented  in  the 
 Temple  at  the  offering  of  these  national  sacrifices. 
 Hence  the  whole  people  was  divided  into  twenty- 
 four  divisions  or  orders,  corresponding  to  the  divi- 
 sions of  the  priests  and  Levites.  Every  division 
 chose  a  number  of  representatives  (1DJ?0  "li'JX), 
 one  of  whom  was  appointed  chief  (IDyO"),  and 
 in  turn  sent  up  some  of  them  as  a  deputation  to 
 Jerusalem  to  represent  the  nation  at  the  daily  sac- 
 rifices in  the  Temple,  and  pronounce  the  prayers 
 and  blessings  in  behalf  of  the  people,  whilst  thesacri- 
 fices  were  being  offered.  They  had  also  to  fast 
 four  days  (/.  e.,  the  second,  third,  fourth,  and  fifth 
 day)  during  the  week  of  their  representation. 
 Those  of  the  representatives  who  remained  at  home 
 assembled  in  a  synagogue  to  pray  during  the  time 
 of  sacrifice. 
 
HALLEL 
 
 201 
 
 HALLOHESH 
 
 first  evening  of  this  feast.  On  this  occasion  the 
 Hallel  was  divided  into  two  parts,  the  part  com- 
 prising Ps.  cxiii.  and  cxiv.  was  chanted  during  the 
 partaking  of  the  second  cup,  whilst  the  second  part, 
 comprising  Ps.   cxv.   and  cxvi.   was  chanted  over 
 
 the  fourth  and  finishing  cup  (HX  ^^^  "1D1J,  ''ym 
 
 ??n,  Mishjia,  Pesachhn  x.  7);  and  it  is  generally  sup- 
 poserl  that  the  smging  of  the  hymn  by  our  Saviour 
 and  his  disciples  at  the  conclusion  of  the  Passover 
 supper  (Matt.  xxvi.  30 ;  Mark  xiv.  26)  refers  to 
 the  last  part  of  this  Hallel.*  In  Babylon  there 
 was  an  ancient  custom,  which  can  be  traced  as  far 
 back  as  the  2d  century  of  the  Christian  era,  to  re- 
 cite this  Hallel  on  every  festival  of  the  new  moon 
 {Taanith  28,  a),  omitting,  however,  Ps.  cxv. 
 I -I  I,  and  cxvi.  i-ii..  . . 
 
 The  great  Hallel  (?njn  T>T\)  was  recited  on  the 
 first  evening  at  the  Passover  supper  by  those  who 
 wished  to  have  a  fifth  cup,  i.  e.,  one  above  the  en- 
 joined number  (Maimonides,  lod Ha-Chezaka,  Hil- 
 choth  Chaincz  u.  Rlaza,  viii.  10).  It  was  also  re- 
 cited on  occasions  of  great  joy  as  an  expression  of 
 thanksgiving  to  God  for  special  mercies  {Mishna, 
 Taanith  iii.  9). 
 
 3.  Present  use  of  the  Hytmial  Service. — The  Jews 
 to  the  present  day  recite  the  Egyptian  Hallel  at 
 the  morning  prayer  immediately  after  the  Eighteen 
 Benedictions  (m^i?  HJIDt^)  on  all  the  festivals  of 
 the  year  except  Neiv  Year  and  the  Day  of  Atone- 
 ment, omitting  Ps.  cxv.  i-ii  and  cxvi.  i-ii  on  the 
 last  six  days  of  the  Feast  of  Passover,  and  on  the 
 new  moon.  Before  the  Hallel  is  recited  they  pro- 
 nounce the  following  benediction  :  '  Blessed  art 
 ftiou,  Lord  our  God,  King  of  the  world,  who  hast 
 sanctified  us  with  thy  commandments,  and  enjoined 
 upon  us  to  recite  the  Hallel ! '  At  the  Passover 
 supper,  on  the  first  two  evenings  of  the  festival, 
 both  the  Egyptian  Hallel  and  the  Great  Hallel  are 
 now  recited,  the  former  is  still  divided  in  the  same 
 manner  as  in  the  days  of  our  Saviour. 
 
 4.  Institutio;i  of  this  Hymnal  Service. — It  is  now 
 impossible  to  ascertain  precisely  when  this  service 
 was  first  instituted.  Some  of  the  Talmudists 
 affirm  that  it  was  instituted  by  Moses,  others  say 
 that  Joshua  introduced  it,  others  derive  it  from 
 Deborah,  David,  Hezekiah,  or  Hananiah,  Mishael 
 and  Azariah  {Pesachim  117,  a).  From  2  Chron. 
 xxxv.  15  we  see  that  the  practice  of  the  Levites 
 chanting  the  Hallel  while  the  Paschal  lambs  were 
 being  slain  was  already  in  vogue  in  flie  days  of 
 Josiah,  and  it  is  not  at  all  improbable  that  it  was 
 customary  to  do  so  at  a  much  earlier  period. 
 
 5.  Literature. — Maimonides,  Jod  Ha-Chezaka, 
 Hilchoth  Chamez  n.  Maza,  sections  vii.  and  viii. 
 vol.  i.   p.  263-265  ;  Buxtorf,  Lexicon  Chaldaicwn 
 
 Talmtidicum  et  Rabbinictcm,  s.  v.  77T\,  col.  613- 
 616;  and  Bartoloccii,  Bibliotheca  Magna  Rab- 
 binica,  vol.  ii.  227-243,  have  important  treatises 
 upon  this  subject,  but  their  information  is  most 
 uncritically  put  together,  and  no  distinction  is  made 
 between  earlier  and  later  practices.  A  thoroughly 
 masterly  and  critical  investigation  is  that  of  Kroch- 
 mal,  Mo?-e  Neboche  Ha-Seman,  Leopoli  185 1,  p. 
 135.  ff-i  comp.  also  Edelmann's  edition  ol  the 
 Siddur,    with   Landshuth's    Critical  Antwtations, 
 
 *  Dean  Alford  (The  Greek  Testament,  etc.,  Matt, 
 xxvi.  30,  vol.  i.,  p.  256,  4th  ed.)  most  strangely 
 confounds  this  Hallel  with  the  Great  Hallel. 
 
 Konigsberg  1S45,  p.  423,  ff ;  Herzfeld,  Geschichte 
 dcs  Volkes  Israel,  Nordhausen  1857,  vol.  ii.  p.  169 
 ff— C.  D.  G. 
 
 HALLELUJAH  (Hp^^n)  or  Alleluia  (\\X- 
 \-r)Kovia),  a  word  which  stands  at  the  beginning  of 
 many  of  the  Psalms.  From  its  frequent  occurrence 
 in  this  position  it  grew  into  a  formula  of  praise, 
 and  was  chanted  as  such  on  solemn  days  of  rejoic- 
 ing. This  is  intimated  by  the  Apocrypl  al  book  of 
 Tobit  (xiii.  iS),  when  speaking  of  the  re  building  of 
 Jerusalem,  '  And  all  her  (Jerusalem's)  streets 
 shall  sing  Alleluia'  (comp.  Rev.  xix.  i,  3,  4,  6). 
 This  expression  of  joy  and  praise  was  transferred 
 from  the  synagogue  to  the  church,  and  is  still  occa- 
 sionally heard  in  devotional  psalmody. 
 
 HALLETT,  Joseph,  a  learned  nonconformist 
 minister  born  at  Exeter  in  the  year  1692.  He  was 
 the  son  of  Joseph  Hallett,  one  of  the  pastors  of  the 
 presbyterian  congregation  in  Exeter,  and  was  the 
 grandsonof  another  Joseph  Hallett  who  was  ejected 
 from  Chesleborough  in  Somersetshire  by  the  Act 
 of  Uniformity.  He  was  educated  for  the  Christiai, 
 ministry  at  a  seminary  conducted  by  his  father  and 
 his  father's  colleague,  J.  Pierce  ;  and  when,  in  the 
 year  1719,  Messrs.  Hallett  and  Pierce  were  removed 
 from  their  pastoral  charge  in  consequence  of  the 
 avowal  of  Arian  opinions,  young  Hallett  was  ap- 
 pointed co-pastor  with  Pierce  over  the  new  congre- 
 gation assembling  in  what  was  called  James's 
 Meeting.  He  died  in  1744.  In  addition  to  some 
 minor  works  on  controversial  topics,  he  published — 
 I.  Index  Librorum  MSS.  Grcecorurn  et  Versionnm 
 antiqjtarum  Novi  Fcederis,  quos  viri  eruditissimi  J. 
 Alillitis  et  L.  ICusterus  cinn  tertia  editione  Stcphanica 
 contidenmt,  Lond.  1728,  8vo.  This  work  was 
 published  as  an  aid  to  the  use  of  Kuster's  edition 
 of  Mill's  New  Testament,  and  contains  an  account 
 of  the  several  MSS.  referred  to  by  these  editors.  2. 
 A  free  and  impa7tial  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
 recommended,  being  notes  on  some  Peculiar  Texts, 
 with  Discourses  and  Observations,  etc.,  3  vols., 
 Lond.  1729,  1732,  1736,  8vo.  Besides  the  notes 
 on  various  texts  of  Scripture,  and  some  discussions 
 on  doctrinal  and  practical  topics,  these  volumes 
 contain  dissertations  on  the  quotations  from  the  O. 
 T.  in  the  Apocrypha ;  on  the  Septuagint  version  ; 
 on  the  errors  in  the  present  Hebrew  copies  of  the 
 O.  T.  ;  on  the  original  meaning  of  the  ten  com- 
 mandments, and  on  the  Agapce  or  Love  Feasts. 
 3.  A  Paraphrase,  and  notes  on  the  three  last  Chap- 
 ters of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  Lond.  1733,  4to. 
 This  was  designed  to  be  a  supplement  to  Pierce's 
 paraphrase  and  notes  on  this  Epistle,  a  work  which 
 had  been  published  in  an  unfinished  state  in  con- 
 sequence of  the  death  of  its  author.  Prefixed  are 
 two  introductory  dissertations,  one  on  the  author- 
 ship, and  the  other  on  the  language,  of  the  epistle. 
 The  former  supports  the  Pauline  authorship,  and 
 is  still  valuable  for  its  trustworthy  array  of  histori- 
 cal testimonies,  the  author  having,  as  he  tells  us, 
 '  trusted  to  no  second-hand  quotations,  but  taken 
 every  passage  immediately  from  the  original  authors 
 themselves.'  In  the  second  dissertation  he  advo- 
 cates the  opinion  of  a  Hebrew  or  Syriac  original, 
 the  translation  into  Greek  being  made  probably  by 
 Luke.— S.  N. 
 
 HALLOHESH  ({^'ni^n  ;  Sept.  'AXwtjs,  Alex. 
 'A 5a'),  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  people  who  sealed  the 
 
HAM 
 
 102 
 
 HAM 
 
 covenant  w^h  NeTiemiah  (x.  24).  It  is  the  same 
 name  whkli  appeors  in  the  A.  V.  as  IlALObHETJi 
 (iii.  12).  Probably  the  first  syllable  is  the  article, 
 and  the  word  means  i/ie  whhperer  or  wizard. — +. 
 
 HAM  or  CHAM   (DH ;    LXX.  Xd/i ;   Vulg. 
 
 Cham)  was  one  of  the  three  sons  of  Noah. 
 
 Hani's  place  in  his  Family.  Idolaiiy  connected 
 "jiith  his  Name. — Like  his  brothers  he  was  mar- 
 ried at  the  time  of  the  Deluge,  and  with  his  wife 
 was  saved  from  the  general  destruction  in  the  ark 
 which  his  father  had  prepared  at  God's  command. 
 He  was  thus  with  his  family  a  connecting  link  be- 
 tween the  antediluvian  population  and  those  who 
 survived  the  Flood.  The  salient  fact  of  his  impiety 
 and  dishonour  to  his  father  has  also  caused  him  to 
 be  regarded  as  the  transmitter  and  representative 
 in  the  renovated  world  of  the  worst  features  of 
 idolatry  *  and  profaneness,  which  had  grown  to  so 
 fatal  a  consummation  amongst  the  antediluvians. 
 The  old  commentators,  full  of  classical  associa- 
 tions, saw  in  Noah  and  his  sons  the  counterpart  of 
 K/jivos,  or  Saturn,  and  his  three  divine  sons,  of 
 whom  they  identified  Jupiter  or  Zews  with  Ham, 
 especially,  as  the  name  suggested,  the  African 
 yupiier  Atnmo)!  ('A/.1  fiovf  yap  [or,  more  correctly, 
 'A/xoOj',  so  Gaisford  and  Baehr],  Alyvwrioi  KaXeovai 
 rbv  Ala,  Herod.  Eiiterp.,  42;  Plutarch  explains 
 'A/ioO;'  by  the  better  known  form  "kix^uov.  Is.  et 
 Osir.  ix.  In  Jer.  xlvi.  25,  '  the  multitude  of  No' 
 is  K)1D  jitDX,  Amon  of  No ;  so  in  Nahum  iii.  8, 
 
 •Populous  No'  is  A"o-At?ton,  jlDX  Nl     For  the 
 
 identificationt  of  Jupiter  Ammon  with  Ham,  see 
 J.  Conr.  Dannhauer's  Politica  Bihlica,  ii.  i  ;  Is. 
 Vossius,  de  Idol.,  lib.  ii.  cap.  7).  One  of  the 
 reasons  which  leads  Bochart  [Phaleg.  i.  i,  ed. 
 Villemand,  p.  7)  to  identify  Ham  with  Jupiter  or 
 Zeus,  is  derived  from  the  meaningof  the  names.    DH 
 
 (from  the  root  DDH,  lo  be  hot)  combines  the  ideas 
 
 hot  and  swarthy  (comp.  Kl^ib^);  accordingly  St. 
 Jerome,  who  renders  our  word  by  calidiis,  and 
 Simon  {Onomast.  p.  103)  by  niger,  are  not  incom- 
 
 *  Lactantius  mentions  this  ancient  tradition  of 
 Ham's  idolatrous  degeneracy  :  '  Ille  [Cham]  pro- 
 fugus  in  ejus  terrae  parte  consedit,  quae  nunc 
 Arabia  nominatur  ;  eaque  terra  de  nomine  suo 
 Chanaan  dicta  est,  et  poster!  ejus  Chananaei.  Hsec 
 fuit  prima  gens  quae  Deum  ignoravit,  quoniam 
 princeps  ejus  [Cham]  et  conditor  cultiim  Dei  a 
 patre  non  accepit,  inalcdictus  ab  eo  ;  itaqiie  ignora7i- 
 tiam  divinitatis  minor ibiis  siiis  reliquit. '  (De  orig. 
 error  is,  ii.  13;  De  falsa  Relig.,  23.)  See  other 
 authors  quoted  in  Beyer's  Addit.  ad  Seldeni  Syntag. 
 de  Diis  Syris  (Ugol.  Thes.  xxiii.  288).  This 
 tradition  was  rife  also  among  the  Jews.  R. 
 Manasse  says  "\V\  D-iJIX  nj<  ^^^'lO:^'  HJ  p  DHI, 
 moreover  Ham,  the  son  of  Noah,  was  the  first  to  in- 
 vent idols,  etc.  The  Tyrian  idols  called  D^JDH, 
 Chamatii?7i,  are  supposed  by  Kircher  to  have  their 
 designation  from  the  degenerate  son  of  Noah  (see 
 Spencer,  de  legg.  Ilebr.  [ed.  Pfaff.  ]  pp.  470-482). 
 
 +  This  identification  is,  however,  extremely 
 loubtful,  eminent  critics  of  modern  times  reject 
 it ;  among  them  Ewald  {Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel, 
 i.  375  [note]),  who  says :  '  Mit  dem  agyptischen 
 Gotte  Amon  oder  Hammon  ihn  zusammenzubrln- 
 gen  hat  7nan  kcinen  Griind,''  u.  s.  w. 
 
 patible.  In  like  manner  Znlr  is  derived  z.fervendo, 
 accoiding  to  the  author  Q{ii\^-E'y7nol.  Mag7i.,  irapa 
 Tr]v  ^idLV,  ^epu-oTaroi  yap  6  dijp,  -fj  irapa  rb  ^iu, 
 to  seethe,  or  boil,  fc/'ven.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  uses 
 ^epfiacrLav  as  synonymous  (1.  ii.  Glaphyr.  ift  Ge7tes.) 
 Another  reason  of  identification,  according  to 
 Bocliart,  is  the  fanciful  one  of  comparative  age. 
 Zeus  was  the  youngest  of  three  brothers,  and  sc 
 was  IIa77i  in  the  opinion  of  this  author.  He  is 
 not  alone  in  this  view  of  the  subject.*  Gesenius 
 ( Thes.  p.  489)  calls  him  '  filius  natu  tertius  et  mini- 
 mus ; '  similarly  Fiirst  (Ilebr.  lVd7-terb.  i.  408), 
 Knobel  (die  Ge7i.erkl.  p.  loi),  Delitzsch  (Co7/i7neiit. 
 iiber  die  Ge/i.  p.  280),  and  Kalisch  ( Ct'w^j'/j',  p.  229), 
 who  lays  down  the  rule  in  explanation  of  the  133 
 
 (Dpn  applied  to  Ham  in  Gen.  ix.  24,   '  if  there 
 
 are  more  than  two  sons,  pHJ  XI  is  the  eldest, 
 JIDp  p  the  youngest  son,'  and  he  aptly  com- 
 pares I  Sam.  xvii.  13,  14.  The  LXX.,  it 
 is  true,  like  the  A.  V.,  renders  by  the  com- 
 parative—  6  veihrepos,  '  his  younger  son.'  Bui, 
 throughout,  She//i  is  the  term  of  comparison, 
 the  central  point  of  blessing  from  vv'hom  all  else 
 diverge.      Hence  not  only  is   Ham   ItDpH  6  yeJ;- 
 
 T€pos,   in  comparison  with  Shem,   but   Japhet    is 
 
 relatively  to  the  same  PilUn,  6  jxd^uv  (see  Gen.  x. 
 
 21).  That  this  is  the  proper  meaning  of  this  latter 
 passage,  which  treats  of  the  age  of  Japhet,  the 
 eldest  son  of  Noah,  we  are  convinced  by  the  con- 
 sideration just  adduced,  and  our  conviction  is  sup- 
 ported by  the  LXX.  translators,  Symmachus, 
 Raschi,+ Abenezra,  Luther,  Junius,  and  Tremellius, 
 Piscator,  Mercerus,  Arias,  Montanus,  Clericus, 
 Dathius,  J.  D.  Michaelis,  and  Mendelssohn,  who 
 gives  a  powerful  reason  for  his  opinion :   '  The  tonic 
 
 accents  make  it  clear  that  the  word  pnjn,  the  elder, 
 applies  to  Yapheth;  wherever  the  words  of  the 
 text  are  obscure  and  eqxu\T)cal,  great  respect  and 
 attention  must  be  paid  to  the  tonic  accents,  as 
 their  author  understood  the  true  meaning  of  the 
 text  better  than  we  do'  (De  Sola,  Lindenthal,  and 
 Raphall's  T7-a7is.  of  Genesis,  p.  43).  In  consistency 
 with  this  seniority  of  Japhet,  his  name  and  gene- 
 alogy are  first  given  in  the  Toldoth  Beni  Noah,  of 
 Gen.  y..X 
 
 *  Josephus  (A7itiq.  i.  6.  3)  expressly  calls 
 Ham  the  youngest  of  Noah's  sons,  6  veibraTos  tup 
 TraiSojv. 
 
 t  Raschi  says  :  '  P'rom  the  words  of  the  text  I  do 
 not  clearly  know  whether  the  elder  applies  to  Shem 
 or  to  Japhet.  But  as  we  are  afterwards  informed 
 that  Shem  was  lOO  years  old,  and  begat  Arphaxad 
 two  years  after  the  deluge  (xi.  10),  it  follows  that 
 faphet  was  the  elder,  for  Noah  was  500  years  old 
 when  he  began  to  have  children,  and  the  deluge 
 took  place  in  his  600th  year.  His  eldest  son  must 
 consequently  have  been  a  hundred  years  old  at  the 
 time  of  the  flood,  whereas  we  are  expressly  in- 
 formed that  She77i  did  not  arrive  at  that  age  until 
 two  years  after  the  deluge.' 
 
 X  Shem's  name  stands _;??-j-/,  when  the  three  bro- 
 thers are  mentioned  together,  probably  because 
 the  special  blessing  (afterwards  to  be  more  fully 
 developed  in  his  great  descendant  Abraham)  was 
 bestowed  on  him  by  God.  But  this  prerogative 
 by  no  means  affords  any  proof  that  Shem  was  the 
 eldest  of  Noah's  sons.     The  obvious  instances  oi 
 
HAM 
 
 203 
 
 HAM 
 
 [The  table,  which  we  present  in  a  genealogical 
 method,  will  speak  for  itself.  The  abbreviatiom 
 denote  the  names  of  the  commentators  quoted ;  the 
 italicised  words  indicate  the  countries  in  which  the 
 
 descendants  of  Hain  settled  ;  and  the  Greek  words 
 are  those  by  which  Josephus  renders  the  proper 
 names  which  occur  in  Ham's  history,  as  he  states 
 it,  in  his  Antiq.  Jud.  i.  4.  I  and  6.  2.] 
 
 ♦  These  are  the  sons  of  HAM, 
 
 after  their  families  (DnhBTO^,  or  clans),  after  their  tongues  (Dnib'pp), 
 
 in  their  countries  (Dn^"lNi)j   [and]  in  their  nations'  (Qn^iJ2),  Gen.  x.  20. 
 
 HAM  (Xd/xcis). 
 
 I.  CUSH. 
 
 II.  MIZRAIM. 
 
 III.  PHUT. 
 
 IV.   CANAAN. 
 
 I.  Seba  ;  2.  Havilah  ;  3. 
 4.  Raamah  ;  5.  Sabtechah  ; 
 
 Sheba ;  Dedan. 
 
 Sabtah ; 
 
 6.  NiMROD. 
 
 I.  Ludim ;  2.  Amamim  ;  3.  Lehabim; 
 
 4.  Naphtuhim  ;  5.  Pathrusim  ; 
 
 5.  Casluhim  ;  Capthorim. 
 
 Philistim. 
 
 [.  Sidon  ;  2.  Heth  ;  3.  Jebu- 
 
 site  ;  4.  Amorite ;  5.  Gir- 
 
 gasite  ;  6.  Hivite  ;  7. 
 
 Arkite  ;  8.  Sinite  ; 
 
 9.  Arvadite  ;   lo. 
 
 Zemarite  ;   11. 
 
 Hamathite. 
 
 A'^..^.— In  the  following  explanatory  remarks,  which  we  have  selected  from  Commentators  of  the  greatest  authority  on 
 this  subject,  Joseph,  stands  for  Josephus  ;  Jer.  for  St.  Jerome  ;  Abul.  for  Abulfaragius ;  B.  for  Bochart ;  C.  a  L. 
 for  Corn,  a  Lapide  ;  C.  for  Calmet :  Patr.  for  Bp.  Patrick ;  J.  for  Sir  W.  Jones;  A.  for  Assemann  ;  V.  for  Vol- 
 ney  :  Br.  for  Bryant  ;  M.  for  J  D.  Michaelis  ;  Ros.  for  E.  F.  C.  Rosenmiiller  ;  H.  for  Dr.  Hales  ;  CI.  for  Dr.  A. 
 Clarke  ;  G.  for  Gesenius  ;  K.  for  Dr.  Kitto  ;  F.  for  Feldhoff ;  Boh.  for  Von  Bohlen  ;  L.  for  Lenormant ;  D.  for 
 Delitzsch ;  Kl.  for  Keil  ;  Kal.  for  Kalisch ;  Kn.  for  Knobel  ;  R.  for  Rawlinson. 
 
 Descendants  of  Ham,  and  their  locality. — With 
 the  particulars  of  this  important  document  we  have 
 here  no  further  to  do  than  so  far  as  it  has  relation 
 to  the  posterity  of  Ham,  i.e.,  with  the  second  sec- 
 tion contained  in  vers.  6-20.  The  loose  distribution, 
 which  assigns  ancient  Asia  to  Shem,  and  ancient 
 Africa  to  Ham,  requires  much  modification  ;  for 
 although  the  Shemites  had  but  little  connection  with 
 Africa,  the  descendants  of  Ham  had,  on  the  con- 
 trary, wide  settlements  in  Asia,  not  only  on  the 
 shores  of  the  Syrian,  Mediterranean,  and  in  the 
 Arabian  peninsula,  but  (as  we  learn  from  linguistic 
 discoveries,  which  minutely  corroborate  the  letter 
 of  the  Mosaic  statements,  and  refute  the  assertions 
 of  modern  rationalism)  in  the  plains  of  Mesopotamia. 
 One  of  the  most  prominent  facts  alleged  in  Gen.  x. 
 is  the  foundation  of  the  earliest  monarchy  by  the 
 grandson  of  Ham,  in  Babylonia.  '  Cush  [the 
 eldest  son  of  Ham]  begat  Nimrod  .  .  .  the 
 beginning  of  whose  kingdom  was  Babel  [margin, 
 Babylon],  and  Erech,  and  Accad,  and  Calneh,  in 
 the  land  of  Shinar'  (vers.  6,  8,  10).  Here  we  have 
 a  primitive  Babylonian  empire  distinctly  declared  to 
 have  been  Hamitic,  through  Cush.  For  the  com- 
 plete vindication  of  this  statement  of  Genesis  from 
 the  opposite  statements  of  Bunsen,  Niebuhr,  Heeren, 
 and  others,  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  Rawlinson's 
 Five  great  Monarchies,  vol.  i.  chap,  iii.,  compared 
 with  his  Historical  Evidences,  etc.  [Bampton  Lec- 
 tures], pp.  18,  68,  355-357.  The  idea  of  an 
 *■  Asiatic  Cush'  was  declared  by  Bunsen  to  be  'an 
 imagination  of  interpreters,  the  child  of  despair' 
 {Phil,  of  Univ.  Hist.  i.  191).  But  in  1858  .Sir  H. 
 Rawlinson  having  obtained  a  number  of  Babylonian 
 
 Seth,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Judah,  Joseph, 
 Ephraim,  Moses,  David,  and  Solomon  (besides 
 this  of  Shem),  give  sufficient  ground  for  observing 
 that  primogeniture  was  far  from  always  securing 
 the  privileges  of  biHhright  and  blessing,  and  other 
 distinctions  (comp.  Gen.  xxv.  23;  xlviii.  14,  18,  19, 
 and  I  Sam,  xvi.  6-12), 
 
 documents  more  ancient  than  any  previously  dis- 
 covered, was  able  to  declare  authoritatively,  that 
 the  early  inhabitants  of  South  Babylonia  %vere  of  a 
 cognate  race  with  the  primitive  colonists  both  of 
 Arabia  and  of  the  African  Ethiopia  (Rawlinson's 
 Herodotus  i.  442).  He  found  their  vocabulary  to  be 
 undoubtedly  Cushite  or  Ethiopian,  belonging  to  that 
 stock  of  tongues  which  in  the  sequel  were  every- 
 where more  or  less  mixed  up  with  the  Semitic 
 languages,  but  of  which  we  have  the  purest  modern 
 specimens  in  the  Mahra  of  Southern  Arabia  and 
 the  Galla  of  Abyssinia  {Ibid,  note  9).  He  found 
 also  that  the  traditions  both  of  Babylon  and  Assyria 
 pointed  to  a  connection  in  very  early  times  betiveen 
 Ethiopia,  Southern  Arabia,  and  the  cities  on  the 
 louver  Euphrates.''  We  have  here  evidence  both  of 
 the  widely-spread  settlements  of  the  children  of 
 Ham,  in  Asia,  as  well  as  Africa,  and  (what  is  now 
 especially  valuable)  of  the  truth  of  the  loth  chapter 
 of  Genesis,  as  an  ethnographical  document  of  the 
 highest  importance.*  This  is  not  the  place  to  give 
 full  details  of  the  settlement  of  Ham's  posterity  in 
 Asia  and  Africa.  As,  however,  the  subject  is  of 
 growing  interest,  and  in  order  to  present  the  reader 
 with  a  general  view  of  facts,  which  are  spread  over 
 many  volumes,  we  propose  to  collect  in  a  table  the 
 various  opinions  of  some  leading  commentators  as 
 to  the  several  countries,  which  were  colonised  by 
 the  descendants  of  Ham,  referring  the  reader  for 
 our  own  views  of  the  details  to  the  different  articles 
 in  this  work  which  are  devoted  to  the  subject. 
 
 *  Some  writers  push  the  settlements  of  Ham 
 still  more  towards  the  east  ;  Feldhoff  (Die  Volker- 
 tafel  der  Genesis,  p.  69),  speaking  generally  of 
 them,  makes  them  spread,  not  simply  to  the  south 
 and  south-west  of  the  plains  of  Shinar,  but  east 
 and  south-east  also  ;  he  accordingly  locates  some 
 of  the  family  of  Cush  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
 Paropamisus  chain  [the  Hindu  A'oosh],  which  he 
 goes  so  far  as  to  call  the  centre  whence  the  Cush- 
 ites  emanated  {Vielleicht gar  ist  der  Hindu  Kusch 
 
HAM 
 
 204 
 
 HAM 
 
 I.  CUSIl  (XoCcros) ';reigned  over  the  Ethiopians,' 
 lAfi-ican  Cusnites],  Joseph. ;  "■  ALthiopia''  (vaguely), 
 Jer.  (in  Qiust.  Hebr.  in  Genes.);  '  Both  the  Arabian 
 Ethiopia.,  which  was  tlie  parent  country,  and  the 
 African,  its  colony'  [Abyssinia  =  Cush  in  Vulg. 
 Syriac],  Ros.*  after  M.  ;  but  these  gradations 
 (confining  Cush  first,  with  Joseph.,  to  the  western 
 shore  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  then,  with  M.  and  Ros., 
 extending  tlie  nation  to  the  Arabian  Peninsula) 
 require  further  extension  ;  modern  discoveries  tally 
 with  this  most  ancient  ethnographical  record  in 
 placing  Cush  on  the  Euphrates  and  the  Persian 
 Gulf,  R.  The  earliest  empire,  that  of  Nimrod, 
 was  Cushite,  literally  and  properly,  not  per  cata- 
 chresin,  as  Heeren,  Bunsen,  and  others,  would 
 have  it,  R.  t  According  to  V.,  the  term  Ethiopian, 
 coextensive  with  Cush,  included  even  the  Hindus  ; 
 he  seems,  however,  to  mean  the  Southern  Arabi- 
 ans, who  were,  it  is  certain,  sometimes  called 
 Indians,!  especially  the  Yemenese  ;  J.  indeed,  on 
 the  ground  of  Sanscrit  affinities  ('  Ctis  or  Cush 
 being  among  the  sons  of  Brahma,  i.  e. ,  among  the 
 
 ais  Muttei-land aller  kuschitischen  Stiimme),  and  he 
 peoples  the  greater  part  of  Hindustan,  Birmah,  and 
 China,  with  the  posterity  of  the  children  of  Cush 
 (see  under  their  names  in  this  art.)  The  late  Dr. 
 Prichard  {Analysis  of  the  Egyptiait  Mythology)  com- 
 pares the  philosophy  and  the  superstitions  of  the 
 ancient  Egyptians  with  those  of  the  Hindus,  and 
 finds  'so  many  phenomena  of  striking  congruity' 
 between  these  nations  that  he  is  induced  to  con- 
 clude that  they  were  descended  from  a  common  origin. 
 Nor  ought  we  here  to  omit  that  the  Armenian  his- 
 torian Abulfaragins  among  the  countries  assigned 
 to  the  sons  of  Ham  expressly  includes  both  Scindia 
 and  India  (by  which  he  means  such  parts  of  Hin- 
 dustan as  lie  west  and  east  of  the  river  Indus  SJ^A  \  • 
 JkJU«]l«  Greg.    Abul-Pharagii,  Hist.  Dynast.  [Ed. 
 
 Pocock.,  Oxon.  1673],  Dyn.  i.  p.  17. 
 
 *  When  Ros.  (Scholia  in  Ges.  in  loc.)  claims 
 Josephus  for  an  '  Asiatic  Cush,'  as  well  as  an 
 '■African''  one,  he  exceeds  the  testimony  of  the 
 historian,  who  says  no  more  than  that  '  the  Ethi- 
 opians  of  his  day  called  themselves  Cushites,  and 
 not  only  they,  but  all  the  Asiatics,  also  gave  them 
 that  name'  (Antiq.  i.  6.  2).  But  Joseph,  does  not 
 specify  what  Ethiopians  he  means  :  the  form  of 
 his  statement  leads  to  the  opposite  conclusion 
 rather,  .that  the  Ethiopians  were  Africans  tnerely, 
 excluded  from  all  the  Asiatics  \inrb  eavrwv  re  Kal 
 tCov  ev  T%  '' kaiq.  Tr6.VTCjv\,  the  iavrQi'  referring  to  the 
 'Ai^i67res  just  mentioned.  (For  a  better  interpre- 
 tation of  Joseph,  here,  see  V.  Systhne  Geog.  dcs 
 Hibreux  ;   CEuvres,  v.  224.) 
 
 "h  J.  (On  the  Origin  and  Families  of  Nations, 
 Works,  iii.  202)  shews  an  appreciation  of  the  wide 
 extent  of  the  Cnshite  race  in  primaeval  times,  which 
 is  much  more  consistent  with  the  discoveries  of 
 recent  times  than  the  speculations  of  the  neocritical 
 school  prove  to  be  ;  '  The  children  of  Ham,'  he 
 says,  'founded  in  Iran  (the  counti-y  of  the  lower 
 Euphrates)  the  monarchy  of  the  first  Chaldeans, 
 invented  letters,  etc.  etc'  (comp.  R.  as  above 
 quoted). 
 
 +  '  In  Menologio  Graeco,  p.  ii.  pag.  197.  Felix 
 Arabia  India  vocatur  ...  vM.  felix  vocalur  India 
 Arabica,  ut  ab  .^Ethiopica  et  Gangetica  distingua- 
 tur.'     Assemanni  Bibl.  Orient,  iii.  (2.)  569. 
 
 progenitors  of  the  Hindus,  and  at  the  head  of  an 
 ancient  pedigree  preserved  in  \he.  Ramayan''),  goes 
 so  far  as  to  say,  '  We  can  hardly  doubt  that  the 
 Cush  of  Moses  and  Valmic  was  an  ancestor  of  the 
 Indian  race.'  J.,  however,  might  have  relied  ton 
 strongly  on  the  forged  Purana  of  Wilford  (Asiatic 
 Researches,  iii.  432)  ;  still,  it  is  certain  that  Oriental 
 tradition  largely  (though  in  its  usual  exaggerated 
 tone)  confirms  the  Mosaic  statements  about  the 
 sons  of  Noah  and  their  settlements.  '  In  the  Rozit 
 111  Siiffah  it  is  written  that  God  bestowed  on  Ham 
 nine  sons,'  the  two  which  are  mentioned  at  the 
 head  of  the  list  (Hind,  Sind,  with  which  comp. 
 Abul.  as  quoted  in  one  of  our  notes  above),  ex- 
 pressly connected  the  Hindus  with  Ham,  although 
 not  through  Cush,  who  occurs  as  the  sixth  among 
 the  Hamite  brethren.  See  the  entire  extract  from 
 the  Khelassut  id  Akhbar  of  Khondemeer  in  Ros. 
 (Bibl.  Geog.  append,  to  chap.  3,  vol.  i.  p.  IC9 
 \^Bibl.  Cab.])  Boh.  (Genes,  in  loc),  who  has  a 
 long  but  indistinct  notice  of  Cush,  with  his  San- 
 scrit predilections,  is  for  extending  Cush  '  as  far  as 
 the  dark  India,'  claiming  for  his  view  the  sanction 
 of  Ros.,  Winer,  and  Schumann.  When  Job  (xxviil. 
 19)  speaks  of  '  the  topaz  of  Ethiopia'  [C^3~riipB]> 
 
 Boh.  finds  a  Sanscrit  word  in  n^DD,  and  conse- 
 quently a  link  between  India  and  Cush  [^3, 
 Ethiopia.]  He  refers  to  the  Syriac,  Chaldsean,  and 
 Saadias  versions  as  having  India  for  Cush,  and 
 (after  Braun,  de  Vest.  Sacerd.  i.  115),  assigns  Rab- 
 binical authority  for  it.  Assemann,  who  is  by  Boh. 
 referred  to  in  a  futile  hope  of  extracting  evidence 
 for  the  identification  of  Cush  and  India  (of  the 
 Hindus),  has  an  admirable  dissertation  on  the  people 
 of  Arabia  (Bibl.  Or.  iii.  (2),  552,  fif.),  one  element 
 of  the  Arab  population  he  derives  from  Cush  (see 
 below).  We  thus  conclude  that  the  children  of 
 Ham,  in  the  line  of  Cush,  had  very  extensive  settle- 
 ments in  Asia,  as  far  as  the  Euphrates  and  Persian 
 Gulf  at  least,  and  probably  including  the  district  of 
 the  Indus  ;  while  /«  Africa  they  both  spread  widely 
 in  Abyssinia,  and  had  settlements  apparently  among 
 their  kinsmen,  the  Egyptians  ;  this  we  feel  war- 
 ranted in  assuming  on  the  testimony  of  the  Arabian 
 geographers  ;  e.  g.,  Abulfeda  (in  his  section  on 
 Egypt,  tables,  p.  1 10  in  the  original,  p.  15 1  trans, 
 by    Reinaud)    mentions   a    Cush    or    rather    Cus 
 
 [j^ij]  as  the  most  important  city  in  Egypt  aftei 
 
 the  capital  Fosthaht ;  its  port  on  the  Red  Sea  was 
 Cosseyr,  and  it  was  a  place  of  great  resort  by  the 
 Mohammedans  of  the  west  on  pilgrimage.  We 
 have  dwelt  the  longer  on  these  particulars  about 
 the  Cushites,  because  we  wish  to  give  greater 
 prominence  to  their  Asiatic  settlements  than  has 
 been  done  by  some  writers  ;  this  we  would  do  and 
 at  the  same  time  avoid  the  extravagance  of  opinions 
 which  (like  those  of  Feldhoff,  for  instance)  cover 
 all  Southern  Asia  to  the  Pacific  with  an  Hamitic 
 population.  We  conclude  this  part  of  our  art. 
 with  some  remarks  of  Br.  on  the  enterprise  of  the 
 Cushites,  and  the  affinity  of  the  primitive  Chaldeans 
 and  Egyptians,  so  corroborative  of  Holy  Scripture, 
 — '  The  sons  of  Cush  where  they  once  got  posses- 
 sion were  never  totally  ejected.  If  they  were  at 
 any  time  driven  a.way,  they  returned  after  a  time 
 and  recovered  their  ground  ;  for  which  reason  I 
 make  no  doubt  but  many  of  them  in  process  of 
 time  returned  to  Chaldasa,  and  mixed  with  those  of 
 their  family  who  resided  there.     Hence  arose  the 
 
HAM 
 
 205 
 
 ilAM 
 
 tradition,  that  the  Babylonians  not  only  conquered 
 Egypt,  but  that  the  learning  of  the  Egyptians  came 
 originally  from  Chaldcea  :  and  the  like  account  from 
 the  Egyptians,  that  people  from  their  country  had 
 conquered  Babylon,  and  that  the  wisdom  of  the 
 Chaldeans  was  derived  from  them'  (On  Ancient 
 Egypt,  I!  oris,  vi.  250). 
 
 1.  Seba  (Sd/3as)  is  '  universally  admitted  by 
 critics  to  be  the  ancient  name  for  the  Egyptian 
 [Nubian]  Jlffroe,'  Boh.  This  is  too  large  a  state- 
 ment ;  Bochart  denies  that  it  could  be  Meroe,  on 
 the  assumption  that  this  city  did  not  exist  before 
 Cambyses,  relying  on  the  statement  of  Diodorus 
 and  Lucius  Ampelius.  Joseph.  (Antiq.  ii.  10), 
 however,  more  accurately  says  that  Saba  '  was  a 
 royal  city  of  Ethiopia  [Nubia],  which  Cambyses 
 afterwards  iiatned  Meroe,  after  the  name  of  his 
 sister.'  B.  would  have  Seba  to  be  Saba-Mareb  m 
 Arabia,  confounding  our  Seba,  written  with  a 
 Samech  [N^D],  with  Sheba  [N^E^],  with  a  Schin. 
 
 Meroe,  with  the  district  around  it,  was  no  doubt 
 settled  by  our  Seba.  (See  G.  s.v.,  who  quotes 
 Burckhardt,  Riippell,  and  Hoskins  ;  so  C.  a  L., 
 Ros. ,  and  Kal.  ;  Patr.  agrees  with  B.  ;  V.  (who 
 differs  from  B. )  yet  identifies  Seba  with  the  modern 
 Arabian  Sabbea  ;  Heeren  throws  his  authority  into 
 the  scale  for  the  Ethiopian*  Meroe;  so  Kn. )  It 
 supports  this  opinion,  that  Seba  is  mentioned  in 
 conjunction  with  the  other  Nile  lands  (Ethiopia  and 
 Egypt)  in  Isaiah  xliii.  3,  and  xlv.  14.  [The  Sheba 
 of  A.rabia,  and  our  Ethiopian  Seba,  as  representing 
 opposite  shores  of  the  Red  Sea,  are  contrasted  in 
 Rs.  Ixxii.  10.]  See  F.  [Volkertafel,  71),  who,  how- 
 ever, discovers  many  Sebas  both  in  Africa  (even  to 
 the  south-west  coast  of  that  continent)  and  in  Asia 
 (on  the  Persian  Gulf),  a  circumstance  from  which 
 he  derives  the  idea  that,  in  this  grandson  of  their 
 patriarch,  the  Hamites  displayed  the  energy  of 
 their  race  by  widely  extended  settlements. 
 
 2.  Havilah  (EwXas),  not  to  be  confounded 
 with  the  son  of  Joktan,  who  is  mentioned  in  ver. 
 29  (as  he  is  by  Ros.,  and  apparently  by  Patr.,  after 
 B. )  Joseph,  and  Jen,  as  quoted  by  C.  a  L.,  were 
 not  far  wrong  in  making  the  Gcetnlians  [the  people 
 of  the  central  part  of  North  Africa,  between  the 
 modem  Niger  and  the  Red  Sea]  to  be  descended 
 from  the  Cushite  Havilah.  Kiepert  (Bibel-Atlas, 
 bl.  I.)  rightly  puts  our  Havilah  '\\\  East  Abyssinia, 
 by  the  straits  oi  Bdb-el-Mandeb.  Ges.,  who  takes 
 this  view,  refers  to  Pliny,  vi.  28,  and  Ptolemy, 
 iv.  7,  for  the  Avalita,  now  Zeilah,  and  adds,  that 
 
 Saadias   repeatedly  renders    np^lH   by    iJb  «',)   or 
 
 d\j\   [Zeilah).     Boh.    at  first   identifies  the  two 
 
 Havilahs,  but  afterwards  so  far  corrects  himself,  as 
 to  admit,  very  properly,  that  there  was  probably 
 on  the  west  coast  of  the  Red  Sea  an  Havilah  as 
 well  as  on  the  east  of  it — 'just  in  the  same  way  as 
 
 *  Meroe,  the  capital  of  Ethiopia,  was  one  of  the 
 greatest  of  African  cities.  Among  the  ruins  of  its 
 temples  are  those  of  a  magnificent  one  dedicated 
 to  Ammon,  the  tutelar  deity  of  the  Hamitic  race. 
 (For  details  of  this  great  city,  see  Strabo,  xviii.  821 ; 
 Herod,  ii.  29  ;  Diod.  i.  23  ;  Pliny,  ii.  73,  etc.  ; 
 also  Heeren,  African  Natiofts,  i.  335-473,  for  a 
 full  description  of  its  grandeur  and  commerce  and 
 ruins,  with  plans  of  the  A??imoniu)/!,  etc.) 
 
 there  was  one  Seba  on  the  coast  of  Arabia,  and 
 another  opposite  to  it  in  Ethiopia.'  * 
 
 3.  Sabtah  {EalSadd,  Zaj3d0as)  is  by  Joseph., 
 with  great  probability,  located  immediately  north 
 of  the  preceding,  in  the  district  east  of  Meroe,  be- 
 tween the  Astabaras  (Tacazze),  a  tributary  of  the 
 Nile,  and  the  Red  Sea,  the  country  of  the  Astabari, 
 as  the  Greeks  called  them  {'Za(3a'^r]vovs  ovofid^ovTai 
 bk  'A(TTdj3apoi  Trap'  "EWriaiv,  Antiq.  i.  6.  2).  Kal. 
 quite  agrees  in  this  opinion,  and  Ges.  substantially, 
 when  he  places  Sabtah  on  the  south-west  coast  oi 
 the  Red  Sea,  where  was  the  Ethiopian  city  2a/3dr. 
 (See  Strabo,  xvi.  p.  770  [ed.  Casaub.],  and  Pto- 
 lemy, iv.  10.)  Ros.,  Boh.,  and  Kn.,  with  less 
 propriety,  place  it  in  Arabia,  with  whom  agree 
 Del.  and  Kl.,  while  F.,  with  his  usual  extrava- 
 gance, identifies  it  with  Thibet. 
 
 4.  Raamah  ('P^7/u.a,  'Pf7/ios)  and  his  two  sons 
 Sheba  (Za^Sas)  and  Dedan  ('lou  5d5as)  are  separated 
 by  Joseph,  and  Jer. ,  who  place  the  last-mentioned  in 
 West  Ethiopia  {Ai'^winKov  ^'Stvos  tQv  'EaTrepiwv, 
 which  Jer.  translates  Gens  Ethiopia;  in  occidentalt 
 plaga).  Ezekiel,  however,  in  xxvii.  20,  22,  men- 
 tions these  three  names  together  in  connection  with 
 Arabia.  According  to  Niebuhr,  who,  in  his  Map 
 of  Yemen,  has  a  province  called  Sabie,  and  the 
 town  of  Sabbea  (in  long.  43°  30'  lat.  18°),  the 
 country  south  of  Sabie  abounds  with  traces  of  the 
 name  and  family  of  Gush.  Without  doubt,  we 
 have  here  veritable  Cushite  settlers  in  Arabia 
 (Assemanni  Bibl.  Oriental,  iii.  (2.)  554).  All  the 
 commentators  whom  we  have  named  (with  the  ex- 
 ception of  F.)  agree  in  the  Arabian  locality  of 
 these  grandsons  and  .son  of  Gush.  A  belt  of 
 country  stretching  from  the  Red  Sea,  opposite  the 
 Ethiopian  Havilah,  to  the  south  of  the  Persian 
 Gulf,  across  Arabia,  comprises  the  settlements  of 
 Raamah  and  his  two  sons.  The  city  called  'Vi-yfia, 
 or  "P'^7/ia,  by  Ptolemy  (vi.  7),  within  this  tract, 
 closely  resembles  Raamah,  as  it  is  written  in  the 
 original  [HDyi]  ;  so  does  the  island  Ddden,  in  the 
 
 Persian  Gulf,   resemble  the  name  of  one  of  the 
 sons,  Dedajt. 
 
 5.  Sabtechah  CZa^aKadd,  Xa^aKadas)  is  by  Kal. 
 thought  to  have  settled  in  Ethiopia,  and  the  form  of 
 the  word  favours  the  opinion,  the  other  compounds 
 
 *  There  is  no  such  difficulty  as  Kal.  (Gen.  Prcf. 
 93)  supposes  in  believing  that  occasionally  kindred 
 people  should  have  like  names.  It  is  not  more  in- 
 credible that  there  should  be  a  Havilah  both  in  the 
 family  of  Ham  and  in  that  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  ver.  7 
 comp.  with  ver.  29)  than  that  there  were  Enochs 
 and  Lamechs  among  the  posterities  of  both  Cain 
 and  Seth  (comp.  Gen.  iv.  17,  18,  with  ver.  18,  25). 
 Kalisch's  cumbrous  theory  of  a  vast  extent  of 
 country  from  the  Persian  Gulf  running  to  the  south- 
 west and  crossing  the  Red  Sea,  of  the  general 
 name  of  Havilah  (possessed  at  one  end  by  the  son 
 of  Joktan,  and  at  the  other  by  the  son  of  Gush), 
 removes  no  difficulty,  and  indeed  is  unnecessary. 
 There  is  no  '  apparent  discrepancy'  (of  which  he 
 speaks,  p.  249)  in  the  Mosaic  statement  of  two 
 Havilahs  of  distinct  races  ;  nor  any  violation  of 
 consistency,  when  fairly  judged  by  the  nature  of 
 the  case.  M.  and  F.  strangely  flounder  about  in 
 their  opposite  conjectures  :  the  former  supposes 
 our  Havilah  to  be  the  land  of  the  Chvalisci,  on  the 
 Caspian,  the  latter  places  it  in  China  Proper,  abou» 
 Pekln  (!) 
 
HAM 
 
 206 
 
 HAM 
 
 of  Sab  being  apparently  of  Elhiopic  or  Kushite 
 origin.  '  Its  obvious  resemblance  to  the  Ethiopian 
 name  Stdiatok,  discovered  on  Egyptian  monu- 
 ments (comp.  the  king  X1D,  in  2  Kings  xvii.  4, 
 and  the  Sebechics  of  Manetho),  renders  its  position 
 in  Arabia,  or  at  the  Persian  Gulf,  improbable  ;  but 
 Samydace,  in  Gedrosia  (as  B.  supposes),  or  Tabo- 
 chosia,  in  Persia  (as  Boh.  suggests),  or  Satakos, 
 are  out  of  the  question.  The  Targum  Jonathan 
 renders  here  ''XJJT  (Zingi),  which  is  the  Arabic 
 name  for  the  African  district  Zanguebar,  and  which 
 is  not  inappropriate  here,'  Kal. 
 
 6.  NiMROD  (Ne/3/)a>57?s),  the  mighty  founder  of 
 theearliest  imperial  power,  and  the graiidest ■nzvae,* 
 not  only  among  the  children  of  Ham,  but  in  pri- 
 mseval  histoiy,  must  be  reserved  to  another  part  of 
 this  work  [Nimrod]  for  a  detailed  description. 
 He  is  noticed  here  in  his  place,  in  passing,  be- 
 cause around  his  name  and  exploits  has  gathered 
 a  mass  of  eastern  tradition  from  all  sources,  which 
 entirely  corroborates  the  statement  of  Moses,  that 
 the  primitive  empire  of  the  Chaldseans  was  Cics/iite, 
 and  that  its  people  were  closely  connected  with 
 Egypt,  and  Canaan,  and  Ethiopia.  R.  {Five  Great 
 Man.,  chap,  iii.)  has  collected  much  of  this  tradi- 
 tion, and  shewn  that  the  hints  of  Herodotus  as  to 
 the  existence  of  an  Asiatic  Ethiopia,  as  well  as  an 
 African  one  (iii.  94  ;  vii.  70),  and  that  the  tradi- 
 tional belief  which  Moses  of  Chorene,  the  Ar- 
 menian historian,  has,  for  instance  how  that 
 Nimrod  is  in  fact  Belus,  and  grandson  of  Cush  by 
 Mizraim  (a  statement  substantially  agreeing  with 
 that  of  the  Bible),  have  been  too  strongly  con- 
 firmed by  all  recent  researches  (among  the  cunei- 
 form inscriptions)  in  comparative  philology  to  be 
 set  aside  by  criticism  based  on  the  mere  conjectures 
 of  ingenious  men.  It  would  appear  that  Nimrod 
 not  only  built  cities,  and  conquered  extensive  terri- 
 tories, '  subduing  or  expelling  the  various  tribes  by 
 which  the  country  was  previously  occupied'  (R. , 
 p.  195  ;  comp.  Gen.  x.  10-12  [marginal  version]), 
 but  established  a  djTiasty  of  some  eleven  or  twelve 
 monarchs.  By  and  by  (about  15CX5B.C.  ;  see  R.  p. 
 223)  the  ancient  Chaldseans,  the  stock  of  Cush  and 
 people  of  Nimrod,  sank  into  obscurity,  crushed  by 
 a  foreign  Shemitic  stock,  destined  after  some  seven 
 or  eight  centuries  of  submission  to  revive  to  a 
 second  tenure  of  imperial  power,  which  culminated 
 in  grandeur  under  the  magnificent  Nebuchadnezzar. 
 
 II.  MIZRAIM  (Meo-paiV,  Mfo-rpaiVos),  that  is, 
 the  father  of  Egypt,  is  the  second  son  of  Cush.  Of 
 this  dual  form  of  a  man's  name  we  have  other  in- 
 stances in  Ephraim  and  Shaharaim  (i  Chron.  viii.  8). 
 We  must,  to  avoid  repetition,  postpone  particulars 
 of  this  important  name  to  a  future  art.  [Mizraim]. 
 We  simply  call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  fact, 
 vouched  for  in  this  genealogy  of  the  Hamites,  of 
 the  near7tess  of  kindred  between  N'imrod  and  Miz- 
 raim. This  point  is  of  great  value  in  the  study  of 
 ancient  eastern  histoiy,  and  will  reconcile  many 
 difficulties  which  would  othei-wise  be   insoluble. 
 
 *  Nimrod  seems  to  have  beeen  deified  under  the 
 title  of  Bilu-Nipru,  or  Bel-Nimrod,  which  may  be 
 translated  '  the  god  of  the  chace,'  or  '  the  great 
 hunter.'     (The  Greek  forms  Ne/S/jciS  and  Ne^pwd 
 
 serve  to  connect  Nipru  with  Tipj.     The  native 
 
 root  is  thought  to  be  napar,  '  to  pursue,'  or  'cause 
 to  flee'),  R.  p.  196. 
 
 '  For  the  last  3000  years  it  is  to  the  Semitic  and 
 Indo-European  races  that  the  world  has  been 
 mainly  indebted  for  its  advancement ;  but  it  was 
 otherwise  in  the  first  ages.  Egypt  and  Babylon^ 
 Mizraim  and  Nimrod,  both  descendants  of  Ham, 
 led  the  way  and  acted  as  the  pioneers  of  mankind 
 in  the  various  untrodden  fields  of  art,  literature, 
 and  science.  Alphabetic  writing,  astronomy,  his- 
 tory, chronology,  architecture,  plastic  art,  sculpture, 
 navigation,  agriculture,  and  textile  industry,  seem, 
 all  of  them,  to  have  had  their  origin  in  one  or 
 other  of  these  two  countries'  (R.  p.  75). 
 
 Land  of  Ham. — We  shall  have  no  more  con- 
 venient place  than  this  to  notice  the  poetic  terms 
 by  which  the  Psaimist  designates  Egypt  in  Ps.  cv. 
 23  ('Jacob  sojourned  in  the  land  of  Ham, ^  K''^? 
 
 DPI,   here  parallel  and  synonjTnous  with  Q^IVD. 
 
 with  which  comp.  ver.  27,  and  cvi.  22,  23),  and  in 
 Ps.   Ixxviii.    51    (where  ''the  tabernacles  of  Ham,'' 
 
 Qn"''^nx,  is  again  parallel  with  CIVD).  That 
 which  is  in  these  passages  the  poetical  name  of 
 Egypt  in  Hebrew  was  among  the  Egyptians  them- 
 selves probably  the  domestic  and  usual  designation 
 of  their  country  (G. )     According  to  G.  this  name 
 
 of  Ham  ['  Coptic  'Y'HJULI,'  for  which  Lepsius, 
 
 however,      substitutes     another     word,     Jl)6JUL 
 
 [Memph.  ]  or  oHJUL  [Thebaic] )  *  is  derived  from 
 
 the  swarthy  complexion  of  the  people,  while  Lep- 
 sius says,  '  not  from  the  colour  of  its  inhabitants, 
 which  was  red,  but  from  that  of  its  soil,  which 
 formed  a  strong  contrast  with  the  adjacent  countries 
 (Comp.  Herodotus'  fj.eKa.yyai.ov,  ii.  12  ;  and  Plu- 
 tarch's At7i'7rro;'  iv  tols  /ndXiffra  fj-ekdyyeiov  odaav 
 .  .  .  Xij^ia  KoKovai,  De  Isid.  et  Osir.  [Reiske]  vol. 
 vii.  p.  437).  In  the  Hieroglyphic  language  the 
 name  occurs  as  KM.  The  inscription  of  it,  as  it 
 frequently  occurs  on  the  Rosetta  stone,  is  pro- 
 nounced by  Champollion,  Akerblad,  and  Spohn, 
 Chme  (G.  Tkes.  489).  The  name  by  which  Egypt 
 is  commonly  called  in  Hebrew,  Q''"IVD  (liVD  should 
 
 probably  be  translated  Egypt  in  2  Kings  xix.  24 ; 
 Is.  xix.  6  J  xx.xvii.  25;  and  Micah  vii.  12;  Ges. 
 and  Fiirst,  s.  v.),  was  not  used  by  the  Egyptians 
 (Baehr,  Herodot.  note,  in  /.  c),  but.  by  Asiatics  it 
 appears  to  have  been  much  used  of  the  land  of  the 
 Nile,  as  is  evident  from  the  cuneiform  inscriptions. 
 
 *  What  G.  calls  Coptic  Lepsius  designates  by 
 the  now  more  usual  term  Memphitic :  G.  adds  the 
 Sahidic    (Lepsius'     Thebaic)    form    of    our    word 
 
 KHJULe  (from  KHJUL,  niger);  but  Lepsius  denies 
 that  the  name  of  Egypt,  Ham  (Qn),  has  'any 
 direct  connection'  with  this  word ;  he  substitutes 
 the  root  I)eJUL,  or  1)HJUL  [Memphitic],  which 
 is  softened  into  oGJUL,  or  oHJH,  He7n,  in  the 
 
 sister  dialect  of  Thebes  ;  the  meaning  of  which  is 
 to  be  hot  ('fervere,  ardere,'  Tattam,  Lex.  ^gypt, 
 
 Lat.  p.  653,  671).  /^HJULI,  however,  and 
 KHAJLH,  are,  no  doubt,  the  constantly  used  terms 
 
 for  the  name  of  the  country  (see  Tattam,  pp.  155, 
 560,  and  Uhlemann,  Copt.  Gr.  et  Lex.  p.  154). 
 
HAM 
 
 207 
 
 HAM 
 
 The  Median  form  of  the  name  was  Mitzariga  ;  the 
 Babylonian  Mizir ;  the  Assyrian  Mnzri.  The 
 Arabic  name  of  the  present  capital  of  Egypt  is 
 
 S   o 
 
 El  Mazr,   and  the  country  also  is  ^^^  [Misr.] 
 
 (Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  yo!/7'.  R.  As.  Soc.  vol.  xiv.  (i.) 
 p.  i8  ;  Lepsius,  in  Herzog,  s.  v.  Egypt).  Josephus 
 (Antiq.  i.  6.  2)  renders  the  Hebrew  name  of  Egypt 
 by  M^orpT?,  and  of  the  people  by  Meorparoi. 
 Whether,  however,  we  regard  the  native  name 
 from  the  father,  or  the  Asiatic  from  the  son,  they 
 both  vouch  for  the  Hamitic  character  of  Egypt, 
 which  probably  differed  from  all  the  other  settle- 
 ments of  this  race  in  having  Ham  himself  as  the 
 actual  dpx''?7os  of  the  nation,  among  whom  also  he 
 perhaps  lived  and  died.  This  circumstance  would 
 afford  sufficient  reason  both  why  the  nation  itself 
 should  regard  the  fa'her  as  their  eponyniiis,  i-ather 
 than  the  son,  who  only  succeeded  him  in  the  work 
 of  settlement,  and  why,  moreover,  foreigners  with 
 no  other  interest  than  simply  to  distinguish  one 
 Hamitic  colony  from  another,  should  have  pre- 
 ferred for  that  purpose  the  name  of  the  son,  which 
 would  both  designate  this  particular  nation,  and  at 
 the  same  time  distinguish  it  from  such  as  were 
 kindred  to  it.  On  the  sons  of  Mizraim  we  must 
 be  brief ;  Josephus  noticed  the  different  fortune 
 which  had  attended  the  names  of  the  sons  and  of 
 the  grandsons  of  Ham,  especially  in  the  family  of 
 Mizraim  ;  for  while  '  time  had  not  hurt'  the  former, 
 of  the  latter  he  says  {Antiq.  i.  6.  2),  ^we  knotv 
 nothing  but  their  naiiies.''  Jer.  (who  in  these  points 
 mostly  gives  us  only  the  echo  of  Joseph.)  says 
 similarly  :  '  casterse  sex  gentes  ignotoe  sunt  nobis. . . 
 quia  usque  ad  oblivionem  praeteritorum  nominum 
 pervenere.'  They  both,  indeed,  except  two  names 
 from  the  obscurity  which  had  oppressed  the  other 
 six,  Labim  and  Philistim,  and  give  them  '  a  local 
 habitation  with  their  name.'  What  this  is  we  shall 
 notice  soon  ;  meanwhile  we  briefly  state  such 
 identifications  of  the  others  as  have  occurred  to 
 commentators. 
 
 I.  LuDiM  [XovZielnos)*  is  not  to  be  confounded 
 with  Shem's  son  Lztd  (ver.  22),  the  progenitor  of 
 the  Lydians.  The  Ludim  are  often  mentioned  in 
 Scripture  (Is.  Ixvi.  19  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxvii. 
 
 *  Joseph. ,  it  will  be  observed,  renders  all  these 
 plural  Hebrew  names  by  singular  forms.  These 
 plurals  seem  to  indicate  clans  speaking  their  cnvn 
 languages  (com  p.  ver.  20,  which  surmounts  our 
 table),  centered  around  their  patriarch,  from  whom, 
 of  course,  they  derived  their  gentile  name ;  thus, 
 Lnditn  from  Lud  ;  Pathrusini  from  Pathros,  etc. 
 (F.  p.  94).  L.  notices  the  fact  of  so  many  iiatio7is 
 emerging  from  Egypt,  and  spreading  over  Africa 
 (PAsie  occidentale,  p.  244),  for  he  understands  these 
 names  to  be  of  peoples,  not  individuals ;  so  Mi- 
 chaelis,  Spicileg.  254,  who  quotes  Aben  Ezra  for 
 the  same  opmion.  Aben  Ezra,  however,  does  not 
 herein  represent  the  general  opinion  of  the  Jewish 
 doctors.  The  relative  DtJ'D  . . .  "IK'S  misled  him; 
 he  thought  it  necessarily  implied  locality,  and  not  a 
 persotial  antecedent.  Mendelssohn  declares  him 
 wrong  in  this  view,  and  refers  to  Gen.  xlix.  24 ; 
 '  It  is  probable  (he  adds)  that  Ludi?n  and  the  other 
 names  were  those  of  men,  who  gave  their  names  to 
 their  descendants.  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Ras- 
 chi,  etc.,'  who  takes  the  same  view  as  the  old 
 Jewish  historian. 
 
 10  ;  xxx.  5)  as  a  warlike  nation,  skilled  in  the  use 
 of  spear  and  bow,  and  seem  to  have  been  emploved 
 (much  as  the  Swiss  have  been)  as  mercenary  troops 
 (G.'s  lesaia,  iii.  31 1).  B.  (who  placed  Cush  in 
 Arabia)  reserved  Ethiopia  for  these  Ludim  ;  one  of 
 his  reasons  being  based  on  their  use  of  the  bow, 
 as  he  learns  of  Herod.,  Strabo,  Heliodor.,  and 
 Diod.  Sicul.  But  the  people  of  North  Africa  were 
 equally  dexterous  in  this  implement  of  war ;  we 
 have  therefore  no  difficulty  in  connecting  the 
 Ludim  with  the  country  through  which  the  river 
 Lnd  or  Land  ran  (Pliny,  v.  2),  in  the  province  of 
 Tingitania  (Tangier) ;  so  Boh.,  D.,  and  F. ,  which 
 last  writer  finds  other  names  of  cognate  origin  in 
 North  Africa,  e.g.,  the  tribe  called  Ltidaya,  in- 
 habiting one  of  the  oases,  and  the  district  of 
 Liidainar,  in  Nigritia.  Kal.  suggests  the  Egyptian 
 Letopolis  or  Letus,  and  CI.  the  Mareotis  of  Egypt ; 
 while  Kl.  supposes  the  Berber  tribe  Leivdtah  ;  and 
 L.  {V Asie  Occid.  p.  244)  the  Nubians  ;  they  think 
 a  proximity  to  Egypt  would  be  most  compatible 
 with  the  fact  that  the  Liidim  were  Egyptian  auxi- 
 liaries (Jer.  xlvi.  9). 
 
 2.  Amamim  ('Ei'sw^os)  are,  with  unusual  unani- 
 mity, placed  by  the  commentators  in  Egj'pt.  C. 
 represents  the  older  opinion,  quoting  Jonathan's 
 Targ.  for  the  Mareotis.  Kn.  (with  whom  agree 
 D.,  KL,  F.)  places  them  in  the  Delta,  the  LXX. 
 rendering  'Ex/e^aeTtei'/^i  suggesting  to  him  Sane?nhit, 
 the  Egyptian  word  for  }torth  country.  The  word 
 occurs  nowhei-e  else  in  O.  T. 
 
 3.  Lehabim  (Aa/Siei/x,  Aa^ifios)  is,  with  absolute 
 unanimity,  including  even  Jer.  and  Joseph,  [who 
 says,  A.  rod  KaroiK-qaavros  ev  Al^iitj  /cat  Tr]v  x'^P'^^  '^0' 
 avTod  KoklaavTos],  identified  with  the  shorter  word 
 
 D''3v,   Lubirn,   in  2  Chron.    xii.  3  ;  xvi.    8  ;  and 
 
 again  in  Nahum  iii.  9  ;  Dan.  xi.  43.  They  are 
 there  the  Libyans ;  B.  limits  the  word  to  the 
 Libyaegyptii,  on  the  west  frontier  of  Egypt,  so  Kn 
 The   Hebrew  word  has   been  connected   (by  B.) 
 
 with  nnnp,  and  the  plur.  of  3n?,  which  means 
 
 flame;  Raschi  supposing  that  they  are  so  called 
 '  because  their  faces  were  inflamed  with  the  sun's 
 heat'  [Is.  xiii.  8]  from  their  residence  so  near  the 
 torrid  zone.  Hitzig's  idea  that  the  Lehabim  may 
 be  Nubians  is  also  held*  by  L.  [EAsie  Occid.  p. 
 244). 
 
 4.  Naphtuhim  (N^Se/ios),  according  to  B.  and 
 Ros.,  should  be  identified  with  Nephtys  in  the 
 north  of  Egypt  ;  Boh.  suggests  the  Nobatae  in 
 Libya ;  C.  a  L.  the  Numidians ;  Patr.  (after 
 Grotius)  Nepata,  in  Ethiopia  ;  but  none  of  these 
 opinions  appear  to  us  so  probable  as  that  of  Kn., 
 who  thus  vindicates  for  the  Memphitic,  or  Middle 
 Egyptians,  the  claim  to  be  the  Nciphtuhim.  Mem- 
 phis was  the  chief  seat  of  the  worship  of  HT^^; 
 
 *  L.  's  opinion  is  based  upon  the  general  principle 
 entertained  by  him,  that,  as  Cush  peopled  Ethiopia, 
 and  Phut  Libya,  and  Canaan  Phoenicia  ;  so  to  Miz- 
 raim must  be  appropriated  Egypt,  or  (at  least)  the 
 vicinity  of  that  countiy.  There  is  some  force  in 
 this  view,  although  the  application  of  it  in  the  case 
 of  the  Lehabim  need  not  confine  his  choice  to  Nubia. 
 Libya,  with  which  the  name  is  associated  by  most 
 writers  since  Josephus,  is  contiguous  to  Egypt,  op 
 its  western  frontier,  and  would  answer  the  condi- 
 tions  as  well  as  Nubia. 
 
HAM 
 
 208 
 
 HAM 
 
 {Phthah)  an  Egyptian  deity.  If  the  plm-al  posses- 
 sive particle  ft^  (ita=ol  tov,  Uhlematm,  sec.  14. 
 l)  be  prefixed,  we  get  the  word    rt<L-m"^^, 
 
 the  people  of  Phthah,  ot  rov  ^ddr,  just  as  the  Moabites 
 are  designated  the peop/e  0/  Chewosh  (Num.  xxi.  29; 
 Jer.  xlviii.  46),  and  the  Hebrews  the  people  of 
 yehovah  (Ezek.  xxxvi.  20). 
 
 5.  Pathrusim  (<l>eS-pa;o-iyuos)  are  undoubtedly  the 
 people  of  Upper  Egypt,  or  the  Thebaid,  of  which 
 the  capital  Thebes  is  mentioned,  under  the  name 
 of  No  and  No- Anion,  in  Nahum  iii.  8  ;  Ezek.  xxx. 
 14-16  ;  and  Jer.  xlvi.  25.     Pathros  is  an  Egyptian 
 
 name,  signifying  the  Sotith  country  [neiT-pHC], 
 
 which  may  possibly  include  Nubia  also  ;  in  Is.  xi. 
 II,  and  probably  Jer.  xliv.  15,  Pathros  is  men- 
 tioned as  distinct  from,  though  in  close  connection 
 with,  Egypt.  By  Greek  and  Roman  writers  the 
 Thebaid  is  called  No7iitts  Phatiiritcs  (Pliny,  Hist. 
 Nat.  V.  9;  Ptol.  iv.  5,  69),  B.,  Boh.,  I)',  Kal,, 
 Kh,  Kn.  Brugsch's  suggestion,  that  our  word 
 comes  from  Pa-Hathor,  that  is,  the  Nome  of  Ha- 
 thor,  an  Egyptian  deity  of  the  nether  world,  is  an 
 improbable  one. 
 
 6.  Casluhim  (Xeo-XoT/ios).  In  addition  to  what 
 is  said  under  the  article  Casluhim,  it  may  be 
 observed  that  the  Coptic  [Basmuric]  name  of 
 the    district    called    Casiotis,    which    Ros.    writes 
 
 Chadsaieloihe,  is  compounded  of  OHC,  moiis,  and 
 ACJDKPj,  ardere,  arere,  and  well  indicates  a  rug- 
 ged and  arid  country,  out  of  which  a  colony  may 
 be  supposed  to  have  emigrated  to  a  land  called  so 
 
 nearly  after  their  own  home.  [Comp.  HvDS  and 
 GhcXuJK^^  [Cheslokh)  and  KoXxts,  with   the 
 
 metathesis  which  Gesenius  suggests.]  This  prox- 
 mity  to  south-west  Palestine  of  their  original 
 abode  also  exactly  corresponds  to  the  relation  be- 
 tween these  Casluhim  and  the  next  mentioned 
 people,  expressed  in  the  parenthetical  clause :  '  Oitt 
 of  whom  catne  PhilistwL''  (Gen.  x.  14);  i.e.,  the 
 Philistines  were  a  colony  of  the  Casluhim,  probably 
 drafted  off  into  the  neighloouring  province  in  conse- 
 quence of  the  poverty  of  their  parental  home,  the 
 very  cause  wliich  we  may  suppose  impelled  some 
 of  the  Casluhim  themselves  to  seek  a  n^ore  favour- 
 able settlement  on  the  south-east  shore  of  the 
 Black  Sea,  in  Colchis. 
 
 Philistim  [^v\i<jTivh%),  who,  according  to 
 Joseph.,  suggested  to  the  Greeks  the  name  of 
 Palestine.  Of  this  well  known  Hamite  people  we 
 do  not  propose  to  treat  ;  a  proper  opportunity  will 
 occur  in  a  future  page  [Philistines].  We  must, 
 however,  advert  to  the  various  readings  of  the  He- 
 brew text  suggested  by  M.  [Spicileg.  p.  278),  who, 
 after  Raschi  and  Masius,  would  transpose  the  sen- 
 tence thus  :  6e  D^P  !|Ny^  nE/'_N  'BSTIKI  'DST.XI, 
 
 that  is,  ''And  Casluhim,  and  Capthorim  (out  of 
 whom  came  Philistim^).  This  transposition  makes 
 Caphtorim  the  origin  of  the  Philistines,  according  to 
 Amos  ix.  7,  and  perhaps  Deut.  ii.  23  ;  Jer.  xlvii.  4. 
 Ros.,  G.,  and  Boh.,  assent  to  this  change,  but 
 there  is  no  authority  for  it  either  in  MSS.,  Tar- 
 gums,  or  Versions  :  and  another  rendering  of  the 
 passage,  '  Out  of  whom  came  Philistim  and  Caph- 
 torim,' is  equally  without  foundation.  In  the 
 Hebrew  text,   as  well   as   the   Targums   and  the 
 
 LXX.,  Philistim  alone  appears  as  a  subject,  all  the 
 other  proper  names  (including  the  last,  Caphtorim) 
 have  the  objective  sign  DX,  V^,  and  tov%.     This  is 
 
 decisive. 
 
 7.  Capthorim  (Xe</)a^6/3tyu,os)  by  Onkelos  is  ren- 
 dered''SpDISp,  '' Cappadocians ;''  in  the  Peschito 
 
 ^i_05Q.^^,  also  '  Cappadocians.''  So  the  other 
 Targums,  and  (according  to  C.)  'veteres  omnes  ac 
 recentiores  stant  pro  Cappadocibus.'  [Caphthor.] 
 In  support  of  the  opinion  advanced  concerning  the 
 Caphthorim  in  this  article,  it  may  be  observed 
 that  in  the  Mishna  {Cethzihoth  [Surenh.],  iii.  103), 
 the  very  word  of  the  Targum,  N''pD1Sp,  Cappa- 
 docia,  repeatedly  occurs  ;  and  (wha'*  escaped  the 
 notice  of  B.)  Maimomdes,  an  excellent  authority 
 in  Egyptian  topography,  and  Bartenora,  both  in 
 their  notes  explain  this  Caphntkaja  to  be  Caphtor, 
 and  identify  it  with  Damietta  in  the  north  of  Egypt, 
 in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  that  Casiotis  where  we 
 placed  the  primitive  Casluhim.*  It  may  be  added, 
 as  some  support  to  our  own  opinion,  that  Benjamin 
 ofTudelasays  (Asher,  p.  158  ;  Bohn,  pp.  121,  123), 
 '  Damietta  is  Caphtor  in  Scripture.''  When  the 
 learned  editors  correct  their  honest  old  author  on 
 the  strength  of  Ros.  and  G.'s  criticism,  we  demur, 
 resting  on  the  still  greater  authority  of  Maimon- 
 ides  and  Bartenora,  to  say  nothing  of  Onkelos  and 
 the  Arabic  translator. 
 
 III.  PHUT  {'^oirrji),  the  third  son  of  Ham,  is 
 thus  noticed  by  Joseph.  [Antiq.  i.  6.  2)  ;  '  Phut  was 
 the  founder  of  Libya ;  he  called  the  inhabitants 
 Phutites,  after  himself ;  there  is  a  river  in  the  country 
 of  the  Moors  which  bears  that  name  ;  whence  it  is 
 that  we  may  see  the  greatest  part  of  the  Grecian 
 historiographers  mention  that  river  and  the  adjoin- 
 ing countiy  by  the  appellation  of  Phut ;  but  its 
 present  name  has  been  given  it  from  one  of  ihe 
 sons  of  Mizraim,  who  was  called  Libys  [the  proge- 
 nitor of  the  Lehabim'].''  Jer.  of  course  adopts  this 
 view,  which  has  also  been  endorsed  by  B.,  M.,  Ros., 
 G.,  Boh.,  D.,  Kl.,  and  Kal.  The  versions  corrobo- 
 rate it  also,  for  in  Jer.  xlvi.  9  [Sept.  xxvi.  9]  13^E3 
 [Phid)  is  rendered  '  Libyans '  in  A.  V.  ;  Libyes  in 
 Vulgate  ;  and  Ai^vei  in  the  Septuagint.  Similarly 
 the  01Q  of  Ezek.  xxx.  5  is  Libya  in  A.  V  ;  Libyes 
 in    Vulg.  ;    and    Aleves   in    Sept.    (so  xxxviii.    5). 
 
 *  It  is  agreeable  to  the  Egyptian  locality  which 
 we  have  assigned  to  the  Caphtorim,  that  Joseph. 
 says,  in  general  terms,  of  Mizraim's  sons,  amongst 
 whom  he  includes  '  Philistim,''  making  them  eight 
 in  number  :  —  TtDv  5^  MeaTpat/Liov  iraiZwv  dKTu 
 yeuo/j-evcov,  oi  vavres  ttjv  dird  Tdi^Tjs  ^ws  AlyvvTox/ 
 yriv  KaTeax^"'  IJ-^^ov  5^  ^vKlot'lvov  Trjv  iTrtjivvfiiav  ij 
 Xcipa  5ie(pu\a^e.  It  will  be  observed  that  we  have, 
 in  fact,  on  independent  grounds,  well  nigh  included 
 all  these  cognate  races  within  the  bounds  here  set 
 them  by  the  historian.  The  Ludim  and  the  Le- 
 habim are  the  only  exceptions  ;  and  with  respect  to 
 the  latter  of  these,  Josephus  must  he  regarded  as 
 intimating  his  belief  that,  if  they  were  primevally  set- 
 tled somewhere,  with  their  brethren,  between  Gaza 
 and  Egypt,  they  must  at  least  have  subsequently 
 migrated  further  west,  for  when  speaking  of  Phut 
 he  uses  language  which  implies  that  the  descendants 
 of  Libys  (/.  e.,  the  Lehabim)  were  connected  with 
 Africa  to  the  west  of  Egypt.  In  Nahum  iii.  9,  Phut 
 and  Lubim  are  associated  ;  probably  they  were 
 inhabitants  together  of  the  same  district. 
 
HAM 
 
 209 
 
 HAM 
 
 Like  some  of  their  kindred  races,  the  children  of 
 Phut  are  celebrated  in  the  Scriptures  '  as  a  wariike, 
 well-armed  tribe,  sought  as  allies,  and  dreaded  as 
 enemies' — (Kal.)  Phut  means  a  bcnu ;  and  the 
 nation  seems  to  have  been  skilled  in  archery,  ac- 
 cording to  the  statements  of  the  Bible.  We  may 
 add,  in  confirmation  of  the  preceding  view  of  4he 
 locality  of  Phut,  that  the  Coptic  name  of  Libya, 
 nearest  to  Egypt,  was  Phaiat.  The  supposition  of 
 Hitzig  that  Phut  was  IIoiyTea,  west  of  Libya  on  the 
 north  coast  of  Africa,  and  of  Kal.  that  it  might 
 have  been  Buto,  the  capital  of  the  Delta,  on  the 
 south  shore  of  the  Butic  lake,  are  unlikely  to  find 
 much  acceptance  by  the  side  of  the  universal  choice 
 of  all  the  chief  writers,  which  we  have  indicated 
 above.  (Pliny,  Nat.  Hist.  v.  i. ,  has  mentioned  the 
 river,  referred  to  by  Joseph. ,  as  the  Fiit  [or  Pluith\ 
 and  Ptolemy,  in  like  manner,  as  the  <i>S^oi;&,  iv.  i. 
 3  ;  comp.  M.  Spicileg.  i.  i6o,  and  Winer,  Bibl.  R. 
 W.  B.  ii.  291).  It  must  be  admitted  that  Joseph. 
 and  those  who  have  followed  him  are  vague  in 
 their  identification.  Libya  was  of  vast  extent ;  as, 
 however,  it  extended  to  the  Egyptian  frontier,*  it 
 will,  perhaps,  best  fulfil  all  the  conditions  of  the 
 case,  keeping  in  view  the  military  connection  which 
 seems  to  have  existed  between  Phut  and  Egypt,  if 
 we  deposit  the  posterity  of  Phut  in  eastern  Libya 
 contiguous  to  Egypt,  not  pressing  too  exactly  the 
 statement  of  Joseph.,  who  probably  meant  no 
 more,  by  his  reference  to  the  country  of  the  Moors, 
 and  the  river  Phut,  than  the  readily  allowed  fact 
 that  in  the  vast  and  unexplored  regions  of  Africa 
 might  be  found  traces,  in  certain  local  names,  of 
 this  ancient  son  of  Ham. 
 
 IV.  CANAAN  (Xai/ctai/os),  the  youngest  of  the 
 sons  of  Ham,  will  not  require  so  full  a  treatment 
 from  us  here  (either  in  respect  of  his  own  name  or 
 those  of  his  sons)  as  Ham's  other  posterity  has  de- 
 manded ;  because  less  obscurity  besets  the  subject, 
 and  less  doubt  and  discrepancy  of  opinion  affect  the 
 commentators.  '  Canaan,  the  fourth  son  of  Ham,' 
 says  Joseph.  {Antiq.  i.  6.  2),  '  inhabited  the  country 
 now  called  Judrea'  \TTr\v  vvv  KaXo\]^ivr\v  ^lovSaiav. 
 In  the  time  of  Joseph.,  it  must  be  recollected,  this 
 included  the  entire  countiy  which  we  loosely  call 
 t/ie  Boly  Land\  '  and  called  it  after  his  own  name, 
 Canaan.'  This  country  is  more  distinctly  described 
 than  any  other  in  Holy  Scripture,  and  in  the  record 
 of  Ham's  family  in  Gen.  x. ,  its  boundary  is  sketched 
 (see  verse  19),  excluding  the  district  east  of  the 
 Jordan.      The   name    Canaan,    however,    is   used 
 
 *  The  only  objection  to  this  is  that  this  part  of  the 
 country  has  been  already  assigned  to  the  Lekabim 
 (see  above).  To  us,  however,  it  seems  sufficient 
 to  obviate  this  difficulty  to  hold  that  while  the 
 Lehabim  impinged  on  the  border  of  Upper  Egypt, 
 the  children  of  Phut  were  contiguous  to  Lower 
 Egypt,  and  extended  westward  along  the  north 
 coast  of  Africa,  and  into  the  very  interior  of  the 
 continent.  Pluit  was  no  doubt  of  much  greater 
 extent  than  the  Lehabim,  who  were  only  a  branch 
 of  Mizraim  ;  for  it  will  be  observed  that  in  the  case 
 of  Phut,  unlike  his  brothers,  he  is  mentioned  alone 
 without  children.  Their  settlements  are  included 
 in  the  general  name  of  their  father  Phut,  without 
 the  subdivisions  into  which  the  districts  colonised 
 by  his  brothers'  children  were  arranged.  The 
 designation,  therefore,  of /%?/;' is  generic;  oiLndhn, 
 Lehabim,  etc.,  specific,  and  in  territory  limited. 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 sometimes  in  a  more  limited  sense  than  is  indicated 
 here  and  elsewhere.  Thus,  in  Num.  xiii.  29,  '  the 
 Canaanitcs '  are  said  to  '  d-well  by  the  sea  and  by  the 
 coast  0/ the  Jordan  '  [i.e.,  obviously  in  the  lowlands, 
 both  maritime  and  inland],  in  opposition  to  the 
 Hittites  and  others  who  occupy  the  highlands. 
 This  limitation  probably  indicates  the  settlements 
 of  Canaan  only — as  a  separate  tribe,  apart  from 
 those  of  his  sons — afterwards  to  be  enumerated 
 (comp.  for  a  similar  limitation  of  a  more  extensive 
 name,  Ctesar,  de  Bel.  Gall.  i.  i,  where  Gallia  has 
 both  a  specific  and  a  generic  sense  ;  comp.  also  the 
 specific  as  well  as  generic  meaning  of  Angle  or 
 Engle  in  the  Saxon  Chronicle  (Gibson,  p.  13  ; 
 Thorpe,  i.  21)  ^  of  Angle  comon  .  .  .  East  Engla, 
 Middel  Angla^).  On  the  much-vexed  questions 
 of  the  curse  of  Noah  (who  was  the  object  of  it, 
 and  what  was  its  extent  ?)  we  cannot  treat ;  they 
 hardly  come  within  the  range  of  such  a  work  as  this. 
 What  we  have  already  discovered,  however,  of  the 
 power,  energy,  and  widely-spread  dominion  of  the 
 sons  of  Ham,  whom  we  have  hitherto  mentioned, 
 offers  some  guidance  to  the  solution  of  at  least  the 
 latter  question.  The  remarkable  enterprise  of  the 
 Cushite  hero,  Nimrod  ;  his  establishment  of  impe- 
 rial power,  as  an  advance  on  patriarchal  govern- 
 ment ;  the  strength  of  the  Egypt  of  Mizraim,  and 
 its  long  domination  over  the  house  of  Israel  ;  and 
 the  evidence  which  now  and  then  appears  that  even 
 Phut  (who  is  the  obscurest  in  his  fortunes  of  all  the 
 Hamite  race)  maintained  a  relation  to  the  descen- 
 dants of  Shem,  which  was  far  from  servile  or  sub- 
 ject :  do  all  clearly  tend  to  li7nit  the  application  of 
 Noah's  maledictory  prophecy  to  the  precise  terms 
 in  which  it  was  indited  ;  '  Cursed  be  Canaan  ;  a 
 servant  of  servants  shall  he  [not  Cush,  not  Mizraim, 
 not  Phut  ;  but  he'\  be  to  his  brethren '  (Gen.  ix. 
 25)  ;  'that  is,'  says  Aben  Ezra,  'to  Cush,  Miz- 
 raim, and  Phut,  his  father's  sons ' — with  remarkable 
 inattention  to  the  context :  '  Blessed  be  the  Lord 
 God  of  Shem,  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant.  God 
 shall  enlarge  Japhet  .  .  .  and  Canaan  shall  be  his 
 servant'  (vv.  26,  27).  If  we,  then,  confine  the 
 imprecation  to  Canaan,  we  can  without  difficulty 
 trace  its  accomplishment  in  the  subjugation  of  the 
 tribes,  which  issued  from  hiw,  to  the  children  of 
 Israel  from  the  time  of  Joshua  to  that  of  David. 
 Here  would  be  verified  Canaan's  servile  relation  to 
 Shem ;  and  when  imperial  Rome  finally  wrested 
 '  the  sceptre  from  Judah'  and  ('  dwelling  in  the  tents 
 of  Shem')  occupied  the  east  and  whatever  remnants 
 of  Canaan  were  left  in  it  :  would  not  this  accom- 
 plish that  further  prediction  that  Japhet  too  should 
 be  lord  of  Canaan,  and  that  (as  it  would  seem  to 
 be  tacitly  implied),  mediately,  through  his  occu- 
 pancy of  '  the  tents  of  Shem  ?'  We  proceed  to 
 enumerate  the  sons  of  Canaan,  and  their  localities. 
 
 1.  SiDON  (2i5cbv  5'  11^'  'FiWrjvwv  Kai  vvv  KaXelrai, 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  i.  6.  2),  founded  the  ancient  metro- 
 polis of  Phoenicia,  the  renowned  city  called  after  his 
 own  name,  and  the  mother-city  of  the  still  more 
 celebrated  Tyre  :  on  the  commercial  enterprise  of 
 these  cities,  which  reached  even  to  the  south  of 
 Britain,  see  SiDON,  Tyre. 
 
 2.  Heth  (Xerraios)  was  the  father  of  the  well- 
 known  Hittites,  who  lived  in  the  south  of  Pales- 
 tine around  Hebron  and  Beersheba  ;  in  the  former 
 of  which  places  the  family  sepulchre  of  Abraham 
 was  purchased  of  them  (Gen.  xxiii.  3).  Esau 
 married  '  two  daughters  of  Heth,'  who  gave  great 
 sorrow  to  their  husband's  mother  (Gen.  xxvii.  46), 
 
HAM 
 
 210 
 
 HAM 
 
 3.  The  Jebusite  ('l€J3ovaaios)  had  his  chief  resi- 
 dence in  and  around  Jerusalem,  which  bore  the 
 name  of  the  patriarcli  of  the  tribe,  the  son  of 
 Canaan,  Jebus.  The  Jebusites  lost  their  strong- 
 hold only  in  the  time  of  David. 
 
 4.  The  Amorite  ('A^uopparos)  seems  to  have 
 been  the  largest  and  most  powerful  of  the  tribes  of 
 Canaan.  [The  name  '•  Aiiiorites'  frequently  de- 
 notes the  inhabitants  of  the  entire  countiy.]  This 
 tribe  occupied  portions  of  territory  on  both  sides  of 
 the  Jordan,  but  its  strongest  hold  was  in  '  the  hill 
 country'  of  Judah,  as  it  was  afterwards  called. 
 
 5.  The  GiRGASlTE  (repYeo-aios)  cannot  be  for 
 certain  identified.  [Origen  conjectured  that  the 
 Girgasites  might  be  the  Gergeseties  of  Matt.  viii. 
 18.] 
 
 6.  The  HiVlTE  (Ei;aros  ?)  lived  partly  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Shechem,  and  partly  at  the  foot 
 of  Hermon  and  Lebanon. 
 
 7.  The  Arkite  ('ApouKaros)*  lived  in  the  Phoe- 
 nician city  of  ^r/f^,  north  of  Tripolis.  Under  the 
 emperors  of  Rome  it  bore  the  name  of  Cissarea 
 [Libani].  It  was  long  celebrated  in  the  time  of 
 the  Crusades.  Its  ruins  are  still  extant  at  Tel. 
 Arka  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  162). 
 
 8.  The  SiNiTE  (SeivaTos)  probably  dwelt  near 
 his  brother,  the  Arkite,  on  the  mountain  fortress  of 
 'Livvo.s,  mentioned  by  Strabo  (xv.  755),  and  by  St. 
 Jerome. 
 
 9.  The  Arvadite  ('Apoi'Saros)  is  mentioned  by 
 Joseph,  as  occupying  an  island  which  was  very  cele- 
 brated in  Phoenician  history.  (Strabo  describes 
 it  in  xvi.  753  ;  see  vol.  i.  p.  237  of  this  Cyclopaedia.) 
 '  The  men  of  Arvad''  are  celebrated  by  Ezekiel 
 xxvii.  8,  II. 
 
 10.  The  Zemarite  (Sa/iaparos)  inhabited  the 
 town  of  Siifiyn-a  (Si/xvpa,  mentioned  by  Strabo), 
 near  the  river  Eleutherus,  at  the  western  extremity 
 of  the  mountains  of  Lebanon  ;  extensive  ruins  of 
 this  city  are  found  at  the  present  day  bearing  the 
 name  of  Suinrah. 
 
 1 1.  The  Hamathite  ('A/udS-ios).  '  The  entering 
 in  of  Hainath''  indicates  the  extreme  northern  fron- 
 tier of  the  Holy  Land,  as  '  the  river  of  Egypt'  does 
 its  southernmost  limit  (i  Kings  viii.  65  et passini). 
 
 In  the  verse  following  the  enumeration  of  these 
 names,  the  sacred  writer  says — '  Afterward  were 
 the  families  of  the  Canaanites  spread  abroad.' 
 This  seems  to  indicate  subsequent  conquests  made 
 by  them  previous  to  their  own  subjugation  by  the 
 Israelites.  '  To  show  the  great  goodness  of  God 
 towards  Israel,'  says  the  Jewish  commentator  Men- 
 delssohn, '  Moses  records  in  Gen.  x.  the  original 
 narrow  limits  of  the  land  possessed  by  the  Canaan- 
 ites, which  they  were  permitted  to  extend  by  con- 
 quest from  the  neighbouring  nations,  and  that  (as 
 in  the  case  of  the  Amorite  Sihon,  Num.  xxi.  26) 
 up  to  the  very  time  when  Israel  was  ready  to  take 
 possession  of  the  whole.  To  prepare  his  readers 
 for  the  great  increase  of  the  Canaanite  dominions, 
 the  sacred  historian  (in  this  early  chapter  where  he 
 mentions  their  original  boundaries)  takes  care  to 
 state  that  subsequently  to  their  primitive  occupa- 
 tion of  the  land,  '  the  families  of  the  Canaanites 
 spread  abroad,'  until  their  boundaries  became  such 
 as  are  described  in  Num.  xxxiv.' 
 
 General  Remarks.  Such  were  Ham  and  his 
 family  ;  notwithstanding  the  stigma  which  clave  to 
 
 *  Josephus  adds  for  once  a  locality — ^ KpovKoXos 
 5^  [^(rxf]  "KpKif\v  T7]v  iv  Tip  Ai.^di'(jj  [Antiq.  i.  6.  2). 
 
 that  section  of  them,  which  came  into  the  nearest 
 relation  to  the  Israelites  afterwards,  they  were  the 
 most  energetic  of  the  descendants  of  Noah  in  the 
 early  ages  of  the  postdiluvian  world — at  least  we 
 have  a  fuller  description  of  their  enterprise  than  of 
 their  brethren's  as  displayed  in  the  primitive  ages. 
 The  development  of  empire  among  the  Euphratean 
 Cushites  was  a  step  much  in  advance  of  the  rest  of 
 mankind  in  political  organization  ;  nor  was  the 
 grandson  of  Ham  less  conspicuous  as  a  conquei-or. 
 The  only  coherent  interpretation  of  the  important 
 passage  which  is  contained  in  Gen.  x.  10-12,  is  that 
 which  is  adopted  in  the  margin  of  A.  V.  After 
 Nimrod  had  laid  the  foundation  of  his  empire  ('  the 
 
 beginning  of  his  kingdom,'  in^PDD  JT't^S"!,    the 
 
 territory  of  which  it  was  at  first  composed — • 
 cf  Hos.  ix.  10,  'as  the  first  ripe  in  the  fig-tret 
 nn^ti'XIB  at  her  first  time,''  that  is,  when  the  tree 
 
 first  begins  to  bear — Ges.)  in  his  native  Shinar,  not 
 satisfied  with  the  splendid  acquisitions  which  he 
 took  at  first,  no  doubt,  from  his  own  kinsmen,  he 
 invaded  the  north-eastern  countries,  where  the  chil- 
 dren of  Shem  were  for  the  first  time  disturbed  in 
 their  patriarchal  simplicity  :  '  Out  of  that  land 
 [even  Shinar,  Nimrod]  went  forth  to*  Asshur  [or 
 Assyria],  and  builded  Nineveh  and  the  city  Reho- 
 both  and  Calah  and  Resen,  between  Nineveh  and 
 Calah  ;  the  same  is  a  great  city  ;  /.  e.,  the  combi- 
 nation of  the  forementioned  four  formed,  with  their 
 interjacent  spaces,  the  'great  city.'  This  is  the 
 opinion  of  Knobel,  answering  to  the  theory  which 
 has  connected  the  ruins  of  Khoisabad,  Koyiinjik, 
 Ni>iiriid,  and  Kcrctnlis  together,  as  the  remains  of  a 
 vast  quadrilateral  city,  popularly  called  Nineveh. 
 For  a  different  view  of  the  whole  subject  the  reader 
 is  referred  to  Mr  Rawlinson's  recent  volume  on 
 The  Five  Great  Monarchies,  vol.  i.  pp.  311-315). 
 But  the  genius,  which  moulded  imperial  power  at 
 first,  did  not  avail  to  retain  it  long  ;  the  sceptre, 
 before  many  ages,  passed  to  the  race  of  Shem,+ 
 
 *  The  objection  to  this  rendering  is  based  by 
 Rosenmiiller  [Schol.  inloc.),  after  other  commenta- 
 tors, on  the  absence  of  the  il  ^ira/ appended  to  "1WX 
 
 (which  they  say  ought  to  be  mitJ-'X  to  produce  the 
 
 meaning  to  Assyria.  The  PI  local  is,  however, 
 far  from  indispensable  for  the  sense  we  require, 
 which  has  been  advocated  by  authorities  of  great 
 value  well  versed  in  Hebrew  construction  ;  Knobel 
 (who  himself  helds  our  view)  mentions  Onkelos, 
 Targ.  Jonath,  Bochart,  Clericus,  De  Wette,  Tuch, 
 Baumgarten,  Delitzsch,  as  supporting  it.  He 
 might  have  added  Josephus,  who  makes  Nimrod 
 the  builder  of  Babylon  (Antiq.  i.  4),  and  Kalisch, 
 and  Keil.  To  make  the  passage.  Gen.  x.  10-12, 
 descriptive  of  the  Shemite  Asshur,  is  to  do  violence 
 to  the  passage  itself  and  its  context.  Asshur,  more- 
 over, is  mentioned  in  his  proper  place  in  ver.  22,  with- 
 out, however,  the  least  indication  of  an  intention  of 
 describing  him  as  the  founder  of  a  rival  empire  to 
 that  of  Nimrod.  Gesenius  admits  the  probability 
 of  our  view,  without  any  objection  of  grammatical 
 structure.  (See,  for  instances  of  the  accus.  noun 
 (without  the  suffix  of  local  T\)  after  verbs  of  motion. 
 Numb,  xxxiv.  4  ;  Gen.  xxxiii.  18  ;  2  Chron.  xx, 
 36.  Cf.  Gesenius,  Gram.  130,  172,  and  Nord- 
 heimer's  Gram.,  sec.  841.) 
 
 +  For  the  Shemitic  character  of  the  Arabian 
 
HAM 
 
 211 
 
 HAM 
 
 except  in  Africa,  where  Mizraim's  descendants  had 
 a  longer  tenure  of  the  Egyptian  monarchy.  It  is 
 well  to  bear  in  mind  (and  the  more  so,  hiasmuch 
 as  a  different  theory  has  here  greatly  obscured 
 plain  historic  truth)  that  in  the  primeval  Cushite 
 empire  of  Babylon  considerable  jirogress  was  made 
 in  the  arts  of  civilised  society  (an  early  allusion  to 
 which  is  made  in  Josh.  vii.  2i  ;  and  a  later  in 
 Dan.  i.  4  :  see  Rawlinson,  First  Alonarchy,  chap. 
 V.)  In  the  genealogical  record  of  the  race  of  Ham 
 (Gen.  X.),  reference  is  made  to  the  '' tutLgues'  [or  dia- 
 lects] which  they  spoke  (ver.  20).  Comparative  philo- 
 logy, which  is  so  rich  in  illustrations  of  the  unity  of 
 the  Indo-Germanic  languages,  has  done  next  to 
 nothing  to  elucidate  the  linguistic  relations  of  the 
 families  of  Ham.  Nor  is  this  the  proper  place  to 
 to  do  more  than  merely  point  to  the  vast  unex- 
 plored field  which  is  now  opening  to  inquirers.  It 
 is  obvious  to  remark  that,  as  the  classification, 
 which  the  sacred  writer  makes  in  chap.  x.  includes 
 the  element  of  various  '  tongues'  or  dialectic  varia- 
 tions amongst  this  section  of  the  human  race,  the 
 time  to  which  we  must  refer  it  must  be  subsequent 
 to  the  events  spoken  of  in  the  beginning  of  the 
 next  chapter  (xi.)  as  having  happened  when  'the 
 whole  earth  was  of  one  language  and  of  one  speech!' 
 With  regard  to  these  Hamitic  '  tongues^  without 
 detaining  the  reader  with  speculations  which  must 
 needs  be  crude,  we  will  direct  him  to  the  few  works 
 which  are  the  most  accessible  and  best  qualified  to 
 furnish  him  with  some  hints  for  the  formation  of  an 
 opinion.  Rawlinson,  Five  Great  Monarchies,  First 
 Mon.  ch.  iv.  ;  Lenormant,  Lit  reduction  a  Vhis- 
 toire  de  PAsie  occidentalte,  ler.  Appendice  ;  Meier, 
 Hebr.  IVurzel.  w.  b.,  3te  Anhang ;  Gesenius, 
 Sketch  of  the  Hebr.  Lang,  (prefixed  to  his  Gram- 
 mar);  lUinsen,  Egypt'' s  Place,  etc., -vol.  i.  App.  i  ; 
 Wiseman,  Lectures  on  Sciejice aiid Rez'ealed Religion, 
 p.  445,  2d  ed.  ;  Max  Mliller,  Science  of  Language, 
 p.  269  [Shemitic  Languages]. 
 
 Theories  more  or  less  specious  have  been  formed 
 to  account  for  these  affinities  to  the  Hebrew  from 
 so  many  points  of  the  Hamite  nations.  None  of 
 these  theories' rise  above  the  degree  of  precarious 
 hypothesis,  nor  could  it  be  expected  that  they  should 
 in  the  imperfection  of  our  present  knowledge.  It 
 is,  indeed,  satisfactory  to  observe  that  the  tendency 
 of  linguistic  inquiries  is  to  establish  the  fact 
 avouched  in  the  Pentateuch  of  the  original  unity  of 
 Imman  speech.  The  most  conspicuous  achieve- 
 ment of  comparative  philology,  hitherto,  has  been 
 to  prove  the  affinity  of  the  members  of  that  large 
 class  of  languages  which  extend  from  the  Eastern 
 Sanscrit  to  our  Western  Welsh  ;  parallel  to  this  is 
 the  comparison  among  themselves  of  the  various 
 members  of  the  Shemitic  class  of  languages,  which 
 has  demonstrated  their  essential  identity;  but  greater 
 still  will  be  the  work  of  establishing,  on  certain 
 principles,  the  natural  relationship  of  tongues  of 
 different  classes.  Among  these,  divergences  must 
 needs  be  wider  ;  but  when  occasional  affinities  crop 
 out  they  will  be  proportionately  valuable  as  evi- 
 dences of  a  more  ancient  and  profound  agreement. 
 
 tribes  who  crushed  the  primitive  Cushite  power  of 
 Babylon,  see  Rawlinson,  Great  Empires,  vol.  i.  pp. 
 222,  223.  The  Arabian  Hamites  of  Yemen  seem 
 also  to  have  merged,  probably  by  conquest,  into  a 
 Toktanite  population  of  Shemitic  descent  (see  for 
 these  Gen.  x.  25-29,  and  Assemanni  Bibl.  Orient. 
 "i-  (2)  553.  544)- 
 
 It  seems  to  as  that  the  facts,  which  have  thus  far 
 transpired,  indicative  of  affinity  between  the  lan- 
 guages of  the  Hamite  and  Shemitic  races,  go  some 
 way  to  shew  the  probability  of  the  historical  and 
 genealogical  record  of  which  we  have  been  treating, 
 that  the  tribes  to  whom  the  said  languages  were 
 vernacular  were  really  of  near  kindred  and  often 
 associated  in  abode,  either  by  conquest  or  amicable 
 settlement,  with  one  another. 
 
 Among  other  points  of  general  interest  connected 
 with  our  article,  the  reader  will  not  fail  to  observe 
 the  relations  in  which  the  different  sections  of  the 
 Hamite  race  stand  to  each  other  ;  e.g.,  it  is  impor- 
 tant to  bear  in  mind  that  the  Philistines  were  not 
 Canaanites,  as  is  often  assumed  through  an  over- 
 sight of  the  fact,  that  the  former  were  descended 
 from  the  second,  and  the  latter  from  the  fourth  son 
 of  Ham.  The  Toldoth  Bent  Noah  of  Genesis  is  a 
 precious  document  in  many  respects  (as  has  been 
 often  acknowledged,  see  R.  [Ba??tpton  Lcctures'l, 
 p.  68)  ;  but  in  no  respect  does  it  bear  a  higher 
 value  than  as  an  introduction,  provided  by  the 
 sacred  writer  himself,  to  the  subsequent  history  of 
 the  Hebrew  nation  in  its  relations  to  the  rest  of 
 mankind.  The  intelligent  reader  of  Scripture  will 
 experience  much  help  in  his  study  of  that  history, 
 and  indeed  of  prophecy  also,  by  a  constant  recur- 
 rence to  the  particulars  of  this  authoritative  ethno- 
 logical record. 
 
 We  conclude  this  article  with  an  extract  from 
 Mr.  Rawlinson's  Five  Great  Mottarchies,  which 
 describes,  in  a  favourable  though  hardly  exagge- 
 rated light,  some  of  the  obligations  under  which 
 the  primitive  race  of  Ham  has  laid  the  world  : 
 '  Not  possessed  of  many  natural  advantages,  the 
 Chaldsean  people  yet  exhibited  a  fertility  of  inven- 
 tion, a  genius,  and  an  energy,  which  place  them 
 high  in  the  scale  of  nations,  and  more  especially  in 
 the  list  of  those  descended  from  the  Hamitic  stock. 
 For  the  last  3000  years  the  world  has  been  mainly 
 indebted  for  its  advancement  to  the  Semitic  and 
 Indo-European  races  ;  but  it  7oas  otherwise  in  the 
 first  ages.  Egypt  and  Babylon,  Mizraim  and  Nim- 
 rod — both  descendants  of  Ham —  led  the  way  and 
 acted  as  the  pioneers  of  mankind  in  the  various  un- 
 trodden fields  of  art,  literature,  and  science.  Al- 
 phabetic writing,  astronomy,  history,  chronology, 
 architecture,  plastic  art,  sculpttire,  navigation, 
 agriculture,  textile  industry — seem,  all  of  them,  to 
 have  had  their  origin  in  one  or  other  of  these  two 
 covmtries.  The  beginnings  may  have  been  often 
 humble  enough.  We  may  laugh  at  the  rude 
 picture-writing,  the  uncouth  brick  pyramid,  the 
 coarse  fabric,  the  homely  and  ill-shapen  instru- 
 ments, as  they  present  themselves  to  our  notice  in 
 the  remains  of  these  ancient  nations ;  but  they  are 
 really  worthier  of  our  admiration  than  of  our  ridi- 
 cule. The  first  inventors  of  any  art  are  among  the 
 greatest  benefactors  of  their  race  ....  and 
 mankmd  at  the  present  day  lies  under  infinite  obli- 
 gations to  the  genius  and  industry  of  these  early 
 ages'  (pp.  75,  76).— P.  H. 
 
 HAM,  THEY  OF  (Dirp ;  Sept.  'E/c  -tC^v  vlCiv 
 Xdfi;  Vulg.,  De  stirpe  Cham),  are  mentioned  in 
 I  Chron.  iv.  40 — in  one  of  those  historical  frag- 
 ments for  which  the  early  chapters  of  these  Chron- 
 icles are  so  valuable,  as  illustrating  the  private 
 enterprise  and  valour  of  certain  sections  of  the 
 Hebrew  nation.  On  the  present  occasion  a  con- 
 siderable portion  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  consisting 
 
HAM 
 
 212 
 
 HAMAKER 
 
 of  thirteen  princes  and  their  clansmen,  in  the  reign 
 of  Hezekiah,  sought  to  extend  their  territories 
 (which  from  the  beginnmg  seemed  to  be  too 
 narrow  for  their  numbers)  by  migrating  'to 
 the  entrance  of  GeJor,  even  unto  the  east  side 
 of  the  valley,  to  seek  pasture  for  their  flocks.' 
 Finding  here  a  quiet,  and,  as  it  would  seem,  a  se- 
 cure and  defenceless  population  of  Hamites  (the 
 meaning  of  I  Chron.  iv.  40  receives  illustration 
 from  Judg.  xviii.  7,  28)  the  Simeonites  attacked 
 them  with  a  vigour  that  reminds  us  of  the  times 
 of  Joshua,  and  took  permanent  possession  of  the 
 district,  which  was  well  adapted  for  pastoral  pur- 
 poses. The  Gedor  here  mentioned  cannot  be  the 
 Gedor  of  Josh.  xv.  58  [Gedor].  There  is  strong 
 ground,  however,  for  supposing  that  it  may  be  the 
 Gederah  of  ver.  36  [Gederah]  ;  or,  if  we  follow 
 the  LXX.  rendering,  Tepapa,  and  read  "TiJ  for 
 113,  it  would  be  the  well-known  Gerar.  This  last 
 would,  of  course,  if  the  name  could  be  relied  on, 
 fit  extremely  well ;  in  its  vicinity  the  patriarchs  of 
 old  had  sojourned  and  fed  their  flocks  and  herds 
 (see  Gen.  xx.  I,  14,  15  ;  xxvi.  i,  6,  14,  and  espe- 
 cially vers.  17-20).  Bertheau  {die  B.  c/dr  C/irofii/c) 
 on  this  passage,  and  Ewald  ( Gesc/i .  des  Volkes  Israel 
 [ed.  2],  i.  322)  accept  the  reading  of  the  LXX.,  and 
 place  the  Simeonite  conquest  in  the  valley  of  Gerar 
 (in  Williams,  Holy  Clljled.  2]  vol.  i.  pp.  463-468, 
 there  is  an  interesting  note,  contributed  by  the  Rev. 
 J.  Rowlands,  on  l/ie  Southern  Border  of  Palestine, 
 and  containing  an  account  of  his  discoveiy  of  the 
 ancient  Gerar  [called  Khirbet-el  Ge7'ar,  the  ruins  of 
 Gerar] ;  see  also,  for  '  a  confirmation  of  the  ac- 
 count,' Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  etc.,  p.  314).  In 
 the  determination  of  the  ultimate  question,  with 
 which  this  article  is  concerned,  it  matters  but  little 
 which  of  these  two  localities  we  accept  as  the  resi- 
 dence of  those  children  of  Ham  whom  the  Simeon- 
 ites dispossessed.  Both  are  within  the  precincts  of 
 the  land  of  the  Philistines  :  the  latter  perhaps  may 
 be  regarded  as  on  the  boi-der  of  the  district  which 
 we  assigned  in  the  preceding  article  to  the  Cusluhim  ; 
 ineithercase  ''  theyofHa7)i,^  of  whom  we  are  writing, 
 in  I  Chron.  iv.  40,  must  be  regarded  as  descended 
 from  Ham  through  his  second  son  Mizraim. — P.  H. 
 
 HAM  [DH,  with  He\  in  Gen.  xiv.  5,  if  a  proper 
 
 name  at  all,  was  probably  the  principal  town  of  a 
 people  whose  name  occurs  but  once  in  O.  T., 
 '■the  Zitzims^  (as  rendered  in  A.  V.)  If  these 
 were  ''the  Zamzunwiins''  of  Deut.  ii.  20,  as  has 
 been  conjectured  by  Raschi,  Calmet,  Patrick,  etc., 
 among  the  older  writers ;  and  Gesenius,  Rosen- 
 miiller,  Ewald  [  Volkes  Israel,  i.  308],  Delitzsch, 
 Knobel,  and  Keil,  among  the  moderns),  we  have 
 some  clue  to  the  site  ;  for  it  appears  from  the 
 entire  passage  in  Deut.,  that  the  Zamzummims 
 were  the  original  occupants  of  the  country  of  the 
 Ammonites.  Tuch  and  others  have  accordingly 
 supposed  that  our  Ham,  where  the  Zuzinis  were 
 defeated  by  Chedorlaomer  on  his  second  invasion, 
 was  the  primitive  name  of  Rabhath  Amnion,  after- 
 wards Philadelphia  (Jerome  and  Euseb.,  Onomast. 
 s.  V.  Amman),  the  capital  of  the  Ammonite  terri- 
 tory.    It  is   still  called  [the  ruins  of]  ^Ammdn, 
 
 .\a£.,   according   to   Robinson,    Researches   [ed. 
 
 i],  vol.  iii.  168.  There  is  some  doubt,  however, 
 whether  the  word  in  Gen.  xiv.  5  be  anything  more 
 than  a  pronoun.     The  Masoretic  reading  of  the 
 
 clause,  indeed,  is  DHH  D'^T^tHTlX"),  the  last  word 
 
 of  which  is  pointed,  DHU  (A.V.,  ' /«  Ham''),  as  if 
 
 there  were  three  battles,  and  one  of  them  had  been 
 fought  at  a  place  so  called  ;  and  it  perhaps  makes 
 for  this  reading  that,  according  to  Kennicott,  seven 
 Samaritan  MSS.  read  0112  (with  Heth),  which 
 can  produce  no  other  meaning  than  ;'«  Ham,  or 
 Cham  with  the  aspirate.  Yet  the  other  (that  is, 
 the  p7-o7tominal)  reading  must  have  been  recog- 
 nised in  ancient  Heb7-ezv  MSS.  even  as  early  as  the 
 time  of  the  LXX.  translators,  who  render  the 
 phrase  by  a/.ta  aiiroh,  '  together  with  the?n  ; '  as  if 
 there  were  but  two  conflicts,  in  the  former  of 
 which  the  great  eastern  invader  '  smote  the  Re- 
 phaims  in  Ashteroth-Karnaim,  and  the  Zuzims 
 [which  the  LXX.  make  an  appellative — ^vq 
 l(7xvpd,  '  stro7!g  7iatio7is']  alo7ig  with  the77i^  as  their 
 allies.  The  following  note,  which  we  extract  from 
 St.  Jerome's  Qttcest.  Hcbr.  Ope7-a  [ed.  Bened. ,  Ven. 
 1767],  iii.  (2)  327,  proves  that  the  Hebrew  MSS. 
 extant  in  his  day  varied  in  their  readings  of  this 
 passage  :  '  Porro  Baem,  pro  quo  LXX.  dixerunt  S/ua 
 avToh,  hoc  est  cti77i  eis,  putaverunt  scribi  per  He, 
 ducti  elementi  similitudine,  quum  per  Heth  scrip- 
 turn  sit.  Baem  enim  quum  per  tres  literas  scrilji- 
 tur — si  mediam  He  habet,  interpretatur,  i/i  eis : 
 si  autem  Heth,  ut  in  prsesenti,  I0C11771  significat,  id 
 est,  i7i  Ho7n^  (A.  V.,  ' /«  Ham'').  St.  Jerome 
 here  refers  to  the  reading,  which  punctuates  the 
 three  letters  as  if  they  merely  constituted  the  pro- 
 noun Dn3,  ^  together  with  them.''     This  reading  he 
 
 seems  to  have  preferred,  for  in  his  own  version 
 [ Vulg.  ]  he  renders  the  word,  like  the  LXX.  '  cum 
 eis.''  Onkelos,  however,  regarded  the  reading  evi- 
 dently as  a  proper  name,  for  he  has  translated  it  by 
 NnDHB,  '^«  Henita,''  and  so  has  the  '  Pseudo  Jona- 
 than '  Targum ;  while  the  Jerusalem  has  Jins  '  with 
 
 them.''     Saadias,  again  has  the  proper  name       i 
 
 /♦IS)   {'"^  Ha77ia).     Hillerus,   whom  Rosenmiiller 
 
 quotes,  identifies  this  Ha77i  with  the  famous  Am- 
 monite capital  Rabbah  (2  Sam.  xi.  i  ;  i  Chron. 
 XX.  i)  ;  'the  two  names,'  he  says,  'are  synony- 
 mous—  Rabbah  meaning  populous,  as  in  Lament, 
 i.  I,  where  Jerusalem  is  DV'Tlin,  ''the  city  [that 
 
 was]  full  of  people  ; '  while  the  more  ancient  name 
 of  the  same  city,  DH,  has  the  same  signification  as 
 
 the  collective  word  jiDH,  that  is,  a  multitude.^ — 
 
 P.  H. 
 
 HAMAKER,  H.  A.,  one  of  the  first  Orientalists 
 of  his  time,  was  born  at  Amsterdam,  25  th  Feb- 
 ruary 1789.  Destined  by  his  parents  for  the  pro- 
 fession of  a  merchant,  his  tastes  led  him  early  to 
 learning  ;  and  the  counsels  of  Willmet  strength- 
 ened him  in  his  ardent  attachment  to  erudite 
 studies,  especially  to  the  Arabic  language,  in  which 
 he  made  great  progress.  In  181 5  he  was  ap- 
 pointed professor  of  the  Oriental  languages  in  the 
 Athenceum  at  Franeker.  In  181 7  he  was  called 
 to  Leyden  as  professor  extraordinary  of  Oriental 
 languages  ;  and  in  1822  he  became  ordinaiy  pro- 
 fessor. Here  he  died  on  the  loth  October  1837, 
 at  the  early  age  of  47,  having  undermined  his 
 health  by  excessive  study.  His  literary  ambition 
 was  too  active,  hurrying  him  from  one  language  to 
 another,   and  injuring  his  reputation.     Instead  ol 
 
HAMAN 
 
 213 
 
 HAMATH 
 
 being  contented  with  the  knowledge  of  five  Semi- 
 tic tongues  besides  the  Arabic,  he  devoted  himself 
 without  relaxation  to  the  study  of  all  the  ancient 
 and  modern  languages  of  Asia  and  Africa — a  task 
 to  which  human  strength  is  unequal.  The  range 
 of  his  Oriental  erudition  was  great  ;  it  would  have 
 been  of  a  profounder  character  if  he  had  confined 
 himself  to  fewer  subjects.  His  works  are  nume- 
 rous, but  none  bears  directly  on  Biblical  science. 
 All  are  of  the  Oriental-literary  or  historical  type. 
 Those  most  related  to  the  O.  T.  are  Diatribe philo- 
 logico-C7'itica  motiumentorttm  aliqitot  Piinicor7tt7i 
 ntiper  in  Africa  repert07-7tin,  inierpretaiioitem  exhi- 
 bens ;  accediait  novce  in  7mmt}tos  aliquot  phce7iicios 
 lapidemq7ie  Carpe77toracte7isem  co/ijcct7ira:,  7iec7i07t 
 tabula  i7iscriptio7ies  et  alphabeta  Pu/iica  cp7iti7te7ttes, 
 Leyden  1822,  4to  ;  and  MisceUa7tea  Phe7iicia,  sive 
 Co77it7ientarii  de  rebus  Pha7iicnm  q7iibiis  i7tscrip- 
 tio7tes  m7iltce  lapidiwi  ac  7itmi77ior7it7i  no7?ti7iaqtie 
 p7-op7-ia  ho77ii7i7i77i  ct  locoritm  explica7it7ir ;  ite?ii 
 Pu/tica  ge7itis  Ii7:g7ia  et  religio7Us  passiin  iliiis- 
 t7-a7itiir,  Leyden  1828,  4to.  See  Juynboll's  07-atio 
 de  He7i7-ici  Are7itii  Ha/naker  studii  litte/-a/iim  Ori- 
 entalitif7i  i7i  patria  nostra  viitdice  prcEclaro,  Gro- 
 ningen  1837. — S.  D. 
 
 HAMAN  (JOn,  a  name  of  the  planet  Mercury ; 
 
 Sept.  'A/udj'),  a  favourite  of  the  king  of  Persia, 
 whose  history  is  involved  in  that  of  Esther  and 
 Mordecai.  He  is  called  an  Agagite  ;  and  as  Agag 
 was  a  kind  of  title  of  the  kings  of  the  Amalekites 
 [Agag],  it  is  supposed  that  Haman  was  descended 
 from  the  royal  family  of  that  nation.  [This  name, 
 however,  may  have  been  merely  a  name  of  re- 
 proach derived  from  the  ancient  Jewish  hatred  of 
 Amalek  (Stanley,  Jewish  Chtu-ch,  p.  141)].  He  or 
 his  parents  probably  found  their  way  to  Persia  as 
 captives  or  hostages  ;  and  that  the  foreign  origin  of 
 Haman  was  no  bar  to  his  advancement  at  court,  is 
 a  circumstance  quite  in  unison  vvath  the  most  an- 
 cient and  still  subsisting  usages  of  the  East.  Joseph, 
 Daniel,  and  Mordecai,  atford  other  examples  of  the 
 same  kind. 
 
 It  is  unnecessary  to  repeat  the  particulars  of  a 
 story  so  well  known  as  that  of  Haman.  The  cir- 
 cumstantial details  of  the  height  which  he  attained 
 and  of  his  sudden  downfall,  afford,  like  all  the  rest 
 of  the  book  of  Esther,  a  most  faithful  picture  of  the 
 customs  of  an  Oriental  court  and  government,  and 
 furnish  invaluable  materials  for  a  comparison  be- 
 tween the  regal  usages  of  ancient  and  modern 
 times.  The  result  of  such  a  comparison  will  excite 
 surprise  by  the  closeness  of  the  resemblance  ;  for 
 there  is  not  a  single  fact  in  the  history  of  Haman 
 which  might  not  occur  at  the  present  day,  even  in 
 its  merely  formal  characteristics,  and  which,  indeed, 
 is  not  of  frequent  occurrence  in  different  combina- 
 tions. The  boundless  credit  which  Haman  enjoyed 
 with  Ahasuerus  ;  the  homage  which  all  the  court 
 in  consequence  paid  to  him ;  the  royal  signet-ring, 
 the  impression  from  which  gave  such  authority  to 
 all  written  orders,  and  placed  the  doom  of  nations  in 
 the  hands  of  its  possessor ;  the  price  of  blood  which 
 Haman  offered  to  the  king  ;  the  inquietude  of  that 
 inordinate  power  which  could  endure  no  rival,  and 
 which  the  shadow  of  opposition  offended  and 
 alarmed  ;  and  the  form  of  poetical  justice  given 
 to  the  final  retribution  in  the  hanging  of  Haman 
 upon  a  gallows  which  he  liad  prepared  for  another  ; 
 —all  these  are  traits  which  would  at  the  present 
 
 day  be  received  in  Asia  as  the  unexaggerated  record 
 of  current  events. 
 
 Even  the  decree  for  the  extermination  of  the 
 Jews  whicli  was  granted  at  the  request  of  Haman, 
 however  startling  it  may  appear  to  those  whose 
 notions  are  grounded  upon  European  institutions, 
 would  appear  in  no  wise  strange  under  an  Oriental 
 government.  Even  in  Europe  the  fanaticism  and 
 tyranny  of  ancient  governments  often  produced 
 similar  proscriptions  (sometimes  with  reference  to 
 the  very  same  people),  which,  under  the  mildness 
 and  tranquillity  of  modern  institutions,  we  are 
 as  little  able  to  compi'ehend.  But  in  the  East  we 
 have  still  no  difficulty  in  discovering  the  traces  of 
 the  same  excesses  of  despotism,  the  same  blind 
 submission  of  the  people,  the  same  respect  for  the 
 seal  of  the  sovereign,  and  the  same  passive  resigna- 
 tion to  the  sword  which  he  uplifts  or  to  the  bow- 
 string which  he  sends.  Even  in  our  own  day  we 
 have  seen  imperial  firmauns  consign  to  utter  de- 
 struction in  the  mass  the  Greeks,  the  Druses,  and 
 the  Maronites  ;  and  such  things  must  and  will 
 occur  wherever  the  extermination  of  a  people  is 
 unhappily  so  easy  a  matter  that  it  costs  a  despot  no 
 further  trouble  than  the  drawing  of  a  ring  from  his 
 finger.  Other  times  and  other  names  make  all  the 
 difference — the  manners  are  the  same.  It  may  be 
 well  to  observe  that  Haman  never  mentions  Mor- 
 decai himself  to  the  king  ;  and  that  in  speaking  of 
 the  Jews  he  does  not  name  them  directly,  but  de- 
 scribes them  as  '  a  certain  people'  dispersed  through 
 the  kingdom,  and  living  separate  under  laws  of  their 
 own  (Esth.  iii.  8).  That  this  people,  or  any  other 
 subject  to  his  sceptre,  should  require  to  be  thus 
 descriptively  indicated,  seems  to  shew  how  little 
 the  king  knew  of  the  actual  state  of  his  dominions, 
 or  of  persons  beyond  the  immediate  circle  of  the 
 court.  The  death  of  Haman  appears  to  have  taken 
 place  about  the  year  B.C.  510.    [Esther.] — J.  K. 
 
 HAMATH  (n»n;  Sept.  AZ^taS^  and 'H^d(9).    A 
 
 very  ancient  city  of  Syria,  and  the  capital  of  a  small 
 kingdom  of  the  same  name.  Gesenius  is  probably 
 right  in  deriving  the  word  from  the  Arabic  root 
 
 \j^-i^,   to  defend ;   with   this   agrees   the   modem 
 
 name  of  the  city  Hamah  (iLij>.).      Hamath  is 
 
 one  of  the  oldest  cities  in  the  world.  We  read  in 
 Gen.  X.  18,  that  the  youngest  or  last  son  of  Canaan 
 was  the  '  Hamathite' — apparently  so  called  be- 
 cause he  and  his  family  founded  and  colonised 
 Hamath.  It  was  a  place  of  note,  and  the  capital 
 of  a  principality,  when  the  Israelites  conquered 
 Palestine  ;  and  its  name  is  mentioned  in  almost 
 every  passage  in  which  the  northern  border  of 
 Canaan  is  defined  (Num.  xiii.  22  ;  xxxiv.  8  ;  Josh, 
 xiii.  5  ;  etc.)  Toi  king  of  Hamath  gave  tribute  to 
 David  after  the  successful  campaign  of  the  latter  in 
 northern  Syria  and  Damascus  (2  Sam.  viii. )  Ha- 
 math was  conquered  by  Solomon  (2  Chron.  viii. 
 3)  ;  and  its  whole  territory  appears  to  have  re- 
 mained subject  to  the  Israelites  during  his  pros- 
 perous reign  (verses  4-6).  After  it  had  regained 
 its  independence,  probably  during  the  reign  of  the 
 first  Jeroboam,  it  was  again  subdued  by  Jeroboam 
 the  second  (circa  B.C.  784  ;  2  Kings  xiv.  28).  At 
 this  period  the  kingdom  of  Hamath  included  the 
 valley  of  the  Orontes,  from  the  source  of  that  river 
 to  near  Antioch  (2  Kings  xxiii.  33  ;  xxv.  21).  It 
 bordered   Damascus   on  the  south,  Zobah  on  the 
 
HAMATH 
 
 214 
 
 HAMATH 
 
 east  and  north,  and  Phoenicia  on  the  west  (i 
 Chron.  xviii.  3  ;  Ezek.  xlvii.  17  ;  xlviii.  i  ;  Zech. 
 ix.  2).  In  the  8th  century  B.C.  the  powerful 
 monarchs  of  Assyria  extended  their  conquests  west- 
 ward, and  captured  Hamath.  It  must  have  been 
 then  a  large  and  influential  kingdom  ;  for  Amos 
 speaks  emphatically  of  '  Hamath  the  Great'  (vi.  2)  ; 
 and  when  Rabshakeh,  the  Assyrian  general,  en- 
 deavoured to  terrify  king  Hezekiah  into  uncondi- 
 tional surrender,  he  said  :  '  Have  the  gods  of  the 
 nations  delivered  them  which  my  fathers  have 
 destroyed,  as  Gozan,  and  Haran,  and  Rezeph  ? 
 Where  is  the  king  of  Hamath,  and  the  king  of 
 Arphad,  and  the  king  of  the  city  of  Sephervaim, 
 Hena,  and  Ivah?'  (Is.  xxxvii.  12-14;  2  Kings 
 xviii.  34,  sq.)  The  frequent  use  of  the  phrase, 
 '  the  entering  in  of  Hamath,'  also  shews  that  this 
 kingdom  was  the  most  important  in  northern 
 Syria  (Judg.  iii.  3).  Hamath  remained  under  the 
 Assyrian  rule  till  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great, 
 when  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Greeks.  The 
 Greeks  introduced  their  noble  language  as  well  as 
 their  government  into  Syria,  and  they  even  gave 
 Greek  names  to  some  of  the  old  cities  ;  among 
 these  was  Hamath,  which  was  called  Epiphania 
 {^"EiWi.cpa.veia),  in  honour  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
 (Cvril,  Cotnment.  aa  Amos). 
 
 This  change  of  name  gave  rise  to  considerable 
 doubts  and  difficulties  among  geographers  regard- 
 ing the  identity  of  Hamath.  Jerome  affirms  that 
 there  were  two  cities  of  that  name — Great  Hamath, 
 identical  with  Antioch,  and  another  Hamath  called 
 Epiphania  (CVww^;;/.  ad  Amos,  yi.)  TheTargums 
 in  Num.  xiii.  22,  render  HavciathAufiei'ia  (Reland, 
 Pa/,  p.  120).  Eusebius  calls  it  'a  city  of  Damas- 
 cus,' and  affirms  that  it  is  not  the  same  as  Epi- 
 phania ;  but  Jerome  states,  after  a  careful  investi- 
 gation, '  reperi  Aemath  urbem  Coeles  Syrije  appel- 
 lari,  quEe  nunc  Grteco  sermone  Epiphania  dicitur' 
 {Oiiomast.,  s.  v.  Aemath  and  Emath).  Theodoret 
 says  that  Great  Hamath  was  Emesa,  and  the  other 
 Hamath  Epiphania  (Comment,  ad  Jerem.  iv. ) 
 Josephus  is  more  accurate  when  he  tells  us  that 
 Hamath  '  was  still  called  in  his  day  by  the  inhabi- 
 tants 'A/xdS-r?,  although  the  Macedonians  called  it 
 Epiphania  {Antiq.  i.  6.  2).  There  is  reason  to 
 believe  that  the  ancient  name  Hamath  was  always 
 retained  and  used  by  the  Aramaic  speaking  popu- 
 lation ;  and,  therefore,  when  Greek  power  de- 
 clined, and  the  Greek  language  was  forgotten, 
 the  ancient  name  in  its  Arabic  form  Hamdh  be- 
 came universal.  There  is  no  ground  whatever  for 
 Reland's  theory  that  the  Hamath  spoken  of  in 
 connection  with  the  northern  border  of  Palestine 
 was  not  Epiphania,  but  some  other  city  much 
 farther  south.  The  identification  of  Riblah  and 
 Zedad  places  the  true  site  of  Hamath  beyond  the 
 possibility  of  doubt  (Reland,  Pal.  p.  121  ;  Porter, 
 Damasc2is,\\.  pp.  335,  354,  sq.) 
 
 Epiphania  remained  a  flourishing  city  during  the 
 Roman  rule  in  Syria  (Ptolemy,  v.  15  ;  Pliny,  Hist. 
 Nat.  v.  19).  It  early  became,  and  still  continues, 
 the  seat  of  a  bishop  of  the  Eastern  Church  [Carol i 
 a  san.  Paulo,  Geogr.  Sac.,  p.  288).  It  was  taken 
 by  the  Mohammedans  soon  after  Damascus.  On 
 the  death  of  the  great  Saladin,  Hamath  was  rifled 
 for  a  long  period  by  his  descendants,  the  Eiyubites. 
 Abulfcda,  the  celebrated  Arab  historian  and  geo- 
 grapher, was  a  member  of  this  family  and  ruler  of 
 Hamah  (Bohadin,  VitaSaladini ;  Schulten's /wot'j; 
 Geographicus,  s.  v.  Hamata). 
 
 Hamah  is  stfll  a  town  of  30,000  inhabitants.  It 
 is  beautifully  situated  in  the  narrow  and  rich  valley 
 of  the  Orontes,  thirty-two  miles  north  of  Emesa, 
 and  thirty-six  south  of  the  ruins  of  Assamea  (An- 
 tonini  ltinerariii77i,  ed.  Wesseling,  p.  188).  Four 
 bridges  span  the  rapid  river  ;  and  a  number  of  huge 
 wheels  turned  by  the  current,  like  those  at  Verona, 
 raise  the  water  into  rude  aqueducts,  which  convey 
 it  to  the  houses  and  mosques.  There  are  no 
 remains  of  antiquity  now  visible.  The  mound  on 
 which  the  castle  stood  is  in  the  centre  of  the  city  ; 
 but  every  trace  of  the  castle  itself  has  disappeared 
 The  houses  are  built  of  sun-dried  bricks  and  timber. 
 Though  plain  and  poor  externally,  some  of  them 
 have  splendid  interiors.  The  inhabitants  carry  on 
 a  considerable  trade  in  silks  and  woollen  and  cotton 
 stuffs  with  the  Bedawin.  A  number  of  noble  but 
 decayed  Muslem  families  reside  in  Hamah,  at- 
 tracted thither  by  its  beauty,  salubrity,  and  cheap- 
 ness (Pococke,  Tj-avels,  ii.  pt.  i.  pp.  143,  sq. ; 
 Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria,  pp.  146,  sq.  ;  Hana- 
 book  for  S.  and  P.,  ii.  p.  620). 
 
 '  The  entrance  of  Hamath,^  or  '■entering  into 
 Hamath^    (JlDri  Si3 ;    dairopevofiivwv  eh  Alfia'^  ; 
 
 introitnm  Emath)  is  a  phrase  often  used  in  the  O. 
 T.  as  a  geographical  name.  It  is  of  considerable 
 nnportance  to  identify  it,  as  it  is  one  of  the  chief 
 landmarks  on  the  northern  border  of  the  land  of 
 Israel.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  sacred 
 writers  apply  the  phrase  to  some  well-known  'pass ' 
 or  '  opening'  into  the  kingdom  of  Hamath  (Num. 
 xxxiv.  8  ;  Josh.  xiii.  5).  The  kingdom  of  Hamath 
 embraced  the  great  plain  lying  along  both  banks 
 of  the  Orontes,  from  the  fountain  near  Riblah  on 
 the  south  to  Apamea  on  the  north,  and  from  Leba- 
 non on  the  west  to  the  desert  on  the  east.  To  this 
 plain  there  are  two  remarkable  '  entrances ' — one 
 from  the  south,  through  the  valley  of  Coelesyria, 
 between  the  parallel  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  An  i- 
 lebanon  ;  the  other  from  the  west,  between  the 
 northern  end  of  Lebanon  and  the  Nusairiyeh 
 mountains.  The  former  is  the  natural  '  entrance ' 
 from  central  Palestine  ;  the  latter  from  the  sea- 
 coast.  The  former  is  on  the  extreme  south  of  the 
 kingdom  of  Hamath  ;  the  latter  on  its  western 
 border. 
 
 Until  within  the  last  few  years  sacred  geogra- 
 phers have  almost  universally  maintained  that  the 
 southern  opening  is  the  'entrance  of  Hamath.' 
 Reland  supposed  that  the  land  described  in  Num. 
 xxxiv.  8,  10  did  not  extend  farther  north  than  the 
 parallel  of  Sidon.  Consequently  he  holds  that  the 
 southern  extremity  of  the  valley  of  Coelesyria,  at 
 the  base  of  Hermon,  is  the  'entrance '  of  Hamath 
 (Pahestina,  pp.  118,  sq.)  Kitto  set  forth  this 
 view  in  greater  detail ;  and  he  would  identify  the 
 '  entrance  of  Hamath  '  with  the  expression  used  in 
 Num.  xiii.  21,  'as  men  come  to  Hamath.'  The 
 two,  however,  are  distinct.  The  latter  is  only  in- 
 tended to  define  the  position  of  Beth-rehob,  which 
 was  situated  on  the  road  leading  from  central 
 Palestine  to  Hamath — '  as  men  come  to  Hamath  ;' 
 that  is,  in  the  great  valley  of  Coelesyria  (Pictorial 
 Bible ;  Cyclopcrd.  of  Bibl.  Lit.  s.  v.  Hamath  and 
 Palestine,  1st  ed.)  Van  de  Velde  appears  to  locate 
 the  '  entrance  of  Hamath'  at  the  northern  end  of 
 the  valley  of  Coelesyria  (Travels,  ii.  470)  ;  and 
 Stanley  adopts  the  same  view  (Sin.  and  Pal.  399). 
 Dr.  Keith  would  place  the  '  entrance  of  Hamath  ' 
 at  that  sublime  gorge  through  which  the  Orontes 
 
HAMATH-ZOBAH 
 
 215 
 
 HAMMATH 
 
 flows  from  Antioch  to   the  sea  {Land  of  Israel, 
 pp.  112,  sq.) 
 
 The  writer  of  this  article,  after  a  careful  survey 
 of  the  whole  region,  and  a  study  of  the  passages  of 
 Scripture  on  the  spot,  was  led  to  the  conclusion 
 that  the  '  entrance  of  Hamath'  must  be  the  open- 
 ing towards  the  west,  between  Lebanon  and  the 
 Nusairiyeh  mountains.  His  reasons  are  as  follow : 
 — I.  That  opening  forms  a  distinct  and  natural 
 northern  boundary  for  the  land  of  Israel,  such  as  is 
 evidently  required  by  the  following  passages  :  i 
 Kings  viii.  65  ;  2  Kings  xiv.  25  ;  2  Chron.  xiii.  5  ; 
 Am.  vi.  14.  2.  The  '  entrance  of  Hamath '  is 
 spoken  of  as  being  from  the  western  border  or  sea- 
 board ;  for  Moses  says,  after  describing  the  western 
 border, — 'This  shall  be  your  north  border, _/;v;« 
 the  gnat  sea  ye  shall  point  out  for  you  Mount  Hor; 
 from  Mount  Hor  ye  shall  point  out  into  the  en- 
 trance of  Hamath '  (Num.  xxxv.  7,  8).  Compare 
 this  with  Ezek.  xlvii.  20,  '  the  west  side  shall  be  the 
 great  sea  from  the  (southern)  border,  ////  a  man 
 come  over  against  Hamath  ;  and  ver.  16,  where  the 
 '  way  of  Hethlon  as  men  go  to  Zedad '  is  mentioned, 
 and  is  manifestly  identical  with  the  '  entrance  of 
 Hamath,'  and  can  be  none  other  than  the  opening 
 here  alluded  to.  3.  The  '  entrance  of  Hamath ' 
 must  have  been  to  the  north  of  the  entire  ridges  of 
 Lebanon  and  Antilebanon  (Josh.  xiii.  5  ;  Judg.  iii. 
 3)  ;  but  the  opening  from  Coelesyria  into  the  plain 
 of  Hamath  is  not  so.  4.  The  territory  of  Hamath 
 was  included  in  the  '  Promised  Land,'  as  described 
 both  by  Moses  and  Ezekiel  (Num.  xxxiv.  8-1 1  ; 
 Ezek.  xlvii.  15-20;  xlviii.  i).  The  'entrance  of 
 Hamath '  is  one  of  the  marks  of  its  tiorthern  bor- 
 der ;  but  the  opening  from  Coelesyria  is  on  the 
 extreme  sotith  of  the  territory  of  Hamath,  and  could 
 not  therefore  be  identical  with  the  '  entrance  of 
 Hamath.' 
 
 From  the  above  statements  it  is  abundantly 
 evident  that  the  '  entrance  of  Hamath '  must  be 
 the  opening  from  that  kingdom  to  the  western 
 coast  between  Lebanon  and  the  Nusairiyeh  moun- 
 tains. The  phrase  was  used  by  the  sacred  writers 
 with  all  the  definiteness  of  a  proper  name  (see 
 Porter's  Damascus,  ii.  354,  sq.  ;  also  Robinson,  B. 
 R.  iii.  568).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAMATH-ZOBAH  (nniVnOH ;  Sept.    Bat- 
 
 oca^d).  In  2  Chron.  viii.  3  it  is  recorded  that 
 '  Solomon  went  to  Hamath-Zobah,  and  prevailed 
 against  it.'  Zobah  was  a  place  in  the  same  dis- 
 trict as  Hamath  [Zobah].  The  conjunction  of 
 the  two  names  here  probably  indicates  nothing 
 more  than  that  the  whole  country  round  Hamath 
 was  brought  by  Solomon  under  the  power  of 
 [udah.  The  possession  of  David  extended  to 
 Hamath,  and  included  Zobah  (i  Chron.  xviii.  3), 
 and  Solomon  probably  added  Hamath  also  to  his 
 empire  ;  certain  it  is  that  he  had  possessions  in 
 that  district,  and  that  part  of  it  at  least  was  in- 
 cluded in  his  dominion  (Ifl^'K-'OO,  i  Kings  ix.  19). 
 There  is  not  the  least  ground  for  the  supposition 
 that  Hamath-Zobah  is  the  name  of  a  different 
 Hamath  from  that  above  noted.  — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HAMILTON,  George,  an  Episcopalian  clergy- 
 man, rector  of  Killermogh  in  Ireland.  He  was  a 
 good  Hebraist,  and  a  laborious  scholar.  His  first 
 Avork  was  entitled — A  General  Introduction  to  the 
 Study  of  the  Hebrau  Scriptures,  ■with  a  Critical  His- 
 
 \  tory  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Versions  of  the  Samari- 
 tan Pentateuch,  and  of  the  Chaldee  Fai-aphrases. 
 Dublin  1814,  8vo.  On  each  of  the  subjc-cts  indi- 
 cated in  the  title,  this  work  will  be  found  to  offer 
 much  important  information,  conveyed  in  a  con- 
 densed, and  yet  clear  -uid  pleasing  style.  His 
 other  work  is  entitled  Codex  Criticiis  of  the  He- 
 brew Bible,  7vherein  Vander  Hooghf  s  text  is  corrected 
 from  the  Hebnw  MSS.  collated  by  Kennicott  and 
 De  Rossi,  and  from  the  Ancient  Versions,  being  an 
 attempt  to  form  a  standaid  text  of  the  O.  T.,  Lond. 
 1 82 1,  8vo  ;  a  work  of  much  learning,  and  a  praise- 
 worthy effort  towards  a  corrected  text  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures.  His  criticisms,  though  not  such  as  tc 
 give  satisfaction  in  every  case,  are  yet  in  most  in- 
 stances so  well  considered  and  reasonable  as  to  in- 
 vest his  work  with  a  permanent  value  to  every 
 student  of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  The  following  is 
 also  deserving  of  being  noted  here — A  Letter  to  the 
 Rev.  Solomon  Ilerschell,  D.D.,  chief  Rabbi  of  the 
 German  and  Polish  Jtivs  in  London,  shewing  that 
 the  resurrection  of  Jesus  from  the  dead  is  as  credible 
 a  fact  as  the  Exodus  of  the  Israelites  f-otn  Egypt ; 
 and  that  the  account  of  the  resurrection  in  the  Ti-aci 
 entitled  Toldoth  Jcsu,  is  no  more  tvorthy  of  credit 
 than  that  which  Tacitus  has  given  of  the  Exodus 
 pp.  38,  8vo,  Lond.  1822.— W.  J.  C. 
 
 HAMMATH  (fim;  Sept.  A2/xc£^,'HMa(9).  One 
 of  the  fenced  cities  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  35). 
 Von  Raumer  has  confounded  it  with  the  great  city 
 of  Hamath  {Pal.  p.  126)  ;  but  the  latter  is  far 
 beyond  the  boundary  of  Naphtali.  It  is  probably 
 the  same  as  Hammath-dor,  which  was  assigned  to 
 the  Levites  out  of  the  territory  of  Naphtali  (  Josh, 
 xxi.  32),  and  which  is  called  Hammon  in  i  Chron. 
 vi.    76.      The   word   Hammath   signifies    '  warm 
 
 baths'    (from    the    Arabic    root       ^4,;^,    '  to    be 
 
 hot'),  and  this,  along  with  the  fact  that  it  is 
 grouped  with  Chinnereth,  enables  us  to  identify 
 its  site.  Josephus  says  that  there  were  warm 
 baths  in  a  village  called  Amtnaus  {'A/x/xaous),  at  a 
 little  distance  from  Tiberias  {Antiq.  xviii.  2.  3)  ; 
 and  adds,  in  another  place,  '  the  name  Ammaus  in 
 our  language  signifies  '  warm  water  ; '  the  name 
 being  derived  from  a  warm  spring  which  rises 
 there,  possessing  sanative  properties '  {Bell.  Jud. 
 iv.  I.  3).  Refeience  is  frequently  made  to  Ham- 
 math  in  the  Talmud.  It  is  there  said  to  have  been 
 a  mile  distant  from  Tiberias  (See  in  Lighlfoot, 
 0pp.  ii.  224,  sq.)  We  can  have  no  difficulty  hi 
 identifying  the  site  of  Hammath.  On  the  shore 
 of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  about  a  mile  south  of 
 Tiberias,  is  a  warm  spring,  still  celebrated  for  its 
 medicinal  properties.  Spacious  baths  were  built 
 over  it  by  Ibrahim  Pasha  ;  but,  like  everything 
 else  in  Palestine,  they  are  falling  to  ruin.  Ancient 
 ruins  are  strewn  around  it,  and  can  be  traced  along 
 the  shore  for  a  considerable  distance.  This  is 
 doubtless  the  Hammath  of  the  Bible,  and  the 
 Ammaus  of  Josephus.  Some  writers  have  con- 
 founded this  Ammaus  with  another  place  of  the 
 same  name  east  of  the  Jordan  ;  and  have  thus 
 been  led  into  strange  topographical  blunders.  The 
 Hammath  of  Gadara,  east  of  the  Jordan,  on  the 
 banks  of  the  river  Hieromax,  and  the  Hammath  of 
 Tiberias,  are  both  mentioned  in  the  Talmud,  and 
 are  quite  distinct.  Pliny,  speaking  of  the  Sea  of 
 Galilee,  says,  'ab  occidente  Tiberiade,  aquis  cah- 
 
HAMMATH-DOR 
 
 216 
 
 HAMUTAL 
 
 dis  salubri'  {Hist.  Nat.  v.  15).  There  are  four 
 warm  springs  at  this  place.  The  water  has  a 
 temperature  of  144°  Fahr.;  the  taste  is  extremely 
 salt  and  bitter,  and  a  strong  smell  of  sulphur  is 
 emitted.  The  whole  surrounding  district  has  a 
 volcanic  aspect.  The  warm  fountains,  the  rocks 
 of  trap  and  lava,  and  the  frequent  earthquakes, 
 prove  that  the  elements  of  destruction  are  still  at 
 work  beneath  the  surface.  It  is  said  that  at  the 
 time  of  the  great  earthquake  of  1837  the  quantity 
 of  water  issuing  from  the  springs  was  greatly  in- 
 creased, and  the  temperature  much  higher  than 
 ordinarily  {Hankbook  for  S.  and  P. ,  ii.  423 ; 
 Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  ii.  385  ;  Wilson,  Lands  of  the 
 Bible,  ii.  397 ;  Reland,  Pal.  pp.  302,  703). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAMMATH-DOR.     [Hammath.] 
 
 HAMMEDATHA  (Sm^n  ;  Sept.  'AfiaMOos), 
 
 father  of  Haman  (Esth.  iii.  i,  10  ;  viii.  5  ;  ix.  10, 
 24).  Gesenius  regards  the  word  as  Medatha  with 
 the  article  prefixed  ;  but  Fiirst,  with  more  proba- 
 bility, identifies  it  with  the  Zendic  haomodata,  i.  e., 
 '  given  by  Horn,'  one  of  the  Izeds. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HAMMELECH  (Tj^On).     This  name  occurs  in 
 
 the  A.  V.  twice  (Jer.  xxxvi.  26 ;  xxxviii.  6).  In  both 
 instances  the  LXX.  renders  by  rov  pacnXicos,  and 
 there  is  no  reason  for  doubting  that  this  is  the 
 correct  rendering.  '  The  king'  in  the  former  in- 
 stance is  Jehoiakim,  and  in  the  latter  Zedekiah. — + 
 
 HAMMER.  In  the  A.  V.  this  is  used  as  an 
 equivalent  for  several  Hebrew  words  : — (i.)  The 
 first  that  occurs  is  n3pQ,  Judg.  iv.    21,    derived 
 
 from  a  verb  signifying  to  hollow  or  ,pe>forate ;  found 
 also  in  I  Kings  vi.  7  ;  Jer.  x.  4  ;  and  Is.  xliv.  12. 
 In  the  last-mentioned  passage  the  LXX.  use  r^pe- 
 Tpov,  a  bora-  or  gimlet,  in  all  the  rest  <T<pdpa,  tiial- 
 
 leus,  Vulg.  (2.)  niO^n,  with  the  addition  whoV, 
 'workmen's ;'  acpdpav  KOTrubuTiav,  LXX.  ;  fabi-oriim 
 malleos,   Vulg.,   only  in  Judg.  v.  26.      (3.)  tJ'^t^EB  ; 
 
 Is.  xli.  7j  cr(pvpa  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  29,  ttAi;^  ;  Jer.  1.  23, 
 ff(pOpa.      (4.)  pSJD;  Nahum  ii.  I,  ^yu^ucrajv,  LXX. , 
 
 probably  reading  rT'DO;  qui  dispe7-gat,  Vulg.,  Prov. 
 
 xxv.   18,   maul,  A.  V.     (5.)  niD?''D  ;  \a.^evTt]piov, 
 
 LXX.  ;  ascia,  Vulg.,  Ps.  Ixxiv.  6.— J.  E.  R. 
 
 HAMMOLEKETH    (D^^bn  ;    Sept.    •^    Ma- 
 
 Xex^^),  the  sister  of  Gilead  and  mother  of  Abiezer 
 (l  Chron.  vii.  18).  The  Targum  takes  this,  not 
 as  a  proper  name,  but  as  appellative,  and  renders 
 *  who  reigned,'  thus  making  her  the  ruler  of  a  dis- 
 trict ;  and  with  this  Jewish  tradition  accords  (Kim- 
 chi  in  loc.)  Through  the  influence  of  this  the 
 Vulg.  gives  '  soror  ejus  Regina. '  The  tradition  is 
 probably  without  foundation,  and  has  been  sug- 
 gested merely  by  the  meaning  of  the  word  =  '  the 
 Queen.' — i" 
 
 HAMMON.     [Hammath.] 
 
 HAMMOND,  Henry,  D.D.,  was  born  at 
 Chertsey,  1 8th  August  1605,  and  educated  at  Eton 
 and  Magdalen  Colleges,  Oxford,  of  which  latter 
 society  he  became  a  fellow.  He  was  named  after 
 Henry  Prince  of  Wales,  his  godfather,  to  whom  Dr. 
 John  Hammond,  his  father,  was  physician.     It  is 
 
 said  that  Robert  Sidney,  Earl  of  Leicester,  was  sc 
 much  impressed  with  a  sermon  he  heard  him 
 preach,  that  he  gave  him  the  rectory  of  Penshurst, 
 1633.  In  1643  he  was  made  Archdeacon  of  Chi- 
 chester. Hammond  was  a  confirmed  royalist,  and 
 took  part  in  the  fruitless  attempt  in  favour  of  the 
 king  at  Tunbridge,  when  a  reward  of  ^100  was 
 offered  to  the  person  who  should  apprehend  him. 
 He  retired  to  Oxford  in  consequence,  and  resided 
 there  while  the  city  was  held  by  the  king.  He 
 became  canon  of  Christ  Chuixh,  and  public  orator 
 in  1645,  and  accompanied  Charles  I.,  as  chaplain, 
 to  Woburn,  Hampton  Court,  and  Carisbrook,  till 
 the  dismissal  of  his  attendants  in  1647.  He  once 
 more  retired  to  Oxford  and  became  sub-dean  of 
 Christ  Church.  The  latter  part  of  his  life  was 
 passed  at  Westwood,  Worcestershire,  the  seat  of 
 Sir  John  Parkwood,  where  he  died  25th  April 
 1660.  He  wrote  a  Paraphrase a7id  Annotations  on 
 the  N'.  T.,  1653,  which  was  translated  into  Latin 
 by  Leclerc,  2  vols.  4to,  1698,  Amsterdam  ;  A 
 Paraphrase  and  Annotations  upon  the  Book  of 
 Psalms,  fol.  Lond.  1659 ;  Practical  Catechism, 
 1644  ;  Humble  Address  to  the  Right  Hon.  the  Lord 
 Fairfax  and  his  Council  of  War,  1649,  concerning 
 the  impending  trial  of  Charles  I.  Hammond's 
 miscellaneous  theological  works  have  been  well 
 edited  in  the  Library  of  Anglo-Catholic  Theology. 
 — S.  L. 
 
 HAMOR,  Chamor  (liDn  ;  Sept.  'Efifxdp),  a 
 
 Hivite  chief,  prince  of  the  district  lying  around 
 Shechem,  and  father  of  Shechem,  whose  assault 
 upon  Dinah  led  to  the  destruction  of  himself,  his 
 father,  and  their  city,  by  the  sons  of  Jacob.  From 
 Hamor  Jacob  bought  a  piece  of  land  in  the  vicinity 
 of  Shechem,  a  transaction  of  a  perfectly  peaceable 
 kind,  but  which  seems  to  have  been  interposed  amid 
 passages  of  a  more  hostile  nature  between  the 
 patriarch  and  his  neighbours  (comp.  Gen.  xlviii.  22). 
 This  he  left  as  a  special  inheritance  to  the  family 
 of  Joseph,  and  here  Joseph's  bones  were  interred 
 (Josh.  xxiv.  32).  Hamor  gate  his  name  to  the 
 tribe  of  which  he  was  chief;  they  are  called  Benei- 
 Hamor  (Gen.  xxxiii.  19),  and  he  himself  is  called 
 Hamor  Abi-Shechem  (josh.  xxiv.  32  ;  Judg.  ix. 
 28  ;  Acts  vii.  16),  with  reference  to  his  having  the 
 seat  of  his  rule  at  Shechem  (comp.  Machir  Abi- 
 Gilead,  Ashchur  Abi  Teqoa,  Shubal  Abi  Qir- 
 jath-Jearim,  i  Chron.  ii.  21,  24,  50,  etc.)  On  the 
 confusion  of  Jacob  with  Abraham  by  St.  Stephen, 
 see  Alford's  note  on  Acts  vii.  16. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HAMUEL,  prop.  Chammuel  (^XISH  ;  Sept. 
 
 'AfiovT^X),  a  descendant  of  Simeon  through  Shaul 
 and  Mishma,  and  from  whom  all  the  families  of 
 Simeon  located  in  Palestine  seem  to  have  descended 
 (i  Chron.  iv.  26,  ff.) — f 
 
 HAMUL,  prop.  CHAMUL(7lDn ;  Sept.  'le/xovTjA, 
 
 'la/uLovv),   the  younger  son  of  Pharez,  the  son  of 
 Judah  by  Tamar  (Gen.   xlvi.   12  ;   I   Chron.  ii.  5) 
 Whether  he  was    born  in    Canaan    or   after   the 
 descent  into  Egypt,  is  a  point  not  settled  among 
 chronologists.      From  him  descended  the  clan  of 
 
 the  Hamulites  C'^^DPin,  Num.  xxvi.  21). — t 
 
 HAMUTAL,  prop.  Chamutal  (^DIOH  ;  Sept. 
 
 ^AfurdX,  WuLeirdaX),  the  daughter  of  Jeremiah  of 
 Libnah,  the  wife  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,  and  the 
 
HA-NAGIU 
 
 217 
 
 HANANIAH 
 
 mother  of  Jehoahaz  and  Mattaniah  or  Zedekiah 
 (2  Kings  xxiii.  31  ;  xxiv.  18  ;  Jer.  Hi.  i).  In  the 
 last  of  these  passages  her  name  is  given  as  Chami- 
 
 tal  (?tO"'10n),  and  this  is  probably  the  correct  read- 
 ing, as  it  has  been   followed  throughout   by  the 
 
 LXX.  and  Vulg.  The  Syr.  reads  ^Q_^1cLkj, 
 Hamtul.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HA-NAGID.     [Samuel.] 
 
 HANAMEEL    (i'Npjn  ;    Sept.    'Avafie^^X),  a 
 
 kinsman  of  Jeremiah,  to  whom,  before  the  siege  of 
 Jerusalem,  he  sold  a  field  which  he  possessed  in 
 Anathoth,  a  town  of  the  Levites  (Jer.  xxxii.  6-12). 
 If  this  field  belonged  to  Hanameel  as  a  Levite,  the 
 sale  of  it  would  imply  that  an  ancient  law  had 
 fallen  into  disuse  (Lev.  xxv.  34)  ;  but  it  is  possible 
 that  it  may  have  been  the  property  of  Hanameel  in 
 right  of  his  mother.  The  transaction  was  con- 
 ducted with  all  the  forms  of  legal  transfer,  and  was 
 intended  to  evince  the  certainty  of  restoration  from 
 the  approaching  exile,  by  shewing  that  possessions 
 which  could  be  estabhshed  by  documents  would 
 yet  be  of  future  value  to  the  possessor  (B.C. 
 587).-J.  K. 
 
 HANAN,   prop.    Chanan  (pn  ;  Sept.  ^Avdv, 
 
 Alvdv).  The  name  of  several  persons  mentioned 
 in  Scripture  (l  Chron.  viii.  23,  38  ;  ix.  44  ;  xi.  43  ; 
 Neh.  viii.  7  ;  x.  10,  22,  26  ;  xiii.  13  ;  Jer.  xxxv. 
 4).  The  Benei- Chanan  are  mentioned  as  amongst 
 the  Nethinim,  or  Temple  officers,  who  came  up 
 from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezra  ii.  46  ;  Neh. 
 vii.  49)  ;  and  at  an  earlier  period  mention  is  made 
 of  them  as  having  apartments  in  the  temple  (Jer. 
 xxxv.    4).     The   Chanan   from  whom    they   took 
 
 their  name  was  a  prophet  (D^"^?S^  U^H,  ibid.) 
 
 The  word  pPI  is  probably  an  abbreviation  of 
 n^33n,  Chananiah,  or  pPlV,  yochanafi  (comp. 
 }nj),  and  this  may  account  for  the  reading  of  the 
 LXX.  in  this  passage  vlCjv  'Iwi-Sj'  vlov  ^Kvavlov 
 (Hitzig,  Exeget.  Hdbiich.  in  loc.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HANANEEL,  The  Tower  of,  ^S3:n  ^^jJj  ; 
 
 vvpyo^  'Ava/ierjX),  one  of  the  towers  forming  part 
 of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem ;  first  mentioned  in  Nehe- 
 miah  (in.  i),  where  its  position  with  respect  to  the 
 sheep-gate  in  particular,  situate  on  the  east  side  of 
 the  city,  is  indicated.  The  other  passages  in  which 
 the  name  occurs  (Neh.  xii.  39  ;  Jer.  xxx.  38 ; 
 Zech.  xiv.  10),  with  no  special  reference  worthy 
 of  note,  pretty  clearly  determine  the  situation 
 mentioned  as  correct.  It  was  obviously  near  the 
 sheep-gate,  and  from  the  direction  in  which  the 
 boundary-line  of  the  city  is  now  described,  on 
 the  north  side  of  that  gate,  and  consequently  was 
 near  the  north-east  corner  of  the  city,  and  probably 
 faced  the  east  {Pid.  Bible,  vol.  iii.  399).  The 
 tower,  it  is  not  unlikely,  derived  its  name  from  the 
 builder.— W.  J.  C. 
 
 HANANI,  CHANANiCJjn,^^^^?/^;  Sept. 'Av- 
 
 a.v'C).  I.  A  prophet  under  the  reign  of  Asa,  king  of 
 Judah,  by  whom  he  was  seized  and  imprisoned  for 
 announcing  that  he  had  lost,  from  want  of  due  trust 
 in  God,  an  advantage  which  he  might  have  gained 
 over  the  king  of  Syria  (2  Chron.  xvi.  7).  The 
 precise  occasion  of  this  declaration  is  not  known. 
 
 This  Hanani  is  supposed  to  be  the  same  who  was 
 father  of  another  prophet,  named  Jehu  (i  Kings 
 xvL  7)  ;  but  circumstances  of  time  and  place  seem 
 adverse  to  this  conclusion. 
 
 2.  A  brother  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  i.  2),  who 
 went  from  Jerusalem  to  Shushan,  being  sent  most 
 probably  by  Ezra,  and  brought  that  infoimation 
 respecting  the  miserable  condition  of  the  returned 
 Jews  which  led  to  the  mission  of  Nehemiah. 
 Hanani  came  back  to  Judsea,  probably  along  with 
 his  brother,  and,  together  with  one  Hananiah,  was 
 appointed  to  take  charge  of  the  gates  of  Jerusalem, 
 and  see  that  they  were  opened  in  the  morning  and 
 closed  in  the  evening  at  the  appointed  time.  The 
 circumstances  of  the  time  and  place  rendered  this 
 an  important  and  responsible  duty,  not  unattended 
 with  some  danger  (Neh.  vii.  2,  3).     B.C.  455. 
 
 [Three  other  persons  of  this  name  are  mentioned, 
 I  Chron.  xxv.  4,  25  ;  Ez.  x.  10  ;  Neh.  xii.  36.  ] 
 
 HANANIAH,  Chananiah  (H"' J  J  PI,  or  with  the 
 
 1  parag.  IH^Jjn  ;  LXX.   'kvavla,  'Aviviaz ;  Vulg. 
 
 Hanania,  Hananias,  Ananias  :  both  in  etymology 
 and  signification  identical  with  pHin*,  Jehohanan, 
 
 whence  the  Greek  ''ludvvqs). 
 
 1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Shashak,  of  the  tribe  of 
 Benjamin,  i  Chron.  viii.  24. 
 
 2.  A  Levite,  of  the  branch  of  Kohath,  and  one 
 of  the  fourteen  sons  of  Heman  the  singer,  all  of 
 whom  were  distinguished  for  their  skill  in  instru- 
 mental music,  and  were  chosen  to  preside  severally 
 over  fourteen  of  the  twenty-four  courses  of  musicians 
 appointed  by  the  order  of  David  for  the  service  of 
 the  house  of  God,  I  Chron.  xxv.  4,  6,  23. 
 
 3.  An  officer  of  state  in  the  service  of  Uzziah, 
 
 2  Chron.  xxvi.  11. 
 
 4.  The  grandfather  of  Irijah,  the  captain  of  the 
 guard,  who  falsely  charged  Jeremiah  with  treason, 
 Jer.  xxxvii.  13. 
 
 5.  The  father  of  Zedekiah,  one  of  the  princes  of 
 Judah  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  Jer.  xxxvi.  12. 
 
 6.  A  pretended  prophet,  the  son  of  Azur  of 
 Gibeon,  who,  in  the  fourth  year  of  the  reign  of 
 Zedekiah,  presumed  to  predict  the  return  of  Jeco- 
 niah  from  Babylon,  and  the  restoration  of  the  sacred 
 vessels.  By  the  command  of  God,  Jeremiah 
 solemnly  denounced  the  falsehood  of  Hananiah, 
 and  foretells  his  approaching  death  as  a  punishment 
 for  his  presumption.  Within  the  short  space  of 
 two  months  Hananiah  died,  Jer.  xxviii.  1-17. 
 
 7.  One  of  the  four  Hebrew  princes  who  were 
 educated  in  the  palace  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  His 
 Chaldean  name  was  Shadrach,   Dan.  i.  6,  7,    11, 
 
 19- 
 
 8.  The  son  of  Zerubbabel,  the  great-grandson  of 
 Jehoiakin,  i  Chron.  iii.  19,  21. 
 
 9.  One  of  the  chief  priests  in  the  days  of  Joia- 
 chim,  son  and  successor  of  Jeshua,  high-priest  in 
 the  time  of  Zerubbabel,  Neh.  xii.  12. 
 
 10.  One  of  the  family  of  Bebai,  who,  at  the  in- 
 stigation of  Ezra,  consented  to  put  away  his  strange 
 wife,  Ezra  x.  28. 
 
 1 1 .  One  of  the  builders  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
 under  Nehemiah,  Neh.  iii.  8.  He  is  called  '  the 
 son  of  one  of  the  apothecaries '   (□''np'irTJIl),   by 
 
 which  is  perhaps  meant  that  he  was  a  skilful  com- 
 pounder of  the  spiced  unguents  used  for  the  sacred 
 and  royal  anointings,  Exod.  xxx.  22-38,  I  Chron. 
 ix.  30,  2  Chron.  xvi.  14.  It  may  be  hence  inferred 
 that  he  was  a  priest,  or  at  least  a  Levite. 
 
HAND 
 
 218 
 
 HANDICRAFT 
 
 12.  Another  builder  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem, 
 described  as  the  son  of  Shelemiah,  Neh.  iii.  30. 
 By  some  identified  with  11. 
 
 13.  Governor  of  the  citadel  of  the  temple  (*iC> 
 
 riT'Sn)  undei  Nehemiah,  Neh.  vii.  2. 
 
 14.  One  of  the  chiefs  of  the  people  (DJ?n  ""E'S"!), 
 
 TT  ••  ■, 
 
 Neh.  X.  23,  Heb.  24,  who  joined  in  sealing  the 
 solemn  confession  and  covenant  which  Nehemiah 
 made  on  behalf  of  the  people. — S.  N. 
 
 HAND   (Ti,    xe/p).      The    ordinary    usages    of 
 
 Scripture  in  regard  to  '  hand,  '  right  hand,'  etc., 
 must  be  familiar  to  the  student,  and  the  passages 
 on  which  tlie  representations  above  made  are 
 founded  are  too  easy  of  access,  by  means  of  a 
 Concordance,  to  need  being  enumerated  here ; 
 it  may  therefore  be  more  useful  to  confine  the  rest 
 of  our  remarks  to  one  or  two  specific  and  more  im- 
 portant points. 
 
 The  phrase  '  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  God,' 
 as  applied  to  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  is  derived 
 from  the  fact  that  with  earthly  princes  a  position 
 on  the  right  hand  of  the  throne  was  accounted  the 
 chief  place  of  honour,  dignity,  and  power  : — '  upon 
 thy  right  hand  did  stand  the  queen'  (Ps.  xlv.  9  ; 
 comp.  I  Kings  ii.  19  :  Ps.  Ixxx.  17).  The  nnme- 
 diate  passage  out  of  which  sprang  the  phraseology 
 employed  by  Jesus  maybe  found  in  Ps.  ex.  i  :  'Je- 
 hovah said  unto  my  Lord,  sit  thou  at  my  right 
 hand  until  I  make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool' 
 Accordingly  the  Saviour  declares  before  Caiaphas 
 (Matt.  xxvi.  64  ;  Mark  xiv.  62),  '  Ye  shall  see  the 
 Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  power,  and 
 coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  ; '  where  the  mean- 
 ing obviously  is  that  the  Jews  of  that  day  should 
 have  manifest  proofs  that  Jesus  held  the  most  emi- 
 nent place  in  the  divine  favour,  and  that  his  present 
 humiliation  would  be  succeeded  by  glory,  majesty, 
 and  power  (Luke  x.xiv.  26  ;  i  Tim  iii.  16).  So 
 when  it  is  said  (Mark  xvi.  19  ;  Rom.  viii.  34;  Col. 
 iii.  I  ;  I  Pet.  iii.  22  ;  Heb.  i.  3  ;  viii.  i)  that  Jesus 
 '  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God,'  '  at  the  right  hand 
 of  the  Majesty  on  high,'  we  are  obviously  to  under- 
 stand the  assertion  to  be  that,  as  his  Father,  so  he 
 worketh  always  (John  v.  17)  for  the  advancement 
 of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  the  salvation  of  the 
 world.      [Knapp,  Script.    Far.  Arg.  p.  39.] 
 
 As  the  hand  is  the  great  instrument  of  action, 
 so  is  it  eminently  fitted  for  affording  aid  to  the 
 mind,  by  the  signs  and  indications  which  it  makes. 
 Thus  to  lay  the  hand  on  any  one  was  a  means  of 
 pointing  hun  out,  and  consequently  an  emblem  of 
 setting  any  one  apart  for  a  particular  office  or  dig- 
 nity. Iinposilio7i  of  hands  accordingly  formed,  at 
 an  early  period,  a  part  of  the  ceremonial  observed 
 on  the  appointment  and  consecration  of  persons  to 
 high  and  holy  undertakings.  In  Num.  xxvii.  19 
 Jeliovah  is  represented  as  thus  speaking  to  Moses. 
 '  Take  thee  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun,  a  man  in 
 whom  is  the  spirit,  and  lay  thine  hand  upon  him, 
 and  set  him  before  Eleazar  the  priest,  and  before 
 all  the  congregation,  and  give  him  a  charge  in 
 their  sight,'  etc.  ;  where  it  is  obvious  that  the  lay- 
 ing on  of  hands  did  neither  originate  nor  communi- 
 cate divine  gifts  ;  for  Joshua  had  '  the  spirit '  before 
 he  received  imposition  of  hands  ;  but  was  merely 
 an  instrumental  sign  for  marking  him  out  individu- 
 ally, and  setting  him  apart,  in  sight  of  the  congre- 
 gation, to  his  arduous  work.     Similar  appears  to 
 
 be  the  import  of  the  observance  in  the  primitive 
 church  of  Christ  (Acts  viii.  15-17  ;  I  Tim.  iv.  14; 
 2  Tim.  i.  6).  A  corruption  of  this  doctrine  was, 
 that  the  laying  on  of  hands  gave  of  itself  divine 
 powers,  and  on  this  account  Simon,  the  magician 
 (Acts  viii.  18),  offered  money,  saying  'Give  me 
 also  this  power,  that  on  whomsoever  I  lay  hands 
 he  may  receive  the  Holy  Ghost,'  intending,  pro- 
 bably, to  carry  on  a  gainful  trade  by  communicat- 
 ing the  gift  to  others. 
 
 La  Col.  ii.  13,  14,  '  the  law  of  commandments 
 contained  in  ordinances'  (Eph.  ii.  15),  is  desig- 
 nated '  the  handtvriting  of  ordinances  that  was 
 against  us,'  which  Jesus  blotted  out,  and  took 
 away,  nailing  it  to  his  cross  ;  phraseology  which 
 indicates  the  abolition,  on  the  part  of  the  Saviour, 
 of  the  Mosaic  law  (Wolfius,  CicrcB  Philolog.  iji  N. 
 T.  iii.  16). — -J.  R.  B.  [In  the  O.  T.  hand  is  some- 
 times used  in  the  sense  of  monument,  or  trophy  (i 
 Sam.  XV.  12  ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  18  ;  Is.  Ivi.  5).  It  is 
 supposed  that  this  usage  is  traceable  to  the  cus- 
 tom of  sculpturing  on  sepulchral  columns  an  up- 
 hited  hand]. 
 
 HANDICRAFT.  In  the  early  periods  to 
 which  the  Scriptural  history  refers,  the  entire  circle 
 of  achievement  which  man  had  effected  in  the 
 natural  world,  was  too  immediately  and  too  ob- 
 viously connected  with  the  labour  of  the  hands, 
 which  is,  in  truth,  the  great  primary  source  of 
 wealth,  for  any  feeling  regarding  it  to  prevail  but 
 one  of  high  estimation.  When  hand-labourers 
 were  seen  on  every  side,  and  found  in  every  grade 
 of  life,  and  when  the  products  of  their  skill  and  in- 
 dustry were  the  chief,  if  not  the  sole,  advantages 
 which  civilization  gave,  handicraftsmen,  as  they 
 were  among  the  great  benefactors,  so  were  they 
 among  the  chief  favourites  of  human  kind.  Ac- 
 cordingly, even  the  creation  of  the  world  is  spoken 
 of  as  the  work  of  God's  hands,  and  the  firmament 
 is  said  to  shew  his  handy-work  (Ps.  viii.  3  ;  xix.  I ; 
 Gen.  ii.  2  ;  Job  xxxiv.  19).  The  primitive  history, 
 too,  which  the  Bible  jiresents  is  the  history  of  hand- 
 labourers.  Adam  dressed  the  garden  in  which 
 God  had  placed  him  (Gen.  ii.  15),  Abel  was  a 
 keeper  of  sheep,  Cain  a  tiller  of  the  ground  (Gen. 
 iv.  3),  Tubal-Cainasmith  (Gen.  iv.  22).  These  refe- 
 rences prove  how  soon  men  gave  themselves  to  the 
 labours  of  the  hand,  and  these  and  similar  passages 
 serve  to  shew  what  were  the  earliest  employments, 
 did  not  the  nature  of  the  case  suffice  to  assure  us 
 that  the  most  necessary  arts  would  be  first  culti- 
 vated. The  general  nature  of  this  article  does  not 
 require  any  extensive  or  detailed  inquiry  into  the 
 hand-labours  which  the  Israelites  practised  before 
 their  descent  into  Egypt ;  but  the  high  and  varied 
 culture  which  they  found  there  declares  that  any 
 histoiy  of  hand-labour  must  be  very  defective  the 
 sources  of  which  are  found  exclusively  in  the  Bible. 
 The  shepherd-life  which  the  patriarchs  previously 
 led  in  their  own  pasture-grounds,  was  not  favour- 
 able to  the  cultivation  of  the  practical  arts  of  life, 
 much  less  of  those  arts  by  which  it  is  embellished. 
 Egypt,  in  consequence,  must  have  presented  to 
 Joseph  and  his  father  not  only  a  land  of  wonders, 
 but  a  source  of  rich  and  attractive  knowledge. 
 And  though  the  herdsman-sort  of  life  which  the 
 Hebrews  continued  to  lead  would  not  be  condu- 
 cive to  their  advancement  in  either  science  or  art ; 
 yet  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  they  derived  in  no 
 slight  degree  those  advantages  which  have  always 
 
HANDICRAFT 
 
 219 
 
 HANDICRAFT 
 
 been  reaped  by  a  less  cultured  people,  when 
 brought  into  proximity  or  contact  with  a  high  state 
 of  civiHzation. 
 
 Another  source  of  knowledge  to  the  Hebrews  of 
 handicrafts  were  the  maritime  and  commercial 
 Plioenicians.  Commerce  and  navigation  imply 
 great  sl<ill  in  art  and  science  ;  and  the  pursuits  to 
 which  they  lead  largely  increase  the  skill  whence 
 they  emanate.  It  is  not,  therefore,  surprising  that 
 the  origin  of  so  many  arts  has  been  referred  to  the 
 north-eastern  shore  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea  ;  nor 
 is  there  any  difficulty  in  understanding  how  arts 
 and  letters  should  be  propagated  from  the  coast  to 
 the  interior,  conferring  high  advantages  on  the 
 inhabitants  of  Syria  in  general,  as  well  before  as 
 after  the  settlement  of  the  Hebrew  tribes  in  the 
 land  of  pi-omise.  At  first  the  division  of  labour 
 was  only  very  partial.  The  master  of  the  family 
 himself  exercised  such  arts  as  were  found  of  absolute 
 necessity.  Among  these  may  be  reckoned  not 
 only  those  which  pasturage  and  tillage  required, 
 but  most  of  those  which  were  of  that  rough  and 
 severe  nature  which  demand  strength  as  well  as 
 skill  ;  such,  for  instance,  as  the  preparation  of 
 wood-work  for  the  dwelling,  the  slaying  of  animals 
 for  food,  which  every  householder  understood, 
 together  with  the  art  of  extracting  the  blood  from 
 the  entire  carcass.  The  lighter  labours  of  the 
 hand  fell  to  the  share  of  the  housewife ;  such  as 
 baking  bread  (2  Sam.  xiii.  S) — for  it  was  only  in 
 large  towns  that  baking  was  carried  on  as  a  trade — 
 such,  also,  as  cooking  in  general,  supplying  the 
 house  with  water,  no  very  easy  office,  as  the  foun- 
 tains often  lay  at  a  considemble  distance  from 
 the  dwelling  :  moreover,  weaving,  making  of 
 clothes  for  males  as  well  as  females,  working  in 
 wool,  flax,  hemp,  cotton,  tapestry,  richly-coloured 
 hangings,  and  that  not  only  for  domestic  use,  but 
 for  '  merchandise,'  were  carried  on  within  the  pre- 
 cincts of  the  house  by  the  mistress  and  her  maidens 
 (Exod.  xxxv.  25  ;  i  Sam.  ii.  19  ;  2  Kings  xxiii. 
 7  ;  Prov.  xxxi. ) 
 
 The  skill  of  the  Hebrews  during  their  wander- 
 ings in  the  desert  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
 inconsiderable.  In  Exodus  (xxxv.  30-35)  a  pas- 
 sage occurs  which  may  serve  to  specify  many  arts 
 that  were  practised  among  the  Israelites,  though  it 
 seems  also  to  intimate  that  at  the  time  to  which  it 
 refers  artificers  of  the  description  referred  to  were 
 not  numerous — '  See,  the  Lord  hath  called  by 
 name  Bezaleel,  and  hath  filled  him  with  the  spirit 
 of  God,  in  knowledge  and  all  manner  of  workman- 
 ship, and  to  devise  curious  works,  to  work  in  gold, 
 and  in  silver,  and  in  brass,  and  in  the  cutting  of 
 stones,  to  set  them,  and  in  carving  of  wood,  to 
 make  any  manner  of  cunning  work  ;  and  he  hath 
 put  in  his  heart  that  he  may  teach  ;  both  he  and 
 Aholiab  ;  them  hath  he  filled  with  wisdom  of  heart 
 to  work  all  manner  of  work  of  the  engraver  ;  and 
 of  the  cunning  workman,  and  of  the  embroiderer  in 
 blue  and  in  purple,  in  scarlet  and  in  fine  linen,  and 
 of  the  -cveaver.''  From  the  ensuing  chapter  (ver.'  34) 
 it  appears  that  gilding  was  known  before  the  settle- 
 ment in  Canaan.  The  ark  (Exod.  xxxvii.  2)  was 
 overlaid  with  pure  gold  within  and  without.  The 
 cherubim  were  wrought  ('beaten,'  Exod.  xxxvii. 
 7)  in  gold.  The  candlestick  was  of  beaten  gold 
 (ver.  17,  22).  Wire-drawing  was  probably  under- 
 stood (Exod.  xxxviii.  4  ;  xxxix.  3).  Covering  with 
 brass  (Exod.  xxxviii.  2)  and  with  silver  (Prov. 
 xxvi.   23)  was  practised  ;  but  the  pursuits  of  war 
 
 and  the  entire  absorption  of  the  energies  of  the 
 nation  in  the  one  great  work  of  gaining  the  land 
 which  had  been  given  to  them,  may  have  led  to 
 their  falling  off  in  the  arts  of  peace  ;  and  from  a 
 passage  in  i  Sam.  (xiii.  20)  it  would  ajipear  that 
 not  long  after  they  had  taken  possession  of  the 
 country  they  were  in  a  low  condition  as  to  the 
 instruments  of  handicraft.  A  comparatively  set- 
 tled state  of  society,  however,  soon  led  to  the 
 revival  of  skill  by  the  encouragement  of  industry. 
 A  more  minute  division  of  labour  ensued.  Trades, 
 strictly  so  called,  arose,  carried  on  by  persons  ex- 
 clusively devoted  to  one  pursuit.  Thus  in  Judg. 
 xvii.  4  and  Jer.  x.  14,  '  the  founder'  is  mentioned, 
 a  trade  which  implies  a  practical  knowledge  of 
 metallurgy  ;  the  smelting  and  working  of  metals 
 were  well  known  to  the  Hebrews  (Job  xxxNdi.  18)  ; 
 brass  was  in  use  before  iron  ;  arms  and  instruments 
 of  husbandry  were  made  of  iron.  Architecture 
 and  the  kindred  arts  do  not  appear  to  have  made 
 much  progress  till  the  days  of  Solomon,  who  em- 
 ployed an  immense  number  of  persons  to  procure 
 timber  (i  Kings  v.  13,  sq.)  ;  but  the  men  of  skill 
 for  building  his  temple  he  obtained  from  Hiram, 
 king  of  Tyre  (i  Kings  v.  6,  sq. ;  I  Chron.  xiv.  i  ;  2 
 Chron.  ii.  7).  Without  pursuing  the  subject  into  all 
 its  details  (see  Scholz,  Haudh.  der  Bib.  Archdol. 
 p.  390,  sq.  ;  De  Wette,  Lebhr.  der  Archdol.  p. 
 115,  sq.  ;  Winer,  Reakvbit.  art.  '  Handwerke'), 
 we  remark  that  the  intercourse  which  the  Baby- 
 lonish captivity  gave  the  Jews  seems  to  have 
 greatly  improved  their  knowledge  and  skill  in  both 
 the  practical  and  the  fine  arts,  and  to  have  led 
 them  to  hold  them  in  very  high  estimation.  The 
 arts  were  even  carried  on  by  persons  of  learning, 
 who  took  a  title  of  honour  from  their  trade  (Rosen- 
 miUler,  Morgenl.  vi.  42).  It  was  held  a  sign  of  a 
 bad  education  if  a  father  did  not  teach  his  son  some 
 handicraft — '  quicunque  filium  suum  non  docet 
 aliquid  opificium  est  ac  si  doceret  eum  latrocinium' 
 (Lightfool,  p.  616;  Mish.  Tr.  Pirke  A  both,  ii.  2  ; 
 Wagenseil's  Sota,  p.  597  ;  Othon.  Lex.  Rabb. 
 491)- 
 
 In  the  Apocrypha  and  N.  T.  there  are  men- 
 tioned tanners  (Acts  ix.  43),  tent-makers  (Acts 
 xviii.  3)  ;  in  Joseph.  {De  Bell.  Jud.  v.  4.  i)  cheese- 
 makers,  rvpoTTOLoi  ;  barbers  (Kovpds,  Antiq.  xvi.  II. 
 6);  in  the  Talmud,  with  others  we  find  tailors,  shoe- 
 makers, blood-letters,  glaziers,  goldsmiths,  plas- 
 terers. Certain  handicraftsmen  could  never  rise  to 
 the  rank  of  high-priest  (Mish.  Tr.  Kiddush,  82.  i), 
 such  as  weavers,  barbers,  fullers,  perfumers,  cup- 
 pers, tanners  ;  which  pursuits,  especially  the  last, 
 were  held  in  disesteem  (Mishna,  Tr.  Megillah,  iii. 
 2  ;  Othon.  Lex.  Rabb.  155  ;  Wetstein,  N.  T.  ii. 
 516).  In  large  cities  particular  localities  were  set 
 apart  for  particular  trades,  as  is  the  case  in  the 
 East  to  the  present  day.  Thus  in  Jeremiah  (xxxvii. 
 21)  we  read  of  'the  bakers'  street.'  So  in  the 
 Talmud  [Mishna,  v.  169,  225)  mention  is  made  of 
 a  flesh-market ;  in  Josephus  [De  Bell.  Jiid.  v.  4.  i) 
 of  a  cheese-market  ;  and  in  the  N.  T.,  probably 
 (John  V.  2)  we  read  of  a  sheep-market.  See  Iken, 
 Antiq.  Hebr.  iii.-ix.  p.  578,  sq.  ;  Bellermann, 
 Handb.  i.  22,  sq. — J.  R.  B. 
 
 A  ddendmn.— To  the  above  general  statements  it 
 
 may  be  well  to  add  a  few  more  minute  particulars 
 
 respecting  the  different  trades  practised  among  the 
 
 Jews. 
 
 i       I.    Masons,  D'TIJ,  literally  wallers,  from  "1^3  a 
 
HANDICRAFT 
 
 220 
 
 HANDICRAFT 
 
 wall  {2  Kings  xii.  i8  [12,  A.V.];  Tjp  }3K  ^^n, 
 workeis  of  wall-stone  (2  Sam.  v.  II  ;  i  Chron. 
 xxii.  15) ;  h'^yiT\,  stone-cullers  or  hewers  (l  Chron. 
 xxii.  2,  15  [workers  of  stone,  A.V.];  Ezra  iii.  7, 
 etc.)  The  CJi  (2  Kings  xii.  12),  were  probably 
 waj/^r-masons  ('builders,'  A.V.  ver.  11).  In  the 
 time  of  Solomon  the  most  skilled  of  these  handi- 
 craftsmen came  from  the  territories  of  Hiram,  king 
 
 of  Tyre ;  hence  the  D''^a3  of  i  Kings  v.  18,  errone- 
 ously rendered  by  'stone-squarers'  in  the  A.  V. 
 [Gebal.]  For  the  squaring  of  the  stones  a  saw 
 (mjO)  was  used  (i  Kings  vii.  9).  [Saw.]  As 
 they  also  prepared  the  stones  by  hewifig  (l  Chron. 
 xxii.  2)  they  must  have  used  the  chisel  and  the 
 mallet  ^'y\>'0,  l  Kings  vi.  7),  though  no  mention  of 
 the  former  occurs  in  Scripture  (see  the  representation 
 of  the  Egyptian  mallet  and  chisel  in  Wilkinson, 
 Anc.  Egypt,  ii.  313,  314).  They  used  also  the 
 plumb-line  (TjJX,  Am.  vii.    7),  the  measuring-reed 
 
 (njp,  Ezek.  xl.  5),  the  measuring-line  ("Ip,  Job 
 xxxviii.  5  ;  Zech.  i.  16),  and  the  axe  (jTIJ,  i  Kings 
 vi.  7). 
 
 2.  Carpenters  ^^T\  ''tpn,  2  Sam.  v.  1 1 ;  2  Kings 
 
 xii.  12,  etc.,  or  simply  J^ID,  Is.  li.  7);  riKTWv, 
 Mark  vi.  3  ;  Matt.  xiii.  55).  The  work  of  the 
 carpenter  belongs  to  the  earliest  efforts  of  men 
 to  provide  themselves  with  the  ordinary  con- 
 veniences and  comforts  of  life.  Though,  there- 
 fore, the  workmen  employed  by  David  and 
 Solomon  in  their  great  buildings  were  chiefly 
 Phoenicians,  we  must  believe  that  the  carpen- 
 ter's art,  at  least  in  its  ordinary  applications, 
 was  familiar  to  the  Hebrews.  It  would  even  ap- 
 pear that  there  were  persons  among  them  at 
 both  an  early  and  a  later  period  who  could  exe- 
 cute the  finer  parts  of  wood  carving  (Exod. 
 XXXV.  33  ;  Is.  xU.  7  ;  xhv.  13).  The  implements 
 used  by  the  carpenter  were  the  axe  (Dllp  [Axe], 
 Ps.  Ixxiv.  5  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  22  ;  or  JpJ,  Deut.  xix.  5 ; 
 Is.  x.  15)  ;  the  measuring-line  (1p,  Is.  xliv.  13) ;  the 
 chisel  or  carving  tool  (ny^VpD,  Is.  xliv.  13) ;  the 
 compass  (ni^n?3),  the  stylus  or  graver  (1"lCi',  Ibid.) 
 They  used  also  the  1p,  the  same  as  the  masons. 
 
 3 .  Workers  in  Metal.  — These  were  copper-smiths 
 (riki'TIQ  ''IJ'in,  I  Kings  vii.  14  ;  xaX/cei^s,  2  Tim.  iv. 
 14);  iron-smtths  Q'H'l  "'5J'"in,  Is.  xhv.  12,  or  simply 
 {J'ln,  I  Sam.  xiii.  19)  ;  and  silver-smiths  or  gold- 
 stniths  (D''Q'i^,  D''Q"l!i'p,  Judg.  xvii.  4 ;  Prov.  xxv. 
 4  ;  Is.  xl.  19  ;  Mai.  iii.  2,  3  ;  dpyvpoKdwos,  Acts 
 xix.  24),  the  last  of  whom  seem  to  have  fonned  a 
 guild  (Neh.  iii.  8).  Weapons  and  cooking  uten- 
 sils were  made  of  copper,  which  was  simply  beat 
 out  (Num.  xvii.  4)  or  cast  into  a  mould  (i  Kings 
 vii.  46  ;  Job.  xxxvii.  18)  and  polished  (i  Kings  vii. 
 45).  Workers  in  the  precious  metals  also  used  the 
 same  methods  of  preparing  their  articles  ;  they 
 seem  also  to  have  understood  the  art  of  gilding  and 
 of  fillagree  work  (Is.  xl.  19;  xii.  7;  xliv.  12: 
 comp.    Hartmann,   Die  Hebrderin,  etc.,  i.   261). 
 
 The  implements  they  used  were  of  the  simplest 
 kind — the   anvil    (DVB,    Is.    xii.   7),    the   hammer 
 
 (I^D^n,  tJ'''L!a  [Hammer]);  the  tongs  (D'jnp^p, 
 
 Is.  vi.  6)  ;  the  bellows  (n^O,  Jer,  vi.  29). 
 
 4.  Workers  in  earth  and  clay.  [See  Bricks  ; 
 Potter;  Glass;  Bottle.] 
 
 5.  The  preparation  of  skins  and  works  in  leather 
 of  various  sorts  must  have  engaged  the  attention  ol 
 the  Hebrews  ;  but  we  possess  no  precise  informa- 
 tion on  this  subject.  [Leather  ;  Bottle  ;  San- 
 dals. ] 
 
 6.  The  art  of  setting  and  engraving  precious 
 stones  was  known  to  the  Israehtes  from  a  very 
 early  period  (Exod.  xxviii.  9,  if.]  [Stones,  Pre- 
 cious.] Works  in  alabaster  were  also  common 
 among  them  (K'SJil  Tl^,  smelling  boxes,  or  boxes 
 
 of  perfume ;  comp.  Matt.  xxvi.  7,  etc.  [Ala- 
 baster.]) They  also  adorned  their  houses  and 
 vessels  with  ivory  (i  Kings  xxii.  39  ;  Amos.  iii.  15  ; 
 vi.  4  ;  Song  of  Sol.  v.  14.     [Ivory.]) 
 
 7.  Textile  arts.  Among  the  Egyptians  these 
 flourished,  and  from  them  probably  the  Hebrews 
 acquired  the  knowledge  and  skill  which  they  from 
 an  early  period  displayed  in  these  arts  (Gen.  xii. 
 42  ;  Exod.  ix.  31 ;  Is.  xix.  9).  Weaving  was  usu- 
 ally the  work  of  women  (Exod.  xxxv.  25  ;  i  Sam. 
 ii.  19  ;  2  Kings  xxiii.  7  ;  Prov.  xxxi.  10,  ff. ;  Acts 
 ix.  39  :  comp.  //.  iii.  125,  ff.  ;  vi.  775,  ff. ;  xxii. 
 439,  ff.  ;  Odyss.  iv.  130,  ff.,  etc.)  That  it  was  not 
 confined  to  females,  however,  is  evident  from  i 
 Chron.  iv.  21  ;  comp.  Is.  xix.  9.  [Weaving.] 
 Besides  the  ordinary  stuffs  pi-epared  by  weaving, 
 they  had  stuffs  prepared  by  interweaving  gold  and 
 silver  threads  with  the  body  of  the  material  and  by 
 needlework.  [Needlework.]  After  being  woven, 
 the  cloth  passed  through  the  hands  of  the  fuller 
 and  the  dyer.     [Fuller  ;  Colours.] 
 
 8.  The  use  of  perfumes  and  perfumed  unguents 
 led  to  persons  devoting  themselves  to  the  prepara- 
 tion of  such  among  the  Hebrews.  Such  an  one 
 was  called  Dpi  ;  fern.  nPIp"!  (Exod.  xxx.  25,  35  ; 
 
 Neh.  iii.  8,  'apothecary,'  A.  V.  ;  I  Sam.  viii.  13, 
 '  confectionaiy,'  A.  V.,  etc.)  [Anointing  ;  Per- 
 fumes.] From  Nehemiah's  calling  Hananiah  'the 
 son  of  the  perfumers'  (DTlplITp),  it  is  supposed 
 they  formed  a  guild  or  corporation,  the  members 
 of  which  builded  a  portion  of  the  wall  under  his 
 superintendence,  as  did  the  goldsmiths  under  that 
 of  Uzziel. 
 
 9.  Among  more  domestic  arts  may  be  ranked 
 that  of  the  baker,  ilDN  (Gen.  xl.  I ;  Jer.  x.xxvii. 
 21 ;  Hos.  vii.  4  [Bread])  ;  and  of  the  barber, 
 n^3  (Ez.  V.  I). 
 
 ID.  In  the  art  of  shipbuilding  the  Hebrews  were 
 the  pupils  of  the  Phoenicians  (l  Kings  ix.  27  ; 
 comp.  xxii.  49),  though  it  is  hardly  supposable 
 that  they  had  not  some  vessels  for  navigating  the 
 internal  lakes  and  seas  of  their  country  long  before 
 the  time  of  Solomon  (Judg.  v.  17).     The  shipmen 
 
 were  PDH,  a  sailor  (Jonah  i.  6 ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  8, 
 
 27-29;  Nai^TTjs,  Acts  xxvii.  30;  Rev.  xviiL    17); 
 
 73'nn  D~),  shipmaster  (Jonah  i.  6  ;  Nai^xXT/pos,  Acts 
 
 xxvii.    11);    n?D,   mariner   (Ezek.  xxvii.   9,  etc.  ; 
 
 Jonah  i.  5). 
 
 Labour  was  held  in  honour  among  the  Hebrews, 
 
HANDKERCHIEF 
 
 221 
 
 HANES 
 
 and  therefore  handicrafts  were  exdusively  pursued 
 by  freemen.  Often  the  same  person  followed  more 
 than  one  occupation  (Exod.  xxxi.  i,  ff.  ;  2  Chron. 
 ii.  14,  etc).  An  artist  of  a  higher  order,  whose 
 efforts  were  devoted  to  inventing  designsfor  others, 
 in  whatever  department,  was  called  3^n,  part,  of 
 
 DK'n,  to  think,  invent  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  15;  Exod. 
 xxvi.  I  ;  XXXV.  30,  fif.) — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HANDKERCHIEF,  NAPKIN  (aovUptov ; 
 Vulg.  sndariuiii),  occurs  in  Luke  xix.  20  ;  John 
 xi.  44  ;  XX.  7  ;  Acts  xix.  12.  The  Greek  word 
 is  adopted  from  the  Latin  (like  k^^ctos,  [xeix^pdva, 
 and  many  others),  and  probably,  at  first,  had  the 
 same  meaning  with  it,  and  which,  being  derived 
 from  siido,  to  perspire,  corresponds  to  our  word 
 (pocket)  handkerchief.  The  Greek  rhetorician 
 Pollux  (a.D.  180)  remarks  that  the  word  ffovSapiov 
 had  supplanted  not  only  the  ancient  Greek  word 
 for  handkerchief,  rjiuTv^uov  or  rifj.iTVfij3iov,  which 
 he  considers  an  Egyptian  word,  but  even  the  more 
 recent  term  Ka\j/i.8pibTL0v  :  T6  5^  tuxltvix^lov  ^cttl  fiev 
 Kai  TOUTO  AlyvTTTLOV,  ei'77  5'  &v  Kara  to  ev  tj  fJ-icrri 
 KWfj,ij)dig.,  Ka\pi5pdi3Tiov  Kokovixevov,  5  vvv  aovddpiov 
 dvofid^eraL  [Onontast.  vii.  16).  The  influence  of 
 the  Romans  caused  the  introduction  of  this  word 
 even  among  the  Orientals.  The  rabbins  have  NIHID. 
 In  the  Syriac  version  NIT'D  answers  to  the  Hebrew 
 nnSDD,  a  veil  (margin,  sheet  or  apron')  ;  and  in 
 Chaldee  "niD  or  SniD  is  used  for  a  veil  or  any 
 linen  cloth  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Chat.  p.  1442).  It 
 is  indeed  but  natural  to  expect  that  a  foreign  word, 
 introduced  into  any  language,  should  be  applied 
 by  those  who  borrow  it  in  a  looser  sense  than  they 
 do  from  whom  it  is  obtained.  Hence,  although 
 the  Latin  word  si'.da7-ium  is  generally  restricted  to 
 the  forementioned  meaning,  yet  in  the  Greek  and 
 Syriac  languages  it  signifies,  chiefly,  napkin, 
 wrapper,  etc.  These  observations  prepare  us  for 
 the  different  uses  of  the  word  in  Scripture.  In  the 
 first  instance  (Luke  xix.  20)  it  means  a  wrapper, 
 in  which  the  '  wicked  servant '  had  laid  up  the 
 pound  entrusted  to  him  by  his  master.  For  refer- 
 ences to  the  custom  of  laying  up  money,  etc.,  in 
 covdapia,  both  in  classical  and  rabbinical  writers, 
 see  Wetstein's  A^.  T.  on  Luke  xix.  20.  In  the 
 second  instance  (John  xi.  44)  it  appears  as  a  ker- 
 chief, or  cloth  attached  to  the  head  of  a  corpse. 
 It  was  perhaps  brought  round  the  forehead  and 
 under  the  chin.  In  many  Egyptian  mummies  it 
 does  not  cover  the  face.  In  ancient  times  among 
 the  Greeks  it  did.  Nicolaus  [De  Gmcor.  Lnctii, 
 c.  iii.  sec.  6,  Thiel.  1697).  Maimonides,  in  his 
 comparatively  recent  times,  describes  the  whole  face 
 as  being  covered,  and  gives  a  reason  for  the  custom 
 (Tract  Efel,  c.  4).  The  next  instance  is  that  of 
 the  crovSdpiov  which  had  been  '  about  the  head'  of 
 our  Lord,  but  which,  after  his  resurrection,  was 
 found  rolled  up,  as  if  deliberately,  and  put  in  a 
 place  separately  from  the  linen  clothes,  X'^P'S  ("ts- 
 rvkiyp-ivov  et's  eva  tottov.  The  last  instance  of  the 
 Biblical  use  of  the  word  occurs  in  the  account  of 
 'the  special  miracles'  wrought  by  the  hands  ol 
 Paul  (Acts  xix.  11);  'so  that  a-ovddpia  (hand- 
 kerchiefs, napkins,  wrappers,  shawls,  etc.)  were 
 brought  from  his  body  to  the  sick  ;  and  the  dis- 
 eases departed  from  them,  and  the  evil  spirits 
 went  out  of  them.'  The  Ephesians  had  not  un- 
 naturally inferred  that  the  apostle's  miraculous 
 power  could  be  communicated  by  such  a  mode 
 
 of  contact  ;  and  certainly  cures  thus  received  by 
 parties  at  a  distance,  among  a  people  famed  for 
 their  addictedness  to  'curious  arts,'  i.e.,  magical 
 skill,  etc.,  would  serve  to  convince  them  of  the 
 truth  of  the  gospel,  by  a  mode  well  suited  to 
 interest  their  minds.  The  Apostle  is  not  recorded 
 to  have  expressed  any  opi7tion  respecting  the 
 reality  of  this  intermediate  means  of  those  miracles. 
 He  had  doubtless  sufficiently  explained  that  these 
 and  all  the  other  miracles  '  wrought  by  his  hands,' 
 /'.  e.,  by  his  means,  were  really  wrought  by  God 
 (ver.  11)  in  attestation  of  the  mission  of  Jesus. 
 If  he  himself  did  7iot  entertain  exactly  the  same 
 ideas  upon  the  subject  as  they  did,  he  may  be  con- 
 sidered as  conceding  to,  or  rather  not  disturbing 
 unnecessarily,  popular  notions,  rendered  harmless 
 by  his  previous  explanation,  and  affording  a  veiy 
 convenient  medium  for  achieving  much  higher  pur- 
 poses. If  the  connection  between  the  secondary 
 cause  and  the  effect  was  real,  it  reminds  us  of  our 
 Saviour's  expression,  '  I  perceive  that  virtue  is 
 gone  out  of  me'  (Lukeviii.  46);  which  is,  however, 
 regarded  by  many  critics  as  a  popular  mode  of  say- 
 ing that  he  knew  that  a  miracle  had  been  wrought 
 by  his  power  and  efficacy — a  mode  of  speaking  in 
 tinison  at  least  with  the  belief  of  the  woman  that 
 she  should  be  healed  if  she  could  but  touch  the  hem 
 of  his  garment  unperceived  by  him,  and  perhaps 
 even  conceded  to,  in  accordance  with  the  miracles 
 wrought  through  the  medium  of  contact  related  in 
 the  O.  T.  (i  Kings  xvii.  21  ;  2  Kings  iv.  29,  etc.), 
 and  in  order,  by  a  superior  display,  in  regard  both 
 to  speed  and  extensiveness,  to  demonstrate  his 
 supremacy  by  a  mode  through  which  the  Jews  were 
 best  prepared  to  perceive  it  (Luke  vi.  19  ;  Schwarz, 
 ad  Olear.  de  Stylo  N.  7!  p.  129  ;  Soler.  de  Pileo, 
 p.  17  ;  Pierson,  ad  Mcer.  p.  348 ;  Lydii  Flor. 
 Spars,  ad  Pass.  ^  C.  p.  5  ;  Drusius,  Qiicsstt.  Heb. 
 c.  2  ;  Rosenmiiller  and  Kuinoel  on  the  passages). 
 —J.  F.  D. 
 
 HANES    (DJH).      The   meaning   of   the    only 
 
 passage  in  which  this  word  occurs  (Is.  xxx.  4),  is 
 obscure,  and  the  true  reading  of  the  original  text 
 has  been  questioned.  The  A.  V.  renders  the 
 whole  verse  thus  :  '  For  the  princes  were  at  Zoan, 
 and  his  ambassadors  came  to  Hanes.''  The  Sep- 
 tuagint  renders  the  latter  clause  koI  AyyeXoi  avroC 
 TTovTjpol,  'And  his  ambassadors  worthless.'  The 
 copy  from  which  this  translation  was  made  may 
 have  read  IW''  UZU,  instead  of  "lyT  D3n  ;  and  it 
 is  worthy  of  note  that  the  reading  Qjn  is  still 
 found  in  a  number  of  ancient  MSS.  (De  Rossi, 
 Variis  Lectiones  Vet.  Test.  iii.  29),  and  is  approved 
 by  Lowth  and  J.  D.  Michaelis.  The  old  Latin 
 version  follows  the  Sept.,  '  nuncii  pessimi ; '  but 
 Jerome  translates  from  a  text  similar  to  our  own, 
 rendering  the  clause  as  follows  : — '  et  nuncii  tui 
 usque  ad  Hanes  pervenerunt '  (Sabbatier,  Bibli- 
 ortun  Sacroriim  Lat.  Verss.,  ad  loc. )  Jerome 
 adds,  in  his  commentary  on  the  verse,  '  intelligimus 
 ultimam  juxta  Ethiopas  et  Blemmyas  esse  Aegypti 
 civitatem.'  Vitringa  would  identify  Hanes  with 
 the  "A^/i/crts  of  Herodotus,  which  he,  with  Geseni- 
 us  and  others,  supposes  to  be  the  same  as  Hera- 
 cleopolis  ('  City  of  Hercules'),  the  ruins  of  which 
 are  now  called  Andsieh.  The  Coptic  name  was 
 Hjies  or  Ehnes  (^SXeC  or  e^rtHC) ;    and  it 
 
 was  one  of  the  ancient  royal  cities  of  Egypt. 
 Anasieh  stands  on  a  high  mound  some  distanc- 
 
HANGING 
 
 222 
 
 HA PUT AR A 
 
 west  of  the  Nile,  near  the  parallel  of  Benisuef. 
 The  great  objection  to  this  theory  is  the  distance 
 of  Anasieh  from  Zoan,  which  stood  in  the  eastern 
 part  of  the  Delta,  near  the  sea. 
 
 The  Targum  reads  Tahpanhes  instead  of  Hanes: 
 and  Grotius  considers  the  latter  to  be  a  contraction 
 of  the  former  {Commetitar.  ad  loc.)  With  this 
 may  be  connected  the  remark  of  De  Rossi — '  Co- 
 dex meus  380  notat  ad  Marg.  esse  DilJSnn,  Jer. 
 ii.  16'  [Var.  LecL,  1.  c.)  On  the  whole,  this 
 seems  to  be  the  most  probable  theoiy,  as  Tah- 
 panhes was  situated  in  the  eastern  part  of  the 
 Delta  ;  and  was  one  of  the  royal  cities  about  the 
 time  of  Isaiah  [Tahpanhes].— J.  L.  P. 
 
 HANGING.     [Punishments]. 
 
 HANGING  (TJDn  ;  Sept.  'KTrlcnraaTpov),  a 
 term  applied  to  a  series  of  curtains  suspended  be- 
 fore the  successive  openings  of  entrance  into  the 
 Tabernacle  and  its  parts.  Of  these,  the  first  hung 
 before  the  entrance  to  the  court  of  the  Tabernacle 
 (Exod.  xxvii.  16 ;  xxxviii.  18  ;  Num.  iv.  26)  ; 
 the  second  before  the  door  of  the  Tabernacle 
 (Exod.  xxvi.  36,  37  ;  xxxix.  38)  ;  and  the  third  be- 
 fore the  entrance  to  the  Most  Holy  Place,  callecl 
 more  fully  Tlp^H  DDnS  ('vail  of  the  covering,' 
 A.  v.,  Exod.  XXXV.  12;  xxxix.  34;  xl.  21) 
 [Tabernacle].— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HANGINGS.  I.  (D''J?i'_p  ;  Sept.  laTla),  coverings 
 of  byssus  for  the  walls'  'of  the  fore-court  of  the 
 Tabernacle  (Exod.  xxvii.  9;  Num.  iii.  26,  etc.) 
 These  hangings  were  to  be  five  cubits  m  height 
 (Ex.  xxxviii  i"8),  and  consequently  half  the  height 
 of  the  Tabernacle  court  (xxvi.  16).  They  were 
 fastened  to  pillars  which  ran  along  the  sides  of  the 
 court,  and  were  also  of  five  cubits  in  height  (xxvii. 
 18)  [Tabernacle].  ^ 
 
 2.    (DTia,    2   Kings  xxiii.    7,   margin    'houses, 
 
 which  is  the  literal  rendering).  What  these  '  houses' 
 were  is  doubtful.  Ewald  conjectures  that  the  read- 
 ing should  be  D^*133,  clothes,  and  supposes  the  refe- 
 rence to  be  to  dresses  for  the  images  of  Astarte  ; 
 but  this  is  both  gratuitous  and  superfluous.  The 
 '  Bottim'  which  these  women  wove  were  probably 
 portable  sanctuaries  consecrated  to  idols  (Gesenius) 
 
 or  tents  for  the  goddess  Ashera  (n^K'S?),  i-^-, 
 Astarte  or  Mylitta  (Fiirst). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HANLEIN,  Heinrich  Karl  Alexander,  a 
 German  theologian,  was  bom  at  Ansbach  in  1762. 
 He  was  professor  of  theology  at  Erlangen,  and 
 afterwards  consistorialrath  in  Ansbach.  In  1805 
 he  was  appointed  at  Oberkirchenrath  in  Munich, 
 and  subsequently  became  Oberconsistorial-direk- 
 tor.  He  died  m  1829.  Hanlein  is  best  known 
 by  an  Jntrodudioft  to  the  New  Testament,  in  2 
 vols.  8vo,  1 794- 1 800.  A  second  edition  of  the 
 second  part  appeared  in  1802.  Here  the  results 
 which  had  been  already  reached  were  given  in  a 
 brief,  lucid,  and  compact  form.  Hanlein  added 
 little'of  his  own  ;  but  his  judgment  was  good,  and 
 he  did  not  follow  either  Michaelis  or  Eichhorn 
 slavishly.  His  own  mind  appears  throughout  the 
 work,  which  never  obtained  much  repute  in  Ger- 
 many.— S.  D. 
 
 HANNAH,  properly  Channah  (njn,  gra- 
 ciousness;  Sept.  "kvva),   wife  of  a  Levite  named 
 
 Elkanah,  and  moiher  of  Samuel.  The  family 
 lived  at  Ramathaiiri-ifophim,  and,  as  the  law  re- 
 quired, there  was  a  yearly  journey  to  offer  sacri- 
 fices at  the  sole  altar  of  Jehovah,  which  was  then 
 at  Shiloh.  Women  were  not  bound  to  attend  ; 
 but  pious  females  often  did  so,  especially  when  the 
 husband  was  a  Levite.  On  one  of  these  visits  ti> 
 Shiloh,  while  Hannah  prayed  before  returning 
 home,  she  vowed  to  devote  to  the  Almighty  the 
 son  which  she  so  earnestly  desired  (Num.  xxx.  1, 
 scq. )  Before  the  end  of  that  year  Hannah  became 
 the  rejoicing  mother  of  a  son,  to  whom  the  name 
 of  Samuel  was  given,  and  who  was  from  his  birth 
 placed  under  the  obligations  of  that  condition  of 
 Nazariteship  to  which  his  mother  had  vowed  him. 
 B.C.  I171. 
 
 Hannah  went  no  more  to  Shiloh  till  her  child 
 was  old  enough  to  dispense  with  her  maternal  ser- 
 vices, when  she  took  him  up  with  her  to  leave  him 
 there,  as,  it  appears,  was  the  custom  when  one 
 already  a  Levite  was  placed  under  the  additional 
 obligations  of  Nazariteship.  When  he  was  pre- 
 sented in  due  form  to  the  high-priest,  the  mothei 
 took  occasion  to  remind  him  of  the  former  transac- 
 tion :  '  For  this  child,'  she  said,  '  I  prayed,  and 
 the  Lord  hath  given  me  my  petition  which  I  asked 
 of  him'  (i  Sam.  i.  27).  Hannah's  gladness  after- 
 wards found  vent  in  an  exulting  chant,  which  fur- 
 nishes a  remarkable  specimen  of  the  early  lyric 
 poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  and  of  which  many  of  the 
 ideas  and  images  were  in  after  times  repeated  by 
 the  Virgin  Mary  on  a  somewhat  similar  occasion 
 (Luke  i.  46,  seq.) 
 
 After  this  Hannah  failed  not  to  visit  Shiloh  every 
 year,  bringing  a  new  dress  for  her  son,  who  re- 
 mained under  the  eye  and  near  the  person  of  the 
 high-priest  [Samuel]. — ^J.  K. 
 
 HANUN,  Chanun  (J!|3n,  bestowe?- ;  Sept.  'Av- 
 
 vu)v),  son  and  successor  of  Nahash,  king  of  the  Am- 
 monites. David,  who  had  in  his  troubles  been 
 befriended  by  Nahash,  sent,  with  the  kindest  inten- 
 tions, an  embassy  to  condole  with  him  on  the  death 
 of  his  father,  and  to  congratulate  him  on  his  own  ac- 
 cession. The  rash  young  king,  however,  was  led  to 
 misapprehend  the  motives  of  this  embassy,  and  to 
 treat  with  gross  and  inexpiable  indignity  the  honour- 
 able personages  whom  David  had  charged  with 
 this  mission.  David  vowed  vengeance  upon  Hanun 
 for  the  insult  ;  and  Hanun  himself,  looking  for 
 nothing  less  than  war  as  the  consequence  of  his 
 conduct,  subsidized  Hadarezer  and  other  Syrian 
 princes  to  assist  him  with  their  armies.  The  power 
 of  the  Syrians  was  broken  in  two  campaigns,  and 
 the  Ammonites  were  left  to  their  fate,  wh.cn  was 
 severe  even  beyond  the  usual  severities  of  war  in 
 that  remote  age  [Ammonites  ;  David]  (2  Sam.  x. ; 
 I  Chron.  xix. ) — J.  K.  [The  name  occurs  twice 
 besides,  Neh.  iii.  13,  30]. 
 
 HAPHRAIM,  properly  Chapharaim,  (□"'"iDPi ; 
 
 Sept.  ^A'ylv;  Alex.  ^A(pepa€ifx).  A  town  in  Issachar 
 (Josh.  xix.  19).  Eusebius  knew  it  as  'A(ppaua, 
 and  Jerome  as  Affarea,  and  place  it  six  miles  north 
 from  Legio  [Onom.,  s.v.  Al(ppatp.). 
 
 HAPHTARA,  pi.  Haphtaroth  (mtSSn, 
 nilLDCri).  This  expression,  which  is  found  in  foot 
 notes  and  at  the  end  of  many  editions  of  the 
 Hebrew  Bible,  denotes  the  different  lessons  from 
 the  prophets  read  in  the  synagogue  every  Sabbath 
 
HAPHTARA 
 
 223 
 
 HAPHTARA 
 
 and  festival  of  the  year.  As  these  lessons  have 
 been  read  from  time  immemorial  in  conjunction 
 with  sections  from  the  law,  and  as  it  is  to  both 
 ''the  7-cadhig'  of  Ike  laiu  and  the  prophets,^  that  refe- 
 rence is  made  in  the  N.  T.  (Acts  xiii.  15,  ciL),  we 
 propose  to  discuss  both  together  in  the  present 
 article. 
 
 I.  Classificatio)!  of  the  lessons,  their  titles,  signi- 
 fication, etc. — There  are  two  classes  of  lessons  indi- 
 cated in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  the  one  consists  of 
 fifty-fonr  sections  into  which  the  entire  law  or 
 Pentateuch  (min)  is  divided,  and  is  called  Pai-- 
 shioth  (DVC^IS,  plur.  of  nC^-Q,  from  ^^'ID,  to  sepa- 
 rate), and  the  other  consists  of  a  corresponding 
 number  of  sections  selected  from  different  parts  of 
 the  prophets,  to  be  read  in  conjunction  with  the 
 former,  and  are  denominated  Haphtaroth  or  Haf- 
 toroth  (nnUDn,  pUm  of  mDDri).  As  the  signifi- 
 cation of  this  term  is  much  disputed,  and  is  inti- 
 mately connected  with  the  view  about  the  origin  of 
 these  prophetic  lessons,  we  must  defer  the  discus- 
 sion of  it  to  section  4.  The  division  of  the  Penta- 
 teuch mio  fifty-four  sections  is  to  provide  a  lesson 
 for  each  Sabbath  of  those  years  which,  according 
 to  Jewish  chronology,  have  fifty-four  Sabbaths  (see 
 sec.  2),  and  to  read  through  the  -whole  Pentateuch, 
 with  large  portions  of  the  different  prophets,  in 
 the  course  of  every  year.  It  must  be  observed, 
 however,  that  this  annual  cycle  was  not  universally 
 adopted  by  the  ancient  Jews.  There  were  some 
 who  had  a  triennial  cycle  (comp.  Megilla,  29,  b). 
 These  divided  the  Pentateuch  into  07ie  hundred  ana 
 fifty-three  ox  fifty -five  sections,  so  as  to  read  through 
 
 the  law  in  SabVjatic  lessons,  once  in  three  years. 
 Tliis  was  still  done  by  some  Jews  in  the  days  of 
 Maimonides  (comp.  lod  Ha-Chczaka  Hilclioth  Te- 
 filla,  xiii.  i),  and  Benjamin  of  Tudela  tells  us  that 
 he  found  the  Syrian  Jews  followed  this  practice  in 
 Memphis  (tv/.  Asher,  vol.  i.,  p.  14S).  The  sections 
 of  the  triennial  division  are  called  by  the  Massorites 
 Sedari/n  or  Sedaroth  (DmO,  niTlD),  as  may  be 
 seen  in  the  Massoretic  note  at  the  end  of  Exodus  : 
 '  Here  endeth  the  book  of  Exodus  .  .  it  hath 
 eleven  Parshioth  (HVCID,  /'.  e.,  according  to  the 
 annual  division),  twenty-nine  .Siv/rfrt'///  (nilHO,  i.  e., 
 accordingto  the  triennial  division),  and  forty  chapters 
 (D''p"ID).'  Besides  the  Sabbatic  lessons,  special  por- 
 tions of  the  law  and  prophets  are  also  read  on  every 
 festival  and  fast  of  the  year.  It  must  be  noticed, 
 moreover,  that  the  Jews,  who  have  for  some  cen- 
 turies almost  universally  followed  the  annual  divi- 
 sion of  the  law,  denominate  the  Sabbatic  section 
 Sidra  (NIT'D),  the  name  which  the  MassOrites 
 give  to  each  portion  of  the  triennial  division,  and 
 that  every  one  of  the  fifty-four  sections  has  a  special 
 title,  which  it  derives  from  the  first  or  second  word 
 with  which  it  commences,  and  by  which  it  is  quoted 
 in  the  Jewish  writings.  To  render  the  following 
 description  more  intelligible,  as  well  as  to  enable 
 the  student  of  Hebrew  exegesis  to  identify  the 
 quotations  from  the  Pentateuch,  we  subjoin  chrono- 
 logical tables  of  the  Sabbatic  Festival  and  Fast 
 Lessons  from  the  law  and  prophets,  and  their  titles. 
 2.  '  The  reading  of  the  Law  and  Prophets''  as  in- 
 dicated in  the  Hebreiv  Bible,  and  practised  ly  the 
 Jeias  to  the  present  day  : — 
 
 I.  Table  of  Sabbatic  Lessons. 
 
 NO. 
 
 MASSORETIC  TITLE 
 OF  THE  LESSON. 
 
 PORTION  OF  THE  LAW. 
 
 THE  PROPHETS. 
 
 I 
 2 
 
 Gen.    i.  i — vi.  8. 
 vi.  9 — xi.  32. 
 
 Is.  xiii.  5 — xliii.  10,  or*  to  Is.  xiii.  21. 
 Is.  liv.  I — iv.  5,  or  to  liv.  lo. 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 xii.  I  —  xvii.  27. 
 xviii.  I — xxii.  24. 
 xxiii.  I — xxv.  18. 
 
 Is.  xl.  27 — xli.  16. 
 
 2  Kings  iv.  1-37,  or  to  ver.  23. 
 
 I  Kings  i.  I -3 1. 
 
 6 
 
 nn^n 
 
 xxv.  19 — xxviii.  9. 
 
 Malachi  i.  i— ii.  7. 
 
 7 
 
 N^^l 
 
 xxviii.  10 — xxxii.  3. 
 
 Hos.  xi.  7 — xii.  12,  or  to  ver.  13. 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 10 
 II 
 12 
 13 
 
 xxxii.  4— xxxvi.  43. 
 xxxvii.  I — xl.  23. 
 xli.  I — xliv.  17. 
 xliv.  18 — xlvii.  27. 
 xlvii.  28 — 1.  26. 
 Exod.  i.  I — vi.  I. 
 
 Hos.  xii.  13 — xiv.  10,  or  Obad.  1-21. 
 
 Amos  ii.  6 — iii.  8. 
 
 I  Kings  iii.  15 — iv.  i. 
 
 Ezek.  xxxvii.  15-28. 
 
 I  Kings  ii.  1-12. 
 
 Is.  xxvii.  6 — xxviii.  13  ;  xxix.  22,  23,  or 
 
 14 
 15 
 
 vi.  2— ix.  35. 
 X.  I — xiii.  16. 
 
 Jer.  i.  I— ii.  3. 
 Ezek.  xxviii.  25 — xxix.  21. 
 Jer.  xlvi.  13-28. 
 
 16 
 
 rh^'2 
 
 xiii.  17 — xvii.  16. 
 
 Judg.  iv.  4 — v.  31,  or  V.  1-31. 
 
 17 
 
 iS 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 nn'' 
 nonn 
 
 xviii.  I — XX.  23. 
 x.xi.  I — xxiv.  18. 
 xxv.  i — xxvii.  19. 
 xxvii.  20 — XXX.  10. 
 
 Is.  vi.  I — vii.  6  ;  ix.  5,  6,  or  vi.  I-13. 
 Jer.  xxxiv.  8-22  ;  xxxiii.  25,  26. 
 I  Kings  v.  26— vi.  13. 
 Ezek.  xliii.  10-27. 
 
 21 
 
 Nii'n  ''D 
 
 xxx.  II — xxxiv.  35. 
 
 I  Kings  xviii.  i  -39,  or  xviii.  20-39. 
 
 22 
 23 
 
 ••nips 
 
 XXXV.  I — xxxviii.  20. 
 xxxviii.  21 — xl.  38. 
 
 I  Kings  vii.  40-50,  or  vii.  13-26. 
 
 I  Kings  vii.  51 — viii.  21,  or  vii.  40-50. 
 
 *  The  first  reference  always  shows  the  I/aphtara  according  to  the  German  and  Polish  Jews  (D''TJtJ'N) ; 
 the  second,  introduced  by  the  disjunctive  particle  or,  is  according  to  the  Portuguese  Jews  (D''''"nDD). 
 
HAPHTARA 
 
 224 
 
 HAPHTARA 
 
 I.  Table  of  Sabbatic  hESSoas—z Confinued. 
 
 NO. 
 
 MASSORETIC  TITLE 
 OF  THE  LESSON. 
 
 PORTION  OF  THE  LAW. 
 
 THE  PROPHETS. 
 
 24 
 
 X^P^I 
 
 Ixvit.  i.  I— V.  26. 
 
 Is.  xliii.  21 — xliv.  23. 
 
 25 
 
 IV 
 
 \'i.   I — vaii.  36. 
 
 Jer.  viL  21 — viii.  3  ;  ix.  22,  23. 
 
 26 
 
 •'yOK' 
 
 ix.  I — xi.  47. 
 
 2  Sam.  vi.  I — vii.  17,  or  vi.  1-19. 
 
 27 
 
 nnrn 
 
 xii.  I — xiii.  59. 
 
 2  Kings  iv.  42 — v.  19. 
 
 28 
 
 mivD 
 
 xiv.  I — XV.  33. 
 
 2  Kings  vii.  3-20. 
 
 29 
 
 DID  nnx 
 
 x\i.  I — xviii.  30. 
 
 Ezek.  xxii.  1-19. 
 
 30 
 
 D-cmp 
 
 xix.  I — XX.  27. 
 
 Amos  ix.  7-15,  or  Ezek.  xx.  2-20. 
 
 31 
 
 ni^DK 
 
 xxi.  I — xxiv.  23. 
 
 Ezek.  xliv.  15-31. 
 
 32 
 
 inn 
 
 XXV.  I — xxvi.  2. 
 
 Jer.  xxxii.  6-27. 
 
 33 
 
 ^npnn 
 
 xxvi.  2 — xxvii.  34. 
 
 Jer.  xvi.  19 — xvii.  14. 
 
 34 
 
 imon 
 
 Num.  i.  I — iv.  20. 
 
 Hos.  ii.  1-22. 
 
 35 
 
 sc: 
 
 iv.  21 — viL  89. 
 
 Judg.  xiii.  2-25. 
 
 36 
 
 ■|mf5yn2 
 
 viiL  I — xii.  16. 
 
 Zech.  ii.  14 — iv.  7. 
 
 37 
 
 li'  1^'^' 
 
 xiii.  I — XV.  41. 
 
 Josh.  ii.  1-24.! 
 
 38 
 
 mp 
 
 xvi.  I — xviii.  32. 
 
 2  Sam.  xi.  14 — xii.  22. 
 
 39 
 
 npn 
 
 xix.  I — xxiL  I. 
 
 Judg.  xi.  1-33. 
 
 40 
 
 pb 
 
 xxii.  2 — XXV.  9. 
 
 Micah  V.  6 — vi.  8. 
 
 41 
 
 DnjD 
 
 Num.  XXV.  10 — XXX.  I. 
 
 I  Kings  xviii.  46 — xix.  21  if  it  is 
 Tamus  17,  after  this  date  Jer.  i.  i 
 
 before 
 -ii.  3. 
 
 42 
 
 nit3^3 
 
 XX3C.  2 — xxxiL  42. 
 
 Jer.  i.  I— ii.  3. 
 
 43 
 
 ••yDo 
 
 xxxiii.  I — xxxvi  13. 
 
 Jer.  ii.  4-25. 
 
 44 
 
 Dnm 
 
 Deut  i.  I — iii.  22. 
 
 Is.  i.  1-27. 
 
 45 
 
 pnnxi 
 
 iii.  23 — vii.  II. 
 
 Is.  xl.  1-26. 
 
 46 
 
 npy 
 
 viL  12 — xi.  25. 
 
 Is.  xlix.  14 — Ii.  3. 
 
 47 
 
 nsi 
 
 xi.  26 — xvi.  17. 
 
 Is.  liv.  II — Iv.  5. 
 
 48 
 
 D-UDIC' 
 
 xvi.  18 — xxi.  9. 
 
 Is.  Ii.  12— hi.  12. 
 
 49 
 
 N^vn  ''3 
 
 xxi.  10 — XXV.  ig. 
 
 Is.  hv.  I-IO. 
 
 50 
 
 xnn  •'3 
 
 xxvL  I — xxix.  8. 
 
 Is.  Ix.  1-22. 
 
 51 
 
 D^VJ 
 
 xxix.  9 — XXX.  20. 
 
 Is.  Ixi.  10 — Ixiii.  9. 
 
 52 
 
 l^'i 
 
 xxxi.  1-30. 
 
 Is.  Iv.  6 — Ivi.  8. 
 
 53 
 
 irrsn 
 
 xxxii.  1-52. 
 
 2  Sam.  xxii.  1-5 1  in  some  places, 
 xvii.  22 — xviii.  32. 
 
 Ezek. 
 
 54 
 
 nainn  nsri 
 
 xxxiii.  I— xxxiv.  12. 
 
 As  has  already  been  remarked,  this  division  into 
 fifty-foM-  sections  is  to  provide  a  special  lesson  for 
 every  Sabbath  of  those  years  which  have  fifty-four 
 Sabbaths.  For  the  intercalar\'  year  (JTi^yiD  HJti'), 
 in  which  New  Year  (^Jt^'^  C*X"1)  falls  on  a  Thurs- 
 day, and  the  months   Cheshvan  (pk^'^)  and  Kislez> 
 
 (vD3)  have  twenty-nine  days,  has  fifty-four  Sab- 
 baths which  require  special  lessons.  But  as  ordi- 
 nary years  (niLDit^'D)  have  not  so  many  Sabbaths, 
 and  those  years  in  which  New  Year  falls  on  a 
 Monday,  and  the  months  Cheshvan  and  Kislev\v3Mt. 
 thirty  days,  or  New  Year  falls  on  a  Saturday,  and 
 the  said  months  are  regular,  i.e.,  Cheshvan  having 
 twenty-nine  days  and  Kislev  thirty,  have  only 
 forty-seven  Sabbaths— y&z/rte«  of  the  fifty-four  sec- 
 tions, viz.,  22  and   23    (^*T|pS,  7np"'l),  27  and  28 
 
 (yiivo,  ynm),  29  and  30  (□''cinp,  nio  '•"inx), 
 32  and  33  cnpnn,  inn),  39  and  40  {p^2,  npn), 
 
 42  and  43  CyOD,  DIDO),  5°  and  51  d'/l,  D''aVJ), 
 have  been  appointed  to  be  read   in  pairs  either 
 
 wholly  or  in  part,  according  to  the  varj'ing  num- 
 ber of  Sabbaths  in  the  current  year.  Thus  the 
 whole  Pentateuch  is  read  through  every  year.  The 
 first  of  these  weekly  sections  is  read  on  the  first 
 Sabbath  after  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  which  is 
 in  the  month  of  Tishri,  and  begins  the  civil  year, 
 and  the  last  is  read  on  the  concluding  day  of  this 
 festival,  Tishri  2^,  which  is  called  The  Rejoicing  oj 
 the  Law  (ITlin  ^^Dt^'),  a  day  of  rejoicing,  because 
 on  it  the  law  is  read  through  [Tabernacles,  Feast 
 of].  According  to  the  triennial  division,  the  read- 
 ing of  the  law  seems  to  have  been  as  follows  : — 
 Gen.i.  i-Exod.  xiii.  16,  comprising /</j-/'6'n- from  the 
 creation  of  the  world  to  the  Exodus,  was  read  in 
 the  first  year;  Exod.  xiii.  17-Nuni.  vi.  27,  em- 
 bracing the  laws  of  both  Sinai  and  the  Tabernacle, 
 formed  the  lessons  for  the  Sabbaths  of  the  second 
 year  ;  and  Num.  vii.  i-Deut.  xxxiv.  12,  contain- 
 ing both  history  {i.e.,  the  history  of  thirty-nine 
 years'  wanderings  in  the  wilderness)  and  Lnv  (i.e., 
 the  repetition  of  the  Mosaic  law),  constituted  the 
 Sabbatic  lessons  for  the  third  year  (comp.  Megilla, 
 29,  b,  and  Volkslehrer,  ii.  p.  209). 
 
HAPHTARA 
 
 225 
 
 HAPHTARA 
 
 n.  Table  of  Festtval  and  Fast  Lessons. 
 
 FEASTS   AND   FASTS. 
 
 THE   LAW. 
 
 \ 
 
 THE  PROPHETS. 
 
 '" i 
 
 i 
 
 New  Moon. 
 
 If  it  falls  on  a  Sabbath  is  read 
 
 Num.  xxviii.  9-15  [Maphtir). 
 
 Is.  Ix-vL  1-24. 
 
 On  a  Sunday 
 
 Num.  xxviii.  3-15. 
 
 I  Sam.  XX.  18-42. 
 
 Fe.\st  of  Dedication.    Day  L 
 
 Num.  \-ii.  1-17. 
 
 Day  ii. 
 
 Num.  vii.  lS-23. 
 
 Day  iii. 
 
 Num.  \u.  24-29. 
 
 Day  iv. 
 
 Num.  viL  30-35. 
 
 Day  V. 
 
 Num.  yii.  36-41. 
 
 Day  vi. 
 
 Num.  -^-ii.  42-47. 
 
 Day  vii. 
 
 Num.  \'ii.  48-53. 
 
 Day  viii. 
 
 Num.  \i\.  54 — ^•iiL  4. 
 
 Sabbath  L 
 
 Zech.  ii.  14 — iv.  7. 
 
 Sabbath  ii. 
 
 I  Kings.  \nx.  40-50. 
 
 Feast  of  Purim. 
 
 Exod.  xvii.  8-16. 
 
 The  Book  of  Esther. 
 
 Sabbath  Parsheth  Sachor, 
 
 Deut.  XXV.  17-19  {Maphtir). 
 
 I  Sam.  XV.  2—34,  or  XV.  I- 
 
 34- 
 
 Sabbath  Parsheth  Par.\. 
 
 Num.  xLx.  1-22  {Mapktir). 
 
 Ezek.  xxxvi.  16-3S,  or  to  ver 
 
 36. 
 
 Sabbath  Parsheth  Ha-Cho- 
 
 Exod.  xiL  1-20. 
 
 Ezek.  xlv.  16 — xlvi.  18,  or 
 
 3dv. 
 
 DESH. 
 
 iS — xl%-i.  15. 
 
 Sabbath  Ha-Gadol. 
 
 Mai.  iii.  4-24. 
 
 Feast  of  Passover.     Day  L 
 
 Exod.  xiL  21-51  ;  Num.  xxviii 
 
 Josh.  iii.   5-7  ;  V.  2-15  ;  ^^. 
 
 27. ; 
 
 16-25  {Maphtir). 
 
 or  V.  2-15. 
 
 Day  ii. 
 
 Le\it.  xxil  26 — xxiii.  44  ;  Num. 
 xxviii.  16-25  {Maphtir). 
 
 2  Kings  xxiii  I-9  ;  21-25. 
 
 Choi  Moed,              Day  L 
 
 Exod.    xiii.    1-16  ;    Num.   xxviii. 
 ^9-25- 
 
 Day  ii. 
 
 Exod.     xxiL -xxiii,    19  ;     Num. 
 
 (If  it  falls  on  a  Sunday  the 
 
 xxviii.  19-25. 
 
 preceding  lesson  is  read. ) 
 
 Day  iii. 
 
 (If  on  a  Monday,  the  preced- 
 
 ing lesson.) 
 
 On  a  Wednesday  or  Thursday 
 
 Exod.  xxxiv.  1-26;  Num.  xxviii. 
 
 19-25. 
 Num.  Lx.  I-14;  xxviii.  19-25. 
 
 Day  iv. 
 
 Sabbath  Choi  Moed 
 
 Exod.    xxxiiL     12 — xxxiv.     26; 
 
 (  Ezek.  xxxvi.   37 — xxx\'ii. 
 
 17, 
 
 Num.  xxviii.  19-25. 
 
 <        or  xxxvii.  1-14. 
 (  The  Song  of  Songs. 
 
 Day  \'iL 
 
 Exod.   xiiL    17 — xv.   26  ;   Num. 
 xxviiu  19-25  {Maphtir). 
 
 2  Sam.  xxii.  I-51. 
 
 If  Sabbath,              Day  viiL 
 
 Deut.  xiv.  22 — x\T.    17  ;  Num. 
 xxviii.  19-25  {Maphtir). 
 
 Is,  X.  32 — xiL  6. 
 
 Week  day, 
 
 Deut.    XV.    19 — x^-i.    17 ;  Num. 
 xxA-iii.  19-25  {Maphtir). 
 
 Is.  X.  32 — xiL  6. 
 
 Feast  of  Pentecost.   Day  i. 
 
 Exod.   xix.    I — XX.    26 ;    Num. 
 xxviii.  26-31  {Maphtir). 
 
 Ezek.  L  1-28  ;  iiL  12. 
 
 If  Sabbath,              Day  iL 
 
 Deut.  xiv.  22 — -axi.  17. 
 
 Habak.  ii.  20 — iiL  19,  or  iii 
 19  ;  Esther. 
 
 .  I- 
 
 Week  day                 ,, 
 
 Deut.   XV.    19 — x^•l    17  ;  Num. 
 
 Habak.  ii,  20 — hi,  19,  or  iij 
 
 .  I- 
 
 xxviiL  26-31  {Maphtir). 
 
 19- 
 
 Fast  of  the  Ninth  of  Ab. 
 
 Morning 
 
 Deut.  iv.  25-40. 
 
 Jer.  viiL   13 — ix,  23  ;  Lamenta-  ! 
 
 tions. 
 
 Noon 
 
 Is.  Iv.  6— IvL  8. 
 
 New  Year.                  Day  i. 
 
 Gen.  xxi.  1-34;  Num.  xxix.  1-6 
 {Maphtir). 
 
 I  Sam.  i.  I — ii.  10. 
 
 Day  LL 
 
 Gen.  xxii.  1-24;  Num.  xxix.  1-6 
 {Maphtir). 
 
 Jer.  xxxi.  2-20. 
 
 Day  of  Atonement.    Morning 
 
 Le\at.    x\-i.    1-34;   Num.    xxLx. 
 
 Is.  Ivii.  14 — Iviii.  14. 
 
 7- II  {Maphtir). 
 
 Noon 
 
 Levit.  xviiL  1-30. 
 
 Jonah. 
 
 Feast  of  Tabernacles. 
 
 Day  L 
 
 Le\-it.  xxii.  26 — xxiii.  44  ;  Num. 
 xxLx.  12-16  {Maphtir\. 
 
 Zech.  xiv.  I -2 1. 
 
HAPHTARA 
 
 226 
 
 HAPHTARA 
 
 II.  Table  of  Festival  and  Fast  Lessons — Continued. 
 
 FEASTS  AND  FASTS. 
 
 Feast  of  Tabernacles. 
 
 Day  ii. 
 
 Choi  Moed, 
 
 Day  i. 
 Day  ii. 
 Day  iii. 
 Day  iv. 
 
 Sabbath  Choi  Moed 
 
 Shemini  Azereth,  If  Sabbath 
 Week  day 
 
 Simchath  Tora 
 
 Sabbath  Shuba. 
 Fast  Days  generally. 
 Mondays  and  Thursdays  all 
 the  year  round. 
 
 THE  LAW. 
 
 Lev.  xxii.  26 — xxiii.  44  ;  Num. 
 xxix.   12-16  {Maphtir). 
 
 Num.  xxix.  17-25  ;  17-22  is  re- 
 peated. 
 
 Num.  xxix.  20-28  ;  20-25  is  re- 
 peated. 
 
 Num.  xxix.  23-31  ;  23-28  is  re- 
 peated. 
 
 Num.  xxix.  26-34;  26-31  is  re- 
 peated. 
 
 Exod.  xxxiii.  12 — xxxiv.  26  ; 
 Num.  xxix.  17-22,  if  it  is  the 
 first  day  of  Choi  Moed  ; 
 Num.  xxix.  23-28,  if  the  third  ; 
 Num.  xxix.  26^31,  if  the  fourth 
 day  {Maphtir). 
 
 Deut.  xiv.  22 — xvi.  17. 
 
 Deut.  XV.  19 — xvi.  17  ;  Num. 
 xxix.  35 — xxx.  I  {Maphtir). 
 
 Deut.  xxxiii.  I — xxxiv.  12  ;  Gen. 
 i.  I — ii.  3  ;  Num.  xxix.  35 — 
 xxx.  I  {Maphtir). 
 
 Exod.  xxxii.  II-14;  xxxiv.  I-IO. 
 The  first  section  of  the  Sabbatic 
 lesson  from  the  law. 
 
 THB  PROPHBTS. 
 
 I  Kings  viiL  2-21. 
 
 Ezelc.  xxxviii.   18 — xxxix.   16  ; 
 Ecclesiastes. 
 
 I  Kings  viii.  54-66 ;  Ecclesiastes. 
 
 Josh.  i.  1-18. 
 
 Hos.  xiv.  2-9  ;  Joel  il  15-27, 
 
 Is.  Iv.  6 — Ivii.  8. 
 
 3.  The  manner  of  reading  the  Law  and  the 
 Prophets. — Every  Sabbatic  lesson  from  the  Law 
 (minn  nK''"lp)  is  divided  into  seven  sections  (evi- 
 dently designed  to  correspond  to  the  seven  days  of 
 the  week)  which,  in  the  days  of  our  Saviour  and 
 afterwards,  were  read  by  seven  different  persons 
 (D^SIIp  ny^tJ'),  who  were  called  upon  for  this 
 purpose  by  the  congregation  or  its  chief  {Mishna, 
 Megilla,  iv.  2  ;  Maimonides,  lod  Ha-Chezaka 
 Hilchoth  Tefilla,  xii.  7).  Great  care  is  taken  that 
 the  whole  nation  should  be  represented  at  this 
 reading  of  the  Law  and  Prophets.  Hence  a  Cohen 
 (jn3)  or  priest  is  called  to  the  reading  of  the  first 
 
 portion,  a  Levi  (117)  to  the  second,  and  an  Lsrael 
 
 (^S"lB''')  to  the  third  ;  and  after  the  three  great 
 divisions  of  the  nation  have  thus  been  duly  repre- 
 sented, the  remaining  four  portions  are  assigned  to 
 four  others  with  less  care.  '  Every  one  thus  called 
 to  the  reading  of  the  Law  must  unroll  the  scroll, 
 and  having  found  the  place  where  he  is  to  begin 
 to  read,  pronounces  the  following  benediction — 
 '  Bless  ye  the  Lord,  who  is  ever  blessed ; '  to 
 which  the  congregation  respond,  '  Blessed  be  the 
 Lord,  who  is  blessed  for  evermore.'  Whereupon 
 he  again  pronounces  the  following  benediction — 
 '  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Lord  our  God,  King  of  the 
 universe,  who  hast  chosen  us  from  among  all  na- 
 tions, and  hast  given  us  thy  Law.  Blessed  art 
 thou,  O  Lord,  giver  of  the  Law  ;'  to  which  all  the 
 congregation  respond  '  Amen.'  He  then  reads 
 the  seventh  portion  of  the  lesson,  and  when  he  has 
 finished,  rolls  up  the  scroll,  and  pronounces  again 
 the  following  benediction — '  Blessed  art  thou,  O 
 Lord  our  God,   King  of  the  universe,  who  hast 
 
 given  us  thy  Law,  the  Law  of  truth,  and  hast 
 planted  among  us  everlasting  life.  Blessed  art 
 thou,  O  Lord,  giver  of  the  Law' '  (Maimonides, 
 ibid.  xii.  5)-  The  other  six,  who  are  called  in  rota- 
 tion to  the  reading  of  the  other  six  portions,  have 
 to  go  through  the  same  formularies.  Then  the 
 Maphtir  (T'JODtD),  or  the  one  who  finishes  up  by  the 
 reading  of  the  Haphtara  (mtOQn),  or  the  lesson  from 
 the  Prophets,  is  called.  Having  read  the  few  con- 
 cluding verses  of  the  lesson  from  the  Law,  and  passed 
 through  the  same  formularies  as  the  other  seven, 
 he  reads  the  appointed  section  from  the  Prophets. 
 Before  reading  it,  he  pronounces  the  following 
 benediction — '  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Lord  our  God, 
 King  of  the  universe,  who  hast  chosen  good  pro- 
 phets, and  delighted  in  their  words,  which  were 
 spoken  in  truth.  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Lord,  who 
 hast  chosen  the  Law,  thy  servant  Moses,  thy  people 
 Israel,  and  thy  true  and  righteous  prophets ;'  and 
 after  reading,  '  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Lord  our  God, 
 King  of  the  universe.  Rock  of  all  ages.  Righteous 
 in  all  generations,  the  faithful  God  who  promises 
 and  performs,  who  decrees  and  accomplishes,  for 
 all  thy  words  are  faithful  and  just.  Faithful  art 
 thou.  Lord  our  God,  and  faithful  are  thy  words, 
 and  not  one  of  thy  words  shall  return  in  vain,  for 
 thou  art  a  faithful  King.  Blessed  art  thou,  O 
 Lord,  the  God  who  art  faithful  in  all  thy  words.' 
 '  Have  mercy  upon  Zion,  for  it  is  the  dwelling  of 
 our  life,  and  save  speedily  in  our  days  the  afflicted 
 souls.  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Lord,  who  wilt  make 
 Zion  rejoice  in  her  children.  Cause  us  to  rejoice, 
 O  Lord  our  God,  in  Elijah  thy  servant,  and  in  the 
 kingdom  of  the  house  of  David  thine  anointed. 
 May  he  speedily  come  and  gladden  our  hearts. 
 
HAPHTARA 
 
 HAPHTARA 
 
 Let  no  stranger  sit  on  his  throne,  and  let  others 
 no  longer  inherit  his  glory,  for  thou  hast  sworn 
 unto  him  by  thy  holy  name  that  his  light  shall  not 
 be  extinguished  for  ever  and  ever.  Blessed  art 
 thou,  O  Lord,  the  shield  of  David. '  '  For  the  Law, 
 the  divine  service,  the  prophets,  and  for  '  this  day 
 of  rest'  [or  of  memorial],  this  goodly  day  of  holy 
 convocation  which  thou  hast  given  to  us,  O  Lord, 
 for  sanctification  and  rest  [on  the  Sabbath],  for 
 honour  and  glory ;  for  all  this,  O  Lord  our  King, 
 we  thank  and  praise  thee.  Let  thy  name  be 
 praised  in  the  mouth  of  every  living  creature  for 
 ever  and  ever.  Thy  word,  O  our  King,  is  true, 
 and  will  abide  for  ever.  Blessed  art  thou.  King 
 of  the  whole  earth,  who  hast  sanctified  the  Sabbath, 
 and  Israel,  and  the  day  of  memorial'  (Maimonides, 
 ibid. )  After  the  Babylonish  captivity,  when  the  He- 
 brew language  became  an  unknown  tongue  to  the 
 common  people,  an  interpreter  (JDJIiriD,  IDJIID) 
 stood  at  the  desk  by  the  side  of  those  who  read 
 the  lessons,  and  paraphrased  the  section  from  the 
 Law  into  Chaldee,  verse  by  verse,  the  reader 
 pausing  at  every  verse,  whilst  the  lesson  from  the 
 Prophets  he  paraphrased  three  verses  at  a  time 
 (Afisktia,  Megiiia,  iv.  4);  and  Lightfoot  is  of  opinion 
 that  St.  Paul,  in  I  Cor.  xiv.  22,  refers  to  this  cir- 
 cumstance {HorcE  HebracE  in  loco).  The  lesson 
 from  the  Law  was  on  these  occasions  rendered 
 into  Chaldee  pretty  literally,  owing  to  the  fear 
 which  both  the  interpreters  and  the  congregation 
 had,  lest  a  free  explanation  of  it  might  misrepresent 
 its  sense,  whilst  greater  freedom  was  exercised  with 
 the  lesson  from  the  Prophets.  Hence  loose  para- 
 phrases and  lengthy  expositions  were  tolerated  and 
 looked  for  both  from  the  professional  interpreter 
 and  those  of  the  congregation  who  were  called  up 
 to  read,  and  who  felt  that  they  could  do  it  with  edifi- 
 cation to  the  audience.  Hence  we  find  that  Christ, 
 according  to  this  custom,  was  asked  in  the  syna- 
 gogue, which  he  attended  on  the  Sabbath,  to  read 
 and  explain  the  Sabbatic  lesson,  and  that  He,  in 
 compliance  with  it,  read  and  expounded  Is.  Ixi., 
 which  was  the  Haphta7-a  for  that  Sabbath.  The 
 Sabbatic  lesson  from  the  Law  was,  as  we  have 
 seen,  divided  into  seven  sections  or  chapters,  each 
 of  which  had  at  least  three  verses,  according  to  the 
 verses  of  those  days,  so  that  the  whole  consisted 
 of  at  least  twenty-one  such  verses.  The  lesson 
 from  the  Prophets  was  not  portioned  out  to  seven 
 different  individuals,  but  has  also  at  least  twenty- 
 one  verses  [Mish7ta,  Megilla,  iv.  4;  Maimonides, 
 lod  Ha-Chezaka  Hilchoth  TefiUa,  xii.  13).  The 
 lesson  from  the  Law  for  the  Day  of  Atonement  is 
 divided  into  six  chapters,  for  Festivals  into  five,  for 
 New  Moon  into  four,  and  for  Mondays  and  Thurs- 
 days into  three  chapters  or  sections.  The  number 
 of  persons  called  up  to  the  reading  of  the  Law 
 always  corresponds  to  the  number  of  sections. 
 For  Mondays  and  Thursdays,  New   Moon,    and 
 
 the  week  days  of  the  Festivals  pyiD  Plil),  there 
 are  no  corresponding  lessons  from  the  Prophets 
 (Mishna,  Megilla,  iv.  1-3). 
 
 4.  The  Origin  of  this  Institution.— The  origin  of 
 this  custom  may  easily  be  traced.  The  Bible  em- 
 phatically and  repeatedly  enjoins  upon  every  Is- 
 raelite to  study  its  contents  (Deut.  iv.  9  ;  xxxii. 
 46) ;  Moses  himself  ordered  that  the  whole  law 
 should  be  read  publicly  at  the  end  of  every  Sab- 
 batic year  {Ibid.  xxxi.  10-12),  whilst  Joshua  urges 
 that  it  should  be  studied  day  and  night  (i.  8 ;  comp. 
 
 also  Ps.  i.  2,  al.)  Now  the  desire  to  carry  out 
 tliij  injimction  literally,  and  yet  the  utter  impossi- 
 bility to  do  it  on  the  part  of  those  who  had  to 
 work  for  daily  bread  all  the  week,  and  who  could 
 not  afford  to  buy  the  necessarily  expensive  scrolls, 
 gave  rise  to  this  institution.  On  the  Sabbath  and 
 festivals  all  were  relieved  from  their  labour,  and 
 could  attend  places  of  worship  where  the  inspired 
 writings  were  deposited,  and  where  care  could  be 
 taken  that  no  private  interpretation  should  be 
 palmed  upon  the  Word  of  God.  Hence  both 
 James  (Acts  xv.  21)  and  Josephus  {Contra  Apion. 
 ii.  17)  speak  of  it  as  a  very  ancient  custom,  and  the 
 Talmud  tells  us  that  the  division  of  each  Sabbatic 
 lesson  into  seven  sections  was  introduced  in  honour 
 of  the  Persian  king  {Megilla,  23),  which  shews  that 
 this  custom  obtained  anterior  to  the  Persian  rule. 
 Indeed  Maimonides  positively  asserts  that  Moses 
 himself  ordained  the  hebdomal  reading  of  the  law 
 {Hilchoth  Tefilla,  xii.  i).  Equally  natural  is  the 
 division  of  the  law  into  Sabbatic  sections  as  the 
 whole  of  it  could  not  be  read  at  once.  The  only 
 difficulty  is  to  ascertain  jjositively  whether  the 
 annual  or  the  triennial  division  was  the  more  an- 
 cient one.  A  triennial  division  is  mentioned  in 
 Megilla  29,  b,  as  current  in  Palestine ;  with  this 
 agree  the  reference  to  155  sections  of  the  law  in  the 
 Midi-ash,  Esther  116,  b,  and  the  Massoretic  divi- 
 sion of  the  Pentateuch  into  154  Sedaiiin.  But  on 
 the  other  hand  R.  Simeon  b.  Eleazar,  a  Palestinian, 
 declared  that  Moses  instituted  the  reading  of  Lev. 
 xxvi.  before  the  Feast  of  Pentecost,  and  Deut. 
 xxviii.  before  New  Year,  which  most  unquestionably 
 presuppose  tlie  annual  division  of  the  Pentateuch 
 into  54  Parshioth.  This  is  moreover  confirmed 
 by  the  statement  {Ibid.  31,  a)  that  the  section  DNTI 
 ilDinn  (Deut.  xxxiii.  i-xxxiv.  12)  was  read  on  the 
 nintli  day  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  thus  terminat- 
 ing the  annual  cycle,  as  well  as  by  the  fact  that  the 
 annual  festival  of  the  rejoicing  of  the  law  (rinDt^ 
 miri)  which  commemorates  the  annual  finishing 
 of  the  perusal  of  the  Pentateuch  [Tabernacles, 
 Feast  of]  was  an  ancient  institution.  We  must, 
 therefore,  conclude  that  the  annual  cycle  which  is 
 now  prevalent  among  the  Jews,  was  the  generally 
 adopted  one,  at  least  since  the  Maccabaean  times, 
 whilst  the  triennial,  though  the  older,  was  the  ex- 
 ception. It  is  far  more  difficult  to  trace  the  origin 
 of  tlie  Haphtara,  or  the  lessons  from  the  prophets, 
 and  its  signification.  A  very  ancient  tradition  tells 
 us  that  the  Syrians  had  interdicted  the  reading  of  the 
 law,  and  carried  away  the  scrolls  containing  it,  and 
 that  appropriate  sections  from  the  prophets  were 
 therefore  chosen  to  replace  the  Pentateuch  (Zunz, 
 Gottesdienstslich.  Vor.  p.  5),  whilst  Elias  Levita 
 traces  the  origin  of  the  Haplitara  to  persecutions  of 
 Antiochus  Epiphanes.  In  his  Lex.  {s.  v.  1J2S)  he 
 says,  '  the  wicked  Antiochus,  king  of  Greece,  pro- 
 hibited the  Jews  to  read  the  law  publicly.  They, 
 therefore,  selected  sections  from  the  prophets  of 
 the  same  import  as  the  Sabbatic  lessons  .  . 
 and  though  this  prohibition  has  now  ceased,  this 
 custom  has  not  been  left  off,  and  to  this  day  we 
 read  a  section  from  the  prophets  aftei-  the  reading 
 of  the  law ; '  and  we  see  no  reason  to  reject  this 
 account.  The  objection  of  Vilringa,  Frankel, 
 Herzfeld,  etc.,  that  Antiochus,  who  wanted  to  ex- 
 terminate Judaism,  would  not  wage  war  against 
 the  Pentateuch  exclusively,  but  would  equally  de- 
 stroy the  prophetic  books,  and  that  this  this  implies 
 a  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  soldiers  of  the  distmc- 
 
HARA 
 
 228 
 
 HARAN 
 
 tion  between  the  Pentateuch  and  the  other  inspired 
 writings,  is  obviated  by  the  fact  that  there  was  an 
 external  difference  between  the  scrolls  of  the  Pc.i- 
 tateuch  and  the  other  sacred  books,*  that  the  Jews 
 claimed  the  Peniateuch  as  their  law  and  rule  of  faith, 
 and  that  this  was  the  reason  why  it  especially  was 
 destroyed.  This  is  corroborated  by  i  Maccab.  i . 
 56,  where  the  laio  only  is  said  to  have  been  burned. 
 Accordingly  mtOSn,  from  ")t3D,  to  liberate,  toffee, 
 signifies  the  liberating  lesson,  the  portion  from  the 
 prophets  which  is  read  instead  of  the  portion  from 
 the  law  that  could  not  be  read,  and  which  libe- 
 rates from  the  injunction  of  reading  the  Penta- 
 teuch. For  the  other  opinions  about  the  significa- 
 tion of  Haphtara,  we  refer  to  the  Literature  quoted 
 below. 
 
 Literature. — Maimonides,  lod Ha-Chezaka  Hil- 
 cJioth  Tefilla  ;  Bartolocci,  Bibliotheca  Magna  Rab- 
 binica,  vol.  ii.  p.  593,  seq. ;  Zunz,  Die  Gotlesdienst- 
 lichen  Vortrdge  der  J-iiden,  cap.  i. ;  Frankel,  Vor- 
 stiidien  zii  der  Septitaginta,  Leipzig  184I,  p.  48,  ff. ; 
 Rapaport,  Erech  Millin,  p.  66,  ff.  ;  Monatschrift 
 fiir  Geschichte  und  IVissenschaft des  Judentkums,  i. 
 p.  352,  ff.  ;  xi.  p.  222,  ff. ;  Herzfeld,  Geschichte  des 
 Volkes  Israel,  ii.  p.  209,  ff.  ;  Der  Israelitische 
 Volkslehrer,  ii.  p.  205,  ff.  ;  p.  36,  ff.  ;  Ben  Cha- 
 nanja,  vol.  v.  p.  125,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 HARA  (sin),  a  province  of  Assyria.     We  read 
 
 that  Tiglath-pilneser  'brought  the  Reubenites, 
 Gadites,  and  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh,  unto 
 Halah,  and  Habor,  and  Hara,  and  to  the  river 
 Gozan'  (l  Chron.  v.  26).  The  parallel  passage  in 
 2  Kings  xviii.  il  omits  Hara,  and  adds  'in  the 
 cities  of  the  Medes.'  Bochart  consequently  sup- 
 poses that  Hara  was  either  a  part  of  Media,  or 
 another  name  for  that  country.  He  shews  that 
 Herodotus  (vii.  62)  and  other  ancient  writers  call 
 the  Medes  A7-ians,  and  their  country  A7-ia.  He 
 farther  supposes  that  the  name  Hara,  which  signi- 
 fies 'mountainous,'  may  have  been  given  to  that 
 northern  section  of  Media  subsequently  called  by 
 the  Arabs  Elgebal  ('  the  mountains;'  see  Bochart, 
 0pp.  i.  194).  All  this,  however,  appears  to  be 
 mere  conjecture.  The  words  Aria  and  Hara  are 
 totally  different,  both  in  meaning  and  origin.  The 
 Medes  were  a  branch  of  the  great  Arian  family 
 who  came  originally  from  Lidia,  and  who  took 
 their  name,  according  to  Miiller  {Science  of  Lan- 
 guage, pp.  237,  sq.,  2d  ed.),  from  the  Sanscrit 
 word  Arya,   which   means    'noble,'    '  of  a  good 
 
 *  The  law  has  two  rollers,  i.  e.,  has  a  roller 
 attached  to  each  of  the  two  ends  of  the  vellum  on 
 which  it  is  written,  and  every  weekly  portion  when 
 read  on  the  Sabbath  is  unrolled  from  the  right 
 roller  and  rolled  on  the  left  ;  so  that  when  the  law 
 is  opened  on  the  next  Sabbath  the  portion  ap- 
 pointed for  that  day  is  at  once  found.  Whereas 
 the  prophetic  books  have  only  one  roller,  and  the 
 lesson  from  the  prophets  has  to  be  sought  out  on 
 every  occasion  (comp.  Baba  Bathra,  14  a).  Dean 
 Alford  ( The  Greek  Testament,  vol.  i.  p.  449,  4th 
 ed.),  overlooking  this  fact,  has  therefore  wrongly 
 assigned  to  the  word  '  found'  in  Matt.  iv.  17,  the 
 sense  of  'fortuitous  (i.  e.,  providential)  finding.' 
 It  is  this  fact  that  the  law  is  on  two  rollers,  and  the 
 other  sacred  books  on  one,  as  mentioned  in  the 
 above-quoted  passage  from  the  Talmud,  which 
 gave  a  different  external  appearance  to  the  scrolls 
 of  the  law,  and  those  of  the  other  sacred  books. 
 
 family.'  Its  etymological  signification  seems  to  be 
 '  one  who  tills  the  ground  ;'  and  it  is  thus  allied  to 
 the  Latin  Arare  (see  also  Rawlinson's  Herodotus  i. 
 p.  401). 
 
 Hara  is  joined  with  Hala,  Habor,  and  the 
 river  Gozan.  These  were  all  situated  in  western 
 Assyria,  between  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  and 
 along  the  banks  of  the  Khabiir.  We  may  safely 
 conclude,  therefore,  that  Hara  could  not  have  been 
 far  distant  from  that  region.  It  is  somewhat  re- 
 markable that  the  name  is  not  given  in  either  the 
 Septuagint  or  Peshito  version.  Some  have  hence 
 imagined  that  the  word  was  interpolated  after  these 
 versions  were  made.  This,  however,  is  a  rash 
 criticism,  as  it  exists  in  all  Hebrew  MSS.,  and  also 
 in  Jerome's  version  (see  Robinson's  Calniet,  s.v., 
 Gozan ;  Grant's  Nestorian  Christians,  p.  120). 
 Tlie  conjecture  that  Hara  and  Haran  are  identical 
 cannot  be  sustained,  though  the  situation  of  the 
 latter  might  suit  the  requirements  of  the  Biblical 
 narrative,  and  its  Greek  classical  name  resembles 
 Hara.  The  Hebrew  words  XIH  and  pH  are 
 radically  different.  Hara  may  perhaps  have  been 
 a  local  name  applied  to  the  mountainous  region 
 north  of  Gozan,  called  by  Strabo  and  Ptolemy 
 Mons  Masius,  and  now  Karja  Baghlar  (Strabo 
 xvi.  23;  Ptolemy  V.  18,  2). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HARADAH  ^T^T^  ;  Sept.  XapaSdd),  a  camp 
 
 or  station  of  the  Israelites  (Num.  xxxiii.  24)  [Wan- 
 dering]. 
 
 HARAM.     [House.] 
 
 HARAN  (pn  ;  Sept.   'Appdv),   son  of  Terah, 
 
 brother  of  Abraham  and  Nahor,  and  father  of  Lot, 
 Milcah,  and  Iscah.  That  he  was  Terah's  youngest 
 son  is  presumable  from  his  being  last  mentioned  ; 
 but  this  does  not  necessarily  follow,  because  the 
 younger  son  is  often,  honoris  causa,  placed  before 
 the  elder.  He  died  before  his  father  Terah ;  an 
 event  which,  from  the  manner  in  which  it  is  men- 
 tioned, appears  to  have  been  a  much  rarer  case  in 
 those  days  than  at  present  (Gen.  xi.  27,  sq.) 
 
 2.  (Sept.  h.a.v  ;  Alex.  'Apdv).  A  Gershonite 
 Levite  of  the  family  of  Shimei,  in  the  time  of  David 
 (l  Chron.  xxiii.  9). 
 
 3.  (pn ;  Sept.  'Apdfi ;   Alex.  'Appdv).     A  son 
 
 of  Caleb  by  his  concubine  Ephah  (i  Chron. 
 ii.  46). 
 
 HARAN    (pn;    Sept.    and  N.  T.,  Xa^pdv). 
 
 In  Gen.  xi.  31  we  read  that  Terah  and  his  family 
 left  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  to  go  to  Canaan,  '  and 
 they  came  to  Haran  and  dwelt  there.'  Terab 
 died  there,  and  a  portion  of  his  family  settled  per- 
 manently in  that  city.  Abraham,  however,  re- 
 ceived a  divine  command  to  go  to  Canaan,  and 
 then  he  finally  left  Haran.  The  next  direct  refer- 
 ence to  Haran  is  in  connection  with  the  flight  and 
 subsequent  history  of  Jacob.  His  mother  Rebekah 
 was  a  native  of  Haran  ;  and  when  by  a  stratagem 
 she  secured  for  Jacob  his  father's  blessing,  she  sent 
 him  to  Laban  her  brother  (Gen.  xxvii.  43).  The 
 country  in  which  Haran  was  situated  is  called 
 Fadan-aram,  or  'the  plain  of  Aram'  (xxviii.  2); 
 and  also  Aram-Nahaf-aim,  '  Aram  of  the  two 
 rivers'  (A.V.  Mesopotamia,  xxiv.  10).  In  2  Kings 
 xix.   12,  Haran  is  mentioned  in  connection  with 
 
HARARITE 
 
 229 
 
 HARE 
 
 Gozan,  a  province  of  Mesopotamia,  as  having 
 been  taken  by  the  Assyrians ;  and  Ezekiel  groups 
 it  with  Canneh,  Eden,  and  other  places  in  Assyria 
 (xxvii.  23).  These  are  the  only  indications  in 
 Scripture  of  the  site  of  Haran.  The  translators  of 
 the  Septuagint  identify  the  Aram-Naharaim  ot 
 Genesis  with  the  well-known  Greek  province  of 
 Mesopotamia.  Josephus  also  says  :  'Terah  hating 
 Chaldiea  on  account  of  his  mourning  for  Haran,  they 
 all  removed  to  Haran  of  Mesopotamia  {els  'Kappav 
 TTJs  MeaoTTOTa/nias)  where  Terah  died'  (Antiq.  i.  6. 
 5).  Jerome  thus  describes  Haran  : — '  Charran,  a 
 city  of  Mesopotamia  beyond  Edessa,  which  to  this 
 day  is  called  Charra,  where  the  Roman  army  was 
 cut  off,  and  Crassus  its  leader  taken'  [Onomast., 
 s.v.  Chan-ail).  Guided  by  these  descriptions  and 
 statements,  which  certainly  appear  sufficiently  clear 
 and  full,  sacred  geographers  have  almost  univer- 
 sally identified  Haran  with  the  Carrae  (Kappat)  of 
 the  Greeks  and  Romans  (Strabo,  xvi.  ;  Pliny,  v. 
 
 21),  and  the  Harrdti  of  the  Arabs  (Arab.  .Sj>-  5 
 
 Schultens,  Index  Geogr.  in  Vitam  Saladini,  s.v.) 
 
 Harran  stands  on  the  banks  of  a  small  river 
 called  Belik,  which  flows  into  the  Euphrates  about 
 fifty  miles  south  of  the  town.  From  it  a  number 
 of  leading  roads  radiate  to  the  great  fords  of  the 
 Tigris  and  Euphrates  ;  and  it  thus  formed  an  im- 
 portant station  on  the  hne  of  commerce  between 
 central  and  western  Asia.  This  may  explain  why 
 Terah  came  to  it,  and  why  it  was  mentioned  among 
 the  places  which  supplied  the  marts  of  Tyre  (Ezek. 
 xxvii.  23).  Crassus  was  probably  marching  along 
 this  great  route  when  he  was  attacked  by  the  Par- 
 thians.  The  people  of  Haran  long  retained  both 
 the  language  and  worship  of  the  Chaldseans  ;  and 
 a  chapel  is  said  to  have  existed  there  dedicated  to 
 Abraham  (see  Asseman,  Bibliotheca  Orientalis,  i. 
 327). 
 
 Dr.  Beke  in  his  Origines  Biblicce  (p.  122,  sq.), 
 made  the  somewhat  starthng  statement  that  Haran 
 must  have  been  near  Damascus,  and  that  Aram- 
 Naharaim  is  the  country  between  the  Abana  and 
 Pharpar.  After  lying  doitnant  for  a  quarter  of  a 
 century  this  theory  was  again  revived  in  i860. 
 The  writer  of  this  article  visited  and  described  a 
 small  village  in  the  plain,  four  hours  east  of  Da- 
 mascus, called  Harran  el-Awamid  ('Harran  of 
 the  columns').  The  description  having  met  the  eye 
 of  Dr.  Beke  fysxFive  Yearsin  Dainascus,  i.  376),  heat 
 once  concluded  that  this  village  was  the  site  of  the 
 real  '  city  of  Nahor.'  He  has  since  visited  Harran 
 el-Awamid,  and  travelled  from  it  to  Gilead,  and 
 is  more  confirmed  in  his  view,  though  he  appears  to 
 stand  alone.  His  arguments  have  not  been  suffi- 
 cient to  set  aside  the  powerful  evidence  in  favour  of 
 Harran  in  Mesopotamia.  The  student  may  see  the 
 whole  subject  discussed  in  the  AtkencBit/n  for  Nov. 
 23,  30  ;  Dec.  7,  1861  ;  Feb.  I,  15  ;  March  I,  22, 
 29  ;  April  6,  19  ;  and  May  24,  1862  ;  also  in 
 Stanley's  Lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church,  p.  447, 
 sq.—].  L.  P. 
 
 HARARITE,  The  (^inn,  once  without  the 
 
 article,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  Il),  the  appellation  of  three  of 
 David's  guard.  Gesenius  translates  the  word  by 
 mountaineer ;  but  Fiirst  thinks  it  is  a  Gentile  from 
 some  place  called  "IH.     It  is  applied  to — i.  Sham- 
 
 M.\H,  the  son  of  Agee  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  11,  33).     In  i 
 
 Chron.  xi.  27  he  is  called  '  Shammoth  the  Haro- 
 rite,'  and  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  25  we  have  mn 
 Harodite,  in  place  of  """("in,  Harorite.  2.  Jona- 
 than, the  son  of  Shage  (i  Chron.  xi.  34).  In  2 
 Sam.  xxiii.  32  he  is  mentioned  without  any  appel- 
 lation or  designation.  3.  Ahiam,  the  son  of  Sacar 
 (i  Chron.  xi.  35).  In  2  Sam.  xxiii.  33  we  have 
 Sharar  for  Sacar,  and  n^S  for  nin.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HARDT,  Hermann  Von  der,  a  learned  theo- 
 logian and  Orientalist,  was  bom  at  Melle,  in  West- 
 phalia, in  the  duchy  of  Osnabrlick,  15th  November 
 1660.  After  receiving  his  early  education  at  Her- 
 fort  and  Osnabrlick,  he  repaired  to  Koburg  in  his 
 17th  year,  and  thence  to  the  University  of  Jena, 
 where  he  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  theology 
 and  the  Oriental  languages.  He  then  spent  a 
 year  at  Hamburg  under  the  learned  Edzard,  and 
 returned  to  Jena  1 681,  where,  after  a  time,  he  be- 
 gan to  give  private  lectures.  In  1686  he  repaired 
 to  Leipzig  and  commenced  as  n  privat-docettt.  In 
 1690  he  became  ordinary  professor  of  Oriental  lan- 
 guages at  Helmstadt.  Here  he  led  a  life  of  un- 
 wearied literary  activity,  lecturing  on  the  Oriental 
 tongues,  the  exegesis  of  the  O.  and  N.  T.,  Hebrew 
 and  ecclesiastical  antiquities.  Biblical  science,  etc. 
 He  died  at  the  age  of  86,  in  1 746,  28th  February. 
 He  was  a  very  learned  man,  but  full  of  paradoxes, 
 eager  after  new  views,  rash,  and  peculiar.  His 
 writings  are  numerous,  exceeding  300,  and  of  a 
 miscellaneous  nature,  grammatical,  exegetical,  and 
 historical.  The  last  are  the  most  valuable  to  us. 
 Those  relating  to  Biblical  literature  are,  Epheme- 
 rides  Philologiccs  quibus  difficiliora  qucsdam  loca 
 Pentateiuhi  ad  Hehraicorum  foiitiutJi  tenorem  ex- 
 plicata,  ctitn  notis  et  epistolis pro  uberiore  commen- 
 tatione,  1 693,  1696,  1703  ;  Brevia  atque  solida 
 HebrcccB  lingucB  fundamenta,  1694  and  1739  ;  Ele- 
 ?nenta  Chaldaica,  1693,  etc.  ;  Brevia  atque  solida 
 SvriaccB  liiigucs  fundamenta,  1694,  etc.  ;  Hoseas 
 illustratus  Chaldaica  Jonathanis  versione  et philolo- 
 gicis  celebrium  rabbinorum  Rase  hi,  A  ben  Esrce  et 
 Kimchi  commentariis,  1702,  1775;  Commentarii 
 lingua  HebrmcB  ex  GrcBcia  apologia,  l']2'j  ;  Evan- 
 geliccB  rei  iniegritas  iti  7tegotio  JoncB  quatuor  libris 
 declaratcE,  1719  ;  ALnigmata  prisci  orbis,  1723  fol. ; 
 Tomus primus  in  Jobufn,  etc.,  1728  fol. — S.  D. 
 
 HARE,  Francis,  D.D.,  successively  Dean  of 
 Worcester,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph, 
 and  Bishop  of  Chichester.  Thedeaneryof  St.  Paul's 
 he  held  with  each  of  his  episcopal  appointments  to 
 his  death  in  1740.  He  was  at  one  time  a  friend  of 
 Dr.  Bentley,  who  dedicated  to  him,  in  17 13,  his 
 celebrated  Reinarks  on  the  Essay  on  Freethinking, 
 in  acknowledgment  of  which  Hare  published  his 
 Letter  entitled  '  A  Clergyman's  thanks  to  Phileleu- 
 therus  Lipsiensis  for  his  Remarks,  etc'  Before 
 his  elevation  to  the  see  of  St.  Asaph,  Dr.  Hare 
 took  part  against  Hoadley  in  the  Bangorian  con- 
 troversy ;  amongst  his  published  works  was  a  ser- 
 mon on  this  subject — '  Concio  ad  Synodum,' on 
 Titus  ii.  8.  Bishop  Hare  was  the  author  of  seve- 
 ral political  tracts,  an  edition  of  Terence,  and  a 
 volume  of  sermons  ;  but  the  only  work  which  en- 
 titles him  to  a  place  in  this  '  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical 
 Literature'  was  his  Book  of  Psalms  in  the  Hebrew, 
 put  into  the  original  poetical  metre,  published  in 
 1736.  'We  learn  (says  Bishop  Jebb,  Sacred  Lite- 
 rature, p.  12)  from  George  Psalmanazar's  memoirs. 
 
HARE 
 
 230 
 
 HARE 
 
 that  his  lordship  printed  but  50O  copies  of  his 
 Hebrew  Psalter,  one-half  of  which  he  presented  to 
 his  learned  friends  at  home  and  abroad — the  re- 
 maining copies  sold  but  slackly,  and  the  work  was 
 never  separately  republished.*  Although  this  in- 
 genious treatise  was  so  soon  superseded  by  Bishop 
 Lowth's  metrical  system,  it  was  unquestionably  the 
 first  publication  of  any  note  that  had  appeared  in 
 England  on  the  subject  of  Hebrew  metre.  The 
 learned  author's  negative  merits  were  not  incon- 
 siderable ;  he  saw  with  clearness  and  exposed  with 
 convincing  arguments  the  faults  of  his  predecessors. 
 Yet  he  fell  into  tlie  self-same  error  which  he  had 
 censured  in  Gomarus,  of  attributing  to  Hebrew 
 poetry  a  closer  affinity  to  Greek  metre  than  it  really 
 possesses  ;  nor  was  he  exempt  from  the  more 
 serious  fault  which  he  justly  imputed  to  Meibomius 
 of  wantonly  altering  and  interpolating,  without  any 
 adequate  authority,  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Psal- 
 mist. In  his  metrical  theory  he  considered  the  ac- 
 cents of  the  syllables  as  one  of  the  characteristics  of 
 Hebrew  poetry  ;  and  although  he  did  not  discover 
 alcaics  and  sapphics  in  the  Psalms  of  David,  he  did 
 suppose  that  they  were  replete  with  iambics  and 
 trochaics.  Whatever  progress  may  yet  be  made  in 
 discovering  the  laws  of  Hebrew  poetiy,  it  may  safely 
 be  assumed  that  all  attempts  like  Bishop  Hare's  to 
 recover  the  Hebrew  system  of  metre  by  means  of 
 Greek  and  Latin  examples  must  be  utterly  futile. 
 Our  Bishop's  name  will  be  kept  in  remembrance  in 
 connection  with  this  sub  ect  by  the  confutations  of 
 Dr.  Lowth.  The  longt  r  of  these  was  written  in 
 English  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Thomas  Edwards,  whose 
 defence  of  Hare  was  hard^  more  than  a  virulent 
 attack  on  Lowth  ;  while  the  shorter  one  is  appended 
 to  the  Pralectiones  under  the  title  of  '  Metrics 
 Harianse  brevis  confutatio.'  In  the  best  Oxford 
 edition  of  Lowth's  great  woik  there  is  reprinted  a 
 valuable  review  of  Bishop  Hare's  theory  by  the 
 learned  German,  Christian  W.^ise,  which  was  ori- 
 ginally published  in  1740  under  the  title  of  '  Sys- 
 tenia  Psalmorum  Metricum  a  celeberrimo  Anglo 
 Francisco  Hare  nuper  adornatum  delineat  Chris- 
 tianus  Weisius.'  There  are  briefer  notices  of  Hare's 
 system  in  Bishop  Jebb's  Sacred  Literaticre,  pp.  12- 
 16,  and  Canon  Roger's  Boo/e  0/  Fsa/;ns  in  Hebreiv, 
 vol.  i.  pp.  16-19.  Bishop  Hare  was  grandfather  of 
 the  late  Archdeacon  Hare  and  his  brother,  the 
 well-known  authors  of  Guesses  at  Tniih. — P.  H. 
 
 HARE  (n33"lX  arnebeth ;  Arab,  arneb)  occurs 
 
 in  Lev.  xi.  6,  and  Deut.  xiv.  7,  and,  in  both  in- 
 stances, the  animal  is  prohibited  from  being  used 
 as  food,  because,  although  it  chews  the  cud,  it  has 
 not  the  hoof  divided.  But  the  hare  belongs  to  an 
 order  of  mammals  totally  distinct  from  the  rumin- 
 antia,  which  are  all,  without  exception,  bisulca,  the 
 camel's  hoof  alone  offering  a  partial  modification. 
 They  have  all  four  stomachs  ;  incisor  teeth,  with 
 again  some  slight  modification  in  the  camel,  solely 
 in  the  lower  jaw  ;  molars  made  for  grinding,  and 
 the  lower  jawbone  articulated,   so  as  to  admit  of 
 
 *  It  is,  however,  reprinted,  with  several  works 
 of  like  nature  in  Ugolini  Thes.  vol.  xxxi. — the  origi- 
 nal title  was  '  Psalmorum  Liber,  in  versiculos 
 metrice  divisus  et  cum  aliis  critices  subsidiis  turn 
 prsecipue  metrices  ope  multis  in  locis  integritati 
 suae  restitutus,  cum  Dissertatione  de  antiqua  Heb- 
 rasorum  poesi  .  .  .  edidit  Franciscus  Hare 
 S.  T.  P.  Episcopus  Cicestrensis.' 
 
 the  circular  action  required  for  that  purpose,  when 
 the  food,  already  swallowed,  is  forced  up  to  be 
 thoroughly  triturated.  All  these  characters  and 
 faculties  are  wanting  in  the  hare,,  which  belongs 
 to  the  order  rodentia  ;  for,  in  common  with  por- 
 cupines, squirrels,  beavers,  and  rats,  it  has  incisor 
 teeth  above  and  below,  set  like  chisels,  and  calcu- 
 lated for  gnawing,  cutting,  and  nibbling.  The 
 stomach  of  rodents  is  single,  and  the  motion  of  the 
 mouth,  excepting  when  they  masticate  some  small 
 portion  of  food  reserved  in  the  hollow  of  the  cheek, 
 is  more  that  of  the  lips  ;  when  in  a  state  of  repose 
 the  animals  are  engaged  in  working  the  incisor 
 teeth  upon  each  other.  This  practice  is  a  neces- 
 saiy  condition  of  existence,  for  the  friction  keeps 
 them  fit  for  the  purpose  of  nibbling,  and  prevents 
 their  growing  beyond  a  proper  length.  It  is  a 
 provision  of  nature  in  the  whole  order  of  rodents  ; 
 and,  if  by  any  accident  the  four  cutting  teeth  be 
 rendered  inefficient  by  not  closing  upon  each  other 
 at  the  exact  line  of  contact,  they  grow  rapidly 
 beyond  serviceable  use,  exceed  the  opening  of  the 
 mouth,  and  impede  feeding  till  the  animal  perishes 
 from  want.  As  hares  do  not  subsist  on  hard  sub- 
 stances, like  most  of  the  genera  of  the  order,  but 
 on  tender  shoots  and  grasses,  they  have  more 
 cause,  and  therefore  a  more  constant  craving,  to 
 abrade  their  teeth  ;  and  this  they  do  in  a  manner 
 which,  combined  with  the  slight  trituration  of  the 
 occasional  contents  of  the  cheeks,  even  modem 
 writers,  not  zoologists,  have  mistaken  for  real 
 rumination.  In  the  German  versions,  the  expres- 
 sion zviederkauen,  '  to  chew  again,'  is  much  more 
 correct  than  the  English  phrase,  '  to  chew  the  cud,' 
 because  this  last  implies  a  faculty  which  re-chewing 
 does  not,  and  which  the  hare  does  not  possess. 
 
 260.  Syrian  Hare. 
 
 Physiological  investigation  having  fully  detet- 
 mined  these  questions,  it  follows  that  both  with 
 regard  to  the  Shaphan  and  the  Hare  we  sliould  un- 
 derstand the  original  in  the  above  passages,  rendered 
 '  chewing  the  cud,'  as  merely  implying  a  second 
 mastication,  more  or  less  complete,  and  not  neces- 
 sarily that  faculty  of  true  niminants,  which  de- 
 rives its  name  from  a  power  to  draw  up  aliment, 
 after  deglutition,  when  worked  into  a  ball,  from 
 the  first  stomach  into  the  mouth,  and  there  to  sub- 
 mit it  to  a  second  grinding  process.  The  act  of 
 'chewing  the  cud'  and  '  re-chewing' being  con- 
 sidered identical  by  the  Hebrews,  the  sacred  law- 
 giver, not  being  occupied  with  the  doctrines  of 
 science,  no  doubt  used  the  expression  in  the  sense 
 in  which  it  was  then  understood.  It  may  be  added, 
 that  a  similar  opinion,  and  consequent  rejection  of 
 the  hare  as  food,  pervaded  many  nations  of  an- 
 tiquity, who  derived  their  origin,  or  their  doctrines, 
 from  a  Semitic  source  ;  and  that  among  others 
 it  existed  among  the  British  Celtje,  probably  even 
 before  they  had  any  intercourse  with  Phcenician 
 mercliants. 
 
HARENBERG 
 
 231 
 
 HARLOT 
 
 There  are  two  distinct  species  of  hare  in  Syria, 
 one,  Lepus  Syriacus,  or  Syrian  hare,  nearly  equal 
 in  size  to  the  common  European,  having  the  fur 
 ochry  buff,  and  Lepus  Sinaiticus,  or  hare  of  the 
 desert,  smaller  and  brownish.  They  reside  in  the 
 localities  indicated  by  their  trivial  names,  and  are 
 distinguished  from  the  common  hare,  by  a  greater 
 length  of  ears,  and  a  black  tail  with  white  fringe. 
 There  is  found  in  Egypt,  and  higher  up  the  Nile, 
 a  third  species,  represented  in  the  outline  paintings 
 on  ancient  monuments,  but  not  coloured  with  that 
 delicacy  of  tint  required  for  distinguishing  it  from 
 the  others,  excepting  that  it  appears  to  be  marked 
 with  the  black  speckles  which  characterise  the 
 existing  species. — C.  H.  S. 
 
 HARENBERG,  John  Christopher,  a  Lu- 
 theran theologian  and  historian,  was  born  in  1696 
 at  Langenholzen,  in  the  duchy  of  Hildesheim.  In 
 1 71 5  he  went  to  Helmstadt  and  studied  theology, 
 history,  and  the  belles  lettres.  In  1720  he  be- 
 came rector  of  the  school  belonging  to  the  chapter 
 at  Gandersheim.  In  1733  he  was  appointed  in- 
 spector-general of  the  schools  in  the  duchy  of 
 Wolfenbiittel.  In  1738  he  was  admitted  into  the 
 Royal  Academy  of  Sciences  at  Berlin  ;  and  from 
 1745  he  taught  ecclesiastical  history  and  political 
 geography  at  the  Carolinum  of  Brunswick.  He 
 was  soon  after  nominated  overseer  of  the  monastery 
 of  St.  Laurence,  near  Schoeningen,  where  he  died 
 1 2th  November  1774.  Harenberg's  works  are 
 numerous,  and  little  read  in  the  present  day.  How- 
 ever useful  at  the  time  when  they  appeared,  they 
 are  almost  forgotten  now.  Those  relating  to  the 
 literature  or  explanation  of  the  Bible  are  Juj-a 
 Isi'aelitariim  in  PalcBstina,  Hildesheim  1724  ;  Pa- 
 lastina,  sen  terra  a  Mose  et  Josna  ocmpata  et  iitter 
 yitdcEos  distribicta  per  xii.  tribiis  vulgo  sancta  ap- 
 pellata,  ex  observationibus  astronotnicis,  ititierum 
 intei~vallis,  ac  scriptis  fide  dignis  concimiata,  Augs- 
 bourg  1737  ;  Oiia  Gaiidersheimensia  sacra,  ex- 
 ponendis  sacris  Uteris  et  historic  ecclesiastias  dicata, 
 Utrecht  1739;  Erkldnaig  der  Offenbaj-taig  S.  yb- 
 hannis,  Brunswick  1759  ;  Amos propheta  expositus 
 i)iterpretatione  nova  latina,  Leyden  1764;  Aufkldr- 
 tijig  des  Bucks  Daniels,  Quedlimburg,  2  vols., 
 1770- 1772.  Besides  separate  works,  he  wrote 
 many  dissertations  and  essays  in  Bibliotheqices  and 
 Museii77is.  Some  are  printed  in  Ugolini's  The- 
 saurus.— S.  D. 
 
 HARETH,  a  forest  in  Judah,.  to  which.  David 
 fled  from  Saul  (i  Sam.  xxii.  5)  [Forest]. 
 
 HAREUS,  Franciscus.  A  learned  Dutch 
 divine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  His  native 
 name  was  Van  der  Haer  ;  he  was  born  at  Utrecht 
 in  1550,  and  died  in  1632.  Among  his  publica- 
 tions suitable  for  mention  here  are  two  4to  volumes 
 on  Chronology,  1602,  1614  ;  Catena  Atirea  in  iv. 
 Evaligelia,  1625  ;  Biblia  Sacra  expositionibus  pris- 
 corum  patrum  literalibus  et  mysticis  illustrata, 
 Antwerp  1630,  foho. — P.  H. 
 
 HARIM  (Q-in  ;  Sept.  ^api^;  Alex.  XapT^/x),  a 
 
 priest  third  in  the  four  and  twenty  orders  of  the 
 divisions  of  the  sons  of  Aaron,  chosen  to  '  the  ser- 
 vice of  the  house  of  the  Lord'  (i  Chron.  xxiv.  8). 
 The  name  repeatedly  occurs  in  Ezra  in  connection 
 with  what  we  believe  to  be  the  descendants  of  the 
 above,  who  came  up  out  of  the  captivity  of  Babylon 
 with  Zerubbabel.     Two  families  of  B'ney  Harim 
 
 (Sept.  viol  'HXa/x,  and  viol  'Hp^/j.)  are  mentioned 
 the  first  numbering  320,  the  other  1017  (Ezra  ii.  32' 
 39).  The  names  of  two  distinct  families  of  B'ney^ 
 Harim  also  occur  among  those  who  had  'taken 
 strange  wives  of  the  people  of  the  land'  (Ezra  x.  21, 
 31).  We  find  a  further  mention  of  the  name,  pro- 
 bably as  representing  the  family  in  one  or  other  of 
 its  divisions,  or  both,  among  those  who  sealed  the 
 covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  5). — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HARLOT,  Whore,   Strange  Woman,   etc. 
 (njir,    more  fully  "f  nE^{<  ;    Sept.    irdpvTj ;   Vulg. 
 
 mentrix;   Hn^J,   mt,   n&lp,  etc.     The  first  of 
 
 T • ;t  tt  t    "    : 
 
 these  English  words,  to  which  various  etymologies 
 have  been  assigned,  signifies  a  prostitute  for  lust  or 
 gain,  y\  riK'N-     The  mercenary   motive   is  more 
 
 evident  in  the  second,  from  the  German  huren, 
 Dutch  hueren,  '  to  hire.'  It  is  equally  apparent  in 
 the  Greek  tr6pvr},  from  Trepvdw,  '  to  sell ; '  and  in 
 the  Latin  meretrix,  from  mereor,  '  to  earn  '  (comp. 
 Ovid,  Amor.  i.  10,  21).  The  first  Hebrew  word 
 (ilJIf)  occurs  frequently,  and  is  often  rendered  in 
 our  version  by  the  first  of  these  English  words,  as 
 in  Gen.  xxxiv.  31,  etc.,  and  sometimes,  without 
 apparent  reason  for  the  change,  by  the  second,  as 
 in  Prov.  xxiii.  27,  and  elsewhere.  The  first  Eng- 
 lish word  is  also  applied  to  difi'crent  Hebrew  word's, 
 whereby  important  distinctions  are  lost.  Thus  in 
 Gen.  xxxviii.  15,  the  word  is  HJIT,.'  harlot,'  which, 
 however,  becomes  changed  to  ilK'np,  'harlot,'  in 
 vers.  21,  22,  which  means,  literally,  a  consecrated 
 woman,  a  female  (perhaps  priestess)  devoted  to 
 prostitution  in  honour  of  some  heathe7i  idol.  The 
 distinction  shews  that  Judah  supposed  Tamar  to 
 be  a  heathen ;  the  facts,  therefore,  do  not  prove 
 that  prostitution  was  then  practised  between  Ue- 
 breivs.  The  following  elucidation  is  offered  of  the 
 most  important  instances  in  which  the  several 
 words  occur  : — ■ 
 
 First,  rUIT.  From  the  foregoing  account  of  Judah 
 it  would  appear  that  the  '  veil '  was  at  that  time 
 peculiar  to  harlots.  Judah  thought  Tamar  to  be 
 such,  '  because  she  had  covered  her  face. '  Mr. 
 Buckingham  remarks,  in  reference  to  this  passage, 
 that  '  the  Turcomaun  women  go  unveiled  to  this 
 day'  [Travels  in  Mesopotamia,  i.  77).  It  is  con- 
 tended by  Jahn  and  others  that  in  ancient  times  all 
 females  wore  the  veil  {Bibl.  Archdol.  p.  127).  Pos- 
 sibly some  pecuharity  in  the  size  ot  the  veil,  or  the 
 mode  of  wearing  it,  may  have  been  (Hjit  JT'K^, 
 Prov.  vii.  10)  the  distinctive  dress  of  the  harlot  at 
 that  period.  The  priests  and  the  high-priest  were 
 forbidden  to  take  a  wife  that  was  {had  been.  Lev. 
 xxi.  7)  a  harlot.  Josephus  extends  the  law  to  all 
 the  Hebrews,  and  seems  to  ground  it  on  the  pro- 
 hibition against  oblations  arising  from  prosti- 
 tution, Deut.  xxiii.  18  (  intiq.  iv.  8.  23).  The 
 celebrated  case  of  Rahab  has  been  much  debated 
 [Rahab].  The  next  instance  introduces  the  epi- 
 thet of  'strange  woman.'  It  is  the  case  of 
 Jephthah's  mother  (Judg.  xi.  2),  who  is  also  called 
 a  harlot  {irbpv-q  ;  7ncretrix)  ;  but  the  epithet  HE^X 
 mnX,  '  strange  woman,'  merely  denotes  foreign 
 ext7'actio7i.  Josephus  says  ^ej'os  -Kepi  riju  /urir^pa, 
 '  a  stranger  by  the  mother's  side. '  The  masterly 
 description  in  Prov.  vii.  6,  etc.,  may  possibly  be 
 that  of  an  abandoned  married  woman  (vers.  19, 
 20),  or  of  the  solicitations  of  a  courtezan,  '  fair 
 speech,'  under  such  a  pretension.  The  mixture  of 
 religious  observances  (ver.    14)   seems  illustrated 
 
HARLOT 
 
 232 
 
 HARMONIES 
 
 by  the  fact  that  '  the  gods  are  actually  worshipped 
 in  many  Oriental  brothels,  and  fragments  of  the 
 otferings  distributed  among  the  frequenters '  (Dr. 
 A.  Clarke's  Comment,  in  loc.)  The  representation 
 given  by  Solomon  is  no  dovht  foiotded  upon  facts, 
 and  therefore  shews  that  in  his  time  prostitutes 
 pHed  their  trade  in  the  'streets'  (Prov.  vii.  12  ;  ix. 
 14,  etc.;  Jer.  iii.  2  ;  Ezek.  xvi.  24,  25,  31).  Since 
 the  Hebrews  regarded  Jehovah  as  the  husband  of 
 his  people,  by  virtue  of  the  covenant  he  had  made 
 with  them  (Jer.  iii.  i);  therefore,  to  cotnmit  forni- 
 cation  is  a  very  common  metaphor  in  the  Scriptures 
 to  denote  defections  on  their  part  from  that  cove- 
 nant, and  especially  by  the  practice  of  idolatry 
 [Fornication].  Hence  the  degeneracy  of  Jeru- 
 salem is  illustrated  by  the  symbol  of  a  harlot  (Is.  i. 
 21),  and  even  that  of  heathen  cities,  as  of  Nineveh 
 (Nah.  iii.  4).  Under  this  figure  the  prophet  Eze- 
 kiel  delivers  the  tremendous  invectives  contained 
 in  ch.  xvi.  xxiii.  In  the  prophecy  of  Hosea  the 
 illustration  is  carried  to  a  starthng  extent.  The 
 prophet  seems  commanded  by  the  Lord  to  take  'a 
 wife  of  whoredoms  and  children  of  whoredoms' 
 (ch.  i.  2),  and  to  'love  an  adulteress'  (ch.  iii.  i). 
 It  has,  indeed,  been  much  disputed  whether  these 
 transactions  were  real,  or  passed  in  vision  only  ; 
 but  the  idea  itself,  and  the  diversified  applications 
 of  it  throughout  the  prophecy,  render  it  one  of  the 
 most  effective  portions  of  Scripture  [Hosea]. 
 
 Secondly,  ^t^^p  (occurs  Gen.  xxxviii.  15,  21, 
 22;  Deut.  xxiii.  17;  Hos.  iv.  14).  It  has  been 
 already  observed  that  the  proper  meaning  of  the 
 word  is  consecrated  prostitute.  The  very  early 
 allusion  to  such  persons,  in  the  Ji7-st  of  these  pas- 
 sages, agrees  with  the  accounts  of  them  in  ancient 
 heathen  writers.  Herodotus  refers  to  the  '  abomi- 
 nable custom  of  the  Babylonians,  who  compelled 
 every  native  female  to  attend  the  temple  of  Venus 
 once  in  her  life,  and  to  prostitute  herself  in 
 honour  of  the  goddess'  (i.  199  ;  Baruch,  vi. 
 43).  Strabo  calls  prostitutes,  who,  it  is  well 
 known,  were  at  Athens  dedicated  to  Venus,  hp6- 
 ^ovKoi  yvvoLKes,  'consecrated  servants,'  'votaries' 
 {Geog.  viii.  p.  378  ;  Grotius,  Amtotat,  ott  Baruch  ; 
 Beloe's  Hei-odotns,  Notes,  vol.  i.  p.  272,  Lond. 
 1806).  The  transaction  related  in  Num.  xv.  1-15 
 (comp.  Ps.  cvi.  28)  seems  connected  with  idolatry. 
 The  prohibition  in  Deut.  xxiii.  1 7,  '  there  shall  be 
 no  HE^Ip,  'whore,'  of  the  daughters  of  Israel,'  is 
 intended  to  exclude  such  devotees  from  the  worship 
 of  Jehovah  (see  other  allusions,  Job  xxxvi.  14 ;  i 
 Kings  xiv.  24  ;  xv.  12). 
 
 Thirdly,  n''"l33,  'the  strange  woman'  (l  Kings 
 xi.  1  ;  Prov.  v.  20  ;  vi.  24  ;  vii.  5  ;  xxiii.  27  ; 
 Sept.  aXKoTpia  ;  Vulg.  alietia,  extranea).  It  seems 
 probable  that  some  of  the  Hebrews  in  later  times 
 interpreted  the  prohibition  against  fornication 
 (Deut.  xxii.  21)  as  limited  to  females  of  their  own 
 nation,  and  that  the  'strange  women'  in  question 
 were  Canaanites  and  olher  Gentiles  (Josh,  xxiii. 
 13).  In  the  case  of  Solomon  they  are  specified  as 
 Moabites,  Ammonites,  Edomites,  Zidonians,  and 
 Hittites.  The  passages  referred  to  discover  the 
 character  of  these  females.  To  the  same  class 
 belongs  JTIT,  '  the  strange  woman '  (Prov.  v.  3,  20  ; 
 xxii.  14  ;  xxiii.  33  ;  yvv-rj  irbpv-r],  aXkoTpla  ;  may- 
 trtx,  aliena,  extranea)  :  it  is  sometimes  found  PIK'N 
 mf  (Prov.  ii,   16  ;  vii.  5).     To  the  same  class  of 
 
 females  belongs  n"l?''D3  fl^N,  '  the  foolish  woman,' 
 i.  e.,  by  a  common  association  of  ideas  in  the 
 
 Shemitish  dialects,  sm/ul  (Ps.  xiv.  i).  Thedescrip. 
 tion  in  Prov.  ix.  14,  etc.,  illustrates  the  character 
 of  the  female  so  designated.  To  which  may  be 
 added  yi  DK'S,  '  the  evil  woman'  (Prov.  vi.  24). 
 
 In  the  N.  T.  irdpvr}  occurs  in  Matt.  xxi.  31,  32  ; 
 Luke  XV.  30;  I  Cor,  vi.  15,  16;  Heb.  xi.  31  ; 
 James  ii.  25.  In  none  of  these  passages  does  it 
 necessarily  imply  prostitution  for  gain.  The  like- 
 liest is  Luke  xv.  30.  It  is  used  symbolically  for  a 
 city  in  Rev.  xvii.  I,  5,  15,  16  ;  xix.  2,  where  the 
 term  and  all  the  attendant  imagery  are  derived 
 from  the  O.  T.  It  may  be  observed  in  regard  to 
 Tyre,  which  (Is.  xxiii.  15,  17)  is  represented  as 
 '  committing  fornication  with  all  the  kingdoms  of 
 the  world  upon  the  face  of  the  earth,'  that  these 
 words,  as  indeed  seems  likely  from  those  which  fol- 
 low, may  relate  to  the  various  arts  which  she  had 
 employed  to  induce  merchants  to  trade  with  her' 
 (Patrick,  in  loc.)  So  the  Sept.  understood  it,  iarai 
 itnrdpiov  Trdcrais  racs  ^aaiXeiais  rrjs  olKovfj.^v7)s  iirl 
 TTpbaunrov  rrjs  7'^s.  Schleusner  observes  that  the 
 same  words  in  Rev.  xviii.  3  fnay  also  relate  to 
 commercial  dealings.  (Winer's  Realworterb. ,  s.  v. 
 HuRE  ;  Rahab  ;  Fesselii  Adversar.  Sacr.  ii.  27. 
 I,  2,  Witteb.  1650;  Frisch,  De  miiliere  peregrina 
 dp.  Hebr.,  Lips.  1744).— J.  F.  D. 
 
 HARMER,  Rev.  Thomas,  a  learned  congrega- 
 tional minister,  was  bom  at  Norwich  17 15,  edu- 
 cated under  Mr.  Eames,  F.  R.S.,  tutor  of  a  dis- 
 senting academy  in  London,  and  ordained,  in  his 
 twentieth  year,  as  pastor  of  the  congregational 
 church  at  Watesfield,  in  Suffolk,  where  he  con- 
 tinued beloved  and  useful  till  his  death  in  1788, 
 aged  73.  His  works  entitling  him  to  a  notice  here 
 are  :  l.  Observations  o?t  divers  passages  of  Scrip- 
 ture, placing  many  of  them  in  a  light  altogether  new 
 by  means  of  circutnstances  mentioned  in 
 books  of  voyages  aftd  travels  into  the  East.  A  new 
 edition  of  this  work,  the  best,  was  edited  by  Dr. 
 Adam  Clark  in  181 6,  4  vols.  8vo.  Here  Harmer 
 broke  new  ground,  and  led  the  way  in  the  applica- 
 tion of  Oriental  travel  to  the  elucidation  of  Scrip- 
 ture, in  which  he  has  been  since  successfully 
 followed  by  many  others.  2.  Outlittes  of  a  7ieio 
 Co?m?ientary  on  Solo?no7i's  Song,  draivn  by  the  Help 
 of  Insti-uctiotis  frojn  the  East,  etc.,  Lond.  1768,  2d 
 edition,  1775.  This  work  has  been  much  esteemed 
 by  some,  but  pronounced  '  singularly  confused'  by 
 others.  According  to  the  author  the  essence  of 
 the  Song  is  the  marriage  of  Solomon  with  an 
 Egyptian  princess,  which  greatly  displeases  Shula- 
 mith,  his  Hebrew  queen ;  the  whole  transaction 
 being  typical  of  the  marriage  of  the  Messiah  with 
 the  Gentile  Church,  and  the  displeasure  of  the 
 Jewish  Church  thereat.  3.  An  account  of  the  Jew- 
 ish Doctri7ie  of  the  Resurrection  from  the  Dead, 
 (See  Memoir  by  Dr.  A.  Clark,  prefixed  to  '  Obser- 
 vations'').— I.  J. 
 
 HARMONIES.  The  object  of  Harmonies  is 
 to  arrange  the  Scriptures  in  chronological  order, 
 so  that  the  mutual  agreement  of  the  several  p.irts 
 may  be  rendered  apparent,  and  the  true  succession 
 of  events  clearly  understood.  With  this  view  vari- 
 ous scholars  have  compiled  harmonies  of  the  Old 
 Testament,  of  the  New,  and  of  particular  portions  of 
 both.  Harmonies  of  the  O.  T.  exhibit  the  books 
 disposed  in  chronological  order  ;  as  is  done  by 
 Lightfoot  in  his  '  Chronicle  of  the  Times,  and  the 
 order  of  the  Texts  of  the  Old  Testament ; '  and  by 
 Townsend  in  his  '  Old  Testament  arranged  in  His- 
 
HARMONIES 
 
 233 
 
 HARMONIES 
 
 ttorical  and  Chronological  order.'  Harrronies  of 
 the  N.  T.  present  the  gospels  and  epistles  distri- 
 buted in  like  order  ;  the  latter  being  interspersed 
 i  ■  among  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  In  this  way 
 Townsend  has  proceeded  in  his  valuable  work  en- 
 titled, '  The  New  Testament  arranged  in  Chrono- 
 logical and  Historical  order.'  Books,  however, 
 of  this  kind  are  so  few  in  number,  that  usage 
 has  almost  appropriated  the  term  harfiiony  to  the 
 gospels.  It  is  this  part  of  the  N.  T.  which  has 
 chiefly  occupied  the  attention  of  those  inquirers 
 whose  object  is  to  arrange  the  Scriptures  in  their 
 true  order.  The  memoirs  of  our  Lord  written  by 
 the  four  Evangelists,  have  chiefly  engaged  the 
 thoughts  of  those  who  wish  to  shew  that  all  agree, 
 and  mutually  authenticate  one  another.  Accord- 
 ingly, such  compositions  are  exceedingly  numerous. 
 The  four  gospels  narrate  some  of  the  events  con- 
 nected with  our  Lord's  abode  on  earth,  from  his 
 birth  to  his  ascension.  There  must  therefore  be  a 
 general  resemblance  between  them  ;  though  that 
 of  John  contains  little  in  common  with  the  others, 
 being  apparently  supplementary  to  them.  Yet 
 there  are  considerable  diversities,  both  in  the  order 
 in  which  facts  are  narrated,  and  in  the  facts  them- 
 selves. Hence  the  difficulty  of  weaving  the  ac- 
 counts of  the  four  into  a  continuous  and  chronolo- 
 gical history.  Those  portions  of  the  Gospels  that 
 relate  to  the  resurrection  of  the  Saviour  have 
 always  presented  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the  com- 
 pilers of  haiTnonies  ;  and  it  must  be  candidly 
 admitted  that  they  are  not  easily  reconciled.  Here 
 the  labours  of  West  and  Townson,  especially  the 
 latter,  have  served  to  remove  some  contradictions. 
 In  addition  to  them  may  be  mentioned  Greswell, 
 Robinson,  and  Stroud,  who  have  tried  the  same 
 problem  with  greater  success. 
 
 In  connection  with  harmonies,  the  term  diates- 
 saron  frequently  occurs.  It  denotes  a  continued 
 narrative  selected  out  of  the  four  Gospels,  in  which 
 all  repetitions  of  the  same  or  similar  words  are 
 avoided.  It  is  thus  the  i-estilt  of  a  harmony  ;  since 
 the  latter,  properly  speaking,  exhibits  the  entire 
 texts  of  the  four  Evangelists,  arranged  in  corres- 
 ponding columns.  In  popular  language  the  two 
 are  often  used  synonymously  (see,  however,  David- 
 son's State  of  the  Old  Testament  Text  considered, 
 etc.  etc.,  p.  541,  2d  ed.) 
 
 The  following  questions  relative  to  harmonies 
 demand  attention  : — 
 
 1.  Have  all  or  a7iy  of  the  Evangelists  observed 
 chronological  arrangement  in  their  narratives  ? 
 
 2.  What  was  the  duration  of  our  Lord's  mi- 
 nistry ? 
 
 I.  It  was  the  opinion  of  Osiander  and  his  fol- 
 lowers, that  all  the  Evangelists  record  the  facts  of 
 the  Saviour's  history  in  their  true  order.  When 
 therefore  the  same  transactions  are  placed  in  a  dif- 
 ferent order  by  the  writers,  they  were  supposed  to 
 have  happened  more  than  once.  It  was  assumed 
 that  they  took  place  a^  often  as  they  were  diffe- 
 rently arranged.  This  principle  is  too  improbable 
 to  require  refutation.  Instead  of  endeavouring  to 
 solve  difficulties,  it  boldly  meets  them  with  a 
 clumsy  expedient.  Improbable  however  as  it  is, 
 it  has  been  adopted  by  Macknight.  It  is  our  de- 
 cided conviction  that  the  Evangelists  have  not  fol- 
 lowed chronological  arrangement. 
 
 The  question  then  arises,  have  all  neglected  the 
 order  of  time.  Newcome  and  many  others  espouse 
 this  view.     '  Chronological  order,'  says  this  writer. 
 
 '  is  not  precisely  observed  by  any  of  the  Evan- 
 gelists ;  St.  John  and  St.  Mark  otserve  it  most ; 
 and  St.  Matthew  neglects  it  most.'  Bishop  Marsh 
 supposes  that  Matthew  probably  adhered  to  the 
 order  of  time,  because  he  was  for  the  most  part  an 
 eye-witness  of  the  facts.  The  others,  he  thinks, 
 neglected  the  succession  of  events.  The  reason 
 assigned  by  the  learned  prelate  in  favour  of  Mat- 
 thew's order  proves  too  much  ;  because  John  was 
 also  an  eye-witness  ;  yet  his  order  differs  from 
 Matthew's.  The  fact  of  one  being  an  eye-witness 
 has  no  conclusive  relation,  by  itself,  to  the  arrange- 
 ment of  written  materials. 
 
 A  close  inspection  of  Matthew's  Gospel  will 
 shew  that  he  did  not  intend  to  mark  the  true  suc- 
 cession of  events.  He  gives  us  no  definite  expres- 
 sions to  assist  in  arranging  his  materials  in  their 
 proper  order.  Very  frequently  he  passes  from  one 
 occurrence  to  another  without  note  of  time  ;  some- 
 times he  employs  a  rtiT^,  sometimes  iv  raFs  ■^/xe- 
 pai%  eKeivaLS,  €v  e/ceiVy  T(p  Kaipip,  or  iv  eKeivrj  rrj  ibpa, 
 iKeWev.  Rarely  is  he  so  minute  as  to  use  /J.ed''  i]/J.^pas 
 ^^  (xvii.  i).  In  short,  time  and  place  seem  to  have 
 been  subordinated  to  the  grand  object  which  he 
 had  in  view,  viz.,  the  lively  exhibition  of  Jesus  as 
 the  Messiah  promised  in  the  O.  T.  With  this 
 design,  he  has  often  brought  together  similar  facts 
 and  discourses.  Although,  therefore,  Kaiser 
 founds  upon  the  phrases  we  have  adduced  a  con- 
 clusion the  very  reverse  of  ours,  we  believe  that 
 Matthew  did  not  propose  to  follow  chronological 
 order.     The  contrary  is  obviously  implied. 
 
 Mark  again  is  still  more  indefinite  than  Mat- 
 thew. Even  the  general  expressions  found  in  the 
 first  Gospel  are  wanting  in  his.  He  uses  Kal  .  .  . 
 TrdXiv,  Kal  iraXiv,  ev  eKeivais  rats  Tjixepais  TrdXtv. 
 Facts  themselves,  not  their  true  succession,  were 
 the  object  of  his  attention.  Chronological  order 
 is  not  observed  in  his  Gospel,  as  is  now  generally 
 admitted.  Yet  Cartwright,  in  his  Harmony,  pub- 
 lished about  1627,  makes  Mark's  arrangement  the 
 rule  of  his  method. 
 
 With  regard  to  Luke,  some  infer  from  the  use  of 
 Kade^Tjs  at  the  beginning  of  his  Gospel,  that  he 
 intended  to  arrange  everything  in  its  true  chrono- 
 logical place.  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Beza, 
 adopted  by  Olshausen.  But  an  examination  of 
 the  work  itself,  which  is  unconnected  and  un- 
 chronological,  shews  another  object.  He  uses  Kal 
 iyivero,  Kal,  and  5^.  His  expressions  of  time  are 
 indeterminate.  Indeed  he  frequently  passes  from 
 one  transaction  to  another  without  any  note  of 
 time  ;  or  gives  pLera  ravra,  iv  ixLq.  rwv  rifxepuiv.  All 
 that  can  be  fairly  deduced  from  the  word  Kade^rjs 
 is,  that  Luke  designed  to  pursue  a  systematic 
 plan,  connecting  events  together  according  to  the 
 predominating  idea  with  which  he  set  out,  which 
 was  not  the  chronological  principle. 
 
 John's  Gospel  has  so  little  in  common  with  the 
 rest  that  it  cannot  be  conveniently  drawn  into  a 
 harmony  with  them.  It  is  obvious  that  his 
 arrangement  is  not  chronological.  In  general  he 
 carefully  notes  whether  one,  two,  or  three  days 
 elapsed  between  certain  events. 
 
 The  Gospels  are  fragmentary.  They  do  not 
 profess  to  record  all  the  sayings  and  doings  of 
 Jesus,  but  give  a  selection  from  the  materials  of 
 his  life.  The  basis  of  each  was  oral  tradition, 
 combined  in  some  cases  with  the  use  of  documents. 
 A  spiritual  idea,  not  the  principle  of  accurate 
 sequence,  guided  and  controlled  both  their  selec- 
 
HARMONIES 
 
 234 
 
 HARMONIES 
 
 tion  of  materials  and  the  form  it  assumed  in 
 their  hands.  Each  evangehst  had  his  own  plan 
 and  object.  Matthew  had  Jews  and  Jewish 
 Christians  in  view  ;  and  therefore  he  places  the 
 facts  of  the  Gospel  in  connection  with  the  revela- 
 tion of  the  Old  Testament.  Mark  designed  to  give 
 prominent  facts  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  accompanied  by 
 minute  and  vivid  details.  Luke,  who  had  become 
 acquainted  with  the  Pauline  circle  and  type  of 
 ideas,  meant  to  present  such  particulars  as  should 
 show  most  convincingly  that  the  man  Jesus  came 
 to  give  light  to  mankind,  and  not  merely  to  Israel 
 after  the  flesh.  Thus  each  evangelist  had  his  pecu- 
 liar purpose  and  method.  The  outward  sequence 
 of  events  was  always  subordinate  to  a  higher  idea. 
 Of  John  this  may  be  said  pre-eminently. 
 
 Existing  data  are  insufficient  to  enable  the 
 inquirer  to  compose  a  harmony  in  chronological 
 order.  As  times  and  places  have  been  left  inde- 
 terminate, it  is  hopeless  to  conceive  of  a  diatessaroii 
 accurate  in  all  particulars.  The  problem  may 
 continue  to  exercise  the  ingenuity  of  critics,  with- 
 out furnishing  an  adequate  reward  for  the  time  and 
 labour  bestowed  on  it.  Diversity  in  unity  pervades 
 the  Gospels,  and  all  that  can  be  properly  done  is  to 
 illustrate  both.  If  it  can  be  demonstrated  that  the 
 evangelical  memoirs  do  not  contradict  one  another 
 in  any  important  particular ;  but  that  they  present 
 the  same  facts  and  discourses  in  a  different  light, 
 according  to  the  object  the  writers  had  in  view, 
 and  perhaps  their  own  idiosyncracies,  we  may  be 
 satisfied  with  the  conclusion.  The  attempts  of  ill- 
 judging  advocates  to  force  them  into  agreement  in 
 every  minute  point  cannot  be  reprobated  too 
 much  ;  for  a  degree  of  discrepancy,  while  violating 
 no  rational  theory  of  inspii-ation,  shows  indepen- 
 dence and  veracity.  We  do  not  believe  that  all 
 variations  between  them  can  be  fairly  reconciled  ; 
 but  that  circumstance  does  not  weaken  our  faith  in 
 the  general  credibility  of  the  narratives.  In  our 
 view,  a  complete  harmony  belongs  to  the  range  of 
 the  impossible. 
 
 2.  What  was  the  duration  of  our  Lord's  mi- 
 nistry ? 
 
 This  is  a  question  upon  which  the  opinions  of 
 the  learned  have  been  much  divided  ;  and  which 
 cannot  be  settled  with  conclusive  certainty.  In 
 order  to  resolve  it,  it  is  necessaiy  to  mark  the  dif- 
 ferent Passovers  which  Christ  attended.  Looking 
 to  the  Gospels  by  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke,  we 
 should  infer  that  he  was  present  at  no  more  than 
 two  ;  the  first  at  the  time  of  his  baptism,  the 
 second  immediately  before  his  crucifixion.  But  in 
 John's  Gospel  three  Passovers  at  least  are  named 
 during  the  period  of  our  Lord's  ministry  (ii.  13  ; 
 vi.  4  ;  xi.  55).  It  is  true  that  some  writers  have 
 endeavoured  to  adapt  the  Gospel  of  John  to  the 
 other  three,  by  reducing  the  Passovers  mentioned 
 in  the  former  to  tzvo.  So  Priestley,  Vossius,  and 
 Mann.  In  order  to  accomplish  this,  it  was  con- 
 jectured that  Trdtrxa,  iu  ch.  vi.  4,  is  an  interpola- 
 tion ;  and  then  that  eopr-i]  denotes  some  other  Jew- 
 ish festival.  Bishop  Pearce  went  so  far  as  to 
 conjecture  that  the  entire  verse  has  been  interpo- 
 lated. For  these  rash  speculations  there  is  no 
 authority.  The  received  reading  must  here  be 
 followed  (Liicke's  Commentar  iiber  Johannes,  dritte 
 Aufl.,  zweiter  Theil,  s.  104).  In  addition  to  these 
 passages,  it  has  been  thought  by  many  that  another 
 Passover  is  referred  to  in  John  v.  I,  where  although 
 n-d(Txa   does   not   occur,    ^  kopri]  is  supposed  to 
 
 denote  the  same  feast.  But  this  is  a  subject  of 
 dispute.  Irena^us  is  the  oldest  authority  for  ex- 
 plaining it  of  the  Passover.  Many  have  adopted 
 the  same  opinion ;  as  Luther,  Calovius,  Grotius, 
 Jansen,  Scaliger,  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  Lightfoot, 
 Lampe,  Paulus,  Kinnoel,  Siisskind,  Klee,  Am- 
 mon,  Greswell,  Hengstenberg,  Robinson. 
 
 Cyril  and  Chijsostom  refer  it  to  the  feast  of 
 Pentecost ;  as  do  also  Erasmus,  Calvin,  Beza, 
 Maldonatus,  and  Bengel. 
 
 Keppler  seems  to  have  been  the  first  who 
 thought  that  it  means  the  feast  of  Puriin.  He 
 was  followed  by  Petau,  Lamy,  D'Outrein,  Hug, 
 Olshausen,  Wieseler,  Neander,  Clausen,  Krabbe, 
 Lange,  Maier,  Meyer. 
 
 Cocceius,  followed  by  Kaiser,  Krafift,  and  Eb- 
 rard,  referred  it  to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  ;  while 
 Keppler  and  Petau  intimated  that  it  may  possibly 
 have  been  the  feast  of  Dedication  ;  but  Llicke,  De 
 Wette,  and  Luthardt  leave  the  matter  indeter- 
 minate. 
 
 The  choice  lies  between  the  Passover  and  the 
 feast  of  Purini.  But  the  arguments  advanced  on 
 behalf  of  either  are  scarcely  conclusive.  The  true 
 meaning  of  eopT-i)  is  still  uncertain.  Those  who 
 wished  it  to  be  understood  of  the  Passover  inserted 
 the  article  before  eopr-q  ;  which  Lachmann  and 
 Tischendorf  have  rightly  expunged.  It  appears  to 
 us  most  probable  that  Fiirifn  is  meant.  From  John 
 iv.  35,  it  follows  that  it  was  then  in  the  end  of 
 November  or  December  ;  and  from  vi.  4  that  the 
 Passover  was  approaching.  Hence  v.  i  agrees 
 well  with  the  feast  of  Puriin,  which  was  in  March. 
 Robinson's  three  reasons  from  Hengstenberg  against 
 this  interpretation  of  eopT-f]  are  neither  powerful 
 nor  conclusive.  That  the  Jews  were  not  required 
 by  their  law  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  at  Purim 
 argues  nothing  against  Jesus's  going  up  at  that  time 
 that  he  might  exercise  his  ministry  in  the  city. 
 When  it  is  alleged  that  Purim  was  never  celebrated 
 on  a  Sabbath,  the  assertion  is  hazardous  as 
 Wieseler  has  shewn ;  and  were  it  even  well- 
 founded,  the  narrative  does  not  prove  that  the 
 Sabbath  on  which  the  infirm  man  was  healed  be- 
 longed to  the  festival.  The  Sabbath  may  have 
 been  before  or  after  the  festival  of  Purim,  as  far  as 
 the  account  shews.  It  is  no  argument  against 
 Purim  that  the  Passover  occurred  a  month  later ; 
 at  which  Jesus  would  necessarily  go  up  to  Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 We  are  thus  inclined  to  believe  that  only  three 
 Passovers  are  named  during  our  Lord's  ministry, 
 at  which  he  attended.  The  fourth,  in  the  passage 
 we  have  been  considering,  is  more  than  doubtful. 
 If  we  are  correct,  his  ministry  lasted  about  two 
 years  and  a  half  A  fourth  would  add  another 
 year  ;  and  that  is  a  very  common,  perhaps  the 
 most  prevailing,  opinion  on  the  subject. 
 
 Sir  Isaac  Newton  and  Macknight  suppose  that 
 fve  Passovers  intervened  between  our  Lord's 
 baptism  and  crucifixion.  This  assumption  rests  on 
 no  foundation.  Perhaps  the  term  eopT-q  in  John 
 vii.  2  may  have  given  rise  to  it  ;  although  ^opr-f)  is 
 explained  in  that  passage  by  cTK-qvoTvrjyla. 
 
 It  has  been  well  remarked  by  Bishop  ^Larsh, 
 that  the  Gospel  of  John  presents  almost  insupera- 
 ble obstacles  to  the  opinion  of  those  who  confine 
 Christ's  ministry  to  one  year.  Yet  it  was  com- 
 monly believed  during  the  first  three  centuries  that 
 Christ's  ministry  lasted  but  a  year,  or  a  year 
 and   some    months.      Such   was   the   opinion  0/ 
 
HARMONIES 
 
 235 
 
 HAROD 
 
 Clemens  Alexandrinus  and  Origen.  Eusebius 
 thought  that  it  continued  for  above  three  years ;  an 
 opinion  wliicli  became  general.  The  ancient 
 hypothesis,  which  confined  the  time  to  one  year, 
 was  revived  by  Mann  and  Priestley  ;  but  New- 
 come,  with  more  judgment,  defended  the  common 
 view,  refuting  Priestley's  arguments.  In  inter- 
 weaving-the  Gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke, 
 with  that  of  John,  the  intervals  between  the  Pass- 
 overs are  filled  up  by  various  transactions.  Were 
 the  number  of  these  feasts  determinate  and  pre- 
 cise, there  would  be  a  general  agreement  in  the 
 filling  up  of  the  times  between  them  ;  but  in  conse- 
 quence of  the  uncertainty  attaching  to  the  subject, 
 harmonies  are  found  materially  to  differ  in  their 
 modes  of  arrangement.  One  thing  is  evident,  that 
 the  moderns  in  their  endeavours  after  a  chronolo- 
 gical disposition  of  the  Gospels,  adopt  a  far  more 
 rational  course  than  the  ancients.  The  latter 
 strangely  supposed  that  the  first  six  chapters  of 
 John's  Gospel  relate  to  a  period  of  Christ's  minis- 
 tiy  prior  to  that  with  which  the  other  three  evan- 
 gelists begin  their  accounts  of  the  miracles.  Thus 
 John  alone  was  supposed  to  narrate  the  events  be- 
 longing to  the  earlier  part  of  his  ministry  ;  while 
 Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  related  the  transactions 
 of  the  last  year. 
 
 The  most  ancient  Harmony  of  the  Gospels  of 
 which  we  have  any  account  was  composed  by 
 Tatian  of  Syria  in  the  2d  centuiy  ;  but  it  is  lost 
 (see  H.  A.  Daniel's  Tatiantis  der  Apologet.,  Halle, 
 1837,  8vo).  In  the  3d  century  Ammonius*  was 
 the  author  of  a  Harmony  supposed  to  be  still 
 extant.  Eusebius  of  Caesarea  also  composed  a 
 Harmony  of  the  Gospels  about  A.  D.  315.  In  it 
 he  divided  the  Gospel  history  into  ten  canons  or 
 tables,  according  as  different  facts  are  related  by 
 one  or  more  of  the  evangelists.  These  ancient 
 Harmonies,  however,  differ  in  character  from  such 
 as  belong  to  modern  times.  They  are  sianmarics 
 of  the  life  of  Christ,  or  indexes  to  the  four  Gospels, 
 rather  than  a  chronological  arrangement  of  different 
 facts,  accompanied  by  a  reconciliation  of  apparent 
 contradictions.  In  modern  times,  Andreas  Osian- 
 der  published  his  Harmony  of  the  Gospels  in  1537- 
 He  adopted  the  principle  that  the  evangelists  con- 
 stantly wrote  in  chronological  order.  Cornelius 
 Jansen's  Conco7-dia  Evangclica  was  published  in 
 1549  ;  R.  Stephanus,  Harnionia  Evang.  (1553)  ; 
 J.  Calvin,  Harmonia  (1553)  ;  Cluver  (1628), 
 Calov  (1680),  Sandhagen  (1684),  Banting  (1689). 
 Martin  Chemnitz's  Hay-mony  was  first  published  in 
 1593,  and  afterwards  with  the  continuations  of 
 Leyser  and  Gerhard,  in  1704.  Chemnitz  stands  at 
 the  head  of  that  class  of  harmonists  who  maintain 
 that  in  one  or  more  of  the  four  Gospels  chronolo- 
 gical order  has  been  neglected  ;  while  Osiander 
 is  at  the  head  of  those  who  maintain  that  all 
 the  Gospels  are  arranged  in  chronological  order. 
 Other  harmonies  were  published  by  Calbct  (1624), 
 
 *  This  Ammonius  is  not  to  be  confounded  with 
 Ammonius  Saccas  the  philosopher,  although  Euse- 
 bius and  Jerome  in  ancient,  as  also  Bayle  and  Bas- 
 nage  in  modem  times,  have  fallen  into  this  mistake. 
 The  same  blunder  is  committed  by  the  writer  of 
 the  article  'Ammonius  Saccas'  in  Smith's  Diction- 
 ary of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography  and  Ulythology. 
 See  Neander's  Allgem.  Geschichte,  i.  3.  S.  11S3  ; 
 Murdock's  Mosheim,  vol.  i.  p.  174,  note  18  (3d 
 edit,  New  York). 
 
 Cartwright  (1627),  Lightfoot  (1654),  Cradock 
 (1668),  Lamy  (1689),  Le  Clerc  (1699),  Toinard 
 (1707),  Burmann  (1712),  Whiston  (1702),  Rus 
 (1727-8-30),  Bengel  (1736),  Hauber  (1737),  Biis- 
 ching  (1766),  Doddridge  (1739  and  40),  Pilking- 
 ton  (1747),  Macknight  (1756),  Bertling  (1767), 
 Griesbach  (1776,  97,  1S09,  22),  Newcome  (177S), 
 Priestley  (1777  in  Greek,  and  1780  in  English), 
 Michaelis  (1788,  in  his  Introduction),  White  (1799), 
 Planck  (1809),  Keller  (1802),  Mutschelle  (1S06), 
 De  Wette  and  Liicke  (1S18),  Hess  (1822),  Sebas- 
 tiani  (1806),  Matthaei  (1826),  Kaiser  (182S), 
 Roediger  (1829),  Clausen  (1829),  Greswell  (1830), 
 Chapman  (1836),  Carpenter  (1838),  Reichel  (1840), 
 Gehringer  (1842),  Robinson  (1845  in  Greek, 
 English  in  1846),  Stroud  (1S53),  Anger  (1851), 
 Tischendorf  (1851). 
 
 In  connection  with  Greswell's  Harmonia  Evan- 
 gelica,  the  same  author's  Dissertations  upon  the 
 Principles  and  Arrarigement  of  a  Harmony  of  the 
 Gospels,  of  which  a  second  edition  has  been  pub- 
 lished, deserve  notice.  These  dissertations  are 
 exceedingly  elaborate,  and  demand  a  patient 
 perusal.  The  learned  writer  has  greatly  distin- 
 guished himself  as  the  most  laborious  of  modem 
 harmonists.  His  work  is  the  most  copious  that 
 has  appeared,  at  least  since  the  days  of  Chemnitz's 
 folios.  Some  of  his  fundamental  principles,  how- 
 ever, are  questionable.  Rather  than  admit  con- 
 siderable diversity  in  the  writers'  narrations  of  the 
 same  events  or  discourses,  he  has  recourse  to  the 
 expedient  of  making  two  out  of  one,  and  placing 
 them  at  different  times.  On  the  whole,  were  we 
 confined  to  one  Harmony  of  the  Gospels,  we 
 should  prefer  that  of  Robinson  to  any  other.  Yet 
 this  scholar  has  strained  words  and  distorted  nar- 
 ratives for  the  purpose  of  forcing  a  literal  agree- 
 ment, the  result  of  a  narrow  theory  of  inspiration. 
 To  adopt  any  harmony  implicitly  is  more  than 
 the  enlightened  inquirer  can  do.  We  should  there- 
 fore recommend  a  minute  examination  of  the  works 
 published  by  Robinson,  Greswell,  Stroud,  Tisch- 
 endorf, and  Anger. 
 
 The  above  list  contains  the  best  Harmonies  and 
 Diatessarons  of  the  Gospels.  Some  are  written  in 
 Greek,  or  Greek  and  Latin,  others  in  Latin,  others 
 in  German  and  Greek,  others  in  English.  The 
 entire  number  of  Harmonies  is  very  great.  Those 
 who  wish  to  see  lists  tolerably  complete  may  con- 
 sult Yahncn  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  vol.  iv. ,  ed.  Harles  ; 
 Walchii  Bibliotheca  Theologica,  tom  iv.  ;  Michae- 
 lis's  Introd.,  by  Marsh,  vol.  iii.,  with  the  transla- 
 tor's very  valuable  notes ;  and  Robinson's  Har- 
 mony in  Greek. — S.  D. 
 
 HAROD  (nnn  ^\  ;  Sept.  T-r)Yn  'Aped.     '  The 
 
 fountain  (A.  V.,  'well')  of  Harod'),  a  fountain 
 which  became  the  scene  of  one  of  the  most  re- 
 markable victories,  and  one  of  the  most  memorable 
 defeats,  in  the  annals  of  Israel.  Its  site  is  fixed 
 by  one  or  two  incidental  notices  in  the  Bible. 
 When  the  Midianites  and  Amalekites  invaded 
 western  Palestine,  'they  pitched  in  the  valley  of 
 Jezreel'  (Judg.  vi.  33).  Gideon  hastily  summoned 
 around  him  the  warriors  of  the  northern  tribes, 
 and  marched  against  them.  He  '  pitched  beside 
 the  'well  of  Ha}vd,  so  that  the  host  of  the  Midian- 
 ites were  on  the  north  side  of  them  by  the  hill  of 
 Moreh,  in  the  valley'  (vii.  i).  '  The  valley' of  Jez- 
 reel here  referred  to  is  an  eastern  arm  of  the  great 
 plain  of  Esdraelon,  bounded  on  the  south  by  GU- 
 
HARODITE 
 
 236 
 
 HARRIS 
 
 boa,  and  on  the  north  by  a  parallel  ridge  called 
 the  '  hill  of  Moreh.'  It  is  about  three  miles  wide. 
 The  Midianites  were  encamped  along  the  base  of 
 Moreh,  and  probably  near  the  town  of  Shunem. 
 On  the  south  side  of  the  valley  at  the  base  of  Gil- 
 boa,  and  nearly  opposite  Shunem,  is  the  large 
 fountain  of  Ain-Jdlild.  There  can  scarcely  be  a 
 doubt  that  this  is  Harod.  It  is  about  a  mile  east 
 of  Jezreel  ;  and  hence  it  was  also  called  the  '  foun- 
 tain of  Jezreel.'  It  is  a  singular  coincidence  that 
 before  the  fatal  battle  of  Gilboa  the  Philistines  en- 
 camped on  the  ground  formerly  occupied  by  the 
 Midianites,  while  Saul  and  his  host  gathered  round 
 the  fountain  (i  Sam.  xxviii.  4;  xxix.  i).  It  has 
 been  suggested  that  the  name  Harod  ('  trembling') 
 may  have  arisen  from  the  testing  command  given 
 to  the  followers  of  Gideon  (Judg.  vii.  3) :  '  Who- 
 soever is  fearful  and  ti-embliitg,  let  him  return.' 
 
 Ain  Jalud  is  a  large  fountain.  The  water  bursts 
 out  from  a  rude  grotto  in  a  wall  of  conglomerate 
 rock,  which  here  forms  the  base  of  Gilboa.  It 
 first  flows  into  a  large  but  shallow  pond,  and  then 
 winds  away  through  the  rich  green  vale  past  the 
 ruins  of  Bethshean  to  the  Jordan.  The  side  of 
 Gilboa  rises  over  the  fountain  steep  and  rugged. 
 Some  have  thought  it  strange  that  the  Midianites 
 should  not  have  seized  on  this  fountain  ;  but  as 
 many  of  the  Israelites  probably  lurked  in  the 
 mountain,  the  Midianites  may  have  deemed  it 
 more  prudent  to  encamp  in  the  open  plain  to  the 
 north,  where  there  are  also  fountains.  The  Jeru- 
 salem Itineraiy  seems  to  indicate  that  the  name 
 Ain-ydhld,  '  Fountain  of  Goliath,'  arose  from  an 
 ancient  tradition  that  the  adjoining  valley  was  the 
 site  of  David's  victory  over  the  giant  (ed.  Wesseling, 
 p.  5^6)-  The  fountain  was  a  noted  camping- 
 ground  for  both  Christians  and  Saracens  during 
 the  crusades.  William  of  Tyre  calls  it  Ttcbania 
 (Gesta  Dei  per  Francos,  p.  1037;  Bohadin,  Vita 
 Saladini,  p.  53).  The  valley  of  Jezreel  still  forms 
 a  favourite  haunt  of  the  wild  Bedawin,  who  periodi- 
 cally cross  from  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan.  The 
 writer  visited  their  camp  beside  this  fountain  in 
 the  spring  of  1858  ;  and  when  he  saw  their  nume- 
 rous tents  and  vast  flocks,  was  forcibly  reminded  of 
 the  words  of  Judg.  vi.  5,  '  They  came  up  with 
 their  cattle,  and  their  tents,  and  they  came  as 
 grasshoppers  for  multitude  ;  both  they  and  their 
 camels  were  without  number'  (Handbook  for  S. 
 and  P.  ii.  355  ;  Stanley,  S.  a?td  F.  334  ;  Robin- 
 son, B.  R.  ii.  324),— J.  L.  P. 
 
 HARODITE.     [Hararite.] 
 
 HARORITE.     [Hararite.] 
 
 HAROSHETH  OF  THE  GENTILES  (nEhn 
 
 D''i2n  ;  Sept.  'A/DttrwS- ;  Alex.  ''Aaeipuid  tujv  i'^vQiv), 
 
 a  town  of  northern  Palestine,  the  home  of  Sisera 
 (Judg.  iv.  2).  At  Harosheth  the  army  and  chariots 
 of  Jabin  were  marshalled  under  the  great  captain 
 before  they  invaded  Israel,  and  defiled  from  the  nor- 
 thern mountains  into  the  broad  battle-field  of  Es- 
 draelon  (ver.  13).  And  after  the  terrible  defeat  and 
 slaughter  on  the  banks  of  the  Kishon,  to  this  place 
 the  fugitives  of  the  army  returned,  a  shattered  and 
 panic-stricken  remnant.  Barak  and  his  victorious 
 troops  followed  them  into  the  fastnesses  of  their  own 
 mountains,  unto  the  gates  of  Harosheth  (ver.  16). 
 The  city  is  not  again  mentioned  in  the  Bible  ;  nor 
 is  it  referred  to  by  Josephus,  Jerome,  or  any  ancient 
 
 writer.  Its  position  is  not  stated  ;  but  from  the 
 fact  of  its  having  been  the  gathering- place  of  Jabin's 
 army,  it  could  not  have  been  far  from  Hazor  ;  and 
 from  the  appellative  D''1Jn  it  would  seem  to  have 
 been  one  of  the  towns  of  the  region  anciently  called 
 
 'Galilee  of  the  Gentiles'  (cf  Is.  ix.  i  ;  D'"ijn  h^h^)- 
 The  etymology  of  the  name  Harosheth,  '  wood- 
 cuttings,' joined  with  the  above  facts,  may  justify 
 us  in  locating  the  city  on  the  upland  plains  of 
 Naphtali,  probably  on  one  of  those  ruin-crowned 
 eminences  still  existing,  from  which  the  mother  of 
 Sisera,  looking  out  at  her  latticed  window,  could 
 see  far  along  that  road  by  which  she  expected  her 
 son  to  return  in  triumph  (Judg.  v.  28).  Deborah 
 in  her  beautiful  ode  doubtless  depicted  the  whole 
 features  of  the  scene.  Remnants  of  the  old  forests 
 of  oak  and  terebinth  still  wave  here  over  the  ruins 
 of  the  ancient  cities  ;  and  the  writer  has  seen  the 
 black  tents  of  the  Arabs — fit  representatives  of  the 
 Kenites  (iv.  17) — pitched  beneath  their  shade 
 (Handbook  for  S.  attd  F.,  ii.  442,  sq.  ;  Stanley, 
 Lectures  oti  "Jewish  Church,  318,  sq^ — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HARP.     [Musical  Instruments.] 
 
 HARRIS,  Samuel,  D.D.,  was  bom  in  the 
 county  of  Middlesex  about  the  year  1683.  He 
 was  educated  in  Merchant  Taylor's  school,  of 
 which  he  was  head  boy  in  1697,  and  was  admitted 
 a  pensioner  of  Peter  House,  Cambridge,  May  15, 
 1 700.  Upon  the  foundation  of  the  chair  of  Modern 
 History  in  the  university  of  Cambridge  by  George 
 I.  in  1 724,  Harris  was  appointed  the  first  professor. 
 He  died  Dec.  21,  1733.  He  was  the  author  of, — 
 I.  Scripture  knowledge  profuoted  by  catechizing, 
 Lond.  1712,  8vo.  2.  A  Cotntnentary  on  the  Fifty - 
 third  chapter  of  Isaiah,  with  an  appendix  of  Queries 
 concerning  Divers  Antient  Religious  Traditions  and 
 Practices,  and  the  sense  of  many  texts  of  Scripture 
 which  seem  to  alhcde  to  or  express  them,  Lond.  1735 
 (not  1739  as  frequently  stated),  4to.  In  some 
 copies  this  work  has  a  different  title-page,  namely, 
 Observations,  Critical  and  Miscellaneous,  on  sez'eral 
 remarkable  Texts  of  the  Old  Testament,  to  which  ii 
 added  a  Commentary,  etc.  Prefixed  are  three  dis- 
 sertations,-—  I.  On  a  Gnozer  or  Advocate  ;  2.  On 
 a  Dour  or  Generation  ;  and  3.  On  the  ancient 
 method  of  propounding  important  points  by  way  of 
 question.  This  work  was  published  shortly  after 
 the  death  of  the  author  by  his  widow.  It  exhibits 
 much  curious  learning,  and  is  several  times  referred 
 to  by  Doddridge  in  his  lectures. — S.  N. 
 
 HARRIS,  Thaddeus  Mason,  D.D.,  chiefly 
 noted  for  his  ardent  devotion  to  the  principles  of 
 Freemasonry,  for  the  illustration  and  vindication  of 
 which  he  published  various  discourses  and  ad- 
 dresses, lie  claims  to  be  noticed  here  for  the  fol- 
 lowing work — A  Dictio7iary  of  the  Natural  History 
 of  the  Bible,  or  a  description  of  all  the  quadrupeds, 
 birds,  fishes,  reptiles,  and  insects,  trees,  plants, 
 flowers,  gums,  atid precious  stories  metitioned  in  the 
 Sacred  Scriptures  ;  Collected  fro7n  the  best  authori- 
 ties, and  alphabetically  arranged ;  a  new  edition, 
 with  corrections  and  considerable  addiiiotts,  l2mo, 
 Lond.  1833.— W.  J.  C. 
 
 HARRIS,  William,  D.D.,  an  eminent  minis- 
 ter of  the  English  Presbyterian  Church,  born  in 
 London  in  the  year  1675,  died  1740.  He  wrote 
 and  published  various  works  of  note,  but  claims 
 notice  here  chiefly  as  one  of  the  continuators  of 
 
HARROW 
 
 237 
 
 HASHABIAH 
 
 Matthew  Heniy's  Commentary.  The  notes  on 
 the  Epistles  to  the  Phihppians  and  Colossians  are 
 from  his  pen.  They  are  strictly  practical,  and  in 
 keeping  with  the  general  character  of  the  Com- 
 mentary. He  also  published  a  volume  of  dis- 
 courses On  the  Principal  Representations  of  the 
 Messiah  throughout  the  Old  Testament.  These  are 
 controversial,  and  were  written  chiefly  in  refuta- 
 tion of  Collins'  Discourses  on  the  Grounds  and  Rea- 
 sons of  the  Christian  Religion. — J.  W.  C. 
 
 HARROW.  The  Hebrew  word  thus  translated 
 in  the  A.  V.,  2  Sam.  xii.  31  ;  i  Chron.  xx.  3, 
 V''"in  {rpl^oKos,  (TKiirapvov,  LXX. ;  carpenta,  Vulg.), 
 
 means,  according  to  the  best  lexicons  (Gesenius, 
 Fiirst,  etc.),  a  threshing  instrument.  A  very  dif- 
 ferent word,  ^l\y,  is  translated  to  harrow,  or  to 
 
 break  the  clods,  in  Job  xxxix.  10  ;  Is.  xxviii.  24  ; 
 Hos.  X.  II  [Agriculture,  p.  35,  Kitto,  D.B.I., 
 iii.  39;  vi.  397.]— J.  E.  R. 
 
 HART.     [AjAL.] 
 
 HARTMANN,  Anthony  Theodore,  a  Ger- 
 man Orientalist  and  theologian,  was  bom  at  Dus- 
 seldorf  on  the  25th  June  1774.  Having  studied 
 the  classics  at  the  Gymnasia  of  Osnabriick  and 
 Dortmund,  he  devoted  himself  to  theology  at 
 Gottingen.  In  1797  he  was  appointed  co-rector 
 of  the  Gymnasium  at  Soest  ;  in  1799  pro-rector  of 
 that  at  Herfort  ;  and  in  1804  a  professor  in  the 
 Gymnasium  of  Oldenburg.  In  1811  he  became 
 professor  of  theology  in  the  University  of  Rostock, 
 where  also  in  1818  he  received  the  charge  of  the 
 cabinet  of  medals.  He  died  there  21st  April  1838. 
 Hartmann  was  a  good  Orientalist ;  but  his  know- 
 ledge of  theolugy  was  not  profound.  As  a  writer 
 he  was  heavy  and  uninterestmg.  His  acquaintance 
 with  the  literature  and  antiquities  of  the  Hebrews 
 was  extensive.  He  was  a  voluminous  author. 
 Among  his  works  the  chief  are — Aufklaerungen 
 ueber  Asieji  fiir  Bibelforscher,  1806,  1807,  2  vols.  ; 
 Die  Hehraerifin  af?i  Putztische  und  als  BraiU,  1809, 
 1 8 ID,  3  vols.  ;  Supplementa  ad  f.  Buxtorfii  et  IV. 
 Gesenii  Lexica,  1813;  Thesauri  lingucB  HehraiccE  e 
 Mischna  augcndi,  1825,  1826,  3  parts  ;  Linguis- 
 iische  Einleituttg  in  das  Studium  der  Biicher  des  A. 
 T.,  181 8;  Historisch-K7-itische  Forschungen  ueber 
 die  Bildung,  das  Zeitalter,  und  den  Plan  der  fiinf 
 Biicher  Moses,  u.  s.  w.,  1831 ;  Die  enge  Verbindung 
 des  alien  Testaments  mit  dem  neuen,  1831  ;  Blicke 
 in  den  Geist  der  Urchristenthums,  1802. — S.  D. 
 
 HARWOOD,  Edward,  Dr.,  an  Arian  minister 
 of  considerable  attainments,  but  whose  moral  repu- 
 tation was  far  from  unblemished.  He  was  born  in 
 1729.  After  residing  in  Bristol  and  other  places 
 as  a  classical  teacher  and  a  preacher,  he  removed 
 to  London,  where  he  died  1 794,  in  very  reduced 
 circumstances.  Besides  a  small  volume  on  the 
 various  editions  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  classics, 
 which  passed  through  four  editions  in  his  lifetime, 
 he  pubhshed  two  works  in  connection  with  Biblical 
 literature  : — (i.)  A  Liberal  Translation  of  the  Nr,u 
 Testameytt ;  being  an  attempt  to  translate  the  Sacred 
 Writings  with  the  same  freedom,  spirit,  and  elegance, 
 with  which  other  English  translations  from  the 
 Greek  classics  have  lately  been  executed :  the  design 
 and  scope  of  each  author  being  strictly  and  im- 
 partially explored,  the  free  signification  atid  force  of 
 the  Original  critically  observed,   and,  as  much  as 
 
 possible,  transferred  into  our  language,  and  the. 
 whole  elucidated  and  explained  tcpon  a  new  and 
 rational  plan  :  with  select  notes,  critical  and  ex- 
 planatory, London,  1768,  2  vols.  8vo.  As  a  ver- 
 bose and  absurd  travesty  of  the  Sacred  Volume 
 (though  not  so  intended  by  the  translator,  who 
 appears  to  have  been  the  dupe  of  his  own  bad 
 taste,  and  incapacity  for  appreciating  the  divine 
 simplicity  of  the  inspired  writers),  it  stands,  and 
 will  ever  stand,  unsurpassed.  How  far  the  work 
 sustains  the  pretensions  of  the  title-page  may  be  in- 
 ferred from  the  following  specimens.  John  the 
 Baptist's  annunciation  of  the  Messiah  is  given  thus  : 
 — '  Behold  yonder  is  the  amiable  object  of  the  divine 
 love  who  is  appointed  to  reform  mankind  ! '  John 
 i.  29.  The  injunction,  '  He  that  hath  ears  to  hear, 
 let  him  hear,'  is  liberally  translated,  '  Let  every  one 
 who  is  endowed  with  the  powers  of  reason  and 
 understanding,  employ  them  in  the  diligent  study 
 of  truth  and  virtue,'  Mark  iv.  9  ;  and  the  parable 
 of  the  Prodigal  Son  begins  with,  '  A  gentleman  of 
 a  splendid  family  and  opulent  fortune  had  two 
 sons,'  Luke  XV.  11.  {2.)  A  new  Introduction  to  the 
 Study  and  knotuledge  of  the  JVew  Testament,  2  vols. 
 8vo,  London,  1773. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 HASHABIAH  {TVI^n,   or  with  the  1  parag. 
 
 ^niaK-'n ;  LXX.  ^Aae^l,  'Affapias,  'Aaa^la,  2aj3ia  ; 
 
 Vulg.  Hasabia,  Hasebid). 
 
 1.  One  of  the  descendants  of  Merari  the  son  of 
 Levi,  I  Chron.  vi.  45  (Heb.  30.)  It  is  probably 
 the  same  who  is  referred  to  in  I  Chron.  ix.  14  and 
 Neh.  xi.  15.  The  close  agreement  of  these  two 
 passages  constrains  the  conclusion  that  the  persons 
 spoken  of  are  the  same  in  both  ;  and  that  the  Ha- 
 shabiah  mentioned  in  them  is  identical  with  the 
 Hashabiah  of  I  Chron.  vi.  45  is  shewn  to  be 
 highly  probable  by  a  comparison  of  ver.  46  with 
 Neh.  xi.  15.  In  the  former  verse  the  descent  from 
 Merari  is  traced  through  Bani  ("ij^),  in  the  latter 
 Hashabiah  is  said  to  be  the  son  of  Bunni  (^3^3), 
 
 forms  so  closely  related  that  in  the  connection  in 
 which  they  occur  they  may  with  good  reason  be 
 taken  to  be  the  names  of  the  same  person. 
 
 2.  One  of  the  sons  of  Jeduthan  the  harper,  and 
 leader  of  the  twelfth  course  of  musicians  appointed 
 by  David  to  conduct  the  service  of  song  in  the  house 
 of  the  Lord,  I  Chron.  xxv.  3,  19. 
 
 3.  A  Levite,  a  descendant  of  Hebron,  the  son 
 of  Kohath,  and  one  of  David's  men  of  valour,  I 
 Chron.  xxvi.  30.  It  is  probably  the  same  who  (l 
 Chron.  xxvii.  17)  is  called  the  son  of  Kemuel, 
 and  said  to  have  been  appointed  ruler  of  the 
 Levites. 
 
 4.  A  chief  of  the  Levites  in  the  reign  of  Josiah, 
 2  Chron.  xxxv.  9  ;  i  Esdras  i.  9. 
 
 5.  A  descendant  of  Merari,  and  one  of  the  priests 
 whom  Ezra  took  up  with  him  to  Jerusalem  to 
 minister  in  the  temple,  and  to  whom  he  entrusted 
 the  care  of  the  vessels  of  silver  and  gold  during 
 the  journey  from  Ahava,  Ezra  viii.  19,  24.  It  is 
 to  the  same,  probably,  that  reference  is  made  in 
 Neh.  xii.  24. 
 
 6.  A  Levite,  one  of  the  builders  of  the  wall  of 
 Jerusalem  under  Nehemiah,  Neh.  iii.  1 7  ;  and  one 
 of  those  who  sealed  the  covenant,  Neh.  x.  11 
 (Heb.  12). 
 
 7.  One  of  the  descendants  of  Asaph,  Neh,  xL 
 22,  c.  17. — S.  N. 
 
HASHMANNIM 
 
 238 
 
 HAURAN 
 
 HASHMANNIM  (□''DOE'n;  Sept.  TrpeajSeis),  a 
 
 word  which  only  occurs  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  31.  In  the 
 A.  V.  it  is  rendered  'princes.'  Hebraists  are  di- 
 vided as  to  the  origin  and  meaning  of  the  word  ; 
 some,  deriving  it  from  Arabic  sources,  give  it  tlie 
 meaning  o{  fat  ones,  rich  and powei-ful  persojiages  ; 
 others,  regarding  it  as  a  proper  name,  derive  it 
 from  the  old  civil  name  of  Hermopolis  Magna,  the 
 famed  city  of  the  Egyptian  Hermes,  the  God  of 
 Wisdom,  and  take  it  to  mean  the  inhabitants  of 
 that  city,  the  Hermopolites.  The  Psalmist  would 
 thus  appear  to  mean  that  the  wisest,  rather  than  the 
 opulent  and  wealthy,  would  come  and  do  homage 
 in  the  temple,  as  well  as  the  Cushites  or  Ethiopians 
 who  lived  at  a  distance.  We  may  add  that  the  name 
 Hasmoneati  which  was  given  to  the  Maccabees  or 
 Jewish  princes  in  the  interval  between  the  O.  and  N. 
 T.  was,  it  is  supposed,  derived  from  Hashmannim 
 (Hengstenberg,  Psalms,  vol.  ii.  369).— W.  J.  C. 
 
 HASHMONAH    (njbDn  ;    .Sept.    SeX^wm ; 
 
 Alex.  ^Aa-eXiMwvd),  a  station  of  the  IsraeHtes,  the 
 next  before  Moseroth  (Num.  xxxiii.  29),  which 
 was  in  the  vicinity  of  Mount  Hor  (comp.  Dent.  x. 
 6  with  Num.  xx.  28). 
 
 HASHUB,  or  more  correctly  Hasshub,  ac- 
 cording to  the  Hebrew  nit^H,  which  always  redu- 
 plicates the  second  letter.  The  A.  V.  has  followed 
 the  Vulgate  in  its  rendering  of  the  form  of  this  pro- 
 per name  ;  in  the  first  passage  where  it  occurs,  the 
 A.  V.  has  Hasshub,  and  the  Vulg.  Hassub,  eacli 
 with  double  s,  like  the  original ;  in  the  other  four 
 passages,  where  the  Latin  version  has  only  one  j 
 {Hasiib),  our  version  resembles  it  in  its  deviation 
 from  the  Hebrew,  and  writes  Hashicb.  The  pas- 
 sages in  which  the  name  occurs  are  these  :  i 
 Chron.  ix.  14;  Neh.  iii.  Ii;  iii.  23;  x.  23;  xi.  15. 
 In  Chronicles  the  LXX.  i-endered  the  word  'A<rwjB, 
 in  all  the  passages  in  Nehemiah  'Aaov^.* 
 
 (i)  In  the  first  and  the  last  of  these  verses  the 
 same  person  (though  his  name  is  differently  spelled 
 in  the  A.  V.)  is  undoubtedly  meant.  He  was  a 
 descendant  of  Merari,  the  third  son  of  Levi  and 
 father  of  Shemaiah,  a  leading  man  of  the  Levites, 
 chosen  by  lot  for  the  somewhat  perilous  duty  of 
 residence  in  Jerusalem,  which  was  at  that  time  the 
 object  of  malignant  hatred  to  the  enemies  of  the  Jews. 
 Raschi  accounts  for  the  greater  fulness  of  the  hst  in 
 I  Chron.  than  that  of  Nehemiah,  by  supposing  that 
 the  latter  gives  only  the  names  of  such  as  were 
 selected  by  lot,  while  the  former  included  also  such 
 as  volunteered  to  live  in  the  metropolis  (see  Neh. 
 xi.  I,  2). 
 
 (2)  The  next  person  who  bears  this  name  (Neh. 
 iii.  11)  was  one  of  the  energetic  band  of  men  who 
 helped  to  build  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  the 
 difficult  circumstances  narrated  in  the  preceding 
 chapter.  The  name  of  his  father,  Pahath-Moab, 
 occurs  in  Ezra  ii.  6  and  Neh.  vii.  11,  as  the  head 
 
 *  Except  Neh.  xi.  15,  where  in  the  ordinary  text 
 the  name  is  omitted,  as  are  the  names  of  Hasha- 
 biah  and  Bunni ;  the  verse  standing  briefly — 'A;/it 
 of  the  Lez'iies,  Shemaiah  the  son  of  Azriha/n.''  The 
 Cod.  Frid-Augiist,  however,  adds  after  Sa^ata,  utos 
 ao-ovj3  utos,  k.tX.,  and  (in  the  insertion  of  a  third 
 hand)  still  more  to  accommodate  the  version  to 
 the  Hebrew,  there  is  the  further  addition  after  'Ef- 
 peka/i  of  the  words  vtos  aaa^iov  '  viov  jSowat. 
 
 of  a  large  clan  which  accompanied  Zerubbabel  on 
 his  return  from  Babylon. 
 
 (3)  The  same  name  was  borne  by  another  man 
 engaged  in  tlie  same  good  worlc  of  rebuilding  the 
 city  wall.  The  statement  (verse  23)  that  he  built 
 such  portion  as  was  '  oz'er  against  his  house''  proves 
 him  to  have  been  one  of  the  residents  of  Jerusalem, 
 instead  of  a  stranger  from  the  country,  as  many 
 were  who  were  occupied  in  this  labour.  We 
 should  not  be  extravagant  if  we  supposed  that  this 
 was  the  Levite  already  mentioned  (i)  ;  we  know 
 that  among  the  builders  some  of  the  Jewish  clergy 
 assisted  (see  ver.  l). 
 
 (4)  The  last  person  who  is  mentioned  as  bearing 
 this  name  (which  was  an  honourable  and  not  infre- 
 quent one  among  the  Jews,  of  the  same  signification 
 as  Tl/xoios  or  Timceiis  among  the  Greeks,  see 
 Simonis  Onomast.  p.  265,  who  refers  to  the  fact 
 that  the  same  name  was  borne  by  a  Jew  of  Jericho 
 in  Mark  x.  46)  is  described  in  Neh.  x.  23  as  one 
 of  the  forty-four  '  chiefs  of  the  people,^  who  joined 
 the  Tirshatha  in  the  pious  office  of  subscrib- 
 ing and  sealing  the  covenant  of  reformation  and 
 dedication  to  God.     The  epithet,   '  one  of  ''E'NI 
 
 □yn,  heads  of  the  people,^  very  well  suits  our  second 
 
 Hashub,  the  son  of  Pahath-Moab,  who  was  evi- 
 dently a  man  of  distinction  and  influence  (Bei- 
 theau,  Die  Bitcher  Esra,  it.  s.  w.  p.  231).  The 
 Levite  is  certainly  excluded  by  this  epithet  as  well 
 as  by  the  fact  that  all  the  subscribing  Levites  are 
 expressly  mentioned  (vers.  9-13).  From  verses  28 
 and  29,  however,  it  follows  that  the  Levite  Hashub 
 was  a  consenting  party  to  the  covenant  which  his 
 namesake,  the  honourable  layman,  had  the  privilege 
 of  signing.  It  thus  seems  that  in  all  our  passages 
 only  two  Hashubs  are  really  designated. — P.  H. 
 
 HATTUSH  (K'ltsn  ;  Xarroi'-s,  Xerroi^s,  'Attovs). 
 
 The  first  of  the  sons  of  Shechaniah  (i  Chron.  iii. 
 22),  and  the  same  probably  as  the  Hattush  men- 
 tioned in  the  roll  of  '  the  priests  and  Levites  that 
 went  up  with  Zerubbabel '  from  Babylon  (Neh.  xii. 
 2).  Another  Hattush  (whether  a  nephew  of  the 
 above,  as  Lord  A.  Hervey  supposes,  Genealogies, 
 307,  322,  sq.,  or  the  representative  of  another 
 family,  it  is  impossible  to  say)  is  also  recorded  to 
 have  accompanied  Ezra  when  '  he  went  up  from 
 Babylon  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  the  king  (Ezra 
 viii.  2,  3).  The  name  is  also  mentioned  among 
 those  who  took  part  in  the  sealing  of  the  covenant 
 with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  4). 
 
 ('Arroi)?  vlbs  '' Acrfiavla)  the  son  of  Hashbaniah, 
 was  one  of  Jeremiah's  co-workers  in  the  rebuilding 
 of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  10). — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HAURAN  (pin ;  Sept.  AvpavTris,  and  'fipaw- 
 
 Tis ;  Vulg.  Auran),  a  province  of  Palestine,  east 
 of  the  Jordan,  embracing  a  portion  of  the  ancient 
 kingdom  of  Bashan.  Ezekiel  is  the  only  one  of 
 the  sacred  writers  who  mentions  it.  In  describing 
 the  northern  border  of  the  'promised  land,'  he 
 gives  as  one  of  its  landmarks  '  Hazor-hatticon, 
 which  is  by  the  coast  of  Hatiran^  (ch.  xlvii.  16)  ; 
 and  in  defining  the  east  border  he  says,  '  Ye  shall 
 measure  from  between  (^30  ;  Sept.  avafxiaov ;  Vulg. 
 de  medio)  Haiiran,  and  from  between  Damascus,' 
 etc.  (ver.  18).  These  statements  would  seem  to 
 indicate  that  Hauran  lay  on  the  north  of  Damas- 
 cus, or  at  least  extended  as  far  north  as  that  city  • 
 and  this,  as  we  shall  see  below,  was  quite  correct. 
 
HAURAN 
 
 239 
 
 HAVILAH 
 
 The  Greek  province  of  Auranitis  was  one  of  the 
 four  into  wliicli  the  kingdom  of  Bashan  was  divided. 
 The  names  of  these  provinces  were  all  Semitic, 
 thougli  the  Greeks  remodelled  them.     Thus  Ba- 
 
 ianaea  is  }C3  ;  Gaulaiiites,  plJ  ;  Trachonites, 
 XJ13"lt3  (called  in  the  Bible  :}J"lN)  ;  and  Auranitis, 
 pin  (see  Joseph.  Antiq.  iv.  5,  3  ;  Bdl.  Jiid.  iii. 
 3>  5;  i"^'-  7)  3;  Lightfoot,  0pp.  i.  316;  ii.  474; 
 Reland,  Pal.  pp.  199,  sq.  ;  younial  of  Sacred 
 Literature  for  July  1854)-  These  were  doubtless 
 the  most  ancient  divisions  of  the  countiy,  inhabited 
 by  distinct  tribes  ;  but  when  brought  under  one 
 rule,  perhaps  by  Og,  the  name  Bashan  was  given 
 to  the  whole  (Deut.  iii.)  Yet  the  names  of  the 
 older  provinces  were  still  occasionally  used  (Deut. 
 iv.  43  ;  I  Kings  iv.  13  ;  Ezek.  xlvii.  18).  On  the 
 conquest  of  the  country  by  the  Assyrians,  that 
 political  unity  which  the  Jews  maintained  was  de- 
 stroyed, and  the  old  sectional  names  came  again 
 into  common  use  ( Josephus,  I.e.)  Of  the  four  pro- 
 vinces Gaulanitis  lay  on  the  west,  along  the  banks 
 of  the  Jordan  ;  Batanaea  on  the  extreme  east, 
 bordering  on  Arabia  ;  Trachonitis  on  the  north, 
 between  the  former  two,  and  adjoining  the  terri- 
 tory of  Damascus  ;  and  Auj-atiitis,  south  of  Trach- 
 onitis, including  the  whole  of  that  fertile  plain 
 which  extends  from  Mezareib  to  Sulkhud,  and  from 
 the  Lejah  to  Um  el-Jemal.  In  the  midst  of  it  lie 
 the  ruins  of  its  once  great  and  splendid  capital 
 Busrah  (Porter's  Damascus,  ii.  250,  sq.)  On  a 
 careful  examination  of  the  references  in  ancient 
 authors  to  this  whole  region,  we  find  that  very  often 
 the  name  of  one  province  is  applied  to  the  whole. 
 Thus  the  evangelist  Luke  says  Philip  was  tetrarch 
 of  '  Iturea  and  the  region  of  Trachonitis  ;'  and  we 
 know  that  under  the  latter  name  were  comprised 
 both  Auranitis  and  Batanaea  (Luke  in.  i  ;  cf 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  11.  4).  So  again  Josephus 
 uses  the  name  Batanaea  to  designate  the  whole  of 
 Bashan  {Antiq.  iv.  7.  4).  Eusebius  employs  it  in 
 the  same  way  [Onomast.,  s.  v.  Basan  ;  Reland, 
 Pal.  p.  197,  sq.) 
 
 By  Arabic  authors  the  name  Hatirdn  (    S  ^,-^  ; 
 
 Heb.  pin  ;  Greek,  Kiipa.vlTi%)  is  used  in  the  same 
 general  way.  Bohadin,  in  his  Life  of  Saladin, 
 makes  it  include  the  whole  country  north  of  Percea 
 (ed.  Schultens,  p.  70)  ;  and  Abulfeda  describes  it 
 as  '  a  wide  region  under  the  rule  of  Damascus,  to- 
 ward the  south,  in  which  are  large  towns  and 
 villages  ;  Busrah  is  its  capital,  and  in  it  are  Edhra, 
 Zera,  and  other  towns'  [Index  Geog.  in  vi/a?n 
 Saladitti,  s.  v. )  In  the  present  day  the  name 
 Hauran  is  usually  applied  to  the  whole  country 
 reaching  from  the  plain  of  Damascus  to  Bozrah — 
 that  is,  to  all  Bashan.  But  the  natives,  when 
 speaking  more  accurately,  confine  it  to  the  plain 
 south  of  the  Lejah — that  is,  to  the  small  province 
 called  by  the  Greeks  Auranitis  (Porter's  Datnascus, 
 i.e.)  In  the  more  extended  signification  it  appears 
 to  have  been  used  by  Ezekiel  ;  and  hence  he 
 rightly  represents  it  as  nmning  as  far  to  the  north 
 as  Damascus.  Hauran  in  this  case  was  not  equi- 
 valent to  the  Greek  province  Auranitis,  which  lay 
 much  farther  southward,  but  to  the  kingdom  of 
 Bashan. 
 
 Lightfoot  {0pp.,  1.  c),  Reland  {I.e.),  and  other 
 more  recent  geographers  (WeUs,  Geography  of  the 
 O.  T.,  L  298  ;  and  even  Winer,  Realwoerterbuch, 
 s.  V.  Havran),  have  overlooked  the  above  facts, 
 
 and  have  thus  been  led  into  serious  errors.  The 
 Hauran  of  Ezekiel  included  the  wild  and  rugged 
 province  of  Lejah  (Trachonitis)  ;  the  mountain- 
 ous district  of  Batanaea,  where  the  oaks  of  Bashan 
 still  flourish  around  the  ruins  of  its  old  cities  ;  and 
 the  district  of  Hauran  proper.  The  latter  is  one 
 uniform  plain  of  surpassing  fertility.  Not  a  rock 
 or  stone  can  be  seen  except  on  the  little  conical 
 hills  that  appear  here  and  thei'e  on  its  surface.  It 
 is  thickly  studded  with  ruined  towns  and  villages, 
 numbering  above  a  hundred  in  all — most  of  them 
 now  deserted,  though  not  ruined  !  The  houses  in 
 them  are  most  remarkable.  The  flat  roofs,  mas- 
 sive doors,  and  even  window-shutters  are  of  stone, 
 and  in  many  cases  perfect.  The  dates  on  some  of 
 them  shew  that  they  are  older  than  our  era ;  and 
 their  simple  and  massive  style  of  architecture  seems 
 to  indicate  that  these  are  the  very  cities  referred  to 
 so  emphatically  by  Moses  (Deut.  iii.  5  ;  see  Hand- 
 book for  S.  and  P.,  ii.  507,  sq.  ;  Graham  in  Cam- 
 bridge Essays,  160  ;  Stanley's  Lectures  on  the  Jew- 
 ish Church,  213,  sq.) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAVERNICK,  Hein.  Andr.  Christ.,  was 
 born  in  1805,  at  Kroplin,  in  Mecklenburg,  and  died 
 at  Konigsberg  in  1845.  He  studied  theology  first 
 at  Halle,  but  having  been  involved  in  the  troubles 
 which  disturbed  that  university  in  consequence  of 
 the  prosecution  for  anti-Christianism  brought 
 against  Wegscheider  and  Gesenius,  the  evidence  in 
 support  of  which  was  chiefly  supplied  from  the 
 notes  of  Havemick  and  Rehrkorn,  he  left  Halle 
 and  completed  his  course  at  Berlin,  where  he 
 attached  himself  closely  to  Hengstenberg.  In 
 1833  he  became  a  teacher  in  the  theological  school 
 at  Geneva  ;  in  1834  he  went  to  Rostock,  where  he 
 taught  theology  first  as  a  privatim  docens,  after- 
 wards as  one  of  the  extraordinary  professors  ;  and 
 in  1840  he  was  appointed  ordinaiy  professor  at 
 Konigsberg.  His  works  are — Com?nentar  iiher  das 
 B.  Daniel,  Hamb.  1833  ;  Melanges  de  Theologie 
 reformee,  2  parts.  Gen.  1 833 -9  (in  conjunction  with 
 Steiger)  ;  Llandbuchder  Histor.-Krit.  Einleit.  iti  d. 
 A.  T.,  Erlang.  1836-1844,  2  vols,  in  4  parts  (un- 
 finished) ;  Naie  Krit.  Untersiichtingen  iiber  d.  B. 
 Daniel,  Hamb.  1838  ;  Co?nmentar  iiber  d.  Proph. 
 Ezechiel,  Erlang.  1843  ;  Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Theo- 
 looie  das  A.  T.  (published  after  his  death  by  Dr. 
 H.  A.  Hahn),  Erlang.  1848.  Of  his  Einleittmg, 
 two  portions — the  General  Introduction  to  the  O. 
 T.,  and  the  Introduction  to  the  Pentateuch — have 
 been  translated  into  English,  and  form  part  of 
 Clark's  Foreign  Theol.  Library.  Havemick  also 
 contributed  several  articles  to  this  Cyclopaedia. 
 He  was  a  great  scholar,  who  never  tired  in  the 
 pursuit  of  knowledge,  and  wore  himself  out  pre- 
 maturely by  his  excessive  labour  as  a  student,  a 
 teacher,  and  a  writer.  He  was  withal  one  of  the 
 honestest  of  men — a  little  too  open  and  outspoken, 
 perhaps,  for  his  own  personal  ease  ;  but  impress- 
 ing all  who  came  near  him  with  a  sense  of  his 
 sincerity,  earnestness,  and  zeal  for  truth.  His  ser- 
 vices to  the  cause  of  evangelical  truth  in  Germany 
 were  great ;  and  his  works  will  long  remain  a 
 storehouse  of  sound  learning  and  candid  reasoning, 
 to  attest  his  eminent  abilities  and  attainments,  and 
 to  suggest  what  might  have  been  expected  from  his 
 diligence,  learning,  and  scientific  precision  had  his 
 life  been  prolonged. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HAVILAH  (n'?"'in,  Gen.  ii.  il;  LXX,  Ei^iAdr, 
 Gen.   X.    7,  YivCKa  ;  Gen.  x.  29,   EueiXd).     In  the 
 
HAVILAM 
 
 240 
 
 HAVOTH-JAIR 
 
 genealogy  of  nations  (Gen.  x. )  Havilah  is  set  down 
 — I.  as  a  son  of  Cush  (v.  7.)  ;  as  a  son  of  Jok- 
 Ian  (v.  29).  Since  in  the  other  places  where  the 
 word  occurs  it  is  always  used  to  designate  a  coun- 
 try, we  may  doubt  wlietlier  persons  of  this  name 
 ever  existed  ;  the  more  so  as  other  names  of  coun- 
 tries (Ophir,  Mizraim,  Canaan,  Sidon),  and  the 
 collective  names  of  tribes  (Kittim,  Dodanim),  are 
 freely  introduced  into  the  genealogy,  which  is  un- 
 doubtedly arranged  with  partial  reference  to  geo- 
 graphical distribution,  as  well  as  direct  descent 
 (see  Sheha,  Dedan,  etc.,  and  Kalisch,  Genesis,  p. 
 287).'  On  this  supposition  it  is  not  difficult  to 
 account  for  the  fact  that  the  people  of  Havilah 
 appear  as  descendants  both  of  the  Hamites  and  of 
 the  Shemites.  If  they  were  originally  of  Semitic 
 extraction  (and  on  this  point  we  have  no  data 
 which  could  enable  us  to  decide),  we  must  suppose 
 that  by  peaceful  emigration  or  hostile  invasion  they 
 overflowed  into  the  territoiy  occupied  by  Hamites, 
 or  adopted  the  name  and  habits  of  their  neigh- 
 bours in  consequence  of  commerce  or  intermar- 
 riage, and  are  therefore  mentioned  twice  over  in 
 consequence  of  their  local  position  in  two  distinct 
 regions.  It  would  depend  on  circumstances  whe- 
 ther an  invading  or  encroaching  tribe  gave  its 
 name  to,  or  derived  its  name  from,  the  tribe  it 
 dispossessed,  so  that  whether  Havilah  was  origi- 
 nally Cushite  or  Joktanite  must  be  a  matter  of 
 mere  conjecture;*  but  by  admitting  some  such 
 principle  as  the  one  mentioned,  we  remove  from 
 the  book  of  Genesis  a  number  of  apparent  perplexi- 
 ties (Ur  ;  and  Kalisch,  Gen.  p.  459).  To  regard 
 the  repetition  of  the  name  as  due  to  carelessness  or 
 error  is  a  method  of  explanation  which  does  not 
 deserve  the  name  of  criticism.     [Ham.] 
 
 Assuming  then,  that  the  districts  indicated  in 
 Gen.  x.  7.  29,  were  conterminous,  if  not  in  reality 
 identical,  we  have  to  fix  on  their  geographical 
 position.  Various  derivations  of  the  word  have 
 been  suggested,  but  the  most  probable  one,  from 
 
 Pin,  'sand'  (Bochart,  Phaleg.  ii.  29),  is  too  vague 
 to  give  us  any  assistance.  Looking  for  preciser 
 indications,  we  find  in  Gen.  xxv.  18,  that  the 
 descendants  of  Ishmael  '  dwelt  from  Havilah  unto 
 Shur  that  is  before  Egypt  as  thou  goest  towards 
 Assyria ; '  and  in  i  Sam.  xv.  7  we  read  that  Saul 
 'smote  the  Amalekites  from  Havilah  tmtil  thou 
 contest  to  Shur  that  is  over  against  Egypt.'  With- 
 out entering  mto  the  question  why  the  Amalekites 
 are  represented  as  possessing  the  country  which 
 formerly  belonged  to  the  Ishmaelites,  it  is  clear 
 that  these  verses  fix  the  general  position  of  Havilah 
 as  a  country  lying  somewhere  to  the  southwards 
 and  eastwards  of  Palestine.  Further  than  this, 
 the  Cushite  Havilah  in  Gen.  x.  7  is  mentioned  in 
 connection  with  Seba,  Sabtah,  and  Raamah  ;  and 
 the  Joktanite  Havilah  (Gen.  x.  29),  in  connection 
 with  Ophir,  Jobab,  etc.  Now,  as  all  these  places 
 lay  on  or  between  the  Arabian  and  Persian  Gulfs, 
 we  may  infer,  with  tolerable  certainty,  that  Ha- 
 vilah '  in  both  instances  designates  the  same  coun- 
 try, extending  at  least  from  the  Persian  to  the 
 Arabian  Gulf,  and  on  account  of  its  vast  extent 
 
 *  We  do  not  know  on  what  certain  grounds  Mr. 
 G.  Williams  decides  that  Havilah  was  originally 
 Cushite  {Diet,  of  Geogr.,  s.  v.)  ;  other  writers  are 
 equally  positive  of  the  contrary  (Mr.  Stanley  Poole 
 in  Smith's  Diet.  0/  the  Bible). 
 
 easily  divided  into    two  distinct   parts'    (Kalisch, 
 Gen.,  p.  93). 
 
 The  only  method  of  fixing  mo'^e  nearly  the  cen- 
 tres of  these  two  divisions  of  Havilah,  is  to  look  for 
 some  trace  of  the  name  yet  existing.  But  although 
 Oriental  names  linger  with  great  vitality  in  the  regions 
 whence  they  have  arisen,  yet  the  frequent  transfer- 
 ence of  names,  caused  by  trade  or  by  political  re- 
 volutions, renders  such  indication  very  uncertain 
 (Von  Bohlen,  on  Gen.  x.  7).  Weshall  therefore  con- 
 tent ourselves  with  mentioning  that  Strabo,  quot- 
 ing Eratosthenes,  places  the  XauXoraiot  near  the 
 Nabathoei,  north  of  the  Arabian  gulf  (Strabo  xvi.  4), 
 and^that  Ptolemy  (iv.  7)  mentions  the  AvaKirai  on 
 the  African  coast  near  Bab-el-Mandeb,  the  modern 
 Zeylah  (cf.  Plin.  vi.  28;  Gesen.,  Thes.  i.  452). 
 Niebuhr  also  finds  two  Khawlans  in  Yemen,  one  a 
 town  between  Sanaa  and  Mecca,  the  other  a  dis- 
 trict some  miles  to  the  south-east  of  Sanaa  {Besehr. 
 Arab.  270,  280  ;  see  further,  Biischung,  Erdbeschr. 
 v.  i.  601  ;  Michaelis,  Spicil.  i.  189 ;  ii.  202  ;  For- 
 ster,  Geogr.  of  Arab.  i.  40,  41,  etc.)  These  names 
 may  very  possibly  be  traces  of  the  great  Biblical 
 country  of  Havilah. 
 
 The  further  question  still  remains,  is  the  Havilah 
 (LXX.  Ei)tXciT)  of  Gen.  ii.  1 1  the  same  country  as 
 the  Havilah  we  have  already  identified  ?  All  we 
 are  told  of  it  is  that  Pison,  one  of  the  rivers  of 
 Eden,  '  compassed'  it,  and  that  it  produced  fine 
 gold,  bdellium  (b\iolach),  and  onyx  {shoham).  It 
 is  natural  to  assume  that  in  the  same  book  the 
 same  name  would  not  be  used  for  two  entirely 
 different  countries,  and  the  region  mentioned  meets 
 the  new  conditions  required,  especially  if  we  under- 
 stand 'b'dolach'  to  mean  'pearls'  or  'gum,'  and 
 '  shoham'  to  mean  '  crystal'  orsome  transparent  stone. 
 Havilah  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  Ophir 
 and  Sheba,  both  of  which  countries  were  formerly 
 celebrated  for  their  gold.  In  this  case  we  must, 
 however,  understand  the  Pison  (Gen.  ii.  11)  to 
 mean  either  an  arm  of  the  sea,  or  '  all  the  rivers 
 that  fall  into  the  Persian  gulf  ;  or,  allowing  for 
 the  notorious  ayeaiypacpia  of  the  ancients  we 
 must  suppose  that  the  course  of  the  Indus  was 
 most  erroneously  imagined  to  make  an  enormous 
 bend  towards  the  west.  The  latter  is  the  more 
 natural,  and  for  other  reasons  the  more  probable 
 supposition. 
 
 Without  entangling  ourselves  in  any  discussion 
 of  the  geography  of  Eden,  we  may  mention  that  on 
 grounds  of  very  slight  and  untenable  conjecture, 
 the  Havilah  of  Gen.  ii.  has  been  identified  with  Col- 
 chis, with  the  'T\ala  of  Herodotus  iv.  9,  with  the 
 Chvalisci  on  the  Caspian  Sea,  with  Kampila  in  the 
 north-west  of  India,  with  Ava,  and  numerous  other 
 countries.  These  conjectures  have  persuaded  very 
 few  except  those  who  originated  them.  Discus- 
 sions about  the  site  of  Havilah  will  be  found  in 
 all  the  chief  Biblical  commentators  ancient  and 
 modern,  as  well  as  in  Hottinger  {Enneas  Dissult.) ; 
 Huet  (De  Lit.  Farad.) ;  Bochart  {Phaleg.  ii.  28) ; 
 Michaelis  {Spicil.  202 ;  Suppl.  685) ;  Schultness 
 {Parad.  p.  105);  Niebuhr  (?.  c),  and  many  other 
 writers.  The  clearest  and  best  account  may  be  de- 
 rived from  Kalisch  {Genesis,  pp.  93,  249,  287,  etc.), 
 who  also  gives  a  long  list  of  those  who  have  exa- 
 mined the  subject  (pp.  109-102). — F.  W.  F. 
 
 HAVOTH-JAIR  (T'x;  ThT\ ;  Sept.  'ETraiJXw 
 'lalp ;  Alex,  'ladp,  and  Kuifias,  and  Al'oi^;  Vulg. 
 
HAWK 
 
 241 
 
 HAZAEL 
 
 Havoih-yair,  id  est,  villas  Jair  ;  and  oppida  Jair), 
 the  name  given  to  a  group  of  'villages'  or  'towns' 
 in  Gilead,  from  the  fact  of  their  having  been  taken 
 by  Jair  a  descendant  of  Manasseh.  The  word 
 Havoth,  mn,  is  the  plural  of  mn,  and  is  probably 
 
 derived  from  the  Arabic  root 
 
 .,  '  to  collect.' 
 
 It  signifies  a  collection  of  dwellings  of  any  kind, 
 whether  tents  or  houses.  The  very  same  places 
 which  are  called  Havoth  in  Num.  xxxii.  41,  are 
 termed  D''"iy,  '  cities,'  in  i  ICings  iv.  13  ;  conse- 
 quently we  cannot  receive  the  interpretation  of 
 some  recent  writers,  who  say  they  were  not  'cities,' 
 but  Bedouin  'villages  of  tents'  (Stanley,  S.  and 
 P.,  321  and  514).  The  origin  of  the  appellation 
 is  thus  explained  in  Num.  xxxii.  40,  41  :  'Moses 
 gave  Gilead  unto  Machir,  the  son  of  Manasseh  ; 
 and  he  dwelt  therein.  And  Jair,  the  son  of 
 Manasseh,  went  and  took  the  sfnall  tmvns  (mn) 
 tliereof,  and  called  them  Havoth -Jair.''  Another 
 Jair,  apparently  a  descendant  of  the  former,  was 
 one  of  Israel's  famous  judges ;  and  it  is  said  of 
 him,  '  He  had  thirty  sons  that  rode  on  thirty  ass- 
 colts,  and  they  had  thirty  cities,  which  are  called 
 Havoth-jair  unto  this  day,  which  are  in  the  land  of 
 Gilead'  (Judg.  x.  3,  4).  This  appears  to  be  only 
 a  new  application  of  an  old  name.  The  original 
 number  of  the  towns  conquered  by  Jair  was 
 twenty-three,  as  we  read  in  i  Chron.  ii.  22  : 
 '  Segub  begat  Jair,  who  had  three  and  twenty 
 cities  in  the  land  of  Gilead.'  The  number  was 
 subsequently  increased  like  the  Decapolis. 
 
 The  ancient  province  of  Gilead  was  bounded  on 
 the  north  by  the  river  Hieromax,  which  separated 
 it  from  Bashan  (Gilead)  ;  and  that  portion  of  it 
 which  fell  to  the  lot  of  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh 
 lay  north  of  the  Jabbok  (Num.  xxxii.  33  ;  Deut. 
 iii.  12,  13).  Consequently  those  towns  of  Gilead 
 which  were  called  Havoth-jair  must  have  been 
 situated  in  the  mountainous  district  between  Maha- 
 naim  and  the  Hieromax  (Josh.  xxi.  38  ;  xiii.  24- 
 30). 
 
 Considerable  confusion  has  been  caused  in  the 
 geography  of  this  region  by  confounding  the 
 Havoth-jair  of  Gilead  with  Bashan-havoth-jair. 
 The  following  passages  prove  that  they  were 
 entirely  distinct,  and  even  far  apart — ^Josh.  xiii. 
 30 ;  I  Kings  iv.  13  ;  I  Chron.  ii.  22,  23.  Eu- 
 sebius  recognises  the  distinction  ;  but  Jerome 
 either  mistakes  his  meaning,  or,  more  probably, 
 had  another  idea  of  his  own  {Onomast.,  s.  v. 
 Avoth-jair ;  Reland,  p.  483  ;  Porter's  Damascus, 
 ii.  270).  The  towns  of  Havoth-jair  were  situated 
 in  Gilead  south  of  the  river  Hieromax  ;  while  those 
 of  Bashan-havoth-jair  were  in  Bashan,  and  identi- 
 cal with  the  sixty  great  cities  of  Argob  (Deut.  iii. 
 14  ;  I  Kings  iv.  13  ;  see  Trachonitis). — J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAWK     [Nets.] 
 
 HAY.     [Chatzir.] 
 
 HAYES,  Charles,  an  English  gentleman  of 
 extensive  scientific  and  literai-y  attainments,  was 
 born  in  the  year  1678.  In  his  early  life  he  devoted 
 himself  principally  to  scientific  studies,  and  was  the 
 author  of  the  first  treatise  on  Fluxions  published  in 
 the  English  language.  Subsequently,  he  gave 
 himself  to  the  study  of  ancient  history,  with  espe- 
 cial reference  to  the  history  contained  in  the  Scrip- 
 tures, and  his  various  works  bear  testimony  to  a 
 vast  amount  of  learned  research.     He  had  a  know- 
 
 VOL.   II. 
 
 ledge  of  Latin,  Greek,  and  Hebrew,  and  also  of 
 several  modern  languages.  He  died  at  the  ad- 
 vanced age  of  eighty-two,  Dec.  i8,  1760.  The 
 following  Biblical  works  were  all  published  anony- 
 niously ;  but  their  authorship  is  attested  by  a  writer 
 in  the  Gentleman's  Magazine,  Dec.  1 761,  in  whose 
 hands  Hayes's  papers  had  been  placed. 
 
 1.  A  vindication  0/ the  History  of  the  Septuagini, 
 Lond.  1736,  8vo. 
 
 2.  A  Critical  Examination  of  the  Holy  Gospels 
 accordinq-to  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  with  regard 
 to  the  History  of  the  Birth  and  Infancy  of  our  Lord 
 Jesus  Christ,  Lond.  173S,  8vo.  3.  A  dissertation 
 on  the  Chronology  of  the  Septuagint,  with  an  Appen- 
 dix shewing  that  the  Chaldaan  and  Egyptian 
 Antiquities,  hithe7-to  esteemed  fabulous,  are  perfectly 
 consistent  with  the  computations  of  that  most  ancient 
 Version  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  Lond.  1 741,  Svo. 
 In  this  work  he  enters  at  length  into  an  examina- 
 tion of  the  variations  in  the  ages  of  the  patriarchs 
 as  given  in  the  Hebrew,  the  Septuagint,  and  Jo- 
 sephus ;  and  offers  some  suggestions  in  defence  of 
 the  integrity  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  texts.  4. 
 Chronographice  Asiatica:  et  Aigyptiaccz  specimen  in 
 quo  i.  Origo  Chronologic  LXX.  Interpretum  inves- 
 tigatur  ii.  Conspectus  totius  operis  exhibetur,  1759, 
 Svo.  This  was  issued  partly  as  a  prospectus  of  a 
 large  work  on  Asiatic  and  Egj-ptian  chronology, 
 from  the  creation  of  the  world  unto  the  birth  of 
 Christ,  which  although  completed  has  never  been 
 published.— S.  N. 
 
 HAZAEL  (ijxrn,  vision  of  God;  'Afa^X),  an 
 officer  of  Benhadad,  king  of  Syria,  whose  eventual 
 accession  to  the  throne  of  that  kingdom  was  made 
 known  to  Elijah  (i  Kings  xix.  15)  ;  and  who,  when 
 Elisha  was  at  Damascus,  was  sent  by  his  master, 
 who  was  then  ill,  to  consult  the  prophet  respecting 
 his  recovery.  He  was  followed  by  forty  camels 
 bearing  presents  from  the  king.  'When  Hazael 
 appeared  before  the  prophet,  he  said,  'Thy  son 
 Benhadad,  king  of  Syria,  hath  sent  me  to  thee, 
 saying,  Shall  I  recover  of  this  disease?'  The 
 answer  was,  that  he  7night  certainly  recover.  '  Ho w  • 
 belt,'  added  the  prophet,  'the  Lord  hath  shewed 
 me  that  he  shall  surely  die.'  He  then  looked  stead- 
 fastly at  Hazael  till  he  became  confused  :  on  whic  h 
 the  man  of  God  then  wept  ;  and  when  Hazael  re- 
 spectfully inquired  the  cause  of  this  outburst,  Elisha 
 replied  by  describing  the  vivid  picture  then  present 
 to  his  mind  of  all  the  evils  which  the  man  now  be- 
 fore him  would  inflict  upon  Israel.  Hazael  ex- 
 claimed, '  But  what  ?  Is  thy  servant  a  dog  that  he 
 should  do  this  great  thing  ?'  The  prophet  explained 
 that  it  was  as  king  of  Syria  he  should  do  it. 
 Hazael  then  returned,  and  delivered  to  his  master 
 that  portion  of  the  prophetic  response  which  was 
 intended  for  him.  But  the  very  next  day  this  man, 
 cool  and  calculating  in  his  cruel  ambition,  took  a 
 thick  clotli,  and,  having  dipped  it  in  water,  spread 
 it  over  the  face  of  the  king,  who,  in  his  feebleness, 
 and  probably  in  his  sleep,  was  smothered  by  its 
 weight,  and  died  what  seemed  to  his  people  a  natu- 
 ral death  (2  Kings  viii.  8,  etc.)  B.C.  885.  We  are 
 not  to  imagine  that  such  a  project  as  this  was  con- 
 ceived and  executed  in  a  day,  or  that  it  was  sug- 
 gested by  the  words  of  Elisha.  His  discomposure 
 at  the  earnest  gaze  of  the  prophet,  and  other  cir- 
 cumstances, shew  that  Hazael  at  that  moment  re- 
 garded Elisha  as  one  to  whom  his  secret  purpos^^ 
 were  known.     In  that  case,  his  cry,  '  Is  tliy  ser- 
 
HAZAR-ADDAR 
 
 24i 
 
 HAZAR-SUSAH 
 
 rant  a  dog,'  etc.,  was  not,  as  some  suppose,  a  cry 
 of  joy  at  the  first  view  of  a  throne,  but  of  horror  at 
 the  idea  of  the  public  atrocities  which  the  prophet 
 described.  This  was  likely  to  shock  him  more 
 than  it  would  do  after  he  had  committed  his  first 
 crime,  and  obtained  possession  of  a  throne  acquired 
 at  such  a  cost. 
 
 The  further  information  respecting  Hazael  which 
 the  Scriptures  afford  is  limited  to  brief  notices  of 
 his  wars  with  Ahaziah  and  Joash,  kings  of  Judah, 
 and  with  Jehoram,  Jehu,  and  Jehoahaz,  kings  of 
 Israel  (2  Kings  viii.  28  ;  ix.  14  ;  x.  32  ;  xii.  17  ; 
 xiii.  3  ;  2  Chron.  xxii.  5).  It  is  difficult  to  distin- 
 guish the  several  campaigns  and  victories  involved 
 in  these  allusions,  and  spread  over  a  reign  of  forty 
 years  ;  but  it  is  certain  that  Hazael  always  had  the 
 advantage  over  the  Hebrew  princes.  He  devas- 
 tated their  frontiers,  rent  from  them  all  their  terri- 
 tories beyond  the  Jordan,  traversed  the  breadth  of 
 Palestine,  and  carried  his  arms  into  the  states  of 
 the  Philistines  ;  he  laid  siege  to  Jerusalem,  and 
 only  retired  on  receiving  the  treasures  of  the  temple 
 and  the  palace.  The  details  of  these  conquests 
 redeemed  to  the  very  letter  the  appalling  predic- 
 tions of  Elisha.  This  able  and  successful,  but  un- 
 principled usurper,  left  the  throne  at  his  death  to 
 his  son  Benhadad. 
 
 HAZAR-ADDAR  ("nK  "lOT  ;  Sept.  "EiravXis 
 
 'ApctS  ;  Viilg.  vi/la  nomine  Adar),  a  town  on  the 
 southern  border  of  Palestine,  near  Kadesh-bamea 
 (Num.  xxxiv.  4).  The  site  of  the  latter  has  been 
 fixed  by  Dr.  Robinson  at  Ain  el-Weibeh,  in  the 
 Arabah,  about  thirty-five  miles  south  of  the  Dead 
 Sea  {B.  R.  ii.  175).  If  this  be  the  true  site  of 
 Kadesh,  then  Hazar-addar  stood  on  the  desert  pla- 
 teau westward,  a  region  as  yet  unexplored.  In 
 Josh.  XV.  3  it  is  called  Adar  (Sept.  Sd/saSa ; 
 Vulg.  Addar). 
 
 The  word  Hazar,  when  joined  to  places  situated 
 in  the  desert  or  on  the  outskirts  of  the  inhabited 
 country,  as  it  frequently  is,  probably  denoted  a 
 piece  of  ground  surrounded  by  a  rude  but  strong 
 fence,  where  tents  could  be  pitched,  and  cattle 
 kept  in  safety  from  marauders.  Such  places  are 
 very  common  at  the  present  day  in  the  outlying 
 districts  of  Palestine.  In  other  cases  Hazar  may 
 denote  a  'castle,'  or  '  fortified  town.' — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZAR-ENAN  ({iry  "l^n  and  J^J?  'H  ;  Sept. 
 
 'Apcreva'tv,  and  'Atrepi/aiV  ;  vt//a  Enan),  a  town  on 
 the  north-eastern  boundary  of  the  promised  land 
 (Ezek.  xlvii.  17  ;  xlviii.  l).  It  could  not  have 
 been  far  distant  from  Riblah  (Num.  xxxiv.  9,  10). 
 It  lay  on  the  border  of  the  kingdoms  of  Damascus 
 and  Hamath.  Eusebius  mentions  it  as  &piov  Aa/j.- 
 dffKov  (Reland,  p.  706).  Hazar-enan  signifies  '  the 
 village  of  fountains^  These  facts,  together  with  a 
 careful  survey  of  the  region  between  Damascus  and 
 Hamath,  led  the  writer  to  identify  it  with  the 
 modem  village  of  Kiiryetein,  which  lies  at  nearly 
 an  equal  distance  from  these  two  cities,  and  about 
 forty   miles  east  of  Riblah.     Kicryelein  signifies 
 
 '  the  two  villages  ;'  and  the  Arabic  ij  j  j  may  in  this 
 
 place  be  regarded  as  equivalent  to  the  Hebrew 
 "l^n.  It  is  a  large  village,  with  noh\&  foi(ntai?ts, 
 the  only  ones  in  a  wide  region.  1  he  writer  found 
 some  fragments  of  columns  and  other  ruins  in  its 
 lanes,  and  in  the  gardens  adjoining  it.  Under  the 
 Greek  nanie  KopaSala,  Coradaa,  we  find  it  men- 
 
 tioned as  an  episcopal  city  of  the  province  of  F/ice- 
 nicia  Libani  (S.  Paulo,  Geographia  Sacra,  p.  295). 
 It  still  contains  a  small  community  of  Christians 
 belonging  to  the  Jacobite  Church  (Wood's  Pal- 
 myra, p.  34  ;  Vox\.&x''%  Damascus,  i.  252). — J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZAR -GADDAH    (H-q:    IVH  ;    2e/)i,    and 
 
 'Ao-ep7a5Sci  ;  Aser-gaddd),  a  town  on  the  extreme 
 southern  boundary  of  Judah  towards  Edom  (Josh. 
 XV.  27).  It  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  Mola- 
 dah,  which  is  situated  about  ten  miles  east  of  Beer- 
 sheba.  Hazar-gaddah  probably  lay  between  these 
 two  towns.  The  Alexandrine  MS.  of  the  Septua- 
 gint  makes  'Acr^p  and  PaSSd  distinct  names ;  and 
 so  also  does  Eusebius.  The  former  he  locates  be- 
 tween Ascalon  and  Ashdod,  where  there  is  still  a 
 village  called  Yazilr  ;  but  this  can  have  no  connec- 
 tion with  Hazar  of  Josh.  xv.  27.  Gadda  he  places 
 in  the  utmost  boundary  of  Darom  ;  and  Jerome 
 adds  that  it  lay  '  on  the  east  over  the  Dead  Sea' 
 (OnomasL,  s.v.  Aser  and  Gadda).  Von  Raumer 
 would  identify  this  Gadda  with  the  great  fortress  of 
 Sebbeh  or  Masada,  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
 ruins  of  Palestine  (Winer,  Real-  Woerterbnch,  s.  v. 
 Hazar;  Robinson,  B.  R.  i.  525;  Reland,  707). 
 Such  a  theory  is  altogether  at  variance  with  the 
 Biblical  topography. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZAR-HATTICON  (Ji3"'rin  I^H  ;  avVr\  rou 
 
 'Za.vvav ;  Alex.  'Kvva.v ;  Do77ins  Tickon),  a  place 
 mentioned  by  Ezekiel  only,  who  gives  it  as  one  of 
 the  landmarks  of  the  north-eastern  border  of  the 
 '  Land  of  Promise' — Hazar-hatticon,  which  is  by  the 
 coast  of  Hauran  (xlvii.  16).  The  site  is  unknown  ; 
 but  it  could  not  have  been  far  distant  from  Damas- 
 cus, probably  to  the  east  of  that  city. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZARMAVETH  (niO^^n  ;  Sept.  'Lapix^hQ), 
 
 the  third  son  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  26),  whose  name 
 is  preserved  in  the  Arabian  province  oi Hadramawt 
 [Arabia]. 
 
 HAZAR- SHUAL    (Wwi*  IVn  ;    'Acrapo-ouXd, 
 
 Vat.  'EcrepcromX,  'AptrwXd,  and  XoXatrewXd  ;  Has- 
 ersual),  a  city  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah, 
 grouped  with  Beersheba  (Josh.  xv.  28).  Though 
 within  the  territory  of  Judah,  it  was  given  to  the 
 tribe  of  Simeon  (xix.  3),  and  was  occupied  by  the 
 family  of  Shimei,  whose  sixteen  sons  dwelt  at  Beer- 
 sheba, Moladah,  and  Hazar-shiial  (i  Chron.  iv. 
 28).  It  was  occupied  by  the  Israelites  after  the 
 captivity,  but  we  hear  no  more  of  it  in  history. 
 Van  de  Velde  conjectures  that  its  site  may  be 
 marked  by  the  ruins  of  Saweh,  between  Beersheba 
 and  Moladah  (see  his  Map  0/ Palestine). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZAR-SUSAH    (HDID  "IVH  ;    ' AcapaovcxliJ., 
 
 Vat.  Hapa-ovalv  ;  Hasersusa),  a  town  of  Simeon 
 near  the  southern  border  of  Palestine,  and  appa- 
 rently not  far  from  Ziklag  (Josh.  xix.  5).  Like 
 Hazar-shual  it  was  occupied  by  the  family  of 
 Shimei,  as  we  learn  from  i  Chron.  iv.  31,  where  it 
 is   called    Hazar -susim    (D''D^D  ;    '13.iJH(Tovcriu(Tlv ; 
 
 Hasersiisitn).  The  name  signifies  '  village  of 
 horses  ;'  and  Stanley  says,  '  In  Bethmarkaboth, 
 '  the  house  of  chariots,'  and  Hazar-susi?n,  '  the 
 village  of  horses,'  we  recognize  the  depots  and 
 stations  for  the  horses  and  chariots,  such  as  those 
 which  in  Solomon's  time  went  to  and  fro  between 
 Egypt  and  Palestine'  {Sin.  a7id  Pal.,  p.  160).     It 
 
HAZEL 
 
 243 
 
 HAZOR 
 
 h  doubtful  whether  there  were  any  such  communi- 
 cation between  those  coimtries  as  early  as  the  time 
 of  Joshua  ;  but  may  not  the  rich  grassy  plains 
 around  Beersheba  (Robinson,  B.  R.  i.  203)  have 
 been  used  at  certain  seasons  by  the  ancient  tribes 
 of  southern  Palestine  for  pasturing  their  war  and 
 chariot  horses,  just  as  the  grassy  plains  of  Jaulan 
 are  used  at  the  present  day  by  the  Druze  chiefs  of 
 Lebanon,  and  the  Turkish  cavalry  and  artillery  at 
 Damascus? — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZEL.     [Luz.] 
 
 HAZEROTH   {T\rm  ;  'AirTjoti^  ;   Haserotk), 
 
 one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israelites  in  the  wilder- 
 ness. It  was  situated  apparently  four  days'  march 
 from  Sinai  (Num.  x.  33  ;  xi.  35),  towards  the 
 north-west.  It  was  also  the  first  place  after  Sinai 
 where  the  camp  remained  for  a  number  of  days. 
 Here  Aaron  and  Miriam  attempted  to  excite  a 
 rebellion  against  Moses  ;  and  here  the  guilty 
 Miriam  was  smitten  with  leprosy  (Num.  xii. )  The 
 accurate  determination  of  the  site  of  Hazeroth  is  of 
 considerable  importance,  as  it  enables  us  to  define 
 with  a  near  approach  to  accuracy  the  line  of  march 
 of  the  Israelites  from  Sinai  to  Kadesh. 
 
 In  a  wild  and  dreary  waste,  among  naked  hills, 
 eighteen  hours  from  Sinai,  is  a  little  fountain  called 
 
 el-Hudherah,  ^ ^,A^\,   a  word  radically  identical 
 
 with  Hazeroth.  Its  distance  from  Sinai  accords 
 with  the  Scripture  narrative,  and  would  seem  to 
 warrant  us  in  identifying  it  with  Hazeroth.  This 
 was  first  suggested  by  Burckhardt  {Travels  in 
 Syria,  p.  495)  ;  and  is  advocated  by  Robinson 
 \B.  R.  i.  151).  There  is  some  difficulty,  however, 
 in  the  position.  The  country  around  the  fountain 
 is  exceedingly  rugged,  and  the  approaches  to  it 
 difficult.  It  does  not  seem  a  suitable  place  for  a 
 large  camp.  Dr.  Wilson  mentions  an  undulating 
 plain  about  fifteen  miles  north  of  Sinai,  and  running 
 '  a  long  way  to  the  eastward,'  called  el-Hadherah  ; 
 and  here  he  would  locate  Hazeroth  (Lands  of  the 
 Bible,  i.  256).  Professor  Stanley  thinks  that  the 
 fountain  called  el-''Ain,  some  distance  north  of  the 
 fountain  of  Hiidherah,  ought  rather  to  be  regarded 
 as  the  site  of  Hazeroth,  because  'Ain  is  the  most 
 important  spring  in  this  region,  '  and  must,  there- 
 fore, have  attracted  around  it  any  nomadic  settle- 
 ments, such  as  are  implied  in  the  name  Hazeroth, 
 and  such  as  th;  .t  of  Israel  might  have  been'  [Si}iai 
 and  Pal.  82).  The  approach  to  'Ain  is  easy  ;  the 
 glens  around  it  possess  some  good  pastures  ;  and 
 the  road  from  il  tj  the  Aelanitic  gulf,  along  whose 
 shore  the  Israelites  appear  to  have  marched,  is 
 open  through  the  sublime  ravine  of  Wetir.  Still 
 those  familiar  with  the  East  know  with  what  tena- 
 city old  names  cling  to  old  sites  ;  and  it  seems  in 
 the  highest  degree  probable  that  the  old  name 
 Hazeroth  is  retained  in  Hudherah.  But  probably 
 the  name  may  have  been  given  to  a  wide  district 
 {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.  i.  37,  sq.) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HAZEZON-TAMAR.     [En-gedi.] 
 
 HAZO   (irn,    Chazo;    Sept.   'AfaC),   a  son   of 
 
 Nahor  (Gen.  xxii.  22),  whose  posterity  settled 
 somewhere  on  the  east  of  the  Euphrates.  Pro- 
 bably in  x^-^WV^  the  name  of  a  region  of  Assyria 
 mentioned  by  Strabo  (xvi.  p.  736),  and  also  a 
 region  in  Mesopotamia  (Steph.  Byzant.),  we  have 
 
 traces   of  their  occupancy.     The   Syrian  vmters 
 
 name  a  ]|_k»  which  they  identify  with  Strabo's  CAa- 
 zene. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HAZOR  ("livn  ;  'Aawp  ;  Asor),  an  ancient  and 
 
 celebrated  royal  city  of  Canaan,  situated  near  the 
 waters  of  Merom.  Jabin,  king  of  Hazor,  was  the 
 recognised  chief  of  a  number  of  small  principalities 
 (Josh.  xi.  10).  When  the  Israelites  invaded 
 Palestine,  Jabin  assembled  his  forces  and  allies  on 
 the  shores  of  the  Lake  Merom.  Joshua  attacked 
 and  utterly  defeated  them,  and  burned  Hazor  with 
 fire  (Josh.  xi.  I-12).  The  city  was  allotted  to 
 Naphtali  (xix.  36).  After  the  death  of  Joshua 
 Hazor  was  rebuilt  by  the  Canaanites,  and  under 
 another  king,  with  the  hereditai-y  name  or  title 
 Jabin,  attained  to  great  power,  and  even  held  the 
 Israelites  in  subjection  for  twenty  years.  At  length 
 the  forces  of  Jabin,  including  600  chariots  of  iron, 
 were  led  by  Sisera  into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
 probably  to  complete  the  conquest  f^f  all  Palestine ; 
 but  they  were  met  and  routed  by  Barak  and  De- 
 borah, and  the  power  of  Hazor  was  broken  for 
 ever  (Judg.  iv.)  The  city  was  afterwards  fortified 
 by  Solomon  (i  Kings  ix.  15)  ;  and  it  was  among 
 those  captured  by  the  Assyrians  on  their  first 
 invasion  of  Palestine  (2  Kings  xv.  29/.  It  is  pro- 
 bably the  same  place  which  Josepl:us  refers  to  in 
 the  time  of  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees.  Deme- 
 trius was  encamped  at  Cadesh,  and  Jonathan 
 marched  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  to  '  the  plain 
 called  Asor^  to  meet  him  {Antiq.  xiii.  5.  6,  7  ;  i 
 Maccab.  xi.  67). 
 
 The  site  of  Hazor  has  not  yet  been  satisfactorily 
 identified.  The  incidental  notices  in  Josh.  xix.  36, 
 and  2  Kings  xv.  29,  would  seem  to  locate  it  to  the 
 south  of  Kedesh  in  Naphtali ;  and  Josephus  says 
 it  was  situated  over  the  Lake  Semechonitis,  and 
 apparently  so  close  to  it  that  the  plain  round  the 
 lake  was  called  by  its  name  [I.e.  and  Antig.  v.  5. 
 i).  Neither  Eusebius  nor  Jerome  appears  to  have 
 known  the  site  {Ononiast.,  s.v.  Asor). 
 
 The  name  Hazor  still  lingers  in  several  places 
 around  the  upper  valley  of  the  Jordan  (Robinson, 
 B.  R.  iii.  63,  81,  401).  There  is  one  Haziliy  on 
 a  commanding  site  above  Csesarea  Philippi,  and 
 close  to  the  great  castle  of  Subeibeh.  Here  Keith 
 {Land  of  Israel,  374)  and  Stanley  {Sin.  and  Pal. 
 389)  would  place  the  ancient  capital  of  Canaan. 
 But  the  territory  of  Naphtali  did  not  extend  so  far 
 eastward.  The  writer  discovered  another  Hasur 
 in  the  plain  a  few  miles  west  of  the  site  of  Dan  ; 
 but  neither  does  this  site  quite  accord  with  the 
 Scripture  notices  (Porter's  Da7nascus,  i.  304 ;  Van 
 de  Velde,  Memoir,  318).  Dr.  Robinson  would 
 place  Hazor  at  Tell  Khureibeh,  a  rocky  peak  a 
 few  miles  south  of  Kedesh.  There  are,  as  the 
 name  KInireibeh,  'ruins,'  implies,  some  ancient 
 ruins  on  the  Tell  ;  but  they  are  those  of  a  village. 
 In  the  year  1850  the  writer  visited  the  ruins  of  an 
 ancient  town  which  occupy  a  commanding  site  on 
 the  south  bank  of  Wady  Hendaj,  overlooking  the 
 valley  and  lake  of  Merom,  and  about  six  miles 
 south  of  Kedesh.  This  seems  to  be  a  more  pro- 
 bable site  for  the  ancient  Hazor  than  Tell  Khurei- 
 beh (Robinson,  B.  R.  iii.  363,  365)  ;  and  the  plain 
 beneath  it,  stretching  to  the  shore  of  the  lake, 
 might  take  the  name  of  the  city  Astir,  as  Josephus 
 seems  to  indicate  {I.e.) 
 
HEAD 
 
 244 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 2.  A  town  on  the  southern  border  of  Judah, 
 near  Kadesh  (Josh.  xv.  23  ;  Sept.  ' Acropiwvalv  ; 
 Vulg.  Asor).     The  site  has  not  been  identified. 
 
 3.  A  town  of  Benjamin  occupied  after  the  cap- 
 tivity, and  grouped  with  Nob  and  Ramah  (Neh. 
 xi.  33)  ;  it  must  thus  have  been  situated  a  few 
 miles  north  of  Jerusalem.  The  verse  in  ^yhich  the 
 name  occurs  is  omitted  in  the  Septuagint  ;  but 
 Jerome  renders  it  Asor  in  his  version.  Robinson 
 suggests  the  identity  of  Hazor  and  the  modern  Zi-// 
 
 Asur    {jyOS.   Aj),  a  ruin  on  a   little  hill  about 
 
 six  miles  north  of  Bethel.  This,  however,  appears 
 to  be  too  far  from  Ramah  (B/d.  /?es.  ii.  264,  note). 
 Tobler  mentions  a  ruin  called  Khnrbet  Arsiir,  near 
 Ramah,  a  little  to  the  west,  the  situation  of  which 
 would  answer  better  to  Hazor  {Topogt.  ii.  400; 
 Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  319). 
 
 4.  Jeremiah  mentions  a  Hazor  in  connection  with 
 Kedar  ;  '  concerning  Kedar,  and  concerning  the 
 kingdoms  of  Hazor,'  etc.  (Jer.  xlix.  28).  The 
 Septuagint  renders  this  ttj  KijSd/)  r^  Bao-iXico-T?  tijs 
 ouXtjs,  'To  Kedar,  the  queen  (or  kingdom,  see 
 Schleusner,  s.  v.)  of  the  fold.'  Jerome  translates  it, 
 '  ad  Cedar,  et  ad  regna  Asor.''  The  name  Hazor 
 is  probably  applied  by  the  prophet  to  some  noted 
 town  or  camping-ground  of  the  Arab  tribes  of 
 Arabia.  May  it  not  be  that  the  country  colonised 
 by  the  descendants  of  Hazarmaveih  is  meant  (Gen. 
 X.  26)  ?  This  province,  called  by  Arab  historians 
 Hadramaiit,  is  situated  in  Yemen  on  the  south 
 coast  of  Arabia  (Hazarmaveth).  The  tribes  of 
 Arabia  are  divided  into  two  classes — Nomads,  who 
 live  exclusively  in  tents  and  wander  from  place 
 to    place  ;    and   those   settled    in   towns   or   vil- 
 
 lages. 
 
 .\ 
 
 \  M^ 
 
 or  sim- 
 
 The  latter  are  called    ■^■^ 
 l-js^.    The  Arabic  word    .-^-^  signifies /i3«/j 
 
 kabUatus  fixus ;  and  may  thus  be  regarded  as 
 equivalent  to  the  Hebrew  "IIVH  (see  Pococke,  Speci- 
 men Historic  Arabicm,  p.  2  ;  Winer,  R.  W.,  s.  v. 
 Hazor).—].  L.  P. 
 
 HEAD  (tJ'N"!  ;  Greek,  Ke<pa\-/,).  As  the  head 
 is  the  topmost  part  of  the  human  body,  it  came 
 derivatively  to  signify  that  which  is  highest, 
 chief,  the  highest  in  position  locally  being  regarded 
 as  highest  in  office,  rank,  or  dignity  ;  whence,  as 
 the  head  is  the  centre  of  the  nervous  system,  holds 
 the  brain,  and  stands  above  all  the  other  parts,  it 
 has  generally  been  considered  as  the  abode  of  the 
 intellect  or  intelligence  by  which  man  is  enlightened 
 and  his  walk  in  life  directed  ;  while  the  heart,  or 
 the  parts  placed  near  it,  have  been  accounted  the 
 place  where  the  affections  lie  (Gen.  iii.  15  ;  Ps.  iii. 
 3  ;  Eccles.  ii.  14).  The  head  and  the  heart  are 
 sometimes  taken  for  the  entire  person  (Is.  i.  5). 
 Even  the  head  alone,  as  being  the  chief  member, 
 frequently  stands  for  the  man  (Prov.  x.  6).  The 
 head  also  denotes  sovereignty  (i  Cor.  xi.  3). 
 Covering  the  head,  and  cutting  off  the  hair,  were 
 signs  of  mourning  and  tokens  of  distress,  which 
 were  enhanced  by  throwing  ashes  on  the  head,  to- 
 gether with  sackcloth  (Amos  viii.  10  ;  Job  i.  20  ; 
 Lev.  xxL  5  ;  Deut.  xiv.  I  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  19  ; 
 Esther  iv.  l)  ;  while  anointing  the  head  was  prac- 
 tised on  festive  occasions,  and  considered  an  em- 
 blem of  felicity  (Eccles.  ix.  8  ;  Ps.  xxiii.  5  ;  Luke 
 vii.  46).  It  was  usual  to  swear  by  the  head  (Malt. 
 V.  36).— J.  R.  B, 
 
 HEAD-DRESS.     [Turban  ;  Veil.] 
 
 HEART.  All  the  phrases,  more  or  less  meta- 
 phorical, in  which  this  word  occurs,  are  rendered 
 intelligible,  without  detailed  examples,  when  we 
 are  told  that  the  heart  was,  among  the  Hebrews, 
 regarded  poetically  not  only  as  the  seat  of  the  pas- 
 sions and  emotions,  as  of  love,  pleasure,  and  grief, 
 but  also  of  the  mtellectual  faculties — the  mind,  the 
 understanding.  [Philosophy,  Biblical.]  In  the 
 original  Scriptures,  as  well  as  in  the  English  and 
 other  translations,  the  word  'heart,'  therefore, 
 constantly  occurs  where  'mind'  is  to  be  under- 
 stood, and  would  be  used  by  a  modem  English 
 writer.  We  say  modem,  because  the  ancient 
 usage  of  the  English  word  '  heart'  was  more  con 
 formable  than  the  present  to  that  of  the  Hebrews. 
 
 HEARTH.  None  of  the  Hebrew  terms  trans- 
 lated hearth  in  the  A.  V.  can  be  regarded  as  per- 
 fectly synonymous  with  it.  In  Gen.  xviii.  6,  a 
 single  word,  nijy  {iyKpv<pias,  LXX.),  stands  for 
 the  '  cakes  upon  the  hearth'  of  the  A.  V.,  or  the 
 '  subcinericios  panes'*    of  the   Vulgate.     IpiO,   in 
 
 Ps.  cii.  3,  means  fitel  or  fireivood  [lignum  ardens, 
 sarmenta,  Gesenius  ;  (ppiyLov,  LXX.  ;  cremium, 
 Vulg.)  ;  the  plural  ''IpID,  Is.  xxxiii.  14,  is  ren- 
 dered in  the  A.  V.  burnings ;  ardoribus,  Vulg.  ; 
 incendiitm,  Gesenius  ;  "|*l*2,  Zech.  xii.  6,  with  the 
 
 addition  of  JJ'X,  means  a  vessel  for  holding  burning 
 
 coals ;  elsewhere  a  laver,  Exod.  xxx.  1 8  ;  Lev 
 viii.  II;  and  once  for  Xhs  pulpit  [scaffold,  A.  V.), 
 used  by  Solomon  at  the  dedication  of  the  Temple, 
 2  Chron.  vi.  13.  Another  word  translated  hearth, 
 HN,  Jer.  xxxvL    22,   23   [iaxdpa,    LXX. ;    arula, 
 
 Vulg.),  appears  to  mean  a.  pi  re-basket  or  chafing' 
 dish,  such  as  is  still  common  in  the  East. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 HEATH,  Thomas,  a  learned  layman  of  the 
 Church  of  England,  sometime  resident  at  Exeter, 
 the  author  of  a  work  entitled — An  Essay  tozvards 
 a  netu  English  version  of  the  Book  of  yob  from  the 
 original  Hebrew,  with  a  cotnmentary  and  some  ac- 
 count of  his  life,  Lond.  1756,  4to.  This  version  of 
 Job  is  in  prose,  and  on  the  whole  is  a  correct  and 
 forcible  rendering  of  the  original.  The  notes  are 
 learned  and  discover  considerable  acquaintance 
 with  the  literature  of  the  subject.  The  author  be- 
 lieves Job  to  have  been  a  real  person  ;  but  the 
 poem  he  thinks  was  written  long  subsequent  to 
 Job's  decease,  and  by  a  person  wholly  unacquainted 
 with  the  doctrines  of  a  future  state  and  the  resur- 
 rection of  the  body.  These  and  cognate  matters 
 are  discussed  with  special  reference  to  the  great 
 controversy  of  the  time,  onginating  in  the  views 
 promulgated  by  Bishop  Warburton  in  his  work 
 on  the  Divine  Legation  of  Moses. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HEATH.     [Ar'ar.]- 
 
 HEATHEN.     [Gentiles.] 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS.  Defittitions  and Dis. 
 tinctions.  —  The  ancient  Hebrews,  for  want  of  a 
 single  term  like  the  Kocr/^os  and  the  Ahuidus  of 
 the  Greeks  and  the  Latins,  used  the  phrase  heaven 
 and  earth  (as  in  Gen.  i.  i  ;  Jer.  xxiii.  24  ;  and  Acts 
 xvii.  24,  where  '  H.  and  E^  =  '  the  world  and 
 all  things  therein')  to  indicate  the  universe,  or  (as 
 Barrow,  Sermons  on  the  Creed,  works  [Oxford  Ed.  ], 
 vol.  iv.  p.  556,  expresses  it)   'those  two  regions. 
 
HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 245 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 superior  and  inferior,  into  which  the  whole  system 
 of  things  is  divided,  together  with  all  the  beings 
 that  do  reside  in  them,  or  do  belong  unto  them,  or 
 are  comprehended  by  them'  (comp.  Pearson  oti  the 
 Creed,  who,  on  art.  i.  ('Maker  of  H.  and  E.') 
 adduces  the  Rabbinical  names  of  a  triple  division 
 of  the  universe,  making  the  sea,  D'',  distinct  from 
 the  31Ji'"',  17  otKov/jLevT).  Compare  also  the  Nicene 
 Creed,  where  another  division  occurs  of  the  uni- 
 verse into  '  things  visible  and  invisible. ')  Deducting 
 from  this  aggregate  the  idea  expressed  by  '  earth' 
 [Earth  ;  Geography],  we  get  a  residue  of  signi- 
 fication which  exactly  embraces  '  heaven.'  Barrow 
 (/.  c. )  well  defines  it  as  '  all  the  superior  region  en- 
 compassing the  globe  of  the  earth,  and  from  it  on 
 all  sides  extended  to  a  distance  inconceivably  vast 
 and  spacious,  with  all  its  parts  and  furniture  and 
 inhabitants — not  only  such  things  in  it  as  are  visible 
 and  material,  but  also  those  which  are  immaterial 
 and  invisible  (Col.  i.  16).'  The  same  writer  (p. 
 558,  with  whom  comp.  Grotius  and  Drusius  on 
 2  Cor.  xii.  2)  ascribes  to  the  Jews  the  notion  that 
 there  are  three  heavens  ;  *  Ccelnvi  mibiferitm,  or  the 
 
 *  Wetstein  (in  a  learned  note  on  2  Cor.  xii.  2) 
 and  Eisenmenger  ( Entdectes  yiidenthicm,  vol.  i.  p. 
 460)  state  the  Rabbinical  opinion  as  asserting  seven 
 heavens.  For  the  substance  of  Wetstein's  note,  see 
 Dr.  Stanley,  Corinthiafis,  1.  c.  This  number  arises 
 confessedly  from  the  mystic  value  of  the  numeral 
 seven  ;  '  omnis  septenariits  dilectus  est  in  seculum — 
 in  superis.'  According  to  Rabbi  Abia,  there  were 
 sbc  ante-chambers,  as  it  were,  or  steps  to  the  seventh 
 heaven,  which  was  the  '  ra/xeTov  in  quo  Rex  habitat ' 
 — the  very  presence-chamber  of  the  Divine  King 
 himself.  Comp.  Origen,  Contra  Celsnm,  vi.  p. 
 289,  and  Clemens  Alex.  Strom,  iv.  p.  636  ;  v.  p. 
 692.  In  the  last  of  these  passages  the  prophet 
 Zephaniah  is  mentioned,  after  some  apocryphal 
 tradition,  to  have  been  caught  up  into  '  the  Jifth 
 heaven,  the  dwelling-place  of  the  angels,  in  a  glory 
 sevenfold  greater  than  the  brightness  of  the  sun.' 
 In  the  Rabbinical  point  of  view,  the  superb  throne 
 of  King  Solomon,  with  the  six  steps  leading  up  to 
 it,  was  a  symbol  of  the  highest  heaven  with  the 
 throne  of  the  Eternal,  above  the  six  inferior  heavens 
 (i  Kings  X.  18-20).  These  gradations  of  the  celes- 
 tial regions  are  probably  meant  in  Amos  ix.  6, 
 where,  however,  the  entire  creation  is  beautifully 
 described  by  ^  the  stories  [or  steps]  of  the  heaven,' 
 for  the  empyreal  heaven ;  '  the  troop  [or  globular 
 aggregate,  the  terra  Jirma,  see  A  Lapide,  in  loc.  ] 
 of  the  earth,'  and  '  the  waters  of  the  sea'  [including 
 the  atmosphere,  whence  the  waters  are  '  poured  out 
 upon  the  face  of  the  earth'].  As  for  the  threefold 
 division  of  the  celestial  regions  mentioned  in  the 
 text,  Meyer  thinks  it  to  be  a  fiction  of  the  learned 
 Grotius,  on  the  ground  of  the  Rabbinical  seveii 
 heavens.  But  this  censure  is  premature  ;  for  ( i )  it 
 is  very  doubtful  whether  this  hebdomadal  division  is 
 as  old  as  St.  Paul's  time  ;  (2)  it  is  certain  that  the 
 Rabbinical  doctors  are  not  unanimous  about  the 
 number  seven.  Rabbi  Judah  ( Chagiga,  fol.  1 2.  2, 
 and  A  both  Natha?!,  37)  says  there  are  '  two  heavens,' 
 after  Deut.  x.  14.  This  agrees  with  Grotius'  state- 
 ment, if  we  combine  his  mibiferum  [ypl]  and  astri- 
 fcrum  [D''DK']  into  one  region  of  physical  heavens 
 (as  indeed  Moses  does  himself  in  Gen.  i.  14,  15,  17, 
 20),  and  reserve  his  angelifernm  for  the  D^DETI  ''JDtJ', 
 '  the  heaven  of  heavens,'  the  supernal  region  of 
 spiritual  beings,  Milton's  'Empyrean'  {P.  L.  vii. 
 
 firmament ;  Calum  astrifernm,  the  starry  heavens  ; 
 Ca-ltim  angelifernm,  or  '  the  heaven  of  heavens,' 
 where  the  angels  reside,  'the  third  heaven'  of  St. 
 Paul.  This  same  notion  prevails  in  the  Fathers. 
 Thus  St.  Gregoiy  of  Nyssa  (llexaem.  tom.  i.  p.  42) 
 describes  the  first  of  these  heavens  as  the  limited 
 space  of  the  denser  air  (jhv  Upov  roC  vaxv/J-epeaTepov 
 d^pos),  within  which  range  the  clouds,  the  winds, 
 and  the  birds ;  the  second  is  the  region  in  which 
 wander  the  plajiets  and  the  stars  {iv  Z  Zk  TrXavTJTai 
 tQv  darepup  diaTropevovrai),  hence  aptly  called  by 
 Hesychius  KaTri<rTpi(Tp.ivov  tottov,  locum  stelliferum  ; 
 while  the  third  is  the  very  summit  of  the  visible  crea- 
 tion (t6  &0V  dKpbraTOV  rod  ala'^TiTov  KOffp-ov),  St. 
 jPatel's  third  heaven,  higher  than  the  aerial  and 
 stellar  world,  cognisable  [not  by  the  eye  but]  by  the 
 7)iind  alone  (iv  aTacFlp.ifi  kol  vorjrfj  (pvaei  yevdpevos), 
 which  Damascene  calls  the  heazvn  of  heavens,  the 
 pritne  heaven  beyond  all  others  {ovpavbs  rod  oupavov, 
 6  TTpwTos  ovpavbs,  Orthod.  Fid.  lib.  ii.  c.  vi.  p.  83)  ; 
 or,  according  to  St.  Basil  {In  Jesaiam,  visione  ii. 
 tom.  i.  p.  813),  the  throne  of  God  i^pbvos  0eoO),  and 
 to  Justin  Martyr  {Qiicest.  et  Resp.  ad  GrcEcos,  adult. 
 QticTst.  p.  236),  the  house  and  throne  of  God  {oTkos 
 Kai  ^pbvos  Tov  GeoO). 
 
 Scripture  Passages  arranged  according  to  these 
 Distinctio7is. — This  division  of  the  celestial  regions 
 is  very  convenient  and  quite  Biblical.  I.  Under 
 the  first  head  [coelum  nubiferum]  the  following 
 phrases  naturally  fall— (a)  'Fowl,'  or  'fowls  of 
 the  heaven,  of  the  air  ;'  see  Gen.  ii.  19  ;  vii.  3,  23  ; 
 ix.  2  ;  Deut.  iv.  17  ;  xxviii.  26  ;  I  Kings  xxi.  24 ; 
 Job  xii.  7;  xxviii.  21  ;  xxxv.  II;  Ps.  viii.  8; 
 Ixxix.  2;  civ.  12;  Jer.  vii.  33  et  passim ;  Ezek. 
 xxix.  5  et  passim  ;  Dan.  ii.  38  ;  Hos.  ii.  18  ;  iv.  3  ; 
 vii.  12  ;  Zeph.  i.  3  ;  Mark  iv.  3  (to.  iriTeLva  rod 
 ovpavov)  ;  Luke  viii.  5  ;  ix.  58  ;  xiii.  19  ;  Acts  x. 
 12  ;  xi.  6 — in  all  which  passages  the  same  original 
 words  in  the  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and  Greek  Scrip- 
 tures [W'lD^,  PDE^*,  ovpavoi]  are  with  equal  propriety 
 
 rendered  indifferently  '  air^  and  '  heavefi' — simi- 
 larly, we  read  of  'the  path  of  the  eagle  in  the 
 air,''  Prov.  xxx.  19  ;  of  '  the  eagles  of  heaven,' 
 Lam.  iv.  19;  of  'the  stork  of  the  heaven,''  Jer. 
 viii.  7  ;  and  of  '  birds  of  heaven '  in  general,  Eccl. 
 X.  20 ;  Jer.  iv.  25.  In  addition  to  these  zoological 
 terms,  we  have  meteorological  facts  included  under 
 
 sub  fin.)  See  Bp.  Pearson's  note.  On  the  Creea 
 [ed.  Chevallier],  p.  91.  The  learned  note  of  De 
 Wette  on  2  Corinthians  xii.  2,  is  also  worth  con- 
 sulting. (3)  The  Targum  on  2  Chron.  vi.  18  [as 
 quoted  by  Dr.  Gill,  Continent.  2  Corinth.  1.  c]  ex- 
 pressly mentions  the  triple  distinction  of  supreme, 
 middle,  and  lower  heavens.  Indeed,  there  is  an 
 accumulation  of  the  threefold  classification.  Thus, 
 in  Tseror  Hanwior,  fol.  I.  4,  and  3.  2,  3,  and  83.  2, 
 three  worlds  are  mentioned.  The  doctors  of  the 
 Cabbala  also  hold  the  opinion  of  three  worlds, 
 Zohar,  Numb.  fol.  66.  3.  And  of  the  highest 
 world  there  is  further  a  tripartite  division,  of  angels, 
 
 D''3s!5?3n  D^iy ;  of  souls,  nit:'E)2  ;  and  of  spirits, 
 
 ■•jmin  D^Jiy.     See  Buxtorfs  Lex.  Rabbin,  p.  1620, 
 
 who  refers  to  D.  Kimchi,  on  Psalm  xix.  9.  St. 
 Paul,  besides  the  well-known  2  Cor.  xii.  2,  refers 
 again,  only  less  pointedly,  to  a  plurality  of  heavens, 
 as  in  Ephes.  iv.  10.  See  Olshausen  [Ed.  Clark] 
 on  the  foiTner  passage. 
 
HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 246 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 the  same  original  words ;  e.  g.  (6)  '  The  dew  of 
 heaven,^  Gen.  xxvii.  28,  39  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  28  ; 
 Dan.  iv.  15  et  passim ;  Hag.  i.  10;  Zech.  viii. 
 12  :  (c)  '  The  clouds  of  heaven^  I  Kings  xviii.  45  ; 
 Ps.  cxlvii.  8  ;  Dan  vii.  13  ;  Matt.  xxiv.  30  ;  xxvi. 
 64 ;  Mark  xiv.  62  :  {d)  The  frost  of  heaven.  Job 
 xxxviii.  29  :  (e)  The  winds  of  heaven,  i  Kings  xviii. 
 55  ;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  26  ;  Dan.  viii.  8  ;  xi.  4  ;  Zecli.  ii. 
 6  ;  vi.  5  [see  margin]  ;  Matt.  xxiv.  3 1  ;  Mark  xiii. 
 27  '•  if)  The  rai7t  of  heaven.  Gen.  viii.  2  ;  Deut  xL 
 II  ;  xxviii.  12  ;  Jer.  xiv.  22;  Acts  xiv.  17  [ovpavh'itev 
 verovs]  ;  James  v.  18  ;  Rev.  xviii.  6  :  (g)  Lightning, 
 with  thtnider.  Job  xxxvii.  3,  4 ;  Luke  xvii.  24. 
 II.  (Coelum  astriferum).  The  vast  spaces  of  which 
 astronomy  takes  cognizance  are  frequently  referred 
 to  :  ex.  gr.  (a)  in  the  phrase,  ^  host  of  heaven,''  in 
 Deut.  xvii.  3  ;  Jer.  viii.  2;  Matt.  xxiv.  29  [Swd/xets 
 Twv  ovpavwv]  ;  a  sense  which  is  obviously  not  to  be 
 confounded  with  another  signification  of  the  same 
 phrase,  as  in  Luke  ii.  13  [Angels]  :  (b)  Lights  of 
 heaven,  Gen.  i.  14,  15,  16  ;  Ezek.  xxxii.  8  :  (c) 
 Stars  of  heaven,  Gen.  xxii.  17;  xxvi.  4;  Exod. 
 xxxii.  13  ;  Deut.  i.  10  ;  x.  22  ;  xxviii.  62  ;  Judg. 
 V.  20;  Neh.  ix.  23;  Is.  xiii.  10 ;  Nahum  iii.  16; 
 Heb.  xi.  12. »  III.  (Coelum  angeliferum).  It 
 would  exceed  our  limits  if  we  were  to  collect  the 
 descriptive  phrases  which  Revelation  has  given  us 
 of  Heaven  in  its  sublimest  sense  ;  we  content  our- 
 selves with  indicating  one  or  two  of  the  most  ob- 
 vious :  [a]  The  heaven  of  heavens,  Deut.  x.  14  ;  i 
 Kings  viii.  27  ;  2  Chron.  ii.  6,  18  ;  Neh.  ix.  6  ; 
 Ps.  cxv.  16  ;  cxlviii.  4  :  (b)  The  third  heavens,  2 
 Cor.  xii.  2  :  (c)  The  high  and  lofty  {place},  Is.  xlvii. 
 15  •  ('^)  ^/^^  highest.  Matt.  xxi.  9  ;  Mark  xi.  10  ; 
 Luke  ii.  14,  compared  with  Ps.  cxlviii.  i.  This 
 heavenly  sublimity  was  graciously  brought  dovra  to 
 Jewish  apprehensions  in  the  sacred  symbol  of  their 
 Tabernacle  and  Temple,  which  they  reverenced 
 (especially  in  the  adytum  of  '  the  Holy  of  Holies ') 
 as  '  the  place  where  God's  honour  dwelt '  (Ps.  xxvi. 
 8),  and  amidst  the  sculptured  types  of  His  celestial 
 retinue,  in  the  cherubim  of  the  mercy-seat  (2  Kings 
 xix.  15  ;  Ps.  Ixxx.  I  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  16). f 
 
 Mea7iing  of  the  tei'ms  used  in  the  Original,  i. 
 The  by  far  most  frequent  designation  of  Heaven  in 
 the  Hebrew  Scriptures  is  D^DK',  which  the  older 
 
 lexicographers  [see  Cocceius,  Lex.  s.  v.]  regarded 
 
 *  These  two  divisions  are  sometimes,  as  we  have 
 said  in  the  previous  note,  regarded  as  one,  the 
 p/iysical  or  material  heavens,  in  opposition  to  the 
 spiritual  region.  Poole,  in  synopsis  on  Gen.  i.,  has 
 with  quaint  succinctness  and  propriety  indicated 
 the  characteristics  of  the  physical  heavens,  in  respect 
 of  their  three  classes  of  occupants,  thus,  '  tres  regio- 
 nes,  ubi  aves,  ubi  nubes,  ubi  sidera. ' 
 
 f  Heaven,  as  the  eternal  rest  and  reversion  of 
 the  saints  (Matt.  v.  12  ;  i  Pet.  i.  4,  and  many 
 other  passages),  and  as  used  in  the  phrase  kingdom 
 of  heaven — the  ultimate  development  of  the  state 
 of  grace  and  salvation  to  the  blessed  company  of 
 all  faithful  people — we  do  not  propose  to  treat  of 
 here  ;  the  beauty  and  glory  of  that  subject  is  too 
 much  connected  with  practical  and  devotional 
 theology  to  be  admitted  into  this  work  ;  for  the 
 same  reason  we  must  refer  to  theological  treatises 
 fo"-  a  commentary  on  Christ's  glorious  '  Ascension 
 into  Heaven'  [the  Ccelum  Angelifetum  of  ourarr.], 
 and  'Session'  thereon  His  mediatoriTl  throne  at 
 God's  right  hand. 
 
 as  the  dtial,  but  which  Gesenius  and  Fiirst  have 
 restored  to  the  dignity,  which  St.  Jerome  gave  it, 
 of  the  plural  of  an  obsolete  noun,  ^)y3  as    (D''i  J 
 
 plur.  of  ■'13  and  D''0  from  ''D).    According  to  these 
 
 recent  scholars  the  idea  expressed  by  the  word  is 
 height,  elevation  (Gesenius,  Thes.  p.  1453  ;  Fiirst, 
 Hebr.  Wort.  ii.  467).  In  this  respect  of  its  essen- 
 tial meaning  it  resembles  the  Greek  ovpavbs  [from 
 the  radical  dp,  denoting  height};  Pott,  Etymol. 
 Forsch.  i.  123,  ed.  i.  Pott's  rendering  of  this 
 root  op,  by  'sich  erheben^  reminds  us  of  our  own 
 beautiful  word  heaven,  which  thus  enters  into 
 brotherhood  of  signification  with  the  grand  idea  of 
 the  Hebrew,  Chaldee,  and  Greek.  Professor  Bos- 
 worth  in  his  Anglo-Sax.  Diet.,  under  the  verb 
 hcbbati,  to  raise  or  elevate,  gives  the  kindred  words 
 of  the  whole  Teutonic  family,  and  deduces  there- 
 from the  noun  heofon  or  heofen,  in  the  sense  of 
 heaven.  And  although  the  primary  notion  of  the 
 Latin  ccelum  (akin  to  koiXos  and  our  hollow)  is  the 
 less  sublime  one  of  a  covered  or  vaulted  space,  yet 
 the  loftier  sense  of  elevation  has  prevailed,  both  in 
 the  original  (see  White  and  Riddle,  s.  v.  Coelum) 
 and  in  the  derived  languages  (comp.  French  ciely 
 and  the  English  word  ceiling). 
 
 2.  Closely  allied  in  meaning,  though  uncon- 
 nected in  origin,  with  D'Dt^,  is  the  oft-recurring 
 D^^D•     This  word  is  never  Englished  heaven,  but 
 
 ^heights,''  or  '■  high  place,^  or  '  high  places.''  There 
 can,  however,  be  no  doubt  of  its  celestial  significa- 
 tion (and  that  in  the  grandest  degree)  in  such  pas- 
 sages as  Ps.  Ixviii.  18  [Hebr.  19]  ;  xciii.  4  ;  cii.  19 
 [or  in  the  Hebr.  Bib.   20,   where  iK^Hp  DilQD  is 
 
 equal  to  the  D''OE'P  of  the  parallel  clause] ;  simi- 
 larly, Job  xxxi.  2  ;  Is.  Ivii.  15  ;  Jer.  xxv.  30.  Dr. 
 Kalisch,  Genesis,  Lntrod.  p.  21,  says,  '  It  was  a 
 common  belief  among  all  ancient  nations  that  at 
 the  summit  of  the  shadow  of  the  earth,  or  on  the 
 top  of  the  highest  mountain  of  the  earth,  which 
 reacheswith  its  crest  into  heaven  .  .  .  the  gods  have 
 their  palace  or  hall  of  assembly,'  and  he  instances 
 the  '&a.hy\oxna.nAlbo?-dsh,  the  chief  abode  of  Ormuzd, 
 among  the  heights  of  the  Caucasus ;  and  the  Hindoo 
 Mem ;  and  the  Chinese  Kulkun  (or  Kaen-lun) ; 
 and  the  Greek  Olympus  (and  Atlas)  ;  and  the 
 Arabian  Caf ;  and  the  Parsee  Tirch.  He,  how- 
 ever, while  strongly  and  indeed  most  properly 
 censuring  the  identification  of  Mount  Meru  with 
 Mount  Aloriah  (which  had  hastily  been  conjectured 
 from  'the  accidental  resemblance  of  the  names'), 
 deems  it  improbable  that  the  Israelites  should  have 
 entertained,  like  other  ancient  nations,  the  notion 
 of  local  height  for  the  abode  of  Him  whose  '  glory 
 the  heaven  and  the  heaven  of  heavens  cannot  con- 
 tain ; '  and  this  he  supposes  on  the  ground  that 
 such  a  notion  '  rests  essentially  071  polytheistic  ideas.'' 
 Surely  the  learned  commentator  is  premature  in 
 both  these  statements.  (l.)  No  such  improbability, 
 in  fact,  unhappily,  can  be  predicated  of  the  Israel- 
 ites, who  in  ancient  times  (notwithstanding  the 
 divine  prohibitions)  exhibited  a  constant  tendency 
 to    the   ritual   of  their   niDB,    or    ^ high   places.^ 
 
 Gesenius  makes  a  correcter  statement,  when  he 
 says  [Hebr.  Lex.  by  Robinson,  p.  138],  'The  He- 
 brews, like  most  other  ancient  nations,  supposed 
 that  sacred  rites  performed  on  high  places  were 
 particularly  acceptable  to  the  Deity.  Hence  they 
 were  accustomed  to  offer  sacrifices  upon  mountains 
 
HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 247 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 and  hills,  both  to  idols  and  to  God  Himself,  i  Sam. 
 ix.  12,  sq.  ;  I  Chron.  xiii.  29,  sq.  ;  I  Kings  iii.  4 ; 
 2  Kings  xii.  2,  3  ;  Is.  Ixv.  7  ;  and  also  to  build 
 there  chapels,  fanes,  tabernacles,  T\\0'2T\  ''^^3.  I 
 Kings  xiii.  32  ;  2  Kings  xvii.  29;  with  their  priests 
 and  other  ministers  of  the  sacred  rites,  010311  \3n3) 
 
 I  Kings  xii.  32  ;  2  Kings  xvii.  32.  And  so 
 tenacious  of  this  ancient  custom  were  not  only  the 
 ten  tribes,  but  also  all  the  Jews,  that,  even  after 
 the  building  of  Solomon's  temple,  in  spite  of  the 
 express  law  of  Deut.  xii.,  they  continued  to  erect 
 such  chapels  on  the  mountains  around  Jerusalem.' 
 (2.)  Neither  from  the  character  of  Jehovah,  as  the 
 God  of  Israel,  can  the  improbability  be  maintained, 
 as  if  it  were  of  the  essence  of  polytheistn  only  to 
 localise  Deity  on  mountain  heights.  '  The  High 
 and  Lofty  One  that  inhabiteth  eternity  whose  name 
 is  Holy,'  in  the  proclamation  which  He  is  pleased  to 
 make  of  His  own  style,  does  not  limit  His  abode 
 to  celestial  sublimities  ;  in  one  of  the  finest  passages 
 of  even  Isaiah's  poetry,  God  claims  as  on^  of  the 
 stations  of  His  gloiy  the  shrine  of  '  a  contrite  and 
 humble  spirit'  (Is.  Ivii.  15).  His  loftiest  attributes, 
 therefore,  are  not  compromised,  nor  is  the  ampli- 
 tude of  His  omnipresence  compressed,  by  an 
 earthly  residence.  Accordingly,  the  same  Jehovah 
 who  ^  vfaHkeih.  0x1  t/ie  high  places,  0103,  of  the  earth' 
 
 (Amos  iv.  13);  who  'treadeth  on  the  fastnesses, 
 rii03,  of  the  sea'  (Job  ix.  8)  ;  and  '  who  ascendeth 
 
 above  the  heights,  ni03,  of  the  clouds,'  was  pleased 
 
 to  consecrate  Zionas  His  dwelling-place  (Ps.  bcxxvii. 
 2),  and  His  rest  (Ps.  cxxxii.  13,  14).  Hence  we 
 find  the  same  word,  QilD,  which  is  often  descrip- 
 tive of  the  sublimest  heaven,  used  of  Zion,  which 
 Ezekiel  calls  '  the  mountain  of  the  height  of  Israel,' 
 
 i'Snb^)  Dinp  "in  (xvii.  23  ;  xx.  40  ;  xxxiv.  14). 
 
 3-   ?2P3-     This  word,  which  literally  meaning  a 
 
 wheel,  admirably  expresses  rotatory  movement,  is 
 actually  rendered  '■heaven''  in  A.  V.  of  Ps.  Ixxvii. 
 18.     '  The  voice  of  thy  thunder  was  in  the  heaven,' 
 
 ?3?33  [LXX.  kv  Ti^  Tpoxv ;  Vulg.  In  rotd.]  Lu- 
 ther's version  agrees  with  A.  V.  In  Himmel ;  and 
 Dathe  renders  per  orbem,  which  is  ambiguous, 
 being  as  expressive,  to  say  the  least,  of  the  globe 
 of  the  earth  as  of  the  circle  of  heaven.  The  Tar- 
 gum  (in  Walton,  vol.  iii.)  on  the  passage,   gives 
 
 X/'Il733  (m  rota),  which  is  as  indeterminate  as  the 
 original,  as  the  Syriac  seems  also  to  be.  De  Wette 
 (and  after  him  Justus  Olshausen,  Die  Ps.  erkliirt, 
 1.  c.)  renders  the  phrase,  im  IVirbelwinde,  'in  the 
 whirlwind.'  Maurer,  who  disapproves  of  this 
 rendering,  explains  the  phrase  7vtans  sc,  or  rotaba- 
 tiir,  '  rotated.'  But  amidst  the  uncertainty  of  the 
 versions,  we  are  disposed  to  think  that  it  was  not 
 without  good  reason  that  our  translators,  in  depart- 
 ing from  the  previous  version  (see  Psalter,  in  loc. , 
 which  has,  '  the  voice  of  thy  thunder  was  heard 
 round  about''),   deliberately  rendered  the  passage 
 
 in  the  heaven,  as  if  the  PJ7J  were  the  correlative 
 
 of  ?3n,  both  being  poetic  words,  and  both  together 
 
 equalled  the  heaven  and  the  earth.  In  James  iii.  6, 
 the  remarkable  phrase,  tI>v  rpox^v  tt^s  yeveaeui, 
 the  course,  circuit,  or  whMl  of  nature,  is  akin  to  our 
 
 biPJ.  The  Syriac  renders  the  rpox^v  by  the  same 
 word,  which  occurs  in  the  Psalm  as  the  equivalent 
 
 of  ?2?3,  namely  I    ti    '  ■.(frnm  the  Hebrew,  '■ejecta 
 
 secunda  radicali  ;'  Schaaf 's  Lex.  Syr.  ;  and  of  the 
 same  indefiniteness  of  signification).  That  the 
 general  sense  '■heaven''  best  expresses  the  force  o{ 
 Ps.  Ixxvii.  18,  is  rendered  probable,  moreover,  by 
 ^he  description  which  Josephus  gives  (Antiq.  ii. 
 16.  3)  of  the  destruction  of  Pharaoh's  host  in  the 
 Red  Sea,  the  subject  of  that  part  of  the  Psalm, 
 '  Showers  of  rain  descended  frofn  heaven,  dw' 
 ovpavov,  with  dreadful  thunders  and  lightning,  and 
 flashes  of  fire  ;  thunderbolts  were  darted  upon 
 them,  nor  were  there  any  indications  of  God's 
 wrath  upon  men  wanting  on  that  dark  and  dismal 
 night.' 
 
 4.  As  the  words  we  have  reviewed  indicate  the 
 height  and  rotation  of  the  heavens,  so  the  two  we 
 have  yet  to  examine  exhibit  another  characteristic 
 of  equal  prominence,  the  breadth  and  expanse  of  the 
 celestial  regions.  These  are  '\>TW  (generally  used 
 in  the  plural)  and  J?''p"1.  They  occur  together  in  Job 
 xxxvii.  18  ;  '  Hast  thou  with  \i:\mspread out  (^''ipiJl) 
 the  sky  or  expanse  of  heaven?' — (D'^pDE'?,    where 
 
 7  is  the  sign  of  the  objective).  We  must  examme 
 them  separately.  The  root  X>VW  is  explained  by 
 Gesenius  to  grind  to potvder,  and  then  to  expatidby 
 rubbing  or  beating.     Meier   {Hebr.    Wurzel  w.  b., 
 
 p.  446)  compares   it  with   the  Arabic  ^.^^w;,  to 
 
 make  fine,  to  attemiate  (whence  the  noun      ^.^yw, 
 
 a  thin  cloud).  With  him  agrees  Fiirst  {Hebr.  w.  b., 
 ii.  433).  The  Hebrew  subst.  is  therefore  well 
 adapted  to  designate  the  skyey  region  of  heaven 
 with  its  cloud-dust,  whether  fine  or  dense.  Ac- 
 cordingly, the  meaning  of  the  word  in  its  various 
 passages  curiously  oscillates  between  sky  and  cloud. 
 When  Moses,  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  26,  lauds  Jehovah's 
 '  riding  in  His  excellence  on  the  sky  ;'  and  when  in 
 2  Sam.  xxii.  12,  and  repeated  in  Ps.  xviii.  il  (12), 
 David  speaks  of  '  the  thick  clouds  of  the  skies ;' 
 when  JoId,  xxxvii.  18,  asks,  'Hast  thou  with  Him 
 spread  out  the  sky  V  when  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  Ixxvii. 
 1 7  (18),  speaks  of  '  //zifji/Vj  sending  out  a  sound,' and 
 the  prophet.  Is.  xlv.  8,  figuratively,  of  their  'pour- 
 ing down  righteousness  ;'  when  finally  Jeremiah, 
 Ii.  9,  by  a  frequently  occurring  simile  [comp. 
 Apoc.  xviii.  5i,  -rjKoXov^Tja-av  avrijs  al  dp-aprlai  fixp' 
 Tov  ovpavov],  describes  the  judgment  of  Babylon  as 
 'lifted  up  even  to  the  skies,''  in  eveiy  instance  our 
 word    D''pnE'   in  the  plu7-al*   is  employed.     The 
 
 same  word  in  the  same  form  is  translated  '  clouds' 
 in  Job  XXXV.  5  ;  xxxvi.  28  ;  xxxvii.  21  ;  xxxviii. 
 37  ;  in  Ps.  xxxvi.  $  (6)  ;  Ivii.  10  (ll)  ;  Ixviii.  34 
 (35)  [margin,  ^heavens']  ;  Ixxviii.  23  ;  in  Prov.  iii. 
 20  ;  viii.  28.  The  prevalent  sense  of  this  word, 
 we  thus  see,  is  a  meteorological  one,  and  falls  under 
 our  first  head  of  coelum  nubiferum  :  its  connection 
 with  the  other  two  heads  is  much  slighter.  It 
 bears  probably  an  astronomical  sense  in  Ps.  Ixxxix. 
 37    {38),   where    'the  faithful  witness  in  heaven' 
 
 *  We  believe  the  only  occurrence  of  the  word 
 in  the  singular  fonn  is  in  Ps.  Ixxxix.  6  (7).  and  37 
 (38). 
 
HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 248 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 seems  to  be  in  apposition  to  the  sun  and  the  moon 
 (Bellarmine,  ifi  loc.)  ;  although  some  suppo<;p  the 
 expression  to  mean  i/ie  rainbow,  '  the  witness'  of 
 God's  covenant  with  Noah  ;  Gen.  ix.  13,  seq.,  (see 
 J.  Olhausen,  /«  loc.)  This  is  perhaps  the  only 
 instance  of  its  falling  under  the  class  coelum 
 astriferum  ;  nor  have  we  a  much  more  frequent 
 reference  to  the  higher  sense  of  the  coelum  angeli- 
 ferum,  Ps.  Ixxxix.  6  containing  the  only  explicit 
 allusion  to  this  sense  ;  unless,  with  Gesenius,  Thes. 
 s  v.,  we  refer  Ps.  Ixviii.  35  also  to  it.  More  pro- 
 bably in  Deut.  xxxiiL  26  (where  it  is  parallel  with 
 D''DE'),  and  in  the  highly  poetical  passages  of  Is. 
 
 xlv.  8  and  Jer.  li.  9,  our  word  W^pTW  may  be  best 
 
 regarded  as  designating  the  empyreal  heavens. 
 
 5.   We  have  already  noticed  the  connection  be- 
 tween D^pnCi'  and  our  only  remaining  word  yp"l, 
 
 from  their  being  associated  by  the  sacred  writer  in 
 the  same  sentence.  Job  xxxvii.  18  ;  it  tends  to  cor- 
 roborate this  connection,  that  on  comparing  Gen. 
 i.  6  (and  seven  other  passages  in  the  same  cbapter) 
 with  Deut.  xxxiii.   26,  we  find  V^pl  of  the  former 
 
 sentence,  and  DpHti'  of  the  latter,  both  rendered 
 
 by  the  LXX.  cTepiwixa  and  firmamenticnt  in  the 
 Vulgate,  whence  the  word  "■  firma7nent''  passed 
 into  our  A.  V.  This  word  is  now  a  well-under- 
 stood term  in  astronomy,  synonymous  with  sky  or 
 else  the  general  heavens,  undivested  by  the  dis- 
 coveries of  science  of  the  special  signification, 
 which  it  bore  in  the  ancient  astronomy  [Firma- 
 ment]. For  a  dear  exposition  of  all  the  Scripture 
 passages  which  bear  on  the  subject,  we  may  refer 
 the  reader  to  Professor  Dawson's  Arckaia  (or 
 '  Studies  of  the  Cosmogony  and  Natural  History  of 
 the  Hebrew  Scriptures'),  especially  chap.  viii.  ; 
 and  to  Dr.  M  'Caul  on  the  Mosaic  Record 0/ Creation, 
 in  '  Aids  to  Faith  ;'  (or,  what  is  substantially  the 
 same  treatise  in  a  more  accessible  form,  his  Notes 
 on  the  First  Chapter  of  Genesis,  sec.  ix.,  pp.  32-44). 
 We  must  be  content  here,  in  reference  to  our  term 
 U''p'),  to  observe,  that,  when  we  regard  its  origin 
 
 (from  the  root  Pipi,  to  spread  out  or  expand  by 
 
 beating;  Ges.  s.  v.;  Fuller,  Misc.  Sacr.  i.  6; 
 Fiirst,  Hebr.  W.  B.  s.  v.  \,  and  its  connection  with, 
 and  illustration  by,  sucTi  words  as   D'^pPIt^  clouds, 
 
 and  the  verbs  HSD  (Is.  xlviii.  13,  '  My  right  hand 
 
 hath  spread  out  the  heavens')  and  nD3  (Is.  xl.  22, 
 
 '  Who  stretchcth  out  the  heavens  like  a  curtain' 
 [literally,  like  finejiess'],  '  and  spreadeth  them  out  as  a 
 tent),  we  are  astonished  at  the  attempt  to  control* 
 
 *  We  extract  the  following  from  a  scientific 
 writer  of  the  present  time,  whose  work  is  an  able 
 protest  against  the  hasty  assumptions  of  the  mo- 
 dem critical  school  : — '  In  Is.  xl.  22,  it  is  said 
 of  God,  that  'it  is  He  that  stretcheth  out  the 
 heavens  like  a  curtain  ;'  and  on  this  passage  an 
 accomplished  Hebrew  scholar  remarks  :  '  The  He- 
 brew word  here  used  for  curtain  means  somethiftg 
 tremulous,  and  as  Gesenius  gives  it,  a  ctdriain 
 Jiangiftg,  so  called  from  its  tremulous  motion.' 
 This  is  a  most  apt  illustration  of  what  modern 
 physical  inquirers  conceive  to  be  the  tmdulatory 
 motion  of  the  ether.  It  is  not  a  movement  of  trans- 
 lation, but  simply  a  wave-like  agitation,  without 
 any  bodily  transportation  of  material.     It  is  fre- 
 
 the  meaning  of  an  intelligible  term,  which  fits  in 
 easily  and  consistently  with  the  nature  of  things, 
 by  a  few  poetical  metaphors,  which  are  themselves 
 capable  of  a  consistent  sense  when  held  subordi- 
 nate to  the  plainer  passages  of  prose. 
 
 77^1?  Physics  of  the  Bible. — A  few  general  re- 
 marks on  this  subject  in  reference  to  recent 
 speculations  will  suitably  conclude  this  article. 
 Notwithstanding  the  tendency  of  critics  to  in- 
 terpret the  statements  of  Scripture  on  physical 
 facts  by  the  wrong  theories,  and  the  national  and 
 temporary  prejudices  of  antiquity,  we  are  per- 
 suaded that  on  a  deeper  examination  of  the  sacred 
 text,  these  statements  will  be  found  to  comport, 
 with  admirable  precision,  with  the  profoundest 
 scientific  conceptions  of  modern  times.  A  thought- 
 ful writer  has  very  lately  said  with  much  force  and 
 propriety :  '  These  utterances  [on  physical  facts 
 contained  in  the  Bible]  are  in  the  mode  of  a  per- 
 sonal consciousness  that  is  older  than  the  material 
 framework  of  the  creation  ;  they  sound  like  the 
 Creator's  recollections  of  an  eternity  past !  If  they 
 contain  no  definite  anticipations  of  the  results  of 
 modem  science,  they  are  marvellously  exenipt  from 
 atty  approximate  error  akin  to  the  misapprehen- 
 sions of  later  times.  It  is  as  if  He  who  framed  the 
 world  out  of  nothing  would  speak  of  His  own  work 
 to  a  certain  limit,  and  not  beyond  it ;  the  truth  is 
 uttered,  but  not  the  whole  truth'  (Isaac  Taylor  on 
 the  Spirit  of  the  Hebrew  Poetry,  p.  146).  When 
 the  word  Vpl,  in  addition  to  the  sense  of  expan- 
 sion, which  is  so  applicable  to  the  aerial  and 
 etherial  spaces  which  surround  the  earth,  and 
 stretch  away  to  the  abysses  beyond,  has  the  idea 
 ol  firmness  assigned  to  it  (in  the  LXX.  arepiufia, 
 and  Vulg.  firmament),  nothing  in  fact  could  better 
 suit  the  requirement  of  the  case  than  this  combina- 
 tion oi  stability  and  expansion,  (i)  If  we  regard 
 only  the  atmospheric  firmament,  and  contemplate 
 the  enormous  quantity  of  water  which  is  suspended 
 over  the  earth — how  enormous  we  may  gather 
 from  the  fact  that  the  waters  of  all  the  rivers  which 
 flow  into  the  sea,  are  but  a  part  of  the  overflowings 
 of  the  vast  atmospheric  reservoir — we,  instead  of 
 wasting  ingenuity  in  trying  to  construct  a  sohd 
 vault  out  of  tlie  Hebrew  phrases,  would  be  more 
 congenially  furthering  the  interests  of  true  criti- 
 cism, if  we  patiently  looked  out  for  opportunities 
 of  adapting  these  phrases  to  the  meteorological 
 facts  which  reveal  the  need  of  a  finnayjtent,  un- 
 solid,  indeed,  but  yet  stable,  in  which  the  Almighty 
 may  '  separate  the  waters  which  are  above  the  fir- 
 mament from  the  waters  below  the  firmament,' 
 and  so  defend  us  from  an  outburst  of  the  aqueous 
 element,  which  would  reduce  our  earth  to  its 
 primeval  chaos.  '  When  we  see  a  cloud  resolve 
 itself  into  rain,  and  pour  out  thousands  of  gallons 
 of  water,  we  cannot  comprehend  how  it  can  float 
 in  the  atmosphere'  (Kasmtz,  Course  of  Meteorology^), 
 but  we  can  appreciate  the  beautiful  provision  ol 
 that  yp^,  in  which  'God  bindeth  up  the  waters  in 
 
 His  thick  clouds,  and  the  cloud  is  not  rent  under 
 them'  (Job.  xxvi.  8).  Is.  Vossius  long  ago  rightly 
 caught    this   idea   by   explaining   the   LXX.    (jt^- 
 
 quently  likened  to  the  waving  or  tremulous  motion 
 of  a  shaken  table-cloth  or  sheet — but  the  foregoing 
 comparison  [of  the  prophet]  is  far  better'  (Profes- 
 sor Young,  Science  elucidative  of  Scripture  and  nol 
 antagonistic  to  it,  pp.  76,  77). 
 
HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 249 
 
 HEAVEN,  HEAVENS 
 
 pioofia,  by  ^ fulcimeniu>?i,  aut  firmamentum;'  the 
 cloud  system  being,  as  he  says,  the  prop  for 
 maintaining  and  upholding  the  moisture  of  the 
 firmament — '  nubes  per  hoc  fulcimentum  [ypl]  in- 
 telhgendre  sunt  tanquam  fulcra,  vehicula  et  arepew- 
 fiara*  humorum'  {Aiictar.  Castig.  ad  Scriptt.  de 
 ALtat.  Afiaidi,  p.  15).  (2)  If  we  extend  our  view 
 beyond  the  atmospheric  to  the  sidereal  firmament, 
 we  again  require  the  same  combination  of  expan- 
 sion and  stability  as  before.  '  The  close  of  cent, 
 xviii.,'  says  Humboldt,  'through  the  new  paths 
 opened  to  the  investigation  of  astronomical  truths 
 by  the  improvement  of  the  infinitesimal  calculus, 
 has  the  merit  of  having  demonstrated  '  the  stability 
 of  the  planetary  system''  (Cosmos  iii.  451,  452).  A 
 thoughtful  reader,  who  peruses  Humboldt's  state- 
 ment of  '  the  principal  elements  of  this  stability,'' 
 will  not  be  at  a  moment's  loss  to  detect  in  these 
 profound  discoveries  of  modern  science  a  much 
 more  congruous  idea  of  the  '■firmament,^  or 
 strength  of  the  yp"),   than  in   the   cosmological 
 
 dreams  of  solid  heavens  and  crystalline  vaults. 
 (3)  A  third  illustration  of  the  suitableness  of  the 
 word  firmament  is  well  supplied  by  Professor 
 Young  : — '  The  term  is  not  so  inappropriate  as 
 objectors  have  imagined.  If  there  be  any  one 
 thing  in  the  whole  of  material  creation  which  is 
 permanent  in  situation,  firmly  and  im?novably  con- 
 tinuing ez'er  in  the  same  place,  that  thing  is  the 
 ethereal  fluid  to  which  the  term  is  applied.  What 
 we  call  its  motion  is  mere  vibratory  agitation,  with- 
 out any  bodily  translation  of  material.  There  is 
 not  the  slightest  reason  to  suppose,  from  any  thing 
 that  science  makes  known  respecting  it,  that  the 
 great  body  of  the  ether  in  which  all  the  heavenly 
 luminaries  are  placed — the  firmament — has  ever 
 stirred  from  the  position  in  which  the  Creator  at 
 first  placed  it.  Look,  too,  at  the  most  ordinary 
 phenomena  of  light.  It  is  never  blown  about  by 
 the  winds,  or  in  the  least  agitated  by  atmospheric 
 commotions  ;  for  in  the  most  violent  storm  we  see 
 the  shadow  of  an  unmoving  object  remaining  itself 
 still  unmoved.  Light  pursues  its  course  unaffected 
 by  these  surrounding  disturbances,  and  what  would 
 prostrate  even  the  firmest  oak  cannot  so  i?i7ich  as 
 bend  aside  the  slenderest  sunbeam  {Science  eluci- 
 dative of  Scripture,  pp.  loo,  lOi).  Surely  no 
 word  could  more  happily  express  such  subtle  fixity 
 as  yp"l ;  while  the  versions  cTepiufia  and  fir?na- 
 
 mentum  are  only  defective  in  the  idea  of  expansion, 
 not  erroneous  in  their  idea  of  firmness  and  sta- 
 bility.''\ 
 
 *  Dr  M'Caul  {Aids  to  Faith,  p.  225  ;  Notes  on 
 Getiesis  i.,  p.  38),  to  the  same  purport  remarks  : 
 '  Stereoma  was  chosen  not  to  express  somethmg  it- 
 self solid,  but  something  which  strengtheiied,  or 
 viade  firm,  the  heavenly  bodies.  They  took  the 
 word  in  the  transitive  sense,  like  Bepaiu)/na,  SrjXufia, 
 ■7r\r]pwfj.a,  etc.  ;  and  this  is  proved  by  the  Vulgate 
 'ha.v'mg  firmament7(m,  which  form  of  word  signifies 
 something  that  makes  firm,  like  ornamentum,  ali- 
 mentum,  motmmentum,  etc.  In  this  sense  stere- 
 oma is  elsewhere  used  by  the  LXX.  as  in  Ezek. 
 xiii.  5  ;  Esther  ix.  29  ;  Ps.  xvii.  3.' 
 
 +  For  another  instance  of  the  applicability  of  a 
 large  Scripture  phrase  to  a  very  high  scientific 
 theory  of  modern  times,  see  Dr.  Whewell's  Theory 
 of  the  Solar  System.  His  opinion,  that  the  re- 
 moter planets  are  '  spheres  of  water  and  af  aque- 
 
 Poetical  Descriptions  of  Physical  Facts. — We 
 have  already  censured  that  quality  in  the  new 
 criticism  which  sets  a  literal  construction  on  a 
 passage  of  poetry,  and  on  that  ground  condemns 
 its  statement  as  erroneous.  We  will  take  a  pro- 
 minent instance  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  the 
 absurdity  of  the  practice.  In  Job.  xxxvii.  18, 
 Elihu  asks  :  '  Hast  thou  with  Him  spread  out  tht 
 sky  which  is  strong  and  as  a  melten  looking-glass?'' 
 This,  it  is  contended,  supports  the  theory  of  a  solid 
 firmament.*  But  this  is  to  destroy  the  difference 
 between  the  simplicity  of  prose  and  the  metaphor 
 of  poetry.  How  much  truer  to  common  sense, 
 the  basis  of  sound  criticism,  was  Luther's  view, 
 when  he  interpreted  the  metallic  firmness  of  the 
 sky  here  '  to  have  respect  not  to  the  material  but 
 to  the  divine  word,  which  can  make  the  softest 
 thing  in  nature  into  the  strongest  and  the  firmest' 
 [On  Genesis  i.  6).  Luther's  comment  is  the  more 
 reasonable,  because  the  word  sky  is  U'^pTW,  which 
 
 we  have  seen  signifies  clouds.  Now  no  one  who 
 has  carefully  watched  the  clouds,  will  wonder  at 
 Elihu's  description — for  the  fantastic  grandeur  of 
 these  skyey  prodigies  has  inspired  still  more  strik- 
 ing exaggerations  of  poetic  fancy.  It  would  be 
 easy  to  illustrate  this  by  quotations  from  the  poets 
 and  descriptive  writers  even  of  recent  times,  whose 
 works  abound  in  gorgeous  pictures  of  massive 
 cloudland  and  solid  heavens,  which  all  feel  must 
 not  critically  be  construed  as  representing  literal 
 but  phenomenal  facts.  We  see  that  such  descrip- 
 tions coexist  side  by  side  with  rigorous  science, 
 without  giving  or  receiving  injury  or  discredit ;  that 
 therefore  the  Hebrew  poetry  when  indulging  in 
 highly-wrought  but  yet  perfectly  imaginable  ex- 
 pressions, cannot,  according  to  the  rules  of  rea- 
 sonable interpretation,  be  deemed  incompatible 
 with  true  and  unexaggerated  science,  any  more  than 
 the  fancy  flights  of  modern  poetry,  when  depicting 
 natural  phenomena  in  their  fantastic  phases,  can  be 
 legitimately  held  to  be,  in  any  critical  sense,  con- 
 
 ous  vapour,'  has  been  conjecturally  applied  by  Dr. 
 M'Caul  to  Moses'  statement  about  the  waters  above 
 the firmametit.  ...  In  this  he  follows  F.  Von 
 Meyer,  Drs.  Kurtz  [Bible  and  Astronomy)  z.nd'De- 
 litsch.  We  have  no  difficulty  in  believing  that  the 
 Holy  Scripture  is  often  in  advance  of  science,  never 
 behind  it   [Aids  to  Faith,  p.  229  ;  Notes  on  Gen.  i. 
 
 P-  43)- 
 
 *  Gesenius,  Knobel,  and  others,  refer,  in  illustra- 
 tion, to  Homer's  epithets  of  the  sky  or  heavens. 
 His  ovpavoi  is  iron  [cndrjpeos,  Odyss.  xv.  329)  and 
 copper  [xdXKeos,  Iliad,  xvii.  425  ;  iroXi^xaX/cos,  Od. 
 iii.  2).  These  descriptions,  like  those  of  the  Scrip- 
 tures, must  be  taken  as  the  fanciful  license  of 
 poetry,  and  certainly  not  as  philosophic  guesses  ;  as- 
 tronomical theories  of  the  solid  heavens,  etc.,  were 
 long  posterior  to  Homer.  Dr.  Kalisch  strangely 
 enough  construes  the  Homeric  epithets  literally  ! 
 and  accordingly  will  not  admit  them  as  illustrative 
 of  the  Hebrew  phrases  [Genesis  hitrod.  p.  20).  In 
 this  he  is  surely  uncritical.  The  fact  is,  that  both 
 in  the  Homeric  and  Scripture  passages  you  have 
 the  phe7iomenal  painting  of  poetical  fancy,  which 
 does  not  wait  for  the  restraints  and  precision  of 
 philosophy  and  science.  Carlyle  does  not  hesitate 
 to  apply  the  epithet  'copper'  to  the  clouds  of  hea- 
 ven (comp.  Gladstone's  Homer  and  the  Homeric 
 Age,  vol.  iii.  pp.  483,  495,  499). 
 
HEBER 
 
 260 
 
 HEBREW 
 
 tradictory  to  the  declarations  of  the  most  advanced 
 modern  philosophy.  .  . 
 
 We  have  omitted,  while  treating  of  the  origmal 
 words  for  heaven,  to  adopt  the  usual  practice  of 
 giving  in  every  case  the  equivalents  in  the  LXX. 
 and  the  Vulgate.  The  extreme  variations  would 
 have  greatly  increased  our  labour,  without  com- 
 mensurate advantage,  as  one  instance  will  at  once 
 shew ;  the  noun  \>n^  (see  above,  4)  is  rendered 
 twice  in  the  Sept.  by  a-np,  eight  times  by  ve<pi\ri, 
 four  times  by  ve(po$,  once  by  ovpavbs,  once  by 
 aT€piwtJ.a,  and  once  by  &(rTpov  (besides  twice  by 
 poTTT],  and  once  by  ■traXalixifia,  in  passages  which 
 hardly  fall  under  the  subject  of  our  article)  ; 
 Aquila  rendered  this  word  by  drip,  and  Symmachus 
 by  af^-qp.  The  Vulgate  is  much  more  uniform  ; 
 fifteen  times  it  has  translated  the  word  nudes, 
 twice  ccthera,  and  as  often  ccelos,  and  once  (Is.  xl. 
 15)  pitlvis.     The  extremely  frequent  word  p''lD^ 
 
 and  the  N.  T.  ovpavb^,  ovpavoi  are  (as  might  be  ex- 
 pected) rendered  commonly,  if  not  always,  hy  ea-liim, 
 and  pi.  cceli,-oru7n,-os,  in  the  Vulg.  [and  ovpavb^, 
 (not  often  ovpavoi  phir.)  in  the  O.  T.  by  LXX.] — 
 P.  H. 
 
 HEBER,  properly  'Eber  (niy,  one  of  the  other 
 side ;  Sept.  "E/Sep  and  "E/3ep),  son  of  Salah,  who 
 became  the  father  of  Peleg  at  the  age  of  34  years, 
 and  died  at  the  age  of  464  (Gen.  x.  24 ;  xi.  14  ;  i 
 Chron.  i.  25).  His  name  occurs  in  the  genealogy 
 of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  35),  where  it  is  written  "E/Se/j. 
 Though  simply  mentioned  in  the  line  of  descent, 
 there  is  a  degree  of  interest  connected  with  him 
 from  the  notion,  which  the  Jews  themselves  enter- 
 tain, that  the  name  of  Hebrews,  applied  to  them, 
 was  derived  from  this  recorded  ancestor  of  Abra- 
 ham.    [Hebbew.] 
 
 HEBER  (nan  ;  Sept.  Xa/3^/)),  a  descendant  of 
 Hobab,  son  of  Jethro,  and  brother  of  the  wife  of 
 Moses.  His  vvife  was  the  Jael  who  slew  Sisera, 
 and  he  is  called  Heber  the  Kenite  (Judg.  iv.  11, 
 17  ;  V.  24),  which  seems  to  have  been  a  name  for 
 the  whole  family  (Judg.  i.  16).  Heber  appears  to 
 have  hved  separate  from  the  rest  of  the  Kenites, 
 leading  a  patriarchal  life,  amid  his  tents  and  flocks. 
 He  must  have  been  a  person  of  some  consequence, 
 from  its  being  stated  that  there  was  peace  between 
 the  house  of  Heber  and  the  powerful  king  Jabin. 
 At  the  time  the  history  brings  him  under  our 
 notice  his  camp  was  in  the  plain  of  Zaanaim,  near 
 Kedesh  in  Naphtali.     [Jael  ;  Kenites.] 
 
 [Five  other  persons  of  this  name  are  mentioned 
 in  the  O.  T.,  viz.,  A  grandson  of  Asher  (Gen.  xlvi. 
 17  ;  Num.  xxvi.  45  ;  i  Chron.  vii.  31,  Xo/36p  and 
 Xo/3^p);  one  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (i  Chron.  iv.  18, 
 'A/3^p)  ;  one  of  the  children  of  Gad  (v.  13,  'fi/3?75) ; 
 a  Benjamite  (viii.  17,  'AjScip)  ;  another  Benjamite 
 (viii.  22,  'fi/3775).] 
 
 HEBREW  Ciny,  'E/3paros),  a  designation  of 
 the  people  of  Israel,  used  first  of  their  progenitor 
 Abraham  (Gen.  xiv.  13  ;  LXX.  ry  irepdrrj).  This 
 name  is  never  in  Scripture  applied  to  tlie  Israelites 
 except  when  the  speaker  is  a  foreigner  (Gen.  xxxix. 
 14,  17;  xli.  12;  Exod.  i.  16;  ii.  6;  I  Sam.  iv. 
 6,  9,  etc.),  or  when  Israelites  speak  of  themselves 
 to  one  of  another  nation  (Gen.  xl.  15  ;  Exod.  i.  19  ; 
 Jonah  i.  9,  etc.),  or  when  they  are  contrasted  wi'h 
 other  peoples  (Gen.  xliii.  32;  Exod.  i.  3,  7,  15  , 
 
 Deut.  XV.  12  ;  i  Sam.  xiii.  3,  7).*  By  the  Greek 
 and  Latin  writers  this  is  the  name  by  which  the 
 descendants  of  Jacob  are  designated  when  they  are 
 not  called  Jews  (Pausan.  v.  5,  2  ;  vi.  24,  6  ;  Plut. 
 Synipos.  iv.  6,  i  ;  Tacit.  Hist.  v.  i)  ;  and  Jose- 
 phus,  who  affects  classical  peculiarities,  constantly 
 uses  it.  On  these  facts  two  opposing  hypotheses 
 have  been  raised  ;  the  one  that  Israelite  or  Jew 
 was  the  name  by  which  the  nation  designated  itself 
 (just  as  the  Welsh  call  themselves  Cyiiiry,  though 
 in  speaking  of  themselves  to  a  Saxon  they  would 
 probably  use  the  name  Welsh);  the  other  is  that 
 '  Hebrew'  is  a  national  name,  merely  indicative  of 
 the  people  as  a  people,  while  Israelite  is  a  sacred 
 or  religious  name  appropriate  to  them  as  the 
 chosen  people  of  God.  This  latter  opinion  Gese- 
 nius  dismisses  as  '  without  foundation'  {^Lexicon  by 
 Robinson,  s.v. ) ;  but  it  has  received  the  deliberate 
 sanction  of  Ewald  [Ausfiihrl.  Lehrb.  der  Heb.  Spr., 
 p.  18,  5  th  ed.) 
 
 According  to  the  sacred  writer,  """liy,  Hebrew,  is 
 a  derivative  from  13^,  'Eber,  the  ancestor  of  Abra- 
 ham ;  at  least  the  same  persons  who  are  called 
 Hebrews  are  called  13y  ""J^  B'ney  ^Eber,  sons  of 
 'Eber  (Gen.  x.  21)  ;  and  "l^J?  ^Eber  (Num.  xxiv. 
 24)  ;  and  this  is  tantamount  to  a  derivation  of  the 
 name  Hebrew  from  'Eber.  In  support  of  this,  it 
 may  be  urged  that  ''"I3y  is  the  proper  form  which 
 a  patronymic  from  13y  would  assume  ;  according 
 to  the  analogy  of  ""ISID,  a  Moabite,  ^T\  a  Daniie, 
 
 "•^P^  a  Calebite,  etc.  (Hiller,  Onomast.  Sac.  c.  xiv., 
 p.  231  ff )  What  adds  much  force  to  this  argu- 
 ment is  the  evident  antithesis  in  Gen.  xiv.  13,  be- 
 tween nayn  n-iaS  and  '•-ONn  SnOO  ;  the  former 
 of  these  is  as  evidently  a  patronymic  as  the  latter. 
 The  objections  to  this  etymology  are  of  little 
 weight.  Theodoret  {Quasi,  in  Gen.  61)  urges 
 against  it  that  the  Hebrews  were  not  the  only  de- 
 scendants of 'Eber,  and,  therefore,  could  not  appro- 
 priate his  name  ;  and  the  objection  has  been  often 
 repeated.  To  meet  it  recourse  has  been  had  to  the 
 suggestion,  first  adduced,  we  believe,  by  Ibn  Ezra 
 {Comment,  ad  Jon.  i.  9)  that  the  descendants  of 
 Abraham  retained  the  name  Hebrew  from  'Eber, 
 because  they  alone  of  his  descendants  retained  the 
 faith  which  he  held.  This  may  be  ;  but  we  are 
 hardly  entitled  to  assume  it  in  order  to  account  for 
 the  fact  before  us.  It  is  better  to  throw  the  onus 
 probatidi  on  the  objector,  and  to  demand  of  him, 
 m  our  ignorance  of  what  determined  the  use  of 
 such  patronymics  in  one  line  of  descent  and  not  in 
 others,  that  he  should  show  cause  why  it  is  incon- 
 ceivable that  Abraham  miglit  have  a  good  and  suffi- 
 cient reason  for  wishing  to  perpetuate  the  memory 
 of  his  descent  from  'Eber,  which  did  not  apply  to  the 
 other  descendants  of  that  patriarch.  Why  might  not 
 one  race  of  the  descendants  of  'Eber  call  them- 
 selves by  pre-eminence  sons  of  'Eber,  just  as  one 
 race  of  the  descendants  of  Abraham  called  them- 
 selves by  pre-eminence  sons  of  Abraham.  But 
 'Eber,  it  is  objected,  is  a  name  of  no  note  in  the  his- 
 tory ;  we  know  nothing  of  him  to  entitle  him  to  be 
 selected  as  the  person  after  whom  a  people  should 
 call  themselves.  But  is  our  ignorance  to  be  the 
 measure  of  the  knowledge  of  Abraham  and  his 
 
 *  The  only  apparent  exception  is  Jer.  xxxiv.  9 ; 
 but  here  there  is  probably  such  an  implied  con- 
 trast between  the  Jews  and  other  peoples  as  would 
 bring  the  usage  under  the  last  case. 
 
HEBREW 
 
 251 
 
 HEBREW 
 
 descendants  on  such  a  point  ?  Because  we  know 
 nothing  to  distinguish  'Eber,  does  it  follow  that 
 they  knew  nothing  ?  Certain  it  is  that  he  was  of 
 sufficient  importance  to  reflect  a  glory  on  his 
 father  Shem,  whose  highest  designation  is  'the 
 father  of  all  the  children  of  'Eber'  (Gen.  x.  21); 
 and  certain  it  is  that  his  name  lingered  for  many 
 generations  in  the  region  where  he  resided,  for  it 
 was  as  '  'Eber'  that  the  Mesopotamian  prophet 
 knew  the  descendants  of  Jacob,  and  spoke  of  them 
 when  they  first  made  their  appearance  in  warlike 
 force  on  the  borders  of  the  promised  land  (Num. 
 xxiv.  24).  These  considerations  raise  a  strong 
 presumption  against  the  objection,  to  say  the  least. 
 Those  who  reject  the  derivation  of  Hebrew  from 
 'Eber,  prefer  tracing  ^"l3y  to  the  verb  131?,  to  pass 
 
 nier,  or  the  noun  "I3y,  the  region  or  coutityy  be- 
 yond. By  those  who  favour  the  former  etymology, 
 '  Hebrew' is  regarded  as  equivalent  to  'the  man 
 who  passed  over  ; '  by  those  who  favour  the  latter, 
 it  is  taken  to  mean  '  the  man  from  the  region  be- 
 yond ; '  and  under  both  suppositions  it  is  held  to 
 be  applied  by  the  Canaanites  to  Abraham  as  having 
 crossed  the  Euphrates  or  come  from  the  region 
 beyond  the  Euphrates  to  Canaan.  Of  these  ety- 
 mologies the  foiTner  is  now  generally  abandoned  ; 
 it  is  felt  that  the  supposition  that  the  crossing  of  the 
 Euphrates  was  such  an  unparalleled  achievement 
 as  to  fix  on  him  who  accomplished  it  a  name  that 
 should  descend  to  his  posterity,  and  become  a  na- 
 tional appellation,  is  somewhat  too  violent  to  be 
 maintained  ;  and  besides,  as  the  verb  "I^J?  signifies, 
 to  pass  from  this  side  to  that,  not  from  that  side  to 
 this,  it  would  not  be  the  term  applied  by  the  people 
 of  Canaan  to  designate  the  act  of  one  who  had 
 come  from  the  other  side  of  the  Euphrates  to 
 them.  The  other  etymology  has  more  in  its 
 favour.  It  is  that  sanctioned  by  the  Greek  trans- 
 lators (LXX.  6  Trepdrris,  Aq.  TrepaiTTjs)  ;  it  is  in 
 accordance  with  the  usage  of  the  phrase  "inun  "I3y, 
 
 which  was  employed  to  designate  the  region  beyond 
 the  Euphrates  (Josh.  xxiv.  2,  3  ;  2  Sam.  x.  16 ; 
 I  Chron.  xix.  16)  ;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that 
 Abraham,  coming  among  the  Canaanites  from 
 beyond  the  Euphrates,  might  be  designated  by 
 them  'the  man  from  the  region  beyond,'  just  as 
 we  might  call  an  American  '  a  transatlantic'  But 
 though  Bleek  very  confidently  pronounces  this 
 view  '  ohne  zweifel  das  richtige'  {Eiiileit.  ins  A. 
 T.,  p.  72),  it  is  open  to  some  serious,  we  think 
 fatal  objections. 
 
 I .  There  is  no  instance  of  I^J?  by  itself  denoting 
 the  region  beyond  the  Euphrates,  or  any  other 
 river;  the  phrase  invariably  used  is  "iH^n  "12^.* 
 2.  If  '•"iQy  was  the  proper  designation  of  those 
 who  lived  on  the  other  side  of  the  Euphrates,  we 
 should  find  that  name  applied  to  such  as  continued 
 
 *  Rosenmiiller,  following  Hyde  (Histor.  Relig. 
 Vet.  Pers.,  p.  5O1  seeks  to  supply  this  deside- 
 rated instance  by  taking  "131?  as  epexegetical  of 
 115i'N  in  Num.  xxiv.  24  =  '  affligant  Assyriam  et 
 totam  transfluvialem  regionem.'  But  the  learned 
 writer  has  in  his  zeal  overlooked  the  second  Ijy, 
 which  quite  precludes  his  exegesis.  Knobel  avoids 
 this  error  by  simply  taking  "nt^'^<  =  Assyria,  and 
 "13y  =  Mesopotamia  ;  but  in  this  case  it  is  the 
 proper  name  *l3y,  ''Eber,  and  not  t'.ie  preposition 
 "13y,  trans,  which  is  in  question. 
 
 to  dwell  there,  not  to  a  race  descended  from  one 
 who  had  left  that  region  never  to  return.  3, 
 Though  Abraham,  as  having  been  originally  a 
 transfluvian,  might  be  so  called  by  the  Canaanites, 
 it  is  improbable  that  they  should  have  extended  this 
 name  to  his  posterity,  to  whom  it  in  no  sense  ap- 
 plied. No  one  would  think  of  continuing  the  term 
 '  transatlantic '  to  persons  born  in  Britain,  on  the 
 ground  that  a  remote  ancestor  had  come  from 
 across  the  Atlantic  to  settle  in  this  country  ?  As 
 to  the  sanction  which  this  etymology  derives  from 
 the  LXX.,  no  great  weight  can  be  attached  to  that 
 when  we  remember  how  often  these  translators 
 have  erred  in  this  way ;  and  also  that  they  have 
 given  ippaiovs  as  the  rendering  of  "l3y  ''22  in  Num. 
 xxiv.  24  ;  '  Plus  vice  simplici  hallucinati  sunt  in- 
 terpretes  Grseci  eorum  ut  nobis  standum  caden- 
 dumve  non  sit  autoritate'  (Carpzov,  Crit.  Sac. 
 V.  T.,  p.  171).  We  may  add  that  the  authority  of 
 the  LXX.  and  Aquila  on  such  a  point  is  urged  with 
 a  bad  grace  by  those  who  treat  with  contempt  the 
 etymologies  of  the  Hebrew  text  as  resting  on  mere 
 Jewish  tradition  ;  if  a  Jewish  tradition  of  the  time 
 of  Moses  is  subject  to  suspicion,  a  fortiori  \s  one  of 
 the  age  of  Ptolemy  Lagi  and  of  Alexandrian  origin. 
 Ewald  pronounces  this  derivation  '  quite  uncertain' 
 (ganz  unsicher). 
 
 Parkhurst,  whose  works  present  occasionally 
 suggestions  worth  consideration,  has  advanced  the 
 opmion  that  ^"131/  is  a  derivation  from  the  verb 
 "13y  in  the  sense  of  passing  through,  oy  front  place 
 to  place  [covap.  Gen.  xviii.  5;  Exod.  xxxii.  27; 
 Ezek.  XXXV.  7  ;  2  Chron.  xxx.  10,  etc.)  ;  so  that 
 its  meaning  would  be  a  sojourner,  ox  passer  thiongh, 
 as  distinct  from  a  settler  in  the  land.  This  un- 
 doubtedly exactly  describes  the  condition  of  Abra- 
 ham and  his  immediate  descendants,  and  might 
 very  naturally  be  assumed  by  them  as  a  designa- 
 tion ;  for,  as  the  apostle  says,  '  they  confessed  they 
 were  strangers  and  pilgrims  on  the  earth'  (Heb.  xi. 
 13).  In  this  case  the  statement  in  Gen.  x.  21, 
 Num.  xxiv.  24,  must  be  understood  as  referring  to 
 the  posterity  of  'Eber  generally,  and  not  to  the 
 Hebrews  specially  or  exclusively.  The  most  serious 
 objection  to  Parkhurst's  suggestion  arises  from  the 
 form  of  the  word  ''"I3y.  A  word  from  "13^,  to 
 convey  the  meaning  of  transitor,  or  one  passi7ig 
 throtigh,  we  should  expect  to  find  in  the  form  1311;, 
 
 or  nay. 
 
 On  the  whole  the  derivation  of  'Ibri  (Hebrew)from  'Eber 
 seems  to  have  most  in  its  favour  and  least  against  it.  (See 
 on  this  side  Augiistin,  de  Civit.  Dei,  vi.  11  ;  Buxtorf,  Diss. 
 ii.  p.  27  ;  Bochart,  Phaleg.  ii.  14;  Hottingcr,  Thes.  Phil., 
 p.  4;  Leusden,  Phil.  Heb.  Diss,  xxi.;  Morinus,  de  Ling: 
 Primcev.  p.  64  ;  Pfeiffer,  Diff.  Script.  Locc.,  0pp.  p.  49  ; 
 Carpzov,  Crit.  Sac.  p.  165 ;  Hezel,  Gesch.  der  Hebr.  Spr., 
 sec.  4;  Ewald,  Ans/ukr.  Lekrbuck,  d.  Heb.  Gram.,  p.  ig, 
 5th  edit.;  Geschichte  des  V.  Israel,  i.,  p.  334;  Havemick, 
 hitrod.  to  the  O.  T.,  p.  125;  Baumgartem,  Theol.  Com- 
 ment, zum  Pent,  in  loc.  On  the  other  side  see  Theodoret, 
 Qucest.  in  Gen.  16 ;  Chrysost.  Ho7n.  35  in  Gen. ;  Selden, 
 de  Diis  Syris,  p.  13  ;  Walton,  Pro!e<::s.,  P-  i5>  ff->  '"  Dathe's 
 edit.  p.  68  ;  Gussetius,  Comment.  Ling.  Heb.  Diss.  Proaem. 
 p.  7;  Michaelis,  Spicileg.  Geogr.  Heb.  Ext.,  P.  ii.  p.  66; 
 Gesenius,  Gesch.  der  Heb.  Spr.,  p.  11,  Gramtnar,  sec.  2; 
 Winer,  Reallex.  s.v.  Hebraer;  Smith's  Diet.  0/  the  Bible _ 
 s.  V.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEBREW  BIBLE,  ancient  various  readings. 
 [Keri  and  Kethiv  ;  Midrash  ;  Targum.] 
 
HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 252 
 
 HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 HEBREW  LANGUAGE,  i.  Hehre-a,  as  a 
 spokett  Language. — The  Hebrew  language  is  that 
 which  was  the  national  idiom  of  those  descendants 
 of  'Eber  which  received  the  distinctive  name  of  the 
 People  of  Israel,  and,  as  such,  was  that  in  which 
 all  the  books  of  the  O.  T.  (with  the  exception  of 
 the  few  Chaldee  passages  occurring  in  those  written 
 after  the  Babylonian  captivity)  were  originally  com- 
 posed. It  belongs  to  the  Semitic,  or,  as  it  is  more 
 appropriately  called,  the  Syro-Arabian  family  of 
 languages  ;  and  it  occupies  a  central  point  amidst 
 all  the  branches  of  this  family,  as  well  with  refer- 
 ence to  the  geographical  position  of  the  country  in 
 which  it  prevailed,  as  with  reference  to  the  de- 
 gree of  development  to  which  it  attained.  In 
 point  of  antiquity,  however,  it  is  the  oldest  form 
 of  human  speech  known  to  us,  and,  from  the  early 
 civilization,  as  well  as  from  the  religious  advan- 
 tages of  the  Hebrews,  has  preserved  to  us  the  oldest 
 and  purest  form  of  the  Syro-Arabian  language.  * 
 
 If  we  except  the  terms  'lip  of  Canaan'  (flSb' 
 }y33)  in  Is.  xix.  18 — where  the  diction  is  of  an 
 elevated  character,  and  is  so  far  np  evidence  that 
 this  designation  was  the  one  commonly  employed 
 — the  only  name  by  which  the  Hebrew  language  is 
 mentioned  in  the  O.  T.  is  'Jewish'  (ri"'Tin\  used 
 adverbially,  Judaice,  in  Jewish,  2  Kings  xviii.  26, 
 28;  Is.  xxxvi.  II,  13;  2  Chron.  xxxii.  18  f), 
 where  the  feminine  may  be  explained  as  an  abstract 
 of  the  last  formation,  according  to  Ewald's  Hehr. 
 Gram.  sees.  344,  457,  or  as  referring  to  the  usual 
 
 gender  of  flOT  understood.  In  a  strict  sense, 
 however,  'Jewish'  denotes  the  idiom  of  the  king- 
 dom of  Judah,  which  became  the  predominant  one 
 after  the  deportation  of  the  ten  tribes.  It  is  in 
 the  Greek  writings  of  the  later  Jews  that  '  Hebrew' 
 is  first  applied  to  the  language,  as  in  the  k^pa- 
 'Cari  of  the  prologue  to  Ecclesiasticus  and  in  the 
 y\Ciia<7a.  tQ>v  'E^paiuv  of  Josephus.  (The  expats 
 SiaX^KToj  of  the  N.  T.  is  used  in  contradistinction 
 to  the  idiom  of  the  Hellenist  Jews,  and  does  not 
 mean  the  ancient  Hebrew  language,  but  the  then 
 vernacular  Aramaic  dialect  of  Palestine. )  Our  title 
 to  use  the  designation  Hebi-ew  language  is,  there- 
 fore, founded  on  the  fact  that  the  nation  which 
 spoke  this  idiom  was  properly  distinguished  by  the 
 ethnographical  name  of  Hebi-ews. 
 
 The  best  evidences  which  we  possess  as  to  the 
 form  of  the  Hebrew  language,  prior  to  its  first  his- 
 torical period,  tend  to  shew  that  Abraham,  on  his 
 entrance  into  Canaan,  found  the  language  then 
 prevailing  among  almost  all  the  different  tribes  in- 
 habiting that  country  to  be  in  at  least  dialectual 
 affinity  with  his  own.  This  is  gathered  from  the  fol- 
 lowing facts :  that  nearly  all  the  names  of  places 
 and  persons  relating  to  those  tribes  admit  of  He- 
 brew etymologies ;  that,  amidst  all  the  accounts  of 
 the  intercourse  of  the  Hebrews  with  the  nations  of 
 Canaan,  we  find  no  hint  of  a  diversity  of  idiom  ; 
 and  that  even  the  comparatively  recent  remains  of 
 
 *  It  may  suffice  here  to  refer  generally  to  Ewald's 
 Hebrew  Grammar,  sees.  I-18,  135-160,  where  the 
 whole  subject  of  this  article  is  treated  of. 
 
 tThe  passage  in  Neh.  xiii.  24  is  not  included 
 here,  because,  as  will  be  seen  below,  it  is  a  disputed 
 point  at  what  time  the  Hebrew  language  ceased  to 
 be  a  living  tongue  ;  and  it  depends  on  the  decision 
 of  that  question  whether  the  'Jewish '  of  Nehemiah 
 means  Hebrau  or  Aramaic. 
 
 the  Phoenician  and  Punic  languages  bear  a  mani- 
 fest  affinity  to  the  Hebrew.  But  whether  the  He- 
 brew language  as  seen  in  the  earliest  books  of  the 
 O.  T.,  is  the  very  dialect  which  Abraham  broughi 
 7vith  him  into  Canaan  ;  or  whether  it  is  the  com- 
 mon tongue  of  the  Canaanite  nations,  which  Abra- 
 ham only  adopted  from  them,  and  which  was  after- 
 wards developed  to  greater  fulness  under  the 
 peculiar  moral  and  political  influences  to  which  his 
 posterity  were  exposed,  are  questions  which,  in 
 the  absence  of  conclusive  arguments,  are  generally 
 discussed  with  some  dogmatical  prepossessions. 
 Almost  all  those  who  support  the  first  view  con- 
 tend also  that  Hebrew  was  the  primitive  language 
 of  mankind.  S.  Morinus,  in  the  work  above  cited, 
 and  Loscher,  in  his  De  Catisis  Litig.  Hebr.,  are 
 among  the  best  champions  of  this  opinion  ;  but 
 Hiivemick  has  recently  advocated  it,  with  such 
 modifications  as  make  it  more  acceptable  [Einleit. 
 in  das  Alte  Test.,  I.  i.  p.  148,  sq)  The  principal 
 argument  on  which  they  depend  is  that,  as  the 
 most  important  proper  names  in  the  first  part  of 
 Genesis  (as  Cain,  Seth,  and  others)  are  evidently 
 founded  on  Hebrew  etymologies,  the  essential 
 connection  of  these  names  with  their  etymological 
 origins  involves  the  historical  credibility  of  the  re- 
 cords themselves,  and  leaves  no  room  for  any  other 
 conclusion  than  that  the  Hebrew  language  is  coseval 
 with  the  earliest  history  of  man.  The  advocates 
 of  the  other  opinion  attach  some  weight  to  the 
 cogency  with  which  they  infer,  from  the  pheno- 
 mena of  the  Hebrew  language  itself,  that  its  roots 
 were  at  one  period  biliteral,  and  were  afterwards 
 developed  to  the  compass  of  three  consonants. 
 They  also  rest  on  the  evidence  which  Gen.  xxxi.  47 
 affords,  that  the  near  relatives  of  Abraham,  residing 
 too  in  the  country  from  which  he  had  recently  emi- 
 grated, spoke  Aramaic ;  and  they  think  this  war- 
 rants the  conclusion  that  Aramaic  must  have  been 
 the  vernacular  dialect  of  Abraham  himself.  Lastly, 
 Gesenius  lays  some  stress  on  the  circumstance  that 
 the  language  not  only  denotes  west  by  D',  sea,  but 
 that  it  does  not  possess  any  other  word  to  express 
 that  sense. 
 
 The  history  of  the  Hebrew  language,  as  far  as 
 we  can  trace  its  course  by  the  changes  in  the  dic- 
 tion of  the  documents  in  which  it  is  preserved, 
 may  be  here  conveniently  divided  into  that  of  the 
 period  preceding,  and  that  of  the  period  succeed- 
 ing, the  Exile.  If  it  be  a  matter  of  surprise  that 
 the  thousand  years  which  intervened  between 
 Moses  and  the  Captivity  should  not  have  produced 
 sufficient  change  in  the  language  to  warrant  its  his- 
 tory during  that  time  being  distributed  into  subor- 
 dinate divisions,  the  following  considerations  may 
 excuse  this  arrangement.  It  is  one  of  the  signal 
 characteristics  of  the  Hebrew  language,  as  seen  in 
 all  the  books  prior  to  the  Exile,  that  notwithstand- 
 ing the  existence  of  some  isolated,  but  important, 
 archaisms,  such  as  in  the  form  of  the  pronoun,  etc. 
 (the  best  collection  of  which  may  be  seen  in  Haver- 
 nick,  I.e.  p.  1S3,  sq.),  it  preserves  an  unparalleled 
 general  uniformity  of  structure.  The  extent  to 
 which  this  uniformity  prevails  may  be  estimated 
 either  by  the  fact  that  it  has  furnished  many  mo- 
 dern scholars,  who  reason  from  the  analogies  dis- 
 covered in  the  changes  in  other  languages  in  a 
 given  period,  with  an  argument  to  shew  that  the 
 Pentateuch  could  not  have  been  written  at  so 
 remote  a  date  as  is  generally  believed  (Gesenius, 
 Gesch.  der  Hebr.  Sprache,  sec.  8)  ;  or,  by  the  cotj* 
 
HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 2a3 
 
 HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 elusion,  a  fortiori,  which  Havemick,  whose  ex- 
 press object  it  is  to  vindicate  its  received  antiquity, 
 candidly  concedes,  that  '  the  books  of  Chronicles, 
 Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  are  the  earliest  in  which  the 
 language  differs  sensibly  from  that  in  the  historical 
 portions  of  the  Pentateuch'  {Einleit.  i.  p.  i8o). 
 We  are  here  solely  concerned  with  the  fact  that 
 this  uniformity  of  type  exists.  The  general  causes 
 to  which  it  is  to  be  ascribed  are  to  be  sought  in 
 the  genius  of  the  language  itself,  as  less  susceptible 
 of  change  ;  in  the  stationary  civilization  of  the 
 Hebrews  during  the  period  ;  and  in  their  compara- 
 tive isolation,  as  regarded  nations  of  foreign  lan- 
 guage (see  Ewald's  Hebr.  Gram.  sec.  7).  The 
 particular  causes  depend  on  the  age  and  author 
 assigned  to  each  book  falling  within  this  period, 
 and  involve  questions  utterly  alien  to  the  scope  of 
 this  article. 
 
 In  the  canonical  books  belonging  to  the  first 
 period,  the  Hebrew  language  appears  in  a  state  of 
 mature  development.  Although  it  still  preserves 
 the  charms  of  freshness  and  simplicity,  yet  it  has 
 attained  great  regularity  of  formation,  and  such  a 
 precision  of  syntactical  arrangement  as  ensures 
 both  energy  and  distinctness.  Some  common 
 notions  of  its  laxity  and  indefiniteness  have  no  other 
 foundation  than  the  very  inadequate  scholarship  of 
 the  persons  who  form  them.  A  clearer  insight 
 into  the  organism  of  language  absolutely,  joined  to 
 such  a  study  of  the  cognate  Syro-Arabian  idioms 
 as  would  reveal  the  secret,  but  no  less  certain, 
 laws  of  its  syntactical  coherence,  would  shew 
 them  to  what  degree  the  simplicity  of  Hebrew  is 
 compatible  with  grammatical  precision. 
 
 One  of  the  most  remarkable  features  in  the  lan- 
 guage of  this  period  is  the  difference  which  distin- 
 guishes the  diction  of  poetry  from  that  of  prose. 
 This  difference  consists  in  the  use  of  unusual  words 
 and  flexions  (many  of  which  are  considered  to  be 
 Aramaisms  or  Archaisms,  although  in  this  case 
 these  terms  are  nearly  identical),  and  in  a  harmonic 
 arrangement  of  thoughts,  as  seen  both  in  the 
 parallelism  of  members  in  a  single  verse,  and  in 
 the  strophic  order  of  longer  portions  ;  the  delicate 
 art  of  which  Ewald  has  traced  with  pre-eminent 
 success  in  his  Poetische  Biicher  des  Alt.  Bundes, 
 vol.  i.     [Hebrew  Poetry,  iii.  553.] 
 
 The  Babylonian  captivity  is  assigned  as  the  com- 
 mencement of  that  decline  and  corruption  which 
 mark  the  second  period  in  the  histoiy  of  the  He- 
 brew language  ;  but  the  Assyrian  deportation  of 
 the  ten  tribes,  in  the  year  B.C.  720,  was  probably 
 the  first  means  of  bringing  the  Aramaic  idiom  into 
 injurious  proximity  to  it.  The  Exile,  however, 
 forms  the  epoch  at  which  the  language  shews  evi- 
 dent signs  of  that  encroachment  of  the  Aramaic  on 
 its  integrity,  which  afterwards  ended  in  its  com- 
 plete extinction.  The  diction  of  the  different 
 books  of  this  period  discovers  various  grades  of 
 this  Aramaic  influence  ,  and  in  some  cases  ap- 
 proaches so  nearly  to  the  type  of  the  first  period, 
 that  it  has  been  ascribed  to  mere  imitation. 
 
 An  interesting  question  has  been  raised  as  to  the 
 precise  time  at  which  the  Hebrew  ceased  to  be  the 
 living  vernacular  language  of  the  Jews.  Some 
 learned  men,  among  whom  are  Kimchi,  Buxtorf, 
 and  Walton,  maintain  that  the  Jews  entirely  lost 
 the  living  use  of  Hebrew  durmg  the  Captivity. 
 Others,  as  Pfeiffer  and  Loscher,  argue  that  it  is 
 quite  unreasonable,  considering  the  duration  and 
 other  circumstances  of  the  Exile,  to  suppose  that 
 
 the  Jews  did  not  retain  the  partial  use  of  their 
 native  tongue  for  some  time  after  their  return  to 
 Palestine,  and  lose  it  by  slow  degrees  at  last. 
 The  points  on  which  the  question  chiefly  turns, 
 are  the  sense  in  which  the  words  CIIQD  and 
 JT'Tin^,  in  Neh.  vhi.  8  ;  xiii.  24,  are  to  be  taken  ; 
 and  Hengstenberg,  in  his  Authentie  des  Daniel,  p. 
 299,  sq.^  and  Gesenius,  in  his  Gesch.  d.  Hebr. 
 Sprache,  sec.  13,  are  the  best  modern  advocates  of 
 either  view.  But,  on  whichever  side  the  truth 
 may  be  here,  it  is  certain  that  the  language  con- 
 tinued to  be  understood  and  used  in  writing  by  the 
 educated,  for  some  time  after  the  Exile,  as  is  evi- 
 dent from  the  date  of  the  latest  Biblical  books  ; 
 and  it  is  found  in  the  inscriptions  on  the  coins  of 
 the  Maccabees.  No  decisive  evidence,  however, 
 shews  at  what  exact  time  it  became  a  virtually  dead 
 language  ;  although  there  is  every  reason  to  con- 
 clude that,  more  than  a  century  before  the  Chris- 
 tian era,  it  gave  place  altogether  in  writing,  as 
 before  in  speech,  to  that  corrupt  Aramaic  dialect, 
 which  some  have  called  the  Syro-Chaldaic,  and 
 that  it  was  thenceforth  solely  studied,  as  the  lan- 
 guage of  the  sacred  books,  by  the  learned. 
 
 The  palseographical  history  of  the  Hebrew  lan- 
 guage requires  a  brief  notice,  at  least  as  far  as 
 regards  the  results  of  modern  inquiries.  The  ear- 
 liest monuments  of  Hebrew  writing  which  we  pos- 
 sess are  the  genuine  coins  of  the  Maccabees,  which 
 date  from  the  year  B.C.  143.  The  character  in 
 which  their  inscriptions  are  expressed  bears  a  very 
 near  resemblance  to  the  Samaritan  alphabet,  and 
 both  are  evidently  derived  from  the  Phoenician 
 alphabet.  The  Talmud  also,  and  Origen  and 
 Jerome,  both  attest  the  fact  that  an  ancient  He- 
 brew character  had  fallen  into  disuse  ;  and,  by 
 stating  that  the  Samaritans  employed  it,  and  by 
 giving  some  descriptions  of  its  form,  they  distinctly 
 prove  that  the  ancient  character  spoken  of  was 
 essentially  the  same  as  that  on  the  Hasmonasan 
 coins.  It  is,  therefore,  considered  to  be  established 
 beyond  a  doubt  that,  before  the  Exile,  the  Hebrews 
 used  this  ancient  character  (the  Talmud  even  calls 
 it  the  '  Hebrew').  At  what  period,  however,  the 
 square  Hebrew  character  of  our  printed  books 
 was  first  adopted,  is  a  matter  of  some  dispute. 
 The  Talmud,  and  Origen  and  Jerome,  ascribe  the 
 change  to  Ezra  ;  and  those  who,  like  Gesenius, 
 admit  this  tradition  to  be  true  in  a  limited  sense, 
 reconcile  it  with  the  late  use  of  the  ancient  letters 
 on  the  coins,  by  appealing  to  the  parallel  use  of 
 the  Kufic  character  on  the  Mohammedan  coins,  for 
 several  centuries  after  the  Nischi  was  employed 
 for  writing  ;  or,  by  supposing  that  the  Maccabees 
 had  a  mercantile  interest  in  imitating  the  coinage 
 of  the  Phoenicians.  The  other  opinion  is  that,  as 
 the  square  Hebrew  character  has  not,  to  all  ap- 
 pearance, been  developed  directly  out  of  the  ancient 
 stiff  Phoenician  type,  iDut  out  of  an  alphabet  bear- 
 ing near  affinity  to  that  found  in  the  Palmyrene 
 inscriptions,  a  combination  of  this  palseographical 
 fact  with  the  intercourse  which  took  place  between 
 the  Jews  and  the  Syrians  under  the  Seleucidce, 
 renders  it  probable  that  the  square  character  was 
 first  adopted  at  some  inconsiderable  but  undefin- 
 able  time  before  the  Christian  era.  Either  of  these 
 theories  is  compatible  with  the  supposition  that  the 
 square  character  underwent  many  successive  mo- 
 difications in  the  next  centuries,  before  it  attained 
 its  full  caligraphical  perfection.  The  passage  in 
 Matt.  v.  18  is  considered  to  prove  that  the  copies 
 
HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 254 
 
 HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 of  the  law  were  already  written  in  the  square  cha- 
 racter, as  i\\ejod  of  the  ancient  alphabet  is  as  large 
 a  letter  as  the  aleph  ;  and  the  Talmud  and  Jerome 
 speak  as  if  the  Hebrew  MSS.  of  the  O.  T.  were, 
 in  their  time,  already  provided  with  the  final  letters, 
 the  Taggin,  the  point  on  the  broken  horizontal 
 stroke  of  n,  and  other  calligraphical  minutiae.* 
 
 The  origin  of  the  vowel-points  is  to  be  ascribed 
 to  the  effort  which  the  Jewish  learned  men  made 
 to  preserve  the  pronunciation  of  their  sacred  lan- 
 guage, at  a  time  when  its  extinction  as  a  living 
 tongue  endangered  the  loss  of  the  traditional 
 memory  of  its  sound.  Every  kind  of  evidence 
 renders  it  probable  that  these  signs  for  the  pronun- 
 ciation were  first  introduced  about  the  seventh 
 century  of  the  Christian  era,  that  is,  after  the 
 completion  of  the  Talmud,  and  that  the  minute 
 and  complex  system  which  we  possess  was  gra- 
 dually developed,  from  a  few  indispensable  signs, 
 to  its  present  elaborateness.  The  existence  of  the 
 present  complete  system  can,  however,  be  traced 
 back  to  the  eleventh  century.  The  skilful  investi- 
 gation of  Hupfeld  (in  the  Studien  tind  Kritiken 
 for  1830)  has  proved  that  the  vowel-points  were 
 unknown  to  Jerome  and  the  Talmud  ;  but,  as  far 
 as  regards  the  former,  we  are  able  to  make  a  high 
 estimate  of  the  degree  to  which  the  traditionaiy 
 pronunciation,  prior  to  the  use  of  the  points,  ac- 
 corded with  our  Masoretic  signs  :  for  Jerome 
 describes  a  pronunciation  which  agrees  wonderfully 
 well  with  our  vocalisation.  We  are  thus  called  on 
 to  avail  ourselves  thankfully  of  the  Masoretic 
 punctuation,  on  the  double  ground  that  it  represents 
 the  Jewish  traditional  pronunciation,  and  that  the 
 Hebrew  language,  unless  when  read  according  to 
 its  laws,  does  not  enter  into  its  full  dialectual  har- 
 mony with  its  Syro- Arabian  sisters. — J.  N. 
 
 [In  the  N.  T.  the  expression  '  Hebrew  tongue' 
 ('¥.^pal'a-Tl,  -q  "K^pal's  SidXeKTOs,  John  v.  2  ;  xix.  20  ; 
 Acts  xxi.  40  ;  XX.  2,  etc.)  is  used  to  designate  the 
 Syro-Chaldaic  dialect  of  the  people  of  Palestine  at 
 the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era.] 
 
 2.  History  of  Hebrciu  Leaj-ning. — It  is  not  till 
 the  closing  part  of  the  9th  century  that  we  find, 
 even  among  the  Jews  themselves,  any  attempts  at 
 the  formal  study  of  their  ancient  tongue.  In  the 
 Talmudic  writings,  indeed,  grammatical  remarks 
 frequently  occur,  and  of  these  some  indicate  an 
 acute  and  accurate  perception  of  the  usages  of  the 
 language ;  but  they  are  introduced  incidentally, 
 and  are  to  be  traced  rather  to  a  sort  of  living  sense 
 of  the  language  than  to  any  scientific  study  of  its 
 structure  or  laws.  What  the  Jews  of  the  Talmudic 
 period  knew  themselves  of  the  Hebrew  they  com- 
 
 *  Some  have  attempted  to  find,  in  the  discre- 
 pancies between  the  Septuagint  and  the  Hebrew 
 text,  the  basis  for  discovering  in  what  character 
 the  MSS.  from  which  they  translated  must  have 
 been  written,  by  trying  to  reduce  these  discrepancies 
 to  mistakes  of  one  letter  for  another.  Eichhorn 
 favours  the  notion  that  the  Septuagint  was  made 
 from  MSS.  in  the  Samaritan  character ;  while 
 Gesenius  decides  that  the  letters  which  are  iirer- 
 changed  are  only  alike  in  the  square  character. 
 The  decision  of  this  question  would  in  some  degree 
 affect  the  view  entertained  of  the  antiquity  of  the 
 square  character.  The  latest  author  on  this  subject, 
 however,  Frankel,  asserts  that  the  evidence  does 
 not  preponderate  on  either  side  {Voistudien  zu  dcr 
 Septuagitita,  184 1,  p.  213). 
 
 municated  to  Origen  and  Jerome,  both  of  whorr 
 devoted  themselves  with  much  zeal  to  the  study 
 of  that  language,  and  the  latter  of  whom  espe- 
 cially became  proficient  in  all  that  his  masters 
 could  teach  him  concerning  both  its  vocabulary  and 
 its  grammar  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.;  Hieron.  Adv. 
 Rufi)i.  i.  p.  363  ;  Epist.  ad  Damns.  Prof,  ad  Jo- 
 btim,  ad  Pa7-alipom,  etc.  ;  Carpzov,  Crit.  Sac.  vi. 
 sec.  2).  As  represented  by  Jerome  the  Church 
 was  quite  on  a  par  with  the  synagogue  in  acquaint- 
 ance with  the  language  of  the  ancient  Scriptures  ; 
 but  how  imperfect  that  was  in  many  respects  may 
 be  seen  from  the  strange  etymologies,  which  even 
 Jerome  adduces  as  explanatory  of  words,  and  from 
 his  statement  that  from  the  want  of  vowels  in 
 Hebrew  '  the  Jews  pronounce  the  same  words 
 with  different  sounds  and  accents,  p?'o  voluntatt 
 ledortmi  ac  varietate  rcgiotiiim '  {Ep.  ad  Evan- 
 gelum). 
 
 Stimulated  by  the  example  of  the  Arabians,  the 
 Jews  began  towards  the  end  of  the  9th  century  to 
 bestow  careful  study  on  the  grammar  of  their 
 ancient  tongue  ;  and  with  this  advantage  over  the 
 Arabian  grammarians,  that  they  did  not,  like  them, 
 confine  their  attention  to  one  language,  but  took 
 into  account  the  whole  of  the  Shemitic  tongues. 
 An  African  Jew,  Jehuda  ben  Qarish,  who  lived 
 about  A.D.  8S0,  led  the  way  in  this  direction  ;  but 
 it  was  reserved  for  Saadia  ben  Joseph  of  Fayum, 
 Gaon  (or  spiritual  head)  of  the  Jews  at  Sora  in 
 Babylonia,  and  who  died  A.D.  942,  to  compose  the 
 first  formal  treatise  on  points  of  Hebrew  grammar 
 and  philology.  To  him  we  are  indebted  for  the 
 Arabic  version  of  the  O.  T.,  of  which  portions  are 
 still  extant  [Arabic  Versions]  ;  and  though  his 
 other  works,  his  commentaries  on  the  O.  T. ,  and 
 his  grammatical  works,  have  not  come  down  to  us, 
 we  know  of  their  existence  from,  and  have  still 
 some  of  their  contents  in,  the  citations  of  later 
 writers.  He  was  followed  by  R.  Jehuda  b.  David 
 Chajug,  a  native  of  Fez,  who  flourished  in  the  nth 
 century,  whose  services  have  procured  for  him  the 
 honourable  designation  of  '  chief  of  grammarians' 
 [Chajug].  From  him  the  succession  of  Jewish 
 grammarians  embraces  the  following  names  [for 
 details  see  separate  articles].  R.  Salomo  Isaaki, 
 C'Cji")  Rashi)  a  native  of  Troyes  in  France,  d.  ab. 
 1 105  ;  Abu'l  Walid  Mervan  ibn  Ganach,  a  physi- 
 cian at  Cordova,  d.  I120;  Moses  Gikatilla,  ab. 
 lioo;  Ibn  Esra,  d.  1194;  the  Kimchis,  especially 
 Moses  and  David,  who  flourished  in  the  13th  cen- 
 tury ;  Isaak  b.  Mose  (Ephodreus,  so  called  from  the 
 title  of  his  work  IIDS  nb'VD)  ;    Solomon  Jarchi 
 
 wrote  a  grammar,  in  which  he  sets  forth  the  seven 
 conjugations  of  verbs  as  now  usually  given  ;  Abra- 
 ham de  Balmez  of  Lecci  ;  and  Elias  Levita  (1472- 
 1549).  The  earliest  efforts  in  Hebrew  lexico- 
 graphy with  which  we  are  acquainted  is  the  little 
 work  of  Saadia  Gaon,  in  which  he  explains  seventy 
 Hebrew  words  ;  a  codex  containing  this  is  in  the 
 Bodleian  library  at  Oxford,  from  which  it  has  been 
 printed  by  Dukes  in  the  Zeitsclwift  fiir  die  Kundt 
 des  Morgenlatides,  Bd.  5,  Hft.  i,  p.  1 15,  ff.  In 
 the  same  codex  is  another  small  lexicographical 
 work  by  Jehuda  b.  Qarish,  in  which  Hebrew  words 
 are  explained  from  the  Talmud,  the  Arabic,  and 
 other  languages  ;  excerpts  from  this  are  given  in 
 Eichhom's  Biblioth.  der  Bibl.  Litt.  iii.  951-980. 
 More  copious  works  are  those  of  Ben  Ganach, 
 where  the  Hebrew  words  are  explained  in  Arabic  , 
 
HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 255 
 
 HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 of  R.  Menahem  ibn  Saruk,  whose  work  has  been 
 printed  with  an  English  translation  by  Herschell 
 Philipowski,  Lond.  1854 ;  of  R.  Salomo  Parchon 
 (ab.  1 160),  specimens  of  whose  work  have  been  given 
 by  De-Rossi  in  his  collection  of  Various  Readings, 
 and  in  a  separate  work  entitled  Lexicon  Heb.  scUrt. 
 quo  ex  antiquo  et  inedito  R.  Parchoiiis  Lexico  novas 
 et  diversas  rariortiin  et  difficiliorimi  vociim  significa- 
 tiones  sistit,  J.  B.  De-Rossi,  Farm.  1805  ;  of  David 
 Kimchi  in  the  second  part  of  his  Jllichlol,  entitled 
 D'^E'lE'n  "IQD  (often  printed  ;  best  edition  by  Bie- 
 
 senthal  and  Leberecht,  2  vols.,  Berl.  1838-47);  and 
 of  Elias  Levita  {Tishbi,  Bas.  1527,  and  with  a 
 Latin  translation  by  Fagius,  4to,  1 541).  The 
 Concordance  of  Isaac  Nathan  (1437)  also  belongs 
 to  this  period. 
 
 The  study  of  the  Hebrew  language  among 
 Christians,  which  had  only  casually  and  at  inter- 
 vals occupied  the  attention  of  ecclesiastics  during 
 the  middle  ages,  received  an  impulse  from  the  re- 
 vived interest  in  Biblical  exegesis  produced  by  the 
 Reformation.  Something  had  been  done  to  facili- 
 tate the  study  of  Oriental  literature  and  to  call 
 attention  to  it  by  the  MSS.,  Hebrew  and  Arabic, 
 which  the  Emperor  Frederic  II.  brought  into 
 Europe  after  the  fourth  crusade  in  1228  (Cuspinian, 
 De  CcEsarihus,  p.  419  ;  Boxhorn,  Hist.  Univ.,  p. 
 779) ;  and  a  few  men  such  as  Raymund  Martini,  a 
 native  of  Catalonia  (b.  1236),  Paulus  Bugensis, 
 Libertas  Cominetus,  who  is  said  to  have  known 
 and  used  fourteen  languages,  etc.,  appeared  as 
 lights  in  the  otherwise  beclouded  firmament  of 
 Biblical  learning.  But  it  was  not  until  the  begin- 
 ning of  the  1 6th  century  that  any  general  interest 
 was  awakened  in  the  Christian  church  for  the 
 study  of  Hebrew  literature.  In  1506  appeared  the 
 grammar  and  lexicon  of  Reuchlin,  which  may  be 
 regarded  as  the  first  successful  attempt  to  open  the 
 gate  of  Hebrew  learning  to  the  Christian  world  ; 
 for  though  the  work  of  Conrad  Pellican,  De  Modo 
 legejidi  et  ititelligotdi  Ilebraa,  Bas.  1503,  had  the 
 precedence  in  point  of  time,  it  was  too  imperfect  to 
 exert  much  influence  in  favour  of  Hebrew  studies. 
 A  few  years  later  Santes  Pagnini,  a  Dominican  of 
 Lucca  issued  his  Instiliitioiinm  Hebraicarum  Libb. 
 iv.,  Lyon  1526;  and  his  Thesaurus  Ling.  Sajict., 
 lb.  1529  ;  but  the  former  of  these  works  is  inferior 
 to  the  Grammar  of  Reuchlin,  and  the  latter  is  a 
 mere  collection  of  excerpts  from  David  Kimchi's 
 Book  of  Roots,  often  erroneously  understood.  No 
 name  of  any  importance  occurs  in  the  history  of 
 Hebrew  philology  after  this  till  we  come  to  those 
 of  Sebastian  Mimster,  and  the  Buxtorfs.  The 
 former  translated  the  grammatical  works  of  Elias 
 Levita,  and  from  these  chiefly  he  constructed  his 
 own  Dictionarium  Hebr.,  adj.  Chald.  vocabulis, 
 Bas.  1523  ;  and  his  Opics  Grammaticwn  ex  variis 
 Elianis  hbris  concinnatitm,  Bas.  1 542.  The  latter 
 rendered  most  important  service  to  the  cause  of 
 Hebrew  learning.  [Buxtorf.]  The  giammars 
 and  lexicons  of  the  older  Buxtorf  were  for  many 
 years  the  principal  helps  to  the  study  of  Hebrew  in 
 the  Christian  Church,  and  one  of  them,  his  Lexicon 
 Chald.  Talmud,  et  Rabbinicum,  Bas.  1640,  is  still 
 indispensable  to  the  student  who  would  thoroughly 
 explore  the  Hebrew  language  and  literature.  The 
 names  also  of  Forster  and  Schindler  may  be  men- 
 tioned as  marking  an  epoch  in  the  histoiy  of  these 
 studies.  Previous  to  them  scholars  had  followed 
 ■almost  slavishly  in  the  track  of  rabbinical  teaching. 
 
 By  them,  however,  an  attempt  was  made  to  gather 
 materials  from  a  wider  field.  Forster  in  his  Diet. 
 Heb.  Nov.,  Bas.  1557,  sought  to  determine  the 
 meaning  of  the  words  from  the  comparison  of  the 
 different  passages  of  Scripture  in  which  they  occur, 
 and  of  allied  words,  words  having  two  consonants 
 in  common,  or  two  consonants  of  the  same  organ. 
 Schindler  added  to  this  the  comparison  of  different 
 Shemitic  dialects  for  the  illustration  of  the  He- 
 brew, in  his  Lex.  Fentaglotton,  Han.  1612.  The 
 example  thus  set  was  carried  forward  by  Sam. 
 Bohle,  a  Rostock  professor  {Dissertt.  pro  formali 
 Signif.  S.  S.  eruenda,  1637) ;  though  by  his  fond- 
 ness for  metaphysical  methods  and  conceits,  he  was 
 often  betrayed  into  mere  trifling ;  by  Christian 
 Nolde,  professor  at  Copenhagen  (Conco7-dant.  par- 
 ticularitm  Ebrcro.  Chald.  V.  T.,  Ham.  1679);  by 
 Joh.  Cocceius  (Coch),  professor  at  Leyden  {L^ex.  et 
 Conunent.  sertn.  Hebr.,  Lond.  1669);  by  Castell 
 {Lex.  Heptaglot.,  Lond.  1669);  by  De  Dieu  in  his 
 commentaries  on  the  O.  T,  ;  and  by  Hottinger  in 
 his  Etymologicicm  Orient,  sive  Lex.  harmonicum 
 heptaglot.,  Frank.  1661.  Sol.  Glass  also  in  his 
 Fhilologia  Sacra,  1636,  rendered  important  service 
 to  Hebrew  learning  and  O.  T.  exegesis.  [See  the 
 articles  under  these  names.] 
 
 Meanwhile  a  new  school  of  Hebrew  philology 
 had  arisen  under  the  leading  of  Jakob  Alting  and 
 Johann  Andr.  Danz.  The  former  in  his  Ftmda- 
 menta  punctationis  lingucE  sanctcE  sive  Grami7tat. 
 Heb.,  Gron.  1654  ;  and  the  latter  in  his  Nucifran- 
 gibtilum,  Jena  1686,  and  other  works,  endeavoured 
 to  shew  that  the  phenomena  which  the  Hebrew  ex- 
 hibited in  a  grammatical  respect,  the  flexions,  etc., 
 had  their  basis  in  essential  properties  of  the  lan- 
 guage, and  could  be  rationally  evolved  from  prin- 
 ciples. Peculiar  to  them  is  the  '  systema  morarum,' 
 a  highly  artificial  method  of  determining  the  placing 
 of  long  or  short  vowels,  according  to  the  number 
 of  inonc  appertaining  to  each  or  to  the  consonant 
 following,  a  method  which  led  to  endless  niceties, 
 and  no  small  amount  of  learned  trifling.  The 
 fundamental  principle,  however,  which  Alting  and 
 Danz  asserted  is  a  true  one,  and  their  assertion  of  it 
 was  not  without  fruits.  Nearly  contemporary  with 
 them  was  Jacques  Gousset,  professor  at  Groningen, 
 who  devoted  much  time  and  labour  to  the  prepara- 
 tion of  a  work  entitled  Coinmentarii  Lijig.  Heb., 
 Amst.  1702,  in  which  he  follows  strictly  the  method 
 of  deducing  the  meanings  of  the  Hebrew  words 
 from  the  Hebrew  itself,  rejecting  all  aid  from  Rab- 
 bins, Versions,  or  Dialects.  The  chief  merit  of 
 Gousset  and  his  followers,  of  whom  the  principal 
 is  Chr.  Stock  [Clavis  Ling.  Sanct.  V.  et  N.  Ti. 
 Lips.  1725),  consists  in  the  close  attention  they 
 paid  to  the  usiis  loquendi  of  Scripture,  and  Haver- 
 nick  thinks  that  adequate  justice  has  not  been  done 
 to  Gousset's  services  in  this  respect  [Lntrod.  to  O.  T. , 
 p.  221,  E.  Tr.) 
 
 Hitherto  not  much  attention  had  been  paid  to 
 etymology  as  a  source  for  determining  the  meaning 
 of  Hebrew  words.  This  defect  was  in  part  reme- 
 died by  Caspar  Neumann  and  Valentin  Loescher ; 
 the  former  of  whom  in  different  treatises,  the  latter 
 m  his  treatise  De  Causis  Ling.  Heb.,  Frank,  and 
 Leips.  1706,  set  forth  the  principle  that  the  He- 
 brew roots  are  biliterce,  that  these  are  the  '  charac- 
 teres  significationis '  as  Neumann  called  them,  or 
 the  'semina  vocum,'  as  they  were  designated  by 
 Loescher,  and  that  from  them  the  triliterals,  of 
 which    the    Hebrew    is    chiefly    composed,    were 
 
HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 256 
 
 HEBREW  LANGUAGE 
 
 formed.  They  contended  also  that  the  funda- 
 mental  meaning  of  the  bihterals  is  to  be  ascertained 
 from  the  meaning  of  the  letters  composing  each  ; 
 and  for  this  purpose  they  assigned  to  each  letter 
 what  the  former  called  '  significatio  hieroglyphica,' 
 and  the  latter  'valor  logicus.'  This  last  is  the 
 most  dubious  part  of  their  system  ;  but  as  a  whole 
 their  views  are  worthy  of  respect  and  consideration 
 (see  Hupfeld,  De  etneitdatida  lexicog.  Semit.  ratione, 
 P-  3)- 
 
 A  great  advance  was  made  in  the  beginning  of 
 the  1 8th  century  by  the  rise  almost  simultaneously 
 of  two  rival  schools  of  Hebrew  philology  ;  the 
 Dutch  school,  headed  by  Albert  Schultens,  and 
 the  school  of  Halle,  founded  by  the  Michaelis 
 family.  In  the  former  the  predominating  tendency 
 was  towards  the  almost  exclusive  use  of  the  Arabic 
 for  the  illustration  of  Hebrew  grammar  and  lexi- 
 cography. Schultens  himself  was  a  thorough 
 Arabic  scholar,  and  he  carried  his  principle  of 
 appealing  to  that  source  for  the  elucidation  of  the 
 Hebrew  to  an  extent  which  betrayed  him  into 
 many  mistakes  and  extravagances ;  nevertheless, 
 to  his  labours  Hebrew  philology  owes  an  imperish- 
 able debt  of  obligation.  Besides  his  commentaries 
 on  Job  and  Proverbs,  which  are  full  of  grammati- 
 cal and  lexicographical  disquisition,  he  wrote 
 Origines  HebriZiZ  sen  Heb.  Ling,  antiquissima 
 natura  et  indoles  ex  Arabics  penetralibiis  revocata, 
 Francf.  1723  ;  and  Institidiones  ad  fundamenta 
 Ling.  Heb.,  Leyd.  1737.  To  this  school  belongs 
 Schroder,  professor  at  Grbningen,  who  published 
 in  1776  a  Hebrew  grammar  of  great  excellence, 
 and  which  has  passed  through  many  editions,  under 
 the  same  title  as  the  second  of  the  works  of  Schul- 
 tens above  noted  ;  and  Robertson,  professor  at 
 Edinburgh  (Gramtnaiica  Hebr.,  Edin.  1783,  sec. 
 ed. )  Both  these  works  excel  that  of  Schultens  in 
 clearness  and  simplicity ;  and  in  neither  is  the 
 Arabic  theory  so  exclusively  adhered  to.  Venema, 
 as  a  commentator,  was  also  one  of  the  luminaries 
 of  this  school. 
 
 The  school  of  Halle  was  founded  by  John  Heniy 
 and  Christian  Benedict  Michaelis  ;  but  its  principal 
 ornament  in  its  earlier  stage  was  the  son  of  the 
 latter,  John  David,  professor  at  Gottingen  [Mi- 
 chaelis]. The  principle  of  this  school  was  to 
 combine  the  use  of  all  the  sources  of  elucidation 
 for  the  Hebrew— the  cognate  dialects,  especially 
 the  Aramaic,  the  versions,  the  rabbinical  writings, 
 etymology,  and  the  Hebrew  itself  as  exhibited  in 
 the  sacred  writings.  The  valuable  edition  of  the 
 Hebrew  Bible,  with  exegetical  notes,  the  conjoint 
 work  of  John  Henry  and  Christ.  Benedict,  some 
 grammatical  essays  by  the  latter,  and  the  Hebrdische 
 Grammatik  (Halle  1744),  the  Siipplementa  ad 
 lexica  Hebr.  (6  parts,  Gott.  1785-92),  and  several 
 smaller  essays  of  John  David,  comprise  the  princi- 
 pal contributions  of  this  illustrious  family  to  Hebrew 
 learning.  To  their  school  belong  the  majority  of 
 more  recent  German  Hebraists — Moser  {Lex.  Man. 
 Heb.  et  Chald.,  Ulm  1795),  Vater  {Heb.  Spmek- 
 lehre,  Leipz.  1797),  Hartmann  {Aiifangsgriinde  der 
 Heb.  Sprac/ie,  Marb.  1798),  Jahn  {G?'a?nmaiica 
 Li7ig.  Heb.,  1809),  and  the  facile  princeps  of  the 
 whole,  Gesenius  {Hebr.  Dentsc/ies  Hdzvorlerbiich, 
 2  vols.  Leipz.  1810-12;  Heb.  Graj/imatik,  1813  ; 
 iSth  ed.  by  Rodiger,  1857  ;  Geschichte  der  Heb. 
 Spr.  und  Sehrift,  1815  ;  Ausfiihrliches  Gram.- 
 Krit.  Lehrgebdude  der  Heb.  Spr.,  1817  ;  Lexicon 
 Manuale,  1833,  1847  ;   Thesaurus  Phil.  Crit.  Ling. 
 
 Hebr.  et  Chald.,  3  torn.  4to,  1835-1858).  [Gese 
 NIUS.]  Gesenius  has  been  followed  closely  by 
 Moses  Stuart  in  his  Grammar  of  the  Hebr.  Lan- 
 guage, of  which  many  editions  have  appeared. 
 Under  the  Halle  school  may  be  also  ranked  Joh. 
 Simonis  {Onomast.  Vet.  Test.,  Halle  1741  ;  Lexi- 
 con  Man.  Heb.  et  Chald.,  1756;  re-edited  by  Eich- 
 horn  in  1793,  and  with  valuable  improvements  by 
 Winer  in  1828)  ;  but  though  a  pupil  of  Michaelis, 
 Simonis  shews  a  strong  leaning  towards  the  school 
 of  Schultens. 
 
 Among  recent  Hebraists  the  names  of  Lee 
 {Grammar  of  the  Heb.  Lajig.  in  a  series  of  Lectures, 
 Lond.  3d  edit.  1844;  Lexicon  Heb.  Chald.  and 
 Engl.,  1840),  Ewald  {Krit.  Grannn.  der  Heb.  Spr. 
 Attsfiihrlich  bearbeitet,  Leipz.  1827  ;  6th  ed.  1855, 
 under  the  title  of  Ausfiihi-liches  Lehrb.  der  Heb. 
 Spr.  des  A.  B.),  and  Hupfeld  {Exercitationes  Aethio- 
 picce,  1825  ;  De  emend.  Lexicogr.  Sem.  ratione 
 Co!?nne7it.,  1827  ;  Ueher  Theotie  d.  Heb.  Gr.  in  the 
 Theol.  Studien  und  Kritiken  for  1828  ;  Ausf.  Hebr. 
 Gram.,  1841),  are  the  most  prominent.  Each  of 
 these  pursues  an  independent  course  ;  but  aU  of 
 them  incline  more  or  less  to  the  school  of  Alting 
 and  Danz.  Lee  avows  that  the  aim  of  his  gram- 
 matical investigations  is  to  '  study  the  language  as 
 /'/  is,  that  is,  as  its  oivfi  analogy  collected  from  itself 
 and  its  cognate  dialects  exhibits  it'  {Grammar, 
 Pref.  p.  iv.,  new  edition,  1844).  Ewald  has  com- 
 bined with  his  philosophical  analysis  of  the  lan- 
 guage, as  it  exists  in  its  own  documents,  a  more 
 extended  use  of  the  cognate  dialects  ;  he  contends 
 that,  to  do  justice  to  the  Hebrew,  one  must  first  be 
 at  home  in  all  the  branches  of  Shemltic  literature, 
 and  that  it  is  by  combining  these  with  the  old 
 Hebrew  that  the  latter  is  to  be  called  from  the 
 dead,  and  piece  by  piece  endowed  with  life  {Gram- 
 matik, Vor.  p.  i.\.)  Hupfeld's  method  is  eclectic, 
 and  does  not  differ  from  that  of  Gesenius,  except 
 that  it  assigns  a  larger  influence  to  the  philosophic 
 element,  and  aims  more  at  basing  the  grammar  of 
 the  language  on  first  principles  analytically  deter- 
 mined ;  by  him  also  the  Japhetic  languages  have 
 been  called  in  to  cast  light  on  the  Shemitic,  a 
 course  to  which  Gesenius  too,  after  formally  repu- 
 diating it,  came  in  his  later  works  to  incline. 
 
 Among  the  Jews  the  study  of  Hebrew  literature 
 has  been  much  fettered  by  rabbinical  and  tradi- 
 tional prejudices.  Many  able  grammarians,  how- 
 ever, of  this  school  have  appeared  since  the  begin- 
 ning of  the  16th  century,  among  whom  the  names 
 of  the  brothers  David  and  Moses  Provengale,  Lon- 
 zano  Norzi,  Ben  Melech,  Siisskind,  and  Lombroso, 
 are  especially  to  be  mentioned.  A  more  liberal 
 impulse  was  communicated  by  Solomon  Cohen 
 (1709-62) ;  but  Mendelsohn  was  the  first  to  intro- 
 duce the  results  and  methods  of  Christian  research 
 among  his  nation.  Fiirst  {Lehrgeb.  d.  Aram.  Idiome 
 }7iit  bczug aufdie Indo-Germ.  Spr.  I.  Chald.  Gra>n., 
 1835  ;  Charuze  Peninim,  1836  ;  CoJicordantice 
 Libr.  Vet.  Test.,  1840;  Hebr.  71  )id  Chald.  Hdwbr- 
 terbuch  iib.  d.  A.  T,  2  vols.  1857)  seeks  to  com- 
 bine the  historical  with  the  analytical  method, 
 taking  note  of  all  the  phenomena  of  the  Hebrew 
 itself,  illustrating  these  from  the  cognate  tongues, 
 and  those  of  the  Indo-Germanic  class,  and  at  the 
 same  time  endeavouring  on  philosophic  grounds  to 
 separate  the  accidental  from  the  necessary,  the 
 radical  from  the  ramified,  the  germ  from  the  stem, 
 the  stem  from  the  branches,  so  as  to  arrive  at  the 
 laws  which  actually  rule  the  language.      All  his 
 
HEBREW  OF  THE  HEBREWS 
 
 257 
 
 HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 works  are  of  the  highest  vahie.  Mr.  Hurwitz,  a 
 Jew  resident  in  Loudon,  has  published  an  excellent 
 Hebrew  Grammar  in  two  part*,  Lond.  1835. 
 Worthy  of  notice  also  is  the  Grammar  of  Isaac 
 Nordheimer,  a  Gernian  Jew  who  spent  his  later 
 years  in  the  United  States,  where  he  died,  in 
 1842,  in  his  thirty-fourth  year.  His  Grammar 
 is  in  2  vols.  8vo,  New  York,  1838-42  (Wolf, 
 Bibliotk.  Hebr.  1715-53  ;  Loscher,  de  Caiisis 
 Liftg.  Ebr.,  libb.  iii.  1706;  Hezel,  Gesch.  der 
 Heb.  Spr.  und  Litter.,  1776  ;  Gesenius,  Gesch.  der 
 Heb.  Spr.,  181 5  ;  Delitzsch,  yeshnrztn,  Isagoge  in 
 Gramm.  et  Lexicogr.  ling.  Heb.,  1838  ;  Fiirst,  Bib- 
 iioth.  yudaica ;  Steinschneider,  Je^vish  Literature, 
 Per.  ii.  sec.  16;  iii.  sec.  27). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEBREW  OF  THE  HEBREWS  ('E^pa?os 
 ii,  'E^paiuv,  Phil.  iii.  5),  emphatically  a  Hebrew, 
 one  who  was  so  by  both  parents,  and  that  by  a 
 long  series  of  ancestors,  without  admixture  of 
 Gentile  or  even  proselyte  blood.  Of  this  the  Jews 
 were  as  proud  as  were  those  Christians  in  Spain, 
 who  called  themselves  Old  Christians,  of  having 
 no  mixture  of  Moorish  blood.  — J .  K. 
 
 HEBREWS,  Epistle  to  the.  In  the  received 
 text  this  composition  appears  as  part  of  the 
 Canonical  Scriptures  of  the  N.T. ,  and  also  as  the 
 production  of  the  apostle  Paul.  For  neither  of 
 these  assumptions  is  the  evidence  allowed  on  all 
 hands  to  be  conclusive  ;  and  hence  the  greatest 
 diversity  of  opinion  prevails  among  critics  as  to 
 the  claims  of  this  epistle,  some  contending  for  its 
 canonical  authority  and  Pauline  origin,  some  deny- 
 ing both  of  these,  and  some  admitting  the  former, 
 whilst  they  repudiate  the  latter.  We  shall  con- 
 sider— 
 
 I.  Its  Canonicity. — In  the  Western  Church  this 
 book  underwent  a  somewhat  singular  fate.  Re- 
 ceived and  quoted  by  Clement  of  Rome,  it  seems 
 after  his  time  to  have  come  under  some  doubt  or 
 suspicion  in  the  West.  It  is  not  cited  or  referred 
 to  by  any  of  the  earlier  Latin  Fathers,  except  Ter- 
 tullian,  who  ascribes  it  to  Barnabas,  and  says  it 
 was  '  receptior  apud  ecclesias  illo  apocrypho  pas- 
 tore  moschorum,'  that  is,  the  Pastor  of  Hermas 
 (,De  Pudicit.  c.  20).  Irenaeus  is  said  by  Eusebius 
 to  have  made  quotations  from  it  in  a  work  now 
 lost  {Hist.  Ecd.  V.  26)  ;  but  he  did  not  receive  it 
 as  of  Pauline  authorship  (Phot.  Biblioth.  Cod.,  252, 
 p.  904,  cited  by  Lardner,  ii.  165),  and  as  Eusebius 
 connects  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  with  the  Epistle 
 to  the  Hebrews,  as  cited  by  Irenseus,  it  is  probable 
 the  latter  viewed  the  two  as  on  the  same  footing. 
 It  is  omitted  by  Caius,  who  only  reckons  thirteen 
 Pauline  epistles  (Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  26  ;  Hieron. 
 De  Vir.  illust.  c.  59)  ;  Hippolytus  expressly  de- 
 clared it  not  to  be  St.  Paul's  (Phot,  p.  301)  ;  it  is 
 omitted  in  the  Muratori  fragment ;  and  by  the 
 Roman  Chui-ch  generally  it  seems  to  have  been 
 suspected  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  3  ;  vi.  20).  Victori- 
 nus  has  one  or  two  passages  which  look  like  quo- 
 tations from  it,  but  he  does  not  mention  it,  and 
 certainly  did  not  receive  it  as  the  work  of  St.  Paul 
 (Lardner,  iii.  300).  In  the  4th  century  it  began  to 
 be  more  generally  received.  Lactantius,  in  the  be- 
 ginning of  the  century,  apparently  borrows  from 
 it  ;  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  Faus- 
 tinus,  and  Marcellinus  (who  cites  it  as  diviiia  Scrip- 
 turd)  ;  Victorinus  of  Rome,  Ambrose,  Philaster 
 (though  admitting  that  some  rejected  the  epistle)  ; 
 Gaudentius,  Jerome,  and  Augustine,  in  the  latter 
 VOL.  IL 
 
 half  and  the  end  of  the  century,  attest  its  canonicity 
 and,  generally,  its  Pauline  origin. 
 
 In  the  Eastern  churches  it  was  much  more  gene- 
 rally, and  from  an  earlier  date,  received.  It  is 
 doubtful  whether  any  citation  from  it  is  made  by 
 Justin  Martyr,  though  in  one  or  two  passages  of 
 his  writings  he  seems  to  have  had  it  in  his  eye. 
 Clement  of  Alexandria  held  it  to  be  St.  Paul's, 
 originally  written  by  him  in  Hebrew,  and  trans- 
 lated by  St.  Luke  (Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  14).  Origen 
 wrote  Homilies  on  this  epistle ;  he  frequently 
 refers  to  it  as  canonical,  and  as  the  work  of  St. 
 Paul,  and  he  tells  us  he  had  intended  to  write  a 
 treatise  to  prove  this  (Lardner,  ii.  472,  ff )  Origen 
 further  attests  that  the  ancients  handed  it  down 
 as  St.  Paul's  (Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  25),  by  which, 
 though  he  cannot  be  understood  as  intending  to 
 say  that  it  had  never  been  questioned  by  any  of 
 those  who  had  lived  before  him,  we  must  under- 
 stand him  at  least  to  affirm  that  in  the  church  of 
 Alexandria  it  had  from  the  earliest  period  been 
 received.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  acknowledged 
 it  as  part  of  sacred  Scripture,  and  as  written  by  St. 
 Paul.  By  Basil,  the  Gregories,  Theodore  of 
 Mopsuestia,  Chrysostom,  and  all  the  Greeks,  as 
 Jerome  attests,  it  was  received.  Eusebius,  though 
 he  ranks  it  in  one  place  among  the  di'Ti.\ey6/xei'a, 
 in  deference  to  the  doubts  entertained  respecting 
 it  in  the  Roman  Church,  nevertheless  asserts  its 
 apostolic  authority,  and  includes  it  among  the 
 books  generally  received  by  the  churches.  In 
 public  documents  of  the  Eastern  Church  also,  such 
 as  the  Epistle  of  the  Synod  at  Antioch,  the  Apos- 
 tolical Constitutions,  the  Catalogue  of  the  Council, 
 its  claims  are  recognised.  In  the  Syrian  churches 
 it  was  received  ;  it  is  found  in  the  Peshito  version  ; 
 it  is  quoted  by  Ephrem  as  St.  Paul's  ;  and  it  is 
 included  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  in  the 
 catalogue  of  Ebedjesu  (Lardner,  iv.  430,  440). 
 To  this  uniform  testimony  there  is  nothing  to 
 oppose,  unless  we  accept  the  somewhat  dubious 
 assertion  of  Jerome  that  it  was  rejected  by  the 
 heretical  teacher  Basilides  {Proem,  in  Ep.  ad  Tit., 
 but  comp,  Lardner,  ix.  305). 
 
 2.  Authorship. — From  the  above  testimonies  it 
 will  be  perceived  that  the  assertion  of  the  canonicity 
 of  this  book  is  mostly  identified  with  the  assertion  of 
 its  Pauline  authorship.  The  former  of  these  posi- 
 tions does  not,  it  is  true>  necessarily  depend  upon 
 the  latter,  for  a  book  may  be  canonical  yet  not  be 
 the  production  of  any  individual  whose  name  we 
 know ;  but  as  the  case  stands,  the  external  evi- 
 dence for  the  canonicity  of  the  book  is  so  nearly 
 commensurate  with  that  for  the  Pauline  authorship 
 of  the  book,  that  we  cannot  make  use  of  the  one 
 unless  we  admit  the  other.  This  gives  immense 
 importance  to  the  question  on  which  we  now 
 enter  ;  for  if  it  could  be  shewn  that  this  epistle  is 
 not  Paul's,  the  entire  historical  evidence  for  its 
 canonicity  must  be  laid  aside  as  inci edible. 
 
 Before  entering  on  the  consideration  of  the  evi- 
 dence bearing  directly  on  this  point,  we  shall  glance 
 at  the  different  hypotheses  which  have  been  ad- 
 vanced by  those  by  whom  the  Pauline  origin  of  the 
 epistle  have  been  derived.  Of  these  some  have 
 advocated  the  claims  of  Barnabas,  others  those  of 
 Luke,  others  those  of  Clement  of  Rome,  others 
 those  of  Silas,  others  those  of  Apollos,  others  those 
 of  some  unknown  Christian  of  Alexandria,  and 
 others  those  of  some  '  apostolic  man,'  whose  name 
 is  no  less  unknown. 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 258 
 
 HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 (l.)  S/'/as. — The  claims  of  this  companion  of  St. 
 Paul  to  the  authorship  of  one  epistle  find  no  sup- 
 port from  the  testimony  of  antiquity.  The  sugges- 
 tion of  them  is  entirely  modem,  having  been  first 
 advanced  by  Bohme  iu  the  introduction  to  his 
 commentary  on  this  epistle  (Lips.  1825),  and  by 
 Mynster  in  the  Shidkn  uiid  Kritiken,  bd.  ii.,  s.  344 ; 
 but  they  have  adduced  nothing  in  support  of  these 
 claims  which  might  not  with  equal  plausibility  have 
 been  urged  on  behalf  of  any  other  of  the  apostle's 
 companions. 
 
 (2. )  Clement  of  Rome. — Origen  tells  us  that  the 
 tradition  which  had  reached  him  was,  that  some 
 held  this  epistle  to  have  been  written  by  Clement, 
 bishop  of  Rome,  whilst  others  said  it  was  written 
 by  Luke,  the  evangelist  (ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  vi. 
 25).  Erasmus  espoused  the  claims  of  Clement, 
 and  Calvin  inclined  to  the  same  view.  Some 
 evidence  in  favour  of  this  hypothesis  has  been 
 thought  to  be  supplied  by  the  resemblance  of  some 
 passages  in  Clement's  first  epistle  to  the  Corin- 
 thians to  passages  in  one  epistle ;  but  these  have 
 much  more  the  appearance  of  quotations  from  the 
 former  or  reminiscences  of  it  on  the  part  of  the 
 author  of  the  latter  than  such  similarities  of  thought 
 and  expression  as  would  indicate  a  community  of 
 authorship  for  the  two.  A  close  comparison  of 
 the  one  with  the  other  leaves  the  impression  very 
 strongly  that  they  are  the  productions  of  different 
 minds  ;  neither  in  style  nor  in  the  general  cast  of 
 thought  is  there  any  pervading  affinity  between 
 them.  Clement,  also,  was  in  all  probability  a 
 convert  from  heathenism,  whereas  the  author  of 
 the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  undoubtedly  by 
 birth  and  education  a  Jew.  Perhaps  what  Origen 
 records  means  nothing  more  than  that  Clement  or 
 Luke  acted  as  the  party  who  reduced  the  epistle 
 to  writing,  leaving  the  question  of  the  authorship, 
 properly  so  called,  untouched.  His  whole  state- 
 ment is — *  not  heedlessly  [ovk  elKrj)  had  the  ancients 
 handed  it  down  as  Paul's ;  but  who  wrote  the 
 epistle  God  truly  knows.  But  the  story  which 
 has  come  down  to  us  from  some,  is,  that  Cle- 
 ment who  was  bishop  of  Rome  wrote  the  epistle  ; 
 from  others  that  it  was  Luke  who  wrote  the  Gos- 
 pel and  the  Acts.'  Jerome,  also,  in  referring  to 
 the  tradition  explains  it  thus — 'quem  [Clemen- 
 tern]  aiunt  ipsi  adjunctum  sententias  Pauli  pro- 
 prio  ordinasse  et  ornasse  sermone '  (£>£  Viris  illust. 
 
 c  5)- 
 
 (3.)  Luke. — The  claims  of  Luke  apparently  rise 
 a  degree  higher  from  the  circumstance  that,  besides 
 being  named  by  Origen  and  Jerome,  as  dividing 
 with  Clement  the  honours  which,  as  these  writers 
 testify,  were  in  certain  quarters  assigned  to  the  lat- 
 ter, there  is  a  character  of  similarity  in  respect  of 
 language  and  style  between  this  epistle  and  the 
 acknowledged  productions  of  the  evangelist.  This 
 has  led  several  eminent  scholars  to  adopt  the  hypo- 
 thesis that,  whilst  the  thoughts  may  be  Paul's,  the 
 composition  is  Luke's.  But  on  this  circumstance  no 
 stress,  we  think,  can  legitimately  be  laid  towards  such 
 a  conclusion.  For,  1st,  where  there  is  no  other  evi- 
 dence, or  at  least  none  of  any  weight,  in  favour  of 
 identity  of  authorship,  mere  general  similarity  of  style 
 cannot  be  allowed  to  possess  much  force.  2dly,  As- 
 suming the  epistle  to  be  the  production  of  Paul,  it 
 is  easy  to  account  for  the  resemblance  of  its  style 
 to  that  of  Luke,  from  the  fact  that  Luke  was  for  so 
 many  years  the  companion  and  disciple  of  Paul ; 
 for  it  is  well  known  that  when  persons  for  a  long 
 
 time  associate  closely  with  each  other,  and  espe- 
 cially when  one  of  the  parties  is  an  individual  of 
 powerful  intellect  whose  forms  of  thought  and 
 modes  of  speech  imperceptibly  impress  themselves 
 on  those  with  whom  he  associates,  they  fall  insensi- 
 bly into  a  similarity  of  tone  and  style  both  of  speak- 
 ing and  writing.  To  this,  indeed,  Chrysostom, 
 whose  authority  in  all  such  matters  must  be  allowed 
 to  stand  very  high,  expressly  ascribes  the  similarity 
 of  Luke's  style  to  that  of  Paul,  when,  contrasting 
 the  language  of  the  former  with  that  of  Mark,  he 
 says,  e/cacrros  hi  6fj.oiws  rbv  5i5d<TKaXov  i/xi/jLTiaaTO' 
 6  iJ.lv  [6  AoiikSs]  tov  UaCiXoj'  vvlp  roiis  Trora/iiovi 
 peovra-  6  M  [6  MdpKos]  rbv  Wirpov  ^pax^Koyias  iin- 
 pieXovixevov  {Hotn.  iv.  iit  Matt.,  quoted  by  Forster, 
 Apostolical  Authority  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
 p.  648).  3dly,  It  is  not  in  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
 brews alone  that  a  resemblance  to  the  style  of 
 Luke  may  be  detected  :  the  same  feature  pervades 
 all  Paul's  epistles,  especially  those  of  a  later  date, 
 as  has  been  frequently  observed  by  critics.  This 
 argument,  then,  if  used  against  the  Pauline  origin 
 of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  would  prove  too 
 much,  as  it  would  go  to  invalidate  the  claims  of 
 almost  all  the  acknowledged  writings  of  the  apos- 
 tle. In  fine,  whilst  there  are  such  resemblances  of 
 style,  etc.,  as  have  been  referred  to  between  this 
 epistle  and  the  writings  of  Luke,  there  are  differ- 
 ences of  a  nature  so  weighty  as  completely  to  over- 
 balance these  resemblances,  and  authorise  the 
 conclusion  that  the  author  of  the  latter  could  not 
 also  be  the  author  of  the  former.  Both  Stuart 
 [Comment,  vol.  i.  p.  333,  Lond.  1828)  and  Eich- 
 horn  [Einleii.  bd.  iii.  s.  465)  justly  lay  stress  on  the 
 greater  predominance  of  Jewish  feelings  in  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  than  in  any  of  Luke's 
 writings,  and  still  more  on  the  marked  familiarity 
 with  the  peculiarities  of  the  Jewish  schools  dis- 
 played by  the  writer  of  the  epistle,  but  of  which  no 
 traces  are  apparent  in  any  of  the  writings  of  the 
 evangelist.  Both  writings  display  the  combined 
 influence  of  the  Palestinian  and  the  Hellenistic  cha- 
 racter on  the  part  of  their  author  ;  but  in  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  the  former  so  decidedly 
 predominates  over  the  latter,  whilst  the  reverse  is 
 the  case  with  the  writings  of  Luke,  that  it  seems 
 to  the  last  degree  improbable  that  the  same  person 
 could  have  written  both.  Luke,  moreover,  was 
 a  convert  from  heathenism  ;  whereas  the  author  of 
 the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  evidently  a  Jew. 
 It  appears,  therefore,  that  for  the  theory  which 
 ascribes  the  composition  of  this  epistle  to  Luke, 
 there  is  no  evidence  of  any  kind  which  will  bear 
 examination,  but,  on  the  contraiy,  not  a  little 
 against  it. 
 
 (4.)  Barnabas. — The  hypothesis  which  claims 
 the  authorship  of  this  epistle  for  Barnabas  has  in  its 
 support  the  testimony  of  Tertullian  [De  Pudicitia, 
 c.  20),  with  whom,  as  we  learn  from  Jerome  (Epist. 
 129,  ad  Darda7iiim),  several  [plerique)  among  the 
 Latins  concurred.*     For  this  opinion  Tertullian, 
 
 *  Ullmann  {Stud,  und  Krit.  i.  391)  and  Wieseler 
 have  laboured  to  show  that  the  'plerique'  in  this 
 passage  must  be  understood  of  persons  belonging 
 to  the  Eastern  church,  the  '  Grasci  sermonis  scrip- 
 tores,'  of  whom  Jerome  speaks  in  the  same  sen- 
 tence. But  what  Jerome  says  is,  that  though  in 
 his  day  '  plerique  eam  vel  Bamabte  vel  dementis 
 arbitrantur,'  it  was  viewed  as  Paul's  '  non  solum 
 ab  ecclesiis  Orientis,  sed  ab  omnibus  retro  [/.  e.. 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE  259  HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 in  the  passage  referred  to,  assigns  no  reasons,  and 
 Jerome  appears  to  have  treated  it  as  a  mere  con- 
 jecture resting  upon  Tertullian's  authority  alone  ; 
 for,  in  his  catalogue  of  ecclesiastical  writers  (c.  5), 
 he  refers  to  this  opinion  as  one  'juxta  Tertullia- 
 num,'  whilst  he  says  that  the  opinion  that  Luke 
 was  the  author  was  one  'juxta  quosdam.'  Hug 
 is  of  opinion  {Introd.  p.  596,  Fosdick's  transl. ), 
 that  in  this  passage  we  have  not  Tertullian's  own 
 view  so  much  as  a  concession  on  his  part  to  those 
 whom  he  was  opposing,  and  who,  because  of  the 
 very  passage  he  is  about  to  quote  from  the  Epistle 
 to  the  Hebrews  (vi.  4-8),  were  inclined  to  reject 
 the  claims  of  that  epistle  to  be  esteemed  the  pro- 
 duction of  Paul.  This  conjecture  is  of  use,  as  it 
 tends  to  show  that  Tertullian  might  have  another 
 reason  for  ascribing  this  epistle  to  Barnabas  than 
 his  total  ignorance  that  it  had  ever  been  imputed 
 to  Paul,  as  has  been  confidently  inferred  by  several 
 writers  from  the  fact  that  it  was  obviously  to  the 
 interest  of  his  argument  to  uphold  the  Pauline  origin 
 of  this  epistle  had  he  been  aware  of  it.  In  recent 
 times  the  ablest  defender  of  this  hypothesis  is  Ull- 
 niann,  who  has  devoted  to  it  an  article  in  the  first 
 volume  of  his  journal,  the  Studien  tind  Kritiken  ; 
 but  the  evidence  he  adduces  in  favour  of  it  is  veiy 
 feeble.  After  enlarging  on  the  testimony  of  Ter- 
 tullian, he  proceeds  to  the  internal  evidence  in 
 favour  of  Barnabas  ;  but  of  the  six  reasons  he 
 assigns  for  ascribing  the  epistle  to  him,  none  pos- 
 sesses any  force.  H\\q first,  viz.,  the  traces  in  the 
 epistle  of  an  Alexandrian  education  on  the  part  of 
 the  author,  supposing  it  granted,  would  not  apply 
 particularly  to  Barnabas,  who  was  a  native  of 
 Cyprus,  and  who,  though  Ullmann  says  '  he  had 
 perhaps  been  in  Alexandria,'  for  aught  we  know 
 had  never  seen  that  seat  of  allegorical  learning. 
 The  second,  viz. ,  that  Barnabas  being  a  Levite  was 
 the  more  likely,  on  that  account,  to  understand  the 
 Jewish  ritual,  as  we  see  the  author  of  this  epistle 
 did,  is  of  no  weight,  for  there  is  nothing  stated  in 
 the  epistle  on  that  head  which  any  intelligent  Jew 
 might  not  have  known,  whether  a  Levite  or  not. 
 The  third,  viz.,  that  what  the  author  of  this  epistle 
 says  concerning  the  law,  divine  revelation,  faith, 
 etc. ,  is  very  Pauline,  and  such  as  we  might  expect 
 from  a  companion  of  Paul,  such  as  Barnabas  was  ; 
 the  fourth,  viz.,  that  the  tenor  of  the  epistle  is 
 worthy  such  a  man  as  Barnabas  ;  the  fifth,  viz., 
 that  the  writer  of  this  epistle  speaks  of  the  Saviour 
 very  frequently  by  the  appellation  6  'Itjo-oO?,  which 
 Dr.  Ullmann  thinks  indicates  that  the  writer  must 
 have  known  our  Lord  during  his  personal  ministry, 
 which  was  probably  the  case  with  Barnabas  ;  and 
 the  sixth,  viz.,  that  the  names  of  persons  men- 
 tioned in  this  epistle  are  names  which  Barnabas 
 might  have  referred  to  had  he  written  it — are 
 reasons  such  as  it  would  be  idle  to  refute,  and  such 
 as  fill  us  with  surprise  that  a  man  of  UUmann's 
 learning  and  vigour  should  have  gravely  adduced 
 them.  With  regard  to  the  fifth  also,  Olshausen 
 has  justly  observed  [Optisc.  Theologica,  p.  115) 
 that  if  it  were  certain  that  Barnabas  had  enjoyed 
 the  advantage  of  our  Lord's  personal  ministry,  it 
 would  clearly  prove  that  he  was  not  the  author  of 
 this  epistle,  for  the  latter  distinctly  classes  himself 
 
 antiquioribus]  ecclesiasticis  Grseci  sermonis  scrip- 
 toribus.'  If  all  the  Greek  writers  judged  it  to  be 
 Paul's,  how  could  many  of  them  ascribe  it  to 
 Barnabas  ? 
 
 with  those  by  whom  this  advantage  had  not  been 
 enjoyed  (ch.  ii.  3).  Stuart  and  some  others  have 
 laid  great  stress  on  the  contrast  afforded  by  this 
 epistle  to  the  extant  epistle  which  passes  under  the 
 name  of  Barnabas,  in  respect  of  style,  tone,  and 
 general  character,  as  supplying  indubitable  evi- 
 dence that  the  former  is  the  production  of  a  different 
 and  a  far  superior  mind.  Of  this  there  can  be  no 
 question,  and,  were  we  quite  certain  that  the  epistle 
 ascribed  to  Barnabas  was  really  his  production,  the 
 argument  would  be  conclusive.  But  though  some 
 very  distinguished  names  may  be  cited  in  support 
 of  its  authenticity,  the  greater  weight,  both  of 
 authority  and  evidence,  is  against  it  [Barnabas, 
 Epistle  of].  The  total  absence  of  any  reason  in 
 favour  of  imputing  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle  to 
 the  Hebrews  to  Barnabas  affords  sufficient  ground 
 for  rejecting  this  hypothesis  without  our  attempting 
 to  adduce  dubious  and  uncertain  reasons  against  it. 
 (5-)  Some  Alexa7idrian  Christian. — This  hypo- 
 thesis rests  on  certain  features  of  the  epistle  wliich 
 are  said  to  betray  Alexandrian  culture,  habits,  and 
 modes  of  thought  on  the  part  of  the  writer.  These 
 have  been  much  insisted  upon  by  Eichhorn,  Schuiz, 
 Bleek,  and  others ;  but  they  are  not  such,  we 
 think,  as  carry  with  them  the  weight  which  these 
 writers  have  allowed  to  them.  The  standard  of 
 comparison  by  which  the  supposed  Alexandrian  tone 
 of  this  epistle  is  evinced,  is  supplied  by  the  writings 
 of  Philo,  between  which  and  this  epistle  it  is 
 affirmed  that  there  is  so  close  a  resemblance  that  it 
 can  be  accounted  for  only  on  the  supposition  that 
 the  author  of  the  latter  was,  like  Philo,  an  Alex- 
 andrian Jew.  Now  before  this  reasoning  can  be 
 so  much  as  looked  at,  it  behoves  those  who  use  it 
 to  point  out  clearly  how  much  of  Philo's  peculiar 
 style  and  sentiment  was  owing  to  his  Jewish,  and 
 how  much  to  his  Alexandrian,  education  or  habits 
 of  thought ;  because,  unless  this  can  be  done,  it 
 will  be  impossible  to  show  that  any  alleged  pecu- 
 liarity necessarily  bespeaks  an  Alexandrian  origin, 
 and  could  not  possibly  have  appeared  in  the  writ- 
 ings of  a  pure  Jew  of  Palestine.  No  attempt,  how- 
 ever, of  this  sort  has  been  made  ;  on  the  contrary, 
 it  has  been  assumed  that  whatever  is  Philonian  is 
 therefore  Alexandrian,  and  hence  all  resemblances 
 between  the  writings  of  Philo  and  the  Epistle  to 
 the  Hebrews  have  been  urged  as  certain  proofs  that 
 the  latter  must  have  been  written  by  a  converted 
 Jew  of  Alexandria.  Such  an  assumption,  however, 
 we  would  by  no  means  concede  ;  and  we  feel  con- 
 firmed in  this  by  an  examination  of  the  evidence 
 adduced  in  support  of  the  alleged  Alexandrian 
 character  of  this  epistle.  As  Stuart  has,  we  think, 
 clearly  shown  (i.  321),  and  as  even  Tholuck,  though 
 obviously  inclining  the  other  way,  has  candidly 
 admitted  [Comment.  07t  the  Hebrews,  i.  p.  68,  sec. 
 7),  there  is  nothing  in  this  evidence  to  shew  that 
 this  epistle  might  not  have  been  written  by  a  Jew 
 who  had  never  left  the  bounds  of  Palestine.  It  is 
 worthy  of  notice  that  several  of  the  points  on  which 
 Eichhorn  chiefly  insists  as  favouring  his  view,  such 
 as  the  prevalence  of  typical  expositions  of  the 
 Mosaic  ritual  in  this  epistle,  and  the  greater  ele- 
 gance of  its  language  and  style  (Einleit.  iii.  443,  ff.), 
 are  given  up  by  Bleek,  and  that  of  the  two  chiefly 
 insisted  upon  by  the  latter,  viz.,  the  close  affinity 
 between  this  epistle  and  the  writings  of  Philo,  and 
 the  alleged  mistake  in  regard  to  the  furniture  of  the 
 tabernacle  which  Bleek  charges  upon  the  author  of 
 this  epistle  in  ch-  ix.  3,  4,  and  which  he  thmks  no 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 2G0 
 
 HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 Jew  of  Palestine  could  have  committed,  both  are 
 relinquished  by  Tholuck  as  untenable  (comp.  the 
 valuable  remarks  of  Hug,  Introd.  p.  584,  note, 
 Fosdick's  transl.)  With  regard  to  the  latter,  it 
 may  be  remarked  that,  even  supposing  it  proved 
 that  the  writer  of  this  epistle  had  erred  in  asserting 
 that  the  pot  containing  the  manna  and  Aaron's  rod 
 were  placed  in  the  ark  of  the  testimony,  and  that, 
 supposing  dvfjuaTTipLov  to  denote  the  altar  0/ incense, 
 and  not  the  censer,  he  had  fallen  into  the  mistake 
 of  placing  this  within  instead  of  without  the  vail, 
 nothing  could  be  thence  deduced  in  favour  of  the 
 Alexandrian  origin  of  the  author.  For,  with  regard 
 to  the  former  of  these,  it  was  a  matter  on  which  the 
 Jews  of  Palestine  had  no  better  means  of  informa- 
 tion than  those  of  any  other  place,  since,  in  the 
 Temple  as  then  standing,  none  of  the  furniture  of 
 the  Holy  of  Holies  had  been  preserved  ;  and  with 
 regard  to  the  latter,  as  it  could  not  be  the  result 
 of  ignorance  either  in  a  Jew  of  Palestine  or  in  a 
 Jew  of  Alexandria,  but  must  have  been  a  piece  of 
 mere  inadvertence  on  the  part  of  either,  it  seems 
 rather  too  much  to  conclude  that  it  was  such  as  the 
 latter  alone  was  capable  of  committing.  That, 
 however,  there  is  no  blunder  in  the  case,  has,  we 
 think,  been  very  satisfactorily  shewn  by  Deyling 
 (Obs.  Sac.  tom.  ii.  No.  47)  and  others  (comp. 
 Stuart,  Tholuck,  and  Delitzsch,  in  loc.) 
 
 (6.)  A  polios. — The  first  to  suggest  ApoUos  as  the 
 probable  author  of  this  epistle  was  Luther  ( Werke, 
 ed.  Walch,  xii.  204,  1996,  etc.)  He  has  been  fol- 
 lowed by  the  majority  of  recent  Gennan  scholars, 
 many  of  whom  have  supported  his  conjecture  with 
 much  ingenuity.  It  has  been  undoubtedly  shewn 
 by  them  that  Apollos  7nay  have  been  the  writer  ; 
 and  they  have,  we  think,  proved  that  of  all  Paul's 
 companions  this  is  the  one  who  was  most  fitted  by 
 education,  life-circumstances,  modes  of  thought, 
 and  religious  stand-point,  to  have  accomplished 
 such  a  task  had  it  fallen  to  his  lot.  Beyond  this, 
 however,  their  arguments  seem  to  us  signally  to  fail. 
 What  weight  they  have  is  derived  almost  entirely 
 fiom  the  assumed  Alexandrian  tone  of  the  epistle ; 
 so  that  in  setting  aside  this  we  of  necessity  invali- 
 date what  has  been  built  on  it.  But  it  may  be 
 permitted  us  to  remark  that,  even  supposing  the 
 former  established,  the  latter  would  by  no  means 
 follow,  any  more  than  because  a  work  produced  in 
 Germany  in  the  present  day  was  deeply  tinctured 
 with  Hegelianism,  it  would  follow  from  that  alone 
 that  it  must  be  the  production  of  some  certain  in- 
 dividual rather  than  of  any  other  disciple  of  Hegel's 
 school.  The  adoption  of  this  theory  by  Dr.  Tho- 
 luck, after  his  exposure  of  the  unsoundness  of 
 Bleek's  reasonings,  has  filled  us  with  surprise. 
 '  Still,'  says  he  (i.  69),  'could  it  be  rendered  pro- 
 bable that  any  distinguished  person  having  inter- 
 course with  Paul,  were  an  Alexandrian,  and  of 
 Alexandrian  culture,  we  might,  with  the  greatest 
 appearance  of  truth,  regard  him  as  the  author  of 
 the  epistle.  Now  such  an  one  is  found  in  the 
 person  of  Apollos.'  What  is  this  but  to  say,  '  The 
 arguments  for  the  Alexandrian  origin  of  this  epistle, 
 I  must  confess,  prove  nothing  ;  but  shew  me  an 
 end  to  be  gained  by  it  and  I  will  admit  them  to 
 be  most  conclusive  ! '  Such  a  statement  affords, 
 we  think,  veiy  clear  evidence  that  the  disposition 
 to  ascribe  this  epistle  to  Apollos  is  to  be  traced 
 not  to  any  constraining  force  of  evidence,  but  ex- 
 clusively to  what  Olshausen  in  his  strictures  on 
 Bleek  {Opusc.  p.  92)  justly  denounces  as  the  maia 
 
 source  of  that  able  writer's  errors  on  this  question 
 — '  Quod  non  ab  omni  partium  studio  ahenum 
 animum  servare  ipsi  contigit.'  It  may  be  added 
 that  if  this  epistle  was  the  product  of  Apollos  or 
 any  other  Alexandrian  convert,  it  is  very  strange 
 that  no  tradition  to  this  effect  should  have  been 
 preserved  in  the  church  at  Alexandria,  but,  on  the 
 contrary,  that  it  should  be  there  we  find  the  tradi- 
 tion that  Paul  was  the  author  most  firmly  and  from 
 the  earliest  period  established. 
 
 We  now  pass  on  to  the  question  of  the  Pauline 
 origin  of  this  epistle.  Referring  our  readers  for 
 particulars  to  the  able  and  copious  discussion  of 
 this  question  furnished  by  the  works  of  Stuart 
 {Co77imentary,  vol.  i. ),  Forster  {The  Apostol.  Autho- 
 rity of  the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews,  etc.),  and  Hug,  we 
 shall  attempt  at  present  a  condensed  outline  of  the 
 evidence,  both  for  and  against  the  Pauline  author- 
 ship of  this  epistle.  Following  the  example  of 
 Hug  and  Forster,  we  shall  commence  with  the 
 internal  evidence,  taking  up  first  that  in  favour  of 
 the  Pauline  origin  of  the  epistle. 
 
 I.  A  person  familiar  with  the  doctrines  on  which 
 Paul  is  fond  of  insisting  in  his  acknowledged  epistles, 
 will  readily  perceive  that  there  is  such  a  correspon- 
 dence in  this  respect  between  these  and  the  Epistle 
 to  the  Hebrews,  as  supplies  good  ground  for  pre- 
 suming that  the  latter  proceeded  also  from  his  pen. 
 That  Christianity  as  a  system  is  superior  to  Judaism 
 in  respect  of  clearness,  simplicity,  and  moral  effi- 
 ciency ;  that  the  former  is  the  substance  and  reality 
 of  what  the  latter  had  presented  only  the  typical 
 adumbration ;  and  that  the  latter  was  to  be  abo- 
 lished to  make  way  for  the  former,  are  points  which, 
 if  more  fully  handled  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
 are  familiar  to  all  readers  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
 (comp.  2  Cor.  iii.  6-18  ;  Gal.  iii.  22  ;  iv.  I -9,  21- 
 31  ;  Col.  ii.  16,  17,  etc.)  The  same  view  is  given 
 in  this  epistle  as  in  those  of  Paul,  of  the  divine  glory 
 of  the  Mediator,  not  simply  as  dedudpuwos,  but  spe- 
 cifically as  the  eiKuv  tou  Qeov,  the  reflection  or  mani- 
 festation of  Deity  to  man  (comp.  Col.  i.  15-20; 
 Phil.  ii.  6  ;  Heb.  i.  3,  etc.)  His  condescension  is 
 described  as  having  consisted  in  an  impoverishing, 
 and  lessening,  and  lowering  of  himself  for  man's 
 behalf  (2  Cor.  viii.  9  ;  Phil.  ii.  7,  8 ;  Heb.  ii.  9) ; 
 and  his  exaltation  is  set  forth  as  a  condition  of 
 royal  dignity,  which  shall  be  consummated  by  all 
 his  enemies  being  put  under  his  footstool  (i  Cor 
 XV.  25-27  ;  Heb.  ii.  8  ;  x.  13 ;  xii.  2).  He  is  re- 
 presented as  discharging  the  office  of  a  fiecrlTrji,  a 
 word  which  is  never  used  except  by  Paul  and  the 
 writer  of  this  epistle  (Gal.  iii.  19,  20  ;  Heb. 
 viii.  6) ;  his  death  is  represented  as  a  sacrifice  for 
 the  sins  of  man  ;  and  the  peculiar  idea  is  announced 
 in  connection  with  this,  that  he  was  prefigured  by 
 the  sacrifices  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  (Rom.  iii. 
 22-26  ;  I  Cor.  v.  7  ;  Eph.  i.  7  ;  v.  2 ;  Heb.  vii.-x.) 
 Peculiar  to  Paul  and  the  author  of  this  epistle  is  the 
 phrase  6  0e6s  rrji  dprjv-qs  (Rom.  xv.  33,  etc.  ;  Heb. 
 xiii.  20) ;  and  both  seem  to  have  conceived  of  the  xa/J- 
 la/J-ara  under  the  aspect  of  diaip^aeis  and  fj-epiff/iol 
 irvetjfjLaTos  (i  Cor.  xii.  4  ;  Heb.  ii.  4).  It  is  worthy 
 of  remark  also  that  the  momentous  question  of  a 
 man's  personal  acceptance  with  God  is  answered  in 
 this  epistle  in  the  same  peculiar  way  as  in  the  ac- 
 knowledged Epistles  of  Paul.  All  is  made  to  de- 
 pend upon  the  individuals  exercising  what  both 
 Paul  and  the  author  of  this  epistle  call  wicrrLS,  and 
 which  they  both  represent  as  a  realizing  apprehen* 
 sion  of  the  facts,  and  truths,  and  promises  of  rove- 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 261 
 
 HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 laticn.  *  By  both  also  the  power  of  this  ttLcttis  is 
 frequently  referred  to  and  illustrated  by  the  ex- 
 ample of  those  who  had  distinguished  themselves 
 in  the  annals  of  the  Jewish  race  (comp.  Rom.  iii. 
 4;  V.  2  ;  Heb.  iii.  6  ;  Gal.  iii.  5-14  ;  Heb.  x.  38; 
 xi.  40).  On  all  these  points  the  sentiments  of 
 this  epistle  are  so  obviously  Pauline,  that  not  only 
 did  Origen  remark  that  it  contained  rd  vorjuara 
 nai^Xou,  but  even  the  most  decided  opponents  of 
 its  Pauline  authorship  in  recent  times  have  laid 
 it  down  as  undeniable  that  it  must  have  been 
 written  by  some  companion  and  disciple  of  Paul. 
 
 2.  Some  of  the  figures  and  allusions  employed  in 
 this  epistle  are  strictly  Pauline.  Thus  the  word  of 
 God  is  compared  to  a  ntm-d  (Eph.  vi.  17  ;  Heb.  iv. 
 12)  ;  inexperienced  Christians  are  children  who 
 need  milk,  and  must  be  instructed  in  the  elements, 
 whilst  those  of  wa/^^r^r  attainments  2ccq  fidl-gyoiV7i 
 men  who  require  stroitg  meat  (i  Cor.  iii.  1,2;  xiv. 
 20  ;  Gal.  iv.  9  ;  Col.  iii.  14  ;  Heb.  v.  12,  13  ;  vi. 
 i) ;  redemption  through  Christ  is  an  introduction 
 and  an  entrance  with  confidence  unto  God  (Rom.  v. 
 2;  Eph.  ii.  18;  iii.  12  ;  Heb.  x.  19);  afflictions  are 
 a  contest  or  strife,  a/yCov  (Phil.  i.  30  ;  Col.  ii.  i ;  Heb. 
 X.  32)  ;  the  Christian  life  is  a  race  (l  Cor.  ix.  24  ; 
 Phil.  iii.  14;  Heb.  xii.  1);  the  Jewish  ritual  is  a 
 Xarpeia  (Rom.  ix.  4  ;  Heb.  ix.  1,6);  a  person  un- 
 der the  constraint  of  some  unworthy  feeling  or 
 principle  is  ^voxos  dovXelas  (Gal.  v.  i  ;  Heb.  ii.  15), 
 etc.  The  fact  that  these  and  other  such  like  figu- 
 rative phrases  occur  only  in  this  epistle  and  in  the 
 acknowledged  Epistles  of  Paul,  affords  strong  evi- 
 dence that  the  former  is  his  production,  for  in 
 nothing  does  a  writer  more  readily  betray  himself 
 than  by  the  use  of  peculiar  and  favourite  figures. 
 
 3.  Certain  marked  characteristics  of  Paul's  style 
 are  found  in  this  epistle.  This  department  of  the 
 internal  evidence  has  more  perhaps  than  any 
 other  been  canvassed  by  recent  critics,  and  in  some 
 cases  opposite  conclusions  have  been  drawn  from 
 the  same  phenomena.  Thus  the  occurrence  of  cirra^ 
 "KeydfJieva  in  this  epistle  has  been  adduced  by  the 
 German  scholars  against  the  Pauline  origin  of  it, 
 whilst  Stuart  and  Forster  have  both  rested  on  this 
 fact  as  strongly  in  favour  of  that  conclusion  ;  and 
 as  it  appears  to  us  with  justice,  for  if  it  be  made  out 
 from  Paul's  acknowledged  writings  that  the  use  of 
 unusual  words  is  a  characteristic  of  his  style  (and 
 this  has  been  placed  by  these  writers  beyond  all 
 question),  it  is  obvious  that  the  occurrence  of  the 
 same  characteristic  in  this  epistle,  so  far  from  being 
 an  argument  against,  is,  as  far  as  it  goes,  an  argu- 
 
 *  Bleek  and  Tholuck  have  both  endeavoured  to 
 shew  that  the  ttIcttis  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
 is  not  the  same  as  the  TriVxis  of  Paul's  acknow- 
 ledged writings,  but,  in  our  view,  with  singular 
 want  of  success.  Tholuck's  chief  argument,  and 
 which  he  urges  as  of  more  weight  than  any  Bleek  has 
 advanced  is,  that  the  writer  has  not  here  contrasted 
 vdfxos  and  ttlittis,  the  ^pya  vbixov,  and  the  ipya.  iria- 
 rewj,  as  Paul  would  have  done.  But  how  can  this 
 be  said  when  the  great  lesson  of  the  epistle  is,  that 
 always,  even  under  the  law  itself,  TrtcTTit  was  the 
 medium  of  acceptance  and  the  channel  of  divine 
 blessing  to  men  ?  When  Paul  says,  '  We  walk  by 
 faith  not  by  sight'  (2  Cor.  v.  7),  and  the  writer  to 
 the  Hebrews  says  that  faith,  by  which  the  just  live, 
 is  the  evidence  of  things  not  seen  (x.  28 ;  xi.  i), 
 what  essential  difference  in  their  notion  of  faith  and 
 its  working  can  be  discerned  ? 
 
 menty^r  our  ascribing  it  to  Paul.  On  arguments, 
 however,  based  on  such  minute  phenomena,  we  art 
 not  disposed  to  rest  much  weight  on  either  side. 
 Every  person  must  be  aware  that  an  author's  use  ol 
 words  is  greatly  modified  by  the  circumstances  un- 
 der which  he  writes,  or  the  design  he  has  in  writ- 
 ing ;  and  the  literature  of  every  country  presents  us 
 with  numerous  cases  of  authors,  whose  works, 
 written  at  different  periods,  and  with  different  de- 
 signs, present  far  greater  diversities  of  expression 
 than  any  which  have  been  pointed  out  between  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the  acknowledged 
 Epistles  of  Paul.  Hence  cautious  critics  have  de- 
 clined to  rest  much  in  questions  of  literary  paren- 
 tage upon  what  Bentley  calls  (Disse/i.  on  Phalaris, 
 p.  19,  Lond.  1699)  '  censures  that  are  made  from 
 stile  and  language  alone,'  and  which,  he  adds,  'are 
 commonly  nice  and  uncertain,  and  depend  upon 
 slender  notices.'  Apart,  however,  from  such  minute 
 niceties,  there  are  certain  marked  peculiarities  of 
 style  which  attach  to  particular  writers,  and  flow  so 
 directly  from  the  character  of  their  genius  or  edu- 
 cation, that  they  can  hardly  express  themselves  in 
 discourse  without  introducing  them.  Now  such 
 peculiarities  the  writings  of  Paul  present,  and  the 
 occurrence  of  them  has  always  been  felt  to  afford  no 
 small  evidence  of  the  authenticity  of  any  production 
 claiming  to  be  his  in  which  they  are  found.  Paley, 
 in  enumerating  these  [Horn Faidina:,  ch.  vi.,  No.  2, 
 3),  has  laid  stress  chiefly  on  the  following :  A  disposi- 
 tion to  the  frequent  use  of  a  word,  which  cleaves  as  it 
 were  to  the  memory  of  the  writer,  so  as  to  become  a 
 sort  of  cant  word  in  his  writings  ;  a  propensity  '  to 
 go  off  at  a  word,'  and  enter  upon  a  parenthetic  series 
 of  remarks  suggested  by  that  word  ;  and  a  fondness 
 for  the  paronomasia,  or  play  ujion  words.  In  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  these  peculiarities  of  Paul's 
 style  are  richly  exemplified  ;  an  evidence  in  favoui 
 of  its  Pauline  origin,  which  can  never  be  enfeebled 
 by  adducing  words,  phrases,  or  features  of  style 
 peculiar  to  this  epistle,  unless  it  can  be  first  shewn 
 that  it  was  impossible  for  Paul  to  have  used  such. 
 4.  There  is  a  striking  analogy  between  Paul's  use 
 of  the  O.  T.  and  that  made  by  the  writer  of  this 
 epistle.  Both  made  frequent  appeals  to  the  O. 
 T.  ;  both  are  in  the  habit  of  accumulating  passages 
 from  different  parts  of  the  O.  T. ,  and  making  them 
 bear  on  the  point  under  discussion  (comp.  Rom.  iii. 
 10-18;  ix.  7-33,  etc.  ;  Heb.  i.  5-14;  iii.;  x.  5-17); 
 both  are  fond  of  linking  quotations  together  by 
 means  of  the  expression  koL  irdXiv  (comp.  Rom.  xv. 
 9-12;  I  Cor.  iii.  19,  20;  Heb.  i.  5  ;  ii.  12,  13  ;  iv. 
 4  ;  X.  30) ;  both  make  use  of  the  same  passages, 
 and  that  occasionally  in  a  sense  not  naturally  sug- 
 gested by  the  context  whence  they  are  quoted  (l 
 Cor.  XV.  27 ;  Eph.  i.  22  ;  Heb.  ii.  8 ;  Rom.  L 
 17  ;  Gal.  iii.  11  ;  Heb.  x.  38);  and  both,  in  one 
 instance,  quote  the  same  passage  in  the  same  way, 
 but  in  a  form  in  which  it  does  not  agree  with 
 the  Sept.,  and  with  an  addition  of  the  words  X^yei 
 K^'piot,  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  ;  thereby  indicat- 
 ing that  the  passage  is  given  in  both  instances  as  it 
 was  present  to  the  memory  of  one  and  the  same 
 writer  (comp.  Rom.  xii.  19  ;  Heb.  x.  30).  On  the 
 other  hand,  great  stress  has  been  laid  by  the  op- 
 ponents of  the  Pauline  origin  of  this  epistle  on  the 
 fact,  that  whilst  Paul  in  his  acknowledged  writings 
 quotes  from  the  Hebrew  original  in  preference  to 
 the  Sept.  where  the  latter  differs  from  the  former, 
 the  author  of  this  epistle  quotes  exclusively  from  the 
 Sept.   even  when  it  departs  very  widely  from  the 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 262 
 
 HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 Hebrew.  To  this  it  may  be  replied  :  ist,  That 
 both  Paul  and  the  author  of  this  epistle  quote 
 generally  from  the  Sept.  ;  2dly,  That  where  the 
 Sept.  differs  from  the  Hebrew,  Paul  does  not  al- 
 ways follow  the  Hebrew  in  preference  to  the  Sept. 
 (comp.  Rom.  ii.  24  ;  x.  11-18  ;  xi.  27  ;  xv.  12  ;  i 
 Cor.  i.  19,  etc.);  and,  3dly,  That  the  writer  of  this 
 epistle  does  not  always  follow  the  Sept.  where  it 
 differs  from  the  Hebrew,  but  occasionally  deserts 
 the  former  for  the  latter  {ex.  g7\  x.  30 ;  xiii.  5) ; 
 (comp.  Davidson,  Tntrod.  iii.  231).  There  is  no 
 ground,  therefore,  for  this  objection  to  the  Pauline 
 origin  of  this  epistle.  Iiifiiie:  The  Epistle  to  the 
 Hebrews  contains  some  personal  allusions  on  the 
 part  of  the  writer  which  strongly  favour  the  sup- 
 position that  he  was  Paul.  These  are  the  mention 
 of  his  intention  to  pay  those  to  whom  he  was  writ- 
 ing a  visit  speedily,  in  company  with  Timothy, 
 whom  he  affectionately  styles  '  our  brother,'  and 
 whom  he  describes  as  having  been  set  at  liberty, 
 and  expected  soon  to  join  the  writer  (Heb.  xiii.  23) ; 
 the  allusion  to  his  being  in  a  state  of  imprisonment 
 at  the  time  of  writing,  as  well  as  of  his  having  par- 
 taken of  their  sympathy  while  formerly  in  a  state 
 of  bondage  among  them  (Heb.  xiii.  19  ;  x.  34)  ; 
 and  the  transmissicm  to  them  of  a  salutation  from 
 the  believers  in  Italy  (Heb.  xiii.  24)  ;  all  of  which 
 agree  well  with  the  supposition  that  Paul  wrote  this 
 epistle  while  a  prisoner  at  Rome. 
 
 Such  is  an  outline  of  the  internal  evidence  fur- 
 nished by  this  epistle  of  its  Pauline  origin.  Let  us 
 now  glance  at  the  main  objections  which  from  vari- 
 ous sources  have  been  urged  against  it. 
 
 1 .  It  is  unaccountable  that  Paul,  had  he  written  this 
 epistle,  should  have  withheld  his  name.  But  is  it  less 
 unaccountable  that  Clement,  or  Apollos,or  Luke,  had 
 any  of  them  been  the  author,  should  have  withheld 
 his  name  ?  Might  not  Paul  write  anonymously  as 
 well  as  any  other  man  ?  Why  he  should  have  done 
 so  in  this  case  we  admit  our  inability  to  say  satis- 
 factorily; the  only  apparent  reason,  as  far  as  we 
 have  been  able  to  see,  being  the  more  rhetorical 
 character  of  the  production,  which  might  induce  the 
 author  to  waive  the  usual  fonn  of  epistolary  ad- 
 dress. But  our  inability  to  assign  the  reason  why 
 this  work  should  have  been  issued  anonymously 
 cannot  surely  be  held  to  be  an  argument  against  its 
 authenticity,  else  it  would  be  impossible  to  esta- 
 blish the  authenticity  of  any  anonymous  production 
 unless  we  could  satisfactorily  shew  what  were  the 
 author's  reasons  for  withholding  his  name — a  thing 
 which  in  five  cases  out  of  six  it  is  impossible  to  do. 
 
 2.  '  This  epistle  is  more  calmly  and  logically 
 written  than  it  was  possible  for  the  energetic  Paul 
 to  have  written  ;  all  the  analogies  between  Judaism 
 and  Christianity  are  calmly  investigated  and  calmly 
 adduced  ;  the  materials  are  arranged  in  the  strictest 
 order,  and  carefuHy  wrought  out  according  to  this 
 disposition,  and  conclusion  follows  conclusion  with 
 the  greatest  regularity ;  the  language  also  is  rotund 
 and  choice,  and  the  representation  unusually  clear. 
 All  this  is  unlike  Paul'  (Eichhom,  Einleit.  iii.  459). 
 It  will  perhaps  surprise  our  readers  to  find  the  au- 
 thor of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  pronounced  so 
 utterly  incapable  of  calm,  connected,  and  logical 
 reasoning,  that  it  is  inconceivable  he  should  have 
 written  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  If  there  be 
 one  thing  for  which  Paul's  writings  are  more  re- 
 markable than  another,  it  is  their  dialectic  accuracy ; 
 and  as  for  calmness,  whilst  we  admit  that  as  a  whole 
 there  is  less  of  ardour  and  vehemence  in  this  epistle 
 
 than  in  the  majority  of  Paul's  acknowledged 
 epistles,  we  think  this  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  fact 
 that  a  large  portion  of  it  is  occupied  with  remarks  of 
 an  explanatory  and  illustrative  kind — remarks  which 
 are  usually  made  in  a  calmer  tone  than  where  the 
 design  of  the  writer  is  to  expose  error,  or  to  exhort  to 
 duty ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  we  would  assert  that 
 in  those  parts  of  the  epistle  where  his  subject  calls  the 
 writer  to  the  utterance  of  reproof,  warning,  or  ex- 
 hortation, the  language  is  equally  ardent  with  that 
 used  in  any  analogous  passages  in  the  writings  of 
 Paul.  This  brings  us  to  the  closing  part  of  Eich- 
 horn's  objection,  which  relates  to  the  use  in  this 
 epistle  of  a  more  rotund,  elegant,  and  perspicuous 
 style  than  we  find  usually  in  the  epistles  of  Paul. 
 Now,  it  must  be  admitted  here  that  this  composi- 
 tion does  partake  much  more  of  the  character  of  a 
 flovv^ing,  continuous  discourse,  than  is  found  in  the 
 apostle's  acknowledged  productions.  The  ques- 
 tion, however,  is  not,  Whether  Paul  might  not  for 
 some  sufficient  reason  prefer  attempting  such  a  dis- 
 course in  this  particular  case  ?  a  question  which  it 
 would  surely  be  absurd  to  discuss  ;  but.  Whether, 
 supposing  him  to  make  the  attempt,  it  is  conceiv- 
 able that  he  should  succeed  in  it  to  the  extent 
 realized  by  the  writer  of  this  epistle  ?  Eichhom 
 concludes  in  the  negative  ;  but  on  what  grounds  ? 
 Apparently  on  the  grounds  that  the  apostle's  ac- 
 knowledged writings  present  no  specimens  of  such 
 success  ;  so  that  his  argument  is  this  :  Supposing 
 Paul  to  have  attempted  to  write  rhetorically,  it  is 
 impossible  he  should  have  succeeded  so  well,  be- 
 cause we  find  that,  where  he  makes  no  such  attempt, 
 his  style  is  far  from  being  rhetorical !  Of  such 
 reasoning  we  are  content  to  say,  '  Valeat  quantum 
 valere  potest.'  We  may  also  hint  that,  in  our 
 opinion,  there  is  no  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
 Hebrews,  imposing  as  it  is,  which  miglit  not  have 
 flowed  from  the  same  pen  which  composed  the  Sth 
 chapter  of  Romans,  and  the  13th  of  1st  Corin- 
 thians. 3.  '  Whilst  we  occasionally  meet  Pauline 
 termini,  we  find  precisely  in  the  leading  ideas  of  the 
 epistle  a  terminology  different  from  that  of  Paul' 
 (Tholuck,  i.  39,  Eng.  transl.)  The  instances  spe- 
 cified by  Dr.  Tholuck  are  the  use  of  Upevs,  iroi/j.7]v, 
 and  d'7r6(TTo\oj,  as  designations  of  Christ  ;  of  6fj.o- 
 \oyia,  which  he  says  is  confined  to  this  epistle  ;  of 
 iyyll^eiv  rip  Getp  ;  and  of  TeXeiovv,  with  its  deriva- 
 tives in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  used,  Heb.  vii.  19. 
 Now,  with  regard  to  this  objection,  it  may  be 
 observed,  1st,  That  supposing  all  the  instances  ad- 
 duced by  Tholuck  to  be  unimpeachable,  and  sup- 
 posing no  reason  could  be  assigned  why  Paul 
 should  use  such  in  writing  to  Hebrews,  when  he 
 did  not  use  them  in  writing  to  others,  still  the 
 objection  cannot  have  much  weight  with  any  per- 
 son accustomed  to  weigh  evidence,  because  not 
 only  is  the  number  of  Pauline  termini  found  in  this 
 epistle  far  greater  than  the  number  of  termini 
 which,  according  to  Tholuck,  are  '  foreign  to  the 
 apostle  to  the  Gentiles  ;'  but  it  is  always  less  likely 
 that  the  peculiar  phrases  of  a  writer  should  be 
 borrowed  by  another,  than  that  a  writer  noted  for 
 the  use  uf  peculiar  words  and  phrases  should,  in  a 
 composition  of  a  character  somewhat  different  from 
 his  other  productions,  use  terms  not  found  else- 
 wliere  in  his  writings.  But,  2dly,  let  us  examine 
 the  instances  adduced  by  Tholuck,  and  see  whether 
 they  bear  out  his  reasoning.  '  Paul  nowhere  calls 
 Christ /;■/«/.'  True  ;  but  though  Paul,  in  writing 
 to  churches  composed  more  or  less  of  Gentile  con- 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 263 
 
 HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 veits,  whose  previous  ideas  of  priests  and  priestly 
 rites  were  anything  but  favourable  to  their  receiv- 
 ing under  sacerdotal  terms  riglit  notions  of  Christ 
 and  his  work,  never  calls  Christ  a  priest,  is  that 
 any  reason  for  our  concluding  that  in  writing  to 
 Jews,  who  had  amongst  them  a  priesthood  of 
 divine  organization,  and  writing  for  the  express 
 purpose  of  shewing  that  that  priesthood  was  typical 
 of  Christ,  it  is  inconceivable  that  the  apostle  should 
 have  applied  the  term  priest  to  Christ  ?  To  us  the 
 difficulty  would  rather  seem  to  be  to  conceive  how, 
 in  handling  such  a  topic,  he  could  avoid  calling 
 Christ  a  priest. — '  Paul  nowhere  calls  Christ  a 
 shepherd  and  an  apostle,  as  the  writer  of  this  epistle 
 does.  But  the  whole  weight  of  this  objection  to 
 the  Pauline  origin  of  this  epistle  must  rest  on  the 
 assumption  that  Paul  never  uses  figurative  appella- 
 tions of  Christ  in  his  writings  ;  for  if  he  do,  why 
 not  here  as  well  as  elsewhere  ?  Now,  it  could  only 
 be  the  grossest  unacquaintedness  with  the  apostle's 
 writings  which  could  lead  any  to  affirm  this.  The 
 very  opposite  tendency  is  characteristic  of  them. 
 Thus  we  find  Christ  termed  tAos  vb^xov  (Rom.  x. 
 4),  ^LO-Kovov  Trepi.ToiJ.TJs  (xv.  8),  TO  7rdiT%a  t]/j.uiv  (i 
 Cor.  V.  7),  T]  rriTpa  (x.  4),  dTrapxh  (xv.  23),  ivl 
 dv5pl  (2  Cor.  xi.  2),  aKpoyuiuLaiov  (Eph.  ii.  20),  etc. 
 With  these  instances  before  us,  why  should  it  be 
 deemed  so  utterly  incredible  that  Paul  could  have 
 called  Christ  dwdaToXos  and  Troiuriv,  that  the  occur- 
 rence of  such  terms  in  the  epistle  before  us  is  to  be 
 held  as  a  reason  for  adjudging  it  not  to  have  been 
 written  by  him  ?  With  regard  to  the  use  of  6fj.o\o- 
 yia  in  the  sense  of  religious  profession,  the  reader 
 may  compare  the  passages  in  which  it  occurs  in 
 this  epistle  with  Rom.  x.  9  ;  2  Cor.  ix.  13  ;  i  Tim. 
 vi.  12,  and  judge  for  himself  how  far  such  a  usage 
 is  foreign  to  the  apostle.  The  phrase  iyyt^eLv  ry 
 Gey  occurs  once  in  this  epistle  (vii.  19),  and  once 
 in  James  iv.  8  ;  Paul  also  once  uses  the  verb  ac- 
 tively (Phil.  ii.  30)  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
 author  of  this  epistle  once  uses  it  intransitively  (x. 
 25).  As  there  is  thus  a  perfect  analogy  in  the 
 usage  of  the  verb  between  the  two,  why  it  should 
 be  supposed  improbable  that  Paul  should  use  it  in 
 reference  to  God,  or  why  a  phrase  used  by  James 
 should  be  deemed  too  Alexandrian  to  be  used  by 
 Paul,  we  feel  ourselves  utterly  at  a  loss  to  conceive. 
 With  regard  to  the  use  of  reXecovu,  Dr.  Tholuck 
 himself  contends  {Appendix,  ii.  297)  that  it  every- 
 where in  this  epistle  retains  the  idea  of  completing; 
 but  he  cannot  understand  how  Paul  could  have 
 contemplated  the  work  of  redemption  under  this 
 term  in  this  epistle,  since  in  no  other  of  his  epistles 
 is  it  so  used.  This  difficulty  of  the  learned  pro- 
 fessor may,  we  think,  be  very  easily  removed,  by 
 remarking  that  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
 Paul's  design  elsewhere,  so  fully  at  least  as  here,  to 
 represent  the  superiority  of  Christianity  over  Juda- 
 ism, as  that  arises  from  the  former  being  sufficient, 
 whilst  the  latter  was  not  sufficient,  to  complete  men 
 in  a  religious  point  of  view,  i.e.,  to  supply  to  tliem 
 all  they  need,  and  advance  them  to  all  of  which 
 they  are  capable.  That  this  is  the  theme  of  the 
 writer,  the  passages  in  which  the  word  in  question 
 occurs  show  :  and  we  see  no  reason  why  such  an 
 idea  might  not  have  occurred  to  Paul  as  well  as  to 
 any  other  man. 
 
 Such  are  the  objections  on  which  the  more  re- 
 cent impugners  of  the  Pauline  authorship  of  this 
 epistle  seem  inclined  to  lay  most  stress.  A  mul- 
 titude of  others  have  been   urged  by  Bertholdt, 
 
 Schulz,  Seyffarth,  etc.,  which  have  been  carefully 
 noticed  and  replied  to  by  Stuart,  but  which  it  is  un- 
 necessary  to  adduce  here,  as  their  futiUty  seems 
 very  generally  admitted  even  by  those  who  take  the 
 anti-Pauline  side. 
 
 It  appears,  therefore,  that  from  the  epistle  itsell 
 nothing  can  be  gathered  materially  unfavourable  to 
 the  opinion  that  Paul  was  its  author,  whilst  there  is 
 much  in  it  strongly  tending  to  support  that  opinion. 
 It  yet  remains  that  we  should  look  at  the  external 
 evidence  bearing  on  this  question. 
 
 Passing  by,  as  somewhat  uncertain,  the  alleged 
 testimony  of  Peter,  who  is  supposed  (2  Pet.  iii.  15, 
 16)  to  refer  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  the 
 composition  of  Paul,  and  passing  by,  also,  the  tes- 
 timonies of  the  apostolic  fathers,  which,  though 
 very  decisive  as  to  the  antiquity  and  canonical 
 authority  of  this  epistle  (see  Forster's  Itiquiry,  sec. 
 13),  yet  say  nothing  to  guide  us  to  the  author,  we 
 come  to  consider  the  testimony  of  the  Eastern  and 
 Western  Churches  upon  this  subject.  As  respects 
 the  former  there  are  two  facts  of  much  importance. 
 The  one  is,  that  of  the  Greek  fathers  not  one  posi- 
 tively ascribes  this  epistle  to  any  but  Paul  ;  the 
 other  is,  that  it  does  not  appear  that  in  any  part  of 
 the  Eastern  Church  the  Pauline  origin  of  this  epistle 
 was  ever  doubted  or  suspected  (comp.  Olshausen, 
 Opusc.   ThfPlog.  p.  95). 
 
 In  the  Western  Church  this  epistle  did  not,  as 
 we  have  seen,  meet  with  the  same  early  and  uni- 
 versal reception.  But  of  what  value  is  the  state  of 
 opinion  in  the  early  churches  of  the  West  in  the 
 question  of  evidence  now  before  us  ?  To  judge  of 
 this,  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the  sole  amount  of 
 evidence  arising  from  the  testimony  of  the  Latin 
 churches  is  negative  ;  all  we  can  conclude  from  it, 
 at  the  most,  is  that  they  had  no  sufficient  evidence 
 in  favour  of  this  epistle  being  Paul's  ;  they  do  not 
 seem  to  have  had  a  shadow  of  historical  evidence 
 against  its  being  his.  The  claims  of  Barnabas, 
 Clement,  and  Luke,  rest  upon  mere  individual  con- 
 jecture, and  have  no  historical  support.  Suppos- 
 ing, then,  that  the  rejection  of  this  epistle  by  the 
 Latins  cannot  be  accounted  for  by  circumstances 
 peculiar  to  them,  still  this  fact  cannot  diminish  the 
 weight  of  evidence  accruing  from  the  unanimity  of 
 the  Greeks  and  Asiatics.  Had  the  Latins  been  as 
 unanimous  in  favour  of  Apollos  or  Clement  as  the 
 Eastern  churches  were  in  favour  of  Paul,  the  case 
 would  have  been  different.  The  value  of  Paul's  claims 
 would  in  that  case  have  been  equal  to  the  difference 
 between  the  value  of  the  Eastern  tradition  and  the 
 value  of  the  Western.  This  would  have  furnished 
 a  somewhat  puzzling  problem  ;  though  even  in  that 
 case  the  superiority  of  the  Eastern  witnesses  to  the 
 Western  would  have  materially  advocated  the 
 claims  of  the  apostle.  As  the  case  stands,  all  the 
 positive  external  evidence  extant  is  in  favour  of  the 
 Pauline  authorship  of  this  epistle  ;  and  the  only 
 thing  against  it  is  that  in  the  Latin  churches  there 
 appears  to  have  been  no  commonly  received  tradi- 
 tion on  the  subject.  Under  such  circumstances,  the 
 claims  of  the  apostle  are  entitled  to  be  regarded  as 
 fully  substantiated  by  the  external  evidence. 
 
 The  result  of  the  previous  inquiry  may  be  thus 
 stated.  I.  There  is  no  substantial  evidence,  ex- 
 ternal or  internal,  in  favour  of  any  claimant  to  the 
 authorship  of  this  epistle  except  Paul.  2.  There  ia 
 nothing  incompatible  with  the  supposition  that 
 Paul  was  the  author  of  it.  3.  The  preponder- 
 ance of  the  internal,   and  all  the  direct  external 
 
HEBREWS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 
 
 264 
 
 HEBRON 
 
 evidence,    go    to    show   that    it   was   written    by 
 Paul. 
 
 3.  Time  and  Place  of  Writing. — Assuming  the 
 Pauline  authorship  of  the  epistle,  it  is  not  difficult  to 
 determine  when  and  where  it  was  written.  The  allu- 
 sions in  ch.  xiii.  19,  21,  point  to  the  closing  period 
 of  the  apostle's  two  years'  imprisonment  at  Rome  as 
 the  season  during  '  the  serene  hours'  of  which,  as 
 Hug  describes  them  (Introd.,  p.  603),  he  composed 
 this  noblest  production  of  his  pen.  In  this  opinion 
 almost  all  who  receive  the  epistle  as  Paul's  concur  ; 
 and  even  by  those  who  do  not  so  receive  it,  nearly 
 the  same  time  is  fixed  upon,  in  consequence  of  the 
 evidence  furnished  by  the  epistle  itself  of  its  having 
 been  written  a  good  while  after  those  to  whom  it  is 
 addressed  had  become  Christians,  but  yet  before 
 the  destruction  of  the  Temple. 
 
 4.  To  whom  Addressed. — That  the  parties  to 
 whom  this  epistle  was  addressed  were  converted 
 Jews,  the  epistle  itself  plainly  shows.  Ancient 
 tradition  points  out  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  or  the 
 Christians  in  Palestine  generally,  as  the  recipients. 
 .Stuart  contends  for  the  church  at  Caesarea,  not 
 without  some  show  of  reason  ;  but  the  preponder- 
 ance of  evidence  is  in  favour  of  the  ancient  tradition. 
 Two  things  make  this  clear,  says  Lange,  the  one  is, 
 that  only  the  Christians  in  Jerusalem,  or  those  in 
 Palestine  generally,  formed  a  great  Jewish-Christian 
 church  in  the  proper  sense ;  the  other  is,  that  for 
 the  loosening  of  these  from  their  religious  sense  of 
 the  Temple-worship  there  was  an  immediate  and 
 pressing  necessity  (Apostol.  Zeitalt.  i.  176).  We 
 know  of  no  purely  Jewish-Christian  community, 
 such  as  that  addressed  in  this  epistle,  out  of  Pales- 
 tine ;  whilst  the  whole  tone  of  the  epistle  indicates 
 that  those  for  whom  it  was  intended  were  in  the 
 vicinity  of  the  Temple.  The  inscription  of  the 
 epistle,  TTphs  'Eppalovs,  which  is  of  great  antiquity, 
 favours  the  same  conclusion  (Roberts,  Discussions 
 on  the  Gospels,  p.  215,  ff.) 
 
 An  early  opinion  that  the  epistle  was  first  written 
 in  Hebrew  or  Aramaic,  and  then  translated  into 
 Greek,  has  found  in  Michaelis  a  strenuous  defender 
 (Introd.  iv.,  p.  221).  The  arguments  he  adduces, 
 however,  are  more  specious  than  sound ;  and  it 
 has  been  abundantly  shown  by  Lardner,  Hug, 
 Eichhorn,  and  others,  that  this  opinion  is  unten- 
 able. Why  Paul  should  have  written  in  Greek  to 
 persons  residing  in  Judaea  is  best  answered  by  the 
 reasons  which  Hug  (Ititrod.,  p.  326,  seq.)  and  Dio- 
 dati  [De  Christo  Grace  loquente  exercitatio,  etc., 
 edited  by  O.  T.  Dobbin,  LL.B.,  Lond.  1843)  have 
 adduced,  to  shew  that  Greek  was  at  that  time  well 
 known  to  the  mass  of  the  Tews  (comp.  Tholuck. 
 i.78). 
 
 5.  Some  have  doubted  whether  this  composition 
 be  justly  termed  an  epistle,  and  have  proposed  to 
 regard  it  rather  as  a  treatise.  The  salutations, 
 however,  at  the  close,  seem  rather  to  favour  the 
 common  opinion ;  though  it  is  of  little  moment 
 which  view  we  espouse. 
 
 6.  The  design  of  this  epistle  is  to  dissuade  those 
 to  whom  it  is  written  from  relapsing  into  Judaism, 
 and  to  exhort  them  to  hold  fast  the  truths  of  Chris- 
 tianity which  they  had  received.  For  this  purpose 
 the  apostle  shows  the  superiority  of  the  latter  dis- 
 pensation over  the  former,  in  that  it  was  introduced 
 by  one  far  greater  than  angels,  or  than  Moses,  from 
 whom  the  Jews  received  their  economy  (i.-iii.),  and 
 in  that  it  affords  a  more  secure  and  complete  salva- 
 tion to  the  sinner  than  the  fonner  (iv.-x.)     In  de- 
 
 monstrating the  latter  position  the  apostle  shows 
 that  in  point  of  dignity,  perpetuity,  sufficiency,  and 
 suitableness,  the  Jewish  priesthood  and  sacrifices 
 were  far  inferior  to  those  of  Christ,  who  was  the 
 substance  and  reality,  whilst  these  were  but  the  type 
 and  shadow.  He  shows,  also,  that  by  the  appear- 
 ance of  the  anti-type  the  type  is  necessarily  abolished; 
 and  adduces  the  important  truth,  that  now,  through 
 Christ,  the  privilege  of  personal  access  to  God  is 
 free  to  all.  On  all  this  he  founds  an  exhortation  to 
 a  life  of  faith  and  obedience,  and  shows  that  it  has 
 ever  been  onlyby  a  spiritual  recognition  and  worship 
 of  God  that  good  men  have  participated  in  his 
 favour  (xi.)  The  epistle  concludes,  as  is  usual 
 with  Paul,  with  a  series  of  practical  exhortations 
 and  pious  vnshes  (xii.-xiii.) 
 
 7.  Literature. — For  the  critico-historical  ques 
 tions  respecting  this  epistle,  see,  besides  the  intro- 
 ductions of  Michaelis,  Eichhom,  De  Wette,  Home, 
 Davidson,  Bleek,  Reuss,  Alford,  etc.,  the  following 
 special  treatises  : — Seyffarth,  De  Ep.  ad  Heb.  indole 
 maxime peciiliari.  Lips.  1821  ;  Hofstede  de  Groot, 
 Ep.  ad  Heb.  aim  Patdinis  Epp.  comparattir,  Traj. 
 1826;  Thiersch,  De  Ep.  ad  Heb.,  Marb.  1848  ; 
 Moll,  De  Christologia  Ep.  ad  Heb.,  Hal.  1854  ; 
 Forster,  Apostolical  Aidhority  of  the  Ep.  to  the 
 Hebreivs,  Lond.  1838;  Lechler,  Ap.  Zeitalt.,  p. 
 159;  Lange,  Ap.  Zeitalt.,  i.  p.  175,  ff;  Wieseler, 
 Krit.  Untersuchung  iiber  d.  H.  B.,  Kiel,  1 861. 
 
 Co77imentaries. — Owen,  4  vols.  fol. ,  Lond.  1668- 
 84,  best  edit,  by  Goold,  7  vols.  8vo,  Edin.  1854; 
 Braun,  4to,  Amst.  1705;  Stark,  4to,  Lips.  1740; 
 Rambach,  1742  ;  Pierce  and  Hallet,  4to,  Lond. 
 1733,  translated  into  Latin  by  Michaelis,  Halle, 
 1747;  Carpzov,  Helmst.  1750;  Baumgarten,  4to, 
 Halle,  1763  ;  Storr,  Tiib.  1789  and  1809  ;  Ernesti, 
 Lips.  1795;  Schuiz,  Bresl.  1818;  Maclean,  2 
 vols.  8vo,  Lond.  1819 ;  Bohme,  Lips.  1825  ; 
 Stuart,  2  vols.  8vo,  Lond.  1828;  Bleek,  2  vols. 
 Berl.  1828-40;  Kuinoel,  Lips.  1831  ;  Paulus, 
 Heidelb.  1833  ;  Tholuck,  Hamb.  1836,  translated 
 by  Hamilton  and  Ryland,  2  vols.  Edin.  1842  ; 
 Stein,  Leipz.  1838  ;  Stier,  2  vols.  1842  ;  De 
 Wette,  Leipz.  1844  ;  Ebrard,  Konigs.  1850,  trans- 
 lated by  Fulton,  Edin.  1853  ;  Liinemann,  Gott. 
 1855;  Delitzsch,  Leipz.  1857;  Moll  (in  Lange's 
 Bibelwerk),  1861.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEBREWS,  The  [oV&^pawi).    [Hellenist.] 
 
 HEBRON  (fnan;    Sept,   Xe^pdiv),   the  third 
 
 son  of  Kohath,  the  son  of  Levi,  and  younger 
 brother  of  Amram,  the  father  of  Moses  and  Aaron 
 (Ex.  vi.  18;  Num.  iii.  19;  i  Chron.  vL  2,  18; 
 xxiii.  12).  From  him  descended  the  family  or 
 clan  of  the  Hebronites  (Num.  iii.  27;  xxvi.  58  ;  I 
 Chron  xxvi.  23,  30,  31),  or  B'ney-Hebron  (l 
 Chron.  xv.  9 ;  xxiii.  19).  In  the  reign  of  Daviil 
 we  find  them  under  the  chieftainship  of  Jerijah 
 settled  at  Jazer  of  Gilead,  to  the  number  of  2700 
 '  mighty  men  of  valour,'  whom  the  king  placed  as 
 overseers  over  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  and 
 the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh,  '  for  any  matter  per- 
 taining to  God  and  affairs  of  the  king'  (i  Chron. 
 xxvi.  31,  32  ;  comp.  xxiii.  19  ;  xxiv.  23).  An- 
 other section  of  them,  numbering  1700,  under  the 
 leadership  of  Hashabiah,  discharged  the  same 
 office  at  the  same  time  on  the  western  side  of  the 
 
 Jordan  (n3~IJ?D  j^ia^  "l?!''!?'  ^^^^-  ^^°^  beyond 
 Jordan  westward,  i.  e.,  coming  westward ;  comp. 
 
i''jHHm»lir«((ir'iiii'((8LL      .    «lf 
 
HEBRON 
 
 2G5 
 
 HEBRON 
 
 Tosh.  xxii.  7).  The  name  Hebron  appears  also 
 among  the  posterity  of  Caleb  (l  Chron.  ii.  43). — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEBRON  (p"l3n ;  Sept.  Xe/Spcii'),  a  town  in  the 
 
 south  of  Palestine  and  in  the  tribe  of  Judah,  18 
 miles  south  from  Jerusalem,  in  31°  32'  30"  N.  lat., 
 35°  8'  20"  E.  long.,  at  the  height  of  2664  Paris 
 feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea  (Schubert).  It  is 
 one  of  the  most  ancient  cities  existing,  having,  as 
 the  sacred  writers  inform  us,  been  built  '  seven 
 years  before  Zoan  in  Egypt,'  and  being  mentioned 
 even  prior  to  Damascus  (Num.  xiii.  22  ;  Gen.  xiii. 
 18;  comp.  XV.  2).  Its  most  ancient  name  was 
 Kirjath-arba,  that  is,  '  the  city  of  Arba,'  from 
 Arba,  the  father  of  Anak  and  of  the  Anakim  who 
 dwelt  in  and  around  Hebron  (Gen.  xxiii.  2  ;  Josh, 
 xiv.  15  ;  XV.  13  ;  xxi.  Ii  ;  Judg.  i.  10).  It  appears 
 to  have  been  also  called  Mamre,  probably  from 
 the  name  of  Abraham's  Amoritish  ally  (Gen. 
 xxiii.  19  ;  XXXV.  27  ;  comp.  xiv.  13,  28).  The 
 ancient  city  lay  in  a  valley  ;  and  the  two  remaining 
 pools,  one  of  which  at  least  existed  in  the  time  of 
 David,  serve,  with  other  circumstances,  to  identify 
 the  modern  with  the  ancient  site  (Gen.  xxxvii.  14  ; 
 2  Sam.  iv.  12).  Much  of  the  lifetime  of  Abra- 
 ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob  was  spent  in  this  neigh- 
 bourhood, where  they  were  all  entombed  ;  and  it 
 was  from  hence  that  the  patriarchal  family  departed 
 for  Egypt  by  way  of  Beersheba  (Gen.  xxxvii.  14  ; 
 xlvi.  i).  After  the  return  of  the  Israelites,  the 
 city  was  taken  by  Joshua  and  given  over  to  Caleb, 
 who  expelled  the  Anakim  from  its  territories 
 (Josh.  X.  36,  37;  xiv.  6-15  ;  xv.  13-14  ;  Judg.  i. 
 20).  It  was  afterwards  made  one  of  the  cities  of 
 refuge,  and  assigned  to  the  priests  and  Levites 
 (Josh.  XX.  7;  xxi.  II,  13).  David,  on  becoming 
 king  of  Judah,  made  Hebron  his  royal  residence. 
 Here  he  reigned  seven  years  and  a  half ;  here 
 most  of  his  sons  were  bom  ;  and  here  he  was 
 anointed  king  over  all  Israel  (2  Sam.  ii.  I-4,  li  ;  I 
 Kings  ii.  n  ;  2  Sam.  v.  i,  3-5).  On  this  exten- 
 sion of  his  kingdom  Hebron  ceased  to  be  suffi- 
 ciently central,  and  Jerusalem  then  became  the 
 metropolis.  It  is  possible  that  this  step  excited  a 
 degree  of  discontent  in  Hebron  which  afterwards 
 encouraged  Absalom  to  raise  in  that  city  the  stan- 
 dard of  rebellion  against  his  father  (2  Sam.  xv.  9, 
 10).  Hebron  was  one  of  the  places  fortified  by 
 Rehoboam  (2  Chron.  xi.  10)  ;  and  after  the  exile 
 the  Jews  who  returned  to  Palestine  occupied 
 Hebron  and   the  surrounding  villages  (Neh.   xi. 
 
 25). 
 
 Hebron  is  not  named  by  the  prophets,  nor  in  the 
 N.  T.  ;  but  we  learn  from  the  first  book  of  Mac- 
 cabees, and  from  Josephus,  that  it  came  into  the 
 power  of  the  Edomites,  who  had  taken  possession 
 of  the  south  of  Judah,  and  was  recovered  from 
 them  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (i  Maccab.  v.  65  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  8.  6).  During  the  great  war, 
 Hebron  was  seized  by  the  rebel  Simon  Giorides, 
 but  was  recaptured  and  burnt  by  Cerealis,  an 
 officer  of  Vespasian  (Joseph.  De  Bell.  yud.  iv.  9. 
 7,  9).  Josephus  describes  the  tombs  of  the  patri- 
 archs as  existing  in  his  day ;  and  both  Eusebius 
 and  Jerome,  and  all  subsequent  writers  who  men- 
 tion Hebron  down  to  the  time  of  the  Crusades, 
 speak  of  the  place  chiefly  as  containing  these 
 sepulchres.  In  the  course  of  time  the  remarkable 
 structure  enclosing  the  tombs  of  Abraham  and  the 
 other  patriarchs  was  called  the  *  Castle  of  Abra- 
 
 ham ;'  and  by  an  easy  transition  this  name  came 
 to  be  applied  to  the  city  itself;  till  in  the  time  of 
 the  Crusades  the  names  of  Hebron  and  Castle  of 
 Abraham  were  used  interchangeably.  Hence,  as 
 Abraham  is  also  distinguished  among  the  Mos- 
 lems by  the  appellation  of  el  Khiilil,  '  the  Friend' 
 (of  God),  this  latter  epithet  became  among  them 
 the  name  of  the  city  ;  and  they  now  know  He- 
 bron only  as  el  Khulil  (Robinson's  Researches,  ii, 
 
 456). 
 
 The  modern  town  of  Hebron  lies  low  down  on 
 the  sloping  sides  of  a  narrow  valley  (of  Mamre), 
 chiefly  on  the  eastern  side,  but  in  the  southern  part 
 stretches  across  also  to  the  western  side.  The 
 houses  are  all  of  stone,  high,  and  well  built,  with 
 windows  and  flat  roofs,  and  on  these  roofs  are 
 small  domes,  sometimes  two  or  three  to  each 
 house.  This  mode  of  building  seemed  to  Dr. 
 Robinson  peculiar  to  Judrea,  as  he  had  not  ob. 
 served  it  further  north  than  Nabulus.  It  is,  how- 
 ever, common  in  the  countries  farther  east,  where 
 wood  is  scarce.  The  streets  are  narrow,  seldom 
 more  than  two  or  three  yards  in  width  ;  the  pave- 
 ment, where  one  exists,  is  rough  and  difficult. 
 The  bazaars  are  to  a  considerable  extent  covered, 
 either  by  some  kind  of  awning,  or  by  arches 
 springing  from  the  tops  of  the  houses,  and  span- 
 ning the  street.  The  goods  in  them  are  thus 
 secured  from  the  effects  of  the  sun  and  rain,  but  the 
 streets  are  rendered  gloomy  as  well  as  damp.  The 
 shops  are  well  furnished,  better  indeed  than  those  of 
 towns  of  the  same  class  in  Egypt,  and  the  commo- 
 dities are  of  a  very  similar  description.  The  only 
 display  of  local  manufactures  is  the  produce  of  the 
 glass-works,  for  which  the  place  has  long  been 
 celebrated  in  these  parts.  The  articles  manufac- 
 tured consist  almost  exclusively  of  glass  lamps, 
 many  of  which  are  exported  to  Egypt,  and  rings 
 of  coloured  glass  worn  by  females  on  the  arms. 
 Gates  are  placed  not  only  at  the  entrance  of  the 
 city,  but  in  different  parts  of  the  interior,  and  are 
 closed  at  night  for  the  better  preservation  of  order, 
 as  well  as  to  prevent  communication  between  the 
 different  quarters.  This  is  a  rude  contrivance 
 much  resorted  to  in  Eastern  towns  from  the  want 
 of  an  efficient  ambulatory  night-watch. 
 
 There  are  nine  mosques  in  Hebron,  none  of 
 which  possess  any  architectural  or  other  interest, 
 with  the  exception  of  the  massive  structure  which 
 is  built  over  the  tombs  of  the  patriarchs.  This  is 
 esteemed  by  the  Moslems  one  of  their  holiest 
 places,  and  Christians  are  rigorously  excluded  from 
 it.  Up  to  a  recent  date,  the  only  Europeans  who 
 had  found  their  way  to  the  interior  were  Ali  Bey 
 and  Giovanni  Finati,  the  Italian  servant  of  Mr. 
 Bankes.  An  account  of  it  is  furnished  by  the  Rev. 
 V.  Monro  {Stwuner  Ramble,  i.  245),  and  also  by 
 Ali  Bey  ( Travels,  ii.  232) ;  but  all  these  partial  ac- 
 counts are  now  superseded  by  the  minute  survey  of 
 the  place  made  by  Dr.  Stanley  in  1862,  in  the 
 suite  of  H.  R.  H.  the  Prince  of  Wales,  and  re- 
 corded by  him  in  the  Appendix  to  his  Lectures  on 
 the  Jewish  Church,  i.  448. 
 
 The  court  in  which  the  mosque  stands  is  sur- 
 rounded by  an  extensive  and  lofty  wall,  formed  of 
 large  stones,  and  strengthened  by  square  buttresses. 
 This  wall  is  the  greatest  antiquity  in  Hebron,  and 
 even  Dr.  Robinson  supposes  that  it  may  be  sub- 
 stantially the  same  which  is  mentioned  by  Josephus 
 (Aiiftq.  I.  14  ;  De  Bell.  yud.  iv.  9.  7),  and  by  Euse- 
 bius and  Jerome  {OnotHast.  s.  v.  Aj-boch)  as  the 
 
HEDGE 
 
 266 
 
 HEDUOSMON 
 
 sepulchre  of  Abraham.  The  enclosed  structure  is 
 usually  ascribed  to  the  empress  Helena ;  but  Dr. 
 Robinson  thinks  it  more  likely  to  have  been  erected 
 by  the  Crusaders,  and  that  till  their  time  no  build- 
 ing existed  within  the  great  wall.  If,  however,  we 
 rightly  understand  the  Rabbi  Benjamin,  he  says 
 there  was  a  synagogue  here  under  the  Moslems 
 (before  the  Crusades)  ;  but  he  certainly  ascribes  to 
 the  Gentiles  (Christians)  the  six  sepulchres  which 
 appear  above  ground.  If  this  were  so,  they  have 
 since  been  renewed  by  the  Moslems,  as  those  which 
 now  exist  are,  as  described,  quite  similar  to  the 
 Moslem  shrines  of  Jewish  saints  which  the  present 
 writer  has  seen  in  countries  where  Christians  never 
 had  power.  A  common  Moslem  tomb  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Hebron  passes  as  the  tomb  of 
 Abner.  He  was  certainly  interred  in  this  city  (2 
 Sam.  iii.  32)  ;  and  the  head  of  Ishbosheth,  after  his 
 assassination,  was  deposited  in  the  same  sepulchre 
 (2  Sam.  iv.  12)  ;  but  there  is  slight  evidence  in 
 favour  of  the  tradition  which  professes  to  point  out 
 this  locality  to  the  modern  traveller. 
 
 Besides  this  venerable  wall,  there  is  nothing  at 
 Hebron  bearing  the  stamp  of  antiquity,  save  two 
 reservoirs  for  rain  water  outside  the  town.  One 
 of  these  is  just  without  the  southern  gate  in  the 
 bottom  of  the  valley.  It  is  a  large  basin,  133  feet 
 square,  and  21  feet  8  inches  deep.  It  is  built  with 
 hewn  limestone,  of  very  solid  workmanship,  and 
 obviously  of  ancient  date.  The  depth  of  water  of 
 course  varies  at  different  times  of  the  year  :  in  May, 
 it  is  14  feet.  The  descent  is  by  flights  of  steps  at 
 the  four  corners,  by  which  the  water  is  brought  up 
 in  vessels  and  skins,  and  poured  out  into  troughs 
 for  the  flocks,  or  carried  away  for  domestic  uses. 
 Just  at  the  north  end  of  the  main  part  of  the  town 
 is  another  and  smaller  pool,  also  occupying  the  bed 
 of  the  valley,  and  measuring  85  feet  by  55,  with  a 
 depth  of  184  feet,  containing  (in  May)  7  feet  of 
 water.  These  cisterns,  which  are  connected  with 
 no  perennial  springs,  and  which  are  filled  only  by 
 the  rains,  seem  (at  least  in  summer)  to  be  the  main 
 dependence  of  the  inhabitants  for  water,  although 
 that  of  the  larger  pool  is  neither  clear  nor  clean. 
 As  these  pools  are  doubtless  of  high  antiquity,  one 
 of  them  is  in  all  likelihood  the  'pool  of  Hebron' 
 over  which  David  hanged  up  the  assassins  of  Ish- 
 bosheth (2  Sam.  iv.  12). 
 
 The  environs  of  Hebron  are  very  fertile.  Vine- 
 yards and  plantations  of  fruit-trees,  chiefly  olive- 
 trees,  cover  the  valleys  and  arable  grounds  ;  while 
 the  tops  and  sides  of  the  hills,  although  stony,  are 
 covered  with  rich  pastures,  which  support  a  great 
 number  of  cattle,  sheep,  and  goats,  constituting  an 
 important  branch  of  the  industry  and  wealth  of 
 Hebron.  The  hill  country  of  Judah,  of  which  it 
 is  the  capital,  is  indeed  highly  productive,  and 
 under  a  paternal  government  would  be  capable  of 
 sustaining  a  large  population.  That  it  did  so  once, 
 is  manifest  from  the  great  number  and  extent  of 
 ruined  terraces  and  dilapidated  towns.  It  is  at 
 present  abandoned,  and  cultivation  ceases  at  the 
 distance  of  two  miles  north  of  the  town.  The  hills 
 then  become  covered  with  prickly  and  other  stunted 
 trees,  which  furnish  Bethlehem  and  other  villages 
 with  wood.  See  the  works  of  travellers  who  have 
 visited  Hebron,  and  in  particular,  Dr.  Robinson, 
 Dr.  Olin,  Rev.  V.  Monro,  Schubert,  De  Saulcy, 
 Van  de  Velde,  Wilson,  and  Thomson. — J.  K. 
 
 HEDGE.     This  term  is  employed  in  the  A.V. 
 
 to    express    four    Hebrew   words    "llj     (and    its 
 
 cognates  inj  and  iTinj)  and  D^Wp  (or  HDIDID) ; 
 
 the  former  might  with  more  propriety  be  rendered 
 fence  ox  tvall,  though,  like  the  Greek  (ppayfj-bs  used 
 by  the  LXX.  for  it,  it  does  not  in  itself  indicate  the 
 materials  of  which  it  is  composed  ;  the  latter  evi- 
 dently means  a  quickset  hedge.  They  are  both 
 used  in  Is.  v.  5,  'I  will  take  away  the  hedge 
 thereof  (IDS^t^'O)  ....   and  break  down  the  wall 
 
 thereof  (ilTJ  ").     See  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Parables, 
 
 p.  193.— J.  E.  R. 
 
 HEDUOSMON  (Gr.  rjbvoafxov,  i.  e.,  having  a 
 sweet  smell),  translated  t?iint,  is  mentioned  in  Matt, 
 xxiii.  23  :  '  Woe  unto  you.  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
 hypocrites  !  for  ye  pay  tithe  of  mint  and  anise 
 (properly  dill)  and  cummin,  and  have  omitted  the 
 weightier  matters  of  the  law  ;'  and,  again,  in  Luke 
 xi.  42  :  '  But  woe  unto  you,  Pharisees  !  for  ye  tithe 
 mint  and  rue,  and  all  manner  of  herbs,  and  pass 
 over  judgment  and  the  love  of  God  :  these  ought 
 ye  to  have  done,  and  not  to  leave  the  other  undone.' 
 All  the  plants  mentioned  in  the  above  passages 
 belong  to  the  smaller  ones  cultivated  in  gardens  in 
 Europe,  and  which  usually  come  under  the  denomi- 
 nation of  sweet  herbs.  Lady  Calcott  inquires 
 whether  mint  was  one  of  the  bitter  herbs  which  the 
 Israelites  ate  with  the  Paschal  Lamb  ;  and  infers 
 the  probability  of  its  being  so  from  our  own  practice 
 of  eating  lamb  with  mint  sauce.  Dr.  Harris  argues 
 that  mint,  anise,  and  cummin  were  not  tithed,  and 
 that  the  Pharisees  only  paid  tithes  of  these  plants 
 from  an  overstrained  interpretation  of  the  law. 
 But,  in  the  article  Anethon  (Dill),  it  may  be 
 seen  that  dill  was  tithed,  and  it  is  one  of  the  herbs 
 mentioned  along  with  mint.  The  meaning,  there- 
 fore, seems  to  be,  that  the  Pharisees,  while,  in 
 conformity  with  the  law,  they  paid  these  minute 
 tithes,  neglected  the  most  important  moral  duties, 
 — truth,  justice,  and  mercy  ;  for  it  is  added,  'these 
 ought  ye  to  have  done,  and  not  to  leave  the  other 
 undone.' 
 
 The  plant  7iSijo(t/j.os  or  rjSioo'/J.ov,  so  called  '  ab 
 odoris  bonitate  vel  jucunditate,'  was  also  called 
 filvda  and  fj.Mos  by  the  Greeks,  and  mentha,  or 
 7?u'nta,  by  the  Romans.     The  Arabs  give  minthee 
 
 as  the  Greek  synonym  of  their  j^j^  nana;  and 
 
 in  India,  Persian  works  give  podeena  as  the  Hindee 
 name  of  the  latter.  Podeena  is  the  common  name 
 of  a  species  of  mint  cultivated  in  the  gardens  of 
 North-Western  India.  These  names  are  interesting 
 as  occurring  in  works  on  Materia  Medica  ;  because 
 both  were  employed  by  early  translators  as  the 
 equivalent  of  ijdvoa/iiov  in  the  above  passages  of 
 Matthew  and  Luke  ;  and  all  European  translators, 
 according  to  Celsius,  concur  in  considering  mint  as 
 intended.  The  species  most  common  in  Syria  is 
 maltha  sylvestris,  found  by  Russell  at  Aleppo,  and 
 mentioned  by  him  as  one  of  the  herbs  cultivated 
 in  the  gardens  there.  It  also  occurs  in  Greece, 
 Taurus,  Caucasus,  the  Altai  Range,  and  as  far  as 
 Cashmere,  whence  we  have  obtained  specimens. 
 Af.  arvensis,  of  which  M.  saliva  (Linn.)  is  one  of 
 the  varieties,  is  also  a  widely  diffused  species,  being 
 found  in  Greece,  in  parts  of  Caucasus,  in  the  Altai 
 Range,  and  in  Cashmere.  Mint  is  highly  esteemed 
 in  Eastern  countries,  and  apparently  was  so  also 
 by  the  Jews.     Celsius  says,    '  Patet  olus  fuisse  in 
 
HEGAI 
 
 267 
 
 HEIDENHEIM 
 
 Judaea  quondam  notum,  et  Judseis  ob  virtutes  et 
 prsestantiam  singularem  acceptissimum.'  It  was 
 much  esteemed  by  the  ancients,  as  Pliny  {Hist.  N'at. 
 xix.  47)  testifies  :   '  Mentse  nomen  suavitas  odoris 
 
 261.  Mentha  sylvestris. 
 
 apud  Groecos  mutavit,  cum  ante  mintha  voca- 
 retur  :  unde  veteres  nostri  nomen  dechnaverunt. 
 Grato  menta  mensas  odore  percurrit  in  rusticis 
 dapibus;'  and  again  (xx.  53),  '  Mentse  ipsius  odor 
 animum  excitat  et  sapor  aviditatem  in  cibis,  ideo 
 embammatum  mixturre  famiharis.'  Dioscorides 
 also  (iii.  41)  mentions  it  as  useful  to  the  stomach, 
 and  peculiarly  grateful  as  a  condiment.  Mint  was 
 employed  by  the  ancients  in  the  preparation  of 
 many  dishes.  '  Hinc  in  Apicii  libro  coquinario, 
 singulis  fere  paginis  menthse  tarn  viridis,  quam 
 arida^,  mentio'  (Gels.  Hierobot.  i.  p.  546).  '  Sic 
 apud  Ebreeos  in  cibis  receptam  fuisse  mentham  ma- 
 nifeste  tradunt  Talmudici  Tract.  Skein.  Ve  yobel, 
 vii.  2  ;  et  Tract.  Oketzin,  i.  2  ;  Sheb.  vii.  i.  Unde 
 et  olerum  decimationi  subjecta  fuit'  (lb.  p.  547). 
 
 It  is  difficult  to  determine  the  exact  species  or 
 variety  of  mint  employed  by  the  ancients.  There 
 are  numerous  species  very  nearly  allied  to  one 
 another.  They  usually  grow  in  moist  situations, 
 and  are  herbaceous,  perennial,  of  powerful  odour, 
 especially  when  bruised,  and  have  small  reddish- 
 coloured  flowers,  arranged  in  spikes  or  whorls. 
 The  taste  of  these  plants  is  bitter,  warm,  and 
 pungent,  but  leaving  a  sensation  of  coolness  on  the 
 tongue  :  in  their  properties  they  are  so  similar  to 
 each  other,  that  either  in  medicine,  or  as  a  condi- 
 ment, one  species  may  safely  be  substituted  for 
 another.  But  the  species  M.  sylvestris  and  lif. 
 arvensis,  which  have  been  mentioned  above,  pro- 
 bably yielded  the  varieties  cultivated  in  Palestine. 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 HEGAI   can  5    Sept.    Pat),   an   officer  of  the 
 
 court  of  king  Ahasuerus,  to  whom  was  entrusted 
 the  care  of  the  young  women  who  were  in  training 
 lo  become  concubines  to  the  king  (Esth.  ii.  8, 
 15).  After  they  had  been  presented  to  the  king 
 they  passed  under  the  charge  of  another  officer, 
 
 who  in  this  narrative  bears  the  name  of  Sha'ashgaz, 
 though  the  LXX.  gives  here  the  same  name  as 
 before,  Pat  In  ver.  3  and  15  the  name  is  omitted 
 by  the  LXX.  altogether.  Origen  suppHes  Po7aros. 
 In  ver.  3  the  name  appears  under  the  form  NJil, 
 Hege.—SN.  L.  A. 
 
 HEIDEGGER,  Johann  Heinrich,  a  Swiss 
 theologian,  was  born  July  i,  1633,  near  Zurich. 
 The  son  of  a  Protestant  pastor,  he  began  his 
 studies  in  his  native  land,  and  went  to  prosecute 
 them  at  Marburg  and  Heidelberg,  under  men  hke 
 Hottinger  and  Spanheim.  In  1656  he  was  chosen 
 professor  extraordinary  of  the  Hebrew  language  in 
 the  University  of  Heidelberg.  In  1659  he  was 
 called  to  .Steinfurt  as  professor  of  theology  and  ec- 
 clesiastical history.  In  1666  he  was  compelled  to 
 leave  the  place  by  war,  and  returned  to  Ziirich, 
 where  he  received  the  chair  of  theology,  which  he 
 held  till  his  death,  January  28,  1698.  Heidegger 
 was  a  man  of  great  influence  and  activity.  He 
 took  part  in  most  of  the  ecclesiastical  controversies 
 of  his  time,  and  obtained  a  wide  reputation.  He 
 was  benevolent  and  patriotic,  a  defender  of  the 
 refugees  of  France  and  Piedmont,  who  found  an 
 asylum  in  Switzerland  from  the  persecutions  of 
 the  Romanists  on  account  of  their  religion.  He 
 was  the  principal  author  of  the  noted  Formula 
 Consensus,  which  was  adopted  by  the  Synod  of 
 Zurich,  held  in  1675.  His  chief  Biblical  works 
 are — De  Hisioria  sacra  Palriarcharuin  exercita- 
 tioncs  selecta:,  1 667-1 671,  2  vols.  4to  ;  Enchiridion 
 Biblicum  succinctius,  1 68 1,  8vo  ;  Mystei-ium  Baby- 
 lonis,  seu  in  divi  Joannis  theologi  Apocalypseos  pro- 
 phetiani  de  Baby  lone  magna  diatribce,  16S7,  2  vols. 
 4to  ;  Exercitationes  biblica,  1 700,  4to  ;  Labores 
 exegetici  in  Josiiam,  Alatthaum,  episiolas  S.  Pauli 
 ad  Romanes,  Corinthios,  et  Ilebmos,  1 700,  4to  ; 
 Corpus  theologicB  Christiance,  etc.,  1700,  folio  ;  Me- 
 dulla theologia:  Christiana:,  1696,  1702,  4to.  Many 
 of  his  writings  were  directed  against  Romanists  and 
 the  proceedings  of  the  Council  of  Trent. — S.  D. 
 
 HEIDENHEIM,  Wolf  b.  Simson,  a  distin- 
 guished grammarian,  Massorite,  and  typographer, 
 who  immortalized  Rodelheim,  near  Frankfort-on- 
 Maine,  in  the  annals  of  Hebrew  literature,  by  the 
 splendid  Hebrew  printing-office  which  he  esta- 
 blished in  it,  and  from  which  he  issued  some  of  the 
 most  beautiful  and  correctly  printed  editions  of  the 
 Pentateuch,  as  well  as  grammatical  and  philologi- 
 cal works.  The  works  for  which  Hebrew  philo- 
 logy and  Biblical  exegesis  are  indebted  to  Heiden- 
 heim  are  as  follows  :— i.  n''Oj;Dn  "'nSC'D,  on  the 
 laws  of  the  accents,  Rodelheim,  1S08.  In  this 
 most  valuable  treatise,  which  is  so  highly  prized  by 
 grammarians,  Heidenheim  has  largely  availed  him- 
 self of  the  works  of  Ben  Asher,  Ibn  Balaam,  Cha- 
 jug,  and  other  ancient  philologians.  2.  nJ3n 
 X~lpOn,  the  understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  a  He- 
 brew commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  with  the 
 Hebrew  text,  and  the  commentary  of  Rashi,  Rodel- 
 heim, 1818.  3.  "IDIDH  py,  the  eye  of  the  Scribe, 
 being  annotations  on  the  Pentateuch,  with  the 
 Hebrew  text  and  the  Massoretic  glosses  of  Jeh. 
 Pisa,  Rodelheim,  1818-1821.  4.  A  German  trans- 
 lation of  the  Pentateuch,  with  the  Hebrew  text, 
 Rodelheim,  1818-1821.  Heidenheim  died  Feb. 
 26,  1832,  and  left  behind  him  many  valuable 
 works  on  philology  in  MS.  Comp.  Fiirst,  Biblio- 
 iheca   Judaica,    i.    p.    3t;9,    etc.  ;    Steinschneidei, 
 
HEIFER 
 
 268 
 
 HELBOxNT 
 
 Catalogus  Liber.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodkiatta, 
 col.  1034  J  Bibliog?aphisches  Handbuch,  p.  74. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 HEIFER.     [Eghel;  Parah.] 
 
 HEIFER,  RED.     [Sacrifice.] 
 
 HEINRICHS,  JoHANN  Heinrich,  a  German 
 theologian,  was  bom  at  Hanover,  loth  April  1765, 
 where  he  prosecuted  his  studies  for  some  time, 
 and  afterwards  at  Gottingen.  In  1789  he  became 
 repetent  in  theology  at  the  University  of  Gottingen ; 
 and  after  remaining  there  three  years,  he  went  to 
 Hanover,  and  gave  public  lectures  in  Mathematics. 
 In  1794  he  became  pastor  at  Quickbom.  In  1799 
 he  became  archdeacon  in  Dannenberg ;  in  1 806 
 superintendent  at  Klotze  ;  and  in  1810  superinten- 
 dent at  Burgdorf.  He  died  17th  March  1850.  His 
 chief  works  are  portions  of  Koppe's  Greek  Testa- 
 ment, viz.,  Ada  Aposiolorian,  part  i.  1832,  2d  ed., 
 and  part  ii.  1827,  2d  ed.  ;  Epistolae Paulli ad  Tim., 
 Tit.,  el  P/iilem.,  1828,  2d  ed. ;  Epistolae  Paul/ i  ad 
 Philipp.  et  Coloss.,  1826,  2d  ed.  ;  Epistolae  Paulli 
 ad  Hebraeos,  1823,  2d  ed.  ;  Apocalypsis,  part  i. 
 1818,  part  ii.  1821 ;  Beitrage  ziir  Befdrderuiig-  der 
 ikeoloi^'ischeii  Wissetischaften,  insondei-heit  der  ttetc- 
 testanientl.  Exegese,  Hanover,  1804.  His  other 
 writings,  which  are  not  numerous,  relate  for  the 
 most  part  to  pastoral  duties  and  preaching.  Hein- 
 richs  was  an  inferior  critic,  possessing  little  ori- 
 ginality or  learning. — S.  D. 
 
 HEINSIUS,  Daniel,  one  of  the  most  learned 
 men  of  his  time,  was  born  at  Ghent,  1580  or  1581. 
 lie  was  sent  by  his  father,  at  the  age  of  fourteen, 
 to  study  law  at  Franeker  ;  but,  contrary  to  parental 
 wishes,  resolved  to  devote  himself  to  ancient  litera- 
 ture ;  and  accordingly  left  Franeker,  and  prose- 
 cuted the  study  of  the  classics  under  Joseph  Scaliger 
 at  Leyden,  where,  at  the  age  of  eighteen,  he  ex- 
 plained the  Latin  classics,  and  where  also,  seven 
 years  afterwards,  he  was  appointed  professor  of  his- 
 tory and  politics.  Ini  607  he  was  appointed  librarian 
 and  secretary  of  the  University.  He  held  also  the 
 office  of  historian  to  the  States  of  Holland,  with  a 
 handsome  salary.  He  acted  as  secretary  to  the 
 Synod  of  Dort  in  1618.  His  fame  was  European. 
 He  died  Feb.  3,  1665,  at  the  age  of  75.  His 
 works  are  veiy  numerous  and  learned.  Those  of 
 them  which  claim  for  him  a  notice  here  are  :  i. 
 Aristarc/nis  Sacer,  sive  ad  Nomii  iii  Johannem 
 Metaphrasin  Exercitationes,  Lugd.  Bat.  1627  ;  2. 
 Exercitationes  Sacrce  ad  Novum  Testamentu/n, 
 1639;  Cantab rigiae,  1640. — I.J. 
 
 HEIR.  [Birthright;  Inheritance.] 
 HELAM  (D^'^n,  nON^rt;  Sept.  Al\dfji,'Ka\aix6.K, 
 XaXafid),  the  place  where  David  defeated  the 
 Syrians  under  Hadarezer ;  it  is  described  in  Sam- 
 uel as  'beyond  the  river,'  by  which  is  meant  the 
 west  side  of  the  river  Euphrates  (2  Sam.  x.  16, 
 17).  The  word  it  will  be  observed  is  variously 
 written  both  in  the  Hebrew  and  the  Sept.  The 
 exact  locality  of  Helam  is  unknown.  Ewald,  how- 
 ever, with  some  probability,  supposes  it  to  have 
 been  identical  with  the  Alamatha  of  Ptolemy  (v. 
 15),  a  town  near  to  Nicephorim,  and  situate  on 
 the  west  bank  of  Euphrates. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HELBON    (Jiafsn  ;    XeXpibv).      The    prophet 
 Ezekiel,  in  describing  the  riches  and  splendour  of 
 
 Tyre,  represents  that  city  as  the  centre  of  thg 
 world's  commerce.  All  other  great  cities  and 
 countries  traded  in  her  marts  ;  each  bringing  its 
 own  staple  produce  or  manufactures.  Among  these 
 Damascus  is  enumerated.  '  Damascus  was  thy 
 merchant  in  the  multitude  of  the  wares  of  thy 
 making,  for  the  multitude  of  all  riches  ;  in  the  wine 
 of  Helbon,   and   white   wool'    (Ezek.    xxvii.    18). 
 
 Jerome  thought  }13?n  was  an  adjective  (from  D^TI, 
 'fatness')  qualifying  p' ;  and  accordingly  in  the 
 Vulgate  he  translates  the  clause  in  vino  pingui. 
 But  all  the  best  authorities  are  against  him,  and 
 make  Helbon  the  name  of  the  place  where  the 
 wine  was  produced.  So  it  is  rendered  in  the 
 Septuagint  oli'os  e/c  XeX^ihv  (the  Alex,  reads 
 Xe/3pwv),  and  in  the  old  Latin  viniim  ex  Ckelbon 
 (Sabatier,  in  loc.) 
 
 Hitherto   sacred    geographers    have    identified 
 Helbon  with  the  city  of  Aleppo,   called  by  the 
 
 s     ^  ^ 
 Arabs  Haleb,  i.    Ji-^.     The  original  name  of  this 
 
 city,  according  to  Greek  orthography,  was  Ckaly- 
 bon  (KaXv^wv,  a  corruption  of  the  Arabic)  ;  and 
 the  province  attached  to  it  was  termed  Chaly- 
 bonitis  (Ptolemy,  v.  15).  Seleucus  Nicatoris  said 
 to  have  changed  the  name  to  Beroea  (Niceph.  Cal- 
 list.  xiv.  39;  Winer,  R.  W.,  s.  v.)  But  the  old 
 name,  as  we  see  from  Ptolemy,  was  not  forgotten  ; 
 and  on  the  capture  of  the  city  by  the  Arabs  in  the 
 7th  century,  it  was  again  resumed  (Schultens, 
 Index  Geogr.  in  vitam  Salad  ini,  s.  v.  Halebum). 
 
 Chalybonian  wine  is  several  times  mentioned  by 
 classic  authors.  Strabo  tells  us  the  Persian  kings 
 imported  Chalybonian  wine  from  Syria  (xv.  3). 
 Both  Hesychius  and  Plutarch  [Vit.  Alex.  ii. )  speak 
 of  this  famous  wine.  It  has  been  generally  thought 
 that  the  name  was  derived  from  Chalybon,  where 
 it  was  supposed  the  wine  was  produced.  But  is  it 
 not  strange  that  Damascus  should  be  represented 
 as  supplying  the  wine  of  Aleppo  to  the  marts  of 
 Tyre  ?  Why  would  not  the  native  merchants  them- 
 selves carry  it  thither  ?  A  passage  which  Bochart 
 quotes  from  Athenseus  (i.  51)  throws  light  on  this 
 point — 6  YiipdQiv  ^acnXeds  rov  'Ka\v0wvLov  fj.6voi> 
 oivov  ^TTLvev  •  Of  (pyjcn  IlocreiStii'ios  Kav  Aa/j.aaKi^  ryjs 
 1,vpias  yiuea'^ai.  '  The  king  of  the  Persians  drank 
 Chalybonian  wine  alone  ;  which,  says  Poseido- 
 nius,  was  also  produced  in  Darnascus''  (Bochart, 
 0pp.  ii.  486).  We  are  thus  led,  both  by  the 
 statement  of  Ezekiel,  and  by  that  of  Poseidonius, 
 who  was  himself  a  native  of  Syria,  to  look  for  a 
 Helbon,  or  Chalybon,  at  or  near  Damascus. 
 
 On  the  eastern  slope  of  Antilebanon,  about  ten 
 miles  north  of  Damascus,  is  the  village  of  Helbon, 
 situated  in  a  wild  and  beautiful  glen,  the  sides  of 
 which  are  still  clothed  with  vineyards.  The  pre- 
 sent inhabitants  are  all  Muslems,  and  of  course 
 make  no  wine  ;  but  the  vintners  of  Damascus 
 regard  the  grapes  of  Helbon  as  the  best  in  this  part 
 of  Syria.  In  and  around  the  village  are  many 
 remains  of  ancient  wealth  and  splendour,  ruins  of 
 temples,    fragments    of    Greek   inscriptions,    and 
 
 rock-hewn  tombs. 
 
 identical  with  the  Hebrew  p3?n  ;  and  there  can- 
 not be  a  doubt  that  this  is  the  long-lost  Helbon 
 (Porter,  Da7nascus,  ii.  330,  sq.  ;  see  also  Robin- 
 son, B.  R.  iii.  472).  How  accurate  were  the 
 descriptions  of  the  Hebrew  prophet  :  '  Damascus 
 
 The  Arabic  name  j.4Jar»-  is 
 
HELDAI 
 
 269 
 
 HELIODORUS 
 
 was  thy  merchant  ...  in  the  wine  of  Helbon, 
 and  white  wool' — wine  from  the  luxuriant  vintage 
 of  that  romantic  glen  on  the  neighbouring  moun- 
 tain side,  and  wool  from  the  flocks  that  roam  over 
 the  vast  plains  to  the  eastward  ! — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HELDAI  (n^n  ;  Sept.  XoXoia;  Alex.  XoX5a;f). 
 
 I.  '  The  Netophathite,'  one  of  the  captains,  the 
 twelfth,  of  the  monthly  courses  in  the  temple  ser- 
 vice (i  Chron.  xxvii.  15).  2.  An  Israelite  from 
 whom  Zechariah  was  commanded  to  take  materials 
 for  making  memorial  crowns  (Zech.  vi.  10)  for 
 Joshua  the  high -priest.  Heldai  and  his  com- 
 panions seem  to  have  been  a  deputation  from 
 Babylon  sent  with  contributions  to  aid  the  work 
 in  which  their  people  were  engaged. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HELEM    (D^n ;   Sept.   BavrjeXd/x,  joining  the 
 
 "•JH  with  the  proper  noun;  Alex,  wos 'EXi/x).  i. 
 A  man  named  in  the  list  of  the  descendants  of 
 Asher  (i  Chron  vii.  35).  It  is  supposed  by  some 
 that  he  was  the  third  son  of  Heber  (ver.  32),  and 
 
 that  of  the  names  Qpn  and  DniH  one  arose  out  of 
 the  other  through  the  mistake  of  a"  transcriber  ; 
 though  what  is  the  original  name  is  uncertain.  If 
 so,  the  mistake  must  be  very  ancient,  as  it  is  fol- 
 lowed by  the  LXX. 
 
 2.  One  of  those  to  whom  the  memorial  crowns 
 were  to  be  assigned  (Zech.  vi.  14) ;  in  all  probability 
 the  same  who  is  called  Heldai  in  ver.  10. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HELEPH  ^r\ ;   Sept.   MooXaM ;  Alex.  MeX^^, 
 
 the  /x  in  both  cases  being  the  Heb.  preposition  JD 
 incorporated  with  the  word),  a  place  on  the  north- 
 ern boundary  of  Naphthali  (Josh.  xix.  33).  Van 
 de  Velde  would  identify  it  with  Beit  Lif  {Mem. ,  p. 
 320  ;  comp.  Robinson,  Rec.  Res.,  p.  61,  62).  But 
 Beit  Lif  lies  towards  what  must  have  been  the  ivest- 
 ern  boundary  of  Naphthali,  between  that  tribe  and 
 Asher ;  whereas,  as  Keil  observes,  the  e.xpression 
 'the  outgoings  thereof  were  at  Jordan,'  and  'also 
 the  fact  that  in  ver.  34  the  southern  boundary  is 
 drawn  from  the  Jordan,  prove  that  it  is  intended  to 
 shew  the  northern  boundary-line  of  Naphthali, 
 drawn  from  the  west  or  from  Asher'  {Coviment.  in 
 loc.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HELI  does  not  occur  in  this  form  in  the  A.  V. 
 of  the  O.  T.  According,  however,  to  the  Sept. 
 and  the  Vulg. ,  the  well-known  name  of  the  aged 
 
 high-priest  Ei.i  is  the  same  word.     His  name,  ""py 
 
 {similar  in  meaning  to  the  Greek  proper  name  Tpd- 
 0tyaos,  ^  a  foster-child ;''  or  stUl  more  like  ALOTpe<pT]s, 
 a  ybve  fmtritus  ['malim  certe  alumnus  yov(E,^  pro 
 
 HvJ?,  \foste^  rki'd o/Jekovak,''  Gesen.  Tkes.  1029]), 
 
 is  rendered  by  the  LXX.  "HXi  {Alex.  'HXet)  ;  and 
 by  the  Vulg.  Heli,  in  no  less  than  thirty  passages 
 (Dutripon,  Concordanti^E  Bibl  Sacr.  Vulg.  p.  600). 
 This  is,  no  doubt,  a  more  correct  rendering  of  the 
 name  than  the  A.  V.  Eli. 
 
 In  the  Apocryphal  book  2  Esdras  i.  2,  Heli 
 occurs  as  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Esdras  or  Ezra. 
 In  the  genealog)^  however,  of  the  canonical  book, 
 Ezra  vii.  2,  3,  the  name  is  omitted,  as  well  as  two 
 others,  between  Ahitub  and  Amariah. 
 
 In  Luke  iii.  23,  Heli  occupies  a  prominent  place 
 in  the  ancestry  of  our  Lord,  owing  to  the  discussion 
 of  the  question,  which  the  proximity  of  his  name  to 
 that  of  Jesus   has   occasioned,   how  was  he  the 
 
 grandfather  of  Christ  ?  According  to  the  letter  of 
 the  gospel  in  the  A.  V.  version,  Heli  was  the  father 
 of  Joseph,  the  reputed  father  of  the  Saviour  ;  and 
 this  relationship  has  been  stoutly  defended  of  late 
 in  the  learned  writings  of  Lord  A.  Hervey  on  the 
 Genealogy  of  Christ.  It  is  impossible,  however, 
 on  a  strict  comparison  of  the  originals  of  the  two 
 ancestral  tables  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  given  in  St. 
 Matthew  (ch.  i.)  and  St.  Luke  (ch.  iii.),  to  avoid 
 the  natural  conclusion  that  Joseph  the  carpenter 
 was  the  real  son  of  Jacob,  and  the  son-in-law  of 
 Heli,  through  his  espoused  wife,  the  Virgin  Mary. 
 The  passages  in  the  Greek  Text  are,  (i)  'IaK-w/3  5^ 
 eyivvqae  t6v  ^luarjcp  rbv  dvSpa  Mapias  [Matt.  i.  16], 
 and  (2)  'Iw<Tr]<p  Tov  'HX/  [Luke  iii.  23].  The  foiTner 
 passage,  'Jacob  begat  Joseph  the  husband  of  Mary,' 
 plainly  predicates  a  literal  and  natural  paternity  oj 
 Jacob  to  Mary's  husband  Joseph  ;  while  the  second 
 o?tly  vaguely  connects  Joseph  with  Heli — '  Joseph  of 
 Heli  ;'  so  that  on  the  simple  assumption,  which 
 the  entire  nature  of  the  case  forces  on  us,  that  Heli 
 was  actually  the  virgin's  father,  we  need  only  insert 
 the  phrase  ''son-in-law''  between  the  two  names 
 [(/.  d.  'Joseph,  who  was  the  son-in-law  of  Heli],' 
 and  the  two  passages  will  become  compatible,  and 
 our  Lord's  natural  descent  from  king  David  as  the 
 '  fruit  of  his  loins'  (Acts  ii.  30)  will  be  avouched  to 
 the  satisfaction  of  so  many  prophecies  and  strong 
 assertions  of  Holy  Scripture.  For  a  full  discussion 
 of  the  question  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  article 
 Genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ,  from  which  it  will 
 appear  that  while  Joseph,  the  legal  father  of  Christ, 
 was  only  a  link  /'«  law  between  the  Saviour  and 
 His  royal  ancestor  David,  through  Solomon,  from 
 whom  Joseph  was  lineally  descended  through  his 
 father  Jacob,  Heli,  the  maternal  grandfather  of  our 
 Lord,  connected  Him  by  natural  line  with  king 
 David  through  his  son  Nathan,  Solomon's  elder 
 brother.— P.  H. 
 
 HELIODORUS  ('HXt65a)pos).  i.  The  treasurer 
 of  Seleucus  Philopator.  This  king,  being  impo- 
 verished by  his  annual  tribute  of  looo  talents  to 
 the  Romans,  and  tempted  by  false  accounts  of  the 
 enormous  wealth  stored  up  in  the  Jewish  temple, 
 sent  Heliodorus  to  plunder  these  treasures.  The 
 attempt  threw  the  people  of  Jerusalem,  and  espe- 
 cially the  high-priest  Onias  HI.,  into  great  anguish 
 of  mind  ;  and  in  consequence  of  their  prayers,  the 
 sacrilege  of  Heliodorus  was  prevented  by  a  '  great 
 apparition'  of  a  horse  '  with  a  terrible  rider  upon 
 him,  who  had  complete  harness  of  gold,'  and  was 
 accompanied  by  two  strong  and  lovely  youths,  who 
 scourged  Heliodorus  '  with  many  sore  stripes,' 
 while  the  horse  '  ran  fiercely  and  smote  at  him 
 with  his  fore  feet'  (2  Maccab.  iii.  8-27).  Heliodorus 
 desisted  from  the  attempt,  and  testified  to  Seleucus 
 that  the  temple  was  defended  by  '  an  especial 
 power  of  God'  (v.  38).  This  story  of  the  vision  of 
 Heliodorus,  familiar  to  all  from  Raphael's  great 
 picture  in  the  Vatican,  receives  no  support  either 
 from  Josephus  {Aiitiq.  xii.  3.  3),  or  from  the  author 
 of  the  '  fourth  book  of  Maccabees."  This  writer 
 tells  the  story  of  Apollonius,  but  with  different  de- 
 tails. Jahn  finds  a  supposed  allusion  to  the  story 
 in  a  passage  of  Polybius,  quoted  by  Josephus 
 {Hebr.    Commonwealth  xci.    E.    T.)     Heliodorus 
 
 *  The  writers  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  and  the  Diet. 
 of  Biography  are  mistaken  in  saying  that  the  author 
 of  De  Maccabseis  does  not  allude  to  the  miracle. 
 
HELKATH 
 
 270 
 
 HELL 
 
 afterwards  poisoned  Seleucus,  and  aimed  at  seiz- 
 ing the  crown,  but  was  suppressed  by  Antiochus 
 Epiphanes,  with  the  assistance  of  Eumenes  and 
 Attains  of  Pergamos,  B.C.  175  (Appian,  Syriaca 
 xlv.  60-70;  Dan.  xi.  20;  Joseph.  Antiq.yi\\.  3.4; 
 2  Maccab.  iii.  ;  4  Maccab.  ;  Liv.  xii.  24  ;  Jahn, 
 /.  c.  ;  Prideaux,  Connect,  ii.  162,  sq.) 
 
 2.  Hehodorus,  son  of  Theodosius,  and  bom  at 
 Emesa  in  Syria,  about  A.D.  365.  He  became 
 Bishop  of  Tricca  in  Thessaly,  and  strictly  enforced 
 celibacy  on  his  priests.  He  is  the  author  of  an 
 admirable  Greek  romance  called  ^thiopica  ;  and 
 Nicephorus  [H.  E.  xii.  34)  says  that,  being  re- 
 quired to  suppress  the  book  or  lay  down  his 
 bishopric,  on  the  ground  that  the  story  injured  the 
 morals  of  the  young,  he  chose  the  latter  alternative 
 (fidWov  eXeffdac  ttjv  iepwavvTiv  \i.Treiv  rj  e/c  fieaov 
 TidivaL  TO  avyypaiMna).  But  the  story  is  almost 
 certainly  false,  for  the  ^thiopica  (or  Charideia,  as 
 it  was  sometimes  called)  was  the  most  moral  of 
 Greek  novels,  and  has  no  irovri/j.aTa  ipwriKo.  (Nice- 
 phor.  /.  c.)  in  it  (Socrates,  //.  £.,  v.  22  ;  Phot. 
 Cod.  72).— F.  W.  F. 
 
 HELKATH    (T\\hn ;    Sept.    'E^eXe/c^^;  Alex. 
 
 XeX/cd^),  a  border  town  of  Asher  assigned  to  the 
 Levites  (Josh.  xix.  25  ;  xxi.  31).  In  1  Chron.  vi. 
 75  Hukok  is  substituted  for  Helkath  in  the  list  of 
 Levitical  towns,  probably  through  some  error  of 
 the  transcriber  ;  that  the  Hukkok  of  Josh.  xix.  34 
 cannot  be  intended  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  this 
 town  was  not  on  the  boundary  of  Asher,  but  to- 
 wards Issachar.  Helkath  has  not  been  identified. 
 Li  the  Onomasticon  it  is  simply  mentioned,  by 
 Eusebius  as  'Edd-q,  by  Jerome  as  Elcath ;  but 
 neither  seems  to  have  known  it.  Van  de  Velde 
 proposes  to  identify  it  with  Ukkrith  or  Ikkrith,  a 
 town  with  ancient  ruins  on  the  high  land  between 
 Wady  el-'Ayun  and  Wady  el-Kurn  {Mem,  320),  but 
 this  seems  a  mere  random  conjecture,  sustained 
 neither  by  the  locality  nor  the  name.  — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HELKATH  -  HAZZURIM  (D''"!V^!  '^pb'^.  ' 
 Sept.  fiepls  tQv  iiri^ovXccv,  apparently  from  their 
 reading  D^IJfH),  a  place  where  twelve  of  the  ser- 
 vants of  David,  and  twelve  Benjamites  who  adhered 
 to  Ishbosheth,  engaged  in  single  combat  and  were 
 all  slaughtered  (2  Sam.  ii.  16).  It  was  near  Gibeon 
 [Gibeon].  Ewald  approves  the  reading  which  the 
 LXX.  seem  to  have  followed,  as  that  which  alone 
 gives  a  suitable  meaning  to  the  name  [Gesck.  Isr., 
 ii.  575,  note  i).  Gesenius  renders  by  'the  field 
 of  swords,'  which  can  hardly  be  admitted,  for 
 though  "liv  is  used  in  the  sense  of  an  '  edge,'  it  is 
 never  used  simply  for  '  sword.'  Fiirst  gives  Felsen- 
 kahlheit,  'rock-smoothness,'  as  the  meaning;  the 
 place  being  smooth  and  level  as  a  surface  of  rock. 
 Aquila  gives  KXfipos  ruiv  arepfujp,  and  the  Vulg. 
 Ager  robustorum,  taking  "lIV  in  a  figurative  sense, 
 of  which,  however,  there  is  no  other  instance. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 HELL  must  be  carefully  freed  from  the  well- 
 known  usage  which  restricts  its  meaning  to  '  the 
 abode  of  the  wicked  after  death,'  if  we  would  make 
 it  commensurate  in  signification  with  the  original 
 words  represented  by  it  in  the  O.  and  N.  T.  These 
 terms,  no  less  than  the  English  equivalent,  have 
 occasioned  much  discussion  as  to  their  Biblical 
 sense.  Dr.  Barrow  {Serm.  on  the  Creed  [Art.  '  He 
 descended  into  Hell'],  Works  [Oxford  1830],  vol. 
 
 V.  pp.  416,  417)  thus  indicates  the  chief  questions 
 which  have  been  raised  on  the  subject :  '  Is  Hell  a 
 state  of  being,  or  a  place  ?  if  a  place,  is  it  that 
 where  bodies  are  repos6d,  or  that  to  which  souls  go  ? 
 if  a  place  of  souls,  is  it  the  place  of  good  and  happy 
 souls,  or  that  of  bad  and  miserable  ones  ;  or  indif- 
 ferently, and  in  common  of  both  those  ;  for  such  a 
 manifold  ambiguity  these  words  have,  or  are  made 
 to  have  ;  and  each  of  these  senses  are  embraced  and 
 contended  for.'  A  solution  of  these  questions,  if 
 indeed  practicable  in  every  instance,  would  require 
 too  long  an  examination  of  many  passages  of  the 
 sacred  writings  for  this  article  ;  we  must  be  content 
 with  noticing  the  chief  points  ;  but  it  wiU  be  con- 
 venient first  to  explain  the  words  which  occur  in 
 the  original  for  the  English  word  '  Hell. ' 
 
 Oji   the  Hebrew  and  Greek  terms. — The   three 
 words,  which  all  but  monopolise  the  subject,  are 
 
 piS^  in  the  O.  T. ;  and  "ASt/s  and  VUvva.  in  the 
 
 N.  T.     PiSK''  occurs  65  times  ;  in  61  of  these  it  is 
 
 rendered  in  the  LXX.  by"A5?7s;  twice  by  ©dvaros 
 (2  Sam.  xxii.  6,  and  Prov.  xxiii.  14)  ;  and  twice 
 omitted  in  the  common  text  (Job  xxiv.  9  ;  Ezek. 
 
 xxxii.    21).     In    the  Vulg.   ?iSE'  is  translated  48 
 
 times  by  Infer juis,  and  1 7  times  by  Infertis  [mostly 
 Inferi  (plur)].  In  our  A.  V.  it  is  represented  31 
 times  by  Grave,  3 1  times  by  Hell,  and  3  times  by 
 Pit.  In  the  N.  T.  our  word  Hell  occurs  23  times  ; 
 12  times  it  stands  for  Viiwa.,  and  11  times  {perhaps 
 the  twelfth  should  be  added,  see  Tischendorf  and 
 Bruder  (Concord.)  on  Rev.  iii.  7]  for  "A 677s.  The 
 Vulg.  closely  follows  the  original  in  its  N.  T. 
 renderings  ;  in  all  the  twelve  passages  Teevva  is 
 simply  copied  into  Gehenna,  while  Infernus  stands 
 for  every  occurrence  of  "A5i;s,  except  once  (Matt, 
 xvi.  18),  where  the  phrase  Tri^Xa:  ahov  {''gates  op 
 JielV)  becomes   'portae  inferi.''     Since,   therefore, 
 
 ?iXt'>  "A5?7J,  and  Vi^vva,  are  employed  m  the  sacred 
 
 original  to  designate  the  mysteries  of  Hell,  we 
 proceed  to  give  first  their  probable  derivation,  and 
 then  their  meaning,  so  far  as  Holy  Scripture  assists 
 in  the  discovery  thereof. 
 
 Their  Derivation. — I.  7\i\V)  (or,    as  it  is  occa- 
 sionally written,  PNC')  is  by  most  of  the  old  writers 
 
 (see  Cocceius,  Lex.,  pp.  840,  841  ;  Schindler,  Lex. 
 Pent.,  1782  ;  Robinson,  Key  to  Hebr.  Bible,  ii.  217  ; 
 and  Leigh,  Crit.  Sacra,  i.  238 ;  ii.  6)  referred  for 
 
 its  origin  to  ?XJi',  to  demand,  seek,  or  ask.     They 
 
 are  not  agreed  as  to  the  mode  of  connecting  the 
 derivative  with  this   root ;   Cocceius   suggests  an 
 
 absurd  reason,  '  P^Xt^'  notat  eum  locum  in  quo  qui 
 
 est  in  quaestione  esf  (!)  A  more  respectable  solu- 
 tion is  suggested  by  those  who  see  in  the  insatiable- 
 
 ness  of  piNki'  (Prov.  xxx.  15,  16)  a  good  ground  for 
 
 connecting  it  with  the  root  in  question.  Thus 
 Fagius  on  Gen.  xxxvii.  ;  Buxtorf,  Lexicon,  s.  v., 
 referring  to  Is.  v.  14 ;  Habak.  ii.  5  >  Prov.  xxviL 
 20.  (Ernst  Meier,  Hebr.  W-w-b,  p.  187,  also 
 adopts  this  root,  but  he  is  far-fetched  and  obscure 
 in  his  view  of  its  relation  to  the  derived  word).* 
 
 *  A  good  defence  (by  a  modern  scholar)  of  this 
 derivation  of  Sheol  from  the  verb  7Xt^  is  given  by 
 Glider,  Lehre  v.  d.  Erschein.  Jesu  Christi  unter  den 
 
HELL 
 
 271 
 
 HELL 
 
 Boettcher  {De  Inferis,  p.  76,  sec.  159J  finds  in  the 
 root  pyC  to  be  hollow,  a  better  origin  for  our  word. 
 Gesenius  {T/ies.  1347),  who  adopts  the  same  deri- 
 vation, supposes  that  bytJ'  means  to  dig  out,  and  so 
 
 contrives  to  unite  /'J?K'  and  ?^^,  by  making  the 
 primary  idea  of  digging  lead  to  the  derived  one  of 
 seeking  (see  Job  iii.  21).  Boettcher  goes  on  to 
 connect   the  German   words  Hohl   (hollow)   and 
 
 Hdhle  (cavity)  with  the  idea  indicated  by  7^'^,  and 
 timidly  suggests  the  possibility  of  HoUe  (Hell) 
 coming  from  Hohle.  Whilst  decidedly  rejecting 
 this  derivation,  we  do  not  object  to  his  derivation 
 of  the  Hebrew  noun  ;  amidst  the  avowed  uncer- 
 tainty of  the  case,  it  seems  to  be  the  least  objec- 
 tionable of  the  suggestions  which  have  been  offered, 
 and,  to  provide  an  intelligible  sense  for  the  word 
 Sheol,  most  in  hannony  with  many  Biblical  pas- 
 sages. Boettcher  defines  the  term  to  mean  '  vastus 
 locus  sttbierra)ieiis''  (p.  72,  sec.  153).  This  agrees 
 very  well  with  the  rendering  of  our  A.  V.  in  so  far 
 as  it  has  used  the  comprehensive  word  Hell,  which 
 properly  signifies  '  a  covered  or  concealed  place.' 
 II.  The  universally  allowed  statement,  that  the 
 N.  T.  has  shed  a  light  on  the  mysteries  of  life 
 and  immortality  which  is  only  in  an  inferior  degree 
 discovered  in  the  O.  T. ,  is  seldom  more  distinctly 
 verified  than  in  the  uncertainty  which  attaches  to 
 Sheol  (the  difficulty  of  distinguishing  its  various 
 degrees  of  meaning,  which  it  is  generally  felt  exist, 
 and  which  our  A.  V.  has  endeavoured  to  express 
 by  an  equal  balance  between  Hell  and  Grave),  in 
 contrast  with  the  distinction  which  is  implied  in 
 the  about  equally  frequent  terms  of  Hades  and 
 Gche9tna,  now  to  be  described.  The  "A5?js  of  the 
 N.  T.  was  suggested,  no  doubt,  by  its  frequent 
 occurrence  in  the  LXX.  The  word  was  originally 
 nnaspirated,  as  in  Homer's  'AtSao  wiiXai  {71.  v.  646  ; 
 ix.  312),  and  Hesiod's  'AtSew  Kvva  x°-^'^^°'P^^°^ 
 (Theog.  311),  and  Pindar's  'Ai'Sai/  Xaxelv  (Pyth. 
 V.  130).  This  form  of  the  word  gives  greater 
 credibility  to  the  generally  received  derivation  of  it 
 from  a  privat.  and  louvy  Plutarch,  accordingly, 
 explains  it  by  aeibh  koX  abparov  {De  Isid.  et  Osit. , 
 
 Todten  [Berne  1853],  and  more  briefly  in  his  art. 
 Hades  (Herzog,  v.  441  [Clark's  Trans,  ii.  468]). 
 His  defence  is  based  on  the  many  passages  which 
 urge  the  insatiable  demand  of  Sheol  for  all  men, 
 such  as  those  we  have  mentioned  in  the  text,  and 
 Gen.  xxxvii.  35  ;  I  Sam.  xxviii.  ;  Ps.  vi.  6,  and 
 Ixxxix.  49.  See  also  Venema  (on  Ps.  xvi.  10)  ; 
 J.  A.  Quensted,  Tract,  de  Sepulttira  Veterum,  ix.  i. 
 *  The  learned  authors  of  Liddle  and  Scott's 
 Greek  Lex.  {s.  v.  "AStjs)  throw  some  doubt  on  this 
 view  of  the  origin  of  the  word,  because  of  its 
 aspirated  beginning,  in  Attic  Greek.  But  surely 
 this  is  precarious  ground.  Is  it  certain  that  even 
 in  Attic  writers  it  was  invariably  aspirated  ? 
 ^schylus  {Sept.  c.  Theb  [Paley]  310)  has  'At5^ 
 irpo'Cdxj/ac  {imth  the  lenis),  according  to  the  best 
 editmg.  It  is  true  that  this  is  in  a  chorus,  but  in 
 the  Agani.  1505,  also  a  choral  fine,  we  read  p-fjlkv 
 iv  "Aidov  txeyakavxeiTia  (with  the  aspirate) ;  as  ii  the 
 usage  were  uncertain.  Possibly  in  the  elliptical 
 phrase  ev  "AiSoi;  [scil  oiKip]  the  aspirate  occurs  be- 
 cause the  genitive  is  really  the  name  of  the  God 
 (not  of  the  region,  which  might,  for  distinction, 
 have  been  then  imaspirated) . 
 
 p.  3S2),  and  in  the  Etymol.  Magn.  dS-ijs  is  defined 
 as  x'^P'-o"  a.<peyyis,  aKorov?  aluvLov  Kai  ^^Scpov  Tew\T)- 
 pwfiivov  ...  iv  Si  ovdiv  jiXeTro/xei:  Hades  is  thus 
 '  the  invisible  place  or  region  ; '  '  Locus  visibus  nostris 
 subtractus,''  as  Grotius  defines  it.  III.  Gehenna 
 {Vievva)  is  composed  of  the  two  Hebrew  words,  X'S 
 {valley),  and  Qi^n  {Hinnorn,  the  name  of  the  pro- 
 prietor of  the  valley).  In  the  Sept.  Valevva  is  used 
 in  Josh,  xviii.  16,  to  designate  "■  the  valley  of  the  son  oj 
 Hinnorn,^  the  full  expression  of  which  is  D-irrp  ""S. 
 The  shorter  appellation  03,1  ''J  occurs  in  the  same 
 verse.  The  Rabbinical  writers  derive  Qan  from 
 DHJ,  ^  rugire''  [to  groan  or  mourn,  in  Ezek.  xxiv. 
 23],  as  if  indicative  of  the  cries  of  the  children  in 
 the  horrid  rites  of  the  Moloch-worship  (see  Buxtorf, 
 Lex.  Hab.,  p.  108  ;  Glassius  [ed.  Dathii],  Philolog. 
 Sacr.  i.  806).  The  etymological  remarks  have 
 paved  our  way  to  the  next  section  of  our  subject. 
 
 The  Biblical  meaning  of  these  three  terms.— I. 
 Meafiings  of  h\^\3.  (i)  The  'Grave.'  Much 
 controversy  has  arisen  whether  within  the  meaning 
 of  Sheol  should  be  included  ^  the  grave  ;^  indeed 
 this  is  the  only  question  of  difficulty.  The  fact, 
 which   we  have  already  stated,    that  our   A.   V. 
 
 translates  piXU'  quite  as  often  by  ^ grave'  as  by  the 
 
 general  term  '  hell,^  supplies  a  primd  facie  reason 
 for  including  it.  Without,  however,  insisting  on 
 the  probability  that  polemical  theology,  rather  than 
 Biblical  science,  influenced  our  translators,  at  least 
 occasionally,  in  their  rendering  of  the  word,  we  may 
 here  adduce  on  the  other  side  the  telling  fact,  that 
 of  all  the  ancient  versions  not  one  translates  in  any 
 passage  the  Hebrew  Sheol  by  the  equivalent  of 
 graz'e.  The  other  Greek  translators,  like  the  vene- 
 rable LXX.,  so  far  as  their  fragments  shew  (see 
 Origen,  Hexapla,  passim),  everywhere  give  "AiStjs 
 for  piXE'  (sometimes  they  use  for  the  locative  case 
 
 the  older  and  better  phrase  et's,  ev  "Ai5ov,  some- 
 times ihe  more  recent  and  vulgar  eh  tov  "A:5r;i/, 
 ev  Tip  "AiS-p).     The   Samaritan  text  in   the  seven 
 
 passages  of  the  Pentateuch  has  either  ^T'CJ'  {Siol)  or 
 ?1N''ti'.  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  everywhere,  ex- 
 cept in  five  passages,  retain  PINC^'.  The  Peschito 
 everywhere  in  both  Testaments  renders  the  Hebrew 
 Sheoland  the  Greek  Hadeshy  ^n  ..  « [hv^,Shitd]; 
 and,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the  Vulgate  trans- 
 lates the  same  words  in  both  the  O.  T.  and  the 
 N.  T.  by  inferus  {plur.  Inferi  mostly)  and  above 
 all  Lnfernus  (see  above  for  particulars).  It  is  to 
 the  later  Targumists  (the  Pseudo-Jonathan  and  the 
 Jerusalem  Targum),  and  afterwards  to  the  Rabbini- 
 cal doctors  of  the  middle  ages,  that  we  trace  the 
 version  of  the  '  sepulchre'  and  '  the  grave'  (thus  in 
 Gen.  xxxvii.  35  ;  xlii.  38;  xliv.  29,  31,  these  Tar- 
 gumists rendered  Sheol  by  Nmi3p  ''3  [the  house  oj 
 
 burial]  ;  similarly  did  they  render  Ps.  cxli.  7  ;  Job 
 vii.  9  ;  xiv.  13  ;  xvii.  13,  16  ;  xxi.  13  ;  Eccl.  ix. 
 10,  and  other  passages,  in  which  it  is  observable 
 how  often  they  have  been  followed  by  our  trans 
 lators.  *     In  the  note  below  we  have  quoted  reasons 
 
 *  See  for  more  information  on  this  point  Arch- 
 bishop Ussher,  Works  [by  Elrington],  vol.  iii.,  pp. 
 
HKLL 
 
 272 
 
 HELL 
 
 which  have  led  learned  men,  who  have  especially 
 examined  the  subject,  to  exclude  the  grave  (specifi- 
 cally understood  as  a  viadc  or  artificial  one)  from 
 the  proper  meaning  of  Sheol.  We  cannot  but 
 accept  their  view  in  critical  exactness.  But  there 
 is  an  inexact  and  generic  sense  of  Sheol  in  which 
 the  word  grave  well  expresses  the  meaning  of  the 
 Scripture  passages  just  mentioned,  and  (in  justice  to 
 A.  V.  it  may  be  admitted)  of  most  of  the  others, 
 which  our  translators  rendered  by  this  word.*     Of 
 
 319-321  ;  and,  more  full)',  Boettcher  (pp.  68-70, 
 sec.  146-149)  who  quotes  Raschi  and  Aben  Ezra 
 [on  Gen.  xxxvii.  35]  ;  D.  Kimchi  {Lib.  Radic.  s.  v. 
 
 ?'1Xt^')  ;  and  other  Rabbis  who  expressly  admit  the 
 
 grave  yi\i\)\Vi  the  scope  of  the  meaning  of  Sheol ; 
 Boettcher  also  quotes  a  very  long  array  of  com- 
 mentators and  lexicographers  [R.  Mardochai  Na- 
 than, with  extravagant  one-sidedness,  in  his  Hebr. 
 Concord,  gives  no  other  sense  to  Sheol  but  "I3p,  the 
 grave],  who  follow  the  Rabbinical  doctors  herein  ; 
 and  he  adds  the  names  of  such  writers  as  deny  the 
 meaning  of  the  \g7-ave  to  the  Hebrew  Sheol:  among 
 these  occur  the  learned  Dutch  divines  Vitringa  and 
 Venema.      The  latter  of  these   expressly  affirms 
 
 '  Pli^ti'  mtllo  modo  ad  sepulchrum  pertinebit''  (Com- 
 ment, ad  Ps.,  vol.  i.,  p.  504).  To  the  authorities 
 he  mentions  we  would  add,  as  maintaining  the 
 same  view,  our  own  learned  Henry  Ainsworth  (on 
 Gen.    xxxvii.    35,  V/orks,   p.    135)  who  draws  an 
 
 important  distmction  ;   '  71 XC^,  the  grave,  the  word 
 
 meaneth  not  the  grave  digged  or  made  with  hands, 
 which  is  named  in  Hebrew  "l3p,  but  it  meaneth 
 
 the  common  place  or  state  of  death' — a  similar 
 distinction  is  drawn  by  Luther  [Enarr.  in  Genes. 
 xlii.  38]  ;  13p  is  only  the  grave  in  which  an  actual 
 interment  takes  place  ;  none  that  die  unbuiied  can 
 have  this  word  used  of  them  ;  their  receptacle  is 
 
 ?1NK')  '  commune  quoddam  receptaculum  non  cor- 
 porum  tantum  sed  et  animarum,  ubi  omnes  mortui 
 congregantur'  (Ann.  Seneca  \lib.  viii.  controvers. 
 4]  observes  between  natural  burial  and  ai-tificial — 
 '  Omnibus  natura  sepulturam  dedit,'  etc.  So 
 Lucan,  vii.  818,  says — '  Capit  omnia  tellus  Qu?e 
 genuit ;  coelo  tegitur,  qui  non  habet  umam.'  Pliny 
 {^Nat.  Hist.  vii.  54)  distinguishes  between  natural 
 burial,  by  applying  to  it  the  word  sepelire;  and  burial 
 by  ceremony,  by  using  of  it  the  synonym  hianare) ; 
 Nicolaus  {De  Sepulchris  Hebr.  i.   8-14)  who  shews 
 
 that  ?ij<t^'  is  never  used  of  funeral  pomp,  nor  of  the 
 burial  of  the  body  in  the  ground  ;  I.  Eberhard 
 Busmann,  who  [in  16S2]  wrote  Dissertatio philol. 
 de  Scheol  Hebr.,  makes  a  statement  to  the  effect 
 that  he  had  examined  all  the  passages  in  the  O.  T., 
 and  pronounces  of  them  thus — '■  Nidhcin  eoriini 
 (excepto  forsan  uno  vel  altero,  de  quo  tamen  adhuc 
 dubitari  potest)  de  sepidchyv  necessario  est  intelligen- 
 dum  .  .  .  multa  tamen  contra  ita  sunt  comparata 
 ut  de  sepulchre  nullo  modo  intelligi  possint,  nee 
 debeant.'  Some  modem  writers,  who  have  spe- 
 cially examined  the  subject,  also  deny  that  >1NK^ 
 ei'er  means  '  the  grave.'  Thus  Breecher,  on  the  Iin- 
 fnortality  of  the  Soul  as  held  by  the  Jews  (and  Pareau, 
 Comment,  de  Immort.  ac  vitce  fnt.  notit.  1807). 
 
 *  The  passages  in  which  the  A.  V.  renders  p'lKti' 
 by  grave  are  these — Gen.  xxxvii.   35  ;  xlii.   38  ; 
 
 this  more  vague  sense  Ussher  [Works,  iii.  324) 
 says — '  When  Sheol  is  said  to  signify  the  grave,  the 
 term  grave  must  be  taken  in  as  large  a  sense  as  it 
 is  in  our  Saviour's  speech,  John  v.  28  ;  and  in  Is. 
 xxvi.  19,  according  to  the  LXX.  reading ;  upon 
 which  passage  writes  Origen  thus — '  Here  and  in 
 many  other  places  the  graves  of  the  dead  ai-e  to  be 
 imderstood,  not  such  only  as  we  see  are  builded  for 
 the  receiving  of  men's  bodies — either  cut  out  in 
 stones,  or  digged  down  in  the  earth  ;  but  ei'ery  plact 
 wherein  a  man^s  body  lieth  either  entire  or  in  pari 
 .  .  .  otherwise  they  which  are  not  committed  to 
 burial,  nor  laid  in  graves,  but  have  ended  their  life 
 in  shipwrecks,  deserts,  and  such  like  ways,  should 
 not  seem  to  be  reckoned  among  those  which  are 
 said  to  be  raised  from  the  grave'  {/n  Esai.  lib.  28 
 citatus  a   Pamphilo,   in  Apol.y     We  have   here, 
 
 then,    the  first  meaning   of  the    Hebrew    ?iSK^, 
 
 largely  applied,  as  we  have  seen,  in  our  A.  V.  to 
 '  the  grave,'  considered  in  a  universal  sense  (see  the 
 passages  in  the  last  note),  commensurate  with  death 
 itself  as  to  the  extent  of  its  signification.  (Comp. 
 ^  the  grave  and  gate  ofi death''  of  the  Engl.  Liturgy, 
 Collect  for  Easter  Even.)  Though  we  carefully 
 exclude  the  artificial  grave,  or  "I3p,  from  this  cate. 
 
 gory,  there  is  no  doubt,  as  Bishop  Lowth  has  well 
 shewn  (De  Sacra  Poesi  Hebr.  Prael.  vii.  [ed. 
 Oxon.  with  notes  of  Michaelis  and  Rosenmiiller, 
 1821],  pp.  65-69),  that  the  Hebrew  poets  drew  all 
 the  imagery,  with  which  they  describe  the  state 
 and  condition  of  the  dead,  from  the  funeral  rites 
 and  pomp,  and  from  the  vaulted  sepulchres  of 
 their  great  men.  The  Bishop's  whole  treatment  of 
 the  subject  is  quite  worth  perusal.  We  can  only 
 quote  his  final  remarks — '  You  will  see  this  tran- 
 scendent imagery  better  and  more  completely  dis- 
 played in  that  noble  triumphal  song  which  was 
 composed  by  Isaiah  (xiv.  4-27)  .  .  .  previous  to 
 the  death  of  the  king  of  Babylon.  Ezekiel  has 
 also  grandly  illustrated  the  same  scene,  with  simi- 
 lar machinery,  in  the  last  prophecy  concerning  the 
 fall  of  Pharaoh  (xxxii.  18-32).'  For  an  excellent 
 vindication  of  the  A.  V.  in  many  of  its  translations 
 of  the  grave,  we  refer  the  reader  to  the  treatise  ot 
 Archbishop  Ussher  (Answer  to  the  jfesuifs  Chal- 
 lenge, Works  [ed.  Elrington],  vol.  iii.,  pp.  319-324 
 and  332-340.     We  doubt  not  that,  if  grave  is  an 
 
 admissible  sense  of  P'lt^C',  our  translators  have,  on 
 
 the  whole,  made  a  judicious  selection  of  the  pas- 
 sages which  will  best  bear  the  sense  :  their  purpose 
 was  a  popular  one,  and  they  accomplished  it,  in  the 
 instance  of  7incertain  words  and  phrases,  by  giving 
 them  the  most  intelligible  turn  they  would  bear,  as 
 in  the  case  before  us.  We  undertake  not  to  decide 
 whether  it  would  be  better  to  leave  the  broad  and 
 generic  word  Sheol,  as  the  great  versions  of  anti- 
 quity did,  every^vhere ;  whether  (e.  g.)  Jacob's 
 lament   (Gen.    xxxvii.  35  ;  xlii.   38)  and  such  like 
 
 xliv.  29,  31  ;  I  Sam.  ii.  6  ;  i  Kings  ii.  6,  9  ;  Job 
 vii.  9  ;  xiv.  13  ;  xvii.  13  ;  xxi.  13  ;  xxiv.  19  ;  Ps. 
 vi.  5  [Hebr.  B.  6)  ;  xxx.  3  (4)  ;  xxxi.  17  (18)  ; 
 xlix.  14  (15)  [twice]  ;  xlix.  15  (16)  ;  Ixxxviii.  3  (4); 
 Ixxxix.  48  (49)  ;  cxli.  7  ;  Prov.  i.  12  ;  xxx.  16  ; 
 Eccl.  ix.  10 ;  Cantic.  viii.  6  ;  Is.  xiv.  1 1  [marg.  of 
 v.  9  has^rrtw]  ;  xxxviii.  lO,  18;  Ezek.  xxxi.  15; 
 Hos.  xiii.  14  [twice] ;  and  in  Jonah  ii.  2  (3)  the 
 margin  has  '  grave.' 
 
HELL 
 
 273 
 
 HELL 
 
 passages  would  be  more  suitably,  if  not  correctly,  * 
 rendered  by  the  simple  retention  of  the  original 
 word,  or  the  equally  indefinite  hades.  (2)  The 
 other  meaning  of  ^IXK',  rendered  IleU'm  thirty-one 
 
 passages  of  A.  V.,  according  to  the  more  ancient 
 and,  as  it  seems  to  us,  preferable  opinion,  makes  it 
 local :  i.  e. ,  the  place  of  disevibodied  spirits.  ("AtSi;? 
 M  riTTOs  riijlv  deiSTjs,  ■fjyovv  d(pavri$  Kal  dyviaaros,  6 
 ras  ^i'l'xots  iifJ-uiv  ivrev^ev  endTjijiovcras  Bex^/J-evos, 
 Andr.  Cjesaricus  in  Apocal.  c.  63.)  A  later  opinion 
 supposes  the  word  to  indicate  '  not  the  place  where 
 souls  departed  are,  hvX  the  state  and  condition  of  the  | 
 dead,  or  their  permansion  in  death,'  as  Bishop  Pear- 
 son calls  it  ( Ovwi' [ed.  Chevallier],  p.  439).  On  this 
 opinion,  which  that  great  divine  '  cannot  admit  as  a 
 full  or  proper  exposition,'  we  shall  say  nothing 
 more  than  that  it  is  at  best  only  a  deduction  from 
 the  foregoing  local  definition.  That  definition  we 
 have  stated  in  the  broadest  terms,  because,  in  re-  ' 
 ference  to  Dr.  Is.  Barrow's  enumeration  (given  at  \ 
 the  beginning  of  this  article)  of  the  questions  which 
 have  arisen  on  the  subject  before  us,  we  believe 
 that  Holy  Scripture  warrants  the  most  ample  of  all 
 the  positions  suggested  by  that  eminent  writer,  to 
 the  effect  that  the  Sheol  or  Hell,  of  which  we  treat,  ' 
 is  not  merely  '  the  place  of  good  and  happy  souls,' 
 or  '  that  of  bad  and  miserable  ones,' but  'indiffer- 
 ently and  in  common  of  both  those.'  We  propose 
 to  arrange  the  Biblical  passages  so  as  to  describe, 
 first,  the  state  of  the  occupants  of  Sheol,  and,  secondly, 
 the  locality  of  it,  in  some  of  its  prominent  features. 
 As  to  the  first  point,  Sheol  is  (d)  the  receptacle 
 of  the  spirits  of  all  that  depart  this  life.f     This 
 
 *  There  is  some  force  in  the  observation  often 
 made  (see  Corn-a  Lapide,  on  Gen.  xxxvii.  35  ; 
 Bellarmine  and  others,  adduced  by  Leigh,  Crit. 
 Sacra,  i.  239),  that  '  it  was  not  the  grave  of  Joseph 
 M'hich  Jacob  meant  ;  for  he  thought  indeed  that 
 his  son  was  devoured  of  wild  beasts  and  not  buried.' 
 See  more  on  this  passage  in  Pearson,  Creed  [ed.  I 
 Chevallier],  p.  437  ;  Fulke,  Translations,  etc.,  p.  ' 
 314;  both  which  writers  defend  the  version  of 
 grave.  Ainsworth  in  loc.  (among  the  older  com- 
 mentators), and  Knobel  (among  the  moderns), 
 stand  for  the  general  word  hell  [Knobel,  Schatten- 
 reich\  Rosenmiiller  learnedly  states  both  views, 
 and  leans  in  favour  of  '  locum,  ubi  mortui  um- 
 brarum  instar  degunt,'  Scholia,  vol.  i.,  p.  576. 
 
 +  Among   the    Scriptural  designations    of   the 
 
 inhabitants  of  Sheol  is  D''>\D"1  ['"iPHp  (in  Prov.  xxi. 
 
 16)  \i.  rendered  'congregation  of  the  dead''  (or  de- 
 parted), in  A.  V.  This  is  better  than  LXX.  avva- 
 yuyrj  yi-ydvTwv ;    and   Vulg.    '  coetus    gigantnrn!' 
 
 There  is  force  in  the  word  pHp  thus  applied,  de- 
 rived from  the  use  of  the  word  to  designate  the 
 great  '  congregatiofi '  of  the  Jewish  nation  ;  see  vol. 
 i.  p.  554,  col.  I,  of  this  work].  For  the  use  of  the 
 word  D^i<D"l,  as  apphcable  to  the  dead,  see,  espe- 
 cially, Bottcher,  de  Infer,  pp.  94-10,  sec.  193-204. 
 The  word  occurs  in  this  sense  also  in  the  grand 
 passage  of  Is.  xiv.  [In  ver.  9  '  Sheol  stirs  up  its 
 Rephaii7i,^  on  the  entrance  of  the  spirit  of  the  king 
 of  Babylon.  ]  D''^5D'1  is  met  with  in  six  other  places 
 in  the  same  sense  of  departed  spitits.  It  is  con- 
 nected with  nSl,    '  weak,'  which  occurs  in  Num. 
 
 xiii.  18,  and  other  passages  (see  Fiirst  Hebr.   W.-b. 
 ii.  383).     The  gentile  noun  (mentioned  in  Gen.  xiv. 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 appears  from  Ps.  Ixxxix.  47,  48  ;  and  Is.  xxxviiL 
 18,  19  (in  which  latter  verse  the  opposition  in  its 
 universal  sense  between  sheol  and  the  state  of  life 
 in  this  world  is  to  be  obseiTed).  We  do  not  hesi- 
 tate with  Archbishop  Ussher  {Worhs,  iii.  318)  to 
 
 translate  pij^t^' in  these  passages   ' helP  or  'sheol, 
 
 instead  of  'graved  as  in  A.  V.  Sheol,  therefore, 
 is  (;3')  the  abode  of  the  wicked.  Num.  xvi.  33  ;  Job 
 xxiv.  19;  Ps.  i.\.  17  (Hebr.  Bib.  18)  ;  xxxi.  17 
 (18)  ;  Prov.  V.  5  ;  ix.  18  ;  Is.  Ivii.  9  ;  and  (7')  oj 
 the  good  [both  in  their  'disembodied'  condition], 
 Ps.  xvi.  ID,  comp.  with  Acts  ii.  27,  31  ;  Ps.  xxx. 
 3  (4);  xlix.  15  (16);  Ixxxvi.  13;  Is.  xxxviii.  10, 
 comp.  with  Job.  iii.  17-19  ;  Hos.  xiii.  14,  comp. 
 with  I  Cor.  XV.  55.  With  regard  to  the  second 
 point,  touching  some  local  features  of  Sheol,  we 
 find  it  described  as  very  deep  (Job  xi.  8)  ;  dark 
 (Job  X.  21,  22)  ;  (yet  confest  and  open  to  the  eye  of 
 God,  Job  xxvi.  6);  ivith  'valleys''  [Gesen.,  Thes. 
 1348]  or  depths  of  various  gradations  (Ps.  Ixxxvi. 
 13  [comp.  with  Deut.  xxxii.  22]  ;  Prov.  ix.  18)  ; 
 -jvith  bars  Qob  xvii.  16  [comp.  with  Jonah  ii.  6]  and 
 gates  (Is.  xxxviii.  10);  situated  beiieath  us;*  hence 
 the  dead  are  said  '  to  go  down '  [TT>]  to  Sheol, 
 
 Num.  xvi.  30,  33  ;  Ezek.  xxxi.  15,  16,  17  [comp. 
 with  Job  vii.  9  ;  Gen.  xiii.  38]).  We  have  seen 
 how  some  have  derived  the  name  of  Sheol  from  its 
 insatiability  ;  such  quality  is  often  attributed  to  it  : 
 it  is  all-devouring  (Prov.  i.  12);  nei'er  satisfied 
 (Prov.  xxx.  16 ;  Is.  v.  14),  and  inexorable  (Cant, 
 viii.  7). 
 
 II.  There  is  in  the  Hades  ("AS^s)  of  the  N.  T. 
 an  equally  ample  signification  with  the  Sheol  of  the 
 O.  T.,  as  the  abode  of  both  happy  and  miserable 
 beings.  Its  characteristics  are  not  dissimilar ;  it  is 
 represented  as  'a  prison''  (comp.  i  Pet.  iii.  19, 
 where  inhabitants  of  hades  are  called  ra  kv  ipv- 
 XaKTJ  TTvevfiaTo)  ;  with  gates  and  bars  (7ri;Xat  ^'Sou, 
 Matt.  xvi.  18;  comp.  with  the  phrase  ds  'A5ow 
 of  Acts  ii.  27,  31,  with  the  ellipsis  of  Sw/xa  or 
 oIkov)  ;  and  locks  (the  '  keys '  of  Hades,  at  KXetj 
 rod  "AiSou,  being  in  the  hands  of  Christ,  Rev.  i.  18) ; 
 its  situation  is  also  doiotvwards  (see  the  ews  q.hov  ku- 
 Tapi^acr'^Tjarj  of  Matt.  xi.  23,  and  Luke  x.  15).  As 
 might  be  expected,  there  is  more  plainly  indicated 
 in  the  N.  T.  the  separate  condition  of  the  righteous 
 and  the  wicked  ;  to  indicate  this  separation  other 
 terms  are  used  ;  thus,  in  Luke  xxiii.  43,  Paradise 
 (Trapdo€iaos — no  doubt  different  from  that  of  St. 
 Paul,  2  Cor.  xii.  4,  which  is  designated,,  in  Rev. 
 ii.    7j    ^s   6   irapadecffos   tov   Qeov,    the  supernal  "Y 
 
 5  and  elsewhere,  and  rendered  Rephaim  and  Giants) 
 
 is  of  the  same  form,  but  probably  of  a  different 
 
 I  origin  (see  Gesenius,  Thes.  1302). 
 
 j       *  Comp.  Joseph.  {Antiq.  xviii.  i.  3),  who  when 
 
 i  describing  the  tenets  of  the  Jewish  sects  attributes 
 
 i  to  the   Pharisees  the  belief  of  a   future  state,   in 
 
 which  '  rewards  and  punishments'  will  be  dealt  out 
 
 I  'to  men  in  their  disembodied  state'  {ral%  ^j/vxcus) 
 
 I  '  under  the  earth'    {inrb  x^ovbs  diKaidiaeis  re  Kal  ti 
 
 yuds,    K.  T.  X.)     On  the  phrase   of  the   creed  'dt- 
 
 scended'mto  Hell,'  and  sundry  uses  of  Tl''  and  KareK- 
 
 ^eh  as  not  necessarily  implying  local  descent,  but 
 rather  '  removal  from  one  place  to  another,' see 
 Ussher,   Works,  iii.  392,  393. 
 
 +  The  distinction  between  the  upper  and  the 
 lower  Paradise  was  familiar  to  the  Jews.  In  Eis- 
 enmenger's   Enidccktes   JudcJithum,    ii.     295-322, 
 
HELL 
 
 274 
 
 HELL 
 
 Paradise;  see  Roh'mson, -Lexicon,  N.  T.,  pp.  13, 
 547  ;  Wahl,  Clavis,  N.  T.,  p.  376 ;  Kuinoel  [Ed. 
 Lond.]  on  N.  T.  vol.  ii.  237  ;  and,  especially, 
 Meyer,  Kom)nentar  ti.  d.  Neiie  Test.  [ed.  4]  vi. 
 292,  and  the  authorities  there  quoted  by  him)  is 
 used  to  describe  that  part  of  Hades  which  the 
 blessed  dead  inhabit — a  figurative  expression,  so 
 vi'ell  adapted  for  the  description  of  a  locality  of 
 happiness,  that  the  inspired  writers  employ  it  to 
 describe  the  three  happiest  places,  the  Eden  of  In- 
 nocence, tlie  Hades  of  departed  saints,  and  the 
 heaven  of  their  glorious  rest  [Paradise].  Another 
 figurative  expression  used  to  designate  the  happy 
 part  of  Hades  is  'Abraham's  bosom,'  6  koXttos 
 ^A^pad/j,,  Luke  xvi.  22.  (St.  Augustine,  who  says 
 [QuiTsf.  Evang.  ii.  38]  ;  '  Sinus  Abrahas  requies 
 est  beatorum  pauperum  ...  in  quo  post  banc 
 vitam  recipiuntur,'  yet  doubts  whether // (7 (yt-j- is  used 
 at  all  in  N.  T.  in  a  good  sense.  It  is  too  strong 
 a  statement  to  say  that  the  great  father  denies  this 
 use  of  the  word  (Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible,  i.  781);  he 
 does  not  do  this,  he  only  expresses  his  doubt,  aris- 
 ing from  imperfect  knowledge.  He  says  \^Ep. 
 clxxxvii.,  Works  iu  689],  'Whether  the  hoso>n  of 
 Abraham,  where  the  wicked  Dives  was,  when  in 
 his  torment  he  beheld  the  poor  man  at  rest,  were 
 either  to  be  deemed  the  same  as  Paradise,  or  to  be 
 thought  to  pertain  to  hell  or  hades,  /  cannot  def?ie,* 
 non  facile  dixerim;'  so  also  he  writes  o?i  Ps.  Ixxxv. 
 [Works,  iv.  912]).  For  an  explanation  of  the  phrase, 
 see  Abraham's  Bosom.  HI.  We  need  not  linger 
 over  the  Biblical  sense  of  our  last  word  Veevva.^  As 
 IlapdSeto-os  is  not  limited  to  the  finite  happiness  of 
 Hades,  but  embraces  in  certain  passages  the  ulti- 
 mate blessedness  of  heaven,  so  there  is  no  violence 
 in  supposing  that  Veevva  (from  thefnite  significa- 
 tion which  it  possibly  bears  in  Matt.  v.  29,  30  ; 
 xxiii.  15,  equivalent  to  the  Tdprapos  referred  to  by 
 St.  Peter,  2  Epist.  ii.  4,  as  the  place  where  the 
 
 much  of  their  curious  opinions  on  the  subject  is 
 collected.  In  p.  298  are  given  the  seven  names  of 
 the  heavenly  Paradise  ;  while  in  the  next  three  are 
 contained  the  seven  names  of  the  loiver  Paradise  of 
 Hades. 
 
 *  Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor  ( Works,  by  Heber,  vol. 
 vi.  p.  552)  justly  censures  the  hesitancy  of  the 
 great  Latin  Father  :  '  If  Christ's  soul  was  in  Para- 
 dise, he  was  in  Hades:  in  vain,  therefore,  does  St. 
 Austin  torment  himself  to  tell  how  Christ  could  be 
 in  both  places  at  once,  when  it  is  no  harder  to  tell 
 how  a  man  may  be  in  England  and  London  at  the 
 same  time.'  Hades  is  no  doubt  mentioned  as  the 
 name  of  the  region  to  which  Christ's  soul  went 
 after  the  sufferings  of  Calvary,  previous  to  his  re- 
 surrection. Acts  ii.  31.  Once  (Luke  xvi.  23)  the 
 same  term  bears  undoubtedly  a  bad  sense,  equi- 
 valent to  Gehenna  ;  but  this  fact  only  proves  the 
 indefiniteness  of  the  meaning  of"At5?;s  in  the  N.  T. 
 
 like  that  of  h^m  in  the  O.  T. 
 
 +  We  think  it  worth  while  to  refer  the  reader  to 
 a  '  Discourse'  by  the  learned  Joseph  Mede  (  Works, 
 p.  31-33)  on  Gehenna,  which  he  shews  to  have  not 
 been  used  to  designate  '  Hell'  before  the  captivity. 
 He,  in  the  same  treatise,  dwells  on  certain  Hebrew 
 words  and  phrases,  which  were  in  use  previous  to 
 that  epoch  for  designating  Hades  and  its  inhabi- 
 tants— among  these  he  especially  notes  □''XDI  and 
 
 '-\  ^i\p,  which  we  have  observed  on  above. 
 
 fallen  angels  are  reserved  jinto  Judgment,  or  '  until 
 sentence,'  comp.  Jude  v.  6)  goes  on  to  mean,  in 
 perhaps  most  of  its  occurrences  in  N.  T.,  the 
 final  condition  of  the  lost,  as  in  Matt,  xxiii.  33, 
 where  the  expression  r;  Kpia-is  tt)s  -yeevvTjs  means 
 probably  the  condemnation  [or  sentence]  to  Gehenna, 
 as  the  ultimate  doom.     [Gehenna.] 
 
 Synonymous  I'Pords  and  Phrases. — This  article 
 would  not  be  complete  without  at  least  a  cursory 
 enumeration  of  some  words  and  phrases,  which,  if 
 not  strictly  synonymous  with,  are  yet  illustrative  of 
 'hell.'  (Most  of  them  are  given  by  Eisenmenger, 
 Entdeck,  Jiid.,  ii.  324,  and  Galatinus,  de  Areanis, 
 vi.    7,  p.   345.)      I.   nO^n,  in  Ps.   cxv.    17,  where 
 
 the  phrase,    "^  il1>"73,    'all  that  go  down  into 
 
 silence,'  is  in  LXX.,  Travres  ot  Karaj^aiPovTes  ei's 
 g!5ov,  while  the  Vulg.  has  '  omnes  qui  descendunt  itt 
 inferum  (comp.  Ps.  xciv.    17).     2.  jnSN,  in  Job 
 
 xxvi.  6,  is  in  poetical  apposition  with  piXK'  (comp. 
 Prov.  xxvii.  20  [Kethib],  where  'K  is  in  conjunc- 
 tion with  'V),  forming  an  hendiadys  for  destructive 
 
 hell  ;  LXX.  "AtS?;?  koX  dirwXeia  ;  Yujg.  Inferiius  et 
 perditio  ;  A.  V.  '  Hell  and destructiofi'').-\-     3.  "1X3 
 
 ^^t^^  Ps.  Iv.  24;  a.  v.  '  pit  of  destruction  ;' \S^^. 
 
 <^peap  5ta0B-opas  ;  Vulg.  Puteus ^  interiius  (see  also 
 passages  in  which  113  and  DPIK^  occur  separately). 
 
 4-  niD?V,   with  or  without  TjtJ'n,  in  Ps.  cvii.  lo, 
 
 and  other  passages  ;  LXX.  2/fta  S-aj/droi; ;  Vulg. 
 Umbra  mortis ;  A.  V.  '■shadow  of  deathJ  5. 
 }*1N~ni*nnri,  in  is.  xliv.  23  ;  a.  v.  '  lower  parts  of 
 
 the  earth'  [Sheol  or  Hades,  Gesen.];  LXX.  Ta 
 S^e/xAta  t^s  7775  ;  Vulg.  Extrejua  ten-iE  (comp. 
 Ezek.  xxvi.  20,  etc.,  where  the  phrase  is  inverted, 
 nVrinn"f"IX  ;  of  similar  meaning  is  JliTinn  Ii3, 
 
 Ps.  Ixxxviii.  6  (7).  6.  nnSn,  in  Is.  xxx.  33  [ac- 
 cording to  Eisenmenger]  ;  for  another  application 
 of  this  word  see  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v.  ;  and  Rosen- 
 miiller,  in  loc.  7.  The  phrase  first  used  of  Abra- 
 ham, Gen.  XXV.  8  (where  it  occurs,  in  the  solemn 
 description  of  the  holy  patriarch's  end,  tnidiuay  be- 
 tweeji  death  and  burial),  'He  was  gathered  to  his 
 fathers,'  is  best  interpreted  of  the  departure  of  the 
 soul  to  Hades  to  the  company  of  those  who  pre- 
 ceded him  thither  (see  Cajetan,  in  loc,  and  Gesen. 
 Thes.,  s.  V.  flDX  [Niphal],  p.    131,  col.  l).     8.   To 
 
 ffKOTOs  TO  e^icTepov,  '  the  outer  darkness'  of  Matt, 
 viii.  12,  et  passim,  refers  probably  to  what  Jose- 
 phus  {Bell.  Jud.  iii.  25)  calls  ^'Stjs  crKOTiwrepos, 
 '  the  darker  Hades.' 
 
 Confrmation  of  these  Biblical  statements  in  Hea- 
 then Tradition. — St.  Chrysostom  {Homil.  ix.  on 
 2  Corinth.,  Opera,  x.  502;  and,  still  more  fully, 
 De  Fato  et  Proz'identia,  orat.  iv. ,  Opei-a,  ii.  766) 
 says  on  this  subject  :—  '  The  Greeks,  though  fool- 
 ish in  many  points,  and  barbarians,  and  poets,  and 
 philosophers,  and  indeed  all  mankind,  do  herein 
 agree  with  us,  though  not  all  alike,  and  say  that 
 
 f  '  Sciendum  quod /fr /;{/^r«KOT  et perditionem, 
 qucE  duo  in  Scripturis  ssepe  conjunguntur,  signifi- 
 catur  status  mortuorum — et  non  solum  damna- 
 torum,  ut  nos  fere  ex  his  vocibus  auditis  concipi- 
 mus,  sed  in  genere  status  defunctorum.''  Cornel. 
 Jansenius,  In  Prov.  c.  xv. 
 
HELL 
 
 275 
 
 HELLENISTS 
 
 there  are  certain  seats  of  judgment  in  Hades :  so 
 manifest  and  confest  a  thing  is  this.'  On  no  sub- 
 ject of  revelation  is  witness  so  closely  borne  by 
 heathendom  as  on  this.  The  great  poems  of 
 Homer  (a  vast  deposit  of  primeval  and  patriarchal 
 tradition,  outside  of  Scripture  revelation,  see  Glad- 
 stone's Homer  and  the  Homeric  Age,  vol.  i.  ])p. 
 7-9)  are  full  of  the  doctrine  of  a  future  state  (Glad- 
 stone, ii.  167-171).  Hades  (and  below  it  Tar- 
 tarus) is  subterranean,  11.  xx.  63  ;  Od.  v.  185  ; 
 dark  and  spacious,  with  mountains,  woods,  and 
 waters,  //.  viii.  16  ;  Od.  x.  509  '■>  having  strong 
 gates,  II.  viii.  366  ;  Od.  xi.  622  ;  inhabited  by  the 
 shades  of  all  who  quit  life.  It  is  a  very  remark- 
 able coincidence  that  conspicuous  among  the  in- 
 habitants of  the  Homeric  Tartarus  and  Hades  are 
 Giants  and  Titans ;  while  the  Rephaini  [same 
 word  as  Giants]  are  a  considerable  part  of  the 
 population  of  the  Hebrew  Sheol  (see  above,  and 
 Gladstone,  ii.  163-166,  where  a  comparison  is 
 made  between  Homer  and  certain  passages  of  the 
 O.  T.  and  the  Apocrypha).  We  cannot  but  call 
 the  reader's  attention  to  the  wonderful  similarity  in 
 detail  between  the  grand  passages  of  Is.  xiv.  and 
 Ezek.  xxxii.  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Ne/cwa  [or 
 as  Dante  calls  it,  the  Inferno^  of  Odyssey  xi., 
 imitated  so  fully  by  Virgil,  ^ti.  vi. ,  and  repeated 
 in  another  relation  in  the  beginning  of  Odyssey 
 xxiv.  Details  are  here  impossible  ;  but  who  can 
 detect  without  admiration  the  similarity  of  thought 
 between  the  sensation  in  Sheol  which  thrills 
 through  its  shadowy  people  when  the  spirit  of 
 '  Lucifer'  enters  ['  Hell  from  beneath  is  moved  for 
 thee  ...  it  stirreth  up  the  dead  for  thee,  even  all 
 the  chief  ones  of  the  earth,'  Is.  xiv.  9],  and  the  ex- 
 citement in  Hades  of  the  spirits  of  the  mighty 
 dead  when  Achilles  enters  [Od.  xxiv.  19-21) — 
 
 "iis  01  y.lv  Trepl  kelvov  ofiiXeov  •  dyxi/^oXov  5k 
 
 "HXuS-'  ^Trt  ^vxv  ^ Ayafxefj.i'oi'os  'ArpeiSao 
 
 ' AxwiJiivT]  •  wepl  5'  dXXai  dyr]y^pa^\     k.  r.  X. 
 
 (Comp.  also  Ezek.  xxxii.  21  ['The  strong  among  the 
 mighty  shall  speak  to  him,'  the  king  of  Egypt,  '  out 
 of  the  midst  of  hell,'  etc.],  and  Od.  xi.  and  ALn. 
 vi.,  passim).  On  the  general  subject,  a  couplet 
 preserved  by  Clement  of  Alex.,  .Strom,  v.,  ascribed 
 to  either  Diphilus  or  Philemon,  distinctly  mentions 
 the  twofold  division  of  Hades  (the  Elysium  and 
 the  Tartarus),  for  the  blest  and  the  miserable  : — 
 
 Ka2  yh.p  Ka^^  "KZifv  hvo  rpi^ovs  vo/nlio/j-ev 
 MLav  dLKo.ioii',  x^'^'^P'^^  d(re^wi>  odov. 
 
 (Comp.  Luke  xvi.  ver.  22  with  23. ) 
 
 Jewish  Opinions. — For  these  the  reader  is  re- 
 ferred to  the  Apocryphal  books — 2  Esdr.  ii.  29  ; 
 iv.  8  ;  viii.  53  ;  Tobit  xiii.  2  ;  Wisdom  xvii.  14  ; 
 Eccles.  xxi.  10  ;  Ii.  5,  6  ;  Song  of  Childr.  ver.  66  : 
 the  doctrines  here  do  not  essentially  differ  from 
 what  occur  in  the  O.  T.  (comp.  Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xviii.  1.3;  and  see  Prideaux,  Cottnection  [ed.  Ox.  ], 
 ii.  367).  Later  Rabbinical  opinions  are  copiously 
 stated  by  Eisenmenger,  Entdeck.  Jziden.,  vol.  ii. 
 pp.  322-369  [according  to  these  there  are  two  Hells 
 (as  there  are  two  Paradises),  and  a  sevenfold  divi- 
 sion of  abodes  therein]  ;  and  by  Bartolocci,  Bib- 
 lioth.  Rabbin.,  ii.  128,  sqq.  ;  a  shorter  statement, 
 containing  both  Rabbinical  and  classical  passages, 
 occurs  in  Wetstein,  New  Test.  i.  768,  769.  For 
 Cabalistic  doctrines  on  the  subject,  see  Reuchlini, 
 Cabala,  lib.  ii.  pp.  675,  676. 
 
 Patristic  Cotnments. — These  are  abundant ;  the 
 
 opinions  of  the  Greek  Fathers  are  largely  collected 
 by  Suicer,  Thes.  Eccles.  vol.  i.  pp.  87-96.  The 
 reader  will  also  find  very  many  quoted  from  the 
 Fathers  of  both  East  and  West  in  Abp.  Ussher's 
 Anstu.  to  Jcstdt,  chap,  viii.,  Limbtis  Patrum,  and 
 Christ's  descent  into  Hell.  St.  Jerome,  in  Epist.  ad 
 Ephes.,  Works,  vii.  (i)  613,  holds  that  Hades  is 
 literally  'in  inferiori  parte terrje.'  St.  Chrysostom 
 discourages  subtle  questions  about  the  precise  site 
 of  Hell  ;  as  for  himself,  he  is  inclined  to  suppose 
 that  it  is  '  somewhere  ojit  of  this  worhV  —"Y.^ii3  ttov, 
 (is  170)76  oTfxai,  Tov  Kdafiov  tovtov  iravrds  [Epist.  act 
 Pom.  Ilomil.  xxxi.  [Works,  ed.  Bened.  vol.  ix. 
 828]).  On  the  general  subject,  besides  the  works 
 which  we  have  referred  to,  passim,  in  this  article 
 (especially  Bdttcher's  work  [of  which,  '  Tract,  ii. 
 cap.  I,'  i.  e.,  from  page  64  to  loi,  is  veiy  valuable], 
 where  a  mass  of  authors  is  adduced,  and  Abp. 
 Ussher's  treatise,  which  is  also  of  great  use  to  the 
 student),  we  may  mention  the  art.  Inferi  in  Hoff- 
 mann's Lexicon,  vol.  ii.  p.  625  ;  Gilder's  articles 
 Hades,  Hell,  Geheiina  (in  Ylerzo^^^Peal Encyclop.) ; 
 Delitzsch,  Comment,  iiber  d.  Psalter,  i.  123-126  ; 
 Keil  and  Delitzsch,  Bibl.  Commentar,  i.  187  ; 
 Thrupp,  Psalms,  vol.  i.  pp.  110-112;  Bp.  Hor- 
 sley.  Psalms,  pp.  199,  200 ;  Calmet,  Diet,  [by 
 Mansi],  s.  v.  Infernus  ;  Comment,  [also  by  Mansi], 
 vol.  V.  pp.  133-144,  containing  a  treatise  called. 
 Dissert,  de  7iatura  Anima:  et  ejus  post  mortem 
 statu. 
 
 Conclusion. — We  have  purposely  abstained  from 
 discussing  all  points  which  fall  under  controversial 
 theology  as  unsuitable  to  this  work,  such  as  the 
 subject  of  the  eternity  of  hell-punishment.  In  one 
 sense,  indeed,  we  must  predicate  a  //;;///  of  such 
 punishment.  In  Rev.  xx.  13,  14,  it  is  certamly 
 intimated  that  Hades,  as  the  companion  of  Death, 
 has  an  agency  [the  best  commentators  supposing  a 
 personification  of  the  infernal  powers  in  this  pas- 
 sage, see  Alford,  Meyer,  De  Wette]  which  will 
 cease  at  a  given  time  ;  but  as  this  surrender  of  a 
 special  function,  which  was  obviously  temporal 
 from  the  first,  is  admitted  on  all  hands,  the  polemi- 
 cal question  is  untouched  by  our  admission.  The  ^ 
 \lp.vt\  TOV  TTvpds  of  tliese  verses  is  probably  equi- 
 valent toyievva  in  its  permanent  character,  of  which 
 we  have  treated.  Our  Lord  predicates  of  r/  7eei'>'a 
 the  strong  attribute  of  t6  ttO/j  t6  dajBearov,  Mark 
 ix.  43-48  ;  this  attribute  gives  consistency  to  the 
 grand  statement  of  St.  John  in  the  passage  of  the 
 Apocalypse  which  we  have  just  considered  — 
 P.  H. 
 
 HELLENISTS,  The  [ol  'EW-nnarat).  This 
 term  occurs  twice  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (vi. 
 I  ;  ix.  29)  as  the  designation  of  a  class  of  persons 
 with  whom  the  Apostles  came  in  contact  at  Jeru- 
 salem at  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel.  In  the  for- 
 mer instance  they  appear  as  members  of  the  church 
 at  Jerusalem  ;  in  the  latter  as  the  decided  and 
 violent  adherents  of  Judaism,  with  whom  Paul  dis- 
 puted, and  by  whom  an  attempt  was  made  to  de- 
 stroy him.  The  word  is  found  in  another  passage 
 in  the  received  text  (Acts  xi.  20)  ;  but  the  proper 
 reading  there  seems  to  be  "E\\r]vas,  and  so  it  ap- 
 pears in  all  the  critical  editions  (comp.  Alford's  note 
 on  the  place). 
 
 All  that  can  with  certainty  be  concluded  from 
 the  references  to  this  class  in  the  N.  T.  is,  that,  on 
 the  one  hand,  they  were  Jews  either  by  descent  or 
 through  proselytism,   and  on  the  other  that  they 
 
HELLENISTS 
 
 276 
 
 HELLENISTS 
 
 were  in  some  way  distinct  from  another  class  of 
 Jews  who  are  designated  ol  'Eppaioi.  Could  we 
 determine  exactly  the  sense  in  which  this  latter 
 designation  was  used  it  would  enable  us  to  fix  the 
 meaning  of  that  with  which  it  is  placed  in  opposi- 
 tion ;  but  unfortunately  it  is  from  this  very  opposi- 
 tion that  it  derives  the  special  meaning  which  it 
 bears  as  so  placed  ;  so  that  we  have  rather  to 
 determine  the  sense  of  ol  'EjSpdioi,  from  that  of  ol 
 'EWTjviaTai  than  the  reverse. 
 
 Uncertainty  as  to  the  constitutive  difference  be- 
 tween these  two  classes  seems  to  have  existed  from 
 a  very  early  period ;  as  appears  from  the  Peshito 
 
 version,  which  in  the  one  passages  gives  (  i  10  », 
 
 Greeks,  in  the  other  explains  the  term  as  [^)0Q1j 
 
 ZuIjOj.    0001    ,_j_i.j_»5    ^^  ■  \  »],  Jeivsiuho 
 
 knew  Greek ;  and  also  from  Chrysostom  having 
 found  it  necessary  to  explain  the  word  to  his 
 hearers  {Horn,  xiv.,  in  Act.  App.,  etc.)  It  is  not 
 surprising,  therefore,  that  a  considerable  variety  of 
 opinion  on  this  point  should  have  emerged.  The 
 opinions  which  have  been  advanced  may  be  distri- 
 buted under  the  following  heads  : — 
 
 1.  The  distinctive  difference  between  them  was 
 simply  one  o^  language;  the  Hebrews  speaking  the 
 Aramaic  of  Palestine,  the  Hellenists  the  Greek. 
 This  is  the  most  ancient  opinion,  being  that  ex- 
 pressed in  the  Peshito,  and  given  by  Chrysostom, 
 Theophylact,  etc.  ;  and  it  is  the  one  which  has  re- 
 ceived the  largest  number  of  suffrages  in  more  re- 
 cent times.  Among  its  advocates  are  Joseph 
 Scaliger,  Ileinsius,  Drusius,  Grotius,  Selden,  Hot- 
 tinger.  Hug,  etc. 
 
 2.  The  distinction  was  partly  of  country  partly  of 
 language:  the  Hebrew  being  a  native  of  Judjea, 
 and  using  the  Aramaic  language ;  the  Hellenist  born 
 among  the  Gentiles,  and  using  the  speech  of  the 
 country  of  which  he  was  a  native.  So  Erasmus, 
 Lightfoot,  Bengel,  Wahl,  De  Wette,  Davidson, 
 Alford,  Baumgarten,  etc. 
 
 3.  The  difference  was  one  of  religious  history: 
 the  Hebrew  being  a  born  child  of  the  covenant ; 
 the  Hellenist  a  proselyte  from  heathenism.  So 
 Beza,  Salmasius,  Pearson,  Basnage,  Pfannkuche, 
 etc. 
 
 4.  The  difference  was  one  of  principle :  the 
 Hebrew  adhering  to  one  set  of  beliefs  or  modes  of 
 thought,  the  Hellenist  adopting  another.  Accord- 
 ing to  some  this  difference  had  the  effect  of  consti- 
 tuting the  Hellenists  into  a  distinct  sect  among  the 
 Jews,  such  as  the  Essenes  ;  whilst  others,  without 
 going  this  length,  regard  the  two  classes  as  stand- 
 ing to  each  other  veiy  much  in  the  relation  in 
 which  parties  in  the  state  holding  different  political 
 views,  or  parties  in  the  same  church  having  diffe- 
 rent aims  and  modes  of  regarding  religious  truth  in 
 modern  times,  may  stand  to  each  other ;  the  Hebrews 
 being  like  the  Conservative  or  High  Church  party, 
 while  the  Hellenists  advocated  a  more  progressive, 
 unfettered,  and  comprehensive  scheme  of  thinking 
 and  acting.  This  latter  view,  in  its  substance,  has 
 recently  found  an  able  advocate  in  Mr.  Roberts 
 [Discussions  on  the  Gospels,  p.  148,  ff. )  According 
 to  him  ^  the  P/cllenists  wtive  those  Jews,  whether  iie- 
 longing  to  Palestine  or  not,  who  willingly  yielded 
 to  the  influence  of  Gentile  civilisation  and  habits, 
 and  were  thus  distinguished  by  their  free  and 
 liberal  spirit ;  the  //edraas,  again,  were  the  rigid 
 
 adherents  to  Judaism,  who,  in  spite  of  the  providen- 
 tial agencies,  which  had  been  long  at  work,  en- 
 deavoured to  keep  up  those  peculiar  and  exclusive 
 usages  by  which  the  Jews  had  for  so  many  cen- 
 turiesbeenpreserved distinct  from  allothernations." 
 
 We  are  not  disposed  to  reject  entirely  any  of 
 of  these  opinions.  Each  of  them  seems  to  ha\  e  an 
 element  of  truth  in  it ;  though  the  contributions  they 
 make  to  the  whole  truth  on  this  subject  are  by  no 
 means  of  equal  importance.  The  last  alone  points 
 to  what  must  be  regarded  as  the  fundamental  and 
 formative  characteristic  of  Hellenism  among  the 
 Jews.  There  can  be  no  doubt  historically  that 
 some  such  distinction  as  that  to  which  it  refers  did 
 subsist  in  the  Jewish  nation  (see  Jost,  Gesch.  des 
 Judenthums,  i.  99  ff ,  345  ff.),  and  had  come  to  a 
 height  at  the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era  ; 
 and  nothing  can  be  more  probable  than  that  the 
 existence  of  such  a  distinction  should  manifest 
 itself  in  the  very  way  in  which  the  distinction  be- 
 tween the  Hebrews  and  the  Hellenists  is  asserted 
 to  have  shewn  itself  in  Acts  vi.  i,  ff.  It  is  in  agree- 
 ment with  this  also  that  Paul  should  have  entered 
 into  discussion  chiefly  with  the  Hellenist  Jews  at 
 Jerusalem ;  for  it  is  probable  that  as  his  early 
 Hellenic  culture  pointed  him  out  as  the  person 
 most  fitted  to  meet  them  on  their  own  ground,  he 
 may  have  been  specially  set  upon  this  work  by  the 
 other  apostles.  The  violent  hostility  which  existed 
 against  him  on  the  part  of  the  Hellenists  is  also 
 wholly  in  harmony  with  this  view  of  their  peculiar 
 characteristic  as  a  party  ;  for,  as  all  history  proves, 
 the  least  tolerant  of  argumentative  confutation  are 
 those  who  have  assumed  the  pretensions  of  the  en- 
 lightened and  advanced  thinkers  of  their  age.  The 
 position  which  this  view  assigns  to  the  Hebrews  as 
 a  party  is  further  wholly  in  accordance  with  the 
 notices  in  the  N.  T.  of  a  party  designated  ol  ck 
 Tr€.piTo/j.TJs,  a  phrase  which,  as  Mr.  Roberts  shews, 
 cannot  be  taken  simply  as  a  periphrase  for  'Jews,' 
 but  always  carries  in  it  an  allusion  to  some  speci- 
 ality of  doctrinal  opinion  or  religious  position.  On 
 the  other  hand,  we  can  hardly  accept  this  as  the 
 7vhole  truth  of  the  case.  If  we  simply  say  that  the 
 Hellenists  were  more  free  and  unfettered  in  their 
 opinions  and  usages  than  the  Hebrew,  we  have 
 only  in  a  very  vague  way  ascertained  their  position 
 and  the  reason  of  their  name.  Grant  that  the 
 Hellenists  were  the  liberal  and  less  fettered  party 
 among  the  Jews,  the  question  still  remains,  In 
 what  did  their  liberalism  shew  itself?  Not  cer- 
 tainly, as  Mr.  Roberts  seems  to  intimate,  in  a  dispo- 
 sition to  relax  the  rigidity  of  Judaic  ceremonial,  or 
 to  abridge  the  distinction  between  Jew  and  Gentile; 
 for  so  far  as  we  know  anything  of  the  Hellenist 
 party  they  were  as  bigotedly  zealous  for  these  as 
 were  the  Hebrews.  But  if  it  was  not  a  religious 
 liberalism  which  characterised  them,  of  what  kind 
 was  it  ?  To  this  question  any  theoiy  which  places 
 the  sole  characteristic  of  Jewish  Hellenism  in  libe-  ^ 
 rality  of  opinion  is  bound  to  furnish  an  answer  be-  ■ 
 fore  it  can  be  accepted. 
 
 If  we  would  proceed  on  solid  ground  in  this 
 inquiry  justice  must  first  of  all  be  done  to  the  word 
 itself  by  which  this  party  is  designated  in  the  N.  T. 
 That  word  is  a  formation  from  the  verb  eWtjvi^w, 
 which,  according  to  the  analogy  of  verbs  in  -ifw, 
 expresses  the  act  or  condition  of  one  who,  in  lan- 
 guage, general  deportment,  and  manner  of  life, 
 appears  as  a  Greek  ;  so  that  Hellenist  applied  to  a 
 Jew  would  indicate  that  he  was  a  favourer  of  what 
 
HELMET 
 
 277 
 
 HELPS 
 
 was  Grecian.  There  seems  no  ground  for  restrict- 
 ing this  to  language  ;  at  the  same  time,  this 
 element  cannot  be  overlooked,  because  not  only  is 
 it  incredible  that  any  man  should  be  called  '  Hel- 
 lenist' who  was  destitute  of  the  most  obvious  charac- 
 teristic of  a  Hellene,  his  language,  but  the  special 
 usage  of  eWrji'i^eii'  in  the  sense  of  '  to  s/>ea^  Greek' 
 (comp.  Xenoph.  Anak  vii.  3,  25  ;  Plat.  Prot.  327 
 E.  ;  Afeno.  82,  B.  ;  Arist.  J?/iet.  iii.  5,  i ;  12,  i ; 
 Lobeck,  Phryn.,  p.  379),  necessitates  our  includ- 
 ing this  meaning  in  'EXXijcicrr'^j.'  A  Hellenist, 
 then,  was  a  Jew  who  spoke  Greek.  It  does  not 
 follow  from  this,  however,  that  he  spoke  only 
 Greek,  or  that  those  Jews  who  were  not  Hellenists 
 were  ignorant  of  Greek.  It  is  probable  than  the 
 knowledge  of  Greek  was  so  widely  diffused  at  the 
 time  when  Christianity  appeared,  that  if  was  in  use 
 throughout  the  Jewish  community.  Still  it  is  con- 
 ceivable that  while  some  spoke  Greek  by  preference 
 and  ostentatiously,  others  preferred  Aramaic,  and 
 used  Greek  only  as  occasion  required,  and  that  the 
 former  stood  to  the  latter  in  somewhat  the  same 
 relation  as  the  Frenchified  Sa.\ons  of  whom  Higden 
 complains  (Warton,  Hist,  of  Engl.  Poetry,  i.  5) 
 stood  to  their  old-fashioned  countrymen,  both  par- 
 ties understanding  French,  but  the  former  using  it 
 by  preference  (which  Higden  calls  'Francigenari'), 
 the  latter  only  from  necessity.  The  preference  of 
 the  Greek  language,  however,  was  not  the  only 
 or  even  the  principal  distinction  of  the  Hellenist. 
 What  marked  him  out  most,  and  perhaps  excited 
 most  the  hostility  of  the  Hebrews  against  him,  was 
 his  adoption  of  heathen  manners,  usages,  and 
 modes  of  thought  ;  his  holding  himself  free  from 
 the  restrictions  under  which  the  other  conceived  all 
 true  Jews  to  be  placed  ;  and  especially  his  claiming 
 to  explain  the  Mosaic  ordinances  and  the  O.  T. 
 generally  according  to  a  free  speculation  unfettered 
 by  the  trammels  of  tradition.  In  this  we  conceive 
 lay  the  essential  characteristic  of  the  Hellenist. 
 With  this  might  coincide  other  peculiarities  ;  and 
 m  point  of  fact  it  is  probable  that  the  majority  of 
 the  Hellenists  were  bom  and  educated  out  of  Pales- 
 tine, and  that  many  of  them  were  proselytes  or  the 
 sons  of  proselytes.  But  these  were  accidents  rather 
 than  essentials  ;  that  which  constituted  the  Hel- 
 lenist was  his  acting  the  Greek,  living  after  Greek 
 fashions,  using  Greek  methods  of  speculation, 
 affecting  the  exclusive  use  of  the  Greek  tongue. 
 Meyer  tersely  defines  the  word  '  Ein  Jude  welcher 
 Griechische  nationalitat  hat,  und  besonders  Grie- 
 chisch  redet'  [Comment,  in  loc. )  The  'besonders,' 
 however,  seems  misplaced  here  ;  that  which  especi- 
 ally marked  the  Hellenist  was  his  leaning  to  Gentile 
 methods  and  forms  of  religious  speculation.  Hence 
 to  Helle7tise  came  in  the  writings  of  the  fathers  to  be 
 used  as  a  current  expression  for  the  adopting  of 
 Gentile  views  and  doctrines  (see  Suicer,  Thes.  Eccl. , 
 sub  voc),  though  it  is  sometimes  also  used  for  the 
 writing  of  good  Greek  or  the  favouring  of  Greek 
 customs. 
 
 On  the  assumption  that  the  Hellenists  were  dis- 
 tinguished by  speaking  Greek  has  been  reared  the 
 doctrine  of  a  Hellenistic  dialect  of  the  Greek 
 language,  a  doctrine  which  has  no  foundation  in 
 the  actual  phenomena  of  the  language  as  presented 
 in  the  LXX.  and  the  N.  T.  [Greek  Language]. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HELMET.     [Arms  ;  Armour.] 
 
 HELPS    (dvTtX^^i'eij ;    Vulg.    opitulationes ;    i 
 
 Cor.  xii.  28).  The  Greek  word,  signifying  aids 
 or  assistances,  has  also  this  meaning,  among  others, 
 in  the  classical  writers  {e.g.,  Diod.  Sic.  i.  87).  In 
 the  Sept.  it  answers  to  mty  (Ps.  xxii.  19),  to  jiyQ 
 (Ps.  cviii.  12),  and  to  yint  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  8).  It  is 
 found  in  the  same  sense,  Ecclus.  xi.  12  ;  2  Maccab. 
 xi.  26  ;  and  in  Josephus  {De  Bell.  Jitd.  iv.  5.  i). 
 In  the  N.  T.  it  occurs  once,  viz.,  in  the  enumera- 
 tion of  the  several  orders  or  classes  of  persons 
 possessing  miraculous  gifts  among  the  primitive 
 Christians  {ui  supra),  where  it  seems  to  be  used 
 by  metonymy,  the  abstract  for  the  concrete,  and  to 
 mean  helpers ;  like  the  words  Suj'd/ueis,  'miracles,' 
 i.  e. ,  workers  of  miracles  ;  Kv^epvi^aeis,  '  govern- 
 ments,' that  is,  governors,  etc.,  in  the  same  enu- 
 meration. The  Amencans,  it  is  well  known,  by 
 a  similar  idiom,  call  their  servants  '  helps.'  Great 
 difficuity  attends  the  attempt  to  ascertain  the 
 nature  of  the  office  so  designated  among  the  first 
 Christians.  Theophylact  explains  avriKritpeis  by 
 6,vTi-x_^(jdai  tCiv  aadevQiv,  helping  or  suppoiting  the 
 infirm.  And  so  Gennadius,  in  Qicumenius.  But 
 this  seems  like  an  inference  from  the  etymology 
 (see  Gr.  of  Acts  xx.  35).  It  has  been  assumed  by 
 some  eminent  modern  writers  that  the  several 
 '  orders'  mentioned  in  ver.  28,  correspond  respec- 
 tively to  the  several  'gifts'  of  the  Spirit  enu- 
 merated in  ver.  8,  9.  In  order,  however,  to  make 
 the  two  enumerations  tally,  it  is  necessary  to  make 
 '  divers  kinds  of  tongues '  and  '  interpretation  of 
 tongues,'  in  the  one,  answer  to  '  diversities  of 
 tongues''  in  the  other,  which,  in  the  present  state  of 
 the  7-eceived  text,  does  not  seem  to  be  a  cotnplete 
 correspondence.  The  7-esult  of  the  collation  is 
 that  dvTiXrj\(/eii  answers  to  'prophecy;'  whence  it 
 has  been  inferred  that  these  persons  were  such  as 
 were  qualified  with  the  gift  of  'lower  prophecy,' 
 to  help  the  Christians  in  the  public  devotions  (Bar- 
 rington's  Afiscellanea  Saci-a,  i.  166  ;  Macknight  on 
 I  Cor.  xii.  10-28).  Another  result  is,  that  'govem- 
 ments'  answers  'to  discerning  of  spirits.'  To  both 
 these  Dr.  Hales  very  reasonably  objects,  as  un- 
 likely, and  pronounces  this  tabular  view  to  be 
 '  perplexed  and  embarrassing'  (AWc  Analysis, 
 etc.,  Lond.  1830,  iii.  289).  Bishop  Horsley  has 
 adopted  this  classification  of  the  gifts  and  office- 
 bearers, and  points  out  as  'helps,'  i.e.,  persons 
 gifted  with  '  prophecies  or  predictions,'  such  per- 
 sons as  Mark,  Tychicus,  Onesimus.  Vitringa, 
 from  a  comparison  of  ver.  28,  29,  30,  infers  that 
 the  avrCK-qxpeis  denote  those  who  had  the  gift 
 of  interpreting  foreign  languages  [De  Synag.  Vet. 
 ii.  505,  Franeq.  1696)  ;  which,  though  certainly 
 possible,  as  an  arbit7-ary  use  of  a  very  significant 
 word,  stands  in  need  of  confirmation  by  actual 
 instances.  Dr.  Lightfoot  also,  according  to  his 
 biographer,  adopted  the  same  plan  and  arrived  at 
 the  same  conclusion  (Strype's  Life  of  Lightfoot, 
 prefixed  to  his  IVorks,  p.  4,  Lond.  1684).  But 
 Lightfoot  himself  explains  the  word  '  persons  who 
 accompanied  the  apostles,  baptized  those  who  were 
 converted  by  them,  and  were  sent  to  places  to 
 which  they,  being  employed  in  other  things,  could 
 not  come,  as  Mark,  Timothy,  Titus.'  He  ob- 
 serves that  the  Talmudists  sometimes  call  the  Le- 
 
 vites  D'^jrai'  '•nyDD,  'the  helpers  of  the  priests' 
 (vol.  ii.  p.  781).  Similar  catalogues  of  miraculous 
 gifts  and  officers  occur,  Rom.  xii.  6-8,  and  Eph. 
 iv.  II,  12  ;  but  they  neither  correspond  in  number 
 nor  in  the  order  of  enutneration.     In  the  former 
 
HEM  OF  THE  GARMENT 
 
 278 
 
 HENDERSON 
 
 '  prophecy'  stands  first,  and  in  the  latter,  second ; 
 and  in  the  former  many  of  the  terms  are  of  wide 
 import,  as  '  ministering,'  while  minute  distinctions 
 are  made  between  others,  as  between  '  teaching' 
 and  'exhortation,'  'giving'  and  'showing  mercy.' 
 Other  writers  pursue  different  methods,  and  arrive 
 at  different  conclusions.  For  instance,  Hammond, 
 arguing  from  the  etymology  of  the  word,  and  from 
 passages  in  the  early  writers  which  describe  the 
 office  of  relieving  the  poor  as  peculiarly  connected 
 with  that  of  the  apostles  and  bishops  by  the 
 deacons,  infers  that  avrCK.  '  denotes  a  special  part 
 of  the  office  of  those  men  which  are  set  down  at  the 
 beginning  of  the  verse.'  He  also  explains  KHjSfp- 
 vTjo-eis  as  another  part  of  their  office  (Hammond, 
 Covivient.  in  loc)  Schleusner  understands  ''deacons 
 who  had  the  care  of  the  sick.'  RosenmuUer, 
 '  Diaconi  qui  pauperibus,  peregrinis,  segrotis,  mor- 
 tuis,  procurandis  prjeerant.'  Bishop  Pearce  thinks 
 that  both  these  words  may  have  been  originally 
 put  in  the  margin  to  explain  bwajxeLs,  '  miracles 
 or  powers,'  and  urges  that  clvtiK.  is  nowhere  men- 
 tioned as  a  gift  of  the  Spirit,  and  that  it  is  not 
 recapitulated  in  ver.  29,  30.  Certainly  the  omis- 
 siott  of  these  two  words  would  nearly  produce  ex- 
 actitude in  the  recapitulation.  Bowyer  adopts  the 
 same  conjecture  ;  but  it  is  without  support  from 
 MSS.  or  versions.  He  also  observes  that  to  the 
 end  of  ver.  28  some  copies  of  the  Vulgate  add  '  in- 
 terpretationes  sermonum,'  epjJLTjveia^  yXwcra-Qv  ;  as 
 also  the  later  Syriac,  Hilary,  and  Ambrose.  This 
 addition  would  make  the  recapitulation  perfect. 
 Chrysostom  and  all  the  Greek  interpreters  con- 
 sider the  avrCk.  and  KvjSepv.  as  importing  the  same 
 thing,  viz.,  functionaries  so  called  with  reference 
 to  the  tivo  different  parts  of  their  office:  the  avrCk. 
 superintending  the  care  of  the  poor,  sick,  and 
 strangers  ;  the  Kvpepv.  the  burial  of  the  dead,  and 
 the  executorship  of  their  effects,  including  the  care 
 of  their  widows  and  orphans,  rather  managers  than 
 governors  (Blomfield's  Recensio  Synopt.)  After  all 
 it  must  be  confessed,  with  Doddridge,  that  '  we 
 can  only  guess  at  the  meaning  of  the  words  in 
 question,  having  no  principles  on  which  to  pro- 
 ceed in  fixing  it  absolutely'  [Family  Expositor,  on 
 I  Cor.  xii.  28).  (Alberti,  Glossar.  p.  123  ;  Suicer, 
 Thesaur.  in  voc.  ;  Salmasius,  De  Fce>io7-e  Trapez- 
 itico,  p.  409;  Wolfii  CurcB  Philolog.,  Basil.  1 741.) 
 — J.F.  D. 
 
 HEM  OF  THE  GARMENT.     [Fringes.] 
 HEMAN  (p"'n  ;  Sept.  klv6.v ;  Alex.  'H/xdc,  At'- 
 
 \x.ov6.v  ;  Alex.  kXtxav).  I.  A  person  of  the  tribe  of 
 Judah,  named  with  others  celebrated  for  their  wis- 
 dom, to  which  that  of  Solomon  is  compared  (l 
 Kings  iv.  31;  I  Chron.  ii.  6).     [Ezrahite.] 
 
 2.  Heman  (Sept.  k'uxav),  a  Kohathite  of  the 
 tribe  of  Levi,  and  one  of  the  leaders  of  the 
 temple-music  as  organised  by  David  (l  Chron.  vi. 
 33  ;  xvi.  41,  42). 
 
 HEMDAN    (l^On;    Sept.    'A^aaSa),    the   first 
 
 named  among  the  sons  of  Dishon,  of  whom  Esh- 
 ban  is  the  second  (Gen.  xxxvi.  26).  In  i  Chron. 
 i.  41,  he  is  called  Hamran  (pDH  ;  A.  V.  Amram). 
 
 Among  the  Arab  tribes  is  one  bearing  the  name 
 
 of  ^Atn)-dn  (    .l^tJi.),  and  dwelling  eastward  and 
 
 south-eastward  from  Akaba.  It  is  divided  into 
 five  clans,    among   which  are   the    Usbany,    the 
 
 Humeidy,  and  the  Humady  (Robinson,  i.  268). 
 These  names  are  not  far  apart  from  Eshban  and 
 Hemdan,  and  this  has  led  to  the  suggestion,  that 
 among  the  'Amran  we  are  to  seek  the  descendants 
 of  these  Horite  chiefs  (ICnobel,  Gen.  p.  256). — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEMLOCK.     [RosH.] 
 
 HEM  SEN,  JoHANN  Tychsen,  a  German 
 theologian,  was  born  at  Boldixum,  October  15, 
 1792.  After  studying  at  Copenhagen  and  Gottin- 
 gen,  he  became  doctor  of  philosophy  in  1821  at 
 the  University  of  the  latter  place,  where  he  was  ap- 
 pointed professor  extraordinary  of  theology  in  1823. 
 He  died  May  14,  1830.  His  chief  works  are — Die 
 Autheftticitiit  der  Schriften  des  F.vangelisten  Jo- 
 hanfies  (against  Bretschneider's  Probabilia),  1823  ; 
 De  Christologia  Joannis  Baptists,  1S24  ;  Der 
 Apostel  Paulits,  sein  Leben,  Wirken,  und  seine 
 Schriften,  published  after  his  death,  under  the  su- 
 perintendence of  LUcke  and  Goeschen,  1830. 
 Hemsen  was  an  amiable  and  pious  man,  but  of 
 very  moderate  abihties. — S.  D. 
 
 HEN,  prop.  Chen  (}n),  appears  in  the  A.  V. 
 
 as  the  son  of  Zephaniah  (Zech.  vi.  14).  The  LXX. 
 takes  the  word  as  a  common  noun,  and  translates 
 ets  x^P'-'''"-  •^'"'^  1,o(povlov.  This  is  approved  by 
 Ewald,  Hengstenberg,  and  Maurer,  who  interpret 
 it  of  the  hospitality  shown  to  the  deputies  by  Josiah. 
 But  for  this  there  seems  no  good  reason.  — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEN.  This  bird  is  mentioned  in  Scripture  in 
 Matt,  xxiii.  37,  and  Luke  xiii.  34,  where  the  word 
 used  is  simply  '6pvi$.     [CoCK.] 
 
 HENA  (yjn ;   Sept.  ^A.vd)  twice  mentioned  in 
 
 Scripture  (2  Kings  xix.  13  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  13),  and 
 one  of  a  number  of  cities  taken  and  destroyed  by 
 some  of  the  kings  of  Assyria  previous  to  the  inva- 
 sion of  Judcea  by  Sennacherib.  What  are  believed 
 to  be  the  ruins  and  traces  of  these  cities  are  still 
 found  on  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates.  Travellers 
 are  divided  as  to  the  exact  situation  of  Hena  ;  but 
 the  balance  of  probability  favours  the  site  near  to 
 Sepharvaim  or  Sippara  (now  Mosaib),  where  an 
 ancient  town  of  the  name  oi  Ana  still  exists,  with 
 the  ruins  of  what  appears  to  have  been  an  immense 
 city  in  its  immediate  neighbourhood  (see  Winer's 
 Reakvortcrbuch,  s.v. ;  'L.^yZixdHi,  Nineveh  and  Baby- 
 Ion,  355)--W.  J.  C. 
 
 HENADAD  (Tl3n,   Chenadad  ;   Sept.  'Hy- 
 
 aSaS),  the  head  of  a  Levitical  family,  distinguished 
 for  the  share  they  had  in  the  rebuilding  of  the 
 temple  (Ezra  iii.  9).  It  is  the  same  person  appar- 
 ently who  is  mentioned  as  the  father  of  Bavai  and 
 Binnui,  who  assisted  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jeru- 
 salem (Neh.  iii.  iS,  24),  and  the  latter  of  whom 
 signed  the  covenant  for  his  family  (x.  9). — t 
 
 HENDERSON,  Ebenezer,  D.D.,  was  bom  at 
 Dunfermline,  17th  Nov.  1784,  and  died  at  Mort- 
 lake  in  Surrey,  i6th  May  1858.  Having  devoted 
 himself  to  the  work  of  a  missionary  to  the  heathen, 
 he  set  out  with  a  view  of  proceeding  to  India  by 
 way  of  Denmark,  direct  access  to  the  British  pos- 
 sessions in  India  not  being  then  permitted  to  any 
 but  the  servants  of  the  Company.  Whilst  at 
 Copenhagen  circumstances  occurred  which  led  to 
 his  relinquishing  his  intention  of  going  to  the  East, 
 
HENOCH 
 
 279 
 
 HERAKLES 
 
 and  to  his  devoting  himself  to  Bible  circulation  in 
 the  north  of  Europe.  In  this  work  he  was  engaged 
 from  1805  to  1825,  and  in  pursuance  of  it  travelled 
 through  most  of  the  northern  countries,  and 
 through  the  south  of  Russia.  In  1818  he  pub- 
 lished his  T7-avels  in  Iceland,  2  vols.  8vo,  and  in 
 1826  his  Biblical  Researches  and  Travels  in  Russia, 
 I  vol.  8vo,  both  works  of  deep  and  lasting  interest. 
 While  engaged  in  circulating  the  Scriptures,  he 
 was  at  the  same  time  a  laborious  student  of  their 
 contents  ;  making  himself  familiar  with  the  ori- 
 ginal languages  and  with  all  the  helps  which  the 
 scholarship  of  the  Continent  afforded  to  the 
 exploration  of  their  meaning.  His  well-known 
 attainments  in  this  department  led  to  his  being 
 appointed  in  1826  president  of  the  Mission  College 
 connected  with  the  London  Missionary  Society  at 
 Hoxton  ;  and  in  1830  he  became  professor  of 
 Theology  and  Biblical  Literature  in  Highbury  Col- 
 lege. Declining  strength  obliged  him  to  resign 
 this  office  in  1850,  when  he  retired  to  Mortlake. 
 Here  he  officiated  for  some  time  as  pastor  of  a 
 small  congregation  at  East  Sheen  ;  but  this  duty, 
 too,  he  was  obliged  to  relinquish  some  years  before 
 his  death.  Besides  the  works  above  mentioned, 
 he  published  a  translation  of  the  Exposition  of  the 
 Prophecies  of  Daniel,  by  M.  F.  Roos  ('der  grosse 
 Schriftforscher  vol!  stiller  Tiefe,'  as  Delitzsch  calls 
 him),  Edin.  iSii  ;  The  great  Mystery  of  Godliness 
 Incontroz'crtible  (a  dissertation  on  I  Tim.  iii.  16), 
 Lond.  1830  ;  Divine  Inspiration  (being  the  con- 
 gregational lecture  for  1835),  Lond.  1836,  3d  ed., 
 1852  ;  The  Book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  translated 
 from  the  Original  Hebretv,  with  a  Commentary, 
 c7-itical,  philological,  and  exegetical,  etc.,  Lond. 
 1840  ;  I  he  Book  of  the  Twelve  Minor  Prophets 
 translated,  with  a  Commentaty,  etc.,  Lond.  1845  ; 
 The  Book  of  the  Prophet  feremiah  and  that  of 
 Latncntations,  etc.,  Lond.  1851  ;  The  Book  of  the 
 Prophet  Ezekiel,  etc.,  Lond.  1855  ;  besides  new 
 editions  of  Buck's  Theological  Dictionary,  and 
 Gutbir's  Syriac  Lexicon,  and  many  minor  works. 
 Dr.  Henderson  was  a  scholar  of  varied  and  exten- 
 sive attainments,  especially  in  Oriental  learning  ; 
 and  his  contributions  to  Biblical  literature  are 
 among  the  most  valuable  the  age  has  produced, 
 especially  his  lectures  on  inspiration  and  his  com- 
 mentaries on  Isaiah  and  the  minor  prophets.  He 
 received  the  honorary  degree  of  D.  D.  simultane- 
 ously from  Amherst  College,  U.S.,  and  from  the 
 university  of  Copenhagen,  a  spontaneous  tribute  to 
 his  learning,  diligence,  and  worth. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HENOCH  [Enoch].  This  appears  also  in  the 
 A.  V.  of  I  Chron.  i.  33  as  the  representative  of  the 
 name  which  is  more  correctly  given  as  Hanoch  in 
 I  Gen.  XXV.  4.     The  original  word  "lijri  is  the  same 
 
 [throughout. 
 
 HENRY,  Matthew,  was  bom  at  Broadoak, 
 [on  the  confines  of  Flintshire  and  Shropshire,  1 8th 
 October   1662,    and  died  at  Nantwich,  2  2d  June 
 1 7 14.      Having  received  his  preliminary  education 
 I  under  his  father,  the  Rev.  PhiHp  Heniy,  and  a  Mr. 
 Turner,  he  was  removed  to  the  academy  of  Mr. 
 Doolittle  at   Islington,   whence   he   proceeded   to 
 I  become  a  student  of  law  at  Gray's  Inn.      His  legal 
 studies,  however,  had  not  proceeded  far  when  he 
 relinquished  them  for  theology,  to  which  he  thence- 
 forward   devoted   himself      In    16S7    he   became 
 minister  of  a  Presbtyerian  congregation  at  Chester, 
 
 where  he  remained  twenty-five  years  ;  from  this  he 
 removed  in  1 7 12  to  Hackney,  where  he  was  per- 
 mitted only  a  short  term  of  labour.  His  death 
 occurred  whilst  on  a  preaching  tour  in  the  vicinity 
 of  his  first  charge.  His  great  work  is  his  Exposi- 
 tion of  the  Old  and  Nezv  Testaments,  of  which  he 
 had  completed  as  far  as  the  end  of  the  Acts  when 
 his  hand  was  arrested  by  death.  The  work  was 
 finished  by  others.  As  a  popular  commentary  on 
 the  Scriptures,  this  work  has  not  yet  been  sur- 
 passed. Without  pretending  to  be  elaborately 
 exegetical,  it  yet  throws  a  continuous  stream  of 
 light  on  the  meaning  of  the  sacred  writers  ;  the 
 author's  analysis  of  the  train  of  thought  is  gene- 
 rally satisfactory  ;  and  nothing  can  be  more  felici- 
 tous than  his  practical  applications  of  ^he  truths  he 
 educes.  If  the  work  does  not  shew  deep  learn- 
 ing, it  displays  unfailing  good  sense,  discriminating 
 thought,  sterling  piety,  and  a  constant  sympathy 
 with  the  sacred  writers,  which  is  often  of  more 
 avail  for  the  discovery  of  their  meaning  than  the 
 profoundest  learning. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HEPHER  OSri;  Sept.  '00^/)).     The  founder 
 
 of  the  family  of  the  Hephrites.  He  was  the  son. 
 of  Gilead,  in  the  line  of  Manasseh,  who  was  the 
 first  of  the  sons  of  Joseph,  by  his  wife  Asenath 
 (Num.  xxvi.  32).  The  daughters  of  his  son  Zelo- 
 phehad  are  noteworthy  as  the  first  to  have  ob- 
 tained the  right  of  inheriting  a  father's  property 
 (Num.  xxvii.  I,  sq.') 
 
 Another  person  of  the  name  of  Hepher  (Sept. 
 'H0dX)  is  mentioned  in  i  Chron.  iv.  6.  He  was 
 the  second  of  the  sons  of  Ashur  by  his  wife 
 Naarah. 
 
 And  a  third  is  Hepher  the  Mecherathite,  and 
 one  of  'the  valiant  men  of  the  armies'  of  David 
 (I  Chron.  xi.  25,  36).  His  name  is  somehow 
 omitted  in  the  list  of  David's  mighty  men  given  in 
 2  Samuel  (xxiii.  34).  Kennicott  is  of  opinion  that 
 the  name  as  occurring  in  I  Chron.  xi.  36  is  a  cor- 
 ruption ;  and  the  supposition  is  by  no  means  im- 
 probable if  he  is  right  in  regarding  the  catalogue 
 in  Samuel  as  the  original  of  the  two. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HEPHZIBAH  (nn-'-ysri;  Sept. 'Ai/'6/3d ;  Alex. 
 
 ^Ocpcripd),  the  wife  of  Hezekiah,  and  mother  of 
 Manasseh  (2  Kings  xxi.  i).  There  may  be  an 
 allusion  to  her  in  Is.  Lxii.  4,  where  the  prophet 
 says  this  name  shall  be  given  to  Jerusalem,  'be- 
 cause Jehovah  delighteth  (|*Sn)  in  thee;'  or  this 
 may  have  been  with  the  Jews  a  name  of  affec- 
 tion.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HERAKLES  {"SpaKXrjs)  is  mentioned  in  2  Mac- 
 cab,  iv.  19,  as  the  Tyrian  god  to  whom  the  Jewish 
 high-priest  Jason  sent  a  religious  embassy  (detopoi), 
 with  the  offering  of  300  drachmas  of  silver.  That 
 this  Tyrian  Hercules  (Herod,  ii.  44)  is  the  same  as 
 the  Tyrian  Baal,  is  evident  from  a  bilingual  Phoeni- 
 cian inscription  found  at  Malta  (described  by  Ge- 
 senius,  Alonian.  Ling.  Pha-n.  i.  96),  in  which  the 
 Phoenician  words,  '  To  our  Lord,  to  Melkarth,  the 
 Baal  of  Tyre,'  are  represented  by  the  Greek  "RpaK- 
 \€L  'Apxvy^Tri.  Moreover,  Herakles  and  Astarte 
 are  mentioned  together  by  Josephus  (Antig.  viii. 
 5.  3),  just  in  the  same  manner  as  Baal  and  Ashto- 
 reth  are  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  further  iden- 
 tity of  this  Tyrian  Baal  with  the  Baal  whom  the 
 idolatrous  Israelites  worshipped,  is  evinced  by  the 
 ioUowing  arguments,  as  stated  chiefly  by  Movers-- 
 
HERALD 
 
 280 
 
 HERDER 
 
 (/?/>  Phontzier,  i.  178).  The  worship  of  Baal, 
 which  prevailed  in  the  time  of  the  Judges,  was  put 
 down  by  Samuel  (i  Sam.  vii.  4),  and  the  effects  of 
 that  suppression  appear  to  have  lasted  through  the 
 next  few  centuries,  as  Baal  is  not  enumerated 
 among  the  idols  of  Solomon  (l  Kings  xi.  5-8; 
 2  Kings  xxiii.  13),  nor  among  those  worshipped  in 
 Judah  (2  Kings  xxiii.  12),  or  in  Samaria,  where 
 we  only  read  of  the  golden  calves  of  Jeroboam 
 (l  Kings  xii.  28  ;  xv.  26).  That  worship  of  Baal 
 which  prevailed  in  the  reign  of  Ahab,  cannot, 
 therefore,  be  regarded  as  a  mere  continuation  or 
 revival  of  the  old  Canaanite  idolatry  (although 
 there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  essential  identity  of 
 both  Baals),  but  was  introduced  directly  from 
 Phoenicia  by  Ahab's  marriage  with  the  Sidonian 
 princess  Jezebel  (i  Kings  xvi.  31).  In  like  man- 
 ner, the  establishment  of  this  idolatry  in  Judah  is 
 ascribed  to  the  marriage  of  the  king  with  a  daughter 
 of  Jezebel.  (Comp.  Josephus,  Antiq.  viii.  13.  i; 
 ix.  6.  6.) 
 
 The  power  of  nature,  which  was  worshipped  un- 
 der the  form  of  the  Tyrian  Hercules,  Melkarth, 
 Baal,  Adonis,  Moloch,  and  whatever  his  other 
 names  are,  was  that  which  originates,  sustains, 
 and  destroys  life.  These  functions  of  the  Deity, 
 according  to  the  Phoenicians,  were  represented, 
 although  not  exclusively,  by  the  nm,  the  influence 
 of  which  both  animates  vegetation  by  its  genial 
 warmth,  and  scorches  it  up  by  its  fervour. 
 
 Almost  all  that  we  know  of  the  worship  of  the 
 Tyrian  Hercules  is  preserved  by  the  classical 
 writers,  and  relates  chiefly  to  the  Phoenician  colo- 
 nies, and  not  to  the  mother-state.  The  eagle,  the 
 lion,  and  the  thunny-fish,  were  sacred  to  him,  and 
 are  often  found  on  Phoenician  coins.  Pliny  ex- 
 pressly testifies  that  human  sacrifices  were  offered 
 up  every  year  to  the  Carthaginian  Hercules  [Hist. 
 Nat.  xxxvi.  v.  12) ;  which  coincides  with  what  is 
 stated  of  Baal  in  Jer.  xix.  5,  and  with  the  acknow- 
 ledged worship  of  Moloch. 
 
 Movers  endeavours  to  shew  that  Herakles  and 
 Hercules  are  not  merely  Greek  and  Latin  syno- 
 iiymes  for  tliis  god,  but  that  they  are  actually  de- 
 rived from  his  true  Phoenician  name.  This  original 
 name  he  supposes  to  have  consisted  of  the  syllables 
 IK  (as  found  in  "ilX,  lio7i,  and  in  other  words), 
 meaning  strong,  and  73,  from  73'>,  to  conquer ;  so 
 that  the  compound  means  Ar  conquers.  This  har- 
 monizes with  what  he  conceives  to  be  the  idea 
 represented  by  Hercules  as  the  destroyer  of  Typho- 
 nic  monsters  (/.  c.  p.  430).  Melkarth,  the  MeX^ 
 Kapdos  of  Sanchoniathon,  occurs  on  coins  only  in 
 the  form  mpPQ.  We  must  in  this  case  assume 
 that  a  kaph  has  been  absorbed,  and  resolve  the 
 
 word  into  t?mp  "^12,  king  of  the  city,  iroXiovxos. 
 The  bilingual  inscription  renders  it  by  'Apx-rjj^TTj^ ; 
 and  it  is  a  title  of  the  god  as  the  patron  of  the 
 city.— J.  N. 
 
 HERALD.  This  term  occurs  only  once  in  the 
 A.   v.,   as  a  translation  of  the   Chaldee   Xli"l3, 
 
 Kifpv^,  praeco,  Dan.  iii.  4.  The  verb  which,  as 
 Gesenius  remarks  (Thesaurus,  712),  belongs  to  a 
 root  widely  diffused  among  the  Indo-Germanic 
 languages,  is  found  in  the  same  book,  ver.  29, 
 lT12n,  iKTipv^f,  praedicatu7n  est.  The  Greek  term 
 Kiipv^  occurs  in  the  Apocrypha,  Ecclus.  xx.  15, 
 '  crier,'  A.  V. ;  also  in  I  Tim,  11.  7  ;  2  Tim.  i.  11  ;  1 
 
 2  Peter  ii.  5  ;  and  the  verb  Kr\pvaae.iv  in  I  Cor.  ix. 
 27,  with  an  evident  allusion  to  the  officer  employed 
 at  the  Grecian  games. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 HERDER,  JoHANN  Gottfried  von.  This 
 truly  great  man,  great  as  a  poet,  a  philosopher,  a 
 scholar,  an  historian,  and  a  divine,  was  bom  at 
 Mohrungen,  25th  August  1744.  His  father  kept 
 a  school  for  girls,  and  the  young  Herder  was 
 allowed  no  books  except  a  Bible  and  hymn-book. 
 At  the  age  of  fifteen  he  became  an  amanuensis  to 
 Trescho,  the  pastor  of  Mohrungen,  who  discovered 
 his  genius,  and  encouraged  his  industry.  Pre- 
 vented by  his  keen  sensitiveness  from  becoming  a 
 surgeon,  he  studied  at  Konigsberg,  and  was 
 allowed  to  attend  Kant's  lecture  gratis.  In  1764 
 he  became  a  teacher  m  the  school  at  Riga,  and  in 
 1767  began  to  obtain  some  celebrity  as  a  preacher, 
 and  made  his  debut  in  literature.  In  1769  he  tra- 
 velled as  tutor  to  the  Prince  of  Holstein,  and  after 
 various  promotions  and  successes,  was  appointed 
 general  superintendent  at  Weimar.  At  this  tovra 
 he  long  lived  in  the  zenith  of  his  fame  and  pro- 
 sperity, mingling  on  equal  terms  with  such  men 
 as  Wieland,  Schiller,  Gothe,  and  Jean  Paul,  and 
 exercising  a  great  and  admirable  influence  both  as 
 court-preacher  and  director  of  education.  In  1801 
 he  became  president  of  the  higher  consistory,  and 
 was  soon  after  ennobled.  He  died  at  Weimar, 
 1 8th  December  1803. 
 
 Herder's  literary  greatness  is  universally  recog- 
 nised, and  it  is  admitted  by  all  that  his  writings 
 had  no  mean  share  in  the  work  of  stimulating  the 
 intellect  of  his  countrymen,  and  giving  that  mighty 
 impulse  to  the  thoughtful  activity  of  Germany 
 which  has  produced  such  grand  results.  But  it 
 has  been  the  fashion  to  depreciate  his  direct  merits 
 as  a  theologian,  which  are  of  the  most  important 
 kind.  He  rendered  to  modem  theology  an  inesti- 
 mable service — a  service  the  effects  of  which  it  is  al- 
 most impossible  to  overrate — by  making  philosophy 
 bear  directly  upon  religion,  and  by  infusing  a  genial 
 and  poetic  spirit  into  inquiries  which  he  enriched 
 with  an  encyclopedic  range  of  knowledge.  Gentle, 
 fresh,  clear-sighted,  tolerant,  liberal,  he  was  at  the 
 same  time  full  of  firm  faith  and  deep  reverence. 
 The  light  of  a  pure  and  lofty  genius,  the  expansive- 
 ness  of  a  glowing  heart,  and  the  charm  of  an 
 eloquent  and  lucid  style,  give  a  value  even  to  those 
 of  his  works  which  are  critically  weak  or  theologically 
 questionable.  He  has  been  called  the  '  prophetic 
 forerunner  of  modem  theology  ;'  and  Jean  Paul 
 Richter  beautifully  observes  that  in  his  works  '  you 
 walk,  as  it  were,  amid  moonshine,  into  which  the 
 red  dawn  is  already  falling  ;  but  one  hidden  sun  is 
 the  painter  of  them  both'  {Vorschul  der  ALsthetick, 
 sec.  545). 
 
 Even  Herder's  philosophical  and  literary  works 
 had  an  influence  on  theology,  especially  his  Ideen 
 Z7ir  Philosophic  d.  Geschichte  d.  Menschheit ;  and 
 his  poems  are  deeply  religious  in  tone  and  spirit. 
 His  general  views  on  doctrine  have  been  selected 
 by  August!  [Herder's Doi;tnatik,]ena.,  1805),  mainly 
 from  papers  in  the  Christliche  Schriften  ;  and  his 
 opinions  on  the  Christian  ministry  (which  are  of  a 
 true  and  lofty  kind)  are  contained  in  his  Provin^ 
 zialbldtter  an  Predigcr,  1774,  and  Briefe  fiber  das 
 Siudiumd.  Theologie,  1780.  His  directly  exegetical 
 works  are  Erlduterungen  zum  N.  T.,  and  short 
 books  on  the  Revelation,  and  the  epistles  of  James 
 and  Tude,     These  are  perhaps  the  least  valuable  of 
 
HERDMAN 
 
 281 
 
 HERDS  AND  FLOCKS 
 
 \ 
 
 his  writings,  as  those  on  the  O.  T.  are  the  most 
 valuable.  The  latter  are  Aelteste  Urkunde  d.  Mens- 
 chengeschlechies,  1774,  an  explanation  of  the  earlier 
 part  of  Genesis  from  a  far  wiser  and  truer  stand- 
 point than  the  one  usually  adopted  ;  and  Gcist  der 
 dtraischen  Poesie,  1782,  a  work  into  which  he 
 threw  his  whole  heart,  and  of  which  he  wrote  to 
 Hamann  that  '  he  had  cherished  the  idea  in  his 
 heart  since  childhood,'  and  to  Miiller  '  that  he 
 loved  it  like  a  child'  (see  the  Vorrede  to  Justi's 
 edition,  1825).  This  is  his  greatest  theological 
 work,  and  though  thirty  years  subsequent  to 
 Lowth's  book,  De  Sacrd  Poesi,  it  is  no  less  valu- 
 able than  its  predecessor,  and  produced  a  wider 
 effect  in  raising  the  poetry  of  the  Bible  from  the 
 contempt  which  it  had  incurred  from  the  superci- 
 lious ignorance  of  shallow  classicists.  So  that 
 both  those  books  opened  a  new  path,  and  mark  a 
 great  epoch  in  the  history  of  Bible  exegesis. 
 
 Herder's  theological  works  (Siimmtlicke  Wcrke 
 zur  Tlieol.  und  Relig.)  were  published  in  12  vols. 
 at  Vienna  in  1823,  and  edited  with  a  biography  by 
 his  friend,  J.  G.  Miiller,  at  Tubingen,  1805-1820. 
 His  Christtiche  Schrifteti  were  published  at  Riga  in 
 1798,  and  contain  papers  on  the  Gift  of  Tongues, 
 the  Resurrection,  the  Redeemer,  the  Son  of  God, 
 on  the  Spirit  of  Christianity,  and  on  Religion. 
 Besides  the  books  already  mentioned  he  wrote 
 Goit,  einige  Gespniche,  Gotka,  1800 ;  Ck}-istliche 
 Reden  mid  Homilien,  edited  by  J.  E.  Miiller,  1805 
 (sketches  of  sermons,  full  of  thoughtful  piety  and  sug- 
 gestive eloquence) ;  Liitker''s  Katechisnms,  with  an 
 explanation  for  the  use  of  schools,  1799  ;  and  Wci- 
 murisches  Gesangbiuh,  1800.  His  Urspriing  d. 
 Sprache  obtained  the  Berlin  prize  in  I77I-  He 
 afterwards  unwisely  retracted  this  eloquently-ex- 
 pounded theory  under  the  influence  of  Hamann, 
 to  whose  philosophic  views  he  leant.  Several  of 
 his  works  have  been  translated  into  English. — 
 F.  W.  F. 
 
 HERDMAN.     [Herds  and  Flocks.] 
 
 HERDS  AND  FLOCKS.  From  the  earliest 
 times  the  Hebrews  were  a  pastoral  people.  Abra- 
 ham and  his  sons  were  masters  of  herds  and  flocks, 
 and  were  regulated  in  their  movements  very  much 
 by  a  regard  to  the  necessities  of  their  cattle,  in 
 which  their  wealth  almost  entirely  consisted.  In 
 Egypt  the  Israelites  were  known  as  keepers  of 
 cattle.  When  they  left  Egypt  they,  notwithstand- 
 ing the  oppressions  to  which  they  had  been  sub- 
 jected, took  with  them  '  flocks  and  herds,  even 
 very  much  cattle '  (Exod.  xii.  38)  ;  and  though 
 during  their  wanderings  in  the  wilderness  their 
 stock  was  in  all  probability  greatly  reduced,  before 
 they  entered  Canaan  they  had  so  replenished  it 
 by  their  conquests  in  the  pastoral  regions  beyond 
 Jordan  that  they  took  with  them  a  goodly  number 
 of  animals  wherewith  to  begin  their  new  life  in  the 
 land  that  had  been  promised  them.  Of  that  land 
 large  tracts  were  suited  for  pasturage  ;  certain  of 
 the  tribes  were  almost  exclusively  devoted  to  pas- 
 toral occupations  ;  and  traces  of  a  nomadic  life 
 among  other  tribes  than  those  settled  on  the  east 
 of  the  Jordan  are  found  even  as  late  as  the  time  of 
 the  monarchy  (comp.  i  Chron.  iv.  38-43). 
 
 The  pastoral  life  has  always  had  a  chann  for  the 
 Semitic  peoples  ;  and  among  them,  as  well  as 
 among  other  nations,  it  has  always  been  held  in 
 honour.  In  the  open  and  spacious  fields  border- 
 ing on  the  Jordan  and  in  the  hill  country  of  Pales- 
 
 tine, it  is  a  life  of  comparative  ease  and  of  great  inde- 
 pendence even  in  the  present  day  ;  men  possessed  of 
 flocks  and  herds  become  quietly  and  gradually  rich 
 without  any  severe  exertion  or  anxiety  ;  and  but  for 
 feuds  among  themselves,  the  oppression  of  superiors, 
 and  the  predatory  tendencies  of  their  less  respectable 
 neighbours,  their  life  might  flow  on  in  an  almost 
 unbroken  tranquillity.  The  wealth  of  Sheykhs  and 
 Emirs  is  measured  chiefly  by  the  number  of  their 
 flocks  and  herds  ;  and  men  who  would  count  it  an 
 intolerable  indignity  to  be  constrained  to  engage  in 
 any  handicraft  occupation,  or  even  in  mercantile 
 adventure,  fulfil  with  pride  and  satisfaction  the 
 duties  which  their  pastoral  life  imposes  upon  them. 
 It  was  the  same  in  ancient  times.  Job's  substance 
 consisted  chiefly  of  cattle,  his  wealth  in  which 
 made  him  the  greatest  of  all  the  men  of  the  east 
 (i.  3).  The  first  two  kings  of  Israel,  Saul  and 
 David,  came  from  '  folio wmg  the  herd'  to  ascend 
 the  throne  (i  Sam.  ix.  ;  xi.  5;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  70). 
 Men  '  very  great,'  like  Nabal,  derived  their  riches 
 from  their  flocks,  and  themselves  superintended 
 the  operations  connected  with  the  care  of  them 
 (l  Sam.  XXV.  2,  ff.)  Absalom,  the  prince  of  Israel, 
 had  a  sheep-farm,  and  personally  occupied  himself 
 with  its  duties  (2  Sam.  xiii.  23).  Mesha,  king  of 
 Moab,  was  '  a  sheepmaster'  (TplJ,  2  Kings  iii.  4). 
 The  daughters  of  chiefs  and  wealthy  proprietors 
 did  not  think  it  beneath  them  to  tend  the  flocks 
 and  herds  of  their  family  (Gen.  xxix.  9  [comp. 
 xxiv.  15,  19];  Exod.  ii.  16;  comp.  Hom.  //.  vi. 
 423  ;  Odys.  xii.  121 ;  xiii.  221 ;  Varro,  De  Re  Rtist. 
 ii.  l).  The  proudest  title  of  the  kings  of  Israel 
 was  that  of  shepherds  of  the  people  (Jer.  xxiii.  4. ; 
 Ezek.  xxxiv.  2,  etc.  ;  comp.  Troi/xives  'Xg.Qv  in 
 Homer  and  Hesiod,  passim,  and  Plato,  De  Rep. 
 iv.  15,  p.  440,  D. ),  and  God  himself  condescended 
 to  be  addressed  as  the  Shepherd  of  Israel  (Ps.  Ixxx. 
 l),  and  was  trusted  in  by  his  pious  servants  as  their 
 shepherd  (Ps.  xxiii.  l).  In  later  times  the  title  of 
 shepherd  was  given  to  the  teachers  and  leaders  of 
 the  synagogues,  who  were  called  D^DJIQ  (Lightfoot, 
 
 //ok  //eb.  in  Matt.  iv.  23) ;  but  this  was  unknown 
 to  the  times  before  Christ. 
 
 By  the  wealthier  proprietors  their  flocks  and 
 herds  were  placed  under  the  charge  of  servants, 
 who  bore  the  designation  of  n:i:5p  >jn,  jNi*  ''yi, 
 '•y'l,  'y&^,  or  D^lp})-  These  were  armed  some- 
 times with  weapons,  to  protect  themselves  and  their 
 charge  from  robbers  or  wild  beasts  ;  though,  if  we 
 may  judge  from  the  case  of  David,  their  furniture 
 in  this   respect  was  of  the   simplest   description. 
 
 Usually  they  carried  with  them  a  staft"  (?[pp,  D3K') 
 
 furnished  with  a  crook,  which  might  be  used  for 
 the  purpose  of  catching  an  animal  by  the  foot ; 
 those  who  had  the  charge  of  oxen  carried  with 
 
 them  a  goad  (J2"l"n,  HIO^p,  Judg-  "i-  3i;  i  Sam. 
 xiii.  21  [Goad]).  They  had  also  a  wallet  or 
 small  bag  (t3^p^\  T^pa)  in  which  to  carry  provi 
 sions,  ammunition,  or  any  easily  portable  article 
 (I  Sam.  xvii.  40,  43;  Ps.  xxiii.  4;  Micah  vii. 
 14;  Matt.  X.  id;  Luke  be.  3,  lo).  Their  dress 
 consisted  pnncipally  of  a  cloak  or  mantle  (the 
 burnoose  of  the  modern  Arabs)  in  which  they 
 could  wrap  the  entire  body  (Jer.  xliii.  12).  For 
 food  they  were  obliged  to  be  contented  with 
 the  plainest  fare,  and  often  were  reduced  to  the 
 
HERDS  AND  FLOCKS 
 
 282 
 
 HERESY 
 
 last  extremities  (Amos  vii.  14  ;  Luke  xv.  15). 
 Their  wages  consisted  in  a  portion  of  tlie  produce, 
 especially  of  the  milk  of  the  flock  (Gen.  xxx.  32, 
 ff. ;  I  Cor.  Lx.  7).  That  they  cultivated  music  is 
 act  unlikely,  though  it  hardly  follows  from  i  Sam. 
 xvi.  18,  for  David's  case  may  have  been  excep- 
 tional ;  in  all  countries  and  times,  however,  music 
 has  been  associated  with  the  pastoral  life.  When 
 the  servants  belonging  to  one  master  existed  in  any 
 number  they  were  placed  under  a  chief  (HJpD  ~\^, 
 
 Gen.  xlvii.  6 ;  dpxtTroi/xTj^,  I  Pet.  v.  4)  ;  and  under 
 the  monarchy  there  was  a  royal  officer  who  bore 
 the  title  of  D^yHH  T'BN,   '  chief  of  the  herdsmen' 
 
 (l  Sam.  xxi.  7  ;  comp.  I  Chron.  xxvii.  29,  and 
 '  magister  regii  pecoris,'  Liv.  i.  4). 
 
 The  animals  placed  under  the  care  of  these 
 herdsmen  were  chiefly  sheep  and  goats  ;  but  be- 
 sides these  there  were  also  neat  cattle,  asses, 
 camels,  and  in  later  times  swine.  It  would  seem 
 that  the  keeping  of  the  animals  last  named  was  the 
 lowest  grade  in  the  pastoral  life  (Luke  xv.  15); 
 and  probably  the  keeping  of  sheep  and  goats  was 
 held  to  be  the  highest,  as  that  of  horses  is  among  the 
 Arabs  in  the  present  day  (Niebuhr,  Arabic,  i.  226). 
 The  herdsman  led  his  charge  into  the  open  pasture- 
 land,  where  they  could  freely  roam  and  find  abun- 
 dant supply  of  food  ;  the  neat  cattle  were  conducted 
 to  the  richer  pastures,  such  as  those  of  Bashan, 
 while  the  sheep,  goats,  and  camels  found  sufficient 
 sustenance  from  the  scantier  herbage  of  the  more 
 rocky  and  arid  parts  of  Palestine,  provided  there 
 was  a  supply  of  water.*  Whilst  in  the  fields  the 
 herdsmen  lived  in  tents  (ni^DK'D,   Song  of  Sol. 
 
 i.  8;  Is.  xxxviii.  12  ;  Jer.  vi.  3),  and  there  were 
 folds    (ninj.    Num.    xxxii.    16;    2    Sam.   vii.    8; 
 
 Zepii.  ii.   6),  and  apparently  in  some  cases  tents 
 
 ^DvnX,  2  Chron.  xiv.  15)  for  the  cattle.     W^atch 
 
 towers  were  also  erected,  whence  the  shepherd 
 could  descry  any  coming  danger  to  his  charge ; 
 and  vigilance  in  this  respect  was  one  of  the  shep- 
 herd's cheif  virtues  (Mic.  iv.  8 ;  Nah.  iii.  18 ; 
 Luke  ii.  8).  If  any  of  the  cattle  wandered,  he  was 
 bound  to  follow  them,  and  leave  no  means  untried 
 to  recover  them  (Ezek.  xxxiv.  12  ;  Luke  xv.  5) ; 
 and  harsh  masters  were  apt  to  require  at  their 
 servants'  hands  any  loss  they  might  have  sustained, 
 either  by  the  wandering  of  the  cattle  or  the  ravages 
 of  wild  beasts  (Gen.  xxxi.  38,  ff. ),  a  tendency  on 
 ivhich  a  partial  check  was  placed  by  the  law,  that 
 if  it  was  torn  by  beasts,  and  the  pieces  could  be 
 produced,  the  person  in  whose  charge  it  was  should 
 not  be  required  to  make  restitution  (Exod.  xxii.  13  ; 
 comp.  Amos  iii.  12).  To  assist  them  in  both 
 watching  and  defending  the  flocks,  and  in  recover- 
 ing any  that  had  strayed,  they  had  dogs  (Job 
 .xxx.  l),  as  have  the  modern  Arabs,  not,  however, 
 '  like  those  in  other  lands,  fine  faithful  fellows, 
 the  friend  and  companion  of  their  masters,  .  .  . 
 but  a  mean,  sinister,  ill-conditioned  generation, 
 kept  at  a  distance,  kicked  about,  and  half-starved, 
 with  nothing  noble  or  attractive  about  them' 
 (Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  i.  301),  a  description 
 which  fully  suits  Job's   disparaging   comparison. 
 
 *  The  ancients  seem  to  have  had  the  belief  that 
 rich  herbage  was  not  favourable  to  the  rearing  of 
 sheep.  Comp.  Virg.,  Georg.  iii.  384  ;  Colum. 
 vii.  2.  3  ;  Varro,  De  lie  Rust.  ii.  2,  4 ;  etc. 
 
 Thft  flocks  and  herds  were  regularly  counted  (Lev 
 xxvii.  32 ;  Jer.  xxxiii.  13). 
 
 The  pastures  to  which  the  herdsmen  conducted 
 their  flocks  were  called  H'l^in,  the  places  without, 
 the  country,  the  desert  {] oh  \.  10  ;  xviii.  17;  Prov. 
 viii.  26  :  comp.  ?^w  iv  epri/xois,  Mark  i.  45)  ;  also 
 niSJ  (Jer.  xxv.  37;  Amos  i.  2),  IBID  "i  (Ps. 
 
 Ixv.  13  ;  Jer.  ix.  9,  etc.),  n"l3  (i  Sam.  vii.  8 ;  Hos. 
 
 ix.  13,  etc.),  12112  (Ps.  bcv.  13;  Is.  xlii.  11 ;  Jer. 
 
 xxiii.  10;  Joel  ii.  22,  etc.)  In  summer  the  mo- 
 dern nom.ades  seek  the  northern  and  more  hilly 
 regions,  in  winter  they  betake  themselves  to  the 
 south  and  to  the  plain  country  (D'Arvieux,  iii. 
 315  ;  v.  428);  and  probably  the  same  usage  pre- 
 vailed among  the  Hebrews.  In  leading  out  the 
 flocks,  the  shepherd  went  before  them,  and  they 
 followed  him  obedient  to  his  call ;  a  practice  from 
 which  our  Saviour  draws  a  touching  illustration  of 
 the  intimate  relation  between  Him  and  His  people 
 (John  X.  4).  The  young  and  the  sickly  of  the 
 flock  the  shepherd  vv'ould  take  in  his  arms  and 
 cany,  and  he  was  careful  to  adapt  the  rate  of  ad- 
 vance to  the  condition  and  capacity  of  the  feebler 
 or  burdened  portion  of  his  charge  ;  a  practice  which 
 again  gives  occasion  for  a  beautiful  illustration  of 
 God's  care  for  his  people  (Is.  xl.  1 1 ;  comp.  Gen. 
 xxxiii.  13).  These  usages  still  prevail  in  Palestine, 
 and  have  been  often  described  by  travellers  ;  one 
 of  the  most  graphic  descriptions  is  that  given  by 
 Mr.  Thomson  [Land  and  Booh,  i.  301,  ff".  ;  comp. 
 Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  ii.  322).  As  the 
 Jews  advanced  in  commercial  wealth  the  office  of 
 shepherd  diminished  in  importance  and  dignity. 
 Among  the  later  Jews  the  shepherd  of  a  small 
 flock  was  precluded  from  bearing  witness,  on  the 
 ground  that,  as  such  fed  their  flocks  on  the  pas- 
 tures of  others,  they  were  infected  with  dishonesty 
 (Maimon.  in  Demai,  ii.  3). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HERESY  (Al'/seo-ts),  as  used  in  the  N.  T.,  means 
 a  sect  or  party.  In  this  sense  it  is  used  of  the 
 Pharisees  as  one  of  the  religious  parties  among  the 
 Jews  (Acts  V.  17;  XV.  5;  xxvi.  5;  xxviii.  22); 
 and  it  is  in  the  same  sense  applied  by  them  to  the 
 Christians  (Acts  xxiv.  5,  14).  This  is  in  accord- 
 ance with  the  common  usage  of  the  Greek,  for 
 not  only  does  Josephus  speak  of  the  three  sects  of 
 the  Jews,  the  Pharisees,  the  Sadducees,  and  the 
 Essenes,  as  the  '  three  heresies  of  the  Jews'  {Antiq. 
 xiii.  5.  9  ;  Vita,  sec.  2)  ;  but  the  Greeks  commonly 
 used  this  term  to  describe  the  schools  into  which 
 their  philosophers  were  divided. 
 
 The  word  itself  properly  means  choice,  or  the 
 taking  of  one  thing  in  preference  to  another  ;  and 
 from  this  by  an  easy  transition  it  passed  to  desig- 
 nate the  party  or  body  which  was  constituted 
 through  choosing  a  certain  dogma  or  set  of  dogmas 
 in  preference  to  others.  But  as  all  such  choosing 
 implies  the  assertion  of  a  right  to  choose,  the  word 
 may  come  to  have  a  bad  meaning  attached  to  it  when 
 the  choice  is  exercised  where  such  a  right  does  not 
 exist ;  and  further,  when  by  the  exercise  of  such 
 choice  a  small  party  separates  itself  from  the  great 
 body  of  those  who  profess  the  same  aims  and  the 
 same  pursuits,  the  application  to  them  of  the  title 
 '  heresy'  may  involve  a  censure  of  them  as  so  sepa- 
 rating themselves.  Hence  we  find  in  the  N.  T 
 that  the  word  heresy'  came  to  be  applied  within 
 the  church  to  divisions  among  the  brethren  arising 
 from  arbitrary  and  self-willed  preferences  oia  the  pari 
 
HERMAS 
 
 283 
 
 HERMAS 
 
 of  some  (i  Cor.  xi.  19  ;  Gal.  v.  20  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  i), 
 
 divisions  to  be  censured  and  sliunned.  A  still 
 further  departure  was  made  in  the  church  from  the 
 primitive  usage  of  the  word  in  the  ages  which  suc- 
 ceeded the  apostolic.  From  designating  the  sec- 
 tion or  body  of  persons  making  the  lawless  or 
 wrong  choice,  it  came  to  be  used  of  the  dogma  or 
 opinion  by  the  choice  of  which  they  were  distin- 
 guished ;  and  as  the  standard  set  up  was  the  assumed 
 consent  of  the  Catholic  Church,  a  heresy  came  to  , 
 mean  any  opinion  in  religion  which  was  a  departure 
 from  this  standard.  'Hatreses.'saysTertullian,  'dic- 
 tse  Grreca  voce  ex  interpretatione  electionis,  qua  quis 
 sive  ad  instituendas  sive  ad  suscipiendas  eas  utitur' 
 {De  Prescript  Hivrel.,  6).  The  same  change  passed 
 on  the  cognate  adjective  /wrdi'c  (aiperiKos).  In  the 
 N.  T.  this  means  one  who  makes  a  party  in  a 
 church,  and  thereby  produces  division  (Tit.  iii.  10) ; 
 in  subsequent  ecclesiastical  usage  it  means  a  man 
 who  adopts  an  opinion  not  in  accordance  with  the 
 assumed  Catholic  belief  This  usage  of  the  term 
 is  purely  ecclesiastical.  '  A  Stoic  could  not  have 
 called  a  Peripatetic  simply  aiperiKbs,  though  he 
 might  have  spoken  of  him  as  aipert/cos  ttjs  'Apia- 
 ToreXtKTjs  4>i\oao(plas.  The  Christian  writers  are, 
 therefore,  the  first  in  which  we  find  the  word  aipe- 
 TiKos  used  by  itself  (Burton,  Barnpioti  Lectures, 
 p.  11).  Instances,  however,  occur  in  which  the 
 Christian  fathers  use  the  word  in  its  original  sense ; 
 as,  ex.gr.,  when  Basil  {Epist.  33)  speaks  of  his  own 
 Trepl  Tov  Qebv  aipiaews.  They  use  it  also  sometimes 
 of  opinions  which  do  not  pretend  to  be  Christian  ; 
 but  this  is  a  rare  and  improper  use  of  the  term 
 (comp.  Dorner  Eitlwickehmgsgesck.  i.  p.  "Ji,  note  4, 
 Eng.  Tr.  I.,  App.  Note  U).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HERMAS,  'Epp.as,  one  of  the  Christians  at 
 Rome  to  whom  Paul  addressed  special  salutations 
 in  his  Epistle  (Rom.  xvi.  14).  Of  his  history  and 
 station  in  life  nothing  is  known.  By  several 
 writers,  ancient  and  modern,  he  has  been  reputed 
 to  be  the  author  of  a  work  entitled  The  Shepherd 
 of  Hernias,  which  from  its  high  antiquity  and  the 
 supposed  connection  of  the  writer  with  St.  Paul, 
 has  been  usually  classed  with  the  epistles  of  the 
 so-called  Apostolic  Fathers.  A  Latin  version  has 
 come  down  to  us  from  the  time  of  Tertullian  ;  of 
 the  original  Greek,  till  very  recently,  only  a  few 
 fragments  have  been  known  as  quotations  in  other 
 ancient  authors.  But  in  1S59  the  first  part  of  the 
 origmal,  bemg  nearly  one-fourth  of  the  ^\■hole,  was 
 discovered  by  Tischendorf  at  the  end  of  the  Codex 
 Shtaitiais  ;  a  fac-simile  of  a  portion  of  it  is  given 
 in  his  Notitia.  A  mediaeval  Greek  re-translation 
 of  the  Latin  version  (according  to  Tischendorf) 
 was  pubhshed  by  Dressel  in  his  edition  of  the 
 Apostolic  Fathers.  It  has  been  divided  by  modern 
 editors  (for  in  the  manuscript  copies  there  is  no 
 such  division)  into  three  books  ;  the  first  consisting 
 of  four  visions,  the  second  of  twelve  commands, 
 and  the  third  of  ten  similitudes.  It  is  called  the 
 '  Shepherd'  (6  IIot^Tjj',  Pastor),  because  the  Angel 
 of  Repentance  {Niintms  Pceiiitentice),  at  whose 
 dictation  Hermas  professes  that  he  wrote  the  second 
 and  third  books,  appeared  in  the  garb  of  a  shep- 
 herd. It  is  frequently  quoted  by  Clemens  Alexan- 
 drinus,  either  by  the  author's  name  {Strom,  i.  29, 
 sec.  181  ;  0pp.  ed.  Klotz,  ii.  119  ;  ii.  i,  sec.  3  ; 
 0pp.  ii.  124),  or  by  the  phrase  'the  Shepherd  says' 
 (Strom,  i.  17,  sec.  85  ;  0pp.  ii.  60  ;  ii.  12,  sec.  55  ; 
 0pp.  ii.  158;  ii.  9,  sec.  43  ;   0pp.  ii.    150 ;  IL    12, 
 
 sec.  55 ;  0pp.  ii.  158 ;  iv.  9,  sec.  76 ;  0pp.  ii. 
 318;  vi.  6,  sec.  46;  0pp.  iii.  125),  though  he  does 
 not  expressly  identify  the  author  as  the  Hermas  in 
 Rom.  xvi.  Eusebius  is  more  definite.  In  his 
 Eccles.  Hist.  (iii.  3)  he  says,  '  The  apostle,  in  the 
 salutations  at  the  end  of  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
 makes  mention  among  others  of  Hermas,  who,  it 
 is  said,  wrote  the  book  called  the  Shepherd  ;  it  is 
 to  be  noted  that  this  book  is  called  in  question 
 (avTiKekeKTaC),  so  that  it  cannot  be  ranked  among 
 the  books  received  as  canonical  {kv  6p.o\oyov/x€uois). 
 By  others  it  is  judged  to  be  a  most  necessary  book 
 for  elementary  instruction.  And  we  know  that  it 
 is  publicly  read  in  churches,  and  that  some  very 
 ancient  writers  make  use  of  it.'  Elsewhere  he 
 says,  '  among  the  spurious  (iv  tols  vbdots)  are  to  be 
 placed  the  Acts  of  Paul,  the  Book  called  the  Shep- 
 herd, and  the  Revelation  of  Peter'  (Hist.  Eccles. 
 iii.  25).  And  in  giving  an  account  of  the  opinions 
 of  Irenaeus  (Hist.  Eccles.  v.  8),  he  remarks,  'the 
 book  (Tr]v  ypa<priv)  of  the  Shepherd  he  not  only 
 knew,  but  received  with  approbation,  saying,  Well 
 spake  the  book  (ri  ypacpr])  which  says,  '  first  of  all 
 believe  that  there  is  one  God.' '  This  passage  has 
 been  adduced,  but,  perhaps,  improperly,  to  prove 
 that  Irenoeus  regarded  '  The  Shepherd'  as  canoni- 
 cal :  the  word  ypaipr),  by  some  here  translated 
 Scripture,  may  mean  simply  the  book  or  writing 
 (Lardner's  Credibility,  ch.  xvii.  ;  Works,  ii.  171). 
 Origen  often  quotes  '  The  Shepherd,'  speaks  of  it 
 as  useful,  and,  in  his  opinion,  inspired  :  ut  puto, 
 divinitus  inspirata  (Ep.  ad  Rom.  Comment,  lib.  x.  ; 
 Opera,  vii.  437,  ed.  Lommatzsch).  Elsewhere  he 
 describes  it  as  'a  book  circulated  in  the  church, 
 but  not  universally  acknowledged  to  be  divine' 
 (Comment,  in  Evang.  Alatt.  Horn.  xiv.  ;  Opp.  iii. 
 316).  Jerome  also  states  that  '  it  was  publicly  read 
 in  some  of  the  churches  of  Greece,  though  among 
 the  Latins  it  was  almost  unknown  (De  Illust.  Vir. 
 cap.  x.)  Tertullian  (De  Pudicitia,  sec.  lo)  classes 
 it  with  apocryphal  and  spurious  writings.  If  it  be 
 admitted  that  '  The  Shepherd'  was  written  by  the 
 Hermas  of  St.  Paul,  its  date  must  be  fixed  towards 
 the  end  of  the  first  centuiy.  Some  eminent  critics, 
 however,  ascribe  it  to  Hermas,  a  brother  of  Pius, 
 who  was  Bishop  of  Rome  about  A.D.  141.  Mosheim 
 argues  at  some  length  in  favour  of  this  opinion  ; 
 but  the  only  authorities  he  adduces  on  its  behalf 
 are  some  lines  in  a  poem  against  the  Marcionites, 
 falsely  attributed  to  Tertullian,  the  fragment  of  an 
 anonymous  work  on  the  canon,  published  by  Mura- 
 tori  in  his  Antiquitates  Ital.  Med.  ALvi,  and  a 
 passage  in  the  Liber  Pontificalis,  respecting  Easter, 
 there  said  to  be  from  a  book  called  the  Shepherd, 
 written  by  Hermas,  the  brother  of  Pius,  but  not 
 found  in  the  work  that  has  come  down  to  us  under 
 that  title  (Co7n>nentaries  on  the  Affairs  of  the  Chris- 
 tians, vol.  i.  pp.  180-188,  Vidal's  transl.)  The 
 same  opinion  is  advocated  by  Hefele,  in  the  Tiibin- 
 gen  Theol.  Quart.  Sch?-ifft.,  1839.  Neander,  while 
 he  allows  that  it  may  be  doubted  whether  '  The 
 Shepherd'  was  written  by  the  Hermas  of  St.  Paul, 
 seems  to  consider  the  other  supposition  still  more 
 questionable,  since  we  cannot  determine  what  credit 
 is  due  to  the  authorities  adduced  in  its  favour,  and 
 it  is  difficult  to  reconcile  with  the  later  origination 
 of  the  work,  the  high  esteem  in  which  it  was  held 
 in  the  age  of  Irenreus  and  Clement  of  Alexandria 
 (Allgemeine  Geschichte,  etc.  Abth.  i.  Band  2,  p. 
 1 139,  2d  ed.  ;  Torrey's  translation  [Bohn]  ii.  210). 
 The  Shepherd  of  Hermas  was  first  published  at 
 
HERMES 
 
 284 
 
 HERMON 
 
 Paris  in  1 5 13,  and  is  included  in  the  editions  of 
 the  apostoUc  fathers  by  Cotelerius,  Galland,  Dres- 
 sel,  and  Hefele.  Fabricius  also  published  it  in  his 
 Codex  Apocryphus,  Hamburgi,  1719.  Archbishop 
 Wake's  translation  is  well  known. 
 
 The  following  works  may  be  consulted — Dorner, 
 Entwicklungsgeschichte  der  Lehre  von  der  Person 
 C/^rw//,  Erste  Abth.  185-215;  Doctrine  of  the  Per- 
 son of  Christ,  vol.  i.  123 -135,  Notes,  380-399 
 (Clark's  F.  T.  Library)  ;  Lechier,  Das  Apostolische 
 und  das  Nachapostolische  Zeitalter,  489,  518  ;  Bun- 
 sen,  Hippolytiis,  vol.  i.  ;  Uhlhorn,  Hernias  in  Her- 
 zo^%  Real  Encyklopddic,  v.  771. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 HERMES  ('EpAt^?),  the  Mercurius  of  the  Ro- 
 mans, was  the  messenger  of  the  gods,  and  was 
 equally  characterised  by  adroitness  of  action  and 
 readiness  of  speech.  He  was  also  the  customary 
 attendant  of  Jupiter  when  he  appeared  on  earth 
 (Ovid,  Fast.  v.  495).  These  circumstances  explain 
 why  the  inhabitants  of  Lystra  (Acts  xiv.  12),  as 
 soon  as  ever  they  were  disposed  to  believe  that  the 
 gods  had  visited  them  in  the  likeness  of  men,  dis- 
 covered Hermes  in  Paul,  as  the  chief  speaker,  and 
 as  the  attendant  of  Jupiter.  It  seems  unnecessary  to 
 be  curious  whether  the  representations  of  Mercury 
 in  ancient  statues  accord  with  the  supposed  per- 
 sonal appearance  of  Paul,  and  especially  in  the 
 matter  of  the  beard  of  the  latter ;  for  all  known 
 representations  of  the  god  differ  in  much  more  im- 
 portant particulars  from  the  probable  costume  of 
 Paul  [e.g. ,  in  the  absence  of  any  garment  at  all,  or 
 in  the  use  of  the  short  chlamys  merely  ;  in  the 
 caduceus,  the  petasus,  etc.)  It  is  more  reasonable 
 to  suppose  that  those  who  expected  to  see  the  gods 
 mixing  in  the  affairs  of  this  lower  world,  in  human 
 form,  would  not  look  for  much  more  than  the 
 outward  semblance  of  ordinary  men.  Comp. 
 the  ' dissimulantque  deos'  of  Ovid  {I.e.,  504). — 
 J.N. 
 
 HERMES  ('E/o/x^s),  the  name  of  a  disciple 
 mentioned  Rom.  xvi.  14.  In  the  Greek  Church 
 his  festival  is  kept  on  April  8.  According  to  them 
 he  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples,  and  afterwards 
 Bishop  of  Dalmatia. 
 
 HERMOGENES  {'Y^pixoyhrii),  the  name  of  a 
 man  mentioned  by  St.  Paul  in  the  latest  of  the 
 pastoral  epistles  (2  Tim.  i.  15),  who,  with  Phyge- 
 lus,  deserted  him  when  '  all  they  which  are  in 
 Asia'  (ot  h  rfj  'Acrlg.,  or  perhaps  '  they  of  or  from 
 Asia,'  oi  iK  t^s  'Acr/as,  Conybeare  and  Howson, 
 Life  of  St.  Paul,  vol.  ii.  p.  585)  had  'turned  away 
 from  him.'  The  'all  in  Asia'  cannot  imply  a 
 general  desertion,  but  only  those  of  whom  St. 
 Paul  had  had  trial  (Alford  in  loc.)  Whether 
 Hermogenes  and  Phygelus  had  forsaken  St.  Paul 
 because  they  were  ashamed  of  him  when  in  bonds 
 (2  Tim.  iv.  16)  ;  or  whether,  like  Hymenjeus  and 
 Philetus,  they  had  'erred  concerning  the  truth' 
 (2  Tim.  ii.  18),  is  not  stated.  In  the  Roman  bre- 
 viary {in  Fest.  S.  fac.  Apost.  Pars  astiva,  p.  485, 
 Milan,  1851)  the  conversion  of  Hermogenes  is  at- 
 tributed to  St.  James  the  Great,  and  in  the  legen- 
 dary history  of  Abdias,  the  so-called  bishop  of 
 Babylon  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Apocryph.  A'".  7".,  p.  517 
 seq.),  Hermogenes  is  represented  as  first  practising 
 magic,  and  converted,  with  Philetus,  by  the  same 
 apostle.  Grotius,  apparently  misled  by  the  cir- 
 cumstance that  the  historian  or  geographer  Her- 
 mogenes, mentioned  by  the  scholiast  of  ApoUonius 
 
 Rhodius  (ii.  722,  Frag.  Hist.  Grmc,  Didot.  ed., 
 vol.  iii.,  p.  523),  wrote  on  primitive  history,  and 
 incidentally  (?)  speaks  of  Nannacus  or  Anacus — 
 and  may  therefore  probably  be  the  same  as  the 
 Hermogenes  whom  Josephus  mentions  as  having 
 treated  on  Jewish  history  {Contra  Apio7i.  i.  23) — 
 suggests  that  he  may  be  the  person  mentioned  by 
 St.  Paul.  This,  however,  is  not  likely.  Nothing 
 more  is  known  of  the  Hermogenes  in  question,  and 
 he  cannot  be  identified  either  witli  Hermogenes  of 
 Tarsus,  a  historian  of  the  time  of  Domitian,  who 
 was  put  to  death  by  that  emperor  (Suet.  Domit. 
 10  ;  Smith's  Did.  of  Biography,  s.  v.  ;  Hoffman, 
 Lex.  Uftiv.,  s.  v.  ;  Alford,  2  Tim.  i.  15),  nor  with 
 Hermogenes  the  painter,  against  whom  Tertullian 
 wrote  (Smith's  Diet,  of  J5iography,  s.  v.),  nor  with 
 the  saints  of  the  Byzantine  Church,  commemorated 
 on  Jan.  24  and  Sept.  i  (Neale,  Eastern  Chiuxh, 
 vol.  ii.,  pp.  770,  781).— F.  W.  M. 
 
 HERMON  O'iDnn,   and  in  the  pi.    CyiOIH  ; 
 
 ^ Kepjjucv,  ^Ep/j-uvLel/jL ;  Herman),  a  celebrated  moun- 
 tain on  the  northern  border  of  Palestine,  on  the 
 east  side  of  the  great  valley  of  the  Jordan,  and  just 
 above  the  sources  of  that  river.  Hence  it  was 
 mentioned  by  Moses  as  marking  the  limit  of  the 
 country  conquered  east  of  the  Jordan  : — '  He  took 
 at  that  time  out  of  the  hand  of  the  two  kings  of  the 
 Amorites  the  land  that  was  on  this  side  Jordan, 
 from  the  river  of  Arnon  zinto  Mount  Herman^ 
 (Deut.  iii.  8).  Hermon  was  a  natural  landmark. 
 It  could  be  seen  from  the  'plains  of  Moab'  beside 
 the  Dead  Sea,  from  the  heights  of  Nebo,  from 
 every  prominent  spot,  in  fact,  in  Moab,  Gilead, 
 and  Bashan — a  pale  blue,  snow-capped  peak,  ter- 
 minating the  view  on  the  northern  horizon.  When 
 the  people  came  to  know  the  country  better — 
 when  not  merely  its  great  physical  features  but  its 
 towns  and  villages  became  familiar  to  them,  then 
 Baal-Gad  and  Dan  took  the  place  of  Hermon  ; 
 both  of  them  being  situated  just  at  the  southern 
 base  of  that  mountain.  Hermon  itself  was  not 
 embraced  in  the  country  conquered  by  Moses  and 
 Joshua  ;  their  conquests  extended  only  to  it  (see 
 Josh.  xi.  17  ;  Deut.  xxxiv.  i  ;  i  Sam.  iii.  20). 
 Hermon  was  also  the  north-western  boundary  of 
 the  old  kingdom  of  Bashan,  as  Salcah  was  the 
 south-eastern.  We  read  in  Josh.  xii.  5  that  Og 
 '  reigned  in  Mount  Hermon,  and  in  Salcah,  and  in 
 all  Bashan  ;'  i.e.,  in  all  Bashan,  from  Hermon  to 
 Salcah.  Another  notice  of  Hermon  shews  the 
 minute  accuracy  of  the  topography  of  Joshua.  He 
 makes  '  Lebanon  toward  the  sun-rising,'  that  is, 
 the  range  of  Antilebanon,  extend  from  Hermon  to 
 the  entering  into  Hamath  (xiii.  5).  Every  Orien- 
 tal geographer  now  knows  that  Hermon  is  the 
 southern  and  culminating  point  of  this  range.  The 
 beauty  and  grandeur  of  Hermon  did  not  escape 
 the  attention  of  the  Hebrew  poets.  From  nearly 
 every  prominent  point  in  Palestine  the  mountain  is 
 visible  ;  but  it  is  when  we  leave  the  hill  country  ot 
 Samaria  and  enter  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  that 
 Hermon  appears  in  all  its  majesty,  shooting  up  on 
 the  distant  horizon  behind  the  graceful  rounded 
 top  of  Tabor.  It  was  probably  this  view  that 
 suggested  to  the  Psalmist  the  words,  '  The  north 
 and  the  south  thou  hast  created  them  :  Tabor  and 
 Hermon  shall  rejoice  in  thy  name'  (Ixxxix.  12). 
 The  explanation  of  this  passage  given  by  Venema, 
 Bochart,  and  others,  that  Tabor  and  Hermon 
 represent  the  east  and  the  west,  are  totally  wrong 
 
HERMON 
 
 285 
 
 HERMON 
 
 (Venema,  Comment,  in  loc.  ;  Bochart,  Opi>.  i. 
 447  ;  Reland,  p.  324). 
 
 The  names  of  Hermon,  ancient  and  modem,  are 
 numerous,  and  they  are  all  descriptive.  They 
 appear  to  have  been  suggested  by  the  impressions 
 made  on  the  minds  of  the  several  writers  by  the 
 appearance  of  the  mountain  from  their  different 
 points   of    viewr.      Hermon    is   equivalent   to   the 
 
 Arabic  Khurmo7i,  /*/>-,  proniiiiC7is  fnonds  ver- 
 tex (Freitag,  Lex.  Aml>.)  Hilary  gives  a  different 
 etymology  :  Hermon  mons  est  in  Phoenice  cujus 
 interpretatio  A nat/iema  est  (Comm.  in  Ps.  cxxxiii.) 
 The  Amorites,  we  are  told,  called  it  Shenir  (T'JtJ'  > 
 
 Sept._  liavip  ;  Deut.  iii.  9),  and  the  Sidonians  Sirion 
 (yW ;    Sept.   liavLibp  ;   Deut.  iii.  9  ;   Ezek.  xxvii. 
 
 5),  words  radically  identical,  and  signifying  'a 
 breastplate'  or  'coat  of  mail  ;'  to  which,  as  seen 
 from  the  west  when  the  sun's  rays  are  reflected 
 from  its  icy  crown,  it  bears  some  resemblance.  It 
 was  also  called  Sion  (}S'K'),  '  the  lofty,'  as  over- 
 topping all  its  fellows  (Deut.  iv.  48) — a  name 
 which  seems  to  throw  light  on  the  difiicult  passage 
 in  Ps.  cxxxiii.  3  :  '  As  the  dew  of  Hermon  that 
 descended  upon  the  mountains  of  Zion.'  Here 
 Zion,  jVi*,  appears  to  be  used  for,  or  as  equivalent 
 to,  )X''K'  (see  Grotius  and  Venema,  ad  loc.) 
 
 Hermon  is  composed  of  a  cluster  of  mountains, 
 which  in  the  distance  appear  to  form  one  great 
 cone  ;  but,  on  closer  inspection,  we  find  a  number 
 of  lofty  ranges,  radiating  from  a  central  peak,  and 
 this  peak  itself  resolves  itself  into  three  summits 
 (Porter's  Damascus,  i.  292,  sq.)  Thus  we  see  the 
 accuracy  of  the  Psalmist's  allusion  :  '  Therefore 
 will  I  remember  thee  from  the  land  of  the  Hermans'' 
 (not  '  Hermonites,'  as  in  our  A.  V.,  but  D''JD"in). 
 It  appears,  too,  that  occasionally  the  different 
 names  of  the  mountain  were  attached  distinctively 
 to  different  parts  of  the  group,  a  practice  not  un- 
 common in  Syria  at  the  present  day.  Thus,  in  i 
 Chron.  v.  23,  '  And  the  children  of  Manasseh 
 dwelt  in  the  land  :  they  increased  from  Bashan 
 unto  Baal-hermon,  and  Senir,  and  unto  Mount  Her- 
 mon.' Now  each  of  these  names  is  used  in  other 
 passages  to  denote  the  whole  mountain  (Judg.  iii. 
 3  ;  Deut.  iii.  9,  etc.)  ;  but  here  they  seem  to  be 
 distinctive.  Probably  that  southern  section  of  the 
 group,  where  the  Sidonians  had  their  great  strong- 
 hold near  Paneas,  was  called  by  local  writers 
 Senir.  The  name  Baal-hermon  may  have  been 
 applied  to  some  noted  sanctuary  on  a  spur  in 
 another  direction,  and  Mount  Hermon  meant  the 
 central  peak  itself.  Its  usual  modern  names  are 
 Jebel  esh- Sheikh,  ^J^\  Jj^,  '  the  chief  moun- 
 tain ; '  and  Jebel  eih-  Thelj,      \  U \    Jjc^,  '  the  snow 
 
 mountain.'  The  latter  we  find  in  the  Targums  of 
 Onkelos  and  Jonathan,  which,  in  Deut.  iii.  9,  read 
 
 W^n  mo  (see  also  Abulfeda,  Tab.  Syr.,  p.  18; 
 Reland,  p.  323).  Hermon  is  the  only  snow- 
 crowned  peak  visible  from  Palestine  during  the 
 summer  months. 
 
 There  can  be  no  doubt  that  one  of  the  southern 
 peaks  of  Hermon  was  the  scene  of  the  Trans- 
 figuration. Our  Lord  travelled  from  Bethsaida  on 
 the  north-east  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  '  to  the 
 coasts  of  Csesarea-Philippi.'  Thence  he  led  his 
 rii.sciples  '  into  an  high  mountain  apart,  and  was 
 
 transfigured  before  them;'  and  afterwards  he 
 returned,  going  towards  Jerusalem  through  Galilee 
 (comp.  Mark  viii,  22-28  ;  Matt.  xvi.  13  ;  Mark 
 ix.  2-13,  30-33).  No  other  moimtain  in  Palestine 
 seems  so  appropriate  to  the  circumstances  of  that 
 glorious  scene.  For  many  centuries  a  monkish 
 tradition  assigned  this  honour  to  Tabor  (Robinson, 
 B.  R.,  ii.  35S)  ;  but  it  is  now  restored  to  its  proper 
 locality,  and  will  give  additional  celebrity  to  the 
 prince  of  Syrian  mountains  (Porter's  Damascus,  i. 
 306  ;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  392). 
 
 Hermon  is,  both  physically  and  politically,  a 
 giand  central  point  in  the  geography  of  Syria  and 
 Palestine.  From  it  radiate  all  the  most  noted 
 rivers — the  Jordan,  whose  fountains  are  fed  by  its 
 eternal  snows  ;  the  Abana  and  Pharpar,  '  rivers  of 
 Damascus  ;'  the  Orontes,  which  swept  past  the 
 walls  of  the  classic  and  '  Christian'  Antioch  ;  and 
 tlie  Leontes.  All  the  great  ancient  kingdoms  in 
 the  country  also  converged  at  Hermon — Bashan, 
 Damascus,  Phoenicia,  Israel.  And  Hermon  was 
 the  religious  centre  of  primeval  Syria.  Its  Baal 
 sanctuaries  not  only  existed,  but  gave  it  a  name, 
 before  the  Exodus  (Josh.  xi.  17).  It  retained  its 
 sacred  character  during  the  long  rule  of  the  Greeks 
 and  Romans  ;  and  Jerome  writes  :  '  Dicitur  esse 
 in  vertice  ejus  insigne  templum,  quod  ab  ethnicis 
 cultui  habetur,'  etc.  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Aermo)i). 
 Recent  investigations  have  illustrated  these  historic 
 statements  in  a  remarkable  manner.  Round  the 
 whole  base  and  sides  of  the  mountain  the  ruins  of 
 many  ancient  temples  have  been  discovered,  and 
 all  of  them  pointing  towards  the  central  peak  ! 
 {Handbook for  S.  and  P.,  p.  457).  The  writer  of 
 this  article  ascended  Hermon  in  1852,  and  found 
 still  existing  on  its  highest  summit  the  remains  of 
 the  very  temple  referred  to  by  Jerome  ;  and  beside 
 it  the  primeval  fire-altar  which  gave  to  it,  in  all 
 probability,  its  Scriptural  appellation,  Baal-her- 
 mon. '  Hermon  has  three  summits.  .  .  .  On  the 
 second  of  these  (overhanging  the  deep  glen  in 
 which  are  the  sources  of  the  Pharpar)  are  curious 
 and  interesting  ruins.  Round  a  rock,  which  forms 
 the  crest  of  the  peak,  are  the  foundations  of  a  cir- 
 cular wall,  composed  of  large  stones,  and  within 
 the  circle  are  heaps  of  hewn  stones,  some  of  them 
 bevelled,  and  others  with  a  plain  moulding  round 
 the  edge.  The  foimdations  of  a  small  temple  can 
 be  made  out.  It  stands  on  the  brow  of  the  moun- 
 tain, overhanging  a  long  steep  declivity.  The 
 ruins  of  this  temple  seem  to  be  more  recent  than 
 the  stones  of  the  riiig''  (Handbook for  S.  and  P.,  ii. 
 p.  454).  The  ancient  inhabitants  of  Canaan  had 
 their  sacred  places  on  '  the  high  mountains  and  the 
 kills''  (Deut.  xii.  2;  cf.  2  Kings  xvii.  10,  11).  We 
 need  not  wonder  then  that  Hermon  should  have 
 been  selected  for  the  erection  of  an  altar  and  the 
 burning  of  a  sacred  fire.  The  glorious  view  ob- 
 tained from  it  of  the  sun's  course,  from  his  rising 
 in  the  eastern  desert  to  his  setting  in  the  great  sea, 
 would  naturally  mark  it  as  the  most  fitting  locality 
 for  his  chief  worship. 
 
 The  lower  slopes  of  Hermon,  and  the  ranges 
 that  radiate  from  it  are  thinly  clothed  with  oak 
 forests,  chiefly  evergreen.  The  central  peak  is  a 
 naked  obtuse  cone  of  gray  limestone,  rising  from 
 2000  to  3000  feet  above  the  attached  ridges.  Dur- 
 ing the  winter  the  peak  is  covered  with  snow,  but 
 in  summer  the  snow  gradually  dissolves  until  only 
 a  few  streaks  remain  on  the  summit.  According 
 to  the  measurement  of  Major  Scott,  Hermon  has  an 
 
HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 286 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 elevation  of  9376  feet,  being  775  feet  less  than  the 
 highest  peak  of  the  Lebanon  lange  (Van  de  Velde, 
 Memoir,  pp.  170,  176).  It  is  thus  the  second 
 mountain  in  Syria.  During  the  summer  months 
 fleecy  clouds  cling  round  the  top  of  Hemion  when 
 the  whole  heavens  are  elsewhere  cloudless.  The 
 dew  on  and  around  the  mountain  is  very  abundant 
 One  of  its  southern  spurs  is  called  Abu  N'ady,  '  the 
 father  of  dew.'  In  the  spring  of  1857,  the  writer  | 
 encamped  two  nights  at  its  base,  and  his  tent  was  I 
 as  completely  satui-ated  as  if  heavy  rain  had  fallen. 
 For  fuller  information  the  student  may  consult 
 Porter,  Damasais,  i.  pp.  279,  sq. ;  Robinson, 
 B.  R.,  iii.  431,  sq.  ;  Lynch,  Expedition  to  the  Dead 
 Sea;  Ritter,  Fa/,  tend  Syr.,  ii.  152,  sq.—].  L.  P. 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILY.  We  are  principally 
 indebted  to  Josephus  for  the  information  respecting 
 the  Herodian  family,  though  incidental  notices  occur 
 in  the  classical  writers,  especially  in  Strabo  (xvi.  c. 
 ii.  46).  It  will  be  sufficient  for  our  purpose  to  com- 
 mence our  consideration  of  their  origin  from  Anti- 
 pater  the  Idumasan,  father  of  Herod  I.  This  Anti- 
 pater,  or  Antipas,  son  of  an  Idumsean  of  the  same 
 name,  had  embraced  the  Jewish  religion  when  Idu- 
 msea  was  taken  by  John  Hyrcanus  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xiii.  9.  i).  Afterwards  disputes  arising  between 
 Hyrcanus  II.  and  his  brother  Aristobulus,  the  com- 
 peting princes  produced  their  case  before  Pompey. 
 In  B.C.  63  Pompey  took  Jerusalem,  and  Aristobu- 
 lus was  deposed  ;  and  in  B.C.  47,  when  Csesar 
 came  to  Syria,  he  appointed  Antipater  governor  of 
 Judrea. 
 
 According  to  Nicolaus  of  Damascus,  Antipater 
 was  of  the  stock  of  the  principal  Jews  who  came 
 out  of  Babylon  into  Judaea  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  I. 
 3).  Various  other  accounts  are  given  of  his  ances- 
 try, but  none  are  worthy  of  notice  here.  Josephus 
 himself  in  several  passages  says  that  Antipater 
 was  of  Idumrean  descent,  and  that  Antigonus, 
 the  adversary  of  Herod,  publicly  proclaimed  that 
 
 the  Romans  would  not  do  justly  if  they  gave  the 
 kingdom  to  Herod,  who  was  an  Iduma^an,  i.e.,  a 
 half-Jew  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  15.  2).  The  latter 
 expression  shews  that  he  was  of  a  proselyte  family. 
 In  other  passages  he  says  that  Antipater  was  of  the 
 same  race  as  the  Jews,  and  that  Herod  was  by  birth 
 a  Jew  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  8.  i;  xx.  8.  7).  It  seems, 
 therefore,  nearly  certain,  that  the  Herodian  family 
 were  of  Idumcean  descent,  and  Ewald  gives  several 
 forms  of  the  names  still  retained  in  the  family 
 {Geschickte,  iv.  477,  note). 
 
 The  splendour  and  magnificence  of  the  reign  of 
 Herod  shed  a  dazzling  lustre  around  his  govern- 
 ment, though  he  was  really  dependent  upon  the 
 empire,  and  wisely  saw  the  policy,  which  was  fol- 
 lowed by  all  the  members  of  his  family,  of  courting 
 his  Roman  masters,  no  doubt  with  the  idea  of 
 forming  at  some  time  an  independent  Eastern 
 monarchy.  He  was  the  first  who  shook  the  foun- 
 dation of  the  ancient  form  of  Jewish  govern- 
 ment as  constituted  by  the  Law.  He  appointed 
 the  high-priests,  and  removed  them  at  pleasure, 
 often  tilling  the  sacred  office  with  men  of  low 
 birth.  In  this  he  was  followed  by  Archelaus,  and 
 afterwards  by  the  Romans,  so  that  there  were  in 
 all  twenty-eight  high-priests  from  the  days  of 
 Herod  to  the  taking  of  the  Temple  by  Titus,  a 
 period  of  107  years  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  10). 
 
 Herod  the  Great  had  ten  wives  ;  of  two  of  them 
 the  names  have  not  been  presented.  Accounts  of 
 thefamily  of  Herod  and  the  combinations  of  relation- 
 ship between  the  descendants  of  the  different  wivts 
 may  be  found  in  the  following  passages  of  Jose- 
 phus {Aiitiq.  xvii.  I.  3  ;  xviii.  5.  4  ;  Bell.  yud.  i. 
 28.  4).  The  following  table  merely  shews  the 
 relationship  between  those  members  of  the  Hero- 
 dian family  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  An  elaborate 
 table,  by  Mr.  Westcott,  giving  a  summary  of  the 
 accounts  of  Josephus,  which  are  not  always  consis- 
 tent in  detail,  is  in  Dr.  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible, 
 vol.  i.  p.  792. 
 
 Antipater  (Ancipas),  {arpaTriybs  6X77S  T^s  'ISoi'yuakj,  Joseph. 
 
 f  Aittiq.  xiv.  i.  3). 
 
 Antipater,  procurator  of  Judaea  in  B.C.  47;  ob.  B  c.  33. 
 =  Cypros  (an  Arabian,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  7.  3). 
 
 Herodes  I.  ;*  \ 
 
 ob.  B.C.  4  ; 
 married. 
 
 Doris. 
 
 Mariamne,  Mariamne, 
 
 granddr.  of  Hyrcanus  II.    dr.  of  Simon. 
 
 Antipater, 
 killed  B.C.  4. 
 
 Aristobulus,  ob.  B.C.  6. 
 =  Berenice. 
 
 Herodes,  t 
 
 (Philip  I.) 
 
 =  Herodias. 
 
 Malthace  (a  Samaritan,  Joseph. 
 I      Antiq.  xvii.  i.  3;  Bell. 
 Jud.  i.  28.  4). 
 
 Antipas,  { 
 =  dr.  of  Aretas. 
 =  Herodias. 
 
 Archelaus 
 (Matt.  ii.  22). 
 
 Cleopatra  ('Iepo(ToXu/*?rty, 
 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  i.  3; 
 
 Bell.  Jud.  i.  28.  4J. 
 
 Philip  II.  § 
 =  Salome. 
 
 Agrippa  I.,^  ob.  A.D.  44. 
 =  Cypros. 
 
 Herodias 
 (Matt.  xiv.  3  ;  Mark 
 vi.  17  ;   Luke  iii.  iq). 
 =  Herod  (Philip  I.) 
 =  Herod  Antipas. 
 
 I  I 
 
 Agrippa  II. ,11  Berenice 
 
 ob.  A.D.  90.  (Acts  XXV.  13;  xxvi.  30). 
 =  Herod,  king  of  Chalcis. 
 =  Polemo,  king  of  Cilicia. 
 
 Drusilla 
 (Acts  xxiv.  24). 
 =  Aziz,  king  of  Emesa. 
 Felix. 
 
 Herod,  king  of  Chalcis, 
 
 ob.   A.D.  4$. 
 
 =  Mariamne, 
 
 dr.  of  Olympias. 
 
 =  Berenice. 
 
 *  Herod  the  King  (Matt.  ii.  i  ;  Luke  i.  5). 
 +  Philip  (I.)  (Matt,  xiv.  3;  Mark  vi.  17  ;  Luke  iii.  19). 
 J  Herod  the  Tetrarch  (Matt  xiv.   i,  3;  Luke  iii.  i,  19; 
 ix.  7).    The  King  (.Matt.  xiv.  9).    King  Herod  (Mark  vi.  14). 
 
 §  Philip  (II.)  the  Tetrarch  (Luke  iii.  i). 
 II  Herod  the  King  (Acts  xii.) 
 II  King  Agrippa  (Acts  xxv.  13;  xxvi.  s,  *e<2.) 
 
IIERODIAN  FAMIl.V^ 
 
 2S7 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILV 
 
 I 
 
 I.  Herod,  sumamed  the  Greai  {"QpiJj'a.;^! 
 was  the  second  son  of  Antipater  and  Cypres,  an 
 Arabian  lady  of  noble  descent  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv. 
 7.  3).  In  B.C.  47  Julius  Caesar  made  Antipater 
 Procurator  of  Judcea,  and  the  latter  divided  his 
 territories  among  his  four  sons,  assigning  the  dis- 
 trict of  Galilee  to  Herod  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  9.  3  ; 
 Bell.  Jiid.  i.  10.  4).  At  the  time  when  he  was 
 invested  with  the  government  he  was  fifteen  years 
 of  age  according  to  Josephus  [Antiq.  xiv.  9.  2)  ; 
 but  it  must  be  a  mistake.  Herod  died,  aged 
 sixty-nine,  in  B.C.  4,  consequently  he  must  have 
 been  twenty-six  or  twenty-five  in  the  year  B.C. 
 47,  when  he  was  made  governor  of  Galilee  {-Khre 
 KoX  eiKoai,  given  by  Dindorf  in  the  ed.  Didot,  but 
 no  stated  authority).  One  of  his  first  acts  was  to 
 repress  the  brigands  who  were  infesting  his  pro- 
 vinces, and  to  put  many  of  their  leaders  to  death 
 upon  his  own  authority.  This  was  made  known  to 
 Hyrcanus,  and  Herod  was  summoned  to  take  his 
 trial  before  the  Sanhedrim  for  his  deeds  of  violence. 
 Herod,  instead  of  appearing  before  the  Sanhedrim 
 clothed  in  mourning,  came  in  purple,  attended  by 
 armed  guards,  and  bearing  in  his  hand  a  letter  from 
 the  Roman  commander  Sextus  Cresar  for  his  ac- 
 quittal. This  overawed  the  assembly,  but  Sameas, 
 a  just  man  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  9.  4),  stepjied  for- 
 ward, and  boldly  addressing  the  assembly,  pre- 
 dicted that  should  the  offender  escape  punish- 
 ment, he  would  live  to  kill  all  those  who  were  his 
 judges,  and  would  not  grant  the  pardon  which  the 
 assembly  seemed  inclined  to  extend  to  him.  He, 
 however,  escaped,  and  took  refuge  with  Sextus 
 Caesar,  who  soon  appointed  him  governor  {arpa.- 
 ri^-ybs)  of  Coele-Syria.  He  then  determined  to 
 march  against  Jerusalem,  and  would  have  done  so, 
 had  not  his  father  Antipater  and  his  family  re- 
 strained him  from  committing  any  fresh  acts  of 
 violence.  In  B.C.  44,  after  Caesar's  death,  Cas- 
 sius  took  the  government  of  Syria.  Herod  and 
 his  father  Antipater  willingly  assisted  Cassius  in 
 obtaining  the  taxes  levied  upon  the  Jews  for  the 
 support  of  the  troops.  For  this  Herod  was  con- 
 firmed in  the  government  of  Coele-Syria  (Joseph. 
 Bell.  Jud.  i.  II.  4).  In  B.C.  41  Antony  came  to 
 Syria,  and  Herod,  by  making  him  valuable  presents, 
 soon  formed  with  him  a  close  personal  intimacy 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  12.  2).  Hyrcanus,  to  whose 
 beautiful  granddaughter  Mariamne  Herod  was 
 betrothed,  induced  Antony  to  make  Herod  and  his 
 brother  Phasael  tetrarchs  of  Judaea  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xiv.  13.  I;  Bell.  Jud.  i.  12.  5).  The  invasion  of  the 
 Parthians,  who  sided  with  Antigonus  the  As- 
 monaean,  compelled  Herod  to  give  up  Judaea  and 
 fly  to  Rome.  Antony  was  then  in  great  power, 
 and  took  Herod  under  his  protection,  and  seeing 
 *.hat  he  might  prove  useful  to  him,  obtained  a  de- 
 cree of  the  senate  appointing  him  king  of  Judasa,  to 
 the  extinction  of  all  the  living  Asmonsean  princes 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  9-14;  Bell.  Jud.  i.  10-14; 
 Dion  Cass,  xlviii. )  These  events  took  place  in 
 B.C.  40,  and  Herod,  only  staying  seven  days  at 
 Rome,  returned  speedily  to  Jerusalem  within  three 
 months  from  the  time  he  had  first  fled. 
 
 It  was  not,  however,  so  easy  for  Herod  to  ob- 
 tain possession  of  Jerusalem  or  to  establish  himself 
 as  king  of  Judsea,  as  it  had  been  to  obtain  this  title 
 from  the  Romans.  The  Jews  still  held  firmly  to 
 Antigonus  as  the  representative  of  the  Asmonaean 
 line,  and  it  was  not  for  several  years  that  Herod 
 made  any  material  advance  whatever.     With  the 
 
 assistance  of  the  Romans  Herod  made  preparations 
 to  take  Jerusalem.  He  had  endeavoured  to  con- 
 ciliate the  people  by  marrying  Mariamne,  thinking 
 that  by  so  doing  the  attachment  of  the  Jews  to  the 
 Asmonsean  family  would  be  extended  to  him. 
 After  six  months'  siege  the  Romans  entered  the 
 city  (B.C.  37),  and  to  revenge  the  obstinate  resist- 
 ance they  had  received,  began  to  ransack  and 
 plunder,  and  it  was  no  easy  task  for  Herod  to 
 purchase  from  the  conquerors  the  freedom  from 
 pillage  of  some  part  of  his  capital.  Antigonus 
 was  taken  and  conveyed  to  Antioch,  where,  having 
 been  previously  beaten,  he  was  ignominiously 
 executed  with  the  axe  by  the  order  of  Antony,  a 
 mode  of  treatment  which  the  Romans  had  never 
 before  used  to  a  king  (Dion  Cass.  Ixix.  22  ;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xv.  I.  2).  Thus  ended  the  government  of 
 the  Asmonffians,  126  years  after  it  \\a.s  first  set  up 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  16.  4).  Immediately  on  as- 
 cendmg  the  throne  Herod  put  to  death  all  the 
 members  of  the  Sanhedrim,  excepting  Pollio  and 
 Sameas,*  who  had  predicted  this  result,  and  also 
 all  the  adherents  of  Antigonus  who  could  be  found. 
 Having  confiscated  their  property,  he  sen*;  presents 
 to  Antony  to  repay  him  for  his  assistance  and  to 
 further  secure  his  favour.  He  then  gave  the  office 
 of  high-priest,  which  had  become  vacant  by  the 
 death  of  Antigonus,  and  the  mutilation  of  Hyr- 
 canus, whose  ears  had  been  cut  off  by  Antigonus 
 (cf  Lev.  xxi.  16-24),  '^o  2.n  obscure  priest  from 
 Babylon,  named  Ananel.  At  this  insult  Alex- 
 andra, the  mother  of  Mariamne  and  Aristobu- 
 lus,  to  whom  the  office  of  high-priest  belonged  by 
 hereditary  succession,  appealed  to  Cleopatra  to  use 
 her  powerful  influence  with  Antony,  and  Herod 
 was  thus  compelled  to  depose  Ananel,  and  to 
 elevate  Aristobulus  to  the  high-priesthood.  The 
 increasing  popularity  of  Aristobulus,  added  to  the 
 further  intrigues  of  Alexandra,  so  excited  the 
 jealousy  of  Herod,  that  he  caused  him  to  be 
 drowned  while  bathing,  and  expressed  great  sor- 
 row at  the  accident.  Alexandra  again  applied 
 to  Cleopatra,  who  at  last  persuaded  Antony  to 
 summon  Herod  to  Laodicea  to  answer  for  his  con- 
 duct. Herod  was  obliged  to  obey,  but  was  dis- 
 missed with  the  highest  honours  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 XV.  3.  1-8;  cf.  Bell.  Jud.  i.  22.  2).  After  the 
 defeat  of  Antony  at  Actium  in  B.C.  31,  Herod 
 had  an  audience  at  Rhodes  with  Octavius,  who  did 
 not  think  that  Antony  was  quite  powerless  while 
 Herod  continued  his  assistance  to  him  (Joseph. 
 Bell.  Jiid.  i.  20.  l).  Herod  so  conciliated  him  that 
 he  obtained  security  in  his  kingdom  of  Judaea,  to 
 which  Octavius  added  Gadara,  Samaria,  and  the 
 maritime  cities  Gaza  and  Joppa.  Shortly  after 
 the  regions  of  Trachonitis,  Batanea,  and  Auranitis, 
 were  given  him  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  5.  6,  7  ;  10.  i; 
 Bell.  yud.  i.  20.  3,  4  ;  comp.  Tac.  Hist.  v.  9). 
 Herod's  domestic  life  was  troubled  by  a  long  series 
 of  bloodshed.  Hyrcanus,  the  grandfather  of  his 
 wife  Mariamne,  was  put  to  death  before  his  visit 
 to  Octavius,  and  Mariamne,  to  whom  he  was  pas- 
 sionately attached,  fell  a  victim  to  his  jealousy  soon 
 after  his  return.  His  remorse  for  the  deed  is  well 
 described  by  Josephus,  who  says  that  Herod  com- 
 manded his  attendants  always  to  speak  of  her  as 
 alive   [Antiq.  xv.  7.  7  ;  Bell.  Jud.  i.    22.  5).     In 
 
 *  These  two  are  the  famous  Hillel  and  Shammai 
 of  the  Rabbinical  writers,  the  founders  of  the  two 
 schools  of  doctrine. 
 
HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 288 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 3.  C.  20,  when  Augustus  visited  Judcea  in  person, 
 another  extensive  addition  was  made  to  his  terri- 
 tories. The  district  of  Paneas  was  taken  away 
 from  its  ruler  Zenodorus  for  leaguing  himself  with 
 the  Arabs,  and  given' to  Herod.  In  return  Herod 
 adorned  this  place  by  erecting  a  temple,  which  he 
 dedicated  to  Augustus  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  lO.  3  ; 
 Bell.  Jicd.  i.  20.  4  ;  Dion  Cass.  liv.  9).  Not  long 
 after  this,  the  death  of  his  wife  was  followed  by 
 other  atrocities.  Alexander  and  Aristobulus,  the 
 sons  of  Mariamne,  were  put  to  death,  and  at  last, 
 in  B.C.  4,  Herod  ordered  his  eldest  son,  Antipater, 
 to  be  killed.  Herod's  painful  disease  no  doubt 
 maddened  him  in  his  later  years,  and  in  anticipa- 
 tion of  his  own  death  he  gave  orders  that  the  prin- 
 cipal Jews,  whom  he  had  shut  up  in  the  Hippo- 
 drome at  Jericho,  should  immediately  after  his 
 decease  be  put  to  death,  that  mourners  might  not 
 be  wanting  at  his  funeral  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  6. 
 5).  On  his  deathbed,  too,  he  must  have  ordered 
 the  murder  of  the  infants  at  Bethlehem,  as  recorded 
 in  St.  Matthew  (ii.  16-18).  The  number  of  children 
 in  a  village  must  have  been  very  few,  and  Josephus 
 has  passed  this  story  over  unnoticed ;  yet  it  is 
 worthy  of  remark  that  he  has  given  an  account  of 
 a  massacre  by  Herod  of  all  the  members  of  his  family 
 who  had  consented  to  what  the  Pharisees  foretold, 
 viz.,  that  Herod's  government  should  cease,  and  his 
 posterity  be  deprived  of  the  kingdom  {Antiq.  xvii. 
 2.  4).  A  confused  account  of  the  massacre  of  the 
 children  and  the  murder  of  Antipater  is  given  in 
 Macrobius — '  Augustus  cum  audisset  inter  pueros, 
 quos  in  Syria  Herodes,  rex  Judseorum,  intra  bima- 
 tum  jussit  interfici,  filium  quoque  ejus  occisum,  ait : 
 Melius  est  Herodis  porcum  {tov  t/j'?)  esse  quam 
 filium  (t6;' i;i6j' ?')  {Sat.  ii.  4).  Macrobius  lived  in 
 tlie  5th  century  (f.A.D.  420),  and  the  words  intra 
 biniatum  (a  bimatu  et  infra.  Matt.  ii.  16,  Vulg.) 
 seem  to  be  borrowed  ;  the  stoiy,  too,  is  wrong,  as 
 Antipater  was  of  age  when  he  was  executed  (Alford, 
 in  loc.)  Macrobius  may  have  made  some  mistake 
 on  account  of  Herod's  wish  to  destroy  the  heir  to 
 the  throne  of  David.  Herod  died  in  the  thirty- 
 seventh  year  of  his  reign  (dating  from  his  being 
 made  king  by  Antony),  and  in  the  seventieth  year 
 of  his  age,  B.C.  4.  His  body  was  conveyed  by  his 
 son  Archelaus  from  Jericho,  where  he  died,  to 
 Herodium,  a  city  and  fortress  200  stadia  distant ; 
 and  he  was  there  buried  with  great  pomp  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xvii.  8.  2  ;  Bell.  Jud.  i.  38.  9). 
 
 On  the  extirpation  of  the  Asmonasan  family, 
 finding  that  there  was  then  no  one  who  could  in- 
 terfere with  hmi,  Herod  had  introduced  heathen- 
 ish customs,  such  as  plays,  shows,  and  chariot- 
 races,  which  the  Jews  condemned  as  contrary  to 
 the  laws  of  Moses  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  8.  i)  ;  and 
 on  the  completion  of  the  building  of  Caesarea  he 
 also  introduced  Olympic  games  and  consecrated 
 them  to  Caesar,  ordering  them  to  be  celebrated 
 every  fifth  year  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  9.  6  ;  xvi.  5. 
 i).  Notwithstanding  that  he  thus  alienated  his 
 subjects  from  him,  he  greatly  improved  his  coun- 
 try by  the  number  of  fine  towns  and  magnificent 
 public  buildings  which  he  had  erected.  He  built 
 a  temple  at  Samaria,  and  converted  it  into  a 
 Roman  city  under  the  name  of  Sebaste.  He  also 
 built  Gaba  in  Galilee,  and  Heshbonitis  in  Persea 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  8.  5),  besides  several  other 
 towns,  which  he  called  by  the  names  of  different 
 members  of  his  family,  as  Antipatris,  from  the 
 name  of  his  father  Antipater,  and  Phasaelis,  in  the 
 
 plains  of  Jericho,  after  his  brother  Phasael  (Joseph 
 Antiq.  xvi.  5-  2).  On  many  other  towns  in  Syria 
 and  Greece  he  bestowed  money,  but  his  grandest 
 undertaking  was  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple  at 
 Jerusalem.  It  was  commenced  in  the  eighteenth 
 year  of  his  reign  (B.C.  20),  and  the  work  was  car- 
 ried on  with  such  vigour  that  the  Temple  itself 
 (j'a6s),  i.e.,  the  Holy  House,  was  finished  in  a  year 
 and  a  half  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  II.  i,  6).  The 
 cloisters  and  outer  buildings  were  finished  in  eight 
 years  (Joseph.  Antiq.,  1.  c,  II.  5).  Additions  and 
 repairs  were  continually  being  made,  and  it  was 
 not  till  the  reign  of  Herod  Agrippa  II.  {c.  A.  D.  65) 
 that  the  Temple  (t6  Uphv)  was  completed  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xx.  9.  7).  Hence  the  Jews  said  to  our 
 Lord,  '  Forty  and  six  years  was  this  Temple  in 
 building  \_ihKohoix-r]dri — and  is  not  even  yet  com- 
 pleted], and  wilt  thou  raise  it  up  in  three  days  V 
 (John  ii.  20).  This  took  place  in  A.D.  27,  just 
 after  our  Lord's  baptism,  who  'was  about  thirty 
 years  of  age'  (Luke  iii.  23),  and  who  was  born  a 
 few  months  before  the  death  of  Herod,  in  B.C.  4, 
 according  to  the  usual  chronology,  which  places 
 the  mtivity  four  years  before  the  Vulgar  era. 
 This  beai'tiful  temple,  though  built  in  honour  of 
 the  God  of  Israel,  did  not  win  the  hearts  of  the 
 people,  as  is  proved  by  the  revolt  which  took  place 
 shortly  before  Herod's  death,  when  the  Jews  tore 
 down  the  golden  eagle  which  he  had  fastened  to  the 
 Temple,  and  broke  it  in  pieces  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xvii.  6.  2,  3). 
 
 The  diversity  of  Herod's  nature  is  remark- 
 able. On  regarding  his  magnificence,  and  the 
 benefits  he  bestowed  upon  his  people,  one  cannot 
 deny  that  he  had  a  very  beneficent  disposition  ;  but 
 when  we  read  of  his  cruelties,  not  only  to  his  sub- 
 jects, but  even  to  his  own  relations,  one  is  forced 
 to  allow  that  he  was  brutish  and  a  stranger  to 
 humanity  (cf  Joseph.  Antiq.  xvi.  5-  4)-  His  ser- 
 vilitv  to  Rome  is  amply  shewn  by  the  manner  in 
 which  he  transgressed  the  customs  of  his  nation 
 and  set  aside  many  of  their  laws,  building  cities 
 and  erecting  temples  in  foreign  countries,  for  the 
 Jews  did  not  permit  him  so  to  do  in  Judaea,  even 
 though  they  were  under  so  tyrannical  a  govern- 
 ment as  that  of  Herod.  His  confessed  apology 
 was  that  he  was  acting  to  please  Cresar  and  the 
 Romans,  and  so  through  all  his  reign  he  was  a 
 Jewish  prince  only  in  name,  with  a  Hellenistic  dis- 
 position (cf.  Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  9.  5  ;  xix.  7.  3). 
 Josephus  gives  Herod  I.  the  surname  of  Great 
 ('HpciS?;  Tcp  fj-fydXii)).  Ewald  suggests  that  the 
 title  of  elder  is  only  intended  to  distinguish  him 
 from  the  younger  Herod  (Antipas),  and  compares 
 the  cases  of 'EX/c^as  6  fiiyas  {Antiq.  xviii.  8.  4)  and 
 Agrippa  the  Great,  in  contradistinction  to  Helcias, 
 the  keeper  of  the  sacred  treasure  {Antiq.  xx.  11.  1), 
 and  to  Agrippa  II.  The  title,  '  Agrippa  the  Great,' 
 is  confirmed  by  coins,  on  which  he  is  styled  MEPAS 
 (Eckhel,  Di'ct.  Num.  Vet ,  vol.  ii:  p.  492  ;  Akerman, 
 iVu/n.  Chroti.,  vol.  ix.  p.  23),  and  so,  says  Ewald, 
 '  it  may  similarly  have  been  given  upon  the  coins 
 of  Herod,  and  from  this  the  origin  of  the  surname 
 may  have  been  derived'  {Geschichte,  vol.  iv.  p.  473, 
 note).  There  are,  however,  7io  coins  of  Herod  I. 
 with  the  title  great.  Jost,  in  his  Geschichte  da 
 yudoithums,  p.  319  note,  in  speaking  of  '  the 
 tyrannical  government  of  Herod,  whom  history 
 called,  as  it  were  in  derision  (?),  the  Great,'  says, 
 '  Perhaps  this  (the  title  Great)  arises  from  a  mis- 
 taken translation  of  K3"|,  which  may  also  mean 
 
HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 2S9 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 ihe  elder?  Unfortunately  he  does  not  say  from 
 what  source  he  obtains  this  word ;  and  if  it  is  to 
 be  found,  it  must  be  of  very  rare  occurrence.  It 
 is  best  to  suppose  that  the  title  in  Josephus  is 
 merely  a  distinguisliing  epithet,  and  not  meant  to 
 express  greatness  of  cliaracter  or  achievements. 
 
 2.  Herod  Antipas  ('HpwST^s,  Matt.,  Mark, 
 Luke  ;  'AyrtVas,  Josephus)  was  the  son  of  Herod 
 the  Great,  by  Malthace,  a  Samaritan  (Joseph.  Aiitiq. 
 xvii.  1.3;  Bell.  Jud.  i.  28.  4).  His  father  had 
 aheady  given  him  '  the  kingdom'  in  his  first  will, 
 but  in  the  final  arrangement  left  him  the  tetrarchy 
 of  Galilee  and  Perrea  (Joseph.  Aiitiq.  xvii.  8.  i  ; 
 Bell.  Jud.  ii.  9.  I  ;  Matt.  xiv.  i  ;  Luke  iii.  i  ;  iii. 
 19  ;  ix.  I  ;  Acts  xiii.  i),  which  brought  him  the 
 j'early  revenue  of  200  talents  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xviii.  5-  i)-  On  his  way  to  Rome  he  visited  his 
 brother  Philip,  and  commencing  an  intrigue  with 
 his  wife  Herodias,  daughter  of  Aristobulus,  the 
 son  of  Mariamne,  he  afterwards  incestuously  mar- 
 ried her.  He  had  been  previously  married  to  a 
 daughter  of  Aretas,  king  of  Arabia  Petrcea,  who 
 avenged  this  insult  by  invading  his  dominions,  and 
 defeated  him  with  great  loss  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii. 
 5.  i).  Josephus  says  that  the  opinion  of  the  Jews 
 was  that  the  defeat  was  a  ]3unishment  for  his 
 having  imprisoned  John  the  Baptist  on  account  of 
 his  popularity,  and  afterwards  put  him  to  death, 
 but  does  not  mention  the  reproval  that  John  gave 
 him,  nor  that  it  was  at  the  instigation  of  Herodias 
 that  he  was  killed,  as  recorded  in  the  Gospels 
 (Joseph.  Aiitiq.  xviii.  5.  4;  Matt.  xiv.  i-ii  ;  Mark 
 vi.  14-16  ;  Luke  iii.  19  ;  ix  7-9).  The  evangelists 
 evidently  give  the  true  reason,  and  Josephus  the 
 one  generally  received  by  the  people.  In  A.  D.  38, 
 after  the  death  of  Tiberius,  he  was  persuaded  to  go 
 to  Rome  to  procure  for  himself  the  royal  title. 
 Agrippa  [Herod  AgrippaL],  who  was  high  in  the 
 favour  of  Caius,  opposed  this  with  such  success, 
 that  Antipas  was  condemned  to  perpetual  banish- 
 ment at  Lyons,  a  city  of  Gaul  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xviii.  7.  2),  and  eventually  died  in  Spain,  whither 
 his  wife  Herodias  [Herodias]  had  voluntarily 
 followed  him*  {Bell.  Jud.  ii.  9.  6).  He  is  called 
 king  by  St.  Matthew  (xiv.  9)  and  by  St.  Mark 
 (vi.  14). 
 
 Herod  Antipas  was  in  high  favour  with  Tiberius. 
 Hence  he  gave  the  name  of  Tiberias  to  the  city  he 
 built  on  the  lake  of  Gennesareth  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xviii.  2.  3).  He  enlarged  and  improved  several 
 cities  of  his  dominions,  and  also  built  a  wall  about 
 Sepphoris,  find  round  Betharamphtha,  which  latter 
 town  he  named  Julias  in  honour  of  the  wife  of  the 
 Emperorf  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  2.  i  ;  cf.  Bell. 
 Jud.  ii.  9.  I). 
 
 *  There  is  here  some  confusion.  It  has  been 
 suggested  (Dr.  Smith's  Bibl.  Diet.  vol.  i.  p.  796) 
 that  the  town  is  Lugdunum  Convenarum  (now  St. 
 Bertrand  de  Comminges),  a  town  of  Gaul  situated 
 on  the  right  bank  of  the  Garonne,  at  the  foot  of  the 
 Pyrenees,  as  a  town  like  this  would  satisfy  both 
 passages. 
 
 t  If  Josephus  means  Augustus,  his  wife  Livia 
 did  not  receive  the  name  of  Julia  till  after  the  Em- 
 peror's death  in  a.d.  14,  and  it  seems  very  im- 
 probable that  Antipas  should  have  renamed  the 
 city  at  so  late  a  date  as  the  death  of  Augustus. 
 If  he  means  Tiberius,  his  wife  Julia,  the  daughter 
 of  Augustus,  was  not  living  with  him  when  he 
 came  to  the  throne.     Eusebius  and  Jerome  state 
 
 vol.  II. 
 
 It  was  before  Herod  Antipas  that  our  Lord  was 
 sent  for  examination  when  Pilate  heard  that  He 
 was  a  Galilean,  as  Pilate  had  already  had  several 
 disputes  with  the  Galileans,  and  was  not  at  this 
 time  on  very  good  terms  with  Herod  (Luke  xiii.  i; 
 xxiii.  6-7),  and  'on  the  same  day  Pilate  and  Herod 
 were  made  friends  together'  (Luke  xxiii.  12;  cf, 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  3.  2 ;  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  5).  The 
 name  of  Herod  Antipas  is  coupled  with  that  of 
 Pilate  in  the  prayer  of  the  Apostles  mentioned  in 
 the  Acts  (iv.  24-30).  His  personal  character  is 
 little  touched  upon  by  either  Josephus  or  the  Evan- 
 gelists, yet  from  his  consenting  to  the  death  of  John 
 the  Baptist  to  gratify  the  malice  of  a  wicked  woman, 
 though  for  a  time  he  had  'heard  him  gladly' 
 (Mark  vi.  20),  we  perceive  his  cowardice,  his 
 want  of  spirit,  and  his  fear  of  ridicule.  His  wicked 
 oath  was  not  binding  on  him,  for  Herod  was  bound 
 by  the  law  of  God  not  to  commit  murder.  He 
 was  in  any  case  desirous  to  see  Jesus,  and  'hoped 
 to  have  seen  a  miracle  from  him'  (Luke  xxiii.  8). 
 His  artifice  and  cunning  are  specially  alluded  to  by 
 our  Lord,  '  Go  ye  and  tell  that/c7x'  (rg  dXibireici 
 TavTTj,  Luke  xiii.  32).  Coins  of  Herod  Antipas 
 bear  the  title  TETPAPXOT. 
 
 3.  Herod  Archelaus  {'ApxAaos,  Matt. ; 
 Josephus;  'Hpwdrjs,  Dion  Cassius  ;  coins),  son  of 
 Herod  the  Great  and  Malthace,  uterine  and 
 younger  brother  of  Herod  Antipas,  and  called  by 
 Dion  Cassius  'E.pwdT]s  UaXaiaTyjfos  (lib.  Iv.  57). 
 His  father  had  disinherited  him  in  consequence 
 of  the  false  accusations  of  his  eldest  brother  Anti- 
 pater,  the  son  of  Doris ;  but  Herod,  on  mak- 
 ing a  new  will,  altered  his  mind,  and  gave  him 
 'the  kingdom,'  which  had  been  before  left  to 
 Antipas  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  8.  i).  He  was 
 saluted  as  'king'  by  the  army,  but  refused  to  ac- 
 cept that  title  till  it  should  be  confirmed  by  Augus- 
 tus (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  8.  2,  4  ;  Bell.  Jud.  i.  i). 
 Shortly  after  this  a  sedition  was  raised  against  him, 
 which  he  quelled  by  killing  30CO  persons,  and  he 
 then  set  sail  with  his  brother  Antipas  to  Rome 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  9.  2,  4  ;  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  2.  3). 
 Upon  this  the  Jews  sent  an  embassy  to  Augustus 
 to  request  that  they  might  be  allowed  to  live  ac- 
 cording to  their  own  laws  under  a  Roman  governor. 
 Our  Lord  seems  to  allude  to  this  circumstance  in 
 the  parable  of  the  nobleman  going  into  a  far  coun- 
 try to  receive  for  himself  a  kingdom.  'But  his 
 citizens  hated  him,  and  sent  a  message  after  him, 
 saying,  we  will  not  have  this  man  to  reign  over  us' 
 (Luke  xix.  12-27).  While  he  was  at  Rome  Jeru 
 salem  was  under  the  care  of  Sabinus  the  Ro- 
 man procurator,  and  a  quarrel  ensued  in  conse- 
 quence of  the  manner  in  which  the  Jews  were 
 treated.  Quiet  was  again  established  through 
 the  intervention  of  Varus,  the  president  of  Syria, 
 and  the  authors  of  the  sedition  were  punished 
 (Jose]5h.  Antiq.  xvii.  lo).  Augustus,  however, 
 ratified  the  main  points  of  Herod's  will,  and 
 gave  Archelaus,  Judaea,  Samaria,  and  Idumcea, 
 with  the  cities  of  Csesarea,  Sebaste,  Joppa,  and 
 Jerusalem,  the  S^tXtoi  ethnarch,  and  a  promise  that 
 he  should   have  the  royal  dignity  hereafter  if  he 
 
 that  Herod  (I.  ?)  had  given  it  the  name  of  Libias 
 [Livias)  in  honour  of  the  wife  of  Augustus  {07to- 
 mnst.,  s.  v.  Libias).  Julias  (Betharamphtha)  must 
 not  be  confounded  with  the  Julias  (Bethsaida)  en- 
 larged by  Herod  Philip  II.,  and  named  after  the 
 daughter  of  Augustus  (see  Herod  Philip  II.) 
 
 u 
 
HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 290 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 g^ovemed  virtuously*  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii  ii.  4; 
 Bell.  Jiid.  ii.  6.  3).  When  Archeiaus  returned  to 
 Judsea  he  rebuilt  the  royal  palace  at  Jericho,  and 
 established  a  village,  naming  it  after  himself,  Arche- 
 lais  (Joseph.  Aiitiq.  xvii.  13.  i).  It  was  evidently 
 the  alteration  of  Herod's  will  that  caused  Joseph  to 
 return  into  Galilee,  which  was  under  the  milder 
 government  of  Antipas  (Matt.  ii.  22).  Shortly  after 
 Archeiaus'  return  he  violated  the  Mosaic  law  by 
 marrying  Glaphyra,  the  daughter  of  Archeiaus, 
 king  of  Cappadocia,  and  the  Jews  complaining 
 again  loudly  of  his  tyranny,  Aaigustus  summoned 
 him  to  Rome,  and  finally,  A.D.  6,  sent  him  into 
 exile  at  Vienna  in  Gaul,  where  he  probably  died, 
 and  his  dominions  were  attached  to  the  Roman 
 empire  (Joseph.  Afitiq.  xvii.  13.  2 ;  Bell.  Jiid.  ii.  7  ; 
 of.  Strabo,  xvi.  p.  765  ;  Dion  Cass.,  Iv.  25,  27). 
 Jerome,  however,  relates  that  he  was  shewn  the 
 tomb  of  Archeiaus  near  Bethlehem  {Ononiasticoit, 
 s.  V.)  Coins  with  the  title  eONAPXOT  belong  to 
 Archeiaus. 
 
 4.  Herod  Philip  I.  {^IXcjnros,  Mark  vi.  17  ; 
 'Rpwbris,  Josephus),  was  the  son  of  Herod  the 
 Great,  by  a  second  Mariamne,  the  daughter  of 
 Simon  the  high-priest  (Joseph.  Aiitiq.  xviii.  5.  4), 
 and  must  be  distinguished  from  Philip  the  tetrarch. 
 [Herod  Philip  II.]  He  was  the  husband  of 
 Herodias,  by  whom  he  had  a  daughter,  Salome. 
 Herodias,  however,  contrary  to  the  laws  of  her 
 country,  divorced  herself  from  him,  and  married 
 her  uncle  Antipas  [Herod  Antipas  ;  Herodias] 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  5.4;  Matt.  xiv.  3  ;  Mark 
 vi.  17  ;  Luke  iii.  19).  He  was  omitted  in  the 
 will  of  Herod  in  consequence  of  the  discovery  that 
 Mariamne  was  conscious  of  the  plots  of  Antipater, 
 Herod  the  Great's  son  by  Doris  (Joseph.  Bdl. 
 Jiid.  i.  30.  7). 
 
 5.  Herodias  ('Hp(65tas,  Matt.  xiv.  i-ii  ;  Mark 
 vi.  14-16  ;  Luke  iii.  19)  was  daughter  of  Aristobulus, 
 one  of  the  sons  of  Herod  I.  by  the  first  Mariamne, 
 and  of  Berenice,  the  daughter  of  Salome,  Herod's 
 sister,  and  was  consequently  sister  of  Herod  Ag- 
 rippa  I.  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  5.  4  ;  Bell.  Jiid.  i. 
 28.  i).  She  was  first  married  to  her  uncle,  Herod 
 Philip  I.,  the  son  of  Herod  I.,  and  the  second 
 Mariamne,  by  whom  she  had  a  daughter  Salome, 
 probably  the  one  that  danced  and  pleased  Herod 
 Antipas,  and  who  afterwards  married  her  uncle 
 Philip  II.  Herodias  soon  divorced  herself  from 
 him,  and  married  Herod  Antipas,  who  was  also  her 
 uncle,  being  the  son  of  Herod  I.  and  Malthace, 
 and  who  agreed,  for  her  sake,  to  put  away  his  own 
 wife,  the  daughter  of  Aretas,  king  of  Arabia 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  5.  i,  4).  St.  John  the 
 Baptist  reproved  her  for  her  crimes,  in  thus  living 
 in  adultery  and  incest,  and  she  took  the  first  oppor- 
 tunity to  cause  him  to  be  put  to  death,  thus  adding 
 thereto  the  crime  of  murder.  Her  marriage  was 
 unlawful  for  three  reasons  ;  first,  her  former  hus- 
 band,   Philip,    was   still    alive    (Stao-racra    fwvTos, 
 
 *  Archeiaus  never  really  had  the  title  of  king 
 (/SacrtXei^s),  though  at  first  called  so  by  the  people 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  8.  2) ;  yet  we  cannot  object  to 
 the  word  ^acriXevei.  in  St.  Matthew,  for  Archeiaus 
 regarded  himself  as  king  (Joseph.  i5^//.  yud.  ii.  i.  i), 
 and  Josephus  speaks  of  the  province  of  Lysanias, 
 which  was  only  a  tetrarchy,  as  ^acnXfiav  Tr]v  Avaa- 
 viov  (Bell.  Jit'd.  ii.  II.  5).  Herod  (Antipas)  the 
 tetrarch  is  also  called  6  pa(n.\eus  (Matt.  xiv.  9  ; 
 Mark  vi.  14). 
 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  5.  4);  secondly,  Antipas'  wife 
 was  still  alive  ;  and  thirdly,  by  her  first  marriage 
 with  Philip  she  became  the  sister-in-law  of  Anti- 
 pas, who  was  consequently  forbidden  by  the  Jewish 
 law  to  marry  his  brother's  wife  (Levit.  xviii.  16  ; 
 XX.  21  ;  cf.  Alford,  Matt.  xiv.  4).  When  Antipas 
 was  condemned  by  Caius  to  perpetual  banishment, 
 Herodias  was  offered  a  pardon,  and  the  Emperor 
 made  her  a  present  of  money,  telling  her  that  it 
 was  her  brother  Agrippa  (I. )  who  prevented  her 
 being  involved  in  the  same  calamity  as  her  hus- 
 band. The  best  trait  of  her  character  is  shewn 
 when,  in  true  Jewish  spirit,  she  refused  this  offer, 
 and  voluntarily  chose  to  share  the  exile  of  her  hus- 
 band [Herod  Antipas]  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviiu 
 7.  2). 
 
 6.  Herod  Philip  II.  {f^'CKnnros,  Luke  ;  Jose- 
 phus) was  son  of  Herod  the  Great  and  Cleopatra 
 {'lepoaoKvfUTis),  and  was  with  his  half  brothers  Ar- 
 cheiaus and  Antipas  brought  up  at  Rome*  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xvii.  I.  3  ;  Bell.  Jnd.  i.  28.  4).  He  re- 
 ceived as  his  share  of  the  empire  the  tetrarchy  of 
 Batanea,  Trachonitis,  Auranitis,  and  certain  parts 
 about  Jamnia,  with  a  revenue  of  100  talents  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xvii.  II.  4;  Bell.  Jnd.  ii.  6.  3.)  He  is 
 only  mentioned  once  in  the  N.  T.  (Luke  iii.  I,  ^i- 
 XIttttov  TeTpapxavuTos).  He  was  married  to  Salome, 
 the  daughter  of  Herod  Philip  I.  and  Herodias,  but 
 left  no  children  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  5.  4).  He 
 reigned  over  his  dominions  for  37  years  (B.C.  4 — 
 A.  D.  34),  during  which  time  he  shewed  himself  to 
 be  a  person  of  moderation  and  quietness  in  the 
 conduct  of  his  life  and  government  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xviii.  4.  6).  He  built  the  city  of  Paneasand  named 
 it  Csesarea,  more  commonly  known  as  Caesarea 
 Philippi  (Matt.  xvi.  13  ;  Mark  viii.  27),  and  also 
 advanced  to  the  dignity  of  a  city  the  village  Beth- 
 saida,  calling  it  by  the  name  of  jfidias,  in  honour 
 of  the  daughter  of  Augustus.  +  He  died  at  Julias, 
 and  was  buried  in  the  monument  he  had  there  built 
 (Joseph.  Afttiq.  xviii.  2.  I  ;  4.  6  ;  Bell.  Jnd.  ii. 
 9.  i).  Leaving  no  children,  his  dominions  were 
 annexed  to  the  Roman  province  of  Syria  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xviii.  5.  6).  Coins  of  Philip  II.  bear  the 
 title  TETPAPXOT. 
 
 7.  Herod  Agrippa  I.  ('HpciSTjs  Acts;  ''Aypiw- 
 TTas,  Josephus)  was  the  son  of  Aristobulus  and 
 Berenice,  and  grandson  of  Herod  the  Great  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xvii.  I.  2  ;  Bell,  jfiid.  i.  28.  i).  He  is 
 called  'Agrippa  the  Great'  by  Josephus  {Antiq. 
 xvii.  2.  2).  A  short  time  before  the  death  of 
 Herod  the  Great  he  was  living  at  Rome,  and  was 
 brought  up  with  Drusus,  the  son  of  Tiberius,  and 
 with  Antonia,  the  wife  of  Drusus  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xviii.  6.  i).  He  was  only  one  year  older  than 
 Claudius,  who  was  born  in  B.C.  10,  and  they  were 
 bred  up  together  in  the  closest  intimacy.  He,  how- 
 ever, soon  exhausted  all  his  funds  by  his  reckless 
 extravagance,  but  ultimately  obtained  the  appoint- 
 
 *  Josephus,  in  his  Antiq.  xvii.  8.  i,  calls  Philip 
 ^ Kpx^Xdov  abikcpQ  yvrjaLij},  o'wn  brother oi  Archeiaus. 
 In  other  passages  he  gives  their  descent  correctly. 
 
 t  This  is  not  the  Bethsaida  of  Galilee,  but  that 
 mentioned  in  Luke  ix.  10,  where  Christ  fed  the 
 5000,  and  in  Mark  viii.  22.  It  was  in  Lower 
 Gaulonitis  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  9.  l).  Its  situa- 
 tion is  described  by  Josephus,  where  he  says  that 
 the  Jordan  just  passes  by  the  city  Julias,  and  then 
 through  the  middle  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth 
 (Bell.  Jud.  iii.  10.  9)  [Bethsaida]. 
 
HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 £91 
 
 HERODIAN  FAMILY 
 
 ment  of  governor  of  the  city  of  Tiberias  through  j 
 the  instigation  of  his  sister  Herodias,  and  liis  wife 
 Cypros,  the  daughter  of  Phasael,  brother  of  Herod 
 the  Great  (Joseph.  Aniiq.  xviii.  6.  2).  In  an  un- 
 guarded moment  he  expressed  tlie  wisli  that  Caius 
 might  soon  succeed  to  the  throne,  which,  being  re- 
 ported to  Tiberius,  he  was  arrested  and  thrown 
 into  prison,  where  he  remained  till  the  accession  of 
 Caius  in  A.n.  37  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  6.  10).  Caius 
 shortly  after  gave  him  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip,  the 
 iron  claain  with  wliich  he  had  been  fastened  to  a 
 soldier  being  exchanged  for  a  gold  one  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xviii.  6.  10).  He  then  started  to  take  pos- 
 session of  his  kingdom,  and  at  Alexandria  was  in- 
 sulted by  the  people,  who  dressed  up  an  idiot,  and 
 bore  him  in  mock  triumph  through  the  streets  to 
 deride  the  new  king  of  the  Jews  (Philo,  in  Flacaun, 
 6).  After  the  exile  of  his  uncle  Antipas,  he  re- 
 ceived from  Caius  the  tetrarchy  of  Gahlee  and 
 Persea  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  7.  2)  ;  and  in  A.D.  41, 
 for  having  greatly  assisted  Claudms,  he  received 
 his  whole  paternal  kingdom  (Judaea  and  Samaria), 
 and  in  addition  the  tetrarchy  of  Lysanias  II.* 
 (cf.  Luke  hi.  i).  Agrippa  now  possessed  the 
 entire  kingdom  of  Herod  the  Great.  At  this 
 time  he  begged  of  Claudius  the  kingdom  of  Chal- 
 cis  for  his  brother  Herod  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xix. 
 5.  I  ;  Bell.  Jud.  h.  11.  5).  He  loved  to  live  at 
 Jerusalem,  and  was  a  strict  observer  of  the  laws  of 
 his  country,  which  will  account  for  his  persecut- 
 ing the  Christians,  who  were  hated  by  the  Jews 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xix.  7.  3).  Thus  influenced  by  a 
 strong  desire  for  popularity,  rather  than  from  innate 
 cruelty,  '  he  stretched  forth  his  hands  to  vex  cer- 
 tain of  the  church.'  He  put  to  death  James  the 
 elder,  son  of  Zebedee,  and  cast  Peter  into  prison, 
 no  doubt  with  the  intention  of  killing  him  also. 
 This  was  frustrated  by  his  miraculous  deliverance 
 from  his  jailors  by  the  angel  of  the  Lord  (Acts 
 xii,  I -19).  Agrippa  I.,  like  his  grandfather,  dis- 
 played great  taste  in  building,  and  especially 
 adorned  the  city  of  Berytus  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xix. 
 7.  5).  In  A.D.  44  Agrippa  celebrated  games  at 
 Ceesarea  in  honour  of  the  emperor,  and  to  make 
 vows  for  his  safety.  At  this  festival  a  number  of 
 the  principal  persons,  and  such  as  were  of  dignity 
 in  the  province,  attended,  t  On  the  second  day 
 Agrippa  appeared  in  the  theatre  in  a  garment  inter- 
 woven with  silver.  On  closing  his  address  to  the 
 people,  they  saluted  him  as  a  god,  for  which  he 
 did  not  rebuke  them,  and  he  was  immediately 
 seized  with  violent  internal  pains,  and  died  five  days 
 after  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xix.  8.  2). 
 
 This  fuller  account  of  Josephus  agrees  sub- 
 stantially with  that  in  the  Acts.  The  silver  diess 
 [i^  dpyvpov  ireiroLri/j.ivrjv  iraaav,  Josephus  ;  iadyJTa 
 ^acLkiKriv,  Acts)  ;  and  the  disease  (tcS  t^s  yaa-rpos 
 d\yTi/j.aTL  Tov  ^lov  KariaTpexpev,  Josephus ;  yevdfie- 
 vos  aKwXrjKo^pwTos  e^exf/v^ev.  Acts).  The  owl  {j3ov- 
 §Q}va.  iiri  crxotj'toD  tivos)  which  on  this  occasion  ap- 
 
 *  Josephus  says,  in  one  passage,  that  Caius  gave 
 him  this  tetrarchy  {Antiq.  xviii.  6.  10),  but  after- 
 wards, in  two  places,  that  Claudius  gave  it  to  him 
 {Antiq.  xix.  5.  I  ;  Bell.  Jiid.  ii.  11.  5).  Caius 
 probably  promised  it,  and  Claudius  actually  con- 
 ferred it. 
 
 +  Josephus  does  not  mention  those  of  Tyre  and 
 Sidon  as  recorded  in  the  Acts  (xii.  20).  Though 
 Agrippa  was  'highly  displeased,'  it  does  not  appear 
 that  any  rupture  worthy  of  notice  had  taken  place. 
 
 pearad  to  Agrippa  as  the  messenger  of  ill  tidings 
 (fi77eXoj  KaKuv,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xix.  8.  2),  though 
 on  a  former  one  it  had  appeared  to  him  as  a 
 messenger  of  good  news  (Joseph.  Afitiq.  xviii. 
 6.  7),  is  converted  by  Eusebius  [H.  E.  ii.  ch. 
 10),  who  professes  to  quote  Josephus,  into  the 
 angel  of  the  Acts  (eTrdra^ei'  avrhv  dyyeXos  Kvpiov, 
 Acts  xii.  23.  For  an  explanation  of  the  confusion, 
 cf.  Eusebius  /.  c,  ed.  Heinichen,  Excurs.  ii.  vol. 
 iii.  p.  556;  Alford.  in.  loc.) 
 
 8.  Herod  Agrippa  II.  i^k.ypiinta'i.  Acts ;  Jo- 
 sephus) was  the  son  of  Herod  Agi-ippa  I.  and 
 Cypros  {Bell.  Jud.  ii.  II.  6).  At  the  time  of  his 
 father's  death  (A.  D.  44)  he  was  only  seventeen  years 
 of  age,  and  the  emperor  Claudius,  thinking  him 
 too  young  to  govern  the  kingdom,  sent  Cuspius 
 Fadus  as  procurator,  and  thus  made  it  again  a 
 Roman  province  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xix.  9.  2  ;  Tac. 
 Hist.  V.  9).  After  the  death  of  his  uncle  Herod  in 
 A.D.  48,  Claudius  bestowed  upon  him  the  small 
 kingdom  of  Chalcis  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  5.  2  ;  Bell. 
 Jud.  ii.  12.  i),  and  four  years  after  took  it  away 
 from  him,  giving  him  instead  the  tetrarchies  of 
 Philip  and  Lysanias  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  7.  I  ;  Bell. 
 Jud.  ii.  12.  8)  with  the  title  of  king  (Acts  xxv.  13  ; 
 xxvi.  2,  7).  In  A.D.  55  Nero  gave  him  the  cities 
 of  Tiberias  and  Tariches  in  Galilee,  and  Julias,  a 
 city  of  Persea,  with  fourteen  villages  near  it  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xx.  8.  4 ;  cf.  Bell.  Jnd.  ii.  13.  2). 
 
 Agrippa  II.  e.xhibited  the  Herodian  partiality 
 for  building.  He  much  enlarged  the  city  of 
 Csesarea  Philippi,  and  in  honour  of  Nero  called  it 
 Neronias.  He  also  supplied  large  sums  of  money 
 towards  beautifying  Jerusalem  and  Berytus,  trans- 
 ferring almost  everything  that  was  ornamental  from 
 his  own  kingdom  to  this  latter  place.  These  acts 
 rendered  him  most  unpopular  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx. 
 9.  4).  In  A.D.  60  king  Agrippa  and  Berenice  his 
 sister  [Berenice],  concerning  the  nature  of  whose 
 equivocal  intercourse  with  each  other  there  had 
 been  much  grave  conversation,  and  who  in  con- 
 sequence persuaded  Polemo,  king  of  Cilicia,  to 
 marry  her  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  7.  3),  came  to 
 Caisarea  (Acts  xxv.  13).  It  was  before  him  and 
 his  sister  that  the  Apostle  Paul  made  his  defence, 
 and  almost  '  persuaded  him  to  be  a  Christian.' 
 
 The  famous  speech  which  Agrippa  made  to  the 
 Jews,  to  dissuade  them  from  waging  war  with  the 
 Romans,  is  recorded  by  Josephus  {Bell.  Jud.  ii. 
 16.  4).  At  the  commencement  of  the  war  he  sided 
 with  the  Romans,  and  was  wounded  by  a  sling- 
 stone  at  the  siege  of  Gamala  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  iv. 
 I.  3).  After  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  he  retired  with 
 his  sister  Berenice  to  Rome,  and  there  died  in  the 
 seventieth  year  of  his  age,  and  in  the  third  year  of 
 Trajan  (A.D.  100).  He  was  on  intimate  terms  with 
 Josephus,  who  gives  two  of  his  letters  {Life,  sec. 
 65),  and  he  was  the  last  Jewish  prince  of  the  He- 
 rodian line. 
 
 As  regards  his  coins,  Eckhel  gives  two  with  the 
 head  of  Nero,  one  with  the  legend  EIII  BA2IAE 
 AFPinilA  NEPfiNIE,  confirming  the  account  of 
 Josephus  as  regards  the  city  of  Cresarea  Philippi, 
 and  the  other  bearing  the  praenomen  of  Marcus, 
 which  he  may  have  received  on  account  of  his 
 family  being  indebted  to  the  triumvir  Antony,  or 
 else,  as  Eckhel  thinks,  more  likely  from  Marcus 
 Agrippa  (Eckhel,  Boct.  Ahim.  Vet.,  vol.  iii.  pj). 
 493,  494;  cf.  Akerman,  Nutn.  Cliron.,  vol.  ix.  ]x 
 42).  There  are  other  coins  with  the  heads  of  Ves- 
 pasian, Titus,  and  Domitian.     Most  of  his  coins 
 
HERODIANS 
 
 292 
 
 HESHBON 
 
 bear  the  title  of  'king  Agrippa,'  by  which  he  is 
 known  in  the  Acts.  An  account  of  the  coinage 
 of  the  Herodian  family  will  be  found  in  the  article 
 Money. 
 
 9.  Berenice.     [Berenice.] 
 
 10.  Drusilla.     [Drusilla.]— F.  W.  M. 
 
 HERODIANS,  a  class  of  Jews  that  existed  in 
 the  time  of  Jesus  Christ,  whether  of  a  political  or 
 religious  description  it  is  not  easy,  for  want  of 
 materials,  to  determine.  The  passages  of  the  N. 
 T.  which  refer  to  them  are  the  following,  Matt. 
 xxii.  16  ;  Mark  iii.  6  ;  xii.  13  ;  Luke  xx.  20.  The 
 particulars  are  these  : — The  ecclesiastical  authori- 
 ties of  Judrea  having  failed  to  entrap  Jesus  by 
 demanding  the  authority  by  which  he  did  his  won- 
 derful works,  especially  as  seen  in  his  expurgation 
 of  the  temple  ;  and  being  incensed  in  consequence 
 of  the  parable  spoken  against  them,  namely,  '  A 
 certain  man  planted  a  vineyard,'  etc.,  held  a  coun- 
 cil against  him,  and  associating  with  themselves 
 the  Herodians,  sent  an  embassy  to  our  Lord  with 
 the  express  but  covert  design  of  ensnaring  him  in 
 his  speech,  that  thus  they  might  compass  his 
 destruction.  The  question  they  put  to  him  was 
 one  of  the  most  difficult — '  Is  it  lawful  to  pay  tri- 
 bute to  Ccesar?'  The  way  in  which  Jesus  extri- 
 cated himself  from  the  difficulty  and  discomfited 
 his  enemies  is  well  known. 
 
 Do  these  circumstances  afford  any  light  as  to 
 what  was  the  precise  character  of  the  Herodians  ? 
 Whatever  decision  on  this  point  may  be  arrived  at, 
 the  general  import  of  the  transaction  is  very  clear, 
 and  of  a  character  highly  honourable  to  Jesus. 
 That  his  enemies  were  actuated  by  bad  faith,  and 
 came  with  false  pretences,  might  also  be  safely 
 inferred.  Luke,  however,  makes  an  express  state- 
 ment to  this  effect,  saying  (xx.  iS-20),  'they 
 sought  to  lay  hands  on  him  ;  and  they  feared  tlie 
 people  ;  and  they  watched  him,  and  sent  forth 
 spies  which  should  feign  themselves  just  jiieti,  that 
 they  might  take  hold  of  his  words,  that  so  they 
 might  deliver  him  unto  the  jiower  and  authority  of 
 tlie goveriioi:''  The  aim,  then,  was  to  embroil  our 
 Lord  with  the  Romans.  For  this  purpose  the 
 question  put  had  been  cunningly  chosen.  These 
 appear  to  have  been  the  several  feelings  whose 
 toils  were  around  Jesus — the  hatred  of  the  priests, 
 the  favour  of  the  people  towards  himself,  and  their 
 aversion  to  the  dominion  of  the  Romans,  their  half 
 faith  in  him  as  the  Messiah,  which  would  probably 
 be  converted  into  the  vexation  and  rage  of  disap- 
 pointment, should  he  approve  the  payment  of 
 tribute  to  Rome  ;  another  element  of  difficulty  had 
 in  the  actual  case  been  deliberately  provided — the 
 presence  of  the  Herodians.  Altogether  the  scene 
 was  most  perplexing,  the  trial  most  perilous.  But 
 what  additional  difficulty  did  the  Herodians  bring  ? 
 Herod  Antipas  was  now  Tetrarch  of  Galilee  and 
 Perasa,  which  M'as  the  only  inheritance  he  received 
 from  his  father  Herod  the  Great.  As  Tetrarch  of 
 Galilee  he  was  specially  the  ruler  of  Jesus,  whose 
 home  was  in  that  province.  The  Herodians,  then, 
 may  have  been  subjects  of  Herod,  Galilceans, 
 whose  evidence  the  priests  were  wishful  to  procure, 
 because  theirs  would  be  the  evidence  of  fellow- 
 countrymen,  and  of  special  force  with  Antipas  as 
 being  that  of  his  own  immediate  subjects  (Luke 
 xxiii.  7). 
 
 Herod's  relations  with  Rome  were  in  an  unsafe 
 condition.     He  was  a  weak  prince,  given  to  ease 
 
 and  luxury,  and  his  wife's  ambition  conspired  witl 
 his  own  desires  to  make  him  strive  to  obtain  from 
 the  Emperor  Caligula  the  title  of  king.  For  this 
 purpose  he  took  a  journey  to  Rome,  and  was 
 banished  to  Lyons  in  Gaul. 
 
 The  Herodians  may  have  been  favourers  of  his 
 pretensions  :  if  so,  they  would  be  partial  hearers, 
 and  eager  witnesses  against  Jesus  before  the 
 Roman  tribunal.  It  would  be  a  great  service  to 
 the  Romans  to  be  the  means  of  enabling  them  to 
 get  rid  of  one  who  aspired  to  be  king  of  the  Jev.'s. 
 It  would  equally  gratify  their  own  lord,  should  the 
 Herodians  give  effectual  aid  in  putting  a  period  to 
 the  mysterious  yet  formidable  claims  of  a  rival 
 claimant  of  the  crown. 
 
 We  do  not  see  that  the  two  characters  here 
 ascribed  to  the  Herodians  are  incompatible  ;  and 
 if  they  were  a  Galilsean  political  party  who  were 
 eager  to  procure  from  Rome  the  honour  of  royally 
 for  Herod  (Mark  vi.  14,  the  name  of  king  is 
 merely  as  of  courtesy),  they  were  chosen  as  asso- 
 ciates by  the  Sanhedrim  with  especial  propriety. 
 
 The  deputation  were  to  '  feign  themselves  just 
 men,'  that  is,  men  whose  sympathies  were  entirely 
 Jewish,  and,  as  such,  anti-heathen  :  they  were  to 
 intimate  their  dislike  of  paying  tribute,  as  being  an 
 acknowledgment  of  a  foreign  yoke  ;  and  by  flatter- 
 ing Jesus,  as  one  who  loved  truth,  feared  no  man, 
 and  would  say  what  he  thought,  they  meant  to 
 inveigle  him  into  a  condemnation  of  the  practice. 
 In  order  to  carry  these  base  and  hypocritical 
 designs  into  effect,  the  Herodians  were  appropri- 
 ately associated  with  the  Pharisees  ;  for  as  the 
 latter  were  the  recognised  conservators  of  Judaism, 
 so  the  former  were  friends  of  the  aggrandisement 
 of  a  native  as  against  a  foreign  prince. 
 
 Other  hypotheses  may  be  found  in  Paulus  on 
 the  passage  in  Matt.  ;  in  Wolf,  Cune  Phil.  i.  311, 
 sq.  ;  see  also  J.  Steuch,  Diss,  de  Herod.,  Lund. 
 1706;  J.  Floder,  Diss,  de  Ucrod.,  Upsal.  1764. — 
 J.  R.  B. 
 
 HERODIAS.     [Herodian  Family.] 
 
 HERON.     [Anapha.] 
 
 HESHBON  (JU:^'n;   Sept.   'Eae^tLv;    Euseb. 
 
 'EdcrejSaij')  ;  a  town  in  the  southern  district  of  the 
 Hebrew  territory  beyond  the  Jordan,  parallel 
 with,  and  twenty-one  miles  east  of,  the  point 
 where  the  Jordan  enters  the  Dead  Sea,  and  nearly 
 midway  between  the  rivers  Jabbok  and  Anion. 
 It  originally  belonged  to  the  Moabites  ;  but  when 
 the  Israelites  arrived  from  Egypt,  it  was  found  to 
 be  in  the  possession  of  the  Amorites,  whose  king, 
 Sihon,  is  styled  both  king  of  the  Amorites  and 
 king  of  Heshbon,  and  is  expressly  said  to  have 
 'reigned  in  Heshbon'  (Josh.  iii.  10  ;  comp.  Num. 
 xxi.  26  ;  Dent.  ii.  9).  It  was  taken  by  Moses 
 (Num.  xxi.  23-26),  and  eventually  became  a  Levi- 
 tical  city  (Josh.  xxi.  39  ;  i  Chron.  vi.  81)  in  the 
 tribe  of  Reuben  (Num.  xxxii.  37  ;  Josh.  xiii.  17)  ; 
 but  being  on  the  confines  of  Gad,  is  sometimes 
 assigned  to  the  latter  tribe  (Josh.  xxi.  39  ;  i  Chron. 
 vi.  81).  After  the  ten  tribes  were  sent  into  exile, 
 Heshbon  was  taken  possession  of  by  the  Moabites, 
 and  hence  is  mentioned  by  the  prophets  in  their 
 declarations  against  Moab  (Is.  xv.  4  ;  Jer.  xlviii. 
 2>  34.  45)-  Under  King  Alexander  Janntieus  we 
 find  it  again  reckoned  as  a  Jewish  city  (Joseph. 
 Autiq.  xiii.  15.  4).  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome  it  was  still  a  place  of  some  consequence 
 
HESHMON 
 
 293 
 
 HEZEKIAH 
 
 under  the  name  of  Esbus  ('Ecr/Soiyr)  ;  but  at  the 
 present  day  it  is  known  by  its  ancient  name  of 
 Heshbon,  in  the  shghtly  modified  form  of  Hesl^an. 
 The  ruins  of  a  considerable  town  still  exist,  cover- 
 ing the  sides  of  an  insulated  hill,  but  not  a  single 
 edifice  is  left  entire.  The  view  from  the  summit  is 
 very  extensive,  embracing  the  ruins  of  a  vast  num- 
 ber of  cities,  the  names  of  some  of  which  bear  a 
 strong  resemblance  to  those  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
 ture. There  are  reservoirs  connected  with  this 
 and  the  other  received  towns  of  this  region.  These 
 have  been  supposed  to  be  the  pools  of  Heshbon 
 mentioned  by  Solomon  (Cant.  vii.  4) ;  but,  say  Irby 
 and  Mangles,  '  The  ruins  are  uninteresting,  and 
 the  only  pool  we  saw  was  too  insignificant  to  be 
 one  of  those  mentioned  in  Scripture.'  In  two  of 
 the  cisterns  among  the  ruins  they  found  about 
 three  dozen  of  human  skulls  and  bones,  which 
 they  justly  regarded  as  an  illustration  of  Gen. 
 xxxvii.  20  ( Travels,  p.  472  ;  see  also  Burckhardt, 
 George  Robinson,  Lord  Lindsay,  etc.) — J.  K. 
 
 HESHMON  (|iD::^n),  a  town  on  the  southern 
 
 boundary  of  Palestine  (Josh.  xv.  27).  It  has  not 
 been  identified.  To  the  suggestion  that  it  is  the 
 same  with  the  Azmon  mentioned  Num.  xxxiv.  4 
 (Smith,  Z)/f/.  of  the  Bible,  s.  v.),  it  maybe  objected 
 that  not  only  does  this  change  the  initiatoiy  guttu- 
 ral, but  it  supposes  a  repetition  of  a  name  already 
 mentioned  in  the  boundary  line  (see  ver.  4),  and 
 probably  more  to  the  west. — t 
 
 HETH,  prop.  Cheth  (Hn ;  Sept.  X^r),  the 
 father  of  the  Hittites.     [Ham  ;  Hittites.] 
 
 HETHLON  (f^nn;  Vnlg.  Hetkalon.  The  name 
 
 is  wanting  in  the  Sept.)  '  The  way  of  Hethlon'  is 
 twice  mentioned  by  Ezekiel  when  describing  the 
 northern  border  of  the  land  of  Israel.  In  one  pas- 
 sage it  is  spoken  of  as  '  the  way  of  Hethlon,  as 
 men  go  to  Zedad'  (xlvii.  15)  ;  in  the  other,  '  the 
 way  of  Hethlon,  as  one  goeth  to  Hamath'  (xlviii. 
 l).  This  'way'  was  manifestly  some  noted  road, 
 or  pass,  leading  from  the  sea-coast  on  the  west  to 
 the  kingdom  of  Hamath,  in  which  Zedad  was 
 situated  [Zedad].  A  comparison  of  these  passages 
 vvith  Num.  xxxiv.  8  warrants  us  in  concluding  that 
 •  the  way  of  Hethlon'  was  identical  with  '  the  en- 
 trance of  Hamath.'  It  was  thus  the  name  of  the 
 great  opening  between  the  northern  extremity  of 
 Lebanon  and  the  Nusairiyeh  mountains.  This 
 pass  forms  the  only  '  entrance'  to  the  plain  of  Ham- 
 ath from  the  western  coast  (Porter,  Damascus,  ii. 
 356  ;  Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  iii.  568).  Winer  calls 
 Hethlon  a  city  (Stadt),  but  there  is  no  proof  of  this 
 (/?.   IV. ,  s.  V.  Hethlo7i).—].  L.  P. 
 
 HEYDENREICH,  August.  Ludwig  Chris- 
 tian, a  Protestant  theologian,  was  bom  at  Wies- 
 baden, 25th  July  1773.  I'^  1795  lie  was  rector 
 and  preacher  in  Usingen  ;  in  1797  rector  and 
 preacher  in  Wiesbaden ;  in  1 800  Stadtpfarrer  in 
 Usingen  ;  in  1809  second  Stadtpfarrer  in  Wies- 
 baden ;  in  1813  inspector  at  Dolzheim ;  in  1818 
 Kirchenrath,  professor  and  preacher  in  Herborn. 
 Subsequently  he  became  evangelical  rural  bishop 
 in  Wiesbaden.  He  died  in  1856  (?).  Most  of 
 his  works  are  homiletic  and  practical  The  exege- 
 tical  are — Commeiitar  in  i  Paiili  ad  Coritith.  epis- 
 tolam,  1825,  1828,  2  parts ;  Die  Pastoralbriefe 
 erldutert,  1827,  1828,  2  parts  ;   Ueber  die  Unzidds- 
 
 sigkeit  de>-  7nythisch.  Aitffasstcng  des  histor.  im 
 JV.  T.  ttnd  im  Christenthttnte,  1S31-1S33,  2  divi- 
 sions. Heydenreich  was  a  dull,  tlat  writer,  who 
 contributed  nothing  to  the  interpretation  of  the 
 N.  T.  He  had  little  talent  and  moderate  learning. 
 His  time  was  devoted  to  the  work  of  a  preacher 
 or  pastor  rather  than  a  scholar.  — S.  D. 
 
 HEZEKIAH  ('  Strength  of  the  Lord,'  ^n'pTH 
 
 and  n'pTn,  and  in  both  forms  with  initial  "•,  LXX. 
 
 'EfeK^as),  son  and  successor  of  Ahaz,  reigned 
 twenty-nine  years  in  Jerusalem.  There  is  some- 
 thing wrong  in  the  numbers,  according  to  which 
 he  was  twenty-five  years  old  at  the  death  of  Ahaz, 
 whose  reign  of  sixteen  years  began  when  he  was 
 twenty  years  old  ;  for  so  Hezekiah  would  have 
 been  born  only  eleven  years  after  his  father.  The 
 error  cannot  he  in  the  number  sixteen,  which  is 
 attested  by  the  synchronisms ;  but  the  difficulty 
 would  be  solved  by  supposing  either  Ahaz  twenty. 
 five,  or  Hezekiah  twenty  years  old  at  accession. 
 And  as  the  LXX.,  followed  by  the  Peshito,  Arabic, 
 and  some  copies  of  the  Hebrew,  does  in  fact  read 
 '  twenty-five'  for  the  'twenty'  of  the  received  text  m 
 2  Chron.  xxviii.  i,  the  former  is  the  solution  usually 
 adopted.  The  history  of  the  reign  is  contained  in 
 2  Kings  xviii.-xx. ,  Is.  xxxvi. -xxxix. ,  and  2  Chron. 
 xxix. -xxxii. ,  illustrated  by  contemporary  prophecies 
 of  Isaiah  and  Micah.  Hezekiah  is  represented  as 
 a  great  and  good  king  (2  Kings  xviii.  5,  6),  who  set 
 himself,  immediately  on  his  accession,  to  abolish 
 idolatry,  and  restore  the  worship  of  Jehovah.  The 
 history  of  this  Reformation,  of  which  2  Kings  xviii. 
 4  ff.  gives  only  a  concise  summary,  is  copiously  re- 
 lated, from  the  Levitical  point  of  view,  in  2  Chron. 
 xxix.  ff.  It  commenced  with  the  cleansing  of  the 
 Temple  'in  the  first  month'  of  Hezekiah's  first 
 year,  /.  e.,  in  the  month  Nisan  next  after  his  acces- 
 sion, and  was  followed  in  the  next  month  (because 
 at  the  regular  season  neither  Levites  nor  Temple 
 were  in  a  due  state  of  preparation)  by  a  great  Pass- 
 over, extended  to  fourteen  days,  to  which  not  only 
 all  J udah  was  summoned,  but  also  the  'remnant' 
 of  the  Ten  Tribes,  some  of  whom  accepted  the 
 invitation.  Some  writers  (as  Jahn,  Keil,  and  Cas- 
 pari)  contend  that  this  passover  must  have  been 
 subsequent  to  the  fall  of  Samaria,  alleging  that  the 
 mention  of  the  'remnant'  (2  Chron.  xxx.  6)  is  un- 
 suitable to  an  earlier  period,  and  that,  while  the 
 kingdom  of  Samaria  still  subsisted,  Hezekiah's 
 messengers  would  not  have  been  suffered  to  pass 
 through  the  land,  much  less  would  the  destruction 
 of  the  high-places  in  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  have 
 been  permitted  (xxxi.  i).  But  the  intention  of  the 
 chronicler  at  least  is  plain  enough  :  the  connection 
 of  xxix.  17,  'the  first  month,'  with  xxx.  2,  'the 
 second  month,'  admits  of  but  one  construction- — 
 that  both  are  meant  to  belong  to  one  and  the  same 
 year,  the  first  of  the  reign.  Accordingly,  Thenius, 
 in  the  kgf.  exeg.  Hdh.  2  Kings,  p.  379,  urges  this 
 as  an  argument  against  the  historical  character  of 
 the  whole  narrative  of  this  passover,  which,  he 
 thinks,  '  rendered  antecedently  improbable  by  the 
 silence  of  the  Book  of  Kings,  is  perhaps  completely 
 refuted  by  2  Kings  xxiii.  22.  The  author  of  the 
 story,  wishing  to  place  in  the  strongest  light  Heze- 
 kiah's zeal  for  religion,  represents  him,  not  Josiah, 
 as  the  restorer  of  the  Passover  after  long  desuetude, 
 and  this  in  the  very  beginning  of  his  reign,  without, 
 perhaps,  caring  to  reflect  that  the  final  deportatior 
 
HEZEKIAH 
 
 294 
 
 HEZEKIAH 
 
 of  the  Ten  Tribes,  implied  in  xxx.  6,  had  not  then 
 taken  place.'  But  2  Kings  xxiii.  22,  taken  in 
 connection,  as  it  ought  to  be,  with  the  preceding 
 verse,  is  perfectly  compatible  with  the  account  in 
 the  Chronicles.  It  says :  '  Surely  stick  a  Passover' — 
 one  kept  in  all  respects  '  as  it  is  written  in  the  Book 
 of  the  Covenant' — '  was  not  holden  from  the  time 
 of  the  Judges,'  etc.  :  whereas  Hezekiah's  Passover, 
 though  kept  with  even  greater  joy  and  fei"vour  than 
 Josiah's,  was  held  neither  at  the  appointed  season, 
 nor  in  strict  conformity  with  the  law.  Nor  is  it 
 necessary  to  suppose  that  by  'the  remnant'  the 
 chronicler  understood  those  who  were  left  by  Shal- 
 maneser.  Rather,  his  view  is,  that  the  people  of 
 the  Ten  Tribes,  untaught  by  the  judgments  brought 
 upon  them  by  former  reverses  and  partial  deporta- 
 tions (under  Tiglath-Pileser),  in  respect  of  which 
 they  might  well  be  called  a  '  remnant'  (comp.  the 
 very  similar  terms  in  which  even  Judah  is  spoken 
 of,  xxix.  8,  9),  and  scornfully  rejecting  the  last  call 
 to  repentance,  brought  upon  themselves  their  final 
 judgment  and  complete  overthrow  (Bertheau,  kgf. 
 exeg.  Hdb.  2  Chron.  p.  395  ff )  Those,  however, 
 of  the  Ten  Tribes  who  had  taken  part  in  the  so- 
 lemnity were  thereby  (such  is  evidently  the  chro- 
 nicler's view  of  the  matter,  xxxi.  i)  inspired  with  a 
 zeal  for  the  true  religion  which  enabled  them,  on 
 their  return  home,  in  defiance  of  all  opposition  on 
 the  part  of  the  scorners  or  of  Hoshea,  to  effect  a 
 destruction  of  the  high-places  and  altars  in  Ephraim 
 and  Manasseh,  as  complete  as  was  effected  in  Jeru- 
 salem before,  and  in  Judali  after  the  Passover.  The 
 notice  of  the  reformation  in  2  Kings  xviii.,  brief 
 as  it  is,  and  confined  to  Hezekiah's  destruction  of 
 the  batnoih,  images,  and  asherah  in  his  own  king- 
 dom, specifies  one  notable  act  unmentioned  by  the 
 chronicler — his  breaking  in  pieces  '  the  brazen  ser- 
 pent which  Moses  had  made,  for  unto  those  days 
 the  children  of  Israel  did  burn  incense  to  it,  and 
 (men)  called  it  (it  was  known  as)  Nehushtan,'  the 
 Brazen  (god).  So  the  passage  must  be  understood. 
 See  Ewald,  Ausf.  Lehrb.  sec.  163,  Gesch.  iii.  328. 
 
 That  this  prudent  and  pious  king  was  not  defi- 
 cient in  military  qualities,  is  shewn  by  his  suc- 
 cesses against  the  Philistines,  seemingly  in  the 
 latter  part  of  his  reign  after  the  overthrow  of 
 Sennacherib,  2  Kings  xviii.  8,  and  by  the  efficient 
 measures  taken  by  him  for  the  defence  of  Jerusalem 
 against  the  Assyrians.  But  he  assiduously  culti- 
 vated the  arts  of  peace,  and  by  wise  management 
 of  finance,  and  the  attention  which,  after  the  ex- 
 ample of  David  and  Uzziah,  he  paid  to  agriculture 
 and  the  inci^ease  of  flocks  and  herds,  he  became 
 possessed,  even  in  troubled  times,  of  an  ample  ex- 
 chequer and  treasures  of  wealth  (2  Chron.  xxxii. 
 27-29  ;  2  Kings  xx.  13  ;  Is.  xxxix.  2).  Himself  a 
 sacred  poet,  and  probably  the  author  of  other  psalms 
 besides  that  in  Is.  xxxviii. ,  he  seems  to  have  col- 
 lected the  psalms  of  David  and  Asaph  for  the 
 Temple-worship,  and  certainly  employed  compe- 
 tent scribes  to  complete  the  collection  of  Solomon's 
 Proverbs  (Prov.  xxv.  i).  He  appears  also  to  have 
 taken  order  for  the  preservation  of  genealogical 
 records.  A  critical  examination  of  the  principal 
 documents  relating  to  the  Levitical  families  in  i 
 Chron.  has  satisfied  the  present  writer  that  the 
 originals  terminated  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  {Re- 
 view of  Lepsius  on  Bible  Chronology,  in  Arnold's 
 Theological  Critic,  i.  59  ff. ) 
 
 At  what  time  it  was  that  Hezekiah  '  rebelled 
 against  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  served  him  not,' 
 
 we  do  not  learn  from  the  direct  history  :  in  the  briet 
 sunmiary,  2  Kings  xviii.  7,  8  (for  such  it  clearly  is), 
 of  the  successes  with  which  the  Lord  prospered 
 him,  that  particular  statement  only  introduces  what 
 is  more  fully  detailed  in  the  sequel,  xviii.  13- 
 xix.  37.  That  it  precedes  the  notice  of  the  over- 
 throw of  Samaria,  ver.  9,  ff. ,  does  not  warrant  the 
 inference  that  the  assertion  of  independence  be- 
 longs to  the  earliest  years  of  Hezekiah's  reign  (see 
 Winer,  Real  W.  B.  i.  497,  n.  2).  Ewald,  how- 
 ever, thinks  otherwise :  in  the  absence  of  direct 
 evidence,  making  history,  as  his  manner  is,  out  of 
 his  own  peremptory  interpretation  of  certain  pas- 
 sages of  Isaiah  (c.  i.  and  xxii.  1-14),  he  informs  us 
 that  Hezekiah,  holding  his  kingdom  absolved  by 
 the  death  of  Ahaz  from  the  obligations  contracted 
 with  Tiglath-Pileser,  prepared  himself  from  the 
 first  to  resist  the  demands  of  Assyria,  and  put 
 Jerusalem  in  a  state  of  defence.  (It  matters  not 
 to  Ewald  that  the  measures  noted  in  2  Kings  xx. 
 20,  2  Chron.  xxxii.  3-5,  30,  are,  in  the  latter  pas- 
 sage, expressly  assigned  to  the  time  of  Senna- 
 cherib's advance  upon  Jerusalem.)  '  From  Shal- 
 maneser's  hosts  at  that  time  stationed  in  Phoenicia 
 and  elsewhere  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Judah, 
 forces  were  detached  which  laid  waste  tlie  land  in 
 all  directions :  an  army  sent  against  them  from 
 Jerusalem,  seized  with  panic  at  the  sight  of  the 
 unwonted  enem.y,  took  to  flight,  and,  Jerusalem 
 now  lying  helplessly  exposed,  a  peace  was  con- 
 cluded in  all  haste,  upon  the  stipulation  of  a  yearly 
 tribute,  and  the  ignominious  deliverance  was  cele- 
 brated with  feastings  in  Jerusalem'  [Gesch.  des  V, 
 y.  iii.  p.  330,  ff. ) :  all  of  which  rests  upon  the  sup- 
 position that  Ewald's  interpretation  of  Is.  i.  22  is 
 the  only  possible  one  :  it  cannot  be  said  to  be  on 
 record  as  histoiy. 
 
 As  gathered/;-;?;;?  Ihe  Scriptttres  only,  the  course  of 
 events  appears  to  have  been  as  follows  :  Ahaz  had 
 placed  his  kingdom  as  tributary  under  the  protection 
 of  Tiglath-Pileser  (2  Kings  xvi.  7).  It  would  seem 
 from  Is.x.  27,  andxxviii.  22,  that  m  the  time  of  Shal- 
 maneser,  to  which  the  latter  passage  certainly,  and 
 the  former  probably,  belongs,  Judah  was  still  un- 
 der the  yoke  of  this  dependence.  Tlie  fact  that 
 Sargon  (whether  or  not  the  same  with  the  Shal- 
 maneser  of  the  history)  in  his  expedition  against 
 Egypt  left  Judah  untouched  (Is.  xx.),  implies  that 
 Judah  had  not  yet  asserted  its  independence.  A 
 powerful  party,  indeed,  was  scheming  for  revolt 
 from  Assyria  and  a  league  with  Egypt  ;  but  there 
 appears  no  reason  to  believe  that  Hezekiah  all 
 along  favoured  a  policy  which  Isaiah  in  the  name 
 of  the  Lord,  to  the  last,  strenuously  condemned. 
 It  was  not  till  after  the  accession  of  Sennacherib 
 that  Hezekiah  refused  the  tribute,  and  at  the  insti- 
 gation of  his  nobles  made  a  league  with  Egypt  by 
 ambassadors  sent  to  Zoan  (Tanis)  Is.  xxx.,  xxxi.  ; 
 comp.  xxxvi.  6-9.*     Hereupon,   'in  the  fourteenth 
 
 *  Some,  indeed  (as  Ewald  and  Caspari),  place  Is. 
 xxix. -xxxii.  before  the  fall  of  Samaria,  to  which 
 time  ch.  xxviii.  must  unquestionably  be  assigned. 
 Possibly  ch.  xxix.  may  belong  to  the  same  time, 
 and  ver.  1 5  may  refer  to  plottings  for  a  league  with 
 Egypt  already  carrying  on  in  secret.  Knobel,  kgf. 
 exeg.  Hdb.  pp.  215,  223,  decides  too  peremptorily 
 that  such  nmsthe.  the  reference,  and  consequently  that 
 ch.  xxix.  falls  only  a  little  earlier  than  the  following 
 chapters,  where  the  league  is  openly  denounced, 
 viz.,  in  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Sennacherib. 
 
HEZEKIAH 
 
 295 
 
 HEZEKIAH 
 
 year  of  Hezekiah,  Sennacheiib  came  up  against 
 all  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah,  and  took  them' 
 (2  Kings  xviii.  13  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  i)  ;  and  Hezekiah  by 
 an  embassy  sent  to  Lachish,  made  humble  sub- 
 mission, and  bought  the  king's  forbeamnce  by  a 
 tribute  of  300  talents  of  silver,  and  30  talents  of 
 gold  (2  Kings  xviii.  14-16  :  it  is  remarkable  that  in 
 Is.  xxxvi.  and  2  Chron.  xxxii.  there  is  no  mention 
 made  of  this  submission).  To  this  conjuncture  Is. 
 xxii.  I -14  may  be  most  suitably  referred,  as  pro- 
 phecy (not  with  Eichhorn,  Ewald,  Maurer,  as  his- 
 tory, to  the  time  of  Shalmaneser,  in  the  early  years 
 of  Hezekiah).  The  untimely  and  shameful  rejoic- 
 ing there  condemned  was,  however,  turned  into 
 renewed  dismay  when  Sennacherib,  allegmg  the 
 Egyptian  alliance  as  the  provocation,  sent  his 
 Tartan,  or  chief  of  the  body-guard,  with  two  other 
 high  officials,  the  Rab-saris  and  the  Rab-shakeh, 
 with  a  powerful  force  from  Lachish  against  Jeru- 
 salem (2  Kings  xviii.  17  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  2  ;  2  Chron. 
 xxxii.  9).  What  length  of  time  elapsed  between 
 the  acceptance  of  the  submission  and  the  hostile 
 advance  from  Lachish,  the  history  does  not  inform 
 us ;  only  it  is  clear  that  in  the  view  of  the  writer  of 
 the  narrative  in  2  Kings  xviii.,  and  especially  of 
 him  by  whom  it  was  transferred  to  the  volume  of 
 Isaiah's  prophecies,  the  two  are  separated  by  no 
 great  inten'al,  and  both  are  referred  to  Hezekiah's 
 fourteenth  year.  According  to  the  chronicler, 
 ibid.  2,  ff. ,  it  was  after  the  attack  upon  '  the  fenced 
 cities  of  Judah,'  and  in  the  prospect  of  an  assault 
 upon  Jerusalem,*  that  Hezekiah  took  measures  for 
 its  defence,  and  especially  for  at  once  cutting  off 
 from  a  besieging  army  the  principal  run  of  water 
 without  the  walls  ('  the  upper  water-course  of 
 Gihon,'  on  the  north-west  side),  and  bringing  it 
 within  the  walls  for  the  supply  of  the  western  por- 
 tion of  Jerusalem  :  a  work  for  which  his  memory 
 was  honoured  in  later  times  (2  Chron.  xxxii.  3,  ff. , 
 30;  comp.  2  Kings  XX.  20;  and  Ecclus  xlviii.  17).+ 
 Whether  the  reservoir  traditionally  called  '  the 
 Pool  of  Hezekiah'  was  the  work  of  this  king,  is 
 disputed  by  Ritter,  Erdkiinde  xvi.  371,  ff.  ;  but 
 Robinson's  latest  investigations,  p.  112,  comp. 
 Bartlett,  Walks  about  Jenisalem,  p.  82,  ff.,  leave 
 little  doubt  that  it  was  (Thenius,  u.  s.,  p.  409). 
 
 Tlie  assault,  however,  did  not  take  place,  and 
 Sennacherib's  officers  drew  off  their  force  to  join 
 him  at  Libnah,  another  fortified  town  in  the 
 south  of  Judah.  Alarmed  by  tidings  of  the  ad- 
 vance of  Tirhaka,  '  king  of  Ethiopia,'  Sennacherib 
 dispatched  a  letter  to  Hezekiah  (whether  from 
 Libnah  or  what  other  place  is  not  said),  imperi- 
 ously urging  him  to  abandon  all  further  resistance. 
 The  miracvilous  overthrow  of  the  Assyrian  army, 
 which  is  represented  as  following  immediately, 
 may  have  been  brought  about  by  a  pestilence  (\oi- 
 lj.iKr)  v&cTos,  Josephus),  if  '  the  angel  of  the  Lord' 
 has  the  same  reference  as  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  15,  16. 
 It  is  not  said  where  it  occurred  :  the  prophecies 
 concerning  it,  Is.  x. -xxxvii.,  seem  to  denote  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  as  would  Ps.  Ixxvi.,  if 
 it  was  written  at  that  time.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
 narrative  would  surely  have  been  fuller,  had  the 
 
 *  Is.  xxxiii.  belongs  to  this  time,  and  perhaps  to 
 the  period  of  suspense  before  the  submission  was 
 accepted. 
 
 t  The  defensive  works  of  Hezekiah  seem  to  be 
 intended  in  Is.  xxii.  9-1I;  and  perhaps  in  Ps.  xlviii. 
 52,  13. 
 
 overthrow,  with  its  attendant  opportunities  of  be- 
 holding the  bodies  of  their  dreaded  enemies  and  ol 
 gathering  great  spoil,  befallen  near  Jerusalem,  or 
 even  within  the  limits  of  Judah.  That  version  of 
 the  story  which  reached  Herodotus  (ii.  140) — for  few 
 will  hold  with  Ewald  {Geseh.  iii.  336)  that  the  story  is 
 not  substantially  the  same — indicates  the  frontier 
 of  Egypt  near  Pelusium  as  the  scene  of  the  disas- 
 ter. The  Assyrian  axmy  would  probably  break  up 
 from  Libnah  on  the  tidings  of  Tirhaka's  approach, 
 and  advance  to  meet  him.  In  ascribing  it  to  a 
 vast  swarm  of  field-miee,  which,  devouring  the 
 quivers  and  bow-strings  of  the  Egyptians,  com- 
 pelled them  to  flee  in  the  morning,  Herodotus  may 
 have  misinterpreted  the  symbolical  language  of  the 
 Egyptians,  in  which  the  mouse  denotes  annihila- 
 tion {a.4>avi(Tixbs,  Horapoll.  i.  50) :  though,  as  Knobel 
 (u.  s.  p.  2S0)  has  shewn  by  apposite  instances,  an 
 army  of  mice  is  capable  of  committing  such  ravages 
 and  also  of  leaving  pestilence  behind  it.  That  the 
 destruction  was  effected  in  the  course  of  one  night, 
 is  clearly  expressed  in  2  Kings  xix.  35,  where 
 '  that  night'  is  plainly  that  which  followed  after  the 
 delivery  of  Isaiah's  prophecy,  and  is  evidently  im- 
 plied alike  in  Is.  xxxvi.  36  ('when  men  arose  early 
 in  the  morning'),  and  in  the  story  of  Herodotus. 
 
 '  In  those  days  was  Hezekiah  sick  unto  death.' 
 So  begins,  in  all  the  accounts,  and  immediately 
 after  the  discomfiture  of  Sennacherib,  the  narrative 
 of  Hezekiah's  sickness  and  miraculous  recoveiy  (2 
 Kings  XX.  I  ;  2  Chron.  xxxii.  24;  Is.  xxxviii.  i).  The 
 time  is  defined,  by  the  promise  of  fifteen  years  to  be 
 added  to  the  life  of  Hezekiah,  to  the  fourteenth  year 
 complete,  or  fifteenth  cuiTent,  of  his  reign  of  twenty- 
 nine  years.  But  it  is  stated  to  have  been  in  the  four- 
 teenth year  of  Hezekiah  that  Sennacherib  took  the 
 fenced  cities  of  Judah,  and  thereafter  threatened  Jeru- 
 salem and  came  to  his  overthrow.  The  two  notes  of 
 time,  the  express  and  the  implied,  fully  accord,  and 
 place  beyond  question  at  least  the  view  of  the  writer 
 or  last  redactor  in  2  Ivings  xviii.,  xix.  ;  Is.  xxxvi., 
 xxxvii.,  that  the  Assyrian  invasion  began  before 
 Hezekiah's  illness,*  and  lies  in  the  middle  of  his 
 reign.  In  the  received  chronology,  as  the  first 
 year  of  Hezekiah  precedes  the  fourth  of  Jehoiakim 
 =  first  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (/.  e. ,  604  E.  c.  in  the 
 Canon,  606  B.C.  in  the  Hebrew  reckoning)  by  29, 
 55,  2,  31,  3  =  120  years,  the  epoch  of  the  reign 
 is  724  or  726  B.C.,  and  its  14th  year  711  or  713 
 B.C.  But  it  is  contended  that  so  early  a  year  is 
 irreconcilable  with  definite  and  unquestionable  data 
 of  contemporary  history,  Egyptian,  Assyrian,  and 
 Babylonian.  The  grounds  on  which  that  conclu- 
 sion rests  have  been  briefly  indicated  in  the  article 
 Chronology,  sec.  12,  ff.  :  a  fuller  consideration  of 
 the  facts  and  necessities  of  the  case  is  reserved  for 
 the  articles  Merodach  -  Balad.\n  and  Senna- 
 cherib. The  present  article  has  confined  itself  to 
 the  Biblical  elements  of  the  question. 
 
 *  But  from  the  promise  '  I  will  deliver  thee  and 
 this  city  out  of  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Assyria' 
 (2  Kings  XX.  6  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  6),  it  appears  that  the 
 deliverance  was  not  yet  completed.  Hezekiah  also, 
 in  his  Psalm  of  thanksgiving,  acknowledges  only  the 
 personal,  not  a  national  deliverance.  This  circum- 
 stance, however,  and  the  absence  of  all  allusion  tc 
 the  peril  then  impending  over  the  nation,  may  be 
 urged  in  favour  of  Dr.  Hincks's  conclusion,  that 
 the  Assyrian  invasion  was  long  subsequent  to  Heze- 
 kiah's illness. 
 
HEZEKIAH 
 
 296 
 
 HEZEKIAH 
 
 Some  writers  have  thought  to  find  a  note  of  time 
 in  2  Kings  xix.  29,  Is.  xxxvii.  30,  '  Ye  shall  eat 
 this  year  such  as  groweth  of  itself,'  etc.,  assuming 
 that  the  passage  is  only  to  be  explained  as  implying 
 the  intervention  of  a  sabbath-year,  or  even  of  a 
 sabbath-year  followed  by  a  year  of  jubilee.  All 
 that  can  be  said  is,  that  the  passage  may  be  inter- 
 preted in  that  sense  ;  and  it  does  happen  that  ac- 
 cording to  that  view  of  the  order  of  sabbatic  and 
 jubilean  years  which  is  the  best  attested,  a  sab- 
 bath-year woidd  begin  in  the  autumn  of  B.C.  713 
 i^Ordo  ScEclorum,  sec.  272-280),  i.  e.,  on  the  per- 
 haps precarious  assumption  that  the  cycle  persisted 
 without  interruption.  At  most,  however,  this  no 
 more  fixes  the  fourteenth  of  Hezekiah  to  the  year  713 
 B.C.,  than  it  does  to  706  or  699  or  any  other  year 
 of  the  series.  But,  in  fact,  it  is  not  necessary  to 
 assume  any  reference  to  a  sabbath-year.  Suppose 
 the  words  to  have  been  spoken  in  the  autumn, 
 then,  the  produce  of  the  previous  harvest  (April, 
 May)  having  been  destroyed  or  carried  off  by  the 
 invaders,  there  remained  only  that  which  sprung 
 naturally  from  the  dropt  or  trodden-out  seed 
 (IT'SD),  and  as  the  enemy's  presence  in  the  land 
 
 hindered  the  autumnal  tillage,  there  could  be  no 
 regular  hai-vest  in  the  following  spring  (only  the 
 IJ^^riD,  avTo/j-ara).     Hence  there  is  no  need  to  infer 
 
 with  Thenius  ad  loc.  that  the  enemy  must  have  been 
 in  the  land  at  least  eighteen  months,  or,  with  Ewald, 
 that  Isaiah,  speaking  in  the  autumn,  anticipated  that 
 the  invasion  would  last  through  the  following  year 
 (die  Prophetcn  des  A.  B.  i.  301,  and  similarly 
 Knobel  ii.  s.,  p.  278). 
 
 The  sign  given  to  Hezekiah  in  the  going  back  of 
 the  shadow  on  the  'sun-dial  of  Ahaz,'  can  only 
 be  interpreted  as  a  miracle  (see  Dial).  The  ex- 
 planation proposed  by  J.  von  Gumpach  (Alt  Test. 
 Shidieii,  p.  181,  ff.)  is  as  incompatible  with  the 
 terms  of  the  narrative  (Is.  xxxviii.  8,  especially  the 
 fuller  one,  2  Kings  xx.  8-1 1)  as  it  is  insulting  to  the 
 character  of  the  prophet,  who  is  represented  to 
 have  managed  the  seeming  return  of  the  shadow 
 by  the  trick  of  secretly  turning  the  movable  dial 
 from  its  proper  position  to  its  opposite  !  Thenius 
 (u.  s.  p.  403,  ff. )  would  naturalise  the  miracle  so  as 
 to  obtain  from  it  a  note  of  time.  The  phenomenon 
 was  due,  he  thinks,  to  a  solar  eclipse,  veiy  small, 
 viz.,  the  one  of  26th  September  713  B.C.  Here, 
 also,  the  prophet  is  taxed  with  a  deception,  to 
 be  justified  by  his  wish  to  inspire  the  despairing 
 king  with  the  confidence  essential  to  his  recovery. 
 The  prophet  employed  fur  this  purpose  his  astrono- 
 mical knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the  eclipse  was 
 about  to  take  place,  and  of  the  further  fact  that 
 '  at  the  beginning  of  an  eclipse  the  shadow  (e.f^ , 
 of  a  gnomon)  goes  back,  and  at  its  ending  goes 
 forward  :'  an  effect,  it  is  true,  so  minute  that  the 
 difference  amounts  at  most  to  sixty  seconds  of 
 time;  but  then,  the  'degrees'  would  mark  ex- 
 tremely small  portions  of  time,  possibly  even  1080 
 to  the  hour  (like  the  later  Hebrew  Chlakim),  and 
 the  so-called  'dial'  was  enormously  large  !  Not 
 more  successfully,  Mr.  Bosanquet  ( Trans,  of  R. 
 Asiat.  See.  XV.  277)  has  recourse  to  the  same  ex- 
 pedient of  an  eclipse  on  1 1  th  Jan.  689  b.  C.  ,  which,  in 
 this  writer's  scheme,  lies  in  the  fourteenth  of  Heze- 
 kiah (see  the  art.  Chronology,  sec.  17).  '  Who- 
 ever truly  believes  in  the  Old  Testament,  as  Mr. 
 Bosanquet  evidently  does,  must  also  be  prepared 
 to  believe  in  a  miracle,'  is  the  just  comment  made 
 
 by  M.  V.  Niebuhr,  Gesch.  Assurs  tiitd  Babels,  p. 
 49.  Mr.  Greswell's  elaborate  attempt  to  prove 
 from  ancient  astronomical  records  that  the  clay  of 
 this  miracle  was  preternaturally  lengthened  out  tc 
 thirty-six  hours  will  scarcely  convince  any  one  but 
 himself  (Fasti  Temporis  Catholici,  etc.,  and  'Re- 
 marks' on  the  same  by  the  present  writer,  1852, 
 p.  23,  ff.) 
 
 Between  Hezekiah's  recovery  and  the  embassy 
 sent  from  Babylon  to  congratulate  him  (Mero- 
 DACH-Baladan),  the  narrative  implies  no  greater 
 length  of  time  than  would  be  required  for  the  tid- 
 ings to  reach  Babylon,  and  the  ambassadors  to 
 make  the  journey  to  Jerusalem.  The  manner  in 
 which  Babylon  is  pointed  to  as  the  instrument  of 
 a  future  judgment  shews  plainly  that  in  the  view  of 
 the  writer  or  last  redactor  the  Assyrian  crisis  was 
 past.  If  in  the  original  record  the  account  of 
 Hezekiah's  illness  preceded  the  Assyrian  invasion, 
 this  mention  of  a  Babylonian  judgment,  and  the 
 expression  of  Hezekiah's  thankfulness  '  there  shall 
 be  peace  and  truth  in  my  days,'  could  not  form 
 the  sequel  to  that  account.  And  unless  we  are 
 prepared  to  assume  that  the  relation  of  what  passed 
 between  Isaiah  and  Hezekiah  took  its  present  form 
 and  colouring  at  a  later  time  when  the  event  had 
 verified  the  prophet's  foreboding  (Ewald,  iii.  346), 
 we  must  suppose  the  order  of  events  to  be — i. 
 Hezekiah's  illness  and  recovery  ;  2.  The  Assyrian 
 invasion,  and  Sennacherib's  discomfiture  ;  3.  The 
 embassy  from  Babylon — that  is,  on  that  construc- 
 tion of  the  chronology  which  is  said  to  be  rendered 
 necessary  by  external  testimony,  the  Babylonian  king 
 sent  to  congratulate  Hezekiah  some  ten  or  twelve 
 years  after  his  recovery  !  On  the  ordinary  con- 
 struction a  difficulty  arises  from  the  fact  that  Heze- 
 kiah, whose  resources  were  exhausted  by  the  Assy- 
 rian tribute,  was  able  only  one  or  two  years  later 
 to  exhibit  treasures  of  wealth  to  these  ambassadors  : 
 but  this  is  explained  by  the  notice,  2  Chron.  xxxii. 
 23,  of  the  costly  gifts  which  flowed  in  from  the  sur- 
 rounding nations  after  the  overthrow  of  the  Assy- 
 rians. It  is  peculiar  to  the  chronicler  that  he 
 represents  the  embassy  to  have  been  '  sent  to  in- 
 quire of  the  wonder  that  was  done  in  the  land' 
 (xxxii.    31),    meaning  by  the   DSiD,    'the   sign' 
 
 ("O,  ver.  24)  given  to  Hezekiah,  which  this  writer 
 must  therefore  have  conceived  to  have  in  some 
 way  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Chaldean  astro- 
 nomers. It  would  be  unwise  to  urge  the  unsup- 
 ported statement  of  the  chronicler,  either  as  imply- 
 ing an  echpse  (Thenius,  n.s.),  or  for  proof  that  the 
 preternatural  occurrence  was  noted  elsewhere  than 
 at  Jerusalem.  Perhaps  he  put  his  own  construc- 
 tion on  a  statement  in  his  sources  purporting  that 
 the  ambassadors  were  sent  to  congratulate  Heze- 
 kiah on  his  recovery,  and  on  the  miraculous  deli- 
 verance afforded  by  the  overthrow  of  the  Assyrians. 
 After  this  embassy  we  have  only  a  general 
 account  of  the  peace  and  prosperity  in  which 
 Hezekiah  closed  his  days.*     In  later  times,  he  was 
 
 *   '  He  was  buried  in  the  going  up  (T0Vt2)  to 
 
 the  sepulchres  of  the  sons  of  David,'  2  Chron. 
 xxxii.  33  :  from  this,  and  the  fact  that  the  succeed- 
 ing kings  were  laid  in  sepulchres  of  their  own,  it 
 may  be  inferred  that  after  Ahaz,  thirteenth  frore 
 David,  there  was  no  more  room  left  in  the  ances 
 tral  sepulchre  (Thenius,  //..^,  p.  410). 
 
HEZEL 
 
 297 
 
 HIDDEKEL 
 
 held  in  honour  as  the  khig  who  had  'after  him 
 none  hke  him  among  all  the  kings  of  Judah,  nor 
 any  that  were  before  him'  (2  Kings  xviii.  5)  ;  in 
 Jer.  xxvi.  17  the  elders  of  the  land  cite  him  as  an 
 example  of  pious  submission  to  the  word  of  the 
 I-ord  spoken  by  Micah  ;  and  the  son  of  Sirach 
 closes  his  recital  of  the  kings  with  this  judgment — • 
 that  of  all  the  kings  of  Judah,  '  David,  Hezekiah, 
 and  Josiah  alone  transgressed  not,  nor  forsook  the 
 law  of  the  Most  High'  (Ecclus  xlix.  4). — H.  B. 
 
 HEZEL,  J.  W.  F.,  a  German  Orientalist  and 
 theologian,  was  born  at  Koenigsberg,  May  16, 
 1754.  Having  received  his  first  instruction  from 
 his  father,  who  was  a  Protestant  pastor,  he  subse- 
 quently repaired  to  the  University  of  Jena,  1772. 
 In  1786  he  was  appointed  professor  of  the  Oriental 
 languages  at  Giessen  ;  and  in  1800  keeper  of  the 
 university  library  there.  In  iSoi  he  was  called  to 
 the  University  of  Dorpat,  where  he  filled  the  chair 
 of  Oriental  literature  till  1820,  in  which  year  he 
 requested  permission  to  retire,  which  was  granted. 
 He  died  February  1st  1829,  at  the  age  of  75.  He- 
 zel's  works  are  many,  but  they  are  little  read  at  the 
 present  day.  They  are  chiefly  these  : — Aiisfiihr- 
 liche Hebrdische Sprachlehre,  1777,  8vo;  An-weisimg 
 zitm  Hehrdischen  bei  Ermani^elnng  alles  miindlichen 
 Unta-richts,  1781,  8vo  ;  Noininalformenlchre  dcr 
 Hehrdischen  Sprache,  1793,  8vo  ;  Instihitio  Philo- 
 logi  Hebraei,  1793,  8vo  ;  Palaeographische  Frag- 
 mente,  1816,  8vo  ;  Gesckichte  der  Hehrdischen  Lite- 
 ratur,  \T]^i  8vo  ;  Ainveisung  ziim  Chaldceischen 
 bit  Er7naugehtng  alles  jniindlichen  Unterrichts, 
 ijSj,  8vo  ;  Syrische  Sprachlehre,  1788,  8vo  ;  Ara- 
 bische  Graminatik  jiehst  einer  kimen  Arabischen 
 Chrestomathie,  1776,  8vo  ;  Anweisinig  ziir  Arabis- 
 chen Sprache  bei  Ermangelung  alles  miindlichen 
 Unterrichts,  1784- 1785,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  Die  Bibel 
 altes  und  neiies  Testament  i7iit  vollstdndig  erklaeren- 
 de7i  Bemerkiingen,  1 780-1 791,  10  vols.  8vo  ;  Dia- 
 logen  ziir  Erldiitenmg  der  Bibel,  17851  ^'^o  >  ^^'^ 
 Bibel  in  ih7-er  wah/rn  Gestalt,  1786,  8vo  ;  Neiier 
 Versnch  neher  den  Brief  an  die  Hebrder,  I795>  ^'^o  > 
 Bihlisches  Reallexicon,  1 783- 1 785,  3  vols.  8vo  ; 
 Die/i'eie  U/tteistichting  der  Absicht  des  Hohailiedes, 
 1777,  8vo.  He  afterwards  published  a  new  trans- 
 lation and  explanation  of  the  Song,  1777,  8vo.  In 
 1777  he  also  published  a  small  treatise  on  the  fall, 
 the  sacrifices  of  Cain  and  Abel,  and  Enoch's  trans- 
 lation ;  and  in  1780  a  dissertation  on  the  sources 
 of  the  early  history  in  the  Pentateuch.  Leh7-bi(ch 
 der  Kritik  des  A.  T.  appeared  in  1783,  8vo. — S.  D. 
 
 HEZION  (jinn)  ;  LXX.  'AfiV ;  Alex.  'Afa^X  ; 
 
 Vulg.  Hezio7t),  the  grandfather  of  the  first  of  the 
 Benhadads  mentioned  in  Scripture  History.  A 
 question  has  long  been  raised  whether  this  name 
 (which  occurs  in  i  Kings  x v.  18)  indicates  the  same 
 person  as  the  Rezon  of  i  Kings  xi.  23.  Thenius, 
 after  Ewald,  suggests  that  the  successful  adventurer 
 who  became  king  of  Damascus,  and  was  so  hostile 
 a  neighbour  to  Solomon  throughout  his  reign,  was 
 really  called  Hezio7i,  and  that  the  designation  Rezo7i 
 (jin,  '  prince')  was  either  assumed  by  him,  or  be- 
 stowed on  him  by  his  followers  after  he  was  seated 
 on  his  new  throne.  There  is  of  course  no  chrono- 
 logical difficulty  in  this  supposition.  Less  than 
 forty  years  intervened  between  the  death  of  Solo- 
 mon, when  Rezon  was  reigning  at  Damascus  (i 
 Kings  xi.  25),  and  the  treaty  between  Asa  and 
 Benhadad  I.    (i   Kings  xv.  18,    19),   during  which 
 
 interval  there  is  no  violence  to  probability  in  assum- 
 ing the  occurrence  of  the  death  of  Rezon  or  Ilezion, 
 the  accession  and  entire  reign  of  Tabrimon  his  son, 
 who  was  unquestionably  king  of  Syria  and  con- 
 temporary with  Asa's  father  (i  Kings  xv.  19),  and 
 the  succession  of  Tabrimon's  son,  Benhadad  I. 
 This  idep*"ity  of  Hezion  with  Rezon  is  an  idea  ap- 
 parently cis  old  as  the  Se]Huagint  translators  ;  for 
 they  associated  in  their  version  with  Solomon's 
 adversary  the  Edomite  Hadad  [or,  as  they  called 
 him,  Ader,  Thv'klip\  '  Esiv/n,  the  son  of  Eliadah' 
 (see  the  LXX.  of  I  Kings  xi.  14)  ;  a  name  which 
 closely  resembles  our  Hezion,  though  it  refers  to 
 Rezon,  as  the  patronymic  proves  (i  Kings  xi.  23). 
 
 The  later  versions,  Peschito  (  oJjOl'  ^^'■'dro7i),  and 
 
 Arabic  (  ...  .JkJb,   Hed)-077),   seem  to  approximate 
 
 also  more  nearly  to  Hezio7i  than  to  Rezo7t.  Of  the 
 older  commentators,  Junius,  Piscator,  Malvenda, 
 and  Menochius  have  been  cited  (see  Poli  Sy7iops. 
 in  loc.)  as  maintaining  the  identity.  Kbhler  also, 
 and  Marsham  {Can.  Chron.  p.  346)  and  Dathe, 
 have  been  referred  to  by  Keil  as  in  favour  of  the 
 same  view.  Keil  himself  is  uncertain.  According 
 to  another  opinion,  Hezion  was  not  identical  with 
 Rezon,  but  his  successor ;  this  is  propounded  by 
 Winer  {B.  R.  W.,  vol.  i.  p.  245,  and  vol.  ii.  p.  322). 
 If  the  account  be  correct  which  is  communicated 
 byjosephus  {A7itiq.  vii.  5.  2)  from  the  4th  book 
 of  Nicolans  Da/nasccnns,  to  the  effect  tliat  the 
 name  of  the  king  of  Damascus  who  was  contempo- 
 rary with  David  was  Hadad  ("ASaSos),  we  have 
 in  it  probably  the  dynastic  name  which  Rezon  or 
 Hezion  adopted  for  himself  and  his  heirs,  who, 
 according  to  the  same  statement,  occupied  the 
 throne  of  Syria  for  ten  generations.  According  to 
 Macrobius  {Satii/-7ialia,  i.  23)  Adad  was  the  name 
 of  the  supreme  god  of  the  Syrians  ['  Deo  quem 
 summum  maximumque  veneratur  Adad  nomen 
 dederunt']  ;  and  as  it  was  a  constant  practice  with 
 the  kings  of  Syria  and  Babylon  to  assume  names 
 which  connected  them  with  their  gods  (cf.  Tabrwi- 
 771071  of  I  Kings  XV.  18,  the  son  of  our  Hezion, 
 whose  name  =  jten  +  2D,    '  good  is    Rimmon,' 
 
 another  Syrian  deity,  probably  the  same  with 
 Adad;  see  2  Kings  v.  18,  and  Zech.  xii.  11),  we 
 may  not  unreasonably  conjecture  that  Hezion,  who 
 in  his  political  relation  called  himself  Rezo7t,  or 
 '  prince,'  adopted  the  name  Hadad  [or  rather  Be7i- 
 hadad,  '  Son  of  the  supreme  God']  in  relation  to 
 the  religio7i  of  his  country  and  to  his  own  ecclesiasti- 
 cal supremacy.  It  is  remarkable  that  even  after 
 the  change  of  dynasty  in  Hazael,  this  title  of  Ben- 
 hadad seemed  to  survive  (see  2  Kings  xiii.  3).  If 
 this  conjecture  be  true,  the  energetic  marauder  who 
 passes  under  the  names  of  Rezon  and  Hezion  in  the 
 passages  which  we  quoted  at  the  commencement  ot 
 this  art.,  was  strong  enough  not  only  to  harassthe 
 great  Solomon,  but  to  found  a  dynasty  of  kings 
 which  occupied  the  throne  of  Syria  to  the  tenth 
 descent,  even  down  to  the  revolution  effected  by 
 Hazael,  '  near  two  hundred  years,  according  to  the 
 exactest  chronology  of  Josephus'  (Whiston's  note, 
 on  A7itiq.  vii.  5.  2). — P.  H. 
 
 HIDDEKEL  (^p^H  ;  TiTptsandT^Ypis'ESSe/cA; 
 
 Tysp-is  and  Tigris),  the  third  river  of  Eden,  de-^ 
 sc'nbed   in   Gen.    ii.    14  as  flowing   '  to  the  east  c 
 
HIDDEKEL 
 
 298 
 
 HIEL 
 
 Assyria'  OltJ'X  DDIp),  or  it  may  be  translated 
 '  towards  the  east  of  Assyria. '  It  is  also  mentioned 
 by  Daniel,  who  saw  one  of  his  wondrous  visions  as 
 he  stood  '  by  the  side  of  the  great  river,  which  is 
 Hiddekel'  (x.  4).  The  translators  of  the  Septua- 
 gint  identify  this  river  with  the  Tigris  ;  and  so  also 
 does  Jerome.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  they 
 are  correct.      The    name    suggests    the    identity. 
 
 The  Aramaean  name  of  the  Tigris  is  N/Jl,  Dlgla, 
 and  the  Arabic  iLs-^^.     The  Hebrew  name  Pplfl 
 
 appears  to  be  compounded  of  nil,  '  active,'  and 
 
 ?pl,  the  common  name.  Digla  M^as  easily  trans- 
 formed by  the  Greeks  into  Tigris  ;  or  perhaps  the 
 latter  was  the  Persian  form,  derived  from  the  word 
 Tigra,   'an  arrow.'     Pliny  says,  'as  soon  as  this 
 
 river  begins  to  flow,  though  with  a  slow  current,  it 
 has  the  name  Diglito.  When  its  course  becomes 
 more  rapid  it  assumes  the  name  Tigris,  given  to  it 
 on  account  of  its  swiftness,  that  word  signifying  '  an 
 arrow'  in  the  Median  language'  (vi.  27).  To  the 
 same  effect  Strabo  writes  (xi.  14.  8).  Josephus 
 states  that  the  word  '  Tigris,  or  Diglath,  signifies 
 what  is  swift,  with  narrowness'  [Antiq.  i.  i.  3).  The 
 great  rapidity  of  the  current  appears  to  have  sug- 
 gested the  name. 
 
 The  Tigris  is  often  mentioned  by  classic  writers. 
 Pliny  gives  the  fullest  description  ;  but  the  notices 
 of  Herodotus  (v.  22),  Strabo  (xi.  14),  and  Xeno- 
 phon  {Anad.  iv.  i.  3)  supply  some  important  de- 
 tails. The  river  has  several  sources  amongthe  moun- 
 tains of  Arminia.  Those  of  the  eastern  branch  were 
 discovered  by  Layard,  south  of  Lake  Van  (Lavard 
 JVin.  and  Babylon,  420)  ;  the  highest  source  of  the 
 
 262.  The  Tigris  at  its  junction  with  the  Euphrates.     Korna. 
 
 western  branch  is  only  a  few  miles  distant  from  the 
 Euphrates.  The  Tigris  flows  at  first  eastward, 
 then  gradually  turns  to  the  south-east  ;  and  after  a 
 tortuous  course  of  more  than  200  miles  through  a 
 wild  mountainous  region,  it  passes  by  a  sublime 
 ravine  into  the  plain  of  Assyria  (Layard,  p.  51)- 
 It  then  sweeps  past  the  great  mounds  of  Nineveh, 
 Rehoboth,  Calali,  and  other  primeval  cities — still 
 retaining  its  rapidity,  and  frequently  breaking  over 
 rocky  barriers  and  artificial  dams.  At  length, 
 near  the  old  town  of  Tekrit,  100  miles  below 
 Mosul,  it  enters  the  low  plain  of  Mesopotamia. 
 Here  its  waters  were  formerly  drawn  off  by  canals 
 for  irrigation.  The  stream  is  now  sluggish,  and 
 the  banks  are  fringed  with  tliick  jungles.  It  flows 
 on  through  the  palm  groves  of  Baghdad,  laving  the 
 walls  of  the  decaying  city.  It  is  here  only  about 
 30  miles  from  the  Euphrates.  The  two  sister 
 rivers  run  parallel  for  100  miles  or  more  ;  and  then 
 the  Tigris  sweeps  round  to  the  eastward,  through 
 
 the  marshy  plains  of  Elam,  and  turning  south  unites 
 with  the  Euphrates  at  Kornah.  The  river  formed 
 by  the  junction  is  called  S/uif  el-Arab.  It  flows  in 
 a  south-eastern  course,  through  swamps  and  deso- 
 late plains,  to  Busrah  and  the  Persian  Gulf. 
 
 The  Tigris  is  navigable  for  small  vessels  as  high 
 up  as  Tekrit — nearly  500  miles  ;  and  a  channel 
 could  easily  be  formed  to  Mosul.  But  the  indiffe- 
 rence and  neglect  of  the  Turkish  government  leave 
 the  river  useless,  and  the  magnificent  country  sur- 
 rounding it  a  desert  (Layard,  p.  475).  In  addition 
 to  the  authors  already  cited,  descriptions  of  the 
 Tigris  are  gi\'en  in  Rich's  Koordistan  ;  Cliesney's 
 Euphrates  Expedition ;  RawYmson^sAneient Monar- 
 chies, vol.  i. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HIEL(^N''n,  Godliveth;  Sept.  'Axt^X),  a  na- 
 tive of  Beth-el,  who  rebuilt  Jericho,  above  500 
 years  after  its  destruction  by  the  Israelites,  and 
 who.  in  so  doing,  incurred  the  effects  of  the  im 
 
HIERAPOLIS 
 
 299 
 
 HIERONYMUS 
 
 precation    pronounced   by  Joshua    (l    Kings   xvi. 
 34). 
 
 Accursed  the  man  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah, 
 Who  shall  arise  and  build  this  city,  even  Jericho  ; 
 With  the  loss  of  his  first-born  shall  he  found  it. 
 And  with  the  loss  of  his  youngest  shall  he  fix  its 
 gates  (Josh.  vi.  26). — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 HIERAPOLIS  (lepdiroXis),  a  city  of  Phrygia, 
 not  far  from  Colossi  and  Laodicea,  where  there 
 was  a  Christian  church  as  early  as  the  time  of  St. 
 Paul  (Col.  iv.  12,  13).  The  place  is  visible  from 
 the  theatre  at  Laodicea,  from  which  it  is  five  miles 
 distant  northward. 
 
 Smith,  in  his  journey  to  the  Seven  Churches 
 (1671),  was  the  first  to  describe  the  ancient  sites  in 
 this  neighbourhood.     He  was  followed  by  Pococke 
 
 and    Chandler;    and   more    recently   by    Richter, 
 Cockerell,  Hartley,  and  Arundell. 
 
 The  place  now  bears  the  name  of  Pambouk-Kiil- 
 asi  (Cotton-castle),  from  the  white  appearance  01 
 the  cliffs  of  the  mountain  on  the  lower  summit,  or 
 rather  an  extended  terrace,  on  which  the  ruins  are 
 situated.  It  owed  its  celebrity,  and  probably  the 
 sanctity  indicated  by  its  ancient  name  (Holy  City), 
 to  its  very  remarkable  springs  of  mineral  water,  the 
 singular  effects  of  which,  in  the  fomiation  of  stalac- 
 tites and  incrustations  by  its  deposits,  are  shewn 
 in  the  accounts  of  Pococke  (ii.  pt.  2,  c.  13)  and 
 Chandler  {Asia  Minor,  c.  6S),  to  have  been  accu- 
 rately described  by  Strabo  (xiii.  p.  629).  A  great 
 number  and  variety  of  sepulchres  are  found  in  the 
 different  approaches  to  the  site,  which  on  one  side 
 is  sufficiently  defended  by  the  precipices  overlook- 
 
 263.  Hierapolis. 
 
 ing  the  valleys  of  the  Lycus  and  Meander,  while 
 on  the  other  sides  the  town  walls  are  still  observ- 
 able. The  magnificent  ruins  clearly  attest  the 
 ancient  importance  of  the  place.  The  main  street 
 can  still  be  traced  in  its  whole  extent,  and  is  bor- 
 dered by  the  remains  of  three  Christian  churches, 
 one  of  which  is  upwards  of  300  feet  long.  About 
 the  middle  of  this  street,  just  above  the  mineral 
 springs,  Pococke,  in  1741,  thought  that  he  dis- 
 tinguished some  remains  of  the  Temple  of  Apollo, 
 which,  according  to  Damascius,  quoted  by  Photius 
 {BU'lioth.  p.  1054),  was  in  this  situation.  But  the 
 principal  ruins  are  a  theatre  and  gymnasium,  both 
 in  a  state  of  uncommon  preservation  ;  the  former  346 
 feet  in  diameter,  the  latter  nearly  filling  a  space  of 
 400  feet  square.  Strabo  (loc.  cit.)  and  Pliny  [Hist. 
 Nat.  v.  29)  mention  a  cave  called  the  Plutonium, 
 filled  with  pestilential  vapours,  similar  to  the  cele- 
 brated Grotto  del  Cane  in  Italy.     High  up  the 
 
 mountain-side  is  a  deep  recess  far  into  the  moun- 
 tain ;  and  Mr.  Arundell  says  that  he  should  have 
 supposed  that  the  mephitic  cavern  lay  in  this 
 recess,  if  Mr.  Cockerell  had  not  found  it  near  the 
 theatre,  the  position  anciently  assigned  to  it.  He 
 adds,  that  the  experiments  made  in  this  mountain- 
 side recess  do  not  seem  very  conclusive,  and  con- 
 jectures that  it  maybe  the  same  in  which  Chandler 
 distinguished  the  area  of  a  stadium  (Arundell,  Asia 
 Minor,  ii.  210).  The  same  writer  gives,  from  the 
 Orieus  Chrisdamis,  a  list  of  the  bishops  of  Hiera- 
 polis dowTi  to  the  time  of  the  emperor  Isaac  An- 
 gelus.  Fuller  accounts  of  the  ruins,  etc.,  may  be 
 seen  in  the  authors  named  above  (comp.  also  Col. 
 Leake's  Geogr.  of  Asia  Minor,  pp.  252,  253).— J.  K 
 
 HIERONYMUS  (Tepcow/xos),  a  Syrian  general 
 in  the  time  of  Antiochus  V.  Eupator  (2  Maccab. 
 xii.  2). 
 
HIERONYMUS 
 
 300 
 
 HIGH  PLACES  and  GROVES 
 
 HIERONYMUS.     [Jerome.] 
 
 HIGGAION.     [Psalms.] 
 
 HIGH  PLACES  and  GROVES,  i.  High 
 Places. — The  word  rendered  'high  place'  in  the 
 A.   V.   is  nD3,    '  a  natural  height.'     Upon  such 
 
 heights  in  Palestine  altars  were  raised  and  tem- 
 ples built,  the  latter  called  'houses  of  high  places' 
 (niOnn  ""ria,    sing.    r\'Cil\r\  n^3).      when  used  in 
 
 relation  to  religion,  whether  idolatrous  or  not,  this 
 word  may  signify  the  sacred  height  itself,  or  the 
 altar  or  temple  upon  it.  At  a  late  period  high 
 places  seem  to  have  been  often  slight  artificial  ele- 
 vations, and  thus  the  name  may  have  come  to 
 be  applied  to  altars.  It  is  needless  to  shew  the 
 motives  which  led  mankind  to  worship  upon  heights, 
 or  to  instance  different  forms  of  this  practice.  Our 
 inquiry  must  be  as  to  the  character  of  the  worship 
 at  the  high  places  of  Palestine  (i)  before  the  con- 
 quest of  the  country ;  (2)  in  the  time  of  the  Judges, 
 and  until  the  Temple  was  built ;  and  (3)  after  the 
 iniilding  of  the  Temple.  [Altar.] 
 
 I.  This  practice  was  probably  of  great  antiquity 
 in  Palestine.  Upon  the  summit  of  lofty  Hermon 
 are  the  remains  of  'a  small  and  very  ancient  temple, ' 
 towards  which  faced  a  circle  of  temples  surround- 
 ing the  mountain  (Smith's  Did.  of  the  Bible,  Her- 
 MON,  i.  p.  790  a) .  That  a  temple  should  have  been 
 built  on  a  summit  of  bare  rock  perpetually  covered 
 with  snow,  shews  a  strong  religious  motive,  and  the 
 position  of  the  temples  around  the  mountain  indi- 
 cates a  belief  in  the  sanctity  of  Hermon  itself.  This 
 inference  is  supported  by  a  passage  in  the  treaty  of 
 Rameses  II.  with  the  Hittites  of  Syria,  in  which, 
 besides  gods  and  goddesses,  the  mountains  and  the 
 rivers,  both  of  the  land  of  the  Hittites  and  of  Egypt, 
 and  the  winds,  are  mentioned,  in  a  list  of  Hittite  and 
 Egyptian  divinities.  The  Egyptian  divinities  are 
 spoken  of  from  a  Hittite  point  of  view,  for  the  ex- 
 pression, '  the  mountains  and  the  rivers  of  the  land 
 of  Egypt'  is  only  half-apphcable  to  the  Egyptian 
 nature-worship,  which  had,  in  Eg)'pt  at  least,  but 
 one  sacred  river  (Lepsius,  Denktndk)-,  iii.  146 ; 
 Brugsch,  Geogmphische  Iiiscriften,  ii.  p.  29  ;  De 
 Rouge  in  Rev.  Arch.,  nouv.  ser.,  iv.  p.  372  ;  Hit- 
 tites). That  Hermon  was  worshipped  in  connec- 
 tion with  Baal  is  probable  from  the  name  Mount 
 Baal-PIermon  (Judg.  iii.  3),  Baal-Hermon  (i  Chron. 
 V.  23)  being  apparently  given  to  it,*  Baal  being,  as 
 the  Egyptian  monuments  indicate,  the  chief  god 
 of  the  Hittites  [Hittites].  That  there  was  such 
 a  belief  in  the  sanctity  of  mountains  and  hills 
 seems  evident  from  the  great  number  of  high 
 places  of  the  old  inhabitants,  which  is  clearly 
 indicated  in  the  prohibition  of  their  worship  as 
 compared  with  the  statement  of  the  disobedience 
 of  the  Israelites.  The  command  enjoined  the  de- 
 struction of  all  the  idolatrous  places  '  upon  the  high 
 mountains,  and  upon  the  hills,  and  under  every 
 green  tree'  (Deut.  xii.  2)  ;  and  it  is  related  that  the 
 Israelites  set  up  idolatrous  objects  '  in  ever)'  high 
 hill,  and  under  every  green  tree,'  high  places  being 
 spoken  of  in  connection  with  this  worship,  and 
 as  belonging  to  the  system  of  the  natives  of  Canaan 
 (2  Kings  xvii.  9-II).  There  is  no  distinct  mention 
 nf  the  exact  character  of  any  idolatrous  worship  at 
 
 *  Mr.  Grove  has  shewn  the  probability  of  Mount 
 Baal-PIermon  being  the  same  as  Hermon  (Smith's 
 Diet,  of  the  Bible,  i.  p.  147  b). 
 
 high  places  in  the  narrative  portions  of  Scripture  re- 
 lating to  the  period  before  the  conquest  of  Canaan, 
 but  no  doubt  there  is  an  indication  in  the  name 
 '  high-places  of  Baal,'  applied  to  one  of  the  heights 
 whence  Balaam  saw  Israel,  and  where  he  sacrificed. 
 But  Balaam  here,  as  elsewhere,  had  altars  built  for 
 the  sacrifices  (Num.  xxii.  41  ;  xxiii.  i).  There  is 
 no  evidence  that  the  believing  Hebrews  before  the 
 Law  followed  this  practice.  Those  who  endeavour 
 to  discover  it  cite  the  passage  describing  Abraham's 
 arrival  at  'a  mountain'  between  Bethel  and  Ai, 
 and  there  building  an  altar  (Gen.  xii.  8),  but  thii 
 is  veiy  insufficient.  The  mountain,  as  the  Hebrew 
 term  allows,  must  have  been  a  slight  eminence, 
 and  it  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  Abraham's 
 pitching  his  tent,  rather  than  his  building  the  altar. 
 It  is  most  unlikely  that  Abraham  would  have  chosen 
 a  place  that  would  have  been  chosen  by  the  heathen ; 
 had  he  done  so  in  this  case,  we  should  probably 
 have  had  some  additional  evidence  from  another 
 instance. 
 
 2.  The  Israelites,  on  occupying  Canaan,  must 
 have  found  the  land  covered  with  the  places  of  ido- 
 latrous worship.  During  the  troubled  period  of  the 
 Judges,  they  were  mainly  confined  to  the  three 
 mountainous  tracts  separated  by  the  plain  of  Es- 
 draelon  and  the  Jordan  valley,  the  territory  of  the 
 northern  tribes,  three  of  which  rose  at  the  call  of 
 Barak  ;  that  of  which  Judah  and  Ephraim  formed 
 the  great  rallying  points  ;  and,  beyond  Jordan,  hilly 
 Gilead.  The  plain  of  Esdraelon  was  held  by  the 
 Canaanites,  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  by  tlv: 
 Phoenicians  and  the  Philistines,  the  great  pasture- 
 lands  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  mainly  by  wandering 
 tribes  of  Abrahamic  descent.  Thus  confined  to  the 
 hilly  parts  of  the  country,  the  Israelites  lived  where 
 the  associations  of  the  old  idolatry  were  strongest. 
 Worship  at  high  places  was  thus  adopted  by  them, 
 and  in  their  subsequent  history  we  find  it  practised 
 among  them,  both  by  believers,  up  to  a  certain 
 period,  and  by  idolators.  It  was,  perhaps,  on  this 
 account  that  the  servants  of  Benhadad  counselled 
 him  to  fight  Israel  in  the  plain,  arguing  :  '  Their 
 gods  [are]  gods  of  the  hills  ;  therefore  they  were 
 stronger  than  we ;  but  let  us  fight  against  them  in 
 the  plain,  and  surely  we  shall  be  stronger  than 
 they'  (i  Kings  xx,  23).  \See  Phcenicia.] 
 
 In  the  Law  it  was  distinctly  commanded  that 
 no  sacrifices  should  be  offered  except  at  the  one 
 place  of  worship.  It  is  indeed  said  that  the 
 offerings  were  to  be  brought  to  this  place  after 
 the  people  had  rest  from  their  enemies  (Deut. 
 xii.  10,  11);  but  this  injunction  seems  to  refer 
 to  the  rest  after  the  first  conquest,  and  certainly 
 does  not  allow  of  the  use  of  other  altars.  That 
 this  law  was  clearly  understood  at  the  first  is" 
 evident  from  the  history  of  the  altar  of  witness 
 built  by  the  two  tribes  and  a  half  when  they  de- 
 parted to  their  inheritance  (Josh.  xxii.  10-34). 
 Nothing  can  be  more  explicit  than  the  words  of 
 these  tribes — '  God  forbid  that  we  should  rebel 
 against  the  Lord,  and  turn  this  day  from  following 
 the  Lord,  to  build  an  altar  for  burnt  offerings,  for 
 meat  offerings,  or  for  sacrifices,  beside  the  altar  of 
 the  Lord  our  God  that  [is]  before  his  tabernacle' 
 (ver.  29).  There  is  therefore  no  possibility  of  ad- 
 mitting the  theoiy  that  the  prohilaition  was  not  to 
 come  into  force  until  the  Temple  had  been  built, 
 when  it  was  thus  understood  in  the  lifetime  of 
 Phinehas. 
 
 Not  long  after  this,  the  custom  of  sacrificing  else- 
 
HIGH  PLACES  AND  GROVES 
 
 301 
 
 HIGH  PLACES  and  GROVES 
 
 where  than  at  Shiloh  appears  to  have  commenced, 
 for  we  read  how,  evidently  in  the  earliest  days  of 
 the  occupation  of  Canaan,  the  people  were  reproved 
 by  an  angel  at  Bochim,  and  '  sacrificed  there  unto 
 tlie  Lord'  (Judg.  ii.  5).  It  is  still  more  remarkable 
 to  read  that  Gideon  built  an  altar  to  the  Lord,  and 
 afterwards  that  he  was  commanded  to  destroy  the 
 altar  of  Baal,  and  build  an  altar  to  the  Lord  (vi. 
 24,  25,  26).  So,  too,  Manoah  sacrificed  where  the 
 angel  appeared  (xiii.  19).  This  worship  seems  to 
 have  been  occasioned  by  the  disturbed  state  of  the 
 comitry  and  the  difficulty  of  uniting  in  journeys  to 
 Shiloh  for  the  great  feasts,  and  it  may  perhaps  have 
 been  permitted  as  a  recurrence  to  the  patriarchal 
 system.  The  local  idolatrous  worship  adopted 
 from  the  heathen  was  carried  on  at  the  same  time. 
 We  hear,  however,  nothing  of  high  places  until  the 
 time  of  Samuel,  when  the  sacrificing  and  worship 
 in  high  places  seems  to  have  been  usual,  and  was 
 sanctioned  by  the  practice  and  approval  of  the 
 priest-judge  (i  Sam.  ix.  12  ;  x.  5,  13).  In  the  time 
 of  Solomon  this  worship  still  obtained,  for  it  is  said 
 of  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  '  Only  the  people 
 sacrificed  in  high  places,  because  there  was  no 
 house  built  unto  the  name  of  the  Lord,  until  those 
 days'  (i  Kings iii.  2).  Solomon  accordingly  'went 
 to  Gibeon  to  sacrifice  there  ;  for  that  [was]  the  great 
 high  place'  (ver.  4).  That  his  sacrificing  was  not 
 disapproved  is  evident  from  the  dream  which  God 
 there  granted  to  him.  At  this  time  the  Tabernacle 
 was  at  Gibeon,  though  David  had  removed  the 
 Ark  to  Jerusalem  (2  Chron.  i.  3-6,  comp.  i  Chron. 
 xvi.  37-40).  The  separation  of  the  Ark  from  the 
 Tabernacle,  and  the  pitching  the  latter  at  a  high 
 place,  are  very  remarkable  points. 
 
 3.  After  the  completion  of  the  Temple  there  must 
 have  been  no  excuse  for  worship  at  high  places, 
 and  it  was  probably  for  a  time  discontinued.  When 
 they  are  again  mentioned  it  is  in  connection  with 
 idolatry.  Solomon  made  a  high  place,  or  high 
 places,  for  the  idols  of  Moab  and  Anmion  (i  Kings 
 xi.  7).  Jeroboam,  to  prevent  his  subjects  from 
 going  to  Jerusalem,  established  a  series  of  high 
 places.  At  Dan  and  Bethel  he  raised  houses  of 
 high  places,  and  throughout  his  kingdom  (xii. 
 26-31  ;  xiii.  32).  The  Levites  having  left  their 
 cities  in  his  dominions,  and  gone  to  Rehoboam,  the 
 king  of  Israel  appears  to  have  made  use  of  Shishak 
 to  capture  those  cities,  and  established  a  spurious 
 priesthood  (2  Chron.  xi.  13,  14,  15  ;  I  Kings  xii. 
 31  ;  xiii.  33.  ;  comp.  Brugsch,  Gcogr.  Inschr.  ii. 
 pp.  70,  71).  The  system  set  up  by  Jeroboam  was 
 jjartly  an  imitation  of  the  national  religion,  partly 
 of  the  idolatry  of  Egypt  and  Canaan  [Idolatry]. 
 From  this  time  we  find  high  places  used  either  for 
 idolatrous  worship,  or,  apparently,  for  an  inde- 
 pendent and  unlawful  practice  of  the  national  rites. 
 In  general,  the  former  use  seems  to  have  obtained 
 in  Judah,  and  the  latter  in  Israel,  though  this  rule 
 cannot  be  strictly  applied  in  either  case.  Al- 
 ready in  Rehoboam's  time  the  people  of  Judah  had 
 set  up  idolatrous  high  places  (i  Kings  xiv.  23). 
 Later  we  find  it  recorded  as  a  flaw  in  the  reigns  of 
 pious  kings  of  |udah  that  the  high  places  yet  re- 
 mained in  use,  the  people  still  sacrificing  and  burn- 
 ing incense  at  them.  It  is  said  of  Asa  that  he  took 
 away  the  high  places  (2  Chron.  xiv.  5),  but  it  ap- 
 pears that  this  reform  was  not  successfully  accom- 
 plished, at  least  in  Israel  (xv.  17  ;  i  Kings  xv.  14), 
 of  which  he  held  cities  (2  Chron.  xv.  8  ;  xvii.  2). 
 Jehoshaphat,  again,   is  said  to  have  taken  away 
 
 '  the  high  places  and  groves  out  of  Judah '  (ver.  6, 
 comp.  xix.  3)  ;  but  it  seems  that  he  was  not  fully 
 successful,  for  we  read  in  a  later  place  that  '  the 
 high  places  were  not  taken  away '  (xx.  33  ;  i  Kings 
 xxii.  43).  Hezekiah  appears,  however,  at  the 
 commencement  of  his  reign,  to  have  successfully 
 suppressed  the  high  places.  They  were  destroyed 
 not  only  in  Judah  and  Benjamin,  but  also  in  Eph- 
 raim  and  Rlanasseh.  This  work,  so  far  as  it  con- 
 cerned the  Israelite  territory,  may  have  been  spon- 
 taneously executed  by  the  believing  people,  as 
 seems  implied  in  the  account  in  Chronicles,  but  it 
 is  also  possible  that  vn  the  broken  state  of  the 
 Israelite  monarchy  Hezekiah  held  a  large  portion 
 of  its  more  southern  territories  (2  Kings  xviii.  4, 
 comp.  2  Chron.  xxxi.  i).  But  even  this  reform 
 was  not  final,  and,  after  the  relapse  into  idolatry  of 
 Manasseh  and  Amon,  there  Avas  another  suppres- 
 sion of  the  high  places  by  Josiah,  apparently  the 
 first  which  was  thorough.  He  destroyed  and  de- 
 filed the  high  place  of  Bethel  which  Jeroboam  had 
 made,  the  houses  of  the  high  places  in  the  cities 
 of  the  kingdom  of  Samaria,  the  high  places  which 
 Solomon  had  built  for  foreign  idols  in  the  Mount 
 of  Corruption,  and  those  in  the  cities  of  Judah  (2 
 Kings  xxiii.  5,  8,  13,  15,  16,  19,  20;  2  Chron. 
 xxxiv.  3-7). 
 
 Worship  at  altars  not  at  Jerusalem  seems  to  have 
 been  occasionally  practised  by  believers  after  the 
 building  of  the  Temple,  as  in  the  remarkable  in- 
 stance of  Elijah  on  Mount  Carmel,  where  '  he  re- 
 paired the  altar  of  the  Lord  [that  was]  broken 
 down,'  building  it  of  twelve  stones,  according 
 to  the  number  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  a  cir- 
 cumstance which  seems  to  make  its  much  older 
 origin  probable  (i  Kings  xviii.  30-32).  Elijah 
 also  complained  at  Horeb  that  God's  altars  were 
 overthrown  (xix.  10).  Yet  we  have  no  ground  for 
 supposing  that  any  general  deviation  from  the 
 worship  at  the  one  sanctuary  was  allowed  after  the 
 Temple  had  been  built.  A  prophet  might  have 
 been  commanded  to  sacrifice  at  an  altar  away  from 
 Jerusalem  on  a  special  occasion.  But  a  gene- 
 ral practice,  tending  to  a  neglect  of  the  feasts  and 
 their  sacrifices,  and  to  tlie  formation  of  an  unlawful 
 priesthood,  was  evidently  forbidden  as  wrong  and 
 dangerous.  The  increase  of  strength  in  the  terms 
 in  which  this  practice  is  condenmed,  seems  due  to 
 the  increase  of  corruption  which  it  caused.  The 
 sin  of  Jeroljoam  soon  led  to  idolatry  of  various  other 
 kinds,  and  the  high  places,  which  probably  were 
 originally,  save  in  the  case  of  Solomon's,  which, 
 perhaps,  were  soon  abandoned,  intended  for  cor- 
 rupt worship,  seem  to  have  been  used  at  last 
 wholly  for  heathen  rites.  As  they  were  opposed 
 to  the  temple-worship,  the  high  places  probably 
 never  took  an  important  position  in  the  kingdom 
 of  Judah  ;  on  the  contrary,  in  the  rival  kingdom 
 they  were  adopted  as  a  state-expedient  to  prevent 
 the  return  of  the  people  to  their  allegiance  to  the 
 line  of  David. 
 
 The  passages  relating  to  the  high  places  furnish 
 us  with  several  interesting  particulars.  Jeroboam 
 not  only  set  up  the  calves  as  objects  of  worship  at 
 the  houses  of  the  high  places  of  Bethel  and  Dan, 
 but,  as  we  have  seen,  he  made  a  priesthood  01 
 the  lowest  of  the  people,  not  Levites,  and  he 
 also  fixed  an  annual  feast  on  the  fifteenth  day 
 of  the  eighth  month  (i  Kings  xii.  28-33).  ^^ 
 was  when  Jeroboam  stood  by  the  altar  at  Bethel 
 that  the   prophet  who  came  out   of  Judah  fore 
 
HIGH  PLACES  and  GROVES 
 
 302 
 
 HIGH  PLACES  and  GROVES 
 
 told  its  overthrow  (xiii.  1-3).  It  was  at  Bethel, 
 in  the  time  of  the  second  Jeroboam,  that  Amos 
 predicted  the  ruin  of  the  high  places,  and  was  com- 
 plained of  to  the  king  by  Amaziah,  the  priest  of 
 Bethel  (Amos  vii.  9-13).  The  remarkable  passage, 
 '  And  the  high  places  of  Isaac  shall  be  desolate, 
 and  the  sanctuaries  of  Israel  shall  be  laid  waste ' 
 (ver.  9),  is  explained  by  a  comparison  with  a  pre- 
 vious enumeration  of  high  places ;  '  Seek  not 
 Bethel,  nor  enter  into  Gilgal,  and  pass  not  to  Beer- 
 feheba'  (ver.  5).  The  high  places  of  Isaac  would 
 refer  to  Beer-sheba,  and  the  sanctuaries  of  Israel 
 to  Bethel ;  Gilgal  was  a  place  of  worship  at  the 
 time  of  Samuel  (i  Sam.  xi.  15).  Hosea,  like 
 Amos  a  prophet  especially  sent  to  Israel,  like 
 him  condemns  the  worship  at  high  places.  He 
 mentions  their  priests  by  the  name  Chemarim, 
 D^"1D3,  a  word  of  Syriac  origin,  used  only  for  ido- 
 latrous priests,  occurring  as  the  designation  of  the 
 priests  of  the  high  places  of  the  cities  of  Judah 
 (2  Kings  xxiii.  5),  and  in  Zephaniah  as  that  of 
 idolatrous  priests  (i.  4).  We  have  no  means  of 
 forming  any  idea  of  the  character  of  the  temples 
 attached  to  the  high  places,  but  it  is  evident  that 
 they  must  have  been  too  numerous  to  have  been 
 large,  except  perhaps  those  at  Dan  and  Bethel. 
 Probably  the  high  place  had  frequently  nothing  on 
 its  summit  but  an  altar,  and  this  would  account  for 
 the  difficulty  of  destroying  this  worship.  So  long 
 as  the  site  was  considered  sacred,  it  little  mattered 
 that  a  fresh  altar  was  to  be  built.  Josiah's  way  of 
 dealing  with  this  practice  was  evidently  effectual. 
 
 ii.  Groves. — '  The  Grove,'  or  '  the  Groves,'  as 
 the  word  Asherah,  mE'N,  and  its  plural  are  ren- 
 dered in  the  A.  V. ,  are  constantly  mentioned  with 
 high  places.  At  first  sight  the  common  LXX. 
 rendering,  followed  by  our  version,  seems  to  carry 
 conviction  with  it,  from  the  connection  of  high 
 places  with  worship  under  the  trees,  and  the  preva- 
 lence of  nature-worship  in  Palestine  ;  but  a  closer 
 examination  shews  that  something  of  the  character 
 of  an  image  must  be  intended.  In  a  previous 
 article  [Ashtoreth]  the  reasons  for  this  conclu- 
 sion have  been  stated,  and  it  has  been  proposed 
 to  adopt  the  theory  which  makes  Asherah  a 
 name  for  Ashtoreth,  as  the  goddess  of  good  for- 
 tune, a  sense  of  the  former  taken  from  the  root 
 "IK'S,   '  he,  or  it,  was  straight,  right,'  and  hence, 
 
 '  fortunate.'  It  is  especially  noticed,  in  favour 
 of  this  identification,  that  the  grove,  or  groves, 
 occur  with  Baal  like  Ashtoreth  ;  that  the  LXX. 
 renders  asherah  by  Astarte  in  2  Chron.  xv.  16, 
 as  does  the  Vulg.  in  Judg.  iii.  7,  and  conversely 
 Ashtoreth  by  groves  in  i  Sam.  vii.  3.  But  it  may 
 be  objected  that  it  is  very  strange  that  two  names 
 should  be  applied  to  the  same  goddess  in  writings 
 of  the  same  age,  and  that  she  should  be  indiscrimi- 
 nately mentioned  by  her  usual  proper  name  and  as 
 a  statue,  for  asherah,  if  a  proper  name,  certainly 
 would  indicate  a  statue  ;  that  the  root  equally  allows 
 us  to  understand  by  asherah  something  upright,  set 
 up  ;  and  that  isolated  renderings  of  the  LXX.  and 
 Vulg.  may  merely  indicate  errors  of  copyists.  Sup- 
 posing that  the  radical  meaning  indicates  something 
 upright  or  set  up,  which  seems  always,  be  it  recol- 
 lected, to  have  been  made  of  wood,  do  we  find 
 anything  in  ancient  idolatry  to  warrant  the  trans- 
 'lation  '  grove  ?'  It  must  be  remembered  that  the 
 grove  is  constantly  connected  with  Baal.     On  the 
 
 ancient  Egyptian  monuments,  the  figure  of  Khem, 
 the  god  of  productiveness,  is  constantly  accom- 
 panied by  the  representation  of  one  or  more  trees 
 or  plants.  In  the  plates  of  Sir  Gardner  Wilkin- 
 son's Ancient  Egyptians  we  observe  the  following 
 variations  in  these  objects.  A  shrine,  from  which 
 rises  a  double  flower  like  two  blossoms  of  the  lotus, 
 behind  Kliem  (here  as  amen-ra  ka-mut-ef, 
 '  Amen-ra,  who  is  male  and  female,'  pi.  22)  ;  a 
 shrine,  from  which  rise  a  flower  and  two  trees,  be- 
 hind Khem  (pi.  26) ;  a  great  nosegay  in  effigy,  car- 
 ried before,  and  another,  behind  an  image  of  Khem  ; 
 behind  the  same  image,  a  sacred  chest  adorned 
 with  rosettes,  upon  which  are  five  representations 
 of  trees  ;  and  behind  an  image  of  Khem,  a  flower 
 and  two  other  objects  (pi.  76).  It  is  quite  evident 
 that  all  these  trees  and  flowers  are  imitations,  on 
 account  of  their  dimensions,  and,  in  some  cases,  the 
 manner  in  which  they  are  attached  to  shrines  or 
 the  like.  From  their  forms  and  size,  compared,  in 
 the  latter  particular,  with  their  being  portable,  it  is 
 equally  certain  that  they  must  have  been  generally, 
 if  not  always,  of  wood.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
 prove  how  completely  they  agree  with  the  idola- 
 trous objects  rendered  'groves'  in  the  A.  V.  Are 
 we  to  suppose  that  the  LXX.  translators  adopted 
 the  meaning  in  consequence  of  their  obseiwing 
 objects  in  Egyptian  idolatry  which  aptly  corres- 
 ponded, letting  alone  the  signification  'grove'  as 
 probably  not  derivable  from  the  Hebrew,  to  the 
 idolatrous  objects  connected  with  the  worship  of 
 Baal  and  Ashtoreth  ;  and,  further,  that  the  groves 
 of  Egypt  and  Palestine  were  identical  ?  The  for- 
 mer question  seems  easily  answered  affirmatively, 
 the  latter  suggests  several  curious  inquiries.  We 
 have  to  determine  how  far  Baal  and  Ashtoreth 
 were  identical  with  Khem,  whether  the  worship 
 of  groves  is  to  be  traced  to  Egypt,  and  what 
 is  the  etymology  of  the  name  asherah.  Khem 
 is  the  Egyptian  personification  of  the  productive- 
 ness of  nature  ;  hence  the  connection  of  these 
 vegetable  objects  with  his  worship  is  easily  under- 
 stood. Baal  is  sometimes  connected  with  produc- 
 tiveness, and  Ashtoreth  has  certainly  this  relation. 
 Perhaps  they  may  be  reasonably  supposed  to 
 represent  the  two  ideas  that  are  expressed  in  the 
 title  of  Khem,  '  who  is  male  and  female.'  But  it  is 
 to  be  observed  that  the  name  of  Baal  is  found  or 
 the  Egyptian  monuments  as  equivalent  to  that  of 
 Set  or  Sutekh,  the  personification  of  physical  evil. 
 The  idea  conveyed  by  the  latter  is  so  opposed  to 
 that  of  Baal  that  we  may  reasonably  conjecture 
 that  the  identification  was  founded  upon  something 
 different  from  a  comparison  of  the  supposed  cha- 
 racteristics of  these  idols.  It  seems  reasonable  to 
 trace  it  to  some  such  idea  as  that  the  personifica- 
 tion of  physical  evil  would  be  the  protector  of  the 
 warlike  enemies  of  Egypt.  Ivliem,  if  the  name  be 
 correctly  read,  was  probably  introduced  from  the 
 East,  and  perhaps  from  Palestine.  Ashtoreth,  like 
 Baal,  is  mentioned  on  the  Egyptian  monuments. 
 She  is  worshipped  as  a  foreign  divinity,  and  is  con- 
 nected with  Set  (Chabas,  Papyrus  lilagiqtce  Har- 
 ris, pp.  55,  seqq.)  The  worship  of  groves  may 
 have  been  common  from  a  remote  period  to  Egypt 
 and  Palestine,  or  it  may  have  been  derived  from 
 Egypt.  This  question  depends  for  its  resolution 
 very  much  upon  the  degree  of  completeness  which 
 the  worship  of  Khem  may  be  supposed  to  have 
 attained  at  the  time  of  its  first  introduction  into 
 Egypt,  if  introduced  into  that  countiy.     With  refer- 
 
HIGH-PRIEST 
 
 S03 
 
 HILLEI.  I. 
 
 ence  to  the  etymology  of  asherah,  we  fnd  no  reason  | 
 for  considering  it  anything  but  Hebrew,  nor  have 
 we  any  ground  for  supposing  it  to  have  been 
 adopted  from  the  resemblance  of  a  Hebrew  to  an 
 Egyptian  word. — The  question  of  the  connection 
 of  the  Israehte  groves  and  the  hke  Egyptian  ob- 
 jects with  primitive  low  nature-worship  will  be 
 considered  in  the  article  Idolatry. — R.  S.  P. 
 
 HTGH-PRIEST.  [Priest;  Tabernacle;  Ananias.] 
 
 HILALI,  or  HELALI  CODEX  O^S^n  ISD), 
 
 one  of  the  most  ancient  and  most  celebrated 
 codices  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  which  derived  its 
 name  from   the  fact  that  it  was  written  at  Hilla 
 
 (n^X^n  ;    Arab.      Xs^),    a  town  built  near  the 
 
 ruins  of  ancient  Babel.  Others,  however,  main- 
 tain that  it  was  called  Hilali  because  the  name 
 of  the  man  who  wrote  it  was  Hillel.  But 
 whatever  uncertainty  there  may  be  about  the  de- 
 rivation of  its  name,  there  can  hardly  be  any 
 doubt  that  it  was  written  a.d.  600,  for  Sakkuto 
 tells  us  most  distinctly  that  when  he  saw  the  re- 
 mainder of  it  (circa  1500),  the  Codex  was  900 
 years  old.  His  words  are — '  In  the  year  4956,  on 
 the  28th  of  Ab  (1196,  better  1 197),  there  was  a 
 great  persecution  of  the  Jews  in  the  kingdom  of 
 Leon  from  the  two  kingdoms  that  came  to  besiege 
 it.  It  was  there  that  the  twenty-four  sacred  books 
 which  were  written  long  ago,  about  the  year  600, 
 by  R.  Moses  b.  Hillel  (on  which  account  the 
 Codex  was  called  Hilali),  in  an  exceedingly  cor- 
 rect manner,  and  after  which  all  the  copies  were 
 corrected,  were  taken  away.  I  saw  the  remaining 
 two  portions  of  it — viz.,  the  earlier  and  later  pro- 
 phets— written  in  large  and  beautiful  characters, 
 which  were  brought  to  Portugal  and  sold  in  Africa, 
 where  they  still  are,  having  been  written  900  years 
 ago.  Kimchi,  in  his  Grammar  on  Num.  xv.  4, 
 says  that  the  Pentateuch  of  this  Codex  was  extant 
 in  Toleti'  (Juc/iassin  ed.  Filipowski,  London  1857, 
 p.  220).  The  Codex  had  the  Tiberian  vowels  and 
 accents,  Massora  and  Nikud  glosses,  and  it  served 
 up  to  A.D.  1500  as  a  model  from  which  copies 
 were  made.  This  Codex  which  Haja  had  in  Baby- 
 lon about  A.D.  1000,  was  conveyed  to  Leon  in 
 Spain,  where  the  greater  part  of  it  became  a  prey 
 to  the  fury  of  the  martial  hosts  who  sacked  the 
 Jewish  dwellings  in  1197.  The  celebrated  gram- 
 marian, Jacob  b.  Eleazar,  fixed  the  renderings  of 
 the  Biblical  text  according  to  this  Codex  [Jacob 
 B.  Eleazar],  and  the  older  philologians  frequently 
 quote  it.  Comp.  Graetz,  Geschichte  des  Volkes 
 Israel,  vi.  132,  229  ;  Fiirst,  Geschichte  des  Karder- 
 thiiins,  Leipzig  1862,  pp.  22,  138  ;  Kimchi,  Radi- 
 cum  Liber  ed.  Biesenthdl  et  Lebrecht,  Berolini  1847, 
 p.  26.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 HILARIUS,  a  native  of  Poitiers,  was  bishop  of 
 that  see  in  the  middle  of  the  4th  century,  and  a 
 zealous  opponent  of  the  Arian  party.  He  became 
 bishop  in  350,  and  died  13th  January  368.  Of  his 
 numerous  works  two  are  of  an  exegetical  character, 
 his  Co?nmcntaiiones  in  Evangelinin  Alatthai,  and 
 his  Coinnientarii  in  Psalmos.  He  displays  little 
 exegetical  ability  and  no  learning  ;  his  strength  as 
 a  writer  lying  chiefly  in  his  polemical  abihties. 
 The  best  edition  of  his  works  is  that  edited  by 
 Maffei,  from  the  Benedictine  edition,  2  vols  fok, 
 Verona  1730. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HILARIUS,  sumamed  Diaconus,  was  a  native! 
 of  Sardinia,  and  a  deacon  of  the  church  at  Rome. 
 He  flourished  in  the  middle  of  the  4th  century. 
 To  him  are  ascribed  the  QucEsliones  in  Vcf.  et  Ncn . 
 Test.,  usually  printed  with  Augustine's  works,  and 
 the  Coinnientarii  in  Epp.  S.  Pauli,  which  appear 
 among  those  of  Ambrose. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HILKIAH  (n'^p^n,    more   fully  "iH^P^n,  Hil- 
 
 KIAHU,  Sept.  XeX/ci'as).  Of  the  seven  persons 
 bearing  this  name  in  the  Bible,  the  most  important 
 is  the  high-priest  in  the  reign  of  Joash  (2  Kings 
 xxii.  4,  ff.  ;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  9,  ff )  He  was  the  son 
 of  Shallum  (i  Chron.  vi.  13) ;  and  Ezra,  the  scribe, 
 was  his  great-grandson  (Ezra  vii.  i).  He  took  a 
 prominent  part  in  the  reforms  effected  by  king 
 Josiah,  and  is  especially  remarkable  for  the  dis- 
 covery which  he  made  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  of 
 a  book  which  is  called  '  The  Book  of  the  Law' 
 (2  Kings  xxii.  8),  and  '  The  Book  of  the  Covenant' 
 (xxiii.  2).  That  this  was  some  well-known  book 
 is  evident  from  the  form  of  the  expression  ;  but  as 
 to  what  it  was  opinions  are  divided.  That  it  was 
 the  writing  of  Moses  is  expressly  stated  (2  Chron. 
 xxxiv.  14)  ;  that  it  was  the  entire  Pentateuch  is  the 
 opinion  of  Josephus,  von  Lengerke,  Keil,  Ewald, 
 Havernick,  etc.  ;  but  others  think  it  was  only  part 
 of  that  collection,  and  others,  that  it  was  simply  a 
 collection  of  laws  and  ordinances  appointed  by 
 Moses,  such  as  are  given  in  the  Pentateuch,  and 
 especially  in  Deuteronomy.  The  objection  to  its 
 being  the  whole  Pentateuch  is  the  improbability  of 
 that  being  read  in  the  audience  of  the  people  at  one 
 time,  a=  was  this  book  (xxiii.  2)  ;  and  there  are 
 many  circi  mstances  which  render  it  probable  that 
 what  was  lead  to  the  people  was  the  book  of 
 Deuteronony,  as,  ex.  gr.,  the  apparent  allusion  to 
 Deut.  xxix.  I  and  xxx.  2  in  ch.  xxiii.  2,  3,  and  the 
 special  effect  which  the  reading  of  the  book  had 
 on  the  king,  who  did,  m  consequence,  just  what 
 one  impressed  by  such  passages  as  occur  in  Deut. 
 xvi.  18,  etc.,  would  be  likely  to  do.  At  the  same 
 time,  even  if  we  admit  that  the  part  actually  read 
 consisted  only  of  the  summary  of  laws  and  institu- 
 tions in  Deuteronomy,  it  will  not  follow  that  that  was 
 the  only  part  of  the  Pentateuch  found  by  Hilkiah  ; 
 for,  as  the  matter  brought  before  his  mind  by  Hul- 
 dah,  the  prophetess  (2  Kings  xxii.  15,  ff.),  respected 
 the  restoration  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  it  might 
 be  only  to  what  bore  on  that  that  the  reading  spe- 
 cially referred.  The  probability  is  that  the  book 
 found  by  Hilkiah  was  the  same  which  was  entrusted 
 to  the  care  of  the  priests,  and  was  to  be  put  in  the 
 side  of  the  ark  (Deut.  xxxi.  9-26) ;  and  that  this 
 was  the  entire  body  of  the  Mosaic  writing,  and  not 
 any  part  of  it,  seems  the  only  tenable  conclusion 
 (Hengstenberg,  Beitrdgeu.  159,  ff)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HILLEL  I.,  Ha-Saken  dpTH),  or  the  Great 
 B.  Simon.  This  extraordinary  Rabbi,  the  second 
 Ezra,  or  the  restorer  of  the  Law,  as  he  is  called 
 (Siicca,  20,  a),  under  whose  presidency  Christ  was 
 born,  and  who,  by  his  self-denying  and  holy  life,  as 
 well  as  by  his  great  wisdom  and  learning,  exercised 
 so  remarkable  an  influence  both  upon  the  theology 
 and  hterature  of  the  J  ewish  nation,  and  prepared 
 the  way  for  the  advent  of  the  Saviour,  was  bomin 
 Babylon  about  75  B.C.,  of  the  royal  family  of  David. 
 He  settled  in  Jerusalem  about  36  B.C.,  where,  not- 
 withstanding his  renowned  lineage,  he  had  to  sup- 
 port  himself  by    the    labour   of    his   hands,    and 
 
HILLEL  I. 
 
 504 
 
 HILLEL  L 
 
 aUtended  at  the  same  time  the  lectures  of  Shemaja 
 and  Abtahoii,  who  were  the  heads  of  the  Sanhe- 
 drim [Education'].  So  great  was  his  thirst  after 
 knowledge  that  he  gave  daily  half  of  his  scanty 
 earnings  to  the  doorkeeper  of  the  college  in  order 
 to  be  admitted  to  the  lectures,  and  when  the  jani- 
 tor would  not  admit  him  one  day  because  he  had 
 no  money  to  pay,  this  zealous  scholar,  rather  than 
 lose  the  day's  instruction,  climbed  up  to  the  win- 
 dow, and  there  sat  outside  on  a  bitterly  cold 
 winter's  day,  attentively  listening  till  he  was  com- 
 pletely covered  with  snow  and  rendered  insensible 
 by  the  cold.  When  he  was  discovered,  though  it 
 was  on  the  Sabbath,  the  students  disregarding  the 
 sanctity  of  the  day,  procured  the  necessary  reme- 
 dies, and  to  their  joy  restored  him  to  life,  and  from 
 that  day  looked  up  to  him  as  their  future  guide 
 [Jo/iia,  35,  l>).  He  succeeded  to  the  presidency  of 
 the  Sanhedrim  about  30  B.C.  His  zeal  for  the  Law 
 of  God,  and  his  modest  honesty,  would  not,  how- 
 ever, allow  him  to  be  seated  on  the  presidential 
 throne  without  plainly  telling  the  spiritual  guides 
 of  Jerusalem  that  it  was  their  negligence  in  study- 
 ing the  Law  which  necessitated  them  to  elect  him. 
 '  What,'  said  he  to  them,  in  godly  sincerity,  '  has 
 led  to  it  that  I,  insignificant  Babylonian,  must  be- 
 come president  of  the  Sanhedrim  ?  Your  negligence 
 in  attending  to  the  teaching  of  Shemaja  and  Abta- 
 liou'  (Sabbath,  15,  a;  Pcsachim,  66,  /').  He  had 
 no  less  than  1000  pupils,  80  of  whom  had  more 
 especially  distinguished  themselves — ^Jonathan  ben 
 Uziel,  the  translator  of  the  prophets  into  Chaldee, 
 being  the  chief,  and  Jochanan  b.  Zakkai  the  least 
 amongst  them  [Sttcca,  28,  a  ;  Baba  Bathra,  134, 
 a).  As  most  of  these  disciples  became  the  spiri- 
 tual guides  of  the  nation  at  the  advent  of  Christ,  it 
 is  most  important  to  give  some  of  the  lessons  which 
 they  were  taught  by  their  great  master  Hillel,  and 
 which  they  again  imparted  to  the  ]ieople,  in  order 
 to  see  how  far  these  lessons  agree  with  those  of  the 
 Saviour,  and  how  they  prepared  the  minds  of  the 
 people  to  receive  the  teachings  of  the  GospeL  Jlis 
 cardinal  doctrine  and  aim  of  life  were  '  to  be  gentle, 
 shewing  all  meekness  to  all  men,'  and  '  when 
 reviled  not  revile  again;'  and  of  this  he  gave  a 
 signal  illustration  on  one  occasion  when  one  laid  a 
 wager  that  he  would  provoke  the  Rabbi  to  anger. 
 He  went  to  Hillel  and  teased  him  with  a  number 
 of  foolish  questions,  and  seeing  that  he  bore  it 
 meekly  and  patiently,  the  man  began  to  insult  him, 
 but  Hillel  answered  him  with  uniform  kindness, 
 mildness,  and  forbearance,  and  uttered  not  an 
 angry  word  in  reply  to  the  insulting  language 
 (comp.  Sabbath,  30  a,  31  b,  with  Titus  iii.  2  ;  i 
 Pet.  ii.  20-23  ;  iii.  9).  A  heathen  appealed  to  him 
 to  tell  him  one  sentence  which  embodies  the  whole 
 Law,  to  which  Hillel  replied,  '  Whatsoever  thou 
 wouldst  not  that  a  man  should  do  to  thee  do  not 
 thou  to  him  :  this  is  the  whole  law'  (comp.  Sabbath, 
 31,  a,  with  Matt.  vii.  12  ;  Mark  vi.  31).  Let  a  few 
 more  of  his  maxims  suffice  :  '  Say  not  I  will  repent 
 when  I  have  leisure,  lest  the  leisure  should  never  be 
 thine.'  '  If  I  do  not  care  for  my  soul,  who  can  do 
 it  for  me  ?  If  I  only  care  for  my  own  soul,  what 
 am  I  ?  If  net  now,  when  then  ?'  (comp.  Aboth.  i. 
 14;  Sab.  iii.  13,  with  James  iv.  13,  14).  '  Do  not 
 separate  thyself  from  the  congregation,  and  have 
 no  confidence  in  thyself  till  the  day  of  death' 
 (comp.  Aboth.  ii.  4,  with  I  Cor.  x.  12).  'Judge 
 not  thy  neighbour  till  thou  art  in  his  situation' 
 (Aboth.  ii.  4,  with  Gal.  vi.  1-4).     'Be  of  the  dis- 
 
 ciples of  Aaron,  love  peace  and  pursue  it,  be  kmdly 
 affectioned  to  all  men,  and  thus  commend  the  law 
 of  God'  [Aboth.  i.  12,  with  Rom.  xiii.  10).  'Who- 
 soever shall  exalt  his  name,  shall  abase  it  ;  whoso- 
 ever does  not  strive  to  the  knowledge  of  the  law  is 
 not  worthy  of  life  ;  whosoever  does  not  increase 
 his  knowledge  decreases  it  ;  whosoever  turns  the 
 crown  of  knowledge  into  filthy  lucre  shall  perish' 
 [Aboth.  i.  13,  with  Matt,  xxiii.  12). 
 
 Hillel  was  the  first  who  laid  down  definite  her- 
 meneutical  rules  for  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible. 
 Just  as  at  the  commencement  of  the  Reformation 
 England  was  distracted  by  the  vacillation  of  Henry 
 VIII.,  who  one  day  became  a  defender  of  the 
 Roman  Catholic  faith  and  another  day  espoused 
 the  cause  of  Protestantism  ;  by  the  alternate  powers 
 of  More,  Fisher,  and  Gardiner,  and  Cromwell,  and 
 Cranmer  ;  by  Mary,  who  succeeded  to  the  throne 
 and  then  again  the  good  Protestant  Edward  VI. 
 who  followed  her  ;  so  Judsea  was  perplexed  by  the 
 Sadducean  and  Pharisean  princes  who  alternately 
 followed  each  other  ;  Alexander  Janai,  a  Sadducee, 
 was  succeeded  by  Queen  Salome,  whose  sympa- 
 thies were  with  the  Pharisees,  she  again  was  suc- 
 ceeded by  Aristobulus  II.,  a  Sadducee ;  and  he 
 again  was  followed  by  his  brother  Hyrkanus  II., 
 who  favoured  the  Pharisees.  Now  Hillel  tried  to 
 reconcile  these  opposite  parties.  He  endeavoured 
 to  shew  the  Sadducees,  who  rejected  every  law 
 which  was  not  expressly  laid  down  in  the  word  of 
 God,  that  the  traditional  law  naturally  flows  from 
 the  written- law,  through  the  medium  of  the  follow- 
 ing seven  rules  of  interpretation  (JinDT). 
 
 1.  Inference  from  viino}' to  the  major  ^yy^p^  7p), 
 e.g.,  Exod.  xxii.  13,  does  not  say  whether  the  bor- 
 rower of  a  thing  is  responsible  for  theft.  In  ver. 
 9-11,  however,it  isdeclared  that  the depositaiy  who 
 can  free  himself  from  making  restitution  in  cases  of 
 death  or  accident,  must  make  restitution  when  the 
 animal  is  stolen  ;  whilst  in  ver.  13,  the  borrower 
 is  even  obliged  to  make  restitution  in  cases  of 
 death  or  accident.  Hence  the  inference  made 
 from  the  minor  {i.e.,  the  depositary)  to  the  major 
 [i.e.,  the  borrower)  that  he  (in  xxii.  13)  is  all  the 
 more  responsible  for  theft  (Baba  Mezia,  95,  ^7). 
 This  exegetical  law  is  employed  by  Christ  and  the 
 apostles  (comp.  Matt.  vii.  11  ;  x.  29-31  ;  Rom.  v. 
 8  ;  viii.  32-34  ;  Heb.  iii.  3). 
 
 2.  The  analogy  of  ideas  (^1t^*  HT'tJ),  ov  a7ialog02(s 
 injerences.  This  rule  was  employed  by  Hillel  him- 
 self on  a  very  extraordinary  occasion.  In  his  days 
 the  evening  of  the  Passover  (PIDD  2"iy)  happened 
 to  fall  on  a  Sabbath,  which  is  of  very  rare  occur- 
 rence, and  the  question  was  hotly  contested,  whe- 
 ther or  not  the  Paschal  lamb  might  be  slain  on  the 
 Sabbath.  Hillel  said  that  it  may  be  slain,  and 
 argued  it  thus  : — It  is  said  respecting  the  daily 
 sacrifice,  '  to  offer  it  ("11^1133)  in  its  time''  (Num. 
 xxviii.  2)  ;  and  it  also  said,  respecting  the  Paschal 
 lamb,  '  let  the  children  of  Israel  keep  it  (1iyiD2) 
 ill  its  time''  [ibid.  ix.  2).  Now,  with  regard  to  the 
 daily  sacrifice,  it  is  distinctly  ordered  that  it  should 
 be  offered  on  the  Sabbath  (ibid,  xxviii.  9)  ;  the  ex- 
 pression in  its  time  does  not,  therefore,  denote  the 
 day,  Init  that  the  offering  is  to  be  observed  at  the 
 appointed  time  ;  and  as  the  expression  is  also  used 
 of  the  Passover  lamb,  hence  it  must  be  offered 
 irrespective  of  the  day,  and,  therefore,  also  irre- 
 spective of  the  Sabbath  (comp.  Jerusalem  Pesa 
 chim,  66,  a  ;  Pesachim,  vi.  i  ;  Tosifta  Pesachim. 
 cap.  iv.) 
 
HILLEL  I. 
 
 305 
 
 HILLEL  II. 
 
 3.  Analo^^y  of  hvo  objects  m  one  verse  (IX  pJ3 
 TnX  2in3b).  ThusLev.  XV.  4  mentions  two  objects, 
 viz.,  the  bed  and  the  chair  (n^DI  DDt^'D),  which, 
 though  belonging  to  two  different  classes,  have  the 
 common  quality  of  serving  for  repose.  And  as  these 
 are  declared  to  be  unclean  when  touched  by  him 
 who  has  an  issue,  and  to  have  the  power  of  defiling 
 both  men  and  garments  through  contact,  it  is  in- 
 ferred that  all  things  which  serve  for  resting  may 
 be  rendered  unclean  by  him  wlio  has  an  issue  and 
 then  defile  both  men  and  garments. 
 
 4.  Anah\s:y  of  two  objects  in  t7vo  verses  (3S  pJi 
 D''2in3  ^Jti'D),  e.g. ,  though  the  command  to  light  the 
 lamps  in  the  sanctuary  (JTnj,  Lev.  xxiv.  4)  is  different 
 from  the  command  'to  put  out  of  the  camp  eveiy  leper' 
 
 (S»t3  b^  n:nDn  p  in^Ei'M,  Num.  y.  2),  inasmuch 
 as  in  the  former  case  the  injunction  is  described  as 
 binding  for  ever  or  for  all  times  (Levit.  xxiv.  3), 
 whilst  in  the  latter  the  speedy  carrying  out  of  it  is 
 especially  spoken  of  (Num.  v.  4)  ;  yet  because 
 they  have  that  in  common  that  they  are  both  alike 
 commands,  and  that  the  word  1^*,  command,  is  used 
 with  regard  to  both  of  them,  hence  it  is  concluded 
 that  every  law  with  regard  to  which  the  expression 
 "IX,  command,  is  used,  must  at  once  and  for  ever  be 
 obeyed.  , , 
 
 5.  General  and  special  {\2r\^'\  PP'2).  Thus,  where- 
 ever  a  special  statement  follows  a  general  one, 
 the  definition  of  the  special  is  to  be  applied  to  the 
 general  one,  because  it  is  always  the  only  valid 
 meaning,  e.g.,  it  is  said  in  Lev.  i.  2,  '  if  any  man 
 of  you  bring  an  offering  to  the  Lord,  from  cattle, 
 from  oxen,  and  from  sheep.'  Here  cattle  is  a 
 general  expression,  and  may  denote  different  kinds 
 of  animals.  Oxen  and  sheep  is  the  special  whereby 
 the  general  is  defined,  and  therewith  it  is  rendered 
 co-extensive.  Hence  it  is  inferred  that  only  oxen 
 and  small  cattle  may  be  brought  as  sacrifices  but 
 not  beasts. 
 
 6.  Analog)'  of  another  passage  (DIpDD  12  XW^ 
 "inS).     This  is  an  extension  of  rules  3  and  4. 
 
 7.  The  connection  [^:l^'^:V'0'^\'i2hT^^y^).  Thus  the 
 prohibition,  'ye  shall  not  steal,'  in  Lev.  xix.  11,  is 
 explained  to  refer  to  stealing  money  and  not  human 
 beings  (comp.  Exod.  x.xii.  16),  because  the  whole 
 connection  treats  upon  money  matters  (comp. 
 Sanhedr.  86). 
 
 These  hermeneutical  rules  which  are  most  impor- 
 tant to  the  understanding  of  the  ancient  versions 
 [Midrash]  were  afterwards  extended  by  R.  Ishmael 
 and  others  [Ishmael].  Hillel  also  simplified  the 
 accumulated  mass  of  the  traditional  explanations  of 
 the  Pentateuch  which  had  been  divided  into  six  or 
 seven  hundred  sections  (Chagiga  24;  Succaxi.),  by 
 classifying  its  materials  under  six  Sedarim  (D''"1TD) 
 or  Orders — the  basis  of  the  present  aiTangement 
 of  the  Mishna.  Hillel's  liberality  of  mind  did  not  suit 
 his  colleague,  the  rigid  Shammai  :  the  latter  there- 
 fore founded  a  separate  school,  of  which  he  became 
 the  head.  The  one  is  well  known  as  the  school  of 
 Hillel,  and  the  other  as  the  school  of  Shammai. 
 After  occupying  the  pi-esidential  throne  for  about 
 forty  years,  the  learned,  godly,  humane,  meek, 
 self-denying  Hillel  died  when  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
 the  Redeemer  of  the  world,  was  about  ten  years 
 old.  The  presidency  became  hereditary  in  Hillel's 
 family  for  fifteen  generations  [Education]. 
 
 Literature — Bartolocci,  Bibliotheca  Magna  Rahbi- 
 nica,  ii.  784-796  ;  Biesenthal,  Theolog.  histor.  Stu- 
 dien,  Berlin  1847,  p.  68,  ff.  ;  Frankel,  Program 
 VOL.  IL 
 
 znr  F.roffnung  des  jiidisch-theologischen  Seminars  zu 
 Breslaii,  1854,  p.  15,  ff.  ;  and  Monatschrift,  ii.  p. 
 201,  ff.  ;  Graetz,  in  FrankePs  Monatschrift,  i.  p. 
 156,  ff.  ;  and  Geschichte  derjuden,  vol.  iii.,  Leipzig 
 1856,  p.  207,  ff. ;  Jost,  Geschiclite  des  Judoithiims, 
 Leipzig  1857,  vol.  i.,  p.  254,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 HILLEL  IL,  b.  Jehudah  HI.,*  succeeded  to 
 the  presidential  throne  about  330,  which  he  occu- 
 pied about  thirty-five  years.  He  immortalized  his 
 name  by  the  introduction  of  the  calendar,  which  is 
 followed  by  the  Jews  to  the  present  day.  Up  to 
 his  time  the  beginning  of  the  month  was  fixed  in 
 Palestine  upon  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses,  who 
 appeared  before  the  Sanhedrim,  and  declared  that 
 they  had  seen  the  new  moon.  The  new  month 
 was  then  proclaimed  and  celebrated,   which  was 
 
 called  n>''X-in  ''S  ^J?  ^i^inn  C'lnp,  and  the  festivals 
 which  happened  to  occur  during  the  month  were 
 fixed.  As  all  the  Jews  who  lived  away  from  Jeru- 
 salem depended  upon  the  authorities  in  the  metro- 
 polis for  their  information  about  the  time  when  the 
 new  moon  began,  it  was  arranged  that  if  it  be  fixed 
 that  the  closing  month  should  have  twenty-nine 
 days,  torches  would  be  lighted  on  the  mountain 
 near  Jerusalem,  and  thus,  as  if  by  telegraph,  com- 
 municate the  light,  and  with  it  the  information 
 from  mountain  to  mountain  throughout  the  land 
 and  beyond  Judaea.  If  these  lights  did  not  ap- 
 pear, it  was  understood  that  the  new  month  be- 
 gins on  thirty-first  of  the  closing  month,  so  that 
 
 the  last  month  had  thirty  days  ("I3iy0,  X?D), 
 and  the  festivals  which  happened  to  occur  during 
 the  new  month  were  arranged  accordingly.  When, 
 however,  the  Samaritans  out  of  spite  kindled 
 torches  at  improper  times,  and  thereby  led  the 
 Jews  at  a  distance  to  begin  their  festivals  at  an  im- 
 proper time,  the  authorities  in  Jerusalem  discarded 
 the  lights,  and  resolved  henceforth  to  communicate 
 the  information  through  authorised  messengers.  But 
 this,  too,  was  attended  with  difficulties,  as  the  mes- 
 sengers could  not  reach  on  the  same  day  the  places 
 which  were  at  a  distance  from  Jerusalem,  and  hence 
 led  to  the  institution  that  those  Jews  who  lived  out  ol 
 Palestine  were  to  double  the  festival  days,  because 
 they  could  not  know  at  once  whether  the  closing 
 month  was  to  have  twenty-nine  days  or  thirty  [Fes- 
 tivals]. Now  Hillel,  by  the  introduction  of  his 
 calendar,  rendered  the  Jews,  dispersed  through  so 
 many  lands,  independent  of  all  such  decisions. 
 The  calculations  of  his  calendar  ai'e  so  simple  and 
 certain,  that  they,  with  a  little  improvement,  are 
 adopted  by  the  Jews  to  the  present  day.  Accord- 
 ing to  this  calendar,  the  difference  between  the 
 solar  and  lunar  year,  upon  which  the  cycle  of  the 
 Jewish  festivals  depends,  is  yearly  made  up  ;  the 
 length  of  the  month  is  made  to  approximate  to 
 the  astronomical  course  of  the  moon  ;  and  attention 
 is  also  paid  in  it  to  the  Halachic  matters  connected 
 with  the  Jewish  festivals.     It  is   based  upon  the 
 
 cycle  of  nineteen  years  (n32^"l  lUriD),  introduced 
 by  the  Greek  astronomer  Meton,  in  which  occur 
 seven  intercalary  years.  Each  year  has  ten  un- 
 changeable months  of  alternately  twenty-nine  and 
 
 *  In  the  article  Education  the  line  '  Jehudah 
 III.,  b.  Gamaliel  IV.  300-300'  has  been  omitted 
 by  mistake,  and  Hillel  II.  is  printed  '  b.  Gamaliel 
 IF.',  instead  of  '  b.  Jehudah  ///.' 
 
 X 
 
HILLS 
 
 306 
 
 HINNOM 
 
 thirty  days  ;  the  two  autumnal  months,  Cheshvan 
 and  Kislev,  which  follow  the  important  month 
 Tishri,  are  left  changeable  [Haphtara],  because 
 they  depend  upon  certain  astronomical  phenomena 
 and  the  following  points  of  Jewish  law: — I.  That  the 
 month  of  Tishri  is  never  to  begin  with  the  day  which, 
 to  a  great  extent,  belongs  to  the  former  month. 
 2.  The  Day  of  Atonement  is  not  to  fall  on  the  day 
 before  or  after  Sabbath  ;  and  3.  That  the  Hossana 
 Day  is  not  to  be  on  a  Sabbath.  It  is  impossible 
 now  to  say  with  certainty  how  much  of  this  calen- 
 dar is  Hillel's  own,  and  how  much  he  took  from 
 the  national  traditions,  since  it  is  beyond  question 
 that  some  astronomical  rules  were  handed  down  by 
 the  presidents.  This  calendar  Hillel  introduced 
 A.  D.  359.  That  he  convened  a  synod  who  fixed 
 the  epoch  of  the  creation  at  the  vernal  equinox, 
 3761  years  before  the  birth  of  Christ,  which  is  the 
 Jewish  chronology  of  the  present  day,  is  simply 
 conjecture.  As  to  the  story  of  his  having  embraced 
 Christianity  and  been  baptised  on  his  death-bed  by 
 a  neighbouring  bishop,  who  ostensibly  came  to 
 visit  him  in  a  medical  capacity,  and  of  there  having 
 been  found  in  his  coffer  a  Hebrew  translation  of 
 the  Gospel  according  to  John,  of  the  Acts  of  the 
 Apostles,  and  of  the  Lord's  genealogy  as  recorded 
 by  Matthew  [Epipkaniiis,  Adv.  Hicr.  xxx.  4,  etc.), 
 this  fact  is  entirely  unknown  to  the  Jews  of  Hillel's 
 time,  who,  if  it  had  actually  taken  place,  would 
 have  execrated  his  name.  It  is,  however,  an  in- 
 teresting fact  connected  with  Biblical  literature  to 
 know  that  a  Hebrew  translation  of  many  portions 
 of  the  N.  T.  existed  at  so  early  a  period  of  Chris- 
 tianity. Comp.  Graetz,  Geschichle  der  Jicden,  vol. 
 iv.,  Berlin  1853,  p.  386,  ff.  ;  Oppenheim,  m  JFran- 
 kePs  Monaischrift,  v.,  p.  412,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 HILLS.     [Palestine.] 
 
 HIN,    a  Hebrew  liquid  measure.     [Weights 
 AND  Measures.] 
 
 HIND  (n^>S  ajalah.   Gen.  xlix.   21 ;  2   Sam. 
 
 xxii.  34;  Job  xxxix.  i;  Ps.  xviii.  33,  etc.),  the 
 female  of  the  hart  or  stag,  doe  being  the  female  of 
 the  fallow-deer,  and  roe  being  sometimes  used 
 for  that  of  the  roebuck.     All  the  females  of  the 
 
 Cervidcc,  with  the  exception  of  the  reindeer,  are 
 hornless.  It  may  be  remarked  on  Ps.  xviii.  33  and 
 Hab.  iii.  19,  where  the  Lord  is  said  to  cause  the 
 feet  to  stand  firm  like  those  of  a  hind  on  high 
 
 places,  that  this  representation  is  in  p>erfect  har- 
 mony with  the  habits  of  mountain  stags  ;  but  the 
 version  of  Prov.  v.  19,  '  Let  the  wife  of  thy  bosom 
 be  as  the  beloved  hind  and  favourite  roe,'  seems  to 
 indicate  that  here  the  words  are  generalized  so  as 
 to  include  under  roe  monogamous  species  of  ante- 
 lopes, whose  affections  and  consortship  are  perma- 
 nent and  strong ;  for  stags  are  polygamous.  Finally, 
 the  emendation  of  Bochart  on  the  version  of  Gen. 
 xlix.  21,  where  for  '  Naphtali  is  a  hind  let  loose  ; 
 he  giveth  goodly  words,'  he,  by  a  small  change  in 
 the  punctuation  of  the  original,  proposes  to  read 
 '  Naphtali  is  a  spreading -tree,  shooting  forth 
 beautiful  branches,'  restores  the  text  to  a  consistent 
 meaning,  agreeing  with  the  Sept.,  the  Chaldee 
 paraphrase,  and  the  Arabic  version.  [Ajal.] — 
 C.  H.  S. 
 
 HINGE.  Tiie  Greeks  and  Romans,  in  common 
 with  the  Oriental  nations,  instead  of  a  hinge  made 
 use  of  a  pivot  and  socket  to  hang  their  doors  with 
 freedom  of  action  for  opening  and  shutting."  By 
 the  Greeks  the  pivot  was  termed  aTpb(pi-y^,  and  the 
 socket  arpoipevs  ;  the  Latins  commonly  used  cardo 
 for  each  part  or  for  the  whole  apparatus.  In  He- 
 brew there  are  two  words,  OS  and  T'V,  both  trans- 
 lated hinge  in  the  A.  V.  ;  the  first  occurs  in  I 
 Kings  vii.  50  ;  and  the  second  in  Prov.  xxvi.  14. 
 In  2  Chron.  iv.  22,  instead  of  JlinD,  '^vpdi/j.aTa, 
 cardites,  we  find  riDD,  ^vpa.  [Gate;  Door.] — 
 J.  E.  R. 
 
 HINNOM,    or    Fa//ey  of  Ben-Hi^inom   (Diin, 
 
 usually  Diirp  ;  'Ew6/n  and  Taiivva  ;  Ennoin  and 
 
 GeefiTio?>t,  etc.),  a  well-known  valley  (X''J  or  ""J  ; 
 Sept.  ipdpa'y^,  and  also  simply  rendered  in  Greek 
 letters  yai  and  77;  ;  hence  Talevva,  Gehenna),  de- 
 scribed in  Josh,  xviii.  16  as  on  the  south  side  of 
 Jebusi,  that  is.  Mount  Zion,  on  which  the  ancient 
 stronghold  of  the  Jebusites  stood.  The  border  of 
 the  tribe  of  Benjamin  ran  along  this  valley,  from 
 En-Rogel  to  the  top  of  the  mountain  '  that  lieth 
 before  the  valley  westward,'  at  the  north  end  of  the 
 plain  of  Rephaim  (Josh.  xv.  8).  The  topographical 
 notice  is  here  singularly  minute  and  accurate.  The 
 valley  of  Hinnom,  still  called  by  its  ancient  name, 
 
 though  in  an   Arabic  form,  yehennatn  (aj;.50>-)5 
 
 commences  in  a  broad  depression  in  the  rocky 
 ridge,  or  plateau,  west  of  Jerusalem.  It  runs  in  a 
 south-easterly  direction  for  about  700  yards  towards 
 the  Yafa  Gate,  where  it  turns  due  south  along  the 
 base  of  Mount  Zion  ;  still  keeping  close  to  the  base 
 of  the  mount  it  sweeps  round  to  the  eastward  and 
 joins  the  Kidron  at  En-Rogel.  Its  total  length  is 
 about  a  mile  and  a  half.  Its  banks  have  at  first 
 an  easy  slope,  but  they  soon  contract  and  become 
 steep  and  rocky.  South  of  Zion  the  right  bank 
 rises  in  broken  irregular  cliffs  of  naked  limestone, 
 filled  with  excavated  tombs,  and  having  a  few 
 gnarled  olives  clinging  to  the  rocks  here  and  there. 
 On  the  side  of  the  ravine,  overhanging  the  point  of 
 junction  with  the  Kidron,  is  Acaldema  (Handbook 
 for  S.  and  P. ,  i.  99  ;  Robinson,  B.  J?,  i.  239 ; 
 Barcklay,  Ciij/  of  the  Great  King,  90). 
 
 The  origin  of  the  name  Hinnom,  orBen-Hinnom, 
 is  unknown  ;  it  may  have  been  derived  from  some 
 of  its  ancient  possessors.  The  valley  obtained  wide 
 notoriety  at  the  scene  of  the  barbarous  rites  of 
 Moiech  and  Chemosh,  first  introduced  by  Solomon, 
 
HIPPOLYTUS 
 
 307 
 
 HIPPOLYTUS 
 
 who  built  '  an  high  place  for  Chemosh,  tlie  abomi- 
 nation of  Moab,  m  the  hill  that  is  before  Jerusalem 
 (Olivet)  ;  and  for  Molech,  the  abomination  of  the 
 children  of  Amnion'  (l  Kings  xi.  7).  The  inhuman 
 rites  were  continued  by  the  idolatrous  kings  of 
 Judah.  A  monster  idol  of  brass  was  erected  in  the 
 opening  of  the  valley,  facing  the  steep  side  of 
 Olivet  ;  and  there  the  infatuated  inhabitants  of 
 Jerusalem  burnt  their  sons  and  their  daughters  in 
 the  fire — casting  them,  it  is  said,  into  the  red-hot 
 arms  of  the  idol  (Jer.  vii.  31  ;  2  Chron.  xxviii.  3  ; 
 xxxiii.  6).  No  spot  could  have  been  selected  near 
 the  Holy  City  so  well  fitted  for  the  perpetration  of 
 these  horrid  cruellies  :  the  deep  retired  glen,  shut  in 
 by  rugged  cliffs ;  and  the  bleak  mountain  sides  rising 
 over  all.  The  worship  of  Molech  was  abolished 
 by  Josiah,  and  the  place  dedicated  to  him  was  defiled 
 by  being  strewn  with  human  bones  :  '  He  defiled 
 Topheth,  which  is  in  the  valley  of  the  children  of 
 Hinnom,  that  no  man  might  make  his  son  or  his 
 daughter  pass  through  the  fire  to  Molech  .  .  .  and 
 he  brake  in  pieces  the  images,  and  cut  down  their 
 groves,  and  filled  their  places  with  the  bones  of  men' 
 (2  Kings  xxiii.  10,  14).  The  place  thus  became  cere- 
 monially unclean  ;  no  Jew  could  enter  it.  It  was 
 afterwards  a  public  cemetery  ;  and  the  traveller  who 
 now  stands  in  the  bottom  of  this  valley,  and  looks 
 up  at  the  multitude  of  tombs  in  the  cliffs  above  and 
 around  him,  and  which  thickly  dot  the  side  of 
 Olivet,  will  be  able  to  see  with  what  wondrous 
 accuracy  the  prophetic  curse  of  Jeremiah  has  been 
 fulfilled — '  Behold,  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord, 
 that  it  shall  no  more  be  called  Tophet,  nor,  The 
 Valley  of  the  Son  of  Hinnom,  but,  Tlie  Valley  of 
 Slaughter  ;  for  they  shall  bury  in  Tophet  till  there 
 be  no  place'  (vii.  32).  We  learn  from  Josephus 
 that  the  last  temble  struggle  between  the  Jews  and 
 Romans  took  place  here  (Bei/.  Jiid.  vi.  8.  5)  ;  and 
 here,  too,  it  appears  the  dead  bodies  were  thrown 
 out  of  the  city  after  the  siege  (v.  12.  7). 
 
 The  inhuman  rites  anciently  practised  in  the 
 Valley  of  Hinnom  caused  the  latter  Jews  to  regard 
 it  with  feelings  of  horror  and  detestation.  The 
 Rabbins  suppose  it  to  be  the  gate  of  Hell  (Light- 
 foot,  Opera,  ii.  286)  ;  and  the  Jews  applied  the 
 name  given  to  the  valley  in  some  passages  of  the 
 Septuagint,  Vitwo.,  to  the  place  of  eternal  torment. 
 Hence  we  find  in  Matt.  v.  22,  '  Whosever  shall 
 say,  thou  fool,  shall  be  in  danger  of  Ty\v  ■^Uwa.v  rod 
 irvpos — the  Gehenna  of  fire.'  The  word  is  formed 
 from  the  Hebrew  Djn  N''3,  '  Valley  of  Hinnom.' 
 
 The  valley  was  also  called  Topheth  (2  Kings 
 xxiii.  10;  Is.  xxx.  33;  Jer.  vii.  31),  either  from 
 nsn,  'spittle,'  and  it  would  hence  mean  '  a  place 
 to  spit  upon  ;'  or  from  nnSD,  '  place  of  burning. ' 
 For  other  theories  about  the  valley  of  Hinnom  the 
 student  may  consult  Hengstenberg,  Christology,  iv. 
 ifiseq.,  ed.  1858.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 HIPPOLYTUS,  PoRTUENSis,  a  bishop  of  Por- 
 tus  during  the  early  part  of  the  3d  century.  The 
 facts  of  his  life  are  few  and  uncertain,  and  we  shall 
 mainly  confine  ourselves  to  giving  the  results  which 
 may  now  be  considered  as  generally  accepted. 
 Eusebius  {H.  E.,  vi.  20)  mentions  Hippolytus  as  a 
 bishop  and  eminent  ecclesiastical  author  in  the 
 times  of  Zephyrinus,  but  does  not  mention  his 
 diocese,  which  Jerome  also  says  that  '  he  could 
 not  learn'  {Cat.  vir.  ilhistr.,  61).  As  Eusebius 
 names  him  with  Beryllus  of  Bostra,  Le  Moyne 
 (Proleg.  ad  Var.  Sacr.)  unfortunately  conjectured 
 
 that  he  was  bishop  of  Aden  (Tortus  Romanus)  in 
 Arabia,  and  Cave  {Script.  Eccks.,  i.  48)  supposed 
 him  to  have  been  an  \rabian  by  birth.  But,  on 
 the  other  hand,  the  Chronicon  Paschale,  our  earli- 
 est authority,  makes  him  '  bishop  of  the  so-called 
 Portus  near  Rome  ;'  and  as  this  statement  is  sup- 
 ported by  the  authority  of  Cyril,  Zonaras,  Anasta- 
 sius,  Nicephorus,  and  Syncellus  (see  Bunsen's 
 Hippolytus,  i.  205),  and  as  Prudentius  (lib.,  irepl 
 CTe<pa.vijv  ;  Hymn  ix. )  describes  his  martyrdom  as 
 having  taken  place  at  Ostia,  close  by  Portus,  we 
 may  regard  this  point  as  finally  settled.  His  mas- 
 tery of  the  Greek  language  would  render  him  pecu- 
 liarly fit  to  be  a  'bishop  of  the  nations,'  who  fre- 
 quented the  Harbour  of  Rome  in  multitudes.  In 
 spite  of  Jacobi's  assertion  of  the  contraiy,  there 
 seems  to  be  no  reason  why  he  should  n  5t  at  the 
 same  time  have  been  (what  the  "EXe7xos  shews 
 him  to  have  been)  a  presbyter  and  head  of  a  party 
 at  Rome.  We  know,  further,  that  he  was  a  dis- 
 ciple of  Irenseus  (Phot.  Cod.  I2i),  and  was  engaged 
 in  some  warm  disputes  with  Callistus  on  points  ot 
 doctrine  and  discipline,  which  are  graphically 
 described  in  his  recovered  book,  /cara  Tra-dQiv  aipe- 
 ffiwv  i\iyx°^-  From  the  confused  and  sometimes 
 contradictory  accounts  of  the  martyrdom,  we  may 
 glean  the  io\\o\wmg  probabilities : — That  in  the  year 
 of  the  death  of  Alexander  Severus  he  was  banished 
 to  Sardinia  {Catal.  Libcrianns,  sec.  iv. ),  B  C.  235  ; 
 that  he  returned  the  following  year,  and  was  mar- 
 tyred at  Ostia.  The  mode  of  his  martyrdom  is 
 wholly  conjectural,  for  the  story  of  Prudentius 
 {Hymn  ix.  1 23- 1 74)  is  obviously  derived  from  the 
 painting  on  the  walls  of  the  chapel  built  in  honour 
 of  St.  Hippolytus  at  Rome,  and  can  hardly  be 
 otherwise  than  a  mere  legendary  confusion.  The 
 day  set  apart  to  his  memory  was  Aug.  13.  One 
 statement  of  Prudentius — that  before  his  martyr- 
 dom the  saint  recanted  his  approval  of  the  Nova- 
 tion schism — is  very  perplexing,  because,  on  the 
 one  hand,  such  a  particular  could  not  have  been 
 invented,  and,  on  the  other  hand.  Novation  belongs 
 to  a  later  period  (a.  D.  245).  The  explanation 
 seems  to  be  that  Hippolytus  strongly  opposed  the 
 Noetianism  of  Callistus,  and  was  therefore  in  later 
 times  considered  as  a  Novation  (Bunsen,  i.  220). 
 
 In  1 55 1  an  old  and  unique  statue  of  Hippolytus 
 was  dug  up  on  the  site  of  his  chapel  ;  at  the  back 
 of  which  was  inscribed  a  list  of  his  works,  and 
 among  others  a  book  irepl  rod  iravros.  Now  this 
 book  is  claimed  by  the  author  of  the  "EXe7xos,  and 
 on  this  and  other  irrefragable  grounds,  that  remark- 
 able treatise  (a  confutation  of  all  the  heresies)  is 
 now  universally  considered  to  have  been  the  work 
 of  Hippolytus.  This  book  was  formerly  ascribed 
 to  Origen.  Having  been  brought  from  Mount 
 Athos  with  other  manuscripts  in  1842,  it  attracted 
 the  attention  of  M.  Emmanuel  Miller,  imder  whose 
 direction  it  was  published  at  the  Oxford  Press  in 
 185 1,  under  the  title,  ^Upiyivovs  (pi\oao(povfji€va  7) 
 Kara  iraaQiv  alpecriuiv  IXeyxos  ;  but  all  European 
 scholars  now  admit  that  it  could  not  have  been 
 written  by  Origen,  and  that  Hippolytus  is  the  only 
 author  to  whom  it  can  be  attributed.  It  is  a  work 
 of  great  value  and  interest,  and  although  it  refutes 
 thirty-two  heresies,  is  mainly  directed  against  Gnos- 
 ticism. Hippolytus  is  a  calm,  acute,  and  learned 
 writer.  Most  of  his  other  works  have  either  per- 
 ished, or  only  remain  to  us  in  fragments.  These 
 have  been  published  by  J.  A.  Fabricius  {Sancti 
 Hippolvti,   Episcopi  et  Martyris    Opera,    2   vols. 
 
HIPPOPOTAMUS 
 
 308 
 
 HIRCANUS 
 
 Hamb.  1 718).  Among  them  are  parts  of  various 
 commentaries  on  books  of  Scripture.  Jerome  calls 
 him  Vir  disertissimus,  and  a  Greek  author  yXuKiiTa- 
 Tos  Kal  fiivovaTUTos.  He  was  a  worthy  disciple  of 
 Irenseus,  and  the  free  use  he  made  of  great  Pagan 
 authors  (^.,f.,  Heraclitus)  gives  additional  value  to 
 his  writings.  Besides  this,  '  he  was  the  first 
 preacher  of  note  whom  the  Church  of  Rome  ever 
 produced.'  (See  Bunsen,  Hippolytiis  and  his  Age, 
 4  vols.  1852  ;  Gieseler,  Stud,  und  A'rii.,  1853  ; 
 Dollinger,  Hippolytus  and  Callistiis,  Ratisb.  1853, 
 etc.)— F.  W.  F. 
 
 HIPPOPOTAMUS.     [Behemoth.] 
 
 HIRAM  or  HURAM  (DTH,  D"Jin  ;  Sept.  Xet- 
 
 paix.     The  name  also  appears  in  the  form  DIITI, 
 
 and  this  was  probably  the  original  form,  as  Me- 
 nander  in  Josephus  (C.  Apion.  i.  18)  gives  it  Ei'pw- 
 Mos,  and  in  Herodotus  (vii.  98)  it  appears  as  Ztpco- 
 juos).  I.  A  king  of  Tyre,  whose  name  appears  as 
 that  of  the  friend  and  ally  both  of  David  and  Solo- 
 mon, to  the  former  of  whom  he  sent  artificers  who 
 built  for  him  a  palace  (2  Sam.  v.  1 1  ;  i  Chron.  xiv. 
 i) ;  and  to  the  latter  of  whom  he  sent  both  mate- 
 rials and  artificers  for  the  erection  of  the  temple  (i 
 Kmgs  V.  15,  ff  [A.V.  v.  I,  fif.];  2  Chron.  ii.  3, 
 ff.)  In  return  Solomon  gave  Hiram  twenty  cities 
 in  GalUee  ;  which,  however,  seemed  to  Hiram  so 
 unworthy  a  return  that  he  applied  to  them  a  term 
 of  contempt  [Cabul],  and  restored  them  to  the 
 Jewish  king  (i  Kings  ix.  11;  2  Chron.  viii.  2). 
 
 It  is  not  easy  to  determine  whether  it  was  the 
 same  Hiram  who  was  the  friend  of  both  David  and 
 Solomon,  or  whether  different  princes  of  the  same 
 name  had  relations  with  these  two  monarchs  suc- 
 cessively. The  latter  is  on  the  whole  the  more 
 probable  solution.  The  chronological  difficulties 
 of  the  former  supposition  seem  insuperable.  The 
 Hiram  who  was  the  friend  of  Solomon  is  said  by 
 Menander  (ap.  Joseph.  /.  c.)  to  have  reigned  33 
 years.  Now  \^'e  know  he  was  alive  and  on  the 
 throne  in  the  twentieth  year  of  Solomon's  reign 
 (i  Kings  ix.  10-13),  so  that  he  could  not  at  the 
 furthest  have  been  king  for  more  than  13  years 
 before  David's  death.  How,  then,  could  he  be 
 the  Hiram  who  assisted  David  to  build  his  house 
 more  than  30  years  before  ?  This  difficulty  is 
 aggravated  if  we  accept  the  statement  of  Josephus 
 that  the  Hiram  who  assisted  Solomon  had  only 
 been  1 1  years  on  the  throne  when  the  temple 
 began  to  be  built  in  the  fourth  year  of  Solomon's 
 reign  ;  for  this  would  allow  only  7  years  for  his 
 being  king  before  David's  death.  It  will  hardly 
 do  with  Michaelis  to  resort  to  the  supposition 
 that  though  the  building  of  David's  house  is 
 mentioned  in  the  history  of  the  early  part  of  his 
 reign,  it  was  not  really  commenced  till  near  the 
 close  of  it ;  for  not  only  is  this  improbable  in  itself 
 — improbable  that  David  should  have  been  con- 
 tent without  a  fitting  house  so  long — improbable 
 that  had  he  wanted  one  so  long  he  would  have 
 begun  to  build  one  at  the  close  of  his  life  (his  sixty- 
 third  year  if  we  take  the  statement  of  Josephus)  ; 
 but  we  must  deal  in  the  most  arbitrary  manner 
 with  the  narrative  to  make  it  accord  with  this  sup- 
 position ;  as,  ex.gr.,  we  must  suppose  the  'king's 
 house,'  mentioned  2  Sam.  xi.  2,  to  be  not  the  house 
 said  to  have  been  built  for  the  king  in  ch.  v.  11, 
 unless  we  would  place  David's  affair  with  Bethsheba 
 in  his  extreme  old  age,  and  make  Solomon  little  more 
 
 than  an  infant  at  the  time  of  his  father's  death.  These 
 difficulties  may,  indeed,  be  avoided  by  rejecting 
 the  statement  of  Menander  that  Hiram  reigned  33 
 years,  and  supposing  that  his  reign  extended  from 
 the  commencement  of  David's  reign  over  Israel,  to 
 the  15th  year  of  Solomon's  reign,  a  period  of  nearly 
 50  years.  But  so  long  a  reign  is  in  itself  impro- 
 bable, and  the  testimony  of  Menander  seems,  from 
 the  minuteness  of  some  of  his  details,  to  have 
 rested  on  authentic  documents.  On  the  whole  it 
 appears  better  to  suppose  two  Hirams.  But  in 
 what  relation  did  they  stand  to  each  other  ?  The 
 natural  supposition  is  that  they  were  father  and  son. 
 But  here  the  testimony  of  Menander  again  inter- 
 poses a  difficulty,  for  he  says  that  Hiram  the  friend 
 of  Solomon  was  the  son  of  Abibal.  This  has  led 
 some  to  conjecture  that  the  later  Hiram  was  the 
 grandson  of  the  earlier ;  while  others  suggest  that 
 
 Abiljal  (?y3''3}5)  was  the  distinctive  honorary  name 
 of  the  former,  whose  proper  name  was  Hiram. 
 This  latter  suggestion  is  rendered  probable  by  the 
 fact  that  other  persons  of  the  name  of  Hiram  oc- 
 cur in  the  series  of  kings  of  Tyre  (Joseph.  Cojit. 
 Apion.  i.  21).  Tatian  {Orat.  C.  Gnrc,  p.  171,  ed. 
 Col.)  says,  on  the  authority  of  Phoenician  historians, 
 that  Solomon  married  Hiram's  daughter.  He  was 
 succeeded  by  his  son  Baleazar  (Joseph.,  /.  c.) — 
 W.  L  A. 
 
 2.  The  son  of  a  widow  in  the  tribe  of  Dan,  and 
 of  a  Tyrian  father.  He  was  sent  by  the  king  of 
 the  same  name  to  execute  the  principal  works  of 
 the  interior  of  the  temple,  and  the  various  utensils 
 required  for  the  sacred  services.  We  recognise  in 
 the  enumeration  of  this  man's  talents  by  the  king 
 of  Tyre  a  character  common  in  the  industrial  his- 
 tory of  the  ancients,  namely,  a  skilful  artificer, 
 knowing  all  the  arts,  or  at  least  many  of  those  arts 
 wliich  we  practise,  in  their  different  branches. 
 [Handicraft.]  It  is  probable  that  he  was  se- 
 lected for  this  purpose  by  the  king  from  among 
 others  equally  gifted,  in  the  notion  that  his  half 
 Hebrew  blood  would  render  him  the  more  accept- 
 able at  Jerusalem. — ^J.  K. 
 
 HIRCANUS  (LXX.  'TpKavbs ;  Vulg.  Hir- 
 eainis),  '  a.  son  of  Tobias,  a  man  of  great  dignity' 
 ('TpKavbs  6  Tw^iov  afpodpa  dvrip  ev  virepoxo  "'f^- 
 p.evos,  2  Maccab.  iii.  ii).  At  the  time  when 
 Heliodorus,  the  treasurer  (6  iirl  twv  ■Kpayp.drwv) 
 of  Seleucus  IV.  Philopator,  was  ordered  to  seize 
 the  riches  which  had  been  placed  in  the  temple 
 of  Jerusalem,  Hircanus  owned  a  large  treasure 
 there  deposited  for  safety  (2  Maccab.  iii.  8  sec/.) 
 Nothing  more  is  mentioned  in  2  Maccab.  than 
 that  he  was  a  '  son  of  Tobias,'  but  Josephus  gives 
 an  account  of  some  '  children  of  Tobias'  (TratSes 
 Tw/3ioi()  who  took  part  with  the  high-priest  Mene- 
 laus  (Onias)  against  Jason  (Jesus),  who  had  been 
 deprived  of  the  high-priesthood  by  Antiochus  IV. 
 Epiphanes  (Antiq.  xii.  5.  i).  This  Tobias  had 
 among  his  children  a  son  named  Joseph,  who 
 married  as  a  second  wife  the  daughter  of  his  brother 
 Solymius,  and  by  her  had  a  son,  whose  name 
 was  Hircanus  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  4.  2).  Hirca- 
 nus, from  this  statement,  would  not  be  the  son  but 
 the  grandson  of  Tobias.  Grotius,  Calmet,  Pri- 
 deaux,  and  others,  have  supposed  that  the  Hircanus 
 of  Josephus  is  the  same  person  as  the  Hircanus 
 of  2  Maccab.,  and  that  'TpKavbs  6  Ta)/3(oi»  should 
 be  translated  '  Hirccinus,  g>-andson  of  Tobias.'  It 
 is.    however,    worthy   of   notice  tliat  the  story  in 
 
HISTORY 
 
 303 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 2  Maccab.  respecting  the  sending  of  Heliodorus 
 by  Seleucus  to  rol:>  the  treasures  at  Jerusalem,  his 
 miraculous  punishment,  and  his  recovery  from 
 death  at  the  prayer  of  Onias,  is  rendered  very  sus- 
 picious by  the  silence  of  Josephus,  and  that 
 though  Hircanus  is  represented  both  in  2  Maccab. 
 and  Josephus  as  being  connected  by  blood  with 
 Tobias,  yet  it  is  not  recorded  in  Josephus  (as  it  is 
 in  2  Maccab.)  that  he  had  any  treasure  in  the 
 temple.  It  seems  hardly  probable  that  the  Hyr- 
 canus  whose  history  is  given  by  Josephus  at  some 
 length  can  be  identified  with  the  'son  of  Tobias' 
 of  2  Maccab.  The  Hircanus  in  question  may  have 
 been  one  of  '  the  sons  of  Tobias'  (TraiSes  Tuptov) 
 mentioned  above  as  assisting  in  the  sedition  of  the 
 two  high-priests. 
 
 The  name  of  Hircanus  occurs  at  a  later  period 
 under  the  Maccabees.  It  has  been  thought  that  it 
 was  adopted  on  account  of  a  victory  gained  by 
 John,  the  son  and  successor  of  Simon  Maccabaeus, 
 over  the  Hircanians  (Euseb. ,  Chron.  lib.  ii.  ; 
 Sulp.  Severus,  Hist.  Sac?-.,  lib.  ii.  c.  .xxvi. )  Jose- 
 phus informs  us  that  Hircanus  accompanied  Anti- 
 ochus  VII.  Sidetes  into  Parthia,  and  Nicolaus  of 
 Damascus  says  that  a  trophy  was  erected  at  the 
 river  Lycus  to  commemorate  the  victory  over  the 
 Parthian  general  [Antiq.  xiii.  8.  4).  The  Hircani- 
 ans were  a  nation  whose  territory  was  bounded  on 
 the  north  by  the  Caspian  Sea,  and  would  thus  be 
 at  no  great  distance  from  Parthia,  where  John 
 Hircanus  had  gained  the  victory.  It  is  remark- 
 able that  the  different  statements  agree  in  the 
 position  of  the  countries,  Hircania,  Parthia,  and 
 the  river  Lycus  (of  Assyria)  being  contiguous. 
 As  Josephus,  however,  does  not  give  any  explana- 
 tion of  the  name  {Antiq.  xiii.  7.  4  ;  Bell.  J-ud.  i. 
 2.  3),  and  the  son  of  Simon  is  nowhere  called  Hir- 
 canus in  I  Maccab.,  the  reason  for  its  assumption 
 is  uncertain  [Maccabees]. — F.  W.  M. 
 
 HISTORY.  Under  this  term  we  here  intend 
 to  give,  not  a  narrative  of  the  leading  events  de- 
 tailed in  the  Bible,  but  such  general  remarks  on  the 
 Biblical  history  as  may  enable  the  reader  to  esti- 
 mate the  comparative  value,  and  apply  for  informa- 
 tion to  the  proper  sources,  of  historical  knowledge, 
 as  presented  in  or  deduced  from  the  sacred  records. 
 
 The  matter  contained  in  the  Biblical  history  is  of 
 a  most  extensive  nature.  In  its  greatest  length 
 and  fullest  meaning  it  comes  down  from  the  crea- 
 tion of  the  world  till  near  the  close  of  the  ist  cen- 
 tuiy  of  the  Christian  era,  thus  covering  a  space  of 
 some  4CKX)  years.  The  books  presenting  this  long 
 train  of  historical  details  are  most  diverse  in  age, 
 in  kind,  in  execution,  and  in  worth  ;  nor  seldom 
 is  it  the  fact  that  the  modem  historian  has  to  con- 
 struct his  narrative  as  much  out  of  the  implications 
 of  a  letter,  the  highly  coloured  materials  of  poetry, 
 the  far-reaching  visions  of  prophecy,  and  the  indi- 
 rect and  allusive  information  of  didactic  and  moral 
 precepts,  as  from  the  immediate  and  express  state- 
 ments of  history  strictly  so  denominated.  The 
 history  of  Herodotus,  embracing  as  it  does  most  of 
 the  world  known  at  this  time,  and  passing,  under 
 the  leading  of  a  certain  thread  of  events,  from  land 
 to  land — this  history,  with  its  naive,  graphic, 
 gossip,  and  traveller-like  narratives,  interweaving  in 
 a  succession  of  fine  old  tapestries  many  of  the  great 
 events  and  moving  scenes  which  had,  up  to  his 
 time,  taken  place  on  the  theatre  of  the  world,  pre- 
 sents to  the  intelligent  reader  a  continuation  of 
 
 varied  gratifications.  But  even  the  Wscory  of 
 Herodotus  must  yield  to  that  contained  or  implied 
 in  the  Bible,  not  merely  in  extent  of  compass,  but 
 also  in  variety,  in  interest,  and  beyond  all  compari- 
 son, in  grandeur,  importance,  and  moral  and  spiri- 
 tual significance.  The  children  of  the  faithful 
 Abraham  seem  to  have  had  one  great  work  of  Pro- 
 vidence intrusted  to  them,  namely,  the  develop- 
 ment, transmission,  and  infusion  into  the  world  of 
 the  religious  element  of  civiHzation.  Their  histor}', 
 accordingly,  is  the  history  of  the  rise,  progress,  and 
 diffusion  of  true  religion,  considered  in  its  source 
 and  its  developments.  Such  a  history  must  pos- 
 sess large  and  peculiar  interest  for  eveiy  student  of 
 human  nature,  and  pre-eminently  for  those  who 
 love  to  study  the  unfoldings  of  Providence,  and 
 desire  to  learn  that  greatest  of  all  arts — the  art  of 
 living  at  once  for  time  and  for  eternity. 
 
 The  Jewish  history  contained  in  the  Bible  em- 
 braces more  and  less  than  the  history  of  the  Israel- 
 ites ; — 7>io>-e,  since  it  begins  with  the  beginning  of 
 the  earth  and  narrates  with  extraordinary  brevity 
 events  which  marked  the  period  terminated  by  the 
 flood,  going  on  till  it  introduces  us  to  Abraham, 
 the  primogenitor  of  the  Hebrew  race  ;  less,  since, 
 even  with  the  assistance  of  the  poetical  books, 
 its  narratives  do  not  come  down  to  a  later  date 
 than  some  600  3'ears  before  the  birth  of  Christ. 
 The  historical  materials  furnished  relating  to  the 
 Hebrew  nation  may  be  divided  into  three  great 
 divisions  :  i.  The  books  which  are  consecrated  to 
 the  antiquity  of  the  Hebrew  nation — the  period 
 that  elapsed  before  the  era  of  the  judges.  These 
 works  are  the  Pentateuch  and  the  book  of  Joshua, 
 which,  according  to  Ewald  {Geschichte  des  Volkes 
 Israel,  i.  72),  properly  constitute  only  one  work, 
 and  which  may  be  termed  the  great  book  of  origi- 
 nal documents.  2.  The  books  which  describe  the 
 times  of  the  judges  and  the  kings  up  to  the  first 
 destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  that  is.  Judges,  Kings, 
 and  Samuel,  to  which  belongs  the  book  of  Ruth  : 
 '  all  these,'  says  Ewald,  '  constitute  also,  according 
 to  their  last  formation,  but  one  work,  which  may 
 be  called  the  Great  Book  of  Kings.'  3.  The  third 
 class  comprises  the  books  included  under  the  head 
 of  Hagiographa,  which  are  of  a  much  later  origin, 
 Chronicles,  with  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  forming  the 
 great  book  of  general  history  reaching  to  the  Gre- 
 cian period.  After  these  books  came  those  which 
 are  classed  together  under  the  name  of  Apocrypha, 
 whose  use  in  this  country  we  think  unduly  ne- 
 glected. Then  the  circle  of  evangelical  records 
 begins,  which  closed  within  the  century  that  saw  it 
 open.  Other  books  found  in  the  O.  and  N.  T., 
 which  are  not  properly  of  a  historical  character, 
 connect  themselves  with  one  or  other  of  these 
 periods,  and  give  important  aid  to  students  of 
 sacred  history. 
 
 Biblical  history  was  often  treated  by  the  older 
 writers  as  a  part  of  church  history  in  general,  as 
 they  considered  the  history  given  in  the  Bible  as 
 presenting  different  and  successive  phases  of  the 
 church  of  God  (Buddei,  Hist.  Eccles.,  2  vols. 
 1726-29;  Stolberg,  Geschichte  der  Religion  yestt,\. 
 III).  Other  writers  have  viewed  this  subject  in  a 
 more  practical  light,  presenting  the  characters 
 found  in  the  Bible  for  imitation  or  avoidance ; 
 among  whom  may  be  enumerated  Hess  [Geschichte 
 der  Israeliten  vor  den  Zeiten  Jesti).  Hess  also 
 wrote  a  history  of  Jesus  [Geschichte  Jesu  :  Ziirich 
 1775)  ;  but  the  best  work  is  a  more  recent,  and  a 
 
HISTORY 
 
 310 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 very  valuable  one,  by  Niemeyer  {Characteristik  der 
 Bibel,  Halle  1830).  Among  the  more  strictly 
 learned  writers  several  have  had  it  in  view  to  supply 
 the  gaps  left  in  the  succession  of  events  by  the 
 Bible,  out  of  sources  found  in  proiane  writers. 
 Here  the  chief  authors  are  of  English  birth, 
 namely,  Prideaux,  Shuckford,  Russell ;  and  for  the 
 N.  T.,  the  learned,  cautious,  and  fair-dealing 
 Lardner.  There  is  a  valuable  work  by  G.  Lan- 
 gen  :  Versiich  einer  Harmonie  der  heiligen  iind pro- 
 fan  scrib.  in  der  Geschichte  der  Welt,  Bayreuth 
 1775-80.  Jahn,  in  his  Bib.  Archdolcgie,  has,  ac- 
 cording to  Gesenius  (art.  '  Bib.  Gescliichte'  in 
 Ersch  and  Gruber's  Allg.  Enc),  made  free  use  of 
 Prideaux.  Other  writers  have  pursued  a  strictly 
 chronological  method,  such  as  '[J ssh.tr  (A n7iales  Vet. 
 N.  T.,  London  1650),  and  Des  Vignoles  (Chrono- 
 h^ie  de  P  Hist.  Sainte,  Berlin  1738).  Heeren 
 {Handb.  der  Geschichte,  p.  50)  recommends,  as 
 containing  many  valuable  inquiries  on  the  mon- 
 archical period,  the  following  work  :  J.  Bemhardi 
 Commentatio  de  causis  qiiibus  ejffectiim  sit  ut  reg- 
 fium  JiidcE  diutiiis  persiste7'et  qiiam  regman  Israel, 
 Lovanni  1S25.  Heeren  also  declares  that  Bauer's 
 Haiidbuch  der  Geschichte  des  H.  Volkes,  1800,  is  the 
 best  introduction  both  to  the  history  and  the  anti- 
 quities of  the  Hebrew  nation  ;  though  Gesenius 
 complains  that  he  is  too  much  given  to  the  con- 
 struction of  hypotheses.  The  English  reader  will 
 find  a  useful  but  not  sufficiently  critical  compen- 
 dium in  The  History  of  the  Hebrew  Conunonwealth, 
 translated  from  the  German  of  John  Jahn,  D.D. 
 A  more  valuable  as  well  as  more  interesting,  yet 
 by  no  means  faultless  work,  is  Milman's  History  of 
 the  yews,  published  originally  in  Murray's  Family 
 Library^  [a  new  edition  of  which  is  said  to  be  now 
 (1863)  in  preparation].  A  more  recent  and  veiy 
 valuable  work,  Kitto's  Pictorial  History  of  Palesti7ie, 
 1841,  combines,  with  the  Bible  history  of  the  Jews, 
 the  results  of  travel  and  antiquarian  research,  and 
 is  preceded  by  an  elaborate  Introduction,  which 
 forms  the  only  Natural  History  of  Palestine  in  our 
 language. 
 
 [An  impulse  has  been  given  to  the  study  of 
 Biblical  history  of  late  years  in  Germany,  which 
 has  led  to  important  results.  The  great  work  of 
 Ewald,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  in  7  vols.  8vo, 
 with  a  supplementaiy  volume,  Altherthiimer  d.  V. 
 Israel,  presents  a  thorough  mvestigation  of  the 
 whole  subject,  from  the  earliest  times  to  the 
 destruction  of  the  Jewish  state  by  the  Romans  ;  a 
 work  of  great  learning,  acuteness,  and  power  of 
 construction  ;  but  displaying  tendencies  towards  a 
 treatment  of  the  sacred  books  with  which  no  one 
 who  receives  them  as  divine  can  sympathise.  A 
 more  orthodox  but  less  able  work  is  Kurz's  Gesch. 
 des  Alten  Biindes,  2  vols.,  with  supplement,  Berlin 
 1848-55  ;  translated  by  Edersheim  and  Martin,  3 
 vols.  8vo,  Edin.  1859-61.  Of  great  value  are  the 
 works  of  the  learned  Jews  :  Jost  {Gesch.  der  Israel- 
 iten  seit  der  Maccabder,  9  vols.  ;  Gesch.  des  Judeti- 
 thums  und  Seiner  Sektot,  3  vols.,  1857-59);  Herz- 
 feld  {Gesch.  d.  Volkes  Ist-ael  votn  Vollendung  des 
 Zweiten  Tempels  bis  zur  Einsetzung  des  Macha- 
 bders  Schimon,  2  vols.  Svo,  1854-57)  ;  Graetz 
 {Gesch.  der  yiideii,  6  vols.  Svo).  Dr.  Stanley,  in 
 his  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the  Jeivish  Church, 
 has  presented  the  results  of  the  most  recent  research 
 in  his  usual  vivid  and  graphic  style.] 
 
 The  sources  of  Biblical  history  are  chiefly  the 
 Biblical  books  themselves.     Any  attempt  to  fix  the 
 
 precise  value  of  these  sources  in  a  critical  point  of 
 view  would  require  a  volume  instead  of  an  article. 
 Whatever  hypothesis,  however,  may  eventually  be 
 held  touching  the  exact  time  when  these  books,  or 
 any  of  them,  were  put  into  their  actual  shape,  as 
 also  touching  the  materials  out  of  which  they  were 
 formed,  one  thing  appears  very  certain,  that  (to 
 take  an  instance)  Genesis,  the  earliest  book  (pro- 
 bably), contains  most  indubitable  as  well  as  most 
 interesting  historical  facts  ;  for  though  the  age,  the 
 mode  of  life,  and  the  state  of  culture  differ  so 
 widely  from  our  own,  we  cannot  do  otherwise  than 
 feel  that  it  is  among  men  and  women,  parents  and 
 children — beings  of  like  passions  with  ourselves — • 
 and  not  with  mere  creations  of  fancy  or  fraud,  that 
 we  converse  when  we  peruse  the  narratives  which 
 this  composition  has  so  long  preserved.  The  con- 
 viction is  much  strengthened  in  the  minds  of  those 
 who,  by  personal  acquaintance  with  the  early  pro- 
 fane writers,  are  able  to  compare  their  productions 
 with  those  of  the  Hebrews,  which  were  long  ante- 
 rior, and  must,  had  they  been  of  an  equally  earthly 
 origin,  have  been  at  least  equally  deformed  by 
 fable.  The  sole  comparison  of  the  account  given 
 in  Genesis  of  the  creation  of  the  world  with  the 
 Cosmogonies  of  heathen  writers,  whether  Hindoo, 
 Greek,  or  Latin,  is  enough  to  assure  the  impartial 
 reader  that  a  purer,  if  not  a  higher  influence,  pre- 
 sided over  the  composition  of  Genesis,  than  that 
 whence  proceeded  the  legends  or  the  philosophies 
 of  heathenism  ;  nor  is  the  conclusion  in  the  slight- 
 est degree  weakened  in  the  writer's  mind  by  any 
 discrepancy  which  modern  science  may  seem  to 
 shew  as  between  its  owa  discoveries  and  the  state- 
 ments in  Genesis.  The  Biblical  history,  as  found 
 in  its  Biblical  sources,  has  a  decided  peculiarity 
 and  a  great  recommendation  in  the  fact  that  we 
 can  trace  in  the  Bible  more  clearly  and  fully  than 
 in  connection  with  any  other  history,  the  first  crude 
 elements  and  the  early  materials  out  of  which  aU 
 history  must  be  constructed.  How  far  the  litera- 
 ture suppHed  in  the  Bible  may  be  only  a  relic  of  a 
 literary  cyclus  called  into  being  by  the  felicitous 
 circumstances  and  favourable  constitution  of  the 
 great  Shemitic  family,  but  which  has  perished  in 
 the  lapse  of  ages,  it  is  now  impossible  to  deter- 
 mine ;  but  had  the  other  portions  of  this  imagined 
 literature  been  of  equal  religious  value  with  what 
 the  Bible  offers,  there  is  little  risk  in  affirming  that 
 mankind  would  scarcely  have  allowed  it  to  be  lost. 
 The  Bible,  however,  bears  traces  that  there  were 
 other  books  current  in  the  time  and  country  to 
 which  it  relates  ;  for  writing,  writers,  and  books 
 are  mentioned  without  the  emphasis  and  distinction 
 which  always  accompany  new  discoveries  or  pecu- 
 liar local  possessions,  and  as  ordinary,  well-known, 
 and  matter-of-course  things.  And  it  is  certain 
 that  we  do  not  possess  all  the  works  which  were 
 known  in  the  early  periods  of  Israelite  history, 
 since  in  Num.  xxi.  14  we  read  of  '  the  book  of  the 
 wars  of  the  Lord,'  and  in  Josh.  x.  13,  of  'the  book 
 of  Jasher.'  Without  writing,  history,  properly  so 
 called,  can  have  no  existence.  Under  the  head 
 Writing  we  shall  trace  the  early  rudiments  and 
 progress  of  that  important  art  :  here  we  merely 
 remark  that  an  acquaintance  with  it  was  possessed 
 by  the  Hebrews  at  least  as  early  as  their  Exodus 
 from  Egypt — a  fact  which  shews  at  least  the  possi- 
 bility that  the  age  of  the  Biblical  records  stands 
 some  thousand  years  or  more  prior  to  the  earliest 
 Greek  historian,  Herodotus. 
 
HISTORY 
 
 311 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 There  is  another  fact  which  has  an  important 
 bearing  on  the  worth  and  credibiUty  of  the  Bibh- 
 cal  narratives,  namely,  that  the  people  of  which 
 they  speak  were  a  commemorative  race,  were,  in 
 other  words,  given  to  create  and  preserve  memo- 
 rials of  important  events.  Even  in  the  patriarchal 
 times  we  find  monuments  set  up  in  order  to  com- 
 memorate events.  Jacob  (Gen.  xxviii.  l8)  'set  up 
 a  pillar'  to  perpetuate  the  memory  of  the  divine 
 promise  ;  and  that  these  monuments  had  a  reli- 
 gious import  and  sanction  appears  from  the  state- 
 ment that  '  he  poured  oil  upon  the  top  of  the  pil- 
 lar' (see  Gen.  xxxi.  45  ;  Josh.  iv.  9  ;  i  Sam.  vii. 
 12  ;  Judg.  ix.  6).  Long-lived  trees,  such  as  oak 
 and  terebinth,  were  made  use  of  as  remembrancers 
 (Gen.  XXXV.  4 ;  Josh.  xxiv.  26).  Commemorative 
 names,  also,  were  given  to  persons,  places,  and 
 things  ;  and  from  the  earliest  periods  it  was  usual 
 to  substitute  a  new  and  descriptive  for  an  old 
 name,  which  may  in  its  origin  have  been  descriptive 
 too  (Exod.  ii.  10  ;  Gen.  ii.  23  ;  iv.  i).  Genealo- 
 gical tables  appear,  moreover,  to  have  had  a  very 
 early  existence  among  the  people  of  whom  the 
 Bible  speaks,  being  carefully  preserved  first  me- 
 moriter,  afterwards  by  writing,  among  family  trea- 
 sures, and  thus  transmitted  from  age  to  age. 
 These,  indeed,  as  might  be  expected,  appear  to 
 have  been  the  first  beginnings  of  histoiy — a  fact 
 which  is  illustrated  and  confirmed  by  the  way  in 
 which  what  we  should  term  a  narrative  or  histori- 
 cal sketch  is  spoken  of  in  the  Bible,  that  is,  as 
 'the  book  of  the  generation'  ('of  Adam,'  Gen.  v. 
 i)  :  a  mode  of  speaking  which  is  applied  even  to 
 the  account  of  the  creation  (Gen.  ii.  4),  'these  are 
 the  generations  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth  when 
 they  were  created.'  The  genealogical  tables  in  the 
 Bible  (speaking  generally)  are  not  only  of  a  very 
 early  date,  but  are  free  from  the  mixtures  of  a 
 theogonical  and  cosmogonical  kind  which  are 
 found  in  the  eai'ly  literature  of  other  primitive 
 nations,  wearing  the  appearance  of  being,  so  far  at 
 least  as  they  go,  true  and  complete  lists  of  mdivi- 
 dual  and  family  descent  (Gen.  v.  i).  But,  perhaps, 
 the  most  remarkable  fact  connected  with  this  sub- 
 ject is  the  employment  of  poetry  at  a  very  early 
 period  to  perpetuate  a  knowledge  of  historical 
 events.  Even  in  Gen.  iv.  23,  in  the  case  of  La- 
 mech,  we  find  poetry  thus  employed,  that  is, 
 by  the  sixth  in  descent  from  Adam.  Other  in- 
 stances may  be  found  in  Exod.  xv.  ;  Josh.  x.  13  ; 
 Judg.  V.  ;  2  Sam.  i.  18,  etc.  This  early  use  of 
 poetry,  which  must  be  regarded  as  a  considerable 
 step  in  civilization,  implies  a  still  earlier  pre-exis- 
 tent  culture ;  confutes  the  notion  that  human 
 society  began  with  a  period  of  barbarism  ;  looks 
 favourably  on  the  hypothesis  that  language  had  an 
 immediately  divine  origin  ;  explodes  the  position 
 that  the  Hebrews  were  at  first  an  ignorant,  un- 
 tutored, and  unlettered  race  ;  and  creates  a  pre- 
 sumption on  behalf  of  their  historical  literature. 
 Poetry  is  a  good  vehicle  for  the  transmission  of 
 great  leading  facts  ;  for,  though  it  may  throw  over 
 fact  a  colouring  borrowed  from  the  imagination, 
 yet  the  form  in  which  it  appears  gives  warning  that 
 such  hues  are  upon  its  details,  which  hues,  besides 
 being  themselves  a  species  of  history,  are  then 
 easily  removed,  while  the  form  shuts  up  and  holds 
 in  the  facts  intrusted  to  the  custody  of  verse,  and 
 so  transmits  them  to  posterity  without  addition  and 
 without  loss.  By  means  of  these  several  forms  of 
 commemoration  much  knowledge  would  be  pre- 
 
 sei-vei  from  generation  to  generation,  and  to  their 
 existence  from  the  first  may  we  ascribe  the  brief 
 but  still  valuable,  notices  which  the  Bible  pre- 
 sents of  the  primitive  ages  and  condition  of  the 
 world. 
 
 Other  sources  for  at  least  the  early  Biblical  his- 
 tory are  comparatively  of  small  value.  Josephus 
 has  gone  over  the  same  periods  as  the  Bible  treats 
 of,  but  obviously  had  no  sources  of  consequence 
 relating  to  primitive  times  which  are  not  open  to 
 us,  and  in  regard  to  those  times  does  little  more 
 than  add  here  and  there  a  patch  of  a  legendary  or 
 traditional  hue  which  could  have  been  well  spared. 
 His  Greek  and  Roman  predilections  and  his  apolo- 
 getical  aims  detract  from  his  value,  while  in  relation 
 to  the  early  history  of  his  countiy  he  can  be  re- 
 garded in  no  other  light  than  a  sort  of  philosophical 
 interpreter ;  nor  is  it  till  he  comes  to  his  own  age 
 that  he  has  the  value  of  an  independent  (not  even 
 then  an  impartial)  eye-witness  or  well-informed  re- 
 porter. In  historical  criticism  and  linguistic  know- 
 ledge he  was  very  insufficiently  furnished.  The 
 use  of  both  Josephus  and  Philo  is  far  more  safe  for 
 the  student  of  the  N.  T.  than  for  the  expounder  of 
 the  old. 
 
 The  Talmud  and  the  Rabbms  afford  very  little 
 assistance  for  the  early  periods,  but  might  probably 
 be  made  to  render  more  service  in  behalf  of  the 
 times  of  the  Saviour  than  has  been  generally  al- 
 lowed. The  illustrations  which  Lightfoot  and  Wet- 
 stein  have  drawn  from  these  sources  are  of  great 
 value  ;  and  Gfrorer,  in  his  jakrkintJert  des  Neils 
 (Stuttgart  1838),  has  made  an  ample  use  of  the 
 materials  they  supply  in  order  to  draw  a  picture  of 
 the  1st  century,  a  use  which  the  learned  author  is 
 at  no  small  pains  to  justify.  The  compilations  of 
 the  Jewish  doctors,  however,  require  to  be  em- 
 ployed with  the  greatest  caution,  since  the  Rabbins 
 were  the  depositaries,  the  expounders,  and  the 
 apologists  of  that  corrupt  form  of  the  primitive 
 faith  and  the  Mosaic  institutions  which  has  been 
 called  by  the  distinctive  name  of  Judaism,  which 
 comprised  an  heterogeneous  mass  of  false  and  true 
 things,  the  coUuvies  of  the  east  as  well  as  light 
 from  the  Bible,  and  which,  to  a  great  extent,  lies 
 under  the  express  condemnation  of  Christ  himself. 
 How  easy  it  is  to  propagate  fables  on  their  autho- 
 rity, and  to  do  a  disservice  to  the  Gospel  records, 
 may  be  learnt  from  the  fact  that  older  writers,  in  their 
 undue  trust  of  Rabbinical  authority,  went  so  far  as 
 to  maintain  that  no  cock  was  allowed  to  be  kept  in 
 Jerusalem  because  fowls  scratched  unclean  things 
 out  of  the  earth,  though  the  authority  of  Scripture 
 (which  in  the  case  they  refused  to  admit)  is  most 
 express  and  decided  (Matt.  xxvi.  34  ;  Mark  xiv. 
 30,  68,  72).  On  the  credibility  of  the  Rabbins  see 
 Ravii  Diss.  Phil.  Theol.  de  eo  quod  Fidei  merentur, 
 etc.,  in  Oelrich's  Collect.  Opusc.  Hist.  Phil.  Theol. ; 
 Wolf  Bibl.  Hehr.  ii.  1095  ;  Fabricius,  Bibliog. 
 Antiq.  i.  3,  4  ;  Brunsmann,  Diss,  de  yudaica  levi- 
 tate, Hafniae  1705. 
 
 The  classic  authors  betray  the  grossest  igno- 
 rance almost  in  all  cases  where  they  treat  of  the 
 origin  and  history  of  the  Hebrew  people  ;  and  even 
 the  most  serious  and  generally  philosophic  writers 
 fall  into  vulgar  errors  and  unaccountable  mistakes 
 as  soon  as  they  speak  on  the  subject.  What,  for 
 instance,  can  be  worse  than  the  blunder  or  preju- 
 dice of  Tacitus,  under  the  influence  of  which  he 
 declared  that  the  Jews  derived  their  origin  from 
 Mount   Ida  in   Crete  ;  that  by  the  advice  of  an 
 
HITTITES,  OR  CHILDREN  OF  HETII     312     HITTITES,  or  CHILDREN  OF  HETH 
 
 oracle  they  had  been  driven  out  of  Egypt ;  and 
 that  they  set  up  in  their  temple  at  Jerusalem  as  an 
 object  of  worship  the  figure  of  an  ass,  since  an 
 animal  of  that  species  had  directed  them  in  the  wil- 
 derness and  discovered  to  them  a  fountain  (Tacit. 
 Hist.  V.  I,  2).  Dion  Cassius  (xxxvii.  17)  relates 
 similar  fables.  Plutarch  {QucEst.  Sympos.  iv.  5) 
 makes  the  Hebrews  pay  divine  honours  to  swine, 
 as  being  their  instructors  in  agriculture,  and  affirms 
 that  they  kept  the  Sabbath  and  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
 nacles in  honour  of  Bacchus.  A  collection  of  these 
 gross  misrepresentations,  together  with  a  profound 
 and  successful  inquiry  into  their  origin,  and  a  full 
 exposure  of  their  falsehood,  may  be  found  in  a 
 paper  by  Dr.  J.  G.  Miiller,  recently  published  in 
 the  Theologische  Studien  and Kriiiken  {1843,  Viertes 
 Heft.  p.  893).— J.  R.  B. 
 
 HITTITES,  or  CHILDREN  OF  HETH,  a  na- 
 tion descended  fiom  Heth  (Tin,  LXX.  X^r ;  gent. 
 
 n.  inn;  LXX.  XeTratos;  DPI  ""pn,  f.  nn  niJ3; 
 
 LXX.  viol  X^T,  Bvyardpei  twv  vlQv  X^r),  son  of 
 Canaan.  The  meaning  of  Heth  is  supposed  to 
 be  '  fear'  or  '  terror,'  but  it  seems  more  probable 
 that  it  has  a  signification  like  Sidon,  '  fishing,'  the 
 Amorite,  '  the  mountaineer,'  etc. 
 
 In  the  list  of  the  descendants  of  Noah,  Heth 
 occupies  the  second  place  among  the  children  of 
 Canaan.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  first  and 
 second  names,  Sidon  and  Heth,  are  not  gentile 
 nouns,  and  that  all  the  names  following  are  gentile 
 nouns  in  the  sing.  Sidon  is  called  the  first-born 
 of  Canaan,  though  the  name  of  the  town  is  pro- 
 bably put  for  that  of  its  founder,  or  eponym,  '  the 
 fisherman,'  'AXieijs,  of  Philo  of  Byblus.  It  is 
 therefore  probable,  as  we  find  no  city  Heth,  that 
 this  is  the  name  of  the  ancestor  of  the  nation,  and 
 the  gentile  noun,  children  of  Heth,  makes  this 
 almost  certain.  After  the  enumeration  of  the 
 nations  sprung  from  Canaan,  it  is  added  :  '  And 
 afterward  were  the  families  of  the  Canaanites 
 spread  abroad'  (Gen.  x.  18).  This  passage  will 
 be  illustrated  by  the  evidence  that  there  were 
 Hittites  and  Amorites  beyond  Canaan,  and  also 
 beyond  the  wider  territory  that  must  be  allowed 
 for  the  placing  of  the  Hamathites,  who,  it  may  be 
 added,  perhaps  had  not  migrated  from  Canaan  at 
 the  date  to  which  the  list  of  Noah's  descendants 
 mainly  refers  (see  ver.  19). 
 
 In  the  time  of  Abraham,  the  Hittites  are  men- 
 tioned among  the  inhabitants  of  the  Promised 
 Land  (xv.  20).  At  Kirjath-arba,  or  Hebron,  he 
 purchased  the  cave  of  Machpelah  of  Ephron  the 
 Hittite,  and  it  is  evident  that  at  this  time  the 
 people  of  that  city  were  Hittites  (Gen.  xxiii.  3-7, 
 ID,  18).  The  city  was,  however,  founded  by  one 
 Arba  of  the  Anakim,  whence  its  earlier  name,  and 
 had  inhabitants  of  that  giant  race  as  late  as  Joshua's 
 time.  It  is  also  connected  with  Zoan  in  Egypt, 
 where  it  is  said  to  have  been  built  seven  years 
 before  that  city  (Num.  xiii.  22).  Zoan  or  Avaris 
 was  built  or  rebuilt,  and  no  doubt  received  its 
 Hebrew  or  Semitic  name,  Zoan,  the  translation  of 
 its  Egyptian  name  HA-AWAR,  in  the  time  of  the 
 first  Shepherd-king  of  Egypt,  who  was  of  Phoeni- 
 cian or  kindred  race.  It  is  also  to  be  noted 
 that,  in  Abraham's  time,  the  Amorites,  connected 
 with  the  giant  race  in  the  case  of  the  Rephaim 
 whom  Chedorlaomer  smote  in  Ashteroth  Kar- 
 naim  (Gen.  xiv.  5),  where  the  Rephaite  Og  after- 
 
 wards ruled,  dwelt  close  to  Hebron  (ver.  13), 
 The  Hittites  and  Amorites  we  shall  see  to  have 
 been  later  settled  together  in  the  Orontes-valley. 
 Thus  at  this  period  there  was  a  settlement  of  the 
 two  nations  in  the  south  of  Palestine,  and  the 
 Hittites  were  mixed  with  the  Rephaite  Anakim, 
 Among  these  Hittites  Isaac  lived  in  southernmost 
 Palestine  (xxvii.  46),  and  of  their  daughters  Esau 
 took  one,  if  not  two,  to  wife  (xxvi.  34 ;  xxxvi.  2, 
 3,  20,  24,  25). 
 
 In  the  enumeration  of  the  six  or  seven  nations 
 of  Canaan  from  the  time  of  the  Exodus  downwards, 
 the  first  names,  in  four  forms,  are  the  Canaanites, 
 Hittites,  and  Amorites  ;  in  two,  which  make  no 
 mention  of  the  Canaanites,  the  Hittites,  and  Amor- 
 ites ;  and  in  three,  the  former  three  names  with  the 
 addition  of  another  nation.  In  but  two  forms  are 
 these  three  nations  further  separated.  It  is  also  to 
 be  remarked  that  the  Hittites  and  Amorites  are  men- 
 tioned together  in  a  bare  majority  of  the  forms  of 
 the  enumeration,  but  in  a  great  majority  of  pas- 
 sages. The  importance  thus  given  to  the  Hittites 
 is  perhaps  equally  evident  in  the  place  of  Heth  in 
 the  list  of  the  descendants  of  Noah,  in  the  place  of 
 the  tribe  in  the  list  in  the  promise  to  Abraham, 
 where  it  is  first  of  the  known  descendants  of 
 Canaan  (xv.  20),  and  certainly  in  the  term  '  all  the 
 land  of  the  Hittites,'  as  a  designation  of  the  Pro- 
 mised Land  in  its  full  extent,  from  Euphrates  to  the 
 Mediterranean,  and  from  Lebanon  to  the  desert 
 (Josh.  i.  4).  The  close  relation  of  the  Hittites  and 
 Amorites  seems  to  be  indicated  by  the  prophet  Eze- 
 kiel,  where  he  speaks  of  Jerusalem  as  daughter  of 
 an  Amorite  father  and  a  Hittite  mother  (xvi.  3,  45). 
 
 When  the  spies  examined  Canaan  they  found 
 '  the  Hittites,  and  the  Jebusites,  and  the  Amorites,' 
 dwelling  '  in  the  mountains'  (Num.  xiii.  29),  that 
 is,  in  the  high  tracts  that  afterwards  formed  the 
 refuges  and  rallying-points  of  the  Israelites  during 
 the  troubled  period  of  the  judges.  There  is,  how- 
 ever, no  distinct  statement  as  to  the  exact  posi- 
 tion of  the  Hittites  in  Palestine.  We  may  draw 
 an  inference  from  their  connection  with  Jerusa- 
 lem and  the  Amorites,  and  their  inhabiting  the 
 mountains,  and  suppose  that  they  were  probably 
 chiefly  seated  in  the  high  region  of  the  tribe 
 of  Judah.  Of  their  territory  beyond  Palestine 
 there  are  some  indications  in  Scripture.  The 
 most  important  of  these  is  the  designation  of 
 the  Promised  Land  in  its  full  extent  as  '  all  the 
 land  of  the  Hittites,'  already  mentioned,  with 
 which  the  notices  of  Hittite  kings  out  of  Canaan 
 must  be  compared.  In  Solomon's  time  '  all  the 
 kings  of  the  Hittites'  are  spoken  of  with  '  the  kings 
 of  Syria,'  in  connection  with  the  traffic  with  Egypt 
 in  chariots  and  horses  (l  Kings  x.  28,  29).  So, 
 too,  when  the  Syrians,  who  were  besieging  Sama- 
 ria in  the  time  of  Jehoram,  fled,  the  cause  is  thus 
 stated: — '  For  the  Lord  had  made  the  host  of  the 
 Syrians  to  hear  a  noise  of  chariots,  and  a  noise  of 
 horses,  the  noise  of  a  great  host  :  and  they  said  one 
 to  another,  Lo,  the  king  of  Israel  hath  hired 
 against  us  the  kings  of  the  Hittites,  and  the  kings 
 of  the  Egyptians,  to  come  upon  us'  (2  Kings  vii. 
 6).  The  latter  two  passages  indicate  that,  at  the 
 periods  to  which  they  refer,  there  was  a  Hittite 
 settlement  beyond  Canaan,  governed  by  kings,  and 
 povvcrful  from  its  use  of  chariots  and  horses,  and 
 the  warlike  disposition  of  its  people. 
 
 The  Egyptian  monuments  give  us  much  informa- 
 tion as  to  a  Hittite  nation  that  can  only  be  that 
 
IIITTITES,  OR  CHILDREN  OF  HETH    313    HITTITES,  or  CHILDREN  OF  HETII 
 
 indicated  in  the  two  passages  just  noticed.  The 
 kings  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties 
 made  extensive  conquests  in  Syria  and  Mesopo- 
 tamia. They  were  opposed  by  many  small  states, 
 which  probably  always  formed  one  or  more  con- 
 federacies. In  the  time  of  Thothmes  HI.  (B.C.  cir. 
 1450),  the  leading  nation  was  that  of  the  RUTEN  (or 
 LUTEN),  which  appears  to  have  once  headed  a  con- 
 federacy defeated  by  that  king  before  Megiddo 
 (De  Rouge  Reinte  Archeolog.,  n.  s. ,  iv.  p.  346, 
 seqq.)  The  Khcta  were  conquered  by  or  tributary 
 to  Thothmes  III.  (Birch,  Annals  of  Thothmes 
 III.,  p.  21);  but  it  is  not  until  the  time  of  Ram- 
 eses  II.  (B.C.  cir.  1360),  second  king  (according 
 to  Manetho)  of  the  19th  dynasty,  that  we  find 
 them  occupying  the  most  important  place  among 
 the  eastern  enemies  of  the  Egyptians,  the  place 
 before  held  by  the  RUTEN.  The  name  is  gene- 
 rally written  KHeT,  and  sometimes  KHeTA,  and 
 was  probably  in  both  cases  pronounced  KHAT.  It 
 is  not  easy  to  determine  whether  it  properly  de- 
 notes the  people  or  the  country  ;  perhaps  it  denotes 
 the  latter,  as  it  rarely  has  a  plural  termination  ;  but 
 it  is  often  used  for  the  former.  This  name  is  iden- 
 tical in  radicals  with  that  of  the  Hittites,  and  that 
 it  designates  them  is  clear  from  its  being  connected 
 with  a  name  equally  representing  that  of  the  Amo- 
 rites,  and  from  the  correspondence  of  this  warlike 
 people,  strong  in  chariots,  with  the  non-Palestinian 
 Hittites  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  The  chief  or 
 strongest  city  of  the  KHeTA,  or  at  least  of  the  terri- 
 tory subject  to,  or  confederate  with,  the  king  of 
 the  KHeTA,  was  KeTesH,  on  the  river  arnut, 
 ANURTA,  or  arunata.  KcTesH  was  evidently  a 
 Kadesh,  '  a  sacred  city,'  C"Ip,  but  no  city  of 
 that  name,  which  could  correspond  to  this,  is 
 known  to  us  in  Biblical  geography.  It  is  repre- 
 sented in  the  Egyptian  sculptures  as  on  or  near  a 
 lake,  which  Dr.  Brugsch  has  traced  in  the  modern 
 lake  of  Kedes,  fed  by  the  Orontes,  southward  of 
 Hems  (Emesa).  The  Orontes,  it  must  be  observed, 
 well  corresponds  to  the  arunata.  The  town  is 
 also  stated  to  have  been  in  the  land  of  AMAR  (or 
 amara),  that  is,  of  the  Amo rites.  The  position 
 of  this  Amorite  territory  is  further  defined  by  Car- 
 chemish  being  placed  in  it,  as  we  shall  shew  in  a 
 later  part  of  this  article.  The  territory  of  these 
 Hittites,  therefore,  lay  in  the  valley  of  the  Orontes. 
 It  probably  extended  towards  the  Euphrates,  for 
 the  KHeTA  are  also  connected  with  neharena,  or 
 Mesopotamia,  not  the  NAHIRI  of  the  cuneiform  in- 
 scriptions, but  it  is  not  clear  that  they  ruled  that 
 country.  Probably  they  drew  confederates  thence, 
 as  was  done  by  the  Syrians  in  David's  time. 
 
 The  greatest  achievement  of  Rameses  II.  was 
 the  defeat  of  the  khcta  and  their  allies  near  Ke- 
 TeSH,  in  the  fifth  year  of  his  reign.  This  event 
 is  commemorated  in  a  papyrus  and  by  several  in- 
 scriptions and  sculptures.  The  nations  confeder- 
 ate with  the  KHeTA  were  the  ARATU,  Aradus  ? 
 maXusu,  Mash?  paatsa  or  patasa,  keshkesh, 
 ARUNU,     katawatana,     kheerabu,     Helbon  ? 
 
 AKATERA,     KETESH,     ReKA,     Arkites  ?    TENTENEE 
 
 (or  tratenuee)  and  KARAKAMASHA,  Carchemish. 
 These  names  are  difficult  to  identify  save  the  seventh 
 and  the  last,  but  it  is  evident  that  they  do  not  be- 
 long to  Palestine.  The  Hittites  are  represented  as 
 having  a  regular  army,  which  was  strong  in  cha- 
 riots, a  particular  which  we  should  expect  from 
 tlie  Biblical  notices  of  them  and  of  the  Canaan- 
 ites,  where  the  latter  name  seems  applied  to  the 
 
 tribe  so  called.  Each  chariot  was  drawn  by  two 
 horses,  and  held  three  men,  a  charioteer  and 
 two  warriors.  They  had  also  cavalry  and  dis- 
 ciplined infantry.  In  the  great  battle  with  Ram- 
 eses they  had  2500  horses,  that  is,  chariots.  The 
 representations  of  the  KHeTA  in  the  sculptures 
 relating  to  this  campaign  probably  shew  that  their 
 forces  were  composed  of  men  of  two  different  races. 
 Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  thinks  that  both  belonged 
 to  the  KHeTA  nation,  and  it  seems  hardly  possible 
 to  form  any  other  conclusion.  '  The  nation  of 
 Sheta  [the  initial  character  is  sometimes  read  '  sh'] 
 seems  to  have  been  composed  of  two  distinct  tribes, 
 both  comprehended  under  the  same  name,  uniting 
 in  one  common  cause,  and  probably  subject  to  the 
 same  government.'  These  supposed  tribes  differed 
 in  dress  and  arms,  and  one  was  sometimes  bearded, 
 the  other  was  beardless  {Ancient  Egyptians,  i.  pp. 
 383-384,  woodcut  p.  385).  They  are  rather  fair 
 than  yellow,  and  the  beardless  warriors  are  pro- 
 bably of  a  different  race  from  the  people  of  Pales- 
 tine generally.  In  some  cases  they  remind  us  of  the 
 Tatars,  and  it  is  impossible  to  forget  that  the  Egyp- 
 tians of  the  Greek  period  evidently  took  the  KHeTA 
 for  Scythians  or  Bactrians.  The  name  Scythian  is 
 not  remote,  nor  is  that  of  the  Kittas,  or  warrior- 
 Tatai's  in  the  Chinese  garrisons,  but  mere  word- 
 resemblances  are  dangerous,  and  the  circumstance 
 that  the  Scythians  ap]3ear  in  history  when  the  Hit- 
 tites have  just  disappeared  is  not  of  much  value. 
 But  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  in  the  time  of 
 Moses  there  was  a  Rephaite  ruling  the  Amorites  in 
 Palestine,  as  the  sons  of  Anak  had  apparently  long 
 ruled  the  Hittites  in  Hebron,  so  that  we  need  not 
 be  surprised  to  find  two  races  under  the  same 
 government  in  the  case  of  the  Hittites  of  Syria. 
 
 In  the  twenty-first  year  of  Rameses  II.,  the  great 
 king  of  the  Hittites,  KHeTSEERA,  came  to  Egypt  to 
 make  a  treaty  of  peace.  A  copy  of  the  treaty  is  pre- 
 served in  a  hieroglyphic  inscription.  From  this  it 
 appears  that  KHeTSEERA  had  been  preceded  by  his 
 grandfather  SAPRARA,  his  father  maurasara,  and 
 his  brother  MAUTNURA,  and  that  in  the  reigns  of 
 SAPRARA  and  MAUTNURA  peace  had  been  made  up- 
 on the  same  conditions.  The  information  the  in- 
 scription affords  as  to  the  religion  of  the  Hittites  will 
 be  noticed  later.  In  a  tablet  of  the  thirty-fourth 
 year  of  the  same  king,  one  of  his  wives,  a  Hittite 
 princess  with  the  Egyptian  name  RA-ma-UR-nc- 
 FRU,  is  represented  as  well  as  her  father,  the  king 
 (or  a  king)  of  the  KHeTA.  Solomon  also,  as  Dr. 
 Brugsch  remarks,  took  Hittite  women  into  his 
 hareem  (i  Kings  xi.  l).  Rameses  III.  (B.C.  cir. 
 1280)  had  a  war  with  the  KHeTA,  mentioned 
 in  one  of  his  inscriptions  with  KeTEE  (KeTeSH) 
 kara[k]amsa  (Carchemish),  aratu  (Aradus  ?), 
 and  arasa,  all  described  as  in  the  land  amara. 
 
 The  religion  of  the  Hittites  is  only  known  from 
 the  treaty  with  Rameses  II.,  though  it  is  probable 
 that  additional  information  may  be  derived  from 
 an  examination  of  pro]->er  names.  In  this  act  the 
 divinities  of  both  the  land  of  KHeTA  and  of  Egypt 
 are  mentioned,  probably  because  they  were  in- 
 voked to  see  that  the  comi^act  was  duly  kept. 
 They  are  described  from  a  Hittite  point  of  view, 
 a  circumstance  which  is  curious  as  shewing  how 
 carefully  the  Egyptian  scribe  had  kept  to  the 
 document  before  him.  They  are  the  gods  of  war 
 and  the  gods  of  women  of  the  land  of  khcta  and 
 of  Egypt,  the  sutekh  of  the  land  of  khcta,  the 
 SUTEKH  of  several  forts,  the  ashtcrat  (written 
 
HITTITES,  OR  CHILDREN  OF  HETH    314 
 
 HIVITES 
 
 antcrat)  of  the  land  of  khcta,  several  unnamed 
 gods  and  goddesses  of  places  or  countries,  and  of 
 a  fortress,  the  mountains  and  rivers  of  the  land  of 
 KHCTA,  and  of  Egypt,  Amen,  sutekh,  and  the 
 winds.  Sutekh,  or  set,  was  the  chief  god  of  the 
 Shepherd-kings  of  Egypt,  one  of  whom  appears  to 
 have  abolished  all  other  worship  in  his  dommions, 
 and  is  also  called  ear,  or  Baal.  Sutekh  is  per- 
 haps a  foreign  form,  set  seems  certainly  of  foreign 
 origin.  AshtcRAT  is  of  course  Ashtoreth,  the 
 consort  of  Baal  in  Palestine.  They  were  the  prin- 
 cipal divinities  of  the  KHeTA,  as  they  are  men- 
 tioned by  name  and  as  worshipped  in  the  whole 
 land.  The  worship  of  the  mountains  and  rivers  is 
 remarkably  indicative  of  the  character  of  the  reli- 
 gion, and  the  mention  of  the  gods  of  special  cities 
 points  in  the  same  direction.  The  former  is  low 
 nature-worship,  the  latter  is  entirely  consistent 
 with  it,  and  indeed  is  never  found  but  in  con- 
 nection with  it. 
 
 The  following  names  of  Hittites  occur  in  the 
 Bible  : — Ephron,  Zohar,  Adah,  daughter  of  Elon, 
 Bashemath  (Basmath),  the  same?  Judith,  daughter 
 of  Beeri,  Ahimelech,  Uriah,  Sibbechai  ? 
 
 The  Egyptian  monuments  furnish  us  with  the 
 following  : — sapraka,    maurasara,    mautnura, 
 
 KHeTSEERA,  TARAKANUNASA,    KAMAEET,    TARKA- 
 
 tatasa  (an  ally  ?)  kheerapsara,  scribe  of  books 
 
 of     the     KHeTA,     PEESA,      TEETARA,      KRABCTUSA, 
 
 aakma  (an  ally  ?)  sa.marus,  tatara,  matreema, 
 brother  of  [the  king  of]  the  KHeTA,  RABSUNUNA, 
 (an  ally  ?)  tuatasa  (an  ally  ?) 
 
 The  former  names  are  evidently  pure  Hebrew, 
 though  the  significations  of  some  (Ephron,  Elon, 
 Beeri)  may  point  to  primitive  nature-worship.  If 
 not  they  are  indicative  of  a  strong  love  of  nature, 
 and  of  the  degree  of  aiental  refinement  which  it 
 necessarily  implies.  Adah  is  remarkable  as  being 
 also  an  antediluvian  name. 
 
 The  latter  names  are  evidently  Semitic,  but  not 
 Hebrew,  a  circumstance  that  need  not  surprise  us 
 when  we  know  that  Aramaic  was  separate  from 
 Hebrew  in  Jacob's  time.  The  syllables  SEERA  in 
 KHeT-SEEKA,  and  rab  in  rab-sununa,  seem  to 
 correspond  to  the  Sar  and  rab  of  Assyrian  and 
 Babylonian  names.  TEETARA  may  be  the  same 
 name  as  the  Tidal  of  Scripture.  But  the  most  re- 
 markable of  all  these  names  is  matreema,  which 
 corresponds  as  closely  as  possible  to  Mizraim. 
 The  third  letter  is  a  hard  T,  and  the  final  syllable 
 is  constantly  used  for  the  Hebrew  dual.  In  the 
 Egyptian  name  of  Mesopotamia,  N  eh  arena,  we 
 find  the  Chaldee  and  Arabic  dual.  It  would 
 tlierefore  appear  that  the  language  of  the  KHeTA 
 was  nearer  to  the  Hebrew  than  to  the  Chaldee. 
 TARKATATASA  ])robably  commences  with  the  name 
 of  the  goddess  Uerketo  or  Atargatis. 
 
 The  principal  source  of  information  on  the 
 Egyptian  bearings  of  this  subject  is  Brugsch's  Geo- 
 gi-aphische  Iiischriften,  ii.  p.  20,  seqq.  The  docu- 
 ments to  which  he  mainly  refers  ai'e  the  inscriptions 
 of  Rameses  II.,  the  poem  of  PENTAur,  and  the 
 treaty.  The  first  are  given  by  Lepsius  (Denkmaler, 
 Abth.  iii.  bL  153-161,  164-166,  187,  196;  see  also 
 130,  209),  and  translated  by  M.  Chabas , (A'^'. 
 Arch.,  1859):  see  also  Brugsch,  Histoire  d'' Egypte 
 (i.  p.  137,  seqq.);  the  second  is  translated  by  M. 
 de  Rouge  {Revue  Co7iteiiiporaine,  No.  106,  p.  389, 
 seqq.).  Dr.  Brugsch  (//.  cc),  Mr.  Goodwin,  Cam- 
 bridge Essays,  1858,  and  in  Bunsen's  Egypfs 
 Place  (iv.  p.  675,  seqq.);  and  the  third  is  translated 
 
 by  Dr.  Brugsch  (//.  cc!),  and  Mr.  Goodwin  {Par- 
 thenon,  1862).— R.  S.  P. 
 
 HIVITES  C^in,  only  found  in  the  sing,  and  with 
 
 the  article  ;  LXX.  6  Ei^aros),  a  nation  descended 
 from  Canaan.  Gesenius  suggests  that  the  name 
 may  signify  'villagers,'  from  T\\T\  [unused]  =  n^n. 
 
 '  a  village  of  nomades,  a  village'  {Lex.  s.  v.) 
 
 In  the  list  of  the  descendants  of  Canaan,  '  the 
 Hivite'  is  followed  by  tribes  most,  if  not  all,  of 
 which  dwelt  to  the  north  of  the  Israelite  territory 
 out  of  the  tract  actually  conquered.  No  name  o*" 
 the  same  region  occurs  before,  save  Sidon,  if  il 
 should  be  assigned  to  it,  mentioned  at  the  head  of 
 the  list  as  the  first-born  of  Canaan  (Gen.  x.  15-18; 
 I  Chron.  i.  13-16).  With  this  placing  agree  the 
 mention  of  '  the  Hivite  under  Hennon  in  the 
 land  of  Mizpeh'  (Josh.  xi.  3),  and  of  'the  Hivite 
 that  dwelt  in  Mount  Lebanon,  from  Mount  Baal- 
 liermon  unto  the  entering  in  of  Hamath'  (Judg. 
 iii.  3).  The  Hivite  prince  Hamor  in  Jacob's  time 
 ruled  in  the  heart  of  Palestine.  We  also  find  a 
 Hivite  confederacy,  at  the  time  of  the  conquest, 
 consisting  of  Gibeon,  Chephirah,  Beeroth,  and 
 Kirjath-jearim  (Josh.  xi.  17). 
 
 It  is  remarkable  that  the  Hivites,  although  men- 
 tioned in  the  list  of  Gen.  x.,  and  afterwards  as 
 settled  in  the  Land  of  Promise,  are  not  found,  in  the 
 Hebrew  text,  in  the  hst  of  nations  whose  territories 
 were  promised  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xv.  19-21).  In 
 the  LXX.  and  Samaritan  they  occur  (ver.  21). 
 The  omission  in  the  Hebrew  has  led  to  the  startling 
 conjecture  that  they  are  the  same  as  the  Kadmon- 
 ites.  It  is  indeed  by  no  means  impossible  that  a 
 Canaanite  tribe  should  be  called  by  different  names, 
 when  we  find  such  cases  of  various  names  as  that  of 
 Hermon,  but  we  cannot  attempt  an  identification 
 of  two  names  when  the  significations  are  neither 
 the  same  nor  similar,  and  when  there  seems  nothing 
 appropriate  in  the  supposed  second  name.  In  this 
 passage,  the  position  of  the  Hivites,  if  represented 
 by  the  Kadmonites,  would  be  at  the  head  of  the 
 nations  usually  assigned  to  the  Land  of  Promise, 
 and  this  is  most  unlikely,  unless  the  order  be  geo- 
 graphical. A  more  ingenious  conjecture  has  been 
 put  forward  by  Mr.  Grove,  who  suggests  the 
 identity  of  the  Hivites  and  the  Avites,  or  Avim, 
 on  the  grounds,  {a)  that  at  a  later  time  the  Galileans 
 confounded  the  gutturals  ;  {b)  that  the  LXX.  and 
 Jerome  do  not  distinguish  the  two  names  ;  {c)  that 
 the  town  of  ha-Avvim  ('  Avim,'  A.  V.)  was  in  the 
 same  district  as  the  Hivites  of  Gibeon  ;  {d)  and  that 
 the  Avim  disappear  before  the  Hivites  appear  ;  {i) 
 to  which  we  may  add,  that  if  Gesenius's  etymology  be 
 sound  it  is  remarkable  that  the  Avim  are  described 
 as  dwelling  '  in  villages'  (see  Smith's  Dictionary  of 
 the  Bible,  AviM,  Hivites).  On  the  other  hand, 
 (fl)  it  is  unlikely  that  a  dialectic  difference  would  be 
 recorded,  and  it  seems  too  slight  to  be  anything  else ; 
 {b)  the  LXX.  and  Jerome  are  not  very  careful  as 
 to  exact  transcriptions  of  proper  names  ;  {c)  the 
 presence  of  Avim  in  a  district  does  not  prove  them 
 to  be  the  same  as  other  inhabitants  of  that  district ; 
 {d)  and  the  narrative  in  Deut.  ii.  speaks  only  of 
 the  overthrow,  before  the  coming  of  the  Israelites, 
 by  later  settlers,  of  certain  tribes  or  peoples,  not 
 mentioned  in  the  list  of  Gen.  x.,  which  were,  as 
 far  as  stated,  Rephaim,  or  of  Rephaite  stock.  The 
 probability  that  the  Avim  were  of  this  stock  is 
 strengthened  by  the  circumstance  that  there  was  a 
 
HIVITES 
 
 315 
 
 HOBNIM 
 
 remnant  of  the  Rephaim  among  the  Philistines  in 
 David's  time,  as  there  was  among  other  nations 
 when  tlie  Israehtes  conquered  the  country.  There- 
 fore, it  seems  to  us  veiy  unhkely  that  the  Avim 
 were  the  same  as  the  Hivites. 
 
 The  Hivites  first  appear  in  the  histoiy  of  the 
 Hebrews  as  a  settled  race,  resembling  the  Hittites 
 of  Hebron.  The  narrative  of  the  transaction  of 
 Jacob,  when  he  bought  the  'parcel  of  a  field,' 
 closely  resembles  that  of  Abraham's  purchase  of 
 the  field  of  Machpelah.  The  people  subject  to 
 '  Hamor  the  Hivite,  prince  of  the  country,'  were 
 dwellers  in  a  city,  and  given  to  trade,  as  well  as 
 having  flocks  and  herds.  They  seem  to  have  been 
 unused  to  war,  and  no  match  for  the  energy  of 
 Simeon  and  Levi.  In  the  matter  that  led  to  the 
 overthrow  of  this  Hivite  city  we  see  an  indication 
 of  the  corruption  that  afterwards  became  charac- 
 teristic of  the  Canaanite  tribes  (Gen.  xxxiii.  18-20; 
 xxxiv. )  Jacob's  reproof  of  his  sons  seems  to  imply 
 that  the  more  powerful  inhabitants  of  at  least  this 
 part  of  the  Promised  Land  were  Canaanites  and 
 Perizzites,  these  only  being  mentioned  as  likely  to 
 attack  him  in  revenge  (xxxiv.  30).  It  is  possible,  but 
 not  certain,  that  there  is  a  reference  to  this  matter 
 where  Jacob  speaks  of  a  portion  he  gave  to  Joseph 
 as  having  been  taken  by  him  in  war  from  the 
 Amorite  (xlviii.  22),  for  his  land  at  Shechem  was 
 given  to  Joseph,  but  it  had  been  bought,  and  what 
 Simeon  and  Levi  seized  was  probably  never  claimed 
 by  Jacob,  unless,  indeed,  the  Hivites,  who  might 
 possibly  be  spoken  of  as  Amorites  (but  comp. 
 xx.xiv.  30),  attempted  to  recover  it  by  force.  Per- 
 haps the  reference  is  to  some  other  occurrence. 
 It  seems  clear,  however,  from  the  first  of  the  pas- 
 sages just  noticed  (xxxiv.  30),  that  the  HiNdtes  ruled 
 by  Hamor  were  a  small  settlement.  Soon  after 
 this  it  is  mentioned  that  Esau  took  to  wife  a  Hivite 
 (xxxvi.  2),  but  the  proposed  reading  Horite  seems 
 preferable  (see  ver.  25).  In  the  enumerations  of 
 the  nations  of  Canaan  in  the  part  of  the  Bible 
 relating  to  the  Exodus  and  to  the  conquest,  the 
 Hivites  are  not  mentioned  in  an  early  position,  and 
 seem,  therefore,  to  have  been  one  of  the  less  im- 
 portant tribes.  At  the  time  of  the  conquest,  the 
 Hivites  of  Gibeon,  and  three  other  cities  in  the  neigh- 
 bourhood, Chephirah,  Beeroth,  and  Kirjath-jearim, 
 forming  a  confederacy,  deceived  the  Israelites  by 
 means  of  travel-worn  ambassadors,  who  feigned  to 
 have  come  from  a  great  distance,  and  so  secured  a 
 treaty.  For  their  deceit  they  were  required  to  be- 
 come servants  for  the  altar.  Their  cities  seem  to 
 have  been  given  for  the  same  service,  for  the  Ark 
 long  remained  at  Kirjath-jearim,  and  the  Taber- 
 nacle, after  the  Ark  had  been  removed  to  Jerusalem, 
 was  raised  at  Gibeon,  where  was  '  the  great  high 
 place.'  Saul  attempted  to  destroy  the  Gibeonites, 
 and  in  consequence  David  gave  up  to  them  seven 
 of  his  sons  and  grandsons  to  be  put  to  death.  If  we 
 hear  of  the  Hivites  again  it  is  only  as  the  Nethinim, 
 or  people  'given'  to  the  temple-service.  The 
 settlement  in  the  south  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
 large,  though  Gibeon  was  an  important  city  (Josh. 
 X.  i,  2).  It  is  also  to  be  noticed  that  this  city  was 
 apparently  not  governed  by  a  king  (/.  c),  but  by 
 elders  (ix.  11),  and  that  the  confederacy  seems  to 
 have  been  of  the  nature  of  a  primitive  federal  re- 
 public, such  as  is  not  unfrequently  found  in  Arabia 
 (/.  c.)  In  Joshua's  time  the  Hivite  dwelt  under 
 Hermon  and  in  Mount  Lebanon  (xi.  3.  ;  Judg.  iii. 
 3),  and  when  Joab  numbered  Israel,  '  all  the  cities 
 
 of  the  Hivite'  seem  to  have  been  situate  in  the 
 north  of  Palestine  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  7).  This  appears 
 to  have  been  the  chief  Hivite  territoiy.  If  we  may 
 hazard  a  conjecture,  the  Hermonites  may  perhaps 
 be  a  later  name  for  the  Hivites ;  we  recognize  them 
 in  the  Egyptian  RcMeNeN,  and  look  in  vain  for  any 
 other  trace  of  the  Hivites  in  the  conquests  of  the 
 Pharaohs  who  passed  through  this  tract. 
 
 There  are  few  Hivite  names  recorded  in  Scrip- 
 ture. Hamor,  '  the  he-ass,'  was  probably  an  hon- 
 ourable name.  Shechem,  'shoulder,'  'back,' may 
 also  be  indicative  of  strength.  Such  names  are 
 suitable  to  a  primitive  people,  but  they  are  not 
 sufficiently  numerous  or  characteristic  for  us  to  be 
 able  to  draw  any  sure  inference.  It  is,  indeed, 
 possible  that  they  may  be  connected,  as  the  similar 
 Hittite  names  seem  to  be,  with  low  nature-worship. 
 [Hittites.]  The  names  of  the  Hivite  towns  do 
 not  help  us.  Gibeon  merely  indicates  lofty  posi- 
 tion ;  Kirjath-jearim,  '  the  city  of  the  woods,'  is 
 interesting  from  the  use  of  the  word  Kirjah,  which 
 we  take  to  be  probably  a  Canaanitish  form  :  the 
 other  names  present  no  special  indications. 
 
 In  the  worship  of  Baal-berith,  or  '  Baal  of  the 
 covenant,'  at  Shechem,  in  the  time  of  the  Judges, 
 we  more  probably  see  a  trace  of  the  head-city  of  a 
 Hivite  confederacy  than  of  an  alHance  between  the 
 Israelites  and  the  Hivites. — R.  S.  P. 
 
 HOBAB.     rjETHRO] 
 
 HOBAH  (nn'tn  ;  XojSci ;  Hobo),  a  place  only 
 
 mentioned  in  Gen.  xiv.  15.  Abraham  having  de- 
 feated the  kings  of  the  east  at  Dan,  pursued  them 
 unto  Hobah,  '  which  is  on  the  left  hand  of  Damas- 
 cus.' The  word  P{<J3tJ*0  may  signify  'left  hand' 
 (Vulg.  ad  lirvam  ;  Sept.   kv  apLcrrepq.),  or  '  on  the 
 
 north,'  like  the  Arabic  A\^%J^,  She7ndl.  Pro- 
 bably the  latter  is  the  true  meaning  here.  Euse- 
 bius  and  Jerome  describe  Hobah  as  one  of  the 
 seats  of  the  Ebionites  ;  but  they  probably  confound 
 it  with  Cocaba  in  Bashan  (Onoinast.,  s.  v.  Choba). 
 About  three  miles  north-east  of  Damascus  is  a  vil- 
 lage called  yobar,  containing  a  Jewish  synagogue 
 dedicated  to  Elijah  ;  this  some  have  identified  with 
 Hobah  (Ritter,  Pal.  und  Syr.,  iv.  312  ;  Wilson, 
 Lands  of  the  Bible,  ii.  331).  At  Burzeh,  another 
 village  a  short  distance  north  of  Damascus,  is  a 
 very  ancient  sanctuary  of  Abraham,  which  might 
 perhaps  mark  the  site  of  Hobah,  as  is  stated  by  the 
 Arab  historian  Ibn  '  Asaker  (see  Porter's  Damascus, 
 i.  82  ;  Stanley's  Lectwres  on  the  'Jewish  Church,  p. 
 48i,.r^.)-J.  L.  P. 
 
 HOBNIM  (D''J3in)  occurs  only  in  one  passage 
 
 of  Scripture,  where  the  prophet  Ezekiel  (xxvii.  15), 
 referring  to  the  commerce  of  Tyre,  says,  '  The  men 
 of  Dedan  were  thy  merchants  ;  many  isles  were  the 
 merchandise  of  thine  hand  :  they  brought  thee  for 
 a  present  horns  of  ivory  and  ebony  (hobnim).''  The 
 Hebrew  word  is  translated  '  Ebony'  in  all  the 
 European  versions  ;  but,  as  Bochai't  states  {Hiero- 
 zoicon,  i.  20,  pars  ii.),  the  Chaldee  version,  fol- 
 lowed by  R.  Selomo  and  other  Jews,  as  well  as  the 
 Greek  and  Arabic  versions,  render  hobnim  by  pea- 
 fowl (pavones) :  '  Itaque  soli  veterum  Symmachus 
 et  Hieronymus  viderunt  (D^33n)  hobnim  esse  hebe- 
 
 num.''  Some  of  the  Hebrew  critics,  however,  as 
 Kimchius,  also  acknowledge  this :  '  Hobnim  lignun: 
 
HOBNIM 
 
 316 
 
 HOBNIM 
 
 interpretantur,  quod  Arabice  vocatur  abenus.^  Of 
 the  correctness  of  this  opinion  there  can  now  be  no 
 doubt.  In  the  first  place,  we  may  allude  to  Dedan 
 being  considered  one  of  the  ports  of  Arabia  on  the 
 Persian  Gulf,  or  at  least  to  the  south  of  the  Red  Sea  ; 
 and  secondly,  as  observed  by  Bochart,  '  hobniin  et 
 hebemcs  sunt  voces  non  absimiles,'  the  latter  word 
 being  variously  written  by  ancient  authors,  as  ejSeyT], 
 ^jSefos,  i^evov,  ebenus  and  hebenus.  The  last  form 
 is  used  by  Jerome  in  his  Latin,  and  'i^evos  by  Sym- 
 machus,   in  his  Greek  version.     The  Arabs  have 
 
 iuj^\i  which  they  apply  to  Ebony,  and  by  that 
 
 name  it  is  known  in  northern  India  at  the  present 
 day.  Forskal  mentions  ahnoos  as  one  of  the  kinds 
 of  wood  imported  in  his  time  from  India  into 
 Arabia.  Whether  the  Arabic  name  be  a  corrup- 
 tion of  the  Greek,  or  the  Greek  a  modification,  as 
 is  most  likely,  of  some  Eastern  name,  we  requn-e 
 some  other  evidence,  besides  the  occurrence  of  the 
 word  in  Arabic  works  on  Materia  Medica,  to  de- 
 termine ;  since  in  these,  Greek  words  are  some- 
 times employed  as  the  principal  terms  for  substances 
 with  which  they  are  not  well  acquainted.  Barditst 
 is,  however,  given  by  some  as  the  Arabic  name  ; 
 abnoos  as  the  Persian.  We  found  the  latter  ap- 
 plied to  ebony  in  North-west  India,  as  did  Forskal 
 in  the  Red  Sea. 
 
 Ebony  wood  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  ancients, 
 and  employed  by  them  for  a  variety  of  purposes. 
 It  is  very  appropriately  placed  in  juxta-position 
 with  ivory,  '  quamvis  unum  ex  animali,  alteram  ex 
 arbore  petatur  ;  quippe,  ut  notat  Fullerus  {Miscell. 
 vi.  14)  utrique  est  extremus  color  eodem  excellen- 
 tiK  gradu.  Ebori  videlicet  pulcherrimi  candoris, 
 hebeno  speciosissimi  nigroris.  Utrumque  politissi- 
 mum,  nitidissimum,  et  incomparabili  Icevore  con- 
 spicuum.  Unde  est,  quod  in  eosdem  usus  fere 
 adhibentur,  et  ex  utroque  arcus  fiunt,  pectines, 
 tabulae  lusorise,  cultrorummanubria,'  etc.  (Bochart, 
 /.  c.)     Ivory  and  Ebony  are  probably,  however. 
 
 265.  Diospyros  Ebenum. 
 
 also  mentioned  together  because  both  were  obtained 
 from  the  same  countries — Ethiopia  and  India  ; 
 and,  among  the  comparatively  few  articles  of  an- 
 
 cient commerce,  must,  from  this  cause,  always 
 have  been  associated  together,  while  their  contrast 
 of  colour  and  joint  employment  in  inlaid  work, 
 would  contribute  as  additional  reasons  for  their 
 being  adduced  as  articles  characteristic  of  a  dis- 
 tinct commerce. 
 
 But  it  is  not  in  Ezekiel  only  that  ebony  and  ivory 
 are  mentioned  together.  For  Diodorus,  as  quoted 
 by  Bochart,  tells  us  that  an  ancient  king  of  Egypt 
 imposed  on  the  Ethiopians  the  payment  of  a  tribute 
 of  ebony,  gold,  and  elephants'  teeth.  So  Hero- 
 dotus (iii.  97),  as  translated  by  Bochart,  says, 
 '^thiopes  Persis  pro  triennali  tributo  vehunt  duos 
 choenices  auri  apyri  [id  est,  igneift  iiondum  expcrti), 
 et  ducentas  ebein  phalangas,  et  magnos  elephant! 
 dentes  viginti.'  Pliny,  referring  to  this  passage, 
 remarks,  '  But  Herodotus  assigneth  it  rather  to 
 Ethiopia,  and  saith,  that  eveiy  three  years  the 
 Ethiopians  were  wont  to  pay,  by  way  of  tribute, 
 unto  the  kings  of  Persia,  100  billets  of  the  timber 
 of  that  tree  (that  is,  Ebene),  together  with  gold  and 
 yvorie  ;'  and,  again,  from  Syene  (which  confineth 
 and  boundeth  the  lands  of  our  empire  and  domi- 
 nion) as  farre  as  to  the  island  Meroe,  for  the  space 
 of  996  miles,  there  is  little  ebene  found  :  and  that 
 in  all  those  parts  betweene  there  be  few  other  trees 
 to  be  found,  but  date  trees,  which  peradventure 
 may  be  a  cause  that  Ebene  was  counted  a  rich 
 tribute  and  deserved  the  third  place,  after  gold 
 and  ivorie'  (Holland's  Pliny,  xii.  4) . 
 
 It  is  sometimes  stated  that  the  ancients  supposed 
 ebony  to  come  only  from  India.  This  arose  pro- 
 bably from  the  passage  of  Virgil  (Georg.  ii.  116, 
 17)  :- 
 
 ' sola  India  nigrum 
 
 Fert  ebenum  - — — .' 
 
 But  the  tenn  '  India'  had  often  a  very  vAdte  significa- 
 tion, and  included  even  Ethiopia.  Several  of  the 
 ancients,  however,  mention  both  Indian  and  Ethio- 
 pian ebony,  as  Dioscorides  and  Pliny  ;  while  some 
 mention  the  Indian,  and  others  the  Ethiopian  only, 
 as  Lucan  {Phars.  x.  304). 
 
 '  nigris  Meroe  fecunda  colonis, 
 
 Lceta  comis  ebeni.' 
 
 The  only  objection  to  the  above  conclusion  of 
 any  weight  is,  that  hobnim  is  in  the  plural  form. 
 To  this  Bochart  and  others  have  replied,  that  there 
 were  two  kinds  of  ebony,  as  mentioned  by  Theo- 
 phrastus,  Dioscorides,  etc.,  one  Ethiopian,  the 
 other  Indian.  Fuller  and  others  maintain  that  the 
 plural  form  is  employed  because  the  ebony  was  in 
 pieces  :  '  refert  ad  ebeni  palangas,  quae  ex  India  et 
 ^Ethiopia  magno  numero  afferebantur.  4>dXa77aj 
 vocant  Herodotus  et  Arrianus  in  Periplo.  Plinius 
 palangas,  2.Vi\.  phalangas,  variante  scriptura,  id  est, 
 fustes  teretes,  et  qui  navibus  supponuntur,  aut  quibus 
 idem  onus  plures  bajulant'  (Bochart,  /.  c.)  But  the 
 names  of  other  valued  foreign  woods,  as  Shittim 
 and  Almuggim,  are  also  used  in  the  plural  form. 
 Besides  ab?wos,  Arab  authors,  as  stated  by  Bochart 
 (/.  c),  mention  other  woods  as  similar  to  and  sub- 
 stituted for  ebony  :  one  of  these  is  called  sheez, 
 sheezee ;  z\so  sasetn  and  semscin,  in  the  plural  form 
 scniasim  ;  described  as  nigrum  lignum  ad  patinas 
 conficiendas.  Hence  in  the  Koran,  '  de  iis,  qui  in 
 gehenna  torquentur,'  it  is  said,  '  Exibunt  ex  igne 
 post  aliquam  in  eo  moram  ;  exibunt,  inquam,  tan- 
 quam  ligna  semasini ;'  that  is,  black,  from  being 
 burnt  in  the  fire.     That  such  a  wood  was  known 
 
HODGES 
 
 317 
 
 HODY 
 
 we  have  the  testimony  of  Dioscorides — "Ectot  5^  to, 
 crrjcrd/j.ii'a  rj  aKavdiva  ^v\a,  e/j-cpepTJ  'ovra,  avrl  ijS^vov 
 TTcoXovcn  ;  '  NoiinuUi  sesamina  aut  acanthina  ligna, 
 quod  consimilia  sunt,  pro  ebeno  vendunt.'  Some 
 critics,  and  even  Sprengel,  in  his  late  edition  of 
 Dioscorides,  read  crvKdfj.Li'a,  instead  of  crrjadM-iva, 
 for  no  reason  apparently  but  because  avKafMiva  de- 
 notes a  tree  with  which  European  scliolars  are  ac- 
 quainted, while  sesa/nina  is  only  known  to  those 
 who  consult  Oriental  writers,  or  who  are  acquainted 
 with  the  products  of  the  East.  Bochart  rightly 
 observes,  '  Cave  igitur  ne  quidquam  mutes.  Aliud 
 enim  hie  sesamina  quam  vulgo.  Nempe  ligna  illius 
 arboris  quae  Arabice  sashn  et  semsem  appellatur,  et 
 ita  plurali  setnasim.     Itaque  Dioscoridis  Arabs  in- 
 
 terpres  hie  recte  habet,  etc.  LcU^n-u^-  sesama  ;  and 
 
 so  also  '  Arrianus  in  Periplo  meminit  qxxkdyyujv 
 o-7iaa/j.ivuv  Kal  ij3evii>o}p,  palangarum  sesaminarum 
 et  ebeninarum,  qute  ex  Indias  urbe  Barygasis  in 
 Persidem  afferuntur'  (Bochart,  /.  c.)  The  above 
 word  is  by  Dr.  Vincent  translated  sesamitm  :  but 
 this  is  an  herbaceous  oil  plant. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 HODGES,  Walter,  D.D.,  a  divine  of  the 
 Hutchinsonian  school,  provost  of  Oriel  College, 
 Oxford.  He  is  the  author  of  a  book  entitled 
 F.Uhu  ;  or  an  Inquiry  into  the  principal  Scope  and 
 Design  of  the  Book  of  yob,  Lond.  1756,  i2mo,  3d 
 edition.  In  this  curious  work  the  author  endea- 
 vours to  shew  that  Elihu  is  intended  to  represent 
 the  Son  of  God.  The  discovery  is  one  on  which 
 he  lays  great  stress,  and  when  the  Biblical  student 
 is  made  aware  that  Hodges  has  interpreted  the 
 whole  book  in  accordance  with  such  a  supposition, 
 he  will  have  some  notion  of  the  kind  of 'criticism 
 the  work  contains.  Another  curious  work  by  the 
 same  author  is  the  following,  entitled  The  Christian 
 Plan,  2d  edit.  ;  with  additions,  with  other  theolo- 
 gical pieces,  8vo.  The  whole  meaning  and  extent 
 of  the  Christian  plan,  the  author  represents  as 
 embodied,  according  to  his  interpretation,  in  the 
 Hebrew  Elohim.  The  other  theological  pieces 
 consist  of  remarks  on  the  historical  account  of  the 
 life  of  David,  and  on  Shcol ;  on  the  latter,  his  re- 
 marks are  described  as  a  dissertation  concerning  the 
 place  of  departed  souls  between  the  time  of  their 
 dissolution  and  the  general  resurrection.  Also, 
 Oratio  habita  in  doino  convocationis. — W.J.  C. 
 
 HODGSON,  Bernard,  LL.D.,  principal  of 
 Hertford  College.  He  is  the  author  of  Solomon^ s 
 Song,  translated  from  the  Hebre^c,  Oxford  1785, 
 4to.  Hodgson's  chief  design  in  this  ti^anslation  has 
 been  to  give  as  literal  a  rendering  of  the  original  as 
 possible.  He  has  done  something  also  towards 
 illustrating  the  poetical  beauties  of  this  Song  of 
 songs.  He  considers  it  an  epithalamium.  In 
 chap.  viii.  2  he  interprets  Talmadin  to  mean  the 
 bride's  mother  ;  and  the  '  chariots  of  Amminadib ' 
 (chap.  vi.  12)  he  renders  'the  chariots  of  my  loyal 
 people.'  He  is  the  author  also  of  The  Proverbs  of 
 Solomon,  translated  from  the  Hebrew,  with  Azotes, 
 Oxford  17S8,  4to  ;  Ecclesiastes,  a  neiv  translation 
 from  the  original  Hebrew,  Oxford  1791,  4to.  Both 
 translations  are  directed  to  the  literal  rendering  of 
 the  original,  and  considering  the  many  and  great 
 difficulties  to  be  encountered  in  such  an  undertak- 
 ing, more  especially  when  helps  were  fewer  than 
 they  are  now.  Dr.  Hodgson's  success  is  desei-v- 
 ing  of  commendation.  He  rarely  deviates  from 
 the  common  version,  and  when  he  does,  assigns 
 
 reasons  which  in  most  instances  are  convincing  and 
 satisfactory.  The  notes,  of  which  there  are  not 
 many,  are  principally  devoted  to  verbal  criticism. — 
 W.  J.  C. 
 
 HODIAH  {r\n\r\).     The  wife  of  Ezra  (Sept.  ^ 
 
 'ISoKi'a  ;  Alex.  'lovSaia)  and  the  mother  of  Jered, 
 and  Heber,  and  Jekuthiel  (i  Chron.  iv.  iS,  19), 
 the  same  who    is    called  Jehudijah    (n*Tn>n,    thi 
 
 Jewess,  i.  e.,  his  Jewish  wife,  as  distinguished  from 
 Bithiah,  who  was  an  Egyptian)  in  the  preceding 
 verse. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HODIJAH    (nn'in,    and   hence    the   same    as 
 
 HODIAH  ;  LXX.  'fiSoDi'a,  'ftSoiya,  'fiSoiy/i  ;  I  Esd. 
 AvTala's  ;  Vulg.   Odia,  Oda'ia). 
 
 1.  One  of  the  Levites  who  explained  the  law  to 
 the  people  on  the  memorable  occasion  when  Ezra 
 solemnly  read  it  in  the  congregation  (Neh.  viii.  7  ; 
 I  Esd.  ix.  48).  It  is  probably  the  same  who  is  re- 
 ferred to  (Neh.  ix.  5  ;  x.  10,  Heb.  11). 
 
 2.  Another  Levite  mentioned  (Neh.  x.  13,  Heb. 
 14)  in  the  list  of  those  who  sealed  the  covenant. 
 
 3.  One  of  the  chiefs  of  the  people  mentioned  in 
 the  same  list  (Neh.  x.  18,  Heb.  19.) — S.  N. 
 
 HODY,  Humphrey,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Eng- 
 lish divine  was  born  Jan.  i,  1659,  at  Oldcombe, 
 Somersetshire.  Educated  at  Oxford  University, 
 he  took  his  degree  of  M.  A.  there  in  1682,  and 
 was  elected  fellow  of  Wadham  College  in  1684. 
 He  became  greatly  distinguished  in  the  Nonjuring 
 controversy,  in  which  he  published  several  works 
 on  the  adverse  side.  For  his  services  in  this  cause 
 he  was  rewarded  by  being  made  domestic  chaplain 
 to  Archbishop  Tillotson,  presented  to  a  living  in 
 London,  and  appointed  regius  professor  of  Greek 
 in  the  university  of  Oxford,  1698,  and  archdeacon 
 of  Oxford  in  1704.  He  evinced  his  liberal  and 
 generous  spirit  by  founding  ten  scholarships  in 
 Wadham  College  to  promote  the  study  of  the 
 Greek  and  Hebrew  languages.  He  died  Jan.  20, 
 1706.  His  principal  works  are  : — i.  Dissertatio 
 contra  Historiam  Aristece  de  LXX.  Interpretibics, 
 1684,  designed  to  prove  that  Aristeas'  history  is  a 
 Jewish  fable  concocted  to  gain  credit  for  the  Sep- 
 tuagint.  2.  De  JSibliorum  Textibus  Originalibus, 
 Versionilms  Grcrcis,  et  Latind  Vulgata,  Libri  Qua- 
 tuor,  Oxonii  1704.  The  former  of  these  works, 
 published  when  the  author  was  only  twenty-two 
 years  of  age,  was  rudely  assailed  by  Isaac  Vossius. 
 Hody,  instead  of  replying  to  his  antagonist,  ap- 
 plied himself  to  his  great  work,  De  Textibus, 
 which  occupied  hhn  nearly  twenty  years.  It  is 
 divided  into  four  books.  The  first  contains  his 
 dissertation  against  Aristeas,  with  improvements, 
 strengthening  his  former  positions.  The  second 
 treats  of  the  true  authors  of  the  Septuagint  ver- 
 sion— of  the  time  when,  and  the  reasons  why,  it 
 was  undertaken,  and  of  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
 performed.  The  third  book  contains  a  history  of 
 the  original  Hebrew  text,  of  the  Septuagint,  and  of 
 the  Vulgate  Latin  version,  shewing  the  authority 
 of  each  in  different  ages,  and  that  the  Hebrew 
 text  has  always  been  most  esteemed  and  valued. 
 The  fourth  book  gives  an  account  of  the  versions 
 of  Symmachus,  Aquila,  and  Theodotion,  and  of 
 Origin's  Hexapla  and  other  ancient  editions,  with 
 lists  of  the  books  of  the  Bible  made  at  different 
 times  bearing  on  the  history  of  the  canon.  It 
 still  maintams  its  high  rank  as  the  '  classical  work 
 
HOFFMAlSnV 
 
 318 
 
 HOLOFERNES 
 
 on  the  Septuagint'  (see  Home's  Introd.  ii.,  Bibliog. 
 App.,  and  Jebb's  Acconnt  of  the  Life  atid  Writings 
 of  Hody,  prefixed  to  the  author's  posthumous  work, 
 De  GrcBcis  Illiistribus,  etc.) — I.  J. 
 
 HOFFMANN,  Immanuel,  was  bom  at  Tubin- 
 gen, April  1 6,  1 710.  In  174 1  he  was  appointed 
 to  the  Archidiaconate  of  Tubingen,  and  in  175^ 
 professor  of  Greek  in  the  university  of  that  city. 
 He  died  in  1772.  Of  his  various  dissertations  pub- 
 lished during  his  lifetime,  the  following  are  the 
 most  important  :  Diss,  in  07-acuhim  Ran.  x.  5-8, 
 Tubing.  1752,  4to  ;  Diss,  de  stilo  Apostoli  Paidi, 
 1757  ;  Diss,  in  loca  parallela,  2  Pet.  ii.  4- 17,  Jud. 
 5-13,  1762,  4to  ;  Co)n::ientatio  in  I  Cor.  i.  19-21, 
 1766,  4to.  He  was  also  the  author  of  a  post- 
 humous work  entitled  Demonstmtio  Evangelica per 
 ipsiun  scriptiirarum  consensicm  in  oraculis  ex  Vetere 
 Testainento  in  Novo  allegatis  dedarata.  Partes  iii. , 
 Tubing.  1773-82,  4to.  Of  this  work  T.  G.  Hegel- 
 maier  was  editor,  who  prefixed  to  it  an  excursus 
 on  the  method  of  interpreting  the  quotations  made 
 from  the  O.  T.  in  the  New.  It  is  described  by 
 Orme  as  'full  of  learning,  and  in  general  veiy  judi- 
 cious.'— S.  N. 
 
 HOFMANN,  KarlGottlob,  D.D.,  was  born 
 at  Schneeberg,  1st  October  1703,  and  died  at 
 Wittenberg,  where  he  was  professor  of  theology 
 and  general  superintendent,  19th  Sept.  1774.  ^'^' 
 sides  editing  and  greatly  enlarging  the  Introdnctio 
 in  Lectionem  N.  T.  of  J.  G.  Pritius,  Lips.  1737, 
 he  wrote  Jtitrodiictio  Theol.-Crii.  in  Lectionem 
 epist.  Paidi  ad  Galat.  et  Coloss.,  4to,  Lips.  1750, 
 and  a  volume  of  Opuscula,  under  the  title  of  Varia 
 Sacra,  4to,  Wittenb.  et  Lips.  1751. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HOLIDAYS.     [Festivals  ;  Passover.] 
 
 HOLMES,  Robert,  D.D.,  a  learned  divineand 
 elegant  scholar,  was  a  native  of  Hampshire,  born 
 1749,  and  educated  at  Winchester  School,  from 
 which  he  was  chosen  to  New  College,  Oxford.  In 
 1790  he  succeeded  Thomas  Warton  as  professor  of 
 poetry  in  that  University.  He  became  rector  of 
 Staunton,  canon  of  Salisbury,  canon  of  Christ 
 Church,  and  in  1804  dean  of  Winchester.  He 
 died  in  1805  at  Oxford.  In  addition  to  the  great 
 work  on  which  his  reputation  depends,  he  pub- 
 lished in  1777  in  quarto  a  very  ingenious  discourse, 
 entitled  '  The  resurrection  of  the  body  deduced 
 from  the  resurrection  of  Christ;'  the  year  after, 
 '  Alfred,  an  Ode,'  etc.,  in  imitation  of  Gray's  style  ; 
 in  1783  the  Bampton  Lectures,  'On  the  prophe- 
 cies and  testimony  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  the 
 parallel  prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ ; '  in  1788  four 
 tracts  on  the  principles  of  religion  as  a  test  of 
 divine  authority  ;  on  the  principles  of  redemption  ; 
 on  the  angelical  message  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and 
 on  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  with  a  discourse  on 
 humility.  In  1793  ^^^  composed  an  ode  for  the 
 Encaenia  at  the  installation  of  the  Duke  of  Port- 
 land as  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Oxford. 
 In  the  same  year  he  published,  what  was  in  fact 
 the  precursor  of  his  great  critical  work,  a  Latin 
 letter  to  Shute  Barrington,  Bishop  of  Durham,  on 
 his  collation  of  the  Septuagint,  with  a  specimen  of 
 the  text  and  various  readings  which  he  was  on  the 
 point  of  publishing.  As  early  as  1788  he  had  puD- 
 lished  at  Oxford  proposals  for  a  collation  of  all  the 
 known  MSS.  of  the  Septuagint — a  labour  which 
 had  never  yet  been  undertaken  on  an  extensive 
 scale,  and  the  want  of  which  had  long  been  felt 
 
 among  Biblical  scholars.  Dr.  Holmes'  undertak- 
 ing was  promoted  by  the  delegates  of  the  Claren- 
 don Press,  to  the  liberality  of  wliich  body  sacied 
 literature  owes  much,  for  besides  the  present  in- 
 stance, Grabe's  edition  of  the  Septuagint  in  four 
 folio  volumes,  and  Dr.  Mill's  critical  Greek  Testa- 
 ment, emanated  from  the  press  of  this  University, 
 at  different  periods  in  the  last  century.  In  addition 
 to  the  learned  editor's  own  labours,  literary  men 
 were  engaged  in  different  parts  of  the  continent 
 for  the  business  of  collation,  and  Dr.  Holmes  an- 
 nually published  an  account  of  the  progress  which 
 was  made.  In  1798  he  published  at  Oxford  the 
 Book  of  Genesis,  which  was  successively  followed 
 by  the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  making  to- 
 gether one  folio  volume,  with  one  title  page  and 
 one  general  preface.  From  this  preface  it  appears 
 that  II  Greek  MSS.  in  uncial  letters,  and  more 
 than  100  MSS.  in  cursive  writing  (containing 
 either  the  whole  or  parts  of  the  Pentateuch)  were 
 collated  for  this  edition.  The  text  of  this  edition 
 being  a  copy  of  the  Roman  edition  of  1587  [that  of 
 Sixtus  v.],  the  deviations  from  it  which  occur  in 
 three  other  cardinal  editions  (the  Complutensian, 
 the  Aldine,  and  Grabe's)  are  constantly  noted. 
 The  quotations  found  in  the  works  of  the  Greek 
 Fathers  are  likewise  alleged,  and  finally  the  various 
 readings  of  the  ancient  versions  which  were  made 
 from  the  Septuagint.  The  plan  of  this  edition  thus 
 bore  a  close  resemblance  to  what  had  been  already 
 applied  by  Mill,  Wetstein,  and  Griesbach  to  the 
 criticism  of  the  Greek  Testament,  and  the  execu- 
 tion of  it  has  been  highly  commended  as  displaying 
 uncommon  industiy  and  apparently  great  accuracy. 
 The  learned  editor  died  in  the  midst  of  his  honour- 
 able labour  in  the  year  1806;  but  shortly  before 
 his  death  he  published  the  book  of  Daniel,  both 
 according  to  the  LXX.  version  and  that  of  Theo- 
 dotion,  the  latter  07ily  having  been  printed  in  for- 
 mer editions  because  the  Septuagint  translation  of 
 this  book  is  not  contained  in  the  common  MSS., 
 and  was  unknown  till  it  was  printed  in  1772  from 
 a  MS.  belonging  to  Cardinal  Chigi.  After  Dr. 
 Holmes'  death  the  work  was  continued  by  the 
 Rev.  J.  Parsons,  B.D.,  and  eventually  complete<l, 
 on  the  original  editor's  plan,  in  five  splendid  folio 
 volumes,  in  the  year  1827.  For  favourable  notices 
 of  this  elaborate  work  the  reader  is  referred  to 
 Bishop  Marsh's  Lectures  on  the  Criticism  of  the 
 Bible  [Lecture  x.],  where  Dr.  Holmes'  portion  is 
 described,  and  Home's  Lntroduclion  [ed.  9],  vol.  v. 
 pp.  57,  58,  where  sundry  Reviews  of  the  earlier 
 volumes  as  they  appeared  are  also  mentioned.  The 
 high  opinion,  however,  which  the  partiality  of  con- 
 temporary critics  induced  them  to  form  of  this 
 handsome  and  expensive  edition  of  the  Septuagint 
 has  not  been  always  endorsed  since — Tischendorf, 
 one  of  the  most  recent  editors  of  the  Alexandrian 
 Version,  complains  bitterly  of  the  carelessness  and 
 inaccuracy  of  the  work—'  tarn  negligenter  tamque 
 male  factse  sunt  [collationes]  ut  etiam  atque  etiam 
 dolendum  sit  tantos  numos  raro  liberahtate  per 
 Angliam  suppeditatos  criticse  sacrse  parum  profu- 
 isse.'  (P'or  his  entire  review  and  strictures  the 
 reader  is  referred  to  his  edition  of  the  Sept.  [1856], 
 Prolegomena,  pp .  Iii. -Ivi. ) — P.  H. 
 
 HOLOFERNES  f^OXocpipvns).  This  name  oc- 
 curs onlv  in  the  Apocrypha  (Judith  ii.  4,  et  al.) 
 Nebuchadnezzar  '  king  of  Nineveh,'  having  re- 
 solved to  '  avenge  himself  on  all  the  earth,'  ap. 
 
HOLON 
 
 319 
 
 HONEY 
 
 pointed  Holofernes  general  of  the  expedition  in- 
 tended for  tliis  purpose,  consisting  of  120,000  foot 
 and  12,000  liorse.  Holofernes  marched  westward 
 and  southward,  carrj'ing  devastation  everywhere  he 
 came,  destroying  harvests,  and  flocks,  and  cities, 
 as  well  as  men,  old  and  young  ;  making  even  the 
 'cities  of  the  sea-coast,'  which  had  submitted  to 
 him,  feel  the  weight  of  his  arm.  Having  reached 
 Esdraelon,  he  encamped  '  between  Geba  and  Scy- 
 thopolis '  a  whole  month  to  collect  his  forces. 
 The  Jews,  however,  resolved  to  resist  him,  and 
 fortified  all  the  mountain  passes.  Dissuaded  by 
 Achior,  '  captain  of  the  sons  of  Ammon,'  from  at- 
 tacking the  Jews,  he  resented  the  advice,  and  de- 
 livered Achior  into  the  hands  of  the  Jews  in 
 Bethulia,  from  whom,  however,  he  met  with  a 
 kind  reception.  Holofernes  proceeded  against 
 Bethulia  (which  see),  where  he  was  brought  to 
 bay  ;  and,  instead  of  attacking  it,  seized  upon  two 
 wells,  on  which  the  city  depended  for  water,  and 
 sat  down  before  it  to  take  it  by  siege.  While  here 
 he  fell  a  victim  to  the  treachery  of  Judith,  a  beau- 
 tiful Jewish  widow,  who  artfully  managed  to  be 
 brought  into  his  presence,  and  who,  by  playing  the 
 hypocrite,  secured  his  favour  and  confidence. 
 Having  invited  her  to  a  banquet,  he  drank  freely, 
 and  having  fallen  asleep,  fell  beneath  the  arm  of 
 his  fair  guest,  who  cut  off  his  head  with  his  own 
 sword,  and  escaped  with  her  bloody  trophy  to  her 
 own  people  in  Bethulia.  The  Jews  immediately 
 fell  on  their  enemies,  who,  finding  their  general 
 dead  in  his  tent,  fled  in  confusion.  Such  is  the 
 story.  It  is  scarcely  necessaiy  to  add  that  it  is 
 wholly unhistorical  (see Judith).  -'The name  (Ho- 
 lofernes) occurs  twice  in  Cappadocian  history,  as 
 borne  by  Ariarthes  I.  {cir.  B.C.  350),  and  afterwards 
 by  a  pretender  to  the  Cappadocian  throne,  who 
 was  at  first  supported,  and  afterwards  imprisoned, 
 by  Demetrius  Soter  («>.  B.C.  130).  The  termina- 
 tion {^\'s>2,phernes,  etc.)  points  to  a  Persian  oiigin, 
 but  the  meaning  of  the  word  is  uncertain'  (Smith's 
 Diet,  of  the  Bible).— \.  J. 
 
 HOLON  (jSh  ;  Sept.  XaXoi^,  XiXoutif ;  Alex. 
 fiXo)!'),  a  town,  the  name  of  which  occurs  in  the 
 enumeration  of  the  places  set  apart  as  '  the  inheri- 
 tance of  the  tribe  of  the  children  of  Judah  according 
 to  their  families'  (Josh.  xv.  20),  and  one  of  a  num- 
 ber of  towns  in  the  mountains  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv. 
 51).     In  I  Chron.  vi.  58  the  name  is  written  Hilen. 
 
 Also  (Jiph  ;  Sept.  XeXtoi')  one  of  a  number  of  cities 
 in  'the  plain  country'  or  level  districts  of  Moab, 
 east  of  the  Jordan.  Jeremiah  mentions  it  as  one  of 
 the  cities  on  which  judgment  had  come  (Jer.  xlviii. 
 21).    Both  localities  are  now  unknown. — W.J.  C. 
 
 HOLY  OF  HOLIES.  [Adytum;  Taber- 
 nacle; Temple.] 
 
 HOLY  SPIRIT  and  HOLY  GHOST.  [Ad- 
 vocate; Paracletus;  Spirit.] 
 
 HOMAM  (DOin  ;  Sept  klp.6.v),  an  Edomite 
 chief  (i  Chron.  i.  39),  whose  name  appears  in  the 
 form  DQTI,  Hemam,  Gen.  xxxvi.  22.  There  is  a 
 town  bearing  the  name  of  El-Homaimeh  south 
 from  Petra,  and  on  the  hill  Sherah,  which  the 
 Arabic  geographers  describe  as  the  native  place  of 
 the  Abassides  (Robinson,  Bib.  Res.,  ii.  572). 
 With  this  Knobel  compares  Homam  [Ge/i.,  in 
 loc.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HOMBERGK  ZU  VACH,  Johann  Fried- 
 
 rich,  a  learned  jurist,  bom  at  Marburg,  April  15, 
 1673.  After  prosecuting  his  studies  for  several 
 years  in  the  University  of  Utrecht,  he  visited  Eng- 
 land, and  stayed  for  some  time  in  London,  Oxford, 
 and  Cambridge.  During  this  visit  he  became  ac- 
 quainted with  Richard  Bentley.  He  died  April 
 20,  1748.  In  addition  to  a  large  number  of  works 
 on  professional  topics,  he  published  in  1 708,  as  the 
 result  of  his  private  study  of  the  N.  T.,  a  work  en- 
 titled Parerga  Sacra  seic  interpi-eiatio  succiitcta  et 
 ncroa  qiwriindatn  textmuit  Novi  Testamenti,  Ultraj. 
 1708,  8vo.  Of  this  an  enlarged  and  improved 
 edition  was  subsequently  issued  under  the  title 
 Parerga  Sacra  sen  observaiio7tes  qticcdavi  ad  Noznim 
 Testamentum,  Ultraj.  17 12,  410.  The  criticisms 
 contained  in  this  work  were  attacked  by  Eisner, 
 and  defended  by  the  author's  son  ^Emilius  Ludwig. 
 Hombergk  takes  a  medium  position  between  the 
 Llebraists  and  the  Purists. — S.  N. 
 
 HOMER.     [Weights  and  Measures.] 
 
 HONEY.  In  the  Scripture  there  are  three 
 words  denoting  different  sweet  substances,  all  o< 
 which  are  rendered  by  'honey'  in  the  A.V.  These 
 it  is  necessary  to  distinguish. 
 
 1.  "ly^  yaar,  which  only  occurs  in   I   Sam.  xiv. 
 
 25,  27,  29;  Cant.  V.  I ;  and  denotes  the  honey  of 
 bees  and  that  only. 
 
 2.  nsi  iiophcth,  honey  that  drops,  usually  associ- 
 ated with  the  comb,  and  therefore  bee-honey.  This 
 occurs  in  Ps.  xix.  10 ;  Prov.  v.  3;  xxiv.  13  ;  xxvii. 
 7;  Cant.  iv.  11. 
 
 3-  E'^'n  debesh.     This  is  the  most  frequent  word. 
 
 It  sometimes  denotes  bee-honey,  as  in  Judg  xiv. 
 8,  but  more  commonly  a  vegetable  honey  distilled 
 from  trees,  and  called  manna  by  chemists  ;  also 
 the  syrup  of  dates,  and  even  dates  themselves.  It 
 appears  also  sometimes  to  stand  as  a  general  term 
 for  all  kinds  of  honey. 
 
 We  shall  here  confine  our  remarks  to  honey  in 
 general,  and  that  of  bees  in  particular,  referring  for 
 the  vegetable  honey  to  Manna,  and  for  the  date- 
 honey  to  Shechar. 
 
 It  is  very  evident  that  the  land  of  Canaan 
 abounded  in  honey.  It  is  indeed  described  as  'a 
 land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey'  (Exod.  iii.  8, 
 etc. ) ;  which  we  apprehend  to  refer  to  all  the  sweet 
 substances  which  the  different  Hebrew  words  indi- 
 cate, as  the  phrase  seems  too  large  to  be  confined 
 to  the  honey  of  bees  alone.  Yet  the  great  number 
 of  bees  in  Palestine  has  been  noticed  by  many  tra- 
 vellers; and  they  were  doubtless  still  more  com- 
 mon in  ancient  times  when  the  soil  was  under  more 
 general  cultivation.  A  recent  traveller,  in  a  sketch 
 of  the  natural  history  of  Palestine,  names  bees, 
 beetles,  and  mosquitoes,  as  the  insects  which  are 
 most  common  in  the  country  (Schubert,  Reise  ins 
 Morgenlande,  ii.  120). 
 
 The  natural  history  of  the  bee,  with  illustrations 
 of  the  passages  of  Scripture  in  which  its  name 
 occurs,  has  been  given  under  a  distinct  head  [De- 
 borah] ;  and  the  use  of  honey  in  food,  under 
 another  [Food].  The  principal  use  of  the  present 
 notice  is  therefore  that  of  an  index  to  the  other 
 articles  in  which  the  different  parts  of  this  large 
 subject  are  separately  investigated. 
 
 The  'wild  honey'  {fj.i\i.  &ypLOp)  which,  with 
 locusts,  formed  the  diet  of  John  the  Baptist,  was 
 probably  the  vegetable  honey,  which  we  refer  to 
 Manna. 
 
HONEY 
 
 S20 
 
 HOOK,  HOOKS 
 
 No  travellers  in  the  East  have  given  us  much  in- 
 formation respecting  the  treatment  of  bees,  or  any 
 peculiar  modes  of  preparing  the  honey. 
 
 Honey  was  not  permitted  to  be  offered  on  the 
 altar  (Lev.  ii.  ii).  As  it  is  coupled  with  leaven  in 
 this  prohibition,  it  would  seem  to  amount  to  an  in- 
 terdiction of  things  sour  and  sweet.  Aben  Ezra 
 and  others  allege  that  it  was  because  honey  partook 
 of  the  fermenting  nature  of  leaven,  and  when  burnt 
 yielded  an  unpleasant  smell — qualities  incompatible 
 with  offerings  made  by  fire  of  a  sweet  savour  imto 
 the  Lord.  But  Maimonides  and  others  think  it 
 was  for  the  purpose  of  making  the  difference  be- 
 tween the  religious  customs  of  the  Jews  and  the 
 heathen,  in  whose  offerings  honey  was  much  em- 
 ployed. The  first-fruits  of  honey  were,  however, 
 to  be  presented,  as  these  were  destined  for  the  sup- 
 port of  the  priests,  and  not  to  be  offered  upon  the 
 altar. 
 
 Under  the  different  heads  to  which  we  have  re- 
 ferred, the  passages  of  Scripture  relating  to  honey 
 are  explained.  The  remarkable  incident  related  in 
 I  Sam.  xiv.  24-32,  requires,  however,  to  be  here 
 noticed.  Jonathan  and  his  party  coming  to  the 
 wood,  find  honey  dropping  from  the  trees  to  the 
 ground,  and  the  prince  extends  his  rod  to  the 
 honeycomb  to  taste  the  honey.  On  this  the  pre- 
 sent writer  is  unable  to  add  anything  to  what  he 
 has  stated  elsewhere  [Pictorial  Bible,  in  loc),  which 
 is  to  the  following  effect : — First,  we  are  told  that 
 the  honey  was  on  the  ground,  then  that  it  dropped, 
 and  lastly,  that  Jonathan  put  his  rod  into  the 
 honeycomb.  From  all  this  it  is  clear  that  the 
 honey  was  bee-honey,  and  that  honey-combs  were 
 above  in  the  trees,  from  which  honey  dropped 
 upon  the  ground  ;  but  it  is  not  clear  whether  Jona- 
 than put  his  rod  into  a  honey-comb  that  was  in  the 
 trees  or  shrubs,  or  into  one  that  had  fallen  to  the 
 ground,  or  that  had  been  formed  there. 
 
 Where  wild  bees  are  abundant  they  form  their 
 combs  in  any  convenient  place  that  offers,  particu- 
 larly in  cavities  or  even  on  the  branches  of  trees  ; 
 nor  are  they  so  nice  as  is  commonly  supposed  in 
 the  choice  of  situations.  In  Lidia  particularly,  and 
 in  the  Indian  islands,  the  forests  often  swarm  with 
 bees.  'The  forests,'  says  Mr.  Roberts,  'literally 
 flow  with  honey  ;  large  combs  may  be  seen  hanging 
 on  the  trees,  as  you  pass  along,  full  of  honey '  ( Oriental 
 Illustrations).  We  have  had  good  reason  to  con- 
 clude, from  many  allusions  in  Scripture,  that  this 
 was  also,  to  a  considerable  extent,  the  case  for- 
 merly in  Palestine.  Rabbi  Ben  Gershom  and  others 
 indeed  fancy  that  there  were  bee-hives  placed  '  all 
 of  a  row'  by  the  wayside.  If  we  must  needs  have 
 bee-hives,  why  not  suppose  that  they  were  placed 
 in  the  trees,  or  suspended  from  the  bouglis  ?  This 
 IS  a  practice  in  different  parts  where  bees  abound, 
 and  the  people  pay  much  attention  to  realise  the 
 advantages  which  their  wax  and  honey  offer.  The 
 woods  on  the  western  coast  of  Africa,  between 
 Cape  Blanco  and  Sierra  Leone,  and  particularly 
 near  the  Gambia,  are  full  of  bees,  to  which  the 
 negroes  formerly,  if  they  do  not  now,  paid  con- 
 siderable attention  for  the  sake  of  the  wax.  They 
 had  bee-hives,  like  baskets,  made  of  reeds  and 
 sedge,  and  hung  on  the  out-boughs  of  the  trees, 
 which  the  bees  easily  appropriated  for  the  purpose  of 
 forming  their  combs  in  them.  In  some  parts  these 
 hives  were  so  thickly  placed  that  at  a  distance  they 
 looked  like  fruit.  There  was  also  much  wild  honey 
 in  the  cavities  of  the  trees  (Jobson's  Golden  Track, 
 
 p.  30,  in  Astley's  Collection).  Moore  confirms  this 
 account,  and  adds,  that  when  he  was  there,  the 
 Mandingoes  suspended  in  this  way  straw  bee-hives 
 not  unlike  our  own,  boarded  at  the  bottom,  and 
 with  a  hole  for  the  bees  to  go  in  and  out  ( Travels 
 into  the  inland  parts  of  Afrita,  Drake's  Collection). 
 As  to  the  other  supposition,  that  the  honeycomb 
 had  been  formed  on  the  ground,  we  think  the 
 context  rather  bears  against  it  ;  but  the  circum- 
 stance is  not  in  itself  unlikely,  or  incompatible  with 
 the  habits  of  wild  bees.  For  want  of  a  better  re- 
 source they  sometimes  form  their  honey  in  any 
 tolerably  convenient  spot  they  can  find  in  the 
 ground,  such  as  small  hollows,  or  even  holes  formed 
 by  animals.  Mr.  Burchel,  in  his  Travels  in  South 
 Africa,  mentions  an  instance  in  which  his  party 
 (Hottentots)  obtained  about  three  pounds  of  good 
 honey  from  a  hole  which  had  formerly  belonged  to 
 the  weazel  kind.  The  natives  treated  this  as  a 
 usual  circumstance,  and  indeed  their  experience  in 
 such  affairs  was  demonstrated  by  the  facility  with 
 which  they  managed  to  obtain  the  honey  without 
 being  injured  by  the  bees. — ^J.  K. 
 
 HOOK,  HOOKS.  The  following  Hebrew 
 words    are   so    rendered  in  the  A.  V.:    Pin  11311, 
 
 11^,  J^;d,   niDTJD,   W7\pD,  na^',   T-D,  \t^.      The 
 
 idea  of  a  thorn  enters  into  the  etymology  of  several 
 of  them,  probably  because  a  thorn,  hooked  or 
 straiglit,  was  the  earliest  instrument  of  this  kind. 
 Tacitus  thus  describes  the  dress  of  the  ancient  Ger- 
 mans, Sagum,  fibula,  aut  si  desit,  spiita  consertum  ; 
 a  '  loose  mantle,  fastened  with  a  clasp,  or,  when 
 that  cannot  be  had,  with  a  thorn'  [Germ.  17). 
 
 I.  nn  ;  2  Kings  xix.  28  ;  Sept.  to,  dyKtcxTpa  ; 
 Vulg.  circulum.  In  the  parallel  passage  (Is.  xxxviL 
 29)  the  Se])t.  reads,  (pip-hv,  muzzle,  halter,  or  noose, 
 etc.  Jehovah  here  intimates  his  absolute  control  over 
 Sennacherib,  by  an  allusion  to  the  practice  of  leading 
 buffaloes,  camels,  dromedaries,  etc.,  by  means  of  a 
 cord,  or  of  a  cord  attached  to  a  ring,  passed  through 
 the  nostrils  (Shaw's  Travels,  pp.  167-68,  2d  ed.)  ; 
 Job  xli.  I  [xl.  25],  'Canst  thou  draw  out  Leviathan 
 with  a  hook?  (H^ri  occurs  Is.  xix.  8,  and  Hab.  i. 
 15;  (LyKicTTpov,  hamus)  or  his  tongue  with  a  cord 
 which  thou  lettest  down  ?'  Sept.  dyKlcrTpij] ;  Vulg. 
 hamo.  Assuming  that  by  Leviathan  the  crocodile  is 
 intended,  Herodotus  (ii.  70)  is  quoted  to  show  that 
 in  his  time  the  Egyptians  captured  the  crocodile 
 with  a  hook  {ayKiarpoi'),  with  which  (e^eXKuadr)  is 
 yrjv)  he  was  drawn  ashore  ;  and  accounts  are  cer- 
 tainly giveu  by  modern  travellers  of  the  continuance 
 of  this  practice  (Maillet,  Descrip.  d'' Egypte,  torn.  ii. 
 p.  127,  ed.  Hag.  1740).  But  does  not  the  eiitire 
 description  go  upon  the  supposition  of  the  itnpossi- 
 bility  of  so  treating  Leviathan  ?  Supposing  the 
 allusions  to  be  correctly  interpreted,  is  it  not  as 
 much  as  to  say,  '  Can^t  thou  treat  him  as  thou 
 canst  treat  the  crocodile  and  other  fierce  cvta.i\xvesV 
 Dr.  Lee  has,  indeed,  given  reasons  which  render 
 it  dojibtfiil,  at  least,  whether  the  leviathan  does 
 mean  the  crocodile  in  this  passage  ;  or  whether  it 
 does  not  mean  some  sjDecies  of  whale,  as  was  for- 
 merly supposed  ;  the  Delphinus  orca  communis,  or 
 common  grampus,  found  in  the  Mediterranean,  the 
 Red  Sea,  and  also  in  tlie  Nile.  (See  his  examina- 
 tion of  Bochart's  reasonings,  etc.,  in  Translation 
 and  Notes  on  Job,  pp.  197  and  529-539,  Lond. 
 1S37)  [Leviathan].  Ezek.  xxi.x.  4  (D''''nn  ; 
 Sept.   ■Ka.ylha.'i  ;    Vulg.  fra:mtm),  where  the  pro 
 
HOOK,  HOOKS 
 
 o2l 
 
 HOK 
 
 pliet  foretells  the  destruction  of  Pharaoh  king  of 
 Egypt,  by  allusions  to  the  destruction,  possibly,  of 
 a  crocodile,  the  symbol  of  Egypt.  Thus  Pliny 
 (//is^.  Nat.  viii.  25)  states,  that  the  Tentyritre  (in- 
 habitants of  Egypt)  followed  the  crocodile,  swim- 
 ming after  it  in  the  river,  sprung  upon  its  back, 
 thrust  a  bar  into  its  mouth,  which,  being  held  by 
 its  two  extremities,  serves — ut  frcrnis  in  terram 
 agant — as  a  bit,  enables  them  to  force  it  on  shore 
 (comp.  Ezek.  xxix.  3,  4).  Strabo  relates  that  the 
 Tentyrit£E  displayed  their  feats  before  the  Romans 
 (xvii.  p.  560,  ed.  Casaub.)  But  see  Dr.  Lee  on 
 this  passage,  tit  supra. 
 
 2.  D"'1'l  (Exod.  xxvi.  32,  37  ;  xxxviii.  19), 
 *  hooks,'  at  K€(pa\i5€S,  capita,  capita  columnarum  ; 
 where  the  Sept.  and  Jerome  seem  to  have  under- 
 stood the  capitals  of  the  pillars  ;  and  it  has  been 
 urged  that  this  is  more  likely  to  be  the  meaning 
 than  hooks,  especially  as  1775  shekels  of  silver 
 were  used  in  making  these  D''11  for  the  pillars,  over- 
 laying the  chapiters,  and  filleting  them  (ch. 
 xxxviii.  28)  ;  and  that  the  hooks  are  really  the 
 D^DIp,  taches  (Exod.  xxvi.  6,  11,  33,  37  ; 
 xxxix.  33).  Yet  the  Sept.  also  renders  D"'n,  KpUoL, 
 'rings.'  or  'clasps'  (E'cod.  xxvii.  10,  11,  and  ayKv- 
 Xat,  Exod.  xxxviii.  17,  19);  and  from  a  compari- 
 son of  these  two  latter  passages,  it  would  seem 
 that  these  hooks,  or  rather  tenters,  rose  out  of  the 
 chapiters  or  heads  of  the  pillars. 
 
 3.  i?fD  (i  Sam.  ii.  13,  14),  'flesh-hook,'  Kpea- 
 
 ypa,  fiiscinula,  and  the  niJ?TD,  '  the  flesh-hooks' 
 (Exod.  xxvii.  3,  and  elsewhere).  This  was  evi- 
 dently, in  the  first  passage,  a  trident,  a  kind  of 
 fork,  '  of  three  teeth,'  for  turning  the  sacrifices  on 
 the  fire,  and  for  collecting  fragments,  etc. 
 
 4.  nilJDTO  (Is.  ii.  4,  and  elsewhere),  '  beat  their 
 spears  into  pruning-hooks'  {^peivava,  fakes).  The 
 Roman  poets  have  the  same  metaphor  (Martial, 
 xiv.  34,  '  Falx  ex  ense').  In  Mic.  iv.  3,  in  ligoncs, 
 weeding-hooks,  or  shovels,  spades,  etc.  Joel  re- 
 verses the  metaphor  'pruning-hooks'  into  spears 
 (iii.  10,  ligones) ;  and  so  Ovid  [Fasti,  L  697,  inpila 
 ligottes). 
 
 5.  WrS^  (Ezek.  xl.  43),  'hooks,'  which  Ge- 
 senius  explains  stalls  in  the  courts  of  the  Temple, 
 where  the  sacrificial  victims  were  fastened :  our 
 translators  give  in  the  margin  '  endirons,  or  the 
 two  hearth-stones.'  The  Sept.  seems  equally  at  a 
 loss,  Kal  iraXaiaTT]!'  ^^ovffi  yeiffos  ;  as  also  Jerome, 
 who  renders  it  laiia.  Schleusner  pronounces  yec- 
 aos  to  be  a  barbarous  word  formed  from  pPI,  and 
 understands  epistylium,  a  little  pillar  set  on  another, 
 and  capitellum,  columned.     The  Chaldee  renders 
 
 |vp3iy,  short  posts  in  the  house  of  the  slaughterers 
 on  which  to  suspend  the  sacrifices.  Dr.  Lightfoot, 
 in  his  chapter  '  on  the  altar,  the  rings,  and  the 
 laver,'  observes,  '  On  the  north  side  of  the  altar 
 were  six  orders  of  rings,  each  of  which  contamed 
 six,  at  which  they  killed  the  sacrifices.  Near  by 
 were  low  pillars  set  up,  upon  which  were  laid 
 overthwart  beams  of  cedar ;  on  these  were  fastened 
 rows  of  hooks,  on  which  the  sacrifices  were  hung  ; 
 and  they  were  flayed  on  marble  tables,  which  were 
 between  these  pillars'  (see  vers.  41,  42;  Works, 
 vol.  II,  ch.  xxxiv. ,  Lond.  1684-5-6). 
 
 6.  X\n  (Amos  iv.  2),  '  take  you  away  with 
 hooks,'  ottXols,  contis,  '  poles'  or  '  spears.'  In  the 
 same  verse — 
 
 7.  njn   niT'D,  'fish-hooks,' e/sX^/3rjrai  i/TFOKato- 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 fiivovs  i/j.^aXouai.t',  ip-irvpoi  \oip.oi,  et  rchquias  vei- 
 tras  in  ollis  ferventibus,   where  both    Sept.    and 
 Vulg.  seem  to  have  taken  "T'D  in  the  sense  of  a  pot 
 or  caldron  instead  of  a  fish-hook.     [Caldron.) 
 8.  JOJS.     f  Agmon.]— J.  F.  D, 
 
 HOPHNI  AND  PHINEAS,  the  sons  of  Eh, 
 whose  misconduct  in  the  priesthood  (as  described 
 in  I  Sam.  ii.  12-17)  brought  down  that  doom  of 
 ruin  and  degradation  upon  the  house  of  Eli  which 
 formed  the  first  divine  communication  through  the 
 young  Samuel  (l  Sam.  iii.)  Hophni  and  Phineas 
 were  slain  in  the  battle  in  which  the  ark  of  God 
 was  taken  by  the  Philistines,  B.C.  1141  (i  Sam. 
 iv.  II).     [Eli.] -J.  K. 
 
 HOPHRA  (yiSH;  Sept.  Oha^pri,  or  Pharaoh- 
 
 hophra),  king  of  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Zedekiah 
 king  of  Judah,  and  of  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of 
 Babylon.  He  formed  alliance  with  the  former 
 against  the  latter,  and  his  advance  with  an  Egyj>- 
 tian  army  constrained  the  Chaldasans  to  raise  the 
 siege  of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xxxvii.  5);  but  they  soon 
 returned  and  took  and  destroyed  the  city.  This 
 momentary  aid,  and  the  danger  of  placing  reliance 
 on  the  protection  of  Hophra,  led  Ezekiel  to  com- 
 pare tlie  Egyptians  to  a  broken  leed,  which  was  to 
 pierce  the  hand  of  him  that  leaned  upon  it  (Ezek. 
 xxix.  6,  7).  This  alliance  was  disapproved  by 
 God  ;  and  Jeremiah  was  authorised  to  deliver  the 
 prophecy  contained  in  his  44th  chapter,  which  con- 
 cludes with  a  prediction  of  Hophra's  death  and 
 the  subjugation  of  his  country  by  the  Chaldseans 
 [comp.  Egypt]. 
 
 This  Pharaoh-hophra  is  identified  with  the  Apries 
 or  Vaphres  of  ancient  authors,  and  he  may  be  the 
 Psamatik  III.  of  the  monuments.  Under  this  iden- 
 tification we  may  conclude  that  his  wars  with  the 
 Syrians  and  Cyrengeans  prevented  him  from  afford- 
 ing any  great  assistance  to  Zedekiah.  Apries  is 
 described  by  Herodotus  (ii.  169)  as  a  monarch 
 who,  in  the  zenith  of  his  glory,  felt  persuaded  that 
 it  was  not  in  the  power  even  of  a  deity  to  dispossess 
 him  of  his  kingdom,  or  to  shake  the  stability  of  his 
 sway  ;  and  this  account  of  his  arrogance  fully  ac- 
 cords with  that  contained  in  the  Bible.  Ezekiel 
 (xxix.  3)  speaks  of  this  king  as  '  the  great  dragon 
 that  lieth  in  the  midst  of  his  rivers,  which  hath 
 said.  My  river  is  mine  oviTi,  and  I  have  made  it  for 
 myself.'  His  overthrow  and  subsequent  captivity 
 and  death  are  foretold  with  remarkable  precision 
 by  Jeremiah  (xliv.  30)  ;  '  I  will  give  Pharaoh- 
 hophra,  king  of  Egypt,  into  the  hands  of  his  ene- 
 mies, and  into  the  hands  of  them  that  seek  his 
 life.'  This  was  brought  about  by  a  revolt  of  the 
 troops,  who  placed  Amasis  at  their  head,  and  after 
 various  conflicts  took  Apries  prisoner.  He  was 
 for  a  time  kept  in  easy  captivity  by  Amasis,  who 
 wished  to  spare  his  life ;  but  he  was  at  length  con- 
 strained to  give  him  up  to  the  vengeance  of  his 
 enemies,  by  whom  he  was  strangled  (Herod.  iL 
 169  ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egyptians,  i.  168-182). 
 
 J.  K. 
 
 HOR  ("I'ln,  nh;  Sept.  "Up),  a  mountain  of 
 Arabia  Petrsea,  on  the  confines  of  Idumsea,  and 
 forming  part  of  the  mountain  of  Seir  or  Edom.  It 
 is  only  mentioned  in  Scripture  in  connection  with 
 the  circumstances  recorded  in  Num.  xx.  22-29. 
 The  Israelites  were  encamped  before  it,  when 
 Aaron  was  summoned  to  its  top  to  die  there,  in 
 
 Y 
 
HOR 
 
 322 
 
 HOR 
 
 the  presence  of  his  brother  and  son,  who  alone 
 witnessed  his  final  departure.     [Aaron.] 
 
 The  mountain  now  identified  with  Mount  Hor 
 is  the  most  conspicuous  in  the  whole  range  of 
 Mount  Seir,  and  at  this  day  bears  the  name  of 
 Mount  Aaron  (Jebel  Haroun).  It  is  in  N.  lat. 
 ^o"  i8'  E.  long.  35°  33'  about  mid-way  between 
 tne  Dead  Sea  and  the  yEIanitic  Gulf.  It  may  be 
 open  to  question  if  this  is  really  the  Mount  Hor  on 
 wliich  Aaron  died,  seeing  that  the  whole  range  of 
 Seir  was  anciently  called  by  that  name  ;  yet,  from 
 its  height  and  the  conspicuous  manner  in  which  it 
 rises  among  the  surrounding  rocks,  it  seems  not 
 unlikely  to  have  been  the  chosen  scene  of  the  high- 
 priest's  death  (Kinnear,  p.  127).  To  this  may  be 
 added  that  Josephus  affirms  Mount  Hor  to  have 
 been  near  Petra  ;  and  near  ^/ia(  place  there  is  cer- 
 
 tainly no  mountain  which  can  contest  the  distinc- 
 tion with  the  one  now  in  view.  The  base  of  the 
 highest  pinnacle  of  this  mountain  is  in  fact  but  a 
 lit'tle  removed  from  the  skirts  of  the  city  to  the 
 westward.  The  account  of  it  given  twenty  years 
 since  by  Captains  Irby  and  Mangles,  in  their  then 
 unpublished  volume  of  Travels,  is  the  best  we  yet 
 possess,  and  we  therefore  present  the  substance  of 
 their  description  in  their  own  words. 
 
 '  We  engaged  an  Arab  shepherd  as  our  guide, 
 and  leaving  Abou  Raschid  with  our  servants  and 
 horses  where  the  steepness  of  the  ascent  com- 
 mences, we  began  to  mount  the  track,  which  is 
 extremely  steep  and  toilsome,  and  affords  but  an 
 indifferent  footing.  In  some  parts  the  pilgrim 
 must  pick  his  way  as  he  can,  and  frequently  on 
 his  hands  and  knees.     Where  by  nature  it  would 
 
 266.  Mount  Hor, 
 
 (Aaron's  Tomb. ) 
 
 have  been  impassable,  there  are  flights  of  rude 
 steps  or  inclined  planes,  constructed  of  stones  laid 
 together,  and  here  and  there  are  niches  to  receive 
 the  footsteps,  cut  in  the  live  rock  :  the  impressions 
 of  pilgrims'  feet  are  scratched  in  the  rock  in  many 
 places,  but  without  inscriptions.  Much  juniper 
 grows  on  the  mountain,  almost  to  the  very  summit, 
 and  many  flowering  plants  which  we  had  not  ob- 
 served elsewhere  ;  some  of  these  are  very  beautiful ; 
 most  of  them  are  thorny.  On  the  top  there  is  an 
 overhanging  shelf  in  the  rock  which  forms  a  sort 
 of  cavern  :  here  we  found  a  skin  of  extremely  bad 
 water  suspended  for  drinking,  and  a  pallet  of  straw, 
 with  the  pitcher  and  other  poor  utensils  of  the 
 sheikh  who  resides  here.  He  is  a  decrepit  old 
 man,  who  has  lived  here  during  the  sjiace  of  forty 
 years,  and  occasionally  endured  the  fatigue  of  de- 
 scending and  re-ascending  the  mountain.  The 
 tomb  itself  is  enclosed  in  a  small  building,  differii'c; 
 not  at  all  in  external  form  and  appearance  from 
 those  of  Mohammedan  saints  common  throughout 
 every  province  of  Turkey.     It  has  probably  been 
 
 rebuilt  at  no  remote  period  :  some  small  columns 
 are  bedded  in  the  walls,  and  some  fragments  of 
 granite  and  slabs  of  white  marble  are  lying  about. 
 The  door  is  near  the  south-west  angle,  within 
 which  a  constructed  tomb,  with  a  pall  thrown  over 
 it,  presents  itself  immediately  upon  entering  :  it  is 
 patched  together  out  of  fragments  of  stone  and 
 marble  that  have  made  part  of  other  fabrics.  Upon 
 one  of  these  are  several  short  lines  in  the  Hebrew 
 character,  cut  in  a  slovenly  manner  :  we  had  them 
 interpreted  at  Acre,  and  they  proved  to  be  merely 
 the  names  of  a  Jew  and  his  family  who  had  scratched 
 this  record.  It  is  not  probable  that  any  professed 
 Jew  has  visited  the  spot  for  ages  past,  probably  not 
 since  the  period  of  the  Mohammedan  conquest  ; 
 it  may  lay  claim,  therefore,  to  some  antiquity,  and 
 in  any  case  is  a  curious  appendage  to  the  testimony 
 of  Josephus  on  the  subject.  There  are  rags  and 
 shreds  of  yarn,  with  glass  beads  and  paras,  left  as 
 votive  offerings  by  the  Arabs. 
 
 '  Not  far  from  the  north-west  angle  is  a  passage, 
 descending  by  steps,  to  a  vault  or  grotto  beneath, 
 
HOREB 
 
 323 
 
 HORN 
 
 for  we  were  uncertain  which  of  the  two  to  call  it, 
 being  covered  with  so  thiclc  a  coat  of  whitewash 
 that  It  is  difficult  to  distinguish  whether  it  is  built 
 or  hollowed  out.  It  aj)peared,  in  great  part  at 
 least,  a  grotto  ;  the  roof  is  covered,  but  the  whole 
 is  rude,  ill-fashioned,  and  quite  dark.  The  sheikh, 
 who  was  not  informed  that  we  were  Christians, 
 furnished  us  with  a  lump  of  butter.  Towards  the 
 further  end  of  this  dark  vault  lie  the  two  corres- 
 ponding leaves  of  an  iron  grating,  which  formerly- 
 prevented  all  nearer  approach  to  the  tomb  ;  they 
 have,  however,  been  thrown  down,  and  we  ad- 
 vanced so  as  to  touch  it ;  it  was  covered  by  a 
 ragged  pall.  We  were  obliged  to  descend  barefoot, 
 and  were  not  without  some  apprehension  of  tread- 
 ing on  scorpions  or  other  reptiles  in  such  a  place.' 
 It  is  highly  interesting  to  know  what  view  it 
 was  which  last  greeted  the  eyes  of  the  dying  high- 
 priest  from  this  lofty  eminence  ;  and  it  is  the  more 
 so  from  the  fact  that  the  region  over  which  the 
 view  extends  is  that  in  which  the  Israelites  wandered 
 for  forty  years.  Our  travellers  supply  this  infor- 
 mation : — 
 
 '  The  view  from  the  summit  of  tlie  edifice  is  ex- 
 tremely extensive  in  every  direction,  and  the  eye 
 rests  on  few  objects  which  it  can  clearly  distingiiish 
 to  give  a  name  to,  although  an  excellent  idea  is 
 obtained  of  the  general  face  and  features  of  the 
 countiy.  The  chain  of  Idumaean  mountains,  which 
 form  the  western  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea,  seem  to 
 run  on  to  the  southward,  though  losing  consider- 
 ably in  their  height.  They  appear  in  this  point  of 
 view  barren  and  desolate.  Below  them  is  spread 
 out  a  white  sandy  plain,  seamed  with  the  beds  of 
 occasional  torrents,  and  presenting  much  the  same 
 features  as  the  most  desert  parts  of  the  Ghor. 
 Where  this  desert  expanse  approaches  the  foot  of 
 Mount  Hor,  there  arise  out  of  it,  like  islands, 
 several  lower  peaks  and  ridges,  of  a  purple  colour, 
 probably  composed  of  the  same  kind  of  sandstone 
 as  that  of  Mount  Hor  itself,  which,  variegated  as 
 it  is  in  its  hues,  presents  in  the  distance  one  uniform 
 mass  of  dark  purple.  Towards  the  Egyptian  side 
 there  is  an  expanse  of  country  without  features  or 
 limit,  and  lost  in  the  distance.  The  lofty  district, 
 which  we  had  quitted  in  our  descent  to  Wady 
 Mousa,  shuts  up  the  prospect  on  the  south-east 
 side  ;  but  there  is  no  part  of  the  landscape  which 
 the  eye  wanders  over  with  more  curiosity  and  de- 
 light than  the  crags  of  Mount  Hor  itself,  which 
 stand  up  on  every  side  in  the  most  rugged  and  fan- 
 tastic forms,  sometimes  strangely  piled  one  on  the 
 other,  and  sometimes  as  strangely  yawning  in  clifts 
 of  a  frightful  depth.  .  .  .  An  artist  who  would 
 study  rock-scenery  in  all  its  wildest  and  most  ex- 
 travagant forms  would  find  himself  rewarded  should 
 he  resort  to  Mount  Hor  for  that  sole  purpose' 
 [comp.  Stanley,  Sin.  and  Pal.,  p.  86]. — ^J.  K. 
 
 HOREB.     [Sinai.] 
 
 HOREM    (Qnn  ;    'flpd/^,    and    in    Vat.    Text 
 
 M-eyXaaplfj,,  by  annexing  to  the  previous  word). 
 One  of  the  fenced  cities  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix. 
 38).  Van  de  Velde  says  that  it  is  '  possibly 
 'die  same  with  Hiirah,  a  low  tell  with  ruins  at 
 the  entrance  of  Wady  el-'Ain'  {Memoir,  322),  in 
 the  midst  of  the  mountains  west  of  Lake  Merom. 
 
 J.  L.  R 
 
 IIOR-HAGIDGAD,    an  encampment   of  the 
 
 Israelites  during  their  wandering  (Num.  xxxiii.  32, 
 33)  [Wandering]. 
 
 HORI  (^nh).     I.  (Sept.  Xo/5po£ ;  Alex.  Xo/5peO 
 
 A  son  of  Lotan  the  Horite,  who  received  the 
 general  designation  of  his  race  as  his  name  (Gen. 
 xxxvi.  22,  30  ;  I  Chron.  i.  39).  2.  (Sept.  Soupii 
 A  man  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  father  of  Shaphet. 
 who  was  one  of  the  heads  of  the  children  of  Israel 
 sent  by  Moses  to  search  the  land  of  Canaan  (Nunu 
 xiii.  5).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 HORITES  or  HORIM  (nh  ;  Sept.  Xoppatox), 
 a  people  who  seem  to  have  been  the  aboriginal 
 occupants  of  Mount  Seir  in  Edom  (Gen.  xiv.  6), 
 and  of  the  stripe  of  land  between  the  Dead  Sea 
 and  the  ^lanitic  Gulf  They  were  subdued 
 and  nearly  extirpated  by  Esau  and  his  descendants, 
 who  took  possession  of  their  territory,  and  made 
 those  that  remained  of  them  tributary,  as  did  the 
 Israelites  the  people  of  Canaan  whom  they  sub- 
 dued but  did  not  utterly  destroy  (Deut.  ii.  12,  22  ; 
 comp.  Gen.  xxxvi.  20,  ff.,  where  the  chiefs  of  the 
 Horites  are  enumerated  along  with  the  Edomites). 
 It  is  generally  supposed  that  the  Horites  took  their 
 name  from  "liPI,  a  hole  or  cave,  and  that  they  were 
 Troglodytes  ;  but  they  were  no  more  so  than  the 
 Edomites  who  succeeded  them,  and  made  use  of 
 the  rock-hev/n  dwellings  of  Petra,  and  they  were 
 never  regarded  as  Troglodytes.  That  the  Horites 
 betook  themselves  to  the  natural  caves  of  the 
 mountains  after  their  subjugation  by  Esau  and  his 
 followers  is  probable  enough  (comp.  Job  xxx.  6, 
 where  the  writer  probably  describes  what  he  saw 
 before  his  eyes  in  the  district  where  he  lived)  ;  but 
 they  had  the  name  Horites  before  this,  as  is  evi- 
 dent from  the  notices  in  Genesis.  Knobel  {Vol- 
 kertafel)  holds  that  they  formed  part  of  the  great 
 race  of  the  Ludim,  to  which  also  the  Rephaim,  the 
 Emim,  and  the  Amorites  belonged.  In  this  case 
 the  Horites  were  of  Semitic  descent.  According 
 to  the  account  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  20,  ff,  they  were 
 divided  into  seven  tribes. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HORN  ^\>  ;    Gr.    Kipa.% ;  Lat.  cornu).     [The 
 
 term  is  used  literally  in  Scripture  to  denote — i. 
 The  horn  of  an  animal  (Gen.  xxii.  1 3  ;  Deut. 
 xxxiii.  17;  Ps.  xxii.  22);  2.  A  trumpet,  originally 
 probably  a  simple  horn  with  the  tip  cut  off,  but 
 afterwards  composed  of  metal  or  other  materials 
 (Josh.  vi.  4,  5  ;  comp.  Lat.  coi-mc);  3.  The  ele- 
 phant's tusk  (Ezek.  xxvii.  15) ;  4.  A  vessel,  niade 
 probably  of  a  horn,  for  holding  oil  (i  Sam.  xvi.  i, 
 13  ;  I  Kings  i.  39  ;  comp.  Hor.  Sat.  ii.  2,  61)  ; 
 5.  A  vessel  for  containing  the  pigment  used  by 
 women  in  the  East  to  anoint  the  eyelashes  (Job 
 xlii.  14)].  From  its  primary  use  for  defence  in  the 
 case  of  horned  animals  it  came  to  acquire  several 
 derivative  meanings,  some  of  which  are  connected 
 with  the  illustration  and  right  understanding  of 
 holy  writ.  As  horns  are  hollow  and  easily  polished, 
 they  have  in  ancient  and  modern  times  been  used 
 for  drinking-vessels  and  for  military  purposes;  and 
 as  they  are  the  chief  source  of  strength  for  attack 
 and  defence  with  the  animals  to  which  God  has 
 given  them,  they  serve  in  Scripture  as  emblemsof 
 power,  dominion,  glory,  and  fierceness  (Dan.  viij. 
 5,  9  ;  I  Sam.  xvi.  1,13;  i  Kings  i.  39  ;  Josh.  vi. 
 4,  5  ;  I  Sam.  ii.  i  ;  Ps.  Ixxv.  5,  10 ;  Jer.  xlviii. 
 25  ;  Ezek.  xxix.  21  ;  Amos  vi.  13).  Hence  to 
 defile  the  horn  in  the  dust  (Job.   xvi.   15),   is  to 
 
HORN 
 
 324 
 
 HORNET 
 
 lower  and  degrade  oneself,  and,  on  the  contraiy,  to 
 lift  up,  to  exalt  the  horn  (Ps.  Ixxv.  4  ;  Ixxix.  17  ; 
 cxlviii.  14),  is  poetically  to  raise  oneself  to  eminent 
 honour  or  prosperity,  to  bear  oneself  proudly. 
 Somethinglikethisisfoundin  classic  authors ;  comp. 
 Hon,  Carfn.  iii.  21,  18.  In  the  East,  at  present, 
 horns  are  used  as  an  ornament  for  the  head,  and  as  a 
 token  of  eminent  rank  (Rosenmiiller,  Morg.  iv. 
 85).  The  women  among  the  Druses  on  Mount 
 Lebanon  wear  on  their  heads  silver  horns  of  native 
 make,  '  which  are  the  distinguishing  badge  of  wife- 
 hood' (Bowring's  Report  on  Syria,  p.  S ;  comp. 
 Thomson,  Land  and  Book,  i.  loi). 
 
 By  an  easy  transition,  horn  came  to  denote  an 
 elevation  or  hill  (Is.  v.  l)  ;  in  Switzerland  moun- 
 tains still  bear  this  name,  thus,  Schreckhorn,  Buch- 
 horn.  The  altar  of  burnt-offerings  (Exod.  xxvii. 
 2)  and  the  altar  of  incense  (Exod.  xxx.  2)  had  each 
 at  the  four  corners  four  horns  of  shittim-wood,  the 
 first  being  overlaid  with  brass,  the  second  with 
 gold  (Exod.  xxxvii.  25  ;  xxxviii.  2  ;  Jer.  xvii.  i  ; 
 Amos  iii.  14).  Upon  the  horns  of  the  altar  of 
 burnt-offerings  was  to  be  smeared  with  the  finger 
 the  blood  of  the  slain  bullock  (Exod.  xxix.  12  ; 
 Lev.  iv.  7-18;  viii.  15;  ix.  9;  xvi.  18;  Ezek. 
 xliii.  20).  By  laying  hold  of  these  horns  of  the 
 altar  of  burnt-offering  the  criminal  found  an  asylum 
 and  safety  (l  Kings  i.  50  ;  ii.  28).  These  horns 
 [according  to  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.]  served  for 
 binding  the  animal  destined  for  sacrifice  (Ps.  cxviii. 
 27)  ;  but  this  use  Winer  {Handworterb.)  denies, 
 asserting  that  they  did  not,  and  could  not,  answer 
 for  such  a  purpose.     [See  Hengstenberg,  in  loc] 
 
 The  old  painters  represented  the  head  of  Moses 
 as  having  two  horns  proceeding  from  his  temples, 
 one  on  either  side.  This  practice  arose  from  a  mis- 
 translation on  the  part  of  the  Vulgate  of  the  words 
 found  in  Exod.  xxxiv.  29— cornuta  esset  facies  sua, 
 where  it  is  said  in  the  Common  Version  '  the  skin 
 of  his  face  shone.'  The  Septuagiut  seems  to  have 
 given  a  good  rendering — hedd^aarai  ij  bfis  toi! 
 Xpiii/JLaTos  ToO  irpoo'dnrov,  '  the  appearance  of  his 
 face  wore  a  glory,'  or  '  nimbus,'  that  is,  rays  part- 
 mg  from  his  head  as  from  a  centre,  as  the  Saviour, 
 and,  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  the  saints,  are 
 often  painted — an  appearance  derived  from  Moses' 
 interview  with  God,  and  designed  to  convince  the 
 Israelites  (Rosenmiiller,  in  loc.)  In  a  somewhat 
 similar  manner  the  Deity  is  said  (Habak.  iii.  4)  to 
 have  '  had  horns  coming  out  of  his  hands,'  that  is 
 to  say,  he  was  made  manifest  by  lightning  and 
 thunder  (fulmina). — ^J.  R.  B, 
 
 HORNE,  George,  D.D.,  bishop  of  Norwich, 
 was  born  at  Otham,  near  Maidstone,  Kent,  Nov. 
 I,  1730,  and  died  Jan.  17,  1792,  in  the  62d  yeai 
 of  his  age.  He  was  sent  to  school  at  Maidstone 
 in  his  thirteenth  year,  and  in  his  fifteenth  entered 
 University  College,  Oxford.  He  was  afterwards 
 elected  fellow  of  Magdelen  College,  of  which  he 
 was  appointed  principal  in  1768.  He  became 
 vice-chancellor  in  1776,  dean  of  Canterbury  in 
 1 781,  and  bishop  of  Norwich  in  1789.  He  ear- 
 nestly devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  Hebrew  and 
 sacred  literature,  adopting  and  applying  the  pecu- 
 liar principles  of  Hutchinsonianism  in  hi.-,  investiga- 
 tions. His  works,  which  are  very  numerous, 
 consist  principally  of  sermons  and  pamphlets, 
 many  of  which  have  long  since  lost  their  interest. 
 His  best  and  most  popular  work,  on  which,  too, 
 his  reputation  chieily  rests,  is  his  Comme/i/ajy  on 
 the  Book  of  Psalms,  2  vols.  4to.,  Oxford  1776 
 (often  since  reprinted  in  many  forms) — a  work 
 which,  making  no  pretensions  to  depth  or  learning, 
 is  a  most  delightful  closet  companion,  containing  a 
 much  larger  amount  of  genuine  exposition  than 
 many  a  work  bristling  formidably  with  Hebrew 
 and  Arabic  words,  and  pretending  to  lofty  achieve- 
 ments. His  collected  works,  with  a  Memoir,  were 
 published  by  Jones  in  6  vols.  8vo,  1795. — 
 I- J- 
 
 HORNE,  Thomas  Hartwell,  was  born  of 
 humble  parentage  in  1780.  He  was  educated  at 
 Christ's  Hospital,  where  he  was  a  contemporary  of 
 Coleridge,  who  taught  him  his  Greek  alphabet, 
 and  assisted  him  in  his  work.  He  began  life  as  a 
 barrister's  clerk  on  £20  a  year,  and  took  to  such 
 literary  work  as  he  could  find,  with  the  view  of 
 increasing  his  income.  In  iSoi  he  sketched  the 
 first  plan  of  his  well-known  '  Introduction,'  which 
 was  published  in  1818,  after  '  seventeen  years  soli- 
 tary, prayerful,  unassisted  labour.'  Bishop  How- 
 ley,  satisfied  with  the  fitness  for  holy  orders  which 
 this  book  demonstrated,  ordained  him  in  1S19. 
 In  1824  he  v/as  appointed  to  superintend  a  classed 
 catalogue  of  the  books  in  the  British  Museum 
 Library.  In  1831,  Bishop  Blomfield  collated  him 
 to  a  prebendal  stall  worth  £11  a  year,  but  did  not 
 expect  it  to  be  ^  ijiiiU  so  small.'  In  1833  Dr 
 Howley,  then  archbishop,  gave  him  the  rectories 
 of  St.  Edmund  and  St.  Nicholas,  in  the  city  of 
 London,  with  £300  a  year.  In  this  post  he  died, 
 Jan.  27,  1862,  at  the  age  of  82. 
 
 Mr.  Home  was  a  man  of  immense  industry,  and 
 the  list  of  his  works  comprises  more  than  fifty 
 books,  sermons,  and  pamphlets.  Of  these,  the 
 only  one  of  any  theological  importance  is.  An  Intro- 
 diiction  to  the  Critical  Study  and  Knozvledge  of  the 
 Holy  Scriptures,  which  has  now  reached  the  lith 
 edition.  It  consists  of  a  summary  of  evidences  for 
 the  genuineness  of  the  Bible  ;  an  introduction  to 
 the  criticism  of  the  O.  and  N.  T.,  and  a  summary 
 of  Biblical  geography  and  antiquities.  It  con- 
 tains a  large  amount  of  useful  information  on  the 
 subjects  of  which  it  treats,  and  does  the  highest 
 credit  to  Mr.  Home's  patient  research  and  wide 
 reading.  It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  the 
 book  is  defaced  by  dogmatism  and  want  of 
 liberality,  and  though  it  was  almost  invaluable  at 
 the  time  when  it  appeared,  it  is  not,  as  a  whole, 
 in  any  way  worthy  of  the  present  more  advanced 
 position  of  English  theology. — F.  W.  F. 
 
 HORNET,  WASP.     [Tsar'ah.] 
 
HORONAIM 
 
 325 
 
 HOSEA 
 
 HORONAIM  (D^Jnh  ;  'Apuviel/j,  and  'Qpwvalfi ; 
 
 Oronaini),  a  place  in  Moab,  mentioned  by  Isaiah 
 in  connection  with  Nimrim  (xv.  5),  and  by  Jere- 
 miah with  Heshbon  and  Luhith  (xlviii.  3).  It  ap- 
 pears to  have  been  situated  on  a  declivity,  as 
 Jeremiah  speaks  of  the  'going  down  of  Horonaim' 
 (ver.  5),  and  beside  a  noted  road  (Is.  /.  c.)  The 
 word  signifies  '  two  caves.'  The  place  was  pro- 
 bably situated  on  some  one  of  the  great  roads 
 which  lead  down  from  the  plateau  of  Moab  to  the 
 Jordan  valley. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 HORONITE,  The  CJnhn  ;  Sept.  6  'A/awj-O,  a 
 
 designation  of  Sanballat,  the  enemy  of  the  Jews 
 (Neh.  ii.  10,  19  ;  xiii.  28).  It  is  probably  derived 
 from  the  town  Beth-Horon,  which  lay  in  the  district 
 occupied  by  the  Samaritans  in  the  lime  of  Nehemiah. 
 
 HORSE.     [Sus;  Parash;  Ramach.] 
 
 HORSE-LEECH.     [Alukah.] 
 
 HORSLEY,  Samuel,  was  bom  in  London 
 1733,  his  father  being  curate  of  St.  Martins-in-the- 
 Fields.  From  Westminster  school  he  entered 
 Trinity  Hall,  Cambridge.  He  took  orders  in 
 1759,  was,  in  1767,  elected  a  Fellow  of  the  Royal 
 Society,  and  in  1768  he  obtained  the  degree  of 
 LL.  D.  during  his  residence  in  Christchurch,  Ox- 
 ford. His  earliest  attention  was  given  to  mathe- 
 matical science,  and  he  edited  the  works  of  Sir 
 Isaac  Newton.  He  first  held  the  living  of  New- 
 ington-Butts  in  Surrey  ;  then,  in  succession,  those 
 of  Aldbury,  Thorley,  and  South  Weald  in  Kent. 
 He  became  archdeacon  of  St.  Albans  in  1781; 
 in  1788  bishop  of  St.  David's  ;  was  translated 
 to  the  see  of  Rochester  1793,  and  to  that  of  St. 
 Asaph  in  1802.  He  died  at  Brighton  4th  Oct. 
 1806.  Bishop  Horsley's  contributions  to  Biblical 
 literature  are  of  no  mean  order.  His  volumes  of 
 charges,  sermons,  and  tracts  bear  directly  on  Bibli- 
 cal topics.  The  'Charges'  in  defence  of  Trini- 
 tarian doctrine  are  masterly  and  skilful,  though 
 often  defiant  in  tone  and  impetuous  in  assault. 
 The  sermons  are,  in  thought  and  style,  among  the 
 best  in  the  language.  The  volumes  on  Biblical 
 criticism,  ranging  over  many  of  the  books  of  the 
 O.  T. ,  contain  many  ingenious  and  many  unsound 
 notes,  and  abound  with  textual  conjectures  and 
 emendations,  unwarranted  either  by  evidence  or 
 demanded  by  any  necessities  of  exegesis.  The 
 Book  of  the  Psalms,  t7-a7islated  from  the  Hebrew, 
 •with  Notes,  is  of  a  higher  order,  though  it  is  not  a 
 thorough  and  sustained  commentary.  His  Hosea 
 is  more  elaborate  and  erudite,  and  still  repays 
 perusal,  for  it  was  the  product  of  anxious  thought 
 and  labour.  Bishop  Horsley's  learning  was  neither 
 very  minute  nor  profound,  but  his  reasonings  are 
 always  powerful  and  trenchant,  and  now  and  then 
 haughty  and  scornful.  He  throws  down  difficul- 
 ties, tears  np  objections,  and  arrays  arguments 
 with  a  wonderful  force  and  directness.  In  his 
 latest  charge  he  avowed  his  belief  in  the  Calvinism 
 of  the  articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  he 
 was  the  last  of  her  great  polemical  giants. — ^J.  E. 
 
 HOSANNA  (X3  r\'^y\r\ ;   N.  T.  'fio-awd),  a 
 
 form  of  acclamatory  blessing  or  wishing  well, 
 which  signifies,  Save  now  !  Succour  now  !  Be  now 
 propitious  !  It  occurs  in  Matt.  xxL  9  (also  Mark 
 xi.  9,  10  ;  John  xii.  13) — '  Hosanna  to  the  Son  of 
 David  ;  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of 
 
 the  Lord  ;  Hosanna  in  the  highest.'  This  was  on 
 the  occasion  of  our  Saviour's  public  entry  intc 
 Jerusalem,  and,  fairly  construed,  would  mean, 
 '  Lord,  preserve  this  Son  of  David  ;  heap  favours 
 and  blessings  on  him  !'  It  is  further  to  be  ob- 
 served that  Hosanna  was  a  customary  form  of 
 acclamation  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  This 
 feast  was  celebrated  in  September,  just  before  the 
 commencement  of  the  civil  year  ;  on  which  occa- 
 sion the  people  carried  in  their  hands  bundles  of 
 boughs  of  palms,  myrtles,  etc.  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
 xiii.  13.  5  ;  iii.  10.  4  ;  Lightfoot,  Temple  Service, 
 xvi.  2).  They  then  repeated  the  25th  and  26th 
 verses  of  Ps.  cxviii. ,  which  commence  with  the  word 
 Hosanna  ;  and  from  this  circumstance  they  gave  the 
 boughs,  and  the  prayers,  and  the  feast  itself,  the 
 name  of  Hosanna.  They  observed  the  same  forms 
 also  at  the  Encaenia  (l  Maccab.  x.  6,  7  ;  2  Maccab. 
 xiii.  51  ;  Rev.  vii.  9)  and  the  Passover.  And  as 
 they  celebrated  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  with  great 
 joy  and  gladness,  in  like  manner,  on  this  occasion, 
 did  they  hail  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  whose 
 advent  they  believed  to  be  represented  in  all  the 
 feasts  [Hallel]. 
 
 HOSEA  (ytJ>'in),  the  first  in  order  of  the  minor 
 prophets  in  the  common  editions  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures,  as  well  as  of  the  Alexandrian  and  Vul- 
 gate translations.  The  arrangement  of  the  other 
 writers  in  the  AuiS€KaTrp6(p7jTov  of  the  Greek  ver- 
 sion differs  considerably  from  that  of  the  Hebrew 
 copies.  Jerome  {Praf  in  XII.  Prophetas)  says, 
 '  Non  idem  est  ordo  duodecim  prophetarum  apud 
 HebrjEOS  qui  est  apud  nos.'  Both,  however, 
 place  Hosea  first  in  the  catalogue  ;  yet  the  reasons 
 often  assigned  for  the  priority  of  place  which  this 
 prophet  enjoys  are  by  no  means  satisfactory. 
 They  are  founded  on  a  misinterpretation  of  the 
 
 first  clause  of  the  second  verse  of  his  oracles,  DPriD 
 nin^  l3n,  '  the  beginning  of  the  word  of  the  Lord. ' 
 Hengstenberg  [Christologie,  iii.  31,  E.  T.  [Clark] 
 i.  192),  taking  "12*1  to  be  the  praeterite  of  piel,  ren- 
 ders the  clause,  '  the  beginning  of  the  Lord  hath 
 
 spoken  ;'  the  status  constructus  of  npnD,  according 
 to  him,  being  explained  by  the  fact  '  that  the  v/hole 
 following  proposition  is  treated  as  one  substantive 
 idea.'  But  the  phrase  has  reference  not  to  priority 
 of  time  in  Hosea's  commission  as  compared  with 
 other  prophets,  but  to  the  period  of  the  predictions 
 to  which  it  is  the  introduction.  It  is  merely  an 
 intimation  that  they  were  the  first  divine  commu- 
 nications which  the  son  of  Been  enjoyed.  Neither 
 did  Hosea  flourish  earlier  than  all  the  other  minor 
 prophets  :  the  very  early  era  assigned  to  him  by 
 the  Jewish  writers  and  other  expositors  of  former 
 times  is  altogether  extravagant.  By  the  best  com- 
 putation he  seems  to  have  been  preceded  by  Joel, 
 
 Amos, 
 by  De 
 
 and  Jonah.      1  he  pr 
 Wette  {Ei7ileitiing, 
 
 ophets  are  thus  £ 
 sec.  225)  : — 
 
 Hebrew  Text. 
 
 1.  Hosea. 
 
 2.  Joel. 
 
 3.  Amos. 
 
 4.  Obadiah. 
 
 Greek  Text 
 
 1.  Hosea. 
 
 2.  Amos. 
 
 3.  Micah. 
 
 4.  Joel 
 
 Chronological  Order. 
 
 1.  Joel,  about  810  B.C. 
 
 2.  Jonah    ,,     810  B.C. 
 
 3.  Amos    ,,      790  B.C. 
 
 4.  Hosea  „     785  B.C. 
 
HOSEA 
 
 326 
 
 HOSLA 
 
 The  table  given  by  Rosenmiiller  {Scholia  in  Min. 
 Proph.,  p.  7)  differs  from  this  only  in  placing  Jonah 
 before  Joel  in  chronological  order.  Compare  New- 
 come  [Preface  to  Minor  Prophets,  p.  45).  The 
 probable  causes  of  this  location  of  Hosea  may  be 
 the  thoroughly  national  character  of  his  oracles, 
 their  \  \  their  earnest  tone  and  vivid  represen- 
 tatio  I'hat  his  priority  of  position  may  be  as- 
 
 cribed to  the  notion  that  he  discharged  the  duties 
 of  his  office  for  a  longer  period  than  any  of  his  pro- 
 phetic associates,  is  the  less  natural  conjecture  of 
 Rosenmiiller. 
 
 The  name  of  this  prophet  has  been  variously  in- 
 terpreted. Jerome  renders  it  'Sal  vator.'  But  it  is 
 the  infinitive  absolute,  '  Salvando,'  not  the  impera- 
 tive, 'Salva'  (O  Deus).  It  is  ordinarily  written 
 in  Greek,  'Oo-i?^,  and  once  with  the  rough  initial 
 aspirate,  'Q,ay]k  (Rom.  ix.  25).  The  figments  of 
 Jewish  writers  regarding  Hosea's  parentage  need 
 scarcely  be  mentioned.  His  father,  """IXn,  has  been 
 confounded  with  mj«3,  a  prince  of  the  Reubenites, 
 I  Chron.  v.  6.  So,  too,  Beeri  has  been  reckoned 
 a  prophet  himself,  according  to  the  rabbinical 
 notion  that  the  mention  of  a  prophet's  father  in  the 
 introduction  to  his  prophecies  is  a  proof  that  sire 
 as  well  as  son  was  endowed  with  the  prophetic 
 spirit. 
 
 Whether  Hosea  was  a  citizen  of  Israel  or  Judah 
 has  been  disputed.  The  pseudo-Epiphanius  and 
 Dorotheus  of  Tyre  speak  of  him  as  being  born  at 
 Belemoth,  in  the  tribe  of  Issachar  (Epiphan.  De 
 Vitis  Prophet,  cap.  xi.  ;  Doroth.  De  Propk.  cap.  i. ) 
 Drusius  {Critici  Sacri,  in  loc,  tom.  v.)  prefers  the 
 reading  'Beth-semes,'  and  quotes  Jerome,  who 
 says,  '  Osee  de  tribu  Issachar  fuit  ortus  in  Beth- 
 semes.'  Conflicting  traditions  are  also  told  of  the 
 -ilace  of  his  death  and  burial  (Burckhardt,  Reiseit 
 in  Syrien,  ii.  206).  But  Maurer  contends  strenu- 
 ously that  he  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
 {Comment.  Theol.,f:di.  Rosenmiiller,  vol.  ii.,  p.  391) ; 
 while  Jahn  supposes  that  he  exercised  his  office, 
 not,  as  Amos  did,  in  Israel,  but  in  the  principality 
 of  Judah.  Maurer  appeals  to  the  superscription  in 
 Amos  as  a  proof  that  prophets  of  Jewish  origin  were 
 sometimes  commissioned  to  labour  in  the  kingdom 
 of  Israel  (against  the  appeal  to  Amos,  see  Credner, 
 Joel,  p.  66,  and  Hitzig,  Ktirz.  exeget.  Handb.  zufu 
 A.  T.  in  loc. )  But  with  the  exception  of  the  case 
 recorded  in  i  Kings  xiii.  I  (a  case  altogether  too 
 singular  and  mysterious  to  serve  as  an  argument), 
 the  instance  of  Amos  is  a  sohtary  one,  and  seems 
 to  have  been  regarded  as  anomalous  by  his  con- 
 temporaries (Amosvii.  12).  Neither  can  we  assent 
 to  the  other  hypothesis  of  Maurer,  that  the  men- 
 tion of  the  Jewish  kings  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz, 
 and  Hezekiah,  by  Hosea  in  his  superscription,  is  a 
 proof  that  the  seer  regarded  them  as  his  rightful 
 sovereigns,  the  monarchs  of  that  territory  which 
 gave  him  birth.  Hengstenberg  has  well  replied, 
 that  Maurer  forgets  '  the  relation  in  which  the 
 pious  in  Israel  generally,  and  the  prophets  in  par- 
 ticular, stood  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  They 
 considered  the  whole  separation,  not  only  the  reli- 
 gious, but  also  the  civil,  as  an  apostacy  from  God. 
 The  dominion  of  the  theocracy  was  promised  to  be 
 the  throne  of  David.'  The  lofty  Elijah,  on  a 
 memorable  occasion,  when  a  direct  and  solemn 
 appeal  was  made  to  the  Head  of  the  theocracy, 
 took  twelve  stones,  one  for  each  tribe — a  proof  that 
 he  regarded  the  nation  as  one  in  religious  confede- 
 ration.    It  was  also  necessary,  for  correct  chrono- 
 
 logy, that  the  kings  of  both  nations  should  be  noted. 
 Jeroboam  of  Israel  is  mentioned  as  a  means  of  as- 
 certaining at  what  period  in  the  long  reign  of 
 Uzziah  Hosea  began  to  prophesy,  and  Uzziah'ii. 
 successors  are  named  in  particular,  because  the  con- 
 fusion and  anarchy  of  the  several  interregna  in  the 
 kingdom  of  Israel  rendered  computation  by  the 
 names  of  Jeroboam's  successors  difficult  and  un- 
 certain. The  other  argument  of  Maurer  for  Hosea's 
 being  a  Jew,  and  not  an  Israelite,  viz.,  because 
 his  own  people  are  so  severely  threatened  in  his 
 reproofs  and  denunciations,  is  evidence  of  the  pro- 
 phet's patriotic  fidelity,  but  not  of  his  specific 
 nationality.  At  the  same  time,  the  prophetic 
 warnings  and  promises  meant  for  the  southern 
 kingdom  of  Judah  may,  along  with  the  Israelitish 
 oracles  in  which  they  are  embedded,  be  easily  sup- 
 posed to  have  reached  it,  and  through  such  a  cir- 
 culation may  have  been  preserved  and  placed  in 
 the  canon  after  the  return  from  Babylon.  But  the 
 proofs  adduced  to  shew  that  Isaiah  was  acquainted 
 with  Hosea's  oracles  are  very  precarious.  So  that 
 we  accede  to  the  opinion  of  De  Wette,  Rosen- 
 miiller, Hengstenberg,  Eichhom,  Manger,  Kuinoel, 
 Hitzig,  and  Simson,  that  Hosea  was  an  Israelite,  a 
 native  of  that  kingdom  with  whose  sins  and  fates 
 his  book  is  specially  and  primarily  occupied.  Thus 
 he  calls,  in  vii.  5,  the  king  of  Israel  'our  king.' 
 
 There  is  no  reason  with  De  Wette,  Maurer,  and 
 Hitzig,  to  doubt  the  genuineness  of  the  present 
 superscription,  or,  -with  Rosenmiiller  and  Jahn,  to 
 suppose  that  it  may  have  been  added  by  a  later 
 hand — though  the  two  last  writers  uphold  its  au- 
 thenticity. The  first  and  second  verses  of  the  pro- 
 phecy are  so  closely  connected  in  structure  and 
 style  that  the  second  verse  itself  would  become  sus- 
 picious, if  the  first  were  reckoned  a  spurious  addi- 
 tion. The  first  is  a  general,  and  the  second  a  special 
 introduction.  The  superscription  determines  the 
 length  of  time  during  which  Hosea  prophesied. 
 That  period  was  both  long  and  eventful,  commen- 
 cing in  the  later  days  of  Jeroboam,  the  son  of  Joash, 
 extending  through  the  lives  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  and 
 Ahaz,  and  concluding  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
 Uzziah  and  Jeroboam  were  contemporary  sove- 
 reigns for  a  certain  length  of  time.  If  we  compute 
 from  the  first  year  of  Uzziah  to  the  last  of  Heze- 
 kiah, we  find  a  period  of  113  years.  Such  a 
 period  appears  evidently  to  be  too  long,  and  the 
 most  probable  calculation  is  to  reckon  from  the 
 last  years  of  Jeroboam  to  the  first  of  Hezekiah. 
 
 We  have  then  at  least  of  Uzziah's  reign  26  years. 
 ,,  ,,  Jotham       ,,      16     ,, 
 
 „  ,,  Ahaz  „      16     „ 
 
 ,,  ,,  Hezekiah  ,,       2     ,, 
 
 _6o* 
 
 This  calculation  is  as  close  an  approximation  as 
 it  is  now  possible  to  obtain.  At  some  point 
 within  the  last  years  of  Jeroboam  II.  Hosea  began 
 to  prophecy.  From  the  death  of  Jeroboam  to  the 
 beginning  of  Hezekiah,  at  an  ordinary  calculation, 
 are  fifty-seven  or  fifty-eight  years.  Bishop  Horsley 
 extends  the  period  considerably  longer  {Coinmen- 
 tary  on  Hosea  ;    Wo7-ks,  vol.   iii.   p.   234).     We  do 
 
 *  Maurer,  in  the  Comrnent.  Theol.  p.   284,  and 
 more  lately  in  his  Commettt.  Gmju.  Hist.  Crit.  tn 
 i  Prqph.  Min.,  Lipsias  i8j.o. 
 
HOSEA 
 
 327 
 
 HOSEA 
 
 not  understand  the  principle  of  Rosenmiiller's 
 computation,  which  reduces  the  time  between 
 Jeroboam's  death  and  Hezekiah's  accession  to  a 
 period  of  about  forty  years.  We  agree  with 
 Maurer's  remark  {Comment.  Grai7i.  Hist.  Crit. 
 in  Prophetas  Minores,  Lipsiee  1840),  'Alii  annos 
 quadraginta  numerant  nescio  quem  computandi 
 modum  secuti.'  This  long  duration  of  office  is 
 not  improbable,  and  the  book  itself  furnishes 
 strong  presumptive  evidence  in  support  of  this 
 chronology.  The  first  prophecy^  of  Hosea  fore- 
 tells the  overthrow  of  Jeliu's  house  ;  and  the 
 menace  was  fulfilled  on  the  death  of  Jeroboam, 
 his  great-grandson  (2  Kings  xv.  12).  A  predic- 
 tion of  the  ruin  which  was  to  overthrow  Jehu's 
 house  at  Jeroboam's  death  must  have  been  uttered 
 during  Jeroboam's  life.  This  fact  defines  the  period 
 of  Hosea's  commencement  of  his  labours,  and 
 verifies  the  inscription,  which  states  that  the  word 
 of  the  Lord  came  to  him  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam, 
 the  son  of  Joash,  king  of  Israel.  Again  in  ch.  x. 
 14,  allusion  is  made  to  an  expedition  of  Shalman- 
 ezer  against  Israel  ;  and  if  it  was  the  first  inroad 
 against  king  Hoshea,  who  began  to  reign  in  the 
 twelfth  year  of  Ahaz,  the  event  referred  to  by  the 
 prophet  as  past  must  have  happened  close  upon  the 
 beginning  of  Hezekiah's  reign  (2  Kings  xvii.  5). 
 The  extended  duration  indicated  in  the  super- 
 scription thus  seems  borne  out  by  the  contents  of 
 the  prophecy. 
 
 The  years  of  Hosea's  public  life  were  dark  and 
 melancholy.  The  vials  of  the  wrath  of  heaven 
 were  poured  out  on  his  apostate  people.  The 
 nation  suffered  under  the  evils  of  that  schism 
 which  was  effected  under  him  who  has  been 
 branded  with  the  indelible  stigma — 'who  made 
 Israel  to  sin.'  The  obligations  of  law  had  been 
 relaxed,  and  the  claims  of  religion  disregarded  ; 
 Baal  became  the  rival  of  Jehovah,  and  in  the 
 dark  recesses  of  the  groves  were  practised  the 
 impure  and  murderous  rites  of  heathen  deities. 
 Peace  and  prosperity  fled  the  land  which  was 
 harassed  by  foreign  invasion  and  domestic  broils. 
 Might  and  murder  became  the  twin  sentinels  of  the 
 throne  ;  alliances  were  formed  with  other  nations, 
 which  brought  with  them  seductions  to  paganism  ; 
 the  land  was  defiled  by  bloodshed  and  adultery, 
 falsehood  and  debauchery — all  classes  being  guilty  ; 
 and  the  nation  was  so  thoroughly  debased  that 
 but  a  fraction  of  its  population  maintained  their 
 spiritual  allegiance  (2  Kings  xix.  18).  The  death 
 of  Jeroboam  II.  was  followed  by  an  interregnum 
 of  ten  years,  an  interregnum  which  Ewald  and  The- 
 nius  deny  without  any  just  chronological  founda- 
 tion (Bleek,  Einleitung,  p.  520,  i860).  At  the 
 expiry  of  this  period,  his  son  Zechariah  assumed 
 the  sovereignty,  and  was  slain  by  Shallum,  after 
 the  short  space  of  six  months  (2  Kings  xv.  10).  In 
 four  weeks  Shallum  was  assassinated  by  Menahem. 
 The  assassin,  during  a  disturbed  reign  of  ten  years, 
 became  tributary  to  the  Assyrian  Pul.  His  suc- 
 cessor, Pekahiah,  wore  the  crown  but  two  years, 
 when  he  was  murdered  by  Pekah.  Pekah,  after 
 swaying  his  bloody  sceptre  for  twenty  years,  met 
 a  similar  fate  in  the  conspiracy  of  Hoshea  ;  Hoshea, 
 the  last  of  the  usurpers,  after  another  interregnum 
 of  eight  years,  ascended  the  throne,  and  his  admi- 
 nistration of  nine  years  ended  in  the  overthrow  of 
 his  kingdom  and  the  expatriation  of  his  people  (2 
 Kings  xvii.  18,  23). 
 
 The  prophecies  of  Hosea  were  directed  especi- 
 
 ally against  the  country  whose  sin  was  bringing 
 upon  it  such  disasters — periodical  anarchy  and  final 
 captivity.  Israel,  or  Ephraim,  is  the  people  espe- 
 cially addressed.  Their  homicides  and  fornica- 
 tions, their  perjury  and  theft,  their  idolatiy  and 
 impiety,  are  censured  with  a  faithful  severity. 
 Judah  is  sometimes,  indeed,  introduced,  warned, 
 and  admonished.  Bishop  Horsley  ( IVorks,  iii. 
 236)  reckons  it  a  mistake  to  suppose  '  that  Hosea's 
 prophecies  are  almost  wholly  directed  against  the 
 kingdom  of  Israel.'  But  any  one  reading  Hosea 
 will  at  once  discover  that  the  oracles  having  rela- 
 tion to  Israel  are  primaiy,  while  the  references  to 
 Judah  are  only  incidental.  In  ch.  i.  7,  Judah  is 
 mentioned  in  contrast  with  Israel,  to  whose  condi- 
 tion the  symbolic  name  of  the  prophet's  son  is 
 specially  applicable.  In  ver.  1 1  the  future  union 
 of  the  two  nations  is  predicted.  The  long  oracle 
 in  ch.  ii.  has  no  relation  to  Judah,  nor  the  sym- 
 bolic representation  in  ch.  iii.  Ch.  iv.  is  seveie 
 upon  Ephraim,  and  ends  with  a  very  brief  exhor- 
 tation to  Judah  not  to  follow  his  example.  In 
 the  succeeding  chapters  allusions  to  Judah  do  in- 
 deed occasionally  occur,  when  similar  sins  can  be 
 predicated  of  both  branches  of  the  nation.  The 
 prophet's  mind  was  intensely  occupied  with  the 
 destinies  of  his  own  people.  The  nations  around 
 him  are  unheeded  :  his  prophetic  eye  beholds  the 
 crisis  approaching  his  own  country,  and  sees  its 
 cantons  ravaged,  its  tribes  murdered  or  enslaved. 
 No  wonder  that  his  rebukes  are  so  terrible,  and  his 
 menaces  so  alarming  ;  yet  invitations  replete  with 
 tenderness  are  interspersed  with  his  startling  expos- 
 tulations. Now  we  have  a  vision  of  the  throne,  at 
 first  shrouded  in  darkness,  and  sending  forth  light 
 nings,  thunders,  and  voices  ;  but  while  we  gaze,  it 
 becomes  encircled  with  a  rainbow,  whicli  gradually 
 expands  till  it  loses  itself  in  the  brilliancy  which  it- 
 self had  originated  (ch.  xi.  and  xiv. ) 
 
 The  peculiar  mode  of  instruction  which  the  pro- 
 phet details  in  the  first  and  third  chapters  has  given 
 rise  to  many  theories.  We  refer  to  the  command 
 expressed  in  ch.  i.  2 — '  And  the  Lord  said  unto 
 Hosea,  Go,  take  unto  thee  a  wife  of  whoredoms 
 and  children  of  whoredoms,' etc.  ;  ch.  iii.  i,  'Then 
 said  the  Lord  unto  me,  Go  yet,  love  a  woman  be- 
 loved of  her  friend,  yet  an  adulteress,'  etc.  What 
 was  the  precise  nature  of  the  transactions  here  re- 
 corded ?  Were  they  real  events,  the  result  of  divine 
 injunctions  literally  understood,  and  as  literally  ful- 
 filled? or  were  these  intimations  to  the  prophet  only 
 intended  to  be  pictorial  illustrations  of  the  apostacy 
 and  spiritual  folly  and  unfaithfulness  of  Israel? 
 The  former  view,  viz.,  that  the  prophet  actually 
 and  literally  entered  into  this  revolting  connubial 
 alliance,  was  advocated  in  ancient  times  by  Cyril, 
 Theodoret,  Basil,  and  Augustine;  and  more  re- 
 cently has  been  maintained  by  Mercer,  Grotius, 
 Houbigant,  Manger,  Horsley,  Stuck,  Drake,  Hen- 
 derson, Pusey,  Hofmann  ( IVeissag.  u.  Erftil.  p. 
 200),  and  by  Kurtz  in  a  sejiarate  tractate.  Die 
 Ehe  dcs  prophden  Hosea,  nach  Hosea  i.-iii.,  Dor- 
 pat,  1859.  Fanciful  theories  are  also  rife  on  this 
 subject.  Luther  supposed  the  prophet  to  perform 
 a  kind  of  drama  in  view  of  the  people,  giving  hii 
 lawful  wife  and  children  these  mystical  appellations, 
 and  the  opinion  of  Calvin  is  not  very  different. 
 Newcome  [Min.  Prophets)  thinks  that  a  wife  of 
 fornication  means  merely  an  Israelite,  a  woman  of 
 apostate  and  adulterous  Israel.  So  Jac.  Capellus 
 (/«  Hoseam;   Opera,  p.  683).     Hengstenberg  sup- 
 
HOSEA 
 
 328 
 
 HOSEA 
 
 poses  the  prophet  to  relate  actions  which  hap- 
 pened, indeed,  actually,  but  not  outwardly — a 
 needless  refinement.  Some,  with  Maimonides 
 [Moreh  Nevochim,  part  ii.),  imagine  it  to  be  a 
 nocturnal  vision ;  while  others  make  it  wholly  an 
 allegory,  as  the  Chaldee  Paraphrast,  Jerome,  Dru- 
 sius,  Bauer,  Witsius,  Rosenmiiller,  Kuinoel,  and 
 Lowth.  The  view  of  Hengstenberg,  and  such 
 as  have  held  his  theory  (Markii  Diatribe  de  iix- 
 ore  fornicatiomtm  accipictida,  etc.,  Lugd.  Batav. 
 1696)  is  not  materially  different  from  the  last  to 
 which  we  have  referred.  Both  agree  in  condemn- 
 ing the  first  opinion,  which  Horsley  so  strenuously 
 maintained.  Hengstenberg,  at  great  length  and 
 with  much  force,  has  argued  against  this  hypothe- 
 sis {Christoh^y),  and  Stahelin,  Einleihmg,  p.  212, 
 1862.  Besides  other  arguments  resting  on  the 
 impurity  and  loathsomeness  of  the  supposed  nuptial 
 contract,  it  may  be  maintained  against  the  external 
 reaUty  of  the  event,  that  it  must  have  required 
 several  years  for  its  completion,  and  that  the  im- 
 pressiveness  of  the  symbol  would  therefore  be 
 weakened  and  obliterated.  Other  prophetic  trans- 
 actions of  a  similar  nature  might  be  referred  to. 
 Jeiome  {Comment,  in  loc.)  has  referred  to  Ezek. 
 iv.  4.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed,  with  Thomas 
 Aquinas,  that  the  prophet  was  commanded  to 
 commit  fornication.  The  diyine  injunction  was  to 
 marry — '  Scortum  aliquis  ducere  potest  sine  pec- 
 cat  o,  scortari  non  item.'  Drusius  {Com?n.  in  loc. 
 ap.  Crit.  Sac.  torn.  v. )  Wliichever  way  this  ques- 
 tion may  be  solved  ;  whether  these  occurrences 
 be  regarded  as  a  real  and  external  transaction,  or 
 as  a  piece  of  spiritual  scenery,  or  only  (Witsii 
 Miscell.  Sac.  p.  90)  as  a  pictorial  descri])tion,  it  is 
 agreed  on  all  hands  that  the  actions  are  typical ; 
 that  they  are,  as  Jerome  calls  them,  sacramenta 
 futiirorntn. 
 
 Expositors  are  not  at  all  agreed  as  to  the  meaning 
 of  the  phrase  'wife  of  whoredoms,'  D''21JT  OCX  ; 
 whether  the  phrase  refers  to  harlotry  before  mar- 
 riage, or  unfaithfulness  after  it.  It  may  afford  a 
 solution  of  the  difficulty  if  we  look  at  the  antitype 
 in  its  history  and  character.  Adultery  is  the  appel- 
 lation of  idolatrous  apostacy.  The  Jewish  nation 
 was  espoused  to  God.  The  contract  was  formed 
 at  Sinai ;  but  the  Jewish  people  had  prior  to  this 
 period  gone  a-whoring.  Comp.  Lev.  xvii.  7,  in 
 which  it  is  implied  that  idolatrous  propensities  had 
 developed  themselves  during  the  abode  in  Egypt  : 
 so  that  D''i13T  ^1C^'S  may  signify  one  impure  prior 
 
 to  her  marriage.  D''J1iT  ""l?',  children  of  whore- 
 dofns,  may  either  mean  cliildren  born  by  the  'wife' 
 before  her  marriage,  or  the  two  sons  and  daughter 
 afterwards  to  be  born.  According  to  some,  they 
 were  not  the  prophet's  own,  and  they  followed  the 
 pernicious  example  of  the  motlier.  Spiritual  adul- 
 tery was  the  debasing  sin  of  Israel.  '  Non  dicitur,' 
 observes  Manger,  'cognovit  uxorem,  sed  simpliciter 
 concepit  et  peperit'     It  is  said,  indeed,  in  verse  3, 
 
 •  She  bare  him  a  son. '  The  word  v  is  wanting  in 
 some  MSS.  and  in  some  copies  of  the  Septuagint, 
 but  may  have  been  omitted  to  confomi  the  clause 
 to  verses  6,  8,  and  9.  According  to  Kurtz,  the  pro- 
 phet's children  born  after  the  marriage  are  the  wit- 
 nesses and  rebuke  against  the  '  children  of  whoie- 
 doms'  adopted  and  brought  into  the  house  along 
 with  their  mother,  and  also  against  their  mother 
 in  her  renewed  infidelities  ;  while  Hosea  himself 
 occupies  the  same  position,  yet  more  palpably  and 
 
 compassionately,  towards  his  unfaithful  and  incor 
 rigible  spouse.  Dr.  Henderson  affirms,  on  the 
 other  hand,  that  the  phrase  '  wife  of  whoredoms' 
 has  reference  only  to  adulterous  courses  after  mar- 
 riage. He  says,  too,  that  the  words,  '  go  take  unto 
 thee  a  wife,'  are  so  plain  and  precise  that  they  must 
 refer  to  an  actual  event.  Now,  the  reply  is  obvious, 
 that  prophetic  figure  or  allegory  is  usually  stated  in 
 diction  implying  reality,  and  that  upon  this  verbal 
 correspondence  depend  the  truth  and  vividness  of 
 the  description.  In  whatever  way  the  transaction 
 be  taken,  the  lesson,  at  all  events,  is  very  apparent. 
 The  Israelites,  who  had  been  taken  into  nuptial 
 covenant,  very  soon  fell  from  their  first  love,  and 
 were  characterized  by  insatiable  spiritual  wanton- 
 ness :  yet  their  Maker,  their  husband,  did  not  at 
 once  divorce  them,  but  exhibited  a  marvellous  long- 
 suffering  toward  them. 
 
 The  names  of  the  children  being  symbolical,  the 
 name  of  the  mother  has  probably  a  similar  signifi- 
 cation. Dv31"n2  1D3  may  have  the  symbolic 
 sense  of  '  one  thoroughly  abandoned  to  sensual 
 delights  ;'  "IJDJ,   completion  (Ewald,  Gram.  228)  ; 
 
 D''?3Tn3,  'daughter  of  grape-cakes,'  the  dual 
 form  being  expressive  of  the  mode  in  which  these 
 dainties  were  baked  in  double  layers.  The  Greek 
 form,   TraXddrj,  is  apparently  a  corruption  of  the 
 
 Hebrew  nPQl-    The  names  of  the  children,  ?Xy~lT'', 
 
 Jezreel,  HDm  X?,  Lo-ruhamah,  and  VOy  H?,  Lo- 
 ammi,  are  explained.  It  is  generally  supposed 
 that  the  names  refer  to  three  successive  generations 
 of  the  Israelitish  people.  Hengstenberg,  on  the 
 other  hand,  argues  that  '  wife  and  children  both 
 are  the  people  of  Israel :  the  three  names  must  not 
 be  considered  separately,  but  taken  together.'  But 
 as  the  marriage  is  first  mentioned,  and  the  births  0/ 
 the  children  are  detailed  in  order,  some  time  elaps- 
 ing between  the  events,  we  rather  adhere  to  the 
 ordinary  exposition. 
 
 The  first  child,  Jezreel,  may  refer  to  the  first 
 dynasty  of  Jeroboam  I.  and  his  successors,  which 
 terminated  in  the  blood  of  Ahab's  house  which  Jehu 
 shed  at  Jezreel.  The  name  suggests  also  the  cruel 
 and  fraudulent  possession  of  the  vineyard  of  Na- 
 both,  'which  was  in  Jezreel,'  where,  also,  Jezebel 
 was  slain  so  ignominiously  (i  Kings  xvi.  i  ;  2  Kings 
 ix.  21).  But  as  Jehu  and  his  family  had  become  as 
 corrupt  as  their  predecessors,  the  scenes  of  Jezreel 
 were  again  to  be  enacted,  and  Jehu's  race  must 
 perish.  Jezreel,  the  spot  referred  to  by  the  pro- 
 phet, is  also,  according  to  Jerome,  the  place  where 
 the  Assyrian  army  routed  the  Israelites.  The  name 
 of  this  child  associates  the  past  and  future,  symbo- 
 lizes past  sins,  intermediate  punishments,  and  final 
 overthrow.  The  name  of  the  second  child,  Loru- 
 hamah,  '  not-pitied,'  the  appellation  of  a  degraded 
 daughter,  may  refer  to  the  feeble,  effeminate  period 
 which  followed  the  o\-erthrow  of  the  first  dynasty, 
 when  Israel  became  weak  and  helpless,  as  well  as 
 sunk  and  abandoned.  The  favour  of  God  was  not 
 exhibited  to  the  nation :  they  were  as  abject  as 
 impious.  But  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II.  was  pros- 
 perous ;  new  energy  was  infused  into  the  govern- 
 ment, and  gleams  of  its  former  prosperity  shone 
 upon  it.  This  revival  of  strength  in  that  genera- 
 tion may  be  typified  by  the  birth  of  a  third  child,  a 
 son,  Lo-ammi,  '  not-my-people'  (2  Kings  xiv.  25). 
 For  prosperity  did  not  bring  with  it  a  revival  ol 
 piety ;  still,  although  their  vigour  was  recruited. 
 
HOSEA 
 
 329 
 
 HOSEA 
 
 ^icy  were  not  God's  people  {Lfctwes  on  the  Jewish 
 Ajitiqtcilies  and  Scriptures^  by  J.  G.  Palfrey,  vol. 
 ii.  422,  Boston,  N.A.,  1841).  The  space  we  have 
 already  occupied  precludes  move  minute  criticism. 
 
 The  integrity  of  a  portion  of  Hosea  has  been 
 faintly  questioned  only  by  Redslob  (Hamburg  1842). 
 Kecent  writers,  such  as  Bertholdt,  Eichhorn,  De 
 Wette,  Stuck,  Maurer,  Ewald,  Unibreit,  Kdster, 
 and  Hitzig,  have  laboured  much,  but  in  vain,  to 
 divide  the  book  of  Hosea  into  sepai^ate  portions, 
 assigning  to  each  the  period  at  which  it  was  writ- 
 ten ;  but  from  the  want  of  sufficient  data  the 
 attempt  must  rest  principally  on  taste  and  fancy. 
 A  sufQcient  proof  of  the  correctness  of  our  opinion 
 may  be  found  in  the  contradictory  sections  and 
 allotments  of  the  various  critics  who  have  engaged 
 in  the  task.  Chapters  i.  ii.  and  iii.  evidently  form 
 one  division,  as  Havernick  and  others  have  shewn, 
 but  it  is  next  to  impossible  to  separate  and  distin- 
 guish the  other  chapters.  The  form  and  style  are 
 very  similar  throughout  all  the  second  portion  ; 
 though  in  reading  it  we  seem,  in  the  words  of 
 Lowth,  in  sparsa  qiuxdam  Sihyllae  folia  incidere. 
 The  oracles  are  so  brief  and  fragmentary,  and  the 
 allusions  so  curt  and  obscure,  especially  in  the 
 darker  pictures  and  denunciations,  that  the  pro- 
 phecy appears  to  be  notes  or  reminiscences  of 
 what  the  seer  had  uttered  during  his  long  and  try- 
 ing career.  It  is  also  to  be  noticed  that  very  often 
 it  is  God  who  address  the  people  directly,  and 
 not  the  prophet  in  God's  name. 
 
 The  peculiarities  of  Hosea's  style  have  been 
 often  remarked.  Jerome  says  of  him,  '  Commati- 
 cus  est,  et  quasi  per  sententias  loquens'  [Pnrf.  ad 
 XII.  Froph.)  'His  style,'  says  De  Wette,  'is 
 abrupt,  unrounded,  and  ebullient ;  his  rhythm 
 hard,  leaping,  and  violent.  The  language  is  pecu- 
 liar and  difficult'  [Einleitiing,  sec.  228).  Lowth 
 [Prceiect.  21)  speaks  of  him  as  the  most  difficult 
 nnd  perplexed  of  the  prophets.  Bishop  Horsley 
 has  remarked  his  peculiar  idioms — his  change  of 
 person,  anomalies  of  gender  and  number,  and  use 
 of  the  nominative  absolute  (  VVo)-ks,  vol.  iii. )  Eich- 
 hom's  description  of  his  style  was  probably  at  the 
 same  time  meant  as  an  imitation  of  it  [Einleitimg, 
 sec.  555)  : — '  His  discourse  is  like  a  garland  woven 
 of  a  multiplicity  of  flowers  :  images  are  woven 
 uijon  images,  comparison  wound  upon  comparison, 
 metaphor  strung  upon  metaphor.  He  plucks  one 
 flower,  and  throws  it  down  that  it  may  directly 
 break  off  another.  Like  a  bee  he  flies  from  one 
 flower-bed  to  another,  that  he  may  suck  his  honey 
 from  the  most  varied  pieces.  It  is  a  natural  con- 
 sequence that  his  figures  sometimes  form  strings  of 
 pearls.  Often  is  he  prone  to  approach  to  allegory 
 — often  he  sinks  down  in  obscurity'  (comp.  ch.  v. 
 9 ;  vi.  3 ;  vii.  8 ;  xiii.  3,  7,  8,  16).  Unusual 
 words  and  forms  of  connection  sometimes  occur 
 (De  Wette,  sec.  228).  Of  the  former,  examples 
 are    to    be   found  in  ch.  viii.    13,   D^QilQn  ;    xiii. 
 
 5,    nUINiri  ;    X.    2,    P)-|j; ;    xi.    7,   t^l^n ;   v.    13  ; 
 
 X.    6,    21''  tj^O  ;    of  the  lattei-,    in   ch.    vii.    i6, 
 
 f)y  K^  ;  ix.  8,  ny  ns^' ;  xiv.  3,  n'<-iQ  r\yhm 
 
 WnSti')  etc.  Many  examples  occur  of  the  com- 
 paratio  deciirtata,  arising  from  ellipses  and  the 
 peculiar  abruptness  of  the  style  ;  the  particles  of 
 connection,  causal,  adversative,  and  transitive,  being 
 frequently  omitted.  Paronomasia  occur  also,  with 
 many  other  peculiarities,  which  render  the  interpre- 
 
 tation difficult.  Some  of  these  peculiarities  may 
 have  originated  in  his  use  of  the  people's  dialect, 
 which  was  marked  by  Aramseisms  ;  the  northern 
 tribes  being  less  under  refining  influences  than  Ju- 
 dah  and  its  great  capital.  But  much  of  this  ellip- 
 tical ruggedness  and  unfashioned  terseness  arose 
 from  the  prophet's  eager  temperament,  from  his 
 earnest  desire  to  express  with  brevity  thoughts  that 
 crowded  upon  him  too  thickly  for  distinct  and  full- 
 formed  utterance,  and  suggestions  that  jostled  and 
 obscured  one  another  by  their  sudden  and  rapid  up- 
 springing  within  him. 
 
 Hosea,  as  a  prophet,  is  expressly  quoted  by 
 IMatthew  (ii.  15).  The  citation  is  from  the  first 
 verse  of  ch.  xi.  Hosea  vi.  6  is  quoted  twice  by 
 the  same  evangelist  (ix.  13  ;  xii.  7).  Quotations 
 from  his  prophecies  are  also  to  be  found  in  Ron^, 
 ix.  25,  26.  References  to  them  occur  in  1  Cor. 
 XV.  55,  and  in  i  Pet.  ii.  10.  Messianic  references 
 are  not  clearly  and  prominently  developed.  This 
 book,  however,  is  not  without  them  ;  but  they  lie 
 more  in  the  spirit  of  its  allusions  than  in  the  letter. 
 Hosea's  Christology  appears  written  not  with  ink, 
 but  '  with  the  spirit  of  the  living  God,  on  the 
 fleshly  tables  of  his  heart.'  The  future  conversion 
 of  his  people  to  the  Lord  their  God  and  David  their 
 king,  their  glorious  privilege  in  becoming  sons  of 
 the  living  God,  the  fulfilment  of  the  original  pro- 
 mise to  Abraham,  that  the  number  of  his  spiritual 
 seed  should  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea,  and  the  re- 
 betrothal  and  re-institution  of  the  nuptial  covenant 
 with  her  who  had  so  long  and  so  wantonly  forgot- 
 ten the  love  of  her  espousals,  are  among  the 
 oracles  which  will  take  effect  only  under  the  new 
 dispensation. 
 
 Hengstenberg  in  his  Die  atitheiitie  des  Penia- 
 teiiches,  Erster  Band,  s.  49-82,  has  many  impor- 
 tant remarks  on  this  book  of  prophecy,  especially 
 shewing  how  much  its  style  and  form  are  based  on 
 the  language  and  peculiar  idioms  of  the  Pentateuch. 
 Many  of  the  clauses  adduced  by  him  and  others, 
 as  Keil  and  Havernick,  may  be  di--missed  as  irrele- 
 vant, and  others  regarded  as  based  on  traditionary 
 lore  ;  but  there  remain  other  phrases  and  allusions, 
 the  origin  and  use  of  which  can  only  be  accounted 
 for  by  the  existence  of  the  written  Pentateuch.  One 
 cannot  but  remark,  too,  the  allusions  to  historic 
 scenes  of  ancient  and  hallowed  association,  but 
 now  debased  and  polluted  by  idolatry.  Bethel, 
 Mizpah,  Shechem,  and  Gilgal,  once  so  famous, 
 were  the  haunts  of  the  men  who  kissed  the  calves. 
 Correspondences  in  style  between  Hosea  and  Amos 
 are  adduced  by  Baur  {Amos,  p.  127)  and  by  Haver- 
 nick (Einleit. ),  but  they  are  not  all  to  be  relied  on. 
 Coincidences  have  been  observed  also  between  Hosea 
 and  Jeremiah,  and  the  examples  in  this  case  are 
 more  decided  and  conclusive.  No  great  stress  can 
 be  laid  on  supposed  similarities  of  phrase  in  Hosea 
 and  Isaiah  (Kueper,  yereniias  libronim  sacroriiin 
 interpres,  etc.,  p.  67). 
 
 Of  commentaries  on  Hosea  may  be  mentioned 
 Burrough's  Exposition  of  Hosea,  Lond.  1643  ;  Seb. 
 Schmidt,  Comment,  in  Hoseam,  Francf.  1687  ;  Ed. 
 Pococke,  Comment,  on  Hosea,  Oxf.  16S5  ;  Manger, 
 Com?nentari2is  in  Hoseam,  Campis.  1782  ;  Chr. 
 Fr.  Kuinoel,  IIosecB  Oraciila,  Hebr.  et  Lat.  per- 
 petiia  annotatione  illustravit,  Lipsiie  1792  ;  L.  Jos. 
 Uhland,  Annotaiioncs  in  Hoseam,  Tiib.  1785- 
 1797;  Horsley,  Hosea,  translated  from  the  He- 
 brew, with  Notes,  explanatory  and  critical,  Lond. 
 1801-4;    Stuck,   Hoseas  Propheta,   Lipsise    1828; 
 
HOSHEA 
 
 330 
 
 HOSPITALITY 
 
 Schroder,  Hoschca,  Joel,  und  Amos,  whersetzt  tind 
 erldutert,  Leipz.  1829  ;  Ruckert,  L>ie  Hebraischen 
 Propheten  uebersetzt,  etc.,  183 1;  Hitzig,  Die  12 
 kleinen  Proph.  erkldrt,  1838  ;  sec.  ed.  1852  ;  Hes- 
 selberg,  Uebersetzjing  und  Aiisleginig,  1838  ;  The 
 Twelve  Minor  Prophets],  by  E.  Henderson,  D.D. , 
 London  1845  ;  Umbreit,  Praktischer  CoiJimentar 
 iiber  die  kleinen  Propheten,  Hamburg  1846  ;  Sim- 
 son,  Der  Prophet  Hosea  erkldrt,  Hamburg  185 1; 
 Drake,  Notes  on  Hosea,  Cambridge,  1853;  Pusey, 
 Minor  Prophets,  1861. — ^J.  E. 
 
 HOSHEA  (J?E'in  ;  Sept.  'Q,(j-r)i),  son  of  Elah, 
 
 and  last  king  of  Israel.  He  conspired  against  and 
 slew  his  predecessor  Pekah,  and  seized  his  domi- 
 nions. '  He  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,'  but 
 not  in  the  same  degree  as  his  predecessors  :  and 
 this,  by  the  Jewish  commentators,  is  understood  to 
 mean  that  he  did  not,  like  former  kings  of  Israel 
 (2  Kings  XV.  30),  restrain  his  subjects  from  going  up 
 to  Jenisalem  to  worship.  The  intelligence  that 
 Hoshea  had  entered  into  a  conferacy  with  So,  king 
 of  Egypt,  with  the  view  of  shaking  off  the  Assyrian 
 yoke,  caused  Shalmaneser,  the  king  of  Assyria,  to 
 march  an  army  into  the  land  of  Israel  ;  and  after 
 a  three  years'  siege  Samaria  was  taken  and  de- 
 stroyed, and  the  ten  tribes  were  sent  into  the  coun- 
 tries beyond  the  Euphrates,  B.C.  720  (2  Kings  xv. 
 30  ;  xvii.  1-6  ;  xviii.  9- 1 2).  The  chronology  of 
 this  reign  is  much  perplexed  [see  Chronology]. 
 [Two  other  persons  of  this  name  are  mentioned, 
 the  son  of  Azaziah  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  20),  and  one 
 of  the  heads  of  the  people  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah 
 (x.  23).  This  was  also  the  original  name  of 
 Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun  (Deut.  xxxii.  44  ;  Num. 
 xiii.  8)]. 
 
 HOSPITALITY.  The  practice  of  receiving 
 strangers  into  one's  house  and  giving  them  suitable 
 entertainment  may  be  traced  back  to  the  early 
 origin  of  human  society.  It  is  not,  however,  con- 
 fined to  any  age  or  to  any  country,  but  has  been 
 obseiTed  in  all  parts  of  the  globe  wherever  circum- 
 stances have  been  such  as  to  render  it  desirable — 
 thus  affording  one  among  many  instances  of  the 
 readiness  with  which  human  nature,  in  its  moral 
 as  well  as  in  its  physical  properties,  ada].)ts  itself  to 
 every  varying  condition.  Hospitality  is,  therefore, 
 not  a  peculiarly  Oriental  virtue.  It  was  jiractised, 
 as  it  still  is  among  the  least  cultivated  nations 
 (Diod.  Sic.  V.  28,  34 ;  Cass.  Bell.  Gall.  vi.  23  ; 
 Tac.  Germ.  21).  It  was  not  less  observed,  in  the 
 early  periods  of  their  histoi-y,  among  the  Greeks 
 and  Romans.  With  the  Greeks,  hospitality  {^ivla) 
 was  under  the  immediate  protection  of  religion. 
 Jupiter  bore  a  name  (^^cios)  signifying  that  its 
 rights  were  under  his  guardianship.  In  the  Odyssey 
 (vi.  206)  we  are  told  expressly  tliat  all  guests  and 
 poor  people  are  special  objects  of  care  to  the  gods. 
 There  were  both  in  Greece  and  Italy  two  kinds  of 
 hospitality,  the  one  private,  the  other  public.  The 
 first  existed  between  individuals,  the  second  was 
 cultivated  by  one  state  towards  another.  Hence 
 arose  a  new  kind  of  social  relation  :  between  those 
 who  had  exercised  and  partaken  of  the  rites  of 
 hospitality  an  intimate  friendship  ensued — a  species 
 of  freemasonry,  which  was  called  into  play  wher- 
 ever the  individuals  might  afterwards  chance  to 
 meet,  and  the  right,  duties,  and  advantages  of 
 which  passed  from  father  to  son,  and  were  de- 
 servedly held  in  the  highest  estimation. 
 
 But  though  not  pecuharly  Oriental,  hospitality 
 has  nowhere  been  more  early  or  more  fully  prac- 
 tised than  in  the  East.  It  is  still  honourably 
 observed  among  the  Arabs,  especially  at  the  pre- 
 sent day.  An  Arab,  on  arriving  at  a  village,  dis- 
 mounts at  the  house  of  some  one  who  is  known  to 
 him,  saying  to  the  master,  '  I  am  your  guest.'  On 
 this  the  host  receives  the  traveller,  and  performs 
 his  duties,  that  is,  he  sets  before  his  guest  his  sup- 
 per, consisting  of  bread,  milk,  and  borgul,  and,  if 
 he  is  rich  and  generous,  he  also  takes  the  necessnjy 
 care  of  his  horse  or  beast  of  burden.  Should  the 
 traveller  be  unacquainted  with  any  person,  he 
 alights  at  any  house,  as  it  may  happen,  fastens  his 
 horse  to  the  same,  and  proceeds  to  smoke  his 
 pipe  until  the  master  bids  him  welcome,  and  offers 
 him  his  evening  meal.  In  the  morning  the  travel- 
 ler pursues  his  journey,  making  no  other  return 
 than  '  God  be  with  you '  (good  bye)  (Niebuhr, 
 Reis.  ii.  431,  462  ;  D'Ai-vieux,  iii.  152  ;  Burck- 
 hardt,  i.  69  ;  Rosenmiiller,  Morgenl.  vi.  82,  257). 
 The  early  existence  and  long  continuance  of  this 
 amiable  practice  in  Oriental  countries  are  owing 
 to  the  fact  of  their  presenting  that  condition  of 
 things  which  necessitates  and  calls  forth  hospi- 
 tality. When  population  is  thinly  scattered  over  a 
 great  extent  of  country,  and  travelling  is  compara- 
 tively infrequent,  inns  or  places  of  public  accom- 
 modation are  not  found  :  yet  the  traveller  needs 
 shelter,  perhaps  succour  and  support.  Pity  prompts 
 the  dweller  in  a  house  or  tent  to  open  his  door  to 
 the  tired  wayfarer,  the  rather  because  its  master 
 has  had,  and  is  likely  again  to  have,  need  of  similar 
 kindness.  The  duty  has  its  immediate  pleasures 
 and  advantages  ;  for  the  traveller  comes  full  0/ 
 news — false,  true,  wonderful ;  and  it  is  by  no 
 means  onerous,  since  visits  from  wayfarers  are  not 
 very  frequent,  nor  are  the  needful  hospitalities 
 costly.  In  later  periods,  when  population  had 
 greatly  increased,  the  establishment  of  inns  (cara- 
 vanserais) diminished,  but  did  by  no  means  abolish 
 the  practice  (Joseph.  Antiq.  v.  i.  2 ;  Luke  x.  34). 
 
 Accordingly  we  find  hospitality  practised  and 
 held  in  the  highest  estimation  at  the  earliest  periods 
 in  which  the  Bible  speaks  of  human  society  (Gen. 
 xviii.  3  ;  xix.  2  ;  xxiv.  25  ;  Exod.  ii.  20 ;  Judg. 
 xix.  16).  Express  provision  for  its  exercise  is  made 
 in  the  Mosaic  law  (Lev.  xix.  33  ;  Deut.  xiv.  29). 
 In  the  N.  T.  also  its  obsei-vance  is  enjouied, 
 though  in  the  period  to  which  its  books  refer  the 
 nature  and  extent  of  hospitality  would  be  changed 
 with  the  change  that  society  had  undergone  (i  Pet. 
 iv.  9  ;  I  Tim.  iii.  2 ;  Tit.  i.  8 ;  i  Tim.  v.  10  ; 
 Rom.  xii.  13  ;  Heb.  xiii.  2).  The  reason  assigned 
 in  this  last  passage,  '  for  thereby  some  have  enter- 
 tained angels  unawares,'  is  not  without  a  parallel 
 in  classical  literature ;  for  the  religious  feeling 
 which  in  Greece  was  connected  with  the  exercise  of 
 hospitality  was  strengthened  by  the  belief  that  the 
 traveller  might  be  some  god  in  disguise  (Horn. 
 Odyss.  xvii.  484).  The  disposition  which  gene- 
 rally prevailed  in  favour  of  the  practice  was  en- 
 hanced by  the  fear  lest  those  who  neglected  its 
 rites  should,  after  the  example  of  impious  men,  be 
 subjected  by  the  divine  wrath  to  frightful  punish- 
 ments (/Elian,  Aniin.  xi.  19).  Even  the  Jews,  in 
 '  the  latter  days,'  laid  very  great  stress  on  the  obli- 
 gation :  the  rewards  of  Paradise,  their  doctors  de- 
 clared, were  his  who  spontaneously  exercised  hos- 
 pitality (Schottgen,  Ilor.  Heb.  i.  220 ;  Kypke, 
 Obse>v.  Sacr.  i.  129). 
 
HOTTINGER 
 
 331 
 
 HOUR 
 
 The  guest,  whoever  he  might  be,  was  on  his 
 appearing  invited  into  the  house  or  tent  (Gen.  xix. 
 2;  Exod.  ii.  20;  Judg.  xiii.  15;  xix.  21).  Cour- 
 tesy dictated  that  no  improper  questions  should  be 
 put  to  him,  and  some  days  elapsed  before  the  name 
 of  the  stranger  was  asked,  or  what  object  he  had 
 in  view  in  his  journey  (Gen.  xxiv.  33  ;  Odyss.  i. 
 123  ;  iii.  69  ;  Iliad,  vi.  1 75  ;  ix.  222  ;  Diod.  Sic. 
 V.  28).  As  soon  as  he  arrived  he  was  furnished 
 with  water  to  wash  his  feet  (Gen.  xviii.  4  ;  xix.  2  ; 
 I  Tim.  V.  10  ;  Odyss.  iv.  49  ;  xvii.  88  ;  vi.  215)  ; 
 received  a  supply  of  needful  food  for  himself  and 
 beast  (Gen.  xviii.  5  ;  xix.  3  ;  xxiv.  25  ;  Exod.  ii. 
 20  ;  Judg.  xix.  20 ;  Odyss.  iii.  464)  ;  and  enjoyed 
 courtesy  and  protection  from  his  host  (Gen.  xix. 
 5  ;  Josh.  ii.  2  ;  Judg.  xix.  23).  The  case  of 
 Sisera,  decoyed  and  slain  by  Jael  (Judg.  iv.  18, 
 sq.),  was  a  gross  infraction  of  the  rights  and  duties 
 of  hospitality.  On  his  departure  the  traveller  was 
 not  allowed  to  go  alone  or  empty-handed  (Judg. 
 xix.  5  ;  Wagenseil,  ad.  Sot.  pp.  1020,  1030  ;  "Zorn, 
 ad  Hecat.  Abder.  22  ;  Iliad,  vi.  217).  As  the  free 
 practice  of  hospitality  v/as  held  right  and  honour- 
 able, so  the  neglect  of  it  was  considered  discredit- 
 able (Job  xxxi.  32  ;  Odyss.  xiv.  56) ;  and  any  interfer- 
 ence with  the  comfort  and  protection  which  the  host 
 afforded  was  treated  as  a  wicked  outrage  (Gen. 
 xix.  4,  sq.)  Though  the  practice  of  hospitality 
 was  general,  and  its  rites  rarely  violated,  yet 
 national  or  local  enmities  did  not  fail  sometimes  to 
 interfere  ;  and  accordingly  travellers  avoided  those 
 places  in  which  they  had  reason  to  expect  an  un- 
 friendly reception.  So  in  Judg.  xix.  12,  the' cer- 
 tain Levite'  spoken  of  said,  'We  will  not  turn 
 aside  hither  into  the  city  of  a  stranger,  that  is  not 
 of  the  children  of  Israel.'  The  quarrel  which  arose 
 between  the  Jews  and  Samaritans  after  the  Baby- 
 lonish captivity  destroyed  the  relations  of  hospi- 
 tality between  them.  Regarding  each  other  as 
 heretics,  they  sacrificed  every  better  feeling.  It  was 
 only  in  the  greatest  extremity  that  the  Jews  would 
 partake  of  Samaritan  food  (Lightfoot,  p.  993),  and 
 they  were  accustomed,  in  consequence  of  their  re- 
 ligious and  political  hatred,  to  avoid  passing 
 through  Samaria  in  journeying  from  one  extremity 
 of  the  land  to  the  other.  The  animosity  of  the 
 Samaritans  towards  the  Jews  appears  to  have  been 
 somewhat  less  bitter ;  but  they  showed  an  adverse 
 feeling  towards  those  persons  who,  in  going  up  to 
 the  annual  feast  at  Jerusalem,  had  to  pass  through 
 their  countiy  (Luke  ix./53).  At  the  great  national 
 festivals  hospitality  wai  liberally  practised  so  long 
 as  the  state  retained  its  identity.  On  these  festive 
 occasions  no  inhabitant  of  Jerusalem  considered  his 
 house  his  own  ;  every  home  swarmed  with  stran- 
 gers ;  yet  this  imbounded  hospitality  could  not 
 find  accommodation  in  the  houses  for  all  who 
 stood  in  need  of  it,  and  a  large  proportion  of  visi- 
 tors had  to  be  content  with  such  shelter  as  tents 
 could  afford  (Helon,  Pilgrim,  i.  228.  si].)  On  the 
 general  subject,  see  linger,  de  ^evoToda  ejiisque 
 ritu  antiquo ;  Stuck,  Antiq.  Convizr.  i.  27;  De 
 Wette,  Lehrb.  der  Archdologie ;  and  Scholz, 
 Handb.  der  Bibl.  Archdologie. — J.  R.  B. 
 
 HOTTINGER,  John  Henry,  a  very  learned 
 Biblical  scholar,  was  born  at  Ziirich,  loth  March 
 1620.  After  being  educated  in  his  native  city  he 
 went  to  Geneva  ;  thence  to  France  and  the  Nether- 
 lands. In  the  last-mentioned  country  he  studied 
 at  Groningen  under  Gomar  and  Alting,  imbibing  a 
 
 taste  for  Oriental  studies.  He  subsequently  re- 
 paired  to  Leyden,  and  lived  in  the  house  of  the 
 celebrated  Golius  as  domestic  tutor.  In  1641  he 
 was  called  to  Ziirich  as  professor  of  ecclesiastical 
 history.  Before  entering  on  this  office  he  came  to 
 England,  where  he  became  acquainted  with  such 
 men  as  Ussher,  Pococke,  Selden,  and  Whelock. 
 Returning  through  France,  he  enjoyed  the  friend- 
 ship of  Grotius.  In  1643  he  became  professor  of 
 Hebrew  in  the  Caroliimm.  In  1653  two  new  offices 
 were  assigned  to  him,  the  professorships  of  logic 
 and  rhetoric,  and  also  of  the  O.  T.  In  1655  he 
 went  to  Heidelberg,  where  he  was  professor  of  the 
 O.  T.  and  Oriental  languages.  In  1656  he  was 
 also  made  rector  of  the  University.  On  the  8th 
 November  1661  he  returned  to  Ziirich.  In  1664 
 he  went  as  ambassador  to  the  Netherlands.  In 
 1666  he  received  a  call  to  Leyden  University.  He 
 was  drowned  in  the  Limmat,  5th  June  1667,  along 
 with  his  son,  two  daughters,  and  a  friend.  Thus 
 he  was  but  forty-seven  years  of  age  when  death 
 suddenly  overtook  him.  Hottinger  was  a  most 
 laborious  author,  and  contributed  much  to  promote 
 a  better  interpretation  of  the  Bible.  He  followed 
 the  grammatical  and  historical  method,  to  which 
 the  doctrinal  element  was  justly  subordinated. 
 Seldom  did  he  appear  as  an  exegetical  writer  ; 
 where  he  did,  he  showed  tolerable  freedom  from 
 prejudice.  His  great  merit  lies  in  laying  a  good 
 foundation  for  a  fundamental  knowledge  of  the 
 O.  T.  by  the  study  of  the  Oriental  languages. 
 Hottinger  was  an  excellent  Semitic  scholar.  His 
 works  connected  with  Biblical  literature  are — The- 
 saurus philologiats  sat  Clavis Scriptiirce,  etc.,  1649, 
 4to  ;  Juris  HebriEortim  leges  261,  etc.,  1655,  4to  ; 
 Sinegna  Orientale,  1657,  4to  ;  Graniniatica:  liugucs 
 sanctiB  libri  duo,  1647,  4to  ;  GramtnaticcE  Chal- 
 dixo-SyriaccB  libri  duo,  1652,  4to  ;  Granimatica 
 qicatuor  linguarum  Hebraiccc,  Chaldaicce,  Syriacic, 
 atque Arabica: harmonica,  1658, 4to;  Prompttiariii?n 
 seu  Bibliotheca  Orientalis,  etc.,  1 658,  4to  ;  Etymo- 
 logicum  Orientale,  seu  Lexicon  harmoniciim  heptag- 
 lotton,  1 66 1,  4to  ;  Exercitationes  Anti-Moi-iance  de 
 Pentateucho  Samaritano,  etc.,  1644,  4to ;  Cippi 
 Hebraici,  1659,  4to  ;  Kr/crts  e^arifiepos,  i.  e.,  His- 
 toricE  Creation  is  examen,  etc.,  1659,  4to  ;  'Apx^^'o- 
 Xo7ta  Oiientalis,  1661,  4to  ;  Historia  ecclesiastica 
 Novi  Testamenti,  165 1- 1667,  9  vols.  4to.  His 
 MS.  collections  and  papers  fill  fifty-two  vols.  fol. 
 and  4to,  and  are  in  the  Zurich  library. — S.  D. 
 
 HOUR.     [The  Hebrew  has  no  word  for  'hour. 
 The  Chaldee  HyK^,  def  NF1J?K',  is  rendered  'hour' 
 
 in  the  A.  V.  of  Dan.   iii.    15  ;  iv.   19,  33  ;  v.   5, 
 
 but  this  word  means  simply  a  short  period  of  time, 
 from  NyC,  to  glance,  'a  twinkling  of  the  eye.'"" 
 The  ancient  Hebrews,  like  the  Greeks  (Homer, 
 strpe),  were  unacquainted  with  any  other  means  of 
 distinguishing  the  times  of  day  than  the  natural 
 divisions  of  morning,  mid-day  or  noon,  twilight, 
 and  night  (Gen.  xv.  12  ;  xviii.  i  ;  xix.  i,  15,  23). 
 Even  in  the  Septuagint  ibpa  invariably  signifies  a 
 season  of  the  year,  as  in  Homer  and  Hesiod.  As 
 the  Chaldceans  claimed  the  honour  of  inventing 
 this  system  of  notation  (Herod,  ii.  109),  it  is  most 
 probable  that  it  w.as  during  their  residence  in 
 Babylon  that  the  Jews  became  familiar  with  their 
 arHficial  distribution  of  the  day.  At  all  events  no 
 trace  of  it  occurs  before  the  captivity  of  that  peo- 
 ple ,  while,  subsequently  to  their  return  to  their 
 own  land,  we  find  the  practice  adopted,  and,  in 
 
HOUR 
 
 332 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 Ihe  time  of  Christ,  universally  established,  of  divid- 
 ing the  day  and  night  respect'vely  into  tvi'elve 
 equal  portions  (Matt.  xx.  3-5  ;  John  xi.  9  ;  Acts 
 V.  7  ;  xix.  34).  The  Jewish  horology,  however,  in 
 common  with  that  of  other  Eastern  nations,  had 
 this  inherent  defect,  that  the  hours,  though  always 
 equal  to  one  another,  were  unequal  in  regard  to  the 
 seasons,  and  that  as  their  day  was  reckoned  from 
 sunrise  to  sunset,  and  not  from  the  fixed  period  of 
 noon,  as  with  us,  the  twelve  hours  into  which  it 
 was  divided  varied,  of  course,  in  duration  accord- 
 ing to  the  fluctuations  of  summer  and  winter.  The 
 mid-day,  which  with  us  is  the  twelfth  hour,  the 
 Jews  counted  their  sixth,  while  their  twelfth  hour 
 did  not  arrive  till  sunset.  At  the  equinoxes,  their 
 hours  were  exactly  of  the  same  length  with  ours, 
 and  the  time  from  which  they  began  to  reckon 
 their  day  at  those  seasons  corresponded  precisely 
 with  our  six  o'clock  A.M.  ;  their  first  hour  being 
 our  seven  o'clock,  their  third  (Acts  ii.  15)  our 
 nine,  their  ninth  (Acts  iii.  i)  our  three  o'clock 
 P.M.,  and  their  eleventh  (Matt.  xx.  6)  our  five. 
 This  equality,  however,  in  the  duration  of  their 
 hours,  as  well  as  in  their  correspondence  to  ours, 
 was  disturbed  as  the  season  approached  towards 
 the  summer  or  winter  solstice.  In  midsummer, 
 when  sunrise  in  Judsea  takes  place  at  five  o'clock 
 A.M.,  and  sunset  at  seven  P.M.,  the  Jewish  hours 
 were  a  little  longer  than  oiu's  ;  and  the  only  one  of 
 their  hours  which  answered  exactly  to  ours  was 
 the  sixth,  or  twelve  o'clock,  while  in  all  the  rest 
 there  was  a  considerable  difference.  Their  third 
 hour  was  shortly  before  our  nine,  and  their  ninth  a 
 little  after  our  three.  In  like  manner,  in  winter, 
 when  the  sun  rises  at  seven  and  sets  at  five,  the 
 Jewish  hour  was  proportionally  shorter  than  ours, 
 their  third  hour  not  occurring  till  a  little  after  our 
 nine,  and  their  ninth  a  little  befo7-e  our  three. 
 Hence  it  is  evident  that  in  order  to  determine  ex- 
 actly the  duration  of  Daniel's  silence,  for  instance 
 ('he  was  astonied  one  hour,'  Dan.  iv.  19),  or  the 
 exact  time  when  the  darkness  at  Christ's  crucifixion 
 ended,  it  is  necessaiy  to  ascertain  the  particular 
 seasons  when  these  incidents  occurred. 
 
 In  ancient  times  the  only  way  of  reckoning  the 
 progress  of  the  day  was  by  the  length  of  the 
 shadow— a  mode  of  reckoning  which  was  both 
 contingent  on  the  sunshine  and  served  only  for  the 
 guidance  of  individuals.  By  what  means  the  Jews 
 calculated  the  length  of  their  hours — whether  by 
 dialHng,  by  the  clepsydra  or  water-clock,  or  by 
 some  horological  contrivance,  like  what  was  used 
 anciently  in  Persia  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xi.  6,  10),  and  by 
 the  Romans  (Martial,  viii.  Efig.  67  ;  Juv.  Sat.  x. 
 245),  and  which  is  still  used  in  India  [Asiat.  Resear. 
 v.  SS),  a  servant  notifying  the  intervals,  it  is  now 
 impossible  to  discover.  The  Chaldee  word  HyC 
 (Dan.  iv.  16),  which  signifies  announcer,  seems  to 
 countenance  the  latter  (as  it  seems  to  refer  to  the 
 mode  employed  by  the  Persians,  Romans,  and  In- 
 dians) supposition. 
 
 Besides  these  smaller  hours,  there  was  another 
 division  of  the  day  into  larger  hours,  with  refer- 
 ence to  the  stated  periods  of  prayer,  viz.,  the  third, 
 sixth,  and  ninth  hours  of  the  day  (Ps.  Iv.  17  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  iv.  4.  3). 
 
 The  night  was  divided  into  twelve  equal  por- 
 tions or  hours,  in  precisely  the  same  manner  as  the 
 day.  The  most  ancient  division,  however,  was 
 mto  three  watches  {Antiq.  Ixiii.  6 ;  xc.  4)  ;  the 
 first,  or  beginning  of  the  watches,  as  it  is  called 
 
 (Lament,  ii.  19)  ;  the  middle-watch  (Judg.  vii.  19), 
 and  the  moniing-watch  (Exod.  xiv.  24).  When 
 Judaea  became  a  province  of  Rome,  the  Roman 
 distribution  of  the  night  into  four  watches  was  in 
 troduced  [see  CocK-CROWiNG  and  Day]  ;  tc 
 which  division  frequent  allusions  occur  in  the  N.  T, 
 (Luke  xii.  38  ;  Matt.  xiv.  25 ;  Mark  xiii.  35),  as 
 well  as  to  that  of  hours  (Matt.  xxv.  13  ;  xxvi.  40  ; 
 Mark  xiv.  37  ;  Luke  xxii.  61  ;  Acts  xxiii.  23  ; 
 Rev.  iii.  3). 
 
 It  remains  only  to  notice  that  the  word  hour  is 
 sometimes  used  in  Scripture  to  denote  some  deter- 
 minate season,  as  '  mine  hour  is  not  yet  come,' 
 '  this  is  your  hour,  and  the  power  of  darkness,' 
 '  the  hour  is  coming,'  etc. — R.  J. 
 
 HOUSE  (n^3  ;  ol/cos).  Houses  are  often  men- 
 tioned in  Scripture,  several  important  passages  of 
 which  cannot  be  well  understood  without  a  clearer 
 notion  of  the  houses  in  which  the  Hebrews  dwelt, 
 than  can  be  realised  by  such  comparisons  as  we 
 naturally  make  with  those  in  which  we  ourselves 
 live.  But  things  so  different  afford  no  grounds  for 
 instructive  comparison.  We  must  therefore  bring 
 together  such  facts  as  can  be  collected  from  the 
 Scripture  and  from  ancient  writers,  with  such  de- 
 tails from  modem  travellers  and  our  own  observa- 
 tions, as  may  tend  to  illustrate  these  statements ; 
 for  there  is  every  reason  to  conclude  that  little  sub- 
 stantial difference  exists  between  the  ancient  houses 
 and  those  which  are  at  this  day  found  in  south- 
 western Asia. 
 
 The  agricultural  and  pastoral  forms  of  life  are 
 described  in  Scripture  as  of  equally  ancient  origin. 
 Cain  was  a  husbandman,  and  Abel  a  keeper  of 
 sheep.  The  former  is  a  settled,  the  latter  an  un- 
 settled mode  of  life.  Hence  we  find  that  Cain, 
 when  the  murder  of  his  brother  constrained  him  to 
 wander  abroad,  built  a  town  in  the  land  where  he 
 settled.  At  the  same  time,  doubtless,  those  who 
 followed  the  same  mode  of  life  as  Abel,  dwelt  in 
 tents,  capable  of  being  taken  from  one  place  to 
 another,  when  the  want  of  fresh  pastures  con- 
 strained those  removals  which  are  so  frequent 
 among  people  of  pastoral  habits.  We  are  not 
 required  to  suppose  that  Cain's  town  was  more 
 than  a  collection  of  huts. 
 
 Our  information  respecting  the  abodes  of  men  in 
 the  ages  before  the  Deluge  is,  however,  too  scanty 
 to  afford  much  ground  for  notice.  The  enterprise 
 at  Babel,  to  say  nothing  of  Egypt,  shows  that  the 
 constructive  arts  had  made  considerable  progress 
 during  that  obscure  but  interesting  period  ;  for  we 
 are  bound  in  reason  to  conclude  that  the  arts  pos- 
 sessed by  man  in  the  ages  immediately  following 
 the  Deluge  existed  before  that  great  catastrophe 
 [Antediluvians]. 
 
 We  may,  however,  leave  this  early  period,  and 
 proceed  at  once  to  the  later  times  in  which  the 
 Hebrews  flourished. 
 
 The  observations  offered  under  Architecture 
 will  preclude  the  expectation  of  finding  among  this 
 Eastern  people  that  accomplished  style  of  building 
 which  Vitnivius  requires,  or  that  refined  taste  by 
 which  the  Greeks  and  Romans  excited  the  admira- 
 tion of  foreign  nations.  The  reason  of  this  is  plain. 
 Their  ancestors  had  roved  through  the  country  as 
 nomade  shepherds,  dwelling  in  tents  ;  and  if  ever 
 they  built  huts  they  were  of  so  light  a  fabric  as 
 easily  to  be  taken  down  when  a  change  of  station 
 became  necessary.     In  this  mode  of  life  solidity  i» 
 
HOUSE 
 
 333 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 the  structure  of  any  dwelling  was  by  no  means  re- 
 quired ;  much  less  were  regular  arrangement  and 
 the  other  requisites  of  a  well-ordered  dwelling 
 matters  of  consideration.  Under  such  circum- 
 stances as  these,  no  improvement  in  the  habitation 
 takes  place.  The  tents  in  which  the  Arabs  now 
 dwell  are  in  all  probability  the  same  as  those  in 
 which  the  Hebrew  patriarchs  spent  their  lives.  It 
 is  not  likely  that  what  the  Hebrews  observed  in 
 Egypt,  during  their  long  sojourn  in  that  countrj', 
 had  in  this  respect  any  direct  influence  upon  their 
 own  subsequent  practice  in  Palestine.  The  reasons 
 for  this  have  been  given  under  Architecture. 
 
 Nevertheless,  the  information  which  may  be  de- 
 rived from  the  figures  of  houses  and  parts  of  houses 
 in  the  Egyptian  tombs,  is  not  to  be  overlooked  or 
 slighted.  We  have  in  them  the  only  representa- 
 tions of  ancient  houses  in  that  part  of  the  world 
 which  now  exist ;  and  however  different  may  have 
 been  the  jAr/t' architecture  of  Egypt  and  Palestine, 
 we  have  every  reason  to  conclude  that  there  was 
 considerable  resemblance  in  the  private  dwellings 
 of  these  neighbouring  countries.  Such  a  resem- 
 blance now  exists,  and  the  causes  which  produce  it 
 equally  existed  in  ancient  times  :  and,  which  is 
 more  to  the  purpose,  the  representations  to  which 
 we  refer  have  almost  the  same  amount  of  agree- 
 ment and  of  difference  with  the  present  houses  of 
 Syria  as  with  those  of  modern  Egypt.  On  these 
 and  other  grounds  we  shall  not  decline  to  avail 
 ourselves  of  this  interesting  source  of  illustration  ; 
 but  before  turning  to  its  details,  we  shall  give  a 
 general  statement,  which  may  render  them  more 
 intelligible. 
 
 On  entering  Palestine,  the  Israelites  occupied  the 
 dwellings  of  the  dispossessed  inhabitants  ;  and  for 
 a  long  time  no  new  buildings  would  be  needed. 
 The  generation  which  began  to  build  new  houses 
 must  have  been  born  and  bred  in  the  country,  and 
 would  naturally  erect  buildings  like  those  which 
 already  existed  in  the  land.  Their  mode  of  build- 
 ing was,  therefore,  that  of  the  Canaanites,  whom 
 they  had  dispossessed.  Of  their  style  of  building 
 we  are  not  required  to  form  any  exalted  notions. 
 In  all  the  history  of  the  conquest  of  the  country  by 
 the  Israelites,  there  is  no  account  of  any  large  or 
 conspicuous  building  being  taken  or  destroyed  by 
 them.  It  would  seem  also  as  if  there  had  been  no 
 temples  ;  for  we  read  not  that  any  were  destroyed 
 by  the  conquerors  ;  and  the  command  that  the 
 monuments  of  idolatry  should  be  overthrown, 
 specifies  only  altars,  groves,  and  high  places — 
 which  seems  to  lead  to  the  same  conclusion ;  since, 
 if  there  had  been  temples  existing  in  the  land  of 
 Canaan,  they  would  doubtless  have  been  included. 
 It  is  also  manifest  from  the  history  that  the  towns 
 which  the  Hebrews  found  in  Palestine  were  mostly 
 small,    and   that   the  largest   were    distinguished 
 
 rather  by  their  number  than  by  the  size  or  inagni 
 ficence  of  their  buildings. 
 
 It  is  impossible  to  say  to  what  extent  Solomon'; 
 improvements  in  state  architecture  operated  to  the 
 advancement  of  domestic  architecture.  He  built 
 different  palaces,  and  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude 
 that  his  nobles  and  great  officers  followed  more  or 
 less  the  models  which  these  palaces  presented.  In 
 the  East,  however,  the  domestic  architecture  of  the 
 bulk  of  the  people  is  little  affected  by  the  improve- 
 ments in  state  buildings.  Men  go  on  building  from 
 age  to  age  as  their  forefathers  built  ;  and  in  all  pro- 
 bability the  houses  which  we  now  see  in  Palestine 
 are  such  as  those  in  which  the  Jews,  and  the 
 Canaanites  before  them,  dwelt — the  mosques,  the 
 Christian  churches,  and  the  monasteries,  being  the 
 only  new  features  in  the  scene. 
 
 There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  many  houses 
 in  Palestine  were  constructed  with  wood.  A  great 
 part  of  that  country  was  always  very  poor  in  tim- 
 ber, and  the  middle  part  of  it  had  scarcely  any 
 vifood  at  all.  But  of  stone  there  was  no  want  ;  and 
 it  was  consequently  much  used  in  the  building  of 
 houses.  The  law  of  Moses  respecting  leprosy  in 
 houses  (Lev.  xiv.  33-40)  clearly  proves  this,  as 
 the  characteristics  there  enumerated  could  only 
 occur  in  the  case  of  stone  walls.  Still,  when  the 
 Hebrews  intended  to  build  a  house  in  the  most 
 splendid  style  and  in  accordance  with  the  taste  of 
 the  age,  as  much  wood  as  possible  was  used.  Hav- 
 ing premised  this,  the  principal  building  materials 
 mentioned  in  Scripture  may  be  enumerated  with 
 reference  to  their  place  in  the  three  kingdoms  of 
 nature. 
 
 I.  Vegetable  Substances  : — 
 
 1.  Shittim,  or  the  timber  of  the  acacia  tree, 
 which  grows  abundantly  in  the  valleys  of  Arabia 
 Petraea,  and  was  therefore  employed  in  the  con- 
 straction  of  the  tabernacle.  Not  being,  however, 
 a  tree  of  Palestine,  the  wood  was  not  subsequently 
 used  in  building. 
 
 2.  Shakemim  ;  that  is,  the  wood  of  the  sycamore 
 fig-tree,  mentioned  in  Is.  ix.  10  as  a  building  tim- 
 ber in  more  common  use  than  cedar,  or  perhaps 
 than  any  other  wood  known  in  Palestine. 
 
 3.  Eres,  or  cedar.  As  this  was  a  wood  imported 
 from  Lebanon,  it  would  only  be  used  in  the  higher 
 class  of  buildings.  For  its  quality  as  a  building 
 timber,  and  respecting  the  question  of  its  being 
 really  what  we  call  the  cedar,  see  Eres. 
 
 4.  Algnm-'ioood,  which,  being  imported  from  the 
 Eastern  seas,  must  have  been  valued  at  a  high 
 price.  It  was  used  by  Solomon  for  pillars  foi  his 
 own  palace,  and  for  the  Temple  (l  Kings  x.  11,12). 
 
 5.  jS'cwj'/^,  or  cypress-wood.  Boards  of  this  were 
 used  for  the  floor  of  the  Temple,  which  may  suggest 
 the  use  to  which  it  was  ordinarily  applied  (l  Kings 
 vi.  15  ;  2  Chron.  iii.  5). 
 
 Particular  accounts  of  all  these  woods,  and  of 
 the  trees  which  afforded  them,  may  be  seen  under 
 the  respective  words. 
 
 II.  Mineral  Substances  : — 
 
 1.  Ma7-ble.  We  find  the  court  of  the  king  of 
 Persia's  palace  covered  with  marble  of  various 
 colours  (Esth.  i.  6).  David  is  recorded  to  have 
 possessed  abundance  of  marble  (i  Chron.  xxx. 
 [xxix.]  2  ;  comp.  Cant.  v.  15),  and  it  was  used  by 
 Solomon  for  his  palace,  as  well  as  for  the  Temple. 
 
 2.  Porphyry  and  Granite  are  supposed  to  be 
 '  the  glistering  stones,  and  stones  of  divers  colours,' 
 named  in  i  Chron.  xxbc.  2.     If  so,  the  mountains 
 
HOUSE 
 
 334 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 of  Arabia  Petrsea  furnished  the  nearest  source  of 
 supply;  as  these  stones  do  not  exist  in  Palestine  or 
 Lebanon. 
 
 3.  Bricks.  Briclvs  liardened  by  fire  were  em- 
 ployed in  the  construction  of  the  tower  of  Babel 
 (Gen.  xi.  3),  and  the  hard  bondage  of  the  Israelites 
 in  Egypt  consisted  in  the  manufacture  of  sun-dried 
 bricks  (Exod.  v.  7,  10-13).  This  important  build- 
 ing-material has  been  noticed  under  another  head 
 [Bricks]  ;  and  it  only  remains  to  remark  that  no 
 subsequent  notice  of  bricks  as  being  used  by  the 
 Hebrews  occurs  after  they  had  entered  Palestine. 
 Yet,  judging  from  existing  analogies,  it  is  more 
 than  probable  that  bricks  were  to  a  considerable 
 extent  employed  in  their  buildings.  From  the  ex- 
 pense and  labour  of  quariying  and  conveying 
 stone,  bricks  are  often  extensively  used  in  Eastern 
 countries  even  where  stone  is  abundant ;  and  it  is 
 not  unusual  to  see  the  foundations  and  lower  parts 
 of  the  house  of  stone,  while  the  superstructure  is  of 
 brick. 
 
 4.  Chalk  and  Gypsiim,  which  the  Hebrews  ap- 
 pear to  have  comprehended  under  the  general  name 
 of  "V^  sid.  That  the  Hebrews  were  acquainted 
 with  these  materials  appears  from  Deut.  xxvii.  2  : 
 and  from  Dan.  v.  5  ;  Acts  xxiii.  3,  it  further  ap- 
 pears that  walls  were  covered  with  them.  A 
 highly  instructive  and  curious  account  of  the  plas- 
 ters used  in  the  East  may  be  seen  in  tome  iv.  of 
 Langles's  edition  of  Chardin's  Voyages. 
 
 g.  Mortar,  a  cement  made  of  lime,  ashes,  and 
 chopped  straw,  or  of  gypsum  and  chopped  straw. 
 This  is  probably  meant  in  Jer.  xliii.  9  ;  Ezek.  xiii. 
 10-15. 
 
 6.  Asphaltuin,  or  BUumen,  which  is  mentioned 
 as  being  used  for  a  cement  by  the  builders  of  Babel. 
 This  must  have  been  in  the  want  of  lime-mortar, 
 the  country  being  a  stoneless  plain.  But  the  Israel - 
 its,  who  had  no  lack  of  the  usual  cements,  did  not 
 employ  asphaltum  [Chemar.] 
 
 7.  The  metals  also  must  be,  to  a  certain  extent, 
 regarded  as  building  materials  :  lead,  iron,  and 
 copjier  are  mentioned  ;  and  even  silver  and  gold 
 were  used  in  combination  with  wood,  for  various 
 kinds  of  solid,  plated,  and  inlaid  work  (Exod.  xxxvi. 
 34,  36,  38). 
 
 III.  Animal  Substances  : — 
 
 Such  substances  can  be  but  in  a  small  degree 
 applicable  to  building.  Ivo}y  houses  are  men- 
 tioned in  I  Kings  xxii.  39  ;  Amos  iii.  15  ;  most 
 likely  from  certain  parts  of  the  wood-work,  pro- 
 bably about  the  doors  and  wmdows,  being  inlaid 
 with  this  valuable  substance.  Solomon  obtained 
 ivory  in  great  quantities  from  Tyre  (i  Kings  x.  22  ; 
 2  Chron.  ix.  21).     [Ivory]. 
 
 In  describing  the  houses  of  ancient  Palestine, 
 there  is  no  way  of  arriving  at  distinct  notions  but 
 by  taking  the  texts  of  Scripture  and  illustrating 
 them  by  the  existing  houses  of  those  parts  of 
 Western  Asia  which  have  been  the  least  exposed  to 
 the  changes  of  time,  and  in  which  the  manners  of 
 ancient  days  have  been  the  best  preserved.  Writers 
 on  the  subject  have  seen  this,  and  have  brought 
 together  the  descriptions  of  travellers  bearing  on 
 the  subject  ;  but  these  descripfions  have  generally 
 been  applied  with  very  little  judgment,  from  the 
 want  of  that  distinct  knowledge  of  the  matter 
 which  only  actual  observation  can  give.  Tra- 
 vellers have  seldom  been  students  of  Scripture, 
 and  studewts  of  Scripture  have  seldom  been  tra- 
 vellers.    The  present  writer,  having  resided  for  a 
 
 considerable  time  in  Turkish  Arabia,  where  the  type 
 of  Scriptural  usages  has  been  better  preserved  than 
 in  Egypt,  or  even  in  Palestine  itself,  is  enabled  tc 
 speak  on  this  matter  with  somewhat  more  pi-e- 
 cision.  Of  four  houses  in  which  he  there  resided, 
 two  were  first-rate,  and  two  were  second-rate. 
 One  of  the  latter  has  always  seemed  to  him  tc 
 suggest  a  more  satisfactory  idea  of  a  Scriptural 
 house  than  any  of  the  others,  or  than  any  that  he 
 ever  saw  in  other  Eastern  countries.  That  one  has 
 therefore  formed  the  basis  of  all  his  ideas  on  this 
 subject ;  and  where  it  seemed  to  fail,  the  others 
 have  usually  supplied  the  illustration  he  required. 
 This  course  he  has  found  so  beneficial,  that  he  will 
 endeavour  to  impart  a  clear  view  of  the  subject  to 
 the  reader  by  giving  a  general  notion  of  the  house 
 referred  to,  explaining  any  points  in  which  the  others 
 difiFered  from  it,  and  producing  the  passages  of  Scrip- 
 ture which  seem  to  be  illustrated  in  the  process. 
 
 We  may  premise  that  the  houses  present  little 
 more  than  a  dead  wall  to  the  street.  The  privacy 
 of  Oriental  domestic  habits  would  render  our  plan 
 of  throwing  the  front  of  the  houses  towards  the 
 street  most  repulsive.  On  coming  to  a  house,  one 
 finds  a  lofty  wall,  which  would  be  blank  but  for  the 
 low  door  of  entrance  [Gate]  ;  over  which  is  usually 
 the  kiosk,  or  latticed  window  (sometimes  project- 
 ing like  the   huge   bay  windows  of  Elizabethan 
 
 houses),  or  screened  balcony  of  the  '  summer  par- 
 lour.' Besides  this,  there  may  be  a  small  latticed 
 window  or  two  high  up  the  wall,  giving  light  and 
 air  to  upper  chambers.  This  seems,  from  theannexed 
 engraving  (No.  269),  to  have  been  the  character  ol 
 the  fronts  of  ancient  Egyptian  houses. 
 
 The  buildings  which  form  the  house  front  to- 
 wards an  inner  square  or  court.  Small  houses  have 
 one  of  these  courts,  but  superior  houses  have  two, 
 and  first-rate  houses  three,  communicating  with 
 each  other;  for  the  Orientals  dislike  ascending 
 stairs  or  steps,  and  prefer  to  gain  room  rather  by 
 the  extent  than  height  of  their  habitations.  It  is 
 only  when  the  building-ground  is  confined  by  nature 
 or  by  fortifications,  that  they  build  high  houses. 
 None  of  our  four  houses  had  more  than  one  story ; 
 but,  from  the  loftiness  of  the  rooms,  they  were  as 
 high  as  houses  of  three  stories  among  ourselves. 
 If  there  are  tliree  or  more  courts,  all  except  the 
 
HOUSE 
 
 335 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 outer  one  are  much  alike  in  size  and  appearance ;  but 
 the  outer  one,  being  devoted  to  the  more  public  life 
 of  the  occupant,  and  to  his  intercourse  with  society, 
 is  materiaUy  different  from  all  the  others.  If  there 
 are  more  than  two,  the  second  is  devoted  chiefly  to 
 the  use  of  the  master,  who  is  there  attended  only 
 by  his  eunuchs,  children,  and  females,  and  sees  only 
 such  persons  as  he  calls  from  the  third  or  interior 
 court  in  which  they  reside.  In  the  history  of  Esther, 
 she  incurs  danger  by  going  from  her  interior  court 
 to  that  of  the  king,  to  invite  him  to  visit  her  part 
 of  the  palace ;  but  she  would  not  on  any  account 
 have  gone  to  the  outermost  court,  in  which  the  king 
 held  his  public  audiences.  When  tliere  are  only 
 two  courts,  the  innermost  is  the  harem,  in  which 
 the  women  and  children  live,  and  which  is  the 
 true  domicile  of  the  master,  to  which  he  withdraws 
 when  the  claims  of  business,  of  society,  and  of 
 friends  have  been  satisfied,  and  where  no  man  but 
 himself  ever  enters,  or  could  be  induced  to  enter, 
 even  by  strong  persuasions. 
 
 Entering  at  the  street-door,  a  passage,  usually 
 sloping  downward,  conducts  to  the  outer  court  ; 
 the  opening  from  tlie  passage  to  this  is  not  oppo- 
 site the  gate  of  entrance,  but  by  a  side  turn,  to  pre- 
 clude any  view  from  the  street  into  the  court  when 
 the  gate  is  opened.  On  entering  the  outer  court 
 through  this  passage,  we  find  opposite  to  us  the 
 public  room,  in  which  the  master  receives  and  gives 
 audience  to  his  friends  and  clients.  This  is  en- 
 tirely open  in  front,  and  being  richly  fitted  up,  has 
 a  splendid  appearance  when  the  first  view  of  it  is 
 obtained.  A  refreshmg  coolness  is  sometimes  given 
 to  tliis  apartment  by  a  fountain  throwing  up  a  jet 
 of  water  in  front  of  it.  Some  idea  of  the  apart- 
 ment maybe  formed  from  the  annexed  cut  (No.  270). 
 
 This  is  the  '  guest-chamber'  of  Luke  xxii.  11.  A 
 large  portion  of  the  other  side  of  the  court  is  occu- 
 pied with  a  frontage  of  lattice-work  filled  with 
 coloured  glass,  belonging  to  a  room  as  large  as  the 
 guest-chamber,  and  which  in  winter  is  used  for  the 
 same  purpose,  or  serves  as  the  apartment  of  any 
 visitor  of  distinction,  who  cannot  of  course  be  ad- 
 mitted into  the  interior  parts  of  the  house.  The 
 other  apartments  in  this  outer  court  are  compara- 
 tively small,  and  are  used  for  the  accommodation 
 of  visitors,  retainers,  and  servants.  These  various 
 apartments  are  usually  upon  what  we  should  call 
 the  first  floor,  or  at  least  upon  an  elevated  terrace. 
 
 The  ground  floor  is  in  that  case  occupied  by  vari- 
 ous store-rooms  and  servants'  offices.  In  all  cases 
 the  upper  floor,  contaming  the  principal  rooms,  is 
 fronted  by  a  gallery  or  terrace,  protected  from  the 
 sun  by  a  sort  of  penthouse  roof  supported  by  pillars 
 of  wood. 
 
 In  houses  having  but  one  court,  the  reception- 
 room  is  on  the  ground  floor,  and  the  domestic 
 establishment  in  the  upper  part  of  the  house. 
 This  arrangement  is  shown  in  the  annexed  en- 
 graving (No.  271),  which  is  also  interesting  from 
 
 its  shewing  the  use  of  the  '  pillars'  so  often  men- 
 tioned in  Scripture,  particularly  'the  pillars  on 
 which  the  house  stood,  and  by  which  it  was  borne 
 up'_(Judg.  xvi.  29).  Some  other  of  the  cuts  which 
 we  introduce  will  exhibit  pillars  of  similar  import- 
 ance to  the  support  of  the  house. 
 
 The  kiosk,  which  has  been  mentioned  above  as 
 fronting  the  street,  over  the  gateway,  is  connected 
 with  one  of  the  larger  rooms  already  described,  or 
 forms  a  separate  apartment,  which  is  the  summer 
 parlour  of  Scripture.  Here,  in  the  heat  of  the 
 aiternoon,  the  master  lounges  or  doses  listlessly, 
 refreshed  by  the  air  which  circulates  between  the 
 openings  of  the  lattice- work ;  and  here  he  can,  if 
 he  pleases,  notic^  unobserved  what  passes  in  the 
 street.  In  this  we  are  to  seek  the  summer  parlour 
 in  which  Ehud  smote  the  king  of  Moab  (Judg.  iii. 
 20),  and  the  '  chamber  on  the  wall,'  which  the 
 Shunamite  prepared  for  the  prophet  (2  Kings  iv. 
 10).  The  projecting  construction  over  the  recep- 
 tion chamber  in  No.  271  is,  like  the  kiosk,  towards 
 the  street  of  a  summer  parlour  j  but  there  it  belongs 
 
HOUSE 
 
 336 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 to  the  women's  apartments,  and  looks   into   the 
 court  and  not  the  street. 
 
 It  is  now  time  to  proceed  to  the  inner  court, 
 which  we  enter  by  a  passage  and  door  similar  to 
 those  by  which  we  entered  from  the  street.  This 
 passage  and  door  are  usually  at  one  of  the  inner- 
 most corners  of  the  outer  court.  Here  a  much 
 more  extended  prospect  opens  to  us,  the  inner 
 court  being  generally  much  larger  than  the  former. 
 The  annexed  cut  (No.  272)  will  convey  some  no- 
 tion of  it ;  but  being  a  Persian  house,  it  somewhat 
 
 differs  from  that  which  we  have  more  particularly 
 in  view.  It  is  lower,  the  principal  apartments 
 standing  upon  a  teiTace  or  bank  of  earth,  and  not 
 upon  a  basement  story  of  offices  ;  and  it  also 
 wants  the  veranda  or  covered  gallery  in  front, 
 which  we  find  in  Syro-Arabian  houses.  The 
 court  is  for  the  most  part  paved,  excepting  a  por- 
 tion in  the  middle,  which  is  planted  with  trees 
 (usually  two)  and  shrubs,  with  a  basin  of  water  in 
 the  midst.  In  our  Arabian  house  the  two  trees 
 were  palm-trees,  in  which  a  number  of  wild  doves 
 built  their  nests.  In  the  second  cut  (No.  269), 
 shewing  an  ancient  Egyptian  house,  we  see  the 
 same  arrangement  ;  two  palm-trees  growing  in  the 
 court  extend  their  tops  above,  and,  as  it  were,  out 
 of  the  house — a  curious  effect  frequently  noticed  in 
 the  towns  of  south-western  Asia.  That  the  Jews 
 had  the  like  arrangement  of  trees  in  the  courts  of 
 their  houses,  and  that  the  birds  nested  in  them, 
 appears  from  Ps.  Ixxxiv.  2,  3  ;  com  p.  Mic.  iv.  4  ; 
 Zech.  iii.  10,  etc.  They  had  also  the  basin  of  water 
 in  the  inner  court,  or  harem  ;  and  among  them  it 
 was  used  for  bathing,  as  is  shewn  by  David's  dis- 
 covering Bathsheba  bathing  as  he  walked  on  the 
 roof  of  his  palace.  The  use  of  the  reservoir  has 
 now  been  superseded  by  the  establishment  of  public 
 ivarin  baths  in  every  town  and  in  private  mansions. 
 Cold  bathing  has  all  but  ceased  in  western  Asia. 
 
 The  arrangement  of  the  inner  court  is  very  simi- 
 lar to  that  of  the  outer;  but  the  whole  is  more 
 open  and  airy.  The  buildings  usually  occupy  two 
 sides  of  the  square,  of  which  the  one  opposite  the 
 entrance  contains  the  principal  apartments.  They 
 are  upon  what  we  should  call  the  first  floor,  and 
 open  into  a  wide  gallery  or  verandah,  which  in 
 good  houses  is  nine  or  ten  feet  deep,  and  covered 
 by  a  wooden  penthouse  supported  by  a  row  of 
 wooden  columns.  This  terrace,  or  gallery,  is  fur- 
 nished with  a  strong  wooden  balustrade,  and  is 
 usually  paved  with  squared  stones,  or  else  floored 
 with  boards.  In  the  centre  of  the  principal  front 
 is  the  usual  open  drawing-room,  on  which  the  best 
 art  of  the  Eastern  decorator  is  expended  (No.  273). 
 Much  of  one  of  the  sides  of  the  court  front  is  usu- 
 
 ally occupied  by  the  large  sitting-room,  with  the 
 
 lattice-front  covered  with  coloured  glass,  similar  to 
 
 7//////// 
 
 that    in   the  outer   court.      The  other  rooms  of 
 smaller  size,  are  the  more  private  apartments  of 
 
HOUSE 
 
 337 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 the  mansion.  The  interior  of  one  of  these  is 
 shewn  in  the  previous  cut  (No.  274).  There  are 
 usually  no  doors  to  the  sitting  or  drawing-rooms  of 
 Eastern  houses  :  they  are  closed  by  curtains,  at 
 least  in  summer,  the  opening  and  shutting  of  doors 
 being  odious  to  most  Orientals.  The  same  seems 
 to  have  been  the  case  among  the  Hebrews,  as  far 
 as  we  may  judge  from  the  curtains  which  served 
 instead  of  doors  to  the  tabernacle,  and  which 
 separated  the  inner  and  outer  chambers  of  the 
 temple.  The  curtained  entrances  to  our  West- 
 minster courts  of  law  supply  a  familiar  example 
 of  the  same  practice. 
 
 Some  ideas  respecting  the  arrangements  and  ar- 
 chitecture of  the  interior  parts  of  the  dwelling  may 
 be  formed  from  the  annexed  cut  (No.  275),  al- 
 though the  house  in  this  case,  being  modern  Egyp- 
 tian, differs  in  some  points  of  arrangement  from 
 those  on  which  our  description  is  chiefly  based. 
 
 These  observations  apply  to  the  principal  story. 
 The  basement  is  occupied  by  various  offices,  stores 
 of  corn  and  fuel,  places  for  the  water-jars  to  stand 
 in,  places  for  grinding  com,  baths,  kitchens,  etc. 
 The  kitchens  are  always  in  this  inner  court,  as  the 
 cooking  is  performed  by  women,  and  the  ladies  of 
 the  family  superintend  or  actually  assist  in  the  pro- 
 cess. The  kitchen,  open  in  front,  is  on  the  same 
 side  as  the  entrance  from  the  outer  court ;  and  the 
 top  of  it  forms  a  terrace,  which  affords  a  communi- 
 cation between  the  first  floor  of  both  courts  by  a 
 private  door,  seldom  used  but  by  the  master  of 
 the  house  and  attendant  eunuchs. 
 
 The  kitchen,  of  which  the  annexed  cut  (No. 
 276)  is  the  only  existing  representation,  is  sur- 
 rounded by  a  brick  terrace,  on  the  top  of  which 
 are  the  fireplaces  formed  in  compartments,  and 
 separated  by  little  walls  of  fire-brick  or  tile.  In 
 these  different  compartments  the  various  dishes  of 
 an  Eastern  feast  may  be  at  once  prepared  at  char- 
 coal fires.  This  place  being  wholly  open  in  front, 
 the  half-tame  doves,  which  have  their  nests  in  the 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 trees  of  the  court,  often  visit  it,  in  the  absence  of 
 the  servants,  in  search  of  crumbs,  etc.  As  they 
 sometimes  blacken  themselves,  this  perhaps  explains 
 the  obscure  passage  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  13,  'Though  ye 
 have  lien  among  the  pots,  ye  shall  be  as  the  wings 
 of  a  dove  covered  with  silver,'  etc.  In  Turkish 
 Arabia  most  of  the  houses  have  underground  cel- 
 lars  or  vaults,    to  which   the  inhabitants   retreat 
 
 during  the  mid-day  heat  of  summer,  and  there 
 enjoy  a  refreshing  coolness.  We  do  not  discover 
 any  notice  of  this  usage  in  Scripture.  But  at  Acre 
 the  substructions  of  very  ancient  houses  were  some 
 years  ago  discovered,  having  such  cellars,  which 
 were  very  probably  subservient  to  this  use.  In 
 the  rest  of  the  year  these  cellars,  or  serdaiibs,  as 
 they  are  called,  are  abandoned  to  the  bats,  which 
 swarm  in  them  in  scarcely  credible  numbers  (Is. 
 ii.  20). 
 
 From  the  court  a  flight  of  stone  steps,  usually 
 at  the  corner,  conducts  to  the  galleiy,  from  which 
 a  plainer  stair  leads  to  the  house-top.  If  the 
 house  be  large,  there  are  two  or  three  sets  of  steps 
 to  the  different  sides  of  the  quadrangle,  but  seldom 
 more  than  one  flight  from  the  terrace  to  the  house 
 top, of  any  one  court.  There  is,  however,  a  sepa- 
 rate stair  from  the  outer  court  to  the  roof,  and  it  is 
 usually  near* the  entrance.  This  will  bring  to 
 mind  the  case  of  the  paralytic,  whose  friends, 
 finding  they  could  not  get  access  to  Jesus  through 
 the  people  who  crowded  the  court  of  the  house  in 
 which  he  was  preaching,  took  him  up  to  the  roof, 
 and  let  him  down  in  his  bed  through  the  tiling,  to 
 the  place  where  Jesus  stood  (Luke  v.  17-26).  If 
 the  house  in  which  our  Lord  then  was  had  more 
 than  one  court,  he  and  the  auditors  were  certainly 
 in  the  outer  one  ;  and  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude 
 that  he  stood  in  the  veranda  addressing  the  crowd 
 below.  The  men  bearing  the  paralytic  therefore, 
 perhaps  went  up  the  steps  near  the  door  ;  and 
 finding  they  could  not  even  then  get  near  the 
 person  of  Jesus,  the  gallery  being  also  crowded, 
 continued  their  course  to  the  roof  of  the  house. 
 
HOUSE 
 
 338 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 and  removing  the  boards  over  the  covering  of  the 
 gallery,  at  the  place  where  Jesus  stood,  lowered 
 the  sick  man  to  his  feet.  But  if  they  covald  not 
 get  access  to  the  steps  near  the  door,  as  is  likely, 
 from  the  door  being  much  crowded,  their  alter- 
 native was  to  take  him  to  the  roof  of  the  next  house, 
 and  there  hoist  him  over  the  parapet  to  the  roof  of 
 the  house  which  they  desired  to  enter. 
 
 The  roof  of  the  house  is,  of  course,  flat.  It  is 
 formed  by  layers  of  branches,  twigs,  matting,  and 
 earth,  laid  over  the  rafters  and  trodden  down  ; 
 after  which  it  is  covered  with  a  compost  which 
 acquires  considerable  hardness  when  dry.  Such 
 roofs  would  not,  however,  endure  the  heavy  and 
 continuous  rains  of  our  climate  ;  and  in  those  parts 
 of  Asia  where  the  climate  is  more  than  usually 
 moist,  a  stone  roller  is  usually  kept  on  every  roof, 
 and  after  a  shower  a  great  part  of  the  population 
 is  engaged  in  drawing  these  rollers  over  the  roofs. 
 It  is  now  very  common,  in  countries  where  timber 
 is  scarce,  to  have  domed  roofs  ;  but  in  that  case, 
 the  flat  roof,  which  is  indispensable  to  Eastern 
 habits,  is  obtained  by  filling  up  the  hollow  intervals 
 between  the  several  domes,  so  as  to  form  a  flat 
 surface  at  the  top.  These  flat  roofs  are  often 
 alluded  to  in  Scripture  ;  and  the  allusions  shew 
 that  they  were  made  to  serve  the  same  uses  as  at 
 present.  In  fine  weather  the  inhabitants  resorted 
 much  to  them  to  breathe  the  fresh  air,  to  enjoy  a 
 fine  prospect,  or  to  witness  any  event  that  occurred 
 in  the  neighbourhood  (2  Sam.  xi.  2  ;  Is.  xxii.  i  ; 
 Matt.  xxiv.  17;  Mark  xiii.  15).  The  dryness  of 
 the  summer  atmosphere  enabled  them,  without 
 injuiy  to  health,  to  enjoy  the  bracing  coolness  of 
 the  night-air  by  sleeping  on  the  house-tops  ;  and  in 
 order  to  have  the  benefit  of  the  air  and  prospect  in 
 the  daytime,  without  inconvenience  from  the  sun, 
 sheds,  booths,  and  tents,  were  sometimes  erected 
 on  the  house-tops  (2  Sam.  xvi.  22). 
 
 The  roofs  of  the  houses  are  well  protected  by 
 walls  and  j^arapets.  Towards  the  street  and  neigh- 
 bouring houses  is  a  high  wall,  and  towards  the 
 interior  court-yard  usually  a  parapet  or  wooden 
 rail.  '  Battlements'  of  this  kind,  for  the  prevention 
 of  accidents,  are  strictly  enjoined  in  the  Law  (Deut. 
 xxii.  8)  ;  and  the  form  of  the  battlements  of  the 
 Egyptian  houses,  as  shewn  in  the  annexed  en- 
 gravmgs,  suggest  some  interesting  analogies,  when 
 we  consider  how  recently  the  Israelites  had  quitted 
 Egypt  when  that  law  was  delivered.  These  cuts, 
 with  the  one  before  given  (No.  269),  are  highly 
 interesting,  not  only  with  reference  to  this  particu- 
 lar point,  but  as  elevations  of  different  styles  of 
 houses  existing  in  a  neighbouring  country  in  the 
 early  ages  of  the  Hebrew  history.  One  of  them 
 (Nos.  277,  278)  exhibits  different  forms  of  a  pecu- 
 liarity which  we  have  not  observed  in  any  modern 
 example.  The  top  of  the  house  is  covered  with  a 
 roof  or  awning,  supported  by  columns,  whereby 
 the  sun  was  excluded,  and  a  refreshing  stream  of 
 air  passed  through.  Other  Egyptian  houses  had 
 merely  a  parapet  wall,  sometimes  surmounted  with 
 a  row  of  battlements,  as  in  the  cut  here  given 
 (No.  279). 
 
 Of  the  inferior  kinds  of  Oriental  dwellings,  such 
 as  are  met  with  in  villages  and  veiy  small  towns, 
 the  subjoined  is  not  an  unfavourable  specimen.  In 
 these  there  is  no  central  court,  but  there  is  generally 
 a  yard  attached,  either  on  one  side  or  at  the  rear. 
 The  shaded  platform  in  front  is  such  as  is  usually 
 seen  attached  to  coffee-houses,  which  is,  in  fact, 
 
 the  character  of  the  house  represented  in  No.  279, 
 Here  the  customers  sit  and  smoke  their  pipes,  and 
 
 sip  their  coffee.     The  village  cabins  and  abodes  ot 
 the  peasantry  are,  of  course,  of  a  still  inferior  de- 
 
 scription ;  and,  being  the  abodes  of  people  who 
 live  much  in  the  open  air,  will  not  bear  comparison 
 
 with  the  houses  of  the  same  class  in  Northern 
 Europe,  where  the  cottage  is  the  home  of  the  owner. 
 No  ancient  houses  had  chimneys.  The  word 
 so  translated  in  Hos.  xiii.  3,  means  a  hole  through 
 which  the  smoke  escaped  ;  and  this  existed  only 
 
HUET 
 
 339 
 
 IIUFNAGEL 
 
 In  the  lower  class  of  dwellings,  where  raw  wood 
 was  employed  for  fuel  or  cooking,  and  where  there 
 was  an  opening  immediately  over  the  hearth  to 
 let  out  the  smoke.  In  the  better  sort  of  houses 
 the  rooms  were  warmed  in  winter  by  charcoal  in 
 braziers,  as  is  still  the  practice  (Jer.  xxxvi.  22  ; 
 Mark  xiv.  54  ;  John  xviii.  18). 
 
 The  windows  had  no  glass.  They  were  only 
 latticed,  and  thus  gave  free  passage  to  the  air  and 
 admitted  light,  while  birds  and  bats  were  excluded. 
 In  winter  the  cold  air  was  kept  out  by  veils  over 
 the  windows  (see  cut  274),  or  by  shutters  with 
 holes  in  them  sufficient  to  admit  light  (l  Kings  vii. 
 17  ;  Cant.  ii.  9). 
 
 In  the  East,  where  the  climate  allows  the  people 
 to  spend  so  much  of  their  time  out  of  doors,  the 
 articles  of  furniture  and  the  domestic  utensils  have 
 
 always  been  few  and  simple.  They  are  in  this 
 work  noticed  under  separate  heads  [Bed  ;  Lamps  ; 
 Pottery  ;  Seats  ;  Tables].  The  rooms,  how- 
 ever, although  comparatively  vacant  of  movables, 
 are  far  from  having  a  naked  or  unfurnished  appear- 
 ance. This  is  owing  to  the  high  ornament  given 
 to  the  walls  and  ceilings.  The  walls  are  broken  up 
 into  various  recesses,  and  the  ceiling  into  compart- 
 ments. The  ceiling,  if  of  wood  and  flat,  is  of 
 curious  and  complicated  joinery  ;  or,  if  vaulted,  is 
 wiought  into  numerous  coves,  and  enriched  with 
 fret-work  in  stucco  ;  and  the  walls  are  adorned 
 with  arabesques,  mosaics,  mirrors,  painting,  and 
 gold ;  which,  as  set  off  by  the  marble-like  white- 
 ness of  the  stucco,  has  a  truly  brilliant  and  rich 
 effect.  There  is  much  in  this  to  remind  one  of 
 such  descriptions  of  splendid  interiors  as  that  in  Is. 
 
 Hv.  II,  12. — ^j.  K. 
 
 HUET,  Peter  Daniel,  bishop  of  Avranches, 
 belonged  to  a  family  of  rank,  and  was  born  at  Caen 
 in  Normandy,  Feb.  8,  1630.  His  parents  were 
 originally  protestants,  but  became  converts  to 
 popery  before  the  birth  of  their  son,  who  was  left 
 an  orphan  when  scarcely  six  years  old.  His  edu- 
 cation began  in  the  Jesuit's  College,  belonging 
 to  his  native  place,  and  for  eight  years  he  pursued 
 his  studies  there  with  an  insatiable,  illimitable  vora- 
 city for  knowledge  that  was  the  ruling  passion  of  a 
 life,  extended  almost  to  a  century.  He  cultivated 
 the  acquaintance  of  the  most  eminent  contemporaiy 
 scholars  ;  one  of  these  was  his  fellow-townsman 
 Samuel  Bochart  [Bochart],  whose  work  on  sacred 
 geography  was  published  when  Huet  was  in  his 
 sixteenth  year,  and  excited  his  taste  for  Biblical 
 studies.  He  accompanied  Bochart  in  his  visit  to 
 Sweden,  undertaken  at  the  express  desire  of  Queen 
 Christina.  At  Stockholm  he  met  in  the  Royal 
 Library  witli  a  manuscript  of  Origen's  commentary 
 
 on  Matthew  and  his  treatise  on  Prayer,  which  sug- 
 gested to  him  the  publication  of  the  works  of  that 
 Father,  a  task  he  partially  accomplished  fifteen  years 
 afterwards.  In  1670  he  was  appointed  tutor  of  the 
 Dauphin  in  conjunction  with  Bossuet,  and  at  the 
 request  of  the  Duke  of  Montausier  superintended 
 the  edition  of  Latin  authors  so  well  known  under 
 the  title  of  the  Delphin  classics.  In  his  forty-sixth 
 year  he  took  orders,  and  was  made  Abbot  of  Aul- 
 nar  ;  in  the  same  year,  1685,  he  was  nominated  to 
 the  see  of  Soissons,  which,  seven  years  after,  he 
 exchanged  for  that  of  Avranches.  In  1699,  owing 
 to  the  state  of  his  health,  he  resigned  his  bishopric, 
 and  received  in  lieu  of  it  the  abbacy  of  Fontenai, 
 two  miles  from  Caen.  He  died  Januaiy  26,  1721, 
 within  eleven  days  of  the  completion  of  his  ninety- 
 first  year.  Only  three  years  before  his  death  he 
 wrote  and  published  an  interesting  but  much  too 
 brief  autobiography,  entitled,  P.  D.  Hitetii  Com- 
 mentarii  de  7-ebus  ad  eiun  pertinentihits,  Ubri  sex, 
 Hagce  1 7 18.  After  his  connection  with  the  Court 
 as  preceptor  to  the  Dauphin  had  ceased,  he  re- 
 newed his  application  to  the  Hebrew  language,  to 
 which  he  added  the  Syriac  and  Arabic.  For  the 
 space  of  thirty-one  years,  from  1681  to  1712,  he 
 suffered  no  day  to  pass  without  devoting  two  or 
 three  hours  to  Oriental  literature,  and  during  that 
 period  read  through  the  original  text  of-the  O.  T. 
 twenty-four  times.  His  literary  sympathies  were 
 too  intense  to  be  confined  within  the  pale  of  his 
 own  communion,  and  besides  Protestant  scholars 
 on  the  continent,  he  was  on  terms  of  friendship 
 with  several  of  our  eminent  countiymen,  such  as 
 Gall,  Bernard,  and  Bishop  Pearson.  Of  his  vari- 
 ous works  the  following  belong  to  Biblical  htera- 
 ture  :  I.  Origenis  in  sacras  scriptiiras  qiicecunque 
 Grace  reperiri  potueriint,  etc.,  2  vols.  fol. ,  Rotho- 
 magi  (Rouen)  1688;  2.  Traite  de  la  situation  du 
 Paradis  terrestre,  a  Messiairs  de  PAcademie  Fraii- 
 (^oise,  1691  ;  3.  De  navigationibus  Salomonis,  1698; 
 this  was  published  at  Amsterdam,  with  a  Latin 
 translation  of  the  essay  on  Paradise,  and  both  were 
 inserted  in  the  eighth  volume  of  the  Critici  Sacri ; 
 4.  Demonstratio  Evangelica,  fol.,  1679.  This  work, 
 which  is  the  great  monument  of  his  literary  repu- 
 tation, was  the  result  of  various  conversations  with 
 the  eminent  Rabbi  Manasseh  Ben  Israel  at  Amster- 
 dam. It  begins  with  a  set  of  definitions  on  the 
 genuineness  of  books,  history,  prophecy,  true  reli- 
 gion, the  Messiah,  and  the  Christian  religion.  Then 
 follow  two  postulates,  and  four  axioms.  Ten  pro- 
 positions occupy  the  rest  of  the  book,  and  in  the 
 discussion  of  these  the  Demonstration  consists.  A 
 second  edition  appeared  at  Amsterdam  in  1680, 
 with  additions  by  the  author,  2  vols.  8vo.  A  few 
 minor  pieces  on  Biblical  subjects  are  contained  in 
 two  volumes,  edited  by  the  Abbe  Tilladet,  DisseV' 
 tations  sitr  di-oerses  Matieres  de  Religion,  et  de  Philo- 
 logie,  etc.,  Paris  1712.  A  translation  of  Huet's 
 autobiography  was  published  in  1 810  by  Dr.  Aikin 
 under  the  title  oi  Memoirs  of  the  life  of  Peter  Daniel 
 Huet,  bishop  of  Avranches,  written  by  himself  and 
 translated  from  theoriginal  Latin,  with  copious  notes, 
 biographical  and  critical,  by  John  Aikin,  M.D.,  2 
 vols.  8vo.— J.  E.  R. 
 
 HUFNAGEL,  Wilhelm  Friedrich,  a  Pro- 
 testant theologian,  was  born  at  Hall,  in  Swabia, 
 15th  Tune  1754.  Having  studied  at  the  Universi- 
 ties of  Altorf  and  Erlangen,  he  became  professor 
 extraordinary  of  philosophy  at  the  latter  place  in 
 
HUG 
 
 340 
 
 HUGO  DE  SANCTO  CARD 
 
 1779  ;  and  in  1782  ordinary  professor  of  theology. 
 In  1788  he  received  the  pastorate  of  the  Academi- 
 cal Church,  and  was  also  appointed  overseer  of  the 
 Seminary  for  Preachers.  In  1791  he  was  called  to 
 Frankfurt-on-the-Main  to  fill  the  place  of  coun- 
 sellor of  the  Consistory  and  preacher  in  one  of  the 
 old  churches  there.  He  died  7  th  February  1830. 
 Hufnagel  was  a  learned,  liberal,  acute  theologian, 
 versed  in  the  Semitic  languages  and  all  branches 
 of  theology.  Most  of  his  writings  are  sermons,  or 
 bear  upon  the  conduct  of  life.  We  can  only  men- 
 tion here  Varia?'tim  lectiomim  e  Bibliis  a  Nisselio 
 aa-atis  excerptanim  sp£ci7neti,  1777;  Salomos  hohes 
 Lied  geprilft,  uebersetzt,  taid e?-laiitert.,  1784  ;  Biblio- 
 theca  nova  theologica,  vol.  i. ,  1782-83  ;  Bearbeiiung 
 derSchriften  des  alien  Testaments  nach  ihreni  Inhalt 
 und  Zzveck  fiir  Leser  ans  alien  Stiindett,  1784  ; 
 Hiob  nezi  uebersetzt  niit  Anmerhtngen,  1781  ;  Dis- 
 sertatio  de psalinis prophetias  Messian.  continentibus, 
 in  2  parts,  1783.  Though  of  great  repute  in  his 
 day,  Hufnagel  is  almost  forgotten  at  the  present 
 time.  None  of  his  printed  works  had  the  element 
 of  permanence  or  immortality. — S.  D. 
 
 HUG,  John  Leonhard,  a  learned  Cathohc 
 theologian,  was  born  at  Constance,  1st  June  1765, 
 and  educated  at  the  Gymnasium  and  Lyceum  of 
 his  native  place ;  afterwards  at  the  University  of 
 Freiburg.  In  1789  he  became  a  priest ;  in  1791 
 he  was  appointed  professor  of  theology  at  Frei- 
 burg, where  he  remained  till  his  death,  nth  March 
 1846.  He  is  the  author  of  an  Einleitung  in  die 
 Sckriften  des  niten  Testaments,  1808,  2  vols.,  1847, 
 4th  edit.,  a  work  of  great  ability,  learning,  and 
 acuteness,  in  which  there  are  some  liberal  senti- 
 ments, but  more  that  are  adverse  to  the  recent 
 results  of  criticism.  It  was  translated  both  into 
 French  and  English.  He  is  also  the  author  of  Die 
 Erfindimg  der  Biichstabenschrift,  i8oi  ;  Unter- 
 stcchimgen  iieber  den  Mythus  der  beriih?ntesten  Volker 
 der  alien  Welt,  1812  ;  Ueher  die  ceginetischen  Tafeln, 
 ^^35  ;  Gutachten  tieber  das  Leben  Jesu  von  D.  F. 
 Strauss,  1840- 1844,  2  vols.  Hug  contributed  to 
 the  criticism  of  the  N.  T.  especially  in  the  depart- 
 ment of  ancient  versions,  which  is  his  strongest 
 side.  In  the  region  of  MSS.  he  was  less  successful, 
 though  always  suggestive  and  ingenious. — S.  D. 
 
 HUGO,  A  S.  ViCTORE,  was  born  at  Ypres  in 
 1097,  and  educated  in  the  monastery  of  Hammersle- 
 ben.  In  1 1 1 5  he  went  to  Paris  with  his  uncle  Hugo, 
 archdeacon  of  Halberstadt,  where  they  both  entered 
 the  monastery  of  St.  Victor.  Here  he  succeeded 
 the  Prior  Thomas  as  head  of  the  school,  and  here 
 he  laboured  with  great  success  during  the  remain- 
 ing period  of  a  secluded  but  useful  life.  He  died 
 in  1 141.  His  writings  procured  him  the  name  of 
 Lingua  Augustini,  or  alter  Aiigiistiniis.  Tlie  aim 
 of  the  illustrious  school  of  theolog)'  to  which  he 
 belonged,  and  of  which  he,  with  his  scholar 
 Richard  and  his  contemporary  Adam,  of  St. 
 Victor,  were  the  greatest  men,  was  '  to  unite  and 
 harmoniously  to  reconcile  the  scholastic  and  mystic 
 tendencies,  the  light  and  warmth,  which  had  ap- 
 peared more  in  opposition  in  Abelard  and  Bernard 
 .  .  .  nor  would  it  be  easy  to  exaggerate  the  influ- 
 ence for  good  which  went  forth  from  this  institu- 
 tion during  the  12th  and  13th  centuries  upon  the 
 whole  church'  (Trench,  Sacred  Lat.  Poetry,  p.  54). 
 
 The  first  volume  of  his  works  (3  vols.  fol. , 
 1526,  s.  1.)  consists  of  notes  on  Scripture,  and  in 
 the  third  is  his  Eruditio  Didascalica,     The  latter 
 
 gained  him  the  title  of  Didascalus,  and  is  intended 
 especially  as  an  introduction  to  the  Scrijitures.  He 
 gave  precedence  to  the  historical  sense,  but  ad- 
 mits, as  was  usual  in  his  time,  the  allegorical  and 
 tropological.  Peter  Lombard  was  his  greatest 
 scholar  (Maurice,  Mediarval  Philosophy,  144- 148  ; 
 Schneider  in  Herzog's  Encykl. ;  Liebner,  Hugo 
 von  St.   Victor).— F.  W.  F. 
 
 HUGO  DE  SANCTO  CARO,  sometimes  called 
 also  H.  DE  S.  Theoruorico,  was  born  at  St. 
 Cher,  near  to  Vienne  in  Dauphiny,  towards  the 
 close  of  the  12th  century.  He  studied  in  the  uni- 
 versity of  Paris,  where  he  subsequently  held  one  of 
 the  chairs  of  theology.  In  1225  he  was  received 
 into  the  order  of  the  Dominicans,  and  in  1227  was 
 appointed  Provincial  of  this  order  in  France.  He 
 was  made  Cardinal  by  Innocent  IV.  in  1244.  He 
 died  at  Orvieto,  March  19,  1263,  and  was  buried 
 at  Lyons.  At  the  request  of  the  Chapter-General 
 of  the  Dominicans,  he  undertook  the  compilation 
 of  a  Correctorium,  or  a  correction  of  the  text  of 
 the  Vulgate.  The  title  of  a  copy  of  this  work, 
 preserved  in  the  Library  of  Nuremberg,  is  Liber 
 de  correctionibiis  novis  super  biblia,  ad  scioidum  qtces 
 sit  verior  et  commnnior  litera,  Pei'erendissimi  patris 
 et  doniini  D.  Htcgoftis,  sacrce  Rom.  eccl.  presbyteri 
 cardinalis,  sacrcE  theologies  professoris  et  de  ordine 
 prcvdicaionim.  The  authorities  used  by  Hugo 
 were  the  exegetical  writings  of  Jerome,  Augustine, 
 Rhabanus  Maurus,  and  Bede.  He  states  also  in 
 the  preface  that  they  are  drawn  partly  ex  libris 
 Hebrasorum  et  antiquissimis  exemplaribus,  quae 
 etiam  ante  tempora  Caroli  Magna  inscripta  fuerant. 
 It  is,  however,  doubtful  whether  he  were  ac- 
 quainted with  either  Greek  or  Hebrew,  as  his 
 various  references  to  Greek  versions  and  the  He- 
 brew text  are  derived  from  Jerome.  This  work 
 was  the  original  of  which  several  other  correctoria 
 were  enlarged  and  revised  editions.  Roger  Bacon 
 strongly  expresses  his  disapproval  of  it,  and  terms  it 
 '  pessima  corruptio,'  and  says  of  it  '  destruitur  tex- 
 tus  Dei'  (Hody,  De Bibl.  Texiibus,  p.  429).  Hugo 
 was  also  the  author  of  a  work  entitled  Sanciorwrn 
 Biblioruf?i  Concordantice,  or,  as  it  is  sometimes 
 called,  Concordantice  S.  yacobi,  from  the  Monastery 
 of  St.  James,  in  Paris,  wherein  Hugo  long  resided. 
 It  is  the  earliest  Scriptural  Concordance,  under- 
 standing by  this  term  an  alphabetical  index  to  the 
 words  of  Scripture.  The  earlier  work  by  Antony 
 of  Padua  [Concordance]  is  rather  an  index  of 
 subjects.  On  this  account  Hugo  is  sometimes 
 styled  Pater  Concordaniiarian.  In  its  earliest  form 
 the  references  only  were  given,  but  in  a  subsequent 
 edition  made  three  English  Dominicans  resident  in 
 Paris,  John  of  Darlington,  Richard  of  Stavensby, 
 and  Hugh  of  Croydon,  the  various  passages  were 
 given  in  full.  Both  these  forms  of  the  work  are 
 called  Cone.  S.  Jacobi,  although  the  latter  is  some- 
 times distinguished  as  Cotic.  Anglicance.  In  addi- 
 tion to  these  works  Hugo  was  the  author  of  a 
 commentary  on  the  entire  Scriptures,  entitled  Pos- 
 tillce  in  tmiversa  Biblia  Juxia  qiiadruplicem  sen- 
 snm,  literalem,  allegoricnm,  7}i07alem,  anagogicum, 
 written  on  the  principle  of  discovering  a  fourfold 
 sense  in  every  passage.  It  has  been  frequently 
 published,  the  principal  editions  being  Venet.  et 
 Basil  1487,  6  vol.  fol.,  Basil  1498,  1504;  Paris 
 1508,  1538;  Venet.  1600;  Colon.  Agripp.  1621: 
 Lugd.  1645,  1669.  Two  other  Biblical  works  by 
 Hugo  exist  in  MS.  in  the  Ubrary  of  Paris  :  Ser- 
 
HUKKOK 
 
 341 
 
 HUNTING 
 
 mones  super  episfolas  et  evangelia,  de  tempore.  Pro- 
 cessus hi  librum  Evangelii  ceterni. — S.  N. 
 
 HUKKOK  (ppn  ;  Sept.  'iKciKand'Ia/caw).     I. 
 
 A  city  on  the  southern  border  of  Naphtah,  near 
 Aznoth-Tabor  (Josh.  xix.  34).  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome  place  it  on  the  borders  of  Naphtah  and 
 Asher.  Robinson  and  Van  de  Velde  identify  it 
 with  Yakuk,  a  small  village  situated  some  five 
 miles  west  of  the  site  of  Capernaum,  between 
 Wady  Kefr  'Anan  and  Wady  Selameh  [Bib.  Res. , 
 iii.  81  ;  Memoir,  322).     This  is  probably  correct. 
 
 2.  Another  Hukkok  ('Akii/c  ;  Alex.  'la/cd/c)  is 
 mentioned  in  I  Chron.  vi.  75  (60),  as  allotted  out 
 of  the  tribe  of  Asher  to  the  Gershonites.  There  is 
 a  difficulty  in  this  passage,  because  the  parallel  in 
 Josh.  xxi.  31  has  Helkath  instead  of  Hukkok.  The 
 probability  is  that  the  two  names  were  given  to  the 
 same  place,  a  thmg  not  unusual  in  Syria  at  the  pre- 
 sent day  (see  Keil,  ad  loc.)  There  is  no  ground 
 for  identifying  this  Hukkok  with  the  preceding. 
 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 HUL  \AX\ ;  Sept.  OifX),  a  name  which  occurs 
 among  the  generations  of  the  sons  of  Noah,  and  is 
 the  name  of  the  second  of  the  sons  of  Aram^  the  son 
 of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  23).  The  district  of  country  pos- 
 sessed by  his  descendants  is  believed  to  have  been  a 
 large  flat  district  in  the  north  of  Palestine,  known  to 
 this  day  as  the  land  of  Hiileh.  The  river  Jordan 
 runs  through  part  of  it.  The  lake  Hfileh,  anciently 
 Merom,  is  situate  in  the  same  district  (see  Dr. 
 ^qMxv&o'c^?,  Researches,  iii.  339-357). — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HULDAH  {Vrbn  -,  Sept.  ^0\5a  ;  Vulg.   Olda), 
 
 a  prophetess  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Josiah.  She 
 was  the  wife  of  Shallum,  the  keeper  of  the  (pro- 
 bably royal)  wardrobe,  and  dwelt  at  Jerusalemv  in 
 what  may  be  described  as  the  lower  or  inferior  part 
 of  the  city  (T\^^'0,   rendered  by   Gesenius,    Thes. 
 
 145 1,  pars  urbis  secondaria  or  suburb  ;  in  the  A.  V. 
 it  is  improperly  translated  '  college'),  the  part  pro- 
 bably which  Josephus  dQSXgndXesiheot/uTcity,  ij  dWy) 
 ir6Xts  {Antiq.  xv.  II.  5),  and  the  lower  city,  ij  ko-tw 
 7r6Xts  {Bell.  Jud.  v.  4.  i).  It  was  to  this  prophetess 
 that  Josiah  sent  a  deputation  consisting  of  the  high- 
 priest  and  other  distinguished  pereons  of  his  court, 
 to  inquire  the  Divine  will,  if  by  any  means  he 
 might  avert  the  punishment  to  which,  as  he  had 
 learnt  from  the  book  of  the  law  read  to  him  by 
 Shaphan  the  scribe,  the  nation  was  exposed  be- 
 cause of  its  transgressions  (2  Kings  xxii.  14-20  ;  2 
 Chron.  xxxiv.  22-28;  Joseph.  Antiq.  x.  4.  2).  This 
 circumstance  shews  the  high  reputation  in  which 
 Huldah  was  then  held,  and  especially  as  Jeremiah 
 had  already,  five  years  before,  begun  to  deliver  his 
 prophecies  (Jer.  i.  2). — S.  N. 
 
 HUMTAH  (noprt;  Sept.  Y.xiiJ.6.;  Alex.   Xa/i- 
 
 /narct),  a  town  of  Judah  in  the  hill  country  mentioned 
 between  Apheka  and  Hebron  (Josh.  xv.  54).  Euse- 
 bius and  Jerome  simply  mention  it  under  the  name 
 'A/xard  or  Ammata,  as  in  the  tribe  of  Judah.  It 
 has  not  been  identified. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HUNT,  Thomas,  D.D.,  F.R.S.,  F.A.S.,  was 
 born  in  1696,  and  educated  at  Hart  Hall,  Oxford, 
 of  which  he  became  a  fellow.  He  was  first  elected 
 to  be  Regius  professor  of  Hebrew,  next  Laudian 
 professor  of  Arabic,  and  canon  of  Christ  Church  in 
 1747.     He  died  1774.     He  is  noticed  here  for  his 
 
 work  entitled  Observations  on  several  Passages  in  thi 
 Book  of  Proverbs,  with  two  Sermons,  Oxford  1775, 
 4to.  This  work,  part  of  which  only  was  printed 
 before  his  death,  and  the  rest  edited  by  Dr.  Kenni- 
 cott,  embraces,  in  the  observations  it  contains, 
 some  twenty-six  passages  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs. 
 Most  of  the  observations  are  valuable,  and  discover 
 the  extensive  and  equally  sound  learning  of  their 
 author.  His  proposed  emendations  of  the  trans- 
 lation are  generally  important,  and  throw  much 
 light  on  some  of  the  more  difficult  passages  of  the 
 book.  Dr.  Hunt  was  the  author  also  of  two  Latin 
 dissertations,  the  first  entitled  De  Antiquitate  ele- 
 gantia  et  utilitate  lingiece  Arabicce  Oratio,  4to,  Oxon. 
 1739  ;  the  other,  De  usu  dialectonim  Orientalium, 
 4to,  Oxon.  1748.  Both  are  treatises  of  some 
 importance,  especially  the  latter,  as  showing  the 
 use  of  the  Oriental  dialects,  and  in  particular  the 
 Arabic,  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
 tures. Some,  however,  are  of  opinion  that  Dr. 
 Hunt's  ideas  on  this  subject  are  carried  sufficiently 
 far  (Orme's  Biblioth.  Bib.)~\N.  J.  C. 
 
 HUNTING.  The  pursuit  and  capture  of  beasts 
 of  the  field  was  the  first  means  of  sustenance  which 
 the  human  race  had  recourse  to,  this  mode  of 
 gaining  a  livelihood  having  naturally  preceded  the 
 engagements  of  agriculture,  as  it  presented  food 
 already  provided,  requiring  only  to  be  taken  and 
 slaughtered  ;  whereas  tillage  must  have  been  an 
 afterthought,  and  a  later  resource,  since  it  implies 
 accumulated  knowledge,  skill,  and  such  provision 
 aforehand  of  subsistence  as  would  enable  a  clan  or 
 a  family  to  wait  till  the  fruits  of  the  earth  were 
 matured.  Hunting  was,  therefore,  a  business  long 
 ere  it  was  a  sport.  And  originally,  before  man 
 had  established  his  empire  on  the  earth,  it  must 
 have  been  not  only  a  serious  but  a  dangerous  pur- 
 suit. In  process  of  time,  however,  when  civihza- 
 tion  had  made  some  progress,  when  cities  were 
 built  and  lands  cultivated,  hunting  was  carried  on 
 not  so  much  for  the  food  which  it  brought  as  for 
 the  recreation  it  gave  and  its  conduciveness  to 
 health. 
 
 The  East— the  cradle  of  civilization — presents  us 
 with  hunting  in  both  the  characters  now  spoken 
 of,  originally  as  a  means  of  support,  then  as  a 
 manly  amusement.  In  the  early  records  of  his- 
 tory we  find  hunting  held  in  high  repute,  partly, 
 no  doubt,  from  its  costliness,  its  dangers,  its  simi- 
 htude  to  war,  its  capability  of  combining  the  ener- 
 gies of  many,  and  also  from  the  relief  which  it 
 afforded  to  the  stagnant  monotony  of  a  court,  in 
 the  high  and  bounding  spirits  that  it  called  forth. 
 Hunting  has  always  borne  somewhat  of  a  regal 
 character,  and  down  to  the  present  hour  has  worn 
 an  aristocratic  air.  In  Babylon  and  Persia  this 
 attribute  is  presented  in  bold  relief.  Immense 
 parks  {irapd5€L(Toi)  were  enclosed  for  nurturing  and 
 preserving  beasts  of  the  chase.  The  monarch  him- 
 self led  the  way  to  the  sport,  not  only  in  these  pre- 
 serves, but  also  over  the  wide  surface  of  the  coun- 
 try, being  attended  by  his  nobles,  especially  by 
 the  younger  aspnants  to  fame  and  warlike  renown 
 (Xen.,  Cyr.  viii.  r.  38). 
 
 In  the  Bible— our  chief  storehouse  of  primitive 
 history  and  customs— we  find  hunting  connected 
 with  royalty  so  early  as  in  Gen.  x.  The  great 
 founder  of  Babel  was  in  general  repute  as  'a 
 mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord.''  The  patriarchs, 
 however,  are  to  be  regarded  rather  as  herdsmen 
 
HUNTING 
 
 342 
 
 HUR 
 
 than  hunters,  if  respect  is  had  to  their  habitual 
 mode  of  life.  The  condition  of  the  herdsman 
 ensues  next  to  that  of  the  hunter  in  the  early  stages 
 of  civilization  ;  and  so  we  find  that  even  Cain  was 
 a  keeper  of  sheep.  This  and  the  fact  that  Abel  is 
 designated  '  a  tiller  of  the  ground,'  would  seem  to 
 indicate  a  very  rapid  progress  in  the  arts  and  pur- 
 suits of  social  life.  The  same  contrast  and  similar 
 hostility  we  find  somewhat  later,  in  the  case  of 
 Jacob  and  Esau ;  the  first,  '  a  plain  man  dwelling 
 in  tents  ; '  the  second,  '  a  cunning  hunter,  a  man  of 
 the  field'  (Gen.  xxv.  27).  The  account  given  of 
 Esau  in  connection  wdth  his  father  seems  to  show 
 that  hunting  was,  conjointly  with  tillage,  pursued 
 at  that  time  as  a  means  of  subsistence,  and  that 
 hunting  had  not  then  passed  into  its  secondary 
 state,  and  become  an  amusement. 
 
 In  Egypt  the  children  of  Israel  would  be  specta- 
 tors of  hunting  carried  on  extensively  and  pursued 
 in  different  manners,  but  chiefly,  as  appears  pro- 
 bable, with  a  view  rather  to  recreation  than  sub- 
 sistence (Wilkinson's  ^«^.  Egypt.,  vol.  iii.)  That 
 the  land  of  promise  into  which  the  Hebrev^s  were 
 conducted  on  leaving  Egypt  was  plentifully  sup- 
 plied with  beasts  of  the  chase,  appears  clear  from 
 Exod.  xxiii.  29,  '  I  will  not  drive  them  out  in  one 
 year,  lest  the  land  become  desolate  and  the  beast 
 of  the  field  multiply  against  thee'  (comp.  Deut.  vii. 
 22).  And  from  the  regulation  given  in  Lev.  xvii. 
 15,  it  is  manifest  that  hunting  was  practised  after 
 the  settlement  in  Canaan,  aiKi  was  pursued  with 
 the  view  of  obtaining  food.  Prov.  xii.  27  proves 
 that  hunting  animals  for  their  flesh  was  an  estab- 
 lished custom  among  the  Hebrews,  though  the 
 turn  of  the  passage  may  serve  to  show  that  at  the 
 time  it  was  penned  sport  was  the  chief  aim.  If 
 hunting  was  not  forbidden  in  the  '  year  of  rest,' 
 special  provision  was  made  that  not  only  the  cattle, 
 but  'the  beast  of  the  field'  should  be  allowed  to 
 enjoy  and  flourish  on  the  imcropped  spontaneous 
 produce  of  the  land  (Exod.  xxiii.  II  ;  Lev.  xxv. 
 7).  Harmer  (iv.  357)  says,  'there  are  various  sorts 
 of  creatures  in  the  Holy  Land  proper  for  hunting  ; 
 wild  boars,  antelopes,  hares,  etc. ,  are  in  consider- 
 able numbers  there,  and  one  of  the  Christian  kings 
 of  Jerusalem  lost  his  life  (Gesta  Dei,  p.  887)  in 
 pursuing  a  hare.'  That  the  lion  and  other  rave- 
 nous beasts  of  prey  were  not  wanting  in  Palestine, 
 many  passages  of  the  Bible  make  obvious  (i  Sam. 
 xvii.  34  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  20 ;  i  Kings  xiii.  24 ; 
 Harris,  Natural  History  of  the  Bible  ;  Kitto's  Pic- 
 to7-ial  Palestine).  The  lion  was  even  made  use  of 
 to  catch  other  animals  (Ezek.  xix.  3),  and  Harmer 
 long  ago  remarked  that  as  in  the  vicinity  of  Gaza, 
 so  also  in  Judtea,  leopards  were  trained  and  used 
 for  the  same  purpose  (Harmer,  iv.  358  ;  Hab.  i. 
 8).  That  lions  were  taken  by  pitfalls  as  well  as  by 
 nets  appears  from  Ezek.  xix.  4,  8  (Shaw,  p.  172). 
 In  the  latter  verse  the  words  of  the  prophet,  '  and 
 spread  their  net  over  him,'  allude  to  the  custom  of 
 enclosing  a  wide  extent  of  country  with  nets,  into 
 which  the  animals  were  driven  by  hunters  (Wilkin- 
 son, A)ic,  Egypt.,  iii.  4).  The  spots  thus  enclosed 
 were  usually  in  a  hilly  country  and  in  the  vicinity 
 of  water  brooks ;  whence  the  propriety  and  force 
 of  the  language  of  Ps.  xlii.  i,  '  As  the  (hunted) 
 hart  panteth  after  the  water  brooks.'  These 
 places  were  selected  because  they  were  those  to 
 which  the  animals  were  in  the  habit  of  repairing 
 in  the  morning  and  evening.  Scenes  like  the  one 
 now  supposed  are  found  portrayed  in  the  Egyptian 
 
 paintings  (Wilkinson).  Hounds  were  used  for 
 hunting  in  Egypt,  and,  if  the  passage  in  Josephus 
 {Antiq.  iv.  8.  9)  may  be  considered  decisive,  in 
 Palestine  as  well.  From  Gen.  xxvii.  3,  '  Now 
 take  thy  weapons,  thy  quiver  and  thy  bow,'  we 
 learn  what  arms  were  employed  at  least  in  captur- 
 ing game.  Bulls,  after  being  taken,  were  kept  at 
 least  for  a  time  in  a  net  (Is.  li.  20).  Various  mis- 
 siles, pitfalls,  snares,  and  gins  were  made  use  of  in 
 hunting  (Ps.  xci.  3  ;  Amos  iii.  5  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
 20).  That  hunting  continued  to  be  followed  till 
 towards  the  end  of  the  Jewish  state  appears  from 
 Josephus  {De  Bell.  Jud.  i.  21.  13)  [Fowling  ; 
 Fishing]. — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 HUPPIM   (D''Qn;    Sept.   Cod.   Alex.  'O^i.t/t^;', 
 
 Gen.  xlvi.  21  ;  'Airiplv,  Alex.  'A4>el/i,  i  Chron.  vii, 
 12),  the  head  of  one  of  the  Benjamite  families.  In 
 Num.  xxvi.  39  he  is  called  Hupham  (DDiin),  and 
 
 his  clan  the  Huphamites.     [Becher.] — + 
 
 HUR  (lin).  I.  (LXX.  '0/);  Joseph.  Oi'pwv) 
 A  man  whose  name  upon  two  important  occasions 
 is  associated  with  those  of  Moses  and  Aaron  in 
 such  a  way  as  to  forcibly  suggest  that  he  was  pro- 
 bably related  to  them  either  by  birth  or  marriage. 
 When,  during  the  engagement  of  Joshua  with  the 
 Amalekites,  Moses  stood  on  the  hill  with  the  rod 
 of  God  in  his  hand,  it  was  Aaron  and  Hur  who 
 accompanied  him,  and  'stayed  up  his  hands' 
 (Exod.  xvii.  10-12),  and  again  when  Moses  went 
 up  into  Mount  Sinai,  it  was  to  Aaron  and  Hur  that 
 he  entrusted  the  chief  authority  during  his  absence 
 (Exod.  xxiv.  14).  According  to  Jewish  tradition, 
 as  preserved  by  Josephus,  he  was  the  husband  of 
 Miriam  (Antiq.  iii.  2.  4),  and  also  identical  with  3 
 {Antiq.  iii.  6.  i). 
 
 2.  (LXX.    Oi)/);   Joseph.    Oiip-q^)    One    of  the 
 
 princes  or  petty  kings  of  Midian  (p*lD  ""^PD),  who, 
 
 along  with  four  othei  Midianite  chieftains,  was  de- 
 feated and  slain,  shortly  before  the  death  of  Moses, 
 by  the  Israelites,  under  the  leadership  of  Phinehas, 
 the  son  of  Eleazar  (Num.  xxxi.  8 ;  Joseph.  Antiq. 
 iv.  7.  i).  In  Josh.  xiii.  21  these  five  Midianites 
 are  termed  pIT'D  ''3''pJ)   '  the  princes  or  vassals  of 
 
 Sihon,'  and    are  also  described  as   V^KH  ""^tj'^, 
 
 'dwellers  in  the  land,'  which  Keil  explains  as 
 meaning  that  they  had  for  a  long  time  dwelt  in  the 
 land  of  Canaan  with  the  Moabites,  whereas  the 
 Amorites  had  only  recently  effected  an  entrance. 
 After  the  defeat  of  Sihon,  these  chieftains  appear 
 to  have  made  common  cause  with  Balak  the  king 
 of  Moab  (Num.  xxii.  4,  7),  and  to  have  joined 
 with  him  in  urging  Balaam  to  curse  the  Israelites. 
 The  evil  counsel  of  Balaam  having  been  followed, 
 and  the  Israelites  in  consequence  seduced  into 
 transgression  (Num.  xxxi.  16),  Moses  was  directed 
 to  make  war  upon  the  Midianites.  The  latter  were 
 utterly  defeated,  and  '  Balaam  also,  the  son  of 
 Beor,  they  slew  with  the  sword.' 
 
 3.  (LXX.  'Up)  The  grandfather  of  Bezaleel,  the 
 architect  of  the  tabernacle  (Exod.  xxxi.  2  ;  xxxv. 
 30  ;  xxxviii.  22).  He  was  the  son  of  Caleb  (or 
 Chelubai),  the  son  of  Hezron,  the  grandson  of 
 Judah  (i  Chron.  ii.  19,  20,  cf.  9  ;  iv.  i).  His 
 mother's  name  was  Ephrath  or  Ephratah,  and  he 
 washer  first-bom  son  (i  Chron.  ii.  50).  His  de- 
 scendants occupied  the  towns  of  Bethlehem,  Kir- 
 jath-jearim,  and  Bethgader  (i  Chron.  ii.  50,  51). 
 
HURAM 
 
 343 
 
 HUSHAI 
 
 4.  The  'son  of  Hur'  is  mentioned  (l  Kings  iv. 
 8)  as  one  of  the  twelve  officers  appointed  by  .Solo- 
 mon to  superintend  the  supply  of  provisions  for 
 the  royal  household.  Mount  Ephraim  was  the 
 district  assigned  to  him.  The  Vulgate  has  Benhur, 
 regarding  the  two  words  as  forming  a  compound 
 proper  name,  and  not  as  a  patronymic.  The 
 LXX.  is  ambiguous,  reading  Be^j'  inos  'Qp.  Jose- 
 phus  gives  Oiip-qs  as  the  name  of  the  officer,  Antiq. 
 viii.  2.  3. 
 
 5.  (LXX.  Soi>/))  The  father  of  Rephaiah,  one  of 
 the  builders  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Nehe- 
 miah  (Neh.  iii.  9). — S.  N. 
 
 HURAM  (DT.ri;  Sept.   Ovpap.;  Alex.  'Iw^/x). 
 
 I.  A  Benjamite  first-born  of  Bela  (l   Chron.   viii. 
 5).     2.  [Hiram]. 
 
 HURD,  Richard,  D.D.,  who  was  bom  at 
 Congreve  in  Staffordshire,  in  1720,  rose  from  a 
 comparatively  humble  rank  in  life,  his  parents 
 being  (to  use  his  own  words)  '  plain,  honest,  and 
 good  people,  farmers,  but  of  a  turn  of  mind  that 
 might  have  honoured  any  rank.'  They  were  wise 
 enough  to  give  their  son  a  good  education,  first  at 
 Brewood  Grammar  School,  and  eventually  at 
 Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge,  of  which  society 
 he  was  elected  fellow  in  1742.  The  result  of  this 
 education  was  honourable  to  Hurd,  who  became  one 
 of  the  most  elegant  classical  scholars  of  his  time. 
 The  first  public  proof  of  this  accomplishment  he 
 gave  in  the  year  1749,  when  he  published  his 
 Commentary  on  Horace's  Ars  Poetica  ;  this  publi- 
 cation introduced  him  to  Bishop  Warburton,  on 
 whose  recommendation  Sherlock,  Bishop  of  Lon- 
 don, appointed  Hurd,  Whitehall  preacher,  in  1750. 
 Among  other  results  of  the  sincere  friendship  which 
 long  existed  between  Warburton  and  Hurd  was  the 
 promotion  of  the  latter  by  his  friend  to  the  arch- 
 deaconry of  Gloucester  in  1767.  The  next  year  he 
 took  his  doctor's  degree  at  Cambridge,  and  was 
 appointed  to  open  the  lecture  founded  by  Warbur- 
 ton for  the  illustration  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures ; 
 his  twelve  discourses  he  published  in  1772,  under 
 the  title  of  'An  Itiiroduction  to  the  study  0/  the 
 Prophecies  concerning  the  Christian  Church,  and  in 
 particular  concerning  the  church  of  Papal  Po?ne.'' 
 This  was  the  first  of  the  Warburtonian  Lectures. 
 Notwithstanding  the  polemical  cast  of  some  of 
 these  sermons,  the  clear  exposition  of  the  general 
 principles  of  prophecy  and  of  the  claims  which 
 this  portion  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  has  on  the 
 serious  and  unprejudiced  attention  of  thoughtful 
 readers,  conveyed  in  perspicuous  and  even  elegant 
 language,  has  secured  a  large  amount  of  popu- 
 larity for  the  work  even  up  to  recent  times.  The 
 last  edition  of  these  discourses  was  edited  by 
 the  Rev.  Ed.  Bickersteth,  who  in  his  'prefatory 
 remarks'  mentijons  many  reasons  '  which  make  this 
 work  both  seasonable  and  profitable  in  the  present 
 day.'  Hurd,  who  was  promoted  to  the  see  of 
 Lichfield  and  Coventiyin  1775,  and  six  years  after- 
 wards was  translated  to  the  bishopric  of  Worcester, 
 on  the  death  of  Archbishop  Comwallis  in  1783, 
 was  pressed  by  the  king  to  accept  the  primacy ; 
 but  'he  humbly  begged  leave  to  decline,  as  a 
 charge  not  suited  to  his  temper  and  talents,  and 
 .uuch  too  heavy  for  him  to  sustain.'  He  died  in 
 the  year  1808,  in  the  eighty-ninth  year  of  his  age. 
 Besides  the  productions  of  his  pen  which  we  have 
 already  mentioned,   Bishop   Hurd  wrote  various 
 
 works  on  the  infidelity  of  the  age,  including  '  Re. 
 marks  on  Hume's  Essay  on  the  Natural  History  oi 
 Religion,'  in  1759;  and  some  volumes  of  sermons. 
 He  also  edited  Cowley's  select  works  in  1769  ; 
 Warburton's  works  in  seven  quarto  vols,  in  1788, 
 with  the  life  of  his  right  reverend  friend  and  patron 
 in  1794;  and  Addison's  works,  with  notes,  in  six 
 vols.  8vo.  Warburton  commended  Hurd  as  'one 
 of  the  best  scholars  in  the  kingdom,  and  of  parts 
 and  genius  equal  to  his  learning,  and  a  moral  cha- 
 racter that  adorned  both.'  Hallam,  Lit.  History  oj 
 Europe  [ed.  4],  vol.  iii.,  p.  475,  note,  with  greater 
 discrimination  praises  Hurd  as  '  having  perhaps  the 
 merit  of  being  the  first  who  in  this  countiy  aimed 
 at  philosophic  criticism  ;  as  having  had  great  in- 
 genuity, a  good  deal  of  reading,  and  great  facility 
 in  applying  it ;  but  [he  adds]  he  did  not  feel  very 
 deeply  .  .  .  assumed  a  dogmatic  arrogance, 
 which  as  it  always  offends  the  reader  for  the  most 
 part  also  stands  in  the  way  of  the  author's  own 
 search  for  truth.'  Hurd's  works  were  collected, 
 and,  three  years  after  his  death,  published  in  eight 
 volumes,  8vo. — P.  H. 
 
 HURDIS,  James,  D.D.,  was  more  a  poet,  per- 
 haps, than  a  divine.  He  was  born  at  Bishopstone, 
 Sussex,  1763,  and  entered  a  commoner  of  St. 
 Mary's  Hall,  Oxford,  1780.  He  was  elected  a 
 fellow  of  Magdalene  College,  1782,  and  presented 
 to  the  living  of  Bishopstone  in  1791.  In  1793  he 
 was  elected  to  the  professorship  of  poetry  in  the 
 University  of  Oxford.  HediediSoi.  His  works 
 of  Biblical  interest  are  the  following  : — Select  Criti- 
 cal Retnarks  upon  the  English  Version  of  the  First 
 Ten  Chapters  of  Genesis,  Lond.  1793,  8vo.  These 
 remarks  are  on  the  whole  judicious,  and  may  be 
 consulted  with  advantage  ;  also  A  short  Critical 
 Disquisition  up07t  the  true  fneaning  of  the  word 
 D'^J^JD,  found  in  Genesis  i.  21,   Lond.   1 790,  Svo. 
 
 The  author  contends  that  the  above  word,  where- 
 ever  it  occurs,  signifies  crocodile.  His  remarks  on 
 the  various  passages  in  which  it  is  found  are,  to  say 
 the  least,  very  ingenious.  Dr.  Hurdis  is  the  author 
 also  of  a  work  entitled  Twelve  Dissertations  on  the 
 Nature  a7ui  Occasion  of  Psabii  and  Prophecy,  1800, 
 Svo.  He  also  wrote  and  published  several  small 
 volumes  of  poetry,  of  which,  however,  no  further 
 mention  can  be  made  here. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HUSHAH.      [HUSHATHITE.] 
 
 HUSHAI  (-E^in  ;  Sept.  Xow/ ;  Vulg.  Chusai) 
 
 appears  as  a  prominent  actor  in  the  history  ot 
 Absalom's  rebellion.  When  David  fled  from  his 
 capital  Hushai  joined  his  mournful  train  at  the  top 
 of  Mount  Olivet,  and  seems  to  have  been  the 
 means  of  first  raising  the  forlorn  monarch  from  the 
 dejection  into  which  he  was  thrown  by  the  tidings 
 of  the  desertion  of  his  ablest  counsellor  Ahithophel 
 (2  Sam.  XV.  32).  At  his  royal  master's  suggestion 
 Hushai  returned  to  the  city  for  the  purpose  of 
 serving  his  cause  as  occasion  might  offer  (vv.  33-37)- 
 One  of  the  prince's  first  acts  was  to  convene  a 
 meeting,  which  Dr.  Kitto  mentions  as  '  the  first 
 cabinet  council  to  which  histoiy  admits  us'  {Bible 
 Illustr.  iii.  420)  :  Hushai  was  invited  to  attend 
 rather  as  an  amicus  curies  than  as  a  recognised 
 member.  After  Ahithophel  had  tendered  his  sage 
 but  fiendish  counsel,  Hushai,  called  on  by  Absalom 
 himself  to  offer  his  opinion,  availed  himself  of  his 
 opportunity  with  an  adroitness  which  reminds  us  of 
 
HUSHAI 
 
 344 
 
 HUSHATHITE 
 
 the  artfulness  of  a  Ulysses  or  a  Themistocles.  In 
 winged  words  of  florid  eloquence  he  portrayed  the 
 martial  spirit  of  the  king,  and,  true  to  his  object  of 
 defeating  Ahithophel's  fatal  counsel,  he  urged  the 
 prince  to  delay  his  pursuit  of  the  '  chafed'  monarch 
 until  he  had  effected  an  ampler  preparation  (xvii. 
 7-13).  The  earnestness  of  his  manner  recommended 
 his  specious  advice  to  Absalom  as  preferable  to  that 
 of  the  rival  counsellor  (xvii.  14).  The  immediate 
 result  was  the  suicide  (the  first  on  record,  Kitto, 
 /.  c.)  of  the  vexed  and  disappointed  Ahithophel, 
 and  the  ultimate  consequence  was  the  crushing  out 
 of  the  formidable  rebellion.  Much  curious  and 
 vain  discussion  has  been  raised  as  to  the  conduct  of 
 Hushai  in  his  seiTice  of  David  ;  all  through  he 
 seems  to  have  closely  followed  the  suggestions  of 
 his  royal  master  (xv.  34)  ;  so  that  whatever  censure 
 is  passed  on  him  belongs  equally  to  the  king. 
 Peter  Martyr  combines  them  both  in  his  extra- 
 ordinary conclusion  (in  loc),  'Si  ex  instinctu  Dei 
 hoc  fecerunt  non  peccarunt  ;  si  humano  impulsu, 
 peccarunt,  et  non  sunt  excusandi.'  We  are  not 
 called  upon  to  justify  every  act  in  the  conduct  of 
 the  best  of  men,  when  we  read  the  simple  and  un- 
 adorned narrative  of  it  in  Holy  Scripture.  In  all 
 the  excitement  of  that  sad  history  of  filial  impiety, 
 human  counsel  and  human  passion  it  was  which 
 ordered  the  means  for  accomplishing  what  was 
 an  undoubtedly  Divine  appointment  (see  2  Sam. 
 xvii.  14).  In  justifying  the  ways  of  God  to  men, 
 and  admiring  the  issues  of  His  will,  we  are  in  no 
 case  obliged  to  approve  actions  which  have  nothing 
 but  their  success  to  commend  them.  Whatever 
 was  Hushai's  general  character  (and  there  is  no 
 ground  for  supposing  it  to  be  other  than  good,  and 
 worthy  of  David's  highest  friendship)  in  the  cabinet 
 council  of  the  rebellious  prince,  he  seems  to  have 
 been  at  least  a  match  for  the  astutest  diplomacy, 
 and  by  the  boldness  of  his  prevarication  to  have 
 been  the  means  of  '  disappointing  the  devices  of 
 the  crafty,  so  that  their  hands  could  not  perform 
 their  enterprise'  (Job  v.  12).  Hushai  is  called 
 the  '■friend'  and  '  companio7i'  of  David  (2  Sam.  xv. 
 37  ;  I  Chron.  xxvii.  33)  ;  but  Holy  Scripture  does 
 not  assign  him  these  honourable  titles  in  acknow- 
 ledgment of  his  service  to  his  master  during  the 
 rebellion  ;  he  was  well  known  for  these  valuable 
 characteristics  long  before  Absalom  put  them  to  so 
 severe  a  test  (see  2  Sam.  xvi.  16,  17,  compared 
 with  XV.  37).  It  saw,  no  doubt,  the  greater 
 earnestness  and  devotion  of  his  character,  as  com- 
 pared with  the  cold  and  calculating  Gilonite  (comp. 
 the  epithets  applied  to  the  two  men,  in  I  Chron. 
 
 xxvii.  33  ;  where  the  TjPSP  ^J^iS  the  mere  genitive 
 
 of  possession,  seems  to  indicate  a  looser  relation  to 
 
 the  king  than  the  T|?J|in  yi,  which,  being  a  phrase 
 
 of  the  '  construct  state,''  probably  expresses  the 
 closest  connection  that  the  words  will  bear  ;  see 
 also  Gesen.  Gram,  [by  Rodiger],  p.  208)  which 
 Induced  Absalom  to  pay  greater  deference  to  Hushai, 
 as  if  he  felt  that  in  /ii?n  he  had  a  more  trustworthy 
 man  to  lean  on. 
 
 But  besides  his  advice  at  the  council,  Hushai 
 promoted  David's  cause  by  keeping  up  a  communi- 
 cation with  him  afterwards,  and  especially  by  the 
 promptitude  with  which  he  despatched  messengers  to 
 urge  the  king  to  flee  for  his  life  (2  Sam.  xvii.  15-22). 
 Hushai  is  called  '  the  Archite'  in  five  of  the  fourteen 
 passages   where   his   name  occurs.      This  gentile 
 
 designation  is  veiy  probably  the  same  as  is  men- 
 tioned in  Josh.  xvi.  2,  in  the  description  of  the 
 southern  border  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  where  the 
 
 '•DlXn  Plia    (A.  V.   Uhe  borders  of  Archi,''  more 
 
 properly  '  the  borders  of  the  Archite'')  lay  near  Bethel 
 or  Luz  towards  Ataroth,*  about  midway  between 
 the  Jordan  and  the  Mediterranean.  The  city  which 
 originated  this  gentile  designation  Was  no  doubt 
 called  E7-ech   CIjIK),   of  the   same  form  with  the 
 
 Babylonian  city  mentioned  in  Gen,  x.  10,  with 
 which  of  course  it  is  not  to  be  confounded.  The 
 gentile  of  this  Eastern  city  is  '  Archevites,''  ''131S, 
 
 mentioned  in  Ezra  iv.  9. 
 
 In  the  next  generation  and  next  reign  the  dis- 
 tinguished honour  of  being  '  the  king's  friend'  was 
 enjoyed  by  a  son  of  Nathan  the  prophet  (i  Kings 
 iv.  5)  ;  contemporary  with  him  was  Baanah,  the 
 son  of  Hushai,  who  served  Solomon  as  one  of  his 
 twelve  officers  or  prefects  appointed  to  levy  the 
 royal  revenues.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
 this  functionary  was  the  son  of  our  Hushai ;  the 
 absence  of  the  designation  '  Archite '  is  immaterial, 
 for  it  does  not  invariably  accompany  Hushai's  name 
 in  the  passages  of  his  history ;  it  is  for  instance 
 absent  in  2  Sam.  xv.  37,  though  found  in  ver.  32  ; 
 in  the  next  chap,  it  is  only  once  mentioned  in  the 
 four  occurrences  of  Hushai's  name  ;  while  in  xvii. 
 chap,  the  name  occurs  six  times,  but  the  gentile 
 epithet  only  t7vice. — P.  H. 
 
 HUSHATHITE,  The,  is  an  epithet  applied  to 
 SiBBECHAl,  one  of  David's  '  mighty  men,'  in  2 
 Sam.  xxi.  18  ;  i  Chron.  xi.  29  ;  xx.  4,  and  xxvii. 
 I  £  ;  and  to  Mebunnai,.  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  27.  As  this 
 latter  name  is  found  among  David's  heroes  also,  it 
 has  been  conjectured  to  be  nothing  more  than 
 another  form  for  Sibbechai — probably  by  cor- 
 ruption of  the  text  (see  Thenius  and  Houbigant, 
 in  loc,  the  latter  of  whom  juxtaposes  ''JDD  and 
 ''32D,  as  if  to  exhibit  their  similarity  and  liability  to 
 be  confounded  by  copyists.  Whether  '  The  Husha- 
 thite''  (^nti'nn,  ormorecon-ectlyTlETin  with  dagesh, 
 
 as  in  the  last  two  places  in  Chronicles)  is  Sipatrony- 
 mic,  indicating  \.\iq  fa})iily  of  Sibbechai,  or  a  gen- 
 tile noun  referring  to  his  native  city,  is  uncertain. 
 No  doubt  either  way  the  reference  is  to  the  name 
 HuSHAH  (nC'^in),  mentioned  in  I  Chron.  iv.  4 — 
 
 *  The  Sept.  renders  '  the  borders  of  Archi'  by 
 TO.  6pi.a  Tou  'A/ox'ctra/atiS-,  which  of  course  is  nothing 
 less  than  the  coalition  of  'Archi'  and  'Ataroth,' 
 next  mentioned.  The  Vulg.  is  very  like  it  in  its 
 '  Termi)iian  Archi,  Ataroth.'  It  is  curious  that 
 the  LXX.  has,  in  2  Sam.  xv.  37,  and  xvi.  16,  made 
 another  coalition  between  two  adjoining  words,  by 
 rendering  yi  ""Sisn  ('the  Archite,  friend')  by  the 
 
 single  compound  epithet '  kpxuTaipoi,  '  chief  friend' 
 Is.  Vossius,  de  Sept.  Intt.  p.  58,  defends  this,  on 
 the  ground  that  the  LXX.  renders  the  same  phrase 
 in  I  Chron.  xxvii.  33  by  the  equivalent  TrptDros 
 0i\os,  '  prime  friend  ;'  while  Josephus  similarly 
 calls  Hushai ' kp-)(}<pCKo%  [Hudson  conjectures  ' kpx- 
 alos  0iXos],  Antiq.  vii.  9.  6.  Fuller,  however,  in 
 Miscell.  Sacr.  ii.  10,  supposes  that  two  words  have 
 grown,  in  fact,  into  one,  and  is  for  separating  them 
 into  6  'Apx^  [it  should  rather  be  6  ' kpaxi,  as  the 
 LXX.  has  it  in  2  Sam.  xvii.  5,  and  other  places], 
 iralpoi  Aa/3i5,  like  the  original  and  our  A.  V. 
 
HUSHIM 
 
 345 
 
 HUTCHINSON 
 
 among  the  genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Judah — thus 
 Ezer,  father  of  Hushah.'  The  first  impression 
 ihat  Hushah  must  needs  be  a  maiCs  name  is  soon 
 corrected  by  two  phrases  of  the  same  verse — '  Fa- 
 ther of  Gedor,'  'Father  oi Bethlehem,''  where  the 
 two  names  in  itahcs  designate  cities.  Hushah, 
 therefore,  may  reasonably  be  taken  for  a  city  also  ; 
 a  conclusion  which  is  quite  confirmed  by  i  Chron. 
 xxvii.  II,  where  the  fullest  information  we  have  is 
 given  respecting   Sibbechai  in  these  words  ''33D 
 
 TII-T-'  Tlt^nn,  which  are  well  rendered  in  the  Vul- 
 gate, Sobachai  Hiishathites  de  stirpe  Zarahi  (A.  V. 
 '  S.the  Hushathite,  of  theZarhites').  The  second  of 
 these  epithets  undoubtedly  marks  the  man'sya;'///)/ 
 as  belonging  to  the  Zarhite  clan  of  Judah  (Num. 
 xxvi.  20,  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  Simeonite 
 clan  of  the  same  name,  in  verse  13),  leaving  '■  Husha- 
 thite'' to  indicate  his  birth-place,  or  else  residence — 
 somewhere  in  the  territory  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 
 The  Vulgate  gives  the  name  of  the  city  as  "■  Husati;'' 
 and  in  two  of  the  five  passages  in  which  our  epi- 
 thet Hushathite  occurs,  renders  it  '  de  Hiisati'' 
 (see  Dutripon's  note,  Concord,  p.  626),  the  other 
 three  passages  having  '  Ilusathites?  The  LXX. 
 version,  in  the  only  passage  of  Samuel  where  the 
 word  occurs  [for  2  Sam.  xxiii.  27  does  not  men- 
 tion '  Mebunnai  the  Hushathite '],  renders  it  by  6  '  Aff- 
 To-TfJisi :  in  all  the  passages  in  Chronicles  it  has 
 6  Oi;cra^t,  for  although  in  the  second  passage  the 
 Vatican  text  reads  ScjcraS-t  (which  is  unintelligible 
 [unless  the  S  represent  the  aspirate]),  the  Cod. 
 Alex,  conforms  to  the  other  reading  6  Oi)cra3-t, 
 which  is  our  very  word  Hushathite  shorn  of  its 
 aspirate. — P.  H. 
 
 HUSHIM  (D''C''n;  Sept.'Ao-^;  'Ao-ti^),  a  name 
 
 which  occurs  first  in  the  catalogue  of  the  descen- 
 dants of  Jacob,  and  is  used  to  designate  the  chil- 
 dren of  Dan  (Gen.  xlvi.  23).  The  form  of  the  word 
 being  plural,  it  is  understood  to  mean,  as  obvi- 
 ously intended,  not  an  individual  member  of  the 
 family  or  tribe,  but  the  tribe  itself.  In  the  corre- 
 sponding catalogue  in  Num.  xxvi.  26  the  name  is 
 Shiihani.  We  meet  with  the  same  name  in  the 
 genealogy  of  Benjamin ;  first,  as  above,  in  the  plural 
 form,  used  to  designate  the  sons  of  Aher  (l  Chron. 
 vii.  12)  ;  second,  as  the  name  of  one  of  the  two 
 wives  of  Shaharim  (l  Chron.  viiii  8).  The  name 
 of  the  other  was  Baara.  Hushim  was  the  mother 
 of  his  two  sons  Abitub  and  Elpaul. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 HUSKS.    [Ceratia.] 
 
 HUTCHESON,  George.  Very  few  facts  can 
 be  ascertained  in  regard  to  the  personal  history  of 
 this  able  expositor.  He  was  minister  of  Colmonell, 
 from  which  he  was  translated  to  Edinburgh.  In 
 early  life  he  held  Arminian  views,  which  he  after- 
 wards saw  reason  to  abandon.  In  1650  he  was 
 one  of  the  Scotch  commissioners  sent  to  treat  with 
 Charles  II.  at  Breda.  He  was  ejected  from  his 
 charge  in  Edinburgh  for  nonconformity,  and,  al- 
 though he  was  noted  for  his  steady  refusal  to  comply 
 with  the  Episcopal  liturgy,  he  availed  himself  of 
 one  of  the  indulgences,  and  accepted  a  charge  in 
 Irvine  in  1669.  He  married  the  widow  of  the 
 celebrated  Andrew  Gray — sister  of  Baillie  of  Jervis- 
 wood.  His  death  took  place  from  apoplexy  in 
 1678.  He  is  described  in  Wodrow's  Analecta  as 
 '  a  great  and  a  good  man  above  many,'  and,  ac- 
 cording to  the  testimony  of  Principal  Violant,  was 
 
 '  of  a  sweet,   amiable,   loving,  and  compassionate 
 disposition.' 
 
 The  works  which  he  has  left  behind  him  are  all 
 of  an  expository  character — A  brief  exposition  of  the 
 ttuelve  sfnall prophets,  Lond.  1655  ;  An  Exposition 
 of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  according  to  Johji, 
 1657  ;  All  exposition  upon  Job,  being  the  sum  op 
 three  hundred  and  sixteen  lectures,  1669;  and  r^wVj- 
 five  sermons  np07i  the  130//;  Psalm,  1691.  A 
 treatise  on  the  Confession  of  Faith  was  never  pub- 
 lished. 
 
 Hutcheson  was  one  of  the  divines  who  laboured 
 in  concert  to  produce  expositions  extending  over 
 the  whole  of  Scripture.  Considering  his  associates 
 in  the  work,  Dickson,  Ferguson,  Nisbet,  and 
 others,  it  is  no  small  praise  if  we  rank  him  at  the 
 head  of  them.  Perhaps  the  circumstance  that  he 
 so  far  conformed  as  to  accept  an  indulgence,  though 
 he  still  held  to  the  intrinsic  jurisdiction  of  the 
 church  so  firmly  as  to  have  been  summoned  before 
 the  council  for  his  conduct,  may  have  diminished 
 his  popularity  as  an  author.  At  all  events,  his 
 works,  with  the  exception  of  his  Commentary  on 
 John  recently  published  by  Ward,  have  not  been 
 reprinted,  though  some  of  them  in  the  author's 
 lifetime  ran  through  three  editions.  His  method  is 
 much  the  same  in  all  his  works.  He  has  what  he 
 terms  '  a  resolution  of  the  context,'  followed  by 
 '  an  explication  of  particular  sentences,'  after  which, 
 when  needed,  there  is  a  general  view  of  the  doc- 
 trine or  principle  urged  in  the  passage,  on  which 
 he  comments.  His  thinking  is  invariably  clear 
 and  definite,  with  a  gracefulness  of  expression  at 
 times  quite  remarkable  for  that  age.  There  is  no 
 great  fervency  in  his  composition,  at  least  in  his 
 strictly  expository  works,  probably  from  his  habits 
 of  strict  adherence  to  the  task  of  exposition.  Ed- 
 mund Calamy  speaks  strongly  in  commendation 
 of  his  labours,  and  yet  not  more  strongly  than  his 
 merits  as  an  expositor  warrant,  when,  in  a  preface 
 to  one  of  Hutcheson's  works,  that  eminent  divine 
 remarks,  '  His  observations  are  so  excellent  and 
 suitable,  and  sometimes  so  unexpected  and  yet  so 
 natural,  that  I  verily  believe  they  will  be  very 
 acceptable  not  only  to  private  Christians,  but  also 
 and  especially  to  ministers.'  With  equal  justice 
 Calamy  gives  him  credit  for  a  quality  which  few 
 authors  of  that  day  possessed  ;  his  book,  while  it 
 '  breathes  out  much  of  God  and  godliness,'  at  the 
 same  time  '  comprehends  tniich  in  little.'' — W.  H.  G. 
 
 HUTCHINSON,  John,  author  of  '  A  Mysti- 
 cal and  Cabalistic  Interpretation  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures,'  was  bom  at  Spennithorne,  Yorkshire, 
 in  1674,  and  died  Aug.  28,  1737.  He  received  a 
 good  education,  and  became,  at  the  age  of  nine- 
 teen, steward  to  Mr.  Bathurst,  and  afterwards  to 
 the  Duke  of  Somerset.  Fond  of  the  study  of 
 mineralogy  and  botany,  he  devoted  his  leisure  to 
 the  cultivation  of  these  branches  of  learning.  A 
 valuable  collection  of  fossils  made  by  him,  was  be- 
 queathed to  the  university  of  Cambridge.  He  is 
 best  known  as  the  originator  of  the  peculiar  system 
 of  Biblical  interpretation  usually  denominated, 
 from  its  author,  Hutchinsonianis7n,  which  he  ex- 
 pounded at  large  in  a  series  of  philosophico-theolo- 
 gical  works,  published  from  time  to  time.  He 
 maintained  that  the  Hebrew  language  was  formed 
 by  God,  and  is,  therefore,  perfect ;  that  the  Scrip- 
 tures were  '  not  writ  ad  capium  humamun,  but 
 philosophically,    beyond  imitation ;'    that  Moses 
 
HUTTER 
 
 346 
 
 HYMEN^US 
 
 was  inspired  to  reveal  a  complete  system  of  phi- 
 losophy as  well  as  theology,  beyond  which  the 
 human  mind  can  never  get ;  that  Newton's  princi- 
 ples are  antiscriptural  and  false,  and  Newton  him- 
 self no  philosopher ;  that  each  Hebrew  word  em- 
 bodies a  great  theological  or  philosophical  truth, 
 but  that  the  points  are  a  '  corrupt  invention  of  the 
 Rabbis,'  and  the  Arabic  language  'a  forgery;' 
 that  the  whole  of  Christianity  is  contained  in  the 
 
 0.  T.,  so  that  the  Jews  understood  it  as  well  as 
 we  ;  and  that  a  knowledge  of  Hebrew  is  essential 
 to  a  right  understanding  of  the  N.  T.,  because  the 
 latter  is  written  in  the  language  of  the  Gentiles. 
 These  and  kindred  principles  parade  all  his  writ- 
 ijigs. 
 
 His  works  were  published  in  twelve  vols.  8vo, 
 in  1749,  the  principal  of  which  are  : — Hoses'  Priti- 
 cipia,  part  \.;  An  Essay  towards  a  Natural  History 
 of  the  Bible — Aloses'  Frincipia,  part  ii.  The  Frift- 
 cipia  embodies  the  fundamental  principles  of  the 
 '  inspired'  philosophy  in  opposition  to  those  of  Sir 
 
 1.  Newton.  Hoses'  Sine  Frincipio,  or  '  the  mean- 
 ing of  the  names  and  titles  of  God,'  with  an  intro- 
 duction to  shew  '  the  nature  of  the  fall,  of  Paradise, 
 and  of  the  body  and  soul.'  A  New  Account  of  the 
 Confusion  of  Tongues,  etc.,  with  the  names  and 
 attributes  of  the  Trinity  of  the  Gentiles,  treating  of 
 the  '  origin  of  idolatry'  and  the  '  loss  of  philosophy 
 in  the  Gentile  world.'  Glory  or  Gravity,  etc.,  in 
 which  the  hieroglyphical  import  of  the  Cherubim 
 is  exhibited.  The  Covenant  in  the  Cherubim,  etc., 
 setting  forth  the  various  ways,  by  Cherubim,  Urim, 
 etc.,  in  which  'it  pleased  God  to  reveal  himself 
 and  the  Covenant  of  grace.'  The  Religion  of  Satan, 
 or  Antichrist  delineated ;  the  Use  of  Reason  re- 
 covered in  the  data  of  Christianity  (parts  i.  and  ii.), 
 '  which  are  shewn  to  be  the  only  subjects  reason 
 can  exercise  itself  upon.' 
 
 Hutchinson  had  many  followers,  although  he 
 formed  no  sect.  His  style  is  loose,  rambling,  and 
 obscure  ;  his  dogmatism  unbounded  ;  and  his  lan- 
 guage towards  opponents  often  rude  and  offensive. 
 He  was  learned,  but  not  ^  truly  learned.'  His 
 works  are  worth  examining,  although  the  task  of 
 reading  them  is  difficult.  There  is  an  autobio- 
 graphic sketch  of  him  in  the  5th  vol.  of  his  col- 
 lected works. — I.  J. 
 
 HUTTER,  Elias,  the  editor  of  several  Poly- 
 glott  Bibles,  was  born  in  1554,  and  died  in  1605. 
 He  was  a  zealous  student  and  teacher  of  Hebrew 
 and  the  cognate  languages,  the  former  of  which  he 
 taught  to  Prince  August  of  Saxony.  Having  formed 
 the  scheme  of  an  edition  of  the  Hebrew  text  on  a 
 peculiar  plan,  accompanied  with  a  series  of  transla- 
 tions in  different  tongues,  he  procured  a  printing 
 press  for  the  purpose,  and  devoted  himself  to  this 
 object.  In  1596  he  brought  out  at  Hamburgh  his 
 Opus  quadripartitum  Script.  Sac,  in  which  the 
 Hebrew  text  of  the  O.  T.  appears  with  three  ver- 
 sions. In  1599  he  issued  at  NUrnberg  the  N.  T. 
 in  twelve  different  languages — Syriac,  Hebrew, 
 Greek,  Latin,  German,  Bohemian,  Italian,  Span- 
 ish, French,  English,  Danish,  and  Polish;  and  in 
 1602  appeared  his  Nov.  Test.  Harmoniciim  Ebr., 
 Gr.,  Lat.  et  Germ.  These  works  are  now  more 
 curious  than  useful.  Hutter  aimed  at  more  than 
 he  could  accomplish,  and  ruined  himself  in  the 
 attempt.  His  idea,  however,  was  noble,  and  he  is 
 entitled  at  least  to  Phaelhon's  eulogy: — Quem  si 
 non  tenuit  masnis  tamen  excidit  ausis. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 HUZZAB  (nsn),  a  word  of  very  doubtful  inter- 
 pretation, occurring  Nahum  ii.  7.  Commentators 
 are  not  agreed  as  to  whether  it  is  a  proper  name. 
 The  Jews  appear  generally  to  have  understood  by 
 it  the  queen  of  Nineveh,  who  was  living  at  the 
 date  of  this  prophecy,  an  opinion  which  is  followed 
 by  the  A.  V.  and  by  Ewald  :  otherwise  it  is  the 
 Hophal  of  3VJ  ;  if  so  taken,  however,  it  will  per- 
 haps be  desirable  to  alter  the  punctuation  in  order 
 to  join  the  word  to  the  former  verse,  as  Dr.  Hen- 
 derson has  done,  who  renders  thus,  '  And  the 
 palace  is  dissolved,  though  firmly  established.' 
 The  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate  seem  to  have  trans- 
 lated the  word  :  one  has  17  vwbaTaais,  and  the 
 other  fuiles  captivtis.  The  Peshito  also  translates 
 it.     Mr.    Rawlinson  would    read   35fn,   and  very 
 
 ingeniously  supposes  it  to  be  a  geographical  desig- 
 nation of  Assyria,  as  the  country  between  the 
 Upper  and  Lower  Zab  (Herod,  i.  570,  n.  7,  and 
 Diet.  Bib.,  s.  v. )  It  maybe  questioned,  however, 
 if  in  that  case  it  would  be  spelt  with  ^. — S.  L. 
 
 HYACINTH.     [Leshem.] 
 
 HY^NA.     [TsEBOA.] 
 
 HYDASPES.  A  river  only  once  mentioned  in 
 the  Bible,  Judith  i.  6.  It  is  doubtful  whether  we 
 may  identify  it  with  the  river  of  the  same  name 
 mentioned  by  Arrian,  Ind.  4,  and  Strabo,  15.  697, 
 which  flowed  westwards  into  the  Indus,  is  now 
 called  Jelum,  and  is  one  of  the  five  streams  which 
 give  the  name  of  Panjab  to  the  district,  Rawlin- 
 son, Herod,  i.  558.  Some  suppose  it  more  pro- 
 bable that  the  Choaspes  or  Euloeus  is  meant,  which 
 was  called  Hydaspes  by  the  Romans  {Pass  ad 
 J-ustin.  ii.  14). — S.  L. 
 
 HYMEN^US  ('TAt^i-atos),  a  professor  of  Chris- 
 tianity  at  Ephesus,  who,  with  Alexander  (i  Tim. 
 i.  20)  and  Philetus  (2  Tim.  ii.  18),  had  departed 
 from  the  truth  both  in  principle  and  practice,  and 
 led  others  into  apostacy.  The  chief  doctrinal  error 
 of  these  persons  consisted  in  maintaining  that  '  the 
 resurrection  was  past  already. '  The  precise  mean- 
 ing of  this  expression  is  by  no  means  clearly  ascer- 
 tained :  the  most  general  and  perhaps  best  founded 
 opinion  is,  that  they  understood  the  resurrection 
 in  a  figurative  sense  of  the  great  change  produced 
 by  the  Gospel  dispensation.  Some  have  suggested 
 that  they  attempted  to  support  their  views  by  the 
 Apostle's  language  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians 
 (veKpoiis — avve^wTroirjaev—crvvTjyeipev,  etc.,  ii.  I-5)  : 
 but  this  is  very  improbable  ;  for  if  such  miscon- 
 ception of  his  language  had  arisen,  it  might  easily 
 have  been  corrected  ;  not  to  say  that  one  of  them 
 appears  to  have  been  personally  inimical  to  St.  Paul 
 (2  Tim.  iv.  14),  and  would  scarcely  have  appealed 
 to  him  as  an  authority.  Most  critics  suppose  that 
 the  same  person  is  referred  to  in  both  the  epistles  to 
 Timothy  by  the  name  of  Hymenseus.  Dr.  Mosheim, 
 however,  contends  that  there  were  two.  He  seems 
 to  lay  great  stress  on  the  Apostle's  declaration  in 
 I  Tim.  i.  20,  '  whom  /  have  delivered  unto  Satan 
 that  they  may  learn  not  to  blaspheme.'  But  what- 
 ever may  be  the  meaning  of  this  expression,  the 
 infliction  was  evidently  designed  for  the  benefit  and 
 restoration  of  the  parties  (comp.  i  Cor.  v.  5),  and 
 was  therefore  far  from  indicating  their  hopeless  and 
 abandoned  wickedness.  Nor  do  the  terms  em- 
 ployed in  the  second  Epistle  import  a  less  flagrant 
 violation  of  the  Christian  profession  than  those  in 
 
HYMN 
 
 347 
 
 HYMN 
 
 the  first.  If  in  the  one  the  individuals  alluded  to 
 are  charged  with  having  '  discarded  a  good  con- 
 science' and  '  made  shipwreck  of  faith,'  in  the  other 
 they  are  described  as  indulging  '  in  vain  and  pro- 
 fane babblings,  which  would  increase  to  more  un- 
 godliness,' as  'having  erred  concerning  the  truth,' 
 and  '  overthrowing  the  faith'  of  others.  These  can 
 hardly  be  said  to  be  '  two  distinct  characters  hav- 
 ing nothing  in  common  but  the  name'  (Mosheim's 
 Commentaries,  i.  304-306).  For  other  interpreta- 
 tions of  2  Tim.  ii.  18,  see  Gill's  Commentary,  in 
 loc,  and  Walchii  Miscellanea  Sacra,  i.  4;  de 
 Hymenxo  Phileto,  Amstel.  1774  [Anathema]. — 
 J.  E.  R. 
 
 HYMN  ("T^i/os).  This  term  as  used  by  the 
 Greeks  primarily  signified  simply  a  song  (comp. 
 Hom.  Od.  viii.  429  ;  Hes.  Op.  et  D.  659  ;  Pindar 
 01.  i.  1 70  ;  xi.  74 ;  Istkm.  iv.  74  ;  Fyth.  x.  82 ; 
 Aesch.  Eum.  331  ;  Soph.  Antig.  809  ;  Plat.  Rep. 
 V.  p.  459,  E,  etc.);  we  find  instances  even  in  which 
 the  cognate  verb  v/xvelv  is  used  in  a  bad  sense  {(pav- 
 Xwj  iKXafi^dverai,  Eustath.  p.  634,  comp.  Soph. 
 £lect.  382  ;  Oed.  Tyr.  1275  ;  Eurip.  Med.  425)  ; 
 but  usage  ultimately  appropriated  the  term  to 
 songs  in  praise  of  the  gods.  We  know  that 
 among  the  Greeks,  as  among  most  of  the  nations 
 of  antiquity,  the  chanting  of  songs  in  praise  of 
 their  gods  was  an  approved  part  of  their  worship 
 (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  p.  633,  ed.  Sylburg.  ;  Por- 
 phyr.  de  Abstin.  iv.  sec.  8  ;  Y^wvuvrnXvAde  Nat.  Deor. 
 c.  14;  Alex,  ab  Alex.  Gtn.  Dies  iv.  c.  17,  s.  f.  ; 
 Spanheim  in  not.  ad  Callimachum,  p.  2  ;  comp. 
 Meiners,  Geschichte  aller  Religionen,  c.  13)  ;  and 
 even  at  their  festive  entertainments  such  songs  were 
 sometimes  sung  (Athen.  Deipnos.  xiv.,  xv.  14 ; 
 Polyb.  Hist.  iv.  20,  ed.  Ernesti).  Besides  those 
 hymns  to  different  deities  which  have  come  down 
 to  us  as  the  composition  of  Callimachus,  Orpheus, 
 Homer,  Linus,  Cleanthes,  Sappho,  and  others,  we 
 may  with  confidence  refer  to  the  choral  odes  of  the 
 tragedians  as  affording  specimens  of  these  sacred 
 songs,  such  of  them  at  least  as  were  of  a  lyric 
 character  (Snedorf,  De  Hymnis  Vet.  Graic.  p.  19). 
 Such  songs  were  properly  called  hymtis.  Hence 
 Arrian  says  distinctly  [De  Exped.  Alex.  iv.  Ii,  2), 
 {ifxvoi  ixkv  is  Toiis  '^eovs  Troiovvrai,  ^iraivoi  5k  is  ai^ 
 Opdiirovs.  So  also  Phavorinus  ;  iJixvos,  ij  irpbs  S-eof 
 v'StJ.  Augustine  {in  Ps.  Ixxii. )  thus  fully  states  the 
 meaning  of  the  tenn  :  '  Hymni  laudes  sunt  Dei  cum 
 cantico.  Hymni  cantus  sunt,  continenter  laudes 
 Dei.  Si  sit  laus,  et  non  sit  Dei  non  est  hymnus. 
 Si  sit  laus  et  Dei  laus,  et  non  cantatur,  non  est 
 hymnus.  Oportet  ergo  ut  si  sit  hymnus,  habeat 
 haec  tria  et  laudem  etDeiet  cantictim? 
 
 In  the  LXX.  the  word  C/xi'os  and  its  cognates  are 
 used  as  representing  several  Hebrew  words  ;  but 
 in  almost  every  case  the  reference  is  to  songs  of 
 praise  or  thanksgiving  to  God.  In  the  N.  T.  this 
 is  the  invariable  usage  of  the  terms. 
 
 Our  Lord  and  his  disciples  after  the  institution 
 of  the  Supper  '  Sang  an  hymn'  [vixv{](sa.vTes)  before 
 they  went  out  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  (Matt.  xxvi. 
 30 ;  Mark  xiv.  26).  There  is  every  reason  to  be- 
 lieve that  what  was  sung  on  this  occasion  was  the 
 latter  part  of  the  Hallel,  Ps.  cxv.  -cxviii.  [Hallel]. 
 When  Paul  and  Silas  were  imprisoned  at  Philippi 
 '  at  midnight  they  prayed  and  sang  praises  unto 
 God'  {iu-vovv  rhv  "itibv.  Acts  xvi.  25).  Whether 
 what  they  sang  were  some  of  the  ancient  psalms  or 
 spontaneous  utterances  of  adoration  and  worship. 
 
 we  have  no  means  of  determining.  In  writing  10 
 the  Ephesians  (v.  19),  and  again  to  the  Colossians 
 (iii.  16),  the  apostle  enjoins  the  use  of  hymns  in  the 
 social  worship  of  Christians,  classing  them  with 
 psalms  and  spiritual  songs  {rpaX/j-ois  /cat  v/j.vois  Kal 
 (^Sais  TTvev/xaTiKois).  In  what  relation  these  stood 
 to  each  other  is  a  question  which  has  occasioned 
 considerable  differences  of  opinion.  According  to 
 some,  the  distinction  between  them  was  one  of 
 subject ;  according  to  others  it  was  merely  one  of 
 form,  having  respect  to  the  manner  in  which  they 
 were  sung  ;  whilst  others  contend  that  the  source 
 whence  they  were  derived,  and  the  general  charac- 
 ter of  the  composition,  determined  the  difference 
 between  them.  Under  these  leading  opinions, 
 endless  differences  of  minor  opinion  have  been  ad- 
 vocated. Of  those  who  adopt  the  first  opinion  is 
 St.  Jerome,  who  thinks  that  the  hymn  was  devoted 
 to  the  celebration  of  the  divuiC  majesty  and  good- 
 ness, that  the  psalm  was  occupied  with  themes  of 
 an  ethical  nature,  and  that  tlie  spiritual  ode  was 
 occupied  with  things  above,  and  the  subtle  discus- 
 sion of  the  concert  of  the  world,  and  the  order  and 
 concord  of  creation  {Comment,  in  Eph.  v.  19). 
 Others,  again,  who  hold  the  same  general  view, 
 state  the  difference  thus  : — The  psalm  belongs  to 
 ethics  ;  the  hymn,  as  setting  forth  the  praises  of 
 God  for  redemption,  to  theology ;  and  the  ode,  as 
 celebrating  the  works  of  God  in  creation  and  provi- 
 dence, to  natural  science  (Thomasius,  in  Prafa- 
 tioitibus,  p.  525).  All  this,  however,  is  purely  arbi- 
 trary. The  second  opinion  was  held  by  Augus- 
 tine, Basil,  Hilary,  and  others  of  the  Christian 
 Fathers,  and  has  been  adopted  by  several  in  more 
 recent  times.  By  some  who  take  this  view,  the 
 distinction  is  supposed  to  lie  in  this,  that  the  \f/a\/j.o[ 
 were  compositions  which  were  chanted  to  the 
 accompaniment  of  an  instrument,  the  xf/akTripLov, 
 the  vfj.voi  songs  of  adoration  uttered  by  the  voice 
 alone,  and  the  oJSat,  short  chants  uttered  also  only 
 by  the  voice  (Aug.  Enarrat.  in  Ps.  iii.  ;  Bas.  Mag. 
 in  Ps.  xxix.  ;  Greg.  Nyss,  Tr.  ii.  in  Psahiios,  ch. 
 iii.,  etc.)  ;  while  others  think  that  the  distinction  is 
 to  be  determined  by  reference  to  the  Hebrew  ter- 
 minology Wy^,  D''"I"10K^D,  'ahr\r\,  which  is  in 
 fact  determining  nothing,  as  the  distinction  between 
 these  is  itself  entirely  uncertain.  The  third  opinion 
 is  that  of  Beza  {Nov.  Test.,  in  loc),  and  Grotius 
 ( Commetit.  ad  Matt.  xxvi.  30,  et  k.  I. )  ;  they  think 
 that  by  Psalms  are  designated  the  sacred  songs 
 bearing  that  name  collectively  in  the  O.  T.  canon ; 
 by  hymtis  such  extemporary  songs  of  praise  as  we 
 have  in  the  song  of  Deborah,  Hannah,  Zachariah, 
 and  Mary,  and  such  as  the  apostle  and  his  com- 
 panion sang  in  the  prison  at  Philippi  ;  and  by  odes 
 premeditated  compositions  of  a  more  elaborate 
 nature  and  stricter  form  than  hymns.  To  this  in 
 the  general  most  subsequent  inquirers  have  given 
 their  consent  ;  only,  some  think  that  the  term 
 'psalms'  should  not  be  restricted  to  the  composi- 
 tions bearing  that  name  in  the  O.  T. ,  but  should 
 be  extended  to  all  of  a  similar  character  which 
 might  be  composed  for  the  use  of  the  Church  in 
 later  times  ;  and  that  by  '  spiritual  odes'  are  to  be 
 understood  specifically  all  sacred  songs,  of  whatever 
 kind,  composed  by  special  inspiration  of  the  Holy 
 Ghost  (S^eoTrj/eiicrrol).  The  former  of  these  modifi- 
 cations is  rendered  almost  imperative  by  i  Cor. 
 xiv.  26  ;  and  the  latter  by  the  general  sense  of  the 
 adjective  irvevixaTiKds  in  the  N.  T.      Not  a  few 
 
HYPERBOLE 
 
 348 
 
 HYPERBOLE 
 
 de!,pairing  of  satisfactorily  discriminating  these 
 three  kinds  of  sacred  song,  have  contended  that  the 
 Apostle  merely  accumulates  terms  for  the  sake  of 
 force,  and  that  no  distinction  between  them  is  to 
 besought  (Clem.  Alex.,  Pirdag.  ii.  4,  p.  565  ;  Cleri- 
 cus,  in  not.  apiid  Hammondiiannott.,  in  loc. ,  etc.) ; 
 but  this  otiose  method  of  disposing  of  the  difficulty 
 has  been  repudiated  by  most. 
 
 As  to  the  form  in  which  these  early  hymns  of  the 
 Church  were  composed,  we  have  no  means  of  even 
 approaching  a  certain  conclusion.  Among  the 
 Jewish  Christians  the  chanting  of  the  Psalms  was 
 familiar,  and  it  would  be  easy  for  them  to  compose 
 hymns  that  could  be  sung  to  their  accustomed 
 tunes  ;  but  with  the  Gentile  converts  it  would  be 
 somewhat  different.  Among  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
 mans poetry  had  fixed  metrical  forms,  to  which 
 the  tunes  of  the  Hebrews  could  not  be  adapted. 
 There  is  no  reason,  however,  to  believe  that  the 
 early  Gentile  Christians  followed  these  metrical 
 forms  in  their  sacred  poetry.  The  earliest  speci- 
 mens of  Christian  song  extant;  the  hymn  to  Christ, 
 preserved  by  Clemens  of  Alexandria ;  the  evening 
 hymn,  referred  to  by  Basil  as  in  his  time  very 
 ancient,  handed  down  from  the  Fathers  (De  S/t'r. 
 Sane,  c.  29)  ;  and  the  morning  hymn,  which  has 
 been  incorporated  with  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church 
 of  England  ;  have  no  traces  of  a  metrical  character, 
 but  are,  like  the  Biblical  hymns,  adapted  only  for 
 being  chanted  in  recitative  with  a  few  and  simple 
 cadences.*  Such  singing  would  no  doubt  be  new 
 to  the  Gentile  converts,  but  it  would  be  speedily 
 learned  ;  and  as  they  probably  had  very  little  sacred 
 music  of  their  own,  they  would  hail  with  delight 
 this  accession  to  their  sources  of  enjoyment,  which 
 served  at  the  same  time  as  a  vehicle  of  the  devo- 
 tional feeling  which  had  been  kindled  within  them. 
 It  has  been  suggested  that  in  i  Cor.  xiii.  we  have 
 an  apostolic  hymn,  and  in  Eph.  v.  14  ;  i  Tim.  iii. 
 16  ;  James  i.  17  ;  Rev.  i.  5,  6  ;  xv.  3,  etc.,  frag- 
 ments of  hymns  sung  in  the  Apostolic  churches  ; 
 but  this  is  mere  conjecture,  though  not  without 
 some  probability  (Deyling,  Hymni  a  Christianis 
 decantandi,  Obss.  Sac.  iii.  430  ;  Walch,  De  Hytn- 
 nis  Ecd.  ApostoL,  1737  ;  Hilliger,  De Psal.  Hymn, 
 atque  Odar.  sac  discrhnine,  Viteb.  1720  ;  Gerbert, 
 De  canhi  et  musica  a  p7-imo  Eccl.  statu  usgiie  ad 
 prcesens  temptis,  Bamb.  et  Frib.  1774,  2  tom.  4to  ; 
 Bingham,  Antiquities,  Bk.  xiv.  ch.  2,  Works,  vol. 
 iv.  p.  447,  ff. ;  Rheinwald,  Chiistl.  Archceologie, 
 p.  262.  For  collections  and  specimens  of  ancient 
 hymns,  see  Poetce  Graci  Christiani,  una  cum  Ho- 
 viei-icis  centonibus  ex  sanctor.  Patr.  opp.  collecti  in 
 usum  Gyinnas.  Sac.  Jesu,  Lutet.  Paris.  1609  ; 
 Maggi,  Sacri  Hinni  eke  si  leggono  in  tutto  anno 
 nella  santa  Chiesa,  Venet.  1567;  Hymni  Ecclesice  e 
 Breviario  Parisiensi,  Oxon.  1838  ;  [Faber]  Hymns 
 translated  from  the  Pa?-isia7i  Brei'iary,'LondL.  1839; 
 Daniel,  Thesaurus  Ify?nnologicus,  3  vols.,  Hal.  et 
 Lips.  1841-55  ;  Burgess,  Select  Metrical  Hymns 
 and  Ho/nilies  of  Ephraem  Syrus,  Lond.  1853  ; 
 Trench,  Sacred  Latin  Poetry,  Lond.  1849  ;  Mrs. 
 Barrett  Browning,  The  Greek  Christian  Poets,  Lond. 
 1863). — W.  L.  A.  [Synagogue,  iii.  905.] 
 
 HYPERBOLE.     Any  one  who  carefully  exa- 
 
 *  '  Primitiva  ecclesia  ita  psallebat  ut  modico 
 flexu  vocis  faceret  psallentem  resonare,  ita  ut  pro- 
 nuntianti  vicinior  esset  quam  canenti.'  Isidor.  His- 
 pal.,  De  Eccl.  Offic.  i.  5. 
 
 mines  the  Bible  must  be  surprised  at  the  very  few 
 hyperbolic  expressions  which  it  contains,  consider- 
 ing that  it  is  an  Oriental  book.  Some  of  these  few 
 have  occasioned  so  much  difficulty  to  sincere  men, 
 that  we  have  reason  to  bless  God  that  the  scene  of 
 those  great  events  which  comprise  the  history  of 
 man's  salvation  was  laid  in  Western,  and  not  in 
 Eastern  Asia,  where  the  genius  of  hyperbole  reigns 
 without  limit  or  control.  In  Eastern  Asia  the  tone 
 of  composition  is  pitched  so  high  as  to  be  scarcely 
 intelligible  to  the  sober  intellect  of  Europe  ;  while 
 in  Western  Asia  a  medium  seems  to  have  been 
 struck  between  the  ultra-extravagance  of  the  far 
 east,  and  the  frigid  exactness  of  the  far  west. 
 
 But  even  regarded  as  a  book  of  Western  Asia, 
 the  Bible  is,  as  compared  with  almost  any  other 
 Western  Asiatic  book,  so  singularly  free  from  hyper- 
 bolic expressions  as  might  well  excite  our  surprise, 
 did  not  our  knowledge  of  its  divine  origin  permit 
 us  to  suppose  that  even  the  style  and  mode  of  ex- 
 pression of  the  writers  were  so  far  controlled  as  to 
 exclude  from  their  writings  what,  in  other  ages  and 
 countries,  might  excite  pain  and  offence,  and  prove 
 an  obstacle  to  the  reception  of  divine  truth.  Nor 
 is  it  to  be  said  that  the  usage  of  hyperbole  is  of 
 modern  growth.  We  find  it  in  the  oldest  eastern 
 writings  which  now  exist ;  and  the  earlier  rabbini- 
 cal writings  attest  that,  in  times  approaching  near 
 to  those  in  which  the  writers  of  the  N.  T.  flourished, 
 the  Jewish  imagination  had  run  riot  in  this  direc- 
 tion, and  has  left  hyperbrbs  as  frequent  and  out- 
 rageous as  any  which  Persia  or  India  can  produce. 
 
 These  things  being  considered,  we  shall  certainly 
 have  more  cause  to  admire  the  rarity  of  hyperbolic 
 expressions  in  the  Bible  than  to  marvel  at  those 
 which  do  occur. 
 
 The  strongest  hyperbole  in  all  Scripture  is  that 
 with  which  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  concludes  : — 
 '  There  are  also  many  other  things  which  Jesus  did, 
 the  which,  if  they  should  be  written  every  one,  I 
 suppose  that  the  world  itself  could  not  contain  all 
 the  books  that  should  be  written.'  This  has  so 
 much  pained  many  commentators,  that  they  have 
 been  disposed  to  regard  it  as  an  unauthorized  addi- 
 tion to  the  sacred  text,  and  to  reject  it  accordingly. 
 Now  this  is  always  a  dangerous  process,  and  not  to 
 be  adopted  but  on  such  overwhelming  authority  of 
 collated  manuscripts  as  does  not  exist  in  the  present 
 case.  How  much  more  natural  and  becoming  is 
 it  to  regard  the  verse  simply  as  a  hyperbole,  so 
 perfectly  conformable  to  Oriental  modes  of  ex- 
 pression, and  to  some  other  hyperboles  which  may 
 ho.  found  interspersed  in  the  sacred  books,  that  the 
 sole  wonder  really  is  that  this  one  should  be  rare 
 enough  to  afford  ground  for  objection  and  remark. 
 
 This  view  of  the  matter  might  be  illustrated  by 
 many  examples,  in  which  we  find  sacred  and  pro- 
 fane authors  using  hyperboles  of  the  like  kind  and 
 signification.  In  Num.  xiii.  33,  the  spies  who  had 
 returned  from  searching  the  land  of  Canaan,  say 
 that  they  saw  '  giants  there,  of  such  a  prodigious 
 size,  that  they  were  in  their  own  sight  as  grass- 
 hoppers.' In  Deut.  i.  28,  cities  with  high  walls 
 about  them  are  said  to  be  '  walled  up  to  heaven.' 
 In  Dan.  iv.  7,  mention  is  made  of  a  tree  whereof 
 '  the  height  reached  unto  heaven,  and  the  sight 
 thereof  unto  the  end  of  all  the  earth  ; '  and  the  au- 
 thor of  Ecclesiasticus  (xlvii.  15),  speaking  of  Solo- 
 mon's wisdom,  says,  '  Thy  soul  covered  the  whole 
 earth,  and  thou  filledst  it  with  parables.'  As  the 
 world  is   here   said   to   be  filled  with  Solomon's 
 
HYP£RIUS 
 
 849 
 
 IBN  AKNIN 
 
 parables  ;  so  in  John  xxi.  25,  by  one  degree  more 
 of  hyperbole,  it  is  said  that  the  world  could  not 
 contain  all  the  books  that  should  be  written  con- 
 cerning Jesus's  miracles,  if  a  particular  account  of 
 every  one  of  them  were  given.  In  Josephus  {An- 
 tiq.  xiv.  22)  God  is  mentioned  as  promising  to 
 Jacob  that  he  would  give  the  land  of  Canaan  to  him 
 and  his  seed  ;  and  then  it  is  added,  '  they  shall  fill 
 the  whole  sea  and  land  which  the  sun  shines  upon.' 
 Wetstein,  in  his  note  on  the  text  in  John,  and  Bas- 
 nage,  in  his  Hisloire  des  Jiiifs  (iii.  1-9  ;  v.  7),  have 
 cited  from  the  ancient  rabbinical  writers  such  pas- 
 sages as  the  following : — '  If  all  the  seas  were  ink, 
 and  every  reed  was  a  pen,  and  the  whole  heaven 
 and  earth  were  parchment,  and  all  the  sons  of  men 
 were  writers,  they  would  not  be  sufficient  to 
 write  all  the  lessons  which  Jochanan  composed;' 
 and  concerning  one  Eliezer  it  is  said,  that  '  if 
 the  heavens  were  parchment,  and  all  the  sons 
 of  men  writers,  and  all  the  trees  of  the  forest 
 pens,  they  would  not  be  sufficient  for  writing  all 
 the  wisdom  which  he  was  possessed  of.' 
 
 Hyperboles  not  less  strong  than  that  under  re- 
 view find  their  way  into  our  own  poetry,  without 
 shocking  our  judgment  or  offending  our  taste, 
 thus : — 
 
 '  And  I  as  rich  in  having  such  a  jewel 
 As  fifty  seas,  if  all  their  sands  were  pearl, 
 Their  rivers  nectar,  and  their  rocks  pure  gold.' 
 
 Homer,  who  if  not  bom  in  Asia  Minor  had  un- 
 doubtedly lived  there,  has  sometimes  followed  the 
 hyberbolic  manner  of  speaking  which  prevailed  so 
 much  in  the  East  :  thus,  in  Iliad  xx.  246,  247,  he 
 makes  ^neas  say  to  Achilles,  '  Let  us  have  done 
 with  reproaching  one  another  ;  for  we  may  throw 
 out  so  many  reproachful  words  on  one  another, 
 that  a  ship  of  a  hundred  oars  would  not  be  able  to 
 carry  the  load.'  Few  instances  of  this  are  to  be 
 found  in  Occidental  writers ;  yet  it  is  observed  that 
 Cicero  {Phil.  ii.  44)  has  '  prassertim  quum  illi  earn 
 gloriam  consecuti  sint,  quae  vix  crelo  capi  posse 
 videatur,'  and  that  Livy  (vii.  25)  says,  '  hse  vires 
 populi  Romani,  quas  vix  terrarum  capit  orbis.' 
 See  Bishop  V&zxc€%Covinientary  071  the  four  Evan- 
 gelists, 1777,  etc. — ^J.  K, 
 
 HYPERIUS,  Andrew  Gerhard  ;  the  name 
 Hyperius,  taken  from  his  birth-place  Yperu,  was 
 used  in  his  published  writings  in  preference  to  that 
 of  his  family.  He  was  bom  May  16,  151 1.  In 
 1528  he  commenced  his  studies  in  that  city  under 
 Joachim  Ringelberg,  an  eminent  teacher,  whose 
 favourite  maxim  was,  Qiiicqiiid  dediceris,  confestitit 
 doceas.  In  1532  he  began  to  attend  a  course  of 
 theology  ;  but  dissatisfied  with  the  dry  scholasticism 
 of  the  Sorbonne,  he  read  in  private  the  Fathers, 
 especially  Augustine,  and  made  himself  well  ac- 
 quainted with  church  history  and  the  canon  law  ; 
 at  the  same  time  he  attended  the  lectures  of  the 
 classical  scholars  who  had  been  invited  to  the  new 
 college  founded  by  Francis  I.  in  1529,  some  of 
 whom  were  warm  friends  of  the  Reformation,  and 
 propagated  its  principles  among  their  students. 
 During  his  theological  triennium  he  travelled 
 through  all  France  and  north  Italy;  at  the  conclu- 
 sion of  his  studies  in  1535  he  went  through  the 
 Netherlands  and  the  north  of  Germany  ;  and  in 
 1537  be  visited  Hesse  and  Saxony,  and  made  the 
 acquaintance  of  the  Protestant  theologians  in  Mar- 
 burg,   Erfurt,    Wittenberg,    and    Leipsic.      Soon 
 
 after  he  openly  joined  the  Reformers,  and  decline<l 
 a  lucrative  post  in  the  Papal  Court  which  his 
 friends,  without  his  knowledge,  had  obtained  for 
 him.  He  ultimately  became  professor  of  theology 
 at  Marburg,  where  he  died  1st  Feb.  1564.  Be- 
 sides several  works  in  theology,  he  prepared  a  com- 
 mentary on  the  Epistles  of  Paul  and  the  Epistle  to 
 the  Hebrews,  which  was  published  after  his  death 
 by  Mylius,  in  4  vols,  fob,  Ziir.  1582-84.  This, 
 though  comparatively  but  little  known,*  is  one  nf 
 the  most  valuable  of  the  exegetical  remains  of  the 
 Reformers.  Hyperius  pursues  the  grammatico-his- 
 torical  method  of  interpretation,  examining  the 
 meaning  of  the  words,  carefully  tracing  the  con- 
 nection of  the  passage,  taking  note  of  the  analogy 
 of  Scripture,  and  so  arriving  at  the  true  sense  of 
 the  place.  Not  until  he  has  thus  done  justice  to 
 the  exegesis,  does  he  proceed  to  the  dogmatical  or 
 practical  use  of  the  passage.  He  also  frequently 
 gives  citations  from  the  Fathers  to  shew  the  agree- 
 ment of  his  conclusions  with  the  understanding  of 
 the  ancient  church.  In  his  Opiiscida  are  to  be 
 found  also  some  exegetical  treatises. — J.  E.  R. 
 
 IBHAR    (inn^  ;    Sept.    Vat.    'EjSea/j,   'Ej3aA/), 
 
 Baa/3;  Alex.  'Iej3ap,  Te/3aap;  Vulg.  lebahar, 
 Jebaar).  A  son  of  David  born  in  Jerusalem  whose 
 name  occurs  in  2  Sam.  v.  15  ;  i  Chron.  iii.  6 ;  xiv.  5 . 
 His  mother's  name  is  not  mentioned ;  but  from 
 I  Chron.  iii.  9  it  appears  that  she  was  one  of  David's 
 wives  of  the  first  order  as  distinguished  from  his 
 concubines.     [CoNCUBiNE.] — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 IBLEAM    (DJ?^n^;    LXX.    'Ie/3\ad/x ;    Onom. 
 
 'le^Xadfx;  Vulg.  Jeblaam).  One  of  the  six  towns 
 which,  together  with  their  adjoining  villages,  were 
 assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  within  the  bor- 
 ders of  Issachar  and  Asher  (Josh.  xvii.  II).  It  was 
 in  the  neighbourhood  of  this  town  that  Ahaziah, 
 king  of  Judah,  received  his  death  wound  from  the 
 servants,  and  at  the  command,  of  Jehu  (2  Kings  ix. 
 27).  Its  exact  position  is  unknown,  but  we  may 
 infer  from  the  passage  just  quoted  that  it  was  on  or 
 near  the  road  from  Jezreel  to  Megiddo.  Accord- 
 ing to  Judg.  i.  27,  Ibleam  was  one  of  the  towns  from 
 which  the  Manassites  failed  to  expel  the  Canaanites, 
 and  the  same  thing  seems  to  be  affirmed  in  Josh, 
 xvii.  II.  For  an  explanation  of  the  grammatical 
 difficulty  connected  with  the  last-mentioned  pas- 
 sage, and  a  reply  to  the  objection  which  would 
 find  a  contradiction  between  the  two  passages,  the 
 reader  is  referred  to  Keil  on  Joshua,  in  loc.  Bi- 
 leam,  which  is  mentioned  in  i  Chron.  vi.  70  as  one 
 of  the  Levitical  cities,  is  perhaps  the  same  as 
 Ibleam.  The  reading,  however,  is  somewhat  doubt- 
 ful, see  Josh.  xxi.  25,  where  the  city  is  termed 
 Gath-Rimmon  [Gath-Rimmon]. — S.  N. 
 
 IBN  ADONIA.    [Jacob  b.  Chajem.] 
 
 IBN  AKNIN  (jijpj;  p^^  or  pj^y)  Joseph  b. 
 Jehudah,  called  in  Arabic  by  the  long  name  of 
 Abiilhag'ag'  Jiisstiff  Ibn  Jahja  Ibn  Shittmn  Alsabti 
 
 *  Bloomfield  refers  frequently  to  Hyperius  in  the 
 notes  to  his  Greek  N.  T.,  but  with  this  exception, 
 one  hardly  ever  sees  a  recognition  of  him  by  British 
 scholars. 
 
IBN  ALI 
 
 350 
 
 TEN  BALAAM  JEHUDAH 
 
 /i/ma£-ArSi,a.disimgmshed  philosopher,  mathemati- 
 cian, astronomer,  physician,  poet,  and  commentator, 
 who  was  born  atCeuta,  Arab.  Sd>/!i7  (Septum),  about 
 li6o.  He  fled  from  liis  native  place  about  1 185, 
 in  consequence  of  the  great  sufferings  which  the 
 Jews  had  to  endure  in  it,  and  for  a  time  settled  in 
 Alexandria,  where  he  became  a  disciple  and  inti- 
 mate friend  of  the  immortal  Maimonides,  and,  by  his 
 sceptical  expressions  about  religion  and  philosophy, 
 caused  this  great  luminary  to  write  the  celebrated 
 More Nebochan  (D''2iaj  miO  Doctor perpkxonun). 
 Ibn  Aknin  then  went  to  Syria  (circa  1 190)  and  thence 
 to  Bagdad  (1192),  where  he  founded  a  Rabbinic 
 college,  and  shortly  after  became  physician  to  the 
 Emir  Faris  ed  Din  Meimun  el  Kasri.  Passing  by 
 his  poetical,  ethical,  medical,  and  metaphysical 
 writings,  we  notice  his  Comnieniary  071  the  Song  of 
 Songs,  written  in  Arabic,  which  is  to  be  found  in 
 the  Bodleian  Library,  Oxford  {Pococke,  189).  He 
 espouses  the  notion  of  the  Talmud,  that  the  Song 
 of  Songs  is  the  most  sacred  of  all  the  twenty-four 
 canonical  books  of  the  O.  T.  [Solomon's  Song], 
 and  accordingly  explains  it  allegorically  as  repre- 
 senting the  relationship  of  God  to  his  people  Israel. 
 'There  are,'  he  says,  'three  different  modes  of  ex- 
 plaining this  book ;  I.  The  literal  {pi?^^  'h'^), 
 which  is  to  be  found  in  the  philologians  or  gram- 
 marians, ex.  gr.,  Saadia,  Abu  Sacharja  Jahja  ben 
 David  el  Fasi  [Chajug],  Abulwalid  Ibn  Ganach 
 of  Saragossa  [Ibn  Ganach],  the  Nagid  R.  Samuel 
 Ha-Levi  ben  Nagdilah,  Abn  Ibrahim  ben  Baran 
 [Isaac  b.  Joseph],  Jehudah  ben  Balaam  [Ibn 
 Balaam],  and  Moses  Ibn  Gikatilla  Ha-Cohen 
 [Gikatella].  2.  The  allegorical,  to  be  found  in 
 the  Midrash  Chasit,  the  Talmud,  and  in  some  of  the 
 ancient  interpretations ;  and  3.  The  philosophical 
 interpretation,  which  regards  this  book  as  referring 
 to  the  active  intellect  \yo\)s  ■TroirjTiKbs],  here  worked 
 out  for  the  first  time,  and  which,  though  the  last 
 in  point  of  time,  is  the  first  of  all  in  point  of  merit 
 
 (ob  lip  nat^*  ijtOIJ).  _  These  three  different 
 explanations  correspond,  in  reverse  order,  to  the 
 three  different  natures  of  man,  namely,  to  his 
 physical  (iT'ynLD),  vital  (rT'JXVn),  and  spiritual 
 (iT'JKDQJ)  natures.'  Ibn  Aknin  always  gives  the 
 first  and  second  explanations  first,  and  then  the 
 philosophical  interpretation.  The  commentary  is 
 invaluable  to  the  history  of  Biblical  literature  and 
 exegesis,  inasmuch  as  all  the  interpreters  therein 
 enumerated  have,  with  the  exception  of  Saadia, 
 hitherto  not  been  known  as  commentators  of  the 
 Song  of  Songs.  These  expositors  form  an  im- 
 portant addition  to  the  history  of  interpretation 
 given  by  Ginsburg  (Historical  and  Critical  Com- 
 mentary of  the  Song  of  Songs,  Longman  1857). 
 Ibn  Aknin  died  about  1226.  Com  p.  also  the 
 masterly  monograph  of  Munk,  Notice  snr  Joseph 
 {>.  Jehiida,  Par.  1842 ;  and  the  veiy  elaborate 
 article  of  Steinschneider,  in  Ersch  und  Gri(ber''s 
 Allgemeine  E7icyklop(idie,%.  v.  Joseph  Ibn  Ak7iin. — 
 
 c.  b.  G. 
 
 IBN  ALI.     [Jeshuah  b.  Jehudah.] 
 
 IBN  BALAAM  JEHUDAH  (Qyb  p  mirf), 
 called  in  Arabic  Abn-Zakaria  Jahja,  and  by  Ibn 
 Ezra  ]^\r\r\   pl\>1\2n    min^    "\,  k.  Jelmdah,  the 
 
 fi/st  grat7wiaria7i,  ""TlSDn  ^)hl  p,  Be7t  Balaam 
 the  Spa7iiard,  one  of  the  most  distinguished  philo- 
 logians and  commentators  of  the  Spanish  school. 
 
 who  lived  in  Seville  between  a.d.  1050  and  1090. 
 He  wrote  (i)  NIpDH  ^DJ;D  ISD,  a  work  on  the 
 acce7tts  of  the  Bible,  which  was  first  edited  by  Jo. 
 Mercer  under  the  title  De  acceniibus  sci'ipturce  pro- 
 saicis.  Par.,  Rob.  Stephanus,  1565.  Some  portions 
 of  this  book  have  been  incorporated  by  Heiden- 
 heim  in  his  excellent  work  called  D'^DyDH  '•DSCJ'D. 
 [Heidenheim.]  (2)  n"nX  DnSD  'J  ""JOyD  "lj?t^, 
 071  the  Poetical  acce7tts  of  yob,  P7'm<erbs,  a7id  the 
 Psali7is,  first  published  by  Mercer,  Paris  1556,  and 
 recently  re-edited  with  the  remarks  of  the  most 
 ancient  grammarians  upon  these  peculiar  accents,  as 
 well  as  notes  and  an  introduction,  by  G.  J.  Polak, 
 
 Amsterdam  1858.  (3)  nnno  IX^JC' D^^J?2mSD 
 rilDJiTI,  071  the  de7io/ni/iative  ve/-bs  /«  the  Hebrew 
 hvigiiage.  These  denominatives  are  arranged  in 
 alphabetical  order,  and  commented  upon  in  Arabic. 
 This  work  has  not  yet  been  published,  but  speci- 
 mens of  it  in  Hebrew  have  been  printed  by  Leopold 
 Dukes  in  Lite7-aticrblatt  des  Orie7tts,  1846,  No.  42. 
 (4)  DTjyn  niniN  IQD,  a  treatise  on  the  Hebrew 
 particles,  in  alphabetical  order.  This  work,  too,  has 
 not  as  yet  been  printed,  but  specimens  of  it  have 
 been  published  both  by  Dukes  and  Fiirst  in  Lite7-a- 
 turblatt  des  Orie7its,  Nos.  29  and  42.  (5)  "IDD 
 D^J  Jnn,  a  ti-eatise  07i  the  Hebrew  ho77io7iyms,  in  alpha- 
 betical order,  extracts  of  which  have  been  pub- 
 lished by  Dukes  in  Litei-atu7-blatt  des  O/'ients,  1846, 
 No.  4.  (6)  A  Co/>i77ie7ita7y  071  the  Pe7itateuch, 
 written  in  Arabic  :  though  this  work  has  long  been 
 known  through  Ibn  Ezra,  who  quotes  it  in  his 
 commentary  on  Gen.  xhx.  6  ;  Exod.  v.  19;  yet  it 
 is  only  lately  (1851)  that  the  indefatigable  Dr. 
 Steinschneider  has  discovered  a  MS.  in  the  Bod- 
 leian Library  containing  the  commentary  on  Num- 
 be7-s  and  Dentero7io77iy.  Ibn  Balaam  always  gives 
 the  grammatical  explanation  of  the  words  first,  he 
 then  enters  into  a  minute  disquisition  on  Saadia's 
 translation  and  exposition  of  the  Pentateuch,  which 
 he  generally  rejects,  then  explains  the  passage  ac- 
 cording to  its  context,  and  finally  sets  forth  the 
 Halachic  and  the  judicial  interpretation  of  the 
 Talmud.  A  specimen  of  this  commentary,  which 
 is  extremely  important  to  the  Hebrew  text  and  the 
 Massora,  has  been  communicated  by  Adolph  Neu- 
 bauer  in  the  Journal  Asiatique  of  December  1861. 
 It  is  on  Deut.  v.  6,  upon  which  Ibn  Balaam  remarks, 
 '  As  to  the  different  readings  of  the  two  Decalogue.'' 
 {i.e.,  Exod.  xx.  2-17,  and  Deut.  v.  6-21),  Saadia 
 is  of  opinion  that  they  contain  two  different  revela- 
 tions. He  entertains  the  same  view  respecting 
 those  Psalms  which  occur  twice  with  some  verbal 
 variations  \_ex.  gr. ,  Ps.  xiv.  and  liii.  ],  and  respecting 
 the  different  readings  of  the  Babylonian  and  Pales- 
 tinian codices.  Thus,  for  example,  when  the 
 Babylonians  omit  the  words  KinH  DV3  in  Zech. 
 xiv.  4,  which  the  Palestinians  insert,  he  takes  this 
 as  a  proof  that  this  prophecy  was  revealed  in  two 
 different  forms.  He,  in  like  manner,  adheres  to 
 both  readings  in  every  other  prophecy  in  which 
 similar  verbal  variations  are  found,  because  both 
 have  been  revealed.  I,  however,  find  it  more 
 probable  that  tradition  is  the  cause  of  these  dif- 
 ferent readings,  inasmuch  as  some  have  undoubt- 
 edly heard  the  prophet  use  such  expressions  on  one 
 occasion,  and  others  heard  from  him  other  expres- 
 sions on  another  occasion,  and  both  traditions  have 
 been  followed.  This,  I  am  also  of  opinion,  is  the 
 cause  of  the  "differences  between  Ben  Asher  and 
 Ben  Naphtali  [Ben  Asher  ;  Ben  Naphtali],  each 
 
IBN  BARUCH 
 
 351 
 
 IBN  CASPI  OR  CASPE 
 
 of  them  found  a  copy,  according  to  one  such  tra- 
 dition, which  he  followed  without  any  regard  to 
 the  deviations.  And  this  is  the  case  with  all  the 
 difference  between  the  Westerns  and  the  Easterns 
 which  the  ancients  have  fixed.'  From  this  import- 
 ant passage  we  get  to  know  a  remarkable  variation 
 between  the  Western  and  Eastern  codices  which  is 
 not  mentioned  else  where,  namely,  that  the  words  DV2 
 Ninn  (Zech.  xiv.  2)  are  omitted  in  the  latter ;  we 
 also  get  to  know  why  the  Syriac  version  has  not 
 these  words  ;  and  we,  moreover,  see  in  what  light 
 Saadia  and  others  regarded  the  various  readings. 
 (7)  A  Commentary  on  the  Psalms,  quoted  by  Ibn 
 Ezra  on  Ps.  iv.  8  ;  vii.  6,  7  ;  x.  14  ;  xxiv.  2  ;  liv.  7  ; 
 Ixxxi.  17;  Ixxxiv.  4;  Ixxxvi.  2;  Ixxxviii.  5;  cvii. 
 28;  cxv.  7;  cxix.  8;  cxliv.  8.  (8)^  Commentary  on 
 the  Song  of  Songs,  which,  according  to  Ibn  Aknin, 
 who  quotes  it,  gives  a  literal  exposition  of  this  book 
 [Ibn  Aknin].  (9)  A  Commentary  on  Isaiah, 
 quoted  by  Joseph  Albo  {Ikarim,  sec.  i.  l),  from 
 which  it  appears  that  Ibn  Balaam,  contrary  to  the 
 generally  received  opinion,  explained  away  the 
 Messianic  prophecies,  and  interprets  Is.  xi.  as  re- 
 ferring to  Hezekiah.  From  Ibn  Ezra's  quotation 
 on  Zech.  ix.  7  and  Dan.  x.  I,  it  seems  as  if  he  had 
 also  written  commentaries  on  these  books.  Ibn 
 Balaam  is  one  of  the  most  liberal  interpreters,  and 
 quotes  Christian  commentators  and  the  Koran  in 
 his  expositions.  Comp.  Steinschneider,  Catalogiis 
 Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col.  1292- 
 1297  ;  He-Chaliiz,  vol.  ii.,  Lemberg  1853,  p.  60, 
 ff.  ;  Leopold  Uukes,  Beitrcige  Ziir  Geschichte  der 
 Aeltesten  Aiislegung  iind  Spracherkldriin^  des  Alten 
 Testavientes  von  Ewald  luid  Dukes,  Stuttgart  1844, 
 vol.  ii. ,  p.  186,  ff. ;  Geiger,  Jiidische  Zeitschrift  fiir 
 Wissenschaft  und  Leben,  vol.  i. ,  1862,  p.  292,  ff 
 — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  BARUCH,  Baruch,  a  distinguished 
 Jewish  philosopher  and  commentator,  flourished 
 in  the  i6th  century  at  Venice.  He  published  a 
 twofold  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  called  by  the 
 
 double  name  of  2py^  D^Hp,  the  Congregation  of 
 
 Jacob,  and  PXIE'''  L^Tp,  Holy  Israel  (Venice  1599), 
 the  first  of  which  is  discursive  and  diffuse,  and 
 the  second  exegetical  and  brief  Based  upon  the 
 first  verse,  '  the  words  of  Coheleth,  son  of  David, 
 king  in  Jerusalem,'  he  maintains  that  two  persons 
 are  speaking  in  its  book,  a  sceptic  named  Coheleth, 
 and  a  believer  called  Beft  David,  and  accordingly 
 treats  the  whole  as  a  dialogue,  in  which  these  two 
 characters  are  shown  to  discuss  the  most  impor- 
 tant problems  of  moral  philosophy,  and  the  philo- 
 sophic systems  of  Greece  and  Arabia  are  made  to 
 furnish  the  two  heroes  of  the  dialogue  with  the 
 necessary  philosophic  materials.  The  remarkable 
 part  of  it  is  that  the  Qitastiones  dispittata  de  Anima 
 of  Thomas  Aquinas,  which  were  translated  into 
 Hebrew  by  Ali  Xabillo,  are  used,  both  to  put 
 objections  into  the  mouth  of  the  sceptic,  and  to 
 supply  the  believer  with  replies.  Thus,  when  the 
 sceptical  Coheleth  questions  the  immortality  of  the 
 soul  {Ecd.  ii.  15,  a),  he  uses  the  same  objections 
 which  Thomas  Aquinas  uses  with  regard  to  the 
 soul  in  question  xiv.  of  his  work  on  the  soul  ;  and 
 the  believing  Ben  David,  in  refuting  these  obiec- 
 tions,  employs  the  arguments  of  Aquinas  (comp. 
 also  Commentary,  65,  a;  71,  b;  96,  a;  97,  c; 
 117,  a;  118,  b;  119,  a).  This  commentary  is 
 most  important  to  the  understanding  of  the  Jewish 
 
 philosophy,  and  must  be  added  to  the  history  of 
 the  interpretation  of  Ecclesiastes  given  by  Gins- 
 burg,  Historical  and  Critical  Commentary  on  Ec- 
 clesiastes ;  comp.  Jellinek,  Thomas  von  Aquino  in 
 der jiidischen  Literatur,  Leipzig  1853,  p.  ii.  13  and 
 vii.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  CASPI  OR  CASPE  ("DD^  pX),  Joseph 
 B.  Abba  Mari  b.  Joseph  b.  Jacob.  This  re- 
 markable philosopher,  poet,  lexicographer,  and 
 commentator,  who  was  bom  about  A.  D.  12S0,  is 
 supposed  to  have  derived  his  name  from  his  native 
 place  L'Argentierre,  in  Languedoc,  now  in  the 
 department  of  L'Ardeche,  ten  miles  from  Privas, 
 of  which  ^SD3  is  a  Hebrew  translation.  His  bril- 
 liant powers  and  fondness  for  Biblical  exegesis  he 
 evinced  at  the  early  age  of  seventeen,  when  he  pub- 
 lished the  masterly  commentaries  upon  Ibn  Ezra's 
 exposition  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  upon  Ibn  Ga- 
 nach's  celebrated  grammatical  work,  called  "ISD 
 riDpin  [Ibn  Ganach].  In  his  thirtieth  year 
 {circa  13  lo)  he  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of 
 logic  and  the  speculative  sciences,  as  well  as  to  the 
 interpretation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  in  accord- 
 ance with  the  rules  of  these  sciences.  Passing  by 
 the  philosophical  and  ethical  productions  of  thi$ 
 voluminous  writer,  we  shall  give  a  list  of  his  gram- 
 matical, lexical,  and  exegetical  works,  and  state 
 the  principles  of  interpretation  by  which  he  was 
 guided.  He  wrote  (i)  a  commentary  (nK-'''"lD)  on 
 Ibn  Ganach's  grammatical  work.  (2)  An  etymolo- 
 gical work,  called  1DD  T^'\)\Tr\,*  silver  chains,  con- 
 taining general  remarks  on  the  roots  (D^L^HtJ*)  of 
 the  Hebrew  language,  in  which  he  shows  that  in 
 Hebrew  more  than  in  any  other  language  things  de- 
 rive their  names  from  certain  accidents.  (3)  A  He- 
 brew lexicon  called  1DD  T\Y\^\^  or  n"lL'^t^',  small 
 silver  chains  or  roots,  which  is  one  of  his  most 
 interesting  and  important  works.  He  starts  from 
 the  principle  that  every  root  has  only  one  general 
 idea  as  its  basis,  and  logically  deduces  from  it  all 
 the  other  shades  of  meaning.  A  copy  of  this  work 
 in  MS.,  2  vols.  4to,  is  in  the  Paris  library,  and 
 another  in  the  Angelica  at  Rome.  Abravanel 
 frequently  quotes  it  in  his  commentary  on  the  Pen- 
 tateuch (comp.  p.  7),  on  Isaiah  (comp.  xiv.  3  ;  Ixvi. 
 17),  etc.  ;  Wolf  gives  a  specimen  of  it  {Bibliotheca 
 fjebi-cca  i.  1543)  ;  Richard  Simon  used  the  Paris 
 MS.  {Hist.  Crit.,  lib.  i.  cap.  xxxi.),  and  Leopold 
 Dukes  printed  extracts  from  it  {Literaturblatt  des 
 Orients,  1847,  p.  486).  (4)  A  commentary  on 
 Ibn  Ezra's  exposition  of  the  Pentateuch  called  nKHQ 
 1D3n,  the  silver  stamnaiy.  (5)  Rules  about  most 
 of  the  mysteries  of  the  Pentateuch  (min  ""IDD), 
 and  explanations  of  its  apparently  superfluous 
 statements,  called  1D2  flT'D,  a  silver  castle.  (6) 
 A  supplement  to  the  preceding  work,  entitled 
 1DD  niOy,  silver  pillars.      (7)  A  commentary  on 
 
 the  Pentateuch,  entitled  1D3P  TlVO,  «  refining-poi 
 for  silver,  in  the  introduction  to  which  he  gives  an 
 analysis  of  its  tendency  and  parts.  Abravanel 
 gives  an  extract  from  it  in  his  commentary  on  the 
 Pentateuch  (comp.  Levit.  xx.  10-21,  p.  205,  ed. 
 Hanau).  (8)  A  collection  of  those  expositions  of 
 the  Pentateuch,  in  which  Ibn  Caspi  differs  from 
 Maimonides  and  Ibn  Ezra,  called  ^IDD  "'"IISD,  silver 
 basons.       (9)    A   commentary  on   eight    prophets, 
 
 *  The  word  1D3,  silver,  which  is  found  in  the 
 titles  of  Ibn  Caspi's  works,  is  in  allusion  to  his 
 name  ''DD3. 
 
IBN  CASPI  OR  CASPE 
 
 352 
 
 IBN  EZRA 
 
 called  1D3  T\'\\::>'C),silver  staves— on  Isaiah  (lii.-liv.), 
 which  is  one  of  these  prophets,  Ibn  Caspi  is  veiy 
 severe  upon  those  who  explain  these  prophecies  as 
 referring  to  the  Messiah  [Ibn  Danan].  (io)  An 
 exposition  of  the  Psalms,  called  1D3  JTllDia, 
 silver  snuffers,  an  extract  of  which  has  been  pub- 
 lished by  Leopold  Dukes  (comp.  Literatiirblatt  des 
 Orients,  1849,  pp.  il,  14).  (n)  A  commentary 
 on  Proverbs,  the  Song  of  Songs,  and  Ecclesiastes. 
 Of  the  commentary  on  Proverbs,  which  is  one  of 
 Ibn  Caspi's  most  valuable  contributions  to  Biblical 
 exegesis,  the  beginning  and  end  have  been  pub- 
 lished by  Werblumer  (comp.  «1D3  HVUp,  1846,  p. 
 19,  etc.)  ;  an  analysis  of  the  commentary  on  Ec- 
 clesiastes is  given  by  Ginsburg  (comp.  Historical 
 and  Critical  Commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  Long- 
 man, 1861,  p.  60,  etc.),  and  the  brief  commentary 
 on,  or  rather  introduction  to,  the  Song  of  Songs, 
 which  was  published  in  1577,  but  which  is  rarer 
 than  the  MSS.,  has  been  reprinted  with  an 
 English  translation  by  Ginsburg  (somp.  Historical 
 and  Critical  Co7nf7tentary  on  the  Song  of  Songs, 
 Longman,  1857,  p.  47,  etc.)     (12)  A  commentary 
 
 on  Job,  called  «1DD  jn^kJ>,  «  silver  table.  (13)  An 
 exposition  of  Ruth  and  Lamentations,  entitled 
 *1D3  ni33,  silver  censers.  (14)  A  commentary 
 on  Esther,  called  <1D3  'hhl.,  silver  rings.  (15) 
 A  commentary  on  Daniel,  called  1D3  JTlJ/'p,  sil- 
 lier dishes.  (16)  An  exposition  of  Ezra  and 
 Chronicles,  entitled  1D3  miJn,  a  silver  girdU ; 
 (17)  A  commentary  on  all  the  passages  found  in 
 the  Pentateuch  and  in  the  Prophets  which  refer  to 
 the  creation,  called  1D3  plTD,  a  silver  vase.  (18) 
 A  commentary  on  the  miracles  and  other  mysteries 
 found  in  the  Pentateuch,  Prophets,  and  Hagio- 
 graphy,  called  «1D2  y^J,  a  silver  cup.  (19)  One 
 hundred  profound  questions  in  connection  with  the 
 Pentateuch  and  Prophets,  called  DTD  1D3,  dross 
 silver. 
 
 As  to  the  principles  of  interpretation  by  which 
 Ibn  Caspi  was  guided  in  explaining  the  Bible,  we 
 cannot  do  better  than  give  them  in  his  own  words. 
 '  The  Sacred  Scriptures,'  says  he  in  his  exposition  of 
 the  Proverbs,  '  must  be  explained  according  to 
 their  plain  and  literal  sense  ;  and  a  recondite 
 meaning  can  as  little  be  introduced  into  them  as 
 into  Aristotle's  writings  on  logic  and  natural  his- 
 tory. Only  where  the  literal  meaning  is  not  suffi- 
 cient, and  reason  rejects  it,  a  deeper  sense  must  be 
 resorted  to.  If  we  once  attempt  to  allegorise  a 
 simple  and  intelligible  passage,  then  we  might  just 
 as  well  do  it  with  the  whole  contents  of  the  Bible.' 
 .  .  .  '  The  logical  division  of  sentences  is  the 
 most  indispensable  and  best  auxiliary  to  the  right 
 understanding  of  the  Bible,  and  the  criterion  to  the 
 proper  order  of  the  words  are  the  Massora  and  the 
 accents^  We  see  from  this  extract  that  this  writer 
 of  the  middle  ages  anticipated  the  hermeneutical 
 rules  of  modern  criticism  at  a  time  when  the  school- 
 men and  the  depositaries  of  Christian  learning 
 were  engaged  in  hair-splitting  and  in  allegorizing 
 every  fact  of  the  Bible.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regietted 
 that  nearly  all  the  exegetical  works  of  Ibn  Caspi 
 are  still  unpublished.  Comp.  Zunz  and  Delitzsch, 
 Katalog  der  Handschr.  der  Leipziger  Rathsbiblioth. 
 pp.  304,  ff.,  323,  ff.  ;  Kirchheim,  Werblumer'' s 
 Edition  of  Ibn  Caspi's  Comt)ientary  on  Maimonides' 
 More  Nebochim,  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1848,  p. 
 10,  ff.  ;  Leopold  Dukes,  Literatiirblatt  des  Orients, 
 1848 ;  and  especially  the  masterly  article  of  Stein- 
 
 schneider,  Er'sch  uttd  Gruber,  Allgemeine  Encyklo- 
 pddie,  sect.  ii.  vol.  xxxL,  p.  58,  ff.  ;  Graetz,  Ge- 
 schichte  der  Juden,  vol.  vii.,  Leipzig  1863,  p.  361, 
 etc.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  CHAJIM,  Aaron,  was  bom  at Eez  about 
 1570.  He  wrote  (i)  a  Conmientary  on  Joshua  and 
 (2)  another  on  Judges,  giving  first  the  verbal  11X^3 
 explanation,  and  then  an  exposition  (tjmo)  of  the 
 text,  which  were  published  in  Venice  1608-1609. 
 A  selection  of  these  commentaries  has  been  pub- 
 lished in  Frankfurter's  Great  Rabbinic  Bible,  un- 
 der the  title  of  pHX  2^,  the  heart  of  Aaron  [Frank- 
 furter]. (3)  A  Commentary  071  Sifra  (K"IQD),  or 
 the  traditional  explanation  of  Leviticus,  which  Ibn 
 Chajim  published  in  Venice,  1609-1611,  under  the 
 title  of  pnx  \'y^'\>,  the  oblation  of  Aaron.  (4)  A 
 treatise  on  R.  Ishmael's  thirteen  rules  for  interpret- 
 ingtheScriptures[R.  Ishmael],  called  pilS  miD, 
 the  rules  of  Aaron,  Venice  1609,  and  Dessau  1 7 12. 
 — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  DANAN,  Saadia  b.  Maimon,  a  Jewish 
 poet,  lexicographer,  and  commentator  of  the 
 Spanish  school,  born  about  A.D.  1450.  His  works 
 which  bear  upon  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible 
 and  the  elucidation  of  its  language,  are  (i)  A  Com- 
 mentary on  Isaiah  lii.  13  in  MS.  (cod.  MS.  Michael 
 412),  in  which  he  tells  us  that  Ibn  Caspi  regards 
 those  who  interpret  this  of  the  Messiah  to  be  as 
 greatly  in  error  as  those  who  refer  it  to  Jesus  of 
 Nazareth,  but  Ibn  Saadia  adds  to  this  remark, 
 '  May  God  have  mercy  upon  him  !'  i.e.,  upon  IbR 
 Caspi.  And  (2)  A  Hebrew  Lexicon,  written  in 
 Arabic.  This  work,  too,  is  still  in  MS.  ;  but 
 Pinsker  has  given  an  extract  from  it  in  his  Lickute 
 Kadmo7iioth,  Vienna  i860,  p.  74.     Comp.  Leopold 
 
 Dukes,  D''0'np^nj,  1853,  vol.  i.,  p.  i;  Stein- 
 schneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca 
 Bodleia7ia,  col.  2155. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  DAUD,  Jehudah.     [Chajug.] 
 
 IBN  DJANAH.     [Ibn  Ganach.] 
 
 IBN  EZRA,  Abraham  b.  Meier,  also  called 
 by  the  Jews  Rabe  (j;Zl"S")),  from  the  initials  of 
 Rabbi  Abraham  ben  Ezra  (XITV  12  DmaX  ''21), 
 and  by  the  scholastics  Ebe7iare  or  Eve7iare,  one  of 
 the  most  remarkable  of  the  Jewish  literati  of  the 
 middle  ages,  who  commanded  the  whole  cycle  of 
 knowledge  of  his  time,  was  born  in  Toledo  in  1088- 
 1089,  and  very  soon  distinguished  himself  as  a 
 mathematician,  astronomer,  philosopher,  poet, 
 physician,  traveller,  theologian,  grammarian,  and 
 commentator.  It  is,  however,  with  his  labours  as 
 a  Biblical  commentator  and  grammarian,  to  which 
 he  consecrated  his  varied  learning,  that  we  have 
 to  deal.  Upon  those  labours  he  first  entered  in 
 the  eternal  city,  where  he  published,  in  his  fiftieth 
 year  (i  140),  Coi/wientaries  onthe  Five  Megilloth  (E^'D^ 
 
 ri1?''J?3),  viz.,  The  So7ig  of  So7igs,  Ruth,  La7nenta- 
 tio7is,  Coheleth,  and  Esther,  which  were  immedi- 
 ately followed  by  a7i  Expositio7i  of  Job,  and  two 
 grammatical  treatises  on  the  language  of  the  Sacred 
 Scriptures,  one  being  a  Hebrew  translation  ol 
 Chajug's  Arabic  work  [Chajug],  and  the  other  an 
 original  production  called  D^JTXD,  the  balance. 
 These  were  succeeded  byanother  Hebrew  Grammar 
 entitled  niDV,  on  the  purity  of  the  Heb7-eib  style, 
 which    he    published   whilst  in  Mantua,   in   I145. 
 
IBN  EZRA 
 
 353 
 
 IBN  EZRA 
 
 From  Mantua  this  erratic  genius  emigrated  to 
 Lucca,  where  he  wrote  in  1154  and  1155  his  mas- 
 terly commentaries  on  Isaiah  and  the  Pentateuch, 
 as  well  as  two  grammatical  treatises — one  inde- 
 pendent, called  11D',  and  the  other  polemic,  en- 
 titled "in^  nSB',  being  a  rejoinder  to  Ibn  Librat's 
 attack  on  Saadia  [Ibn  Librat  ;  Saadia].  We 
 then  find  him  in  1155-1157  issuing  commentaries 
 on  Daniel,  the  Psalms,  and  the  Minor  Prophets,  in 
 Rhodes,  then  in  1159  publishing  an  energetic  de- 
 fence of  the  Sabbath  in  London,  and  then  again  in 
 Rhodes,  where  he  issued  in  1166  a  second  edition 
 of  his  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  and  another 
 grammatical  work  called  mi"l3  ilDti'.  He  now 
 determined  to  return  to  Spain,  at  the  advanced  age 
 of  seventy-eight  ;  but  died  on  his  journey  when  he 
 arrived  at  Calahorra,  on  the  borders  of  Navarre 
 and  Arragon,  in  1176. 
 
 2.  His  principles  of  interpretation  atid  the  merits 
 of  his  cotnmentaries. — The  contradictions  of  which 
 human  nature  is  composed  appear  more  glaringly 
 in  the  commentaries  of  Ibn  Ezra  than  in  the  writ- 
 ings of  the  majority  of  great  men.  His  keen  and 
 daring  researches  brought  him  to  the  very  verge  of 
 Pantheism,  yet  his  faith  in  revelation  was  at  times 
 perfectly  fanatical.  He  questioned  the  genuineness 
 of  many  portions  of  the  Pentateuch,  as  well  as  the 
 latter  part  of  Isaiah,  regarded  the  history  of  Jonah 
 as  a  dream,  and  charged  the  chronicles  with  a 
 blunder  (Exod.  xxv.  29);  yet  he  anathematized 
 Itzchaki  for  doing  the  same  thing  (comp.  Gen. 
 xxxvi.  30),  and  denounced  free  inquiry  as  heretical. 
 His  confidence  in  God,  and  resignation  to  the 
 gracious  dealings  of  Providence,  were  almost  un- 
 bounded, yet  he  fully  believed  in  the  irresistible 
 influence  of  the  stars  on  human  actions.  He 
 traced  every  phenomenon  in  the  Bible  to  a  natural 
 origin,  yet  he  propounded  a  mystical  theory, 
 according  to  which  all  things  are  wrapped  up  in 
 profound  darkness,  and  execrated  Chavi  El  Balchi 
 for  doing  similar  things  (comp.  Exod.  xiv.  27  ; 
 xvi.  3  ;  xxxiv.  29) — he  was  a  rigid  literalist  yet  a 
 great  mystic.  Notwithstanding  these  contradic- 
 tions, Ibn  Ezra  was  born  a  commentator,  and  was 
 the  first  who  raised  Biblical  exegesis  to  a  science, 
 interpreting  the  text  according  to  the  laws  of  lan- 
 guage. In  his  commentary  on  the  Song  of  Songs, 
 which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  one  of  his  earliest 
 exegetical  productions,  he  already  laid  down  the 
 principle  that  in  the  interpretation  of  unique  ex- 
 pressions in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  we  may  derive 
 great  help  from  cognate  languages  :  '  As  the 
 Bible,'  says  he,  '  is  all  the  Hebrew  we  possess 
 containing  the  limited  vocabulary  used  by  the 
 inspired  men  to  express  their  wants,  and  as  the 
 Arabic  very  much  resembles  the  Hebrew,  the 
 conjugations,  vowel  CinS),  and  servile  letters,  the 
 Niphal  and  the  Hithpael,  the  construct  state 
 and  the  numerals  being  alike  in  both  languages, 
 and  more  than  half  of  the  Arabic  vocabulary 
 being  found  in  the  Hebrew,  therefore  eveiy  aTra^ 
 Xe7o/x.  in  the  Hebrew  which  occurs  in  Arabic  may 
 be  supposed  to  have  the  same  sense  in  the  former 
 which  it  has  in  the  latter ;  still  you  cannot  always 
 rely  upon  it'  {Comment,  on  Songof  Songs,  viii.  11). 
 Hence  we  find  him  constantly  illustrating  peculiar 
 forms  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  by  examples  from  the 
 Arabic  (comp.  on  Gen.  xi.  3  ;  xx.  16  ;  xxxvi.  20 ; 
 Exod.  iL  3  ;  iii.  3  ;  ix.  31  ;  xii.  9,  43  ;  xiii.  17  ; 
 XV.  2;  xvi.  I  ;  xxi.  18;  xxiv.  6;  xxv.  4;  xxviii. 
 20  ;  xxix.   2  ;  xxxi.   2  ;  xxxvi.   8 ;  Levit.  ii.  I  ;  vi. 
 
 VOL.   II. 
 
 26;  xi.  12,  15,  21,  44;  xii.  2;  xiii.  32;  xxvii. 
 19;  Num.  X.  31;  xi.  15,  25;  xxxii.  29;  Deut. 
 xxviii.  22,  27)  and  the  Chaldee  (comp.  on  Gen.  ix. 
 27  ;  xii.  9  ;  xix.  8 ;  xxxvii.  3  ;  xli.  45  ;  Exod. 
 xxvii.  8  ;  xxviii.  20 ;  xxxvi.  8 ;  Deut.  i.  37).  His 
 ingenious  criticisms  of  the  text  deserve  the  greatest 
 attention  of  the  Biblical  student  and  Hebrew 
 grammarian.  He  denies  the  existence  of  diviinii- 
 tives  in  Hebrew  (see  Comment,  on  Eccl.  xii.  5), 
 which  is  taken  for  granted  by  Gesenius  {Hebrao 
 Grammar,,  sec.  86,  2,  4)  and  Ewald  (Lehrbnch, 
 sec.  167),  and  most  ingeniously  accounts  for  the 
 four  letters  ''inN  constituting  the  original  vowels 
 (see  Comment,  on  Eccl.  vii.  19).  Having  tra- 
 velled in  Italy,  Provence,  England,  Rhodes, 
 Palestine,  Africa,  and  India,  this  shrewd  observer 
 and  profound  scholar  frequently  illustrates  the 
 manners  and  customs  mentioned  in  the  Bible  by 
 those  of  other  nations  with  whom  he  mixed  (comp. 
 Comment,  on  Gen.  iii.  20 ;  xxx.  24 ;  xxxviii.  8  ; 
 Num.  xii.  l),  and  also  makes  some  valuable  re- 
 marks on  Biblical  geography,  viz.,  on  Egypt  (see 
 Comment,  on  Gen.  ii.  11 ;  Exod.  vii.  15;  xiii.  8, 
 31  ;  XX.  8  ;  Num.  xiii.  8);  Gadomes  (Exod.  xxv. 
 5)  ;  Arabia  (Gen.  xxxii.  4  ;  Exod.  xvi.  3),  Palestine 
 (Exod.  X.  19);  Persia  and  India  (Esther  vii.  8). 
 His  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  was  truly 
 wonderful.  Though  living  at  a  time  when  no 
 concordances  existed,  yet  he  knew  whether  a  word 
 or  a  certain  form  of  a  word  was  unique  or  not 
 (comp.  Comment,  on  Gen.  vi.  14 ;  xli.  23  ;  Exod. 
 ix.  27;  Levit.  i.  15;  vi.  14;  xi.  20;  xiii.  55; 
 Num.  xi.  5  ;  xxii.  22 ;  xxiv.  3  ;  Deut.  vi.  8). 
 Equal  to  this  marvellous  knowledge  of  the  Scrip- 
 tures was  his  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  best 
 grammatical,  lexical,  and  exegetical  works  of  his 
 predecessors  and  contemporaries,  which  he  con- 
 stantly quotes.  Aaron  Ha-Cohen  (Gen.  xxxiv. 
 30 ;  xlbc.  6  ;  Levit.  xviii.  6)  ;  Abraham  Ha-Nassi 
 (Dan.  xi.  3) ;  Ben  Ha-Jotzer  (Dan.  x.  25) ;  Ibn 
 Sita  (Exod.  ii.  2 ;  xxi.  24 ;  xxii.  5,  28) ;  Ben 
 Ephraim  (Exod.  xix.  16) ;  Chajug  (Gen.  xli.  48  ; 
 Exod.  vii.  5  ;  x.  8  ;  xxi.  8  ;  Num.  x.  36 ;  xxiii. 
 13  ;  Deut.  xxix.  29 ;  Is.  xiv.  20 ;  xxvi.  20 ;  xlix. 
 5  ;  Ixv.  10  ;  Habak.  ii.  19  ;  iii.  2 ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  14 ; 
 Ixxxiv.  7  ;  cii.  28  ;  cxxxvii.  2  ;  cl.  6 ;  Job  xxxviii. 
 5  ;  Ruth  i.  20  ;  Eccl.  ix.  12  ;  xii.  5)  ;  Chavi  El 
 Balchi  (Exod.  xiv.  27 ;  xvi.  13  ;  xxxiv.  29);  Dunash 
 b.  Tamim  (Exod.  xxxviii.  9;  Eccl.  xii.  5) ;  Dunash 
 Ha-Levi  (Ps.  ix.  i,  7,  10) ;  Eldad  Ha-Dani  (Exod. 
 ii.  23) ;  Hai  Gaon  (Job  iv.  10 ;  vi.  10 ;  xiii.  26  ; 
 xxxi.  32;  Ps.  Iviii.  10;  Is.  xlvi.  8;  Amos  v.  23); 
 Hannanel  (Levit.  xviii.  22) ;  M.  Gikatilla  (Job  iv. 
 10 ;  V.  5) ;  Ibn  Balaam  (Gen.  xli.  48 ;  xlix.  6 ; 
 Exod.  V.  19,  al.) ;  Ibn  Ganach  (Gen.  iii.  8;  xxviii. 
 1 1 ;  xlix.  27 ;  Exod.  iii.  3,  al.)\  Ibn  Gebirol  (Gen. 
 iii.  I ;  Dan.  xi.  30,  al.) ;  Ibn  Giath  (Deut.  x.  7 ;  Ps. 
 cxlvii.  3) ;  Ibn  Koreish  (Amos  vi.  10) ;  R.  Isaac 
 (Exod.  xlix.  18;  Levit.  v.  7);  Isaac  b.  Levi  (Dan. 
 xi.  30)  ;  Isaac  b.  Saul  (Is.  xxvii.  3) ;  Itzchaki 
 (Gen.  xxxvi.  30,  31;.  Num.  xxiv.  17;  Hos.  i.  i); 
 R.  Islimael  (Gen.  xxxviii.  28;  Exod.  xxxviii.  25)  ; 
 Jepheth  b.  Eh  (Hos.  iii.  4;  Joel  i.  4,  al.) ;  R.  Josi 
 (Ps.  xiv.  5) ;  Joseph  b.  Gorion  (Gen.  xxxvii.  25 ; 
 Is.  ii.  2;  Hos.  xiv.  2;  Hag.  ii.  9;  Ps.  xlix.  20; 
 cxx.  5 ;  Dan.  ii.  39 ;  xi.  3) ;  R.  Joshuah  (Gen. 
 xxviii.  II;  Exod.  iii.  3;  Levit.  xvi.  i,al.);  Judah 
 Ha-Levi  (Exod.  iv.  10;  Num.  xxvii.  3;  Deut. 
 xiv.  21,  al.);  R.  Levi  (Ps.  vii.  10 ;  xxxv.  13); 
 Menachem  b.  Saruk  (Exod.  vi.  3;  Deut.  xxii.  9; 
 Is.  lix.    16 ;   Hag.   ii.    12) ;  Moses  b.  Amram  FJa- 
 
 2  A 
 
IBN  EZRA 
 
 354 
 
 IBN  GANACH 
 
 Parsi  (Exod.  xii.  5 ;  Amos  vii.  14) ;  Moses  Ha- 
 Nagid  (Is.  Ivii.  9) ;  Saadia  (Gen.  i.  i ;  Exod.  ii. 
 8;  Levit.  ii.  9;  Num.  xix.  2;  Deut.  vii.  21,  al); 
 Samuel  b.  Chofni  (Gen.  iii.  I ;  xxxviii.  1 1 ;  Exod. 
 iv.  24,  25 ;  viii.  5 ;  Levit.  xvi.  10 ;  Num.  xxii. 
 28),  are  cited  alternately  for  approbation  and  dis- 
 approbation. Some  of  the  works  of  these  dis- 
 tinguished writers  would  not  have  been  known  but 
 for  the  quotations  preserved  by  Ibn  Ezra.  Hence 
 his  commentaries  may  be  regarded  as  furnishing 
 most  valuable  materials  for  the  construction  of  a 
 history  of  O.  T.  exegesis.  No  wonder  that  his 
 commentaries  were  a  complete  triumph  over  the 
 allegorical  and  trifling  manner  in  which  the  Bible 
 was  expounded  both  by  the  synagogue  and  the 
 church,  and  that  even  the  great  luminary  Maimo- 
 nides  charged  his  son,  in  his  last  will  and  testament, 
 not  to  study  any  other  commentaries  but  those  of 
 Ibn  Ezra,  '  which  are  exceedingly  good,  and  can- 
 not be  consulted  without  profit,  and  which,  for 
 beauty  of  thought,  clearness  of  wisdom,  and  clear- 
 ness of  perception,  are  unlike  any  other  writings.' 
 Ibn  Ezra's  style  is  very  concise  and  sometimes  very 
 obscure,  which  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  fact  that  he 
 formed  a  technical  phraseology  of  his  own,  that  the 
 good  humour  with  which  he  exposes  the  exposi- 
 tions of  his  opponents  is  often  expressed  in  plays 
 upon  words,  and  that  he  not  unfrequently  veiled 
 his  scepticism  about  the  Mosaic  authorship  of 
 certain  portions  of  the  Pentateuch  in  ambiguous 
 and  laconic  phrases.      Thus,   for  instance,   upon 
 
 Gen.  xii.  6  he  remarks  (mT"  ^"^K'ttni  TiD  "1^  K'"'), 
 '  there  is  a  mystery  here,  but  the  wise  man  will  be 
 quiet.'  Another  way  in  which  he  expresses  his 
 scepticism  may  be  seen  in  Gen.  xxii.  14,  where  he 
 remarks  'the  meaning  of  the  words  nXT*  niD^  "IHZI 
 
 is  to  be  found  in  the  section  D''"l3in  n?X,'  /.^.,  at 
 the  beginning  of  his  commentary  on  Deuteronomy, 
 and  on  turning  to  the  place  we  simply  find  an 
 enumeration  of  all  the  post  Mosaic  passages  in  the 
 Pentateuch.  Or  he  merely  says,  '  this  passage 
 belongs  to  the  mystery  of  the  twelve  verses,'  i.e., 
 it  is  not  written  by  Moses,  just  as  the  last  twelve 
 verses  of  the  Pentateuch,  which  narrate  the  death 
 and  burial  of  Moses,  were  not  written  by  him. 
 
 3.   ne  best  editions  and  traiislations  of  his  com- 
 metttaries  according  to  the  order  of  the  Hebrew  Bible, 
 
 etc.  (i)  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  7J?  CIIS 
 minn,  the  best  edition  of  which  is  the  one  edited 
 by  Jekuthiel  Lasi  b.  Nachum,  Amsterdam  1721, 
 
 under  the  title  of  n31D  nV^ilD,  the  pearl  of  great 
 price,  with  square  letters,  and  the  super  commen- 
 taries  of  Joseph   b.   Eleazar  Sefardi  (ijDV  PHX), 
 
 Samuel  Motot  (DnjlD  vhyo  or  DIDIDH  'a),  and 
 Samuel  Zarza  (D^Ti  "lIpD  "IDD).  The  commen- 
 tary is  also  given  in  the  Rabbinic  Bibles  of 
 Bomberg,  Buxtorf,  and  Frankfurter.  The  intro- 
 duction of  this  valuable  commentary  has  been 
 translated  into  Latin  by  Voisin,  Disputa.  R.  Israelis 
 de  Anifna,  Paris  1635,  p.  151-167,  and  I.  Galle, 
 Upsala  171 1.  Richard  Simon  gives  an  anlaysis  of 
 it  in  his  Hisioria  Critique,  lib.  iii. ,  cap.  5  ;  and  the 
 Comment,  on  the  Decalogue  was  translated  into 
 Latin  by  Seb,  Miinster,  Froben  1527.  (2)  The 
 Commentary  on  the  Earlier  Prophets  (?>. ,  Joshuah, 
 Judg.,  Sam.,  and  Kings)  has  not  as  yet  been  pub- 
 lished. (3)  Of  the  Commentary  on  the  Later  Pro- 
 phets {i.e.,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  Ezekiel),  Isaiah 
 
 only  is  given  in  the  Rabbinic  Bibles  of  Bomberg, 
 Buxtorf,  and  Frankfurter.  (4)  The  Commentary  on 
 the  Minor  Prophets  is  given  entire  in  the  Rabbinic 
 Bibles.  Of  these  we  have  a  Latin  translation  of 
 Hosea  by  Mercer,  Leyden  1621  ;  a  Latin  transla- 
 tion of  Joel  and  Obadaja,  by  Leusden,  Utrecht 
 1657;  of  Jonah  by  Leusden,  Utrecht  1656;  of 
 Nahum,  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah,  and  Haggai,  by 
 Don.  Lund,  Upsala  1705-1708;  and  of  Malachi, 
 by  And.  Borgwall,  Upsala  1707.  (5)  The  Com- 
 mentary on  the  Hagiographa  {i.e..  Psalms,  Proverbs, 
 Job,  the  Five  Megilloth,  Daniel,  Ezra,  Nehemiah, 
 and  Chronicles)  is,  with  the  exception  of  Chronicles, 
 given  in  the  great  Rabbinic  Bibles.  There  are 
 Latin  versions  of  the  119th  Psalm  by  Ph.  Aquinas, 
 Lib.  Veter.  Rabb.,  etc.,  ed.  1620 ;  of  the  Song  of 
 Songs,  by  Gilbert  Gereboard,  Paris  1585;  an  Eng- 
 lish version  of  the  first  chapter  is  given  by  Gins- 
 burg,  Coj>i?nenta7y  on  the  Song  of  Songs,  Longman, 
 1857,  p.  45.  Latin  of  Ruth  by  Jo.  Carpzov,  1722, 
 ed.  3  ;  English  of  the  first  chapter  of  Ecclesiastes 
 by  Ginsburg,  Commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  Long- 
 man, 1 86 1,  p.  46;  and  Latin  of  Lamentations  by 
 Fr.  Taylor,  London  1615-  Zedner  of  the  British 
 Museum  has  published  the  commentary  on  Esther 
 after  another  recension  (London  1850).  As  to  his 
 grammatical  works  the  best  edition  of  (l)  ~BD 
 D"'3ti<D,  Rudiments  of  Hebretv  Grammar,  is  by 
 Wolf  Heidenheim,  Offenbach  1794 ;  (2)  "IDD 
 riinV,  Critical  Grammar  of  the  Hebrew  Langtiage, 
 by  H.  Lippman,  Fiirth  1827  ;  (3)  miia  ilSK^,  on 
 diversepoi>its  of  Hebrew  Grammar,  by  H.  Lippmann, 
 Fiirth  1839  ;  (4)  "iP""  T\Zi^,  on  difficult  words  in  the 
 Old  Testai?ient,  in  defence  of  Saadia,  by  G.   H. 
 
 Lippmann,  Frankfort  on  Main,  1843  ;  (5)  pymTl 
 ''inX  nVniX,  Gram??iatical  efiigtna  in  poetry  on  the 
 quiescent  letters,  is  given  at  the  beginning  of  Ibn 
 Ezra's  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  in  the  great 
 Rabbinic   Bibles,    and    has    been   translated   into 
 
 Latin  by  De  Lara,  Leyden  1658;  (6)  ^y  rn^D 
 I'TD  niTlIX,  Grammatical  cjiigma  in  Prose  on  the  two 
 liquids  D  a7td  3  is  given  in  Lippmann's  edition  of 
 Ibn  Ezra's  n"11~l3  HStJ'.  Ibn  Ezra's  translations  of 
 Chajug's  grammatical  works  are  noticed  in  the 
 article  ChaJUG.  Comp.  Hartmann,  Ersch  und 
 Gruber''s  Allgemeine  Encyklop.  sec.  i.,  voL  i.  79,  ff. ; 
 Geiger,  Wissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift,  i.  (1835),  p. 
 198,  ff.  ;  308,  ff. ;  ii.  (1836),  p.  553,  if.  ;  iv.  (1839), 
 pp.  261,  436  ;  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Judatca  i.  251, 
 etc. ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in 
 Bodleiana  Bibliotheca,  680-689  >  Jost,  Geschichte  des 
 Jude7tthu7ns  ii.  419,  ff.,  Leipzig  1858;  Graetz, 
 Geschichte  der  Juden,  vi.  198,  ff.,  Leipzig  1861 ; 
 Geiger,  Jiidische  Zeitschrift,  Breslau  1862,  219; 
 Ben  Cha/ia7ija,  v.  146,  210,  372, — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  GANACH,  or  Djanah  Jonah,  or  Abul- 
 VALID  Mervan,  as  he  is  called  in  Arabic.  This 
 famous  grammarian  and  lexicographer,  who  is 
 alternately  quoted  in  Jewish  writings  by  the  names 
 of  njV  '-),  R.  Jo7iah  ;  plpnOH  njV '-),  R.  Jonah 
 the  G7-avi77iarian  ;  ''TlSDn  njl''  H,  R.  Jo7tah  the 
 Spa7iiard;  XDlin  Hir  '1,  R.  Jo7iah  the  Phy- 
 sician; nSJJ  pX  XQnn  n:V  "\,  R.  Jo7iah  the 
 Physician,  Ibn  Ganach ;  and  D13*"l»  '"1,  R.  Mer- 
 i7ius  (derived  from  piD  =Me7-van),*  was  born  at 
 
 *  That  lona  Ibn  Ganach  and  Merinus  designate 
 the  same  person  has  already  been  remarked  by 
 David  Kimchi,  who  most  plainly  declared  in  his 
 
IBN  GANACH 
 
 355 
 
 IBN  GANACH 
 
 Cordova  about  A.  D.  .995,  and  died  about  1050. 
 When  quite  a  youth  Ibn  Ganach  evinced  his  skill 
 in  the  sacred  language  by  writing  Hebrew  poetry. 
 This,  however,  he  soon  gave  up  for  the  more  solid 
 and  arduous  studies  of  Hebrew  grammar  and  lexi- 
 cography under  the  guidance  of  Isaac  Ibn  Gika- 
 tilla  [Gikatilla],  and  of  medicine,  in  the  academy 
 which  was  called  into  existence  by  the  literary 
 tastes  of  the  Caliph  Al-Hakem  II.  But  his  studies 
 and  domestic  peace  were  soon  interrupted,  as  he, 
 like  many  of  his  co-religionists,  had  to  quit  Cor- 
 dova in  consequence  of  the  sufferings  wliich  were 
 inflicted  upon  the  inhabitants  of  that  devoted  city 
 in  the  year  1013,  after  it  was  taken  by  Al-Mos- 
 tain  Suleiman.  He  went  to  Saragossa,  where  he 
 settled  down  when  about  twenty  years  of  age 
 (1014-1015),  practised  medicine  for  a  maintenance, 
 and  devoted  all  his  spare  time  to  the  prosecution  of 
 his  researches  in  sacred  philology  and  hermeneu- 
 tics,  which  were  the  chief  aim  of  his  life  ;  and  his 
 achievements  in  these  departments  are  truly  mar- 
 vellous. Independent  in  his  researches,  and  sin- 
 cerely believing  that  whatever  tends  to  evolve  the 
 true  sense  of  the  inspired  text  ought  to  be  publicly 
 made  known,  though  it  might  be  contrary  to  vene- 
 rated opinions  and  against  one's  own  interests, 
 Ibn  Ganach  published  (i)  the  first  instalment  of 
 his  labours  in  Arabic,  in  the  form  of  additions  to 
 and  correction  of  Chajug's  grammatical  treatise  on 
 the  quiescent  letters  (rUH  nVJllS  "IDD  [Chajug]), 
 
 under  the  title  of  pin^DDO^X  Hebrew  "ISD 
 njKTt,  Supplement  or  Siridia-es,  which  is  a  very 
 important  contribution  to  Biblical  exegesis.  But 
 notwithstanding  the  excellency  of  his  criticisms, 
 and  the  meek  and  gentle  spirit  of  their  author,  and 
 in  spite  of  his  acknowledgment  '  that  he,  in  com- 
 mon with  many  others,  had  sucked  at  Chajug's 
 breast  of  wisdom,'  but  that  he  must  say  with  Aris- 
 totle, '  his  love  for  truth  is  greater  even  than  his 
 love  for  Plato  ;'  these  strictures  upon  so  celebrated 
 a  man  provoked  the  disciples  of  Chajug,  and 
 Samuel  Ha-Nagid  issued  a  rejoinder  to  Ibn  Ga- 
 noch's  animadversions  [Samuel  Ha-Nagid].  To 
 this  Ibn  Ganoch  replied  in  a  treatise,  (2)  entitled 
 
 T'lK'n^X  nsni  Hebrew  HD^^nn  -IDD,  the  hook 
 of  reproach  or  correction,  which,  like  its  predeces- 
 sor, contains  very  valuable  grammatical  and  exe- 
 getical  remarks.  He  then  published  (3)  a  polemi- 
 cal work  called  rT'^JD^X  n'6sD")  Hebrew  IDD 
 mynn,    the    book    of   recollections ;    (4)    another 
 
 called  is'^non^XI  n^pH^X  3Xn3  Hebrew  "iSD 
 "nE'^-|1  Qn^pn,  the  book  of  approximation  and  recti- 
 fication ;  and  (5)  another  entitled  fT'lDni'K  H^XD") 
 Hebrew  nSltJTin  IQD,  the  book  of  reconciliation. 
 
 Michlol,  '  And  the  teacher  Ben  Gaitach,  the  same 
 who  is  constantly  called  in  this  book  R.  Jonah,  and 
 whom  people  generally  call  R.  Mariitus''  (ed. 
 Venice,  13,  a).  The  celebrated  Orientalist,  Ed- 
 ward Pococke,  also  remarks,  "-Abu  Valid,  whom  he 
 \i.e.,  David  Kimchi]  often  cites  by  the  name  of 
 Rabbi  Jonah,  as  Aben  Ezra  doth  by  the  name  of 
 R.  Mariniis,  his  name  at  length  being  Abu  Walid 
 Marimi  Ebn  Janachi  Cordubensis''  {Preface  to  the 
 Cotnmentary  on  Micha,  voL  i.,  p.  10,  ed.  Twell's, 
 London  1740).  It  is,  therefore,  all  the  more  re- 
 markable that  Wolf  should  make  R.  Marinus  to  be 
 the  father  of  R%  Jonah  [Bibliotheca  Hebrcea,  i. 
 p.  486). 
 
 He  also  wrote  (6)  a  Commentary  on  the  Son"  of 
 Song,  which,  according  to  Ibn  Aknin,  who  quotes 
 it,  gives  a  literal  exposition  of  this  book  [Ibn 
 Aknin],  Whilst  engaged  in  these  polemical 
 works,  all  of  which  are  valuable  contributions  to 
 Hebrew  lexicography  and  Biblical  exegesis,  Ibn 
 Ganach  prepared  himself  for  his  chefd^a'uvre,  called 
 IT'pjnPii,  Ihe  critic,  which  he  finished  in  his  ad- 
 vanced age,  and  divided  into  two  parts  ;  the  one 
 (7)  being  a  treatise  on  grammar  as  connected  with 
 
 exegesis,  entitled  yOPPN  ^XflD  Hebrew  "120 
 ilDpin,  the  book  of  embroidery ;  and  the  other  (8) 
 
 a  Lexicon,  entitled  7lVxi?N  3X03  Hebrew  ISD 
 WU~\^'T\,  the  book  of  1-oots.  This  gigantic  work  is 
 the  most  important  philological  production  in  the 
 Jewish  literature  of  the  middle  ages.  The  mastery 
 of  the  science  of  the  Hebrew  language  in  all  its 
 delicate  points  which  Ibn  Ganach  therein  displays, 
 the  lucid  manner  in  which  he  explains  every  gram- 
 matical difficulty,  and  the  sound  exegetical  rules 
 which  he  therein  propounds,  have  few  parallels  up 
 to  the  present  day.  He  was  not  only  the  creator 
 of  the  Hebrew  syntax,  but  almost  brought  it  to 
 perfection.  He  was  the  first  who  pointed  out  the 
 ellipses  and  the  transposition  of  letters,  words,  and 
 verses  in  the  Hebrew  Bible.  He  explained  in  a 
 simple  and  natural  manner  more  than  two  hundred 
 obscure  passages  in  the  Bible,  which  had  up  to 
 his  time  greatly  perplexed  all  interpreters,  by 
 showing  that  the  sacred  writers  used  abnormal  for 
 nonnal  expressions  (comp.  his  HDp-in  "IDD,  chap, 
 x.wiii.  ;  Ibn  Ezra's  Commentary  on  Daniel  i.  i, 
 and  ninV  "IDD,  ed.  Lippmann,  p.  72,  note). 
 Though  his  faith  in  the  inspiration  of  the  He- 
 brew Scriptures  was  absolute,  yet  he  maintainec" 
 that,  being  addressed  to  men,  they  are  subject  to 
 the  laws  of  language,  and  hence  urged  that  the 
 abnormal  expressions  and  fonns  in  the  Bible  are 
 not  to  be  ascribed  to  the  ignorance  of  transcribers 
 and  punctuators,  nor  to  wilful  corruption,  but  are 
 owing  to  the  fact  that  the  sacred  writers  being 
 human  paid  the  tribute  of  humanity.  The  meek 
 and  gentle  spirit  which  he  manifested  in  the  midst 
 of  his  sufferings  for  his  independent  researches  may 
 be  seen  from  his  beautiful  and  touching  combina- 
 tion of  the  sei-vile  letters  into  the  voces  memoriales, 
 
 njSn  *1X  ^"dyP^,  O  thai  my  peace  tcere  established  ! 
 But  notwithstanding  the  opposition  he  met  with 
 during  his  life,  no  philologian  has  exercised 
 directly  and  indirectly  such  an  influence  both  upon 
 Jewish  and  Christian  grammarians  and  commen- 
 tators as  Ibn  Ganach,  as  may  be  seen  from  Ibn 
 Ezra's  numerous  references  to  him,  as  well  as  from 
 the  fact  that  the  Lexicons  of  Parchi  and  David 
 Kimchi  are  to  a  great  extent  translations  of  his 
 Lexicon  [Parchon  ;  Kimchi.]  All  his  works 
 were  written  in  Arabic.  Analysis  of  the  fi'st, 
 third,  and  fourth  treatises  are  given  in  Ewald's 
 Beitrdge,  i.  p.  127-140 ;  the  sixth  treatise,  i.e., 
 the  grammar,  entitled  Sefer  Ha-Rikma,  which 
 was  translated  into  Hebrew  by  Ibn  Tibbon,  was 
 published  by  Goldberg,  Frankfurt  on  Main,  1856  ; 
 of  the  seventh  treatise,  i.  e. ,  the  Lexicon,  a  hundred 
 and  twenty-three  fragments,  which  were  found  as 
 marginal  glosses  in  Ibn  Ezra's  and  Ralbg's  Com- 
 mentary on  the  Pentateuch,  have  been  published 
 by  S.  D.  Luzzatto  in  the  Hebrew  annual  entitled 
 Kerem  Chemed,  v.  p.  34-47,  Prag.  1841.  Speci- 
 mens of  it  have  also  been  published  by  Gesenius 
 
IBN  GEBIROL  or  GABIROL 
 
 356 
 
 IBN  JACHJA 
 
 in  the  dissertation  to  his  Hebrdisches  7ind  Chal- 
 ddisches  Haiidworterhitch.  This  dissertation  is 
 given  in  English  by  Dr.  Robinson  in  the  Americafi 
 Biblical  Repository  for  1833.  The  Arabic  MS.  of 
 Ibn  Ganach's  Lexicon,  which  Dr.  Pococke  brought 
 with  him  from  the  East,  is  in  the  Bodleian  Library. 
 Comp.  Uri  Catalog,  codd.  orient.  bibliotheccE  Bod- 
 leiaiice,  cod.  456,  457  ;  Ewald  und  Dukes,  Beitnige 
 zur  Geschichte  der  AHltesten  Anslegimg  d.  Alten 
 Testa?>ientes,  i.  p.  126-150  ;  ii.  p.  169-175  ;  Le- 
 brecht,  Ersch  tind  Gricber's  Allgemeine  Encyklo- 
 pddie,  section  ii.  vol.  xxii.  p.  383-385  ;  Munk, 
 Notice  siir  Abidwalid  Merivan  Ibn  DjanAJi,  Par. 
 1851  ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hehr.  in 
 Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col.  14 15- 1420  ;  Graetz, 
 Geschichte  der  Juden,  vi.  p.  25-30. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  GEBIROL  or  GABIROL,  Solomon  b. 
 Jehtjdah,    also  called  by  the  Jews  Solotnon   the 
 
 Spaniard,  ">n-lSDn  T\'oh^,  Ihe  hynuiologist  ^ya 
 D''"l''ki'n,  and  RaMag  3"3Cin,  from  the  initials  of 
 i'lT'^J  p  ilD^t^  '^,  by  the  Arabians  Abie  Ajitb  Su- 
 leiman Ibn  Jachja,  and  by  the  Christian  school- 
 men Avicebrol,  Avicebron,  etc.,  a  distinguished 
 Jewish  philosopher,  commentator,  grammarian, 
 and  a  most  celebrated  hymnologist,  born  in  Malaga 
 about  A.  D.  102 1,  and  died  in  1070.  To  this  sweet 
 singer  of  Israel  versification  in  the  sacred  language 
 <vas  so  easy  that  he  wrote  a  Hebrew  grammar  in 
 rhyme  when  nineteen  years  of  age  (1040),  and  by 
 his  charming  style  imparted  life  to  the  otherwise 
 dry  rules.  This  grammar,  entitled  pJJ?,  which 
 originally  consisted  of  400  verses,  has  not  yet 
 been  published  entire.  Part  of  it  is  given  by  Par- 
 chon  in  his  Hebrew  lexicon,  Ponsonii  1844,  p. 
 xxiii.,  and,  with  some  corrections,  by  Leopold 
 Dukes,  Shire  Shlomo,  Hanover  1858,  part  ii.  p. 
 56.     At  the  age  of  twenty-four  (1045),  he  wrote  in 
 
 Arabic  an  ethico-philosophical  work,  entitled  nSPVX 
 
 PX73X7X,  which  was  translated  into  Hebrew  by 
 Jehudah  Ibn  Tibbon,  and  printed  under  the  name 
 K'DJn  n"l1?D  jlpn  in  1550,  and  frequently  since. 
 Ibn  Gebirol  propounds  in  this  work  a  peculiar 
 theory  of  the  human  temperament  and  passions, 
 enumerates  twenty  propensities  corresponding  to 
 the  four  dispositions  multiplied  by  the  five  senses, 
 and  shows  how  the  leaning  of  the  soul  to  the  one 
 side  may  be  brought  to  the  moral  equipoise  by 
 observing  the  declarations  of  Scripture,  and  ethical 
 sayings  of  the  Talmud,  which  he  largely  quotes, 
 and  which  he  intersperses  with  the  chief  sayings 
 of  '  the  divine'  Socrates,  his  pupil  Plato,  Aristotle, 
 the  Arabic  philosophers,  and  especially  with  the 
 maxims  of  a  Jewish  moral  philosopher,  called 
 Chefcz  Al-Kute,  who  is  the  author  of  an  Arabic 
 paraphrase  of  the  Psalms  in  rhyme  (comp.  Stein- 
 schneider, yewish  Literature,  Longman  1857,  p. 
 101).  In  consequence  of  some  personal  allusions 
 which  he  made  in  this  work,  Ibn  Gebirol  was 
 obliged  to  quit  Saragossa  in  1046,  and  for  some 
 time  to  wander  about  Spain,  till  he  was  taken  up 
 by  the  celebrated  Jewish  prime  minister  and  gram- 
 marian, Samuel  Ha-Nagid,  when  he  wrote  in 
 Arabic  his  grand  philosojihical  work,  called  in 
 Hebrew  D^^lin  llpD,  the  fountain  of  life,  and  in 
 Latin,  De  Materia  Universali.  Fragments  of  a 
 Hebrew  translation,  and  an  entire  Latin  version,  of 
 it  have  only  lately  been  published  by  the  indefati- 
 gable and  learned  Munk  in  his  Melanses  de  Philo- 
 
 sophitjuive  et  arabe,  Paris  1857-1859.  Ibn  Gebi- 
 rol's  works  form  an  important  part  in  the  histoiy 
 of  Jewish  philosophy  [Philosophy],  inasmuch  as 
 he  was  the  first  philosopher  of  the  middle  ages  in 
 Europe,  and  as  his  philosophical  treatises  were  used 
 by  the  schoolmen,  William  of  Auvergne,  bishop  of 
 Paris  (died  1248),  Albert  the  Great  (died  1280), 
 Thomas  Aquinas  (died  1274),  and  Duns  Scotas 
 (died  1308).  From  Ibn  Ezra's  quotations  (comp. 
 commentaries  on  Gen.  iii.  I  ;  Exod.  xxviii.  37  ; 
 Is.  xliii.  7  ;  Ps.  xvi.  2  ;  cxliii.  10  ;  cl.  6  ;  Dan.  xi. 
 30),  it  appears  that  Ibn  Gebirol  also  wrote  expo- 
 sitions of  the  Scriptures.     It  must  also  be  added 
 
 that  his  hymn  entitled  ni370  103,  the  royal 
 diade?n,  which  is  a  beautiful  and  pathetic  poetical 
 composition  of  profound  philosophical  sentiments 
 and  great  devotion,  forms  an  important  part  of  the 
 divine  service  on  the  evening  preceding  the  great 
 
 Day  of  Atonement  (TIM  Xl^h  JT'anj?)  with  the 
 devout  Jews  to  the  present  day.  Comp.  Sachs, 
 Die  religiose  Pa:sie  der  yuden  in  Spanien,  Berlin 
 1845,  pp.  3-30;  213,  etc.;  Munk,  Melange  di 
 Fhilosophie  Juive  et  arabe,  Paris  1857-59  ;  Stein- 
 schneider, Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca 
 Bodleiana,  col.  2313-2338;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der 
 Jiiden,  Leipzig  186 1,  vi.  31-49. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  GIATH,  Isaac  b.  Jehudah,  was  born 
 about  1030  of  a  very  distinguished  family  who  re- 
 sided in  Lucena,  not  far  from  Cordova,  and  after- 
 wards became  the  spiritual  head  of  the  Jevnsh 
 community  in  that  place.  He  wrote  a  Co}7imeit- 
 tary  on  Ecclesiastes,  which  has  not  as  yet  come  to 
 light,  but  which,  as  appears  from  the  not  unfre- 
 quent  quotations  from  it  by  the  best  interpreters 
 and  lexicographers,  contains  important  contribu- 
 tions to  the  critical  exposition  of  this  difficult  book. 
 From  the  references  to  his  writings  made  by  Ibn 
 Ezra  (comp.  comment,  on  Deut.  x.  7  ;  Ps.  cxlvii. 
 3),  Kimchi  (Lexicon  under  articles  "IID,  y33,  ~13T, 
 p~lK^,  njy,  noy),  and  Solomon  ben  Melech  (com- 
 ment, on  2  Sam.  xxii.  36),  it  is  evident  that  Ibn 
 Giath  also  wrote  some  other  exegetical  and  gram- 
 matical treatises,  and  that  he  materially  aided  the 
 development  of  Biblical  exegesis.  Like  his  con- 
 temporary, Ibn  Gebirol,  he  also  distinguished  him- 
 self as  a  hymnologist,  and  his  devotional  poetry  is 
 used  in  the  Jewish  service  to  the  present  day,  but 
 he  is  inferior  to  the  former  as  a  writer.  Comp.  Sachs, 
 Die  Religiose  Poesie  der  Juden  in  Spanien,  Berlin 
 1845,  pp.  46,  etc.,  255,  etc.  ;  Landshuth,  Amudt 
 Ha-Aboda,  Berolini  1857,  fasciculus  i.,  p.  Ill, 
 etc  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  Berlin  1 86 1, 
 vi.  74.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  GIKATILLA.     [Gikatill.^.] 
 
 IBN  JACHJA,  Joseph,  b.  David,  b.  Joseph, 
 b.  David,  b.  Joseph,  b.  Salomon,  b.  David,  b. 
 Gedaliah,  b.  Salomo,  b.  Joseph,  b.  Jehudah,  b. 
 Don  Jachja,  the  Spaniard.  This  commentator, 
 the  eleventh  generation  of  the  celebrated  ancient 
 family  Ibn  Jachja,  was  born  in  1494  at  Florence, 
 whither  his  mother  Dinah,  clad  in  man's  apparel, 
 followed  her  husband,  who  had  fled  from  Portugal 
 in  consequence  of  the  religious  persecutions  which 
 John  II.,  called  the  perfect,  following  the  example 
 of  Ferdinand,  heaped  upon  the  Jews  for  refusing 
 to  embrace  Christianity.  When  a  child,  Ibn 
 Jachja  came  with  his  parents  to  Verona,  thence 
 went  to  Imola  and  Padua,  where  he  studied  under 
 
IBN  JAISH 
 
 357 
 
 IBN  SERGADAH 
 
 Jehudah  Minz,  and  after  he  had  finished  his  educa- 
 tion he  returned  to  Imola,  where  he  spent  the 
 remainder  of  his  hfe  and  wrote  his  commentaries. 
 At  the  age  of  thirty-three  (January  20,  1527)  he 
 issued  his  first  exegetical  work,  which  is  (i)  A 
 Commentary  on  the  Five  Megilloth,  viz. ,  tlie  Song 
 of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
 Esther.  This  was  followed  by  (2)  A  Commentary 
 on  the  Psalms,  which  he  published  July  12  ;  and  (3) 
 A  Com7nenta7y  on  Proverbs,  published  on  Septem- 
 ber 26  of  the  same  year  ;  and  (4)  A  Commentary 
 on  Daniel,  on  7th  July  1529.  The  most  important 
 books,  especially  the  Psalms,  are  preceded  by  very 
 extensive  introductions.  Ibn  Jachja  died  at  Imola 
 in  1539)  having  undermined  his  constitution  with 
 excessive  literary  labour;  his  remains  were  conveyed 
 ten  years  after  his  death  (1549)  to  Safet,  where 
 Joseph  Caro  had  them  deposited  with  great  honour. 
 The  merits  of  his  commentaries  chiefly  consist  in 
 the  fact  that  they  give  a  digest  of  the  traditional 
 interpretation  of  the  Bible,  and  that  the  student  of 
 historico-critical  exegesis  finds  in  them  ready  at  hand 
 the  Midrashic  lore  for  which  he  would  otherwise 
 have  to  search  in  many  an  ancient  volume.  All 
 the  commentaries  of  Ibn  Jachja  are  given  in  Frank- 
 furter's Rabbinic  Bible  [Frankfurter].  The 
 commentary  on  Daniel  has  been  translated  into 
 Latin  by  Constantin  L'Empereur,  and  published  at 
 Amsterdam,  1633,  with  the  Hebrew  text  and  a  re- 
 futation of  the  anti-Christian  passages.  Comp. 
 Carmoly,  in  ybst's  /sraelitische  Annalen,  ii.  p. 
 393,  etc.  ;  Cassel,  i)i  Ersch  and  Grziber's  Allget?ieine 
 Encyklopiidie,  sect.  ii.  vol.  xxxi.,  p.  81,  etc.  ; 
 Steinschneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca 
 Bodleiana,  col.  1476. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  JAISH  {V:rT  PX),  Baruch,  b.  Issac,  b. 
 Salomon,  b.  Isaac,  b.  Baruch  of  Cordova,  flour- 
 ished in  the  15th  century,  wrote  commentaries  (i) 
 
 on  the  Song  of  Songs,  entitled  T'J:^  ^J?  Ilin  "lIpD 
 D^^KTI,  the  blessed  fottfjtain,  etc.,  published  at  Con- 
 stantinople 1576;  and  (2)  on  Ecclesiastes  a7id  Job, 
 
 called  n^npl  aVK  ^y  inn  llpO,  the  Messed  foun- 
 tain on  Job  and  Ecclesiastes,  Constantinople  1576. 
 He  generally  gives  the  literal  explanation  of  every 
 passage  according  to  the  context,  and  tries  to  solve 
 the  grammatical  difficulties  of  the  text. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  KASTOR.     [Itzchaki.] 
 
 IBN  KOREISH  JEHUDAH,  one  of  the  ear- 
 liest Jewish  lexicographers,  who  flourished  about 
 A.  D.  870  to  900  in  Tahart  (mnj^D)  or  Tahort  in 
 Africa,  and  may  be  regarded  as  the  first  who  wrote 
 on  comparative  philology.  So  little  is  known 
 about  his  life,  and  so  thoroughly  have  all  the 
 endeavours  to  ascertain  his  history  been  baffled, 
 that  it  still  remains  a  doubtful  question  whether  he 
 was  a  Karaite  or  a  Rabbinic  Jew.  He  wrote  (i) 
 a  Hebrew  Lexicon,  to  which  Ibn  Koreish  himself 
 
 refers  in  his  npXDI,  p.  45,  and  which  has  not  as 
 yet  come  to  light.  (2)  pHpT  "ISD,  a  Hebreiv 
 Gratnmar,   which  has  also  not  been  found  yet ; 
 
 and  (3)  nPXDI,  an  ^//j/Zi?  addressed  to  the  Jewish 
 community  at  Fez,  in  which  he  rebukes  his 
 brethren  for  neglecting  to  study  the  Chaldee  para- 
 phrases of  the  O.  T. ,  and  tries  to  show  that  it  is 
 impossible  to  understand  some  portions  of  the 
 Bible  without  the  help  of  the  cognate  Semitic 
 idioms.     The  treatise  is  divided  into  three  parts. 
 
 In  the  first  part  Ibn  Koreish  arranges  in  alpha- 
 betical  order  all  the  Hebrew  words  which  can  only 
 be  explained  with  the  help  of  the  Chaldee  para- 
 phrases of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  ben  Uziel ;  in 
 the  second  part  he  explains  in  alphabetical  order 
 those  Biblical  words  which  also  occur  in  the  Mishna 
 and  the  Talmud ;  and  in  the  third  part  he  most 
 minutely  and  carefully  collects  all  the  Hebrew 
 roots,  forms  of  expressions,  prefixes,  and  suffixes, 
 which  have  their  analogy  in  the  Arabic.  In  his 
 illustrations  and  parallels  Ibn  Koreish  shews  that 
 he  had  not  only  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the 
 Targumim  and  the  Talmudic  works,  but  also  with 
 the  Koran  and  the  Arabian  poets  (comp.  pp.  So, 
 81,  82),  and  that  he  had  sound  judgment  and  fine 
 grammatical  tact.  The  work  is  an  important  con- 
 tribution to  Hebrew  grammar  and  lexicography, 
 and  it  is  only  to  be  regretted  that  it  has  not  come 
 down  to  us  entire,  since  the  first  part  breaks  up 
 with  letter  3  and  does  not  begin  again  till  letter 
 n.  It  has  lately  been  published  in  the  Arabic 
 under  the  title  R.  Jehuda  be>i  Koreisch  Tiha^-enten- 
 sis  Africani  ad  Synagogam  yudceoriim  civitatis  Fez 
 epistola  de  studii  Targjim  utilitate  et  de  lingiice 
 chaldaiccE,  rnisniccE,  ialmiidiae,  arabicce,  vocabn- 
 lorum  item  non?ndlo}-Uf?i  barbaricortan  convenioitia 
 ctmi  hebrcea  ;  ediderunt  y.  y.  L.  Barges  et  D.  B. 
 Goldberg,  Lutetise  Parisiorum  1857.  The  intro- 
 duction, with  specimens  from  the  work,  have  been 
 published  in  Arabic,  with  a  German  translation  by 
 Schnurrer,  in  Eichko>?i's  Allgemeine  Btbliothek  der 
 Biblischen  Literatur,  Leipzig  1 790,  vol.  iii.  p.  951- 
 980  ;  the  introduction  has  also  been  published  with 
 a  German  translation  by  Wetzstein  in  Literatur- 
 blatt  des  Orients  1845,  vol.  iii.  No.  2  ;  and  extracts 
 are  given  by  Ewald  and  Dukes,  Beitrage  zur 
 Geschichte  der  Aeltesten  Aiislegitng  7ind  Spracher- 
 kldrutig  des  Alien  Testamentes,  Stuttgart  1844,  i. 
 1 16-123;  ii.  117,  118.  The  influence  which  Ibn 
 Koreish  exercised  upon  the  development  of  Biblical 
 exegesis  and  lexicography  must  have  been  very 
 great,  judging  from  the  fact  that  he  is  quoted  by 
 the  best  grammarians  and  interpreters,  ex.gr.,  Men- 
 
 achem  b.  Saruk  (Lexicon  under  fpH,  |n''X>  HQX 
 
 PlB'N),  Dunash  (PjvX),  Raschi  (comment,  on  Jer. 
 xii.  10),  Ibn  Ezra  (comment,  on  Amos  vi.  10), 
 Kimchi  (Lexicon,  art.  njtJ'),  etc.  As  for  the  so- 
 called  work  DX1  3N,  which  Ibn  Ezra  quotes  in  the 
 preface  to  his  D^JTIXO,  and  which  has  been  taken 
 by  many  to  describe  a  distinct  lingual  treatise,  this 
 
 is  nothing  else  than  the  third  part  of  the  ilPNDI, 
 as  has  rightly  been  remarked  by  Graetz.  Comp. 
 Pinsker,  Liknte  Kadmonioth,  Vienna  i860,  p.  107, 
 etc.  ;  a7id  additions  to  this  work,  p.  179,  etc. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  LIBRAT.     [Dunash.] 
 
 IBN  SAKTAR.     [Itzchaki.] 
 
 IBN  SARUK.     [Menachem.] 
 
 IBN  SERGADAH  (mxjno  pS),  Aaron,  also 
 called  Aa}-on  Ha-Cohen  (jH^H  pHX)  b.  yoseph,  a 
 rich  and  learned  merchant  of  Bagdad,  who  was  an 
 opponent  of  Saadia  and  was  elected  spiritual  head 
 (|1X:)  of  the  academy  at  Pumbadita,  A.  D.  943. 
 Whilst  holding  this  high  office  he  devoted  himself 
 to  the  exposition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  and  pub- 
 lished a  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  (ti'lID 
 mnn  i'J?),   which  has  not  as  yet  come  to  light. 
 
IBN  SHOEIB 
 
 358 
 
 ICONIUM 
 
 From  the  fragments  of  it  preserved  by  Ibn  Ezra 
 we  see  that  Ibn  Sergadah,  though  abiding  by  the 
 traditional  explanation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures, 
 Avas  by  no  means  a  slavish  follower  of  ancient 
 opinions.  Fragments  of  his  commentary  are  given 
 by  Ibn  Ezra,  on  Gen.  xviii.  28 ;  xxxiv.  30 ;  xlix. 
 6,  7  ;  Exod.  X.  12  ;  Levit.  xviii.  6 ;  comp.  Geiger, 
 yiidische  Zeitsckrifi  fiir  Wisse7ischaft  imd  Leben, 
 1862,  p.  297  ;  Zunz,  i7i  Geiger' s  Wissenschaftliche 
 Zeitsckrifi,  vol.  iv.,  Stuttgart  1839,  p.  389,  etc. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  SHOEIB  {■y^V'Vi^  pK),  Joel,  flourished 
 about  A.D.    1430- 1 490  at  Tudela.      He  wrote  (i) 
 
 A  Commenta7y  on  the  Pentateuch,  entitled  nPJ? 
 riQK',  the  holocaust  of  Sabbath,  which  he  finished  in 
 the  year  1469,  and  was  published  in  Venice  1577  ; 
 (2)  A    Commentary   on   the  Psalms,  called    N"I1J 
 
 riviin,  feaiful  iti  praises,  published  at  Salonaica 
 1 568- 1 569;  (3)  A  Conunentary  07t  the  So7ig  of 
 So7tgs,  called  "I'IS"'3  OVp,  a  brief  exposition,  pub- 
 lished together  with  Abraham  Levi's  exposition, 
 Sabionneta  1558;  and  (4)  An  Expositio7i  of  La- 
 me7itatio7i,  called  ~I"1N''2,  which  was  published  at 
 Venice  1589.  His  liberality  of  mind  in  expound- 
 ing the  Hebrew  Scriptures  may  be  judged  of  from 
 the  fact  that  at  the  very  time  when  his  co-reli- 
 gionists were  suffering  most  bitterly  from  the 
 Christian  nations  of  those  days,  Ibn  Schceib  main- 
 tained in  his  Co77i77ie7ita7y  071  the  Psal/iis  (fol.  12,  b) 
 that  pious  Gentiles  will  have  a  portion  in  the  world 
 
 to  come  (X3n  D7iy?  p^H),  and  corroborated  his 
 opinion  by  references  to  the  Tosifta,  the  Talmud, 
 and  the  Midrashim.  Comp  Zunz,  Zur  Geschichte 
 U7id Literaticr,  Berlin  1845,  p.  384  ;  Steinschneider, 
 Catalogus  Libr.  Hcbr.  i7i  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col. 
 1400.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  SITTA  (XDn  p),  a  distinguished  Karaite 
 Jew  who  hved  at  Irak  about  A.D.  900.  His  con- 
 scientious desire  to  explain  the  Scriptures  made  him 
 exclude  from  his  exposition  all  the  points  of  con- 
 troversy between  the  Rabbinic  and  Karaite  Jews 
 [Karaites],  and  restrict  his  explanation  to  the 
 grammatical  forms  and  etymological  significations 
 of  the  words,  as  well  as  to  tracmg  the  logical  se- 
 quence of  every  passage.  Worthy  of  notice  is  his 
 peculiar  translation  of  Exod.  xx.  26  by,  '  and  thou 
 
 shalt  not  ascend  my  altar  in  sin,'  deriving  DpyOl 
 from  pyo,  to  be  treache>-0!is,  faithless.  Other  frag- 
 ments of  this  commentary,  which  has  not  as  yet 
 come  to  light,  are  given  by  Ibn  Ezra  on  Exod. 
 xxi.  24,  35  ;  xxii.  28.  Saadia  Gaon  thought  Ibn 
 Sitta  of  sufficient  importance  to  refute  his  interpre- 
 tation, whilst  Ibn  Ezra  exercises  his  withering 
 sarcasm  upon  him.  Comp.  Pinsker,  Lickute  Kad- 
 mo7tioth,  Vienna  i860,  p.  43  ;  Fiirst,  Geschichte 
 des  Karde7-thu77is,  Leipzig  1862,  pp.  100,  173. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  TIBBON,  Jehudah.  b.  Saul,  was  born 
 at  Lunel  about  A.d.  1120,  and  had  early  to  quit 
 his  native  place  for  Provence  in  consequence  of 
 persecution.  He  was  chiefly  distinguished  as  a 
 translator  into  Hebrew  of  some  of  the  most  valu- 
 able Jewish  works  which  were  written  in  Arabic, 
 and  is  therefore  denominated  D'^pTiyon  ti'N"),  the 
 pri7ice  of  tra7tslators.     He  translated  between  I161 
 
 and  1186— (i)  the  celebrated  nnafri  Dmn,  the 
 
 duties  of  heart,  of  Joseph  b.  Bechai  ;  (2)  the  ethics 
 ofIb7t  Gebirol;  {"^the re7tow7ied Kitsari oi'^t\m.d.z.\\ 
 Ha-Levi ;  (4)  the  7no7'al philosophy  of  Saadia  Gaon  ; 
 and  (5)  the fa77ious g7-a/r>77tatical and lex!cog7-aphica/ 
 wo7-k  of  Ibn  Ganach.  He  also  wrote  (6)  a  work 
 on  the  purity  of  the  Hebrew  language  (mnV  "11D 
 
 (1E^'P^)>  which  is  lost.  Ibn  Tibbon  died  abou 
 1 190.  Comp.  Steinschneider,  Catalogiis  Libr, 
 Hebr.  ift  Bibliotheca  Bodleia7ia,  col.  1374-1376  ; 
 Graetz,  Geschichte der yude7i,\^€v^z\^  1 861,  vol.  vi. , 
 p.  241,  etc.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBN  TIBBON,  Samuel,  son  of  the  preceding 
 writer,  was  born  about  I160,  and  died  1230.  Be- 
 sides the  philosophical  works  both  of  heathen  and 
 Jewish  authors  which  he  translated,  Samuel  Ibn 
 Tibbon  wrote — (l)  A    Cot}tme7itary  on  Ecclesiastes 
 
 (n?np  t^'"l")^Q))  which  exists  in  MS.  in  several  of 
 the  European  libraries  ;  and  (2)  A  Co77inie7itary  071 
 Gen.  i.  1-9,  entitled  D'^On  lip''  IDXD,  being  a  dis- 
 sertation on  the  creation,  published  at  Presburg 
 1837.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 IBZAN  (|V2X,  ilhistrions;  Sept.  'A^aiaadv),  the 
 
 tenth  'judge  of  Israel.'  He  was  of  Bethlehem, 
 probably  the  Bethlehem  of  Zebulun  and  not  of 
 Judah.  He  governed  seven  years.  The  prosperity 
 of  Ibzan  is  marked  by  the  great  number  of  his 
 children  (thirty  sons  and  thirty  daughters),  and  his 
 wealth,  by  their  marriages — for  they  were  all  mar- 
 ried. Some  have  held,  but  without  the  least  pro- 
 bability, that  Ibzan  was  the  same  with  Boaz  :  B.C. 
 II 82  (Judg.  xii.  8).— J.  K 
 
 I-CHABOD  n'l33  ''i<, -where  is  the  glory  ;  Sept. 
 
 Ovat^apxa^wO,  Ovaixa^did),  son  of  Phinehas  and 
 grandson  of  Eli.  He  is  only  known  from  tlie  un- 
 happy circumstances  of  his  birth,  which  occasioned 
 this  name  to  be  given  to  him.  The  pains  of  labour 
 came  upon  his  mother  when  she  heard  that  the  ark 
 of  God  was  taken,  that  her  husband  was  slain  in 
 battle,  and  that  these  tidings  had  proved  fatal  to 
 his  father  Eli.  They  were  death-pains  to  her  ;  and 
 when  those  around  sought  to  cheer  her,  saying, 
 '  Fear  not,  for  thou  hast  bonie  a  son,'  she  only 
 answered  by  giving  him  the  name  of  I-chabod, 
 adding,  '  The  gloiy  is  departed  from  Israel'  (i 
 Sam.  iv.  19-22)  :  B.C.  I141.  The  name  again  oc- 
 curs in  I  Sam.  xiv.  3  [Eli]. — ^J.  K. 
 
 ICONIUM  ('Ik6viov),  a  large  inland  city  of 
 Asia  Minor,  situated  in  the  province  of  Lycaonia, 
 on  the  military  road  between  Antioch  of  Pisidia 
 and  Derbe.  Strabo  describes  it  as  a  small  town, 
 well  peopled,  and  encompassed  by  a  fertile  region 
 (xii.  6.  i).  According  to  Cicero,  it  was  the  capi- 
 tal of  Lycaonia  {ad  Pa/zi.  iii.  6.  8) ;  but  Xenophon 
 places  it  on  the  eastern  border  of  Phrygia  [A /tab. 
 i.  2.  19),  Ammianus  Marcellinus  reckoned  it  to 
 Pisidia  (xiv.  2),  and  Pliny  states  that  in  his  time 
 it  was  the  capital  of  a  distinct  territoiy,  governed 
 by  a  tetrarch  {H.  N.  v.  25).  This  may  be  the 
 reason  why  the  sacred  writers  do  not  speak  of  it 
 as  belonging  to  any  of  the  great  provinces  of  Asia 
 Minor.  Paul  and  Barnabas  went  from  Antioch  ot 
 Pisidia  to  Iconium,  thus  approaching  it  from  the 
 west  by  the  military  road  which  crosses  the  moun- 
 tain chain  (Acts  xiii.  51).  The  population,  like 
 that  of  the  other  great  cities  of  Asia  Minor,  was 
 then  mixed,  consisting  of  play-loving  and  novelty- 
 seeking  Greeks,  an  old  established  and  influential 
 
ICONIUM 
 
 359 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 colony  of  Jews,  who  exercised  their  trades  during 
 the  week,  and  met  in  their  synagogue  to  read  the 
 Law  on  the  Sabbath,  some  dignified  Roman  officials 
 and  soldiers,  and  probably  a  few  of  the  ancient  in- 
 habitants of  the  country  (Conybeare  and  Hovvson, 
 Life  of  St.  Paid,  i.  196,  1st  ed.)  This  explains 
 the  nature  of  the  apostles'  reception,  and  the 
 cause  of  the  events  which  followed.  They  went 
 first  to  the  synagogue  as  was  their  custom.  Their 
 preaching  was  successful,  for  '  a  great  multitude 
 both  of  Jews  and  also  of  the  Greeks  believed' 
 (Acts  xiv.  i).  The  unbelieving  Jews  stirred  up 
 opposition,  and  a  riot  followed — part  of  the  people 
 holding  with  the  Jews,  and  part  with  the  apostles. 
 This  became  at  length  so  serious,  that  the  lives  of 
 Paul  and  Barnabas  were  endangered,  and  they  re- 
 tired to  Lystra,  about  twenty  miles  southward 
 (ver.  6).  The  bitter  hostility  of  the  Jews  followed 
 them  thither  ;  they  were  attacked  and  stoned,  and 
 Paul  was  left  for  dead.  Restored  by  a  miracle,  he 
 soon  returned  to  Iconium,  '  confirming  the  souls 
 of  the  disciples'  (verses  7-21).  Some  years  after- 
 wards it  appears  that  Paul  paid  another  visit  to 
 Iconium,  accompanied  by  Silas,  travelling  from 
 Cilicia  through  Derbe  and  Lystra  (xvi.  I -3).  No 
 particulars  are  given,  and  we  cannot  tell  whether 
 the  '  persecutions  and  afflictions'  of  which  he 
 writes  to  Timothy  came  upon  him  partly  in  this 
 latter  tour  or  altogether  during  the  former  (2  Tim. 
 iii.  11). 
 
 Iconium  was  the  scene  of  the  apocryphal  story 
 of  Paul  and  Thecla,  so  often  mentioned  by  Jerome, 
 Augustine,  and  others  of  the  early  Fathers  (see 
 Jones  On  the  Canon,  where  the  Acts  of  Paul  and 
 Thecla  are  given  in  Greek  and  English,  ii.  299, 
 seq.;  an  abridgment  of  the  legend  is  given  in  a 
 note  in  Conybeare  and  Howson,  i.  197).  The 
 church  planted  by  the  apostles  continued  to  flourish, 
 and  the  city  itself  to  increase  in  importance  under 
 the  Byzantine  monarchs  (Ilierocles,  p.  675).  Ico- 
 nium having  been  captured  by  the  Seljukian  Turks, 
 became  the  capital  of  one  of  their  dynasties,  and 
 may  be  regarded  as  the  cradle  of  the  Ottoman 
 empire.  It  is  one  of  the  few  towns  of  Asia  Minor 
 v.'hich  have  retained  to  the  present  day  something 
 of  their  ancient  prosperity.  A'onieh,  as  it  is  now 
 called,  is  a  large  city,  the  residence  of  a  pasha, 
 and  head  of  a  province.  It  is  surrounded  by  a 
 wall  said  to  have  been  erected  by  the  Seljukian 
 sultans,  but  out  of  the  ruins  of  older  structures,  as 
 pieces  of  marble  columns,  capitals,  and  cai-ved 
 cornices  appear  everywhere  in  the  masonry.  Some 
 of  its  mosques,  minarets,  palaces,  and  gateways, 
 are  beautiful  specimens  of  Saracenic  architecture. 
 There  are  few  remains  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
 Iconium,  besides  the  fragments  of  columns,  and 
 Greek  inscriptions  in  the  walls. 
 
 The  situation  of  Konieh  is  very  fine.  It  stands 
 on  a  fertile  plain,  which  towards  the  east  stretches 
 away  to  the  horizon,  while  immediately  behind  the 
 city,  on  the  west,  it  is  shut  in  by  a  semicircle  of 
 snow-capped  mountains.  Rich  gardens  and  or- 
 chards, abundantly  stocked  with  fruit  trees,  and 
 watered  by  numerous  streams  from  the  neighbour- 
 ing mountains,  encircle  the  old  city.  The  suburbs 
 extend  far  beyond  the  walls,  and,  like  those  of 
 Damascus,  have  a  gay  and  picturesque  appearance 
 at  a  distance,  but  do  not  bear  close  inspection. 
 The  population  is  still  mixed ;  and  as  it  contains 
 the  tomb  of  one  of  the  most  venerated  of  Moham- 
 medan saints,   it  is  swarming  with  fanatical  Der- 
 
 vishes. (Descriptions  of  Konieh  are  given  by 
 Kinneir,  Travels  in  Asia  Minor  ;  Leake,  Geog.  of 
 Asia  Minor;  Hamilton,  Researches;  Chesney, 
 Euphrates  Expedition.) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IDALAH  (n^N'l\    Yia'alah;    Sept.    'leptxti ; 
 
 Alex.  'laSTjXd),  a  town  of  Zebulun,  apparently  lying 
 between  Shimron  and  Bethlehem  (Josh.  xix.  15). 
 It  is  only  once  mentioned  in  Scripture,  and  does  not 
 occur  in  any  other  writer.  Bethlehem  is  situated 
 about  six  miles  west  of  Nazareth,  and  Idalah  could 
 not  have  been  far  distant  from  it.  Its  site  is  un- 
 knowTi. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IDDO.  I.  (X'ny  ;  Sept.  2a55ci  ;  Alex.  2a5(i/c) 
 The  father  of  one  of  Solomon's  purveyors. 
 
 2.  (Iiy;  Sept.  'A55i)  A  descendant  of  Gershom 
 
 (i  Chron.  vi.  21),  called  Adaiah,  and  placed 
 among  the  ancestors  of  Asaph  (ver.  41). 
 
 3.  (ii''  ;    Sept.    'Ia5at ;    Alex.   'laSSat)   Son  ol 
 
 Zechariah,  prince  of  east  Manasseh  in  the  lime  ol 
 David  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  21). 
 
 4.  l^•^T,  K'ri  'ny^ ;  Sept.  'AS5w,  'Ito^X)  A  seer 
 
 who  wrote  visions  against  Jeroboam,  in  which  the 
 deeds  of  Solomon  were  noticed  (2  Chron.  ix.  29)  ; 
 he  also  wrote  the  history  of  Rehoboam  and  Abi 
 jah  ;  or  rather  perhaps,  in  conjunction  with 
 Seraiah,  kept  the  public  rolls  during  their  reigns. 
 It  seems  from  2  Chron.  xiii.  22  that  he  named  his 
 book  ti'TJO,  Midrash,  or  'Exposition.'  Josephus 
 {Antiq.  viii.  9.  l)  states  that  this  Iddo  was  the 
 prophet  who  was  sent  to  Jeroboam  at  Bethel,  and 
 consequently  the  same  that  was  slain  by  a  lion  for 
 disobedience  to  his  instructions  (i  Kings  xiii.)  ; 
 and  many  commentators  have  followed  this  state- 
 ment. 
 
 5.  (S'ny,  nj? ;    Sept.  'A55t6,  'A5a5ai,  'AoSai') 
 
 Grandfather  of  the  prophet  Zechariah  (Zech.  i.  I ; 
 Ezra  V.  I;  vi.  14;  Neh.  xii.  16). 
 
 6.  (nX ;  Sept.)  Chief  of  the  Jews  of  the  cap- 
 tivity established  at  Casiphia,  a  place  of  which 
 it  is  difficult  to  determine  the  position.  It  was 
 to  him  that  Ezra  sent  a  requisition  for  Levites 
 and  Nethinim,  none  of  whom  had  yet  joined  his 
 caravan.  Thirty-eight  Levites  and  220  Nethinim 
 responded  to  his  call  (Ezra  viii.  17-20),  B.C.  457. 
 It  would  seem  from  this  that  Iddo  was  a  chief 
 person  of  the  Nethinim,  descended  from  those 
 Gibeonites  who  were  charged  with  the  servile 
 labours  of  the  tabernacle  and  temple.  This  is  one 
 of  several  circumstances  which  indicate  that  the 
 Jews  in  their  several  colonies  under  the  Exile  were 
 still  ruled  by  the  heads  of  their  nation,  and  allowed 
 the  free  exercise  of  their  worship. 
 
 IDOLATRY.  Introduction.— \6.Q\z.try  is  the 
 worship  of  anything  instead  of  God.  The  term, 
 therefore,  includes  all  the  kinds  of  false  and  corrupt 
 worship  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  There  is  no  exactly- 
 corresponding  general  term  in  Hebrew,  but  there 
 are  some  general  terms  that  seem  to  have  the  same 
 range  but  a  less  precise  signification,  such  as  jlX, 
 'vanity:'  in  the  N.  T.  el^wKoKarpda,  idolatry, 
 appears  to  be  employed  in  its  widest  sense,  as  we 
 may  judge  from  the  tropical  use  in  Col.  iii.  5, 
 '  covetousness,  which  is  idolatry.'  It  is  to  be  re- 
 marked   that   the   corruption    of  true  religion   is 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 360 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 spoken  of  in  the  Bible  in  the  same  terms  as 
 paganism,  as  a  sin  of  the  same  kind  if  not  of  the 
 same  degree. 
 
 The  main  subjects  to  be  considered  in  this  article 
 are  the  origin  of  idolatry,  the  classification  of  diffe- 
 rent kinds  of  idolatry,  the  history  of  idolatry,  so  far 
 as  it  is  necessary  for  the  illustration  of  the  passages 
 in  the  Bible  relating  to  this  matter,  an  examination 
 of  which  will  be  interwoven  with  this  historical 
 outline,  and  the  Hebrew  terms  for  idolatry  and 
 idols. 
 
 i.  Origm  of  Idolatry. — In  the  primceval  period 
 man  appears  to  have  had  not  alone  a  revelation  but 
 also  an  implanted  natural  law.  Adam  and  some 
 of  his  descendants,  as  late  as  the  time  of  the  Flood, 
 certainly  lived  under  a  revealed  system,  now  usually 
 spoken  of  as  the  patriarchal  dispensation,  and  St. 
 Paul  tells  us  tliat  the  nations  were  under  a  natural 
 law.  '  Man  in  his  natural  state  must  always  have 
 had  a  knowledge  of  God  sufficient  for  the  condition 
 in  which  he  had  been  placed.  Although  God  '  in 
 times  past  suffered  all  nations  [or  rather  'all  the 
 Gentiles,'  -KavTo.  to,  ^Ovt]']  to  walk  in  their  own  ways, 
 nevertheless  He  left  not  Himself  without  witness,  in 
 that  He  did  good,  and  gave  us  rain  from  heaven,  and 
 fruitful  seasons,  filling  our  hearts  with  food  and 
 gladness.'  '  For  the  invisible  things  of  Him,  from 
 the  creation  of  the  world,  are  clearly  seen,  being 
 understood  by  the  things  that  are  jnade,  [even]  his 
 eternal  power  and  godhead.'  But  the  people  of 
 whoiT.  we  are  speaking  'changed  the  glory  of  the 
 incorruptible  God  into  an  image  made  like  to  cor- 
 ruptible man,  and  to  birds,  and  four-footed  beasts, 
 and  creeping  things,'  '  and  worshipped  and  served 
 the  creature  more  than  the  Creator,  who  is  blessed  for 
 ever.'  Thus  arose  that  strange  superstition  which 
 is  known  by  the  term  Fetishism  [or  low  nature- 
 worship],  consisting  in  the  worship  of  animals, 
 trees,  rivers,  hills,  and  stones'  ■.(Genesis  of  the 
 Earth  atid  of  Man,  2ded.,  pp.  i6o,  i6i).  St.  Paul 
 speaks  of  those  who  invented  this  idolatry  as  there- 
 fore forsaken  of  God  and  ■suffered  to  sink  into  the 
 deepest  moral  corruption.  'It  is  remarkable  that 
 among  highly-civilized  nations  the  converse  obtains ; 
 moral  corruption  being  very  frequently  the  cause 
 of  the  abandoning  of  true  religion  for  infidelity. 
 
 St.  Paul  thus  shews  us  what  was  the  earliest 
 kind  of  idolatry,  but  he  does  not  state  what  mental 
 condition  gave  rise  to  it.  We  can  only  trace  this 
 condition  by  examining  those  nations  which  still 
 practice  this  lowest  system,  but  we  shall  not  enter 
 upon  this  subject  in  the  present  article,  and  it  is 
 probable  that  it  cannot  be  satisfactorily  exhausted, 
 as  we  can  scarcely  understand,  however  we  may 
 define,  the  mental  condition  of  the  races  which 
 practise  fetishism. 
 
 ii.  Classification  of  Idolatry.  — All  unmixed  systems 
 of  idolatry  may  be  classified  under  the  following 
 heads ;  all  mixed  systems  may  be  resolved  into  two 
 or  more  of  tnem. 
 
 1.  Low  nature-worship  or  fetishism,  the  wor- 
 ship of  animals,  trees,  rivers,  hills,  and  stones. 
 The  fetishism  of  the  Negroes  is  thought  to  admit  of 
 a  belief  in  a  supreme  intelligence  :  if  this  be  true 
 such  a  belief  is  either  a  relic  of  a  higher  religion  or 
 else  is  derived  from  the  Muslim  tribes  of  Africa. 
 Fetishism  is  closely  connected  with  magic,  and  the 
 Nigritian  priests  are  universally  magicians. 
 
 2.  Shamanism,  or  the  magical  side  of  fetishism, 
 the  religion  of  the  Mongolian  tribes,  and  ap- 
 parently the  primitive  religion  of  China. 
 
 3.  High  nature-worship,  the  worship  of  the  sun, 
 moon,  and  stars,  and  of  the  supposed  powers  ol 
 nature. 
 
 4.  Hero-worship,  the  worship  of  deceased  an- 
 cestors or  leaders  of  a  nation. 
 
 5.  Idealism,  the  worship  of  abstractions  ot 
 mental  qualities,  such  as  justice,  a  system  nevei 
 found  unmixed. 
 
 Fetishism  and  Shamanism  appear  to  be  the  only 
 systems  of  idolatry  which  certainly  have  obtained 
 and  still  obtain  unmixed  with  any  other.  But  it  is 
 easy  to  detect  and  detach  the  other  systems,  as  will 
 be  seen  in  the  next  section. 
 
 iii.  Histoiy  of  Idolatry. — Nothing  is  distinctly 
 stated  in  the  Bible  as  to  any  antediluvian  idolatry. 
 It  is,  however,  a  reasonable  supposition  that  in  the 
 general  corruption  before  the  Flood  idolatry  was 
 practised.  And  that  such  was  the  case  may  in- 
 deed be  inferred  on  other  evidence.  There  is  no 
 trace  of  the  names  of  heathen  divinities  in  the 
 names  of  the  antediluvians  ;  but  there  are  indica- 
 tions of  ancestral  worship  in  ithe  postdiluvian  wor- 
 ship of  some  of  the  antediluvian  patriarchs.  It  can 
 scarcely  be  doubted  that  the  set  or  SUTEKH  of 
 the  Egyptian  Pantheon  is  the  Hebrew  Seth.  The 
 Cainite  Enoch  was  probably  commemorated  as 
 Annacus  or  Nannacus  at  Iconium,  though,  this 
 name  being  identified  with  Enoch,  the  reference 
 may  be  to  Enoch  of  the  line  of  Seth  [Ark, 
 Noah's].  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the 
 worship  of  these  antediluvians  originated  before 
 the  P'lood,  for  it  is  unlikely  that  it  would  have 
 been  instituted  after  it. 
 
 The  earliest  idolatry  mentioned  in  the  Bible  is 
 noticed  in  the  last  address  of  Joshuaito  the  assembled 
 tribes,  where  he  says,  speaking  ty  Divine  commis- 
 sion, '  Your  fathers  dwelt  on  the  other  side  of  the 
 flood  in  old  hme,  [even]  Terah,  the  father  of  Abra- 
 ham, and  the  father  of  Nachor  :  and  they  served 
 other  gods'  (xxiv.  2).  Was  this  idolatry  a  wor- 
 ship of  false  gods,  or  a  corruption  of  true  religion  ? 
 The  passage  seems  to  necessitate  the  former  sup- 
 position. We  must,  therefore,  inquire  what  the 
 idolatry  of  the  Babylonians  and  Chaldees  of  that 
 period  is  likely  to  have  been,  and  whether  there 
 are  any  traces  of  it  among  the  Hebrews. 
 
 It  will  be  best  to  give  a  summary  of  the  main 
 facts  of  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson's  '  Essay'  on  the  re- 
 ligion of  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians  in  the 
 Rev.  George  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  as  the  most 
 authoritative  statement  of  the  results  of  recent 
 research.  The  Pantheons  of  Babylon  and  Nineveh, 
 though  originally  dissimilar  in  the  names  of  the 
 divinities,  cannot  as  yet  be  treated  separately. 
 The  principal  god  of  the  Assyrians  \vz.s  Asshur, 
 replaced  in  Babylonia  by  a  god  whose  name  is  read 
 II  or  Ra.  The  special  attributes  of  Asshur  were 
 sovereignty  and  power,  and  he  was  regarded  as  the 
 especial  patron  of  the  Assyrians  and  their  kings. 
 It  is  the  Semitic  equivalent  of  the  Hamitic  or 
 Scythic  Ra,  which  suggests  a  connection  with  Egypt, 
 although  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  same  root 
 may  perhaps  be  traced  in  the  probably  Canaanite 
 Heres.  Next  to  Asshur  or  II  was  a  triad,  consist- 
 ing of  Ann,  who  appears  to  have  corresponded  to 
 Pluto,  a  divinity  whose  name  is  doubtful,  corre- 
 sponding to  Jupiter,  and  Hea  or  Hoa,  correspond- 
 ing in  position  and  partly  in  character  to  Neptune. 
 The  supreme  goddess  Mulita  or  Bilta  (Mylitta  or 
 Beltis)  was  the  wife  of  the  Babylonian  Jupiter. 
 This  triad  was  followed  by  another,  consisting  of 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 361 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 ^ther  (Iva?),  tlie  sun,  and  the  moon.  Next  in 
 order,  are  '  the  five  minor  gods,  who,  if  not  of 
 astronomical  origin,  were  at  any  rate  identified 
 with  the  five  planets  of  the  Chaldeean  system.'  In 
 addition,  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  enumerates  several 
 other  divinities  of  less  importance,  and  mentions 
 that  there  are  'a  vast  number  of  other  names,' 
 adding  this  remarkable  observation  :  '  Every  town 
 and  village  indeed  throughout  Babylonia  and  As- 
 syria appears  to  have  had  its  own  particular  deity, 
 many  of  these  no  doubt  being  the  great  gods  of 
 the  Pantheon  disguised  under  rustic  names,  but 
 others  being  distinct  local  divinities.'  Sir  H.  Raw- 
 linson contents  himself  with  stating  the  facts  dis- 
 coverable from  the  inscriptions,  and  does  not 
 theorize  upon  the  subject  further  than  to  point  out 
 the  strong  resemblances  between  this  Oriental  sys- 
 tem and  that  of  Greece  and  Rome,  not  indeed  in 
 the  Aryan  ground- work  of  the  latter,  but  in  its 
 general  superstructure.  If  we  analyze  the  Baby- 
 Ionian  and  Assyrian  system,  we  discover  that  in  its 
 present  form  it  is  mainly  cosmic,  or  a  system  of 
 high  nature-worship.  The  supreme  divinity  ap- 
 pears to  have  been  regarded  as  the  ruler  of  the 
 universe,  the  first  triad  was  of  powers  of  nature, 
 the  second  triad  and  the  remaining  chief  divinities 
 were  distinctly  cosmic.  But  beneath  this  system 
 were  two  others,  evidently  distinct  in  origin,  and  too 
 deep-seated  to  be  obliterated,  the  worship  of  an- 
 cestors and  low  nature-worship.  Asshur,  at  the 
 very  head  of  the  Pantheon,  is  the  deified  ancestor  of 
 the  Assyrian  race  ;  and,  notwithstanding  a  system 
 of  great  gods,  each  city  had  its  own  special  idolatry, 
 either  openly  reverencing  its  primitive  idol,  or  con- 
 cealing a  deviation  from  the  fixed  belief  by  making 
 that  idol  another  form  of  one  of  the  national 
 divinities.  In  this  separation  into  its  first  elements 
 of  this  ancient  religion,  we  discover  the  superstitions 
 of  those  races  which,  mixed  but  never  completely 
 fused,  formed  the  population  of  Babylonia  and 
 Assyria,  three  races  whose  three  languages  were 
 yet  distinct  in  the  inscribed  records  as  late  as  the 
 time  of  Darius  Hystaspis.  These  races  were  the 
 primitive  Chaldceans,  called  Hamites  by  Sir  H. 
 Rawlinson,  who  undoubtedly  had  strong  affinities 
 with  the  ancient  Egyptians,  the  Shemite  Assyrians, 
 and  the  Aryan  Persians.  It  is  not  difficult  to 
 assign  to  these  races  their  respective  shares  in 
 the  composition  of  the  mythology  of  the  countries 
 in  which  they  successively  ruled.  The  ancestral 
 worship  is  here  distinctly  Semitic  :  the  name  of 
 \sshur  proves  this.  It  may  be  objected  that  such 
 worship  never  characterized  any  other  Semitic 
 stock  :  that  we  find  it  among  Turanians  and 
 Aryans  :  but  we  reply,  that  the  Shemites  borrowed 
 their  idolatry,  and  a  Turanian  or  Aryan  influence 
 may  have  given  it  this  peculiar  form.  The  low 
 nature-worship  must  be  due  to  the  Turanians.  It 
 is  never  discerned  except  where  there  is  a  strong 
 Turanian  or  Nigritian  element,  and  when  once  esta- 
 blished it  seems  always  to  have  been  very  hard  to 
 remove.  The  high  nature- worship,  as  the  last 
 element,  remains  for  the  Aryan  race.  The  primi- 
 tive Aiyan  belief  in  its  different  forms  was  a  rever- 
 ence for  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  and  the  powers 
 of  nature,  combined  with  a  belief  in  one  supreme 
 being,  a  religion  that,  though  varying  at  different 
 times,  and  deeply  influenced  by  ethnic  causes,  was 
 never  deprived  of  its  essentially-cosmic  charac- 
 teristics. 
 
 The  family  of  Abraham,  as  Shemites,  would 
 
 have  naturally  followed  the  ancestral  worship  of 
 their  people  in  Babylonia,  were  it  still  separately 
 practised,  unless  the  influence  of  neighbouring 
 idolaters  of  another  race  had  imbued  them  with 
 a  tendency  to  some  other  system.  In  the  family, 
 names  there  is  no  trace  of  any  idolatry,  nor  does 
 their  later  history  furnish  any  clue  but  that  of 
 Laban's  teraphim,  for  the  time  of  Job  is  too 
 distant  and  his  position  too  different  to  afford  us 
 any  aid.  Laban's  idolatiy  being  the  next  men- 
 tioned in  Scripture,  we  may  pass  on  to  consider  it 
 for  the  illustration  of  our  present  subject. 
 
 When  Jacob  left  Padan-aram,  Rachel  stole  and 
 carr'ed  away  her  father  Laban's  teraphim.  These 
 teraphim  Laban  greatly  valued,  as  we  may  judge 
 from  his  determined  search.  He  called  them  his 
 gods  (Gen.  xxxi.  30,  32),  though  he  was  not  without 
 a  belief  in  the  true  God  (24,  49-53).  It  has  indeed 
 been  thought  that  the  passage  rendered  '  The  God 
 of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Nahor,  the  God  of 
 their  fathers,  judge  betwixt  us.  And  Jacob  sware 
 by  the  fear  of  his  father  Isaac'  (53) — might  be  read 
 so  as  to  illustrate  Laban's  idolatry  ;  but  the  seeming 
 difference  between  Laban's  oath  and  Jacob's  dis- 
 appears if  we  compare  the  passage  with  that 
 earlier  one,  where  Jacob  says,  '  Except  the  God  of 
 my  father,  the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  fear  of 
 Isaac,  had  been  with  me,  surely  thou  hadst  sent 
 me  away  now  empty'  (42).  There  is,  therefore,  no 
 warrant  for  reading  the  word  rendered  God  in  any 
 occurrence  or  all  occurrences  in  the  passage  first 
 cited  as  a  plural.  Evidently,  therefore,  Laban's 
 teraphim  were  not  images  of  false  gods,  but  were 
 idols  corruptly  used  by  believers  in  the  patriarchal 
 religion.  Yet  it  is  probable  on  other  grounds  than 
 any  theories  advanced  in  this  article  that  these  images 
 were  connected  with  ancestral  worship  :  if  so,  they 
 may  have  been  relics  of  the  Shemite  idolatry  from 
 the  midst  of  which  Abraham  was  called  away. 
 And  here  it  may  be  remarked  that  these  corrup- 
 tions clung  to  the  families  or  retainers  of  the  He- 
 brew patriarchs,  for  Jacob,  at  a  later  time,  com- 
 manded his  household,  and  those  that  were  with 
 him,  to  put  away  strange  gods  (xxxv.  2). 
 
 We  purposely  resei^ve  the  discussion  of  the  ido- 
 latry of  Canaan  for  that  later  period  when  the 
 iniquity  of  its  people  was  full,  and  when  the  Divine 
 warnings,  as  well  as  the  sacred  history,  give  us  a 
 more  complete  view  of  the  idol-worship  of  the 
 seven  doomed  nations.  But  it  must  be  here  ob- 
 served, that  already  in  Abraham's  time  such  a 
 name  as  Ashteroth  Karnaim  (Ashteroth  of  the  two 
 horns)  shows  the  existence  of  pagan  worship.  On 
 the  other  hand,  the  mysterious  Melchizedek,  seem- 
 ingly a  Canaanite,  if  not  a  Rephaite  (like  Adoni- 
 zedek  of  Joshua's  time),  is  a  witness  that  the  true 
 patriarchal  belief  was  not  yet  overwhelmed  by  the 
 corruptions  of  Canaan. 
 
 The  sojourn  in  Egypt  brings  us  again  in  contact 
 with  one  of  the  great  idolatrous  systems  of  antiquity. 
 There  is  some  little  evidence,  but  that  little  very 
 curious  and  valuable,  as  to  the  adoption  of  a  false 
 religion  by  many  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt.  At 
 that  time  Egypt  was  not  wholly  in  the  hands  of 
 the  Egyptians,  not  wholly  even  Egyptian.  The 
 Shepherd-strangers,  if  they  did  not  rule  the  counti-y 
 for  the  whole  period  of  their  stay,  were  certainly 
 long  firmly  planted  in  its  north-eastern  provinces. 
 From  the  Pathmetic,  now  the  Damietta,  branch  to 
 the  eastern  border,  dwelt  a  Shemiteorquasi-Shemite 
 population.     The  marshes  that  skirt  the  Mediter- 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 362 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 ranean  and  the  great  lakes  that  feed  them,  after- 
 wards the  last  homes  of  Egyptian  freedom,  were 
 then  the  haunts  of  the  eastern  enemies  of  Egypt, 
 whose  traits  of  person  and  character  are  still  to  be 
 discerned,  as  they  were  long  ago  by  Achilles  Tatius, 
 in  the  sturdy  fishermen  of  Lake  Alenzeleh.  South- 
 ward, the  pasture-lands  of  a  long  valley,  the  land 
 of  Goshen,  through  which  a  prudent  ruler,  whose 
 name  has  perished  through  the  lapse  of  ages,  had 
 cut  a  canal,  more  to  water  this  fertile  tract  than  to 
 open  a  way  from  the  Nile  to  the  Erythraean  Sea, 
 this  long  valley  was  the  home  of  settled  Arabs, 
 the  Israelites,  and  the  mixed  multitude,  or  Ereb, 
 spoken  of  in  Scripture.  The  names  of  several  of 
 the  towns  of  north-eastern  Egypt  are  either  He- 
 brew, or  known  to  us  both  in  Hebrew  and  Eg}'p- 
 tian  forms  of  the  same  signification.  So  marked  is 
 the  distinction  between  true  Egypt  and  Shemite 
 Egypt,  that  the  monuments  of  the  great  Shep- 
 herd-city Zoan,  executed  under  the  foreign  rule, 
 though  Egyptian,  have  a  distinctive  character  of 
 their  own.  Thus  we  may  expect  to  find  two 
 pagan  religions  prevailing  in  Egypt,  one  the  religion 
 of  the  Egyptians,  the  other  that  of  such  of  the 
 Shemite  colonists  as  were  idolaters.  We  would 
 not  deny  that  constant  waves  of  Shemite  immigra- 
 tion had  produced  their  effect  on  the  religion  and 
 physical  characteristics  of  the  Egyptians  from  that 
 very  first  which  gave  the  strong  Shemite  side  to 
 their  moral  and  physical  nature,  but  in  the  Shep- 
 herd-period foreign  influence  could  no  longer  affect 
 the  essential  part  of  the  native  religion,  and  any 
 distinct  system  must  have  had  a  separate  growth. 
 
 When  we  come  to  speak  of  the  ancient  Egyptian 
 religion,  we  are  at  last  on  safe  ground.  The  inter- 
 pretation of  hieroglyphics  has  laid  before  us  a 
 mass  of  documents,  acquainting  us  almost  as  fully 
 with  its  tenets  as  do  the  classical  writings  with 
 those  of  pagan  Greece  and  Rome.  The  result  is, 
 that  we  are  compelled  to  discard,  at  least  for  the 
 present,  the  philosophical  theories  which  we  had 
 been  accustomed  to  regard  as  the  very  mainsprings 
 of  Egyptian  belief,  but  which  are  probably  for  the 
 most  part  fabrications  constructed  in  the  attempt 
 to  fortify  the  ancient  religion  against  the  shocks  of 
 a  new  and  vital  faith.  We  are  indeed  compelled 
 finally  to  put  aside  all  ideas  that  the  Egyptian 
 religion  formed  one  philosophical  whole,  and  to 
 admit  that  it  consists  of  several  distinct  elements, 
 which  were  never  fused,  because  their  nature  for- 
 bade so  complete  a  union. 
 
 The  strongest  and  most  remarkable  peculiarity 
 of  the  Egyptian  religion  is  the  worship  of  animals, 
 trees,  and  like  objects,  which  was  universal  in  the 
 country,  and  was  even  connected  with  the  belief 
 in  the  future  state.  No  theory  of  the  usefulness 
 of  certain  animals  can  explain  the  worship  of  others 
 that  were  utterly  useless,  nor  can  a  theory  of  some 
 strange  analogy  find  even  as  wide  an  application. 
 The  explanation  is  to  be  discovered  in  every  town, 
 every  village,  every  hut,  of  the  Negroes,  whose 
 fetishism  corresponds  perfectly  with  this  low  nature- 
 worship  of  the  ancient  Egyptians. 
 
 Connected  with  fetishism,  was  the  local  charac- 
 ter of  the  religion.  Each  nome,  city,  town,  and 
 probably  village,  had  its  divinities,  and  the  posi- 
 tion of  many  gods  in  the  Pantheon  was  due  rather 
 to  the  importance  of  their  cities  than  any  powers 
 or  qualities  they  were  supposed  to  have. 
 
 The  Egyptian  Pantheon  shows  three  distinct 
 elements.      Certain  of  the   gods  are    only  per- 
 
 sonifications connected  with  low  nature-worship. 
 Others,  the  great  gods,  are  of  Shemite  origin,  and 
 are  connected  with  high  nature-worship,  though 
 showing  traces  of  the  worship  of  ancestors.  In 
 addition,  there  are  certain  personifications  of  ab- 
 stract ideas.  The  first  of  these  classes  is  evidently 
 the  result  of  an  attempt  to  connect  the  old  low 
 nature-worship  with  some  higher  system.  The 
 second  is  no  doubt  the  religion  of  the  Shemite 
 settlers.  It  is  essentially  the  same  in  character  as 
 the  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  religion,  and  as  the 
 belief  of  a  dominant  race  took  the  most  important 
 place  in  the  intricate  system  of  which  it  ultimately 
 formed  a  part.  The  last  class  appears  to  be  of  later 
 invention,  and  to  have  had  its  origin  in  an  endea- 
 vour to  construct  a  philosophical  system. 
 
 In  addition  to  these  particulars  of  the  Egyptian 
 religion,  it  is  important  to  notice  that  it  comprised 
 very  remarkable  doctrines.  Man  was  held  to  be  a 
 responsible  being,  whose  future  after  death  de- 
 pended upon  his  actions  done  while  on  earth. 
 He  was  to  be  judged  by  Osiris,  ruler  of  the  West, 
 or  unseen  world,  and  either  rewarded  with  felicity 
 or  punished  with  torment.  Whether  these  future 
 states  of  happiness  and  misery  were  held  to  be  of 
 eternal  duration  is  not  certain,  but  there  is  little 
 doubt  that  the  Egyptians  believed  in  the  immor- 
 tality of  the  soul. 
 
 The  religion  of  the  Shepherds  is  not  as  distinctly 
 known  to  us.  It  is,  however,  clear  from  the  monu- 
 ments that  their  chief  god  was  SET  or  SUTEKH,  and 
 we  learn  from  a  papyrus  that  one  of  the  Shepherd- 
 kings,  APEPEE,  probably  Manetho's  '  Apophis,' 
 established  the  worship  of  SET  in  his  dominions, 
 and  reverenced  no  other  god,  raising  a  great  temple 
 to  him  in  Zoan,  or  Avaris.  Set  continued  to 
 be  worshipped  by  the  Egyptians  until  the  time 
 of  the  22d  dynasty,  when  we  first  find  no  trace  of 
 him  on  the  monuments.  At  this  period  or  after- 
 wards his  figure  was  effaced  in  the  inscriptions. 
 The  change  took  place  long  after  the  expulsion  of 
 the  Shepherds,  and  was  effected  by  the  22d 
 dynasty,  which  was  probably  of  Assyrian  or 
 Babylonian  origin :  it  is,  therefore,  rather  to  be 
 considered  as  a  result  of  the  influence  of  the 
 Median  doctrine  of  Ormazd  and  Ahriman,  than 
 as  due  to  the  Egyptian  hatred  of  the  foreigners 
 and  all  that  concerned  them.  Besides  set,  other 
 foreign  divinities  were  worshipped  in  Egypt,  the 
 god  RENPU,  the  goddesses  ken  or  ketesh,  anta, 
 and  ASTARTA.  All  these  divinities,  except  astarta, 
 as  to  whom  we  have  no  particular  information,  are 
 treated  by  the  Egj'ptians  as  powers  of  destruction 
 and  war,  as  set  was  considered  the  personification 
 of  physical  evil.  Set  was  always  identified  by  the 
 Egyptians  with  Baal  :  we  do  not  know  whether  he 
 was  worshipped  in  Egypt  before  the  Shepherd- 
 period,  but  this  is  almost  certain. 
 
 This  foreign  worship  in  Egypt  was  probably 
 never  reduced  to  a  system.  What  we  know  of  it 
 shews  no  regularity,  and  it  is  not  unlike  the  imita- 
 tions of  the  Egyptian  idols  made  by  Phoenician 
 artists,  probably  as  representations  of  Phoenician 
 divinities.  The  gods  of  the  Hycsos  are  foreign 
 objects  of  worship  in  an  Egyptian  dress. 
 
 Before  speaking  of  the  partial  or  general  falling 
 away  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  we  may  notice  the 
 other  kinds  of  idolatry  which  influenced  them  at 
 the  same  period,  or  that  immediately  succeeding 
 it,  the  idolatry  of  the  Abrahamite  tribes,  of  Canaan, 
 of  Phoenicia,  of  the  Philistines,  and  of  Syria,  which 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 363 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 they  encountered  on  their  journey,  or  after  they 
 reached  the  Land  of  Promise. 
 
 The  centre  of  the  idolatry  of  the  Palestinian  races 
 is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  religion  of  the  Rephaites 
 and  the  Canaanites.  We  can  distinctly  connect  the 
 worship  of  Baal  and  Ashtoreth  with  the  earliest 
 kind  of  idolatry,  and  having  thus  established  a 
 centre,  we  can  understand  how,  for  instance,  the 
 same  infernal  rites  were  celebrated  to  the  Am- 
 monite Molech  and  the  Carthaginian  Baal.  The 
 most  important  document  for  the  idolatry  of  the 
 Hittites  is  the  treaty  concluded  between  the  branch 
 of  that  people  seated  on  the  Orontes  and  Rameses 
 11.  From  this  we  learn  that  SUTEKH  (or  set)  and 
 ASTeRAT  were  the  chief  divinities  of  these  Hit- 
 tites, and  that  they  also  worshipped  the  moun- 
 tains and  rivers,  and  the  winds.  The  SUTEKHS 
 of  several  forts  are  also  specified  [Hittites].  Set 
 is  known  from  the  Egyptian  inscriptions  to  have 
 corresponded  to  Baal,  so  that  in  the  two  chief 
 divinities  we  discover  Baal  and  Ashtoreth,  the  only 
 Canaanite  divinities  known  to  be  mentioned  in 
 Scripture.  The  local  worship  of  different  forms  of 
 Baal  well  agrees  with  the  low  nature-worship  with 
 which  it  is  found  to  have  prevailed.  Both  are 
 equally  mentioned  in  the  Bible  history.  Thus  the 
 people  of  Shechem  worshipped  Baal-berith,  and 
 Mount  Hermon  itself  seems  to  have  been  wor- 
 shipped as  Baal-Hermon,  while  the  low  nature- 
 worship  may  be  traced  in  the  reverence  for  groves, 
 and  the  connection  of  the  Canaanite  religion  with 
 hills  and  trees.  The  worst  feature  of  this  system 
 was  the  sacrifice  of  children  by  their  parents ;  a 
 feature  that  shews  the  origin  of  at  least  two  of  its 
 offshoots. 
 
 The  Bible  does  not  give  a  very  clear  description 
 of  Canaanite  idolatry.  As  an  abominable  thing  to 
 be  rooted  out  and  cast  into  oblivion  nothing  is 
 needlessly  said  of  it.  The  appellation  Baal,  iiiler, 
 or  possessor,  implies  supremacy,  and  connects  the 
 chief  Canaanite  divinity  with  the  Syrian  Adonis. 
 He  was  the  god  of  the  Canaanite  city  Zidon  or 
 Sidon,  where  '  Ashtoreth,  the  abomination  of  the 
 Zidonians,'  was  also  specially  worshipped.  In  the 
 Judge-period  we  read  of  Baalim  and  Ashteroth  in 
 the  plural,  probably  indicating  various  local  forms 
 of  these  divinities,  but  perhaps  merely  the  worship 
 of  many  images.  The  worship  of  Baal  was  con- 
 nected with  that  of  the  groves,  which  we  take 
 to  have  been  representations  of  trees  or  other 
 vegetable  products  [High  Places  and  Groves]. 
 In  Ahab's  time  a  temple  was  built  for  Baal, 
 where  there  was  an  image.  His  worshippers  sac- 
 rificed in  garments  provided  by  the  priests  ;  and 
 his  prophets,  seeking  to  propitiate  him,  were 
 wont  to  cry  and  cut  themselves  with  swords  and 
 lances.  Respecting  Ashtoreth  we  know  less  from 
 Scripture.  Her  name  is  not  derivable  from  any 
 Semitic  root.  It  is  equivalent  to  the  Ishtar  of 
 the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  the  name  of  the  As- 
 syrian or  Babylonian  Venus,  the  goddess  of  the 
 planet.  The  identity  of  the  Canaanite,  and  the 
 Assyrian  or  Babylonian  goddess,  is  further  shown 
 by  the  connection  of  the  former  with  star-worship. 
 In  the  Iranian  languages  we  find  a  close  radical 
 resemblance  to  Ashtoreth  and  Ishtar  in  the  Pers. 
 
 ^ j\''.,..,  Zend  stara,  Sansk.   stra,  aar-qp,  stern,  all 
 
 equivalent  to  our  '  star.'  This  derivation  confirms 
 our  opinion  that  the  high  nature -worship  of  the 
 Babylonians  and  Assyrians  was  of  Aiyan  origin. 
 
 As  no  other  Canaanite  divinities  are  noticed  in 
 Scripture,  it  seems  probable  that  Baal  and  Ash- 
 toreth were  alone  worshipped  by  the  nations  of 
 Canaan.  Among  the  neighbouring  tribes  we  find, 
 besides  these,  other  names  of  idols,  and  we  have  to 
 inquire  whether  they  apply  to  different  idols  or  are 
 merely  different  appellations. 
 
 Beginning  with  the  Abrahamite  tribes,  we  find 
 
 Molech,  Malcham,  or  Milcom  ("ili^b,  D3^0,  Dil^D), 
 spoken  of  as  the  idol  of  the  Ammonites.  This 
 name,  in  the  first  form,  always  has  the  article,  and 
 
 undoubtedly  signifies  the  'king'  (TI^Gn,  equivalent 
 to  ^/f^n),  for  it  is  indifferently  used  as  a  proper  name 
 
 and  as  an  appellative  with  a  suffix  (comp.  Jer.  xlix. 
 I,  3,  with  Amos  i.  15).  Milcom  is  from  Molech 
 or  its  root,  with  Q  formative,  and  Malcham  is  pro- 
 bably a  dialectic  variation,  if  the  points  are  to  be 
 relied  upon.  Molech  was  regarded  by  the  Am- 
 monites as  their  king.  When  David  captured 
 Rabbah  we  are  told  that  'he  took  Malcham's  crown 
 from  off"  his  head,  the  weight  whereof  [was]  a 
 talent  of  gold  with  the  precious  stones  :  and  it  was 
 [set]  on  David's  head'  (2  Sam.  xii.  30,  comp.  i 
 Chron.  xx.  2).*  The  prophets  speak  of  this  idol 
 as  ruler  of  the  children  of  Amnion,  and  to  go  into 
 captivity  with  his  priests  and  princes  (Jer.  xlix.  I, 
 3  ;  Amos  i.  15).  The  worship  of  Molech  was  per- 
 formed at  high  places,  and  children  were  sacrificed 
 to  him  by  their  parents,  being  cast  into  fires.  This 
 horrible  practice  prevailed  at  Carthage,  where  chil- 
 dren were  sacrificed  to  the  chief  divinity  Baal,  called 
 
 at  Tyre  '  Melcarth,  lord  (Baal)  of  Tyre'  mp^lO 
 
 "IV  ?J?3   (Inscr.   Melit.    Biling.,   ap.  Gesen.,  Lex. 
 
 s.v.  byn),  the  first  of  which  words  signifies  'king 
 
 of  the  city,'  for  Jllp  T]?0.     There  can  therefore  be 
 
 no  doubt  that  IMolech  was  a  local  form  of  the  chief 
 idol  of  Canaan,  and  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that 
 this  name  was  limited  to  the  Ammonite  worship, 
 as  we  shall  see  in  speaking  of  the  idolatry  of  the 
 Israelites  in  the  Desert. 
 
 We  know  for  certain  of  but  one  Moabite  divinity 
 as  of  but  one  Ammonite.  Chemosh  appears  to  have 
 held  the  same  place  as  Molech,  although  our  infor- 
 mation respecting  him  is  less  full.  Moab  was  the 
 '  people  of  Chemosh'  (Num.  xxi.  29  ;  Jer.  xlviii. 
 46),  and  Chemosh  was  doomed  to  captivity  with 
 his  priests  and  princes  (Jer.  xlviii.  7).  In  one 
 place  Chemosh  is  spoken  of  as  the  god  of  the  king 
 of  the  children  of  Ammon,  whom  Jephthah  con- 
 quered (Judg.  xi.  24);  but  it  is  to  be  remarked  that 
 the  cities  held  by  this  king,  which  Jephthah  took, 
 were  not  originally  Ammonite,  and  were  appa- 
 rently claimed  as  once  held  by  the  Moabites  (21-26; 
 comp.  Num.  xxi.  23-30),  so  that  at  this  time  Moab 
 and  Ammon  were  probably  united,  or  tlie  Ammonites 
 ruled  by  a  Moabite  chief  The  etymology  of  Che-, 
 mosh  is  doubtful,  but  it  is  clear  that  he  was  dis- 
 tinct from  Molech.  There  is  no  positive  trace  of 
 the  cruel  rites  of  the  idol  of  the  Ammonites,  and  it  is 
 unlikely  that  the  settled  Moabites  should  have  had 
 the  same  savage  disposition  as  their  wild  brethren 
 
 *  The  probable  weight  of  a  talent  of  gold,  up- 
 wards of  200  lbs.  troy,  is  so  great  that  we  can  onlv 
 suppose  that  the  crown  was  held  on  David's  head. 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 364 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 on  the  north.  There  is,  however,  a  general  re- 
 semblance in  the  regal  character  assigned  to  both 
 idols  and  their  solitary  position.  Chemosh,  there- 
 fore, like  Molech,  was  probably  a  form  of  Baal. 
 Both  tribes  appear  to  have  had  other  idols,  for  we 
 read  of  the  worship,  by  the  Israelites,  of  '  the  gods 
 of  Moab,  and  the  gods  of  the  children  of  Amnion' 
 (Judg.  X.  6)  ;  but  as  there  are  other  plurals  in  the 
 passage,  it  is  possible  that  this  may  be  a  general 
 expression.  Yet  in  saying  this  we  do  not  mean  to 
 suggest  that  there  was  any  monotheistic  form  of 
 Canaanite  idolatry.  There  is  some  difficulty  in 
 ascertaining  whether  Baal-Peor,  or  Peor,  was  a 
 Moabite  idol.  The  Israelites,  while  encamped  at 
 Shittim,  were  seduced  by  the  women  of  Moab 
 and  Midian,  and  joined  them  in  the  worship  of 
 Baal-Peor.  There  is  no  notice  of  any  later  in- 
 stance of  this  idolatry.  It  seems,  therefore,  not  to 
 have  been  national  to  Moab,  and  if  so,  it  may  have 
 been  borrowed,  and  Midianite,  or  else  local,  and 
 Canaanite.  The  former  idea  is  supported  by  the 
 apparent  connection  of  prostitution,  even  of  women 
 of  rank,  with  the  worship  of  Baal-Peor,  which 
 would  not  have  been  repugnant  to  the  pagan 
 Arabs ;  the  latter  finds  some  support  in  the  name 
 Shittim,  '  the  acacias,'  as  though  the  place  had  its 
 name  from  some  acacias  sacred  to  Baal,  and,  more- 
 over, we  have  no  certain  instance  of  the  application 
 of  the  name  of  Baal  to  any  non-Canaanite  divi- 
 nity. Had  such  vile  worship  as  was  probably  that 
 of  Baal-Peor  been  national  in  Moab,  it  is  most  un- 
 likely that  David  would  have  been  on  very  friendly 
 terms  with  a  Moabite  king. 
 
 The  Philistine  idolatry  is  connected  with  that  of 
 Canaan,  although  it  has  peculiarities  of  its  own, 
 which  are  indeed  so  strong  that  it  may  be  questioned 
 whether  it  is  entirely  or  even  mainly  derived  from 
 the  Canaanite  source.  At  Ekron,  Baal-zebub  was 
 worshipped,  and  had  a  temple,  to  which  Ahaziah, 
 the  wicked  son  of  Ahab,  sent  to  inquire.  This 
 name  means  either  '  the  lord  of  the  fly,'  or  '  Baal 
 the  fly.'  It  is  generally  held  that  he  was  wor- 
 shipped as  a  driver  away  of  flies,  but  we  think  it 
 more  probable  that  some  venomous  fly  was  sacred 
 to  him.  The  use  of  the  term  Baal  is  indicative  of 
 a  connection  with  the  Canaanite  system.  The 
 national  divmity  of  the  Philistines  seems,  however, 
 to  have  been  Dagon,  to  whom  there  were  temples 
 at  Gaza  and  at  Ashdod,  and  the  general  character 
 of  whose  worship  is  evident  in  such  traces  as  we 
 observe  in  the  names  Caphar-Dagon,  near  Jamnia, 
 and  Beth-Dagon,  the  latter  applied  to  two  places, 
 one  in  Judah  and  the  other  in  Asher.  The  deri- 
 vation of  the  name  Dagon,  JiJ'H,  as  that  of  a  fish- 
 god,  is  from  i"!,  'a  fish.'     Gesenius  considers  it  a 
 
 diminutive,  'little  fish,'  used  by  way  of  endearment 
 and  honour  ( Thes.  s.  v. ),  but  this  is  surely  hazardous. 
 Dagon  was  represented  as  a  man  with  the  tail  of  a 
 fish.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  was  connected 
 with  the  Canaanite  system,  as  Derceto  or  Atargatis, 
 the  same  as  Ashtoreth,  was  worshipped  under  a 
 like  mi.ved  shape  at  Asiikelon  {axir-r)  di  rb  ixkv 
 Trp6(TU)irov  ^xf '  yvvaiKSs,  to  5'  &X\o  aw/xa  wav  Ixdoos, 
 Diod.  Sic.  ii.  4).  In  form  he  is  the  same  as  the 
 Assyrian  god  supposed  to  correspond  to  the  planet 
 Saturn.  The  house  of  Dagon  at  Gaza,  which 
 Samson  overthrew,  must  have  been  vei-y  large,  for 
 about  3000  men  and  women  then  assembled  on  its 
 roof.  It  had  two  principal,  if  not  only,  pillars, 
 in  the  midst,  between  which  Samson  was  placed 
 
 and  was  seen  by  the  people  on  the  roof.  The 
 inner  portion  of  some  of  the  ancient  Egyptian 
 temples  consisted  of  a  hypsethral  hall,  supported 
 by  two  or  more  pillars,  and  inner  chambers.  The 
 overthrow  of  these  pillars  would  bring  down  the 
 stone  roof  of  the  hall,  and  destroy  all  persons  be- 
 neath or  upon  it,  without  necessarily  overthrowing 
 the  side-walls. 
 
 The  idolatry  of  the  Phoenicians  is  not  spoken  of 
 in  the  Bible.  From  their  inscriptions  and  the 
 statements  of  profane  authors,  we  learn  that  this 
 nation  worshipped  Baal  and  Ashtoreth.  The  de- 
 tails of  their  worship  will  be  spoken  of  in  the  art. 
 Phcenicia. 
 
 Syrian  idols  are  mentioned  in  a  few  places  in 
 Scripture.  Tammuz,  whom  the  women  of  Israel 
 lamented,  is  no  doubt  Adonis,  whose  worship  im- 
 plies that  of  Astarte  or  Ashtoreth.  Rimmon,  who 
 appears  to  have  been  the  chief  divinity  of  the 
 Syrian  kings  ruling  at  Damascus,  may,  if  his  name 
 signifies  'high'   (from  DfD"l),   be  a  local  form  of 
 
 Baal,  who,  as  the  sun-god,  had  a  temple  at  the 
 great  Syrian  city  Heliopolis,  now  called  Baalabekk. 
 
 The  book  of  Job,  which,  whatever  its  date, 
 represents  a  primitive  state  of  society,  speaks  of 
 cosmic  worship  as  though  it  was  practised  in  his 
 country,  Idumasa  or  northern  Arabia.  '  If  I  beheld 
 a  sun  when  it  shined,  or  a  splendid  moon  pro- 
 gressing, and  my  heart  were  secretly  enticed,  and 
 my  hand  touched  my  mouth,  surely  this  [were]  a 
 depravity  of  judgment,  for  I  should  have  denied 
 God  above'  (xxxi.  26-28).  See  the  Genesis  of  the 
 Earth  and  of  Mail,  2d  ed. ,  p.  184.  This  evidence 
 is  important  in  connection  with  that  of  the  ancient 
 prevalence  of  cosmic  worship  in  Arabia,  and  that 
 of  its  practice  by  some  of  the  later  kings  of  Judah. 
 
 If  we  take  a  retrospect  of  this  evidence  as  to  the 
 ancient  idolatries  of  the  Canaanites  and  the  nations 
 immediately  surrounding  them,  we  perceive  the  cor- 
 rectness of  the  principle  with  which  we  commenced 
 this  part  of  the  inquiry,  that  the  centre  of  Palestinian 
 idolatry  is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  religion  of  the 
 Rephaite  and  Canaanite  races.  Local  influences 
 may  have  affected  the  varieties  of  this  system  ;  the 
 Philistines,  as  a  people  of  the  sea-coast,  may  have 
 preferred  an  inferior  sea-god  for  their  chief  divinity, 
 the  softer  races  may  have  chosen  the  corrupt  rites 
 of  the  consort  of  Baal  for  their  main  worship,  the 
 more  savage  may  have  sought  only  to  please  Baal 
 with  the  cruel  sacrifice  of  children,  yet  throughout 
 the  region  we  find  nothing  distinctly  separate  and 
 different,  neither  bare  fetishism  on  the  one  hand, 
 nor  unmixed  cosmic  worship  on  the  other.  If  we 
 might  venture  to  resolve  this  religion  into  its  primi- 
 tive elements,  we  should  assign  the  fetishism  to  the 
 Rephaite  races,  and  the  other  element,  mainly  high 
 nature- worship,  to  the  Canaanites.  This  may  seem 
 fatal  to  our  theory  that  high  nature-worship  in  the 
 religion  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria  is  the  Aryan  ele- 
 ment, but  it  must  be  recollected  that  we  do  not  know 
 at  what  time  and  through  what  conflict  or  mixture 
 of  races,  the  second  element  of  Palestinian  idolatry 
 was  introduced.  There  are  points  of  resemblance 
 between  the  idolatry  of  Palestine  and  that  of 
 Assyria  and  Babylonia,  which  prove  a  common 
 origin  in  their  cosmic  element ;  but,  on  the  other 
 hand,  there  are  differences,  which  show  either  that 
 the  contact  was  extremely  remote,  or  that  in  Pales- 
 tine a  complex  system  was  greatly  modified. 
 
 We  may  now  speak  of  the  idolatrous  jjractices 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 366 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 into  "which  the  Israelites  fell  at  various  times  from 
 the  period  of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  downwards. 
 
 The  Israelites  in-  Egypt  yielded  to  the  tempta- 
 tions of  the  polytheistic  population  among  which 
 they  dwelt.  In  Joshua's  last  address  he  counselled 
 the  people  to  put  away  the  gods  which  their  fathers 
 served  beyond  Euphrates  and  in  Egypt  (Josh, 
 xxiv.  14),  that  is,  if  we  compare  the  context, 
 not  to  return  to  these  forms  of  idolatry  (15,  16). 
 The  same  is  stated  (Ezek.  xx.  6,  7,  S)  and  alluded  to 
 (xxiii.  3)  by  Ezekiel.  The  only  other  notices  of 
 this  idolatry  are  the  account  of  the  golden  calf,  and 
 the  passage  in  Amos,  cited  by  St.  Stephen  in  the 
 Acts,  respecting  the  worsirip  of  Chiun  or  Remphan. 
 
 Let  us  take  a  glance  at  the  condition  of  the 
 Israelites  in  Egypt.  We  have  seen  that  they  were 
 in  a  country  where  two  pagan  religions  obtained, 
 the  Egyptian  and  that  of  the  Shepherd- strangers. 
 The  Israelites,  as  dwellers  in  the  most  outlying  and 
 separate  tract  of  the  Shemite  part  of  Lower  Egypt 
 are  more  likely  to  have  followed  the  corruptions  of 
 the  strangers  than  those  of  the  Egyptians,  moi^e 
 especially  as,  saving  Joseph,  Moses,  and  not  im- 
 probably Aaron  and  Miriam,  they  seem  to  have 
 almost  universally  preserved  the  manners  of  their 
 former  wandering  life.  There  is  scarcely  a  trace  of 
 Egyptian  influence  beyond  that  seen  in  the  names 
 of  Moses  and  Miriam,  and  perhaps  of  Aaron  also, 
 for  the  only  other  name  besides  the  former  two 
 that  is  certainly  Egyptian,  and  may  be  reasonably 
 referred  to  this  period,  that  of  Harnepher,  evi- 
 dently the  Egyptian  HAR-NEFRU,  '  Horus  the 
 good,'  in  the  genealogies  of  Asher  (i  Chron. 
 vii.  36),  probably  marks  an  Egyptian  taken  by 
 marriage  into  the  tribe  of  Asher,  whether  a  pro- 
 selyte or  not  we  cannot  attempt  to  decide. 
 
 The  only  glimpse  we  have  of  the  manners  of 
 the  tribes  after  their  settlement  in  Goshen  shows 
 us  that  they  led  a  pastoral  if  not  a  freebooting  life. 
 The  calamity  that  deprived  Ephraim  of  his  sons 
 was,  however  we  read  the  passage,  an  event  of 
 wild  desert  -  warfare  (i  Chron.  vii.  21).  If  the 
 Israelites  left  Egypt  tainted  with  idolatry,  they  cer- 
 tainly left  it  uncorrupted  by  the  evils  of  civilized 
 and  settled  life.  It  is  to  be  supposed,  therefore, 
 that  whatever  false  worship  they  pi^actised  would 
 have  been  adopted  rather  from  the  Shepherds  than 
 the  Egyptians.  The  little  evidence  we  have  pre- 
 cisely confirms  this  supposition.  The  Hebrew  ido- 
 latry in  the  Desert  was  like  that  of  the  Shepherds, 
 partly  borrowed  from  the  Egyptian  system,  partly 
 showing  a  separate  source. 
 
 The  golden  calf,  or,  more  accurately,  '  bull- 
 calf,'  was,  we  suppose,  not  a  representation  of 
 any  Egyptian  god,  but  made  to  represent  God 
 Himself.  There  has  been  a  difference  of  opinion 
 as  to  the  golden  calf,  some  holding  the  view  we 
 have  expressed,  others  maintaining  that  it  was 
 only  an  imitation  of  an  Egyptian  idol.  We  first 
 observe  that  this  and  Jeroboam's  golden  calves 
 are  shown  to  have  been  identical  in  the  inten- 
 tion with  which  they  were  made,  by  the  cir- 
 cumstance that  the  Israelites  addressed  the  former 
 as  the  God  who  had  brought  them  out  of  Eg}'pt 
 (Exod.  xxxii.  4,  S),  and  that  Jeroboam  proclaimed 
 the  same  of  his  idols  (i  Kings  xii.  28).  We  next 
 remark,  that  Aaron  called  the  calf  not  only  god 
 but  the  Lord  (Exod.  xxxii.  5),  that  in  the  Psalms 
 it  is  said  '  they  changed  their  glory  into  the  simili- 
 tude of  an  ox  that  eateth  hay'  (cvi.  20),  that  no  one 
 of  the  calf- worshipping  kings  and  princes  of  Israel 
 
 bears  any  name  connected  with  idolatry,  while 
 many  have  names  compounded  with  the  most  sacred 
 name  of  God,  and  that  in  no  place  is  any  foreign 
 divinity  connected  with  calf-worship  in  the  slight- 
 est degree. 
 
 The  adoption  of  such  an  image  as  the  golden  calf 
 shows  the  strength  of  Egyptian  associations,  else 
 how  would  Aaron  have  fixed  upon  so  ignoble  a 
 form  as  that  of  the  God  who  had  brought  Israel 
 out  of  Egypt?  Only  a  mind  thoroughly  accus- 
 tomed to  the  pi-ofound  respect  paid  in  Egypt  to  the 
 sacred  bulls,  and  especially  to  Apis  and  Mnevis, 
 could  have  hit  upon  so  strange  a  representation  ; 
 nor  could  any  people  who  had  not  witnessed  the 
 Egyptian  practices  have  found,  as  readily  as  did 
 the  Israelites,  the  fulfilment  of  their  wishes  in  such 
 an  image.  The  feast  that  Aaron  celebrated,  when, 
 after  eating  and  drinking,  the  people  arose,  sang, 
 and  danced  naked  before  the  idol,  is  strikingly 
 like  the  festival  of  the  finding  of  Apis,  which  was 
 celebrated  with  feasting  and  dancing,  and  also, 
 apparently,  though  this  custom  does  not  seem  to 
 have  been  part  of  the  public  festivity,  with  indecent 
 gestures.  [Moschoi.atrv.  ] 
 
 The  golden  calf  was  not  the  only  idol  which 
 the  Israelites  worshipped  in  the  Desert.  The 
 prophet  Amos  speaks  of  others.  In  the  Masoretic 
 text  the  passage  is  as  follows,  '  But  ye  bare  the 
 tent  [or  '  tabernacle']  of  your  king  and  Chiun  your 
 images,  the  star  of  your  gods  [or  '  your  god '], 
 which  ye  made  for  yourselves'  (v.  26).  The  LXX. 
 has  MoXox  for  '  your  king,'  as  though  their  original 
 
 Heb.   had  been   D3pjD,   instead   of  D33?D,   and 
 
 'PaKpdu  for  Chiun,  besides  a  transposition.  In  the 
 Acts  the  reading  is  almost  the  same  as  that  of  the 
 LXX.,  '  Yea,  ye  took  up  the  tabernacle  of  Moloch, 
 and  the  star  of  your  god  Remphan,  figures  which 
 ye  made  to  worship  them'  (vii.  43).  We  cannot 
 here  discuss  the  probable  causes  of  these  differences 
 except  of  the  more  important  ones,  the  substitution 
 of  Moloch  for  'your  king,'  and  Raiphan  or  Rem- 
 phan for  Chiun.  It  should  be  observed,  that  if 
 the  passage  related  to  Ammonite  worship,  nothing 
 would  be  more  likely  than  that  Molech  should  have 
 been  spoken  of  by  an  appellative,  in  which  case  a 
 strict  rendering  of  the  Masoretic  text  would  read 
 as  does  the  A.  V. ;  a  freer  could  follow  the  LXX. 
 and  Acts ;  but,  as  there  is  no  reference  to  the  Am- 
 monites or  even  the  Canaanites,  it  is  more  reason- 
 able to  suppose  that  the  LXX.  followed  a  text  in 
 
 which,  as  above  suggested,  the  reading  was  D3?0, 
 
 Malcham,  or  'your  king.'  The  likelihood  of  this 
 being  the  true  reading  must  depend  upon  the  rest 
 of  the  passage.  Remphan  and  Chiun  are  at  once 
 recognised  as  two  foreign  divinities  worshipped 
 together  in  Egypt,  renpu,  probably  pronounced 
 REMPU,  and  KEN,  the  former  a  god  represented  as 
 of  the  type  of  the  Shemites  and  apparently  con- 
 nected with  war,  the  latter  a  goddess  represented 
 naked  standing  upon  a  lion.  They  were  wor- 
 shipped with  KHEM,  the  Egyptian  god  of  produc- 
 tiveness, and  the  foreign  war -goddess  ANATA. 
 Excluding  khem,  who  is  probably  associated  with 
 KEN  from  her  being  connected,  as  we  shall  see, 
 with  productiveness,  these  names,   renpu,*  ken, 
 
 *  The  name  RENPU  is  in  sound  very  near  RENP, 
 '  the  year,'  Copt.  pOJULIII,  etc. ;  but  renpu  is 
 a  god  of  war,  not  of  time. 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 366 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 and  ANATA,  are  clearly  not,  except  in  orthography, 
 Egyptian.  We  can  suggest  no  origin  for  the  name 
 of  RENPU.  The  goddess  KEN,  as  naked,  would  be 
 connected  with  the  Babylonian  Mylitta,  and  as 
 standing  on  a  lion,  with  a  goddess  so  represented 
 in  rock-sculptures  at  Maltheiyyeh  near  Nineveh. 
 The  former  similarity  connects  her  with  genera- 
 lion  ;  the  latter  perhaps  does  so  likewise.  If  we 
 adopt  this  supposition,  the  name  KEN  may  be 
 traced  to  a  root  connected  with  generation  found 
 in  many  varieties  in  the  Iranian  family,  and  not 
 out  of  that  family.  It  may  be  sufficient  to  cite  the 
 Greek  yiv-o/jiai,  yvv-rj :  she  would  thus  be  the  god- 
 dess of  productiveness.  Anata  is  the  Persian 
 Anaitis.  We  have  shown  earlier  that  the  Baby- 
 lonian high  nature-worship  seems  to  have  been  of 
 Ar}'an  origin.  In  the  present  case  we  trace  an 
 Aryan  idolatry  connected,  from  the  inention  of  a 
 star,  with  high  nature-worship.  If  we  accept  this 
 explanation,  it  becomes  doubtful  that  Molech  is 
 mentioned  in  the  passage,  and  we  may  rather  suj)- 
 pose  that  some  other  idol,  to  whom  a  kingly 
 character  was  attributed,  is  intended.  Here  we 
 must  leave  this  difficult  point  of  our  inquiry,  only 
 summing  up  that  this  false  worship  was  evidently 
 derived  from  the  Shepherds  in  Egypt,  and  may  pos- 
 sibly indicate  the  Aryan  origin  of  at  least  one  of 
 these  tribes,  almost  certainly  its  own  origin,  directly 
 or  indirectly,  from  an  Ayran  source.  The  worship 
 of  Baal-Peor  was  next  followed  ;  but  this  was  a 
 temporary  apostasy  :  we  have  already  spoken  of  it. 
 It  is  probable  that  during  the  wanderings,  and 
 under  the  strong  rule  of  Joshua,  the  idolatry  learnt 
 in  Egypt  was  so  destroyed  as  to  be  afterwards 
 utterly  forgotten  by  the  people.  But  in  entering 
 Palestine  they  found  themselves  among  the  monu- 
 ments and  associations  of  another  false  religion,  less 
 attractive  indeed  to  the  reason  than  that  of  Egypt, 
 which  still  taught,  notwithstanding  the  wretched 
 fetishism  that  it  supported,  some  great  truths  of 
 man's  present  and  future,  but  of  a  religion  which, 
 in  its  deification  of  nature,  had  a  strong  hold  on  the 
 imagination.  The  genial  sun,  the  refreshing  moon, 
 the  stars,  at  whose  risings  or  settings  fell  the  longed- 
 for  rains,  were  naturally  reverenced  in  that  land  of 
 green  hills  and  valleys,  which  were  fed  by  the  water 
 of  heaven.  A  nation  thrown  in  the  scene  of  such 
 a  religion  and  mixed  with  those  who  professed  it, 
 at  that  period  of  national  life  when  impressions  are 
 most  readily  made,  such  a  nation,  albeit  living 
 while  the  recollection  of  the  deliverance  from  Egypt 
 and  the  wonders  with  which  the  Law  was  given 
 was  yet  fresh,  soon  fell  away  into  the  practices  that 
 it  was  strictly  enjoined  to  root  out.  In  the  first 
 and  second  laws  of  the  Decalogue,  the  Israelites 
 were  commanded  to  worship  but  one  God,  and  not 
 to  make  any  image  whatever  to  worship  it,  lest  they 
 and  their  children  should  fall  under  God's  heavy 
 displeasure.  The  commands  were  explicit  enough. 
 But  not  alone  was  idolatry  thus  clearly  condemned  : 
 the  Israelites  were  charged  to  destroy  all  objects 
 connected  with  the  religion  of  the  inhabitants  of 
 Canaan.  They  were  to  destroy  utterly  all  the 
 heathen  places  of  worship,  '  upon  the  high  moun- 
 tains, and  upon  the  hills,  and  under  every  green 
 tree.'  They  were  to  'overthrow'  the  'altars'  of 
 the  heathen,  'break  their  pillars,'  'burn  their 
 groves,  hew  down  the  graven  images  of  their  gods, 
 and  destroy  the  names  of  them  out  of  that  place' 
 (Deut.  xii.  2,  3),  a  passage  we  cite  on  account  of 
 the  fulness  of  the  enumeration.      Had  the   con- 
 
 quered nations  been  utterly.extirpated  their  idolatry 
 might  have  been  annihilated  at  once.  But  soon 
 after  the  lands  had  been  apportioned,  that  separate 
 life  of  the  tribes  began  which  was  never  inter- 
 mpted,  as  far  as  history  tells  us,  until  the  time  of 
 the  kings.  Divided,  the  tribes  were  unable  to 
 cope  with  the  remnant  of  the  Canaanites,  and  either 
 dwelt  with  them  on  equal  terms,  reduced  them  to 
 tribute,  or  became  tributaries  themselves.  The 
 Israelites  were  thus  surrounded  by  the  idolatry  of 
 Canaan  ;  and  since  they  were  for  the  most  part 
 confined  to  the  mountain  and  hilly  districts,  where 
 its  associations  were  strongest,  they  had  but  to 
 learn  from  their  neighbours  how  they  had  wor- 
 shipped upon  the  high  hills  and  under  every  green 
 tree.  It  is  related  how,  by  the  generation  that 
 followed  Joshua  and  those  who  outlived  him,  true 
 religion  was  forgotten,  and  the  people  fell  into  the 
 worship  of  Baalim,  Ashtaroth,  and  the  groves. 
 From  the  use  of  plural  forms  in  the  case  of  the 
 first  and  second  idols,  it  is  probable  that  the  Baals 
 and  Ashtoreths  of  several  towns  or  tribes  were  wor- 
 shipped by  the  Israelites,  as  Baal-Peor  had  been, 
 and  Baal-berith  afterwards  was.  It  does  not  seem, 
 however,  that  the  people  at  once  fell  into  heathen 
 worship  :  the  first  step  appears  to  have  been  adopt- 
 ing a  corruption  of  the  true  religion.  Practices  like 
 the  worship  of  the  golden  calf  are  again  mentioned 
 as  obtaining  at  this  time,  and  we  are  astonished  to 
 read  in  the  history  of  Micah  that  this  spurious  wor- 
 ship was  already  systematized.  '  In  those  days 
 [there  was]  no  king  in  Israel,  every  man  did  [that 
 which  was]  right  in  his  own  eyes'  (Judg.  xvii.  6). 
 Thus  Micah,  a  man  of  Mount  Ephraim,  having  first 
 stolen  the  large  sum  of  1 100  shekels  of  silver  from 
 his  mother  (42  lbs.  So  grs.  troy,  taking  the  shekel 
 at  220  grs.),  restored  it  to  her,  and  she,  although 
 professing  to  have  dedicated  the  whole  of  it  to  the 
 Lord,  yet  gave  but  200  shekels  of  silver  (7  lbs.  7  oz. 
 320  grs.),  to  a  founder,  who  made  '  a  graven  image 
 and  a  molten  image,'  which,  unless  merely  over- 
 laid with  precious  metal,  must  have  been  small. 
 Not  content  with  these,  Micah  had  a  house  of  god 
 or  of  gods,  an  ephod,  and  teraphim,  here,  as  in 
 Laban's  case,  associated  with  spurious  worship, 
 and  made  one  of  his  sons  priest,  consecrating  him 
 by  some  old  patriarchal,  perhaps  heathenish,  right 
 of  the  master  of  the  house.  But  still  greater  good 
 fortune  befell  Micah,  when  a  young  Levite,  coming 
 from  Bethlehem-Judah  in  search  of  a  place  where 
 he  might  settle,  was  persuaded  by  him  to  stay,  and 
 be  to  him  '  a  father  and  a  priest.'  So  he  hired  the 
 Levite  for  '  ten  [shekels]  of  silver  by  the  year,  and 
 a  suit  of  apparel,'  and  his  food.  Micah  exercised 
 his  right  of  consecration,  and  in  full  satisfaction 
 exclaimed,  '  Now  know  I  that  the  Lord  will  do 
 me  good,  seeing  I  have  a  Levite  to  [my]  priest.' 
 But  the  priest  speedily  gave  a  fresh  instance  of 
 his  mercenary  character.  Certain  Danites,  from 
 the  two  warlike  cities  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  six  hun- 
 dred armed  men,  seeking  an  inheritance,  heard  of 
 Micah's  '  house  of  gods,'  and  coming  as  friends, 
 stole  the  contents  of  the  place,  and  carried  away, 
 he  nothing  loth,  the  priest  to  be  'a  father  and  a 
 priest'  to  them,  asking  him,  '  [Is  it]  better  for  thee 
 to  be  a  priest  unto  the  house  of  one  man,  or  that 
 thou  be  a  priest  unto  a  tribe  and  a  family  in 
 Israel.'  The  Danites  smote  Laish,  and  called  it 
 Dan,  and  there  set  up  the  graven  image  :  the  priest 
 and  his  sons  continued  to  be  priests  to  the  tribe  of 
 Dan  until  the  captivity :  the  graven  image  remained 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 367 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 at  Dan  '  all  the  time  that  the  house  of  God  was  in 
 Shiloh,'  being  probably  suppressed  for  a  time  under 
 Saul,  David,  and  Solomon,  and  superseded  by 
 Jeroboam's  golden  calf.  The  priest  was  Jonathan, 
 the  son  of  Gershom,  the  son  of  Moses,  a  wonderful 
 instance  of  the  rapid  corruption  of  those  days  ( Judg. 
 xvii.,  xviii. )  It  is  noteworthy  that  throughout  this 
 remarkable  narrative,  which  is  told  with  a  simpli- 
 city that  would  vouch  for  its  antiquity  and  authen- 
 ticity were  there  no  other  evidence,  idolatrous 
 practices  are  associated  with  deceit  and  dishonesty. 
 Wealthy  and  at  ease,  the  tribes  would  not  be  at  the 
 trouble  of  going  to  Shiloh  to  worship,  but,  like 
 their  ancestors  two  or  three  generations  before, 
 who  demanded  a  calf  of  Aaron  because  they  knew 
 not  what  had  become  of  Moses,  each  man  would 
 have  his  house  of  gods,  with  images,  a  priest,  and, 
 perhaps,  for  teraphim  are  mentioned,  magical 
 practices  also.  This  declension  would  have  easily 
 led  the  way  to  the  adoption  not  only  of  the  forms, 
 but  of  the  realities  of  the  heathenism  around.  An 
 illegal  worship  of  the  true  God  would  soon  give 
 place  to  the  flexible  religion  of  the  heathen. 
 
 The  histoiy  contained  in  the  Book  of  Judges 
 and  the  early  part  of  the  First  Book  of  Samuel 
 is  a  narrative  of  the  successive  declensions  and 
 reformations  of  the  Israelites  in  the  period  of  the 
 Judges.  It  is  noticeable  that  they  do  not  seem 
 during  this  period  to  have  generally  adopted  the 
 religions  of  any  but  the  Canaanites,  although  in 
 one  remarkable  passage  they  are  said,  between 
 the  time  of  Jair  and  that  of  Jephthah,  to  have  for- 
 saken tlieLord,  and  served  Baalim,  and  Ashtaroth, 
 and  the  gods  of  Syria,  Zidon,  Moab,  the  children 
 of  Amnion,  and  the  Philistines  (Judg.  x.  6),  as 
 though  there  had  then  been  an  utter  and  profli- 
 gate apostasy.  The  cause  no  doubt  was  that  the 
 Canaanite  worship  was  borrowed  in  a  time  of 
 amity,  and  that  but  one  Canaanite  oppressor  is 
 spoken  of,  whereas  the  Abrahamites  of  the  east  of 
 Palestine,  and  the  Philistines,  were  almost  always 
 enemies  of  the  Israelites.  Each  time  of  idolatry 
 was  punished  by  a  sei-vitude,  each  reformation  fol- 
 lowed by  a  deliverance.  Speedily  as  the  nation 
 returned  to  idolatry  its  heart  was  fresher  than  that 
 of  the  ten  tribes  which  followed  Jeroboam,  and 
 never  seem  to  have  had  one  thorough  national  re- 
 pentance. There  are  some  curious  traces  of  the 
 special  customs  of  this  time.  Gideon,  though  he 
 commenced  his  judgeship  by  casting  down  Joash 
 his  father's  altar  of  Baal  and  grove,  which  seem  to 
 have  been  set  up  more  for  custom  than  from  a  be- 
 lief in  this  false  god  (Judg.  vi.  30-32),  yet  after  his 
 defeat  of  the  confederate  Arabs,  and  pious  refusal  to 
 be  made  king,  was  a  cause  of  idolatry  to  his  people. 
 He  asked  of  the  Israelites  the  golden  earrings  (?)  or 
 rings  (?)  they  had  taken,  of  which  the  weight  was 
 1700  shekels  of  gold,  according  to  our  calculation 
 38  lbs.  II  oz.  240  grs.  troy,  and  made  of  them 
 an  ephod  in  his  city  Ophrah,  to  the  idolatrous 
 worship  of  which  all  Israel  was  attracted,  '  which 
 thing  became  a  snare  unto  Gideon  and  to  his 
 house'  (viii.  24-27).  An  ephod  was  a  priestly  and 
 Levitical  vestment.  TAe  ephod  of  the  Law  was  the 
 high-priest's  garment,  to  which  was  attached  the 
 breast-plate,  and,  even  including  the  breast-plate, 
 cannot  have  contained  anything  like  the  amount  of 
 gold  used  by  Gideon  (Exod.  xxviii.  4-35).  It  has, 
 therefore,  been  supposed  that  an  idol  covered  with 
 an  ephod  was  made  by  the  judge.  This  idea 
 involves  a  great  improbability ;  we  cannot  suppose 
 
 Gideon  to  have  been  guilty  of  more  than  some  mis- 
 taken following  of  corrupt  religion,  not  of  its  ex- 
 treme or  of  heathen  worship.  Perhaps  he  made 
 the  ephod  for  the  priest  of  the  altar  he  had  built  at 
 his  town,  and  it  came  to  be  treated  with  supersti- 
 tious reverence,  or  else  he  may  have  framed  the 
 gold  into  the  form  of  an  ephod  as  a  kind  of  trophy, 
 and  the  same  may  have  occurred.  It  is  needless 
 to  cite  the  sacred  veil  of  Carthage,  which,  did  we 
 think  Gideon  had  gone  back  to  Baal-worship, 
 would  be  an  apt  illustration. 
 
 In  the  next  generation,  the  Israelites,  led  no 
 doubt  by  Abimelech,  the  son  of  Gideon  and  a 
 concubine  of  Sliechem,  probably  a  Hivite,  adopted 
 the  worship  of  Baal-berith,  or  Baal  of  the  cove- 
 nant (that  is,  probably,  god  of  the  head-city  of  a 
 Hivite  confederation  rather  than  of  an  alliance  be- 
 tween the  Hivites  and  the  Israelites  [HiviTEs]), 
 who  had  at  Shechem  a  temple  either  fortified  or  in  a 
 fort  like  the  Atargation  at  Ashteroth  Karnaim  in  the 
 Maccabasan  period.  But  Abimelech  seems  only  to 
 have  adopted  this  idol  for  his  own  purposes,  as  he 
 had  no  scruple  in  burning  the  hold  when  the  revolted 
 Shechemites  took  refuge  there. 
 
 The  notices  of  their  great  wars  show  that  the 
 enmity  between  the  Philistines  and  the  Israelites  was 
 too  great  for  any  idolatry  to  be  then  borrowed  of  the 
 former  by  the  latter,  though  at  an  earlier  time  this 
 was  not  the  case.  Once  more  under  Samuel  there 
 was  a  reformation,  and  Baalim  and  Ashtaroth  were 
 put  away,  probably  for  more  than  a  century.  Saul's 
 family  were,  however,  tainted  as  it  seems  with  ido- 
 latry, for  the  names  of  Ishbosheth  or  Eshbaal,  and 
 Mephibosheth  or  Merib-baal,  can  scarcely  have  been 
 given  but  in  honour  of  Baal.  From  the  circum- 
 stances of  Michal's  stratagem  to  save  David,  it 
 seems  not  only  that  Saul's  family  kept  teraphim, 
 but,  apparently,  that  they  used  them  for  purposes 
 of  divination,  the  LXX.  having  'liver'  for  'pil- 
 low,' as  if  the  Hebr.  had  been  133  instead  of  the 
 
 present  "1''33.  The  circumstance  of  having  tera- 
 phim, more  especially  if  they  were  used  for  divina- 
 tion, lends  especial  force  to  Samuel's  reproof  of 
 Saul  (i  Sam.  xv.  23).  During  the  reign  of  David 
 and  the  earlier  part  of  that  of  Solomon,  idolatry 
 in  Israel  is  unmentioned,  and  no  doubt  was  almost 
 unknown. 
 
 The  earlier  days  of  Solomon  were  the  happiest 
 of  the  kingdom  of  Istael.  The  temple-worship 
 was  fully  established,  with  the  highest  magnifi- 
 cence, and  there  was  no  excuse  for  that  worship  of 
 God  at  high  places,  which  seems  to  have  been  be- 
 fore permitted  on  account  of  the  constant  distrac- 
 tions of  the  country.  But  the  close  of  that  reign 
 was  marked  by  an  apostasy  of  which  we  read 
 with  wonder.  Hitherto  the  people  had  been  the 
 sinners,  their  leaders,  refoniiers  ;  this  time  the 
 king,  led  astray  by  his  many  strange  wives,  per- 
 verted the  people,  and  raised  high  places  on  the 
 mount  of  Corruption,  opposite  God's  temple.  He 
 worshipped  Ashtoreth,  goddess  of  the  Zidonians, 
 Chemosh,  the  god  of  the  Moabites,  and  Milcom, 
 the  abomination  of  the  Ammonites,  for  the  latter 
 two  building  high  places,  as  well  as  for  all  the  gods 
 of  his  strange  wives.  Solomon  no  doubt  was  veiy 
 tolerant,  and  would  not  prevent  these  women  from 
 following  their  native  superstitions,  even  if  they  felt 
 it  a  duty  to  burn  their  and  his  children  before  Mo- 
 lech.  Calamity  speedily  followed  this  great  ajios- 
 tasy  :  the  latter  years  of  Solomon  were  troubled, 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 368 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 and  ten  tribes  were  wrenched  from  tJie  weak  hands 
 of  his  half- Ammonite  son. 
 
 Jeroboam,  newly  come  from  the  court  of  Shishak, 
 as  soon  as  he  had  been  made  kmg  by  the  turbulent 
 house  of  Joseph,  set  himself  to  devise  some  national 
 religion  that  should  keep  his  subjects  from  going 
 to  worship  at  Jerusalem,  and  so  returning  to  their 
 allegiance  to  the  house  of  David.  He  could  hit 
 upon  nothing  better  than  the  golden  calf,  and  after 
 the  lapse  of  centuries  restored  Aaron's  idol,  calling 
 it  as  before  a  symbol  of  the  God  that  brought  Israel 
 oil)  of  Egypt.  He  made  two  calves  :  the  one  he 
 set  up  at  Dan,  on  the  northern  boundary  of  his 
 kingdom,  where  there  was  already  an  idolatrous 
 priesthood,  the  other  at  the  ancient  high  place  of 
 Bethel,  as  though  to  lead  aside  journeyers  to  the 
 temple  at  Jerusalem.  He  established  a  spurious 
 priesthood  of  the  lowest  of  the  people,  and  himself 
 ministered  at  the  altar  at  Bethel.  He  fixed  an 
 annual  feast  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  eighth 
 month,  in  imitation  rather  of  the  passover  than,  as 
 usually  supposed,  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles.  * 
 
 From  the  time  of  Jeroboam  to  that  of  Ahab  no 
 further  progress  in  idolatry  seems  to  have  been 
 made.  The  system  set  up  by  the  Israelite  king, 
 notwithstanding  the  warning  miracle  wrought  by 
 the  prophet  that  came  out  of  Judah,  does  not  appear 
 to  have  been  abandoned  by  Jeroboam  or  his  suc- 
 cessors. There  were,  no  doubt,  many  true  be- 
 lievers in  the  Israelite  kingdom,  and  as  their  going 
 to  Jerusalem  even  in  time  of  peace  was  probably 
 forbidden  by  the  kings,  it  seems  likely  that  wor- 
 ship at  high  places  was  not  unlawful  to  them.  In 
 Judah  the  temple-worship  was  maintained,  but  an 
 unlawful  worship  at  high  places,  perhaps  some- 
 times or  at  some  places  connected  with  idolatrous 
 rites,  seems  to  have  generally  continued. 
 
 Ahab,  making  a  worldly-wise  marriage  with  Je- 
 zebel, daughter  of  Ethbaal,  king  of  the  Zidonians, 
 introduced  the  worship  of  Baal,  the  god  of  Zidon,  as 
 the  national  religion.  Jeroboam's  sin  naturally  paved 
 the  way  for  this  worse  apostasy,  as  the  worship  of  the 
 golden  calf  was  followed  by  that  of  Baal-Peor,  and 
 the  corruptions  that  were  practised  after  the  death 
 of  those  who  outlived  Joshua  immediately  led  to 
 the  adoption  of  the  paganism  of  Canaan.  But 
 never  had  there  been  such  a  national  apostasy.  A 
 temple  of  Baal  was  raised,  apparently  near  Samaria, 
 and  an  image  and  a  grove  there  set  up  ;  there 
 were  four  hundred  and  fifty  prophets  of  Baal,  and 
 
 *  The  difference  of  time  is  suggestive  of  a  curious 
 chronological  computation.  We  suppose  that  at 
 the  time  of  the  Exodus,  Moses  fixed  the  Egyptian 
 movable  Vague  year  by  making  the  first  day  of 
 its  seventh  month  the  first  of  the  Hebrew  year, 
 and,  therefore,  the  fifteenth  day  the  first  of  the 
 Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread  ;  and,  from  the  charac- 
 teristics of  the  Hebrew  year,  we  suppose  this  one 
 to  have  been  commenced  B.C.  1652.  If  Jeroboam 
 had  taken  the  same  day  of  the  seventh  Egyptian 
 month  as  that  of  his  feast,  it  would  have  almost 
 fallen  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  Hebrew  eighth 
 month  ;  for  during  the  interval  from  the  Exodus 
 to  Jeroboam,  if  the  long  period  be  the  true  one, 
 the  Egyptian  Vague  year  must  have  fallen  back  in 
 the  Hebrew  year  about  the  number  of  days  indi- 
 cated. Five  months  imply  a  difference  of  620 
 years,  but  as  the  Hebrew  months  commenced  on 
 the  days  of  new  moons,  the  period  may  have  been 
 somewhat  greater  or  less. 
 
 four  hundred  of  the  groves,  all  of  whom,  it 
 seems,  sat  at  Jezebel's  table.  For  the  first  time 
 we  read  that  a  persecution  of  true  religion  was 
 raised,  and  Jezebel  attempted  to  slay  all  the  pro- 
 phets of  the  Lord.  Although  Baal -worship  re- 
 ceived a  signal  check  when,  at  Carmel,  before  Ahab 
 and  all  Israel,  the  false  prophets  were  miracu- 
 lously shown  to  be  impostors,  and  were  slain 
 by  Elijah,  yet  that  only  remaining  true  prophet 
 who  had  dared  to  show  himself  in  the  Israelite 
 kingdom  fled  for  his  life  from  Jezebel,  and  lament- 
 ing the  forsaken  covenant,  overthrown  altars,  and 
 slain  prophets  of  the  Lord,  complained  that  he 
 alone  was  left.  But  God  made  known  to  him  that 
 there  were  still  left  in  Israel  seven  thousand  that 
 had  neither  bowed  to  Baal  nor  kissed  his  image. 
 The  miracle  at  Carmel  had  no  lasting  effect  on 
 Ahab's  mind.  Not  only  did  he  allow  his  wife  to 
 seek  the  fife  of  Elijah,  but  a  staff  of  four  hundred 
 false  prophets  was  formed,  by  whose  prediction  he 
 was  led  to  the  fatal  battle  of  Ramoth-gilead. 
 Ahab's  son  Ahaziah  followed  his  parents'  iniqui- 
 ties, and  sent  to  inquire  of  Baal-zebub  ;  but  his 
 brother  and  successor,  Jehoram,  put  away  the 
 image  of  Baal,  and  was  contented  with  Jeroboam's 
 sin,  though  the  image  was  afterwards  restored,  no 
 doubt  through  Jezebel's  influence. 
 
 Jehu  aimed  at  the  destruction  of  the  house  of 
 Ahab  and  the  overthrow  of  the  worship  of  Baal  : 
 both  objects  he  thoroughly  accomplished,  so  far  as 
 the  northern  kingdom  was  concerned,  perhaps  with 
 some  selfish  ambition,  and  probably  with  some 
 needless  bloodshed,  but  certainly  with  a  vigour 
 that  marks  him  as  one  of  the  most  resolute  of  the 
 Israelite  kings.  The  worshippers  of  Baal  were  col- 
 lected and  slain,  the  house  of  Baal  overthrown,  his 
 image  and  other  images  broken  and  burnt,  and  the 
 house  permanently  polluted.  It  is  to  be  observed 
 that  a  city  of  the  house  of  Baal  is  mentioned,  as 
 though  a  city,  probably  a  suburb  of  Samaria,  had 
 grown  up  around  the  idol  temple.  Yet  Jehu,  with 
 a  foolish  policy,  was  afraid  to  abandon  the  corrup- 
 tions of  Jeroboam,  and  thenceforward  the  golden 
 calves  at  Bethel  and  Dan  were  worshipped  by  the 
 ten  tribes  until  the  overthrow  of  the  kingdom. 
 
 Baal-worship,  though  destroyed  in  Israel,  was 
 untouched  in  Judah.  The  good  king  Jehoshaphat 
 had  allied  himself  with  the  powerful  house  of  Ahab, 
 and  this  piece  of  political  wisdom  nearly  extinguished 
 the  line  of  David.  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab 
 and  Jezebel,  had  become  the  wife  of  Jehoram,  the 
 son  of  Jehoshaphat.  Jehoram,  and  Ahaziah  his  son, 
 under  the  strong  influence  of  Athaliah,  had  walked 
 in  the  way  of  the  house  of  Ahab.  When  Ahaziah 
 had  been  slain  by  Jehu,  Athaliah  outdid  Jezebel, 
 and  slew  all  the  male  seed  royal,  but  one  child, 
 Jehoash,  being  saved.  During  the  six  years'  reign 
 of  Athaliah,  he  remained  hidden  in  the  temple, 
 until  a  priestly  revolution  overthrew  at  once  the 
 usurper  and  her  religion.  The  wicked  queen  was 
 slain,  the  house  of  Baal  broken  down,  the  altars 
 and  images  broken  in  pieces  thoroughly,  and  Mat- 
 tan  the  priest  slain  before  the  altars.  We  thus 
 learn  in  this  history  of  its  overthrow  how  com- 
 pletely Baal-worship  had  been  set  up  in  Jerusalem. 
 
 From  the  time  of  the  second  Jeroboam,  the 
 prophets  furnish  us  with  most  interesting  details 
 of  idol-worship  in  both  kingdoms.  The  use  of 
 the  word  Israel  is  not  in  every  case  to  be  un- 
 doubtedly restricted  to  the  northern  kingdom,  but 
 there  is  no  difficulty  in  the  most  imoortant  pas- 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 369 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 sages.  In  the  time  of  Amos,  Jeroboam,  not- 
 withstiiuding  his  prosperity,  gave  the  same  support 
 as  his  namesake  to  the  calf-worship.  Amaziah, 
 the  priest  of  Bethel,  complained  to  the  king  of  the 
 prophesying  of  Amos,  and  told  him  not  to  pro- 
 phesy again  at  that  place,  '  it  [is]  the  king's  sanc- 
 tuary, and  it  [is]  the  house  of  the  kingdom'  (vii. 
 10-13).  ^^  must  be  noticed  that  Amos  was  accused 
 by  Amaziah  of  predicting  the  king's  death  by  the 
 sword,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  he  did  so,  and 
 his  prediction  against  the  Israelite  line  as  pre- 
 served is,  '  I  will  rise  against  the  house  of  Jeroboam 
 with  the  sword'  (vei.  9),  a  passage  immediately 
 followed  by  the  account  of  Amaziah's  complaint : 
 'Then  Amaziah,' etc.  (ver.  10).  We  are,  there- 
 fore, surprised  that  Canon  Stanley  should  say, 
 '  The  prediction  of  Amos  was  not  fulfilled  as  re- 
 garded the  king  himself  (Smith's  BMe  Dictionary, 
 i.,  p.  981,  a).  Amos  speaks  of  oaths  by  the  gods 
 of  Samaria,  Dan,  and  Beersheba  (viii.  14),  and 
 of  worship  or  sacrifice  at  Bethel,  Gilgal,  and  Beer- 
 sheba (iv.  4  ;  V.  5).  Hosea  warns  Judah  against 
 the  Israelite  sin  in  these  remarkable  words  : 
 *  Though  thou,  Israel,  play  the  harlot,  [yet]  let 
 not  Judah  offend  ;  and  come  not  ye  unto  Gilgal, 
 neither  go  ye  up  to  Beth-aven,  nor  swear,  the  Lord 
 liveth'  (iv.-i5)  :  whence  it  seems,  if  the  Masoretic 
 text  be  correct,  that  the  Israelites  dared  to  apply 
 God's  most  sacred  revealed  name  to  their  idols. 
 This  prophet  speaks  of  worship  not  only  at  Bethel, 
 but  also  at  Gilgal,  and  Gilead,  the  latter  probably 
 Jacob's  stone  at  Mizpah  (xii.  11 ;  ix.  15  ;  vi.  8  ;  v. 
 i).  Amos  speaks  of  'the  high  places  of  Isaac,' 
 and  '  the  sanctuaries  of  Israel'  (vii.  9),  no  doubt  in- 
 tending Beersheba  and  Bethel.  From  these  pas- 
 sages it  is  evident  that  the  Israelites  sought  to 
 fortify  their  spurious  worship  by  paying  especial 
 honour  to  the  early  high  places.  Hosea  mentions 
 the  '  calf  of  Samaria'  (viii.  5,  6),  but  the  reference 
 is  probably  to  the  calf- worship  of  the  kingdom  gene- 
 rally. It  seems  to  have  been  customary  for  sacri- 
 ficers  to  'kiss  the  calves'  (xiii.  2).  The  mention 
 of  'the  calves  of  Beth-aven'  (x.  5),  a  name  of  re- 
 proach for  Bethel,  probably  shows  that  there  were 
 small  images  there  besides  the  chief  one  set  up  by 
 Jeroboam,  for  '  the  high  places'  'of  Aven'  (ver.  S) 
 are  similarly  spoken  of,  and  we  know  there  was 
 one  principal  high  place  there.  The  abundance  of 
 high  places  is  shown  by  the  remarkable  expression, 
 after  mention  of  Gilead  and  Gilgal,  '  yea,  their 
 altars  [are]  as  heaps  in  the  furrows  of  the  field' 
 (xii.  II,  Heb.  12).  The  Danite  worship  in  the 
 north  seems  meant  in  the  prediction — '  the  chil- 
 dren of  Israel  shall  abide  many  days  without  a 
 king,  and  without  a  prince,  and  without  a  sacri- 
 fice, and  without  an  image,  and  without  an  ephod 
 and  teraphim  :  afterward  shall  the  children  of 
 Israel  return,  and  seek  the  Lord  their  God,  and 
 ■  David  their  king'  (iii.  4,  5).  The  spurious  wor- 
 ship and  separate  royal  line  were  alike  to  be  taken 
 •from  the  Israelites,  and  afterwards  they  were  to 
 repent,  a  prophecy  perhaps  fulfilled  after  the  cap- 
 tm-e  of  Samaria.  A  modern  writer  has  most  un- 
 critically suggested  that  the  meaning  is,  that  the 
 people  were  to  be  deprived  even  of  '  their  mild 
 household  superstitions.'  How  does  he  know  that 
 these  corruptions  were  either  mild  or  household  ? 
 The  worship  of  Baal  and  Baalim  seems  to  be 
 spoken  of  as  a  thing  of  the  past  (ii.  8,  16,  17  ;  xi. 
 2  ;  esp.  xiii.  i,  2),  at  last  exceeded  by  the  calf- 
 worship  (see  last  citation);  but  sacrificing  and 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 burning  incense  '  upon  the  tops  of  the  mountains,' 
 '  upon  the  hills,'  under  shadowing  trees,  was  still 
 prevalent  (iv.  13).  With  the  overthrow  of  the 
 northern  kingdom  the  calf-worship  evidently  ended  : 
 the  costly  golden  calves  were  no  doubt  carried 
 away,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  Assyrians, 
 as  had  been  predicted,  but  the  idolatrous  high 
 places  were  not  yet  destroyed.  The  priesthood  of 
 Dan  came  to  an  end  at  this  time  (Judg.  xviii.  30) : 
 that  of  Bethel  seems  to  have  been  overthrown  by 
 Josiah  (2  Kings  xxiii.  15-20).  There  is  no  evi- 
 dence of  any  subsequent  practice  of  calf-worship  : 
 it  may  have  been  adopted  by  the  people  trans- 
 ported to  the  Israelite  cities  by  the  king  of  Assyria, 
 but  it  had  no  attraction  for  the  people  of  Judah, 
 whose  idolatry  was  the  adoption  of  wholly  foreign 
 systems,  not  the  corruption  of  true  religion. 
 
 Under  many  of  the  later  kings  of  Judah  apostasy 
 was  carried  to  an  astonishing  extent.  Not  content 
 with  a  single  kind  of  idolatry,  they  borrowed  the 
 abominations  of  all  the  nations  around.  It  is 
 scarcely  possible  to  ascertain  the  dates  and  occa- 
 sions of  the  various  introductions  of  pagan  religions 
 or  practices,  but  some  main  particulars  may  be 
 reasonably  inferred.  It  is,  however,  observable 
 that  Baal-worship  after  its  great  overthrow  never 
 seems  to  have  risen  to  any  prominence  in  Judah, 
 and  that  star-worship  appears  to  have  been  the 
 chief  form  of  idolatry  during  the  subsequent  period. 
 It  might  be  supposed  that  Solomon's  high  places 
 were  the  origin  of  this  various  idolatry,  but  much  of 
 it  is  unmentioned  before  the  time  of  the  later  kings 
 of  Judah.  Were  the  supposed  later  idolatry  alone 
 spoken  of  in  the  writings  of  the  prophets,  we  might 
 conjecture  that  it  was  earlier  practised,  but  in  the 
 historical  books  it  is  only  noticed  in  the  later  period. 
 
 Ahaz  seems  to  have  been,  before  Manasseh,  the 
 chief  innovator  who  led  Judah  astray.  Amaziah 
 had,  indeed,  after  a  successful  campaign  in  Edom, 
 '  brought  the  gods  of  the  children  of  Seir,'  appa- 
 rently here  the  Edomites,  and  worshipped  them  (2 
 Chron.  XXV.  14,  15)  ;  but  it  is  probable  that  this 
 idolatry  was  abolished  by  Uzziah  :  the  mention  of 
 it  is  important,  as  indicating  that  Arab  paganism 
 was  at  least  once  introduced  ^nto  Judah.  Ahaz 
 ordered  a  fresh  altar  to  be  made,  after  the  pattern 
 of  some  idol-altar  at  Damascus,  and  to  be  placed 
 in  the  temple,  and  offered  upon  it,  otherwise  also 
 usurping  tlie  priestly  office  (2  Kings  xvi.  10-16). 
 He  introduced  the  worship  of  the  gods  of  Damas- 
 cus, raised  altars  throughout  Jerusalem,  idol  high 
 places  in  every  city  of  Judah,  niade  his  son  pass 
 through  the  fire,  and  closed  the  temple  (2  Chron. 
 xxviii.  22-25  5  2  Kings  xvi.  3,  4). 
 
 Under  the  subsequent  kings  there  were  two 
 great  reforms ;  and  between  them  a  long  period, 
 which  appears  to  have  been  mainly  of  apostasy. 
 Hezekiah  suppressed  idolatry,  which  did  not  break 
 out  afresh  during  his  reign.  Manasseh  introduced 
 Baal-worship  again,  caused  his  son  or  children  to 
 pass  through  the  fire,  used  witchcraft,  and  set  up 
 an  idol  and  altars  for  the  host  of  heaven  in  the 
 temple  itself  (2  Kings  xxi.  3-7;  2  Chron.  xxxiii. 
 3-7).  Manasseh's  repentance  did  not  lead  to  an 
 effectual  removal  of  idolatrs',  and  Amon  returned 
 to  his  father's  sins.  But  Josiah  set  himself  to  over- 
 throw false  worship  throughout  his  dominions,  and 
 by  defiling  the  idol  altars  prevented  their  after-use. 
 The  main  varieties  of  the  idolatry  of  this  period  we 
 now  notice. 
 
 a.  Sun-worship,  though  mentioned  with  other 
 
 2  H 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 870 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 kinds  of  high  nature-worship,  as  in  the  enumeration 
 of  those  suppressed  by  Josiah,  seems  to  liave  been 
 practised  alone  as  well  as  with  the  adoration  of 
 other  heavenly  bodies.  In  Ezekiel's  remarkable 
 vision  of  the  idolatries  of  Jerusalem,  he  saw  about 
 four  and  twenty  men  between  the  porch  and  the 
 altar  of  the  temple,  with  their  backs  to  the  temple 
 and  their  faces  to  the  east,  worshipping  the  sun 
 (Ezek.  viii.  1 6).  Josiah  had  before  this  taken 
 away  '  the  horses  that  the  kings  of  Judah  had 
 given  to  the  sun,  at  the  entering  in  of  the  house  of 
 the  Lord,'  and  had  '  burned  the  chariots  of  the 
 sun  with  fire'  (2  King.'j  xxiii.  11).  The  same  part 
 of  the  temple  is  perhaps  here  meant.  There  is 
 nothing  to  show  whether  these  were  images  or 
 living  horses.  The  horse  was  sacred  to  the  sun 
 among  the  Carthaginians,  but  the  worship  of  the 
 visible  sun  instead  of  an  image  looks  rather  like  a 
 Persian  or  an  Arab  custom. 
 
 b.  In  the  account  of  Josiah's  reform  we  read  of 
 the  abolition  of  the  worship  of  Baal,  the  sun, 
 the  moon,  Mazzaloth,  also  called  Mazzaroth  (Job 
 xx.xviii.  32),  which  we  hold  to  be  the  mansions  of 
 the  moon  [Astronomy],  and  all  the  host  of  heaven 
 (2  Kings  xxiii.  5).  Manasseh  is  related  to  have 
 served  'all  the  host  of  heaven'  (xxi.  3).  Jeremiah 
 speaks  of  '  the  houses  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  houses 
 of  the  kings  of  Judah,'  as  to  be  defiled,  'because 
 of  all  the  houses  upon  whose  roofs  they  have 
 burned  incense  unto  all  the  host  of  heaven,  and 
 have  poured  out  drink-offerings  unto  other  gods' 
 (Jer.  xix.  13).  In  this  prophet's  time  the  people 
 of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  among  other  abomina- 
 tions, made  cakes  for  *  the  queen  of  heaven,' 
 or  '  the  worship  of  heaven  ; '  a  different  form 
 justifying  the  latter  reading.     The  usual   reading 
 
 is  n3PD,  '  queen,'  which  the  LXX.  once  follows, 
 the  Vulg.  always ;  some  copies  give  n^NPDj  '  wor- 
 ship,' that  is  'a  deity  or  goddess.'  The  former 
 reading  seems  preferable,  and  the  context  in  two 
 passages  in  Jeremiah  shows  that  an  abstract  sense 
 is  not  admissible  (xliv.  17,  18,  19,  25).  In  Egypt, 
 the  remnant  that  fled  after  the  murder  of  Gedaliah 
 were  warned  by  this  prophet  to  abandon  those 
 idolatrous  practices  for  which  their  country  and 
 cities  had  been  desolated.  The  men,  conscious 
 that  their  wives  had  burned  incense  to  false  gods  in 
 F-gypt,  declared  that  they  would  certainly  burn 
 incense  and  pour  out  drink-offerings  to  the  queen 
 of  heaven,  as  they,  their  fathers,  their  kings,  and 
 their  princes  had  done  in  a  time  of  plenty,  assert- 
 ing that  since  they  had  left  off  these  practices  they 
 had  been  consiuned  by  the  sword  and  by  famine : 
 for  this  a  fresh  doom  was  pronounced  upon  them 
 (xliv.)  It  is  very  difficult  to  conjecture  what  god- 
 dess can  be  here  meant  :  Ashtoreth  would  suit, 
 but  is  never  mentioned  interchangeably ;  the  moon 
 must  be  rejected  for  the  same  reason. — Here  we 
 certainly  see  a  strong  resemblance  to  Arab  ido- 
 latry, which  was  wholly  composed  of  cosmic  wor- 
 ship and  of  fetishism,  and  in  which  the  mansions 
 of  the  moon  were  reverenced  on  account  of  their 
 connection  with  seasons  of  rain.  This  system  of 
 cosmic  worship  may  have  been  introduced  from 
 the  Nabathseans  or  Edomites  of  Petra,  from  the 
 Sabians,  or  from  other  Arabs  or  Chaldteans. 
 
 c.  Two  idols,  Gad  "52  or  Fortune,  and  Menee  ""30 
 
 or  Fate,  from  HJO,  '  he  or  it  divided,  assigned, 
 numbered,'  are  spoken  of  in  a  single  passage  in  the 
 
 later  part  of  Isaiah  (Ixv.  11).  Gesenius,  depend- 
 ing upon  the  theory  of  the  post-Isaian  authorship 
 of  the  later  chapters  of  the  prophet,  makes  these 
 idols  worshipped  by  the  Jews  in  Babylonia,  but  it 
 must  be  remarked  that  their  names  are  not  trace- 
 able in  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  mythology. 
 Gesenius  has,  however,  following  Pococke  {Spec. 
 Hist.    Arabuin,    p.    93),    compared    Menee    with 
 
 Manah  i'LLc>  a  goddess  of  the  pagan  Arabs,  wor- 
 shipped in  the  form  of  a  stone  between  Mek- 
 keh  and  El-Medeeneh  by  the  tribes  of  Hudheyl 
 and  Khuza'ah.  But  El-Beydawee,  though  deriv- 
 ing  the   name  of  this  idol  from   the  root  mana 
 
 A^,  'he  cut,'  supposes  it  was  thus  called  be- 
 cause victims  were  slain  upon  it  [Com.  in  Coran. 
 ed.  Fleischer,  p.  293).  This  meaning  certainly 
 seems  to  disturb  the  idea  that  the  two  idols  were 
 identical,  but  the  mention  of  the  sword  and 
 slaughter  as  punishments  of  the  idolaters  who 
 worsliipped  Gad  and  Menee  is  not  to  be  forgotten. 
 Gad  may  have  been  a  Canaanite  form  of  Baal,  if 
 we  are  to  judge  from  the  geographical  name  Baal- 
 gad  of  a  place  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Heraion 
 (Josh.  xi.  17;  xii.  7;  xiii.  5).  Perhaps  the  gram- 
 matical form  of  Menee  may  throw  some  light  upon 
 the  origin  of  this  idolatry.  The  worship  of  both 
 idols  resembles  that  of  the  cosmic  divinities  of  the 
 later  kings  of  Judah. 
 
 d.  In  Ezekiel's  vision  of  the  idolatries  of  Jerusa- 
 lem, he  beheld  a  chamber  of  imagery  in  the  temple 
 itself,  having  '  eveiy  form  of  creeping  things,  and 
 abominable  beasts,  and  [or  'even']  all  the  idols  of 
 the  house  of  Israel,  portrayed  upon  the  wall 
 round  about,'  and  seventy  Israelite  elders  offering 
 incense  (Ezek.  viii.  7"I2).  This  is  so  exact  a 
 description  of  an  Egyptian  sanctuary,  with  the 
 idols  depicted  upon  its  walls,  dimly-lighted,  and 
 filled  with  incense-offering  priests,  that  we  cannot 
 for  a  moment  doubt  that  these  Jews  derived  from 
 Egypt  their  fetishism,  for  such  this  special  worship 
 appears  mainly  if  not  wholly  to  have  been. 
 
 e.  In  the  same  vision  the  prophet  saw  women 
 weeping  for  Tammuz  (ver.  13,  14),  known  to  be 
 the  same  as  Adonis,  and  from  whom  the  fourth 
 month  of  the  Syrian  year  was  named.  This  wor- 
 ship was  probably  introduced  by  Ahaz  from  Syria. 
 
 f.  The  'image  of  jealousy,' nXJpn  ?DD,  spoken 
 
 of  in  the  same  passage,  which  was  placed  in  the 
 temple,  has  not  been  satisfactorily  explained.  The 
 meaning  may  only  be  that  it  was  an  image  of  a 
 false  god,  or  there  may  be  a  play  in  the  second 
 part  of  the  appellation  upon  the  proper  name.  We 
 cannot,  however,  suggest  any  name  that  might  be 
 thus  intended. 
 
 g.  The  brazen  serpent,  having  become  an  object 
 of  idolatrous  worship,  was  destroyed  by  Hezekiah 
 (2  Kings  xviii.  4). 
 
 h.  Molech-worship  was  not  only  celebrated  at 
 the  high  place  Solomon  had  made,  but  at  Topheth, 
 in  the  Valley  of  the  sons  of  Hinnom,  where  chil- 
 dren were  made  to  pass  through  the  fire  to  the 
 Ammonite  abomination.  This  place,  as  well  as 
 Solomon's  altars,  Josiah  defiled,  and  we  read  of  no 
 later  worship  of  Molech,  Chemosh,  and  Ashto- 
 reth. 
 
 The  new  population  placed  by  the  king  of 
 Assyria  in  the  cities  of  Samaria  adopted  a  strange 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 371 
 
 IDOLATRV 
 
 mixture  of  religions.  Terrified  at  the  destruction 
 by  lions  of  some  of  their  number,  they  petitioned 
 the  king  of  Assyria,  and  an  Israelite  jiriest  was 
 sent  to  them.  They  then  adopted  the  old  worship 
 at  high  places,  and  still  served  their  own  idols. 
 The  people  of  Babylon  made  Succoth-benoth,  the 
 Cuthites,  Nergal,  the  Hamathites,  Ashima,  the 
 Avites,  Nibhaz  and  Tartak,  and  the  people  of 
 Sepharvaim  burnt  their  children  to  their  native 
 gods,  Adrammelech  and  Anammelech.  Nergal  is 
 a  well-known  Babylonian  idol,  and  the  occurrence 
 of  the  element  '  melech'  (king)  in  the  names  of 
 the  Molechs  of  Sepharvaim  is  very  remarkable  (2 
 Kings  xvii.  24-41). 
 
 The  Babylonian  Exile  seems  to  have  purified  the 
 Jews  from  their  idolatrous  tendencies.  The  people 
 that  returned  did  indeed  in  many  cases  marry 
 strange  wives,  and  so  were  in  danger  of  falhng  into 
 idolatry.  The  post-exilian  prophets  speak  of  it  as 
 an  evil  of  the  past,  Zechariah  foretelling  the  time 
 when  the  very  names  of  the  false  gods  will  be  for- 
 gotten (xiii.  2).  In  Malachi  we  see  that  a  cold 
 formalism  was  already  the  national  sin.  How  this 
 great  change  was  wrought  does  not  appear.  Partly 
 no  doubt  it  was  due  to  the  pious  examples  of  Ezra 
 and  Nehemiah,  partly  perhaps  to  the  Persian  con- 
 tempt for  the  lower  kinds  of  idolatry,  which  insured 
 a  respect  for  the  Hebrew  religion  on  the  part  of 
 the  government,  partly  to  the  sight  of  the  fulfil- 
 ment of  God's  predicted  judgments  upon  the  ido- 
 latrous nations  which  the  Jews  had  either  sought 
 as  allies  or  feared  as  enemies. 
 
 Years  passed  by  and  the  names  of  the  idols  of 
 Canaan  had  been  forgotten,  when  the  Hebrews 
 were  assailed  by  a  new  danger.  Greek  idolatry 
 under  Alexander  and  his  successors  was  practised 
 throughout  the  civilized  world.  Some  place-hunt- 
 ing Jews  were  base  enough  to  adopt  it.  At  first 
 the  Greek  princes  who  ruled  Palestine  wisely  for- 
 bore to  interfere  with  the  Hebrew  religion.  The 
 politic  earlier  Ptolemies  even  encouraged  it,  but 
 when  the  country  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
 the  Seleucidse,  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  reversing  his 
 father's  policy  of  toleration,  seized  Jerusalem,  set 
 up  an  idol-altar  to  Jupiter  in  the  Temple  itself,  and 
 forbade  the  observance  of  the  Law.  Weakly  sup- 
 ported by  a  miserable  faction,  he  had  to  depend 
 wholly  upon  his  military  power.  The  Maccabsean 
 revolt,  small  in  its  beginning,  had  the  national  heart 
 on  its  side,  and  after  a  long  and  varied  struggle 
 achieved  more  than  the  nation  had  ever  before 
 effected  since  the  days  of  the  Judges.  Thencefor- 
 ward idolatry  was  to  the  Jew  the  religion  of  his 
 enemies,  and  naturally  made  no  perverts. 
 
 The  early  Christians  were  brought  into  contact 
 with  idolaters  when  the  Gospel  was  preached  among 
 the  Gentiles,  and  it  became  necessary  to  enact 
 regulations  for  preventing  scandal  by  their  being 
 involved  in  Pagan  practices,  when  joining  in  the 
 private  meals  and  festivities  of  the  heathen.  But 
 the  Gentile  converts  do  not  seem  to  have  been  in 
 any  danger  of  reverting  to  idolatry,  and  the  cruel 
 persecutions  they  underwent  did  not  tend  to  lead 
 them  back  to  a  religion  which  its  more  refined 
 votaries  despised.  It  is,  however,  not  impossible 
 that  many  who  had  been  originally  educated  as 
 idolaters  did  not,  on  professing  Christianity,  really 
 abandon  all  their  former  superstitions,  and  that 
 we  may  thus  explain  the  very  early  outbreak  of 
 many  customs  and  opinions  not  sanctioned  in  the 
 N.  T. 
 
 Two  subjects  remain  to  be  noticed  ;  the  different 
 Hebrew  terms  used  for  idols,  and  the  idolatrous 
 practices  mentioned  in  the  O.  T.  which  cannot 
 certainly  be  restricted  to  a  single  kind  of  false 
 worship. 
 
 It  would  be  unsuitable  to  the  present  article  to 
 give  a  lexicographical  examination  of  every  separate 
 term  connected  with  idolatry.  Our  main  objects 
 are  to  show  how  these  terms  indicate  the  feeling  of 
 the  believing  Hebrews  towards  idolaters,  and  what 
 particulars  they  afford  as  to  the  forms  and  mate- 
 rials of  idols. 
 
 I.   General  terms  of  doubtful  signification  : — 
 
 o-    ?vX,    eleel,   derived   from   the  unused  root 
 
 ppX,  and  so  meaning  vain  or  empty  ;  or  from  the 
 
 negative  7X)  but  this  is  very  doubtful  ;  or  else  as  a 
 
 diminutive,  a  meaning  we  are  disposed  to  prefer, 
 
 from  7X5   'god.'     The  difference  between  DM?i< 
 
 and  D  vvX  suggests  that  the  Hebrews  may  ha-ve 
 adopted  the  latter  term  in  place  of  the  former  when 
 speaking  of  false  gods.  The  Arabs  have  formed 
 the  name  Allah  for  the  true  God  by  a  slight  change 
 from  the  general  term  Ilah,  '  a  god'  or  '  idol' 
 (Lane's  Arabic  Lexicon,  bk.  i.  pp.  82,  83). 
 
 b-  Dv1^2,  comes  from  a  root  ppj,  signifying  '  he 
 
 or  it  rolled,'  from  which  are  derived  words  mean- 
 ing anything  circular,  dung,  etc.  The  Vulg.  ren- 
 ders it  so7-des,  sordes  idolonim.  It  occurs  in  the 
 Pentateuch,  there  and  elsewhere  with  words  ex- 
 pressing contempt.  In  Ezekiel  it  is  thus  used  of 
 the  idols  of  Egypt  :  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord  GoD  ;  I 
 
 will  also  destroy  the  idols  (D''^^),  and  cause  the 
 httle  idols  ([?]  D''^''^X)  to  cease  out  of  Noph'  (xxx. 
 13).  May  not  Dvvi  mean  scarabsei,  the  com- 
 monest of  Egyptian  idols  ?  The  sense  of  dung  is 
 appropriate  to  the  dung-beetle  ;  that  of  rolling  is 
 doubtful,  for,  if  the  meaning  of  the  verb  be  retained, 
 we  should,  in  this  form,  rather  expect  a  passive 
 sense,  'a  thing  rolled;'  but  it  may  be  observed 
 that  these  grammatical  rules  of  the  sense  of  deriva- 
 tives are  not  always  to  be  strictly  insisted  on,  for 
 Sidon,  jiT'^,  though  held  to  signify  '  the  place  of 
 
 fishing,'  is,  in  the  list  of  the  Noachians,  the  name 
 of  a  man,  '  the  fisherman,'  ' Kkum,  of  Philo  of 
 Byblus.  That  a  specially-applicable  word  is  used, 
 may  perhaps  be  conjectured  from  the  occurrence 
 
 of  D''^''^X,  which,  if  meaning  little  gods,  would 
 aptly  describe  the  pigmy  pteh-seker-hesar,  Ptah- 
 Sokari- Osiris,  of  Memphis.  Ezekiel  uses  the  term 
 C^I^J  of  the  idols  of  Egypt  which  the  Israelites 
 were  commanded  to  put  away  at  or  about  the  time 
 of  the  Exodus,  but  did  not,  and  seem  to  have  car- 
 ried into  the  Desert,  for  the  same  word  is  used, 
 unquahfied  by  the  mention  of  any  country,  of  those 
 worshipped  by  them  in  the  Desert  (xx.  7,  8,  16, 
 18,  24) ;  it  is,  however,  apparently,  employed  also 
 for  all  the  idols  worshipped  in  Canaan  by  the 
 Israelites  (ver.  31;  xxiii.  37).  Scarabrei  were  so 
 abundant  among  the  Egyptians  and  Phoenicians, 
 that  there  is  no  reason  why  they  may  not  have 
 been  employed  also  in  the  worship  of  the  Canaanite 
 false  gods  ;  but  it  cannot  be  safely  supposed,  with- 
 out further  evidence,  that  the  idols  of  Canaan  were 
 virtually  termed  scarabaei. 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 372 
 
 IDOLATRY 
 
 2.  General  terms  of  known  signification  : — 
 
 a.  pi<,  '  emptiness,'  or  'vanity,'  used  with  other 
 
 terms  of  like  signification  for  idols  and  idolatry  in 
 general.  Heliopolis  in  Egypt,  or  On,  JiX,  is 
 punctuated  pS  in  Ezek.  xxx.  17,  if  we  may  depend 
 
 upon  the  Masoretic  pointing,  on  account  of  its 
 idolatiy,  and  Beth-el  is  called  Beth-aven  in  Hosea 
 (iv.  15  ;  X.  5))  which  passages  could  not  be  cited 
 by  those  who  derive  the  golden  calves  from  Helio- 
 polis, as  that  city,  though  called  in  Egyptian  AN, 
 for  its  civil  name,  has  as  its  sacred  name,  derived 
 as  usual  from  that  of  the  local  idol,  '  the  abode  of 
 the  sun,'  HA-RA,  or,  as  some  read,  pa-ra. 
 
 b.  ppC,  '  an  abomination,'  used  of  idols  in  both 
 sing,  and  pi.     The  form  is  the  same  as  that  of 
 
 c.  nC*3,  'shame,'  hence  'an  idol,'  as  a  shameful 
 
 thing,  or  as  making  the  worshippers  ashamed,  or 
 as  connected  with  shameful  worship. 
 
 d.  nV/SO,  probably  meaning  a  fearful  or  hor- 
 rible thing,  is  a  term  by  which  the  idol  of  Maachah, 
 Asa's  grandmother,  or  mother,  is  designated  (i 
 Kings  XV.  13  ;  2  Chron.  xv.  16).  It  was  made  for 
 'a  grove,'  and  there  is  therefore  some  reason  in 
 the  idea  that  it  was  a  Priapic  image  [High  Places 
 and  Groves]  ;  but  it  is  not  impossible  that  the 
 Vulg.  translation,  in  the  second  place,  simulacrum 
 Priapi,  was  influenced  by  the  sound  of  the  He- 
 brew. 
 
 e.  nCX,  '  a  terror,'  is  a  like  teiTn,  used  in  the  pi. 
 
 D''fD''N,  for  idols  (Jer.  1.  38),  and  it  is  noticeable 
 
 that,  in  the  pi.,  it  is  also  the  name  of  a  primitive 
 Palestinian  people  destroyed  by  the  Moabites  (Gen. 
 xiv.  5;  Deut.  ii.  11).  As  idols  are  apparently 
 spoken  of  as  '  the  dead'  (Ps.  cvi.  28),  this  connec- 
 tion is  worth  noticing, 
 
 3.  Terms  indicating  the  form  of  idols  : — 
 
 ^-  /DD,  or  7DD,  'an  image'  or  'idol,'  of  un- 
 known derivation.  Gesenius  compares  ptJ'D ;  it 
 may  be  cognate  to  D?V.  It  is  impossible  to  assign 
 any  more  special  signification  to  it. 
 
 b-  uTii  literally  '  a  shadow,'  signifies  '  a  like- 
 ness,' 'an  image,'  and  hence  an  'idol'     It  is  pro- 
 
 jbably  represented  in  Arabic  by  ^Ju?,  '  an  idol,' 
 unless  this  is  related  to  7DD. 
 
 c.  yiyi,   nvy,  rq^iV,   the  second  in   pi.    only, 
 
 *  an  idol '  or  '  idols,'  from  the  root  2Vy,  '  he  or  it 
 
 laboured,  formed,  fashioned,  toiled  with  pain.' 
 Gesenius  supposes  these  appellations  to  indicate 
 that  idols  were  cut  or  carved. 
 
 d.  TVf,  'an  idol,'  from  the  root  "l^lV,  in  its  sense 
 
 of  forming,  or  possibly  from  "1^\*,  '  a  stone,'  but  we 
 have  found  no  evidence  in  favour  of  the  idea  that 
 sacred  stones  were  thus  designated. 
 
 e.  n22fD,  'a  pillar'  or  'statue,'  from  3^f3,  'he  or 
 
 it  set,  placed,'  used  of  the  stone  Jacob  set  up  at 
 Bethel  (Gen.  xxviii.  18,  22),  of  the  twelve  pillars 
 set  up  by  Moses  at  Sinai  (Exod.  xxiv.  4),  hut  also 
 used  of  idolatrous  statues,  as,  for  instance,  of  the 
 
 image  of  Baal  (2  Kings  iii.  2,  cf  x.  26).  In 
 Jer.  xliii.  13,  'the  pillars  [or  'statues']  of  Beth- 
 shemesh,'  or  Heliopolis,  in  Egypt,  which  were  to 
 be  broken  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  have  been  not  un- 
 reasonably conjectured  to  be  the  obelisks  which 
 were  numerous  at  that  ancient  city.  As  obelisks, 
 though  not  representing  any  divinity,  were  wor- 
 shipped, this,  in  the  sense  of  an  idolatrous  pillar, 
 is  a  very  fit  appellation,  but  it  might  as  well  desig- 
 nate the  statues  of  Heliopolis.  It  must  be  ob- 
 served that,  though  originally  applied  to  stone 
 pillars,  the  term  is  afterwards  used  for  wooden 
 images,  as  images  thus  called  are  said  to  have  been 
 burnt  (2  Kings  x.  26).  — DHSfD  is  applied  to  the 
 
 sacrificial  stone  set  np  by  Jacob  at  Bethel  on  his 
 return  (Gen.  xxxv.  14),  as  well  as  to  Absalom's 
 memorial-pillar  (2  Sam.  xviii.  iS). 
 
 /  □''JSn,  pi.  of  a  lost  sing.  jSn,  images,  con- 
 nected with  the  groves,  and  which  stood  upon  the 
 altar  of  Baal  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  4).  Gesenius  {T/ies. 
 s.v.)  explains  them  to  be  statues  of  the  sun,  citing 
 
 the  Phoenician  name  of  Baal,  [DPlPy^  ;  but  this  ex- 
 planation is  unsatisfactory,  as  we  find  in  Hebrew 
 
 geography  the  name  jion  ?y3,  which  Gesenius  him- 
 self considers  the  same  as  '  sacred  to  Jupiter  Am- 
 mon,'  whose  name  is  written  \S'0)^  in  )i?wX  N3,  the 
 
 name  of  Thebes,  and  referred  to  where  |iDS  (Jer. 
 
 xlvi.  25)  and  jlJOH  (Ezek.  xxx.  15)  are  used  for  the 
 
 '  multitude'  of  that  city  :  we  should,  therefore, 
 expect  to  find  D'^JDH,  or  b''JOX,  rather  than  D''JDn. 
 All  that  can  be  certainly  said  is  that  these  images 
 or  upright  objects  were  set  up  like  '  the  groves,'  but 
 it  may  be  conjectured  that  their  name  is  connected 
 with  that  of  khem,  the  Egyptian  god  of  produc- 
 tiveness, which  is  related  to  the  root  HDH,  from 
 which  the  word  under  consideration  is  held  to  be 
 derived. 
 
 g-  n''3b'ID  is  the  term  rendered  '  imagery'  in  the 
 
 A.  V.  in  the  description  by  Ezekiel  of  the  ''"nn 
 
 JT'SC'O,  or  '  chambers  of  imagery  (viii.  7-12).'    The 
 
 root  is  unused,  but  found  in  theChaldee  N3ti',  'he 
 
 or  it  looked  at,'  and  is  traceable  in  related  words. 
 The  exact  meaning  may  be  reasonably  inferred  from 
 the  description  of  the  idols  portrayed  upon  the  walls 
 of  these  chambers,  and  from  the  expression  pS 
 
 JT'StJ'O.  Lev.  xxvi.  i,   '  a  stone  pictured,'  that  is, 
 
 bearing  idolatrous  pictures.  Comp.  also  the  use  of 
 the  term  in  Prov.  xxv.  1 1,  '  apples  of  gold  in  chased 
 work  [?]  of  silver,'  like  the  inlaid  silver  in  brazen 
 vessels  of  this  period  (that  of  Hezekiah,  ver.  i), 
 brought  from  Nineveh,  and  now  in  the  British 
 Museum. 
 
 h.  D''D"in,  teraphim,  idolatrous  images  connected 
 
 with  magic,  but  not  known  to  have  been  wor- 
 shipped, used  in  the  patriarchal  period  by  those, 
 as  Laban,  who,  without  being  ignorant  of  trae  reli- 
 gion, yet  practised  corruptions,  afterwards  by  the 
 same  class  in  the  time  of  the  judges  and  kings,  and 
 by  the  Babylonians  in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
 The  derivation  is  doubtful,  but  we  are  disposed  to 
 think  the  name  is  not  Hebrew  or  Semitic,  but, 
 in  origin,  Egyptian  or  so-called  Turanian  of  Baby- 
 lonia, or  both. 
 
IDOLATRY 
 
 373 
 
 IDUM^A  OR  IDUMEA 
 
 4.  Terms  indicating  the  workmanship  of  idols  : — 
 
 a.  ?D3,  and  ?^D3,  or  ?''DQ.  the  latter  only  found 
 in  the  pi.,  'a  graven  image,'  from  7D2,  'he  or  it 
 
 cut  or  carved.'  It  properly  signifies  a  carved 
 wooden  image,  but  as  such  images  were  overlaid 
 with  plates  or  a  molten  coat  of  precious  metal,  it 
 is  sometimes  used  for  a  molten  image. 
 
 b.  TJDJ,  T]D3,  and  n2DD,  '  a  molten  image,' from 
 ^D3,  'he  or  it  poured,  poured  out,  cast.'  Un- 
 doubtedly these  images  were  made  of  molten  metal, 
 and  they  must  have  been  very  small  when  of  gold 
 or  silver,  unless  the  metal  were  a  mere  coating,  as 
 suggested  under  the  last  head,  or  the  idol  were 
 hollow.  As  the  graven  and  molten  images  are 
 constantly  mentioned  together,  it  may  be  reason- 
 ably supposed  that  they  were  usually  of  about  the 
 same  size.  This  subject  of  the  terms  connected 
 with  idolatry  has  been  carefully  treated  by  Mr.  Aldis 
 Wright  in  Dr.  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  art.  Idol, 
 Image. 
 
 We  may  now  speak  of  the  idolatrous  practices 
 mentioned  in  the  Bible  which  cannot  be  certainly 
 restricted  to  any  one  kind  of  false  worship. 
 
 We  have  no  minute  account  in  the  Bible  of  ido- 
 latrous temples.  The  high  places  were  indifferently 
 used  for  all  kmds  of  false  worship,  except  that  of 
 the  stars,  practised  under  the  later  kings  of  Judah. 
 They  were  originally  Canaanite,  and  were  upon 
 mountains  and  hills,  and  under  the  shade  of  trees. 
 The  star-worship  mentioned  above  was  rather  a 
 city-idolatry,  practised  upon  the  flat  roofs  of  houses. 
 
 Servants  or  slaves  of  temples  or  idols  are  men- 
 tioned under  the  term  ^Ip,  nti'lp,  and  there  can 
 
 be  no  doubt  that  their  service  consisted  in  such 
 practices  as  those  usual  in  Babylonia,  in  honour  of 
 Mylitta,  at  Aphaca  in  the  Lebanon,  and  at  Corinth. 
 The  ancient  Egyptians  were  apparently  not  guilty 
 of  this  very  evil  phase  of  idolatry.  The  Theban 
 priestesses  who  bore  among  the  Greeks  the  suspi- 
 cious name  of  concubines  of  Ammon,  were  women 
 of  royal  blood,  sought  in  marriage  by  kings. 
 
 The  Canaanite  sacrifices  seem  to  have  been 
 mainly  of  living  things,  though  libations  were  also 
 customary  (Jer.  vii.  18  ;  xliv.  19).  The  star-wor- 
 shippers made  cakes  and  poured  libations,  and  are 
 not  known  to  have  offered  sacrifices  of  living  things. 
 
 Some  personal  customs  of  idolaters  are  distinctly 
 mentioned  :  others  are  probably  referred  to  in  pro- 
 hibitory laws.  The  latter  are,  however,  to  be 
 veiy  cautiously  examined,  as  the  wide  range  of  our 
 information  on  ancient  idolatry  furnishes  examples 
 of  almost  all  supposed  customs  :  we  should  not, 
 therefore,  infer  that  any  one  is  forbidden  which  we 
 do  not  recognise  as  anciently  practised  in  Palestine 
 or  the  neighbouring  countries. 
 
 The  Caucasian  temhu,  apparently  a  Libyan 
 nation,  to  the  west  of  Egypt,  are  represented  on 
 the  Egyptian  monuments  as  tattooed  with  at  least 
 one  idolatrous  symbol,  the  spindle  of  Neith,  the 
 goddess  of  Sais.  Cuttings  and  tattooed  marks 
 were  forbidden  in  the  Law  (Lev.  xix.  28),  in  one 
 place  as  superstitions  of  mourning  (xxi.  5).  Among 
 the  Egyptians  such  practices  were  not  connected 
 with  funerals,  though  they  may  have  been  among 
 the  Shepherds.  Partial  shaving  of  the  head  and 
 beard  (/.  c.)  was  also  prohibited.  The  Egyptians 
 shaved  the  head  in  mouming,  but  as  their  heads 
 were  always  shaven  it  is  difficult  to  understand  1 
 
 what  was  meant  by  this  custom  unless  it  was  a  relic 
 of  an  earlier  condition  of  society.  It  has  been 
 thought  that  the  separation  of  clean  and  unclean 
 anim'als  was  to  prevent  the  eating  of  heathen  sacri- 
 fices, but  although  unclean  animals  were  sacrificed 
 and  eaten  by  idolaters  (Is.  Ixvi.  17),  clean  animals 
 were  also  thus  sacrificed  and  eaten  in  Egypt  and 
 Palestine. 
 
 In  conclusion,  we  may  remark  that  idolatry,  so 
 far  as  it  was  practised  by  the  Hebrews,  seems  to 
 separate  itself  into  three  main  divisions  :  the  old 
 corrupt  worship  of  ancestors,  connected  witli 
 magical  rites  ;  the  Canaanite  worship  of  Baal  and 
 Ashtoreth,  in  various  forms  ;  and,  apparently,  star- 
 worship,  derived  either  from  Arabia  or  Chaldjea, 
 besides  many  systems  or  practices  less  generally 
 followed,  as  that  of  the  chambers  of  imagery. 
 
 The  most  moderate  view  of  the  various  kinds  of 
 idolatry  of  Canaan  and  the  neighbouring  countries 
 shows  the  wisdom  of  the  strict  prohibitions  we 
 read  in  the  Law,  and  the  strong  terms  of  reproba- 
 tion used  by  the  prophets,  who  liken  it  to  the 
 deepest  moral  corruption.  The  debasing  supersti- 
 tions of  the  Hindoos,  and  the  savage  rites  of  the 
 Dahomans  and  Ashantees,  were  outdone  in  the 
 homes  of  ancient  civilization,  in  Egypt  and  Baby- 
 lonia, the  parents  of  science,  in  Tyre  and  Sidon, 
 the  queens  of  primitive  commerce.  No  wonder 
 that  the  imitation  of  these  abominations,  for  which 
 so  many  fair  cities  now  lie  in  ruins,  was  forbidden 
 under  penalty  of  God's  heaviest  displeasure,  and 
 that  the  corrupt  Israelites  suffered  almost  the  doom 
 which  they  had  been  commanded  to  execute  upon 
 the  nations  of  Canaan. 
 
 The  lesson  taught  by  the  Biblical  condemnation 
 of  idolatry  seems  to  be  that  all  worship  of  what  is 
 not  God  is  to  be  strictly  avoided,  and  anything 
 tending  thereto  unflinchingly  put  away.  The  com- 
 mentary of  histoiy  is  that  trae  religion  cannot  exist 
 when  overlaid  with  corruptions,  and  that  the  per- 
 versions of  heathenism  are  surely  followed  by  its 
 fierce  persecutions. — R.  S.  P. 
 
 IDUM.^A  or  IDUMEA  (TSou/xct/a),  the  Greek 
 form  of  the  Hebrew  name  DHN,  Edom,  as  found 
 
 in  the  Septuagint,  the  N.  T.,  and  Josephus. 
 
 I .  Origin  of  the  Name.  — The  meaning  and  origin 
 of  the  name  Edom  are  given  in  Gen.  xxv.  30  . 
 '  And  Esau  said  to  Jacob,  _  Feed  me,  I  pray 
 thee,  with  that  red  red  (n^H  DhXH  OhSlTp),  for 
 
 I  am  faint  ;  therefore  was  his  name  called  Red'' 
 (Edom  ;  DiTX).     In  the  East  it  has  always  been 
 
 usual  for  a  chief  either  to  give  his  name  to  the 
 country  which  he  conquers,  or  over  which  he  rules, 
 or  to  take  a  name  from  it.  Esau,  during  the  life 
 of  his  father,  seized  the  mountainous  region  occu- 
 pied by  the  Horites.  He  had  two  names  ;  but 
 one  of  them  was  peculiarly  applicable  to  the  newly 
 acquired  territory.  The  mountains  of  Seir  were 
 remarkable  for  their  7-eddish  colour  ;  hence,  doubt- 
 less, the  name  Edom  'red,'  was  given  to  them. 
 Esau  is  called  'the  father  of  Edom'  (DHN  ''3S), 
 giving  to  it  his  name  and  ruling  over  it  (Gen. 
 xxxvi.  43)  ;  and  the  country  is  termed  DIIX  mC, 
 'the  field  of  Edom'  (Gen.  xxxii.  3  ;  Judg.  v.  4)  ; 
 and  more  commonly  DHS  pX,  '  the  land  of 
 Edom'  (Gen.  xxxvi.  16,  etc.)  In  a  very  few 
 cases  it  is  also  called  'the  mount  of  Esau,'  IK'J?  "IH 
 (Obad.  8,  9,  19).  In  the  Septuagint  the  Hebrew 
 phrase  Eretz-Edom  is  commonly  rendered  'I5oi'- 
 
IDUM^A  OR  IDUMEA 
 
 374 
 
 IDUMEA  OR  IDUMEA 
 
 fj.ala  ;  and  this  is  the  word  uniformly  used  in  the 
 Apocrypha  and  in  classic  authors,  and  it  is  hke- 
 wise  the  name  found  in  Mark  iii.  8,  the  only  place 
 in  which  Idumeea  is  mentioned  in  the  N.  T. 
 The  Septuagint  has  occasionally  'ESci^  instead  of 
 'Idovfiaia.  The  Gentile  noun  is  Edovii,  "'J^^N, 
 'an  Edomite'  (Deut.  xxiii.  8  [7]);  but  the  in- 
 habitants as  a  whole  are  called  Edom  (Num.  xx. 
 20),  which  is  perhaps  a  figurative  expression,  as  we 
 say  '  England  conquered.'  The  Edomites  were  also 
 called  dnX  "'J3,  'children  of  Edom'  (Ps.  cxxxvii. 
 7),  and  "S"n2,  '  daughter  of  Edom'  (Lam.  iv.  21). 
 
 The  original  name  of  the  country  was  Jlloiint 
 Seir,  I'lyb'  "in  ;  and  it  was  probably  so  called  from 
 Seir,  the  progenitor  of  the  Horites  (Gen.  xiv.  6  ; 
 xxxvi.  20-22)  ;  though  the  signification  of  this 
 name,  'rugged,'  may  have  been  the  cause  of  its 
 adoption,  as  the  mountains  are  singularly  rough 
 and  rugged.  The  name  Seir  continued  to  be  ap- 
 plied to  Edom  after  its  occupation  by  the  descen- 
 dants of  Esau,  and  even  down  to  the  close  of  the 
 O.'T.  history  (see  Josh.  xi.  17;  2  Chron.  xx.  10; 
 Ezek.  XXV.  8,  etc.)  The  aborigines  were  called 
 Horites  (^"IPI ;  Sept.  XoppaLoi  ;  Gen.  xiv.  6)  ;  that 
 is,  'Troglodytes'  or  'cave-dwellers,'  from  the 
 nature  of  their  habitations  [Horites].  The  moun- 
 tains of  Edom,  as  all  travellers  know,  are  filled  with 
 caves  and  grottos  hewn  in  the  soft  sandstone  strata. 
 
 2.  Situatio7i  and  boundaries. — Edom  proper,  or 
 IduniEea,  is  situated  on  the  south-eastern  border  of 
 Palestine,  extending  from  it  to  the  northern  ex- 
 tremity of  the  Elanitic  Gulf.  It  was  bounded  on 
 the  west  by  the  great  valley  of  Arabah  ;  on  the 
 south  by  a  line  drawn  due  east  from  the  modern 
 fortress  of  Akabah ;  on  the  east  by  the  desert  of 
 Arabia ;  and  on  the  north  by  the  ancient  kingdom 
 of  Moab.  Its  length  from  north  to  south  was 
 about  100  miles,  and  its  breadth  averaged  20. 
 These  boundaries  are  nowhere  directly  defined, 
 but  we  can  ascertain  them  from  various  incidental 
 references  in  Scripture.  When  the  Israelites  en- 
 camped at  Kadesh-barnea  they  were  close  to  the 
 border  of  Edom  (Num.  xx.),  and  Mount  Hor  is 
 said  to  be  within  its  border  (xxxiii.  37).  Hence, 
 as  Kadesh  was  situated  in  the  valley  of  Arabah, 
 and  as  Mount  Hor  is  a  few  miles  to  the  east  of  it, 
 we  conclude  that  the  Arabah  is  the  western  bound- 
 ary. The  Israelites  asked,  but  were  refused,  a 
 passage  through  either  Edom  or  Moab,  so  as  to 
 get  direct  from  Kadesh  to  the  east  side  of  the 
 Jordan  (Num.  xx.  14-20;  Judg.  xi.  17,  18).  In 
 consequence  of  this  refusal  they  were  obliged  to 
 march  south  along  the  Arabah  to  Ezion-geber  and 
 thence  eastward  by  the  wilderness  round  the  terri- 
 tories of  Edom  and  Moab  (Id.  with  Num.  xxi.  4). 
 Hence  we  conclude  that  Edom  and  Moab  occupied 
 the  entire  region  along  the  east  side  of  the  valley 
 of  Arabah,  from  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  Elanitic 
 Gulf.  Edom  was  wholly  a  mountainous  country, 
 as  may  be  inferred  from  the  names  given  to  it  in 
 the  Bible  and  by  ancient  writers  (Deut.  i.  2 ;  ii.  5  ; 
 Joseph.  Aniiq.  ii.  i,  2;  Euseb.  Onomast.  s.  v. 
 Jdumcea).  The  foot  of  the  mountain  range  there- 
 fore may  be  regarded  as  marking  its  eastern 
 border.  On  the  north  it  appears  to  have  been 
 separated  from  Moa'^  by  the  '  brook  Zered '  (Deut. 
 w.  13,  14,  18  ;  Num.  xxi.  12),  which  is  probably 
 identical  with  the  modern  Wady  el-Ahsy.  These 
 views  are  corroborated  by  other  and  independent 
 testimony.  In  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  the  word 
 Gabla  is  substituted  for  Seir  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  2; 
 
 and  Eusebius  and  Jerome  state  that  Idumsea  was 
 in  their  time  called  Gebalene,  which  is  a  Greek 
 corruption  of  the  Hebrew  Gcbal,  '  mountains ' 
 (Oiicmiast.  id.  et  s.  v.  Seir),  and  is  retained  to  this 
 
 day   in   the   Arabic  form    jfebdl,    Jljcs-.       The 
 
 modern  province  of  Jebal  is  bounded  on  the  west 
 by  the  Arabah,  and  on  the  north  by  Wady  el-Ahsy 
 (Robinson,  JS.  J\.  ii.  154;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  in 
 Syria,  p.  410).  We  may  safely  conclude  from  this 
 that  the  ancient  province  had  the  same  boundaries 
 as  it  had  the  same  name. 
 
 The  Idumcea  of  Josephus  and  the  classic  authors 
 was  sometimes  made  to  include  a  much  more  ex- 
 tensive region,  for  reasons  which  will  appear  in  the 
 historical  sketch.  Josephus  divides  Idumaea  into 
 two  provinces,  Gobolitis  and  Amalekitis  {Antiq.  ii. 
 I,  2).  The  former  embraced  Idumtea  proper, 
 being  identical,  as  the  name  would  indicate,  with 
 '' Aloitnt  Seir;'  the  other  embraced  a  portion  of 
 southern  Palestine  with  the  desert  plain  south  of 
 it,  which  was  originally  occupied  by  the  Amalekitcs 
 (Num.  xiii.  29),  and  subsequently,  as  we  shall  see, 
 by  the  Edomites.  Pliny  places  Idumasa  to  the 
 south  of  Palestine,  bordering  upon  Egypt  (//.  A^. 
 V.  14).  Strabo  (xvi.  2.  36,  p.  760)  states  that  the 
 Idumseans  were  originally  Nabatheans,  but  being 
 driven  out  thence,  they  joined  themselves  to  the 
 Jews. 
 
 3.  History.— The  first  mention  of  Mount  Seir  is 
 in  Gen.  xiv.  6,  where  the  confederate  kings  are 
 said  to  have  smitten  the  '  Horites  in  their  Mount 
 Seir.'  These  Horites  appear  to  have  been  a  tribe 
 of  the  gigantic  aborigines  of  Western  Asia,  so 
 called  from  their  dwelling  in  caves  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
 20-30).  They  were  a  pastoral  people,  divided  into 
 tribes  like  the  modern  Bedawin,  having  independent 
 
 chiefs  called  Alluf  (f]"l?X,  ver.  29).  Esau's  marri- 
 age with  the  daughters  of  Canaan  alienated  him 
 from  his  parents,  and  he  then  obtained  a  settle- 
 ment among  the  Horites,  where  he  had  already 
 acquired  power  and  wealth  at  the  time  of  Jacob's 
 return  from  Padan-aram  (Gen.  xxvii.  46).  Pro- 
 bably his  close  alliance  with  Ishmael  tended  to  in- 
 crease his  influence  in  his  adopted  country  (xxviii. 
 9;  xxxii.  3,  seq.)  Though  then  established  in 
 Edom,  Esau  had  still  some  part  of  his  flocks  in 
 Western  Palestine  in  connection  with  those  of  his 
 father ;  but  on  the  return  of  Jacob  he  removed  all 
 his  property  from  Canaan  and  dwelt  in  Mount 
 Seir  (xxxvi.  6-8).  He  gradually  subdued  and 
 finally  exterminated  the  Horites  (Deut.  ii.  12,  22), 
 and  a  distinct  tribe  of  his  descendants,  the  Amale- 
 kitcs, leaving  Edom,  took  possession  of  the  desert 
 plateaus  south  of  Canaan  (Gen.  xxxvi.  12  ;  Exod. 
 viii.  14,  seq.)  The  earliest  form  of  government 
 among  the  Edomites  was,  like  that  of  the  Horites, 
 by  chiefs  (in  the  A.  V.  rendered  'Dukes,'  but 
 manifestly  the  same  as  the  modern  Arab  s/ieiklis), 
 exercising  independent  authority  over  distinct 
 tribes  (Gen.  xxxvi.  15-19).  It  appears,  however, 
 that  the  various  tribes  were,  at  least  in  times  or 
 general  war,  united  under  one  leader,  to  whom  the 
 
 title  of  king  (1?D)  was  given.  The  names  of 
 eight  of  these  kings  are  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxvi. 
 31-39,  who  are  said  to  have  reigned  in  Edom  'be- 
 fore there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of 
 Israel,'  that  is  apparently  before  the  time  of 
 Moses  (see  Deut.  xxxiii.  5;  Exod.  xviii.  16-19). 
 Most  of  the  large  nomad  tribes  of  Arabia  hase 
 
IBUMiEA  OR  IDUMEA 
 
 375 
 
 JDUMA*;A  or  IDUMEA 
 
 now  an  acknowledged  chief,  who  is  styled  Emir, 
 and  who  takes  the  lead  in  any  great  emergency ; 
 while  each  division  of  the  tribe  enjoys  independ- 
 ence under  its  own  sheikh  on  all  ordinary  occasions. 
 Such  would  seem  to  have  been  the  case  with  the 
 Edomites,  and  this  affords  an  easy  solution  of  the 
 apparent  confusion  ui  the  account  given  by  Moses, 
 Gen.  xxxvi.  31-43  ;  and  again  in  Exod.  xv.  15, 
 where  it  is  said  '  The  dukes  of  Edom  shall  be 
 amazed,'  and  Judg.  xi.  17,  where  Moses  is  repre- 
 sented as  having  sent  '  messengers  from  Kadesh 
 unto  the  Z'/«^of  Edom.' 
 
 Though  the  Israehtes  and  Edomites  were  closely 
 related,  and  though  the  former  were  commanded 
 'not  to  abhor  an  Edomite  for  he  is  thy  brother' 
 (Deut.  xxiii.  7),  yet  the  bitterest  enmity  appears 
 to  have  existed  between  them  at  every  period  of 
 their  history.  When  the  Israelites  asked  permis- 
 sion to  pass  through  the  territory  of  Edom  on  their 
 way  to  Canaan,  they  were  rudely  refused.  For 
 400  years  after  that  e^'ent  the  histoiy  of  Edom  is  a 
 blank.  The  country  was  attacked  by  Saul  with 
 partial  success  \\  Sam.  xiv.  47).  A  few  years  later 
 David  overthrew  the  Edomites  in  the  '  valley  of 
 Salt,'  at  the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea 
 (Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  109),  and  put  garrisons  in 
 their  cities  (2  Sam.  viii.  14).  Solomon  created  a 
 naval  station  at  Ezion-geber  on  the  Elanitic  Gulf, 
 from  whence  his  ships  went  to  India  and  Eastern 
 Africa  (i  Kings  ix.  26;  2  Chron.  viii.  iS).  An 
 attempt  was  made  by  a  native  prince  called  Ha- 
 dad  to  regain  the  independence  of  Edom  in  the 
 time  of  Solomon,  but  it  was  unsuccessful  ( i  Kings 
 xi.  14,  seq.)  The  Edomites  were  subject  to 
 Israel  until  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat,  when  they 
 joined  Ammon  and  Moab  in  a  warlike  expedition, 
 but  were  miraculously  defeated  in  the  valley  of 
 Berachah  (2  Chron.  xx.  21).  They  subsequently 
 revolted,  elected  a  king,  and  asserted  their  inde- 
 pendence ;  and  though  they  were  defeated  with 
 terrible  slaughter  by  Amaziah  (2  Kings  xiv.  7  ;  2 
 Chron.  xxv.  11,  12),  the  Israelites  wei'e  never  able 
 afterwards  completely  to  subdue  them  (xxviii.  17). 
 Rezin,  king  of  Syria,  expelled  the  Jews  from  Elath, 
 which  was  thenceforth  occupied  by  the  Edomites 
 (2  Kings  xvi.  6,  where  for  Syrians,  D''D1"I5!{,  we 
 ought  to  read  Edomites  Q^DHX,  De  Rossi,  Varia 
 Lec/iones,  ii.  247).  During  the  decline  of  the 
 Jewish  power  and  wars  of  Judah  and  Israel  the 
 Edomites  gradually  enlarged  their  possessions. 
 When  Nebuchadnezzar  besieged  Jerusalem  the 
 Edomites  joined  him  and  took  an  active  part  in 
 the  plunder  and  slaughter  which  followed.  Their 
 cruelty  at  that  time  is  specially  referred  to  in  Ps. 
 cxxxvii.,  and  was  the  chief  cause  of  those  dreadful 
 prophetic  curses  which  have  since  been  executed 
 upon  their  country  (Jer.  xlix.  17  ;  Lam.  iv.  21  ; 
 Ezek.  xxv.  13,  14;  Obad.  10-21).  Probably  as  a 
 reward  for  the  assistance  afforded  by  them  to  the 
 Chaldeans,  the  Edomites  were  permitted  to  settle 
 in  southern  Palestine  and  in  the  country  lying 
 between  it  and  the  borders  of  Egypt.  The  name 
 Idumasa  was  now  given  to  the  whole  countiy,  from 
 the  valley  of  Arabah  to  the  Mediterranean  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  v.  I,  22;  Strabo  xvi.  2),  and  from  Eleu- 
 theropolis  to  Elath  (Jerome,  Comment,  in  Obad.) 
 Hence  arose  the  mistakes  of  Roman  writers,  who 
 sometimes  give  the  name  Idumeea  to  all  Palestine, 
 and  even  call  the  Jews  Idumseans  (Virgil,  Georg. 
 iii.  12;  Juven.  viii.  160). 
 
 While  the  Edomites  thus  extended  their  conquests 
 
 westward  they  were  driven  out  of  their  own  country 
 by  the  Nabatheans  [Nabatheans],  who,  leaving  the 
 nomad  habits  of  their  ancestors,  settled  down  amid 
 the  mountains  of  Edom,  engaged  in  commerce, 
 and  founded  the  little  kingdom  of  Arabia  Petra-a. 
 Some  of  their  monarchs  took  the  name  Aretas  (2 
 Maccab.  v.  8  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  I.  2).  One  ot 
 them  was  that  Aretas  whose  daughter  Herod 
 Antipas  married  (Matt.  xiv.  3,  4)  ;  and  it  was  the 
 same  king  of  Arabia  who  captured  Damascus,  and 
 held  it  at  the  time  of  Paul's  conversion  (Acts  ix. 
 25  ;  2  Cor.  xi.  32).  Idumaea  was  taken  by  the 
 Romans  in  A.  D.  105;  and  under  their  paternal 
 government  the  enterprising  inhabitants  increased 
 greatly  in  wealth  and  power.  A  lucrative  trans- 
 port trade  between  India,  Persia,  and  the  Levant, 
 was  in  their  hands.  Roads  were  constructed 
 across  the  desert  of  Arabia,  through  the  defiles  of 
 Edom,  and  westward  and  northward  to  the  Medi- 
 terranean and  Palestine.  The  magnificent  rock- 
 temples,  palaces,  and  tombs  of  Petra  were  then 
 constructed,  which  still  continue  to  be  the  wonder 
 and  admiration  of  Eastern  travellers.  They  are 
 not  the  works  of  the  Edomites,  but  of  the  descend- 
 ants of  Ncbaioth,  Ishmael's  oldest  son  and  Esau's 
 brother-in-law  (Gen.  xxv.  13  ;  xxxvi.  3  ;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  i.   12.  4;  Diodor.  Sic.  19). 
 
 On  the  revival  of  Jewish  power  under  the  As- 
 moneans,  that  part  of  southern  Palestine  to  which 
 the  name  Idumrea  had  been  given  by  classic  writers 
 was  seized,  and  the  inhabitants  compelled  to  con- 
 form to  Jewish  law.  The  country  was  governed 
 by  Jewish  prefects,  and  one  of  these,  an  Idumtean 
 by  birth,  became  procurator  of  Judrea,  and  his  son 
 was  Herod  the  Great,  '  king  of  the  Jews'  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xii.  8.  6  ;  xiii.  9.  2  ;  xiv.  I.  3  and  8  ;  xv. 
 7.  9  ;  xvii.  II.  4). 
 
 In  the  first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  Edom 
 was  included  in  the  province  oi  Pala-slina  Tertia, 
 of  which  Petra  was  metropolis  (S.  Paulo,  Geogr. 
 Sac.  p.  307 ;  Reland,  Pal.  218).  After  the  Moham- 
 medan conquest  its  commercial  importance  declined, 
 its  flourishing  port  and  inland  cities  fell  to  ruin. 
 The  Mohammedans  were  the  instruments  by  which 
 the  fearful  predictions  of  Scripture  were  fulfilled. 
 The  Crusaders  made  several  expeditions  to  Edom, 
 penetrating  it  as  far  as  to  Petra,  to  which  they  gave 
 the  name  '  Valley  of  Moses  '  {Gesta  Dei  per  Fran- 
 cos, pp.  518,  555,  etc.),  a  name  still  existing  in  the 
 Arabic  form,  Wady  Miisa.  On  a  commanding 
 hill,  some  twelve  miles  north  of  Petra,  they  built  a 
 fortress,  and  called  it  Mans  Regalis ;  its  modern 
 name  is  Shobek  (/(/.  p.  611).  The  Crusaders  oc- 
 cupied and  fortified  Kerak,  the  ancient  Kir  Moab, 
 and  raised  it  to  the  dignity  of  an  episcopal  see,  under 
 the  impression  that  it  was  Petra  {Id.  ]ip.  812,  8S5, 
 1 1 19).  From  the  age  of  the  crusaders  until  the 
 present  century  nothing  was  known  of  Idumasa. 
 No  traveller  had  passed  through  it,  and  as  a  coun- 
 try it  had  disappeared  from  history.  Volney  heard 
 some  vague  reports  of  its  wonders  from  Arabs. 
 Seetzen  also  heard  much  of  it  in  the  year  1S06,  but 
 he  was  unable  to  enter  it.  Burckhardt  was  the 
 first  to  traverse  the  country.  In  1S12  he  travelled 
 from  Kerak  south  by  Shobek  to  Petra  ( Trav.  in 
 Syria,  pp.  377,  sq.;  Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  165). 
 
 4.  Physical  Geography. — Idumiea  embraces  a 
 section  of  a  broad  mountain  range,  extending  in 
 breadth  from  the  valley  of  Arabah  to  the  desert 
 plateau  of  Arabia.  'Along  the  base  of  the  range 
 on  the  side  of  the  Arabah,  are  low  calcareous  hills. 
 
IDUM^A  OR  IDUMEA 
 
 376 
 
 IGDALIAH 
 
 To  these  succeed  lofty  masses  of  igneous  rock, 
 chiefly  ]3orphyry ;  over  which  lies  the  red  and 
 variegated  sandstone  in  irregular  ridges  and  abrupt 
 cliffs,  broken  by  deep  and  wild  ravines.  The  latter 
 strata  give  the  mountains  their  most  striking 
 features'  {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  i.  44).  'The 
 first  thing  that  struck  me,'  says  Stanley,  'in  turn- 
 ing out  of  the  Arabah  up  the  defiles  that  lead  to 
 Petra  was,  that  we  had  suddenly  left  the  Desert. 
 Instead  of  the  absolute  nakedness  of  the  Sinaitic 
 valleys,  we  found  ourselves  walking  on  grass, 
 sprinkled  with  flowers,  and  the  level  platforms  on 
 each  side  were  filled  with  sprouting  com  ;  and  this 
 continues  through  the  whole  descent  to  Petra, 
 and  in  Petra  itself.  The  next  peculiarity  was 
 when,  after  having  left  the  summit  of  the  pass,  or 
 after  descending  from  Mount  Hor,  we  found  our- 
 selves insensibly  encircled  with  rocks  of  deepening 
 and  deepening  red.  Red,  indeed,  even  from  a  dis- 
 tance, the  mountains  of  '  red '  Edom  appear,  but 
 not  more  so  than  the  granite  of  Sinai ;  and  it  is 
 not  till  one  is  actually  in  the  midst  of  them  that  this 
 red  becomes  crimson,  and  that  the  wonder  of  the 
 Petra  colours  fully  displays  itself  [S.  and  P.,  p. 
 88).  The  ravines  which  intersect  these  sandstone 
 mountains  are  very  remarkable.  Take  them  as  a 
 whole,  there  is  nothing  like  them  in  the  world, 
 especially  those  near  Petra.  '  You  descend  from 
 wide  downs    .     .     .     and  before  you  opens  a  deep 
 
 lie  ill  Iduaij;a. 
 
 cleft  t)etween  rocks  of  red  sandstone  rising  perpen- 
 dicularly to  the  height  of  one,  two,  or  three  hun- 
 dred feet.  This  is  the  Sik.  .  .  .  Follow  me 
 then  down  this  magnificent  gorge — the  most  mag- 
 nificent, beyond  all  doubt,  which  I  have  ever  be- 
 held. The  rocks  are  almost  precipitous,  or  rather 
 they  would  be,  if  they  did  not,  like  their  brethren 
 in  all  this  region,  overlap,  and  crumble,  and  crack, 
 as  if  they  would  crash  over  you'  {/d.  p.  90).  Such 
 are  the  ravines  of  Idumrea,  and  the  dark  openings 
 of  the  numerous  tombs  and  grottos  which  dot  their 
 sides;  and  the  sculptured  fajades  here  and  there 
 
 hewn  out  in  their  gorgeously  coloured  cliffs,  add 
 vastly  to  their  picturesque  grandeur.  The  average 
 elevation  of  the  sandstone  range  is  about  2000  feet. 
 Immediately  on  its  eastern  side,  and  indeed  so 
 close  to  it  as  to  make  up  part  of  one  great  range,  is 
 a  parallel  ridge  of  limestone,  attaining  a  somewhat 
 higher  elevation,  and  extending  unbroken  far  to 
 the  north  and  south.  The  latter  sinks  with  a  gentle 
 slope  into  the  desert  of  Arabia.  The  deep  valleys, 
 and  the  little  terraces  along  the  mountain  sides, 
 and  the  broad  downs  upon  their  summits,  are  co- 
 vered with  rich  soil,  in  which  trees,  shrubs,  and 
 flowers  grow  luxuriantly.  All  this  proves  how 
 minutely  accurate  were  the  statements  contained  in 
 Isaac's  blessing  to  Esau — '  Thy  dwelling  shall  be 
 the  fatness  of  the  earth,  and  of  the  dew  of  heaven 
 from  above'  (Gen.  xxvii.  39). 
 
 5.  Present  State  of  the  Country. — Idumaea,  once 
 so  rich  in  its  flocks,  so  strong  in  its  fortresses 
 and  rock-hewn  cities,  so  extensive  in  its  commer- 
 cial relations,  so  renowned  for  the  architectural 
 splendour  of  its  temples  and  palaces — is  now  a  de- 
 serted and  desolate  wilderness.  Its  whole  popu- 
 lation is  contained  in  some  three  or  four  miserable 
 villages,  no  merchant  would  now  dare  to  enter  its 
 borders,  its  highways  are  untrodden,  its  cities  are 
 all  in  ruins.  The  predictions  of  God's  word  have 
 been  fulfilled  to  the  very  letter,  'Thorns  shall 
 come  up  in  her  palaces,  nettles,  and  brambles  in 
 the  fortresses  thereof.  ,  .  .  When  the  whole  earth 
 rejoiceth  I  will  make  thee  desolate.  .  .  .  Thou 
 shalt  be  desolate,  O  Mount  Seir,  and  all  Idumea, 
 even  all  of  it.  .  .  .  Edom  shall  be  a  desolation  ; 
 every  one  that  goeth  by  it  shall  be  astonished'  (Is. 
 xxxiv.  13  ;  Exek.  xxxv.  14  ;  Jer.  xlix.  17).  Idu- 
 maea  is  now  divided  into  two  districts,  Jebdl,  in- 
 cluding the  northern  section  as  far  as  Wady  el- 
 Ghuweir,  and  Esh-sherah,  embracing  the  southern 
 part  (Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria,  p.  410  ;  Ro- 
 binson, B.  P.  ii.  154).  The  site  of  the  ancient 
 capital  Bozrah  is  now  marked  by  the  small  village 
 of  Busaireh,  and  Petra,  the  Nabathean  capital,  is 
 well  known  as  Wady  Musa. 
 
 The  following  works  may  be  consulted  on  Idu- 
 maea.  For  its  ancient  geography — Reland's  Pal- 
 (Tstina;  Islichzoiis,  Dissert,  de  Ant.  Idumiror.  Hist.; 
 Forster's  Geography  of  Arabia  ;  Ritter's  Palastina 
 7ind  Syrien.  For  its  history  and  commerce — -Vin- 
 cent's Comme?-ce  a7id  A'avigation  of  the  Ancients, 
 vol.  ii.  For  modern  geography — the  travels  of 
 Burckhardt,  Laborde,  Wilson,  Robinson,  Stanley, 
 and  Handbook  for  S.  and  P. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 IGAL(^W^  Sept.  Vat.  'IXadX;  Alex.  'l7dX). 
 
 I.  One  of  the  twelve  spies  sent  by  Moses  to  explore 
 the  land  of  Canaan.  He  is  described  as  the  son  of 
 Joseph,  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar,  Num.  xiii.  7. 
 
 2.  One  of  David's  'mighty  men,'  said  in  2  Sam. 
 xxiii.  36  to  be  the  son  of  Nathan  of  Zobah  {VaaXvlh% 
 Na^ai'd) ;  in  the  parallel  passage,  i  Chron.  xi.  38,  we 
 find  'Joel  the  i5;v/'/^i?r  of  Nathan ;'  Sept.  Alex.  'IwrjX 
 dde\(pbs  Nadav  ;  Vat.  vl6s.—].  E.  R. 
 
 IGDALIAH  (ilH'i^'^J'' ;  Sept.  ToSoXlas),  the  son 
 
 of  Hanan,  into  whose  chamber  in  the  temple  Jere- 
 miah took  the  Rechabites  (Jer.  xxxv.  4).  It  is 
 not  quite  certain  whether  the  phrase  'man  of 
 God'  in  this  verse  applies  to  Hanan  or  Igdaliah  ; 
 but  analogy  would  lead  us  to  assign  it  to  the  for- 
 mer (comp.  Jer.  L  l  ;  xxviii.  I  ;  Zech.  i.  I,  etc.) — 
 W.  I^  A. 
 
IGEAL 
 
 377 
 
 ILAI 
 
 IGEAL  (bSJ^ ;  "IwtjX,  jfegaal).    The  same  name 
 
 in  the  original  as  Igal,  but  belonging  to  a  remote 
 descendant  of  David,  the  son  of  Shemaiah,  i 
 Chron.  ill.  22. — ^J.  E.  R. 
 
 IHRE,  JOHANN  VON,  professor  of  rhetoric  at 
 Upsala,  was  born  3d  March  1707  at  Lund,  and 
 died  at  Upsala  26th  November  17S0.  He  is 
 chiefly  remarkable  for  his  labours  on  the  Gothic 
 version  of  Ulfilas.  The  results  of  these  are  given 
 in  a  work  entitled  Scripta  Versionem  Ulphilanam 
 et  ling.  Moesogothicam  iHiistrantia,  collected  and 
 edited  with  the  author's  corrections  and  additions 
 by  Ant.  Fr.  Blisching,  Berl.  1773,  4to.  This 
 collection  contains  the  following  tracts  :  i.  Ulphilas 
 illustratus,  a  series  of  critical  observations  on  the 
 readings  of  the  Codex  argenteus,  to  which  is  pre- 
 fixed a  preface,  in  which,  among  other  things,  the 
 author  endeavours  to  prove  that  the  letters  of  the 
 Codex  were  produced  by  an  encaustic  process,  the 
 surface  of  the  parchment  having  been  covered  with 
 wax,  on  which  silver-leaf  was  laid  and  the  form 
 of  the  letter  stamped  thereon  with  a  hot  iron  ;  2. 
 Fragmenta  versionis  Ulphilajtce,  containing  the 
 portions  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  published 
 by  Knittel,  with  annotations ;  3.  Disseiiatio  de 
 originibiis  Ling.  Lat.  et  Gr.  inter  Moesogothos 
 reperiu7idis ;  4.  De  verbis Moesogothoriim ;  Analecta 
 Ulphilana,  \.de  Cod.  Argent,  et  litleratiira  Gothica, 
 ii.  de  no7)iinibus  subst.  et  adject.  li/oesogothorum ; 
 5-  De  Lingua  Cod.  Arg.;  6.  Specimen  Glossarii 
 Ulphilani,  cimi praefationibits.  An  Appendix  con- 
 tains some  tracts  by  other  writers,  viz.,  Heupelii 
 Diss,  de  Ulphila;  Oelrichsii  Animadv.  in  hanc 
 Diss. ;  Esbergii  et  Soedermanni  Diss,  de  Ulphila; 
 To.  Gordoni  Specim.  animadvers.  critt.  in  priscam 
 Evangg.  vers.  Gothicam  ;  Wachteri  Diss,  de  ling. 
 Cod.  Arg.  As  only  131  copies  of  this  collection 
 were  printed  for  subscribers,  it  is  now  extremely 
 rare ;  which  has  induced  us  to  give  the  above  list 
 of  its  contents  from  a  copy  in  our  own  possession. 
 Besides  the  tracts  contained  in  this  volume,  Ihre 
 wrote  several  others  devoted  to  the  same  depart- 
 ment of  inquiiy,  the  titles  of  which  are  given  by 
 Zahn  in  the  preface  to  his  edition  of  Ulphilas,  p. 
 70.  Ihre's  contributions  to  the  Gothic  literature 
 are  of  the  highest  importance  and  value. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 IIM  (Csy ;  Sept.  Ba/cci/c,  Alex.  kveitJ. ;  Jiin),  a 
 
 town  on  the  southern  border  of  Judah,  between 
 Baalah  and  Azem,  and  not  far  from  Beersheba 
 (Josh.  XV.  29).  It  is  only  once  mentioned,  and  its 
 site  is  unknown. 
 
 2.  (Sept.  Vai;  7;"m(^rtr/>«),  aname  givenin  Num. 
 xxxiii.  45  as  a  contraction  of  Ijeabariin. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IJEABARIM    (D''-inyn    «y;    Sept.    'AxaX7af, 
 
 and  Fat;  ycabarim),  a  place  on  the  eastern  frontier 
 of  Moab,  where  the  Israelites  encamped  before  cross- 
 ing the  valley  of  Zared  (Num.  xxi.  1 1  ;  xxxiii.  44). 
 The  word  signifies  '  the  heaps  of  Abarim,'  and 
 Abarim  was  the  name  of  that  mountain  range 
 which  runs  along  the  eastern  side  of  the  Dead  Sea 
 [Abarim].  These  'heaps'  of  Abarim  were  some 
 noted  mounds,  perhaps  covered  with  ruins,  which 
 served  to  give  a  distinctive  name  to  this  spot  on 
 the  edge  of  the  wilderness.  The  site  is  unknown  ; 
 and,  indeed,  the  region  in  which  it  is  situated  has 
 not  as  yet  been  explored.  In  Num.  xxxiii.  45  the 
 place  is  called  simply  ///«,  '  the  heaps. ' — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IJON  (j'i'y  ;  'AtV,  Alex.  NatV  and  'Ai'ujv  ;  Ahion 
 
 and  Aion),  a  town  of  northern  Palestine,  mentioned 
 in  connection  with  Dan  and  Abel  as  taken  by  Ben- 
 hadad,  king  of  Syria,  at  the  instigation  of  Asa  (i 
 Kings  XV.  20).  At  a  subsequent  period,  when  Tig- 
 lath-Pileser,  king  of  Assyria,  invaded  Israel,  Ijon 
 was  the  first  place  captured  (2  Kings  xv.  29).  It 
 was  thus  situated  on  the  northern  border  of  the  land. 
 Between  the  great  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Her- 
 mon,  a  few  miles  north-west  of  the  site  of  Dan,  is 
 a  little  plain  called  Merj  AiyAn,  '  the  meadow  of 
 the  fountains,'  and  at  its  northern  extremity  is  a 
 large  tell  covered  with  ruins  called  Dibbin.  Of 
 this  Dr.  Robinson  says  : — 'Tell  Dibbin  is  a  noble 
 site  for  a  city  ;  overlooking,  as  it  does,  the  whole 
 plain  of  Merj,  and  commanding  one  of  the  ^reat 
 roads  between  the  sea-coast  and  the  interior.  Un- 
 mistakeable  traces  likewise  show  that  in  very 
 ancient  times  the  place  was  occupied  by  a  city. 
 Shall  we  perhaps  be  wrong  in  regarding  it  as  tlie 
 site  of  the  ancient  Ijon,  the  name  of  which  has 
 been  perpetuated  in  the    Arabic  'Ayiin?'     (The 
 
 words  jVy  and    .y,*^,  though  radically  the  same, 
 
 are  different  in  meaning.)  There  can  be  no  doubt 
 that  Tell  Dibbin  is  the  site  of  the  ancient  border 
 city  of  Ijon  (Robinson,  B.  R.  iii.  375  ;  Ritter,  Pal. 
 und  Svr.  ii.  241  ;  Handbook  for  S.  and  F.  ii.  445). 
 -J.  L.  P. 
 
 IKEN,  KoNRAD,  D.  D. ,  born  at  Bremen  25th 
 December  16S9,  and  died  30th  June  1753.  He 
 was  professor  of  theology  at  the  Gymnasium,  and 
 first  minister  of  St.  Stephen's  Church  at  Bremen. 
 He  wrote  Antiqnitates  Plebraica:  1730,  4th  ed. 
 1764;  Thesaurus  Nov.  Theol.  Philol.,  2  vols. 
 1732  ;  Dissertt.  Fhilol.  -  Theol.  in  diversa  Sac. 
 Cod.  loca.  Lug.  Bat.  1749,  2d  ed.  by  Schacht,  2 
 vols.,  Utr.  1770. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 IKRITI,  Shemarja  b.  Eliah  Ct3''-lp"'t<  nnOL'^ 
 
 nvi<  p),  a  distinguished  Jewish  philosopher,  philo- 
 logian,  and  most  voluminous  commentator,  origi- 
 nally from  the  island  of  Crete,  whence  he  derived 
 his  name  (''lD''"1P''X),  flourished  about  A.D.  1290- 
 1320  at  Negroponte.  He  was  at  the  court  of 
 Robert  king  of  Naples,  who  studied  Hebrew  under 
 R.  Jehudah  b.  Moses  b.  Daniel,  and  for  whom 
 Ikriti  wrote  commentaries  on  the  whole  of  the  O. 
 T.  with  the  exception  of  Leviticus,  Numbers,  and 
 Deuteronomy,  which  the  death  of  his  son  prevented 
 him  from  interpreting.  The  first  instalments  of 
 this  exposition  were  finished  in  1328,  and  de- 
 spatched to  the  king,  to  whom  they  were  dedi- 
 cated. The  chief  aim  of  Ikriti  was  to  reconcile  in 
 his  expositions  the  conflicting  opinions  of  the  Rab- 
 binic and  the  Karaite  Jews  [Karaites],  as  well 
 as  to  allay  the  contest  of  the  followers  of  Maimon- 
 ides  with  the  old  orthodox  school  [Maimonides]. 
 His  commentaries  are  very  diffuse,  and  contain 
 much  valuable  criticism.  It  is  to  be  regretted 
 that  they  have  not  as  yet  been  published.  Comp. 
 Carmoly  in  Josfs  Aniwlen,  1839,  pp.  63,  155; 
 Geiger  in  He-Chaluz,  Lemberg  1853,  vol.  ii.,  pp. 
 25,  158;  Ozar  Nechmad,  Vienna  1857,  vol.  ii.,  p. 
 90,  etc.  ;  Duke's  Shire  Shelonto,  Hanover  185S, 
 ii.,  p.  4 ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  Leipzig 
 1863,  vol.  vii.,  p.  318,  etc. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 ILAI  ^^V;  Sept.  'HXO-  An  Ahohite,  one  of 
 the  valiant  men  of  David's  army  (i  Chron.  xi.  29), 
 
ILGEN 
 
 373 
 
 IMMANUEL 
 
 In  2  Sam.   xxiii.    28,  the  name  given  is  Zalmon 
 
 (jllD^V),  which  Thenius  {Exegct.  Hdb.,  in  loc.) 
 thinks  passed  through  clerical  error  and  oblitera- 
 tion into  ''7^j;.  Keniiicott  on  the  other  hand  de- 
 cides for  ''7''y  as  the  original  name  [Dissaiation,  p. 
 187,  ff.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 ILGEN,  Karl  David,  D.D.,  born  at  Burgholz- 
 hausen  in  1768,  died  at  Berlin  17th  Sept.  1834; 
 vas  successively  rector  of  the  burgh  school  at 
 Naumberg  (1790),  professor  of  Oriental  literature 
 at  Jena  (1794),  rector  at  Schulpforteand  Ober-con- 
 sistorial-rath  (1802).  In  consequence  of  failing 
 health  he  resigned  this  office  in  1830  and  retired  to 
 Berlin,  where  he  died.  Besides  numerous  contri- 
 butions to  classical  literature  he  wrote  a  treatise 
 De  Jcbi  antiquissiini  Carminis  nahira  atqiie  vhtii- 
 tilms,  Leipzig  1 789  ;  Die  Urkmidcn  des  I.  Biich  von 
 Moses  in  Hirer  iirgestalt,  etc.,  Halle  1798^  Die 
 Gesch.  ToWs  nach  drey  verschied.  originalen,  dcm 
 Griech.  dem  Lat.  des  Hieronynn,  tend  einer  Syrisch. 
 UehersetzKng,  ;;///  Annierk.  Einleit,  u.  s.  iv.,  Jena 
 {800.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 ILLESCAS,  Jacob  de  (ti•Xp:^'"'^n  nipy^), 
 flourished  in  the  14th  century  at  Illecas,  not  far 
 from  Madrid,  whence  his  family  derived  their 
 name.  He  wrote  allegorical,  Kabbalistic,  and 
 grammatical  commentaries  on  the  Pentateuch,  en- 
 titled Dyj  ''"l?JX,  pleasant  -words.  He  also  ex- 
 plains in  it  the  obscure  passages  of  Rashi  and  Ibn 
 Ezra's  expositions  on  this  portion  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures,  and  quotes  Lekach  Tob,  Joseph,  Tarn, 
 Bechor  Shor,  Jehudah  the  Pious,  Isaac  of  Vienna, 
 Moses  de  Coney,  Aaron,  Eljakim,  the  Tosafoth, 
 etc.  This  commentary  is  given  in  Frankfurter's 
 Great  Rabbinic  Bible  [Frankfurter].— C.  D.  G. 
 
 ILLYRICUM  {'IXXupt/ci;/),  a  country  lying 
 along  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Adriatic  Gulf,  north 
 of  Epirus.  The  Apostle  Paul,  in  his  third  great 
 missionary  journey,  after  traversing  Asia  Minor 
 and  Macedonia,  tells  the  church  of  Rome,  '  that 
 round  about  unto  lllyricum  (kukXi^  f^^XP'-  '''^^  'IXXk- 
 pLKov)  I  have  fully  preached  the  Gospel  of  Christ ' 
 (Rom.  XV.  19).  Tlie  exact  meaning  of  the  pas- 
 sage is  somewhat  doubtful.  The  kvkXos  may  be 
 joined  with  Jerusalem,  and  signify  its  '  neighbour- 
 hood' (as  Alford,  in  loc.);  or  it  may  be  joined 
 with  the  ^e'xP'  '''o^  'iWvpiKov,  and  denote  the 
 '  circuit'  of  the  apostle's  journey  'as  far  as  Iliyri- 
 cym.'  The  extent  and  boundaries  of  lllyricum 
 weie  different  at  different  periods.  The  earliest 
 notices  state  that  certain  tribes  called  ^IXXvptoi  in- 
 habited the  mountainous  region  along  the  coast 
 between  Epirus  and  Liburnia  (Scylax,  ch.  xix., 
 set/.)  On  the  invasion  of  the  country  by  the  Goths, 
 these  tribes  were  scattered  eastward  and  north- 
 ward, and  gave  their  name  to  a  wider  region. 
 According  to  Strabo,  Illyria  was  bounded  on  the 
 north  by  the  Alps,  on  the  south  by  Epirus,  and  on 
 the  east  by  the  provinces  of  Macedonia  and  Moesia, 
 and  the  rivers  Save  and  Drave  (vii.  5) ;  and  this 
 was  probably  the  geographical  import  of  the  name 
 as  used  by  Paul.  At  a  later  period  lllyricum  be- 
 came one  of  the  four  great  divisions  of  the  Roman 
 P'.mpire,  and  embraced  the  whole  country  lying  be- 
 tween the  Adriatic,  the  Danube,  the  Black  Sea, 
 and  Macedonia  {G ibhoii' s  /?ivn an  Eni/ire,  chap,  i.) 
 Through  the  southern  part  of  Illyria  proper  ran 
 the  great  road   called  P"ia   Egnatia,   which  con- 
 
 nected Italy  and  the  East,  beginning  at  Apollonia 
 and  Dyrrhachium,  passing  through  Thessalonica 
 and  Philippi,  and  terminating  at  the  Hellespont 
 {Antonini  Jtinemrium,  ed.  Wessel.,  p.  317). 
 Along  this  road  Paul  may  have  travelled  on  his 
 third  journey  till  he  reached  that  region  on  the 
 shore  of  the  Adriatic  which  was  called  lllyricum. 
 From  Dyrrhachium  he  may  have  turned  north  into 
 that  district  of  lllyricum  then  called  Dalmatia, 
 and  may  have  founded  the  churches  subsequently 
 visited  by  Titus  (2  Tim.  iv.  10;  Dalm.'VTIa). 
 Afterwards  he  may  have  gone  southward  by  Nico- 
 polis  to  Corinth.  (But  see  Conybeare  and  How- 
 son,  Life  0/ St.  Paul,  i.  389,  ii.  128,  ist  ed.) 
 
 lllyricum  is  a  wild  and  bare  mountainous  region, 
 affording  a  fitting  home  for  a  number  of  wild  tribes, 
 who  now,  as  in  ancient  times,  inhabit  the  country. 
 The  coast-line  is  deeply  indented,  and  possesses 
 some  excellent  harbours  (Grote,  History  of  Greece, 
 vol.  iv. ;  Wilkinson,  Dalmatia  and  Montenegro). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 IMAGE.     \See  Idolatry.] 
 
 IMMANUEL  (^K13BU  ;  Sept.  'Ejctjua.'oi/^X),  oc- 
 curring in  forty-three  MSS. ,  and  thirty-nine 
 printed  editions,  as  Dr.  Henderson  informs  us,  as 
 
 two  words,  7t^  IJJSy,  is  literally  translated   '  God 
 
 with  us.'  As,  however,  the  precise  character  and 
 significancy  of  the  name  is  closely  bound  up  with 
 the  interpretation  of  the  principal  passage  in  which 
 it  occurs — viz..  Is.  vii.  14,  cited  by  Matthew  in  his 
 Gospel,  ch.  i.  vers.  22,  23 — the  latter  demands 
 our  first  consideration. 
 
 Perhaps  there  is  no  other  portion  of  O .  T.  pro- 
 phecy on  which  so  much  has  been  written,  and  in 
 regard  to  which  there  has  been,  and  stdl  exists,  so 
 great  a  diversity  of  opinion,  as  the  one  we  have 
 now  to  do  with.  Following  Dr.  Henderson's 
 arrangement,  there  are — 1st,  The  Jewish  interpre- 
 ters, who  of  course  ignore  altogether  the  authority 
 of  the  N.  T.,  and  are  yet  divided  among  them- 
 selves ;  the  earlier  rabbins  explaining  the  passage 
 of  the  queen  of  Ahaz,  the  later,  as  Jarchi  and 
 Aben-Ezra,  of  the  wife  of  the  prophet,  but  others, 
 as  Kimchi  and  Abarbanel,  of  a  second  spouse  of 
 the  king.  2dly,  '  The  great  body  of  Christian  inter- 
 preters, who  have  held  it  to  be  directly  and  exclu- 
 sively a  prophecy  of  our  Saviour,  and  have  con- 
 sidered themselves  fully  borne  out  by  the  inspired 
 authority  of  the  evangelist  Matthew.'  3dly,  Those 
 scholars  who,  not  content  to  stop  short  here,  have 
 ajiplied  themselves  to  the  study  of  the  passage 
 taken  in  its  connection,  in  other  words,  to  its 
 historical  exegesis,  and  have  perceived  the  difficul- 
 ties which  in  this  view  attach  to  the  use  made  of 
 it  in  the  N.  T.  Of  these  (i),  '  Grotius,  Faber, 
 Isenbiehl,  Hezel,  Bolten,  Fitsche,  Pluschke,  Ge- 
 senius,  Hitzig,  suppose  either  the  then  present  or  a 
 
 future  wife  of  Isaiah  to  be  meant  by  the  nD?y  re- 
 ferred to.  (2)  Eichhorn,  Paulus,  Plensler,  Am- 
 nion,' to  whom  may  be  added  J.  D.  Michaelis, 
 '  are  of  opinion  that  the  prophet  had  nothing  more 
 in  view  than  an  ideal  virgin,  and  that  both  she  and 
 her  son  were  purely  imaginaiy  persons,  introduced 
 for  the  purpose  of  prophetic  illustration.  (3) 
 Bauer,  Cube,  Steudel,  and  some  others,'  including 
 E.  F.  Rosenmiiller  in  the  1st  edition  of  his  Scholia, 
 '  think  that  the  prophet  pointed  to  a  young  woman 
 in  the  presence  of  the  king  and  his  courtiers.' 
 
IMMANUEL 
 
 379 
 
 IMMANUEL 
 
 '"Richard  Simon,  Le  Clerc,  Koppe,  Lowth, 
 Oathe,  Williams,  Von  Meyer,  Olshausen,  Dr.  J. 
 Pye  Smith,'  with  Dr.  S.  Davidson,  'adopt  the 
 hypothesis  of  a  double  sense  ;  one,  in  whith  the 
 words  apply  primarily  to  some  female  living  in  the 
 time  of  the  pi^ophet,  and  giving  birth  to  a  son  ac- 
 cording to  the  ordinary  laws  of  nature,  or,  as 
 Dathe  holds,  to  some  virgin  who  should  miracu- 
 lously conceive ;  and  the  other,  in  which  they 
 received  a  secondary  and  plenary  fulfilment  in  the 
 miraculous  conception  and  birth  of  Christ. '  Lastly, 
 there  are  those  who,  with  much  learning  and 
 ability,  have  striven  to  vindicate  what  Gesenius 
 calls  'the  Messianic  interpretation,'  or  the  exclu- 
 sive reference  of  the  prediction  to  Christ ;  among 
 whom  may  be  mentioned,  in  addition  to  Dr.  Hen- 
 derson himself,  Vitringa,  Crusius,  Dereser,  Rosen- 
 miiller  (in  his  Scholia  in  Comp.  redacta),  Heng- 
 stenberg,  apparently  Ewald,  Dr.  W.  L.  Alexander, 
 and  Dr.  P.  Fairbairn,  who,  however,  are  by  no 
 means  agreed  among  themselves  as  to  the  way  in 
 which  RIatthew  and  Isaiah  are  to  be  reconciled. 
 
 One  cannot  avoid  the  suspicion  that  such  a 
 diversity,  even  among  those  who  are  at  one  as  to 
 fundamental  principles,  and  most  fully  recognise 
 the  canon  that  the  N.  T.  is  to  be  considered  as  the 
 key  to  the  Old,  has  its  source  in  something  more 
 than  the  idiosyncracies  of  different  minds,  and  that, 
 to  use  a 'familiar  phrase,  interpreters  may  have  set 
 out  on  the  wrong  scent.  Now  it  is  observable 
 that  it  has  been  almost  universally  assumed  at  the 
 outset,  that  the  immediate  and  direct  object  of  the 
 prophet,  speaking  as  the  messenger  of  Jehovah, 
 was  to  convince  Ahaz  by  a  striking  sign  that  God 
 would  shortly  deliver  him  from  the  enemies  by  luhom 
 kx;  zaas  threatened.  '  The  design  of  the  prophet 
 (they  say)  was  to  show  to  the  distressed  and  dis- 
 trustful king,  that,  in  the  extremity  of  his  affairs, 
 there  was  no  reason  to  despair,  and  that  the  coun- 
 try should  not  be  subdued'  (Doederlein,  /';/  loc.) 
 '  It  seems  to  be  as  clear  as  words  can  make  it,' 
 says  Dr.  J.  P.  Smith,  '  tl'at  the  son  promised  was 
 born  within  a  year  after  the  giving  of  the  piedic- 
 tion  ;  that  his  being  so  born,  at  the  assigned 
 period,  was  the  sign  or  pledge  that  the  political 
 deliverance  announced  to  Ahaz  should  certainly 
 take  place  ;  and  that  such  deliverance  would  arrive 
 before  this  child  should  have  reached  the  age  in 
 which  children  are  commonly  able  to  discriminate 
 the  different  kinds  of  food'  {Script.  Test,  vol.  i.  p. 
 237).  In  like  manner  Gesenius  complains  that 
 the  defenders  of  the  immediate  application  of  the 
 prediction  to  Christ  '  do  not  meet  the  numerous 
 objections  which  arise  out  of  the  context,  especially 
 this,  that  it  was  necessary  to  give  to  the  incredulous 
 Ahaz  a  sign  that  was  speedily  fulfilled,  and  that  lay 
 as  it  were  before  his  eyes '  {Comvioitar  iiber  yesaia, 
 znr  stelle).  And  so,  some  maintain  that  the  pro- 
 mised child  was  Hezekiah  ;  others  a  son  of  the 
 prophet,  called  Immanuel ;  Dr.  Davidson  that 
 Maher-shalal-hash-baz  was  primarily  intended  ; 
 while  others,  as  Dr.  Kennicott,  refer  the  first  part 
 of  the  prediction  to  Messiah,  and  the  latter  (ver.  16) 
 to  Shear-Jashub  :  some  will  have  it  that  the  '  Almah 
 was  really  present,  and  her  son  born  shortly  after- 
 wards ;  others,  as  Hengstenberg,  that  the  whole 
 scene  was  merely  beheld  in  vision,  '  the  child  being 
 ideally  present,  in  his  birth  and  growth  to  man- 
 hood, before  the  spiritual  eye  of  the  prophet,  and 
 constituting,  as  so  present,  the  sign  of  a  speedy 
 deliverance  of  Judah  from  Israel  and  Syria;'  while 
 
 Rosenmiiller,  after  an  able  defence  of  the  Messianic 
 interpretation,  is  constrained  to  admit  that  the 
 prophet  was  mistaken  about  the  period  of  the 
 child's  nativity :  Dathe  and  others  hold  that 
 the  Evangelist  quotes  the  passage  as  a  typical 
 prophecy ;  Isenbiehl,  that  he  cites  it  by  way 
 of  accovimodation  (for  which  sentiment  the  pro- 
 fessor was  cruelly  subjected  to  chains  and  a 
 dungeon) ;  while  Dr.  Wilhams  of  Sydenham  goes 
 so  far  as  to  question  the  authenticity  of  the  first 
 two  chapters  of  his  gospel  altogether. 
 
 But  if  this  preliminary  assumption  be  unfounded, 
 there  will  be  no  room  for  such  variety  of  opinion, 
 nor  any  need  of  having  resource  to  such  desperate 
 expedients  to  get  over  the  difficulty — to  which,  in 
 fact,  that  supposition  gives  rise — how  Isaiah's  in- 
 tention in  delivering  the  prediction  and  that  of 
 Matthew  in  quoting  it  are  to  be  brought  into 
 mutual  harmony.  That  it  is  so,  we  think,  will  be  ap- 
 parent from  the  following  considerations  :  1st,  That 
 it  is  inconsistent  with  the  temper  of  Ahaz  on  the 
 occasion.  Not  to  insist  on  his  habitual  ungodli- 
 ness, it  is  clear,  as  Dr.  Fairbairn  well  shews,  that 
 at  the  time  referred  to  he  was  in  no  mood  to  listen 
 to  assurances  of  divine  protection.  The  whole 
 compass  of  nature  is,  as  it  were,  placed  at  his  dis- 
 posal, that  he  may  exact  from  it  a  pledge  of  the 
 faithAdness  of  Jehovah.  But  his  earthly  mind 
 craves  a  more  tangible  dependence,  his  reliance 
 must  be  on  an  arm  of  flesh,  and  his  thoughts 
 secretly  turn  to  the  King  of  Assyria,  if  indeed  he 
 was  not  already  on  terms  with  him  (2  Kings  xvi. 
 7  ;  2  Chron.  xxviii.  16).  His  carnality  and  un- 
 belief seem  to  have  been  anticipated  by  the 
 prophet  in  the  concluding  words  of  the  preceding 
 oracle  (ver.  9),  and  are  distinctly  brought  out  by  his 
 hypocritical  reply  to  this  second  message.  Pie 
 'will  not  tempt  the  Lord,'  forsooth,  by  'asking' 
 what  is  freely  offered.  Would  it  have  been,  ■we 
 ask,  either  a  dignified  or  a  salutary  course,  to  have 
 vouchsafed  what  was  thus  scornfully  and  impiously 
 refused  ?  Must  the  incredulous  monarch  be  con- 
 vinced against  his  will?  It  may  indeed  be  doubted 
 whether,  in  the  circumstances,  any  miracle,  how- 
 ever surprising,  would  have  induced  him  to  re- 
 nounce '  the  broken  reed  on  which  he  trusted,'  and 
 rely  simply  on  the  word  of  God.  And  as  we  find 
 that  a  disposition  to  question  the  divine  veracity 
 was  always  reproved,  and  often  severely  punished, 
 we  should  rather  expect,  a  priori,  that,  while  the 
 promise  already  ^wexi  (ver.  7)  would  be  performed, 
 Ahaz  would  yet  be  made  to  feel  the  consequence^ 
 of  his  unbelief,  and  be  '  filled  with  his  own  devices  ;' 
 which  leads  us  to  remark,  2dly,  That  this  asiump 
 tion  is  at  variance  with  the  language  of  the  prophet 
 in  the  preceding  and  following  context.  The  strain 
 of  the  prophet's  address  to  the  king  is  that  of 
 threatening  rather  than  of  encouragement.  '  Hear 
 ye  now'  (a  formula  most  frequently  used  in  menace 
 and  reproof)  '  O  house  of  David  !  Is  it  too  little 
 for  you  to  weary  men,  that  ye  [proceed  to]  weary  my 
 God  also?'  (ver.  13)  ;  and  from  ver.  17  he  goes  on 
 to  denounce  against  the  sovereign  and  his  people 
 a  severe  chastisement  at  the  hands  of  the  venr 
 power  on  whose  aid  he  relied,  even  '  days  such  a:; 
 had  not  come  from  the  day  that  Ephraim  departed 
 from  Judah.'  3dly,  The  position  referred  to  hardly 
 comports  with  what  is  recorded  in  the  following 
 chapter.  We  are  there  informed  that  a  son,  con- 
 ceived about  the  date  of  the  previous  announcemeni , 
 to  be  named  Maher-shal.il-hash-baz,  was  to  be  born 
 
IMMANUEL 
 
 380 
 
 IMMANUEL 
 
 to  the  prophet,  concerning  whom  it  is  intimated 
 that  '  before  the  child  should  have  knowledge  to 
 cry  '  my  father  ! '  and  '  my  mother  ! '  the  riches  of 
 Damascus  and  the  spoil  of  Samaria  should  be 
 taken  away  before  the  King  of  Assyria.'  But, 
 according  to  the  view  commonly  taken  of  the  pre- 
 diction in  chap,  vii.,  the  two  signs  must  refer  to 
 one  and  the  same  event,  viz.,  the  invasion  of 
 Israel  and  Syria  by  Tiglath-pileser,  and  the  contem- 
 porary destruction  of  their  reigning  sovereigns  (nar- 
 rated 2  Kings  XV.  29,  30  ;  xvi.  9).  They  are  also 
 precisely  analogous  in  character.  In  both  cases  a 
 child  is  to  be  born  ;  each  is  to  receive  a  significant 
 name  ;  and  the  promised  deliverance  is  to  happen 
 when  each  attains  a  certain  age.  Moreover,  un- 
 less we  adopt  the  hypothesis  that  both  children 
 were  sons  of  the  same  parents  (according  to 
 Gosenius,  of  Isaiah,  by  the  'Alniah  of  chap.  vii. 
 14),  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  the  lapse  of  any 
 interval  of  moment  between  the  two  oracles, 
 which  would  not  equally  support  the  idea  that 
 they  refer  to  different  future  events  ;  if  therefore 
 they  refer  to  the  same  event,  the  births  must  have 
 been  as  nearly  as  possible  contemporary,  and  the 
 children  coetaneous.  Such  a  tautological  reitera- 
 tion, if  we  may  so  speak,  in  the  matter  of  signs 
 (unless  we  homologate  Dr.  Davidson's  conclusion, 
 that  the  same  child  is  spoken  of  under  different 
 names)  would  not  only  be  without  a  parallel  in  the 
 sacred  volume,  but  is  in  itself  highly  improbable. 
 The  improbability  will  be  greater  if,  as  Dathe 
 supposes,  the  first  child  was  born  miraculously,  and 
 the  second  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature ;  and 
 still  more  if,  as  Dr.  Fairbairn  plausibly  argues, 
 Maher-shalal-hash-baz  was  conceived  and  brought 
 forth  in  vision  merely ;  for  in  either  case  the  addi- 
 tional sign  would  be  less  remarkable,  and  there- 
 fore less  convincing  than  that  which  preceded  it, 
 which  is  certainly  reversing  the  natural  order  of 
 things,  and  unlike  the  usual  method  of  the  divine 
 procedure.  Lastly,  as  the  rendering  in  the  com- 
 mon version  of  the  last  clause  of  ver.  16,  which  is 
 very  generally  adopted  by  commentators,  has  gone 
 a  great  way  to  foster  the  supposition  in  ques- 
 tion, it  is  proper  here  to  remark  that  it  is  micon- 
 formable  to  the  genius  and  usage  of  the  original 
 language.     The  preposition  ''J3D,    '  from  before,' 
 
 or  '  because  of,'  is  regularly  employed  as  the  link 
 between  verbs  of  'fearing' — such  as  "112,  N"l\  riDn, 
 
 and  pip,  here  translated  '  abhorrest,'  but  which 
 also  signifies  '  to  fear,' — and  the  object  dreaded 
 (see  Exod.  i.  12  ;  Numb.  xxii.  3  ;  and  comp.  ver. 
 2  of  this  chap.)  But  our  translators  have  anoma- 
 lously connected  it  with  the  verb  3ryn,  '  shall  be 
 
 forsaken,'  and  assigned  to  it  a  privative  sense, 
 such  as  it  never  bears.  Dr.  Henderson  indeed  re- 
 fers, in  support  of  this  construction,  to  ch.  xvii.  9, 
 where  certainly  the  preposition  in  (\\\Qsiior\  foHcm's 
 the  verb  3Ty,  adding,  that  '  it  appears,  in  such  con- 
 nection,   to  have  no  more  force  than  |D  in  Lev. 
 
 xxvi.  43.'  On  turning,  however,  to  his  comment 
 on  the  former  passage,  we  find  that  he  there  ex- 
 plains the  juxtaposition  by  a  constructio prccgna?is, 
 or  by  an  ellipsis,  which,  being  supplied,  he  renders 
 the  clause  thus  :  '  which  they  left  (when  they  fled) 
 before  the  children  of  Israel'  (comp.  a  like  use  of 
 the  preposition  in  Judg.  ix.  21).  On  his  own 
 shewing,  therefore,  the  passage  quoted  is  not  a 
 case  in   point.     The   only  sense,   in   fact,  which 
 
 could  be  elicited  from  such  an  arrangement  of  the 
 words  would  be  :  'the  land,  which  thou  alihorrest. 
 shall  be  forsaken  before,'  or  '  on  account  of  its 
 two  kings.'  This  construction  is  therefore  justly 
 rejected  by  the  most  eminent  scholars,  as  Schul- 
 tens,  Gesenius,  Rosenmiiller,  etc.,  who  translate  : 
 '  the  land,  of  whose  two  kings  thou  art  afraid,' 
 or,  according  to  Schultens,  comparing  ver.  6, 
 where  the  same  verb  occurs,  '  by  whose  two  kings 
 thou  art  vexed  {i.e.,  besieged)  shall  be  forsaken.' 
 The  idea  of  an  express  reference  in  these  words  to 
 the  slaughter  of  Pekah  and  Rezin,  about  two  years 
 after  the  delivery  of  the  prophecy,  is  thus  seen  to 
 be  illusory. 
 
 This  hypothesis  then,  regarding  the  primary 
 intention  of  the  oracle,  being  discarded,  there  will 
 remain  no  valid  excuse  for  either  ignoring  or  depre- 
 ciating the  authority  of  the  evangelic  record,  or 
 undervaluing  the  explicitnesso^ihe  declaration  tovto 
 bk  "OAON  yeyovev  iva  vXripwOrj  t6  prjOev  vtto  toC 
 Kvpiov,  K.  T.  \. :  to  those  who  admit  the  inspiration 
 of  the  Evangelist,  the  question,  '  Of  whom  speaketti 
 the  prophet  this?'  will,  in  that  case,  allow  of  but 
 cue  answer,  whatever  may  be  the  difficulties  that 
 present  themselves  on  a  closer  examination  ;  and 
 the  utmost  that  can  reasonably  be  demanded  is, 
 that  it  can  be  shewn  that  the  prophecy  (vers.  14-16) 
 admits  of  being  applied  to  Christ  throughout,  and 
 that,  when  so  understood,  it  has  an  intelligible  and 
 appropriate  bearing  on  the  circumstances  of  those 
 to  whom  it  was  originally  addressed.  We  translate 
 the  verses  thus  : — 
 
 '  Therefore  Jehovah  /limse//  shall  give  you  a  sign  : 
 Behold  the  Virgin  shall  conceive,  and  bear  a  Son, 
 And  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel. 
 Milk  and  honey  shall  he  eat 
 Till  he  know  to  refuse  the  evil,  and  choose  the 
 
 good  ; 
 For  before  the  child  (or  youth)  shall  know 
 To  refuse  the  evil  and  choose  the  good, 
 The  land  shall  be  forsaken. 
 Of  whose  two  kings  thou  art  afraid.' 
 
 Now,  in  the  whole  of  this  passage,  there  is  at  least 
 nothing  which  does  not  tally  with  the  Gospel  his- 
 tory of  our  Saviour's  infancy,  {a)  He  was  miraeu- 
 loiisly  bo7-n,  as  we  are  there  informed,  of  a  virgin, 
 betrothed,  but  not  married,  {b)  He  was  named  by 
 his  mother,  according  to  divine  direction,  (c)  Nor 
 is  there  any  real  discrepancy  in  the  tiai/ies,  as  might 
 at  first  sight  apjiear ;  for  1st,  there  is  no  necessity 
 that  'Immanuel'  should  be  taken  as  an  appella- 
 tive, any  more  than  'Wonderful,'  'Counsellor," 
 'Mighty  God,'  etc.,  in  ch.  ix.  6,  which  were  never 
 used  as  proper  names  of  our  Lord  ;  and,  2dly, 
 there  is  a  close  approximation  in  significancy  be- 
 tween the  two  designations  (as  pointed  out  under 
 the  article  'Jesus'),  to  which  the  Evangelist  him- 
 self seems  to  refer:  Ii?ima!tiiel,^^  God.  with  us,' 
 conveying  the  sense  '  God  is  on  our  side,'  and 
 ycsits  or  Joshua,  contracted  for  Jehoshiia  (Num. 
 xiii.  i6)= '  the  salvation  of  Jehovah'  (Gesen.),  being 
 apparently  tantamount,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Israel- 
 itish  leader,  to  '  he  by  whom  Jehovah  shall  save.' 
 {d)  Although  we  have  no  historical  notice  of  the 
 diet  of  the  infant  Saviour,  there  is  no  presumption 
 against  its  having  been  identical  with  that  here 
 mentioned,  but  the  contraiy,  if  we  consider,  1st, 
 that  'milk  and  honey  are  frequently  mentioned  by 
 ancient  writers  as  the  food  of  tender  children,'  as 
 in  Callimachus'  hymn  to  Jupiter  (48) : 
 
 1 
 
IMMANUEL 
 
 381 
 
 IMMANUEL 
 
 ci  5'  idrjaao  vlova  fxa^bv, 
 Alybs  ^Afia\0d7]s,  ctti  5^  yXvKij  KTjpLop  'i^puis, 
 
 (comp.  I  Cor.  lii.  I,  2  ;  I  Pet.  ii.  i,  etc.),  and 
 '  were  recommended  by  the  Greek  physicians  for 
 tl lis  purpose'  (Gesen. );  and,  2dly,  that  as  the  land 
 of  our  Saviour's  birtlr  was  celebrated  for  the  abun- 
 dance of  these  productions,  they  would  be  easily 
 accessible  even  to  persons  in  such  humble  circum- 
 stances as  Joseph  and  Mary,  {e)  It  is  scarcely  ne- 
 cessary to  add,  that,  in  conformity  with  the  predic- 
 tion, the  calamity  deiiotatced  against  Ephraim  and 
 Syria — that  'the  land  should  be  forsaken'  of  its 
 inhabitants  (the  two  countries  being  spoken  of  as 
 one,  on  account  of  the  alliance  between  them,  as 
 in  ch.  xvii.  1-3) — took  place  long  before  the  child 
 Jesus  attained  the  years  of  discretion. 
 
 Let  us  next  see  how  the  passage  thus  translated 
 and  interpreted  fits  in  to  the  connection  in  which  it 
 occiirs.  As  all  classes  alike  had  been  filled  with 
 alarm  at  the  threatened  invasion  (ver.  2),  and  as  the 
 king  had  treated  with  contempt  the  gracious  offer 
 of  Jehovah,  we  conceive  that  the  direct  and  imme- 
 diate design  of  the  prophet  in  these  verses  was — 
 to  speak  comfort  to  those  who  alone  xvere  prepared  to 
 receive  it,  by  a  si^^n  which  they  at  least  would  be  able 
 to  appreciate,  and  which,  taken  in  connection  with 
 what  follows  (ver.  17-end),  might  at  the  same  time 
 convey  a  tacit  rebuke  to  the  ungodly  monarch.  It 
 is  true  the  prophet  was  originally  sent  to  Ahaz 
 (ver.  3),  and  continues  ostensibly  to  address  him,  not 
 personally,  however,  so  much  as  officially,  viz.,  as 
 the  lineal  representative  of  the  house  of  David,  and 
 vicarious  head  of  the  Jewish  people  (whose  real 
 sovereign  was  Jehovah).  God's  longsuffering  with 
 the  king  was  due  to  his  regard  for  David,  just  as 
 his  forbearance  towards  the  nation  is  to  be  ex- 
 plained by  his  promise  to  Abraliam.  Considering 
 the  character  of  Ahaz,  it  may  indeed  be  doubted 
 whether,  apart  from  his  adventitious  position,  he 
 would  have  been  acknowledged  at  all  on  the  occa- 
 sion. On  the  other  hand,  the  undeniable  fact  that 
 the  grand  aim  of  God's  providence  and  the  chief 
 burden  of  his  promises  have  ever  been  the  advance- 
 ment of  his  spiritual  kingdom  in  the  e-arth,  and  the 
 happiness  of  his  loyal  subjects,  sufficiently  accounts 
 both  for  the  virtual  change  of  parties  addressed,  and 
 for  the  peculiar  character  of  the  prediction  itself 
 
 The  exordium  of  the  oracle  is  highly  significant : 
 '  therefore,'  i.  e.,  '  since  you  thus  perversely  refuse 
 to  make  choice  of  a  sign,'  'Jehovah  shall  give  you 
 a  sign  hitnself,^  i.e.,  'one  of  his  own  selection  ;' 
 thus  preparing  the  minds  of  the  hearers  for  some- 
 thing different  from  what  might  have  been  expected, 
 had  Ahaz  shewn  a  better  spirit.  Accordingly,  the 
 prophet,  taking  high  ground,  proceeds  to  assure 
 the  faithful  that  God  had  not  forgotten  his  pro- 
 mises to  the  fathers,  but  that  the  predicted  'seed  of 
 the  woman'  should  certainly  be  bom  in  due  time  ; 
 which  was  primarily,  and  on  the  very  face  of  it, 
 an  earnest  of  all  those  spiritual  blessings  dis- 
 cernible to  the  eye  of  faith  through  the  symbols  of 
 the  law,  and  the  figurative  language  of  prophecy, 
 as  attendant  upon  his  coming.  Moreover,  there 
 were  certain  advantages  of  an  outward  and  tempo- 
 ral kind  to  the  Jewish  nation,  as  such,  necessarily 
 bound  up  with  the  appearance  of  such  a  Deliverer 
 among  them,  and  of  these  also  this  renewed  assur- 
 ance of  his  advent  was  secondarily,  and  by  infe- 
 rence, a  pledge,  ist,  It  is  manifest  that  if  the  uro- 
 mised  Saviour  was  to  come  out  of  Judah   (Gen. 
 
 xlix.  lo)  that  tribe  should  at  least  not  be  extermi- 
 nated, and  disappear  from  among  the  nations  like 
 the  ten  which  had  separated  from  it.  2dly,  So  far 
 from  this,  it  was  distinctly  foretold  by  Jacob  him- 
 self, in  the  passage  referred  to,  that  the  tribe  of 
 Judah  should  continue  to  enjoy  that  pre-eminence 
 which  was  accorded  to  its  head  in  consequence  ot 
 the  misconduct  of  Reuben,  'until  Shiloh,'  the 
 '  peace  bringer,'  i.  e.,  the  Messiah  (comp.  Is.  ix.  6  ; 
 Micah  V.  5  ;  Eph.  ii.  14)  'should  come.'  Now  it 
 is  clear  that  the  hostile  kings  sought,  if  not  the 
 annihilation  of  Judah,  which  on  a  foi-mer  occasion 
 they  were  very  near  effecting  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  5-8), 
 at  least  to  humble  it  by  the  destruction  of  its  inde- 
 pendence. This  is  intimated  in  the  preceding 
 oracle,  vers.  8,  9  :  '  For  Damascus  shall  be  (as  for- 
 merly) the  head  of  Syria  (but  no  more),  and  Rezin 
 the  head  of  Damascus  ;  and  Samaria  shall  be  the 
 head  of  Ephraim,  and  Remaliah's  son  the  head  of 
 Samaria,'  i.e.,  'neither  Rezin  nor  Pekah  shall 
 succeed  in  adding  Judaea  to  his  dominions,  and 
 making  Damascus  or  Samaria  its  capital  instead  of 
 Jerusalem.'  So  that  we  have  here  an  important 
 connection  between  the  sign  and  the  circumstances 
 of  those  to  whom  it  was  vouchsafed.  This,  how- 
 ever, is  not  all.  For,  3dly,  it  was  already  known 
 from  God's  covenant  with  David  (2  Sam.  vii.  12-16; 
 xxiii.  2-5  ;  compared  with  Acts  ii.  30),  that  the 
 Messiah  was  to  be  in  the  direct  line  of  that  prince  ; 
 a  promise  which  could  not  be  redeemed  if  his 
 family  should  become  exti?!ct.  And,  4thly,  as  in 
 that  covenant  it  is  expressly  affirmed  that  David's 
 'throne,' as  well  as  '  house,' should  be  'established 
 for  ever'  (comp.  Ps.  Ixxxix.  34-37)  it  follows  that 
 his  posterity  should  reign  in  his  stead  in  uninter- 
 rupted succession,  unless  by  their  own  misconduct 
 they  forfeited  the  privilege,  which  was  held  imme- 
 diately and  conditionally  from  God  as  the  real  Plead 
 of  the  Theocracy  (i  Kings  ii.  4  ;  viii.  25  ;  Ps.  Ixxxix. 
 30,  31,  32;  cxxxii.  II,  12);  while  the  Messiah, 
 although  about  to  inaugurate  an  entirely  new  order 
 of  things,  appears,  according  to  this  representation, 
 as  the  last  of  the  series,  who  should  sit  down  on 
 the  throne  of  his  father  David,  never  to  rise  from  it 
 (see  Dr.  Alexander's  Connection  of  O.  and  N.  T., 
 p.  220).  But  the  confederacy  of  Rezin  and  Pekah 
 (whether  or  not  they  meant  to  extirpate  the  royal 
 family)  was,  as  Dr.  Fairbairn  points  out,  a  direct 
 contravention  of  this  divine  decree  ;  and,  although 
 on  a  less  important  occasion,  as  much  an  instance 
 of  the  '  kings  of  the  earth  setting  themselves,  and 
 the  rulers  taking  counsel  together,  against  the  Lord 
 and  against  his  anointed,'  as  was  the  later  con- 
 federacy of  Pilate  and  Herod.  For,  as  we  are 
 informed  in  vers.  5,  6,  their  '  counsel'  was  not  only 
 to  'go  up  against  Judah,  and  make  it  afraid'  by 
 beleaguering  its  capital,  but  to  displace  the  existing 
 dynasty,  and  '  set  a  king'  of  their  own  nomination 
 'in  the  midst  of  it,  even  the  son  of  Tabeal,'  who 
 should  of  course  hold  sway  as  their  satrap  or  vice- 
 roy, ready  at  all  times  to  do  their  bidding.  The 
 promise  now  given,  however,  taken  in  connection 
 with  the  emphatic  declaration  of  ver.  7,  was  a  token 
 that  'the  Lord  held  them  in  derision,'  and  that 
 their  attempt  should  prove  abortive  ;  while  in  ver. 
 16  '  he  speaks  to  them,'  as  it  were,  'in  his  wrath,' 
 and  threatens  them  with  merited  punishment  for 
 their  presumption.  However  remote  such  con- 
 siderations might  be  from  the  thoughts  of  the 
 worldly-minded  king  and  his  courtiers,  they  would 
 readily  suggest  themselves  to  those  whose  'hope 
 
IMMANUEL 
 
 382 
 
 IMMANUEL 
 
 was  in  the  Lord  their  God,'  and  who  'made  his 
 testimonies  their  meditation.' 
 
 To  Ahaz,  on  the  other  hand,  the  prophetic 
 announcement  wore  a  very  different  aspect.  Un- 
 hke  the  promises  to  the  patriarchs  and  to  David, 
 no  mention  is  made  of  any  bond  of  union  betwixt 
 him  and  his  ilkistrious  successor.  '  In  this  divine 
 purpose  and  provision  for  a  better  state  of  things, 
 the  existing  royal  house  is  entirely  overleapt  ; 
 silently  passed  by  on  account  of  their  unfaithful- 
 ness and  corruption'  (Dr.  Fairbairn's  Hermen. 
 Mamial,  p.  423).  And  if  we  take  into  view  the 
 entire  communication,  which  is  continuous  to  the 
 end  of  the  chapter,  there  is  evidently,  as  the  same 
 writer  observes,  an  intended  contrast  between  the 
 child  Immanuel  and  the  degenerate  king.  The 
 very  name  of  the  fomier  was  a  tower  of  strength, 
 and  a  beacon  of  hope.  He  was  to  be  bor7i  in  a 
 time  o{ peace,  if  not  of  prosperity,  which  we  con- 
 sider to  be  indicated  by  the  alhision  to  his  being 
 fed  on  '  milk  and  honey  ;'  because  the  supply  of 
 these  articles,  common  as  they  were,  depended  on 
 freedom  of  access  to  the  fields  and  forests  from 
 which  they  were  respectively  procured.  Accord- 
 ingly, ere  he  attained  the  years  of  discretion  (5ia- 
 Kpiaews)  expressed  by  the  phrase,  '  Know  to 
 refuse  the  evil,  and  choose  the  good'  (the  proper 
 parallel  to  which  is  to  be  found  in  Heb.  v.  13,  14), 
 and  so  should  be  of  an  age  to  think  and  act  for 
 himself,  and  to  take  an  interest  in  public  affairs, 
 these  deadly  foes  of  his  nation  and  throne  should 
 have  tdtei'ly  disappeared,  both  king  and  people. 
 Ahaz,  on  the  contrary,  is  specially  marked  out 
 (ver.  17)  as  an  object  of  divine  displeasure.  He 
 had  already  been  sorely  harassed  by  the  kings  of 
 Syria  and  Israel,  and  might  still,  for  anything  that 
 is  liere  said,  suffer  from  them.  But  no  sooner 
 should  he  escape  from  one  enemy  than  he  should 
 fall  into  the  hands  of  another  (comp.  2  Chron. 
 xxviii.  20).  And,  as  a  necessary  consequence,  the 
 people  of  his  rule  would  suffer  with  him  {qiiicqiiid 
 delirant  reges,  plecUtntur  Achivi)  ;  and  so  great 
 should  be  the  devastation  of  the  country,  and  its 
 inhabitants  so  reduced  in  number,  that  at  the  reticrn 
 of  peace,  for  want  of  hands  to  cultivate  the  fields, 
 vien  would  be  glad  to  subsist  on  the  food  of  chil- 
 dren :  '  for  milk  and  honey  shall  every  one  eat 
 that  is  left  in  the  land'  (vers.  21,  22;  comp.  2 
 Chron.  xxviii.  19). 
 
 We  have  hitherto  looked  at  the  prediction 
 chiefly  as  ■a.  pledge  of  certain  things  which  its  fulfil- 
 ment necessarily  ensured  and  presupposed.  Be- 
 sides this,  however,  the  event  was  a  'sign'  in  the 
 more  usual  sense  of  the  term,  not  only  on  account 
 of  the  child's  miraculous  birth,  but  also  by  reason 
 of  his  significant  iia??ie.  This  latter  circumstance, 
 which  we  think  has  not  received  the  attention  it 
 deserves,  might  be  inferred  from  the  parallel  in- 
 stances in  ch.  viii.  1-4  ;  Hosea  i.  4,  6,  9  ;  and  is 
 clearly  established  by  the  use  made  of  the  designa- 
 tion in  the  following  chapter  (vers.  8,  10),  where  it 
 is  employed,  like  many  of  the  watchwords  of  the 
 Greeks  and  Romans,  as  well  as  of  modem  nations 
 (comp.  in  particular  that  of  Cyrus'  army  at  the 
 battle  of  Cunaxa,  Zei^s  Zwttjp  /cat  'SUkt},  and  that  of 
 the  Lutherans  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  Gott  mit 
 uns)  as  an  incentive  to  courage  in  the  hour  of 
 danger  ;  and,  as  given  by  Jehovah  himself,  was  an 
 attestation  to  his  people  that,  whatever  mischief 
 their  enemies  might  do,  their  fury  would  be  re- 
 strained within  due  bounds. 
 
 It  will  be  seen  that  the  view  we  have  given  ot 
 the  passage,  which  is  mainly  that  of  Dr.  Fairbairn, 
 though  differing  from  his  in  some  minor  particulars, 
 is  in  a  great  measure  free  from  the  difficulty  arising 
 from  '  the  circumstance  of  time,'  which  has  been  so 
 unduly  magnified  by  many.  Still,  as  the  desola- 
 tion of  Syria  and  Ephraim  actually  took  place  some 
 seven  centuries  before  the  birth  of  Christ  (the 
 inhabitants  of  Damascus  having  been  carried  cap- 
 tive by  Tiglath-pileser  about  two  years  after  the 
 date  of  the  prediction  (2  Kings  xvi.  9),  and  the 
 removal  of  the  Israelites  completed  by  Esar- 
 haddon  sixty -three  years  later  (see  v.  8,  and 
 comp.  2  Kings  xvii.  23,  24)),  it  may  be  thought 
 strange  that  Isaiah  should  seem  to  connect  the 
 two  events  chronologically  together  (ver.  16). 
 The  anachronism,  however,  is  only  inferential 
 and  apparent ;  for  what  is  said  was  strictly  true. 
 And  so  far  as  there  is  any  ambiguity,  it  is  quite 
 in  accordance  with  the  enigmatical  character 
 and  studied  obscurity  of  prophecy  in  general.  The 
 prophet  might  have  been  commissioned  to  say 
 '700  years  before,'  or  'long  before.'  For  wise 
 reasons,  however,  it  was  not  deemed  expedient 
 that  the  precise  period  of  Messiah's  coming  should 
 yet  be  made  known  ;  the  language  on  this  point, 
 therefore,  is  purposely  vague.  As  Dr.  Henderson 
 has  well  observed,  '  the  uncertainty  in  regard  to 
 time  was  calculated  to  exert  a  salutary  influence 
 upon  the  minds  of  believers,  by  keeping  up  in  them 
 a  constant  expectation  of  the  event ;  just  as  the 
 uncertainty  of  the  time  of  our  Lord's  second  ad- 
 vent has  always  been  found  to  operate  favourably 
 upon  the  minds  of  his  people.'  We  meet  with 
 the  same  commingling  of  times  indeed  in  reference 
 to  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  which  is  connected 
 in  a  similar  manner  in  the  N.  T.  with  events  that 
 were  to  precede  it  by  even  mnch  greater  intervals. 
 Thus  our  Lord  himself  (Matt.  xxiv.  29)  speaks  of 
 his  coming  to  judgment  as  if  it  were  shortly  to 
 follow  (e^(?ea)s  /uerd)  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
 So  the  Apostle  Paul,  correcting  the  error  into 
 which  the  Thessalonicns  had  been  led  as  to  '  the 
 day  of  Christ'  being  then  'at  hand,'  assures  them 
 that  that  day  should  not  come  '  except  there  should 
 come  a  falling  away  first,  and  the  man  of  sin  be 
 revealed  ;'  yet  (assuming  with  the  majority  of  ex- 
 positors that  the  reference  is  to  the  Papacy)  fifteen 
 centuries  have  already  elapsed  since  '  he  that  let' 
 was  '  taken  out  of  the  way,'  and  not  less  than  eight 
 centuries  since  '  the  mystery  cf  iniquity'  was  fully 
 '  revealed,'  and  the  pretensions  of  its  head  reached 
 their  climax. 
 
 The  limits  of  this  article  preclude  a  more  minute 
 criticism  of  the  passage,  and  refutation  of  the 
 various  opinions  from  which  we  dissent.  We  can 
 only  remark  upon  one  or  two  words  in  conclu- 
 sion : — 
 
 That  one  future  event  was  sometimes  made  the 
 *  sign'  (riiS)  of  another  anterior  to  it  in  point  of 
 time,  is  shewn  by  Dr.  Henderson  from  Exod.  iii. 
 12  ;  Jer.  xliv.  29,  30.  An  example  still  more  appro- 
 priate, as  occurring  in  the  same  author,  and  relat- 
 ing to  a  parallel  case,  will  be  found  in  chap,  xxxvii. 
 of  this  prophet,  ver.  30,  31  (compared  with  2  Kings 
 xix.  29),  where  the  promise,  that  for  two  years  the 
 people  should  subsist  on  the  spontaneous  produce 
 of  the  seed  of  the  previous  harvest,  is  constituted  a 
 '  sign'  that  the  kingdom  of  Judah  should  recover 
 from  the  effects  of  the  Assyrian  invasion,  and  by 
 inference,  that  the  designs  of  Sennacherib  agamst 
 
IMMANUEL  B.  SALOMON  ROMI         -iSS 
 
 INCENSE 
 
 Jemsakm  should  he  frustrated,  of  which  a  positive 
 lissurance  is  subjoined  in  ver.  33  and  following  ; 
 just  as  the  sign  of  Immanuel,  which  is  indirect, 
 and  indefinite  as  to  time,  is  supplemented,  ch.  viii. , 
 by  a  special  and  definite  token  of  the  downfall  of 
 Samaria  and  Damascus  within  the  space  of  two 
 years. 
 
 In  regard  to  nOpJ?,  we  are  perfectly  willing  to 
 
 accept  the  derivation  of  Gesenius  (from  the  Arab. 
 
 f^ 
 
 z,  pubcs  fitit),    and    the    etymological    sense 
 
 thence  derived,  ptiella  mthilis,  '  a  marriageable 
 maid,'  along  with  the  admission  of  its  advocates 
 regarding  the  7^sus  Icqiiendi,  which  is  what,  after 
 all,  fixes  the  meaning  of  a  term,  '  that  in  all  the 
 places  of  the  O.  T.  in  which  the  word  occurs,  it 
 undoubtedly  denotes  a  young  woman  who  is  pro- 
 perly and  strictly  a  vit^^iiC  (Dr.  P.  Smith's  Test,  to 
 Mess.,  sec.  19,  note  A)  ;  for  in  that  case  it  is  the 
 most  apposite  designation  that  could  have  been 
 selected  for  the  virgin  mother  of  our  Lord. 
 
 In   fine,    with   respect   to  PXIJQJ?  we  hold,  in 
 
 accordance  with  the  views  above  exhibited — (i) 
 That  it  is  an  expressive  epithet  or  fide,  and  not  a 
 proper  name.  (2)  That  it  denotes  that  the  pre- 
 sence of  God  sJioidd  be  with  his  people,  to  defend 
 and  deliver  them ;  the  same  expression,  or  others 
 of  precisely  similar  import,  being  of  frequent 
 occurrence  in  the  sacred  writers,  from  Moses  down- 
 wards, of  which  it  may  be  sufficient  to  adduce  as 
 examples  Gen.  xxvi.  24,  28  ;  xxxix.  2,  21  ;  xlviii. 
 21  ;  I  Sam.  xvi.  18  ;  i  Kings  viii.  57  ;  Ps.  xlvi. 
 7,  II  ;  Zech.  viii.  23,  and  especially  the  repetition 
 of  the  phrase  in  the  immediate  context  of  this  pas- 
 sage (ch.  viii.  10),  compared  with  its  like  use  on  a 
 similar  occasion,  2  Chron.  xxxii.  7,  8.  (Compare 
 also  the  use  of  avv-elfii  and  adsum  in  the  classics, 
 as — 01  Geo;  cxiv  riplv  ^crovrai,  Xen.  Anad.  iii.  I,  21  ; 
 Adsis  O  !  placidusqiie  juves,  Virg.  ^"w.  iv.  578.) 
 (3)  That  it  is  of  analogous  significancy  to  the  name 
 (Jesus)  actually  conferred  on  our  Lord  in  confor- 
 mity with  the  directions  of  the  angel.  (4)  That 
 the  former,  no  more  than  the  latter,  can  fairly  be 
 considered  as  implying  the  divinity  of  our  Lord. 
 In  this,  as  in  many  other  such  cases,  we  have  in- 
 sensibly brought  to  the  term,  from  independent 
 sources  of  information,  an  idea  which  is  not  in  it, 
 and  which  does  not  harmonize  with  the  context 
 and  occasion.  All  that  can  be  said  is,  that,  as 
 applied  to  Christ,  the  title  has  ■x  pecidiar  appropri- 
 ateness. Let  it  be  enough  that  divine  attributes  are 
 explicitly  ascribed  to  him  in  a  prophecy  which 
 must  have  been  delivered  almost  immediately  after 
 (ch.  ix.  6).— W.  S. 
 
 IMMANUEL  B.    SALOMON   ROMI.     Tbis 
 distinguished  poet   and  commentator,  also  called 
 
 PX^"IJJD3  nyTn  ^yp^,  the  prime  of  science  in  Rome, 
 was  born  in  the  eternal  city  about  a.d.  1265,  of  a 
 highly  respectable  Roman  family  denominated 
 (□'JIIST)  Ziphronlm,  and  by  diligent  study  and  his 
 natural  endowments  soon  became  master  of  the 
 whole  cycle  of  Biblical  and  Talmudic  literature,  as 
 well  as  of  the  productions  of  ancient  and  modern 
 Greece  and  Rome.  His  brilliant  talents,  his 
 charming  poetry,  and  his  delightful  company, 
 made  him  a  general  favourite,  and  attracted  the 
 notice  of  the  immortal   Dante,   so   that   the   tv/o 
 
 spirits,  kindred,  and  yet  different  in  many  respects, 
 formed  a  mutual  and  intmiate  attachment.  Im- 
 manuel wrote  commentaries  on  the  whole  O.  T., 
 with  the  exception  of  the  minor  Prophets  and 
 Ezra,  giving  not  only  a  grammatical  and  archaeolo- 
 gical explanation  of  the  text,  but  making  also  some 
 of  the  most  valuable  remarks  upon  the  nature  and 
 spirit  of  the  poetical  books.  It  is  greatly  to  be 
 regretted  that  of  all  his  exegetical  works  whicli  are 
 in  different   public  libraries  of  Europe,  the  Coin- 
 
 inentary  on  Proverbs   (^X'tS  ?V  t/'"l"lS),    and    same 
 
 glosses  on  the  Psalms  (D"'^nn  tmSO  D"'D1p^),  are 
 the  only  ones  as  yet  puljlished,  the  former  in 
 Naples  i486,  and  the  latter  in  Parma  1S06.  The 
 introduction  of  his  commentary  on  the  Song  of 
 Songs  has  been  published  with  an  English  transla- 
 tion by  Ginsburg,  Historical  and  Critical  Commen- 
 tary on  the  Song  of  Songs,  Longman  1857,  j:i.  49- 
 55.  Immanuel  died  about  1330.  Comp.  Zunz, 
 in  Geiger's  IVissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift,  Stuttgart 
 1839,  iv.  194,  etc.  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  ynden, 
 Leipzig  1863,  vol.  vii.  p.  307,  etc. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 IMMER  (-1?3X  ;  Sept.  '^y-m?).    i.  The  father  (  ' 
 
 Pashur,  who  was  chief  governor  of  the  Temple  in 
 the  time  of  Jeremiah,  and  the  head  of  a  priestly 
 family  (Ezra  ii.  37  ;  Neh.  vii.  40  ;  Ezra  x.  20  ; 
 Neh.  lii.  29  ;  xi.  13  ;  I  Chron.  ix.  12) ;  from  which 
 the  sixteenth  order  or  coarse  was  formed,  I  Chrou, 
 xxiv.  14. 
 
 2.  The  name  of  a  place  in  Babylonia,  Ezra  ii. 
 59  ('Emmtjp)  ;  Neh.  vii.  61  ('le/^T^p),  from  which 
 several  persons  returned  with  Zerubbabel  to  Jeru- 
 salem who  could  not  prove  their  nationality. — 
 J.  E.  R. 
 
 INCENSE,  niOp,  once  miDp,  LXX.  evixla/xa, 
 
 ffwdiffLs  ;  Vulg.  thymiama,  is  to  be  distinguished 
 
 from  nj37,  lebonah,  or  frankincense,  with  which, 
 
 however,  it  is  confounded  by  Calmet,  as  it  some- 
 times also  is  in  the  A.  V. ;  the  former  being  a  con- 
 fection of  several  sweet  spices  ;  the  latter,  a  distinct 
 precious  gtmi,  forming  one  of  the  ingredients  of  the 
 incense.  The  components  of  incense,  as  given  in 
 Exod.  xxx. ,  are  Stacte,  Onycha,  Galbanum,  and 
 pure  Frankincense,*  tempered  together,  or  rather, 
 
 salted,  n?Op.     Salt,  the  symbol  of  incorruptness, 
 
 was  added  to  all  sacrifices  and  offerings,  except 
 the  wine  of  the  drink  offerings,  the  blood,  and  the 
 wood  (Lev.  ii.  13,  where  see  Bp.  Patrick).  These 
 four  ingredients  were  mingled  together  '  in  equal 
 proportions,^  133  "13,    according   to    the   A.    V., 
 
 LXX.,  Vulg.,  '  Targ.  et  Arabs  uterque,'  although 
 '  Ebenesra  et  Abarbanel :  singida  M-om3,\.7i.  seo?-sim , 
 atque  ita  hac  formula  utuntur  in  Talm.  Sebach  2 
 (Ges.  Thes.  17S).  What  weight  of  each  ingredient 
 was  compounded  at  a  time  is  unknown  ;  for,  says 
 Bp.  Patrick,  '  I  see  no  authority  for  what  the 
 Hebrew  doctors  say,  that  there  were  70  pounds 
 of  each  of  the  four  spices ;  and  they  add  (which 
 makes  all  they  say  of  this  matter  questionable), 
 that  there  were  also  several  pounds  of  Cinnamon, 
 and  Cassia,  and  Crocus,  in  short,  of  13  several 
 spices,  which  Josephus  [Bell.  Jiid.  v.  5)  affirms 
 were  in  this  composition — of  which  Moses,   they 
 
 •  See    AiiALiM,    Algum,   Chelbenah,    Le- 
 bonah. and  Nataf;  and  Kalisch  on  Exod.  xx\-  34. 
 
INCENSE 
 
 S84 
 
 INCENSE 
 
 say,  made  in  the  whole  368  lbs.;  that  is,  one 
 pound  for  every  day  in  the  year,  and  three  for  the 
 day  of  Expiation.  And  accordingly  R.  Levi 
 Barzelonita  saith,  the  priests  made  every  year  as 
 much  as  would  suffice  for  every  day  of  it ;  and  that 
 the  ordinary  priests  might  make  it  as  well  as  the 
 high-priest,  Praecept.  ci.'  (Com.  on  Exod.  xxx.  34). 
 
 Incense  compounded  in  any  other  way  than  that 
 prescribed  by  Moses  was  called  'stratige  incense,'  and 
 was  forbidden  to  be  offered  (Exod.  xxx.  9) ;  this  law, 
 as  well  as  the  requisition  in  ver.  36,  that  it  should 
 be  '■pure,''  excludes  all  those  additional  ingredients 
 mentioned  by  Josephus  and  the  Rabbins  ;  and  if 
 they  were  introduced  in  later  times,  as  seems  to 
 have  been  the  case,  it  was  done  in  direct  violation 
 of  the  law. 
 
 This  incense  is  called  '  most  holy,'  D"'ti'1p  Clp 
 
 (ver.  36),  because  it  was  to  be  used  in  the  service  of 
 Jehovah  only,  and  was  pre-eminently  sacred  to  him. 
 The  preparation  of  a  similar  kind  by  any  one  for 
 pi-ivate  use  was  forbidden  under  a  severe  penalty — 
 the  penalty  of  excision  from  among  his  people 
 (Exod.  xxx.  38)  ;  but  tliat  this  includes  the  excision 
 not  only  of  the  transgressor  himself  but  of  his 
 'whole  race'  is  far  from  'probable,'  as  Bp. 
 Patrick  says. 
 
 Aaron  at  first  performed  the  duty  of  burning 
 incense,  but  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been  made 
 an  exclusive  part  of  the  functions  of  the  high- 
 priest  ;  for  afterwards  the  sons  of  Aaron  in  their 
 courses  performed  this  service,  as  appears  from 
 Luke  i.  8,  9,  when  Zacharias,  who  was  not  an 
 high-priest,  offered  incense  when  it  fell  to  his  lot. 
 The  offering  of  incense  was  considered  the  most 
 honourable  part  of  the  priest's  duty  ;  a  peculiar 
 blessing  was  supposed  to  attach  to  it ;  but  surely 
 Alford  is  wrong  when  he  says  that,  '  the  same 
 person  could  not  serve  in  it  more  than  once'  (N. 
 T.  on  L.  i.  9),  since  the  parts  of  the  priestis  duty 
 were  distributed  by  lot  (^Xax^,  Lightfoot,  Minis- 
 terhtjn  Templi,  ix.  i,  Hor.  Heb.  Tal.  on  L.  i.  9) ; 
 but  that  all  might  share  the  honour,  those  of  the 
 family  who  ministered  on  any  particular  day,  who 
 had  not  hitherto  obtained  the  incense,  cast  lots  for 
 it  among  themselves  (Lightfoot,  Miiiist.  Temp.  Lx. 
 5).  Uzziah,  attempting  to  invade  this  sacred  func- 
 tion of  the  priesthood,  was  smitten  with  'leprosy' 
 which  '  clave  to  him  till  the  day  of  his  death ' 
 (2  Chron.  xxvi.  16-21).  [Offering.] 
 
 The  times  for  offering  mcense  are  distinctly 
 specified.  First,  it  was  to  be  burned  every  morning 
 and  every  evening  in  the  holy  place,  on  the  '  altar  of 
 incense '  provided  for  the  purpose.  This  altar  was 
 made  of  '  Shittim,'  or  acacia  wood,  a  cubit  in 
 length  and  breadth,  covered  with  gold,  encircled 
 with  a  golden  crown  or  wreath,  having  horns  at 
 the  corners,  and  rings  beneath  the  crown,  through 
 which  the  acacia  gold-covered  staves  passed  for 
 carrying  it.  It  stood  before  the  vail  which  sepa- 
 rated the  holy  from  the  most  holy  place.  On  this 
 altar,  then,  the  priests  burned  incense  eveiy  even- 
 ing when  they  lighted,  and  every  morning  when 
 ttiey  trimmed,  the  lamps  in  the  sanctuary.  '  Mane, 
 inter  saiigidnein  et  membra  sitffiehat,  vesperi,  ijiter 
 membra  et  libamina  (Talm.  in  Lightfoot  M.  T. 
 ix.  5).  When  the  priest  entered  to  burn  incense, 
 the  people,  at  the  sound  of  a  bell,*  were  removed 
 from  the  temple  and  stood  without,  and  the  priests 
 
 *  The  3figrepha. 
 
 and  Levites  hastened  to  take  their  stations.  The 
 most  profound  silence  prevailed  (Rev.  viii.  5)  while 
 prayer  ascended  to  God  from  the  assembled  wor- 
 shippers. At  a  signal  from  the  Prcefcctus  Miiiisterii 
 the  priest  cast  incense  upon  the  fire  on  the  altar 
 and  then  departed.  '  When  the  incense  and  the 
 prayers  were  finished  the  parts  of  the  victim  were 
 laid  on  the  altar,  and  then  the  Levites  applied 
 themselves  to  psalmody,  and  the  priests  to  the 
 blowing  of  trumpets'  (Lightfoot,  Ho?:  Heb,  et 
 Tal.  on  L.  i.  9,  10 ;  M.  T.  cix.  5).  [Altar.] 
 
 On  the  great  day  of  Atonement  it  is  enjoined  the 
 high-priest  '  that  he  shall  take  a  censer  full  of 
 burning  coals  of  fire  from  off  the  altar  before  the 
 Lord,  and  his  hand  full  of  sweet  incense  beaten 
 small,  and  bring  it  within  the  vail,  and  he  shall 
 put  the  incense  on  the  fire  before  the  Lord,  that 
 the  cloud  of  incense  may  cover  the  mercy-seat  that 
 is  upon  the  testimony,  that  he  die  not '  (Lev.  xvi. 
 12,  13).  Before  he  entered  with  the  incense,  the 
 Jewish  doctors  tell  us,  that  the  elders  of  the  San- 
 hedrim brought  him  into  the  house  of  Abtines, 
 where  the  incense  was  kept,  that  he  might  learn 
 how  it  was  to  be  handled.  Then  they  adjured 
 him  thus  :  '  Lord  high-priest,  we,  the  delegates  of 
 the  Sanhedrim,  ....  adjure  thee  by  Him  who 
 has  caused  His  name  to  dwell  in  this  temple,  that 
 thou  make  no  change  in  those  things  we  have  said 
 unto  you.  Then  they  parted  in  tears.'  The  reason 
 of  this  solemn  adjuration  was,  that  the  Sadducees 
 taught  that  he  might  kindle  the  incense  without  the 
 vail,  and  then  cany  it  smoking  into  the  most  holy 
 place,  contrary  to  the  express  command  of  the 
 Lord.  The  high-priest  then  took  a  censer  full  of 
 live  coals  from  the  altar  and  placed  it  on  a  bench 
 in  the  temple,  and  from  a  vase  brought  to  him  he 
 took  a  handful  of  incense  and  threw  it  upon  a  plate. 
 He  took  the  censer  of  coals  in  his  right  hand,  and 
 the  plate  with  the  incense  in  his  left.  Thus  he 
 entered  the  most  holy  place  and  approached  the 
 Ark,  on  which  place  he  deposited  his  coals,  and 
 poured  incense  into  his  hands,  and  placed  it  on 
 the  coals,  and  waited  until  the  whole  apartment 
 was  filled  with  smoke,  then  he  retired  backward 
 from  the  Adytum  with  his  face  turned  towards  the 
 Ark.  Having  come  forth,  he  offered  this  short 
 prayer  :  '  O  Lord  God,  may  it  please  thee  that  this 
 year  may  have  timely  rains ;  nor  suffer  thy  sceptre 
 to  depart  from  Judah ;  nor  thy  people  Israel  to 
 want  food ;  nor  the  prayers  of  transgressors  to 
 come  before  thee'  (Lightfoot,  M.  T.  c.  xv.)  Pre- 
 sently he  went  forth  out  of  the  sanctuary  and 
 showed  himself  to  the  people,  that  '  they  might 
 not  suspect  he  had  done  amiss  and  miscarried  in 
 his  office' — (Patrick).     [AtonEiMENT,  Day  OF.] 
 
 Incense  was  also  offered  on  extraordinary  occa- 
 sions, as  in  the  case  of  the  plague  which  broke  out 
 among  the  murmuring  people  after  the  destruction 
 of  Korah  and  his  company,  when  Aaron,  by  com- 
 mand of  Moses,  took  a  censer  and  put  fire  therein, 
 and  incense  upon  the  fire,  and  ran  into  the  midst 
 of  the  congregation  and  '  stood  between  the  living 
 and  the  dead,'  and  made  atonement  for  the  people, 
 so  that  the  '  plague  was  stayed '  (Num.  xvi.  46-50). 
 Thus  atonement,  usually  made  by  blood,  was 
 made  by  incense,  '  Cuf7-ens  ira  Dei,  sacerdotii  voce 
 pjohibcbatnr''  (Jerome)— anotable  type  of  the  power 
 with  God  of  our  great  High-priest  and  Intercessor, 
 the  Lord  Jesus — (Patrick).  [Tabernacle,  iii.  926.] 
 
 The  offering  of  incense  formed  a  part  of  the 
 worsluu  of  almost  all  nations.     How  ancient  the 
 
INCENSE 
 
 385 
 
 INDIA 
 
 practice  is  we  liave  no  means  of  knowing.  By  the 
 Egyptians  '  incense  was  presented  to  all  the  gods, 
 and  introduced  on  eveiy  grand  occasion  when  a 
 complete  oblation  was  made  (Wilkinson's  Pep.  Act. 
 of  the  Anct.  Egyptians,  i.  265). 
 
 As  might  be  expected,  the  Jews  in  their  fits  of 
 idolatry  offered  incense  to  their  idols  (Hos,  xi.  2  ; 
 Jer.  xlviiL  35. 
 
 The  incense  burnt  in  the  Temple  is  called  '  a 
 perpetual  incense'  (Exod.  xxx.  8),  'in  the  same 
 sense  that  the  morning  and  evening  sacrifice  is 
 called  a  perpetual  burnt-offering  (Exod.  xxxix.  38, 
 42),  because  it  was  never  intermitted  twice:  a  day. 
 And  one  reason  why  it  was  thus  continually  burnt 
 was  because  of  the  vast  number  of  beasts  that  were 
 slain  and  cut  to  pieces,  and  washed,  and  burnt 
 every  day  in  the  sanctuary,  which  would  have 
 made  it  smell  like  shambles  (as  Maitiionides  speaks), 
 if  this  sweet  odour  had  not  perfumed  it  and  the 
 garments  of  the  priests  who  there  ministered. 
 Whence,  saith  he,  that  speech  of  the  Rabbins  : 
 This  sweet  odoia-  ?night  he  smdt  as  far  as  yericho  ; 
 whereby  the  reverence  due  to  God's  house  was  pre- 
 served, which  would  have  been  contemptible  if 
 there  had  been  an  ill  smell  constantly  in  it,  as  he 
 truly  observes.  More  Nevoch.  p.  iii.  c.  45 '  (Pat.  07t 
 Exod.  xxx.  8).  There  need  be  little  difficulty  in 
 admitting  this.  The  incense  was,  most  likely, 
 disinfectant  and  corrective,  purifying  and  sweeten- 
 ing the  atmosphere  of  the  sacred  house.  But  this 
 view  does  not  interfere  in  the  least  with  the  higher 
 and  nobler  object  contemplated  by  the  appoint- 
 ment of  the  incense  offering.  There  can  be  little 
 doubt  that  it  was  intended,  more  humano,  in  the 
 honour  of  Jehovah,  the  Great  King,  whose  palace 
 the  tabernacle,  as  also  the  temple,  was.  In  this 
 way  it  served  its  purpose  directly  and  at  once  ;  but 
 as  God  is  truly  worshipped  in  a  spiritual  manner 
 only  ('  God  is  a  spirit'),  the  incense  in  the  symbol- 
 ism of  the  Hebrews  was  intended  to  represent 
 some  spiritual  truth.  What  was  that  ?  fosephns 
 thinks  that  the  spices  gathered  from  sea  and  all 
 lands  inhabited  and  uninhabited  were  designed  to 
 teach  that  'all  things  are  of  God  and  for  God' 
 (fewish  IVar,  Traill's  Trans.,  B.  v.,  sec.  5).  Philo 
 indulges  in  his  accustomed  vagaries  of  the  imagina- 
 tion. Bahr  in  his  Sytnbolik  regards  the  incense  as 
 the  symbol  of  the  name  of  God,  each  ingredient 
 representing  some  divine  perfection.  Fairbaim,  in 
 his  admirable  Typology,  following  Hengstenberg, 
 takes  what  appears  the  most  natural  and  Scriptural 
 view.  In  the  language  of  the  latter,  '  the  smoking, 
 sweet-smelling  incense,  is  in  Scripture  the  standing 
 symbol  of  the  prayer  of  believers,  which  is  precious 
 before  God  (comp.  Apoc.  v.  8  ;  viii.  3,  4  ;  Luke 
 i.  10).  The  Psalmist  comes  forth  here  [Ps.  cxli.  2] 
 as  an  expositor  of  the  Mosaic  law,  in  which  the 
 offering  of  incense  every  morning  and  evening 
 (Exod.  xxx.  77,  95)  symbolised  jirayer,  and  re- 
 minded the  faithful  of  their  obligation  to  present  it, 
 and  the  blessing  which  arises  from  it.  He  who 
 prayed  brought  to  the  Lord  the  substance  of  the 
 incense-offering'  [Com.  on  Ps.  cxli.)  Nor  is  it  a 
 conclusive  objection  to  this  view,  that,  if  the  incense 
 is  a  symbol  of  prayer,  the  evening  sacrifice  must 
 have  the  same  symbolic  meaning  ;  for  the  evening 
 sacrifice  is  rather  the  meat-offering,  Pin^JD,  which, 
 
 according  to  Hengstenberg,    '  is   in   the  lav/  the 
 symbolical  representation  of  good  works.'     Hence 
 the  Psalmist  prays,  that  his  prayer  might  be  set 
 vol..  II. 
 
 forth  as  incense  before  the  Lord,  and  the  lifting  up 
 of  his  hands  as  the  evening  meat-offering  ;  prayer 
 and  good  works  being  inseparably  connected  in  the 
 true  worship  of  God.  It  might,  indeed,  appear  at 
 first  view,  that  the  incense  was  not  symbolical  of 
 the  prayers  of  the  saints,  but  rather  of  that  which 
 renders  those  prayers  acceptable  before  God — the 
 merits  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  But  in  Rev.  v.  8  the 
 representatives  of  the  Church  have  golden  vials 
 full  of  odours  (lit.  incenses,  QvixLaiMxrwv),  which  are 
 said  to  be  'the  prayers  of  the  saints,'  where  the 
 logical  connection  of  the  relative  is  with  '  odours,' 
 not  with  'vials,'  which  in  no  proper  sense  could  be 
 called  the  ^ prayos  of  the  saints.'  And  in  Rev. 
 viii.,  ailthough  the  incense  is  'given'  to  the  angel 
 to  be  offered  with  the  prayers  of  the  saints,  all  that 
 we  are  compelled  by  the  symbolism  to  understand 
 is  the  acceptability  of  the  prayers  of  the  saints  of 
 God,  long  unanswered,  but  now  at  length  about  to 
 be  accomplished.  It  is,  however,  perfectly  true 
 that  the  prayers  of  the  saints  are  a  sweet  mcense 
 unto  God,  chiefly  because  they  came  up  before 
 Him  '  through  Jesus  Christ.' — I.  J. 
 
 INCHANTMENTS.     [Witchcraft.] 
 
 INDIA  (^nn  ;  Sept.  'IwSiKTj).  This  name  oc- 
 curs only  in  Esther  i.  i  ;  viii.  9,  where  the  Persian 
 king  is  described  as  reigning  '  from  India  unto 
 Ethiopia,,  over  a  hundred  and  seven  and  twenty 
 provinces.'  It  is  found  again,  however,  in  the 
 Apocr)'pha,  where  India  is  mentioned  among  the 
 countries  which  the  Romans  took  from  Antiochus 
 and  gave  to  Eumenes  (l  Maccab.  viii.  8).  It  is 
 also  with  some  reason  conceived  that  in  Acts  ii.  9 
 we  should  read  ''Yvhla.v,  India,  and  not  'loySata;/, 
 Judcea.  If  this  could  be  admitted,  an  interesting 
 subject  of  inquiry  would  arise ;  for  these  dwellers 
 in  India — that  is,  Jews  of  India — are  described  as 
 being  present  in  Jerusalem  at  the  Passover.  There 
 is  much  to  say  in  favour  of  this  reading,  but  more 
 in  favour  of  Idumsea  ;  for  the  name  of  that  coun- 
 try, ''\hov\j.ala.v,  might,  much  more  easily  than  that 
 of  India,  ''\vciia.v,  have  been  accidentally,  or  rather 
 carelessly,  corrupted  into  ''Yovhala.v  :  and,  at  the 
 same  time,  the  name  of  Idumsea  would  come 
 better  into  the  list  than  that  of  India,  seemg  that 
 the  enumeration  is  manifestly  taken  from  east  to 
 west  ;  which  allows  Idumsea  with  great  propriety 
 to  follow  Mesopotamia,  but  forbids  India  to  do  so. 
 Whichever  may  be  preferred  of  the  other  two,  the 
 reading  '  Judsea'  cannot  but  be  wrong  ;  fo!?,  on  the 
 face  of  the  list,  we  cannot  but  see  the  superfluous- 
 ness  of  the  infoiTnation,  that  the  people  of  Judaea 
 were  present  in  their  own  city  at  the  Passover. 
 
 It  is  evident  on  the  face  of  the  above  intima- 
 tions, and  indeed  from  all  ancient  history,  that  the 
 countiy  known  us  India  in  ancient  times  extended 
 more  to  the  west,  and  did  not  reach  so  far  to  the 
 east — that  is,  was  not  known  so  far  to  the  east — 
 as  the  India  of  the  moderns.  When  we  read  of 
 ancient  India,  we  must  clearly  not  understand  the 
 whole  of  Hmdostan,  but  chiefly  the  northern  parts 
 of  it,  &r  the  countries  between  the  Indus  and  the 
 Ganges  ;  although  it  is  not  necessary  to  assert  that 
 the  rest  of  that  peninsula,  particularly  its  western 
 coast,  was  then  altogether  unknown.  It  was  from 
 this  quarter  that  the  Persians  and  Greeks  (to  whom 
 we  are  indebted  for  the  earliest  accounts  of  India) 
 invaded  the  countiy  ;  and  this  was  consequently 
 the  region  which  first  became  generally  known. 
 The  countries  bordering  on  the  Ganges  continued 
 
 2  C 
 
INHERITANCE 
 
 386 
 
 INHERITANCE 
 
 to  be  involved  in  obscurity,  tlie  great  kingdom  of 
 the  Prasians  excepted,  which,  situated  nearly  above 
 the  modern  Bengal,  was  dimly  discernible.  The 
 nearer  we  approach  the  Indus,  the  more  clear  be- 
 comes our  knowledge  of  the  ancient  geography  of 
 the  country  ;  and  it  follows  that  the  districts  of 
 which  at  the  present  day  we  know  the  least  were 
 anciently  best  known.  Besides,  the  western  and 
 northern  boundaries  were  not  the  same  as  at  pre- 
 sent. To  the  west,  India  was  not  then  bounded 
 by  the  river  Indus,  but  by  a  chain  of  mountains 
 which,  under  the  name  of  Koh  (whence  the  Gre- 
 cian appellation  of  the  Caucasus),  extended  from 
 Bactria  to  Makran,  or  Gedrosia,  enclosing  the 
 kingdoms  of  Candahar  and  Cabul,  the  modern 
 kingdom  of  Eastern  Persia,  or  Afghanistan.  Tliese 
 districts  anciently  formed  part  of  India,  as  well  as, 
 further  to  the  south,  the  less  perfectly  known 
 countries  of  the  Arabi  and  Haurs  (the  Arabitos  and 
 Orita;  of  Arrian,  vi.  21),  bordering  on  Gedrosia. 
 This  western  boundary  continued  at  all  times  the 
 same,  and  was  removed  to  the  Indus  only  in  con- 
 sequence of  the  victories  of  Nadir  Shah. 
 
 Towards  the  north,  ancient  India  overpassed 
 not  less  its  present  limit.  It  comprehended  the 
 whole  of  the  mountainous  region  above  Cashmir, 
 Badakshan,  Belur  Land,  the  western  boundary 
 mountains  of  Little  Bucharia,  or  Little  Thibet,  and 
 even  the  desert  of  Cobi,  so  far  as  it  was  known. 
 The  discoveiy  of  a  passage  by  sea  to  the  coasts  of 
 India  has  contributed  to  withdraw  from  these 
 regions  the  attention  of  Europeans,  and  left  them 
 in  an  obscurity  which  hitherto  has  been  little  dis- 
 turbed, although  the  current  of  events  seems  likely 
 ere  long  to  lead  to  our  better  knowledge. 
 
 From  this  it  appears  that  the  India  of  Scripture 
 included  no  part  of  the  present  India,  seeing  that 
 it  was  confined  to  the  territories  possessed  by  the 
 Persians  and  the  Syrian  Greeks,  that  never  ex- 
 tended beyond  the  Indus,  which,  since  the  time  of 
 Nadir  Shah,  has  been  regarded  as  the  western 
 boundary  of  India.  Something  of  India  beyond 
 the  Indus  became  known  through  the  conquering 
 march  of  Alexander,  and  still  more  through  that  of 
 Seleucus  Nicator,  who  penetrated  to  the  banks  of 
 the  Ganges  ;  but  the  notions  thus  obtained  are  not 
 embraced  in  the  Scriptural  notices,  which,  both  in 
 the  canonical  and  the  Apocryphal  text,  are  confined 
 to  Persian  India.  (See  Heeren's  Historical  Re- 
 (tarches,  i.  c.  I,  sec.  3,  on  Persian  India ;  and 
 Rennel's  Gcog.  of  Herodotus.) 
 
 INHERITANCE.  The  laws  and  observances 
 which  determine  the  acquisition  and  regulate  the 
 devolution  of  property,  are  among  the  influences 
 which,  affect  the  vital  interests  of  states  ;  and  it  is 
 therefore  of  high  consequence  to  ascertain  the 
 nature  and  bearing  of  the  laws  and  observances  re- 
 lating to  this  subject,  which  come  to  us  with  the 
 sanction  of  the  Bible.  We  may  also  premise  that, 
 in  a  condition  of  society  such  as  that  in  which  we 
 now  live,  wherein  the  two  diverging  tendencies 
 which  favour  immense  accumulations  on  the  one 
 hand,  and  lead  to  poverty  and  pauperism  on  the 
 other,  are  daUy  becoming  more  and  more  decided, 
 disturbing,  and  baneful  tnere  seems  to  be  required, 
 on  the  part  of  those  who  take  Scripture  as  tlieir 
 guide,  a  careful  study  of  the  foundations  of  human 
 society,  and  of  the  laws  of  property,  as  they  are 
 developed  in  the  divine  records  which  contain  the 
 revealed  will  of  God. 
 
 That  will,  in  truth,  as  it  is  the  source  ot*  all 
 created  things,  and  specially  of  the  earth  and  its 
 intelligent  denizen,  man,  so  is  it  the  original  foun- 
 dation of  property,  and  of  the  laws  by  which  its 
 inheritance  should  be  regulated.  God,  as  the 
 Creator  of  the  earth,  gave  it  to  man  to  be  held, 
 cultivated,  and  enjoyed  (Gen.  i.  28,  sq.  ;  Ps.  cxv. 
 16  ;  Eccles.  v.  9).  The  primitive  records  are  too 
 brief  and  fragmentary  to  supply  us  with  any  details 
 respecting  the  earliest  distribution  or  transmission 
 of  landed  property  ;  but  from  the  passages  to  which 
 reference  has  been  made,  the  important  fact  ap- 
 pears to  be  established  beyond  a  question,  that  the 
 origin  of  property  is  to  be  found,  not  in  the 
 achievements  of  violence,  the  success  of  the  sword, 
 or  any  imaginary  implied  contract,  but  in  the  will 
 and  the  gift  of  the  common  Creator  and  bountiful 
 Father  of  the  human  race.  It  is  equally  clear  that 
 the  gift  was  made,  not  to  any  favoured  portion  of 
 our  race,  but  to  the  race  itself — to  man  as  repre- 
 sented by  our  great  primogenitor,  to  whom  the  use 
 of  the  divine  gift  was  first  graciously  vouchsafed. 
 The  individual  appropriation  of  portions  of  the 
 earth,  and  the  transmission  of  the  parts  thus  appro- 
 priated— in  other  words,  the  consuetudinary  laws  of 
 property — would  be  determined  in  each  instance  by 
 the  peculiar  circumstances  in  which  an  individual, 
 a  family,  or  a  clan,  might  find  itself  placed  in  rela- 
 tion to  the  world  and  its  other  inhabitants  ;  nor  is 
 it  now,  in  the  absence  of  written  evidence,  possible 
 to  ascertain,  and  it  is  useless,  if  not  worse,  ta 
 attempt  to  conjecture,  what  these  laws  were.  This, 
 however,  is  certain,  that  if  in  any  case  they  inflicted 
 injury,  if  they  aided  the  aggrandisement  of  the  few, 
 and  tended  to  the  depression  of  the  many,  they 
 thereby  became  unjust,  and  not  only  lost  their 
 divine  sanction,  but,  by  opposing  the  very  purposes 
 for  which  the  earth  was  given  to  man,  and  operat- 
 ing in  contravention  of  the  divine  will,  they  were 
 disowned  and  condemned  of  God,  the  tenure  of  the 
 property  was  forfeited,  and  a  recurrence  to  first 
 principles  and  a  re-distribution  became  due  alike  to 
 the  original  donor,  and  to  those  whom  he  had  in- 
 tended impartially  to  benefit. 
 
 The  enforcement  of  these  principles  has,  in  diffe- 
 rent ]ieriods  of  human  history,  been  made  by  the 
 seen  hand  of  God,  in  those  terrible  providential 
 visitations  which  upturn  the  very  foundations  of 
 society  and  reconstruct  the  social  frame.  The 
 Deluge  was  a  kind  of  revocation  of  the  Divine  gift; 
 the  Creator  took  back  into  his  own  hands  the 
 earth  which  men  had  filled  with  injustice  and  vio- 
 lence. The  trust,  however,  was,  after  that  terrible 
 punishment,  once  more  committed  to  man,  to  be 
 held,  not  for  himself,  but  for  God  ;  and  to  be  so 
 used  and  improved  as  to  further  the  divine  will  by 
 furthering  human  good.  And,  whatever  conduct 
 may  have  been  pursued,  at  any  period,  at  variance 
 with  the  divine  purpose,  yet  it  is  in  trust,  not  in  ab- 
 solute possession,  it  is  for  God's  purposes,  not  our 
 ovvn,  that  the  earth  at  large,  and  every  portion  of 
 the  earth,  has  been  and  is  still  held.  In  truth, 
 man  is  the  tenant,  not  the  proprietor,  of  the  earth. 
 It  is  the  temporary  use,  not  the  permanent  posses- 
 sion of  it  that  he  enjoys.  The  lord  of  ten  thousand 
 broad  acres,  equally  with  the  poor  penniless  squat- 
 ter, is  a  sojourner  and  pilgrim  in  the  land,  as  all 
 his  fathers  were,  and  is  bound,  not  less  than  the 
 other,  to  remember,  not  only  that  property  has  its 
 duties  as  well  as  its  rights,  but  also  that  its  best 
 titles  are  held  by  a  momentary  tenure,  revoralne  at 
 
INHERITANCE 
 
 387 
 
 INHERITANCE 
 
 the  will  of  an  omnipotent  power,  and  subject  to 
 unerring  scrutiny,  in  regaid  both  to  their  origin 
 and  their  use,  in  a  court  where  the  persons  of  men 
 are  not  respected,  where  justice  is  laid  to  the  line, 
 and  judgment  to  the  plummet  (Is.  xxiii.  17). 
 
 The  impression  which  the  original  gift  of  the 
 earth  was  calculated  to  make  on  men,  the  Great 
 Donor  ,was  pleased,  in  the  case  of  Palestine,  to 
 render,  for  his  own  wise  purposes,  more  decided 
 and  emphatic  by  an  express  re-donation  to  the 
 patriarch  Abraham  (Gen.  xiii.  14,  sij.)  Many 
 years,  however,  elapsed  before  the  promise  was 
 fulfilled.  Meanwhile  the  notices  which  we  have 
 regarding  the  state  of  property  in  the  patriarchal 
 ages,  are  few  and  not  very  definite.  The  products 
 of  the  earth,  however,  were  at  an  early  period  ac- 
 cumulated and  held  as  property.  Violence  in- 
 vaded the  possession ;  opposing  violence  recovered 
 the  goods.  War  soon  sprang  out  of  the  passions 
 of  the  human  heart.  The  necessity  of  civil  go- 
 vernment was  felt.  Consuetudinary  laws  accord- 
 ingly developed  themselves.  The  head  of  the 
 family  was  supreme.  His  will  was  law.  The  phy- 
 sical superiority  which  he  possessed  gave  him  this 
 dominion.  The  same  influence  would  secure  its 
 transmission  in  the  male  rather  than  the  female 
 line.  Hence  too  the  rise  of  the  rights  of  primo- 
 geniture. In  the  early  condition  of  society  which 
 is  called  patriarchal,  landed  property  had  its 
 origin,  indeed,  but  could  not  be  held  of  first 
 importance  by  those  who  led  a  wandering  life, 
 shifting  continually,  as  convenience  suggested,  from 
 one  spot  to  another.  Cattle  were  then  the  chief 
 property  (Gen.  xxiv.  35).  But  land,  if  held,  was 
 held  on  a  freehold  tenure  ;  nor  could  any  other 
 tenure  have  come  into  existence  till  more  complex 
 and  artificial  relations  arose,  resulting,  in  all  pro- 
 bability, from  the  increase  of  population  and  the 
 relative  insufficiency  of  food.  When  Joseph  went 
 down  into  Egypt,  he  appears  to  have  found  the 
 freehold  tenure  prevailing,  which,  however,  he  con- 
 verted into  a  tenancy  at  will,  or,  at  any  rate,  into  a 
 conditional  tenancy.  Other  intimations  are  found 
 in  Genesis  which  confirm  the  general  statements 
 which  have  just  been  made.  Daughters  do  not 
 appear  to  have  had  any  inheritance.  If  there  are 
 any  exceptions  to  this  rule,  they  only  serve  to  prove 
 it.  Thus  Job  (the  book  so  called  is  undoubtedly 
 very  old,  so  that  there  is  no  impropriety  in  citing  it 
 in  this  connection)  is  recorded  (xlii.  15)  to  have 
 given  his  daughters  an  inheritance  conjointly  with 
 their  brothers — a  record  which  of  itself  proves  the 
 singularity  of  the  proceeding,  and  establishes  our 
 position  that  inheritance  generally  followed  the 
 male  line.  How  highly  the  privileges  conferred  by 
 primogeniture  were  valued,  may  be  learnt  from  the 
 history  of  Jacob  and  Esau.  In  the  patriarchal  age 
 doubtless  these  rights  were  very  great.  The  eldest 
 son,  as  being  by  nature  the  first  fitted  for  com- 
 mand, assumed  influence  and  control,  under  his 
 father,  over  the  family  and  its  dependents  ;  and 
 when  the  father  was  removed  by  death,  he  readily, 
 and  as  if  by  an  act  of  Providence,  took  his  father's 
 place.  Thus  he  succeeded  to  the  property  in  suc- 
 ceeding to  the  headship  of  the  family,  the  clan,  or 
 the  tribe.  At  first  the  eldest  son  most  probably 
 took  exclusive  possession  of  his  father's  property 
 and  power  ;  and  when,  subsequently,  a  division 
 became  customaiy,  he  would  still  retain  the  largest 
 share — a  double  portion,  if  not  more  (Gen.  xxvii. 
 25>  29,  40).     That  in  the  days  of  Abraham  other 
 
 sons  partook  with  the  eldest,  and  that  too  though 
 they  were  sons  of  concubines,  is  clear  from  the 
 story  of  Hagar's  expulsion  : — 'Cast  out  (said 
 Sarah)  this  bondwoman  and  her  son ;  for  the  son 
 of  this  bondwoman  shall  not  be  heir  with  my  son, 
 even  with  Isaac '  (Gen.  xxi.  10).  The  few  notices 
 left  us  in  Genesis  of  the  transfer  of  property  from 
 hand  to  hand  are  interesting,  and  bear  a  remark- 
 able similarity  to  what  takes  place  in  Eastern  coun- 
 tries even  at  this  day  (Gen.  xxi.  22,  sq.  ;  xxiii.  9, 
 sq.)  The  purchase  of  the  Cave  of  Machpelah  as  a 
 family  burying-place  for  Abraham,  detailed  in  the 
 last  passage,  serves  to  shew  the  safety  of  property 
 at  that  early  period,  and  the  facility  with  which  an 
 inheritance  was  transmitted  even  to  sons'  sons 
 (comp.  Gen.  xlix.  29).  That  it  was  customary, 
 during  the  father's  lifetime,  to  make  a  disposition 
 of  property,  is  evident  from  Gen.  xxiv.  35,  where 
 it  is  said  that  Abraham  had  given  all  he  had  to 
 Isaac.  This  statement  is  further  confirmed  by 
 ch.  XXV.  5,  6,  where  it  is  added  that  Abraham 
 gave  to  the  sons  of  his  concubines  '  gifts,  send- 
 ing them  away  from  Isaac  his  son,  while  he  yet 
 lived,  eastward  unto  the  east  country.'  Some- 
 times, however,  so  far  were  the  children  of  un- 
 married females  from  being  dismissed  with  a  gift, 
 that  they  shared,  with  what  we  should  temi  the 
 legitimate  children,  in  the  father's  property  and 
 rights.  Thus  Dan  and  Naphtali  were  sons  of  Bil- 
 hah,  Rachel's  maid,  whom  she  gave  to  her  hus- 
 band, failing  to  bear  children  herself.  So  Gad  and 
 Asher  were,  under  similar  circumstances,  sons  of 
 Zilpah,  Leah's  maid  (Gen.  xxx.  2-14).  In  the 
 event  of  the  eldest  son's  dying  in  the  father's  life- 
 time, the  next  son  took  his  place  ;  and  if  the  eldest 
 son  left  a  widow,  the  next  son  made  her  his  wife 
 (Gen.  xxxviii.  7,  sq.),  the  offspring  of  which  union 
 was  reckoned  to  the  first-born  and  deceased  son. 
 Should  the  second  likewise  die,  the  third  son  took 
 his  place  (Gen.  xxxviii.  Ii).  While  the  rights  of 
 the  first-bom  were  generally  established  and  recog- 
 nised, yet  were  they  sometimes  set  aside  in  favour 
 of  a  younger  child.  The  blessing  of  the  father  or 
 the  grandsire  seems  to  have  been  an  act  essential  in 
 the  devolution  of  power  and  property — in  its  effects 
 not  unlike  wills  and  testaments  with  us  ;  and  in- 
 stances are  not  wanting  in  which  this  (so  to  term  it) 
 testamentary  bequest  set  aside  consuetudinary  laws, 
 and  gave  precedence  to  a  younger  son  (Gen.  xlviii. 
 15,  sq.)  Special  claims  on  the  parental  regards 
 were  acknowledged  and  rewarded  by  special  gifts, 
 as  in  the  case  of  Jacob's  donation  of  Joseph  (Gen, 
 xlviii.  22).  In  a  similar  manner,  bad  conduct  on 
 the  part  of  the  eldest  son  (as  well  as  of  others)  sub- 
 jected him,  if  not  to  the  loss  of  his  rights  of  pro- 
 perty, yet  to  the  evil  influence  of  his  father's  dying 
 malediction  (Gen.  xlix.  3)  ;  while  the  good  and 
 favoured,  though  younger,  son  was  led  by  the 
 paternal  blessing  to  anticipate,  and  probably  also 
 to  reap,  the  richest  inheritance  of  individual  and 
 social  happiness  (Gen.  xlix.  8-22). 
 
 The  original  promise  made  to  Abraham  of  the 
 land  of  Palestine  was  solemnly  repeated  to  Isaac 
 (Gen.  xxvi.  3),  the  reason  assigned  being,  because 
 '  Abraham  obeyed  my  voice  and  kept  my  charge, 
 my  commandments,  my  statutes,  and  my  laws  ; 
 while  it  is  expressly  declared  that  the  earlier  inhabi 
 tants  of  the  country  were  dispossessed  and  destined 
 to  extermination  for  the  greatness  of  their  iniquity. 
 The  possession  of  the  promised  land  was  embraced 
 by  Isaac  in  his  dymg  benediction  to  Jacob  (Gen. 
 
INHERITANCE 
 
 388 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 xxviii.  3,  4),  to  whom  God  vouchsafed  (Gen. 
 xxviii.  15  ;■  see  also  xxxv.  10,  11)  to  give  a  re- 
 newed assurance  of  the  destined  inheritance.  That 
 this  donation,  however,  was  held  to  be  dependent 
 for  the  time  and  manner  of  its  fulfilment  on  the 
 divme  will,  appears  from  Gen.  xxxiii.  18,  where 
 Jacob,  on  coming  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  bought 
 for  an  hundred  pieces  of  money  'a  parcel  of  a  field, 
 at  the  hand  of  the  children  of  Hamor.'  Delayed 
 though  the  execution  of  the  promise  was,  confidence 
 never  deserted  the  family  of  Abraham,  so  that 
 Joseph,  dying  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  assured  his 
 brothers  that  they  would  be  visited  of  God  and 
 placed  in  possession  of  Canaan,  enjoining  on  them, 
 in  this  conviction,  that,  when  conducted  to  their 
 possession,  they  should  carry  his  bones  with  them 
 out  of  Egypt  (Gen.  1.  25). 
 
 A  promise  thus  given,  thus  repeated,  and  thus 
 believed,  easily,  and  indeed  unavoidably,  became 
 the  fundamental  principle  of  that  settlement  of  pro- 
 perty which  Moses  made  when  at  length  he  had 
 effected  the  divine  will  in  the  redemption  of  the 
 children  of  Israel.  The  observances  and  practices, 
 loo,  which  we  have  noticed  as  prevailing  among 
 the  patriarchs  would,  no  doubt,  have  great  influ- 
 ence on  the  laws  which  the  Jewish  legislator  ori- 
 ginated or  sanctioned.  The  land  of  Canaan  was 
 divided  among  the  twelve  tribes  descended  through 
 Isaac  and  Jacob  from  Abraham.  The  division  was 
 made  by  lot  for  an  inheritance  among  the  families 
 of  the  sons  of  Israel,  according  to  the  tribes  and  to 
 the  number  and  size  of  families  in  each  tribe.  The 
 tribe  of  Levi,  however,  had  no  inheritance;  but 
 forty-eight  cities  with  their  suburbs  were  assigned 
 to  the  Levites,  each  tribe  giving  according  to  the 
 number  of  cities  that  fell  to  its  share  (Num.  xxxiii. 
 50;  xxxiv.  I  ;  xxxv.  i).  The  inheritance  thus  ac- 
 quired was  never  to  leave  the  tribe  to  which  it  be- 
 longed ;  eveiy  tribe  was  to  keep  strictly  to  its  own 
 inheritance.  An  heiress,  in  consequence,  was  not 
 allowed  to  marry  out  of  her  own  tribe,  lest  property 
 should  pass  by  her  marriage  into  another  tribe 
 (Num.  xxxvi.  6-9).  This  restriction  led  to  the 
 marriage  of  heiresses  with  their  near  relations :  thus 
 the  daughters  of  Zelophehad  '  were  married  unto 
 their  father's  brother's  sons,'  'and  their  inheritance 
 remained  in  the  tribe  of  the  family  of  their  father' 
 (ver.  II,  12;  comp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  iv.  7.  5).  In 
 general  cases  the  inheritance  went  to  sons,  the 
 first-born  receiving  a  double  portion,  '  for  he  is  the 
 beginning  of  his  father's  strength.'  If  a  man  had 
 two  wives,  one  beloved,  the  other  hated,  and  if  the 
 first-bom  were  the  son  of  her  who  was  hated,  he 
 nevertheless  was  to  enjoy  'the  right  of  the  first- 
 born' (Deut.  xxi.  15).  If  a  man  left  no  sons,  the 
 inheritance  passed  to  his  daughters  ;  if  there  was  no 
 daughter,  it  went  to  his  brothers  ;  in  case  there 
 were  no  brothers,  it  was  given  to  his  father's  bro- 
 thers ;  if  his  father  had  no  brothers,  it  came  into 
 possession  of  the  nearest  kinsman  (Num.  xxvii.  8). 
 The  land  was  Jehovah's,  and  could  not  therefore  be 
 permanently  alienated.  Every  fiftieth  year,  what- 
 ever land  had  been  sold  returned  to  its  former 
 owner.  The  value  and  pi-ice  of  land  naturally  rose 
 or  fell  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  years  there 
 were  to  elapse  prior  to  the  ensuing'  fiftieth  or 
 jubilee-year.  If  he  who  sold  the  land,  or  a  kins- 
 man, could  redeem  the  land  before  the  year  of 
 jubilee,  it  was  to  be  restored  to  him  on  his  paying 
 to  the  purchaser  the  value  of  the  produce  of  the 
 years  remaining  till  the  jubilee.     Houses  in  vil- 
 
 lages or  unwalled  towns  might  not  be  sold  for  ever  : 
 they  were  restored  at  the  jubilee,  and  might  at 
 any  time  be  redeemed.  If  a  man  sold  a  dwelling- 
 house  situated  in  a  walled  city,  he  had  the  option 
 of  redeeming  it  within  the  space  of  a  full  year  after 
 it  had  been  sold  ;  but  if  it  remained  unredeemed, 
 it  belonged  to  the  purchaser,  and  did  not  return  to 
 him  who  sold  it  even  at  the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv. 
 8,  23).  The  Levites  were  not  allowed  to  sell  the 
 land  in  the  suburbs  of  their  cities,  though  they 
 might  dispose  of  the  cities  themselves,  which,  how- 
 ever, were  redeemable  at  any  time,  and  must  re- 
 turn at  the  jubilee  to  their  original  possessors  (Lev. 
 xxvii.  16). 
 
 The  regulations  which  the  laws  of  Moses  esta- 
 blished rendered  wills,  er  a  testamentary  disposi- 
 tion of  (at  least)  landed  property,  almost,  if  not 
 quite,  unnecessary;  we  accordingly  find  no  provi- 
 sion for  anything  of  the  kind.  Some  difficulty 
 may  have  been  now  and  then  occasioned  when 
 near  relations  failed  ;  but  this  was  met  by  the  tradi- 
 tional law,  which  furnished  minute  directions  on 
 the  point  (Misch.  Baba  Bathra,  iv,  3,  c.  8,  9). 
 Personal  property  would  naturally  follow  the  land, 
 or  might  be  bequeathed  by  word  of  mouth.  At  a 
 later  period  of  the  Jewish  polity  the  mention  of 
 wills  is  found,  but  the  idea  seems  to  have  been 
 taken  from  foreign  nations.  In  princely  families 
 they  appear  to  have  been  used,  as  we  learn  from 
 Josephus  {Antiq.  xiii.  16.  i;  xvii.  3.  2;  De  Bell. 
 Jud.  ii.  2.  3)  ;  but  such  a  practice  can  hardly 
 suffice  to  establish  the  general  use  of  wills  among 
 the  people.  In  the  N.  T.,  however,  wills  are 
 expressly  mentioned  (Gal.  iii.  15  ;  Heb.  ix.  17). 
 Michaelis  {CommeJitaries,  i.  431)  asserts  that  the 
 phrase    (2    Sam.    xvii.    23 ;    2    Kings  xx.    1  ;    HIX 
 
 "iri''2?)  'set  thine  house  in  order'  has  reference  to 
 a  will  or  testament.  But  his  grounds  are  by  no 
 means  sufficient,  the  literal  rendering  of  the  words 
 being,  'give  commands  to  thy  house.'  The  ut- 
 most which  such  an  expression  could  inferentially 
 be  held  to  comprise  in  regard  to  property,  is  a 
 dying  and  final  distribution  of  personal  property ; 
 and  we  know  that  it  was  not  unusual  for  fathers  to 
 make,  while  yet  alive,  a  division  of  their  goods 
 among  their  children  (Luke  xv.  12  ;  Rosenmiiller, 
 Morgenl.  v.  197). — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 INK,  INKHORN.     [Writing.] 
 
 INN.     [Caravanserai.] 
 
 INSPIRATION.  This  word  js  sometimes  used 
 to  denote  the  excitement  and  action  of  a  fervent 
 imagination  in  the  poet  or  orator.  But  even  in 
 this  case  there  is  generally  a  reference  to  some 
 supposed  divine  influence,  to  which  the  excited 
 action  is  owing.  It  is  once  used  in  Scripture  to 
 denote  that  divine  agency  by  which  man  is  endued 
 with  the  faculties  of  an  intelligent  being,  when  it  is 
 said,  '  the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty  giveth  him 
 understanding.'  But  the  inspiration  now  to  be 
 considered  is  that  which  belonged  to  those  who 
 wrote  the  Scriptures,  and  which  is  particularly 
 spoken  of  in  2  Tim.  iii.  16,  and  in  2  Pet.  i.  21  : 
 '  All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God  ;' 
 '  Holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by 
 the  Holy  Ghost.'  These  passages  relate  specially 
 to  the  O.  T.  ;  but  there  is  at  least  equal  reason  tc 
 predicate  divine  inspiration  of  the  N.  T. 
 
 The  definition  which  Dr.  Knapp  gives  of  in- 
 spiration is  the  one  we  shall  adopt.      He  says,  '  It 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 may  be  best  defined,  according  to  the  representa- 
 tions of  the  Scriptures  themselves,  as  an  extraor- 
 dinarv  divine  agency  tipon  teachers  while  giving 
 instruction,  whether  07-al  or  written,  by  ivhich  they 
 were  taught  what  and  how  they  should  write  or 
 speak.''  Or  we  may  say  more  briefly,  that  the 
 sacred  penmen  were  completely  under  the  direc- 
 tion of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  that  they  wrote  under  a 
 plenaiy  inspiration.  Dr.  Calamy's  definition  agrees 
 substantially  with  that  of  Dr.  Knapp. 
 
 To  prove  that  the  Scriptures  are  divinely  inspired 
 we  might  with  propriety  refer  to  the  excellence  of 
 the  doctrines,  precepts,  and  promises,  and  other 
 instructions,  which  they  contain  ;  to  the  simplicity 
 and  majesty  of  their  style  ;  to  the  agreement  of  the 
 different  parts,  and  the  scope  of  the  whole  ;  espe- 
 cially to  the  full  discovery  they  make  of  man's 
 fallen  and  ruined  state,  and  the  way  of  salvation 
 through  a  Redeemer  ;  together  with  their  power 
 to  enlighten  and  sanctify  the  heart,  and  the  accom- 
 panying witness  of  the  spirit  in  believers.  These 
 are  circumstances  of  real  importance,  and  the  dis- 
 cerning advocates  of  inspiration  have  not  overlooked 
 them.  But  the  more  direct  and  conclusive  evidence 
 that  the  Scriptures  were  divinely  inspired,  is  found 
 in  the  testitnony  of  the  luriters  themselves.  And  as 
 the  writers  did,  by  working  miracles,  and  in  other 
 ways,  sufficiently  authenticate  their  divine  com- 
 mission, and  establish  their  authority  and  infalli- 
 bility as  teachers  of  divine  truth,  their  testimony, 
 in  regard  to  their  own  inspiration,  is  entitled  to  our 
 full  confidence.  For  who  can  doubt  that  they  were 
 as  competent  to  judge  of,  and  as  much  disposed  to 
 speak  the  truth  on  this  subject  as  on  any  other  ? 
 If  then  we  admit  their  divine  commission  and 
 authority,  why  should  we  not  rely  upon  the  plain 
 testimony  which  they  give  concerning  the  divine 
 assistance  aflorded  them  in  their  work  ?  To  reject 
 their  testimony  in  this  case  would  be  to  impeach 
 their  veracity,  and  thus  to  take  away  the  founda- 
 tion of  the  Christian  religion.  And  it  is  well 
 Known  that  those  who  deny  the  justice  of  the 
 claim  which  they  set  up  to  divine  inspiration,  do, 
 in  fact,  give  up  the  infallible  truth  and  authority  of 
 the  Scriptures,  and  adopt  the  principles  of  deism. 
 
 It  is,  then,  of  the  first  importance  to  inquire 
 what  representations  are  made  by  the  prophets, 
 and  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  respecting  the  in- 
 spiration, and  the  consequent  authority,  of  the 
 sacred  Scriptures. 
 
 The  prophets  generally  professed  to  speak  the 
 word  of  God.  What  they  taught  was  introduced 
 and  confimied  by  a  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord  ; '  or 
 '  The  Lord  spake  to  me,  saying.'  And,  in  one 
 way  or  another,  they  gave  clear  proof  that  they 
 were  divinely  commissioned,  and  spoke  in  the 
 name  of  God,  or  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  N.  T., 
 that  God  spake  by  them. 
 
 But  the  strongest  and  most  satisfactory  proof  of 
 the  inspiration  and  divine  authority  of  the  O.  T. 
 writings  is  found  in  the  testimony  of  Christ  and 
 the  apostles. 
 
 The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  possessed  the  spirit  of 
 wisdom  without  measure,  and  came  to  bear  wit- 
 ness to  the  trath.  His  works  proved  that  he  was 
 what  he  declared  himself  to  be — the  Messiah,  the 
 great  Prophet,  the  infaUible  Teacher.  The  faith 
 which  rests  on  him  rests  on  a  rock.  As  soon  then 
 as  we  learn  how  he  regarded  the  Scriptures,  we 
 have  reached  the  end  of  our  inquiries.  His  word 
 is   truth.     Now  every  one  who   carefully  attends 
 
 to  the  four  Gospels  will  find,  that  Christ  every 
 where  spoke  of  that  collection  of  writings  called 
 the  Scripture,  as  the  word  of  God  ;  that  he  re- 
 garded the  whole  in  this  light ;  that  he  treated  the 
 Scripture,  and  every  part  of  it,  as  infallibly  true, 
 and  as  clothed  with  divine  authority, — thus  dis- 
 tinguishing it  from  every  mere  human  production. 
 Nothing  written  by  man  can  be  entitled  to  the  re- 
 spect which  Christ  showed  to  the  Scriptures.  This, 
 to  all  Christians,  is  direct  and  incontrovertible  evi- 
 dence of  the  divine  origin  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
 is,  by  itself,  perfectly  conclusive. 
 
 But  there  is  clear  concurrent  evidence,  and  evi- 
 dence still  more  specific,  in  the  writings  of  the 
 apostles.  In  two  texts  in  particular,  divine  inspi- 
 ration is  positively  asserted.  In  the  first  (2  Tim. 
 iii.  16),  Paul  lays  it  down  as  the  characteristic  of 
 '  all  Scripture,^  that  it  '  is  given  by  inspiration  of 
 God'  (6e6Trv€va-Tos,  'divinely  inspired')  ;  and  from 
 this  results  its  profitableness.  Some  writers  think 
 that  the  passage  should  be  rendered  thus  :  All 
 divinely  inspired  Scripture,  or,  all  Scripture,  being 
 divinely  inspired,  is  profitable.  According  to  the 
 common  rendering,  inspiration  is  predicated  of  all 
 Scripture.  According  to  the  other,  it  is  presup- 
 posed, as  the  attribute  of  the  subject.  But  this 
 rendering  is  liable  to  insuperable  objections.  For 
 OeSTTvevcTTOi  and  u<pi\i/xos  are  connected  by  the 
 conjunction  Ka[,  and  must  both  be  predicates,  if 
 either  of  them  is  ;  and  unless  one  of  them  is  a  pre- 
 dicate there  is  no  complete  sentence.  Henderson 
 remarks,  that  the  mode  of  construction  referred  to 
 '  is  at  variance  with  a  common  rule  of  Greek  syn- 
 tax, which  requires,  that  when  two  adjectives  are 
 closely  joined,  as  dedTrveva-ros  and  dxpiXifxos  here 
 are,  if  there  be  an  ellipsis  of  the  substantive  verb 
 iari,  this  verb  must  be  supphed  after  the  former  of 
 the  two,  and  regarded  as  repeated  after  the  latter. 
 Now  there  exists  precisely  such  an  ellipsis  in  the 
 case  before  us  ;  and  as  there  is  nothing  in  the  con- 
 text which  would  lead  to  any  exception  to  the  rule, 
 we  are  bound  to  yield  to  its  force.'  And  he  adds, 
 that  '  the  evidence  in  favour  of  the  common  ren- 
 dering, derived  from  the  Fathers,  and  almost  all 
 the  versions,  is  most  decided.'  It  cannot  for  a 
 moment  be  admitted,  that  the  apostle  meant  to 
 signify  that  divine  inspiration  belongs  to  a  part  of 
 Scripture,  but  not  to  the  whole  ;  or  that  he  meant, 
 as  Semler  supposes,  to  furnish  a  criterion  by  which 
 to  judge  whether  any  work  is  inspired  or  not, 
 namely,  its  utility.  '  That  author  proceeds  fear- 
 lessly to  apply  this  criterion  to  the  books  of  the 
 O.  T.,  and  to  lop  off  eight  of  them,  as  not  pos- 
 sessing the  requisite  marks  of  legitimacy.  Most 
 of  the  German  divines  adopt  Semler's  hypothesis.' 
 But  it  is  ver)'  manifest  that  such  a  sense  is  not  by 
 any  means  suggested  by  the  passage  itself,  and  that 
 it  is  utterly  precluded  by  other  parts  of  the  N.  T. 
 For  neither  Christ  nor  any  one  of  his  apostles  ever 
 intimates  a  distinction  between  some  parts  of  Scrip- 
 ture which  are  inspired  and  other  parts  which  are 
 not  inspired.  The  doctrine  which  is  plainly  as- 
 serted in  the  text  under  consideration,  and  which 
 is  fully  sustained  by  the  current  language  of  the 
 N.  T.,  is,  that  all  the  writings  denominated  the 
 Scriptures  are  divinely  inspired. 
 
 The  other  text  (2  Pet.  i.  21)  teaches  that  'pro- 
 phecy came  not  by  the  will  of  man,  but  holy  men 
 of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy 
 Ghost.'  This  passage,  which  the  apostle  Peter 
 applied  particularly  to  the  subject  of  which  he  waj 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 390 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 speaking,  may  be  considered  as  explanatory  of 
 what  is  intended  by  inspiration.  For  to  say  that 
 all  Scripture  is  divinely  inspired,  and  that  men  of 
 God  wrote  it  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy 
 Ghost,  is  one  and  the  same  thing. 
 
 The  various  texts  in  which  Christ  and  the  apos- 
 tles speak  of  Scripture  as  the  word  of  God,  and  as 
 invested  with  authority  to  decide  all  questions  of 
 tmth  and  duty,  fully  correspond  with  the  texts 
 above  considered. 
 
 From  this  view  of  the  subject  it  follows,  that  the 
 attempt  which  has  been  made  by  a  certain  class  of 
 writers,  to  account  for  the  production  of  the  whole 
 or  any  part  of  the  scriptures  by  the  will  or  agency, 
 the  ingenuity,  diligence  or  fidelity  of  men,  in  the 
 use  of  the  means  within  their  reach,  without  the 
 supernatural  influence  of  the  Spirit,  is  utterly  at 
 variance  with  the  teachings  of  Christ  and  the 
 apostles  as  to  the  origin  of  the  sacred  writings. 
 
 As  the  Christian  dispensation  surpasses  the  for- 
 mer in  all  spiritual  privileges  and  gifts,  it  is  reason- 
 able to  presume  that  the  N.  T.  was  written  under 
 at  least  an  equal  degree  of  divine  influence  with 
 the  Old,  and  that  it  comes  recommended  to  us  by 
 equal  characteristics  of  infallible  truth.  But  of  this 
 there  is  clear  positive  evidence  from  the  N.  T.  itself. 
 
 In  the  first  place,  yestis  Christ,  whose  works 
 proved  him  to  be  the  great  unerring  Teacher,  and 
 to  be  possessed  of  all  power  in  Heaven  and  earth, 
 gave  commission  to  his  apostles  to  act  in  his  stead, 
 and  to  cany  out  the  work  of  i7istniction  which  he 
 had  begun,  confirming  their  authority  by  investing 
 them  with  power  to  perform  miracles.  But  how 
 could  such  a  commission  have  answered  the  end 
 proposed,  had  not  the  Divine  Spirit  so  guided  the 
 apostles  as  to  render  them  infallible  and  perfect 
 teachers  of  divine  truth  ? 
 
 But,  secondly,  in  addition  to  this,  yesus  expressly 
 profnised  to  give  thon  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  abide  with 
 them  continually,  and  to  guide  them  into  all  the 
 truth.  He  said  to  them,  '  When  they  shall  deliver 
 you  up,  take  no  thought  how  or  what  ye  shall 
 speak  ;  for  it  shall  be  given  you  in  the  same  hour 
 what  ye  shall  speak.  For  it  is  not  ye  that  speak, 
 but  the  Spirit  of  your  Father  that  speaketh  in 
 you.'  Storr  and  Flatt  think  this  is  the  idea  in- 
 tended :  '  The  instractions  which  ye  in  general 
 give  are  derived  not  so  much  from  yourselves  as 
 from  the  Holy  Spirit.  Hence,  when  ye  are  called 
 on  to  defend  your  doctrines,  ye  need  feel  no 
 anxiety,  but  may  confidently  rely  on  the  Holy 
 Spirit  to  vindicate  his  own  doctrines,  by  suggesting 
 to  you  the  very  words  of  your  defence. '  If  these 
 promises  were  not  fulfilled,  then  Jesus  was  not  a 
 true  prophet.  If  they  were  fulfilled,  as  they  cer- 
 tainly were,  then  the  apostles  had  the  constant  as- 
 sistance of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and,  whether  engaged 
 in  speaking  or  writing,  were  under  divine  guidance, 
 and,  of  course,  were  liable  to  no  mistakes  either 
 as  to  the  matter  or  manner  of  their  instructions. 
 
 In  the  third  place,  the  writers  of  the  N.  T. 
 manifestly  considered  themselves  to  be  binder  the 
 guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  their  instructions, 
 whether  oral  or  writte7i,  to  be  clothed  with  divine 
 authority,  as  the  ivord  of  God. 
 
 'We  speak,'  they  say,  'as  of  God.'  Again, 
 '  Which  things  we  speak,  not  in  the  words  which 
 man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  in  words  which  the 
 Holy  Ghost  teacheth.'  They  declared  what  they 
 taught  to  be  the  word  of  God,  and  the  things  they 
 wrote  to  be  the  commandments  of  God.     Now  the 
 
 apostles,  being  honest,  unassuming,  humble  men, 
 would  never  have  spoken  of  themselves  and  their 
 writings  in  such  a  manner,  had  they  not  known 
 themselves  to  be  under  the  unerring  guidance  of 
 the  Holy  Spirit,  and  their  instructions  perfectly  in 
 accordance  with  the  mind  of  God. 
 
 From  several  passages  in  Paul's  epistles  to  the 
 Corinthians,  it  has  been  supposed  that,  in  the  cases 
 referred  to,  he  meant  to  disclaim  inspiration.  But 
 that  those  passages  will  bear  another  construction, 
 and  ought  to  be  understood  in  another  manner, 
 has  been  satisfactorily  argued  by  several  writers, 
 particularly  by  Haldane  and  Gaussen  in  their 
 treatises  on  inspiration,  and  by  Henderson  in  his 
 lectures.  And  the  writer  of  this  article  would 
 take  the  liberty  to  refer  also  to  his  lectures  on  the 
 same  subject. 
 
 It  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  plenary  insj)i- 
 ration  here  maintained,  that  God  operated  on  the 
 minds  of  inspired  men  in  a  variety  of  ways,  some- 
 times by  audible  words,  sometimes  by  direct  in- 
 ward suggestions,  sometimes  by  outward  visible 
 signs,  sometimes  by  the  Urim  and  Thummim,  and 
 sometimes  by  dreams  and  visions.  This  variety 
 in  the  mode  of  divine  influence  detracted  nothing 
 from  its  certainty.  God  made  known  his  will 
 equally  in  different  ways  ;  and,  whatever  the  mode 
 of  his  operation,  he  made  it  manifest  to  his  servants 
 that  the  things  revealed  were  from  him. 
 
 But  inspiration  was  concerned  not  only  in  mak- 
 ing known  the  will  of  God  to  prophets  and 
 apostles,  but  also  in  giving  them  direction  in  writ- 
 ing the  sacred  books.  They  wrote  as  they  were 
 moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  in  this,  also,  there 
 was  a  diversity  in  the  mode  of  divine  influence. 
 Sometimes  the  Spirit  of  God  moved  and  guided  his 
 servants  to  write  things  which  they  could  not  know 
 by  natural  means,  such  as  new  doctrines  or  pre- 
 cepts, or  predictions  of  future  events.  Sometimes 
 he  moved  and  guided  them  to  write  the  history  of 
 events  which  were  wholly  or  partly  known  to  them 
 by  tradition,  or  by  the  testimony  of  their  contem- 
 poraries, or  by  their  own  obser\'ation  or  experi- 
 ence. In  all  these  cases  the  Divine  Spirit  effectu- 
 ally preserved  them  from  all  error,  and  influenced 
 them  to  write  just  so  much  and  in  such  a  manner 
 as  God  saw  to  be  best.  Sometimes  he  moved  and 
 guided  them  to  write  a  summary  record  of  larger 
 histories,  containing  what  his  infinite  wisdom  saw 
 to  be  adapted  to  the  end  in  view,  that  is,  the 
 benefit  of  his  people  in  all  ages.  Sometimes  he 
 influenced  them  to  make  a  record  of  important 
 maxims  in  common  use,  or  to  write  new  ones, 
 derived  either  from  their  own  reason  or  experience, 
 or  from  special  divine  teaching.  Sometimes  he 
 influenced  them  to  write  parables  or  allegories, 
 particularly  suited  to  make  a  salutary  impression 
 of  divine  things  on  the  minds  of  men  ;  and  some- 
 times to  record  supernatural  visions.  In  these  and 
 all  other  kinds  of  writing  the  sacred  penman  mani- 
 festly needed  special  divine  guidance,  as  no  man 
 could  of  himself  attain  to  infallibility,  and-  no 
 wisdom,  except  that  of  God,  was  sufficient  to  de- 
 termine what  things  ought  to  be  written  for  perma- 
 nent use  in  the  church,  and  what  manner  of  writing 
 would  be  best  fitted  to  promote  the  great  ends  of 
 revelation. 
 
 Some  writers  speak  of  different  modes  and  diffe- 
 rent kinds,  and  even  different  degrees,  of  inspiration. 
 And  if  their  meaning  is  that  God  influenced  the 
 minds  of  inspired  men  in  different  ways ;  that  he 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 391 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 adopted  a  variety  of  modes  in  revealing  divine 
 things  to  their  minds ;  that  he  guided  them  to 
 give  instruction  in  prose  and  in  poetry,  and  in  all 
 the  different  forms  of  composition  ;  that  he  moved 
 and  guided  them  to  write  history,  prophecy,  doc- 
 trines, commands,  promises,  reproofs,  and  exhorta- 
 tions, and  that  he  adapted  his  mode  of  operation  to 
 each  of  these  cases — against  this  no  objection  can 
 be  made.  It  is  a  fact,  that  the  Scriptures  exhibit 
 specimens  of  all  these  different  kinds  of  writing 
 and  these  different  modes  of  divine  instruction. 
 Still  each  and  every  part  of  what  was  written  was 
 divinely  inspired,  and  equally  so.  It  is  all  the 
 word  of  God,  and  clothed  with  divine  authority,  as 
 much  as  if  it  had  all  been  made  known  and  written 
 in  one  way. 
 
 Dr.  Henderson,  who  labours  perhaps  with  too 
 much  zeal  against  carrying  inspiration  to  extreme 
 lengths,  still  says  that  if  those  who  hold  to  different 
 modifications  of  inspiration  intend  that  there  are 
 different  modifications  and  degrees  of  aiithoiity 
 given  to  Scripture,  their  opinion  must  meet  with 
 unqualified  reprobation  from  every  sincere  believer. 
 He  insists  that  a  diversity  in  the  modes  and  degrees 
 of  divine  operation  did  exist  in  the  work  of  inspi- 
 ration, and  that  this  diversity  was  the  result  of 
 infinite  wisdom  adapting  itself  to  different  circum- 
 stances. He  thinks  that,  imless  we  admit  such  a 
 diversity,  we  cannot  form  correct  ideas  of  the  sub- 
 ject. But  he  is  confident  that  the  distinction  which 
 he  endeavours  to  establish  is  not  in  the  slightest 
 degree  hostile  to  the  divine  authority  of  Scripture. 
 He  affirms  that  no  part  of  that  holy  book  was 
 %orilten  witkozit  miraculous  injlueiice  ;  that  all  parts 
 luere  equally  inspired ;  that  in  regard  to  the  whole 
 volume  the  great  end  was  infallibly  attained, 
 namely,  the  commitment  to  writing  of  precisely 
 such  matters  as  God  designed  for  the  religious  in- 
 struction of  mankind  ;  that  the  sacred  penman 
 wrote  what  had  for  its  object  not  merely  the 
 immediate  benefit  of  individual  persons  or  churches, 
 but  what  would  be  useful  to  Christians  in  all  future 
 times ;  and  that  in  i-egard  to  the  most  minute  and 
 inconsiderable  things  which  the  Scripture  contains 
 we  are  compelled  to  say,  this  also  cometh/rom  the 
 Lord. 
 
 The  controversy  among  orthodox  divines  respect- 
 ing what  is  called  verbal  inspiration,  appears  to 
 arise,  in  a  great  measure,  from  the  different  senses 
 affixed  to  the  phrase.  Dr.  Henderson,  who  is 
 among  the  most  candid  and  able  writers  opposed 
 to  the  doctrine  of  verbal  inspiration,  seems  to  un- 
 derstand the  doctrine  as  denoting  the  itmnediate 
 covinitmication  to  the  writers  of  every  word,  and 
 syllable,  and  letter  of  what  they  wrote,  indepen- 
 dently of  their  intelligent  agency  and  without  any 
 regard  to  their  peculiar  mental  faculties  or  habits  : — 
 while  those  who  most  earnestly  and  successfully 
 contend  for  the  higher  views  of  inspiration,  par- 
 ticularly Calamy,  Haldane,  and  Gaussen,  consider 
 the  doctrine  they  maintain  as  entirely  consistent 
 with  the  greatest  diversity  of  mental  endo\vments, 
 culture,  and  taste  in  the  writers,  and  witli  the  most 
 perfect  exercise  of  their  intelligent  agency, — con- 
 sistent with  their  using  their  own  memory,  their 
 own  reason,  their  own  manner  of  thinking,  and 
 their  own  language, — consistent,  too,  with  their 
 making  what  they  were  to  write  the  subject  of 
 diligent  and  laborious  study, — only  insisting  that  it 
 was  all  under  the  tiner?ing  guidance  of  the  Divine 
 Spirit. 
 
 In  a  controversy  of  such  a  character  as  this,  we 
 may  often  succeed  in  removing  difficulties,  and  in 
 presenting  the  subject  in  a  light  which  will  be 
 satisfactory  to  all  concerned,  by  laying  aside  an 
 ambiguous  word  or  phrase,  and  making  use  of  one 
 which  will  express  the  idea  intended  with  clearness 
 and  certainty.  The  word  verbal,  in  its  most 
 common  senses,  is  not  well  suited  to  the  present 
 subject.  According  to  the  best  philologists  its 
 first  signification  is,  '  spoken,  expressed  to  the  ear 
 in  words,  not  written.'  But  no  one  supposes  that 
 when  God  inspired  the  sacred  writers  he  generally 
 spoke  to  them  in  audible  words.  It  is,  indeed, 
 true,  that  he  sometimes  uttered  articulate  words  in 
 making  known  his  will,  as  at  Sinai,  at  the  baptism 
 of  Christ,  and  on  some  other  occasions.  In  such 
 cases  he  did,  properly  speaking,  make  verbal  com- 
 munications, or  give  2'crbal  instruction.  But  we 
 should  hardly  call  this  verbal  inspiration.  Who 
 can  suppose  that  this  was  commonly,  if  ever,  the 
 way,  in  which  God  inspired  holy  men  of  old  while 
 engaged  in  writing  the  Scriptures  ?  Who  can  sup- 
 pose that  he  taught  them  what  to  write  by  speaking 
 words  in  their  ears,  as  a  man  teaches  his  amanuen- 
 sis ?  His  influence  was  doubtless  inwai'd.  He 
 guided  them  in  writing  by  an  operation  in  their 
 minds. 
 
 The  next  meaning  of  verbal  is  '  oral,  uttered  by 
 the  mouth  ;'  and  this  agrees  no  better  with  our 
 subject.  Other  significations  of  verbal  are,  'con- 
 sisting in  mere  words  ;  respecting  words  only ; 
 literal,''  as  in  a  translation,  '  having  word  answer- 
 ing to  word.'  Neither  of  these  senses  is  adapted  to 
 the  subject.  Now  it  would  be  nothing  strange, 
 if  applying  this  word  to  inspiration,  and  thus  giving 
 it  an  unusual  sense,  should  occasion  needless  per- 
 plexity and  confusion.  For  the  sake  of  avoiding 
 this  evil  why  would  it  not  be  expedient  to  employ 
 such  words  as  will  convey  the  idea  intended  clearly 
 and  definitely ;  and,  if  necessary,  to  incur  the  in- 
 convenience of  using  an  exact  explanation,  instead 
 of  the  word  or  phrase  which  causes  the  difficulty  ? 
 
 The  real  question,  and  the  whole  question  at 
 issue,  may  be  stated  thus  :  did  the  work  of  the 
 Divine  Spirit  i/i  the  sacred  pentnen  relate  to  the 
 language  the)'  tised,  or  their  manner  of  expressing 
 their  ideas  ;  and  if  so,  hotvfar,  and  in  what  way  ? 
 
 All  those  with  whom  we  are  concerned  in  the 
 discussion  of  this  question,  hold  that  divine  inspi- 
 ration had  some  respect  to  the  language  employed 
 by  the  inspired  writers,  at  least  in  the  way  of 
 general  supervision.  And  Dr.  Henderson  shows, 
 in  various  passages  of  his  excellent  lectures,  that 
 there  is  no  material  difference  between  him  and 
 those  who  profess  to  maintain  higher  ground.  He 
 allows  that,  to  a  certain  extent,  what  is  called 
 verbal  inspiration,  or  the  inspiration  of  words,  took 
 place.  '  In  recording  what  was  immediately  spoken 
 with  an  audible  voice  by  Jehovah,  or  by  an  angel 
 interpreter  ;  in  giving  expression  to  points  of  reve- 
 lation which  entirely  surpassed  the  comprehension 
 of  the  writers  ;  in  recording  prophecies,  the  minute 
 bearings  of  which  they  did  not  perceive  ;  in  short, 
 in  committing  to  writing  any  of  the  dictates  of  the 
 Spirit,  which  they  could  not  have  otherwise  accu- 
 rately expressed,  the  writers,'  he  alleges,  'were 
 supplied  with  the  words  as  well  as  the  matter.' 
 He  says,  that  even  when  Biblical  writers  made  use 
 of  their  own  faculties,  and  wrote  each  one  in  his 
 own  manner,  without  having  their  mental  consti- 
 tution  at   all  disturbed,    they   were   yet    '  always 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 392 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 secured  by  celestial  influence  against  the  adoption 
 of  any  forms  of  speech,  or  collocation  of  words, 
 that  would  have  injured  the  exhibition  of  divine 
 truth,  or  that  did  not  adequately  give  it  expression  ;' 
 that  the  characteristic  differences  of  style,  so  appa- 
 rent among  the  sacred  writers,  were  employed  by 
 the  Holy  Spirit  for  the  purposes  of  inspiration, 
 and  '  were  called  forth  in  a  rational  way  ;'  that 
 the  writers,  '  being  acted  upon  by  the  Divine  Spirit, 
 expressed  themselves  naturally ;  that  while  the 
 divine  influence  adapted  itself  to  whatever  was 
 peculiar  in  the  minds  of  inspired  men,  it  con- 
 stantly guided  them  in  writing  the  sacred  volume.' 
 He  declares  his  belief  that  the  Scriptures  were 
 written  not  under  a  partial  or  hnperfect,  but  under 
 a  plenary  and  infallible  inspiration  ;  that  they  were 
 entirely  the  result  of  divine  intervention,  and  are 
 to  be  regarded  as  the  oracles  of  Jehovah.  Refer- 
 ring to  2  Tim.  iii.  i^,  he  says,  '  We  are  here  ex- 
 pressly taught  the  divine  inspiration  of  the  whole 
 O.  T.  Codex,  that  the  Scriptures  are  inspired  as 
 written  docji7nents  ;  that  they  are  the  result  of  the 
 special  and  extraordinary  influence  of  the  Spirit, 
 and  contain  whatever  the  Spirit  caused  to  be 
 written  for  our  instruction.'  Referring  to  I  Cor. 
 ii.  13,  he  says,  '  It  is  past  all  dispute  that  the 
 apostle  here  unequivocally  ascribes  both  the  doc- 
 trines which  he  and  his  fellow-labourers  taught, 
 and  their  manner  pf  propounding  them,  to  the  in- 
 fluence of  the  same  divine  agent ;'  that  the  passage 
 conveys  the  idea  '  that  (he  style,  or  mode  of  expres- 
 sion which  they  used,  was  such  as  they  were  in- 
 structed by  the  Spirit  to  employ  ;'  that  '  in  deliver- 
 ing their  doctrines  they  were  under  the  constant 
 guidance  of  the  Great  Instructor,  and  clothed  them 
 in  that  garb  which  he  directed  them  to  use  ;'  that, 
 in  the  passage  alluded  to,  the  apostle  refers  '  to  the 
 entire  character  of  the  style  which  the  first  teachers 
 of  Christianity  were  taught  to  use  in  announcing  its 
 all  important  doctrines.'  The  passage  in  Matt.  x. 
 19,  20,  he  says,  implies,  '  that  the  subject-matter 
 of  apology  was  to  be  supplied  to  the  apostles  ;  and 
 they  might  be  well  assured  that  if  this,  which  was 
 the  most  important,  was  secured  by  divine  instruc- 
 tion, the  mere  expression  would  not  be  wanting.' 
 'To  remove  all  ground  of  hesitation  from  their 
 minds,  our  Lord  says,  it  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the 
 Spirit  of  your  Father  which  speaketh  in  you.  By 
 his  teaching  and  superintending  influence,  they 
 would  always  be  enabled  to  express  themselves  in 
 a  manner  worthy  of  the  divine  cause  which  they 
 were  called  to  defend — a  manner  which  they  could 
 never  have  attained  by  the  exertion  of  their  unas- 
 sisted powers  ;  so  that,  although  these  powers  were 
 not  to  be  superseded,  but  employed,  it  was  to  be 
 as  the  organs  of  the  divine  agency  by  which  they 
 were  employed.'  And  he  concedes  that,  as  to  all 
 practical  purposes,  they  were  favoured  with  divine 
 influence  in  cotnposing  their  writings,  as  well  as  in 
 their  public  speaking. 
 
 Our  author  says  that  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
 when  the  apostles  were  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost, 
 and  spake  with  other  tongues,  as  the  Spirit  gave 
 them  utterance,  '  verbal  inspiration  in  the  strictest 
 sense  of  the  term  took  place.'  'The  immediate 
 supply  of  words,'  he  holds,  '  was  in  this  and  -every 
 similar  i-nstance  absolutely  necessary.'  And  he 
 thinks  that  direct  verbal  inspiration  was  indispens- 
 ably requisite  in  all  instances  in  which  prophets  and 
 apostles  were  employed  to  write  what  they  did  not 
 clearly  comprehend.     The  passages  in  which  such 
 
 terms  as  the  ivord  of  God,  the  Lord  spake,  etc., 
 occur,  are,  in  this  view,  descriptive  of  immediate 
 verbal  communications.  He  supposes  that,  in  all 
 such  cases,  words  were  literally  spoken,  or  audibly 
 pronounced  by  God  himself,  or  by  an  angel  in  his 
 name.  In  this  opinion,  however,  I  think  he  is  mis- 
 taken. For  unquestionably  the  word  of  the  Lord 
 often,  if  not  generally,  came  to  the  prophets  in 
 the  vv'ay  of  dreams,  or  other  modes  of  inward  sug- 
 gestion. 
 
 The  doctrine  of  a  plenary  inspiration  of  all 
 Scripture  in  regard  to  the  language  employed,  as 
 well  as  the  thoughts  communicated,  ought  not  to 
 be  rejected  without  valid  reasons.  The  doctrine  is 
 so  obviously  important,  s,nd  so  consonant  to  the 
 feelings  of  sincere  piety,  that  those  evangelical 
 Christians  who  are  pressed  with  speculative  ob- 
 jections against  it,  frequently,  in  the  honesty  of 
 their  hearts,  advance  opinions  which  fairly  imply 
 it.  This  is  the  case,  as  we  have  seen,  with  Dr. 
 Henderson,  who  says,  that  the  Divine  Spirit 
 guided  the  sacred  penmen  in  writing  the  Scrip- 
 tures ;  that  their  mode  of  expression  was  such  as 
 they  were  instructed  by  the  Spirit  to  employ  ;  that 
 Paul  ascribes  not  only  the  doctrines  which  the 
 apostles  taught,  but  the  entire  character  of  their 
 style,  to  the  influence  of  the  Spirit.  He  indeed 
 says,  that  this  does  not  always  imply  the  immediate 
 commttnication  of  the  words  of  Scripture  ;  and  he 
 says  it  with  good  reason.  For  immediate  properly 
 signifies,  acting  without  a  mediiwi,  or  without  the 
 intervention  of  another  cause  or  means,  not  acting 
 ■by  second  causes.  Now,  those  who  hold  the  highest 
 views  of  inspiration  do  not  suppose  that  the  Divine 
 Spirit,  except  in  a  few  instances,  so  influenced  the 
 writers  of  Scripture  as  to  interfere  with  the  use  of 
 their  rational  faculties  or  their  peculiar  mental 
 habits  and  tastes,  or  in  any  way  to  supersede 
 secondary  causes  as  the  medium  through  which  his 
 agency  produced  the  desired  effect. 
 
 In  regard  to  this  point,  therefore,  there  appears 
 to  be  little  or  no  ground  for  controversy.  For,  if 
 God  so  influenced  the  sacred  writers  that,  either 
 with  or  without  the  use  of  secondary  causes,  they 
 wrote  just  %uhat  he  intended,  and  in  the  manner 
 he  intended,  the  end  is  secured ;  and  what  they 
 wrote  is  as  truly  Ids  word,  as  though  he  had  written 
 it  with  his  own  hand  on  tables  of  stone,  without 
 any  human  instrumentality.  The  very  words  of 
 the  decalogue  were  all  such  as  God  chose.  And 
 they  would  have  been  equally  so  if  Moses  had  been 
 moved  V)y  the  Divine  Spirit  to  write  them  with  his 
 hand.  The  expression,  that  God  immediately  im- 
 parted or  conimu7iicated  to  the  writers  the  very 
 words  which  they  wrote,  is  evidently  not  well 
 chosen.  The  exact  truth  is  that  the  write)  s  them- 
 selves were  the  subjects  of  the  divine  influence. 
 The  Spirit  employed  them  as  active  instruments, 
 and  directed  them  in  writing,  both  as  to  matter  and 
 manner.  They  wrote  '  as  they  were  moved  by  the 
 Holy  Ghost.'  The  matter,  in  many  cases,  was 
 what  they  before  knew,  and  the  manner  was  en- 
 tirely conformed  to  their  habits  ;  it  was  their  own. 
 But  what  was  written  was  none  the  less  inspired  on 
 that  account.  God  may  have  influenced  andgm'ded 
 an  apostle  as  infallibly  in  \\Titing  what  he  had  be- 
 fore known,  and  that  guidance  may  have  been  as 
 really  necessary,  as  in  writing  a  new  revelation. 
 And  God  may  have  influenced  Paul  or  John  to 
 write  a  book  in  his  own  peculiar  style,  and  that  in- 
 fluence may  have  been  as  real  and  as  necessary 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 393 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 as  if  the  style  had  been  what  some  would  call  a 
 divine  style.  It  was  a  divine  style,  if  the  writer 
 used  it  under  divine  direction.  It  was  a  divine 
 style,  and  it  was,  at  the  same  time,  a  human  style, 
 and  the  ivritcr''s  own  style,  all  in  one.  Just  as  the 
 believer's  exercises,  faith  and  love,  are  his  own  acts, 
 and  at  the  same  time  are  the  effects  of  divine  influ- 
 ence. '  In  efficacious  grace,'  says  Edwards,  '  we 
 are  not  merely  passive,  nor  yet  does  God  do  some 
 and  we  do  the  rest.  But  God  does  all,  and  we  do 
 all.  God  produces  all,  and  we  act  all.  For  that 
 is  what  ho  produces,  namely  our  own  acts.  God 
 is  the  only  proper  author  and  foundation  :  we  only 
 are  the  proper  actors.  We  are,  in  different  re- 
 spects, wholly  passive  and  wholly  active.  In  the 
 Scriptures,  the  same  things  are  represented  as  from 
 God  and  from  us.  God  is  said  to  convert  men, 
 and  men  are  said  to  convert  and  turn.  God  makes 
 a  new  heart,  and  we  are  commanded  to  make  us  a 
 new  heart — not  merely  because  we  must  use  the 
 means  in  order  to  the  effect,  but  the  effect  itself  is 
 our  act  and  our  duty.  These  things  are  agreeable 
 to  that  text,  '  God  worketh  in  you  both  to  will  and 
 to  do.' '  The  mental  exercises  of  Paul  and  of  John 
 had  their  own  characteristic  peculiarities,  as  much 
 as  their  style.  God  was  the  author  of  John's  mind 
 and  all  that  was  peculiar  to  his  mental  faculties 
 and  habits,  as  really  as  of  Paul's  mind  and  what 
 was  peculiar  to  him.  And  in  the  work  of  inspira- 
 tion he  used  and  directed,  for  his  own  purposes, 
 what  was  peculiar  to  each.  When  God  inspired 
 different  men  he  did  not  make  their  minds  and 
 tastes  all  alike,  nor  did  he  make  their  language 
 alike.  Nor  had  he  any  occasion  for  this ;  for  while 
 they  had  different  mental  faculties  and  habits,  they 
 were  as  capable  of  being  infallibly  directed  by  the 
 Divine  Spirit,  and  infallibly  speaking  and  writing 
 divine  truth,  as  though  their  mental  faculties  and 
 habits  had  been  all  exactly  alike.  And  it  is  mani- 
 fest that  the  Scriptures  written  by  such  a  variety  of 
 inspired  men,  and  each  part  agreeably  to  the  pecu- 
 liar talents  and  style  of  the  writer,  are  not  only 
 equally  from  God,  but,  taken  together,  are  far 
 better  adapted  to  the  purposes  of  general  instruc- 
 tion, and  all  the  objects  to  be  accomplished  by 
 revelation,  than  if  they  had  been  written  by  one 
 man,  and  in  one  and  the  same  manner. 
 
 This  view  of  plenary  inspiration  is  fitted  to  re- 
 lieve the  difficulties  and  objections  which  have 
 arisen  in  the  minds  of  men  from  the  variety  of 
 talent  and  taste  which  the  writers  exhibited,  and 
 the  variety  of  style  which  they  used.  See,  it  is 
 said,  how  each  writer  expresses  himself  naturally, 
 in  his  own  way,  just  as  he  was  accustomed  to  do 
 when  not  inspired.  And  see  too,  we  might  say  in 
 reply,  how  each  apostle,  Peter,  Paul,  or  John, 
 when  speaking  before  rulers,  with  the  promised  aid 
 of  the  Holy  Spirit,  spoke  naturally,  with  his  own 
 voice,  and  in  his  own  way,  as  he  had  been  accus- 
 tomed to  do  on  other  occasions  when  not  inspired. 
 There  is  no  more  objection  to  plenary  inspiration 
 in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other.  The  mental 
 faculties  and  habits  of  the  apostles,  their  style, 
 their  voice,  their  mode  of  speech,  all  remained  as 
 they  were.  What,  then,  had  the  divine  Spirit  to 
 do  ?  What  was  the  work  which  appertained  to 
 him  ?  We  reply,  his  work  was  so  to  direct  the 
 apostles  in  the  use  of  their  own  talents  and  habits, 
 their  style,  their  voice,  and  all  their  peculiar  en- 
 dowments, that  they  should  speak  or  write,  each  in 
 his  own  way,  just  what  God  would  have  them 
 
 speak  or  write,  for  the  good  of  the  Church  in  aU 
 ages. 
 
 The  fact  that  the  individual  peculiarities  of  the 
 sacred  penmen  are  everywhere  so  plainly  impressed 
 on  their  writings,  is  often  mentioned  as  an  objec- 
 tion to  the  doctrine,  that  inspiration  extended  to 
 their  language  as  well  as  their  thoughts.  This  is, 
 indeed,  one  of  the  most  common  objections,  and 
 one  which  has  obtained  a  very  deep  lodgment  in 
 the  minds  of  some  intelligent  Christians.  It  may, 
 therefore,  be  necessary  to  take  some  further  pains 
 completely  to  remove  it.  And  in  our  additional 
 remarks  relative  to  this  and  other  objections,  it  will 
 come  in  our  way  to  shew  that  such  a  writer  as 
 Gaussen,  who  contends  with  great  earnestness  and 
 ability  for  the  highest  views  of  inspiration,  does 
 still,  on  all  important  points,  agree  with  those  who 
 advocate  lower  views  of  the  subject. 
 
 Gaussen  says,  'Although  the  title  of  each  book 
 should  not  indicate  to  us  that  we  are  passing  from 
 one  author  to  another ;  yet  we  could  quickly  dis- 
 cover, by  the  change  of  their  characters,  that  a  new 
 hand  has  taken  the  pen.  It  is  perfectly  easy  to  re- 
 cognise each  one  of  them,  although  they  speak  of 
 the  same  master,  teach  the  same  doctrines,  and  re- 
 late the  same  incidents.'  But  how  does  this  prove 
 that  Scripture  is  not,  in  all  respects,  inspired?  'So 
 far  are  we,'  says  this  author,  'from  overlooking 
 human  individuality  everywhere  impressed  on  our 
 sacred  books,  that,  on  the  contraiy,  it  is  with  pro- 
 found gratitude,  and  with  an  ever-increasing  admi- 
 ration, that  we  regard  this  living,  real,  human 
 character  infused  so  charmingly  into  every  part  of 
 the  Word  of  God.  We  admit  the  fact,  and  we  see 
 in  it  clear  proof  of  the  divine  wisdom  which  dic- 
 tated the  Scriptures.' 
 
 Those  who  urge  the  objection  above  mentioned 
 are  plainly  inconsistent  with  themselves.  For  while 
 they  deny  the  plenaiy  inspiration  of  some  parts  of 
 Scripture,  because  they  have  these  inarks  of  indivi- 
 duality, they  acknowledge  inspiration  in  the  fullest 
 sense  in  other  parts,  particularly  in  the  prophecies, 
 where  this  individuality  of  the  writers  is  equally 
 apparent. 
 
 In  truth,  what  can  be  more  consonant  with  our 
 best  views  of  the  wisdom  of  God,  or  with  the  gene- 
 ral analogy  of  his  works,  than  that  he  should  make 
 use  of  the  thoughts,  the  memories,  the  peculiar 
 talents,  tastes,  and  feehngs  of  his  servants  in  re- 
 cording his  Word  for  the  instruction  of  men? 
 Why  should  he  not  associate  the  peculiarities  of 
 their  personal  character  with  what  they  write  under 
 his  personal  guidance  ?  But,  independently  of  our 
 reasoning,  this  matter  is  decided  by  the  Bible  it- 
 self. 'All  Scripture  is  divinely-inspired,' and  it  is 
 all  the  word  of  God.  And  it  is  none  the  less  the 
 Word  of  God,  and  none  the  less  inspired,  because 
 it  comes  to  us  in  the  language  of  Moses,  and  David, 
 and  Paul,  and  the  other  sacred  writers.  _  '  It  is  God 
 who  speaks  to  us,  but  it  is  also  man  ;  it  is  man,  but 
 it  is  also  God.'  The  word  of  God,  in  order  to  be 
 intelligible  and  profitable  to  us,  '  must  be  uttered 
 by  mortal  tongues,  and  be  written  by  mortal  hands, 
 and  must  put  on  the  features  of  human  thoughts. 
 This  blending  of  humanity  and  divinity  in  the 
 Scriptures  reminds  us  of  the  majesty  and  the  conde- 
 scension of  God.  Viewed  in  this  light,  the  Word 
 of  God  has  unequalled  beauties,  and  exerts  an  un- 
 equalled power  over  our  hearts.' 
 
 The  objection  to  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the 
 Scriptures,  from  the  inaccuracy  of  the  translations 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 394 
 
 INSPIRATION 
 
 and  the  various  readings  of  the  ancient  manuscript 
 copies,  is  totally  irrelevant.  For  what  we  assert  is, 
 the  inspiration  of  the  (j;7>/;/a/ Scriptures,  not  of  the 
 translations  or  the  ancient  copies.  The  fact  that  the 
 Scriptures  were  divinely  inspired,  cannot  be  ex- 
 punged or  altered  by  any  subsequent  event.  The 
 very  words  of  the  decalogue  were  written  by  the 
 fmger  of  God,  and  none  the  less  so  because  the 
 manuscripts  which  transmit  it  to  us  contain  some 
 variations.  The  integrity  of  the  copies  has  nothing 
 to  do  with  the  inspiration  of  the  original.  It  is, 
 however,  well  known  that  the  variations  are  hardly 
 worthy  to  be  mentioned. 
 
 But  if  the  copies  of  the  Scriptures  which  we  have 
 are  not  inspired,  then  how  can  the  inspiration  of 
 the  original  writings  avail  to  our  benefit  ?  The 
 answer  is,  that  according  to  the  best  evidence,  the 
 original  writings  have  been  transmitted  to  us  with 
 remarkable  fidelity,  and  that  our  present  copies,  so 
 far  as  anything  of  consequence  is  concerned,  agree 
 with  the  writings  as  they  came  from  inspired  men  ; 
 so  that,  through  the  gracious  care  of  divine  provi- 
 dence, the  Scriptures  now  in  use  are,  in  all  import- 
 ant respects,  the  Scriptures  which  were  given  by 
 inspiration  of  God,  and  are  stamped  with  divine 
 authority.  In  this  matter,  we  stand  on  the  same 
 footing  with  the  apostles.  For  when  they  spoke  of 
 the  Scriptures,  they  doubtless  referred  to  the  copies 
 which  had  been  made  and  preserved  among  the 
 Jews,  not  to  the  original  manuscripts  written  by 
 Moses  and  the  prophets. 
 
 It  has  been  made  an  objection  to  the  plenary  in- 
 spiration of  the  writers  of  the  N.  T.,  that  they 
 generally  quote  from  the  Septuagint  version,  and 
 that  their  quotations  are  frequently  wanting  in 
 exactness.  Our  reply  is,  that  their  quotations  are 
 made  in  the  usual  manner,  according  to  the  dic- 
 tates of  common  sense,  and  always  in  such  a  way 
 as  to  subserve  the  cause  of  truth ;  and  therefore, 
 that  the  objection  is  without  force.  And  as  to  the 
 Septuagint  version,  the  apostles  never  follow  it  so 
 as  to  interfere  with  the  authority  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures.  Their  references  to  the  O.  T.  are  just 
 such  as  the  case  required.  There  is  a  noble  free- 
 dom in  their  quotations,  but  that  freedom  never 
 violates  truth  or  propriety. 
 
 If  any  one,  like  Priestley  and  others  of  the  same 
 school,  alleges,  that  there  are  in  the  Scriptures 
 errors  in  reasoning  and  in  matters  of  fact,  he  opens 
 the  door  to  the  most  dangerous  consequences.  In- 
 deed he  takes  the  ground  of  infidelity.  And  if  any 
 one  holds  that  some  parts  are  inspired,  while  other 
 parts  are  not  inspired,  then  we  ask,  who  shall  make 
 the  distinction  ?  And  if  we  begin  this  work,  where 
 will  it  end  ?  But  our  present  concern  is  with  those 
 who  deny  that  inspiration  respected  the  language  of 
 Scripture. 
 
 There  are  some  who  maintain  that  all  which 
 was  necessary  to  secure  the  desired  results,  was 
 an  infallible  guidance  of  the  thoughts  of  the  sacred 
 writers  ;  that  with  such  a  guidance  they  might  be 
 safely  left  to  express  their  thoughts  in  their  own 
 way,  without  any  special  influence  from  above. 
 
 Now,  if  those  who  take  this  view  of  the  subject 
 mean  that  God  not  only  gives  the  sacred  penmen 
 the  very  ideas  which  they  are  to  write,  but,  in 
 some  way,  secures  an  infallible  connection  between 
 those  ideas  and  a  just  expression  of  them  in  words  ; 
 then,  indeed,  we  have  the  desired  result — an  infal- 
 lible revelation  from  God,  made  in  the  proper 
 language  of  the  writers.     But  if  any  one  supposes 
 
 that  there  is  naturally  such  an  infallible  connection 
 between  right  thoughts  and  a  just  expression  of 
 them  in  language,  without  an  effective  divine  super- 
 intendence, he  contradicts  the  lessons  of  daily  ex- 
 perience. But  those  to  whom  we  refer  evidently 
 do  not  themselves  believe  in  such  an  infallible 
 connection.  For  when  they  assigir  their  reason 
 for  denying  that  inspiration  related  to  the  language 
 of  the  Scriptures,  they  speak  of  the  different,  and, 
 as  they  regard  them,  the  contradictory  statements 
 of  facts  by  different  writers — for  example,  the  dif- 
 ferent accounts  of  the  crucifixion  and  the  resur- 
 I'ection,  and  the  different  accounts  of  the  numbers 
 of  the  slain  in  Num.  xxv.  9  and  i  Cor.  x.  8. 
 Who,  they  say,  can  believe  that  the  language  was 
 inspired,  when  one  writer  says  that  24,000  were 
 slain,  and  the  other  23,000?  But  it  is  easy  to  see 
 that  the  difficulty  presses  with  all  its  force  upon 
 those  who  assert  the  inspiration  of  the  thoughts. 
 For  surely  they  will  not  say  that  the  sacred  writers 
 had  tfiie  thoughts  in  their  minds,  and  yet  uttered 
 them  in  the  language  of  falsehood.  This  would 
 contradict  their  own  idea  of  a  sure  connection 
 between  the  conceptions  of  the  mind  and  tlie  utter- 
 ance of  them  in  suitable  words,  and  would  clearly 
 shew  that  they  themselves  feel  it  to  be  necessary 
 that  the  divine  guidance  should  extend  to  the  words 
 of  inspired  men  as  well  as  their  thoughts.  But  if 
 Paul,  through  inadvertence,  committed  a  real  mis- 
 take in  saying  that  23,000  fell  in  one  day,  it  must 
 have  been  a  mistake  in  his  thoughts  as  well  as  in  his 
 words.  For  when  he  said  23,000,  had  he  not  the 
 idea  of  that  number  in  his  mind  ?  If,  then,  there 
 was  a  mistake,  it  lay  in  his  thoughts.  But  if  there 
 was  no  mistake  in  either  of  the  wiiters,  then  there 
 is  nothing  to  prove  that  inspiration  did  not  extend 
 to  the  language.  If,  however,  there  was  a  real 
 mistake,  then  the  question  is  not,  what  becomes  of 
 vc}-bal  inspiration,  but  what  becomes  of  inspiration 
 in  any  sense. 
 
 As  to  the  way  of  reconciling  the  two  statements 
 above  mentioned,  but  a  few  words  can  be  offered 
 here.  Some  writers  attempt  to  remove  the  diffi- 
 culty in  this  maimer.  The  first  writer  says,  24,000 
 were  slain,  meaning  to  include  in  that  number  all 
 who  died  in  consequence  of  that  rebellion.  The 
 other  writer  says,  23,000  fell  hi  one  day,  leaving  us 
 to  conclude  that  an  addition  of  1000  fell  the  next 
 day.  But  it  may  perhaps  be  more  satisfactory  to 
 suppose,  that  neither  of  the  writers  intended  to 
 state  the  exact  number,  this  being  of  no  conse- 
 quence to  their  objects.  The  real  number  might 
 be  between  23,000  and  24,000,  and  it  might  be 
 sufficient  for  them  to  express  it  in  general  terms, 
 one  of  them  calling  it  24,000,  and  the  other  23,000, 
 that  is,  about  so  many)  either  of  the  numbers  being 
 accurate  enough  to  make  the  impression  designed. 
 Suppose  that  the  exact  number  was  23,579,  and 
 that  both  the  writers  knew  it  to  be  so.  It  was  not 
 at  all  necessary,  in  order  to  maintain  their  charac- 
 ter as  men  of  veracity,  that  they  should,  when 
 writing  for  such  a  purpose,  mention  the  particular 
 number.  The  particularity  and  length  of  the  ex- 
 pression would  have  been  inconvenient,  and  might 
 have  made  a  less  desirable  impression  of  the  evil 
 of  sin  and  the  justice  of  God,  than  expressing  it 
 more  briefly  in  a  round  number ;  as  we  often  say, 
 with  a  view  merely  to  make  a  strong  impression, 
 that  in  sucli  a  battle  10,000,  or  50,000,  or  500,000 
 were  slain,  no  one  supposing  that  we  mean  to  state 
 the  number   with  arithmetical  exactness,   as   oui 
 
INSPIRATION 
 
 395 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 object  docs  not  require  this.  And  who  can  doubt 
 that  the  Divine  Spirit  miglit  lead  the  sacred  pen- 
 men to  make  use  of  this  principle  of  rhetoric,  and 
 to  speak  of  those  who  were  slain,  according  to  the 
 common  practice  in  such  a  case,  in  round  numbers  ? 
 
 It  is  sometimes  said  that  the  sacred  writers  were 
 of  themselves  generally  competent  to  express  their 
 ideas  in  proper  language,  and  in  this  respect  had 
 no  need  of  supernatural  assistance.  But  there  is 
 just  as  much  reason  for  saying  that  they  were  of 
 themselves  generally  competent  to  form  their  own 
 conceptions,  and  so  had  no  need  of  supernatural  aid 
 in  this  respect.  It  is  just  as  reasonable  to  say  that 
 Moses  could  recollect  what  took  place  at  the  Red 
 Sea,  and  that  Paul  could  recollect  that  he  was  once 
 a  persecutor,  and  Peter  what  took  place  on  the 
 mount  of  transfiguration,  without  supernatural  aid, 
 as  to  say  that  they  could,  without  such  aid,  make 
 a  proper  record  of  these  recollections.  We  believe 
 a  real  and  infallible  guidance  of  the  Spirit  in  both 
 respects,  because  this  is  taught  in  the  Scriptures. 
 And  it  is  obvious  that  the  Bible  could  not  be  what 
 Christ  and  the  apostles  considered  it  to  be,  unless 
 they  were  divinely  inspired. 
 
 The  diversity  in  the  narratives  of  the  Evangelists 
 is  sometimes  urged  as  an  objection  against  the 
 position  we  maintain  in  regard  to  inspiration,  but 
 evidently  without  reason,  and  contrary  to  reason. 
 For  what  is  more  reasonable  than  to  expect  that  a 
 work  of  divine  origin  will  have  marks  of  consum- 
 mate wisdom,  and  will  be  suited  to  accomplish  the 
 end  in  view.  Now  it  will  not  be  denied  that  God 
 determined  that  there  should  be  four  narratives  of 
 the  life  and  death  of  Jesus  from  four  historians. 
 If  the  narratives  were  all  alike,  three  of  them  would 
 be  useless.  Indeed  such  a  circumstance  would 
 create  suspicion,  and  would  bring  discredit  upon  the 
 whole  concern.  The  narratives  must  then  be  dif- 
 ferent. And  if,  besides  this  useful  diversity,  it  is 
 found  that  the  seeming  contradictions  can  be  satis- 
 factorily reconciled,  and  if  each  of  the  narratives  is 
 given  in  the  peculiar  style  and  manner  of  the  writers, 
 then  all  is  natural  and  unexceptionable,  and  we 
 have  the  highest  evidence  of  the  credibility  and 
 truth  of  the  narratives. 
 
 We  shall  advert  to  one  more  objection.  It  is 
 alleged  that  writers  who  were  constantly  under  a 
 plenary  divine  inspiration  would  not  descend  to 
 the  unimportant  details,  the  trifling  incidents,  which 
 are  found  in  the  Scriptures.  To  this  it  may  be 
 replied  that  the  details  alluded  to  must  be  admitted 
 to  be  according  to  truth,  and  that  those  things 
 which,  at  first  view,  seem  to  be  trifles,  may,  when 
 taken  in  their  connections,  prove  to  be  of  serious 
 moment.  And  it  is  moreover  manifest  that,  con- 
 sidering what  human  beings  and  human  affairs 
 really  are,  if  all  those  things  which  are  called 
 trifling  and  unimportant  were  excluded,  the  Scrip- 
 tures would  fail  of  being  conformed  to  fact  ;  they 
 would  not  be  faithful  histories  of  human  life  :  so 
 that  the  very  circumstance  which  is  demanded  as 
 proof  of  inspiration  would  become  an  argiiment 
 against  it.  And  herein  we  cannot  but  admire  the 
 perfect  wisdom  which  guided  the  sacred  writers, 
 while  we  mark  the  weakness  and  shallo\\'ness  of 
 the  objections  which  are  urged  against  their  in- 
 spiration. 
 
 On  the  whole,  after  carefully  investigating  the 
 subject  of  inspiration,  we  are  conducted  to  the  im- 
 portant conclusion  that  'all  Scripture  is  divinely 
 inspired;'  that  the  sacred  penmen  wrote  'as  they 
 
 were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;'  and  that  these 
 representations  are  to  be  understood  as  implying 
 that  the  writers  had,  in  all  respects,  the  effectual 
 guidance  of  the  divine  Spirit.  And  we  are  still 
 more  confinned  in  this  conclusion  because  we  find 
 that  it  begets,  in  those  who  seriously  adopt  it,  an 
 acknowledgment  of  the  divine  origin  of  Scripture, 
 a  reverence  for  its  teachings,  and  a  practical  regard 
 to  its  requirements,  like  what  appeared  in  Christ 
 and  his  apostles.  Being  convinced  that  the  Bible 
 has,  in  all  parts  and  in  all  respects,  the  seal  of  the 
 Almighty,  and  that  it  is  truly  and  entirely  from 
 God,  we  are  led  by  reason,  conscience,  and  piety, 
 to  bow  submissively  to  its  high  authority,  implicitly 
 to  believe  its  doctrines,  however  incomprehensible, 
 and  cordially  to  obey  its  precepts,  however  contrary 
 to  our  natural  inclinations.  We  come  to  it  from 
 day  to  day,  not  as  judges,  but  as  learners,  never 
 questioning  the  propriety  or  utility  of  any  of  its 
 contents.  This  precious  Word  of  God  is  the  per- 
 fect standard  of  our  faith,  and  the  rule  of  our  life, 
 our  comfort  in  affliction,  and  our  sure  guide  to 
 heaven. — L.  W. 
 
 [Literature  : — Klemm,  Theopneustia  Sacronun 
 litl.  asserta,  Tiib.  1743  ;  Stosch,  De  duplici  Apostoll. 
 theop7ienstia,  turn  gcnerali  turn  spcciali,  Guelpherb. 
 1754  ;  Teller,  De  mspir.  divina  Vatum  Sacrortnn, 
 Helmst.  1762;  ejusd.  Diss,  de  Jnspir.  Script.  Sac. 
 Judicio  fonnando,  Helmst.  1 764 ;  Tollner,  Die 
 Gottliche  Eingcbiing  der  heiligen  Schrift  taitersucht, 
 Mittau  und  Leipzig,  1772;  Hegelmaier,  De  Tfieo- 
 pneiistia  ejusque  statu  in  viris  Sanctis  Libb.  Sacc. 
 anctoribns,  Tub.  1 784  ;  Findlay,  T/ie  Divine  In- 
 spiration of  the  Jeiuish  Scriptures,  etc.,  Lond. 
 1803  ;  Dick,  Essay  on  the  Inspiration  of  the  Holy 
 Scriptures,  Glasg.  1800,  3d  ed.  1813 ;  Sontag, 
 Doctr.  inspiratio)iis  ejusqjce  ratio,  hist,  et  usus popti- 
 laris,  Heidelb.  1810  ;  Parry,  Inquiry  into  the  nature 
 and  extent  of  the  Inspiration  of  the  writers  of  the 
 N.  T.,  2d  ed.,  Lond.  1822  ;  Haldane,  The  Books 
 of  the  O.  and  N.  T.  proved  to  be  canonical,  and  their 
 Vei-bal  Inspiration  inaintained and  established,  etc., 
 3d  ed.,  Edin.  1830;  Eraser,  Essay  on  the  Plena? y 
 and  Verbal  Inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
 in  New  Family  Library,  vol.  ii.,  Edin.  1834; 
 Henderson,  Divine  Inspiratio7t,  Lond.  1836,  4th 
 ed.,  1852;  Gaussen,  Theopneustie,  2d  ed.,  1842, 
 translated  into  English,  Edin.  1850;  Jahn,  Ad 
 quosdam  pertinent  promiss.  Sp.  S.  sec.  N.  T., 
 Bas.  1 841;  Leblois,  Sur  T inspiration  des  prerniers 
 Chretiefis,  Strasb.  1850.  See  also  Home,  Intro- 
 duction, i.  ;  Witsius,  Miscell.  Sac.  i.,  p.  262,  ff  ; 
 Twesten,  Dogmatik,  i.,  sec.  23-28;  Hill,  Lectures 
 on  Divinity,  bk.  ii.  ch.  I  ;  Tholuck  in  Herzog's 
 Encyc.  vi.  39.] 
 
 INTERPRETATION  (BIBLICAL),  and 
 HERMENEUTICS.  There  is  a  very  ancient 
 and  vsdde-spread  belief  that  the  knowledge  of  divine 
 things  in  general,  and  of  the  divine  will  in  parti- 
 cular, is  by  no  means  a  common  property  of  the 
 whole  human  race,  but  only  a  prerogative  of  a  few 
 specially-gifted  and  privileged  individuals.  It  has 
 been  considered  that  this  higher  degree  of  know- 
 ledge has  its  source  in  light  and  instruction  pro- 
 ceeding directly  from  God,  and  that  it  can  be 
 imparted  to  others  by  communicating  to  them  a 
 key  to  the  signs  of  the  divine  will.  Since,  how- 
 ever, persons  who  in  this  manner  have  been  indi- 
 rectly taught,  are  initiated  into  divine  secrets,  and 
 consequently   appear   as  the  confidants   of  deity. 
 
INTERPRETATIOxNJ 
 
 396 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 they  also  enjoy,  although  instructed  only  through 
 the  medium  of  others,  a  more  intimate  communion 
 with  God,  a  more  distinct  perception  of  his 
 thoughts,  and  consequently  a  mediate  conscious- 
 ness of  deity  itself.  It  therefore  follows  that  persons 
 thus  either  immediately  or  mediately  instructed  are 
 supposed  to  be  capable,  by  means  of  their  divine 
 illumination  and  their  knowledge  of  the  signs  of 
 the  divine  will,  to  impart  to  mankind  the  ardently- 
 desired  knowledge  of  divine  things  and  of  the  will 
 of  deity.  They  are  considered  to  be  interpreters 
 or  explainers  of  the  signs  of  the  divine  will,  and, 
 consequently,  to  be  mediators  between  God  and 
 man.  Divine  illumination  and  a  communicable 
 knowledge  of  the  signs  and  expressions  of  the 
 divine  will,  are  thus  supposed  to  be  combined  in 
 one  and  the  same  person. 
 
 This  idea  is  the  basis  of  the  Hebrew  X"'3J,  pro- 
 phet. The  prophet  is  a  divinely-inspired  seer,  and, 
 as  such,  he  is  an  interpreter  and  preacher  of  the 
 divine  will.  He  may  either  be  directly  called  by 
 God,  or  have  been  prepared  for  his  office  in  the 
 schools  of  the  prophets  (comp.  Knobel,  Der  Pro- 
 phetismiis  der  Hebrder  vollstdndig  dargestcllt,  Bres- 
 lau  1S37,  pt.  i.  p.   102,  sq.  ;  pt.  ii.  p.  45,  sq.) 
 
 However,  the  being  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
 was  the  most  prominent  feature  in  the  Hebrew  idea 
 of  a  prophet.  This  is  even  implied  in  the  usual 
 appellation  X''33,  which  means  a  person  in  the  state 
 of  divine  inspiration  (not  a  predicter  of  future 
 events).  Prophetism  ceased  altogether  as  soon  as 
 Jehovah,  according  to  the  popular  opinion,  ceased 
 to  communicate  his  Spirit. 
 
 The  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans  kept  the  idea 
 of  divine  inspiration  more  distinct  from  the  idea 
 of  interpretation  of  the  divine  will.  They,  accord- 
 ing to  a  more  natural  manner  of  viewing  the  sub- 
 ject, recognised  generally,  in  the  mediator  between 
 God  and  man,  more  of  an  experienced  and  skilful 
 interpreter  than  of  a  divinely-inspired  seer.  They 
 distinguished  the  interpreter  and  the  seer  by  dif- 
 ferent names,  of  which  we  will  speak  hereafter. 
 It  was  the  combination  of  the  power  of  interpreta- 
 tion with  inspiration,  which  distinguished  the  He- 
 brew prophets  or  seers  from  those  of  other  ancient 
 nations.  The  Hebrew  notion  of  a  N''33  appears, 
 among  the  Greeks,  to  have  been  split  into  its  two 
 constituent  parts  of  ixdvTis,  from  ixalveadaL,  to  rave 
 (Platonis  F/usdnis,  sec.  48,  ed.  Steph.  p.  244, 
 a.  b.),  and  o^  i^riyriT7}S,  from  i^yjyeladai.,  to  expound. 
 However,  the  ideas  of  (jlolvtis  and  of  e^rjyrjTTjs 
 could  be  combined  in  the  same  person.  Comp. 
 Boissonnade,  Anecdota  GrcEca,  i.  96,  Kdixirtiiv 
 ov^r]y7]T7]s  fiavTis  yap  ?]v  Kal  xRV^^'l^oiis  i^rjyelTo 
 (comp.  Scholia  in  Aristophanis  Nubes,  336),  and 
 Arriani  Epictetus,  ii.  7,  rhv  fxavrw  rhv  €^r]yov/j.evov 
 ra  C7jfj.e7a  ;  Plato,  De  Legibus,  ix.  p.  871,  c. ,  /xer' 
 e^rjyrjTwv  Kal  fj-durewv  ;  Hunpidis  P/iam'ssa;  v.  1018, 
 6  fidvTLs  e^rjyrjaaTo,  and  Iphigenia  in  Atdide,  1.  529. 
 Plutarch  {Vita  Ntunce,  cap.  xi.)  places  i^ijyi^TTjs 
 and  irpo<pi]TT}s  together  ;  so  also  does  Dionysius 
 Halicamassensis,  ii.  73.  The  first  two  of  these 
 examples  prove  that  i^-qy-qTal  were,  according  to 
 the  Greeks,  persons  who  possessed  the  gift  of  dis- 
 covering the  will  of  the  Deity  from  certain  appear- 
 ances, and  of  interpreting  signs.  Jul.  Pollux,  viii. 
 124,  i^r]y7]Tal  5^  eKaXovvro,  ol  to,  irtpl  rwv  oi.o(r7iueiui> 
 Kal  ra  tQp  dWuv  iepQv  SiSdcKOVTes.  Harpocration 
 says,  and  Suidas  repeats  after  him,  i^rjyijTris  6 
 i^i]yovp.evos  rd  iepd.  Comp.  Bekker,  Anecdota 
 Grceca,    i.    185,    i^TjyovvTai   ol   ip.TreLpou      Creuzer 
 
 defines  the  i^7]yr]TaL,  in  his  Symbolik  iind  Mythologii 
 der  Alten  Volker,  i.  15,  as  'persons  whose  high 
 vocation  it  was  to  bring  laymen  into  harmony  with 
 divine  things.'  These  iiT)yr\Tai  moved  in  a  re- 
 ligious sphere  (comp.  Herod,  i.  78,  and  Xeno- 
 phontis  Cyropadia,  viii.  3,  11).  Even  the  Delphic 
 Apollo,  replying  to  those  who  sought  his  oracles, 
 is  called  by  Plato  i^rjyrjTr]s  {Po/it.  iv.  448,  b. ) 
 Plutarch  mentions,  in  Fita  T/iesei,  c.  25,  ocriwv  Kal 
 lepCiv  i^Tjyqral ;  comp.  also  the  above-quoted  pas- 
 sage of  Dionysius  Halicamassensis,  and  especially 
 Ruhnken  {ad  Titncei  Lexicon,  ed.  Lugd.  Bat.  1789, 
 p.  189,  sq.)  The  Scholiast  on  Sophocles  {Ajax,  1. 
 320)  has  €^iqy7]ais  eirl  tGjv  ddoiv,  and  the  Scholiast 
 on  Electra,  426,  has  the  definition  e^-qyricTis  Stacrd- 
 (p-qcTLs  deiwv.  It  is  in  connection  with  this  original 
 signification  of  the  word  e^TjyyjTyjs  that  the  ex- 
 pounders of  the  law  are  styled  i^rjyrjTai ;  because 
 the  ancient  law  was  derived  from  the  gods,  and 
 the  law-language  had  become  unintelligible  to  the 
 multitude.  (Comp.  Lysias,  vi.  10  ;  Diodorus  Sicu- 
 lus,  xiii.  35  ;  Ruhnken,  as  quoted  above  ;  the 
 annotatorson  Pollux  and  Harpocration  ;  and  K.  Fr. 
 Hermann,  Lehrbiich  der  Griechischen  Staats-alter- 
 thiimer,  Marburg  1836,  sec.  104,  note  4.)  In 
 Athenseus  and  Plutarch  there  are  mentioned  books 
 under  the  title  i^rjyrjTiKd,  which  contained  intro- 
 ductions to  the  right  understanding  of  sacred  signs. 
 (Comp.  Valesius,  ad  Harpocrationis  Lexicon^  Lip- 
 siK  1824,  ii.  462.) 
 
 Like  the  Greeks,  the  Romans  also  distinguished 
 between  vates  and  interpres  (Cicero,  Fragm.  ;  Hor- 
 tens.)  : — 'Sive  vates  sive  insacris  initiisque  traden- 
 dis  divinse  mentis  interpretes.'  Servius  {ad  Vir- 
 gil ii  yEn.,  iii.  359)  quotes  a  passage  from  Cicero 
 thus  : — ut  ait  Cicero,  omnis  divinandi  peritia  in 
 duas  partes  dividitur.  Nam  aut  furor  est,  ut  in 
 vaticinantibus  ;  aut  ars,  ut  in  aruspicibus,  fulguritis 
 sive  fulguratoribus,  et  auguribus.  The  ariispices, 
 fidgiiriti,  fulgttratores,  and  angures,  belong  to  the 
 idea  of  the  ititerpres  deortt??i.  Comp.  Cicero,  Pro 
 donio  sua,  c.  41  : — Equidem  sic  accepi,  in  religioni- 
 bus  suscipiendis  caput  esse  interpretari  quae  volun- 
 tas deorum  immortalium  esse  videatur.  Cicero 
 {De  Divi7iatione,  i.  41)  says  : — Etruria  interpre- 
 taturquid  quibusque  ostendaturmonstris  atque  por- 
 tentis.  Hence,  in  Cicero  {De  Legibus,  ii.  27),  the 
 expression,  '  interpretes  religionum.' 
 
 An  example  of  this  distinction,  usual  among  the 
 Greeks,  is  found  in  I  Cor.  xii.  4,  30.  The  Corin- 
 thians filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  were  yXu^craii 
 XaXovyres,  speaking  in  tongues,  consequently  they 
 were  in  the  state  of  a  fidfris ;  but  frequently  they 
 did  not  comprehend  the  sense  of  their  own  inspi- 
 ration, and  did  not  understand  how  to  interpret  it 
 because  they  had  not  the  ipp.rjveia  yXucrcruif,  interpre- 
 tation of  tongues  :  consequently  they  were  not  ^^ij- 
 yijTai. 
 
 The  Romans  obtained  the  interpretatio  from  the 
 Etruscans  (Cicero,  De  Divinatione,  i.  2,  and  Ott- 
 fried  Miiller,  Die  Etrusker,  ii.  8,  sq.')  ;  but  the 
 above  distinction  was  the  cause  that  the  interpre- 
 tatio degenerated  into  a  common  art,  which  was 
 exercised  without  inspiration,  like  a  contemptible 
 soothsaying,  the  rules  of  which  were  contained  in 
 writings.  Cicero  {De  Divinatione,  i.  2)  says  : — • 
 Furoris  divinationem  Sibyllinis  maxime  versibus 
 contineri  arbitrati,  eorum  decem  interpretes  delec- 
 tos  e  civitate  esse  voluerunt. 
 
 Tlie  ideas  of  i}iterpres  and  of  interpretatio  were 
 not  confined  amone  the  Romans  to  sacred  sub 
 
INTERPRETATION 
 
 397 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 jects  ;  which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the  case  among 
 the  Greeks  with  the  corresponding  Greek  terms. 
 The  words  interprcs  and  intcrpretatio  were  not  oiily, 
 as  among  the  Greeks,  applied  to  the  explanation 
 of  the  laws,  but  also,  in  general,  to  the  explanation 
 of  whatever  was  obscure,  and  even  to  a  mere  inter- 
 vention in  the  settlement  of  affairs  ;  for  instance, 
 we  find  in  Livy  (xxi.  12)  pads  interpres,  denoting 
 Alorcus,  by  whose  instrumentality  peace  was 
 offered.  At  an  earlier  period  hiterpretes  meant 
 only  those  persons  by  means  of  whom  affairs  be- 
 tween God  and  man  were  settled  (comp.  Virgilii 
 ALneis,  x.  175,  and  Servius  on  this  passage).  The 
 words  hitetpyetcs  and  conjectorcs  became  convertible 
 terms  : — unde  etiam  somniorum  atque  ominum  in- 
 terpretescci/y'trft'^Yj' vocantur  (Quintil.  Insiit.  iii.  6). 
 
 From  what  we  have  stated  it  follows  that  e^?j- 
 77/0-15  and  intcrpretatio  were  originally  terms  con- 
 fined to  the  unfolding  of  supernatural  subjects, 
 although  in  Latin,  at  an  early  period,  these  terms 
 ware  also  applied  to  profane  matters.  The  Chris- 
 tians also  early  felt  the  want  of  an  interpretation  of 
 their  sacred  writings,  which  they  deemed  to  be  of 
 divine  origin  ;  consequently  they  wanted  inter- 
 preters and  instruction,  by  the  aid  of  which  the 
 true  sense  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  might  be  dis- 
 covered. The  right  understanding  of  the  nature 
 and  will  of  God  seemed,  among  the  Christians,  as 
 well  as  at  an  early  period  among  the  heathen, 
 to  depend  upon  a  right  understanding  of  certain 
 external  signs  ;  however,  there  was  a  progress  from 
 the  unintelligible  signs  of  nature  to  more  intelligible 
 written  signs,  which  was  certainly  an  important 
 progress. 
 
 The  Christians  retained,  in  respect  of  the  inter- 
 pretation of  their  sacred  writings,  the  same  expres- 
 sions which  had  been  current  in  reference  to  the 
 interpretation  of  sacred  subjects  among  the  heathen. 
 Hence  arose  the  fact  that  the  Greek  Christians 
 employed  with  predilection  the  words  ktrfl-t]cn%  and 
 i^TjyTjTrjs  in  reference  to  the  interpretation  of  the 
 Holy  Scriptures.  But  the  circumstance  that  St. 
 Paul  employs  the  term  ep/xTjvela  yXwaawp  for  the  in- 
 terpretation of  the  yXwacrais  XaXe'tv  (i  Cor.  xii.  10, 
 xiv.  26),  greatly  contributed  to  establish  the  usage 
 of  words  belonging  to  the  root  ip/j.rji'eieLv.  Ac- 
 cording to  Eusebius  {Historia  Ecdesiastica,  iii.  9), 
 Papias,  bishop  of  Hierapolis,  wrote,  as  early  as 
 about  A.  D.  100,  a  work  under  the  title  of  Xoy'iuiv 
 KvpiaKuiv  i^rr/Tjcns,  which  means  an  interpretation 
 of  the  discourses  of  Jesus.  Papias  explained  the 
 religious  contents  of  these  discourses,  which  he 
 had  collected  from  oral  and  written  traditions. 
 He  distinguished  between  the  meaning  of  e^rj- 
 yetffdaL  and  epfXTjueveiv,  as  appears  from  his  obser- 
 vation (presei"ved  by  Eusebius  in  the  place  quoted 
 above),  in  which  he  says,  concerning  the  X6yia  of 
 St.  Matthew,  written  in  Hebrew,  €p/j.rjvevae  5e  aiVa 
 ws  iSvparo  ^Kacrros,  '  but  every  one  interpreted  them 
 according  to  his  ability. '  In  the  Greek  Church  6  i^-rj- 
 7?;t7)s  and  e^rjyriTal  tou  X6yov  were  the  usual  terms 
 for  teachers  of  Christianity.  (See  Eusebii  Historia 
 Ecdesiasiica,  vii.  30,  and  Heinichen  on  this  pas- 
 sage, note  21  ;  Photii  Biblioth.  Eod.  105  ;  Cave, 
 Hist.  Liter,  i.  146.)  Origen  called  his  commen- 
 tary on  the  Holy  Scriptures  i^7]yr]TiKd  ;  and  Pro- 
 copiius  of  Gaza  wrote  a  work  on  several  books  of 
 the  Bible,  entitled  axoXal  i^rjyqriKai  However, 
 we  find  the  word  ipp.-qvda  employed  as  a  synonym 
 of  i^riyr]ais,  especially  among  the  inhabitants  of 
 Antioch.     For  instance,  Gregorius  Nyssenus  says, 
 
 concerning  Ephraim  Syrus,  ypafpriv  SX-rji'  uKpifi^i 
 irpbs  Xi^Lu  7]pix7]V€Vff€v  (See  Gregorii  Nysseni  Vita 
 Ephraimi  Syri  ;  Opera,  Paris,  ii.  p.  1033).  Theo- 
 doras of  Mopsuestia,  Theodoret,  and  others,  wrote 
 commentaries  on  the  sacred  Scriptures  under  the 
 title  of  epp-rjueia  (compare  A.  H.  Niemeyer,  de  Isi- 
 dori  Pelnsiotee  Vita,  Scriptis,  et  Doctrina,  Halae 
 1825,  p.  207). 
 
 Among  the  Latin  Christians  the  word  intetprei 
 had  a  wider  range  than  the  corresponding  Greek 
 term,  and  the  Latins  had  no  precise  term  for  the 
 exposition  of  the  Bible  which  exactly  corresponded 
 with  the  Greek.  The  word  iiiterpretatio  was  ap- 
 plied only  in  the  sense  of  OCCUPATION  or  act  of  ati 
 expositor  of  the  Bible.,  but  not  in  the  sense  of  con- 
 tents elicited  from  Biblical  passages.  The  words 
 tractare,  tractaior,  and  tradatiis,  were  in  ]5reference 
 employed  with  respect  to  Biblical  exposition,  and 
 the  sense  which  it  elicited.  Together  with  these 
 words  there  occur  commentariiis  and  expositio.  In 
 reference  to  the  exegetical  work  of  St.  Hilary  on 
 St.  Matthew,  the  codices  fluctuate  between  com- 
 niejitaritis  and  tractatiis.  St.  Augustine's  tractatiis 
 are  ^^  ell  known  ;  and  this  father  frequently  men- 
 tions the  <//z'/«rt77/w  scripturariiiii  tractatores.  For 
 instance,  Retractationcs  1.  23.  diviiioniin  tractatores 
 eloqiiioriun.  Sulpicius  Severus,  Dial.  i.  6.  origiiiii 
 qui  tradator  sacrorum  peritissimus  Iiabe- 
 batur.  Vincentius  Lirinensis  observes  in  his  Com- 
 nionitoriitm  on  i  Cor.  xii.  28  : — tertio  doctores  qui 
 tractatores  nunc  appellantur  ;  quos  hie  idem  apos- 
 tolus etiam  prophetas  interdum  nuncupat,  eo  quod 
 per  eos  prophetarum  mysteria  populis  aperiantur 
 (compare  Dufresne,  Glossariiim  medics  et  infimiE 
 Latiiiitatis,  sub  TRACTATOR  et  TRACTATUS  ;  and 
 Baluze,  ad  Servat.  Liipitm,  p.  479). 
 
 However,  the  occupation  of  interpres,  in  the 
 nobler  sense  of  this  word,  was  not  unknown  to  St. 
 Jerome  ;  as  may  be  seen  from  his  Prcrfatio  in 
 libivs  Samttelis  (Opera,  ed.  Vallarsi,  ix.  p.  459)  : — 
 Quicquid  enim  crebrius  vertendo  et  emendando 
 solicitius  et  didicimus  et  tenemus,  nostrum  est. 
 Et  quum  intellexeris,  quod  antea  nesciebas,  vel 
 interpretem  me  estimato  si  gratus  es,  vel  wapa- 
 (ppaaTT^v  si  ingratus. 
 
 In  modern  times  the  word  interpretatio  has  again 
 come  into  repute  in  the  sense  of  scriptural  exposi- 
 tion, for  which,  indeed,  ijiterpretation  is  now  the 
 standing  technical  term. 
 
 The  German  language  also  distinguishes  between 
 the  words  OTislegcn  and  e}-kldrejt  in  such  a  manner 
 that  the  former  corresponds  to  e^rjye'ta-Bai  and  in- 
 terpretari.  The  word  auslcgen  is  ah\'ays  used  in 
 the  sense  of  rendering  perceptible  what  is  contained 
 under  signs  and  symbols.  Compare  Dionysii  Hali- 
 camassensis  Antiq.  Rom.  ii.  73  :  rots  re  IdLCOTah, 
 biroaoi  pi)  icraai  roiis  Trepl  to.  Oela.  (xe^aapLoiis,  i^rj- 
 yrjTaL  yivovrai  Kal  TrpocprjTai. 
 
 The  word  erkliiren,  on  the  contrary,  means  to 
 dear  up  by  a7-g2it)ienis  what  has  been  indistinctly  un- 
 derstood, so  that  what  was  incomprehensible  is 
 comprehended. 
 
 The  Erkldrer  does  not  develope  what  is  hidden 
 and  concealed,  but  explains  what  is  unclear  and 
 obscure  (see  Weigand,  IVortei'bnch  der  Deutschen 
 Synonymen,  i,  Mainz  1840,  p.  140,  seq.)  Hence 
 it  follows  that  the  Aiisleger  of  the  Bible  occupies  a 
 position  different  from  that  of  the  Et-kliirer,  al- 
 though these  terms  are  frequently  employed  as  if 
 they  were  synonymous.  The  Aiisleger,  i^vyVTV^, 
 opens  what  is  concealed  under  the  words  of  the 
 
INTERPRETATION 
 
 3S3 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 Bible.  He  unveils  mysteries,  while  the  Erklarer, 
 epfJ.Tjve^s,  sees  in  the  Words  of  the  Bible  not  merely 
 signs  for  something  concealed  and  hidden,  but 
 words  the  sense  of  which  is  to  be  cleared  up  when- 
 ever it  is  obscure.  The  Erkldy-er  stands  on  NATU- 
 RAL ground,  but  the  Aitsleger  on  supernatural. 
 
 From  ancient  times  the  church,  or  rather  eccle- 
 siastical bodies  and  religious  denominations,  have 
 taken  the  supernatural  position  with  reference  to 
 the  Bible,  as,  before  the  Church,  the  Jews  did  in 
 respect  of  the  O.  T.  The  church  and  denomina- 
 tions have  demanded  Atisleger,  not  Erkliirer.  They 
 have  supposed  that  in  the  authors  of  Biblical  books 
 there  did  not  exist  a  literary  activity  of  the  same 
 kind  which  induces  men  to  write  down  what  they 
 have  thought,  but  have  always  required  from  their 
 followers  the  belief  that  the  Biblical  authors  wrote 
 in  a  state  of  inspiration,  that  is  to  say,  under  a 
 peculiar  and  direct  influence  of  the  Divine  Spirit. 
 Sometimes  the  Biblical  authors  were  described  to 
 be  merely  external  and  mechanical  instruments  of 
 God's  revelation.  But  however  wide,  or  however 
 narrow  the  boundaries  were,  within  which  the 
 operation  of  God  upon  the  writers  was  confined  by 
 ecclesiastical  supposition,  the  origin  of  the  Biblical 
 books  was  always  supposed  to  be  essentially  diffe- 
 rent from  the  origin  of  human  compositions  ;  and 
 this  difference  demanded  the  application  of  peculiar 
 rules  in  order  to  understand  the  Bible.  There 
 were  required  peculiar  arts  and  kinds  of  infonna- 
 tion  in  order  to  discover  the  sense  and  contents  of 
 books  which,  on  account  of  their  extraordinary 
 origin,  were  inaccessible  by  the  ordinaiy  way  of 
 logical  rules,  and  whose  written  words  were  only 
 outward  signs,  behind  which  a  higher  and  divine 
 meaning  was  concealed.  Consequently,  the  church 
 and  denominations  required  Deuter,  Attslegcr,  i^rj- 
 yi]Tal,  or  interpreters,  of  the  signs  by  means  of 
 which  God  had  revealed  his  will.  Thus  neces- 
 sarily arose  again  in  the  Christian  church  the  art  of 
 opening  or  interpreting  the  supernatural ;  which 
 art  had  an  existence  in  earlier  religions,  but  with 
 this  essential  difference,  that  the  signs,  by  the 
 opening  of  which  supernatural  truth  was  obtained, 
 were  now  more  simple,  and  of  a  more  intelligible 
 kind,  than  in  earlier  religions.  They  were  now 
 written  signs,  which  belonged  to  the  sphere  of 
 speech  and  language,  through  which  alone  all 
 nodes  of  thinking  obtain  clearness,  and  can  be 
 readily  communicated  to  others.  But  the  Holy 
 Scriptures  in  which  divine  revelation  was  preserved, 
 differ,  by  conveying  divine  thoughts,  from  common 
 language  and  writing,  which  convey  only  human 
 thoughts.  Hence  it  followed  that  its  sense  was 
 much  deeper,  and  far  exceeded  the  usual  sphere  of 
 human  thoughts,  so  that  the  usual  requisites  for  the 
 right  understanding  of  written  documents  appeared 
 to  be  insufficient.  According  to  this  opinion  a 
 LOWER  and  a  higher  sense  of  the  Bible  were  dis- 
 tinguished. The  lower  sense  was  that  which  could 
 be  elicited  according  to  the  rules  of  grammar  ;  the 
 higher  sense  was  considered  to  consist  of  deeper 
 thoughts  concealed  under  the  grammatical  mean- 
 ing of  the  words.  These  deeper  thoughts  they 
 endeavoured  to  obtain  in  various  ways,  but  not  by 
 grammatical  research. 
 
 The  Jews,  in  the  days  of  Jesus,  employed  for 
 this  purpose  especially  the  typico-allegorical  inter- 
 pretation. The  Jews  of  Palestine  endeavoured  by 
 means  of  this  mode  of  interpretation  especially  to 
 elicit  the  secrets  of  futurity,  which  were  saia  to  be 
 
 fully  contained  in  the  O.  T.  (See  Wsehner,  An/i- 
 quitates  Hebraoncm,  vol.  i.,  Gottingse  1743,  p.  341, 
 sq.  ;  Dopke,  Hermeneutik  der  7iMtestaTnentlichen 
 Schrifiseller,  Leipzig  1829,  p.  88,  sq.,  164,  sq. ; 
 Hirschfeld,  dcr  Geist  der  Talmiidischen  Atcslegimg 
 der  Bibel,  Berlin  1840;  comp.  Juvenal,  Sat.  xiv. 
 103 ;  Justin  Martyr,  Apol.  i.  pp.  52,  61  ;  Bret- 
 Schneider,  Historisch-dogmatische  Aiislegung  des 
 N^eiien  Testament es,  Leipzig  1806,  p.  35,  sq.\ 
 
 The  Alexandrine  Jews,  on  the  contrary,  endea- 
 voured to  raise  themselves  from  the  simple  sense  of 
 the  words,  rh  \pvxi-K6v,  to  a  higher,  more  general, 
 and  spiritual  sense,  t6  Trvevf/.ari.Kdi'  (see  Dahne, 
 Geschidliche  Darstelhitig  der  yHdisch-Alexayidrinis- 
 chen  Religions-Philosophie,  Halle  1834,  i.  p.  52, 
 sq.;  ii.  17,  195,  sq.,  209,  228,  241).  Similar  prin- 
 ciples were  adopted  by  the  authors  of  the  N.  T. 
 (see  De  Wette,  Ueber  die  Symbolisch-  Typische  Leh- 
 raj-t  in  Briefe  an  die  Hebrder,  in  der  Theologischen 
 Zeitschrift,  von  Schleiermacher  und  De  Wette,  part 
 iii.  ;  Tholuck,  Beilage  zmn  Commeniar  iiber  den 
 Brief  an  die  Hebriier,  1840). 
 
 These  two  modes  of  interpretation,  the  alle- 
 GORICO-TYPICAL  and  the  allegorico-mystical, 
 are  found  in  the  Christian  writers  as  early  as  the 
 1st  and  2d  centures  ;  the  latter  as  ypQcris,  the  for- 
 mer as  a  demonstration  that  all  and  everything, 
 both  what  had  happened,  and  what  would  come  to 
 pass,  was  somehow  contained  in  the  sacred  Scrip- 
 tures (see  Justin  Martyr,  as  quoted  above,  and  Ter- 
 tullian,  Adversus  Alarcionem,  iv.  2,  Prsedicatio 
 discipulorum  suspecta  fieri  posset  si  non  assistat 
 auctoritas. 
 
 To  these  allegorical  modes  of  interpretation  way 
 added  a  third  mode,  which  necessarily  sprung  up 
 after  the  rise  of  the  Catholico-apostolical  church, 
 namely,  the  DOGMATICAL,  or  theologico-eccle- 
 SIASTICAL.  The  followers  of  the  Catholico-apos- 
 tolical church  agreed  that  all  apostles  and  all 
 apostolical  writings  had  an  equal  authority,  be- 
 cause they  were  all  under  an  equal  guidance  of  the 
 Holy  Ghost.  Hence  it  followed  that  they  could 
 not  set  forth  either  contradictoiy  or  different  doc- 
 trines. A  twofold  expedient  was  adopted  in  order 
 to  effect  harmony  of  interpretation.  The  one  was 
 of  the  apparent  and  relative  kind,  because  it  re- 
 ferred to  subjects  which  appear  incomprehensible 
 only  to  the  confined  human  understanding,  but  which 
 are  in  perfect  harmony  in  the  divine  thoughts. 
 Justin  {Dialogiis  ai?>i  Tryphone,  c.  65)  says  : — e/c 
 Travrhs  Treirei.cixivo's  6ti  ov5efj,la  ypacp-rj  rfj  eripq, 
 evavrla  earlv,  avrbs  /xt?  voew  fxaWov  ofioXoyrjau) 
 TO.  elpriixiva.  St.  Chrysostom  restricted  this  as 
 follows  :— TrafTtt  <ya(f>rj  Kal  evdea  to,  irapa  rait 
 OeiaTs  ypa(pa?i,  Travra  to,  avayKoia  5^\a  [Homil.  iii. 
 c.  4.  in  Ep.  2  ad  Tliessalmticeiises)  (comp.  Homil.  iii. 
 de  Lazaro,  and  Athanasii  Oratio  contra  gentes ; 
 Opera  i.  p.  12). 
 
 The  SECOND  expedient  adopted  by  the  church 
 was  to  consider  certain  articles  of  faith  to  be 
 LEADING  DOCTRINES,  and  to  regulate  and  de- 
 fine accordingly  the  sense  of  the  Bible  wherever 
 it  appeared  doubtful  and  uncertain.  This  led  to 
 the  tiieologico-ecclesiastical  or  dogmatical 
 mode  of  interpretation,  which,  when  the  Chris- 
 tians were  divided  into  several  sects,  proved  to  be 
 indispensable  to  the  Church,  but  which  adopted 
 various  forms  in  the  various  sects  by  which  it  was 
 employed.  Not  only  the  heretics  of  ancient  times, 
 but  also  the  followers  of  the  Roman  Catholic,  the 
 Greek  Catholic,  the  Syrian,  the  Anglican,  the  Pro' 
 
INTERPRETATION 
 
 399 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 testant  Church,  etc.,  have  endeavoured  to  interpret 
 the  Bible  in  harmony  with  tlieir  dogmas. 
 
 The  different  modes  of  interpreting  the  Bible  are, 
 according  to  what  we  have  stated,  the  following 
 three — the  grammatical,  the  allegorical,  the 
 DOGMATICAL.  The  grammatical  mode  of  interpre- 
 tation simply  investigates  the  sense  contained  in 
 the  words  of  the  Bible.  The  allegorical,  accord- 
 ing to  Quintilian's  sentence,  'aliud  verbis,  aliud 
 sensu  ostendo,'  maintains  that  the  words  of  the 
 Bible  have,  besides  their  simple  sense,  another 
 which  is  concealed  as  behind  a  picture,  and  en- 
 deavours to  find  out  this  supposed  figurative  sense, 
 which,  it  is  said,  was  not  intended  by  the  authors 
 (see  Olshausen,  Ein  Wort  iiber  tieferen  Sckriftsinii, 
 Konigsberg  1824).  The  dogmatical  mode  of  in- 
 terpretation endeavours  to  explain  the  Bible  in 
 harmony  with  the  dogmas  of  the  church,  following 
 the  principle  of  analogia  fidei.  Comp.  Concilii 
 Tridentini,  sess.  iv.  decret.  2  : — Ne  quis  Sacram 
 Scripturam  interpretari  audeat  contra  eum  sensum 
 quern  tenuit  et  tenet  sancta  mater  ecclesia,  cujus 
 est  judicare  de  vero  sensu  et  interpretatione  Scriptu- 
 rarum  Sacrarum. 
 
 Rambach,  Instiintiones  Her>?iene!iticcB  Sacra, 
 Jense  1723  :  Auctoritas,  quam  h?ec  analogia  fidei  in 
 re  exegetica  habet,  in  eo  consistit,  ut  sit  fundamen- 
 tum  ac  principium  generale,  ad  cujus  normam 
 omnes  Scriptm-fe  expositiones,  tamquam  ad  lapi- 
 dem  Lydium,  exigendoe  sunt. 
 
 Anglican  Clmrch,  art.  xx.  : — ECCLESI.^  non 
 licet  quicquam  instituere,  quod  verbo  Dei  scripto 
 adversetur,  nee  unum  Scripturse  locum  sic  exponere 
 potest,  ut  alteri  contradicat : — '  It  is  not  lawful  for 
 the  church  to  ordain  anything  that  is  contrary  to 
 God's  word  written,  neither  may  it  expound  one 
 place  of  Scripture  so  as  to  be  repugnant  to  an- 
 other.' 
 
 Confessio  Scotica,  18  : — Nullam  enim  interpreta- 
 tionemadmittereaudemus,  quaalicui  principali  arti- 
 culo  fidei,  aut  alicui  piano  textui  Scriptura;,  aut 
 caritatis  regular  repugnat,  etc.  : — '  We  dare  not  ad- 
 mit any  interpretation  which  contradicts  any  lead- 
 ing article  of  faith,  or  any  plain  text  of  Scripture, 
 or  the  rule  of  charity,  etc. 
 
 Besides  the  three  modes  of  interpretation  which 
 have   been   mentioned  above,   theological  writers 
 
 have  spoken  of  TYPICAL,  PROPHETICAL,  EMPHATI- 
 CAL,    PHILOSOPHICAL,    TRADITIONAL,    MORAL,    Or 
 
 PRACTICAL  interpretation.  But  all  these  are  only 
 one-sided  developments  of  some  single  feature  con- 
 tained in  the  above  three,  arbitrarily  chosen  ;  and, 
 therefore,  they  cannot  be  considered  to  be  separate 
 modes,  but  are  only  modifications  of  one  or  other 
 of  those  three.  The  interpretation  in  which  all 
 these  modes  are  brought  into  harmony,  has  lately 
 been  called  the  PANHARMONICAL,  which  word  is 
 not  very  happily  chosen  (F.  H.  Germar,  Die  Paii- 
 harmonische  Interpretation  der  Heiligen  Schrifi, 
 Leipsic  1721;  and  by  the  same  author,  Beitrag 
 ztir  Allgeineinen  He7-meneiitik,  Altona  1828). 
 
 The  ALLEGORICAL,  as  well  as  the  dogmatical, 
 mode  of  interpretation,  presupposes  the  gram- 
 matical, which,  consequently,  forms  the  basis  of 
 the  other  two ;  so  that  neither  the  one  nor  the 
 other  can  exist  entirely  without  it.  Consequently, 
 the  grammatical  mode  of  interpretation  must  have 
 an  historical  precedence  before  the  others.  But 
 history  also  proves  that  the  church  has  constantly 
 endeavoured  to  curtail  the  province  of  grammatical 
 interpretation,  to  renounce  it  as  much  as  possible, 
 
 and  to  rise  above  it.  If  we  follow,  with  the  exa- 
 mining  eye  of  an  historical  inquirer,  the  course 
 in  which  these  three  modes  of  interpretation,  in 
 their  mutual  dependence  upon  each  other,  have 
 generally  been  applied,  it  becomes  evident  that 
 in  opposition  to  the  grammatical  mode,  the  alle- 
 gorical was  first  set  up.  Subsequently,  the  alle- 
 gorical was  almost  entirely  supplanted  by  the 
 dogmatical ;  but  it  started  up  with  renewed  vigour 
 when  the  dogmatical  mode  rigorously  confined  the 
 spiritual  movement  of  the  human  intellect,  as  well 
 as  all  religious  sentiment,  within  the  too  narrow 
 bounds  of  dogmatical  despotism. 
 
 The  dogmatical  mode  of  interpretation  could  only 
 spring  up  after  the  church,  renouncing  the  original 
 multiplicity  of  opinions,  had  agreed  upon  certain 
 leading  doctrines  ;  after  which  time,  it  grew,  toge- 
 ther with  the  church,  into  a  mighty  tree  towering 
 high  above  eveiy  surrounding  object,  and  casting 
 its  shade  over  everything.  The  longing  desire  for 
 light  and  warmth,  of  those  who  were  spell-bound 
 under  its  shade,  induced  them  to  cultivate  again  the 
 allegorical  and  the  grammatical  interpretation ;  but 
 they  were  unable  to  bring  the  fruits  of  these  modes 
 to  full  maturity.  Every  new  intellectual  revolution, 
 and  every  spiritual  development  of  nations,  gave  a 
 new  impulse  to  grammatical  interpretation.  This 
 impulse  lasted  until  interpretation  was  again  taken 
 captive  by  the  overwhelming  ecclesiastical  power, 
 whose  old  formalities  had  regained  strength,  or 
 which  had  been  renovated  under  new  forms. 
 Grammatical  interpretation,  consequently,  goes 
 hand  in  hand  with  the  principle  of  spiritual  pro- 
 gress, and  the  dogmatical  with  the  conservative 
 principle.  Finally,  the  allegorical  interpretation  is 
 as  an  artificial  aid  subservient  to  the  conservative 
 principle,  when,  by  its  vigorous  stability,  the  latter 
 exercises  a  too  unnatural  pressure.  This  is  con- 
 firmed by  the  history  of  all  times  and  countries,  so 
 that  we  may  confine  ourselves  to  the  following  lew 
 illustrative  obsei'vations.  The  various  tendencies 
 of  the  first  Christian  period  were  combined  in  the 
 2d  century,  so  that  the  principle  of  one  general 
 (Catholic)  church  was  gradually  adopted  by  most 
 parties.  But  now,  it  became  rather  difficult  to  se- 
 lect, from  the  variety  of  doctrines  prevalent  in 
 various  sects,  those  by  the  application  of  which  to 
 Biblical  interpretation  a  perfect  harmony  and  sys- 
 tematical unity  could  be  effected.  Nevertheless, 
 the  wants  of  science  powerfully  demanded  a  sys- 
 tematical arrangement  of  Biblical  doctrines,  even 
 before  a  general  agreement  upon  dogmatical  prin- 
 ciples had  been  effected.  The  wants  of  science 
 were  especially  felt  among  the  Alexandrine  Chris- 
 tians ;  and  in  Alexandria,  where  the  allegorical 
 interpretation  had  from  ancient  times  been  prac- 
 tised, it  offered  the  desired  expedient  which  met 
 the  exigency  of  the  church.  Hence,  it  may  natu- 
 rally be  explained  why  the  Alexandrine  theologians 
 of  the  2d  and  3d  century,  particularly  Clemens 
 Alexandrinus  and  Origen,  interpreted  allegorically, 
 and  why  the  allegorical  interpretation  was  per- 
 fected, and  in  vogue,  even  before  the  dogmatical 
 came  into  existence.  Origen,  especially  in  his 
 fourth  book,  De  Principiis,  treats  on  scriptural  in- 
 terpretation, using  the  following  arguments  :  — The 
 Holy  Scriptures,  inspired  by  God,  form  an  har- 
 monious whole,  perfect  in  itself,  without  any  de- 
 fects and  contradictions,  and  containing  nothing 
 that  is  insignificant  and  superfluous.  The  gram- 
 matical interpretation  leads  to  obstacles  and  objec- 
 
INTERPRETATION 
 
 400 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 tions,  which,  according  to  tlie  quality  just  stated  of 
 the  Holy  Scriptures,  are  inadmissible  and  impos- 
 sible. Now,  since  the  merely  grammatical  inter- 
 pretation can  neither  remove  nor  overcome  these 
 objections,  we  must  seek  for  an  expedient  be- 
 yond the  boundaries  of  grammatical  interpre- 
 pretation.  The  allegorical  interpretation  offers  this 
 expedient,  and  consequently  is  above  the  grammati- 
 cal. Origen  observes  that  man  consists  of  body, 
 soul,  and  spirit  ;  and  he  distinguishes  a  triple  sense 
 of  the  Holy  Scriptures  analogous  to  this  division  : — 
 oi'Kovv  TpLffCTios  CLTroypdcpeaOaL  Set  els  ti)v  eavrou 
 '^pvxh"  ■''tt  ■'"'^''  ayiiov  ypa/j./j.dTwv  vorj/JLara '  'iva  6 
 ixiv  aTrXovarepos  oiKo5op.7jTai,  dirb  rrjs  olovel  aapKos 
 rrjs  ypa<pT]S,  ovtojs  dvofia^ovrcov  7jfj.wv  rrji'  irp6- 
 Xeipov  eKSoxrjv '  6  5^  iirl  iroabv  avajSe^rjKws,  diro 
 TTjs  (hcnrepei  ^vxvs  avrfjs  '  6  5^  riXeios  Kai  Spioios 
 Toh  Trapa  t(2  d^rocrroXy  (l  Cor.  ii.  6,  7)  \eyo  fie  vols' 
 ffo<piav  5e  \a\ovp.ev  .  .  .  aTrb  tov  Trvev/xaTiKov 
 vofiov  cTKiav  'ixovTOS  Twv  p.eWbPTUV  dyadC^v'  u-airep 
 yap  b  dvdpwiros  crvvecrTrjKev  iK  awp-aroi  koL  ipvxv^ 
 Kal  irveu/xaros,  rbv  avrbv  Trpbirov  Kal  i]  oiKovofiTj- 
 detaa  virb  tou  6eoD  eh  dvdptlnruv  (jwrripiav  dodrjvai. 
 ypa(p-f)v  {De  Princip.,  iv.  108;  comp.  Klausen, 
 Hei'meneutik  des  Neiioi  Tt'sta?nenies,  Leipzig  1841, 
 p.  104,  sq.) 
 
 Since,  however,  allegorical  interpretation  can- 
 not be  reduced  to  settled  rules,  but  always  depends 
 upon  the  greater  or  less  influence  of  imagination  ; 
 and  since  the  system  of  Christian  doctrines,  which 
 the  Alexandrine  theologians  produced  by  means  of 
 allegorical  interpretation,  was  in  many  respects  ob- 
 jected to  ;  and  since,  in  opposition  to  these  Alexan- 
 drine theologians,  there  was  gradually  established, 
 and  more  and  more  firmly  defined,  a  system  of 
 Christian  doctrines  which  formed  a  firm  basis 
 for  uniformity  of  inter]->retation,  in  accordance  with 
 the  mind  of  the  majority,  there  gradually  sprung 
 up  a  dogmatical  mode  of  intei-pretation  founded 
 upon  the  interpretation  of  ecclesiastical  teachers, 
 which  had  been  recognised  as  orthodox  in  the 
 Catholic  church.  This  dogmatical  interpretation 
 has  been  in  perfect  existence  since  the  beginning  of 
 the  4th  century,  and  then  more  and  more  sup- 
 planted the  allegorical,  which  henceforward  was  left 
 to  the  wit  and  ingenuity  of  a  few  individuals.  Thus 
 St.  Jerome,  about  a.  D.  400,  could  say  : — Regula 
 scripturarum  est :  ubi  manifestissima  prophetia  de 
 futuris  texitur  per  INCERTA  allegorl^  non  ex- 
 tenuare  quae  scripta  sunt  {Comment,  in  Malachi'i. 
 16).  During  the  whole  of  the  4th  century,  the  ec- 
 clesiastico-dogmatical  mode  of  interpretation  was 
 developed  with  constant  reference  to  the  grammati- 
 cal. Even  Hillary,  in  his  book  De  Triniiate,  i. 
 properly  asserts  : — Optimus  lector  est,  qui  dictonmi 
 intelligentiam  expectet  ex  dictis  potius  quam  im- 
 ponat,  et  retulerit  magis  quam  attulerit  ;  neque 
 cogat  id  videri  dictis  contineri,  quod  ante  lectionem 
 prassumpserit  intelligendum. 
 
 After  the  commencement  of  the  5th  century, 
 grammatical  interpretation  fell  entirely  into  decay  ; 
 which  ruin  was  effected  partly  by  the  full  develop- 
 ment of  the  ecclcNiastical  system  of  doctrines  de- 
 fined in  all  their  parts,  and  by  a  fear  of  deviating 
 from  this  system,  partly  also  by  the  continually  in- 
 creasing ignorance  of  the  languages  in  which  the 
 Bible  was  written.  The  primary  condition  of  eccle- 
 siastical or  dogmatical  interpretation  was  then  most 
 clearly  expressed  by  Vincentius  Lirinensis  {Com- 
 vionit.  i. )  : — Quia  videlicet  scripturam  sacram  pro 
 if  sa  sua  altitudine  non  uno  eodemque  sensu  uni- 
 
 versi  accipiunt,  sed  ejusdem  eloquia  aliter  atque 
 aliter  alius  atque  alius  interpretatur,  ut  poene  quot 
 homines  sunt,  tot  illinc  sententise  erui  posse  videan- 
 tur.  ...  in  ipsa  catholica  ecclesia  magnopere 
 curandum  est,  ut  id  teiieamus,  quod  ubique,  quod 
 semper,  quod  ab  omnibus  creditum  est  (compare 
 Commoiiit.  ii.,  ed.  Bremensis,  1688,  p.  321,  xeq.) 
 Henceforward,  interpretation  was  confined  tr  the 
 mere  collection  of  explanations,  which  had  first 
 been  given  by  men  whose  ecclesiastical  orthodoxy 
 was  unquestionable.  Prasstantius  prcesumpta  no- 
 vitate  non  imbui,  sed  priscorum  fonte  satiari  (Cas- 
 siodori  InstitntioJies  Diviiia,  Pi'tzf.  Compare  Al- 
 cuini  Epistola  ad  Gislam  ;  Opera,  ed.  Frobenius, 
 i.  p.  464.  Comtnent.  in  yo/i.  Prcef.,  ib.  p.  460. 
 Claudius  Turon,  Prolegomena  in  Cotnmeni.  in 
 libros  Regitm.  Haymo,  Historia  Ecclesiastica,  ix. 
 3,  etc.)  Doubtful  cases  were  decided  according  to 
 the  precedents  of  ecclesiastical  definitions.  In  his 
 qu£e  vel  dubia  vel  obscura  fuerint  id  noverimus 
 sequendum  quod  nee  prseceptis  evangelicis  con- 
 trarium,  nee  decretis  sanctorum  invenitur  adversum 
 (Benedicti  Capihdara,  iii.  58,  in  Pertz,  Moniimenta 
 Veteris  German.  Histor.  iv.  2,  p.  107).  But  men 
 like  Bishop  Agobardus  (a.d.  S40,  in  Galandii  Bihl., 
 xiii.,  p.  446),  Johannes  Scotus,  Erigena,  Druth- 
 mar,  Nicolaus  Lyranus,  Roger  Bacon,  and  others, 
 acknowledged  the  necessity  of  grammatical  inter- 
 pretation, and  were  only  wanting  in  the  requisite 
 means,  and  in  knowledge,  for  putting  it  successfully 
 into  practice. 
 
 During  the  whole  period  of  the  middle  ages  the 
 allegorical  interpretation  again  prevailed.  The 
 middle  ages  were  more  distinguished  by  sentiment 
 than  by  clearness,  and  the  allegorical  interpreta- 
 tion gave  satisfaction  to  sentiment  and  occupation 
 to  free  mental  speculation. 
 
 When,  in  the  15th  century,  classical  studies  had 
 revived,  they  exercised  also  a  favourable  influence 
 upon  Biblical  interpretation,  and  restored  gram- 
 matical interpretation  to  honour.  It  was  especi- 
 ally by  grammatical  interpretation  that  the  domi- 
 neering Catholic  church  was  combated  at  the  period 
 of  the  Reformation  ;  but  as  soon  as  the  newly- 
 sprung-up  Protestant  church  had  been  dogmatically 
 established,  it  began  to  consider  grammatical  inter- 
 pretation a  dangerous  adversary  of  its  own  dogmas, 
 and  opposed  it  as  much  as  did  the  Roman  Catholics 
 themselves.  From  the  middle  of  the  i6th  to  the 
 middle  of  the  i8th  century  this  important  ally  of 
 Protestantism  was  subjected  to  the  artificial  law  ot 
 a  new  dogmatical  interpretation  ;  while  the  Roman 
 Catholic  church  changed  the  principle  of  interpre- 
 tation formerly  advanced  by  Vincentius  into  an 
 ecclesiastical  dogma.  In  consequence  of  this  new 
 oppression  the  religious  sentiment,  which  hau 
 frequently  been  wounded  both  among  Roman 
 Catholics  and  Protestants,  took  refuge  in  allegori- 
 cal interpretation,  which  then  re-appeared  under 
 the  forms  of  typical  and  mystical  theology. 
 
 After  the  beginning  of  the  i8th  century  gram- 
 matical interpretation  recovered  its  authority.  It 
 was  then  first  re-introduced  by  the  Arminians,  and, 
 in  spite  of  constant  attacks,  towards  the  conclusion 
 of  that  centuiy  it  decidedly  prevailed  among  the 
 German  Protestants.  It  exercised  a  very  beneficial 
 influence,  although  it  cannot  be  denied  that  mani- 
 fold errors  occurred  in  its  application.  During  the 
 last  thirty  years  both  Protestants  and  Roman  Catho- 
 lics have  again  curtailed  the  rights  and  invaded  the 
 province  of  grammatical  interpretation,  by  promot* 
 
INTERPRETATION 
 
 $01 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 ing  (according  to  the  general  reaction  of  our  times) 
 the  opposing  claims  of  dogmatical  and  mystical  in- 
 terpretation (comp.  J.  Rosenmiiller,  Historia  In- 
 ierpretationis  Lihroriim  sac7vritin  in  Ecdesia  Chris- 
 tiana, Lipsiffi  1 795-1814,  5  vols.  ;  W.  Van  Mil- 
 dert,  An  Inquiry  into  the  General  Principles  of 
 Scripture  Interpretation,  in  Eight  Sermons,  etc., 
 Oxford  1815  ;  G.  W.  Meyer,  Geschichte  der Schrifl- 
 erkldrung  seit  der  Wicdcrherstellung  der  IFissen- 
 schaften,  Gottingen  1802-9,  5  vols.  ;  Richard 
 Simon,  Histoire  Critique  des  principaux  Connnen- 
 tateurs  du  Nouv.  Test.,  Rotterdam  1693;  H.  N. 
 Klausen,  Hermeneiitik  des  Neiien  Testa?nentes, 
 Aus  dem  Diinischen,  Leipzig  1841,  p.  77,  seq.  ; 
 E.  F.  K.  Rosenmiiller,  Ilandbuchfiir  die  Litei-atur 
 der  Biblischen  Kritik  und  Exegese,  Gottingen 
 1797-1800,  4  vols.) 
 
 The  aim  of  human  speech  in  general  may  be  de- 
 scribed as  the  desire  to  render  one's  own  thoughts 
 intelligible  to  others  by  means  of  words  in  their 
 capacity  of  signs  of  thoughts.  These  words  may  be 
 written,  or  merely  spoken.  In  order  to  understand 
 the  speech  of  another,  several  arts  and  branches  of 
 knowledge  are  requisite.  The  art  of  understanding 
 the  language  of  another  is  called  hermeneutics,  epjui?- 
 vevTiKTi  Tex^T),  or  eirL(jTrip.rj.  Every  art  may  be  re- 
 duced to  the  skilful  application  of  certain  principles, 
 which,  if  they  proceed  from  one  highest  principle, 
 may  be  said  to  be  based  on  science. 
 
 Here  we  have  to  consider  not  the  spoken,  but 
 the  written  language  only.  The  rules  to  be  observed 
 by  the  interpreter,  and  the  gifts  which  qualify  him 
 for  the  right  understanding  of  written  language, 
 are  applicable  either  to  all  written  language  in 
 general,  or  only  to  the  right  understanding  of  par- 
 ticular documents  ;  they  are,  therefore,  to  be 
 divided  into  general  and  particular,  or  especial  rules 
 and  gifts.  In  Biblical  interpretation  arises  the  ques- 
 tion, whether  the  general  hermeneutical  rules  are 
 applicable  to  the  Bible  and  sufficient  for  rightly 
 understanding  it,  or  whether  they  are  insufficient, 
 and  have  to  undergo  some  modification. 
 
 Most  Biblical  interpreters,  as  we  might  infer 
 from  the  principle  of  dogmatical  and  allegorical  in- 
 terpretation, have  declared  the  general  hermeneu- 
 tical principles  to  be  insufficient  for  explaining  the 
 Bible,  and  required  for  this  purpose  especial  her- 
 meneutical rules,  because  the  Bible,  they  said, 
 which  had  been  written  under  the  direct  guidance 
 of  the  Holy  Ghost,  could  not  be  measured  by  the 
 common  rules  which  are  applicable  only  to  the 
 lower  sphere  of  merely  human  thoughts  and  com- 
 positions. Therefore,  from  the  most  ancient  times, 
 peculiar  hermeneutical  rules,  meeting  the  exigency 
 of  Biblical  interpretation,  have  been  set  forth, 
 which  deviated  from  the  rules  of  general  heiTneneu- 
 tics.  Thus  Biblical  hermeneutics  were  changed 
 into  an  art  of  understanding  the  Bible  according  to 
 a  certain  ecclesiastical  system  in  vogue  at  a  certain 
 period. 
 
 The  advocates  of  grammatical  intei-pretation  have 
 opposed  these  Biblical  hermeneutics,  as  proceeding 
 upon  merely  arbitrary  suppositions.  Sometimes 
 they  merely  limited  its  assertions,  and  sometimes 
 they  rejected  it  altogether.  In  the  latter  case  they 
 said  that  the  principles  of  general  hermeneutics 
 ought  to  be  applicable  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  also. 
 Against  the  above-mentioned  train  of  argument 
 cited  from  Origen,  on  which  the  demand  of  parti- 
 cular Biblical  hermeneutics  essentially  rests,  the 
 following  argument  might,  with  greater  justice,  be 
 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 opposed  :  if  God  deemed  it  requisite  to  reveal  hi.* 
 will  to  mankind  by  means  of  intelligible  books,  he 
 must,  in  choosing  this  medium,  have  intended  that 
 the  contents  of  these  books  should  be  discovered 
 according  to  those  general  laws  which  are  con- 
 ducive to  the  right  understanding  of  documents  in 
 general.  If  this  were  not  the  case  God  would 
 have  chosen  insufficient  and  even  contradictory- 
 means  inadequate  to  the  purpose  he  had  in  view. 
 
 The  interpretation,  which,  in  spite  of  all  eccle- 
 siastical opposition,  ought  to  be  adopted  as  being 
 the  only  trae  one,  strictly  adheres  to  the  demands 
 of  general  hermeneutics,  to  which  it  adds  those 
 particular  hermeneutical  rules  which  meet  the  requi- 
 sites of  particular  cases.  This  has,  in  modern 
 times,  been  styled  the  historico-grammatical 
 mode  of  interpretation.  This  appellation  has  been 
 chosen  because  the  epithet  grammatical  seems  to  be 
 too  narrow  and  too  much  restricted  to  the  mere 
 verbal  sense.  It  might  be  more  correct  to  style  it 
 simply  the  historical  interpretation,  since  the 
 word  HISTORICAL  Comprehends  eveiything  that  is 
 requisite  to  be  known  about  the  language,  the  turn 
 of  mind,  the  individuality,  etc.,  of  an  author  in 
 order  rightly  to  understand  his  book. 
 
 In  accordance  with  the  various  notions  concern- 
 ing Biblical  interpretation  v.diich  we  have  stated, 
 there  have  been  produced  Biblical  hermeneutics  of 
 veiy  different  kinds  ;  for  instance,  in  the  earlier 
 period  we  might  mention  that  of  the  Donatist 
 Ticonius,  who  wrote  about  the  4th  century  his 
 RegulcE  ad  investigandam  et  inveniendam  Intelli- 
 gentiam  Scripturarum  Septeni ;  Augustinus,  De 
 Docti'ina  Christiana,  lib.  i.  3  ;  Isidorus  Hispalen- 
 sis,  Sentent.  419,  seq.  ;  Santis  Pagnini  (who  died 
 in  1 541),  Isagoga  ad  Mystieos  Sacra:  Scripturcc 
 Sensus,  libri  octodecini.  Colon.  1540;  Sixti  Senen- 
 sis  (who  died  1599),  Bibliotheca  Sancta,  Venetiis 
 1566.  Of  this  work,  which  has  been  frequently 
 reprinted,  there  belongs  to  our  present  subject  only 
 Liber  tertius  Arte7)i  cxponendi  Sancta  Scripta  Cat  he 
 lie  is  Exposiioribus  aptissimis  Regttlis  et  Ex  em  pi  is 
 osteudens.  At  a  later  period  the  Roman  Catholics 
 added  to  these  the  works  of  Bellarmine,  Martianay, 
 Calmet,  Jahn,  and  Arigler. 
 
 On  the  part  of  the  Lutherans  were  added  by 
 Matt.  Flacius,  Clavis  ScripturcE  Sac7-c€,  Basileae 
 1537,  and  often  reprinted  in  two  volumes;  by 
 Johann  Gerhard,  Tractatus  de  Legitit?ia  Scriptures 
 Sacra  Intei'pretatione,  Jenre  1610 ;  by  Solomon 
 Glassius,  PhilologicB  Sacra,  libri  quinque,  Jens 
 1623,  and  often  reprinted  ;  by  Jacob  Rambach, 
 Insiitutiones  Hermeneutica  Saem,  Jenje  1723. 
 
 On  the  part  of  the  Calvinists  there  were  fur- 
 nished by  J.  Alph.  Turretinus,  De  Scripturce  Sacra: 
 Interpretatione  Tractatus  Bipartitus,  Dortrecht 
 1723,  and  often  reprinted.  In  the  English  Church 
 were  produced  by  Herbert  Marsh  Lectures  on  the 
 Criticism  and  Interpretation  of  the  Bible,  Cambridee 
 1828. 
 
 Since  the  middle  of  the  last  century  it  has  been 
 usual  to  treat  on  the  O.  T.  hermeneutics  and  on 
 those  of  the  N.  T.  in  separate  works.  For  in- 
 stance, G.  \V.  Meyer,  Versuch  einer  IIer7neneutik 
 des  Alten  Testamentes,  Liibeck  1799;  J.  H.  Pareau, 
 Institutio  Interpretis  Veieris  Testamenti,  Trajecti 
 1822,  translated  into  English  by  Dr.  P.  Forbes,  Edin. 
 1835-40,  2  vols.  ;  J.  A.  Ernesti,  Institutio Inte7pretis 
 Novi  Testa7ne7iti,  Lipsice  1761,  ed.  5ta,  curante 
 Ammon,  1809,  translated  into  English  by  Terrot, 
 I'^dinburgli,    1833  ;    Moras,    Super  Hermenei4tica 
 
 2  n 
 
INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 402 
 
 INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 NoTL'i  Testamenti ac7-oases  academics,  ed.  Eiclistaedt, 
 Lipsiae  1797-1802,  in  two  vols.,  but  not  completed; 
 K.  A.  G.  Kei'l,  Lehrbuch  der  Hennetteutik  dcs 
 JVetien  Testamentes,  nach  Gmndsdtzen  der  graiu- 
 matisch-historischen  hiterpretation,  Leipzig  iSio  ; 
 the  same  work  in  Latin,  Lipsije  181 1  ;  Liicke, 
 Grtmdriss  der  N.  T.  Hermeneuiik,  Gott.  181 7  ; 
 T.  T.  Conybeare,  The  Bamptoti  Lectures  for  the 
 year  1824,  being  an  attempt  to  trace  the  History  and 
 to  ascertain  the  limits  of  the  secondary  and  spiritual 
 Inte?-pretation  of  Scripture,  Oxford  1824  ;  Schleier- 
 macher,  Hermenadik  und  Kritik  viit  besonderer 
 Beziehimg  aufdas  Neue  Testament,  heraiisgegeben 
 von  Liicke,  Berlin  1838  ;  H.  Nik.  Klausen,  Her- 
 meyteittik  des  Neuen  Tesfamentes,  aus  deni  Danis- 
 chen,  Leipzig  1841  ;  Chr.  Gottlieb  Wilke,  Die 
 Hermeneutik  des  Neuen  Testamentes  systematisch 
 datgestellt,  Leipzig  1843  ;  Davidson,  Sacred  Her- 
 me}ieutics  developed  and  applied  ;  including  a  His- 
 tory of  Biblical  Interpretation  from  the  earliest  of 
 the  Fathers  to  the  Heformation^  Edin.  1S43  ;  Fair- 
 bairn,  Hermeneutical  Manual  or  Introd.  to  the 
 Exeget.  Study  of  the  N.  T,  Edin.  1858.— 
 K.  A.  C. 
 
 INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL.  The  Greek 
 word  eiaayorYT],  in  the  sense  of  an  introduction  to  a 
 science,  occurs  only  in  later  Greek,  and  was  first 
 used  to  denote  an  introduction  to  the  right  under- 
 standing of  the  Bible,  by  a  Greek  called  Adrian,  who 
 lived  in  the  fifth  century  after  Christ.  'Adptdvov 
 eiaayooyrj  r?js  ypa<pris  is  a  small  book,  the  object  of 
 which  is  to  assist  readers  who  are  unacquainted 
 with  Biblical  phraseology  in  rightly  understanding 
 peculiar  words  and  expressions.  It  was  first  edited 
 by  David  Hoeschel,  under  the  title  of  Adriani 
 Isagoge  in  Sacj-am  Scripturam  Greece  cum  Scholiis, 
 Augustae  Vindobonje,  1602,  4to.  This  work  is 
 reprinted  in  the  London  edition  of  the  Critici  Sacri, 
 torn.  viii. ;  and  in  the  Frankfort  edition,  torn.  vi. 
 Before  Adrian,  the  want  of  similar  works  had 
 already  been  felt,  and  books  of  a  corresponding 
 tendency  were  in  circulation,  but  they  did  not 
 bear  the  title  of  elaayuyrj.  Melito  of  Sardis,  who 
 lived  in  the  latter  half  of  the  2d  century,  wrote 
 a  book  under  the  title  of  17  KXeh,  being  a  key 
 both  to  the  Old  and  to  the  N.  T.  The  so-called 
 Ae^eis,  which  were  written  at  a  later  period,  are 
 books  of  a  similar  description.  Some  of  these 
 A^^eis  have  been  printed  in  Matthsei's  Novum 
 Testamenttwi  GriEce^  and  in  Boissonade's  Anccdota 
 Grceca,  torn,  iii.,  Parisiis  1 831.  These  are  merely 
 linguistic  introductions  ;  but  there  was  soon  felt  the 
 want  of  works  which  might  solve  other  questions  ; 
 such  as,  for  instance,  what  are  llie  principles  which 
 should  guide  us  in  Biblical  interpretation.  The 
 Donatist  Ticonius  wrote,  about  the  year  3S0, 
 RegulcB  ad  investigandam  et  invcniendatn  Intelli- 
 gentiam  Scripturarum  Scplem.  St.  Augustine,  in 
 his  work  De  Doc t rind  ChristianA  (iii.  302),  says 
 concerning  these  seven  rules,  that  the  author's  in- 
 tention was  by  means  of  them  to  open  the  secret 
 sense  of  Holy  Writ,  'quasi  clavibus,'  as  if  it  were 
 by  keys. 
 
 There  arose  also  a  question  concerning  the  ex- 
 tent of  Holy  Writ — that  is  to  say,  what  belonged, 
 and  what  did  not  belong,  to  Holy  Writ ;  and  also 
 respecting  the  contents  of  the  separate  Biblical 
 books,  and  the  order  in  which  they  should  follow 
 each  other,  etc. 
 
 About  A.D.  550,  Cassiodorus  wrote  his  Institu- 
 
 tiones  Divine?.  He  mentions  in  this  work,  under 
 the  name  of  Introductores  Divina;  Scripture,  five 
 aiidiors  who  had  been  engaged  in  Biblical  investiga- 
 tions, and  in  his  tenth  chapter  speaks  of  them  thus  : 
 
 — Ad  introductores  scripturas  divinse 
 
 sollicita  mente  redeamus,  id  est  Ticonium  Dona- 
 tistam.  Sanctum  AuGUSTlNtiM  de  doctrina  Chris- 
 tiana, Adrianum,  Eucherium,  et  Junillum, 
 quos  sedula  curiositate  collegi,  ut,  quibus  erat 
 similis  intentio,  in  uno  corpore  adunati  codices 
 clauderentur. 
 
 Henceforward  the  title,  Introductio  in  Sc7-ipturam 
 Sacram,  was  established,  and  remained  current  for 
 all  works  in  which  were  solvetl  questions  introduc- 
 tory to  the  study  of  the  Bible.  In  the  Western, 
 or  Latin  church,  during  a  thousand  years,  scarcely 
 any  addition  was  made  to  the  collection  of  Cassi- 
 odorus; while  in  the  Eastern,  or  Greek  church, 
 only  two  works  written  during  this  long  period  de- 
 serve to  be  mentioned,  boili  hearing  the  title  1ivvo\l/{.i 
 TTJs  deias  ypa<p7ji.  One  of  these  works  was  falsely 
 ascribed  to  Athanasius,  and  the  other  as  falsely  to 
 Chr}'sostom. 
 
 At  the  commencement  of  the  l6th,  century,  the 
 Dominican  friar  Santes  Pagninus,  who  died  in 
 1541,  published  his  Isagoge,  by  means  of  which  he 
 intended  to  revive  the  Bililical  knowledge  of  Jerome 
 and  St.  Augustine.  Tiiis  work,  considering  the 
 time  of  its  appearance,  was  a  great  step  in  ad- 
 vance. Its  title  is,  Saiitis  Pagnini  Lucefisis  Isa- 
 i^oge  ad  Sacras  Literas,  liber  unicus,  Coloniae  1540, 
 'fol. 
 
 The  work  of  the  Dominican  friar  Sixtus  of 
 Sienna,  who  died  in  1599,  is  of  greater  importance, 
 although  it  is  manifestly  written  under  the  influence 
 of  the  Inquisition,  which  had  just  been  restored, 
 and  is  perceptibly  shackled  by  the  decrees  of  the 
 Coiuicil  of  Trent.  Sixtus  had  the  intention,  worthy 
 of  an  inquisitor,  to  expurgate  from  Christian  litera- 
 ture every  heretical  element.  The  Index  Librorum 
 Prohibitoriim,  which  was  then  first  published,  had 
 the  same  object;  but  Sixtus  furnished  also  a  list  of 
 books  to  be  used  by  a  true  Catholic  Christian  for 
 the  right  understanding  of  Holy  Writ,  as  well  as 
 the  principles  which  should  guide  a  Roman 
 Catholic  in  criticism  and  interpretation.  The  title 
 of  his  work  is,  Bibliotheca  Sancta  ab  A.  F.  Sixto, 
 Senensi,  ordinis  pnedicatorum,  ex  pnecipuis  Catho- 
 licie  Ecclesice  auctoribus  collecta,  et  in  ccto  libros 
 digesta,  Venetiis  1566.  This  book  is  dedicated  to 
 the  Cardinal  Ghisleri,  who  ascended  the  papal 
 throne  in  1566,  under  the  name  of  Pius  V. :  it  has 
 frequently  been  reprinted. 
 
 The  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent  prevented 
 the  Roman  Catholics  from  moving  freely  in  the 
 field  of  Biblical  investigation,  while  the  Protestants 
 zealously  carried  out  their  researches  in  various 
 directions.  The  Illyrian,  Matthias  Flacius,  in  his 
 Clavis  ScripturcE  Sacrir,  sen  de  Sermone  Sacrarum 
 Literarum,  which  was  first  printed  at  Basle.  1567, 
 in  folio,  furnished  an  excellent  work  on  Biblical 
 hermeneutics ;  but  it  was  surpassed  by  the  Prole- 
 gomena of  Brian  Walton,  which  belong  to  his 
 celebrated  ^/Mrt  Sacra  Polyglotta,  Lond.  1657,  six 
 volumes  fol.  These  Prolegomena  contain  much 
 that  will  always  be  accounted  valuable  and  neces- 
 sary for  the  true  criticism  of  the  sacred  text.  They 
 have  been  published  separately,  with  notes,  by 
 Archdeacon  Wrangham,  in  2  vols.  8vo.  Thus  we 
 have  seen  that  excellent  works  were  produced  on 
 isolated  portions  of  Biblical  introduction,  but  they 
 
INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 403 
 
 INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 were  not  equalled  in  merit  by  the  works  in  which 
 it  was  attempted  to  furnish  a  whole  system  of 
 Biblical  introduction. 
 
 The  following  Biblical  introductions  are  among 
 the  best  of  those  which  were  published  about  that 
 period  :  Micliaelis  Waltheri  Officina  Biblica  7ioviter 
 adaperta,  etc.,  Lipsice,  first  published  in  1636; 
 Abrahami  Calovii  Critiais  Sacer  Biblicus,  etc.,  Vi- 
 tembergse  1643  ;  J.  H.  Hottinger,  Thesatinis  Philo- 
 logicus,  sell  Clam's  ScripturcB  Sacrcr,  Tiguri  1649  ; 
 Johannis  Henrici  Heidegger,  Enchiridion  Biblicutn 
 itpoixv-rtfjioviKhv,  Tiguri  16S1 ;  Leusden,  a  Dutchman, 
 published  a  work  entitled  Philologiis  Hebrcrtts,  etc., 
 Utrecht  1656,  and  P/iilohgus  Hebnvo-Gnrcus 
 Generalis,  Utrecht  1670.  All  these  works  have 
 been  frequently  reprinted. 
 
 The  dogmatical  zeal  of  the  Protestants  was 
 greatly  excited  by  the  work  of  Louis  Capelle,  a 
 reformed  divine  and  learned  professor  at  Saumur, 
 which  appeared  under  the  title  of  Ludovici  Cap- 
 pelli  Critica  Sacra;  sive  de  variis  qtue  in  veteris 
 Testamenti  libris  occtirriint  lectionibns  libri  sex. 
 Edita  opere  ac  studio  joannis  Cappelli,  aiictoris 
 filii,  Parisiis  1 650.  A  learned  Roman  Catholic 
 and  priest  of  the  Oratory,  Richard  Simon,  who  was 
 born  in  1658,  and  died  in  17 12,  rightly  perceived, 
 from  the  dogmatical  bile  stirred  up  by  Capelle, 
 that  Biblical  criticism  was  the  most  effective  weapon 
 to  be  employed  against  the  Protestantism  which 
 had  grown  cold  and  stiff  in  dogmatics.  He  there- 
 fore devoted  his  critical  knowledge  of  the  Bible  to 
 the  service  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and 
 endeavoured  to  inflict  a  death-blow  upon  Protes- 
 tantism. The  result,  however,  was  the  production 
 of  Simon's  excellent  work  on  Biblical  criticism, 
 which  became  the  basis  on  which  the  science  of 
 Biblical  introduction  was  raised.  Simon  was  the 
 first  who  correctly  separated  the  criticism  of  the 
 O.  T.  from  that  of  the  New.  His  works  on 
 Biblical  introduction  appeared  under  the  follow- 
 ing titles  Histoire  Critique  da  Viciix  Testament, 
 Paris  1678.  This  work  was  inaccurately  reprinted 
 at  Amsterdam  by  Elzevir  in  1679,  and  subsequently 
 in  many  other  bad  piratical  editions.  Among  these 
 the  most  complete  was  that  printed,  together  with 
 several  polemical  treatises  occasioned  by  this  work, 
 at  Rotterdam,  in  1685,  4to : — Histoire  Critique  du 
 Texte  du  Nouveau  Testament,  Rotterdam  1689 ; 
 Histoire  Critique  des  Versions  du  Nouveau  Testa- 
 ment, Rotterdam  1690 ;  Histoire  Critique  des 
 principaux  Commentateurs  du  Nouveau  Testame7it, 
 Rotterdam  1693.  By  these  excellent  critical  works 
 Simon  established  a  claim  upon  the  gratitude  of  all 
 real  friends  of  truth  ;  but  he  was  thanked  by  none 
 of  the  prevailing  parties  in  the  Christian  church. 
 The  Protestants  saw  in  Simon  only  an  enemy  of 
 their  church,  not  the  thorough  investigator  and 
 friend  of  truth.  To  the  Roman  Catholics,  on  the 
 other  hand,  Simon's  works  appeared  to  be  destruc- 
 tive, because  they  demonstrated  their  ecclesiastical 
 decrees  to  be  arbitrary  and  unhistorical.  The  His- 
 toire Critique  du  Vieux  Testament  was  suppressed 
 by  the  Roman  Catholics  in  Paris  immediately  after 
 its  publication,  and  in  Protestant  countries  also  it 
 was  forbidden  to  reprint  it.  The  Roman  Catholic 
 bishop  Bossuet  lamented  that  Simon  had  under- 
 mined the  dogma  of  tradition,  and  had  changed  the 
 holy  fathers  into  Protestants.  Simon,  as  an  honest 
 investigator  and  friend  of  truth,  remained  undis- 
 turbed ;  but  kept  aloof  from  both  Roman  Catholics 
 and  Protestants,  by  both  of  which  parties  he  was 
 
 persecuted,  and  died  in  171 2,  in  a  merely  externa! 
 connection  with  the  Romish  church. 
 
 The  churches  endeavoured,  with  apparent  suc- 
 cess, to  destroy  Simon  and  his  writings,  in  a  host 
 of  inimical  and  condemnatory  publications,  by 
 which  the  knowledge  of  truth  was  not  in  the  least 
 promoted.  However,  the  linguistic  and  truly 
 scientific  researches  of  Pococke;  the  Oriental  school 
 in  the  Netherlands  ;  the  unsurpassed  work  of 
 Humphry  Hody,  De  Bibliorum  Textibus  Origi7i- 
 alibus  Versionibus,  etc.,  Oxonias  1705,  folio;  the 
 excellent  criticism  of  Mill,  in  his  Noz'um  Testa- 
 nientum  Gnvcum  cum  Lectionibus  Variantibus, 
 Oxonias  1707,  folio;  which  was  soon  followed  by 
 Wetstein's  Novjim  Testamentum  Grcectim  edifionis 
 receptcr,  cuf?i  Lectionibus  Variantibus,  Amstelodami 
 1751-52,  folio,  and  by  which  even  Johann  Albert 
 Bengel,  who  died  in  1752,  was  convinced,  in  spite  of 
 his  ecclesiastical  orthodoxy  (comp.  Bengelii  Ap- 
 paratus Criticus  Novi  Testamenti,  p.  634,  sq.);  the 
 Biblical  works  by  Johann  Heinrich  Michaelis, 
 especially  his  Biblia  Hebraica  ex  Manuscriptis  et 
 impressis  Codicibus,  Halce  1720;  and  Benjamin 
 Kennicott's  Vetus  Testamentum  Hebraicum  cum 
 variis  Lectionibus,  Oxoniae  1776,  and  the  revival 
 of  classical  philology; — all  this  gradually  led  to 
 results  which  coincided  with  Simon's  criticism,  and 
 shewed  the  enormous  difference  between  historical 
 truth  and  the  arbitrary  ecclesiastical  opinions  which 
 were  still  prevalent  in  the  works  on  Biblical  intro- 
 duction by  Pritius,  Blackwall,  Carpzov,  Van  Til, 
 Moldenhauer,  and  others.  Johann  David  Michaelis, 
 who  died  in  1791,  mildly  endeavoured  to  reconcile 
 the  church  with  historical  truth,  but  has  been 
 rewarded  by  the  anathemas  of  the  ecclesiastical 
 party,  who  have  pronounced  him  a  heretic.  By 
 their  ecclesiastical  persecutors,  Richard  Simon  was 
 falsely  described  to  be  a  disciple  of  the  atheistical 
 Spinoza,  and  Michaelis  as  a  follower  of  both 
 Simon  and  Spinoza.  However,  the  mediating 
 endeavours  of  Michaelis  gradually  prevailed.  His 
 Introduction  to  the  New  Testament  appeared  first 
 as  a  work  of  moderate  size,  under  the  title  of 
 Johann  David  Michaelis  ^/«/t7/««?  in  die  Gottlicheti 
 Schriften  des  Neuen  Bundes,  Gottingen  1750,  8vo. 
 It  was  soon  translated  into  English.  In  the  years 
 1765-66  Michaelis  published  a  second  and  aug- 
 mented edition  of  the  German  original,  in  two 
 volumes.  The  fourth  edition,  which  received  great 
 additions,  and  in  which  many  alterations  were 
 made,  appeared  in  17S8,  in  two  vols.  4to.  This 
 edition  was  translated  and  essentially  augmented 
 by  Herbert  Marcli,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Peter- 
 borough, and  appeared  under  the  title,  I^itrodicction 
 to  ike  New  Testa7nent,  by  John  David  Michaelis, 
 translated  from  the  fourth  edition  of  the  German, 
 and  considerably  augmented,  Cambridge  1791- 
 1801,  4  vols.  8vo.  Michaelis  commenced  also  an 
 Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  but  did  not 
 complete  it.  A  portion  of  it  was  printed  under  the 
 title,  Einleitung  in  die  Gdttlichen  Schriften  des  Alte7i 
 Bimdes,  Theil  i.  Abschnitt  i,  Hamburg  1787. 
 
 A  work  by  Ed.  Harwood,  entitled  A  New  L7itro- 
 dtiction  to  the  Study  a7td  Knowledge  of  the  New  Tes- 
 ia77ie7it,  London  1767-71,  was  translated  into  Ger- 
 man by  Schulz,  Halle  1770-73,  in  three  volumes. 
 In  this  book  there  are  so  many  heterogeneous 
 materials,  that  it  scarcely  belongs  to  the  science  of 
 introduction. 
 
 The  study  of  N.  T.  introduction  was  in  Germany 
 especially  promoted  also  by  Johann  Solomon  Sem- 
 
INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 404 
 
 INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 ler,  who  died  at  Halle  in  1791.  It  was  by  Sem- 
 ler's  influence  that  the  critical  works  of  Richard 
 Simon  were  translated  into  German,  and  the  works 
 of  Wetstein  re-edited  and  circulated.  The  original 
 works  of  Semler  on  Biblical  introduction  are  his 
 Apparatus  ad  liheralem  Norn  Tcstameiiti  Interpreta- 
 tionem,  Halae  1767,  and  his  Abhandlung  voii  freicr 
 Untersuchutig dcs  Canons,  4  vols.,  Halle  1771-75. 
 
 Semler's  school  produced  Johann  Jacob  Gries- 
 bach,  who  died  at  Jena  in  the  year  181 2.  Gries- 
 bach's  labours  in  correcting  the  text  of  the  N.  T. 
 are  of  great  value.  K.  A.  Haenlein  published  a 
 work  calletl  Handlmch  der  Einleitung  in  die  Schrif- 
 ten  des  Ak'iien  Testainentes,  Erlangen  1 794-1802, 
 in  two  volumes,  in  which  he  followed  up  the  lec- 
 tures of  Griesbach.  A  second  edition  of  this  work 
 appeared  in  the  years  1802-9.  This  introduction 
 contams  excellent  materials,  but  is  wanting  in  deci- 
 sive historical  criticism. 
 
 Johann  Gottfried  Eichhom,  who  died  at  Gcittin- 
 gen  in  1827,  was  formed  in  the  school  of  Michaelis 
 at  Gottingen,  and  was  inspired  by  Herder's  poeti- 
 cal views  of  the  East  in  general,  and  of  the  litera- 
 ture of  the  ancient  Hebrews  in  particular.  Eich- 
 hom commenced  his  Introduction  when  the  times 
 were  inclined  to  give  up  the  Bible  altogether,  as  a 
 production  of  priestcraft  inapplicable  to  the  present 
 period.  He  endeavoured  to  bring  the  contents  of 
 the  Bible  into  harmony  with  modern  modes  of 
 thinking,  to  explain,  and  to  recommend  them.  He 
 endeavoured  by  means  of  hypothesis  to  furnish  a 
 clue  to  their  origin,  without  sufficiently  regarding 
 strict  historical  criticism.  Eichhorn's  Einleitnng 
 in  das  Alle  Testament  was  first  published  at  Leip- 
 sic  in  1780-83,  in  three  volumes.  The  fifth  edi- 
 tion was  published  at  Gottingen  in  1820-24,  i" 
 five  volumes.  His  Einleitung  in  das  Nene  Testa- 
 ment was  published  at  Gottingen  in  1804-27,  in 
 five  volumes.  The  earlier  volumes  have  been 
 republished.  The  external  treatment  of  the  mate- 
 rials, the  style,  aim,  and  many  separate  portions  of 
 both  works,  are  masterly  and  excellent  ;  but  with 
 regard  to  linguistic  and  historical  research,  they  are 
 feeble  and  overwhelmed  with  hypotheses. 
 
 Leonhardt  Bertholdt  was  a  very  diligent  but  un- 
 critical compiler.  He  made  a  considerable  step 
 backward  in  the  science  of  introduction,  not  only 
 by  reuniting  the  Old  and  N.  T.  into  one  whole, 
 but  by  even  intermixing  the  separate  writings  with 
 each  other,  in  his  work  entitled  Historisch-h'itische 
 Einleitimg  in  sdnuntliche  kanonische  und  Apocry- 
 *hisc/ie  Schri/ten  des  A/ten  und  Neiten  Testatnentes, 
 Erlangen  1812-19,  in  six  volumes. 
 
 The  Isagoge  Historico-critica  in  Libras  Novi 
 Fcederis  Sacros,  Jenre  1830,  of  H.  A.  Schott,  is 
 more  distinguished  by  diligence  than  by  penetra- 
 tion. The  Leh7-bitch  der  Historisch-kritischen  Ein- 
 leitung in  die  Bibel  A.  und  N.   T,  Berlin  ;    Theil 
 
 1,  Die  Allgemeine  Einleitung  und  das  Alte  Testa- 
 ment enthaltend,  181 7  (fifth  edition,    1840);    Theil 
 
 2,  Das  Neue  Testament  enthaltend,  1826  (fourth 
 edition,  1842),  by  W.  M.  Lebrecht  de  Wette,  is 
 distinguished  by  brevity,  precision,  critical  pene- 
 tration, and  in  some  parts  by  completeness.  This 
 book  contains  an  excellent  survey  of  the  various 
 opinions  prevalent  in  the  sphere  of  Biblical  intro- 
 duction, interspersed  with  original  discussions. 
 Almost  every  author  on  Biblical  criticism  will  find 
 that  De  Wette  has  made  use  of  his  labours  ;  but  in 
 the  purely  historical  portions  the  book  is  feeble, 
 and  indicates  that  tlie  author  did  not  go  to  tlte  first 
 
 sources,  but  adopted  the  opinions  of  others  ;  con- 
 sequently the  wi.rk  has  no  internal  harmony.  An 
 English  translation  of  this  work,  with  additions  by 
 the  translator,  Theodore  Parker,  has  lately  ap- 
 peared in  America,  under  the  title  of  A  Critical 
 and  Historical  Introdjiction  to  the  Canonical  Scrip- 
 tures of  the  Old  Testament. 
 
 Tlie  word  'introduction'  being  of  rather  vague 
 signification,  there  was  also  formerly  no  definite 
 idea  attached  to  the  expression  Biblical  Intro- 
 duction. In  works  on  this  subject  (as  in  Home's 
 Introduction)  might  be  found  contents  belonging  to 
 geography,  antiquities,  interpretation,  natural  his- 
 tory, and  other  branches  of  knowledge.  Even  the 
 usual  contents  of  Biblical  introductions  were  so 
 unconnected,  that  Schleiermacher,  in  his  Kurze 
 Darstellung  dcs  Theologischen  Studiums,  justly 
 called  it  ein  Mancherlei ;  that  is,  a  farrago  or 
 omnium -gatherum.  Biblical  introduction  was 
 usually  described  as  consisting  of  the  various 
 branches  of  preparatory  knowledge  requisite  for 
 viewing  and  treating  the  Bible  correctly.  It  was 
 distinguished  from  Biblical  history  and  archaeology 
 by  being  less  intimately  connected  with  what  is 
 usually  called  history.  It  comprised  treatises  on 
 the  origin  of  the  Bible,  on  the  original  languages, 
 on  the  translations,  and  on  the  history  of  the 
 sacred  text  ;  and  was  divided  into  general  and 
 special  introduction. 
 
 The  author  of  this  article  endeavoured  to  remove 
 this  vagueness  by  furnishing  a  firm  definition  of 
 Biblical  introduction.  In  his  work,  Einleitung  in 
 das  Neue  Testament,  von  Dr.  K.  A.  Credner,  th.  i. , 
 Halle  1836,  he  defined  Biblical  introduction  to  be 
 the  history  of  the  Bible,  and  divided  it  into  the 
 following  parts  : 
 
 1.  The  history  of  the  separate  Biblical  books. 
 
 2.  The  history  of  the  collection  of  these  books, 
 or  of  the  canon. 
 
 3.  The  history  of  the  spread  of  these  books,  or 
 of  the  translations  of  it. 
 
 4.  The  history  of  the  preservation  of  the  text. 
 
 5.  The  history  of  the  interpretation  of  it. 
 
 This  view  of  the  science  of  introduction  has  re- 
 ceived much  approbation,  and  is  the  basis  of 
 Reus's  Geschichte  der  Heiligen  Schri/ten  des  N^euen 
 Tcstamentes,  Halle  1842  [3d  ed.  enlarged,  Braun- 
 schw.  i860].  The  results  of  the  critical  examina- 
 tion of  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  are  comprehended 
 in  the  following  work.  Das  Neue  Testament  nach 
 scinem  Ziveck,  Ursprunge  tind  Inhalt,  von  A.  R, 
 Credner,  Giessen  1841-43,  in  two  volumes. 
 
 The  critical  investigation  which  prevailed  in  Ger- 
 many after  the  days  of  Michaelis,  has  of  late  been 
 opposed  by  a  mode  of  treating  Biblical  introduc- 
 tion, not  so  much  in  the  spirit  of  a  free  search 
 after  truth  as  in  an  apologetical  and  polemical 
 style.  This  course,  however,  has  not  enriched 
 Biblical  science.  To  this  class  of  books  belong  a 
 number  of  monographs,  or  treatises  on  separate 
 subjects  ;  also  the  Handbuch  der  Historisch-kri- 
 tischen Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament,  Erlan- 
 gen 1S36,  by  H.  A.  C.  Hiivemick,  of  which  there 
 have  been  published  two  parts,  in  three  volumes, 
 and  of  which  The  General  Introductio7i  and  the  In- 
 troduction to  the  Pentateuch  have  been  translated 
 into  English,  Edin,  1850,  1852  ;  and  also  H.  E, 
 Ferd.  Guericke's  Einleitung  in  das  A'eue  Testa- 
 ment, Halle  1843,  in  which  too  frequently  an 
 anathema  against  heretics  serves  as  a  substitute  for 
 demonstration.     The    apologetical    tendency   pre. 
 
INTRODUCTION,  BIBLICAL 
 
 40"> 
 
 IOTA 
 
 vails  in  the  work  of  G.  Hamilton,  entitled  A  Gene- 
 ral Introdicction  to  the  Study  of  the  Hebj-ew  Scrip- 
 tures, etc.,  Dublin  1814 ;  in  Thomas  Hartwell 
 Home's  Introduction  to  the  Critical  Study  and 
 Kno^uledge  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  etc.,  London 
 1818,  four  volumes  [the  tenth  edition  of  this 
 work  was  issued  in  four  large  vols.  Svo,  in  1856, 
 of  which  the  second  vol.  on  the  O.  T.  was  pre- 
 pared by  Dr.  S.  Davidson,  and  the  fourth  on  the 
 N.  T.,  by  Dr.  P,  Tregelles.  For  Dr.  Davidson's 
 vol.,  one  by  Mr.  Ayre  has  since  been  substituted] ; 
 and  in  J.  Cook's  Inquiry  into  the  Boohs  of  the  New 
 Testament,  Edin.  1824. 
 
 The  Roman  Catholics  also  have,  in  modern 
 times,  written  on  Biblical  introduction,  although 
 the  unchangeable  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent 
 hinder  all  free,  critical,  and  scientific  treatment  of 
 the  subject.  The  Roman  Catholics  can  treat 
 Bibhcal  introduction  only  in  a  polemical  and  apo- 
 logetical  manner,  and  are  obhged  to  keep  up  the 
 attention  of  their  readers  by  introducing  learned 
 archjeological  researches,  which  conceal  the  want 
 of  free  movement.  This  latter  mode  was  adopted 
 by  J.  Jahn  (who  died  at  Vienna  in  18 16)  in  his 
 Eifileitung  in  die  Gottlichen  Biicher  des  Alten 
 Bwides,  Vienna  1793,  two  volumes,  and  1802, 
 three  volumes ;  and  in  his  Introductio  in  Libros 
 Sacros  Veleris  Tcstamenti  in  epitomen  redacta, 
 Viennse  1805.  This  work  has  been  republished  by 
 F.  Ackermann,  in  what  are  asserted  to  be  the 
 third  and  fourth  editions,  under  the  title  of  Intro- 
 ductio in  Libros  Sacros  Veteris  Testanienti,  usibus 
 academicis  accommodata,  Vienna  1825  and  1839. 
 But  these  so-called  new  editions  are  lull  of  altera- 
 tions and  mutilations,  which  remove  every  free  ex- 
 pression of  Jahn,  who  belonged  to  the  liberal 
 period  of  the  Emperor  Joseph. 
 
 Johann  Leonhard  Hug's  Einleitung  in  das  Neue 
 Testament,  Stuttgart  and  Tubingen  1808,  two 
 volumes,  third  edition,  1826,  surpasses  Jahn's 
 work  in  ability,  and  has  obtained  much  credit 
 among  Protestants  by  its  learned  explanations, 
 although  these  frequently  swerve  from  the  point  in 
 question.  Hug's  work  has  been  translated  into 
 English  by  the  Rev.  D.  G.  Wait,  LL.D.  ;  but 
 this  translation  is  much  surpassed  by  that  of  Fos- 
 dick,  published  in  the  United  States,  and  enriched 
 by  the  addenda  of  Moses  Stuart.  The  polemical 
 and  apologetical  style  prevails  in  the  work  of  J.  G. 
 Herbst,  Historisch-kritische  Einleitung  in  die 
 Schriften  des  Alten  Testamentes,  completed  and 
 edited  after  the  death  of  the  author,  by  Welte, 
 Carlsruhe  1840  ;  and  in  E Introduction  Historique 
 et  Critique  aux  Livres  de  V Ancien  et  du  Nouveau 
 Testament,  par  J.  B.  Glaire,  6  vols.,  2d  ed., 
 Paris  1843.  The  work  of  the  excellent  Feilmoser, 
 who  died  in  1831,  Einleitung  in  die  Biicher  des 
 Neuen  Bundes,  in  the  second  edition,  Tubingen 
 1830,  forsakes  the  position  of  a  true  Roman 
 Catholic,  inasmuch  as  it  is  distinguished  by  a  noble 
 ingenuousness  and  candour.  All  these  last-men- 
 tioned works  prove  that  the  science  of  introduction 
 cannot  prosper  in  ecclesiastical  fetters. — K.  A.  C. 
 
 [To  the  works  above  enumerated  may  be  added 
 — Collyer's  Sacred  Interpreter,  2  vols.  8vo,  1746, 
 last  edit.  1815  ('a  good  popular  preparation  for 
 the  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,'  Bp.  Marsh)  ; 
 Lardner,  Credibility  ;  and  History  of  the  Apostles 
 and  Evangelists,  Works  i.-vi.  ;  Schoiz,  Einleit.  ift 
 die  Heiligen  Schriften  des  A.  imd N.  T.  4  vols.,  of 
 which  only  three  had  appeared  before  the  author's 
 
 death  in  1852  ;  Hengstenberg,  Beitriige  zur  Ein- 
 leit. ins  A.  B.,  I.  Authent.  des  Daniel  u.  Iiitegritiit 
 des  Sacharja,  Ber.  1831  ;  II.  III.  Auth.  des  Pettta- 
 teuchs,  1836-39  ;  Maier,  Einleit.  in  die  Schriften 
 des  N.  T,  Freib.  1852;  Keil,  Lehrbuch  der  Hist.- 
 Krit.  Einleit.  in  die  Kanon.  Schriften  des  A.  T., 
 in  3  parts,  forming  i  vol.,  Frankf.  and  Erlang.' 
 1853  ;  Davidson,  Introduction  to  the  O.  T.,  3  vols. 
 Svo,  Lond.  1862-63  '■>  Introduction  to  the  N.  T, 
 3  vols.  8vo,  Lond.  1848-50;  Scholten,  Hist.. 
 Krit.  Einl.  in  die  Schriften  des  N.  T,  1853,  2d 
 ed.  enlarged  1856  ;  Bleek,  Einleit.  in  d.  A.  T, 
 Berk  i860;  in  das  N.  T,  1862.] 
 
 IONIA.  It  has  been  suggested  that  in  i  Mac- 
 cab,  viii.  8,  for  the  existing  reading  X'^P"''  tw 
 'IvSlkt]!/  Kai  Mrjdeiai',  should  be  read  x-  '''•  'l<^viav 
 Kal  Mvaiav,  on  the  ground  that  to  include  India 
 and  Media  within  the  domain  of  Antiochus  III.  is 
 to  contradict  directly  the  voice  of  history,  which 
 confines  this  monarch's  possessions  to  this  side  the 
 Taurus  range  (Liv.  Hist,  xxxvii.  56  ;  xxxviii.  38). 
 Tliis  alteration  is  purely  conjectural,  and  it  is  not 
 easy  to  see,  supposing  it  to  be  the  correct  read- 
 ing, how  the  error  in  the  text  could  have  arisen. 
 Michaelis  supposes  that  by  a  mistake  on  the  part 
 of  the  translator,  HO  was  read  for  ""DO,  and  Hn 
 or  n^n  for  ''Djn,  and  that  the  nations  intended 
 are  the  Mysians  and  the  'Everoi  (Horn.  //.  ii.  580) 
 of  Paphlagonia ;  but  this  is  still  more  improbable 
 than  the  former  conjecture,  and  besides,  not  only 
 was  Paphlagonia  not  within  the  domain  of  Anti- 
 ochus, but  the  Eretians  did  not  at  that  time  exist 
 (Strabo,  xii.  8).  Perhaps  the  conjectural  emenda- 
 tion above  mentioned  may  be  adopted  on  the 
 ground  of  its  internal  probability ;  as  the  only 
 alternative  seems  to  be  to  suppose  gross  geographi- 
 cal and  historical  ignorance  on  the  part  of  the 
 author.  It  is  followed  by  Luther  (who  puts 
 '  lonien'  in  the  text),  Drusius,  Grotius,  Houbi- 
 gant,  etc.  Adopting  the  reading  Ionia,  the  dis- 
 trict referred  to  is  that  bordering  on  the  .^Egean 
 Sea  from  Phocaea  to  Miletus.  Its  original  inhabi- 
 tants were  Greeks,  but  in  later  times  a  large  Jew- 
 ish element  was  found  in  the  population  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xvi.  2.  3).  Under  the  Roman  dominion 
 the  name  Ionia  remained,  but  its  towns  were  dis- 
 tributed politically  under  other  provinces.  Ptolemy 
 ranks  them  in  Asia  Proper,  while  Strabo  (xiv. 
 632),  Pliny  {H.  N.  v.  31),  and  Mela  (i.  17),  speak 
 of  Ionia  as  a  distinct  territory.  In  the  account 
 which  Josephus  gives  {Antiq.  xvi.  2.  3)  of  the  ap- 
 peal of  the  Jews  in  Ionia  to  Agrippa  for  exemp- 
 tion from  certain  oppressions  to  which  they  were 
 exposed,  the  ancient  name  of  the  country  is  re- 
 tained. He  speaks  of  ttoXi)  ■k\t\Qo%  'Lovdaiwi'  as 
 inhabiting  its  cities. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 IOTA  (A.  V.  '  Jof),  the  smallest  letter  of  the 
 Greek  alphabet  (i)  ;  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew 
 
 jod  (^)  and  the  Syriac  judh  (wj),  and  employed 
 
 metaphorically  to  express  the  minutest  trifle.  This 
 is,  in  fact,  one  of  several  metaphors  derived  from 
 the  alphabet — as  when  alpha,  the  first  letter,  and 
 omega,  the  last,  are  employed  to  express  the 
 beginning  and  the  end.  We  are  not  to  suppose, 
 however,  that  this  proverb  was  exclusively  ap- 
 posite in  the  Greek  language.  The  same  practi- 
 cal allusion  equally  existed  in  Hebrew,  some 
 curious  examples  of  which  may  be  seen  in  Wet- 
 stein  and  Lightfoot.     [Jot.] — ^J.  K. 
 
IPHEDEIAH 
 
 406 
 
 IR-HAHERES 
 
 IPHEDEIAH  {nnB>,  YipKd'yah;  Sept.  'le^a- 
 
 5/as  ;  Alex.  'le^aS/a),  a  Benjamite  of  the  family  of 
 Shashak  (i  Chron.  viii.  25),  and  himself  the  head 
 of  a  branch  or  clan  of  that  family.  He,  with  the 
 other  chiefs  of  the  family,  resided  at  Jerusalem 
 (ver,  28). 
 
 IRA  (S"l''y).    There  seem  to  have  been  as  many 
 
 as  three  different  individuals  connected  with  David 
 who  were  known  by  this  name.  They  occur  in  the 
 following  order  in  Samuel  : — 
 
 1.  (Sept.  'Ipds ;  Alex.  Etpds).  'Ira  the  Jairite' 
 (2  Sam.  XX.  26),  described  in  the  A.  V.  as  'a 
 chief  ruler  about  David.'     [Jairite.] 
 
 2.  '  Ira,  the  son  of  Ikkesh  the  Tekoite'  (2  Sam. 
 xxiii.  26,  'I/xij ;  Alex.  Eipas ;  I  Chron.  xi.  28, 
 'flpa ;  Alex,  'flpas).  His  name  occurs  as  sixth 
 among  David's  guard  of  '  thirty-seven  in  all ;'  also 
 as  sixth  among  the  twelve  captains  appointed  to 
 the  monthly  course  of  service  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  9, 
 '05ou/as ;  Alex.  Et'pd). 
 
 3.  '  Ira  the  Ithrite,'  also  one  of  David's  guard  (2 
 Sam.  xxiii.  38,  'Ipdr ;  Alex.  E/pds ;  i  Chron.  xi. 
 40,  'Ipd ;  Alex.  'Ipds).  Some  are  of  opinion  that 
 this  Ira  was  identical  with  the  first  mentioned  ;  but 
 when  the  names  occur  so  distinctly  one  after  the 
 other  in  the  Bible  narrative,  we  incline  to  the 
 belief  that  there  were  three  individuals  bearing  the 
 name  of  Ira. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 IRAM    (DT'y  ;    LXX.    Alex.    'H/)c{/i  ;    Vat. 
 
 Zacpcciiv  ;  Vulg.  Hiram).  The  personal  or  terri- 
 torial designation  of  one  of  the  Edomite  chiefs  or 
 
 alliiphim  (D''S^?X,  '  phylarchs  ;'  in  A.  V.  'dukes;' 
 
 Gen.  xxxvi.  43  ;  i  Chron.  i.  54).  In  the  genealogy 
 of  Esau,  contained  in  Gen.  xxxvi.,  we  have,  after 
 the  names  of  his  wives  and  children,  a  list  of  the 
 alluphim  of  the  Edomite  tribes.  These  are  given 
 in  the  following  order  :  in  vers.  15,  16,  the  allu- 
 phim, seven  in  number,  who  sprang  from  Eliphaz, 
 the  son  of  Esau,  by  his  wife  Adah  ;  in  ver.  1 7  the 
 alluphim,  four  in  number,  who  sprang  from  Reuel, 
 the  son  of  Esau,  by  his  wife  Bashemath  ;  and  in 
 ver.  18  we  have,  as  three  additional  alluphim,  the 
 three  sons  of  Esau  by  his  wife  Aholibamah.  The 
 genealogy  of  Esau  is  then  interrupted  for  the  pur- 
 pose of  giving  that  of  Seir  the  Horite,  from  whom 
 Aholibamah  was  descended.  After  this  digression 
 we  have,  in  vers.  31-39,  a  list  of  'the  kings  who 
 reigned  in  Edom  before  there  reigned  any  king 
 over  the  children  of  Israel  ;'  and  then  follows,  in 
 vers.  40-43,  another  list  of  Edomite  alluphim.  It 
 is  in  this  that  tlie  name  Iram  occurs.  The  position 
 of  this  latter  list  has  given  rise  to  various  opinions 
 respecting  it.  By  some  it  is  regarded  as  a  list  of 
 chiefs  who  exercised  either  in  succession  or  con- 
 temporaneously the  supreme  autliority  after  the 
 kingly  power  had  been  overthrown.  There  is, 
 however,  no  evidence  that  in  the  time  of  Moses 
 kings  had  ceased  to  reign  in  Edom  ;  on  the  con- 
 traiy,  it  is  clear  from  Num.  xx.  14  that  there  was 
 still  a  king  of  Edom.  By  others  it  is  taken  to  be  a 
 list  of  the  chiefs  who  were  descended  from  the 
 three  sons  of  Esau  mentioned  in  ver.  18,  just  as 
 those  who  are  mentioned  in  ver.  15-17  were  de- 
 scended from  the  two  elder  sons  of  Esau.  It  is  an 
 objection  to  this  opinion  that  these  three  sons  of 
 Esau  are  themselves  termed  alluphim,   and  that 
 
 this  is  not  the  case  with  their  two  elder  brothers. 
 A  third,  and  more  probable  opinion,  is  that  the 
 list  in  vers.  40-43  gives,  not  the  personal,  but  the 
 territorial  designations  of  the  Edomite  chiefs. 
 This  is  confinned  by  the  fact  that  two  of  the  names 
 in  the  list,  namely  Timnah  and  Aholibamah  are 
 feminine  nouns,  and  still  further  by  the  statement 
 made  at  the  beginning  of  the  passage,  '  these  are 
 the  names  of  the  princes  (alluphim)  of  Esau  ac- 
 cording to  their  families  and  places,  after  their 
 names  ;'  and  by  that  with  which  it  concludes — 
 '  these  are  the  princes  [alhtphim)  of  Edom,  accord- 
 ing to  their  habitations.'  If  it  be  alleged  that  the 
 personal  names  given  in  vers.  15-18  are  fourteen  in 
 number,  but  that  the  territorial  names  are  eleven 
 only,  the  objection  may  be  met  by  the  supposition 
 that  some  of  the  names  have  been  accidentally 
 omitted  from  the  latter  list — an  hypothesis  which 
 derives  some  support  from  the  peculiar  reading  of 
 the  Vatican  MS.,  which  may  possibly  have  pre- 
 served one  of  the  omitted  names. — S.  N. 
 
 IR-HAHERES.     In  Isaiah  xix.  18  the  words 
 D"inn  T*!?  are  rendered  'C//y  of  destruction,^  though, 
 
 as  is  suggested  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.,  they 
 might  be  taken  as  the  proper  name  of  a  city  of 
 Egypt.  The  meaning  of  the  verse  is  very  obscure, 
 and  has  been  variously  interpreted.  Some  main- 
 tain that  the  prophet  refers  to  five  great  and  noted 
 cities  of  Egypt,  when  he  says,  '  In  that  day  shall 
 five  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt  speak  the  language 
 of  Canaan;'  but  they  cannot  agree  as  to  what 
 cities  these  are.  Others  suppose  that  by  five  a 
 round  number  is  meant ;  while  others  think  that 
 some  proportional  number  is  referred  to — five  out 
 of  20,000,  or  five  out  of  1000.  Calvin  interprets 
 the  passage  as  meaning  five  out  of  six— ^tr  pro- 
 fessing the  true  religion,  and  one  rejecting  it. 
 That  one  is  hence  called  '  City  of  destruction,' 
 which  is  not  its  proper  name,  but  a  description 
 indicative  of  its  doom.  Instead  of  Dinn,  how- 
 ever, a  number  of  ancient  MSS.  read  Dinn 
 which  signifies  ''the  sun.''  This  reading  is  sup- 
 ported by  the  version  of  Symmachus,  which  has 
 7r6\ty  i]\iou,  and  by  the  Vulgate,  civitas  solis. 
 Hence  some  have  supposed  that  Ir-haheres  is  a 
 proper  name,  and  equivalent  to  Heliopolis,  the 
 famous  city  of  Lower  Egypt,  called  On  in  Gen. 
 xli.  45,  and  Beth-shemesh  ('  City  of  the  Sun')  in  Jer. 
 xliii.  13.  All  this,  however,  is  mere  conjecture. 
 Jerome  supposes  DIH  to  be  equivalent  to  K'ln, 
 '  a  potsherd,'  and  to  be  a  name  of  the  town  called 
 by  the  Greeks  'Oa-TpaKivrj  ('earthen').  Others 
 suppose  that  reference  is  made  to  Tahpanes,  the 
 brick-kilns  of  which  are  mentioned  by  Jeremiah 
 (xliii.  9;  Alexander  on  Is.  xix.  18;  Jerome,  ad 
 loc.)     Gesenius  says,  'From  the  Arabic  usage  of 
 
 lujjS-,  *to  defend,'  '  to  preserve,'  the  clause  may 
 
 be  rendered,  '  One  shall  be  called  a  city  preserved,* 
 that  is,  'one  of  tlie  five  cities  shall  be  preserved* 
 [Comment,  ad  loc.)  Several  other  interpretations 
 have  been  given  of  the  passage,  but  they  are  too 
 fanciful  to  be  worth  recording.  The  most  natural 
 meaning  is  that  of  Calvin,  who  follows  the  reading 
 D"in,  and  the  ordinaiy  signification  of  the  word, 
 making  it  a  descriptive  title,  and  not  a  proper 
 name.  The  prophecy  of  the  whole  verse  would 
 thus  express  the  idea,  that  for  one  town  of  Egypt 
 which  should  perish  in  unbelief,  five  should  pro. 
 
IR-HATTEMARIM 
 
 407 
 
 ISAAC 
 
 fesj  the  true  faith,  and  swear  fealty  to  the  Lord. 
 The  simpUcity  of  this  interpretation,  and  its  agree- 
 ment with  the  scope  of  the  whole  passage  as  a 
 prophetic  picture  of  the  changes  in  Egypt,  serve  to 
 commend  the  common  reading  as  the  true  one 
 (Alexander,  /.  c.)—].  L.  P. 
 
 IR-HATTEMARIM,  '  T/ie  city  of  palm  trees' 
 (D''"lDnn  "l^J? ;  TToXts  (poivLKiov),  a  name  given  to 
 Jericho  (Judg.  i.  i6 ;  Deut.  xxxiv.  3)  in  conse- 
 quence of  the  number  of  palm  trees  which  at  one 
 time  grew  on  the  rich  plain  round  it.  It  is  a 
 remarkable  fact  that  not  a  single  palm  exists  there 
 now. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IR-NAHASH  (Vn:  -\%   'City  of  Serpents;' 
 
 ■Kb\i%  'Naas ;  Url/s  Naas).  In  I  Chron.  iv.  12  we 
 read  that  Eshton  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  '  begat  Te- 
 hinnah  the  father  of  Ir-nahash,'  which  means  that 
 Tehinnah  occupied  the  ancient  town  of  Ir-nahash. 
 Its  situation  is  not  indicated,  and  the  place  is  not 
 again  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  Van  de  Velde 
 says,  that  about  two  miles  east  of  Beit  Jibrin,  on 
 the  road  to  Hebron,  is  a  village  with  some  ancient 
 ruins  called  Deir  Nakhaz,  and  this  he  would  iden- 
 tify with  Ir-nahash  {Memoir,  p.  322)  ;  but  it  is 
 mere  conjecture.  We  have  no  data  by  which  to 
 fix  the  locality. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IRON.     [Barzel.] 
 
 IRPEEL  (!?X3"1%  'God  restores;'  Sept.  Alex. 
 
 'lep(parj\  ;  Jarepliel),  an  ancient  town  of  Benja- 
 min, apparently  situated  on  the  mountain  ridge 
 north  of  Jerusalem  (Josh,  xviii.  27).  The  site  is 
 unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IR-SHEMESH  {^"m  T-J?,  'City  of  the  Sun  ;' 
 
 x6Xets  ^afifia^s ;  Alex.  TroXty  2a,a^s ;  Hirsemes), 
 a  city  of  Dan,  near  Zorah  and  Eshtaol  (Josh.  xix. 
 41),  and  doubtless  identical  with  Beth-shemesh 
 ('  House  of  the  Sun').— J.  L.  P. 
 
 ISAAC  (pn^*\  or  pnb'\  as  it  occurs  four  times 
 
 in  the  poetical  books,  viz.,  Ps.  cv.  9  ;  Jer.  xxxiii. 
 26  ;  Amos  vii.  9,  16 — in  the  last  two  cases  being 
 put  poetically  for  the  whole  nation  of  Israel ; 
 LXX.  'IcractK,  laiighte7',  sporting)^  son  of  Abraham 
 and  Sarah,  and  child  of  promise,  born  when  his 
 father  was  one  hundred,  and  his  mother  ninety 
 years  of  age  (Gen.  xxi.  I-7).  To  the  etymology  of 
 the  name  there  is  reference  in  Gen.  xvii.  17,  19; 
 xviii.  12  ;  xxi.  6.  There  need  be  no  dispute  as  to 
 which  of  these  passages  the  import  of  the  name 
 refers  ;  it  includes  a  reference  to  them  all,  besides 
 according  with,  and  expressing  the  happy,  cheerful 
 disposition  of  the  bearer,  and  suggesting  the  rela- 
 tion in  which  he  stood,  as  the  seed  of  Abraham, 
 the  channel  of  the  promised  blessing,  and  the  type 
 of  Him  who  is  pre-eminently  THE  seed,  whose 
 birth  has  put  laughter  into  the  hearts  of  myriads  of 
 our  race. 
 
 When  he  was  eight  days  old  he  received  circum- 
 cision, and  was  thus  received  into  the  covenant 
 made  with  his  father  ;  while  his  mother's  sceptical 
 laughter  was  turned  into  triumphant  exultation  and 
 joy  in  God  (Gen.  xxi.  4-7).  '  And  the  child  gi-ew 
 and  was  weaned'  (in  his  third  year),  upon  which 
 occasion  Abraham  made  a  'great  feast'  to  celebrate 
 the  glad  event  ;  when  Sarah  saw  Ishmael,  the  son 
 of  the  Egyjitian,  '  mocJciitg^  as  the  A.  V.  has  it, 
 
 and  therefore  resolved  that  Ishmael  should  be  '  cast 
 out,'  that  he  might  not  '  inherit'  with  her  son  Isaac. 
 It  is  generally  supposed  that  Paul  refers  to  this,  when 
 he  says,  that  he  who  was  born  after  the  flesh  perse- 
 cuted '  him  that  was  born  after  the  spirit'  (Gal.  iv.  29). 
 But  we  question  the  correctness  of  the  translation, 
 '  mocking,''  in  Genesis,  and,  of  course,  the  fact 
 of  Paul's  reference  to  it.     pIlV  does  not  mean  to 
 
 insult.  Gen.  xxxix.  14,  where  it  relates  '  ad  hisiis 
 venereos''  (Ges.  T/tes.)  ;  nor  to  pay  idolatrous  wor- 
 ship, Exod.  xxxii.  6,  where  it  expresses  idolatrous 
 sports  in  the  form  of  danee  and  song  ;  nor  to  fight, 
 2  Sam.  ii.  14,  where,  to  sport*  covers  the  real 
 object  contemplated  by  Abner.  Gesenius  seems  to 
 take  the  right  view  :  '  Vidit  Sarah  filium  Hagariis 
 pn^'D,  ludentem^  {.t.^exultantem,  salta7item — Con- 
 
 vivium  enim  Pater  instituerat  (com.  8)  in  quo 
 filiolus  saltando  novam  gratiam  inibat  a  patre. 
 Qua  re  novercae  invidia  et  zelotypia  ita  resuscitata 
 est,  uti  pueri  matrisque  expulsionem  a  marito  flagi- 
 taret  (com.  10).'  He  adds,  '  Male  LXX.  et 
 Vulg.  addunt  :  ludentem  cum  Isaac  filio  suo ;  in 
 eo  enim  causa  odii  recandescentis  esse  non  potuit ; 
 et  ridicule  Hebrrei  pueros  faciunt  de  hereditate 
 futura  inter  se  disceptantes'  (IVies.  1163).  Paul 
 must,  therefore,  have  had  in  view  some  unrecorded 
 fact,  traditionally  handed  down,  when  he  repre- 
 sented the  son  of  Hagar  as  persecuting  Isaac.  It 
 may  be  added,  that  it  is  very  unlikely  that  the  verb 
 pni*  should  be  used  in  a  sense  so  different  from 
 
 that  which  it  has  twice  before  in  the  same  chapter 
 and  in  several  preceding  chapters. 
 
 What  effect  the  companionship  of  the  wild  and 
 wayward  Ishmael  miglU  have  had  on  Isaac  it  is  not 
 easy  to  say ;  but  his  expulsion  was,  no  doubt, 
 ordered  by  God  for  the  good  of  the  child  of  pro- 
 mise, and  most  probably  saved  him  from  many  an 
 annoyance  and  sorrow.  Freed  from  such  evil  in- 
 fluence, the  child  grew  up  under  the  nurturing  care 
 of  his  fond  parents,  mild  and  gentle,  loving  and 
 beloved.  In  his  tv.-enty-fifth  year  the  most  notable 
 circumstance  of  his  life  occurred  to  him.  Jehovah, 
 resolving  to  test  the  faith  of  Abraham,  and  exhibit 
 it  as  a  pattern  to  all  generations,  commanded  him 
 to  take  his  son,  the  son  of  his  love,  Isaac,  to  the 
 land  of  Moriah,  and  offer  him  up  as  a  burnt-offer- 
 ing f  upon  a  mountain  by  and  by  to  be  showm  him 
 
 *  '  De  lusu  puerorum  se  invicem  tentantium,  quid 
 vires  valeant'  (Fiirst). 
 
 +  Kurtz  maintains  that  the  basis  for  this  trial  of 
 Abraham  was  laid  in  the  state  of  mind  produced  in 
 him  by  beholding  the  Canaanitish  human  sacrifices 
 around  him.  His  words  are  :  '  These  Canaanitish 
 sacrifices  of  children,  and  the  readiness  with  which 
 the  heathen  around  him  offered  them,  must  have 
 excited  in  Abraham  a  contest  of  thoughts  .  .  .  and 
 induced  him  to  examine  himself  whether  he  also 
 were  capable  of  sufficient  renunciation  and  self- 
 denial  to  do,  if  his  God  demanded  it,  what  the 
 heathen  around  him  were  doing.  But  if  this  ques- 
 tion ivas  raised  in  the  heart  of  Abraham,  it  must 
 also  have  been  brought  to  a  definite  settlement  through 
 some  outivard  fact.  Such  was  the  basis  for  the 
 demand  of  God  so  far  as  Abraham  was  concerned, 
 and  such  the  educational  motive  for  his  trial.  The 
 obedience  of  Abraham's^faith  must,  in  energy  and 
 entireness,  not  lag  behind  that  which  the  religion 
 of  nature  demanded  and  obtained  from  its  profes 
 
ISAAC 
 
 403 
 
 ISAAC 
 
 (ver.-  22).  Not  hesitating  for  a  moment,  nor  stag- 
 gered by  the  imposition  of  a  service  so  severe  and 
 unnatural,  and  although  pierced  through  the  heart 
 with  sorrow,  Abraham  directly  set  out  to  fulfil  the 
 Divine  command,  accompanied  by  two  servants 
 and  his  son,  and  in  full  confidence  that  God,  who 
 had  quickened  Sarah's  womb,  would  quicken  his 
 son  when  slain,  and  raise  him  from  the  dead  (Heb. 
 xi.  19).  Nothing  but  a  clear  command  from  God 
 could  have  suggested  such  a  service.  '  A  craving 
 to  please,  or  propitiate,  or  communicate  with  the 
 powers  above^  by  surrendering  '  an  object  near  and 
 dear'  to  one,  which  Canon  Stanley  erroneously 
 says  is  the  '  source  of  all  sacrifice,'  and  to  which  he 
 attributes  Abraham's  conduct  in  the  present  case, 
 could  never  have  led  to  such  an  act.  The  idea  is 
 wholly  improbable  and  irrational  {Lectures  on  the 
 Hist,  of  the  J.  Ck.,  p.  47). 
 
 As  they  drew  near  to  the  place  of  sacrifice,  Isaac 
 bearing  the  wood,  and  Abraham  the  fire  and  the 
 knife,  the  former  said  to  his  father,  '  behold  the 
 fire  and  the  wood  ;  but  where  is  the  lamb  for  the 
 burnt- offering?' — words  which  must  have  pierced 
 like  a  sword  through  the  father's  heart ;  replying 
 to  which  he  uttered  an  unconscious  prophecy :  '  My 
 son,  God  will  provide  himself  a  Iamb  for  a  burnt- 
 offering.'  Arrived  at  the  place,*  Abraham  built 
 an  altar,  arranged  the  wood,  and  bound  his  son, 
 to  whom  no  doubt  he  had  before  this  communi- 
 cated the  divine  command,  and  who,  unresistingly 
 submitted  to  the  will  of  his  father,  and  of  his  father's 
 God.  But  when  the  patriarch  was  in  the  vary  act 
 of  stretching  forth  his  hand  to  complete  the  solemn, 
 awful  act,  the  voice  of  the  '  Angel  of  the  Lord ' 
 reached  his  ear,  forbidding  the  deed,  and  accept- 
 ing the  obedient,  submissive  will  instead.  A  ram 
 caught  by  its  branching  horns  in  a  thicket,  and 
 thus  providentially  furnished,  served  as  a  substitute. 
 But,  virtually,  the  sacrifice  was  consummated. 
 The  obedience  of  the  father,  and  the  submission  of 
 the  son  concurred  in  it — the  actual  death  of  the 
 
 sors.  Abraham  must  be  ready  to  do  for  his  God 
 what  the  nations  around  him  were  capable  of  doing 
 for  their  false  gods.  In  every  respect  Abraham, 
 as  the  hero  of  faith,  is  to  out-distance  all  others  in 
 self-denial'  (Hist,  of  the  Q.  Cov.,  i.  269).  Objec- 
 tively, the  transaction  was  intended  to  recognise  the 
 element  of  tncth  in  human  sacrifices,  while  con- 
 demning the  sacrifices  themselves  (pp.  269,  270). 
 
 It  were  at  once  tedious  and  unprofitable  even  to 
 catalogue  the  various,  for  the  most  part,  absurd 
 theories  of  especially  German  theologians  respect- 
 mg  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac. 
 
 *  What  place  was  this  ?  Moriah,  on  which  the 
 Temple  was  afterwards  built,  or  Mount  Gerizim  ? 
 Stanley  is  in  favour  of  the  latter  (see  S.  and  P., 
 250-252,  3d  ed.)  The  Samaritans  read  Morehfor 
 Moriah  (Gen.  xxii.)  Kurtz,  however,  successfully 
 defends  the  moie  usual  view  (see  Hist,  of  the  O. 
 Gov.,  i.  270-272).  Stanley  records  the  following 
 interesting  Samaritan  tradition  :  '  Isaac  was  offered 
 on  Ar-Gerizim.  Abraham  said,  '  Let  us  go  up 
 and  sacrifice  on  the  mountain.'  He  took  out  a 
 ■rope  to  fasten  his  son ;  but  Isaac  said,  '  No  :  I  will 
 lie  still.'  Thrice  the  knife  refused  to  cut.  Then 
 God  from  heaven  called  to  Gabriel,  '  Go  down  and 
 save  Isaac  or  I  will  destroy  thee  from  among  the 
 angels.'  From  the  seventh  heaven  Gabriel  called, 
 and  pointed  to  the  ram.  The  place  of  the  ram's 
 capture  is  still  shewn  near  the  holv  place.' 
 
 victim  was  neither  necesary,  nor  desired  by  God. 
 An  example  of  faith  and  self-sacrifice  was  furnished 
 to  the  world,  which  still  continues,  and  shall,  to 
 the  end  of  time,  continue  to  exert  a  blessed  influ- 
 ence, and  teach  mankind  that  their  best  and  dearest 
 are  to  be  surrendered  unto  God  whenever  he  de- 
 mands them.  At  the  same  time  a  check  was  given 
 to  human  sacrifices,  which  are  here  most  strikingly 
 shewn  not  to  be  pleasing  to  God,  but,  on  the  con- 
 trary, abhorrent  to  his  will.  '  Human  sacrifice 
 which  was  in  outward  form  nearest  to  the  offering 
 of  Isaac  was,  in  fact  and  in  spirit,  condemned  and 
 repudiated  by  it'  (Stanley's  J.  Ch.,  p.  51).  Isaac 
 became  by  this  transaction  pre-eminently  a  type  of 
 the  Messiah.  In  the  surrender  by  the  father  of 
 his  '  only  son,'  the  concurrence  of  the  son's  will 
 with  the  father's,  the  sacrificial  death  which  virtu- 
 ally took  place,  and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead, 
 whence  Abraham  received  his  son  '  in  figure'  (Heb. 
 xi.  19)  are  all  points  of  analogy  which  cannot  be 
 overlooked.* 
 
 When  Isaac  had  reached  the  age  of  forty  years, 
 Abraham,  disliking  the  daughters  of  Canaan,  sent 
 his  most  trusted  sei-vant  to  Mesopotamia  to  take 
 from  thence  of  his  own  kindred  a  wife  for  his  son 
 (Gen.  xxiv. )  This  mission  having,  by  the  guidance 
 of  Jehovah,  proved  successful,  the  servant  imme- 
 diately returned  home  with  the  bride,  and  fell  in 
 with  Isaac,  who,  in  accordance  with  his  reflective 
 disposition,  had  gone  out  into  the  fields  '  at  even- 
 tide' to  meditate.  Isaac  having  heard  from  the 
 servant  the  story  of  his  wonderful  success,  received 
 Rebecca  as  a  gift  from  God,  'and  brought  her  to 
 his  mother  Sarah's  tent,  and  she  became  his  wife, 
 and  he  loved  her,  and  was  comforted  after  his 
 mother's  death.'  As  Kalisch  remarks,  after  three 
 years  lonely  sorrow  for  his  loved  mother,  joy  for 
 the  first  time  entered  his  h^art.  This  simple  record 
 brings  before  us,  very  beautifiilly,  the  domestic 
 character  and  loving  disposition  of  Isaac. 
 
 The  sons  which  Abraham  had  by  Keturah  he 
 sent  away  with  appropriate  gifts  from  his  son 
 Isaac,  sometime  after  which  he  died,  when  Isaac 
 and  Ishmael  united  in  burying  him  in  the  family 
 tomb. 
 
 Isaac  was  forty  years  old  when  he  married  Re- 
 becca, who,  to  his  great  grief,  was  barren ;  but  he, 
 although  the  seed  through  whom  Abraham's  pos- 
 terity was  to  be  multiplied  as  the  stars  of  heaven, 
 and  although  he  knew  the  Divine  purpose  could 
 not  be  frustrated,  yet  had  recourse  to  prayer  for  the 
 fulfilment  of  the  promise,  and  the  '  Lord  was  en- 
 treated of  him,'  and  Rebecca  bore  him  two  sons  at 
 a  birth  (Esau  and  Jacob),  when  he  was  in  the  six- 
 tieth year  of  his  age.  Of  these  Esau,  the  open, 
 ingenuous,  brave,  impulsive  boy,  was,  naturally, 
 his  father's  favourite. 
 
 Isaac  dwelt  by  the  well  Lahai-roi,  but  a  famine 
 drove  him  unto  Gerar  (ch.  xxvi.),  God  appearing  to 
 him  and  forbidding  him  to  go  down  into  Egypt, 
 and  renewing  to  him  the  covenant  promise  given 
 originally  to  Abraham.  While  here  he  fell  into 
 the  great  error  and  sin  into  which  his  father  had 
 
 *  Several  Greek  myths  have  been  compared 
 with  this  narrative,  ex.  gr.,  the  story  of  Iphigenia, 
 daughter  of  Agamemnon,  and  that  of  Athmas  and 
 Phrixus  ;  but  this  is  mere  trifling.  The  similarity 
 exists  only  in  one  or  two  outward  circumstances  ; 
 the  narratives  are,  in  all  essential  particulars,  un- 
 like (see  Kalisch). 
 
ISAAC 
 
 409 
 
 ISAAC 
 
 fallen  twice,— the  sin  of  denying  his  wife,  and  say- 
 ing that  she  was  his  sister,  through  fear  of  suffering 
 for  her  sake.  Tliere  is  no  improbabihty,  as  has 
 been  asserted,  that  the  same  sort  of  event  should 
 happen  in  rude  times  at  different  intervals ;  and, 
 therefore,  no  reason  for  maintaining  that  these 
 events  have  the  same  historical  basis,  and  are,  in  fact, 
 the  same  event  differently  represented.  Neither  is 
 it  an  unfair  assumption  that  Abimelech  was  the 
 common  title  of  the  kings  of  Gerar,  as  Pharaoh 
 was  of  the  kings  of  Egypt,  or  that  it  may  have  been 
 the  proper  name  of  several  kings  in  succession,  as 
 George  has  been  of  several  English  kings.  Abime- 
 lech discovered  the  cheat  practised  by  Isaac. 
 From  a  window,  which  probably  overlooked  the 
 courts  of  the  surrounding  houses,  he  saw  Isaac 
 'sporting,'   pDVp,*  with   Rebecca  his  wife,    in  a 
 
 way  that  plainly  indicated  the  relationship  between 
 them ;  and  having  called  him  severely  reproved 
 him  for  his  falsehood,  and  afterwards  charged  his 
 people  respecting  them.  Isaac's  excuse  was  that 
 he  thought  'the  fear  of  God'  was  'not  in  the 
 place  ;'  but  the  real  cause  was,  the  failure  of  his 
 own  trust  in  the  gracious  guardian  care  of  Jehovah. 
 
 While  in  Gerar  his  prosperity  was  so  great  that 
 the  Philistines  envied  him  ;  and  Abimelech  re- 
 quested him  to  depart  from  them.  He,  therefore, 
 left  the  city  and  dwelt  in  the  country.  But  even 
 there  he  was  not  free  from  annoyance.  Having 
 digged  wells,  tlie  herdsmen  of  Gerar  contended  for 
 them  ;  and  in  accordance  with  his  pacific  temper, 
 he  yielded  them  up,  one  after  another,  rather  than 
 live  in  contention,  till  at  length  his  sei"vants  digged 
 one  for  which  no  one  contended,  which,  from  that 
 circumstance,  he  called  Rehoboth  =  room  ;  '  for 
 now,'  saith  he,  '  the  Lord  hath  made  room  for  us' 
 (vers.  17-23).  But  Abimelech,  feeling  that  God 
 was  with  him,  visited  him,  in  company  with  Ahuz- 
 zath,  and  Phichol  the  chief  captain  of  his  army,  and 
 entered  into  a  covenant-oath  with  him  of  mutual 
 peace  and  friendship.  On  the  day  this  covenant 
 was  ratified,  Isaac's  servants  having  found  water 
 came  and  told  him  of  it ;  when  he,  in  commemora- 
 tion of  the  event  which  had  just  occurred,  called 
 the  well  Beer-Shcba — the  well  of  the  oath. 
 
 The  last  prominent  event  in  the  life  of  Isaac  is 
 the  blessing  of  his  sons  (ch.  xxvii.)  When  old  and 
 dim  of  sight  (which  fails  much  sooner  in  eastern 
 countries  than  in  Europe),  supposing  that  the  time 
 of  his  departure  was  at  hand,  he  called  for  his  be- 
 loved son  Esau,  and  sent  him  to  '  take  some  veni- 
 son '  for  him,  and  to  make  his  favourite  '  savoury 
 meat,'  that  he  might  eat  and  'bless'  him  before 
 his  death.  Esau  prepared  to  obey  his  father's  will, 
 and  set  forth  to  the  field  ;  but  through  the  decep- 
 tious  stratagem  of  Rebecca  the  '  savoury  meat ' 
 was  provided  before  Esau's  return;  and  Jacob,  dis- 
 guised so  as  to  resemble  his  hairy  brother,  imposed 
 on  his  father,  and  obtained  the  blessing.  Yet,  on 
 the  discovery  of  the  cheat,  when  Esau  brought  into 
 his  father  the  dish  he  had  prepared,  Isaac,  remem- 
 bering no  doubt  the  prediction  that  '  the  elder 
 should  serve  the  younger,'  and  convinced  that  God 
 intended  the  blessing  for  Jacob,  deeply  agitated 
 though  he  was,  would  not,  perhaps  rather  could 
 not,  reverse  the  solemn  words  he  had  uttered,  but 
 bestowed  an  inferior  blessing  on  Esau,  t 
 
 *  '  De  blanditiis  maritalibus'  (Fiirst). 
 
 t  It  is  remarkable  that  the  blessing,  in  both  cases, 
 
 There  is  little  ground  for  founding  on  this  narra- 
 tive a  criticism  adverse  to  Isaac,  as  if  he  had  de- 
 generated very  much  from  his  former  self,  because 
 of  his  seeming  to  lay  so  much  stress  on  the  '  savoury 
 meat'  he  requested  of  his  son.  Such  a  longing  in 
 an  old  man  was  innocent  enough,  and  indicated 
 nothing  of  a  spirit  of  self-indulgence.  It  was  an 
 extraordinary  case,  too,  and  Kalisch  sets  it  in  its 
 true  light  :  '  The  venison  is  evidently  like  a  sacri- 
 fice offered  by  the  recipient  of  the  blessing,  and 
 ratifying  the  proceedings  ;  and  hence  Jacob  killed 
 and  prepared  two  kids  of  the  goats  (ver.  9),  where- 
 as, for  an  ordinary  meal,  one  would  have  been 
 more  than  sufficient ;  it  imparted  to  the  ceremony, 
 in  certain  respects,  the  character  of  a  covenant 
 (comp.  xxi.  27-30  ;  xxvi.  30  ;  Exod.  xii.  2  ;  xxiv. 
 S-ii,  etc.)  ;  the  one  party  shewed  ready  obedience 
 and  sincere  affection,  while  the  other  accepted  the 
 gift,  and  granted  in  return,  the  whole  store  of  hap- 
 piness he  was  able  to  bequeath.  Thus  the  meal 
 which  Isaac  required  has  a  double  meaning,  both 
 connected  with  the  internal  organism  of  the  book' 
 {Com.  on  Gen.  xxvii.  1-4). 
 
 Isaac  lived  after  this  forty  or  fifty  years  in  com- 
 plete privacy,  and  died  in  Hebron  at  the  advanced 
 age  of  180  years,  and  was  buried  by  his  sons  Esau 
 and  Jacob  in  the  cave  of  Machpelah. 
 
 The  character  of  Isaac  may  be  summed  up  in 
 the  words  of  Kalisch  :  '  Isaac  was  the  worthy  off- 
 spring of  the  chosen  patriarch.  He  ever  displayed 
 imperturbable  harmony  of  soul,  unmoved  by  the 
 greatest  and  dearest  sacrifices  ;  his  mind  was,  by 
 nature,  calm  and  placid  ;  modest  and  reserved  ;  he 
 was  susceptible  of  that  happiness  which  flows  from 
 sentiment  ;  his  heart  was  warm  and  sensitive  ;  his 
 piety  internal  and  unostentatious  ;  he  inclined  to 
 reflection  and  prayer  ;  his  affections  were  strong 
 without  impetuosity  ;  his  impressions  profound 
 without  exuberance.  His  destinies  corresponded 
 with  his  character.  They  form  the  exact  medium 
 between  the  history  of  Abraham  and  that  of  Jacob. 
 He  spent  his  life  without  the  deeds  of  the  one  and 
 the  sufferings  of  the  other  ;  he  was  not  like  either, 
 compelled  to  distant  wanderings  ;  after  the  grand 
 trial  of  his  youth,  the  course  of  his  life  was,  on  the 
 whole,  calm  and  even.  Without  labour  or  care  he 
 inherited  a  large  fortune,  while  both  his  father  and 
 his  son  acquired  property  but  gradually,  and  the 
 latter  not  without  laborious  exertion  ;  he  obtained 
 a  pious  and  beautiful  wife  without  the  least  per- 
 sonal effort,  by  the  care  of  a  provident  father  and 
 a  faithful  servant,  whereas  Jacob  had,  for  the  same 
 purpose,  not  only  to  undertake  a  perilous  journey, 
 but  to  submit  to  a  long  and  toilsome  sei-vitude  ; 
 and  though  we  shall  soon  have  occasion  to  shew 
 many  parallels  in  the  destinies  of  Isaac  and  Abra- 
 ham, the  history  of  the  former  exhibits  a  certain 
 pause  in  the  progress  of  the  narrative  ;  it  contains 
 few  new  elements,  and  advances  but  little  the 
 Hebrew  theocracy  ;  its  tendency  is  rather  to  secure 
 the  old  ideas,  than  to  introduce  new  ones  ;  and  its 
 chief  interest  consists  in  proving  how  the  enlighten  ■ 
 ment  of  Abraham  had,  by  habit  and  temperament, 
 
 relates  to  purely  earthly  good  things.  The  dew  of 
 heaven,  the  fatness  of  the  earth,  plenty  of  corn  and 
 wine,  dominion  over  nations,  and  lordship  over 
 brethren,  with  a  curse  to  those  who  cursed,  a:id  a 
 blessing  to  those  that  blessed  him,  constituting  the 
 portion  bestowed  on  Jacob,  who  obtained  the 
 blessing  in  its  highest  fonn. 
 
ISAAC 
 
 41C 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 hecome  with  Isaac  an  impulsive  feeling  ;  and  how 
 the  acquirements  of  the  mind  had  become  the  pro- 
 perty of  the  heart'  {Com.  on  Gen.  xxiv.  62-67). 
 
 Many  curious  legends  exist  among  the  Jews  and 
 Mohammedans  respecting  Isaac,  such  as  that  he  was 
 an  angel  created  before  the  world,  who  descended 
 to  earth  in  a  human  form  :  that  he  was  one  of  the 
 three  in  whom  there  was  no  sin,  and  one  of  the  six 
 over  whom  the  nngel  of  death  had  no  power  ;  and 
 that  he  was  the  instituter  of  evening  prayer,  as 
 Abraham  was  of  morning,  and  Jacob  of  night 
 prayer ;  but  that  related  by  Canon  Stanley,  in  his 
 account  of  the  visit  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  to  the 
 patriarchal  tomb  at  Hebron,  is  the  strangest,  be- 
 cause of  its  being  so  totally  out  of  harmony  with  the 
 character  of  the  patriarch.  It  is  as  follows  : — '  On 
 requesting  to  see  the  tomb  of  Isaac,  we  were  en- 
 treated not  to  enter.'  Asking  the  reason  of  this, 
 we  were  told  '  that  Abraham  was  full  of  loving- 
 kindness,'  etc.  ;  but  that  '  Isaac  was  proverbially 
 jealous,  and  it  was  exceedingly  dangerous  to  pro- 
 voke him.  When  Ibrahim  Pasha  [as  conqueror  of 
 Palestine]  had  endeavoured  to  enter,  he  was  driven 
 out  by  Isaac,  and  fell  back  as  if  thunderstruck' 
 (Led.  on  the  Hist,  ofthej.  Ck.,  pp.  496,  497).  On 
 the  history  of  Isaac  the  following  works  may  be 
 consulted  : — Kalisch's  Com.  on  Genesis  ;  Kurtz  on 
 the  Old  Gov.,  in  the  For.  Theol.  Lib.,  vol.  I; 
 Graves  on  the  Pentateuch,  part.  iii.  ;  Maurice, 
 Patriarchs  and  Lawgivers,  iv.  ;  Frischmulh,  Thes. 
 Theol.  Phil.,  attached  to  the  Critici  Sacri,  etc. — 
 I-  J- 
 
 ISAAC  B.  Elia  b.  Samuel,  a  Jewish  com- 
 mentator who  flourished  in  the  beginning  of  the 
 1 8th  century,  and  wrote  [i)  A  Goimneiitary  on  the 
 Psalms,  published  at  Dyrhenfurt  1728,  under  the 
 
 title  of  Qi-tJD  i^lp!?  Dy  uhT\T\,  the  Psalms  with  a 
 valuable  catena,  consisting  of  excerpts  from  the 
 celebrated  expositions  of  Rashi,  D.  Kimchi,  etc., 
 giving  also  an  abridgment  of  Alsheich's  commen- 
 tary entitled  PX  niJDDI"!  [Alsheich],  and  a  Ger- 
 man explanation    of  the   difficult  words.      (2)    A 
 
 Commentary  on  Proverbs,  entitled  '•J^lp?  Dy  'h^'d 
 DnjD,  Proverbs  with  a  valuable  catena.  Wands- 
 beck  1730-31,  composed  of  excerpts  from  the  ex- 
 ]30sitions  of  Rashi,  D.  Kimchi,  Ibn  Ezra,  Levi  b. 
 Gershon,  Salomon  b.  Melech,  giving  also  a  Ger- 
 man explanation  of  the  difficult  expressions,  and 
 an  abridgment  of  Alsheich's  exposition  called  311 
 D''2^J3  ;  and  (3)  A  Commentary  on  the  Sabbatic 
 Lessons  from  the  Prophets  [Haphtara],  entitled  ''JD 
 pn^'\  the  face  of  Isaac,  Wandsbeck  1730,  which 
 consists  of  excerpts  from  nine  of  the  most  distin- 
 guished commentators,  viz.,  Rashi,  Ibn  Ezra,  D. 
 Kimchi,  Levi  b.  Gershon,  Abravanel,  Alsheich, 
 Samuel  b.  Laniado,  J.  Arama,  and  Joseph  Albo. 
 The  works  of  Isaac  b.  Elia  are  very  valuable,  inas- 
 much as  they  enable  the  Biblical  student  to  see  on 
 one  page  the  expositions  of  the  best  and  most 
 famous  Jewish  commentators  on  eveiy  difficult 
 passage  without  being  obliged  to  search  for  them 
 in  inaccessible  and  costly  volumes. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 ISAAC  B.  Moses,  also  called  VIlK  =^;-(7;'f', 
 which  has  been  improperly  pronounced  Ai-viv  and 
 Arbib,  lived  in  the  i6th  century,  and  wrote  (i)  A 
 Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  entitled  niDirUD 
 
 PJC,  the  Consolation  of  God,  which  was  printed  in 
 tjaloniki   1578-79;    and    (2)    A    Commentary    on 
 
 the  book  of  Ecclesiastes,  called  nSip  PTlpD,  tJii 
 Gatherer  of  the  Congregation,  also  published  at  Sal- 
 oniki  1597.  Both  these  commentaries  are  written 
 in  a  philosophical  spirit,  and  are  valuable  contribu- 
 tions to  Biblical  exegesis  (comp.  Steinschneider, 
 Catalogiis  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana, 
 col.  1 139). — C.  D.  G. 
 
 ISAAC  BLITZ.     [Jekuthiel  b.  Isaac] 
 
 ISAAC  B.  GIKATILLA.     [Gikatilla.] 
 
 ISAAC  B.  JEHUDAH.     [Ibn  Giath.] 
 
 ISAAC,  PULGAR.     [Pulgar.] 
 
 ISAACUS,   John,    is    the    Christian  name    of 
 
 JocHANAN  Ha-Levi  OI^JH  pni"*  pHV  '-\),  a  dis- 
 tinguished Jewish  grammarian  and  lexicographer, 
 who  flourished  in  the  middle  of  the  1 6th  cen- 
 tury, when  he  embraced  Christianity  and  became 
 Oriental  professor  in  Cologne.  He  wrote  (i)  An 
 Introduction  to  the  Hebmu  Grammar  and  to  the  art 
 ofwritino  a  pure Hebrero  style,  entitled  """IDX  X1DD 
 "iQt^,  Colon.  1553.  Isaacus  gives  in  this  work 
 different  specimens  of  Hebrew  writing,  dialogues, 
 and  epistles,  both  from  the  O.  T.  and  other  He- 
 brew writings,  as  well  as  the  books  of  Obadiah  and 
 Jonah  in  Hebrew  with  a  Latin  translation ;  (2)  A 
 grammatical  treatise  entitled  Meditationes  Hebraiccz 
 in  Art  em  Gi'amm.  per  integrian  libr  urn  Ruth  expli- 
 cates ;  adjecta  stmt  qiiadam  contra  D.  I.  Pbrsiert 
 lexicon.  Colon.  155S,  which  consists  of  a  useful 
 analysis  and  excellent  translation  of  the  entire  book 
 of  Ruth ;  (3)  Notes  in  Clenardi  Tabnlam,  etc.. 
 Colon.  1555,  being  annotations  on  Clenard's  Tables 
 of  Hebrew  Grammar  ;  (4)  An  excellent  introduc- 
 tion to  the  edition  of  Elias  Levita's  Chaldee  Lexi- 
 con entitled  (Dl'ilTID,  which  was  published  at 
 Colon.  1560  ;  and  (5)  Dcfensio  vcritatis  hebrae  sa- 
 crarian  scripturarum  adversus  Lindanum,  Colon. 
 1559. -C.  D.  G. 
 
 ISAIAH    (5l^'•J!t^'■'' ;    Sept.    'Ho-ai'as).     L    Times 
 
 and  circnmstanees  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah. — The 
 heading  of  this  book  places  the  prophet  under  the 
 reigns  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah, 
 kings  of  Judah  ;  and  an  examination  of  the  pro- 
 phecies themselves,  independently  of  the  heading, 
 leads  us  to  the  same  chronological  results.  Chap- 
 ter vi.,  in  which  is  related  the  call  of  Isaiah,  not  to 
 his  prophetic  office,  but  to  a  higher  degree  of  it,  is 
 thus  headed  :  '  In  the  year  in  which  king  Uzziah 
 died  I  saw  the  Lord,'  etc.  The  collection  of  pro- 
 phecies is  chronologically  arranged,  and  the  utter- 
 ances in  the  preceding  chapters  (i.  to  vi.)  belong, 
 for  chronological  and  other  reasons,  to  an  earliei 
 period,  preceding  the  last  year  of  the  reign  of 
 Uzziah,  although  the  utterances  in  chapters  ii.  iii. 
 iv.  and  v.  have  been  erroneously  assigned  to  the 
 reign  of  Jotham.  We  have  no  document  which 
 can,  with  any  degree  of  certainty,  or  even  of  proba- 
 bility, be  assigned  to  that  reign.  We  by  no  means 
 assert  that  the  prophetic  ministry  of  Isaiah  was 
 suspended  during  the  reign  of  Jotham,  but  merely 
 that  then  apparently  the  circumstances  of  the 
 times  did  not  require  Isaiah  to  utter  predictions  of 
 importance  for  all  ages  of  the  church.  We  cer- 
 tainly learn  from  the  examples  of  Nathan,  Elijah, 
 and  Elisha,  that  a  powerful  prophetic  ministration 
 may  be  in  operation,  although  the  predictions 
 uttered,   finding  their   accomplishment  within  the 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 411 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 times  of  the  prophet,  are  not  preserved  for  subse- 
 quent ages.  As,  however,  the  position  of  affairs 
 was  not  materially  changed  under  the  reign  of 
 Jotham,  we  may  say  that  the  first  two  utterances 
 have  a  bearing  upon  that  reign  also.  These  two 
 prophecies  contain  the  sum  and  substance  of  what 
 Isaiah  taught  during  twenty  years  of  his  life.  If 
 these  prophetic  utterances  belonging  to  the  reign  of 
 Uzziah  had  not  been  extant,  there  would,  doubt- 
 less, have  been  written  down  and  preserved  similar 
 discourses  uttered  under  the  reign  of  Jotham.  As, 
 however,  the  former  utterances  were  applicable  to 
 that  reign  also,  it  was  unnecessary  to  preserve  such 
 as  were  of  similar  import. 
 
 The  continuation  of  prophetic  authorship,  or  the 
 writing  down  of  uttered  prophecies,  depended  upon 
 the  commencement  of  new  historical  developments, 
 Guch  as  took  place  under  the  reigns  of  Ahaz  and 
 Hezekiah.  Several  prophecies  in  the  seventh  and 
 following  chapters  belong  to  the  reign  of  Ahaz  ; 
 and  most  of  the  subsequent  prophecies  to  the  reign 
 of  Hezekiah.  The  prophetic  ministry  of  Isaiah 
 imder  Hezekiah  is  also  described  in  an  historical 
 section  contained  in  chapters  xxxvi. -xxxix.  The 
 data  which  are  contained  in  this  section  come  down 
 to  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  ; 
 consequently  we  are  in  the  possession  of  historical 
 documents  proving  that  the  prophetic  ministry  of 
 Isaiah  was  in  operation  during  about  forty-seven  or 
 fifty  years,  commencing  in  the  year  B.C.  763  or 
 759,  and  extending  to  the  year  B.C.  713.  Of  this 
 period,  from  one  to  four  years  belong  to  the  reign 
 of  Uzziah,  sixteen  to  the  reign  of  Jotham,  sixteen 
 to  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  and  fourteen  to  the  reign  of 
 Hezekiah. 
 
 Staudlein,  Jahn,  Bertholdt,  and  Gesenius,  have, 
 in  modern  times,  advanced  the  opinion  that  Isaiah 
 lived  to  a  much  later  period,  and  that  his  life  ex- 
 tended to  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  the  successor  of 
 Hezekiah.  For  this  ijpinion,  the  following  reasons 
 are  adduced  : — 
 
 1.  According  to  2  Chron.  xxxii.  32,  Isaiah  wrote 
 the  life  of  King  Hezekiah.  It  would  hence  ap- 
 pear that  he  survived  that  king. 
 
 2.  We  find  a  tradition  current  in  the  Talmud,  in 
 the  Fathers,  and  in  Oriental  literature,  that  Isaiah 
 suffered  martyrdom  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  liy 
 being  sawn  asunder.  It  is  thought  that  an  allusion 
 to  this  tradition  is  found  in  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
 brews (xi.  37),  in  the  expression  they  were  saivn 
 asimder  {iwpicrd7]<rai'),  which  seems  to  harmonise 
 with  2  Kings  xxi.  16,  '  moreover  Manasseh  shed 
 innocent  blood  very  much.' 
 
 3.  The  authenticity  of  the  second  portion  of  the 
 prophecies  of  Isaiah  being  admitted,  the  nature  of 
 this  portion  would  seem  to  confirm  the  idea  that 
 its  author  had  lived  under  Manasseh.  The  style 
 of  the  second  portion,  it  is  asserted,  is  so  different 
 from  that  of  the  first,  that  they  could  not  well 
 have  been  composed  by  the  same  author,  except 
 under  the  supposition  that  a  considerable  time 
 intervened  between  the  composition  of  the  first 
 and  second  portion.  The  contents  of  the  latter — 
 such  as  fhe  complaints  respecting  gross  idolatry, 
 the  sacrifice  of  children  to  idols,  the  wickedness  of 
 rulers,  etc.— seem  to  be  applicable  neither  to  the 
 times  of  the  exile,  into  which  the  prophet  might 
 have  transported  himself  in  the  spirit,  nor  tu  the 
 period  of  the  pious  Hezekiah,  but  are  quite  appli- 
 cable to  the  reign  of  Manasseh. 
 
 These  arguments,  however,  do  not  stand  a  strict 
 
 scrutiny.  The  first  can  only  prove  that  Isaiah  sur- 
 vived Hezekiah ;  but  even  this  does  not  follow 
 with  certainty,  because  in  2  Chron.  xxxii.  32, 
 where  Isaiah's  biography  of  Hezekiah  is  men- 
 tioned, the  important  words  '  first  and  last'  are 
 omitted  ;  while  in  chap.  xxvi.  22,  we  read,  '  Now 
 the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Uzziah,  first  and  last, 
 did  Isaiah,  the  son  of  Amoz,  write.'  If  we  take 
 into  consideration  this  important  omission,  we  can 
 easily  believe  that  Isaiah  died  before  Hezekiah, 
 although  he  wrote  his  biography  up  to  a  certain 
 point ;  more  especially  if  we  bear  in  mind  that, 
 according  to  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles, 
 the  latter  years  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  were  de- 
 void of  important  events.  We  certainly  find,  in 
 all  ages  of  literature,  biographies  of  persons  written 
 during  their  life-time. 
 
 We  may  well  suppose  that  the  history  of  Heze- 
 kiah terminated  with  the  glorious  aid  granted  to 
 him  in  his  war  with  the  Assyrians,  and  with  the 
 events  immediately  consequent  upon  that  war. 
 
 In  reply  to  the  second  argument,  we  observe, 
 that  it  is  not  certain  that  the  word  eirpiaO-r^aav,  they 
 were  sawn  asunder,  is  used  in  Hebrews  with  refer- 
 ence to  Isaiah.  The  statement  in  the  Fathers,  and 
 in  Oriental  writers,  is  entirely  deduced  from  the 
 Jewish  tradition,  which  is  throughout  of  so  doubt- 
 ful a  character  that  no  conclusive  argument  can  be 
 based  upon  it. 
 
 With  regard  to  the  third  argument,  we  remark, 
 that  the  difference  discernible,  if  we  compare  the 
 latter  with  the  former  portion  of  Isaiah,  can,  and 
 ought  to  be,  differently  accounted  for.  Such 
 merely  external  attempts  at  explanation,  when  ap- 
 plied to  Holy  Writ,  always  appear  unsatisfactory 
 if  closely  examined.  We  invariably  find  that  the 
 real  cause  of  the  external  appearance  lies  deeper, 
 and  in  the  nature  of  the  subject  itself.  For 
 instance,  the  pecuharity  of  Deuteronomy  arises 
 from  the  special  bearing  of  that  book  upon  the 
 other  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  peculiar 
 style  of  the  Apocalypse  arises  from  its  relation  to 
 the  gospel  of  St.  John.  The  appeal  to  such 
 merely  external  arguments  always  proceeds  from 
 an  inability  to  understand  the  essence  of  the  matter. 
 In  reference  to  the  censures  occurring  in  the  lattei 
 portion  of  Isaiah,  we  observe,  that  they  might  also 
 have  a  bearing  upon  the  corruptions  prevalent  in 
 former  reigns,  and  that  they  were  not  necessarily 
 confined  to  manifestations  of  wickedness  occurring 
 at  the  time  when  they  were  written  down.  These 
 censures  might  also  refer  to  the  gross  pei-versions 
 under  Ahaz ;  and  it  is  also  unlikely  that  the  per- 
 sonal piety  of  Hezekiah  entirely  extinguished  all 
 abuses  among  his  people.  We  certainly  do  not 
 find  that  the  personal  piety  of  King  Josiah  had  that 
 effect  upon  all  his  subjects. 
 
 Several  other  arguments  adduced  against  the 
 opinion  that  Isaiah  died  during  the  reign  of  JMa- 
 nasseh,  are  certainly  of  little  weight.  For  instance, 
 the  argunientiim  e  sikntio,  or  the  proof  derived 
 from  the  silence  of  the  historical  books  respecting 
 Isaiah  during  the  reign  of  Manasseh.  This  argu- 
 ment is  of  no  importance  at  all,  since,  at  any  rate, 
 the  death  of  Isaiah  is  nowhere  mentioned  in  the 
 Bible  ;  from  which  circumstance  we  infer,  that,  on 
 account  of  his  advanced  age,  he  had  retired  from 
 active  life. 
 
 Of  somewhat  more  weight  is  the  objection  that, 
 according  to  the  supposition  that  Isaiah  died  under 
 Manasseh,  too  great  an  age  would  be  ascribed  to 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 412 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 the  prophet.  Although  we  were  to  suppose  that 
 Isaiah,  as  well  as  Jeremiah,  was  called  to  the  pro- 
 phetic office  at  an  early  age — perhaps  in  his  twen- 
 tieth year — he,  nevertheless,  in  the  fifteenth  year 
 of  Hezekiah,  up  to  which  date  we  can  prove  his 
 ministrations  by  existing  documents,  would  have 
 reached  quite  or  nearly  to  his  seventieth  year, 
 which  is  the  usual  duration  of  human  life  ;  conse- 
 quently, at  the  time  of  the  accession  of  Manasseh 
 he  would  have  been  about  eighty-four  years  old  ; 
 and  if,  with  the  defenders  of  the  tradition,  we 
 allow  that  he  exercised  the  prophetic  functions  for 
 about  seven  or  eight  years  during  the  reign  of 
 Manasseh,  he  must  at  the  period  of  his  martyrdom 
 have  attained  to  the  age  of  ninety-two.  This,  in- 
 deed, is  quite  possible.  The  example  of  the  pro- 
 phet Hosea,  who  exercised  his  prophetic  calling 
 during  sixty  years,  and  that  of  the  priest  Jehoiada, 
 who,  according  to  2  Chron.  xxiv.  15,  was  a  hun- 
 dred and  thirty  years  old  when  he  died,  prove  the 
 possibility  of  the  age  ascribed  to  Isaiah. 
 
 The  chief  argument  against  the  tradition,  how- 
 ever, is  contained  in  the  inscription  of  the  book 
 itself.  According  to  this  inscription  all  the  pro- 
 phecies of  Isaiah  in  our  collection  are  included 
 within  the  period  from  Uzziah  to  Hezekiah.  Not 
 one  of  the  prophecies  which  are  headed  by  an  in- 
 scription of  their  own  is  placed  after  the  fifteenth 
 year  of  .Hezekiah  ;  and  the  internal  evidence  leads 
 us  in  none  beyond  this  period.  Hence  we  infer 
 that  the  prophetic  ministry  of  Isaiah  terminated 
 soon  after  its  fullest  development,  to  which  it 
 attained  during  the  period  of  the  Assyrian  inva- 
 sion, in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
 
 According  to  these  statements  Isaiah  belongs  to 
 the  cycle  of  the  most  ancient  prophets  whose  pre- 
 dictions have  been  preserved  in  writing.  He  was  a 
 contemporary  of  Hosea,  Amos,  and  Jonah,  al- 
 though younger  than  those  prophets,  who  belonged 
 to  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  He  vvas  likewise  a  con- 
 temporary and  co-worker  of  the  prophet  Micah  in 
 the  kingdom  of  Judah.  We  infer  also  from  the 
 circumstance  that  the  prophecies  of  Joel  are  in- 
 serted among  the  books  of  the  minor  prophets 
 before  those  of  Micah,  that  Isaiah  must  have  been 
 a  contemporary  of  Joel,  since  the  minor  prophets 
 are  chronologically  arranged. 
 
 Micah  entered  upon  his  prophetic  office  under 
 the  reign  of  Jotham,  consequently  somewhat  later 
 than  Isaiah  commenced  his  prophetic  career.  Oba- 
 diah,  who  is  placed  among  the  minor  prophets, 
 after  Joel  and  before  Micah,  was  likewise  a  con- 
 temporary of  Isaiah.  It  is  not  accidental  that 
 Isaiah  and  all  these  prophets  commence  the  series 
 of  those  whose  prophetic  utterances  were  written 
 down  and  preserved.  Nor  is  there  any  reason  to 
 assert  that  the  preceding  age  was  neglectful  of 
 the  preservation  of  prophetic  literature,  although 
 even  Ewald,  in  his  Propheteii  (i.  p.  54,  Stuttgard, 
 1840),  asserts  that  beyond  the  prophetic  literature 
 which  we  possess  there  lay  an  earlier,  which  was 
 more  comprehensive.  There  is,  however,  no  one 
 genuine  proof  sufficient  to  evince  that  there  were 
 written  prophecies  before  Isaiah  and  his  contem- 
 poraries. Hosea  refers  (viii.  12),  not  to  earlier 
 prophetic  writings,  but  to  the  books  of  Moses. 
 This  has  been  proved  by  Hengstenberg  {Beitrdge, 
 part  ii.  p.  604,  seq.)  Isaiah  ii.  and  Micah  iv.  do 
 not  rest  upon  an  earlier  prophetic  production  which 
 was  lost ;  but  Isaiah  rests  upon  Micah  as  Jeremiah 
 does  upon  Obadiah ;  and  it  is  not  the  case  that 
 
 both  prophets  rest  upon  a  third  unknown  prophet. 
 At  the  period  when  these  prophets  commenced 
 their  career,  prophetism  itself  had  attained  a  new 
 epoch,  at  which  a  great  number  of  important  pro- 
 phets were  ranged  beside  each  other.  The  affairs 
 of  the  Israelites  became  at  this  period  more  inter- 
 woven with  those  of  the  great  Asiatic  empires, 
 which  then  began  to  bring  about  the  threatened 
 judgments  of  the  Lord  upon  his  people.  Hence- 
 forward, also,  the  prophetic  office  was  to  be  con- 
 ducted on  a  grander  scale.  To  the  prophets  it 
 was  now  assigned  to  declare  and  to  interpret  the 
 judgments  of  the  Lord,  in  order  to  render  the 
 peo]ile  conscious  as  well  of  his  chastising  justice 
 as  of  his  preserving  mercy.  A  larger  field  was 
 now  opened  to  the  strictly  prophetic  office,  which 
 consisted  in  uttering  predictions  of  the  future. 
 The  admonitions  to  repentance  were  now  also 
 supported  by  more  powerful  motives.  The  hopes 
 of  a  coming  Messiah  were  revived.  To  the  worldly 
 power,  which  threatens  destruction  to  the  external 
 theocracy,  is  henceforth  opposed  the  kingdom  of 
 God,  destined  to  conquer  and  to  govern  the  world 
 through  the  Messiah.  This  consolation  was  offered 
 to  those  who  would  otherwise  have  been  driven  to 
 despair.  Now  only  was  prophetism  able  to  de- 
 velope  its  full  power  and  become  important  for  all 
 subsequent  ages.  This  persuasion  induced  thai 
 prophets  to  write  their  prophecies,  and  it  caused 
 these  documents  also  to  be  carefully  preserved. 
 The  reason  why  the  earlier  prophets  did  not  com- 
 mit their  utterances  to  writing  is  the  same  that, 
 with  two  exceptions,  led  Isaiah  not  to  write  under 
 Uzziah,  and  to  omit  writing  his  utterances  under 
 Jotham  altogether. 
 
 Little  is  known  respecting  the  circumstances  of 
 Isaiah's  life.  His  father's  name  was  Amoz  (pDN). 
 The  fathers  of  the  church  confound  him  with  the 
 prophet  Amos  (D1DJ/),  because  they  were  unac- 
 quainted with  Hebrew,  and  in  Greek  the  two  names 
 are  spelled  alike.  The  opinion  of  the  Rabbins,  that 
 Isaiah  was  a  brother  of  King  Amaziah,  rests  also  on 
 a  mere  etymological  combination.  Isaiah  resided 
 at  Jenisalem,  not  far  from  the  temple.  We  learn 
 from  chapters  vii.  and  viii.  that  he  was  married. 
 Two  of  his  sons  are  mentioned,  Sliear-jashub  and 
 Maher-shalal-hash-baz.  These  significant  names, 
 which  he  gave  to  his  sons,  prove  how  much  Isaiah 
 lived  in  his  vocation.  He  did  not  consider  his 
 children  to  belong  merely  to  himself,  but  rendered 
 them  living  admonitions  to  the  people.  In  their 
 names  were  contained  the  two  chief  points  of  his 
 prophetic  utterances  :  one  recalled  to  mind  the 
 severe  and  inevitable  judgment  wherewith  the  Lord 
 was  about  to  visit  the  world,  and  especially  his 
 people ;  the  other,  which  signifies  '  The  remnant 
 shall  return,'  pointed  out  the  mercy  with  which 
 the  Lord  would  receive  the  elect,  and  with  which, 
 in  the  midst  of  apparent  destruction,  he  would 
 take  care  to  preserve  his  people  and  his  kingdom. 
 Isaiah  calls  his  wife  nN''33,  prophetess.  This  indi- 
 cates that  his  marriage-life  was  not  in  opposition 
 to  his  vocation,  and  also  that  it  not  only  went 
 along  with  his  vocation,  but  that  it  was  intimately 
 interwoven  with  it.  This  name  cannot  mean  the 
 wife  of  a  prophet,  but  indicates  that  the  prophetess 
 of  Isaiah  had  a  prophetic  gift,  hke  Miriam,  De- 
 borah, and  Huldah.  The  appellation  here  given 
 denotes  the  genuineness  of  their  conjugal  relation. 
 
 Even  the  dress  of  the  prophet  was  subservient 
 to  his  vocation.     He  wore  a  garment  of  hair-cloth 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 413 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 or  saclccloth  (ch.  xx.  2).  This  seems  also  to  have 
 been  the  costume  of  Elijah,  according  to  2  Kings 
 i.  8  ;  and  it  was  the  dress  of  John  the  Baptist. 
 Hairy  sackcloth  is,  in  the  Bible,  the  symbol  of 
 repentance  (compare  Is.  xx.  11,  12,  and  i  Kings 
 xxi.  27).  This  costume  of  the  prophets  was  a 
 sermo  propheiicus  rcalis,  a  prophetic  preaching  by 
 fact.  The  prophetic  preacher  comes  forward  in 
 the  form  of  personified  repentance.  What  he  does 
 exhibits  to  the  people  what  they  should  do.  Be- 
 fore he  has  opened  his  lips  his  external  appearance 
 proclaims  fieravoe'iTe,  repiut. 
 
 II.  Oji  the  Historical  Works  of  Isaiah. — Besides 
 the  collection  of  prophecies  which  has  been  pre- 
 served to  us,  Isaiah  also  wrote  two  historical  works. 
 It  was  part  of  the  vocation  of  the  prophets  to  write 
 the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  to  exhibit  in 
 this  history  the  workings  of  the  law  of  retribution, 
 and  to  exhort  to  the  true  worship  of  the  Lord. 
 History,  as  written  by  the  prophets,  is  itself  retro- 
 verted  prophecy,  and,  as  such,  offers  rich  materials 
 for  prophecy  strictly  so-called.  Since  all  the  acts 
 of  God  proceed  from  his  essence,  a  complete  un- 
 derstanding of  the  past  implies  also  the  future  ; 
 and,  vice  versd,  a  complete  understanding  of  the 
 future  implies  a  knowledge  of  the  past.  Most  of 
 the  historical  books  in  the  O.  T.  have  been  written 
 by  prophets.  The  collectors  of  the  Canon  placed 
 most  of  these  books  under  the  head  D''N''33,  p7-o- 
 phets  ;  hence,  it  appears  that,  even  when  these  his- 
 torical works  were  re-modelled  by  later  editors, 
 these  editors  were  themselves  prophets.  The 
 Chronicles  are  not  placed  among  the  D''X''33  :  we 
 may,  therefore,  conclude  that  they  were  not  written 
 by  a  prophet.  But  their  author  constantly  indi- 
 cates that  he  composed  his  work  from  abstracts 
 taken  verbatim  from  historical  monographies  written 
 by  the  prophets  ;  consequently  the  books  of  Ruth, 
 Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther,  are  the  only  histori- 
 cal books  of  the  O.  T.  which  did  not  originate 
 from  prophets. 
 
 The  first  historical  work  of  Isaiah  was  a  bio- 
 graphy of  King  Uzziah  (comp.  2  Chron.  xxvi.  22), 
 '  Now  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Uzziah,  first  and  last, 
 did  Isaiah  the  prophet,  the  son  of  Amoz,  write.' 
 The  second  historical  work  of  Isaiah  was  a  bio- 
 graphy of  King  Hezekiah,  which  was  subsequently 
 inserted  in  the  annals  of  Judah  and  Israel.  These 
 annals  consisted  of  a  series  of  prophetic  mono- 
 graphies, which  were  received  partly  entire,  partly 
 in  abstracts,  and  are  the  chief  source  from  which 
 the  information  contained  in  the  Chronicles  is  de- 
 rived. In  this  work  of  Isaiah,  although  its  con- 
 tents were  chiefly  historical,  numerous  prophecies 
 were  inserted.  Hence  it  is  called  in  2  Chron. 
 xxxii.  32,  1^"'J;t^"'  prn.  The  vision  of  Isaiah.  In 
 a  similar  manner  the  biography  of  Solomon  by 
 Ahijah  is  called  in  2  Chron.  ix.  29,  '  the  prophecy 
 of  Ahijah.'  The  two  historical  works  of  Isaiah 
 were  lost,  together  with  the  annals  of  Judah  and 
 Israel,  into  which  they  were  embodied.  Whatever 
 these  annals  contained  that  was  of  importance  for 
 all  ages,  has  been  preserved  to  us  by  being  re- 
 ceived into  the  historical  books  of  the  O.  T.,  and 
 the  predictions  of  the  most  distinguished  prophets 
 have  been  formed  into  separate  collections.  After 
 this  was  effected,  less  care  was  taken  to  preserve 
 the  more  diffuse  annals,  which  also  comprehended 
 many  statements,  of  value  only  for  particular  times 
 and  places. 
 
 III.  TJte  integral  gemcineness  of  the  prophecies  of 
 
 Isaiah. — The  Jewish  synagogue,  and  the  Christian 
 church  during  all  ages,  have  considered  it  as  an 
 undoubted  fact  that  the  prophecies  which  bear  the 
 name  of  Isaiah  really  originated  from  that  prophet. 
 Even  Spinoza  did  not  expressly  assert  in  his  Trac- 
 tatits  Theologico-Politicus  (viii.  8),  that  the  book  oi 
 Isaiah  consisted  of  a  collection  originating  from  a 
 variety  of  authors,  although  it  is  usually  considered 
 that  he  maintained  this  opinion.  But  in  the  last 
 quarter  of  the  i8th  century  this  prevailing  convic- 
 tion appeared  to  some  divines  to  be  inconvenient. 
 In  the  theology  of  the  natural  man  it  passed  as 
 certain,  that  nature  was  complete  in  itself,  and  that 
 prophecies,  as  well  as  miracles,  never  had  occurred, 
 and  were  even  impossible.  Whoever  is  spell- 
 bound within  the  limits  of  nature,  and  has  never 
 felt  the  influence  of  a  supernatural  principle  upon 
 his  own  heart,  is  incapable  of  understanding  the 
 supernatural  in  history,  and  feels  a  lively  interest  in 
 setting  it  aside,  not  only  on  account  of  its  appear- 
 ing to  him  to  be  strange  and  awful,  but  also  be- 
 cause supernatural  events  are  facts  of  accusation 
 against  the  merely  natural  man.  The  assumption 
 of  the  impossibility  of  miracles  necessarily  de- 
 manded that  the  genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch 
 should  be  rejected  ;  and,  in  a  similar  manner,  the 
 assumption  of  the  impossibility  of  prophecy  de- 
 manded that  a  great  portion  of  the  prophecies  of 
 Isaiah  should  be  rejected  likewise.  Here  also  the 
 wish  was  father  to  the  thought,  and  interest  led  to 
 the  decision  of  critical  questions,  the  arguments  for 
 which  were  subsequently  discovered.  All  those 
 who  attack  the  integral  genuineness  of  Isaiah  agree 
 in  considering  the  book  to  be  an  anthology,  or 
 gleanings  of  prophecies,  collected  after  the  Baby- 
 lonian exile,  although  they  differ  in  their  opinions 
 respecting  the  origin  of  this  collection.  Koppe 
 gave  gentle  hints  of  this  view,  which  was  first  ex- 
 plicitly supported  by  Eichhorn  in  his  Introduction. 
 Eichhorn  advances  the  hypothesis  that  a  collection 
 of  Isaian  prophecies  (which  might  have  been  aug- 
 mented, even  before  the  Babylonian  exile,  by  seve- 
 ral not  genuine  additions)  formed  the  basis  of  the 
 present  anthology,  and  that  the  collectors,  after  the 
 Babylonian  exile,  considering  that  the  scroll  on 
 which  they  were  written  did  not  form  a  volume 
 proportionate  to  the  size  of  the  three  other  pro- 
 phetic scrolls,  containing  Ezekiel,  Jeremiah,  and 
 the  minor  prophets,  annexed  to  the  Isaian  collec- 
 tion all  other  oracles  at  hand  whose  authors  were 
 not  known  to  the  editors.  In  this  supposition  of 
 the  non-identity  of  date  and  authorship,  most 
 learned  men,  and  lately  also  Hitzig  and  Ewald, 
 followed  Eichhorn.  Gesenius,  on  the  contrary, 
 maintained,  in  his  introduction  to  Isaiah,  that  all 
 the  non-Isaian  prophecies  extant  in  that  book 
 originated  from  one  author  and  were  of  the  same 
 date.  Umbreit  and  Koster  on  the  main  point 
 follow  Gesenius,  considering  chapters  xl.  to  Ixvi.  to 
 be  a  continuous  whole,  written  by  a  pseudo-Isaiah 
 who  lived  about  the  termination  of  the  Babylonian 
 exile.  In  reference  to  other  portions  of  the  book 
 of  Isaiah,  the  genuineness  of  which  has  been  ques- 
 tioned, Umbreit  expresses  himself  doubtingly,  and 
 Koster  assigns  them  to  Isaiah.  Gesenius  declines 
 to  answer  the  question,  how  it  happened  that  these 
 portions  were  ascribed  to  Isaiah,  but  Hitzig  felt 
 that  an  answer  to  it  might  be  expected.  He  ac- 
 cordingly attempts  to  explain  why  such  additions 
 were  made  to  Isaiah  and  not  to  any  of  the  other 
 prophetical  books,  by  the  extraordinaiy  veneration 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 414 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 in  which  Isaiah  was  held.  He  says  that  the  great 
 authority  of  Isaiah  occasioned  important  and  dis- 
 tinguished prophecies  to  be  placed  in  connection 
 with  his  name.  But  he  himself  soon  after  destroys 
 the  force  of  this  assertion  by  observing,  that  the 
 great  authority  of  Isaiah  was  especially  owing  to 
 those  prophecies  which  were  falsely  ascribed  to 
 him.  A  considerable  degree  of  suspicion  must, 
 however,  attach  to  the  boasted  certainty  of  such 
 critical  investigations,  if  we  notice  how  widely  these  i 
 learned  men  differ  in  defining  what  is  of  Isaian 
 origin  and  what  is  not,  although  they  are  all  linked 
 together  by  the  same  fundamental  tendency  and 
 interest.  There  are  veiy  few  portions  in  the  whole 
 collection  whose  genuineness  has  not  been  called  in 
 question  by  some  one  or  other  of  the  various  im- 
 pugners.  Almost  every  part  has  been  attacked 
 either  by  Doederlein,  or  by  Eichhorn  (who,  espe- 
 cially in  a  later  work  entitled  Die  Hebrdischen 
 Propheien,  Gottingen  1816  to  1S19,  goes  farther 
 than  all  the  others),  or  by  Justi  (who,  among  the 
 earlier  adversaries  of  the  integral  genuineness  of 
 Isaiah,  uses,  in  his  Vennischte  Schrifteii  (vols.  i. 
 and  ii.),  the  most  comprehensive,  and,  apparently, 
 the  best  grounded  arguments),  or  by  Paulus, 
 Rosenmiiller,  Bauer,  Bertholdt,  De  Wette,  Gese- 
 nius,  Hitzig,  twald,  Umbreit,  or  others.  The 
 only  portions  left  to  Isaiah  are  chap.  i.  3-9,  xvii., 
 XX.,  xxviii.,  xxxi.,  and  xxxiii.  All  the  other  chap- 
 ters are  defended  by  some  and  rejected  by  others  ; 
 they  are  also  referred  to  widely  different  dates.  In 
 the  most  modern  criticism,  however,  we  observe 
 an  inclination  again  to  extend  the  sphere  of  Isaian 
 genuineness  as  much  as  the  dogmatic  principle  and 
 system  of  the  critics  will  allow.  Modem  criticism 
 is  inclined  to  admit  the  genuineness  of  chaps,  i.  to 
 xxiii.,  with  the  only  exception  of  the  two  pro- 
 phecies against  Babylon  in  chaps,  xiii.  and  xiv., 
 and  in  chap.  xxi.  i-io.  Chaps,  xxviii. -xxxiii.  are 
 allowed  to  be  Isaian  by  Ewald,  Umbreit,  and 
 othei-s. 
 
 Divines,  who  were  not  linked  to  these  critics  by 
 the  same  dogmatical  interest,  undertook  to  defend 
 the  integrity  of  Isaiah,  as  Hensler,  Jesaias  nai 
 iibersetzt,  1 7S8  ;  Piper,  Intcgritas  Jesaia:,  1 793  ; 
 Beckhaus,  Ueber  die  Integritat  der  Prophetischen 
 'Schrifteii,  1796  ;  Jahn,  in  his  Einleitimg,  who  was 
 the  most  able  among  the  earlier  advocates ;  Dereser, 
 in  his  Bearbeitiiftg  des  Jesaias  iv.  I  ;  Greve,  V^ati- 
 cinia  Jesaia:,  Amsterdam  1810.  All  these  works 
 have  at  present  only  an  historical  value,  because 
 they  have  been  surpassed  by  two  recent  mono- 
 graphies.  The  first  is  by  Jo.  Ulr.  Moeller,  De 
 AiUheitiia  Oraciilorum  Jesaice,  ch.  xl. -bcvi. ,  Copen- 
 hagen 1825.  Although  this  work  professedly  de- 
 fends only  the  latter  portion  of  the  book  of  Isaiah, 
 there  occur  in  it  many  arguments  applicable  also 
 to  the  first  portion.  The  standard  work  on  this 
 subject  is  that  of  Kleinert,  Die  Aechtheit  des  Jesaias, 
 vol.  i.,  Berlin  1829.  It  is,  however,  very  diftuse, 
 and  contains  too  many  hypotheses.  The  compre- 
 hensive work  of  Schleier,  Wiirdigmig  der  Einiviirfe 
 gegen  die  Altteslamctitlichcii  Weissagiingen  im  'Je- 
 saias, chaps,  xiii.  and  xiv.,  of  course  refers  more 
 especially  to  these  chapters,  but  indirectly  refers  also 
 to  all  the  other  portions  whose  authenticity  has  been 
 attacked.  Since  the  objections  against  the  various 
 parts  of  Isaiah  are  all  of  the  same  character,  it  is 
 very  inconsistent  in  Koster,  in  his  work  Die  Pro- 
 pheten  des  alten  Testamentes,  to  defend,  in  page  I02, 
 the  genuineness  of  chaps,  xiii.,  xiv.,  and  x.\i.  ;  but 
 
 nevertheless,  in  pages  117  and  297,  to  ascribe 
 chaps,  xl.-lxvi.  to  a  pseudo-Isaiah. 
 
 After  this  sui-vey  of  the  present  state  of  the  in- 
 quiry, we  proceed  to  furnish,  first,  the  external 
 arguments  for  the  integral  genuineness  of  Isaiah. 
 
 I.  The  most  ancient  testimony  in  favour  of 
 Isaiah's  being  the  author  of  all  the  portions  of  the 
 collection  which  bears  his  name,  is  contained  in  the 
 heading  of  the  whole  (i.  l),  '  The  vision  of  Isaiah, 
 the  son  of  Amoz,  which  he  saw  concerning  J  udah 
 and  Jerusalem,  in  the  days  of  Uzziah,  jotham, 
 Ahaz,  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah.'  It  is  here  clearly 
 stated  that  Isaiah  was  the  author  of  the  following 
 prophecies,  uttered  during  the  reign  of  four  suc- 
 cessive kings.  This  inscription  is  of  great  import- 
 ance, even  if  it  originated  not  from  Isaiah,  but 
 from  a  later  compiler.  If  we  adopt  the  latest  date 
 at  which  this  compilation  could  have  been  made, 
 we  must  fix  it  at  the  time  of  its  reception  into  the 
 canon  in  the  days  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Con- 
 sequently the  compiler  could  not  be  separated  by 
 many  years  from  the  pseudo-Isaiah,  who  is  said  to 
 have  prophesied  just  before  Babylon  was  conquered, 
 or  who,  according  to  most  critics,  wrote  even  after 
 the  fall  of  Babylon.  It  is  not  credible  that  a  com- 
 piler living  so  near  the  times  of  the  author,  should 
 have  erroneously  ascribed  these  prophecies  to 
 Isaiah,  who  lived  so  much  earlier,  especially  if  we 
 bear  in  mind  that  this  so-called  pseudo-Isaiah  must 
 have  been  a  very  remarkable  person  in  an  age  so 
 devoid  of  the  prophetic  spirit  as  that  in  which  he  is 
 said  to  have  lived. 
 
 It  is  still  less  credible  that  a  pseudo-Isaiah  should 
 himself  have  fraudulently  ascribed  his  prophecies  to 
 Isaiah.  None  of  the  adversaries  of  the  genuine- 
 ness of  the  book  make  such  an  assertion. 
 
 If  the  compiler  lived  before  the  exile,  the  in- 
 scription appears  to  be  of  still  greater  importance. 
 That  the  collection  was  made  so  early  is  very 
 likely,  from  the  circumstance  that  Jeremiah  and 
 other  prophets  apparently  made  use  of  the  pro- 
 phecies of  Isaiah.  This  fact  indicates  that  the 
 prophecies  of  Isaiah  early  excited  a  lively  interest, 
 and  that  the  compiler  must  have  lived  at  a  period 
 earlier  than  that  which  is  ascribed  to  the  pseudo- 
 Isaiah  himself.  From  all  this  we  infer  that  the 
 compiler  lived  before  the  exile.  The  adversaries 
 themselves  felt  the  weight  of  this  argument.  They, 
 therefore,  attempted  to  remove  it  by  various  hypo- 
 theses, which  received  a  semblance  of  probability 
 from  the  circumstance  that  even  the  considerate 
 Vitringa  had  called  in  question  the  genuineness 
 of  the  heading.  Vitringa  conjectured  that  this 
 heading  belonged  originally  to  the  first  chapter 
 alone.  He  further  conjectured  that  it  originally 
 contained  only  the  words,  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  the 
 son  of  Amoz,  which  he  saw  concerning  Judah  and 
 Jerusalem.  The  following  words,  he  says,  were 
 added  by  the  compiler,  who  enlarged  the  particular 
 inscription  of  the  first  chapter  to  a  general  one  of 
 the  whole  collection.  According  to  Vitringa  the 
 inscription  does  not  suit  the  whole  book,  the  con- 
 tents of  which  are  not  confined  to  Judah  and  Jeru- 
 salem alone.  This  had  been  felt  even  by  Kimchi, 
 who,  anticipating  the  objection,  observes,  qjuT' 
 ciijique  contra  gcntes  prof ert,  ea  omnia  propter  Judain 
 dicit.  Whatsoever  Isaiah  utters  against  the  nations, 
 he  says  on  account  of  Judah.  Judah  and  Jerusalem 
 are  the  chief  subject,  and,  in  a  certain  sense,  the 
 only  subject  of  prophecy.  There  is  no  prophecy 
 concerning  other  nations  without  a  bearing  upon 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 415 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 the  covenant- people.  If  this  beanng  should  be 
 wanting  in  any  portion  of  prophecy,  that  portion 
 would  be  a  piece  of  divination  and  soothsaying. 
 No  prophet  against  foreign  nations  prophesied  con- 
 cerning them  with  the  view  to  spread  his  predictions 
 among  them,  because  the  mission  of  all  prophets  is 
 to  Israel.  The  predictions  against  foreign  nations 
 are  intended  to  preserve  the  covenant-people  from 
 despair,  and  to  strengthen  their  faith  in  the  omni- 
 potence and  justice  of  their  God.  These  predic- 
 tions are  intended  to  annihilate  the  reliance  upon 
 political  combinations  and  human  confederacies. 
 They  are  intended  to  lead  Israel  to  the  question, 
 *  If  they  do  these  things  in  the  gi^een  tree,  what 
 shall  be  done  in  the  dry  ?'  If  this  is  the  punish- 
 ment of  those  who  are  less  intimately  allied  with 
 God,  what  shall  then  become  of  us  to  whom  he 
 has  more  clearly  revealed  himself?  But  they  are 
 also  intended  to  indicate  the  future  conversion  of 
 the  heathen,  and  to  open  to  the  view  of  the  faith- 
 ful the  future  gloiy  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  its 
 final  victory  over  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  ;  and 
 thus  to  extirpate  all  narrow-minded  nationality. 
 God  shall  be  revealed  not  only  as  Jehovah  but  also 
 as  Elohim.  His  relation  to  Israel  is  misunder- 
 stood, if  that  relation  is  exclusively  kept  in  view 
 without  any  regard  to  the  universe.  Therefore  the 
 whole  collection  is  justly  entitled  Prophecies  con- 
 cerning Judah  and  Jerusalem.  No  matter  whether 
 this  inscription  originated  from  Isaiah  himself  or 
 from  an  ancient  compiler.  That  the  word  jlTn 
 means  not  merely  a  vision,  but  also  a  collection  of 
 visions  and  prophecies,  may  be  learned  from  2 
 Chron.  xxxii.  32,  and  Nahum  i.  I.  It  means  a 
 collection  of  prophecies  and  visions  united  like  a 
 picture  in  an  historical  frame  (comp.  Jer.  xiv.  14), 
 although  it  may  also  denote  one  separate  prophecy, 
 as  in  Obadiah,  ver.  I.  |irn  has  no  plural  (comp. 
 Hitzig's  Commentary  on  ch.  i.  i  ;  Ewald,  Fro- 
 fheten  i.,  p.  59). 
 
 The  inscription  in  ch.  i.  i  has  a  general  bearing 
 upon  the  whole  collection.  Then  follows  the  first 
 portion,  which  contains,  as  it  were,  the  general 
 prophetic  programme.  Thereupon  follows  a  series 
 of  prophecies  directly  bearing  upon  Judah  and 
 Jerusalem,  commencing  again  with  a  particular 
 heading  (ii.  i).  To  this  succeeds  a  series  of  pro- 
 phecies indirectly  bearing  upon  Judah  and  Jeru- 
 salem, but  directly  upon  foreign  nations.  The  first 
 of  this  series  has  again  its  own  heading  (xiii.  i). 
 
 Gesenius,  advancing  in  the  direction  to  which 
 Vitringa  had  pointed,  although  he  grants  the  in- 
 tegrity of  ch.  i.  I,  nevertheless  maintains  that 
 this  heading  belonged  originally  only  to  chaps. 
 i. -xii. ,  in  which  were  contained  genuine  prophecies 
 of  Isaiah.  To  this  collection,  he  asserts,  were 
 afterwards  subjoined  the  anthologies  contained  in 
 the  following  chapters,  and  the  heading  was  then 
 misunderstood  as  applying  to  the  whole  volume. 
 This  opinion  is  more  inconsistent  than  that  of  Vit- 
 ringa, since  there  occur  in  the  first  twelve  chapters 
 two  prophecies  against  foreign  nations  ;  one  against 
 the  Assyrians,  in  ch.  x.,  and  another  against  Eph- 
 raim,  in  ch.  ix. 
 
 Vitringa,  Gesenius,  and  their  followers,  are  also 
 refuted  by  the  parallel  passage  in  the  heading  of 
 Amos,  '  The  words  of  Amos,  which  he  saw  con- 
 cerning Israel.'  The  prophecies  of  Amos  in  gene- 
 ral are  here  said  to  be  concerning  Israel,  although 
 there  are,  as  in  Isaiah,  several  against  foreign  na- 
 tions, a  series  of  which  stands  even  at  the  com- 
 
 mencement of  the  book.  To  this  we  may  add  the 
 similarity  of  the  headings  of  other  prophetical 
 books.  For  instance,  the  commencement  of  Jere- 
 miah, Hosea,  Micah,  and  Zephaniah. 
 
 Ewald  spoils  the  argument  of  Vitringa  still  more 
 than  Gesenius,  by  extending  the  original  collection 
 to  ch.  xxiii. ,  and  thus  introducing  within  the  cycle 
 headed  by  the  inscription,  whose  genuineness  he 
 grants,  most  of  the  predictions  against  foreign  na- 
 tions. Whoever  subjoined  the  subsequent  portions 
 to  the  so-called  original  collection,  did  it  only  be- 
 cause he  perceived  that  these  portions  could  be 
 brought  under  the  general  heading.  He  could  only 
 have  been  induced  to  make  the  so-called  additions, 
 because  he  perceived  that  the  heading  applied  to 
 the  whole :  consequently  neither  Gesenius  nor 
 Ewald  rid  themselves  of  the  troublesome  authority 
 of  ch.  i.  I ;  the  words  of  which  have  the  more 
 weight,  since  all  critics  ascribe  to  the  headings  of 
 the  prophetical  books  a  far  greater  authority  than 
 to  the  headings  of  the  Psalms,  and  agree  in  saying 
 that  nothing  but  the  most  stringent  arguments 
 should  induce  us  to  reject  the  statements  contained 
 in  these  prophetical  headings. 
 
 2.  It  cannot  be  proved  that  there  ever  existed  a::  j 
 so-called  prophetic  anthology  as  has  been  supposed 
 to  exist  in  the  book  of  Isaiah.  We  find  nothing 
 analogous  in  the  whole  range  of  prophetic  litera- 
 ture. It  is  generally  granted  that  the  collections 
 bearing  the  names  of  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  contain 
 only  productions  of  those  authors  whose  name  they 
 bear.  In  the  book  of  the  minor  prophets,  the 
 property  of  each  is  strictly  distinguished  from  the 
 rest  by  headings.  The  genuineness  of  only  the 
 second  portion  of  Zechariah  has  been  attacked  ; 
 and  this  with  very  feeble  arguments,  which  have 
 been  refuted.  De  Wette  himself  has,  in  the  latest 
 editions  of  his  Introdiiciion,  confessed  that  on  this 
 point  he  is  vanquished. 
 
 But  even  if  it  could  be  proved  that  the  prophe- 
 cies of  Zechariah  belonged  to  two  different  authors, 
 namely,  as  Bertholdt  and  Gesenius  suppose,  to  the 
 two  Zechariahs,  each  of  whom  happened  to  be  the 
 son  of  a  Barechiah,  this  identity  of  names  might  be 
 considered  an  inducement  for  uniting  the  produc- 
 tions of  the  two  authors  in  one  collection :  still 
 this  case  would  not  be  analogous  to  what  is  as- 
 serted to  be  the  fact  in  Isaiah.  In  Isaiah,  it  is  al- 
 leged not  only  that  a  series  of  chapters  belonging 
 to  a  different  author  were  subjoined,  commencing 
 about  chap,  xxxiv.,  but  it  is  affirmed  that,  even  in 
 the  first  thirty-three  chapters,  the  genuine  and  spu- 
 rious portions  are  intermixed.  Before  we  admit 
 that  the  compilers  proceeded  here  in  a  manner  so 
 unreasonable,  and  so  contrary  to  their  usual  cus- 
 tom, we  must  expect  some  cogent  proof  to  be  ad- 
 duced. Gesenius  declares  that  he  would  not 
 attempt  to  touch  this  problem.  This  is  as  much 
 as  to  admit  the  vahdity  of  our  objection.  Eich- 
 horn  supposes  that  the  spurious  additions  were 
 made  because  the  scroll  otherwise  would  not  have 
 been  filled  up.  But  this  fuga  vacni,  this  abhor- 
 rence of  a  vacuum,  does  not  explain  the  intermix- 
 ture of  the  spurious  with  the  genuine.  It  does  not 
 explain  why  the  additions  were  not  all  subjoined  at 
 the  end  of  the  genuine  portions.  Doederlein  creates 
 for  himself  a  second  Isaiah,  son  of  Amoz,  living  at 
 the  conclusion  of  the  exile.  But  even  this  fiction 
 does  not  explain  why  the  property  of  these  two 
 prophets  was  intermixed  in  spite  of  their  being 
 separated  from  each  other  by  two  centuries,  and  so 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 416 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 intermixed  that  it  is  now  difficult  to  say  which  be- 
 longs to  which.  Augusti  supposes  that  the  spurious 
 y)ieces  were  added  to  the  genuine  on  account  of 
 their  being  written  entirely  in  the  spirit  and  style 
 of  Isaiah.  But  in  this  he  seems  to  contradict  him- 
 self, since  he  bases  his  attack  against  their  authen- 
 ticity upon  the  assertion  that  they  differed  from 
 Isaiah  in  spirit  and  manner.  The  style  of  Isaiah 
 was  certainly  not  the  style  of  the  age  in  which  the 
 pseudo-Isaiah  is  said  to  have  lived.  Justi  supposes 
 that  the  prediction  concerning  the  Babylonian  exile, 
 in  ch.  xxxix.  led  to  the  addition  of  the  whole  of  the 
 second  portion.  But  this  hypothesis  is  improbable 
 and  without  analogy,  and  it  does  not  explain  the 
 intermixture  of  the  genuine  with  the  spurious  in  the 
 first  portion. 
 
 How  untenable  all  these  hypotheses  are  may  be 
 readily  perceived  from  the  fact  that  each  of  them 
 remained  the  almost  exclusiveproperty  of  its  author, 
 and  that  each  following  critic  felt  himself  prompted 
 to  discover  a  new  hypothesis,  until  Gesenius  endea- 
 voured to  stop  them  by  cutting  the  Gordian  knot. 
 Hitzig,  however,  again  attempted  to  unloose  it, 
 but,  as  we  have  already  seen,  unsuccessfully. 
 Ewald  maintains  that  the  compiler  never  intended 
 that  chaps,  xl.-lxvi.  should  belong  to  Isaiah,  and  that 
 the  last  twenty-six  chapters  had  been  subjoined 
 merely  in  order  to  presei've  them  the  better.  But  it 
 is  untrue  that  the  first  portion  is  unconnected  with 
 these  chapters.  The  first  portion  terminates  with  the 
 prediction  of  the  Babylonian  exile,  and  the  second 
 commences  with  the  annunciation  of  a  future  re- 
 demption from  this  captivity.  Chaps,  xl.-lxvi.  have 
 no  heading  of  their  own ;  which  proves  that  the 
 compiler  annexed  them  as  Isaian,  and  intended 
 them  to  be  read  as  such.  The  so-called  spurious 
 portions  in  the  first  part  of  Isaiah  were,  according 
 to  the  opinion  of  Ewald  (p.  62),  intermixed  with 
 the  genuine,  because  the  compiler  really  supposed 
 them  to  belong  to  Isaiah.  Thus  Ewald  admits 
 that  the  intermixed  pieces  have  the  testimony  of 
 the  compiler  in  favour  of  their  authenticity.  To 
 deny  that  this  testimony  extends  also  to  the  second 
 part,  is  an  arbitrary  assumption.  Now,  if  this  tes- 
 timony is  granted,  we  are  content.  With  it  we 
 gain  this  much,  that  the  attacked  portions  have  the 
 presumption  of  genuineness  in  their  favour,  and 
 that,  therefore,  very  substantial  reasons  are  required 
 for  denying  their  Isaian  origin.  This  is  all  that  we 
 want. 
 
 3.  According  to  the  opinion  of  several  critics,  all 
 the  spurious  portions  of  Isaiah  belong  to  one  and 
 the  same  author.  But  it  so  happens  that  the  por- 
 tion which  is  most  emphatically  declared  to  be 
 spurious,  namely,  chaps,  xiii.  and  xiv.,  bear  an 
 inscription  which  expressly  ascribes  them  to  Isaiah. 
 Now,  as  the  internal  arguments  against  the  authen- 
 ticity of  all  the  portions  which  are  said  to  be  spuri- 
 ous are  nearly  identical,  if  the  opposition  to  chaps, 
 xiii.  and  xiv.  is  given  up,  it  cannot  with  consistency 
 be  maintained  against  the  other  portions.  This 
 argument  serves  also  as  an  answer  to  those  who 
 ascribe  the  portions  which  they  consider  spurious  to 
 several  authors.  The  contents  of  these  portions 
 are  similar.  They  contain  predictions  of  the  fall 
 of  Babylon,  and  of  the  redemption  of  Israel  from 
 captivity.  Whatever  proves  the  genuineness  of 
 one  of  these  portions,^  indirectly  proves  the  others 
 also  to  be  genuine. 
 
 4.  According  to  Josephus  {Aniiq.  xi.  I.  I,  2) 
 Cyrus  was  induced  by  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  re- 
 
 specting him  to  allow  the  return  of  the  Jews,  ami 
 to  aid  them  in  rebuilding  the  temple.  The  credi- 
 bility of  Josephus,  who  in  regard  to  facts  of 
 ancient  history  is  not  always  to  be  relied  upon,  is 
 here  supported  by  two  circumstances.  First,  the 
 favour  shewn  by  Cyrus  to  the  Jews,  which  remains 
 inexplicable  except  by  the  fact  mentioned,  in  com- 
 bination with  the  influence  of  Daniel.  In  modern 
 times,  the  favour  of  Cyrus  to  the  Jews  has  been 
 called  a  prudential  measure ;  but  it  does  not  appear 
 what  he  could  either  hope  or  fear  from  a  peo]3le  so 
 enfeebled  as  the  Jews  were  at  that  period.  It  has 
 been  added  that  Cyrus  was  favourable  to  the  Jews 
 on  account  of  the  similarity  between  the  Persian 
 and  the  Jewish  religion;  but  there  is  no  historical 
 proof  that  the  Persians,  on  any  other  occasion,  fa- 
 voured the  jews  on  account  of  their  religion.  The 
 favours  shewn  to  Nehemiah  on  behalf  of  Israel 
 were  only  personal  favours,  owing  to  his  position 
 at  the  Persian  court.  We  allow  that  all  this  would 
 be  insufficient  to  prove  the  correctness  of  the  above 
 statement  in  Josephus,  but  it  must  render  us  inclined 
 to  admit  its  truth. 
 
 The  second  argument  is  much  stronger :  it  is, 
 that  the  statement  of  Josephus  is  supported  by  the 
 edict  of  Cyrus  (Ezrai. )  This  edict  pre-supposes 
 the  fact  related  by  Josephus,  so  that  Jahn  calls  the 
 passage  in  Josephus  a  commentary  on  the  first 
 chapter  of  Ezra,  in  which  we  read  that  Cyrus  an- 
 nounces in  his  edict,  that  he  was  commanded  by 
 Jehovah  to  build  him  a  temple  in  Jerusalem,  and 
 that  he  received  all  the  conquered  kingdoms  of  the 
 earth  as  a  gift  from  Jehovah.  This  cannot  refer  to 
 any  other  predictions  of  the  prophet,  but  only  to 
 what  are  called  the  spurious  portions  of  Isaiah,  in 
 which  the  Lord  grants  to  Cyrus  all  his  future  con- 
 quests, and  appoints  him  to  be  the  restorer  of  his 
 temple  (comp.  xli.  2-4;  xliv.  24-2S ;  xiv.  1-13 ; 
 xlvi.  II  ;  xlviii.  13-15).  The  edict  adopts  almost 
 the  words  of  these  passages  (comp.  the  synopsis  in 
 the  above-mentioned  work  of  Kleinert,  p.  X42). 
 In  reply  to  this,  our  adversaries  assert  that  Cyrus 
 was  deceived  by  pseudo-prophecies  forged  in  the 
 name  of  Isaiah  ;  but  if  Cyrus  could  be  deceived  in 
 so  clumsy  a  manner,  he  was  not  the  man  that  his- 
 tory represents  him  ;  and  to  have  committed  for- 
 gery is  so  contrary  to  what  was  to  be  expected  from 
 the  author  of  chaps,  xl.-lxvi.,  that  even  the  feelings 
 of  our  opponents  revolt  at  the  supposition  that  the 
 pseudo-Isaiah  should  have  forged  vaticinia  post 
 etientum  in  the  name  of  the  prophet.  Had  these 
 prophecies  been  written,  as  it  is  alleged,  only  in 
 sight  of  the  conquest  of  Babylon,  Cyrus  would  have 
 been  deceived  before  the  eyes  of  the  author,  and 
 this  could  not  have  been  effected  without  collusion 
 on  the  part  of  the  author.  This  collusion  woula 
 be  undeniable,  since  the  author  again  and  again  re- 
 peats that  he  was  proclaiming  unheard-of  facts, 
 which  were  beyond  all  human  calculation. 
 
 5.  In  the  books  of  the  prophets  who  lived  after 
 Isaiah,  and  before  the  period  of  the  so-called 
 pseudo-Isaiah,  we  find  imitations  of  those  prophe- 
 cies which  have  been  ascribed  to  the  latter.  Since 
 Gesenius  has  demonstrated  that  all  the  portions 
 which  have  been  considered  spurious  are  to  be 
 ascribed  to  only  one  author,  it  can  be  shewn  that 
 they  were  all  in  existence  before  the  time  assigned 
 to  the  pseudo-Isaiah,  although  we  can  produce  the 
 imitations  of  only  some  of  these  portions.  But  even 
 those  opponents  who  ascribe  these  portions  to  dif- 
 ferent authors  must  grant  that  their  objections  are 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 417 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 Invalidated,  if  it  can  be  shewn  that  later  prophets 
 have  referred  to  these  portions,  because  the  argu- 
 ments employed  against  them  closely  resemble  each 
 other :  consequently  these  prophecies  stand  and 
 fall  together.  The  verbal  coincidence  between 
 Jeremiah  and  the  so-called  pseudo- Isaiah  is  in  this 
 respect  most  important.  Jeremiah  frequently  makes 
 use  of  the  earlier  prophets,  and  he  refers  equally, 
 and  in  the  same  manner,  to  the  portions  of  Isaiah 
 whose  genuineness  has  been  questioned,  as  to  those 
 which  are  deemed  authentic  (comp.  Kliper,  'Jeremias 
 librorum  sacrorn??i  interpres  atqite  vindex,  pp.  132- 
 155).  The  most  striking  is  the  coincidence  of  Jer.  1. , 
 li.,  with  the  predictions  against  Babylon  in  Isaiah. 
 Jeremiah  here  gives  to  God  the  appellation  CHp 
 
 ^i^S^^  the  Holy  one  of  Israel,  which  frequently  occurs 
 in  Isaiah,  especially  in  the  portions  whose  authenti- 
 city is  questioned,  but  is  found  only  three  times  in  the 
 other  books  of  the  O .  T.    Isaiah  uses  the  appellation 
 
 ?X"lt^*''  t;^'1"^p  with  peculiar  predilection,  because  it 
 points  out  the  omnipotent  covenant  fidelity  of  the 
 Lord  ;  which  was  to  be  considered,  especially  as  it 
 guarantees  the  truth  of  the  contents  of  those  pro- 
 phecies which  are  attacked  by  our  opponents. 
 This  circumstance  is  so  striking  that  Von  Coelln 
 and  De  Wette,  on  this  account,  and  in  contradic- 
 tion to  eveiy  argument,  declare  even  the  corre- 
 sponding chapter  of  Jeremiah  to  be  spurious.  This 
 is  certainly  a  desperate  stroke,  because  the  chapter 
 is  otherwise  written  in  the  very  characteristic  style 
 of  that  prophet.  This  desperation,  however,  gives 
 us  the  advantage  afforded  by  an  involuntary  testi- 
 mony in  favour  of  those  portions  of  Isaiah  which 
 have  been  attacked.  The  words  of  Isaiah,  in  ch. 
 li.  15,  '  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God  who  moves  the  sea 
 that  Its  waves  roar,'  are  repeated  in  Jer.  xxxi.  35. 
 The  image  of  the  cup  of  fury  in  Is.  li.  17,  is  in 
 Jer.  XXV.  15-29  transformed  into  a  symbolic  act, 
 according  to  his  custom  of  embodying  the  imagery 
 of  earlier  prophets,  and  especially  that  of  Isaiah. 
 In  order  to  prove  that  other  prophets  also  made  a 
 similar  use  of  Isaiah,  we  refer  to  Zephaniah  ii.  15, 
 where  we  find  Isaiah's  address  to  Babylon  applied 
 to  Nineveh,  '  Therefore  hear  now  this,  thou  that 
 art  given  to  pleasures,  that  dwellest  carelessly,  that 
 sayest  in  thine  heart  I  am,  and  none  else  beside 
 me,'  etc.  Zephaniah,  living  towards  the  termina- 
 tion of  prophetism,  has,  like  Jeremiah,  a  dependent 
 character,  and  has  here  even  repeated  the  charac- 
 teristic and  difficult  word  ''DSN.  Kiiper  (p.  13S) 
 has  clearly  demonstrated  that  the  passage  cannot 
 be  original  in  Zephaniah.  The  words  of  Isaiah 
 (hi.  7),  '  How  beautiful  upon  the  mountains  are  the 
 feet  of  him  that  bringeth  good  tidings,  tliat  pub- 
 lisheth  peace,'  are  repeated  by  Nahum  in  ch.  i. 
 15  (ii.  i);  and  what  he  adds,  'the  wicked  shall 
 no  more  pass  through  thee,'  agrees  remarkably 
 with  Is.  lii.  I,  '  for  henceforth  shall  no  more  come 
 into  thee  the  uncircumcised  and  the  unclean.'  Na- 
 hum iii.  7  contains  an  allusion  to  Is.  li.  19.  Beside 
 these  references  to  the  portions  of  Isaiah  which  are 
 said  to  be  spurious,  we  find  others  to  the  portions 
 which  are  deemed  genuine  (comp.  for  instance, 
 Nahum.  i.  13,  with  Is,  x.  27). 
 
 6.  Again,  the  most  ancient  production  of  Jewish 
 literature  after  the  completion  of  the  canon  fur- 
 nishes proof  of  the  integral  authenticity  of  Isaiah. 
 The  book  of  Jesus  vSirach,  commonly  called  Eccle- 
 siasticus,  was  written  as  early  as  the  3d  century  be- 
 fore Christ,  as  Hug  has  clearly  demonstrated,  in 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 opposition  to  those  who  place  it  in  the  2d  century  be- 
 fore Christ.  In  Ecclesiasticus  xlviii.  22-25,  Isaiah 
 is  thus  praised  :  'For  Hezekiah  had  done  the  thing 
 that  pleased  the  Lord,  and  was  strong  in  the  ways 
 of  David  his  father,  as  Isaiah  the  prophet,  who  was 
 great  and  faitliful  in  his  vision,  had  commanded 
 him.  In  his  time  the  sun  went  backward,  and  he 
 lengthened  the  king's  life.  He  saw  by  an  excel- 
 lent spirit  what  should  come  to  pass  at  the  last, 
 and  he  comforted  them  that  mourned  in  Sion.  He 
 shewed  what  should  come  to  pass  for  ever,  and 
 secret  things  or  ever  they  came.' 
 
 This  commendation  especially  refers,  as  even 
 Gesenius  grants,  to  the  disputed  portions  of  the 
 prophet,  in  which  we  find  predictions  of  the  most 
 distant  futurity.  The  comfort  for  Zion  is  found 
 more  particularly  in  the  second  part  of  Isaiah, 
 which  begins  with  the  words  '  Comfort  ye,  comfort 
 ye,  my  people.'  The  author  of  this  second  part 
 himself  says  (xlviii.  3),  'I  have  declared  the  formei 
 things  from  the  beginning  ;  and  they  went  forth  out 
 of  my  mouth,  and  I  shewed  them.'  Thus  we  per- 
 ceive that  Jesus  Sirach,  the  learned  scribe,  confi- 
 dently attributes  the  debated  passages  to  Isaiah,  in 
 such  a  manner  as  plainly  indicates  that  there  was  no 
 doubt  in  his  days  respecting  the  integral  genuine- 
 ness of  that  book,  which  has  the  testimony  of  his- 
 torical tradition  in  its  favour.  Jesus  Sirach  declares 
 his  intention  (Ecclus.  xliv.-l. )  to  praise  the  most 
 celebrated  men  of  his  nation.  The  whole  tenor  oi 
 these  chapters  shews  that  he  does  not  confine  him- 
 self to  celebrated  authors.  We  therefore  say  that 
 the  praise  which  he  bestows  upon  Isaiah  is  not  in- 
 tended for  the  book  personified,  but  for  the  pefson 
 of  the  prophet.  If  Jesus  Sirach  had  entertained 
 doubts  respecting  the  genuineness  of  those  pro- 
 phecies on  which,  in  particular,  he  bases  his  praise, 
 he  could  not  have  so  lauded  the  prophet. 
 
 In  the  Jewish  synagogue  the  integral  genuineness 
 of  Isaiah  has  always  been  recognised.  This  general 
 recognition  cannot  be  accounted  for  except  by  the 
 power  of  tradition  based  upon  truth  ;  audit  is  sup- 
 ported as  well  by  the  N.  T.,  in  which  Isaiah  is 
 quoted  as  the  author  of  the  whole  collection  which 
 bears  his  name,  as  also  by  the  express  testimony  of 
 Josephus,  especially  in  his  Antiquities  (x.  2.  2,  and 
 xi.  I.  l).  After  such  confirmation  it  would  be 
 superfluous  to  mention  the  Talmudi&ts. 
 
 7.  According  to  the  hypothesis  of  our  oppo- 
 nents, the  author  or  authors  of  the  spurious  por- 
 tions wrote  at  the  end  of  the  Babylonian  exile. 
 They  confess  that  these  portions  belong  to  the 
 finest  productions  of  prophetism.  Now  it  is  very 
 remarkable  that  in  the  far  from  scanty  historical 
 accounts  of  this  period,  considering  all  circum- 
 stances, no  mention  is  made  of  any  prophet  to 
 whom  we  could  well  ascribe  these  prophecies. 
 This  is  the  more  remarkable,  because  at  that  period 
 prophetism  was  on  the  wane,  and  the  few  prophets 
 who  still  existed  excited  on  that  account  the 
 greater  attention.  What  Ewald  (p.  57)  writes 
 concerning  the  time  about  the  conclusion  of  the 
 Babylonian  exile,  is  quite  unhistorical.  He  says, 
 '  In  this  highly  excited  period  of  liberty  regained, 
 and  of  a  national  church  re-established,  there  were 
 rapidly  produced  a  great  number  of  prophecies, 
 circulated  in  a  thousand  pamphlets,  many  of  which 
 were  of  great  poetical  beauty. '  What  Ewald  states 
 about  a  new  flood  of  prophetic  writings  which  then 
 poured  forth,  is  likewise  unhistorical.  History 
 shews  that  during  the  exile  prophetism  was  on  the 
 
 2  E 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 •118 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 wane.  What  we  read  in  the  books  of  Jeremiah 
 and  Ezekiel  proves  that  these  prophets  were  iso- 
 lated ;  and  from  the  book  of  Ezra  we  learn  what 
 was  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  new  colony.  If 
 we  compare  with  their  predecessors  the  prophets 
 who  then  propliesied,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and 
 Malachi,  we  cannot  say  much  about  a  revival  of 
 tlie  prophetic  spirit  towards  the  conclusion  of  the 
 exile.  Everything  concurs  to  shew  that  the  effi- 
 ciency of  prophetism  was  drawing  towards  its  end. 
 The  later  the  prophets  are,  the  more  do  they  lean 
 upon  the  earlier  prophets  ;  so  that  we  are  enabled 
 to  trace  the  gradual  transition  of  prophetism  into 
 the  learning  of  scribes.  Prophetism  dug,  as  it 
 were,  its  own  grave.  The  authority  whicli  it  de- 
 mands for  its  earlier  productions  necessarily  caused 
 that  the  later  were  dependent  upon  the  earlier ; 
 and  the  more  this  became  the  case  during  the  p>ro- 
 gress  of  time,  the  more  limited  became  the  field  for 
 new  productions.  It  is  not  only  unhistorical,  but, 
 according  to  the  condition  of  the  later  produc- 
 tions of  prophecy,  impossible,  that  about  the  con- 
 clusion of  the  exile  there  should  have  sprung  up 
 a  fresh  prophetic  literature  of  great  extent  In 
 this  period  we  hear  only  the  echo  of  prophecy. 
 That  one  of  the  later  prophets  of  whom  we  possess 
 most,  namely  Zechariah,  leans  entirely  upon  Jere- 
 miah and  Ezekiel,  as  upon  his  latest  predecessors. 
 There  is  not  a  vestige  of  an  intervening  prophetic 
 literature.  The  feebleness  of  our  opponents  is 
 manifested  by  their  being  obliged  to  have  recourse 
 to  such  unhistorical  fi-ctions  in  order  to  defend  their 
 opinions. 
 
 Thus  we  have  seen  that  we  possess  a  series  of  ex- 
 ternal arguments  in  favour  of  the  integral  genuine- 
 ness of  Isaiah.  Each  of  these  arguments  is  of 
 importance,  and  in  their  combination  they  have  a 
 weight  which  could  only  be  counterbalanced  by  in- 
 surmountable difliculties  in  the  contents  of  these 
 prophecies.  We  now  proceed  to  shew  that  there 
 are  no  such  difficulties,  and  that  the  internal  argu- 
 ments unite  with  the  external  in  demonstrating  the 
 authenticity  of  Isaiah  as  a  whole. 
 
 I.  The  portions  of  Isaiah  which  have  been  de- 
 clared by  our  opponents  to  be  spurious,  are,  as  we 
 have  already  said,  almost  entirely  such  as  contain 
 prophecies  of  an  especially  definite  character.  It 
 is  this  very  definiteness  which  is  brought  forward  as 
 the  chief  argument  against  theirgenuineness.  Those 
 of  our  adversaries  who  go  farthest  assert  in  downright 
 terms  that  predictions  in  the  stricter  sense,  STich, 
 namely,  as  are  more  than  a  vague  foreboding,  are 
 imp>ossible.  The  more  considerate  of  our  oppo- 
 nents express  this  argument  in  milder  terms,  saying, 
 that  it  was  against  the  usage  of  the  Hebrew  pro- 
 phets to  prophesy  with  so  much  individuality,  or  to 
 give  to  their  prophecies  so  individual  a  bearing. 
 They  say  that  these  prophecies  were  never  anything 
 more  than  general  prophetic  descriptions,  and  that, 
 consequently,  where  we  find  a  definite  reference  to 
 historical  facts  quite  beyond  the  horizon  of  a  human 
 being  like  Isaiah,  we  are  enabled  by  analogy  to 
 declare  those  portions  of  the  work  in  which  they 
 occur  to  be  spurious. 
 
 Although  this  assertion  is  pronounced  with  great 
 assurance,  it  is  sufficiently  refuted  by  an  impartial 
 examination  of  the  prophetic  writings.  Our  op- 
 ponents have  attempted  to  prove  the  spuriousness 
 of  whatever  is  in  contradiction  with  this  assertion, 
 as,  for  instance,  the  book  of  Daniel ;  but  there  still 
 remain  a  number  of  prophecies  announcing  future 
 
 events  with  great  definiteness.  Micah,  for  example 
 (iv.  8-10),  announces  the  Babylonian  exile,  and  the 
 deliverance  from  that  exile,  one  hundred  and  fifty 
 years  before  its  accomplishment,  and  before  the 
 commencement  of  any  hostilities  between  Babylon 
 and  Judah,  and  evet)  before  Babylon  was  an  inde- 
 pendent state.  All  the  prophets,  commencing 
 with  the  earliest,  predict  the  coming  destruction  of 
 their  city  and  temple,  and  the  exile  of  the  people. 
 All  the  prophets  whose  predictions  refer  to  the  As- 
 syrian invasion,  coincide  in  asserting  that  the 
 Assyrians  would  NOT  be  instrumental  in  realising 
 these  predictions ;  that  Judah  should  be  delivered 
 from  those  enemies,  from  whom  to  be  delivered 
 seemed  impossible ;  and  this  not  by  Egyptian  aid, 
 which  seemed  to  be  the  least  unlikely,  but  by  an 
 immediate  intervention  of  the  Lord ;  and,  on  the 
 contraiy,  all  the  prophets  whose  predictions  refer 
 to  the  successors  of  the  Assyrians,  the  Chaldees, 
 unanimously  announce  that  these  were  to  fulfil  the 
 ancient  prediction,  and  exhort  to  resignation  to  this 
 inevitable  fate.  These  are  facts  quite  beyond  hu- 
 man calculation.  At  the  period  when  the  Chaldaean 
 empire  had  reached  the  summit  of  its  power,  Jere- 
 miah not  only  predicts  in  general  terms  its  fall,  and 
 the  destruction  of  its  chief  city,  but  also  details  par- 
 ticular circumstances  connected  therewith  ;  for  in- 
 stance, the  conquest  of  the  town  by  the  Medes  and 
 their  allies  ;  the  entrance  which  the  enemy  effected 
 through  the  dry  bed  of  the  Euphrates,  during  a 
 night  of  general  revelry  and  intoxication  ;  the  return 
 of  the  Israelites  after  the  reduction  of  the  town  ; 
 the  utter  destruction  and  desolation  of  this  city, 
 which  took  place,  although  not  at  once,  yet  cer- 
 tainly in  consequence  of  the  first  conquest,  so  that 
 its  site  can  scarcely  be  shewn  with  certainty.  In 
 general,  all  those  proud  ornaments  of  the  ancient 
 world,  whose  destruction  the  prophets  predicted — 
 Nineveh,  Babylon,  Tyre,  Memphis,  the  chief  cities 
 of  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  and  many  others 
 — have  perished,  and  the  nations  to  whom  the 
 prophets  threatened  annihilation — the  Ammonites, 
 Moabites,  Philistines,  and  Idumasans — have  en- 
 tirely disappeared  from  the  stage  of  history.  There 
 is  not  a  single  city  nor  a  single  people,  the  fate  of 
 which  has  been  at  variance  with  prophecy.  AU 
 this  is  not  a  casual  coincidence.  The  ruins  of  all 
 these  cities,  every  vestige  of  the  former  existence  of 
 those  once  flourishing  nations,  are  loud  speaking 
 witnesses,  testifying  to  the  futility  of  the  opinion 
 which  raises  into  a  fact  the  subjective  wish  that 
 prophecy  might  not  exist.  Zechariah  clearly  de- 
 scribes the  conquests  of  Alexander  (ix.  1-8).  He 
 foretells  that  the  Persian  empire,  which  he  specifies 
 by  the  symbolic  name  Hadrach,  shall  be  ruined  ; 
 that  Damascus  and  Hamath  shaU  be  conquered  ; 
 that  the  bulwarks  of  the  mighty  Tyre  shall  be 
 smitten  in  the  sea,  and  that  the  city  shall  be  burned ; 
 that  Gaza  shall  lose  its  king,  and  that  Ashdod  shall 
 be  peopled  with  the  lowest  rabble ;  and  that  Jeru- 
 salem shall  be  spared  during  all  these  troubles. 
 These  prophecies  were  fulfilled  during  the  expedi- 
 tion of  Alexander  (comp.  Jahn's  Einleitung,  vol. 
 i.  p.  84,  sq. ;  vol  ii.  p.  349,  sq. )  Eichhom  de- 
 spaired of  being  able  to  explain  the  exact  corre- 
 spondence of  the  fulfilmentwith  the  predictions;  he, 
 therefore,  in  his  work.  Die  Hebrdischen  Propheten, 
 endeavours  to  prove  that  these  prophecies  were 
 veiled  historical  descriptions.  He  has  recourse  to 
 the  most  violent  operations  in  order  to  support  this 
 hypothesis  ;  which  proves  how  fully  he  recognised 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 419 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 the  agreement  of  the  prophecies  with  their  fulfil- 
 ment, and  that  the  prophecies  are  more  than  gene- 
 ral poetical  descriptions.  The  Messianic  predictions 
 prove  that  the  prophecies  were  more  than  veiled 
 historical  descriptions.  There  is  scarcely  any  fact 
 in  Gospel  history,  from  the  birth  of  our  Saviour  at 
 Bethlehem  down  to  his  death,  which  is  unpredicted 
 by  a  prophetical  passage. 
 
 Eichhorn's  hypothesis  is  also  amply  refuted  by 
 the  unquestioned  portion  of  Isaiah.  How  can  it 
 be  explained  that  Isaiah  confidently  predicts  the  de- 
 struction of  the  empire  of  Israel  by  the  Assyrians, 
 and  the  preservation  of  the  empire  of  Judah  from 
 these  enemies,  and  that  he  with  certainty  knew  be- 
 forehand that  no  help  would  be  afforded  to  Judah 
 from  Egypt,  that  the  Assyrians  would  advance  to 
 the  gates  of  Jerusalem,  and  there  be  destroyed  only 
 by  the  judgment  of  the  Lord  ?  No  human  combi- 
 nations can  lead  to  such  results.  Savonarola,  for 
 instance,  was  a  pious  man,  and  an  acute  observer; 
 bnt  when  he  fancied  himself  to  be  a  prophet,  and 
 ventured  to  predict  events  which  should  come  to 
 pass,  he  was  immediately  refuted  by  facts  (comp. 
 BiograpJiie  Savonarola^ s,  von  Rudelbach). 
 
 If  we  had  nothing  of  prophetic  literature,  beside 
 the  portions  of  Isaiah  which  have  been  attacked, 
 they  alone  would  afford  an  ample  refutation  of  our 
 opponents,  because  they  contam  in  chapter  liii.  the 
 most  remarkable  of  O.  T.  prophecies,  predicting 
 the  sufferings  and  glory  of  our  Saviour.  If  it 
 can  be  proved  that  this  one  prophecy  necessarily 
 refers  to  Christ,  we  can  no  longer  feel  tempted  to 
 reject  other  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  on  account  of 
 their  referring  too  explicitly  to  some  event,  like  that 
 of  the  Babylonian  exile.  As  soon  as  only  one 
 genuine  prophecy  has  been  proved,  the  whole  argu- 
 ment of  our  opponents  falls  to  the  ground.  This 
 argument  is  also  opposed  by  the  authority  of  Christ 
 and  his  apostles ;  andwhoeverwill  consistently  main- 
 tain this  opinion  must  reject  the  authority  of  Christ. 
 The  prophets  are  described  in  the  N.  T.  not  as 
 acute  politicians,  or  as  poets  full  of  a  foreboding 
 genius,  but  as  messengers  of  God  raised  by  His 
 Spirit  above  the  intellectual  sphere  of  mere  man. 
 Christ  repeatedly  mentions  that  the  events  of  his 
 own  life  were  also  destined  to  realise  the  fulfilment 
 of  prophecy,  saying,  '  this  must  come  to  pass  in 
 order  that  the  Scripture  may  be  fulfilled.'  And 
 after  his  resurrection,  he  interprets  to  his  disciples 
 the  prophecies  concerning  himself  Peter,  speak- 
 ing of  the  prophets,  says,  in  his  First  Epistle  (i.  Ii), 
 '  Searching  what,  or  what  manner  of  time  the 
 Spirit  of  Christ,  which  was  in  them,  did  signify, 
 when  it  testified  beforehand  the  sufferings  of  Christ, 
 and  the  glory  that  should  follow  ;'  and,  in  his 
 Second  Epistle  (i.  21),  '  For  the  prophecy  came  not 
 in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man ;  but  holy  men  of  God 
 spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost — vwo 
 irvev/JLaros  ayiov  (fyepbjxevoi. 
 
 Since  we  have  shewn  that  there  are  in  the  Holy 
 Scriptures  definite  prophecies,  the  &  priori  argu- 
 ment of  our  opponents,  who  pretend  that  prophecy 
 is  useless,  loses  its  significance.  Even  if  we  could 
 not  understand  the  purpose  of  prophecy,  the  in- 
 quiry respecting  its  reality  should  nevertheless  be 
 independent  of  such  d  priori  reasoning,  since  the 
 cause  of  our  not  understanding  it  might  be  in 
 ourselves.  We  frequently  find,  after  we  have  been 
 raised  to  a  higher  position,  the  causes  of  facts 
 which  at  an  earlier  period  we  could  not  compre- 
 hend.    A  later  age  frequently  understands  what 
 
 was  hidden  to  the  preceding.  However,  the  pur- 
 pose of  definite  predictions  is  not  hidden  to  those 
 who  recognise  the  reality  of  the  divine  scheme  for 
 human  salvation. 
 
 There  is  one  truth  in  the  opinion  of  our  oppo- 
 nents. The  predictions  of  the  future  by  the  pro- 
 phets are  always  on  a  general  basis,  by  which 
 they  are  characteristically  distinguished  from  sooth- 
 saying. Real  prophecy  is  based  upon  the  idea 
 of  God.  The  acts  of  God  are  based  upon  his 
 essence,  and  have  therefore  the  character  of  ne- 
 cessity. The  most  elevated  prerogative  of  the 
 prophets  is  that  they  have  possessed  themselves  of 
 his  idea,  that  they  have  penetrated  into  his  es- 
 sence, that  they  have  become  conscious  of  the 
 eternal  laws  by  which  the  world  is  governed.  For 
 instance,  if  they  demonstrate  that  sin  is  the  perdi- 
 tion of  man,  that  where  the  carcase  is,  the  eagles 
 will  be  assembled,  the  most  important  point  in  this 
 prediction  is  not  the  HOW  but  the  WHAT  which 
 first  by  them  was  clearly  communicated  to  the  peo- 
 ple of  God,  and  of  which  the  lively  remembrance  is 
 by  them  kept  up.  But  if  the  prophets  had  merely 
 kept  to  the  THAT,  and  had  never  spoken  about 
 the  HOW,  or  if,  like  Savonarola,  they  had  errone- 
 ously described  this  HOW,  they  would  be  unfit 
 effectually  to  teach  the  that  to  those  people  who 
 have  not  yet  acquired  an  independent  idea  of  God. 
 According  to  human  weakness,  the  knowledge  of 
 the  FORM  is  requisite  in  order  to  fertilize  the  know- 
 ledge of  the  ESSENCE,  especially  in  a  mission  to  a 
 people  among  whom  formality  so  much  predomi- 
 nated as  among  the  people  of  the  Old  Covenant. 
 The  position  of  the  prophets  depends  upon  these 
 circumstances.  They  had  not,  like  the  priests,  an 
 external  warrant.  Therefore  Moses  (Deut.  xviii.) 
 directed  them  to  produce  true  prophecies  as  their 
 warrant.  According  to  ver.  22,  the  true  and  the 
 false  prophet  are  distinguished  by  the  fulfilment  or 
 non-fulfilment  of  prophecy.  This  criterion  is  de- 
 stroyed by  the  modern  opinion  respecting  pro- 
 phetism.  Without  this  warrant,  the  principal 
 point  of  prophetical  preaching,  the  doctrine  of  the 
 Messiah,  could  not  be  brought  to  the  knowledge 
 of  the  people,  as  being  of  primary  importance. 
 Without  this  fulfilment  the  prophets  had  no  answer 
 to  those  who  declared  that  the  hopes  raised  by 
 them  were  fantastic  and  fanatical. 
 
 It  is  true  that,  according  to  what  we  have  stated, 
 the  necessity  of  prophecy  arises  only  from  the 
 weakness  of  man.  Miracles  also  are  necessary 
 only  on  account  of  this  weakness.  Prophecy  is 
 necessary  only  under  certain  conditions  ;  but  these 
 conditions  were  fully  extant  during  the  period  of 
 the  ancient  Covenant.  During  the  New  Covenant 
 human  weakness  is  supported  by  other  and  more 
 powerful  means,  which  were  wanting  during  the 
 time  of  the  Old  Covenant  ;  especially  by  the  ope- 
 ration of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  upon  the  hearts  of  the 
 faithful  ;  which  operation  is  by  far  more  powerful 
 than  that  of  the  Spirit  of  God  during  the  Old  Cove- 
 nant ;  consequently,  definite  predictions  can  be 
 dispensed  with,  especially  since  the  faithful  of  the 
 N.  T.  derive  benefit  also  from  the  prophecies 
 granted  to  the  people  of  the  O.  T. 
 
 The  predictions  of  futurity  in  the  O.  T.  have  also 
 a  considerable  bearing  upon  the  contemporaries  of 
 the  prophet.  Consequently,  they  stand  not  so  iso- 
 lated and  unconnected  as  our  opponents  assert.  The 
 Chaldseans,  for  instance,  who  are  said  to  threaten 
 destruction  to  Israel,  were,  in  the  days  of  Isaiah, 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 42U 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 already  on  the  stage  of  history  ;  and  their  juvenile 
 power,  if  compared  with  the  decline  of  the  Assy- 
 rians, might  lead  to  the  conjecture  that  they  would 
 some  time  or  other  supplant  the  Assyrians  in  domi- 
 nion over  Asia.  Babylon,  certainly,  was  as  yet 
 under  Assyrian  government  ;  but  it  was  still  during 
 the  lifetime  of  the  prophet  that  this  city  tried  to 
 shake  off  their  yol<;e.  This  attempt  was  unsuccess- 
 ful, but  the  conditions  under  which  it  might  suc- 
 ceed at  a  future  period  were  already  in  existence. 
 The  future  exaltation  of  tliis  city  might  be  foreseen 
 from  histoiy,  and  its  future  fall  from  theology.  In 
 a  pagan  nation  success  is  always  the  forerunner  of 
 pride,  and  all  its  consequences.  And,  according 
 to  the  eternal  laws  by  which  God  governs  the 
 world,  an  overbearing  spirit  is  the  certain  forerun- 
 ner of  destruction.  The  future  liberation  of  Israel 
 might  also  be  theologically  foreseen  ;  and  we  can- 
 not look  upon  this  prediction  as  so  abrupt  as  a 
 prediction  of  the  deliverance  of  other  nations  would 
 have  been,  and  as,  for  instance,  a  false  prediction 
 of  the  deliverance  of  Moab  would  have  appeared. 
 Even  the  Pentateucli  emphatically  informs  us  that 
 the  covenant-people  cannot  be  given  up  to  final 
 perdition,  and  that  mercy  is  always  concealed 
 behind  the  judgments  which  befall  them. 
 
 2.  Attempts  have  been  made  to  demonstrate 
 the  spuriousness  of  several  portions  from  the  cir- 
 cumstance that  the  author  takes  his  position  not 
 in  the  period  of  Isaiah,  but  in  mucli  later  times, 
 namely,  those  of  the  exile.  It  has  been  said,  '  Let 
 it  be  granted  that  the  prophet  had  a  knowledge  of 
 futurity  :  in  that  case  we  cannot  suppose  that  he 
 would  predict  it  otlierwise  than  as  future,  and  he 
 cannot  proclaim  it  as  present.'  The  prophets, 
 however,  did  not  prophesy  in  a  state  of  calculating 
 reflection,  but  virb  irvevixaros  ayiov  (pepd/xevoi., 
 '  borne  along  by  the  Holy  Ghost.'  The  objects 
 offered  themselves  to  their  spiritual  vision.  On 
 that  account  they  are  frequently  called  stvrs,  to 
 whom  futurity  appears  as  present.  Even  Hebrew 
 grammar  has  long  ago  recognised  this  fact  in  the 
 terms  pra^terita  prophetica.  These  prophetical 
 prseter  tenses  indicate  a  time  ideally  past,  in  con- 
 tra-distinction  to  the  time  which  is  really  past. 
 Every  chapter  of  Isaiah  furnishes  examples  of  this 
 grammatical  fact.  Even  in  the  first  there  is  con- 
 tained a  remarkable  instance  of  it.  Interpreters 
 frequently  went  astray,  because  they  misunderstood 
 the  nature  of  prophecy,  and  took  the  praterita  pro- 
 phetica as  real  preterites  ;  consequently,  they 
 could  only  by  some  inconsistency  escape  from 
 Eichhorn's  opinion,  that  the  prophecies  were 
 veiled  historical  descriptions.  The  prophets  have 
 futurity  always  before  their  eyes.  Prophetism, 
 therefore,  is  subject  to  the  laws  of  poetry  more 
 than  to  those  of  history  (compare  the  ingenious 
 remarks  on  the  connection  of  poetry  and  prophet- 
 ism m  the  work  of  Steinbeck,  Der  Dic/iter  ein 
 Seher,  Leipzig  1836).  Prophetism  places  us  in 
 medias  res,  or  rather  the  prophet  is  placed  in  ?nedias 
 res.  The  Spirit  of  God  elevates  him  above  the 
 ien'a  firnia  of  common  reality,  and  of  common 
 perception.  The  prophet  beholds  as  connected 
 things  externally  separated,  if  they  are  linked  to- 
 gether by  their  internal  character.  The  prophet 
 beholds  what  is  distant  as  near,  if  its  hidden  basis, 
 although  concealed  to  the  eyes  of  flesh,  already 
 exists.  This  was,  for  instance,  the  case  with 
 Israel's  captivity  and  deliverance.  Neither  hap- 
 pened by   chance.     Both   events  proceeded  from 
 
 the  justice  and  mercy  of  God,  a  living  knowledge 
 of  which  necessarily  produced  the  beholding  know- 
 ledge of  the  same.  The  prophet  views  things  in 
 the  light  of  that  God  who  calls  the  things  that  are 
 not  as  though  they  were,  and  to  whom  the  future 
 is  present. 
 
 3.  What  the  prophet  says  about  what  is  present 
 to  him  (namely,  about  that  which  appears  to  him 
 in  the  form  of  the  present  time),  is  correctly  and 
 minutely  detailed  ;  and  what  he  describes  as  future, 
 are  ideal  and  animated  hopes  which  far  exceed  ter- 
 rene reality.  Hence  our  opponents  attempt  to 
 prove  that  the  present  time  in  those  portions  which 
 they  reject,  is  not  ideal  but  real  ;  and  that  the 
 author  was  actually  an  eye-witness  of  the  exile,  be- 
 cause, they  say,  if  the  prophet  merely  placed  him- 
 self in  the  period  of  the  exile,  then  this  present 
 time  would  be  ideal,  and  in  that  case  there  could 
 be  no  difference  between  this  ideally  present  time 
 and  the  more  distant  future.  But  we  question  this 
 fact  most  decidedly.  The  descriptions  of  the  per- 
 son of  Messiah  in  the  second  part  of  Isaiah  are  far 
 more  circumstantial  than  the  descriptions  of  the 
 person  of  Cyrus.  Of  Cyrus  these  prophecies  fur- 
 nish a  very  incomplete  description.  Whoever  does 
 not  fill  up  from  history  what  is  wanting,  obtains  a 
 very  imperfect  idea  of  Cyrus.  But  there  is  suffi- 
 cient information  to  show  the  relation  between  his- 
 tory and  prophecy  ;  and  nothing  more  was  required 
 than  that  the  essence  of  prophecy  should  be  clear. 
 The  form  might  remain  obscure  until  it  was  cleared 
 up  by  its  historical  fulfilment.  The  Messiah,  on 
 the  contrary,  is  accurately  depicted,  especially  in 
 ch.  liii.,  so  that  there  is  scarcely  wanting  any  essen- 
 tial trait.  It  is  quite  natural  that  there  should  be 
 greater  clearness  and  definiteness  here,  because  the 
 anti-type  of  redemption  stands  in  a  far  nearer  rela- 
 tion to  the  ideal  than  is  the  case  witli  Cyrus,  so 
 that  form  and  essence  less  diverge. 
 
 The  assertion  that  the  animated  hopes,  ex- 
 pressed in  the  second  part  of  Isaiah,  had  been  very 
 imperfectly  fulfilled,  proceeds  from  the  erroneous 
 supposition  that  these  hopes  were  to  be  entirely 
 fulfilled  in  the  times  immediately  following  the 
 exile.  But  if  we  must  grant  that  these  prophecies 
 refer  both  to  the  deliverance  from  captivity,  and  to 
 the  time  of  the  Messiali  in  its  whole  extent,  from 
 the  lowliness  of  Christ  to  the  glorious  completion 
 of  his  kingdom,  then  the  fulfilment  is  clearly  placed 
 before  our  eyes  ;  and  we  may  expect  that  whatever 
 is  yet  unfulfilled,  will,^in  due  time,  find  its  accom- 
 plishment. In  this  hope  we  are  supported  by  the 
 N.  T.,  and  still  more  by  the  nature  of  the  matter 
 in  question.  If  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  were 
 nothing  but  arbitrary  predictions  on  his  own  exter- 
 nal authority,  without  any  internal  warrant,  one 
 might  speak  here  of  an  evasion  of  the  difficulty  ; 
 but  as  the  matter  stands,  this  objection  proves  only 
 that  those  who  make  it  are  incapable  of  compre- 
 hending the  idea  which  pervades  the  whole  repre- 
 sentation. The  entire  salvation  which  the  Lord 
 has  destined  to  his  people  has  been  placed  before 
 the  spiritual  eye  of  the  prophet.  His  prediction  is 
 not  entirely  fulfilled  in  history,  so  that  we  could 
 say  we  have  now  done  with  it,  but  every  isolated 
 fulfilment  is  again  a  prediction  de  facto,  supporting 
 our  hope  of  the  final  accomplishment  of  the  whole 
 word  of  prophecy. 
 
 4.  Our  opponents  think  that  they  have  proved 
 that  a  portion  of  Isaiah  is  not  genuine,  if  they  can 
 show  that  there  occur  a  'i&w  Aramaic  words  and 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 421 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 forms  of  speech,  which  they  endeavour  to  explain 
 from  the  style  prevalent  in  a  period  later  than  Isaiah. 
 
 That  this  argument  is  very  feeble  even  our  oppo- 
 nents have  granted  in  instances  where  it  can  be 
 adduced  with  by  far  greater  stringency  than  in  the 
 questioned  portions  of  Isaiah.  This  appears  espe- 
 cially from  the  example  of  the  Song  of  Solomon, 
 in  which  there  occur  a  considerable  number  of 
 Aramaic  words  and  expressions,  said  to  belong  to 
 the  later  Hebrew  style.  Bertholdt,  Umbreit,  and 
 others,  base  upon  this  their  argument,  that  the 
 Song  of  Solomon  was  written  after  the  Babylonian 
 exile.  They  even  maintain  that  it  could  not  have 
 been  written  before  that  period.  On  the  contrary, 
 the  two  most  recent  commentators,  Ewald  and 
 Doepke,  say  most  decidedly  that  the  Song  of  Solo- 
 mon, in  spite  of  its  Aramaisms,  was  written  in  the 
 days  of  Solomon. 
 
 Hirzel,  in  his  work  De  Chaldaismi  Bihlici  ori- 
 gine,  Leipsic  1S30,  has  contributed  considerably  to 
 the  formation  of  a  correct  estimate  of  this  argu- 
 ment. He  has  proved  that  in  all  the  books  of 
 the  O.  T. ,  even  in  the  most  ancient,  there  occur  a 
 few  Chaldaisms.  This  may  be  explained  by  the 
 fact  that  the  patriarchs  were  surrounded  by  a  popu- 
 lation whose  language  was  Chaldee.  Such  Chal- 
 daisms are  especially  found  in  poetical  language  in 
 which  unusual  expressions  are  preferred.  Conse- 
 quently, not  a  few  isolated  Chaldaisms,  but  only 
 their  decided  prevalence,  or  a  Chaldee  tincture  of 
 the  whole  style,  can  prove  that  a  book  has  been 
 written  after  the  exile.  Nobody  can  assert  that 
 this  is  the  case  in  those  portions  of  Isaiah  whose 
 authenticity  has  been  questioned.  Even  our  oppo- 
 nents grant  that  the  Chaldaisms  in  this  portion  are 
 not  numerous.  After  what  have  erroneously  been 
 called  Chaldaisms  are  subtracted,  we  are  led  to  a 
 striking  result,  namely,  that  the  unquestionable  Chal- 
 daisms are  more  numerous  in  the  portions  of  Isaiah 
 of  which  the  genuineness  is  granted,  than  in  the 
 portions  which  have  been  called  spurious.  Hirzel, 
 an  entirely  unsuspected  witness,  mentions  in  his 
 work  De  Chaldaismo,  p.  9,  that  there  are  found 
 only  four  real  Chaldaisms  in  the  whole  of  Isaiah  ; 
 and  that  these  all  occur  in  the  portions  which  are 
 declared  genuine  ;  namely  in  vii.  14  (where,  how- 
 ever, if  the  grammatical  form  is  rightly  understood, 
 we  need  not  admit  a  Chaldaism) ;  xxix.  I  ;  xviii. 
 7  ;  xxi.  12. 
 
 5.  The  circumstance  that  the  diction  in  the 
 attacked  portions  of  Isaiah  belongs  to  the  first,  and 
 not  to  the  second  period  of  the  Hebrew  language, 
 must  render  us  strongly  mclined  to  admit  their 
 authenticity.  It  has  been  said  that  these  portions 
 were  written  during,  and  even  after,  the  Baby- 
 lonian exile,  when  the  ancient  Hebrew  language 
 fell  into  disuse,  and  the  vanquished  people  began 
 to  adopt  the  language  of  their  conquerors,  and 
 that  thus  many  Chaldaisms  penetrated  into  the 
 works  of  authors  who  wrote  in  ancient  Hebrew. 
 Since  this  is  not  the  case  in  the  attacked  portions 
 of  Isaiah,  granting  the  assertions  of  our  opponents 
 to  be  correct,  we  should  be  compelled  to  suppose 
 that  their  author  or  authors  had  intentionally  ab- 
 stained from  the  language  of  their  times,  and  pur- 
 posely imitated  the  purer  diction  of  former  ages. 
 That  this  is  not  quite  impossible  we  learn  from  the 
 prophecies  of  Haggai,  Malachi,  and  especially  from 
 those  of  Zechariah,  which  are  nearly  as  free  from 
 Chaldaisms  as  the  writings  before  the  exile.  But 
 it  is  improbable,  in  this  case,  because  the  pseudo- 
 
 Isaiah  is  stated  to  have  been  in  a  position  very 
 different  from  that  of  the  prophets  just  mentioned, 
 who  belonged  to  the  newly  returned  colony.  The 
 pseudo-Isaiah  has  been  placed  in  a  position  similar 
 to  that  of  the  strongly  Chaldaizing  Ezekiel  and 
 Daniel  ;  and  even  more  unfavouraljly  for  the 
 attainment  of  purity  of  diction,  because  he  had 
 not,  like  these  prophets,  spent  his  youth  in  Pales- 
 tine, but  is  said  to  have  grown  up  in  a  country  in 
 which  the  Aramsean  language  was  spoken  ;  conse- 
 quently, it  would  have  been  more  difficult  for  him 
 to  write  pure  Hebrew  than  for  Ezekiel  and  Daniel. 
 In  addition  to  this  it  ought  to  be  mentioned  that 
 an  artificial  abstinence  from  the  language  of  their 
 times  occurs  only  in  those  prophets  who  entirely 
 lean  upon  an  earlier  prophetic  literature  ;  but  that 
 union  of  purity  in  diction  with  independence, 
 which  is  manifest  in  the  attacked  portions  of  Isaiah, 
 is  nowhere  else  to  be  found. 
 
 The  force  of  this  argument  is  still  more  increased 
 when  we  observe  that  the  pretended  pseudo-Isaiah 
 has,  in  other  respects,  the  characteristics  of  the 
 authors  before  the  exile  ;  namely,  their  clearness 
 of  perception,  and  their  freshness  and  beauty  of 
 description.  This  belongs  to  him,  even  according 
 to  the  opinion  of  all  opponents.  These  excel- 
 lences are  not  quite  without  example  among  the 
 writers  after  the  exile,  but  they  occur  in  none  of 
 them  in  the  same  degree  ;  not  even  in  Zechariah, 
 who,  besides,  ought  not  to  be  compared  with  the 
 pseudo-Isaiah,  because  he  does  not  manifest  the 
 same  independence,  but  leans  entirely  upon  the 
 earlier  prophets.  To  these  characteristics  of  the 
 writers  before  the  exile  belongs  also  the  scarcity 
 of  visions  and  symbolic  actions,  and  what  is  con- 
 nected therewith  (because  it  proceeds  likewise  from 
 the  government  of  the  imagination),  the  natural- 
 ness and  correctness  of  poetical  images.  What 
 Umbreit  says  concerning  the  undisputedly  genuine 
 portions  of  Isaiah  fully  applies  also  to  the 
 disputed  portions  :  '  Our  prophet  is  more  an  oratoi 
 than  a  symbolic  seer.  He  has  subjected  the 
 external  imagery  to  the  intei^nal  government  qf 
 the  word.  The  few  symbols  which  he  exhibits 
 are  simple  and  easy  to  be  understood.  In  the  pro- 
 phets during  and  after  the  exile  visions  and  sym- 
 Ijolic  actions  prevail,  and  their  images  frequently 
 bear  a  grotesque  Babylonian  impress.  Only  those 
 authors,  after  the  exile,  have  not  this  character, 
 whose  style,  like  that  of  Haggai  and  Malachi. 
 does  not  rise  much  above  prose.  A  combination 
 of  vivacity,  originality,  and  vigour,  with  natural- 
 ness, simplicity,  and  correctness,  is  not  found  in 
 any  prophet  durmg  and  after  the  exile.'  Nothing 
 but  very  strong  arguments  could  induce  us  to  as- 
 cribe to  a  later  period  prophecies  which  rank  in 
 language  and  style  with  the  literary  monuments  of 
 the  earlier  period.  In  all  the  attacked  portions 
 of  Isaiah  independence  and  originality  are  mani- 
 fest in  such  a  degree,  as  to  make  them  hannonize 
 not  only  with  the  prophets  before  the  exile  in 
 general,  but  especially  with  the  earliest  cycle  of 
 these  prophets.  If  these  portions  were  spurious, 
 they  would  form  a  perfectly  isolated  exception, 
 which  we  cannot  admit,  since,  as  we  have  before 
 shewn,  the  leaning  of  the  later  prophets  upon  the 
 earlier  rests  upon  a  deep-seated  cause  arising  from 
 the  very  nature  of  prophetism.  A  prophet  form- 
 ing such  an  exception  would  stand,  as  it  were, 
 without  the  cycle  of  the  prophets.  We  cannot 
 imagine  such  an  exception. 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 422 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 6.  A  certain  difference  of  style  between  the 
 portions  called  genuine  and  those  called  spurious 
 does  not  prove  what  our  opponents  assert.  Such 
 a  difference  may  arise  from  various  causes  in  the 
 productions  of  one  and  the  same  author.  It  is  fre- 
 quently occasioned  by  a  difference  of  the  subject- 
 matter,  and  by  a  difference  of  mood  arising  there- 
 from ;  for  instance,  in  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah 
 against  foreign  nations,  the  style  is  more  elevated 
 and  elastic  than  in  the  home-prophecies.  How 
 little  this  difference  of  style  can  prove,  we  may 
 learn  by  comparing  with  each  other  the  prophecies 
 which  our  opponents  call  genuine;  for  instance, 
 ch.  ix.  7-x.  4.  The  genuineness  of  this  pro- 
 phecy is  not  subject  to  any  doubt,  although  it  has 
 not  that  swing  which  we  find  in  many  prophecies 
 of  the  first  part.  The  language  has  as  much  ease 
 as  that  in  the  second  part,  with  which  this  piece 
 has  several  repetitions  in  common.  The  difference 
 of  style  in  the  prophecies  against  foreign  nations 
 (which  predictions  are  particularly  distinguished 
 by  sublimity),  from  that  in  chapters  i.-xii.,  which 
 are  now  generally  ascribed  to  Isaiah,  appeared 
 to  Bertholdt  a  sufficient  ground  for  assigning  the 
 former  to  another  author.  But  in  spite  of  this 
 difference  of  style  it  is,  at  present,  again  generally 
 admitted  that  they  belong  to  one  and  the  same 
 author.  It  consequently  appears  that  our  op- 
 ponents deem  the  difference  of  style  alone  not  a 
 sufficient  argument  for  proving  a  difference  of 
 authorship  ;  but  only  such  a  difference  as  does 
 not  arise  from  a  difference  of  subjects  and  of 
 moods,  especially  if  this  difference  occurs  in  an 
 author  whose  mind  is  so  richly  endowed  as  that 
 of  Isaiah,  in  whose  works  the  form  of  the  style  is 
 produced  directly  by  the  subject.  Ewald  cor- 
 rectly observes  (p.  173),  'We  cannot  state  that 
 Isaiah  had  a  peculiar  colouring  of  style.  He  is 
 neither  the  especially  lyrical,  nor  the  especially 
 elegiacal,  nor  the  especially  oratorical,  nor  the 
 especially  admonitory  prophet,  as,  perhaps,  Joel, 
 Hosea,  or  Micah,  in  whom  a  particular  colouring 
 more  predominates.  Isaiah  is  capable  of  adapting 
 his  style  to  the  most  different  subject,  and  in  this 
 consists  his  greatness  and  his  most  distinguished 
 excellence.' 
 
 The  chief  fault  of  our  opponents  is,  that  they 
 judge  without  distinction  of  persons  ;  and  here 
 distinction  of  persons  would  be  proper.  They 
 measure  the  productions  of  Isaiah  with  the  same 
 measure  that  is  adapted  to  the  productions  of  less- 
 gifted  prophets.  Jeremiah,  for  example,  does  not 
 change  his  tone  according  to  the  difference  of 
 subject  so  much  that  it  could  be  mistaken  by  an 
 experienced  Hebraist.  Of  Isaiah,  above  all,  we 
 might  say  what  Fichte  wrote  in  a  letter  to  a 
 friend  in  Konigsberg  :  '  Strictly  speaking,  I  have 
 no  style,  because  I  have  all  styles'  (Fichte's 
 Leben  von  seiiie?n  Sohne,  th.  i.  p.  196).  If 
 we  ask  how  the  difference  of  style  depends  upon 
 the  difference  of  subject,  the  answer  must  be  veiy 
 favourable  to  Isaiah,  in  whose  book  the  style  does 
 not  so  much  differ  according  to  the  so-called 
 genuineness  or  spuriousness,  as  rather  according 
 to  the  subjects  of  the  first  and  second  parts.  The 
 peculiarities  of  the  second  part  arise  from  the 
 subjects  treated  tlierein  ;  and  from  the  feelings  to 
 which  these  subjects  give  lise.  Here  the  prophet 
 addresses  not  so  much  the  multitude  who  live 
 around  him,  as  the  future  people  of  the  Lord, 
 purified   by   his    judgments,    who    are    about  to 
 
 spring  from  the  eKKoyr],  that  is,  the  small  numbei 
 of  the  elect  who  were  contemporaries  of  Isaiah. 
 Here  he  does  not  speak  to  a  mixed  congregation, 
 but  to  a  congregation  of  brethren  whom  he  com- 
 forts. The  commencement,  '  Comfort  ye,  comfort 
 ye,  my  people,'  is  the  themeof  the  whole.  Hence 
 arise  the  gentleness  and  tenderness  of  style,  and 
 the  frequent  repetitions.  Comforting  love  has 
 many  words.  Hence  the  addition  of  many  epi- 
 thets to  the  name  of  God,  which  are  so  many 
 shields  by  which  the  strokes  of  despair  are  warded 
 off,  and  so  many  bulwarks  against  the  attacks  of 
 the  visible  world  which  was  driving  to  despair. 
 The  sublimity,  abruptness,  and  thunders  of  the 
 first  part  find  no  place  here,  where  the  object  of 
 Isaiah  is  not  to  terrify  and  to  shake  stout-hearted 
 sinners,  but  rather  to  bring  glad  tidings  to  the 
 meek ;  not  to  quench  the  smoking  flax,  nor  to 
 break  the  bruised  reed.  But  wherever  there  is  a 
 similarity  of  hearers  and  of  subject,  there  we  meet 
 also  a  remarkable  similarity  of  style,  in  both  the 
 first  and  second  part ;  as,  for  example,  in  the 
 description  of  the  times  of  Messiah,  and  of  the 
 punishments,  in  which  (Ivi.-lix.)  the  prophet  has 
 the  whole  nation  before  his  eyes,  and  in  which 
 he  addresses  the  careless  sinners  by  whom  he  is 
 surrounded. 
 
 We  attach  no  importance  to  the  collections  of 
 isolated  words  and  expressions  which  some  critics 
 have  gleaned  from  the  disputed  parts  of  Isaiah, 
 and  which  are  not  found  in  other  portions  that 
 are  deemed  genuine.  We  might  here  well  apply 
 what  Kriiger  wrote  on  a  similar  question  in  pro- 
 fane history  [De  autkattia  el  integj-itate  Anab. 
 Xenophontis,  Halle  1824,  p.  27)  ;  Hoc  argii- 
 mentandi  genus  perqtiam  htbriciun  est.  Si  quid 
 mimerjts  valeret,  iirgeri  possel,  qtwd  in  his  lib>-is 
 a/nplius  qttadraginta  vocabula  legiintitr,  quce  in 
 reliquis  Xenophontis  operibiis  frzcstra  quceranticr. 
 Si  quis  propter  vocabula  alibi  ab  hoc  scriptore  vet 
 alia  potestate,  vel  prorsus  non  usuipata,  Aiiabasin 
 ab  eo  profectam  neget,  hac  ratione  admissa  quod- 
 vis  aliud  ejus  opus  injuria  ei  tribui,  ostendi 
 potest;  that  is,  'This  is  a  very  slippeiy  mode  of 
 reasoning.  If  number  were  of  importance,  it 
 might  be  urged  that  in  these  books  occur  more 
 than  forty  words  for  which  one  searches  in  vain 
 in  the  other  works  of  Xenophon.  But  if  it 
 should  be  denied  on  account  of  those  words 
 which  this  author  has  either  employed  in  a  dif- 
 ferent sense,  or  has  not  made  use  of  at  all,  that 
 the  Anabasis  was  written  by  him,  it  could,  by  the 
 same  reasoning,  be  shewn,  that  every  other  work 
 was  falsely  attributed  to  him.' 
 
 7.  We  find  a  number  of  characteristic  peculi- 
 arities of  style  which  occur  both  in  what  is  ac- 
 counted genuine  and  what  is  styled  spurious  in 
 Isaiah,  and  which  indicate  the  identity  of  the 
 author.  Certain  very  peculiar  idioms  occur 
 again  and  again  in  all  parts  of  the  book.  Two  of 
 them  are  particularly  striking.  The  appellation 
 of  God,  'the  Holy  One  of  Israel,'  occurs  with 
 equal  frequency  in  what  has  been  ascribed  to 
 Isaiah  and  in  what  has  been  attributed  to  a  pseudo- 
 Isaiah  ;  it  is  found  besides  in  two  passages  in 
 which  Jeremiah  imitates  Isaiah,  and  only  three 
 times  in  the  whole  of  the  remainder  of  the  O. 
 T.  Another  peculiar  idiom  is  that  '  to  be  called' 
 stands  constantly  for  'to  be.'  These  are  plieno- 
 mena  of  language  which  even  our  opponents 
 do  not  consider   casual ;    but   they    say   that  the 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 423 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 later  poet  imitated  Isaiah,  or  that  they  originated 
 from  the  hand  of  a  uniformising  editor,  who  took 
 an  active  part  in  modelling  the  whole.  But 
 there  cannot  be  shewn  any  motive  for  such  inter- 
 ference ;  and  we  find  nothing  analogous  to  it  in 
 the  whole  of  the  O.  T.  Such  a  supposi- 
 tion cuts  away  the  linguistic  ground  from  under 
 the  feet  of  higher  criticism,  and  deprives  it 
 of  all  power  of  demonstration.  In  this  manner 
 every  linguistic  phenomenon  may  easily  be  re- 
 moved, when  it  is  contrary  to  preconceived  opi- 
 nions. But  everything  in  Isaiah  appears  so 
 natural,  bears  so  much  the  impress  of  originality, 
 is  so  free  from  every  vestige  of  patch-work,  that  no 
 one  can  conscientiously  maintain  this  hypothesis. 
 
 We  have  still  to  consider  the  other  conjecture 
 of  our  opponents.  If  we  had  before  us  a  prophet 
 strongly  leaning,  like  Jeremiah  and  Zechariah, 
 upon  preceding  prophets,  that  conjecture  might 
 be  deemed  admissible,  in  case  there  were  other 
 arguments  affording  a  probability  for  denying 
 that  Isaiah  was  the  author  of  tliese  portions — a 
 supposition  which  can  here  have  no  place.  But 
 here  we  have  a  prophet  whose  independence  and 
 originality  are  acknowledged  even  by  our  op- 
 ponents. In  him  we  cannot  think  of  imitation, 
 especially  if  we  consider  his  peculiarities  in  con- 
 nection with  the  other  peculiar  characteristics  of 
 Isaiah,  and  of  what  has  been  said  to  belong  to  a 
 pseudo-Isaiah ;  we  refer  here  to  the  above-men- 
 tioned works  of  Mceller  and  of  Kleinert  (p.  231,  scj. ) 
 In  both  portions  of  Isaiah  there  occur  a  number  of 
 words  which  are  scarcely  to  be  found  in  other 
 places ;  also  a  frequent  repetition  of  the  same 
 word  in  the  parallel  members  of  a  verse.  This 
 repetition  very  seldom  occurs  in  other  writers  (com- 
 pare the  examples  collected  by  Kleinert,  p.  239). 
 Other  writers  usually  employ  synonyms  in  the 
 parallel  members  of  verses.  It  further  belongs  to 
 the  characteristics  of  Isaiah  to  employ  words  in 
 extraordinary  acceptations ;  for  instance,  JHT  is 
 used  contemptuously  for  brood ;  DTS,  for  rabble ;. 
 {jnK'',  for  a  shoot  Isaiah  also  employs  extra- 
 ordinary constructions,  and  has  the  peculiar  custom 
 of  explaining  his  figiu-ative  expressions  by  directly 
 subjoining  the  prosaical  equivalent.  This  custom 
 has  induced  many  interpreters  to  suppose  that 
 explanatory  glosses  have  been  inserted  in  Isaiah. 
 Another  peculiarity  of  Isaiah  is  that  he  inter- 
 sperses his  prophetic  orations  with  hymns ;  that 
 he  seldom  relates  visions,  strictly  so  called,  and 
 seldom  performs  symbolic  actions  ;  and  that  he 
 employs  figurative  expressions  quite  peculiar  to 
 himself,  as,  for  example,  pasted-up  eyes,  for  spiri- 
 tual darkness  ;  mo7-ning-red,  for  approachuig  hap- 
 piness ;  the  remnant  of  olive  trees,  vineyards,  and 
 orchards,  for  the  remnant  of  the  people  which  have 
 been  spared  during  the  judgments  of  God  ;.  re- 
 jected tendrils  or  branches,  for  enemies  who  have 
 been  slain. 
 
 In  addition  to  this  we  find  an,  almost  verbal 
 harmony  between  entire  passages ;  for  instance, 
 the  Messianic  description  commencing  xi.  6,  conx- 
 pared  with  Ixv.  25. 
 
 IV.  The  origin  of  the  present  Collection ^  attd 
 its  ar7-angement. — No  definite  account  respecting 
 the  method  pursued  in  collecting  into  books  the 
 utterances  of  the  Prophets  has  been  handed  down 
 to  us.  Concerning  Isaiah,  as  well  as  the  rest,  these 
 accounts  are  wanting.  We  do  not  even  know 
 whether  he  collected  his  prophecies  himself.     But 
 
 we  have  no  decisive  argument  against  this  opinion. 
 The  argument  of  Kleinert,  in  his  above-mentioned 
 work  (p.  112),  is  of  slight  importance.  He  says. 
 If  Isaiah  himself  had  collected  his  prophecies, 
 there  would  not  be  wanting  some  which  are  not 
 to  be  found  in  the  existing  book.  To  this  we 
 reply,  that  it  can  by  no  means  be  proved  with 
 any  degree  of  probability  that  a  single  prophecy 
 of  Isaiah  has  been  lost,  the  preservation  of  which 
 would  have  been  of  importance  to  posterity,  and 
 which  Isaiah  himself  would  have  deemed  it  neces- 
 sary to  preserve.  Kleinert  appeals  to  the  fact, 
 that  there  is  no  prophecy  in  our  collection  which 
 can  with  certainty  be  ascribed  to  the  days  of 
 Jotham  ;  and  he  thinks  it  incredible  that  the  pro- 
 phet, soon  after  having  been  consecrated  to  his 
 ofhce,  should  have  passed  full  sixteen  years  with- 
 out any  revelation  from  God.  This,  certainly,  is 
 unlikely  ;  but  it  is  by  no  means  unlikely  that 
 during  this-  time  he  uttered  no  prophecy  which 
 he  thought  proper  to  preserve.  Nay,  it  appears 
 very  probable,  if  we  compare  the  rather  general 
 character  of  chaps,  i.-v..,  the  contents  of  which 
 would  apply  to  the  days  of  Jotham  also,  since 
 during  his  reign  no  considerable  changes  took 
 place ;  consequently  the  prophetic  utterances 
 moved  in  the  same  sphere  with  those  preserved  to 
 us  from  the  reign  of  Uzziah.  Hence  it  was  na- 
 tural that  Isaiah  should  confine  himself  to  the 
 communication  of  some  important  prophetic  ad- 
 dresses, which  might  as  well  represent  the  days 
 of  Jotham  as  those  of  the  preceding  reign.  We 
 must  not  too  closely  identify  the  utterances  of  the 
 prophets  with  their  writings.  Many  prophets  have 
 spoken  much  and  written  nothing.  The  minor 
 prophets  were  generally  content  to  write  down  the 
 quintessence  alone  of  their  numerous  utterances. 
 Jeremiah  likewise,  of  his  numerous  addresses  under 
 Josiah,  gives  us  only  what  was  most  essential. 
 
 The  critics  who  suppose  that  the  present  book  of 
 Isaiah  was  collected  a  considerable  time  after  the 
 death  of  tlie  prophet,  and  perhaps  after  the  exile, 
 lay  especial  stress  upon  the  assertion  that  the  his- 
 torical section  in  the  36th  and  following  chapters 
 was  transcribed  from  2  Kings  xviii.-xx.  This  sup- 
 position, however,  is  perfectly  unfounded. 
 
 According  to  Ewald  (p.  39),  the  hand  of  a  later 
 compiler  betrays  itself  in  the  headings.  Ewald  has 
 not,  however,  adduced  any  argument  sufficient  to 
 prove  that  Isaiah  was  net  the  author  of  these  head- 
 ings, the  enigmatic  character  of  which  seems  more 
 to  befit  the  author  himself  than  a  compiler.  The 
 only  semblance  of  an  argument  is  that  the  heading 
 '  Oracle  (better  translated  burden)  concerning  Da- 
 mascus (xvii.  i),  does  not  agree  with  the  prophecy 
 tliat  follows,  which  refers  rather  to  Samaria.  But 
 we  should  consider  that  the  headings  of  prophecies 
 against  foreign  nations  are  always  expressed  as  con- 
 cisely as  possible,  and  that  it  was  incompatible 
 wuh  the  usual  brevity  more  fully  to  describe  the 
 subject  of  this  prophecy.  We  should  further  con- 
 sider that  this  prophecy  refers  to  the  connection  of 
 Damascus  with  Samaria,  in  which  alliance  Damas- 
 cus was,  according  to  chap,  vii.,  the  prevailing 
 power,  with  which  Ephraim  stood  and  fell.  If  all 
 this  is  taken  into  account  the  above  heading  will  be 
 found  to  agree  with  the  prophecy.  According  to 
 the  Talmudists,  the  book  of  Isaiah  was  collected  by 
 the  men  of  Hezekiah.  But  this  assertion  rests 
 merely  upon  Prov.  xxv.  i,  where  the  men  of  Heze- 
 kiah are  said  to  have  compiled  the  Proverbs.    The 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 424 
 
 TSAIAH 
 
 Talmudists  do  not  sufficiently  distinguish  between 
 what  might  be  and  what  is.  They  habitually  state 
 bare  possibilities  as  historical  facts. 
 
 To  us  it  seems  impossible  that  Isaiah  left  it  to 
 others  to  collect  his  prophecies  into  a  volume,  be- 
 cause we  know  that  he  was  the  author  of  historical 
 works  ;  and  it  is  not  likely  that  a  man  accustomed 
 to  literary  occupation  would  have  left  to  others  to 
 do  what  he  could  do  much  better  himself. 
 
 Hitzig  has  of  late  recognised  Isaiah  as  the  col- 
 lector and  arranger  of  his  own  prophecies.  But 
 he  supposes  that  a  number  of  pieces  were  inserted 
 at  a  later  period.  The  chronological  arrangement 
 of  these  prophecies  is  a  strong  argument  in  favour 
 of  the  opinion  that  Isaiah  himself  formed  them  into 
 a  volume.  There  is  no  deviation  from  this  arrange- 
 ment, except  in  a  few  instances  where  prophecies 
 of  similar  contents  are  placed  together ;  but  there 
 is  no  interruption  which  might  appear  attributable 
 to  either  accident  or  ignorance.  There  is  not  a 
 single  piece  in  this  collection  which  can  satisfac- 
 torily be  shewn  to  belong  to  another  place.  All 
 the  portions,  the  date  of  which  can  be  ascertained 
 either  by  external  or  internal  reasons,  stand  in  the 
 right  place.  This  is  generally  granted  with  respect 
 to  the  first  twelve  chapters,  although  many  persons 
 erroneously  maintain  that  chap.  vi.  should  stand  at 
 the  beginning. 
 
 Chaps,  i.-v.  belong  to  the  later  years  of  Uzziah  ; 
 chap.  vi.  to  the  year  of  his  death.  What  follows 
 next,  up  to  chap.  x.  4,  belongs  to  the  reign  of 
 Ahaz.  Chaps,  x.  -xii.  is  the  first  portion  appertain- 
 ing to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Then  follows  a 
 series  of  prophecies  against  foreign  nations,  in 
 which,  according  to  the  opinions  of  many,  the 
 chronological  arrangement  has  been  departed  from, 
 and,  instead  of  it,  an  arrangement  according  to 
 contents  has  been  adopted.  But  this  is  not  the 
 case.  The  predictions  against  foreign  nations  are 
 also  in  their  right  chronological  place.  They  all 
 belong  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  are  placed 
 together  because,  according  to  their  dates,  they 
 belong  to  the  same  period.  In  the  days  of  Heze- 
 kiah the  nations  of  Western  Asia,  dwelling  on  the 
 banks  of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  more  and  more 
 resembled  a  threatening  tempest.  That  the  pro- 
 phecies against  foreign  nations  belong  to  this  period 
 is  indicated  by  the  home-prophecy  in  chap,  xxii., 
 which  stands  among  the  foreign  prophecies.  The 
 assertion  that  the  first  twelve  chapters  are  a  collec- 
 tion of  home-prophecies  is  likewise  refuted  by  the 
 fact  that  there  occur  in  these  chapters  two  foreign 
 prophecies.  The  prophetic  gift  of  Isaiah  was  more 
 fully  unfolded  in  sight  of  the  Assyrian  invasion 
 under  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Isaiah,  in  a  series  of 
 visions,  describes  what  Assyria  would  do,  as  a 
 chastising  rod  in  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  and  what 
 the  successors  of  the  Assyrians,  the  Chaldees, 
 would  perfoiTn,  according  to  the  decree  of  God,  in 
 order  to  realise  divine  justice  on  earth,  as  well 
 among  Israel  as  among  the  heathen.  The  prophet 
 shows  that  mercy  is  hidden  behind  the  clouds  of 
 wrath.  There  is  no  argument  to  prove  that  the 
 great  prophetic  picture  in  chaps,  xxiv.-xxvii.  was 
 not  depicted  under  Hezekiah.  Chaps,  xxviii.- 
 xxxiii.  manifestly  belong  to  the  same  reign,  but 
 somewhat  later  than  the  time  in  which  chaps,  x. , 
 xi.,  and  xii.,  were  written.  They  were  composed 
 about  the  time  when  the  result  of  the  war  against 
 the  Assyrians  was  decided.  With  the  termination 
 of  this  war  terminated  also  the  public  life  of  Isaiah, 
 
 who  added  an  historical  section  in  chaps,  xxxvi. - 
 xxxix.,  in  order  to  facilitate  the  right  understanding 
 of  the  prophecies  uttered  by  him  during  the  most 
 fertile  period  of  his  prophetic  ministry.  Then 
 follows  the  conclusion  of  his  work  on  earth.  The 
 second  part,  which  contains  his  prophetic  legacy,  is 
 addressed  to  the  small  congregation  of  the  faithful 
 strictly  so  called.  This  part  is  analogous  to  the 
 last  speeches  of  Moses  in  the  fields  of  Moab,  and 
 to  the  last  speeches  of  Christ  in  the  circle  of  his 
 disciples,  related  by  John.  Thus  we  have  every- 
 where order,  and  such  an  order  as  could  scarcely 
 have  proceeded  from  any  one  but  the  author. 
 
 V.  Contents,  Character,  and  Atttkority  of  the 
 Book  of  Isaiah. — It  was  not  the  vocation  of  the 
 prophets  to  change  anything  in  the  religious  con- 
 stitution of  Moses,  which  had  been  introduced  by 
 divine  authority  ;  and  they  were  not  called  upon  to 
 substitute  anything  new  in  its  place.  They  had 
 only  to  point  out  the  new  covenant  to  be  intro- 
 duced by  the  Redeemer,  and  to  prepare  the  minds 
 of  men  for  the  reception  of  it.  They  themselves 
 in  all  their  doings  were  subject  to  the  law  of  Moses. 
 They  were  destined  to  be  extraordinary  ambassa- 
 dors of  God,  whose  reign  in  Israel  was  not  a  mere 
 name,  not  a  mere  shadow  of  earthly  royalty,  but 
 rather  its  substance  and  essence.  They  were  to 
 maintain  the  government  of  God,  by  punishing  all, 
 both  high  and  low,  who  manifested  contempt  of 
 the  Lawgiver  by  offending  against  his  laws.  It  was 
 especially  their  vocation  to  counteract  the  very 
 ancient  delusion,  according  to  which  an  external 
 observance  of  rites  was  deemed  sufficient  to  satisfy 
 God.  This  opinion  is  contrary  to  many  passages 
 of  the  law  itself,  which  admonish  men  to  circum- 
 cise the  heart,  and  describe  the  sum  of  the  entire 
 law  to  consist  in  loving  God  with  the  whole  heart ; 
 which  make  salvation  to  depend  upon  being  inter- 
 nally turned  towards  God,  and  which  condemn  not 
 only  the  evil  deed,  but  also  the  wicked  desire. 
 The  law  had,  however,  at  the  first  assumed  a  form 
 corresponding  to  the  wants  of  the  Israelites,  and  in 
 accordance  with  the  symbolical  spirit  of  antiquity. 
 But  when  this  form,  which  was  destined  to  be  the 
 living  organ  of  the  Spirit,  was  changed  into  a  corpse 
 by  those  who  were  themselves  spiritually  dead,  it 
 offered  a  point  of  coalescence  for  the  error  of  those 
 who  contented  themselves  with  external  obser- 
 vances. 
 
 The  prophets  had  also  to  oppose  the  delusion  of 
 those  who  looked  upon  the  election  of  the  people 
 of  God  as  a  preservative  against  the  divine  judg- 
 ments ;  who  supposed  that  their  descent  from  the 
 patr-archs,  with  whom  God  had  made  a  covenant, 
 was  an  equivalent  for  the  sanctification  which  they 
 wanted.  Even  Moses  had  strongly  opposed  this 
 delusion  ;  for  instance,  in  Lev.  xxvi.  and  Deut. 
 xxxii.  David  also,  in  the  Psalms,  as  in  xv.  and 
 xxiv. ,  endeavours  to  counteract  this  error,  which 
 again  and  again  sprang  up.  It  was  the  vocation  of 
 the  prophets  to  insist  upon  genuine  piety,  and  to 
 shew  that  a  true  attachment  to  the  Lord  neces- 
 sarily manifests  itself  by  obedience  to  his  precepts ; 
 that  this  obedience  would  lead  to  happiness,  and 
 disobedience  to  misfortune  and  distress.  The  pro- 
 phets were  appointed  to  comfort  the  faint-hearted, 
 by  announcing  to  them  the  succour  of  God,  and 
 to  bring  glad  tidings  to  the  faithful,  in  order  to 
 strengthen  their  fidelity.  They  were  commissioned 
 to  invite  the  rebellious  to  return,  by  pointing  out 
 to  them  future  salvation,  and  by  teaching  them  that 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 425 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 without  conversion  they  could  not  be  partakers  of 
 salvation  ;  and  in  order  that  their  admonitions  and 
 rebukes,  their  consolations  and  awakenings,  might 
 gain  more  attention,  it  was  granted  to  them  to  be- 
 hold futurity,  and  to  foresee  the  blessings  and  judg- 
 ments which  would  ultimately  find  their  full  ac- 
 complishment in  the  days  of  the  Messiah.  The 
 Hebrew  appellation  nebiini  is  by  far  more  expres- 
 sive than  the  Greek  ■Kpo<t>-l]T(]%,  which  denotes  only 
 a  part  of  their  office,  and  which  has  given  rise  to 
 many  misunderstandings.  The  word  J<''23  (from 
 the  root  X3J,  which  occurs  in  Arabic  in  the  signi- 
 fication of  to  infor?n,  to  explain,  to  speak)  means, 
 
 according  to  the  usual  signification  of  the  form  P'^Dp, 
 a  person  into  whom  God  has  spoken  ;  that  is,  a 
 person  who  communicates  to  the  people  what  God 
 has  given  to  him.  The  Hebrew  word  indicates 
 divine  inspiration.  What  is  most  essential  in  the 
 prophets  is  their  speaking  iv  Trvev/ji.aTi ;  conse- 
 quently they  were  as  much  in  their  vocation  when 
 they  rebuked  and  admonished  as  when  they  pre- 
 dicted future  events.  The  correctness  of  our  ex- 
 planation may  be  seen  in  the  definition  contained 
 in  Deut.  xviii.  i8,  where  the  Lord  says,  '  I  will 
 raise  them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their  brethren 
 like  unto  thee,  and  will  put  my  words  in  his  mouth; 
 and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I  shall  com- 
 mand him. ' 
 
 The  prophet  here  mentioned  is  an  ideal  person. 
 It  is  prophetism  itself  personified.  It  is  a  charac- 
 teristic mark  that  God  gives  his  word  into  the 
 mouth  of  the  prophet,  by  means  of  which  he  is 
 placed  on  an  equality  with  the  priest,  who  is  like- 
 wise a  bearer  of  the  word  of  God.  The  prophet  is 
 at  the  same  time  distinguished  from  the  priest,  who 
 receives  the  word  of  God  from  the  Scriptures, 
 while  the  prophet  receives  it  without  an  intervening 
 medium.  The  internal  communications  of  God  to 
 the  prophets  are  given  to  them  only  as  being  mes- 
 sengers to  his  people.  By  this  circumstance  the 
 prophets  are  distinguished  from  mystics  and  theo- 
 sophers,  who  lay  claim  to  divine  communications 
 especially  for  themselves.  Prophetism  has  an  en- 
 tirely practical  and  truly  ecclesiastical  character, 
 remote  from  all  idle  contemplativeness,  all  fantastic 
 trances,  and  all  anchoretism. 
 
 In  this  description  of  the  prophetical  calling 
 there  is  also  contained  a  statement  of  the  contents 
 of  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah.  He  refers  expressly 
 in  many  places  to  the  basis  of  the  ancient  covenant, 
 that  is,  to  the  law  of  Moses  ;  for  instance,  in  viii. 
 1 6,  20,  and  xxx.  9,  10.  In  many  other  passages 
 his  utterance  rests  on  the  same  basis,  although  he 
 does  not  expressly  state  it.  All  his  utterances  are 
 interwoven  with  references  to  the  law.  It  is  of 
 importance  to  examine  at  least  one  chapter  closely, 
 in  order  to  understand  how  prophecies  are  related 
 to  the  law.  Let  us  take  as  an  example  the  first. 
 The  beginning,  '  Hear,  O  heavens,  and  give  ear,  O 
 earth,'  is  taken  from  Deut.  xxxii.  Thus  the 
 prophet  points  out  that  his  prophecies  are  a  com- 
 mentary upon  the  Magna  Charta  of  prophetism 
 contained  in  the  books  of  Moses.  During  the 
 prosperous  condition  of  the  state  under  Uzziah  and 
 Jotham,  luxury  and  immorality  had  sprung  up. 
 The  impiety  of  Ahaz  had  exercised  the  worst  in- 
 fluence upon  the  whole  people.  Great  part  of  the 
 nation  had  forsaken  the  religion  of  their  fathers  and 
 embraced  gross  idolatry  ;  and  a  great  numbez  of 
 those  who  worshipped  God  externally  had  forsaken 
 
 Him  in  their  hearts.  The  divme  judgments  were 
 approaching.  The  rising  power  of  Assyria  was 
 appointed  to  be  the  instrument  of  divine  justice. 
 Among  the  people  of  God  internal  demoralisation 
 was  always  the  forerunner  of  outward  calamity. 
 This  position  of  affairs  demanded  an  energetic  in- 
 tervention of  prophetism.  Without  prophetism 
 the  eKXoyrj,  the  number  of  the  elect,  would  have 
 been  constantly  decreasing,  and  even  the  judg- 
 ments of  the  Lord,  if  prophetism  had  not  furnished 
 their  interpretation,  would  have  been  mere  facts, 
 which  would  have  missed  their  aim,  and,  in  many 
 instances,  might  have  had  an  effect  opposite  to 
 that  which  was  intended,  because  punishment 
 which  was  not  recognised  to  be  punishment, 
 necessarily  leads  away  from  God.  The  prophet 
 attacks  the  distress  of  his  nation,  not  at  the  sur- 
 face but  at  the  root,  by  rebuking  the  prevailing 
 corruption.  Pride  and  arrogance  appear  to  him 
 to  be  the  chief  roots  of  all  sms. 
 
 He  inculcates  again  and  again  that  men  should 
 not  rely  upon  the  creature,  but  upon  the  Creator, 
 from  whom  all  temporal  and  spiritual  help  pro- 
 ceeds ;  that  in  order  to  attain  salvation,  we  should 
 despair  of  our  own  and  all  human  power,  and 
 rely  upon  God.  He  opposes  those  who  expected 
 help  through  foreign  alliances  with  powerful  neigh- 
 bouring nations  against  foreign  enemies  of  the  state. 
 
 The  people  of  God  have  only  one  enemy,  and 
 one  ally,  that  is,  God.  It  is  foohsh  to  seek  for 
 aid  on  earth  against  the  power  of  heaven,  and  to 
 fear  man  if  God  is  our  friend.  The  panacea 
 against  all  distress  and  danger  is  true  conversion. 
 The  politics  of  the  prophets  consist  only  in  point- 
 ing out  this  remedy.  The  prophet  connects  with 
 his  rebuke  and  with  his  admonition,  his  threaten- 
 ings  of  divine  judgment  upon  the  stiff-necked. 
 These  judgments  are  to  be  executed  by  the  inva- 
 sion of  the  Syrians,  the  oppression  of  the  Assyrians, 
 the  Babylonian  exile,  and  by  the  great  final 
 separation  in  the  limes  of  the  Messiah.  The  idea 
 which  is  the  basis  of  all  these  threatenings,  is  pro- 
 nounced even  in  the  Pentateuch  (Lev.  x.  3),  '  I 
 will  be  sanctified  in  them  that  come  nigh  me, 
 and  before  all  the  people  I  will  be  glorified  ;'  and 
 also  in  the  words  of  Amos  (iii.  2),  '  You  only 
 have  I  known  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth ; 
 therefore  I  will  punish  you  for  all  your  iniquities  :' 
 that  is,  if  the  people  do  not  voluntarily  glorify 
 God,  he  glorifies  himself  against  them.  Partly 
 in  order  to  recal  the  rebellious  to  obedience, 
 partly  to  comfort  the  faithful,  the  ]irophet  opens  a 
 prospect  of  those  blessings  which  the  faithful  por- 
 tion of  the  covenant-people  shall  inherit.  In 
 almost  all  prophetic  utterances,  we  find  in  regular 
 succession  three  elements  —  rebuke,  threatening, 
 and  promise.  The  prophecies  concerning  the  de- 
 struction of  powerful  neighbouring  states  partly 
 belong,  as  we  have  shewn,  to  the  promises,  be- 
 cause they  are  intended  to  prevent  despair,  which, 
 as  well  as  false  security,  is  a  most  dangerous 
 hindrance  to  conversion. 
 
 In  the  direct  promises  of  deliverance  the  pur- 
 pose to  comfort  is  still  more  evident.  This  de- 
 liverance refers  either  to  burdens  which  pressed 
 upon  the  people  in  the  days  of  the  prophet,  or  to 
 burdens  to  come,  which  were  already  announced 
 by  the  prophet  ;  such,  for  instance,  were  the  op- 
 pressions of  the  Syrians,  the  Assyrians,  and  finally, 
 of  the  Chaldceans. 
 
 The  proclamation  of  the  Messiah  is  the  inex- 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 426 
 
 ISAIAH 
 
 haustible  source  of  consolation  among  the  pro- 
 phets. In  Isaiah  this  consolation  is  so  clear  that 
 some  fathers  of  the  church  were  inclined  to  style 
 him  rather  evangelist  than  prophet.  Ewald 
 pointedly  describes  (p.  169)  the  human  basis  of 
 Messianic  expectations  in  general,  and  of  those  of 
 Isaiah  in  particular  : — '  He  who  experienced  in  his 
 own  royal  soul  what  infinite  power  could  be 
 granted  to  an  individual  spirit  in  order  to  influence 
 and  animate  many,  he  who  daily  observed  in 
 Jerusalem  the  external  vestiges  of  a  spirit  like  that 
 of  David,  could  not  imagine  that  the  future  new 
 congregation  of  the  Lord  should  originate  from  a 
 mind  belonging  to  another  race  than  that  of 
 David,  and  that  it  should  be  maintained  and  sup- 
 ported by  any  other  ruler  than  a  divine  ruler. 
 Indeed  every  spiritual  revival  must  proceed  from 
 the  clearness  and  firmness  of  an  elevated  mind  ; 
 and  this  especially  applies  to  that  most  sublime 
 revival  for  which  ancient  Israel  longed  and  strove. 
 This  longing  attained  to  clearness,  and  was  pre- 
 served from  losing  itself  in  indefiniteness,  by  the 
 certainty  that  such  an  elevated  mind  was  to  be 
 expected.' 
 
 Isaiah,  however,  was  not  the  first  who  attained 
 to  a  knowledge  of  the  personality  of  Messiah. 
 Isaiah's  vocation  was  to  render  the  knowledge  of 
 this  personality  clearer  and  more  definite,  and 
 to  render  it  more  efficacious  upon  the  souls  of  the 
 elect  by  giving  it  a  greater  individuality.  The 
 person  of  the  Redeemer  is  mentioned  even  in  Gen. 
 xlix.  10,  '  The  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from 
 Judah,  nor  a  lawgiver  from  between  his  feet,  until 
 Shiloh  {the  traiiquilliser)  come ;  and  unto  him 
 shall  the  gathering  of  the  people  be'  (i.e.,  him 
 shall  the  7iations  obey).  The  personality  of  Mes- 
 siah occurs  also  in  several  psalms  which  were 
 written  before  the  times  of  Isaiah ;  for  instance,  in 
 the  2d  and  iioth,  by  David  ;  in  the  45th,  by  the 
 sons  of  Korah  ;  in  the  72d,  by  Solomon.  Isaiah 
 has  especially  developed  the  perception  of  the 
 prophetic  and  the  priestly  office  of  the  Redeemer, 
 while  in  the  earlier  annunciations  of  the  Messiah 
 the  royal  office  is  more  prominent  ;  although  in 
 Ps.  ex.  the  priestly  office  also  is  pointed  out.  Of 
 the  two  states  of  Christ,  Isaiah  has  expressly  de- 
 scribed that  of  the  exinanition  of  the  suffering 
 Christ,  while,  before  him,  his  state  of  glory  was 
 made  more  prominent.  In  the  Psalms  the  inse- 
 parable connection  between  justice  and  suffering, 
 from  which  the  doctrine  of  a  suffering  Messiah 
 necessarily  results,  is  not  expressly  applied  to  the 
 Messiah.  We  must  not  say  that  Isaiah  first  per- 
 ceived that  the  Messiah  was  to  suffer,  but  we 
 must  grant  that  this  knowledge  was  in  him  more 
 vivid  than  in  any  earlier  writer ;  and  that  this 
 knowledge  was  first  shewn  by  Isaiah  to  be  an  in- 
 tegral portion  of  O.  T.  doctrine. 
 
 The  following  are  the  outlines  of  Messianic  pro- 
 phecies in  the  book  of  Isaiah  : — A  scion  of  David, 
 springing  from  his  family,  after  it  has  fallen  into 
 a  veiy  low  estate,  but  being  also  of  divine  nature, 
 shall,  at  first  in  lowliness,  but  as  a  prophet  filled 
 with  the  spirit  of  God,  proclaim  the  divine  doc- 
 trine, develope  the  law  in  truth,  and  render  it  the 
 animating  principle  of  national  life  ;  he  shall,  as 
 high  priest,  by  his  vicarious  suffering  and  his 
 death,  remove  the  guilt  of  his  nation,  and  that  of 
 other  nations,  and  finally  rule  as  a  mighty  king, 
 not  only  over  the  covenant-people,  but  over  all 
 nations  of  the  earth  who  will  subject  themselves  to 
 
 his  peaceful  sceptre,  not  by  violent  compulsion, 
 but  induced  by  love  and  gratitude.  He  will  make 
 both  the  moral  and  the  physical  consequences  of 
 sin  to  cease  ;  the  whole  earth  shall  be  filled  with 
 the  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  and  all  enmity,  hatred, 
 and  destruction  shall  be  removed  even  from  the 
 brute  creation.  This  is  the  survey  of  the  Messianic 
 preaching  by  Isaiah,  of  which  he  constantly  renders 
 prominent  those  portions  which  were  most  calcu- 
 lated to  impress  the  people  under  the  then  existing 
 circumstances.  The  first  part  of  Isaiah  is  directed 
 to  the  whole  people,  consequently  the  glory  of  the 
 Messiah  is  here  dwelt  upon.  The  fear  lest  the 
 kingdom  of  God  should  be  overwhelmed  by  the 
 power  of  heathen  nations,  is  removed  by  pointing 
 out  the  glorious  king  to  come,  who  would  elevate 
 the  now  despised  and  apparently  mean  kingdom 
 of  God  above  all  the  kingdoms  of  this  world.  In 
 the  second  part,  which  is  more  particularly  ad- 
 dressed to  the  eKXoyri,  the  elect,  than  to  the  whole 
 nation,  the  prophet  exhibits  the  Messiah  more  as 
 a  divine  teacher  and  high-priest.  The  prophet 
 here  preaches  righteousness  through  the  blood  of 
 the  servant  of  God,  who  will  support  the  weakness 
 of  sinners,  and  take  upon  himself  their  sorrows. 
 
 We  may  show,  by  an  example  in  chap.  xi.x.  18- 
 25,  that  the  views  of  futurity  which  were  granted 
 to  Isaiah  were  great  and  comprehensive,  and  that 
 the  Spirit  of  God  raised  him  above  all  narrow- 
 minded  nationality.  It  is  there  stated  that  a  time 
 should  come  when  all  the  heathen,  subdued  by  the 
 judgments  of  the  Lord,  should  be  converted  to  him, 
 and  being  placed  on  an  equality  with  Israel,  with 
 equal  laws,  would  equally  partake  of  the  kingdom 
 of  God,  and  form  a  brotherly  alliance  for  his  wor- 
 ship. Not  the  whole  mass  of  Israel  is  destined, 
 according  to  Isaiah,  to  future  salvation,  but  only 
 the  small  number  of  the  converted.  This  truth  he 
 enounces  most  definitely  in  the  sketch  of  his  pro- 
 phecies contained  in  chapter  vi. 
 
 Isaiah  describes  with  equal  vivacity  the  divine 
 justice  which  punishes  the  sins  of  the  nation  with 
 inexorable  severity.  Holy,  holy,  holy,  is  the  Lord 
 of  Sabaoth,  is  the  key-note  of  his  prophecies.  He 
 describes  also  the  divine  mercy  and  covenant- 
 fidelity,  by  which  there  is  always  preserved  a  rem- 
 nant among  the  people  :  to  them  punishment  itselt 
 is  a  means  of  salvation,  so  that  life  everywhere  pro- 
 ceeds from  death,  and  the  congregation  itself  is  led 
 to  full  victory  and  glory. 
 
 Isaiah  saw  the  moral  and  religious  degradation 
 of  his  people,  and  also  its  external  distress,  both 
 then  present  and  to  come  (chap.  vi. )  But  this  did 
 not  break  his  courage  ;  he  confidently  expected  a 
 better  futurity,  and  raised  himself  in  God  above  all 
 that  is  visible.  Isaiah  is  not  afraid  when  the  whole 
 nation  and  its  king  tremble.  Of  this  we  see  a  re- 
 markable instance  in  chapter  vii.,  and  another  in 
 the  time  of  the  Assyrian  invasion  under  Hezekiah, 
 during  which  the  courage  of  his  faith  rendered  him 
 the  saviour  of  the  commonwealth,  and  the  origi- 
 nator of  that  great  religious  revival  which  followed 
 the  preservation  of  the  state.  The  faith  of  the 
 king  and  of  the  people  was  roused  by  that  of  Isaiah. 
 
 Isaiah  stands  pre-eminent  above  all  other  pro- 
 phets, as  well  in  the  contents  and  spirit  of  his 
 predictions,  as  in  their  form  and  style.  Sim- 
 plicity, clearness,  sublimity,  and  freshness,  are  the 
 never-failing  characters  of  his  prophecies.  Even 
 Eichhorn  mentions,  among  the  first  merits  ot 
 Isaiah,  the  concinnity  of  his  expressions,  the  beauti- 
 
ISAIAH 
 
 427 
 
 ISHBAK 
 
 ful  outline  of  his  images,  and  the  fine  execution  of 
 his  speeches.  In  reference  to  richness  of  imagery 
 he  stands  between  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel.  Sym- 
 bohc  actions,  which  frequently  occur  in  Jeremiah 
 and  Ezekiel,  seldom  occur  in  Isaiah.  The  same  is 
 the  case  with  visions,  strictly  so  called,  of  which 
 there  is  only  one,  namely,  that  in  chapter  vi.  ;  and 
 even  it  is  distinguished  by  its  simplicity  and  clear- 
 ness above  that  of  the  later  prophets.  But  one 
 characteristic  of  Isaiah  is,  that  he  likes  to  give 
 signs — that  is,  a  fact  then  present,  or  near  at  hand 
 — as  a  pledge  for  the  more  distant  futurity  ;  and 
 that  he  thus  supports  the  feebleness  of  man  (comp. 
 vii.  20 ;  xxxvii.  30;  xxxviii.  7,  sqq.)  The  in- 
 stances in  chapters  vii.  and  xxxviii.  show  how  much 
 he  was  convinced  of  his  vocation,  and  in  what  inti- 
 macy he  lived  with  the  Lord,  by  whose  assistance 
 alone  he  could  effect  what  he  offers  to  do  in  the 
 one  passage,  and  what  he  grants  in  the  other.  The 
 spiritual  riches  of  the  prophet  are  seen  in  the 
 variety  of  his  style,  which  always  befits  the  sub- 
 ject. When  he  rebukes  and  threatens,  it  is  like  a 
 storm,  and,  when  he  comforts,  his  language  is  as 
 tender  and  mild  as  (to  use  his  own  words)  that  of 
 a  mother  comforting  her  son.  With  regard  to 
 style,  Isaiah  is  comprehensive,  and  the  other  pro- 
 phets divide  his  riches. 
 
 Isaiah  enjoyed  an  authority  proportionate  to  his 
 gifts.  We  learn  from  history  how  great  this 
 authority  was  during  his  life,  especially  under  the 
 reign  of  Hezekiah.  Several  of  his  most  definite 
 prophecies  were  fulfilled  while  he  was  yet  alive  : 
 for  instance,  the  overthrow  of  the  kingdoms  of 
 Syria  and  Israel ;  the  invasion  of  the  Assyrians, 
 and  the  divine  deliverance  from  it  ;  the  prolonga- 
 tion of  life  granted  to  Hezekiah  ;  and  several  pre- 
 dictions against  foreign  nations.  Isaiah  is  honour- 
 ably mentioned  in  the  historical  books.  The  later 
 prophets,  especially  Nahum,  Habakkuk,  Zepha- 
 niah,  Jeremiah,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi, 
 clearly  prove  that  his  book  was  diligently  read, 
 and  that  his  prophecies  were  attentively  studied. 
 
 The  authority  of  the  prophet  greatly  increased 
 after  the  fulfilment  of  his  prophecies  by  the  Baby- 
 lonian exile,  the  victories  of  Cyrus,  and  the  deliver- 
 ance of  the  covenant-people.  Even  Cyrus  (accord- 
 ing to  the  above-mentioned  account  in  Josephus, 
 Anliq.  xi.  I.  I,  2)  was  induced  to  set  the  Jews 
 at  liberty  by  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  concerning 
 himself  This  prediction  of  Isaiah  made  so  deep 
 an  impression  upon  him  that  he  probably  took 
 from  it  the  name  by  which  he  is  generally  known 
 in  history.  Jesus  Sirach  (xlviii.  22-25)  bestows 
 splendid  praise  upon  Isaiah,  and  both  Philo  and 
 Josephus  speak  of  him  with  great  veneration.  He 
 attained  the  highest  degree  of  authority  after  the 
 times  of  the  N.  T.  had  proved  the  most  important 
 part  of  his  prophecies,  namely,  the  Messianic,  to 
 be  divine.  Christ  and  the  apostles  quote  no  pro- 
 phecies so  frequently  as  those  of  Isaiah,  in  order  to 
 prove  that  he  who  had  appeared  was  one  and  the 
 same  with  him  who  had  been  promised.  The 
 fathers  of  the  church  abound  in  praises  of  Isaiah. 
 — E.  W.  H. 
 
 [Piper,  Integritas  lesaia;  a  recent,  conat.  vindi- 
 cata,  Gryphsw.  1792  ;  Moller,  De  Autheiit.  Ora- 
 ailor.  EsaicE,  cap.  xl.-Lxvi.,  Havn.  1825;  Kleinert, 
 Echtheii  sdnunlt.  in  d.  Bttche  Jes.  enthalt.  wets- 
 sagungen,Y>^x\.  1S29;  ^t\e.ge.r,  yesaiasmcht  Psendo 
 yi'saias,  Barm.  1 850;  comp.  the  Introductions  of 
 Eichhorn,    Bertholdt,    Jahn,     Haveinick,     Keil, 
 
 Bleek,  Home,  Davidson.  Commentaries : — Calvin, 
 Genev.  1570,  3d  ed.  ;  Musculus,  Bas.  1570; 
 Schmid,  Hamb.  1702  ;  Abarbanel  (Lat.  vertit 
 J.  H.  Mains),  Frankf.  a.  M.  1711;  Vitringa,  2 
 vols.  Leuward.  1714-20,  ed.  Schultens,  Bas.  1732  ; 
 Doederlein,  Niirnb.  and  Altorf  1775-80-89  ; 
 Lowth,  Lond.  1778,  and  often  ;  Hensler,  Hamb. 
 1788 ;  Paulus,  Jena  1793  ;  Gesenius,  2  vols., 
 Leipz.  1820-21  ;  Jerome,  2  vols.,  Lond.  1830 ; 
 Hitzig,  Heidelb.  1833;  Hendewerk,  2  vols., 
 Konigsb.  1838-43;  Barnes,  Boston  U.S.,  1840 ; 
 Henderson,  Lond.  1840;  Ewald,  Gott.  1841  ; 
 Umbreit,  Hamb.  1842  ;  Knobel,  Leipz.  1843  ; 
 Drechsler,  3  vols.,  Erlang.  1845-57,  unfin.  ;  Alex- 
 ander, 2  vols..  New  York,  1846-47,  edited  by 
 Eadie,  i  vol.  Edin.  1848;  comp.  also  Hengsten- 
 berg,  Christology,  E.  T.,  vol.  ii.,  Edin.  1856.] 
 
 ISCAH  (nap^ ;  Sept.  'leaxa),  the  daughter  of 
 Haran,  the  brother  of  Abraham,  and  the  sister  of 
 Lot  and  of  Milcah  Nahor's  wife  (Gen.  xi.  27,  29). 
 According  to  Jewish  tradition  (Joseph.  Antiq.  i. 
 6.  5  ;  Targ.  Jonath.  ;  Talm.  ;  Hieron.,  Qiicrst.  in 
 Gen.),  Iscah  was  the  same  as  Sarai,  Abraham's 
 wife  ;  but  there  are  serious  difficulties  in  the  way 
 of  this  belief     [Sarah.] — W.  L.  A. 
 
 ISCARIOT.     [Judas  Iscariot.] 
 
 ISHBAH  {m&  ;  Sept.   6  Teo-jSd ;  Alex.  'Ie<r- 
 
 a^a.),  the  father  of  Eshtemoa,  and  apparently  the 
 son  of  Ezra  by  his  Egyptian  wife  Bithiah  (i  Chron. 
 iv.  17  ;  comp.  Bertheau,  Exeget.  Hdb.  in  loc.) — t. 
 
 ISHBAK  (pnC'^  'Ieo-/3ti(c  and  So/SdK ;  Jesboc), 
 
 a  son  of  Abraham  by  Keturah,  and  founder  of  one 
 of  the  tribes  of  Arabia.  His  brethren  Midian  and 
 Jokshan  are  better  known.  We  are  told  that 
 Abraham  '  gave  gifts'  to  the  sons  of  Keturah,  '  and 
 sent  them  away  from  Isaac  his  son,  eastward,  unto 
 the  east  country'  (Gen.  xxv.  1-6).  They  settled  in 
 the  region  east  of  the  Arabah,  in  and  near  Mount 
 Seir,  and  southward  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai 
 (Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  36 ;  Exod.  iii.  i ;  Num.  xxxi. 
 9,  10).  On  the  top  of  the  mountain  range  which 
 l)ounds  the  valley  of  Arabah  on  the  east,  and 
 about  twelve  miles  north  of  Petra,  stands  the 
 great  castle  of  Shobek,  on  the  crest  of  a  peak  com- 
 manding a  wide  view.  It  was  built  by  Baldwin 
 king  of  Jerusalem  in  A.D.  1 115,  on  the  site  of  a 
 much  more  ancient  fortress  and  city,  and  it  was 
 one  of  the  chief  strongholds  of  the  Crusaders.  The 
 name  they  gave  it  was  Mons  Regalis ;  but  by  the 
 Arabs,  both  before  and  since,  it  has  been  uniformly 
 called  Shobek.  It  was  finally  taken  from  the 
 Franks  by  Saladin  in  A.D.  1188  {Gesta  Dei  Per 
 Francos,  pp.  426,  611,  812;  Bohadin,  Vita  Sala- 
 dini,  pp.  38,  54,  and  Index  Geographicus,  s.  v. 
 Sjanbachiwi).  The  castle  is  still  in  tolerable  pre- 
 sei-vation,  and  a  few  families  of  Arabs  find  within 
 its  walls  a  secure  asylum  for  themselves  and  their 
 flocks.  It  contains  an  old  church,  with  a  Latin 
 inscription  of  the  Crusading  age  over  its  door 
 (Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria,  p.  416 ;  Handbook 
 for  S.  and  P.,  p.  58). 
 
 It  seems  highly  probable  that  in  Shobek  we 
 have  still  preserved  the  name  and  first  possession 
 of  Abraham's  son  Ishbak.  The  words  f^J^ 
 (Robinson  spells  it  (jjo^-ij)  and  ^1^'^  are  radi- 
 cally identical.     And  as  the  descendants  of  Ke- 
 
ISHBI,  OR  ISHBI-BENOB 
 
 428 
 
 ISHMAEL 
 
 turah  unquestionably  settled  in  this  region,  and 
 were  closely  connected  with  the  IshmaeHtes  and 
 Moabites,  we  may  safely  identify  Sliobek  and  Ish- 
 bak  (see  Forster,  Geography  of  Arabia,  i.  352  ; 
 Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  164;  Bunsen,  Bibelwerk,  I. 
 ii.  53).-J.  L.  P. 
 
 ISHBI,  or  ISHBI-BENOB.     [Giants.] 
 
 ISH-BOSHETH  (DC'il  ti'^K,  man  of  shame; 
 
 Sept.  'le^ocyd^),  a  son  of  king  Saul,  and  the  only 
 one  who  survived  him.     In  i  Chron.  viii.  33,  and 
 
 ix.  39,  this  name  is  given  as  ?J?2I^'X  Eshbaal. 
 Baal  was  the  name  of  an  idol,  accounted  abomin- 
 able by  the  Hebrews,  and  which  scrupulous  per- 
 sons avoided  pronouncing,  using  the  word  bosheth, 
 '  shame'  or  '  vanity,'  instead.  This  explains  why 
 the  name  Eshbaal  is  suljstituted  for  Ish-bosheth, 
 Jerubbaal  for  Jerubbesheth  (comp.  Judg.  viii.  35 
 with  2  Sam.  xi.  21),  and  Merib-baal  for  Mephi- 
 bosheth  (comp.  2  Sam.  iv.  4  with  i  Chron.  viii.  34 
 and  ix.  40).  Ish-bosheth  was  not  present  in  the 
 disastrous  battle  at  Gilboa,  in  which  his  father  and 
 brothers  perished  ;  and,  too  feeble  of  himself  to 
 seize  the  sceptre  which  had  fallen  from  the  hands 
 of  Saul,  he  owed  the  crown  entirely  to  his  uncle 
 Abner,  who  conducted  him  to  Mahanaim,  beyond 
 the  Jordan,  where  he  was  recognised  as  king  by 
 ten  of  the  twelve  tribes.  He  reigned  seven,  or, 
 as  some  will  have  it,  two  years — if  a  power  so 
 uncertain  as  his  can  be  called  a  reign.  Even 
 the  semblance  of  authority  which  he  possessed 
 he  owed  to  the  will  and  influence  of  Abner,  who 
 kept  the  real  substance  in  his  own  hands.  A 
 sharp  quarrel  between  them  led  at  last  to  the  ruin 
 of  Ish-bosheth.  Although  accustomed  to  tremble 
 before  Abner,  even  his  meek  temper  was  roused 
 to  resentment  by  the  discovery  that  Abner  had 
 invaded  the  haram  of  his  late  father  Saul,  which 
 was  in  a  peculiar  manner  sacred  under  his  care 
 as  a  son  and  a  king.  By  this  act  Abner  exposed 
 the  king  to  public  contempt  ;  if  it  did  not  indeed 
 leave  himself  open  to  the  suspicion  of  intending  to 
 advance  a  claim  to  the  crown  on  his  own  behalf 
 Abner  highly  resented  the  rebuke  of  Ish-bosheth, 
 and  from  that  time  contemplated  uniting  all  the 
 tribes  under  the  sceptre  of  David.  Ish-bosheth, 
 however,  reverted  to  his  ordinary  timidity  of  cha- 
 racter. At  the  first  demand  of  David,  he  restored 
 to  him  his  sister  Michal,  who  had  been  given  in 
 marriage  to  the  son  of  Jesse  by  Saul,  and  had 
 afterwards  been  taken  from  him  and  bestowed 
 upon  another.  It  is,  perhaps,  right  to  attribute 
 this  act  to  his  weakness ;  although,  as  David 
 allows  that  he  was  a  righteous  man,  it  may  have 
 been  owing  to  his  sense  of  justice.  On  the  death 
 of  Abner  Ish-bosheth  lost  all  heart  and  hope,  and 
 perished  miserably,  being  murdered  in  his  own 
 palace,  while  he  took  his  mid-day  sleep,  by  two  of 
 his  officers,  Baanah  and  Rechab.  They  sped  with 
 his  head  to  David,  expecting  a  great  reward  for 
 their  deed ;  but  the  monarch— as  both  right  feeling 
 and  good  policy  required  —  testified  the  utmost 
 horror  and  concern.  He  slew  the  murderers,  and 
 placed  the  head  of  Ish-bosheth  with  due  respect  in 
 the  sepulchre  of  Abner:  B.  C.  1048  (2  Sam.  ii.  8-1 1  ; 
 iii.  6-39  ;  iv.)  There  is  a  serious  difficulty  in  the 
 chronology  of  this  reign.  In  2  Sam.,  iL  10  Ish- 
 bosheth  is  said  to  have  reigned  two  years  ;  which 
 some  understand  as  the  whole  amount  of  his  reign. 
 
 And  as  David  reigned  seven  and  a  half  years  ovei 
 Judah  before  he  became  king  of  all  Israel  upon  the 
 death  of  Ish-bosheth,  it  is  conceived  by  the  Jewish 
 chronologer  {Seder  01am  Rabba,  p.  37),  as  well  as 
 by  Kimchi  and  others,  that  there  was  a  vacancy 
 of  five  years  in  the  throne  of  Israel.  It  is  not, 
 however,  agreed  by  those  who  entertain  this  opi- 
 nion, whether  this  vacancy  took  place  before  or 
 after  the  reign  of  Ish-bosheth.  Some  think  it  was 
 before,  it  being  then  a  matter  of  dispute  whether 
 he  or  Mephibosheth,  the  son  of  Jonathan,  should 
 be  made  king;  but  others  hold  that  after  his  death  ■ 
 five  years  elapsed  before  David  was  generally  V 
 recognised  as  king  of  all  Israel.  If  the  reign  of  ■ 
 Ish-bosheth  be  limited  to  two  years,  the  latter  is 
 doubtless  the  best  way  of  accounting  for  the  other 
 five,  since  no  ground  of  delay  in  the  accession  of 
 Ish-bosheth  is  suggested  in  Scripture  itself;  for 
 the  claim  of  Mephibosheth,  the  son  of  Jonathan, 
 which  some  have  produced,  being  that  of  a  lame 
 boy  five  years  old,  whose  father  never  reigned, 
 against  a  king's  son  forty  years  of  age,  would  have 
 been  deemed  of  little  weight  in  Israel.  Besides, 
 our  notions  of  Abner  do  not  allow  us  to  suppose 
 that  under  him  the  question  of  the  succession  could 
 have  remained  five  yeai's  in  abeyance.  But  it  is 
 the  more  usual,  and  perhaps  the  better  course,  to 
 settle  this  question  by  supposing  that  the  reigns  of 
 David  over  Judah,  and  of  Ish-bosheth  over  Israel, 
 were  nearly  contemporaneous,  and  that  the  two 
 years  are  mentioned  as  those  from  which  to  date 
 the  commencement  of  the  ensuing  events — namely, 
 the  wars  between  the  house  of  Saul  and  that  ol 
 David.— J.  K. 
 
 ISHI.  This  word  in  the  A.  V.  represents  two 
 different  words  in  the  original,  viz. — i.  ''yti'\  YisKi, 
 
 a  proper  name  of  a  man,  occurring  i  Chron.  ii.  3 1 
 (Sept.  ''\afix.ir\K;  Alex.  'lecreO ;  iv.  20  (Sept.  Zei'; 
 Alex.  'Es);  iv.  42  (Sept.  'letrt ;  Alex.  'lecre/)  ;  v. 
 24    (Sept.    2et;    Alex.    'leo-ei)-      2.    ''C'''X,    Ushi ; 
 
 Sept.  6  avi^p  ixov,  the  name  by  which  the  true 
 Israel   should   express   her   relation    to    Jehovah, 
 
 as   contradistinguished  from  vJ?Zlj  Baa//,  which, 
 
 though  once  applicable  to  Jehovah  (Is.  liv.  5),  had 
 ceased  to  be  so  in  consequence  of  its  application  to 
 heathen  deities  (Hos.  ii.  16;  comp.  Henderson  on 
 the  place).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 ISHMAEL  (i'Sy»t?'\    'God  hears;'  'Ia/J.a-/j\ ; 
 
 Ismae/.     Hence  the  patronyinic  ^pNypti'S  pi.  D''", 
 
 given  to  the  Arabs  descended  from  Ishmael). 
 
 I.  Abraham's  son  by  Hagar,  Sarah's  Egyptian 
 maid.  The  story  of  his  birth  as  recorded  in  Gen. 
 xvi.,  though  it  seems  so  strange  and  even  unnatural 
 in  Christian  England,  is  in  every  respect  charactei  is- 
 tic  of  Eastern  life  and  morals  in  the  present  age. 
 The  intense  desire  of  both  Abraham  and  Sarah  for 
 children  ;  Sarah's  gift  of  Hagar  to  Abraham  as 
 wife  ;  the  insolence  of  the  slave  when  suddenly 
 raised  to  a  place  of  importance  ;  the  jealousy  and 
 consequent  tyranny  of  her  high-spirited  mistress  ; 
 Hagar's  flight,  return,  and  submission  to  Sarah— 
 for  all  these  incidents  we  could  easily  find  parallels 
 in  (he  modern  history  of  every  tribe  in  the  desert  of 
 Arabia.  The  origin  of  the  name  Islunae/  is  thus  ex- 
 plained.   When  ilagar  fled  from  Sarah,  the  Angel 
 
ISHMAEL 
 
 429 
 
 ISHMAEL 
 
 of  the  Lord  found  her  by  a  fountain  of  water  in  the 
 wilderness  in  the  way  of  Shur  .  .  .  and  he 
 said,  '  Behold  thou  art  with  child,  and  shalt  bear  a 
 son,  and  shalt  call  his  name  Ishmael  ('  God  bears'), 
 because  the  Lord  hath  heard  thy  affliction'  (Gen. 
 xvi.  ii).  Hagar  had  evidently  intended  when  she 
 fled  to  return  to  her  native  country.  But  when  the 
 Angel  told  her  of  the  dignity  in  store  for  her  as  a 
 mother,  and  the  power  to  which  her  child,  as  the 
 son  of  the  great  patriarch,  would  attain,  she  re- 
 solved to  obey  his  voice,  and  to  submit  herself  to 
 Sarah  (xvi.  10-13). 
 
 Ishmael  was  born  at  Manire,  in  the  eighty-sixth 
 year  of  Abraham's  age,  eleven  years  after  his  arri- 
 val in  Canaan,  and  fourteen  before  the  birth  of 
 Isaac  (xvi.  3,  16  ;  xxi.  5).  No  particulars  of  his 
 early  life  are  recorded.  His  father  was  evidently 
 strongly  attached  to  him,  for  when  an  heir  was 
 promised  through  Sarah,  he  said,  '  O  that  Ishmael 
 might  live  before  Thee!'  (xvii.  18).  Then  were 
 renewed  to  Abraham  in  more  definite  terms  the 
 promises  made  to  Hagar  regarding  Ishmael  ;  '  As 
 for  Ishmael,  I  have  heard  thee  ;  behold,  I  have 
 blessed  him,  and  will  make  him  fruitful,  and  will 
 multiply  him  exceedingly  :  twelve  princes  shall  he 
 beget  :  and  I  will  make  him  a  great  nation'  (ver. 
 20).  Ishmael  seems  to  have  remained  in  a  great 
 measure  under  the  charge  of  his  mother,  who, 
 knowing  his  destiny,  would  doubtless  have  him 
 trained  in  such  exercises  as  would  fit  him  for  suc- 
 cessfully acting  the  part  of  a  desert  prince.  In- 
 dulged in  every  whim  and  wish  by  a  fond  father, 
 encouraged  to  daring  and  adventure  by  the  hardy 
 nomads  who  fed  and  defended  his  father's  flocks, 
 and  having  a  fitting  field  on  that  southern  border- 
 land for  the  play  of  his  natural  propensities,  Ishmael 
 grew  up  a  true  child  of  the  desert — a  wild  and 
 wayward  boy.  The  perfect  freedom  of  desert  life, 
 and  his  constant  intercourse  with  those  who  looked 
 up  to  him  with  mingled  feelings  of  pride  and  affec- 
 tion as  the  son  and  heir-apparent  of  their  great 
 chief,  tended  to  make  him  impatient  of  restraint, 
 and  overbearing  in  his  temper.  The  excitement  of 
 the  chase — speeding  across  the  plains  of  Beersheba 
 after  the  gazelles,  and  through  the  rugged  moun- 
 tains of  Engedi  after  wild  goats,  and  bears,  and 
 leopards,  inured  him  to  danger,  and  trained  hmi 
 for  war.  Ishmael  must  also  have  been  accustomed 
 from  childhood  to  those  feuds  which  raged  almost 
 incessantly  between  the  '  trained  servants'  of  Abra- 
 ham and  their  warlike  neighbours  of  Philistia,  as 
 well  as  to  the  more  serious  incursions  of  roving 
 bands  of  freebooters  from  the  distant  East.  Such 
 was  the  school  in  which  the  great  desert  chief  was 
 trained.  Subsequent  events  served  to  fill  up  and 
 fashion  the  remaining  features  of  Ishniael's  charac- 
 ter. He  had  evidently  been  treated  by  Abraham's 
 dependents  as  their  master's  heir,  and  Abraham 
 himself  had  apparently  encouraged  the  belief.  The 
 unexpected  Ijirth  of  Isaac,  therefore,  must  have 
 been  to  him  a  sad  and  bitter  disappointment.  And 
 when  he  was  afterwards  driven  forth,  with  his  poor 
 mother,  a  homeless  wanderer  in  a  pathless  wilder- 
 ness ;  when  in  consequence  of  such  unnatural 
 harshness  he  was  brought  to  the  vei-y  brink  of  the 
 grave,  and  was  only  saved  from  a  painful  death  by 
 a  miracle  ;  when,  after  having  been  reared  in 
 luxuiy,  and  taught  to  look  forward  to  the  posses- 
 sion of  wealth  and  power,  he  was  suddenly  left  to 
 win  a  scanty  and  uncertain  subsistence  by  his  sword 
 and  bow — we  need  scarcely  wonder  that  his  proud 
 
 spirit,  revolting  against  injustice  and  cruelty,  should 
 make  him  what  the  Angei  had  predicted,  '  a  wild 
 ass  man  ;  his  hand  against  every  man,  and  every 
 man's  hand  against  hnn'  (xvi.  12). 
 
 The  first  recorded  outbreak  of  Ishmael's  rude 
 and  wayward  spirit  occurred  at  the  weaning  of 
 Isaac.  On  that  occasion  Abraham  made  a  great 
 feast  after  the  custom  of  the  country.  In  the  ex- 
 citement of  the  moment,  heightened  probably  by 
 the  painful  consciousness  of  his  own  blighted  hopes, 
 Ishmael  could  not  restrain  his  temper,  but  gave 
 way  to  some  insulting  expressions  or  gestures  of 
 mockery.  Perhaps  the  very  name  of  the  child, 
 Isaac  ('laughter'),  and  the  exuberant  joy  of  his 
 aged  mother,  may  have  furnished  subjects  for  his 
 untimely  satire.  Be  this  as  it  may,  Sarah's  jealous 
 eye  and  quick  ear  speedily  detected  him  ;  and  she 
 said  to  Abraham,  'Expel  this  slave  and  her  son  ; 
 for  the  son  of  this  slave  shall  not  be  heir  with  my 
 son,  with  Isaac'  (xxL  10).  Now  Abraham  loved 
 the  boy  who  first,  lisping  the  name  '  father,'  opened 
 in  his  heart  the  gushing  fountain  of  paternal  affec- 
 tion. The  bare  mention  of  such  an  unnatural  act 
 made  him  angry  even  with  Sarah,  and  it  was  only 
 when  influenced  by  a  Divine  admonition  that  he 
 yielded.  The  brief  account  of  the  departure  of 
 Hagar,  and  her  journey  through  the  desert,  is  one 
 of  the  most  beautiful  and  touching  pictures  of 
 patriarchal  life  which  has  come  down  to  us,  '  And 
 Abraham  rose  early  in  the  morning,  and  took 
 bread,  and  a  skin  of  water,  and  gave  it  to  Hagar, 
 
 putting  it  on  her  shoulder,  and  the  lad  (Ip'ri) ;  and 
 
 sent  her  away  ;  and  she  departed,  and  wandered 
 in  the  wilderness  of  Beersheba.  And  when  the 
 water  was  spent  in  the  skin,  she  placed  the  lad 
 under  one  of  the  shrubs.  And  she  went,  and  sat 
 down  opposite,  at  the  distance  of  a  bowshot  :  for 
 she  said,  I  will  not  see  the  death  of  the  lad.  And 
 she  sat  opposite,  and  lifted  up  her  voice  and  wept' 
 (xxi.  14-16). 
 
 Ishmael  was  about  sixteen  years  old  when  thus 
 cast  upon  the  world.  It  may  seem  strange  to  some 
 that  the  hardy,  active  boy,  inured  to  fatigue,  should 
 have  been  sooner  overcome  by  thirst  than  his 
 mother ;  but  those  advanced  in  life  can  bear  absti- 
 nence longer  than  the  young,  and  besides,  Ishmael 
 had  probably  exhausted  his  strength  in  vain  attempts 
 to  gain  a  supply  of  food  by  his  bow.  Again  Hagar 
 is  saved  by  a  miracle  ;  '  God  heard  the  voice  of 
 the  lad  .  .  .  and  said  unto  her.  What  aileth  thee, 
 Hagar  ?  fear  not  .  .  .  And  God  opened  her  eyes, 
 and  she  saw  a  well  of  water'  (ver.  17,  19).  And 
 again  the  cheering  promise  is  renewed  to  her 
 son,  '  I  will  make  of  him  a  great  nation'  (ver. 
 18). 
 
 The  wilderness  of  Paran,  lying  along  the  wes- 
 tern side  of  the  Arabah,  between  Canaan  and  the 
 mountains  of  Sinai,  now  became  the  home  of  Ish- 
 mael ;  '  And  God  was  with  him,  and  he  became  a 
 great  archer'  (ver.  20).  Some  of  the  border  tribes 
 with  which  the  shepherds  of  Abraham  were  wont 
 to  meet  and  strive  at  the  wells  of  Gerar,  Beer- 
 sheba, and  En-Mishpat,  probably  received  and 
 welcomed  the  outcast  to  their  tents.  A  youth  of 
 his  warlike  training  and  daring  spirit  would  soon 
 acquire  a  name  and  a  high  position  among  nomads. 
 His  relationship  to  Abraham  also  would  add  to  his 
 personal  claims.  His  mother,  as  soon  as  she  saw 
 him  settled,  took  for  him  an  Egyptian  wife — one 
 of  her  own  people,  and  thus  completely  separated 
 
ISHMAEL 
 
 430 
 
 ISHMAEL 
 
 him  from  his  Shemite  comiections.  At  this  period 
 the  Arabian  desert  appears  to  have  been  thinly 
 peopled  by  descendants  of  Joktan,  the  son  of  Eber, 
 'whose  dwelling  was  from  Mesha,  as  thou  goest 
 unto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  east'  (Gen.  x.  25-30). 
 The  Joktanites,  or  Bene  KaJddn,  are  regarded  by 
 Arab  historians  as  the  first  and  most  honourable 
 progenitors  of  the  Arab  tribes  (ARABIA;  D'Her- 
 h&\oi,  Bihliothiqiie  Oricntale,  s.  v.  Anibes).  Aveiy 
 old  tradition  affirms  that  Ishmael  married  a  woman 
 of  that  race.  This  is  not  stated  in  the  Bible  ;  and 
 the  story  may  probably  have  its  origin  in  the  fact 
 that  he  became  closely  allied  with  the  Joktanites, 
 and  was  one  of  their  greatest  leaders.  Though 
 Ishmael  joined  the  native  tribes  of  Arabia,  his 
 posterity  did  not  amalgamate  with  them.  The 
 Joktanites  have  left  traces  of  their  names  and 
 settlements  chiefly  in  the  southern  and  south- 
 eastern parts  of  the  peninsula,  while  the  Ishmael- 
 ites  kept  closer  to  the  borders  of  Canaan  (Joktan  ; 
 Forster's  Geography  of  Arabia,  \.  'j'j,  scq.)  Not- 
 withstanding his  expulsion,  Ishmael  appears  to 
 have  kept  up  some  slight  intercourse  with  his 
 father's  house  ;  and  when  Abraham  died,  we  read 
 that  '  his  sons  Isaac  and  Ishmael  buried  him  in  the 
 cave  of  Machpelah.'  The  rival  brothers  then  met, 
 in  the  vale  of  Mamre  at  their  father's  tomb  (Gen. 
 XXV.  9).  That  must  have  been  a  strange  and 
 deeply  interesting  scene  at  the  burial  of  the  great 
 patriarch.  All  his  own  old  '  trained  servants,' 
 with  Isaac,  the  peaceful  shepherd  chief,  at  their 
 head,  were  assembled  there  ;  while  Ishmael,  sur- 
 rounded by  the  whole  body  of  his  wild  retainers 
 and  allies,  as  was  and  still  is  the  custom  of  Bedawy 
 sheikhs,  stood  there  too.  Of  Ishmael's  personal 
 history  after  this  event  we  know  nothing.  The 
 sacred  historian  gives  us  a  list  of  his  twelve  sons, 
 tells  us  that  Esau  married  his  daughter  Mahalath, 
 the  sister  of  Nebajoth  (xxviii.  9),  and  sums  up  the 
 brief  simple  sketch  in  these  words,  '  These  are  the 
 years  of  the  life  of  Ishmael,  a  hundred  and  thirty- 
 seven  years  ;  and  he  died  ;  and  was  gathered  to 
 his  people'  (xxv.  17).  Where  he  died,  or  where 
 he  was  buried,  we  know  not. 
 
 Ishmael  was  driven  out  from  his  father's  house, 
 and  his  father's  imperious  wife  said  of  him,  '  The 
 son  of  the  slave  shall  not  be  heir  with  my  son  ;' 
 yet  a  divine  promise  assured  the  outcast  that  he 
 should  dwell  '  in  the  presence  of  all  his  brethren.' 
 Ishmael  was  the  son  of  the  'faithful'  Abraham, 
 the  chosen  '  friend'  of  God  ;  yet  the  Lord  Himself 
 said  of  him,  '  He  shall  be  a  wild  man — his  hand 
 against  every  man,  and  every  man's  hand  against 
 him.'  The  long  history  of  Ishmael  and  his  posterity, 
 from  the  day  he  was  sent  into  the  desert  till  the 
 present  hour,  is  one  continuous  fulfilment  of  these 
 remarkable  prophecies.  Ishmael  had  twelve  sons  : 
 Nebajoth,  Kedar,  Abdeel,  Mibsam,  Mishma,  Du- 
 mah,  Massa,  Hadar,  Tema,  Jetur,  Naphish,  and 
 Kedemah.  In  giving  the  list  of  them,  the  sacred 
 historian  communicates  an  important  piece  of  in- 
 formation— '  These  are  the  sons  of  Ishmael,  and 
 these  are  their  names,  by  their  cities  (DH^IVn, 
 '  fortified  towns'),  and  their  camps  (DDT'tO) ;  twelve 
 
 princes  acco7-ding  to  their  nations''  (DnOS57).  Every 
 one  of  the  twelve  sons  of  Ishmael,  therefore,  like 
 the  children  of  Jacob,  was  the  head  of  a  tribe,  and 
 the  founder  of  a  distinct  colony  or  camp.  In  this 
 respect  the  statements  in  the  Bible  exactly  accord 
 with  the   ancient  traditions  and   histories   of  the 
 
 Arabs  themselves.  Native  historians  divide  the 
 Arabs  into  two   races — i.  Pure  Arabs  (c__jjtl\ 
 
 irjilxli),  descendants  of  Joktan  (^lla.^^)  ;  and 
 
 2.  Mixed  Arabs  (^j  jtjuu^^    < >.]^),  descendants 
 
 of  Ishmael.  Abulfelda  gives  a  brief  account  of 
 the  several  tribes  and  nations  which  descended 
 from  both  these  original  stocks  {Historia  Anteis- 
 lamica,  ed.  Fleischer,  pp.  180,  191,  seq.)  Some 
 of  the  tribes  founded  by  sons  of  Ishmael  retained 
 the  names  of  their  founders,  and  were  well  known 
 in  history.  The  Nabatheans,  who  took  posses- 
 sion of  Idumjea  in  the  4th  century  B.C.,  and  con- 
 structed the  wonderful  monuments  of  Petra,  were 
 the  posterity  of  Nebajoth,  Ishmael's  eldest  son 
 [Nabatheans].  The  descendants  of  fetur  and 
 Naphish  disputed  with  the  Israelites  possession  of 
 the  country  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  the  former, 
 described  by  Strabo  as  KaKovpyoi  TravTes  (xvi.  2), 
 gave  their  name  to  a  small  province  south  of  Da- 
 mascus, which  it  bears  to  this  day  [Itui^Ea]. 
 The  black  tents  of  Kedar  were  pitched  in  the 
 heart  of  the  Arabian  desert,  and  from  their  abun- 
 dant flocks  they  supplied  the  marts  of  Tyre  (Jer. 
 ii.  ID;  Is.  Ix.  7;  Ezek.  xxvii.  21).  The  district 
 of  Tema  lay  south  of  Edom,  and  is  referred  to  by 
 both  Job  and  Isaiah  (Job  vi.  19  ;  Is.  xxi.  14  ;  For- 
 ster's Geogr.  of  Arabia,  i.  292  ;  Heeren's  Historical 
 Researches,  ii.  107).  Dumah  has  left  his  name  to 
 a  small  province  of  Arabia.  For  a  fuller  investiga- 
 tion of  this  subject  the  reader  is  referred  to  For- 
 ster's Geography  of  Arabia,  where  a  vast  amount 
 of  information  has  been  collected,  though  not  all 
 entirely  to  the  point.  Still  there  is  enough  to 
 shew  that  the  statement  of  Moses  is  perfectly 
 accurate,  that  the  sons  of  Ishmael  were  heads  of 
 great  tribes,  and  to  shew  too  that  the  prophecy 
 has  been  fulfilled  to  the  letter,  Ishmael  'shall 
 dwell  in  the  presence  of  all  his  brethren'  (Gen. 
 xvi.  12).  Since  the  days  of  Abraham  the  tents  of 
 the  Ishmaelites  have  been  studded  along  the  wlfole 
 eastern  confines  of  Palestine,  and  they  have  been 
 scattered  over  Arabia  from  the  borders  of  Egypt 
 to  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates.  As  friends  and 
 foes,  as  oppressors  and  oppressed, — but  ever  as 
 freemen, — the  seed  of  Ishmael  have  dwelt  in  the 
 presence  of  their  brethren. 
 
 The  prophecy  which  drew  their  character  has 
 been  fulfilled  with  equal  minuteness  of  detail. 
 '  He  shall  be  a  wild  ass  of  a  man  (DlK  X"lS) ; 
 
 his  hand  against  every  man,  and  every  man's  hand 
 against  him.'  A  recent  commentator  on  the  pas- 
 sage has  illustrated  the  prophecy  with  equal  force 
 and  beauty.  '  The  character  of  the  Ishmaelites, 
 or  the  Bedouins,  could  not  be  described  more  aptly 
 or  more  powerfully.  Against  them  alone  time 
 seems  to  have  no  sickle,  and  the  conqueror's  sword 
 no  edge.  They  have  defied  the  softening  influence 
 of  civilization,  and  mocked  the  attacks  of  the 
 invader.  Ungovernable  and  roaming,  obeying  no 
 law  but  their  spirit  of  adventure,  regarding  all 
 mankind  as  their  enemies,  whom  they  must  either 
 attack  with  their  spears  or  elude  with  their  faithful 
 steeds,  and  cherishing  their  deserts  as  heartily  as 
 they  despise  the  constraint  of  towns  and  com- 
 munities ;  the  Bedouins  are  the  outlaws  among  the 
 nations.  Plunder  is  legitimate  gain,  a  daring  rob- 
 bery is  praised  as  valour.     Liberty  is  the  element 
 
ISHMAEL 
 
 431 
 
 ISHMAEL  B.  ELISA 
 
 which  the  Arab  breathes,  and  if  he  were  thrown 
 into  servitude  lie  would  either  break  the  yoke  or 
 perish  in  the  attempt.  He  cannot,  indeed,  be 
 better  compared  than  with  a  wild  ass.  This  in- 
 domitable animal,  which  defies  the  swiftness  of  the 
 swiftest  horse,  delights  in  its  native  deserts,  easily 
 satisfied  with  the  scanty  food  furnished  by  those 
 inhospitable  regions.  It  seems  to  revel  in  inde- 
 pendence, free  from  the  master's  pressing  voice,  it 
 scorns  the  tumult  of  the  town,  and  roves  on  the 
 parched  mountain  sides  in  search  of  grass  and 
 herbs.  Although  in  the  zones  it  generally  inhabits 
 water  seems  a  vital  condition,  the  wild  ass  can  long 
 exist  without  it ;  and  its  marvellous  power  of  en- 
 during hunger  and  thirst  explains  its  preservation 
 in  its  arid  and  cheerless  abodes.  .  .  .  With  such 
 animals  are  the  Bedouins  pointedly  compared  ;  to 
 the  latter  may  be  properly  applied  the  words  of 
 Job  :  '  Who  hath  sent  out  the  wild  ass  free  ?  or 
 who  hath  loosed  the  bands  of  the  wild  ass  ?  whose 
 house  I  have  made  the  wilderness,  and  the  barren 
 land  its  dwellings '  (xxxix.  5,  6).  They  may  be 
 hunted  like  game,  but  they  cannot  be  caught ; 
 their  wants  are  few,  they  neither  covet  wealth  nor 
 tempt  the  conqueror's  avarice,  and  the  waste  tracts 
 shunned  by  other  nations  are  their  terrestrial  para- 
 dise. '  In  the  desert,  everybody  is  everybody's 
 enemy,'  is  their  proverbial  saying ;  and  they  express, 
 therefore,  only  in  other  words  the  sense  of  our  text, 
 'his  hand  will  be  against  every  man,  and  every  man's 
 hand  against  him"  (Kalisch,  adloc.)  "W^o.  desert  vi 
 now  and  has  always  been  the  home  of  the  Ishmaelite. 
 
 In  Arabic  the  desert  is  called  bedii.  (,  A.',  campus  in 
 
 quo  nulla  sunt Jirmahabitaaila,Yvey\.s.g,  s.  v.),  hence 
 
 the  genuine  Arab  calls  himself  Bedaiuy  r      ,  Jj  or 
 
 *\jJ}    'S'  ™an  of  the  desert,'    pi.    Bcdazvtn). 
 
 The  Ishmaelites  are  nomads,  moving  from  place  to 
 place  as  the  requirements  of  water  and  pasture,  the 
 chances  of  war,  or  the  hope  of  plunder,  may  lead 
 them.  They  live  exclusively  in  tents,  and  have  a 
 kind  of  instinctive  dread  of  towns,  villages,  and 
 permanent  habitations.  They  can  pitch  and  move 
 their  camps  with  almost  incredible  rapidity,  while 
 on  their  fleet  dromedaries  and  fleeter  horses  they 
 sweep  like  a  tornado  across  the  broad  plams,  now 
 plundering  a  caravan  beneath  the  walls  of  Baghdad, 
 and  anon  carrying  off  the  flocks  of  some  border 
 town  of  Syria.  And  it  has  not  been  on  the  con- 
 fines of  their  own  desert  home  only  that  'the 
 hand  of  the  Ishmaelite  has  been  against  every 
 man.'  Inspired  by  the  fierce  fanaticism,  and  led 
 by  the  daring  chiefs  of  Mohammed,  they  carried 
 their  victorious  arms  to  the  banks  of  the  Oxus  and 
 the  Indus  on  the  east,  and  over  Syria,  Egypt, 
 Northern  Africa,  and  Spain,  to  the  shores  of  the 
 Atlantic  on  the  west.  Nearly  4000  years  have 
 passed  since  the  Ishmaelites  became  a  nation,  and 
 yet  in  disposition,  in  manners,  in  habits,  in  govern- 
 ment, in  occupation,  and  even  in  dress,  they  are 
 the  same  as  they  were  at  the  first.  The  writer  has 
 seen  much  of  them,  and  lived  among  them  ;  he 
 has  experienced  both  their  hospitality  and  their 
 hostility,  and  all  his  personal  knowledge  has  tended 
 to  impress  more  deeply  upon  his  mind  the  won- 
 derful accuracy  of  those  brief  but  graphic  descrip- 
 tions given  in  the  words  of  O.  T.  prophecy.  (In 
 addition    to    the    books   already   referred   to,    the 
 
 student  may  consult  Burckhardt's  Travels  in  Syria 
 Travels  tn  Arabia,  Notes  07i  the  Bedouifi ;  D'Ar- 
 vieux's  Travels  in  Arabia;  Niebuhr's  Descriptio7t 
 de  r Aratiie ;  Porter's  Five  Years  in  Darnasais ; 
 Eichhorn's  Momaneiita  Antiqiiiss.  Hist.  Ara^ 
 bu/n.) 
 
 2.  ISHMAEL,  tlie  son  of  Nethaniah,  one  of  the 
 royal  family  of  Judah,  who  committed  acts  of  great 
 treachery  and  ci-uelty  in  Palestine  during  the  Baby- 
 lonish captivity.  It  appears  that  during  the  wars 
 which  preceded  the  captivity,  he,  and  a  numerous 
 band  of  followers,  took  refuge  among  the  Ammon- 
 ites. When  Gedahah  was  appointed  governor  by 
 the  king  of  Babylon,  these  refugees  determined  to 
 slay  him.  They  returned  to  Palestine,  came  to 
 Gedaliah  at  Mizpah  under  the  mask  of  friendship, 
 and  after  being  kindly  received  and  promised  full 
 protection,  Ishmael  treacherously  murdered  him. 
 This  did  not  satisfy  his  savage  cruelty  ;  he  slew  all 
 the  Jews  and  Chaldeans  who  were  with  Gedaliah 
 in  Mizpah,  and  eighty  others,  who  came  from 
 vShechem,  Shiloh,  and  Samai'ia,  with  offerings  to 
 the  Lord ;  and  then,  seizing  the  women  and  the 
 remaining  inhabitants  of  Mizpah,  he  attempted  to 
 carry  them  captive  to  the  country  of  the  Ammon- 
 ites. In  this,  however,  he  was  disappointed,  for 
 they  were  rescued  in  passing  Gibeon  ;  the  followers 
 of  Ishmael  were  dispersed,  but  Ishmael  himself 
 effected  his  escape  (2  Kings  xxv.  23-28  ;  Jer.  xl. ; 
 xli.  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  x.  9). 
 
 Several  other  Ishmaels  are  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
 ture (l  Chron.  viii.  38 ;  2  Chron.  xix.  11 ;  xxiii.  i ; 
 Ezra  X.  22). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 ISHMAEL  B.  Elisa  (JHD  "H^hvi,  p  ^XyOt^''  '1 
 
 pnj).  This  renowned  Rabbi,  who  is  one  of  the 
 principal  interpreters  of  the  Pentateuch  or  Law 
 (mn)  mentioned  in  the  Mishna,  was  the  son  of  the 
 high-priest  Elisha  b.  Fabi,  whom  Josephus  (Anliq. 
 XX.  7)  erroneously  calls  Ishmael  b.  Fabi.  He  was 
 born  about  A.  D.  60,  carried  away  a  captive  to 
 Rome  during  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  when  a 
 child,  and  was  afterwards  redeemed  by  R.  Joshua, 
 who,  when  at  the  Eternal  city,  with  R.  Eliezer  b. 
 Azzariah  and  R.  Gamaliel  II.,  as  deputation  to  in- 
 tercede with  the  emperor  Domitian  in  behalf  of 
 their  suffering  brethren  {circa  A. D.  83),  heard  of 
 the  imprisonment  of  this  far-famed  beautiful  boy. 
 He  at  once  went  to  the  prison  and  exclaimed  at  the 
 Qcor — '  Who  gave  Jacob  for  a  spoil  and  Israel  to 
 the  robbers  ! '  (Is.  xlii.  24)  ;  and  when  the  captive 
 boy  touchingly  replied,  '  The  Lord,  against  whom 
 we  have  sinned,  and  would  not  walk  in  his  ways, 
 nor  be  obedient  unto  his  law '  {ibid.),  the  rabbi 
 vowed  that  he  would  not  quit  Rome  till  he  had  re- 
 deemed this  remarkable  youth  {Giitin,  58,  a).  R. 
 Ishmael  afterwards  lived  in  southern  Judcea,  not  far 
 from  the  Idumaean  boundaries  {KetJniboth,  64,  b),  at 
 a  place  called  Kephar-Aziz  (TVy  "123)  where  he  occu- 
 pied himself  with  the  cultivation  of  the  vine  {Mishna 
 Kilaitn,  vi.  4),  and  spent  a  large  portion  of  his 
 wealth  in  maintaining  and  fitting  out  young  women 
 who  had  been  impoverished  by  the  desolations  of 
 the  war  {Nedarim,  66,  a).  The  remarkable  part 
 of  his  life  to  us  is  the  system  of  interpretation  which 
 he  laid  down,  and  which,  as  the  head  of  a  large 
 school  in  the  apostolic  age,  he  propounded  to  his 
 disciples.  As  his  exegetical  canons  were  avowedly 
 opposed  to  those  of  his  contemporary  R.  Akiba, 
 the  head  of  an  equally  numerous  and  influential 
 school,  and  as  the  mode  in  which  the  Scriptures 
 
ISHMAEL  B.  ELISA 
 
 432 
 
 ISHMAEL  B.  ELISA 
 
 were  explained  in  the  apostolic  age  will  be  better 
 understood  by  setting  forth  the  two  systems,  we 
 shall  notice  R.  Akiba's  principles  of  interpretation 
 before  stating  the  rules  which  R.  Ishmael  laid 
 down.  According  to  some  ancient  notions  which 
 R.  Akiba  systematized,  every  repetition,  figure, 
 parallelism,  synonym,  word,  letter,  particle,  ple- 
 onasm, nay  the  very  shape,  and  eveiy  ornament  of 
 a  letter  or  title,  has  a  recondite  meaning  in  the 
 Scripture,  'just  as  every  fibre  of  a  fly's  wing  or 
 an  ant's  foot  has  its  peculiar  significance.'  Hence 
 he  maintained  that  the  particles  hn,  DJ,  "jt^,  and  pi, 
 as  well  as  the  construction  of  the  finite  verb  with 
 the  infinitive,  ex.  gr.,  Vj]^'^2VT\  Dnyn,  n^m  at^'H, 
 have  a  dogmatic  significance,  and  he,  therefore,  de- 
 duced points  of  law  from  them.  Philo  was  of  the 
 same  opinion  (comp.  cra^ujj  et'Sois,  6'rt  irepiTTov 
 ovo/j-a  ovdiv  TLjSrjcriv,  inrb  ttjs  tov  irpayiiaToKoyelv 
 a/xv^-qrov  <popas,  De  proftii^is,  ed.  Mangey,  p.  458), 
 only  that  he  deduced  from  them  ethical  and  philo- 
 sophical maxims  ;  and  this  was  also  the  opinion  of 
 the  Greek  translator  of  Ecclesiastes  in  the  Septua- 
 gint,  as  may  be  seen  from  his  anxiety  to  indicate 
 the  Hebrew  particle  HX  by  the  Greek  ciV,  which 
 has  greatly  perplexed  the  commentators  who,  being 
 unacquainted  with  this  fact,  have  been  unable  to 
 account  for  this  barbarism  and  violation  of  gram- 
 matical propriety  (comp.  Ginsburg,  Coinnent.  on 
 Ecclesiastes,  p.  496).  Now  R.  Ishmael  opposed 
 this  mode  of  interpretation,  and  maintained  that 
 the  Bible,  being  written  in  human  language,  uses 
 expressions  in  their  common  acceptation,  that 
 many  of  the  repetitions  and  parallelisms  are  simply 
 designed  to  render  the  style  more  rhetorical  and 
 powerful,  and  cannot,  therefore,  without  violation 
 of  the  laws  of  language  be  adduced  in  support  of 
 legal  deductions.    Accordingly  he  laid  down  thirteen 
 
 exegetical  rules  which  are  called  JTilD  mtJ'y  tivB' 
 
 i'XyntJ'^  '•nm,  the  thirteen  niles  of  R.  Ishmael,  by 
 which  alone  the  Scriptures  are  to  be  interpreted 
 (Dna  mrr\l  rrmrW),  and  which  are  as  follows  :— 
 
 1.  Inferejtce  from  Minor  to  Major,  IJoni  Pp.  — 
 As  this  law  has  been  laid  down  by  Hillel  I.,  and 
 as  it  is  illustrated  by  examples  in  its  proper  place 
 [Hillel],  we  shall  only  add  that  the  object  of 
 inference  {i.e.,  the  major)  must  never  be  treated 
 more  rigorously  than  the  subject  from  which  the 
 inference  is  made  (i.  e.,  the  minor),  as  is  evident 
 from  Num.  xii.  14,  15,  where  the  argument  de 
 minore  ad  maJoi-em  is  employed  by  God  httnself, 
 and  where,  as  the  Talmud  rightly  remarks  {Baba 
 Kama,  28,  a),  Miriam,  who  offended  her  hea- 
 venly Father,  is  not  treated  more  rigorously  than  a 
 daughter  who  offends  her  earthly  parent  (comp. 
 also  Mishna,  Baba  Kaina,  ii.  5). 
 
 2.  The  Comparison  of  Words  or  Ideas  (iTT'fJ 
 nitJ*). — When  a  similar  expression  occurs  in  the 
 Bible  in  connection  with  two  subjects,  the  same 
 law  is  under  certain  circumstances  applied  to  both. 
 Three  distinctions  must  be  observed  in  the  appli- 
 cation of  this  exegetical  law : — i.  Either  the  ex- 
 pression is  superfluous  in  both  passages,  in  which 
 case  there  can  be  no  objection  to  this  comparison 
 of  words,  inasmuch  as  the  very  employment  in 
 both  places  of  the  same  or  a  similar  superfluous 
 expression  indicates  a  design  ;  or  2.  The  expression 
 is  necessary  in  both  places,  in  which  case  no  com- 
 parison is  made,  as  the  HIC'  mM  is  eo  ipso  null 
 5ud  void,  because  the  expressions  are  wanted  to 
 
 explain  the  sense,  and  cannot  therefore  be  em- 
 ployed for  the  deduction  of  particular  laws  ;  or  3. 
 One  of  the  expressions  is  superfluous,  in  which 
 case  the  inference  may  be  made,  provided  no  ob- 
 jection can  be  raised  against  it  from  another  law 
 which  has  assigned  a  distinction  to  the  subject  of 
 comparison  (comp.  Jebamoth,  70,  b). 
 
 3.  Building  of  the  fatht)-,  or  the  chief  law,  from 
 one  verse,  and  the  chief  laiv  from  two  verses  (UN  pJ3 
 
 D'^nina  ''JE^'?^  3t«  pjni  ins  mn^a).    That  is  to 
 
 say,  a  law  which  is  applied  in  the  Bible  to  two 
 subjects  different  in  nature,  and  occurring  either  in 
 one  verse  or  in  two  separate  verses,  and  through 
 which  these  subjects  become  alike,  is  considered  as 
 the  chief  law,  and  every  subject  which  through  one 
 point  comes  within  its  range,  is  also  put  thereby, 
 in  all  other  respects,  on  an  equality  with  those  two 
 subjects.  This  hermeneutical  law  is  called  3S  PJD, 
 btiilding  of  the  father,  because  it  requires  two  sub- 
 jects, and  something  whereby  they  are  connected, 
 as  if  it  were  two  bricks  constituting  the  walls,  and 
 one  serving  as  a  cover  and  medium  to  join  the  two 
 walls  together.  The  term  2!^,  father,  shows  the 
 superior  power  and  durability  of  this  exegetical 
 law  (comp.  Pesachim,  86,  b  ;  Succa,  6,  b  ;  feba- 
 moth,  8,  a  ;  Kiddushim,  18,  b  ;  Saiihedrivi,  4,  a  ; 
 Maccoth,  37,  b ;  Berachoth,  34,  a ;  Kerithoth,  17,  b). 
 
 4.  General  and  Special  (D1D1  ?)2^. — Thus  when 
 the  law  mentions  first  a  general  subject  which  has 
 fewer  marks  and  is  of  a  wider  compass,  and  this  is 
 followed  by  a  special  subject,  with  more  marks 
 and  of  a  smaller  compass,  the  definition  of  the  lat- 
 ter is  applied  to  the  former  in  the  interpretation  of 
 the  law  (comp.  Tosafoth  Nasir,  35,  b,  and  art. 
 Hillel). 
 
 5.  Special  and  Gene>-al  (PPJI  D"lD). — If  vice 
 versa  a  special  subject  is  followed  by  a  general  one, 
 the  special  is  extended  by  the  general,  since, 
 according  to  the  traditional  mode  of  interpretation, 
 the  first  term  is  to  be  explained  by  the  one  which 
 follows  it.  Thus  when  it  is  said,  Exod.  xxii.  9, 
 '  If  a  man  deliver  unto  his  neighbour  an  ass,  or  an 
 ox,  or  a  sheep,  or  any  beast,  to  keep,'  where  ass, 
 ox,  and  sheep  are  special,  but  the  following  expres- 
 sion nDHQ,  beast  or  cattle,  is  general,  the  preceding 
 special  terms  are  extended  thereby,  and  it  is  con- 
 cluded that  everything  living,  even  if  it  is  not  like 
 the  ass,  ox,  or  sheep,  comes  under  this  law. 
 
 6.  General  Special  and  General  (hy\  D"1D"I  ^^3). 
 That  is,  when  the  general  is  followed  by  a  special 
 and  this  again  by  a  general  subject,  the  law  is  inter- 
 preted according  to  the  marks  of  the  special  sub- 
 ject, since  there  is  a  doubt  whether  the  stress  lies 
 upon  the  middle  term,  whereby  the  first  general 
 term  is  limited,  or  upon  the  last  general  term, 
 which  obtains  a  wider  generality  through  it. 
 Hence  the  middle  course  is  taken,  and  the  law  is 
 neither  extended  to  the  whole  compass  of  the  last 
 expression  nor  limited  to  the  middle  term,  but  is 
 applied  to  everything  which  resembles  it.  Thus, 
 for  instance,  when  Deut.  xiv.  26  ordains  that  the 
 money  realised  from  the  sale  of  the  tithes  to  be 
 taken  to  the  Temple  '  may  be  bestowed  on  what- 
 soever thy  sold  lusteth  after  [general],  for  oxen,  or 
 for  sheep,  or  for  wine,  or  for  strong  drink  [special], 
 and  for  whatsoever  thy  soul  desireth'  [general 
 again],  it  is  concluded  that  just  as  the  general  has 
 two  properties.  Viz.,  fecit /idity,  which  is  the  case  with 
 oxen  and  sheep,  and  sustenance,  which  is  the  case 
 
ISHMAEL  B.  ELISA 
 
 433 
 
 ISHTOB 
 
 ttdth  wine,  so  the  subject  which  is  to  be  comprised 
 therein  must  have  these  two  properties  ;  and  as 
 winged  animals  liave  these  two  qualities,  the  money 
 in  question  may  be  expended  upon  them.  It  is, 
 however,  a  matter  of  dispute  whether  the  resem- 
 blance is  to  be  established  on  the  ground  of  two  or 
 three  properties  (comp.  Erubim,  27,  b  ;  28,  a). 
 
 7.  A  general  subject  -which  requires  a  special  one, 
 
 and  a  special  'which  requires  a  general  subject  (773 
 
 fe^  yrir\  DISI  DIS^  in^'n)  for  mutual  ex- 
 planation.— The  difference  between  this  rule  and 
 rules  4  and  5  is  that  the  foi'mer  is  incomplete  with- 
 out farther  explanation,  whilst  the  latter  are  com- 
 plete in  themselves.  Thus,  for  instance,  in  the  law 
 respecting  the  sanctification  of  the  first-born,  we 
 have  in  Exod.  xiii.  2,  '  Sanctify  unto  me  all  the 
 first-born  [general],  whatsoever  openeth  the  womb' 
 [special],  and  in  Deut.  xv.  19  is  added,  '  all  the 
 firstling  males  thou  shalt  sanctify'  [special],  ex- 
 plaining the  general  tevrajirst-born,  which  includes 
 both  males  and  females,  to  denote  males  only. 
 But  as  the  term  male  is  still  insufficient,  inasmuch 
 as  it  simply  denotes  the  first  male,  which  may  have 
 been  preceded  by  the  birth  of  females — the  phrase 
 '  whatsover  openeth  the  womb '  is  added,  thus 
 restricting  it  to  the  first-born  (comp.  Bechoroth, 
 19,  a). 
 
 8.  WJien  a  special  law  is  enacted  for  something 
 •which  has  already  been  comprised  in  a  general  law, 
 it  shows  that  it  is  also  to  be  applied  to  the  zohole 
 
 class  (K^,  ^)2hh  ^bn  p  N\'M  hh^^i  r\'^r\'^  lai 
 n:»*^  1^3  ^bn  hv  "^dh  aha,  a.-^'  in^'y  hv  "^dW 
 
 Thus  it  is  enacted  in  Lev.  vii.  20,  that  '  the  soul 
 that  eateth  of  peace-offerings  that  pertain  unto 
 the  Lord,  having  his  uncleanness  upon  him,  shall 
 be  cut  off  from  his  people,'  which  is  already  com- 
 prised in  the  law,  '  he  shall  not  eat  of  the  holy  things' 
 {ibid.  xxii.  4),  since  peace-offerings  are  holy  things, 
 hence  it  is  inferred  that  it  is  applicable  to  all  the 
 sacrifices  which  belong  to  the  category  of  peace- 
 offerings,  but  not  to  other  classes  of  sacrifices 
 which  are  devoted  to  the  service  of  the  Temple. 
 This  exegetical  rule,  however,  is  not  applicable  in 
 case  the  subject  thus  singled  out  from  the  general 
 law  for  special  enactment  is  expressed  in  the  posi- 
 tive, and  the  general  law  itself  is  in  the  negative 
 form  (comp.  Jebamoth,  7,  a ;  Shebuoth,  7,  a ; 
 Rashi  on  Sabbath,  70,  a). 
 
 9.  When  a  subject  ijicluded  in  a  general  descrip- 
 tion is  excepted  fro7n  it  for  another  enactmetit,  whilst 
 it  remains  in  all  other  respects  like  it,  it  is  excepted 
 
 to  be  alleviated  but  not  aggravated  (7?D3  nTIti*  "IHT 
 
 "l^JOnnP). — Thus,  for  instance,  in  Lev.  xiii.  18  it 
 is  stated,  '  The  flesh,  when  there  was  in  the  skin 
 thereof  a  boil  and  it  healeth,'  and  in  ver.  24,  '  or 
 flesh,  when  there  was  in  the  skin  thereof  a  burn 
 from  fire.'  Now,  from  both  these,  which  seem 
 to  be  superfluous,  inasmuch  as  inflammation  and  a 
 burn  belong  to  eruptions,  and  hence  come  under  the 
 law  enacted  for  this  class  of  complaints,  it  is  in- 
 ferred that  they  are  only  subject  to  the  law  which 
 is  expressly  stated  here,  and  not  to  the  rigid  laws 
 which  are  elsewhere  enacted  about  eruptions. 
 
 10.  When  a  subject  included  in  a  general  descrip- 
 tion is  excepted  from  it  for  another  enactment,  whilst 
 it  is  also  not  like  it  in  other  respects,  it  is  excepted 
 both  to  be  alleviated  and  aggravated,  i.e.,  its  connec- 
 
 VOL,  U 
 
 tion  with  the  general  law  entirely  ceases  (HNIC'  "l3  1 
 
 hx>rh  x^*i  irjyD  s^jr,  nns  pyo  pyoi'  x^'"i  ^ba 
 
 TH3nn?'l). — Thus,  for  instance,  from  the  special 
 mention  in  Lev.  xiii.  29,  '  If  a  man  or  woman  have 
 a  plague  upon  the  head  or  the  beard,'  when  we 
 should  have  thought  that  head  and  beard  are  com- 
 prised under  the  skin  and  flesh,  and  come  under  the 
 law  of  skin  diseases  generally,  it  is  inferred  that 
 they  are  only  comprised  under  it  in  name  but  not 
 in  reality,  and  are  the  subject  of  speciallavv  (comp. 
 ibid.,  vers.  10,  25,  30). 
 
 1 1.  If  a  subject  included  in  a  general  description 
 has  been  excepted  from  it  for  the  enactment  of  a  new  and 
 opposite  laiu,  it  cannot  be  restored  again  to  thegeneral 
 class  unless  the  Bible  itself  expressly  restores  it  ("13T 
 
 ^3^  nnx  ^s  B^nnn  -imi  \v:h  xv^i  hh^i  n\it}' 
 ^-\^^i  ninan  "mnn'^t^  iy  i^b^  nnnn^).— Thus, 
 
 from  the  statement  in  Lev.  xiv.  13,  'And  he  shall 
 slay  the  lamb  in  the  place  where  he  shall  kill  the 
 sin-offering  and  the  bumt-offering,  in  the  holy 
 place ;  for  as  the  sin-offering  is  the  priest's,  so  is 
 the  trespass-offering  ;  it  is  most  holy  ; '  it  is  inferred 
 that  the  phrase  '  as  the  sin-offering  so  is  the  trespass- 
 ofering,^  which  would  otherwise  be  entirely  super- 
 fluous, shows  that  the  special  subject  respecting 
 which  new  laws  had  been  passed  (comp.  Lev.  xiv. 
 13  with  vii.  2-5),  whereby  it  had  been  put  in 
 opposition  to  the  general  class,  is  again  united  and 
 put  on  an  equahty  therewith  (comp.  Jebatnoth, 
 7,  a ;  Sebachim,  49,  a). 
 
 12.  The  sense  of  an  indefinite  statement  must 
 either  be  determined  from  its  connection  (comp.  Art. 
 HiLLEL,  rule  7)   or  from  the  form  and  tendency  of 
 
 the  stateinent  itself  (ID^n  imi  "I3''JVD  ntD^H  im 
 1D1DD). 
 
 13.  When  two  statements  seem  to  conti'adict  each 
 other,    a   third  statement  will  reconcile  them  CJt^ 
 
 It  will  be  seen  in  the  article  MiDRASHiM  of  this 
 Cyclopedia  that  these  heiTneneutical  rules  are  most 
 important  to  the  understanding  of  the  ancient  ver- 
 sions. R.  Ishmael  is  also  the  reputed  author  of 
 the  celebrated  Midrash  or  traditional  commentary 
 
 on  Exod.  xii.-xxiii.  20,  called  KD^'^ro  [Midrash]. 
 Comp.  Zunz,  Die  Gottesdienstlichen  Vortrdge  der 
 Juden,  Berlin  1832,  p.  47,  etc.  ;  Flirst,  Bibliotheca 
 Judaica  ii.,  p.  75,  etc.  ;  Pinner,  Talmud  Babli, 
 vol.  i.,  Berlin  1842,  p.  17,  etc.  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte 
 der  Juden,  vol.  iv.,  Leipzig  1853,  p.  68,  etc.  ; 
 Steinschneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Biblio- 
 theca Bodleiana,  col.  1 160,  etc.  ;  Ben  Chananja, 
 vol.  L,  Szegedin  1858,  p.  122,  etc. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 ISHTOB  (niD  t^'''^?,  'men  of  good;'  'lo-rci^; 
 Istob).  It  is  doubtful  whether  this  is  to  be  taken 
 as  one  word,  Ishtob,  or  whether  the  sacred  writer 
 intended  to  express  by  it  the  'men'  (C^^K)  or  in- 
 habitants 'of  Tob,'  as  in  the  phrase  ^X"lb^"E'''N, 
 '  the  men  of  Israel'  ( Judg.  xx.  39).  According  to 
 the  latter  interpretation  2  Sam.  x.  6  would  read 
 'The  children  of  Amnion  sent  and  hired  the 
 Syrians  of  Beth-rehob,  and  the  Syrians  of  Zoba, 
 twenty  thousand  footmen,  and  of  king  Maacah  a 
 thousand  men,  and  the  men  of  Tob  twelve  thousand 
 men.'  In  ver.  8,  the  only  other  place  where  Ishtob 
 occurs,   it  may  be  interpreted  in  the  same  way, 
 
 2  K 
 
ISIDORUS 
 
 434 
 
 ISLE,  ISLAND 
 
 though  it  has  there  more  the  appearance  of  a  pro- 
 per name  ;  and  we  know  that  proper  names  were 
 sometimes  compounded  of  ^^H,  as  /r^-boshetli 
 and  Js/iod.  Whatever  the  name  may  have  been, 
 reference  is  evidently  made  to  one  of  the  small 
 principalities  of  Aram  south  of  Damascus.  'The 
 land  of  Tob'  lay  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  may  per- 
 haps be  the  same  here  referred  to  (Judg.  xi.  3,  5  j 
 Tob).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 ISIDORUS  HisPALENsis,  bishop  of  Seville 
 (Hispalis),  was  born  about  A.D.  570  at  Cartha- 
 gena,  of  which  city  his  father  Severianus  was  the 
 Prsefect.  In  the  year  600  or  601  he  succeeded  his 
 brother  Leander  in  the  episcopate  of  Seville.  He 
 presided  at  the  second  council  of  Seville  (A.D.  619) 
 and  at  the  council  of  Toledo,  held  in  the  year  633. 
 He  died  April  4,  636.  For  variety  and  extent  of 
 knowledge  Isidore  is  entitled  to  rank  amongst  the 
 most  learned  men  of  his  time,  and  his  numerous 
 writings,  which  exhibit  a  marvellous  degree  of 
 familiarity  with  almost  every  branch  of  learning 
 then  known,  rendered  important  sei'vice  to  his 
 country  and  age.  Of  his  extant  works,  those  which 
 relate  to  Biblical  exegesis  are — i .  Procemia  hi  Libros 
 Veteris  ac  Novi  Testamenii,  which,  as  its  title  inti- 
 mates, consists  of  brief  summaries  of  the  contents 
 of  the  books  of  the  O.  and  N.  T.  ;  2.  Liber  nia/ie- 
 ronim  qui  in  Sanctis  Scripturis  ocairrunt,  which 
 may  be  described  as  a  brief  treatise  on  the  mystic 
 signification  of  numbers ;  3.  Allegoria  qticEdam 
 SanctcB  ScriptiircE,  brief  allegorical  explanations 
 of  various  terms  and  passages  in  the  O.  and  N. 
 T.  ;  4.  QiKEsfiones  de  Veteri  et  Novo  Testamento, 
 a  short  Scripture  catechism  ;  and  5.  Mysticorum 
 expositiones  sacrafnentorum  sen  Qnixsiiones  in  Vetus 
 Testamentiun,  This,  which  is  the  largest  and 
 most  important  of  his  Biblical  works,  consists 
 of  expositions  of  various  passages  in  the  Penta- 
 teuch, Joshua,  Judges,  and  1st  and  2d  Samuel, 
 1st  and  2d  Kings,  Esdras,  and  IMaccabees,  selected 
 for  the  most  part  from  the  writings  of  Origen, 
 Victorinus,  Ambrose,  Jerome,  Augustine,  Cassian, 
 and  Gregoiy  the  Great.  As  its  title  leads  us  to 
 expect,  it  is  constructed  on  the  principle  of  finding 
 a  mystical  meaning  in  the  minutest  details  of  the 
 Scripture  narrative.  Thus,  for  instance,  in  the 
 explanations  of  the  work  of  creation,  the  gathering 
 together  of  the  salt  waters  is  said  to  donote  the 
 punishment  of  unbelievers  by  leaving  them  to  the 
 consequences  of  their  unbelief ;  whilst  the  dry  land 
 represents  the  men  who  are  thirsting  after  faith  ; 
 the  formation  of  man  from  the  dust  of  the  earth 
 prefigures  the  birth  of  Christ  from  the  seed  of 
 David  ;  and  the  creation  of  Eve  from  the  rib  taken 
 out  of  Adam's  side  represents  the  origination  of 
 the  Church  from  the  blood  which  flowed  from  the 
 side  of  the  Saviour.  In  addition  to  the  above- 
 mentioned  works  the  following  are  also  attributed 
 to  Isidore,  but  the  evidence  in  favour  of  their  au- 
 thenticity is  not  conclusive.  6.  Expositio  in  Ca7i- 
 ticutn  Canticortan  Solomonis.  7.  Testimonia  Divines 
 ScriptwcB  et  Patmm — A  classified  arrangement  of 
 Scriptural  texts  and  aphorisms  from  the  Fathers. 
 8.  GlussiB  ifi  Sacrant  Scripturam. — S.  N. 
 
 ISIDORUS  Pelusiota,  an  exegetical  writer 
 of  the  early  part  of  the  5th  century.  He  was  a 
 native  of  Alexandria  (Ephraem  of  Antioch  in  Pho- 
 iitis,  cod.  288),  and  if  we  may  believe  Nicephoms 
 {Hist.  Eccl.  xiv.  30)  was  a  disciple  of  Chrysostom. 
 From  two  of  his  extant  letters  (i.  epp.  310,  311)  it 
 
 appears  that  he  survived  the  council  of  Ephesus 
 (A.D.  381)  ;  and  from  another  (i.  ep.  370)  that  he 
 was  probably  then  of  great  age,  since  Cyril  ad- 
 dressed him  as  '  father.'  The  date  of  his  death  is 
 uncertain.  He  passed  a  large  part  of  his  life  in 
 monastic  seclusion  at  Pelusium,  and  hence  has 
 acquired  the  surname  Pelusiota.  He  was  greatly 
 celebrated  amongst  his  contemporaries  for  the 
 austerity  of  the  discipline  to  which  he  subjected 
 himself  (Evagrius,  Hist.  Eccl.  i.  15).  He  is  styled 
 'presbyter'  by  Facundius  Hermianensis,  a  writer 
 of  the  6th  century  {Pro  Def.  Triu?n  Capitid.  ii.  4), 
 who  speaks  of  him  as  '  vir  sanctissimus  et  magn^ 
 in  Ecclesia  Christi  glorise,'  and  adds,  that  '  he 
 wrote  two  thousand  letters  to  the  edification  of  the 
 church,  as  many  persons  well  knew.'  Other 
 writers  (Suidas  and  Nicephorus)  speak  of  nine  or 
 ten  thousand.  Of  the  letters  now  extant,  which 
 are  2013  in  number,  a  large  proportion  are  devoted 
 to  the  explanation  of  Scripture  passages.  From 
 these  it  is  evident  that  Isidore  enjoyed  a  high  repu- 
 tation as  an  expositor  of  Scripture,  and  that  a  large 
 number  of  persons  amongst  both  the  clergy  and 
 the  laity  were  in  the  habit  of  seeking  from  him  the 
 solution  of  their  exegetical  difficulties.  His  replies 
 are  written  in  a  terse  and  sententious  style,  and 
 contain  many  judicious  remarks  on  the  study  of 
 the  Scriptures  (ii.  ep.  63),  the  right  method  of 
 exegesis  (iii.  epp.  125,  292),  the  interpretation  of 
 prophecy  (iv.  ep.  203),  and  the  explanation  of 
 parables  (iv.  ep.  137).  As  an  expositor  he  follows 
 in  the  steps  of  Chrysostom,  of  whom  he  was  a 
 warm  admirer,  and  although  not  wholly  free  from 
 the  allegorizing  tendencies  of  the  times,  he  com- 
 monly bases  his  exposition  upon  a  careful  investi- 
 gation of  the  grammatical  sense.  His  explanations 
 show  a  sound  judgment  and  much  Christian  in- 
 sight, and  many  of  them  are  still  worthy  of  respect- 
 ful consideration. — S.  N. 
 
 ISLE,  ISLAND  CX  ;  Sept.  v=q<so%,  Vulg.  in- 
 sula). The  Hebrew  word  is  invariably  translated 
 either  by  the  former  or  by  the  latter  of  these  Eng- 
 lish words,  which,  having  the  same  meaning,  will 
 be  considered  as  one.  It  occurs  in  the  three  fol- 
 lowing senses.  First,  that  of  dry  land  in  opposi- 
 tion to  water;  as,  '  I  will  make  the  rivers  islands' 
 (Is.  xHi.  15).  In  Is.  XX.  6,  the  Isle  of  Ashdod 
 means  the  country,  and  is  so  rendered  in  the 
 margin.  In  Is.  xxiii.  2,  6,  'the  isle'  means  the 
 country  of  Tyre,  and  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  6,  7,  that  of 
 Chittim  and  Ehsha.  (See  also  Job  xxii.  30.) 
 Secondly  ;  it  is  used  both  in  Hebrew  and  Enghsh, 
 according  to  its  geographical  meaning,  for  a 
 country  surrounded  by  water,  as  in  Jer.  xlvii.  4, 
 '  the  isle  (margin)  of  Caphtor,'  which  is  probably 
 that  of  Cyprus.  'The  isles  of  the  sea'  (Esth.  x. 
 i)  are  evidently  put  in  opposition  to  '  the  land,'  or 
 continent.  In  Ps.  xcvii.  i,  '  the  multitude  of  the 
 isles'  seem  distinguished  from  the  earth  or  conti- 
 nents, and  are  evidently  added  to  complete  the 
 description  of  the  whole  world.  Thirdly;  the 
 word  is  used  by  the  Hebrews  to  designate  all 
 those  countries  divided  from  them  by  the  sea.  In 
 Is.  xi.  II,  after  an  enumeration  of  countries  lying 
 on  their  own  continent,  the  words,  '  and  the  islands 
 of  the  sea,'  are  added  in  order  to  comprehend 
 those  situate  beyond  the  ocean.  The  following 
 are  additional  instances  of  this  usage  of  the  word, 
 which  is  of  very  frequent  occurrence  (Is.  xlii. 
 10 ;  lix.  18;  Ixvi.   19;  Jer.  xxv.  22;  Ezek.  xxvii. 
 
ISRAEL 
 
 435 
 
 ISRAEL 
 
 3,  15;  Zeph.  ii.  11).  It  is  observed  by  Sir  I. 
 Newton  (on  Daniel,  p.  276),  '  By  the  earth  the 
 Jews  understood  the  great  continent  of  all  Asia 
 and  Africa,  to  which  they  had  access  by  land,  and 
 by  the  isles  of  the  sea  they  understood  the  places  to 
 which  they  sailed  by  sea,  particularly  all  Europe.' 
 -J.  F.  D. 
 
 ISRAEL  (^Xlb'S   for  h^  rrW\  contender  or 
 
 •wrestler  with  God,  Gen.  xxxii.  28 ;  Hos.  xii.  4), 
 the  name  received  from  God  by  the  patriarch 
 Jacob  on  the  occasion  of  the  mysterious  interview 
 on  Peniel.  Jacob  having  made  preparation  for 
 meeting  his  brother  Esau  on  his  return  from 
 Padan-Aram,  sent  his  people  on  across  the  brook 
 Jabbok,  while  he  remained  behind  to  spend  the 
 night  alone,  probably  in  earnest  prayer  for  divine 
 protection  and  help.  Here  during  the  night  a 
 being  appeared  to  him  in  the  form  of  a  man,  with 
 whom  the  patriarch  wrestled  until  the  dawn. 
 Unable  to  overcome  him,  the  stranger  touched  the 
 hollow  of  his  thigh,  that  is,  the  place  of  the  thigh- 
 joint,  the  effect  of  which  was  to  incapacitate  him 
 for  continuing  the  struggle.  Jacob  then  recog- 
 nised in  his  opponent  a  superior  being,  the  angel 
 of  Jehovah,  and  found  that  he  had  been  in  his 
 ignorance  struggling  with  God.  This  changed  his 
 course ;  he  then  betook  himself  to  prayers  and 
 tears,  and  by  these  he  prevailed  (Hos.  xii.  4) ;  his 
 former  antagonist  yielded  the  blessing  which  Jacob 
 implored,  and  to  signalise  his  success  and  per- 
 petuate the  lesson  the  scene  was  designed  to  teach, 
 he  said,  '  Thy  name  shall  be  called  no  more  Jacob 
 but  Israel,  for  thou  hast  wrestled  (n''"lb')  with  God 
 
 and  with  man,  and  hast  prevailed.'  It  is  the 
 opinion  of  many  who  accept  this  narrative  as  his- 
 torical, that  the  scene  narrated  took  place  in  a 
 vision  (Hengstenberg,  Schroder,  Umbreit,  Mil- 
 man,  etc.)  But  this  view  is  plainly  untenable;  the 
 wrestling  with  the  angel  is  no  more  a  vision  than  is 
 the  passing  over  Jabbok,  the  dawning  of  the  morn- 
 ing, or  the  halting  of  Jacob  ;  the  intention  of  the 
 writer  is  evidently  to  place  the  whole  on  the  same 
 level,  and  we  must  either  accept  the  scene  of  the 
 wrestling  as  a  fact,  or  reject  it  wholly  as  a  myth. 
 To  those  who  would  eliminate  the  supernatural  from 
 the  Bible  histories  entirely,  it  will  of  course  appear 
 as  the  latter.  But  if  the  supernatural  be  admitted, 
 if  it  be  believed  that  God  was  wont  to  appear  in 
 human  form  to  his  servants,  there  seems  no  diffi- 
 culty in  believing  the  whole  transaction  to  have 
 taken  place  as  it  is  narrated.  Where  the  super- 
 natural is  admitted  at  all,  it  is  absurd  to  cavil 
 about  a  greater  or  a  less  in  the  degree  of  mystery 
 attaching  to  any  reported  case  of  its  manifestation ; 
 and  in  the  case  before  us  it  is  not  more  incredible 
 that  the  angel  of  Jehovah  should  have  wrestled 
 with  Jacob  than  that  he  should  have  partaken  of 
 food  with  Abraham,  or  have  allowed  his  feet  to  be 
 washed  when  he  entered  that  patriarch's  tent 
 (Hofmann,  Schriftbeweis,  i.  334 ;  Kurz,  Hist,  of 
 Old  Gov.,  i.  333).  Besides,  what  is  gained  by  the 
 hypothesis  of  a  vision  ?  If  it  was  a  true  vision,  and 
 not  a  mere  idle  dream,  God  must  have  given  it ; 
 so  that  all  that  came  before  the  patriarch's  mind 
 was  a  representation  vouchsafed  by  God  himself. 
 But  if  it  were  unworthy  of  God  to  wrestle  with  his 
 creature,  was  it  worthy  of  him  to  represejtt  him- 
 self as  doing  so  ?  If  it  lowers  our  conception  of 
 God  to   suppose  him  actually  doing  any  given 
 
 thing,  does  it  mend  the  matter  to  say  that  he 
 virtually  did  that  thing  ?  To  most  minds,  we  pre- 
 sume, this  will  increase  the  difficulty  rather  than 
 alleviate  it;  as  is  generally  the  case  when  expe- 
 dients are  resorted  to  to  avoid  the  plain  obvious 
 meaning  of  Scripture.  As  to  the  nieanitig  and 
 intent  of  the  scene,  the  suggestion  of  Kurz  seems 
 most  probable,  that  God  designed  by  the  whole 
 transaction  to  teach  Jacob  that  it  was  not  by 
 human  astuteness  or  power  that  he  was  to  prevail, 
 but  by  submission,  dependence,  and  prayer.  '  As, 
 with  the  thigh  the  seat  of  his  natural  strength,  in 
 which  he  had  contended,  was  paralysed,  and  he 
 has  now  to  betake  himself  to  entreaty  and  prayer, 
 so  on  the  last  day  of  his  former  life  all  confidence 
 in  his  own  strength  which  he  had  hitherto  cherished, 
 all  trust  in  his  natural  cunning  and  cleverness,  is 
 cast  away.  He  acknowledges  that  he  is  overcome, 
 and  only  appeals  to  the  grace  and  promise  of  God 
 (Gen.  xxxii.  11,  13).  .  .  .  We  do  not  find  the 
 reason  of  the  victory  of  Jacob  over  Jehovah  in  the 
 continuance  of  his  bodily  wrestling  as  a  symbol  of 
 spiritual  wrestling,  but,  on  the  contrary,  we  regard 
 this  very  bodily  wrestling  as  representing  the  per- 
 versity which  had  characterised  his  former  life' 
 (Bk.  cited  p.  331). 
 
 2.  The  designation  of  the  people  descended  from 
 Jacob  (Gen.  xlviii.  20 ;  Exod.  v.  2 ;  Num.  xxi.  i ; 
 Josh.  iv.  22;  Rom.  ix.  6,  etc.)     For  this  we  have 
 
 sometimes  the  fuller  expression  ?X"ltJ'*  ^11,  E'ney 
 Yisrael,    Ghildren   of  Israel;    '"•  T\"'1,    Beyth    V., 
 
 House  of  I.;  '">  mj?,  'AdatA  K,  or  '""hnp,  Qhal 
 v.,  Gongregation  of  I. ;  '">  ''122^,  Shibhtey  K, 
 Tribes  of  I.  Israel  came  to  be  the  common 
 historical  designation  of  the  nation.  For  the  his- 
 tory of  the  IsraeUtish  people  before  the  division 
 of  kingdoms,  see  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Moses, 
 Wandering,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Saul, 
 David,  Solomon. 
 
 3.  A  name  of  honour  for  the  truly  pious  among 
 the  people,  the  elect  of  God  (Ps.  Ixxiii.  1 ;  Is.  xlix. 
 3 ;  Hosea  viii.  2 ;  Rom.  ix.  6,  xi.  26). 
 
 4.  The  designation  of  the  ten  tribes  which  sepa- 
 rated from  Judah  and  formed  The  Kingdom  of 
 Israel  (2  Sam  ii.  9;  i  Kings  xii.  i,  etc.) 
 
 5.  After  the  captivity  this  name  is  applied  to 
 the  whole  nation  as  settled  again  in  Palestine 
 (Ezra  ii.  70;  x.  5;  Neh.  xii.  47,  etc.)  ;  and  it  re- 
 mains the  designation  by  which  the  Jews  still 
 prefer  being  known. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 ISRAEL,  Kingdom  of.  The  separation  of  the 
 Hebrew  nation  into  two  parts,  of  which  one  was  to 
 embrace  ten  of  the  tribes,  and  be  distinctively 
 named  Israel,  had  its  origin  in  the  early  power  and 
 ambition  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim.  The  rivalry  of 
 Ephraim  and  Judah  began  almost  from  the  first 
 conquest  of  the  land ;  nor  is  it  unsignificant,  that 
 as  Caleb  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  so  did 
 Joshua  to  that  of  Ephraim.  From  the  veiy  begin- 
 ning Judah  learned  to  act  by  itself ;  but  the  central 
 position  of  Ephraim,  with  its  fruitful  and  ample 
 soil,  and  the  long-continued  authority  of  Joshua, 
 must  have  taught  most  of  the  tribes  west  of  the 
 Jordan  to  look  up  to  Ephraim  as  their  head  ;  and 
 a  still  more  important  superiority  was  conferred  on 
 the  same  tribe  by  the  fixed  dwelling  of  the  ark  at 
 Shiloh  for  so  many  generations  (Josh,  xviii.  etc. ) 
 Judah  could  boast  of  Hebron,  Machpelah,  Bethle- 
 hem, names  of  traditional  sanctity ;  yet  so  could 
 
ISRAEL 
 
 436 
 
 ISRAEL 
 
 Ephraim  point  to  Shechem,  the  ancient  abode  of 
 Jacob  ;  and  while  Judah,  being  on  the  frontier, 
 was  more  exposed  to  the  attack  of  the  powerful 
 Philistines,  Ephraim  had  to  fear  only  those 
 Canaanites  from  within  who  were  not  subdued  or 
 conciliated.  The  haughty  behaviour  of  the  Eph- 
 raimites  towards  Gideon,  a  man  of  Manasseh 
 (Judg.  viii.  i),  sufficiently  indicates  the  pretensions 
 they  made.  Still  fiercer  language  towards  Jeph- 
 thah  the  Gileadite  (Judg.  xii.  i)  was  retorted  by 
 less  gentleness  than  Gideon  had  shewn  ;  and  a 
 bloody  civil  war  was  the  result,  in  which  their  pride 
 met  with  a  severe  punishment.  This  may  in  part 
 explain  their  quiet  submission,  not  only  to  the 
 priestly  rule  of  Eli  and  his  sons,  who  had  their 
 centre  of  authority  at  Shiloh,  but  to  Samuel,  whose 
 administration  issued  from  three  towns  of  Benja- 
 min. Of  course  his  prophetical  character  and  per- 
 sonal excellence  eminently  contributed  to  this 
 result  ;  and  it  may  seem  that  Ephraim,  as  well 
 as  all  Israel  besides,  became  habituated  to  the  pre- 
 dominance of  Benjamin,  so  that  no  serious  resistance 
 was  made  to  the  supremacy  of  Saul.  At  his  death 
 a  new  schism  took  place  through  their  jealousy  of 
 Judah  ;  yet,  in  a  few  years'  time,  by  the  splendour 
 of  David's  victories,  and  afterwards  by  Solomon's 
 peaceful  power,  a  permanent  national  union  might 
 seem  to  have  been  effected.  But  the  laws  of  in- 
 heritance in  Israel,  excellent  as  they  were  for  pre- 
 venting permanent  alienation  of  landed  property, 
 and  the  degradation  of  the  Hebrew  poor  into 
 prasdial  slaves,  necessarily  impeded  the  perfect 
 fusion  of  the  tribes,  by  discouraging  intermarriage, 
 and  hindering  the  union  of  distant  estates  in  the 
 same  hands.  Hence,  when  the  sway  of  Solomon 
 began  to  be  felt  as  a  tyranny,  the  old  jealousies  of 
 the  tribes  revived,  and  Jeroboam,  an  Ephraimite 
 (l  Kings  xi.  26),  being  suspected  of  treason,  fled 
 to  Shishak,  king  of  Egypt.  The  death  of  Solomon 
 was  followed  by  a  defection  of  ten  of  the  tribes, 
 which  established  the  separation  of  Israel  from 
 Judah  (B.C.  975). 
 
 This  was  the  most  important  event  which  had 
 befallen  the  Hebrew  nation  since  their  conquest  of 
 Canaan.  The  chief  territory  and  population  were 
 now  with  Jeroboam,  but  the  religious  sanction,  the 
 legitimate  descent,  lay  with  the  rival  monarch. 
 From  the  political  danger  of  allowing  the  ten  tribes 
 to  go  up  to  the  sanctuary  of  Jerusalem,  the  princes 
 of  Israel,  as  it  were  in  self-defence,  set  up  a  sanc- 
 tuary of  their  own  ;  and  the  intimacy  of  Jeroboam 
 with  the  king  of  Eg>'pt  may  have  determined  his 
 preference  for  the  form  of  idolatry  (the  calves) 
 which  he  established  at  Dan  and  Bethel.  In 
 whatever  else  his  successors  differed,  they  one  and 
 all  agreed  in  upholding  this  worship,  which,  once 
 estabUshed,  appeared  essential  to  their  national 
 tmity.  Nevertheless  it  is  generally  understood  to 
 have  been  a  worship  of  Jehovali,  though  under  un- 
 lawful and  degrading  forms.  Worse  by  far  was 
 the  worship  of  Baal,  which  came  in  under  one 
 monarch  only,  Ahab,  and  was  destroyed  after  his 
 son  was  slain  by  Jehu.  A  secondary  result  of  the 
 revolution  was  the  ejection  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  from 
 their  lands  and  cities  in  Israel  ;  at  least,  such  as 
 remained  were  spiritually  degraded  by  the  com- 
 pliances required,  and  could  no  longer  offer  any 
 resistance  to  the  kingly  power  by  aid  of  their  sacred 
 character.  When  the  priestly  tribe  had  thus  lost 
 independence,  it  lost  also  the  power  to  assist  the 
 crown.     The  succession  of  Jeroboam's  family  was 
 
 hallowed  by  no  religious  blessing ;  and  when  his 
 son  was  slain,  no  Jehoiada  was  found  to  rally 
 his  supporters  and  ultimately  avenge  his  cause. 
 The  example  of  successful  usurpation  was  so  often 
 followed  by  the  captains  of  the  armies,  that  the 
 kings  in  Israel  present  to  us  an  irregular  series  of 
 dynasties,  with  several  short  and  tumultuous  reigns. 
 This  was  one  cause  of  disorder  and  weakness  to 
 Israel,  and  hindered  it  from  swallowing  up  Judah  : 
 another  was  found  in  the  relations  of  Israel  to- 
 wards foreign  powers,  which  will  presently  be 
 dwelt  upon. 
 
 Jeroboam  originally  fixed  on  Sheehem  as  the 
 centre  of  his  monarchy,  and  fortified  it ;  moved 
 perhaps  not  only  by  its  natural  suitability,  but  by 
 the  remembrances  of  Jacob  which  clove  to  it,  and 
 by  the  auspicious  fact  that  here  first  Israel  had  de- 
 cided for  him  against  Rehoboam.  But  the  natural 
 delightfulness  of  Tirza/i  (Cant.  vi.  4)  led  him,  per- 
 haps late  in  his  reign,  to  erect  a  palace  there  (l 
 Kings  xiv.  17).  After  the  murder  of  Jeroboam's 
 son,  Baasha  seems  to  have  intended  to  fix  his 
 capital  at  Rainah,  as  a  convenient  place  for  annoy- 
 ing the  king  of  Judah,  whom  he  looked  on  as  his 
 only  dangerous  enemy  ;  but  when  forced  to  re- 
 nounce this  plan  (xv.  17,  21),  he  acquiesced  in 
 Tirzah,  which  continued  to  be  the  chief  city  of 
 Israel,  until  Omri,  who,  since  the  palace  at  Tirzah 
 had  been  burned  during  the  civil  war  (i  Kings  xvi. 
 18),  built  Samaria,  with  the  ambition  not  uncom- 
 mon in  the  founder  of  a  new  dynasty  (xvi.  24). 
 Samaria  continued  to  the  end  of  the  monarchy  to 
 be  the  centre  of  administration  ;  and  its  strength 
 appears  to  have  justified  Omri's  choice.  For  de- 
 tails, see  Samaria  ;  also  Tirzah  and  Shechem. 
 
 There  is  reason  to  believe  that  Jeroboam  carried 
 back  with  him  into  Israel  the  good-will,  if  not  the 
 substantial  assistance,  of  Shishak  ;  and  this  will 
 account  for  his  escaping  the  storm  from  Egypt 
 which  swept  over  Rehoboam  in  his  fifth  year. 
 During  that  first  period  Israel  was  far  from  quiet 
 within.  Although  the  ten  tribes  collectively  had 
 decided  in  favour  of  Jeroboam,  great  numbers  of 
 individuals  remained  attached  to  the  family  of 
 David  and  to  the  worship  at  Jerusalem,  and  in  the 
 three  first  years  of  Rehoboam  migrated  into  Judah 
 (2  Chron.  xi.  16,  17).  Perhaps  it  was  not  until 
 this  process  commenced,  that  Jeroboam  was 
 worked  up  to  the  desperate  measure  of  erecting 
 rival  sanctuaries  with  visible  idols  (i  Kings  xii. 
 27) :  a  measure  which  met  the  usual  ill-success  of 
 profane  state-craft,  and  aggravated  the  evil  which 
 he  feared.  It  set  him  at  war  with  the  whole  order 
 of  priests  and  Levites,  whose  expulsion  or  subjuga- 
 tion, we  may  be  certain,  was  not  effected  without 
 convulsing  his  whole  kingdom,  and  so  occupying 
 him  as  to  free  Rehoboam  from  any  real  danger, 
 although  no  peace  was  made.  The  king  of  Judah 
 improved  the  time  by  immense  efforts  in  fortifying 
 his  territory  (2  Chron.  xi.  5-11)  ;  and,  although 
 Shishak  soon  after  carried  off  the  most  valuable 
 spoil,  no  great  or  definite  impression  could  be 
 made  by  Jeroboam.  Israel  having  so  far  taken  the 
 place  of  heatlien  nations,  and  being  already  per- 
 haps even  in  alliance  with  Egypt,  at  an  early  period 
 — we  know  not  how  soon — sought  and  obtained 
 the  friendship  of  the  kings  of  Damascus.  A  sense 
 of  the  great  advantage  derivable  from  such  a  union 
 seems  to  have  led  Ahab  afterwards  to  behave  with 
 mildness  and  conciliation  towards  Benhadad,  at 
 a  time  when  it  could  have  been  least  expected 
 
ISRAEL 
 
 437 
 
 ISRAEL 
 
 (i  Kings  XX.  31-34).  From  that  transaction 
 we  leam  that  Benhadad  I.  had  made  in  Damas- 
 cus 'streets  for  Omri,'  and  Omri  for  Benhadad 
 in  Samaria.  This,  no  doubt,  implied  that  'a 
 quarter'  was  assigned  for  Syrian  merchants  in 
 Samaria,  which  was  probably  fortified  like  the 
 'camp  of  the  Tyrians'  in  Memphis,  or  the  Eng- 
 lish factory  at  Calcutta ;  and  in  it,  of  course, 
 Syrian  worship  would  be  tolerated.  Against  such 
 intercourse  the  prophets,  as  might  be  expected,  en- 
 tered their  protest  (ver.  35-43)  ;  but  it  was  in  many 
 ways  too  profitable  to  be  renounced.  In  the  reign 
 of  Baasha,  Asa  king  of  Judah,  sensible  of  the  dan- 
 gerous advantage  gained  by  his  rival  through  the 
 friendship  of  the  Syrians,  determined  to  buy  them 
 off  at  any  price  [see  also  under  Judah]  ;  and  by 
 sacrificing  '  the  treasures  of  the  house  of  the  Lord 
 and  the  treasures  of  the  king's  house'  (xv.  18),  in- 
 duced Benhadad  I.  to  break  his  league  with  Baasha 
 and  to  ravage  all  the  northern  district  of  Israel. 
 This  drew  off  the  Israelitish  monarch,  and  enabled 
 Asa  to  destroy  the  fortifications  of  Ramah,  which 
 would  have  stopped  the  course  of  his  trade  (xv. 
 17),  perhaps  that  with  the  sea-coast  and  with  Tyre. 
 Such  was  the  beginning  of  the  war  between  Israel 
 and  Syria,  on  which  the  safety  of  Judah  at  that 
 time  depended.     Cordial  union  was\  not  again  re- 
 
 stored between  the  two  northern  states  until  the  days 
 of  Rezin  king  of  Syria,  and  Pekah  the  son  of  Rema- 
 liah,  when  Damascus  must  have  already  felt  the 
 rising  power  of  Nineveh.  The  renewed  alliance 
 instantly  proved  so  disastrous  to  Judah,  which 
 was  reduced  to  extremest  straits  (Is.  vii.  2 ;  2 
 Kings  xv.  37  ;  2  Chron.  xxviii.  5,  6),  as  may  seem 
 to  justify  at  least  the  policy  of  Asa's  proceeding. 
 Although  it  was  impossible  for  a  prophet  to  ap- 
 prove of  it  (2  Chron.  xvi.  7),  we  may  only  so  much 
 the  more  infer  that  Judah  was  already  brought 
 into  most  pressing  difficulties,  and  that  the  general 
 course  of  the  war,  in  spite  of  occasional  reverses, 
 was  decidedly  and  increasingly  favourable  to  Israel. 
 The  wars  of  Syria  and  Israel  were  carried  on 
 chiefly  under  three  reigns,  those  of  Benhadad  II., 
 Hazael,  and  Benhadad  III.,  the  two  first  monarchs 
 being  generally  prosperous,  expecially  Hazael,  the 
 last  being  as  decidedly  unsuccessful.  Although  these 
 results  may  have  depended  in  part  on  personal 
 qualities,  there  is  high  probability  that  the  feeble- 
 ness displayed  by  the  Syrians  against  Jehoash  and 
 his  son  Jeroboam  was  occasioned  by  the  pressure 
 of  the  advancing  empire  of  Nineveh.  To  make 
 this  clear,  a  small  table  of  synchronisms,  represent- 
 ing the  two  heathen  powers,  may  be  serviceable. 
 The  dates  are  only  approximate. 
 
 B.C. 
 
 Syria. 
 
 B.C. 
 
 Assyria. 
 
 1000? 
 980? 
 960? 
 940 
 910? 
 8S5 
 
 845 
 
 Rezon. 
 
 Hizion. 
 
 1 
 Tabrimon. 
 
 Benhadad  I. 
 
 Benhadad  II. 
 
 Hazael. 
 
 Benhadad  HI. 
 
 1050 
 940 
 
 850 
 800 
 765? 
 
 Nineveh  unable  to  resist  the  king  of 
 Zobah,  and  quite  unheard  of  in  Pa- 
 lestine. 
 
 Nineveh   still  unable  to  interfere  with 
 the   Syrians,  but  perhaps  beginning 
 to  rise  into  empire  by  the  conquest 
 of  Media  and  Babylon. 
 
 Assyria  undoubtedly  coming  forward 
 
 into  great  power. 
 Assyria    probably    in    possession    of 
 
 Northern  Syria. 
 The  king  of  Assyria  marches  for  the 
 
 first  time  into  Israel. 
 
 800? 
 
 [Damascus  taken  by  Jeroboam  II.] 
 
 758 
 
 Rezin. 
 
 Asa  adhered,  through  the  whole  of  his  long 
 reign,  to  the  policy  of  encouraging  hostility  be- 
 tween the  two  northern  kingdoms  ;  and  the  first 
 Benhadad  had  such  a  career  of  success  that  his  son 
 found  himself  in  a  condition  to  hope  for  an  entire 
 conquest  of  Israel.  His  formidable  invasions 
 wrought  an  entire  change  in  the  mind  of  Jehosha- 
 phat  (i  Kings  xxii.  44),  who  saw  that  if  Israel  was 
 swallowed  up  by  Syria  there  would  be  no  safety  for 
 Judah.  We  may  conjecture  that  this  consideration 
 determined  him  to  unite  the  two  royal  families  ; 
 for  no  common  cause  would  have  induced  so  reli- 
 gious a  king  to  select  for  his  son's  wife  Athaliah 
 the  daughter  of  Jezebel.  The  age  of  Ahaziah,  who 
 was  sprung  from  this  marriage,  forces  us  to  place 
 it  as  early  as  B.C.  912,  which  is  the  third  year  of 
 
 Jehoshaphat  and  sixth  of  Ahab.     Late  in  his  reign 
 ehoshaphat  threw  himself  most  cordially  (i  Kings 
 xxii.  4)  into  the  defence  of  Ahab,  and  by  so  doing 
 
 probably  saved  Israel  from  a  foreign  yoke.  Another 
 mark  of  the  low  state  into  which  both  kingdoms 
 were  falling,  is,  that  after  Ahab's  death  the  Moab- 
 ites  refused  their  usual  tribute  to  Israel,  and  (as 
 far  as  can  be  made  out  from  the  ambiguous  words 
 of  2  Kings  iii.  27)  the  united  force  of  the  two 
 kingdoms  failed  of  doing  more  than  irritate  them. 
 Soon  after,  in  the  reign  of  Jehoram  son  of  Jehosha- 
 phat, the  Edomites  followed  the  example,  and 
 established  their  independence.  This  event  pos- 
 sibly engaged  the  whole  force  of  Judah,  and  hin- 
 dered it  from  succouring  Samaria  during  the  cruel 
 siege  which  it  sustained  from  Benhadad  II.,  in  the 
 reign  of  Jehoram  son  of  Ahab.  The  declining 
 years  and  health  of  the  king  of  Syria  gave  a  short 
 respite  to  Israel ;  but,  in  B.C.  885,  Hazael,  by  de- 
 feating the  united  Hebrew  armies,  cornmenced  the 
 career  of  conquest  and  harassing  invasion  by  which 
 he  '  made  Israel  like  the  dust  by  threshing.'    Even 
 
ISRAEL 
 
 433 
 
 ISRAEL 
 
 under  Jehu  he  subdued  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes 
 (2  Kings  X.  32).  Afterwards,  since  he  took  the 
 town  of  Gath  (2  Kings  xii.  17)  and  prepared  to 
 attack  Jerusalem — an  attack  which  Jehoash  king 
 of  Judah  averted  only  by  strictly  following  Asa's 
 precedent — it  is  manifest  that  all  the  passes  and 
 chief  forts  of  the  country  west  of  the  Jordan  must 
 have  been  in  his  hand.  Indeed,  as  he  is  said  '  to 
 have  left  to  Jehoahaz  only  fifty  horsemen,  ten 
 chariots,  and  ten  thousand  footmen,'  it  would  seem 
 that  Israel  was  strictly  a  conquered  province,  in 
 which  Hazael  dictated  (as  the  English  to  the  native 
 rajahs  of  India)  what  military  force  should  be  kept 
 up.  From  this  thraldom  Israel  was  delivered  by 
 some  unexplained  agency.  We  are  told  merely 
 that  '  Jehovah  gave  to  Israel  a  saviour,  so  that  they 
 went  out  from  under  the  hand  of  the  Syrians  ;  and 
 the  children  of  Israel  dwelt  in  their  tents  as  before- 
 time,'  2  Kings  xiii.  5.  It  is  allowable  to  conjec- 
 ture that  the  (apparently  unknown)  deliverer  was 
 the  Assyrian  monarchy,  which,  assaulting  Hazael 
 towards  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Jehoahaz,  entirely 
 drew  away  the  Syrian  armies.  That  it  was  some 
 urgent,  powerful,  and  continued  pressure,  consider- 
 ing the  great  strength  which  the  empire  of  Damas- 
 cus had  attained,  seems  clear  from  the  sudden 
 weakness  of  Syria  through  the  reigns  of  Jehoash 
 and  Jeroboam  II.,  the  former  of  whom  thrice  de- 
 feated Benhadad  III.  and  '  recovered  the  cities  of 
 Israel ;'  the  latter  not  only  regained  the  full  terri- 
 tory of  the  ten  tribes,  but  made  himself  master  (for 
 a  time  at  least)  of  Damascus  and  Hamath.  How 
 entirely  the  friendship  of  Israel  and  Judah  had 
 been  caused  and  cemented  by  their  common  fear 
 of  Syria  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  no  sooner  is  the 
 power  of  Damascus  broken  than  new  war  breaks 
 out  between  the  two  kingdoms,  which  ended  in  the 
 plunder  of  Jerusalem  by  Jehoash,  who  also  broke 
 down  its  walls  and  carried  off  hostages ;  after  which 
 there  is  no  more  alliance  between  Judah  and  Israel. 
 The  empire  of  Damascus  seems  to  have  been  en- 
 tirely dissolved  under  the  son  of  Hazael,  and  no 
 mention  is  made  of  its  kings  for  eighty  years  or 
 more.  When  Pekah,  son  of  Remaliah,  reigned  in 
 Samaria,  Rezin,  as  king  of  Damascus,  made  a  last 
 but  ineffectual  effort  for  its  independence. 
 
 The  same  Assyrian  power  which  had  doubtless 
 so  seriously  shaken,  and  perhaps  temporarily  over- 
 turned, the  kingdom  of  Damascus,  was  soon  to  be 
 felt  by  Israel.  Menahem  was  invaded  by  Pul  (the 
 first  sovereign  of  Nineveh  whose  name  we  know), 
 and  was  made  tributary.  His  successor,  Tiglath- 
 pileser,  in  the  reign  of  Pekah,  son  of  Remaliah, 
 carried  captive  the  eastern  and  northern  tribes  of 
 Israel  (J.  e. ,  perhaps  all  their  chief  men  as  hos- 
 tages ?),  and  soon  after  slew  Rezin,  the  ally  of 
 Pekah,  and  subdued  Damascus.  The  following 
 emperor,  Shalmaneser,  besieged  and  captured  Sa- 
 maria, and  terminated  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  B.C. 
 721. 
 
 This  branch  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy  suffered 
 far  greater  and  more  rajiid  reverses  than  the  other. 
 From  the  accession  of  Jeroboam  to  the  middle  of 
 Baasha's  reign  it  probably  increased  in  power ;  it 
 then  waned  with  the  growth  of  the  Damascene 
 empire ;  it  struggled  hard  against  it  under  Ahab 
 ana  Jehoram,  but  sank  lower  and  lower ;  it  was 
 dismembered  under  Jehu,  and  made  subject  under 
 Jehoahaz.  From  B.C.  940  to  B.C.  850,  is,  as 
 nearly  as  can  be  ascertained,  the  period  of  de- 
 pression;  and  from  B.C.  914  to  B.C.  830  that  of 
 
 friendship  or  alliance  with  Judah.  But  aftei 
 (about)  B.  C.  850  Syria  began  to  decline,  and  Israel 
 soon  shot  out  rapidly ;  so  that  Joash  and  his  son 
 Jeroboam  appear,  of  all  Hebrew  monarchs,  to 
 come  next  to  David  and  Solomon.  How  long  this 
 burst  of  prosperity  lasted  does  not  distinctly  appear ; 
 but  it  would  seem  that  entire  dominion  over  the 
 ten  tribes  was  held  until  Pekah  received  the  first 
 blow  from  the  Assyrian  conqueror. 
 
 Besides  that  which  was  a  source  of  weakness  to 
 Israel  from  the  beginning,  viz. ,  the  schism  of  the 
 crown  with  the  whole  ecclesiastical  body,  other 
 causes  may  be  discerned  which  made  the  ten  tribes 
 less  powerful,  in  comparison  with  the  two,  than 
 might  have  been  expected.  The  marriage  of  Ahab 
 to  Jezebel  brought  with  it  no  political  aavantages 
 at  all  commensurate  with  the  direct  moral  mischief, 
 to  say  nothing  of  the  spiritual  evil ;  and  the  re- 
 action against  the  worship  of  Baal  was  a  most  ruin- 
 ous atonement  for  the  sin.  To  suppress  the 
 monstrous  iniquity,  the  prophets  let  loose  the 
 remorseless  Jehu,  who,  not  satisfied  with  the  blood 
 of  Ahab's  wife,  grandson,  and  seventy  sons, 
 murdered  first  the  king  of  Judah  himself,  and  next 
 forty- two  youthful  and  innocent  princes  of  his 
 house;  while,  strange  to  tell,  the  daughter  of 
 Jezebel  gained  by  his  deed  the  throne  of  Judah, 
 and  perpetrated  a  new  massacre.  The  horror  of 
 such  crimes  must  have  fallen  heavily  on  Jehu,  and 
 have  caused  a  wide-spread  disaffection  among  his 
 own  subjects.  Add  to  this,  that  the  Phoenicians 
 must  have  deeply  resented  his  proceedings  ;  so  that 
 we  get  a  very  sufficient  clue  to  the  prostration  of 
 Israel  under  the  foot  of  Hazael  during  the  reign  of 
 Jehu  and  his  son. 
 
 Another  and  a  more  abiding  cause  of  political 
 debility  in  the  ten  tribes  was  found  in  the  imper- 
 fect consolidation  of  the  inhabitants  into  a  single 
 nation.  Since  those  who  lived  east  of  the  Jordan 
 retained,  to  a  great  extent  at  least,  their  pastoral 
 habits,  their  union  with  the  rest  could  never  have 
 been  very  firm ;  and  when  a  king  was  neither 
 strong  independently  of  them,  nor  had  good 
 hereditary  pretensions,  they  were  not  likely  to  con- 
 tribute much  to  his  power.  After  their  conquest 
 of  the  Hagarenes  and  the  depression  of  the  Moab- 
 ites  and  Ammonites  by  David,  they  had  free  room 
 to  spread  eastward  ;  and  many  of  their  chief  men 
 may  have  become  wealthy  in  flocks  and  herds  (like 
 Machir  the  son  of  Ammiel,  of  Lodebar,  and 
 Barzillai  the  Gileadite,  2  Sam.  xvii.  27),  over 
 whom  the  authority  of  the  IsraeHtish  crown  would 
 naturally  be  precarious  ;  while  west  of  the  Jordan 
 the  agrarian  law  of  Moses  made  it  difficult  or  im- 
 possible for  a  landed  nobility  to  form  itself,  which 
 could  be  formidable  to  the  royal  authority.  That 
 the  Arab  spirit  of  freedom  was  rooted  in  the  east- 
 em  tribes,  may  perhaps  be  inferred  from  the  case 
 of  the  Rechabites,  who  would  neither  live  in  houses 
 nor  plant  vines ;  undoubtedly,  like  some  of  the 
 Nabathjeans,  lest  by  becoming  settled  and  agricul- 
 tural they  should  be  enslaved.  Yet  the  need  of  im- 
 posing this  law  on  his  descendants  would  not  have 
 been  felt  by  Jonadab,  had  not  an  opposite  ten- 
 dency been  rising — that  of  agricultural  settlement. 
 
 On  another  point  our  information  is  defective, 
 viz.,  what  proportion  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
 land  consisted  of  foreign  slaves,  or  subject  and  de- 
 graded castes  [Solomon].  Such  as  belonged  to 
 tribes  who  practised  circumcision  [Circumcision] 
 would   with  less    difficulty   become   incorporated 
 
ISSACHAR 
 
 439 
 
 ISSUE 
 
 with  the  Israelites  ;  but  the  Philistines  who  were 
 intermixed  with  Israel,  by  resisting  this  ordinance, 
 must  have  continued  heterogeneous.  In  i  Kings 
 XV.  27  ;  xvi.  15,  we  find  the  town  of  Gibbethon  in 
 the  hand  of  the  Philistines  during  the  reigns  of  Na- 
 dab,  Baasha,  and  Zimri :  nor  is  it  stated  that  they 
 were  finally  expelled.  Gibbethon  being  a  Levitical 
 town,  it  might  be  conjectured  that  it  had  been  occid- 
 pied  by  the  Philistines  when  the  Levites  emigrated 
 into  Judah  ;  but  the  possibilites  here  are  many. 
 
 Although  the  priests  and  Levites  nearly  dis- 
 appeared out  of  Israel,  prophets  were  perhaps  even 
 more  numerous  and  active  there  than  in  judah  ; 
 and  Ahijah,  whose  prediction  first  endangered 
 Jeroboam  (i  Kings  xi.  29-40),  lived  in  honour  at 
 Shiloh  to  his  dying  day  (xiv.  2).  Obadiah  alone 
 saved  one  hundred  prophets  of  Jehovah  from  the 
 rage  of  Jezebel  (xviii.  13).  Possibly  their  extra- 
 social  character  freed  them  from  the  restraint  im- 
 posed on  priests  and  Levites  ;  and  while  they  felt 
 less  bound  to  the  formal  rites  of  the  Law,  the  kings 
 of  Israel  were  also  less  jealous  of  them.  In  fact, 
 just  as  a  great  cathedral  in  Christendom  tends  to 
 elevate  the  priestly  above  the  prophetical  functions, 
 so,  it  is  possible,  did  the  proximity  of  Jerusalem  ; 
 and  the  prophet  may  have  moved  most  freely  where 
 he  came  least  into  contact  with  the  priest.  That 
 most  inauspicious  event) — the  rupture  of  Israel  with 
 Judah — may  thus  have  been  overruled  for  the 
 highest  blessing  of  the  world,  by  a  fuller  develop- 
 ment of  the  prophetical  spirit. — F.  W.  N. 
 
 ISSACHAR  {-|^Ei'^'^  Sept.  'Ia<Tdxap).     i.  A 
 
 son  of  Jacob  and  Leah,  born  B.C.  1749,  who  gave 
 name  to  one  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  (Gen.  xxx.  18  ; 
 Num.  xxvi.  25). 
 
 2.  The  tribe  called  after  Issachar.  Jacob,  on 
 his  death-bed,  speaking  metaphorically  of  the 
 character  and  destinies  of  his  sons,  or  rather  of 
 the  tribes  which  should  spring  from  them,  said, 
 '  Issachar  is  a  strong  ass  couching  down  between 
 two  burdens'  (Gen.  xlix.  14,  15).  Remembering 
 the  character  of  the  ass-  in  eastern  countries,  we 
 may  be  sure  that  this  comparison  was  not  intended 
 in  disparagement.  The  ass  is  anything  but  stupid  ; 
 and  the  proverbial  obstinacy  which  it  sometimes 
 exhibits  in  our  own  country  is-  rather  the  result  of 
 ill-treatment  than  a  natural  characteristic  of  the 
 ^animal.  Its  true  attributes  are  patience,  gentleness, 
 great  capability  of  endurance,  laborious  exertion, 
 and  a  meek  submission  to  authority.  Issachar, 
 therefore,  the  progenitor  of  a  race  singularly  docile, 
 and  distinguished  for  their  patient  industry,  is  ex- 
 hibited under  the  similitude  of  the  meekest  and 
 most  laborious  of  quadrupeds.  The  descriptive 
 character  goes  on  : — '  And  he  saw  that  rest  was 
 good,  and  the  land  that  it  was  pleasant,  and  he 
 bowed  his  shoulder  to  bear,  and  became  a  sei-vant 
 unto  tribute;'  which  probably  does  not  imply  that 
 reproach  upon  Issachar,  as  addicted  to  ignominious 
 ease,  which  some  commentators  find  in  it.  It  seems 
 simply  to  mean  that  finding  itself  in  possession  of 
 a  most  fertile  portion  of  Palestine,  the  tribe  de- 
 voted itself  to  the  labours  of  agriculture,  taking 
 little  interest  in  the  public  affairs  of  the  nation. 
 Josephus  says  that  the  portion  of  this  tribe  ex- 
 tended in  length  from  Mount  Carmel  to  the  river 
 [Jordan],  and  in  breadth  to  Mount  Tabor  {Antiq. 
 V.  I.  22).  '  Every  traveller  has  remarked  on  the 
 richness  of  its  soil,  and  the  exuberance  of  its  crops. 
 .  .   .  The  very  weeds  are  a  sign  of  what,  in  better 
 
 hands,  the  vast  plain  might  become'  (Stanley,  Sin, 
 and  Pal.,  348).  But  although  a  decided  preference 
 of  agricultural  over  commercial  or  military  pursuits 
 is  here  indicated,  there  seems  no  reason  to  conclude, 
 as  some  gather  from  the  last  clause,  that  the  tribe 
 would  be  willing  to  purchase  exemption  from  war 
 by  the  payment  of  a  heavy  tribute.  The  words  do 
 not  necessarily  imply  this  ;  and  there  is  no  evidence 
 that  the  tribe  ever  decFmed  any  military  service  to 
 which  it  was  called.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  speci- 
 ally commended  by  Deborah  for  the  promptitude 
 with  which  it  presented  itself  in  the  war  with  Jabin 
 (Judg.  V.  15)  ;  and  in  the  days  of  David  honour- 
 able testimony  is  borne  to  its  character  (i  Chron. 
 xii.  32).  In  this  passage  the  '  children  of  Issachar' 
 are  described  as  'men  that  had  understanding  of 
 the  times,  to  know  what  Israel  ought  to  do  :' 
 which,  compared  with  Esther  i.  13,  has  been  sup- 
 posed to  mean  that  they  were  skilled  in  the  various 
 practical  applications  of  astronomy.  But  what 
 need  there  was  of  astronomy  on  the  occasion  of 
 calling  David  to  the  throne  of  Israel  after  the  death 
 of  Abner  and  Ishbosheth,  is  not  very  easy  to  dis- 
 cover. It  more  probably  means  that  they  were 
 men  held  in  esteem  for  their  prudence  and  wisdom, 
 and  who  knew  that  the  time  was  come  when  it  was 
 no  longer  safe  to  delay  calling  David  to  the  throne 
 of  all  Israel.  On  quitting  Egypt  the  tribe  of  Issa- 
 char numbered  54,400  adult  males,  which  gave  it 
 the  fifth  numerical  rank  among  the  twelve  tribes, 
 Judah,.  Simeon,  Zebulun,  and  Dan  being  alone 
 above  it.  In  the  wilderness  it  increased  nearly 
 10,000,  and  then  ranked  as  the  third  of  the  tribes, 
 Judah  and  Dan  only  being  more  numerous  (Num. 
 i.  29;  xxvi.  25).  The  territory  of  the  tribe  com- 
 prehended the  whole  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  and 
 the  neighbouring  districts — the  granary  of  Palestine. 
 It  was  bounded  on  the  east  by  the  Jordan,  on  the 
 west  and  south  by  Manasseh,  and  on  the  north  by 
 Asher  and  Zebulun.  It  contained  the  towns  of 
 Megiddo,  Taanach,  Shunem,  Jezreel,  and  Beth- 
 shan,  with  the  villages  of  Endor,  Aphek,  and  Ib- 
 leam,  all  historical  names  :•  the  mountains  of  Tabor 
 and  Gilboa,  and  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  were  in  the 
 territory  of  this  tribe,  and  the  course  of  the  river 
 Kishon  lay  through  it. — ^J.  K. 
 
 ISSHIAH  ip^^\ ;  Sept.  'Iwcrtas),  also  written 
 
 Jeshaiah  (l  Chron.  xxvi.  25),  was  son  of  Rehabiah, 
 whose  father  was  Eliezer,  the  younger  son  of  Moses 
 by  his  wife  Zipporah.  He  was  one  of  the  '  rulers' 
 or  keepers  '  of  the  treasures'  in  the  time  of  David 
 (l  Chron.,  xxvi.  25,  26),  and  the  head  of  the  nume- 
 rous family  of  Rehabiah  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  17). 
 
 The  name  also  occurs  (Sept.  'Icrta)  among  the 
 family  of  Uzziel  the  KohathLte,  who  was  of  the 
 tribe  of  Levi  (i  Chron.  xxiv.  20,  25).  The  name 
 of  his  eldest  son  was  Zechariah. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 ISSUE.  L  D"^!  "IpD,  the  puerperal  hemor- 
 rhage (Lev.  xii.  7) ;  the  ceremonial  uncleanness 
 caused  by  which  had  to.  be  atoned  for  and  cleansed. 
 2.  The  yxivT]  al/jLoppovaa  who  was  cured  by  our  Lord 
 (Matt.  ix.  20  ;  Mark  v.  25  ;  Luke  viii.  44)  suffered 
 from  some  chronic  hzamorrhage,  but  of  what  kind 
 we  are  not  informed.  It  may  have  been  excessive 
 menstrual  discharge,  or  it  may  have  been  severe 
 haemorrhoids.  Whatever  it  was,  the  long  continu- 
 ance of  the  disease  indicates  that  it  must  have  been 
 periodic  in  its  attacks.  Such  a  disease  not  only 
 prostrated  the  strength  of  the  sufferer  but  exposed 
 
ITALIAN  VERSIONS 
 
 440 
 
 ITALY 
 
 her  to  a  constant  exclusion  from  the  religious  as- 
 semblies of  the  Jews,  as  well  as  to  an  enforced 
 celibacy.     3.  3ll  or  21  {'  a  running  issue,'  Lev.  xv. 
 
 2 ;  xxii.  4 ;  an  '  issue,'  Lev.  xv.  3,  8,  25,  28 ; 
 Num.  V.  2 ;  2  Sam.  iii.  29),  denotes,  in  the  case 
 of  females,  doubtless  the  ordinary  menstrual  dis- 
 charge, protracted,  it  may  be,  to  an  abnormal 
 extent  (Lev.  xv.  25)  ;  and  in  the  case  of  men 
 either  an  involuntary  flux  of  the  seminal  fluid,  or 
 gonorrhoea  of  the  more  virulent  kind,  such  as  is  the 
 result  of  impure  coition.  The  LXX.  describe  the 
 person  referred  to  in  Lev.  xv.  2  as  yovoppvrjs  (cf 
 ver.  4,  ff.);  Josephus  takes  the  same  view  {Aiitiq. 
 iii.  II.  3;  Bell.  Jiid.  v.  5.  6;  vi.  6.  9);  and 
 the  Talmudists  accord  (Maimon.  in  Mishnam ;  Tr. 
 Zabim  ii.  2,  p.  vi.,  ed.  Surenhus.  p.  454).  The 
 uncleanness  specified  in  this  chapter  as  communi- 
 cated by  the  3T  seem  to  favour  this  opinion ;  for 
 when  the  spittle,  the  clothes,  the  seat,  convey  un- 
 cleanness, something  of  the  nature  of  a  virulent 
 disease  must  be  supposed.  A  difficulty,  however, 
 arises  in  the  way  of  our  supposing  that  the  disease 
 referred  to  is  the  gonorrhoea  virulenta,  from  the 
 fact  that  this  disease  is  supposed  only  to  be  conse- 
 quent on  the  lues  venerea,  a  disease  unknown,  it 
 is  said,  before  the  15th  century.  This  has  led 
 Winer  to  conclude  that  the  disease  in  question  is  a 
 discharge  from  the  urethra,  such  as  may  arise  from 
 impure  coition,  though  without  any  syphilitic  con- 
 tagion (A'^a/w.,  in  voc.  Samenfluss;comp.  Michaelis, 
 Laws  of  Moses  Vi.  282;  Bartholin!,  De  morbis  Bib- 
 licis).—\N.  L.  A. 
 
 ITALIAN  VERSIONS.  The  earliest  version 
 of  the  Scriptures  into  the  modern  Italian  is  said  to 
 have  been  made  by  Giacomo  da  Viraggio  (Jacobus 
 de  Voragine),  Archbishop  of  Genoa,  in  the  begin- 
 ning of  the  13th  century.  This  rests  exclusively 
 on  the  authority  of  Sixtus  Senensis  {Biblioth. 
 Sand.,  lib.  4),  and  there  is  weighty  reason  for 
 doubting  the  statement.  That  at  an  early  period, 
 however,  versions  of  parts,  if  not  of  the  whole,  of 
 Scripture  into  Italian  were  made,  is  evidenced  by 
 the  existence  in  various  libraries  of  MSS.  containing 
 these.  In  the  Royal  Library  at  Paris  is  an  Italian 
 Bible  in  two  vols.  foL,  as  well  as  several  codices 
 containing  parts  of  the  Bible  in  that  language ; 
 in  the  library  at  Upsala  is  a  codex  containing  a 
 history  compiled  from  the  first  seven  books  of  the 
 O.  T.  in  Italian  ;  in  the  library  of  Trinity  College, 
 Dublin,  is  an  Italian  translation  of  the  N.  T.,  with 
 portions  of  the  Old  :  and  in  other  libraries  like 
 reliques  are  preserved  (see  Le  Long,  Bib.  Sac, 
 cap.  vi.,  sec.  l). 
 
 The  earliest  printed  Italian  Bible  is  that  of 
 Nicolo  di  Malermi  (or  Malherbi),  a  Venetian 
 Benedictine  monk  of  the  order  of  Camaldoli ;  it 
 appeared  under  the  title  of  Biblia  Volgare  Histo- 
 riota,  etc.,  Venice  147 1.  The  translation  is  from 
 the  Vulgate,  and  is  pronounced  by  R.  Simon  to  be 
 executed  in  a  harsh  style  and  carelessly  {Hist.  Crit. 
 du  N.  7^,  p.  487).  It  was,  however,  repeatedly 
 reprinted  ;  the  best  editions  are,  that  superintended 
 by  Marini,  2  vols,  fol.,  Ven.  1477,  and  that  issued  at 
 Venice  in  i  vol.  fol.  in  1567.  In  1530  Antonio 
 Bruccioli  [Bruccioli]  issued  his  translation  of  the 
 N.  T.,  and  in  1532  the  first  edition  of  his  transla- 
 tion of  the  entire  Bible,  containing  a  revised  and 
 corrected  translation  of  the  N.  T.,  under  the  title 
 of  La  Biblia  eke  coniiene  Sacri  libri  del  vecchio 
 Testafnento  tradotto    nuovamente  de  la  Hebraica 
 
 verita  in  lingua  Toscana,  con  divini  libri  del  N.  T. 
 tradotti  da  Greco  in  ling.  Tosc.  con  privilegio  de  lo 
 inclito  Senaio  Veneto,  e  letera  a  Francesco  I.  Rege 
 Christianissimo,  fol.  Ven.  ap.  Luc.  Ant.  Juntse. 
 This  translation  is  said  by  Simon  to  follow  in  the 
 O.  T.  the  Latin  version  of  Pagnini  rather  than  to 
 be  made  from  the  original  Hebrew,  and  to  partake 
 of  the  rudeness  and  barbarism  of  Pagnini's  style. 
 It  was  put  in  the  index  of  the  prohibited  books 
 among  works  of  the  first  class.  Many  editions  of 
 it,  however,  appeared  ;  of  which  the  most  impor- 
 tant is  that  of  Zanetti,  3  vols,  fol.,  Ven.  1 540, 
 Bruccioli's  version  of  the  O.  T.  in  a  corrected  form 
 was  printed  at  Geneva  in  1562,  along  with  a  new 
 version  of  the  N.  T.  by  Gallars  and  Beza  ;  to  this 
 notes  are  added,  and  especially  an  exposition  of 
 the  Apocalypse.  The  translation  of  Marmochini, 
 though  professedly  original,  is  in  reality  only  a  re- 
 vised edition  of  that  of  Bruccioli,  the  design  of 
 which  was  to  bring  it  more  fully  into  accordance 
 with  the  Vulgate.  Several  translations  of  the 
 Psalms,  some  from  the  Hebrew,  and  of  other  parts 
 of  Scripture,  appeared  in  Italy  between  the  middle 
 and  end  of  the  i6th  century,  and  a  new  translation 
 of  the  N.  T.,  by  a  Florentine  of  the  name  of 
 Zacharia,  appeared  in  8vo  at  Venice  in  1542,  and 
 at  Florence  in  1566^  copies  of  which  are  now  ex- 
 tremely rare.  The  Jew  David  de  Pomis  issued  a 
 translation  of  Ecclesiastes  with  the  original  Hebrew, 
 Ven.  1578. 
 
 In  1607  appeared  at  Geneva  the  first  Protestant 
 Italian  version,  that  of  Giovanni  Diodati[DiODATl]: 
 La  Biblia :  Cioi  I  Libri  del  Vecchio  e  del  Nuo^'o 
 Testamento,  sm.  fol.  To  this  are  appended  brief 
 marginal  notes.  This  version  was  made  directly 
 from  the  original  texts,  and  stands  in  high  esteem 
 for  fidelity.  It  has  been  repeatedly  reprinted. 
 Being  in  the  plain  Lucchese  dialect,  it  is  especially 
 adapted  for  circulation  among  the  common  people. 
 
 A  version  affecting  greater  elegance,  but  by  no 
 means  so  faithful,  is  that  of  Antonio  Martini, 
 Archbishop  of  Florence.  The  N.  T.  appeared  at 
 Turin  in  1769,  and  the  O.  T.  in  1779,  both  accom- 
 panied with  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  and  with 
 copious  notes,  chiefly  from  the  fathers.  This  work 
 received  the  approbation  of  Pope  Pius  VI.  It  is 
 made  avowedly  from  the  Vulgate,  and  is  in  the 
 pure  Tuscan  dialect.  Repeated  editions  have  ap- 
 peared ;  one  issued  at  Livorno  (Leghorn),  and 
 those  issued  by  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible 
 Society,  Lond.  1813,  1821,  want  the  notes,  and 
 have  been  consequently  placed  in  the  index  of  pro- 
 hibited books.  To  read  and  circulate  this  book, 
 though  bearing  the  Papal  sanction,  was  till  lately 
 a  grave  offence,  as  the  well-knoviTi  case  of  the 
 Madiai  in  Florence  proves. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 ITALY  ('IraXia).  This,  like  most  geographical 
 names,  was  differently  applied  at  different  periods. 
 In  the  earliest  times  the  name  '  Italy '  included 
 only  the  little  peninsula  of  Calabria  (Strabo,  v.  i). 
 The  country  now  called  Italy  was  then  inhabited 
 by  a  number  of  nations  distinct  in  origin,  language, 
 and  government  :  such  as  the  Gauls,  Ligurians, 
 and  Veneti,  on  the  north ;  and  the  Pelasgi,  Sabines, 
 and  Etrurians,  etc.,  on  the  south.  But  as  the 
 power  of  Rome  advanced,  these  nations  were  suc- 
 cessively annexed  to  the  great  state,  and  the  name 
 '  Italy'  extended  also.  The  time  when  it  came  to 
 be  applied  to  the  whole  country  south  of  the  Alps 
 cannot  be  ascertained  ;  but  Polybius  seems  to  em. 
 
ITHAMAR 
 
 441 
 
 ITHRITE 
 
 ploy  it  in  this  sense  (i.  6 ;  ii.  14).  In  the  age  of 
 Augustus  the  name  was  definitely  used  as  a  geo- 
 graphical term,  in  the  same  sense  in  which  it  is 
 used  at  the  present  day,  and  Rome  was  its  acknow- 
 ledged capital.  Italy  was  then  the  nucleus  of  the 
 Roman  empire — the  centre  of  its  wealth,  its  go- 
 vernment, and  its  power.  What  England  is  now 
 to  the  British  empire,  Italy  was  then  to  the  Roman 
 empire.  It  was  evidently  in  this  sense  the  N.  T. 
 writers  used  the  name.  Italy  was  to  them  the  seat 
 and  centre  of  Roman  authority.  Luke  tells  us 
 (Acts,  xviii.  2)  of  a  certain  Aquila  and  Priscilla 
 '  lately  come  from  Italy  (to  Corinth),  because 
 Claudius  had  commanded  all  Jews  to  depart  from 
 Rome.'  It  would  seem  that  by  foreigners  and  all 
 those  in  distant  countries  '  Rome'  and  '  Italy'  were 
 used  as  almost  synonymous.  So  when  Paul  ap- 
 pealed to  Csesar,  and  Agrippa  resolved  to  send  him 
 to  Rome,  Luke  writes,  '  It  was  determined  that  we 
 should  sail  into  Italy''  (Acts  xxvii.  i).  The  phrase  ol 
 OTF^  TTjs  'IraXi'as  in  Heb.  xiii.  24  has  been  variously 
 interpreted.  Some  have  regarded  it  as  clearly 
 indicating  that  the  writer  was  in  Italy  at  the  lime  ; 
 while  others  affirm  that  it  proves  the  very  contrary, 
 showing  the  locality  of  the  writer  to  have  been  out 
 of  Italy,  otherwise  ol  iv  rrj  'IraXlq.  would  have 
 been  used.  The  fact  is  however,  as  has  been 
 stated  by  Winer,  that  '  A  critical  argument  re- 
 garding the  place  where  the  letter  was  written 
 should  never  have  been  drawn  from  this  passage.' 
 The  phrase  simply  means  '  those  belonging  to 
 Italy,'  whether  in  that  country  or  out  of  it  (Winer, 
 Grammar  0/ JV.  T.  Diction,  p.  651;  Delitzsch, 
 Der  Brief  an  die  Hebrder,  ad  loc. )  Christianity 
 must  have  taken  root  in  Italy  at  a  very  early 
 period.  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  written  only 
 about  twenty-five  years  after  the  crucifixion,  shows 
 that  there  was  then  a  large  and  flourishing  church 
 there.  Notwithstanding  repeated  and  terrible  per- 
 secutions, the  church  continued  to  prosper,  until  at 
 length  Rome  became  the  centre  of  eeclesiastical  as 
 well  as  of  civil  authority. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 ITHAMAR  ("loir's, /a/w-w/aW;  Sept.  '16'd- 
 
 /tao),  fourth  son  of  Aaron.  He  was  consecrated 
 to  the  priesthood  along  with  his  brothers  (Exod. 
 vi.  23  ;  Num.  iii.  2,  3).  Nothing  is  individually 
 recorded  of  him,  except  that  the  property  of  the 
 tabernacle  was  placed  under  his  charge  (Exod. 
 xxxviii.  21),  and  that  he  superintended  all  matters 
 connected  with  its  removal  by  the  Levitical  sections 
 of  Gershon  and  Merari  (Num.  iv.  28-33).  The 
 sacred  utensils  and  their  removal  were  entrusted  to 
 his  elder  brother  Eleazar.  Ithamar,  with  his  de- 
 scendants, occupied  the  position  of  common  priests 
 till  the  high-priesthood  passed  into  his  family  in  the 
 person  of  Eli,  under  circumstances  of  which  we  are 
 ignorant.  Abiathar,  whom  Solomon  deposed,  was 
 the  last  high-priest  of  that  line  ;  and  the  pontificate 
 then  reverted  to  the  elder  line  of  Eleazar  in  the 
 person  of  Zadok  (i  Kings  ii.  27). — ^J.  K. 
 
 ITH-K'K  (pp'Tl"").  This  expression,  which  is 
 composed  of  the  initials  C")  of  iT'^K*''  Isaiah,  {T\) 
 "l^y  "i"in    the  tuielve  minor  prophets,    (p)    m^p, 
 
 Lamentations,  (p)  DPHp  Coheleth  or  Ecclcsiastes, 
 occurs  at  the  end  of  these  four  books  in  the  Mas- 
 soretic  text  of  some  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bibles. 
 It  is  to  indicate  that  each  of  these  books  belongs  to 
 those  four  in  which  the  penultimate  verse  eixptjixias 
 Xci/)(j'  is  repeated  to  obviate  the  harsh  expression 
 
 with  which  these  books  terminate,  and  to  shew 
 that  the  verses  thus  repeated  did  not  originally 
 foiTn  part  of  the  text,  and  are  therefore  left  un- 
 pointed. In  the  minor  prophets,  which  have  always 
 formed  one  volume  in  the  Hebrew  MSS.,  the  repe- 
 tition, and  hence  the  phrase  pp'TT*  JD'^D — Note, 
 this  is  one  of  the  four  indicated  by  Ith-K-k — occur 
 at  the  end  of  Malachi.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 ITHNAN  (pn\  'given.'  There  is  great  con- 
 fusion in  the  proper  names  in  the  part  of  the 
 Septuagint  where  this  occurs.  Josh.  xv.  23  reads 
 Kal  Kd57;s  koI  Waopiuvaiv  Kal  Maivd/J..  The  word 
 WaopLcovaiv  appears  to  be  formed  by  running  to- 
 gether the  two  names  Hazor  and  Ithnan.  The 
 Alexandrine  text  reads  ^Visva^lip,  joining  Ithnan 
 and  Ziph  ;  Vulg.  Jethnam),  a  town  on  the  south- 
 east border  of  Judah,  near  Edom,  and  mentioned 
 in  connection  with  Kedesh  and  Hazor.  The  site 
 is  unknown.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 ITHRA  (N"jri\  also  in'';  'Udep,  'loBhp;  Jetra, 
 
 fether ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  ^leddpaos  ;  excellence,  pre- 
 eminence), brother-in-law  of  David,  father  of 
 Amasa,  by  Abigail,  David's  sister,  and  uncle  of 
 Joab.  He  is  called  an  '•  Ishynaelite^  i  Chron.  ii. 
 17;  but  an  '■Israelite,^  2  Sam.  xvii.  25.  The 
 latter  is  almost  certainly  an  incorrect  reading.  It 
 appears  so  for  tliese  reasons :  i.  All  the  other 
 persons  mentioned  in  the  connection  are  Israelites, 
 and,  consequently,  there  is  no  reason  for  dis- 
 tinguishing one  of  them  by  this  title — the  title 
 would  be  meaningless,  2.  There  would  be  nothing 
 noticeable  in  the  fact  that  the  father  of  Amasa  was 
 an  Israelite,  yet  the  historian  by  his  manner  evi- 
 dently intends  something  remarkable.  3.  It  is 
 quite  a  remarkable  fact  that  a  brother-in-law  of 
 David  should  be  an  Ishmaelite.  4.  The  use  of  the 
 article  before  the  word  indicates  something  em- 
 phatic :  '  Now  Amasa  was  the  son  of  a  man  whose 
 
 name  was   Ithra,   THE  .'     'Abigail  bare  A. 
 
 and    the    father   of  A.    was  Jether,    THE   .' 
 
 Surely  Israelite,  in  such  a  case,  would  be  not  only 
 wholly  unemphatic,  but  altogether  unnecessary. — 
 I- J. 
 
 ITHREAM  (Djnn;; ;  Sept.  'ledepaaii;  'leOpdix), 
 
 the  sixth  and  last  son  bom  to  David  in  Hebron. 
 His  mother  was  Eglah,  distinguished  by  the  special 
 title  of  '  David's  wife'  (2  Sam.  iii.  5  ;  i  Chron.  iii. 
 3),  and  believed,  according  to  Jewish  tradition 
 (Jerome,  Qucesi.  Heb.  in  2  Sam.  iii.  5  ;  v.  23),  to 
 have  been  the  same  as  Michal,  the  daughter  of 
 Saul  (2  Sam.  vi.  20).  The  Bible,  however,  not 
 only  affords  no  foundation  for  such  a  tradition,  but 
 expressly  contradicts  it  by  saying  that  '  Michal,  the 
 daughter  of  Saul,  had  no  child  unto  the  day  of  her 
 death'  (2  Sam.  vi.  23). — W,  J.  C. 
 
 ITHRITE,    The   (nn^n  ;   6  '^Oipalo^,  'ledpi ; 
 
 Alex.  'Idrjpei),  is  a  name  supposed  to  be  derived 
 from  Jether ;  but  whether  originally  applied  to  a 
 person  belonging  to  a  place  of  that  name,  or  to  one 
 whose  father's  name  was  Jether,  it  is  impossible  to 
 say.  Gesenius  is  silent  regarding  it.  The  balance 
 of  probability,  however,  seems  in  favour  of  the  latter 
 supposition.  Jether,  it  is  understood,  is  only  an- 
 other form  for  Ithra  (2  Sam.  xvii.  25),  the  latter 
 being  most  likely  a  corruption.  Ithra  was  the 
 brother-in-law  of  David,  and  it  is  just  possible  that 
 the  '  Ilhrites,'  as  a  family,  sprang  from  him.     In  i 
 
ITTAH-KAZIN 
 
 442 
 
 ITURAEA 
 
 Chron.  (ii.  53)  they  are  the  first  mfintioned  among 
 the  families  of  Kirjath-jearim,  a  circumstance  which 
 points  to  Judah  as  at  one  time  their  place  of  resi- 
 dence. Two  of  David's  hero  guards  were  Ithrites 
 (2  Sam.  xxiii.  38  ;  i  Chron.  xi.  40). — W.  J.  C. 
 
 ITTAH-KAZIN  (pvp  nnj?,  '  The  time  or  peo- 
 
 •  T  T    • 
 
 pie  of  the  judge  ; '  without  the  H  local  it  would  be 
 'p  ny  ;  7r6\ts  Karacr^/t ;  Ale.\.  Kaal/J, ;   Thacasin), 
 
 the  name  of  one  of  the  towns  on  the  border  of 
 Zebulun.  Japhia,  which  is  mentioned  along  with 
 it,  stood  about  three  miles  south-west  of  Nazareth, 
 and  Ittah-Kazin  could  not  have  been  far  distant, 
 but  the  site  has  not  been  discovered  (Josh.  xix. 
 I3).-J.  L.  P. 
 
 ITTAI  ens,  'E^o-^,  'E^i;  Alex, 'E6l6'ei ;  Ethai ; 
 
 7ny  near7iess),  called  ^Ittai,  the  Gittite,''  usually  re- 
 garded as  a  native  of  Gath  and  a  Philistine,  com- 
 mander of  David's  body-guard  of  Gittites.  We 
 first  meet  with  him,  2  Sam.  xv.  19,  when,  during 
 the  rebellion  of  Absalom,  David,  at  a  distance  from 
 Jerusalem,  took  up  a  position  to  review  his  servauti 
 and  his  troops  as  they  passed  before  him.  Among 
 those  who  passed  were  the  Cherethites,  and  the 
 Pelethites,  and  the  Gittites,  who  had  followed  the 
 king  from  Gath,  and  of  whom  Ittai  seems  to  have 
 been  the  leader.  And  '  David  said  to  Ittai  the 
 Gittite:  wherefore  goest  thou  also  with  us?  Return 
 to  thy  place  and  abide  with  the  king;*  for  thou 
 art  a  stranger,  and  also  an  exile.  Whereas  thou 
 camest  but  yesterday,  should  I  this  day  make  thee 
 to  go  up  and  down  with  us?'  etc.  But  Ittai  nobly 
 resolved  to  abide  with  the  king  '  in  life  or  in  death ; ' 
 so  he  '  passed  over  before  the  king  with  all  his 
 men  and  his  little  ones'  (19-22).  In  the  battle 
 which  ensued  David  appointed  him  commander  of 
 a  third  part  of  his  army,  co-ordinate  in  authority 
 with  Joab  and  Abishai.  After  this  we,  apparently 
 at  least,  hear  no  more  of  him  in  Bible  history. 
 
 2.  'H^oy,  ESat;  Vat.  Ecr^at,  klpl -^  Ithai ;  called 
 Ittai,  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  29,  but  in  the  parallel  list,  I 
 Chron.  xi.  31,  ''ri"'N,  Ithai ;  son  of  Ribai  of  Gibeah, 
 
 of  the  children  of  Benjamin,  one  of  David's  thirty 
 heroes.  Is  not  this  the  same  as  the  preceding  ?  May 
 he  not  be  called  a  Gittite  as  a  native  of  Gittaim  in 
 Benjamin,  2  Sam.  iv.  3,  as  Obed  Ed'om,  a  Levite,  is 
 called  a  Gittite,  2  Sam.  vi.  10?  And  may  he  not 
 be  called  a  '  stranger  and  an  exile,'  as  a  Gibeonite, 
 who  having  fled  from  Beeroth,  a  Gibeonite  town 
 (Josh.  ix.  17),  had,  with  his  brethren,  taken  up 
 •  his  residence  in  Gittaim  ?  Or,  if  this  be  denied, 
 may  not  Ittai  be  called  a  Gittite  from  his  residence 
 in  Gath,  as  Jesus  was,  for  a  similar  reason,  called 
 a  Nazarene,  although,  in  reality,  a  native  of  Gibeah  ? 
 Is  it  likely  that  Ittai  the  Gittite  would  be  over- 
 looked or  omitted  in  a  list  of  David's  heroes  ?  Or 
 is  it  probable  that  David  would  have  his  body-guard 
 composed  of  Philistines?  and  a  Philistine  com- 
 mander at  their  head  ?  If  safe  for  himself,  it  would 
 prove  a  source  of  annoyance  and  jealousy  to  his 
 subjects — an  error  into  which  the  wisdom  of  David 
 would  not  be  likely  to  fall. 
 
 Of  Ittai  Jerome  preserves  the  following  curious 
 and  interesting  tradition  in  his  Quaest.  sai  tradit. 
 Hebraiccz  in  Paralipomeno7T,  20.  2 ;   '  Tulit  autcni 
 
 *  Meaning  Absalom,  and  intended  to  test  Ittai, 
 who,  however,  would  know  no  king  but  David. 
 The  words  are  not  '  omitted '  by  the  LXX. 
 
 coronam  David  Melchom  de  capiie  ejus.  Melchom 
 idolum  Ammonitarum,  de  quo  in  Regum,  et  in 
 Paralipom.  et  in  Sophonia  scribitur.  Melchom 
 interpretatur  rex  eo7'iim.  De  simulachro  enim  illius 
 idoli  tulit  David  diadema.  lUicitum  erat  de  idolis 
 aliquid  auri  appetere  aut  argenti  Judaeis  per  legem  ; 
 sed,  ut  ipsi  tradunt,  Ethai  Jetheus,  qui  de  gente 
 Philistinorum  ad  David  venerat,  ipse  diadema  diri- 
 puit  in  capite  Melchom,  ut  liceret  Hebraeo  de 
 manu  hominis  capere,  quod  de  capite  idoli  non 
 licebat.' — I.  J. 
 
 ITURAEA  ('Iroirpak),  a  district  of  Syria  on 
 the  northern  border  of  Bashan,  which  formed  part 
 of  the  tetrarchy  of  Philip  the  brother  of  Herod 
 (Luke  iii.  l).  Strabo  mentions  the  country  of  the 
 Ituraeans  as  adjoining  the  territory  of  Chalcis  on 
 the  one  side  and  Trachonitis  on  the  other,  and  he 
 says  it  is  a  mountainous  and  rugged  region,  in- 
 habited by  bands  of  freebooters  who  prey  upon 
 their  neighbours  (xvi.  2).  According  to  Pliny  it 
 formed  part  of  Coelesyria  [H.  N.  v.  19) ;  but  the 
 latter  name  was  often  used  in  a  very  wide  significa- 
 tion. The  true  position  of  Ituraea  is  described 
 incidentally  by  William  of  Tyre,  '  Secus  mare 
 GalilEese,.  viam  carpentes,  Phoenicem  Lybanicam 
 ingressi,  Paneadem,  quae  est  Caesarea  Philippi,  a 
 dextris  prsetereuntes,  Ituraea7n  ingredientes^  etc, 
 {De  Bella  Sacro,  in  Gesta  Dei  per  Francos,  p.  771). 
 Lightfoot  [Opp.  ii.  475),  Reland  {Palaestina,  p. 
 106,  seq.),  and  others  who  follow  their  authority 
 (Alford,  on  Luke  iii.  l),  have  supposed  that  because 
 in  Luke  we  read  that  Philip  was  '  tetrarch  of  Iturea 
 and  the  region  of  Trachonitis,'  whereas  Josephus 
 says  his  tetrarchy  was  composed  of  Trachonitis, 
 Batanaea,  and  Auranitis  (Antiq.  xv.  10.  i  and 
 II.  4;  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  6.  3),  therefore  Batanaea 
 and  Auranitis  were  the  same  as  Ituraea.  A 
 survey  of  the  country  soon  convinced  the  writer 
 that  this  view  is  wholly  erroneous.  The  dis- 
 tricts mentioned  by  Luke  and  Josephus  were  dis- 
 tinct ;  but  neither  of  these  historians  gives  a  full 
 list  of  all  the  little  provinces  in  the  tetrarchy  of 
 Philip.  Each  probably  gave  the  names  of  such  as 
 were  of  most  importance  in  connection  with  the 
 events  he  was  about  to  relate.  Both  Batanaea  and 
 Auranitis  appear  to  have  been  included  in  the 
 'region  of  Trachonitis'  (Tpaxw^TtSoj  X'^P"^) ;  and 
 as  Josephus  mentions  a  part  of  the  '  House  of 
 Zenodorus '  which  was  given  to  Philip,  it  unques- 
 tionably embraced  Ituraea  {Antiq.  xv.  lO.  3). 
 
 The  sacred  historian  states  that  Ishmael's  sons 
 gave  their  names  to  the  tribes  they  founded  and 
 the  territories  they  occupied.  One  of  them  was 
 Jetur  ('^'^'Cl'^ ;  Gen.  xxv.  15,  16).     At  a  subsequent 
 
 period  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  made  war 
 with  the  Hagarites  or  Ishmaelites,  namely,  with 
 Jeiiir,  Nephesh,  and  Nodab,  conquered  their  terri- 
 tories, and  dwelt  in  their  land.  And  in  immediate 
 connection  with  the  latter  statement  it  is  said  that 
 the  '  children  of  the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh  dwelt 
 in  the  land,  ajid  they  increased  fio??i  Bashan  unto 
 Baal-hermo7i,  and  Senir,  and  Mount  Hei-mon ' 
 (i  Chron.  v.  19-23).  Now  this  indicates  the 
 district  occupied  by  Jetur,  and  proves  its  identity 
 with  the  Greek  Ituraea  and  the  modem  Jedilr.  It 
 lies  between  Hermon  and  Bashan  (Porter's  Dam- 
 ascus, ii.  272,  seq.)  The  old  inhabitants  were  not 
 annihilated,  they  took  refuge  in  the  mountain  fast- 
 nesses, and  returned  again  to  the  lowlands  at  the 
 captivity.     In  the  second  century  B.  c,  Aristobulus 
 
ITZCHAKI 
 
 44.<i 
 
 IVORY 
 
 conquered  Ituraea,  and  gave  the  inhabitants  their 
 choice  either  to  embrace  the  Jewish  faith  or  leave 
 the  country.  They  chose  the  former,  and  we  find 
 them  still  there  in  the  time  of  Strabo  and  Pliny 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  II.  3;  Strabo,  1.  c.) 
 
 Ituraea  was  bounded  on  the  south  by  Auranitis, 
 on  the  east  by  Trachonitis,  on  the  north  by 
 Damascus,  and  on  the  west  by  the  ridge  of  Har- 
 mon. It  probably  embraced  tlie  eastern  slopes  of 
 the  latter.  In  name  and  extent  it  corresponds  ex- 
 actly with  the  modern  province  of  Jedur  (..Jus^)- 
 
 The  greater  part  of  the  province  is  table  land,  like 
 Bashan.  The  soil  is  in  general  rich,  the  pasture 
 excellent,  and  water  abundant ;  yet  portions  of  its 
 surface  near  the  mountains  are  covered  with  rugged 
 fields  of  basalt,  while  conical  and  cup-shaped  hills 
 of  the  same  material  occur  at  intervals.  Most  of 
 the  ancient  towns  and  villages  are  now  mere  heaps 
 of  ruins,  and  not  one-tenth  of  the  soil  is  under 
 cultivation.  The  settled  inhabitants  live  partly  in 
 <)ld  houses,  built,  like  those  of  Bashan,  of  massive 
 blocks  of  basalt,  and  partly  in  modern  hovels  con- 
 structed of  old  materials.  Several  small  nomad 
 tribes,  perhaps  descendants  of  the  ancient  Ituraeans, 
 pitch  their  tents  on  its  rich  plains  and  among  its 
 rocky  fastnesses.  In  early  spring  the  vast  flocks 
 of  the  desert  Bedawin  cover  the  country  like 
 locusts ;  the  settled  inhabitants  pay  them  black 
 mail,  and  the  local  nomads  retire  before  them  to 
 the  mountains.  (Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria, 
 p.  286  ;  Ha7idbc}ok  for  S.  and  P.,  p.  465  ;  Miinter, 
 De  Rebus  Ituraeoritm  ;  Robinson,  Bibl.  Res. ,  iii. 
 App.  p.  149,  isted.;  Joiintal  of  Sacred  Literature, 
 July  1854,  p.  3ii)--J-  L-  P. 
 
 ITZCHAKI,  also  called  Ben  Jasus,  pn\*''~1 
 CIC^'^  p  Xlpjn  (comp.  Ibn  Ezra,  introduction  to 
 his  D''JTSD),  and  by  the  long  Arabic  name  of  Abu 
 Ibraham  Isaac  Ibn  Kastar  {or  Saktar),  ben  jfasus, 
 was  born  A.  D.  982  at  Toledo,  and  died  in  1057. 
 This  daring  grammarian,  commentator,  and  philo- 
 sopher, who  was  physician  to  the  princes  of  Denia, 
 and  Mug'ahid,  and  to  Ali  Ikbal  Addaula,  wrote  (i) 
 a  Hebrew  grammar,  called  D"'D1"li*n  "ISD,  the  Book 
 of  Syntax;  and  (2)  on  Biblical  criticism,  called  1DD 
 ''pnV',  the  work  of  Itzchaki.  Neither  of  these 
 works  has  as  yet  come  to  light,  but  from  Ibn  Ezra, 
 who  quotes  them,  we  see  that  Itzchaki  was  one  of 
 the  earliest  assailants  of  the  Mosaic  authorship  of 
 some  portions  of  the  Pentateuch.  Thus  he  main- 
 tains that  the  portion  in  the  Pentateuch  which  de- 
 scribes the  kings  of  Idumsea  (Gen.  xxxvi.  30,  etc.), 
 'was  written  many  centuries  after  Moses.  Comp. 
 Ibn  Ezra,  Co>n?nentaries  on  Gen.  xxxzi.  30,  31  ; 
 Num.  XX iv.  17  ;  Hos.  i.  i  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der 
 jfuden,  vol.  vi.,  Leipzig  1861,  p.  53.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 ITZCHAKI,  Solomon.     [Rashi]. 
 
 IV AH  (niy),  also  written  Ava  (Kiy,  'overturn- 
 ing'), and  under  the  latter  may  be  seen  the  older 
 opinions  regarding  its  site  and  identity.  There 
 can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  a  noted  city  of  Assyria, 
 as  it  is  mentioned  four  times  in  connection  with 
 Sephervaim  and  Hena  (2  Kings  xvii.  31 ;  xviii.  34; 
 xix.  13;  Is.  xxxvii.  13).  Out  of  these  cities  Shal- 
 maneser  brought  colonists  to  Samaria  to  occupy 
 the  place  of  the  captive  Jews.  Sir  Henry  RawHn- 
 son  supposes  that  the  city  may  have  taken  its  name 
 from  the  Assyrian  deity  Iva,  the  god  of  the  air ; 
 
 but  when  he  attempts  to  institute  an  analogy  be- 
 tween the  Hebrew  Hiy  and  the  Arabic  \^,  he 
 runs  counter  to  all  principles  of  philology.  The 
 letters  J?  and  ^  are  totally  distinct  (see,  however, 
 
 Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  606).  Some  would 
 identify  Ivah  with  the  "Is  of  Herodotus  and  the 
 modern  Hit  on  the  Euphrates.  For  this  there  are 
 no  true  grounds,  and  the  names  are  radically  dif- 
 ferent (Rawlinson's  Herod,  i.  317).  The  true  site 
 of  Ivah  has  not  yet  been  discovered. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 IVORY  (|K^  generally,  twice  D"'3n3t;' ;  Chald. 
 
 ^''D"I  |K^;    Sept.   (556;'rej  iXecpavrivoi.     N.   T.   Ae- 
 
 (pdvrivos ;  1  Kings  x.  22  ;  2  Chron.  ix.  21  ;  Rev. 
 xviii.  12).  'Elephant's  tooth,'  or  simply  'ele- 
 phant,' is  a  common  name  for  ivory,  not  only  in 
 the  Oriental  languages  and  in  Greek,  but  also  in 
 the  Western  tongues  ;  although  in  all  of  them 
 teeth  of  other  species  may  be  included.  There 
 can  be  no  doubt,  for  example,  that  the  harder 
 and  more  accessible  ivory  obtained  from  the  hip- 
 popotamus, was  known  in  Egypt,  at  least  as 
 early  as   that   obtained  from  the  elephant.     We 
 
 have  seen  what  appeared  to  be  an  ivory  sword- 
 handle  of  Egyptian  workmanship,  which  was  de- 
 clared by  dentists  to  be  derived  from  the  river- 
 horse,  and  of  the  same  texture  as  that  which  they 
 now  manufacture  into  false  teeth  to  supply  decayed 
 teeth  in  the  human  mouth.  This  kind  of  ivory 
 does  not  split,  and  therefore  was  anciently  most 
 useful  for  niihtary  instruments.  Elephants'  teeth 
 were  largely  imported  as  merchandise,  and  also 
 brought  as  tribute  into  Egypt.  The  processions  of 
 human  figures  bearing  presents,  etc.,  still  extant 
 on  the  walls  of  palaces  and  tombs,  attest  by  the 
 black  crisp-haired  bearers  of  huge  teeth,  that  some 
 of  these  came  from  Ethiopia  or  Central  Africa  ; 
 and  by  white  men  similarly  laden,  who  also  bring 
 an  Asiatic  elephant  and  a  white  bear,  that  others 
 came  from  the  East.  Phoenician  traders  had  ivory 
 in  such  abundance  that  the  chief  seats  of  their 
 galleys  were  inlaid  with  it.  In  the  Scriptures, 
 according  to  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase,  Jacob's  bed 
 was  made  of  this  substance  (Gen.  xlix.  33)  ;  we 
 find  King  Solomon  importing  it  from  Tarshish  (i 
 Kings  X.  22)  ;  and  if  Psalm  xlv.  8  was  written  be- 
 fore his  reign,  ivory  was  extensively  used  in  the 
 furniture  of  royal  residences  at  a  still  earlier  period. 
 The  same  fact  is  corroborated  by  Homer,  who 
 notices  this  article  of  luxury  in  the  splendid  palace 
 of  Menelaus,  when  Greece  had  not  yet  formed  that 
 connection  with  Egypt  and  the   East  which  the 
 
lYAR 
 
 444 
 
 JAARE  OREGIM 
 
 Hebrew  people,  from  their  geographical  position, 
 naturally  cultivated.  As  an  instance  of  the  super- 
 abundant possession  and  barbarian  use  of  elephants' 
 teeth,  may  be  mentioned  the  octagonal  ivory  Jnint- 
 iiig-tower  built  by  Akbar,  about  twenty-four  miles 
 west  of  Agra  :  it  is  still  standing,  and  bristles  with 
 128  enormous  tusks  disposed  in  ascending  lines, 
 sixteen  on  each  face.  Mr.  Roberts,  remarking  on 
 the  words  of  Amos  (vi.  4),  they  '  that  lie  upon  beds 
 of  ivory,  and  stretch  themselves  upon  their  couches,' 
 refers  the  last  word,  in  conformity  with  the  Tamul 
 version,  to  s\vinging  cots,  often  mentioned  in  the 
 early  tales  of  India,  and  still  plentifully  used  by  the 
 wealthy.  But  it  does  not  appear  that  they  were 
 known  in  Western  Asia,  or  that  figures  of  them 
 occur  on  Egyptian  bas-reliefs.  It  is  more  likely 
 that  '  palkies'  (those  luxurious  travelling  litters)  are 
 meant,  which  were  borne  on  men's  shoulders, 
 whilst  the  person  within  was  stretched  at  ease. 
 They  were  in  common  use  even  among  the  Ro- 
 mans ;  for  Cicero  fell  into  his  assassins'  hands 
 while  he  was  attempting  to  escape  in  one  of  them 
 towards  Naples.  The  tusks  of  African  elephants 
 are  generally  much  longer  than  those  of  the  Asiatic ; 
 and  it  may  be  observed  in  this  place,  that  the 
 ancients,  as  well  as  the  moderns,  are  mistaken 
 when  they  assert  elephants'  tusks  to  be  a  kind  of 
 horns.  They  are  genuine  teeth,  combining  in 
 themselves,  and  occupying,  in  the  upper  jaw,  the 
 whole  mass  of  secretions  which  in  other  animals 
 form  the  upper  incisor  and  laniary  teeth.  They 
 are  useful  for  defence  and  offence,  and  for  holding 
 down  green  branches,  or  rooting  up  water-plants  ; 
 but  still  they  are  not  absolutely  necessary,  since 
 there  is  a  variety  of  elephant  in  the  Indian  forests 
 entirely  destitute  of  tusks,  and  the  females  in  most 
 of  the  races  are  either  without  them,  or  have  them 
 very  small  ;  not  turned  downwards,  as  Bochart 
 states,  but  rather  straight,  as  correctly  described  by 
 Pliny.     [Elephant.] — C.  H.  S. 
 
 lYAR  (T'"'X ;  'lap,  Joseph.  Antiq.  viii.  3.    i  ; 
 
 the  Macedonian  ^ kpTeiilaios)  is  the  late  name  of 
 that  month  which  was  the  second  of  the  sacred, 
 and  the  seventh  of  the  civil,  year  of  the  Jews,  and 
 which  began  with  the  new  moon  of  May.  The 
 itv/  memorable  days  in  it  are  the  loth,  as  a  fast  for 
 the  death  of  EU  ;  the  14th,  as  the  second  or  lesser 
 Passover,  for  those  whom  uncleanness  or  absence 
 prevented  from  celebrating  the  feast  in  Nisan  (Num. 
 ix.  11);  the  23d,  as  a  feast  instituted  by  Simon  the 
 Maccabee  in  memoiy  of  his  taking  the  citadel  Acra 
 in  Jerusalem  (i  Maccab.  xiii.  51,  52)  ;the  28th,  as  a 
 fast  for  the  death  of  Samuel. 
 
 Gesenius  derives  lyarfrom  the  Hebrew  rootllS, 
 to  shine;  but  Benfey  and  Stem,  following  out  their 
 theory  of  the  source  from  which  the  Jews  obtained 
 such  names,  deduce  it  from  the  assumed  Zend  re- 
 presentative of  the  Persian  bahar,  '  spring'  {Mo- 
 tiatsnamen,  p.  134)-  The  name  lyar  does  not 
 occur  in  the  O.  T. ,  this  month  being  always  de- 
 scribed as  the  second  month,  except  in  four  places 
 in  which  it  is  called  Ziv  (l  Kings  vi.  i,  37  ;  Dan. 
 ii.  31  ;  iv.  33).  Ziv,  which  is  written  IT  and  VT,  is 
 not  considered  to  be  a  proper  name,  but  an  appel- 
 lative. It  is  derived  from  inf,  and  is  a  curtailed 
 form  for  VHT,  '  zehiv,'  bright,  an  appropriate  epi- 
 thet of  the  month  of  flowers. — ^J.  N. 
 
 lYIM  (D'"X),  a  term  occurring  Is.  xiii.  22 ; 
 xxxiv.  14 ;  Jer.  1.  39,  as  designating  some  species 
 
 of  wild  gregarious  animal.  In  the  A.  V.  it  is  ren- 
 dered by  '  wild  beasts  of  the  islands,'  from  a  sup- 
 posed connection  of  the  word  with  ""X,  ati  island. 
 
 But  this  is  clearly  inadmissible  ;  D''''K,  the  plural 
 of  ""N,  means  '  islands,''  but  cannot  mean  '  beasts  oj 
 the  islands,''  The  LXX.  give  ovoKivravpoi.  in  the 
 first  two  passages,  and  iv  vqaois  in  the  third.     The 
 
 Targum  has  pPinH,  cats,  as  its  equivalent.  Bochart 
 shows  that  the  ""N  was  probably  the  jackal ;  and 
 that  the  word  is  onomatopoetic  from  imitation  of 
 the  animal's  peculiar  howl.     The  jackal  is  called 
 
 by  the  Arabs  Ibn-awi  \^%\  ,S\)i  ^^^^  •^'"^  of  howl- 
 ing. The  cry  of  the  jackal  is  like  that  of  a  child 
 (Henderson  on  Is.  xiii.  22). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 IZHAR  ("inV ;  Sept.  'Itrtrda/),  'lo-dap),  the  son 
 
 of  Kohath,  grandson  of  Levi,  and  uncle  of  Moses 
 and  Aaron  (Exod.  vi.  16-20 ;  Num.  iii.  19;  1 
 Chron.  vL  2,  18).  From  him  were  descended  the 
 family  of  the  Izeharites  (Num.  iii.  27).  He  was  the 
 father  of  Korah  whose  rebellion  brought  such  dis- 
 aster on  himself  and  those  whom  he  induced  to 
 share  in  his  'gainsaying'  (Num.  xvi.  i).  In  i 
 Chron.  vi.  22  the  name  Amminadab  is  substituted 
 for  Izhar,  apparently  by  some  clerical  error  (comp. 
 the  Codex  Alex,  of  the  LXX.  here,  and  see 
 ver.  38).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 IZRAHITE  (nnrri;   Sept.   6  'Ito-pa^ ;   Alex. 
 
 6  'lefpa^X),  the  designation  of  Shamhuth,  captain 
 of  the  fifth  of  the  monthly  courses  appointed  by 
 David  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  8).  The  word  is  pro- 
 bably formed  from  n"lT,  Zerach,  the  head  of  one  of 
 the  families  of  Judah,  and  is  another  form  of  Tllf, 
 Zarchi  {Zarhite,  A.  V.),  the  designation  of  two  be- 
 sides of  these  captains  (ver.  11,  13). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 IZRI  (ni"";    Sept.    'l£(r/3i;    Alex.   'leadpl),    a 
 
 Levite,  to  whom  fell  the  lot  of  leader  of  the  fourth 
 ward  in  the  service  of  song  in  the  house  of  the 
 Lord  under  David  (i  Chron.  xxv.  Ii).  The  name 
 is  an  abbreviation  of  n*"lif^,  Creator  is  Jah.     By 
 
 omission  of  the  initial ''  it  becomes  ^IT,  Zeri,  as  in 
 ver.  3. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 J. 
 
 J  A  ARAN.     [Benei-Jaakan.] 
 
 JAARE    OREGIM    (D'-JliX    --nr    [S-|''j;t"1, 
 
 small  (doubtful  1),  according  to  the  Massorah] 
 LXX.  ^ApLwp-flp.),  2  Sam.  xxi.  19  ;  a  Bethlehemite, 
 father  of  Elhanan,  who  in  that  passage  is  reported 
 to  have  slain  Goliath  the  Gittite.  In  order  to  re- 
 concile this  statement  with  the  one  contained  in 
 1  Sam.  xvii. ,  according  to  which  it  was  David 
 who  slew  the  formidable  Philistine,  the  Midrash 
 
 identifies  Elhanan  with  David  (7{<  133  ntJ',  ^whom 
 God  has  favoured,^  ^=  Hananel,  Elhanan,  Jalk.  to  2 
 Sam.  xxi.  19,  etc.),  and  interprets  the  Jaare  Oregim, 
 which  follows,  in  various  fanciful  manners,  so  as  to 
 make  it  agree  with  the  circumstances.  Ben  yaa?-e, 
 according  to  one  version  (Jalk,  ib.),  was  David's 
 own  name,  '  because  he  was  great  among  the  forest 
 [of  the]  Oregim  or  Weavers  [of  the  Law] ;  i.e. ,  the 
 Sanhedrim,  who  brought  the  Halacha  (legal  deci- 
 
JAAZANIAH 
 
 445 
 
 JAAZER  AND  JAZER 
 
 sions)  before  him  that  he  might  weave  it,'  as  it 
 were.  Another  version  traces  the  Jaare  Oregim 
 to,  or  rather  founds  upon  it,  the  legend  tliat  Da- 
 vid's mother  habitually  wove  veils  for  the  sanctu- 
 ary, which  pious  occupation  procured  for  her  son 
 the  epithet  of  a  '  son  of  weavers'  beams.'  A 
 third  simply  takes  the  two  words  as  an  epithet  for 
 
 David's  father  Jesse.    Jonathan  translates  in  i?t2p1 
 
 "131  onh  n'lm  xt^'ipo  rT'n  nniis  '•no  ••t^"'  -12 
 
 '  And  David,  the  son  of  Jesse,  the  weaver  of  veils  for 
 the  sanctuaiy  in  Bethlehem,  killed,'  etc.  The  Vulg. 
 renders  '  A deoda /us  filius  Saltiis[Jaar=  forest]  Poly- 
 mitarius  [?David  himself  a  weaver  or=Polymitari/] 
 
 15ethlehemites;'  Pesh.  ]^0  i"^]  .<^VVn_  Arab.  V. 
 _La!li_jL<i  =  Malaph  (?)  the  weaver. 
 
 All  these  more  or  less  allegorical  explanations, 
 however,  are  unsatisfactory  to  a  degree,  and  the 
 whole  passage  has  been  sharply  contested  from  the 
 days  of  the  early  commentators.  It  would  indeed 
 appear  as  if  nothing  short  of  a  corrupt  read- 
 ing, such  as  Kennicott,  after  Piscator,  has  lucidly 
 pointed  out,  could  account  for  the  existence  of 
 this  most  mysterious  compound  name  ;  while  at  the 
 same  time,  by  his  suggestion,  much  is  gained  for 
 the  reconciliation  of  the  two  flagrantly  contradictoiy 
 accounts  of  Goliath's  defeat.  The  parallel  passage 
 in  I  Chron.  xx.  5  seems  to  have  the  correct  reading. 
 'And  Elhanan,'  we  find  there,  'the  son  of  Jair 
 (Ketib  liy)  slew  Lahmi,  the  brother  of  Goliah  the 
 Gittite,  whose  spear  staff  was  like  a  weaver's  beam 
 (□■"JIIX  "11303).'  Some  early  copyist,  after  having 
 finished  the  word  T'y^  01^^),  mistook  the  "1  in 
 11J03,  which  in  the  manuscript  from  which  he 
 copied  happened  to  stand  exactly  underneath, 
 for  the  one  he  had  just  written,  and  consequently 
 went  on  with  the  word  CJIIX,  which  happened  to 
 follow  in  the  second  line.  How  this  mistake  was 
 perpetuated,  what  efforts  were  made,  by  further  ad- 
 ditions of  words  or  single  letters,  to  render  the  now 
 obscure  passage  somewhat  more  clear  and  more  in 
 accordance  with  the  statements  preferred  elsewhere 
 — for  these  and  other  points  in  connection  with 
 them  we  must  refer  to  Elhanaii  (vol.  i. ,  p.  762), 
 where  also  the  different  speculations  and  sugges- 
 tions of  ancient  and  modern  commentators  will  be 
 found  discussed  at  somewhat  greater  length. 
 
 As  a  characteristic  specimen  of  late  poetical 
 etymology  (Jaare,  Jair)  we  will  add  the  Targum  to 
 the  passage  in  i  Chron.  xx.  5,  amended  in  its  turn 
 after  the  one  in  Samuel  :  '  '  And  David,  the  son  of 
 Jishai,' — this  is  the  pious  man  who  arose  ("lyJT'D) 
 from  his  sleep  in  the  middle  of  the  night  to  give 
 praise  unto  God — '  slew  Lachmi  the  brother  of 
 Goliath  on  the  same  day  on  which  he  killed  Go- 
 liath of  Gath.'  This  derivation  of  "1"'^''  is  founded 
 upon  the  following  beautiful  legend,  found  in  Talm. 
 Berach.  3  b.,  Jer.  Ber.  i. ,  Bamidb.  Rab.  15,  etc.  : 
 '  A  harp  was  hanging  above  David's  bed,  and  in 
 the  middle  of  the  night  the  north  wind  came  and 
 rustled  in  its  strings  so  that  it  sang  [played]  of 
 itself.  And  David  rose  at  once  and  praised  God, 
 and  studied  in  the  law  till  the  dawn  of  morning. 
 As  it  is  written  (Ps.  Ivii.  9  [A.  V.  8]),  '  Awake  up 
 my  glory,  awake,  psaltery  and  harp  ;  /  vjill  wake 
 the  dawn.' ' — E.  D. 
 
 JAAZANIAH  (n''J_TX\  or  with  1  parag.  !in''3TX'' ; 
 LXX.  'lefoj'tas ;  Vulg.  yczonias). 
 
 1.  One  of  Zedekiah's  'captains  of  the  forces,' 
 who  escaped  capture  by  the  army  of  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, and  to  whom,  with  his  troops,  Gedaliah, 
 after  his  appointment  as  governor  of  Judrea,  gave 
 assurances  of  safety  (2  Kings  xxv.  23).  He  is  de- 
 scribed as  the  son  of  the  Maachathite  (TlDyt^rTp), 
 
 which  probably  means  that  he  was  the  son  or  de- 
 scendant of  a  native  of  Maachah,  a  district  on  the 
 slope  of  Mount  Hermon,  the  Canaanitish  inhabit- 
 ants of  which  were  not  expelled  by  the  Israelites, 
 but  were  permitted  to  dwell  amongst  them  on 
 friendly  terms  (Josh.  xii.  5 ;  xiii.  13).  In  the 
 book  of  Jeremiah  his  name  appears  in  the  slightly 
 abbreviated  form  of  Jezaniah  (iT'JT'' ;  LXX.  'Ei'o- 
 
 w'aj),  xl.  8,  xlii.  I ;  and  in  the  latter  passage  he  is 
 said  to  be  the  son  of  Hoshaiah. 
 
 2.  Son  of  Jeremiah,  the  son  of  Habaziniah,  and 
 the  head  of  that  family  of  Rechabites  to  whom  the 
 prophet  Jeremiah  announced  the  divine  blessing 
 because  of  their  faithful  observance  of  the  com- 
 mandments of  Jonadab  their  ancestor  (Jer.  xxxv.  3). 
 The  LXX.  reads  in  this  passage  Jechoniah  ('lexo- 
 v[a%),  which  is  probably  an  error  of  transcription  ; 
 the  same  form  occurs  as  a  various  reading  in  Ezek. 
 viii.  II. 
 
 3.  Son  of  Shaphan  (Ezek.  viii.  11),  and  an  elder 
 of  the  house  of  Israel,  who  took  a  prominent  part 
 in  the  idolatrous  abominations  practised  in  Jerusa- 
 lem during  the  reign  of  Zedekiah. 
 
 4.  Son  of  Azur  (Ezek.  xi.  i),  and  one  of  the 
 princes  of  Jerusalem  who  '  gave  wicked  counsel  in 
 this  city,'  and  encouraged  the  people  in  their  dis- 
 belief of  the  prophetic  warnings  which  had  an- 
 nounced to  them  the  approaching  destruction  of 
 their  city  by  the  king  of  Babylon. — S.  N. 
 
 JAAZER  and  JAZER  (n^rV''  and  -lTj;\  '  Jehovah 
 
 helps;'  'laf'T?^;  Jazer),  a  town  of  Gilead  (i  Chron. 
 xxvi.  31),  situated  near  Heshbon  (vi.  81  [66]).  It 
 was  originally  occupied  by  the  Amorites,  and  was 
 taken  by  the  Israelites  after  the  defeat  of  Sihon 
 (Num.  xxi.  31-32).  It  must  have  been  a  place  of 
 importance,  for  it  gave  its  name  to  a  large  section 
 of  country.  The  '  land  of  Jazer  '  was  fertile,  and 
 its  rich  pastures  attracted  the  attention  of  the  tribes 
 of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  Manasseh  (xxxii.  i).  It  was 
 within  the  allotted  territory  of  Gad  (ver.  35  ;  Josh, 
 xiii.  25) ;  and  as  it  is  mentioned  between  Dibon 
 and  Nimreh,  it  appears  to  have  stood  on  the  high 
 plain  north  of  Heshbon  (Num.  xxxii.  3).  It  was 
 one  of  the  four  cities  out  of  Gad  assigned  to  the 
 Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  39)  ;  but  on  the  decline  of  the 
 Jewish  power  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Moabites. 
 Isaiah  connects  it  with  Heshbon  and  Elealah  in  the 
 prophetic  curse  pronounced  upon  Moab,  predicting 
 its  utter  ruin,  and  the  destruction  of  its  fields  and 
 vineyards  by  the  wild  hordes  of  the  desert  (xvi. 
 7-10).  The  parallel  passages  in  Isaiah  and 
 Jeremiah  are  rendered  somewhat  obscure  by  refer- 
 ence to  '  the  sea.'  Isaiah  says  of  the  vine,  for 
 which  that  region  was  celebrated  :— '  Its  branches 
 were  stretched  out,  they  reached  to  (or  over)  the 
 sea;''  and  Jeremiah  says — 'Thy  plants  are  gone 
 over  the  sea,  they  reach  to  the  sea  of  fazer '  (□'• 
 "iTy^  ;  xlviii.  32).  What  sea  is  here  referred  to  ? 
 Some  have  supposed  it  a  noted  '  pool '  or  '  lake  ' 
 in  the  vicinity  of  Jazer  ;  but  there  is  no  lake  in  that 
 district,  and  the  word  D""  could  scarcely  be  applied 
 with  propriety  to  a  mere  pool.  We  learn  from 
 Num.    xxxii.    i    that    the   whole   country   around 
 
JAAZIAH 
 
 446 
 
 JABBOK 
 
 Heskbon  and  Jazer  was  called  '  the  land  o/yazer.'' 
 That  land  must  have  extended  to  the  shore  of  the 
 Dead  Sea.  May  not  that  sea,  therefore,  have  been 
 called  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  district  '  the  Sea  of 
 Jazer,'  just  as  the  northern  lake  took  the  name  of 
 'Tiberias,'  and  '  Genesaret,'  and  '  Chinnereth  ?' 
 Gesenius  questions  the  integrity  of  the  text  in  Jere- 
 miah, but  without  sufficient  reason  {Coiiunent.  iib. 
 Jes.  xvi.  8).  The  Sept.  reads  7r6Xeis 'lafrjp  ;  this 
 version,  however,  is  here  far  from  being  trustworthy. 
 Jazer  was  taken  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  from  the 
 Ammonites  (l  Maccab.  v.  8  ;  cf.  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii. 
 8.  i).  Eusebiusand  Jerome  describe  it  as  a  city  of 
 the  Amorites  ten  miles  west  of  Philadelphia,  and 
 fifteen  from  Heshbon ;  they  also  state  that  a  large 
 stream  rose  beside  it  and  flowed  into  the  Jordan 
 {Otiomast.  s.  v.  yazer).  Burckhardt  in  travelling 
 from  Es-Salt  to  Heshbon  passed  a  ruined  town 
 
 called  Sir  (_««))  situated  on  the  side  of  a  hill,  and 
 
 immediately  below  it  was  the  source  of  a  stream 
 which  ran  down  to  the  Jordan  (Trav.  t?i  Sy^-ia, 
 364).  The  ruins  lie  four  hours  north  of  Heshbon, 
 and  thus  correspond  to  the  position  of  Jazer  as 
 given  by  Jerome.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
 this  is  the  Jazer  of  the  Bible  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
 323).  The  prophecies  of  Scripture  are  fulfilled. 
 The  city  and  country  are  alike  desolate.  The  vine- 
 yards that  once  covered  the  hill  sides  are  gone  ; 
 and  the  wild  Bedawin  from  the  eastern  desert  make 
 cultivation  of  any  kind  impossible. — [^Handbook  for 
 S.  and  P.,  298,  sq.)—].  L.  P. 
 
 JAAZIAH  (tinny  ;   Sept.  '0^'a).      This  name 
 
 appears  (i  Chron.  xxiv.  26,  27)  in  the  genealogy  of 
 Merari,  a  Levite ;  but  the  text  is  in  such  a  state 
 that  it  is  hard  to  know  in  what  light  to  regard  the 
 person  to  whom  it  is  assigned.  Elsewhere  the  only 
 sons  of  Merari  mentioned  are  Mahli  and  Mushi 
 (Exod.  vi.  10 ;  Num.  iii.  33  ;  I  Chron.  vi.  4 
 [A.  V.  19] ;  xxiii.  21).  It  has  been  supposed  that 
 Jaaziah  was  a  third  son  of  Merari,  and  the  founder 
 of  three  houses  in  that  line,  Shoham,  Zaccur,  and 
 'Ibri ;  but  in  its  present  state  the  text  does  not  say 
 this,  and  it  can  only  be  conjecturally  asserted. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 JAAZIEL  (isj^nj;'';  Sept. 'O^TjX;  Alex.  'Itjoi^X), 
 
 a  Levite  of  the  second  order  of  those  who  had 
 charge  of  the  music  in  the  temple  service  in  the 
 
 time  of  David  (i  Chron.  xv.  18) ;  called  Aziel  (^K^J?) 
 
 in  ver.  20,  and  Jeiel  (?K''y)  in  xvi.  5. 
 
 JABAL  (^n\  a  stream;  Sept.  'Iw/StJX),  a  de- 
 scendant of  Cain,  son  of  Lamech  and  Adah,  who 
 is  described  in  Gen.  iv.  20,  as  '  the  father  of  such 
 as  dwell  in  tents,  and  have  cattle.'  This  obviously 
 means  that  Jabal  was  the  first  who  adopted  that 
 nomade  life  which  is  still  followed  by  numerous 
 Arabian  and  Tartar  tribes  in  Asia.  Abel  had  long 
 before  been  a  keeper  of  sheep  ;  but  Jabal  invented 
 such  portable  habitations  (formed,  doubtless,  of 
 skins)  as  enabled  a  pastoral  people  to  remove  their 
 dwellings  with  them  from  one  place  to  another, 
 when  they  led  their  flocks  to  new  pastures. — ^J.  K. 
 
 JABBOK  (pin'',  perhaps  =  pa\  'pouring  out;' 
 
 'Ia/3ti(c  and  'Ia/36K  ;  Jaboc ;  in  Joseph.  'la^d^xos), 
 a  stream  which  falls  into  the  Jordan  from  the  east, 
 
 about  midway  between  the  lake  of  Tiberias  and 
 Dead  Sea.  It  was  on  the  banks  of  the  Jabbok 
 that  the  remarkable  interview  took  place  between 
 Jacob  and  Esau,  on  the  return  of  the  former  from 
 Padanaram  (Gen.  xxxii.  22).  The  stream  is  im- 
 portant in  a  geographical  point  of  view,  and  a 
 knowledge  of  its  topography  helps  us  to  understand 
 more  easily  some  passages  of  Scripture.  It  was 
 the  boundary  between  the  Amorites  and  the 
 Ammonites.  We  are  told  that  after  the  defeat  of 
 Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites,  at  Jazer,  '  Israel  pos- 
 sessed his  land  from  Arnon  unto  Jabbok,  even  unto 
 the  children  of  Amnion ;  for  the  border  of  the 
 children  of  Ammon  was  strong '  (Num.  xxi.  24). 
 The  Jabbok,  flowing  in  a  wild  and  deep  ravine 
 through  the  Gilead  mountains,  formed  a  strong 
 natural  frontier  for  the  bordering  principalities.  It 
 would  seem  that  at  the  Exodus  the  Ammonites 
 possessed  the  country  eastward  and  northward  of 
 the  upper  sources  and  branches  of  the  Jabbok,  and 
 that  Sihon  and  Og  occupied  the  whole  region 
 between  the  Ammonites  and  the  Jordan,  extending 
 as  far  north  as  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (Josh.  xii.  2-8  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  iv.  5.  2,  and  3).  The  Israelites  con- 
 quered Sihon  and  Og,  and  took  their  kingdoms  ; 
 and  the  possessions  of  the  three  tribes,  thus  ac- 
 quired, extended  from  the  Dead  Sea  to  Hermon  ; 
 but  they  were  not  permitted  to  touch  the  territory 
 of  Ammon  (Deut.  ii.  37  ;  iii.  16).  About  fifteen 
 miles  from  the  Jordan  the  Jabbok  forks ;  one  branch 
 coming  down  from  Jerash  on  the  north,  and  the 
 other  from  Rabbath-Amman  on  the  south  ;  these 
 branches  formed  the  western  frontier  of  the 
 Ammonites,  dividing  them  from  the  Amorites,  and 
 subsequently  from  the  Israelites  (Reland,  Pal.,  p. 
 103).  Previous  to  the  Exodus,  the  territoiy  of  the 
 Ammonites  was  much  more  extensive,  embracing 
 the  whole  region  between  the  Jabbok  and  the 
 Arnon  ;  but  the  Amorites  drove  them  out  of  that 
 portion,  and  forced  them  into  the  mountains 
 around  the  sources  of  the  Jabbok,  and  into  the 
 plain  eastwards  (Judg.  xi.  13,  22).  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome  rightly  describe  the  Jabbok  as  flowing  be- 
 tween Ammon  and  Gerasa,  and  falling  into  the 
 Jordan  {Onoinast.  s.  v.  Jabboch).  ^^ 
 
 The  Jabbok  is  now  called  Wady  Zurka  (Ij,:). 
 
 Its  sources  are  chiefly  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
 mountains  of  Gilead,  and  it  also  drains  a  portion 
 of  the  high  plateau  of  Arabia  beyond.  The  upper 
 branches  and  tributaries  are  mere  winter  streams. 
 At  the  point  where  the  two  main  branches  from 
 Jerash  and  Ammon  unite,  the  stream  becomes 
 perennial ;  and  often,  after  heavy  rain,  is  a  foaming 
 impassable  torrent.  '  The  ravine  through  which  it 
 flows  is  narrow,  deep,  and  in  places  wild.  Through- 
 out nearly  its  whole  course  it  is  fringed  by  thickets 
 of  cane  and  oleander,  and  the  large  clustering 
 flowers  of  the  latter  give  the  banks  a  gay  and  gorge- 
 ous appearance  during  the  spring  and  early  summer ' 
 {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  310).  Higher  up,  the 
 sides  of  the  ravine  are  clothed  with  forests  of  ever- 
 green oak,  pine,  and  arbutus  ;  and  the  undulating 
 forest  glades  are  carpeted  with  green  grass,  and 
 strewn  with  innumerable  wild  flowers.  The 
 scenery  along  the  banks  of  the  Jabbok  is  probably 
 the  most  picturesque  in  Palestine  ;  and  the  ruins  of 
 town  and  village  and  fortress  which  stud  the  sur- 
 rounding mountain  sides  render  the  country  as 
 interesting  as  it  is  beautiful  (See  Burckhardt, 
 Travels  in   Syria,   p.    347 ;   Irljy  and   Mangles, 
 
JABESH-GILEAD 
 
 447 
 
 JABEZ 
 
 Travels,  319,  ist  ed.  ;  Lynch,  Expedition  to  Dead 
 Sea,  p.  179,  English  ed.)— J-  L.  P. 
 
 JABESH-GILEAD  (p^, '  dry, '  also  K'^T ;  'la^eh 
 
 and  'Ia/3^s ;  Jabes).  The  first  mention  of  this  an- 
 cient city  is  in  connection  with  the  tragic  stoiy  of 
 the  sin  and  punishment  of  the  Benjamites.  The 
 Israehtes  had  made  an  oath  that  every  one  who 
 did  not  join  in  taking  vengeance  on  them  for  tlieir 
 revoking  crime  should  be  put  to  death.  The 
 people  of  Jabesh  failed  to  appear  at  the  national 
 gathering,  and  therefore,  at  the  close  of  the  war, 
 their  city  was  attacked  and  the  whole  population 
 slain,  except  400  young  virgins,  who  were  reserved 
 as  wives  for  the  remnant  of  the  Benjamites  (Judg. 
 xix.  ;  XX  ;  xxi.  8-14).  About  three  centuries  later 
 Jabesh  was  again  the  scene  of  a  remarkable  episode 
 in  Jewish  history.  The  city  was  surrounded  by 
 the  vast  forces  of  the  Ammonites.  Unable  to 
 resist,  the  inhabitants  offered  to  become  the  slaves 
 of  their  foes  ;  but  the  conditions  proposed  by  the 
 cruel  Arab  prince  were  so  terrible  that  they  asked 
 some  days  respite.  Saul  had  just  been  proclaimed 
 king.  They  sent  to  him  and  told  their  tale  of  woe. 
 He  saw  in  it  a  favourable  opportunity  for  establish- 
 ing his  yet  unrecognised  authority.  The  news  came 
 to  him  at  Gibeah.  That  very  day  he  summoned 
 Israel  to  the  gathering-place  at  Bezek,  near  Beth- 
 shan.  From  thence  he  made  a  night  march  across 
 the  Jordan,  attacked  the  Ammonites  in  the  morn- 
 ing-watch, and  gained  one  of  the  most  signal  vic- 
 tories ever  achieved  by  Jewish  arms  (i  Sam.  xi.) 
 The  whole  subsequent  history  of  Jabesh  clusters 
 round  this  one  event.  The  inhabitants  felt  deeply 
 grateful  to  their  king.  No  opportunity  occurred 
 during  his  life  of  showing  their  gratitude,  but  when 
 Saul  fell  on  Gilboa,  and  when  the  barbarous  Phi- 
 listines fastened  his  body  to  the  wall  of  Bethshan, 
 the  men  of  Jabesh  heard  the  sad  tidings.  From 
 the  streets  of  their  own  city  they  could  see,  beyond 
 the  Jordan  valley,  that  great  fortress  on  which  the 
 mangled  remains  of  their  king  hung.  Then  '  all 
 the  valiant  men  arose,  and  went  all  night,  and 
 took  the  body  of  Saul,  and  the  bodies  of  his  sons, 
 from  the  wall  of  Bethshan,  and  came  to  Jabesh, 
 and  burnt  them  there.  And  they  took  their  bones, 
 and  buried  them  under  a  tree  at  Jabesh,  and  fasted 
 seven  days'  (i  Sam.  xxxi.  II-13).  It  was  a  noble 
 act ;  and  the  heroism  of  the  actors  was  appreciated 
 by  the  high-minded  David  ;  for  when  he  was  told, 
 '  he  sent  messengers  unto  the  men  of  Jabesh- 
 Gilead,  and  said  unto  them,  '  Blessed  be  ye  of  the 
 Lord,  that  ye  have  showed  this  kindness  unto  your 
 lord.  .  .  .  And  now  the  Lord  show  kindness 
 and  truth  unto  you  :  and  I  also  will  requite  you  for 
 this  kindness'  (2  Sam.  ii.  5,  6).  The  last  mention 
 of  the  city  occurs  when  David,  at  a  subsequent 
 period,  removed  the  bones  of  Saul  and  his  sons, 
 and  buried  them  in  the  sepulchre  of  Kish  (xxi. 
 12-14). 
 
 Jabesh  is  not  again  referred  to  by  any  writer 
 except  Josephus,  who  merely  repeats  the  Scripture 
 story  (Antiq.  v.  2.  II  ;  vi.  14.  8),  until  the  time  of 
 Eusebius,  who  says,  '  It  is  now  a  village  (Kdi/xr)) 
 situated  on  a  hill,  six  miles  from  Pella,  on  the  road 
 to  Gerasa  (Onomast.  s.  v.  Jabis ;  cf.  Jerome, 
 Comment,  ad  Lib.  Jitd. )  The  great  city  of  Pella 
 had  risen  beside  it,  and  was  made  capital  of  the 
 province  ;  this  probably  led  to  the  decline  of  Jabesh 
 and  its  final  rain.  From  that  time  until  our  own 
 age  the  site  has  remained,   not  merely  deserted, 
 
 but  unknown.     The  old  name,   however,  is  still 
 
 given  in  its  Arabic  form  Yabes  (,  i^^lj)  to  a  ravine 
 
 which  winds  down  the  side  of  Mount  Gilead, 
 nearly  opposite  Bethshan.  On  the  south  bank  ol 
 the  ravine,  about  six  miles  from  the  ruins  of  Pella, 
 near  the  line  of  the  ancient  road  to  Gerasa,  stands 
 a  little  hill  covered  with  ruins,  called  by  the  Arabs 
 Ed-Deir  ('the  convent');  this  in  all  probability 
 marks  the  site  of  Jabesh-Gilead.  (Robinson,  B.  R. 
 iii.  39  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Travels  ii.  349-52  ;  Hand- 
 book for  S.  and  P.,  p.  3 1 7  ;  Burckhardt,  Travels 
 in  Syria,  p.  345-)— J-  L.  P. 
 
 JABEZ  0^3^;  Sept.  'Id/3is;  Alex.  Fa/ST^s).  i.  A 
 town  in  which  the  '  families  of  the  scribes'  (DDDtl/O 
 D''~l3iD)  resided  (i  Chron.  ii.  55).  It  was  appa- 
 rently in  Judah  ;  for  details,  which  are  chiefly  of  a 
 topographical  kind,  from  ver.  42  onwards,  form  a 
 sort  of  appendix  to  the  statement  of  Judah's  de- 
 scendants (1-41).  This  sets  aside  the  conjecture  of 
 Rashi,  who  would  identify  Jabez  with  Abez  (Josh, 
 xix.  20),  which  belonged  to  Issachar. 
 
 2.  A  descendant  apparently  of  Coz,  and  head 
 of  one  of  the  families  of  Judah  (l  Chron.  iv.  9). 
 Fiirst  suggests  that  the  reading  here  may  originally 
 have  been—'  Zereth,  and  Jezoar,  and  Ethran,  and 
 Coz.  And  Coz  begat  Azub  and  Jabez,  and  this 
 Jabez  was  the  father  of  Jabez  [the  town]  and  Zo- 
 bebah,'  etc.  Of  Jabez  it  is  said,  that  '  he  was  more 
 honourable  than  his  brethren,'  and  it  is  stated  that 
 his  mother  gave  him  the  name  Jabez  to  comnie- 
 morate  the  sorrow  with  which  she  bore  him  ;  thus 
 tracing  the  name  etymologically  to  3^y,  to  grieve. 
 A  remarkable  prayer  of  Jabez  is  also  recorded, 
 with  the  notice  that  God  granted  it.  These  verses 
 are  supposed  to  be  from  some  ancient  source. 
 There  is  a  close  resemblance  between  them  and 
 some  of  the  narratives  in  Genesis  (comp.  Gen. 
 xxviii.  20;  xxix.  32-35  ;  etc.) — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JABEZ  ^IVt"),  Isaac  b.  Salomo  b.  Isaac  b. 
 Joseph,  a  Jewish  commentator  who  flourished  in 
 the  i6th  century.  He  wrote — i.  A  Cotnmentary 
 on  the  Haphtaroth,  or  Sabbatic  lessons  from  the 
 prophets  [Haphtara],  entitled  JI^Tl  pS%  he  will 
 find  favour,  which  is  of  a  homiletic  character,  and 
 was  published  at  Belvedere  near  Constantinople  in 
 1593;   2.   A  Commentary  07i  the  Psalms,  entitled 
 
 nin^  m^nn,  the  praises  of  the  Lord;  3.  A  Commen- 
 tary on  Proverbs,  entitled  nirT"  '•TlJD?,  the  taught  of 
 God;  4.  A  Conunentary  on  Proverbs,  entitled  nX"l"* 
 ''^t^',  the  fear  of  the  Ali7iighty  ;  5.  A  Conunentary  oti 
 the  Song  of  Songs,  entitled  D''CJ'lp  t^Hp,  the  holy  of 
 holies ;  6.  A  Commentary  on  Ruth,  entitled  PID^ 
 p'^nV,  a  branch  of  righteousness ;  7.  A  Commentary 
 on  Lamentations,  entitled  D'^DH  TSpTi,  the  righteous- 
 ness of  the  perfect ;  8.  A  Commentary  on  the  Book 
 ofEcclesiastes,  entitled  yiD  "•lyCJ',  the  gates  of  know- 
 ledge;  9.  A  Commentary  on  the  Book  of  Esther,  en- 
 titled Dl^ti'  mtiy,  the  crown  of  peace ;  10.  A  Com- 
 mentary on  Daniel,  called  W'X^''  nD"l3,  the  blessing 
 of  the  upright ;  ii.  A  Commentary  on  Ezra  and 
 Nehemiah,  entitled  □"'DIP!  ytTlJO,  the  Saviour  of 
 those  who  trust  in  him.  All  these  commentaries, 
 which  are  chiefly  a  compilation  made  up  from  ten 
 different  expositors,  are,  with  the  exception  of  the 
 first,  contained  in  Frankfurter's  Rabbinic  Bible 
 [Frankfurter].    He  also  wrote  a  Commejttary  on 
 
JABIN 
 
 448 
 
 JABLONSKI 
 
 (he  Pentateuch,  entitled  nnjOn  TwO,  floin-  for  offer- 
 ing, which  is  not  published  (comp.  Wolf,  Biblio- 
 theca  Hebrica,  i.  694  ;  iii.  617,  sg.,  iv.  8S6  ;  Fiirst, 
 Bibliotheca  Jitdaica  ii.  2  ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogus 
 Libr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col.  1 125). — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JABIN  (pn\  discertier;  Sept.  ^la^iv).      I.  King 
 
 of  Hazor,  and  one  of  the  most  powerful  of  all  the 
 princes  who  reigned  in  Canaan  when  it  was  in- 
 vaded by  the  Israelites.  His  dominion  seems  to 
 have  extended  over  all  the  north  part  of  the  coun- 
 try ;  and  after  the  ruin  of  the  league  formed  against 
 the  Hebrews  in  the  south  by  Adonizedek,  king 
 of  Jerusalem,  he  assembled  his  tributaries  near  the 
 waters  of  Merom  (the  lake  Huleh),  and  called  all 
 the  people  to  arms.  This  coalition  was  destroyed, 
 as  the  one  in  the  south  had  been,  and  Jabin  him- 
 self perished  in  the  sack  of  Hazor,  his  capital,  B.C. 
 1450.  This  prince  was  the  last  powerful  enemy 
 with  whom  Joshua  combated,  and  his  overthrow 
 seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  the  crowning  act  in 
 the  conquest  of  the  Promised  Land  (Josh.  xi.  I- 14). 
 
 2.  A  king  of  Hazor,  and  probably  descended  from 
 the  preceding.  It  appears  that  during  one  of  the 
 servitudes  of  the  Israelites,  probably  when  they  lay 
 under  the  yoke  of  Cushan  or  Eglon,  the  kingdom 
 of  Hazor  was  reconstructed.  The  narrative  gives 
 to  this  second  Jabin  even  the  title  of  '  king  of 
 Canaan;'  and  this,  with  the  possession  of  900  iron- 
 armed  war-chariots,  implies  unusual  power  and 
 extent  of  dominion.  The  iniquities  of  the  Israelites 
 having  lost  them  the  Divine  protection,  Jabin 
 gained  the  mastery  over  them  ;  and,  stimulated 
 by  the  remembrance  of  ancient  wrongs,  oppressed 
 tham  heavily  for  twenty  years.  From  this  thral- 
 dom they  were  relieved  by  the  great  victory  v^'on 
 by  Barak  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  over  the  hosts 
 of  Jabin,  commanded  by  Sisera,  one  of  the  most 
 renowned  generals  of  those  times,  B.C.  1285. 
 The  well-compacted  power  of  the  king  of  Hazor 
 was  not  yet,  however,  entirely  broken.  The  war 
 was  still  prolonged  for  a  tmie,  but  ended  in  the 
 entire  ruin  of  Jabin,  and  the  subjugation  of  his 
 territories  by  the  Israelites  (Judg.  iv.) 
 
 This  is  the  Jabin  whose  name  occurs  in  Ps. 
 Lxxxiii.  10. — ^J.  K. 
 
 Addendum. — The  question  has  been  raised  whe- 
 ther these  two  Jabins  were  not  one  and  the  same  ; 
 and  the  affirmative  has  by  some  been  assumed 
 as  an  argument  against  the  authenticity  of  the 
 narrative  in  Joshua  (De  Wette,  Einl.  ins  A.  T., 
 p.  251;  Maurer,  Comment,  in  loc. );  while  others 
 think  that  the  two  narratives  may  be  of  events  so 
 nearly  contemporaneous  that  they  may  have  hap- 
 pened in  the  lifetime  of  the  same  person.  This 
 latter  hypothesis,  however,  cannot  possibly  be  re- 
 tained ;  for,  even  supposing  that  the  ordinary 
 chronology,  which  places  the  defeat  of  Sisera  150 
 years  after  the  time  of  Joshua,  requires  correction, 
 no  correction  that  can  be  legitimately  made  will 
 render  it  possible  to  synchronise  tlie  two  narratives, 
 nor  can  we  suppose  that  within  the  lifetime  of  one 
 man  Hazor  could  have  been  rebuilt,  the  shattered 
 kingdom  of  its  ruler  restored,  and  that  ruler  en- 
 abled to  tyrannise  over  his  former  conquerors  for 
 20  years.  It  has  been  asked,  '  What  is  to  pre- 
 vent us  from  supposing  Jabin  and  his  confederate 
 kings  to  have  been  defeated  both  by  Joshua  and 
 by  Barak?'  The  reply  is.  That  as  Joshua  killed 
 the  Jabin  with  whom  he  fought  (Josh.  ii.  10)  the 
 latter  could  not  be  alive  to  fight  again  with  Barak, 
 
 even  supposing  Joshua  and  Barak  -were  contem- 
 poraries, as  some  would  make  them  (Hervey,  Gene- 
 alogy of  our  Lord,  p.  228).  The  only  alternative 
 possible,  is  the  supposition  that  there  were  two 
 Jabins,  the  one  the  antagonist  of  Joshua  and 
 destroyed  by  him,  the  other  a  later  prince,  by  whom 
 the  recovered  strength  of  the  Canaanites  was 
 brought  to  bear  on  the  Israelites  so  as  to  keep  them 
 in  subjection  until  Barak  delivered  them  ;  Or  the 
 supposition  that  the  narrative  in  Joshua  is  bor- 
 rowed from  that  in  Judges,  or  vice  versa.  The 
 burden  of  proof  here  lies  on  those  who  adopt  the 
 latter  side  of  this  alternative.  They  must  show 
 that  the  other  side  is  impossible  or  incredible  ;  and 
 they  must  show  what  possible  cause  there  is  for  sup- 
 posing that  the  author  of  the  book  of  Joshua  should 
 seek  to  defraud  Barak  of  his  rightful  fame,  or  the 
 author  of  the  book  of  Judges  seek  to  defraud  Joshua 
 of  his.  That  Hazor  was  rebuilt  after  its  destruc- 
 tion by  Joshua  we  know  (see  I  Kings  ix.  15),  and 
 this  may  have  been  done  by  the  time  of  the  second 
 Jabin  ;  though,  as  it  is  nowhere  said  that  he  resided 
 in  Hazor,  but  only  that  he  rided  over  Hazor,  this 
 latter  supposition  is  not  necessary  iox  the  credibility 
 of  the  narrative  (Havernick,  Einl.  ii.  53  ;  Keil  on 
 Joshua,  p.  287  ;  Winer,  R.  W.  B.,  s.  v.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JABLONSKI,  Daniel  Ernst,  born  1660,  at 
 Nassenhuben  near  Danzig,  son  of  the  preacher 
 Figulus,  who,  a  native  of  Jablunka,  a  small  place 
 in  Silesia,  had  adopted  the  surname  of  Jablonski. 
 Having  acquired  his  first  instruction  at  the  Gym- 
 nasium of  Lissa  (in  Prussian  Poland),  the  subject 
 of  our  notice  went  to  the  university  of  Frankfort 
 on-the-Odei",  where  he  applied  himself  to  literature 
 and  philosophy  as  well  as  to  theology  and  the 
 Oriental  languages.  In  1668  he  set  out  for  a 
 learned  tour  to  the  universities  and  libraries  of 
 Holland  and  England,  and  remained  for  a  con- 
 siderable time  at  Oxford.  At  his  return  in  1683 
 he  was  appointed  preacher  at  Magdeburg,  which 
 place  he  left  two  years  later  in  order  to  assume  the 
 rectorship  of  the  Gymnasium  at  Lissa.  In  1690 
 he  was  made  court  preacher  at  Konigsberg,  and  in 
 1693  his  fame  procured  him  the  place  of  preacher 
 to  the  king  at  Berlin.  Many  were  the  honourable 
 offices  further  entrusted  to  his  care.  Thus,  in  1 7 18 
 he  was  made  a  member  of  the  Consistory,  in  1729 
 a  church-councillor,  and  in  1733  ^^  "^^'•^^  elected 
 president  of  the  Royal  Academy  of  Siences  at 
 Berlin.  At  the  instance  of  Queen  Anne  the  honor- 
 ary degree  of  D.D.  had,  as  early  as  1706,  been 
 bestowed  upon  him.  He  died  at  the  age  of  81 
 years,  in  1741.  His  chief  work  is  the  edition  of 
 the  Hebrew  Bible,  under  the  title  Biblia  Hebraica, 
 cum  notis  Hebraicis,  the  first  edition  of  which  ap- 
 peared in  Berlin  1699  in  2  vols.  4to,  followed  by  a 
 second  in  1712,  i2mo.  Most  of  his  other  writings 
 refer  chiefly  to  the  state  of  the  church  in  Poland  ; 
 such  as,  'Jus  et  libertates  dissendentiiini  in  regno 
 Polonia ;  Das  betriibte  Thortt ;  Historia  consensus 
 Sandomiriensis,  etc.  He  also  translated  several 
 theological  works  into  Latin  ;  e.g.,  Stultitia  et  ir- 
 rationabilitas  Athcismi ex  Anglico  Richardi  Bentleii, 
 latine  versa  ;  Gilberti  Burnet  expositio  articidi  xvii. 
 EcclesicE  Anglicana:  de  pra:destinatione  et  gratia, 
 latine  versa,  etc.  Many  of  his  sermons  have  been 
 printed.  A  not  inconsiderable  number  of  his 
 writings,  chiefly  referring  to  the  union  of  all  the 
 Protestant  churches — an  object  which  he  had  much 
 at  heart — are  still  extant  in  manuscript. — E.  D. 
 
JABLONSKI 
 
 449 
 
 JACOB 
 
 JABLONSKI  (Jablonsky),  Paul  Ernst, 
 the  son  of  the  former,  born  in  BerUn,  1693. 
 Having  completed  his  preliminary  studies  at  the 
 Joachimsthal  Gymnasium  at  Berlin,  he  applied 
 himself,  at  the  university  of  Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 
 whither  he  went  in  1 7 14,  to  theology,  but  also 
 to  linguistic  studies,  chiefly  Coptic,  in  which  La 
 Croze  was  his  instructor.  By  the  munificence 
 of  the  king  he  was  enabled  to  travel,  when  he  left 
 the  university,  through  Germany,  Holland,  Eng- 
 land, and  France.  He  visited  the  libraries  at 
 Leyden,  Paris,  and  Oxford,  chiefly  with  a  view  of 
 extending  his  knowledge  of  Coptic  language  and 
 literature.  At  his  return,  in  1720,  he  was  ap- 
 pointed preacher  at  Liebenberg,  but  in  the  course 
 of  the  very  next  year  the  chair  of  philosophy  was 
 offered  to  him  at  the  university  of  Frankfort-on- 
 the-Oder.  In  1722  he  was  elected  professor  of 
 theology,  and  afterwards  member  of  the  Royal 
 Academy  of  Sciences  at  Berlin.  He  died  in  1757, 
 and  his  contemporaries  bestowed  upon  him  the 
 eulogy,  '  Vir  et  singularis  humanitatis  et  egregias 
 doctrinae  laude  celeberrimus.' 
 
 Although  he  had  a  singular  aversion  to  print  any  of 
 his  writings,  yet  more  than  fifty  independent,  smaller 
 or  larger,  works  are  extant.  We  name  the  following 
 as  the  most  important  : — Disqidsitio  de  lingua 
 Lycaotiica,  Berlin  1 7 14,  4to  ;  Exercitatio  Histonco- 
 Theologica  de  Nestoriasmo,  etc. ,  Berlin  1 724,  Svo  ; 
 Dlssertationes  academicccviii.  de  terra  G'(7j-f;z,  Frank- 
 fort-on-the-Oder 1735,  4to ;  Pantheon  ^gyptiortiin 
 sive  de  Diis  eorum  co7nmentanus,  cum  prolegomenis 
 de  religione  ei  Theologia  yEgyptioriim,  Berlin  1750- 
 1752,  in  three  vols.  Svo,  —  Jablonski's  principal 
 work,  and  one  which  will  for  all  times  ensure  him 
 the  high  respect  of  the  learned  ;  Institutiones  His- 
 iorice  Christiana  Antiqitioris,  Frankfort-on-the- 
 Oder  1753,  ^^°  >  followed  by  Listittitiones  Historic 
 Christiana  recentioris,  Frankfort-on-the-Oder  1756, 
 Svo,  both  re-edited  by  Schultze,  ib.  1783-84;  by 
 Stosch,  who  added  a  third  volume,  ib.  in  1767;  and 
 by  Schickedanz  in  1767,  Svo.  A  collection  of  his 
 minor  works,  under  the  title  Opiiscida  quibus 
 lingua  et  antiquitas  ALgyptiortnn,  difficilia  sacrorum 
 librorum  loca  et  historice  ecclesiasticcB  capita  illus- 
 traniur,  was  published  by  J.  S.  T.  Water,  Leyden 
 1804-1810,  m  three  vols.  Svo. — E.  D. 
 
 JABNEEL  6xn_\  '  God  causeth  to  be  built ;' 
 
 Ae^vd  ;  Alex.  'lapvrjX  ;  Jebneel). 
 
 I.  A  town  on  the  north-western  border  of 
 Tudah,  situated  in  the  plain  of  Philistia,  west  of 
 Ekron,  and  between  Mount  Baalah  and  the  sea. 
 "Jabneel  is  only  mentioned  in  Josh.  xv.  11  ;  but  a 
 comparison  of  that  passage  with  2  Chron.  xxvi.  6, 
 shews  that  it  is  the  same  place  which  is  there  cal- 
 led jfabneh,  and  which  Uzziah  captured,  with  Gath 
 and  Ashdod,  from  the  Philistines.     Jabneh  (HJ^"') 
 
 is  the  first  part  of  the  compound  Jabneel  (?W3''), 
 
 the  latter  part  PX,  'God')  being  omitted  (Sept. 
 ^Ia^v7}p  and  'Ia/3ers).  In  Josh.  xv.  46,  instead 
 of  '  From  Ekron  even  unto  the  sea,'  the  Sept. 
 has,  airo  '' kKKapuiv  Te/jLvd  (Alex.  'le/xvai),  which 
 at  first  sight  would  seem  to  be  an  allusion  to  this 
 city,  though  it  is  only  a  mistake  on  the  part  of 
 the  translators  of  the  Hebrew  word  nC,  '  to  the 
 sea,'  for  a  proper  name.  Josephus  calls  this  city 
 lamnia  (^la/xvid),  and  assigns  it  to  the  tribe  of  Dan 
 {Aiitiq.  v.  I.  22).  It  became  an  important  place 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 during  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees,  and  played  a 
 conspicuous  part  in  later  Jewish  histoiy  ( i  Maccab. 
 iv.  15;  v.  58;  X.  69).  The  school  of  Jamnia  was 
 celebrated  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  espe- 
 cially under  the  presidency  of  the  famous  Rabbin 
 Gamaliel.  The  Jews  called  this  school  their  San- 
 hedrim, though  it  only  possessed  a  faint  shadow  of 
 the  authority  of  that  great  council  (Milman,  His- 
 tory of  the  Jews,  iii.  95,  2d  ed.  ;  Lightfoot,  Opera, 
 ii.  141-143).  At  this  period,  also,  Jamnia  had  a 
 considerable  trade,  and  a  good  port  on  the  shore 
 of  the  Mediterranean  (2  Maccab.  xii.  8,  9  ;  Pto- 
 lemy, v.  16  J  Strabo,  xv.  2,  29;  Phny,  H.N. 
 V.  14). 
 
 Jamnia  stood,  according  to  the  Itinerary  of 
 Antonine,  between  Diospolis  (Lydda)  and  Asca- 
 lon,  twelve  miles  from  the  former,  and  twenty 
 from  the  latter  (Ant.  Itin.  ed.  WesseL  p.  150). 
 Euesbias  describes  it  as  a  small  town  (ttoXix"'?) 
 between  Diospolis  and  Ashdod  {Onomast.  s.  v. 
 jfamnia).  We  have  no  difficulty  in  identifying  it 
 with  the  modern  village  of  Yebtia,  whose  name  is 
 
 radically  identical  with  the  Hebrew  Jabneh  (ujo  = 
 
 nj^'').  Yebna  is  situated  on  an  eminence  in  the 
 midst  of  a  rich  plain,  two  miles  from  the  sea,  and 
 three  from  Ekron.  Between  it  and  the  latter 
 place  is  a  low  ridge  of  limestone  hills  which  the 
 writer  was  able  to  identify  as  the  '  Jllount  Baalah ' 
 of  Josh.  XV.  II  (which  is  different  from  the  town 
 of  Baalah  mentioned  in  ver.  9  ;  see  Handbook  for 
 S.  and  P.,  p.  275).  The  Crusaders  thought  Jam- 
 nia occupied  the  site  of  Gath,  and  they  built  in  it 
 a  fortress  called  Ibelin,  with  a  church,  the  ruins  of 
 which  still  remain,  and  have  in  later  times  been 
 used  as  a  mosque  (Irby  and  Mangles,  Travels,  p. 
 57,  ed.  1844;  Robinson,  B.  R.  ii.  66,  227;  Re- 
 land,  Palast.  p.  822  ;  Le  Quien,  Oriens  Christ.,  iiL 
 5S7  ;  Ritter,  Pal.  und  Syr.,  iii.  125). 
 
 2.  A  city  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  33).  It  may 
 have  been,  perhaps,  identical  with  the  village 
 Jamnia,  which  Josephus  fortified  during  the 
 Jewish  wars  {Vita,  37)  ;  but  its  site  is  unkno'wn. — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 JABNEH.     [Jabneel..] 
 
 JACHIN  AND  BOAZ,  the  names  of  two 
 brazen  pillars  in  the  porch  of  Solomon's  temple. 
 [Temple.] 
 
 JACINTH.     [Leshem.] 
 
 JACOB  (apr;  SepL  'la/ccJjS)  was  the  second 
 
 son  of  Isaac  by  his  wife  Rebekah.  Her  conceiv- 
 ing is  stated  to  have  been  supernatural.  Led  by 
 peculiar  feelings  she  went  to  inquire  of  the  Lord, 
 and  was  informed  that  she  was  indeed  with  child, 
 that  her  offspring  should  be  the  founders  of  two 
 nations,  and  that  the  elder  should  serve  the 
 younger  :  circumstances  which  ought  to  be  borne 
 m  mind  when  a  judgment  is  pronounced  on  her 
 conduct  in  aiding  Jacob  to  secure  the  privileges  of 
 birth  to  the  exclusion  of  his  elder  brother  Esau 
 — conduct  which  these  facts,  connected  with  the 
 birth  of  the  boys,  may  well  have  influenced. 
 Some  have  indeed  denied  the  fac:s,  and  taken 
 from  them  the  colouring  they  bear  in  the  Bible  ; 
 and  such  persons  may  easily  be  led  on  to  pro- 
 nounce a  severe  and  indiscriminate  sentence  of 
 condemnation  on  Rebekah ;  but  those  who  pro- 
 fess to  receive  and  to  respect  the  Biblical  records 
 
 2  G 
 
TACOB 
 
 450 
 
 JACOB 
 
 are  unjustifiable,  if  they  view  any  part  of  them,  or 
 any  event  which  they  record,  in  any  other  light 
 than  that  which  the  Bible  supplies,  in  any  other 
 position  than  that  which  the  Bible  presents.  It  is 
 as  a  whole  that  each  separate  character  should  be 
 contemplated  —  under  the  entire  assemblage  of 
 those  circumstances  which  the  Bible  narrates.  If 
 we  first  maim  an  historical  person  we  may  very 
 readily  misrepresent  him. 
 
 As  the  boys  grew,  Jacob  appeared  to  partake  of 
 the  gentle,  quiet,  and  retiring  character  of  his 
 father,  and  was  accordingly  led  to  prefer  the 
 tranquil  safety  and  pleasing  occupations  of  a  shep- 
 herd's life  to  the  bold  and  daring  enterprises  of 
 the  hunter,  for  which  Esau  had  an  irresistible  pre- 
 dilection. Jacob,  therefore,  passed  his  days  in  or 
 near  the  paternal  tent,  simple  and  unpretending  in 
 his  manner  of  life,  and  finding  in  the  flocks  and 
 herds  which  he  kept,  images  and  emotions  which 
 both  filled  and  satisfied  his  heart.  His  domestic 
 habits  and  affections  seem  to  have  co-operated 
 with  the  remarkable  events  that  attended  his  birth, 
 in  winning  for  him  the  peculiar  regard  and  undis- 
 guised preference  of  his  mother,  who  probably  in 
 this  merely  yielded  to  impressions  which  she  could 
 scarcely  account  for,  much  less  define,  and  who 
 had  not  even  a  faint  conception  of  the  magnitude 
 of  influence  to  which  her  predilection  was  likely  to 
 rise,  and  the  sad  consequences  to  which  it  could 
 hardly  fail  to  lead. 
 
 That  selfishness  and  a  prudence  which  ap- 
 proached to  cunning  had  a  seat  in  the  heart  of  the 
 youth  Jacob,  appears  but  too  plain  in  his  dealing 
 with  Esau,  when  he  exacted  from  a  famishing 
 brother  so  large  a  price  for  a  mess  of  pottage  as 
 the  surrender  of  his  birthright.  Nor  does  the 
 simple  narrative  of  the  Bible  afford  grounds  by 
 which  this  act  can  be  well  e,\tenuated.  Esau  asks 
 for  food,  alleging,  as  his  reason,  'for  I  am  faint.' 
 Jacob,  unlike  both  a  youth  and  a  brother,  answers, 
 '  Sell  me  this  day  thy  birthright.'  What  could 
 Esau  do  ?  '  Behold,'  he  replies,  '  I  am  at  the 
 point  to  die,  and  what  profit  (if  by  retaining  my 
 birthright  I  lose  my  life)  shall  this  birthright  do 
 me  ?'  Determined  to  have  a  safe  bargain,  the 
 prudent  Jacob,  before  he  gave  the  needed  refresh- 
 ment, adds,  'Swear  to  me  this  day.'  The  oath 
 was  given,  the  food  eaten,  and  Esau  '  ive}it  his 
 way,''  leaving  a  home  where  he  had  received  so 
 sorry  a  welcome. 
 
 The  leaning  which  his  mother  had  in  favour  of 
 Jacob  would  naturally  be  augmented  by  the  con- 
 duct of  Esau  in  marrying,  doubtless  contrary  to 
 his  parents'  wishes,  two  Hittite  women,  who  are 
 recorded  to  have  been  a  grief  of  mind  unto  Isaac 
 and  to  Rebekah. 
 
 Circumstances  thus  prepared  the  way  for  pro- 
 curing the  transfer  of  the  birthright,  when  Isaac, 
 bemg  now  old,  proceeded  to  take  steps  to  pro- 
 nounce the  irrevocable  blessing  which  acted  with 
 all  the  force  of  a  modem  testamentary  bequest. 
 This  blessing,  then,  it  was  essential  that  Jacob 
 should  receive  in  preference  to  Esau.  Here  Re- 
 bekali  appears  the  chief  agent ;  Jacob  is  a  mere 
 instrument  in  her  hands.  Isaac  directs  Esau  to 
 procure  him  some  venison.  This  Rebekah  hears, 
 and  urges  her  reluctant  favourite  to  personate  his 
 elder  brother.  Jacob  suggests  difficulties ;  they 
 are  met  by  Rebekah,  who  is  ready  to  incur  any 
 personal  danger  so  that  her  object  be  gained.  My 
 father,  peradventure,  will  feel  me,  and  I  shall  seem 
 
 to  him  as  a  deceiver,  and  I  shall  bring  a  curse 
 upon  me  and  not  a  blessing.  His  mother  said  unto 
 him.  Upon  me  be  thy  curse,  my  son,  only  obey  my 
 voice.  Her  voice  is  obeyed,  the  venison  is  brought, 
 Jacob  is  equipped  for  the  deceit ;  he  helps  out  his 
 fraud  by  direct  falsehood,  and  the  old  man,  whose 
 senses  are  now  failing,  is  at  last  with  difficulty 
 deceived.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  this  is  a  most 
 reprehensible  transaction,  and  presents  a  truly 
 painful  picture  ;  in  which  a  mother  conspires  with 
 one  son  in  order  to  cheat  her  aged  husband,  with 
 a  view  to  deprive  another  son  of  his  rightful  in- 
 heritance. Justification  is  here  impossible,  but  it 
 should  not  be  forgotten  in  the  estimate  we  form, 
 that  there  was  a  promise  in  favour  of  Jacob,  that 
 Jacob's  qualities  had  endeared  him  to  his  mother, 
 and  that  the  prospect  to  her  was  dark  and  threat- 
 ening which  arose  when  she  saw  the  neglected 
 Esau  at  the  head  of  the  house,  and  his  hateful 
 wives  assuming  command  over  herself.  [Eycke, 
 Devejiditione  pri7?iogenitu7-(B  Esavi,  Witteb.  1729; 
 Roesler,  De  benedict,  paterna  Esavo  a  Jacobo  pro:- 
 repta,  Tiib.  1706;  Heydegger,  Hist.  Patriarch. 
 ii.  14  ;  Shuckford,  Connection,  Bk.  7  ;  Blunt,  Un- 
 designed  Coincid.,  part  i.  i,  sec.  2,  3  ;  Benson,  Hul- 
 s can  Led.  07i  Scripture  Difficulties,  16,  17.] 
 
 Punishment  in  this  world  often  follows  close 
 upon  the  heels  of  transgression.  Fear  seized  the 
 guilty  Jacob,  who  is  sent  by  his  father,  at  the  sug- 
 gestion of  Rebekah,  to  the  original  seat  of  the 
 family,  in  order  that  he  might  find  a  wife  among 
 his  cousins,  the  daughters  of  his  mother's  brother, 
 Laban  the  Syrian.  Before  he  is  dismissed  Jacob 
 again  receives  his  father's  blessing,  the  object  ob- 
 viously being  to  keep  alive  in  the  young  man's 
 mind  the  great  promise  given  to  Abraham,  and 
 thus  to  transmit  that  influence  which,  under  the 
 aid  of  divine  providence,  was  to  end  in  placing  the 
 family  in  possession  of  the  land  of  Palestine,  and 
 in  so  doing  to  make  it  'a  multitude  of  people.' 
 The  language,  however,  employed  by  the  aged 
 father  suggests  the  idea,  that  the  religious  light 
 which  had  been  kindled  in  the  mind  of  Abraham 
 had  lost  somewhat  of  its  fulness,  if  not  of  its 
 clearness  also  ;  since  '  the  blessing  of  Abraham,' 
 which  had  originally  embraced  all  nations,  is  now 
 restricted  to  the  descendants  of  this  one  patriarchal 
 family.  And  so  it  appears,  from  the  language 
 which  Jacob  employs  (Gen.  xxviii.  16)  in  relation 
 to  the  dream  that  he  had  when  he  tarried  all  night 
 upon  a  certain  plain  on  his  journey  eastward,  that 
 his  idea  of  the  Deity  was  little  more  than  that  of  a 
 local  god — '  Surely  the  Lord  is  in  this  place,  and 
 /  knew  it  not. '  Nor  does  the  language  which  he 
 immediately  after  employs  shew  that  his  ideas  of 
 the  relations  between  God  and  man  were  of  an 
 exalted  and  refined  nature  ; — '  If  God  will  be  with 
 me,  and  will  keep  me  in  the  way  that  I  go,  and 
 will  give  me  bread  to  eat  and  raiment  to  put  on, 
 so  that  I  come  again  to  my  father's  house  in  peace, 
 then  shall  the  Lord  be  my  God.'  The  vision, 
 therefore,  with  which  Jacob  was  favoured  was  not 
 without  occasion,  nor  could  the  terms  in  which  he 
 was  addressed  by  the  Lord  fail  to  enlarge  and 
 correct  his  conceptions,  and  make  his  religion  at 
 once  more  comprehensive  and  more  influential. 
 [Miegius  De  Scala  yacobi,  in  Iken's  Tkes.  T/ieol.- 
 Phil.  i.  195  ;  Kurz,  Hist,  of  the  Old  Cffvenant,  i. 
 
 309-] 
 
 Jacob,  on  coming  into  the  land  of  the  people  of 
 the  East,  accidentally  met  with  Rachel,  Laban's 
 
JACOB 
 
 451 
 
 JACOB 
 
 daughter,  to  whom,  with  true  eastern  simplicity 
 and  pohteness,  he  shewed  such  courtesy  as  the 
 duties  of  pastoral  life  suggest  and  admit.  And 
 here  his  gentle  and  affectionate  nature  displays 
 itself  under  the  influence  of  the  bonds  of  kindred 
 and  the  fan-  form  of  youth  : — '  Jacob  kissed  Rachel, 
 and  lifted  up  his  voice  and  wept.' 
 
 After  he  had  been  with  his  uncle  the  space  of  a 
 month,  Laban  inquires  of  him  what  reward  he  ex- 
 pects for  his  services.  He  asks  for  '  the  beautiful 
 and  well-favoured  Rachel.'  His  request  is  granted 
 on  condition  of  a  seven  years'  service — a  long 
 period  truly,  but  to  Jacob  '  they  seemed  but  a 
 few  days  for  the  love  he  had  to  her. '  When  the 
 time  was  expired,  the  crafty  Laban  availed  him- 
 self of  the  customs  of  the  country,  in  order  to  sub- 
 stitute his  elder  and  '  tender-eyed '  daughter  Leah. 
 In  the  morning  Jacob  found  how  he  had  been 
 beguiled  ;  but  Laban  excused  himself,  saying,  '  It 
 must  not  be  so  done  in  our  country,  to  give  the 
 younger  before  the  first-born.'  Another  seven 
 years'  service  gains  for  Jacob  the  beloved  Rachel. 
 Leah,  however,  has  the  compensatory  privilege  of 
 being  the  mother  of  the  first-born — Reuben  ;  three 
 other  sons  successively  follow,  namely,  Simeon, 
 Levi,  and  Judah,  sons  of  Leah.  This  fruitfulness 
 was  a  painful  subject  of  reflection  to  the  barren 
 Rachel,  who  employed  language  on  this  occasion 
 that  called  forth  a  reply  from  her  husband  which 
 shews  that,  mild  as  was  the  character  of  Jacob,  it 
 was  by  no  means  wanting  in  force  and  energy 
 (Gen.  XXX.  2).  An  arrangement,  however,  took 
 place,  by  which  Rachel  had  children  by  means 
 of  her  maid,  Bilhah,  of  whom  Dan  and  Naphtali 
 were  born.  Two  other  sons — Gad  and  Asher — 
 were  born  to  Jacob  of  Leah's  maid,  Zilpah.  Leah 
 herself  bare  two  more  sons,  namely,  Issachar  and 
 Zebulun  ;  she  also  bare  a  daughter,  Dinah.  At 
 length  Rachel  herself  bare  a  son,  and  she  called 
 his  name  Joseph. 
 
 Most  faithfully,  and  with  great  success,  had 
 Jacob  served  his  uncle  for  fourteen  years,  when  he 
 became  desirous  of  returning  to  his  parents.  At 
 the  urgent  request  of  Laban,  however,  he  is  m- 
 duced  to  remain.  The  language  employed  upon 
 this  occasion  (Gen.  xxx.  25,  si/.)  shews  that  Jacob's 
 character  had  gained  considerably  during  his  ser- 
 vice both  in  strength  and  comprehensiveness  ;  but 
 the  means  which  he  employed  in  order  to  make 
 his  bargain  with  his  uncle  work  so  as  to  enrich 
 himself,  prove  too  clearly  that  his  moral  feelings 
 had  not  undergone  an  equal  improvement,  and 
 that  the  original  taint  of  prudence,  and  the  sad 
 lessons  of  his  mother  in  deceit,  had  produced  some 
 of  their  natural  fruit  in  his  bosom.  Those  who 
 may  wish  to  inquu'e  into  the  nature  and  efficacy  of 
 the  means  which  Jacob  employed,  iriay,  in  addition 
 to  the  original  narrative,  consult  Michaelis  and 
 Rosenmiiller  on  the  subject,  as  well  as  the  follow- 
 ing : — Hieron.  QiuTst.  in  Gen. ;  Plin.  Hist.  Nat. 
 vii.  10  ;  Oppian,  Cyneg.  i.  330,  sq.  ;  Hastfeer,  iiber 
 Schafzncht ;  Bochart,  Hieroz.  i.  619.  Winer, 
 Handwort.,  gives  a  parallel  passage  from  .i^lian 
 {Hist.  Anim.  viii.  21). 
 
 The  prosperity  of  Jacob  displeased  and  grieved 
 Laban,  so  that  a  separation  seemed  desirable. 
 His  wives  are  ready  to  accompany  him.  Accord- 
 ingly he  set  out,  with  his  family  and  his  property, 
 '  to  go  to  Isaac  his  father  in  the  land  of  Canaan.' 
 It  was  not  till  the  third  day  that  Laban  learned 
 that  Jacob  had  fled,  when  he  immediately  set  out 
 
 in  pursuit  of  his  nephew,  and  after  seven  day^' 
 journey  overtook  him  in  Mount  Gilead.  Laban, 
 however,  is  divinely  warned  not  to  hinder  Jacob's 
 return.  Reproach  and  recrimination  ensued 
 Even  a  charge  of  theft  is  put  forward  by  Laban 
 — '  Wherefore  hast  thou  stolen  my  gods?'  In 
 truth,  Rachel  had  carried  off  certain  images  which 
 were  the  objects  of  worship.  Ignorant  of  this 
 misdeed,  Jacob  boldly  called  for  a  search,  adding, 
 '  With  whomsoever  thou  findest  thy  gods,  let  him 
 not  live.'  A  crafty  woman's  cleverness  eluded  the 
 keen  eye  of  Laban.  Rachel,  by  an  appeal  which 
 one  of  her  sex  alone  could  make,  deceived  her 
 father.  Thus  one  sin  begets  another ;  super- 
 stition prompts  to  theft,  and  theft  necessitates 
 deceit. 
 
 Whatever  opinion  may  be  formed  of  the  tera- 
 phim  which  Richael  stole,  and  which  Laban  was  so 
 anxious  to  discover,  and  whatever  kind  or  degree 
 of  worship  may  in  reality  have  been  paid  to  them, 
 their  existence  in  the  family  suffices  of  itself  to  shew 
 how  imperfectly  instructed  regarding  the  Creator 
 were  at  this  time  those  who  were  among  the  least 
 ignorant  on  divine  things.     [Teraphim.] 
 
 Laban's  conduct  on  this  occasion  called  forth  a 
 reply  from  Jacob,  from  which  it  appears  that  his 
 service  had  been  most  severe,  and  which  also 
 proves  that  however  this  severe  service  might  have 
 encouraged  a  certain  servility,  it  had  not  pre- 
 vented the  development  in  Jacob's  soul  of  a  high 
 and  energetic  spirit,  which  when  roused  could  assert 
 its  rights  and  give  utterance  to  sentiments  both  just, 
 striking,  and  forcible,  and  in  the  most  poetical 
 phraseology. 
 
 Peace,  however,  being  restored,  Laban,  on  the 
 ensuing  morning,  took  a  friendly  if  not  an  affec- 
 tionate farewell  of  his  daughters  and  their  sons, 
 and  returned  home.  Meanwhile  Jacob,  going  on 
 his  way,  had  to  pass  near  the  land  of  Seir,  in  which 
 Esau  dwelt.  Rememl)ering  his  own  conduct  and 
 his  brother's  threat,  he  was  seized  with  fear,  and 
 sent  messengers  before  in  order  to  propitiate  Esau, 
 who,  however,  had  no  evil  design  against  liim  ;  but, 
 when  he  '  saw  Jacob,  ran  to  meet  him,  and  em- 
 braced him,  and  fell  on  his  neck  and  kissed  him, 
 and  they  wept' — the  one  tears  of  joyful  recognition, 
 the  other  of  gladness  at  unexpected  escape. 
 
 The  passage  in  which  this  meeting  is  recorded  is 
 very  striking  and  picturesque.  In  moral  qualities 
 it  exhibits  Jacob  the  inferior  of  his  generous,  high- 
 minded,  and  forgiving  brother ;  for  Jacob's  bear- 
 ing, whatever  deduction  may  be  made  for  Oriental 
 politeness,  is  crouching  and  servile.  Independently 
 of  the  compellation,  '  my  lord,'  which  he  repeatedly 
 uses  in  addressing  Esau,  what  can  be  said  of  the 
 following  terms  : — '  I  have  seen  thy  face  as  though 
 I  had  seen  the  face  of  God,  and  thou  wast  pleased 
 with  me?'  (Gen.  xxxiii.  10). 
 
 It  was  immediately  preceding  this  interview  that 
 Jacob  passed  the  night  in  wrestling  with  'a  man,' 
 who  is  afterwards  recognised  as  God,  and  who  at 
 length  overcame  Jacob  by  touching  the  hollow  of 
 his  thigh.  His  name  also  was  on  this  event  changed 
 by  the  mysterious  antagonist  into  Israel,  '  for  as  a 
 prince  hast  thou  power  with  God  and  with  men, 
 and  hast  prevailed'  (Gen.  xxxii.  28).  It  is  added 
 that  on  this  account  his  descendants  abstained 
 from  eating  the  thigh  of  slaughtered  animals. 
 [Israel.] 
 
 Having,  by  the  misconduct  of  Shechem  the  Hi- 
 vite  and  the  hardy  valour  of  his  sons,  been  involved 
 
JACOB 
 
 452 
 
 JACOB 
 
 in  danger  from  the  natives  of  Shechem  in  Canaan, 
 Jacob  is  divinely  directed,  and  under  the  divine 
 protection  proceeds  to  Bethel,  where  he  is  to 
 '  make  an  altar  unto  God  that  appeared  unto  thee 
 when  thou  fleddest  from  the  face  of  Esau  thy 
 brother.'  Obedient  to  the  divine  command,  he 
 first  purifies  his  family  from  'strange  gods,' 
 which  he  hid  under  '  the  oak  which  is  by  She- 
 chem ;'  after  which  God  appeared  to  him  again  with 
 the  important  declaration,  'I  am  God  Almighty,' 
 and  renewed  the  Abrahamic  covenant.  While 
 journeying  from  Beth-el  to  Ephrath,  his  beloved 
 Rachel  lost  her  life  in  giving  birth  to  her  second 
 son,  Benjamin.  At  length  Jacob  came  to  his 
 father  Isaac  at  Mamre,  the  family  residence,  in 
 time  to  pay  the  last  attentions  to  the  aged  patriarch. 
 Not  long  after  this  bereavement  Jacob  was  robbed 
 of  his  beloved  son  Joseph  through  the  jealousy  and 
 bad  faith  of  his  brothers.  This  loss  is  the  occa- 
 sion of  shewing  us  how  strong  were  Jacob's  pater- 
 nal feelings  ;  for  on  seeing  what  appeared  to  be 
 proofs  that  '  some  evil  beast  had  devoured  Joseph,' 
 the  old  man  'rent  his  clothes,  and  put  sackcloth 
 upon  his  loins,  and  mourned  for  his  son  many 
 days,  and  refused  to  be  comforted.' — 'I  will  go 
 down  into  the  grave  unto  my  son  mourning '  (Gen. 
 xxxvii.  33). 
 
 A  widely  extended  famine  induced  Jacob  to  send 
 his  sons  down  into  Egypt,  where  he  had  heard  there 
 was  corn,  without  knowing  by  whose  instrumen- 
 tality. The  patriarch,  however,  retained  his 
 youngest  son  Benjamin,  'lest  mischief  should  be- 
 fall him,'  as  it  had  befallen  Joseph.  The  young 
 men  returned  with  the  needed  supplies  of  corn. 
 They  related,  however,  that  they  had  been  taken 
 for  spies,  and  that  there  was  but  one  way  in  which 
 they  could  disprove  the  charge,  namely,  by  carry- 
 ing down  Benjamin  to  'the  lord  of  the  land.' 
 This  Jacob  vehemently  refused  : — •'  Me  have  ye 
 bereaved  ;  Joseph  is  not,  and  Simeon  is  not,  and 
 ye  will  take  Benjamin  ;  my  son  shall  not  go  down 
 with  you  ;  if  mischief  befall  him,  then  shall  ye 
 bring  down  my  grey  hairs  with  sorrow  to  the 
 grave  '  (Gen.  xlii.  36).  The  pressure  of  the  famine, 
 however,  at  length  forced  Jacob  to  allow  Benjamin 
 to  accompany  his  brothers  on  a  second  visit  to 
 Egypt  ;  whence  in  due  time  they  brought  back  to 
 their  father  the  pleasing  intelligence,  'Joseph  is 
 yet  alive,  and  he  is  governor  over  all  the  land  of 
 Egy[it.'  How  naturally  is  the  effect  of  this  on 
 Jacob  told — 'and  Jacob's  heart  fainted,  for  he  be- 
 lieved them  not.'  When,  however,  they  had  gone 
 into  particulars,  he  added,  '  Enough,  Joseph  my 
 son  is  yet  alive  ;  I  will  go  and  see  him  before  I 
 die.'  Touches  of  nature  like  this  suffice  to  shew 
 the  reality  of  the  history  before  us,  and  since  they 
 are  not  unfrequent  in  the  book  of  Genesis  they  will 
 of  themselves  avail  to  sustain  its  credibility  against 
 all  that  the  enemy  can  do.  Each  competent  and 
 unprejudiced  judge,  on  reading  these  gems  of  truth, 
 may  well  exclaim,  '  This  is  history,  not  mythology ; 
 reality,  not  fiction.'  The  passage,  too,  with  others 
 recently  cited,  strongly  proves  how  much  the  cha- 
 racter of  the  patriarch  had  improved.  In  the  entire 
 of  the  latter  piart  of  Jacob's  life,  he  seems  to  have 
 gradually  parted  with  many  less  desirable  qualities, 
 and  to  have  become  at  once  more  truthful,  more 
 energetic,  more  earnest,  affectionate,  and,  in  the 
 largest  sense  of  the  word,  religious. 
 
 Encouraged  '  in  the  visions  of  the  night,'  Jacob 
 goes  down  to  Egypt.     '  And  Joseph  made  ready 
 
 his  chariot,  and  went  up  to  meet  Israel  his  father, 
 to  Goshen,  and  presented  himself  unto  him  ;  and 
 he  fell  on  his  neck,  and  wept  on  his  neck  a  good 
 while.  And  Israel  said  unlo  Joseph,  Now  let  me 
 die,  since  I  have  seen  thy  face,  because  thou  art 
 yet  alive'  (Gen.  xlvi.  29).  Joseph  proceeded  to 
 conduct  his  father  into  the  presence  of  the  Egyptian 
 monarch,  when  the  man  of  God,  with  that  self- 
 consciousness  and  dignity  which  religion  gives, 
 instead  of  offering  slavish  adulation,  'blessed 
 Pharaoh.*  Struck  with  the  patriarch's  venerable 
 air,  the  king  asked,  '  How  old  art  thou?'  What 
 composure  and  elevation  is  there  in  the  reply, 
 '  The  days  of  the  years  of  my  pilgrimage  are  an 
 hundred  and  thirty  years  ;  few  and  evil  have  the 
 days  of  the  years  of  my  life  been,  and  have  not 
 attained  unto  the  days  of  the  years  of  the  life  of 
 my  fathers  in  the  days  of  their  pilgrimage  :  and 
 Jacob  blessed  Pharaoh,  and  went  out  from  before 
 Pharaoh'  (Gen.  xlvii.  8-10). 
 
 Jacob,  with  his  sons,  now  entered  into  posses- 
 sion of  some  of  the  best  land  of  Egypt,  where  they 
 carried  on  their  pastoral  occupations,  and  enjoyed 
 a  very  large  share  of  earthly  prosperity.  The  aged 
 patriarch,  after  being  strangely  tossed  about  on  a 
 veiy  rough  ocean,  found  at  last  a  tranquil  harbour, 
 where  all  the  best  affections  of  his  nature  were 
 gently  exercised  and  largely  unfolded.  After  a 
 lapse  of  time  Joseph,  being  informed  that  his 
 father  was  sick,  went  to  him,  when  '  Israel  strength  ■ 
 ened  himself,  and  sat  up  in  his  bed.'  He  ac- 
 quainted Joseph  with  the  divine  promise  of  the 
 land  of  Canaan  which  yet  remained  to  be  fulfilled, 
 and  took  Joseph's  sons,  Ephraim  and  Manasseh, 
 in  place  of  Reuben  and  Simeon,  whom  he  had 
 lost.  How  impressive  is  his  benediction  in  J  oseph's 
 family  !  '  And  Israel  said  unto  Joseph,  1  had  not 
 thought  to  see  thy  face  :  and,  lo,  God  hath  showed 
 me  also  thy  seed'  (Gen.  xlviii.  Ii).  '  God,  before 
 whom  my  fathers  Abraham  and  Isaac  did  walk, 
 the  God  which  fed  me  all  my  life  long  unto  this 
 day,  the  angel  which  redeemed  me  from  all  evil, 
 bless  the  lads  ;  and  let  my  name  be  named  on 
 them,  and  the  name  of  my  fathers  ;  and  let  them 
 grow  into  a  multitude  in  the  midst  of  the  earth' 
 (ver.  15,  16).  'And  Israel  said  unto  Joseph,  Be- 
 hold I  die ;  but  God  will  be  with  you  and  bring 
 you  again  unto  the  land  of  your  fathers'  (ver.  21). 
 Then  having  convened  his  sons,  the  venerable 
 patriarch  pronounced  on  them  also  a  blessing, 
 which  is  full  of  the  loftiest  thought,  expressed  in 
 the  most  poetical  diction,  and  adorned  by  the  most 
 vividly  descriptive  and  engaging  imagery,  showing 
 how  deeply  religious  his  character  had  become, 
 how  freshly  it  retained  its  fervour  to  the  last,  and 
 how  greatly  it  had  increased  in  strength,  elevation, 
 and  dignity  : — And  when  Jacob  had  made  an  end 
 of  commanding  his  sons,  he  gathered  up  his  feet 
 into  the  bed  and  yielded  up  the  ghost,  and  was 
 gathered  unto  his  people'  (Gen.  xlix.  33). — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 JACOB  B.  AsHERi  B.  Jechiel  b.  Uri  b.  Elia- 
 KIM  B.  Jeiiudah,  also  called  Baal  Ha-Turim, 
 after  his  celebrated  ritual  work,  was  born  in  Ger- 
 many about  A.  D.  1280.  At  the  age  of  eighteen  he 
 was  an  eyewitness  to  the  fearful  massacres  of  his 
 brethren  which  began  at  Rdttingen,  April  20,  1298, 
 under  the  leadership  of  Rindfleisch,  and  spread 
 over  Bavaria,  France,  and  Austria,  when  upwards 
 of  120  Jewish  communities,  numbering  more  than 
 100,000   souls   were    slaughtered  in  less  than  six 
 
JACOB 
 
 453 
 
 JACOB 
 
 months.  Though  the  death  of  the  emperor 
 Adolph  and  the  election  of  Albrecht  to  the  throne 
 put  an  end  to  the  civil  war,  yet  Jacob  b.  Asheri 
 felt  it  unsafe  to  remain  in  Germany,  and  hence  emi- 
 grated, in  the  year  1303,  with  his  renowned  father, 
 his  mother,  and  seven  brothers,  wandered  about 
 from  place  to  place  for  two  years,  and  at  last 
 settled  down  at  Toledo  in  Spain  in  1305.  Here 
 he  entered  upon  his  literary  labours  under  most 
 straitened  pecuniary  circumstances,  and  pub- 
 lished (l)  ^  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch  (dT'S 
 
 minn  Py),  the  basis  of  which  is  Nachmanide's  ex- 
 position. He  excluded  from  it  Nachmanide's  philo- 
 sophico-Kabbalistic  portions,  inserted  in  their  stead 
 remarks  of  Rashi,  Joseph  Cara,  Samuel  b.  Meier, 
 Abraham  b.  Chija,  R.  Tam,  Ibn  Ezra,  Joseph 
 Kimchi,  Jehudah  the  Pious,  Simon  b.  Abraham, 
 Meier  of  Rothenburg,  R.  Asher,  the  father,  and 
 R.  Jehudah,  the  brother  of  the  author,  as  well  as 
 glosses  of  his  own  at  the  beginning  of  every  Sab- 
 batic section  [Haphtara],  which  chiefly  consist  of 
 explanations  of  words  and  whole  sentences  accord- 
 mg  to  the  hermeneutical  rule  called  S''"1L3?D^J,  /.  e., 
 reducing  every  letter  of  a  word  to  its  numerical 
 value,  and  explaining  it  by  another  word  of  the 
 same  quantity  [Midrash],  and  which  he  calls 
 mX"lQ~l2,  dainty  supplements,  and  recondite  rea- 
 sons for  the  critical  remarks  of  the  Massorites  upon 
 the  text  (nniDDH  '•OVD).  This  work  is  of  great 
 importance  to  the  understanding  of  the  original 
 design  of  the  Massora.  Such  was  the  extraor- 
 dinary popularity  of  the  Gematrical  portions  of  this 
 commentary  that  they  were  detached  from  the 
 exegetical  part  and  printed  in  a  separate  form  in 
 Constantinople  15 14,  in  Venice  1544,  and  have 
 since  appeared  not  only  in  the  Rabbinic  Bibles  of 
 Bomberg,  Venice  1546-1548,  and  1568;  of  Buxtorf, 
 Basle  1617-1619,  and  Frankfurter,  Amsterdam 
 1724-1727,  under  the  title  oi'^^'Vn  HIXISID  nVp 
 
 D^IILDn  ?y3,  but  also  in  five  editions  of  the  Bible 
 between  1595  and  1653,  and  in  no  less  than  twenty 
 different  editions  of  the  Pentateuch  between  the 
 years  1566  and  1804 — whereas  the  exegetical 
 part  was  not  published  till  1805  in  Zolkiew,  and 
 again  in  1838  in  Hanover  ;  and  (2)  the  celebrated 
 religious  code  called  D"'"1"ID  iiy^lX,  from  the  fact 
 that  it  consists  of  four  parts  or  rows,  respectively 
 denominated  D"'^n  miS,  the  way  of  life ;  HIV 
 nyT,  the  teacher  of  k7iowleds;e;  ITyH  pN,  the  stone 
 of  help;  and  DQK'Dn  itiTl,  the  breastplate  of  Justice; 
 which  treats  on  the  ritual,  moral,  matrimonial,  civil, 
 and  social  observances  of  the  Jews.  This  remark- 
 able work,  which  for  a  time  supplanted  the  lod 
 Ha-Chezaka  of  the  immortal  Maimonides,  soon  be- 
 came the  text-book  of  the  Jewish  Rabbins  through- 
 out the  world,  and  is  indispensable  to  the  forma- 
 tion of  a  correct  knowledge  of  the  manners  and 
 customs  of  this  ancient  people.  The  best  editions 
 of  it  are  the  one  published  in  Augsburg  1540,  and 
 another  published  in  Hanover  16 10.  Jacob  b. 
 Asheri  died  in  1340  (comp.  Geiger,  Wissenschaft- 
 liche  Zeitung,  vol.  iv.,  Stuttgart  1839,  p.  395, 
 etc.  ;  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  jfudaica,  vol.  ii.,  p.  16, 
 etc.  ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  ift 
 Bibliotheca  Bodleiatta,  col.  1 181 -i  192;  Graetz, 
 Geschichte  der  yuden,  voL  vii.,  Leipzig  1863,  pp. 
 346-350.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 JACOB,  B.  Chajim  b.  Isaac  Ibn  Adonia,  the 
 celebrated  editor  of  Bomberg's    Rabbinic   Bible, 
 
 was  born  at  Tunis  about  1470.  When  about  forty 
 years  of  age,  circa  1 5 10,  he  was  driven  from  his 
 peaceful  home  and  literary  labours.  He  then  went 
 to  Italy,  lived  for  some  time  in  Rome  and  in  Flor- 
 ence, and  not  finding  any  occupation  he  at  last 
 went  to  Venice,  where  through  the  exertions  of  R. 
 Chajim  Alton,  he  became  connected,  in  1520,  with 
 the  celebrated  Hebrew  printing-office  of  Daniel 
 Bomberg  as  corrector  of  the  press.  He  published 
 (i)  the  celebrated  lod  Ha-Chezaka  of  Maimonides, 
 Venice  1524  ;  and  (2)  edited,  in  four  volumes  folio, 
 the  Rabbinic  Bible  called  Bomberg's  second  Rab- 
 binic Bible,  Venice  1524-1525,  the  first  being  the 
 one  edited  by  Felix  Pratensis  [Pratensis].  The 
 following  are  the  contents  of  this  stupendous  work. 
 
 The  first  volume,  embracing  the  Pentateuch 
 (min),  begins,  i.,  with  the  elaborate  introduction  of 
 the  editor,  in  which  he  discusses  the  Massora,  the 
 Keri,  and  Kethib,  the  variations  between  the  Tal- 
 mud and  the  Massora,  the  Tikune  Sopherim  CJIpn 
 D''~ID1D),  and  the  order  of  the  larger  Massora ;  ii. ,  an 
 index  of  the  sections  of  the  whole  O.  T.  according 
 to  Massora ;  and  iii.  Ibn  Ezra's  preface  to  the 
 Pentateuch.  Then  follow  the  five  books  of  Moses 
 in  Hebrew,  with  theChaldee  paraphrases  of  Onkelos 
 and  Jonathan  b.  Uziel,  and  the  commentaries  of 
 Rashi  and  Ibn  Ezra,  the  margins  being  filled  up 
 with  as  much  of  the  Massora  as  they  would  admit. 
 
 The  second  volume,  comprising  the  earlier  prophets 
 (D''J1tJ'N"l  D"'X''33),  i-  e.,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel, 
 and  the  Kngs,  has  the  Hebrew  text,  the  Chaldee 
 paraphrase  of  Jonathan  b.  Uziel,  and  the  commen- 
 taries of  Rashi,  Kimchi,  and  Levi  b.  Gershon,  and 
 the  Massora  in  the  margin. 
 
 The  third  volume,  comprising  the  later  prophets 
 (D"'J1"inX  D''N''3J),  /.  e.,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel, 
 and  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  contains  the  He- 
 brew text,  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  of  Jonathan  b. 
 Uziel,  the  commentaries  of  Rashi,  which  extend 
 over  all  the  books  in  this  volume,  of  Ibn  Ezra  on 
 Isaiah  and  the  minor  prophets,  and  of  Kimchi  on 
 Jeremiah,  and  the  Massora  in  the  margin. 
 
 Thefojirth  volume,  comprising  the  Hagiographa 
 (D''3'in3),  gives  the  Hebrew  text,  the  Chaldee 
 paraphrase  of  Joseph  the  blind,  the  commentaries 
 of  Rashi  on  the  Psalms,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  the  five 
 Megilloth,  and  Chronicles  ;  of  Ibn  Ezra  on  the 
 Psalms,  Proverbs,  Job,  Daniel,  the  five  Megil- 
 loth, Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  ;  of  Levi  b.  Gershon  on 
 Proverbs  and  Daniel ;  of  Saadia  on  Daniel  and  the 
 second  Targum  of  Esther.  Appended  to  this 
 volume  are,  i.,  the  Massora  which  could  not  get  into 
 the  margin  of  the  text,  in  alphabetical  order,  with 
 Jacob  b.  Chajim's  directions;  ii.,  the  various  read- 
 ings of  Ben-Asher  and  Ben-Naphtali,  and  the 
 Eastern  and  Western  Codd. ;  and  iii.,  a  treatise  upon 
 the  points  and  accents,  containmg  the  work  ■•  jll 
 
 mrjjni  Tlpjn  or  *Tlp"i:n  'hh'2  by  Moses  Nakdan. 
 Jacob  b.  Chajim  bestowed  the  utmost  labour  in 
 amassing  the  Massora  and  in  purifying  and  arrang- 
 ing those  materials  which  Felix  Pratensis  published 
 very  incorrectly  in  the  first  edition  of  Bomberg's 
 Rabbinic  Bible.  He  was,  moreover,  the  first  who, 
 in  his  elaborate  introduction,  furnished  the  Biblical 
 student  vrith  a  treatise  on  the  Massora;  and  his 
 edition  of  the  Bible  is  of  great  importance  to  the 
 criticism  of  the  text,  inasmuch  as  from  it  most  of 
 the  Hebrew  Bibles  are  printed.  Kennicott  pub- 
 lished a  Latin  translation  of  Jacob  b.  Chajim's 
 valuable  introduction  from  an  anonymous  MS.  in 
 
JACOB  B,  ELEAZAR 
 
 454 
 
 TAEL 
 
 the  Bodleian  Library  in  an  abridged  form  (Comp. 
 Dissertation  the  second,  Oxford  1759,  p.  229-244), 
 and  Ginsburg  has  pulDlished  an  English  transla- 
 tion of  the  whole  with  explanatory  notes,  in  the 
 Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  1863.  In  after  life 
 Jacob  b.  Chajim  embraced  Christianity,  a  circum- 
 stance which  will  account  for  Elias  Levita's  vitu- 
 perations against  him  ("iriVQ  mi"li'  inDJ^'J  NIH 
 2ipj).— C.  D.  G. 
 
 JACOB  B.  ELEAZAR,  a  Hebrew  poet  and 
 grammarian  who  flourished  at  Toledo  A.  D.  1 130. 
 He  distinguished  himself  in  investigating  the  nature 
 of  the  vowel  points  and  the  etymology  of  the  pro- 
 per names,  and  though  he  wrote  several  works 
 upon  these  subjects,  yet  only  one  treatise  of  his, 
 
 entitled  DpKTI  "IDD,  t!ie  ^ook  of  completion,  is  known 
 to  us,  through  the  quotations  from  it  by  Kimchi. 
 The  fragments  of  it  show  that  Jacob  b.  Eleazar  was 
 a  sound  grammarian,  laid  down  some  excellent 
 rules  respecting  the  Hebrew  syntax,  and  materially 
 aided  the  development  of  philology  in  Spain  at  a 
 time  when  Biblical  exegesis  was  much  neglected 
 and  the  study  of  the  Talmud  was  paramount.  He 
 moreover  devoted  himself  to  the  formation  of  a 
 correct  Hebrew  text  of  the  O.  T.,  and  for  this  pur- 
 pose used  the  celebrated  Codex  Hillali  [Hillali]. 
 The  importance  of  his  labours  may  be  seen  from 
 the  fact  that  Kimchi  quotes  his  explanations  as 
 authoritative.  Comp.  Biesenthal  und  Lebrecht's 
 edition  of  KimchPs  Lexicon,  Berlin  1847,  ititrodue- 
 tion  p.  15  ;  Geiger  in  Ozar  Nechmad  ii.,  Vienna 
 1857,  p.  159,  etc.;  Graetz,  Geschichte  derjudcnsx., 
 Leipzig  1861,  p.  131,  etc. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JACOB  B.  MEIER.     [Tam.] 
 
 JADDUA  (jnT' ;  Sept.  TaSoO),  son  of  Jonathan 
 
 the  high-priest,  whom  he  succeeded  in  the  same 
 office.  According  to  Eusebius  his  pontificate  con- 
 tinued seventeen  years.  Josephus  states  that  he 
 was  in  office  at  the  time  when  Alexander  the  Great 
 invaded  Judaea,  and  that  he  went  out  to  meet  the 
 conqueror  as  he  approached  Jerusalem  ;  that  the 
 latter  went  with  Jaddua  to  the  temple  to  worship 
 and  offer  sacrifice  ;  that  he  was  shewn  Daniel's 
 predictions  relating  to  himself,  and  gave  the  Jews  per- 
 mission to  live  according  to  their  own  laws,  as  well 
 as  freedom  from  tribute  on  Sabbatical  years.  His 
 brother  Manasseh  was  appointed  first  high-priest  of 
 the  Samaritan  temple  on  Mount  Gerizim  by  San- 
 ballat's  request  [Antiq.  xi.  8.  5).  These  circum- 
 stances related  by  Joseph'as  are  not  credible,  though 
 Jahn  and  other  Roman  Catholic  writers  usually  re- 
 ceive them  as  historical.  If  '  Darius  the  Persian,'' 
 who  is  mentioned,  Neh.  xii.  22,  in  connection  with 
 Jaddua,  be  Darius  HI.  Codomannus,  last  monarch 
 of  Persia  (336-330  B.C.),  the  compiler  of  the  book 
 of  Nehemiah  is  brought  down  to  the  time  of  the 
 Grecian  dynasty,  and  could  not  therefore  have  been 
 Nehemiah  himself.  The  name  of  Jaddua  does  not 
 mark  the  time  when  the  last  additions  were  made 
 to  the  book  of  Nehemiah  and  the  O.  T.  canon  ; 
 nor  has  it  any  proper  relation  to  the  settlement  of 
 the  canon. — S.  D. 
 
 JAEL  py,  wild  goat  or  gazelle ;  Sept.  ^larj\), 
 
 wife  of  Heber,  the  Kenite.  When  Sisera,  the 
 general  of  Jabin,  had  been  defeated,  he  alighted 
 from  his  chariot,  hoping  to  escape  best  on  foot 
 from  the  hot  pursuit  of  the  victorious  Israelites. 
 
 On  reaching  the  tents  of  the  nomade  chief,  he  re- 
 membered that  there  was  peace  between  his  sove- 
 reign and  the  house  of  Heber  ;  and,  therefore,  aji- 
 plied  for  the  hospitality  and  protection  to  which 
 he  was  thus  entitled.  This  request  was  very  cor- 
 dially granted  by  the  wife  of  the  absent  chief,  who 
 received  the  vanquished  warrior  into  the  inner  part 
 of  the  tent,  where  he  could  not  be  discovered  by 
 strangers  without  such  an  intrusion  as  eastern  cus- 
 toms would  not  warrant.  She  also  brought  him 
 milk  to  drink,  when  he  asked  only  water  ;  and 
 then  covered  him  from  view,  that  he  might  enjoy 
 repose  the  more  securely.  As  he  slept,  a  horrid 
 thought  occurred  to  Jael,  which  she  hastened  too 
 promptly  to  execute.  She  took  one  of  the  tent 
 nails,  and  with  a  mallet,  at  one  fell  blow,  drove  it 
 through  the  temples  of  the  sleeping  Sisera.  Soon 
 after,  Barak  and  his  people  arrived  in  pursuit, 
 and  were  shown  the  lifeless  body  of  the  man  they 
 sought.  This  deed  drew  much  attention  to  Jael, 
 and  preserved  the  camp  from  molestation  by  the 
 victors  ;  and  there  is  no  disputing  that  her  act  is 
 mentioned  with  great  praise  in  the  triumphal  song 
 wherein  Deborah  and  Barak  celebrated  the  deli 
 verance  of  Israel  (Judg.  v.  24).* 
 
 It  does  not  seem  difficult  to  understand  the 
 object  of  Jael  in  this  painful  transaction.  Her 
 motives  seem  to  have  been  entirely  prudential,  and, 
 on  prudential  grounds,  the  very  circumstance  which 
 renders  her  act  the  more  odious — the  peace  sub- 
 sisting between  the  nomade  chief  and  the  king  of 
 Hazor — must,  to  her,  have  seemed  to  make  it  the 
 more  expedient.  She  saw  that  the  Israelites  had 
 now  the  upper  hand,  and  was  aware  that,  as  being 
 in  alliance  with  the  oppressors  of  Israel,  the  camp 
 might  expect  very  rough  treatment  from  the  pur- 
 suing force  ;  which  would  be  greatly  aggravated  if 
 Sisera  were  found  sheltered  within  it.  This  cala- 
 mity she  sought  to  avert,  and  to  place  the  house  of 
 Heber  in  a  favourable  position  with  the  victorious 
 party.  She  probably  justified  the  act  to  herself, 
 by  the  consideration  that  as  Sisera  would  certainly 
 be  taken  and  slain,  she  might  as  well  make  a  benefit 
 out  of  his  inevitable  doom,  as  incur  utter  ruin  in 
 the  attempt  to  protect  him.  We  have  been  grieved 
 to  see  the  act  vindicated  as  authorized  by  the 
 usages  of  ancient  warfare,  of  rude  times,  and  of 
 ferocious  manners.  There  was  not  warfare,  but 
 peace,  between  the  house  of  Heber  and  the  prince 
 of  Hazor  ;  and,  for  the  rest,  we  will  venture  to 
 affirm  that  there  does  not  now,  and  never  did 
 exist,  in  any  country,  a  set  of  usages  under  which 
 the  act  of  Jael  would  be  deemed  right. 
 
 It  is  much  easier  to  explain  the  conduct  of  Jael 
 
 [  *  There  is  some  doubt  whether  the  Jael  men- 
 tioned, Judg.  V.  6,  is  the  same  as  Jael  the  wife 
 of  Heber,  or  another  Jael  who  had  judged  Israel 
 before  the  time  of  Deborah.  It  is  not  necessary 
 for  the  latter  supposition  to  make  Jael  the  name  of 
 a  man  ;  for  the  case  of  Deborah  shews  that  the 
 place  of  Judge  might  be  occupied  by  a  female. 
 The  reasons  for  this  supposition  are — I.  That  the 
 state  of  things  described  in  Judg.  v.  6,  as  exist- 
 ing in  Jael's  days,  is  not  the  state  of  things  existing 
 in  the  days  of  Jael  the  wife  of  Heber,  whose  time 
 was  famous  for  the  restoration  of  the  nation  to  a 
 better  ;  2.  That  the  wife  of  a  stranger  would 
 hardly  have  been  named  as  marking  an  epoch  in 
 the  history  of  Israel.  (See  Gesen.  Thes.  in  verb.  ; 
 Bertheau  in  the  Exeget.  Hd.B.  in  loc.)] 
 
JAGUR 
 
 455 
 
 JAHDAI 
 
 than  to  account  for  the  praise  which  it  receives  in 
 the  triumphal  ode  of  Deborah  and  Barak.  But 
 the  following  remarks  will  go  far  to  remove  the 
 difficulty  : — There  is  no  doubt  that  Sisera  would 
 have  been  put  to  death  if  he  had  been  taken  alive 
 by  the  Israelites.  The  war  usages  of  the  time  war- 
 ranted such  treatment,  and  there  are  numerous  ex- 
 amples of  it.  They  had,  therefore,  no  regard  to 
 her  private  motives,  or  to  the  particular  relations 
 between  Heber  and  Jabin,  but  beheld  her  only  as 
 the  instrument  of  accomplishing  what  was  usually 
 regarded  as  the  final  and  crowning  act  of  a  great 
 victory.  And  the  unusual  circumstance  that  this 
 act  was  performed  by  a  woman's  hand  was,  ac- 
 cording to  the  notions  of  the  time,  so  great  a  humi- 
 liation, that  it  could  hardly  fail  to  be  dwelt  upon, 
 in  contrasting  the  result  with  the  proud  confidence 
 of  victory  which  had  at  the  outset  been  entertained 
 (Judg.  iv.  5). — ^J.  K.  [Comp.  Coleridge,  Confes- 
 sions of  an  Inquiring  Spirit,  p.  33-35.] 
 
 JAGUR  p^r,  'lodging;'  'Acrcip;  Alex,  '\a-yovp; 
 
 Ja^tr],  a  city  on  the  extreme  south-eastern  border 
 of  Judah,  towards  Edom  (Josh.  xv.  21).  Its  name 
 might  perhaps  indicate  that  it  was  one  of  the  forti- 
 fied camping-grounds  of  the  border  Arabs.  Its 
 site  is  unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 J  AH.    [Jehovah.] 
 
 JAHATH  (nn'' ;  LXX.  '1^(9 ;  Vulg.  JaJiatk). 
 
 1.  Son  of  Libni,  the  son  of  Gershon,  the  son  of 
 Levi  (i  Chron.  vi.  20,  43).  In  the  latter  verse  the 
 LXX.   read  'Uid,  and  the  Vulgate  Jelh.     He  is 
 
 perhaps  identical  with  Jehiel   pXTl''),    i   Chron. 
 
 xxiii.  8,  who  was  the  founder  of  one  of  the  patri- 
 archal houses  (QriTli^S  D''^,  house  of  their  fathers) 
 
 of  the  tribe  of  Levi. 
 
 2.  Another  grandson  of  Gershon  by  his  son 
 Shimei,  and  the  founder  of  one  of  the  patriarchal 
 houses  of  the  Gershonites  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  10,  11). 
 In  the  Vulgate  he  is  called  Leheth. 
 
 3.  Son  of  Reaiah  (=  Haroeh,  i  Chron.  ii.  52), 
 the  grandson  of  Hur  [HuR,  3],  of  the  tribe  of 
 Judah  (l  Chron.  iv.  2). 
 
 4.  (LXX.  'Ici6i;  Alex.  'IviQ).  The  leader  or 
 chief  in  the  time  of  David  of  the  Benei-Shelomoth, 
 the  Levitical  house,  which  was  the  only  representa- 
 tive of  Izhar,  the  son  of  Kohath  (l  Chron.  xxiv. 
 22). 
 
 5.  A  Levite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  who  was 
 appointed  one  of  the  overseers  of  the  workmen  en- 
 gaged in  the  repair  of  the  Temple  in  the  reign  of 
 Josiah  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  12). — S.  N. 
 
 JAHAZ,  JAHAZA,  JAHAZAH,  and  JAH- 
 ZAH  (|^n^  and  T^'^y,  perhaps  i.  9,  ^^-^n..  '  tram- 
 pled down;'  'Iacr<Td  and  'lacrct ;  Jasa),  a  town  in 
 the  territory  of  the  Amorites,  on  the  confines  of 
 the  eastern  desert,  where  the  IsraeUtes  gained  the 
 decisive  victory  over  Sihon  (Num.  xxi.  23  ;  Deut. 
 ii.  32).  It  was  given  to  the  Reubenites,  and  was 
 assigned  out  of  that  tribe  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xiii. 
 18 ;  xxi.  36  ;  I  Chron.  vi.  78).  Isaiah  and  Jere- 
 miah include  it,  with  Heshbon  and  Elealeh,  in  the 
 prophetic  curse  pronounced  upon  Moab  (Is.  xv.  4 ; 
 jer.  xlviii.   34).     The  whole  country  east  of  tLt 
 
 Dead  Sea  had  originally  been  given  to  the  Moab- 
 ites  and  Ammonites  (Gen.  xix.  36-38  ;  Deut.  ii. 
 19-22) ;  but  the  warlike  Amorites  from  the  west  ol 
 the  Jordan  conquered  them  and  expelled  them 
 from  the  region  north  of  the  river  Arnon.  From 
 the  Amorites  the  Israelites  took  this  country  ;  but 
 subsequently  the  Ammonites  claimed  it  as  theirs 
 (Judg.  xi.  13)  ;  and  on  the  decline  of  Jewish  power 
 the  Moabites  and  Ammonites  again  took  possession 
 of  it.  For  this  reason  Jahaz  is  ascribed  by  the 
 prophets  to  Moab.  Eusebius  states  that  in  his  day 
 Jahaz  (he  writes  it  'lecrcrd)  still  existed,  and  was 
 situated  between  Medaba  and  Debus  (Atj^oCs, 
 Jerome  says  Diblatha ;  Onomast.  s.  v.  fassa ; 
 Reland,  PaL,  p.  825  ;  Winer,  Keahuoerterbuch, 
 s.  V.)  The  situation  thus  given  to  it  appears  to  be 
 too  far  west  for  the  requirements  of  the  sacred 
 narrative.  We  read  in  Num.  xxi.  23  that  Sihon 
 '  went  out  against  Israel  into  the  wilderness  ;  and 
 he  came  to  "Jahaz  and  fought  against  them. '  Con- 
 sequently we  must  look  for  the  site  on  the  extreme 
 eastern  border  of  Ammon.  This  region  is  still 
 unknown.  No  traveller  has  ventured  to  explore 
 it  ;  and  the  site  of  Jahaz  remains  yet  to  be  identi- 
 fied (Keil  on  Joshua,  xiii.  18). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JAHAZIEL  b^^'\r\\  God  regarded;  similar  in 
 etymology  and  meaning  to  Jahaziah,  IT'Tn''). 
 
 1.  (LXX.  'lei-i^X, 'Iai-:i5\ ;  Vulg.  Jahaziel).  A 
 descendant  of  Hebron,  the  son  of  Kohath,  and 
 founder  of  one  of  the  twenty-four  chief  houses,  or 
 clans,  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  19 ; 
 xxiv.  23). 
 
 2.  (LXX.  'le^TjX  ;  Vulg.  Jeheziel).  A  Benjamite, 
 and  one  of  the  mighty  men  who  joined  the  party 
 of  David  whilst  he  was  under  the  protection  of 
 Lachish,  king  of  Gath,  and  who  are  described  as 
 able  to  use  both  the  right  hand  and  the  left  in 
 hurling  stones  and  shooting  arrows  (i  Chroru 
 xii.  4). 
 
 3.  (LXX.  '0^^X ;  Vulg.  Jaziel).  One  of  the 
 two  priests  who  were  appointed  by  David  to  the 
 office  of  playing  the  trumpet  before  the  ark,  after 
 it  had  been  brought  to  Jerusalem  from  the  house 
 of  Obed-edom  (i  Chron.  xvi.  6). 
 
 4.  (LXX.  'O^^X;  Vulg.  Jahazid).  Son  of 
 Zechariah,  and  one  of  the  '  sons  of  Asaph.'  He 
 lived  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  was  inspired 
 by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  to  foretell  to  the  king 
 and  the  people  of  Jerusalem  the  miraculous  over- 
 throw of  the  combined  army  of  the  Moabites,  Am- 
 monites, and  inhabitants  of  Mount  Seir,  upon  the 
 following  day  (2  Chron.  xx.  14 ;  Joseph.  Antiq. 
 ix.  I.  2).  According  to  Hengstenberg,  the  author- 
 ship of  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  is  to  be  referred  to  Jahaziel. 
 
 5.  (LXX.  'A^tJX,  I  Esd.  'I^^?Xos ;  Vulg.  Eze- 
 kiel).  The  father  of  one  of  the  'chief  men'  who 
 returned  with  Ezra  from  Babylon  (Ezra  viii.  5  ; 
 I  Esd.  viii.  32).  According  to  the  A.  V.  and  the 
 Hebrew  text,  Ben-Jahaziel  appears  as  the  chief  or 
 patriarch  of  the  sons  of  Shechaniah,  but  according 
 to  the  reading  of  the  LXX.,  he  was  the  patriarch 
 of  sons  of  Zathoes,  and  his  personal  name  was 
 Shechaniah.  The  same  also  is  stated  in  the  book 
 of  Esdras.— S.  N. 
 
 JAHDAI  ('''nn\    God  directed;    LXX.   'A55at; 
 
 Alex.  'laSat ;  Vulg.  Jahaddai).  A  descendant  of 
 Caleb,  the  son  of  Hezron,  by  his  concubine  Ephah 
 ;i  Chron.  ii.  47).     The  genealogical  list  gives  the 
 
TAHN 
 
 456 
 
 JAIRUS 
 
 names  of  only  the  sons  of  Jahdai ;  the  name  of  his 
 father  is  not  mentioned.  Houbigant  and  others 
 have  supposed  him  to  be  the  son  of  Haran  (ver. 
 46),  and  that  Gazez,  the  last  name  in  the  preced- 
 ing verse,  is  an  error  of  the  copyist,  who  has 
 repeated  a  name  previously  mentioned.  Less 
 probable  is  the  conjecture  of  Grunenberg,  quoted 
 by  Michaelis  (Adnotal.  in  Hagiog.),  that  Jahdai 
 was  another  of  Caleb's  concubines. — S.  N. 
 
 JAHN,  JoHANN,  a  celebrated  Biblical  and 
 Oriental  scholar  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church, 
 was  born  at  Taswitz  in  Moravia,  June  18,  1750- 
 He  studied  at  the  Gymnasium  of  Xnaym,  at 
 Olmiitz,  and  at  Bruck.  In  1775  he  was  ordained 
 priest,  and  devoted  himself  for  some  time  to  the 
 care  of  souls  at  Miswitz.  In  1782  he  received  the 
 degree  of  doctor  at  Olmiitz  ;  and  became  vice- 
 director  of  the  Gymnasium  at  Xnaym.  In  1784 
 he  was  chosen  professor  of  Oriental  languages  and 
 Biblical  hermeneutics  at  the  Lyceum  of  Olmiitz. 
 In  1789  he  was  transfeiTcd  to  a  wider  sphere  of 
 influence,  being  appointed  to  the  same  office  with 
 the  superadded  duties  of  teaching  Biblical  archaeo- 
 logy and  dogmatics  in  the  University  of  Vienna. 
 Here  he  laboured  successfully  for  seventeen  years, 
 amid  suspicions  and  petty  persecutions  which  pained 
 his  ingenuous  spirit.  Some  words  in  the  preface  to 
 his  Introdtutio7i  to  the  Old  Tesfaf)ient,  the  assertion 
 that  the  books  of  Job,  Jonah,  Judith,  and  Tobit 
 are  didactic  poems  ;  and  that  the  demoniacs  in  the 
 N.  T.  were  possessed  with  dangerous  diseases,  not 
 with  the  devil,  were  made  charges  against  him. 
 Complaints  of  his  unsoundness  were  laid  before  the 
 emperor  Francis  II. ,  by  a  cardinal ;  and  a  commis- 
 sion was  appointed  to  £xamine  the  matter,  which 
 decided  that  the  views  were  not  heterodox.  The 
 worthy  critic,  however,  received  a  cEcUtion  to  be 
 more  guarded  in  future.  Though  he  honestly 
 submitted,  his  detractors  continued  their  machina- 
 tions, till  he  was  removed  from  the  congenial 
 duties  of  an  office  to  which  he  had  dedicated 
 his  life,  and  made  canon  or  Domherr  in  the 
 metropolitan  church  of  St.  Stephen,  1806.  Even 
 before  he  was  compelled  to  resign  his  professor- 
 ship, his  two  books,  Iiitroductio  in  libros  sacros 
 Veteris  Testametiti  in  compendittin  redacta,  Wien 
 1804 ;  and  Archceologia  Biblica  in  cornpendiimi 
 redacta,  Wien  1805,  were  condemned,  without 
 their  author  being  heard  in  his  defence.  His 
 death  took  place  August  16,  1816.  Jahn  was  a 
 clear,  methodical  writer,  whose  numerous  works 
 diffused  a  knowledge  of  Biblical  subjects  in  places 
 and  circles  where  the  books  of  Protestants  would 
 scarcely  have  been  received.  The  latter,  however, 
 have  appreciated  his  writings  fully  as  much  as 
 Catholics.  He  was  not  profound  in  any  one  thing, 
 because  he  scattered  his  energies  over  so  wide  a 
 field  ;  but  he  was  a  most  useful  author,  and  one  of 
 his  books  is  still  the  largest  and  best  on  the  sub- 
 jects of  which  it  treats.  As  a  theologian  of  the 
 Romish  church,  he  was  so  liberal  that  Hengsten- 
 lierg  finds  fault  with  him  on  the  Pentateuch.  He 
 is  the  author  of  Einleitimg  in  die  gbttlichen  Biicher 
 des  alien  Bundes,  2  parts,  1802,  1803,  2d  ed.  ; 
 Hebrdische  Sprachlehrefiir  Anfiinger,  1792;  Ara- 
 mdische  oder  Chalddische  u.  Syrische  Sprachlehre, 
 1796  ;  Biblische  ArchcBologie,  three  parts  in  five 
 volumes,  1796- 1804  (his  best  work);  Elementar- 
 buck  des  Hebrdiscken  Sprache  sammt  Hebrdiscken 
 H'orterbiich,  2  parts,   1799  ;  Chalddische  Chresto- 
 
 viathie,  1 800  ;  Arabische  Chrestomathie,  1 802  ; 
 Lexicon  Arabico-latimim,  1812  ;  Biblica  Hebraica, 
 digessit,  et  graviores  lectionunt  vat'ietates  adjecit,  4 
 vols.,  1806;  Enchiridion  Herineneuticae  geiieralis 
 tabularum  veteris  et  ttovi  fxderis,  181 2;  Appendix 
 Her?neneHticae,  two  fasciculi,  1 8 13 -i  815  ;  and  the 
 two  compendiums  already  mentioned.  Some  time 
 after  his  death  appeared  Nachtrdge  (Tiibingen, 
 1821),  containing  six  interesting  dissertations  on 
 Biblical  subjects.  The  memory  of  this  meritorious 
 scholar  ought  to  be  respectfully  cherished  by  every 
 Biblical  student.  Succeeding  works  have  been 
 largely  indebted  to  his,  of  which  several  have  been 
 translated  into  English. — S.  D. 
 
 JAIR  ("T'X'',  'Jehovah  enlightens;'  'lai/j;  Jair). 
 
 I.  A  descendant  of  Manasseh  by  his  grandmother, 
 and  of  Judah  by  his  grandfather.  His  grand- 
 mother was  probably  an  heiress,  and  therefore 
 Jair  was  reckoned  to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  (I 
 Chron.  ii.  5,  22,  23).  When  the  Israelites  en- 
 tered Eastern  Palestine,  Jair  led  an  expedition 
 against  a  part  of  Northern  Gilead,  and  having 
 taken  a  number  of  its  towns,  '  called  them  Havoth- 
 yair''  ('the  towns  of  Jair,'  Num.  xxxii.  41).  He 
 subsequently  conquered  the  province  of  Argob  in 
 Bashan,  with  '  its  threescore  great  cities,'  and 
 called  it  Bashati-Havoth-jfair,  to  distinguish  it 
 from  the  province  previously  occupied  in  Gilead 
 (Deut.  iii.  14).  Most  writers  have  confounded 
 these  two  territories  ;  but  in  Josh.  xiii.  30,  i  Kings 
 iv.  13,  and  r  Chron.  ii.  22,  23,  they  are  clearly 
 distinguished  from  each  other  (Argob  ;  Havoth- 
 Jair  ;  Voxitx^s  Da?nascHS,  ii.  268,  seq.) 
 
 2.  One  of  the  judges  of  Israel,  doubtless  a  de- 
 scendant of  the  former,  who  '  had  thirty  sons  that 
 rode  on  thirty  ass-colts,  and  they  had  thirty  cities, 
 which  are  called  Havoth-Jair  unto  this  day,  which 
 are  in  the  land  of  Gilead'  (Judg.  x.  3,  4). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 JAIRITE    (nX'n;    Sept.    6  'laplv  •    Alex,    6 
 
 'laet/je/),  a  designation  applied  to  Ira,  one  of 
 David's  officers  (2  Sam.  xx.  26).  The  word  must 
 be  regarded  as  a  patronymic  from  Jair ;  but  such  a 
 mode  of  designating  an  individual  is  unusual,  the 
 more  common  method  being  to  describe  him  from 
 his  place  of  nativity.     This  draws  attention  to  the 
 
 reading  of  the  Syriac  Vers.   ;_»A-»      ^^,  d^men 
 
 Jdthir,  'of  Jathir  ;'  from  which  it  may  be  inferred 
 that  probably  the  original  reading  was  "•IDTI,  Ela- 
 Jathiri,  '  The  Jathirite,'  or  'Ithrite.'  In  this  case 
 the  Ira  of  2  Sam.  xx.  26  is  the  same  as  the  Ira  of 
 2  Sam.  xxiii.  38  and  i  Chron.  xi.  40.  In  the 
 first  of  these  passages  he  is  farther  described  as  |nD 
 
 *in?,  Cohen  P  David,  'a  chief  niler  about  David,' 
 A.  V.  Cohen  is  here  used,  as  in  viii.  1 8,  in  its 
 primary  sense  of  a  servant  in  a  posiiion  of  tntst 
 and  honour;  if  of  God  a  priest,  if  of  an  earthly 
 sovereign  a  minister  (Kimchi,  Fiirst).  Ira  may 
 have  been  private  secretary  or  annalist  to  David 
 (Thenius,  in  loc.)  The  notion  of  Gesenius  and 
 others  that  the  palatial  cohenim  were  house  chap- 
 lains of  the  king  not  of  Aaronic  descent,  is  purely 
 conjectural  and  altogether  improbable. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JAIRUS  ('lde(pos),  a  ruler  of  the  synagogue 
 at  Capernaum,  whose  daughter  Jesus  restored  to 
 life  (Mark  v.  22  ;  Luke  viii.  41  ;  comp.  Matt.  ix. 
 18). 
 
JAISH 
 
 457 
 
 JAMES 
 
 JAISH.       [IBN  JAISH.] 
 
 JAKAN  (I  Chron.  i.  42),  for  Jaakan,  probably 
 by  a  misprint. 
 
 JAKEH  (np'',  the  pious  or  obedient,  from  the 
 
 unused  root  Hp'',  derived  from  the   'Arab.  ^,  v. 
 
 to  veiierate;  viii.  to  fear  God,  to  be  pious,  ^  Ges.)  oc- 
 curs only  in  Prov.  xxx.  I  as  a  proper  name.  Yet, 
 that  it  is  a  proper  name  is  disputed.  Stuart,  how- 
 ever, admits  '  there  can  be  no  doubt '  that  this 
 word  and  Ithiel  and  Ucal  '  were  regarded  by  the 
 punctuators,  by  the  Chal.  and  Syr.  translators,  and 
 by  nearly  all  the  modern  commentators,  as  proper 
 names;'  but  he  declines  their  authority.  The 
 Vulg.  renders  the  whole  verse  thus  :  Verba  congi-e- 
 gantis,  filii  Vomentis  (following  the  van  lee.  of 
 some  MSS.,  Sp"'),  visio  quani  loaitus  est  vir,  cum 
 fuo  est  Deus  et  qui  Deo  secttm  moraute  confortaius 
 ait.  The  LXX.  :  roi>s  5^  e/xoiis  X67o,uj,  vU,  (pofiri- 
 6r)Ti,  Kal  de^dfievos  aiiTovs  fJLeravdei.  TdSe  X^yei  6  dvrjp 
 Toh  TTiffTevovaiv  deu,  Kal  Travofiai, — renderings  which 
 not  only  alter  the  points,  but  dislocate  the  words. 
 Stuart,  following  Hitzig  and  Bertheau,  takes  equal 
 liberties  with  the  text.  He  renders  the  words  thus  : 
 '  T/ie  words  of  Agur,  the  soft  of  her  ivho  was  obeyed 
 tu  Massa.  Thus  spake  the  man :  I  have  toiled,  I  have 
 toiled  for  God,  and  have  failed^     He  converts  X\\>'' 
 
 into  rinp\  by  addhig  to  it  the  H  from  Nti'tSn,  and 
 
 altering  the  vowel  points,  and  by  a  few  more 
 such  alterations  opens  the  way  for  his  translation. 
 Then  Massa  becomes  the  proper  name  of  a  country 
 near  Dumah,  in  Arabia  (see  Gen.  xxv.  14 ;  i 
 Chron.  i.  30),  and  'her  who  was  obeyed,'  the 
 queen  who  reigned  over  it,  the  mother  of  Agur  and 
 Lemuel  (Prov.  xxxi.  i)  and  whom  Lemuel  suc- 
 ceeded on  the  throne — The  strangeness  of  attributing 
 the  proverbs  which  follow  to  Arabians  and  Amale- 
 kites  is  removed  by  the  '  historic  notice '  (i  Chron. 
 iv.  41-43)  that  this  district  of  Arabia  had  been  con- 
 quered in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  by  a  colony  of 
 Simeonites,  who,  having  expelled  the  former  in- 
 habitants, took  possession  of  it,  taking  which  'his- 
 torical events  into  view,'  it  will  be  easily  seen  how 
 '  a  writer  in  Massah  should  develope  an  acquaint- 
 ance with  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.'  The  only 
 objections  to  this  whole  course  are  :  that  it  is  arbi- 
 trary, involving  principles  which  might  be  applied 
 to  dislocate  the  entire  Hebrew  text  ;  that  the  alter- 
 ations made  are  no  improvement  of  the  text,  but 
 rather  exceedingly  awkward,  it  being  impossible  to 
 educe  with  ease  the  Eng.  rendering  from  the 
 altered  original  (nnp""   cannot  be  fairly  rendered 
 
 'her  who  was  obeyed,'  or  '  her  whose  domain  is') ; 
 and  lastly,  the  entire  theory  of  the  Hebrew  queen 
 in  Massa  is  simply  a  fancy  of  learned  men,  who 
 often  toil  to  bring  forth  wind.  It  remains  for  us, 
 therefore,  to  abide  by  the  Hebrew  text  and  the 
 A.  V.  as  our  best  course.  Agur,  Jakeh,  Ithiel, 
 and  Ucal  may  be  the  names  of  real  persons  ;  or 
 they  may  be  symbolical.  Ithiel  and  Ucal  may  be 
 either  the  sons  or  disciples  of  Agur  ;  and  the  fol- 
 lowing proverbs  may  have  been  written  for  their 
 special  instruction.  Beyond  this  we  can  aver 
 nothing  positive.  Stuart's  hypercritical  objections 
 do  not  throw  any  serious  hindrance  in  the  way  of 
 the  following  rendering :  '  the  words  of  Agur  ben 
 Jakeh,  the  weighty  utterance,  the  oracle  of  the 
 man  to  Ithiel — to  Ithiel  and  Ucal.'     The  heaping 
 
 together  of  words  in  such  a  connection,  designed 
 to  call  emphatic  attention  to  what  follows,  has  a 
 remarkable  parallel  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  I,  2  (see  more 
 in  the  Critid  Sacri). — I.  J. 
 
 JAMBRES.     [JANNES.] 
 
 JAMBRI  (LXX.  TaAi/3p^,'IaM/3/3eiV;  Joseph,  reads, 
 oi  ' A/xapaiov  Trai5es;  Vulg.  fambri),  apparently  a 
 mighty  man  in  the  city  of  Medaba,  with  whom  we  first 
 become  acquainted  in  the  first  book  of  Maccabees 
 (ch.  ix.  36).  Jonathan,  who  succeeded  his  brother 
 Judas  in  the  government  of  the  Jews  (B.C.  161), 
 about  to  be  attacked  by  Bacchides,  an  officer  of 
 the  king  of  Syria,  on  the  Sabbath  day,  serit  off  a 
 detachment,  under  the  command  of  his  brother 
 John,  in  charge  of  all  his  baggage,  to  leave  it  for 
 security  with  their  friends,  the  Nabathites.  But 
 '  the  children  of  Jambri  came  out  of  Medaba,  and 
 took  John  and  all  that  he  had  and  went  their  way.' 
 This  "hostile  act  was  not,  however,  left  unavenged  ; 
 for,  soon  after,  it  was  told  Jonathan  and  Simon 
 that,  the  'children  of  Jambri'  were  celebrating  a 
 great  marriage,  and  bringing  the  bride  from  Nada- 
 bath,  when  Jonathan  and  his  party  laid  an  ambush 
 for  them,  and  as  the  bridegroom  was  coming  forth 
 with  great  pomp  to  meet  the  bride,  with  timbrels 
 and  songs,  fell  upon  them,  committing  great 
 slaughter,  and  taking  great  spoil ;  thus  '  convert- 
 ing the  marriage  into  mourning,  and  their  melody 
 into  lamentation'  (i  Maccab.  ix.  33-42).  But  who 
 Jambri  was  we  know  not.  .Some  suppose  that  the 
 '  children  of  Jambri'  were  a  family  of  Amoritcs  who 
 lived  in  Medaba,  and  who,  as  such,  were  ready  to 
 shew  their  hatred  to  the  Jews.  But,  query.  May 
 not  Jambri  be  the  same  as  Jambres,  one  of  the  two 
 magicians  who  opposed  Moses  ?  and  may  not  the 
 persons,  who,  on  the  above  named  occasion,  at- 
 tacked the  Jews,  be  called  the  '  children  of  Jam- 
 bri,' or  Jambres,  to  brand  them  with  infamy  as 
 the  enemies  of  God's  people  and  cause  ? — I.  J. 
 
 JAMES,  'Id/cw^os.  Two,  if  not  three  persons 
 of  this  name  are  mentioned  in  the  N.  T. 
 
 I.  James,  the  son  of  Zebedee  ('Iokw/Jos  6  tov 
 Zepedaiov),  and  brother  of  the  evangelist  John. 
 Their  occupation  was  that  of  fishermen,  probably 
 at  Bethsaida,  in  partnership  with  Simon  Peter 
 (Luke  V.  10).  On  comparing  the  account  given  in 
 Matt.  iv.  21,  Mark  i.  19,  with  that  in  John  i.,  it 
 would  appear  that  James  and  John  had  been  ac- 
 quainted with  our  Lord,  and  had  received  him  as 
 the  Messiah,  some  time  before  he  called  them  to 
 attend  upon  him  statedly — a  call  with  which  they 
 immediately  complied.  Their  mother's  name  was 
 Salome.  We  find  James,  John,  and  Peter  associ- 
 ated on  several  interesting  occasions  in  the  Saviour's 
 life.  They  alone  were  present  at  the  Transfigura- 
 tion (Matt.  xvii.  i ;  Mark  ix.  2  ;  Luke  ix.  28) ;  at 
 the  restoration  to  life  of  Jairus'  daughter  (Mark  v. 
 42;  Luke  viii.  51);  and  in  the  garden  of  Geth- 
 semane  during  the  agony  (Mark  xiv.  33  ;  Matt, 
 xxvi.  37 ;  Luke  xxi.  37).  With  Andrew  they 
 listened  in  private  to  our  Lord's  discourse  on  the 
 fall  of  Jerusalem  (Mark  xiii.  3).  James  and  his 
 brother  appear  to  have  indulged  in  false  notions  of 
 the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  and  were  led  by  am- 
 bitious views  to  join  in  the  request  made  to  Jesus 
 by  their  mother  (Matt.  xx.  20-23  ;  Mark  x.  35). 
 From  Luke  ix.  52,  we  may  infer  that  their  tem- 
 perament was  warm  and  impetuous.  On  account, 
 probably,   of  their  boldness   and   energy  in  dis- 
 
JAMES 
 
 458 
 
 JAMES 
 
 charging  their  apostleship,  they  received  from  their 
 Lord  the  appellation  of  Boanerges,  or  Sons  of 
 Thunder.  (For  the  various  explanations  of  this 
 title  given  by  the  fathers,  see  Suiceri  T/ies.  Eccles. 
 s.  V.  Y>povTi],  and  Liicke's  Commentar,  Bonn.  1 840  ; 
 Einleitiing,  c.  i.  sec.  2,  p.  17.)  James  was  the 
 first  martyr  among  the  apostles.  Clement  of  Alex- 
 andria, in  a  fragment  preserved  by  Eusebius  {Hist. 
 Eccles.  i.  9),  reports  that  the  officer  v/ho  conducted 
 James  to  the  tribunal  was  so  influenced  by  the  bold 
 declaration  of  his  faith  as  to  embrace  the  Gospel 
 and  avow  himself  also  a  Christian  ;  in  consequence 
 of  which  he  was  beheaded  at  the  same  time. 
 
 2.  James,  the  son  of  Alphazis  ('laKupos  6  rod 
 ^AX^aiov),  one  of  the  twelve  apostles  (Mark  iii. 
 18;  Matt.  X.  3;  Luke  vi.  15;  Acts  i.  13).  His 
 mother's  name  was  Mary  (Matt,  xxvii.  56  ;  Mark 
 XV.  40) ;  in  the  latter  passage  he  is  called  James  the 
 Less  (6  /xiKpos,  the  Little),  either  as  being  younger 
 than  James  the  son  of  Alphffius,  or  on  account  of 
 his  low  stature  (Mark  xvi.  I  ;  Luke  xxiv.  10). 
 
 3.  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord  (6  ddeXcpb^  rod 
 Kvplov  ;  Gal.  i.  19).  Whether  this  James  is  iden- 
 tical with  the  son  of  Alphceus  is  a  question  which 
 Dr.  Neander  pronounces  to  be  the  most  difficult  in 
 the  apostolic  history,  and  which  cannot  yet  be  con- 
 sidered as  decided.  We  read  in  Matt.  xiii.  55, 
 '  Is  not  his  mother  called  Maiy,  and  his  brethren 
 James,  and  Joses,  and  Simon,  and  Judas?'  and  in 
 Mark  vi.  3,  '  Is  not  this  the  carpenter,  the  son  of 
 Mary,  and  brother  of  James  and  joses,  and  of  Juda 
 and  Simon  ?  and  are  not  his  sisters  here  with  us  ?' 
 Those  critics  who  suppose  the  terms  of  affinity  in 
 these  and  parallel  passages  to  be  used  in  the  laxer 
 sense  of  near  relations,  have  remarked  that  in  Mark 
 XV.  40,  mention  is  made  of  '  Mary,  the  mother  of 
 James  the  less  and  of  Joses;'  and  that  in  John 
 xix.  25,  it  is  said,  '  there  stood  by  the  cross  of 
 Jesus,  his  mother  and  his  mother's  sister,  Mary, 
 the  wife  of  Cleophas,  and  Maiy  Magdalene  : '  they 
 therefore  infer  that  the  wife  of  Cleophas  is  the 
 same  as  the  sister  of  the  mother  of  Jesus,  and, 
 consequently,  that  James  (supposing  Cleophas  and 
 AlphKus  to  be  the  same  name,  the  former  accord- 
 ing to  the  Hebrew,  the  latter  according  to  the 
 Greek  orthography)  was  afrst  cousin  of  our  Lord, 
 and,  on  that  account,  termed  his  brother,  and  that 
 the  other  individuals  called  the  brethren  of  Jesus 
 stood  in  the  same  relation.  It  is  also  urged  that 
 in  the  Acts,  after  the  death  of  James  the  son  of 
 Zebedee,  we  read  only  of  one  James  ;  and,  more- 
 over, that  it  is  improbable  that  our  Lord  would 
 have  committed  his  mother  to  the  care  of  the  be- 
 loved disciple,  had  there  been  sons  of  Joseph  liv- 
 ing, whether  the  offspring  of  Mary  or  of  a  former 
 marriage.  Against  this  view  it  has  been  alleged 
 that  in  several  early  Christian  writers  James,  the 
 brother  of  the  Lord,  is  distinguished  from  the  son 
 of  Alphseus  ;  that  the  identity  of  the  names  Al- 
 phKus  and  Cleophas  is  somewhat  uncertain  ;  and 
 that  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  words  '  his  mother's 
 sister,'  in  John  xix.  21,  are  to  be  considered  in 
 apposition  with  those  immediately  following — 
 '  Mary,  the  wife  of  Cleophas,'  or  intended  to 
 designate  a  different  individual ;  since  it  is  highly 
 improbable  that  two  sisters  should  have  had  the 
 same  name.  Wieseler  {Stud/en  taid  Kriliken, 
 1840,  iii.  648)  maintains  that  not  three,  but  four 
 persons  are  mentioned  in  this  passage,  and  that 
 since  in  Matt,  xxvii.  56,  Mark  xv.  40,  besides 
 Maiy  of  Magdala,  and  Mary  the  mother  of  James 
 
 and  Joses,  Salome  also  (or  the  mother  of  the  sons 
 of  Zebedee)  is  named  as  present  at  the  Crucifixion, 
 it  follows  that  she  must  have  been  the  sister  of  our 
 Lord's  mother.  This  would  obviate  the  difficulty 
 arising  from  the  sameness  of  the  names  of  the  two 
 sisters,  and  would  set  aside  the  proof  that  James, 
 the  Lord's  brother,  was  the  son  of  Alphceus.  But 
 even  allowing  that  the  sons  of  Alphaeus  were  re- 
 lated to  our  Lord,  the  narrative  in  the  Evangelists 
 and  the  Acts  presents  some  reasons  for  suspecting 
 that  they  were  not  the  persons  described  as  '  the 
 brethren  of  Jesus.'  I.  The  brethren  of  Jesus  are 
 associated  with  his  mother  in  a  manner  that  strongly 
 indicates  their  standing  in  the  filial  relation  to  her 
 (Matt.  xii.  46;  Mark  iii.  31  ;  Luke  viii.  19;  Matt, 
 xiii.  56,  where  '  sisters '  are  also  mentioned  ;  they 
 appear  constantly  together  as  forming  one  family, 
 John  ii.  12).  'After  this  he  went  down  to  Caper- 
 naum, he,  and  his  mother,  and  his  brethren,  and 
 his  disciples'  (Kuinoel,  Conunent.  in  Alatt.  xii.  46). 
 2.  It  is  explicitly  stated,  that  at  a  period  posterior 
 to  the  appointment  of  the  twelve  apostles,  among 
 whom  we  find  '  the  son  of  Alphreus,'  '  neither  did 
 his  brethren  believe  on  him'  (Johnvii.  5;  Liicke's 
 Coinmentar).  Attempts,  indeed,  have  been  made 
 by  Grotius  and  Lardner  to  dilute  the  force  of  this 
 language,  as  if  it  meant  merely  that  their  faith  was 
 imperfect  or  wavering — '  that  they  did  not  believe 
 as  they  should  ;'  but  the  language  of  Jesus  is  de- 
 cisive : — '  My  time  is  not  yet  come,  but  your  time 
 is  always  ready  ;  the  world  cannot  hate  you,  but 
 me  it  hateth'  (compare  this  with  John  xv.  18,  19  : 
 'If  the  world  hate  you,'  etc.)  This  appears  to 
 overthrow  the  argument  for  the  identity  of  the 
 brethren  of  Jesus  with  the  sons  of  Alphaeus,  drawn 
 from  the  sameness  of  the  names ;  for  as  to  the  sup- 
 position that  what  is  affirmed  in  John's  Gospel 
 might  apply  to  only  some  of  his  brethren,  it  is  evi- 
 dent that,  admitting  the  identity,  only  one  brother 
 of  Jesus  would  be  left  out  of  the  '  company  of  the 
 apostles.'  3.  Luke's  language  in  Acts  i.  13,  14, 
 is  opposed  to  the  identity  in  question  ;  for,  after 
 enumerating  the  apostles,  among  whom,  as  usual, 
 is  '  James,  the  son  of  AlpliKus,'  he  adds,  '  they  all 
 continued  with  one  accord  in  prayer  and  supplica- 
 tion with  the  women,  and  Mary,  the  mother  of 
 Jesus,  and  zvith  his  bj-ethren.''  From  this  passage, 
 however,  we  learn  that,  by  this  time,  his  brethren 
 had  received  him  as  the  Messiah.  That  after  the 
 death  of  the  son  of  Zebedee  we  find  only  one 
 James  mentioned,  may  easily  be  accounted  for  on 
 the  ground  that  probably  only  one,  '  the  brother  of 
 the  Lord,'  remained  at  Jerusalem  ;  and,  under  such 
 circumstances,  the  silence  of  the  historian  respect- 
 ing the  son  of  Alphaus  is  not  more  strange  than 
 respecting  several  of  the  other  apostles,  whose 
 names  never  occur  after  the  catalogue  in  ch.  i.  13. 
 Paul's  language  in  Gal.  i.  19  has  been  adduced  to 
 prove  the  identity  of  the  Lord's  brother  with  the 
 son  of  Alphceus,  by  its  ranking  him  among  the 
 apostles,  but  Neander  and  Winer  have  shewn  that 
 it  is  by  no  means  decisive  (Winer's  Granunatik, 
 4th  ed.  p.  517;  '^^■3.r^A&x'%  LListory  of  the  Planting, 
 etc.,  vol.  ii.  p.  5,  Eng.  transl.)  If  we  examine  the 
 early  Christian  writers,  we  shall  meet  with  a  variety 
 of  opinions  on  this  subject.  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles. 
 ii.  l)  says  that  James,  the  first  bishop  of  Jerusa- 
 lem, brother  of  the  Lord,  son  of  Joseph,  the  hus- 
 band of  Mary,  was  surnamed  the  just  by  the 
 ancients,  on  account  of  his  eminent  virtue.  He 
 uses  similar  language  in  his  Evangelical  Dan^nstra- 
 
JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 459 
 
 JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 lion  (iii.  5).  In  his  commentai-y  on  Isaiah  he 
 reckons  fourteen  apostles ;  namely,  the  twelve, 
 Paul,  and  James,  the  brother  of  our  Lord.  A 
 similar  enumeration  is  made  in  the  '  Apostolic 
 Constitutions'  (vi.  14).  Epiphanius,  Chrysostom, 
 and  Theophylact  speak  of  James,  the  Lord's  bro- 
 ther, as  being  the  same  as  the  son  of  Cleopas. 
 They  suppose  that  Joseph  and  Cleopas  were  bro- 
 thers, and  that  the  latter  dying  without  issue, 
 Joseph  married  his  widow  for  his  first  wife,  ac- 
 cording to  the  Jewish  custom,  and  that  James  and 
 his  brethren  were  the  offspring  of  this  marriage 
 (Lardner's  C>'edibility,  pt.  ii.  ch.  118,  Works,  iv. 
 548;  ch.  i.  163,  Works,  v.  160;  History  of  Here- 
 tics, c.  xi.  sec.  II,  Works,  viii.  527;  Supplement  to 
 the  Credibility,  ch.  17,  Works,  vi.  iSS).  A  pas- 
 sage from  Josephus  is  quoted  by  Eusebius  {Hist. 
 Eccles.  ii.  23),  in  which  James,  the  brother  of 
 '  him  who  is  called  Christ,'  is  mentioned ;  but  in 
 the  opinion  of  Dr.  Lardner  and  other  eminent 
 critics  this  clause  is  an  interpolation  (Lardner's 
 y^wish  Testimonies,  ch.  iv. ;  Works,  vi.  496).  Ac- 
 cording to  Hegesippus  (a  converted  Jew  of  the 
 2d  century),  James,  tlie  brother  of  the  Lord, 
 undertook  the  government  of  the  church  along 
 with  the  apostles  (/nerd  rdv  dirocTToXuiv).  He  de- 
 scribes him  as  leading  a  life  of  ascetic  strictness, 
 and  as  held  in  the  highest  veneration  by  the  Jews. 
 But  ia  the  account  he  gives  of  his  martyrdom  some 
 circumstances  are  highly  improbable.  In  the  Apo- 
 cryphal Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  he  is 
 said  to  have  been  precipitated  from  a  pinnacle  of 
 the  temple,  and  then  assaulted  with  stones ;  and 
 at  last  dispatched  by  a  blow  on  the  head  with 
 a  fuller's  pole  (Lardner's  Supplement,  ch.  xvi. , 
 Works,  vi.  p.  174;  Neander,  History  of  the  Plant, 
 ins;,  etc.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  9,  22,  Eng.  transl.)  Dr. 
 Niemeyer  enumerates  not  less  than  five  persons  of 
 this  name,  by  distinguishing  the  son  of  Alphaeus 
 fxcm  James  the  less,  and  assuming  that  the  James 
 last  mentioned  in  Acts  i.  13  was  not  the  brother, 
 but  the  father  of  Judas  {Charalderistik  der  Bibel, 
 Halle  1830,  i.  399).— J.  E.  R. 
 
 JAMES,  Epistle  of  ;  said,  according  to  Euse- 
 bius, to  be  the  first  of  the  so-called  Catholic 
 epistles,  r/  •Kpint]  tQiv  opofia^o/j.ei'wv  KaOoXitcQv  eiricr- 
 To\u)v.  The  question  of  its  authorship  has  been  a 
 subject  of  keen  and  prolonged  controversy,  since, 
 as  Eusebius  has  again  remarked,  Tro\Xot'IdKw/3ot  e\-a- 
 \ovvTO.  James  the  Great,  or  the  son  of  Zebedee,  was 
 put  to  death  under  Herod  Agrippa  about  the  year 
 44,  and,  therefore,  the  authorship  cannot  with  any 
 propriety  be  ascribed  to  him,  though  a  Syriac  MS., 
 published  by  Widmandstadt,  and  an  old  Latin  ver- 
 sion, published  by  Martianay  and  Sabatier,  make 
 the  assertion.  The  authorship  has  been  assigned 
 by  not  a  few  to  James  the  Less,  6  fxiKpbs,  the  son 
 of  Alphasus  or  Cleophas,  and  by  others  to  James, 
 the  Lord's  brother.  Some,  indeed,  maintain  that 
 the  two  names  were  borne  by  the  same  individual, 
 James  being  called  the  Lord's  brother,  either  as 
 being  a  cousin  or  adoptive  brother  of  Jesus  (Lange, 
 art.  Jacolms  in  Herzog's  Encyclopddie),  or  as  a  son 
 of  Joseph  by  a  levirate  connection  with  the  widow 
 of  Cleophas — the  opinion  of  Epiphanius  and  Theo- 
 phylact ;  or  as  a  son  of  Joseph  by  a  former  mar- 
 riage— the  view  of  Chrysostom,  Hilary,  Cave,  and 
 Basnage.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  held  by  many 
 that  James,  son  of  Alphseus,  and  James,  brother 
 of  our  Lord,  were  distinct  persons,  the  latter  being 
 
 a  uterine  brother  of  Jesus,  and  standing,  according 
 to  the  representation  of  the  gospels,  in  the  same 
 relation  with  him  to  their  common  mother  Mary — 
 as  in  Matt.  xii.  47  ;  xiii.  55  ;  Mark  vi.  3  ;  John 
 ii.  12  ;  Acts  i.  14.  After  some  hesitation  we  are 
 inclined  to  this  hypothesis,  but  we  cannot  enter  into 
 the  question,  referring  the  reader  to  the  previous 
 article,  and  to  that  on  'Jesus  Christ.'  There  are 
 also  three  excellent  monographs  on  the  sul'jject. 
 Blom,  Theol.  Dissert,  de  Toh  a5e\(f>0LS  Kvplov,  Lug. 
 Bat.  1839  ;  Schaff,  das  Verhaltniss  dcs  Jacobus  Bric- 
 ders  des  Hemis,  Berlin  1842  ;  Wijbelingh,  qiiis  est 
 epistol(E  yacobi  Scriptor  ?  Groning.  1 854.  P'or  the 
 other  side,  see  Mill  on  the  Mythical  Interpretation  of 
 the  Gospels,  p.  219,  ed.  sec,  1S61.  Dr.  Mill  held 
 the  perpetual  virginity  of  Maiy,  or  that  she  was,  in 
 ecclesiastical  language,  denrapdevos,  and  thus  virtu- 
 ally forecloses  the  entire  investigation.  It  serves 
 no  purpose  to  sneer  at  those  who  hold  the  opposite 
 theory  as  having  their  prototypes  in  the  Antidico- 
 marianites  or  Helvidians  of  the  4th  century.  Ac- 
 cording to  our  view,  the  author  of  this  epistle  was 
 the  Lord's  brother,  not  an  apostle  or  one  of  the 
 twelve,  but  a  man  of  apostolical  standing  ;  accord- 
 ing to  Eusebius,  making,  along  with  Paul,  four- 
 teen apostles  (Comment,  ad  Jesai.  xvii.  5).  In  Gal. 
 ii.  9  Paul  classes  him  with  Peter  and  John,  not  as 
 an  apostle,  but  all  three  as  being  pillars  {ffTvXoL). 
 He  is  said  by  Hegesippus  (Euseb.  Hist.  ii.  23)  to 
 have  received  the  government  of  the  church,  p-era. 
 tQ>v  dTro(XTb\wv,  not  post  apostolos,  as  Jerome 
 wrongly  renders  it,  but  'along  with  the  apostles' 
 — as  the  natural  rendering  is — or  was  received  by 
 them  into  a  collegiate  relation.  In  the  pseudo- 
 Clementines,  and  in  the  Apostolical  Constitutions, 
 he  is  traditionally  separated  from  the  apostles.  It 
 is  quite  groundless  on  the  part  of  Wieseler  (Studien 
 71.  Kritiken,  1842),  Stier,  and  Davidson,  to  argue 
 that  the  James  mentioned  in  the  first  chapter  of 
 Galatians  is  a  different  person  from  the  James  re- 
 ferred to  in  the  second  chapter.  Again,  we  have 
 Paul  distinctly  acknowledging  the  high  position  of 
 the  brethren  of  the  Lord  when  he  ranges  them 
 between  'other  apostles  'and  'Cephas'  in  i  Cor. 
 ix.  5.  By  universal  consent  James  was  called  6 
 SiKaLos,  and,  being  martyred,  was  succeeded  by  a 
 cousin,  Symeon,  second  of  the  cousins  of  the  Lord, 
 and  a  son  of  Alphseus —oira  dve\pLbv  rod  Kvpiov 
 5€VTepov.  Thus  James  was  the  superintendent  of  the 
 church  at  Jerusalem,  and,  probably  on  account  ot 
 continuous  residence,  possessed  of  higher  influence 
 there  than  Peter,  the  apostle  of  the  circumcision, 
 who  could  only  be  an  occasional  visitor.  '  Cer- 
 tain from  James,'  riv^s  diro  ^laKw^ov,  went  down  to 
 Antioch,  before  whom  Peter  prevaricated,  as  if  he 
 had  stood  in  awe  of  the  stricter  Judaic  principles  of 
 James  and  his  party.  It  seems,  therefore,  very 
 natural,  that  one  occupying  this  position  in  the  theo- 
 cratic metropolis,  should  write  to  his  believing 
 brethren  of  the  Dispersion.  He  sympathized  so 
 strongly  with  the  myriads  of  the  Jews  who  believed 
 and  yet  were  zealous  of  the  law — ^tjXuTal  toO 
 vbpov,  that  for  their  sakes  and  to  ward  off  their 
 hostility,  he  advised  the  apostle  Paul  to  submit  to 
 an  act  of  conformity.  This  consei-vative  spirit,  this 
 zeal  for  the  law  at  least  as  the  moral  rule  of  life,  and 
 this  profession  of  Christianity  along  with  uniform 
 obedience  to  the  'customs,'  seem  to  us  character- 
 istic elements  of  the  epistle  before  us.  This  opinion 
 as  to  the  authorship  is  held  by  Herder,  Clement, 
 De  Wette,  Neander,  Kern,  Schaff,  Winer,  Stier, 
 
JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 460 
 
 JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 Rothe,  and  Alford.  Davidson,  while  holding  the 
 opinion  that  the  Lord's  brother  and  James  the 
 apostle  are  different  persons,  ascribes  the  epistle  to 
 the  latter.  But  the  theory  seems  to  violate  all  the 
 probabilities  that  may  be  gathered  from  the  early 
 fathers  and  historians.  That  James  the  Lord's 
 brother  is  James  the  apostle,  is  an  opinion  main- 
 tained by  Baronius,  Lardner,  Pearson,  Gabler, 
 Eichhoni,  Hug,  Guericke,  Meier,  Gieseler,  and 
 Theile. 
 
 Canonical  aiUJiority. — The  epistle  is  found  in  the 
 Syrian  Peshito  in  the  2d  centuiy,  a  version  which 
 circulated  in  the  neighbourhood  of  that  country  to 
 which  James  and  his  readers  belonged,  and  the 
 translator  and  his  coadjutors  must  have  had  special 
 historical  reasons  for  inserting  James  in  their  canon, 
 as  they  exclude  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of 
 John,  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse. 
 There  are  clauses  in  Clement  of  Rome  {Ad  Cor. 
 xxxii. ),  and  in  Hermas  {Mandat.  xii.  15),  which 
 probably  may  refer  to  correspondent  portions  of 
 this  epistle,  though,  perhaps,  they  may  only  allude 
 directly  to  the  Septuagint.  The  quotation  from 
 the  Latin  version  of  Irenseus  (Advejs.  Haeres.  iv. 
 16)  appears  to  be  more  direct  in  the  phrase — et 
 a?nkus  Dei  vocaliis  est.  But  this  phrase,  found 
 also  in  Clement,  seems  to  have  been  a  current  one, 
 and  Philo  calls  Abraham  by  the  same  appellation. 
 We  cannot,  therefore,  lay  such  immediate  stress 
 on  these  passages  as  is  done  by  Kern,  Wiesin- 
 ger,  and  others,  though  there  is  a  presumption  in 
 favour  of  the  opinion  that  passages  in  the  apos- 
 tolical fathers,  bearing  any  likeness  of  style  or 
 thought  to  the  apostolical  writings,  were  borrowed 
 from  them,  are  either  direct  imitations  or  uncon- 
 scious reproductions.  This  epistle  is  quoted  by 
 Origen  (In  jfoan.,  Opei-a,  vol.  iv.  p.  306)  ;  and  the 
 Latin  version  of  Rufinus  uses  the  phrase  yacobus 
 apostolus  as  a  preface  to  a  quotation.  This  father 
 quotes  the  epistle  also  as  ascribed  to  James — iv  Ty 
 ^epofxhri,  ^laKwjSov  imaToXf  ;  though,  as  Kern  re- 
 marks, Origen  says  that  the  doctrine  '  faith  without 
 works  is  dead,'  is  not  received  by  all — ov  avyx^' 
 pijdev.  Clement  of  Alexandria  does  not  quote  it, 
 but  Eusebius  says  that  he  expounded  all  the 
 Catholic  epistles,  including,  however,  in  the  range 
 cf  his  comments  the  epistle  of  Barnabas  and  the 
 so-called  Apocalypse  of  Peter.  TertuUian  seems 
 to  make  no  reference  to  it,  though  Credner 
 supposes  an  allusion  to  ii.  23  in  the  second  book 
 Adversus  yudaos  {Opera,  ed.  Oehler,  vol.  ii.  p. 
 704).  Eusebius  places  it  among  the  Antilego- 
 mena  (Histor.  Eccles.  ii.  23  ;  iii.  25),  saying  of 
 the  epistle,  under  the  first  reference,  after  he  had 
 just  spoken  of  its  author's  death,  hriop  U  ws 
 voOeijeTai  fxiv,  etc. ,  '  it  is  reckoned  spurious— not 
 many  of  the  ancients  have  mentioned  it;'  sub- 
 joining, however,  that  it  and  Jude  were  used  in 
 most  of  the  churches.  In  other  places  Eusebius 
 quotes  James  without  hesitation,  calling  the  epistle 
 by  the  sacred  title  of  ypacp-q,  and  its  author  6  lepbs 
 airbcrroKos.  Jerome  is  very  explicit,  saying  that 
 James  wrote  one  epistle,  which  some  asserted  had 
 been  published  by  another  in  his  name,  but  that 
 by  degrees  and  in  process  of  time,  paidlatim  tem- 
 pore procedente,  it  obtained  authority.  Jerome's 
 assertion  may  arise  from  the  fact  that  there  were 
 several  persons  named  James,  and  that  confusion 
 on  this  point  was  one  means  of  throwing  doubt  on 
 the  epistle.  There  seems  to  be  also  an  allusion 
 in  Hippolytus  (ed.  Lagarde,  p.  122)  to  ii.  i;^.  in 
 
 the  words,  ■^  7a/)  Kpia-i^  dviXeds  icm.  tQ  firj  Tron^cravrt 
 Aeos.  It  was  at  length  received  by  the  council  of 
 Carthage  in  397,  and  in  this  century  it  seems  to 
 have  been  all  but  universally  acknowledged,  both 
 by  the  eastern  and  western  churches — Theodore  of 
 Mopsuestia  being  a  marked  exception,  because  of 
 (v.  11)  the  allusion  in  it  to  the  book  of  Job.  At  the 
 period  of  the  Reformation,  its  genuineness  was  again 
 called  into  question.  Luther,  in  his  preface  to  the 
 N.  T.  in  1522,  comparing  it  'with  the  best  books 
 of  the  N.  T.,'  stigmatised  it  as  '«'«  recht  strohern 
 Epistel  dcnn  sie  dock  kein  evangelisch  Art  an  ihr 
 hat.''  Cyril  Lucar  had  a  similar  objection,  that 
 Christ's  name  was  coldly  mentioned,  and  that  only 
 once  or  twice,  and  that  it  treated  merely  of  morality 
 • — sola  a  la  moralita  attende— Zi?//;rj  Anecdotes,  p. 
 85,  Amsterdam  1718.  Erasmus  had  doubts  about 
 it,  and  so  had  Cardinal  Cajetan,  Flacius,  and  the 
 Magdeburg  centuriacors.  Grotius  and  Wetstein 
 shared  in  these  doubts,  and  they  are  followed  by 
 Schleiermacher,  Schott,  De  Wette,  Reuss,  the  Tii- 
 bingen  critics  Baur  and  Schwegler,  and  Ritschl  in 
 his  Enstehimg  der  Alt-kath.  Kirche,  p.  150.  These 
 recent  critics  deny  its  apostolic  source,  and  some 
 of  them  place  it  in  the  2d  century,  from  its  resem- 
 blance in  some  parts  to  the  Clementine  homilies. 
 But  it  is  plain  that  the  objections  of  almost  all 
 these  opponents  spring  mainly  from  doctrinal  and 
 not  from  critical  views  ;  are  rather  originated  and 
 sustained  by  the  notion  formed  of  the  contents  ot 
 the  epistle,  than  rest  on  any  proper  historical  foun- 
 dation. We  have  not  space  to  go  over  the  several 
 objections — such  as  the  absence  of  the  term  'apostle' 
 from  the  inscription,  though  it  is  not  found  in 
 several  of  Paul's  epistles  ;  the  want  of  individuality 
 in  the  document,  though  this  may  be  easily  ac- 
 counted for  by  the  circumstances  of  the  author  in 
 relation  to  his  readers ;  and  the  apparent  antago- 
 nism to  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification  by 
 faith,  which  we  shall  afterwards  consider.  It  is  01 
 no  avail  to  object,  with  Wetstein  and  Theile,  that 
 James  refers  to  the  apocryphal  writings,  a  practice 
 unknown  till  a  later  period,  for  Theile's  array  ot 
 passages  {Pj-olegotn. ,  p.  46)  does  not  prove  the  state- 
 ment, as  Huther's  reply  to  this  and  other  similar 
 objections  has  shewn  at  length,  and  step  by  step. 
 Nor,  lastly,  can  it  be  said  that  the  Greek  style  ot 
 the  epistle  betrays  a  culture  which  the  author  could 
 not  possess.  The  style  is  nervous,  indeed,  and 
 is  more  Hebraistic  in  general  structure  than  in  its 
 individual  phrases,  as  in  its  short  and  pithy  clauses, 
 the  absence  of  logical  formulae,  the  want  of  elabo- 
 rate constructions,  its  oratorical  fervour,  and  the 
 simple  and  direct  outflow  of  thoughts  in  brief  and 
 often  parallelistic  clauses.  Intercourse  with  foreign 
 Jews  must  have  been  frequent  in  those  days,  and 
 there  are  always  minds  which  from  natural  propen- 
 sity are  more  apt  than  others  to  acquire  a  tasteful 
 facility  in  the  use  of  a  tongue  which  has  not  been 
 their  vernacular.  Taking  all  these  things  into 
 account,  we  have  every  reason  to  accept  the 
 canonical  authority  of  this  epistle,  the  trial  it 
 has  passed  through  giving  us  fuller  confidence  in 
 It.  since  the  principal  objections  are  the  offspring 
 either  of  polemical  prejudice,  or  of  a  subjective 
 criticism  based  more  on  jesthetic  tendencies  than 
 historical  results.  Rauch  has  faintly  objected  to 
 the  integrity  of  the  epistle,  asserting  that  the  con- 
 clusion of  ch.  v.  12-20,  may  be  an  interpolation, 
 because  it  is  not  in  logical  harmony  with  what 
 precedes ;  but  he  has  had  no  followers,  and  Kem, 
 
JAMES,  EPISTLK  OF 
 
 461 
 
 JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 Theile,  Schneckenburger,  and  others,  have  refuted 
 him — logical  sequence  being  a  form  of  critical 
 argument  wholly  inapplicable  to  this  epistle. 
 
 The  Persons  for  whom  the  Epistle  is  intended. — 
 The  salutation  is  addressed  rats  5a)5e/ca  (jivKats 
 rals  iv  rfj  ^laavopq..  They  were  Jews,  ddeXcpoL — 
 brethren  or  believing  Jews,  and  they  lived  beyond 
 Palestine  or  in  the  Dispersion.  Such  are  the  plain 
 characteristics,  national  and  religious,  of  the  per- 
 sons addressed.  There  are,  however,  two  extremes 
 of  erroneous  opinion  about  them.  Some,  as  Lard- 
 ner,  Macknight,  Theile,  Credner,  and  Hug,  ima- 
 gine that  the  epistle  is  meant  for  all  Jews.  But 
 the  inscription  forbids  such  a  supposition.  The 
 tone  of  the  epistle  implies  that  '  the  servant  of 
 the  Lord  Jesus  Christ' addressed  fellow-believers — 
 'brethren' — 'begotten'  along  with  himself  (r]/xcis) 
 '  by  the  word  of  truth,'  and  all  of  them  bearing 
 the  'good  name' — KaKbu  6vo/j,a.  The  first  verse 
 of  the  second  chapter  implies  also  that  they  held 
 '  the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Lord  of 
 Glory,'  and  they  are  exhorted  not  to  hold  it  incon- 
 sistently, along  with  manifest  respect  of  persons, 
 or  shewing  unfounded  social  preferences.  They 
 are  told  besides,  in  v.  7,  to  exercise  patience,  ews 
 rijs  Trapova-ias  rov  Kvpiov,  till  the  public  promised 
 advent  of  the  Lord  their  Saviour.  The  rich  men 
 denounced  in  v.  i  may  not  have  belonged  to  the 
 church  in  reality,  but  this  startling  denunciation 
 carried  in  it  warning  to  them  and  comfort  to 
 the  poor  and  persecuted.  May  there  not  be,  in  a 
 letter  to  a  church,  holy  invective  against  those 
 without  it,  who  annoy  and  oppress  its  unresisting 
 members  ?  Dean  Alford,  after  Huther,  inclines 
 to  include  in  the  diaa-jropd,  Jews  also  in  Palestine 
 — ^Jerusalem  being  regarded  as  the  centre.  He 
 refers  to  the  phrase,  Acts  viii.  I,  irdcres  5^  ducrird- 
 pijcrav  /card  rds  X'^P"-^  '''V^  'lowSatas  /cat  Sa/xapeias. 
 But  the  use  of  the  verb  here  in  its  general  sense 
 and  in  an  easy  narrative  cannot  modify  the  popular 
 meaning  of  diacnropd  as  the  technical  or  geographic 
 title  of  Jews  beyond  Palestine. 
 
 On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been  maintained  by 
 Koster  {Stitdien  tt.  Kritiken,  1831),  Kern,  Neu- 
 decker,  and  De  Wette,  that  the  title  in  the  inscrip- 
 tion is  a  symbolic  one,  and  signifies  simply  Christians 
 out  of  Palestine,  as  the  true  Israel  of  God.  A 
 modification  of  this  view  is  held  by  others — viz., 
 that  while  the  epistle  is  addressed  to  believing  Jews, 
 Delieving  heathen  and  unconverted  Jews  are  not 
 excluded.  But  the  phrase  in  the  inscription,  as  in 
 Acts  xxvi.  7,  is  to  be  taken  in  its  natural  sense,  and 
 with  no  spiritualized  meaning  or  reference.  The 
 entire  tone  and  aspect  also  are  Jewish.  The  place 
 of  ecclesiastical  meeting  is  avva-^tjr^i] ;  the  law,  vb- 
 lio^,  is  of  supreme  authority.  The  divine  unity  is 
 a  primary  and  distinctive  article  of  faith,  the  ordi- 
 nary terms  of  Jewish  obtestation  are  introduced,  as 
 is  also  the  prophetic  epithet  symbolising  spiritual 
 unfaithfulness,  p-OLxaXides  (iv.  4).  Anointing  with 
 oil  '<^  mentioned,  and  the  special  regard  to  be  paid 
 (i.  27)  to  orphans  and  widows  finds  its  basis  in 
 repeated  statutes  of  the  Mosaic  law.  The  errors 
 refuted  also  are  such  as  naturally  arose  out  of 
 I'harisaic  pride  and  formalism,  and  the  acceptance 
 of  the  promised  Christ  in  a  spirit  of  traditional 
 carnality.  The  fact  that  the  Dispersion  was  found 
 principally  in  the  East — that  is,  in  Syria  and  ad- 
 jacent countries  —  countenances  the  presumption 
 that  this  epistl''  is  found  in  the  Peshito  at  so  early 
 a  period,  because  it  had  immediate  circulation  in 
 
 that  region,  and  there  had  proved  the  fitness  and 
 usefulness  of  its  counsels  and  warning.  Josephus 
 says  of  the  Dispersion,  the  Jews  were  scattered 
 everywhere,  nXelarov  5i  rg  1,vp'iq.  dvap.epcypivov 
 (Bell.  Jiid.  vii.  3.  3).  The  persons  addressed 
 were  poor ;  the  rich  were  their  persecutors,  their 
 own  partialities  and  preferences  were  worldly  and 
 inconsistent ;  they  wanted  perfect  confidence  in 
 God,  and  stumbled  at  the  divine  dispensations  ; 
 sins  of  the  tongue  were  common,  eagerness  to  be 
 public  teachers  was  an  epidemic  among  them  ;  they 
 spoke  rashly  and  hardly  of  one  another  ;  and  they 
 felt  not  the  connection  between  a  living  faith  and 
 a  holy  life.  Society  was  under  a  process  of  appa- 
 rent disintegration,  wars  and  fightings  were  fre- 
 quent, with  loss  of  life  and  property.  Its  extremes 
 were  the  rich  and  the  poor,  with  no  middle  class 
 between,  for  though  tradings  and  journeyings  quite 
 in  Jewish  style  are  referred  to,  iv.  13,  14,  the 
 principal  occupation  was  husbandry,  with  no  social 
 grade  between  those  who  owned  and  those  who 
 reaped  the  fields. 
 
 Time  and  place  of  writing  the  Epistle. — The 
 place  most  probably  was  Jerusalem,  where  James 
 had  his  residence.  Many  allusions  in  the  epistle, 
 while  they  apply  to  almost  any  eastern  locality, 
 carry  in  them  a  presumption  in  favour  of  that 
 country,  in  the  metropolis  of  which  James  is  known 
 to  have  lived  and  laboured.  These  allusions  are 
 to  such  natural  phenomena,  as  parching  winds, 
 i-il;  long  drought,  v.  17,  18;  the  early  and  latter 
 rain,  v.  7;  saline  springs,  iii.  12;  proximity  to  the 
 sea,  i.  6,  iii.  4  (Hug's  Einleitung,  vol.  ii.  p.  439). 
 Naturally  from  the  holy  capital  of  Judaea  goes 
 forth  from  the  '  servant  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ'  a 
 solemn  circular  to  all  the  believing  brethren  in  the 
 Dispersion — for  to  them  James  was  a  living  au- 
 thority to  which  they  bowed,  and  Jerusalem  a  holy 
 centre  that  stirred  a  thousand  loyal  associations 
 within  them.  It  is  not  so  easy  to  determine  the 
 time  at  which  the  epistle  was  written.  Many  place 
 the  date  about  the  year  60 — close  on  the  martyr- 
 dom of  James  the  just,  or  not  long  before  the  de- 
 struction of  Jerusalem — as  Michaelis,  Pearson, 
 Mill,  Guericke,  Burton,  Macknight,  Bleek,  Einleit. 
 p.  547,  1862,  and  the  older  commentators  gener- 
 ally. Hug  and  De  Wette  place  it  after  the  epistle 
 to  the  Hebrews,  to  which  they  imagine  it  contains 
 some  allusions — Hug  holding  that  it  was  written 
 — iiberlegt — on  set  purpose  against  Paul  and  his 
 doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  So  also  Baur, 
 Paiihis,  p.  677.  But  these  reasons  are  by  no  means 
 conclusive.  The  great  argument  that  the  epistle 
 of  James  was  written  to  oppose  either  the  doctrine 
 or  counteract  the  abuses  of  the  doctrine  of  justifica- 
 tion by  faith  has,  as  we  shall  see,  no  foundation. 
 The  notion  that  this  epistle  is  in  some  sense  cor- 
 rective in  its  tone  and  purpose  appears  plausible  to 
 us,  as  Paul  is  so  usually  read  by  us  before  James 
 that  we  gain  an  earlier  acquaintance  with  him, 
 while  James  occupies  also  a  later  place  in  the 
 ordinary  arrangement  of  the  books  of  the  N.  T. 
 But  the  state  of  the  Judseo-Christians  addressed  in 
 the  epistle  is  not  that  which  we  know  to  have  ex- 
 isted at  and  before  the  year  60.  There  is  no  allusion 
 to  the  fierce  disputations  as  to  the  value  and  perma- 
 nence of  circumcision,  the  authority  and  meaning  of 
 the  ceremonial  law,  or  the  conditions  on  which  Gen- 
 tile converts  should  be  admitted  into  the  church  — 
 the  questions  discussed  at  the  Council  of  Jerusalem. 
 Controversies  on  these  points  saturated  the  church 
 
JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 462 
 
 JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 daring  many  years  before  the  fall  of  Terusalem,  and 
 no  one  could  address  Jewish  converts  at  any  length 
 without  some  allusion  to  them.  The  myriads  who 
 believed,  as  James  said,  were  'all  zealous  of  the 
 law  ;'  and  that  zeal  assumed  so  many  false  shapes, 
 threw  up  so  many  barriers  in  the  way  of  ecclesias- 
 tical relationship,  nay,  occasionally  so  infringed  on 
 the  unconditioned  freeness  of  the  gospel  as  to  rob  it 
 of  its  simplicity  and  power,  that  no  Jew  addressing 
 Jewish  believers  with  the  authority  and  from  the 
 position  of  James  could  fail  to  dwell  on  those  dis- 
 turbing and  engrossing  peculiarities.  The  inference 
 therefore  is,  that  the  epistle  was  written  prior  to 
 those  keen  and  universal  discussions,  and  to  that 
 htate  of  the  church  which  gave  them  origin  and 
 continuance  ;  prior  therefore  also  to  the  time  when 
 the  labours  of  the  apostle  Paul  among  the  Gentiles 
 called  such  attention  to  their  success  that  '  certain 
 from  James  came  down'  to  Antioch  to  examine 
 for  themselves  and  carry  back  a  report  to  the 
 mother  church  in  Jerusalem.  The  epistle  might 
 thus  be  written  shortly  before  the  Council  of 
 Jerusalem — probably  about  the  year  45.  Such  is 
 the  view  of  Neander,  Schneckenburger,  Theile, 
 Thiersch,  Huther,  Davidson,  and  Alford.  The 
 objections  of  Wiesinger  and  Bleek  admit  of  easy 
 reply.  Both  afiirm  that  the  interval  supposed  is 
 too  limited  for  such  a  growth  of  Christianity  as  this 
 epistle  implies.  But  we  refer  to  the  scene  and  re- 
 sults of  Pentecost^when  the  Dispersion  assembled 
 at  the  feast  felt  the  moving  power  of  the  Divine 
 Spirit,  and  went  to  their  distant  homes  carrying  the 
 new  religion  in  their  hearts.  Then,  at  the  perse- 
 cution after  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen,  the  mem- 
 bers of  tlie  church  went  '  everywhere  preaching 
 the  word;'  or,  should  this  expression  be  hmited 
 by  the  previous  clause  '  throughout  the  regions  of 
 Judrea,'  then  they  carried  the  gospel  to  the  very 
 frontiers  ;  and  afterwards,  it  is  affirmed  (Acts  xi. 
 19)  that  the  same  parties  or  others  at  the  same 
 period  travelled  into  other  countries  'preaching 
 the  word  to  none  but  unto  the  Jews  only.'  It 
 would  be  rash  to  affirm  that  Phenice,  Cyprus, 
 and  Antioch  were  the  only  places  so  visited,  for 
 they  are  mentioned  to  account  for  the  mission 
 of  Barnabas  and  the  introduction  of  Paul  into 
 the  scene  of  active  service.  The  meeting  of  the 
 churches  for  worship  in  places  fitted  up  for  the 
 purpose,  ii.  2,  their  being  called  by  the  KaXbv 
 huofxa,  and  their  having  a  bench  of  office-bearers, 
 are  tokens  of  an  organization  which  could  surely 
 be  set  up  within  the  space  of  twenty  years.  The 
 same  space  is  sufficient  too  for  the  development  of 
 such  errors  in  doctrine  and  practice  as  are  here  re- 
 buked, for  some  of  them  have  their  root  in  human 
 nature,  and  others  of  them  had  a  propitious  soil  in 
 Jewish  temperament  and  education.  They  might 
 be  called  by  the  'good  name'  without  being  desig- 
 nated by  the  special  term  coined  and  applied  first 
 at  Antioch  ;  and  separate  places  of  worship,  with 
 appointed  presbyters  or  elders,  were  the  result  of 
 secession  from  the  synagogue  and  the  natural 
 imitation  of  its  mode  of  government,  both  in  name 
 and  jurisdiction. 
 
 But  the  great  objection  advanced  by  Hug, 
 Wiesinger,  Bleek,  and  others,  is,  that  the  discus- 
 sion in  this  epistle  on  the  relation  of  faith  and 
 works  presupposes,  on  the  part  of  the  writer,  an 
 acquaintance  with  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justifica- 
 tion as  found  both  in  Romans  and  Galatians. 
 That  there  is  some  correspondence  of  phrase  is 
 
 evident  not  only  in  the  use  of  the  terms  Tr/crrts,  ^pya, 
 SiKaiouadaL,  but  in  the  special  diction — ej  ^pywf 
 iSiKaLwOi] — SiKatovTai  Kal  ovk  ck  Tri'crrews — compared 
 with  Rom.  iii.  20;  v.  I;  Gal.  ii.  16,  etc.  ;  and  the 
 conclusion  is  that  James  wrote,  not  directly  indeed 
 in  antagonism  to  Paul,  as  some  insinuate,  but  to 
 correct  Antinomian  perversions  of  his  distinctive 
 doctrine.  Now,  not  to  answer  in  the  meantime 
 that  the  antagonism  is  apparent  and  not  real, 
 it  may  be  said  that  surely  the  doctrine  expressed 
 by  the  terms  faith  and  works  was  not  first  intro- 
 duced by  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  Wherever 
 the  gospel  was  proclaimed  those  terms  must  have 
 found  some  place  in  the  proclamation,  for  the 
 grand  and  characteristic  doctrine  was  faith  in 
 Clirist,  the  belief  that  Jesus  was  the  promised 
 Messiah,  the  Redeemer  who  had  appeared  in  the 
 fulness  of  the  times.  The  sermon  of  Peter  at 
 Pentecost  inculcates  that  faith  in  his  Messiahship 
 which  all  the  house  of  Israel  ought  to  possess, 
 and  faith  in  His  name  wrought  a  miracle  at 
 the  'gate  Beautiful.'  Immediately  afterwards  the 
 church  is  called  '  the  multitude  of  them  who 
 believed.'  Remission  of  sins  through  faith  was 
 the  point  of  Peter's  preaching  to  Cornelius.  Our 
 Lord  Himself  insists  on  faith  as  the  one  means  of 
 life.  If  the  gospel  were  faithfully  presented,  if  its 
 distinctive  character  were  fully  brought  out,  then 
 faith  must  have  been  the  burden  of  the  message  ; 
 and  as  faith  in  itself  could  not  be  easily  defined,  it 
 might  be  illustrated  from  its  natural  contrast  with 
 works.  So  that  this  nomenclature  of  faith  and 
 works,  so  far  from  being  peculiar  to  Paul,  must 
 have  been  as  old  as  the  gospel,  and  as  widely 
 known  as  the  publication  of  it.  What  should 
 hinder  James  therefore  from  using  these  familiar 
 terms  in  writing  to  the  believers  of  the  Dispersion, 
 who  could  not  enjoy  his  personal  and  more  syste- 
 matic teaching  ? 
 
 What  then  is  the  teaching  of  this  epistle  ?  Many 
 attempts  have  been  made,  as  the  phrase  is,  to 
 liarmonise  Paul  and  James  ;  but  into  a  history  of 
 such  attempts  we  cannot  enter.  Suffice  it  to  say, 
 some  hold  that  there  are  two  justifications  spoken 
 of,  a  former  and  latter,  or  that  Paul  speaks  of 
 justification  before  God,  and  James  of  justification 
 to  one's  own  heart,  or  before  men — the  view  of  very 
 many.  Others,  like  Bishop  O'Brien  {Nature  and 
 Efftxis  of  Faith,  p.  517,  sec.  ed.),  imagine  that 
 faith  is  used  in  two  different  senses  by  the  two 
 apostles.  Others,  as  Knapp,  argue  that  the  term 
 'works'  is  employed  by  them  with  very  different 
 meanings  ;  while  others  follow  Bishop  Bull,  who, 
 in  his  famous  '  Hannonia,'  adopts  a  theory  so 
 decidedly  anti-Pauline  as  to  hold  that  faith  is 
 not  a  single  Christian  grace,  but  stands  for  the 
 '  whole  body  of  Christian  graces,  or  a  life  accord- 
 ing to  the  gospel  ; '  nay,  that  faith  fer  sc,  so  far 
 from  being  the  instrument  of  justification,  no  more 
 justifies  than  charity,  nay,  may  actually  dwell  in  an 
 ungodly  and  unjustified  heart.  The  Bishop  more- 
 over does  not  attempt  to  bring  James,  whose  allu- 
 sion to  the  doctrine  is  only  brief  and  incidental,  into 
 harmony  with  Paul,  who  has  fully  discussed  it  in 
 formal  and  frequent  arguments,  but  he  labours  to 
 bring  Paul  into  harmony  with  James.  See  on  this 
 subject  Knapp,  Scripta,  p.  5 1 1  ;  Reuss,  T/u'ologie, 
 ii.  p.  524 ;  Hofmann,  Schriftbeweis,  i.  p.  639 ; 
 Wardlaw's  Sermons ;  Wood's  Theology,  vol.  ii.  p. 
 408  ;  Watson's  Institutes,  vol.  ii.  614 ;  Lechler, 
 das  Apostol,    und  nachajbostol.    Zeitalter,   p.    163. 
 
JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 463 
 
 JAMES,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 Now,  first  of  all,  it  may  be  said  with  ^lichaelis, 
 '  no  man  whose  object  was  merely  to  prevent 
 the  doctrine  of  another  from  being  falsely  under- 
 stood would  express  himself  in  such  a  manner  that 
 his  readers  might  suppose  he  meant  to  combat 
 the  doctrine  itself  The  statements  of  the  two 
 writers  are  independent,  and  apparent  discrepancy 
 arises  from  difference  in  the  point  of  view  of  each 
 of  them.  The  works  which  Paul  sets  aside  as  a 
 means  of  justification  are  such  external  compliances 
 with  the  law  as  are  valueless  in  themselves  (Philip, 
 iii.  2-6) ;  the  works  which  James  commends  are  the 
 fruit  of  inner  renovation  and  life.  Works  prior  to 
 faith,  and  superseding  it  or  forming  a  barrier  to  the 
 possession  of  it,  are  reprobated  by  the  one  ;  works 
 springing  out  of  faith,  and  embodying  its  living 
 power,  are  enjoined  by  the  other.  The  former  deals 
 with  Jewish  self-righteousness,  and  strips  it  of  all 
 pretension,  that  it  may  be  argued  or  wooed  into 
 faith  ;  the  latter  deals  with  the  self-styled  faith 
 of  Jewish  indifference,  that  it  may  be  shaken 
 off  and  that  spiritual  activity  may  be  developed. 
 For  a  dead  faith  is  no  faith,  and  is  unworthy 
 of  the  name  ;  wherever  faith  exists  it  must  of  ne- 
 cessity prove  and  put  forth  its  energy.  A  barren 
 faith  differs  from  true  faith,  just  as  a  mere  cheap 
 wish  differs  from  genuine  beneficence,  ii.  14-17. 
 Abraham  was  justified  by  works,  those  works 
 being  the  results  of  a  faith  which  he  had  long  pos- 
 sessed— for  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  was  the  crown- 
 ing realization  of  the  divme  statement,  '  Abraham 
 believed  in  God.'  In  and  through  that  faith  he 
 had  been  justified,  yet  by  works  his  faith  was  per- 
 fected— that  is,  not  merely  was  its  genuineness  de- 
 monstrated, but  in  this  act  of  obedience  to  the 
 Divine  will,  and  by  means  of  it,  his  faith  reached 
 its  climax — lose  into  completeness.  The  faith 
 which  does  not  sanctify  can  have  had  no  power  to 
 justify — the  faith  which  does  not  make  us  righteous 
 cannot  have  availed  to  have  us  pronounced  right- 
 eous. Similar  is  the  illustration  from  the  history 
 of  Rahab.  The  faith  which  James  declares  to  be 
 no  faith — for  it  has  no  fruits — is  a  mere  change  of 
 opinion  or  of  party  without  change  of  heart ;  and 
 in  the  case  of  those  whom  he  addressed  was  a  belief 
 that  Jesus  was  the  promised  Messiah,  but  a  belief 
 weakened  and  neutralized  by  traditional  preposses- 
 sions, as  if  the  mere  addition  of  this  article  to  their 
 national  creed  sufficed  of  itself  to  secure  their  sal- 
 vation. 
 
 Contents.  — The  errors  and  sins  against  which 
 James  warns  his  readers  are  such  as  arose  out  of 
 their  situation.  Perfection  —  TeXeioTrjs  is  a  pro- 
 minent idea,  and  r^Xeios  is  a  frequent  epithet — 
 the  '  perfect  work '  of  patience,  the  '  perfect ' 
 gift  of  God,  the  '  perfect  law '  of  liberty  or 
 the  new  covenant,  faith  'made  perfect,'  and  the 
 tongue-governing  man,  is  a  '  perfect  man.'  He 
 writes  from  a  knowledge  of  their  circumstances, 
 does  not  set  before  them  an  ethical  system  for  their 
 leisurely  study,  but  selects  the  vices  of  opinion  and 
 life  to  which  their  circumstances  so  markedly  and 
 so  naturally  exposed  them.  Patience  is  a  primary 
 inculcation,  it  being  essential  to  that  perfection 
 which  is  his  central  thought.  Trials  develop  pa- 
 tience, and  such  evils  as  produce  trials  are  not  to  be 
 ascribed  in  a  spirit  of  fatalism  to  God.  Spiritual 
 life  is  enjoyed  by  believers,  and  is  fostered  by  the 
 reception,  and  specially  by  the  doing,  of  the  word ; 
 and  true  religious  service  is  unworldly  and  disinte- 
 rested beneficence.      Partial  preferences  are  for- 
 
 bidden by  the  royal  law — faith  without  works  is 
 dead — tongue  and  temper  are  to  be  under  special 
 guard,  and  under  the  control  of  wisdom — the  de- 
 ceits of  casuistry  are  to  be  eschewed — contentious 
 covetousness  is  to  be  avoided  as  one  of  the  works 
 of  the  devil,  along  with  censorious  pride.  Rich  op- 
 pressors are  denounced,  and  patience  is  enjoined  on 
 all  ;  the  fitting  exercises  in  times  of  gladness  and 
 of  sickness  are  prescribed;  the  efficacy  of  prayer 
 is  extolled  and  exemplified  ;  while  the  conclusion 
 animates  his  readers  to  do  for  others  what  he  has 
 been  doing  for  them — to  convert  them  'from  the 
 error  of  their  way'  (see  Stanley's  Sernwns  and  Es- 
 says on  the  Apostolic  Age,  p.  297).  The  epistle 
 contains  no  allusion  to  the  cardinal  doctrines  of 
 Christianity,  though  they  are  implied.  It  was  not 
 the  writer's  object  either  to  discuss  or  defend  them. 
 It  would  be  unwarranted,  on  that  account,  to  say 
 that  Christianity  had  not  penetrated  his  own  spiri- 
 tual life,  or  that  he  was  only  in  a  transition  state  be- 
 tween Judaism  and  Christianity.  He  might  not,  in- 
 deed, have  the  free  and  unnational  views  of  Paul  in 
 presenting  the  gospel.  But  a  true  Christianity  is 
 implied,  and  his  immediate  work  lay  in  enforcing 
 certain  Christian  duties,  which  he  does  in  the  style 
 of  the  Master  himself. 
 
 Style  and  Lantiiiage.  — The  similarity  of  this 
 epistle  in  tone  and  form  to  the  Sermon  on  the 
 Mount  has  often  been  remarked.  In  the  spirit  of 
 the  great  Teacher,  he  sharply  reprobates  all  exter- 
 nalism,  all  selfishness,  inconsistency,  worldliness, 
 ostentation,  self-deception,  and  hypocrisy.  Thus 
 in  the  first  chapter  as  a  sample  : — comp.  i.  2, 
 Matt.  v.  10-12;  i.  4,  Matt.  v.  48;  i.  5,  Matt, 
 vii.  7  ;  i.  9,  Matt.  v.  3  ;  i.  20,  Matt.  v.  22,  etc. 
 The  epistle,  in  short,  is  a  long  and  earnest  illus- 
 tration of  the  final  warning  given  by  our  Lord 
 in  the  figures  of  building  on  the  rock  and  build- 
 ing on  the  sand.  The  composition  is  the  abrupt 
 and  stern  utterance  of  an  earnest,  practical  soul 
 —  a  rapid  series  of  censures  and  counsels — not 
 entirely  disconnected,  but  generally  suggested  by 
 some  inner  link  of  association.  Often  a  general 
 law  is  epigrammatically  laid  down,  while  a  peculiar 
 sin  is  reprobated  or  a  peculiar  virtue  enforced — or 
 a  principle  is  announced  in  the  application  of  it. 
 The  style  is  vigorous — full  of  imperatives  so  solemn 
 and  categorical  as  to  dispel  all  idea  of  resistance  or 
 compromise,  and  of  interrogations  so  pointed  that 
 they  carry  their  answer  with  them.  It  is  also 
 marked  by  epithets  so  bold  and  forcible  that  they 
 give  freshness  and  colour  to  the  diction.  The 
 clauses  have  a  rhetorical  beauty  and  power,  and 
 as  in  men  of  fervent  oratorical  temperament,  the 
 words  often  fall  into  rythmical  order,  while  the 
 thoughts  occasionally  blossom  into  poetry.  An 
 accidental  hexameter  is  found  in  i.  17  [provided  it 
 be  lawful  to  make  the  last  syllable  of  oiiris  long]. 
 The  Greek  is  remarkably  pure,  and  it  is  difficult  to 
 account  for  this  comparative  purity.  Hegesippus, 
 as  quoted  by  Eusebius,  says  that  James's  believing 
 brethren  desired  him  to  address  the  crowds  as- 
 sembled at  the  Passover ;  for  there  were  brought 
 together — xacrat  aX  (pvXal  fxera  Kal  rCiv  idvwv — and 
 Greek  must  have  been  the  language  employed.  It 
 is  therefore  quite  preposterous  on  the  part  of  Bol- 
 ten,  Bertholdt,  and  Schott  to  suspect  that  the  Greek 
 of  this  epistle  is  a  translation  from  an  Arameeasi. 
 original.  Resemblances  have  sometimes  been 
 traced  between  this  epistle  and  the  first  epistle  of 
 Peter,  and  these  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact 
 
JANNES  AND  TAMBRES 
 
 464 
 
 JANOHAII 
 
 that  both  authors  are  somewhat  similarly  circum- 
 stanced in  relation  to  their  readers.  But  Hug's 
 and  Bleek's  inference  is  a  rash  one — that  Peter 
 must  have  read  the  epistle  of  James.  In  a  word, 
 tlie  epistle  of  James  is  a  noble  protest  against  laxity 
 of  morals — against  supine  ana  easy  acquiescence 
 in  the  truths  of  the  Gospel  \vithout  feeling  their 
 power  or  acting  under  their  influence,  while  it  pre- 
 sents such  etiiical  lessons  as  the  church,  placed  in 
 multiple  relations  to  a  world  of  sense  and  trial,  has 
 ever  need  of  to  animate  and  sustain  it  in  its  pro- 
 gress toward  perfection.  Or  as  Calvin  says.  Nihil 
 continet  Christi  apostolo  indignum,  multiplici  vero 
 doctrina  scatet,  cujus  utilitas  ad  omnes  Christianje 
 vitEe  partes  late  patet.  Among  special  commen- 
 taries on  James  may  be  noted — Althamar,  Com- 
 ment., 1527;  Baumgarten,  ^;«A'^.,  1750  ;  Semler, 
 Paraphras.  1781  ;  Hensler,  Der  Brief  Jac.  iibcrs. 
 und  Aiisleg.,  1801  ;  Sch\.\\iQi,s,  Episi.  jfacobi  expla- 
 nata,  1824;  Gebser,  Der  Brief  Jac.  iibers.  underkl., 
 1828;  Schneckenburger,  ^««<'Az/'.  ad  epistolamjac. 
 perpciua,  1832  ;  Theile,  Commentarius  in  Epist. 
 Jacobi,  1833  ;  Kern,  Der  Brief  Jac.  tintersiicht  und 
 erkldrt,  1838  ;  Cellarier,  Etude  ct  Commentaire  S2cr 
 EEpitre  de  St.  Jacques,  1850 ;  Wiesinger,  Der 
 Brief  des  Jacobus,  1854;  Huther,do.,  1858;  and  the 
 more  practical  expositions  of  Mayer,  Manton,  Stier, 
 Jacobi,  Neander,  and  Draseke. — ^J.  E. 
 
 JANNES  AND  JAMBRES  ^\avvri%  koX  'la/x- 
 ^prjs),  two  of  the  Egyptian  magicians  who  at- 
 tempted by  their  enchantments  (D''£37,  occtdtce 
 artes,  Gesenius)  to  counteract  the  influence  on 
 Pharaoh's  mind  of  the  miracles  wrought  by  Moses. 
 Their  names  occur  nowhere  in  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
 tures, and  only  once  in  the  N.  T.  (2  Tim.  iii.  S). 
 The  Apostle  Paul  became  acquainted  with  them, 
 most  probably,  from  an  ancient  Jewish  tradition, 
 or,  as  Theodoret  expi-esses  it,  '  from  the  unwritten 
 teaching  of  the  Jews'  (ttJs  dypd(pov  tuv  ^lovSaMv 
 SidaaKaXlas).  They  are  found  frequently  in  the 
 Talmudical  and  Rabbinical  writings,  but  with  some 
 variations.  Thus,  for  Jannes  we  meet  with  D'^y, 
 N:nV,  '•jnV,  "'JJ\1\  DIJV.  Of  these,  the  three  last 
 are  forms  of  the  Hebrew  pHI'',  which  has  led  to 
 the  supposition  that  ^lavuTJs  is  a  contracted  form  of 
 the  Greek  'Iwdvvrjs.  Some  critics  consider  that 
 these  names  were  of  Egyptian  origin,  and,  in  that 
 case,  the  Jewish  writers  must  have  been  misled  by 
 a  similarity  of  sound  to  adopt  the  forms  above- 
 mentioned.  For  Jambres  we  find  N"IDD,  ''"IDD, 
 D''■|nD^  DnnOV,  and  in  the  Shalsheleth  Hakka- 
 bala  the  two  names  are  given  "IX''D'1"HDX1  "'JXV, 
 i.  e.,  Johannes  and  Ambrosius  !  The  Targum  of 
 Jonathan  inserts  them  in  Exod.  vii.  11.  The  same 
 writer  also  gives  as  a  reason  for  Pharaoh's  edict 
 for  the  destruction  of  the  Israelitish  male  children, 
 that  '  this  monarch  had  a  dream  in  which  the  land 
 of  Egypt  appeared  in  one  scale  and  a  lamb  in 
 another  ;  that  on  awakening  he  sought  for  its  in- 
 terpretation from  his  wise  men  ;  whereupon  Jannes 
 and  Jambres  (D''1I1D''1  D''J'')  said — '  A  son  is  to  be 
 born  in  the  congregation  of  Israel  who  will  desolate 
 the  whole  land  of  Egypt.'  Several  of  the  Jewish 
 writers  speak  of  Jannes  and  Jambres  as  the  two 
 sons  of  Balaam,  and  assert  that  they  were  the 
 youths  Ciyj,  servants,  A.  V.)  who  went  with  him 
 to  the  king  of  Moab  (Num.  xxii.  22).  The  Pytha- 
 gorean philosopher  Numenius  mentions  these  per- 
 sons in  a  passage  preserved  by  Eusebius  {pt-icp. 
 Evan^,  ix.   8),  and  by  Origen  (r.  Cels.  it.  p.  198. 
 
 ed.  Spencer)  ;  also  Pliny  {^Hist.  Nat.  xxx.  l). 
 There  was  an  ancient  apocryphal  writing  entitled 
 Jannes  and  Mainbres,  which  is  referred  to  by  Ori- 
 gen {in  Matt.  Comment,  sec.  117  ;  Opera,  v.  29), 
 and  by  Ambrosiaster,  or  Hilary  the  Deacon  :  it 
 was  condemned  by  Pope  Gelasius  (Wetstenii  Nov. 
 Test.  Gnvc.  ii.  362  ;  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  Rabb. 
 col.  945  ;  Lightfoot's  Sermon  on  Jannes  and 
 Jambres;  Works,  vii.  89 ;  Ertcbkin,  or  Miscellanies, 
 ch.  xxiv.  ;  Works,  iv.  33  ;  Lardner's  Credibility, 
 pt.  ii.,  ch.  35  ;  Works,  vii.  381.) — ^J.  E.  R.  [Mr. 
 R.  S.  Poole  (Smith's  Dictionary  i.  928)  traces 
 Jannes  to  the  Eg)'ptian  Aci7i,  pronounced  Ia7i, 
 which  he  shews  to  have  been  a  proper  name  in  use 
 among  the  Egyptians.  This  supports  the  belief 
 that  the  names  given  by  Paul  are  the  real  names 
 of  the  parties  referred  to.  For  Jambres,  however, 
 or,  as  it  is  in  some  codices,  Mambres,  no  satisfac- 
 tory Egyptian  equivalent  has  been  found  ;  all  that 
 can  be  said  is  that  the  termination  is  the  Grecised 
 form  of  Ra,  '  sun,'  a  frequent  ending  of  compound 
 words  in  Egyptian,   as  ex.  gr.  Men-kaw-ra,  Mec- 
 
 JANOAH  (niy,  rest;  'Awcix ;  Alex,  ''\a.vihx; 
 
 Jduoc),  a  town  of  Northern  Palestine,  situated  ap- 
 parently between  Abel-beth-Maachah  and  Kedesh, 
 and  within  the  boundaries  of  Naphtali.  It  was 
 taken,  with  several  other  cities,  on  the  first  invasion 
 of  Palestine  by  Tiglath-Pileser,  king  of  Assyria  (2 
 Kings  XV.  29).  It  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius,  but 
 he  strangely  confounds  it  with  Janohah,  a  town  of 
 Ephraim  ;  and  in  this  he  is  followed  by  Gesenius 
 and  others  {Onomast.  s.  v.  Janon :  Gesenius,  The- 
 saurus, s.  v.)  The  site  of  Janoah  has  not  been 
 identified.  The  modern  village  of  Hunin,  which 
 stands  on  the  brow  of  a  mountain  between  Abel 
 and  Kedesh,  and  which  contains  the  massive  ruinj 
 of  a  large  and  strong  castle,  would  answer  to  the 
 situation,  and  the  names  Hunin  and  Janoah^ 
 though   apparently   so    unlike,   have   some    slight 
 
 radical  affinity  (  ,y,:,s>-,  TlJ*  :  for  a  description  of 
 
 Hunin,  se.e  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  444). — J.  L.  P. 
 
 JANOHAH    (nmr,    the    same  as   Hir   with 
 
 n  local ;  'lafw/cd;  Alex.  'lavii;  Janoe),  a  town  on 
 the  north-eastern  border  of  Ephraim,  and  conse- 
 quently in  or  near  the  Jordan  valley  (Josh.  xvi.  6, 
 7).  It  is  only  once  mentioned  in  Scripture  ;  but 
 Eusebius  and  Jerome  state  that  in  their  time  it  was 
 still  a  village  in  the  district  of  Acrabatane,  twelve 
 miles  east  of  Neapolis,  the  ancient  Sichem.  Eu- 
 sebius calls  it  'la^ci  {Ono7?tast.  s.  v.  Janon). 
 About  three  and  a  half  hours  (12  miles)  east  by 
 south  of  Nabulus,  stands  the  little  village  of 
 Yati/ln ;  situated  in  a  vale  which  descends  the 
 eastern  slope  of  the  mountains  of  Ephraim  to  the 
 Jordan.  The  village  is  now  mostly  in  ruins,  but 
 it  has  a  few  houses  inhabited,  and  its  ancient  re- 
 mains '  are  extensive  and  interesting.  Entire 
 houses  and  walls  are  still  existing,  but  covered 
 with  immense  heaps  of  earth  and  rubbish.  The 
 dwellings  of  the  present  inhabitants  are  built  upon 
 and  between  the  houses  of  the  ancient  Janohah ' 
 (Van  de  Velde,  Travels,  ii.  303).  There  can  be 
 no  doubt  that  this  is  the  Janon  of  Jerome,  and  the 
 Janohah  of  the  Bible.  As  an  example  of  the 
 mir-ute  accuracy  of  Joshua's  topography,  it  may  be 
 remarked  that  he  states,  the  border  of  Ephraim 
 '  went  down  from  Janohah  to  Ataroth.'    Janohah 
 
JAPHtTH 
 
 4G5 
 
 JAPIIETH 
 
 being  situated  on  the  side  of  the  mountain  range, 
 the  border  'went  down'  to  Ataroth,  which  lay  in 
 the  valley  of  the  Jordan.  About  a  mile  up  the 
 vale  of  Janohah  is  a  little  fountain,  and  on  a  hill 
 above  it  the  prostrate  ruins  of  another  ancient  town, 
 which  is  now  called  Khirbet  YanCen,  '  ruined 
 Yanun'  (Robinson,  B.  K.,  iii.  297).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 JAPHETH  (na^;  'Id0e6i;  Vulg.  Japheth),  one 
 
 of  the  three  sons  of  Noah,  of  whom  '  the  whole 
 earth  was  overspread'  (Gen.  ix.  19).  It  is  uncer- 
 tain whether  he  was  the  eldest  or  the  second  son. 
 When  the  three  are  mentioned  together,  the  order 
 invariably  is  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth,  and  it 
 would  be  most  natural  to  suppose  that  they  are 
 mentioned  in  the  order  of  primogeniture.  It  is 
 clear  that  Ham  was  younger  than  Shem,  but  it  is 
 not  absolutely  necessary  to  suppose  from  Gen. 
 ix.  24  that  he  was  \\vt youngest  of  the  three.  Such, 
 however,  has  been  the  general  supposition,  and 
 Josephus  writes  them  in  the  order  Shem,  Japheth, 
 Ham  {Antiq.  i.  4.  i).  Nothing  can  be  said  in 
 favc^ir  of  Japheth  being  the  eldest  son  ;  for  the  ex- 
 pression in  Gen.  x.  21,  'unto  Shem,  the  brother 
 of  Japheth  the  elder,'   may,   and   probably  does 
 
 mean,  '  the  elder  brother  of  Japheth'  (taking  pna 
 
 with  ins),  and  not  as  the  LXX.,  Symmachus,  and 
 
 Eng.  Ver.  take  it,  aSeXipui  'ld(ped  tou  fiel^ovos. 
 There  are,  indeed,  two  arguments  against  this — 
 I.  that  Japheth  is  placed  Jirst  in  the  genealogy ; 
 and  2.  that  in  Gen.  v.  32  Noah  is  said  to  have  be- 
 gotten sons  in  his  500th  year,  one  hundred  years 
 before  the  deluge  (vi.  11),  whereas  in  xi.  10,  Shem 
 becomes  father  of  Arphaxad,  tiuo  years  after  the 
 deluge,  when  he  is  lOO  years  old  ;  whence  it  is  in- 
 ferred that  Shem  must  have  been  born  in  the  502d 
 year  of  Noah,  and  that  Japheth  must  have  been 
 the  eldest  son.  But  these  arguments  are  not  con- 
 clusive. Japheth  is  placed  first  in  the  genealogy 
 (Gen.  X.)  in  order  that  the  thread  of  the  narrative, 
 which  continues  in  the  line  of  Shetn,  may  not  be 
 broken  ;  and  in  Gen.  v.  32,  since  Noah  could  not 
 have  had  three  sons  born  in  one  year,  500  is 
 obviously  a  round  number  for  502  ;  so  that  we 
 conclude  unhesitatingly  that  yapheth  was  NoaJis 
 yoiingest  son  (Rosenmiiller,  Schol.  ad  Gen.  x.  21). 
 This  conclusion  is  important,  inasmuch  as  it  best 
 agrees  with  the  ethnological  and  historical  signifi- 
 cance of  the  name  Japheth. 
 
 2.   The  name  appears  to  be  derived  from  njlQ, 
 
 '  to  extend,'  in  Gen.  ix.  27.     But  as  T\tf7  riQi  is 
 
 one  of  those  very  numerous  instances  of  parono- 
 masia which  so  strongly  characterises  the  Hebrew 
 writings  (cf.  Gen.  xlviii.  22;  Mic.  vii.  12;  Jer. 
 i.  II  ;  Is.  xxi.  II,  etc.),  we  may  perhaps  consider 
 that  no  derivation  is  there  intended  (das  Wortspiel; 
 Ewald,  Gesch.  d.  Volk.  Isr.  i.  373)  ;  and  in  that 
 case,  although  no  obvious  derivation  suggests  itself, 
 the  name  may  be  referred  to  nB^,    'pulcher  fuit,'* 
 
 and  may  contain  an  allusion  to  the  beauty  of  the 
 Japhetic  race  (Ewald,  I.e.;  Gesenius,  s.  v.,  Thes.  iii. 
 
 *  This  derivation  was  suggested  by  Jonathan  ; 
 
 Aben  Ezra  calls  it  however  nC  NP;  '  interpretatio 
 minime  pulchra  ;'  on  what  grounds  is  not  clear. 
 Fuller,  Miscell.  Sac?: ,  ii.  4  ;  Rosenmiiller  ad  Gen. 
 ix.  37. 
 
 vol-  II. 
 
 p.  1 139).  This  is  the  less  milikely  since  Ham 
 means  '  hot,'  and  Phut  and  Lubim  are  names  which 
 contain  a  reference  to  the  darkness  of  those  races. 
 It  is  clear  that  throughout  the  famous  ethnographi- 
 cal chart  of  Gen.  x.,  and  perhaps  elsewhere  in  the 
 Bible,  the  names  are  rather  ethnic  and  allusive  than 
 individual.  Unless — of  which  we  have  no  hint — 
 names  were  bestowed  by  a  spirit  of  prophecy  in 
 the  earliest  infancy,  it  is  obvious  that  in  many  in- 
 stances the  name  by  which  the  founders  of  families 
 were  afterwards  known,  were  names  suggested  by 
 the  subsequent  fortunes  of  themselves  or  their  de- 
 scendants. The  name  Japheth  does  not  occur  again 
 in  the  Bible,  but  is  found  as-  the  designation  of  a 
 province,  in  Judith  ii.  25. 
 
 3.  Of  the  personal  history  of  Japheth  we  know 
 nothing  beyond  the  single  incident  narrated  in 
 Gen.  ix.  23,  in  which  Japheth  seems  to.  have  acted 
 upon  the  suggestion  of  his  elder  brother  Shem. 
 and  therefore  only  receives  the  blessing  of  temporal 
 prosperity,  not  the  loftier  privilege  of  religious 
 truth.  If,  broadly  and  generally,  we  regard  Shem 
 as  the  direct  ancestor  of  the  Shemites,  and  Japheth 
 as  the  intended  representative  of  the  chief  Arian 
 nations,  this  passage  shews  a  marvellous  insight 
 into  the  destinies  of  those  great  races,  as  well  as 
 into  the  fact  that  reverence,  filial  piety,  and  the 
 purity  of  heart  and  eye  are  the  main  foundations 
 on  which  the  greatness  of  those  mighty  civilized 
 races  has  been  built  up.  The  blessing  itself  re- 
 ceived ample  historical  fulfilment  in  the  extension 
 of  Japheth's  dominions  into  the  territories  of  the 
 vShemites,  and  the  participation  of  the  Japhetida 
 in  the  religious  privileges  of  their  kinsmen  of  the 
 elder  branch. 
 
 4.  In  Gen.  x.  seven  sons  are  ascribed  to  Japheth 
 • — Gomer,  Magog,  Madai,  Javan,  Tubal,  Meshech, 
 Tiras.  For  the  significance  of  these  names,  as 
 well  as  of  those  attributed  to  their  sons,  see  the 
 separate  articles  upon  them.  All  that  we  need 
 here  observe  is  that  they  are  intended  to  include 
 all  the  non- Semitic  and  non-Hamitic  nations 
 known  to  the  jfcwSy  and  that  generally  Japheth 
 stands  for  the  nations  north  of  Palestine,,  as  Ham 
 for  those  to  the  south,  Palestine  itself  being  re- 
 garded as  a  'navel  of  the  earth'  (Ezek.  v.  5; 
 Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  373).  Among  the  most  import- 
 ant Japhetic  nations  are  the  Bactrians  (Gomer), 
 the  Scythians  (Magog),  the  Medes  (Madai),  the 
 Thracians  (Tiras),  and  the  Greek  (Javan). 
 
 5.  There  are  numerous  Oriental  legends  about 
 Japheth.  According  to  Mohammedan  writers  he 
 was  the  eldest  son  of  Noah,  who  gave  him  a  stone 
 (called  Giude  Tasch  and  Seuk  Jede,  long  pre- 
 served in  the  country  of  the  Mogul),  upon  which 
 was  inscribed  the  name  of  God,  and  which  enabled 
 him  to  cause  rain  at  pleasure.  They  call  him 
 Aboultierk,  and  ascribe  to  him  eleven  sons,  among 
 whom  are  Sin,  father  of  the  Chinese,  Turk  of  the 
 Turks,  and  Ros  of  the  Russians — nations  wholly 
 unknown  to  the  ancient  Hebrews.  Tliey  ascribe 
 to  his  sons  great  wisdom,  but  say  that  no  pi'ophet 
 was  ever  born  among  them  (Weil,  Biblische  Legen- 
 den,  viii.  46).  The  resemblance  of  Japheth  with 
 the  Greek  ^Idireros,  whether  fortuitous  or  not,  is 
 highly  remarkable  ;  but  the  attempts  of  Bochart, 
 Huet,  and  others,  to  identify  Japheth  with  Nep- 
 tune (Calmet's  Diet.  Fra,s,m.  xix.,  xx.),  have  little  to 
 rest  upon  (Bochart,  Phaleg.  iii.  I  ;  D'Herbelot, 
 Bibl.  Orient,  ii.  281  ;  Hottinger,  Hist.  Orient.,  p> 
 37 ;  Buttmann  Mythol.  i.  222,  etc.)— F.  W.  F. 
 
 1  H 
 
JAPHETH  B.  ALI  HA-LEVI 
 
 466 
 
 JAREB 
 
 JAPHETH  B.  Ali  Ha-Levi  cb]}  ]3  DD''  "i 
 t-l^n),  of  Bassra,  called  in  Arabic  Al>u  Ali  Hassan 
 h.  Ali  al-Levi  al-Bozrii  Cil^^X  'h^  \1  |Dn  "h^i  135< 
 '|-^^;3PX)>  a  very  eminent  Karaite  grammarian  and 
 commentator  of  the  O.  T.  who  flourished  about 
 950-990,  and  who  so  distinguished  himself  through 
 his  literary  labours  that  he  obtained  the  honour- 
 able appellation  of  isn^H  no^nn,  the  great  teacher, 
 and  a  place  among  those  who  are  mentioned  in  the 
 Karaite  prayer-book.  Though  his  gigantic  com- 
 mentaries must  have  exercised  great  influence  on 
 the  development  of  Biblical  exegesis,  as  may  be 
 concluded  from  the  fact  that  Ibn  Ezra  had  them 
 constantly  before  him  when  writing  his  expositions 
 of  the  O.  T.,  and  that  he  quotes  them  with  the 
 greatest  respect,  yet  they  have  not  as  yet  been  pub- 
 lished, and  we  have  still  only  the  fragments  which 
 Ibn  Ezra  gives  us.  The  MSS.  of  these  commen- 
 taries, which  consist  of  twenty  large  volumes,  are 
 in  Paris  and  in  Leyden.  The  eminent  Orientalist 
 IMunk  brought  in  1841  from  Egypt  to  the  royal 
 library  at  Paris,  eleven  volumes,  five  of  which  are 
 on  Genesis,  and  many  sections  of  Exodus,  Leviti- 
 cus, and  Numbers  ;  two  volumes  are  on  the  Psalms, 
 one  is  on  Proverbs,  and  one  on  the  Five  Megilloth. 
 The  commentaries,  which  are  in  Arabic,  are  pre- 
 ceded by  the  Hebrew  text,  and  an  Arabic  transla- 
 tion. The  indefatigable  Pinsker  has  examined 
 twenty  volumes  of  these  commentaries  and  made 
 extracts  from  them  (comp.  Jost,  Israelifisc/ie  Anna- 
 len,  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1841,  p.  76;  Barges, 
 Rabbi  Japhet  ben  Heli  Bassore7isis  Karaite  ifi  psal. 
 Comme7itarii  Prefatio,\Zdfi;  Pinsker,  Lickide Kad- 
 inoniot,  Vienna  1863,  p.  169,  supplement,  p.  181, 
 etc. ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Jitden,  vol.  v. ,  Magde- 
 burg i860,  p.  342). — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JAPHETH  II.,  B.  Said,  a  descendant  of  the 
 foregoing  writer,  flourished  about  1 160-1200.  Be- 
 sides the  celebrated  work  in  defence  of  Karaism, 
 entitled  Ha-Atakat  Ha-Tora,  he  wrote  commen- 
 taries on  the  Pentateuch  and  other  books  of  the 
 O.  T.  Pinsker  supposes,  and  not  without  reason, 
 that  this  is  the  Japheth  whom  the  Karaites  describe 
 as  the  Rabbi  of  Ibn  Ezra,  and  has  shewn  that  Ibn 
 Ezra's  quotations  from  the  commentary  on  Exod. 
 iv.  20;  viii.  13;  ix.  16;  x.  5,  21,  belong  to  this 
 Japheth,  aiid  not  the  former.  These  commentaries 
 are  still  in  MS.,  both  in  the  Paris  and  Leyden 
 libraries  (comp.  Pinsker,  Lichite  Kadmo7iiot, 
 Vienna  i860,  p.  222,  ff.,  and  185,  ff.,  supple- 
 ment; Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  vol.  vi., 
 Leipzig  1861,  p.  305,  ff.)— C.  D.  G. 
 
 JAPHIA     (S;''S^^,    'splendid;'    <l'a77at ;    Alex. 
 
 'Ia0a7a£ ;  Japhie),  a  town  on  the  border  of  Zebu 
 lun,  between  Daberath  and  Gittah-hepher  (Josh. 
 xix.  12).  Eusebius  and  Jerome  identify  Japhia 
 with  the  town  on  the  sea  coast,  beneath  the  brow 
 of  CarmeLj  called  Sycaminus,  and  also  Hepha 
 ('H(/)d  ;  its  modern  name  is  Haifa).  This,  how- 
 ever, is  manifestly  an  error,  for  Daberath  is  situated 
 at  the  base  of  Mount  Tabor,  and  from  thence 
 Joshua  says  the  border  '  goeth  up  to  Japhia  ;'  Japhia 
 must  consequently  be  looked  for  in  the  hills  near 
 Nazareth.  Reland  (Pal.,  p.  826)  and  Gesenius 
 {Thesaurus,  s.v. )  follow  Eusebius.  In  a  retired 
 valley  among  the  rocky  hills,  about  two  miles  south- 
 west of  Nazareth,  lies  the  little  village  of  Yd/a,  con- 
 
 taining about  thirty  houses  and  the  ruins  of  a  church. 
 This  is  unquestionably  the  ancient  town  of  Japhia  ; 
 and  also  the  same  place  which  Josephus  fortified, 
 with  other  cities  of  Galilee,  during  the  Jewish  war 
 (Vita,  37  and  45).  It  was  afterwards  stormed  by 
 Titus,  and  a  vast  number  of  its  inhabitants  put  to 
 the  sword.  The  Italian  monks  of  Nazareth  call  it 
 San  Giacamo,  believing  it  to  be  the  native  place  of 
 Zebedee,  and  his  sons  James  and  John.  (Marinus 
 Sanutus,  p.  253;  Early  Travels  in  Pal.,  p.  186; 
 Robinson,  B.R.,  ii.  343;  Handbook  for  S.  and  P., 
 p.  3S5).-J.  L-  P. 
 
 JAPHLETI  CDi^Cn  =  the  Japhletite  ;  ri  ^pio. 
 
 Tou  ^ ATTToXifji,  Vat.  ;  rod  'lecpaKrl,  Alex. ;  termitius 
 Japhleti,  Vulg.)  In  Josh.  xvi.  3  we  find  'the 
 border  of  the  Japhletite'  ('  the  coast  of  Japhleti,' 
 A.  V.)  mentioned  as  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
 southern  frontier  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim.  From 
 the  form  of  the  word  it  is  evident  that  we  have 
 here  the  name  of  one  of  the  many  petty  tribes  or 
 clans  that  peopled  Palestine  before  its  occupation 
 by  the  children  of  Israel,  of  which  the  topographi- 
 cal details  of  the  book  of  Joshua  contain  many 
 traces,  e.g.,  the  Archite  (Archi,  A.  V.),  in  the  pre- 
 ceding verse  (cf.  2  Sam.  xv.  32 ;  xvii.  5)  ;  the 
 Ophnite  (Ophni,  A.  V.),  Josh,  xviii.  24 ;  the  Jebu- 
 site  (Jebusi,  A.  V.),  ver.  28  ;  Adummim,  '  the  red- 
 men,'  Josh.  XV.  7,  etc.  Japhlet  occurs  (i  Chron. 
 vii.  32,  33)  as  a  descendant  of  Asher,  but  the  dis- 
 tance between  the  tribes  is  too  great  for  us  to  sup- 
 pose that  the  names  had  any  connection. — E.  V. 
 
 JAPHO.     QOPPA.] 
 
 JAREB  (^T*;  Sept.  ^lapel/x),  supposed  by  some 
 
 to  be  the  name  of  a  king,  by  others  that  of  the 
 place  where  he  was  king,  whilst  others  regard  the 
 word  as  an  appellative  of  the  king  (Hos.  v.  13  ; 
 x.  6).  All  are  agreed  that  the  king  meant  is  the 
 king  of  Assyria.  The  first  view  is  followed  by 
 the  LXX.,  where  the  rendering  is  irpbs  ^acnX^a 
 ^lapelfx;  also  by  the  Syriac  and  Arabic.  Ibn 
 Ezra  advocates  the  second,  and  says  that  Jareb 
 was  the  name  of  a  city  of  Assyria  not  elsewhere 
 mentioned  ;  but  besides  being  purely  conjectural 
 this    explanation  is  hardly  reconcilable  with   the 
 
 absence  of  the  article  before  "p^.  Similar  to  this 
 view  is  that  of  Hitzig ;  for,  though  he  translates 
 31^  by  enemy,  foe,  he  regards  it  as  a  symbolical 
 name  of  Assyria,  as  Rahab  is  of  Egypt ;  an  opinion 
 obnoxious  to  the  same  objection  as  the  preceding. 
 Symmachus,  who  is  followed  by  Jerome,  gave  ^k- 
 SiKov  or  iKSLK-qTTjv,  ultorem,  avenger,  as  the  meaning 
 of  the  word ;  Aquila  biKa^dfievof,  and  Theodotion 
 
 KpiT-qv,  fudge.     The  Targum  gives  y"lSnN?  ''JVI 
 
 |in?,  'who  shall  come  to  vindicate  (or  avenge) 
 them.'  In  the  A.  V.  the  rendering  in  the  text  is 
 '  to  king  Jareb,'  in  the  margin  '  to  the  king  of 
 Jareb  or  to  the  king  that  should  plead.'  The  third 
 way  of  construing  the  passage  is  that  followed  by 
 most  recent  interpreters  :  Rosenmiiller,  '  misitque 
 legatos  ad  regem  adversarium  ; '  De  Wette,  '  Der 
 konig  der  rachen  soil  [the  king  who  shall  avenge];' 
 Henderson,  'a hostile  king,'  etc.  In  this  case  31' 
 is  the  apocopated  future  in  Hiphil  of  3"l"l.  Rivet 
 was  of  opinion  that  the  title  '  Avenger '  may  have 
 been  assumed  by  the  potent  king  of  Assyria  as  the 
 French  king  assumes  that  of  '  Most  Christian,'  and 
 the   English   that   of  *  Defender    of    the    F-iith' 
 
JARHA 
 
 467 
 
 JASHER 
 
 (Glass.  Phil.  Sac.  4,  3,  17,  p.  644).  Fiirst,  who 
 inclines  to  the  second  view,  suggests  the  possibility 
 of  Jareb  being  an  old  Assyrian  word. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JARHA  (ynn^;  Sept.  'Iwx^X),  an  Egyptian  who 
 
 was  in  the  service  of  a  Hebrew  master  named 
 Sheshan,  whose  daughter  he  married,  and  so  be- 
 came his  heir,  and  head  of  a  house  of  the  Jerah- 
 meelites  (i  Chron.  ii.  31-35).  No  other  case  ex- 
 actly similar  to  this  is  mentioned  in  Scripture.  It 
 is  supposed  by  some  that  the  name  of  Sheshan's 
 daughter  whom  Jarha  married  was  Ahlai,  from  the 
 statement  in  ver.  31  compared  with  that  in  ver.  34; 
 but  the  masculine  form  of  the  word,  and  the  use  of 
 Ahlai  elsewhere  (l  Chron.  xi.  41)  for  a  man,  is 
 adverse  to  this  conclusion.  As  Sheshan's  oldest 
 grandson  by  this  marriage  was  called  Attai,  and  as 
 the  genealogy  would  run  through  him,  it  is  sup- 
 posed by  others  that  Ahlai  is  a  clerical  error  for 
 
 Attai ;  while  others  think  Ahlai  (""priS,    '  the  dis- 
 
 joiner,'  from  priN)  was  a  name  given  to  Jarha  on 
 his  incorporation  into  the  family  of  Sheshan. 
 This  last  seems  to  us  the  most  probable  view.  At 
 what  time  this  marriage  occurred  we  cannot  cer- 
 tainly determine,  but  as  Sheshan  was  the  seventh 
 in  descent  from  Hezron,  the  grandson  of  Judah,  it 
 is  probable  he  lived  near  the  close  of  the  time  of 
 Eli  or  the  beginning  of  that  of  Samuel.  In  i  Sam. 
 XXX.  13  mention  is  made  of  an  Egyptian  who  was 
 servant  to  an  Amalekite,  and  there  is  no  reason 
 why  it  should  seem  strange  that  an  Egyptian 
 should  also  be  found  in  the  family  of  a  Hebrew, 
 especially  as,  being  a  Jerahmeelite,  he  had  his  pos- 
 sessions in  the  same  district  as  the  Amalekites,  in  the 
 south  of  Judah  (l  Sam.  xxvii.  8,  10). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JARMUTH  (DTOT,  '  lofty;'  'leyst/xoi'^-  and  'le/j- 
 
 ft.o\f^  ;  Jerimoth),  an  ancient  royal  city  of  Canaan, 
 and  one  of  the  five  which  joined  in  the  league 
 against  the  Gibeonites,  and  were  defeated  by 
 Joshua  (Josh.  x.  3).  Its  king  was  hanged  with 
 the  others  at  Makkedah  (ver.  23;  ch.  xii.  11). 
 Jarmuth  was  situated  in  the  Shephelah  (A.  V. 
 'Valley')  or  plain  of  Philistia,  and  was  assigned  to 
 Judah  (xv.  35).  It  was  occupied  by  the  Jews 
 after  the  return  from  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  29).  The 
 geographical  position  of  Jarmuth  is  not  stated  in 
 the  Bible,  farther  than  that  it  lay  in  the  Shephelah ; 
 but  as  it  is  enumerated  with  Adullam  and  Socho, 
 we  can  have  no  difficulty  in  identifying  it  with  the 
 
 modern   village   of   Yarnmk    (i^«^^),   a   name 
 
 almost  identical  with  the  Hebrew  Jarmuth.  It 
 appears  to  be  this  city  which  Eusebius  calls  Tep- 
 MoDs,  and  Jerome  Jenmis,  stating  that  in  their  day 
 it  was  a  village  ten  miles  distant  from  Eleuthero- 
 polis,  on  the  road  to  Jerusalem  [Onomast.  s.  v.) 
 Under  Jarimiith,  however  (which  Eusebius  writes 
 'Ia/3eT$),  Jerome  states  that  it  is  a  city  captured  by 
 Joshua,  given  to  Judah,  and  foia-  miles  distant 
 from  Eleutheropolis  towards  Eshtaol.  It  would 
 seem  to  be  the  same  city  which  is  alluded  to  in 
 both  places,  but  probably  some  error  may  have 
 crept  into  the  text  of  the  Onomasticon.  Yarmuk 
 is  about  eight  miles  from  Eleutheropolis,  and  is 
 situated  on  the  crest  of  a  rugged  hill.  As  the 
 writer  saw  it  from  the  vales  of  Bethshemesh  and 
 Elah,  and  again  from  the  ridge  of  Beit  Nettif, 
 perched  on  its  airy  site,  and  clearly  defined  against 
 the  bright  sky,  he  could  not  but  think  that  it  well 
 
 deser\'ed  its  name,  'the  lofty.'  The  village  is 
 small  and  poor,  but  there  are  a  few  traces,  in  the 
 hewn  stones  and  ruins,  of  past  strength  and  great- 
 ness {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  p.  281;  Robinson, 
 B.  R.,\\.  17;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  324). 
 
 2.  A  Levitical  town  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xxi.  29) ; 
 identical  with  the  Remeth  of  Josh.  xix.  21,  and 
 the  Ramoth  of  I  Chron.  vi.  73.  See  Ramoth. — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 JASHEN  (JE^^* ;  ' kukv ;  Jassen).     Of  the  sons 
 
 of  Jashen,  Jonathan  appears  in  the  catalogue  of  the 
 mighty  men  of  David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  32). 
 In  the  corresponding  passage  (i  Chron.  xi.  34), 
 we  read,  '  the  sons  of  Hashem  the  Gizonite.' 
 This  form  of  the  name  is  probably  correct,  as  the 
 LXX.  in  both  places  give  '' kaav.  In  the  present 
 corrupt  and  dislocated  state  of  these  catalogues,  it 
 is  extremely  difficult  to  decide  what  is  the  true 
 reading  of  the  whole  passage,  but  a  comparison 
 with  Chronicles  seems  to  shew  that  Jonathan  has 
 no  connection  with  the  B'ne-Jashen,  and  that  a 
 name  has  dropt  out  in  both  places.  This  name 
 Kennicott  believes  {Dissertation,  vol.  i.,  pp.  201- 
 203)  lies  concealed  in  the  word  rendered  '  the 
 Gizonite'  in  Chronicles,  and  accordingly  proposes 
 to  read  in  both  places,  '  Gouni,  of  the  sons  of 
 Hashem  ;  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Shamha  the  Har- 
 arite ; '  his  view  being  supported  by  the  Alex, 
 copy  of  the  LXX.,  which  reads  viol  'Acra/JL  6  TioiJvl 
 'luvadav  vibs  ^ayrj  6  'ApapL  However,  the  want 
 of  the  D  before  ''22,  and  the  n  prefixed  to  the 
 
 name  read  by  him  as  Gouni,  are  objections  to 
 this  view,  and  Bertheau  may  probably  be  right 
 {Chronik.,  p.  134),  that  '^y^  is  due  to  a  repetition 
 
 of  the  last  three  letters  of  the  preceding  word, 
 
 '  the  Shaalbonite,'  ''jhi'yE'n,  and  tliat  we  should 
 
 simply  read  Hashem  the  Gizonite. — E.  V. 
 
 JASHER,  or  rather  JASHAR,  Book  of,  a 
 work  quoted  in  Josh.  x.  13,  and  2  Sam.  i.  18. 
 The  former  passage  runs  thus  :  '  And  the  sun  stood 
 still,  and  the  moon  stayed  until  the  people  had 
 avenged  themselves  upon  their  enemies.  Is  not 
 this  written  in  the  book  of  Jasher  ?  So  the  sun 
 stood  still  in  the  midst  of  heaven,  and  hasted  not 
 to  go  down  about  a  whole  day,'  etc.  The  passage 
 in  2  Sam.  is  as  follows  ;  '  And  David  lamented 
 with  this  lamentation  over  Saul,  and  over  Jonathan 
 his  son  :  (Also  he  bade  them  teach  the  children 
 of  Judah  the  use  of  the  bow:  behold,  it  is  written 
 in  the  book  of  Jasher. ') 
 
 The  origin  of  the  name  Jashar  is  obscure.  Some 
 have  supposed  that  the  book  was  so  called  because 
 it  celebrated  the  praises  oi  j 21st  or  righteous  men, 
 "IK'S  meaning  Jiist.  This  is  more  probable  than  that 
 
 the  name  of  its  author  was  given  to  the  book  ;  or 
 that  it  was  so  called  from  beginning  with  the  word 
 "lE's^.     Bishop  Lowth  {De  sacra poesi,  pp.  241,  242, 
 
 ed.  Oxon.  1821),  who  adopts  the  latter  conjecture, 
 refers  to  the  old  Syriac  translator  who  renders  the 
 word  by  "I^K'S^j  i-  £■  ■,  sang,  in  one  place  where  it  oc- 
 curs. The  fact  that  Exod.  XV.  I,  begins  with  T'K''^  fX 
 
 •     T  T 
 
 nti'D)  fhen  sang  Moses,  does  not  much  favour  this 
 
 assumption.  It  is  true  that  the  different  books 
 of  the  Hebrew  Bible  derived  the  names  which  they 
 bore  among  the  Jews  from  the  initial  word ;  but  the 
 custom  was  scarcely  so  old  as  the  time  of  the  book 
 
JASHER 
 
 468 
 
 JASHER 
 
 of  Jashar,  except  the  initial  word  afforded  a  clear 
 index  to  the  contents  of  the  poem  or  book,  at  the 
 beginning  of  which  it  stood.  It  is  against  Lowth's 
 opinion  that  ~[l^^  does  not  mean  Ae  sang.  It  should 
 have  been  "|>tJ?V  Besides,  the  article  is  prefixed  to 
 1K^\  IV^il.  Ilgen  supposes  that  the  phrase  means 
 dock  of  dexterity  or  valour,  because  the  book  con- 
 sisted of  poems  celebrating  examples  of  dexterity 
 and  every  warlike  virtue  of  the  time,  in  the  same  way 
 as  the  first  book  of  a  celebrated  Arabic  anthology 
 containing  poems  in  praise  of  heroic  deeds,  is  en- 
 titled i^L*,-^,  Hamasa,  i.  e.,  warlike  virtue,  valour. 
 
 Whatever  may  have  been  the  origin  of  the  title, 
 there  is  little  doubt  that  the  book  was  a  poetical 
 anthology,  or  a  collection  of  poetical  pieces.  As 
 to  the  time  of  its  origin  we  are  hardly  able  to  ascer- 
 tain it  with  probability.  David's  lamentation  over 
 Saul  and  Jonathan  was  contained  in  it ;  and  per- 
 haps the  collection  was  not  begun  earlier  than  his 
 reign.  It  may  have  been  enlarged  with  additions 
 from  time  to  time. 
 
 Some  of  the  fathers  had  singular  opinions  about 
 the  contents  of  the  book.  Thus  Jerome  apparently 
 thought  that  it  was  identical  with  Genesis ;  an 
 opinion  derived  from  the  Jews  [Comtnentar.  in 
 Esaiam  xliv.  2,  and  in  Ezech.  cap.  viii.)  Others 
 supposed  that  it  included  the  Pentateuch,  or  rather 
 that  it  was  the  book  of  the  law.  Such  is  the  ex- 
 planation of  the  Targum,  with  which  agree  Kimchi 
 and  Abarbanel.  Theodoret  conceived  that  the 
 book  of  Joshua  was  an  extract  from  that  of  Jashar, 
 and  that  the  author,  fearing  his  assertion  of  the 
 sun's  standing  still  would  not  be  credited,  referred 
 to  the  book  itself  as  his  authority  for  the  miracle 
 (QucBst.  xiv.  in  fosuam,  tom.  i.,  0pp.  p.  l). 
 Rabbi  Elieser  supposed  that  the  book  was  the 
 same  as  Deuteronomy  ;  R.  Samuel  ben  Nachman 
 identified  it  with  tlie  book  of  Judges.  Other 
 opinions  are  enumerated  by  Wolf  {Bibliotheca  He- 
 brcBa,  ii.  p.  219,  et  seq.),  and  Abicht  [Dissei'tatio  de 
 libra  Recti,  p.  5,  etc.) 
 
 The  old  supposition  that  the  book  contained  a 
 treatise  on  archeiy  is  justly  exploded  at  the  present 
 day.  The  words  of  2  Sam.  i.  18,  '  Also  he  bade 
 them  teach  the  children  of  Israel  the  bow,'  mean 
 'the  bow-song,'  i.  e.,  a  poem  in  praise  of  Jona- 
 than's bow,  belonging  to  the  book  of  Jashar.  An 
 ancient  mode  of  citing  a  document  consisted  in 
 referring  to  some  particular  word  in  it,  such  as 
 the  bow  (i.  22). 
 
 The  book  of  Jashar  has  attracted  attention  be- 
 cause it  is  appealed  to  in  connection  with  the  ac- 
 count of  the  sun  and  moon  standing  still.  The 
 compiler  of  the  book  of  Joshua  refers  to  it  as  con- 
 taining a  record  of  the  miracle  in  question.  It  is 
 therefore  impossible  to  do  justice  to  our  subject 
 without  entering  into  an  interpretation  of  the  won- 
 derful phenomenon  on  which  so  much  ingenuity 
 has  been  wasted.  The  mis-spent  time  which  has 
 been  devoted  to  the  passage  in  Joshua  makes  a 
 critic  sad  indeed.  Instead  of  looking  at  the  words 
 in  their  natural  and  obvious  sense,  men  have  been 
 led  away  by  their  adlierence  to  the  letter  into  re- 
 condite, foolish,  and  absurd  conjectures.  One 
 thing  is  a  key  to  the  right  interpretation,  viz.,  that 
 the  passage  recording  the  miracle  is  a  quotation 
 from  the  poetical  book  of  Jashar.  The  only  diffi- 
 culty is  to  discover  where  the  quotation  begins  and 
 
 ends.  All  must  allow  that  the  words  of  the  poeti- 
 cal anthology  are  found  in — 
 
 Sun,  stand  thou  still  upon  Gibeon, 
 
 And  thou,  moon,  in  the  valley  of  Ajalcn. 
 
 And  the  sun  stood  still, 
 
 And  the  moon  stayed, 
 
 Till  the  people  had  avenged  themselves 
 
 Upon  their  enemies. 
 
 It  is  not  easy,  however,  to  say  whether  the  quota- 
 tion extends  farther  than  this,  and  includes  tlie 
 following : — 
 
 So  the  sun  stood  still 
 
 In  the  midst  of  heaven, 
 
 And  hasted  not  to  go  down 
 
 About  a  whole  day. 
 
 And  there  was  no  day  like  that 
 
 Before  it  or  after  it. 
 
 That  the  Lord  hearkened 
 
 Unto  the  voice  of  a  man, 
 
 For  the  Lord  fought  for  Israel. 
 
 And  Joshua  returned. 
 
 And  all  Israel  with  him, 
 
 Unto  the  camp,  to  Gilgal. 
 
 The  point  is,  whether  the  question  of  the  histo- 
 rian, '  Is  not  this  written  in  the  book  of  Jasher?' 
 terminates  the  quotation  by  stating  whence  it  is 
 taken  ;  or  whether  the  citation  does  not  proceed  to 
 the  end  of  the  15th  verse,  after  this  insei-ted  notice. 
 We  are  inclined  to  think  that  the  quotation  in- 
 cluded vers.  12-15.  The  strongest  objection  to  the 
 view  in  question  is,  that  the  statement  of  its  being 
 taken  from  the  book  of  Jashar  is  thus  made  to  stand 
 in  the  middle  of  the  passage  quoted,  instead  of  at 
 the  beginning  or  end,  as  in  Num.  xxi.  14,  27. 
 But  Keil  replies  that  the  cases  are  not  analogous  ; 
 for  that  the  references  to  sources  at  the  end  of  the 
 biographies  of  the  kings  of  Israel  are  not  appended 
 to  verbal  extracts  from  documents ;  and  that  the 
 cited  work  in  Num.  xxi.  14,  27,  as  well  as  2  Sam. 
 i.  18,  though  named  before  the  excerpts,  is  inter- 
 woven with  the  historical  narrative  itself.  Another 
 objection  is,  that  part  of  the  quotation  is  thus  made 
 to  consist  of  prose  ;  for  when  it  is  granted  that  the 
 second  half  of  the  13th  and  the  14th  verses  are 
 poetical,  the  15th  verse  still  remains.  But  perhaps 
 the  book  of  Jashar  had  some  prose  interwoven  with 
 its  poetical  pieces  (see  Davidson's  Introduction  to 
 the  O.   T.,  vol.  i.  p.  431,  et  seq.) 
 
 If  this  explanation  be  correct,  we  have  no  need 
 to  resort  to  other  interpretations.  Let  us  glance  at 
 the  principal  ones,  though  they  are  now  of  merely 
 historical  interest. 
 
 I.  Of  those  who  take  the  account  of  the  miracle 
 literally,  some  believe  that  the  sun  revolved  round 
 the  earth,  and  was  stayed  in  his  course.  Rejecting 
 the  diurnal  motion  of  the  earth  as  inconsistent  with 
 Scripture,  they  reject  the  Copernican  system.  One 
 should  have  thought  that  this  view  prevailed  among 
 Roman  Catholics  only.  Yet  Protestants  also  held 
 it  in  the  1 8th  century.  Galileo's  astronomy  had 
 not  penetrated  their  unscientific  minds,  which  clung 
 to  the  literal,  in  opposition  to  enlightened,  inter- 
 pretation. Others  have  explained  the  miracle  in 
 accordance  with  the  true  doctrine  of  the  earth's 
 motion,  taking  the  language  in  a  popular  and  opti- 
 cal sense,  and  believing  that  the  earth  stood  still  at 
 the  command  of  Joshua,  not  the  sun.  One  com- 
 mentator takes  a  singular  view  of  the  passage,  ex- 
 ]3laining  it  in  accordance  with  true  science,  as  he 
 
JASHER 
 
 469 
 
 JASHER 
 
 thinks  : — 'Joshua's  mode  of  expression  evidently 
 considers  the  sun  as  the  great  ruler  or  master  in 
 the  system,  and  all  the  planets  moving  in  their  re- 
 spective orbits  at  his  command.  He,  therefore, 
 desires  him  in  the  name  and  by  the  authoiity  of 
 his  Creator  to  suspend  his  mandate  with  respect  to 
 the  earth's  motion,  and  that  of  its  satellite  the 
 moon.  Had  he  said  ea7-th  stand  thou  still,  it  could 
 not  have  obeyed  him.  Instead  of  doing  so,  he 
 speaks  to  the  sun,  the  cause  of  all  these  motions,' 
 etc.  (A.  Clarke.)  The  strained,  erroneous  charac- 
 ter of  this  explanation  is  apparent. 
 
 2.  Spinoza  suggested  that  the  miracle  was  effected 
 by  refraction,  causing  the  sun  to  appear  above  the 
 horizon  after  its  setting,  or  by  such  atmospherical 
 phenomena  as  produced  light  enough  to  enable 
 Joshua  to  pursue  his  enemies  ( Tractatus  theologico- 
 Miticiis,  cap.  ii.,  0pp.  ed.  Paulus,  vol.  ii.  p.  iSo). 
 Thus  the  words  sun  and  moon  are  taken  to  mean 
 nothing  more  than  the  solar  and  limar  rays,  not 
 the  bodies  themselves. 
 
 Maimonides  seems  to  have  rejected  the  idea  of  a 
 miracle,  for  he  writes  that  the  phrase  '  as  an  entire 
 day,'  denotes  a  very  long  day,  as  if  the  historian 
 had  said  that  the  day  was  to  them  in  Gibeon  like 
 a  great  and  long  day  in  summer  [Afore  Nevochiin, 
 translated  by  Buxtorf,  part  ii.  xxxv.  p.  292).  His 
 opinion  was  followed  by  Grotius  and  others.  Even 
 Jahn  resolved  the  address  of  Joshua  into  a  bold 
 poetical  figure  {Ehileitung  in  die  gottlichen  Biicher 
 des  alten  Bundes,\\.  p.  176).  Hengstenberg  him- 
 self wrote  an  able  article  in  the  Evaiigelische  Kir- 
 ckenzeitu7tg  for  November  1832,  pointing  out  the 
 true  explanation.  This  was  translated  in  the  Atne- 
 rican  Biblical  Repository  for  1833,  which  jour- 
 nal had  a  good  article  in  1845  from  the  pen  of  Mr. 
 Hopkins. 
 
 One  would  have  thought  that  these  writers  must 
 have  established  the  right  exegesis  of  the  passages ; 
 especially  as  Keil  took  the  same  view  in  his  Com- 
 mentary on  Joshua.  But  it  was  not  so.  There  are 
 some  who  must  have  a  real  miracle  here,  and  who, 
 unless  sun  and  moon  stand  still,  fear  lest  Christi- 
 anity should  be  destroyed.  Hence  it  continues  to 
 be  asserted  in  books  that  there  was  a  miracle,  and 
 that  the  sacred  historian  expressly  records  the  event 
 as  such.  Its  very  object  is  also  explained,  viz.,  to 
 contribute  to  the  effectual  conquest  of  the  idola- 
 trous heathen  nations  who  worshipped  the  sun  and 
 moon.  But  Deborah  sings  in  her  hymn  of  grati- 
 tude (Judg.  v.),  'The  stars  in  their  courses  fought 
 against  Sisera:'  must  this  be  taken  literally,  and 
 not  rather  as  a  poetical  hyperbole?  It  is  only 
 necessary  to  enter  into  the  spirit  of  the  poetry  to 
 take  Joshua's  words  as  the  language  of  impassioned 
 desire.  The  absurd  lengths  to  which  some  will  go 
 in  upholding  the  idea  of  a  miracle  in  the  passage 
 before  us,  is  remarkably  shewn  by  the  following, 
 in  a  popular  English  book  on  the  Bible :  '  An  in- 
 genious French  philosopher,  who  has  consecrated 
 his  geological  researches  to  the  elucidation  and  de- 
 fence of  the  sacred  volume,  has  endeavoured  to 
 shew  that  the  double  day  in  Palestine,  caused  by 
 the  miracle  in  Josh,  x.,  must  have  produced  a 
 double  night  in  Europe.  He  considers  that  the 
 double  night  so  frequently  mentioned  by  the  Latin 
 poets,  and  connected  with  the  birth  of  Hercules, 
 was  identical  with  this  miracle,  which  is  thus  col- 
 laterally confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  ancient  pro- 
 fane writers.'  Chaubard,  Elemens  de  Geologie,  pp. 
 321-327. 
 
 Under  the  name  Book  ofjasher,  two  rabbinical 
 works  exist.  One  was  written  by  Jacob  ben  Meir, 
 or  R.  Tam,  who  died  in  1171,  and  contains  a 
 treatise  on  Jewish  ritual  questions.  It  was  pub- 
 lished at  Cracow  in  1586,  4to,  and  again  at  Vienna 
 iSii,  but  incorrectly.  No  translation  of  it  was 
 ever  made.  The  second  book  was  written  in  Spain 
 and  published  at  Venice  1625,  at  Cracow  1628, 
 and  at  Prague  1668.  It  contains  the  histories  of 
 the  Pentateuch,  Joshua,  and  Judges,  and  inter- 
 mixes many  fabulous  things.  The  preface  itself 
 relates  fictions  about  Sidrus  one  of  Titus's  officers 
 finding  the  work  in  a  palace  when  Jerusalem  was 
 destroyed,  where  an  old  man  was  shut  up  who  had 
 many  Hebrew  books,  among  others,  the  book  of 
 Jasher,  which  was  taken  to  Spain  and  preserved 
 there,  and  thence  to  Naples,  where  it  was  printed. 
 A  German  version  of  it,  with  additions,  was  pub- 
 lished by  R.  Jacob  at  Frankfort-on-the-Main,  1674, 
 8vo,  with  the  title  ^C^"|'1  Dri,  perfect  and  right. 
 
 T  t:        1 
 
 In  1 75 1  was  published  '  The  Book  ofjashar,  with 
 testimonies  and  notes  explanatory  of  the  text,  to 
 which  is  prefixed  various  readings.  Translated  into 
 English  from  Hebrew  by  Alcuin  of  Britain,  whc 
 went  a  pilgrimage  into  the  Holy  Land,'  4to.  This 
 is  a  forgery.  The  preface,  purporting  to  be  written 
 by  Alcuin,  contains  an  account  of  the  finding  of 
 the  book  in  MS.  at  Gazna  in  Persia,  and  the  way 
 in  which  it  was  translated.  Having  brought  it  to 
 England,  Alcuin  says  that  he  left  it  among  other 
 papers  to  a  clergyman  in  Yorkshire.  After  two 
 pages  of  various  readings,  the  book  itself  follows, 
 divided  into  thirty-seven  chapters.  Testimonies 
 and  notes  are  appended.  This  silly  forgery  was 
 the  production  of  Jacob  Hive,  a  type-founder  of 
 Bristol.  The  editor  states  in  a  dedication  at  the 
 beginning,  that  he  bought  the  MS.  at  an  auction 
 in  the  north  of  England,  and  affirms  that  Wickliffe 
 had  written  on  the  outside,  '  I  have  read  the  book 
 ofjasher  twice  over,  and  I  much  approve  of  it  as 
 a  piece  of  great  antiquity  and  curiosity,  but  I  can- 
 not assent  that  it  should  be  made  a  part  of  the 
 canon  of  Scripture.'  It  was  repiinted  at  Bristol  in 
 1829,  4to.  In  an  advertisement  prefixed,  the 
 editor  says  that  since  1 751  the  MS.  was  preserved 
 with  great  care  by  a  gentleman  who  gave  it  to  him, 
 and  that  the  latter  committed  it  to  the  press.  He 
 studiously  omits  to  state  that  it  had  been  printed  in 
 1 75 1.  Some  have  made  a  mistake  in  saying  that 
 there  was  another  reprint  in  1833  at  London.  A 
 prospectus  of  a  new  edition  was  circulated  by  the 
 Rev.  C.  R.  Bond  in  that  year,  but  no  reprint  fol- 
 lowed. 
 
 In  1840  there  appeared  at  New  York,  in  one 
 volume  8vo,  '  "l5J'">n  "ISD,  or  the  book  of  Jasher, 
 referred  to  in  Joshua  and  2  Samuel,  faithfully  trans- 
 lated from  the  original  Hebrew  into  English. '  This 
 professes  to  be  a  translation  of  the  rabbinical  book 
 already  noticed,  which  was  printed  at  Venice  in 
 1625.  It  has  a  preface  by  M.  M.  Noah,  a  trans- 
 lator's preface,  a  translation  of  the  Hebrew  pre- 
 face, and  the  printer's  preface.  The  work  itself 
 contains  ninety  chapters. 
 
 In  the  year  1854  appeared — fashar.  Fragmenta 
 archetypa  carminum  Hebraicortim  in  Masoretico 
 Veteris  Testamenti  textu  passitn  tesselata,  collegit, 
 ordinavit,  restituit,  in  tinum  corpus  redegit,  Latine 
 exkibuit,  commentario  ifistruxit  Joannes  Gul.  Don- 
 aldsott,  S.  Theologies  doctor,  8vo.  In  this  work 
 the  learned  author  maintained  that  the  anthology 
 
JASHER 
 
 470 
 
 JASHUB 
 
 called  Jashar,  in  which  the  religious  marrow  of 
 the  O.  T.  is  contained,  was  put  together  in  the 
 reign  of  Solomon,  either  by  himself,  or  by  his  ad- 
 vice. The  critic  undertook,  therefore,  to  collect 
 the  scattered  parts  of  the  work,  and  restore  them 
 to  their  primitive  order.  In  pursuance  of  this 
 task,  he  distributed  the  book  into  seven  parts,  thus  : 
 Part  i.,  shewing  that  man  was  made  upright  ("lE''')i 
 
 but  fell  into  sin  by  carnal  wisdom,  consisting  of 
 two  fragments,  viz. ,  a  shorter  Elohistic  poem  (Gen. 
 i.  27,  28 ;  vi.  I,  2,  4,  5  ;  viii.  21  ;  vi.  6,  3) ;  and  a 
 longer  Jehovistic  fragment  (Gen.  ii.  7-9,  15-25  ; 
 iii.  1-19,  21,  23,  24).  Part  ii.,  shewing  how  the 
 descendants  of  Abraham,  as  tipright  (D''"ltJ'^))   are 
 
 adopted  into  the  number  of  the  sons  of  God,  and 
 the  neighbouring  nations,  Cainites,  Ishmaelites, 
 Canaanites,  and  Edomites  are  rejected,  consists  of 
 four  fragments,  viz.,  the  rejection  of  the  Hamites 
 and  Canaanites  in  general  (Gen.  ix.  18-27)  ;  the  re- 
 jection of  the  Cainites  (iv.  2-8,  8-16) ;  the  rejection 
 of  the  Hagarenes  (xvi.  1-4,  15,  16;  xvii.  16,  18- 
 26  ;  xxi.  1-14,  20,  21);  the  rejection  of  the  Edom- 
 ites (xxiv.  32-34  ;  xxvii. )  Part  iii.  shews  how  the 
 pious  Israelites,  having  escaped  from  Egypt,  and 
 spent  forty  years  in  the  desert,  after  many  vicissi- 
 tudes of  fortune,  dedicate  a  temple  to  Jehovah, 
 under  the  peaceful  king  Solomon,  in  a  land  of 
 tranquilhty  (Gen.  viii.  6-12).  Part  iv.  contains  di- 
 vine laws  to  be  observed  by  the  upright  people,  and 
 consists  of  three  fragments,  viz. ,  the  ten  precepts 
 of  probity  (Deut.  v.  I-19);  the  marrow  of  the 
 divine  law  (Deut.  vi.  3-5;  x.  12-22;  xi.  I-9)  ; 
 the  inculcation  of  obedience  (viii.  1-3  ;  vi.  6-25). 
 Part  V.  contains  the  benedictions  and  admonitions  of 
 the  upright  (Gen.  xlix.  ;  Num.  xxiii.,  xxiv.  ;  Deut. 
 xxxii.,  xxxiii.)  Part  vi.  contains  the  wonderful  vic- 
 tories and  deliverances  of  the  upright  people,  and 
 consists  of  Exod.  xv.  1-19 ;  Josh.  x.  12-13  ;  Judg.  v. 
 1-20.  Part  vii.  Various  poems  respecting  the  rule 
 of  the  good,  and  the  prosperity  that  characterised 
 the  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon,  viz.,  i  Sam.  ii.  i- 
 10;  2  Sam.  i.  17-27,  33,  34;  xxiii.  1-7;  Ps.  xviii. 
 I-51  ;  2  Sam.  xxii.  1-51  ;  Ps.  xlv.  1-18;  Ix.  1-14  ; 
 Ixviii.  1-36. 
 
 It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  critic  has  shewn 
 great  ingenuity  and  constructive  skill  in  elaborat- 
 ing his  theoiy.  His  commentaries  on  the  indi- 
 vidual fragments  composing  the  parts  often  exhibit 
 striking  and  just  remarks,  with  a  right  percep- 
 tion of  the  genius  of  some  portions  of  the  O.  T. 
 But  we  must  pronounce  the  attempt  a  failure.  The 
 }eading  positions  are  untenable.  Donaldson's  argu- 
 ments are  often  weak  and  baseless.  Most  of  the  con- 
 tents which  he  assigns  to  the  book  of  Jashar  never 
 belonged  to  it ;  such  as  the  pieces  of  Genesis  which 
 he  selects,  etc.  But  it  is  needless  to  enter  into  a 
 refutation  of  the  hypothesis,  ingeniously  set  forth 
 in  elegant  Latin,  and  supported  with  considerable 
 acuteness.  Most  of  the  book  of  Jashar  cited  in 
 Joshua  and  2d  Samuel  is  lost  It  is  veiy  impro- 
 bable that  laws,  such  as  those  in  Deut.  vi.,  x.,  xi.  ; 
 or  historical  pieces  like  Gen.  xvi.  1-4,  ever  belonged 
 to  it.     And  it   is  a  most  unfortunate  conjecture 
 
 that   fo'^'^,    in   Gen.    xlix.   10,   is   abridged    from 
 
 HOPE',  or  even  if  it  were,  that  it  furnishes  a  proof 
 
 of  the  poem  being  written  while  Solornon  was  king 
 (p.  27).  We  are  persuaded  that  the  critic  gives 
 great  extension  of  meaning  to  the  Hebrew  word 
 
 "Iti'"',  in  making  it  almost,  if  not  altogether,  an  ap 
 pellation  of  the  Israelite  people.  When  he  as- 
 sumes that  it  is  contained  in  ?K"1ti*'',  the  notion  is 
 erroneous  (p.  23). — S.  D.  "t  :  • 
 
 JASHOBEAM  (OyaC'^ ;  Sept.  'leo-epaSd),  son 
 
 of  Hachmoni,  one  of  David's  worthies,  and  the 
 first  named  in  the  two  lists  which  are  given  of 
 them  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  8;  I  Chron.  xi.  11).  One  of 
 these  texts  is  held  to  have  suffered  through  the 
 negligence  of  copyists,  and  as  Jashobeam  is  not 
 historically  known,  commentators  have  been  much 
 embarrassed  in  comparing  them.  The  former 
 attributes  to  him  the  defeat  of  800,  the  latter  of 
 300  Philistines  ;  and  the  question  has  been  whether 
 there  is  a  mistake  of  figures  in  one  of  these  ac- 
 counts, or  whether  two  different  exploits  are 
 recorded.  Further  difficulties  will  appear  in  com- 
 paring the  two  texts.  We  have  assumed  Jasho- 
 beam to  be  intended  in  both ;  but  this  is  open 
 to  question.  In  Chronicles  we  read,  '  Jashobeam, 
 the  Hachmonite,  chief  of  the  captains  :  he  lifted 
 up  his  spear  against  300  men,  slain  by  him  at  one 
 time;'  but  in  Samuel  [margin],  ' Josheb-bassebe t 
 the  Tachmonite,  head  of  the  three,  Adino,  of 
 Ezni,  who  lifted  up  his  spear  against  800  men 
 whom  he  slew.'  That  Jashobeam  the  Hachmon- 
 ite, and  Joseb-besheth  the  Tachmonite,  are  the 
 same  person  is  clear  ;  but  may  not  Adino  of  Ezni, 
 whose  name  forms  the  immediate  antecedent  of 
 the  exploit,  which,  as  related  here,  constitutes  the 
 sole  discrepancy  between  the  two  texts,  be  another 
 person  ?  Many  so  explain  it,  and  thus  obtain  a 
 solution  of  the  difficulty.  But  a  further  compari- 
 son of  the  two  verses  will  again  suggest  that  the 
 whole  of  the  last  cited  must  belong  to  Jashobeam  ; 
 for  not  only  is  the  parallel  incomplete,  if  we  take 
 the  last  clause  from  him  and  assign  it  to  another, 
 but  in  doing  this  we  leave  the  '  chief  among  the 
 captains'  without  an  exploit,  in  a  list  which  records 
 some  feat  of  eveiy  hero.  We  incline,  therefore, 
 to  the  opinion  of  those  who  suppose  that  Jasho- 
 beam, or  Josheb-bassebet,  was  the  title  as  chief, 
 Adino  the  proper  name,  and  Hachmonite  the 
 patronymic  of  the  same  person ;  and  the  discre- 
 pancy which  thus  remains,  we  account  for,  not  on 
 the  supposition  of  different  exploits,  but  of  one  of 
 those  corruptions  of  numbers  of  which  several  will 
 be  found  in  comparing  the  books  of  Chronicles 
 with  those  of  Samuel  and  Kings.     [Eznite.] 
 
 The  exploit  of  breaking  through  the  host  of  the 
 Philistines  to  procure  David  a  draught  of  water 
 from  the  well  of  Bethlehem,  is  ascribed  to  the  three 
 chief  heroes,  and  therefore  to  Jashobeam,  who  was 
 the  first  of  the  three  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  13-17  ;  I  Chron. 
 xi.  15-19). 
 
 A  Jashobeam  is  named  among  the  Korhites  who 
 came  to  David  at  Ziklag  (i  Chron.  xii.  6);  but 
 this  could  scarcely  have  been  the  same  with  the 
 preceding. 
 
 We  also  find  a  Jashobeam  who  commanded 
 24,000,  and  did  duty  in  David's  court  in  the 
 month  Nisan  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  2).  He  was  the 
 son  of  Zabdiel ;  if,  therefore,  he  was  the  same  as 
 the  first  Jashobeam,  his  patronymic  of  '  the  Hach- 
 monite' must  be  referred  to  his  race  rather  than  to 
 his  immediate  father.     This  seems  hkely,— J.  K. 
 
 JASHUB  (niE'' ;  Sept.  'Iacroi5/3),  the  third  son 
 of  Issachar,  and  the  head  of  the  family  or  clan  oi 
 
 I 
 
JASHUBI-LEHEM 
 
 471 
 
 JASON 
 
 the  Tashubites  (Num.  xxvi.  24;  I  Chron.  vii.  l). 
 In  tills  last  passage  the  textual  reading  is  y^^, 
 but  there  is  a  K'ri  2W'^-  In  the  former  passage 
 the  Samaritan  has  2^V,  but  some  copies  have 
 Qlt^*  (see  Kennicott,  Bi'i.  Heb.  in  loc.)  In  Gen. 
 xlvi.  13  the  name  appears  in  the  form  of  "y^  Job. 
 As  the  two  words  have  the  same  meaning,  '  tlie 
 returner '  (the  one  from  2'lJ^',  the  other  from  3T>  or 
 
 31 X  ;  Arab.  \),  the  one  may  have  been  substi- 
 tuted for  the  other  by  an  oversight. 
 
 Another  person  of  this  name  is  mentioned  Ezra 
 X.  29.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JASHUBI-LEHEM    (nnip-Ut^V   Returner  to 
 
 Lehem,  i.e.,  Bet/ilehcm  ;  Sept.  Kal  airiaTp€\j/€v  av- 
 Tous),  the  last  in  the  list  of  the  sons  of  Shelah 
 (i  Chron.  iv.  22).  According  to  one  Jewish  tra- 
 dition, as  presented  by  the  Targum,  this  was  Boaz  ; 
 cut  another,  as  given  by  Jerome  (Qurrst.  Heb.  in 
 Paralip.),  represents  the  words  as  describing  Naomi 
 and  Ruth  who  returned  to  Bethlehem.  The  latter 
 tradition  explains  the  whole  verse  thus  :  — '  Who 
 made  the  swi  to  statid,  that  is,  Elimelech,  in  whose 
 time  the  sun  stood  because  of  those  who  acted  de- 
 ceitfully by  the  law,  that  by  so  great  a  miracle  they 
 might  be  converted  to  God  ;  this  failing,  a  famine 
 ensued,  by  which  they  were  driven  from  their 
 country.  Men  of  a  lie  (Chozeba),  that  is,  Mahlon 
 and  Chilion,  called  here  Secure  (Joash),  and  Flam- 
 ing (Saraph) ;  and  who  are  styled  princes  0/  Aloab 
 because  they  married  Moabite  wives.  T/iey  who 
 returned  to  Lehem  are  Naomi  and  Ruth;  and  these 
 are  said  to  be  ancient  words  because  they  are  re- 
 corded in  the  book  of  Ruth. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JASON  ('Ido-wi',  the  healer,  from  lacrdai,  to  heal), 
 the  equivalent  of  Jesus  {'[rjaovs).  This  latter  is  a 
 name  of  frequent  occurrence  in  Josephus,  and  is 
 the  Greek  form  of  Joshua  or  Jeshua,  a  contraction  of 
 Jehoshua  (J?ti'in%  '  whose  help  is  Jehovah,' Gesen. ; 
 
 '  God  the  Saviour,'  Pearson  On  the  Creed,  art.  ii.  p. 
 129,  seqJ)  The  names  of  Jason  and  Jesus  each  oc- 
 cur twice  in  the  list  of  the  seventy- two  elders  who 
 were  sent  to  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  by  Eleazar  (Aris- 
 teas.  Hist.  ap.  Hody,  p.  7).  Another  instance  of 
 the  interchange  of  Greek  and  Hebrew  names  is  in 
 the  case  of  Alcimus  or  Jacimus  ('AX/ct/xos  6  /cat 
 'Id/cei^os,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  9.  7),  which  are 
 equivalent  to  jakim,  Jachin,  and  Eliakim.  The 
 Greek  names  in  Josephus  in  connection  with  the 
 Hebrew  would  seem  to  indicate  that  both  lan- 
 guages were  used  indiscriminately  by  the  Jews  (see 
 Bell.  Jud.,  V.  4.  I,  2). 
 
 1.  Jason,  the  Son  of  Eleazar  ('Ido-wv  vih% 
 ''^Xio.la.pov.,  I  Maccab.  viii.  17  ;  cf.  'Iijo-oOs  wos 
 "Lt-ph-x  'EXed^ap,  Alex.,  Ecclus.  1.  27),  was  one  of 
 the  ambassadors  chosen  by  Judas  Maccabseus,  in 
 conjunction  with  Eupolemus,  and  sent  to  Rome  to 
 make  a  league  of  amity  and  confederacy  with  the 
 Romans,  B.C.  161  (i  Maccab.  /.  c.  ;  Joseph.  A^ttiq. 
 xii.  ID.  6). 
 
 2.  Jason,  the  Father  of  Antipater,  who 
 was  sent  by  Jonathan,  in  conjunction  with  Nume- 
 nius,  the  son  of  Antiochus,  to  Rome  to  renew  the 
 former  treaty,  is,  in  all  probability,  the  same  per- 
 son as  Jason,  the  son  of  Eleazar  (i  Maccab.  xii. 
 16 ;  xiv.  22). 
 
 3.  Jason,  of  Gyrene,  in  Africa,  was  a  Helle- 
 nist Jew  of  the  race  of  those  Jews  whom  Ptolemy 
 
 Soter  sent  into  Eg)'pt  (2  Maccab.  i,  ;  Joseph.  An- 
 tiq. xii.  I  ;  Prideaux,  Connectiott,  vol  ii.,  p.  176). 
 He  wrote  in  five  books  the  history  of  Judas  Mac- 
 cabteus  and  his  brethren,  and  the  principal  transac- 
 tions of  the  Jews  during  the  reigns  of  Seleucus  IV. 
 Philopator,  Antiochus  IV.  Epiphanes,  and  An- 
 tiochus V.  Eupator  (B.C.  187-162),  from  which  five 
 books  most  of  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  is 
 abridged.  In  all  probability  it  was  written  in  Greek, 
 and  from  the  fact  of  it  including  the  wars  under 
 Antiochus  V.  Eupator,  it  must  have  been  written 
 after  B.C.  162  [2  Maccabees.]  The  sources  from 
 which  Jason  obtained  his  information  are  unknown, 
 and  it  is  not  certain  when  either  he  or  his  epito- 
 miser  lived.  His  history  is  contained  in  the  few 
 verses  of  the  2  Maccab.  ii.  19-23  (cf.  Winer  Real- 
 wdrterbuch,  s.  v.  jfason). 
 
 4.  Jason,  the  High-Priest,  was  the  second 
 son  of  Simon  II.,  and  the  brother  of  Onias  HI. 
 His  proper  name  was  Jesus,  but  he  had  changed 
 it  to  that  of  Jason  ('I?;croDs  ^Idaova  'iavrov  ixerwvb- 
 p-aaev,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  5.  i).  Shortly  after  the 
 accession  of  Antiochus  IV.  Epiphanes,  Jason 
 offered  to  the  king  440  talents  of  yearly  tribute  if 
 he  would  invest  him  with  the  high-priesthood,  to 
 the  exclusion  of  his  elder  brother.  Josephus  says 
 that  Onias  III.  was  dead  on  the  accession  of  Jason 
 to  the  high-priesthood,  and  that  Jason  received  this 
 post  in  consequence  of  his  nephew,  Onias  IV.,  the 
 son  of.  Onias  HI.,  being  as  yet  an  infant  (Antiq.  xii. 
 5.  i).  Jason  also  offered  a  further  150  talents  for 
 the  license  '  to  set  him  up  a  place  of  exercise,  and 
 for  the  training  up  of  youth  in  the  fashions  of  the  hea- 
 then' (2  Maccab.  iv.  7-9  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  5.  i). 
 This  offer  was  immediately  accepted  by  Antiochus, 
 and  Jason  built  a  gymnasium  at  Jerusalem.  The 
 effect  of  this  innovation  was  to  produce  a  stronger 
 tendency  than  ever  for  Greek  fashions  and  heathen- 
 ish manners,  and  they  so  increased  under  the  super- 
 intendence of  the  wicked  Jason  that  the  priests 
 despised  the  Temple  and  '  hastened  to  be  partakers 
 of  the  unlawful  allowance  in  the  place  of  exercise, 
 after  the  game  of  Discus  [Discvs]  called  them 
 forth'  (2  Maccab.  iv.  14).  Some  of  the  Jews  even 
 '  made  themselves  uncircumcised'  that  they  might 
 appear  to  be  Greeks  when  they  were  naked  (i 
 Maccab.  i.  15  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  5.  l).  At  last, 
 as  was  the  custom  of  the  cities  who  used  to  send 
 embassies  to  Tyre  in  honour  of  Hercules  (Curt, 
 iv.  2  ;  Polyb.  Reliq.  xxxi.  20,  12),  Jason  sent  spe- 
 cial messengers  {Qewpom)  from  Jerusalem,  who 
 were  the  newly-elected  citizens  of  Antioch  ('Av- 
 Ttoxets  diras,  cf.  2  Maccab.  iv.  9),  to  carry  three 
 hundred  drachms  of  silver  to  the  sacrifice  of  that 
 god.  The  money,  however,  contrary  to  the  wish 
 of  the  sender,  was  not  used  for  the  sacrifice  of  Her- 
 cules, but  reserved  for  making  triremes,  because 
 the  bearers  of  it  did  not  think  it  proper  (5ia  rh  p.7] 
 KadriKeiv)  to  employ  it  for  the  sacrifice  (2  Maccab. 
 iv.  19,  20)  [Hercules].  In  B.C.  172  Jason  also 
 gave  a  festival  to  Antiochus  when  he  visited  Jeru- 
 salem, Jason  and  the  citizens  leading  him  in  by 
 torchlight  and  with  great  shoutings  (2  Maccab. 
 iv.  22).  Josephus  mentions  this  visit,  but  says  that 
 it  was  an  expedition  against  Jerusalem,  and  that 
 Antiochus,  upon  obtaining  possession  of  the  city, 
 slew  many  of  the  Jews,  and  plundered  it  of  a  great 
 deal  of  money  [Antiq.  xii.  5.  3).  The  crafty  Jason, 
 however,  soon  found  a  yet  more  cunning  kinsman, 
 who  removed  him  from  his  o.ffice  in  much  the  same 
 manner  as  he  had  done  with  his  brother  Onias 
 
JASPER 
 
 472 
 
 JAVAN 
 
 III.  Menelaus,  the  son  of  Simon  (Joseph.  An- 
 tig.  xii.  5.  I ;  Simon's  brother,  2  Maccab.  iv.  23), 
 governor  of  the  Temple,  having  been  sent  by  Jason 
 to  Antiochus,  knew  how  through  flattery,  and  by 
 offering  three  hundred  talents  more  than  Jason,  to 
 gain  the  favour  of  the  king.  Antiochus  immedi- 
 ately gave  him  the  office  of  high-priest,  and  Jason 
 was  forced  to  flee  into  the  country  of  the  Ammo- 
 nites (2  Maccab.  iv.  26)  [Menelaus].  In  b.c.  170 
 Antiochus,  having  undertaken  his  second  expedition 
 into  Egypt,  there  was  a  rumour  that  he  was  dead, 
 and  Jason  made  an  attack  upon  Jerusalem,  and 
 committed  many  atrocities.  He  was,  however, 
 forced  again  to  flee  into  the  country  of  the  Ammo- 
 nites (2  Maccab.  v.  5-7).  At  length,  being  accused 
 before  Aretas,  king  of  the  Arabians,  he  was  com- 
 pelled '  to  flee  from  city  to  city,  pursued  of  all 
 men,  and  being  held  in  abomination  as  an  open 
 enemy  of  his  country  and  countrymen,'  and  even- 
 tually retired  into  Egypt  (2  Maccab.  v.  8).  He 
 afterwards  retired  to  take  refuge  among  the  Lace- 
 daemonians, '  thinking  there  to  find  succour  by 
 reason  of  his  kindred' (2  Maccab.  v.  9  ;  cf  l  Mac- 
 cab. xii.  7.  21  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  4.  lO  ;  Pri- 
 deaux,  Cotinection,  vol.  ii.,  p.  140),  and  perished 
 miserably  '  in  a  strange  land.'  His  body  remained 
 without  burial,  and  he  had  '  none  to  mourn  for 
 him'  (2  Maccab.  v.  9,  10). 
 
 5.  Jason  of  Thessaxonica  was  the  host  of 
 Paul  and  Silas  at  that  city.  In  consequence  his 
 house  was  assaulted  by  the  Jews  in  order  to  seize 
 the  apostle,  but  not  finding  him,  they  dragged 
 Jason  and  other  brethren  before  the  ruler  of  the 
 city,  who  released  them  on  security  (Acts  xvii. 
 5-9).  He  appears  to  have  been  the  same  as  the 
 Jason  mentioned  in  Rom.  xvi.  21  as  one  of  the 
 kinsmen  of  St.  Paul,  a-nd  probably  accompanied 
 him  from  Thessalonica  to  Corinth.  He  was  not 
 one  of  those  who  accompanied  the  apostle  into 
 Asia,  though  Lightfoot  conjectures  that  Jason  and 
 Secundus  were  the  same  person  (Acts  xx.  4). 
 Alford  says  Secundus  is  altogether  unknown  (Acts, 
 I.e.)  According  to  tradition  Jason  was  Bishop  of 
 Tarsus.  (Fabric,  Lux.  Evattg.,  pp.  91,  92;  Winer, 
 Realwdrterbuch,  s.  v.  yaso7i). — F.  W.  M. 
 
 JASPER.     [Yashpeh.] 
 
 JASPIS,  Gottfried  Siegmund,  a  German 
 theologian,  was  born  at  Meissen,  April  8,  1766. 
 He  received  his  education  there  from  1779  till 
 1785,  when  he  repaired  to  Leipzig,  where  he  en- 
 joyed the  advantages  of  Morus's  lectures.  The 
 influence  of  this  teacher  upon  him  was  beneficial 
 and  lasting.  In  1792  he  became  pastor  at  Piichau, 
 and  in  18 14  deacon  of  the  Nicolaikirche  in  Leipzig, 
 to  which  office  he  was  recommended  by  Tittmann, 
 Tzschirner  and  Goldhorn.  He  died  at  Leipzig, 
 February  15,  1823.  Jaspis  is  best  known  by  his 
 excellent  Latin  translation  of  the  apostolic  Epistles, 
 Lipsice  1793-1795,  and  new  ed.  1821,  8vo.  His 
 homiletic  and  polemical  writings  have  passed  into 
 oblivion.  He  was  a  man  of  pure  aims  and  cheer- 
 ful piet}',  a  good  scholar  and  preacher. — S.  D. 
 
 JATTIR  (T'ri*,  and  -in\  '  height  i'  'le^^p  and 
 
 AlKwfK,  etc.;  yether),  an  ancient  Canaamtish  town 
 situated  in  the  mountains  of  Judah,  and  assigned 
 to  the  priests  Qosli.  xv.  48;  xxi.  14).  Its  inha- 
 bitants appear  to  have  been  friendly  to  David,  for 
 he  sent  them  a  present  out  of  the  spoils  of  Ziklag 
 (I   Sam.   xxx.   27).     After  this  time  we  hear  no 
 
 more  of  it  in  Scripture  ;  but  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
 describe  it  as  '  a  very  large  village,  twenty  miles 
 distant  from  Eleutheropolis,  in  Darom,  towards 
 Malatha,  inhabited  wholly  by  Christians'  {Ono- 
 mast.  s.  v.  Jether).  Malatha,  we  know  lay  about 
 twenty  miles  due  south  of  Hebron.  Between 
 these  two  places,  and  twelve  miles  from  the  latter, 
 stands   the  village  of  Attir,   which,    though   the 
 
 name  is  different   (  -JLc>  ^^^  c  taking  the  place 
 
 of  the  \  a  very  unusual  change),  is  unquestionably 
 identical  with  the  ancient  Jattir.  It  is  situated  on 
 a  'height,'  as  the  old  name  implies  ;  and  grouped 
 round  it  at  the  distance  of  a  few  miles  are  Socoh, 
 Anab,  and  Eshtemoh,  which  are  connected  with  it 
 in  Joshua's  list  (xv.  48-50;  see  Robinson,  B.  R., 
 ii.  494;  Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  i.  353). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 JAVAN  (|V  ;  Sept.  'Iwi^a.-).     I.  The  fourth  in 
 
 order  of  the  sons  of  Japheth,  and  the  father  of 
 Elishah,  Tarshish,  Kittim,  and  Dodanim  (Gen.  x. 
 
 2,  4).  2.  In  later  books  the  designation  of  a 
 place,  which  is  coupled  with  Tarshish,  Pul,  Lud, 
 Tubal,  and  '  the  isles  afar  off,'  as  among  the  na- 
 tions to  which  Israel  should  be  scattered  (Is.  Ixvi. 
 19) ;  and  with  Tubal  and  Meshech  as  carrying  on 
 traffic  with  the  Tyrians,  and  especially  as  supply- 
 ing them  with  slaves  (Ezek.  xxvii.  13).  This  ren- 
 ders it  probable  that  Javan  was  the  name  given  by 
 the  Hebrews  to  Greece,  with  its  dependencies ; 
 and  this  rises  to  certainty  when  we  find  the  term 
 employed  to  designate  the  Macedonian  empire  in 
 Greece  (Dan.  viii.  21),  and  find  the  enemies  over 
 whom  the  Jews  were  to  triumph  called  B'ney- 
 Javan,  whether  we  understand  this  of  the  soldiers 
 of  Antiochus,  who  were  Greek  by  descent  ('  He- 
 
 brsei  omnes  illos  SyricC  .^gyptique  reges  }V  ""S^D 
 locant,'  Grotius),  or  of  the  Greeks  as  representing 
 generally  the  Gentile  world.  When  we  find  that 
 this  name,  or  its  analogue,  is  found  as  a  designa- 
 tion of  Greece  not  only  in  all  the  Shemitic  dialects, 
 but  also  in  the  Sanscrit,  the  Old  Persic,  and  the 
 Egyptian  (Knobel,  Vblkertafel,  p.  78,  ff.);  when 
 we  find  it  in  the  form  of  Yaenan,  or  Yamm, 
 in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  as  designating  the 
 countiy  to  which  the  Cyprians  belonged  (Rawlin- 
 son's  Herod,  i.  474) ;  when  we  remember  that  in 
 the  form  'Idoves,  appears  in  Homer  as  the  designa- 
 tion of  the  early  inhabitants  of  Attica  (//.  xiii.  685), 
 that  .^schylus  and  Aristophanes  make  their  Persian 
 interlocutors  call  the  Greeks  'Idofes  (cf.  .(Esch. 
 Pers.  174,  555,  911,  etc.  ;  Aristoph.  Acharn.  104, 
 106),  and  that  the  Scholiast  on  the  latter  of  these 
 passages  from  Aristophanes  expressly  says,  -wav- 
 rasTovs  'EX\T]vas  'Idovai  ol  ^dp^apoi  iKaXovi',  there 
 can  remain  no  reasonable  doubt  that  by  Javan  the 
 Hebrews  designated  Greece.  On  this  has  been 
 founded  the  hypothesis,  that  Javan,  the  son  of 
 Japheth,  was  the  source  of  the  Greek  peoples, 
 but  the  foundation  here  is  slippery  ;  for  it  remains 
 a  question  whether  the  Oriental  nations  derived 
 the  term  Javan  as  applied  to  Greece  from  'law;', 
 the  designation  of  those  of  the  Greeks  with  whom 
 they  came  into  contact,  or  the  Greeks  of  Attica 
 derived  the  name  'Idoves  from  a  traditionary  recol- 
 lection of  Javan  as  their  progenitor.  The  former, 
 it  is  presumed,  is  the  more  probable  hypothesis. 
 
 3.  A  place  mentioned  Ezek.  xxvii.  19  as  supplying 
 Tyre  with  sword-blades,  cassia,  and  calamus.    Tha 
 
JAVELIN 
 
 473 
 
 JEBUS 
 
 nature  of  these  products  indicates  that  the  Javan  of 
 this  verse  must  be  different  from  the  Javan  of  ver. 
 13,  which,  indeed,  the  separate  mention  of  the 
 two  of  itself  suggests.  The  natural  productions 
 mentioned  are  from  Arabia,  and  from  it  also  came 
 the  famous  sword -blades  of  Yemen.  Now,  in  the 
 Kamoos,  there  is  a  place  mentioned  of  the  name 
 
 of  Javan  in  Yemen  ;  and  if  for  p-f^xp  [ni'oozzal, 
 something  spun,  thread,  from  pfK),  we  read  PT^XD 
 (may-oozal,  from  Uzal),  which  seems  to  be  the 
 correct  reading  (see  Havernick,  in  loc),  we  have 
 here  another  place  in  Yemen  mentioned  along  with 
 it  (comp.  Gen.  x.  27  ;  see  Bochart,  Geogr.  Sacr. 
 pt.  i.  bk.  ii.  c.  21;  Rosenmiiller,  Bib.  Geogr.  iii. 
 296,  305).  All  this  renders  it  almost  certain  that 
 an  Arabic  Javan  is  here  intended.  Tuch  suggests 
 {Genesis,  p.  210)  that  the  name  may  have  been  de- 
 rived from  a  Greek  colony  having  settled  there  ; 
 which  is  not  improbable). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JAVELIN.     [Arms.] 
 
 JEALOUSY,  WATER  OF.    [See  vol  i.  p.  74; 
 and  Offering,  vol.  iii.  p.  355.] 
 
 JEARIM,  Mount  (DnjT'in,   '  the  mount  of 
 
 thickets;'  Sept.  7r6Xii''Ioptv  ;  Alex.. 'lapl/x  ;  Afontis 
 Jaritn),  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  northern  bor- 
 der of  Judah  : — 'The  border  compassed  from 
 Baalah  westward  unto  Mount  Seir,  and  passed 
 along  unto  the  side  of  Mouiit  yearim,  which  is 
 Chesalon,  and  went  down  to  Bethshemesh'  (Josh. 
 XV.  10).  Baalah  is  another  name  for  Kirjath-jearim 
 (ver.  9),  now  identified  with  Kuryet  el-Enab  ;  be- 
 tween it,  therefore,  and  Bethshemesh,  Mount  Jearim 
 must  have  been  situated.  Behind  Kuryet  el-Enab, 
 on  the  south-west,  is  a  steep  hill,  and  south  of  this 
 hill  is  the  deep  glen  called  Wady  Ghurab,  nmning 
 from  east  to  west.  About  two  miles  farther  south  is 
 the  parallel  Wady  Ismail.  Between  the  two  Wadys 
 is  a  high  and  rugged  ridge,  on  the  crest  of  which 
 stands  Keslu,  the  ancient  Chesalon ;  and  about  six 
 miles  south-west  of  the  latter  are  the  ruins  of  Beth- 
 shemesh, in  a  valley.  The  ridge  on  which  Keslu 
 stands  is  doubtless  Mount  Jearim.  Perhaps  the 
 hill  behind  Kuryet  el-Enab  may  be  Mount  Seir ; 
 from  it  the  border  '  passed  over  (Wady  Ghurab) 
 
 to  the  shoulder  (in3"!5X  "l3yi)  of  Mount  Jearim 
 .  .  .  and  then  wf^i*  dSTZfw  to  Bethshemesh'  (Josh. 
 XV.  10).  The  topography  of  Joshua  here,  as  else- 
 where, is  wonderfully  accurate.  It  may  be  that  a 
 considerable  district  of  the  mountains  in  this  loca- 
 lity was  called  Jearim,  for  Baalah  is  called  Kirjath- 
 Jearim  ('  the  town  of  Jearim')  ;  and  if  so,  then  we 
 can  see  the  reason  why  the  explanatory  phrase  is 
 added,  '  Mount  Jearim,  which  is  Chesalon,'  to 
 limit  the  more  general  appellative  to  the  narrow 
 ridge  between  the  two  wadys.  (See  Keil  on 
 Joshua,  ad  loc;  Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  11,  12; 
 Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  p.  285.)— J.  L.  P. 
 
 JEBB,  John,  D.D.,  was  born  at  Drogheda 
 Sept.  27,  1775.  He  entered  Trinity  College, 
 Dublin,  in  July  1791,  was  ordained  deacon  in  Feb. 
 24,  1 799,  and  in  the  following  July  became  curate 
 of  Swanlibar,  in  the  diocese  of  Kilmore.  He 
 received  priest's  orders  in  December  of  the  same 
 year,  and  in  1801  took  his  degree  of  A.M.  In 
 the  beginning  of  1804  he  removed  to  the  neigh- 
 bourhood of  Cashel,  and  in  June  1810  became 
 rector  of  Abington  in  the  county  of  Limerick.     In 
 
 1820  he  was  presented  to  the  archdeaconry  of 
 Emly  by  the  archbishop  of  Cashel,  in  the  follow 
 ing  year  received  the  degree  of  D.D.,  and  in  Jan. 
 1823  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Limerick.  He 
 died  Dec.  9,  1833.  His  reputation  as  a  writer 
 rests  on  the  following  work  :  Sacred  Literature, 
 comprising  a  review  of  the  principles  of  composi- 
 tion  laid  do%vn  by  the  late  Robert  Lo^vth,  D.  D. , 
 Lord  Bishop  of  London,  in  his  Prelections  and 
 Isaiah,  arid  an  application  of  the  principles  so 
 reviezved  to  the  illustration  of  the  N.  T. ;  in  a  series 
 of  critical  observations  on  the  style  and  sttucture 
 of  that  Sacred  vohcme ;  8vo,  Lond.  1820,  2d  ed. 
 183 1.  The  design  of  this  work  is  to  prove  that 
 the  structure  of  the  N.  T.  is  often  modelled  after 
 the  poetical  parts  of  the  Old,  and  although  the 
 writer  has  often  pressed  his  principle  to  an  extreme, 
 and  exalted  mere  rhetorical  antitheses  into  the 
 parallelisms  of  Hebrew  poetry,  the  force  and  beauty 
 of  many  passages  in  the  N.  T.  are  exhibited  with 
 great  clearness  and  interest. — S.  N. 
 
 JEBERECHIAII  (^n''3nn'' ;  Bapax/as;  Bara- 
 
 chias).  In  Is.  viii.  2  we  find  Jeberechiah  men- 
 tioned as  the  father  of  a  certain  Zechariah,  selected 
 by  Isaiah,  together  with  a  priest  named  Uriah,  as 
 witnesses  to  attest  his  prediction.  Both  the  LXX. 
 and  the  Vulgate  give  the  name  in  its  ordinary 
 form,  Barachiah,  and  as  we  do  not  find  it  else- 
 where, the  initial  ^  is  probably  an  error,  which 
 may  be  accounted  for  by  supposing  the  preceding 
 word  p  to  have  been  originally  plural,  ''J3,  the 
 two  witnesses  being  both  sons  of  Barachiah,  and 
 the  final  letter,  by  a  mistake  of  the  copyist,  to 
 have  been  prefixed  to  the  following  word. 
 
 The  same  pair  of  names  seems  to  have  been  of 
 no  unfrequent  occurrence  in  the  priestly  houses. 
 Zechariah  the  prophet  was  son  of  Berechiah  (Zech. 
 i.  i),  and  we  have  '  Zacharias,  son  of  Barachias' 
 (Matt,  xxiii.  3,  5).  Josephus  also  {Bell.  fud.  iv. 
 5.  4)  mentions  another  Zacharias,  sonof  Baruch. — 
 E.  V. 
 
 JEBUS  (D13^,  '«  place  trodden  down,''  perhaps 
 
 '«  threshing-floor;''  Sept.  'le/So^s ;  febus),  the 
 name  of  the  ancient  Canaanitish  city  which  stood 
 on  Mount  Zion,  one  of  the  hills  on  which  Jerusalem 
 was  built.  In  Judg.  xix.  10  it  is  identified  with 
 Jerusalem — '  And  came  over  against  Jebus,  which 
 is  Jerusalem;'  and  in  i  Chron.  xi.  4,  5,  the  only 
 other  passage  in  which  the  name  occurs,  it  is  iden- 
 tified with  the  castle  of  Zion,  subsequently  called 
 the  castle  or  city  of  David — '  And  David  and  all 
 Israel  went  to  Jerusalem,  which  is  Jebus ;  where 
 the  Jebusites  were,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land. 
 And  the  inhabitants  of  Jebus  said  to  David,  thou 
 shalt  not  come  hither.  Nevertheless  David  took 
 the  castle  of  Zion,  which  is  the  city  of  David.' 
 The  sides  of  Zion  descended  precipitously  on  the 
 west  and  south  into  the  deep  valley  of  Hinnom, 
 and  on  the  east  into  the  Tyropoean,  which  sepa- 
 rated it  from  Moriah.  On  the  north  side  the  upper 
 part  of  the  Tyropoean  swept  round  it ;  and  here 
 was  a  ledge  of  rock  on  which  a  massive  tower  was 
 afterwai'ds  founded,  perhaps  on  the  site  of  an 
 older  one.  Jebus  was  thus  naturally  a  place  of 
 great  strength;  and  being  strongly  fortified  be- 
 sides, it  is  not  strange  that  the  Jebusites  should 
 have  gloried  in  it  as  impregnable,  and  that  the 
 capture  of  it  by  David  should  have  been  considered 
 one  of  his  most  brilliant  achievements  (2  Sam.  v. 
 
JEBUSITE 
 
 474 
 
 JEDAIAH 
 
 8).  Even  after  Jebus  was  captured,  and  Jerusalem 
 founded  and  made  the  capital  of  Israel,  Zion  was 
 separately  fortified.  It  seems  that  in  addition  to 
 the  '  castle '  on  the  summit  of  the  hill  there  was  a 
 lower  city  or  suburb,  perhaps  lying  in  the  bottom 
 of  the  adjoining  valleys  ;  for  we  read  that  the 
 children  of  Judala  had  captured  and  burned  Jeru- 
 salem (Judg.  i.  7,  8),  while  afterwards  it  is  said 
 '  the  Benjamites  did  not  drive  out  the  Jebusites 
 that  inhabited  Jerusalem'  (ver.  2i).  The  Jebu- 
 sites still  held  the  '  castle '  which  was  within  the 
 allotted  territory  of  Benjamin,  but  the  children  of 
 Judah  drove  them  out  of  the  lower  town  which 
 was  situated  within  their  borders.  This  is  in  sub- 
 stance the  explanation  given  by  Josephus  {Antiq. 
 V.  2.  2  and  5).  An  attempt  has  recently  been 
 made  to  represent  Jebus  and  Zion  as  distinct,  and 
 to  identify  Zion  and  Moriah  (Smith's  Did.  of  ike 
 Bible,  s.  V.  Jerusalem,  vol.  i.,  p.  1026),  but  this  is 
 plainly  at  variance  with  i  Kings  viii.,  where,  after 
 the  building  of  the  temple  on  Moriah,  Solomon 
 assembled  the  elders  '  that  they  miglit  bring  up 
 the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  out  of  the  city 
 of  David,  which  is  Zion  '  (see  also  2  Chron.  v.  2-7). 
 Of  course  if  Zion  and  Moriah  were  identical  this 
 statement  would  be  inaccurate  [ZiON].  But 
 again,  as  has  been  stated  above,  Jebus  and  the 
 '  castle  of  Zion,  which  is  the  city  of  David,'  are 
 clearly  identified  in  I  Chron.  xi.  4,  5.  While  the 
 Jebusites  had  their  castle  or  citadel  upon  one  hill 
 they  had  their  threshing-floors  upon  another  ad- 
 joining it,  Mount  Moriah,  a  thing  very  often  seen 
 in  Syria  at  the  present  day  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  18-24, 
 with  2  Chron.  iii.  i). 
 
 Jebus  was  the  stronghold  and  capital  of  the 
 powerful  tribe  of  the  Jebusites,  who  were  descended 
 from  one  of  the  sons  of  Canaan  (Gen.  x.  16).  We 
 cannot  tell  whether  the  city  took  its  name  from 
 the  man  who  founded  it,  or  whether  the  tribe  took 
 its  name  from  the  peculiar  character  of  the  hill  on 
 which  their  chief  city  was  built.  [Jebusite.]— 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 JEBUSITE    CDIT;    '\^^ovaaXo%  \    Jebiismis). 
 
 The  genealogy  of  this  ancient  tribe  is  given,  with 
 numerous  others,  in  that  invaluable  loth  chapter 
 of  Genesis.  At  ver.  15,  we  read,  'And  Canaan 
 begat  Sidon,  his  first-born,  and  Heth,  and  the 
 Jebusite.''  It  is  worthy  of  note,  that  while  the 
 two  first  names  are  those  of  individuals,  the  third 
 and  all  that  follow  denote  tribes — the  Jebusite,  etc. 
 CDOTI).  The  only  instance  in  which  the  indi- 
 vidual name  appears  is  as  applied  to  the  city  Jebus. 
 [Jebus.]  The  Jebusites  are  always  mentioned 
 among  the  tribes  who  possessed  Canaan  before  the 
 Exodus.  They  dwelt  in  that  country  during  the 
 time  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xv.  21).  When  the 
 twelve  spies  were  sent  by  Moses  from  the  wilder- 
 ness of  Paran  '  to  spy  out  the  land,'  they  reported 
 on  their  return  that  '  the  Amalekites  dwell  in  the 
 land  of  the  south  ;  and  the  Hittites,  and  the  Jebu- 
 sites, and  the  Amorites,  divell  in  the  mountains,^ 
 etc.  (Num.  xiii.  29).  Jerusalem,  the  capital  of  the 
 Jebusites,  stands  on  the  very  crest  of  the  mountain 
 range.  On  Mount  Zion  they  built  their  great 
 stronghold  (i  Chron.  xi.  4,  5),  and  doubtless  they 
 occupied  a  considerable  section  of  the  surrounding 
 hills.  The  Jebusites  were  a  warlike  tribe,  and 
 their  king  appears  to  have  exercised  extensive  in- 
 fluence, as  he  was  the  head  of  the  league  formed 
 against  the  Gibconites  (Josh.  x.  i).     The  Israelites 
 
 conquered  them,  seized  their  land,  and  reduced 
 them  to  tribute  ;  but  the  Jebusites  still  held  their 
 castle  on  Zion,  and  dwelt  among  the  Benjamites 
 until  David  attacked  their  fortress,  and  Joab  sue 
 ceeded  in  scaling  its  cliffs  and  walls.  Then  the 
 tribe  was  dispersed  ;  though  it  would  seem  that  a 
 few  of  them  were  permitted  to  remain  around  their 
 old  capital,  since  David  bought  from  Araunah  the 
 Jebusite,  the  threshing-floor  on  Moriah  on  which 
 the  Temple  was  afterwards  built.  From  the  narra- 
 tive of  David's  remarkable  interview  with  Araunah, 
 it  would  seem  that  the  latter  was  of  the  royal 
 family  of  the  Jebusites  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  18-25  >  ^ 
 CIn-on.  xxi.  15-30).  Josephus  tells  us  that  Araunah 
 was  '  a  particular  friend  of  David's  ;  and  for  that 
 cause  it  was  that,  when  he  overthrew  the  city,  he 
 did  him  no  harm'  {Antiq.  vii.  13.  4;  and  3.  3). 
 This  is  the  last  notice  we  have  of  the  Jebusites. — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 JECAMIAH    (n^Pip."';    Sept.    'leKe^/a;    Alex. 
 
 'le/cev/a),  one  of  seven  who  are  mentioned  as  sons 
 of  Jeconiah  in  the  line  of  David  (l  Chron.  iii.  18). 
 By  some  the  first  in  the  list  Shealtiel  (A.  V.  Sala- 
 thiel)  alone  is  regarded  as  the  son  of  Jeconiah,  the 
 other  six  being  reckoned  sons  of  Shealtiel.  It  is 
 in  favour  of  this  that  Zerubbabel,  who  appears 
 here  as  the  son  of  Pedaiah  (ver.  19),  is  elsewhere 
 called  the  son  of  Shealtiel  (Ezra  iii.  2  ;  Hag.  i.  12  ; 
 Matt.  i.  12) ;  which  he  might  be  if  his  father 
 Pedaiah  was  the  son  of  Shealtiel,  but  not  if  he  was 
 his  brother.  There  is  a  difficulty,  however,  in  the 
 way  of  this,  arising  from  the  use  of  the  copula  in 
 ver.  18,  which  evidently  connects  Malchiram,  Pe- 
 daiah, etc.,  with  Shealtiel,  as  sons  of  Jeconiah. 
 May  not  Shealtiel  have  been  childless,  and  the 
 oldest  son  of  his  brother  Pedaiah  be  adopted  by 
 him,  and  appear  in  the  genealogies  as  his  son  ? 
 We  find  Shealtiel  or  Salathiel  himself  appeanng 
 as  the  [legal]  son  of  Neri  (Luke  iii.  27),  though 
 [really]  the  son  of  Jeconiah  [Genealogy  of  Jesus 
 Christ].  With  the  exception  of  Shealtiel,  none 
 of  these  sons  of  Jeconiah  is  mentioned  elsewhere. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JECONIAH,  another  form  of  Jehoiachin,  king 
 of  Judah  (I  Chron.  iii.  16,  17  ;  Jer.  xxiv.  I  ;  xxvii. 
 20 ;  xxviii.  4  ;  xxix.  i ;  Esth.  ii.  6).  The  name 
 is  further  abbreviated  into  Coniah. 
 
 JEDAIAH.  By  this  word  are  represented  in 
 the  A.  V.  two  distinct  Hebrew  names.  The  one 
 of  this  is  iT'yT',  Jah  knozvs  (Sept.  ''Iwbai,  'leoou^, 
 
 'laStd).  Three  persons  of  this  name,  apparently, 
 are  mentioned  in  Scripture  : — 
 
 I.  The  head  of  the  second  course  of  priests  ac- 
 cording to  the  arrangement  of  David  (i  Chron. 
 xxiv.  7).  In  Neh.  xi.  10  Jedaiah  is  made  the  son 
 of  Joiarib  ;  but  there  is  here  an  evident  clerical 
 error ;  for  Jedaiah  and  Joiarib  were  heads  of  dif- 
 ferent priestly  courses  (comp.  i  Chron.  ix.  10). 
 A  portion  of  those  who  returned  from  the  captivity 
 are  described  as  the  '  sons  of  Jedaiah,  of  the  house 
 of  Jeshua'  (Ezra  ii.  36 ;  Neh.  vii.  39).  Jewish 
 tradition  makes  this  Jeshua  the  famous  high-priest 
 in  the  time  of  Zerubbabel ;  but  this  may  be  a 
 mistake.  2.  The  head  of  another  priestly  family 
 in  the  time  of  Jeshua  (Neh.  xii.  7,  21).  3.  A 
 priest  in  the  time  of  Jeshua  (Zech.  vi.  10,  14). 
 
 Tlie  other  Hebrew  name  which  Jedaiah  repre- 
 
JEDIAEL 
 
 475 
 
 JEGAR-SAHADUTHa 
 
 sents  is  iT'T',  Praise  JaJi,  or  Praiser  of  Jah  (Sept. 
 
 'leSad ;  Alex.  'E5id,  'leSaV'a).  Two  men  of  this 
 name  are  mentioned  : — i.  An  ancestor  of  Ziza,  the 
 head  of  a  family  in  the  tribe  of  Simeon  (i  Chron. 
 iv.  37).  2.  The  son  of  Harumaph,  who  is  men- 
 tioned as  one  who  builded  over  against  his  house 
 in  the  repairing  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  lo). — • 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEDIAEL  b^Ty^,  God-kncrwn).     i.  (Sept.  'le- 
 
 lii]K ;  Vulg.  Jadiel,  'jadihet).  One  of  the  lineal 
 descendants  of  Benjamin,  and  founder  of  one  of 
 the  leading  Benjamite  clans  (l  Chron.  vii.  6,  lo,  n). 
 On  the  difficulties  connected  with  the  genealogies 
 of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  see  art.  Becher. 
 
 2.  (TeSf^X;  Vulg.  jedihel).  One  of  David's 
 valiant  men  (l  Chron.  xi.  45).  Perhaps  the  same 
 as  the  following ;  but  this  is  altogether  uncertain. 
 
 3.  ('PojSi^X;  Alex.  'leSiT/X ;  Vulg.  JcdUiel). 
 One  of  the  chief  military  officers  of  the  tribe  of 
 Manasseh,  who  joined  the  army  of  David  when 
 the  latter  was  retiring  to  Ziklag  after  the  Philistines 
 had  refused  to  allow  him  to  go  up  with  them 
 against  Saul  (i  Chron.  xii.  20). 
 
 4.  ('laSi^X  ;  Vulg.  Jadihd).    A  Korahite  CHip) 
 
 appointed  to  be  one  of  the  doorkeepers  of  the 
 temple  in  accordance  with  the  arrangements  made 
 by  David  in  the  last  year  of  his  life  (i  Chron.  xxvi. 
 2).  He  was  the  second  son  of  Meshelemiah,  the 
 son  of  Kore  (Xip).— S.  N. 
 
 JEDIDIAH  (nnn'';  Sept.  'Ie55e5i;  Ale.x.  'le- 
 
 SiSt'a  ;  Amahilis  Domino,  '  darling  of  Jehovah'). 
 
 The  name  bestowed  on  the  newly-born  Solomon 
 by  the  prophet  Nathan,  by  God's  appointment,  as 
 a  token  of  His  love  for  the  child,  and  His  restored 
 favour  towards  his  father  David,  '  because  of  the 
 Lord,'  '  eo  quod  diligeret  eum  Dominus,'  Vulg., 
 2  Sam.  xii.  25.  Ewald  remarks  {Geschichte  iii. 
 215)  on  the  happy  omen  the  imposition  of  such  an 
 auspicious  name,  formed  then  for  the  first  time  for 
 this  express  purpose,  by  Divine  authority,  must 
 have  been  considered  by  the  penitent  and  sorrow- 
 ful David,  and  how  naturally  a  child,  born  under 
 such  circumstances,  and  so  pointedly  owned  of  God, 
 would  become  the  best  beloved  of  his  father,  and 
 be  marked  out  for  the  royal  succession. 
 
 It  must  not  be  overlooked  that  the  same  root 
 nn,  amare,  appears  both  in  David  and  Jedidiah, 
 which  would  doubtless  increase  the  significance  in 
 the  father's  mind.  Ewald  remarks  (/.  c.  note  l) 
 that  it  is  still  a  common  custom  among  the 
 Orientals  to  give  children  a  second  name  in  addi- 
 tion to  that  imposed  at  birth,  of  a  higher  charac- 
 ter, belonguig  to  the  man  in  a  religious  aspect. — 
 
 JEDUTHUN  (I^n^l^,  sometimes  )^rr\\ ;  Sept. 
 
 'ISoi/^wi',  ^YbiQoiv,  'I5t&oi5/x),  a  Levite  of  the  family 
 of  Merari,  and  one  of  the  great  masters  of  the 
 temple  music.  That  he  was  a  Merarite,  is  proved 
 (i)  from  the  fact  that  his  son  Hosah  (i  Chron.  xvi. 
 38  ;  comp.  42)  was  a  descendant  of  Merari  (xxvi. 
 10) ;  (2)  by  the  consideration  that,  as  the  appoint- 
 ment of  three  masters  of  song  in  the  temple  was 
 determined  by  a  regard  to  the  three  sons  of  Levi, 
 and  as  Asaph  represented  the  descendants  of  Ger- 
 shom,  and  Heman  those  of  Kohath,  Jeduthun 
 must  be  regarded  as  representing  those  of  Merari ; 
 and  (3)  when  we  compare  i  Chron.  xv.    17,   19, 
 
 with  xvi.  41,  42 ;  xxv.  I,  3,  6  ;  and  2  Chron. 
 xxxv.  15,  it  will  appear  that  Jeduthun  and  Ethan 
 are  names  of  the  same  person  ;  from  which  it  fol- 
 lows, that  as  Ethan  is  expressly  called  a  Merarite 
 (i  Chron.  xv.  17;  vi.  29  [A.  V.  44]),  Jeduthun 
 must  also  be  such.  This  identification  with  Ethan 
 enables  us  further  to  trace  his  genealogy  ;  he  was 
 the  son  of  Kishi,  or  Kushai,  and  was  13th  in  de- 
 scent from  Levi.  The  department  superintended 
 by  Jeduthun  and  his  colleagues  in  the  temple  ser- 
 vice was  that  of  the  '  instruments  of  the  song  of 
 
 God'  (DM^X  "fC*  "'^3),  by  which  are  intended  the 
 nebel  or  psalteiy,  the  kinnor  or  harp,  and  the 
 metsiltaim  or  cymbals  (xv.  16).  In  2  Chron. 
 xxxv.  15  Jeduthun  is  called  'the  king's  seer,' 
 which  would  seem  to  indicate  that  he  was  the 
 medium  of  divine  guidance  to  David.  The  name 
 occurs  in  the  title  of  Pss.  xxxix.,  Ixii. ,  Ixxvii., 
 where  some  have  thought  that  it  indicates  some 
 special  kind  of  composition,  and  others  some  in- 
 strument of  music,  but  without  reason. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEEZER   (■ir3;''N;   Sept.  'kx^^i?),   the   eldest 
 
 son  of  Gilead,  and  grandson  of  Manasseh,  from 
 whom  sprang  the  family  of  the  Jeezerites  (Num. 
 xxvi.  30).  In  Josh.  xvii.  2  he  is  called  Abiezer 
 ("lTy2S),  and  those  descended  from  him  the  Abi- 
 
 ezrites  (Judg.  vi.  ii).  One  of  these  names  is  sup- 
 posed to  be  the  result  of  a  clerical  mistake  ;  but 
 whether  the  2  has  been  inserted  in  the  one,  or 
 omitted  in  the  other,  remains  uncertain.  The 
 LXX.  would  seem  to  have  read  1TJ?^nX,  but  it  is 
 remarkable  that  in  Josh.  xvii.  2  they  give  'left. 
 This  seems  to  countenance  the  suggestios.  that 
 Jeezer  is  a  contracted  form  of  Abiezer  (SimoRis, 
 Onomasi.  p.  451). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEGAR-SAHADUTHA  (Sniin^'  "l3*  ;  Chal- 
 
 dee,  '  The  heap  of  witness  ;'  Sept.  Bow6sr7js/xapri;- 
 pias;  himulitm  testis),  the  name  given  by  Laban  in 
 his  native  Chaldee  dialect  to  the  heap  of  stones  raised 
 by  Jacob  on  the  spot  where  he  made  the  covenant 
 with  Laban  in  Gilead.  Laban  called  it  Jegar-Sa- 
 hadutha,  but  Jacob  called  it  Galeed.     And  Laban 
 
 said.  This  /leap  Q^,gal)  is  a  witness  (IJ?,  ed)  between 
 me  and  thee  this  day.  Therefore  was  the  name 
 of  it  called  Galeed  (Gen.  xxxi.  46-48).  It  would 
 seem  from  this  remarkable  interview  that  Jacob 
 while  in  Mesopotamia  had  kept  up  the  pure  He- 
 brew dialect,  and  had  trained  his  wives,  children, 
 and  servants  to  the  use  of  it.  Laban  and  his  fol- 
 lowers, however,  only  understood,  or  at  least  were 
 more  familiar,  with  the  Chaldee.  Both  Jacob  and 
 Laban  were  anxious  not  only  to  ratify  the  covenant 
 between  themselves  personally,  but  also  to  have  its 
 solemnity  deeply  impressed  upon  their  followers, 
 and  its  terms  fully  undertsood  by  them  all.  Hence 
 the  different  names  given  to  that  '  heap '  which 
 was,  as  it  were,  the  seal  of  the  covenant.  The 
 names  Jegar-Sahadutha  and  Galeed  are  not  quite 
 synonymous ;  the  difference  is  accurately  repre- 
 sented in  the  Septuagint,  Bow6s  r^s  ixaprvpias  and 
 'Eovvhs  fxaprvs ;  and  in  the  Old  Latin  Acervum  tesH- 
 monii  and  Acervum  testis  ;  but  Jerome  has  just  re- 
 versed the  two  in  the  Vulgate,  Tumulum  testis  and 
 Acerviim  testimonii  (Sabatier,  Biblor.  Sacr.  LatincB 
 Versiones,  ad  loc. )  An  account  of  the  covenant 
 and  the  situation  of  the  '  heap '  are  given  under 
 Gilead. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
JEHIEL 
 
 476 
 
 JEHOAHAZ 
 
 JEHIEL  (!?X''n'' ;    Sept.  'lel'^X ;   Vulg.  Jahid, 
 
 less  frequently  yehiel).  I.  One  of  the  lineal  de- 
 scendants of  Gershon,  by  his  son  Laadan,  and  the 
 founder  of  one  of  the  great  patriarchal  houses  of 
 the  Levites  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  8).     The  members  of 
 
 this  family  or  clan  are  termed  Jehieli  (ipXTT',   i 
 
 Chron.  xxvii.  21,  22). 
 
 2.  A  Levite,  and  one  of  the  singers  appointed 
 to  accompany  the  ark  from  the  house  of  Obed- 
 edom  (i  Chron.  xv.  18,  20),  and  subsequently  to 
 minister  before  it  in  the  tabernacle  which  David 
 had  prepared  for  it  in  Jerusalem  (i  Chron.  xvi.  5). 
 
 3.  The  representative  of  the  family  of  the  Jehieli 
 in  the  reign  of  David,  to  whom  were  entrusted  the 
 precious  stones  contributed  by  the  princes  of  Israel 
 towards  the  erection  of  the  temple  (i  Chron.  xxix. 
 8).  Jehiel  was  probably  his  surname  only,  or  title 
 of  rank,  his  personal  name  being  Zetham  (i  Chron. 
 xxvii.  22). 
 
 4.  (Sept.  'IfTjX ;  Alex.  'leptijX).  Son  of  Hach- 
 moni    ('ilD3n"|3,    rendered   in   the   A.    V.    'an 
 
 Hachmonite,'  i  Chron.  xi.  11),  and  one  of  the 
 officers  of  David's  household,  described  as  '  with 
 the  king's  sons  ;'  probably  he  was  their  tutor  (i 
 Chron.  xxvii.  32). 
 
 5.  Son  of  Jehoshaphat,  king  of  Judah  (2  Chron. 
 xxi.  2). 
 
 6.  A  Levite  of  the  branch  of  Kohath,  and  a  de- 
 scendant of  Heman  the  singer.  He  took  an  active 
 part  in  the  religious  reformation  originated  by  Heze- 
 kiah,  and  was  appointed  one  of  the  overseers  of  the 
 free-will  offerings  given  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
 priests  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  13). 
 
 7.  A  Levite,  and  one  of  the  rulers  of  the  house 
 
 of  God  (D''n'^X  n*"!  "''!"']:)  in  the  reign  of  Josiah 
 (2  Chron.  xxxv.  8). 
 
 8.  The  father  of  Obadiah,  the  head  of  the  Benei- 
 Joab  in  the  time  of  Ezra  (Ezra  viii.  9).  In  the 
 hook  of  Esdras  (viii.  32)  he  is  called  Jezelus  ('lei"^- 
 Xos). 
 
 9.  The  father  of  Shechaniah,  one  of  the  con- 
 temporaries of  Ezra  (Ezra  x.  2).  He  is  described 
 as  one  of  the  sons  of  Elam.  In  the  book  of  Esdras 
 he  is  styled  'one  of  the  sons  of  Israel'  (l  Esd. 
 viii.  92). 
 
 10.  (Sept.  'lai'TjX  ;  Alex.  'Aiet^X  ;  i  Esd.  'Ie^ 
 ^iTjXos.)  One  of  the  Benei-Elam  who,  at  the  ex- 
 hortation of  Ezra,  agreed  to  put  away  his  strange 
 wife  (Ezra  x.  26  ;  I  Esd.  ix.  27). 
 
 1 1.  A  priest  of  the  course  of  Harim,  who  also 
 made  public  acknowledgment  of  his  transgression 
 in  marrying  a  strange  wife  (Ezra  x.  21  ;  also  i 
 Esd.  ix.  21,  which  reads  'le/jeijX). — S.  N. 
 
 JEHIEL  (^Xir.  but  according  to  the  Keri 
 h^^'Vt.  =  JEIEL).  I.  (Sept.  'le^X  ;  Alex.  'leiTjX  ; 
 Vulg.  Jehiel).  The  chief  of  a  Benjamite  family 
 which  settled  at  Gibeon,  and  one  of  the  ancestors 
 of  Saul  (i  Chron.  ix.  35,  see  also  viii.  29). 
 
 2.  ('lei'-^X;  Vulg.  Jehiel).  Son  of  Hotham  the 
 Areorite  and  one  of  David's  valiant  men  (i  Chron. 
 xi.  44).— S.  N. 
 
 JEHIZKIAH  (^in^^rn'' ;  Sept.  'E^/c/as),  one  of 
 
 the  princes  or  chiefs  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  who, 
 at  the  instigation  of  the  prophet  Oded,  withstood 
 the  retaining  in  captivity  of  those  whom  the  host 
 of  Israel  under  Pekah  had  carried  away  out  of 
 
 Judah,  and  succeeded,  after  clot'ning  and  feeding 
 them  out  of  the  spoils,  in  restoring  them  to  their 
 own  land. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEHOAHAZ    (THJ^in),    God- sustained ;    Sept. 
 
 'Icoaxcti').  I.  Son  of  Jehu,  king  of  Israel,  who 
 succeeded  his  father  in  B.C.  856,  and  reigned 
 seventeen  years.  As  he  followed  the  evil  courses 
 of  the  house  of  Jeroboam,  the  Syrians  under  Hazael 
 and  Benhadad  were  suffered  to  prevail  over  him  ; 
 so  that,  at  length,  he  had  only  left  of  all  his  forces 
 fifty  horsemen,  ten  chariots,  and  10,000  foot. 
 Overwhelmed  by  his  calamities,  Jehoahaz  at  length 
 acknowledged  the  authority  of  Jehovah  over  Israel, 
 and  humbled  himself  before  him  ;  in  consideration 
 of  which  a  deliverer  was  raised  up  for  Israel  in  the 
 person  of  Jehoash,  his  son,  who  was  enabled  to 
 expel  the  Syrians  and  re-establish  the  affairs  of  the 
 kingdom  (2  Kings  xiii.  1-9,  25). 
 
 2.  Otherwise  called  Shallum,  seventeenth  king 
 of  Judah,  son  of  Josiah,  whose  reign  began  and 
 ended  in  the  year  B.C.  608.  After  his  father  had 
 been  slain  in  resisting  the  progress  of  Pharaoh 
 Necho,  Jehoahaz,  who  was  then  twenty-three  years 
 of  age,  was  raised  to  the  throne  by  the  people,  and 
 received  at  Jerusalem  the  regal  anointing,  which 
 seems  to  have  been  usually  omitted  in  times  of 
 order  and  of  regular  succession.  He  found  the 
 land  full  of  trouble,  but  free  from  idolatry.  Instead, 
 however,  of  following  the  excellent  example  of 
 his  father,  Jehoahaz  fell  into  the  accustomed  crimes 
 of  his  predecessors  ;  and  under  the  encouragements 
 which  his  example  or  indifference  offered,  the  idols 
 soon  re-appeared.  It  seems  strange  that  in  a  time 
 so  short,  and  which  must  have  been  much  occu- 
 pied in  arranging  plans  for  resisting  or  pacifying 
 the  Egyptian  king,  he  should  have  been  able  to 
 deserve  the  stigma  which  the  sacred  record  has  left 
 upon  his  name.  But  there  is  no  limit  except  in  the 
 greatness  of  the  divine  power  to  the  activity  of  evil 
 dispositions.  The  sway  of  Jehoahaz  was  terminated 
 in  three  months,  when  Pharaoh  Necho,  on  his 
 victorious  return  from  the  Euphrates,  thinking  it 
 politic  to  reject  a  king  not  nominated  by  himself, 
 removed  him  from  the  throne,  and  set  thereon  his 
 brother  Jehoiakim.  This  reign  was  the  shortest 
 in  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  although  in  that  of  Israel 
 there  were  several  shorter.  The  deposed  king  was 
 at  first  taken  as  a  prisoner  to  Riblah  in  Syria  ;  but 
 was  eventually  carried  to  Egypt,  where  he  died  (2 
 Kings  xxiii.  30-35  ;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  I-4;  I  Chron. 
 iii.  15  ;  Jer.  xxii.  10-12). 
 
 The  anointing  of  this  king  has  drawn  attention 
 to  the  defect  of  his  title  as  the  reason  for  the  addi- 
 tion of  that  solemn  ceremony.  It  appears  from 
 I  Chron.  iii.  15  that  Josiah  had  four  sons,  of  whom 
 Johanan  is  expressly  said  to  have  been  '  the  first- 
 born.' But  he  seems  to  have  died  before  his 
 father,  as  we  nowhere  find  his  name  historically 
 mentioned,  while  those  of  the  other  brothers  are 
 familiar  to  us.  If,  therefore,  he  died  childless, 
 and  Jehoahaz  were  the  next  son,  his  claim  would 
 have  been  good.  But  he  was  not  the  next  son. 
 His  name,  as  Shallum,  occurs  last  of  the  four  in 
 I  Chron.  iii.  15  ;  and  from  the  historical  notices 
 in  2  Kings  xxiii.  and  I  Chron.  xxxvi.  we  ascertain 
 that  when  Josiah  died  the  ages  of  the  three  surviving 
 sons  were,  Eliakim  (Jehoiakim)  twenty-five  years, 
 Jehoahaz  (Shallum)  twenty-three  years,  Mattaniah 
 (Zedekiah)  ten  years  ;  consequently  Jehoahaz  was 
 preferred  by  the  popular  favour  above  his  elder 
 
JEHOASH 
 
 477 
 
 JEIIOIADA 
 
 bi other  Jehoiakim,  and  the  anointing,  therefore, 
 was  doubtless  intended  to  give  to  his  imperfect 
 claim  the  weight  of  that  solenin  ceremony.  It  was 
 also  probably  suspected  that,  as  actually  took  place, 
 the  Egyptian  king  would  seek  to  annul  a  popular 
 election  unsanctioned  by  himself;  but  as  the  Egyp- 
 tians anointed  their  own  kings,  and  attached  much 
 importance  to  the  ceremony,  the  possibility  that 
 he  would  hesitate  more  to  remove  an  anointed  than 
 an  unanointed  king  might  afford  a  further  reason 
 for  the  anointing  of  Jehoahaz.     [Anointing.] 
 
 Jehoahaz  is  supposed  to  be  the  person  who  is 
 designated  under  the  emblem  of  a  young  lion 
 carried  in  chains  to  Egypt  (Ezek.  xix.  3,  4). — ^J.  K. 
 
 JEHOASH.     [JoASH.] 
 
 '    JEHOHANAN  (p^^^^  whom  Jehovah  bestows 
 
 =9eo5cJ/3os,  Ges. ,  or  rather,  he  to  whom  Jehovah  is 
 gracious,  or  the  grace  of  Jehovah  :  LXX.  ^luavav, 
 'Iwwc,  'IwvdOav  ;  Vulg.  Johanati).  The  name  of 
 several  persons. 
 
 1 .  A  military  leader  under  Jehoshaphat,  next  to 
 Adnah,  who  was  first  in  command  (2  Chron.  xvii. 
 15  ;  also  xxiii.  i).  The  number  of  troops  assigned 
 to  each  commander  in  this  connection  is  obviously 
 an  exaggeration. 
 
 2.  The  father  of  Azariah,  who  was  one  of  the 
 '  heads  of  the  children  of  Ephraim,'  who  seconded 
 the  prophet  Oded  in  opposing  the  retention  of  the 
 two  hundred  thousand  captives  of  Judah  taken  by 
 Pekah,  king  of  Israel,  declaring  that  they  should 
 not  be  brought  into  Samaria  to  add  to  the  sins 
 of  Israel  ;  and  who,  in  common  with  other  chiefs, 
 '  clothed  those  that  were  naked  among  them'  out 
 of  the  spoils,  and  '  gave  them  to  eat  and  drink, 
 and  anointed  them,  and  carried  all  that  were  feeble 
 among  them  upon  asses,  and  brought  them  back 
 as  far  as  Jericho,  the  city  of  palm  trees'  (2  Chron. 
 xxviii.  6-15). 
 
 3.  The  sixth  son  of  Meshelamiah  or  Sheleraiah, 
 a  porter  of  the  family  of  the  Kohrites  (i  Chron. 
 xxvi.  3). 
 
 4.  The  son  of  Amariah,  a  priest,  in  the  days  of 
 Joiakim,  the  high-priest  (Neh.  xii.  13). 
 
 5.  The  son  of  Shechaniah,  the  father-in-law  of 
 Tobiah,  and  who  had  married  the  daughter  of 
 Meshullam,  the  son  of  Berechiah,  whose  interest, 
 therefore,  was  sufficiently  powerful  to  support 
 Tobiah  (Neh.  vi.  18). 
 
 6.  The  son  of  Eliashib,  who  had  a  chamber 
 about  the  Temple,  where  Ezra  bewailed  the  trans- 
 gressions of  the  people  of  the  captivity  in  the  mat- 
 ter of  the  strange  wives  (Ezra  x.  6  ;  Neh.  xii. 
 22,  23). 
 
 7.  One  of  the  four  sons  of  Behai  who  had  taken 
 strange  wives  (Ezra  x.  28). 
 
 8.  A  priest  who  took  part  in  the  joyful  festivi- 
 ties of  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  re- 
 built by  the  returned  captives  (Neh.  xii.  42). 
 
 In  the  A.  V.  the  form  of  the  word  in  Nos.  3,  5, 
 6,  is  Johanan.  The  name  is  of  very  frequent  occur- 
 rence in  later  Jewish  histoiy.  Its  form  in  Josephus 
 is  ^ \(jia.vvr\'5  =  John. — I.  J. 
 
 JEHOIACHIN  (p3''in\  appointed  by  Jehovah  ; 
 
 Sept.  'lo}axi-/J'),  by  contraction  Jeconiah  and 
 CoNiAH,  nineteenth  king  of  Judah,  and  son  of 
 Jehoiakim.  When  his  father  was  slain,  B.C.  599, 
 the  king  of  Babylon  allowed  him,  as  the  rightful 
 heir,  to  succeed.     He  was  then  eighteen  years  of  age 
 
 according  to  2  Kings  xxiv.  8  ;  but  only  eight  ac- 
 cording to  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  9.  Many  attempts  have 
 been  made  to  reconcile  these  dates,  the  most  usual 
 solution  being  that  he  had  reigned  ten  years  m 
 conjunction  with  his  father,  so  that  he  was  eight 
 when  he  began  his  joint  reign,  but  eighteen  when 
 he  began  to  reign  alone.  There  are,  however, 
 difficulties  in  this  view,  which,  perhaps,  leave  it 
 the  safest  course  to  conclude  that  'eight'  in  2 
 Chron.  xxxvi.  9,  is  a  corruption  of  the  text,  such 
 as  might  easily  occur  from  the  relation  of  the  num- 
 bers eight  and  eighteen. 
 
 Jehoiachin  followed  the  evil  courses  which  had 
 already  brought  so  much  disaster  upon  the  royal 
 house  of  David,  and  upon  the  people  under  its 
 sway.  He  seems  to  have  wery  speedily  indicated 
 a  political  bias  adverse  to  the  interests  of  the 
 Chaldsean  empire ;  for  in  three  months  after  his 
 accession  we  find  the  generals  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
 again  laying  siege  to  Jerusalem,  according  to  the 
 predictions  of  Jeremiah  (xxii.  i8-xxiv.  30).  Con- 
 vinced of  the  futility  of  resistance,  Jehoiachin  went 
 out  and  surrendered  as  soon  as  Nebuchadnezzar 
 arrived  in  person  before  the  city.  He  was  sent 
 away  as  a  captive  to  Babylon,  with  his  mother,  his 
 generals,  and  his  troops,  together  with  the  artificers 
 and  other  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  to  the  number 
 of  ten  thousand.  Few  were  left  but  the  poorer 
 sort  of  people  and  the  unskilled  labourers,  few, 
 indeed,  whose  presence  could  be  useful  in  Babylon 
 or  dangerous  in  Palestine.  Neither  did  the  Baby- 
 lonian king  neglect  to  remove  the  treasures  which 
 could  yet  be  gleaned  from  the  palace  or  the  temple  ; 
 and  he  now  made  spoil  of  those  sacred  vessels  of 
 gold  which  had  been  spared  on  former  occasions. 
 These  were  cut  up  for  present  use  of  the  metal  or 
 for  more  convenient  transport  ;  whereas  those 
 formerly  taken  had  been  sent  to  Babylon  entire, 
 and  there  laid  up  as  trophies  of  victory.  Thus 
 ended  an  unhappy  reign  of  three  months  and  ten 
 days.  If  the  Chaldaean  king  had  then  put  an  end 
 to  the  show  of  a  monarchy  and  annexed  the  country 
 to  his  own  dominions,  the  event  would  probably 
 have  been  less  unhappy  for  the  nation.  But  still 
 adhering  to  his  fonner  policy,  he  placed  on  the 
 throne  Mattaniah,  the  only  surviving  son  of  Josiah, 
 whose  name  he  changed  to  Zedekiah  (2  Kings 
 xxiv.  I- 16;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  9,  10;  Jer.  xxix.  2; 
 xxxvii.  i). 
 
 Jehoiachin  remained  in  prison  at  Babylon  during 
 the  lifetime  of  Nebuchadnezzar ;  but  when  that 
 prince  died,  his  son,  Evil-merodach,  not  only  re- 
 leased him,  but  gave  him  an  honourable  seat  at  his 
 own  table,  with  precedence  over  all  the  other  de- 
 throned kings  who  were  kept  at  Babylon,  and  an 
 allowance  for  the  support  of  his  rank  (2  Ivings  xxv. 
 27-30;  Jer.  lii.  31-34).  To  what  he  owed  this 
 favour  we  are  not  told  ;  but  the  Jewish  commenta- 
 tors allege  that  Evil-merodach  had  himself  been 
 put  into  prison  by  his  father  during  the  last  year 
 of  his  reign,  and  had  there  contracted  an  intimate 
 friendship  with  the  deposed  king  of  Judah. 
 
 The  name  of  Jeconiah  re-appears  to  fix  the 
 epoch  of  several  of  the  prophecies  of  Ezekiel  (Ezek. 
 i.  2),  and  of  the  deportation  which  terminated  his 
 reign  (Esth.  ii.  6).  In  the  genealogy  of  Christ 
 (Matt.  i.  11)  he  is  named  as  the  'son  of  Josias'  his 
 grandfather. — ^J.  K. 
 
 JEHOIADA  (J;T'^^^  known  by  Jehovah  ;  Sept. 
 
 'IwSae').     Several  persons  of  this  name  are  men- 
 
JEHOIAKIM 
 
 478 
 
 JEHOIAKIM 
 
 tioned  in  the  O.  T. ,  of  whom  the  one  most  de- 
 serving notice  is  he  who  was  high-priest  in  the 
 times  of  Ahaziah  and  Athahah.  He  is  only  known 
 from  tlie  part  which  he  took  in  recovering  tlie 
 throne  of  Judah  for  the  young  Joash,  who  had  been 
 saved  by  his  wife  Jehoshehali  from  the  massacre  by 
 which  Atlialiali  sought  to  exterminate  the  royal  line 
 of  David.  The  particulars  of  this  transaction  are 
 related  under  other  heads.  [Athaliah  ;  JOASH.] 
 Jehoiada  manifested  much  decision  and  forecast  on 
 this  occasion ;  and  he  used  for  good  the  great 
 power  which  devolved  upon  him  during  the  mi- 
 nority of  the  young  king,  and  the  influence  which 
 he  continued  to  enjoy  as  long  as  he  lived.  The 
 value  of  this  influence  is  shown  by  the  misconduct 
 and  the  disorders  of  the  kingdom  after  his  death. 
 He  died  in  B.C.  834,  at  the  age  of  130,  and  his 
 remains  were  honoured  with  a  place  in  the  sepul- 
 chre of  the  kings  at  Jerusalem  (2  Kings  xi.  12  ; 
 2  Chron.  xxiii.  xxiv. )  [For  the  other  persons  of 
 this  name  see  2  Sam.  viii.  18  ;  i  Chron.  xii.  27  ; 
 I  Chron.  xxvii.  34  (where  for  '  Jehoiada  the  son  of 
 Benaiah,'  we  should  probably  read  '  Benaiah  the 
 son  of  Jehoiada')  ;  2  Kings  xxv.  18  ;  Jer.  xxix. 
 25-29 ;  Nell.  iii.  6.] 
 
 JEHOIAKIM  (D''i:^in^,  established  by  Jehovah  ; 
 
 Sept.  'Iwa/ctya),  originally  ELIAKIM,  second  son 
 of  Josiah,  and  eighteenth  king  of  Judah.  On  the 
 death  of  his  father  the  people  raised  to  the  throne 
 his  younger  brother  Jehoahaz  ;  but  three  months 
 after,  when  the  Egyptian  king  returned  from  the 
 Euphrates,  he  removed  Jehoahaz,  and  gave  the 
 crown  to  the  rightful  heir,  Eliakim,  whose  name  he 
 changed  to  Jehoiakim.  This  change  of  name  often 
 took  place  in  similar  circumstances ;  and  the 
 altered  name  was  in  fact  the  badge  of  a  tributary 
 prince.  Jehoiakim  began  to  reign  in  B.  C.  608,  and 
 reigned  eleven  years.  He  of  course  occupied  the 
 position  of  a  vassal  of  the  Egyptian  empire,  and  in 
 that  capacity  had  to  lay  upon  the  people  heavy 
 imposts  to  pay  the  appointed  tribute,  in  addition 
 to  the  ordinary  expenses  of  government.  But,  as 
 if  this  were  not  enough,  it  would  seem  from  various 
 passages  in  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxii.  13,  etc.)  that 
 Jehoiakim  aggravated  the  public  charges,  and  con- 
 sequently the  public  calamities,  by  a  degree  of 
 luxury  and  magnificence  in  his  establishments  and 
 structures  very  ill-suited  to  the  condition  of  his 
 kingdom  and  the  position  which  he  occupied. 
 Hence  much  extortion  and  wrong-doing,  much 
 privation  and  deceit ;  and  when  we  add  to  this  a 
 general  forgetfulness  of  God  and  proneness  to 
 idolatiy,  we  have  the  outlines  of  that  picture  which 
 the  prophet  Jeremiah  has  drawn  in  the  most 
 sombre  hues. 
 
 However  heavy  may  have  been  the  Egyptian 
 yoke,  Jehoiakim  was  destined  to  pass  under  one 
 heavier  still.  In  his  time  the  empire  of  Western 
 Asia  was  disputed  between  the  kings  of  Egypt  and 
 Babylon  ;  and  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  pressed  be- 
 tween these  mighty  rivals,  and  necessarily  either 
 the  tributary  or  very  feeble  enemy  of  the  one  or 
 the  other,  could  not  but  suffer  nearly  equally, 
 whichever  proved  the  conqueror.  The  kings  of 
 Judah  were  therefore  placed  in  a  position  of  peculiar 
 difficulty,  out  of  which  they  could  only  escape  with 
 safety  by  the  exercise  of  great  discretion,  and 
 through  the  special  mercies  of  the  God  of  Israel, 
 who  had  by  his  high  covenant  engaged  to  protect 
 them  so  long  as  they  walked  uprightly.     This  they 
 
 did  not,  and  were  in  consequence  abandoned  to 
 their  doom. 
 
 In  the  third  year  of  his  reign  Jehoiakim,  being 
 besieged  in  Jerusalem,  was  forced  to  submit  to 
 Nebuchadnezzar,  and  was  by  his  order  laden  with 
 chains,  with  the  intention  of  sending  him  captive 
 to  Babylon  (2  Chron.  xxxvi.  6)  ;  but  eventually  the 
 conqueror  changed  his  mind  and  restored  the 
 crown  to  him.  Many  persons,  however,  of  high 
 family,  and  some  even  of  the  royal  blood,  were 
 sent  away  to  Babylon.  Among  these  was  Daniel, 
 then  a  mere  youth.  A  large  proportion  of  the 
 treasures  and  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple  were 
 also  taken  away  and  deposited  in  the  idol-temple 
 at  Babylon  (Dan.  i.  I,  2).  The  year  following  the 
 Egyptians  were  defeated  upon  the  Euphrates  (Jer. 
 xlvi.  2),  and  Jehoiakim,  when  he  saw  the  remains 
 of  the  defeated  army  pass  by  his  territory,  could 
 not  but  perceive  how  vain  had  been  that  reliance 
 upon  Egypt  against  which  he  had  been  constantly 
 cautioned  by  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxxi.  i  ;  xlv.  i).  In 
 the  same  year  the  prophet  caused  a  collection  oi 
 his  prophecies  to  be  written  out  by  his  faithful 
 Barach,  and  to  be  read  publicly  by  him  in  the 
 court  of  the  temple.  This  coming  to  the  know- 
 ledge of  the  king,  he  sent  for  it  and  had  it  read 
 before  him.  But  he  heard  not  much  of  the  bitter 
 denunciations  with  which  it  was  charged,  before 
 he  took  the  roll  from  the  reader,  and  after  cutting 
 it  in  pieces  threw  it  into  the  brasier  which,  it  being 
 winter,  was  burning  before  him  in  the  hall.  The 
 counsel  of  God  against  him,  however,  stood  sure  ; 
 a  fresh  roll  was  written,  with  the  addition  of  a 
 further  and  most  awful  denunciation  against  the 
 king,  occasioned  by  this  foolish  and  sacrilegious 
 act.  '  He  shall  have  none  to  sit  upon  the  throne 
 of  David  :  and  his  dead  body  shall  be  cast  out  in 
 the  day  to  the  heat  and  in  the  night  to  the  frost ' 
 (Jer.  xxxvi.)  All  this,  however,  appears  to  have 
 made  little  impression  upon  Jehoiakim,  who  still 
 walked  in  his  old  paths. 
 
 The  condition  of  the  kingdom  as  tributary  to  the 
 Chaldceans  probably  differed  little  from  that  in 
 which  it  stood  as  tributary  to  the  Egyptians,  except 
 that  its  resources  were  more  exhausted  by  the 
 course  of  time,  and  that  its  gold  went  to  the  east 
 instead  of  the  south.  But  at  length,  after  three 
 years  of  subjection,  Jehoiakim,  finding  the  king  of 
 Babylon  fully  engaged  elsewhere,  and  deluded  by 
 the  Egyptian  party  in  his  court,  ventured  to  with- 
 hold his  tribute,  and  thereby  to  throw  off  the  Chal- 
 drean  yoke.  This  step,  taken  contrary  to  the 
 earnest  remonstrances  of  Jeremiah,  was  the  ruin  oi 
 Jehoiakim.  It  might  seem  successful  for  a  little, 
 from  the  Chaldjeans  not  then  having  leisure  to 
 attend  to  the  affairs  of  this  quarter.  In  due  time, 
 however,  the  land  was  invaded  by  their  armies, 
 accompanied  by  a  vast  number  of  auxiliaries  from 
 the  neighbouring  countries,  the  Edomites,  Moab- 
 ites,  and  others,  who  were  for  the  most  part 
 actuated  by  a  fierce  hatred  against  the  Jewish  name 
 and  nation.  The  events  of  the  war  are  not  related. 
 Jerusalem  was  taken,  or  rather  surrendered  on 
 terms,  which  Josephus  alleges  were  little  heeded 
 by  Nebuchadnezzar.  It  is  certain  that  Jehoiakim 
 was  slain,  but  whether  in  one  of  the  actions,  or,  as 
 Josephus  says,  after  the  surrender,  we  cannot  deter- 
 mine. His  body  remained  exposed  and  unlamented 
 without  the  city,  under  the  circumstances  foretold 
 by  the  prophet — '  They  shall  not  lament  for  him, 
 saying,   Ah,  my  brother !  or,  Ah,  sister !     They 
 
JEHOIARIB 
 
 479 
 
 JEHOSHAPHAT 
 
 shall  not  lament  for  him,  saying,  Ah,  lord  !  or, 
 Ah,  his  glory  !  He  shall  be  buried  with  the  burial 
 of  an  ass,  drawn  and  cast  forth  beyond  the  gates  of 
 Jerusalem'  (Jer.  xxii.  iS,  19  ;  I  Chron.  iii.  15  ;  2 
 kings  xxiii.  3437  ;  xxiv.  I-7 ;  2  Chron.  xxxvi. 
 4-8). 
 
 It  was  not  the  object  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to  de- 
 stroy altogether  a  power  which,  as  tributary  to  him, 
 formed  a  serviceable  outpost  towards  Egypt,  which 
 seems  to  have  been  the  great  final  object  of  all 
 his  designs  in  this  quarter.  He  therefore  still 
 maintained  the  throne  of  Judah,  and  placed  on  it 
 Jehoiachin,  the  son  of  the  late  king.  He,  how- 
 ever, sent  away  another  body,  a  second  corps  of 
 the  nobles  and  chief  persons  of  the  nation,  three 
 thousand  in  number,  among  whom  was  Ezekiel, 
 afterwards  called  to  prophesy  in  the  land  of  his 
 exile.— J.  K. 
 
 JEHOIARIB    (nn'^h"'),    abbreviated   to  JOI- 
 
 ARIB    (n"'Ti'';    Sept' duaplfj. ;    Alex.    'Iwapel^, 
 
 'Iapei/3;  I  Maccab.  ii.  I,  'Ia>api/3),  head  of  the  first 
 of  the  twenty-four  courses  into  which  the  priests 
 were  divided  according  to  David's  arrangement  (l 
 Chron.  xxiv.  7).  Of  these  courses  only  four  are 
 mentioned  as  having  returned  from  Babylon,  those 
 of  Jedaiah,  Immer,  Pashur,  and  Harim  (Ezra  ii. 
 36-39 ;  Nell.  vii.  39-42)  ;  and  Jewish  tradition 
 says  that  each  of  these  was  divided  into  six,  so  as 
 to  preserve  the  original  number  with  the  original 
 names  (Talm.  Hierosol.  Taanith,  c.  4,  p.  68,  col. 
 I,  in  ed.  Bomberg).  This  might  account  for  our 
 finding  at  a  later  period  Mattatliias  described  as  of 
 the  course  of  Joarib  (i  Maccab.  ii.  i),  even  though 
 this  course  did  not  return  from  Babylon  (Prideaux, 
 Co)inection,  i.  136,  8th  ed.)  We  find,  however, 
 that  some  of  the  descendants  of  Jehoiarib  did 
 return  from  Babylon  (l  Chron.  ix.  10;  Neh.  xi. 
 10  [Jedaiah])  ;  we  find  also  that  in  subsequent 
 lists  other  of  the  priestly  courses  are  mentioned  as 
 retivrning,  and  in  one  of  these  that  of  Jehoiarib  is 
 expressly  mentioned  (Neh.  x.  2-8;  xii.  1-7),  and 
 mention  is  made  of  Mattenai  as  chief  of  the  house 
 of  Joiarib  in  the  days  of  Jeshua  (xii.  19).  The 
 probability  therefore  is  that  the  course  of  Jehoiarib 
 did  go  up,  but  at  a  later  date  perhaps  than  those 
 four  mentioned  Ezra  ii.  36-39  and  Neh.  vii.  39-42. 
 To  the  course  of  Joiarib  Josephus  tells  us  he  be- 
 longed [Anttq.  xi.  6.  i ;  Life,  sec.  i). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEHONADAB.     [Jonadab.] 
 
 JEHONATHAN  (jn^in"' ;  Sept.  'luivadds),  the 
 
 full  form  of  the  name  which  elsewhere  appears  as 
 Jonathan.  It  is  used  in  the  A.  V.  of  three  per- 
 sons : — I.  The  officer  who  had  charge  of  'the 
 storehouses'  of  David  '  in  the  fields,  in  the  cities, 
 and  in  the  villages,  and  in  the  caslles,'  /.  e.,  the 
 revenues  of  the  king  drawn  from  his  property  out 
 of  Jerusalem  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  25).  2.  One  of  tlie 
 Levites  sent  by  Jehoshaphat  to  instruct  the  people 
 in  the  law  of  the  Lord  (2  Chron.  xvii.  8).  3.  A 
 priest,  chief  of  the  family  of  Shemaiah  in  the  time 
 of  Jeshua  (Nelx  xii.  18).— t 
 
 JEHORAM  I.  (ir\\r\'^,  exalted f>y  Jehovah ;  Sept. 
 
 'Iwpdia),  eldest  son  and  successor  of  Jehoshaphat,  and 
 fifth  king  of  Judah,  who  began  to  reign  (separately) 
 in  B.C.  889,  at  the  age  of  thirty-five  years,  and 
 reigned  five  years.  It  is  indeed  said  in  tlie  general 
 account  that  he  began  to  reign  at  the  age  of  thirty- 
 
 two,  and  that  he  reigned  eight  years  ;  but  the  con- 
 clusions deducihle  from  the  fact  that  his  reign  began 
 in  the  seventh  year  of  Joram,  king  of  Israel,  shew 
 tliat  the  reign  thus  stated  dates  back  three  years 
 into  the  reign  of  his  father,  who  from  this  is  seen  to 
 have  associated  his  eldest  son  with  him  in  the  later 
 years  of  his  reign. 
 
 Jehoram  profited  little  by  this  association.  He 
 had  unhappily  been  married  to  Athaliah,  the 
 daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel ;  and  her  influence 
 seems  to  have  neutralized  all  the  good  he  might 
 have  derived  from  the  example  of  liis  father.  One 
 of  the  first  acts  of  his  reign  was  to  put  his  brothers 
 to  deatli  and  seize  the  valuable  appanages  which 
 their  father  had  m  his  lifetime  bestowed  upon  them. 
 After  this  we  are  not  surprised  to  find  him  giving 
 way  to  the  gross  idolatries  of  that  new  and  strange 
 kind — the  Phoenician — which  had  been  brought 
 into  Israel  by  Jezebel,  and  into  Judah  by  her 
 daughter  Athaliah.  For  these  atrocities  the  Lord 
 let  forth  his  anger  against  Jehoram  and  his  king- 
 dom. The  Edomites  revolted,  and,  according  to 
 old  prophecies  (Gen.  xxvii.  40),  shook  off  the  yoke 
 of  Judah.  The  Philistines  on  one  side,  and  the 
 Arabians  and  Cushites  on  the  other,  also  grew  bold 
 against  a  king  forsaken  of  God,  and  in  repeated  in- 
 vasions spoiled  the  land  of  all  its  substance  ;  they 
 even  ravaged  the  royal  palaces,  and  took  away  the 
 wives  and  children  of  the  king,  leaving  him  only 
 one  son,  Ahaziah.  Nor  was  this  all ;  Jehoram  was 
 in  his  last  days  afflicted  with  a  frightful  disease  in 
 his  bowels,  which,  from  the  terms  employed  in  de- 
 scribing it,  appears  to  have  been  malignant  dysen- 
 tery in  its  most  shocking  and  tormenting  form. 
 After  a  disgraceful  reign,  and  a  most  painful  death, 
 public  opinion  inflicted  the  posthumous  dishonour 
 of  refusing  him  a  place  in  the  sepulchre  of  the 
 kings.  Jehoram  was  by  far  the  most  impious  and 
 cruel  tyrant  that  had  as  yet  occupied  the  throne  of 
 Judah,  though  he  was  rivalled  or  surpassed  by  some 
 of  his  successors  (2  Kings  viii.  16-24;  2  Chron. 
 xxi.) 
 
 JEHORAM  II.,  king  of  Israel.  Qoram.]— 
 J.  K. 
 
 JEHOSHAPHAT    (nSt:'',n\    whom    Jehovah 
 
 judges  ;  Sept.  ^lwcTa(f>dv),  the  fourth  king  of  Judah, 
 and  son  of  Asa,  whom  he  succeeded  in  B.C.  914,  at 
 the  age  of  thirty-five,  and  reigned  twenty-five  years. 
 He  commenced  his  reign  by  fortifying  his  kingdom 
 against  Israel  ;  and  having  thus  secured  himself 
 against  surprise  from  the  quarter  which  gave  most 
 disturbance  to  him,  he  proceeded  to  purge  the 
 land  from  the  idolatries  and  idolatrous  monuments 
 by  which  it  was  still  tainted.  Even  the  high  places 
 and  groves,  which  foimer  well-disposed  kings  had 
 suffered  to  remain,  were  by  the  zeal  of  Jehoshaphat 
 in  a  great  measure  destroyed.  The  chiefs,  with 
 priests  and  Levites,  proceeded  from  town  to  town, 
 with  the  book  of  the  law  in  their  hands,  instruct- 
 ing the  people,  and  calling  back  their  wandering 
 affections  to  the  religion  of  their  fathers.  This  was 
 a  beautiful  and  interesting  circumstance  in  the  ope- 
 rations of  the  young  king.  Other  good  princes  had 
 been  content  to  smite  down  the  outward  show  of 
 idolatry  by  force  of  hand  ;  but  Jehoshaphat  saw 
 that  this  was  not  of  itself  sufficient,  and  that  the 
 basis  of  a  soHd  reformation  must  be  laid  by  provid- 
 ing for  the  better  instruction  ot  the  people  in  theii 
 religious  duties  and  privileges. 
 
JEHOSHAPHAT 
 
 430 
 
 JEHOSHAPHAT 
 
 Jehoshaphat  was  too  well  instructed  in  the  great 
 principles  of  the  theocracy  not  to  know  that  his 
 faithful  conduct  had  entitled  him  to  expect  the 
 divine  protection.  Of  that  protection  he  soon  had 
 manifest  proofs.  At  home  he  enjoyed  peace  and 
 abundance,  and  abroad  security  and  honour.  His 
 treasuries  were  filled  with  the  '  presents'  which  the 
 blessing  of  God  upon  the  people,  '  in  their  basket 
 and  their  store,'  enabled  them  to  bring.  His  re- 
 nown extended  into  the  neighbouring  nations,  and 
 the  Philistines,  as  well  as  the  adjoining  Arabian 
 tribes,  paid  him  rich  tributes  in  silver  and  in  cattle. 
 He  was  thus  enabled  to  put  all  his  towns  in  good 
 condition,  to  erect  fortresses,  to  organise  a  power- 
 ful army,  and  to  raise  his  kingdom  to  a  degree  of 
 importance  and  splendour  which  it  had  not  enjoyed 
 since  the  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes. 
 
 The  weak  and  impious  Ahab  at  that  time  occu- 
 pied the  throne  of  Israel ;  and  Jehoshaphat,  having 
 nothing  to  fear  from  his  power,  sought,  or  at  least 
 did  not  repel,  an  alliance  with  him.  This  is 
 alleged  to  have  been  the  grand  mistake  of  his 
 reign  ;  and  that  it  was  such  is  proved  by  the  con- 
 sequences. Ahab  might  be  benefited  by  the  con- 
 nection, but  under  no  circumstance  could  it  be  of 
 service  to  Jehoshaphat  or  his  kingdom,  and  it 
 might,  as  it  actually  did,  involve  him  in  much  dis- 
 grace and  disaster,  and  bring  bloodshed  and 
 trouble  into  his  house.  His  fault  seems  to  have 
 been  the  result  of  that  easiness  of  temper  and  over- 
 flowing amiability  of  disposition,  which  the  careful 
 student  may  trace  in  his  character ;  and  which,  al- 
 though very  engaging  attributes  in  private  life,  are 
 not  always  among  the  safest  or  most  valuable 
 qualities  which  a  king  in  his  public  capacity  might 
 possess. 
 
 After  a  few  years  we  find  Jehoshaphat  on  a  visit 
 to  Ahab,  in  Samaria,  being  the  first  time  any  of  the 
 kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  had  met  in  peace.  He 
 here  experienced  a  reception  worthy  of  his  great- 
 ness ;  but  Ahab  failed  not  to  take  advantage  of  the 
 occasion,  and  so  worked  upon  the  weak  points  of 
 his  character  as  to  prevail  upon  him  to  take  arms 
 with  him  against  the  Syrians,  with  whom,  hitherto, 
 the  kingdom  of  Judah  never  had  had  any  war  or 
 occasion  of  quarrel.  However,  Jehoshaphat  was 
 not  so  far  infatuated  as  to  proceed  to  the  war 
 without  consulting  God,  who,  according  to  the 
 principles  of  the  theocratic  government,  was  the 
 final  arbiter  of  war  and  peace.  The  false  prophets 
 of  Ahab  poured  forth  ample  promises  of  success, 
 and  one  of  them,  named  Zedekiah,  resorting  to 
 material  symbols,  made  him  horns  of  iron,  saying, 
 •  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  with  thee  shalt  thou  smite 
 the  Syrians  till  they  be  consumed.'  Still  Jehosha- 
 phat was  not  satisfied  ;  and  the  answer  to  his  fur- 
 ther inquiries  extorted  from  him  a  rebuke  of  the 
 reluctance  which  Ahab  manifested  to  call  Micaiah, 
 '  the  prophet  of  the  Lord. '  The  fearless  words  of 
 this  prophet  did  not  make  the  impression  upon  the 
 king  of  Judah  which  might  have  been  expected  ; 
 or,  probably,  he  then  felt  liimself  too  deeply  bound 
 in  honour  to  recede.  He  went  to  the  fatal  battle 
 of  Ramoth-Gilead,  and  there  nearly  became  the 
 victim  of  a  plan  which  Ahab  had  laid  for  his  own 
 safety  at  the  expense  of  his  too  confiding  ally.  He 
 persuaded  Jehoshaphat  to  appear  as  king,  while  he 
 himself  went  disguised  to  the  battle.  This  brought 
 the  heat  of  the  contest  around  him,  as  the  Syrians 
 took  him  for  Ahab  ;  and  if  they  had  not  in  time 
 discovered  their  mistake,  he  would  certainly  have 
 
 been  slain.  Ahab  was  killed,  and  the  battle  lost 
 [Ahab]  ;  out  Jehoshaphat  escaped,  and  returned  to 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 On  his  return  from  this  imprudent  expedition  he 
 was  met  by  the  just  reproaches  of  the  prophet 
 Jehu.  The  best  atonement  he  could  make  for  this 
 error  was  by  the  course  he  actually  took.  He  re- 
 sumed his  labours  in  the  further  extirpation  of 
 idolatry,  in  the  instruction  of  the  people,  and  the 
 improvement  of  his  realm.  He  now  made  a  tour 
 of  his  kingdom  in  person,  that  he  might  see  the 
 ordinances  of  God  duly  established,  and  witness 
 the  due  execution  of  his  intentions  respecting  the 
 instruction  of  the  people  in  the  divine  law.  This 
 tour  enabled  him  to  discern  many  defects  in  the 
 local  administration  of  justice,  which  he  then  ap- 
 plied himself  to  remedy.  He  appointed  magis- 
 trates in  every  city,  for  the  determination  of  causes 
 civil  and  ecclesiastical ;  and  the  nature  of  the  abuses 
 to  which  the  administration  of  justice  was  in  those 
 days  exposed,  may  be  gathered  from  his  excellent 
 charge  to  them  : — '  Take  heed  what  ye  do,  for  ye 
 judge  not  for  man,  but  for  the  Lord,  who  is  with 
 you  in  the  judgment.  Wherefore  now  let  the  fear 
 of  the  Lord  be  upon  you  ;  take  heed  and  do  it  ; 
 for  there  is  no  iniquity  with  the  Lord  our  God,  nor 
 respect  of  persons,  nor  taking  of  gifts.'  Then  he 
 established  a  supreme  council  of  justice  at  Jeru- 
 salem, composed  of  priests,  Levites,  and  '  the 
 chiefs  of  the  fathers ; '  to  which  difficult  cases 
 were  referred,  and  appeals  brought  from  the  pro- 
 vincial tribunals.  This  tribunal  also  was  inducted 
 by  a  weighty  but  short  charge  from  the  king,  whose 
 conduct  in  this  and  other  matters  places  him  at  the 
 veiy  head  of  the  monarchs  who  reigned  ovei 
 Judah  as  a  separate  kingdom. 
 
 The  activity  of  Jehoshaphat's  mind  was  then 
 turned  towards  the  revival  of  that  maritime  com- 
 merce which  had  been  established  by  Solomon. 
 The  land  of  Edom  and  the  ports  of  the  Elanitic 
 Gulf  were  still  under  the  power  of  Judah  ;  and  in 
 them  the  king  prepared  a  fleet  for  the  voyage  to 
 Ophir.  Unhappily,  however,  he  yielded  to  the 
 wish  of  the  king  of  Israel,  and  allowed  him  to  take 
 part  in  the  enterprise.  For  this  the  expedition  was 
 doomed  of  God,  and  the  vessels  were  wrecked  al- 
 most as  soon  as  they  quitted  port.  Instructed  by 
 Eliezer,  the  prophet,  as  to  the  cause  of  this  disaster, 
 Jehoshaphat  equipped  a  new  fleet,  and  having  this 
 time  declined  the  co-operation  of  the  king  of  Israel, 
 the  voyage  prospered.  The  trade  was  not,  how- 
 over,  prosecuted  vcitli  any  zeal,  and  was  soon  aban- 
 doned [Commerce]. 
 
 In  accounting  for  the  disposition  of  Jehoshaphat 
 to  contract  alliances  with  the  king  of  Israel,  we  are 
 to  remember  that  there  existed  a  powerful  tie  be- 
 tween the  two  courts  in  the  marriage  of  Jehosha- 
 phat's eldest  son  with  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of 
 Ahab  ;  and,  when  we  advert  to  the  part  in  public 
 affairs  which  that  princess  afterwards  took,  it  may 
 well  be  conceived  that  even  thus  early  she  pos- 
 sessed an  influence  for  evil  in  the  court  of  Judah. 
 
 After  the  death  of  Ahaziah,  king  of  Israel, 
 Joram,  his  successor,  persuaded  Jehoshaphat  to 
 join  him  in  an  expedition  against  Moab.  This 
 alliance  was,  however,  on  political  grounds,  more 
 excusable  than  the  two  former,  as  the  Moabites, 
 who  were  under  tribute  to  Israel,  might  draw  into 
 their  cause  the  Edomites,  who  were  tributary  to 
 Judah.  Besides,  Moab  could  be  invaded  with 
 most  advantage  from  the  south,  round  by  the  end 
 
JEHOSHAPHAT 
 
 481 
 
 JEHOSHAPHAT,  VALLEY  OF 
 
 of  the  Dead  Sea  ;  and  the  king  of  Israel  could  not 
 gain  access  to  them  in  that  quarter  but  by  march- 
 ing through  the  territories  of  Jehoshaphat.  The 
 latter  not  only  joined  Joram  with  his  own  army, 
 but  required  his  tributary,  the  king  of  Edom,  to 
 bring  his  forces  into  the  field.  During  seven  days' 
 march  through  the  wilderness  of  Edom,  the  army 
 suffered  much  from  want  of  water ;  and  by  tlie 
 time  the  allies  came  in  sight  of  the  army  of  Moab, 
 they  were  ready  to  perish  from  thirst.  In  this 
 emergency  the  pious  Jehoshaphat  thought,  as 
 usual,  of  consulting  the  Lord  ;  and  hearing  that 
 the  prophet  Elisha  was  in  the  camp,  the  three 
 kings  proceeded  to  his  tent.  For  the  sake  of 
 Jehoshaphat,  and  for  his  sake  only,  deliverance 
 was  promised  ;  and  it  came  during  the  ensuing 
 night,  in  the  shape  of  an  abundant  supply  of  water, 
 which  rolled  down  the  exhausted  wadys,  and  hlled 
 the  pools  and  hollow  grounds.  Afterwards  Jehosha- 
 phat took  his  full  part  in  the  operations  of  the 
 campaign,  till  the  armies  were  induced  to  withdraw 
 in  horror,  by  witnessing  the  dreadful  act  of  Mesha, 
 king  of  Moab,  in  offering  up  his  eldest  son  in 
 sacrifice  upon  the  wall  of  the  town  in  which  he  was 
 shut  up. 
 
 This  war  kindled  another  much  more  dangerous 
 to  Jehoshaphat.  The  Moabites,  being  highly  ex- 
 asperated at  the  part  he  had  taken  against  them, 
 turned  all  their  wrath  upon  him.  They  induced 
 their  kindred,  the  Ammonites,  to  join  them,  ob- 
 tained auxiliaries  from  the  Syrians,  and  even  drew 
 over  the  Edomites  ;  so  that  the  strength  of  all  the 
 neighbouring  nations  may  be  said  to  have  been 
 united  for  this  great  enterprise.  The  allied  forces 
 entered  the  land  of  Judah  and  encamped  at  En- 
 gedi,  near  the  western  border  of  the  Dead  Sea.  In 
 this  extremity  Jehoshaphat  felt  that  all  his  defence 
 lay  with  God.  A  solemn  fa;>t  was  held,  and  the 
 people  repaired  from  the  towns  to  Jerusalem  to 
 seek  help  of  the  Lord.  In  the  presence  of  the 
 assembled  multitude  the  king,  in  the  court  of  the 
 temple,  offered  up  a  fervent  prayer  to  God,  con- 
 cluding with — '  O  our  God,  wilt  thou  not  judge 
 them,  for  we  have  no  might  against  this  great 
 com])any  that  cometh  against  us,  neither  know 
 we  what  to  do  ;  but  our  eyes  are  upon  thee.' 
 He  ceased ;  and  in  the  midst  of  the  silence 
 which  ensued,  a  voice  was  raised  pronouncing 
 deliverance  in  the  name  of  the  Loixl,  and  telling 
 them  to  go  out  on  the  morrow  to  the  cliffs  over- 
 looking the  camp  of  the  enemy,  and  see  them 
 all  overthrown  without  a  blow  from  them.  The 
 voice  was  that  of  Jahaziel,  one  of  the  Leviles. 
 His  words  came  to  pass.  The  allies  quarrelled 
 among  themselves  and  destroyed  each  other ;  so 
 that  when  the  Judahites  came  the  next  day  they 
 found  their  dreaded  enemies  all  dead,  and  nothing 
 was  left  for  them  but  to  take  the  rich  spoils  of  the 
 slain.  This  done,  they  returned  with  triumphal 
 songs  to  Jerusalem.  This  great  event  was  recog- 
 nised even  by  the  neighbouring  nations  as  the  act 
 of  God  ;  and  so  strong  was  the  impression  which 
 it  made  upon  them,  that  the  remainder  of  the 
 good  king's  reign  was  altogether  undisturbed. 
 His  death,  however,  took  place  not  very  long 
 after  this,  at  the  age  of  sixty,  after  having  reigned 
 twenty-five  years,  B.C.  896.  He  left  the  king- 
 dom in  a  prosperous  condition  to  his  eldest  son 
 Jehoram,  whcmi  he  had  in  the  last  years  of  his  life 
 associated  with  him  in  the  government. 
 '  Jehoshaphat,  who  sought  the  Lord  with  all  his 
 
 VOL.    II. 
 
 heart,'  was  the  character  given  to  this  kmg  by 
 Jehu,  when,  on  that  account,  he  gave  to  his 
 grandson  an  honourable  grave  (2  Chron.  xxii.  9). 
 And  this,  in  fact,  was  the  sum  and  substance  of 
 his  character.  The  Hebrew  annals  offer  the  ex- 
 ample of  no  king  who  more  carefully  squared  all 
 his  conduct  by  the  principles  of  the  theocracy. 
 He  kept  the  Lord  always  before  his  eyes,  and 
 was  in  all  things  obedient  to  his  will  when  made 
 known  to  him.  by  the  prophets.  Few  of  the  kings 
 of  Judah  manifested  so  much  zeal  for  the  real 
 welfare  of  his  people,  or  took  measures  so  judi- 
 cious to  promote  it.  His  good  talents,  the  bene- 
 volence of  his  disposition,  and  his  generally  sound 
 judgment,  are  shown  not  only  in  the  great  mea- 
 sures of  domestic  policy  which  distinguished  his 
 reign,  but  by  the  manner  in  which  they  were 
 executed.  No  trace  can  be  found  in  him  of  that 
 pride  which  dishonoured  some  and  ruined  others 
 of  the  kings  who  preceded  and  followed  him. 
 Most  of  his  errors  arose  from  that  dangerous 
 facility  of  temper  which  sometimes  led  him  to  act 
 against  the  dictates  of  his  naturally  sound  judg- 
 ment, or  prevented  that  judgment  from  being 
 fairly  exercised.  The  kingdom  of  Judah  was 
 never  happier  or  more  prosperous  than  under  his 
 reign  ;  and  this,  perhaps,  is  the  highest  praise  that 
 can  be  given  to  any  king. — J.  K. 
 
 [Four  other  persons  bearing  this  name  are  men- 
 tioned \\\  the  O.  T.  See  2  Sam.  viii.  16,  and  I 
 Kings  IV.  3  ;  I  Chron.  xv.  24 ;  I  Kings  iv.  17; 
 2  Kings  ix.  2,  14.] 
 
 JEHOSHAPHAT,  Valley  of  (OSC'in^  pa;^; 
 
 K-wXct? 'Iw(Ta0t£r  ;  vallis  yosaphaf).  In  one  of  the 
 sublime  prophecies  of  Joel,  when  describing  the 
 events  which  would  occur  after  the  return  of  the 
 Jews  from  the  Babylonish  captivity,  he  represents 
 the  Lord  as  sa}'ing  :  '  I  will  gather  all  the  nations, 
 and  bring  them  down  into  the  valley  of  Jehosha- 
 phat, and  will  plead  with  them  there,  on  account 
 of  my  people,  and  Israel  mine  inheritance,  whom 
 they  have  scattered  among  the  nations '  (iii.  2,  in 
 the  Hebrew  iv.  2).  The  nations  referred  to  ap- 
 pear to  be  those  which  oppressed  Israel  and  aided 
 in  their  overthrow.  These  then,  including  the 
 Sidonians,  Tyrians,  and  Phoenicians  generally  (ver. 
 4),  were  to  be  brought  down  into  this  valley  and 
 judged  (ver.  12).  The  act  is  clearly  symbolical, 
 and  in  that  case  we  can  scarcely  think  that  refer- 
 ence is  made  to  any  specific  locality.  The  valley 
 appears  to  have  been  intended  to  symbolise  those 
 bloody  battle-fields  where  the  hostile  nations  con- 
 tiguous to  Judaea  had  signal  vengeance  inflicted  on 
 them.  The  phrase  DSEi'in"'  pOJ?,  literally  signi- 
 fies '  The  valley  where  Jehovah  judgeth  ;'  and  may 
 thus  have  been  intended  to  represent  any  scene 
 of  divine  judgment       This   is   supported  by  the 
 
 Targum,  where  the  words  are  rendered  JI7S  'Iti'^C 
 Xjn,  '  the  plain  of  the  distribution  of  judgment ;' 
 and  by  the  translation  of  Theodotion,  r'j]v  xcipai* 
 T77S  Kpiaew^,  'the  place  of  judgment'  (Plenderson, 
 Minor  Prophets,  ad  loc.) 
 
 The  interpretations  of  this  passage  have  been 
 both  numerous  and  conflicting  (see  Poll  Synopsis 
 Crit.  Sac.  ad  loc.)  Many  think  a  definite  place  is 
 referred  to,  and  some  say  it  is  the  '  valley  of  Bera- 
 chah '  where  Jehoshaphat  obtained  the  signa? ' 
 victory  over  Ammon  and  Moab  (2  Chron.  xx.  26). 
 Some  again  affirm  that  the  valley  of  the  Kidron  is, 
 
 2  I 
 
JEHOSHEBAH 
 
 482 
 
 JEHOVAH 
 
 meant — that  deep  valley  or  jjlen  which  separates 
 Jerusalem  from  the  Mount  of  Olives.  This  may 
 be  regarded  as  the  traditional  interpretation  both 
 among  Jews  and  Christians.  Eusebius  says  KotXds 
 'lucracpar  lay  between  Jerusalem  and  the  Mount  of 
 Olives  (Oiiotnasf.,  s.\,  Coelas),  and  from  his  time 
 until  the  present  day  this  is  the  common  name 
 given  to  the  Kidron  ;  and  this  reference  of  the  pro- 
 phet Joel  has  given  rise  to  the  current  belief  among 
 Christians,  Jews,  and  Mohammedans,  that  the  last 
 judgment  will  take  place  there  (Robinson,  B.  R.  i. 
 269).  For  this  identification,  however,  there  is 
 not  the  slightest  ground,  either  in  the  writings  of 
 Scripture  or  in  Josephus.  The  name  universally 
 given  to  the  glen  is  Kidron  (2  Sam.  xv.  23  ;  i  Kings 
 ii.  38 ;  John  xviii.  i  ;  Joseph.  Bell.  yud.  v.  2.  3, 
 etc.)  Not  only  so,  but  the  word  pOJ?,  translated 
 'valley,'  is  altogether  inapplicable  to  the  Kidron  ; 
 it  signifies  a  low  tract  of  land  of  wide  extent,  such 
 as  suited  a  battle-field  (Job  xxxix.    10,  21  ;  Josh. 
 
 XV.  8).  The  Kidron  is  always  termed  pDJ,  '  tor- 
 rent valley'  or  'glen,'  and  the  Septuagint  and 
 Josephus  render  it  xe'A'a/'pos,  and  this  is  the  word 
 used  in  John  xviii.  i.  Josephus  also  applies  the 
 word  ipdpay^  to  the  Kidron.  The  Kidron  is  a 
 narrow  rocky  ravine  [Kidron],  and  wholly  un- 
 suitable for  such  an  event  as  is  referred  to  by 
 Joel  ;  and  even  though  we  could  believe  that  the 
 prophet  referred  to  a  specific  valley  this  could  not 
 be  the  one. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JEHOSHEBAH  (yaC^^.T;  'looaape^ ;  Josaba; 
 
 2  Kings  xi.  2  ;  2  Chron.  xxii.  11.  Jehoshabeath, 
 ni?3K>in"';  'I wo-a^e^e ;  Josabeth  ;  'Icoaapedri,  Joseph. ; 
 
 JehovaJi^^  oath),  daughter  of  Joram,  king  of  Judah, 
 sister  of  Ahaziah,  but  probably  by  a  secondary 
 wife,  and  so  not  the  daughter  of  Athaliah,  wife  of 
 the  high-priest  Jehoiada,  2  Chron.  xxii.  11.  When 
 Athaliah  had  the  whole  of  the  seed  royal  massacred 
 with  a  view  to  the  usurpation  of  the  throne,  Jeho- 
 shebah  discovered  her  infant  nephew  Joash  and 
 his  nurse  concealed  under  the  heaps  of  corpses 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  ix.  7.  i),  which  covered  the  pave- 
 ment of  the  palace,  and,  conveying  him  away 
 secretly,  hid  him  in  one  of  the  bedchambers  an- 
 nexed to  the  Temple,  in  whose  sacred  precincts  he 
 was  brought  up  by  her  and  her  husband  Jehoiada 
 among  their  own  children. 
 
 The  view  that  she  was  not  the  daughter  of 
 Athaliah  appears  to  be  confirmed  by  Josephus, 
 who  calls  her  '0;^ofia  o/xoTrdrptos  dSeX^ij,  and  is 
 in  keeping  with  the  subsequent  measures  taken  by 
 her  husband  Jehoiada  for  the  death  of  the  usurping 
 queen.  Needless  doubt  has  been  thrown  upon  her 
 marriage  with  Jehoiada  (Newman,  Heb.  l\Io7iarch., 
 P-  19s),  which  is  not  expressly  mentioned  in  Kings, 
 as  '  a  fiction  of  the  chronicler  to  glorify  his  great- 
 ness.' This,  however,  is  certainly  assumed  in  2 
 Kings  xi.  3,  and  is  accepted  by  Ewald,  Geschkhte 
 iii.  575,  as  perfectly  authentic. — E.  V. 
 
 JEHOSHUA    {V^\r\\    the   full  form   of  the 
 
 name  which  usually  appears  as  Joshua.  It  occurs 
 twice  m  the  A.  V.  of  the  leader  of  Israel  (Num. 
 xiii.  16  ;  I  Chron.  vii.  27),  in  the  latter  case  with 
 a  final  h.  The  LXX.  in  the  former  give  'JijtroCs, 
 in  the  latter  'l-rjcrovi. — t 
 
 JEHOVAH  (run"'),  the  proper  and  incommuni- 
 cable name  of  the  Most  High  God.     As  usually 
 
 pointed,  this  word  appears  as  niH^,  but,  as  is  well 
 
 known,  these  are  the  points  appropriate  to  '•JIS, 
 
 and  are  affixed  to  mn''  in  order  that  in  reading, 
 the  former  may  be  substituted  for  the  latter,  so 
 as  to  avoid  the  utterance  of  the  peculiar  name  of 
 God,  which  to  the  Jews  appears  irreverent.*  For 
 the  same  reason,  where  these  two  words  occur 
 together,  the  latter   is  pointed  nih^    that   it  may 
 
 be  pronounced  as  D'H  pj^.     In  consequence  of  this 
 
 usage,  the  proper  pronunciation  of  mn''  has  been 
 entirely  lost  from  traditionary  recollection,  and  can 
 be  recovered  with  probability  only  from  etymo- 
 logical research. 
 
 I.  Etymology  of  the  word. — Passing  over  some 
 fantastic  and  baseless  conjectures  on  this  head,  we 
 go  at  once  to  the  passage  in  which  we  have  what 
 was  undoubtedly  regarded  by  the  ancient  Hebrews 
 as  the  etymon  of  the  word,  Exod.  iii.  14.  In 
 reply  to  the  request  of  Moses  that  God  would 
 announce  to  him  his  name,  '  God  said  unto  Moses, 
 /  a7)i  that  I  am  (n\"lN  "l^^?  iT'nX) ;  and  he  said. 
 
 Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  1 
 am  hath  sent  me  unto  you.'  Again,  in  ch.  vi.  2, 
 we  read,  '  And  God  spake  unto  Moses,  and  said 
 unto  him,  I  am  Jehovah  (mn'').'  According  to 
 this  the  word  must  be  referred  to  the  substantive 
 verb  riNH,  of  which  the  earlier  form  was  mn  ;  and 
 of  this  nin^  would  be  the  regular  form  of  the  third 
 person  sing.  masc.  of  the  future.  In  this  case  the 
 punctuation  would  regularly  be  niiT'   YMveh,  or 
 
 mn''  Yeheveh ;  and  such  is  regarded  by  some  as 
 
 the  original  and  proper  pronunciation  of  the  word. 
 This  etymology  preserves  the  connection  between 
 the  peculiar  name  of  God  and  the  name  by  which 
 He  told  Moses  He  would  be  made  known  to  the 
 Israelites  ;  and  it  falls  in  with  the  representation  of 
 Scripture  that  to  be  is  the  special  characteristic  of 
 God  (Ps.  cii.  12,  26,  27  ;  Is.  xliii.  13  ;  Rev.  iv.  8, 
 etc. )  On  this  hypothesis  also  can  be  best  accounted 
 for  the  abbreviated  forms  of  the  word  found  in 
 proper  names,  "in">  and  IT' ;  the  ^  becomes  "•  as  in 
 
 N^n''  for  S^iri''  (Eccles.  xi.  3),  and  after  the  elision 
 
 of  the  He  the  Vau  may  easily  assume  the  O 
 sound  ;  so  also  from  iT'  is  formed  rT*,    as  in  the 
 
 apocopate  form  "Tl^,  and  this  in  composition  be- 
 comes n^,  as  in  y'lSJ'^  (Fiirst,  H.  IV. B.  in  verb.) 
 Gesenius  and  Ewald  prefer  to  punctuate  and  pro- 
 
 *  Among  those  of  Israel  who  shall  not  obtain 
 eternal  life,  Abba  Shaul  includes,  '  Him  who 
 shall  pronounce  the  name  by  its  own  letters '  (San- 
 hedrin,  ch.  xi.  sec.  i,  in  the  edit,  of  the  Mishna 
 by  Surenhusius,  vol.  iv.  p.  159.  Comp.  Philo,  De 
 Vita  Mosis ;  Theodoret,  Qiicasi.  xv.  in  Exod.) 
 This  disuse  of  the  word  must  have  begun  very 
 early,  as  it  is  not  employed  in  the  LXX.  or  the 
 Apocryphal  writings.  Jewish  tradition  states  that 
 in  later  times  the  name  was  pronounced  in  the 
 temple  only  by  the  priest  on  pronouncing  the 
 blessing  commanded  by  God  in  the  law.  Accord- 
 ing to  Maimonides  this  usage  terminated  with 
 Simon  the  Just,  or,  according  to  others,  when  the 
 temple  was  destroyed.  Cf.  Drusii  Tet7-agram' 
 maton,  in  Reland's  Decas  Exercitatiojium  PhiL 
 de  vera  pronun.  nominis  Jehova, 
 
JEHOVAH 
 
 4S3 
 
 JEHOVAH 
 
 nounce    the    word    iTin''    Yahveh ;    but    the   only 
 
 reason  apparently  that  can  be  produced  for  this  is 
 that  Epiphanius  gives  'Ia/3^  as  the  Hebrew  name 
 for  God,  and  Theodoret  {Qucest.  in  Exod.  xv. ), 
 says  that  so  the  word  was  pronounced  by  the 
 Samaritans  ;  to  which  much  importance  cannot  be 
 attached,  as  we  do  not  know  what  were  the  means 
 of  information  possessed  by  these  writers,  as  they 
 partially  contradict  each  other,  and  as  other  writers 
 who  have  sought  to  express  the  Hebrew  word  in 
 Greek  letters  have  given  it  otherwise,  ex.  gr.,  'laou 
 (Clemens  Alex.,  Strom,  v.  p.  666),  'Iei;c6  (Porphyr. 
 ap.  Euseb.  PrcEp.  Evangel,  i.  9,  21),  'law  (Diodor. 
 Sic.  i.  94  ;  Porphyr.  [quoting  Sanchoniatho]  ap. 
 Theodoreti  Ciir.  Gnec.  Affect,  ii.  28.  15,  p.  77, 
 ed.  Gaisford ;  Origen,  ad.  Johan.  i.  i  ;  Euseb., 
 Dem.  Evang.  x.  p.  494,  ed.  Colon.  1688).  Jerome 
 gives  it  also  (on  Ps.  viii.  2)  as  yaho,  for  which  we 
 should  probably  read  yahvo.  Irenjeus  (adv. 
 Haer.  ii.  353)  writes  it  yaoth,  where Knobel  suggests 
 that  the  S-  in  the  Greek  text  probably  was  meant  to 
 represent  the  Heb.  n.  These  varieties  have  given 
 ground  for  other  modes  of  pointing  and  pronounc- 
 ing the  original  word  besides  those  above  given. 
 Thus  several  prefer  mri''  Yahvah,  where  the  hard 
 
 sound  of  the  Kamets,  as  usually  pronounced 
 by  the  Jews,  passes  into  that  of  Cholem,  and 
 the  word  becomes  YaJivoh,  the  form  given  by 
 Jerome,  and  which  Fiirst  regards  as  the  form  re- 
 presented by  the  'Ici/tj  of  Porphyry  (probably 
 pronounced  Yevo),  as  the  liT'  would  become  'ley. 
 
 We  are  precluded  from  attaching  much  importance 
 to  these  Greek  representations  of  the  Hebrew 
 word,  not  only  by  the  reasons  above  assigned,  but 
 by  the  consideration  that  it  is  by  no  means  certain 
 that  the  word  was  pronounced  by  all  the  Shemitic 
 peoples  alike,  or  that  it  was  the  same  word  which 
 they  have  all  sought  to  represent.  Probably  the 
 'law  of  Diodorus  Siculus  and  others  is  rather  ir* 
 
 than  nin'',  and  'lajS^  may  have  been  the  Samaritan 
 pronunciation,  while  that  of  the  Jews  was  dif- 
 ferent, as  indeed  Theodoret  [loc.  cit. )  attests  ;  or 
 it  may  have  been,  as  Knobel  suggests,  an  unhebraic 
 form  given  to  the  word  from  some  confusion  of  the 
 Hebrew  name  for  God  with  the  Phoenician  God 
 'law  (see  Mover's  Phonizier,  i.  ]3.  539,  ff.)  If  we 
 hold  fast  the  derivation  of  the  word  from  T\\T\  we 
 can  adopt  only  a  form  such  as  may  be  legitimately 
 obtained  from  this  stem.  Now,  neither  niH''  Yah- 
 veh, nor  nin^  Yahvah,  meets  this  test.  The  same 
 objection  applies  to  niH''  Yahvoh,  which  Capellus 
 
 suggests.  The  suggestion  of  Mercer  and  Cornelius 
 a  Lapide  that  we  should  point  and  read  miT'  is 
 
 not  exposed  to  this  objection ;  but  it  is  to  the 
 objection  that  from  this  we  could  not  get  such 
 an  abbreviated  form  as  the  frequently  recurring  ^iT" 
 
 in  words  like  in'ppn  (Hilkiah),  etc.     Some  have 
 
 even  sought  to  defend  the  common  punctuation  as 
 that  proper  to  the  word  ;  but  that  this  is  utterly 
 untenable  has  been  fully  shewn  by  the  writers 
 whose  treatises  are  collected  by  Reland ;  the  fact 
 that  when  '•JTX  and  niiT'  occur  together  the  latter 
 has  the  points  belonging  to  Elohim  is  sufficient 
 to  refute  it.  Usage,  however,  has  established  a 
 prerogative  for  the  pronunciation  Jehovah,  and  it 
 
 would  be  pedantic  now  to  employ  any  other 
 (Reland,  Decas  Exercitationutn  philologicaritm  dt 
 vei'a  prontintiatione  nominis  yehoz'a,  1707). 
 
 2,  Significance  of  the  term. — If  the  etymology 
 above  indicated  be  adopted,  this  of  itself  will  in 
 great  measure  determine  the  meaning  and  force  of 
 the  word.  According  to  the  analogy  of  futures 
 used  as  proper  names  (comp.  ^py^  mO'',  JTIDI^, 
 pn^'',  etc.),  it  must  be  regarded  as  expressing  the 
 concentration,  in  the  Being  to  whom  it  is  applied, 
 of  the  quality  expressed  by  the  simple  verb  ;  that 
 is,  in  this  case,  the  quality  of  being  or  existence. 
 This  term,  therefore,  as  applied  to  God,  intimates 
 that  to  be  is  his  peculiar  characteristic  ;  that  He  is 
 in  a  sense  in  which  no  other  being  is  ;  that  He  is 
 self-existent,  and  cannot  but  be ;  that  He  is  the 
 source  of  all  being,  the  unchangeable,  infinite, 
 eternal  essence.  With  this  explanation  of  the 
 word  all  the  passages  in  Scripture  in  which  stress 
 is  laid  on  it  as  a  designation  of  the  Almighty  ac- 
 cord. It  is  because  this  is  his  name  that  He  changes 
 not  (Mai.  iii.  6) ;  that  He  is  king  of  the  whole  earth, 
 reigning  for  ever  (Ps.  x.  16  ;  xcix.  i  ;  cxlvi.  10)  ; 
 that  He  is  the  author  of  creation  and  the  ruler  of 
 the  universe  (Amos  v.  8  ;  ix.  6  ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  4  ;  Jer. 
 xxxii.  27  ;  comp.  also  the  often  recurring  phrase 
 niX3^*  nin''.  Lord  of  Hosts)  ;  that  his  people  may 
 with  confidence  call  on  Him  as  ever  present  and  as 
 having  all  things  in  his  hand  (Jer.  xxxiii.  2  ;  1.  33, 
 34)  ;  and  that  in  this  Hes  a  security  for  his  forgiving 
 grace  enduring  from  generation  to  generation  (Exod. 
 xxxiv.  5-7).  Worthy  of  notice  also  is  it,  that  the 
 most  solemn  oath  of  the  Jews  was  by  Jehovah  as 
 the  Living  One  (Jer.  v.  2).  In  the  opinion  that  in 
 this  lies  the  significancy  of  the  name,  the  ancient 
 Jews  and  most  scholars  of  eminence  have  concurred. 
 R.  Bechai  (in  Exod.,  fol.  65,  col.  4,  quoted  by  Bux- 
 torf.  Lexicon  in  verb.)  says,  '  The  blessed  God  rules 
 in  the  three  times,  past,  present,  and  future,  and 
 the  name  alone  (^^'^^?)  embraces  these  three  times  ;' 
 and  again,  '  nnVDH  Dt^'3,  in  the  appropriated 
 name  (nilT')  are  comprehended  these  three  times, 
 as  is  known  to  all'  (comp.  also  the  Targum  Jon- 
 ath.  on  Exod.  iii.  14)  ;  Buxtorf :  Nomen  Dei  pro- 
 prium  ipsum  ab  essentia  sua  denominans,  q.  d. 
 ens,  existens  ab  setemo  et  in  aetemum  ;  Hottinger  : 
 Nomen  niH"'  est  essentiale,  i.  e.  simplicissimam,  in- 
 finitam  et  seternam  Dei  essentiam  significantissime 
 exprimit.  '  The  meaning,'  says  Knobel  (Exeget. 
 Hdb.  z.  Exod.  p.  30),  '  cannot  be  doubtful.  The 
 LXX.  render  n\-IX  "lE^X  '!Vr\^  by  e-y^  elixi  8  &v, 
 and  the  following  n\"IX  by  6  &iv,  and  the  Greco- 
 Venet.  by  6  dvTWTTis.  Theodotion  gives  t6  bv  as 
 the  rendering  of  n\    Hesychius  explains  dX\r]\ovia 
 
 by  aluos  ry  6vti.  al  0ei?>  ^^'^  Theodoret  (QiicBst.  ad 
 Pa7-alipom.  I.)  explains  'lati  as  meaning  6  ^e6s  ibv, 
 as  also  on  Ps.  ex.  i,  Pl^  as  6  &v.  Recent  writers 
 also,  as  Hitzig  (on  Is.  i.  2)  and  Maurer  {W.  B.), 
 embrace  this  meaning.  Jehovah  calls  Himself  THE 
 Being  in  contradistinction  to  the  Gods  of  the 
 nations,  which,  as  gods,  had  no  being,  but  were 
 mere  fictions  and  pretences,  and  therefore  non- 
 entities ;  He  thus  denotes  Himself  as  the  true  and 
 only  God.  Many  regard  this  being  as  unchange- 
 able and  eternal  (Gesen.,  Rosenm.,  Hengstenb., 
 Reinke,  Herder.  Geist.  der  Eb.  Poes.  I.  p.  108 ; 
 Tuch.  Genes,  p.  xxxv.  ;  von  Coelln.  Bibl.  Theol.  i. 
 p.  lOo),  and  accordingly  give  Eternal  as  its  mean- 
 ing. This  is  intimated  already  by  the  6  Civ  Kal  6  fju 
 Kai  h  ipx^fifyoi  of  Apoc.  L  4,  8,  and  the  6  uv  Kal  6 
 
JEHOVAH 
 
 484 
 
 JEHOVAH 
 
 i^y  of  ch.  xi.  1 7,  and  x\n.  5  ;  also  by  the  0  icv  Kal  6 
 ipXOfievos  of  Clement,  and  the  6?  Tiv  kuI  earl  Kal  dei 
 ibv  of  Epiphanius  ;  but  how  this  idea  lies  in  a  deri- 
 vative from  iTTI,  to  he,  does  not  appear'  {Book 
 cited,  p.  30).  The  difficulty  hinted  at  in  this  con- 
 cluding clause  may  be  easily  obviated.  If  the 
 tetragrammaton  conveys  the  idea  of  absolute  essence, 
 then,  as  this  is  not  separable  either  in  reality  or  in 
 thought  from  eternal  self-existence,  it  must  include 
 also  the  latter.  It  has  been  objected  to  this,  that 
 the  idea  thus  conveyed  of  God  is  too  abstract  to  be 
 suited  to  the  genius  of  the  ancient  Hebrews.  To 
 meet  this  Gesenius  has  suggested  [Thes.  in  voc.) 
 that  we  may  read  the  word  niH"'   as  the  fut.    in 
 
 Hiphil  =  He  wJio  causes  to  he,  the  Creator.  This 
 is  ingenious  but  purely  conjectural,  as  the  verb 
 does  not  occur  in  the  Hiphil ;  and  besides  the  idea 
 of  creativeness  does  not  predominate  in  the  usages 
 of  the  word.  Havernick  (Introd.,  p.  ^i,  E.  T.) 
 says,  '  this  name  denotes  the  essence  of  the  God- 
 head in  its  concrete  relation  to  mankind,  the  reve- 
 lation of  the  living  God  Himself;'  and  again  (p. 
 60),  that  '  it  does  not  assign  so  much  the  abstract 
 idea  of  eternal  existence  as  that  rather  of  the  con- 
 crete existence  of  God,  and  his  disposition  towards 
 Israel,  his  permanent  relationship  to  them.'  But, 
 though  it  is  as  Jehovah  that  God  enters  into 
 covenant  relations  with  men,  it  does  not  follow 
 from  this  that  such  is  the  t?ieaning-  of  the  word  ; 
 rather  is  it  because  He  is  Jehovah,  the  self-existent, 
 that  such  relations  subsist.  The  proper  answer 
 to  the  objection  is  that  it  proceeds  on  an  as- 
 sumption which  is  quite  gratuitous  ;  the  ancient 
 Hebrews  were  not  so  destitute  of  abstract  notions 
 as  it  presumes.  Modern  Jewish  translators  gene- 
 rally prefer  a  rendering  equivalent  to  Eternal. 
 Since  the  version  of  Olivetan  all  the  French  ver- 
 sions translate  the  word  V Eteriiel ;  some  German 
 versions  follow  this  and  give  Der  Etvige  (see  Bun- 
 sen,  Bibelwerk,  I.  p.  Ixxxviii.)  By  some  recent 
 writers  stress  is  laid  on  the  fact  of  \h.Q.  future  tense 
 being  used,  and  a  meaning  corresponding  to  this 
 has  been  attached  to  the  word.  Thus  Baumgarten 
 says  {Theol.  Coin.  I.  p.  410),  '  We  must  go  to  ilin'' 
 from  the  words  HTIX  "lt^i<  HTIK,  and  thus  Jeho- 
 vah is,  as  He  Himself  declares,  the  historical  God, 
 the  God  of  Abraham.  The  reference  becomes 
 clear  when  with  Aquila  and  Theodotion  we  give 
 the  mood  its  usual,  /.  e.,  futuritive  meaning.  Since 
 the  repetition  of  nVTN  cannot  be  tautological,  we 
 translate  :  I  shall  be  who  I  will  and  should  be 
 ('  Ich  werde  sein  der  ich  sein  will  und  soil' ).  We 
 have  thus  here  the  reference  to  the  promise  to  the 
 fathers,  which  ever  points  to  a  future  manifestation 
 of  Jehovah.'  Delitzsch  adopts  substantially  the 
 same  view  {Genesis,  p.  32)  :  '  Creation,'  says  he, 
 '  is  the  beginning,  and  the  bringing  of  every  thing 
 created  perfectly  to  its  idea  is  the  end.  The  king- 
 dom of  power  must  become  the  kingdom  of  glory. 
 Between  lies  the  kingdom  of  grace,  a  long  history, 
 whose  essential  content  is  Redemption.  Hin''  is  the 
 Lord  wlio  mediates  the  beginning  and  the  end  in 
 the  lapse  of  this  history,  in  one  word,  God  the 
 Redeemer.'  That  the  idea  here  suggested  is  sub- 
 stantially true  cannot  be  questioned  ;  God  the  ever- 
 lasting is  from  that  very  fact  God  who  is  ever  re- 
 vealing Himself  to  His  creatures,  and  in  the  sphere 
 of  this  fallen  world  ever  revealing  Himself  as  the 
 Restorer  and  Redeemer ;  but  that  his  reason  for 
 taking  to  Himself  the  name  Jehovah  was  to  convey 
 
 this  truth,  or  that  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  futuri- 
 tive  form  of  the  word  seems  altogether  without 
 ground.  * 
 
 This  idea  has  been  carried  still  farther  by  Mr. 
 Tyler  {Jehovah  the  Redeemer  God,  etc.,  Lond. 
 1861),  by  Mr.  Macwhorter  {Bihlioth.  Sac,  Jan. 
 1857),  and  by  Mr.  Macdonald  {Introduction  to  the 
 Pentateuch)  ;  by  whom  the  term  Jehovah  is  made 
 to  bear  reference  to  the  future  manifestation  of 
 God  the  Saviour  in  Jesus  Christ.  What  has  been 
 advanced  in  illustration  of  their  view  by  these 
 writers,  contains  much  that  is  ingenious,  interest- 
 ing, and  instructive  ;  but  their  entire  theory  seems 
 to  us  to  want  a  basis  in  fact  on  which  to  rest.  Mr. 
 Macwhorter  renders  the  exclamation  of  Eve  on  the 
 birth  of  her  son  Cain,  thus  :  '  I  have  gotten  a  man, 
 even  him  who  is  to  be'  or  '  to  come;'  with  this 
 Mr.  Tyler  substantially  coincides,  and  on  this  their 
 theory  rests.  Now,  is  such  a  rendering  grammati- 
 cally possible  ?  Can  a  single  instance  be  adduced 
 of  a  verb  not  already  recognised  as  a  proper  name 
 being  placed  in  apposition  with  a  preceding  clause 
 by  means  of  Jlt^  ?  And,  with  respect  to  the  whole 
 class  to  which  this  view  belongs,  may  we  not  ask 
 whether  it  be  not  liable  to  the  objection  of  conveying 
 to  us  unworthy  views  of  God,  as  if  He,  the  immu- 
 table and  eternal,  should  give  as  \as  peculiar  name 
 — the  symbol  conveying  the  true  concept  of  Him — ■ 
 a  word  which  expresses  rather  Avhat  He  is  to  he- 
 cane,  as  manifested  to  men,  than  what  He  is  in 
 Himself? 
 
 On  the  whole,  we  accept  as  that  best  sustained, 
 the  old  view,  that  by  this  name  God  would  convey 
 to  us  the  idea  that  PURE  BEING  is  his  peculiar  and 
 characteristic  quality. 
 
 3.  Relation  of  JcJiovah  to  Elohim. — As  both  of 
 these  are  designations  of  the  one  God,  it  is  not  sur- 
 prising that  we  should  find  sometimes  the  one, 
 sometimes  the  other,  and  sometimes  both  together, 
 used  by  the  sacred  writers.  It  is  remarkable,  how- 
 ever, that  usually  where  the  writer  employs  the  one 
 he  does  not  in  the  same  section  or  context  employ 
 the  other.  [See  article  God.]  This  has  excited 
 notice,  and  has  led  to  much  investigation,  some 
 contending  that  the  use  of  the  one  teiTn  or  the 
 other  is  determined  by  the  suitableness  of  its  signifi- 
 cancy  to  the  subject  of  the  context  in  which  it 
 occurs  ;  others  finding  in  the  distinctive  use  of  the 
 terms  traces  and  evidences  of  separate  authorship 
 of  the  sections  ;  while  others  see  in  this  nothing  but 
 one  of  the  accidents  of  composition.  This  is  not 
 the  place  to  enter  fully  into  this  subject,  which  will 
 be  better  discussed  where  the  question  becomes  one 
 of  practical  value  as  bearing  on  the  authenticity  and 
 integrity  of  certain  books  of  Scripture  ;  but  a  few' 
 general  observations  may  not  be  out  of  place  here. 
 
 I.  The  two  first  of  the  hypotheses  just  stated 
 have  been  generally  put  forth  as  directly  antagonist 
 
 *  One  may  cite  Delitzsch  here  against  himself. 
 Writing  of  nouns  formed  from  the  future  (or  as  he 
 calls  it,  the  imperfect)  of  verbs,  he  says  {Isagoge  in 
 Graju.  ct  Lex.  Ling.  Heh),  'In  nmm.  formandis 
 ad  habitum  quondam,  vel  actionis  vel  status  qui 
 personam  vel  rei  inhaerescat  significandum  imper- 
 fecta verba  adhiberi.'  This  is  fully  supported  by 
 the  usage  of  the  language  ;  in  all  such  nouns  it  is 
 the  eminence  or  predominance  of  the  quality  in  the 
 object,  and  not  progressiveness  or  continued  deve- 
 lopment of  that  quality,  which  the  form  of  the 
 word  is  designed  to  convey. 
 
JEHOVAH 
 
 4S5 
 
 JEHOVAH 
 
 to  each  other.  Should  we  not,  however,  rather 
 say  that  both  rest  really  on  the  same  fundamental 
 assumption — that,  namely,  of  such  a  distinction 
 in  the  meaning  of  the  two  terms  as  renders  it 
 proper  that  the  one  and  not  the  other  should  be 
 used  in  certain  connections  ?  This  is  avowedly 
 the  assumption  of  those  who  advocate  the  former 
 of  the  two  ;  but  it  is  not  less  by  implication 
 involved  in  the  latter.  For  if  the  difference  of 
 usage  is  traceable  to  difference  of  authorship, 
 then  as  each  author  must  have  had  a  reason  for 
 preferring  the  one  name  to  the  other,  and  as  the 
 only  reason  that  could  have  dictated  such  a  pre- 
 ference is  one  arising  from  the  signification  of  the 
 word,  we  are  as  much  on  this  hypothesis  as  on  the 
 other  thrown  back  on  the  inquiry  whether  any 
 such  distinction  of  signification  can  be  established 
 as  will  account  for  the  one  name  being  used  in  any 
 given  connection  rather  than  the  other.  We  say 
 the  only  reason  that  could  have  led  different  writers 
 to  use  the  one  word  rather  than  the  other  is  such 
 a  distinctive  difference  of  sense  as  rendered  the  one 
 word  proper  and  the  other  not  in  the  connection  ; 
 for  to  what  else  can  the  preference  of  the  one  to 
 the  other  be  referred  ?  It  cannot  be  pretended  that 
 both  names  were  not  equally  familiar  to  every 
 Hebrew  writer  ;  and  if  it  be  said  that  7nere  accident 
 determined  it,  a  cause  is  assumed  which  will  ac- 
 count for  the  diversity  as  well  on  the  hypothesis  of 
 one  writer  throughout,  as  on  that  oi  several ;  which 
 is  a  virtual  giving  up  of  the  latter  hypothesis  entirely. 
 We  conclude,  then,  that  the  assumption  we  have 
 specified  is  essential  to  both  hypotheses.  The 
 question  thus  comes  to  be,  can  such  a  distinction 
 of  meaning  be  established  ?  That  the  two  words 
 in  their  primary  etymological  sense  are  distinguish- 
 able from  each  other  lies  on  the  surface  ;  but  this 
 is  not  the  question  here.  The  question  is.  Are 
 they  so  distinct  that  a  correct  writer  would  feel  in 
 some  connections  he  could  use  only  the  one,  and  in 
 other  connections  only  the  other  ?  To  this  question 
 no  satisfactoiy  answer  has  been  yet  given.  Many 
 suggestions  have  been  offered  as  to  the  distinctive 
 difference  of  the  two  words  ;  but  they  can  be  re- 
 garded in  no  other  light  than  as  the  a  priori  guesses 
 of  learned  and  ingenious  men.  As  yet  no  attempt 
 has  been  made  to  discover  by  a  careful  induction 
 what  is  the  conclusion  which  the  usage  of  Scripture 
 authorises  on  this  point.  2.  Sufficient  care  does 
 not  seem  to  have  been  taken  to  eliminate  passages 
 which  can  contribute  nothing  to  the  settlement  of 
 the  question  at  issue — to  'purge  the  instances,'  if 
 we  may  use  the  language  of  Bacon.  Of  the  many 
 cases  in  which  Elohim  is  used,  a  very  large  number 
 prove  nothing  whatever  as  to  any  preference  on  the 
 part  of  the  writer  for  that  name  rather  than  Jehovah, 
 simply  because  the  grammatical  conditions  of  the 
 sentence  preclude  the  use  of  a  proper  name  such 
 as  Jehovah.  In  all  cases,  for  instance,  where  a 
 pronoun  or  adjective  has  to  be  used  along  with  the 
 appellation  of  God,  the  writer  lies  vmder  a  necessity 
 of  using  Elohim  and  not  Jehovah.  On  the  other 
 hand,  there  are  cases  where  Jehovah  could  alone 
 be  used  ;  as,  for  instance,  when  Jacob  says  (Gen. 
 xxviii.  2i),  'then  shall  Jehovah  be  my  God,'  or 
 when  Pharaoh  asks  (Exod.  v.  2),  '  Who  is  Jehovah 
 that  I  should  obey  his  voice  ?'  or  when  Moses  said 
 to  Pharaoh  that  he  would  pray  Jehovah  to  send  a 
 judgment  on  him  that  he  might  know  that  the 
 earth  is  Jehovah's  (Exod.  ix.  29),  or  when  Moses 
 cried  when  he  saw  the  people  offering  idolatrous 
 
 homage  to  the  calf,  '  Who  is  on  the  side  of 
 Jehovah?'  (Exod.  xxxii.  26),  and  a  multitude  of 
 similar  instances,  where  from  the  very  circumstances 
 of  the  case  only  a  proper  name  could  be  used. 
 Such  instances  are  obviously  to  be  abstracted  from  ; 
 and  when  this  is  done  with  due  care  it  will  be  found 
 that  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  cases  in  which 
 either  word  is  used  is  accounted  for  without  the  aid 
 of  either  of  the  hypotheses  above  stated.  3.  Due 
 regard  does  not  seem  to  have  been  paid  to  the 
 bearing  of  exceptive  cases  on  the  question  at  issue. 
 It  is  a  rule  of  the  inductive  method  that  where  any 
 hypothesis  is  found  irreconcilable  with  any  ascer- 
 tained fact,  which,  if  true,  it  ought  to  embrace,  it 
 must  be  set  aside  as  thereby  invalidated  :  Data 
 instantia  cadit  inductio.  Now  there  are  instances 
 of  the  use  both  of  Jehovah  and  of  Elohim  in  the 
 O.  T.  which  cannot  be  brought  under  either  of 
 these  hypotheses  ;  and  from  this  it  follows  that  both 
 are  logically  unsound  ;  each  involves  the  fallacy  of 
 an  '  undistributed  middle.'  Such  exceptional  pas- 
 sages, for  instance,  in  relation  to  the  Document 
 hypothesis  are  found  in  Gen.  iv. ,  which  is  said  to 
 be  Jehovistic,  but  in  which  at  ver.  25  we  find 
 Elohim  used;  in  Gen.  vi.  1-6,  where  Jehovah  and 
 Elohim  are  both  used  ;  in  Gen.  xx.,  where  Elohim 
 is  chiefly  used,  but  where  in  ver.  4  and  ver.  18  we 
 have  Jehovah.  Such  instances  are  plainly  utterly 
 irreconcilable  with  the  hypothesis  of  original  Elo- 
 histic  documents  with  which  Jehovistic  documents 
 have  at  a  later  period  been  interwoven.  Equally 
 irreconcilable  with  both  hypotheses  are  those  pas- 
 sages in  which  the  narrative  is  plainly  uniform  and 
 continuous,  but  where  the  Document  hypothesis 
 would  require  us  violently  to  dislocate  the  whole, 
 and  where  it  is  impossible  to  discover  any  such  diffe- 
 rences of  reference  and  application  in  the  portions 
 where  the  two  divine  appellations  are  used  respec- 
 tively as  a  regard  to  the  Sense  hypothesis  would  de- 
 mand. To  this  objection  we  have  never  seen  a  fair 
 and  tenable  answer.  It  is  easy  to  say  the  passages 
 are  interpolated,  or  to  suggest  the  agency  of  a  second, 
 third,  or  seventh  reviser  ;  but  to  men  of  scientific 
 habits  of  research  such  expedients  only  serve  the 
 more  to  condemn  the  hypothesis  they  are  adopted 
 to  save.  4.  It  would  be  well  before  setting  to 
 work  to  frame  hypotheses  affecting  the  integrity 
 and  genuineness  of  the  sacred  books,  were  some 
 attempt  made  to  settle  on  a  solid  basis  the  criteria 
 by  which  questions  of  this  sort  are  to  be  deter- 
 mined. Especially  in  relation  to  such  a  case  as 
 that  before  us,  it  would  be  well  to  settle  with  some 
 degree  of  precision,  and  by  means  of  a  large  induc- 
 tion from  the  phenomena  of  literature,  what  kind 
 and  what  degree  of  variety  in  phraseology  and  style 
 afford  a  safe  criterion  of  diversity  of  authorship. 
 At  present  it  seems  to  be  chiefly  the  critic's  own 
 subjectivity  that  determines  his  conclusion  ;  the 
 consequence  of  which  is  that  different  men  arrive 
 at  conflicting  conclusions,  all  of  which  are  alike 
 without  any  solid  ground  on  which  they  can  be 
 rested.  It  would  be  well,  before  we  dispute  further 
 on  such  points,  that  some  organon  of  the  higher 
 criticism  were  in  recognised  use  among  critics. 
 
 These  remarks  are  designed  to  point  towards  the 
 desirableness  of  a  reconsideration  of  the  subject  of 
 the  relation  of  Elohim  to  Jehovah  in  the  usage  of 
 the  sacred  writers,  from  a  more  strictly  scientific 
 point  of  view  than  has  hitherto  been  assumed. 
 Learning  has  done  its  utmost  in  regard  to  this 
 matter ;  all  the  facts  of  the  case  have  been  col- 
 
JEHOVAH 
 
 486 
 
 JEHOVAH  SHALOM 
 
 lected  and  elucidated  by  scholars  of  the  first  emi- 
 nence ;  it  is  only  from  a  juster  application  of  the 
 method  of  scientific  investigation  to  these  facts  that 
 any  further  light  can  be  hoped  for.  As  things 
 stand  now  the  prevalence  of  the  one  term  in  a  con- 
 text rather  than  the  other  can  be  regarded  in  no 
 other  light  than  as  one  of  those  accidents  of  com- 
 position for  which  we  are  unable  to  account. 
 
 4.  It  yet  remains  to  inquire  at  what  time  '  Jeho- 
 vah' became  known  as  the  proper  appellation 
 of  God.  Here  the  question  resolves  itself  very 
 much  into  an  inquiry  into  the  meaning  of  Exod. 
 vi.  3.  Is  this  to  be  regarded  as  intimating  the 
 first  revelation  of  the  name  as  a  name  ?  or  is 
 the  import  of  the  statement  that  though  the  patri- 
 archs before  this  time  may  have  known  the  word 
 as  a  designation  of  God,  they  had  not  had  the 
 means  of  realising  the  full  meaning  of  the  ap- 
 pellation—  that  not  before  this  had  all  which  lies 
 involved  concerning  God  in  that  word  been  fully 
 made  known  to  them.  The  former  of  these  views  is 
 probably  that  which  the  first  reading  of  the  passage 
 would  suggest  ;  but  it  is  exposed  to  such  serious 
 difficulties  that  it  seems  untenable.  How  on  this 
 view  are  we  to  account  for  such  a  statement  as 
 that  in  Gen.  iv.  I,  that  in  Gen.  vi.  26,  that  in  Gen. 
 xii.  8,  and  many  similar  passages  ?  To  say  that  in 
 these  passages  the  word  is  used  by  prolepsis,  is  to 
 resort  to  a  very  arbitrary  and  violent  expedient  for 
 escaping  from  a  difficulty.  In  such  a  proper  name 
 also  as  Moriah  (iT'llD),  we  have  evidence  of  early 
 
 acquaintance  with  the  name  Jehovah  ;  while  from 
 the  name  of  the  mother  of  Moses,  Jochebed  (133^), 
 
 we  learn  that  among  his  maternal  ancestry  this 
 name  was  known.  In  the  family  of  Jacob  also  we 
 have  such  names  as  Ahijah  and  Abiah  {Abijah),  to 
 which  may  be  added  the  names  of  the  two  wives  of 
 Ezra  or  Ezer,  Hodiah  and  Bithiah  (i  Chron.  ii. 
 25  ;  vii.  8  ;  iv.  18),  all  indicating  a  familiarity  with 
 the  pecuhar  name  of  God  before  the  time  of  Moses. 
 In  the  face  of  these  facts,  the  opinion  that  the  name 
 Jehovah  was  for  the  first  time  made  known  to  Moses 
 on  the  occasion  referred  to  cannot  be  retained. 
 Adopting  the  other  view,  the  statement  '  by  my 
 name  Jehovah  was  I  not  known  to  them'  is  best 
 explained  by  a  reference  to  Exod.  xxxiii.  19,  Ps. 
 Ixxvi.  I,  etc.  (Hengstenberg,  Die  Anth.  des  Fenta- 
 teuches,  i.  268,  ff. ;  Kurz,  Hist,  of  the  Old  Covenant, 
 ii.,  p.  98,  215  ;  Delitzsch,  Genesis,  p.  26).  'The name 
 Jehovah,'  says  Kurz,  'was  (or  rather  became)  un- 
 doubtedly a  new  one  then,  but  only  in  the  sense  in 
 which  Christ  said  (John  xiii.  34)  '  a  ftew  com- 
 mandment give  I  unto  you ;'  whereas  he  merely 
 repeated  one  of  the  primary  commandments  which 
 we  find  in  the  O.  T.,  and  meet  with  on  every  hand 
 in  the  laws  of  Moses.  It  was  a  commandment, 
 however,  the  fulness  and  depth,  the  meaning,  force, 
 and  value  of  which  were  first  unfolded  by  the  Gospel. 
 And  just  as  the  greatest  act  of  love  which  the  world 
 ever  witnessed  provided  a  new  field  for  the  exem- 
 plification of  this  command  in  greater  glory  than 
 was  possible  under  the  law,  and  thus  the  old  com- 
 mandment became  a  new  one  ;  so  did  the  new 
 act  of  God  in  the  redemption  of  Israel  from  Egypt 
 furnish  a  new  field  in  which  the  ancient  name  of 
 God  struck  fresh  and  deeper  roots,  and  thus  the 
 ancient  name  became  a  new  one.' 
 
 5.  Attempts  have  been  made  by  some  to  find  a 
 heathen  origin  for  the  name  Jehovah ;  but  the 
 futility  of  these  have  been  so  amply  exposed,  and 
 
 the  hypothesis  is  now  so  generally  repudiated  bj 
 scholars,  that  it  seems  needless  to  occupy  space  by 
 detailing  them  (see  Tholuck,  Ueb.  die  Hypothese  dei 
 Urspriings  des  Nomens  yehovah  aus  Aegypten 
 Phcenicien  oder  Indien  in  his  Verm.  Schriften,  i. 
 377-405  ;  Gesenius,  Thes.,  s.  v.) 
 
 6.    In  composition  the  word  hin''  is  abbreviated 
 into  in;  Jeho,  _^  Je,  V  >,  ^H""  Jahu.     The  name 
 
 iT',  yah,  is  also  an  abbreviation  of  the  telegramma- 
 
 ton,  chiefly  used  in  poetry  and  in  devotional  ejacu- 
 lations. 
 
 The  name  appears  entire  also  in  some  proper 
 names,  viz. — 
 
 Jehovah  Jireh  (HKI^  •Tin''),  the  name  given 
 
 by  Abraham  to  the  place  where  the  angel  of  the 
 Lord  appeared  to  him  when  about  to  offer  up  his 
 son  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.  14).  The  words  mean 
 'Jehovah  will  see,'  i.e.,  see  to  something,  provide 
 for  it ;  and  have  evident  allusion  to  ver.  8,  where, 
 in  answer  to  Isaac's  question,  Abraham  says,  '  My 
 son,  God  will  provide  himself  a  lamb  for  a  burnt- 
 offermg.'  The  name  thus  given  to  the  place  did 
 not  continue,  but  seems  to  have  given  place  to 
 Moriah    (nniO  =  n""  nN^D,    shewn   of  yehovah, 
 
 the  place  indicated  by  Him),  which  was  probably 
 also  the  earlier  name  (ver.  2).  The  circumstance, 
 however,  gave  rise  to  a  proverb,  '  In  the  mountain 
 of  Jehovah  it  will  be  seen,'  i.e.,  foreseen,  provided 
 for  ;  so  that  it  became  a  belief  among  the  Jews 
 that,  in  the  place  which  God  had  pointed  out  as 
 his  holy  mountain,  the  place  where  He  would  be 
 worshipped,  there  should  be  provision  for  the 
 guidance  of  his  people ;  the  place  of  worship 
 should  be  the  place  of  revelation.  Mount  Moriah 
 became  in  after  times  the  site  of  the  Temple  (2 
 Chron.  iii.  l)  ;  and  then  did  these  earlier  intima- 
 tions receive  their  full  accomplishment  ;  in  the 
 place  where  sacrifice  could  alone  be  made  Jehovah 
 revealed  Himself,  and  men  knew  that  they  might 
 come  and  inquire  in  his  holy  temple.  The  LXX. 
 render  this  clause  by  kv  ti^  &pei.  Kupios  Sicpd-r),  which 
 would  indicate  that  they  read  the  text  nin''  "in3 
 
 nS"!^,  'in  the  mountain  Jehovah  was  seen.' 
 
 Jehovah  Nissi  PDJ  'i\\X\^ ,  yehovah  my  bamier), 
 
 the  name  given  by  Moses  to  an  altar  which  he 
 erected  in  celebration  of  the  great  victory  ob- 
 tained by  the  Israelites  over  the  Amalekites 
 (Exod.  xvii.  15).  The  design  of  this  erection  is 
 stated  in  ver.  16,  the  meaning  of  which  is  very  im- 
 perfectly brought  out  in  the  A.  V.  The  literal 
 rendering  is,  '  And  he  said.  For  a  hand  upon  the 
 throne  (D3  for  NDD,  a7ra|  XtySfievov)  of  Jah,  war 
 to  Jehovah  with  Amalek,  from  generation  to  gene- 
 ration.' Hand  ("T')  may  be  taken  here  either  as 
 the  symbol  of  an  oath  (comp.  Gen.  xiv.  22),  or  in 
 the  sense  of  memorial  (i  Sam.  xv.  12;  Is.  Ivi.  5). 
 Luther  adopts  the  latter  sense,  and  renders,  '  Es 
 ist  ein  Maalzeichen  bey  dem  Stuhl  des  Herrn.' 
 If  the  conjectural  emendation  of  Le  Clerc,  D3  for 
 DD,  be  adopted,  the  meaning  may  be,  '  The  hand 
 upon  the  banner,'  etc.,  /.  e.,  Let  not  the  banner  of 
 Jehovah  be  ever  furled  as  if  peace  had  come,  but 
 let  there  be  war,  etc. 
 
 Jehovah  Shalom  (DiPK'  "\  y.  is  peace),  the 
 
 name  given  by  Gideon  to  an  altar  which  he  liad 
 erected  to  commemorate  the  appearance  to  him  of 
 
JEHOVAH  SHAMMAH 
 
 487 
 
 JEHU 
 
 the  angel  of  the  Lord  who  commissioned  him  to 
 deliver  Israel  from  the  Midianites,  and  who,  when 
 Gideon  was  alarmed  on  discovering  with  whom  he 
 had  been  conversing,  assuaged  his  fears  by  saying, 
 'Peace  be  with  thee' (  Judg.  vi.  11-24).  This 
 altar  was  erected  at  Ophrah  of  the  Abiezites,'  so 
 designated  to  distinguish  it  from  Ophrah  in  Benja- 
 min (Josh,  xviii.  23  ;  I  Sam.  xiii.  17)  ;  and  which 
 is  afterwards  called  Gideon's  city  (judg.  viii.  27). 
 [Ophrah.] 
 Jehovah  Shammah  (HDK^  "\  Jehovah  is  there), 
 
 the  name  of  the  future  Jerusalem,  the  church  of 
 God  (Ezek.  xlviii.  35).  Havernick,  following 
 Hengstenberg  {Christology,  i.  257,  E.  T.),  contends 
 that  X\iyD  properly  means  thither,  and  remarks 
 that  '  here  this  meaning  is  alone  appropriate,  for 
 Jehovah  dwells  not^in  Jerusalem  properly,  but  in 
 the  strictest  and  highest  sense  in  his  sanctuary. 
 Thence  He  looks  forth  on  Jerusalem,  thitherward 
 He  turns,  that  is,  with  the  fulness  of  his  grace  and 
 love.  What  makes  Jerusalem  a  true  city  of  God 
 is  the  fully-turned  love  of  God  on  her,  his  pleasure 
 resting  on  her  ;  in  which  complete  communion 
 with  God,  her  sure  defence,  her  eternal  continu- 
 ance, is  firmly  secured'  (Comment,  p.  746). 
 
 Jehovah  Tsidqenu  (^l^plX  '"•),  the  name  that 
 
 shall  be  given  to  a  king  whom  God  will  raise  up 
 to  David  (Jer.  xxiii.  6).  That  the  king  so  pro- 
 mised is  the  Messiah,  is  the  opinion  of  all  the  best 
 interpreters,  Jewish  and  Christian  ;  but  all  are  not 
 agreed  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  appellation.  By 
 some  it  is  regarded  as  ascribing  to  the  Messiah  the 
 name  Jehovah,  and  asserting  that  He  is  or  brings 
 righteousness  to  man  ;  while  others  think  that 
 the  appellation  here  given  to  the  Messiah  is,  like 
 that  given  by  Moses  to  the  altar  he  erected,  and 
 which  he  called  Jehovah-Nissi,  simply  a  concise 
 utterance  of  the  faith  of  Israel,  that  by  means  of 
 the  Messiah  God  will  cause  righteousness  to 
 flourish.  The  strongest  argument  in  favour  of  the 
 latter  is  derived  from  Jer.  xxxiii.  16,  where  the 
 same  name  is  given  to  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and 
 where  it  can  only  receive  such  an  explanation. 
 See  on  the  one  side.  Smith's  Scripture  Testi?nony 
 to  the  Messiah,  i.  271,  4th  ed.  ;  Henderson's  note 
 on  the  passage  ;  Alexander's  Contiection  and  Har- 
 mony of  the  0.  and  N.  T.,  p.  287,  2d  ed.  On  the 
 other,  Hengstenberg's  Christology,  ii.  4175  E.  T. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEHOZABAD  ("I^Tin'').     i.  (Sept.  'Iwfa/3(£^; 
 
 Alex.  'Iwfa/3d5).  One  of  the  sons  of  Obededom, 
 to  whom  was  intrusted  the  care  of  the  council 
 chamber  connected  with  the  temple  (D^DDN  IT'D, 
 Beyth  -  Asuppim,  the  house  of  the  gatherings ; 
 LXX.  o'lKos  'E(T€(piix;  A.  V.  House  of  Asuppim,  I 
 Chron.  xxvii.  4,  15).  2.  (Sept.  'Iwfa^SdS ;  Joseph. 
 'Ox6/3aTos).  One  of  the  captains  of  Jehoshaphat, 
 who  had  under  him  180,000  men  of  the  tribe  of 
 Benjamin  (2  Chron.  xvii.  18).  3.  (Sept.  'Iefe;3oi)^, 
 'Iwfa/3^5).  The  son  of  Shomer  or  Shimrith,  a 
 Moabitess  who  conspired  with  Jozachar  or  Zabad, 
 the  son  of  Shimeath,  an  Ammonitess,  to  slay  Joash 
 king  of  Judah  (2  Kings  xii.  21 ;  2  Chron.  xxiv. 
 26).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEHOZADAK    (pT^n^,    p^^{i^     Jehovah    is 
 T  ■*"      :  7  1 
 
 righteous;  Sept.  'Iwo-aSdx,  'IcocreS^X  >  Josedec), 
 tiie    son    of    Seraiah,    the    last   high-priest  who 
 
 ministered  in  Solomon's  temple.  Although  he  suc- 
 ceeded to  the  high-priesthood  after  the  slaughter 
 of  his  father  at  Riblah  (2  Kings  xxv.  18-21), 
 he  had  no  opportunity  of  performing  the  functions 
 of  his  office  (Selden,  De  success,  in  Pont.,  Op.  ii. 
 104).  He  was  carried  into  captivity  by  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar (l  Chron.  vi.  15)  ;  and  evidently  died  in 
 exile,  as  on  the  return  from  the  captivity  his  son 
 Joshua  is  mentioned  as  the  high-priest  (Ezra  iii.  2). 
 In  our  A.  V.  the  name  appears  in  three  forms  : 
 Jehozadak,  i  Chron.  vi.  15  ;  Jozadak  throughout 
 Ezra  and  Nehemiah  ;  Josedech  in  Haggai  and 
 Zechariah. — H.  C.  G. 
 
 JEHU  (Kin\  Jehovah  is;  Sept.  'loO;  Cod.  Alex. 
 
 Ei'rjoO),  tenth  king  of  Israel,  and  founder  of  its 
 fourth  dynasty,  who  began  to  reign  in  B.C.  884, 
 and  reigned  twenty-eight  years. 
 
 Jehu  held  a  command  in  the  Israelite  army 
 posted  at  Ramoth  Gilead  to  hold  in  check  the 
 Syrians,  who  of  late  years  had  made  strenuous 
 efforts  to  extend  their  frontier  to  the  Jordan,  and 
 had  possessed  themselves  of  much  of  the  territory 
 of  the  Israelites  east  of  that  river.  The  contest 
 was  in  fact  still  carried  on  which  had  begun 
 many  years  before  in  the  reign  of  Ahab,  the 
 present  king's  father,  who  had  lost  his  life  in 
 battle  before  this  very  Ramoth  Gilead.  Ahaziah, 
 king  of  Judah,  had  taken  part  with  Joram,  king 
 of  Israel,  in  this  war;  and  as  the  latter  had 
 been  severely  wounded  in  a  recent  action,  and 
 had  gone  to  Jezreel  to  be  healed  of  his  wounds, 
 Ahaziah  had  also  gone  thither  on  a  visit  of  sym- 
 pathy to  him. 
 
 In  this  state  of  affairs  a  council  of  war  was 
 held  among  the  military  commanders  in  camp, 
 when  very  unexpectedly  one  of  the  disciples  of  the 
 prophets,  known  for  such  by  his  garb,  appeared 
 at  the  door  of  the  tent,  and  called  forth  Jehu,  de- 
 claring that  he  had  a  message  to  deliver  to  him. 
 He  had  been  sent  by  Ehsha  the  prophet,  in  dis- 
 charge of  a  duty  which  long  before  had  been 
 confided  by  the  Lord  to  Elijah  (i  Kings  xix.  16), 
 and  from  him  had  devolved  on  his  successor. 
 When  they  were  alone  the  young  man  drew  forth 
 a  horn  of  oil  and  poured  it  upon  Jehu's  head,  with 
 the  words,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  I 
 have  anointed  thee  king  over  the  people  of  the 
 Lord,  even  over  Israel.  And  thou  shalt  smite 
 the  house  of  Ahab  thy  master,  that  I  may  avenge 
 the  blood  of  my  servants  the  prophets,  and  the 
 blood  of  all  the  servants  of  the  Lord,  at  the  hand 
 of  Jezebel'  (2  Kings  ix.  7,  8).  Surprising  as 
 this  message  must  have  been,  and  awful  the  duty 
 which  it  imposed,  Jehu  was  fully  equal  to  the 
 task  and  the  occasion.  He  returned  to  the  council, 
 probably  with  an  altered  air,  for  he  was  asked 
 what  had  been  the  communication  of  the  young 
 prophet  to  him.  He  told  them  plainly ;  and 
 they  were  obviously  ripe  for  defection  from  the 
 house  of  Ahab,  for  they  were  all  delighted  at 
 the  news,  and  taking  him  in  trium.ph  to  '  the  top 
 of  the  stairs,'  they  spread  their  mantles  beneath 
 his  feet,  and  proclaimed  him  king  by  sound  of 
 trumpet  in  the  presence  of  all  the  troops. 
 
 Jehu  was  not  a  man  to  lose  any  advantage 
 through  remissness.  He  immediately  entered  his 
 chariot,  in  order  that  his  presence  at  Jezreel  should 
 be  the  first  announcement  which  Joram  could 
 receive  of  this  revolutioru 
 
 As  soon  as  the  advance  of  Jehu  and  his  party 
 
JEHU 
 
 488 
 
 JEHU 
 
 wm  seen  in  the  distance  by  the  watchmen  upon 
 the  palace-tower  in  Jezreel,  two  messengers  were 
 Buccessively  sent  forth  to  meet  him,  and  were 
 commanded  by  Jehu  to  follow  in  his  rear.  But 
 when  the  watchman  reported  that  he  could  now 
 recognise  the  furious  driving  of  Jehu,  Joram 
 went  forth  himself  to  meet  him,  and  was  accom- 
 panied by  the  king  of  Judah.  They  met  in  the 
 field  of  Naboth,  so  fatal  to  the  house  of  Ahab. 
 The  king  saluted  him  with  'Is  it  peace,  Jehu?' 
 and  received  the  answer,  '  What  peace,  so  long  as 
 the  whoredoms  (idolatries)  of  thy  mother  Jezebel 
 and  her  witchcrafts  are  so  many?'  This  com- 
 pletely opened  the  eyes  of  Joram,  who  exclaimed 
 to  the  king  of  Judah,  '  There  is  treachery,  O 
 Ahaziah  ! '  and  turned  to  flee.  But  Jehu  felt  no 
 infirmity  of  purpose,  and  knew  that  the  slightest 
 wavering  might  be  fatal  to  him.  He  therefore 
 drew  a  bow  with  his  full  strength  and  sent  forth 
 an  arrow  which  passed  through  the  king's  heart. 
 Jehu  caused  the  body  to  be  thrown  back  into  the 
 field  of  Naboth,  out  of  which  he  had  passed  in  his 
 attempt  at  flight,  and  grimly  remarked  to  Bidkar 
 his  captain,  '  Remember  how  that,  when  I  and 
 thou  rode  together  after  Ahab  his  father,  the  Lord 
 laid  i/iis  burden  upon  him.'  The  king  of  Judah 
 contrived  to  escape,  but  not  without  a  wound,  of 
 which  he  afterwards  died  at  Megiddo  [Ahaziah]. 
 Jehu  then  entered  the  city,  whither  the  news  of 
 this  transaction  had  already  preceded  him.  As 
 he  passed  under  the  walls  of  the  palace  Jezebel 
 herself,  studiously  arrayed  for  effect,  appeared  at 
 one  of  the  windows,  and  saluted  him  with  a 
 question  such  as  might  have  shaken  a  man  of 
 weaker  nerves,  '  Had  Zimri  peace  who  slew  his 
 master?'  But  Jehu  was  unmoved,  and  instead 
 of  answering  her,  called  out,  *  Who  is  on  my  side, 
 who?'  when  several  eunuchs  made  their  appear- 
 ance at  the  window,  to  whom  he  cried,  'Throw 
 her  down ! '  and  immediately  this  proud  and 
 guilty  woman  lay  a  blood-stained  corpse  in  the 
 road,  and  was  trodden  under  foot  by  the  horses 
 [Jezebel].  Jehu  then  went  in  and  took  posses- 
 sion of  the  palace. 
 
 He  was  now  master  of  Jezreel,  which  was,  next 
 to  Samaria,  the  chief  town  of  the  kingdom  ;  but 
 he  could  not  feel  secure  while  the  capital  itself 
 was  in  the  hands  of  the  royal  family,  and  of 
 those  who  might  be  supposed  to  feel  strong  at- 
 tachment to  the  house  of  Ahab.  The  force  of 
 the  blow  which  he  had  struck  was,  however,  felt 
 even  in  Samaria.  When  therefore  he  wrote  to 
 the  persons  in  authority  there  the  somewhat 
 ironical  but  designedly  intimidating  counsel,  to 
 set  up  one  of  the  young  princes  in  Samaria  as 
 king  and  fight  out  the  matter  which  lay  between 
 them,  they  sent  a  very  submissive  answer,  giving 
 in  their  adhesion,  and  professing  their  readiness  to 
 obey  in  all  things  his  commands.  A  second  letter 
 from  Jehu  tested  this  profession  in  a  truly  horrid 
 and  exceedingly  Oriental  manner,  requiring  them 
 to  appear  before  him  on  the  morrow,  bringing 
 with  them  the  heads  of  all  the  royal  princes  in 
 Samaria.  A  fallen  house  meets  with  little  pity  in 
 the  East;  and  when  the  new  king  left  his  palace 
 the  next  morning,  he  found  seventy  human  heads 
 piled  up  in  two  heaps  at  his  gate.  There,  in  the 
 sight  of  these  heaps,  Jehu  took  occasion  to  explain 
 his  conduct,  declaring  that  he  must  be  regarded 
 IS  the  appointed  minister  of  the  divine  decrees, 
 pronounceo  long  since  against  the  house  of  Ahab 
 
 by  the  prophets,  not  one  of  whose  words  should 
 fall  to  the  ground.  He  then  continued  his  pro- 
 scriptions by  exterminating  in  Jezreel  not  only  all 
 in  whose  veins  the  blood  of  the  condemned  race 
 flowed,  but  also — by  a  considerable  stretch  of  his 
 commission — those  officers,  ministers,  and  crea- 
 tures of  the  late  government,  who,  if  suffered  to 
 live,  would  most  likely  be  disturbers  of  his  own 
 reign.  He  then  proceeded  to  Samaria.  So  rapid 
 had  been  these  proceedings  that  he  met  some  of 
 the  nephews  of  the  king  of  Judah,  who  were  going 
 to  join  their  uncle  at  Jezreel,  and  had  as  yet  heard 
 nothing  of  the  revolution  which  had  taken  place. 
 These  also  perished  under  Jehu's  now  fully- 
 awakened  thirst  for  blood,  to  the  number  of  forty- 
 two  persons. 
 
 On  the  way  he  took  up  into  his  chariot  the  pious 
 Jehonadab  the  Rechabite,  whose  austere  virtue  and 
 respected  character  would,  as  he  felt,  go  far  to 
 hallow  his  proceedings  in  the  eyes  of  the  multitude. 
 At  Samaria  he  continued  the  extirpation  of  the 
 persons  more  intimately  connected  with  the  late 
 government.  This,  far  from  being  in  any  way 
 singular,  is  a  common  circumstance  in  eastern 
 revolutions.  But  the  great  object  of  Jehu  was  to 
 exterminate  the  ministers  and  more  devoted  ad- 
 herents of  Baal,  who  had  been  much  encouraged 
 by  Jezebel.  There  was  even  a  temple  to  this  idol 
 in  Samaria  ;  and  Jehu,  never  scrupulous  about  the 
 means  of  reaching  objects  which  he  believed  to  be 
 good,  laid  a  snare  by  which  he  hoped  to  cut  off 
 the  main  body  of  Baal's  ministers  at  one  blow. 
 He  professed  to  be  a  more  zealous  servant  of  Baal 
 than  Ahab  had  been,  and  proclaimed  a  great  fes- 
 tival in  his  honour,  at  which  none  but  his  true  ser- 
 vants were  to  be  present.  The  prophets,  priests, 
 and  officers  of  Baal  assembled  from  all  parts  for 
 this  great  sacrifice,  and  sacerdotal  vestments  were 
 given  to  them,  that  none  of  Jehovah's  worsliippers 
 might  be  taken  for  them.  When  the  temple  was 
 full,  soldiers  were  posted  so  that  none  might  escape ; 
 and  so  soon  as  the  sacrifice  had  been  offered,  the 
 word  was  given  by  the  king,  the  soldiers  entered 
 the  temple,  and  put  all  the  worshippers  to  the 
 sword.  The  temple  itself  was  then  demolished, 
 the  images  overthrown,  and  the  site  turned  into  a 
 common  jakes. 
 
 Notwithstanding  this  zeal  of  Jehu  in  exterminat- 
 ing the  grosser  idolatries  which  had  grown  up 
 under  his  immediate  predecessors,  he  was  not 
 prepared  to  subvert  the  policy  which  had  led 
 Jeroboam  and  his  successors  to  maintain  the 
 schismatic  establishment  of  the  golden  calves  iu 
 Dan  and  Beth-el.  The  grounds  of  this  policy  are 
 explained  in  the  article  Jeroboam,  a  reference 
 to  which  will  shew  the  grounds  of  Jehu's  hesita- 
 tion in  this  matter.  This  was,  however,  a  crime 
 in  him— the  worship  rendered  to  the  golden  calves 
 being  plainly  contrary  to  the  law  ;  and  he  should 
 have  felt  that  He  who  had  appointed  him  to  the 
 throne  would  have  maintained  him  in  it,  notwith- 
 standing the  apparent  dangers  which  might  seem 
 likely  to  ensue  from  permitting  his  subjects  to 
 repair  at  the  great  festivals  to  the  metropolis  of 
 the  rival  kingdom,  which  was  the  centre  of  the 
 theocratical  worship  and  of  sacerdotal  service. 
 Here  Jehu  fell  short  :  and  this  very  policy,  ap- 
 parently so  prudent  and  far-sighted,  by  which  he 
 hoped  to  secure  the  stability  and  independence  of 
 his  kingdom,  was  that  on  account  of  which  the 
 term  of  rule  granted  to  his  dynasty  was  shortened. 
 
JEHUD 
 
 485) 
 
 JEHUDAH  HA-LEVI 
 
 For  this,  it  was  foretold  that  his  dynasty  should 
 extend  only  to  four  generations  ;  and  for  this,  the 
 divine  aid  was  withheld  from  him  in  his  wars 
 with  the  Syrians  under  Hazael  on  the  eastern 
 frontier.  Hence  the  war  was  disastrous  to  him, 
 and  the  Syrians  were  able  to  maintain  themselves 
 in  the  possession  of  a  great  part  of  his  territories 
 beyond  the  Jordan.  He  died  in  B.C.  856,  and 
 was  buried  in  Samaria,  leaving  the  throne  to  his 
 son  Jehoahaz. 
 
 There  is  nothing  difficult  to  understand  in  the 
 character  of  Jehu.  He  was  one  of  those  decisive, 
 terrible,  and  ambitious,  yet  prudent,  calculating, 
 and  passionless  men,  whom  God  from  time  to  time 
 raises  up  to  change  the  fate  of  empires  and  execute 
 his  judgments  on  the  earth.  He  boasted  of  his 
 zeal — '  come  and  see  my  zeal  for  the  Lord' — but  at 
 the  bottom  it  was  zeal  for  Jehu.  His  zeal  was 
 great  so  long  as  it  led  to  acts  which  squared  with 
 his  own  interests,  but  it  cooled  mai-vellously  when 
 required  to  take  a  direction  in  his  judgment  less 
 favourable  to  them.  Even  his  zeal  in  extirpating 
 the  idolatry  of  Baal  is  not  free  from  suspicion. 
 The  altar  of  Baal  was  that  which  Ahab  had  associ- 
 ated vnih  his  throne,  and  in  overturning  the  latter 
 he  could  not  prudently  let  the  fomier  stand,  sur- 
 rounded as  it  was  by  attached  adherents  of  the 
 house  which  he  had  extirpated  (2  Kings  ix.-x. ) 
 
 2.  The  son  of  Hanani,  a  prophet,  who  was  sent 
 to  pronounce  upon  Baasha,  king  of  Israel,  and  his 
 liouse,  the  same  awful  doom  which  had  been  al- 
 ready executed  upon  the  house  of  Jeroboam  (i 
 Kings  xvi.  I -7).  The  same  prophet  was,  many 
 years  after,  commissioned  to  reprove  Jehoshaphat 
 for  his  dangerous  connection  with  the  house  of 
 Ahab  (2  Chron.  xix.  2). — ^J.  K. 
 
 JEHUD    on'';    Sept.   'A^ibp;   Alex.    'Ioi;6i),   a 
 
 town  pertaining  to  Dan.  It  is  not  noticed  in  the 
 0>io77iasticon ;  but  it  has  been  conjecturally  iden- 
 tified with  a  village  called  el  Yehndijeh,  about  five 
 miles  to  the  north  of  Lydd  (Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii. 
 45  ;  Van  de  Velde's  map). — + 
 
 JEHUDAH  B.  Balaam.     [Ibn  Balaam.] 
 
 JEHUDAH  B.  David.     [Chajug.] 
 
 JEHUDAH  B.  KoRELSH.     [Ibn  Koreish.] 
 
 JEHUDAH  (ArjeLoeb)  b.  Zebi  (Hirsh),  was 
 born  at  Krotoschin  about  1680,  and  afterwards  be- 
 came rabbi  at  Carpentras  and  Avignon.     He  wrote 
 
 (l)  A  Hebre'cV  Lexicon,  entitled  T\'V\T\'*  vilX,  the  tents 
 of  Judah,  which  consists  of  two  parts  ;  the  first 
 
 part,  called  DPiy  DC^,  the  everlasting  name,  treats 
 especially  upon  proper  names  ;  the  second  part, 
 denominated  Dt^*1  "V,  place  and  na7ne,  takes  up  the 
 words  omitted  in  the  first  part.  This  work  par- 
 takes of  the  nature  of  a  concordance  as  well  as 
 of  a  lexicon,  inasmuch  as  it  gives  the  places  in 
 Scripture  in  which  every  word  is  to  be  found.  It 
 was   printed    in    Jesmitz    17 19.       (2)    A    Ilebreiv 
 
 C7rrt;??7«ar,  called  min''  p?n,  the  portion  of  Jttdah ; 
 
 of  this  work  the  introduction  only,  called  jlti^p  IID'' 
 {JT)pn,  the  foundation  of  the  Sacred  Lajiguage,  has 
 been  published,  Wilmersdorf  1721  :  it  contains 
 fifteen  canons  and  paradigms,  with  a  German  trans- 
 lation ;  and  (3)  A  Coficordance,  entitled  T\'V\TV  yfj, 
 the  stem  of  Judah,  it  only  goes  a.s  far  as  the  root 
 
 13^*,  and  was  printed  at  Offenbach  1732.  Comp. 
 .Steinschneider,  Catalogiis  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca 
 Bodleiana,  col.  1378  ;  Bibliographisches  Hattdbttch^ 
 Leipzig  1859,  p.  70. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JEHUDAH  (Lev. )DEMODEN A.  [Modena. 
 
 JEHUDAH    HA-LEVI    b.    Samuel,    called 
 in  Arabic  Abulhassan,  by  Ibn  Ezra  and  other 
 
 Jewish  writers  "•"nQDn  "'"l^H  min''.  This  dis- 
 tinguished Hebraist,  poet,  and  moral  philosopher, 
 was  bom  in  Castile  about  1086,  and  displayed  his 
 mastery  of  the  Hebrew  language  as  well  as  his 
 great  poetical  genius  at  the  early  age  of  fourteen 
 or  fifteen  {circa  iioo),  when  he  wrote  at  Lucena 
 some  charming  songs  to  celebrate  the  nuptials  of 
 his  friends  Ibn  Migash  and  the  birth  of  Baruch 
 Ibn  Albalia's  first  son.  He  spent  his  manhood 
 at  Toledo,  where  he  founded  a  college,  and  had 
 many  disciples.  Here  he  issued  those  sacred  and 
 secular  poems  in  Hebrew  which  are  to  the  preser.t 
 day  the  pride  of  Israel  ;  and  here  too  he  laboured  at 
 and  completed  in  his  fifty-fifth  year  {circa  1 141)  that 
 remarkable  apology  of  the  Jewish  religion  com- 
 monly called  Cnsari  (^"ITID),  more  properly  A7i(?3ar/, 
 which  he  published  in  Arabic  under  the  title  of 
 
 ^"'^n^x  pi^i<  -i^j  ^s  hh-h^^  r\"irh^  nxn^,  the 
 
 book  of  evidence  a7id  argm/ieitt  i/i  apology  of  the  de- 
 spised i-eligio7i,  i.e.,  of  Judaism,  in  reply  to  some  of 
 his  disciples  who  asked  him  how  he  justified  Rab- 
 binic Judaism,  and  repelled  the  objections  brought 
 against  it  by  philosophers,  Mohammedans,  Christi- 
 ans, and  Karaites.  To  understand  the  nature  of  this 
 most  important  work,  which  created  a  new  epoch 
 in  Jewish  literature,  it  is  necessary  to  remark  that 
 it  is  founded  upon  the  conversion  of  the  King  of 
 Khozars  to  Judaism.  The  Khozars,  a  Finnish  tribe, 
 related  to  the  Bulgarians,  Avarians,  and  Ugurians, 
 or  Hungarians,  settled  down  on  the  boundaries  of 
 Asia  and  Europe,  and  founded  a  dominion  on  the 
 mouth  of  the  Volga  on  the  Caspian  Sea,  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Astrachan.  After  the  destruc- 
 tion of  the  Persian  empire,  they  invaded  the  Cau- 
 casus, made  inroads  into  Armenia,  conquered  the 
 Crimea,  exacted  tribute  from  the  Byzantine  em- 
 perors, made  vassals  of  the  Bulgarians,  etc.,  and 
 compelled  the  Russians  to  send  annually  to  their 
 kings  a  sword  and  a  costly  fur.  Like  their  neigh- 
 bours, the  Bulgarians  and  Russians,  they  followed 
 a  species  of  idolatiy  which  was  connected  with 
 gross  sensuality  and  licentiousness,  but  became 
 acquainted  with  Christianity  and  Mohammedan, 
 ism,  through  commercial  intercourse  with  the 
 Greeks  and  Arabs,  and  with  Judaism  through  tho 
 Greek  Jews  who  fled  from  the  religious  persecu- 
 tions of  the  Byzantine  emperor  Leo  (a.D.  723). 
 The  Jews  who  found  refuge  in  the  Khozarian 
 dominions  soon  distinguished  themselves  as  mer- 
 chants, physicians,  and  councillors  of  state ;  and 
 so  great  was  the  admiration  of  the  Khozars  for 
 the  Jewish  religion  when  contrasted  with  the 
 then  corrupt  Christianity  and  Mohammedanism, 
 that  King  Bulan,  the  officials  of  state,  and  the 
 majority  of  the  people  embraced  Judaism,  A.D. 
 731.*     Now  it  is  upon  this  fact  that  Jehudah  Ha- 
 
 *  This  most  important  fact  in  Jewish  history, 
 which  has  only  lately  been  established  beyond  the 
 shadow  of  a  doubt  (comp.  Vivien  de  St.  Martin, 
 Les  Khazars,  7ne77ioii-e  In  d  Vacade7nie  des  inscrip- 
 tio7zs  et  des   belles  lettres,   Paris   iS^^i  ;    Caimoly 
 
JEHUDAH  HA.LEVI 
 
 430 
 
 JEKUTHIEL 
 
 Levi  based  his  work.  He  represents  this  King  of 
 Khozaris  as  being  shaken  in  his  idolatry,  and  ear- 
 neslly  desirous  to  find  the  true  religion,  for  which 
 cause  he  sends  for  two  philosophers,  a  Christian  and 
 a  Mohammedan,  listens  to  the  expositions  of  their 
 respective  creeds,  and  as  they  all  refer  to  the  Jews 
 as  the  fountain  head,  he  at  last  sends  for  an  Israelite 
 to  propound  his  religious  tenets,  becomes  convinced 
 of  their  divine  origin,  and  embraces  the  Jewish 
 religion.  What  makes  this  work  so  important  to 
 the  Biblical  student,  is  the  fact,  that  in  the  course 
 of  these  discussions  all  subjects  bearing  upon  the 
 exposition  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  Jewish  litera- 
 ture, history,  philosophy,  etc.,  etc,  are  in  turn 
 reviewed.  Thus,  for  instance,  synagogual  service, 
 feasts,  fasts,  sacrifices,  the  Sanhedrim,  the  develop- 
 ment of  the  Talmud,  the  Massora,  the  vowel 
 points,  the  Karaites,  etc.,  etc.,  are  all  minutely  dis- 
 cussed in  this  work,  which  De  Sacy  has  pronounced 
 to  be  one  of  the  most  valuable  and  beautiful  pro- 
 ductions of  the  Jewish  pen.  It  is  to  this  work  that 
 Ibn  Ezra  frequently  refers  (comp.  commentaries 
 on  Exod.  iv.  lo  ;  ix.  i ;  xiii.  1 1 ;  xxiv.  1 1  ;  .xxvii.  3  ; 
 Deut.  xiv.  20;  xx\a.  17;  xxix.  19;  xxxiii.  5;  Zech. 
 viii.  4  ;  Ps.  xviii.  5 ;  xxx.  8;  xlix.  21;  Ixxiii.  25; 
 Ixxxii.  8;  cxxxix.   14;  cl.   I;  Dan.  ix.  i),  and  to 
 
 which  Kimchi  alludes  in  his  Lexicon,  art  JI7.  It 
 was  translated  into  Hebrew  by  Jehudah  Ibn  Tib- 
 bon,  who  named  it  ''"iTISn  ~iDD,  the  book  of  Kho- 
 zari,  after  the  hero  of  it,  and  it  was  first  published 
 in  Fano  1506,  then  in  Venice  1547,  with  an  intro- 
 duction and  commentary  by  Muscato,  Venice  1594; 
 with  a  Latin  translation  and  dissertations  by  Jo. 
 Buxtorf,  fil.,  Basle  1660 ;  a  Spanish  translation  by 
 Abendana  without  the  Hebrew  text,  Amsterdam 
 1663  ;  with  a  commentary  by  Satorow,  Berlin  1795; 
 with  a  commentary,  various  readings,  index,  etc., 
 by  G.  Brecher,  Prague  1838- 1840  ;  and  lastly,  with 
 a  German  translation,  explanatory  notes,  etc.,  by 
 Dr.  David  Cassel,  Leipzig  1853,  which  is  the  most 
 useful  edition. 
 
 After  finishing  this  gigantic  work  {circa  II41), 
 Jehudah  Ha-Levi  was  seized  with  a  longing  desire 
 to  undertake  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy  Land,  set 
 sail  for  Egypt,  accompanied  by  some  of  his  dis- 
 ciples, wrote  some  sublime  hymns  when  tossed  on 
 the  sea,  was  obliged  to  take  refuge  in  Alexandria 
 in  consequence  of  a  great  storm,  went  to  Egypt 
 (1142)  in  accordance  with  the  entreaties  of  Samuel 
 Ha-Nagid,  the  celebrated  philosopher  and  philo- 
 logian,  who  was  at  that  time  the  prince  of  the 
 Jewish  community  in  the  land  of  their  former  bon- 
 dage, then  wrote  at  Damascus  his  celebrated  elegy 
 
 on  Zion  i^KKTl  N^H  l^i*,  at  the  recital  of  which 
 in  the  synagogue,  in  the  month  of  Ab,  when  the 
 destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus  is  commemorated, 
 every  Jewish  heart  is  filled  with  the  deepest  emo- 
 tions ;  and  died,  most  probably  without  seeing  the 
 land  of  his  fathers.  The  year  of  his  death  and  the 
 place  of  his  burial  are  alike  unknown.  Tradition 
 says  that  he  was  murdered  by  an  Arab  as  he  was 
 
 Jtineraires  de  la  terre  satnte,  Bruxelles  1847,  des 
 Kohozor,  p.  I -104;  Graetz,  Geschichte  dcr  Jiiden, 
 vol.  v.,  Magdeburg  i860,  p.  210-216),  throws  light 
 upon  Eldad  Ha-Dani's  description  of  the  lost  tribes 
 [Eldad]  ;  the  references  in  the  Chaldee  paraphrase 
 on  Chron.  i.  5,  26  ;  the  allusion  in  Josippon  b. 
 Gorion,  chap,  x.,  ed.  Breithaupt ;  and  many  other 
 theories  about  the  whereabouts  of  the  ten  tribes. 
 
 lying  on  his  face  under  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  and 
 mourning  over  the  ruins  of  Zion;  and  that  he  was 
 buried  at  Kephar  Kabul.  Comp.  Geiger,  Wissen- 
 schaftliche  Zeitschrift,  vol.  i. ,  Frankfort  -  on  -  the- 
 Maine  1835,  p.  158,  ff.  ;  vol.  ii.  (1836),  p.  367,  ff ; 
 Cassei,  Das  Buck  Ktisari,  Leipzig  1853,  p.  v. - 
 xxxv.  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  ynden,  vol.  vi., 
 Leipzig  1861,  p.  140-167  ;  Steinschneider,  Cata- 
 logus  Libr.  Hebr.  iti  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col. 
 1338-1342. 
 
 JEHUDIJAH  (n^nn^ri;  'ASk;  Alex. 'I5/0 ;  7?/- 
 
 daia).  Though  this  appears  as  a  proper  name  in 
 the  E.  v.,  I  Chron.  iv.  18,  as  well  as  in  the  LXX., 
 there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  is  really  an  appel- 
 lative, and  should  be  translated  '  the  Jewess,'  as  in 
 the  margin.  The  same  person  is  perhaps  intended  by 
 '  Hodiah,'  E.  V.  ('ISouta,  Odaia),  in  ver.  19,  where 
 the  Alexandrine  copy  of  the  LXX.  renders  it  viol 
 yvvaiKos  TTJs  ^lovSalas.  The  whole  genealogy,  vers. 
 17-19,  appears  to  be  so  dislocated  and  corrupt  that 
 it  is  almost  impossible  to  arrive  at  any  satisfactory 
 conclusion.  It  would  however  become  intelligible 
 and  consistent  with  itself  if  we  supposed  that  Mered 
 the  son  of  Ezra,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  had  two  wives, 
 one  an  Egyptian, '  Bilhiah  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,' 
 ver.  18  (for  though  the  difficulty  in  the  way  of  sup- 
 posing a  daughter  of  the  royal  house  of  Egypt  to 
 have  become  the  wife  of  an  Israelite  is  consider- 
 able, it  is  utterly  improbable  that  the  title '  Pharaoh' 
 should  have  been  borne  as  a  proper  name  by  a 
 Hebrew),  and  the  other  a  Jewess.  The  sons  of  the 
 Egyptian  wife  we  may  conceive  to  be  given  by  the 
 latter  clause  of  ver.  17.  Adopting  the  conjecture 
 of  Michaelis  (accepted  by  Bertheau,  Chroiiik,  p.  41) 
 that  the  closing  words  of  ver.  18,  'And  these  are 
 the  sons  of  Bethiah,'  etc.,  should  be  read  before 
 'And  she  bare  Miriam,'  etc.,  ver.  17,  the  remain- 
 ing portions  of  vers.  18,  19,  would  then  define  the 
 Jewish  wife  by  the  mention  of  her  brother  Naham, ' 
 the  father  of  the  inhabitants  of  Keilah  and  Esh- 
 temoa,  and  name  her  sons,  Jered,  Heber,  and 
 Jekuthiel.     [Bithiah  ;  Hodiah.] 
 
 It  may  be  remarked  that  Bertheau  argues  against 
 identifying  Hodiah,  ver.  19,  with  Jehudijah,  ver. 
 18,  regarding  it  as  the  name  of  a  man,  and  reading 
 the  sons  of  the  wife  of  Hodiah,  '  which  wife  was 
 the  sister  of  Naham,'  etc.  Vatablus  in  loc.  adopts 
 the  view  that  they  were  the  same. — E.  V. 
 
 JEKABZEEL  (^XV3p^),  Ne.u  xi.  20.     [Kab- 
 
 ZEEL.] 
 
 JEKUTHIEL  (^N"'rap^,  God  is  viy  hope ;  LXX. 
 
 'leK^TjTjX,  XertTjX ;  Vulg.  Icuthiel),  a  proper  name 
 occurring  i  Chrcn.  iv.  18.  This  passage,  as  it 
 now  stands,  is  in  utter  confusion.  To  remedy 
 this,  Michaelis  and  others  have  proposed  to  trans- 
 fer the  last  clause  of  ver.  18  to  the  middle  of  ver. 
 17,  which  in  some  measure  answers  the  purpose. 
 Jekuthiel  then  appears  as  the  son  of  Mered  by 
 Jehudijah,  or  rather,  the  ycivess,  to  distinguish  her 
 from  Alered's  other  wife,  Bithiah,  a  daughter  of 
 Pharaoh  (see  Bithiah).  Yet,  much  as  this  con- 
 jectural emendation  helps  to  clear  the  passage, 
 it  is  not  wholly  satisfactory,  for  it  still  leaves 
 the  19th  verse  isolated  and  meaningless.  The 
 probability  is,  that  the  words  Bithiah  and  Mered 
 have  fallen  out  of  the  text  in  ver.  17  ;  which  being 
 supplied  before  '  Miriam,'  the  confusion  is  removed, 
 and  any  disturbance  of  the  text  rendered  unneces- 
 
JEKUTHIEL 
 
 491 
 
 JENNINGS 
 
 sary — 'And  BIthiah  bore  to  Mered,'  etc.  Then  his 
 Jewish  wife  and  children  are  named,  after  which 
 the  annaHst  adds  the  latter  part  of  the  l8th  and 
 19th  verses  as  an  emphatic  repetition.* 
 
 The  Targum  of  Rabbi  Joseph  on  Chronicles 
 makes  Jekuthiel  to  be  Moses.  The  passage  is  so 
 curious  as  to  deserve  transcription  : — '  And  his 
 wife  (Ezra's)  brought  up  Moses  when  he  was 
 drawn  out  of  the  water,  and  called  his  name  Jered, 
 because  he  made  manna  to  descend  for  Israel ; 
 Prince  of  Gedor,  because  he  restored  (or  built  up) 
 the  desolation  of  Israel  ;  and  Cheber,  because  he 
 united  Israel  to  their  Father  who  is  in  heaven  ; 
 Prmce  of  Socho,  because  he  overshadowed  the 
 house  of  Israel  with  his  justice  (or  purity)  ;  and 
 Teicuthiel,  because  Israel  waited  on  the  God  of 
 "heaven  in  his  days  forty  years  in  the  wilderness  ; 
 Prince  of  Zanoach,  because  God  remitted  the  sins 
 of  Israel  for  his  sake.  By  these  names  the 
 daughter  of  Pharaoh  called  him,  in  the  spirit  of 
 prophecy,  for  she  became  a  proselyte,  and  Mered 
 took  her  to  himself  for  a  wife.  This  is  Caleb,  so 
 called,  because  he  opposed  the  purpose  or  counsel 
 of  the  spies.' 
 
 In  the  prayers  of  the  Spanish  and  Portuguese 
 Jews,  a  curious  reference  to  Jekuthiel  occurs  : — 
 '  O  may  Elijah  the  prophet  come  to  us  speedily, 
 with  Messiah,  the  son  of  David,  to  whom  tidings 
 of  peace  were  delivered  by  the  hand  of  Jekuthiel' 
 (Allen's  Mod.  Jud.,  p.  229,  2d  ed.) — I.  J. 
 
 JEKUTHIEL  B.  Isaac  Blitz  (p  ^XTlip''  '"I 
 yhl  pnV))  also  called  by  his  father's  name  only, 
 Isaac  Blitz,  was  corrector  of  the  press  at  the  print- 
 ing establishment  of  Uri  Phobus,  and  has  the 
 honour  of  being  the  first  Jew  who  translated  the 
 whole  O.  T.  into  German.     It  was  published  under 
 
 the   title    IJ3D'X  "^^hl  n"jn,    ihe  fonr-and-tiventy 
 
 books  translated  into  German,  with  (3"3?~in  Dlvyin 
 
 \Zy^^  |1Er^3)  Ralbag's  nV^yiD  Usus  on  Joshuah, 
 Judges,  and  Samuel,  and  a  threefold  introduction, 
 viz.,  a  Hebrew  introduction  by  the  translator,  a 
 Latin  diploma  from  the  Polish  king  John  So- 
 bieski  III.,  a  Judteo-German  introduction  by  Uri 
 Phobus,  the  publisher,  and  a  German  introduction 
 by  the  translator,  Amsterdam  1676-1678.  A  speci- 
 men of  this  translation  is  given  by  Wolf,  Bibliothcca 
 Hebraa,  vol.  iv.,  p.  183-187.  Comp.  also  vol.  ii., 
 p.  454  of  the  same  work ;  Steinschneider,  Cata- 
 logus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col. 
 175.— C.  D.G. 
 
 JEKUTHIEL  B.  Jehudah  Cohen,  also  called 
 Salman  Nakdon,  i.e.,  the  Punctuator,  and  by  con- 
 traction ichavi  ("'n"n'' =  min^  \i  jn^n  ^sTiip"'), 
 
 a  distinguished  Massorite  and  editor  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptures,  who  flourished  in  Prague  about  A.  D. 
 1250- 1300.  He  edited  a  very  correct  text  of  the 
 Pentateuch  and  the  Book  of  Esther,  with  the  vowels 
 and  accents,  and  used,  in  preparing  it,  six  old 
 Spanish  codices,  which  he  denominates  f'K.  t3"K, 
 K  'n,  p"K,  n 'X,  D"D{<,  and  which  Heidenheim  ex- 
 
 *  Dathe  supplies  omissions,  and  renders  the 
 passage  thus  :■ — ■'■  Uxor  Meredi  gravida  peperit  Mir- 
 jamum,  etc.  ;  uxor  ejus  Judijah  peperit,'  etc.  ;  and 
 says  in  his  note,  '  Hoc  nomen  supplendum  esse  ex 
 sequent!  versa  observat  Clericus.  Deest  enim 
 nomen  uxoris,  quae  peperit.' 
 
 plains  to  mean  J-.cnp,  nit^'H,  nVIIDD,  IpT,  31D; 
 TnX  ppTl,  the  prefix  J<  denoting  Spain  (comp. 
 N"l1pn  py  on  Num.  xxxiv.  28).  Jekuthiel  em- 
 bodied the  results  of  his  critical  labours  in  a  work 
 which  he  called  Xllp  PV,  the  eye  of  the  reader,  and 
 in  which  he  quotes  Ben-Naphtali,  Ben-Asher, 
 Chajug,  Ibn  Ganach,  Ibn  Ezra,  Parchon,  Tam, 
 Samuel,  etc.,  as  well  as  the  book  XllpH  DVlin, 
 by  an  anonymous  writer.  Connected  with  this  is 
 a  grammatical  treatise,  denominated  Hlpjn  ''Dll  or 
 
 nipjn  ^7?3,  th^  /awJ  of  the  vowel  poitits,  which  is 
 divided  into  sections  (D'"iytJ'),  treating  upon  the 
 quiescent  letters  {X\'\yr\r\  JTIJ  '\V^),  the  vowels  {"^W 
 nip''jn),  theDas^esh  (m^JIH  lytT),  the  accents  (lytT 
 ni3"'J3n  aVD),  "the  heavy  and  light  Metheg    pj?EJ' 
 
 ni^pn  nirn»ni  D'-nasn  D''3nDn),  the Makef{-\v^ 
 
 pDpDn),  etc.      His  (i)  Massoretic  Criticis?ns  on  the 
 
 Pentateuchr\y\T\Ty  hv  XllpH  py,  which  are  quoted  in 
 the  margin  of  ancient  codd.  by  the  abbreviation  iT'J?, 
 i.e.,  Kllpn  py,  and  have  been  used  by  De  Balmes, 
 Elias  Levita,  etc.,  have  been  published  for  the  first 
 time  by  Heidenheim  in  his  edition  of  the  Penta- 
 teuch called   D'':''y  "lINO,   Rodelheim    1818-1821. 
 
 (2)  The  Massoretic  Criticisms  on  Esther  (NllpH  py 
 
 "inOX  rbyO  ?V)  have  also  been  published  by  Hei- 
 denheim in  his  D''"11Sn  ''O''  "llD,  Rodelheim  1825. 
 
 (3)  The  introduction,  as  well  as  the  practical  part 
 of  the  Gratnmatical  Treatise,  have  appeared  in 
 Heidenheim's  D''J''y  11XD,  Rodelheim  1818-1821. 
 Comp.  Zunz,  Zicr  Geschichte  ufid  Literatur,  Berlin 
 1845,  p.  115  ;  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Judaica  ii.,  p.  53  ; 
 Geiger,  Wissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift  fiir  fiidische 
 Theologie,  vol.  v.,  p.  418-420 ;  Steinschneider, 
 Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr,  iti  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana, 
 col.  1381.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 JEMIMA  (HD^O''),  the  first-bom  of  the  daughters 
 
 of  Job  after  his  affliction  (Job.  xlii.  14).  The 
 LXX.  render  by  rj/n.^pa,  and  the  Vulg.  has  dies,  as 
 if  the  word  came  from  D'i>.     It  is  more  probably 
 
 from  the  Arab.  ^UjLk)   Yemamah,  a  dove. — t 
 
 JENNINGS,  David,  D.D.,  an  eminent  Dis- 
 senting  minister  and  tutor,  son  of  one  of  the 
 ejected  Nonconformists,  was  born  at  Kibworth, 
 Leicester,  in  1691,  and  died  in  1762.  He  studied 
 under  Dr.  Chauncy  in  London  ;  and  after  certain 
 minor  appointments,  became  assistant  pastor  of 
 the  Congregational  Church  of  Old  Gravel  Lane, 
 Wapping,  where  he  continued  forty  years.  In 
 1740  he  wrote  against  Dr.  Taylor  in  defence  of 
 original  sin.  In  1744  he  was  appointed  theologi- 
 cal tutor  in  Coward's  College,  in  which  office  he 
 exhibited  great  adaptation  for  his  work,  and  had 
 great  success.  In  1747  the  university  of  St. 
 Andrews  conferred  on  him  the  degree  of  D.D. 
 His  principal  work,  and  the  only  one  which  here 
 requires  notice,  is — Jewish  Antiquities ;  or  a  Course 
 of  Lectures  on  the  Three  Fiist  Books  of  Godwin! s 
 Moses  and  Aaron.  To  iu,'-Jch  is  annexed  a  Disser- 
 tation on  the  Hebrew  Language,  2  vols.  8vo,  1 766. 
 It  is  divided  into  three  books,  treating  respectively 
 of  persons,  places,  and  times.  His  work,  which 
 has  been  often  reprinted  in  various  forms,  is  distin- 
 guished by  learning  and  sound  sense,  and  long 
 held  a  distinguished  place  on  account  of  its  solid 
 worth ;  but,  as  might  be  expected,  has  been  quite 
 
JEPHTHAH 
 
 492 
 
 JEPHTHAH 
 
 ?\iperseded  by  more  recent  and  accurate  works  on 
 the  subject. — I.  J. 
 
 JEPHTHAH  (nriS\    opener;   Sept.  'le^i^cte), 
 
 ninth  judge  of  Israel,  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh. 
 He  was  the  son  of  a  person  named  Gilead  by  a 
 concubine.  After  the  death  of  his  father  he  was 
 expelled  from  his  home  by  the  envy  of  his 
 brothers,  who  refused  him  any  share  of  the 
 heritage,  and  he  withdrew  to  the  land  of  Tob, 
 beyond  the  frontier  of  the  Hebrew  territories.  It 
 is  clear  that  he  had  before  this  distinguished  him- 
 self by  his  daring  character  and  skill  in  arms  ; 
 for  no  sooner  was  his  withdrawment  known  than  a 
 great  number  of  men  of  desperate  fortunes  re- 
 paired to  him,  and  he  became  their  chief.  His 
 position  was  now  very  similar  to  that  of  David 
 when  he  withdrew  from  the  court  of  Saul.  To 
 maintain  the  people  who  had  thus  linked  their 
 fortunes  with  his,  there  was  no  other  resource  than 
 that  sort  of  brigandage  which  is  accounted  honour- 
 able in  the  East,  so  long  as  it  is  exercised  against 
 public  or  private  enemies,  and  is  not  marked  by 
 needless  cruelty  and  outrage.  Even  our  diffe- 
 rent climate  and  manners  afford  some  parallel 
 in  the  Robin  Hoods  of  former  days  ;  in  the  border 
 forays,  when  England  and  Scotland  were  ostensibly 
 at  peace  ;  and — in  principle,  however  great  the 
 formal  difference — in  the  authorised  and  popular 
 piracies  of  Drake,  Raleigh,  and  the  other  naval 
 heroes  of  the  Elizabethan  era.  So  Jephthah  con- 
 fined his  aggressions  to  the  borders  of  the  small 
 neighbouring  nations,  who  were  in  some  sort  re- 
 garded as  the  natural  enemies  of  Israel,  even  when 
 there  was  no  actual  war  between  them. 
 
 Jephthah  led  this  kind  of  life  for  some  years, 
 during  which  his  dashing  exploits  and  successful 
 enterprises  procured  him  a  higher  military  reputa- 
 tion than  any  other  man  of  his  time  enjoyed.  The 
 qualities  required  to  ensure  success  in  such  opera- 
 tions were  little  different  from  those  required  in 
 actual  warfare,  as  warfare  was  conducted  in  the 
 East  before  fire-arms  came  into  general  use  ;  and 
 hence  the  reputation  which  might  be  thus  acquired 
 was  more  truly  military  than  is  easily  conceivable 
 by  modern  and  occidental  readers. 
 
 After  the  death  of  Jair  the  Israelites  gradually 
 fell  into  their  favourite  idolatries,  and  were  punished 
 by  subjection  to  the  Philistines  on  the  west  of  the 
 Jordan,  and  to  the  Ammonites  on  the  east  of  that 
 river.  The  oppression  which  they  sustained  for 
 eighteen  years  became  at  length  so  heavy  that  they 
 recovered  their  senses  and  returned  to  the  God  of 
 their  fathers  with  humiliation  and  tears  ;  and  he 
 was  appeased,  and  promised  them  deliverance  from 
 their  affliction  (B.C.  1143). 
 
 The  tribes  beyond  the  Jordan  havmg  resolved 
 to  oppose  the  Ammonites,  Jephthah  seems  to 
 occur  to  every  one  as  the  most  fitting  leader.  A 
 deputation  was  accordingly  sent  to  invite  him  to 
 take  the  command.  After  some  demur,  on  ac- 
 count of  the  treatment  he  had  formerly  received, 
 he  consented.  The  rude  hero  commenced  his 
 operations  with  a  degree  of  diplomatic  considera- 
 tion and  dignity  for  which  we  are  not  prepared. 
 The  Ammonites  being  assembled  in  force  for  one 
 of  those  ravaging  incursions  by  which  they  had  re- 
 peatedly desolated  the  land,  he  sent  to  their  camp 
 a  formal  complaint  of  the  invasion,  and  a  demand 
 of  the  ground  of  their  proceeding.  This  is  highly 
 interesting,  because   it   shows   that   even  in   that 
 
 age  a  cause  for  war  was  judged  necessary — no 
 one  being  supposed  to  war  without  provocation  ; 
 and  in  this  oise  Jephthah  demanded  what  cause 
 the  Ammonites  alleged  to  justify  their  aggressive . 
 operations.  Their  answri  was,  that  the  land  ol 
 the  Israelites  beyond  thf  Jordan  was  theirs.  It 
 had  originally  belonged  to  them,  from  whom  it 
 had  been  taken  by  the  Amorites,  who  had  been 
 dispossessed  by  the  Israelites  :  and  on  this  ground 
 they  claimed  the  restitution  of  these  lands. 
 Jephthah's  reply  laid  down  the  just  principle 
 which  has  been  followed  out  in  the  practice  of 
 civilized  nations,  and  is  maintained  by  all  the 
 great  writers  on  the  law  of  nations.  The  land 
 belonged  to  the  Israelites  by  right  of  conquest 
 from  the  actual  possessors  ;  and  they  could  not 
 be  expected  to  recognise  any  antecedent  claim  of 
 former  possessors,  for  whom  they  had  not  acted, 
 who  had  rendered  them  no  assistance,  and  who  had 
 themselves  displayed  hostility  against  the  Israel- 
 ites. It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  they  would 
 conquer  the  country  from  the  powerful  kings  who 
 had  it  in  possession,  for  the  mere  purpose  of  re- 
 storing it  to  the  ancient  occupants,  of  whom  they 
 had  no  favourable  knowledge,  and  of  whose  pre- 
 vious claims  they  were  scarcely  cognizant.  But 
 the  Ammonites  re-asserted  their  former  views,  and 
 on  this  issue  they  took  the  field. 
 
 When  Jephthah  set  forth  against  the  Ammon- 
 ites he  solemnly  vowed  to  the  Lord,  '  If  thou 
 shalt  without  fail  deliver  the  children  of  Ammon 
 into  my  hands,  then  it  shall  be,  that  whatsoever 
 cometh  forth  of  the  doors  of  my  house  to  meet  me, 
 when  I  return  in  peace  from  the  children  of  Am- 
 mon, shall  surely  be  the  Lord's,  and  I  will  offer 
 it  up  for  a  burnt  offering.'  He  was  victorious. 
 The  Ammonites  sustained  a  terrible  overthrow. 
 He  did  return  in  peace  to  his  house  in  Mizpeh. 
 As  he  drew  nigh  his  house,  the  one  that  came 
 forth  to  meet  him  was  his  own  daughter,  his  only 
 child,  in  whom  his  heart  was  bound  up.  She, 
 with  her  fair  companions,  came  to  greet  the  tri- 
 umphant hero  '  with  timbrels  and  with  dances. 
 But  he  no  sooner  saw  her  than  he  rent  his  robes, 
 and  cried,  'Alas,  my  daughter!  thou  hast  brought 
 me  very  low ;  .  .  .  for  I  have  opened  my  mouth 
 unto  the  Lord,  and  cannot  go  back.'  Nor  did 
 she  ask  it.  She  replied,  '  My  father,  if  thou  hast 
 opened  thy  mouth  unto  the  Lord,  do  to  me  ac- 
 cording to  that  which  has  proceeded  out  of  thy 
 mouth  ;  forasmuch  as  the  Lord  hath  taken  ven- 
 geance for  thee  of  thine  enemies,  the  children  of 
 Ammon.'  But  after  a  pause  she  added,  'Let 
 this  thing  be  done  for  me :  let  me  alone  two 
 months,  that  I  may  go  up  and  down  upon  the 
 mountains,  and  bewail  my  virginity,  I  and  my 
 fellows.'  Her  father  of  course  assented;  and 
 when  the  time  expired  she  returned,  and,  we  are 
 told,  'he  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow.'  It 
 is  then  added  that  it  became  '  a  custom  in  Israel, 
 that  the  daughters  of  Israel  went  yearly  to  lament 
 the  daughter  of  Jephthah  the  Gileadite  four  da^s 
 in  the  year.' 
 
 The  victory  over  the  Ammonites  was  followed 
 by  a  quarrel  with  the  proud  and  powerful 
 Ephraimites  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan.  This 
 tribe  was  displeased  at  having  had  no  share  in 
 the  glory  of  the  recent  victory,  and  a  large  body  of 
 men  belonging  to  it,  who  had  crossed  the  river  tc 
 share  in  the  action,  used  very  high  and  threatening 
 language  when  they  found  their  services  were  not 
 
JEPHTHAH 
 
 493 
 
 JEPHTHAH 
 
 required.  Jephthah,  finding  his  remonstrances 
 had  no  effect,  re-assembled  some  of  his  disbanded 
 troops  and  gave  the  Ephraimites  battle,  when  they 
 were  defeated  with  much  loss.  The  victors 
 seized  the  fords  of  the  Jordan,  and  when  any  one 
 came  to  pass  over,  they  made  hira  pronounce  the 
 word  Shibboleth  [an  ear  of  corn],  but  if  he  could 
 not  give  the  aspiration,  and  pronounced  the  word 
 as  Sibbohih,  they  knew  him  for  an  Ephraimite, 
 and  slew  him  on  the  spot.  This  is  a  remarkable 
 instance  of  the  dialectical  differences,  answering 
 to  the  varieties  in  our  provincialisms,  which  had 
 already  sprung  up  among  the  tribes,  and  of  which 
 other  instances  occur  in  Scripture. 
 
 Jephthah  judged  Israel  six  years,  during  which 
 we  have  reason  to  conclude  that  the  exercise  of 
 his  authority  was  almost  if  not  altogether  con- 
 fined to  the  country  east  of  the  Jordan. 
 
 Volumes  have  been  written  on  the  subject  of 
 '  Jephthah's  rash  vow  ; '  the  question  being 
 whether,  in  doing  to  his  daughter  'according  to 
 his  vow,'  he  really  did  offer  her  in  sacrifice  or  not. 
 The  negative  has  been  stoutly  maintained  by 
 many  able  pens,  from  a  natural  anxiety  to  clear 
 the  character  of  one  of  the  heroes  in  Israel  from 
 so  dark  a  stain.  But  the  more  the  plain  rules  of 
 common  sense  have  been  exercised  in  our  view  of 
 Biblical  transactions ;  and  the  better  we  have  suc- 
 ceeded in  realizing  a  distinct  idea  of  the  times  in 
 which  Jephthah  lived  and  of  the  position  which  he 
 occupied,  the  less  reluctance  there  has  been  to 
 admit  the  interpretation  which  the  first  view  of 
 the  passage  suggests  to  eveiy  reader,  which  is,  that 
 he  really  did  offer  her  in  sacrifice.  The  expla- 
 nation which  denies  this  maintains  that  she  was 
 rather  doomed  to  perpetual  celibacy  ;  and  this,  as 
 it  appears  to  us,  on  the  strength  of  phrases  which,  to 
 one  who  really  imderstands  the  character  of  the 
 Hebrew  people  and  their  language,  suggest  no- 
 thing more  than  that  it  was  considered  a  lament- 
 able thing  for  any  daughter  of  Israel  to  die 
 childless.  To  live  unmarried  was  required  by  no 
 law,  custom,  or  devotement  among  the  Jews  :  no 
 one  had  a  right  to  impose  so  odious  a  condition 
 on  another,  nor  is  any  such  condition  implied  or 
 expressed  in  the  vow  which  Jephthah  uttered.  To 
 get  rid  of  a  difficulty  which  has  no  place  in  the  text, 
 but  arises  from  our  reluctance  to  receive  that  text 
 in  its  obvious  meaning — we  invent  a  new  thing  in 
 Israel,  a  thing  never  heard  of  among  the  Hebrews 
 in  ancient  or  modern  times,  and  more  entirely 
 opposed  to  their  peculiar  notions  than  any  thing 
 which  the  wit  of  man  ever  devised — such  as  that 
 a  damsel  should  be  consecrated  to  perpetual  vir- 
 ginity in  consequence  of  a  vow  of  her  father, 
 which  vow  itself  says  nothing  of  the  kind.  If 
 people  allow  themselves  to  be  influenced  in  their 
 interpretations  of  Scripture  by  dislike  to  take  the 
 words  in  their  obvious  meaning,  we  might  at 
 least  expect  that  the  explanations  they  would 
 have  us  receive  should  be  in  accordance  with  the 
 notions  of  the  Hebrew  people,  instead  of  being  en- 
 tirely and  obviously  opposed  to  them.  The  Jewish  ' 
 commentators  themselves  generally  admit  that 
 Jephthah  really  sacrificed  his  daughter ;  and  even 
 go  so  far  as  to  allege  that  the  change  in  the  pon- 
 tifical dynasty  from  the  house  of  Eleazar  to  that  of 
 Ithamar  was  caused  by  tlie  high-priest  of  the  time 
 having  suffered  this  transaction  to  take  place. 
 
 It  is  very  true  that  human  sacrifices  were  for- 
 bidden by  the  law.     But  in  the  rude  and  unsettled 
 
 age  in  which  the  judges  lived,  when  the  Israelites 
 had  adopted  a  vast  number  of  erroneous  notions 
 and  practices  from  their  heathen  neighbours,  many 
 things  were  done,  even  by  good  men,  which  the 
 law  forbade  quite  as  positively  as  human  sacrifice. 
 Such,  for  instance,  was  the  setting  up  of  the  altar 
 by  Gideon  at  his  native  Ophrah,  in  direct  but  un- 
 designed opposition  to  one  of  the  most  stringent 
 enactments  of  the  Mosaical  code. 
 
 It  is  certain  that  human  sacrifice  was  deemed 
 meritorious  and  propitiatory  by  the  neighbouring 
 nations  [Sacrifice]  ;  and,  considering  the  manner 
 of  life  the  hero  had  led,  the  recent  idolatries  in 
 which  the  people  had  been  plunged,  and  the  pecu- 
 liarly vague  notions  of  the  tribes  beyond  the  Jor- 
 dan, it  is  highly  probable  that  he  contemplated 
 from  the  first  a  human  sacrifice,  as  the  most  costly 
 offering  to  God  known  to  him.  It  is  difficult  to 
 conceive  that  he  could  expect  any  other  creature 
 than  a  human  being  to  come  forth  <?///  of  the  door  of 
 his  house  to  meet  him  on  his  return.  His  house 
 was  surely  not  a  place  for  flocks  and  herds,  nor 
 could  any  animal  be  expected  to  come  forth  *  to 
 meet  him,'  i.  e.,  with  the  purpose  of  meeting  him, 
 on  his  return.  We  think  it  likely  that  he  even  con- 
 templated the  possibility  that  his  daughter  might 
 be  the  person  to  come  forth,  and  that  he  took 
 merit  to  himself  for  not  expressly  withholding  even 
 his  only  child  from  the  operation  of  a  vov,'  which 
 he  deemed  likely  to  promote  the  success  of  his 
 arms.  His  affliction  when  his  daughter  actually 
 came  forth  is  quite  compatible  with  this  notion ; 
 and  the  depth  of  that  affliction  is  scarcel)'  recon- 
 cilable with  any  other  alternative  than  the  actual 
 sacrifice. 
 
 If  we  again  look  at  the  text,  Jephthah  vows  that 
 whatsoever  came  forth  from  the  door  of  his  house 
 to  meet  him  '  shall  surely  be  the  Lord's,  and  I  will 
 offer  it  up  for  a  burnt-offering,'  which,  in  fact,  was 
 the  regular  way  of  making  a  thing  wholly  the 
 Lord's.  Afterwards  we  are  told  that  '  he  did  with 
 her  according  to  his  vow,'  that  is,  according  to  the 
 plain  meaning  of  plain  words,  offered  her  for  a 
 burnt-offering.  Then  follows  the  intimation  that 
 the  daughters  of  Israel  lamented  her  four  days 
 every  year.  People  lament  the  dead,  not  the  liv- 
 ing. The  whole  story  is  consistent  and  intelligible, 
 while  the  sacrifice  is  understood  to  have  actually 
 taken  place  ;  but  becomes  perplexed  and  difficult 
 as  soon  as  we  begin  to  turn  aside  from  this  obvious 
 meaning  in  search  of  recondite  explanations. 
 
 The  circumstances  of  this  immolation  we  can 
 never  know.  It  probably  took  place  at  some  one 
 of  the  altars  beyond  the  Jordan.  That  it  took 
 place  at  the  altar  of  the  tabernacle,  and  that  the 
 high-priest  was  the  sacrificer,  as  painters  usually 
 repreb.ent  the  scene,  and  even  as  some  Jewish 
 writers  believe,  is  outrageously  contrary  to  all  the 
 probabilities  of  the  case. 
 
 Professor  Bush,  in  his  elaborate  note  on  the  text, 
 maintains  with  us  that  a  human  sacrifice  was  all 
 along  contemplated.  But  he  suggests  that  during 
 the  two  months,  Jephthah  might  have  obtained 
 better  information  respecting  the  nature  of  vows, 
 by  which  he  would  have  learned  that  his  daughtei 
 could  not  be  legally  offered,  but  might  be  redeemed 
 at  a  valuation  (Lev.  xxvii.  2-12).  This  is  possible, 
 and  is  much  more  likely  than  the  popular  alterna- 
 tive of  perpetual  celibacy  :  but  we  have  serious 
 doubts  whether  even  this  meets  the  conclusion  that 
 '  he  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow.'     Besides, 
 
JEPHTHAH 
 
 494 
 
 JERAH 
 
 in  this  case,  where  was  the  ground  for  the  annual 
 'lamentations'  of  the  daugliters  of  Israel,  or  even 
 for  the  '  celebrations'  which  some  understand  the 
 word  to  mean  ?  See  the  Notes  of  the  Pictorial 
 Bible  and  Bush's  Notes  on  yiidgcs ;  com  p.  Cal- 
 met's  Dissertation  sur  le  Van  de  Jephte,  in  Coin- 
 meni.  Litteral,  torn.  ii.  ;  Dresde,  Votiim  Ji-phthcE 
 ex  Antiq.  Jiidaica  illtisir.  1778  ;  Randolf,  Erkliir. 
 d.  Geliibdes  yephtha,  in  Eichhorn's  Repertoriitm, 
 viii.  13  ;  Lightfoot's  Harmony,  under  Judges  xi., 
 End'kin,  cap.  xvi..  Sermon  on  Judges  xi.  39  ; 
 Bishop  Russell's  Connection  of  Sacred  and  Profane 
 History,  i.  479-492. — J.  K. 
 
 Addendum. — In  this  article  the  opinion  that 
 Jephthah  offered  up  his  daughter  as  a  burnt-offering 
 to  the  Lord  is  supported  by  the  usual  arguments, 
 but  the  reasons  for  the  other  view  hardly  receive 
 justice.  It  may  be  well,  therefore,  briefly  to  state 
 them.  I.  Jephthah,  in  making  his  vow,  must  have 
 distinctly  contemplated  the  possibility,  or  rather  the 
 probability,  that  the  first  thing  that  should  come 
 forth  from  his  house  to  meet  him  on  his  return 
 would  be  a  human  being.  He  must,  therefore, 
 have  clearly  intended  to  offer  to  the  Lord  in  some 
 way  a  human  being,  in  case  such  was  the  first  to 
 come  forth.  2.  It  is  improbable  that  he  delibe- 
 rately purposed  to  slay  and  offer  as  a  burnt-offering 
 to  the  Lord  one  of  his  fellow-creatures,  in  case  such 
 should  be  the  first  to  come  forth  to  meet  him.  We 
 have  no  reason  to  regard  Jephthah  as  a  barbarian  or 
 as  a  heathen,  though  he  led  a  roving  and  warlike 
 life.  He  was  a  worshipper  of  Jehovah,  as  his  vow 
 indicates,  and  if  he  knew  anything  of  the  true  God 
 at  all  he  must  have  known  that  a  human  sacrifice 
 would  be  abominable  to  him.  We  may  presume, 
 also,  that  his  own  feelings  would  have  revolted 
 from  such  an  act.  It  is  not  until  idolatry  had 
 taken  firm  hold  of  the  Israelites  that  we  find  such 
 sacrifices  regarded  by  them  otherwise  than  with 
 horror.  When  the  king  of  Moab  in  his  extremity 
 slew  his  son  as  a  sacrifice  to  his  God,  the  deed 
 filled  the  Israelites  with  anger  and  abhorrence  (2 
 Kings  iii.  27)  :  can  we  suppose  that  one  of  their 
 own  judges  would  deliberately  purpose  and  actually 
 offer  a  similar  sacrifice?  3.  According  to  the 
 Mosaic  law  a  man  might  vow  to  the  Lord  persons 
 or  animals  (Lev.  xxvii.  1-13);  the  former  being  re- 
 deemable, the  latter  not,  except  in  the  case  of  un- 
 clean animals.  Now  Jephthah  seems  to  have  dis- 
 tinctly contemplated  this  alternative  in  his  vow, 
 
 for  his  words  were  rh'\]h  in"'n''^J?ni  niH"'^  ''H'^l, 
 which  may  be  rendered  '  It  shall  be  to  the  Lord,  or 
 I  will  offer  it  for  an  offering.'  It  is  true  that  this 
 is  not  the  usual  meaning  of  the  conj.  1,  but  it  is 
 sometimes  so  used,  and  the  context  seems  to  re- 
 quire sucli  rendering  here  ;  for  as  everything  de- 
 voted to  the  altar  was  given  to  the  Lord,  it  would 
 have  been  superfluous  to  add  this  had  not  an  alterna- 
 tive been  contemplated.  In  making  his  vow,  there- 
 fore, Jephthah  probably  intended  to  offer  in  sacrifice 
 only  an  animal  in  case  that  should  be  the  first  to 
 meet  him  ;  in  the  case  of  a  human  being  his  vow 
 bound  him  to  devote  him  or  her  irredeemably  to 
 the  Lord.  4.  Jephthah  did  to  his  daughter  accord- 
 ing to  his  vow.  But  it  is  not  said  that  he  offered 
 her  in  sacrifice  ;  and  in  so  singular  a  case  it  can 
 hardly  be  supposed  that  the  writer  would  have 
 failed  to  say  this  had  it  really  been  done.  5.  Jeph- 
 thah's  daughter  requested  to  be  allowed  to  go  with 
 her   companions  for  two  months   up  and  down 
 
 among  the  mountains  to  bewail  her  virginity. 
 Now,  if  it  was  to  death  she  was  doomed,  why 
 mourn  her  virginity  ?  or,  if  by  this  is  meant  merely 
 her  young  life,  why  not  spend  her  last  hours  in  her 
 father's  house  ?  why  go  to  lonely  and  unfrequented 
 places  with  her  companions  to  utter  her  wail  ? 
 why  not  enjoy  all  the  comfort  she  could  so  long  as 
 life  was  allowed  her  ?  If,  on  the  other  hand,  it 
 was  to  perpetual  virginity  she  was  doomed,  what 
 more  natural  than  that,  with  her  virgin  associates, 
 she  should  mourn  this  which,  in  her  estimation  and 
 theirs,  would  appear  a  sacrifice  as  great  as  that  of 
 life,  and  should  select  for  this  a  solitary  scene  far 
 from  the  inspection  or  hearing  of  the  other  sex  ? 
 6.  If  Jephthah's  daughter  was  put  to  death,  what 
 need  was  there  for  adding  that  '  she  knew  no  man  ?' 
 As  she  was  a  virgin  at  the  time  of  the  vow,  have 
 not  these  words  a  prospective  sense,  and  intimate 
 that  though  she  lived  after  this  she  never  ceased  to 
 be  a  virgin?  7.  The  A.  V.,  following  the  older 
 versions,  says  that  '  the  daughters  of  Israel  went 
 yearly  to  lament  the  daughter  of  Jephthah.'     But 
 
 is  nun?  properly  rendered  by  latnent  ?  For  this 
 the  usage  of  the  word  gives  no  authority.  In  Piel 
 the  verb  denotes  to  praise,  celebrate,  rehearse  in 
 eulogy  (comp.  Judg.  v.  Il),  so  that  the  proper  ren- 
 dering of  the  passage  is,  '  The  daughters  of  Israel 
 went  yearly  to  celebrate  the  daughter  of  Jephthah.' 
 But  why  so  if  she  was  offered  in  sacrifice  ?  On  the 
 other  hand,  if  she  was  devoted  to  perpetual  vir- 
 ginity, her  virtue  would  merit  perpetual  celebration 
 (comp.  Eurip.,  Hippol.,  1425,  ff.,  especially  the 
 words  det  5^  iJ.ov<TOTroL6s  els  (xe  irapdeviov  iffrai  /jl4- 
 pLfiva).  See  the  article  Jephta  by  Cassel  in  Her- 
 zog's  Peal  Cycl.—W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEPHUNNEH    (nap^).      I.    (Sept.    'Ucpbvvr,) 
 
 The  father  of  Caleb  the  spy.  The  name  occurs  in 
 the  form  Jephunna  in  the  A.  V.  of  Ecclus.  xlvi.  7. 
 2.  (Sept.  'le^ira).  The  eldest  son  of  Jether,  of  the 
 tribe  of  Asher  (i  Chron.  vii.  38). — t 
 
 JERAH   (HI'',  month,  from  the  same  root  as 
 
 V^y^,  the  moon;  Sept. 'lapctx;  Alex. 'la/sdS ;  Jare), 
 
 a  son  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  26  ;  i  Chron.  i.  20).  As 
 he  is  placed  next  in  succession  to  Hazarmaveth, 
 we  may  conclude  that  the  region  colonized  by  him 
 was  in  or  near  the  province  of  Hadhramaut 
 [Hazarmaveth].  To  determine  it  with  greater 
 precision  requires  a  more  accurate  knowledge  of 
 Arabia  than  we  possess  at  present.  The  conclu- 
 sions of  Bochart  (Phaleg,  ii.  xbc.)  and  Michaelis 
 {Spicil.  ii.,  p.  161),  although  approved  by  emi- 
 nent critics,  seem  precarious.  Bochart,  looking  to 
 the  Hebrew  derivation  of  the  word,  considers 
 Jerah  to  be  the  Hebrew  translation  of  the  name 
 of  the  Aliiffii  of  the  ancient  geographers  (Diod.  Sic. 
 iii.  45),  whom  he  asserts  to  have  been  thus  called 
 on  account  of  their  worshipping  the  moon.  In 
 proof  of  this  being  their  practice  he  appeals  to  the 
 testimony  of  Herodotus  (iii.  8)  that  the  Arabs  in 
 their  language  '  call  Bacchus  Orotal,  and  Urania, 
 Alilat'  The  Alilaei  he  further  identifies  with  the 
 Bene  Helal  (Niebuhr,  Arabia,  sec.  xviii.,  c.  v.), 
 Helal,  in  Arabic,  signifying  the  new  moon,  a  tribe 
 dwelling  in  the  north  of  Yemen,  not  far  from 
 Chaulan,  and  distinguished  from  the  inhabitants 
 of  Djidda  and  Yemen  by  dialect  and  peculiar  re- 
 ligious usages.  But  it  seems  fatal  to  this  hypo- 
 thesis that  Arabian  >vriters  themselves  assign  an 
 
JERAHMEEL 
 
 495 
 
 JEREMIAH 
 
 Islimaelitish  origin  to  the  Bene  Helal  (Knobel, 
 Volkeriafel,  p.  195).  The  view  of  Michaelis  is  less 
 liable  to  objection.  He  also  takes  the  word  to  be 
 the  Hebrew  translation  of  an  Arabic  name ;  and 
 he  finds  traces  of  it  in  '  the  mountain  of  the  moon 
 (kaniarY  and  'the  coast  of  t/ie  moon  (kamar),^ 
 localities  mentioned  by  Edrisi  as  near  Hadhramaut 
 (Winer,  Reahv.  s.  v.)  However,  there  is  no  evi- 
 dence of  the  existence  at  any  time  of  a  people 
 bearing  this  name.  The  most  satisfactory  identifi- 
 cation yet  given  seems  to  be  that  of  Mr.  E.  S. 
 Poole  (Smith's  Diet.  s.  v. )  with  the  fortress  of 
 Yerakh,  belonging  to  the  district  of  the  Nijjad. — 
 H.  C.  G. 
 
 JERAHMEEL   (isN^HT,    Jerachmeel ;    Sept. 
 
 'lepf/i^TyX).  I.  The  eldest  son  of  Hezron,  and 
 grandson  of  Judah  (i  Chron.  ii.  9,  25-27,  33,  42). 
 From  him  descended  the  Jerahmelites  (i  Sam. 
 xxvii.  10).  2.  A  Levite  of  the  house  of  Merari, 
 head  of  the  family  of  Kish  in  the  time  of  David 
 (i  Chron.  xxiv.  29).  3.  The  son  of  Hammelech 
 {tov  ^aacX^ojs,  LXX. )  who  was  commanded,  along 
 with  others,  by  Jehoiakim,  to  seize  Jeremiah  and 
 Baruch  (Jer.  xxxvi.  26). 
 
 JERED   {ly;  Sept.  'IdpeS ;    Jare^I).      i.   The 
 
 son  of  Mahalaleel,  of  the  line  of  Seth  (Gen.  v.  15), 
 where  the  name  in  the  A.  V.  appears  as  Jared.  The 
 supposed  similarity  between  this  name  and  that  of 
 the  Cainite  Irad,  which  has  been  used  as  an  argu- 
 ment for  the  original  identity  of  the  two  family 
 lists  given  in  the  4th  and  5th  chapters  of  Genesis, 
 vanishes  when  the  Hebrew  original  is  inspected. 
 The  two  words  differ  essentially  in  form  and  signi- 
 fication ;    Jered,    Tl'',    signifying    '  descent,'    and 
 
 Irad,  TT'y,  '  wild  ass. ' 
 
 2.  According  to  the  arrangement  generally 
 adopted  of  the  text  of  the  very  confused  passage 
 I  Chron.  iv.  17-19  [Bithiah],  the  son  of  Mered 
 by  his  Jewish  wife,  and  the  head  or  leader  of  the 
 clan  which  settled  in  Gedor. — H.  C.  G. 
 
 JEREMIAH   (in^DI^  and  n^DI',  rahed  up  or 
 
 appointed  by  God ;  Sept.  'le/je/xtas).  I.  Life. 
 The  prophet  Jeremiah  was  the  son  of  Hilkiah,  a 
 priest  of  Anathoth,  in  the  land  of  Benjamin  [Ana- 
 THOTh],  Many  have  supposed  that  his  father  was 
 the  high-priest  of  the  same  name  (2  Kings  xxii.  8), 
 who  found  the  book  of  the  law  in  the  eighteenth 
 year  of  Josiah  (Umbreit,  Praktischer  Commentar 
 uber  den  Jeretnia,  p.  x.  ;  see  Carpzov,  Introd.  part 
 hi.,  p.  130).  This,  however,  seems  improbable  on 
 several  grounds  :— first,  there  is  nothing  in  the 
 writings  of  Jeremiah  to  lead  us  to  think  that  his 
 father  was  more  than  an  ordinary  priest  ('  Hilkiah 
 [one]  of  the  priests,' Jer.  i.  i);— again,  the  name 
 Hilkiah  was  common  amongst  the  Jews  (see  2 
 Kings  xviii.  18  ;  i  Chron.  vi.  45,  xxvi.  11  ;  Neh. 
 viii.  4  ;  Jer.  xxix.  3)  ;— and  lastly,  his  residence  at 
 Anathoth  is  evidence  that  he  belonged  to  the  line 
 of  Abiathar  (i  Kings  ii.  26-35),  who  was  deposed 
 from  the  high-priest's  office  by  Solomon  :  after 
 which  time  the  office  appears  to  have  remained  in 
 the  line  of  Zadok.  Jeremiah  was  very  young  when 
 the  word  of  the  Lord  first  came  to  him  (ch.  i.  6). 
 This  event  took  place  in  the  thirteenth  year  of 
 Josiah  (B.C.  629),  whilst  the  youthful  prophet  still 
 lived  at  Anathoth.  It  would  seem  that  he  re- 
 mained in  his   native   city  several  years,  but  at 
 
 length,  in  order  to  escape  the  persecution  of  his 
 fellow-townsmen  (ch.  xi.  21),  and  even  of  his  own 
 family  (ch.  xii.  6),  as  well  as  to  have  a  wider  field 
 for  his  exertions,  he  left  Anathoth  and  took  up  his 
 residence  at  Jerusalem.  The  finding  of  the  book 
 of  the  law,  five  years  after  the  commencement  of 
 his  predictions,  must  have  produced  a  powerful  in- 
 fluence on  the  mind  of  Jeremiah,  and  king  Josiah 
 no  doubt  found  him  a  powerful  ally  in  carrying 
 into  effect  the  reformation  of  religious  worship  (2 
 Kings  xxiii.  I-25).  During  the  reign  of  this 
 monarch,  we  may  readily  believe  that  Jeremiah 
 would  be  in  no  way  molested  in  his  work  ;  and 
 that  from  the  time  of  his  quitting  Anathoth  to  the 
 eighteenth  year  of  his  ministry,  he  probably  uttered 
 his  warnings  without  interruption,  though  with 
 little  success  (see  ch.  xi.)  Indeed,  the  reformation 
 itself  was  nothing  more  than  the  forcible  repression 
 of  idolatrous  and  heathen  rites,  and  the  re-estab- 
 lishment of  the  external  service  of  God,  by  the 
 command  of  the  king.  No  sooner,  therefore,  was 
 the  influence  of  the  court  on  behalf  of  the  true  re- 
 ligion withdrawn,  than  it  was  evident  that  no  real 
 improvement  had  taken  place  in  the  minds  of  the 
 people.  Jeremiah,  who  hitherto  was  at  least  pro- 
 tected by  the  influence  of  the  pious  king  Josiah 
 soon  became  the  object  of  attack,  as  he  must 
 doubtless  have  long  been  the  object  of  dislike,  to 
 those  whose  interests  were  identified  with  the  cor- 
 ruptions of  religion.  We  hear  nothing  of  the 
 prophet  during  the  three  months  which  constituted 
 the  short  reign  of  Jehoahaz  ;  but  '  in  the  begmnmg 
 of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim'  the  prophet  was  inter- 
 rupted in  his  ministry  by  '  the  priests  and  the  pro- 
 phets,' who  with  the  populace  brought  him  before 
 the  civil  authorities,  urging  that  capital  punishment 
 should  be  inflicted  on  him  for  his  threatenings  of 
 evil  on  the  city  unless  the  people  amended  their 
 ways  (ch.  xxvi.)  The  princes  seem  to  have  been 
 in  some  degree  aware  of  the  results  which  the 
 general  corruption  was  bringing  on  the  state,  and 
 if  they  did  not  themselves  yield  to  the  exhortations 
 of  the  prophet  they  acknowledged  that  he  spoke  in 
 the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  were  quite  averse  from 
 so  openly  renouncing  his  authority  as  to  put  his 
 messenger  to  death.  It  appears,  however,  that  it 
 was  rather  owing  to  the  personal  influence  of  one 
 or  two,  especially  Ahikam,  than  to  any  general 
 feeling  favourable  to  Jeremiah,  that  his  life  was 
 preserved ;  and  it  would  seem  that  he  was  then 
 either  placed  under  restraint  or  else  was  in  so 
 much  danger  from  the  animosity  of  his  adversaries 
 as  to  make  it  prudent  for  him  not  to  appear  in 
 public.  In  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (B.C.  606) 
 he  was  commanded  to  write  the  predictions  which 
 had  been  given  through  him,  and  to  read  them  to 
 the  people.  From  the  cause,  probably,  which  we 
 have  intimated  above,  he  was,  as  he  says,  '  shut 
 up,'  and  could  not  himself  go  into  the  house  of  the 
 Lord  (ch.  xxxvi.  5).  He  therefore  deputed  Baruch 
 to  write  the  predictions  after  him,  and  to  read 
 them  pubhcly  on  the  fast-day.  These  threatenings 
 being  thus  anew  made  public,  Baruch  was  sum- 
 moned before  the  princes  to  give  an  account  of 
 the  manner  in  which  the  roll  containing  them 
 had  come  into  his  possession.  The  princes,  who, 
 without  strength  of  principle  to  oppose  the  wicked- 
 ness of  the  king,  had  sufficient  respect  for  religion, 
 as  well  as  sagacity  enough  to  discern  the  import- 
 ance of  listening  to  the  voice  of  God's  prophet,  ad- 
 vised both  Baruch  and  Jeremiah  to  conceal  them- 
 
TEREMIAH 
 
 496 
 
 JEREMIAH 
 
 selves,  whilst  they  endeavoured  to  influence  the 
 mind  of  the  king  by  reading  the  roll  to  him.  The 
 result  shewed  that  their  precautions  were  not  need- 
 less. The  bold  self-will  and  reckless  daring  of 
 the  monarch  refused  to  listen  to  any  advice,  even 
 though  coniing  with  the  professed  sanction  of  the 
 Most  Kigh.  Having  read  three  or  four  leaves  '  he 
 cut  the  roll  with  the  penknife  and  cast  it  into  the 
 fire  that  was  on  the  hearth,  until  all  the  roll  was 
 consumed,'  and  gave  immediate  orders  for  the  ap- 
 prehension of  Jeremiah  and  Baruch,  who,  however, 
 were  both  preserved  from  the  vindictive  monarch. 
 Of  the  histoiy  of  Jeremiah  during  the  eight  or  nine 
 remaining  years  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  we  have 
 no  certain  account.  At  the  command  of  God  he 
 procured  another  roll,  in  which  he  wrote  all  that 
 was  in  the  roll  destroyed  by  the  king,  '  and  added 
 besides  unto  them  many  like  words'  (ch.  xxxvi. 
 32).  In  the  short  reign  of  his  successor  Jehoiachin 
 or  Jeconiah,  we  find  him  still  uttering  his  voice  of 
 warning  (see  ch.  xiii.  18;  comp.  2  Kings  xxiv.  12, 
 and  ch.  xxii.  24-30),  though  without  effect.  It 
 was  probably  either  during  this  reign,  or  at  the 
 commencement  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  that  he 
 was  put  in  confinement  by  Pashur,  the  '  chief 
 governor  of  the  house  of  the  Lord.'  He  seems, 
 however,  soon  to  have  been  liberated,  as  we  find 
 that  'they  had  not  put  him  into  prison'  when  the 
 army  of  Nebuchadnezzar  commenced  the  siege  of 
 Jerusalem.  l"he  Chaldteans  drew  off  their  army 
 for  a  time,  on  the  report  of  help  coming  from 
 Egypt  to  the  besieged  city  ;  and  now  feeling  the 
 danger  to  be  imminent,  and  yet  a  ray  of  hope 
 brightening  their  prospects,  the  king  entreated 
 Jeremiah  to  pray  to  the  Lord  for  them.  The  hopes 
 of  the  king  were  not  responded  to  in  the  message 
 which  Jeremiah  received  from  God.  He  was  as- 
 sured that  the  Egyptian  army  should  return  to  their 
 own  land,  that  the  Chaldosans  should  come  again, 
 and  that  they  should  take  the  city  and  burn  it  with 
 fire  (ch.  xxxvii.  7,  8).  The  princes,  apparently 
 irritated  by  a  message  so  contrary  to  their  wishes, 
 made  the  departure  of  Jeremiah  from  the  city, 
 during  the  short  respite,  the  pretext  for  accusing 
 him  of  deserting  to  the  Chaldosans,  and  he  was 
 forthwith  cast  into  prison.  The  king  seems  to 
 have  been  throughout  inclined  to  favour  the  pro- 
 phet, and  sought  to  know  from  him  the  word  of 
 the  Lord  ;  but  he  was  wholly  under  the  inlhience 
 of  the  prmces,  and  dared  not  communicate  with 
 him  except  in  secret  (ch.  xxxviii.  14,  28)  ;  much 
 less  could  he  follow  advice  so  obnoxious  to  their 
 views  as  that  which  the  prophet  gave.  Jeremiah, 
 therefore,  more  from  the  hostility  of  the  princes 
 than  the  inclination  of  the  king,  was  still  in  con- 
 finement when  the  city  was  taken.  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar formed  a  more  just  estimate  of  his  character 
 and  of  the  value  of  his  counsels,  and  gave  a  special 
 charge  to  his  captain  Nebuzar-adan,  not  only  to 
 provide  for  him  but  to  follow  his  advice  (ch.  xxxix. 
 12).  He  was  accordingly  taken  from  the  prison 
 and  allowed  free  choice  either  to  go  to  Babylon, 
 where  doubtless  he  would  have  been  held  in  honour 
 in  the  royal  court,  or  to  remain  with  his  own 
 people.  We  need  scarcely  be  told  that  he  who 
 had  devoted  more  than  forty  years  of  unrequited 
 service  to  the  welfare  of  his  falling  country,  should 
 choose  to  remain  with  the  remnant  of  his  people 
 rather  than  seek  the  precarious  fame  which  might 
 await  him  at  the  court  of  the  king  of  Babylon. 
 Accordingly  he  went  to   Mizpah  with    Gedaliah, 
 
 whom  the  Babylonian  monarch  had  appointed 
 governor  of  Judaea  ;  and  after  his  murder,  sought 
 to  persuade  Johanan,  who  was  then  the  recognised 
 leader  of  the  people,  to  remain  in  the  land,  assur- 
 ing him  and  the  people,  by  a  message  from  God  in 
 answer  to  their  inquiries,  that  if  they  did  so  the 
 Lord  would  build  them  up,  but  if  they  went  tc 
 Egypt  the  evils  which  tliey  sought  to  escape  should 
 come  upon  them  there  (ch.  xlii.)  The  people  re- 
 fused to  attend  to  the  divine  message,  and  under 
 the  command  of  Johanan  went  into  Egypt,  taking 
 Jeremiah  and  Baruch  along  with  them  (ch.  xliii.  6). 
 In  Egypt  the  prophet  still  sought  to  turn  the 
 people  to  the  Lord,  from  whom  they  had  so  long 
 and  so  deeply  revolted  (ch.  xliv. ) ;  but  his  writings 
 give  us  no  subsequent  information  respecting  his 
 personal  history.  Ancient  traditions  assert  tha*'  h** 
 spent  the  remainder  of  his  life  in  Egypt.  Accoiti- 
 ing  to  the  pseudo-Epiphanius  he  was  stoned  by  the 
 people  at  Taphnre  (iv  Td^vais),  the  same  as  Tah- 
 jianhes,  where  the  Jews  were  settled  {De  Vitis  Pro- 
 phet, tom.  ii.  p.  239,  quoted  by  Fabricius,  Codex 
 rseudepigraphits  V.  T.  tom.  i.  p.  11 10).  It  is  said 
 that  his  bones  were  removed  by  Alexander  the 
 Great  to  Alexandria  (Carpzov.  Introd.  part  iii.  p. 
 138,  where  other  traditions  respecting  him  will  be 
 found). 
 
 Jeremiah  was  contemporary  with  Zephaniah, 
 Habakkuk,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel.  None  of  these, 
 however,  are  in  any  remarkable  way  connected 
 with  him,  except  Ezekiel.  The  writings  and  cha- 
 racter of  these  two  eminent  prophets  furnish  many 
 very  interesting  points  both  of  comparison  and  con- 
 trast. Both,  during  a  long  series  of  years,  were 
 labouring  at  the  same  time  and  for  the  same  object. 
 The  representations  of  both,  far  separated  as  they 
 were  from  each  other,  are  in  substance  singularly 
 accordant  ;  yet  there  is  at  the  same  time  a  marked 
 difference  in  their  modes  of  statement,  and  a  still 
 more  striking  diversity  in  the  character  and  natura' 
 disposition  of  the  two.  No  one  who  compares 
 them  can  fail  to  perceive  that  the  mind  of  Jeremiah 
 was  of  a  softer  and  more  delicate  texture  than  that 
 of  his  illustrious  contemporary.  His  whole  history 
 convinces  us  that  he  was  by  nature  mild  and  retir- 
 ing (Ewald,  Fropheten  des  Alt.  Bund.  p.  2),  highly 
 susceptible  and  sensitive,  especially  to  sorrowful 
 emotions,  and  rather  inclined,  as  we  should  imagine, 
 to  shrink  from  danger  than  to  brave  it.  Yet,  with 
 this  acute  perception  of  injury,  and  natural  repug- 
 nance from  being  'a  man  of  strife,'  he  never  in 
 the  least  degree  shrinks  from  publicity  ;  nor  is  he 
 at  all  intimidated  by  reproach  or  insult,  or  even  by 
 actual  punishment  and  threatened  death,  when  he 
 has  the  message  of  God  to  deliver.  Kings  and 
 priests,  princes  and  people,  are  opposed  with  the 
 most  resolute  determination,  and  threatened,  if 
 they  disobey,  in  the  most  emphatic  terms.  When 
 he  is  alone,  we  hear  him  lamenting  the  hard  lot 
 which  compelled  him  to  sustain  a  character  so 
 alien  to  his  natural  temper  ;  but  no  sooner  does  the 
 divine  call  summon  him  to  bear  testimony  for  God 
 and  against  the  evils  which  surrounded  him,  than 
 he  forgets  his  fears  and  complaints,  and  stands 
 forth  in  the  might  of  the  Lord.  He  is,  in  truth,  as 
 remarkable  an  instance,  though  in  a  different  way, 
 of  the  overpowei-ing  influence  of  the  divine  energy; 
 as  Ezekiel.  The  one  presents  the  spectacle  of  the 
 power  of  divine  inspiration  acting  on  a  mind  natu- 
 rally of  the  firmest  texture,  and  at  once  subduing  tc 
 itself  every  element  of  the  soul ;  whilst  the  other 
 
JEREMIAH 
 
 497 
 
 JEREMIAH 
 
 furnishes  an  example,  not  less  niemorable,  of  moral 
 courage  sustained  by  the  same  divine  inspiration 
 against  the  constantly  opposing  influence  of  a  love 
 of  retirement  and  strong  susceptibility  to  impres- 
 sions of  outward  evil.  Ezekiel  views  the  conduct 
 of  his  countrymen  as  opposed  to  righteousness  and 
 truth,  Jeremiah  thinks  of  it  rather  as  productive  of 
 evil  and  misery  to  themselves— Ezekiel's  indig- 
 nation is  roused  at  the  sins  of  his  people,  Jere- 
 miah's pity  is  excited  by  the  consequences  of 
 their  sins — the  former  takes  an  objective,  the  lat- 
 ter a  subjective  view  of  the  evils  by  which  both 
 were  surrounded. 
 
 II.  Writings. — The  style  of  Jeremiah  corre- 
 sponds with  this  view  of  the  character  of  his  mind  ; 
 though  not  deficient  in  power,  it  is  peculiarly 
 marked  by  pathos.  He  delights  in  the  expression 
 of  the  tender  emotions,  and  employs  all  the  re- 
 sources of  his  imagination  to  excite  corresponding 
 feelings  in  his  readers.  He  has  an  irresistible 
 sympathy  with  the  miserable,  which  finds  utterance 
 in  the  most  touching  descriptions  of  their  condition. 
 He  seizes  with  wonderful  tact  those  circumstances 
 which  point  out  the  objects  of  his  pity  as  the 
 objects  of  sympathy,  and  founds  his  expostulations 
 on  the  miseries  which  are  thus  exhibited.  His 
 book  of  Lamentations  is  an  astonishing  exhibition 
 of  his  power  to  accumulate  images  of  sorrow.  The 
 whole  series  of  elegies  has  but  one  object — the  ex- 
 pression of  sorrow  for  the  forlorn  condition  of  his 
 country  ;  and  yet  he  presents  this  to  us  in  so  many 
 lights,  alludes  to  it  by  so  many  figures,  that  not 
 only  are  his  mournful  strains  not  felt  to  be  tedious 
 reiterations,  but  the  reader  is  captivated  by  the 
 plaintive  melancholy  which  pei-vades  the  whole. 
 '  Nullum,  opinor,'  says  Lowth  {De  Saa-a  Poesi  Heb., 
 ed.  Michaelis,  p.  458),  'aliud  extat  poema  ubi  intra 
 tarn  breve  spatium  tanta,  tarn  felix,  tam  lecta,  tarn 
 illustris  adjunctorum  atque  imaginum  varietas  elu- 
 ceat.  Quid  tam  elegans  et  poeticum,  ac  urbs  ilia 
 florentissima  pridem  et  inter  gentes  princeps,  nunc 
 sola  sedens,  affiicta,  vidua  ;  deserta  ab  amicis, 
 prodita  a  necessariis  ;  frustra  tendens  manus,  nee 
 inveniens  qui  earn  consoletur.  .  .  .  Verum  omnes 
 locos  elegantes  proferre,  id  sane  esset  totum  poema 
 exscribere.'  The  style  of  Jeremiah  is  marked  by 
 the  peculiarities  which  belong  to  the  later  Hebrew, 
 and  by  the  introduction  of  Aramaic  forms  (Eich- 
 honi,  Emleitung^  vol.  iii.  p.  122;  Gesenius,  Gcs- 
 chichte  der  Heb.  Sprache,  p.  35).  It  was,  we 
 imagine,  on  this  account  that  Jerome  complained 
 of  a  certain  nisticity  in  Jeremiah's  style.  Lowth, 
 however,  says  he  can  discover  no  traces  of  it,  and 
 regards  Jeremiah  as  nearly  equal  in  sublimity  in 
 many  parts  to  Isaiah  [De  Sacra  Poesi  Neb.,  p. 
 426). 
 
 The  genuineness  and  caiionicity  of  the  writings 
 of  Jeremiah  in  general  are  established  both  by  the 
 testimony  of  ancient  writers,  and  by  quotations 
 and  references  which  occur  in  the  N.  T.  Thus 
 the  son  of  Sirach  refers  to  him  as  a  prophet  conse- 
 crated from  the  womb,  and  quotes  from  Jer.  i.  10, 
 the  commission  with  which  he  was  intrusted  ('  a.vrhs 
 iv  fJLTjTpq.  ijyLdcrdT]  irpo(pr)T7]s  eKpii^ovv  Kal  KaKovv 
 Kcd  aiToWveiv,  CiaavTws  olKoBofJieiv  Kal  KaracjiVTevtiv,'' 
 Ecclus.  xlix.  7).  In  2  Maccab.  ii.  1-8,  there  is  a 
 tradition  respecting  his  hiding  the  tabernacle  and 
 the  ark  in  a  rock,  in  which  he  is  called  'Jepe/j-las  6 
 Trpo(p7]T7]s.  Philo  speaks  of  him  as  Trpo(prjT7]s, 
 uvaTrjs,  i€po(pdvT7)s,  and  calls  a  passage  which  he 
 quotes  from  Jer.  iii.  4,  an  oracle,  xP't'^l^^v  (Eich- 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 horn,  Einleifiino,  vol.  i.  p.  95).  Josephus  refers 
 to  him  by  name  as  the  prophet  who  predicted  the 
 evils  which  were  coming  on  the  city,  and  speaks 
 of  him  as  the  author  of  Lamentations  (/xAos  dpijvr)- 
 tik6v)  which  are  still  existing  (An/iq.,  lib.  x.  5.  i). 
 His  writings  are  included  in  the  list  of  canonical 
 books  given  by  Melito,  Origen  (whose  words  are 
 remarkable,  'lepe^tas  aiiv  dp-qvoLS  Kal  ry  iTriaroXfj 
 iv  eui),  Jerome,  and  the  Talmud  (Eichhorn,  Pin- 
 Icitung,  vol.  iii.  p.  184).  In  the  N.  T.  Jeremiah 
 is  referred  to  by  name  in  Matt.  ii.  17,  where  a 
 passage  is  quoted  from  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  and  in  Matt, 
 xvi.  14  ;  in  Heb.  viii.  8-12,  a  passage  is  quoted 
 from  Jer.  xxxi.  31-34.  There  is  one  other  place 
 in  which  the  name  of  Jeremiah  occurs.  Matt,  xxvii. 
 9,  which  has  occasioned  considerable  difficulty, 
 because  the  passage  there  quoted  is  not  found  in 
 the  extant  writings  of  the  prophet.  Jerome  affirms 
 that  he  found  the  exact  passage  in  a  Hebrew 
 apocryphal  book  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseiidcp.  i.  1 103) ; 
 but  there  is  no  proof  that  that  book  was  in  exist- 
 ence before  the  time  of  Christ.  It  is  probable 
 that  the  passage  intended  by  Matthew  is  Zech 
 xi.  12,  13,  which  in  part  corresponds  with  the 
 quotation  he  gives,  and  that  the  name  is  a  gloss 
 which  has  found  its  way  into  the  text  (see  Olshau- 
 sen,  Commentar  iiber  N.  T.,  vol.  ii.  p.  493). 
 
 Much  difficulty  has  arisen  in  reference  to  the 
 writings  of  Jeremiah  from  the  apparent  di.sorder  in 
 which  they  stand  in  our  present  copies,  and  from 
 the  many  disagreements  between  the  Hebrew  text 
 and  that  found  in  the  Septuagint  version ;  and 
 many  conjectures  have  been  hazarded  respecting 
 the  occasion  of  this  disorder.  The  following  are 
 the  principal  diversities  between  the  two  texts  : — 
 I.  The  prophecies  against  foreign  nations,  which 
 in  the  Hebrew  occupy  chs.  xlvi.-li.  at  the  close 
 of  the  book,  are  in  the  Greek  placed  after  ch.  xxv. 
 14,  forming  chs.  xxvi.  -xxxi. ;  the  remainder  of 
 ch.  xxv.  of  the  Heb.  is  ch.  xxxii.  of  the  Sept.  The 
 following  chapters  proceed  in  the  same  order  in 
 both  chs.  xliv.  and  xlv.  of  the  Heb.  forming  ch.  IL 
 of  the  Sept.  ;  and  the  historical  appendix,  ch.  Hi., 
 is  placed  at  the  close  in  both.  2.  The  prophecies 
 against  the  heathen  nations  stand  in  a  different 
 order  in  the  two  editions,  as  is  shown  in  the  fol- 
 lowing table : — 
 
 Hebrew. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Egypt. 
 Philistines. 
 Moab. 
 Ammon. 
 
 Elam. 
 Egypt. 
 Babylon. 
 Philistines 
 
 Edom. 
 
 Edom. 
 
 Damascus. 
 
 Ammon. 
 
 Kedar. 
 
 Kedar. 
 
 Elam. 
 
 Damascus 
 
 Babylon. 
 
 Moab. 
 
 3.  Various  passages  which  exist  in  the  Hebrew 
 are  not  found  in  the  Greek  copies  {e.,Q. ,  ch.  xxvii. 
 19-22;  xxxiii.  14-26;  xxxix.  4-14;  xlviii.  45-47). 
 Besides  these  discrepancies,  there  are  numerous 
 omissions  and  frequent  variations  of  single  words 
 and  phrases  (Movers,  P)e  iii?-t:isgue  Vaticiniattm 
 yeremi(e  recensionis  indole  et  engine,  pp.  8-32). 
 To  explain  these  diversities  recourse  has  been  had 
 to  the  hypothesis  of  a  double  recension,  an  hypo- 
 thesis which,  with  various  modifications,  is  held 
 by  most  modern  critics  (Movers,  nt  supra;  De 
 Wette,    Lehrbuch   der  Hist.-Crit.    Einleitung  in 
 
 2  K 
 
JEREMIAH 
 
 498 
 
 /EREMIAH 
 
 A.  T.,  p.  303  ;  Ewald,  Propheten  des  Alt.  Buttd. 
 vol.  ii.  p.  23). 
 
 The  genuineness  of  some  portions  of  the  book 
 has  been  of  late  disputed  by  German  critics. 
 Movers,  whose  views  have  been  adopted  by  Dp 
 Wette  and  Hitzig,  attributes  ch.  x.  1-16,  and 
 chs.  XXX.,  xxxi.,  and  xxxiii. ,  to  the  author  of  the 
 concluding  portion  of  the  book  of  Isaiah.  His 
 fundamental  argument  against  the  last-named 
 portion  is,  that  the  prophet  Zechariah  (ch.  viii. 
 7,  8)  quotes  from  Jer.  xxxi.  7,  8,  33,  and  in 
 ver.  9  speaks  of  the  author  as  one  who  lived  '  in  the 
 day  that  the  foundation  of  the  house  of  the  Lord 
 of  hosts  was  laid.'  He  must,  therefore,  have  been 
 contemporaiy  with  Zechariah  himself.  This  view 
 obliges  him,  of  course,  to  consider  ch.  xxx.  I, 
 with  which  he  joins  the  three  following  verses,  as 
 a  later  addition.  By  an  elaborate  comparison  of 
 the  peculiarities  of  style  he  endeavours  to  shew 
 that  the  author  of  these  chapters  was  the  so-called 
 pseudo-Isaiah.  He  acknowledges,  however,  that 
 there  are  many  expressions  peculiar  to  Jeremiah, 
 and  supposes  that  it  was  in  consequence  of  these 
 that  the  prediction  was  placed  among  his  writings. 
 These  similarities  he  accounts  for  by  assuming 
 that  the  later  unknown  prophet  accommodated 
 the  writings  of  the  earlier  to  his  own  use.  Eveiy 
 one  will  see  how  slight  is  the  external  ground  on 
 which  Movers'  argument  rests  ;  for  there  is  nothing 
 in  ver.  7,  8,  of  Zechariah  to  prove  that  it  is  intended 
 to  be  a  quotation  from  any  written  prophecy, 
 much  less  from  this  portion  of  Jeremiah.  The 
 quotation,  if  it  be  such,  is  made  up  by  joining 
 together  phrases  of  frequent  recurrence  in  the 
 prophets  picked  out  from  amongst  many  others. 
 Then,  again,  the  mention  of  prophets  is  evidence 
 that  Zechariah  was  not  referring  to  the  writings 
 of  one  individual  ;  and,  lastly,  the  necessity  of  re- 
 jecting the  exordium,  without  any  positive  ground 
 for  suspecting  its  integrity,  is  a  strong  argument 
 against  the  position  of  Movers.  Hitzig  {ycremui, 
 p.  230)  is  induced,  by  the  force  of  these  considera- 
 tions, to  give  up  the  external  evidence  on  which 
 Movers  had  relied.  The  internal  evidence  arising 
 from  the  examination  of  particular  words  and 
 phrases  — a  species  of  proof  which,  when  standing 
 alone,  is  always  to  be  received  with  great  caution 
 — is  rendered  of  still  less  weight  by  the  evidence 
 of  an  opposite  kind,  the  existence  of  which  Movers 
 himself  acknowledges,  '  quumque  indicia  usus 
 loquendi  tantummodo  Jeremise  peculiaris  haud 
 raro  inveniantur '  (p.  42).  And  this  evidence 
 becomes  absolutely  nothing,  if  the  authenticity  of 
 the  latter  portion  of  Isaiah  is  maintained  ;*  for  it 
 is  quite  likely  that  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  would, 
 when  relating  to  the  same  subject; .  bear  marks  of 
 similarity  to  those  of  his  illustrious  predecessor. 
 We  may  mention  also  that  Ewald,  who  is  by  no 
 means  accustomed  to  acquiesce  in  received  opi- 
 nions as  such,  agrees  that  the  chapters  in  question, 
 as  well  as  the  other  passage  mentioned  ch.  x. 
 I -16,  are  the  work  of  Jeremiah.  The  authenticity 
 of  this  latter  portion  is  denied  solely  on  internal 
 grounds,  and  the  remarks  we  have  already  made 
 will,  in  substance,  apply  also  to  these  verses.     It 
 
 *  For  a  proof  of  its  authenticity,  see  Hengsten- 
 berg's  Christologie,  vol.  i.  c.  2,  pp.  168-206 
 (translated  in  the  Am.  Biblical  Repository,  vol.  i. 
 pp.  700-733)  E.  T.  [Clark] ;  see  also  the  article 
 Isaiah. 
 
 seems,  however,  not  improbable  that  the  Chaldee 
 of  ver.  1 1  is  a  gloss  which  has  crept  into  the  text — 
 both  because  it  is  (apparently  without  reason)  in 
 another  language,  and  because  it  seems  to  mter- 
 rupt  the  progress  of  thought.  The  predictions 
 against  Babylon  in  chs.  1.  and  li.  are  objected  to 
 by  Movers,  De  Wette,  and  others,  on  the  ground 
 that  they  contain  many  interpolations.  Ewald 
 attributes  them  to  some  unknown  prophet  who 
 imitated  the  style  of  Jeremiah.  Their  authen- 
 ticity is  maintained  by  Hitzig  (p.  391),  and  by 
 Umbreit  (pp.  290-293),  to  whom  we  must  refer  for 
 an  answer  to  the  objections  made  against  them. 
 The  last  chapter  is  generally  regarded  as  an 
 appendix  added  by  some  later  author.  It  is  almost 
 verbally  the  same  as  the  account  in  2  Kings  xxiv. 
 18  ;  XXV.  30,  and  it  carries  the  history  down  to 
 a  later  period  probably  than  that  of  the  death 
 of  Jeremiah  :  that  it  is  not  his  work  seems  to  be 
 indicated  in  the  last  verse  of  ch.  li. 
 
 It  is  impossible,  within  the  limits  assigned  to 
 this  article,  even  to  notice  all  the  attempts  which 
 have  been  made  to  account  for  the  apparent  dis- 
 order of  Jeremiah's  prophecies.  Blayney  speaks 
 of  their  present  disposition  as  a  '  preposterous 
 jumbling  together  of  the  prophecies  of  the  reigns 
 of  Jehoiakim  and  Zedekiah,'  and  concludes  that 
 '  the  original  order  has,  most  probably,  by  some 
 accident  or  other,  been  distributed'  (Notes,  p.  3). 
 Eichhorn  says  that  no  other  explanation  can  be 
 given  than  that  the  prophet  wrote  his  oracles  on 
 single  rolls,  larger  or  smaller  as  they  came  to  his 
 hand,  and  that,  as  he  was  desirous  to  give  his 
 countrymen  a  copy  of  them  when  they  went  into 
 captivity,  he  dictated  them  to  an  amanuensis  from 
 the  separate  rolls  without  attending  to  the  order  of 
 time,  and  then  preserved  the  rolls  in  the  same 
 order  {Einl.  iii.  134).  Later  critics  have  at- 
 tempted in  different  ways  to  trace  some  plan  in 
 the  present  arrangement.  Thus  Movers  supposes 
 the  whole  collection  to  have  consisted  of  six  books 
 — the  longest  being  that  written  by  Baruch  (Jer. 
 xxxvi.  2,  32),  which  was  taken  by  the  collector  as 
 his  foundation,  into  which  he  inserted  the  other 
 books  in  such  places  as  seemed,  on  a  very  slight 
 glance  at  their  contents,  to  be  suitable.  All  such 
 theories,  however,  proceed  on  the  presumption 
 that  the  present  arrangement  is  the  work  of  a  com- 
 piler, which,  therefore,  we  are  at  liberty  to  alter 
 at  pleasure  ;  and  though  they  offer  boundless 
 scope  for  ingenuity  in  suggesting  a  better  arrange- 
 ment, they  serve  us  very  little  in  respect  to  the 
 explanation  of  the  book  itself.  Ewald  adopts 
 another  principle,  which,  if  it  be  found  valid,  can- 
 not fail  to  throw  much  light  on  the  connection  and 
 meaning  of  the  predictions.  He  maintains  that 
 the  book,  in  its  present  form,  is,  from  ch.  i.  to  ch. 
 xlix.,  substantially  the  same  as  it  came  from  the 
 hand  of  the  prophet,  or  his  amanuensis,  and  seeks 
 to  discover  in  the  present  arrangement  some  plan 
 according  to  which  it  is  disposed.  He  finds  that 
 various  portions  are  prefaced  by  the  same  formula, 
 '  The  word  which  came  to  Jeremiah  from  the 
 Lord'  (vii.  i  ;  xi.  I  ;  xviii.  I  ;  xxi.  I  ;  xxv.  I  ; 
 xxx.  I  ;  xx\ii.  i  ;  xxxiv.  I,  8;  xxxv.  I  ;  xl.  I  ; 
 xliv.  i),  or  by  the  very  similar  expression,  '  The 
 word  of  the  Lord  which  came  to  Jerenaiah '  (xiv. 
 I ;  xlvi.  I ;  xlvii.  I  ;  xlix.  34).  The  notices  of 
 time  distinctly  mark  some  other  divisions  which 
 are  more  or  less  historical  (xxvi.  I  ;  xxvii.  I  ; 
 xxxvi.  I  ;  xxxvii.    i).     Two  other  portions  are  in 
 
JEREMIAH 
 
 4S9 
 
 JEREMIAH,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 themselves  sufficiently  distinct  w  ithout  such  indica- 
 tion (xxix.  r  ;  xlv.  1),  whilst  the  general  introduc- 
 tion to  the  book  serves  for  the  section  contained  in 
 eh.  i.  There  are  left  two  sections  (ch.  ii.  iii.  )>  the 
 former  of  which  has  only  the  shorter  introduction, 
 which  generally  designates  the  commencement  of 
 a  strophe ;  while  the  latter,  as  it  now  stands, 
 seems  to  be  imperfect,  having  as  an  introduction 
 merely  the  word  '  saying.'  Thus  the  book  is 
 divided  into  twenty-three  separate  and  independent 
 sections,  which,  in  the  poetical  parts,  are  again 
 divided  into  strophes  of  from  seven  to  nine  verses, 
 frequently  distinguished  by  such  a  phrase  as  '  The 
 Lord  said  also  unto  me.'  These  separate  sections 
 are  arranged  by  Ewald  so  as  to  form  five  distinct 
 books:— I.  The  introduction,  ch.  i.  ; — II.  Re- 
 proofs of  the  sins  of  the  Jews,  ch.  ii. -xxiv.,  con- 
 sisting of  seven  sections,  viz. — i.  ch.  ii.,  2.  ch. 
 iii. -vi. ,  3.  ch.  vii. -x.,  4.  ch.  xi. -xiii. ,  5.  ch.  xiv.-xvii. 
 18,  6.  ch.  xvii.  i9*-xx.,  7.  ch.  xxi. -xxiv.  ; — III. 
 A  general  review  of  all  nations,  the  heathen  as 
 well  as  the  people  of  Israel,  consisting  of  two 
 sections,  i.  ch.  xlvi.-xlix.  (which  he  thinks  have 
 been  transposed),  2.  ch.  xxv.,  and  an  historical 
 appendix  of  three  sections,  I.  ch.  xxvi. ,  2.  ch. 
 xxvii.,  and  3.  ch.  xxviii.-xxix.  ; — IV.  Two  sections 
 picturing  the  hopes  of  brighter  times,  i.  ch.  xxx.- 
 XXXI.,  and  2.  ch.  xxxii.-xxxiii.,  to  which,  as  in  the 
 last  book,  is  added  an  historical  appendix  in  three 
 sections,  I.  ch.  xxxiv.  1-7,  2.  ch.  xxxiv.  8-22,  3. 
 ch  XXXV.  ; — V.  The  conclusion,  in  two  sections, 
 I.  ch.  xxxvi.,  2.  ch.  xlv.  All  this,  he  supposes, 
 was  arranged  in  Palestine,  during  the  short  inter- 
 val of  rest  between  the  taking  of  the  city  and  the 
 departure  of  Jeremiah  with  the  remnant  of  the 
 Jews,  to  Egypt.  In  Egypt,  after  some  interval, 
 Jeremiah  added  three  sections,  viz.,  ch.  xxxvii.- 
 xxxix. ,  xl.-xliii.,  and  xliv.  At  the  same  time, 
 probably,  he  added  ch.  xlvi.  13-26  to  the  previous 
 prophecy  respecting  Egypt,  and,  perhaps,  made 
 some  additions  to  other  parts  previously  written. 
 We  do  not  profess  to  agree  with  Ewald  in  all  the 
 details  of  this  arrangement,  but  we  certainly  prefer 
 the  principle  he  adopts  to  that  of  any  former  critic. 
 We  may  add  that  Umbreit  [Praklischer  Comni.  iib 
 d.  yeremia,  p.  xxvii.)  states,  that  he  has  found 
 himself  more  nearly  in  agreement  with  Ewald,  as 
 to  arrangement,  than  with  any  one  else. 
 
 The  principal  predictions  relating  to  the  Mes- 
 siah are  found  in  ch.  xxiii.  1-8;  xxxi.  31-40 ; 
 xxxiii.  14-26  (Hengstenberg's  Chrisiologie,  vol.  iii. 
 pp.  495-619).— F.  W.  G. 
 
 [Liternfure.  —  Nagel,  Dissert,  in  var.  lecit.  25 
 CLipp.  priornm  Jer.  ex  duobus  codd.  JlfSS.  Hebr. 
 demmptas,  Altorf  1772;  Leiste,  Obss.  ad  Jer.  vati- 
 ciiiiaspec.  /.,  Gott.  1794;  Spohn,  Jer.  Vat.  e  vers, 
 yndceorinn  Alex,  emendatiis,  Lips.  1824  ;  Kiiper, 
 Jer.  Libb.  Sacc.  inter pres  et  vindex,  1837  ;  Mo- 
 vers, De  utriusqiie  recensionis  vaticin.  Jer.  itidole 
 et  origine,  1837  ;  Wichelhaus,  De  Jerem.  vers. 
 Alex.,  1847.  Commentaries  : — Besides  the  homi- 
 lies of  Origen,  the  Scholia  of  Theodoret,  and  the 
 Commentary  of  Jerome  among  the  Fathers,  and 
 those  of  Oecolampad  and  Calvin  among  the  Re- 
 formers, niay  be  mentioned  those  of  Piscator, 
 1614;  Sanctius,  1618 ;  Ghislerus,  3  torn,  fol., 
 1623  ;  Schmidt,  1685  ;  Venema,  2  vols.  4to,  1784; 
 
 *  Ewald  supposes  that  the  proper  place  of  the 
 introductory  formula  to  ch,  xviiii.  i,  is  ch.  xvii.  19. 
 
 Bla)Tiey,  1784;  Michaelis,  1796;  Schnurrer,  1793- 
 97,  in  Velthusen's  Commentationes  Theologies,  vol, 
 iii.  ;  Dahler,  1S25,  2  vols.  ;  Rosenmliller  in  his 
 Scholia,  \xv  Vet.  Test.\\\\.;  Ewald,  1840;  Hitzig, 
 1841  ;  Umbreit,  1842  ;  Henderson,  1852.  To 
 which  may  be  added  Hensler,  Bemerk.  iiber  Stellen 
 in  ycr.  fVeiss.,  1806;  Gaab,  Erkldr.  schewerer  st. 
 in  d.  Weiss.  Jer.,  1824;  Hengstenberg,  Chris- 
 tology,  E.  T.,  vol.  iii. 
 
 For  Jeremiah's  other  writing,  see  LAMENTA- 
 TIONS. 
 
 JEREMIAH.  Besides  the  prophet,  seven  other 
 persons  bearing  this  name  are  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
 ture, viz. — Jeremiah  of  Libnah,  the  father  of 
 Hamutal,  wife  of  king  Josiah  (2  Kings  xxiii.  31)  ; 
 the  head  of  one  of  the  houses  of  Manasseh  (l 
 Chron.  v.  24)  ;  three  of  the  warriors  who  joined 
 David  at  Ziklag  (i  Chron.  xii.  4,  10,  13)  ;  a  priest, 
 one  of  those  who  sealed  the  covenant  along  with 
 Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  2,  8),  and  after  whom  one  of 
 the  courses  of  the  priests  under  Zerubbabel  was 
 named  (xii.  i,  12)  ;  the  father  of  Jaaziniah,  a  con- 
 temporary of  the  prophet  (Jer.  xxxv.  3). 
 
 JEREMIAH,  THE  Ei'isTi.E  of,  one  of  the 
 apocryphal  writings,  purporting  to  proceed  from 
 the  pen  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah. 
 
 1.  Title  and  position. — This  apocryphal  piece, 
 which  derives  its  title  evicToKj)  'lepe/xiov  (Sept., 
 Vulg.,  Syriac,  etc.)  from  purporting  to  be  an  epistle 
 sent  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  '  to  them  which  were 
 to  be  led  captive  to  Babylon,'  has  different  positions 
 in  the  different  Codd.  It  is  placed  after  the 
 Lamentations  in  Origen's  Hexaplas,  according  to 
 the  Syriac  Hexapla  codex  in  the  Ambrosian  Lib- 
 rary at  Milan,  in  the  cod.  Alex.,  the  Arabic  ver- 
 sions, etc.  ;  in  some  editions  of  the  Sept.,  in  the 
 Latin,  and  the  Syriac,  which  was  followed  by 
 Luther,  the  Zurich  Bible,  Coverdale,  the  Geneva 
 Version,  the  Bishops'  Bible,  and  the  A.  V.,  it 
 constitutes  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  apocryphal  book 
 of  Baruch,  whilst  Theodoret,  Hilary  of  Poitiers, 
 and  several  MSS.  of  the  Sejit.  entirely  omit  it.  It 
 is,  however,  an  independent  production,  and  has 
 nothing  to  do  with  Baruch. 
 
 2.  Design  and  contents. — The  design  of  this 
 epistle  is  to  admonish  the  Jews  who  were  going 
 into  captivity  with  the  king,  to  beware  of  the 
 idolatry  which  they  would  see  in  Babylon.  It  tells 
 the  people  of  God  not  to  become  idolaters  like  the 
 strangers,  but  to  serve  their  own  God  whose  angel 
 is  with  them  (1-7),  and  it  exposes  in  a  rhetorical 
 declamation  the  folly  of  idolatry  (S-72),  concluding 
 eveiy  group  of  verses,  which  contains  a  fresh  proof 
 of  its  folly,  with  the  reiterated  remarks  'seeing 
 that  they  are  no  gods,  fear  them  nof  (vers.  16,  23, 
 29,  66),  '  hozo  can  a  man  think  that  they  are  gods  T 
 (vers.  40,  44,  56,  64,  69),  '  ho7i)  can  a  man  not  see 
 that  they  are  not  gods  r  (vers.  49,  53). 
 
 3.  Author,  date,  original  language,  canonicity, 
 etc. — The  inscription  claims  the  authorship  of  thi-s 
 epistle  for  Jeremiah,  who,  it  is  said,  wrote  it  just 
 as  the  Jews  were  going  to  Babylon,  which  is 
 generally  reckoned  to  be  the  first  year  of  Nebu- 
 chadnezzar the  Great,  i.e.,  A.  M.  3398,  or  B.C 
 606.  This  is  the  general  opinion  of  the  Roman 
 Church,  which,  as  a  matter  of  course,  regaids  it 
 as  canonical.  But  nodern  critics,  both  Jewish 
 and  Christian,  who  deny  the  power  to  any  church 
 to  override  internal  evidence,   and  defy  the  laws 
 
JEREMOTH 
 
 5Ci() 
 
 JERICHO 
 
 of  criticism,  have  shewn  satisfactorily  that  its  orifji- 
 nal  language  is  Greek,  and  that  it  was  written  by 
 Hellenistic  Jews  in  imitation  of  Jeremiah,  chaps. 
 X.  and  xxix.  This  is  corroborated  by  the  fact  that 
 this  epistle  does  not  exist  in  the  Hebrew,  was 
 never  included  in  the  Jewish  canon,  is  designated 
 by  St.  Jerome,  who  knew  more  than  any  father 
 what  the  Jewish  canon  contained,  as  ^evSeTri- 
 ypa(f>os  {Pive//i.  Comment  in  Hierom.),  was  marked 
 with  obeli  by  Origen  in  his  Hexapla,  as  is  evident 
 from  the  note  of  Cod.  Chislianus  (Bapoi''X  6'Xos 
 ci/J^Xicrrat  /caret  to!>s  6),  and  was  passed  over  by 
 Theodoret,  though  he  explained  the  Book  of 
 Baruch.  The  date  of  this  epistle  cannot  be  defi- 
 nitely settled.  It  is  generally  supposed  that  2 
 Maccab.  ii.  2  alludes  to  this  epistle,  and  that  it 
 must,  therefore,  be  older  than  this  book  of  Macca- 
 bees. Herzfeld  {Geschichte  d.  V.  Israel  vor  d.  Zer- 
 st'driing  d.  ersten  Tempels,  Brunswick  1847,  p. 
 316)  infers  from  it  the  very  reverse,  namely,  that 
 this  epistle  was  written  after  the  passage  in  2 
 Maccab.,  whilst  P'ritzsche  and  Davidson  are  utterly 
 unable  to  see  the  appropriateness  of  the  sup- 
 posed reference.  It  is  most  probable  that  the 
 writer  lived  towards  the  end  of  the  Maccabrean 
 period. 
 
 4.  Literature. — Arnald,  A  Critical  Commentary 
 oti  the  Apocryplial  Books  ;  being  a  continnation  of 
 Patrick  and  Lowth  ;  Eichhorn,  Einleitung  in  die 
 apohypkische  Schriftcn  dcs  Alten  Testaments,  Leip- 
 zig 1795,  p.  390,  ff.  ;  De  Wette,  Einleitung  in  d. 
 Alte  Testament,  sec.  324 ;  Fritzsche,  Kiu-zgefasstes 
 exegetisches  Handbttch  2.  d.  apokr.  d.  Alten  Tcsta- 
 mentes,  part  i.,  Leipzig  1S51,  p.  205,  ff.  ;  Keil, 
 Einleitung  in  d.  Alte  Testament,  1859,  p.  731,  ff.  ; 
 Davidson,  The  Text  of  the  Old  Testament  considered, 
 London  1S56,  p.   1038,  etc. — C.  I).  G. 
 
 JEREMOTH    (nVDT,    loftinesses),     i.  (LXX. 
 
 ''lapLfjLwd  ;  V\x\<g.  ferimoth).  A  lineal  descendant  of 
 Mushi,  son  of  Merari,  and  founder  of  one  of  the 
 twenty-four  (?)  patriarchal  houses  of  the  Levites 
 (i  Chron.  xxiii.  23).  He  is  called  Jerimoth,  chap, 
 xxiv.  ver.  30. 
 
 2.  (LXX.  'A/)t/iu)5  ;  Alex.  ^lapinoiO ;  Vulg. 
 Jerimoth. )  A  Benjamite,  one  of  the  '  heads  of  the 
 fathers'  of  the  Benei-Elpaal  (i  Chron.  viii.  14). 
 
 3.  (LXX.  'lepi/j-wd  ;  Vulg.  Jerimoth.)  A  Levite, 
 son  of  Hemau  the  singer,  who  was  one  of  those 
 who  were  chosen  to  preside  respectively  over  the 
 twenty-four  courses  of  musicians  instituted  by  Da- 
 vid for  the  service  of  song  in  the  house  of  the 
 Lord.  In  the  distribution  of  the  courses  by  lot, 
 the  fifteenth  was  assigned  to  Jeremoth  (l  Chron. 
 XXV.  22).  In  veroe  4  of  the  same  chapter  he  is 
 called  Jerimoth. 
 
 4.  (LXX.  ^lapL/xwd ;  Alex.  ^lepifuLO ;  Vulg. 
 Jerimoth.)  One  of  the  Benei-Elam,  who,  at  the 
 exhortation,  publicly  agreed  to  put  away  his  strange 
 wife  (Ezra  x.  26).  In  Esdras  his  name  occurs 
 under  the  form  Hieremoth  (lepefiwd,  i  Esd.  i.x. 
 27). 
 
 1;.  (LXX.  'Apfjiud;  Alex.  'lappLthd  ;  Vulg.  Jeri- 
 vioth.)  One  of  Benei-Zattu,  and  another  of  those 
 who  had  married  strange  wives,  and  joined  in 
 the  public  expression  of  their  penitence  (Ezra 
 X.  27). _ 
 
 6.  The  name,  according  to  the  written  text,  of 
 one  of  the  Benei-Bani,  who  also  took  part  in  the 
 same  public  acknowledgment  of  guilt  (Ezra  x.  29). 
 The  margmal  note  {.Keri)   reads,   'and  Ramoth' 
 
 (niD">1),  and  this  is  followed  by  the  LXX.  CPi? 
 
 fibiQ)  and  Vulgate  {Ramoth).  In  Esdras  the  name 
 is  Hieremoth  (lepe/xwd,  i  Esd.  ix.  30). — S.  N. 
 
 JERICHO  (inT,  andinn^,  and  iin'^y  ;  the  firs 
 
 form  of  the  name  would  signify  '  city  of  the 
 moon,'  but  the  second,  '  a  fragrant  place  ;'  'lepixa; ; 
 Jericho),  a  well-known  city  of  Canaan,  situated  in 
 the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  about  eight  miles  from 
 the  mouth  of  that  river.  Nothing  is  known  of  the 
 origin  of  Jericho.  It  is  first  mentioned  in  connec- 
 tion with  the  approach  of  the  Israelites  to  Pales- 
 tine. The  Israelites  '  pitched  in  the  plains  of 
 Moab,  on  this  side  Jordan  by  Jericho'  (Num. 
 xxii.  i).  It  was  then  a  large  and  strong  city,  and 
 must  have  existed  for  a  long  period.  The  proba- 
 bility is,  that  on  the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  the 
 plain  by  fire  from  heaven,  Jericho  was  founded, 
 and  perhaps  by  some  who  had  resided  nearer  the 
 scene  of  the  catastrophe,  but  who  abandoned  their 
 houses  in  fear.  Had  the  city  existed  in  the  time 
 of  Abraham  and  Lot,  it  would  scarcely  have 
 escaped  notice  when  the  latter  looked  down  on 
 the  plain  of  Jordan  from  the  heights  of  Bethel 
 (Gen.  xiii.)  From  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
 referred  to,  and  the  frequency  with  vvh-ich  it  is 
 mentioned,  it  was  evidently  the  most  important 
 city  in  the  Jordan  valley  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus 
 (Num.  xxxiv.  15;  xxxi.  12;  xxxv.  i,  etc.)  It 
 was  then  encompassed  by  groves  of  palms,  which 
 attracted  the  special  attention  of  the  Israelites  as 
 they  looked  down  upon  its  plain  from  the  heights 
 of  Aloab,  and  led  them  to  call  it  the  '  city  of  palm 
 trees'  (Deut.  xxxiv.  3)  Jericho  was  the  first  city 
 captured  by  the  Israelites  west  of  the  Jordan,  and 
 the  story  of  the  two  spies  who  were  sent  to  it,  and 
 of  its  subsequent  siege  and  destruction,  forms  one 
 of  the  most  wonderful  and  romantic  episodes  in 
 sacred  history  (Josh.  ii.  6).  Scarcely  less  remark- 
 able was  the  curse  pronounced  upon  the  city  by 
 Joshua — '  Cursed  be  the  man  before  the  Lord, 
 that  riseth  up  and  buildeth  this  city  Jericho  ;  he 
 shall  lay  the  foundation  thereof  in  his  first-born, 
 and  in  his  youngest  son  shall  he  set  up  the  gates  of 
 it'  (vi.  26).  It  is  evident  this  was  no  hasty  or 
 causeless  anathema.  The  sin  of  Sodom  appears 
 to  have  clung  to  the  spot,  perhaps  in  some  measure 
 owing  to  the  relaxing  nature  of  the  climate  and 
 the  great  productiveness  of  the  soil,  generating 
 habits  of  idle  luxury.  On  the  division  of  the  land 
 among  the  tribes,  Jericho  was  one  of  the  marks 
 on  the  border  of  Benjamin,  whose  territory  ex- 
 tended down  in  a  narrow  point  to  the  Jordan 
 (Josh.  xvi.  1-7).  But  though  the  Benjamites  pos- 
 sessed the  site  of  the  city  (xviii.  21),  and  though  a 
 few  inhabitants  gathered  round  it  to  cultivate  the 
 plain  (Judg.  iii.  13 ;  2  Sam.  x.  5),  the  ban  of 
 Joshua  lay  upon  it  for  nearly  five  centuries.  We 
 read  that,  in  the  reign  of  Ahab,  '  Hiel  the  Bethelite 
 built  Jericho  :  he  laid  the  foundation  thereof  in 
 Abiram  his  first-born,  and  set  up  the  gales  thereof 
 in  his  youngest  son  Segub,  according  to  the  word 
 of  the  Lord'  (i  Kings  xvi.  34).  Jericho  thus 
 became  once  more  a  large  and  important  city ; 
 and  notwithstanding  the  curse  of  Joshua  and  the 
 fatality  attendant  en  its  rebuilding,  the  pi'ophets 
 gathered  round  it,  established  a  famous  school, 
 and  gave  it  a  name  for  sanctity  and  learning  which 
 it  retained  down  to  the  commencement  of  our  own 
 era.     Doubtless  the  visit  of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  the 
 
JERICHO 
 
 501 
 
 JERICHO 
 
 translation  of  the  former  on  the  opposite  bank  of 
 the  Jordan,  and  the  miraculous  heahng  of  the 
 poisonous  fountain  by  the  latter,  contributed  much 
 to  the  celebrity  of  the  place  (2  Kings  ii. )  With 
 the  exception  of  two  incidental  references  (2  Kings 
 XXV.  5  ;  2  Chron.  xxviii.  15),  we  hear  nothing  more 
 of  the  city  till  after  the  captivity.  Of  '  the  chil- 
 dren of  Jericho  three  hundred  and  forty  and  five ' 
 returned  from  Babylon  (Ezra  ii.  34),  and  aided  in 
 rebuilding  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  2).  In  the  interval 
 between  the  O.  T.  and  N.  T.  histories,  Jericho 
 was  a  place  of  note.  It  was  one  of  the  towns  for- 
 tified by  Bacchides,  a  general  of  Demetrius  Soter, 
 when  defeated  by  the  Jews  under  Jonathan  Macca- 
 beus (l  Maccab.  ix.  50 ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  i.  3). 
 Pompey  encamped  here  on  his  way  to  Jerusalem 
 in  B.  C.  63  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  4.  I  ;  Bell.  Jud.  i. 
 
 6.  6).  Antony  gave  Jericho  with  nearly  all  Palestine 
 to  Cleopatra  {Aniiq.  xv.  4.  2),  and  there  is  an  old 
 tradition  that  she  caused  slips  of  the  balsam  shrub, 
 for  which  the  gardens  of  Jericho  were  famous,  to 
 be  taken  to  Egypt  and  planted  at  Heliopolis  (Bro- 
 cardus,  Dcscriptio  Terra  Sa)tcta,  xiii.)  From 
 Cleopatra  Jericho  and  its  plain  were  farmed  by 
 Herod  the  Great  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  4.  2),  who 
 adorned  them  with  splendid  palaces,  castles,  and 
 theatres.  The  city  became  one  of  his  favourite 
 places  of  residence,  and  in  it  he  died  {Bell.  Jud.  i. 
 21.  4  and  9  ;  Antiq.  xvii.  8). 
 
 The  history  of  Jericho  is  incomplete.  It  ap- 
 pears that  its  site  was  changed  ;  but  at  what 
 period  or  for  what  reason  we  cannot  tell.  The 
 city  destroyed  by  Joshua  and  rebuilt  by  Hiel  stood 
 beside  Elisha's  fountain.     This  we  infer  from  the 
 
 2S3.  Jericho. 
 
 narrative  in  2  Kings  ii.  19-21  ;  and  Josephus  says, 
 '  In  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Jericho  is  a  copious 
 spring  of  great  virtue  in  irrigation.  It  bursts  forth 
 near  the  ancient  town,  the  first  in  the  land  of  the 
 Canaanites  which  yielded  to  the  arms  of  Israel ' 
 (Bell.  Jud.  iv.  8.  3).  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
 the  spring  here  mentioned  is  that  now  called  Ain- 
 es-Sultan,  and  also  sometimes  '  Elisha's  fountain,' 
 which  is  situated  about  a  mile  and  a  half  north- 
 west of  the  village  of  Riha.  Now,  from  the  Jeru- 
 salem Itinerary  we  learn  that  the  Jericho  of  the 
 4th  century,  which  was  identical  with  that  of  the 
 first,  stood  at  the  base  of  the  mountains,  on  the 
 right  of  the  place  where  the  road  from  Jerusalem 
 enters  the  plain,  and  nearly  two  miles  south  of  the 
 fountain.  After  describing  the  fountain,  the  author 
 of  the  Itineraij  says,  Ibi  fuit  civitas  Hiericho, 
 cujus  muros  gyraverunt  cum  area  Testamenti  filii 
 Israel  et  ceciderunt  muri '  ( Vetera  Ro7na7ioriim 
 Itineraria,  ed.  Wesseling). 
 
 The  writer  of  this  article  was  acquainted  with 
 these  facts  before  he  visited  the  plain  of  Jericho, 
 and  was  hence  led  to  make  a  careful  survey.  The 
 substance  of  the  following  sentences  was  written  on 
 the  spot.  The  ancient,  and  indeed  the  only  prac- 
 ticable road  from  Jerusalem  zigzags  down  the  rug- 
 ged and  bare  mountain  side,  close  to  the  south 
 bank  of  Wady  el-Kelt,  one  of  the  most  sublime 
 ravines  in  Palestine.  In  the  plain,  half  a  mile  from 
 the  foot  of  the  pass,  and  a  short  distance  south  of 
 the  road  to  Riha,  is  an  immense  reservoir,  now 
 dry,  and  round  it  are  extensive  ruins,  consisting 
 of  mounds  of  rubbish  and  ancient  foundations. 
 Riding  northward  similar  remains  were  seen  on 
 both  sides  of  Wady  el-Kelt.  Half  a  mile  farther 
 north  we  enter  cultivated  ground,  interspersed  with 
 clumps  of  thorny  7iid>k  ('  lote-tree')  and  other 
 shrubs  ;  another  half  mile  brings  us  to  Ain-es- 
 Sultan,  a  large  fountain  bursting  forth  from  the 
 foot  of  a  mound.    The  water  though  warm  is  sweet, 
 
JERICHO 
 
 602 
 
 JERICHO 
 
 and  is  extensively  used  in  the  irrigation  of  the  sur- 
 rounding plain.  The  whole  plain  immediately 
 around  the  fountain  is  strewn  with  ancient  ruins 
 and  heaps  of  rubbish.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
 that  this  is  the  fountain  healed  by  Elisha,  and  that 
 the  ruins  beside  it  are  those  of  the  city  captured  by 
 [oshua  and  rebuilt  by  Hiel  the  Bethelite  ;  while 
 "the  ruins  lying  at  the  foot  of  the  pass,  and  on  the 
 banks  of  the  Kelt,  mark  the  site  of  the  Jericho  of 
 the  N.  T. 
 
 The  more  modern  city  thus  lay  on  the  direct 
 route  from  Peraea  to  Jerusalem.  Our  Lord  fol- 
 lowed this  route.  On  approaching  Jericho  he  ap- 
 pears to  have  cured  one  blind  man  (Luke  xviii. 
 35)  ;  and  on  leaving  it  on  the  opposite  side  he  cured 
 another  (Mark  x.  46).  Then,  proceeding  on  his 
 journey,  a  vast  crowd  having  gathered  round  him, 
 he  saw  Zaccheus  up  in  the  sycamore  tree,  went  into 
 his  house,  probably  a  villa  in  the  gardens  near  the 
 road,  and  having  rested  there  for  a  time,  and  re- 
 lated the  parable  of  the  Ten  Pounds,  '  he  went  for- 
 ward, ascending  tip  (by  the  steep  wild  mountain 
 road)  to  Jerusalem'  (Luke  xix.  1-28).  At  this 
 period  the  environs  of  Jericho  must  have  been  ex- 
 ceedingly rich  and  beautiful.  The  abundant  waters 
 of  Elisha's  fountain,  and  of  other  larger  fountains 
 at  the  foot  of  the  mountains  northward,  were  con- 
 ducted by  aqueducts  and  canals,  and  distributed 
 far  and  wide  over  the  vast  plain.  The  gardens  and 
 orchards  abounded  in  spices,  shrubs,  and  fruit  trees 
 of  the  rarest  kinds,  and  were  dotted  besides  with 
 the  palaces  of  the  Jewish  princes  and  nobles  (J  oseph. 
 Antiq.  xvi.  5.  2;  xviii.  13.  I;  Bell.  Jitd.  i.  21, 
 4-9  ;  iv.  8.  2  and  3). 
 
 The  subsequent  history  of  Jericho  contains  little 
 worthy  of  note.  It  was  made  the  head  of  one  of 
 the  toparchies  of  Palestine  under  Vespasian  (Joseph. 
 Bell.  yiid.  iii.  3.  5).  Eusebius  and  Jerome  state 
 that  it  was  destroyed  during  the  siege  of  Jerusalem 
 {Onomasf.,  s.  v.  Jericho).  It  afterwards  contained 
 a  considerable  Christian  population,  and  was  for  a 
 long  period  the  seat  of  a  bishopric  (S.  Paul, 
 Geogr.  Sacra,  ed.  Holsten.  p.  306  ;  Reland,  Pahes- 
 tina,  p.  215).  A  church  and  hospice  were  built 
 here  by  the  Emperor  Justinian  (Procopius,  De  ^■Edi- 
 fic.  yustiniaiii,  5,  9)  ;  but  these  buildings  and  the 
 city  appear  to  have  been  destroyed  during  or  soon 
 after  the  Mohammedan  conquest,  for  Adamnanus 
 at  the  close  of  the  7th  century  describes  the  site  as 
 deserted,  with  the  exception  of  Rahab's  house  [De 
 Locis  Sanctis,  2,  13).  During  the  rule  of  the  Sara- 
 cens, Jericho  again  in  some  measure  revived  ;  the 
 old  aqueducts  were  repaired,  and  the  plain  ren- 
 dered fruitful.  But  it  would  seem  that  the  site  was 
 again  changed,  and  the  new  town  or  village  built 
 where  the  little  hamlet  of  Riha  now  stands  (Jacob 
 de  Vitry  in  Gesia  Dei  per  Francos,  p.  1076  ;  see 
 also  Robinson,  B.  A\,  i.  561).  When  the  Crusa- 
 ders conquered  Palestine  the  plain  of  Jericho  was 
 one  of  the  most  fertile  regions  in  the  country,  and 
 was  assigned  to  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre 
 (William  of  Tyre  in  Gesifa  Dei,  xi.  15).  After  the 
 close  of  the  Crusades  Jericho  again  gradually  de- 
 clined, and  it  has  never  since  revived  (Brochardus, 
 chap.  vii.  ;  Maundrell,  March  29 ;  Pococke,  ii.  i, 
 P-  31)- 
 
 Riha  (written  in  Arabic  l^^^j  .',  Eriha  =  Heb. 
 
 ^HT),  the  only  modem  representative  of  the  an- 
 cient royal  city  of  Jericho,  is  a  small,  poor,  filthv 
 
 hamlet.  The  houses  consist  of  rough  walls  of  old 
 building  stones,  roofed  with  straw  and  brushwood. 
 Each  has  in  front  of  it  an  enclosure  for  cattle  fenced 
 with  branches  of  the  thorny  nubk  ;  and  a  stronger 
 fence  of  the  same  material  surrounds  the  whole  vil- 
 lage, forming  a  rude  barrier  against  the  raids  of  the 
 Bedawin.  Not  far  from  the  village  is  a  little  square 
 castle  or  tower,  evidently  of  Saracenic  origin,  but 
 now  dignified  by  the  title  of  '  the  house  of  Zac- 
 cheus.' This  village,  though  it  bears  the  name  of 
 Jericho,  is,  as  has  been  stated,  about  a  mile  and  a 
 half  distant  both  from  the  Jericho  of  the  prophets 
 and  that  of  the  Evangelists.  Very  probably  it  may 
 occupy  the  site  of  Gilgal  [Gilgal].  The  soil  of  the 
 plain  is  unsurpassed  in  fertility  ;  there  is  abundance 
 of  water  for  irrigation,  and  many  of  the  old  aque- 
 ducts are  almost  perfect ;  yet  nearly  the  whole 
 plain  is  waste  and  desolate.  The  few  fields  of 
 wheat  and  Indian  corn,  and  the  few  orchards  of 
 figs,  are  enough  to  show  what  the  place  might  be- 
 come under  proper  cultivation.  But  the  people 
 are  now  few  in  number,  indolent,  and  licentious. 
 The  palms  which  gave  the  ancient  city  a  distinctive 
 appellation  are  gone  ;  even  that  '  single  solitary 
 palm'  which  Dr.  Robinson  saw,  exists  no  more. 
 The  climate  of  Jericho  is  exceedingly  hot  and  un- 
 healthy. On  the  13th  of  May  the  thermometer  rose 
 to  102°  Fahr.  in  Dr.  Robinson's  tent  beside  the 
 village  ;  and  the  writer  can  testify  that  he  never 
 suffered  so  severely  from  the  effects  of  intense  heat 
 as  during  two  days  he  spent  in  the  plain  of  Jericho 
 in  April  1858.  The  heat  is  accounted  for  by  the 
 depression  of  the  plain,  which  is  about  1200  feet 
 below  the  level  of  the  sea.  The  reflection  of  the 
 sun's  rays  from  the  bare  white  cliffs  and  mountain 
 ranges  which  shut  in  the  plain,  and  the  noisome  ex- 
 halations from  the  lake,  and  from  the  numerous 
 salt  springs  around  it,  are  enough  to  poison  the 
 atmosphere. 
 
 Jericho  owed  its  ancient  wealth  and  importance 
 to  a  variety  of  circumstances.  First,  The  site  is 
 one  of  nature's  own  making.  Water  is  the  first 
 grand  requisite  for  an  eastern  city.  Plere  the 
 stream  of  the  Kelt,  issuing  from  a  sulilime  ravine, 
 flows  across  an  alluvial  plain.  A  little  more  than 
 a  mile  northward  is  the  large  fountain  of  Elisha  ; 
 and  still  farther  the  fountain  of  Diik.  I'ln-ee 
 copious  streams  thus  combined  by  the  aid  of  a 
 little  human  skill  and  industry  to  convert  a  parched 
 plain  into  a  paradise.  No  more  fitting  site  could 
 have  been  chosen  for  a  great  city. 
 
 Second,  The  climate  of  this  plain  is  different  from 
 that  of  any  other  part  of  Palestine  ;  it  is  in  fact  tro- 
 pical. The  people  of  the  country  soon  found  that 
 the  fruits,  spices,  and  perfumes  of  other  climes  could 
 be  grown  there  in  great  abundance.  The  palms  of 
 Jericho  equalled  those  of  Egypt.  The  gardens  of 
 Jericho  produced  the  sweet-smelling  /wnna,  called 
 '  camphire'  (Heb.  ~IS3),  in  the  English  version  of 
 Cant.  i.  14  ;  also  the  useful  myrobalan,  known  to 
 the  Arabs  as  zukkum  ;  and  the  rare  and  fragrant 
 balsam,  or  'balm  of  Gilead,'  which  was  in  ancient 
 times  so  highly  esteemed  both  as  a  perfume  and  a 
 medicine  (Gen.  xliii.  11  ;  Jer.  viii.  22;  xlvi.  11). 
 The  balsam  was  peculiar  to  Palestine  (Strabo,  xvi. 
 2  ;  Pliny,  xii.  25,  54)  ;  and  Josephus  informs  us 
 that  it  was  chiefly  produced  in  the  environs  of 
 Jericho  (A?itiij.  xiv.  4.  I  ;  xv.  4.  2).  In  addition 
 to  these  the  ordinaiy  fruits  grew  more  luxuriantly, 
 and  ripened  sooner,  in  the  plain  of  Jericho  than 
 elsewhere.    Josephus  is  lavish  in  his  praises  of  its 
 
JERIMOTH 
 
 503 
 
 JEROBOAM  I. 
 
 amazing  fertility.  He  calls  it  the  most  fertile  tract 
 in  Judaea — a  divine  region  {Oelou  xw/>ioc,  Bt'//.  Jud. 
 iv.  8.  3). 
 
 Third,  After  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  its 
 rich  plain,  the  site  of  Jericho  was  the  only  one  in 
 the  southern  section  of  the  Jordan  valley  adapted 
 for  a  great  city.  Fugitives  from  the  surrounding 
 country  vi'ould  naturally  concentrate  here,  and 
 Jericho,  when  founded,  would  become  what  Sodom 
 had  been,  the  capital  of  the  Arabah. 
 
 Fourth,  The  principal  parts  of  the  lower  Jordan 
 are  opposite  Jericho.  The  valley  is  bounded  on  the 
 west  by  a  steep  and  rugged  line  of  mountains  which 
 form  a  great  natural  barrier  to  that  division  of 
 Palestine.  The  two  main  passes  through  this 
 barrier — to  Jerusalem,  and  to  Bethel — converge  at 
 Jericho  ;  and  a  strong  city  built  there  would  thus 
 form  the  key  of  Palestine.  So  Josliua  found  it ; 
 and  when  Jericho  fell  the  way  was  opened  into  the 
 whole  countiy. 
 
 The  forest  gardens  and  verdant  fields  and 
 meadows  of  Jericho  must  have  been  a  glorious 
 sight  to  the  Israelites  from  the  mountain  sides  of 
 Moab,  and  to  Moses  from  the  top  of  Pisgah.  After 
 the  bare  rocks  of  vSinai,  and  the  bare  valley  of 
 Arabah,  and  the  bare  downs  of  Moab,  the  waving 
 palm  groves,  and  broad  plains  sparkling  with 
 streams,  and  the  wide  sea  would  seem  an  earthly 
 paradise.  And  desolate  as  tlie  piam  has  now  be- 
 come,  it  is  still  beautiful  to  tlie  eye  of  the  pilgrim, 
 after  his  six  hours'  weary  marcli  down  through  the 
 white  and  parched  wilderness  of  Judaea.  The 
 glory  of  the  'city  of  palm-trees'  has  long  since 
 passed  away  ;  but  the  beauty  of  the  site  is  peren- 
 nial.—J.  L.  P. 
 
 JERIMOTH     (nion'';    Vulg.    Jerimoth).     i. 
 
 ('lepLfJubd.)  A  lineal  descendant  of  Mushi,  son  of 
 Merari,  and  founder  of  one  of  the  Levitical  families 
 (l  Chron.  xxiv.  30).     [See  Jeremoth,  i.] 
 
 2.  (lepi.fj.ovd.)  One  of  the  Benei-Bela,  and  foun- 
 der of  one  of  the  patriarchal  houses  of  the  Benjam- 
 ites  (l  Chron.  vii.  7). 
 
 3-    (nVO''"T' ; 'Ie/"y"oi;^.)  One  of  the  Benei-Becher, 
 
 and  founder  of  another  of  the  Benjamite  families 
 (i  Chron.  vii.  8). 
 
 4.  CApLiMoi/d  ;  Alex.  'JapifiovO  ;  Vulg.  Jerivnith.) 
 A  Benjamite,  one  of  the  ambidextrous  warriors 
 who  joined  the  party  of  David  at  Ziklag  (i  Chron. 
 xii.  5). 
 
 5.  Clepifjucd.)  Son  of  Heman,  and  leader  of  the 
 fifteenth  course  of  musicians  (l  Chron.  xxv.  4). 
 [See  Jeremoth,  3.] 
 
 6.  ('IepLfj.d)d.)  Son  of  Azriel,  and  ruler,  (T>Jj)  or 
 
 prince  ("IK')  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  in  the  latter 
 
 part  of  the  reign  of  David  (i  Chron.  xxvii.  19). 
 
 7.  (lepL/noiid ;  Alex.  'Epfiovd.)  Son  of  David, 
 and  the  father  of  Mahalath,  the  wife  of  Rehoboam 
 (2  Chron.  xi.  18).  The  name  of  his  mother  is  not 
 known. 
 
 8.  i^lepLfXii-e.)  A  Levite,  one  of  the  officers  ap- 
 pointed by  Hezekiah  to  the  oversight  of  the  free- 
 will offerings  given  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
 priests  and  Levites  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  13). — S.  N. 
 
 JERIOTH  (niyn^ ;  Sept.  'lepLiLd),  the  wife  or 
 
 concubine  of  Caleb,  the  son  of  Hezron  (i  Chron. 
 ii.  18).  Her  descendants  are  not  mentioned,  but 
 they  probably  stood  in  the  genealogy,  and  were 
 oiijitiod  by  the  chronicler  for  some  reason.     If  we 
 
 I  knew  nothing  from  other  sources  of  Achsah,  the  iso 
 lated  mention  of  her  at  ver.  49  would  be  analotrous 
 to  the  mention  of  Jerioth  here.  The  Vulg.  makes 
 Jerioth  the  daughter  of  Azubah,  Caleb's  wife  ;  and 
 some  of  the  older  interpreters  regard  Jerioth  as 
 another  name  of  Azubah  ;  but  both  expedients  are 
 arbitrary. — -W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEROBOAM  I.  (DpT" ;  Sept.  'lepw^odfj.),  the 
 son  of  Nebat,  and  first  king  of  Israel,  who  became 
 king  B.C.  975,  and  reigned  22  years. 
 
 He  was  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  the  son  of  a 
 widow  named  Zeruiah,  when  he  was  noticed  by 
 Solomon  as  a  clever  and  active  young  man,  and 
 was  appointed  one  of  the  superintendents  of  the 
 works  vvliich  that  magnificent  king  was  carrying 
 on  at  Jerusalem.  This  appointment,  the  reward  of 
 his  merits,  might  have  satisfied  his  ambition,  had 
 not  the  declaration  of  the  prophet  Ahijah  given 
 him  higher  hopes.  When  informed  that,  by  the 
 divine  appointment,  he  was  to  become  king  ovc- 
 the  ten  tribes  about  to  be  rent  from  tlie  house  01 
 David,  he  was  not  content  to  wait  patiently  for  the 
 death  of  Solomon,  but  began  to  form  plots  and 
 conspiracies,  the  discovery  of  which  constrained 
 him  to  flee  to  Egypt  to  escape  condign  punish- 
 ment. The  king  of  that  country  was  but  too 
 ready  to  encourage  one  whose  success  must  neces- 
 sarily  weaken  the  kingdom  which  had  become 
 I  great  and  formidable  under  David  and  Solomon, 
 I  and  which  had  already  pushed  its  frontier  to  the 
 
 Red  Sea  (i  Kings  xi.  26-40). 
 I  When  Solomon  died,  the  ten  tribes  sent  to  call 
 Jeroboam  from  Egypt ;  and  he  appears  to  have 
 headed  the  deputation  which  came  before  the  son 
 of  Solomon  with  a  demand  of  new  securities  for 
 the  rights  which  the  measures  of  the  late  king  had 
 compromised.  It  may  somewhat  excuse  the  harsh 
 answer  of  Rehoboam,  that  the  demand  was  urged 
 by  a  body  of  men  headed  by  one  whose  pretensions 
 \i  ere  so  well  known  and  so  odious  to  the  house  of 
 David.  It  cannot  be  denied,  that  in  making  theii 
 applications  thus  offensively,  they  struck  the  first 
 blow  ;  although  it  is  possible  that  they,  in  the  first 
 instance,  intended  to  use  the  presence  of  Jeroboam 
 for  no  other  purpose  than  to  frighten  tlie  king  into 
 compliance.  The  imprudent  answer  of  Rehoboam 
 rendered  a  revolution  inevitable,  and  Jeroboam 
 was  then  called  to  reign  over  the  ten  tribes,  by  the 
 style  of  '  King  of  Israel'  (l  Kings  xii.  1-20). 
 
 The  general  course  of  his  conduct  on  the  throne 
 has  already  been  indicated  [Israel,  Kingdom  of], 
 and  need  not  be  repeated  in  this  place.  The  lead- 
 ing object  of  his  policy  was  to  widen  the  breach 
 between  the  two  kingdoms,  and  to  rend  asunder 
 those  common  interests  among  all  the  descendants 
 of  Jacob,  which  it  was  one  great  object  of  the  law 
 to  combine  and  interlace.  To  this  end  he  scrupled 
 not  to  sacrifice  the  most  sacred  and  inviolable  im 
 terests  and  obligations  of  the  covenant  people,  by 
 forbidding  his  subjects  to  resort  to  the  one  temple 
 and  altar  of  Jehovah  at  Jerusalem,  and  by  estab- 
 lishing shrines  at  Dan  and  Beth-el— the  extremities 
 of  his  kingdom— where  '  golden  calves '  were  set 
 up  as  the  symbols  of  Jehovah,  to  which  the  people 
 were  enjoined  to  resort  and  bring  their  offerings. 
 The  pontificate  of  the  new  establishment  he  united 
 to  his  crown,  in  imitation  of  the  Egj'ptian  kings. 
 He  was  officiating  in  that  capacity  at  Beth-el, 
 offering  incense,  when  a  prophet  appeared,  and  in 
 the  name  of  the  Lord  announced  a  coming  time, 
 
JEROBOAM  II. 
 
 504 
 
 JEROME 
 
 as  yet  far  off,  in  which  a  king  of  the  house  of 
 David,  Josiah  by  name,  should  burn  upon  that 
 unholy  altar  the  bones  of  its  ministers.  He  was 
 then  preparing  to  verify,  by  a  commissioned  pro- 
 digy, the  truth  of  the  oracle  he  had  delivered, 
 when  the  king  attempted  to  arrest  him,  but  was 
 smitten  with  palsy  in  the  arm  he  stretched  forth. 
 At  the  same  moment  the  threatened  prodigy  took 
 place,  the  altar  was  rent  asunder,  and  the  ashes 
 strewed  far  around.  This  measure  had,  however, 
 no  abiding  effect.  The  policy  on  which  he  acted 
 lay  too  deep  in  what  he  deemed  the  vital  interests 
 of  his  separate  kingdom,  to  be  even  thus  aban- 
 doned :  and  the  force  of  the  considerations  which 
 determined  his  conduct  may  in  part  be  appreciated 
 from  the  fact  that  no  subsequent  king  of  Israel, 
 however  well  disposed  in  other  respects,  ever  ven- 
 tured to  lay  a  finger  on  this  schismatical  establish- 
 ment. Hence  '  the  sin  of  Jeroboam  the  son  of 
 Nebat,  wherewith  he  sinned  and  made  Israel  to 
 sin,'  became  a  standing  phrase  in  describing  that 
 iniquity  from  which  no  king  of  Israel  departed  (i 
 Kings  xii.  25-33  ;  xiii.) 
 
 The  contumacy  of  Jeroboam  eventually  brought 
 upon  him  the  doom  which  he  probably  dreaded 
 beyond  all  others — the  speedy  extinction  of  the 
 dynasty  which  he  had  taken  so  much  pains  and 
 incurred  so  much  guilt  to  establish  on  firm  founda- 
 tions. His  son  Abijah  being  sick,  he  sent  his  wife 
 disguised  to  consult  the  prophet  Ahijah,  who  had 
 predicted  that  he  should  be  king  of  Israel.  The 
 prophet,  although  he  had  become  blind  with  age, 
 knew  the  queen,  and  saluted  her  with — '  Come  in, 
 thou  wife  of  Jeroboam,  for  I  am  sent  to  thee  with 
 heavy  tidings.'  These  were  not  merely  that  the 
 son  should  die — for  that  was  intended  in  mercy  to 
 one  who  alone,  of  all  the  house  of  Jeroboam,  had 
 remained  faithful  to  his  God,  and  was  the  only  one 
 who  should  obtain  an  honoured  gi'ave — but  that 
 his  race  should  be  violently  and  utterly  extin- 
 guished :  '  I  will  take  away  the  remnant  of  the 
 house  of  Jeroboam  as  a  man  taketh  away  dung, 
 till  it  be  all  gone'  (i  Kings  xiv.  1-18). 
 
 The  son  died  so  soon  as  the  mother  crossed  the 
 threshold  on  her  return ;  and  as  the  death  of 
 Jeroboam  himself  is  the  next  event  recorded,  it 
 vv^ould  seem  that  he  did  not  long  survive  his  son. 
 He  died  in  B.C.  954  (l  Kings  xiv.  20). 
 
 Jeroboam  was  perhaps  a  less  remarkable  man 
 than  the  circumstance  of  his  being  the  founder  of 
 a  new  kingdom  might  lead  us  to  expect.  The 
 tribes  would  have  revolted  without  him  ;  and  he 
 was  chosen  king  merely  because  he  had  been 
 pointed  out  by  previous  circumstances.  His  go- 
 vernment exhibits  but  one  idea — that  of  raising  a 
 barrier  against  the  re-union  of  the  tribes.  Of  this 
 idea  he  was  the  slave  and  victim  ;  and  although 
 the  barrier  which  he  raised  was  effectual  for  its 
 purpose,  it  only  served  to  show  the  weakness  of 
 the  man  who  could  deem  needful  the  protection 
 for  his  separate  interests  which  such  a  barrier 
 offered. 
 
 JEROBOAM  II.,  thirteenth  king  of  Israel, 
 son  of  Joash,  whom,  in  B.C.  824,  he  succeeded  on 
 the  throne,  and  reigned  forty-one  years.  He  fol- 
 lowed the  example  of  the  first  Jeroboam  in  keeping 
 up  the  idolatry  of  the  golden  calves.  Nevertheless 
 the  Lord  had  pity  upon  Israel,  the  time  of  its 
 ruin  was  not  yet  come,  and  this  reign  was  long 
 and  flourishing.     Jeroboam  brought  to  a  success- 
 
 ful result  the  wars  which  his  father  had  under- 
 taken, and  was  always  victorious  over  the  Syrians. 
 He  even  took  their  chief  cities  of  Damascus  and 
 Hamath,  which  had  formerly  been  subject  to  the 
 sceptre  of  David,  and  restored  to  the  realm  of 
 Israel  the  ancient  eastern  limits  from  Lebanon  to 
 the  Dead  Sea.  He  died  in  B.C.  783  (2  Kings  xiii. 
 13  ;  xiv.  16,  23-29). 
 
 The  Scriptural  account  of  this  reign  is  too  short 
 to  enable  us  to  judge  of  the  character  of  a  prince 
 under  whom  the  kingdom  of  Israel  seems  to  have 
 reached  a  degree  of  prosperity  which  it  had  never 
 before  enjoyed,  and  was  not  able  long  to  preserve, 
 -J.  K. 
 
 JEROHAM    (nrh\  ivho  pids  mercy;  LXX. 
 
 'lepe/neriX,  'lepo^od/j,,  'IwyodyU,  'lepodfi,  ^Jepadfi  ; 
 Vulg.  Jeroham).  Several  persons  bear  this  name. 
 I.  The  father  of  Elkanah,  and  grandfather  of 
 Samuel  the  prophet  (l  Sam.  i.  i  ;  i  Chron.  vi.  27, 
 34).  His  father's  name  is  variously  given  :  Elihu 
 (i  Sam.  i.  i),  Eliab  (i  Chron.  vi.  27),  Eliel  (i 
 Chron.  vi.  34). 
 
 2.  The  father  of  Adaiah,  a  priest  of  the  re- 
 turned captives,  and  son  of  Pashur,  whose  brethren 
 are  described  as  '  very  able  men  for  the  work  of  the 
 service  of  the  house  of  God'  (l  Chron.  ix.  12,  13. 
 It  is  surely  the  same  who  is  mentioned  Neh.  xi.  12, 
 notwithstanding  the  discrepancy). 
 
 3.  The  father  of  Azareel,  who  was  a  prince  of 
 the  tribe  of  Dan  in  the  days  of  David  (i  Chron. 
 xxvii.  22). 
 
 4.  The  father  of  Azariah,  one  of  the  '  captains 
 of  hundreds'  who  aided  Jehoiada  to  put  down  the 
 infamous  Athahah,  and  place  Joash,  the  righlful 
 heir,  on  tlie  throne  (2  Chron.  xxiii.  i). 
 
 5.  A  man  of  Benjamin,  the  father  of  six  sons, 
 who  were  of  '  the  heads  of  the  fathers,  by  their 
 generations,  chief  men'  (i  Chron.  viii.  27). 
 
 6.  A  man  of  Benjamin,  the  father  of  Ibneiah, 
 who  with  his  brethren  lived  in  Jerusalem  (i 
 Chron.  ix.  8). 
 
 7.  A  man  of  Gedor,  whose  sons,  described  as 
 'mighty  men,  helpers  in  the  war,' although  they 
 were  '  of  Saul's  brethren  of  Benjamin,'  yet  united 
 themselves  with  David  at  Ziklag  (i  Chron.  xii. 
 I,  2,  7).-L  J. 
 
 JEROME,  EusEBius  Hieronymus  Sophro- 
 Niu.s,  one  of  the  greatest  and  most  learned  of  the 
 Latin  fathers,  was  born  at  a  place  called  Striilon,  in 
 Dalmatia,  about  A.D.  346.  He  died  at  Bethlehem, 
 Sept.  30,  420.  The  name  of  his  father,  who  was 
 a  wealthy  man  and  a  Christian,  was  Eusebius.  At 
 the  age  of  18,  Jerome  was  sent  to  Rome,  where  he 
 studied  under  the  grammarian  Donatus.  He  does 
 not  appear  to  have  been  baptised  till  he  was  about 
 20,  and,  according  to  his  own  admissions,  he  fell 
 afterwards  into  a  course  of  dissipation,  though  not 
 to  the  extent  that  Augustine  had  so  deeply  to  de- 
 plore. After  a  residence  of  some  years  at  Rome, 
 he  travelled  into  Gaul,  Germany,  and  Britain.  At 
 Treves  he  commenced  the  study  of  theology,  ana 
 in  order  to  prosecute  it,  retired  into  a  cell  in  the 
 desert  of  Chalcis,  near  Antioch,  where  for  four 
 years  he  devoted  himself  to  a  life  of  penance  and 
 study.  Here  he  acquired  that  skill  in  the  Hebrew 
 language  for  which  he  afterwards  became  so  cele- 
 brated, and  which  he  turned  to  such  good  account. 
 He  also  visited  Palestine  and  Constantinople,  where 
 he  formed  a  friendship  with  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
 
lulird 
 
^j;^;;>v-\'^;"\riivii jjjmmijTmr~ 
 
 - — r^  Ihiii/)'  .Mount      Scopus 
 
 ■N 
 
 "^Hiij,, 
 
 _,  ,         S   \        J    ,J 
 
 3 
 
 T' 
 
 .r-.V"     rinir.l,  ,,1  111, 
 
 >r, 
 
 >M  o  11  11  I 
 
 /     o  1    o  I"  r  c  II  v  V 
 
 4A-  C.  Blue}.: 
 
 jExLgraired.  i^^  W  &  AX  c*  olmstoiL  Edin^ 
 
JERUBBAAL 
 
 505 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 at  that  time  bishop  there,  and  the  only  man  who, 
 since  St.  John,  had  won  the  title  of  'the  Divine.' 
 Jerome  calls  him  his  father,  preceptor,  and  cate- 
 chist.  It  was  here  that  he  translated  the  chronicle 
 of  Eusebius  and  14  homilies  of  Origen.  In  382  a 
 council  was  called  at  Rome  by  Damasus.  Jerome 
 attended  it  and  stayed  there  till  the  death  of  Damasus 
 in  385.  It  is  not  clearly  known  why  he  left  Rome, 
 but  he  does  not  seem  to  have  gained  the  affection 
 of  the  bishop  who  succeeded  Damasus.  On  leav- 
 ing Italy  he  retired  to  Bethlehem,  where  he  con- 
 tinued till  his  death. 
 
 His  works  are  partly  exegetical  and  partly  ex- 
 planatory. He  took  part  in  the  controversies 
 against  the  Arians,  Sabellians,  Luciferians,  and 
 Pelagians ;  wrote  commentaries  on  Ecclesiastes, 
 Canticles,  the  Prophets,  greater  and  less,  St.  Mat- 
 thew, and  St.  Paul's  Epistles  ;  also  QiicEstionum 
 Hebrakafiim  in  Gaiesim  liber  and  De  Viris  illustri- 
 bus,  and  35  short  notices  of  defenders  of  the  faith, 
 beginning  with  Peter  and  James  and  ending  with 
 himself  ;  but  the  great  work  for  which  he  is  chiefly 
 renowned  is  the  translation  of  the  Scriptures  from 
 the  Hebrew,  which  is  the  only  one  sanctioned  by 
 the  Council  of  Trent,  and  is  known  as  the  Vulgate. 
 It  is  uncertain  what  help  he  derived  in  this  work 
 from  tlie  Hexapla  and  the  older  Italic  versions  that 
 are  supposed  to  have  existed.  The  first  complete 
 edition  of  Jerome  was  that  by  Erasmus,  Basle  1516,- 
 9  vols.  fol.  There  is  also  the  Benedictine  edit. 
 1693-1706,  5  vols,  fol.;  andthatofVallarsi,  Verona 
 1734-42,  II  vols,  fol.,  reprinted  and  improved, 
 Venice  1766,  11  vols.  4to. — S.  L. 
 
 JERUBBAAL  ^))ir\\ ;  Sept.  'Ie/>o/3aaX  ;  Alex. 
 
 SiKaffTrjpiov  Tov  BciaX),  the  name  given  to  Gideon 
 in  consequence  of  his  destroying  the  altar  of  Baal 
 at  Ophrah  (Judg.  vi.  32).  The  name  is  a  com- 
 pound of  2"li  and  7^3,  and  may  signify  either, 
 Let  Baal  contend,  or  Be  it  contended  with  Baal ; 
 the  addition  13  shews  that  here  the  former  meaning 
 is  to  be  adopted.  In  the  A.  V.  the  giving  of  the 
 name  is  assigned  to  Joash,  the  father  of  Gideon  ; 
 but  instead  of  '  he  gave,'  it  is  better  to  use  the  in- 
 definite form  '  they  gave,'  i.  e.,  the  name  was 
 given  to  him  by  common  consent.  Instead  of 
 Jerubbaal  we  have  in  2  Sam.  xi.  21  the  name 
 Jerubbesheth  (Dt^'ST*),  in  which  nt'3  =  riil'^  is  a 
 
 term  used  by  the  Jews  as  a  substitute  for  Baal ; 
 
 comp.  ?y3t^'''X  Eshbaal,  i  Chron.  viii.  33  ;  ix.  39 
 for   the   nti'3£J'''X,    Ish-bosheth,    of   the    books    of 
 
 Samuel ;  ?y3"3''"10  Merib-baal,  I  Chron.  viii.  34, 
 for  ntJ'^^QD,  Mephibosheth,  etc.  The  name  Jerub- 
 baal appears  in  the  Grecised  form  of  Hierotnbal 
 (l€p6fj.^a\os)  in  a  fragment  of  Philo-Byblius  pre- 
 served by  Eusebius  (Prap.  Evang.  i.  9) ;  but  the 
 identity  of  name  does  not  authorise  us  to  conclude 
 that  it  is  Gideon  who  is  there  referred  to.  In  the 
 Palmyrene  inscriptions,  'Iapt/3oXos  appears  as  the 
 name  of  a  deity  (Gesenius,  Mo7mm.  Phcenic.  229  ; 
 Movers,  Phonizier,  i.  434). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JERUBBESHETH.    [Jerubbaal.] 
 
 JERUEL,    Wilderness    of    (^XIT"    "I3"!P ; 
 
 Sept.  r]  ip'rj/ji.os  ''lepirjK),  the  scene  of  the  discomfiture 
 of  the  Ammonites,  Moabites,  and  other  Arab  tribes 
 who  invaded  Judasa  in  the  reign  of  Jelioshaphat 
 
 (2  Chron.  xx.  16).  Although  not  mentioned 
 elsewhere,  the  situation  of  this  region  may  be 
 determined  with  tolerable  precision  from  the  cir 
 cumstantial  details  given  in  the  chapter  cited.  The 
 invading  tribes  havmg  marched  round  the  south  of 
 the  Dead  Sea  had  encamped  at  Engedi.  The  road 
 thence  to  Jerusalem  ascends  from  the  shore  by  a 
 steep  and  '  terrible  pass'  (Walcott,  Bib.  Sac.  i.  p. 
 69),  and  thence  leads  northwards,  passing  below 
 Tekoa  (Robinson,  Bib.  Pes.  i.  501,  50S).  Jehosha- 
 phat,  by  the  direction  of  Jahaziel,  goes  forth  from 
 Jerusalem  to  the  wilderness  of  Tekoa.  He  is  told 
 that  the  invaders  are  coming  up  by  the  ascent  of 
 Ziz  (or  Hazziz,  Sept.  'Ao-o-eis ;  Alex.  'Acrae ;  comp. 
 Bertheau,  ad  loc),  evidently  the  difficult  pass  just 
 mentioned,*  and  that  he  should  find  them  'at  the 
 end  of  the  brook  before  the  wilderness  of  Jeruel.' 
 Three  days  having  been  consumed  in  spoiling  the 
 dead,  he  leads  his  ai'my  to  the  valley  of  Berachah 
 (Bereikut)  to  offer  thanks  for  the  deliverance. 
 The  wilderness  of  Jeruel  must  therefore  have  been 
 traversed  by  the  road  from  Engedi  to  Jerusalem,  ad- 
 jacent to  the  wilderness  of  Tekoa,  and  distant  by  3 
 short  march  from  Bereikut.  In  all  these  respects 
 the  large  tract  of  table  land  called  el-Husasah  from, 
 a  wady  on  its  northern  side  (Robinson,  i.  527),  and 
 extending  '  in  verdant  slopes '  to  the  hill  country 
 about  Tekoa  (Walcott,  /.  c),  sr.tibfies  the  require- 
 ments of  the  narrative. — H.  C.  G. 
 
 JERUSALEM  (D''^ti>n'',  habitation  qx  foiinda- 
 tioti  of  peace ;  Sept.'Ie/)oi'(raX?7/x;  NvX^.  Hierosolyma; 
 
 Arab.   /ujjJillj  E.I  Kuds),  the  Jewish  capital  of 
 
 Palestine. 
 
 Part  I. — Name  and  History. — This  far- 
 famed  and  most  sacred  of  all  cities  has  a  name 
 which  at  once  suggests  inquiry  as  to  its  meaning 
 and  origin.  The  old  traditions  and  natural  pre- 
 possessions 'both  of  Jews  and  Christians  connect  it 
 with  that  Salem  of  which  Melchizedek,  the  priest 
 of  the  Most  High  God,  was  king,  and  there  is  no 
 doubt  that  it  is  the  place  which  the  Psalmist  had 
 in  view  when  he  sung—'  In  Judah  is  God  known  ; 
 his  name  is  great  in  Israel.  In  Salem  also  is  his 
 tabernacle,  and  his  dwelling-place  in  Zion.'  It  is 
 also  worthy  of  note  that,  at  the  conquest  of 
 Canaan  by  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  the  king 
 of  Jerusalem  had  a  name,  Adonizedek  {Lord  of 
 Righteousness),  almost  identical  in  meaning  with 
 that  of  Melchizedek  {King  of  Righteousness),  who 
 was  king  of  Salem  in  the  time  of  Abraham. 
 
 Josephus,  writing  in  Greek,  endeavours  to  clothe 
 the  Jewish  notions  on  the  subject  in  a  Greek  dress, 
 by  saying  that  the  city  having  been  formerly  called 
 'LoXvfxa,  received  the  name  of  'lepoaSXvpia,  or  the 
 sacred  Solyma,  from  its  Hebrew  captors.  This 
 would  be  an  easy  explanation  of  the  change  of  name 
 from  Salem  to  Jerusalem,  if  there  was  anything  m  the 
 
 prefixed  syllables  of  the  Hebrew  word,  ppK'llS  to 
 
 convey  that  idea  of  sacredness  which  is  asserted  by 
 the  Greek  prefix  "lepo.  It  is  needless  to  say  that 
 such  is  not  the  case.  Various  opinions  are  enter- 
 tained as  to  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  prefix,  but 
 
 *  Compare  the  account  given  by  Joseph.,  Antiq. 
 ix.  I,  evp-queiv  yap  avrous  eTrl  tt]s  fiera^ii  'lepoffoXij- 
 fj.ci3v  Kal  £'y7a'o577S  dca/Sctcrews. 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 BOS 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 none  of  them  quite  satisfactory  or  quite  consistent 
 with  the  rules  of  Hebrew  etymology.  We  may 
 dismiss,  almost  without  consideration,  supported 
 though  it  be  by  Lightfoot,  the  rabbinical  notion 
 that  the  word  Jerusalem  is  derived  from  Jireh.  the 
 name  given  to  the  place  by  Abraham  (Gen.  xxii. 
 14),  and  Shalem,  the  name  which  it  received  from 
 Shem,  whom  they  hold  to  be  the  same  person  as 
 Melchizedek.  Of  the  derivations  enumerated  by 
 Gesenius,  and  which  would  give  to  the  word  the 
 several  meanings  oi  fearing  peace,  fearing  Salem, 
 possession  of  peace,  Salem  a  possession,  honse  of  peace, 
 foundation  of  peace,  he  prefers  the  last,  expressing 
 this  name  in  German  by  the  word  Friedensgrund. 
 There  is  also  something  in  the  latter  part  of  the  word 
 which  is  suggestive  of  inquiry.  Though  the  letters 
 are  the  same  as  those  of  the  word  Salem,  the  vowel- 
 points  are  different,  the  one  being  written  Qpti', 
 Shalem,  and  the  other  DPC',  Shalaim,  and  in 
 some  places  with  the  insertion  of  a  *',  D  vtJ',  Shala- 
 
 jim.  This  gives  to  the  word  a  dual  character, 
 which  has  been  considered  referable  to  the  two 
 cities,  the  one  on  a  height  and  the  other  in  a  val- 
 ley, of  which  it  consisted.  Nor  is  it  unnatural  to 
 suppose  that  the  original  name  of  the  place  having 
 been  Salem,  it  might  in  the  course  of  time,  when  it 
 embraced  more  ground  within  its  circuit,  and  be- 
 came a  double  city,  have  acquired  a  pronunciation 
 which  described  to  the  ear  its  local  form  and  cha- 
 racter. At  the  conquest  of  Canaan  the  place  was 
 known  by  quite  another  name.  It  was  called 
 Jehus  or  Jebusi,  which  simply  means  the  city  of  the 
 Jebusite,  just  as  we  find  innumerable  French  towns 
 of  the  present  day  with  names  derived  from  tribes 
 enumerated  by  Caesar.  Thus  we  may  imagine 
 such  a  combination  of  words  as  Salem  Jebus,  or 
 Salem  Jebusi,  with  a  meaning  analogous  to  that  of 
 Lutetia  Parisionim  ;  and  as  Paris  is  the  only  por- 
 tion of  this  appellation  which  has  been  retained, 
 we  can  conjecture  how  Jebus  may  have  usurped 
 the  place  of  Salem  at  the  time  of  Joshua.  Some, 
 indeed,  have  supposed  that  the  word  Jebus  still 
 lies  concealed  in  the  first  syllables  of  the  word  Jeru- 
 salem, while  others  are  led  by  St.  Jerome  to  iden- 
 tify the  Salem  of  Melchizedek  with  that  '  Shalem, 
 a  city  of  Shechem,'  upwards  of  seventy  miles  to 
 the  north  of  Jerusalem,  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
 Scythopolis  (or  Bethshan),  to  which  Jacob  came 
 after  he  had  left  Padanaram  (Gen.  xxxiii.  18). 
 There  is  little,  however,  beyond  the  mere  assertion 
 of  St.  Jerome  to  contradict  the  uniform  tradition 
 both  of  Jews  and  Christians  ;  and  the  inference  we 
 are  disposed  to  draw  from  the  above  considerations 
 is  that  Jerusalem  was  originally  the  Salem  of  Mel- 
 chizedek, that  the  place  was  afterwards  familiarly 
 known  as  Jebusi  or  Jebus,  from  the  name  of  the 
 people  who  occupied  it,  while  its  older  name  was 
 itill  kept  in  memory  ;  and  that  it  received  the 
 name  of  Jerusalem  when  it  was  finally  conquered 
 by  David,  partly  in  memory  of  its  ancient  founder, 
 partly  to  indicate  the  secure  enjoyment  of  peace 
 which  the  acquisition  of  so  important  a  fortress 
 seemed  to  promise.  The  use  of  the  word  in 
 Joshua  and  Judges,  either  by  itself  or  as  an  equi- 
 valent of  Jebus,  was  probably  in  anticipation  of  the 
 name  which  it  afterwards  received.  The  dual  form 
 of  its  termination,  which  was  first  embodied  in  the 
 letters  of  the  word  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  400 
 years  after  its  conquest  by  David,  may  have  crept 
 
 gradually  into  use  ;  and  be  now  indicated  by  the 
 Masoretic  vowel-points  w/ierever  the  word  occurs, 
 because  it  had  long  since  been  established  as  its 
 proper  form  when  those  points  were  invented 
 (A.D.  500). 
 
 The  position  of  Jerusalem  was  such  as  to  make 
 it  a  place  of  leading  importance  at  the  time  of  the 
 invasion  of  the  land  by  Joshua  ;  and  we  accord- 
 ingly find  Adonizedek  its  '  king '  summoning  four 
 other  chieftains  of  the  land  to  punish  Gibeon  for 
 having  made  peace  with  Israel.  Its  great  strength 
 also  appears  in  the  fact  that  it  was  not  one  of  the 
 places  sacked  by  Joshua  after  he  had  slain  Adoni- 
 zedek and  the  other  four  kings  who  had  gone  up 
 with  him  against  Gibeon,  and  that  the  Jebusites 
 continued  to  hold  it  for  so  long  a  period  after- 
 wards. We  are  told  in  Joshua  (xv.  63)  that  the 
 children  of  Judah  could  not,  and  in  Judges  (i.  21), 
 after  an  account  of  the  taking  and  burning  of  Jeru- 
 salem by  the  children  of  Judah,  that  the  children  o* 
 Benjamin  did  not,  drive  out  the  Jebusites  ;  audit  ii 
 added  in  the  former  verse,  '  but  the  Jebusites 
 dwell  with  the  children  of  Judah,'  and  in  the  latter, 
 '  but  the  Jebusites  dwell  with  the  children  of  Ben- 
 jamin in  Jerusalem  unto  this  day.'  The  difficulty 
 of  dislodging  the  Jebusites,  followed  as  it  is  by 
 the  account  of  the  sacking  and  burning  of  Jeru- 
 salem, and  again  by  the  repetition  of  the  statement 
 that  the  Jebusites  continued  to  dwell  with  the  chil- 
 dren of  Israel  in  Jerusalem,  point  clearly  to  the 
 fact  of  the  natural  division  of  the  place  into  an 
 upper  and  lower  town.  Of  the  upper  town,  in- 
 closed within  powerful  defences  and  forming  the 
 stronghold  of  Zion,  the  Jebusites  no  doubt  main- 
 tained possession  while  the  rest  of  the  city  was  in 
 flames,  and  they  continued  to  dwell  there  after  the 
 chikh-en  of  Benjamin  had  established  themselves  in 
 the  valley  at  its  foot,  or  on  contiguous  but  lower 
 heights.  This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  authority 
 of  Josephus,  from  whom  we  also  learn  that  the 
 children  of  Judah,  disappointed  in  their  attempt 
 upon  the  upper  town,  withdrew  to  Hebron,  about 
 thirty  miles  to  the  south  of  Jerusalem.  This  would 
 naturally  give  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  an  opportunity 
 for  occupying  the  ruined  town  which  Judah  had 
 abandoned  ;  as  the  boundary  line  which  separated 
 the  northern  edge  of  the  territoiy  apportioned  to 
 Judah  from  the  southern  edge  of  that  apportioned 
 to  Benjamin  passed  through,  or  close  to  Jerusalem, 
 possibly  at  the  foot  of  Zion*  (comp.  Josh.  xv.  8, 
 and  xviii.  28,  with  Ps.  xlviii.  2). 
 
 The  stronghold  of  Zion,  which  was  thus  main- 
 tained by  the  Jebusites  in  this  first  recorded  siege 
 of  Jerusalem  (B.C.  1443)  continued  in  their  hands 
 throughout  the  whole  of  the  troubled  times  of 
 the  judges,  and  the  early  days  of  the  kingdom  of 
 Israel.  It  was  about  400  years  afterwards,  accord- 
 ing to  the  chronology  of  the  A.  V. — though 
 not  more  than  200  according  to  another  compu- 
 putation  t— that  David  the  man  offndah,  having 
 finally  triumphed  over  the  house  of  Saul  the  Ben- 
 jamite,  and  being  firmly  established  on  the  throne 
 i  of  the  kingdom  of  all  Israel  as  well  as  Judah 
 (B.C.  1048),  in  that  Hebron  which  had  been  the 
 
 *  There  is  a  rabbinical  tradition  that  part  of  the 
 Temple  was  in  the  lot  of  Judah,  and  part  of  it  in 
 that  of  Benjamin  (Lightfoot,  vol.  i.  p.  1050,  London 
 1684. 
 
 t  See  article  Genealogy. 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 5U7 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 chief  city  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  ever  since  its  first 
 ineffectual  attempt  on  the  stronghold  of  Zion, 
 gathered  together  his  forces  for  a  fresh  attempt  on 
 the  fortress  which  had  hitherto  baffled  the  efforts 
 of  its  Hebrew  invaders.  Great  as  was  the  reputa- 
 tion of  David,  the  confidence  of  the  men  of  Jehus 
 was  still  greater.  As  the  Hebrew  armies  lay 
 round  about  them,  they  shouted  insultingly  from 
 their  walls  :  '  Except  thou  take  away  the  blind  and 
 the  lame  thou  shalt  not  come  in  hither.'  The 
 simplest  interpretation  of  this  insult  seems  to  be 
 that  the  lame  and  the  blind,  the  most  infirm  and 
 helpless  of  the  place,  were  exhibited  on  the  walls  as 
 a  sufficient  defence  against  its  besiegers.  Others 
 have  thought  that  the  idols  of  the  Jebusites  were  so 
 displayed,  and  that  the  words  lame  and  blind  were 
 used  ironically  and  derisively  in  allusion  to  the 
 terms  in  which  those  idols  were  spoken  of  by  the 
 
 Israelites.  This  futile  taunt,  however,  only  served 
 to  rouse  the  indignation  of  the  divinely  assisted 
 hero  whom  the  giant  of  Gath  had  once  so  vainly 
 cursed  by  his  gods,  threatening  to  give  his  flesh  to 
 the  fowls  of  the  air  and  the  beasts  of  the  field.  A 
 fresh  impulse  was  added  to  the  zeal  of  the  be- 
 siegers, and  the  hill  of  Zion  was  taken. 
 
 Jerusalem  was  now  made  the  capital  of  the  united 
 kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah,  and  Zion  its  strong- 
 hold, henceforth  dignified  by  the  name  of  the  City 
 of  David,  became  the  residence  of  the  king,  and 
 the  site  of  that  royal  palace,  for  the  building  of 
 which  'cedar  trees,  and  carpenters  and  masons'  were 
 furnished  by  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre.  The  position 
 of  the  new  capital,  with  reference  to  the  territories 
 of  the  several  tribes,  was  eminently  suited  to  give  it 
 a  commanding  influence  among  them.  It  rested 
 on  the  southern  edge  of  that  grand  and  lofty  pla- 
 
 ^f^T|^' 
 
 264.   Jerusalem. 
 
 teau  which — interrupted  only  by  the  valley  of 
 Esdraelon  crossing  it  mid-way  between  its  northern 
 and  southern  extremity — occupies  the  entire  area 
 of  the  Holy  Land  between  the  valley  of  the  Jordan 
 and  the  low  lands  bordering  on  the  Mediterranean 
 Sea.  And  yet  it  did  not  occupy,  like  Hebron, 
 Shechem,  and  other  great  cities  of  Israel,  the  crest 
 of  one  particular  hill,  but  was  seated  at  a  height 
 of  some  3000  feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea,  at  a 
 point  on  the  eastern  edge  of  the  great  southern 
 table-land  which  is  protected  on  its  south  and  east 
 sides  by  two  deep  valleys  or  ravines  running  down 
 from  the  west  and  north,  and  joining  at  its  south- 
 east corner,  where  they  form  the  head  of  a  deep 
 winding  cleft  rather  than  valley,  which  reaches  to 
 the  Dead  Sea,  and  forms  the  dry  bed  of  the  Kedron. 
 This  stream  also  gives  its  name  to  the  ravine  which 
 comes  from  the  north  and  protects  Jerusalem  on 
 the  east,  while  the  southern  ravine  is  known  as  the 
 valley  of  Hinnom.  Jerusalem  being  thus  defended 
 against  invaders  on  the  south  and  east,  and  partly 
 
 on  the  north,  by  these  ravines,  is  open  and  able  to 
 extend  itself,  and  hold  ready  communication  with 
 the  whole  country  towards  the  west  and  north- 
 west over  the  undulating  height  of  the  plateau  on 
 which  it  rests.  This  peculiarity  of  position  is  the 
 key  to  much  of  its  subsequent  histoiy. 
 
 But  Jerusalem  was  something  more  than  the  civil 
 capital  of  the  kingdom.  It  was  the  place  which 
 had  been  fore-ordained  by  the  wisdom  of  God  to 
 be  its  spiritual  centre,  the  Holy  City  to  which  the 
 tribes  of  the  Lord  were  to  go  up  every  year  to  cele- 
 brate at  different  seasons  their  three  great  festivals. 
 David  accordingly  proceeded  to  invest  it  with  that 
 sacredness  of  character  which  it  was  to  possess 
 throughout  all  future  ages.  The  ark  of  the  cove- 
 nant, that  mysterious  testimony  of  God's  favour 
 and  presence  which  had  been  constructed  accord- 
 ing to  his  express  directions  in  the  wilderness,  was 
 still  resting  at  Kirjath-jearim,  where  it  had  remained 
 ever  since  the  high -priesthood  of  Eli  and  those 
 terrible  manifestations  of  its  sanctity  which  fell  both 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 508 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 on  Philistines  and  Israelites  after  its  removal  from 
 the  tabernacle  at  Shiloh.  This  sacred  receptacle 
 with  its  mysterious  contents  David  now  resolved  to 
 carry  to  Jerusalem.  But  its  progress  to  its  in- 
 tended shrine  was  again  arrested  by  the  anger  of 
 God,  which  burst  with  fatal  violence  on  the  head 
 of  Uzzah,  a  man  who  had  ventured  to  steady  it 
 with  his  hand  as  it  tottered  with  the  motion  of  the 
 cart  which  bore  it  on  its  way.  The  revered  and 
 dreaded  object,  left  once  more  in  charge  of  a  private 
 person,  became  a  blessing  to  those  who  sheltered 
 it  with  reverence,  and  David  was  again  encouraged 
 to  carry  out  his  purpose.  This  time  a  troop  of 
 Levites  was  employed  to  bear  it  with  staves  on 
 their  shoulders,  according  to  the  directions  of  the 
 law  of  Moses,  and  David  himself  headed  a  great 
 procession,  which  conducted  it  in  triumph,  with 
 music,  and  singing,  and  dancing,  to  the  tabernacle 
 prepared  for  it  on  Mount  Zion.  We  then  find 
 David  performing  the  functions  of  priest  as  well  as 
 king,  offering  burnt-offerings  and  peace-offerings, 
 and  I)lessing  the  people  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 
 He  also  appointed  certain  Levites  to  minister  be- 
 fore the  ark  continually,  and  to  '  record,  and  to 
 thank  and  praise  the  Lord  God  of  Israel.' 
 
 In  the  meantime  the  building  of  Jerusalem,  and 
 its  enclosure  within  walls  of  wider  circuit  than 
 those  which  had  surrounded  the  Jebusite  city,  was 
 carried  on  with  that  zeal  which  distinguished  all 
 the  actions  of  the  poet  king.  But  he  could  not  see 
 the  contrast  between  his  own  palace,  adorned  with 
 kingly  magnificence,  and  the  slight  structure  which 
 sheltered  the  ark,  without  fervent  desires  to  build 
 for  it  a  temple  more  suited  to  the  majesty  of  God. 
 Besides  which,  the  divine  oracles  seemed  to  point 
 at  a  centralization  of  his  worship  which  was  not  yet 
 realized  ;  for  while  the  'ark  of  the  covenant'  was 
 enshrined  in  the  City  of  David,  the  tabernacle  of 
 the  Lord  was  at  Gibeon,  and  there  the  whole 
 ritual  of  the  Mosaic  law  continued  to  be  observed 
 by  the  high-priest  and  his  attendant  priests  and 
 Levites. 
 
 His  pious  wish  was  made  known  to  the  prophet 
 Nathan,  who  at  first  applauded  the  design,  but 
 was  afterwards  instructed  by  special  revelation  to 
 forbid  its  present  accomplishment,  while  he  fore- 
 told the  perpetual  establishment  of  the  house  of 
 David,  and  the  birth  of  a  son  who  would  carry  out 
 his  father's  purpose  in  more  peaceful  times. 
 
 There  are  many  passages  in  the  life  of  David 
 which  one  cannot  read  without  feeling  how  deeply 
 we  are  indebted  to  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  and 
 the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  his  church  for 
 the  purity  of  Christian  morals.  For  while  David 
 has  left  on  record  in  his  Psalms  the  fullest  evidence 
 of  that  fervour  of  devotion  and  confidence  in  God, 
 and  that  deep  himiility  and  penitence  which  made 
 him  the  man  after  God's  own  heart,  we  find  him 
 living  in  the  unrestrained  practice  of  such  habits 
 as  are  now  universally  felt  to  weaken  the  moral 
 sense  and  deteriorate  the  character.  Already  while 
 he  reigned  at  Hebron,  the  number  of  his  wives  and 
 concubines  was  considerable,  and  we  read  that  he 
 took  him  more  concubines  and  wives  out  of  Jeru- 
 salem after  he  was  come  from  Hebron.  This  was 
 in  direct  disobedience  to  the  law  of  Moses  (Deut. 
 xvii.  17),  and  v/ith  it  was  connected  much  of  the  sin 
 and  sorrow  of  his  subsequent  history.  We  need  only 
 refer  to  his  evening  walk  '  on  the  roof  of  the  king's 
 house,'  followed  by  the  crimes  of  adultery  and 
 murder,  to  the  incest  committed  bv  Aninon,  and 
 
 the  murder  committed  by  Absalom — too  faithfu] 
 imitators  of  their  father's  errors — and  to  the  revolt 
 of  Absalom,  and  his  incestuous  intercourse  with  his 
 father's  concubines  in  the  sight  of  all  Israel,  on  the 
 same  spot  which  had  been  the  scene  of  David's 
 temptation  and  sin.  These  melancholy  transac- 
 tions, interspersed  with  victories  over  the  Philis- 
 tines and  other  heathen  nations,  and  terminated  by 
 his  sorrowful  triumph  over  his  own  misguided  son, 
 occupied  about  twelve  years,  and  brought  David  to 
 the  sixty-third  year  of  his  age. 
 
 Our  next  scene  in  the  history  of  Jerusalem  is  one 
 of  affecting  interest.  About  six  years  after  the  last 
 event,  David  was  moved,  contrary  to  the  advice  of 
 Joab,  to  make  a  census  of  the  people  of  Israel  and 
 Judah,  either  for  the  purpose  of  taxation  or  to  as- 
 certain the  number  of  fighting  men  he  could  com- 
 mand. By  so  doing  he  incurred  the  displeasure  of 
 God,  who,  to  punish  him  for  his  fault,  destroyed 
 70,000  of  his  subjects  by  a  pestilence  of  three  days' 
 duration.  The  destroying  angel  was  standing  over 
 Jerusalem  on  Mount  Moriah,  his  hand  was  uplifted 
 and  ready  to  fall  upon  the  city,  when  the  Lord 
 said,  'It  is  enough,  stay  now  thine  hand.'  This 
 occurred  near  the  threshing-floor  of  Oman  or 
 Araunah,  a  Jebusite,  and  probably  of  the  blood 
 royal  of  that  race  ;  at  the  same  place,  according  to 
 Jewish  tradition,  where  Abraham  had  his  knife  un- 
 sheathed to  slay  his  son.  David  himself  saw  the 
 angel  standing  between  earth  and  heaven  with  the 
 drawn  sword  in  his  hand,  and  by  his  command, 
 conveyed  through  the  prophet  Gad,  he  set  up  an 
 altar  on  the  threshing-floor  of  Araunah,  the  site  of 
 which  he  purchased  for  600  shekels  of  gold  (having 
 given  50  shekels  of  silver  for  the  threshing-floor 
 itself  v/ith  the  oxen  and  materials  for  sacrifice). 
 This  spot  thus  distinguished  by  these  two  instances 
 of  God's  sparing  mercy,  and  about  to  be  still 
 further  honoured  by  its  near  proximity  to  the  place 
 of  the  great  sacrifice  for  the  sin  of  the  world,  was 
 selected  by  the  Lord  as  the  site  of  his  future  temple. 
 David  recognised  the  divine  purpose  in  the  fire 
 which  came  down  from  heaven  to  consume  his 
 burnt-offering,  and  he  devoted  the  short  remainder 
 of  his  life  to  the  collection  of  materials  for  a  fabric 
 of  exceeding  magnificence  to  be  reared  on  the  spot 
 after  his  death  by  his  son  Solomon. 
 
 Solomon  was  very  young  when  he  succeeded  his 
 father  (b.  c.  1015).  Josephus,  followed  by  Light- 
 foot,  says  twelve,  but  he  was  probably  a  few  years 
 older.  No  prince  could  display  greater  wisdom  and 
 magnificence  than  he  did  in  the  works  which  occu- 
 pied him  during  the  first  twenty  years  of  his  reign. 
 The  Temple,  for  which  he  made  preparations,  with 
 the  help  of  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  during  three 
 years,  and  of  which  another  Hiram,  born  in  Tyre, 
 but  of  Hebrew  descent,  was  architect,  occupied 
 seven  years  and  a  half  in  building,  and  was  com- 
 pleted and  dedicated  B.  C.  1004.  The  ark  of  the 
 covenant  was  brought  with  imposing  ceremonies, 
 and  placed  in  the  Holy  of  Holies  beneath  the 
 wings  of  the  cherubim.  The  tabernacle  also,  and 
 all  its  sacred  vessels,  were  conveyed  thither  from 
 Gibeon,  and  probably  deposited  as  sacred  memo- 
 rials within  its  walls  (l  Kings  viii.  4  ;  2  Chron.  v. 
 5  ;  Lightfoot,  vol.  i.  p.  2063).  The  name  of  the 
 high-priest  at  this  time  was  Azariah  ;  he  was  a  de- 
 scendant, perhaps  grandson  (cf.  I  Kings  vi.  2  ;  I 
 Chron.  vi.  8-10),  of  Zadok,  who  was  high-priest  at 
 Gibeon  when  David  brought  the  ark  from  Kirjath- 
 jearim,  and  was  of  the  house  of  Eleazar,  the  eldest 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 609 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 ton  of  Aaron — the  high-priesthood  of  the  house  of 
 Ithamar,  Aaron's  younger  son,  having  been  for- 
 feited through  the  sins  of  Hophni  and  Phineas, 
 and  having  terminated  in  Abiathar,  from  wliora  it 
 was  talcen  by  Solomon  for  his  share  in  the  revolt  of 
 Adonijah  (i  Kmgs  ii.  35).  After  the  completion 
 of  the  Temple,  Solomon  surrounded  Jerusalem  with 
 strong  walls  and  towers,  and  filled  it  with  magnifi- 
 cent structures  —  his  own  palace,  tlie  vast  estab- 
 lishment for  his  chariots  and  horses,  the  palace 
 which  he  built  for  Pharaoh's  daugliter,  and  the 
 palace  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon.  Li  the  mean 
 time  other  cities  were  built  in  different  parts  of  his 
 dominions;  he  formed  alliances  with  powerful 
 princes,  and  carried  on  a  lucrative  commerce  with 
 Egypt  by  land,  with  Eastern  Africa  and  Lidia  by 
 the  Red  Sea,  and  with  Spain  and  Western  Africa  by 
 the  Mediterranean.  By  his  wealth  and  influence, 
 and  the  prestige  of  his  power,  he  extended  the  range 
 of  his  dominion  from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Nile  (i 
 Kings  iv.  21  ;  2  Chron.  ix.  26).  At  the  beginning 
 of  his  reign  he  organised  a  government,  at  the 
 head  of  which  was  Azariah,  the  son  (or  grandson) 
 of  Zadok,  who  was  afterwards  high-priest.  Light- 
 foot  says  that  his  office  was  that  of  chief  of  the 
 Sanhedrim.  This  incient  and  venerable  council  is 
 supposed  to  have  originated  in  the  seventy  elders 
 appointed  by  Moses  to  help  him  to  govern  the 
 people  in  the  wilderness,  and  is  believed  by  some 
 to  have  continued  throughout  the  whole  ]ieriod  of 
 the  Jewish  history,  while  others  contend  that  it 
 existed  as  a  national  council  only  from  the  time  of 
 the  Maccabees. 
 
 But  Solomon,  who  filled  the  world  with  the 
 fame  of  his  wisdom,  and  received  so  many  testi- 
 monies of  the  favour  of  God  during  his  youth  and 
 manhood,  was  at  length  infatuated  by  the  same 
 seductions  which  brought  so  much  sorrow  on 
 his  father.     Towards  the  close  of  his  reign — 
 
 His  heart,  though  large, 
 Beguiled  by  fair  idolatresses  fell 
 To  idols  foul ; 
 
 and  he  built  temples  for  Ashtorethj  Chemosh,  and 
 Milcom  on  the  right  hand  (;.  e.,  the  south  side)  of 
 the  Mount  of  Corruption  (i  Kings  xi.  7  ;  2  Kings 
 xxhi.  13).  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  means 
 on  one  or  more  of  the  four  hills  lying  to  the  east  of 
 Jerusalem,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  valley  of  the 
 Kedron,  and  constituting  together  what  we  know 
 as  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The  name  Con-uption 
 \  Hammashchith)  seems  to  have  been  given  to  this 
 range  of  hills  on  account  of  its  desecration  by 
 Solomon,  and  to  be  a  sort  of  play  upon  the  word 
 Hammishchah,  which  means  unction,  and  which 
 u  may  be  supposed  to  have  derived  from  the  olives 
 for  which  it  was  famous.  These  temples  con- 
 tinued to  give  a  character  of  unholiness  to  the 
 ground  which  was  afterwards  made  so  holy  by  the 
 footsteps  of  our  Lord,  till  Josiah  removed  them, 
 about  360  years  afterwards.  The  same  dishonour 
 was  done  to  the  Valley  of  Hinnom  on  its  south 
 side,  by  the  establishment  there  of  the  worship  of 
 Molech  (2  Kings  xxiii.  10). 
 
 Grievous  troubles  fell  upon  Solomon  as  a  punish- 
 ment for  these  sins,  the  worst  of  them  all  being 
 the  threatened  disruption  of  his  kingdom  under  his 
 son  and  successor  Rehoboam.  Egypt,  the  old 
 enemy  of  Israel,  was  the  fosterer  of  this  revolution ; 
 Jeroboam,  who  had  been  announced  by  prophecy 
 tts  its  instrument,  having  sought  shelter  there  from 
 
 the  expected  indignation  of  Solomon.  After  Solo- 
 mon's death,  the  separation  of  the  kingdoms  took 
 place  through  Rehoboam's  weakness  and  folly, 
 and  it  was  followed  (B.  C.  972),  in  the  fifth  year  of 
 his  reign,  by  an  invasion  of  his  kingdom,  and  a 
 siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Shishak,  king  of  Egypt. 
 Rehoboam  made  no  attempt  to  withstand  him, 
 but  cowered  within  the  wails  of  the  city,  which 
 Shishak  plundered  of  all  its  treasures.  He  then 
 retired  without  doing  further  injury  to  its  inhabi- 
 tants. 
 
 His  grandson  Asa  was  a  thoughtful  and  high- 
 minded  prince,  who  did  much  by  his  zeal  and 
 influence  to  banish  idolatry  and  its  attendant  gross 
 immorality  from  Jerusalem.  He  repelled  a  vast 
 Cushite  army  which  invaded  his  kingdom,  and  en- 
 riched himself  with  its  spoils,  much  of  which 
 he  devoted  to  the  service  of  the  Temple,  in  place 
 of  the  treasures  of  which  it  had  been  rifled  by 
 Shishak.  But  he  made  use  of  these  same  dedi- 
 cated treasures  to  purcliase  the  help  of  Benhadad, 
 king  of  Syria,  against  Baasha,  king  of  Israel,  who 
 made  war  upon  him,  B.  C.  930,  and  imprisoned 
 the  prophet  Hanani,  who  reproached  him  with 
 this  sin. 
 
 His  son  Jehoshaphat  was  an  upright  and  most 
 powerful  monarch,  who  promoted  religion  and  the 
 administration  of  justice,  and  gained  great  influence 
 over  neighbouring  nations  ;  but  he  acted  inconsis- 
 tently in  making  alliances  both  with  Ahab  and  Aha- 
 ziah,  the  wicked  kings  of  Israel,  and  married  his  son 
 Joram  to  Athaliah,  Ahab's  daughter.  The  influ- 
 ence of  this  wretched  marriage  pervaded  the  three 
 following  reigns  of  Joram,  Ahaziah,  his  son  by 
 Athaliah,  and  Athaliah  herself,  who  made  her 
 way  to  the  throne  by  destroying  all  the  princes  01 
 the  house  of  Judah  except  the  infant  Joash,  her 
 own  grandchild,  who  was  snatched  out  of  her 
 hands,  and  educated  in  the  Temple  till  he  was 
 seven  years  old.  She  and  her  sons  (2  Chron. 
 xxiv.  7) — Lightfoot  interprets  natural  sons,  and 
 Hales  adhei-ents — partially  destroyed  the  Temple, 
 and  took  from  it  the  holy  things,  which  they 
 dedicated  to  the  service  of  Baal.  But  she  was 
 overthrown  and  put  to  death  by  Jehoiada,  the 
 high-priest  and  guardian  of  young  Joash,  B.  C. 
 878. 
 
 The  temple  and  worship  of  Baal  were  imme- 
 diately destroyed,  and  as  long  as  Jehoiada  lived, 
 Joash  submitted  himself  to  his  guidance,  and  did 
 much  for  the  good  of  his  people  and  the  restoration 
 of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  But  he  was  a  weak 
 prince,  and  on  Jehoiada's  death  fell  into  idolatry, 
 and  put  Zechariah,  the  son  of  Jehoiada,  to  death, 
 for  his  testimony  against  it.  He  bought  off  Hazael 
 from  an  invasion  of  Jerusalem  by  the  gift  of  the 
 treasures  of  the  Temple,  and  perished  by  the  hands 
 of  his  own  servants,  B.  C.  839. 
 
 His  son  and  successor  Amaziah  made  war  against 
 Joash,  king  of  Israel,  who  defeated  and  took  him 
 prisoner,  broke  down  400  cubits  of  the  wall  of 
 Jerusalem,  and  plundered  the  Temple.  He  died 
 the  victim  of  a  conspiracy,  B.C.  810. 
 
 Uzziah,  his  son,  was  veiw  successful  in  war,  and 
 greatly  strengthened  the  fortifications  of  Jenisalem, 
 which  he  furnished  with  engines  for  throwing  great 
 stones  and  arrows.  His  long  reign  of  fifty-two 
 years  was  the  age  of  the  prophets  Hosea,  Joel, 
 Amos,  and  Isaiah,  and  was  marked  by  the  occur- 
 rence of  three  terrible  judgments,  which  had  been 
 the  subject  of  prophetic  warnings — an  earthquake  ,• 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 510 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 d  plague  of  locusts,  caterpillars,  and  cankerworms  ; 
 and  an  extreme  drought.  Uzziah  died  a  leper  for 
 having  dared  to  burn  incense  on  the  altar  of  in- 
 cense in  the  Temple,  B.C.  758. 
 
 The  reigns  of  Jotham  and  Ahaz  followed — the 
 former  a  good  prince,  who  built  the  gate  between 
 the  king's  house  and  the  Temple  ;  the  latter  an 
 idolater,  who  caused  his  sons  to  pass  through  the 
 fire  to  Molech,  and  by  tr)'ing  to  gain  the  help  of 
 the  Assyrians  against  Israel  gave  them  a  footing 
 in  Jerusalem.  Isaiah  and  Micah  continued  to 
 prophesy  during  these  reigns. 
 
 Hezekiah  succeeded  Ahaz,  and  was  an  eminent 
 reformer  of  religion  and  restorer  of  the  Temple  and 
 temple  worship,  not  only  destroying  every  vestige 
 of  idolatry  in  Judah,  but  inviting  all  the  people  of 
 Israel,  in  spite  of  the  laughter  and  derision  of  many 
 of  them,  to  come  up  and  keep  the  passover  in 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 Assyria  was  now  at  the  height  of  her  glory  and 
 ambition.  She  had  already,  B.C.  721,  taken  pos- 
 session of  Samaria  and  carried  the  ten  tribes  into 
 captivity.  She  had  acquired  an  ascendency  over 
 Judah,  and  was  endeavouring  to  subjugate  Egypt. 
 Hezekiah,  however,  had  resisted  her  authority,  and 
 Sennacherib,  the  Assyrian  monarch,  stopped  in  his 
 progress  towards  Egypt  to  reassert  his  supremacy 
 over  Judah  and  obtain  tangible  proofs  of  submis- 
 sion from  her  king.  Hezekiah  was  alarmed,  and 
 once  more  the  Temple  was  stripped  of  its  treasures 
 to  avert  the  anger  of  a  heathen  conqueror.  But 
 Sennacherib,  so  far  from  being  appeased  by  this 
 gift,  sent  his  messenger  Rabshakeh,  not  impro- 
 bably an  apostate  Jew,  to  threaten  Jerusalem  with 
 destruction  unless  its  inhabitants  would  submit  to 
 his  dictation  and  consent  to  migrate  where  he 
 pleased.  After  the  delivery  of  this  message  Rab- 
 shakeh retired,  and  the  consternation  of  the  people 
 was  only  relieved  by  the  assurance  of  Divine  aid 
 given  to  them  by  the  prophet  Isaiah.  It  was  pro- 
 bably after  this  that  Hezekiah  constructed  his 
 famous  works  for  drawing  the  waters  of  the  Gihon 
 from  their  source  into  the  city  to  supply  the 
 citizens,  and  distress  the  enemy,  in  the  event  of  a 
 siege. 
 
 After  Sennacherib's  attempt  on  Egypt  he  re- 
 turned towards  Jerusalem,  approaching  it  from  the 
 west,  and  this  time  encamped  his  whole  vast  army 
 near  its  walls,  in  a  place  which  was  known  long  after- 
 wards as  the  camp  of  the  Assyrians.  It  was  made 
 famous  by  his  terrible  and  complete  discomfiture, 
 185,000  of  his  host  having  died  by  the  visitation  of 
 God  in  one  night.  Hezekiah,  meanwhile,  had  re- 
 covered, by  Divine  interposition,  from  a  disorder 
 of  great  malignity ;  and  the  report  of  his  danger 
 and  miraculous  restoration  having  spread  as  far  as 
 Babylon,  Merodach-Baladan,  its  viceroy  under  the 
 Assyrian  king,  sent  messengers  to  congratulate 
 him  on  the  event.  Hezekiah,  in  the  thoughtless 
 exuberance  of  his  feelings,  showed  them  all  his 
 treasures.  The  treasures  of  Jerusalem  seem  at  all 
 times  to  have  been  famous,  quickly  replaced  after 
 spoliation,  and  ever  offering  a  fresh  bait  to  the 
 cupidity  of  invaders  ;  but  it  is  probable  that  ob- 
 jects were  displayed  at  this  time  which  had  hitherto 
 escaped  notice. 
 
 By  this  act  of  ostentation  Hezekiah  incurtea  the 
 severe  displeasure  of  God,  and  was  forewarned  by 
 the  prophet  that  all  these  things,  together  with 
 many  of  his  own  descendants,  would  one  day  be 
 carried  captive  to  Babylon.     This   propliecy  re- 
 
 ceived a  parti.ii  fulfilment  in  the  reign  of  his  sot 
 Manasseh,  who  re-established  idolatry  under  it: 
 most  repulsive  forms,  for  he  was  himself  carried 
 captive  to  Babylon  by  the  Assyrians,  and  there 
 repented  of  his  siu.  After  a  captivity  of  twelve 
 years  he  was  released,  and  on  his  return  to  Jeru- 
 salem strengthened  the  fortifications  of  the  city  and 
 laboured  to  extirpate  the  idolatry  which  he  had 
 established.  His  son  Amon,  however,  revived  it, 
 and  continuing  impenitent,  was  killed  through  a 
 conspiracy  of  his  own  servants  (B.C.  641). 
 
 Josiah  his  son  began  his  reign  at  eight  years  of 
 age,  under  the  tutelage  of  the  high-priest.  He 
 was  one  of  the  best  kings  of  Judah,  and  began  at  an 
 early  age  to  seek  after  the  God  of  his  father  David. 
 Before  he  was  eighteen  he  had  destroyed  the  idols 
 and  places  of  idolatrous  worship  throughout  all  the 
 land  of  Israel  as  well  as  Judah  ;  and  then  began  to 
 repair  the  breaches  of  the  house  of  the  Lord.  ,  The 
 discovery  of  the  books  of  the  law  by  Hilkiah  the 
 high-priest,  during  the  progress  of  these  repairs,  led 
 to  the  celebration  of  a  passover  in  strict  accordance 
 with  the  Mosaic  rule,  after  a  neglect  of  centuries. 
 But  Jerusalem  and  its  kings  were  to  become  in 
 volved  in  the  mighty  struggle  which  at  this  time 
 [  agitated  the  rival  powers  of  the  East.  The  Medes: 
 and  Babylonians  had  risen  against  Assyria  and 
 were  besieging  Nineveh  ;  and  the  Egyptian  Pharaoh 
 Necho  took  advantage  of  the  distress  of  Assyria  to 
 make  an  attempt  on  Carchemish — one  of  its  im. 
 jiortant  posts  on  the  Euphrates.  As  he  was 
 advancing  from  the  sea  coast,  through  the  valley 
 of  Esdraelon,  for  this  purpose,  Josiah  encountered 
 him  at  Megiddo,  and  there  received  his  death 
 wound.  He  was,  however,  carried  to  die  at  Jeru- 
 salem. Of  the  three  sons  whom  he  left — Eliakim, 
 Jehoahaz  or  Shallum,  and  Zedekiah — Jeiioahaz 
 was  elected  king  by  the  people  ;  but  Pharaoh 
 Necho  deposed  hnn,  and  carried  him  captive  into 
 Egypt  on  his  return  from  his  expedition  into 
 Assyria,  having  taken  Carchemish  (B.C.  608).  He 
 also  placed  his  elder  brother  Eliakim  upon  the 
 throne,  changing  his  name  to  Jehoiakim  ;  and  he 
 imposed  a  heavy  fine  upon  the  people. 
 
 The  next  visit  paid  to  Jerusalem  was  that  of 
 Nebuchadnezzar.  It  is  doubtful  at  what  time,  but 
 probably  after  the  victory  which  he  in  his  turn 
 obtained  over  Pharaoh  Necho  at  Carchemish  (B.C. 
 605),  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim.  He  obliged 
 Jehoiakim  to  acknowledge  himself  his  subject,  and 
 took  some  treasure  and  captives  to  Babylon,  among 
 the  rest  Daniel  and  the  'three  Hebrew  children.' 
 But  Jehoiakim  rebelling  three  years  afterwards, 
 Jerusalem  was  beset  by  the  tributaries  of  Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, who  carried  on  a  harassing  warfare 
 against  it  until  his  death,  in  the  eleventh  year  of  his 
 reign.  His  son  Jehoiakim  succeeded  him,  and 
 Jerusalem  being  now  besieged  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
 in  person,  he  came  out  with  his  mother,  servants, 
 princes,  and  officers,  and  delivered  himself  into  his 
 hands.  Then  it  was  that  Nebuchadnezzar  took 
 possession  of  all  the  treasures  of  the  king's  house 
 and  of  the  Temple,  and  carried  away  from  Jeru- 
 salem all  the  princes  and  chief  men,  as  well  as  all 
 the  ingenious  craftsmen  and  artificers,  and  all  that 
 were  strong  and  apt  for  war,  leaving  only  the 
 poorest  of  the  people;  and  over  these  he  set  an 
 uncle  of  Jehoiachin  to  whom  he  gave  the  name  of 
 Zedekiah,  and  '  made  him  swear  by  God '  that  he 
 would  remain  his  s^ibject  (Ezek.  xvii.  14).  This 
 oath  Zedekiah  (2  Chron.  xxxvi.  13)  broke,  trustuig 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 511 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 in  the  help  of  Pharaoh  Hophra,  king  of  Egyjit ; 
 and  thereby  not  only  provoked  the  vengeance  of 
 Nebuchadnezzar  but  iilcurred  the  anger  of  God. 
 Nebuchadnezzar  invested  Jerusalem  on  the  tenth 
 day  of  the  tenth  month  (B.C.  588),  in  the  ninth 
 year  of  Zedekiah.  Engines  of  war  raised  on  heights 
 ■about  the  vi^alls  hurled  weighty  missiles  into  the 
 city,  :he  walls  were  battered  with  rams,  and  famme 
 and  pestilence  prevailed  within  them.  There  was 
 a  temporary  lull  in  the  siege,  during  which  the 
 Chaldean  army  went  to  meet  the  Egyptians  who 
 were  coming  to  the  relief  of  Jerusalem,  but  the 
 Eg)-ptians  returned  back  without  an  encounter,  and 
 the  siege  was  resumed.  The  wall  was  broken  on 
 the  ninth  day  of  the  fourth  month  of  the  second 
 year  of  the  siege,  and  Zedekiah  secretly  took  flight, 
 passing  over  the  Mount  of  Olives  towards  the  Jor- 
 dan ;  but  he  was  taken  near  Jericho  and  conveyed 
 to  Riblah  in  Coele-Syria,  on  the  extreme  north 
 of  Palestine,  where  Nebuchadnezzar  was  watching 
 from  afar  the  siege  of  Tyre.  There  his  two  sons 
 were  slain  before  his  eyes,  and  he  was  deprived  of 
 sight  and  carried  to  Babylon.  There  also  were 
 slain  Seraiah  the  chief  priest  and  Zephaniah  the 
 second  priest,  three  doorkeepers  of  the  Temple, 
 five  officers  of  the  court,  two  of  the  army,  and 
 sixty  persons  of  note  who  were  found  in  Jerusalem. 
 The  rest  of  the  people,  with  the  remaining  treasure 
 of  the  Temple — some  of  it  broken  in  pieces  for 
 facility  of  removal,  including  the  great  brazen  sea 
 and  the  two  pillars  Jachin  and  Boaz — were  carried 
 away.  This  was  the  third  great  deportation  of 
 captives  and  treasure  from  Jerusalem  to  Babylon. 
 It  was  effected  by  Nebuzaradan  about  a  month  after 
 the  siege.  He  completed  his  work  by  burning  the 
 Temple  and  the  city,  and  razing  the  walls  to  the 
 ground.  From  this  time  the  land  '  enjoyed  her 
 sabbaths'  till  the  end  of  the  seventy  years. 
 
 Sacred  and  profane  histoiy  agree  with  the 
 general  tradition  of  the  East,  and  the  testimony  of 
 ancient  inscriptions,  in  asserting  the  fact  that  in  the 
 latter  part  of  the  6th  century  before  Christ  a  prince 
 named  Cyrus,  of  the  hitherto  unimportant  state  of 
 Persia,  conquered  the  greater  part  of  Asia.  This 
 prince,  whom  the  Lord  by  the  mouth  of  the  pro- 
 phet Isaiah  had  named  as  his  '  shepherd '  and  his 
 '  anointed  one  '  200  years  before,  wrested  Babylon 
 out  of  the  hands  of  Belshazzar  (53S  B.C.)  at  the 
 very  moment  when  he  was  profaning  the  vessels 
 of  the  Lord's  house  by  using  them  at  his  impious 
 revels.  The  successes  of  this  conqueror  had  been 
 foretold  in  the  ancient  writings  of  a  people  whom 
 he  found  in  captivity  within  its  walls,  and  he  was 
 glad  to  co-operate  with  the  Divine  Being  who  had 
 thus  singled  him  out  as  his  instrument  in  restoring 
 that  people  to  their  own  land  and  enabling  them 
 to  raise  again  the  Temple  and  the  city  on  which 
 their  hearts  still  dwelt  with  such  tender  recollec- 
 tion. 
 
 From  a  comparison  of  Ezra  i.  I  with  Daniel  ii. 
 I  we  may  infer  that  after  the  capture  of  Babylon 
 Cyrus  set  '  Darius  the  Mede '  upon  the  throne, 
 perhaps  conjointly  with  himself,  giving  him  the 
 dignity  of  the  position  while  he  undertook  its  toils 
 and  responsibilities.  Certain  it  is,  that  in  the  first 
 year  of  his  own  reign  he  invited  any  among  the 
 Jews  who  might  feel  so  disposed  to  go  up  to  Jeru- 
 salem and  build  the  house  of  the  Lord  God  of 
 Israel,  and  directed  all  those  that  remained  to  assist 
 them  liberally  with  treasure,  while  he  restored  to 
 them  all  the  sacred  vessels  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
 
 liad  taken  from  the  Temple.  Joshua  and  Zerub- 
 babel  were  the  leaders  of  the  noble  band  of  42,360, 
 comprising  within  it  members  of  the  royal  family, 
 priests,  Levites,  servants  of  the  Temple,  and  private 
 persons,  which  set  out  from  Babylon  to  re-colonise 
 the  country  of  their  forefathers. 
 
 Seven  months  were  spent  in  the  necessary  work 
 of  settling  themselves  in  the  different  cities  of  the 
 holy  land  to  which  their  families  belonged,  after 
 which  they  all  collected  together  at  the  ruins  ot 
 Jerusalem.  Their  first  work  on  arriving  there  was 
 to  set  up  an  altar  to  the  Lord,  their  next  to  lay  the 
 foundation  of  the  Temple.  They  were  soon  hindered 
 by  the  officious  zeal  of  some  of  their  neighbours, 
 who  first  proposed  to  assist  them  in  their  work  and 
 afterwards  represented  it  as  a  source  of  danger  to 
 the  Persian  empire.  Other  casualties,  incident  to 
 all  new  settlements,  delayed  their  operations,  and 
 at  length  the  representations  of  their  enemies  led 
 to  a  stoppage  of  the  works  by  order  of  Artaxerxes 
 (the  pseudo-Smerdis  who  succeeded  Cambyses,  B.C. 
 522)^  but,  urged  by  the  exhortations  of  Haggai 
 and  Zechariah,  who  reproached  the  people  with 
 living  in  'ceiled  houses'  while  the  Temple  lay  waste, 
 Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  began  the  work  again  in 
 the  second  year  of  Darius  Hystaspes  ;  and  on  a 
 report  of  their  preceedings  being  sent  to  that  prince 
 by  Tatnai,  the  Persian  governor  of  the  province, 
 he  caused  a  search  to  be  made,  and  the  original 
 decree  of  Cyrus  for  the  building  of  the  Temple  being 
 discovered,  he  not  only  ordered  it  to  proceed,  but 
 directed  Tatnai  and  his  subordinate  officers  to  co- 
 operate heartily  in  the  work  ;  which  went  on  so 
 prosperously  that  it  was  completed,  and  the  feast  ol 
 its  dedication  kept,  in  the  sixth  year  of  his  reign 
 (B.C.  515). 
 
 An  interval  of  fifty-eight  years  follows,  of  which 
 M'e  have  no  account,  but,  on  the  first  day  of  the 
 seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  (457  B.C.), 
 Ezra,  a  priest  of  the  line  of  Eleazar,  with  a  small 
 party  of  seventeen  or  eighteen  hundred  men  of  all 
 classes,  left  Babylon  furnished  with  a  commission 
 from  Artaxerxes  to  collect  money  for  the  temple 
 service,  and  inquire  into  the  state  of  the  Jews  at 
 Jerusalem.  His  journey  occupied  four  months, 
 and  on  his  arrival  he  found  it  necessary  to  effect  an 
 important  and  very  difficult  reform  among  the 
 people  who  were  already  settled  in  the  land ;  for 
 priests,  Levites,  and  persons  of  all  classes  had 
 broken  the  Mosaic  law  by  connecting  themselves 
 with  women  of  heathen  parentage.  The  matter 
 was  solemnly  brought  before  the  L'  rd  and  the 
 assembled  people  with  prayers,  humiliations,  and 
 confessions  of  sin.  A  plan  of  examination  into  the 
 several  cases  was  agreed  upon,  and  the  evil  was 
 put  an  end  to  by  the  voluntary  submission  of  those 
 who  had  transgressed. 
 
 Eleven  years  afterwards  Jerusalem  was  visited  by 
 another  eminent  reformer,  Nehemiah,  a  great  Jewish 
 officer  of  the  court  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus. 
 Morally  and  externally  the  Holy  City  was  at  this 
 time  in  a  lamentable  condition,  its  walls  unbuilt, 
 its  houses  in  ruins,  and  mixed  marriages  and  other 
 bad  practices  continued.  A  report  of  the  state  of 
 things  determined  Nehemiah,  with  the  sanction  and 
 credentials  of  his  royal  master,  who  appointed  him 
 Tirshatha,  or  governor  of  the  district,  to  visit  Jeru- 
 salem. His  arrival  caused  dismay  to  the  principal 
 foreigners,  one  of  whom  had  a  daughter  married 
 into  the  high-priest's  family.  On  the  third  day 
 after  hi.s  arrival  he  made  a  secret  inspection  of  the 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 612 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 walls  by  niglit,  and  soon  afterwards  called  all  the 
 people  together,  and  exhorted  them  to  lay  them- 
 selves out  with  one  accord  for  the  work  of  rebuild- 
 ing them  ;  and  they  undertook  this  work  with  so 
 much  system,  zeal,  and  perseverance,  that  in  spite 
 of  the  opposition,  both  open  and  secret,  of  the 
 powerful  foreigners,  which  obliged  them  to  build 
 with  arms  in  their  hands  and  be  ready  at  any 
 moment  for  a  hostile  interruption,  the  whole  wall 
 was  finished  in  fifty-two  days.  Other  work  was 
 done  in  the  meantime,  usury  renounced,  restitution 
 made,  a  genealogical  enumeration  of  the  people 
 recorded,  and  strict  and  self-denying  economy  intro- 
 duced. Public  readings  and  explanations  of  the 
 law  by  Ezra,  and  an  appointed  staff  of  priests  and 
 Levites,  were  set  on  foot.  The  Feast  of  Taber- 
 nacles was  celebrated  for  the  first  time  since  the 
 days  of  Joshua  (Neh.  viii.  17),  a  solemn  fast  with 
 confession  of  sin  was  held,  and  a  covenant  of 
 obedience  made  and  signed  in  the  name  of  the 
 people,  of  princes,  priests,  and  Levites.  The 
 numbers  who  were  to  live  at  Jerusalem  were,  ap- 
 pointed, and  an  unceasing  effort  made  by  the  great 
 and  good  Nehemiah  to  correct,  by  his  personal 
 influence,  every  practice  inconsistent  with  the 
 character  of  the  people  of  God. 
 
 In  the  last  chapter  of  the  book  of  Nehemiah, 
 which  closes  the  inspired  records,  we  learn  that 
 one  of  the  sons,  i.e.,  grandsons,  of  Joiada  the  son 
 of  Eliashib,  the  high-priest,  w-as  son-in-law  to  San- 
 ballat  the  Horonite.  This  disposition  to  an  ad- 
 mixture wiih  powerful  foreigners  on  the  part  of 
 the  rulers  of  the  people  is  a  key  to  much  of  their 
 subsequent  history. 
 
 Eliashib  was  succeeded  in  the  high-priesthood  by 
 his  son  Joiada,  and  he  in  time  by  his  son  Jonathan 
 or  Johanan  (Neh.  xii.  11,  22),  who  killed  his  own 
 brother  Joshua  in  the  Temple  for  ha\'ing  endea- 
 voured through  Persian  influence  to  supplant  him 
 in  his  office.  Jonathan  had  two  sons,  Jaddua  and 
 Manasseh.  It  was  Manasseh  who  had  married  the 
 daughter  of  the  Horonite.  He  seems  notwith- 
 standing this  to  have  had  at  one  time  some  share  in 
 the  high-priesthood  at  Jerusalem  (Josephus),  but 
 being  obliged  to  give  it  up,  probably  through  the 
 same  influence  which  caused  the  expulsion  of  To- 
 biah  from  the  Temple  (Neh.  xiii.  8),  he  became  the 
 first  priest  of  the  Samaritan  temple  on  Mount 
 Gerizim.  Jaddua  succeeded  Jonathan.  He  is  the 
 high-priest  who  is  said  to  have  met  Alexander  the 
 Great,  with  a  company  of  priests  in  white  robes, 
 when  he  came  from  the  siege  of  Tyre  with  hostile 
 intentions  to  Jerusalem.  Jaddua  had  refused  to 
 assist  him  against  Tyre  on  account  of  his  allegiance 
 to  Darius,  but  he  obtained  his  favour  and  important 
 immunities  for  the  Jews  by  shewing  him  the  pro- 
 phecies concerning  himself  in  the  book  of  Daniel. 
 Jaddua  was  succeeded  by  Onias  I.  the  year  before 
 the  death  of  Alexander. 
 
 The  short-lived  empire  which  Alexander  raised 
 on  the  ruins  of  the  empire  of  Persia  split  at  his 
 death  into  four  kingdoms  (Dan.  xi.  1-4),  governed 
 by  four  of  his  generals.  These  were  Thrace,  ruled 
 by  Lysimachus,  Asia  Minor  by  Antigonus,  Syria 
 by  Seleucus  Nicator,  and  Egypt  by  Ptolemy  Soter. 
 Tn  320  B.C.  Ptolemy  Soter  made  an  incursion  into 
 Syria  and  took  Jerusalem,  his  conquest  being 
 facilitated  by  the  refusal  of  the  Jews  to  fight  on 
 the  Sabbath.  Tliey  suffered  severely  afterwards, 
 and  multitudes  of  the  people  were  carried  captive  to 
 Egypt  and  Northern  Africa. 
 
 The  possession  of  Jerusalem  was  secured  to  the 
 Ptolemies  by  the  defeat  of  Antigonus  at  Ipsus, 
 B.C.  301,  and  remained  in  their  hands  for  more 
 than  100  years.  In  the  following  year  Simon  the 
 Just  succeeded  Onias  I.  in  the  high-priesthood. 
 He  adorned  the  Temple,  extended  and  deepened  its 
 foundations,  and  strengthened  the  walls  of  the 
 city.  Under  the  peaceful  rule  of  the  Ptolemies 
 Jerusalem  increased  in  wealth  and  prosperity. 
 
 Philadelphus,  the  immediate  successor  of  Soter, 
 caused  the  Hebrew  Bible  to  be  translated  into 
 Greek  [Septuagint.]  He  also  made  many  pre- 
 sents to  the  Temple.  This  was  during  the  high- 
 priesthood  of  Eleazar,  who  had  succeeded  his  bro- 
 ther Simon  the  Just,  B.C.  291  ;  Eleazar,  \}i\t  brother, 
 was  succeeded  by  Manasseh,  the  uncle,  and  he  by 
 Onias  II.,  the  son  of  Simon  the  Just.  Onias  II. 
 was  of  a  mean  and  covetous  disposition  ;  he  a.1 
 lowed  the  tribute  payable  to  Egypt  to  fall  into 
 arrear  for  a  long  time,  and  when  Ptolemy  Eueigetes 
 sent  to  reclaim  it,  he  allowed  his  nephew  Joseph 
 to  go  to  Egypt  and  plead  for  its  remission.  Joseph 
 not  only  succeeded  in  this  object,  but  obtained  from 
 the  court  of  Egypt  for  himself  and  his  family  the 
 valuable  privilege  of  farming  the  revenues  of 
 Judaea,  Samaria,  Phoenicia,  and  Coele-Syria.  This 
 was  a  source  of  such  great  wealth  to  his  house  that 
 it  soon  rivalled  that  of  the  high-priest  in  power  and 
 influence,  while  the  quarrels  and  intrigues  which 
 this  rivalry  occasioned  provoked  the  interference 
 of  the  ruling  state. 
 
 From  Onias  II.  the  high-priesthood  descended 
 successively  to  Simon  II.  his  son,  and  Onias  III. 
 his  grandson.  During  the  high-priesthood  of 
 Simon  II.,  Ptolemy  Philopator, who  had  succeeded 
 Euergetes  (B.C.  221),  visited  Jerusalem,  and  offered 
 a  sacrifice  in  the  court  of  the  Temple,  but  to  his 
 extreme  indignation  was  prevented  by  Simon  from 
 entering  the  sanctuary.  This  offence  cost  the 
 Jews  a  good  deal  of  persecution  and  the  loss 
 of  many  immunities  which  they  had  previously  en- 
 joyed. 
 
 But  the  power  soon  passed  into  other  hands. 
 Antiochus  the  Great,  king  of  Syria,  the  great 
 grandson  of  Alexander's  general  Seleucus  Nicator, 
 had  already  endeavoured  without  success  to  wrest 
 from  Ptolemy  Philopator  the  provinces  of  Phoe- 
 nicia, Palestine,  and  Ccele-Syria,  which  he  claimed 
 as  belonging  to  his  own  kingdom.  The  attempt 
 was  renewed  with  various  results,  v^'hen  Philopatoi 
 was  succeeded  by  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  a  child  of 
 five  years  old  (B.C.  105),  but  it  was  not  till  B.C. 
 198  that  he  was  finally  successful.  In  that  year  he 
 gained  a  decisive  victory  over  Scopas  the  Egyptian 
 general.  Jerusalem  opened  her  gates  to  receive 
 him,  and  the  Jews  were  glad  to  help  him  in  reduc- 
 ing the  garrison  which  Scopas  had  the  year  before 
 set  over  their  city. 
 
 As  long  as  Antiochus  lived,  and  in  the  first  year 
 of  his  son  Seleucus  Philopator,  Jerusalem  enjoyed 
 great  prosperity  under  its  excellent  high-priest 
 Onias  III.  But  Seleucus  was  induced  by  a 
 wretched  informer  named  Simon  to  attempt  to 
 gain  possession  of  the  treasures  of  the  Temple. 
 His  own  treasurer  Heliodorus,  who  afterwards 
 murdered  him,  was  sent  to  execute  this  act  of 
 spoliation,  but  was  deterred  from  its  performance 
 by  a  terrible  appearance,  which  is  recorded  in  2 
 Maccab.  iii.  But  the  whole  story  is  rendered 
 doubtful  by  the  silence  of  Josephus. 
 
 Seleucus  Philopator  was  succeeded  by  his  brother, 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 513 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 the  detestable  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  B.C.  175.  : 
 Onias  IIL,  who  was  then  high-priest,  had  two  ! 
 brothers,  Joshua,  and  another  also  named  Onias.  | 
 Joshua  changed  his  name  to  Jason,  and  having  | 
 purchased  the  high-priesthood  from  Antiochus,  | 
 forced  his  brother  out  of  the  office,  and  did  his 
 utmost  to  introduce  into  Jerusalem  the  morals  and  ' 
 customs  of  a  Greek  city.     He  established  a  gym-  ; 
 
 nasium,  and  induced  his  young  countrymen  to 
 practise  the  Grecian  games,  and  to  pay  court  to 
 the  king  by  calling  themselves  Antiochians.  Jason 
 was  in  his  turn  ousted  from  the  high-priesthood  by 
 the  third  brother  Onias,  who  took  the  name  of 
 Menelaus,  and  robbed  the  temple  to  pay  to 
 Antiochus  the  price  of  his  office.  Thence  ensued 
 party    riots    and    merciless    slaughter.      Antiochus 
 
 285.  jCTusaX^m.— The  Modern  City. 
 
 was  at  this  time  in  Egypt,  of  which  he  had  almost 
 effected  the  conquest,  on  the  plea  of  re-asserting 
 his  claim  to  the  possession  of  Ccele-Syria  and 
 Palestine.*  On  his  return  from  Egypt  he  visited 
 Jerusalem,    to    quell   the    disturbances    and    take 
 
 *  These  territories  had  been  given  up  to  Egypt 
 on  the  betrothal  of  Cleopatra,  daughter  of  An- 
 tiochus the  Great,  to  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  and 
 were  reclaimed  by  Syria  on  account  of  her  death 
 before  marriage. 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 vengeance  on  the  partizans  of  Pompey.  Massacre 
 and  pillage  followed.  The  Temple  was  once  more 
 robbed  of  its  treasures,  and  a  great  train  of  cap- 
 tives carried  to  Antioch.  Two  years  afterwards 
 there  was  a  fresh  attack  upon  Jerusalem.  Fresh 
 slaughter,  fresh  pillage,  and  burning  of  the  city. 
 A  Syrian  garrison  seized  and  fortified  a  height 
 within  the  city  called  the  Acra.*   The  Temple  was 
 
 *  It  is  difficult  to  say  whether  this  height,  called 
 Acra,    or  the  hill  on  which   the  upper  city  was 
 
 2  L 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 514 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 profaned  by  idolatrous  rites,  enactments  were 
 made  against  the  practice  of  the  Jewish  ritual, 
 persecution  and  martyrdom  followed. 
 
 All  this  led  to  an  insurrection,  which  was  begun 
 at  some  distance  from  Jerusalem  by  an  aged  man 
 of  priestly  family  named  Mattathias,  the  father  of 
 five  sons.  His  noble  opposition  to  the  tyrant 
 aroused  a  war  of  independence,  in  the  first  year  of 
 which  he  died.  But  he  left  behind  him  a  family 
 of  heroes.  His  son  Judas  gained  signal  victories 
 over  the  Syrians,  and  thereby  obtained  for  himself 
 and  his  race  the  surname  of  Maccabeus,  from  the 
 Hebrew  word  Makkab,  a  hammer.  Having  con- 
 quered Lysias,  a  general  of  Antiochus,  at  Bethzur 
 (i;.C.  165),  he  repaired  to  Jerusalem,  and  found 
 the  sacred  enclosures  of  the  Temple  encumbered 
 with  ruins,  the  altar  of  burnt-offering  surmounted 
 by  an  altar  to  Jupiter,  the  sanctuaiy  open  and 
 empty,  and  the  whole  place  overgrown  with 
 shrubs  and  herbage. 
 
 He  cleansed  and  repaired  it,  and  it  was  once 
 more  dedicated  to  God  (b.  c.  165),  three  years 
 after  its  desecration.  He  also  fortified  the  Temple, 
 and  placed  in  it  a  Jewish  garrison,  the  Syrian 
 garrison  retaining  possession  of  the  Acra,  and  an- 
 noying the  people  by  frequent  sallies.  Judas  at- 
 tempted the  siege  of  this  place  the  year  after,  but 
 was  withdrawn  from  it  by  an  attack  made  on 
 I'ethzur,  one  of  his  own  strongholds,  by  Antiochus 
 Eupator,  who  had  just  succeeded  his  father  Epi- 
 phanes.  His  small  force  was  defeated,  and  his 
 brother  Eleazer  killed  by  one  of  the  elephants  of 
 the  king's  army  near  Bethzur,  and  he  was  himself 
 obliged  to  retire  within  the  fortress  of  the  Temple. 
 There  he  was  besieged  for  a  considerable  time, 
 hut  at  last  accepted  the  terms  offered  to  him  by 
 Antiochus,  who  was  called  away  to  resist  the  claim 
 of  his  cousin  Demetrius  to  the  throne  of  Syria. 
 Demetrius,  who  was  in  fact  the  lawful  heir,  was 
 successful,  and  Antiochus  and  his  general  Lysias 
 were  slain.  Representations  against  Judas  were 
 immediately  made  to  the  new  king  by  Alcimus 
 (Eliakim),  a  Hellenizing  Jew  of  priestly  descent, 
 who,  by  the  influence  of  Lysias,  had  been  ap- 
 pointed high-priest  on  the  death  of  Menelaus. 
 Demetrius  sent  him  back  to  Jerusalem  with  Bac- 
 chides,  one  of  his  own  officers,  and  a  large  force, 
 to  act  against  Judas.  But  nothing  was  accom- 
 I^lished  beyond  the  murder  of  sixty  of  the  pious 
 Jews  who  trusted  themselves  to  Alcimus,  be- 
 cause he  was  high-priest  and  of  the  family  of 
 Aaron.  Demetrius  sent  another  army  against 
 Judas  under  the  Syrian  general  Nicanor,  but  Judas 
 was  now  victorious,  and  Nicanor  obliged  to  take 
 refuge  in  the  Acra.  From  that  stronghold  he 
 sallied  out  on  one  occasion  and  cruelly  interrupted 
 the  worshippers  in  the  Temple,  but  having  obtained 
 reinforcements,  and  again  met  Judas  in  the  field, 
 he  was  beaten  and  killed,  and  his  head  and  right 
 arm  carried  away  and  nailed  up  in  Jerusalem. 
 Judas  Maccabeus  died  B.  c.  161,  leaving  his 
 lirothers  Jonathan  and  Simon  to  carry  on  the 
 work  he  had  begun. 
 
 There  Avere  now  two  parties  at  Jerusalem — the 
 pious  Jews  or  Chasidim,   a  word  Grecised  into 
 
 built,  was  the  original  Mount  Sion.  The  former 
 lay  to  the  north,  the  latter  to  the  west,  of  Mount 
 Moriah,  a  hill  of  lower  elevation,  which  was  occupied 
 by  the  Temple  and  its  precincts,  and  is  sometimes 
 called  the  *  Mountain  of  the  House  of  the  Lord.' 
 
 Assidasi,  connected  with  the  Maccabees,  and  the  so- 
 called  impi'»'is  or  Hellenizing  faction,  under  the  lead 
 of  Alcimus,  who,  acting  with  Bacchides,  strength- 
 ened the  Acra,  and  placed  within  it  as  hostages 
 the  children  of  some  of  the  principal  families  of 
 Judaea.  He  was  on  the  point  of  making  some  ob- 
 jectionable alteration  in  the  structure  of  the  Temple 
 when  he  died  ;  after  which  Bacchides  returned  to 
 Antioch,  and  things  remained  quiet  at  Jerusalem 
 for  some  years,  the  Syrian  garrison,  however,  still 
 holding  the  Acra  and  retaining  the  hostages. 
 
 In  153  B.  c.  there  was  a  new  claimant  for  the 
 throne  of  Syria — Alexander  Balas,  calling  himself 
 the  son  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  This  added  to 
 the  power  of  the  Maccabees,  for  both  parties 
 courted  them  ;  so  that  Jonathan  was  able  to  release 
 the  hostages  from  the  Acra,  to  repair  the  city, 
 and  fortify  Mount  Sion.  He  was  also  appointed 
 to  the  high-priesthood  by  Alexander  ;  while  De- 
 metrius, recognising  Jerusalem  as  '  holy  and  free,' 
 and  renouncing  all  right  to  the  Acra,  not  only 
 freed  the  Temple  from  taxation,  but  richly  endowed 
 it  and  authorised  its  repair,  and  promised  that 
 Jerusalem  should  be  fortified  at  his  own  ex- 
 pense. 
 
 Jonathan,  however,  was  so  mixed  up  for  some 
 years  with  the  contentions  for  the  throne  of  Syria, 
 and  so  enormous  was  the  strength  of  the  Acra, 
 that  it  was  not  till  142  B.C. — two  years  after  his 
 death — that  it  was  forced  by  famine  to  capitulate. 
 Simon,  who  was  now  high-priest,  having  thus 
 fully  accomplished  the  independence  of  Judasa,  de- 
 molished the  Acra  and  lowered  the  height  on 
 which  it  stood.  He  also  built  a  very  strong  tower — 
 the  Baris,  afterwards  called  Antonia — close  to  the 
 wall  of  the  Temple,  to  command  its  site,  and  in 
 this  tower  he  resided  with  his  followers.  No 
 event  of  importance  occurred  at  Jerusalem  till  his 
 death,  B.  C.  135.  He  was  treacherously  killed, 
 with  two  of  his  sons,  Judas  and  Mattathias,  by  his 
 son-in-law  Ptolemy,  just  as  he  had  succeeded  in 
 resisting  an  attempt  of  Antiochus  VH.,  second  son 
 of  Demetrius  Soter,  to  regain  possession  of  Judaea. 
 Simon  was  succeeded  as  high-priest  and  chief  by 
 John  Hyrcanus,  his  rero^ining  son  ;  and  Antiochus 
 immediately  repeated  nis  attempt  upon  Judjea. 
 Jerusalem  was  invested ;  a  hundred  towers  were 
 raised  on  its  north  side  to  hurl  projectiles  into  the 
 city,  and  a  deep  ditch  made  in  front  of  the  towers 
 to  impede  the  sallies  of  the  besieged.  Hyrcanus 
 was  induced,  by  a  failure  of  water  and  the  pros- 
 pect of  a  long  siege,  to  send  all  the  aged  and 
 infirm  out  of  the  city  ;  and  on  the  approach  of  the 
 Feast  of  Tabernacles  he  requested  Antiochus  to 
 grant  a  truce  for  its  celebration.  The  request  was 
 complied  with,  and  further  negotiations  led  to  an 
 honourable  capitulation  and  a  peace,  B.  c.  133. 
 Hostages  and  a  heavy  payment  were  required  by 
 Antiochus,  and  the  city  walls  were  dismantled. 
 But  the  walls  were  afterwards  repaired,  and  Hyr- 
 canus ruled  in  great  peace  and  prosperity  for  many 
 years.  He  had  belonged  originally  to  the  sect  of 
 the  Pharisees,  but  he  afterwards  became  a  Sad- 
 ducee,  and  took  their  part  strongly  against  his 
 former  friends.  During  the  wars  of  his  long 
 government,  he  subdued  the  Idumeans — whom  he 
 obliged  to  conform  to  the  laws  and  customs  of  the 
 Jews — and  Samaria,  which  he  razed  to  the  ground. 
 He  died  B.  C.  106. 
 
 A  short  pedigree  of  the  descendants  of  John 
 Plyrcanus  will  here  be  useful  :  — 
 
 J 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 615 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 John  Hyrcanus, 
 
 High-Priest  and  Ruler  B.C.  136  ; 
 
 Died  B.C.  106. 
 
 I 
 
 Aristobulus  I., 
 
 surnamed  'i'iXAXlJJ', 
 
 High-Priest  and  King  B.C.  106; 
 
 Died  B.C.  105. 
 
 Antigonus.         A  third  son.  A  fourth  son. 
 Put  to  death  by 
 Aristobulus  B.C.  10 
 
 Alexander  Jannsus, 
 
 High-Priest  and  King  B.C.  105; 
 
 Married  Alexandra ; 
 
 Died  B.C.  78. 
 
 Hyrcanus  II., 
 
 High-Priest  B.C.  78  ;  King  B.C.  69  ; 
 
 Resigned  the  Kingdom  B.C.  68; 
 
 Allowed  to  govern  by  favour 
 
 of  Rome  B.C.  63  ; 
 
 Put  to  death  B.C.  30. 
 
 I 
 Alexandra, 
 Married  her  cousin  Alexander  ; 
 Put  to  death  by  Herod.        =: 
 
 Aristobulus  II., 
 
 King  B.C.  68 ; 
 
 Poisoned  B.C.  49. 
 
 Alexander, 
 Married  his  cousin  Alexandra; 
 :  Put  to  death  B.C.  49. 
 
 Antigonus,  King  B.C.  40  ; 
 Put  to  death  by  Antony  b.  c.  37. 
 
 Mariamne  ; 
 
 Married  to  Herod  the  Great, 
 
 and  put  to  death  by  him. 
 
 Aristobulus ; 
 
 Appointed  High-Priest  by  Herod 
 
 B.C.  36: 
 
 Assassinated  B.C.  35. 
 
 Aristobulus  was  the  first  of  the  Maccabees  who 
 assumed  the  title  of  king.  He  was  a  promoter  of 
 Greek  habits  and  manners,  as  his  name  and  sur- 
 name indicate.  His  death  was  hastened  by  remorse 
 for  the  murder  of  his  brother  Antigonus,  whom  he 
 caused  to  be  put  to  death  in  a  subterraneous  pas- 
 sage between  the  Baris  and  the  Temple.  During 
 the  reign  of  his  brother,  Alexander  Janneus,  who 
 was  chiefly  engaged  in  distant  wars,  Jerusalem  was 
 a  scene  of  fierce  strife  between  Pharisees  and  Saddu- 
 cees  ;  and  once,  at  the  instigation  of  the  Pharisees, 
 Alexander  himself  was  pelted  with  citrons  while 
 performing  the  high-priest's  office  during  the  Feast 
 of  Tabernacles.  This  led  to  cruel  retaliation,  and 
 6cx)0  citizens  were  put  to  death.  On  a  subsequent 
 occasion,  800  of  his  opponents  were  crucified,  and 
 their  wives  and  children  slain  before  their  eyes, 
 while  he  and  his  concubines  feasted  in  their  pre- 
 sence. But,  perceiving  that  the  Pharisees  were 
 the  more  powerful  of  the  two  sects,  he  directed 
 his  queen  Alexandra,  to  whom  he  bequeathed  his 
 authority,  to  join  their  party.  She  thus  secured 
 to  herself  the  peaceable  possession  of  the  throne  at 
 his  death,  while  Hyrcanus  took  the  high-priesthood, 
 and  Aristobulus  the  command  of  the  army.  At 
 her  death  Hyrcanus  claimed  the  crown,  but  yielded 
 it  to  his  brother  after  a  few  months'  possession. 
 He  was,  however,  persuaded  by  Antipater,  an  Idu- 
 mean  noble  who  had  been  brought  up  at  his  father's 
 court,  to  seek  the  protection  and  help  of  Aretas, 
 king  of  Arabia  Petrsea.  Aretas,  at  his  instigation, 
 invaded  Judaea  and  besieged  Jerusalem,  B.C.  65, 
 but  was  interrupted  by  Scaurus,  one  of  Pompey's 
 lieutenants,  whose  aid  Aristobulus  had  purchased 
 by  a  gift  of  400  talents.  It  was  in  the  same  year 
 that  Antiochus  XHI.  was  conquered,  and  Syria 
 constituted  a  Roman  province  by  Pompey,  and  the 
 rival  brothers  appeared  to  plead  their  cause  before 
 the  great  Roman  general.  Aristobulus  saw  that 
 Pompey  was  disposed  to  favour  Hyrcanus,  and 
 returned  to  Jerusalem  to  prepare  for  resistance  ; 
 but  thinking  it  hopeless,  went  to  meet  Pompey  as 
 he  approached  the  city,  and  offered  to  surrender. 
 Pompey  sent  on  Gabinius  to  take  possession,  but 
 he  was  refused  admittance,  and  Aristobulus  was 
 carried  there  a  prisoner.  The  city  was  now  in 
 possession  of  Hyrcanus,    who   received   Pompey 
 
 with  open  arms  ;  but  the  Temple  was  occupied  by 
 the  friends  of  Aristobulus,  who  sustained  a  deter- 
 mined and  most  severe  siege  with  admirable  courage 
 and  magnanimity.  The  temple-worship  was  carried 
 on  all  the  time  with  the  greatest  exactness,  and  had 
 it  not  been  for  the  opportunity  they  gave  their 
 assailants  to  make  their  approaches  and  repair  their 
 engines  on  the  Sabbath,  the  Roman  battering-rams 
 might  never  have  been  brought  to  bear  against  the 
 works.  But  a  breach  was  made  at  the  end  of  three 
 months,  and,  after  great  slaughter,  the  Temple  was 
 taken  by  Pompey,  who  was  amazed,  on  exploring 
 the  Holy  of  Holies,  to  find  there  no  image  of  any 
 God.  He  left  the  sacred  things  and  treasures  un- 
 touched, but  imposed  a  tribute  upon  the  city  and 
 demolished  its  walls,  B.C.  63.  Hyrcanus  was 
 allowed  to  govern  as  high-priest,  but  without  the 
 title  of  king,  and  Aristobulus  and  his  sons,  Alex- 
 ander and  Antigonus,  were  carried  to  Rome.  Hyr- 
 canus governed  peacefully  for  a  great  many  years 
 under  the  favour  of  Rome,  and  by  the  advice  of 
 Antipater  the  Idumean,  and  about  the  year  47  B.C. 
 received  the  title  of  Ethnarch  from  Julius  Csesar, 
 together  with  confirmation  in  the  high-priesthood, 
 for  help  given  to  his  ally  Mithridates.  C^sar  also 
 made  Antipater  procurator  of  Judaea,  and  allowed 
 the  walls  of  Jerusalem  to  be  rebuilt. 
 
 But  some  events  of  importance  had  happened  in 
 the  meantime.  Crassus  had  visited  Jerusalem,  and 
 rifled  the  Temple  of  its  treasures  on  his  way  to 
 Parthia  ;  and  Gabinius,  who  had  been  made  pro- 
 consul of  Syria,  had  established  in  Jerusalem  one 
 of  the  five  Sanhedrims  or  Senates,  by  which  the 
 country  was  to  be  governed.  Four  years  later 
 Antipater  was  poisoned  by  Malichus,  a  man  who 
 owed  him  his  life.  Malichus  was  in  his  turn  assas- 
 sinated by  order  of  Herod,  the  young  son  of  Anti- 
 pater. This  young  man  had  been  made  governor 
 of  Galilee  when  his  father  was  made  procurator  of 
 Judcea.  He  had  early  displayed  his  arrogance  when 
 brought  before  the  Sanhedrim  to  answer  the  charge 
 of  having  put  Jewish  citizens  to  death  without  a 
 trial,  and  he  now  bid  defiance  to  the  friends  of 
 Malichus,  who  sought  to  expel  him  and  his  brother 
 Phasael  from  Jerusalem.  About  this  time  Anti- 
 gonus, the  only  surviving  son  of  Aristobulus,  ap- 
 peared in  Judsa  to  assert  his  claim  to  the  throne, 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 62  6 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 and  a  Parthian  army  under  Paconis,  son  of  Arsaces 
 XIV.,  encouraged  by  the  distracted  state  of  the 
 Roman  commonwealth  after  the  death  of  Cffisar, 
 invaded  Syria.  Antigonus  apphed  for  help  to  the 
 Parthian,  and,  with  the  aid  received,  penetrated  into 
 Jerusalem,  took  Phasael  prisoner,  forced  Herod  to 
 fly,  and  being  himself  made  king,  bit  off  the  ear  of 
 the  aged  Hyrcanus  while  he  knelt  before  him  as  a 
 suppliant — to  prevent  him  by  this  mutilation  from 
 ever  again  acting  as  high-priest  (B.C.  40). 
 
 Herod  fled  to  Rome,  and  through  the  influence 
 of  Antony  and  Octavius  (afterwards  the  Emperor 
 Augustus),  obtained  a  decree  of  the  senate,  appoint- 
 ing him  king  of  Judrea.  He  soon  appeared  with 
 an  army  before  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  but  events 
 called  him  away,  and  it  was  not  till  B.C.  37  that  he 
 began  the  siege,  which  was  conducted  much  as 
 Pompey's  had  been  twenty-six  years  before.  The 
 invading  army  approached  from  Jericho,  but  at- 
 tacked the  city  from  the  level  country  on  tl'  e  north. 
 Similar  works  were  carried  on,  similar  courage 
 displayed  by  the  besieged.  Herod  absented  him- 
 self for  a  time  to  celebrate  his  marriage  with 
 Mariamne,  the  granddaughter  both  of  Hyrcanus 
 and  Aristobulus,  and  the  niece  of  Antigonus,  but 
 returned  with  renewed  zeal,  and  an  army  of  50,000 
 men  under  Sosius,  the  Roman  governor  of  Syria. 
 
 The  Temple  and  city,  all  except  the  impregnable 
 Baris,  where  Antigonus  lay  concealed,  were  taken 
 by  storm.  There  was  dreadful  slaughter,  and 
 Herod  had  to  stand  with  a  drawn  sword  at  the 
 door  of  the  sanctuaiy  to  prevent  its  plunder  and 
 desecration  by  the  Roman  soldiers.  Antigonus 
 obtained  his  life  from  Sosius,  but  he  was  afterwards 
 put  to  death  by  Antony.  Herod  also  put  to  death 
 all  the  chiefs  of  the  Asmoncean  party,  including  the 
 whole  Sanhedrim  except  the  two  great  Hebrew 
 doctors,  Hillel  and  Shammai.  He  appointed  to 
 the  high-priesthood  a  Babylonian  Jew  named  Ana- 
 nel,  but  displaced  him  afterwards,  at  the  earnest 
 solicitation  of  Mariamne,  in  favour  of  her  brother 
 Aristobulus,  a  boy  of  sixteen.  The  people  hailed 
 the  appointment  of  the  young  Asmoncean  with  too 
 much  pleasure ;  he  was  therefore  put  to  death 
 while  bathing,  and  Ananel  reinstated  in  his  dignity. 
 
 B.C.  34  Jerusalem  was  visited  by  Cleopatra  on 
 her  return  from  the  Euphrates.  Three  years  later 
 a  great  part  of  the  city  was  destroyed,  and  ten 
 or  twenty  thousand  persons  killed,  by  an  earth- 
 quake. In  B.C.  30  Herod  put  Hyrcanus  to  death, 
 and  in  the  next  year  Mariamne.  Soon  afterwards 
 he  built  a  theatre  and  instituted  quinquennial 
 games.  This  innovation  nearly  cost  him  his  life 
 by  assassination.  He  enlarged  and  strengthened 
 the  Baris,  and  named  it  Antonia  in  honour  of  An- 
 tony. In  B.C.  25  there  was  a  famine  in  Judrea,  and 
 Herod  sacrificed  great  treasure  to  procure  corn 
 from  Egypt,  for  distribution  among  the  people, 
 and  for  seed.  He  married  a  second  Mariamne, 
 the  daughter  of  an  obscure  priest  named  Simon, 
 whom  he  raised  to  the  high-priesthood.  He  built 
 and  fortified  a  new  palace,  and,  after  two  years' 
 preparation,  laid  the  foundation  of  his  magnificent 
 Temple,  the  principal  buildings  of  which  were  com- 
 pleted B.C.  9.  He  also  built  three  towers  of  im- 
 mense strength  and  size,  which  he  called  Hippicus, 
 Mariamne,  and  Phasaelus,  at  the  north-\vest  corner 
 of  the  city,  where  it  was  most  exposed  to  attack, 
 and  one,  which  he  called  Psephinus,  as  an  outwork, 
 a  little  to  the  north.  B.C.  7  he  fixed  a  large  golden 
 eagle  (as  an  emblem  of  the  Roman  rule)  over  the 
 
 entrance  to  the  sanctuaiy.  This,  as  a  breach  of 
 the  second  commandment,  was  most  offensive  to 
 the  Jews,  and  it  was  torn  down  in  open  day  at  the 
 instigation  of  two  of  the  chief  Rabbis,  who  were  in 
 consequence  burnt  to  death  by  Herod's  orders. 
 His  sons,  Aristobulus  and  Alexander,  were  put  to 
 death  on  pretence  of  plotting  against  him,  B.C.  6, 
 and  his  son  Antipater,  who  did  plot  against  him, 
 five  days  before  his  own,  which  occurred  a  few 
 months  after  the  birth  of  our  Lord,  in  B.C.  4  of 
 our  era.  The  succession  of  high -priests  during 
 Herod's  reign  was  Ananel,  Aristobulus,  Ananel  a 
 second  time,  Jesus  son  of  Faneus,  Simon  son  of 
 Boethus,  Matthias  son  of  Theophilus,  Jozarus  son 
 of  Simon. 
 
 Archelaus  (the  son  of  Malthace)  now  reigned 
 in  the  room  of  his  father  Herod,  though  he  never 
 received  or  assumed  the  title  of  king.  He  began 
 his  rule  with  great  moderation.  But  this  encour- 
 aged the  people  to  make  demands  for  a  remission 
 of  taxes  and  liberation  of  prisoners.  The  crowds 
 who  had  assembled  for  the  Passover  made  these 
 demands  more  formidable,  and  they  were  not  put 
 down  without  recourse  to  arms,  and  the  massacre 
 of  3000  persons.  Another  disturbance,  accom- 
 ])anied  by  fresh  slaughter  and  plunder  of  the  sacred 
 treasures,  took  place  soon  afterwards,  while  Arche- 
 laus was  at  Rome,  whither  he  had  gone  to  obtain 
 the  ratification  of  his  father's  will.*  He  was  ap- 
 pointed elhnarcht  by  the  senate,  and  on  his  return 
 made  Eleazar  high-priest,  instead  of  his  brother 
 Joazar ;  but  was  himself  deposed,  and  banished 
 to  Vienne  in  Gaul,  on  account  of  his  tyranny,  A.D. 
 6,  mainly  at  the  instigation  of  his  brothers,  H[erod 
 Antipas  and  Philip.  Juda:a  now  became  a  Roman 
 province  under  the  governor  of  Syria,  and  was  ad- 
 ministered by  a  procurator  or  lieutenant-governor 
 of  its  own.  But  the  procurator  resided  at  Cajsarea, 
 leaving  the  affairs  of  Jerusalem  to  be  managed  by 
 the  high-priest  and  Sanhedrim — an  arrangement 
 which  greatly  tended  to  promote  its  peace  and 
 quiet  for  the  next  twenty  years.  Quirinus,  called 
 by  St.  Luke  Cyrenius,  was  governor  of  Syria,  and 
 Coponius  procurator  of  Judrea,  immediately  after 
 the  deposition  of  Archelaus.  Coponius  was  fol- 
 lowed by  M.  Ambivius,  Annius  Rufus,  Val.  Gratus, 
 and  Pontius  Pilate,  in  succession.  The  latter  de- 
 parted from  the  custom  of  his  predecessors  in 
 bringing  his  troops  to  winter  quarters  at  Jerusalem, 
 and  a  riot  was  the  immediate  consequence.  The 
 eagles  and  images  of  the  emperor  on  the  Roman 
 standards  excited  such  commotion,  that  Pilate  was 
 obliged  to  withdraw  them,  and  the  same  thing 
 happened  in  the  case  of  some  shields  consecrated 
 to  heathen  deities,  and  inscribed  with  their  names, 
 
 *  It  is  to  this  circumstance — Archelaus  gomg  to 
 Rome  to  be  confirmed  in  the  kingdom  left  to  him 
 by  his  father — that  our  Lord  alludes  in  the  parable, 
 Luke  xix.  12. 
 
 t  This  word,  which  means  rjth}-  of  a  nation, 
 and  tetrarch,  which  means  ruler  of  the  fourth  pari 
 of  a  country,  were  gi\'en  by  the  Romans  to  the 
 native  princes  of  tributary  states  which  were  not  of 
 sufficient  importance  to  be  governed  by  kings. 
 They  bore  much  the  same  relations  to  the  Roman 
 government  which  the  great  Zemindars  of  India 
 bear  to  our  own.  Tetrarch  is  an  ancient  Greek 
 title,  and  was  originally  applied  to  the  several 
 rulers  of  the  four  districts  of  Thessaly,  Phthiotis. 
 Histiceotis,  Thessaliotis,  and  Pelasgiotis. 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 517 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 which  were  hung  up  in  the  palace  at  Jerusalem. 
 Another  disturbance  was  occasioned  by  the  appro- 
 priation of  a  large  sum  of  money,  dedicated  to  God 
 by  voluntary  offering  [Corban  ;  see  Mark  vii.  1 1], 
 to  the  construction  of  an  aqueduct. 
 
 The  received  and  most  probable  date  of  our 
 blessed  Lord's  crucifixion  is  A. D.  29  [Chrono- 
 logy], when — dating  his  birth  B.C.  4 — he  would 
 be  thirty-three  years  of  age.*  The  succession  of 
 high-priests  up  to  this  date  from  Eleazar,  who  was 
 appointed  by  Archelaus,  was  as  follows : — Jesus 
 son  of  Sie,  Jozar  a  second  time,  Ananus  (called 
 Annas  in  N.  T.),  Ishmael  son  of  Phabi,  Eleazar 
 son  of  Ananus,  Simon  son  of  Kamith,  +  Caiaphas, 
 called  also  Joseph.  Ananus  was  appointed  by 
 Quirinus,  and  his  successors  by  the  contemporary 
 procurators  of  Judjea.  It  was  Herod  Antipas, 
 tetrarch  of  Galilee,  the  brother  of  Archelaus,  who 
 was  at  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  crucifixion. 
 
 Pontius  Pilate  was  removed  from  his  office  on 
 account  of  his  tyrannical  conduct  A.  D.  36,  and 
 thereupon  Vitellius,  the  governor  of  Syria,  visited 
 Jerusalem  and  conferred  some  benefits  upon  the 
 people. 
 
 The  Emperor  Tiberius  was  succeeded  by  Cali- 
 gula. A.D.  37  ;  with  him  Herod  Agrippa,  grandson 
 of  Herod  the  Great,  had  formed  an  intimacy  at 
 Rome,  where,  like  many  others  of  his  family,  he 
 resided  in  his  youth.  On  the  accession  of  Cahgula 
 he  received  from  him  several  of  the  Syrian  tetrar- 
 chies,  and  was  able  by  his  influence  to  save  Jeru- 
 salem from  the  dishonour  of  having  a  statue  of  the 
 emperor  set  up  in  the  Temple.  On  the  accession 
 of  Claudius,  who  had  been  his  schoolfellow,  Judcea 
 and  Samaria  were  added  to  his  dominions  (A.D. 
 41),  and  one  of  his  first  acts  in  coming  to  take 
 possession  of  his  kingdom  was  to  visit  the  Temple, 
 where  he  offered  sacrifice,  and  dedicated  a  gold 
 chain  which  had  been  given  to  him  by  Caligula. + 
 
 Herod  Agrippa,  like  his  grandfather  Herod  the 
 Great,  added  greatly  to  the  outward  magnificence 
 of  Jerusalem.  His  chief  work  was  to  increase  the 
 size  of  the  city  by  encircling  with  a  massive  wall 
 an  important  suburb  called  Bezetha,  which  had 
 sprung  up  on  its  northern  side.  The  work  was  in- 
 terrupted for  a  time  by  orders  from  Rome,  but  was 
 afterwards  completed,  and  some  of  the  great  stones 
 of  which  it  was  built  are  still  to  be  seen  in  their 
 original  position.  But  an  evil  fame  attends  him 
 for  his  treatment  of  the  Christians.  He  began  by 
 killing  James,  and  proceeded  to  take  Peter,  hoping 
 
 *  Blair  adopts  A.  D.  33  as  the  date  of  the  cruci- 
 fixion, making  our  Lord  thirty-seven  years  of  age 
 at  the  time.  Dr.  Hales  adopts  March  27,  31, 
 placing  his  birth  in  autumn,  B.C.  5. 
 
 +  His  inotke?:  She  is  said  to  have  had  seven 
 sons  who  all  served  in  the  office  of  high-priest, 
 whence  the  Rabbinical  proverb,  '  All  meal  is 
 meal,  but  Kamith's  meal  is  fine  flour '  (Lightfoot). 
 The  actual  high-priest  might  often  be  under  tlie 
 necessity  of  having  his  office  performed  by  another 
 person.  Thus  Caiaphas  appears  to  have  been 
 assisted  during  his  high-priesthood  by  Annas,  his 
 father-in-law,  who  had  been  high-priest  some  years 
 before  (Luke  iii.  2). 
 
 +  He  had  been  imprisoned  by  Tiberius  for  ex- 
 pressing a  wish  that  Caligula  might  soon  succeed 
 him,  and  Caligula,  on  his  accession,  presented  him 
 with  a  gold  chain  of  the  same  weight  as  the  iron 
 one  he  had  worn  in  prison. 
 
 perhaps  in  this  way  to  exterminate  the  whole  sect, 
 when  he  was  stopped  by  Divine  interposition. 
 His  own  death,  under  fearful  circumstances,  soon 
 followed  (a.D.  44),  Acts  xii.  During  this  and  the 
 following  years  Jerusalem  was  visited  with  a  severe 
 famine,  which  was  alleviated  by  the  contributions 
 of  the  Christians  of  Antioch,  and  of  Helena,  widow 
 of  Monobazus,  king  of  Adiabene,  who  had  become 
 a  convert  to  Judaism. 
 
 Herod  Agrippa,  at  his  death,  left  a  son  aged 
 seventeen,  who  was  then  receiving  his  education  at 
 the  court  of  Claudius  ;  but  as  he  was  too  young 
 to  take  the  government  of  so  troubled  a  kingdom, 
 Cuspius  Fadus  was  made  procurator  of  Judtea, 
 while  the  superintendence  of  the  Temple  and  the 
 right  of  appointing  the  high -priest  was  conferred 
 on  Herod,  king  of  Chalcis,  the  brother  of  the  late 
 king  of  Judxa.  Cuspius  Fadus  was  succeeded 
 about  A.D.  46  by  Tiberius  Alexander,  the  Ala- 
 harch,  or  chief  magistrate  of  the  Jews  at  Alexan- 
 dria, and  he  in  A.D.  48  by  Ventidius  Cumanus. 
 
 A  strong  feeling  of  jealousy  had  long  been  grow- 
 ing up  between  the  Jews  and  Romans.  The  former 
 would  not  tolerate  the  overbearing  interference 
 which  the  latter  would  exercise  in  the  details  of 
 their  religion.  It  was  with  great  difficulty  that 
 they  retained  in  their  hands  the  custody  of  the  high- 
 priest's  robes,  and  this  year  the  Roman  policy  of 
 placing  a  cohort  in  the  portico  (or  cloisters)  of  the 
 Temple  to  prevent  disturbance  at  the  Passover  leu 
 to  a  frightful  tumult  and  destruction  of  life,  the 
 people  trampling  on  one  another  in  their  endeavour 
 to  escape  through  the  narrow  streets  from  the  great 
 body  of  troops  which  Cumanus  thouglit  it  right  to 
 bring  up  and  place  in  the  Antonia  after  the  first 
 outbreak. 
 
 Herod,  king  of  Chalcis,  died  in  the  same  year, 
 and  a  year  or  two  later  the  younger  Agrippa  suc- 
 ceeded him  in  that  kingdom,  as  well  as  in  the 
 government  of  the  Temple.  He  afterwards  resigned 
 Chalcis  for  the  tetrarchies  which  had  been  held  by 
 Lysanias  and  Philip,  but  was  still  honoured  with 
 the  title  of  king  (Acts  x.xv.  13).  In  A.D.  52 
 Cumanus  was  removed  from  the  procuratorship  of 
 Judtea,  being  unable  or  unwilling  to  check  the 
 growing  disturbances,  and  Felix  was  appointed  in 
 his  place. 
 
 Brigandage,  impostures,  and  assassinations  were 
 now  rife.  High-priests  and  priests  quarrelled  for 
 their  share  of  the  tithes,  and  acts  of  violence  en- 
 sued, which  were  referred  to  Rome.  Jerusalem 
 was  infested  with  a  banditti  (Sicarii),  who  cloaked 
 their  murders  and  robberies  with  a  pretended  i-ieal 
 for  Jewish  interests.  Felix  aggravated  rather  than 
 repressed  these  disorders,  exercising  his  almost  un- 
 limited powers  for  the  gratification  of  his  own 
 cupidity  and  malice  with  a  mean  and  servile  dispo- 
 sition [Tacitus].  He  was  superseded  by  Porcius 
 Festus,  A.D.  60. 
 
 The  troubles  continued.  Agrippa  gave  great 
 offence  by  erecting  in  the  palace  of  the  Herods  a 
 chamber  at  such  an  elevation  that  he  could  see 
 from  it  what  took  place  in  the  courts  of  the  Temple 
 The  priests  in  their  turn  built  a  wall  which  shut 
 out  the  view,  not  only  from  him,  but  from  the 
 station  at  which  the  Romans  kept  guard  at  the 
 great  festivals.  This  dispute  was  referred  to  Nero, 
 who  decided  in  favour  of  the  priests,  through  the 
 influence  of  Popptea,  but  Agrippa  deprived  the 
 high-priest  of  his  office,  and  he  was  afterwards  be- 
 headed at  Cyrene.     Festus  died  in  61  or  62,  and 
 
JERUSALExM 
 
 518 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 Albinus  was  appointed  to  succeed  him,  but  before 
 his  arrival  at  Jerusalem  Annas  the  high-priest  had 
 summoned  the  Sanhedrim  and  condemned  to  death 
 St.  James  and  other  Christians.  On  this  Agrippa 
 deposed  Annas,  and  appointed  Jesus,  son  of  Dam- 
 neus,  in  his  place. 
 
 Albinus  busied  himself  in  putting  down  the  ban- 
 ditti, but  was  too  ready  to  accept  ransom  from 
 those  whom  he  got  into  his  power,  while  Jesus, 
 son  of  Damneus,  who  in  his  turn  was  deposed  from 
 the  high-priesthood  ;  Jesus,  son  of  Gamaliel,  the 
 new  high-priest  ;  and  Annas,  the  former  one,  had 
 each  his  party  of  banditti  at  command.  The 
 quarrel  about  tithes  continued,  and  a  new  subject 
 of  discussion  arose  among  the  priests  from  a  per- 
 mission granted  by  Agrippa  to  the  Levites  to  wear, 
 for  the  first  time,  a  distinctive  dress.  Things  were 
 in  this  state  of  ferment  when  18,000  workmen 
 were  put  out  of  employment  by  the  completion  of 
 the  repairs  of  the  Temple. 
 
 The  appointment  of  Gessius  Floras  to  succeed 
 Albinus  brought  matters  to  a  crisis.  His  craelty 
 and  rapacity,  and  the  impunity  enjoyed  by  plun- 
 derers who  were  willing  to  give  him  a  share  of  their 
 spoils,  were  intolerable,  and  produced  a  representa- 
 tion to  Cestius  Gallus,  the  governor  of  Syria,  which 
 Florus  treated  with  contempt.  He  sent  from 
 Caesarea  to  demand  seventeen  talents  out  of  the 
 treasury  of  the  Temple,  and  when  a  large  body  of 
 the  people  came  to  meet  him  as  he  approached  Jeru- 
 salem, he  not  only  put  them  to  flight,  but  the  next 
 day  insisted  that  they  should  be  given  up  to  him  for 
 punishment,  and,  when  this  was  refused,  he  com- 
 manded a  general  pillage  and  massacre  by  his 
 soldiers.  A  few  days  afterwards  he  provoked  a 
 fresh  outrage  and  inflicted  fresh  vengeance.  But 
 he  failed  in  his  object  of  penetrating  into  the  Temple 
 for  plunder,  as  the  Jews,  by  breaking  down  the 
 cloisters  of  the  Temple,  interrupted  the  passage  of 
 communication  between  it  and  the  Antonia  Tower. 
 Three  thousand  six  hundred  persons  were  slaugh- 
 tered on  this  occasion,  and  the  cruelty  of  the  pun- 
 ishments which  he  inflicted  on  the  noblest  of  the 
 Jewish  citizens  drew  Bernice  from  the  palace  of 
 the  Asmonaeans  to  plead  for  them  in  vain  with 
 prayers  and  tears  and  bare  feet  at  his  tribunal. 
 
 After  Florus  had  returned  to  C^sarea,  Agrippa 
 visited  Jerusalem,  hoping  to  quiet  the  people,  and 
 he  prevailed  on  them  to  restore  the  communication 
 between  the  Antonia  and  the  Temple,  and  to  pay 
 their  arrears  of  tribute ;  but  on  his  proposing  that 
 they  should  submit  themselves  to  Florus  till  an- 
 other procurator  was  appointed,  they  were  filled 
 with  fury,  and  treated  him  with  such  violence  that 
 he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  city.  Scarcely  was  he 
 gone,  when  Eleazar  the  son  of  Ananias  the  high- 
 priest,  who  was  at  that  time  captain  of  the  Temple, 
 raised  the  standard  of  revolt  by  refusing  to  offer 
 the  customary  sacrifice  for  the  emperor  and  the 
 Roman  people.  Immediate  notice  of  this  bold  act 
 was  given  to  Agrippa  and  to  Florus  by  the  more 
 aged  and  wiser  citizens,  that  they  might  stifle  the 
 sedition  at  its  birth.  Florus  paid  no  attention  to 
 the  message,  but  Agrippa  sent  3000  horse,  who, 
 acting  with  those  who  wished  to  preserve  peace, 
 held  possession  of  the  upper  town  while  Eleazar 
 and  his  adherents,  among  whom  was  a  large  body 
 of  bandits  who  had  returned  to  Jerusalem  after  sur- 
 prising and  murdering  the  Roman  garrison  at 
 Masada  on  the  Dead  Sea,  occupied  the  Temple  and 
 the  lower  town.     For  seven  days  there  was  a  fierce 
 
 contest,  which  ended  in  the  triumph  of  the  rebels. 
 The  house  of  the  high-priest  and  the  palace  0/ 
 Agrippa  and  Bernice  were  set  on  fire.  Fire  was 
 also  carried  to  the  Chamber  of  Archives  to  gain 
 the  debtors  to  their  side  by  destroying  the  evi- 
 dences of  their  debts.  Another  three  days'  struggle 
 ended  in  the  burning  of  the  Antonia,  and  the 
 slaughtering  of  the  small  Roman  garrison  (Septem- 
 ber 6,  A.D.  66).  Herod's  palace  was  next  taken, 
 and  there  the  high-priest  Annas  was  found  and 
 slain,  while  the  Roman  soldiers  vvho  had  kept  it 
 first  took  refuge  in  the  three  great  towers,  and 
 afterwards,  on  their  surrender,  were  put  to  the 
 sword. 
 
 It  was  now  time  for  Cestius  Gallus,  the  governor 
 of  Syria,  to  interfere.  He  came  from  Antioch  with 
 the  twelfth  legion,  burnt  on  his  way  the  town  of 
 Lidda,  and  at  Bethhoron  engaged  without  result  a 
 large  body  of  the  rebels  who  had  gone  to  meet 
 him.  He  afterwards  pushed  on  towards  the  city, 
 and  encamped  for  three  days  at  Scopus,  a  few  fur- 
 longs off,  hoping  that  the  moderate  party  would 
 propose  conditions  of  surrender.  He  then  made 
 his  way  into  the  new  suburb,  which  he  occupied, 
 forcing  the  Jews  to  take  refuge  within  the  walls 
 surrounding  the  Temple  and  the  inner  city.  For 
 six  days  he  assaulted  the  wall  without  success,  and 
 then,  apparently  without  cause,  but,  as  Josephus 
 hints,  through  the  secret  influence  of  Florus,  with- 
 drew his  whole  force  back  to  Scopus.  Thither  he 
 was  followed  by  the  now  exulting  rebels,  who 
 spoiled  his  camp,  carried  off"  his  war  engines,  and 
 killed  5000  of  his  troops. 
 
 The  Jews  now  began  an  organized  resistance  to 
 the  sovereign  state,  and  the  most  important  posts 
 throughout  the  country  were  assigned  to  their 
 bravest  and  best  citizens.  Josephus,  son  of  Gorion, 
 and  the  high-priest  Ananus  had  the  command  at 
 Jerusalem,  Josephus  the  historian  in  Galilee,  and 
 Eleazar  in  Iturea.  And,  Cestius  Gallus  and  Florus 
 being  both  dead,  Nero  gave  the  government  of 
 Syria  to  Vespasian,  who  desired  his  son  Titus  to 
 come  to  him  from  Egypt  with  the  seventh  and 
 tenth  legions. 
 
 Father  and  son  met  at  Ptolemais  in  the  winter  of 
 A.  D.  66-7,  and  during  the  following  summer  and 
 autumn  the  important  places  of  the  country  fell  one 
 after  another  into  their  hands.  Among  the  rest 
 Jotapata,  with  its  governor  Josephus  the  historian, 
 who  was  made  prisoner,  but  treated  with  respect ; 
 and  Giscala,  whose  chief,  John,  the  subsequently 
 famous  John  of  Giscala,  escaped  to  Jerusalem. 
 That  unhappy  city  in  the  meantime  became  the 
 most  frightful  scene  of  civil  strife  and  violence.  It 
 comprised  two  great  parties,  those  who  wished  for 
 order  and  peace,  and  those  who,  guided  by  wild 
 fanaticism  or  rapacity,  thirsted  only  for  deeds  of 
 violence.  These  latter  were  now  known  by  the 
 general  name  of  zealots,  and  were  not  less  dreaded 
 by  the  quieter  citizens  than  the  Romans  themselves, 
 while  they  were  ever  ready  to  split  into  new  fac- 
 tions and  fall  upon  one  another  like  wild  beasts. 
 This  was  the  state  of  things  in  the  summer  of  68, 
 when  Vespasian,  who  had  now  approached  Jeru- 
 salem, hearing  of  the  death  of  Nero,  sent  Titus  for 
 fresh  orders  from  his  successor  Galba.  It  was 
 about  the  same  time  that  the  quieter  party  in  Jeru- 
 salem, unable  to  bear  the  excesses  of  the  zealots  led 
 by  Eleazar  and  by  John  of  Giscala,  invited  Simon, 
 son  o*"  Gioras,  the  leader  of  a  band  of  marauding 
 Galileans,   to  come   to   their  assistance.      In   the 
 
TERUSALEM 
 
 519 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 middle  of  the  following  year  Vespasian  himself  was 
 made  emperor  and  went  to  Rome.  Titus  devoted 
 the  remainder  of  it  to  active  preparations  for  the 
 siege,  and,  when  the  city  was  crowded  with  the 
 multitudes  who  came  up  for  the  Feast  of  the  Pass- 
 over, which  was  to  occur  in  April  A.  D.  70,  he  drew 
 up  his  forces  and  placed  them  on  the  heights  which 
 lay  to  the  north  and  east  of  Jerusalem,  three  legions 
 on  Scopus  and  one  on  the  Mount  of  Olives.  When 
 the  ground  between  Scopus  and  the  city  was  cleared 
 of  obstruction,  and  made  fit  for  the  march  of  an 
 army,  the  three  legions  advanced  forward,  and 
 bearing  to  the  west,  made  their  attack  on  one  of 
 the  western  faces  of  Agrippa's  wall,  in  order,  as 
 Cestius  had  done  three  years  and  a  half  before,  to 
 break  into  the  new  suburb.  But  the  besieged  were 
 now  better  prepared  for  resistance,  and  what  Cestius 
 seems  to  have  accomplished  by  escalade,  was  not 
 done  without  the  aid  of  catapult  and  battering-ram 
 and  the  erection  of  mounds  surmounted  by  lofty 
 towers,  from  which  tlie  assailants  could  cast  their 
 arrows  at  the  defenders,  who  on  their  side  sallied 
 out  from  the  gates,  fought  from  the  walls,  and 
 made  good  use  of  the  engines  they  had  taken  from 
 the  Antonia  and  the  camp  of  Cestius  Gallus.  At 
 length,  however,  they  were  driven  back  by  the 
 missies  discharged  from  the  Roman  towers,  a 
 breach  was  made  in  the  wall  on  the  fifteenth  day 
 of  the  siege,  the  gates  were  thrown  open,  and  the 
 whole  of  the  Assyrian  camp  and  Bezetha  suburb 
 were  in  the  hands  of  Titus. 
 
 This  suburb  occupying  the  ground  on  the  north  of 
 the  city,  Titus  had  three  points  of  attack  before  him 
 — the  upper  city  facing  him  on  the  west,  the  Temple 
 and  its  precincts  on  the  east,  and  the  lower  city 
 protected  by  the  second  wall,  cropping  out  towards 
 him  in  the  middle.  Within  this  second  wall  Simon 
 had  retired.  The  same  efforts  were  now  repeated 
 by  both  parties  as  at  the  first  wall.  The  Jews 
 sallied  out  and  attacked  their  invaders  with  des- 
 perate bravery,  the  Romans  drove  them  back  with 
 equal  courage.  This  went  on  for  five  days,  and  at 
 length  a  breach  was  made  in  the  second  wall. 
 Titus  did  as  little  harm  as  he  could,  hoping  the 
 people  would  now  surrender,  but  he  entered  with  a 
 thousand  picked  men.  They  were  met  with  de- 
 termined obstinacy  by  constantly  increasing  num- 
 bers in  the  narrow  streets  and  lanes  of  the  lower 
 city,  and  were  at  length  obliged  to  retreat.  But 
 Titus  repeated  his  efforts,  an  entrance  was  once 
 more  effected,  and  this  time  he  took  care  to  de- 
 molish the  whole  wall,  and  become  master  of  all 
 that  portion  of  the  city  which  was  not  surrounded 
 by  the  first  (or  innermost)  wall,  i.e.,  the  Temple 
 with  the  Antonia  and  the  adjoining  structures,  and 
 the  upper  city.  The  engines  on  the  Mount  of 
 Olives  had  been  hurling  their  huge  projectiles  on 
 the  Temple  and  its  precincts  since  the  beginning 
 of  the  siege,  and  four  great  mounds  were  now 
 erected  within  the  suburb,  two  facing  the  Temple 
 and  two  facing  the  upper  city,  to  act  upon  these 
 places  from  the  north.  But  the  two  mounds  op- 
 posite the  Temple  had  been  undermined  and  sunk 
 by  the  skill  and  untiring  efforts  of  John  of  Giscala, 
 and  the  engines  on  the  other  two  had  been  burnt 
 by  the  no  less  pertinacious  bravery  of  Simon  and 
 his  men.  This  disheartened  the  Romans  a  good 
 deal.  But  in  the  meantime  famine  had  begun  its 
 horrors,  and  many  daily  crept  out  of  the  city  on 
 the  sides  where  it  was  not  invested  to  seek  for  food. 
 Great   numbers   of  these   wretched    people   were 
 
 caught  by  the  Roman  soldiers  and  cruelly  scourged 
 and  crucified  in  the  sight  of  their  fellow-citizens. 
 At  last,  to  shut  out  all  hope  of  escape,  Titus  de- 
 termined to  surround  the  city  with  a  wall.  This 
 was  completed  hi  three  days  by  the  united  efforts 
 of  the  whole  Roman  army  ;  and  the  siege  was  then 
 recommenced  with  fresh  vigour. 
 
 The  whole  strength  of  the  besiegers  was  now 
 directed  against  the  Antonia  and  the  Temple.  The 
 Antonia  lay  before  them  to  the  east,  a  strong  and 
 lofty  tower,  within  a  square  inclosed  by  strong  walls. 
 Behind  the  Antonia,  stretching  farther  to  the  east,  lay 
 themuchlargersquareof  'the  mountainof  the  Lord's 
 house  ;'  this  too  was  protected  with  strong  walls 
 lined  on  the  inside  by  lofty  pillared  cloisters,  the 
 flat  roof  of  which  ran  nearly  on  a  level  with  the  top 
 of  the  wall.  Within  this  large  square  was  another 
 inclosure  of  an  oblong  shape,  also  protected  by 
 walls  of  great  strength,  cloistered  like  the  others  on 
 the  inside,  and  containing  within  them  the  sacreil 
 courts  of  the  Lord's  house  and  the  holy  edifice 
 itself  The  whole  of  this  ground  was  called  the 
 Temple,  and  with  it  the  Antonia  was  connected  by 
 a  passage  opening  upon  the  cloisters  of  the  great 
 square  at  its  north-west  corner.  Titus  began  by 
 raising  four  fresh  mounds  to  act  against  the  An- 
 tonia. These  mounds  were  of  great  size,  and  it 
 took  twenty-one  days  to  complete  them.  They 
 seem  to  have  been  erected  as  a  support  for  the  en- 
 gines by  which  projectiles  were  thrown  into  the 
 fortress,  while  the  battering-rams  acted  against  its 
 walls.  Some  sallies  were  in  the  meantime  made  by 
 the  besieged,  but  not  with  as  much  vigour  as  before, 
 nor  did  they  interfere  much  with  the  progress  of 
 the  besiegers  ;  and  such  was  the  effect  of  one  day's 
 battering  upon  the  wall,  the  foundations  of  which 
 had  been  already  loosened  by  the  mine  which  had 
 destroyed  the  first  mounds,  that  it  fell  in  the  night. 
 It  was'  then  discovered  that  the  besieged  had  built 
 a  second  wall  within,  and  the  ruins  of  the  first  had 
 fallen  against  it,  and  formed  a  sort  of  bank  by 
 which  it  might  be  scaled.  A  forlorn  hope  of 
 twelve  men,  fired  by  the  exhortations  of  Titus,  and 
 the  example  of  their  leader,  sprung  forward,  but 
 perished  in  their  attempt  to  dislodge  the  enemy. 
 Two  nights  afterwards  another  party  of  twelve 
 stole  in  over  the  ruins,  killed  the  guards  of  the 
 Antonia  Tower,  and  let  in  the  Romans.  Then  fol- 
 lowed a  scene  of  terrible  struggling  and  bloodshed, 
 while  Roman  and  Jew  fought  together  in  a  space 
 too  narrow  for  the  action  of  great  numbers,  both 
 parties  urged  forward  from  behind  and  the  places 
 of  the  slain  perpetually  filled  up  by  fresh  men,  the 
 Romans  striving  to  press  through  the  passage  from 
 the  Antonia  into  the  Temple,  the  Jews  thrusting 
 them  back.  That  day's  fight  accomplished  nothing, 
 and  Titus  resolved  to  clear  a  passage  through  the 
 Antonia  precincts  for  the  main  body  of  his  troops. 
 In  the  meantime  he  strove  to  win  the  Jews  to  sub- 
 mission by  sending  them  proposals  of  peace,  and 
 graciously  receiving  those  who  placed  themselves  in 
 liis  power,  while  famine  and  its  usual  attendants, 
 death,  pestilence,  and  horrible  rapacity,  added 
 force  to  his  persuasions.  But  they  were  met  with 
 obstinate  refusal  and  contempt  by  the  heads  of  the 
 fighting  party,  while  the  unhappy  sufferers  could 
 do  nothing.  On  the  17th  Tammuz  (June  23),  about 
 the  time  of  the  first  attack  upon  the  Temple,  the 
 dailv  sacrifice  ceased  for  want  of  priests  to  offer  it, 
 and' from  that  day  to  the  9th  Ab  (July  14),  was  the 
 last  death-strusTgfe  cf  Jerusalem.     Titus  hemming 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 520 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 in  the  holy  places  closer  and  closer,  every  inch  of 
 the  way  to  the  inner  courts  disputed,  and  again  and 
 again  recovered,  the  wall  of  the  great  court  taken 
 and  its  cloisters  burnt,  the  inner  court  invested,  its 
 walls  battered  in  vain,  its  silver-plated  gates  forced 
 by  fire,  its  cloisters  and  encircling  chambers  burnt 
 piece  by  piece.  Onward  still  went  the  flames 
 making  their  way  round  the  court  of  the  priests, 
 burning  down  cloister  and  sacred  chamber,  while 
 the  holy  fane  itself  still  reared  its  '  polished  cor- 
 ners '  in  all  their  glory,  resplendent  with  gold  and 
 marble,  before  the  astonished  eyes  of  its  besiegers, 
 still  sheltered  its  ministering  priests,  its  priceless 
 treasures,  and  its  objects  of  mysterious  sanctity. 
 Titus  anxiously  desired  to  preserve  it ;  but  a  Roman 
 soldier  flung  a  burning  brand  through  a  window 
 
 which  opened  into  its  exterior  chambers.  The  fire 
 once  kindled  never  ceased  to  rage  till  the  whole 
 was  a  ruin,  and  the  roar  of  its  burning  was  mingled 
 with  cries  of  agony,  terror,  and  despair. 
 
 On  the  south  side  of  the  great  inclosure  of  the 
 Temple  were  two  gates,  which  led  by  a  bridge 
 across  the  deep  valley  of  the  cheesemongers  (Tyro- 
 pason)  to  the  upper  city.  Along  this  way  now 
 rushed  the  crowd  of  fighting  men,  leaving  10,000 
 of  the  more  helpless,  who  had  sought  shelter  in 
 the  Temple,  to  be  butchered  by  the  Roman  sol- 
 diers, who,  when  the  work  of  destruction  was 
 over,  set  up  their  standards  before  the  east  gate  of 
 the  Temple,  paid  them  divine  honours,  and  saluted 
 Titus  as  Imperator.  After  this,  the  conqueror, 
 still  anxious  to  spare  the  people  and  the  city,  held 
 
 286.  Jerusalem  as  seen  from  Mount  of  Olives. 
 
 a  parley  with  the  chiefs  of  the  insurrection,  the  two 
 parties  standing  at  opposite  ends  of  the  bridge. 
 Titus  required  an  unconditional  surrender,  but  pro- 
 mised them  their  lives  and  kind  treatment.  This  they 
 refused,  requiring  permission  to  leave  the  city  with 
 their  wives  and  children.  Titus  thereupon  directed 
 its  plunder  and  destruction.  This  was  not  the 
 work  of  a  day,  nor  was  it  accom])lished  without  a 
 valorous  resistance.  But  at  length  the  whole  city 
 was  reduced  to  ashes,  except  the  three  great  towers 
 on  the  western  wall,  and  all  its  inhabitants  put  to 
 the  sword,  except  those  who  were  reserved  for 
 slavery  or  to  grace  the  triumph  of  the  conqueror. 
 
 After  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus,  and 
 the  occu])ation  of  a  militaiy  post  among  its  ruins 
 by  a  Roman  garrison,  we  hear  nothing  of  any  con- 
 sequence connected  with  the  city  till  A.  D.  130.  In 
 that  year  the  EniDeror   Hadrian  took  some  first 
 
 steps  with  a  view  to  the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem 
 for  his  own  purposes.  Stringent  laws  had  been 
 made  for  the  control  of  the  Jews,  and  a  heavy 
 tribute  exacted  from  them  immediately  after  the 
 destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  violent  outbreaks 
 had  occurred  among  them  in  various  parts  of  the 
 empire,  at  Cyrene,  in  Egypt,  in  Cyprus,  in  Meso- 
 ]iotamia  ;  and  it  was  obviously  important  that 
 Rome  should  have  a  powerful  centre  of  dominion 
 in  the  midst  of  them,  and  that  a  race  possessing  so 
 much  vitality  and  so  turbulent  a  spirit  should  be 
 prevented  from  seizing  it  themselves.  He  was  in- 
 terrupted in  this  design  by  a  more  serious  outbreak 
 than  any  previous  one,  which  led  to  another  long 
 Jewish  war,  and  which  cost  Rome  so  much  blood 
 that  the  victory  by  which  it  was  finally  suppressed 
 \yas  not  considered  a  subject  for  congratulation. 
 The  leader  of  the  insurrection  was  Ben  Coziba,  a 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 521 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 bandit  chief,  who  proclaimed  himself  to  be  the 
 Messiah,  and  changed  his  name  to  Barchochab  or 
 Barchocheba  (son  of  a  star),  in  alhision  to  tlie  star 
 foretold  by  Balaam.  He  took  possession  of  Jeru- 
 salem, stamped  money  there  with  his  own  insignia, 
 and  was  so  bold  and  specious  an  impostor  that 
 Rabbi  Akibah,  a  president  of  the  Sanhedrim,* 
 was  induced  to  join  him  and  become  his  armour- 
 bearer.  Julius  Severus  was  summoned  from  Britain 
 in  this  emergency,  and  two  years  were  spent  in 
 various  attempts  to  suppress  the  insurrection  before 
 Jerusalem  was  taken,  after  an  obstinate  defence, 
 and  Barchocheba  slain.    The  insurgents  then  betook 
 
 themselves  to  Bether  (otherwise  written  Bitter  and 
 Beth  Tar),  a  strong  place  near  Jerusalem,  which 
 was  also  taken  with  terrible  slaughter  after  great 
 sufferings  from  famine  and  disease,  a.d.  135.  R. 
 Akibah  was  made  prisoner,  and  after  a  close  con- 
 finement of  two  years,  cruelly  put  to  death. 
 
 Hadrian's  first  work  after  this  victory  was  the 
 litter  demolition  of  all  remains  of  the  old  Jeru- 
 salem ;  his  next  was  to  build  a  new  city  with  a 
 new  name,  and  occupying  a  site  rather  more  to  the 
 north  than  the  former  one,  so  as  to  exclude  the 
 suburb  of  Ophel,  to  the  south  of  the  Temple,  and  a 
 portion  of  what  had  been  the  upper  city.     To  this 
 
 287.   Pool  of  Hezekiah — Jerusalem. 
 
 new  city  he  gave  the  name  of  ^Elia  Capitolina, 
 from  his  own  name,  Publius  ^fElius  Hadrianus, 
 and  that  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus.  All  persons  of 
 Jewish  descent  were  excluded  from  it  by  peremp- 
 tory decree.  They  were  not  even  to  approach  it 
 within  a  distance  of  three  miles;  and  to  extinguish 
 
 *  This  body,  which  originally  held  its  sittings  in  a 
 chamber  of  the  Temple,  continued  to  exist,  and  was 
 treated  with  some  favour  by  the  Romans,  after  the 
 destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It  sat  first  at  Japhne, 
 afterwards  at  Tiberias.  It  was  a  school  of  educa- 
 tion rather  than  a  centre  of  government.  But  its 
 influence  was  considerable,  and  it  became  wealthy 
 by  the  exaction  of  a  small  tax,  which  was  readily 
 paid  by  the  Jews. 
 
 all  affectionate  remembrance  of  the  place,  every- 
 thing was  done  to  give  it  the  character  of  a  heathen 
 city.  A  temple  of  Jupiter  Capitolinus  and  statues 
 of  the  emperor  occupied  the  site  of  the  Lord's 
 House  ;  a  temple  of  Astarte,  the  ancient  Ashtoreth 
 or  Syrian  Venus,  was  built  on  the  place  afterwards 
 recognised  as  the  holy  sepulchre.  The  worship  of 
 Serapis  was  introduced  from  Egypt ;  and  the  mili- 
 tary ensigns  of  Rome  were  sculptured  over  the  gates. 
 But  though  Jews  were  so  rigorously  excluded 
 from  Rome,  Christians  of  Gentile  descent  were 
 allowed  to  reside  there  ;  and  consequently  we  find 
 that  the  return  of  the  Christian  church  of  Jerusa- 
 lem from  Pella — where,  according  to  our  Lord's 
 forewarning,  it  had  taken  refuge  before  the  siege 
 by  Titus — and  the  api^ointment  of  the  first  Gentile 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 522 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 bishop,  were  contemporaneous  with  the  foundation 
 of  the  new  Roman  colony  of  ^lia  Capitohna. 
 From  St.  James,  the  first  bishop,  to  Jude  IL, 
 who  died  A.  D.  136,  there  had  been  a  series  of  fif- 
 teen bishops  of  Jewish  descent ;  and  from  Marcus, 
 who  succeeded  Simeon,  to  Macarius,  who  presided 
 over  the  church  of  Jerusalem  under  Constantine, 
 there  was  a  series  of  twenty-three  bishops  of  Gentile 
 descent,  but  beyond  a  bare  list  of  their  names,  little 
 is  known  of  the  church  or  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
 during  the  whole  of  this  latter  period. 
 
 The  adoption  of  Christianity  as  the  religion  of 
 the  empire,  which  dates  from  the  edict  of  Milan, 
 A.  D.  313  (the  year  in  which  Macarius  began  his 
 episcopate),  produced  a  great  change  in  the  cir- 
 cumstances of  Jerusalem.  Pilgrimages  had  already 
 been  made  to  the  holy  places  in  the  previous  cen- 
 turies. In  the  year  326  they  were  visited  by  the 
 Empress  Helena,  the  mother  of  Constantine,  then 
 in  her  eightieth  year.  At  this  visit  the  true  cross 
 is  said  to  have  been  discovered  under  the  temple 
 dedicated  to  Astarte,  during  the  progress  of  its 
 demolition.  It  is  certain  that  noble  Christian 
 churches  now  took  the  place  of  the  heathen 
 temples  by  which  the  holy  city  had  previously 
 been  defiled  ;  and,  A.D.  335,  a  council  was  held 
 at  Jerusalem  for  their  dedication.  It  was  at  this 
 council  that  Arius,  abetted  by  Eusebius  of  Nico- 
 media,  had  a  temporary  triumph  over  Athanasius. 
 Twenty-seven  years  later  an  attempt  was  made  by 
 the  Emperor  Julian,  the  apostate,  to  falsify  the  pre- 
 dictions of  our  Lord  by  rebuilding  the  Temple  and 
 re-establishing  the  Mosaic  ritual.  The  plan  was 
 adopted  with  enthusiasm  by  the  Jews,  who  thought 
 no  sacrifice  too  costly  to  promote  the  work.  It  was, 
 however,  interrupted,  tradition  says  by  whirlwind, 
 earthquake,  and  fire,  which  destroyed  the  work- 
 men and  consumed  their  tools.  After  the  death 
 of  Julian,  the  Jews  were  again  rigorously  excluded 
 from  Jerusalem,  except  on  the  anniversary  of  its 
 capture,  when  they  were  allowed  to  enter  the  city 
 and  weep  over  it.  Their  appointed  wailing-place 
 remains,  and  their  practice  of  waihng  there  con- 
 tinues to  the  present  day. 
 
 During  the  two  following  centuries  little  is 
 known  of  Jerusalem  beyond  the  part  taken  by  its 
 bishops  in  councils,  which  determined  various 
 ecclesiastical  and  theological  questions.  At  the 
 council  of  Chalcedon,  A.D.  451,  Jerusalem  was 
 made  an  independent  patriarchate  ;  and  a  synod 
 held  at  Jerusalem,  A.D.  536,  affirmed  the  twofold 
 nature  of  our  Lord.  In  A.D.  529,  Justinian  built 
 a  church  in  honour  of  the  Virgin  Mary  on  the  site 
 of  the  ancient  temple,  founded  several  convents  in 
 or  near  Jerusalem  and  Jericho,  and  at  least  one 
 hospital  for  pilgrims.  But  the  peace  of  Jerusalem 
 was  to  be  interrupted  by  a  fresh  storm  of  invasion. 
 The  Persian  dynasty,  which  had  originated  in 
 Ardechyr,  the  son  of  Sassan,  A.D.  226,  had  long 
 struggled,  first  with  the  Roman,  and  afterwards 
 with  the  Greek  empire,  for  the  dominion  of  the 
 East,  and  now  its  reigning  monarch  Chosroes  II. 
 conducts  a  victorious  army — swelled  by  24,000 
 Jews  eager  to  emerge  from  their  state  of  subjec- 
 tion and  to  be  avenged  on  their  oppressors — from 
 Syria  to  Palestine.  The  combined  forces  stormed 
 Jerusalem,  A.D.  614.  The  churches  were  sacked 
 and  plundered,  the  Christian  inhabitants  put  to  the 
 sword  without  mercy,  and  the  supposed  true  cross 
 carried  away.  But  as  Chosroes  advanced  towards 
 Constantinople,    he    was    met    by   the    Emperor 
 
 Heraclius,  who  defeated  him,  and  after  furthei 
 triumphs  came  to  Jerusalem  as  a  pilgrim,  bearing 
 the  true  cross  on  his  shoulders,  rebuilt  the  churches 
 which  had  been  destroyed,  and  re-enacted  Ha- 
 drian's law,  forbidding  the  Jews  to  come  within 
 three  miles  of  the  city. 
 
 But  a  new  power,  and  one  more  formidable 
 than  that  of  Persia,  was  now  springing  up — the 
 religion  and  rule  of  the  imposter  Mohammed.  He 
 died  A.  D.  632,  and  then  the  work  of  spreading  his 
 system  through  the  world  was  taken  up  with 
 ardour  by  his  followers,  whose  successive  leaders 
 received  the  title  of  khalif  or  vicegerent  of  the  pro- 
 phet. Omar,  the  second  of  the  khalifs,  a  man  of 
 singular  austerity,  enthusiasm,  and  elevation  of 
 character,  having  conquered  Arabia,  Syria,  and 
 Egypt,  sent  his  forces  against  Jerusalem.  The 
 valour  with  which  they  were  met  won  the  admira- 
 tion of  the  besiegers,  but  the  inhabitants  were  at 
 length  obliged  to  yield,  and  Omar  himself,  at  the 
 request  of  the  patriarch  Sophronius,  proceeded 
 there  on  a  red  camel,  which  also  carried  his  simple 
 provisions — a  bag  of  corn,  a  bag  of  dates,  a  wooden 
 dish,  and  a  bottle  of  water — to  ratify  the  terms  of 
 capitulation,  which  secured  to  the  Christians  the.r 
 liberty  to  worship  in  the  churches  they  already 
 possessed.  This  done,  he  entered  the  city,  con- 
 versed freely  with  the  patriarch  on  its  antiquities, 
 and  knelt  for  prayer  on  the  steps  of  the  church 
 built  by  Constantine.  The  Mosque  of  Omar  is  an 
 existing  record  of  his  conquest,  and  of  his  desire  to 
 raise  a  temple  to  the  honour  of  God  in  a  place 
 regarded  so  sacred  both  by  Jews  and  Christians. 
 
 After  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  by  Omar,  it 
 passed  to  the  different  Arab  powers  which  succes- 
 sively had  dominion  in  the  East,  and  was  from 
 time  to  time  snatched  out  of  their  hands  by  the 
 Turks,  the  general  name  by  which  all  the  Tartar 
 tribes  called  themselves.  Finally,  in  the  year  1076 
 it  was  taken  from  the  Fatimite  Arabs,  who  then 
 possessed  it,  by  Acsis,  an  officer  of  the  Sultan 
 Malek  Shah,  of  the  race  of  the  Seljouk  Turks.  Pre- 
 viously to  this  it  had  been  visited  by  many  pilgrims, 
 and  had  once  been  the  scene  of  an  interchange  of 
 courteous  messages  between  Haroun-el-Raschid, 
 the  great  Eastern  ruler,  and  Charlemagne,  the 
 emperor  of  the  West.  But  its  Seljouk  masters,  a 
 barbarous  and  cruel  race,  heaped  wrongs  and  in- 
 sults upon  the  Christians,  and  these  wrongs  and 
 insults  awakened  throughout  Christendom  that 
 burning  desire  to  possess  the  holy  city  which, 
 during  a  period  of  200  years,  gave  rise  to  seven 
 crusades,  conducted  by  the  monarchs,  the  nobles, 
 and  the  people  of  Europe,  to  effect  or  maintain  its 
 conquest.  Jerusalem  was  taken  by  the  first  Cru- 
 saders, A.D.  1099,  after  a  fearful  slaughter  of  its 
 defenders — now  again  the  Fatimites  of  Egypt,  who 
 had  expelled  the  Seljouks  eleven  months  before. 
 
 Godfrey  de  Bouillon  was  elected  to  be  its  king, 
 notwithstanding  the  opposition  of  the  bishops,  who 
 said — non  d^bere  ibi  eligi  Rcgem,  ubi  Deics  passus 
 et  coronatus  est ;  the  feudal  system  was  adopted, 
 and  a  code  of  laws,  called  the  Assize  of  Jerusalem, 
 drawn  up  ("or  the  government  of  its  people.  God- 
 frey was  the  first  of  a  dynasty  of  thirteen  Latin 
 kings,  nine  of  whom — ending  in  Guy  de  Lusignan, 
 husband  of  Sybilla,  great-grand-daughter  of  Bald- 
 win II.* — reigned  successively  in  Jerusalem,  till  it 
 was  taken  by  Saladin,  Oct.  2,  I1S7. 
 
 The  third  elected  kinf 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 523 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 LATIN  KINGS  OF  JERUSALEM. 
 
 I.  Godfrey  de  Bouillon, 
 
 2.  Baldwin  I., 
 
 3.   Baldwin  II.  (de  Burgo), 
 
 elected  July  1099, 
 
 brother  of  Godfrey 
 
 , 
 
 a  relative  of  Godfrey, 
 
 died  July  iioo. 
 
 died  II iS. 
 
 died  1131. 
 
 4.  Foulques  d'Anjou  = 
 
 Melisseude. 
 
 Three  other 
 
 d.  1144. 
 
 c)I 
 
 daughters. 
 
 5.  Baldwin  III.,      Agnes  de  Courtenai  =: 
 
 1 
 =     6.  Amauri  (or  Almeri 
 
 =               =  Maria,  daughter  of  Isaac 
 
 d.  1162.               first  wife,  m.  1157. 
 
 d.  1173. 
 
 Comnenus,  second  wife, 
 m.  1 167. 
 
 7.   Baldwin  IV.          William  de    =  Sibylla 
 
 =  9.  Guy  de  Lusignan, 
 
 Isabella. 
 
 the  leper,  struggles      Montferrat,      d.  1189. 
 
 second  husband. 
 
 Humphrey                                 11.   Henri  de  Cham- 
 
 with  Saladin,           first  husband. 
 
 loses  Jerusalem  to 
 
 de 
 
 Thoron,                                pagne,  third  husband. 
 
 d.  1185 
 
 Saladin  1187  ;  loses 
 
 first  husband.                              appointed  by  Richard 
 
 8.   Baldwin  V. 
 
 the  title  of  King  1189; 
 
 1 192,  d.  1197. 
 
 d.  1 186, 
 
 made  King  of  Cyprus 
 
 si.\  years  eld. 
 
 by  Richard  Cosur-de- 
 
 10.   Conrad  de  Mont-       12.  Amauri  de 
 
 Lion  1 192. 
 
 ferrat,  second  hus-       Lusignan,  fourth 
 band,  appomted  to       husband,  d.  1205. 
 
 the  title  by  Richard 
 
 Coeur-de-Lion  1192  ; 
 assassinated  1192. 
 
 13.  John  de  Brienne  =  Mary, 
 
 crowned  at  Acre      1       married  John  d 
 1210;  d.  1237.  Brienne  1210. 
 
 Frederick  II.,        =  Yoleude,  m.  1222. 
 
 Emperor  of  Germany, 
 
 assumed  the  title  of 
 
 King  of  Jerusalem 
 
 during  the  lifetime  of 
 
 John  de  Brienne. 
 
 The  possession  of  Jerusalem  during  this  period 
 by  a  Christian  power  gave  birth  to  the  two 
 great  orders  of  knighthood,  that  of  the  Temple 
 and  that  of  St.  John  of  Jerusalem  ;  the  former 
 of  which  was  distributed  throughout  Europe,  and 
 the  latter — known  also  under  the  name  of  Knights 
 Hospitallers  —  first  fixed  themselves  at  Rhodes, 
 and  afterwards  dwindled  down  into  the  little 
 society  of  the  Knights  of  Malta.  The  Teu- 
 tonic order  sprung  up  at  Acre  in  II91,  and  its 
 grand  masters,  who  became  hereditary,  were  the 
 ancestors  of  the  house  of  Brandenburg,  and  the 
 kings  of  Prussia.  The  capture  of  the  city  by 
 Saladin  produced  the  third  crusade,  but  it  was 
 never  retaken  by  the  Christians,  and  the  remaining 
 kings  of  the  series — ending  in  Jean  de  Brienne — 
 were  only  titular,  and  resided  at  Tyre,  Acre,  or 
 elsewhere  in  Palestine.  In  1229 — during  the  life- 
 time of  Jean  de  Brienne — the  Emperor  Frederic 
 H.  of  Germany  entered  and  took  possession  of 
 Jerusalem  by  virtue  of  a  treaty  with  the  Sultan  of 
 Egypt  ;  but  ten  years  later  it  fell  once  more, 
 through  neglect,  into  the  hands  of  the  Moham- 
 medans. In  1 241  it  was  again  given  up  to  the 
 Christians  by  the  Sultan  of  Damascus,  to  in- 
 duce them  to  help  him  against  Egypt,  but 
 three  years  afterwards  it  was  taken,  after  a 
 battle  of  two  days'  duration,  and  the  loss  of  the 
 grand  masters  and  most  of  the  knights  of  the  two 
 great  orders,  by  the  Kharismians,  a  Tartar  horde 
 driven  out  of  their  countiy  by  more  powerful 
 tribes.  The  Kharismians  were  themselves  dispos- 
 sessed of  Jerusalem,  and  driven  back  to  the  Cas- 
 pian Sea  by  the  Mohammedans  of  Syria,  A.D.  1247. 
 
 The  Ottoman  Sultan  Selim  I.  took  possession  of 
 Jerusalem  with  the  rest  of  Syria  and  Egypt  in  1517, 
 and  his  successor,  Soliman  the  Magnificent,  built  its 
 present  walls  m  1542.     In  1832  Jerusalem  became 
 
 subject  to  Mohammed  Ali,  the  Pasha  of  Eg}'pt,  re- 
 ceiving him  without  resistance  within  its  gates.  In 
 1 841  he  was  deprived  of  all  his  Syrian  possessions 
 by  European  interference,  and  Jerusalem  was  again 
 subjected  to  the  government  of  the  Ottoman  Porte, 
 and  in  the  same  year  a  bishopric  of  the  Anglican 
 church  was  established  there  by  the  combined 
 movement  of  England  and  Prussia. 
 
 In  1850  a  dispute  about  the  guardianship  of  the 
 holy  places  between  the  monks  of  the  Greek  and 
 Latin  churches,  in  which  Nicholas  Emperor  of 
 Russia  sided  with  the  Greeks,  and  Louis  Napoleon, 
 Emperor  of  the  French,  with  the  Latins,  led  to  a 
 decision  of  the  question  by  the  Porte,  which  was 
 unsatisfactory  to  Russia,  and  which  resulted  in  a 
 war  of  considerable  magnitude  between  that  coun- 
 try, on  the  one  side,  and  the  allied  forces  of  Eng- 
 land and  France  on  the  other. 
 
 For  the  history  of  Jerusalem  see  History  von 
 Jericsalem,  Strasbourg  1518  ;  Spalding,  Gesch. 
 d.  Christl.  Konigsreichs  Jentsalem,  Berlin  1803  ; 
 Deyling,  ALlia:  Capitolince  Origg.  et  Historia,  Lips. 
 1743  ;  Poujoulat,  Histoire  de  yjmsalem,  Brux. 
 1842;  Raumer's  Paliisthia ;  Robinson's  Bib.  Re- 
 searches in  Palestine;  also  Lightfoot  ;  Stanley's 
 Sinai  a7id  Palestine ;  VArt  de  Verifier  les  Dates  ; 
 Universal  History  Ancient  and  Modern  ;  Gibbon's 
 Decline  and  Fall,  etc. — M.  H. 
 
 Part  11.^ — Topography,  i.  Site  oJ  the  City. — 
 'Jerusalem  lies  near  tlie  summit  of  a  broad  moun- 
 tain-ridge. This  ridge,  or  mountainous  tract, 
 extends,  without  interruption,  from  the  plain  of 
 Esdraelon  to  a  line  drawn  between  the  south  end 
 of  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  south-east  corner  of  the 
 Mediterranean ;  or,  more  properly,  perhaps,  it 
 may  be  regarded  as  extending  as  far  south  as  to 
 Jebel  Araif  in  the  Desert,  where  it  sinks  down  at 
 once  to  the  level  of  the  great  western  plateau. 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 524 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 This  tract,  which  is  everjrwhere  not  less  than  from 
 20  to  25  geographical  miles  in  breadth,  is,  in  fact, 
 high  uneven  table-land.  It  everywhere  forms  the 
 precipitous  western  wall  of  the  great  valley  of  the 
 Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea  ;  while  towards  the  west 
 It  sinks  down  by  an  offset,  into  a  range  of  lower 
 hills,  which  lie  between  it  and  the  great  plain  along 
 the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean.  The  surface  of 
 this  upper  region  is  everywhere  rocky,  uneven, 
 and  mountainous ;  and  is,  moreover,  cut  up  by 
 deep  valleys  which  run  east  or  west  on  either  side 
 towards  the  Jordan  or  the  Mediterranean.  The 
 line  of  division,  or  water-shed,  between  the  waters 
 of  these  valleys — a  term  which  here  applies  almost 
 exclusively  to  the  waters  of  the  rainy  season — fol- 
 lows for  the  most  part  the  height  of  land  along  the 
 ridge  ;  yet  not  so  but  that  the  heads  of  the  valleys, 
 which  run  off  in  different  directions,  often  interlap 
 for  a  considerable  distance.  Thus,  for  example,  a 
 valley  which  descends  to  the  Jordan,  often  has 
 its  head  a  mile  or  two  westward  of  the  commence- 
 ment of  other  valleys  which  run  to  the  western  sea. 
 '  From  the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon  onwards 
 towards  the  south,  the  mountainous  country  rises 
 gradually,  forming  the  tract  anciently  known  as 
 the  mountains  of  Ephraim  and  Judah  ;  until,  in 
 the  vicinity  of  Ilebrcm,  it  attains  an  elevation  of 
 nearly  3000  Paris  feet  [ab.  3,200  Eng.]  above  the 
 level  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  Further  north, 
 nn  a  line  drawn  from  the  north  end  of  the  Dead 
 Sea  towards  the  true  west,  the  ridge  has  an  eleva- 
 tion of  only  about  2500  Paris  feet  [ab.  2,700  Eng.] ; 
 and  here,  close  u;  on  the  water-shed,  lies  the  city 
 of  Jerusalem.  Its  mean  geographical  position  is 
 in  lat.  31°  46'  35"  N.,  and  long.  35°  18'  30"  E. 
 from  Greenwich. 
 
 '  Six  or  seven  miles  N.  and  N.W.  of  the  city  is 
 spread  out  the  open  plain  or  basin  round  about 
 el-Jib  (Gibeon),  extending  also  towards  el-Bireh 
 (Beeroth)  ;  the  waters  of  which  flow  off  at  its  S.  E. 
 part  through  the  deep  valley  here  called  by  the 
 Arabs  Wady  Beit  Hanina  ;  but  to  which  the 
 monks  and  travellers  have  usually  given  the  name 
 of  the  '  Valley  of  Turpentine,'  or  of  the  Terebinth, 
 on  the  mistaken  supposition  that  it  is  the  ancient 
 Valley  of  Elah.  This  great  valley  passes  along  in 
 a  S.  W.  direction,  an  hour  or  more  west  of  Jerusa- 
 lem ;  and  finally  opens  out  from  the  mountains 
 into  the  western  plain,  at  the  distance  of  six  or 
 eight  hours  S.W.  from  the  city,  under  the  name 
 of  Wady  es  Siirar.  The  traveller,  on  his  way 
 from  Ramleh  to  Jerusalem,  descends  into  and 
 crosses  this  deep  valley  at  the  village  of  Kulonieh 
 on  its  western  side,  an  hour  and  a  half  from  the 
 latter  city.  On  again  reaching  the  high  ground 
 on  its  eastern  side,  he  enters  upon  an  open  tract 
 sloping  gradually  downwards  towards  the  east ; 
 and  sees  before  him,  at  the  distance  of  about  two 
 miles,  the  walls  and  domes  of  the  holy  city,  and 
 beyond  them  the  higher  ridge  or  sunnnit  of  the 
 Mount  of  Olives.  The  traveller  now  descends 
 gradually  towards  the  city  along  a  broad  swell 
 of  ground,  having  at  some  distance  on  his  left  the 
 shallow  northern  part  of  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat ; 
 close  at  hand  on  his  right  the  basin  which  forms 
 the  beginning  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom.  Further 
 down  both  these  valleys  become  deep,  narrow, 
 and  precipitous  ;  that  of  Hinnom  bends  south  and 
 again  east  nearly  at  right  angles,  and  unites  with 
 the  other,  which  then  continues  its  course  to  the 
 Dead  Sea.     Upon  the  broad  and  elevated    pro- 
 
 montory within  the  fork  of  these  two  valleys  lies 
 the  holy  city.  All  around  are  higher  hills  ;  on 
 the  east  the  Mount  of  Olives  ;  on  the  south  the 
 Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,  so  called,  rising  directly 
 from  the  Vale  of  Hinnom  ;  on  the  west  the  ground 
 rises  gently,  as  above  described,  to  the  borders  of 
 the  great  Wady  ;  while  on  the  north,  a  bend  of 
 the  ridge,  connected  with  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
 bounds  the  prospect  at  the  distance  of  more  than 
 a  mile.  Towards  the  S.W.  the  view  is  somewhat 
 more  open  ;  for  here  lies  the  plain  of  Rephaim, 
 commencing  just  at  the  southern  brink  of  the 
 Valley  of  Hinnom,  and  stretching  off  S.W. ,  where 
 it  runs  to  the  western  sea.  In  the  N.W.,  too,  the 
 eye  reaches  up  along  the  upper  part  of  the  valley 
 of  Jehoshaphat ;  and  from  many  points  can  dis- 
 cern the  mosque  of  Neby  Samwil,  situated  on  a 
 lofty  ridge  beyond  the  great  Wady,  at  the  distance 
 of  two  hours. 
 
 '  The  surface  of  the  elevated  promontory  itself, 
 on  which  the  city  stands,  slopes  somewhat  steeply 
 towards  the  east,  terminating  on  the  brink  of  the 
 Valley  of  Jehoshaphat.  From  the  northern  part, 
 near  the  present  Damascus  gate,  a  depression  or 
 shallow  wady  runs  in  a  southern  direction,  having 
 on  the  west  the  ancient  hills  of  Akra  and  Zion, 
 and  on  the  east  the  lower  ones  of  Bezetha  and 
 Moriah.  Between  the  hills  of  Akra  and  Zion 
 another  depression  or  shallow  wady  (still  easy  to 
 be  traced)  comes  down  from  near  the  Jaffa  gate, 
 and  joins  the  former.  It  then  continues  obliquely 
 down  the  slope,  but  with  a  deeper  bed,  in  a 
 southern  direction,  quite  to  the  pool  of  Siloam  and 
 the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat.  This  is  the  ancient 
 Tyropoeon.  West  of  its  lower  part  Zion  rises 
 loftily,  lying  mostly  without  the  modern  city ; 
 while  on  the  east  of  the  Tyropoeon  and  the  valley 
 first  mentioned,  lie  Bezetha,  Moriah,  and  0[)hel, 
 the  last  a  long  and  comparatively  narrow  ridge, 
 also  outside  of  the  modern  city,  and  terminating  in 
 a  rocky  point  over  the  pool  of  Siloam.  These 
 three  last  hills  may  strictly  be  taken  as  only 
 parts  of  one  and  the  same  ridge.  The  breadth  of 
 the  whole  site  of  Jerusalem,  from  the  brow  of  the 
 Valley  of  Hinnom,  near  the  Jaffa  gate,  to  the  brink 
 of  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  is  about  1020  yards, 
 or  nearly  half  a  geographical  mile ;  of  which  dis- 
 tance 318  yards  are  occupied  by  the  area  of  the  great 
 mosque  el-Haram  esh-Sherif.  North  of  the  Jaffa 
 gate  the  city  wall  sweeps  round  more  to  the  west, 
 and  increases  the  breadth  of  the  city  in  that  part. 
 
 '  The  country  around  Jerusalem  is  all  of  lime- 
 stone formation,  and  not  particularly  fertile.  The 
 rocks  everywhere  come  out  above  the  Surface, 
 which  in  many  parts  is  also  thickly  strewed  with 
 loose  stones ;  and  the  aspect  of  the  wliole  region 
 is  barren  and  dreary ;  yet  the  olive  thrives  here 
 abundantly,  and  fields  of  grain  are  seen  in  the 
 valleys  and  other  places,  but  they  are  less  produc- 
 tive than  in  the  region  of  Hebron  and  Nabulus. 
 Neither  vineyards  nor  fig-trees  flourish  on  the 
 high-ground  around  the  city,  though  the  latter  are 
 found  in  the  gardens  below  Siloam,  and  very  fre- 
 quently in  the  vicinity  of  Bethlehem.' 
 
 This  description  of  the  site  of  the  city,  written 
 by  Dr.  Robinson  in  1838  {Bib.  Researches,  vol.  i. , 
 pp.  25S-260),  is  so  perspicuous  and  so  minutely 
 accurate,  that  few  later  travellers  have  attempted 
 to  improve  upon  it.  The  second  visit  of  Dr. 
 Robinson  in  1852,  while  more  fruitful  in  the  dis- 
 cussion of  particular  physical  features  of  the  Holy 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 525 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 City,  made  no  additions  to  his  first  description  of 
 its  general  topography.  Stanley  calls  attention  to 
 the  central  situation  of  the  city  with  regard  to  the 
 territory  of  which  it  was  the  capital.  'Jerusalem 
 was  on  the  ridge,  the  broadest  and  most  strongly 
 marked  ridge  of  the  back-bone  of  the  complicated 
 hills  which  extend  through  the  whole  country  from 
 the  Desert  to  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  Every  wan- 
 derer, every  conqueror,  eveiy  traveller  who  has 
 trod  the  central  route  of  Palestine  from  north  to 
 south,  must  have  passed  through  the  table-land  of 
 Jerusalem.  It  was  the  water-shed  between  the 
 streams,  or  rather  the  torrent-beds,  which  find  their 
 way  eastward  to  the  Jordan,  and  those  which  pass 
 westward  to  the  Mediterranean'  {Sinai  and  Pales- 
 tine, p.  175).  This  double  promontory,  with  its 
 twin  steeps,  Zion  and  Moriah,  separated  upon  three 
 sides  by  deep  ravines  from  the  surrounding  moun- 
 tams,  some  of  which  are  slightly  above  its  own 
 level,  answers  to  the  Psalmist's  picture  of  Jeru- 
 salem as  at  once  founded  upon  the  mountains  and 
 encompassed  by  them  :  '  His  foundation  is  in  the 
 holy  mountains.'  '  Beautiful  for  situation  is  Mount 
 Zion — the  mountain  of  his  holiness.'  'As  the 
 mountains  are  round  about  Jerusalem,  so  the  Lord 
 is  round  about  his  people.' 
 
 2.  Topography  of  the  Ancient  City. — The  fore- 
 going description  by  Dr.  Robinson  incidentally 
 assumes  as  settled  certain  points  in  the  inte- 
 rior topography  of  Jerusalem,  such  as  the  posi- 
 t  on  of  Akra,  and  the  course  of  the  Tyropoeon, 
 which  are  yet  in  controversy.  Indeed,  hardly  any 
 point  in  the  topography  of  the  city  as  described  by 
 josephus,  which  lias  a  bearing  upon  questions  of 
 ecclesiastical  tradition,  can  be  regarded  as  settled 
 beyond  dispute  ;  so  that,  as  Isaac  Taylor  has  said, 
 in  making  what  at  first  appears  to  be  so  simple  a 
 thing  as  a  plan  of  ancient  Jerusalem,  one  must 
 'take  position  upon  a  battle-field  ;  and  he  must 
 prepare  himself  to  defend,  by  all  available  means, 
 every  inch  of  that  position  ;  he  must,  in  fact,  make 
 himself  a  party  in  an  eager  controversy,  which  has 
 enlisted,  and  which  continues  to  enlist,  feelings  and 
 jirepossessions  of  no  ordinary  depth  and  intensity' 
 (Traill's  yosephits,  note  cxxi. )  It  is  possible,  how- 
 ever,— and  this  is  the  design  of  the  present  article, 
 — to  survey  this  battle-field  as  spectators,  and  even 
 to  reconnoitre  it  minutely  as  engineers,  without 
 taking  a  position  as  combatants.  Every  reader  of 
 Scripture  feels  a  natural  anxiety  to  form  some 
 notion  of  the  appearance  and  condition  of  Jeru- 
 salem as  it  existed  in  the  time  of  Christ,  or  rather 
 as  it  stood  before  its  destruction  by  the  Romans. 
 I'here  are  unusual  difficulties  m  the  way  of  satisfy- 
 ing this  desire,  although  it  need  not  be  left  alto- 
 gether ungratified.  The  principal  sources  of  these 
 difficulties  have  been  indicated  by  different  travel- 
 lers, and  by  none  more  forcibly  than  by  Richard- 
 son {Travels,  ii.  251).  '  It  is  a  tantalizing  circum- 
 stance, however,  for  the  traveller  who  wishes  to 
 recognise  in  his  walks  the  site  of  particular  buildings, 
 or  the  scenes  of  memorable  events,  that  the  greater 
 part  of  the  objects  mentioned  in  the  description, 
 both  of  the  mspired  and  of  the  Jewish  historian, 
 are  entirely  razed  from  their  foundation,  without 
 leaving  a  single  trace  or  name  behind  to  point  out 
 where  they  stood.  Not  an  ancient  tower,  or  gate, 
 or  wall,  or  hardly  even  a  stone  remains.  The 
 foundations  are  not  only  broken  up,  but  every 
 fragment  of  which  they  were  composed  is  swept 
 away,  and  the  spectator  looks  upon  the  bare  rock 
 
 with  hardly  a  sprinkling  of  earth  to  point  out  her 
 gardens  of  pleasure,  or  groves  of  idolatrous  devo- 
 tion. A  few  gardens  still  remain  on  the  sloping 
 base  of  Mount  Zion,  watered  from  the  pool  of 
 Siloam  :  the  gardens  of  Gethsemane  are  still  in  a 
 sort  of  ruined  cultivation  ;  the  fences  are  broken 
 down  and  the  olive-trees  decaying,  as  if  the  hand 
 which  dressed  and  fed  them  were  withdrawn  :  the 
 Mount  of  Olives  still  retains  a  languishing 
 verdure,  and  nourishes  a  few  of  tliose  trees  from 
 which  it  derives  its  name  ;  *  but  all  round  about 
 Jerusalem  the  general  aspect  is  blighted  and 
 barren  :  the  grass  is  withered  :  the  bare  rock  looks 
 through  tlie  scanty  sward,  and  the  grain  itself,  like 
 the  starving  progeny  of  famine,  seems  in  doubt 
 whether  to  come  to  maturity  or  die  in  the  ear.' 
 
 It  is  impossible  for  the  Christian  traveller  to 
 look  upon  Jerusalem  with  the  same  feelings  with 
 which  he  would  contemplate  tha  ruins  of  any 
 other  city  which  the  world  ever  saw.  There  is  in 
 all  the  doings  of  the  Jews,  their  virtues  and  their 
 vices,  their  wisdom  and  their  folly,  a  height  and  a 
 depth,  a  breadth  and  a  length,  that  angels  can- 
 not fathom  ;  their  whole  history  is  a  history  of 
 miracles  ;  the  precepts  of  their  sacred  book  are  the 
 most  profound,  and  the  best  adapted  to  every  sta- 
 tion in  which  man  can  be  placed  :  they  moderate 
 him  in  prosperity,  sustain  him  in  adversity,  guide 
 him  in  health,  console  him  in  sickness,  support  him 
 at  the  close  of  life,  travel  on  with  him  through 
 death,  live  with  him  throughout  endless  ages  of 
 eternity,  and  Jerusalem  lends  its  name  to  the  eter- 
 nal mansions  of  the  blessed  in  heaven  which  man 
 is  admitted  to  enjoy  through  the  atonement  of 
 Christ,  who  was  born  of  a  descendant  of  Judah. 
 
 In  determining  the  topography  of  Jerusalem, 
 '  the  chief  diversities  of  opinion  have  arisen  in 
 endeavouring  to  ap]ily  the  descriptions  of  Josephus 
 to  the  present  physical  features  of  the  Holy  City. 
 Thus  it  is  the  valley  of  the  Tyropoeon,  the  hills 
 Akra  and  Bezetha,  the  course  of  the  second  wall, 
 the  place  of  the  ancient  bridge,  the  extent  of  the 
 Temple  area,  and  the  relation  to  it  of  the  fortress 
 Antonia,  it  is  these  which  have  formed  the  chief 
 topics  of  inquiiy,  and  the  themes  of  disquisition, 
 sometimes  anything  but  tranquil.  Nor  is  it  won- 
 derful that  the  subject  should  be  environed  with 
 difficulties.  Ever  since  Jerusalem  became  the 
 capital  of  the  chosen  people,  she  has  been  sub- 
 jected to  calamities,  to  revolutions,  to  overthrows, 
 almost  without  number.  Even  of  old,  in  the  time 
 of  the  exile,  it  was  predicted,  that  '  the  city  should 
 be  builded  upon  her  own  heap  ; '  and  how  often 
 has  she  since  been  thus  rebuilded  ?  Her  walls  and 
 dwellings,  her  fortresses,  palaces,  and  temple,  have 
 been  laid  in  ruins,  and  have  crumbled  into  dust. 
 The  ruins  and  rubbish  of  nearly  thirty  centuries 
 are  strewed  over  her  surface  ;  and  no  wonder  that 
 her  hollows  and  ravines  are  filled  up,  and  her  hills 
 made  low '  (Robinson,  iii.  204).  Some  notion  of 
 this  may  be  formed  from  the  fact  that  in  seeking  a 
 foundation  for  the  Protestant  church  on  Mount 
 Zion,  superincumbent  rubbish  to  the  depth  of  fifty 
 feet  was  dug  through  before  reaching  the  solid 
 rock  (Olin,  ii.  254).  Not  only  a  very  minute  sur- 
 vey, but  numerous  excavations  would  be  necessary 
 to  the  ends  of  a  really  satisfactoiy  investigation. 
 
 *  [This  does  not  seem  to  be  the  case  now.  In 
 May  1863  the  fences  were  good,  and  the  trees 
 carefully  preserved.  ] 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 526 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 Of  late  years  increasing  facilities  have  been  afforded 
 for  such  explorations  through  the  relaxing  of  Mo- 
 hammedan prejudices  against  the  infidel  Franks. 
 The  fanatical  jealousy  which  once  held  such  strict 
 surveillance  over  the  approaches  to  the  mosque  of 
 Omar,  and  threatened  with  death  any  non-Mussul- 
 man invader  of  its  holy  precincts,  has  so  far  subsided 
 that,  with  proper  pains  and  courtesy,  the  traveller 
 may  gain  admittance  to  the  interior.  Barclay  and 
 Thomson  have  had  free  access,  where  Robinson 
 and  Stanley  were  denied,  and  where  Catherwood 
 ventured  only  in  disguise  and  at  the  risk  of  his  life. 
 The  anticipation  of  Isaac  Taylor  begins  to  be 
 fulfilled  :  '  that  in  the  almost  inevitable  progress  of 
 European  affairs  Palestine  must  come  under  the 
 wing  of  one  of  the  great  European  states  ;  that  this 
 land  will  receive  ere  long  a  Christian  and  civilized 
 government — will  have  a  police — will  afford  a  se- 
 cure and  tranquil  liberty  of  travel  and  of  residence 
 — a  liberty  of  wandering  and  strolling  about,  even 
 as  one  does  in  the  highlands  of  Scotland,  or  in  the 
 valleys  of  Switzerland  ;  that  it  will  give  leisurely 
 opportunity  to  dig  and  to  trench,  to  upturn  and  to 
 excavate. 
 
 '  When  such  a  time  comes,  or  within  a  period 
 of  five  years  after  it  has  come,  Palestine — a  region 
 not  more  extensive  than  any  three  adjoining  Eng- 
 lish counties — will  have  opened  its  long  hidden 
 secrets  to  antiquarian  eyes  ;  its  few  square  miles  of 
 soil,  teeming  vv'ith  historic  materials,  will  have  been, 
 if  not  sifted,  yet  turned  over,  or  pierced  here  and 
 there,  and  especially  the  lowest  basements  of  the 
 Holy  City  will  have  been  moved  from  their  places, 
 or  sufficiently  exposed  to  view. 
 
 '  Such  a  time  will  not  pass  without  yielding  evi- 
 dence enough  for  constructing  an  authentic  plan  of 
 ancient  Jerusalem  ;  and  may  it  not  be  well  until 
 then  to  hold  in  suspense  our  opinion,  whatever  it 
 may  be,  on  matters  which  at  present  cannot  be 
 conclusively  determined.  Let  the  Turk  retire  and 
 the  topographer  may  step  forward '  (Traill's  Jose- 
 plius,  II.,  cxxi.) 
 
 The  Mohammedan  jealousy  of  the  exploration  of 
 Jerusalem  tiy  the  Franks  is  due  mainly  to  two 
 causes, — the  apprehension  that  a  military  survey  of 
 the  city  will  thus  be  secured  as  a  guide  in  some 
 future  assault,  and  the  suspicion  that  the  Franks 
 by  some  divining  art  have  ascertained  the  locality 
 of  hidden  treasures,  and  intend  to  deprive  the 
 Moslem  of  unknown  spoils.  These,  with  a  religious 
 aversion  toward  Christians,  and  a  constitutional 
 aversion  to  innovation,  have  created  a  formidable 
 barrier  to  topographical  research  in  Jerusalem. 
 Resident  foreigners,  by  patience,  kindness,  watch- 
 fulness, and  firmness,  can  do  much  to  overcome 
 this  prejudice,  and  to  further  such  investigation. 
 In  this  respect  the  long  residence  of  Dr.  Barclay  at 
 ferusalem  in  the  capacity  of  a  medical  missionary 
 was  of  much  service,  and  we  shall  have  occasion  in 
 this  article  to  profit  by  his  personal  researches 
 {City  of  the  Great  King,  pp.  456-512). 
 
 As  the  ground  ]5lan  of  the  topography  of  ancient 
 Jerusalem  we  have  the  following  description  by 
 Josephus  : — '  It  was  built  upon  two  hills,  one  part 
 facing  the  other  (dvTLTrpdffUTros,  fare  to  face),  sepa- 
 rated by  an  intervening  valley,  at  which,  one  upon 
 another  (/.  e.,  crowded  together),  the  houses  ended. 
 Of  these  hills,  that  on  which  the  upper  city  stood 
 was  much  the  higher  and  straighter  in  its  length. 
 Accordingly,  on  account  of  its  strength,  it  was 
 caUed  the  fortress  of  King  David,  the  father  of 
 
 Solomon,  by  whom  the  Temple  was  originallj 
 built,  but  by  us  it  is  called  the  upper  market-place. 
 The  other  hill,  called  Akra,  which  sustains  the 
 lower  city,  was  curved  on  each  side  {afxcplKvpros, 
 gibboics).  Over  against  this  was  a  third  hill,  natu- 
 rally lower  than  Akra,  and  formerly  separated  from 
 it  by  another  broad  ravine.  Afterwards,  however, 
 when  the  Asmonceans  were  in  power,  desiring  to 
 connect  the  city  with  the  Temple,  they  filled  ir 
 this  ravine,  and,  cutting  down  the  summit  of  Akra, 
 they  reduced  its  elevation  so  that  the  Temple  might 
 appear  above  it.  The  valley  called  Tyropceon, 
 which  we  have  said  separated  the  hill  of  the  upper 
 city  from  that  of  the  lower,  extends  as  far  as  Siloam, 
 for  so  we  call  a  fountain  whose  waters  are  both 
 sweet  and  abundant.  From  without  (/.  e. ,  exterior 
 to  the  city)  the  two  hills  of  the  city  were  encom- 
 passed by  deep  ravines,  and  because  of  the  pre- 
 cipices on  both  sides  there  was  nowhere  any  ap- 
 proach'  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  v.  4.  i). 
 
 The  main  features  of  this  description  are  con- 
 firmed by  the  terse  and  graphic  picture  which 
 Tacitus  gives  of  the  siege  of  the  city : — '  Two  hills 
 of  immense  height  were  inclosed  by  walls  project- 
 ing outward  or  retiring  inward.  The  extremities 
 of  the  rock  were  abrupt.  .  .  .  The  Temple 
 was  like  a  citadel,  with  walls  of  its  own. 
 Thus  Jenisalem,  by  nature  difficult  of  approach, 
 was  fortified  by  works  which  would  have  been  a 
 sufficient  defence  had  the  city  stood  upon  a  plain ' 
 (Tac.  Hist.,  v.  10,  11,  12). 
 
 Leaving  out  of  view  all  details  as  to  the  interior 
 of  the  modern  city,  and  all  questions  of  the  sacred 
 places,  and  regarding  only  the  general  face  of  the 
 country,  it  seems  not  difficult  to  project  upon  paper 
 a  ground-plan  of  Jerusalem  as  Josephus  describes 
 it.  We  first  lay  down  upon  the  map  a  lofty  craggy 
 hill,  or  rather  a  bold  promontory,  with  steep  de- 
 clivities upon  three  sides.  Facing  this  at  some 
 part,  with  a  valley  intervening,  we  lay  down  a 
 second  hill,  somewhat  lower  than  the  first,  but  like 
 it  steep  and  craggy  upon  its  outer  side.  Opposite 
 to  this  must  now  be  placed  a  third  hill — the  site  of 
 Solomon's  Temple.  But  at  what  point  ?  In  de- 
 signating the  three  hills  the  Jewish  historian  gives 
 no  hint  of  their  relations  to  the  points  of  the  com- 
 pass ;  but  elsewhere,  in  describing  the  gates  of  the 
 Temple,  he  gives  a  clue  to  the  relative  position  of 
 the  first  and  third  hills.  '  In  the  western  parts  of 
 the  enclosure  stood  four  gates,  one  leading  over  to 
 the  royal  palace,  the  valley  between  being  inter- 
 cepted to  form  a  passage,  two  leading  to  the  suburb, 
 and  the  remaining  one  into  the  other  city  being 
 distinguished  by  many  steps  down  into  the  valley, 
 and  from  this  up  again  upon  the  ascent,  for  the 
 city  lay  over  against  the  Temple  in  the  manner  of 
 a  theatre,  being  encompassed  by  a  deep  valley  on 
 all  its  southern  quarter.'  This  statement  places  the 
 third  or  Temple-hill  upon  the  east,  and  the  first  or 
 Palace-hill  upon  the  west,  of  a  dividing  valley,  and 
 bounds  the  Palace-hill,  or  Zion,  by  another  'deep 
 valley'  upon  the  south.  In  this  first  rough  draft 
 of  the  topography  of  Jerusalem  we  therefore  have 
 two  hills — Zion  and  Monah,  or  the  upper  city  and 
 the  Temple-hill— proximately  determined  ;  and  the 
 problem  of  ascertaining  the  position  of  Akra,  a 
 hill  opposite  to  both  these  and  separated  from  each 
 by  a  valley.  Had  Josephus  or  any  othe:  com^ 
 petent  authority  anywhere  stated  that  Akra  lay 
 north  of  Zion  and  west  of  the  Temple-hill,  or  east 
 of  Zion  and  north  of  the  Temple-hill,  there  could 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 5--' 7 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 have  been  no  difficulty  in  identifying  its  site.  But 
 the  absence  of  any  such  definite  statement  leaves 
 the  position  of  Akra  a  question  of  uncertainty  and 
 of  superabundant  controvers)'.  The  general  out- 
 line and  the  relative  position  of  Zion  and  Moriah 
 are  agreed  upon  by  nearly  all  archaeologists.  The 
 southernmost  and  westward  knob  of  the  double 
 promontory  already  mentioned  as  marking  the  site 
 of  Jerusalem  is  Mount  Zion,  the  sharper,  narrower 
 eastward  ridge  is  Moriah,  or  the  Temple-hill  with 
 the  pointed  elongation  of  Ophel.  The  valley  of 
 Hinnom  bounds  Zion  on  the  west,  and  passing 
 around  its  southern  extremity  unites  with  the 
 valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  which  bounds  Moriah  upon 
 the  east.  These  two  valleys  define  the  promontory 
 upon  which  the  city  was  built.  Between  Zion  and 
 Aloriah,  it  is  also  agreed,  is  the  valley  known 
 anciently  as  the  Tyropoeon,  extending  northward 
 from  the  Fool  of  Siloam.  Over  this  valley  passed 
 the  viaduct  leading  from  the  Temple-gate  to  the  I 
 royal  palace.  Thus  far  all  is  plain.  But  above  I 
 the  point  where  it  separates  Zion  from  Moriah,  the  i 
 Tyropoeon  also  separated  Zion  from  Akra  ;  and  | 
 the  topographical  puzzle  is  to  ascertain  the  proper  j 
 starting-point  of  this  valley.  If  it  began  at  or  near  : 
 the  present  Jaffa  gate,  then  Akra  lay  north  of  Zion, 
 between  the  Jaffa  and  Damascus  gates,  and  while 
 facing  Zion  with  a  valley  between,  it  also  stood 
 'over  against  the  Temple,  with  the  valley  that  ex- 
 tends southward  from  the  Damascus  gate  separat- 
 ing it  from  Moriah.'  This  fulfils  the  conditions  of 
 Josephus.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  Tyropoeon 
 began  at  the  Damascus  gate,  Akra  lay  upon  its 
 eastern  side,  facing  Zion  (which  must  then  be  made 
 to  include  in  whole  or  in  part  the  ridge  of  the 
 'Christian  Quarter'),  and  consequently  it  lay  north 
 of  the  Temple-hill,  or  the  present  Haram,  from 
 which  it  was  separated  by  a  valley,  the  traces  of 
 which  are  now  hardly  discernible.  This  also  fulfils 
 the  conditions  of  Josephus  ;  and  upon  either  sup- 
 ]iosition  the  city,  as  comprising  Zion  and  Akra, 
 '  lay  over  against  the  Temple  in  the  manner  of  a 
 theatre. ' 
 
 Sion  and  the  Temple-hil 
 
 The  accompanying  sketch  exhibits  at  a  glance 
 these  two   theories.     Zion   and   the   Temple-hill, 
 
 with  the  intervening  section  of  the  Tyropoeon,  are 
 marked  as  definite  ;  the  situation  of  Akra  and  the 
 upper  part  of  the  Tyropoeon  are  hypothetical ;  the 
 Jaffa  and  Damascus  gates  are  indicated  as  modem 
 landmarks. 
 
 Upon  a  superficial  view  of  the  locality,  the  claims 
 of  the  Damascus  valley  to  be  the  continuation  of 
 the  Tyropoeon  are  altogether  the  most  striking 
 One  cannot  cross  the  city  from  west  to  east,  oi 
 look  down  into  it  from  the  walls,  without  noting 
 this  deep  depression  ;  whereas  the  Jaffa  valley  is 
 now  but  a  gentle  descent,  hardly  perceptible  to  the 
 eye  ;  though  excavations  have  been  made  through 
 rubbish  at  a  point  near  the  gate  to  the  depth  of 
 about  40  feet  before  reaching  the  natural  soil.  Even 
 Dr.  Robinson,  who  strenuously  contends  that  'the 
 beginning  of  the  Tyropteon  must  be  sought  near 
 the  Jaffa  gate,'  admits  that  first  impressions  are 
 against  this  view.  'When  the  traveller  first  enters 
 Jerusalem,  with  the  description  of  Josephus  before 
 his  mind,  and  sees  the  most  marked  valley  of  the 
 city  to  be  that  extending  southward  from  the 
 Damascus  gate  to  Siloam,  he  is  naturally  led,  at 
 the  first  glance,  to  inquire  whether  this  valley  is 
 not  the  Tyropoeon.  Such  was  my  own  experience, 
 and  has,  doubtless,  been  that  of  very  many  others' 
 (iii.  207).  But  Dr.  Robinson  rejects  this  first  im- 
 pression of  the  topography  of  the  ancient  city, 
 fjccause  '  the  position  thus  assumed  for  the  T7T0- 
 poeon  would  require  Akra  to  be  on  the  north  of 
 the  Temple,  and  would  separate  it  from  Zion,  not 
 by  a  single  valley  only,  but  by  two  large  depres- 
 sions with  a  rocky  ridge  between.'  He  therefore 
 makes  this  ridge  itself — lying  between  the  obvious 
 valley  running  down  from  the  Damascus  gate,  and 
 the  valley  supposed  to  have  begun  at  a  point  near 
 the  Jaffa  gate— the  Akra  of  Josephus.  And  in- 
 deed this  has  been  the  prevailing  view  of  scholars 
 and  Biblical  geographers,  from  Reland  downward. 
 Some  recent  visitors,  however,  transfer  Akra  to  the 
 northern  section  of  the  Temple-hill  ;  and  one,  at 
 least,  regards  the  hill  Akra  as  nearly  identical  with 
 the  citadel  of  the  same  name,  situated  on  the 
 northern  side  of  the  Temple.  But,  unless  Zion  is 
 made  to  include  the  ridge  between  the  Jaffa  and 
 Damascus  gates,  this  view  greatly  circumscribes 
 tlie  area  of  the  ancient  city.  Hence  a  theory  has 
 been  started  which  makes  the  valley  running  down 
 from  the  Damascus  gate  the  Tyropoeon,  places 
 Akra  upon  the  east  of  this  and  north  of  the  Haram, 
 and  extends  Zion  northwards,  so  as  to  include  as 
 a  spur  of  its  own  the  ridge  commonly  designated 
 as  the  Akra  of  Josephus.  This  brings  Akra  and 
 Zion  face  to  face,  and  so  meets  the  objection  made 
 above  by  Dr.  Robinson  to  locating  Akra  east  of 
 the  Damascus  valley. 
 
 In  this  diversity  of  opinions — we  had  almost  said 
 conjectures — are  there  no  other  landmarks  given  by 
 the  Jewish  historian  which  may  serve  to  fix  the 
 relative  position  of  these  hills  ?  The  closing  sen- 
 tence of  the  passage  already  quoted  from  Josephus 
 is  significant,  '  from  without,  the  two  hills  of  the 
 city  were  encompassed  by  deep  ravines,  and  be- 
 cause of  the  precipices  on  both  sides  there  was 
 nowhere  any  approach.'  The  hills  here  spoken  of 
 are  unquestionably  Zion  and  Akra  ;  but  this  de- 
 scription cannot  apply  to  the  ridge  between  the 
 Jaffa  and  Damascus  gates,  for  there  is  at  that  point 
 no  ravine  exterior  to  the  city.  Hitter  regards 
 this  passage  as  almost  decisive  for  locating  Akra 
 upon  the  eastern  side  of  the  Damascus  gate  valley. 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 528 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 The  *  inaccessible  sides,'  described  by  Josephus, 
 can  be  found  nowhere  upon  the  north  ;  indeed,  in 
 that  quarter  the  city  was  so  assailable  from  without 
 that  it  was  fortified  with  a  triple  wall.  The  '  steep 
 declivities  upon  both  sides '  can  be  identified  only 
 with  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat  upon  the  east,  and 
 that  of  Hinnom  upon  the  south  and  west  ;  and 
 tlierefore  the  one  hill  can  only  be  Zion  with  its 
 prolongation  towards  the   north,   and   the  other. 
 
 Akra,  must  be  the  section  bounded  on  the  east  by 
 the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  which  extends 
 southward  as  the  Temple-hill,  which  Josephus 
 describes  as  a  third  hill,  by  nature  lower  than 
 Akra.  The  Tyropoeon,  which  separated  the  two 
 hills  as  the  upper  and  lower  city,  must  then  be 
 sought  in  the  direction  of  the  present  Mill  Street, 
 i.e. ,  running  from  north  to  south,  from  the  Damas- 
 cus gate  to  Siloam  {Erdkunde,  xvi,  407). 
 
 2S<j.   Wall  of  Jcrusakin. 
 
 If  this  view  can  be  maintained,  it  conforms  to  the 
 ground-plan  of  the  city  as  sketched  by  Josephus, 
 and  at  the  same  time  enlarges  its  dimensions  more 
 nearly  to  the  demands  of  its  estimated  population. 
 Ritter's  inference  from  this  statement  of  Josephus 
 touching  the  'steep  declivities  upon  both  sides,'  Dr. 
 Robinson — whom  we  quote  as  ablest  advocate  of 
 the  westward  location  of  Akra — seeks  to  obviate  by 
 taking  the  expression  the  two  hills  as  '  by  synec- 
 doche for  the  whole  city.'  He  says,  '  if  the  his- 
 torian here  means  the  two  particular  hills  of  Zion 
 
 and  Akra  (as  the  insertion  of  the  Greek  article 
 might  seem  to  imply),  the  language  is  not  literally 
 exact  ;  but  if,  as  is  more  probable,  this  is  a  mere 
 form  of  expression  intended  to  embrace  tlie  whole 
 city,  then  it  presents  no  difficulty'  (i.  2S1).  A 
 better  solution  seems  to  be  that  Josephus,  having 
 already  mentioned  the  filling  up  of  the  valley  be- 
 tween Akra  and  Moriah,  treats  these  hills  as  prac- 
 tically o)ie.  '  The  city,'  he  says,  'was  fortified  by 
 three  walls,  wherever  it  was  not  encircled  by  im- 
 passable ravines :   for  iu  that  part  there  was  but 
 
JERUSALEM  5 
 
 one  wall.'  Now,  we  know  also  from  Josephus 
 that  this  old  first  wall  encompassed  the  Temple- 
 hill  upon  the  south  and  the  east,  and  that  the  third 
 M-all,  or  the  wall  of  Agrippa,  intercepted  it  north  of 
 the  Temple,  at  or  in  the  valley  of  the  Kidron 
 {Bt'/l.  Jiid.  V.  4.  2).  Of  course,  then,  when  he 
 speaks  of  the  city  as  a  whole  as  fortified  by  three 
 walls,  Josephus  includes  the  Temple  as  part  of  the 
 city ;  and  does  not  here,  as  elsewhere,  distinguish 
 between  them. 
 
 The  city,  i.e.,  the  whole  area  within  the  walls, 
 he  describes  in  general  terms  as  '  built  upon  hvo 
 hills,  with  a  valley  between  them' — the  Tyropoeon. 
 These  two  hills  were  the  upper  city,  or  Zion,  and 
 Akra  or  the  lower  city.  But  opposite  to  Akra 
 there  was  also  a  third  hill,  formerly  separated  from 
 it  by  a  broad  valley,  which,  in  the  time  of  the 
 Maccabees,  was  filled  in  so  as  to  connect  the  city 
 with  the  Temple — the  crown  of  Akra  being  levelled 
 so  that  the  Temple  might  appear  above  it.  Thus 
 Akra  and  the  Temple-hill  were  virtually  made  one. 
 Hence  the  city,  including  the  Temple  within  its 
 walls,  could  be  spoken  of  in  a  general  way  as  built 
 upon  two  hills.  The  Tyropoeon,  extending  down 
 to  Siloam,  separated  within  the  city  the  upper 
 and  lower  hills  ;  but  from  without  the  two  hills  of 
 the  city  were  encompassed  by  deep  valleys ;  and 
 because  of  the  steep  declivities  on  both  sides,  there 
 was  nowhere  any  approach.  If  Akra  and  Moriah 
 are  taken  as  one  hill,  the  former  valley  between 
 them  being  almost  obliterated,  this  description  is 
 intelligible  and  literally  exact.  Then  Zion  is 
 bounded  on  the  south-west  by  the  steep  ravine  of 
 Hinnom  ;  and  Akra,  taken  in  connection  with  the 
 Temple-hill,  is  bounded  on  the  east  by  the  steep 
 ravine  of  the  Kidron.  Such,  apparently,  was  the 
 picture  before  the  mind  of  Tacitus,  '  two  hills  of 
 immense  elevation,'  with  steep  rocky  sides.  It  is 
 therefore  credible  at  least  that  Akra  was  an 
 elevation  north  of  the  Temple-hill,  and  that  the 
 two  were  sometimes  spoken  of  as  one. 
 
 Another  element  for  determining  this  question  is 
 the  situation  of  the  tower  of  Hippicus.  This  is 
 commonly  identified  with  the  tower  of  David,  near 
 the  Jaffa  gate.  Hippicus  is,  with  Josephus,  the 
 starting-point  in  describing  the  course  of  the  seve- 
 ral walls,  and  it  evidently  stood  at  the  north-west 
 angle  of  the  first  wall — the  original  enclosure  of 
 Mount  Zion.  The  third  wall  began  at  Hippicus, 
 and  ran  in  a  north-westerly  direction  to  the  tower 
 of  Psephinos,  where  it  turned  to  the  east,  and,  pass- 
 ing in  face  of  the  monument  of  Helena  and  the 
 tombs  of  the  kings,  terminated  in  a  junction  with 
 the  old  wall,  at  the  brink  of  the  Kedron  valley. 
 The  great  octagonal  tower  of  Psephinos  stood  in 
 the  extreme  north-west  corner  of  this  wall.  '  Over 
 against '  this,  in  the  corresponding  angle  of  the  first 
 wall,  and  at  the  junction  of  the  first  wall  with  the 
 third,  stood  the  tower  Hippicus ;  and  on  a  line  with 
 this,  built  also  on  the  north  side  of  the  old  or  first 
 wall,  were  two  other  towers,  Phasaelus  and  Mari- 
 amne.  To  determine  the  position  of  Hippicus  it  is 
 necessary  to  keep  in  mind  its  relation  to  these 
 several  towers.  For  this  purpose,  the  position  of 
 Psephinos  becomes  important,  though  this  tower 
 belonged  to  the  third  wall,  which  was  not  built 
 until  several  years  after  the  death  of  Christ.  From 
 Psephinos  '  could  be  seen  Arabia  towards  the  ris- 
 ing sun,  and  the  inheritance  of  the  Hebrews  quite 
 to  the  sea.  This  shews  that  it  must  have  stood 
 upon  the  high  swell  of  ground  which  extends  up 
 
 VOL.   II. 
 
 29 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 north-north-west  from  the  north-west  corner  of  the 
 present  city.  In  this  quarter  there  are  traces  of  an- 
 cient substructions,  apparently  of  towers  or  other 
 fortifications.'  This  is  at  a  distance  of  700  feet  from 
 the  north-west  corner  of  the  present  city.  The 
 position  of  Psephinos  being  thus  proximately  deter- 
 mined, we  must  seek  for  Hippicus  in  nearly  a  direct 
 line  southward  from  it,  'over  against,'  or  answering 
 to  it.  This  could  hardly  be  said  of  the  so-called 
 castle  of  David,  near  the  Jaffa  gate,  which  is  too 
 far  eastward  from  the  supposed  site  of  Psephinos, 
 and  too  remote  for  the  proper  distribution  of  such  a 
 line  of  military  defences.  Besides,  this  tower  is  in  a 
 re-entering  angle,  whereas  Hippicus  was  a  project- 
 ing corner.  Moreover,  the  measurement  of  the  inner 
 tower  of  the  present  castle  far  exceeds  that  of  the 
 Hippicus  of  Josephus.  He  describes  Hippicus  as  a 
 square  tower,  measuring  twenty-five  cubits,  or  about 
 thirty-eight  feet  on  each  side.  Butthetower  of  David 
 measures  fifty-six  feet  byseventy.  Still  Dr.  Robinson 
 argues,  from  the  solidity  of  the  lower  part  of  this 
 tower,  and  the  size  and  levelling  of  its  stones,  both 
 features  of  the  Hippicus,  that  this  is  the  founda- 
 tion of  that  tower  ;  and  he  disposes  of  the  markea 
 variation  in  the  dimensions  of  the  two,  by  saying 
 that  'Josephus  probably  had  no  such  specific 
 measurements  ;  he  was  writing,  after  the  lapse  of 
 years,  at  Rome,  and  the  numbers  here  given  must 
 therefore  be  regarded  only  in  the  light  of  conjec- 
 tural estimates.'  Upon  other  points,  however, 
 this  learned  and  cautious  critic  places  much  de- 
 pendence upon  the  minute  details  of  Josephus.  It 
 is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  Jewish  historian  could 
 have  given  the  dimensions  of  Hippicus  from  '  con- 
 jectural estimates.'  He  says,  '  It  was  a  quadran- 
 gular structure,  tv/enty-five  cubits  on  each  side,  and 
 built  up  entirely  solid  to  the  height  of  thirty  cubits. 
 Above  this  solid  part  was  a  cistern  twenty  cubits 
 high  ;  and  then,  for  twenty-five  cubits  more,  were 
 chambers  of  various  kinds,  with  a  breast-work  of 
 two  cubits,  and  battlements  of  three  cubits  upon 
 the  top.  The  altitude  of  the  whole  tower  was  con- 
 sequently eighty  cubits.  The  stones  of  which  it 
 was  built  were  veiy  large,  twenty  cubits  long  by  ten 
 broad  and  five  high,  and  were  of  white  marble.' 
 This  reads  like  an  accurate,  not  a  conjectural  de- 
 scription ;  and  it  is  not  likely  that  the  author 
 would  have  given  these  minute  proportions  without 
 data,  or  have  mistaken  a  quadrangle  fifty-six  feet 
 by  seventy,  for  a  square  of  but  little  more  than  one- 
 half  its  superficial  area.  But  Josephus  describes 
 also  two  other  towers — those  of  Phasaelus  and 
 Mariamne,  both  built  by  Herod,  one  of  them  being 
 named  after  a  friend,  and  the  other  after  his  favour- 
 ite wife.  These  stood  not  far  from  Hippicus, 
 upon  the  first  or  most  ancient  wall,  which  ran  from 
 the  latter  tower  eastward  along  the  northern  brow 
 of  Zion.  Connected  with  these  towers  and  Hippi- 
 cus was  the  royal  castle  or  palace  of  the  first  Herod, 
 which  was  enclosed  by  this  wall  on  the  north, 
 and  on  the  other  sides  by  a  wall  thirty  cubits  high. 
 The  whole  was  finished  with  great  strength  and 
 regal  splendour,  and  furnished  with  halls,  galleries, 
 cisterns,  and  apartments  without  number  (Joseph. 
 De  Bell.  Jiid.,  v.  4.  3,  v.  4.  4).  Indeed,  the 
 historian  says  that  the  Temple  itself — though  re- 
 built by  Herod  in  a  style  of  great  magnificence — 
 bore  no  comparison  with  the  palace  he  built  for 
 himself  in  the  upper  town.  This  contained  two 
 7>ery  spacious  buildings,  which  were  named  after  his 
 friends,  the  one  Caesarium,  the  other  Agrippium 
 
 2  M 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 530 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 [Bell.  yicd.  i.  21.  i).  Accordingly,  Hippicus  must 
 be  located  at  a  point  in  the  first  wall  '  over  against' 
 Psephinos  at  the  north-west  angle  of  the  third  wall, 
 and  with  enough  space  along  the  northern  extremity 
 of  Zion  to  admit  of  two  large  towers  in  the  line  of 
 tlie  wall  eastward  from  Hippicus,  and  of  the  very 
 spacious  palace  of  Herod  adjoining  these  several 
 towers,  upon  the  southern  or  inner  side  of  the  first 
 wall.  All  this  would  seem  to  require  that  Hippi- 
 cus should  be  placed  further  north  than  the  tower 
 of  David.  The  three  towers  named  above  as 
 standing  in  a  row  upon  the  north  line  of  the  old 
 wall  must  have  been  nearly  upon  a  line  with  the 
 tower  of  Antonia,  which  was  north  of  the  Temple. 
 For,  when  Herod's  palace  was  destroyed  by  fire, 
 '  the  conflagration  began  at  the  Antonia,  passed 
 onward  to  the  palace,  and  consumed  the  roofs  of 
 the  three  towers'  {Bell.  yiid.  v.  4).  The  rabbi, 
 Joseph  Schwartz,  in  his  descriptive  geography  of 
 Palestine  (pp.  250-51)  states  that  the  Targumist, 
 Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel,  who  lived  at  Jerusalem  in 
 the  time  of  king  Herod,  refers  to  the  tower  of 
 Hippicus,  built  by  that  monarch,  as  representing 
 the  site  of  the  tower  of  Hai^aneel,  spoken  of  by 
 Jeremiah  (xxxi.  38)  and  by  Zechariah  (xiv.  10). 
 The  site  of  Hananeel  was  north-east  of  the  prison 
 gate,  which  Schwartz  assumes  to  have  been  at  or 
 near  the  grotto  of  Jeremiah.  But  this  would  locate 
 Hippicus  too  far  to  the  east.  Fergusson  conjec- 
 tures that  the  ruins  of  the  Kasr  Jaliid  in  the  north- 
 western angle  of  the  modern  wall  may  represent 
 the  site  of  Hippicus  ;  and  Robinson,  while  he 
 maintains  the  identity  of  the  tower  of  David  with 
 the  Hippicus  of  Herod,  conjectures  that  the  ruins 
 near  the  Damascus  gate  '  wei-e  ancient  towers  of  a 
 date  anterior  to  the  time  of  Herod.'  But  if  Hip- 
 picus stood  on  the  spot  of  the  Kasr  Jahid,  then 
 those  ruins  may  mark  the  site  of  Mariamne  on  the 
 north-eastern  brow  of  Zion,  or  of  a  portion  of 
 Herod's  palace,  which  would  thus  be  brought 
 directly  opposite  the  tower  of  Antonia,  so  that 
 the  fire,  as  described  by  Josephus,  could  easily 
 have  communicated  from  the  fortress  on  the  north 
 of  the  Temple  to  the  palace  in  the  upper  city,  and 
 thence  to  the  towers  in  its  northern  wall.  In  iden- 
 tifying the  tower  of  David  with  Hippicus,  Dr. 
 Robinson  attaches  much  importance  to  'the  solidity 
 of  the  antique  part'  of  the  structure  near  the  Jaffa 
 gate.  While  he  rejects  the  measurements  of  Hip- 
 picus by  Josephus  as  '  conjectural  estimates,'  he 
 says,  '  the  solidity  of  the  lower  part  of  the  tower 
 is  a  circumstance  so  remarkable,  and  was  probably 
 of  such  publicity,  that  it  cannot  well  be  referred  to 
 the  imagination  of  the  historian'  {i.  307).  But 
 Josephus  states  expressly  that  eveiy  one  of  the 
 towers  in  the  third  wall  was  built  in  the  same 
 manner.  '  On  this  wall  were  erected  towers, 
 twenty  cubits  in  breadth,  and  the  same  in  height, 
 square,  and  solid  as  the  zvall  itself.  .  ,  .  Over  the 
 solid  altitude  of  the  towers^  which  was  twenty 
 cubits,  were  sumptuous  apartments ;  and  above 
 these,  again,  upper  rooms  and  numerous  cisterns 
 therein  to  receive  the  rain  water,  and  to  each  room 
 wide  staircases.  Of  stick  towers  the  third  wall  had 
 ninety,  disposed  at  intervals  of  200  cubits'  [Bell. 
 yud.  V.  4.  3).  This  '  solidity  of  the  lower  part  of 
 the  tower,'  so  far  from  being  a  remarkable  feature 
 of  Hippicus,  was  the  common  feature  of  them  all ; 
 and  therefore,  when  Josephus  gives  this  portion  of 
 Hippicus  of  larger  dimensions  than  the  correspond- 
 ing portion  in  the  rest — Hippicus  having  a  solid 
 
 foundation  twenty-five  cubits  square,  and  thirty 
 high  and  the  other  towers  a  solid  cubic  foundation 
 of  twenty  cubits — the  presumption  is,  that  his  esti- 
 mates are  not  'conjectural,'  but  literally  exact. 
 But  these  measurements  do  not  at  all  correspond 
 with  the  dimensions  of  the  present  tower  of  David, 
 which,  in  the  solid  part,  measures  fifty-six  feet  by 
 seventy.  Josephus  describes  the  towers  of  Pha- 
 saelus  and  Mariamne  as  minutely  as  Hippicus. 
 Both  these  exhibited  the  same  '  solidity  in  the  lower 
 part,'  which  Dr.  Robinson  regards  as  the  reliable 
 feature  in  the  Jewish  historian's  description  of  thai 
 tower ;  indeed,  in  Phasaelus,  there  was  a  cubic 
 mass  of  stone  as  a  foundation,  measuring  forty 
 cubits  either  way,  and  the  entire  altitude  of  this 
 tower  was  about  ninety  cubits,  that  of  Hippicus 
 being  about  eighty  cubits.  We  cannot  then  dis- 
 card the  measurements  which  Josephus  gives  of 
 Hippicus  as  '  conjectiual ;'  and  therefore  we  can- 
 not regard  it  as  settled  that  the  tower  of  such  very 
 different  dimensions  near  the  Jaffa  gate  is  the 
 representative  of  the  tower  that  Herod  built  at  the 
 north-west  corner  of  the  old  wall  of  Zion.  But  if 
 Hippicus  be  displaced  from  that  point,  and  if  to 
 bring  it  over  against  Psephinos,  and  in  due  range  of 
 a  fire  spreading  from  Antonia,  and  also  to  make 
 room  for  the  three  great  towers  of  Herod,  and  his 
 contiguous  palace  upon  the  high  northern  point  of 
 Zion — it  seems  necessary  to  place  Hippicus  near 
 the  north-western  angle  of  the  modem  wall ; — then 
 the  Zion  or  upper  city  of  Josephus  included  the 
 ridge  lying  between  the  Jaffa  and  Damascus  gates 
 — the  Christian  quarter  of  the  present  city— and 
 Akra  must  be  looked  for  upon  the  eastern  side  of 
 the  Damascus  gate  valley. 
 
 Again,  Josephus  {Bell.  yiid.  v.  4.  i)  states  that 
 opposite  to  Akra  was  a  third  hill,  naturally  lower, 
 and  separated  from  it  by  a  broad  valley  ;  but  that 
 the  Asmonasans,  during  their  reign,  filled  up  the 
 valley  with  the  intention  of  uniting  the  city  to  the 
 Temple ;  and,  levelling  the  summit  of  Akra,  they 
 reduced  its  elevation,  so  that  the  Temple  might  be 
 conspicuous  above  other  objects  in  this  quarter 
 also.  A  more  particular  account  of  this  is  given  in 
 the  Antiquities  (bk.  xiii.  64.  7),  where  it  is  stated 
 that  Simon,  having  taken  the  citadel  of  Jerusalem 
 by  siege,  razed  it  to  the  ground,  and  persuaded  the 
 people,  as  a  measure  of  precaution,  to  level  the 
 very  mountain  upon  which  the  citadel  stood, — '  a 
 work  which  cost  them  three  whole  years  before  it 
 was  removed  and  brought  to  an  entire  level  with 
 the  rest  of  the  city.'  Now,  if  Akra  were  upon  the 
 western  side  of  the  Damascus  valley,  and  north  of 
 Zion,  it  could  not  have  abstracted  the  view  of  the 
 Temple  from  the  latter  hill,  nor  the  view  upon  that 
 side  from  without  the  city  as  much  as  Zion  itself 
 obstructed  it.  But  if  Akra  and  its  citadel  were 
 upon  the  eastern  side  of  that  valley,  and  north  of 
 the  Temple — and  there  is  much  reason  to  believe 
 that  the  citadel  was  there— then  the  hill,  with  its 
 buildings,  would  obstruct  the  view  of  the  Temple 
 from  the  north,  besides  commanding  the  sacred 
 edifice  strategically  from  that  quarter.  According 
 to  Josephus,  Antiochus  built  in  the  lower  city  a 
 fortress  {Akra),  which  was  lofty,  and  overlooked 
 the  Temple  ;  and,  indeed,  wps  so  near  to  it,  that 
 its  garrison  could  seriously  annoy  the  labourers 
 whom  Judas  brought  to  purify  and  restore  the 
 building  {Antiq.  xii.  5.  4,  7.  6,  9.  3).  In  the  first 
 book  of  Maccabees  (xiv.  36),  this  Akra  is  described 
 as  a  stronghold  from  which  the  heathen   '  issued 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 531 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 and  polluted  all  about  the  sanctuary,  and  did  much 
 hurt  in  the  holy  place.'  Josephus  states  tliat  this 
 citadel  overlooked  the  Temple  so  closely,  that  its 
 soldiers  would  sometimes  rush  out  and  slay  those 
 who  were  going  up  to  the  Temple  to  worship 
 {Antiq.  xii.  9.  3).  When  Simon  became  master 
 of  the  city,  he  '  strengthened  the  hill  of  the  Temple 
 that  was  by  the  fortress  (i  Maccab.  xiii.  52) ;  after- 
 wards, as  stated  above,  he  razed  the  Akra  to  its 
 foundations,  lowered  the  hill  upon  which  it  stood, 
 and  filled  in  the  valley  between  it  and  the  Temple. 
 All  this  accords  extremely  well  with  the  supposi- 
 tion that  the  hill  and  citadel  of  Akra  were  adjacent 
 to  the  Temple-hill  upon  the  north.  Moreover,  in 
 every  capture  of  the  city  Akra  and  the  Temple  go 
 together ;  to  secure  one  was  practically  to  secure 
 the  other,  while  Zion  required  a  separate  siege. 
 Thus,  in  Herod's  siege,  when  the  outer  court  of 
 the  Temple  and  the  lower  city  were  taken,  the 
 Jews  took  refuge  in  the  inner  court  of  the  Temple 
 and  in  the  upper  city  {Antiq.  xiv.  16.  2).  Thus 
 Akra  and  the  Temple  are  always  represented  as  in 
 close  proximity.  North  of  the  Haram  area  are 
 traces  of  indentations  in  the  surface  of  the  moun- 
 tain which  may  possibly  represent  the  broad  or 
 flat  [Quere,  shallow  ?]  valley  that  anciently  sepa- 
 rated Akra  from  the  Temple-hill.  Dr.  Robinson 
 insists  that  '  in  no  possible  shape  or  sense  can  the 
 hill  north  of  Moriah  be  said  to  be  gibbaus  or 
 d/j.(p[KvpTos,'  and  therefore  that  it  cannot  be  the 
 Akra  of  Josephus  (Bi6.  Sac,  1846,  p.  424).  But 
 the  author  of  the  Biblical  Researches  elsewhere 
 states  that  '  this  word  a/j.(plKvpTos  may  mean  no- 
 thing more  than  that  Akra  was  slopijig  071  both 
 sides,  i.  e. ,  was  a  ridge  running  down  into  the  city ' 
 (i.  278,  note  3) ;  and  the  hill  north  of  the  Temple 
 answers  to  this  meaning. 
 
 A  more  serious  objection  to  regarding  this  hill 
 as  the  Akra  of  Josephus  is  found  in  the  descrip- 
 tion that  he  gives  of  the  gates  on  the  west  of  the 
 Temple  enclosure.  '  In  the  western  parts  of  the 
 enclosure  stood  four  gates  ;  one  leading  over  to  the 
 royal  palace,  the  valley  between  being  intercepted 
 to  form  a  passage  ;  two  leading  to  the  suburb  ; 
 and  the  remaining  one  into  the  other  city,  being 
 distinguished  by  many  steps  down  into  the  valley, 
 and  from  this  up  again  upon  the  ascent ;  for  the 
 city  lay  over  against  the  Temple  in  the  manner  of 
 a  theatre,  being  encompassed  by  a  deep  valley  on 
 all  its  southern  quarter'  {Antiq.  xv.  11.  5).  Upon 
 this  Dr.  Robinson  remarks,  that  '  the  gate  with 
 many  steps  led  to  the  other  city ;  which,  as  thus 
 mentioned  after  the  royal  palace  on  Zion,  can  only 
 be  the  lower  city  or  Akra.  Here,  then,  we  have 
 direct  testimony  by  the  Jewish  historian,  that  Akra 
 formed  part  of  the  general  acclivity  on  the  west  of 
 Moriah.'  But  //"Akra  and  Moriah  had  been  made 
 virtually  one,  then  '  the  other  city'  would  be  the 
 Upper  city,  in  distinction  from  the  Lower,  which 
 was  more  closely  identified  with  the  Temple  ;  and 
 the  steps  would  provide  the  public  with  a  way  of 
 access  from  one  to  the  other,  in  distinction  from 
 the  viaduct  which  connected  the  Temple  directly 
 with  the  royal  palace.  Besides,  how  could  Akra 
 and  the  Temple  have  been  connected  by  this 
 double  flight  of  steps  for  descending  and  ascend- 
 ing the  two  hills,  when  the  valley  that  formerly 
 separated  them  had  been  filled  in  so  as  to  connect 
 the  Temple  with  the  lower  city  ? 
 
 But  any  theory  which  would  transfer  Akra  from 
 the  western  to  the  eastern  side  of  the  Damascus 
 
 gate  valley,  must  be  made  to  harmonize  with  the 
 express  statement  of  Josephus,  that  Bezetha  lay 
 upon  that  side,  north  of  the  Temple  area,  and  ad- 
 jacent to  the  tower  of  Antonia,  from  which  it  wa.s 
 separated  by  an  artificial  trench  or  fosse.  In  de- 
 sciibing  the  third  wall,  built  by  Agrippa,  Josephus 
 says  :  '  The  city,  overflowing  with  population,  had 
 gradually  crept  beyond  the  walls,  and  incorporat- 
 ing with  itself  the  parts  on  the  north  of  the  I'emple 
 close  to  the  hill,  had  extended  not  a  little  ;  so  that 
 a  fourth  hill,  called  Bezetha,  was  now  occupied, 
 lying  over  against  Antonia,  and  separated  from  it 
 by  a  deep  fosse.  For  a  trench  had  been  dug  on 
 purpose,  lest  the  foundations  of  Antonia,  being 
 joined  to  this  hill,  should  be  less  high  and  easily 
 accessible'  {Bell.  yud.  v.  4.  2).  Again,  in  de- 
 scribing the  Temple,  Josephus  says  :  '  The  hill 
 Bezetha  was  separated,  as  I  have  said,  from  An- 
 tonia ;  and  being  the  highest  of  all,  it  was  built  up 
 adjoining  a  part  of  the  new  city,  and  alone  ob- 
 structed the  view  of  the  Temple  on  the  north' 
 {Bell.  Jiid.  V.  5.  8). 
 
 The  fortress  of  Antonia,  it  is  generally  agreed, 
 bounded  the  north-west  angle  of  the  Temple  area, 
 whatever  the  dimensions  of  that  area  may  have 
 been.  Adjacent  to  this,  upon  the  north,  was  the 
 hill  Bezetha,  which,  in  its  highest  elevation,  cut  off 
 the  view  of  the  Temple  from  that  quarter.  But  the 
 fortress  Antonia  was  evidently  included  within  the 
 circuit  of  the  second  wall,  which,  beginning  at  the 
 gate  Gennath  in  the  first  wall,  enclosed  Akra,  or 
 the  lower  city  :  and  the  wall  which  was  over- 
 flowed by  a  population  crowding  outwards  upon 
 Bezetha  was  the  northern  wall  of  Akra.  More- 
 over, the  Akra,  i.e.,  the  tower  of  the  Akra  hill,  is 
 described  as  commanding  the  Temple  in  the  time 
 of  the  Asmonasans,  as  Antonia  commanded  it  in 
 the  time  of  Herod  (i  Maccab.  xiii.  52).  If,  then, 
 we  may  regard  the  fortress  Baxis,  afterwards  An- 
 tonia, as  identical  with  the  Akra  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
 phanes,  the  hill  Akra  was  the  ridge  north  of  the 
 Temple  area  sloping  toward  the  Damascus  valley — 
 then  the  Tyropceon — and  Bezetha,  the  ridge  rising 
 northward  from  this,  and  skirted  by  the  valley  of 
 Jehoshaphat.  As  was  remarked  above,  it  greatly 
 relieves  the  perplexity  of  this  subject,  if  we  can 
 conceive  of  Akra  and  the  Temple-hill  as  made  vir- 
 tually one  by  the  Asmonasans,  and  as  so  regarded 
 by  Josephus  in  his  general  descriptions  of  the  city. 
 In  his  account  of  the  sack  of  the  city  by  Titus, 
 when  as  yet  only  the  lower  city  and  the  Temple 
 had  been  taken,  Josephus  states  that  Roman  sol- 
 diers '  set  fire  to  the  residence  of  the  magistrates, 
 the  Akra,  the  council-chamber,  and  the  place 
 called  Ophla,  the  flames  spreading  as  far  as  the 
 palace  of  Queen  Helena,  which  was  in  the  centre 
 of  the  Akra.  The  streets  also  were  consumed,  and 
 the  houses.  .  .  .  On  the  next  day  the  Romans, 
 having  driven  the  brigands  from  the  lower  town, 
 burned  all,  as  far  as  Siloam  ;'  and  while  the  four 
 legions  were  raising  mounds  on  the  western  side  of 
 the  upper  city,  the  auxiliaries  '  laboured  in  the 
 region  of  the  Xystus,  the  bridge,  and  the  tower  of 
 Simon'  {Bell.  Jud.  vi.  6.  6,  vi.  7.  2,  vi.  8.  i).  Thus, 
 the  historian  seems  to  group  the  lower  city  with 
 Ophel  and  other  localities  lying  eastward  of  Zion. 
 Upon  the  whole,  then,  the  site  of  Akra  is  still  a 
 question  of  probabilities ;  and  as  yet  we  can  but 
 state  the  various  theories  propounded  by  scholars 
 and  topographers,  and  await  the  results  of  future 
 explorations  upon  the  ground.    These  theories  are — 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 532 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 I.  Akra  is  the  ridge  between  the  Jaffa  and  Damas- 
 cus gates,  the  principal  Christian  quarter  of  the 
 modern  city.  See  in  Reland,  Von  Raumer,  Robin- 
 son, Stanley,  etc.  As  yet  the  weight  of  authorities 
 favours  this  view.  The  Tyropoeon  then  began  at 
 the  Jaffa  gate. 
 
 2.  Akra  is  north  of  the  Haram  area  and  con- 
 tiguous to  it,  and  east  of  the  valley  that  runs  south- 
 ward from  the  Damascus  gate,  which  then  becomes 
 the  Tyropceon — Zion  is  extended  northward  so  as 
 to  embrace  in  whole  or  in  part  the  ridge  which  is 
 the  Akra  of  No.  i.  The  argument  for  this  theory 
 is  given  above  from  Ritter.  See  also  in  Rabbi 
 Schwartz.  Akra  thus  hes  wholly  within  the  Mo- 
 hammedan quarter  of  the  modern  city,  and  Zion 
 includes  the  whole  of  the  Christian,  Armenian,  and 
 Jewish  quarters. 
 
 3.  Akra,  as  above,  is  identified  with  the  hill  of 
 the  present  Mohammedan  quarter  ;  but  Zion  is 
 not  extended  northward  so  as  to  stand  'face  to 
 face '  with  it,  as  the  statement  of  Josephus  would 
 require  (Williams  in  Holy  City,  and  in  Smith's 
 Dictionary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Geography).  The 
 course  which  Williams  assigns  to  the  second  wall 
 includes  the  Tyropoeon  with  the  inclosure  of  the 
 lower  city,  instead  of  making  it  the  division  be- 
 tween this  and  the  upper  city. 
 
 4.  Akra  was  that  portion  of  the  Haram  esh- 
 Sherif  which  was  not  occupied  by  the  Temple 
 (Schultz  and  Krafft).  This  reduces  Akra  to  the  in- 
 significant area  of  fifteen  or  twenty  acres  ;  and  the 
 geological  structure  of  the  Temple-hill  forbids  the 
 supposition  that  the  Haram  was  ever  crossed  at 
 that  point  by  a  valley  from  east  to  west  which 
 could  answer  to  Josephus'  description  of  the  broad 
 valley  separating  Akra  from  Moriah. 
 
 5.  Akra  was  the  ridge  south  of  the  Temple  area, 
 and  east  of  Zion,  commonly  known  as  Ophel 
 (Prof.  Justus  Olshausen).  But  there  never  was 
 room  for  a  city  on  that  rocky  declivity  ;  it  could 
 not  have  been  separated  from  the  Temple  by  a 
 valley ;  and  it  is  jiatiirally  lower  than  the  site  of 
 the  Temple,  whereas  Akra  was  originally  higher. 
 
 6.  Akra  was  the  lower  eastern  portion  of  the 
 hill  commonly  known  as  Zion,  i.  e. ,  Akra  answers 
 to  the  Jewish  quarter,  and  Zion  to  the  Armenian 
 quarter  of  the  modern  city  (Dr.  Titus  Tobler). 
 But  this  theory  greatly  contracts  the  area  of  the 
 city,  and  interposes  Akra  between  Zion  and  the 
 Temple,  which  Josephus  states  were  directly  con- 
 nected by  a  viaduct. 
 
 7.  Akra  is  the  entire  ridge  of  the  Haram,  from 
 Stephen's  gate  to  Siloam,  including  of  course  the 
 site  of  the  Temple  (Thrupp).  Thus  the  Temple 
 stood  within  the  lower  city.  Thrupp  and  Fergusson 
 agree  that  the  Temple-hill  was  the  ancient  Zion,  the 
 city  of  David.  Among  all  these  theories  the  first  and 
 second  appear  the  more  tenable  in  view  of  all  the 
 data  furnished  by  Josephus ;  and  yet  those  data 
 alone  are  insufficient  to  determine  the  question  in 
 favour  of  either  site  as  the  true  Akra. 
 
 T/ie  JVa//s.—'Ne\t  in  importance  to  the  rela- 
 tive location  of  the  hills  of  Jerusalem,  is  tlie 
 course  of  the  several  walls  mentioned  l)y  Josephus. 
 His  general  description  of  these  walls  is  to  the 
 following  purport.  The  single  wall  which  inclosed 
 that  part  of  the  city  skirted  by  precipitous  valleys 
 1  egan  on  the  north  at  the  tower  of  Hippicus.  On 
 the  west  it  extended  (southward)  through  a  place 
 called  Bethso  to  the  gate  of  the  Essenes  ;  thence  it 
 kept  along  on  the  south  to  a  point  over  against 
 
 Siloam  ;  and  thence  bending  to  the  east  it  was  car- 
 ried along  by  Solomon's  Pool  and  Ophla  (Ophel), 
 till  it  ioined  the  eastern  portico  of  the  Temple.  On 
 the  north  this  wall  began  at  the  tower  of  Hippicus, 
 and  extending  (along  the  northern  brow  of  Zion) 
 to  the  Xystus,  terminated  at  the  western  portico  ol 
 the  Temple.  The  second  wall  began  at  the  gate 
 of  Gennath  (apparently  near  Hippicus),  and,  en- 
 circling only  the  northern  part  of  the  city,  extended 
 to  the  castle  of  Antonia  at  the  north-west  corner  of 
 the  area  of  the  Temple.  The  third  wall  was  built 
 by  Agrippa  at  a  later  period  ;  it  also  had  its  be- 
 ginning at  the  tower  of  Hippicus,  ran  northward 
 as  far  as  the  tower  of  Psephinos  ;  and  thence 
 sweeping  round  towards  the  north-east  by  east,  it 
 turned  afterwards  towards  the  south,  and  was 
 joined  to  the  ancient  wall  at  or  in  the  valley  of  the 
 Kidron.  This^vall  enclosed  the  hill  Bezetha  {Be//. 
 Jitd.  v.  4.  2).  The  Xystus  here  spoken  of  was  an 
 open  area  upon  the  eastern  brow  of  Zion,  extend- 
 ing from  the  first  wall,  which  there  crossed  the 
 Tyropoeon,  southward  to  the  bridge  which  con- 
 nected the  Temple  with  the  upper  city.  In  this 
 area,  where  perhaps  there  was  a  colonnade,  the 
 people  were  accustomed  to  gather  upon  public 
 occasions.  The  position  of  the  bridge,  so  often 
 referred  to  by  Josephus  in  connection  with  the 
 Xystus,  has  been  well  identified  with  the  immense 
 fragment  of  an  ancient  arch  discovered  by  Dr. 
 Roijinson  in  the  western  wall  of  the  Haram  en- 
 closure, near  the  south-west  corner  [Bib.  Res.  i. 
 287  ;  iii.  221).  This  arch  measures  fifty-one  feet 
 along  the  wall,  and  three  courses  of  its  stones  re- 
 main.    Some  of  the  stones  are  of  great  size. 
 
 The  valley  at  this  point  is  about  116  yards  in 
 width.  The  discovery  of  this  bridge  is  of  great 
 importance  in  determining  the  position  of  the 
 Xystus,  and  the  line  of  the  western  -Hall  of  the 
 Temple.  Dr.  Robinson  was  the  first  explorer  who 
 identified  this  fragment  of  an  arch  with  the  bridge 
 that  spanned  the  Tyropoeon  from  the  Temple  to 
 the  upper  city. 
 
 The  first  or  most  ancient  wall  described  above 
 appears  to  have  inclosed  the  whole  of  Mount  Zion 
 toward  the  soutli.  Lideed  it  must  have  formed 
 the  exterior  and  sole  wall  on  that  side,  overlooking 
 the  deep  valleys  below  Mount  Zion ;  and  the 
 northern  part  evidently  passed  from  the  tower  of 
 Hippicus  on  the  west  side  along  the  northern  brow 
 of  Zion,  and  across  the  valley,  to  the  western  side 
 of  the  Temple  area.  It  probably  nearly  coincided 
 with  the  ancient  wall  which  existed  before  the  time 
 of  David,  and  which  enabled  the  Jebusites  to  main- 
 tain themselves  in  possession  of  the  upper  city,  long 
 after  the  lower  city  h^  been  in  the  hands  of  the 
 Israelites.  Much  of  Mount  Zion  upon  the  south 
 lies  without  the  walls  of  the  modern  city.  Some 
 traces  of  this  old  wall  were  visible  in  the  time  of 
 Benjamin  of  Tudela,  who  says  that  the  stones  of 
 the  foundation  were  then  taken  away  for  building 
 (Itiner.  ed.  Asher,  i.  73).  No  trace  of  it  can  now 
 be  perceived  ;  but  by  digging  through  the  rubbish 
 the  foundations  might  perhaps  be  discovered. 
 
 The  account  given  by  Josephus  of  the  second 
 wall  is  very  short  and  unsatisfactory.  This  is  the 
 more  to  be  regretted,  as  on  the  course  taken  by  tlie 
 eastern  part  of  that  wall  rests  the  question,  whether 
 that  which  is  now  shewn  as  the  site  of  Calvaiy  and 
 the  Holy  Sepulchre  was  anciently  beyond  the  wall 
 or  not.  While  the  traditional  and  the  historical 
 evidences  are  strongly  urged  in  favour  of  the  pre- 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 633 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 sent  site,  the  topographical  evidence  is  urged  as 
 strongly  against  it.  Reference  is  made  to  botli 
 classes  of  evidences  in  the  article  on  Golgotha. 
 The  topographical  argument  is  here  in  place.  If 
 the  location  assigned  to  Akra  in  No.  2  above  be  ac- 
 cepted, with  a  corresponding  extension  of  Zion,  of 
 course  the  present  church  of  the  holy  sepulchre  can- 
 not mark  the  scene  of  our  Lord's  crucifixion  and 
 burial,  for  it  must  have  been  far  within  the  wall  of 
 Zion. 
 
 The  Akra  of  No.  I  is  almost  equally  fatal  to  the 
 identity  of  the  alleged  site  ;  since  the  course  of  the 
 second  wall  from  its  starting  point  at  the  gate 
 Gennath,  near  Hippicus,  would  naturally  have 
 included  this  site  in  what  Josephus  describes  as  its 
 '  circling '  sweep  northward  and  eastward  to  the 
 Temple.  The  precise  course  of  this  wall  might 
 perhaps  be  determined  by  excavations  ;  especially 
 along  one  of  the  two  streets  which  intersect  the  via 
 Dolorosa.  It  is  likely  that  the  foundations  of  the 
 old  wall  still  exist ;  and  if  it  lay  at  a  point  within 
 the  present  wall,  those  foundations  must  pass  under 
 this  street,  and  an  excavation  of  not  greater  extent 
 than  those  which  are  made  every  day  in  London  for 
 sewerage  M'ould  bring  them  to  light,  and  shew 
 whether  the  alleged  site  of  Calvary  lay  within  or 
 without  the  second  wall.  Dr.  Robinson  argues 
 that  the  gate  Gennath  in  the  first  wall,  from  which 
 the  second  wall  had  its  beginning,  being  a  gate 
 that  led  out  of  Zion  into  the  country,  must  have 
 been  but  a  little  to  the  east  of  Hippicus,  which  he 
 locates  at  the  Jaffa  gate.  Regarding  the  chambers 
 near  the  Damascus  gate  as  remnants  of  a  gate  in 
 the  second  wall,  he  claims  also  to  have  found  traces 
 of  an  ancient  wall  running  from  the  Damascus  gate 
 to  a  point  near  the  Latin  convent.  By  this  course 
 the  second  wall  would  be  carried  far  to  the  west  of 
 the  church  of  the  sepulchre,  thus  including  that 
 site  within  the  city  walls.  Assuming  that  Zion 
 terminated  at  the  Jaffa  gate,  and  that  Gennath  was 
 near  the  present  tower  of  David,  this  supposed  line 
 of  wall  would  answer  well  to  the  statement  of 
 Josephus  that,  '  encircling  the  tract  in  the  north,  it 
 extended  to  Antonia.'  Those  who  advocate  the 
 genuineness  of  the  site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  are 
 obliged  either  to  transfer  Akra  to  the  east  of  the 
 Damascus  gate  valley,  without  a  co7-respondi!ig  ex- 
 tension of  Zion  to  the  7iorth ;  or  to  place  the  gate 
 Gennath  so  far  eastward  from  the  Jaffa  gate,  as 
 greatly  to  contract  the  lower  city  by  a  wall  from 
 that  point  to  Antonia,  or  to  violate  Josephus  by 
 making  a  wall  with  re-entering  angles,  constructed 
 as  if  on  purpose  to  throw  the  Holy  Sepulchre 
 without  the  wall ;  and  in  either  case  to  violate  the 
 strategic  conditions  of  the  ridge  in  question,  by 
 running  the  wall  across  the  slope  of  the  hill,  where 
 it  could  be  easily  overtopped  by  engines  of  war  from 
 without.  In  a  word,  then,  the  whole  weight  of 
 topographical  evidence  is  against  the  alleged  site  of 
 the  sepulchre. 
 
 Nor  is  the  traditionary  and  historical  evidence 
 for  this  site  so  continuous  and  conclusive  as  is 
 sometimes  represented.  The  historical  evidence 
 seeks  to  identify  the  site  with  that  selected  by  Con- 
 stantine  for  his  commemorative  church  as  described 
 by  Eusebius.  But  if  this  be  assumed,  to  insist 
 that  after  Jerusalem  had  for  three  centuries  been 
 either  a  desolation  or  the  abode  of  Pagan  con- 
 temners, a  foreign  prince  so  manifestly  given  to 
 enthusiasm  and  superstition  as  was  Constantine, 
 would  identify  the  very  place  of  the  crucifixion — 
 
 which  the  gospels  had  left  unmarked  by  any  *  loca\ 
 sanctity'— is  to  demand,  not  faith  in  historical  evi- 
 dence,  nor  even  in  local  tradition,  but  simple 
 creduhty  for  legendary  trifles.  We  are  liable  to 
 be  misled  as  to  the  value  of  tradition  in  such  a 
 case,  by  comparing  three  centuries  with  nineteen, 
 and  imagining  that  one  living  in  the  4th  century 
 after  Christ  was  so  7iear  to  the  events  embodied  in 
 the  traditions  as  to  be  able  to  judge  correctly  of 
 their  truth.  But  if  we  go  back  300  years  from  our 
 own  time,  how  obscure  and  uncertain  is  oral  tra- 
 dition, how  conflicting  oiten  are  written  statements 
 touching  important  events  in  church  and  state  ! 
 One  of  the  earliest  and  best  sustained  traditions 
 makes  the  ascension  of  Christ  to  have  taken  place 
 from  the  smninit  of  Olivet ;  whereas  Luke  places 
 it  near  Bethany.  When  Constantine  determined 
 the  site  of  the  holy  sepulchre,  Jerusalem  had 
 already  been  for  three  centuries  in  the  hands 
 either  of  Jewish  or  of  Pagan  enemies  of  the  Chris- 
 tian faith. 
 
 The  historical  identity  of  the  church  of  the  holy 
 sepulchre  with  the  site  selected  by  Constantine 
 has  been  called  in  question  by  Mr.  James  Fergus- 
 son  in  an  original  and  very  able  argument.  This 
 writer  regards  the  Mosque  of  Omar,  so  called,  in 
 tlie  enclosure  of  the  Haram,  as  the  church  of  the 
 Anastasis,  built  by  Constantine  ;  and  the  Khubbit- 
 es-Sakrab,  or  holy  stone  within  the  mosque,  as  the 
 sepulchre  of  rock  in  which  the  Lord  was  laid. 
 Accordingly,  he  greatly  reduces  the  Temple  area 
 as  compared  with  the  Haram ;  that  being  an 
 irregular  parallelogram  about  1500  feet  long  by 
 from  900  to  1000  in  breadth  ;  and  the  Temple 
 area  having  been  a  square  of  600  feet  at  its  south- 
 western corner.  Thus,  he  would  throw  the  rock 
 outside  of  the  wall  of  the  old  city.  He  argues 
 also  that  Eusebius  is  to  be  understood  as  fixing  the 
 church  of  the  Anastasis  upon  the  eastern  hill  of 
 the  city,  opposite  to  Zion.  '  On  the  very  spot 
 which  witnessed  the  Saviour's  sufferings,  a  new 
 Jerusalem  was  constructed  ove)-  against  the  one  so 
 celebrated  of  old,  which,  since  the  foul  stain  of 
 guilt  brought  upon  it  by  the  murder  of  the  Lord, 
 had  experienced  the  extremity  of  desolation.  It 
 was  opposite  the  city  that  the  emperor  began  to 
 rear  a  monument  to  the  Saviour's  victory  over 
 death,  with  rich  and  lavish  magnificence'  [Life  of 
 Con.,  iii.  33).  But  Mr.  Fergusson's  main  reliance 
 is  upon  the  architecture  of  the  mosque  and  of  the 
 so-called  golden  gate — a  point  upon  which  he  is 
 certainly  a  high  authority,  and  of  which  he  does 
 not  hesitate  to  speak  with  the  utmost  confidence. 
 This  he  assigns  unhesitatingly  to  '  the  first  half  of 
 the  4th  centuiy ; '  and  he  makes  the  golden  gate 
 '  the  propylon  of  Constantine's  basilica,'  and  the 
 mosque  or  '  dome  of  the  rock,'  the  '  Anastasis  built 
 by  him.'  By  reducing  the  Temple  area  to  the 
 exact  dimensions  given  by  Josephus,  and  locating 
 Antonia  close  upon  its  north-western  corner,  this 
 writer  throws  the  dome  of  the  rock  outside  of  the 
 ancient  city  wall.  His  arguments  for  circumscrib- 
 ing the  Temple  area  to  a  square  of  600  feet  are 
 borne  out,  not  only  by  the  frequent  statements  of 
 Josephus  upon  that  point,  but  by  the  appearance 
 of  the  substructions  of  the  Haram  area  in  its 
 south-western  comer.  This  theory  is  combated 
 with  acrimonious  vigour  in  the  Edinburgh  Review 
 (Oct.  i860),  as  violating  the  relative  positions 
 assigned  by  Eusebius  to  the  Basilica  and  the 
 Anastasis  of  Constantine,  and  his  statement  that 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 534 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 the  propylo7i  faced  an  open  market-place,  for 
 which  the  steep  brow  overhanging  Jehoshaphat 
 affords  no  room.  Upon  the  whole,  while  the 
 topographical  argument  appears  conclusive  against 
 the  church  of  the  holy  sepulchre  as  the  authentic 
 site  of  the  sepulchre  of  our  Lord,  the  site  proposed 
 by  Mr.  Fergusson,  though  urged  with  so  much 
 ability  and  enthusiasm,  can  hardly  be  accepted  as 
 satisfactory.  Future  excavations  in  Jerusalem  may 
 bring  to  light  some  reliable  evidence  touching  the 
 sacred  places,  though  they  may  also  undermine  and 
 demolish  all  existing  theories  upon  the  subject. 
 The  genuineness  of  the  traditional  site  of  the 
 sepulchre  is  disproved  by  any  plausible  and  defen- 
 sible theory  of  Akra  and  the  second  wall,  and  by 
 the  strategical  lay  of  the  hill  upon  which  the 
 church  of  the  sepulchre  stands  :  while  of  Mr.  Fer- 
 gusson's  theory  it  is  enough  to  say,  according  to  a 
 peculiar  Scottish  verdict,  that  it  is  '■  not  prmenJ' 
 Dr.  Barclay  suggests  that  the  place  of  crucifixion 
 may  have  been  a  spur  of  the  ridge  '  projecting 
 south-eastwardly  into  the  Kidron  valley,  a  short 
 distance  above  Gethsemane.'  But  this  is  only  con- 
 jecture ;  and  we  must  rather  say  with  Keble — 
 
 '  Dear  sacred  haunts  of  glory  and  of  woe. 
 Help  us,  one  hour,  to  trace  His  musings  high 
 
 and  low  ; 
 One  heart-ennobling  hour  !  it  may  not  be ; 
 Th'    unearthly   thoughts    have    pass'd    from 
 earth  away. 
 And  fast  as  evening  sunbeams  from  the  sea 
 
 Thy  footsteps  all  in  Sioifs  deep  decay 
 Were  blotted  from  the  holy  ground :  yet  dear 
 Is    every   stone    of   hers;    FOR    Thou    wast 
 
 SURELY  HERE.' 
 
 Later  Walls. — Although  the  two  walls  above 
 described  were  the  only  walls  that  existed  in  the 
 time  of  our  Saviour,  we  are  not  to  infer  that  the 
 habitable  city  was  confined  within  their  limits. 
 On  the  contrary,  it  was  because  the  city  had  ex- 
 tended northward  far  beyond  the  second  wall, 
 that  a  third  was  built  to  cover  the  defenceless 
 suburb  :  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  this 
 unprotected  suburb,  called  Bezetha,  existed  in  the 
 time  of  Christ.  This  wall  has  already  been  de- 
 scribed as  having  also  begun  at  the  tower  of 
 Hippicus  ;  it  ran  northward  as  far  as  to  the  tower 
 Psephinos,  then  passed  down  opposite  the  sepul- 
 chre of  Helena  (queen  of  Adiabene),  and  being 
 carried  along  through  the  royal  sepulchres,  turned 
 at  the  comer  tower  by  the  Fullers'  monument, 
 and  ended  by  making  a  junction  with  the  ancient 
 wall  at  the  valley  of  the  Kidron.  It  was  begun 
 ten  or  twelve  years  after  our  Lord's  crucifixion  by 
 the  elder  Herod  Agrippa,  who  desisted  from  com- 
 pleting it  for  fear  of  offending  the  Emperor 
 Claudius.  But  the  design  was  afterwards  taken 
 up  and  completed  by  the  Jews  themselves,  although 
 on  a  scale  of  less  strength  and  magnificence.  Some 
 traces  of  this  wall  have  been  found  to  the  north  of 
 the  modern  city  wall. 
 
 Robinson  thinks  that  the  wall  of  the  new  city, 
 the  .^lia  of  Adrian,  nearly  coincided  with  that  of 
 the  present  Jerusalem  ;  and  the  portion  of  Mount 
 Zion  which  now  lies  outside  would  seem  then  also 
 to  have  been  excluded,  for  Eusebius  and  Cyrill,  in 
 the  4th  century,  speak  of  the  denunciation  of  the 
 prophet  being  fulfilled,  and  describes  Zion  as  '  a 
 ploughed  field'  (Mic.  iii.  2). 
 
 We  know  from  Josephus  that  the  circumference 
 
 of  the  ancient  city  was  33  stadia,  equivalent  to 
 nearly  four  English  miles.  The  circumference  of 
 the  present  walls  does  not  exceed  two  and  a  half 
 geographical  miles  ;  but  the  extent  of  Mount  Zion, 
 now  without  the  walls,  and  the  tract  on  the  north 
 formerly  enclosed,  or  partly  so,  by  the  third  wall, 
 sufficiently  account  for  the  difference.  (See  wood- 
 cut, page  528.) 
 
 The  present  walls  have  a  solid  and  formidable 
 appearance,  especially  when  cursorily  observed 
 from  without ;  and  they  are  strengthened,  or 
 rather  ornamented,  with  towers  and  battlements 
 after  the  Saracenic  style.  They  are  built  of  lime- 
 stone, the  stones  being  not  commonly  more  than  a 
 foot  or  fifteen  inches  square.  The  height  varies 
 with  the  various  elevations  of  the  ground.  The 
 lower  parts  are  probably  about  twenty-five  feet 
 high,  while  in  more  exposed  localities,  where  the 
 ravines  contribute  less  to  the  security  of  the  city, 
 they  have  an  elevation  of  sixty  or  seventy  feet. 
 
 The  Ancient  Gates. — Much  uncertainty  exists 
 respecting  the  ancient  gates  of  Jerusalem.  It  has 
 been  objected  that  the  gates  named  in  the  Scrip- 
 tures are  more  in  number  than  a  town  of  the  size 
 of  Jerusalem  could  require,  especially  as  they  all 
 occur  within  the  extent  embraced  by  the  first  and 
 second  walls,  the  third  not  then  existing.  It  has, 
 therefore,  been  suggested  as  more  than  probable 
 that  some  of  these  gates  were  within  the  city,  in 
 the  walls  which  separated  the  town  from  the 
 Temple  and  the  upper  town  from  the  lower,  in 
 which  gates  certainly  existed.  On  the  other  hand, 
 considering  the  circumstances  under  which  the 
 wall  was  rebuilt  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  it  is 
 difficult  to  suppose  that  more  than  the  outer  wall 
 was  then  constructed,  and  certainly  it  was  in  the 
 wall  then  built  that  the  ten  or  twelve  gates  men- 
 tioned by  Nehemiah  occur.  But  these  may  be 
 somewhat  reduced  by  supposing  that  two  or  more 
 of  the  names  mentioned  were  applied  to  the  same 
 gate.  If  this  view  of  the  matter  be  taken,  no 
 better  distribution  of  these  gates  can  be  given  than 
 that  suggested  by  Raumer  {Palcestina,  3d  ed., 
 p.  256). 
 
 A.  On  the  north  side. 
 
 1.  The  Old  Gate,  probably  at  the  north-east 
 corner  (Neh  iii.  6  ;  xii.  39). 
 
 2.  The  Gate  of  Ephraim  or  Benjamin  (Jer. 
 xxxviii.  7 ;  xxxvii.  13 ;  Neh.  xii.  9  ;  2  Chron. 
 XXV.  23).  This  gate  derived  its  names  from  its 
 leading  to  the  territory  of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin. 
 
 3.  The  Corner-gate,  300  cubits  from  the  former, 
 and  at  the  north-west  comer  (2  Chron.  xxv.  9  ;  2 
 Kings  xiv.  13  ;  Zech.  xiv.  10).  Probably  the 
 Gate  of  the  Furnaces  is  the  same  (Neh.  iii.  2  ; 
 xii.  38). 
 
 B.  On  the  west  side. 
 
 4.  The  Valley-gate,  over  against  the  Dragon- 
 fountain  of  Gihon  (Neh.  ii.  13  ;  iii.  13  ;  2  Chron. 
 xxxvi.  9).  It  was  probably  about  the  north-west 
 corner  of  Zion,  where  there  appears  to  have  been 
 always  a  gale.  Dr.  Robinson  supposes  it  to  be 
 the  same  with  the  Gennath  of  Josephus. 
 
 c.  On  the  south  side. 
 
 5.  The  Dung-gate,  perhaps  the  same  as  Jo- 
 sephus's  Gate  of  the  Essenes  (Neh.  ii.  13  ;  xii.  31). 
 It  was  1000  cubits  from  the  valley-gate  (Neh.  iii. 
 14),  and  the  dragon-well  was  between  them  (Neh. 
 ii.  13).  This  gate  is  probably  also  identical  with 
 'the  gate  between  two  walls'  (2  Kings  xxv.  a,\ 
 Jer,  xxxix.  4;  Lam,  ii.  7). 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 535 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 6.  The  Gate  of  the  Fountain,  to  the  south-east 
 (Neh.  ii.  14;  iii.  15);  the  gate  of  the  fountain  near 
 the  king's  pool  (Neh.  ii.  14) ;  the  gate  of  the  foun- 
 tain near  '  the  pool  of  Siloah  by  the  king's  garden ' 
 (Neh.  iii.  15).  The  same  gate  is  probably  denoted 
 in  all  these  instances,  and  the  pools  seem  to  have 
 been  also  the  same.  It  is  also  possible  that  this 
 fountain-gate  was  the  same  otherwise  distinguished 
 as  the  brick-gate  (or  potter's  gate),  leading  to  the 
 valley  of  Hinnom  (Jer.  xix.  2,  where  the  A.  V. 
 has  'east-gate'). 
 
 D.   On  the  east  side. 
 
 7.  The  Water-gate  (Neh.  iii.  26). 
 
 8.  The  Prison-gate,  otherwise  the  Horse-gate, 
 near  the  Temple  (Neh.  iii.  2S  ;  xii.  39,  40). 
 
 9.  The  Sheep-gate,  probably  near  the  sheep-pool 
 (Neh.  iii.  1-32  ;  xii.  29). 
 
 10.  The  Fish-gate  was  quite  at  the  north-east 
 (Neh.  iii.  3  ;  xii.  39 ;  Zeph.  i.  10  ;  2  Chron. 
 xxxiii.  14). 
 
 It  will  be  observed  that  in  two  of  the  cases  the 
 distances  of  the  gates  from  each  other  are  men- 
 tioned. Thus  the  corner  gate  (3)  was  only  300 
 cubits  from  the  gate  of  Ephraim  (2),  and  the  dung- 
 gate  (5)  was  1000  cubits  from  the  valley-gate  (4). 
 If  the  circumference  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  before 
 the  third  wall  was  added  be  assumed  to  have  been 
 two  miles  and  a  half,  or  equal  to  the  present  wall, 
 then  this  extent  would  have  allowed  ten  gates  at 
 the  highest  named  distance  of  1000  cubits  apart, 
 and  more  than  thrice  that  number  at  the  lowest 
 named  distance  of  300  cubits. 
 
 In  the  Middle  Ages  there  appear  to  have  been 
 two  gates  on  each  side  of  the  city,  making  eight 
 in  all  ;  and  this  number,  being  only  two  short 
 of  those  assigned  in  the  above  estimate  to  the 
 ancient  Jerusalem,  seems  to  vindicate  that  estimate 
 from  the  objections  which  have  been  urged  against  it. 
 
 On  the  west  side  were  two  gates,  of  which  the 
 principal  was  the  Porta  David,  Gate  of  David, 
 often  mentioned  by  the  writers  on  the  Crusades. 
 It  was  called  by  the  Arabs  Bah  el-Mihrah,  and 
 corresponds  to  the  present  Jaffa  gate,  or  Bah  cl- 
 Khnlil.  The  other  was  the  gate  of  the  Fuller's 
 Field  {Porta  Villce  Ftdlonis),  so  called  from  Is.  vii. 
 3.  This  seems  to  be  the  same  which  others  call 
 Porta  Jiidiciaria,  and  which  is  described  as  being 
 in  the  wall  over  against  the  church  of  the  holy 
 sepulchre,  leading  to  Silo  (Neby  Samwil)  and 
 Gibeon.  This  seems  to  be  that  which  the  Arabian 
 writers  call  Serb,  There  is  no  trace  of  it  in  the 
 present  wall. 
 
 On  the  north  there  were  also  two  gates  ;  and  all 
 the  middle-age  writers  speak  of  the  principal  of 
 them  as  the  gate  of  St.  Stephen,  from  the  notion 
 that  the  death  of  the  protomartyr  took  place  near 
 it.  This  was  also  called  the  gate  of  Ephraim,  in 
 reference  to  its  probable  ancient  name.  Arabic 
 writers  called  it  Bah  ^Amiid  el-Ghnrab,  of  which 
 the  present  name,  Bab  el-Amttd,  is  only  a  con- 
 traction. The  present  gate  of  St.  Stephen  is  on 
 the  cast  of  the  city,  and  the  scene  of  the  martyr- 
 dom is  now  placed  near  it ;  but  there  is  no  ac- 
 count of  the  change.  Further  east  was  the  gate 
 of  Benjamin  {Porta  Benja77iinis),  corresponding 
 apparently  to  what  is  now  called  the  gate  of 
 Herod. 
 
 On  the  east  there  seem  to  have  been  at  least 
 two  gates.  The  northernmost  is  described  by 
 Adam.nanus  as  a  small  portal  leading  down  to  the 
 valley  of  Jehoshaphat.     It  was  called  the  gate  of 
 
 Jehoshaphat,  from  the  valley  to  which  it  led.  It 
 seems  to  be  represented  by  the  present  gate  of  St. 
 Stephen.  The  Arabian  writers  call  it  Bah  el- 
 Usbat,  Gate  of  the  tribes,  being  another  form  ol 
 the  modern  Arabic  name  Bab  es-Si/bat.  The 
 present  gate  of  St.  Stephen  has  four  lions  sculp- 
 tured over  it  on  the  outside,  which,  as  well  as  the 
 architecture,  show  that  it  existed  before  the  pre- 
 sent walls.     The  other  gate  is  the  famous  Golden 
 
 290.  The  Golden  Gate. 
 
 Gate  (Porta  atirea)  in  the  eastern  wall  of  the 
 Temple  area.  It  is  now  called  by  the  Arabs  Bab 
 ed-Dahariyeh,  but  formerly  Bah  er-Rahmeh,  '  Gate 
 of  Mercy.'  The  name  Golden  Gate  appears  to 
 have  come  from  a  supposed  connection  ■with  one 
 of  the  ancient  gates  of  the  Temple,  which  are 
 said  to  have  been  covered  with  gold  ;  but  this 
 name  cannot  be  traced  back  beyond  the  historians 
 of  the  Crusades.  This  gate  is,  from  its  architect 
 ture,  obviously  of  Roman  origin,  and  is  conjectured 
 by  some  to  have  belonged  to  the  enclosure  of  the 
 Temple  of  Jupiter  which  was  built  by  Adrian  upon 
 Mount  Moriah  ;  but  Mr.  Fergusson,  as  seen  above, 
 ascribes  it  to  Constantine.  The  exterior  is  now 
 walled  up  ;  but  being  double,  the  interior  forms 
 within  the  area  a  recess,  which  is  used  for  prayer 
 by  the  Moslem  worshipper.  Different  reasons  are 
 given  for  the  closing  of  this  gate.  It  was  probably 
 because  it  was  found  inconvenient  that  a  gate  to 
 the  mosque  should  be  open  in  the  exterior  wall. 
 Although  not  walled  up,  it  was  kept  closed  even 
 when  the  Crusaders  were  in  possession  of  the  city, 
 and  only  opened  once  a  year,  on  Palm  Sunday,  in 
 celebration  of  our  Lord's  supposed  triumphal  entry 
 through  it  to  the  Temple. 
 
 On  the  south  side  were  also  two  gates.  The 
 easternmost  is  now  called  by  the  Franks  the  Dung- 
 gate,  and  by  the  natives  Bab  el-Miighariheh.  The 
 earliest  mention  of  this  gate  is  by  Brocard,  about 
 A.D.  1283,  who  regards  it  as  the  ancient  Water- 
 gate. Further  west,  between  the  eastern  brow  ot 
 Zion  and  the  gate  of  David,  the  Ci^usaders  found  a 
 gate  which  they  call  the  Gate  of  Zion,  correspond- 
 ing to  one  which  now  bears  the  same  name. 
 
 It  thus  appears  that  before  the  rebuilding  of 
 the  walls  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Turks  in  the  i6t]i 
 century,  the  principal  gates  of  the  city  were  much 
 the  same  as  at  the  present  day.  But  of  the  seven 
 gates  mentioned  as  still  existing,  three,  the  Dung 
 Gate,  the  Golden  Gate,  and  Herod's  Gate,  are 
 closed.  Thus  there  are  only  four  gates  now  in 
 use,  one  on  each  side  of  the  town,  all  of  which 
 have  been  enumerated.  St.  Stephen's,  on  the 
 east,  leads  to  the  Mount  of  Olives,  Bethany,  and 
 Jericho.  From  the  nature  of  the  ground,  taken  in 
 connection  with  the  situation  of  the   Temple,    a 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 536 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 little  south,  there  must  always  have  been  a  great 
 thoroughfare  here.  Zion  Gate,  on  the  sovith  side 
 of  the  city,  connects  the  populous  quarter  around 
 the  Armenian  convent  with  that  part  of  Mount 
 Zion  which  is  outside  the  walls,  and  which  is  much 
 resorted  to  as  being  the  great  field  of  Christian 
 burial,  as  well  as  for  its  traditionary  sanctity  as  the 
 site  of  David's  tomb,  the  house  of  Caiaphas,  house 
 of  Mary,  etc.  The  Jaffa  Gate,  on  the  west,  is  the 
 termination  of  the  important  routes  from  Jaffa, 
 Bethlehem,  and  Hebron.  The  formation  of  the 
 ground  suggests  this  as  one  of  the  great  thorough- 
 fares of  the  ancient  city,  which  could  here  be  ap- 
 proached from  the  quarters  just  indicated  much 
 more  conveniently  than  at  any  other  point.  The 
 Damascus  Gate,  on  the  north,  is  planted  in  a  vale, 
 which  in  every  age  of  Jerusalem  must  have  been  a 
 great  public  way,  and  the  easiest  approach  from 
 Samaria  and  Galilee. 
 
 Subferraiieatt  Quarries. — Dr.  Barclay  was  so 
 fortunate  as  to  discover  near  the  Damascus  gate 
 an  entrance  to  a  large  excavation  under  Bezetha, 
 which  was  probably  the  quarry  from  which  much 
 of  the  stone  was  taken  for  building  the  Temple. 
 The  principal  cave  is  upwards  of  3000  feet  in  cir- 
 cumference, its  roof  about  30  feet  high,  supported 
 by  rude  pillars  of  rock.  There  are  numerous  late- 
 ral galleries  leading  to  halls  of  various  sizes,  in 
 some  of  which  are  traces  of  artificial  excavation. 
 Dr.  W.  M.  Thomson,  who  also  visited  the  quarry, 
 gives  the  following  graphic  description  of  it  : — 
 
 '  The  excavations  under  the  ridge  which  extends 
 from  the  north-west  corner  of  ihe  Temple  area  to 
 the  north  wall  of  the  city  are  most  extraordinary. 
 I  spent  a  large  part  of  this  forenoon  examining  them 
 with  a  company  of  friends  from  the  city.  Passing 
 out  at  the  Damascus  gate,  we  ascended  the  hill  of 
 rubbish  east  of  it,  and  just  under  the  high  precipice 
 over  which  the  wall  is  carried,  we  crept  or  rather 
 backed  through  a  narrow  opening,  and,  letting  our- 
 selves down  some  five  feet  on  the  inside,  we  stood 
 within  the  cavern.  Lighting  our  candles,  we  began 
 to  explore.  For  some  distance  the  descent  south- 
 ward was  rapid,  down  a  vast  bed  of  soft  earth. 
 Pausing  to  take  breath  and  look  about,  I  was  sur- 
 prised at  the  immense  dimensions  of  the  room. 
 The  roof  of  rock  is  about  tliirty  feet  high,  even 
 above  these  huge  heaps  of  rubbish,  and  is  sustained 
 by  large,  shapeless  columns  of  the  original  rock, 
 left  for  that  purpose  by  the  quarriers,  I  suppose. 
 On  we  went,  down,  down  from  one  depth  to  a 
 lower,  wandering  now  this,  now  that  way,  and  ever 
 in  danger  of  getting  lost,  or  of  falhng  over  some  of 
 the  many  precipices  into  the  yawning  darkness  be- 
 neath. In  some  places  we  climbed  with  difficulty 
 over  large  masses  of  rock,  which  appear  to  have 
 been  shaken  down  from  the  roof,  and  suggest  to 
 the  nervous  the  possibility  of  being  ground  to 
 powder  by  similar  masses  which  hang  overhead. 
 In  other  parts  our  progress  was  arrested  by  pyra- 
 mids of  rubbish  which  had  fallen  from  above, 
 through  apertures  in  the  vault,  either  natural  or 
 artificial.  We  found  water  trickling  down  in  seve- 
 ral places,  and  in  one  there  was  a  small  natural 
 pool  full  to  the  brim.  This  trickling  water  has 
 covered  many  parts  with  crystalline  incrustations, 
 pure  and  white — in  others,  stalactites  hang  from 
 the  roof,  and  stalagmites  have  grown  up  from  the 
 floor.  The  entire  rock  is  remarkably  white,  and, 
 though  not  veiy  hard,  will  take  a  polish  quite,  suffi- 
 cient for  architectural  beauty 
 
 'The  general  direction  of  these  excavations  is 
 south-east,  and  about  parallel  with  the  valley  which 
 descends  from  the  Damascus  Gate.  I  suspect  that 
 they  extend  down  to  the  Temple  area,  and  also 
 that  it  was  into  these  caverns  that  many  of  the 
 Jews  retired  when  Titus  took  the  Temple,  as  we 
 read  in  Josephus.  The  whole  city  might  be  stowed 
 away  in  them  ;  and  it  is  my  opinion  that  a  great 
 part  of  the  very  white  stone  of  the  Temple  must 
 have  been  taken  from  these  subterranean  quarries' 
 (Thomson's  Land  and  Book,  vol.  ii.  pp.  491,  492). 
 
 Water  Resources  of  Jerusalem.  —  In  his  ac- 
 count of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Pompey, 
 Strabo  says  that  the  town  was  well  provided  with 
 water  within  the  walls,  but  that  there  was  none  in 
 the  environs  {Geog.  xvi.  2,  40).  Probably  the 
 Roman  troops  then  suffered  from  want  of  water, 
 as  did  other  armies  whicli  laid  siege  to  Jerusalem. 
 In  the  narratives  of  such  sieges  we  almost  never 
 read  of  the  besieged  suffering  from  thirst,  although 
 driven  to  the  most  dreadful  extremities  and  re- 
 sources by  hunger,  while  the  besiegers  are  frequently 
 described  as  suffering  greatly  from  want  of  water, 
 and  as  being  obliged  to  fetch  it  from  a  great  dis- 
 tance. The  agonies  of  thirst  sustained  by  the  first 
 Crusaders  in  their  siege  of  Jerusalem  will  be  remem- 
 bered by  most  readers  from  the  vivid  picture  drawn 
 by  Tasso,  if  not  from  the  account  furnished  by 
 William  of  Tyre.  Yet  when  the  town  was  taken 
 plenty  of  water  was  foimd  within  it.  This  singular 
 circumstance  is  only  in  part  explained  by  reference 
 to  the  system  of  preserving  water  in  cisterns,  as  at 
 this  day,  in  Jerusalem.  Every  house  is  furnished 
 with  cisterns  and  tanks,  into  which  the  rain-water 
 is  conducted.  Some  of  the  reservoirs  are  vei^  ca- 
 pacious. 
 
 Besides  these  there  were  several  aqueducts  for 
 conveying  water  from  reservoirs  outside  of  the  city. 
 The  principal  of  these  was  that  leading  from  the 
 enormous  pools  of  Solomon  near  Bethlehem.  But 
 in  time  of  war  these  external  supplies  of  water 
 could  be  cut  off  by  the  besiegers.  At  the  siege  of 
 Titus  the  well  of  Siloam  may  have  been  in  posses- 
 sion of  the  Jews,  /.  e.,  within  the  walls  ;  but  at  the 
 siege  by  the  Crusaders  it  was  certainly  held  by  the 
 besieging  Franks  :  and  yet  the  latter  perished  from 
 thirst,  while  the  besieged  had  '  ingentes  copias 
 aquae.'  There  is  good  ground  to  conclude  that 
 from  very  ancient  times  there  has  been  under  the 
 Temple  an  unfailing  source  of  water,  derived  by 
 secret  and  subterraneous  channels  from  springs  to 
 the  west  of  the  town,  and  communicating  by  other 
 subterraneous  passages  with  the  pool  of  Siloam 
 and  the  fountain  of  the  Virgin  in  the  cast  of  the 
 town,  whether  they  were  within  or  without  the 
 walls  of  the  town. 
 
 Barclay  is  of  opinion  that  there  was  a  natural 
 but  small  fountain  under  the  Temple  ;  but  he  thinks 
 the  early  travellers  and  geographers  who  speak  of 
 this  were  misled  by  the  sound  of  water  falling  into 
 a  subterranean  reservoir  from  the  aqueduct  oi 
 Ethaia ;  and  that  the  overflow  of  this  reservoir  pro- 
 duced the  stream  that  Oman  found  flowing  from 
 the  Temple  area  when  he  took  the  city.  The 
 existence  of  a  perennial  source  of  water  below  the 
 Temple  has  always  been  admitted.  Tacitus  knew 
 of  it  [Hist  V.  12)  ;  and  Aristeas,  in  describing  the 
 ancient  Temple,  informs  us  that  '  the  supply  of 
 water  was  unfailing,  inasmuch  as  there  was  an 
 abundant  natural  fountain  flowing  in  the  interior, 
 and   reservoirs   of  admirable    construction    undei 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 537 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 ground,  extending  five  stadia  round  the  Temple, 
 with  pipes  and  conduits  unknown  to  all  except 
 those  to  whom  the  service  was  entrusted,  by  which 
 the  water  was  brought  to  various  parts  of  the 
 Temple  and  again  conducted  off.'  The  Moslems 
 also  have  constantly  affirmed  the  existence  of 
 this  fountain  or  cistern.  But  a  reserve  has  always 
 been  kept  up  as  to  the  means  by  which  it  is  sup- 
 plied. This  reserve  seems  to  have  been  maintained 
 by  the  successive  occupants  of  Jerusalem  as  a  point 
 of  civic  honour  ;  and  this  fact  alone  intimates  that 
 there  was  danger  to  the  town  in  its  becoming 
 known,  and  points  to  the  fact  that  the  supply  came 
 from  without  the  city  by  secret  channels,  which  it 
 was  of  importance  not  to  disclose.  Yet  we  are 
 plainly  told  in  the  Bible  that  Hezekiah  '  stopped 
 the  upper  water-course  of  Gihon,  and  brought  it 
 down  to  the  west  side  of  the  city  of  David '  (i  Kings 
 i.  33,  38)  ;  from  2  Chron.  xxxii.  30,  it  seems  that 
 all  the  neighbouring  fountains  were  thus  '  stopped ' 
 or  covered,  and  the  bi-ook  which  they  had  formed 
 diverted  by  subterraneous  channels  into  the  town, 
 for  the  express  purpose  of  preventing  besiegers  from 
 finding  the  '  much  water '  which  previously  existed 
 outside  the  walls  (comp.  also  Ecclus.  xlviii.  17). 
 Perhaps,  likewise,  the  prophet  Ezekiel  (xlvii.  1-12) 
 alludes  to  this  secret  fountain  under  the  Temple 
 when  he  speaks  of  waters  issuing  from  the  thresh- 
 old of  the  Temple  towards  the  east,  and  flowing 
 down  towards  the  desert  as  an  abundant  and 
 beautiful  stream.  This  figure  may  be  drawn  from 
 the  waters  of  the  inner  source,  under  the  Temple, 
 being  at  the  time  of  the  overflow  discharged  by  the 
 outlets  at  Siloam  into  the  Kidron,  which  takes  the 
 eastward  course  thus  described.  (See  woodcut, 
 page  521.) 
 
 There  are  certainly  wells,  or  rather  shafts,  in  and 
 near  the  Temple  area,  which  are  alleged  to  derive 
 their  waters  through  a  passage  of  masoniy  four  or 
 five  feet  high,  from  a  chamber  or  reservoir  cut  in 
 the  solid  rock  under  the  grand  mosque,  in  which 
 the  water  is  said  to  rise  from  the  rock  into  a  basin 
 at  the  bottom.  The  existence  of  this  reservoir  and 
 source  of  water  is  affirmed  by  all  Moslems,  and 
 coincides  with  the  preceding  intimations,  but  it 
 must  be  left  for  future  explorers  to  clear  up  all  the 
 obscurities  in  which  the  matter  is  involved. 
 
 Dr.  Barclay,  who  has  given  much  attention  to 
 the  water  sources  of  Jerusalem,  both  ancient  and 
 modem,  and  who  made  several  fruitless  attempts 
 to  explore  this  subterranean  stream,  leaves  the 
 question  of  its  origin  in  uncertainty.  '  Whether 
 there  be  indeed  any  natural  spring  of  water  deep- 
 seated  within  the  Temple  enclosure,  and  the  waste 
 of  which  runs  off  at  Siloam,  cannot  perhaps  at  pre- 
 sent be  certainly  determined ;  it  is  a  question  which, 
 with  many  others  of  the  same  kind,  must  await  the 
 time  when  the  Holy  City  comes  under  the  sway  of 
 some  civilized  government '  ( City  of  the  Great  Knig, 
 p.  293  ;  see  also  Thomson's  Land  and  Book,  vol. 
 ii.  p.  530). 
 
 The  Modern  City. — To  comprehend  the  gene- 
 ral topography  of  Jerusalem  and  its  environs,  one 
 should  have  before  him  Altmiiller's  raised  map  of 
 the  modern  city.  Upon  the  whole  the  best  verbal 
 description  of  Jerusalem  is  that  from  the  pen  of  Dr. 
 Olin.  The  summit  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  is 
 about  half  a  mile  east  from  the  city,  which  it 
 completely  overlooks,  every  considerable  edifice 
 and  almost  every  house  being  visible.  The  city 
 seen  from  tliis  point  appears  to  be  a  regular  in- 
 
 clined plain,  sloping  gently  and  uniformly  from 
 west  to  east,  or  towards  the  observer,  and  indented 
 by  a  slight  depression  or  shallow  vale,  running 
 nearly  through  the  centre  in  the  same  direction. 
 The  south-east  corner  of  the  quadrangle — for  that 
 may  be  assumed  as  the  figure  formed  by  the  rocks 
 — that  which  is  nearest  to  the  observer,  is  occupied 
 by  the  mosque  of  Omar  and  its  extensive  and 
 beautiful  grounds.  This  is  Mount  Moriah,  the 
 site  of  Solomon's  temple,  and  the  ground  embraced 
 in  the  sacred  enclosure  occupies  about  an  eighth 
 of  the  whole  modem  city.  It  is  covered  with  green 
 sward  and  planted  sparingly  with  olive,  cypress, 
 and  other  trees,  and  it  is  certainly  the  most  lovely 
 feature  of  the  town,  whether  we  have  reference  to 
 the  splendid  structures  or  the  beautiful  lawn  spread 
 out  around  them.      (See  woodcut,  page  520.) 
 
 The  south-west  quarter,  embracing  that  part  of 
 Mount  Zion  which  is  within  the  modem  town,  is  to 
 a  great  extent  occupied  by  the  Armenian  convent, 
 an  enormous  edifice,  which  is  the  only  conspicuous 
 ol^ject  in  this  neighbourhood.  The  north-west  is 
 largely  occupied  by  the  Latin  convent,  another 
 very  extensive  establishment.  About  midway  be- 
 tween these  two  convents  is  the  castle  or  citadel, 
 close  to  the  Bethlehem  gate,  already  mentioned. 
 The  north-east  quarter  of  Jerusalem  is  but  partially 
 built  up,  and  it  has  more  the  aspect  of  a  rambling 
 agricultural  village  than  that  of  a  crowded  city. 
 The  vacant  spots  here  are  green  with  gardens  and 
 olive-trees.  There  is  another  large  vacant  tract 
 along  the  southern  wall,  and  west  of  the  Haram, 
 also  covered  with  verdure.  Near  the  centre  of  the 
 city  also  appear  two  or  three  green  spots,  which 
 are  small  gardens.  The  church  of  the  Holy 
 Sepulchre  is  the  only  conspicuous  edifice  in  this 
 vicinity,  and  its  domes  are  striking  objects.  There 
 are  no  buildings  which,  either  from  their  size  or 
 beauty,  are  likely  to  engage  the  attention.  Eight 
 or  ten  minarets  mark  the  position  of  so  many 
 mosques  in  different  parts  of  the  town,  but  they  are 
 only  noticed  because  of  their  elevation  above  the 
 surrounding  edifices.  Upon  the  same  principle  the 
 eye  rests  for  a  moment  upon  a  great  number  of  low 
 domes,  which  form  the  roofs  of  the  principal  dwell- 
 ings, and  relieve  the  heavy  uniformity  of  the  flat 
 plastered  roofs  which  cover  the  greater  mass  of 
 more  humble  habitations.  Many  ruinous  piles  and 
 a  thousand  disgusting  objects  are  concealed  or  dis- 
 guised by  the  distance.  Many  inequahties  of  sur- 
 face, which  exist  to  so  great  an  extent  that  there  is 
 not  a  level  street  of  any  length  in  Jerusalem,  are 
 also  unperceived. 
 
 From  the  same  commanding  point  of  view  a  few 
 olive  and  fig-trees  are  seen  in  the  lower  part  of  the 
 valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  and  scattered  over  the  side 
 of  Olivet  from  its  base  to  the  summit.  These  are 
 sprinkled  yet  more  sparingly  on  the  southern  side 
 of  the  city  on  Mounts  Zion  and  Ophel.  North  of 
 Jerusalem  the  olive  plantations  appear  more  nume- 
 rous as  well  as  thriving,  and  thus  offer  a  grateful 
 contrast  to  the  sun-burnt  fields  and  bare  rocks 
 which  predominate  in  this  landscape.  The  region 
 west  of  the  city  appears  to  be  destitute  of  trees. 
 Fields  of  stunted  wheat,  yellow  with  the  drought 
 rather  than  white  for  the  harvest,  are  seen  on  all 
 sides  of  the  town. 
 
 Jerusalem,  as  seen  from  Mount  Olivet,  is  3 
 plain  inclining  gently  and  equably  to  the  East. 
 (See  woodcut,  page  520.)  Once  enter  its  gates, 
 however,  and  it  is  found  to  be  full  of  inequali- 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 633 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 ties.  The  passenger  is  always  ascending  or  de- 
 scending. There  are  no  level  streets,  and  little 
 skill  or  labour  has  been  employed  to  remove 
 or  diminish  the  inequalities  which  nature  or  time 
 has  produced.  Houses  are  built  upon  moun- 
 tains of  rubbish,  which  are  probably  twenty,  thirty, 
 or  fifty  feet  above  the  natural  level,  and  the 
 streets  are  constructed  with  the  same  disregard  to 
 convenience,  with  this  difference,  that  some  slight 
 attention  is  paid  to  the  possibility  of  carrying  off 
 surplus  water.  The  streets  are,  without  exception, 
 narrow,  seldom  exceeding  eight  or  ten  feet  in 
 breadth.  The  houses  often  meet,  and  in  some 
 instances  a  building  occupies  both  sides  of  the 
 street,  whicli  runs  under  a  succession  of  arches 
 barely  high  enough  to  permit  an  equestrian  to  pass 
 under  them.  A  canopy  of  old  mats  or  of  plank  is 
 suspended  over  the  principal  streets  when  not 
 arched.  This  custom  had  its  origin,  no  doubt,  in 
 the  heat  of  the  climate,  which  is  very  intense  in 
 summer,  and  it  gives  a  gloomy  aspect  to  all  the 
 most  thronged  and  lively  parts  of  the  city.  These 
 covered  ways  are  often  pervaded  by  currents  of 
 air  when  a  perfect  calm  prevails  in  other  places. 
 The  principal  streets  of  Jerusalem  run  nearly  at 
 right  angles  to  each  other.  Very  few,  if  any,  of 
 them  bear  names  among  the  native  population. 
 Tliey  are  badly  paved,  being  merely  laid  irregularly 
 with  raised  stones,  with  a  deep  square  channel,  for 
 beasts  of  burden,  in  the  middle  ;  but  the  steepness 
 of  the  ground  contributes  to  keep  them  cioa.ier 
 than  in  most  Oriental  cities. 
 
 The  houses  of  Jerusalem  are  substantially  built  of 
 the  limestone  of  which  the  whole  of  this  part  of 
 Palestine  is  composed :  not  usually  hewn,  but 
 broken  into  regular  forms,  and  making  a  solid 
 wall  of  very  respectable  appearance.  For  the 
 most  part  there  are  no  windows  next  to  the  street, 
 and  the  few  which  exist  for  the  purposes  of  light 
 or  ventilation  are  completely  masked  by  casements 
 and  lattice-work.  The  apartments  receive  their 
 light  from  the  open  courts  within.  The  ground 
 plot  is  usually  surrounded  by  a  high  enclosure, 
 commonly  forming  the  walls  of  the  house  only,  but 
 sometimes  embracing  a  small  garden  and  some 
 vacant  ground.  The  rain-water  which  falls  upon  the 
 pavement  is  carefully  conducted,  by  means  of  gutters, 
 into  cisterns,  where  it  is  preserved  for  domestic  uses. 
 The  people  of  Jerusalem  rely  chiefly  upon  these 
 reservoirs  for  their  supply  of  this  indispensable 
 article.  Every  house  has  its  cistern,  and  the  larger 
 habitations  are  provided  with  a  considerable  num- 
 ber of  them,  which  occupy  the  ground-story  or  cells 
 formed  for  the  purpose  below  it.  Stone  is  em- 
 ployed in  building  for  all  the  purposes  to  which  it 
 can  possibly  be  applied,  and  Jerusalem  is  hardly 
 more  exposed  to  accidents  by  fire  than  a  quariy  or 
 subterranean  cavern.  The  floors,  stairs,  etc.,  are 
 of  stone,  and  the  ceiling  is  usually  formed  iDy  a 
 coat  of  plaster  laid  upon  the  stones,  which  at  the 
 same  time  form  the  roof  and  the  vaulted  top  of  the 
 room.  Doors,  sashes,  and  a  few  other  appurte- 
 nances, are  all  that  can  usually  be  afforded  of  a 
 material  so  expensive  as  wood.  The  little  timber 
 which  is  used  is  mostly  brought  from  Mount 
 Lebanon,  as  in  the  time  of  Solomon.  A  rough, 
 crooked  stick  of  the  fig-tree,  or  some  gnarled, 
 twisted  planks  made  of  the  olive — the  growth  of 
 Palestine — are  occasionally  seen.  In  other  respects 
 the  description  in  the  article  House  will  afford  a 
 sufficient  notion  of  those  in  Jerusalem,     A  large 
 
 number  of  houses  in  Jerusalem  are  in  a  dilapidated 
 and  ruinous  state.  Nobody  seems  to  make  repairs 
 so  long  as  his  dwelling  does  not  absolutely  refuse 
 him  shelter  and  safety.  If  one  room  tumbles  about 
 his  ears  he  removes  into  another,  and  permits 
 rubbish  and  vermin  to  accumulate  as  they  will 
 in  the  deserted  halls.  Tottering  staircases  are 
 propped  to  prevent  their  fall ;  and  when  the  edifice 
 becomes  untenantable,  the  occupant  seeks  another 
 a  little  less  ruinous,  leaving  the  wreck  to  a  smaller 
 or  more  wretched  family,  or,  more  probably,  to  a 
 goatherd  and  his  flock.  Habitations  which  have  a 
 very  respectable  appearance  as  seen  from  the  street, 
 are  often  found,  upon  entering  them,  to  be  little 
 better  than  heaps  of  ruins. 
 
 Nothing  of  this  would  be  suspected  from  the 
 general  appearance  of  the  city  as  seen  from  the 
 various  commanding  points  without  the  walls,  nor 
 from  anything  that  meets  the  eye  in  the  streets. 
 Few  towns  in  the  East  offer  a  more  imposing  spec- 
 tacle to  the  view  of  the  approaching  stranger.  He 
 is  struck  with  the  height  and  massiveness  of  the 
 walls,  which  are  kept  in  perfect  repair,  and  natu- 
 rally produce  a  favourable  opinion  of  the  wealth 
 and  comfort  which  they  are  designed  to  protect. 
 Upon  entering  the  gates,  he  is  apt,  after  all  that 
 has  been  published  about  the  solitude  that  reigns  in 
 the  streets,  to  be  surprised  at  meeting  large  num- 
 bers of  people  in  the  chief  thoroughfares,  almost 
 without  exception  decently  clad.  A  longer  and 
 more  intimate  acquaintance  with  Jerusalem,  how- 
 ever, does  not  fail  to  correct  this  too  favourable 
 impression,  and  demonstrate  the  existence  and  gene- 
 ral prevalence  of  the  poverty  and  even  wretchedness 
 which  must  result  in  eveiy  country  from  oppression, 
 from  the  absence  of  trade,  and  the  utter  stagnation 
 of  all  branches  of  industry.  Considerable  activity 
 is  displayed  in  the  bazaars,  which  are  supplied 
 scantily,  like  those  of  other  Eastern  towns,  with 
 provisions,  tobacco,  coarse  cottons,  and  other 
 articles  of  prime  necessity.  A  considerable  busi- 
 ness is  still  done  in  beads,  crosses,  and  other  sacred 
 trinkets,  which  are  purchased  to  a  vast  amount  by 
 the  pilgrims  who  annually  throng  the  holy  city. 
 The  support  and  even  the  existence  of  the  con- 
 siderable population  of  Jerusalem  depend  upon 
 this  transient  patronage — a  circumstance  to  which  a 
 great  part  of  the  prevailing  poverty  and  degradation 
 is  justly  ascribed.  The  articles  employed  in  this 
 pitiful  trade  are,  almost  without  exception,  brought 
 from  other  places,  especially  Hebron  and  Bethle- 
 hem— the  former  celebrated  for  its  baubles  of 
 glass,  the  latter  chiefly  for  rosaries,  crucifixes,  and 
 other  toys  made  of  mother-of-pearl,  olive-wood, 
 black  stones  from  the  Dead  Sea,  etc.  These  are 
 eagerly  bought  up  by  the  ignorant  pilgrims, 
 sprinkled  with  holy  water  by  the  priests,  or  conse- 
 crated by  some  other  religious  mummery,  and 
 carried  off  in  triumph  and  worn  as  ornaments  to 
 charm  away  disease  and  misfortune,  and  probably 
 to  be  buried  with  the  deluded  enthusiast  in  his 
 coffin,  as  a  sure  passport  to  eternal  blessedness. 
 With  the  departure  of  the  swarms  of  pilgrims,  how- 
 ever, even  this  poor  semblance  of  active  industry 
 and  prosperity  deserts  the  city.  With  the  excep- 
 tion of  some  establishments  for  soap-making,  a 
 tannery,  and  a  very  few  weavers  of  coarse  cottons, 
 there  do  not  appear  to  be  any  manufacturers  pro- 
 perly belonging  to  the  place.  Agriculture  ib 
 almost  equally  wretched,  and  can  only  give  em. 
 ployment  to  a  few  hundred  peopie.     The  masses 
 
JERUSALEM 
 
 539 
 
 JERUSALEM 
 
 really  seem  to  be  without  any  regular  employment. 
 A  considerable  number,  especially  of  the  Jews, 
 professedly  live  on  chanty.  Many  Christian  pil- 
 grims annually  find  their  way  hither  on  similar 
 resources,  and  the  approaches  to  the  holy  places 
 are  thronged  with  beggars,  who  in  piteous  tones 
 demand  alms  in  the  name  of  Christ  and  the  Blessed 
 Virgin.  The  general  condition  of  the  population 
 is  that  of  abject  poverty.  A  few  Turkish  officials, 
 ecclesiastical,  civil,  and  military ;  some  remains  of 
 the  old  Mohammedan  aristocracy — once  powerful 
 and  rich,  but  now  much  impoverished  and  nearly 
 extinct ;  together  with  a  few  tradesmen  in  easy 
 circumstances,  form  almost  the  only  exceptions  to 
 the  prevailing  indigence. 
 
 Inhabitants. — The  number  of  the  inhabitants 
 of  Jerusalem  has  been  variously  estimated  by 
 different  travellers,  some  making  it  as  high  as 
 30,000,  others  as  low  as  12,000.  An  average  of 
 these  estimates  would  make  it  somewhere  between 
 15,000  and  20,000.  Of  these.  Dr.  Barclay  enu- 
 merates the  Christians  at  about  4500.  The  Jewish 
 population  is  perhaps  a  little  less  ;  though  Barclay 
 gives  about  11,000  for  his  missionary  district,  of 
 which  this  city  was  the  head.  The  Moslems  ex- 
 ceed in  number  the  Jews  or  Christians  respectively, 
 but  are  fewer  than  these  two  bodies  united.  To 
 all  these  classes  Jerusalem  is  holy  ;  and  it  is  the 
 only  city  in  the  world  which  peoples  of  such  diffe- 
 rent origin,  races,  language,  and  rehgions,  agree 
 to  regard  with  nearly  equal  veneration.  The 
 language  most  generally  spoken  among  them  is  the 
 Arabic.  Schools  are  rare,  and  consequently  faci- 
 lity in  reading  is  not  often  met  with. 
 
 The  Turkish  governor  of  the  town  holds  the 
 rank  of  Pasha,  but  is  responsible  to  the  Pasha  of 
 Beirout.  The  government  is  somewhat  milder 
 than  before  the  period  of  the  Egyptian  dominion  ; 
 and  has  felt  somewhat  the  restraining  influence  of 
 tlie  treaty  of  Paris.  Yet  the  Moslems  reverence 
 the  same  spots  which  the  Jews  and  Christians 
 account  holy,  the  holy  sepulchre  only  excepted. 
 Formerly  there  were  in  Palestine  monks  of  the 
 Benedictine  and  Augustine  orders,  and  of  those  of 
 St.  Basil  and  St.  Anthony  ;  but  since  1304  there 
 have  been  none  but  Franciscans,  who  have  charge 
 of  the  Latin  convent  and  the  holy  places.  They 
 resided  on  Mount  Zion  till  A.  D.  1561,  when  the 
 Turks  allowed  them  the  monastery  of  St.  Salvador, 
 which  they  now  occupy.  They  had  formerly  a 
 handsome  revenue  out  of  all  Roman  Catholic 
 countries,  but  these  sources  have  fallen  off  since 
 the  French  revolution,  and  the  establishment  is 
 said  to  be  poor  and  deeply  in  debt.  The  expenses 
 arise  from  the  duty  imposed  upon  the  convent  of 
 entertaining  pilgrims  ;  and  the  cost  of  maintaining 
 the  twenty  convents  belonging  to  the  establishment 
 of  the  Terra  Santa  is  estimated  at  40,000  Spanish 
 dollars  a  year.  Formerly  it  was  much  higher,  in 
 consequence  of  the  heavy  exactions  of  the  Turkish 
 government.  Burckhardt  says  that  the  brother- 
 hood paid  annually  ;,^  12,000  to  the  Pasha  of 
 Damascus.  But  the  Egyptian  government  relieved 
 them  from  these  heavy  charges,  and  imposed  in- 
 stead a  regular  tax  on  the  property  possessed. 
 For  the  buildings  and  lands  in  and  around  Jerusalem 
 the  annual  tax  was  fixed  at  7000  piastres,  or  about 
 (^So  sterling.  The  convent  contains  fifty  monks, 
 half  Italians  and  half  Spaniards.  In  it  resides  the 
 Intendant  or  the  Principal  of  all  the  convents, 
 with  the  rank  of  abbot,  and  the  title  of  Guardian 
 
 of  Mount  Zion  and  Custos  of  the  Holy  Land. 
 He  is  always  an  Italian,  and  has  charge  of  all  the 
 spiritual  affairs  of  the  Roman  Catholics  in  the 
 Holy  Land.  There  is  also  a  president  or  vicar, 
 who  takes  the  place  of  the  guardian  in  case  ol 
 absence  or  death  :  he  was  formerly  a  Frenchman, 
 but  is  now  either  an  Italian  or  Spaniard.  The 
 procurator,  who  manages  their  temporal  affairs,  is 
 always  a  Spaniard.  A  council,  called  Discreto- 
 rium,  composed  of  these  officials  and  three  other 
 monks,  has  the  general  management  of  both  spiri- 
 tual and  temporal  matters.  Much  of  the  attention 
 of  the  order  is  occupied,  and  much  of  its  expense 
 incurred,  in  entertaining  pilgrims  and  in  the  dis- 
 tribution of  alms.  The  native  Roman  Catholics 
 live  around  the  convent,  on  which  they  are  wholly 
 dependent.  They  are  native  Arabs,  and  are  said 
 to  be  descended  from  converts  in  the  times  of  the 
 Crusades. 
 
 There  is  a  Greek  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  but  he 
 usually  resides  at  Constantinople,  and  is  repre- 
 sented in  the  holy  city  by  one  or  more  vicars  who 
 are  bishops  residing  in  the  great  convent  near  the 
 Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre.  At  present  the 
 vicars  are  the  bishops  of  Lydda,  Nazareth,  and 
 Kerek  (Petra),  assisted  by  the  other  bishops  resi- 
 dent in  the  convent.  In  addition  to  thirteen 
 monasteries  in  Jerusalem,  they  possess  the  convent 
 of  the  Holy  Cross  near  Jerusalem,  that  of  St. 
 Helena,  between  Jerasalem  and  Bethlehem,  and 
 that  of  St.  John,  between  Jerusalem  and  the  Dead 
 Sea.  All  the  monks  of  the  convents  are  foreigners. 
 The  Christians  of  the  Greek  rite  who  are  not 
 monks  are  all  native  Arabs  with  their  native 
 prests,  who  are  allowed  to  perform  the  church 
 services  in  their  mother  tongue — the  Arabic. 
 
 The  Armenians  in  Jerusalem  have  a  patriarch, 
 with  three  convents  and  100  monks.  They  have 
 also  convents  at  Bethlehem,  Ramleh,  and  Jaffa. 
 Few  of  the  Armenians  are  natives ;  they  are 
 mostly  merchants,  and  among  the  wealthiest  in- 
 habitants of  the  place  ;  and  their  convent  in  Jeru- 
 salem is  deemed  the  richest  in  the  Levant.  Their 
 church  of  St.  James  upon  Mount  Zion  is  very 
 showy  in  its  decorations,  but  void  of  taste.  The 
 Coptic  Christians  at  Jerusalem  are  only  some 
 monks  residing  in  the  convent  of  Es-Sultan,  on 
 the  north  side  of  the  pool  of  Hezekiah.  There  is 
 also  a  convent  of  the  Abyssinians,  and  one  belong- 
 ing to  the  Jacobite  Syrians. 
 
 The  number  of  Jews  in  Jerusalem  varies 
 with  the  emigration  from  special  causes.  They 
 inliabit  a  distinct  quarter  of  the  town  between 
 Mcjunt  Zion  and  Mount  Moriah.  This  is  the 
 worst  and  dirtiest  part  of  the  holy  city,  and  that  in 
 which  the  plague  never  fails  to  make  its  first 
 appearance.  Few  of  the  Jerusalem  Jews  are 
 natives ;  and  most  of  them  come  from  foreign 
 parts  to  die  in  the  city  of  their  fathers'  sepulchres. 
 The  greater  proportion  of  them  are  from  different 
 parts  of  the  Levant,  and  appear  to  be  mostly  of 
 Spanish  and  Polish  origin.  Few  are  from  Germany, 
 or  understand  the  German  language.  They  are 
 for  the  most  part  wretchedly  poor,  and  depend  in 
 a  great  degree  for  their  subsistence  upon  the  con- 
 tributions of  their  brethren  in  different  countries. 
 These  contributions  have  of  late  years  been  smaller 
 than  usual,  and  when  they  arrive  are  the  occasion 
 of  much  heartburning  and  strife.  The  Scottish 
 Deputation  {^Narrative,  p.  14S)  say,  '  They  are 
 alway.s  quarrelhng,  and   frequently  apply  to    the 
 
JESHAIAH 
 
 540 
 
 JESSE 
 
 consul  to  settle  their  disputes.  The  expectation  of 
 support  from  the  annual  European  contributions 
 leads  many  of  them  to  live  in  idleness.  Hence 
 there  are  in  Jerusalem  several  hundreds  who  are 
 acknowledged  paupers,  or  who  receive  charity  in  a 
 quiet  way.  Many  are  so  poor  that,  if  not  relieved, 
 they  would  not  stand  out  the  winter  season.  A 
 few  are  shopkeepers,  and  a  few  more  hawkers, 
 and  a  very  few  are  operatives.  Few  of  them  are 
 agriculturists,  though  the  colony  at  Wady-Ustas 
 has  done  something  to  revive  a  taste  for  the  culti- 
 vation of  the  soil.'  Reisner,  lenisalem  Vetustis- 
 sima  Dcscripta,  Francof.  1563  ;  Olshausen,  Ztir 
 Topographie  d.  alien  yenisaleni,  Kiel  1833  ;  Adri- 
 chomius,  Jerusalem  sicut  Ck}-isii  tempore  floruit. 
 Colon.  1593  ;  Chrysanthi  (Beat.  Patr.  Hierosoly- 
 morum),  Historia  et  Descriptio  Terrce  Sancta, 
 Urbisque  Sancta  Hierusalem,  Venet.  1728  (this 
 work  is  in  Greek) ;  D'Anville,  Dissert,  surf  Etendtie 
 de  rAitdennejferusalem,  Paris  1747  :  the  articles  on 
 Jerusalem  in  Ersch.  and  Griiber's  Eticyclopddie ; 
 in  Raumer's  Paliistina ;  in  Winer's  Realworter- 
 buch  ;  in  Eugene  Roger's  La  Ter7-e  Saincte.,  ou  De- 
 script.  Topographique  tr^s-particulih'e  des  Sainctes 
 Lieux,  et  de  la  Terre  de  P?-o?nissiou,  Paris  1646  ; 
 and  in  Dr.  Robinson's  Bibl.  Researches  in  Pales- 
 tine;  with  the  additions  since  published  in  the 
 Biblical  Repository  z.nA  Bibliotheca  Sacra  :  also,  the 
 notices  of  Jerusalem  in  various  books  of  travels, 
 particularly  those  of  Cotovicus,  Zuallart,  Radzivil, 
 Morison,  Nau,  Sandys,  Doubdan,  D'Arvieux, 
 Maundrell,  Pococke,  Niebidir,  Clarke,  Turner, 
 Buckingham,  Richardson,  Richter,  JolHffe,  Jowett, 
 Prokesch,  Scholz,  Monro,  Hardy,  Stephens,  Pax- 
 ton,  Schubert,  Olin,  Stent,  Formby,  Gerardy- 
 Saintine  (Par.  i860),  and  the  Scottish  Deputation. 
 -J.  K.  and  J.  T. 
 
 JESHAIAH.      I.    (^nW   [same   as   Isaiah]; 
 
 Sept.  'Icr^as ;  Alex.  'lee'ta  Kal  Tle/xet,  I  Chron. 
 XXV.  3  :  'Iwcrta  in  ver.  15  ;  Alex.  'lo-tas.)  A  son 
 of  Jeduthun,  chief  of  the  eighth  division  of  the 
 singers  in  the  Temple.  2.  (Sept.  'Iwaias  ;  Alex, 
 'iicratas.)  A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  David  [Isshiah]. 
 3.  (rr^VE^^ ;  Sept.  'Ualas  ;  Alex.  'Hcrata.)  The  son 
 
 of  Athaliah,  and  head  of  the  sons  of  Elam,  who 
 with  fifty  males  accompanied  Ezra  on  his  return 
 from  Babylon  (Ezra  viii.  7).  In  i  Esdr.  viii.  33  he 
 is  called  Josias.  4.  (Sept.  'Icraia.)  A  Merarite 
 who  returned  with  Ezra  (Ezra  viii.  19),  called 
 Osias  in  i  Esdr.  viii.  48. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JESHANAH  (n^K''' ;  Sept.  ^  'leo-wd),  a  town 
 
 with  its  dependencies  taken  by  Abijah  from  Jero- 
 boam (2  Chron.  xiii.  19).    It  has  not  been  identified. 
 
 JESHIMON    (jilD-'E'^).      In    our    A.    V.    this 
 
 word  is  rendered  as  a  proper  name  in  six  passages 
 in  which  it  has  the  article  (Num.  xxi.  20 ;  xxiii. 
 28;  I  Sam.  xxiii.  19  and  24;  xxvi.  I,  3).  In  two 
 of  these  passages  the  Septuagint  reads  ^prjfxos ;  in 
 the  others  'leaaaLfids.  The  Vulgate  reads  deser- 
 tuni,  soliticdo,  and  Jesimon.  The  word  also  occurs 
 in  the  following  poetical  passages  : — Deut.  xxxii. 
 10  and  Ps.  Ixviii.  7,  in  which  it  is  translated  ivil- 
 dertiess ;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  40,  cvi.  14,  and  Is.  Ixiii.  19, 
 20,  translated  desert ;  and  Ps.  cvii.  4,  translated 
 solitary.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  '  the 
 poetical  passages'  it  means  simply  ivilderness,  and 
 is  applied  to  the   '  wilderness  of  Sinai.'     In  the 
 
 other  passages  its  import  is  not  so  clear.  It  may 
 possibly  be  a  proper  name  ;  but  if  so  there  were 
 two  Jeshimons  ;  one  east  of  the  Jordan,  connected 
 with  Pisgah  and  Peor  (Num.  xxi.  20)  ;  the  other 
 west  of  the  Jordan,  and  connected  with  Hachilah 
 and  Maon  (i  Sam.  xxiii.  19,  etc.)  We  are  in- 
 clined to  believe  that  in  these  cases  also  it  means 
 '  -wilderness ;'  in  the  former  the  '  wilderness  of 
 Arabia,'  in  the  latter  the  'wilderness  of  Judaea.' 
 For  farther  details  see  the  articles  Desert  and 
 Hachilah. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JESHUA  OR  JESHUAH  (_y^K^;_;  Sept. 'VoOs), 
 
 a  contraction  of  Jehoshua,  and  the  same  as  Joshua, 
 for  which  it  is  sometimes  substituted,  as  in  Num. 
 viii.  17  for  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun  [Joshua,  i], 
 and  in  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  for  Joshua  the  high- 
 priest  [Joshua,  4].  The  other  persons  thus  desig- 
 nated in  the  O.  T.  are — i.  A  priest  in  the  reign  of 
 David,  to  whom  the  ninth  course  was  allotted  (i 
 Chron.  xxiv.  ii).  2.  A  Levite  in  the  reign  of 
 Hezekiah,  to  whom,  along  with  others,  was  as- 
 signed the  office  under  Kore  of  distributing  to  their 
 brethren,  in  the  cities  of  the  priests,  the  free-will 
 offerings  of  the  people  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  15).  3. 
 The  son  of  Azaniah  (Neh.  x.  9),  a  descendant  of 
 Hodaviah,  whose  descendants  came  up  with  Ezra 
 from  Babylon  (Ezra  ii.  40).  In  this  passage  he  is 
 associated  with  Kadmiel,  another  descendant  of 
 Hodaviah,  also  in  Neh.  ix.  4,  5  ;  xii.  8,  etc. ;  but 
 in  Neh.  xii.  24  he  is  called  '  the  son  of  Kadmiel,' 
 which  is  doubtless  to  be  traced  to  a  clerical  mis- 
 take. 4.  In  Neh.  vii.  1 1  mention  is  made  of  '  the 
 children  of  Jeshua  and  Joab'  as  included  in,  or 
 represented  by  'the  children  of  Pahath-Moab.' 
 Pahath-Moab  was  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  people 
 (Neh.  X.  4 ;  Ezra  x.  30),  but  in  what  relation  the 
 children  of  Jeshua  stood  to  him  is  uncertain. 
 
 Jeshua  is  also  the  name  of  a  town  mentioned, 
 along  with  Molada  and  Beth-Phelet,  as  one  of 
 those  occupied  by  the  children  of  Judah  after  their 
 return  from  exile  (Neh.  xi.  26). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JESHURUN  (}^"IC^'''),  a  poetical  name  for  Israel 
 
 (Deut.  xxxii.  15;  xxxiii.  5,  26;  Is.  xliv.  2  [Jesu- 
 run,  A.  V.]).  Various  explanations  of  the  word 
 have  been  given.  The  opinion  generally  held  by 
 the  best  authorities  is,  that  it  is  a  diminutive  from 
 "IC  yashar,  upright,  pious,  and  is  used  as  a  term 
 of  endearment,  'quasi  rectulus,  justulus'  (Gesen. ); 
 '' das  fromme  Volcken,  etwa  Frominchen''  (Fiirst). 
 The  LXX.  render  it  by  6  dyaTrrj/jiivos,  but  Aquila 
 and  Symmachus  give  evdus,  the  Vulg.  rectissimus  et 
 dilectus,  and  the  other  ancient  versions  accord.  The 
 notion  of  Grotius,  that  the  word  is  a  contraction 
 
 of  jvKIK'''  Yisraelun,  a  diminutive  from  PKItJ''' 
 Yisrael,  is  now  deservedly  rejected  by  all  scholars. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JESSE   C^;'';   Sept.  and  N.    T.    'leacral),    the 
 
 father  of  David,  described  as  'the  Bethlehemite' 
 (l  Sam.  xvi.  i,  18),  or  more  fully  as  the  Ephra- 
 thite  of  Bethlehem-Judah  (xvii.  12).  He  was  the 
 son  of  Obed,  and  the  grandson  of  Boaz  and  Ruth. 
 Though  of  illustrious  descent  (Ruth  iv.  18-22),  he 
 does  not  seem  to  have  possessed  much  wealth  ; 
 what  he  had  consisted  in  sheep  and  goats,  of  which 
 his  son  David  had  the  care  (i  Sam.  xvi.  il  ;  xvii. 
 34"35)*  Jewish  tradition  says  that  he  was  a 
 weaver  of  veils  for  the  sanctuar}'  (Targ.  Jonath.  in 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 541 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 2  Sam.  xxi.  19)  ;  but  for  this  there  is  probably  no 
 foundation  [Jaare-Oregim].  When  his  son  David 
 was  in  liiding  from  Saul,  '  his  brethren  and  all  his 
 father's  house  '  joined  him  in  the  cave  of  Adullam 
 (i  Sam.  xxii.  i)  ;  and  David,  to  secure  a  retreat 
 for  his  aged  parents,  took  them  to  Mizpeh  of 
 Moab,  where  he  left  them  under  the  protection  of 
 the  king  of  Moab  (vers.  3-4).  At  this  point  they 
 disappear  from  Scripture  history,  but  tradition 
 asserts  that  they,  with  all  their  sons  except  two — 
 David  and  another — were  put  to  death  by  the  king 
 of  Moab.  In  two  passages  of  the  O.  T.  (Is.  xi.  i, 
 10),  the  Messiah  is  described  by  his  relation  to 
 Jesse  ;  whilst  elsewhere  it  is  as  the  son  of  David 
 that  he  is  presented.  As  in  these  passages  it  is  as 
 a  shoot  from  the  root  that  the  Messiah  is  figura- 
 tively set  forth,  this  probably  determined  the 
 reference  to  the  parent  of  David  rather  than  to 
 David  himself  In  the  N.  T.  Christ  is  spoken  of 
 as  i]  pl^a.  Aaj8i5  (Apoc.  v.  5  ;  xxii.  16),  though  St. 
 I'aul,  citing  from  Isaiah,  calls  him  also  i]  pi^a  tou 
 Ifffo-al  (Rom.  xv.  16). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST  ('I7?(ro0s  Xpca-rds,  'Ivtovs  6 
 Xpiaros  [in  the  Epistles  often  without  the  article 
 'Itjo-oOs  Xpiarbs,  less  frequently  Xp.  'Irj.  ;  in  the 
 Gospels  generally  'Itjo-ovs  is  used]),  the  ordinary 
 designation  of  the  incarnate  Son  of  God,  and 
 Saviour  of  mankind. 
 
 I.  Import  of  this  Designation. — This  double 
 designation  is  not,  like  Simon  Peter,  John  Mark, 
 Joses  Barnabas,  composed  of  a  name  and  a  sur- 
 name, but,  like  John  the  Baptist,  Simon  Magus, 
 Bar-Jesus  Elymas,  of  a  proper  name,  and  an  official 
 title.  Jesus  was  our  Lord's  proper  name,  just  as 
 Peter,  James,  and  John,  were  the  proper  names  of 
 three  of  his  disciples.  The  name  seems  not  to  have 
 been  an  uncommon  one  among  the  Jews.  The 
 apocryphal  book  Ecclesiasticus  is  attributed  to 
 Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach  ;  and,  in  the  N.  T.,  we 
 read  of  Jesus,  the  father  of  Elymas,  the  sorcerer 
 (Acts  xiii.  6),  and  of  'Jesus,  which  is  called  Justus, 
 of  the  circumcision'  (Col.  iv.  11),  one  of  Paul's 
 '  fellow- workers  unto  the  kingdom  of  God  which 
 had  been  a  comfort  to  him.'  To  distinguish  our 
 Lord  from  others  bearing  the  name,  he  was  termed 
 Jesus  of  Nazareth  (John  xviii.  7,  etc.),  'It/ctoOs  6 
 'Na^upaios,  and  Jesus  the  son  of  Joseph  (John  vi. 
 42,  etc.) 
 
 Some  of  the  fathers,  from  their  ignorance  of  the 
 Hebrew  language,  have  given  a  Greek  etymology 
 to  the  name.  They  derive  it  from  the  noun,  t'acrij, 
 healing.  Thus  Eusebius,  'Itjctovs  wvop-agero  Trap' 
 5crov  TTJs  tQiv  avdpWTTLvwv  \f/vxii)v  idcreil)S  re  koL  6epa- 
 Treias  X'^P^"  '''V''  TrdpoSov  eis  ti/jlcLs  ewoLilTO  {^Deinonst. 
 Evang.  lib.  iv.) ;  and  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  'It^o-oOs 
 KoXeirai  (pepiavvfiois,  €k  ttjs  (jwry^puhbeos  idaews  ^x'^" 
 rrjv  TTpoffTiyopiav  {Catech.  Illuin.  x.  )* 
 
 There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Jesus  is  the  Greek 
 form  of  a  Hebrew  name,  which  had  been  borne 
 by  two  illustrious  individuals  in  former  periods  of 
 the  Jewish  history, — the  successor  of  Moses  and 
 introducer  of  Israel  into  the  promised  land  (Exod. 
 xxiv.    13),   and  the  high-priest   who,   along  with 
 
 *  Some  of  the  Patristic  etymologies  are  really 
 very  odd.  Ildcrxa  is  traced  to  irdax^  ;  Aei/iVTjs  is 
 derived  from  the  Latin  levis ;  and  Aidj3o\os  Irom 
 dvo  and  /3a)\oj,  because  he  who  bears  that  name 
 swallows  man  at  two  bites,  first  the  soul,  and  then 
 the  body. 
 
 Zerubbabel  (Zech.  iii.  l),  took  so  active  a  part  m 
 the  re-establishment  of  the  civil  and  religious  polity 
 of  the  Jews  on  their  return  from  the  Babylonish 
 captivity.  Its  original  and  full  form  is  Jehoshua 
 (Num.  xiii.  16).  By  contraction  it  became  Joshua, 
 or  Jeshua  ;  and  when  transferred  into  Greek,  by 
 taking  the  termination  characteristic  of  that  lan- 
 guage, it  assumed  the  form  Jesus.  It  is  thus  the 
 names  of  the  illustrious  individuals  referred  to  are 
 uniformly  written  in  the  Sept.  ;  and  the  first  of 
 them  is  twice  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  by  this  name 
 (Acts  vii.  45  ;  Heb.  iv.  8). 
 
 The  conferring  of  this  name  on  our  Lord  was 
 not  tlie  result  of  accident,  or  of  the  ordinary  course 
 of  things,  there  being  '  none  of  his  kindred,'  so  far 
 as  we  can  trace  from  the  two  genealogies,  '  called 
 by  that  name'  (Luke  i.  61).  It  was  the  conse- 
 quence of  a  twofold  miraculous  interposition.  The 
 angel  who  announced  to  his  virgin  mother  that  she 
 was  to  be  '  the  most  honoured  of  women,'  in  giving 
 birth  to  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Saviour  of  men, 
 intimated  also  to  her  the  name  by  which  the  holy 
 child  was  to  be  called  :  '  Thou  shalt  call  his  name 
 Jesus'  (Luke  i.  31).  And  it  was  probably  the 
 same  heavenly  messenger  who  appeared  to  Joseph, 
 and,  to  remove  his  suspicions  and  quiet  his  fears, 
 said  to  him,  '  That  which  is  conceived  in  thy  wife 
 Mary  is  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  she  shall  bring 
 forth  a  son,  and  thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus' 
 (Matt.  i.  20,  21).  The  pious  pair  were  'not  dis- 
 obedient to  the  heavenly  vision.'  '  When  eight 
 days  were  accomplished  for  the  circumcising  of  the 
 child,  his  name  was  called  Jesus,  which  was  so 
 named  of  the  angel  before  he  was  conceived  in  the 
 womb'  (Luke  ii.  21). 
 
 The  name  Jesus,  like  most  of  Jewish  proper 
 names,  was  significant ;  and,  as  might  well  be  ex- 
 pected, when  we  consider  who  imposed  it,  its 
 meaning  is  at  once  important  and  appropriate. 
 The  precise  import  of  the  word  has  been  a  subject 
 of  doubt  and  debate  among  interpreters.  As  to  its 
 general  meaning  there  is  all  but  an  unanimous  con- 
 currence. It  was  intended  to  denote  that  he  who 
 bore  it  was  to  be  a  Deliverer  or  Saviour.  This, 
 whatever  more,  is  indicated  in  the  original  word  ; 
 and  the  reason  given  by  the  angel  for  the  imposi- 
 tion of  this  name  on  the  Virgin's  son  was  '  because 
 he  shall  save  his  people  from  their  sins'  (Matt.  i. 
 21).  But  while  some  interpreters  hold  that  it  is 
 just  a  part  of  the  verb  signifying  to  save,  in  the 
 form  Hiphil,  slightly  modified,  and  that  it  signifies 
 'he  shall  save,'  others  hold  that  it  is  a  compound 
 word  formed  by  the  addition  of  two  letters  of  the 
 incommunicable  name  of  the  divinity,  mn',  to  that 
 verb,  and  that  it  is  equivalent  to  '  The  salvation  of 
 the  Lord,'  or  'The  Lord  the  Saviour.'  It  is  not  a 
 matter  of  vital  importance.  The  following  cir- 
 cumstances seem  to  give  probability  to  the  latter 
 opinion.  It  does  not  appear  likely  that  Moses 
 would  have  changed  the  name  of  his  destined  suc- 
 cessor from  Oshea,  which  signifies  'saviour,'  into 
 Jehoshua  (Num.  xiii.  16),  if  the  latter  signified 
 merely  he  shall  save  ;  whereas,  if  the  word  be  a 
 compound  term,  embodying  in  it  the  name  Jehovah, 
 we  see  an  adequate  reason  for  the  change.  In  the 
 first  chapter  of  the  Gospel  by  Matthew  (Matt.  i. 
 22,  23),  the  most  natural  interpretation  of  the 
 words  (though  they  admit  of  another  exegesis) 
 seems  to  imply  that  the  prediction  of  Isaiah,  that 
 the  Virgin's  son  should  be  called  Immanuel,  was 
 fulfilled  in  the  imposition  of  the  name  Jesus  on  the 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 542 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Son  of  Mary.  This  would  be  the  case  only  on 
 the  supposition  thatlmmanuel  and  Jesus  are  equiva- 
 lent terms,  a  supposition  which  cannot  be  sustained 
 unless  yaiis  can  be  fairly  rendered  'Jehovah  will 
 save,'  or  'Jehovah  the  Saviour.'  In  that  case, 
 Jesus  and  Immanuel — God  with  us,  /.  e.,  on  our 
 side — express  the  same  ideas. 
 
 It  is  right,  however,  to  remark,  that  the  merely 
 bearing  such  a  name  as  either  Immanuel  or  Jesus,' 
 even  by  divine  appointment,  is  not  0/ /tsel/  evidence 
 of  the  divinity  of  him  who  bears  it.  The  Hebrews 
 were  in  the  habit  of  giving  names,  both  to  persons 
 and  places,  which  were  intended  not  to  describe 
 their  distinctive  properties,  but  to  express  some 
 important  general  truth.  Jacob  called  an  altar 
 built  by  him  El-Elohe-Israel  {Gen.  xxxiii.  20), 
 'God  the  God  of  Israel,'  i.  e.,  God  is  the  God  of 
 Israel.  Moses  called  an  altar  he  built  Jehovah 
 Nissi  (Exod.  xvii.  15),  'Jehovah  my  banner,'  i.e., 
 Jehovah  is  my  banner.  The  name  Jeiioshua,  as 
 borne  by  him  who  brought  the  people  of  the  Lord 
 into  the  heritage  of  the  Gentiles,  means  no  more 
 than  that  by  him  Jehovah  would  deliver  his  people. 
 In  many  of  the  proper  names  in  the  O.  T.,  the 
 name  El,  or  Jehovah,  forms  a  part.  Yet  when, 
 as  in  the  case  before  us,  he  who  bears  such  a  name, 
 by  express  divine  appointment,  is  shewn  'by  many 
 infallible  proofs'  to  be  indeed  an  incarnation  of 
 divinity,  we  cannot  but  perceive  a  peculiar  pro- 
 priety in  this  divine  appointment,  and  find  in  it,  if 
 not  a  new  argument,  a  corroboration  of  the  host  of 
 arguments  which  lead  us  to  the  conclusion  that  He 
 who,  'according  to  the  flesh,'  was  the  Son  of 
 David,  ' according  to  the  Spirit  of  Holiness'  was 
 '  the  Son  of  God,'  '  God  over  all,  blessed  for  ever' 
 (Rom.  i.  3,  4  ;  ix.  5). 
 
 The  above  are  the  oxAy  probable  etymologies  of 
 the  word.  Others,  however,  have  been  suggested, 
 and  supported  with  considerable  learning  and  in- 
 genuity. The  Valentinians,  according  to  Irenseus 
 (lib.  ii.  c.  41),  were  in  the  habit  of  writing  the  name 
 IC*,  and  explained  it  as  meaning  '  Him  who  pos- 
 sesses heaven  and  earth,'  making  each  letter,  ac- 
 cording to  the  cabbalistic  art  called  notarikon, 
 expressive  of  a  word  or  clause  ;  thus,  "•  for  nilT', 
 ^  for  □"'OE',  and  1  for  pXI,  '  Jehovah  of  heaven 
 and  earth.' 
 
 The  learned  but  fanciful  Osiander  insists  that 
 Jesus  is  not  the  Greek  form  of  Joshua,  but  the 
 ineffable  name,  the  Shem-hamphorash,  rendered 
 utterable  by  the  insertion  of  the  letter  JJ*.  The 
 reader  who  wishes  to  see  the  arguments  by  which 
 he  supports  this  wild  hypothesis  may  consult  his 
 Harmonia  Evangelica,  lib.  i.  c.  6,  Basil  1 561. 
 And  a  satisfactory  reply  may  be  found  in  Chem- 
 nitius' dissertation,  Z)^;?cw//«if7^j'2/,  in  Thcs.  Theol. 
 Philol.,  torn.  ii.  p.  62,  Amst.  1702  ;  and  in  Caninii 
 Disquis.  in  loc.  aliq.  N.  T. ,  c.  i.  ;  apud  Crit.  Sac. , 
 tom.  ix. 
 
 Castalio  maintains  an  equally  whimsical  notion  as 
 to  the  etymology  of  the  word,  deriving  it  from  mn'' 
 and  E'''X,  as  if  it  were  equivalent  to  Jehova-homo, 
 God-man. 
 
 The  'name  of  Jesus'  (Phil.  ii.  10)  is  not  the  name 
 Jesus,  but  '  the  name  above  every  name,'  6vofj.a  rb 
 \nrkp  irav  6vo/xa,  ver.  9  ;  i.  e.,  the  supreme  dignity 
 and  authority  with  which  the  Father  has  invested 
 Jesus  Christ,  as  the  reward  of  his  disinterested 
 exertions  in  the  cause  of  the  divine  glory  and 
 human  happiness  ;  and  the  bowing  iv  tu)  6vbaaTi 
 'Iij(roD  is  obviously  not  an  external  mark  of  homage 
 
 when  the  name  Jesus  is  pronounced,  but  the  in- 
 ward sense  of  awe  and  submission  to  him  who  is 
 raised  to  a  station  so  exalted. 
 
 Christ  ;  Gr.  Xpiards ;  Heb.  n''K'D.  This  is 
 not,  strictly  speaking,  a  proper  name,  but  an  official 
 title.  Jesus  Christ,  or  rather,  as  it  generally  ought 
 to  be  rendered,  Jesus  //le  Christ,  is  a  mode  of  ex- 
 pression of  the  same  kind  as  John  the  Baptist,  or 
 Baptiser.  In  consequence  of  not  adverting  to  this, 
 the  force  and  even  the  meaning  of  many  passages 
 of  Scripture  are  misapprehended.  When  it  is 
 stated  that  Paul  asserted,  '  This  Jesus  whom  I 
 preach  unto  you  is  Chiist'  (Acts  xvii.  3),  6ti  o5t6s 
 icTTLv  6  ^ptarbs'lijcrovs,  etc.,  that  he  '  testified  to  the 
 Jewsthat  Jesus  was  Christ'  (Acts  xviii.  5),  the  mean- 
 ing is,  that  he  proclaimed  and  proved  that  Jesus  was 
 the  Christ,  rbv  Xpiarbv  ^lijaovv,  or  Messiah — the 
 rightful  owner  of  a  title  descriptive  of  a  high  official 
 station  which  had  been  the  subject  of  ancient  pre- 
 diction. When  Jesus  himself  says  that  '  it  is  life 
 eternal  to  know  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus 
 Christ  whom  he  has  sent'  (John  xvii.  3),  he  repre- 
 sents the  knowledge  of  himself  as  the  Christ,  the 
 Messiah,  as  at  once  necessary  and  sufficient  to 
 make  men  truly  and  permanently  happy.  When 
 he  says,  '  What  think  ye  of  Christ  ?'  irepl  rod 
 XpiffTov  :  'whose  son  is  he?'  (Matt.  xxii.  42),  he 
 does  not  mean.  What  think  ye  of  ME,  or  of  my 
 descent  ?  but.  What  think  ye  of  the  Christ — the 
 Messiah — and  especially  of  his  paternity?  There 
 can  be  no  doubt  that  the  word,  though  originally 
 an  appellative,  and  intended  to  bring  before  the 
 mind  a  particular  official  character  possessed  by 
 him  to  whom  it  is  applied,  came  at  last,  like  many 
 other  terms  of  the  same  kind,  to  be  often  used 
 very  much  as  a  proper  name,  to  distinguish  our 
 Lord  from  other  persons  bearing  the  name  Jesus. 
 This  is  a  sense,  however,  of  comparatively  rare 
 occurrence  in  the  N.  T. 
 
 Proceeding,  then,  on  the  principle  that  Christ 
 is  an  appellative,  let  us  inquire  into  its  origin 
 and  signification  as  applied  to  our  Lord.  Christ 
 is  the  English  form  of  a  Greek  word,  XpLarbs, 
 corresponding  in  meaning  to  the  Hebrew  word 
 Messiah,  and  the  English  word  Anointed.  The 
 Christ  is  just  equivalent  to  the  Anointed  One. 
 The  important  question,  however,  remains  behind. 
 What  is  meant  when  the  Saviour  is  represented 
 as  the  Anointed  One  ?  To  reply  to  this  question 
 satisfactorily,  it  will  be  necessary  to  go  somewhat 
 into  detail. 
 
 Unction,  from  a  very  early  age,  seems  to  have 
 been  the  emblem  of  consecration,  or  setting  aparl 
 to  a  particular,  and  especially  to  a  religious,  pur- 
 pose. Thus  Jacob  is  said  to  have  anointed  the 
 pillar  of  stone  which  he  erected  and  set  apart  as 
 a  monument  of  his  supernatural  dream  at  Beth-el 
 (Gen.  xxviii.  18 ;  xxxi.  13  ;  xxxv.  14).  Under 
 the  O.  T.  economy  high-priests  and  kings  were 
 regularly  set  apart  to  their  offices,  both  of  which 
 were,  strictly  speaking,  sacred  ones,  by  the  cere- 
 mony of  anointing,  and  the  prophets  were  occa- 
 sionally designated  by  the  same  rite.  Thi.i  rite 
 seems  to  have  been  intended  as  a  public  intimation 
 of  a  divine  appointment  to  office.  Thus  Saul  is 
 termed  'the  Lord's  anointed'  (i  Sam.  xxiv.  6); 
 David,  '  the  anointed  of  the  God  of  Israel '  (2 
 Sam.  xxiii.  1);  and  Zedekiah,  'the  anointed  of 
 the  Lord '  (Lam.  iv.  20).  The  high-priest  is  called 
 'the  anointed  priest'  (Lev.  iv.  3). 
 
 From  the  origin  and  design  of  the  rite,  it  is  not 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 543 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 wonderful  that  the  term  should  have,  in  a  secon- 
 dary and  analogical  sense,  been  applied  to  persons 
 set  apart  by  God  for  important  purposes,  though 
 not  actually  anointed.  Thus  Cyrus,  the  King  of 
 Persia,  is  termed  'the  Lord's  anointed'  (Is,  xlv. 
 l)  ;  the  Hebrew  patriarchs,  when  sojourning  in 
 Canaan,  are  termed  '  God's  anointed  ones '  (Ps. 
 cv.  15) ;  and  the  Israelitish  peoj^le  receive  the  same 
 appellation  from  the  prophet  Habakkuk  (Hab.  iii. 
 13).  It  is  probably  with  reference  to  this  use  of 
 tlie  expression  that  Moses  is  said  by  the  writer  of 
 the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  have  '  counted  the 
 reproach  of  Christ '  (Heb.  xi.  26,  tov  XpicrroO 
 (XaoC),  the  same  class  who  in  the  parallel  clause 
 are  termed  the  'people  of  God')  'greater  riches 
 than  the  treasures  of  Egypt.' 
 
 In  the  prophetic  Scriptures  we  find  this  appel- 
 lation given  to  an  illustrious  personage,  who, 
 under  various  designations,  is  so  often  spoken  of 
 as  destined  to  appear  in  a  distant  age  as  a  great 
 deliverer.  The  royal  prophet  David  seems  to  have 
 been  the  first  who  spoke  of  the  great  deliverer 
 under  this  appellation.  He  represents  the  heathen 
 (the  Gentile  nations)  raging,  and  the  people  (the 
 Jewish  people)  imagining  a  vain  thing,  '  against 
 Jehovah,  and  against  his  anointed''  (Ps.  ii.  2). 
 He  says,  '  Now  know  I  that  the  Lord  saveth  his 
 anointed''  (Ps.  xx.  6).  '  Thou  hast  loved  righte- 
 ousness and  hated  iniquity'  says  he,  addressing 
 himself  to  '  Him  who  was  to  come,'  '  therefore 
 God,  even  thy  God,  hath  anointed  thee  with  the 
 oil  of  gladness  above  thy  fellows '  (Ps.  xlv.  7). 
 In  all  the  passages  in  which  the  great  deliverer  is 
 spoken  of  as  '  the  anointed  one'  by  David,  he  is 
 plainly  viewed  as  sustaining  the  character  of  a 
 king. 
 
 The  prophet  Isaiah  also  uses  the  appellation, 
 *  the  anointed  one,'  with  reference  to  the  promised 
 deliverer,  but,  when  he  does  so,  he  speaks  of  him  as 
 a  prophet  or  great  teacher.  He  introduces  him  as 
 saying,  '  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  God  is  upon  me, 
 because  the  Lord  God  hath  anointed  me  to  preach 
 good  tidings  unto  the  meek  ;  he  hath  sent  me  to 
 bind  up  the  broken-hearted,  to  proclaim  liberty  to 
 the  captives,  and  the  opening  of  the  prison  to  them 
 who  are  bound,  to  proclaim  the  acceptable  year  of 
 the  Lord,  and  the  day  of  vengeance  of  our  God, 
 to  comfort  all  that  mourn,'  etc.  (Is.  Ixi.  i,  etc.) 
 
 Daniel  is  the  only  other  of  the  prophets  who 
 uses  the  appellation  '  the  anointed  one '  in  refer- 
 ence to  the  great  deliverer,  and  he  plainly  repre- 
 sents him  as  not  only  a  prince,  but  also  a  high- 
 priest,  an  expiator  of  guilt.  '  Seventy  weeks  are 
 determined  upon  thy  people  and  upon  thy  holy 
 city,  to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an 
 end  of  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation  for  ini- 
 quity, and  to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness, 
 and  to  seal  up  the  vision  and  the  prophecy,  and  to 
 anoint  the  most  holy.  Know  therefore  and  under- 
 stand that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  command- 
 ment to  restore  Jerusalem  unto  Messiah  the  Prince 
 shall  be  seven  weeks  and  threescore  and  two  weeks; 
 the  city  shall  be  built  again,  and  the  wall,  even 
 in  troublous  times  ;  and  after  threescore  and  two 
 weeks  shall  Messiah  be  cut  off,  but  not  for  him- 
 self (Dan.  ix.  24-26). 
 
 During  the  period  which  elapsed  from  the  close 
 of  the  prophetic  canon  till  the  birth  of  Jesus,  no 
 appellation  of  the  expected  deliverer  seems  to  have 
 been  so  common  as  the  Messiah  or  Anointed  One, 
 and  this  is  still  the  name  which  the  unbelieving 
 
 Jews  ordinarily  employ  when  speaking  of  him 
 whom  they  still  look  for  to  avenge  their  wrongs 
 and  restore  them  to  more  than  their  former 
 honours. 
 
 Messiah,  Christ,  Anointed,  is,  then,  a  term 
 equivalent  to  consecrated,  sacred,  set  apart ;  and 
 as  the  record  of  divine  revelation  is  called,  by 
 way  of  eminence,  77/,?  Bible,  or  book,  so  is  the 
 Great  Deliverer  called  The  Messiah,  or  Anointed 
 One,  much  in  the  same  way  as  he  is  termed  Tht 
 Man,  The  Son  of  Man. 
 
 The  import  of  this  designation  as  given  to  Jesus 
 of  Nazareth  may  now  readily  be  apprehended. — • 
 (i.)  When  he  is  termed  the  Christ  it  is  plainly 
 indicated  that  He  is  the  great  deliverer  promised 
 under  that  appellation,  and  many  others  in  the 
 O.  T.  Scriptures,  and  that  all  that  is  said  of  tliis 
 deliverer  under  this  or  any  other  appellation 
 is  true  of  Him.  No  attentive  reader  of  the  O.  T. 
 can  help  noticing  that  in  every  part  of  the  pro- 
 phecies there  is  ever  and  anon  presented  to  our 
 view  an  illustrious  personage  destined  to  appear  at 
 some  future  distant  period,  and,  however  varied 
 may  be  the  figurative  representations  given  of 
 him,  no  reasonable  doubt  can  be  entertained  as  to 
 the  identity  of  the  individual.  It  is  quite  obvious 
 that  the  Messiah  is  the  same  person  as  '  the  seed 
 of  the  woman '  who  was  to  '  bruise  the  head  of  the 
 serpent'  (Gen.  iii.  15);  'the  seed  of  Abraham,  in 
 whom  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be 
 blessed'  (Gen.  xxii.  18);  the  great  'prophet  to 
 be  raised  up  like  unto  Moses,'  whom  all  were  to 
 be  required  to  hear  and  obey  (Deut.  xviii.  15) ; 
 the  'priest  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek ;'  'the 
 rod  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse,  which  should  stand 
 for  an  ensign  of  the  people  to  -which  the  Gentiles 
 should  seek'  (Is.  xi.  i,  10);  the  virgin's  son 
 whose  name  was  to  be  Immanuel  (Is.  vii.  14) ; 
 '  the  branch  of  Jehovah '  (Is.  iv.  2) ;  '  the  Angel 
 of  the  Covenant'  (Mai.  iii.  i);  'the  Lord  of  the 
 Temple,'  etc.  etc.  {ib.)  When  we  say,  then,  that 
 Jesus  is  the  Christ,  we  in  effect  say,  'This  is  He 
 of  whom  Moses,  in  the  law,  and  the  prophets  did 
 write'  (John  i.  45) ;  and  all  that  they  say  of  Him 
 is  true  of  Jesus. 
 
 Now,  what  is  the  sum  of  the  prophetic  testimony 
 respecting  him?  It  is  this — that  he  should  belong 
 to  the  very  highest  order  of  being,  the  incommuni- 
 cable name  Jehovah  being  represented  as  right- 
 fully belonging  to  him;  that  'his  goings  forth  have 
 been  from  of  old,  from  everlasting'  (Mic.  v.  2) ; 
 that  his  appropriate  appellations  should  be  '  Won- 
 derful, Counsellor,  the  Mighty  God'  (Is.  ix.  6) ; 
 that  he  should  assume  human  nature,  and  become 
 '  a  child  born '  of  the  Israelitish  nation  of  the  tribe 
 of  Judah  (Gen.  xlix.  10),  of  the  family  of  David 
 (Is.  xi.  i);  that  the  object  of  his  appearance 
 should  be  the  salvation  of  mankind,  both  Jews 
 and  Gentiles  (Is.  xlix.  6) ;  that  he  should  be 
 '  despised  and  rejected '  of  his  countrymen ;  that 
 he  should  be  'cutoff,  but  not  for  himself;'  that 
 he  should  be  '  wounded  for  men's  transgressions, 
 bruised  for  their  iniquities,  and  undergo  the  chas- 
 tisement of  their  peace  ; '  that  '  by  his  stripes  men 
 should  be  healed  ;'  that  'the  Lord  should  lay  on 
 him  the  iniquity '  of  men ;  that  '  exaction  should 
 be  made  and  he  should  answer  it ; '  that  he  should 
 'make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin  ;'  that  after 
 these  sufferings  he  should  be  'exalted  and  extolled 
 and  made  very  high;'  that  he  should  '  see  of  the 
 travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied,   and  by  his 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 644 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 knowledge  justify  many'  (Is.  liii.  passim);  that 
 Jehovah  should  say  to  him,  'Sit  at  my  right  hand 
 until  I  make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool '  (Ps.  ex. 
 l) ;  that  he  should  be  brought  near  to  the  Ancient 
 of  Days,  and  that  to  him  should  be  given  '  domi- 
 nion, and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that  all  people, 
 and  nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him — an 
 everlasting  dominion  which  shall  not  pass  away 
 — a  kingdom  that  shall  not  be  destroyed'  (Dan. 
 vii.  13,  14).  All  this  is  implied  in  saying  Jesus 
 IS  the  Christ.  In  the  plainer  language  of  the  N. 
 T.,  'Jesus  is  the  Christ'  is  equivalent  to  Jesus  is 
 'God  manifest  in  flesh'  (i  Tim.  iii.  16) — the  Son 
 of  God,  who,  in  human  nature,  by  his  obedience, 
 and  sufferings,  and  death  in  the  room  of  the 
 guilty,  has  obtained  salvation  for  them,  and  all 
 power  in  heaven  and  earth  for  himself,  that  he 
 may  give  eternal  life  to  all  coming  to  the  Father 
 through  him. 
 
 (2.)  While  the  statement  'Jesus  is  the  Christ'  is 
 thus  materially  equivalent  to  the  statement  '  all 
 that  is  said  of  the  Great  Deliverer  in  the  O.  T. 
 Scriptures  is  true  of  Him,'  it  brings  more  directly 
 before  our  mind  those  truths  respecting  him  which 
 the  appellation  '  the  Anointed  One '  naturally 
 suggests.  He  is  a  prophet,  a  priest,  and  a  king. 
 He  is  the  great  revealer  of  divine  truth ;  the  only 
 expiator  of  human  guilt,  and  reconciler  of  man  to 
 God ;  the  supreme  and  sole  legitimate  ruler  over 
 the  understandings,  consciences,  and  affections  of 
 men.  In  his  person,  and  work,  and  word,  by  his 
 spirit  and  providence,  he  unfolds  the  truth  with 
 respect  to  the  divine  character  and  will,  and  so 
 conveys  it  into  the  mind  as  to  make  it  the  effectual 
 means  of  conforming  man's  will  to  God's  will, 
 man's  character  to  God's  character.  He  has  by 
 his  spotless,  all-perfect  obedience,  amid  the  se- 
 verest sufferings,  '  obedience  unto  death  even  the 
 death  of  the  cross,'  so  illustrated  the  excellence  of 
 the  divine  law  and  the  wickedness  and  danger  of 
 violating  it,  as  to  make  it  a  righteous  thing  in  'the 
 just  God'  to  'justify  the  ungodly,'  thus  propitiat- 
 ing the  offended  majesty  of  heaven;  while  the 
 manifestation  of  the  divine  love  in  appointing  and 
 accepting  this  atonement,  when  apprehended  by 
 the  mind  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
 becomes  the  effectual  means  of  reconciling  man  to 
 God  and  to  his  law,  '  transforming  him  by  the  re- 
 newing of  his  mind.'  And  now,  possessed  of  'all 
 power  in  heaven  and  earth,'  'all  power  overall 
 flesh,'  '  He  is  Lord  of  AU.'  All  external  events 
 and  all  spiritual  influences  are  equally  under  his 
 control,  and  as  a  king  he  exerts  his  authority  in 
 carrying  into  full  effect  the  great  purposes  which 
 his  revelations  as  a  prophet,  and  his  great  atoning 
 sacrifice  as  a  high-priest,  were  intended  to  accom- 
 plish. 
 
 (3. )  But  the  full  import  of  the  appellation  the 
 Christ  is  not  yet  brought  out.  It  indicates  that 
 He  to  whom  it  belongs  is  the  anointed  prophet, 
 piiest,  and  king — not  that  he  was  anointed  by 
 material  oil,  but  that  he  was  divinely  appointed, 
 qualified,  cotmnissioned,  and  accredited  to  be  the 
 Saviour  of  men.  These  are  the  ideas  which  the 
 term  anointed  seems  specially  intended  to  convey. 
 Jesus  was  ^wmtXy  appoi7ited  X.o  the  offices  he  filled, 
 he  did  not  ultroneously  assume  them,  '  he  was 
 called  of  God  as  was  Aaron'  (Heb.  v.  4),  '  Behold 
 mine  Elect,  in  whom  my  soul  delighteth.'  He 
 was  divinely  qualified :  '  God  gave  to  him  the 
 Spirit  not  by  measure.'     '  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
 
 was  upon  him,  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  under- 
 standing, the  spirit  of  counsel  and  might,  the  spirit 
 of  knowledge  and  of  the  fear  of  the  Lord,  and 
 they  made  him  of  quick  understanding  in  the 
 fear  of  the  Lord,  so  that  he  does  not  judge  after 
 the  sight  of  his  eyes,  nor  reprove  after  the  hearing 
 of  his  ears,  but  he  smites  the  earth  with  the  rod  of 
 his  mouth,  and  with  the  breath  of  his  lips  he  slays 
 the  wicked  ;  and  righteousness  is  the  girdle  of  his 
 loins,  and  faithfulness  the  girdle  of  his  reins '  (Is. 
 xi.  2-4).  He  was  divinely  commissioned:  'The 
 Father  sent  him. '  Jehovah  said  to  him,  '  Thou 
 art  my  servant,  in  thee  will  I  be  glorified.  It  is  a 
 light  thing  that  thou  shouldst  be  my  servant,  to 
 raise  up  the  tribes  of  Jacob  and  to  restore  the  pre- 
 served of  Israel  ;  I  will  also  give  thee  for  a  light  to 
 the  Gentiles,  that  thou  mayest  be  my  salvation  to 
 the  ends  of  the  earth'  (Is.  xlix.  6).  '  Behold,'  says 
 Jehovah,  '  I  have  given  him  for  a  witness  to  the 
 people — a  leader  and  commander  to  the  people.' 
 He  is  divinely  accredited:  'Jesus  of  Nazareth,' 
 says  the  Apostle  Peter,  was  '  a  man  approved  of 
 God  among  you  by  miracles,  and  wonders,  and 
 signs  which  God  did  by  him  in  the  midst  of  you' 
 (Acts  ii.  22).  '  The  Father  who  hath  sent  me,' 
 says  Jesus  himself,  'hath  borne  witness  of  me' 
 (John  V.  37).  This  he  did  again  and  again  by  a 
 voice  from  heaven,  as  well  as  by  the  miracles 
 which  he  performed  by  that  divine  power  which 
 was  equally  his  and  his  Father's.  Such  is  the 
 import  of  the  appellation  Christ. 
 
 If  these  observations  are  clearly  apprehended, 
 there  will  be  little  difficulty  in  giving  a  satisfactory 
 answer  to  the  question  which  has  sometimes  been 
 proposetl — when  did  Jesus  become  Christ?  when 
 was  he  anointed  of  God  ?  We  have  seen  that  the 
 expression  is  a  figurative  or  analogical  one,  and 
 therefore  we  need  not  wonder  that  its  references 
 are  various.  The  appointment  of  the  Saviour,  like 
 all  the  other  divine  purposes,  was,  of  course,  from 
 eternity.  '  He  was  set  up  from  everlasting'  (Prov. 
 viii.  23)  ;  he  '  was  fore-ordained  before  the  foun- 
 dation of  the  world'  (i  Pet.  i.  20).  His  qualifica- 
 tions, such  of  them  as  were  conferred,  were  be- 
 stowed in,  or  during  his  incarnation,  when  God 
 anointed  him  '  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with 
 power'  (Acts  x.  38).  His  commission  may  be 
 considered  as  given  him  when  called  to  enter  on 
 the  functions  of  his  office.  He  himself,  after 
 quoting,  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth,  in  the  com- 
 mencement of  his  ministj-y,  the  passage  from  the 
 prophecies  of  Isaiah  in  which  his  unction  to  the 
 prophetical  office  is  predicted,  declared,  ''This  day 
 is  this  Scripture  fulfilled  in  your  ears.'  And  in  his 
 resurrection  and  ascension,  God,  as  the  reward  of 
 his  loving  righteousness  and  hating  iniquity, 
 '  anointed  him  with  the  oil  of  gladness  above  his 
 fellows'  (Ps.  xlv.  7),  i.  e.,  conferred  on  him  a  regal 
 power,  fruitful  in  blessings  to  himself  and  others, 
 far  superior  to  that  which  any  king  had  ever 
 possessed,  making  him,  as  the  Apostle  Peter 
 expresses  it,  '  both  Lord  and  Christ'  (Acts  ii.  36). 
 As  to  his  being  accredited,  every  miraculous  event 
 performed  in  reference  to  him  or  by  him  may  be 
 viewed  as  included  in  this  species  of  anointing — 
 especially  the  visible  descent  of  the  Spirit  on  him 
 in  his  baptism. 
 
 These  statements,  with  regard  to  the  import  of 
 the  appellation  '  the  Christ,'  shew  us  how  we  are 
 to  understand  the  statement  of  the  Apostle  John, 
 '  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  is 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 545 
 
 TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 born  of  God'  (l  John  v.  l),  i.e.,  is  'a  cliild  of 
 God,'  'born  again,'  'a  new  creature;'  and  the 
 similar  declaration  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  '  No  man 
 can  say  that  Jesus  is  the  Lord,  /.  e.,  the  Christ,  the 
 Messiah,  'but  by  the  Holy  Ghost'  (i  Cor.  xii.  3). 
 It  is  plain  that  the  proposition,  'Jesus  is  the 
 Christ,  when  understood  in  the  latitude  of  mean- 
 ing which  we  have  shewn  belongs  to  it,  contains  a 
 complete  summaiy  of  the  truth  respecting  the 
 divine  method  of  salvation.  To  believe  that  prin- 
 ciple rightly  understood  is  to  believe  the  Gospel — 
 the  saving  truth,  by  the  faith  of  which  a  man  is, 
 and  by  the  faith  of  which  only  a  man  can  be, 
 brought  into  the  relation  or  formed  to  the  character 
 of  a  child  of  God,  and  though  a  man  may,  without 
 divine  influence,  be  brought  to  acknowledge  that 
 'Jesus  is  the  Lord,'  '  Messiah  the  Prince,'  and  even 
 firmly  to  believe  that  these  words  embody  a  truth, 
 yet  no  man  can  be  brought  really  to  believe  and 
 cordially  to  acknowledge  the  truth  contained  in  these 
 words,  as  we  have  attempted  to  unfold  it,  without 
 a  peculiar  divine  influence.  That  Jesus  is  6  iXduv, 
 6  Xpiards,  is  the  testimony  of  God,  the  faith  of 
 which  constitutes  a  Christian,  to  ev,  the  one  thing 
 to  which  the  Spirit,  the  water,  and  the  blood, 
 unite  in  bearing  witness  (i  John  v.  6,  8,  9). — ^J.  B. 
 
 II.  Life  of  Jesus  Christ  on  Earth. — The 
 earthly  life  of  our  Lord,  with  great  facility,  divides 
 itself  into  well-marked  epochs.  Each  of  these 
 epochs  we  propose  to  handle  in  separate  chapters. 
 
 Chapter  I.  Our  Lord's  Life  previous  to 
 THE  Ministry. —  The  Birth  of  Jesus  Christ  and  its 
 Circiivistances,  both  Previous  and  Concomitaiit. — 
 Instead  of  a  formal  register  of  the  date  of  Christ's 
 birth  after  the  manner  of  biography,  the  N.  T. 
 uses  a  general  phrase  only  ('  In  the  days  of  Herod 
 the  king,'  Matt.  ii.  i.  Comp.  Luke  i.  5,  ii.  1-7), 
 which  has  much  engaged  the  attention  of  the 
 learned,  and  given  occasion  to  many  chronological 
 conjectures.  It  does  not  fall  within  our  plan  to 
 consider  these  ;  we  only  place  in  a  note  below*  a 
 
 I  few  results  derived  from  the  chief  authorities.  One 
 remarkable  designation  of  the  epoch  of  our  Lord's 
 birth  occurs  in  Gal.  iv.  4,  where  St.  Paul  calls  it 
 '  the  fulness  of  time^  (t6  TrXT^pw/uct  rov  \pbvov). 
 Few  topics  have  received  ampler  illustration  than 
 this.  Dean  Alford  has  briefly  summed  up  the 
 various  phases  in  his  note  on  the  passage  : — '  Not 
 only  are  God's  absolute  will  and  the  workings  of 
 his  providence  included  in  the  apostle's  phrase,  but 
 likewise  the  preparations  which  were  made  on 
 earth  for  the  Redeemer,  in  the  various  courses  of 
 action  which  he  had  brought  about  by  men  as  his 
 instruments.'     The  elements   contributing  to   the 
 
 full  ripeness  of  this  7r\7jpW;Ua,  on  the  humatt  side, 
 have  been  much  illustrated,  especially  by  modem 
 writers  on  the  evidences,  who  have  seen  in  the 
 political  state  of  the  world,  in  the  prevalence  of  the 
 Roman  power,  in  the  wide  spread  of  the  Greek 
 language,  and  in  the  failure  of  the  several  schools 
 of  philosophy  *  to  fulfil  the  expectations  which 
 they  had  raised,  a  complex  preparation  both  for 
 the  advent  of  Christ  and  for  the  propagation  of 
 Christianity.  Others  have  dwelt  on  the  developed 
 sins  of  mankind,  which  called  for  a  remedy  ("Ore 
 irav  etSos  KUKcas  5i.e^e\6ov(Ta  i]  (pvai'i  rj  dv'^pWTrlvr] 
 iSe^To  ^epaweias,  Theophyl.  quoted  by  Meyer ; 
 '  Non  decuit  ante  peccatum  Deum  incarnari, 
 cum  non  detur  medicina  nisi  infirmis,  nee  statim 
 post  peccatum,  ut  homo  ]ier  peccatum  humi- 
 liatus  recognosceret  se  liberatore  indigere,  sed  in 
 plenitudine  temporis,'  etc.  —  Aquinas,  Summa 
 iii.   1-5).     Others,   again,   especially   the    Fathers, 
 
 *  The  following  memoranda  of  the  date  of  our 
 Lord's  birth  are  supplemental  to  the  article 
 Chronology,  and  are  here  added  to  give  com- 
 pleteness to  this  portion  of  our  subject.  Bishop 
 Ellicott  {Lectures  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord  Jesns 
 Christ,  p.  63,  note)  '  leans  to  the  opinion  that,  early 
 in  February,  most  probably  A.  U.  C.  750  [B.  C.  4], 
 was  the  time  of  the  nativity.'  This  is  substantially 
 the  opinion  of  Wieseler  {Chronol.  Synapse),  who 
 says,  p.  145,  '  that  Jesus  could  hardly  have  been 
 born  bcfoi-e  the  first  of  January  A.  U.  C.  750 — some- 
 what later,  in  all  probability  ;'  in  p.  146  he  men- 
 tions '  the  month  of  February  of  that  year  as  the 
 latest  period  of  the  birth  of  Jesus  ;'  in  his  summing 
 up  in  p.  150,  he  supposes  '  the  end  of  December 
 and  the  months  of  January  and  Februaiy  to  be 
 worthy  of  the  utmost  consideration  as  the  probable 
 time  of  our  Lord's  birth  ;  of  these  he  pronounces 
 the  December  to  be  least  likely,  and  the  February 
 to  be  extremely  probable.'  According  to  the 
 conjecture  of  Greswell  {Dissertations  on  the  Har- 
 mony, i.  402),  '  April  5  or  April  6  must  express 
 the  day  of  our  Saviour's  birth ;  the  former,  if 
 he  was  born  on  the  evening  of  the  tenth  of  Nisan, 
 the  latter,  if  he  was  born  on  the  morning' 
 [the  year  previously  determined  was  A.  U.  C.  750]. 
 Tischendorf  (6)/«<7/.s'/i'  Evnuf^elica,  p.  16)  endorses 
 Wiescler's  date.  Dr.  Robinson  {Harmony,  ap- 
 pendix, pp.  195,  196)  supposes  '  that  the  bii'th  of 
 \Oh.  II. 
 
 Christ  cannot  in  any  case  be  fixed  later  than  the 
 autumn  of  A.  U.  C.  749  ;  while  it  ;;/«;' have  occurred 
 one  or  two  years  earlier.'  According  to  Lardner 
 {lVo7'ks,  voL  i.  pp.  370-372),  'Jesus  was  born  be- 
 tween the  middle  of  August  and  the  middle  of 
 November  A.  U.  C.  748  or  749.'  Sanclementius 
 {De  Vidg.  ALrcE  Einendatione,  lib.  iv. ),  Munter  (as 
 quoted  by  Gieseler,  Eccles.  Hist.  [Clark],  vol.  i. 
 p.  53,  note),  Ideler  {Chronol.  ii.  394,  etc.),  and 
 Winer  {R.  W.  B.,  ii.  614),  agree  in  thinking  our 
 Lord's  birth-year  to  have  been  A.  u.  C.  747. 
 Clinton  {F.  H,  vol  ii.,  appendix,  238)^  who  is 
 followed  by  Dr.  Wordsworth  {Gr.  Test,  on  Matt, 
 ii.  20,  note),  places  the  Saviour's  birth  in  the 
 spring  of  A.  U.  C.  749  =  B.  C.  5.  As  to  the  birth- 
 day itself,  Clement  of  Alexandria  {Stro/n.  i.  230) 
 relates  how  in  his  time  (cent,  iii.)  some  regarded  it 
 to  be  May  20,  others  April  20.  But  the  great 
 authority,  Wieseler,  comes  to  the  conclusion  that 
 the  day  must  be  left  undecided.  Our  ecclesiastical 
 date,  December  25,  began  to  be  observed  in  the 
 IVestern  church  in  the  4th  centur)'.  Few  points 
 have  been  more  elaborately  sifted  ;  few,  notwith- 
 standing, remain  more  undecided.  Dr.  Words- 
 worth well  says  on  this  uncertainty,  '  Perhaps  the 
 Holy  Ghost  may  have  concealed  these  things  from 
 the  wise  and  prudent,  in  order  to  teach  them 
 humility  ;  to  remind  them  at  the  very  outset  of  the 
 gospel  that  their  knowledge  is  very  limited  ;  that 
 their  powers  of  discovering  even  historical  truths  are 
 feeble,  and  to  make  them  more  meek  and  docile 
 with  regard  to  supernatural  truth,'  etc.  {Gr.  Test. 
 i.  140)1 
 
 *  Comp.  Eusebius,  Pneparatio  Evangelica, 
 Viger's  edition,  passim ;  and  in  Migne's  series, 
 Demonsti-ations  Evangcliques,  vol.  i.  p.  498,  etc.  ; 
 Conclusion  of  Ritter's  Hist,  of  Phil,  [trans,  by 
 Morrison] ;  Lange,  Lebcn  Jesu,  i.  34. 
 
 2  N 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Ti-lfi 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 dwell  largely  on  the  divine  side  of  the  preparation 
 for  the  Redeemer's  advent,  in  the  several  progres- 
 sive dispensations  which  preceded  it,  wherein  '  the 
 Son  of  God  himself,' as  Tertullian  strikingly  puts 
 it,  '  was,  in  fact,  the  dispenser  of  things — ever 
 from  the  beginning  laying  the  foundation  of  the 
 course  of  his  own  dispensations,*  which  he  meant 
 to  follow  out  unto  the  end '  (see  Tertullian's  whole 
 statement  and  other  passages  quoted  and  finely 
 annotated  by  Bishop  Bull,  Defens.  Fid.  iVic,  as 
 translated  by  the  writer  of  this  art.,  vol.  1.  pp.  15- 
 20).  It  is  in  accordance  with  this  preparation, 
 that  the  coming  of  Christ  was  an  object  of  general 
 expectation  about  the  time  of  his  birth.  The 
 longing  of  the  pious  Jew  was  stimulated  by  the 
 voice  of  prophecy  ;  indications  occur  in  the  sacred 
 songs  of  Elizabeth  (Luke  i.  42-45)  ;  of  Mary  (vers. 
 48-55)  ;  and  of  Zacharias  (vers.  76-79)  ;  in  the 
 character  of  the  holy  Simeon  (ii.  25,  26)  ;  in  his 
 thanksgiving  (vers.  29-32)  ;  in  the  conversation  of 
 the  aged  Anna  and  her  pious  companions  (ver.  38)  ; 
 to  which  may  well  be  added  what  is  said  of  Joseph 
 of  Arimathea  (by  St.  Mark  xv.  43,  and  St.  Luke 
 xxiii.  51).  Nor  was  Israel  alone  expectant.  As 
 of  old  prophecy  had  shed  its  message  upon  the 
 Gentile  Balaam  (Num.  xxiv.  17)  ;  so  now,  on  tlie 
 eve  of  its  accomplishment.  Gentile  hearts  are 
 moved,  and  one  of  the  most  touching  events  con- 
 nected with  the  Saviour's  birth  is  the  visit  of  the 
 Eastern  magi,  rendering  their  homage,  as  Gentiles, 
 to  Him  whose  illumination  of  their  race  they  saw 
 symbolised  in  their  guiding  star  (Matt.  ii.  I-12, 
 comp.  with  Luke  ii.  32  —  0cDs  eh  a,TroKa\v\p'iv 
 e'^vQv,  and  Acts  xiii.  47 — eis  (pws  i'^vuv,  which  is, 
 
 in  fact,  the  prophet's  phrase,  D''i3  IIXp — Is.  xlii. 
 
 6 ;  xlix.  6,  comp.  with  Is.  Ix.  3).  It  is  satisfactoiy 
 to  find  that  these  intimations  of  the  sacred  writers 
 are  confirmed,  as  to  the  latter  point,  by  heathen  tes- 
 timony. The  oft-quoted  passages  of  Suetonius,  P^es- 
 pasian.,  cap.  4-8  ('  Percrebuerat  oriente  toto  vetus 
 et  constans  opinio,  esse  in  fatis  ut  eo  tempore 
 Judrea  profecti  rerum  potirentur'),  and  of  Tacitus, 
 //is(.  V.  9-13  ('Pluribus  persuasio  inerat,  antiquis 
 sacerdotum  literis  contineri,  eo  ipso  tempore  fore, 
 ut  valesceret  oriens,  profectique  judtEa  rerum  poti- 
 rentur'), are  express  and  to  the  point,  and  seem  to 
 afford  all  the  greater  corroboration  from  their  very 
 obscurity  of  language,  so  natural  in  pagan  writers, 
 who  were  ignorant  of  the  nature  of  the  fact,  and  the 
 charade}-  ol  \\\Q.  persons  of  which  they  wrote.  The 
 actual  advent  of  the  illustrious  Saviour  was  not  un- 
 accompanied indeed  with  suitable  pageantry.  'The 
 same  Evangelist,'  says  Bp.  Ellicott,  'that  tells  us 
 that  the  mid-day  stm  was  darkened  during  the  last 
 hours  of  the  Redeemer's  earthly  life  (Luke  xxiii. 
 
 *  In  these  preliminary  dispensations,  ordered  by 
 the  Son  of  God  himself,  we  seem  to  have  a  better 
 explanation  of  the  Kaipoi  of  St.  Paul,  in  his  striking 
 expression,  '  the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of 
 times'  [olKovo/jiia  rod  irXrjpiifMaTos  twv  Kaipwv], 
 Eph.  i.  10,  than  that  suggested  by  Dean  Alford, 
 who  would  have  the  Kaipoi  to  be  gospel-seasons 
 (whatever  they  may  mean)  =  olKovop.La.  The 
 ancient  interpretation  regarded  the  olKovofxla  as 
 pointing  to  Christ's  Ittcarnation,  which  was  itself 
 the  completion  and  fulness  of  all  the  preceding 
 Kaipoi,  or  several  dispensations  leading  to  it.  (For 
 the  Patristic  sense,  see  Suicer,  s.  v.  olKovoyla  :  also 
 Bishop  Bull's  Jiidiciuvi  Eccl.  as  cited  above.) 
 
 44),  tells  us  also  that  in  his  first  hours  the  night  was 
 turned  into  more  than  day,  and  that  heavenly 
 glories  shone  forth  not  unwitnessed  (Luke  ii.  9), 
 while  angels  announce  to  shepherd-watchers  on  the 
 grassy  slopes  of  Bethlehem  the  tidings  of  great  joy,' 
 the  birth  of  the  new-born  Saviour.  But  how 
 unworldly  was  this  display  !  What  humility  in 
 the  midst  of  that  gloiy  !  They  were  not  imperial 
 councillors  or  lordly  courtiers,  that  were  sum- 
 moned to  witness  the  birth  of  the  Prince  of  Peace  ; 
 but  lowly  men  who  tended  sheep  !  Nor  was 
 it  in  palatial  saloons  that  this  Royal  Babe  first 
 saw  light  (Luke  ii.  12,  16).  Does  not  the  pro- 
 found simplicity  of  that  humble  nativity  add  won 
 derfully  to  its  glory  ?  In  the  appreciation  oi faith, 
 no  doubt,  it  does.  And  herein  we  recognise  a 
 great  moral  purpose  !  The  entire  history  of  tht 
 birth,  as  well  as  of  the  life  and  death  of  Clirist,  is 
 an  appeal  to  the  purest  faculty  of  human  faith. 
 And  greater  trial  still  of  the  same  holy  faculty  is 
 presented  to  us  in  his  pie-natal  histoiy.  How 
 often  has  belief  been  sorely  tested  since  that  an- 
 nouncement of  the  immaculate  conception  which  the 
 Holy  Virgin  herself  made  to  her  husband,  when 
 even  that  'just  man'  was  staggered  with  a  transient 
 apprehension  of  Mary's  unfaithfulness,  and  was 
 'minded  to  put  her  away'  (Matt.  i.  19) !  Neander 
 {Life  of  Jesus  Christ  [V>d\m\,  p.  13)  has  well  shewn 
 the  a  priori  necessity  of  the  immaculate  conception. 
 '  It  was  impossible  that  the  second  Adam — the 
 progenitor  of  a  new  and  heavenly  race — could  de- 
 rive his  origin  from  the  first  Adam  in  the  ordinary 
 course  of  nature.'  But  the  miraculous  entrance  of 
 Christ  into  humanity  was  misunderstood  and  rudely 
 calumniated  (John  viii.  41).  To  the  pure  in  heart 
 and  unwavering  in  faith  only  does  it  occur  as  an 
 article  of  the  creed  in  sublime  congruity  with  every 
 other  particular  of  the  human  life  of  their  Saviour. 
 That  life  teems  with  conditions,  equally  intelligible 
 to  faith,  equally  perplexing  to  unbelief!  Let  us 
 mention  one  case  which  enters  into  our  present  sec- 
 tion. The  national  expectation  pointed  to  Bethle- 
 hem- Ephratah  as  the  birth-place  of  Christ  (John 
 vii.  42).  Prophecy  had  stimulated  this  expectation 
 (Micah  V.  2) ;  and  authoritative  interpreters  con- 
 firmed it  (Matt.  ii.  4,  5).  Yet  He,  whose  ways  are 
 unlike  ours  (Is.  Iv.  8),  accomplished  the  prophecy 
 indeed*  (Matt.  ii.  I  ;  Luke  ii.  4-7),  but  as  it  were 
 furti-^iely,  so  that  men  mistook  the  qualification  of 
 Jesus  to  be  the  Christ,  in  what  was  one  of  its 
 clearest  points  (John  i.  46  ;  vii.  41,  42,  52).  To 
 our  mind  this  difficult  and  tindemonstrative  charac- 
 ter of  Christ's  earthly  history  adds  to  its  vahte  and 
 beauty,  as  testing  the  loyalty  of  faith.  +     The  cir- 
 
 *  Bp.  Ellicott  accepts  the  statement  of  Justin 
 Martyr,  'who  was  born,'  as  he  says,  'but  little 
 more  than  a  century  afterwards,  and  not  forty  miles 
 from  the  same  spot,'  to  the  effect,  that  'in  one  of 
 the  caverns  in  that  narrow  ridge  of  long  grey  hill  on 
 which  stands  the  city  of  David,'  Bethlehem,  'was 
 the  Redeemer  bom  into  the  world '  (Justin  Martyr, 
 Tryph.  c.  78  [ed.  Otto],  vol.  ii.  p.  264 — iv  airy) 
 Xaiij)  Tivl  (Ti/f £77115  TTJs  KWfiTjs,  K.  T.  X.)  ;  comp. 
 Origen,  IVorks,  i.  567  ;  Eusebius,  Vita  Const,  iii. 
 41  ;  St.  Jerome,  Epist.  xxiv.  ad  Marcel.  ;  and  see 
 Suicer,  s.  v.  4'dTV7].  In  Kitto's  Bible  Ilhistr. 
 (xxix.  week,  2  day)  there  is  a  good  account  of  the 
 Cave  of  the  Nativity ;  see  also  Robinson,  Res. 
 Palest,  ii.  285. 
 
 +  Neander,  who  wrote  his  Life  of  J.  C.  in  answer 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 547 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 cumstances  of  the  Saviour's  birth  might  have  been 
 ordered  otherwise — and  mere  liuman  -Ti'isdom  would 
 probably  have  accompanied  them  with  so  miposing 
 a  display  of  an  imperial  grandeur  as  to  have  co- 
 erced the  minds  of  men  into  a  ready  acquiescence  : 
 with  such  a  display  unbelief  indeed  would  have  been 
 simply  impossible — but  equally  impossible  must  have 
 been  that  ennobling  discipline  of  faith,  which  now 
 constitutes  the  value  as  well  as  the  characteristic  of 
 the  Gospel.  We  will  now  sum  up  the  facts  con- 
 nected with  our  Lord's  birth,  noting  the  features  of 
 concealment  and  mystery,  which  hid  their  full  ap- 
 preciation from  the  mass  of  mankind,  and  confined 
 their  acceptance  to  the  few,  who  believed,  (i)  He 
 was  born  of  'a  pure  virgin'  by  an  immaculate  con- 
 ception ;  but  this  fact  was  disguised  either  by  his 
 passing  for  the  real  son  of  Joseph,  his  legal  father 
 only  (Matt.  xiii.  55  ;  Mark  vi.  3),  or  by  the  stigma 
 of  illegitimacy  (John  viii.  41).  (2)  He  was  actually 
 born  at  BctJilehem,  whither  Joseph  and  Mary  had 
 temporarily  removed,  to  be  registered  according  to 
 the  census*  of  Augustus  (Luke  ii.  6,  7) ;  but  he  was 
 regarded  by  the  Jews  as  a  Galilean  (Luke  xxiii.  6, 
 7).  His  birth-place  and  home  was  supposed  to  be 
 Nazareth  (John  i.  46  and  passim  in  the  Gospels, 
 with  which  comp.  Matt.  xiii.  54,  57  ;  Mark  vi.  i, 
 4  ;  Luke  iv.  23,  where  Nazareth  is  no  doubt  the 
 Trarpis  of  Jesus).  (3)  His  parentage  was  of  the 
 highest  royalty,t  whether  we  regard  his  mother's 
 
 to  Strauss,  with  great  ability  applies  these  charac- 
 teristics of  the  gospel  history  in  refutation  of  that 
 unbeliever's  mythic  theory.  It  is  the  invariable 
 style  of  a  my  thus  to  ennoble  its  object  even  to 
 ostentation  ;  to  eliminate  every  feature  of  weakness 
 and  indignity  from  its  conception.  But  in  the 
 evangelic  narrative  the  opposite  treatment  most 
 commonly  occurs  in  the  representation  of  Jesus 
 Christ  .  .  .  glories  are  concealed,  while  humi- 
 liation and  indignities  are  brought  prominently  out 
 to  our  view. 
 
 *  In  addition  to  the  arguments  and  authorities  in 
 vindication  of  St.  Luke's  statement  of  the  census  of 
 Cyrenius,  which  are  adduced  under  Cyrenius,  we 
 would  here  by  way  of  supplement  quote  from  Mr. 
 Merivale,  Roman  Empire,  iv.  457,  note,  an  import- 
 ant observation  :  '  A  remarkable  light  has  recently 
 been  thrown  upon  this  point'  [/.  e.,  the  supposed 
 error  of  the  Evangelist,  in  making  the  birth  of 
 Christ  contemporary  with  the  rule  of  Cyrenius]  'by 
 the  demonstration,  as  it  seems  to  me,  of  Augustus 
 Zumpt,  in  his  vol.  ii.  of  Commentationes  Epi- 
 graphies; that  Quirinus  (the  Cyrenius  of  St.  Luke) 
 was  governor  of  Syria  y^r  the  first  time,  from  the 
 closeof  A.U.C.  750 [B.C.  4]  to  753  [B.C.  i].  Accord- 
 ingly, the  enumeration  begun  or  appointed  under 
 his  predecessor,  Varus,  and  before  the  death  of 
 Herod,  was  completed  after  that  event  under  Qui- 
 rinus.' Mr.  Merivale  finds  in  this  a  confirmation 
 of  the  date  of  our  Lord's  birth  [a.u.C.  750],  which 
 we  have  quoted  in  a  former  note  from  Wieseler  and 
 Bp.  Ellicott.  Cyrenius  was  'governor'  twice,  and 
 held  two  diroypacpdt.  St.  Luke  seems  to  refer  to 
 both — to  the  first  in  Luke  ii.  2  ;  and  to  the  second, 
 and  more  important  one,  in  Acts  v.  37.  The 
 Evangelist  is  thus  found  to  be  minutely  accurate, 
 instead  of  being  open  to  the  censure  which  arose 
 from  a  want  of  a  full  knowledge  of  the  case. 
 
 +  In  our  article  on  the  Genealogy  of  Jesus 
 Christ  we  have  supposed  the  line  in  Luke  iii.  to 
 contain  the  ancestry  of  the  blessed  Virgin ;  if  we 
 
 descent  (Luke  i.  31,  comp.  with  32);  or  that  of 
 his  reputed  and  legal  father  (Matt.  i.  20  ;  Luke  i. 
 27)  :  but  he  was  looked  upon  as  the  son  of  a 
 humble  Galilean,  far  removed  from  all  regal  de- 
 scent (Matt.  xiii.  56;  Mark  vi.  3;  John  vii.  41, 
 42). 
 
 Our  Lord's  Infancy. — Eight  days  after  his  birth 
 the  child  Jesus  was  circumcised  (Luke  ii.  21),  and 
 at  the  ceremony  received  the  name  which  the  angel 
 had  originally  prescribed,  and  which  has  been 
 dearer  than  all  names  to  unnumbered  souls  from 
 that  time  until  now.  In  due  season  (on  the  thirty- 
 third  day  after  circumcision,  Lev.  xii.  3,  4),  the 
 blessed  virgin  and  her  husband,  in  pious  conformity 
 to  the  Mosaic  ordinance,  carried  her  infant  to  the 
 Temple  at  Jerusalem  to  offer  the  appointed  sacri- 
 fice for  her  purification,  and  to  pay  the  usual  ran- 
 som for  her  first-born  (Num.  iii.  47).  St.  Luke's 
 beautiful  narrative  (ii.  21-39)  presents  to  us  the 
 same  union  of  lowliness  and  honour,  which  has 
 already  struck  us,  as  characteristic  of  every  circum- 
 stance connected  with  our  Lord's  entrance  into  the 
 world.  The  humbler  offering  of  the  mother  ex- 
 posed to  public  view  her  'low  estate'  (Lev.  xii.  8), 
 and  the  rite  of  hex  purification  concealed  and  dis- 
 guised that  immaculate  purity  of  her  offspring 
 which  was  indispensable  to  his  efficiency  as  the 
 Redeemer  of  mankind.  But  as  in  the  paradoxes  of 
 his  nativity,  so  here  also,  faith  did  not  stumble  at 
 this  humility.  In  that  helpless  Babe,  surrounded 
 as  he  was  with  every  sign  of  obscurity  and  lowli- 
 ness, the  devout  Simeon,  under  the  impulse  of  in- 
 spiration, descried  the  Blessed  One,  who  was  to  be 
 the  glory  of  Israel,  and  the  light  of  the  Gentiles  ! 
 And  while  the  astonished  parents  were  yet  m 
 amazement  at  this  heavenly  attestation  of  their  son, 
 whom  they  had  dedicated,  in  such  humble  guise,  to 
 the  Lord  (Luke  ii.  33),  the  widowed  prophetess 
 Anna,  '  coming  in  that  instant,  gave  thanks  like- 
 
 are  correct  in  that  view,  our  Lord  was  descended 
 from  David's  son  Nathan  by  his  mother  ;  while 
 Joseph  her  husband  has  his  pedigree  traced  through 
 Solomon,  in  Matt.  i.  To  the  patristic  testimony 
 in  favour  of  our  view,  which  we  there  adduced,  we 
 would  add  the  following  from  Justin  Martyr  [Dial, 
 cum  Tryphone,  sec.  100),  who,  in  evident  allusion 
 to  the  genealogy  of  the  third  gospel,  expressly  says 
 that  '  the  Virgin  derived  her  descent  from  David, 
 and  Jacob,  and  Isaac,  and  Abraham  ; '  and  he  adds 
 a  rule,  which  literally  applies  to  St.  Luke's  table, 
 on  the  principle  for  which  we  have  contended,  that 
 Heli  was  the  grandfather  of  Jesus  Christ  (through 
 his  mother,  whose  place  in  the  table  is  formally 
 occupied  by  her  husband  Joseph) :  '  Abraham  was 
 the  father  also  of  those  who  are  numbered  [or 
 registered  in  the  genealog)'],  from  whom  the  Virgin 
 derives  her  descent ;  for  we  know  that  those  who 
 have  daughters  are  accounted  [in  family  descent] 
 as  the  fathers  of  their  daughters'  children — dvu 
 avTov  Tov  'AjS/jad/x  iraripa  Kal  tovtwv  tGiv  Karyjpi'i^- 
 ixrjixlvwv,  e^  S)v  Kardyei  i]  Mapia  rb  7e>'0j'  /cat  yap 
 iraripas  tCjv  yevvco/nevcov  rals  ^vyarpdaiv  avTwv 
 T^Kvwv,  Toiis  Twv  6r]\eiu)v  yevvrjTOpas  eiricTTd/xeS-a 
 (IVorlcs  [Ed.  Bened.],  p.  206).  Justin  Martyr 
 wrote  this  treatise  within  a  century  after  the  publi- 
 cation of  St.  Luke's  gospel.  His  testimony,  added 
 to  what  we  quoted  in  the  former  article,  goes  far  to 
 prove  that  in  the  earliest  ages  of  the  Church  the 
 Virgin  Mary's  genealogy'  was  supposed  to  be  con- 
 tained in  the  third  gospel. 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 548 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 wise  unto  the  Lord,  and  spake  of  him  to  all  them 
 that  looked  for  redemption  in  Jerusalem'  (ver.  38). 
 It  would  be  difficult  to  imagine  any  more  impres- 
 sive scene  than  tliat  of  the  Presentation  in  the 
 Temple,  or  a  really  greater  honour  to  the  infant 
 Saviour  than  the  meek  glory  which  was  accorded 
 to  him  in  the  devotion  of  these  venerable  person- 
 ages and  in  the  admiration  of  the  pious  group 
 gathered  around  them  at  that  service !  That 
 nothing  might  be  wanting  in  the  witness  which 
 God  gave  of  his  son  even  thus  early,  '  wise  men ' 
 came,  as  we  have  already  said,  from  the  East  to 
 Jerusalem  to  render  to  the  new-born  Saviour  their 
 homage,  as  representatives  of  the  Gentile  world. 
 Not  finding  him  in  the  metropolis,  they  proceeded 
 to  Bethlehem.  Hither  Joseph  and  Mary  had 
 returned  as  to  their  temporary  home  from  their 
 visit  to  the  Temple  but  a  few  days  (Bp.  Ellicott, 
 Lectures,  p.  70,  and  the  authorities  quoted  by  him), 
 when  the  Magi  appeared  on  their  royal  errand. 
 Greater  than  ever  must  have  been  the  wonder  of 
 the  parents,  especially  of  the  meditative  and  obser- 
 vant heart  of  the  Virgin  (Luke  ii.  19,  33,  51), 
 when  these  strangers,  undeterred  by  the  poverty  of 
 her  lodging,  did  not  disdain,  with  princely  munifi- 
 cence, to  offer  their  gifts  and  adoration  of  her  infant 
 Son,  in  whom,  by  a  wonderful  faith,  they  saw  under 
 the  depths  of  that  lowly  condition  no  less  a  being 
 than  '  him  who  was  born  king  of  the  Jews'  (Matt. 
 ii.  2,  11) — '  One  who  was  the  hope  of  the  world, 
 greater  than  Zoroaster  had  ever  foretold,  a  truer 
 Redeemer  than  the  Sosiosh  of  their  own  ancient 
 creed'  (Bp.  Ellicott,  Lectures,  p.  77,  gives  a  brief 
 description,  from  Anquetil  du  Perron's  Life  of 
 Zoroaster,  of  some  articles  of  the  Magian  creed 
 contained  in  the  Zaid-Avesta).  But  the  excite- 
 ment which  attended  the  birth  of  the  holy  child 
 Jesus  was  not  confined  to  the  faithful  and  pious. 
 The  powers  of  evil  were  moved.  Alien  as  he  was 
 on  the  throne  of  Israel,  the  first  of  the  Herods  did 
 his  worst  to  destroy  the  Infant  whose  reputed 
 claim  to  the  kingdom  he  occupied  aroused  his 
 cruel  jealousy.  To  secure  tlie  death  of  Mary's  son, 
 St.  Matthew  informs  us  that  the  tyrant  issued  a 
 decree,  which  was  but  too  faithfully  obeyed,  for  the 
 murder  of  the  babes  of  Bethlehem,  'from  two 
 years  old  and  under'  (Matt.  ii.  16).  We  have 
 in  these  apprehensions  of  the  savage  king  a 
 rough  and  unwilling  testimony  (such  alone  as 
 he  could  offer)  to  the  real  greatness  of  the  new- 
 born babe,  notwithstanding  the  apparent  lowli- 
 ness which  surrounded  him  at  Bethlehem.  From 
 the  massacre  *  of  the  infants,  Jesus  escaped 
 through  the  prompt  obedience  of  Joseph  to  the  ad- 
 monition of  the  angel,  which  directed  him  to  flee 
 to  the  south,  into  Egypt,  and  there  remain  until  the 
 tyranny  was  overpast  (Matt.  ii.  13-15).  The  doci- 
 lity of  this  excellent  guardian  (comp.  on  avy^p  Sl- 
 KaLos,  Wordsworth,  Gr.  Test.  i.  5,  col.  2)  of  the 
 infant  Saviour  was  rewarded  by  supernatural  guid- 
 ance at  every  critical  step  in  his  precious  trusteeship. 
 
 *Josephus  says  nothing  of  this  massacre,  and 
 from  his  silence  some  ill-considered  objections  have 
 been  raised  against  the  truth  of  the  narrative.  For 
 a  brief  but  sufficient  vindication  of  it  the  reader 
 is  referred  to  Bp.  Ellicott,  Lectures,  pp.  78,  79  ; 
 and  Neander  (by  Bohn),  Lfe  of  Jesus,  pp.  30,  31. 
 For  a  fuller  discussion,  see  Dr.  Mill,  Observations 
 on  Pantheistic  Principles,  pp.  319-359;  also  Jack- 
 son, on  the  C/Vdv/ ( Works),  vol.  vii.  pp.  259-299. 
 
 On  the  death  of  the  tyrant  another  angelic  voice 
 called  him  back  from  Egypt  (Matt.  ii.  19,  20),  and 
 when  he  felt  a  natural  hesitation  at  returning  to 
 Judasa,  which  had  passed  into  the  hands  of  a  prince 
 whose  character  only  too  much  resembled  Herod's, 
 a  divine  communication  by  dream  induced  him  to 
 withdraw  again  to  the  north,*  and  to  take  up  his 
 permanent  dwelling  in  Nazareth  (ii.  22,  23).  The 
 history,    which  has  been  hitherto  copious,  begins 
 
 *  Neander  replies  {Life,  p.  31)  to  an  alleged 
 contradiction  between  the  evangelists  of  the  infancy. 
 But  there  is  no  discrepancy  in  the  statements  of 
 St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke.  From  the  latter  we 
 learn  that  Joseph  and  Mary  resided  at  Nazareth  at 
 the  veiy  beginning  of  these  great  events  (Luke  i. 
 26).  Some  little  time  after  her  conception  Mary 
 alone  visited  her  cousin  Elizabeth,  who  dwelt  in  '  a 
 city  of  Juda'  (ver.  39)  ;  and,  after  a  happy  sojourn 
 of  three  months,  she  returned  to  her  northern 
 home  (ver.  56).  Not  long  afterwards,  in  conse- 
 quence of  the  imperial  decree,  her  husband  and 
 she  removed  to  Bethlehem  for  the  purposes  of  the 
 census  (ii.  4,  5).  Here  her  holy  child  was  born, 
 and  here  it  is  likely  she  and  her  husband  meant 
 henceforward  to  settle,  amidst  the  inheritance  of 
 their  ancestors,  encouraged,  as  they  naturally  would 
 feel,  by  the  progress  of  the  Divine  accomplishment 
 of  the  ancient  prophecies  in  which  they  now  saw 
 their  personal  interest.  But  the  ruthless  cruelty  of 
 the  Herods,  and  the  direction  which  Joseph  re- 
 ceived in  his  dream,  disturbed  this  intention,  and 
 Joseph  returned  to  his  original  residence.  Surely 
 the  very  word  (XJ'exwp7;crfj',  by  whiclr  St.  Matthew 
 expresses  Joseph's  removal  to  the  north,  ought  to 
 save  the  evangelist  from  the  slur,  which  Meyer  and 
 otliers  suggest,  of  his  being  ignorant  of  what  St. 
 Luke  mentions — the  holy  family's  previous  resi- 
 dence at  Nazareth  (see  the  Greek  of  Matt.  ii.  22). 
 The  rendering  of  A.  V.  '  turned  aside  [instead  of 
 the  more  accurate  'returned']  into  the  parts  of 
 Galilee,  conceals  the  force  of  St.  Matthew's  state- 
 ment. It  contributes  to  the  same  vindication  of 
 this  evangelist,  that  he  calls  Nazareth  the  Trarpis, 
 or  'country,'  of  Jesus  (xiii.  54),  as  St.  Luke  does 
 in  iv.  23,  24  ;  and  as  indeed  the  other  evangelists 
 do  (comp.  Mark  vi.  I,  4,  and  John  iv.  44).  It  is 
 worth  while  here  to  refer  to  the  statement  of 
 Eusebius  (lately  published  by  Cardinal  Mai  from 
 the  Syriac,  Patr.  Bid/,  iv.  279,  280),  that  there  is 
 good  reason  to  suppose  that  Joseph  and  Mary  7'e- 
 turned  to  Nasairth,  soon  after  the  presentation,  and 
 thence  -event  back  to  Bethlehem,  where  the  Magi 
 visited  them,  not  now  in  a  stable,  but  in  a  house. 
 The  reader  is  referred  to  a  fuller  statement  of  the 
 order  of  the  events,  in  this  point  of  view,  in  a  note 
 of  Dr.  Wordsworth,  Greek  Test.  i.  8.  Patricius, 
 who  is  for  this  intercalation  of  the  return  to  Galilee 
 between  the  presentation  and  the  visit  of  the  Magi, 
 treats  on  the  subject  [De  Evangel.,  pp.  330,  331, 
 and  343),  and  supposes  that  the  temporaiy  return 
 to  tlie  north  was  to  wind  up  his  affairs  with  the 
 view  of  his  ultimate  settlement  in  the  land  of  his 
 progenitors.  After  an  interesting  quotation  from 
 Papelirochius  {Propyl,  ad.  Act.  Sanct,  p.  26),  he 
 says — '  Itaque  sentias  licet  Josephum  post  purifica- 
 tionem  sponsre  Nazarethum  cum  suis  remeasse, 
 non  tit  ihi  degeret,  sea  ut  cotnpositis  rebus  dotnesticii 
 migrationein  inde  alio  pararet,  idqrce  brevi  exse- 
 quutum  Bethlehemum  migrasse  et  ibi  Magos  ex 
 cepisse,'  etc. 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 549 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 ROW  to  be  sparing  in  detail.  Having  certified  to 
 us  by  indubitable  evidence  the  perfection  of  our 
 Lord's  human  nature,  both  as  to  its  purity  and 
 reality,  it  at  this  point  only  adds  a  few  brief  inti- 
 mations of  its  growth  to  maturity  both  in  mind  and 
 body— as  a  transition  to  his  entering  upon  that 
 career  which  was  the  final  cause  of  his  mission  into 
 the  world. 
 
 Otir  Lord^s  Youth. — It  is  not  to  the  beloved 
 disciple  St.  John,  the  friend  of  the  Virgin,  that  we 
 owe  the  precious  record  of  the  Saviour's  childhood 
 and  youth  ;  but  to  the  methodical  evangelist  St. 
 Luke,  who  has  been  guided  to  narrate,  in  general 
 but  effective  terms,  our  Lord's  gradation  from 
 early  to  mature  age.  He  tells  us  (ii.  41)  that  the 
 parents  of  Jesus  were  accustomed  to  resort  together 
 to  Jerusalem,  at  least  once  a  year,  at  the  feast  of 
 the  Passover.  Of  Joseph's  piety  and  reverence  we 
 have  several  indications  ;  but  here  the  object  of 
 the  narrative  seems  to  be  to  set  forth,  in  its  unob- 
 trusive manner,  the  excellence  of  the  Virgin,  whose 
 attendance  at  the  festival  was  not  compulsory* 
 (Kuinoel,  ht  loc.)  In  their  blameless  care  of  their 
 son,  they  took  him  with  them,  probably  for  the 
 first  time  since  his  first  presentation,  when  he,  at 
 the  age  of  twelve  years,  emerged  from  childhood  to 
 youth,  and,  when  a  Jewish  boy,  became  a  minn  p, 
 
 son  of  the  law,  and  HIVD  )3,  son  of  the  precept,  in 
 
 short,  a  Hebrew  catechumen,  emancipated  in  a 
 great  measure  from  the  mere  tutelage  of  guardians, 
 and  (like  the  confirmed  members  of  the  Church  of 
 England),  undertaking  the  responsibilities  of  reli- 
 gious duty  in  his  own  person  and  by  his  own  will. 
 In  the  wonderful  Temple  scene  with  the  doctors, 
 how  completely  does  the  youthful  Jesus  demon- 
 strate his  appreciation  of  these  responsibilities — 
 and  not  of  them  only,  but  of  that  higher  vocation 
 of  the  Messiahship  to  which  no  other  Jewish 
 youth  but  he  was  ever  called !  If  his  display  of 
 'astonishing'  wisdom  (ii.  47)  was  unexampled,  we 
 must  not  forget  that  the  occasion  was  unique.  It 
 is  a  great  presumption  of  the  tnith  of  the  narrative 
 that  the  conduct  of  the  young  Messiah  was  entirely 
 worthy  of  the  occasion.  The  details  of  the  whole 
 event,  so  graphically  given  by  St.  Luke  (ii.  41-50), 
 need  not  detain  us.  We  must  notice,  however, 
 the  two  general  remarks  with  which  the  evangelist 
 both  introduces  (in  ver.  40)  and  follows  up  (in  ver. 
 52)  his  narrative.  There  is  a  shade  of  variety  in 
 the  midst  of  the  substantial  identity  of  these  grand 
 remarks.  The  former  is  relative  to  the  twelve 
 years'  growth  of  his  childhood  ;  the  latter  is  de- 
 scriptive of  the  next  eighteen  years  of  his  advance 
 through  youth  to  manhood.  +     Both  describe,  no 
 
 *  There  is  some  diversity  of  opinion  on  this 
 point.  Our  statement  in  the  text,  after  Kuinoel, 
 has  its  voucher  in  Mechilta,  f.  1 7.  2.  on  Exod.  xiii. 
 9.  The  school  of  Hillel,  however,  seems  to  have 
 held  that  women  were  also  bound  to  attend  the 
 Passover  at  Jerusalem.  But  this  was  not  the  pre- 
 valent opinion  among  the  doctors  of  Israel ;  see 
 Ckagiga,  c.  I,  sec.  I,  as  quoted  by  Patritius,  De 
 Evang.,  p.  410.  The  attendance  of  women  was 
 indicative  of  \\\zX.  piety,  which  we  have  attributed 
 to  the  blessed  Virgin.  See  Schoettgen,  Hor.  Hebr. 
 et  Talm.  in  loc.  ;  also  Patritius,  ut  antea. 
 
 •f"  In  the  Tju^ave  of  the  former  verse  we  have  the 
 growth  of  infancy  ;  in  the  irpoiKOTrrev  of  the  other 
 passage  there  is  the  subsequent  advance,  which 
 
 doubt,  an  increase,  but  rather  of  the  development 
 of  the  gifts  than  of  their  bestowal,  for  that  was  perfect 
 from  the  first  {rh  U  iraidiov  -qii^ave,  tt\t)  pov /xevov 
 ao<f)Lai  ;  with  which  compare  the  TrXrjpTjs  xo-piros 
 of  St.  John  i.  14,  and  contrast  the  account  of  the 
 Baptist  in  St.  Luke  i.  80,  where  this  clause  is 
 absent ;  see  also  i  Sam.  ii.  26).  The  first  opportu- 
 nity wliich  legitimate  circumstances  presented  to 
 Jesus  of  manfesting  in  public  his  perfect  gifts  was 
 in  this  visit  to  the  Temple  and  his  intercourse  with 
 the  doctors.  He  had  not  studied  in  human  schools 
 of  learning  (Neander,  Life,  36,  etc.),  but  his  origi- 
 nal, God-inspired  gifts,  which  he  modestly  exhi- 
 bited, as  became  a  boy,  shewed  such  unusually 
 high  intelligence  [avvicns,  ver.  47)  as  to  astonish 
 not  only  his  parents,  but  all  his  audience.  We 
 have  not  the  voucher  oi experience  to  certify  and  illus- 
 trate the  progress  of  an  unfallen  and  sinless  human 
 being  in  the  growth  of  the  perfect  faculties  of  our 
 nature.  But  this  contact  of  the  simple  wisdom  of 
 the  heaven-taught  child  with  the  mature  learning 
 of  possibly  a  Hillel  and  a  Shammai,  and  the  wise 
 sons  of  Betirah,  and  the  most  august  of  the  mas- 
 ters of  Israel  (Bishop  Ellicott,  Lectures,  92),  attests 
 at  once  the  superiority  of  a  pure  and  divine  in- 
 struction to  the  sophisticated  system  of  the  schools, 
 and  the  completeness  of  those  endowments  with 
 which  Jesus  was  even  then  invested,  and  which 
 only  wanted  time  and  occasion  for  their  ultimate 
 and  perfect  display.  The  brevity  with  which  the 
 sacred  narrative  treats  so  many  of  the  years  of  our 
 Lord's  life  has  often  caused  surprise.  Such  brevity 
 is  no  doubt  unusual  in  the  style  of  fiction  or  even 
 history,  which  seek  to  deck  out  their  heroes  in 
 minute  and  exaggerated  terms.  The  modesty  and 
 even  silence  of  the  Gospels  become  thus  so  far 
 evidence  of  their  truth  and  inspired  origin.*  But 
 with  all  this  brevity  we  yet  have  in  these  two  gene- 
 ral statements,  when  duly  weighed,  an  adequate 
 introduction  to  the  history  of  Christ's  public  career 
 which  follows.  Before  we  proceed  to  that,  let  us 
 make  a  passing  remark  on  the  answer  which  Jesus 
 gave  to  his  mother  :  '  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be 
 about  my  Father's  business  ?'  or  '  in  my  Father's 
 house  V  as  the  words  may  possibly  mean.  Among 
 the  many  features  of  the  wisdom,  of  which  he  was 
 full,  we  must  include  his  appreciation  of  the  Messi- 
 anic mission  with  which  he  was  invested.  He  be- 
 gins now  to  assert  his  consciousness  of  that  duty. 
 
 probably  is  meant  to  indicate  the  development  of 
 his  great  natural  powers  in  the  eyes  of  nien  = '  he 
 made  way.'  It  was  not  the  growth  and  increase  of 
 the  heavenly  gift  which  the  evangelist  describes  ; 
 for  that  was  complete  in  Him  from  the  beginning  ; 
 but  the  greater  display  of  it,  as  opportunity  offered 
 in  his  growing  years.  (Aquinas,  iii.  9.  7.  a  12  ad 
 3,  after  distinguishing  between  '  the  increase  in  the 
 donation  oi  grace,  which  was  not  true  of  Christ,' 
 and  'the  increase  in  its  manifested  operation,''  says 
 '  Sic  Christus  proficiebat  sapientia  et  gratia  sicut 
 et  ffitate,  quia  secundum  processum  astatis  perfec- 
 tiora  opera  faciebat,  ut  se  verum  hominem  demon- 
 straret  et  in  his,  quae  sunt  ad  Deum,  et  in  his  quas 
 sunt  ad  homines.') 
 
 *  Any  one  would  feel  this  conviction  doubly 
 forced  on  him  who  took  the  pains  to  contrast  the 
 beautiful  simplicity  of  the  canonical  Gospels  with 
 '  the  silly  fictions'  (as  Bishop  Ellicott  rightly  calls 
 them)  '  of  the  Apocryphal  infancies'  [Apocryphal 
 Gospels}, 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 650 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Ilis  mother  had  just  before  referred  to  Joseph  as 
 \\\%  father.  He  does  not  indeed  reject  the  economic 
 relationship  :  he  even  continued  to  respect  it  (ver. 
 51)  ;  but  he  pointedly  refers  to  anotliej-  Father, 
 Whose  'business'  he  had  in  hand,  and  to  Whom 
 it  was  now  time  that  he  should  exhibit  a  public 
 obedience.  The  piety  of  the  reputed  father  would 
 no  doubt  suggest  to  him  a  cheerful  compliance  with 
 the  mysterious  bent  of  his  wonderful  foster-child. 
 Though  he  understood  not  the  mission,  he  would 
 in  faith  submit  to  the  will  of  God,  who  was  evi- 
 dently calling  the  child  to  a  great  destiny  ;  and 
 thus  worthily  did  he  conclude  the  guardianship  of 
 Jesus,  which  he  had  so  well  discharged  from  his 
 veiy  birth.  We  do  not  again  hear  of  Joseph,  who, 
 it  would  therefore  seem,  did  not  live,  with  Mary, 
 to  witness  the  public  career  and  death  of  his  illus- 
 trious ward. 
 
 Our  LorcCs  Brethreji. — As  Jesus  has  not  yet 
 quitted  the  sphere  of  domestic  life,  we  will,  while 
 he  is  still  at  home  in  Nazareth,  adorning  it  with  his 
 meek  submission  to  his  parents,  consider  briefly  the 
 other  members  of  his  family  circle,  who  are  occa- 
 sionally referred  to  in  the  Gospel  narrative.  They 
 are  most  perspicuously  mentioned  in  Matt.  xiii.  55, 
 56  :  'Is  not  this  the  carpenter's  son  ?  Is  not  his 
 mother  called  Mary  ?  and  his  brethren,  James,  and 
 yoses,  and  Simon,  and  jjidas  ?  and  his  sisters,  are 
 they  not  all  with  us  ?'  (Comp.  xii.  46,  48 ;  xxvii. 
 56  ;  Mark  iii.  31;  vi,  3  ;  xv.  40  ;  xvi.  i  ;  Luke 
 viii.  19;  xxiv.  10;  John  ii.  12;  vii.  3-10  ;  Acts  i. 
 13,  14  ;  I  Cor.  ix.  5  ;  Gal.  i.  19.)  Speculation  was 
 very  early  rife  on  the  nature  of  this  relationship  to 
 Jesus,  and  the  question  is  still  unsolved  and  pro- 
 bably insoluble.  Passing  over  the  obviously  here- 
 tical opinions  of  Cerinthus  (Irenaeus  [Harvey],  vol. 
 i.  p.  211)  and  the  Ebionites,  most  of  whom  at  least 
 accompanied  their  opinions  on  the  human  birth  of 
 our  Lord  with  the  denial  of  his  miraculous  concep- 
 tion (Origen,  co>itra  Cels.  v.  61,  65  ;  Eusebius,  Hist. 
 Ecd.  iii.  27),  we  find,  in  cent,  iv.,  that  the  ques- 
 tion had  assumed  a  shape  from  which  it  has  never 
 since  quite  extricated  itself.  Helvidius,  Jovinian, 
 and  Bonosus  of  Macedonia  started  opinions  which 
 afterwards  formed  the  party  whom  St.  Augustine 
 and  Epiphanius  call  ' Ai>TioiKo/j.api.avLTai  (Adver- 
 saries of  Mary').  St.  Jerome  vehemently  opposed 
 the  first  and  second  (see  his  treatises.  Adv.  Helvi- 
 dium  and  Adv.  yoz'inianian).  His  work  against 
 Helvidius  enters  largely  into  the  discussion  of  our 
 subject.  He  asserts  '  the  perpetual  virginity  of 
 our  Lord's  mother'  against  his  opponent,  whom 
 the  learned  father  vigorously  rates  as  a  '  heretic. ' 
 This  censure,  however,  is  too  harsh,  for  Helvidius 
 believed  the  conception  of  Jesus  to  have  been  sui 
 generis  and  immaculate.  He  only  held  that  after 
 the  birth  of  Christ,  his  mother  Mary,  by  her  hus- 
 band Joseph,  became  also  the  mother  of  the  four 
 who  in  the  Gospels  are  called  '  the  Lord's  breth- 
 ren.' Much  of  the  argument  on  either  side  up  to 
 the  present  time  may  be  found  in  germ  employed 
 by  Helvidius  and  Jerome.  *     In  controverting  his 
 
 *  Although  the  diversity  of  opinions  may  be 
 generally  classed  under  the  two  prevalent  heads  of 
 Helvidianism  (the  opinion  that  Maiy  had  other 
 children  after  Jesus — even  the  '  brethren'  of  Matt, 
 xiii.  55),  and  the  orthodox  view  opposed  to  it  by 
 St.  Jerome,  that  the  mother  of  Christ  was  aeiirap- 
 OevU  and  the  aunt  only  of  our  Lord's  brethren,  as 
 stated  in  the  text,  our  account  of  the  controversy 
 
 opponent  the  Latin  father  maintained  that  the 
 Lord's  brethren  were  in  fact  his  cousins.  In  ac- 
 cepting this  view  of  St.  Jerome  as  our  own,  we 
 wish  to  keep  clear  of  the  theological  prepossessions 
 in  which  its  advocacy  has  been  much  involved,  and 
 simply  state  its  biblical  grounds.  [l.]  We  first  re- 
 mark, that  the  Hebrew  usage  undoubtedly  justifies 
 the  extension  of  the  word  '  brethren'  required  by 
 our  view:  See  Gen.  xiii.  8;  xiv.  14;  xxix.  12; 
 Lev.  XXV.  48,  49  ;  Judg.  xiv.  3 ;  Job  xiii.  1 1. 
 [2.]  The  men  of  Nazareth,  who  predicated  the 
 fraternal  relation  to  Jesus  of  James  and  the  rest 
 (Matt.  xiii.  55),  seem  either  to  have  spoken  in  a 
 lax  and  popularly  understood  sense,  or  to  have 
 been  ignorant  of  the  real  degree  of  the  family 
 relationship  of  the  persons  whom  they  were  some- 
 what contumeliously  speaking  of  This  is  appa- 
 rent from  their  very  first  question — '  Is  not  this 
 the  carpenter's  son?'  [3.]  Of  the  Marys  who 
 so  nobly  endured  the  agonising  scenes  of  the  cruci- 
 fixion, one  is  called  ''the  mother  of  fames,''  etc. 
 (Matt,  xxvii.  56 ;  Mark  xv.  40),  and  '  the  other 
 Mary''  (Matt,  xxvii.  61).  These  designations,  in- 
 deed, leave  it  undetermined  whether  this  mother 
 of  James  was  the  Virgin  Mary,  as  Helvidius  as- 
 serted, and  as  Gal.  i.  19  (considered  hastily  and 
 alone)  might  suggest.  We  have,  however,  the 
 additional  testimony  of  another  eye-witness  of  the 
 awful  events  on  Calvary,  decisive  we  think  of  the 
 question.  St.  John  (xix.  25)  tells  us  of  a  third 
 Mary  who  saw  the  Saviour's  agony,  even  his  own 
 Virgin  Mother.  So  that  '  the  other  Mary,'  the 
 mother  of  James  and  others,  was  the  Virgin's 
 sister,  and  bore  [no  unusual  thing  in  Hebrew  fami- 
 lies] her  name.  The  domiciliation  of  either  sister, 
 when  a  widow,  in  the  other's  house  at  Nazareth, 
 on  the  decease  of  either  husband,  Joseph  or  Clo- 
 pas,  so  that  the  children  of  both  would  thenceforth 
 form  but  one  household,  and  well  be  accounted 
 '  brethren,'  is  therefore  a  most  conceivable  and 
 probable  event ;  still  more  if,  as  the  ancient  his- 
 torian Hegesippus  positively  testifies,  those  hus- 
 bands of  the  sisters  were  themselves  brothers. 
 (The  marriage  of  two  brothers  to  two  sisters  ap- 
 jiears  to  have  been  no  uncommon  case  among  the 
 Hebrews  ;  see  Surenhusii  Mischna,  iii.  9,  12,  44  ; 
 Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  Eng.  Trans.,  ii.  82-122). 
 Dean  Alford,  in  an  interesting  note  on  Matt,  xiii. 
 55,  goes  into  the  question,  and,  like  Helvidius  of 
 old,  determines  these  persons  to  have  been  strictly 
 the  brothers  of  our  Lord,  as  the  younger  children 
 of  the  Virgin  Mary.  He  sets  great  store  on  i 
 Cor.  ix.  5,  and  Jude  17,  as  if  these  passages 
 established  an  antithesis  bettveen  the  apostles  and  the 
 Lord's  brethi-en.  On  the  strength  of  this  he  denies 
 that  SS.  James  and  Jude  were  members  of  the 
 sacred  body  of  the  twelve  apostles.     That  James 
 
 would  be  incomplete  were  we  to  omit  mention  of 
 the  third  opinion,  which  was  prevalent  in  the 
 Eastern  Church,  to  the  effect,  that  the  persons 
 whom  the  evangelists  call  '  the  Lord's  brethren' 
 were  in  fact  his  brothers-in-law,  being  the  sons  of 
 Joseph  (who  was  much  older  than  the  Virgin  Mary) 
 by  a  former  wife.  (So  Epiphanius,  Hicres.  xxvii. 
 l^Opera,  \.  115],  and  St.  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Opera, 
 ii.  844  ;  both  of  whom  hold  Mary,  the  mother  of 
 our  Saviour,  to  have  been  the  step-mother  only, 
 though  in  a  lax  sense  called  the  mother,  of  James, 
 Joses,  Simon,  and  Jude.  See  more  fully  Dr.  Mill, 
 pp.  258,  2S2-28S.) 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 551 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 IS  asserted  to  be  an  apostle  in  Gal.  i.  19,  does  not 
 disconcert  him ;  for  James  he  supposes  was  one  of 
 the  later  and  extraordinary  apostles — such  as  Paul 
 himself.  This,  however,  is  inadmissible  in  the 
 face  of  Gal.  ii.  9.  The  James  of  this  Epistle,  if 
 we  would  take  an  unsophisticated  view  ot  the  en- 
 tire case,  was  in  fact  a  colleague  of  Peter  and 
 John,  and  identical  with  the  James  who,  in  the 
 apostolic  lists,  is  called  the  son  of  Alphceiis*  (Matt. 
 X.  3;  Mark  iii.  iS ;  Luke  vi.  15;  Acts  i.  13). 
 Now,  assuming  that  the  four  'brethren'  mentioned 
 in  Matt.  xiii.  55  were  brothers,  we  infer  that 
 (AlpliKus,  and  Clopas  or  Cleophas  being  one  and 
 the  same  person,  both  names  being,  it  is  said,  de- 
 rived t  from  the  Hebrew  ""S^n)}  as  they  were  the 
 
 sons  of  the  Maiy,  wife  of  Cleophas,  whom  St. 
 John,  as  we  have  seen,  expressly  calls  the  sister  of 
 the  blessed  Virgin  (xix.  25),  they  must  needs  stand 
 to  our  Lord  in  the  relation  oi  first  cousins.  We 
 do  not  fear  that  our  assumption  will  be  deemed 
 harsh,  in  understanding  the  Nazarenes  to  state  the 
 strict  fraternity  of  James,  Joses,  Simon,  and  Jude. 
 In  support   of  it,  it  is  worth  while  to    compare 
 
 *  St.  John,  xix.  25,  calls  the  mother  of  James 
 '  the  wife  of  Cleophas,  or  Clopas'  [■:7  tov  KXcottS,  a 
 name  not  to  be  confounded  with  that  of  '  Cleopas'' 
 (KXe^Tras)  mentioned  in  Luke  xxiv.  18].  This  has 
 given  rise  to  two  suppositions,  either  that  Mary 
 had  two  husbands,  named  Alphaeus  and  Clopas  ; 
 or,  that  her  husband,  as  was  not  unfrequent  among 
 the  Hebrews,  bore  himself  these  two  names.  It 
 certainly  supports  this  latter  view,  that  in  an  im- 
 portant fragment  of  the  veiy  early  Christian  writer, 
 Papias,  who  was  a  scholar  of  St.  John,  the  iden- 
 tity of  Alphffius  and  Clopas  is  asserted  :  '  The 
 second  Mary  was  the  wife  of  Cleophas  or  Al- 
 phreus,  and  mother  of  James  bishop  and  apostle, 
 and  of  Simon,  and  of  Thaddzeus,  and  of  a  certain 
 Joseph,  or  Joses.  John  calls  Alphaeus  also  Cleo- 
 phas, either  from  his  father,  or  his  family,  or  some 
 other  cause.'  Papias,  we  need  not  add,  makes 
 James,  Joses,  Simon,  and  Jude,  consins,  and  not 
 literal  brothers  of  our  Lord  (Routh,  Reliq.  Sacr. 
 i.  16). 
 
 +  The  Hebrew  name  may  be  rendered  either  by 
 Chalpai  or  Chlopai.  The  former  is  adopted  by 
 SS.  Matthew  and  Mark,  who,  more  Grerconan, 
 reject  the  oriental  aspirate  at  the  beginning  of  the 
 word,  and  affix  the  termination  os,  whence  they 
 have  'AXi/jaios,  like  'A77oros  from  ""Sn  (Hag.  i.  i) ; 
 
 whereas  St.  John  adopts  the  latter  rendering  in  the 
 shape  of  KXwTras,  the  PI  becoming  K,  as  in  2 
 Chron.  xxx.  i,  where  the  LXX.  put  ^a<jiK  for 
 riDQ.  That  Alphceiis  and  Clopas  should  be  Hel- 
 lenic forms  of  one  and  the   same  Syriac  name, 
 
 |g^\  K .  or  KSPn,  is  certainly  not  more  strange 
 
 than  that  in  the  far  less  dissimilar  languages  of 
 Southern  and  Northern  Europe,  Aloysiics  and 
 Ludovictis  should  be  the  representatives  of  the  same 
 Teutonic  or  Prankish  name  Louis  or  Ludwig.  This 
 name  underwent  the  following  changes  : — I.  Clo- 
 doveus  or  Clovis ;  2.  Chlodovicus ;  3.  Hludovicus 
 or  Hlouis  ;  4.  Tlie  same  with  the  aspirate  dropped. 
 In  Spain  and  Italy  the  first-named  depravation  of 
 the  name  was  adopted — the  two  extremes,  Clovis 
 and  Aloysius,  bearing  a  certain  inexact  analogy  to 
 our  Clopas  and  Alplucus  (Kuinoel  and  Mill). 
 
 Jude  r,  Matt,  xxvii.  56,  and  Mark  xv.  40 ;  foi 
 these  passages  seem  to  corroborate  the  statement 
 of  Matt  xiii.  55  with  regard  to  three  of  the  four 
 '  brethren.'  As  to  the  fourth,  Simon,  we  find  no 
 similar  link  elsewhere  in  the  N.  T.  binding  him 
 with  the  rest.  In  Eusebius,  however  [Eccl.  Hist. 
 iv.  22),  we  have  an  extract  from  the  very  ancient 
 and  credible  writer  Hegesippus,  which  expressly 
 speaks  of  a  Simon,  or  ''Simeon.,  son  of  Clopas^ 
 who  succeeded  James  the  Just  in  the  see  of  Jerusa- 
 lem ;  and  there  further  occurs  in  the  same  extract 
 the  extremely  valuable  and  consistent  statement, 
 that  '  this  Simeon,  son  of  Clopas,  was  a  first  cousiii 
 of  the  Lord''  (2u,uecbi'  6  tov  KXwTra  Ko^iara.Ta.1 
 iiricTKOTros,  6v  wpoii^evTO  Travres  6vTa  dvexpihv  toC 
 Yivpiov  SevTepov,  where  the  last  word  seems  to  re- 
 late to  the  before-mentioned  James  the  Just,  as  if 
 he  had  been  the  first  of  the  Lord's  cousins  who 
 had  filled  the  office  to  which  the  second  of  them 
 had  now  succeeded).  We  cannot  linger  to  point 
 out  the  importance  of  this  passage  in  connection 
 with  the  places  which  we  have  adduced  out  of  the 
 N.  T.  Its  remarkable  fitness  and  consistency  with 
 these  places  is  also  obvious.  (Neander,  Planting 
 of  Christian  Church,  Bohn,  pp.  350-354,  reviews 
 this  passage,  but  curiously  endeavours  to  evade 
 its  force,  as  it  seems  to  us,  without  success. ) 
 
 If  these  premises  be  correct,  it  follows  that  two 
 of  the  Lord's  bi-ethren  stood  to  him  also  in  the 
 far  higher  relation  of  apostles.  We  do  not  shrink 
 from  this  conclusion,  though  we  reject  the  fancy  of 
 those  writers  (including  St.  Chrysostom  himself) 
 who  are  fond  of  discovering  family  relationship  to 
 Christ  in  more  of  his  apostles,  and  who  attach 
 even  St.  Matthew  as  a  brother  to  James  the  less 
 and  the  others,  from  the  mere  circumstance  that 
 his  father  bore  the  name  Alphccus  (Mark  ii.  14). 
 In  like  manner  Simon,  one  of  'the  brethren,'  has 
 been  confounded  (by  St.  Jerome  and  others)  with 
 the  apostle  Simon  Zelotes  ;  and,  as  if  this  were  not 
 enough,  the  sons  of  Zebedee  have  been  brought 
 within  the  same  degree  of  cousinly  affinity  through 
 their  mother  Salome,  whom  these  writers  assert  to 
 have  been  another  sister  of  the  blessed  virgin. 
 Thus  no  less  than  six  of  the  original  apostles  have 
 been,  by  various  writers,  connected  with  our  Lord 
 by  consanguinity!  The  claims  of  the  last  men- 
 tioned four  we  think  to  be  unsustained  by  scrip- 
 tural evidence,  but  the  case  is  different  with  respect 
 to  James  and  fiulas.  We  have  already  endea- 
 voured to  show  that  there  is  good  ground  for 
 supposing  them  to  have  been  really  cousins,  and, 
 therefore,  within  the  laxer  sense  'brethren'  of 
 Christ.  An  objection,  however,  against  this  view 
 has  been  raised  from  the  statement  of  St.  John 
 (vii.  5).  None  of  the  apostles,  it  has  been  con- 
 tended, could  have  been  among  the  brethren  of 
 Christ — for,  at  a  late  period  of  his  ministry,  it  is 
 expressly  said,  that  '  his  brethren  did  not  believe 
 in  him,'  an  allegation  which  could  not  have  been 
 true  of  any  of  the  apostles.  The  objection,  how- 
 ever, thus  stated  is  too  rigorously  put.  [i.]  As 
 Grotius  suggested,  'the  brethren  of  Christ'  may 
 fairly  be  supposed  to  include  many  more  persons 
 than  the  four  mentioned  in  Matt.  xiii.  55,  so  that 
 the  assertion  of  the  unbelief  of  his  brethren  may 
 be  quite  true,  without  involving  the  two  apostolic 
 kinsmen,  James  and  Jude,  in  the  censure.  [2.] 
 Moreover,  it  does  not  seem  to  us,  even  if  the 
 two  apostles  be  included  in  the  statement  of  the 
 evangelist,  that  it  would  imply  too  strong  a  censure, 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 552 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 for  there  is  force  in  Schleyer's  view  {iiber  die 
 Briider  ycsit)  that  '  not  even  his  brethren '  (this  is 
 the  right  rendering  of  John  vii.  5,  see  Malan  in 
 loc. ), '  though  numbering  among  them  three  apostles ' 
 {he  identifies  Simon  with  Zelotes),  '  had  attained 
 that  riglit  spiritual  faith  in  the  Lord's  divine  cha- 
 racter, which  could  enter  into  his  reasons  for 
 declining  a  proclamation  of  his  claims  to  the 
 world.'  The  whole  passage  appears  to  exhibit  the 
 ignorance  of  Christ's  kinsmen  as  to  the  nature  of 
 his  mission.  Neither  John  Baptist  (see  Matt  xi.  3  ; 
 Luke  vii.  19,  20)  nor  the  apostles  (for  Peter's 
 mistaken  views,  see  Matt.  xvi.  21,  23  ;  that  they 
 were  probably  shared  by  John  and  James,  see 
 Mark  x.  37,  38 ;  and  by  the  blessed  virgin  herself, 
 see  John  ii.  4 ;  Matt.  xii.  46,  50,  even  later  than 
 the  close  of  his  ministry,  but  previous  to  the 
 illumination  of  Pentecost,  Acts  i.  6)  seemed  to 
 have  possessed  anything  like  a  prosper  idea  of  our 
 Lord's  Messiahship,  the  want  of  which  (it  is  very 
 likely)  constituted  in  St.  John's  sense  the  'unbelief,' 
 with  which  he  charges  the  Lord's  brethren  in 
 vii.  5  (comp.  St.  John's  own  view  oi  adequate  belief 
 in  XX.  31).  [3.]  Dr.  Mill  {in  his  Christian  Advo- 
 cates Publications  [on  '  the  Record  of  the  Brother- 
 hood of  Jesus  in  the  Gospels'],  pp.  248-260) 
 suggests  that  the  apostles  James  and  Jude  pos- 
 sessed a  higher  faith  than  their  non-apostolic 
 brethren,  at  the  time  referred  to  in  John  vii.  5  ; 
 that  their  brothers  and  other  kinsfolk  are  there 
 censured  in  general  terms ;  but  that  even  these  (at 
 least  Joses  and  Simon)  were  converted  fully  to 
 Christ  between  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  referred 
 to  in  John  vii.  5,  and  the  passover  of  the  following 
 year,  when  Christ  suffered.  The  fault  of  such  a 
 theory  lies  less  in  its  incredibility  than  in  its  im- 
 probable elaborateness.  If  we  have  taken  a 
 reasonable  view  in  [2],  it  will  be  strictly  consistent 
 with  it  to  suppose  here  that  nothing  tended  more 
 to  elevate  the  low  and  worldly  expectations  of  his 
 disciples,  not  excluding  his  blessed  mother  heiself, 
 than  the  death  and  resurrection  of  our  Lord.  We 
 have  a  brief  glance  of  these  personages  permitted 
 us  in  Acts  i.  12-14;  and  we  find  that,  notwith- 
 standing the  terrible  shock  to  their  expectations, 
 which  two  of  them  described  so  naturally  and 
 strikingly  in  Luke  xxiv.  19-21,  they  were  still 
 hopeful  of  a  future,  of  which  they  had  as  yet  failed 
 to  see  the  nature  ;  so  with  all  their  imperfection 
 of  belief,  they  well  and  wisely  await  the  great  issue 
 'with  one  accord,  in  prayer  and  supplication.' 
 The  result  is  complete.  The  very  brethren  whose 
 conduct  to  Jesus  wore  so  much  the  appearance  of 
 rudeness  as  well  as  unbelief  (John  vii.  5),  were 
 within  fifty  days  in  the  upper  chamber  of  Jerusa- 
 lem, amidst  virulent  and  triumphant  enemies, 
 calmly  awaiting,  in  company  not  only  with  all  the 
 surviving  apostles,  but  with  her  too  who  had 
 witnessed,  if  not  partaken  of,  their  '  unbelief,'  the 
 descent  of  that  Holy  Spirit  who  should  clear  up 
 all  perplexities,  and  endue  them  with  a  full  under- 
 standing of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Such  were 
 '  the  brethren''  of  our  Lord,  and  such  their  bearing 
 towards  him. 
 
 Preparatio7i  for  His  Ministry.— Viow  little  help 
 from  any  human  source  did  Jesus  receive  in  his 
 Galilean  home  for  the  work  to  which  he  is  now 
 approaching !  The  one  key-note  of  his  ministry 
 was,  '  I  came  not  to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the 
 v/ill  of  Him  that  sent  me'  (John  vi.  38).  No 
 training  could  better  prepare  him  for  such  a  mis- 
 
 sion than  that  to  which  he  was  content  to  submit 
 himself,  among  his  humble  kindred  at  Nazareth. 
 Far  removed  from  the  metropolis,  where  learned 
 men  were  for  the  most  part  divided  between  the 
 hollow  pretensions  of  Pharisaism  or  the  sceptical 
 sophistries  of  the  Sadducees  ;  and  shedding  around 
 him  the  graces  of  a  spotless  life,  full  of  the  charm 
 of  social  virtues — not  austerely  separate  from  his 
 kindred,  after  the  manner  of  an  Essene  recluse, 
 but  by  his  own  active  example  recommending  the 
 excellent  worth  of  an  honourable,  if  humble  calling 
 (see  Mark  vi.  3)  ;  our  blessed  Lord  passed  through 
 the  stages  of  childhood  and  youth  to  the  perfect 
 manhood  of  thirty  years,  and  at  that  ripe  age 
 enters  on  his  great  career,  educated  for  it  (as  one 
 of  the  noblest  of  his  followers  once  said  of  him- 
 self) '  not  of  men,  neither  by  mati,^  'ovk  air'  dv'b^pu- 
 irwv,  ovd^  5i'  dv^piiiirov  (Gal.  i.  l),  but  by  the 
 plenary  endowments  of  that  Spirit  which  God  gave 
 him  without  stint  or  measure  (comp.  the  Tr\Tfpov- 
 ixevou  ao(pias,  of  Luke  ii.  40,  with  the  ov  yap  iK 
 /xerpov,  K.T.\.  of  John  iii.  34). 
 
 Chapter  ii.     The  Lord's  Ministry  until 
 
 THE  WEEK  OF  HIS  SUFFERING — HocV  longwas  it  ? — 
 
 The  chronological  emphasis  of  Luke  iii.  I,  2,  marks 
 a  great  event  in  the  history  of  the  gospels.  One, 
 whom  none  of  woman  born,  through  the  long  ages 
 of  God's  revelation  under  the  O.T.  ever  equalled 
 in  spiritual  gift  (Matt.  xi.  11),  now  comes,  himself 
 the  fulfiller  of  many  prophecies  (Matt.  xi.  13),  to 
 announce  the  speedy  approach  of  Messiah.  His 
 ministry  preceded  the  Lord's  by  about  six  months, 
 so  that  '  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Tiberius 
 Caesar '  probably  was  the  date  of  the  beginning  of 
 the  Lord's  public  life  as  well  as  of  that  of  his  great 
 forerunner.  This,  the  general  opinion,  is  disputed 
 by  Wieseler,  who  (for  reasons  which  may  be  seen 
 in  Bishop  Ellicott's  Hist.  Lect.,  p.  104,  note  l) 
 conceives  that  the  15th  of  Tiberius  coincides  with 
 the  Baptist's  i?nprisonment,  and  he  makes  it  to  be 
 the  year  which  fell  between  the  Aug.  of  A.  U.C. 
 781  and  the  same  month  of  A. U.C.  782.  It  is 
 certain  that  in  ancient  times  (see  Eusebius,  Hist. 
 Eccl.  iii.  24)  John's  captivity  was  regarded  as  the 
 terfninus  a  quo  of  '  the  deeds  of  our  Lord,'  as  given 
 by  the  three  synoptical  evangelists  (comp.  Matt, 
 iv.  12  ;  Mark  i.  14  ;  Luke  iv.  14).  No  doubt  this 
 event  suitably  marks  the  beginning  of  Christ's 
 general  tninistry  in  the  north.  Previously  to  it, 
 however,  he  had  emerged  from  his  private  life ; 
 and,  as  Eusebius  further  observes,  we  must  look 
 to  the  supplemental  gospel  of  St.  John  for  '  the 
 account  of  the  things  done  by  Christ,  atnoftg  the 
 first  of  his  deeds,  and  at  the  commencement  of  the 
 gospel ''  [loc.  cii.)  The  same  historian  (i.  10)  says 
 that  the  whole  time  of  the  Lord's  public  ministry 
 falls  within  an  interval  of  four  years  {ovK  6\os  6 
 fiera^ii  Terpairris  TraplaTarai  xp^^os).  However 
 incorrect  be  the  grounds  on  which  Eusebius  bases 
 this  statement,  we  cannot  but  think  that  grave 
 reasons  render  his  conclusion  substantially  the 
 right  one.*     Theodoret  also  refers  to  St.  John's 
 
 *  The  following  chronological  notes,  which  we 
 derive  mainly  from  the  fourth  gospel,  mark  the  dis- 
 tribution of  the  three  years  and  a  half  The 
 baptism  of  Jesus,  from  which  his  ministiy  dates, 
 took  place  about  six  months  previous  to  his  first 
 passover.  This  passover  is  mentioned  in  John  ii. 
 13.  His  second  passover  (for  we  accept  the  con^ 
 elusion  of  Robinson,  Harmony  [Tract  Soc.  ed.], 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 553 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Gospel  as  furnishing  chronological  data  on  the 
 point,  and  expressly  names  three  years  and  a  half 
 as  the  period  of  Christ's  ministiy  up  to  the  time  of 
 his  death  (ws  Trept  rd  rpta  krt]  koX  ij/uav  KTjpv^as  6 
 K>jpios  Kal  Toiis  ayiovs  avToO  /uaS-r/rds  rfi  BidaaKaXig, 
 Kal  TOis  da'ufx.acn.  ^ej^aidxras,  rbre  rh  TrdS-os  h-Kiyave). 
 For  a  summary  of  opinions  on  this  much  discussed 
 question,  we  must  refer  to  Bishop  Ellicott's  note  2, 
 Hist.  Lect.,  p.  149.  We  simply  add  here  our  con- 
 viction, lliat  the  remarkable  expression  used  by 
 Daniel,  ix.  27  ['the  midst  of  the  week,  etc.'],  and 
 'the  three  years'  and  additional  year  of  the 
 significant  parable,  Luke  xiii.  7,  8,  are  indications, 
 which  cannot  be  overlooked,  that  the  duration  of 
 the  Lord's  public  life,  no  less  than  the  events  of  it, 
 was  among  the  appointments  of  prophecy,  and 
 that  these  indications  may,  with  much  propriety, 
 be  taken  to  possess  a  decisive  force  in  a  question 
 but  for  them  insoluble. 
 
 Preliminary  events  of  the  Ministry. — Among  the 
 many  services  rendered  by  the  great  herald,  not  the 
 least  was  his  baptism  of  the  Saviour  in  the  Jordan. 
 This  was  the  solemn  consecration  of  Christ  to  his 
 work ;  it  terminated  in  the  divine  attestation  by 
 the  voice  from  the  opened  heaven,  out  of  which 
 descended  the  holy  dove  and  alighted  on  the  pray- 
 ing Saviour  (Luke  iii.  21,  22).  No  sooner  was  the 
 Messiah  thus  inaugurated  in  his  mission,  than  he 
 had  to  confront  in  spiritual  conflict  the  fearful 
 adversary  of  his  kingdom,  and  of  that  race  which 
 he  came  to  save.  The  tempter  was  baffled  at  every 
 point,  and  he  left  the  spotless  Jesus  to  the  pursuit 
 of  his  ministry — not  again,  as  it  would  seem,  to 
 renew  his  assault  until  '  the  convenient  time '  (this 
 is  unquestionably  the  force  of  St.  Luke's  H-XP'- 
 KatpoD,  iv.  13)  of  the  Lord's  passion,  when  his  last 
 strength  would  be  put  forth  against  the  Redeemer's 
 person,  and  in  vain  (comp.  Luke  xxii.  53,  and 
 John  xiv.  30).  While  Jesus  was  undergoing  his 
 severe  preparation  for  the  work  which  lay  before 
 him,  his  kinsman  was  so  thoroughly  stirring  the 
 heart  of  the  nation,  that  the  Sanhedrim  sent  to  him 
 a  deputation  of  priests  and  Levites,  requesting  him 
 to  explain  his  mission.  With  admirable  humility 
 and  self-denial,  the  Baptist  pointed  to  the  mightier 
 One,  even  then  amongst  them,  but  as  yet  unknown, 
 '  whose  shoe-latchet  he  was  himself,'  notwithstand- 
 ing men's  high  musings  about  him,  '  unworthy  to 
 unloose'  (John  i.  19-28).  On  the  morrow  Jesus 
 unexpectedly  appeared,  and  was  greeted  by  the 
 Baptist  with  that  sublime  exclamation,  '  Behold 
 the  Lamb  of  God  ! '  to  which  we  might  apply 
 Christ's  own  explanation  of  another  confession  of 
 like  grandeur  (Matt.  xvi.  17).  Marked  was  the 
 impression  which  this  testimony  produced,  when, 
 on  the  day  following,  John  repeated  it  on  the 
 departure  of  Jesus.     Andrew  and  another  of  his 
 
 note,  p.  199,  and  of  Hengstenberg,  Christology, 
 vol.  iii.  [Clark],  pp.  244,  sq. ,  as  against  Wieseler's 
 opinion,  that  the  feast  of  Purim  is  referred  to  in 
 John  v.  I.  Bishop  Ellicott,  who  adopts  Wieseler's 
 view,  admits  that  it  is  based  on  no  more  than 
 '  dependent  and  negative '  arguments ;  see  his 
 note,  //ist.  Lect.,  p.  136)  is  alluded  to  in  John  v.  i. 
 The  third  passover,  which  Jesus  did  not  attend,  is 
 mentioned  in  John  vi.  4.  The  fourth  and  last, 
 completing  three  years  of  ministry,  is  mentioned  in 
 their  history  of  the  passion  by  the  synoptical 
 evangelists,  in  Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark  xiv.  12; 
 Luke  xxii.  7,  8  ;  and  by  St.  John  in  xiii.  i. 
 
 followers  ('not  improbably  the  evangelist  himself 
 who  gives  the  account,'  Ellicott,  p.  n6)  were  so 
 much  struck,  that  they  attached  themselves  to 
 Christ,  and  thus  became  the  very  first  of  his 
 disciples.  In  the  evening  of  that  quietly  eventful 
 day,  which  we  might  well  distinguish  as,  in  one 
 sense,  the  birth-day  of  the  Christian  church,  Simon 
 Peter  was  induced  to  join  himself  to  the  little 
 company,  which  on  the  morrow  was  further 
 increased  by  the  accession  of  Philip  of  Bethsaida 
 and  Nathaniel  of  Cana  (John  i.  29-51).  These 
 men  were  afterwards  called  to  the  apostleship 
 [Nathaniel  =  Bartholomew]  ;  but  at  present 
 they  were  preparing  for  that  trust,  by  associating 
 themselves  with  Jesus  and  beholding  the  wonderful 
 displays  of  his  gradually  revealed  power.  Their 
 first  opportunity  of  strengthened  convictions  hap- 
 pened at  Cana,  where  at  the  marriage-feast  Jesus 
 wrought  the  first  of  his  miracles  (John  ii.  i-ii). 
 Nathaniel,  who  had  just  emerged  out  of  the  rude 
 prejudice  (John  i.  46),  which  offended  so  many 
 Jews  against  the  Saviour  (comp.  John  vii.  41,  42), 
 must  have  been  singularly  confirmed  in  his  belief 
 of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  by  this  '  manifestation 
 of  his  glory'  (John  ii.  11)  in  his  own  native  town. 
 The  Lord  was  soon,  on  a  grander  field,  to  spread  a 
 like  conviction  of  his  Messianic  mission.  After  a 
 brief  sojourn  at  Capernaum  (ii.  12),  he  went  up  to 
 Jerusalem  to  celebrate  the  passover  (ver.   13). 
 
 Sect.  i.  His  First  Passover. — While  at  the 
 metropolis  he  gave  the  highest  proofs  of  his 
 authority,  by  rescuing  'his  Father's  house' 
 from  the  profanation  of  the  buyers  and  sellers  in 
 the  Temple  (ii.  13-17).  This  act  of  dignity  and 
 power,  added  to  the  miracles  which  he  wrought  at 
 the  feast,  not  only  moved  the  people  to  a  favour- 
 able view  of  his  claims,  but  produced  in  one  dis- 
 tinguished member  of  the  Sanhedrim  a  lasting 
 belief  of  his  divine  mission  (comp.  St.  John's 
 notices  of  Nicodemus ;  iii.  2  ;  vii.  50  ;  xix.  39). 
 This  worthy  man  shared  no  doubt  in  the  current 
 views,  which  supposed  that  Messiah  would  establish 
 a  throne  of  earthly  splendour ;  to  correct  his  error, 
 the  Lord  in  his  divine  discourse  set  forth  the 
 spiritual  nature  of  his  kingdom,  the  entrance  into 
 which  involved  the  utter  change  of  man's  nature 
 by  the  neiu  birth  (iii.  3-8).  In  the  same  discourse 
 we  observe  thus  early  the  shadow  of  the  cross  thrown 
 over  the  mission  of  the  Son  of  Man — no  doubt 
 meant  as  another  corrective  of  men's  expectations 
 about  Messiah  (vers.  13-15). 
 
 The  Early  fiidaan  Ministry. — Whatever  may 
 have  been  the  siispiciojis  of  the  Jewish  party,  there 
 seems  to  have  been  no  demonstrated  opposition  to 
 Jesus  at  his  first  Passover;  for  the  evangelist,  to 
 whom  we  entirely  owe  our  information  on  this  part 
 of  our  subject,  describes  our  Lord  as  leaving  Jeru- 
 salem indeed,  but  still  tarrjdng  with  his  disciples  in 
 the  lajid  of  fudaa,  and  baptising  (John  iii.  22). 
 The  success  of  his  ministry,  in  which  he  put  under 
 contribution  the  willing  help  of  his  disciples,  to 
 whom  he  entrusted  the  sole  administration  of  the 
 baptismal  rite  (John  iv.  2),  was  so  complete,  that, 
 notwithstanding  the  numbers  of  John  Baptist's  fol- 
 lowers (Matt.  iii.  5  ;  Mark  i.  5),  his  own  outnum- 
 bered them  (John  iv.  i).  The  Baptist  himself,  in 
 the  last  of  his  testimonies  to  Jesus,  frankly  acknow- 
 ledged the  manifest  superiority  of  him,  to  whom  he 
 never  compared  himself  but  in  terms  of  humblest 
 contrast.  On  the  present  occasion  the  proximity 
 of   the   Saviour's  labours   to   his    own   naturally 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 554 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 enough  suggested  to  his  followers  a  comparison 
 of  their  master  with  the  new  teacher  :  '  All  are 
 coming  to  him  ! '  they  said,  not  without  some  signs 
 of  jealousy  (iii.  26).  True  to  his  mission,  with 
 touching  humility,  in  words  which  signified  his 
 conviction  that  his  work  was  done,  and  propheti- 
 cally indicated  his  own  speedy  removal  from  the 
 scene,  he  said  :  '  This  my  joy  is  fulfilled  ;  he  must 
 increase,  hut  I  must  decrease.^  So  ending  his  thrill- 
 ing message  with  a  denunciation  of  God's  abiding 
 wrath  on  any  man  who  should  refuse  to  believe  on 
 his  Son  (iii.  36),  the  faithful  forerunner  is  shortly 
 afterwards  consigned  to  the  dungeon  of  Machaerus 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  5.  2)  by  Herod  Antipas,  who 
 had  taken  offence  at  the  good  man's  bold  rebukes 
 of  his  sin  (Matt.  xiv.  3-5  ;  Mark  vi.  17-20;  Luke 
 iii.  19,  20).  This  event  seems  to  have  suggested 
 to  Jesus  some  thoughts  of  danger  to  himself  and  his 
 disciples,  for  he  quitted  Judsea  (Matt.  iv.  12).  St. 
 John  (iv.  i)  connects  our  Lord's  departure  from  the 
 south,  where  he  had  been  labouring  for  about  eight 
 months,  with  certain  indications  of  the  rising  envy 
 of  the  Pharisaic  party.  John's  success,  as  we  have 
 seen,  had  attracted  their  notice,  as  an  interference 
 with  their  monopoly  of  making  proselytes  (Matt. 
 xxiii.  15);  when  then  they  found  a  new  rival,  whose 
 intrinsic  dignity  and  popular  influence  were  more  for- 
 midable than  the  Baptist  had  even  proved  himself  to 
 be,  Jesus,  who  never  prematurely  exposed  himself 
 and  his  cause  to  danger,  thought  fit  to  withdraw 
 from  their  malice  (see  Tischendorf,  Synops.  Evang. , 
 p.  XXV.)  On  his  way  to  Galilee  he  passed  through 
 the  district  of  Samaria,  and  while  resting  from  his 
 fatigue  at  the  well-known  well  of  Jacob  at  Sychar 
 (as  Sychem,  or  the  modern  N'ab-hh,  was  then  con- 
 temptuously called — see  Ellicott,  p.  131,  note  3),  a 
 woman  approached  to  draw  water.  He  asked  her 
 for  drink  to  quench  his  thirst,  and  seized  the  occa- 
 sion (as  was  the  way  with  him,  who  never  lost  an 
 opportunity)  to  sow  the  seed  of  eternal  life  in  her 
 heart.  She  seems  to  have  been  a  woman  of  great 
 energy  and  intelligence.  So,  thrilled  with  the  dis- 
 play of  that  intuition  which  enabled  him  to  pene- 
 trate the  secrets  of  her  past  life,  she  hurried  home 
 to  invite  her  neighbours  :  '  Come,'  she  said,  '  see  a 
 man  which  has  told  me  all  things  that  ever  I  did  ; 
 is  not  this  the  Christ  ?'  They  came  and  listened  to 
 the  more  than  usually  explicit  proofs  which  he  gave 
 them  of  his  Messiahship,  and  with  joy  welcomed 
 him  to  prolong  his  stay  among  them.  For  two 
 days  he  gratified  their  request  ;  and  this  simple 
 race,  desjMsed  by  the  Jews  around  them,  though 
 stimulated  by  no  miracle  rose  to  the  noble  convic- 
 tion— '  We  have  now  heard  him  ourselves,  and  are 
 sure  that  this  is  indeed  the  Christ,  the  Saviour  of 
 the  world  ! '  (John  iv.  42).  The  Lord  afterwards 
 pursued  his  way  to  Galilee.  He  was  joyously  re- 
 ceived by  the  people  who  had  heard  of,  and  in 
 many  cases  seen,  the  wonderful  works  he  had  done 
 at  Jerusalem.  Their  faith,  however,  appears  in  un- 
 favourable contrast  with  that  of  the  Samaritans 
 (com p.  John  iv.  vers.  41  and  48).  They  required 
 the  stimulus  of  miracles,  and  the  gracious  Saviour 
 would  not  withhold  even  this  lower  means  of  con- 
 viction from  their  dull  hearts.  On  his  return  to 
 Cana  he  wrought  another  miracle,  especially  noted 
 by  St.  John  (see  iv.  40,  54),  by  healing  the  son, 
 who  was  dangerously  ill,  of  a  nobleman  of  the 
 court  of  Herod  Antipas.  This  was  indeed  a  no- 
 table sign  of  Jesus'  power  ;  he  spake  the  fiat  of 
 health  at  Cana  ;  it  took  effect  at  CaDemaum  where 
 
 the  patient  lay;  no  wonder  that  the  nobleman  hinii 
 self  believed  and  all  his  household  (iv.  53). 
 
 The  Ministry  i7t  E.  Galilee. — It  seems  to  have 
 been  not  without  misgiving  that  he  approached  his 
 northern  labours,  especially  at  Nazareth,  where  he 
 proposed  to  commence  them.  The  supposed  ob- 
 scurity of  his  birth  created  a  strong  prejudice  against 
 him.  His  foreboding  of  this  even  in  Judaea  is 
 mentioned  by  St.  John  iv.  44  ;  nor  did  the  first 
 outburst  of  enthusiasm  in  his  favour  on  the  part  of 
 the  Galileans  remove  his  apprehensions  (comp. 
 I,uke  iv.  24).  He  formally  inaugurated  his 
 northern  ministiy  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth, 
 where  he  had  been  brought  up  (Luke  iv.  16). 
 From  the  grand  language  of  the  prophet  (Is.  Ixi.  i), 
 he  in  the  most  impressive  manner  asserted  his 
 Messiahship.  The  solemnity  with  which  he  pro- 
 claimed himself  to  be  the  promised  one,  whose 
 mission  it  was  to  give  liberty  to  the  captive,  pro- 
 duced at  first  a  general  sensation  of  wonder  in  his 
 audience  (ver.  22).  But  they  were  dreaming  of  only 
 a  political  emancipation.  When  he  declined  to 
 gratify  their  morbid  craving  for  miraculous  display 
 (ver.  23),  and  intimated  that  the  gifts  he  had  to 
 distribute  were  not  to  be  confined  to  them ;  but 
 that,  after  the  examples  of  their  illustrious  prophets, 
 Elijah  and  Elisha,  he  must  offer  them  even  to  Gen- 
 tile ojitcasts  (vers.  25-27),  '  they  were  filled  with 
 wrath,  and  thrusting  him  out  of  their  city,'  were 
 about  to  follow  up  their  fierce  rejection  by  his 
 death.  His  escape  by  his  own  divine  interposi- 
 tion reserved  that  consummation  for  the  guilty 
 metropolis. 
 
 Nazareth  and  Capernaum. — This  was  no  pass- 
 ing frenzy  of  the  hostile  Nazarenes  :  Jesus  almost  a 
 year  aftei-wards  gave  them  an  opportunity  of  revers- 
 ing their  antipathy.  St.  Matthew  (xiii.  54-58)  and 
 St.  Mark  (vi.  1-6)  both  describe  another  vi?tt  of 
 the  Saviour  to  Nazareth.  But  with  not  dissimilar 
 results  :  'they  were  offended  at  him,  and  he  could 
 there  do  no  mighty  work  ' — the  very  pertinacity  of 
 their  unbelief  even  excited  the  Lord's  astonish- 
 ment, as  the  graphic  St.  Mark  informs  us  (vi.  6). 
 Nazareth,  after  its  first  rejection  of  Christ,  ceased 
 to  be  his  earthly  resting-place.  The  privileges 
 which,  if  accepted  by  its  people,  might  have  led  oii 
 to  their  salvation,  were  now  transferred  to  a  neigh- 
 bouring town,  which  in  the  sacred  history  stands 
 out  conspicuous  as  blessed  beyond  all  other  places 
 with  gifts  of  spiritual  opportunity.  How  much  of 
 heavenly  admonition,  and  how  many  wonderful 
 and  gracious  manifestations  of  his  power  did  Jesus 
 vouchsafe  to  Capernaum  *  and  its  neighbourhood 
 during  that  ''  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,''  in  which 
 were  wrought  the  grand  events  of  his  Galilean 
 career — events  which  form  so  large  a  portion  of  the 
 synoptical  gospels,  and  were  so  often  lauded  by  the 
 oldest  Fathers  as  the  very  coronal  of  the  ez'angclic 
 story  !  And  yet  how  sad  the  issue  !  After  all  its 
 advantages,  this  favoured  city  seems  to  have  slighted 
 them  in  a  degree  of  enormity  only  inferior  to  that 
 of  Nazareth ;  and  at  last  to  have  wrung  from  the 
 grieved  Saviour  the  melancholy  reflection  :   '  Thou 
 
 *  The  'H  iUa  -rrdXis  of  St.  Matthew  ix.  i  is  no 
 doubt  Capernaum.  And  the  adverbial  phrases, 
 eh  oXkov,  domu7ii ;  iv  rfj  oiKla,  domi  surr,  at  his 
 house,  rather  than  'in  the  house''  (A.V.),  employed 
 by  St.  Mark  in  connection  with  Capernaum,  seem 
 to  indicate  that  that  city  was  now  the  Lord's 
 nome. 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 555 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Capernaum,  which  art  exalted  to  heaven,  shall  be 
 thrust  down  to  hell !'  (Luke  x.  15  ;  Matt.  xi.  23). 
 Before  he  entered  on  his  active  ministry,  in  which 
 Capernaum  was  so  largely  to  share,  Jesus  attached 
 to  himself  permanently  four  of  the  disciples, 
 who  had  already  been  so  long  witnesses  of  his 
 works.  They  were  Simon  Peter  and  his  brother 
 Andrew,  and  the  two  sons  of  Zebedee.  In  con- 
 siderate regard  to  the  prepossessions  of  their  past 
 life,  the  Lord,  in  his  miracle  of  the  draft  of  fishes 
 (Matt.  iv.  18-22;  Mark.  i.  16-20;  Luke  v.  l-ii), 
 wrought  so  strongly  upon  their  convictions  that 
 they  quitted  their  calling  and  home,  and  followed 
 Christ  amidst  all  the  perils  and  obloquy  of  his 
 future  course.  The  astonishment  which  this  miracle 
 produced  on  the  lake  of  Gennesaret,  especially  in 
 the  minds  of  those  who  witnessed  it,  and,  as  St. 
 Luke's  account  indicates  (v.  8,  9),  of  Peter  more 
 than  the  others,  was  intensely  increased  by  a  series 
 of  others,  which  in  various  ways  manifested  Christ's 
 complete  dominion  over  all  things.  He  was 
 rivetting  the  attention  of  the  Capernaites  in  their 
 synagogue  in  a  discourse  of  commanding  authority 
 (Mark  i.  22),  when  he  was  interrupted  by  the 
 shrieks  of  a  demoniac.  He  rebuked  the  foul 
 spirit,  and  restored  the  sufferer  to  soundness  of 
 mind  and  strength  of  body.  Returning  from  the 
 synagogue  to  Peter's  house,  Jesus  added  to  the 
 excitement  of  the  scene  by  his  instantaneous  cure 
 of  a  *■  greaf  or  virulent  fever  (Luke  iv.  38),  with 
 which  the  apostle's  wife's  mother  was  afflicted.  A 
 few  hours  later  on  this  eventful  day  '  the  whole 
 city'  (Mark  i.  33)  submitted  their  sick  and  pos- 
 sessed to  the  merciful  Saviour,  who  fulfilled  one  of 
 the  most  gracious  features  which  prophecy  had  as- 
 signed to  him  (Is.  liii.  4  ;  Matt.  viii.  17),  by  heal- 
 ing every  mental  and  bodily  disease,  and  curbing 
 the  violence  of  the  foul  and  expelled  spirits. 
 Natural  was  their  wish  to  keep  him  amongst  them. 
 First  ciradt  of  Galilee. — But  his  philanthropy 
 could  not  thus  be  limited.  Other  cities,  as  he 
 said,  must  hear  the  glad  tidings  which  he  was  sent 
 to  proclaim.  So,  in  company  with  his  few  devoted 
 followers,  he  sets  out  on  a  tour  of  mercy,  during 
 which  he  '  went  about  all  Galilee,  teaching  in  their 
 synagogues  and  preaching  the  gospel  of  the  king- 
 dom, and  healing  all  manner  of  sickness  and 
 disease  among  the  people'  (Matt.  iv.  23).  The 
 time  occupied  in  this  circuit,  whether  'a  few  days' 
 only,  as  Bishop  Ellicott,  p.  168,  or  three  or  four 
 months,  as  Mr.  Greswell,  Dissert,  ii.  293,  with 
 greater  probability  (as  it  seems  to  us)  supposes,  we 
 have  no  data  in  the  narrative  to  determine.  It  was 
 probably  before  the  termination  of  this  journey  that 
 the  Lord  performed  the  miracle,  which  had  about 
 it  some  features  of  special  interest  and  power,  and 
 perhaps  enhanced  his  exceeding  fame  more  than 
 any  previous  one.  Pie  healed  a  leper  '  in  a  certain 
 city'  (Luke  v.  12)  with  a  touch.  Lord  of  all  power 
 and  might,  he  here  proved  his  dominion  over  the 
 direst  malady  which  afflicts  the  East  (Thomson, 
 Land  a7id  the  Book,  new  ed.,  p.  651).  Legislator 
 higher  than  Moses,  and  priest  greater  than  Aaron, 
 he  displayed  in  this  touch  of  the  leper  authority 
 over  the  ancient  law  (Lev.  xiv.),  and  a  command 
 over  a  fouler  disease  than  it  ever  fell  to  a  Levilical 
 priest  to  be  'the  cleanser'  of.  (Ver.  il. — This 
 ethical  import  of  the  miracle  is  well  put  by  Mr. 
 Jameson,  Norrisian  Prize  Essay  [Miracles  and 
 Doctrines  of  Scripture],  p.  45,  comp.  Trench. 
 Miracles,  p.   216-219;   and  Greswell,  Dissert,  ii. 
 
 296,  297.)  Our  Lord's  return  to  Capernaum  was 
 signalised  by  his  restoration  of  one  sick  of  the  palsy 
 to  health  and  vigour.  But  his  mighty  deeds  had 
 brought  together  many  strangers  to  the  city,  and 
 amongst  them  some  Pharisees  and  .Scribes  from 
 Judsea  and  Jerusalem.  The  hostility  of  these 
 southern  Jews  is  first  developed  on  this  occasion. 
 Whilst  the  simpler  and  more  honest  multitude 
 blessed  '  God,  who  had  given  such  power  to  men' 
 (Matt.  ix.  8),  the  envious  Scribes  began  to  mutter 
 about  '  blasphemy,''  until  the  actual  accomplishment 
 of  the  miracle  in  their  presence  made  them  silent  with 
 amazement  and  (as  Luke  adds,  v.  26)  even  'fear' 
 before  one  whose  power  and  dignity  commanded 
 their  unwilling  homage.  The  scarcely  dissembled 
 hatred  of  the  Pharisaic  party  was  further  stimulated 
 by  Christ's  admitting  to  close  companionship  with 
 himself  one  of  the  offensive  publicans,  Levi  or 
 Matthew  by  name,  whose  call  from  his  toll-booth 
 took  place  probably  on  the  very  day  of  the 
 l^aralytic's  cure  (Matt.  ix.  9  ;  Mark  ii.  13,  14 ; 
 Luke  V.  27,  28).  The  great  Galilean  ministry,  at 
 this  point,  is  interrupted  by  the  approach  of  the 
 feast  of  the  Jews,  anonymously  mentioned  by  St. 
 John,  V.  I.  This  we,  on  the  authority  of  the 
 majority  of  commentators,  have  assumed  to  be  the 
 Passover. 
 
 Sect.  2.  Our  Lord''s  Second  Passover. — It  called 
 our  Lord  to  Jerusalem.  During  this  visit  happened 
 the  miracle  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  when  Jesus 
 restored  the  infirm  man  from  his  inveterate  malady 
 of  thirty-eight  years  standing  to  lusty  health  (John 
 V.  8,  9).  In  this  miracle  we  have  a  sign  of  Christ's 
 authority  over  the  Mosaic  law  of  the  Sabbath. 
 His  reply  to  the  cavillers,  who  complained  that  he 
 had  violated  the  sanctity  of  the  holy  day,  convinced 
 them  that  he  was  claiming  an  equality  with  God — 
 a  claim  which  for  the  first  time  exposed  our  Lord 
 to  the  rancour  of  the  Jews  of  the  metropolis. 
 Jerusalem  henceforth  vies  even  with  the  intolerant 
 "Nazareth  in  its  hostility  to  the  Son  of  Man,  and 
 rests  not  until,  to  its  own  ultimate  ruin,  it  has  ac- 
 complished the  death  of  the  Messiah,  whom  it 
 ought  to  have  loyally  welcomed  and  received. 
 The  hostile  spirit  was  spreading  everywhere,  so 
 active  were  the  efforts  of  the  Pharisaic  malignants. 
 On  his  way  back  to  Galilee  (for  the  persecution  of 
 the  Jews,  which  St.  John  refers  to,  v.  16-18, 
 shortened  our  Lord's  stay  at  Jerusalem^  on  the 
 first  of  the  Sabbaths  which  intervened  between  the 
 second  [or  great]  day  of  the  Passover  (Levit.  xxiii. 
 11)  and  the  ensuing  Pentecost  (we  adopt  this  as, 
 on  the  whole,  the  simplest  of  the  alleged  explana- 
 tions of  St.  Luke's  phrase  kv  aajijidrc^j  Sevrepo- 
 ■wpJoTip,  vi.  I  ;  see  De  Welte,  in  loc.  ;  Greswell, 
 Dissert.,  ii.  p.  310  ;  Wahl,  Clavis  ;  and  Robinson's 
 Le.vico7i  of  N.  T.,  s.  v.,  and  the  authorities  they 
 adduce),  his  disciples  happened  to  pluck  some  ears 
 of  corn  as  they  were  passing  through  a  ripened 
 field.  The  act  was  observed  by  some  Pharisees  ; 
 and  they  urged  a  case  of  constructive  Sabbath- 
 breaking  by  combined  reaping  and  threshing  !  The 
 Lord,  in  answer  to  their  complaint,  vindicated  his 
 accused  companions  by  the  example  of  the  great 
 David,  and  proceeded  to  claim,  by  reason  of  his 
 Messianic  authority,  a  power  over  the  Sabbath  and 
 its  alleged  restrictions.  This  was  a  very  high  clairn, 
 and  the  assertion  of  it  increased  the  hostility  of  his 
 enemies. 
 
 Resit}nptio7t  of  his  Galilean  Ministry.  His  a7i- 
 ihority  over  the  Sabbath. — The   very  next   of  his 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 550 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 miracles,  wrought  on  his  return  to  the  IM.  (pro- 
 bably  at   Capernaum),    was  a    still    more    open 
 assumption  of  his  right  to  modify  the  severity  of 
 the  Mosaic  Sabbath  and  its  traditional  exaggera- 
 tion.    In  the  face  of  the  assembled  Scribes  and 
 Pharisees,  on  the  seventh  day  and  in  the  synagogue, 
 he  healed  the  withered  hand,  to  the  exasperation 
 of  his  foes  (Luke  vi.  ii),  who,  to  accomplish  their 
 deadly  purposes  against  Jesus,    now  enlisted   the 
 services  of  the  Herodians,   whom  they  generally 
 despised,    but    from   whose   interest   with    Herod 
 Antipas  they  hoped  to  secure  the  destruction  of 
 Christ   on  the  spot.     The  graphic  St.  Mai-k  de- 
 scribes the  Lord,   when  in  the  act  of  performing 
 the  miracle,  as  '  looking  round  about  on  them  with 
 anger,    being   grieved   for   the   hardness   of  their 
 hearts'  (iii.  5).     This  miracle  is  one  of  the  seven 
 which    are   recorded   to   have   been  wrought   on 
 Sabbath  days.     The  whole  illustrate  with  almost 
 mystic    completeness   our   Lord's    legislative    do- 
 minion* over  this  prominent  institution  of  the  law. 
 Four  of  these  instances  we  have  already  mentioned 
 — the  demoniac  in  the  synagogue  of  Capernaum, 
 the  cure  of  Peter's  wife's  mother,   the  healing  of 
 the  infirm  man  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  and  the 
 present  instance  of  the  withered  hand.     The  other 
 three,  though  occurring  later,  may  conveniently  be 
 mentioned  here  for  the  sake  of  unity  of  subject. 
 Their  proper  date  is  during  the  latter  six  months 
 of  the  third  year's  ministry.     The  first  of  these 
 cases  is   the  noted  one  of  the  gift  of  sight  to  the 
 man  born  blind,  in  Jerusalem  after  the   feast  of 
 tabernacles  (John  ix.  1-16).     Upon  the  miserable 
 Pharisees  that  signal    miracle  lost  its   convincing 
 effect.     While  the  physical  vision  led  the  happy 
 object  of  the  miracle  to  the  spiritual  view  of  the 
 Son  of  God  (vers.   37,  38),   the  malignants  were 
 blinded  to  the  claims  of  Jesus,  of  whom  they  ex- 
 claimed,   'This   man  is  not  of  God,  because  he 
 keepeth  not  the  Sabbath  day.'     The  next  miracle 
 gave  Jesus  an  opportunity  of  asserting  elsewhere  the 
 truth  which  he  had  asserted  in  Jerusalem  and  in 
 Galilee  of  his  own  lordship  over  the  Sabbath.     In 
 one  of  the  synagogues  of  Peraa,  east  of  the  Jordan, 
 he  healed   the   infirm  woman,    who  for   eighteen 
 years  had  literally  'bent'  beneath  her  inveterate 
 malady.      The  grateful  patient  glorified  God,  and 
 the  people  rejoiced  at  the  Saviour's  glorious  deeds  ; 
 but   the    unhappy   ruler  of   the    synagogue   was 
 indignant   at   what   he    chose   to    construe   into  a 
 violation   of  the   Sabbath    (Luke   xiii.    14).     The 
 Redeemer   with    burning    words    denounced    his 
 hypocrisy  to  his  face,  and  by  the  cogency  of  his 
 rebuke    reduced    'all   his   adversaries    to  shame' 
 (ver.  17).     It  was  in  the  same  district  of  Perrea  that 
 Jesus  wrought  the  last  of  his  Sabbatical  miracles — 
 the  cure  of  '  a  certain  man  which  had  the  dropsy.' 
 On  these  two  occasions  the  great  Healer  vindicated 
 his  merciful   acts  by  the  argument  a  miitori  ad- 
 dressed to  his  cavillers,  '  Which  of  you  shall  have 
 
 *  '  In  one  respect  only  all  these  miracles  were 
 alike;  they  were  miracles  of  the  Sabbath.  They 
 were  emphatically  the  beginnings  of  a  new  order 
 [Cf.  Ambros.  Cotntiient.  iii  Luc.  iv.  58.  '  Sab- 
 bato  medicinae  Dominicse  opera  coepta  significat. 
 ut  inde  nova  creatura  coeperit,  ubi  vetus  ante 
 desivit ;  nee  sub  Lege  esse  Dei  Filium,  sed  supra 
 I^egem  in  ipso  principio  designarel,  nee  solvi 
 Legem  sed  impleri.']  The  triumph  of  love  over 
 ritual. 
 
 an  ox  or  an  ass  fallen  into  a  pit  and  will  not 
 straightway  pull  him  out  on  the  Sabbath  day?' 
 This  plain  appeal  silenced  them  effectually  (Luke 
 xiv.  6;  comp.  with  xiii.  15,  16).  Returning  from 
 this  short  digression,  we  find  our  blessed  Saviour 
 makingtwomost  important  provisions  for  thesociety 
 which  was  soon  to  be  consecrated  with  his  holy 
 name  and  organised  into  perpetual  vitality  by  the 
 presence  of  his  Holy  Spirit.  Men,  under  the 
 strong  emotion  which  Christ's  wonderful  works 
 and  words  were  everywhere  exciting,  were  crowd- 
 ing around  him.  The  harvest  was  fast  ripening. 
 Labourers  were  wanted  for  it.  From  amongst  his 
 most  ardent  followers,  including  the  five  whom  we 
 have  already  heard  of  as  obeying  his  call,  he  selects 
 twelve,  a  symbolical  number  it  may  be,  not  without 
 some  mystic  reference  to  the  tribes  of  the  common- 
 M'ealth  of  Israel  (in  which  sense  it  is  worth  while 
 to  compare  such  passages  as  Matt.  xix.  28  ;  Luke 
 xxii.  30;  Rev.  vii.  4-8;  xxi.  10-14),  to  be  with 
 him,  whom  he  might  educate  for  the  noble  work 
 of  founding  and  organising  under  him  the  church, 
 for  which,  by  his  own  incredible  exertions  and 
 surpassing  influence  over  men's  minds,  amidst  the 
 intensest  malevolence,  he  was  preparing,  like  another 
 David,  the  precious  materials. 
 
 The  Twelve  Apostles,  and  the  Sermon  on  the 
 Monnt.  —  We  detain  not  the  reader  over  the  names 
 of  the  apostles,  of  whom  no  less  than  four  lists  are 
 given  (Matt.  x.  2-4;  Mark  iii.  16-19;  Luke  vi. 
 14-17;  Acts  i.  13).  They  were  probably  all  of 
 Galilee,  except,  perhaps,  the  traitor,  whose  desig- 
 nation, Iscariot,  seems  to  point  to  a  Jud^ean  origin 
 (Iscariotes  is,  not    unlikely,    equal    to  ni'~lp  E'''N, 
 
 Ish  Kerioth,  of  Kerioth,  mentioned  Josh.  xv.  25). 
 For  the  instruction  of  both  these  and  others,  who 
 through  them  should  believe  in  Christ,  he  now 
 delivers  that  heavenly  summary  of  the  life  and 
 practice  of  Christianity  which  age  after  age  has 
 regarded  as  the  most  sacred  heritage  that  God  has 
 vouchsafed  unto  his  church  (Bp.  Ellicott,  p.  1 78). 
 We  accept  the  view  of  those  writers  who  regard 
 St.  Luke's  recital  of  the  Lord's  discourse  (vi.  20-49) 
 as  a  summary  of  the  whole,  given  by  St.  Matthew 
 in  chapters  v. -vii.  If  'the  Mount  of  the  Beati- 
 tudes '  be  the  square-shaped  '  Hattin  with  its 
 Horns'  which  tradition  asserts.  Dr.  Stanley  {Palest. 
 p.  368  [ed.  3])  sees  in  the platforjn  below  the  horns 
 the  T67roj  7re5ii'6f  of  St.  Luke  (ver.  17,  not  'plain' 
 [A.  v.],  but  level  place ;  for  the  plain  is  some  60 
 feet  below),  to  which  Christ  would  come  down,  as 
 the  evangelist  represents  him,  from  the  higher 
 horns  of  the  Mount,  for  the  purpose  of  addressing 
 the  people  assembled  on  the  before-mentioned 
 plateau.  Dr.  Stanley  is  strong  in  the  conviction 
 that  this  was  the  hill,  and  that  its  peculiar  form,  in 
 fact,  easily  reconciles  the  statements  of  the  evange- 
 lists   (Matt.   v.    I*  and  Luke  vi.    17,    20).     Dr. 
 
 *  St.  Matthew,  although  he  enumerates  '  the 
 twelve,'  in  immediate  connection  with  the  sermon 
 on  the  mount,  makes  Christ  ascend  the  mount 
 only  as  if  to  address  the  people  ;  whereas  St.  Luke 
 (and  St.  Mark  with  him)  mentions  the  Saviour  as 
 already  on  the  mountain  with  his  disciples,  and  as 
 afterwards  descending  to  the  level  place  to  deliver 
 the  address.  This  is  an  omission  of  the  first  evan- 
 gelist, but  no  discrepancy.  When  he  comes  to 
 the  sermon  on  the  mount,  he  is  found  in  accord- 
 4Jice,  really,  with  St.  Luke,  inasmuch  as  he  repre- 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 557 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Robinson  also,  who  visited  Hattin,  allows  the 
 probability  of  the  tradition,  and  (in  his  Harmony 
 [ed.  Tr.  Soc],  p.  32,  note)  asserts  that  St.  Luke's 
 phrase  k-nl  rbwov  vedLvov,  exactly  indicates  the 
 elevated  situation  of  the  'level  spot'  on  which 
 Jesus  delivered  his  discourse.  That  the  two  evan- 
 gelists narrate  the  same  discourse  is  rendered  still 
 more  likely  by  the  context.  They  not  only  intro- 
 duce the  sermon  on  the  mount  with  the  Lord's 
 nomination  of  the  apostles,  but  they  ho^h  follo^v  it 
 tip  by  the  narrative  of  Christ's  return  to  Capernaum, 
 and  his  there  healing  the  centurion's  servant.  An 
 unusual  circumstance,  worthy  to  be  mentioned  in 
 refreshing  contrast  to  the  examples  of  Nazareth 
 and  Jerusalem,  occurs  in  connection  with  this 
 miracle.  The  Gentile  centurion  in  military  com- 
 mand of  the  district,  who  deserves  comparison  with 
 the  pious  Cornelius,  is  too  meek  and  humble  to  put 
 himself  in  immediate  correspondence  with  the 
 Saviour.  He  therefore  despatches  such  friends  as 
 he  supposes  meet  to  approach  so  wonderful  a 
 Person.  It  is  a  delightful  exception  to  the  usual 
 character  of  the  class  to  find  that  these  friends  were 
 '  the  elders  of  the  Jews'  (Luke  vii.  3),  who  seem 
 to  have  acted  both  with  kindness  to  the  centurion, 
 their  liberal  benefactor  as  well  as  lenient  governor, 
 and  with  much  respect  and  propriety  towards 
 Christ  himself.  We  observe,  moreover,  in  this 
 miracle  a  natural  transition  to  the  still  greater  one 
 which  follows.     The  patient  whom  the  Redeemer 
 
 sents  Jesus  as  on  some  elevated  ground  while 
 addressing  the  assembly,  as  the  third  evangelist 
 does  also  in  fact,  as  shewn  in  the  text.  It  increases 
 the  probability  that  St.  Luke's  is  only  an  abridged 
 form  of  the  sermon,  which  St.  Matthew  gives  in 
 extenso,  that  on  a  comparison  of  the  two  forms  the 
 shorter  seems  to  have  omitted  all  such  portions  as 
 had  specially  a  Jewish  cast.  In  a  gospel  intended 
 primarily  for  Israelite  readers,  such  passages  as 
 Matt.  v.  17-39,  and  vi.  I-34,  are  specially  suitable 
 from  their  references  to  the  Mosaic  Scriptures,  and 
 from  their  Jewish  allusions  and  illustrations.  These 
 long  passages  are  entirely  omitted  by  St.  Luke. 
 Moreover,  in  some  of  the  passages  which  are 
 common  to  the  two,  St.  Luke  omits  the  Jewish 
 stnicture  and  tone  of  St.  Matthew  ;  e.g.,  in  the 
 injunctions  of  non-resistance  to  evil  and  of  love  to 
 enemies  (Luke  vi.  29,  30  ;  27,  28),  St.  Luke  omits 
 the  introductory  references  to  the  law,  which  St. 
 Matthew  characteristically  gives  :  and  while  the 
 latter  bases  the  golden  rule  of  doing  to  others  as  we 
 ivotild have  done  to  its  on  '  the  law  and  the  prophets' 
 (Matt.  vii.  12),  his  brother  evangelist,  not  writing 
 for  Jews  especially,  says  nothing  of  this  sanction. 
 These  and  similar  points,  such  as  the  omission  by 
 St.  Luke  of  the  warning  against  '  false  prophets,' 
 so  suitable  in  the  pages  of  St.  Matthew  (vii.  15), 
 seem  to  account  for  the  diversities  which  occur  in 
 the  two  evangelists.  We  do  not  deny  that  Christ 
 may  have  repeated  his  discourses  substantially  at 
 times.  But  we  believe  that  the  two  evangelists, 
 with  their  different  aims,  would  probably  report 
 a7iy  one  discourse  of  the  Lords  with  the  charac- 
 teristic differences  which  we  in  fact  possess  in  their 
 narratives.  The  nomination  of  the  apostles  being 
 the  context,  which  introduces  the  sermon  in  both 
 accounts,  clearly  identifies  these  accounts  as  being 
 of  one  and  the  same  discourse.  The  context  tvhic/i 
 follows  is  noticed  in  the  text  as  affording  a  like 
 argument. 
 
 here  restores  to  health  '  was  sick  and  ready  to  die'' 
 (ver.  2).  On  the  morrow  he  puts  forth  his  powei 
 to  effect  a  yet  greater  restoration. 
 
 77^1?  raising  of  the  dead. — It  was  at  Nain,  a  small 
 town  on  the  north  slope  of  the  valley  of  Esdraelon, 
 that  the  Lord  of  Life  first  came  into  conflict  with 
 the  powers  of  death.  He  was  passing  the  gate  as 
 they  were  carrying  to  his  grave  the  only  son  of  a 
 weeping  widow.  Full  of  kindness  as  well  as  of 
 power,  he  spoke  a  word  of  comfort  to  the  mother 
 and  of  life  to  the  dead  son.  The  effect  of  both 
 was  complete.  Amidst  the  awful  fear  and  adora- 
 tion of  the  crowds  that  thronged  him  he  delivered 
 the  young  man  alive  to  his  mother  (Luke  vii.  1 1-17). 
 Three  instances  only  occur  in  Christ's  history  of 
 his  assertion  of  this  dominion  over  death.  In  the 
 present  case  the  corpse  was  071  its  way  to  Intrial 
 when  interrupted  by  the  fiat  of  the  Life-restorer. 
 In  the  next  instance,  of  the  daughter  of  Jairus 
 (which,  as  happening  only  a  few  days  [or  at  most 
 weeks]  after  this,  may,  for  the  unity  of  the  subject, 
 be  here  considered),  the  bands  of  death  were 
 loosened  almost  at  once  after  life  had  ceased.  The 
 widow's  son  was  raised  in  the  sight  of  all  Nain. 
 The  ruler's  daughter  in  the  presence  only  of  three 
 apostles  (Peter,  James,  and  John),  who  were  after- 
 wards associated  with  Christ  on  two  other  especial 
 occasions,  and  of  her  parents.  Crowds,  however, 
 had  been  gathered  around  Jesus  on  his  way  to  the 
 house  of  Jairus,  and  in  the  throng  a  suffering 
 woman  had  pressed  close  to  the  Saviour.  For 
 twelve  years  she  had  tried  in  vain  all  the  medical 
 resources  at  her  command.  Her  issue  of  blood 
 was  growing  worse.  She  now  thought  that  a  touch 
 even  of  the  clothes  of  the  great  Healer  would 
 restore  her.  Whatever  we  may  think  of  the  intelli- 
 gence of  her  faith,  it  possessed  the  virtue  of  a  rare 
 simplicity.  The  Lord  at  once  acknowledged  it, 
 and  in  gracious  words  dismissed  her  '  in  peace  and 
 whole  of  her  plague'  (Mark  v.  34).  The  third 
 instance  of  the  gift  of  life,  which  we  must  now 
 only  glance  at,  was  at  the  close  of  his  ministry, 
 when  he  raised  Lazarus  fmr  days  after  burial. 
 We  mention  this  great  case  here  as  the  ultimate 
 degree  of  his  power,  so  far  at  least  as  he  was 
 pleased  to  exert  it  on  others.  It  was  not  only  the 
 restoration  of  life  to  the  dead,  but  of  the  freshness 
 of  health  to  corruption  (John  xi.  39).  If  this  gift 
 of  life  to  his  friend  hastened  his  own  death  in  fact 
 (John  xi.  47,  57  ;  xii.  lo,  19),  that  event  only 
 expedited  the  consummation  of  his  conquest  and 
 dominion  over  death  by  his  own  resurrection  from 
 the  grave  (John  ii.  19,  21).  We  group  together 
 these  wonderful  facts.  The  three  resurrections  and 
 the  climax  of  the  fourth  must  be  noted,  in  however 
 brief  a  history  of  Jesus.  They  develope  the 
 grandest  of  his  Messianic  functions  which  early 
 prophecy  foretold,  and  the  whole  gospel  has  only 
 echoed  and  illustrated  (comp.  Hosea  xii.  14 ;  Is. 
 XXV.  8  ;  xxvi.  19  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  25,  26,  54,  55  ;  2 
 Tim.  i.  10;  Heb.  ii.  14,  15  ;  Rev.  i.  18;  xx.  14; 
 xxi.  4). 
 
 Death  of  John  Baptist,  and  remainder  of  the  E. 
 Galilean  Ministiy. — This  was,  however,  not  the 
 idea  of  Messiah  which  even  good  men  had  been 
 wont  to  entertain.  It  was  of  imperial  pomp  rather 
 than  of  spiritual  dominion  that  they  dreamt.  Even 
 the  Baptist's  faith  seemed  to  fail  under  the  personal 
 trials  which  Herod's  cruelty  imposed  on  him,  when 
 after  so  much  expectation  he  found  Messiah's  guise 
 50  lowly   and  the  signs  of  his  kingdom  so  uneaa'thiy 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 558 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 (Matt.  xi.  3  ;  Luke  vli.  19,  20.  See  Neander, 
 Life  of  Christ  [BohnJ,  pjj.  60-62).  He  sent  a 
 desponding  message  to  Jesus  from  his  prison  : 
 '  Art  thou  he  that  should  come,  or  look  we  for 
 another?''  The  practical  reply  which  the  Lord 
 returned  to  him,  as  he  bade  his  messengers  report 
 to  their  master  his  works  and  words  of  grace  and 
 power,  brings  out  into  strong  relief  those  lineaments 
 of  Messiah's  character  which  present  him  to  our 
 spiritual  intuition  as  the  Benefactor  and  Saviour  of 
 mankind  amidst  privation  and  suffering  rather  than 
 as  an  assertor  of  mere  dominion  and  of  material 
 power.  He  pronounces  a  fresh  beatitude  on  the 
 man  who  should  not  take  offence  at  the  lowly 
 blessings  which  Christ  came  to  distribute  amongst 
 the  meek  and  poor  (comp.  Is.  Ixi.  I  ['meek'] 
 with  Matt.  xi.  5  and  Luke  vii.  22  ['poor']),  and 
 who  should  recognise  in  his  remedies  for  the  blind, 
 the  lame,  the  leprous,  and  the  dead,  the  most 
 appropriate  demonstrations  of  Messiah's  power, 
 and  the  surest  guarantees  of  his  ultimate  glory  ! 
 Christ's  testimony  to  his  true-hearted  though  de- 
 sponding forerunner  (Matt.  xi.  7-15;  Luke  vii. 
 24-30)  is  a  fine  illustration  of  his  sympathy  and  ap- 
 preciation of  men  under  trial.  John  shortly  after 
 was  removed  to  his  rest  by  the  tyrant's  sword ;  * 
 it  is  consolatory  to  see  that  the  Lord's  last  reference 
 to  his  mission  and  conduct  of  it  was  one  of  accept- 
 ance and  gracious  praise.  He  called  him  an 
 Elijah,  pronounced  him  equal  to  the  greatest  of 
 prophets,  and  even  compared  him  with  the  Son  of 
 Man  himself  as  a  faithful  example  of  '  wisdom 
 justified  of  her  children'  (see  Matt.  xi.  14;  Luke 
 vii.  28 ;  and  Matt.  xi.  18,  19).  In  melancholy 
 contrast  are  the  reflections  which  Jesus  about  this 
 time  made  as  to  the  effect  of  his  mighty  works  on 
 the  population  which  witnessed  them.  The  towns 
 around  the  west  and  north  shores  of  the  Sea  of 
 Galilee  had  enjoyed  the  clearest  evidences  of  his 
 heavenly  mission  ;  but  beyond  the  transient  wonder 
 which  his  miracles  could  not  but  elicit,  no  signs  of 
 intelligent  faith  appeared,  even  in  Capernaum,  with 
 all  its  wealth  of  opportunity.  '  Woe  unto  thee 
 Chorazin  !  Woe  unto  thee  Bethsaida !  And  thou, 
 Capernaum,  which  art  exalted  unto  heaven,  shalt 
 be  brought  down  to  hell ! '  Such  were  the  sad 
 words  in  which  he  '  upbraided  the  cities  wherein 
 most  of  his  mighty  works  were  done,  because  they 
 repented  not'  (Matt.  xi.  21,  23). 
 
 Two  7Hore  circidts  of  Galilee. — Before  this  year 
 of  ministerial  activity  came  to  its  close,  the  Lord, 
 who,  while  dining  with  a  Pharisee,  was  anointed  by 
 a  woman  whose  loving  act,  sinner  though  she  was, 
 was  graciously  accepted  (Luke  vii.  36-50),  repeated 
 his  visitation  around  the  northern  districts  of  Pales- 
 tine on  two  occasions.  Last  year  he  was  accom- 
 panied by  Simon  Peter  and  the  four  others  who 
 were  the  first  to  follow  Christ.  This  year  he  took 
 with  him  in  his  former  circuit  his  twelve  apostles, 
 
 *  Herod  Antipas  was  a  superstitious  man. 
 Hearing,  after  his  execution  of  the  Baptist  (which 
 he  seems  to  have  consented  to  with  regret),  of  the 
 Saviour's  fame,  his  troubled  conscience  at  once 
 reverted  to  his  victim.  He  exclaimed,  '  This  is 
 John  the  Baptist  ;  he  is  risen  from  the  dead  ;  and 
 therefore  mighty  works  do  show  forth  themselves 
 in  him  !'  (Matt.  xiv.  2).  This  is  a  rough  though 
 valid  testimony  from  a  man  of  the  world  of  the 
 profound  impression  which  was  created  both  by 
 the  Forerunner  and  the  Saviour. 
 
 whom  he  was  educating  for  their  work  of  founding 
 the  church.  This  second  of  the  circuits  is  also  re^ 
 mavkable  for  the  attendant  ministiy  of  certain  ear- 
 nest women,  among  whom  was  Mary  Magdalene, 
 now  for  the  first  time  introduced  to  our  notice 
 (Luke  viii.  1-3).  Between  this  and  the  third  cir- 
 cuit we  trace  some  of  the  effects  of  Pharisaic  malig- 
 nity. Emissaries  from  Jerusalem  are  busy  eveiy- 
 wliere  in  their  fiendish  efforts  to  destroy  his  popu- 
 larity, and  to  thwart  the  progress  of  his  cause. 
 '  His  friends'  (Mark  iii.  21),  including  no  doubt 
 some  of  his  kindred,  who  from  the  first  were 
 ignorant  of  his  mission,  and  displayed  that  grudge 
 against  him  of  which  the  poet  writes  : 
 
 '  How  shall  envious  brethren  own 
 A  brother  on  the  eternal  throne?' 
 
 {Christian  Year,  Trinity  Sunday.) 
 
 now  sought  to  lay  hands  on  him,  for  they  said, 
 '  he  is  beside  himself  The  opposition  of  the 
 Pharisees,  who  had  been  only  feeling  their  way 
 hitherto,  begins  to  assume  a  definite  shape.  In 
 the  face  of  the  popular  favour  they  do  not  resort  to 
 violence  yet  ;  but  they  hope  to  effect  their  object 
 of  crushing  the  Great  Teacher  by  working  on  the 
 credulity  of  the  people,  whom  they  would  persuade 
 that  Jesus  was  in  league  with  the  powers  of  evil. 
 They  could  not  deny  his  miracles,  but  they  had 
 their  explanation  :  '  This  fellow  doth  not  cast  out 
 devils,  but  by  Beelzebub  the  prince  of  the  devils' 
 (Matt.  xii.  24).  The  Lord  did  not  find  it  difficult 
 to  meet  this  blasphemous  imputation  by  exposing 
 the  absurdity  of  it.  But  he  was  not  content  to  da 
 this  simply  ;  with  words  of  most  awful  severity  he, 
 in  express  and  immediate  reference  to  this  Phari- 
 saic impiety,  pronounced  'Ci\€\x  veno}noiis  (Matt.  xii. 
 34 — 'yei'V7]ixaTa  ixtSvQv)  slander  as  a  sin  against  the 
 Holy  Ghost  for  which  the  exhausted  long-suffering 
 of  God  had  no  forgiveness  in  store.  In  strict  keep- 
 ing with  that  sentence,  he  went  on  to  remind  men 
 of  the  heavy  responsibility  they  were  treasuring  up 
 for  the  day  of  doom  when  they  indulged  in  wanton 
 imputations.  They  probably  did  not  believe  them. 
 This  excuse,  however,  would  not  serve  them  ;  tlie 
 •slander  remained,  and  '  for  every  idle  word  that 
 men  should  speak,  they  must  give  an  account  in 
 the  day  of  judgment'  (ver.  36,  comp.  with  ver.  32). 
 
 Expostires  of  Pharisaism. — ^Jesus  sought  every 
 legitimate  opportunity  of  cautioning  men  against 
 that  Pharisaism  which  was  not  more  hostile  to 
 himself  than  fatal  to  their  own  highest  interests. 
 In  his  severe  reflections  on  the  Scribes  and  Phari- 
 sees, who  sought  a  sign  from  him  out  of  very  wan- 
 tonness in  order  to  tempt  him  (Matt.  xii.  38  ;  Luke 
 xi.  16,  24-36),  as  well  as  in  his  denunciations  of 
 woe  at  the  Pharisee's  table  (ver.  37-54)i  "^^^  have 
 instances.  And  how  full  of  this  righteous  indig- 
 nation he  was,  becomes  yet  more  apparent,  from 
 his  long  addresses  to  his  disciples  and  the  multi- 
 tude, in  which  he  bids  them  '  beware  of  the  leaven 
 of  the  Pharisees'  (Luke  xii.)  At  Levi's  feast, 
 tliough  in  milder  terms,  he  seized  the  opportunity 
 of  rebutting  some  less  injurious  though  character- 
 istic censures  of  the  Pharisees,  who  took  offence  at 
 his  gracious  association  wdth  the  abject  class  of 
 '  publicans  and  sinners.'  His  very  mission  was,  as 
 he  said,  to  call  such  men  to  repentance. 
 
 Parables. — It  was,  however,  not  only  by  de- 
 nouncing the  hollowness  of  the  Jewish  party,  but 
 still  more  by  instructing  his  disciples  in  the  princi- 
 ples of  his  kingdom,   '  the  kingdom  of  heaven,* 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 559 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 that  our  Lord  advanced  the  cause  of  divine  tnuh. 
 Much  of  this  instruction  we  have  in  his  inimitable 
 parables.  The  earliest  of  these  (beginnnig  with 
 that  of  'the  sower  and  the  seed'),  which  have  a 
 wider  range  of  application  than  some  of  his  later 
 ones,  belong  to  this  period  of  his  history.  Those 
 which  are  given  in  St.  Matthew  xiii.  and  parallel 
 passages,  seem  to  have  a  mutual  relation,  revealing 
 '  varied  aspects  of  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth' 
 (Bishop  Ellicott,  Z^r//^;w,  p.  21,  n.  2,  briefly  traces 
 their  connection.  See  also  Wordsworth  on  Matt. 
 xiii.  3),  in  its  present  mixed  and  imperfect  condi- 
 tion. This  feature  of  Christ's  teaching  was  pro- 
 phetically appointed,  as  tiie  evangelist  observes 
 (Matt.  xiii.  34).  It  was  also  best  suited  for  the 
 purposes  of  moral  probation  :  means  were  pro- 
 vided whereby  to  the  willing  and  well-affected  these 
 parables  should  become  intelligible  (Mark.  iv.  33, 
 34)  ;  to  the  hostile  and  self-conceited  the  truths 
 which  underlay  the  parables  would  remain  an  un- 
 explained and  useless  mystery  (comp.  Butler's 
 Anal.  ii.  4).  It  was  on  the  shore  of  the  Sea  of 
 Galilee  that  the  Lord  delivered  these  parables,  in 
 presence  of  a  '  multitude'  of  eager  listeners  (Mark 
 iv.  36).  In  the  evening  of  the  same  day  his  dis- 
 ciples, desirous  of  securing  him  some  retirement 
 and  rest,  took  him  across  the  sea.  While  he  wab 
 asleep  from  weariness,  on  the  passage  a  storm 
 burst  upon  their  vessel.  This  circumstance,  which 
 filled  his  companions  with  alarm,  afforded  to  Jesus 
 an  opportunity  of  asserting  a  power  whereat  they 
 were  struck  with  a  new  amazement.  He  stilled  the 
 raging  tempest,  and  they  exclaimed,  '  What  man- 
 ner of  man  is  this  that  even  winds  and  sea  obey 
 him  ! '  When  he  landed  on  the  opposite  coast,  near 
 Gergasa,  he  was  met  by  two  fierce  demoniacs 
 (Matt.  viii.  28).  The  ferocity  and  deprecating  cry 
 of  both  are  mentioned  in  the  first  gospel.  The  cure 
 of  one  only,  who  seems  to  have  been  the  pest  and 
 terror  of  the  country,  is  fully  described  by  SS. 
 Mark  (v.)  and  Luke  (viii.),  but  they  omit  the  men- 
 tion of  the  second,  as  being  of  no  account  by  the 
 side  of  his  very  notorious  companion  (Ellicott, 
 p.  188,  note ;  Bibliothcca  Sacra,  vol.  ii.  p.  169).  The 
 two  events,  which  took  place  shortly  after  our 
 Lord's  return  to  Capernaum  (the  raising  of  Jairus' 
 daughter  and  the  contemporary  cure  of  the  issue  of 
 blood),  we  have  already  adverted  to  ;  they  were 
 followed  by  the  healing  of  two  blind  men  and  the 
 ejection  of  the  dumb  spirit,  amidst  the  grateful  ex- 
 clamation of  the  multitudes  :  '  It  was  never  so  seen 
 in  Israel ! '  and  the  renewal  of  the  Pharisees'  blas- 
 phemous cry  :  '  He  casteth  out  devils  through  the 
 prince  of  the  devils  !'  (Matt,  ix.)  How  prominent 
 a  feature  in  the  sacred  narrative  is  this  contrast  in 
 the  results  of  our  Lord's  ministration— the  con- 
 temptuous rejection  by  the  Pharisee  and  the  enthu- 
 siastic favour  of  the  impressible  crowd  (St.  John's 
 6x^.0$).  Strong,  however,  as  this  popular  feeling 
 was,  it  was  no  match  for  that  unflagging  hostility 
 which  sought  by  every  means,  and  at  last  too  suc- 
 cessfully, to  convert  the  affection  of  the  people  into 
 enmity.  The  tide  of  alienation  surged  first  of  all 
 from  Nazareth,  the  Saviour's  chosen  city.  We 
 have  already  noticed  the  deliberate  and  repeated 
 rejection  of  Jesus  by  this  infatuated  and  guilty 
 population.  The  last  of  these  miserable  acts  falls 
 into  the  present  section  of  our  history.  With  what 
 grief  must  the  merciful  Redeemer  have  turned  his 
 back,  for  the  last  time,  upon  a  tovra  whose  claims 
 upon  his  divine  regard  he  would  gladly  have  satis- 
 
 fied, but  could  not  because  of  men's  astounding 
 unbelief  (Mark  vi.  5,  6).  His  loving  labours,  how- 
 ever, could  not  be  checked.  Pie  immediately  sets 
 out  on  his  third  circuit  of  Galilee — whether  with 
 the  former  company  of  his  apostles  or  not  we  are 
 not  informed.  His  observation  on  this  tour  of 
 mercy  excited  more  than  ever  his  compassion  for 
 the  multitude  —  scattered  and  fainting  as  they 
 seemed  to  be,  like  sheep  without  a  shepherd  (Matt. 
 ix.  36). 
 
 Mission  of  the  Twelve. — The  supply  of  their 
 need  he  matle  an  object  of  prayer,  enjoining  on 
 his  disciples  the  duty  of  invoking  God's  help  (ver. 
 38)  ;  and,  what  was  still  more,  he  gave  them  an 
 effectual  lesson  how  best  to  secure  an  answer  to 
 prayer  by  acting  on  it.  He  without  delay  sent 
 forth  the  twelve  on  their  first  missionary  tour,  and 
 after  their  departure  resumed  his  own  labours 
 among  the  neighbouring  cities  (Matt.  xi.  i).  This 
 mission,  which  seems  to  have  been  made  while  the 
 Lord  was  on  his  third  circuit,  and  not  from  Caper- 
 naum, gave  occasion  for  the  delivery  of  a  minis- 
 terial charge,  in  which  the  great  '  Shepherd  and 
 Bishop  of  souls'  sets  forth  to  the  apostolic  pastors  a 
 regime  of  visitation  adapted  to  their  primitive  field 
 of  labour.  In  this  beautiful  exhortation  Christ 
 makes  an  affecting  allusion  to  tlie  persecutions 
 with  which  his  own  loving  labours  were  met.  In 
 their  mission  they  were  receiving  from  him  a 
 heritage  of  like  obloquy  and  trial,  but  a  probation, 
 withal,  of  noblest  aims  and  a  blessed  recompense 
 — '  Ye  shall  be  hated  of  all  men  for  my  name's 
 sake,  but  he  that  endureth  unto  tlie  end  shall  be 
 saved'  (Matt.  x.  22.  The  entire  charge  occupies 
 the  chapter).  This  service  was  no  doubt  intended, 
 among  other  purposes,  for  instruction  to  the 
 apostles  themselves,  to  the  preparation  of  whom 
 for  their  ultimate  duties  the  Lord  has  evidently  at 
 this  period  of  his  ministry  great  regard.  They 
 were  as  yet  novices  in  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom 
 of  heaven  ;  so  they  were  to  limit  their  teaching  to 
 the  simple  announcement  that  that  kingdom  was 
 at  hand  ;  miraculous  power  in  attestation  of  their 
 solemn  message  was  given  them,  and  they  exer- 
 cised it  by  casting  out  devils  and  healing  the  sick 
 (Mark  vi.  12;  Luke  ix.  6).  As  their  circuit  was 
 confined  to  Galilee,  and  they  took  various  direc- 
 tions in  six  different  companies  (Mark  vi.  7),  they 
 would  not  require  long  time  for  this  their  first 
 essay  in  mission  work  (Bishop  Ellicott  conjectures 
 an  absence  of  only  two  days,  p.  193).  Their 
 return  to  Capernaum  may  also  have  been  hastened 
 by  the  violent  death  of  the  Baptist.  Christ,  pro- 
 bably with  a  view  to  greater  privacy,  withdraws 
 with  the  twelve  to  the  Northern  Bethsaida  (called 
 Julias  by  the  tetrarch  Philip,  after  the  emperor's 
 daughter),  but  he  failed  to  find  the  quietness 
 which  he  sought.  His  fame  attracted  crowds  from 
 the  villages  and  towns  of  the  north  shore  of  the 
 Sea  of  Galilee.  He  was  not  indifferent  to  their 
 earnest  though  scarcely  intelligent  longing  after 
 him  ;  and  in  compassion  to  their  wants  he  wrought 
 what  in  some  respects  was  the  most  imposing  of 
 all  his  miracles.  On  the  slender  sore  of  five 
 loaves  and  two  fishes,  he  satisfied  the  craving 
 appetite  of  5000  men,  besides  women  and  children 
 (Matt.  xiv.  21),  leaving  a  hoard  of  fragments 
 enough  to  fill  twelve  baskets.  This  marvellous 
 exhibition  of  creative  power,  which  so  greatly 
 excelled  the  analogous  miracle  of  the  pr':phet 
 Elisha,  2  Kings  iv.  42-44,  produced  an  extreme 
 
TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 660 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Eensation  ;  and  while  some  lauded  him  as  the  long 
 expected  prophet  who  was  to  introduce  Messiah, 
 others  were  lor  going  so  far  as  to  set  him  up  as 
 the  very  theocratic  King  himself  (John  vi.  14,  15). 
 To  evade  their  importunity,  Jesus  retired  to  a  soli- 
 tary upland  on  the  north-east  of  the  lake,  having 
 requested  his  disciples  to  return  to  the  western 
 side.  Another  ,of  the  furious  storms  so  usual  on 
 those  waters  impeded  for  hours  the  vessel  in  which 
 they  were  crossing.  With  an  astonishment  which 
 far  exceeded  the  emotions  with  which  they  had 
 viewed  the  recent  miracle,  the  twelve  saw  the  Lord 
 walking  on  the  troubled  waves,  as  if  to  pass  them 
 (Mark  vi.  48).  He  soothed  their  bewilderment 
 with  reassuring  words,  and  permitted  Peter  to 
 attempt  to  approach  him  on  the  water.  He  sus- 
 tained the  sinking  apostle  until  they  were  received 
 into  the  ship.  The  storm  then  ceased  ;  their  faith 
 rose  higher  still,  and  they  exclaimed,  '  Of  a  truth, 
 thou  art  the  Son  of  God  ! '  (Matt.  xiv.  33).  A 
 hasty  but  not  ineffectual  visit  again  to  the  east 
 shore  of  Gennesaret  is  related  by  SS.  Matthew  and 
 Mark,  during  which  he  was  pleased  to  disperse 
 broadcast  gifts  of  healing  to  the  eager  crowds  of 
 town  and  country  (Matt.  xiv.  35  ;  Mark  vi.  56)  ; 
 and  the  supplemental  narrative  of  St.  John  then 
 winds  up  the  history  of  the  second  year's  ministry. 
 Discourse  iit  the  Synagogue  of  Capernaum. 
 Apostacv  of  many. — The  material  benefits  of  food 
 and  health  had  by  this  time  attracted  numbers  to 
 Christ,  who  had  formed  no  seemly  views  of  his 
 spiritual  kingdom.  This  was  only  too  likely  to 
 foster  the  worldly  opinions  which  were  so  rife 
 about  the  Messiah.  The  Lord  therefore  deter- 
 mines to  correct  the  error,  and  to  sift  the  sincerity 
 of  his  followers.  In  a  discourse  full  of  the  pro- 
 foundest  mysteries  of  man's  spiritual  relation*  to 
 
 *  Our  Lord's  bearing  towards  his  relatives  de- 
 serves mention  in  connection  with  this  point  in 
 our  history.  It  was  on  one  occasion,  during  this 
 year's  ministry  in  Galilee,  that  a  somewhat  urgent 
 request  was  made  to  Jesus  to  gratify  the  wish  of 
 his  mother  and  his  brethren,  who  were  awaiting 
 an  interview.  He  was  at  the  moment  engaged  in 
 an  earnest  discourse  on  the  blasphemy  of  the 
 Scribes  and  Pharisees.  So,  instead  of  breaking 
 off  immediately  to  salute  his  kinsfolk,  he  seized 
 the  opportunity  of  assuring  the  bystanders,  that  by 
 their  regeneration  his  disciples  enjoyed  a  nearer 
 relation  to  him  than  even  mother  or  bretliren 
 (Matt.  xii.  46-50).  Probably  we  may  best  explain 
 on  this  same  principle  the  apparent  distance  of 
 manner  which  he  shewed  his  mother  at  the  mar- 
 riage-festival of  Cana  at  the  beginning  of  his  public 
 course.  liighteen  years  before  he  had  intimated 
 tc  her  that  he  had  a  work  before  him  which  she 
 knew  not  of  (Luke  ii.  49,  50).  He  was  now  at 
 Cana  taking  in  hand  his  divine  '  Father's  business,' 
 and  was  about  to  build  up  a  spi7-itual  household. 
 This  would  bring  out  to  view  a  changed  relation 
 between  him  and  his  human  mother.  She  seems, 
 hoM'ever,  to  have  stood  more  on  her  natural  tie  to 
 hii»  than  was  convenient,  when  she  urged  him  to 
 work  his  earliest  miracle.  So  our  Lord's  words  to 
 hei  contained,  it  is  certain,  a  tender  rebuke  (John 
 ii.  4),  and  it  was  not  until  her  subsequent  act  of 
 faith  (ver.  5),  that  the  Lord  actually  complied  with 
 her  request.  After  his  resurrection  we  hnd  this 
 posfponevient  of  all  himtau  connection  and  feeling  to 
 spiritual  relationship,  in   the   Saviour's   emphatic 
 
 the  Saviour  he  gives  them  to  understand  that  il 
 was  not  by  an  earthly  career  of  popularity,  excite- 
 ment, and  dominion,  that  he  meant  to  set  up  his 
 throne  amongst  them — nor  by  physical  food  was 
 he  about  to  feed  them.  As  before  to  the  woman 
 of  .Sychar  he  promised  water  better  than  Jacob's 
 well  ever  produced,  to  slake  her  thirst,  so  now  to 
 the  men  of  Capernaum  he  offers  a  bread  better 
 than  the  manna  of  their  fathers,  his  own  flesh — the 
 bread  of  life,  which  should  satisfy  their  appetite 
 for  ever,  and  impart  to  the  eater  an  eternal  life. 
 The  murmurs  which  the  envious  '  Jews '  first  raised 
 (John  vi.  41,  52)  soon  spread  to  his  disciples. 
 Numbers  of  them  exclaimed  against  his  doctrine  as 
 harsh  and  intolerable  (ver.  60),  and  'from  that 
 time  went  back  and  walked  no  more  with  him' 
 (ver.  66).  Painful  as  was  this  large  secession,  it 
 was  not  altogether  unexpected  (ver.  64)  by  Jesus, 
 to  whom  it  was  no  doubt  a  real  pleasure  to  dis- 
 cover, at  this  trying  moment,  that  they  who  had 
 been  the  especial  objects  of  his  instructing  care 
 were  making  great  advances  in  spiritual  know- 
 ledge. His  touching  appeal  to  the  apostles  drew 
 from  them,  through  their  mouth-piece  Peter,  the 
 grand  confession,  '  We  believe  and  are  sure  that 
 thou  art  that  Christ,  the  son  of  the  living  God ' 
 (ver.  69).* 
 
 End  of  the  second  year.  — And  thus  terminated 
 that  year  of  grace  and  love.  Sad  it  is  to  reflect 
 that  after  all  its  most  lavish  expenditure  of  miracu- 
 lous energy,  and  faithful  admonitions  and  sublime 
 recommendations  of  the  truth,  only  twelve  public 
 adherents  of  Christ  were  at  last  found  in  Galilee  of 
 all  the  multitudes  that  had  been  moved  to  follow 
 him  !  The  ultimate  result  of  the  Redeemer's  mis- 
 sion to  his  own  nation  is  told  by  the  fourth  evan- 
 gelist in  few  but  expressive  Vi'ords  :  '  He  came 
 unto  his  own,  but  his  own  received  him  not'  We 
 have  by  this  time  seen  how  much  of  the  crime  of 
 that  rejection  was  accomplished  in  this  the  most 
 active  year  of  the  Lord's  ministerial  career,  and  in 
 the  province  he  had  most  favoured  with  his  pre- 
 sence. 
 
 Sect.  3.  The  Third  Passover. — The  last  year 
 of  the  ministry,  as  in  many  other  respects,  so  at 
 its  very  beginning,  differs  from  the  two  preceding. 
 We  have  seen  how  the  Lord  exercised  a  control 
 over  the  Sabbath,  we  now  find  him  using  a  discre- 
 tion with  regard  to  the  great  feast.  Though  it  was 
 his  principle  '  to  fulfil  all  righteousness,'  he  yet 
 absented  himself  from  the  present  Passover  to  pre- 
 vent any  premature  outbreak  of  the  Pharisaic  ma- 
 hgnants,  whose  plans  were  laid  for  his  destruction. 
 'Jesus  would  not  walk  in  Jewry,'  says  St.  John, 
 
 prohibition  of  the  Magdalene's  ofitered  embrace. 
 She  must  not  touch  him  with  the  bodily  touch  ; 
 but  wait  for  that  gift  of  the  Spirit,  after  the  ascen- 
 sion, which  should  enable  her  to  embrace  and 
 touch  him  with  the  hand  of  faith  (John  xx.  17). 
 And  at  the  cross,  besides  the  transfer  of  inert 
 human  loi'e,  implied  in  the  Saviour's  beautiful  act 
 of  commending  his  mother  to  the  beloved  disciple's 
 care,  there  was  surely  the  inseparable  bond  of  a 
 spiritual  relationship  more  closely  cemented  amidst 
 the  solemnity  of  that  awful  hour  (John  xix.  26, 
 
 27)- 
 
 *  Or,  according  to  Tischendorf  and  Griesbach, 
 'Thou  art  the  Holy  One  of  God.'  This  is  also 
 accepted  by  Alford  [5th  edit.  ] ;  but  the  readings 
 greatly  vary. 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 5(31 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 in  reference  to  this  time,  '  because  the  Jews  sought 
 to  kill  him'  (vii.  i).  But  he  was  not  wholly  to 
 escape  from  their  opposition.  At  Capernaum  he 
 has  to  justify  his  disciples  (in  noticeable  similarity 
 to  the  apology  he  made  for  them  at  the  beginning 
 of  the  former  year)  for  eating  with  '  unwashen 
 hands'  (Matt.  xv.  ;  Mark  vii.)  He  makes  this  an 
 opportunity  of  again  vindicating  moral  truth  from 
 the  miserable  traditions  with  which  the  Scribes  and 
 the  Pharisees  had  overlaid  it.  Unclean  hearts,  not 
 unwashen  hands  it  is,  which  defile  the  man  ;  and 
 he  quotes  against  them,  with  much  severity,  Isaiah's 
 prophecy  (xxix.  13),  illustrating  it  by  their  own 
 evasion  of  the  fifth  commandment  under  the  hypo- 
 critical maxim  of  '  Corban.'' 
 
 Ministry  in  N.  Galilee. — One  of  the  points  of 
 contrast  between  the  present  and  the  preceding 
 years  of  the  Great  Teacher's  career,  is  the  predo- 
 minance in  it  of  teaching  and  preaching  above 
 miraculous  display  (see  Bishop  Ellicotl,  Lectures, 
 pp.  204-207).  Miracles,  indeed,  he  still  wrought, 
 and  with  the  usual  effect  of  eliciting  from  the  mul- 
 titudes, not  their  admiration  only,  but  their 
 homage  ;  but  he  did  this  in  neio  scenes  of  labour, 
 and  in  some  instances  beyond  the  bounds  of  '  the 
 land  of  Israel.'  In  the  neighbourhood  of  Tyre 
 and  Sidon,  he,  in  answer  to  the  admirable  faith 
 and  humility  of  the  Syrophenician  woman,  healed 
 her  daughter,  who  was  'grievously  vexed  with 
 a  devil'  (Matt.  xv.  22).  The  precise  spot  where 
 this  happened  is  not  mentioned.  The  Lord,  who 
 had  probably  retired  so  far  north  out  of  the 
 way  of  Herod's  jurisdiction,  seems,  from  the 
 best  attested  reading  of  Mark  vii.  31,  to  have 
 been  journeying  at  that  time  to  Sidon  (e|eXS-d)i' 
 iK  rCov  bpiwv  Ti'ipou  ffK'^iv  5td  "Zlowvos  is,  after 
 NBDLA  and  other  manuscripts,  adopted  by  Tis- 
 chendorf  and  Tregelles,  as  well  as  Lachmann). 
 From  this  great  Gentile  city,  the  utmost  limit  of 
 our  Lord's  travels  in  that  direction,  he,  in  a 
 journey  of  as  much  privacy  as  possible,  crossed 
 the  Jordan  above  its  uppermost  lake,  '  the  waters 
 of  Merom,'  and  so  approached  the  Sea  of  Genne- 
 saret  on  its  east  side,  through  the  Northern  Deca- 
 polis — still  beyond  the  territories  of  Herod  Antipas, 
 whose  hostility  to  the  Redeemer  had  probably 
 been  pi'ocured  by  the  Pharisees  through  the  aid  of 
 their  new  allies  the  Herodians.  This  unnatural 
 league  Christ  warned  his  disciples  to  beware  of 
 under  the  metaphor  of  leaven — '  the  leaven  of  the 
 Pharisees  and  the  leaven  of  Herod'  (Mark  viii.  15) 
 — intolerant  bigotry  united  to  mere  worldliness  in 
 an  "effort  to  destroy  the  truth,  which  was  as  much 
 opposed  to  the  heartless  formalism  of  the  one,  as 
 it  was  to  the  unprincipled  levity  of  the  other.  The 
 solitary  miracle  of  Phoenicia  was  followed,  on 
 Christ's  arrival  in  Decapolis,  by  another,  which  St. 
 Mark  alone  describes  (vii.  31-37).  This  healing  of 
 the  deaf  and  dumb  man,  like  that  wrought  shortly 
 afterwards  on  the  blind  man  of  Bethsaida  Julias 
 (Mark  viii.  22-26),  is  noticeable  for  a  few  peculiar 
 features,  the  reason  of  which  we  are  not  informed 
 of.  In  both  cases  the  Lord  withdrew  the  men 
 from  the  gaze  of  the  multitude,  restored  them  to 
 soundness  by  gradual  and  apparently  laboured 
 processes,  and  prohibited  the  publication  of  the 
 miracles.     In  the  former  instance,  indeed,  this  in- 
 
 I 'unction  was  emphatically  disobeyed.  Instead  of 
 :eeping  silence,  they  raised  a  chorus  of  praise 
 throughout  Decapolis  :  '  He  hath  done  all  things 
 well — He  maketh  both  the  deaf  to  hear  and  the 
 VOI.  II. 
 
 dumb  to  speak  ! '  While  on  these  eastern  shores 
 of  the  lake,  and  in  the  interval  between  these 
 similar  miracles,  our  Lord  repeated  his  stupendous 
 display  of  creative  power  by  feeding  the  four 
 thousand  with  the  seven  loaves  and  a  few  small 
 fishes  in  the  wilderness.  The  effort  which  certain 
 writers,  for  instance  De  Wette  (on  Matt.  xv.  29) 
 and  Neander  {Life  of  Christ  [Bohn]  p.  287,  note), 
 make  to  identify  this  with  the  like  feeding  of  the 
 five  thousand,  is  refuted  by  Christ's  own  distinct 
 mention  of  both  (see  Matt.  xvi.  9,  10,  a-nd  Mark 
 viii.  19,  20.  For  an  examination  of  the  minute 
 points  of  difference  in  these  great  and  similar 
 miracles,  Bishop  Ellicott,  Lectures,  pp.  221,  222 
 and  notes,  is  worth  consulting).  We  have  said 
 that  in  this  period  of  the  Saviour's  ministry,  more 
 of  the  didactic  than  of  the  viiracidons  element 
 occurs.  His  first  object  now  seems  to  be  more 
 than  ever  the  instruction  of  his  followers,  of  the 
 twelve  especially.  They  have  many  prejudices  to 
 unlearn,  and  still  more  of  spiritual  truth  to  learn. 
 In  this  purpose  of  teaching  the  disciples  we  have 
 probably  the  chief  reason  of  the  privacy  which 
 characterised  our  Lord's  movements  at  this  time. 
 Various  occasions  are  mentioned  suggesting  various 
 methods  of  imparting  his  divine  instructions. 
 
 Didactic  character  of  the  Ministry  of  this  period, 
 — Besides  his  long  exposure  of  the  Pliarisaic  tra 
 ditions  at  Capernaum,  while  vindicating  his  dis- 
 ciples from  the  charge  to  which  we  have  already 
 referred,  of  eating  with  unwashen  hands,  there  is 
 his  angry  rebuke  of  the  sign-seeking  Pharisees  and 
 Sadducees  near  Magdala.  While  he  indignantly 
 refused  to  gratify  their  insolent  and  treacherous 
 curiosity,  he  yet,  with  an  emotion  of  grief  at  their 
 hai'sh  hostility,  intimated  to  them,  under  '  the 
 sign  of  the  prophet  Jonas'  (Matt.  xvi.  4),  the  con- 
 summation of  his  own  sacrifice,  from  the  benefit  of 
 which  their  wilfulness  would  be,  alas  !  too  sure  a 
 bar  to  them.  This  sign,  however,  if  hidden  to 
 their  unbehef,  would  serve  with  many  other  signifi- 
 cant hints  to  help  the  faith  of  his  apostles  ;  and  it 
 needed  help  !  What  ebbing  and  flowing  of  in- 
 telligence did  they  not  exhibit !  For  instance, 
 when  Christ,  shortly  afterwards  in  his  desire  to 
 caution  them  against  the  machinations  of  the 
 malignants,  designated  their  principles  as  '  the 
 leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees,'  the 
 twelve  were  so  dull  as  to  construe  his  plain  meta- 
 phor literally,  as  if  he  were  only  rebuking  them 
 for  a  failure  of  their  loaf-store !  Such  stolidity 
 was  a  great  hindrance  to  the  Saviour  in  his  tuition 
 of  the  twelve.  But  his  patience  under  it  all  was 
 inexhaustible,  and  his  very  rebukes  won  them  to 
 conviction  by  their  graciousness.  We  have  already 
 referred  to  the  healing  of  the  blind  man  of  Bethsaida 
 Julias,  which  belongs  to  this  place.  This  happened 
 on  our  Lord's  journey  northward  to  Caesarea 
 Philippi,  or  Paneas.  Here  in  this  remote  seclusion 
 occurred  some  of  the  most  striking  points  of  his 
 ministerial  occupation.  Intent  on  educating  his 
 faithful  followers  for  the  great  events  which  were 
 now  not  far  off,  he  drew  them,  during  one  of  their 
 walks  among  the  villages  of  Cassarea  (Mark  viii. 
 27),  into  a  conversation  respecting  himself,  'the 
 Son  of  Man.'  After  hearing  their  report  of  others' 
 opinions,  he  pointedly  asked  them:  'But  whom 
 say  ye  that  I  am  ? '  and  from  the  forward  lips  of 
 Peter,  the  spokesman  of  the  rest,  he  heard  the 
 gratifying  confession,  which  proved  that  his  labours 
 had  not  been  thrown  away    notwithstanding  the 
 
 2  O 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 562 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 tardiness  of  iheir  minds  :  '  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the 
 son  of  the  hving  God'  (Matt.  xvi.  i6).  But  they 
 must  not  divulge  this  mysteiy  of  Messianic  truth. 
 It  would  be  premature.  Men's  spiritual  faculties 
 were  all  unprepared  to  receive  so  sublime  a 
 doctrine,  which  must  therefore  be  guarded  in 
 respectful  silence  until  the  divine  plan  was  maturely 
 developed  (Luke  ix.  21).  Grand,  however,  was 
 the  encomium  which  the  apostle's  noble  conviction 
 called  forth  from  the  admiring  Saviour,  and  in  his 
 faith  was  laid  the  foundation  of  the  church  as  on 
 an  impregnable  rock,  proof  against  the  powers  of 
 darkness  (Matt.  xvi.  17-19).  But  there  was  a 
 context  in  that  Messianic  truth  which  the  apostle 
 had  not  heeded.  The  glorious  side  of  it  he  readily 
 enough  embraced  ;  but  the  aspect  of  affliction  and 
 death  offended  him.  So  when  Jesus  proceeded 
 for  the  first  time  in  explicit  words  to  shew  unto 
 his  disciples  the  awful  catastrophe  which  was  before 
 long  to  happen  at  Jerusalem,  the  same  Peter  is  as 
 prompt  in  deprecation  as  before  in  faith  :  '  Be  it 
 far  from  thee,  Lord,  this  shall  not  be  unto  thee.' 
 The  Master's  altered  tone  is  as  emphatic  as  his 
 disciple's.  In  words  of  severest  rebuke  he  con- 
 demned the  apostle's  interruption  as  an  interfer- 
 ence with  the  pui'poses  of  God,  which  savoured  as 
 strongly  of  the  world's  inspiration  (ver.  23)  as  his 
 former  faith  had  of  heaven  (ver.  17).  The  cross, 
 however,  must  be  borne  (ver.  24)  by  those  who 
 would  wear  the  crown.  They  must,  therefore, 
 resign  themselves  with  heart  and  will  to  that  dis- 
 pensation of  suffering,  with  him  and  for  him,  which 
 (however  little  they  had  regarded  it)  was  yet  ap- 
 pointed as  the  precursor  of  even  Messiah's  gloiy, 
 and  the  inevitable  probation  of  the  subjects  of  his 
 kingdom. 
 
 The  Transfiguration. — To  assure  them  of  the 
 glories  of  that  kingdom,  and  to  encourage  them 
 for  the  endurance  of  the  trials  which  were  to  pre- 
 pare them  for  it,  he,  a  week  after  this  discourse, 
 while  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Csesarea,  and  most 
 probably  '  on  one  of  the  lofty  spurs  of  the  snow- 
 capt  Hermon'  (for  the  preference  oiihis  mountain 
 over  the  more  southern  Tabor,  see  Bishop  Ellicott, 
 Lectures,  p.  226),  revealed  to  the  three  of  the 
 twelve  (Peter,  James,  and  John),  whom  he  occa- 
 sionally chose  out  for  especial  offices  (comp.  Mark 
 v.  37  ;  ix.  2  ;  xiv.  33),  a  view  of  his  glorified  con- 
 dition in  the  wonderful  Transfiguration,  which  is 
 described  in  the  three  synoptical  gospels,  and  ex- 
 pressly alluded  to  by  the  two  apostles,  who  lived 
 to  hand  down  their  writings  to  the  church  (see 
 John  i.  14  ;  2  Peter  i.  16-18).  Over  the  details  of 
 this  glorious  scene — the  Redeemer's  pure  efful- 
 gence v}-ing  with  the  '  glistering'  brightness  of 
 the  snows  of  the  mountain  on  which  he  stood 
 (comp.  the  equally  glorious  and  still  fuller  descrip- 
 tion by  St.  John,  Rev.  i.  13-16)  ;  the  presence  of 
 Moses  and  Elias,  '  speaking  of  his  decease  which 
 he  was  to  accomplish  at  Jerusalem,'  and  tlius  giv- 
 ing the  vouchers  of  the  law  and  the  prophets  to 
 that  portion  of  Messiah's  mission,  which  all  men 
 then  failed  to  recognise,  even  his  humiliation  and 
 death  (Laike  ix.  31)  ;  and  the  conduct  of  the 
 apostles  in  the  midst  of  all — we  must  not  tarry. 
 This  scene,  though  the  reverse  of  Gethsemane, 
 presents  to  us  the  same  three  apostles  as  similarly 
 affected  under  the  extremes  alike  of  glory  and 
 humiliation.  On  both  occasions  they  were  over- 
 come with  sleep  (comp.  Luke  ix.  32  with  xxii.  45); 
 thus  presenting  to  us  an  expressive  contrast  to  him, 
 
 whose  sensibility  and  care  never  flagged  at  any 
 step  he  took  in  the  accomplishment  of  his  mission. 
 Like  the  rest  of  his  recent  communications,  this 
 revelation  of  glory  and  suffering  was  to  be  kept 
 secret  until  after  his  resurrection  (Mark  ix.  9)— a 
 limitation  of  period  which  excited  strange  ques- 
 tioning among  themselves  (ver.  10)  ;  as  did  a  simi- 
 lar prophecy,  afterwards  given  them  on  their 
 return  to  Galilee,  wherein  the  Lord  with  increasing 
 explicitness  foretold  to  them  the  particulars  of  his 
 approaching  passion  (Matt.  xvii.  22,  23).  With 
 anxious  timidity  they  kept  these  things  to  them- 
 selves, afraid  to  open  even  to  Christ  the  subject  for 
 explanation.  The  weakness  of  their  faith  had  re- 
 ceived a  more  practical  and  obvious  exposure 
 shortly  before  their  departure  from  Caesarea  Phil- 
 ippi.  A  lunatic  youth  had  been  submitted  by  his 
 father  for  cure,  in  the  Saviour's  absence  on  the 
 Mount,  to  the  nine  apostles.  After  they  had 
 tried  in  vain  to  cast  out  the  evil  spirit,  Jesus  at 
 once  wrought  the  miraculous  restoration — upbraid- 
 ing the  faithlessness  of  the  perverse  generation, 
 and  convicting  his  own  companions  of  a  want  of 
 that  spirit  of  self-denial  and  humility  which  so 
 characterised  everything  he  did  and  said  himself 
 (Mark  ix.  14-29).  Two  circumstances  which  hap- 
 pened after  their  return  to  Capernaum  from  the 
 north  indicate  how  far  they  were  yet  from  realising 
 the  nnzvorldly  nature  of  Christ's  kingdom.  Rather 
 than  appear  to  slight  any  legal  demand  made  of 
 him,  he,  by  a  miracle,  provides  the  fee  of  the 
 temple-tribute,  so  unwilling  was  he  to  encourage 
 any  thought  of  exemption  from  law,  even  in  a  case 
 where  exemption  might  well  have  been  asserted 
 (Matt.  xvii.  26).  In  no  sense  would  he  have  them 
 believe  that  his  kingdom  was  of  this  world.  Far 
 other  thoughts  were  in  the  minds  of  his  disciples. 
 They  were  dreaming  of  the  establishment  of  a 
 material  kingdom,  and  were  beguiling  themselves 
 with  a  dispute  about  their  own  rank  and  superio- 
 rity in  the  new  dominion.  This  section  of  the 
 Galilean  ministry  accordingly  ends  in  a  series  ot 
 cognate  exhortations,  in  which  the  Saviour  rebukes 
 the  ambition  of  his  scholars  by  the  example  of  a 
 little  child.  Humility  and  not  ambition  would 
 entitle  them  to  exaltation  in  his  kingdom  !  (Matt, 
 xviii.  4).  Guilelessness  and  self-sacrifice  would 
 also  be  a  good  security  for  the  recompense  of 
 heaven  (vers.  8,  9),  and  so  would  a  forgiving  tem- 
 per be  (vers.  15-35).  These  cardinal  virtues  of 
 Christian  lowliness,  so  little  understood  as  yet  by 
 the  disciples,  Jesus  inculcated  for  the  sake  of  a 
 deeper  impression  by  some  touching  parables.  We 
 are  now  arrived  at  the  termination  of  the  former 
 moiety  of  the  third  year's  ministry.  '  The  Jews' 
 feast  of  tabernacles  was  at  hand,'  and  the  Lord  is 
 about  to  quit  his  long  residence  in  Gahlee,  never 
 more  to  resume  it.* 
 
 Sect.  iv.  Christ  after  his  departure  froin 
 Galilee  ;  his  anticipation  of  Death. — There  is  some- 
 thing very  grand  in  St.  Luke's  conception  of  the 
 last  six  months'  labours  of  Christ.  As  early  as  the 
 51st  verse  of  his  chap,  ix.,  he  withdraws  him  from 
 
 *  The  statement  that  the  Lord  never  again  re- 
 sumed his  residence  in  Galilee  will  not  be  deemed 
 contradictory  to  the  view  which  we  take  in  a  sub- 
 sequent part  of  this  article,  where,  in  his  ultimate 
 circuit  of  the  whole  country,  we  make  him  once 
 n\ove  pass  through  Galilee  (Luke  xvii.  Ii). 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 his  great  Galilean*  career,  and  commences  the  nar- 
 rative of  what  he  designates  the  Lord^s  journeying 
 to  Jcrusale-m.  In  contrast  with  the  locally  fixed 
 and  limited  character  of  his  northern  residence,  this 
 migratoriness  is  a  just  description  of  the  latter 
 history.  In  the  verse  just  referred  to  we  have  the 
 key-note  :  '  It  came  to  pass  when  the  time  was 
 come  that  he  should  be  received  up  [the  dva\-r}\pLS  = 
 his  ascension  or  assumption  back  to  his  glory  in 
 heaven — Euthymius  in  Arnold,  De  Wette,  and 
 especially  Meyer  and  Bleek,  in  /ocl,  he  steadfastly 
 set  his  face  to  go  to  Jerusalem.'  In  this  journeying 
 to  his  death — these  '  funeral  marches  to  the  grave ' 
 — how  finely  does  the  sacred  narrative  set  before 
 us  his  firm  and  earnest  look  towards  Jerusalem 
 as  the  scene  of  his  approaching  sacrifice  !  [Tb 
 TrpdawTTov  avrou  icTTrjpi^e  rod  nopevea'd-ai  els  lepocr- 
 ffaXrjp..]  He  will  not  indeed  throw  away  his  pre- 
 cious life,  however  due  he  knows  it  to  be  to  a 
 violent  death  ;  nay,  he  more  than  once  withdraws 
 frcra  danger,  to  which  he  at  last  only  succumbs 
 when  '  his  hour  is  fully  come  ! '  Like  a  clue  we 
 can  trace  this  migration  of  Christ  through  the 
 remainder  of  St.  Luke — comp.  ix.  53,  56,  57  ;  x. 
 38  ;  xiii.  33  ;  xvii.  ;  and  xix.  28,  36. 
 
 //is  Missionaries — the  Sei'cnty. — While  yet  in 
 Galilee  his  brethren,  who  had  no  intelligent  faith  in 
 his  mission  (John  vii.  7),  urged  him  to  remove  to 
 the  metropolis,  and  there  exhibit  the  mighty  power 
 which  had  raised  so  great  a  sensation  in  the  north. 
 They  bhndly  thought  that  he  would  perhaps 
 achieve  some  national  greatness — possibly  the  as- 
 sumption of  the  Messiahship — which  might  even 
 reflect,  though  they  hardly  knew  how,  some  glory 
 on  themselves.  (On  the  character  of  the  brethren's 
 unbelief,  see  a  good  note  of  Bishop  EUicott,  Lec- 
 tures, p.  246.)  Their  self-seeking  expectations  the 
 Lord  repudiates,  and  refuses  to  accompany  them  to 
 Jerusalem.  In  tliis  refusal  too  many,  from  Porphyry 
 [' inconstantiK  ac  mutationis  accusat,'  St.  Jerome 
 says  of  him,  adv.  Pelag.  ii.  ;  see  also  Ullmann, 
 Sundlos.  Jes.,  by  Brown,  p.  191]  to  Meyer,  have 
 discovered  an  evidence  of  weakness  and  a  faltering 
 purpose  !  Unjustly  !  The  Loi-d's  words,  fairly, 
 deny  only  his  intention  to  travel  with  his  brethren, 
 whose  unsympathising  ambition  would  unfit  them 
 to  be  his  companions.  He  rather  implies  some 
 intention  of  going  up  in  the  very  terms  of  his 
 refusal  \ex.  gr.,  in  the  o£(7ra)  avo.^aXvtxi  of  John  vii.  8]. 
 Nor  will  his  retinue  be  unworthy  of  the  true  Mes- 
 siah. On  the  departure  of  his  brethren,  he  de- 
 spatches some  apostolic  messengers  to  prepare  his 
 way  through  Samaria,  the  less  frequented  road  from 
 
 ^63 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 *  In  our  Sect.  ii.  above,  we  have,  following 
 Robinson,  placed  a  passage  or  two  of  Luke  xi.  and 
 xii.  in  the  Galilean  ministry,  because  of  the  parallel 
 places  of  the  other  evangelists.  It  will,  however, 
 be  seen  that  the  subjects  of  these  passages  [Expo- 
 sures of  Pharasaism)  are  very  general,  and  might 
 in  fact  be  referred  quite  as  well  to  other  parts  of 
 the  ministiy.  In  some  other  dislocations  of  St. 
 Luke  by  this  excellent  harmonist,  ex.  gr.,  in  x.  i- 
 16,  and  xvii.  11-19  [see  his  Jlannony,  Eng.  ed. , 
 pp.  89,  90],  which  are  of  a  more  marked. character, 
 we  have  felt  ourselves  unable  to  follow  him.  To 
 our  mind,  after  a  careful  examination,  it  is  ex- 
 tremely doubtful  whether  St.  Luke  has  in  any  case 
 departed  from  that  order  of  time  and  place  which 
 in  the  opening  of  his  gospel  he  undertakes  to 
 follow. 
 
 the  north  to  the  capital.  Nor  is  this  all.  With  a 
 solemnity  suitable  to  his  last  extensive  effort  to 
 prepare  men's  hearts  for  the  reception  of  his 
 kingdom,  he  commissions  no  less  than  seventy  of 
 his  most  devoted  followers  to  disperse  themselves 
 in  five  and  thirty  different  companies,  with  instruc- 
 tions rebcmbling  those  he  had  given  to  the  twelve 
 (only  more  urgent,  as  in  view  of  the  increasing  hos- 
 tility of  the  nation).  They  were  to  go  '  before  his 
 face  into  every  city  and  place,  whither  he  himself 
 was  about  to  come'  (Luke  x.  l).  So  that,  how- 
 ever widely  spread  were  the  Lord's  last  migrations 
 — a  sort  of  compendious  visitation,  embracing  the 
 entire  country  (Luke  .xvii.  11) — he  seems  to  have 
 gone  no  whither  without  a  plan,  and  a  previous 
 announcement  of  his  approach. 
 
 Samaria. — While  taking  his  journey  through  the 
 district  west  of  the  Jordan  in  comparative  quietude 
 (01;  (pavepw's,  John  vii.  lo),  as  off  the  usual  caravan- 
 route  to  the  festivals,  he  had  to  bear  the  slight  of 
 the  Samaritans,  who,  perceiving  him  to  be  bent  on 
 passing  by  their  Gerizim  to  visit  the  city  and  temple, 
 which  were  so  hateful  to  them,  and  forgetful  of 
 their  former  devotion  to  him,  refused  to  receive  him 
 (Luke  ix.  53).  This  indignity  kindled  the  resent- 
 ment of  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  and  they  gave  a 
 strong  proof  (and  that  not  a  solitary  one,  Mark  x. 
 38)  of  their  ignorance  of  their  master's  character, 
 and  of  the  spirit  which  was  due  to  their  associa- 
 tion with  him  (ver.  55),  by  appealing  to  one  of  the 
 severest  instances  of  vengeance  on  record,  and  re- 
 questing a  repetition  of  it  on  the  present  occasion 
 (ver.  54).  He  was,  however,  not  utterly  uncheered 
 by  some  demonstration  of  favourable  feeling  in 
 Samaria.  One  eagerly  desired  to  attach  himself  to 
 his  company  (ver.  57)  whom  the  Lord  saw  fit  to 
 warn  of  the  self-denial  which  such  an  adhesion 
 would  cost  liim  (ver.  58). 
 
 Jerusalem  ;  Feast  of  Tabernacles. — The  eight  days' 
 festival  was  half-expired  (John  vii.  14)  \vhen  Jesus 
 appeared  in  the  Temple.  Great  expectation  seems 
 to  have  been  formed  of  his  coming.  Graphically 
 does  St.  John  describe  the  freedom  with  which  his 
 character  was  canvassed.  The  multitude,  as  usual, 
 felt  favourably  towards  him.  The  authorities  were 
 more  than  ever  hostile,  and  laying  plans  for  his 
 apprehension.  Their  officers  (not  unlike  those  who 
 were  afterwards  sent  to  arrest  him  in  Gethsemane), 
 awed  by  the  majesty  of  his  demeanour,  shrank 
 from  their  tmwelcome  office  amidst  the  taunts  of 
 their  heartless  einployers  (vers.  45-47)-  'Never 
 man  spake  like  this  man  ! '  was  all  the  answer  they 
 could  give  to  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees,  when 
 they  demanded  their  prisoner  at  their  hands.  But 
 it  was  not  the  people  only  who  favoured  Christ. 
 In  the  very  Sanhedrim  the  once  timid  but  now 
 courageous  Nicodemus  dared  to  demand,  that  the 
 council  should  at  least  proceed  by  legal  process  and 
 not  passion,  in  their  vindictive  efforts  against  him, 
 whose  secret  disciple  he  had  not  ceased  to  be,  ever 
 since  that  memorable  night  when  the  Lord  taught 
 him  the  mystery  of  the  second  birth.  The  malig- 
 nants  wreaked  their  impotent  rage  on  the  faithful 
 senator  by  taunts  and  gibes.  They  could  do  no 
 more  in  the  present  temper  of  the  populace,  whom 
 they  feared  while  professing  to  despise  them  (ver. 
 49).  Notwithstanding  the  great  doubtfulness  ot 
 its  critical  authority,  the  beautiful  history  of  '  the 
 woman  taken  in  adultery '  is  generally  held  to  be  a 
 trae  portion  of  inspired  Scripture,  and  fits  in  with- 
 !  out  inconvenience  at  this  place  and  time.     In  it  we 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 564 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 have  one  of  the  many  instances  of  the  wisdom 
 wherewith  the  Lord  baffled  the  Pharisaic  party  in 
 their  attempts  to  entrap  him  into  an  incautious  ex- 
 pression of  opinion  on  a  point  of  delicate  and  intri- 
 cate relation  to  the  Jewish  law.  While  still  at 
 Jerusalem,  on  the  Sabbath  after  the  feast,  Christ 
 wrought  the  noted  miracle,  which  we  have  already 
 referred  to,  of  giving  sight  to  the  man  born  blind 
 (John  ix. )  The  evangelist  to  whom  we  are  in- 
 debted for  the  account  of  it,  makes  the  miracle  an 
 iiistorical  occasion  for  a  grand  series  of  most  pro- 
 found discourses  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  which  vary  in 
 character  from  those  which  he  had  been  speaking 
 in  Galilee,  and  from  those  which  he  afterwards  de- 
 livered, in  this  respect,  that  whereas  those  were 
 primarily  designed  as  instruction  to  believers  and 
 disciples,  these  were  addressed  to  the  Jewish  party 
 in  the  midst  of  their  hostility,  and  in  mild  though 
 earnest  rebuke  of  it.  His  hour  is  at  hand.  He 
 must  declaie  the  counsel,  as  well  as  work  the  works, 
 of  his  Father.  He,  therefore,  amidst  much  virulent 
 interruption  (accompanied,  however,  in  some  in- 
 stances with  an  effort  to  believe — John  viii.  30), 
 indicates  the  truth  of  his  mission,  sets  forth  his 
 divine  relation  to  God,  proclaims  himself  as  the 
 fight  of  the  world,  and  enlarges  on  his  own  person 
 and  salvation.  He  also  rebukes  the  degeneracy  of 
 the  nation,  and  exposes  the  unavailing  confidence 
 of  men  who,  while  boasting  of  their  descent  from 
 Abraham,  had  nothing  of  h\5  faith  :  he  shews  them 
 what  was  the  true  liberty  from  the  thraldom  of  sin 
 and  the  devil  with  which  he  was  ready  to  emanci- 
 pate them  ;  and  at  the  most  favourable  moment,  at 
 the  climax  of  the  festival,  he  with  gesture  and  lan- 
 guage of  surpassing  dignity,  offers  the  gift  of  his 
 Spirit  (John  vii.  39)  under  the  beautiful  figure 
 \\'hich  he  had  used  at  the  well  of  Sychar,  of  a  pure 
 and  flowing  stream,  whose  waters  should  for  ever 
 quench  the  thirst  of  the  weary  soul.  We  do  not 
 pretend  in  this  brief  notice  to  sketch  the  connection 
 of  these  discourses,  which  occupy  the  greater  part 
 of  four  chapters  of  St.  John  (vii. -x. );  the  reader 
 would  find  much  help  to  a  profounder  view  of  them 
 in  Dr.  Rudolf  S  tier's  Words  of  the  Lord  jfesus,  as 
 translated  by  Mr.  Pope,  vol.  v.,  pp.  243-507.  The 
 former  part  of  the  loth  chap,  contains  the  only 
 parable  given  by  St.  John,  that  of  the  Good  Shep- 
 ha-d.  It  is  not  a  Trapa^oXri,  a  parabolic  story  or 
 narrative,  like  those  of  the  synoptical  gospels  ;  but 
 a  irapoL/xia  or  amplified  proverb,  as  Stier  more  fully 
 points  out,  /.  c,  p.  463.  The  last  twenty  verses  of 
 the  same  chapter  carry  us  forward  from  the  October 
 of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  to  the  December  of  the 
 Feast  of  Dedication.  During  this  interval  Jesus  pro- 
 bably remained  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of 
 the  metropolis  to  make  the  last  experiment  of  his 
 love  in  efforts  to  reclaim  his  countrymen.  St.  John 
 is  silent  on  this  period  of  his  histoiy.  Some  events, 
 however,  mentioned  by  St.  Luke  (chaps,  x.,  xi.) 
 probably  best  fit  in  here. 
 
 I//s  stay  in  Judiva. — This  interval  was  spent,  it 
 would  appear,  in  comparative  quietness,  and  re- 
 sembles somewhat  the  latter  Galilean  ministry  in 
 its  didactic  character.  The  twelve  were  with  him, 
 and  the  seventy  return  to  him  at  this  time.  To  the 
 former,  who  request  instruction  in  the  great  duty 
 of  prayer,  Jesus  repeats  the  same  model-form  of 
 prayer  as  he  had  taught  in  his  sermon  on  the 
 mount  (Luke  xi.  2).  Only  he  now  insists  on  the 
 lesson  of  earnestness  and  importimity,  as  then  he 
 inculcated  forgiveness  of  injuries,  as  the  corollary 
 
 of  prayer ;  and  he  grounds  this  importunity  on  the 
 bountiful  mercy  of  their  heavenly  Father,  who  will 
 certainly  never  be  behind  any  earthly  parent  in  the 
 plenteousness  and  excellence  of  his  gifts  (ver.  13). 
 The  seventy  brought  him  a  report  of  their  simple 
 ministration,  which  seemed  to  fill  him  with  a  joy- 
 ous satisfaction.  His  intuition  saw  at  a  glance  in 
 the  success  of  these  plain  and  humble  men  a  sample 
 of  the  future  progress  of  his  kingdom,  triumphing 
 over  the  dominion  of  the  evil  one.  '  I  beheld 
 Satan,'  he  exultingly  exclaimed,  'as  lightning  fall 
 from  heaven  ! '  Only  not  let  them  grow  vain  at 
 their  success  ;  even  this  must  be  subordinate  in 
 their  joy  to  the  security  of  their  own  salvation 
 (Luke  xi.  20).  But  not  merely  to  his  own  followers 
 did  Jesus  confine  his  instruction.  The  touching 
 parable  of  the  Good  Sat?mrita!i,  which  St.  Luke 
 places  after  the  return  of  the  seventy  (x.  25-37), 
 was  directed  in  answer  to  the  '  tempting '  question 
 of  a  certain  lawyer,  and  to  illustrate  the  principle 
 of  love  to  onis  neighboicr.  The  scene  of  this 
 parable,  the  historical  occasion  of  which  we  only 
 set  down  here — omitting  the  deeper  theological  im- 
 port which  probably  underlies  it,  as  unsuitable  to 
 this  sketch  (see  Alford,  Gr.  Test.,  vol.  i.  [5th  ed.], 
 p.  542),  seems  to  imply  that  it  was  spoken  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  and  Bethany.  The 
 evangelist  in  the  same  chapter  introduces  us  to  the 
 family  of  Bethany,  our  Lord's  domestic  intercourse 
 with  which  forms  a  most  interesting  feature  in  his 
 later  ministry.  In  the  holy  quietude  of  his  visits 
 here  what  a  refreshing  contrast  we  have  to  the  hos- 
 tile turbulence  of  the  city  !  In  the  purity  of  his 
 love  for  the  brother  and  sisters  of  that  highly- 
 favoured  household  we  find  the  sublimest  consecra- 
 tion of  human  friendship  ;  while  the  tears  which  the 
 Redeemer  shed  over  that  brother's  grave  (John  xi. 
 35)  are  amongst  the  truest  evidences  which  the 
 sacred  history  affords  us  of  his  genuine  sympathy 
 with  man's  sorrows  (Heb.  iv.  15).  St.  Luke,  in  a 
 few  exquisite  touches  of  that  descriptive  power 
 which  adorns  the  four  gospels,  reveals  to  us  in 
 Martha  and  Mary  two  types  of  character  pei-petu- 
 ally  recurring  in  the  Church.  They  are  both  im- 
 pressed  with  the  loz'e  of  Christ,  and  are  ever  seeking 
 to  promote  his  cause.  The  Mary- type,  meekly 
 sitting  at  his  feet,  concentrates  its  energy  on  him, 
 and  wins  his  praise  for  its  undivided  love.  The 
 Martha-type,  full  of  nature,  yet  not  insincere  in 
 its  love,  permits  the  distraction  of  many  collateral 
 cares  {/j-epifivg^s  Kal  dopv^d^ri  irepl  rroXXd  are  the  ex- 
 pressive words  of  St.  Luke  x.  41),  which  does  not 
 forfeit  indeed  the  Saviour's  kindly  regard,  but 
 draws  from  him  a  rebuke,  the  very  gentleness  of 
 which — '  Martha,  Martha' — is  meant  to  reclaim  the 
 perturbed  soul  from  the  disquietude  of  many 
 troubles  to  the  needful  solace  of  a  simple  fealty  to 
 its  Lord. 
 
 The  Feast  of  Dedication. — This  anniversary,  in- 
 stituted by  Judas  Maccabaeus  in  memoiy  of  the 
 purification  of  the  temple  from  the  pollution  of 
 Antiochus  Epiphanes,  differed  from  the  other 
 Jewish  festivals  in  not  confining  its  celebration  to 
 the  metropolis.  Our  Lord,  however,  being  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  attended  the  feast  in 
 that  city.  The  crowds,  which  had  gathered  around 
 him  in  Solomon's  porch  where  he  walked  (pro- 
 bably to  avoid  the  inclemency  of  the  winter 
 weather),  with  a  grander  doctrine  to  declare  than 
 ever  fell  from  the  old  philosophers  in  their  re- 
 nowned stoa,  plied  him  with  hypocritical  petulance 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 565 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 to  solve  their  doubts  about  tlie  Messiahship.  '  If 
 thou  be  the  Christ,  tell  us  plainly  ! '  He  refers  them 
 to  his  late  discussions  at  the  treasury  and  the  public 
 miracle  connected  with  them.  These  plainly  indi- 
 cated that  his  mission  was  of  God,  and  they  ought 
 to  be  evidence  enough  to  them  for  the  decision  of 
 their  question.  '  If  I  do  not  the  works  of  my  Father, 
 believe  me  not.  But  if  I  do,  though  ye  believe 
 not  me,  believe  the  works.'  And  he  went  on  to 
 assert  his  own  divinity.  '  I  and  my  Father  are  one' 
 — 'The  Father  is  in  me,  and  I  in  him'  (John  x. 
 30,  39).  He  had  concluded  his  form.er  addresses 
 to  them  in  a  similarly  lofty  strain  ;  '  Verily,  verily, 
 I  say  unto  you,  before  Abraham  was,  I  am'  (viii. 
 58).  Then  they  took  up  [rjpav]  such  stones  as 
 were  casually  lying  in  their  way,  placed  there  no 
 doubt  for  the  building  of  the  yet  unfinished  Temple 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  8),  to  cast  at  him  ;  but  he 
 escaped  by  an  assertion  of  his  own  mighty  pro- 
 vidence, as  he  had  aforetime  from  a  like  critical 
 danger  at  Nazareth  (see  above).  On  the  present 
 occasion  they  interrupted  his  sublime  doctrine  by  a 
 second  recourse  to  stoning.  Only  this  time  they 
 seem  to  have  in  their  hatred  come  prepared  with 
 their  weapons  of  death  ;  i^daraaav  is  now  the 
 word  used  by  St.  John  (x.  31),  as  if  they  had 
 brought  the  stones  with  them.  Having  with  calm 
 resolution  delivered  to  them  his  noble  message, 
 and  having  no  further  purpose  to  serve  by  tarrying 
 amongst  them,  he  will  save  them  again  from  blood- 
 guiltiness,  and  so  escapes  out  of  their  hand  (ver.  39). 
 The  Peraan  or  Transjordafiic  Miiiistry. — Every 
 other  province  has  been  traversed ;  so  the  Lord, 
 driven  from  Jerusalem,  retires  across  the  Jordan, 
 where  the  field  had  been  some  time  ago  prepared 
 for  him  by  the  illustrious  Baptist.  That  holy  man's 
 labours  were  not  in  vain  ;  we  now  see  what  Bengel 
 calls  {Gnomon,  in  loc.)  their  'posthumous  fruits' 
 in  the  great  success  of  the  Saviour's  ministry.  St. 
 John  (x.  40-42)  intimates  that  Christ's  sojourn  was 
 a  lengthy  one  ;  and  he  expressly  informs  us,  that 
 
 '  many  resorted  unto  him many  believed  on 
 
 him  there.'  In  this  section  we  must  place  most  of 
 the  interesting  events  which  St.  Luke  [mainly] 
 and  his  fellow-synoptics  [occasionally]  relate  as 
 having  occurred  during  our  Lord's  last  journey  to 
 Jerusalem.  This  portion  of  his  life  is  generally 
 deemed  by  the  Harmonists  to  be  attended  with 
 much  difficulty.  (For  succinct  views  of  the  whole 
 subject,  see  Dean  Alford's  Gr.  Test,  on  Luke 
 ix.  51  [ed.  5];  Bishop  Ellicott's  Lectures,  pp. 
 242-45;  Bieek's  Synopt.  Erkldr.,  ii.  139-145; 
 Abp.  Thomson's  Art.  Jesus  Christ  in  Smith's 
 Diet,  of  Bible,  i.  106 1  ;  and  Dr.  Robinson's  Har- 
 mony [Engl,  ed.],  pp.  91-94.)  We  cannot  pre- 
 sume here  to  do  more  than  broadly  set  the  full 
 details  of  the  third  evangelist  (with  the  occasional 
 parallels  of  SS.  Matthew  and  Mark)  over  against 
 the  brief  and  general  statements  of  St.  John, 
 and  so  construct  a  probable  narrative  of  this 
 farewell  mmistiy  of  the  Saviour.  Much  of  its 
 transitory  course  was,  as  we  have  said,  passed 
 beyond  the  Jordan.  On  quitting  the  metropolis 
 Christ  retired  at  first  to  Bethabara  (John  x.  40; 
 where  the  -Kokw  refers  to  i.  28),  or  rather,  as  the 
 best  critical  authority  warrants  us  to  call  the  place, 
 Bethany,  where  he  would  meet  with  much  to  re- 
 mind him  of  his  earliest  consecration  to  his  public 
 life.  The  trath  of  the  Baptist's  prophecy,  of 
 which  we  spoke  early  in  this  Art. ,  haunts  us  here 
 also  (John  iii.    30).     As  in  Judaea   early  in   his 
 
 career,  so  here  in  Persea  at  the  end  of  it,  there  arc 
 not  wanting  signs  of  Christ's  superiority  over  his 
 great  forerunner  being  confest  to  men's  view  (comp. 
 John  iii.  26  ;  iv.  I  ;  and  x.  41).  This  will  account 
 probably  for  some  of  the  subjects  on  which  the 
 Lord  discoursed  while  beyond  Jordan.  These 
 discourses,  like  the  Baptist's,  were  in  answer  to 
 practical  questions  proposed  to  him  for  solution  ; 
 they  are  of  a  higher  nature,  however,  and  indicate 
 that  an  involuntary  respect  for  his  greatness  was 
 entertained  even  by  his  opponents.  They  relate 
 in  some  instances  to  what  was  uppermost  in  men's 
 expectations,  the  kingdom  of  Messiah  and  its  cir- 
 cumstances. '  Are  there  few  that  be  saved  ?' 
 (Luke  xiii.  23) ;  '  Blessed  is  he  that  shall  eat  bread 
 in  the  kingdom  of  God'  (xiv.  15) ;  '  When  shall 
 the  kingdom  of  God  come?'  (xvii.  20);  'Good 
 master,  what  shall  I  do  to  inherit  eternal  life?' 
 (xviii.  18) ;  and  the  enunciation  of  the  law  of  divorce, 
 in  which  he  corrects  the  imperfection  of  the  law  of 
 Moses  (Mark  x.  4,  etc.);  and  their  submission  of 
 young  children  for  his  blessing  (Luke  xviii.  15-17) 
 .  .  .  Such  profound  questions  as  these  elicited  from 
 the  Saviour  some  of  his  sublimest  teaching.  His 
 audience  were  of  the  Pharisaic  class  generally,  to 
 whom  he  addressed  his  later  parables :  The  grain  of 
 mustard  seed  (xiii.  18) ;  the  lost  sheep;  the  prodigal 
 son  ;  the  unjust  steward;  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  ; 
 the  importunate  widow ;  the  Pharisee  and  Publican 
 (xv.,  xvi.,  xviii.  1-14) ;  the  labourers  in  the  vine- 
 yard (Matt.  XX.  I -16).  These  illustrious  lessons,  deli- 
 vered in  the  hearing  of  multitudes  of  eager  listeners 
 (Matt.  xi.x.  I,  2  ;  Mark  x.  i),  bore  very  much  on 
 the  mysteries  of  his  kingdom,  its  growth,  and  the 
 principles  of  those  who  should  be  its  subjects — so 
 different  from  the  prejudices  fostered  by  the  mono- 
 polists of  heaven's  favour  among  the  selfish  Phari- 
 sees ;  and  the  catholicity  of  its  embrace — wherein 
 repentant  prodigals  and  contrite  publicans  would 
 find  a  welcome,  denied  to  their  proud  and  arrogant 
 oppressors.  While  thus  condemning  the  exactions 
 of  Pharisaism,  the  Lord  did  not  relax  the  rigour  of 
 his  demand  on  the  fidelity  of  his  own  followers. 
 '  Whosoever  doth  not  bear  his  cross  and  come  after 
 me  cannot  be  my  disciple'  (Luke  xiv.  27) — he  said 
 to  the  multitudes  that  crowded  his  path.     '  Sell 
 
 whatsoever  thou  hast  and  give  to  the  poor, 
 
 and  come  take  up  the  cross  and  follow  me,'  was 
 the  self-sacrifice  that  he  lovingly  (Mark  x.  21)  re- 
 quested of  the  rich  young  ruler,  who  went  away 
 sorrowful  from  so  vast  a  demand  (Matt.  xix.  22  ; 
 Luke  xviii.  23).  On  his  disciples  he  inculcates 
 forbearance,  faith,  humility ;  let  them  build  up  the 
 fabric  of  a  character  perfect  in  self-denial ;  but 
 'when,'  said  he,  'ye  shall  have  done  all  those 
 things  which  are  commanded  you,  say,  '  We  art 
 unprofitable  servaiits''''  (Luke  xvii.  10).  St.  Mat- 
 thew refers  to  the  exercise  of  his  healing  powers  in 
 Perasa  (xix.  2),  and  accordingly  St.  Luke  gives  us 
 an  example  in  the  case  already  referred  to  above, 
 in  the  section  of  the  Sabbath-day  cures,  of  the  im- 
 mediate restoration  to  her  natural  erectness  of  the 
 woman  who  had  for  eighteen  years  a  spirit  of 
 infirmity  and  was  bowed  together  and  coidd  in  no 
 wise  lift  up  herself  (xiii.  10-17).  He  also  healed  a 
 man  afflicted  with  dropsy,  and  again  on  the  Sab- 
 bath (see  above,  /.  c.)  at  the  house  of  a  leader  of 
 the  Pharisees  (Luke  xiv.  1-6).  But  the  trans- 
 jordanic  ministry,  as  it  would  seem,  was  mainly 
 didactic  (comp.  Mark  x.  I  and  Luke  xiii.  22).  He 
 was  now  in  the  territories  of  Herod  Antipas.     On 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 566 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 a  former  occasion  we  saw  how  Jesus,  with  the 
 caution  that  marked  his  earher  course,  retired  to 
 the  north  out  of  the  tyrant's  way,  when  his  attention 
 was  directed  to  him.  But  now  when  Christ  is 
 warned  of  the  tetrarch's  hostile  designs,  with  an 
 indignant  protest  against  his  hypocrisy  and  mahce, 
 lie  boldly  persists  in  his  glorious  ministry,  which  he 
 is  eager  to  accomplish  in  face  of  all  dangers  (Luke 
 xiii.  31, 32).  He  will  soon  perfect  his  work  by  death. 
 Nazareth  had  prematurely  essayed  the  guilt  of  that 
 consummation  ;  Capernaum  and  Galilee  had  re- 
 jected him  ;  Samaria  had  spurned  him  ;  the  tyrant 
 of  Pertea  was  now  seeking  to  kill  him  ;  but  for 
 Jerusalem  was  reserved  at  once  the  accomplish- 
 ment of  his  sacrifice  and  the  completion  of  its  own 
 guilt  and  ruin.  This  the  Redeemer  knew,  and 
 expressed  his  lament  for  the  fate  of  the  obdurate 
 city  in  a  strain  of  compassionate  pathos  but  yet 
 dooming  severity,  which  will  never  cease  to  move 
 the  heart  of  the  reader  :  '  O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem, 
 which  killest  the  prophets  .  .  .  How  often  would  I 
 have  gathered  thy  children  together  as  a  hen  her 
 brood  beneath  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not ! '  (Luke 
 xiii.  34,  35).  What  the  threats  of  Herod  failed  to 
 effect  was  brought  about  by  the  call  of  love. 
 
 Raising  of  Lazarics. — About  the  time  of  this 
 message  to  the  tyrant,  he  received  from  the  sisters 
 of  Bethany  the  afflicting  tidings  that  his  loved 
 friend,  their  brother,  was  dangerously  ill.  After 
 two  days  spent  in  concluding  his  ministry  beyond 
 Jordan  (see  Bishop  Ellicott,  Lectures,  pp.  264-268), 
 he  sets  out  to  go  to  Bethany,  amidst  the  expostula- 
 tion of  the  twelve,  who  did  not  forget  the  danger 
 from  which  he  had  escaped  at  the  feast  of  dedica- 
 tion (John  xi.  9).  When  Jesus  divulged  to  them 
 the  death  of  Lazarus  as  the  occasion  of  his  visit  to 
 the  vicinity  of  the  capital,  they  withdrew  all  oppo- 
 sition, and  acquiesced  in  the  resolution  of  the  de- 
 voted though  desponding  Thomas,  to  accompany 
 him,  and,  if  it  must  be,  to  die  with  him  (ver.  16). 
 The  Redeemer,  with  prescient  glance,  saw  at  once 
 what  a  noble  opportunity  was  at  hand  for  the  mani- 
 festation of  his  Father's  glory,  the  object  of  all  his 
 efforts,  and  for  the  confirmation  of  the  faith  of  his 
 disciples  and  friends,  an  equally  dear  object  in  his 
 view  (w.  4,  15,  26,  40,  42,  45).  On  the  road  near 
 the  town  Jesus  is  met  by  the  ardent  Martha,  whose 
 noble  response  of  faith  to  the  Saviour's  challenge 
 (ver.  27)  justifies  the  view  which  makes  her,  no  less 
 than  Mary,  a  true  lover  of  her  Lord.  The  con- 
 tagion of  the  tears  of  Mary  and  her  friends  kindled 
 the  Saviour's  sorrow.  In  the  briefest,  but  one  of 
 the  most  precious,  of  the  verses  of  the  N.  T.,  St. 
 John  informs  us  how  '  Jesus  wept'  (xi.  35).  But 
 even  into  the  midst  of  that  sacred  grief  did  the 
 Jewish  cynics  intrude  (ver.  37),  and  the  Redeemer's 
 sympathetic  tears  were  mingled  with  an  emotion  of 
 pain  at  their  obduracy  (ver.  38).  As  he  approaches 
 the  grave  he  is  again  interrupted  by  an  impatient 
 exclamation  of  Martha,  which  he  first  rebukes,  and 
 then,  after  ordering  the  sepulchre  to  be  opened, 
 with  a  calm  thanksgiving  to  his  Father,  he  utters 
 the  loud  fiat  which  called  forth  the  dead,  and  ex- 
 changed his  corruption  for  the  freshness  of  health 
 and  strength  !  We  have  already  commented  on 
 the  grandeur  of  this  great  miracle  (see  above,  in 
 the  section  The  raising  of  the  dead).  Its  effect 
 was  immense,  both  on  friend  and  on  foe.  It  stimu- 
 lated the  adherence  of  many  believers  ;  and  excited 
 the  keener  animosity  of  the  malevolent.  While  the 
 Sanhedrim,  under  the  direction  of  Caiaohas,  were 
 
 organising  a  wide-spread  plot  for  his  capture,  Jesiu 
 withdrew  to  the  town  of  Ephraim  (or  Ophrah  = 
 the  modern  Taiyibeh,  about  twenty  miles  north  of 
 Jerusalem.).  From  this  place  the  Lord,  after  a  stay 
 of  two  or  three  weeks  with  his  disciples,  proceeded 
 on  the  ultimate  journey  throughout  the  countiy  to 
 which  we  have  already  adverted. 
 
 Final  circuit  from  Ephraim, — Pursuing  a  north- 
 ern course,  '  he  passed  through  the  midst  of  Sa- 
 maria and  Galilee'  (Luke  xvii.  11)  ;  and,  while  on 
 the  way,  probably  on  the  Samaritan  frontier,  he 
 healed  the  ten  lepers  (vv.  12-14).  It  sti-angely  sym- 
 bolised the  scant  gratitude  of  the  nation,  that  of 
 all  the  benefited  sufferers  one  only  expressed  his 
 thanks  for  his  cure,  nor  is  it  less  remarkable  that 
 the  solitary  one  belonged  to  the  despised  Samaria 
 (ver.  16,  18).  Crossing  the  Jordan  in  Galilee,  he 
 traversed  Percea  again,  in  quiet  company,  as  it 
 would  seem,  with  the  twelve,  to  whom  for  the  third 
 time,  to  prepare  them  for  the  shock  of  his  ap- 
 proaching separation  from  them,  he  foretells  his 
 death  and  resurrection  (Matt.  xx.  17-19  ;  Mark  x. 
 32-34;  Luke  xviii.  31-34).  We  do  not  read  that 
 this  startling  announcement  brought  out  from  the 
 impetuous  Peter  a  repetition  of  his  former  resist- 
 ance. All  apparently  were  acquiescent,  but  with- 
 out intelligence.  St.  Luke  is  emphatic  in  his  de- 
 scription of  their  ignorance  (xviii.  34).  Of  the 
 Messiahship  of  their  friend  and  master  they  doubted 
 not ;  but  of  death  and  suffering,  as  connected  with 
 that  dignity,  they  could  not  bring  their  minds  to 
 think.  At  this  veiy  moment,  indeed,  the  sons  of 
 Zebedee  were  dreaming  of  regal  grandeur,  and  pre- 
 sumed to  request  the  posts  of  honour  for  them- 
 selves in  the  approaching  kingdom  (Mark  x.  35, 
 37).  This  they  probably  did  at  the  prompting  of 
 their  mother,  Salome  (Matt.  xx.  20,  21).  With 
 mild  dignity  did  Jesus  check  their  ambition,  as  in- 
 compatible with  the  appointments  of  God.  The 
 ten,  however,  were  moved  with  an  indignation 
 against  the  brothers,  which  was  only  quelled  by 
 the  calm  wisdom  of  the  Saviour.  He,  in  coun- 
 selling forbearance  among  them,  pointed  to  his  own 
 example  of  self-abnegation,  as  '  the  Son  of  Man,' 
 who  '  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto  but  to 
 minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many' 
 (ver.  28).  But  though  they  understood  not,  they 
 were  not  without  strange  forebodings  of  the  imme- 
 diate future.  Mixed  feelings  absorbed  them  on 
 their  way.  For  themselves  they  feared,  as  they 
 followed  Christ ;  but  at  his  undaunted  courage 
 they  were  astonished  as  he  put  himself  at  their 
 head  (Mark  x.  32),  with  that  unfaltering  purpose, 
 which,  as  St.  Luke  remarks,  distinguished  him  ever 
 since  he  began  to  have  Jerusalem  and  his  sacrifice 
 there  in  view  (ix.  51). 
 
 Jericho.— K\\(S.  thus  they  reach  Jericho,  one  of 
 the  most  important  cities  at  that  time  in  Palestine. 
 As  he  was  ajiproaching  it  he  was  greeted  as  '  the 
 Son  of  David'  by  a  certain  blind  man  who  sat  by 
 the  roadside  begging.  St.  Luke,  who  alone  of  the 
 evangelists  narrates  another  event  of  interest  con- 
 nected with  this  visit  to  Jericho,  by  s-prolepsis  not 
 unusual  in  the  Gospels  (see  Luke  iii.  19  ;  xix.  45  ; 
 John  xi.  2  comp.  with  xii.  3  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  52,  53  ; 
 xxi.  20  comp.  with  Mark  xi.  20),  to  finish  the  his- 
 tory of  the  blind  man's  cure,  connects  it  imme- 
 diately with  his  salutation  of  Jesus.  St.  Mark, 
 whose  account  is  more  detailed  and  literally  exact, 
 both  mentions  the  sufferer's  name,  as  Bartimjeus, 
 and  describes  the  cure  as  happening  on  the  morrow, 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 567 
 
 TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 when  the  Lord  was  leaving  the  city  on  the  western 
 side.  On  this  second  occasion,  however,  the  blind 
 suppliant  was  not  alone ;  a  fellow-sufferer  joins 
 him  in  his  importunity  and  acclamation.  Affected 
 by  this  double  act  of  faith  and  praise,  the  Lord, 
 undeterred  by  the  crowd,  who  at  first  endeavoured 
 to  suppress  the  cry  of  the  helpless  pair,  graciously 
 commanded  their  approach,  and,  with  a  touch,  in- 
 stantly gave  them  sight.  These  twin  miracles  St. 
 Matthew,  it  will  be  seen,  characteristically  (comp. 
 his  viii.  28  with  Mark  v.  2  and  Luke  viii.  27,  and 
 see  our  notice  above)  combines  (xx.  29-34 ;  comp. 
 with  Mark  x.  46-52  and  Luke  xviii.  35-43).  Three 
 times  does  the  first  evangelist  associate  this  Mes- 
 sianic eulogy  of  Christ  as  David's  son  with  his 
 miraculous  healing  of  the  blind.  It  is  worth  while 
 to  compare  the  present  duplicate  instance  with 
 chap.  ix.  27  and  xii.  23.  In  the  latter  of  these  two 
 parallels  the  contagion  of  the  praise  spread  among 
 the  bystanders.  It  was  probably  so  at  Jericho, 
 where  there  seems,  in  simpler  strain,  to  have  begim 
 that  glorious  thrill  of  popular  acclamation  in  honour 
 of  Jesus  as  the  Christ,  which  in  heart-moving  dia- 
 pason was  a  few  days  afterwards  heard  from  a 
 myriad  of  tongues  on  the  slope  of  Olivet.  Alas  ! 
 how  inconstant  the  favour  of  the  impressible  multi- 
 tude !  That  enormous  apostasy  of  Passion-week, 
 which  so  soon  drifted  from  the  gentle  nxDtes  of 
 '  Hosannah'  to  the  shriek  of  '  Crucify  him  !'  has 
 here  also  its  premonitoiy  sign  in  the  '  murmurs' 
 of  the  fickle  crowd  (Luke  xix.  7),  whose  prejudices 
 were  aroused,  when  the  gracious  Jesus  offered 
 himself  as  a  guest  to  the  unassuming  (ver.  3, 
 4),  earnestly  devoted  (ver.  4,  5),  and  sincerely 
 repentant  (ver.  8)  Zacchseus.  With  modest  joy 
 this  man  entertained  his  wonderful  guest  (ver.  6), 
 and  received  from  his  lips  the  assurance  of  his 
 blessed  acceptance  (ver.  9).  As  a  divine  com- 
 ment on  all  that  was  happening,  the  Loi-d  de- 
 livered the  weighty  parable  of  '  The  Ten  Foitnds'' 
 (ver.  12-27).  They  were  all  in  expectation  that 
 he  was  on  the  eve  of  establishing  his  visible  king- 
 dom as  Messiah  (ver.  Ii).  They  migkthz.\e  learnt 
 from  this  parabolic  lesson,  that,  as  their  own  re- 
 cent princes  had  only  gained  their  thrones  after 
 journeys  to  distant  Rome,  so  they  must  postpone 
 their  hopes  of  his  asserted  royalty  till  his  return 
 from  '  the  far  country'  (ver.  12),  whither  their 
 own  hatred  and  rejection  of  him  (ver.  14)  were  in 
 fact  about  to  send  him.  After  the  delivery  of  this 
 great  parable  he  resumes  the  same  remarkable 
 position  at  tJu  head  of  his  followers  (ver.  28)  which 
 had  raised  before  such  a  mingled  emotion  of  won- 
 der and  alarm  (Mark  x.  32),  and  thus  reaches  the 
 temporary  rest  of  Bethany,  previous  to  the  accom- 
 plishment of  the  eventful  occurrences  which  will 
 form  the  subject  of  our  next  chapter,  six  days  be- 
 fore his  last  Passover  (John  xii.  i). 
 
 Chap.  III.  Occurrences  of  Passion  week. 
 Introductory  events :  Friday  and  Saturday. — With 
 Wieseler  [Chronol.  Synops.  386-392),  we  assume 
 Friday,  8th  of  Nisan  (March  31  of  a.d.  30,  or 
 A.  U.C.  783)  to  have  been  the  day  refeiTed  to  by 
 St.  John  (xii.  i)  as  that  of  our  Lord's  arrival  at 
 Bethany.  After  quitting  the  hospitable  roof  of 
 Zacchasus,  and  traversing  the  rough  road  which  lay 
 between  Jericho  and  Jerusalem,  he  would  without 
 difficulty  complete  his  journey  before  the  com- 
 mencement of  the  Sabbath  at  six  o'clock.  This, 
 the  last  Sabbath  of  his  mortal  life,  he  spent  in  the 
 retirement  of  the  village  where  his  most  devoted 
 
 friends,  Lazarus  and  his  sisters,  lived.  The  grateful 
 family,  to  do  him  honour,  prepared  him  '  a  supper- 
 (John  xii.  2),  at  the  house  of  a  certain  Simon,  con- 
 nected probably  with  them  by  a  close  relationship, 
 on  whom,  as  on  Lazarus  himself,  the  Lord  it  would 
 seem  had  bestowed  his  mighty  power ;  for  from 
 the  epithet  attached  to  his  name  by  St.  Matthew 
 (xxvi.  6),  and  St.  Mark  (xiv.  3),  it  has  been  con- 
 jectured that  he  had  been  recovered  of  the  frightful 
 disease  of  leprosy.  This  domestic  entertainment 
 is  interesting,  not  only  for  the  presence  of  Lazarus, 
 whom  the  late  astounding  miracle  had  made  a 
 most  observed  person  (John  xii.  2,  10),  but  as 
 eliciting  tire  character  of  his  sisters.  Martha 
 '  served,'  deeply  impressed,  no  doubt,  with  the 
 honour  of  service  to  one  whose  greatness  she  had, 
 on  a  former  occasion,  acknowledged  to  be  more 
 than  human  (John  xi.  27)  ;  while  the  thoughtful 
 Mary  proved,  by  a  remarkable  act,  that  she  had 
 not  in  vain  sat  at  Jesus'  feet.  During  the  meal 
 she  approached  the  tricliiiium  whereon  the  Lord 
 reclined,  and  having  first  anointed  his  head  and 
 then  his  bare  feet  with  most  costly  and  fragrant 
 unguents  which  she  had  prepared  (comp.  Matt, 
 xxvi.  7  and  Mark  xiv.  3,  with  John  xii.  3),  she 
 proceeded,  in  token  of  a  still  intenser  devotion,  to 
 wipe  his  feet  \\  ith  her  hair.  As  on  a  former  not 
 dissimilar  occasion  (Luke  vii.  37-49),  so  here  also, 
 the  Lord  commended  the  act  in  terms  of  emphatic 
 praise  ;  but  in  this  case  he  recognised  a  specially 
 profound  faith  in  Mary.  She  seemed  to  be  the 
 only  one  whose  intuition  of  belief  embraced  with 
 prophetic  power  the  great  consummation,  which  all 
 were  so  slow  to  allow,  of  his  approaching  sacrifice. 
 While  Judas  and  (sad  to  say)  his  fellow-disciples 
 (Matt.  xxvi.  8  comp.  with  John  xii.  4)  were  disin- 
 genuously gi'udging  this  precious  office  of  love  and 
 faith,  the  Lord  bestowed  on  it  one  of  the  most 
 expressive  commendations  to  be  met  with  in  the 
 Gospel  :  '  She  hath  done  what  she  could,'  he  said, 
 '  she  is  come  beforehand  to  anoint  my  body  to  the 
 luirying''  (Mark  xiv.  8)  :  and  he  graciously  added 
 the  promise  of  immortality  as  the  guerdon  of  her 
 love  ;  the  pages  of  the  Gospel  should  be  for  ever 
 as  redolent  with  the  record  of  that  pious  deed 
 (ver.  9)  as  was  all  the  house  at  that  moment  with 
 the  odour  of  the  ointment  (John  xii.  3).  After  the 
 Sabbath,  but  before  the  day  was  past,  many  from 
 the  neighbouring  city  seem  to  have  been  attracted 
 to  Bethany  by  the  information  that  Jesus  and  La- 
 zarus were  both  to  be  seen  there  (ver.  9).  But, 
 true  to  their  old  malignity,  while  the  many  were 
 displaying  a  popular  attachment,  if  not  an  actual 
 faith  and  adhesion  to  Christ  (ver.  11),  the  Phari- 
 saic authorities  began  to  renew  their  efforts  to  ap- 
 prehend him,  including,  in  their  malevolent  pur- 
 pose, on  this  occasion,  his  friend,  whose  fame  the 
 great  miracle  had  indissolubly  linked  with  his  own 
 (ver.  10). 
 
 Siinday  of  Passion  iveek  ;  10th  of  Nisan  (April  2). 
 Owing  to  his  absence  from  the  last  year's  Passover, 
 and  his  cautious  attendance  only  at  the  festivals  of 
 Tabernacles  and  Dedication,  much  speculation  was 
 rife  as  to  the  possibility  of  his  further  absence  from 
 the  present  feast  (John  xi.  56).  It  was,  however, 
 known  on  the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath  that 
 Jesus  would  certainly  visit  Jerusalem .  This  evoked 
 the  grand  enthusiasm,  of  which  some  symptoms 
 had  appeared  at  Jericho,  and  which  terminated  in 
 the  Messianic  triumph  of  a  public  entry  into  the 
 metropolis  amidst  the  applause  of  the  nation.    Not 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 668 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 only  the  country  population  who  had  come  to  the 
 Passover  (S^Xos  voXiis  o  eX'^Cbv  et's  rriv  eopTrjv,  John 
 xii.  12),  but  the  urban  also,  whom  the  resurrec- 
 tion of  Lazarus  had  lately  roused  (/cat  vir-^vrriaev  6 
 fix^oj,  K-  T.  X.,  ver.  jtS),  united  their  loud  and  cor- 
 dial Hosannahs  to  his  praise  as  the  Son  of  David 
 come  to  his  royal  heritage.  The  four  evangelists 
 unite  in  describing  the  illustrious  welcome  which 
 Christ  received  in  his  progress  from  Bethany  to  the 
 capital  (Matt.  xxi.  1-9  ;  Mark  xi.  i-io  ;  Luke  xix. 
 29-35  j  John  xii.  12-15).  Moving  beyond  descrip- 
 tion was  the  scene,  when,  amidst  the  palm-bearing 
 multitudes,  who  shouted  their  paeans  of  victory, 
 and  strawed  the  way  with  their  garments,  in  honour 
 of  him  whom  they  were  conducting  as  their  sin- 
 cerely accepted  Messiah  to  the  city  of  his  royal 
 ancestors,  the  meek  and  lowly  Saviour,  accepting 
 the  homage  of  the  moment,  but  prescient  withal  of 
 tlie  approaching  apostasy  and  the  miseries  it  would 
 bring,  came  to  the  spot,  on  a  ledge  of  Olivet,  where, 
 as  travellers  say,  '  the  whole  city  in  an  instant 
 bursts  into  view'  (Stanley,  Sinai  and  PaL  [ed.  3], 
 p.  193).  The  sudden  view  which  met  the  Re- 
 deemer's eye  drew  tears  of  profoundest  sorrow  from 
 him  ;  and  as  the  gloiy  of  his  transfiguration  was 
 shadowed  by  his  cross  and  death  (Luke  ix.  31),  so 
 this,  the  twin  glory  of  his  triumph,  was  dimmed 
 with  that  '  shower  of  tears  wherewith'  [as  Jeremy 
 Taylor  says]  '  he  wet  the  palms  with  a  dew  sweeter 
 than  the  moistures  upon  Mount  Hermon  or  the 
 manna-drops,  as  he  wept  over  undone  Jerusalem  in 
 the  day  of  his  triumph'  (Life  of  Christ,  part  iii. 
 sec.  15).  And  another  bitterness  mingled  itself 
 with  this  brief  joy.  We  have  seen  how  often  the 
 hoMest,  happiest  moments  of  the  Saviour's  life  were 
 intruded  on  by  the  carping  Pharisees.  Their  spite 
 did  not  spare  him  now.  They  urge  him  to  check 
 the  rejoicing  crowds  (Luke  xi.x.  39).  But  in  vain  ! 
 He,  who  in  Galilee  so  often  repressed  the  ambition 
 of  his  followers  and  their  offers  to  proclaim  him 
 king,  now  accepts  all  their  homage  and  encourages 
 all  theii  loyal  acclamations  :  ■*  I  tell  you,  if  these 
 should  hold  their  peace,  the  stones  would  imme- 
 diately cry  out !'  (ver.  40).  He  had  actually  him- 
 self initiated  this  great  demonstration ;  for,  on 
 arriving  at  Bethpliage,  the  suburb  or  pomcerium 
 which  stretches  away  to  the  eastern  basement  of  the 
 temple  (Renan,  Vie  de  JJsus,  p.  374,  n.  4),  he  de- 
 spatched two  of  his  attendants  to  fetch  the  fresh 
 and  unsullied  colt  on  which  he  meant  to  enter  the 
 city  (Mark  xi.  1-7).  Every  act  almost  was  a  deli- 
 berate verification  of  ancient  prophecy  (comp.  Zech. 
 ix.  9  with  Matt.  xxi.  4),  and  every  hour  was  bring- 
 ing him  nearer  to  that  death  which  was  the  very 
 purpose  of  his  life  and  mission.  So  he  will  check 
 nothing,  conceal  nothing.  The  unrepressed  excite- 
 ment which  greeted  him  outside  Jerusalem,  con- 
 tagiously spread  to  the  population  within  the  gates. 
 '  All  the  city  was  moved,  saying.  Who  is  this?' 
 (Matt.  xxi.  10).  His  approach  to  the  temple  was 
 welcomed  by  the  Hosannah-chants  of  little  chil- 
 dren (comp.  Ps.  viii.  2),  amidst  the  murmurs  of 
 the  chief  priests  and  scribes  (Matt.  xxi.  15,  16),  and 
 signalised  by  his  merciful  cures  upon  the  blind  and 
 the  lame,  who  gathered  around  him  within  the 
 sacred  precincts  (ver.  14).  So  complete  was  the 
 sensation  which  his  arrival  excited  among  the  varied 
 inhabitants  of  the  capital  whom  the  Passover  had 
 tollected,  that  St.  John  notices  it  as  a  memorable 
 fact,  tliat  sundry  Gentile  proselytes  humbly  and 
 reverentially  sought  an  interview  with  Jesus  IJy  the 
 
 assistance  of  the  apostles  Philip  and  Andrew  ( Johu 
 xii.  20-36).  He  freely  announced  his  own  impend- 
 ing death,  and  proclaims  its  universal  efficacy  for 
 Gentile  no  less  than  Jew.  In  direct  allusion  also 
 to  the  mode  of  his  dying,  he  said  :  '  And  I,  if  I  be 
 lifted  up  from  the  earth,  zvill  draw  all  men  unto 
 me'  (ver.  33).  The  short  address  which  Christ 
 delivered  on  this  remarkable  occasion  (which  Dr. 
 Stier  strikingly  couples  with  the  visit  of  the  Magi, 
 as  an  indication  of  the  interest  of  the  Gentiles  in 
 him,  at  the  end  of  his  career,  such  as  that  event 
 had  betokened  at  its  commencement),  was  inter- 
 rupted by  a  voice  of  heavenly  approbation  like  that 
 which  had  greeted  him  at  his  baptism  and  his 
 transfiguration  (vers.  28-30).  Far  otherwise  was 
 its  reception  among  the  carping  bystanders.  It 
 spoke  of  '  light,''  as  befitted  the  announcement  of 
 blessing  to  the  benighted  heathen  (comp.  Luke  ii. 
 32  and  Matt.  ii.  2),  and  of  himself  as  that  light. 
 Happy  would  he  he  if  they  would  only  bask  in 
 such  a  sunshine  J  But,  alas  !  their  minds  were 
 blinded  by  prejudice  against  so  glorious  an  exten- 
 sion of  spiritual  blessing.  They  were  for  quench- 
 ing the  light.  The  melancholy  record  follows  : 
 '  These  things  spake  Jesus,  a7td  departed  and  did 
 hide  hi7nselffrom  them''  (John  xii.  36).  This  state- 
 ment probably  synchronises  with  Matt.  xxi.  17  and 
 Mark  xi.  1 1  ;  if  so,  our  Lord's  retreat  from  the 
 hatred  and  opposition  of  the  city  was  to  the  love 
 and  faith  of  the  happy  Bethany,  Before  this  re- 
 markable day,  the  loth  of  Nisan,  ends,  we  cannot 
 refrain  from  noticing  the  typical  provision  of  the 
 Mosaic  law  (Exod.  xii.  3),  which  prescribed  to  the 
 whole  '  congregation  of  Israel '  the  separation  on 
 it  of  the  paschal  lamb  in  readiness  for  its  offering 
 on  the  14th.  Do  we  not  read,  in  the  events  of  the 
 day  just  past,  the  solemn,  though  most  unconscious 
 consecration,  on  the  part  of  the  universal  nation,  of 
 him  who  was  so  soon  to  be  sacrificed  as  the  true 
 paschal  lamb  ?  From  an  important  statement  of 
 St.  Luke  (xxi.  37,  38),  it  would  appear  that  during 
 the  few  remaining  days  of  his  earthly  ministry,  the 
 Lord  devoted  the  mornings  to  public  teaching  in 
 the  temple,  eager  to  embrace  eveiy  opportunity 
 which  the  favourable  temper  of  the  people  allowed 
 him,  of  impressing  their  minds  with  his  instruction. 
 The  rest  of  the  day  seems  to  have  been  given  to 
 the  disciples,  with  whom  he  would  at  eventide 
 retire  to  Bethany. 
 
 Afojiday,  iitJi  of  Nisatt  [April  t,). — When  the 
 Lord  visited  the  temple  yesterday,  he  was  not  so 
 absorbed  by  the  exciting  scenes  as  to  be  indifferent 
 to  the  honour  of  his  Father's  house.  With  Mes- 
 sianic dignity  he  cast  a  scrutinising  look  '  round 
 about  upon  all  things'  (Mark  xi.  Ii),  and  took  his 
 measures  for  the  morrow.  But  on  his  way  to  the 
 city  in  the  morning,  he  was  attracted  by  the  foliage 
 of  one  of  the  fig-trees  of  Bethphage ;  and,  being 
 hungry  no  doubt  from  the  long  vigil  of  the  night, 
 he  approached  it  in  search  of  fruit.  But  in  vain  ! 
 The  tree,  although  so  precocious  in  leaves,  was 
 fruitless.  Fit  but  sad  emblem  of  the  city  and 
 nation  !  He  had  in  an  earlier  part  of  his  ministry 
 strikingly  pictured  the  unfruitfulness  of  the  people 
 in  the  parable  of  the  barren  fig-tree  (Luke  xiii.  6-9). 
 The  three  years'  forbearance  and  the  prolonged 
 probation  then  vouchsafed  were  now  exhausted. 
 The  time  for  judgment  was  come.  The  sentence, 
 suspended  in  the  parable  some  months  before,  now 
 falls  upon  the  useless  tree  before  him  ;  and  in  the 
 spirit  and  power  of  Messiah — such  as  he  had  as- 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 569 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 serted  yesterday  when  demanding  the  use  of  the 
 colt  (Matt.  xxi.  3),  and  would  again  display  this 
 very  day  in  the  Temple,  and  yet  again  on  Thurs- 
 day on  requesting  the  accommodation  of  the  Pass- 
 over-chamber (Matt.  xxvi.  18) — he  pronounces  the 
 fatal  doom,  which  before  to-morrow's  sun  we  shall 
 see  accomplished.  On  his  arrival  at  the  Temple, 
 his  indignant  zeal  at  the  desecration  of  its  holy 
 precincts  was  kindled,  just  as  it  had  been  at  the 
 outset  of  his  ministry  three  years  before  (com  p. 
 Matt.  xxi.  12,  etc.  with  John  ii.  14,  etc.  :  on  the 
 two  cleansings  of  the  Temple,  as  the  opinion  of 
 most  of  the  commentators,  ancient  and  modern  ;  see 
 Alford,  and  especially  Meyer,  in  locis,  and  Ellicott, 
 Lectures,  p.  122,  n.  3).  The  holy  Baptist,  among 
 Messiah's  attributes,  symbolised  his  judicial  and 
 reformatory  power  by  making  him  wield  '  a  fan  in 
 his  hand'  (Matt.  iii.  12).  How  signal  was  his  dis- 
 play of  this  authority,  when  he  purged  the  courts 
 and  purlieus  of  the  Temple  of  these  purveyors  and 
 their  traffic,  who  in  the  godless  pursuit  of  their 
 gain  had  reduced  God's  house  of  prayer  to  the 
 condition  of  a  den  of  thieves  !  This  is  not  the  first 
 time  we  have  traced  in  the  meek  and  lowly  Saviour 
 the  grandeur  of  a  righteous  indignation,  and  the 
 exercise  of  a  sinless  though  withering  vengeance 
 against  the  hypocrite  and  the  wordling  (comp.  his 
 many  denunciations  [passim'\  against  Pharisaism, 
 and  his  message  to  Herod  Antipas,  with  his  cleans- 
 ings of  the  Temple).  This  moral  power,  in  action, 
 is  no  less  Messianic  than  his  vast  prerogative  of 
 miraculous  agency.  But  how  utterly  alien  were 
 the  minds  of  even  the  most  educated  classes  of  the 
 Jews  from  the  true  view  of  Messiah  is  strikingly 
 shev/n  by  the  invariable  hostility  wherewith  those 
 classes  pursued  Christ  after  every  manifestation  of 
 his  theocratic  power.  The  present  instance  is  no 
 exception.  '  The  chief  priests  and  the  scribes, 
 and  the  chief  of  the  people,  sought  to  destroy  him,' 
 after  his  expulsion  of  the  traders  and  his  angry 
 rebuke  of  their  sin.  It  is  true  they  were  as  yet 
 powerless.  The  popularity  of  Jesus  still  shielded 
 him  from  the  machinations  of  the  few.  But  St. 
 Luke,  to  whom  we  owe  this  information,  mentions 
 in  this  passage  (xix.  47),  for  the  first  time,  some 
 new  allies  of  the  priestly  party  (ol  irpCoroL  rod  \aov). 
 His  words  are  remarkable  and  emphatic.  We  must 
 bear  them  in  mind,  for  they  will  afford  us  some 
 clue  to  the  astonishing  ebb  of  that  tide  of  public 
 favour,  which  up  to  this  moment  and  later  still 
 sustains  the  Lord  in  his  great  career.  The  treble 
 combination  mentioned  by  the  evangelist  avails 
 nothing  as  yet  to  arrest  Messiah's  progress  through 
 this  wonderful  week,  'for  all  the  people  hung  7ipon 
 his  lips  (6  Xaos  'yap  airas  i^sKpefxaro  avrov  aKoi'xiJv) , 
 being  exceedingly  struck  with  the  mode  and  matter 
 of  his  teaching,  as  St.  Mark  informs  us  (e^eirX^cr- 
 crero  eirl  rfj  StSaxjj  avrov,  xi.  18). 
 
 Ttiesday,    12th  of  Nisan    {April  4).— This  un- 
 equalled dignity  and  authority  in  the  subjects  and 
 
 '  manner  of  his  teaching  was  another  mark  of  his 
 Messiahship.     It  had  been  indeed  observed  by  his 
 
 ,    hearers  from  the  beginning  of  his  career  (Mark  i. 
 
 J  22)  ;  but  is  reserved  for  perhaps  its  grandest  deve- 
 lopment on  the  day  upon  which  we  are  now  enter- 
 ing ;  a  day  inferior  to  none  of  the  Saviour's  life  on 
 earth  in  interest,  not  for  miraculous  display — for 
 not  a  miracle  was  wrought — but  for  the  amount, 
 the  variety,  and  Ihe  grave  solemnity  of  the  instruc- 
 tion which  Jesus  now  vouchsafed,  for  the  last  time, 
 to  address  to  the  genera)  public.     Full  of  expecta- 
 
 tion, the  people  resorted  early  to  the  Temple  to 
 hear  him  (Luke  xxi.  38).  On  his  way  from  Bethany, 
 accompanied  by  his  disciples,  the  astonished  Peter 
 calls  his  attention  to  the  hapless  fig-tree,  '  dried 
 up  from  the  roots'  (Mark  xi.  20),  under  the  wither- 
 ing curse  of  the  preceding  day.  The  Lord  points 
 to  it  as  an  indication  of  the  mighty  power  of  God  ; 
 let  them  learn  to  put  their  trust  in  It.  This  im- 
 plicit faith,  so  necessary  to  them  in  the  future  to 
 which  they  were  called,  would  enable  them  to  re- 
 move mountains.  Theirs  would  not  be  a  tvalk  by 
 si<;ht,  as  the  prevalent  hopes  of  an  imperial  Mes- 
 siah might  erroneously  suggest.  They  would  have 
 to  commend  their  cause  to  God  in  earnest  prayer  ; 
 only  let  their  prayers,  would  they  have  them  pre- 
 vail, be  tempered,  as  he  had  already  taught  them 
 on  the  Mount  (Matt.  vi.  14,  15),  with  a.  forgiving 
 spirit.  Prayer  from  a  vindictive  heart  was  a  ter- 
 rible impropriety  which  God  would  surely  punish. 
 On  his  arrival  at  the  Temple,  he  was  met  by  a 
 phalanx  of  his  bitterest  foes,  who  had  united  their 
 incongruous  forces  in  the  vain  hope  of  confounding 
 him  with  hard  and  insidious  questions.  Could 
 they  break  the  spell  of  his  influence  with  the 
 masses  by  this  public  discomfiture,  their  purpose 
 would  be  effected  and  his  ruin  sure.  Their  first 
 challenge  [By  7ohat  authority  he  was  effecting  those 
 mighty  works,  the  reality  of  which  they  could 
 not  deny?]  he  promptly  parried,  by  proposing  to 
 them  a  dilemma  about  the  Baptist  and  his  mission. 
 It  was  a  fair  retort.  They  instantly  saw  his  advan- 
 tage ;  and  by  declining  to  answer  him,  they  only 
 justified  his  own  refusal  to  satisfy  their  irreverent 
 and  hostile  curiosity.  This  first  assault  seems  to 
 have  had  somewhat  of  an  official  tone.  The  San- 
 hedrim, when  in  the  beginning  they  sent  a  deputa- 
 tion to  the  Baptist  to  demand  an  account  of  his 
 mission  (John  i.  19),  thereby  meant  to  assert  their 
 prerogative  as  triers  and  conservators  of  doctrine 
 and  spiritual  gifts.  The  same  function  they  now 
 discharge  by  challenging  the  Lord's  authority.  On 
 the  former  occasion  of  cleansing  the  Temple,  they 
 demanded  of  him  a  sign,  or  miracle,  in  attestation 
 of  his  mission  (John  ii.  18).  The  insincerity  of  that 
 demand  they  prove  by  now  ignoring  the  wonders 
 he  had  in  the  meantime  wrought,  and  requesting  a 
 fresh  voucher.  As  in  the  other  instance,  so  in  this, 
 Jesus  meets  their  demand  with  an  authoritative  re- 
 joinder in  the  shape  of  three  weighty  parables,  that 
 of  The  Tzuo  Sons  (Matt.  xxi.  28-32)  ;  of  The 
 Wicked  Husbandmen  (Matt.  xxi. ;  Mark  xii. ;  Luke 
 XX.);  and  of  The  Marriage  of  the  King's  Sott  (Matt, 
 xxii.  1-14).  In  these  we  have  a  catena  of  solemn 
 protest  and  warning,  in  which  the  Lord  exposes 
 the  failure  of  the  Pharisaic  party  to  profit  from  the 
 labours,  first  of  John  the  Baptist  and  then  of  him- 
 self. With  all  their  sanctimonious  pretensions  of 
 fealty  to  God,  they  were  in  fact  forfeiting  (like  the 
 second  son)  the  blessings  of  his  kingdom  to  '  the 
 publicans  and  the  harlots,'  those  objects  of  their 
 proud  contempt  (symbolised  by  the  first  of  the 
 sons)  whose  simple  faith  was  leading  them  to  the 
 heritage  which  the  Lord  of  the  vineyard  would 
 take  from  them.  Like  the  husbandmen  of  the 
 second  parable,  they  were  consummating  the  re- 
 probation of  their  ancestors,  who  had  slain  God's 
 servants  the  prophets,  by  now  compassing  the 
 death  of  his  Son  and  heir.  The  vineyard  of  their 
 church  and  nation  would  soon  be  judicially  taken 
 from  them  and  transferred  to  other  races,  whom 
 they  indeed  had  superciliously  cursed,  but  whono 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 570 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 God  would  svirely  choose.  The  same  stem  truth  is 
 taught  in  the  third  of  these  parables,  in  which  the 
 graciousness  of  the  provision  which  the  King  of 
 Heaven  had  made  for  his  subjects  is  conspicuously 
 illustrated  ;  while  their  rebelliousness  is  visited 
 with  the  burning  up  of  their  guilty  city,  and 
 the  offer  of  their  blessings  to  wayfarers  and  stran- 
 gers, who  would  gladly  accept  and  cherish  the 
 gifts  which  they  had  slighted  and  abused.  Over- 
 powering was  the  effect  of  these  parabolic  dis- 
 courses, the  second  of  which,  delivered  with  an 
 immistakeable  point,  which  converted  parable  into 
 plain  rebuke,  so  incensed  the  chief  priests  and  the 
 scribes,  that  nothing  but  their  paramount  dread  of 
 a  rescue  by  tlie  yet  unestranged  multitude  deterred 
 them  from  the  immediate  apprehension  (ei'  ahrfj 
 TTJ  (bpa,  Luke  xx.  19)  of  Jesus.  Foiled  in  their 
 united"  effort,  they  separate  their  forces  and  renew 
 their  attempts  to  embarrass  the  Lord  by  dangerous 
 and  captious  questions.  One  of  the  most  remark- 
 able proofs  of  the  intense  hatred  of  all  parties 
 towards  the  holy  Saviour  occurs  in  the  violent 
 incongruity  of  the  alliances  which  men  formed  to 
 effect  their  deadly  object.  On  the  present  occasion 
 the  Pharisees  were  content  to  make  common  cause 
 with  opponents,  whose  hostility  on  ordinary  ques- 
 tions of  political  and  theological  interest  was  im- 
 placable. In  their  first  attack  they  joined  the 
 Herodians  in  proposing  the  famous  dilemma  about 
 ti-ibtite  to  Civsar  (Matt.  xxii. ;  Mark  xii.;  Luke  xx.) 
 This  was  followed  by  the  less  perilous  but  equally 
 insidious  inquiry  about  the  sevenfold  widow  and 
 the  resurrection.  The  Lord's  answers  were  as 
 unevasive  and  full  to  the  point  as  they  were  wise 
 and  suggestive  of  principles  of  eternal  interest ;  the 
 first  settles  with  delicate  precision  the  compatibility 
 of  political  and  religious  duty,  and  the  second 
 reconciles,  on  intelligible  and  simple  grounds,  the 
 necessaiy  discrepancy  of  social  existence  in  the 
 earthly  and  the  heavenly  states.*  The  Pharisees, 
 undeterred  by  their  first  repulse,  return  to  the 
 charge.  This  time  they  selected  one  of  their  most 
 able  scribes  to  confront  the  Saviour  (comp.  Matt, 
 xxii.  34  with  Mark  xii.  28).  To  his  question 
 about  the  great  com7na7idmcnt  of  the  laiv,  the  Lord 
 returned  an  exhaustive  answer,  which  extorted 
 even  from  his  dialectic  assailant  an  exclamation  of 
 approving  surprise.  The  effect  of  Christ's  replies 
 was  to  silence  his  foes,  one  after  the  other,  amidst 
 the  astonishment  and  delight  of  the  listening 
 crowds.  The  humiliation  of  his  assailants  was 
 stiU  further  increased  by  their  utter  inability  to 
 meet  him,  when  he  retorted  on  them  the  profound 
 but  (considering  their  pretensions  of  knowledge) 
 not  unreasonable  question  respecting  the  Son  and 
 Lord  of  David.  The  Lord's  victory  was  complete 
 over  eveiy  opponent  and  at  every  stage  of  these 
 discussions.  Nothing  is  more  emphatic  in  the 
 gospels,  than  the  statement,  again  and  again  re- 
 peated in  the  history  of  this  great  day,  of  the 
 silence  to  which  Christ  reduced  his  adversaries 
 (comp.  Matt.  xxi.  27 ;  xxii.  22,  46 ;  Mark  xi.  33 ; 
 
 •  The  Lord  was  pleased  to  add  an  argument  out 
 of  the  Pentateuch,  authoritative  with  the  Saddu- 
 cees,  in  which  the  doctrine  of  the  future  life  and 
 the  resurrection  was  proved  by  a  process  of  impli- 
 cation, which  suggests  how  deep  a  substratum  of 
 spiritual  truth  underlies  the  scriptural  letter.  .See 
 Matt.  xxii.  31-33;  Mark  xii.  26,  27;  and  Luke  .\x. 
 37-40. 
 
 xii.  12,  34;  Luke  xx.  7,  26,  40).  Having  thus 
 stilled  them,  the  Lord  proceeds,  in  a  final  attempt 
 to  convince  and  win  them  to  conversion,  to 
 deliver  that  most  solemn  of  his  addresses  which 
 St.  Matthew  has  preserved  in  his  23d  chapter. 
 Free  from  passion  (vers.  2,  3),  but  full  of  love, 
 he  begins  by  warning  his  disciples  (Luke  xx.  45) 
 and  the  well-affected  multitude  (Matt,  xxiii.  i) 
 against  the  hypocritical  teachers,  who  had  misled 
 them  by  perverting  the  doctrines  of  Moses.  Then 
 in  words  of  righteous  but  withering  indignation  he 
 goes  on  to  condemn  the  fatal  casuistry  of  these 
 scribes,  who  were  closing  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
 against  others  and  themselves.  They  were  worse 
 than  their  fathers,  whose  guilt  they  were  fast  con- 
 summating, so  that  upon  that  reprobate  generation 
 must  burst  the  storm  of  vengeance  which  had  long 
 been  gathering.  And  all  this  was  in  spite  of  his 
 dear  love  which  had  so  often  yearned  over  the 
 children  of  Jerusalem  in  vain !  (see  the  tender 
 expostulation  over  the  city,  which  he  had  uttered 
 first  in  Persea  and  repeated  here  and  now,  in 
 Matt,  xxiii.  37-39).  SS.  Mark  (xii.)  and  Luke 
 (xxi.)  mention  one  affecting  incident,  which  gives 
 point  to  the  Lord's  burning  censures.  Foremost 
 amongst  these  he  had  placed  the  extortion  of  the 
 false  teachers,  who  (not  unlike  the  Sophists  of 
 Athens)  doubled  their  sin  by  first  poisoning  know- 
 ledge and  then  vending  the  noxious  doses  at  high 
 prices.  They  enriched  themselves  by  devouring 
 widows'  houses  and  robbing  the  poor  and  simple. 
 One  of  these  victims  of  their  rapacity  was  observed 
 by  Jesus  humbly  offering  at  the  Temple-treasuiy 
 the  scanty  remains  of  her  living  at  the  call  of 
 unaffected  piety.  The  Lord  bestowed  his  com- 
 mendation on  the  widow's  mite  as  the  sign  of  a 
 higher  sacrifice,  given  in  her  penuiy,  than  the 
 copious  offerings  of  the  affluent,  who  felt  not  the 
 want  of  their  costlier  gifts.  And  now  this  great 
 day  of  teaching  drew  near  its  end,  but  not  its 
 sacred  instructions.  For  as  Jesus  was  taking  his 
 leave  of  the  Temple  his  disciples  remarked  on  the 
 beauty  of  its  structure  and  materials.  He  answered 
 their  admiration  by  prophesying  the  complete 
 overthrow  of  the  splendid  fabric.  After  pensively 
 traversing  their  way,  Peter  and  his  brother  and 
 the  two  sons  of  Zebedee,  availing  themselves  of  a 
 halt  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  where  the  Lord 
 turned  another  look  towards  the  Temple,  anxioiisly 
 desired  an  explanation  of  the  mournful  prophecy. 
 Their  inquiry  afforded  Jesus  a  ready  opportunity 
 of  discoursing  on  two  events  fraught  with  pro- 
 fouiidest  interest  to  them,  as  Jews  and  as  men 
 — the  end  of  the  Jewish  polity  and  the  end  of 
 the  world.  After  what  Lord  Bacon  calls  the 
 gert?zinaiit  way  of  prophecy,  which  often  ignores 
 chronological  sequence  and  springs  from  a  crisis 
 to  its  analogue,  Christ  on  this  momentous  occa 
 sion,  in  the  long  foreview  of  his  prophetic  in^ 
 tuition,  couples  together  the  two  analogous  events, 
 the  fate  of  Jerusalem  and  the  final  judgment, 
 from  which  he  wishes  his  immediate  audience, 
 and  after  them  his  church,  throughout  all  genera- 
 tions, to  learn  the  lessons  of  vigilance  and  endur 
 ance  and  preparation,  under  many  trials  on  earth, 
 waiting  for  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man.  He 
 in  forces  his  injunctions  of  watchfulness  and  patient 
 discharge  of  duty  by  the  solemn  parables  of  the 
 Ten  Virgins  and  the  Ta/ents ;  and  winds  up  the 
 ii^strLictions  of  this  most  memorable  day  by  a 
 revelation,  suck  as  he  alone  could  make,  of  the 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 571 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 scenes  and  processes  of  the  last  judgment  (Matt. 
 XXV.  31-46). 
 
 Wednesday,  i^^/i  of  Nisan  (April  ^).— This,  the 
 perfect  contrast  of  yesterday,  was  a  day  of  no 
 excitement  and  but  little  incident.  In  its  quietness, 
 however,  was  planned  the  treachery  which  brought 
 about  the  death  of  Jesus.  The  Lord  seems  to 
 have  spent  the  whole  of  this,  his  last  day  of 
 freedom,  in  the  retirement  of  Bethany  or  on  the 
 slopes  of  Olivet.  By  some  the  supper  of  Simon 
 the  leper,  which  we  have  assigned  to  the  preced- 
 ing Saturday,  is  supposed  to  have  taken  place 
 to-day.  Its  sequence  in  the  narrative  of  SS. 
 Matthew  and  Mark  is  the  only  ground  (and  it  is  a 
 most  inconclusive  one)  for  the  conjecture.  More 
 consistent  with  probability  is  the  view  of  those  who 
 think  that  Holy  Scripture  now  removes  the  Saviour 
 from  the  gaze  of  men,  and  throws  a  veil  over  him 
 as  he  approaches  death.  In  the  profound  causes 
 of  that  death,  in  the  endurance  of  it,  and  in  its 
 momentous  issues,  what  room  for  meditation  and 
 prayer,  and  what  need  of  communion  with  his 
 heavenly  Father!  Whether  his  disciples,  whom 
 '  he  loved  to  the  end,'  were  the  sharers  of  his 
 thoughts — or  whether  he  spent  these  precious 
 hours  in  absolute  solitude — we  are  not  informed. 
 One  at  least  avoided  his  presence  during  a  part  of 
 the  day.  The  Sanhedrim,  as  we  have  seen,  had 
 long  been  seeking  some  means  of  apprehending 
 Jesus.  Though  thwarted  hitherto  by  the  favour  of 
 the  people,  they  were  still  bent  on  their  malignant 
 purpose,  and  were  met  to-day  for  consultation  at 
 the  house  of  Caiaphas,  the  high-priest.  To  this 
 body  did  the  traitor  Judas,  one  of  the  twelve,  now 
 go  — probably  in  the  afternoon  —  and  offer  his 
 miserable  services.  This  unexpected  aid  put  them 
 in  higher  hope  than  they  had  yet  dared  to  enter- 
 tain of  the  speedy  accomplishment  of  their  wishes. 
 Two  of  the  evangelists  expressly  mention  [heir  joy 
 (Mark  xiv.  11 ;  Luke  xxii.  12).  They  gratify  the 
 cupidity  of  their  new  accomplice  with  the  paltry 
 sum,  which  Moses  appointed  for  the  life  of  a 
 servant  or  slave  (Matt.  xxvi.  15,  comp.  with  Exod. 
 xxi.  32).  We  have  sometimes  called  attention  to 
 the  accomplishment  of  prophecy  in  this  history  of 
 our  Lord.  Not  the  least  remarkable  of  these 
 prophetic  coincidences  is  connected  with  this  fee 
 of  treacheiy  (see  Zech.  xi.  12,  13,  and  Matt,  xxvii. 
 9,10).  The  bargain  thus  made  in  privacy  was  to 
 be  carried  out  as  quietly  as  possible.  The  fear  of 
 the  populace  still  haunted  the  rulers,  who  were 
 laying  their  plans  for  the  seor^  death  of  Christ. 
 This,  however,  would  not  accord  with  the  appoint- 
 ment of  prophecy,  nor  with  the  intimations  which 
 the  Lord  had  himself  occasionally  dropped  about 
 the  great  event.  So  recently  as  this  veiy  morning 
 he  had  distinctly  said  to  his  appalled  disciples,  '  Ye 
 know  that  after  two  days  is  the  passover,  and 
 the  Son  of  Man  is  betrayed  (0  be  crucified^  (Matt. 
 xxvi.  i).  The  death  of  the  cross,  therefore,  and 
 that  of  course  by  public  sentence  and  execution, 
 a\vaits  the  Saviour ;  although  such  a  design  (and 
 still  more  the  attainment  of  it)  is,  even  so  late  as 
 the  present  time,  far  from  the  thoughts  of  his 
 bitterest  foes.  The  active  counsels  of  the  Pharisaic 
 party,  however,  as  we  have  said,  had  received  a 
 great  impulse  to-day  from  the  unexpected  adhesion 
 of  one  of  the  apostles.  They  accordingly  laid 
 their  plans  for  tampering  with  the  populace,  and 
 they  found  effective  helpers  in  those  '  chiefs  of  the 
 people,'  whom  we  have  already  observed  closely 
 
 leagued  with  the  malignants.  With  what  success 
 their  efforts  were  crowned  we  shall  soon  discover. 
 Jesus,  who  is  now  a  free  man,  will  be  by  to-morrow 
 night  a  prisoner  in  the  house  of  the  high-priest, 
 awaiting  death. 
 
 Thursday,  li^th  of  Nisan  (April  6). — The  greater 
 portion  of  this,  like  the  whole  of  the  previous  day, 
 was  spent  in  private,  either  at  Bethany  or  some 
 other  part  of  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The  proceed- 
 ings of  the  Sanhedrim,  no  less  than  the  actions  of 
 our  Lord,  are  again  veiled  in  obscurity.  Never 
 did  history  fail  in  her  record  at  a  more  momentous 
 period  than  at  this  great  crisis,  M'hen  the  powers 
 of  darkness  were  successfully  engaged  in  their  fatal 
 activity  to  accomplish  the  Saviour's  death.  How 
 profoundly  sacred  were  the  meditations  of  Jesus, 
 and  how  intensely  malignant  were  the  labours  of 
 his  enemies,  which  this  veil  of  history  shrouds  from 
 view,  we  may  in  some  degree  gather  from  the 
 nature  of  the  case  and  from  the  events  which  are 
 revealed  to  us,  on  either  side,  on  the  resumption 
 of  the  narrative.  Among  the  many  astonishing 
 occurrences  which  make  this  week  the  most  won- 
 derful in  all  history,  not  the  least  remarkable  is 
 the  conduct  of  '  the  people '  tov/ards  our  Lord. 
 And  now  while  the  faction  which  rules  at  Jerusa- 
 lem is  so  engrossed  in  detaching  the  multitude 
 from  their  hngering  devotion  to  Christ,  let  us 
 bestow  a  moment's  reflection,  in  passing,  on  the 
 probable  cause  of  that  revolution  in  the  pubhc 
 sentiment  which  enabled  the  Sanhedrim  to  effect 
 their  deadly  object.  From  the  capricious  qualities 
 of  a  crowd,  which  shrewd  observers  of  mankind 
 have  so  often  noticed  (comp.  Eurip.  Orest.  1157; 
 Cicero,  pro  Plane,  iv.  ;  Virgil,  ALn.  ii.  39  ['  incer- 
 tumvulgus'];  Horat.  Od.  ii.  16.  40  ['malignum 
 vulgus '] ;  Od.  i.  35.  25  ['infidum'];  Shakespere, 
 Coriolaims,  i.  i),  the  Jewish  populace  was  cer- 
 tainly not  exempt.  Nowhere  could  one  find  a 
 more  vivid  portraiture  of  popular  inconsistency 
 than  in  the  accounts  which  the  evangelists  give 
 us  of  the  change  in  the  shouts  of  the  multitude  in 
 the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  from  the  ''  Hosaiinas''  of 
 Palm  Sunday  to  the  '  Away  with  him,  crucify  him ' 
 of  the  following  Friday.  Other  examples  are 
 given  us  by  St.  Luke  (Acts  xiv.  11-19;  xix.  32, 
 sqq.  ;  xxviii.  4-6),  but  they  are  faint  illustrations 
 indeed  of  the  vast  and  fatal  inconsistency  of  which 
 we  are  writing.  Startling,  however,  as  it  was,  we 
 have  not  far  to  go  for  the  reason  of  the  change. 
 
 Intense  was  the  popular  craving  to  exchange  the 
 Roman  yoke  for  a  native  monarch  who  should 
 restore  the  line  of  their  glorious  David  ;  and  in 
 spite  of  the  Lord's  studied  efforts  to  check  all 
 political  demonstrations  in  his  favour,  the  great 
 works  of  mercy,  which  he  designed  to  instigate 
 only  spiritual  adhesion  to  him,  suggested  to  the 
 wonder-stricken  crowds  which  saw  them  the  con- 
 clusion, that  the  Wonder-worker  himself  could  be 
 none  else  than  the  very  Messiah,  the  restorer  of 
 their  ancient  kingdom.  In  vain  did  Jesus  seek 
 every  opportunity  of  discouraging  and  reproving 
 this  mere  worldly  expectation.  His  very  apostles 
 were  full  of  it  to  the  last.  How  bitter  then  was 
 the  disappointment  of  all  men,  when,  instead  of 
 displaying  the  insignia  of  a  revolutionary  enterprise 
 to  which  their  Hosannas  were  intended,  on  the 
 first  day  of  the  week,  to  invite  him,  he  gradually 
 withdrew  himself  from  all  intercourse  and  apparent 
 sympathy  with  the  people.  Disappointment,  as 
 is  natural,  begat  a  reaction  of  dislike  and  a  desire 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 572 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 of  revenge.  The  higher  classes,  whom  the  Lord's 
 severe  strictures  had  within  the  last  day  or  two 
 exasperated  more  keenly  than  ever,  saw  the  change, 
 and  instantly  embraced  it  by  the  help  of  the 
 popular  leaders  whom  they  had  already  on  their 
 >ide.  In  this  somewhat  speedy  collapse  of  their 
 Messianic  hopes  may  we  then  trace  the  cause  of 
 the  defection  of  the  populace  from  the  side  of 
 Christ,  stimulated  as  it  was  by  the  artful  mis- 
 representations of  their  subtle  guides,  who  were 
 too  well  practised  in  hypocrisy  to  be  at  a  loss  for 
 means  of  converting  a  popular  disappointment  into 
 a  strong  antipathy.  What  particular  shape  their 
 persuasion  took  we  shall  have  another  opportunity 
 of  seeing.  We  need  only  here  remark,  that  in  the 
 face  of  these  considerations  we  shall  feel  no  aston- 
 ishment, when  to-morrow  we  find  Jesus,  whom 
 any  attempt  to  injure  would  four  days  ago  have 
 brought  thousands  to  his  rescue,  led  out  to  execu- 
 tion amid  the  execrations  of  a  hostile  multitude. 
 To-day  he  is  still  at  rest,  probably  in  the  company 
 of  his  beloved  disciples.  In  answer  to  their  natural 
 inquiiy — where  they  should  prepare  for  him  the 
 passover? — he,  towards  the  end  of  the  present 
 day,  dispatches  Peter  and  John  to  a  certain  house 
 within  the  city,  where,  as  he  had  foretold,  a  ready 
 welcome  awaited  the  entire  party  for  the  purpose 
 of  their  commemoration.  Before,  however,  they 
 had  begun  their  sacred  festival,  the  comparatively 
 uneventful  Thursday,  in  its  civil  sense,  was  ended, 
 and  that  day  had  begun  its  legal  course,  which  is 
 in  its  issues  immeasurably  the  greatest  of  all  days. 
 
 Friday  \^th  of  Nisan  {April  'j)^  first  portion,  or 
 Thursday  evening  and  Jiight. — It  will  more  accord 
 with  the  usual  treatment  of  this  part  of  the  sacred 
 history,  if  we  divide  the  isthof  Nisan  into  \\.%natiiral 
 sections  of  (i)  Thursday  evening  and  night,  and  (2) 
 Friday.  It  is  some  indication  of  the  importance  of 
 this  day's  events,  that  hardly  one  of  them  is  unen- 
 cumbered with  much  discussion  and  contrariety  of 
 opinion.  Were  our  space  much  longer  than  it  is, 
 it  would  be  too  brief  to  admit  of  any  controversial 
 matter.  This  we  therefore  forego,  and  content 
 ourselves  with  registering  such  results  as  seem  to 
 us  to  approach  most  nearly  to  verisimihtude.  Fol- 
 lowing the  express  statements  of  SS.  Matthew  (xxvi. 
 17),  Mark  (xiv.  12),  and  Luke  (xxii.  7),  with  which 
 the  apparently  discrepant  narrative  of  St.  John 
 does  not  in  fact  disagree  (see  the  ai-guments  suc- 
 cinctly given  by  Dr.  Robinson  in  the  Bihliotheca 
 Sacra  of  Aug.  1845,  pp.  405-436;  and  with  still 
 greater  brevity,  in  the  Tract  Society's  edition  of 
 his  Harmony,  pp.  145-151;  while  a  convenient 
 statement  of  the  opposite  view  may  be  seen  in 
 Bishop  Ellicott's  Lectu-res,  pp.  322,  323,  notes ; 
 and  Neander's  Life  of  'Jesus  Christ  [Bohn],  pp. 
 425-427,  note),  we  find,  as  might  a  priori  be  ex- 
 pected of  him,  who  in  his  holy  mission  was  careful 
 '  to  fulfil  all  righteousness,'  that  Jesus,  according 
 to  the  prescription  of  the  law  (Exod.  xii.  i),  pro- 
 ceeded this  evening  to  eat  with  his  disciples  the 
 paschal  meal  which  had  been  duly  prepared  in  the 
 afternoon  of  Thursday  by  Peter  and  John  (Luke 
 xxii.  8).  Fit  conclusion  was  this  to  his  loving 
 intercourse  with  them  ;  and  the  celebration  gave 
 him  an  especial  joy,  as  gratifying  the  most  earnest 
 desire  which  he  had  of  ending  his  ministry  with 
 the  holiest  of  the  festivals  of  the  ancient  church, 
 into  which  he  was  now  to  infuse  a  sacred  trans- 
 forming power,  whence  a  new  feast  was  to  arise, 
 the  memorial  of  his  death,  which  should  become 
 
 the  blessed  means  of  union  and  strength  to  his 
 future  people  (Luke  xxii.  15).  But  not  unsallied 
 was  his  joy.  In  that  extreme  infatuation  which 
 blinded  the  eyes  of  the  disciples  against  the  faSi*' 
 approaching  humiliation  of  their  Master,  and  which 
 on  the  very  threshold  of  his  deepest  sorrow  made 
 them  dream  of  earthly  greatness  and  glory,  they 
 were  no  sooner  seated  at  the  supper  than  they 
 began  an  unseemly  strife  '  which  of  them  should  be 
 accounted  the  greatest'  (ver.  24).  Jesus  .gently 
 deprecates  that  ambition,  so  unfit  in  the  followers 
 of  him  who  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but 
 had  ever  been  amongst  them  'as  one  that  serveth.' 
 And,  the  more  emphatically  to  recommend  the 
 meekness  of  such  a  character,  he,  with  deliberate 
 earnestness,  proceeded  to  wash  the  feet  of  each  of 
 them  in  succession.  It  was  the  office  of  a  menial ; 
 but,  as  Christ  performed  it,  it  rather  enhanced  than 
 compromised  the  inherent  dignity  of  his  exalted 
 character,  and  drew  from  all  the  company,  and 
 even  from  the  impetuous  Peter,  who  at  first  pro- 
 tested against  the  act  as  a  needless  htmiiliation, 
 acquiescence  and  profound  respect.  The  paschal 
 supper  was  still  going  on  (the  hd-Kvov  yevoixhov 
 of  John  xiii.  2  should  rather  be,  when  supper  had 
 begun,  than  had  ended,  as  A.  V.  has  it ;  the  reading 
 of  B,  and  other  MSB.,  including  C,  priitia  manu, 
 and  the  newly  discovered  X  \^d-nvov  '^ivoixivov\,  still 
 more  clearly  shews  our  version  to  be  improbable), 
 when  Jesus  with  troubled  spirit  indicates  in  a  few 
 solemn  and  emphatic  words  his  certain  knowledge 
 of  the  foul  treachery  which  was  lurking  in  the 
 heart  of  one  of  his  companions  and  was  soon  to  be 
 displayed  in  the  betrayal  of  himself  to  his  enemies. 
 This  perfidious  requital  of  his  love,  which  was  not 
 unmarked  in  prophecy  (Ps.  xli.  9;  Iv.  12-14),  was 
 one  of  the  bitterest  ingredients  of  his  cup  of  sorrow, 
 and  the  announcement  of  it  now  filled  the  disciples 
 with  sad  and  anxious  fears.  Each  felt  the  anguish 
 of  a  momentary  distrust  of  even  his  own  fidelity, 
 and  with  deep  emotion  asked,  '  Lord,  is  it  I  ?'  Nor 
 did  the  conscious  one  himself  relieve  their  doubt 
 by  any  apparent  embarrassment.  It  is  impossible 
 to  tell  what  was  passing  in  his  heart  at  this  moment 
 of  severe  trial.  Was  he  by  this  time  utterly 
 estranged  from  his  good  and  loving  Master,  or  was 
 he  even  yet  reclaimable  by  the  merciful  and  gentle 
 warnings,  which  the  Lord  obviously  addressed  to 
 him  to  the  very  last  ?  On  the  answer  to  this  ques- 
 tion depends  the  traitor's  meaning  in  repeating  the 
 inquiry  of  the  rest,  'Master,  is  it  I?'  It  might 
 have  been  the  effect  of  an  irrepressible  awe,  which 
 made  him  involuntarily  re-echo  the  anxiety  of  his 
 fellows.  It  might  have  been  a  mere  blind  to  hide 
 himself  withal  from  observation.  It  might  have 
 been  the  insolence  of  bravado.  Be,  however,  the 
 fact  what  it  may,  the  fatal  moment  of  his  apostasy 
 is  at  liand.  The  Lord,  with  no  ungracious  intent 
 (for  to  give  a  xj/w/xiov  at  an  Eastern  repast  was  a 
 mark  of  affectionate  friendship  ;  see  Wordsworth 
 and  Alford,  on  John  xiii.  26),  handed  to  him  a 
 fragment  of  the  paschal  viands.  The  kindness  was 
 lost  upon  his  faithless  heart,  which  vacillates  no 
 longer.  '  After  the  sop,  Satan  entered  into  him ' 
 (John  xiii.  27).  He  quits  the  sacred  presence  with 
 a  few  words  from  the  Saviour.  His  departure 
 seems  to  have  relieved  the  soul  of  Jesus  of  an  op- 
 pressive weight ;  '  Now  is  the  Son  of  Man  glori- 
 fied,' he  exclaims,  'and  God  is  glorified  in  him' 
 (ver.  31).  The  paschal  supper  terminates  ;  and  at 
 its  third  cup  {(he  cup  of  blessing;  comp.  i  Car.  x 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 57; 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 16)  the  Lord  proceeds  to  engraft  upon  it  the 
 eucharistic  feast  of  the  gospel,  the  oldest  and  the 
 highest  of  Christian  institutions,  which  will  only 
 cease  to  be  a  blessing  to  faithful  souls  when  the 
 Lord  shall  come  himself  to  supersede  it  to  them  by 
 his  own  eternal  presence.  St.  John  is  silent  on 
 this  act  of  Christ  in  ordaining  his  holy  supper. 
 But  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  (see  I  Cor. 
 xi.  23-25)  supplies  his  place,  and  unites  with  the 
 other  three  evangelists  in  a  beautiful  history  of  an 
 event,  in  which  the  Gentile  no  less  than  the  Jewish 
 believer  has  an  indefeasible  interest.  A  few 
 melancholy  words  are  first  uttered  by  Christ  on 
 the  desertion  and  dispersion  of  those  around  him, 
 when  the  near-approaching  hour  of  danger  should 
 come  ;  and  then,  when  the  self-confident  Peter,  as 
 usual,  interrupts  him  with  his  vain  protest,  the 
 Lord  announces  to  him  that  his  desertion  will  be 
 especially  deliberate  and  repeated  ;  but  he  graci- 
 ously added,  '  Simon,  Simon,  behold  Satan  hath 
 desired  to  have  you,  that  he  may  sift  you  as  wheat 
 — but  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not. ' 
 The  tenderness  of  this  expostulation,  which  St. 
 Luke  alone  records  (xxii.  31),  must  afterwards  have 
 gone  home  to  the  heart  of  the  fallen  apostle,  and 
 with  that  loving  '  look '  of  sorrowful  rebuke,  which 
 again  St.  Luke  is  the  only  one  to  mention  (xxii.  61), 
 must  have  gone  far  to  work  that  repentance  in  him 
 which  ultimately  restored  him  to  the  Saviour's  side 
 and  cause.  (We  may  thus  regard  the  third  evan- 
 gelist as  the  historian  of  Peter's  contrition,  in  its 
 causes  no  less  than  its  fact.)  Of  all /«//(/;/'/ com- 
 munications Christ  has  now  unburdened  his  mind, 
 and  he  is  free  to  take  his  farewell  of  them  in  words 
 which  breathe  only  of  love  and  heavenly  comfort. 
 Who,  in  limits  far  more  spacious  even  than  ours  in 
 this  sketch,  can  hope  to  express  the  sublime  in- 
 struction, prayer,  and  consolation,  which  now  flowed 
 from  the  mouth  of  the  holy  Saviour  ?  In  the  long 
 section  which  intervenes  between  the  latter  part  of 
 nis  chap.  xiii.  and  the  close  of  chap.  xvii.  the 
 beloved  disciple  has  been  permitted  to  record  for 
 the  church's  eternal  consolation  the  profound  secrets 
 of  his  dear  Lord's  wise  and  loving  heart.  Olshausen 
 {Commentary  [Clark's  ed.],  vol.  iv.  p.  47)  well  calls 
 this  portion  of  the  evangelical  history  '  its  holy  of 
 holies,  the  view  into  which  our  Evangelist,  like  a 
 consecrated  priest,  alone  opens  to  us.'  Jesus 
 sounds  at  the  very  first  the  key-note  of  his  address. 
 '  Let  not  your  heart  be  troubled ;  ye  believe  in 
 God,  believe  also  in  vie?  And  he  goes  on  to  shew 
 them  how  intimate,  how  inseparable,  was  his  rela- 
 tion to  the  Father  ;  in  this  close  union  lay  all  their 
 security  as  believers  in  him.  If  he  had  spoken  of 
 leaving  them,  let  them  be  assured  that  his  neces- 
 sary absence  would  be  more  than  compensated  for 
 by  the  abiding  presence  and  indwelling  of  attother 
 Comforter,  who  would  faithfully  represent  Him  to 
 them  ;  teach  them  more  than  they  could  then  know 
 of  him  ;  replenish  their  memories  with  all  his  past 
 instructions  ;  strengthen  them  for  trials,  and  give 
 them  the  victory  over  them  all.  This  Comforter 
 would  guide  them  into  all  truth  and  impart  to  them 
 his  spirit  and  disposition.  Possessing  that,  let 
 them  love  one  another  ;  and  he  adduces  the  eternal 
 and  indissoluble  oneness  of  the  Almighty  Father 
 and  himself  as  the  groundwork  and  the  model  of 
 that  union  which  his  people  should  have  among 
 themselves  and  with  him.  These  sublime  instruc- 
 tions, which  for  their  better  recollection  of  them  he 
 repeats  in  various  forms,  by  simile  (as  that  of  the 
 
 Vine  and  the  Branches  [chap,  xv.])  no  less  than 
 precept — he  ends  with  a  solemn  intercessoiy  prayer 
 for  himself  and  his  much  loved  ones,  whom  he  was 
 leaving — '  I  am  no  more  in  the  world,  but  these 
 are.     I  am  coming  to  thee.     Holy  Father,  keep 
 through  thine  own  name  those  whom   thou  hast 
 given  me,  that  they  may  be  one,  as  we  are.'     And 
 that  this  prayer  might  never  fail  in  interest  to  the 
 church,  it  embraces  in  its  sacred  scope  the  latest 
 converts  to  a  discipleship  with   Christ ;    '  Ahither 
 pray' I  for  these  alone,  but  for  them  also  which  shall 
 believe  on  me  through  their  word,  that  they  all  may 
 be  one,  as  thou.  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee.' 
 How  profound  was  the  impression  made  by  this 
 address  and  supplication  of  the  Lord  on  the  minds 
 of  those  who  were  privileged  to  hear  them  we  may 
 gather  from  him  who  survived  all  the  rest.      He 
 was  spared  to  a  ripe  old  age  ;  but  he  never  failed 
 to  address  his  audience  to  the  veiy  last  in  the  very 
 echoes  of  Christ's  own  sweet  words,  '  Little  child- 
 ren '  (comp.  the  Lord's  reKvla,  John  xiii.  13,  with 
 the  venerable  apostle's  own  use,  no  less  than  seven 
 times  in  his  epistles,  of  the  same  endearing  appella- 
 tion), and  'Love  one  another.'     At  the  conclusion 
 of  the  Lord's  intercessory  supplication,   the  little 
 company,  who  had  some  time  before  risen  to  depart 
 (John  xiv.  31),  having  chanted  the  conclusion  of 
 their   sacred  Hallel,   quitted    their   chamber,   and 
 Jesus  led  the  way  through  the  city-gate  (probably 
 that  now    called  St.    Stephen's)   over    the   brook 
 Cedron,  where  his  great  progenitor  David,    1000 
 years  before,  in  bitterness  of  spirit,  had  passed  flying 
 from  persecution  and  treachery  (Burgon  on  John 
 xviii.  i).     Knowing  that  his  hour  at  last  is  come, 
 he  will  not  flee  from  his  enemies.     He  accordingly 
 betakes  himself  to  the  garden  of  Gethsemane,  a 
 favourite  haunt,    as  it  would  seem    (ver.    2),    the 
 shades    of  which    he    had   no   doubt    often   con- 
 secrated  by  prayer  and   holy   converse   with   his 
 disciples.     In   company  with    them    he   enters    it 
 (John  xviii.    i)  under  the  light  of  the  fuh  moon, 
 which  fails,  however,  to  illuminate  the  deeper  re- 
 cesses into  which  the  Lord  penetrates  with  Peter, 
 James,  and  John  (Matt.  xxvi.  37  ;  Mark  xiv.  33). 
 These,  it  will  be  remembered,  were  his  companions 
 at  the  Transfiguration  ;  but  as  then  they  were  op- 
 pressed with  sleep,  amid  the  effulgent  glories  of 
 the  heavenly  scene  (Luke  ix.  32)  ;  so  now,  when 
 their  Master  and  Friend  is  bearing  the  agonies  of 
 an  amazing    sorrow    'even   unto    death' — (What 
 words  are  equal  to  describe  the  magnitude  of  the 
 sufferings  of  Gethsemane?     We  will  not  attempt 
 to  find  any  !     But  we  will  point  to  the  expressive 
 words  of  St.  Mark,  who  is  always  graphic  on  great 
 occasions  :  ijp^a.To  eK'^a/xlSeTcr'^ai  Kai  ddij/j.oveci',  xiv. 
 33  ;  and  of  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
 brews, 5e7;o-eis  re  Kal  iKeT7]pias   .    .    .   fiera  Kpaxryrji 
 iffx^pas   Kal   SaKpvwv  vpocrev^yKas,    v.    7,    as   some 
 indication  of  the  anguish  of  this  night  of  sorrow, 
 unequalled  by  any  other  incident  of  his  passion, 
 but  the  consummation  itself  of  Calvary) — a  like 
 heaviness,  though  caused  by  sorrow,  as  St.  Luke  is 
 careful  to  inform  us  (xxii.  45),  removed  them  from 
 the  sight  of  that  mystery  of  sufl'ering.     Deeper  and 
 deeper  still  were  the  abysses  of  his  grief :   '  His 
 sweat  was  as  it  were  great  drops  of  blood  falling 
 down   to    the   ground'    (ver.    44) ;    the  prmce   of 
 darkness,  whom  we  saw  retreat  before  his  stead- 
 fastness  at    the   beginning    of  his    ministry  (&xp> 
 Kaipov,  Luke  iv.  13),  returns  now  to  his  last  and 
 most  dreadful  assault,  no   longer  with  blandish 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 574 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Dieiits,  but  with  all  the  force  of  a  rousrh  unsparing 
 hatred.  Was  the  first  gush  of  woe  in  Gethsemane 
 stronger  than  the  last  ?  or  was  it  that  he,  who 
 'learned  obedience  by  the  things  which  he  suf- 
 fered and  became  perfect'  (Heb.  v.  S,  9),  grew, 
 angel-helped,  as  St.  Luke  tells  us  he  was  (xxii.43), 
 7}iore patient  even  by  endurance?  For  it  is  a  feature 
 in  the  grandeur  of  the  Redeemer's  conflict,  that 
 whereas  he  at  first  entreated  the  Father  to  take 
 a-cvay  the  ct/p  from  him  if  possible^  his  second  prayer 
 modifies  that  request,*  acknowledging  its  impossi- 
 bility ;  while  in  terms  of  a  most  absolute  resigna- 
 tion he  submits  to  its  bitterest  draught  :  '  O  my 
 Father,  since  this  cup  cannot  pass  away  from  me 
 without  my  drinkmg  it,  thy  will  be  done'  {d  ov 
 hiwarai  tovto  to  Trorrjpcov  napeX'^e'ip  (ztt  e/xov,  eav  fj-rj 
 ai'To  Tviw,  K.T.X.,  Watt.  xxvi.  42,  comp.  with  ver. 
 39).  The  more  intense  his  suffeiing,  the  more 
 earnest  grew  his  prayer  of  meek  submission  ! 
 Human  as  he  was,  he  affectingly  asks  of  his  com- 
 panions their  help  and  sympathy.  But  however 
 willing  in  their  loving  hearts  (Matt.  xxvi.  41  ; 
 Mark  xiv.  38),  they  were  unable  to  render  him 
 even  this  scanty  consolation.  The  most  forward  of 
 them  failed  in  the  hour  of  need  :  '  Simon,  steepest 
 thou .?'  More  than  once  did  he  gently  rebuke 
 them — so  gently,  that  his  very  gentleness,  no  less 
 than  their  own  consciousness  of  neglect,  deprived 
 them  of  all  excuse,  except  that  which  he  was  pleased 
 so  graciously  to  find  for  them ;  '  they  wist  not 
 what  to  answer  him'  (Mark  xiv.  40).  In  their 
 weakness,  which  stands  as  afoil\\\  the  sacred  nar- 
 rative, we  have  a  touching  contrast  to  the  strong 
 will  and  calm  spirit  with  which  he  rose  superior  to 
 the  terrible  conflict.  The  victory  of  his  soul  was 
 gained ;  his  will  lost  its  last  natural  inclination  to 
 shrink  from  suffering ;  but  the  scene  closes  upon 
 the  still  sleeping  disciples.  Without  resentment  at 
 even  a  third  disappointment,  he  says  to  them  at 
 last  in  words,  which  Neander  has  perhaps  best  in- 
 terpreted [Life  of  Jesus  [Bohn],  p.  453)  :  '  Sieep 
 on;  /will  rouse  you  no  more  to  watch  and  pray 
 with  me  ;  but  your  rest  shall  be  rudely  disturbed  ; 
 for,  behold,  the  hour  of  my  suffering  is  at  hand. 
 Already  my  captors  are  near.'  The  happy  effect 
 of  his  self-conquest  in  the  fearful  struggle  of  Geth- 
 semane appears  in  all  the  sequel  of  his  passion.  At 
 every  step  from  the  garden  to  the  cross  what  trials 
 await  him  !  But  from  none  does  he  for  an  instant 
 shrink.  With  the  full  volition  of  his  soul,  he  offers 
 himself  to  meet  them  all — '  the  pain,  the  shame, 
 the  scorn,  the  loss'  [Christian  Year,  loth  Sunday 
 after  Trinity).  The  traitor,  who  had  gone  from  the 
 Paschal  chamber  straight  to  the  chief  priests  and 
 Pharisees,  conducts  a  troop  of  the  Temple  police, 
 who  were  aided  by  a  picquet  of  military  from  the 
 garrison  of  Antonia,  and  furnished  with  eveiy  ap- 
 pliance of  defence  and  search — 'lanterns  and 
 torches,'  in  case  of  concealment  among  the  darker 
 
 *  St.  Luke  refers  to  the  second  prayer  as  offered 
 iKTiviarepov  \7n0re  earnestly'\  ;  not,  however,  as 
 more  urgently  supplicating  for  the  removal  of  the 
 cup  ;  but  more  vehemently  struggling  for  the  vic- 
 tory of  submission  in  his  agony.  Christ  knew  that 
 the  Father  'always  heard  him'  (John  xi.  42).  He 
 therefore  understands  the  7tot  passing  away  of  his 
 anguish  as  the  granting  in  fact  of  his  last  petition 
 \^  as  Thou  wi/t'];  as  the  indication  of  the  divine 
 will  that  he  should  drink  the  cup.  Stier,  IVordsof 
 tht  L.  J.  [Clark],  vii.  256. 
 
 recesses  of  the  garden,  '  and  weapons,'  in  case  of 
 an  attempt  at  rescue  (John  xviii.  3).  The  extent 
 of  these  precautions  gives  evidence  of  the  fears  of 
 the  Sanhedrim  lest  after  all  they  should  miss  their 
 victim.  But  they  little  knew  what  had  passed  in 
 the  sufferer's  heart,  while  they  had  been  making  all 
 their  preparation  of  arrest !  The  discipline  of  the 
 agony  had  rendered  that  preparation  completely 
 useless  !  Jesus,  instead  of  resisting,  went  forth  to 
 meet  the  troop  on  their  approach  to  the  garden. 
 Useless  too  was  the  miserable  formality  of  the 
 traitor,  who  must  needs  give  the  kiss,  the  concerted 
 signal  of  his  treachery  !  But  all  was  in  vain  ! 
 Though  Jesus  offered  himself  to  their  grasp,  such 
 was  his  majesty  and  moral  dignity,  even  in  weak- 
 ness, that  the  entire  party  who  had  advanced  to 
 seize  him  involuntarily  reeled  back  and  fell  to  the 
 ground.  He  presents  himself  again  to  them,  after 
 they  had  come  to  themselves,  and  gave  an  addi- 
 tional proof  of  his  voluntary  surrender  by  stipulat- 
 ing for  the  dismissal  and  safety  of  his  friends  who 
 had  sworn  to  defend  him  to  the  last  :  '  If  ye  seek 
 me,  let  these  go  their  way'  (John  xviii.  8).  But 
 the  traitor's  kiss  incensed  his  old  companions. 
 They  asked  permission  to  avenge  it  with  the  swoi'd 
 (Luke  xxii.  49),  and  Peter  actually  dealt  what  was 
 within  a  little  of  a  deadly  blow  at  the  foremost  of 
 the  arresting  party.  This  mistimed  zeal  drew  forth 
 another  proof  of  the  Lord's  willingness  to  surrender 
 himself  to  the  appointment  of  God.  His  recent 
 agony  and  self-conquest  are  uppennost  in  his 
 mind  :  '  The  cup  which  my  Father  hath  given  me, 
 shall  I  not  drink  it?'  (John  xviii.  II).  He  puts 
 forth  for  the  last  time  a  sign  of  his  miraculous 
 power,  by  healing  the  ear  of  the  maimed  Malchus  ; 
 meekly  submits  to  the  armed  troop  with  an  expres- 
 sion of  surprise  at  the  magnitude  of  their  prepara- 
 tion ;  and  when  the  arrest  is  completed,  he  has  an 
 augmentation  of  his  sorrow  in  the  cowardice  of  his 
 disciples,  'who  all  forsook  him  and  fled'  (Matt. 
 xxvi.  56;  Mark  xiv.  50).  And  now  he  enters  once 
 more  '  the  holy  city,'  which  is  so  soon  to  cover 
 itself  with  the  guilt  of  his  rejection,  no  longer  Math 
 the  Hosannas  of  an  admiring  people,  but  a  prisoner 
 strictly  guarded,  as  if  a  robber,*  unhelped  by  the 
 sympathy  of  the  multitudes  whom  his  capture  had 
 brought  together,  even  at  that  early  hour  (Matt. 
 xxvi.  55).  We  shall  not  attempt  to  narrate  the 
 series  of  examinations  through  which  he  was 
 dragged  by  Jew  and  Gentile — from  Annas  to  Caia- 
 phas ;  from  Caiaphas  to  Pilate ;  from  Pilate  to 
 Herod  ;  from  Herod  back  again  to  Pilate.  The 
 misery,  however,  and  humiliation  of  these  pro- 
 cesses of  injustice,  probably  brought  less  pain  to 
 the  heart  of  the  sufferer  than  the  base  conduct  ot 
 his  foremost  friend  and  follower.  After  his  fit  ot 
 unseasonable  courage  in  Gethsemane,  Simon  Peter 
 joined  his  brother  apostles  in  their  ignominious 
 flight.  In  company,  however,  with  one  of  them, 
 and  under  the  cover  of  the  night,  he  found  his  way 
 to  the  house  of  the  high-priest,  and  in  the  hurry 
 gained  admission  into  the  outer  court.  He  was  soon 
 recognised  ;  among  others  by  a  kinsman  of  the 
 man  whom  he  had  wounded  in  the  garden.  Three 
 times  was  he  charged  with  a  complicity  with  the 
 
 *  (is  iirl  Xrja-TTjv  is  the  Lord's  own  expression  : 
 A'£'i^(^(?;-,  rather  than  [A.V.]  'thief  more  truly  ex- 
 presses the  idea  of  force  and  violence,  which  is  in- 
 volved in  Christ's  words  (Matt.  xxvi.  55 ;  Mark 
 xiv.  48  ;  Luke  xxii.  52). 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 575 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 prisoner.  Three  times  did  he  deny  his  gracious 
 master,  accompanying  his  third  denial  with  curses 
 and  oaths.  So  loud  were  his  protestations  as  to 
 catch  the  ear  of  Jesus,  whom  they  were  perhaps 
 leading  across  the  quadrangle  at  the  moment  : 
 'The  Lord  turned  and  looked  upon  Peter'  (Luke 
 xxii.  6i).  The  pity  and  loving  correction  of  that 
 reproving  glance,  added  to  the  crowing  at  that 
 instant  of  a  cock,  which  Christ  had  only  the  even- 
 ing before  associated  with  his  grievous  fall,  roused 
 the  unhappy  man  to  a  consciousness  of  his  shame- 
 ful ingratitude.  He  quitted  the  scene  and  wept 
 bitterly.  We  are  not  told  whether  he  ventured  in 
 openly  again  during  the  avvful  events  which  fol- 
 lowed, but  that  his  penitential  tears  washed  the  sin 
 from  the  Saviour's  memory  may  well  be  gathered 
 from  the  merciful  signs  of  reconciliation  which  he 
 took  the  earliest  opportunity  of  evincing  after  his 
 resurrection  (among  these  signs  the  angel's  message 
 IS  remarkable,  Mark  xvi.  7). 
 
 Friday,  \^th  of  A^ is  an  {April  7).  Second  por- 
 tion, or  Friday  proper. — The  evening  which  had 
 begun  with  the  Paschal  celebration,  and  the  night 
 with  the  agony  of  Gethsemane — were  both  termi- 
 nated. The  daybreak  of  Friday  opens  (probably  at 
 about  two  o'clock  A.M.)  on  another  event,  which 
 had  grown  out  of  the  occurrences  of  this  night  of 
 malevolent  activit}'.  No  sooner  was  Jesus  captured 
 than  the  Sanhedrim  were  convened.  After  some 
 delay  (perhaps  of  an  hour),  during  which  Annas 
 the  ex-high-priest,  a  man  of  influence  in  the  coun- 
 cil, had  the  charge  of  the  captive,  the  members 
 met  at  the  house  of  this  man's  son-in-law,  Caia- 
 phas,  who  was  the  high-priest  this  year,  and  took 
 a  leading  part  in  the  Saviour's  condemnation. 
 It  was  before  this  court  of  Caiaphas  that  the 
 most  deliberate  proceedings  against  Jesus  were 
 taken.  Much  has  been  written  both  by  Jewish 
 and  by  Christian  writers  in  vindication  of  the  San- 
 hedrim. The  former  (like  Mon.  Salvador,  in  his 
 Histoire  des  Institutions  de  Moise,  iv.  3,  writing  on 
 '  the  trial  and  condemnation  of  Jesus ')  claim  for 
 the  council  the  merit  of  an  honourable  and  con- 
 scientious examination  of  the  entire  case,  and  by  a 
 regular  routine  of  law.  The  latter  (like  Mr.  Wil- 
 son in  his  valuable  Ilhistraiion  of  the  Method  of 
 explaining  the  N.  T.),  while  repudiating  the  action 
 of  the  Jewish  tribunal,  which  is  so  satisfactory  to 
 writers  of  that  nation,  admit  '  the  regularity  of  the 
 proceedings  before  Caiaphas,  the  earnest  manner 
 of  the  high-priest,  and  the  promptitude  and  unani- 
 mity of  the  whole  court,  as  bearing  as  strong  marks 
 of  sincerity  as  can  accompany  any  public  act  what- 
 ever' (Wilson,  p.  79).  6"/«(r«-(?  they  may  no  doubt 
 have  been,  and  consiste?it  in  their  hostility  to  the 
 Saviour  :  nor  do  we  deny  that  the  seven  occasions 
 (John  v.  18;  vi.  42;  viii.  59;  x.  31  and  39; 
 Matt.  ix.  3  ;  Mark  xiv.  64)  adduced  by  Mr.  Wil- 
 son do  furnish  an  unhappy  clue  of  fatal  consistency 
 in  the  conduct  of  the  Pharisaic  party  towards  the 
 Redeemer.  Bat  no  admission  of  this  kind  can  in 
 anywise  amount  to  a  justification  of  the  Sanhedrim. 
 Their  sincerity  was  that  of  malignants  ;  their  con- 
 sistency that  of  men  to  whom  the  death  of  their 
 victim  was  a  foregone  conclusion  (Matt.  xxvi.  4 ; 
 Mark  xiv.  2),  an  end  to  be  accomplished  by  any 
 means — by  regular  process  if  possible  ;  but  if  not, 
 by  violence  or  assassination  rather  than  not  at  all. 
 Nothing  is  more  evident  to  the  reader  of  the  Gos- 
 pels than  the  prejudice  of  the  priests  and  scribes, 
 whose  influence  among  the  people  was  endangered 
 
 by  the  works  and  words  of  Jesus.  This  dangel 
 gave  them  an  interest  in  removing  the  great  teacher 
 out  of  the  way.  It  also  rendered  theni  incapable 
 of  judging  equitably  of  his  character  and  claims. 
 The  grounds  of  this  incapacity  the  Lord  himself 
 had  often  pointed  out  to  them  ;  he  perceived  theit 
 inability  to  be  a  moral  one,  founded  on  their  inte- 
 rested malevolence  ;  and  as  such  it  was  an  immo- 
 rality, a  guilt  worthy  of  the  condemnation  he 
 passed  upon  it.  Such  being  the  disposition  of  the 
 Lord's  judges,  who  were  also  his  determined  foes, 
 it  is  no  wonder  if  their  proceedings  against  him, 
 when  they  had  him  at  last  in  their  power,  were 
 characterised  by  a  violent  and  unseemly  haste  (as  if 
 they  felt  that  no  time  was  to  be  lost,  lest  their  vic- 
 tim should  somehow  escape,  if  they  lingered),  and 
 a  disregard  of  law  and  justice,  when  injustice  pre- 
 sented to  them  a  shorter  way  to  the  accomplish- 
 ment of  their  fatal  purpose.  Mon.  Salvador's  first 
 assumption  (which,  however,  he  only  reproduces 
 from  Maimonides  and  other  doctors  of  his  nation) 
 of  the  infallible  competency  of  the  Sanhedrim  to 
 pronounce  on  the  claims  of  Jesus,  is  a  paradox 
 which  the  reader  may  find  refuted  in  Dr.  M 'Caul's 
 Lectures  on  the  Prophecies,  Lect.  i.  ;  while  his 
 argument  in  defence  of  the  decency  and  regularity 
 of  the  Council  at  the  trial  is  shewn  to  be  plainly 
 untenable  by  Mon.  Dupin  in  his  tract  en- 
 titled yjsus  dei'ant  Caiphe  et  Pilate  (in  Migne's 
 Demonstrations  Evang.,  xvi.  727-754),  translated 
 in  Greenleaf's  Test,  of  the  Evangelists,  pp.  531- 
 568.  It  is  enough  for  us  to  remark,  on  the 
 whole  transaction  of  this  trial  before  the  high- 
 priest,  that,  if  we  carefully  regard  the  primary 
 features  of  it  ;  such  as  the  unseasonable  period  of 
 the  trial  (at  night,  and  during  a  sacred  feast) ;  the 
 lax  and  undecided  way  in  which  they  drew  up 
 their  indictment  (first  on  the  lozver  ground  of  con- 
 structive blasphemy  against  the  Temple,  etc. ,  and, 
 when  that  collapsed  through  the  palpable  perjury 
 of  their  witnesses,  shifting  their  charge  to  the 
 higher  offence  against  the  Divine  Being) ;  and  their 
 resorting,  when  all  other  means  failed,  to  their  old 
 method  of  '  entangling  the  Lord  m  his  talk,'  by 
 compelling  him,  under  an  irresistible  adjuration 
 (Matt.  xxvi.  63),  to  give  that  answer  to  a  dan- 
 gerous question,*  which  they  unanimously  made 
 the  occasion  of  an  immediate  condemnation — we 
 cannot  but  denounce  the  entire  proceecUngs  as 
 most  hostile  to  justice,  and  alien  from  the  spirit  of 
 even  the  Jewish  law.  Nor  is  this  verdict  at  all 
 modified  in  our  minds,  when  we  contemplate  some 
 of  the  secondary  facts  ;  for  instance,  tht  barbarous 
 treatment  which  the  Sanhedrim  permitted  their 
 prisoner  to  receive,  apparently  in  open  court — 
 certainly  while  under  their  protection — the  blow 
 on  the  face  by  one  of  the  officers,  before  the  sen- 
 tence (John  xviii.  22) ;  and,  after  the  condemna- 
 
 *  This  question  was  dangerous  to  the  accused, 
 inasmuch  as  it  demanded  an  answer  from  Jesus 
 which  would  itself  be  construed  into  the  capital 
 offence  charged  against  him — but  it  was  more 
 than  dangerous  to  the  accused.  It  was  disin- 
 genuous, nay  dishonest,  in  Caiaphas  to  put  a 
 question  which  predicated  Divinity  of  the  Mes- 
 siah :  '  Art  thou  the  Christ,  the  soti  of  the  Blessed?' 
 [Mark  xiv.  61 ;  '  the  son  of  God?'  Matt.  xxvi.  63] ; 
 when,  in  the  view  of  himself  and  of  the  nation  in 
 general,  this  divine  character  of  the  Christ  was  not 
 believed  (Wilson,  Illustr.  of  N.  T.,  pp.  68-76^ 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 076 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 tion,  the  blindfolding,  the  spitting  in  his  face,  the 
 buffeting  and  the  blows  with  the  palms  of  the 
 hand  (Luke  xxii.  64  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  67).  The  for- 
 mality of  Caiaphas  too,  in  rending  his  garments, 
 in  which  some  writers  have  seen  an  evidence  of  the 
 man's  unfeigned  surprise  and  horror  at  the  Lord's 
 answer  (see  Wilson,  on  the  N.  T.,  p.  79,  and  Bp. 
 Ellicott,  Lectures,  p.  337),  is  quite  as  reasonably 
 by  others  regarded  as  an  indication  of  indecent 
 violence  meant  to  produce  an  abhorrence  of  the 
 accused  in  the  bystanders,  especially  in  the  public 
 whose  favour  the  Jewish  authorities  were  using 
 every  method  of  detaching  from  the  Saviour.  It 
 is  worth  while  to  observe,  in  reference  to  the  point 
 of  law  and  order  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Coun- 
 cil, that  Caiaphas'  extravagant  act  of  rending  his 
 garments  seems  to  have  been  plainly  illegal.  (See 
 Lev.  xxi.  10  compared  with  the  remarkable  prohi- 
 bition to  Aaron  and  Eleazar  in  Lev.  x.  6  ;  also 
 Baronius,  Annates  Eccles.  [on  year  34],  vol.  i.  p. 
 196  ;  and  I.  Q.  Hedeni,  Scissio  Vestinm  Hebr. 
 [Ugolini,  Thes.  xxix.  1046]).  After  the  sentence, 
 and  the  gratification  of  their  shameless  brutality, 
 the  Sanhedrim  hand  over  their  victim,  bound,  to 
 the  Roman  governor,  Pontius  Pilate,  whose  official 
 residence  was  either  in  the  fortress  of  Antonia 
 (Ewald,  Christits,  p.  12),  or,  more  probably  in 
 Herod's  palace  (Ellicott,  p.  339).  This  transfer 
 seems  to  have  been  the  result  of  a  second  delibera- 
 tion of  the  Council,  which  met  for  the  purpose, 
 probably  at  about  five  or  six  o'clock  in  the  morn- 
 ing (Matt,  xxvii.  i ;  John  xviii.  28 — but  these 
 notes  of  time  are  not  very  distinct.  With  Robin- 
 son \_Ha7'm.,  p.  168],  we  have  assumed  St.  Luke 
 [xxii.  66]  to  refer  to  the  commencement  of  the  first 
 meeting  which  terminated  in  the  Lord's  condemna- 
 tion). At  this  second  meeting  they  agreed  on  a 
 report  to  the  governor,  on  the  strength  of  which 
 they  flattered  themselves  that  he  would  at  once 
 order  the  execution  of  their  sentence.  But  with 
 the  instinct  of  a  Roman,  to  whom  the  administra- 
 tion of  law  was  at  once  a  congenial  procedure  and 
 a  mark  of  sovereignty,  Pilate  undertook  to  examine 
 the  accused  himself  He  was  the  more  inclined  to 
 take  this  course,  because  he  doubted  the  sincerity 
 of  the  prosecutors,  and  felt  assured  that  '  envy' 
 was  at  the  bottom  of  their  proceedings  (Matt. 
 xxvii.  18 ;  Mark  xv.  10).  The  Sanhedrim  well 
 deserved  this  suspicion  of  the  governor,  who  had, 
 no  doubt,  heard  of  the  result  of  the  trial  before 
 Caiaphas,  and  was  aware  of  the  real  accusation 
 which  they  had  prepared  against  Jesus.  It  was 
 not  therefore  without  surprise,  and  probably  dis- 
 gust, that  he  now  finds  them  shifting  their  ground, 
 and  accusing  the  prisoner  of  sedition  and  treason — 
 '  We  found  this  fellow  perverting  the  nation,  and 
 forbidding  to  give  tribute  to  Csesar'  (Luke  xxiii.  2). 
 Pilate  had  no  difficulty  in  detecting  the  hoUowness 
 of  this  charge,  which  was  expressly  contrary  to  a 
 remarkable  statement  which  Christ  had  very  pub- 
 licly made  so  recently  as  on  the  Tuesday  of  this 
 week,  when,  in  the  great  Temple  discussions,  he 
 counselled  the  Pharisees  to  '  render  to  Cajsar  the 
 things  which  be  Cresar's'  (Luke  xx.  25).  He 
 therefore  acquits  Jesus  of  this  foul  charge,  and,  to 
 escape  from  the  importunity  of  the  chief  priests, 
 avails  himself  of  the  circumstance — which  came 
 out  in  the  proceedings — that  Jesus  '  belonged  to 
 Herod's  jurisdiction'  (xxiii.  7),  to  ask  the  assist- 
 ance of  the  tetrarch  of  Galilee,  who  happened  to 
 be  in  the  city,  in  the  decision  of  the  case.     Herod 
 
 had  long  felt  an  irreverent  curiosity  to  see  the  Man 
 whose  miracles  had  produced  so  great  a  sensation 
 in  the  north,  and  accepts  the  office.  He  was  not 
 without  hope  that  his  prisoner  would  not  refuse  to 
 win  his  release  by  the  performance  of  some  mighty 
 wonder.  Vain  man  !  All  his  idle  inquiries  and 
 solicitations  the  Lord  met  with  the  dignified  rebuke 
 of  an  absolute  silence.  Thwarted  and  irritated, 
 '  Herod  with  his  men  of  war  set  Jesus  at  nought, 
 and  mocked  him,  and  having  arrayed  him  in  a 
 gorgeous  robe,  sent  him  again  to  Pilate'  (Luke 
 xxiii.  11).  The  prisoner's  return  was  nothing 
 short  of  a  calamity  to  the  arrogant  but  irresolute 
 Roman.  It  plunged  him  into  a  fearful  contest 
 with  the  Jewish  populace,  and  into  a  still  more 
 awful  one  with  his  own  conscience,  the  result  of 
 which  has  associated  his  name  in  an  eternal  infamy 
 with  the  murderers  of  the  Just  and  Holy  Jesus. 
 The  verdict  passed  on  his  share  of  this  crime  by 
 the  infant  church,  in  their  beautiful  prayer  (Acts 
 iv.  27),  has  been  corroborated  by  the  universal 
 voice  of  Christendom  and  the  ineradicable  convic- 
 tions of  every  reader  of  the  sacred  history.  Whether 
 it  was  because  he  intensely  despised  and  hated  the 
 Jews,  or  because  he  saw  in  the  wondeiful  Man 
 before  him  an  object  whose  patent  innocence  and 
 meek  dignity  under  provocation  and  suffering  en- 
 dued his  mind  with  an  unprecedented  and  irre- 
 sistible interest  and  sympathy,  Pilate,  from  first  to 
 last,  and  especially  after  the  examination  of  Herod, 
 who  took  his  'friend's'  (Luke  xxiii.  12)  view  of 
 the  blamelessness  of  the  accused,  strove  by  every 
 means  to  release  Jesus.  But  his  will  refused  to  do 
 the  bidding  of  his  conscience.  With  a  fatal  weak- 
 ness he  parleyed  with  the  Jews.  '  I  find  this  man 
 innocent,  and  so  indeed  does  Herod  ;  but  as  your 
 resentment  is  keen  against  him,  I  will  gratify  you 
 by  chastising  him  before  I  let  him  go ! '  (vers. 
 15,  16).  And  he  followed  up  this  concession  by 
 another — a  proposal  to  release  Jesus,  not  so  much 
 as  an  innocent  man,  but  in  compliance  with  a  cus- 
 tom of  the  feast.  This  stultification  of  his  own 
 acquittal  of  the  accused  they  at  once  meet  with  a 
 fiendish  retort,  by  demanding  the  release  of  a 
 notorious  robber  and  murderer,  who  was  awaiting 
 execution  in  prison.  The  embarrassment  which 
 he  felt  at  this  unexpected  and  insolent  demand 
 was  increased  a  hundredfold  by  a  strange  message 
 from  his  wife — '  Have  thou  nothing  to  do  with 
 that  just  man,  for  I  have  suffered  many  things  to- 
 day in  a  dream  because  of  him'  (Matt,  xxvii.  19). 
 The  yells  of  the  multitude  also  alarmed  him. 
 Mortified  with  that  disappointment  of  their  worldly 
 hopes,  which  we  have  already  referred  to  (see 
 above  \_Thiirsda}i\],  the  designing  priests  and  elders 
 now  stimulate  the  resentment  of  the  rabble  with 
 the  report  of  the  blasphemy  of  their  late  idol,  who 
 had  not  hesitated  to  arrogate  divine  honours  to 
 himself,  and  to  talk  about  the  destruction  of  their 
 glorious  national  Temple  !  When  the  faltering 
 governor  therefore  formally  submits  to  them  the 
 option  :  '  Whether  of  the  twain  will  ye  that  I 
 release  unto  you?'  they  overpower  him  with  loud 
 and  savage  clamours  :  '  Not  this  man,  but  Barab- 
 bas.'  Pitiful  spectacle  of  an  awful  crisis!  The 
 issue  is — shall  the  Holy  Redeemer  die  or  live? 
 For  his  death  there  is  a  rough  and  wilful  crowd, 
 lashed  almost  into  a  riotous  fury  (Matt,  xxvii.  24) 
 as  it  thirsts  for  the  blood  of  the  Innocent ;  while 
 the  sole,  frail  advocate  for  his  life,  by  a  compro- 
 mise as  weak  as  it  is  unjust  (Luke  xxiii.  22),  only 
 
 I 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 677 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 pours  oil  on  the  fire  of  their  cruel  wrath.  The 
 issue  cannot  long  be  doubtful.  The  multitude 
 chafes  ;  Pilate  expostulates — '  Why  crucify  him  ? 
 What  evil  hath  he  done  ?'  Their  temper  will  not 
 brook  even  this  slight  restraint.  '  They  cried  out 
 the  more  exceedingly,'  says  St.  Mark  (irepLaffOTipws 
 iKpa^au)  ;  '  They  were  instant  with  loud  voices,' 
 says  St.  Luke  {eireKeivro  (pwvah  ficyakan)  ;  '  And,' 
 as  the  latter  significantly  adds,  '  f/ie  voices  of  them 
 and  of  the  chief  priests  prevailed''  (xxiii.  23).  The 
 unhappy  magistrate's  abused  conscience  requires  a 
 satisfaction.  He  ostentatiously  gives  it  by  taking 
 v/ater  and  washing  his  hands  before  the  crowd, 
 vainly  protesting  his  innocence  of  the  blood  of  the 
 Just  Person  before  him.  The  ruthless  spectators 
 accept  the  responsibility  with  frightful  promptitude  : 
 '  His  blood  be  on  us  and  on  our  children  !'  Hav- 
 ing lulled  his  convictions,  Pilate  plunges  more 
 deeply  still  into  those  cowardly  and  infamous  con- 
 cessions which  have  given  him  the  ineffaceable 
 character  of  the  unjust  judge.  '  Willing  to  content 
 the  people,  he  released  Barabbas  unto  them' 
 (Mark),  'and  delivered  Jesus  to  their  will'  (Luke). 
 Then  followed  those  merciless  indignities  —  the 
 stripping  by  the  brutal  executioners  ;  the  crown  of 
 thorns  ;  the  crimson  or  purple  robe  ;  the  knotty 
 sceptre  first  thrust  into  his  manacled  hands  in  de- 
 rision, and  then  cruelly  used  to  smite  his  lacerated 
 head  ;  the  spitting  and  the  mockery  of  pretended 
 homage — which  were  the  Gentile  counterpart  of 
 the  appalling  scenes  of  fiendish  derision  in  which 
 the  officials  of  Caiaphas  had  indulged  but  an  hour 
 or  two  before.  The  Prcetorium  now  resounded 
 with  the  Roman  thongs  (flogging  being  the  pre- 
 liminary to  capital  punishments  in  the  cruel  pro- 
 cess of  Roman  executions),  and  blood  followed 
 the  stripes,  and  his  tender  flesh  quivered  with  the 
 pain.  '  The  plowers  plowed  upon  his  back,  they 
 made  long  their  furrows'  (Ps.  cxxix.  3);  but  the 
 patience  which  he  brought  from  Gethsemane  could 
 not  be  exhausted.  Not  a  word  of  reproach,  re- 
 monstrance, or  entreaty,  escaped  those  parched 
 lips,  so  ignominiously  soiled  and  smitten.  How  is 
 it  that  we  can  be  calm  as  we  contemplate  so  foul  a 
 tragedy  ? 
 
 '  Is  it  not  strange,  the  darkest  hour 
 That  ever  dawn'd  on  sinful  earth 
 Should  touch  the  heart  with  softer  power 
 For  comfort,  than  an  angel's  mirth  ?' 
 
 {Chi'istiaii  Year,  Good  Friday.) 
 
 The  great  ancient  critic,  with  no  impropriety, 
 contemplated  in  the  awful  facts  of  a  true  and 
 measured  tragedy  a  subliming  and  purifying  influ- 
 ence on  the  human  spirit  (see  Aristotle,  Poetics, 
 chap,  vi.,  sub  init.) ;  but  the  secret  of  the  touching 
 power  of  our  Saviour's  most  awful  passion  hes 
 deeper  than  the  depths  of  our  mental  nature. 
 '  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions  ;  he  was 
 bruised  for  our  iniquities  ;  the  chastise7nent  of  our 
 peace  icas  upon  him,  and  zvith  his  stripes  tve  are 
 healed'  (Is.  liii.  5) — in  this  assurance  of  prophecy, 
 which  modem  scepticism  has  luigraciously  tried  to 
 make  void  {e.g.,  in  Dr.  R.  Williams'  contribution 
 to  Essays  and  Reviews),  lies  the  profound  and 
 holy  and  purifying  interest  which  good  men  have 
 ever  felt  in  the  awful  scenes  through  which  our 
 narrative  is  carrying  us.  In  his  supplementaiy 
 history,  St.  John  adds  an  affecting  narrative,  full 
 of  characteristic  incident  (xix.  4-16).  Pilate,  con- 
 vinced of  the  Saviour's  utter  innocence,  brings  him 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 outside  the  palace,  and,  in  hopes  that  the  piteous 
 state  of  the  sufferer  might  possibly  turn  their  hearts, 
 he  submits  him  to  the  gaze  of  the  populace,  with  a 
 brief  appeal  to  their  compassion — '  Behold  the  man' 
 {Ecce  Hotno  ;  tSe  6  dv'^pwiros).  Some  hearts  might 
 be  relenting  ;  but  the  obdurate  chief  priests  and 
 ofi&cers  roughly  interpose  with  their  hackneyed, 
 wretched  shouts  for  crucifixion.  Petulantly  does 
 the  governor  try  to  fling  the  execution  of  such  a 
 crime  on  them — '  Take  ye  him,  and  crucify  him  ; ' 
 adding,  as  at  the  first,  his  acquittal,  '  I  find  no 
 fault  in  him.'  Emboldened  by  their  evident  ad- 
 vantage over  his  irresolution,  they  now  bring  up 
 the  accusation  which  they  had  concealed  at  the 
 beginning,  '  We  have  a  law,  and  by  our  law 
 he  ought  to  die,  because  he  made  himself  the  Son  0/ 
 God.'  Strange  words  to  a  Roman  heathen  im- 
 mersed in  worldliness,  but  with  an  untranquil 
 spirit,  and  a  conscience  not  seared  yet,  though 
 often  wounded.  The  haughty  monarch  of  Baby- 
 lon was  'astonied'  with  a  thrilling  disquietude, 
 when  brought  face  to  face  with  the  apparition  of 
 the  Son  of  God  (Dan.  iii,  25).  No  wonder  if  a 
 weaker  man  than  he  cowered  when  in  the  actual 
 presence  of  the  incarnate  deity,  whom  so  many 
 portents,  both  of  conscience  and  external  fact, 
 were  recommending  to  his  bewildered  mind,  as 
 infinitely  more  than  the  human  abject  which  he 
 seemed  to  be  !  Impelled  by  his  increasing  fears 
 (ver.  9),  he  withdrew  his  prisoner ;  and  within  the 
 palace  asked  him,  in  few  but  ardent  words,  of  Ais 
 origin.  Whether  it  was  that  Pilate  was  unable,  or, 
 from  his  want  of  integrity,  unfit,  to  receive  infor- 
 mation on  so  weighty  an  inquiry,  'Jesus  gave  him 
 no  answer.'  But  when  the  governor,  ignorant  of 
 the  quality  of  his  captive,  began  to  rebuke  him 
 angrily  as  forgetful  of  his  official  power,  the  Lord, 
 with  calm  dignity  and  in  brief  but  solemn  words, 
 informed  him  of  a  profound  truth,  which  he  had 
 little  dreamt  of.  that  the  power  which  he  was  too 
 ostentatiously  claiming,  of  crucifying  him  {KaT* 
 ifxoO,  in  reference  to  Pilate's  e^ovcriav  (TTavpuxral 
 as),  was  not  inherent  in  his  magistracy  as  derived 
 from  Cffisar,  but  was  a  special  and  mysterious 
 commission  from  on  high.  Christ  then,  in  evident 
 sympathy  with  the  mental  straggle  which  the  piti- 
 able man  was  passing  through,  gently  implies, 
 that  in  the  execution  of  this  awful  commission 
 Pilate  was  no  doubt  incurring  sin,,  inasmuch  as  he 
 was  step  by  step  rebelling  against  the  dictates  of 
 his  own  conscience  ;  but  there  was  another  agent 
 in  the  deed,  whose  sin  was  greater  still  (hie  erat 
 Caiaphas.  Pilatus  qualicunque  mentione  Filii  Dei 
 audita  timuit ;  Caiaphas,  quum  Jesum  ex  ipso 
 audisset  Dei  Filium,  eum  blasphemum  dixit  et 
 mortis  reum  judicavit. — Bengelii  Gnomon).  The 
 high-priest,  God's  own  functionary,  with  the 
 oracles  of  heaven  in  his  hand,  and  his  attention 
 thereto  quickened  by  a  prophetic  impulse  (John 
 xi.  51,  52),  being  led  by  an  intense  and  selfish 
 hatred  (ver.  48),  dared  to  condemn  the  Son  of 
 God  as  a  blasphemer,  although  Jesus  himself  had 
 solemnly  assured  him  of  his  own  riglit  and  title  to 
 that  divine  relationship  ;  while  the  heathen  gover- 
 nor, with  no  knowledge  of  revelation  to  guide  him, 
 could  not  refrain  from  fear  at  the  bare  mention  of 
 the  unearthly  name  (John  xix.  8,  and  12,  in  which 
 latter  verse  iK  tovtov  is  probably  not  a  mark  of 
 time,  but  a  reference  to  the  Lord's  answer  in  the 
 preceding  sentence).  Thus  did  Jesus,  humiliated 
 and  prostrated  though  he  was  beneath  the  strange 
 
 2  P 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 578 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 conflicting  verdicts  of  his  Jewish  and  Gentile 
 judges,  himself  anticipate  his  own  subhme  function 
 iii  judgment,  by  pronouncing  his  decision  on  the 
 comparative  conduct  of  the  two  chief  promoters  of 
 his  sufferings  and  death.  No  wonder  that  the 
 union  of  unapproachable  superiority,  rebuke,  and 
 kindly  interest,  which  Pilate's  conscience  detected 
 in  the  words  of  Jesus,  revived  for  the  fourth  time, 
 and  in  still  greater  force,  his  determination  to 
 release  the  captive  (ver.  12).  The  prey  was  all 
 but  delivered,  when  the  enemy  made  a  last  despe- 
 rate thrust  at  the  tremulous  heart  of  Pilate.  '  The 
 Jews  cried  out.  If  thou  let  this  man  go,  thou  art 
 not-  Caesar's  friend.'  The  insolent  threat  here 
 implied  was  decisive.  The  governor  instinctively 
 shrank  from  the  risk  of  a  recall  to  Rome,  to 
 answer,  it  might  be,  for  his  life  before  his  gloomy 
 and  suspicious  master.  The  protests  of  his  con- 
 science no  longer  restrain  him,  and  his  repeated 
 declarations  of  the  innocence  of  his  prisoner  are 
 all  forgotten  under  the  panic  with  which  the  un- 
 friendly shouts  of  the  multitude  now  filled  him. 
 He  delivered  Jesus  unto  the  chief  priests  to  be 
 crucified — no  longer  with  an  Ecce  Homo,  to  melt 
 their  hearts  to  pity,  but  with  an  angi"y  and  sarcastic 
 Ecce  Kex,  which  provoked  their  last  and  most 
 deliberate  clamour  for  their  victim's  death  —  so 
 deliberate,  indeed,  that  in  one  and  the  same  sen- 
 tence they  rejected  their  Messiah,  cut  themselves 
 off  from  the  glory  and  protection  of  God's  theo- 
 cratic rule,  and  bound  themselves  to  the  hated 
 dominion  of  a  Gentile  and  heathen  power.  .  .  . 
 '  Away,  away  with  Him.  .  .  .  We  have  no  king 
 but  Caesar'  (ver.  15)  !  Pilate's  former  interest  in 
 the  fate  of  Christ  did  not  induce  him  to  relax  the 
 rigours  of  execution.  Cruel  mockeiy  of  the  suf- 
 ferer is  for  the  third  time  resorted  to,  and  two 
 companions  in  death  are  awarded  him  in  the  per- 
 sons of  two  rufiians,  accomplices,  probably,  of  the 
 murderer  who  had  iDeen  rescued  from  the  cross  to 
 make  way  for  him.  It  was,  it  would  seem, 
 between  eight  and  nine  o'clock  when  the  gover- 
 nor's final  decision  set  the  officials  of  the  execution 
 about  their  awful  but  not  unwelcome  work.  As 
 they  were  leading  the  holy  Saviour  to  the  spot 
 appointed  for  his  final  suffering  (outside  the  city, 
 but  yet  near  it,  e77i's  ^v  6  tottos  ttjs  tt^Xeois, 
 John  xix.  20),  he  seems  to  have  sunk  from  the 
 exhaustion  of  his  recent  sufferings  beneath  the 
 cross,  which  as  usual  they  made  him  carry.  They 
 immediately  find  a  substitute  in  a  man  whose  name 
 is  given  as  Simon  of  Cyrene,  whom  they  compel 
 to  bear  the  sad  burden.  This  is  one  of  the  only 
 two  instances  of  relief  which  we  read  that  Jesus 
 accepted  in  mitigation  of  his  weight  of  woe  ;  pro- 
 bably nothing  but  the  physical  prostration,  which 
 this  incident  so  remarkably  attests,  was  the  reason 
 of  this  noticeable  exception.  It  is  some  consola- 
 tion to  discover  one  kindly  symptom  in  this  tale  of 
 sorrow,  for  we  find  that  the  sight  of  the  drooping 
 sufferer  excited  the  wail  and  lamentation  of  some 
 women  who  were  among  the  attendant  multitude. 
 The  Lord  was  not  unobservant  of  their  kindness  ;  j 
 in  words  of  mild  and  self-denying  solemnity  he 
 bade  these  '  daughters  of  Jerusalem '  to  weep  not 
 for  him — but  for  the  sufferings  which  that  day's 
 crime  would  too  certainly  bring  upon  their  children 
 and  them  (Luke  xxiii.  28).  Nine  o'clock,  the 
 hour  of  the  morning  sacrifice,  had  arrived,  when 
 the  executioners  consummated  their  terrible  task. 
 A.S  they  were  nailing  to  the  cross  those  hands  and 
 
 feet  which  had  been  through  life  so  active  in  offices 
 of  love  and  mercy,  Jesus,  amidst  the  excruciating 
 pain,  which  he  had  refused  to  deaden  by  drinking 
 of  the  assuaging  cup  (Mark  xv.  23),  said,  '  Father 
 forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they  do' 
 (Luke  xxiii.  34).  This  was  the  first  of  the  seven 
 utterances  which  the  holy  evangelists  were  led  to 
 record  of  the  dying  Saviour  on  the  cross.  *  Mani- 
 fold, indeed,  are  the  aspects  which  have  been 
 taken  of  the  solemn  scenes  of  Calvary.  But  to  us, 
 none  is  more  interesting  than  that  which  is  sug- 
 gested by  these  sacred  words  of  the  dying  Re- 
 deemer. They  profoundly  indicate  the  current  of 
 his  precious  thoughts  throughout  that  most  awful 
 period,  and  coherently  illustrate  that  wonderful 
 combination  of  the  tenderest  humanity  with  con- 
 scious deity,  and  of  the  most  serene  composure 
 amidst  agonising  torture,  which  is  the  glory,  and 
 the  wonder,  and,  we  must  add,  the  crowning  value 
 and  interest  to  man  of  this  transaction  of  human 
 redemption.  The  first  of  these  ejaculations,  which 
 soon  produced  fruit  in  the  last  moments  of  the  first 
 martyr  (Acts  vii.  60),  and  the  spirit  of  which  has 
 so  often  since  soothed  the  bitterness  of  violent 
 death,  was,  as  we  have  said,  occasioned  by  the 
 hideous  work  of  the  four  Roman  executioners, 
 who  were  probably  the  literal  objects  of  the 
 Saviour's  prayer.  Having  completed  their  task, 
 they  unconsciously  fulfilled  a  prophecy  in  their 
 mode  of  appropriating  their  perquisites — the  gar- 
 ments of  the  crucified  (John  xix.  23,  24).  We 
 pass  rapidly  by  the  sad  sequel  of  taunts,  and  gibes, 
 and  railing,  which  the  assembled  spectators  in- 
 dulged in.  All  classes  combined  in  this  fiendish 
 malignity.  With  execrable  consistency,  the  chief 
 priests,  with  the  Scribes  and  elders,  were  there 
 encouraging  the  rabble  by  their  own  grossly  in- 
 human reproaches — ■'  He  saved  others;  himself  he 
 cannot  save  :  if  he  be  the  King  of  Israel,  let  him 
 now  come  down  from  the  cross,  and  we  will 
 believe  him '  (Matt,  xxvii.  42).  Alas  !  the  offence 
 of  the  cross  has  not  ceased  !  Mon.  Salvador  com- 
 mends '  t/ie  good  faith  '  (!)  of  these  sacerdotal 
 mockers  ;  and  in  words  which  are  not  more  inde- 
 cent than  demonstrative  of  a  profound  ignorance  of 
 the  occasion  and  its  character,  asks — '  Would  not 
 a  miracle  at  this  time  have  been  decisive  V  Mon. 
 Salvador  thinks,  alas,  that  Jesus  lost  an  oppor- 
 tunity of  converting  these  miserable  despisers,  and 
 attesting  his  (we  will  not  say  supernatural,  but, 
 rather,  icniiattiral)  power  over  the  cross !  But 
 will  Israel  never  learn  the  deep  purport  of  its  own 
 prophetic  Scriptures  ?  We  appeal  from  its  past 
 and  present  temper  of  unbelief  to  the  relentings  of 
 the  future,  when  '  they  shall  look  on  him  v/hom 
 they  have  pierced,  and  shall  mourn  for  him  as  one 
 mourneth  for  his  only  son '  (Zech.  xii.  10).  In- 
 stead of  a  failure  of  the  Messianic  character,  we 
 regard  this  very  inhumanity  of  the  high-priestly 
 blasphemers,  as  one  evidence  that  Jesus,  in  tliis 
 aspect  of  his  dreadful  sufferings,  was  in  fact  fulfill- 
 ing one  condition  of  the  true  Messiahship,  as 
 guaranteed  by  prophecy — '  All  they  that  see  me 
 laugh  me  to  scorn  ;  they  shoot  out  the  lip  ;  they 
 shake  the  head,  saying.  He  trusted  on  the  Lord 
 that  he  would  deliver  him,'  etc.   (Ps.  xxii.  7,  8). 
 
 *  In  a  fine  old  Latin  hymn,  which  will  be  found 
 in  Dr.  H.  A.  Daniel's  T/iesaicrus  Hy?Jt7iotogiciis, 
 vol.  ii.  pp.  348,  349,  there  is  a  striking  collection 
 of  all  these  sayings. 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 579 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 But  the  mockers  on  Calvary  had  not  a  monopoly  of 
 their  vindictive  joy.     Pilate,   who   from  the  first 
 despised  the  promoters  of  the  suit  against  Jesus, 
 now  felt  an  aggravation  of  his  antipathy  from  their 
 insolent  violence   to   himself.      In    his    celebrated 
 inscription   on  the    Saviour's  cross,   in  vvfhich,   to 
 gratify  his  contempt  of  the  Jews  (if  we  may  not 
 add,  to  register  the  strange  conviction  of  his  own 
 mind),  he  most  ostentatiously  set  forth  the  style  of 
 the  crucified  as  'The  King  of  the  Jews,'  he 
 seems  to  have  had  his  revenge.     The  chief  priests 
 at  once  requested  a  modification  of  the  irritating 
 title  ;  but  it  was  now  the  governor's  turn   to  be 
 obstinate,  and  he  angrily  declined  to  withdraw  or 
 alter   a  syllable    of    the    trilingual    superscription 
 (John   xix.    20-22).       The   gross    derision    of  the 
 bystanders  must  have  greatly  increased  the  suffer- 
 ing of  the  pure  and  gentle  Jesus  ;  one  consolation, 
 however,    he    received    in   the   conversion    of  the 
 crucified    penitent.      At    first,     both    his    fellow- 
 sufferers  seem  to  have  joined  in  the  reproaches  of 
 the  crowd  (Matt.,  Mark),  and  the  nnbelief  of  the 
 priests — '  If  he  were  the  Christ,  why  did  he  not 
 save  himself  and    them  ? '     But   before    the   end 
 came,  the  constancy  and  the  lamblike  endurance  of 
 the  central  sufferer  wrought  conviction  in  one  of 
 the   malefactors.      He   proved   his   repentance  by 
 acknowledging  the  justice  of  his  own  punishment, 
 and  rebuking  the  taunts  which  his  companion  in 
 misery  was  still  pouring  forth  ;  and  his  faith,  by 
 proclaiming   the   innocence    of  Jesus,   and,   by  a 
 wonderful  insight,  which  penetrated  the  glories  of 
 the  future  through  the  ignominy  of  the  present, 
 invoking  his  sovereign  grace  and  mercy.     To  his 
 prayer  of  unsurpassed  faith—'  Lord,  remember  me 
 when    thou    comest    into    thy    kingdom,'    Jesus 
 answered,  in  the  second  of  his  seven  great  utter- 
 ances— in  terms  through  which  his  divinity  surely 
 gleams — '  Verily  I  say  unto  thee,  to-day  shalt  thou 
 be  with  me  in  paradise'  (Luke  xxiii.  42-43).    Thus 
 the  protracted  agony  of  the  cross  fails  to  exhaust 
 the  mercy  of  the  Redeemer ;  it  failed,  moreover, 
 to  blunt  the  kindly  affections  of  his  human  heart. 
 Near  the  cross  he  observed  his  virgin  mother  now 
 soul-pierced  with  the  terrible  sword  of  which  the 
 aged  Simeon  had  spoken  (Luke  ii.  35)  more  than 
 thirty  years  ago.     She  was  accompanied   by  her 
 sister  and  Mary  Magdalene,  and  by  the  disciple  of 
 her  son's  special  love,  who  seems  to  have  been  the 
 only  one  that  braved  the  dangers  of  approaching 
 the  fatal  scene  from  which   the  constant-hearted 
 women,  who  had  followed  him  from  the  north, 
 were    repelled*    possibly   by   the   military   guard 
 (Mark  xv.  40).     The  sight  of  his  afflicted  mother 
 drew  from  Jesus,  who  forgot  nothing  and  neglected 
 nothing  amidst  all  his  distracting  pains,  the  third 
 utterance  from  the  cross,  in  which  he  commended 
 Mary  to  the  guardianship  of  the  beloved  John,  who 
 '  from   that  hour'    [probably  from  that  moment] 
 withdrew   his  precious    charge   from   the    painful 
 scene,  and  'took  her  unto  his  own  home'   (John 
 
 *  A  comparison  of  John  xix.  25-27  with  Matt. 
 xxvii.  55,  56,  and  with  Mark  xv.  40,  41,  seems  to 
 indicate  that  Mary  Magdalene  and  Mai-y  the  wife 
 of  Cleophas,  who  were  at  first  near  the  cross,  re- 
 moved afterwards  and  joined  the  distant  group  of 
 Galilean  women  including  Salome.  They  no 
 doubt  withdrew  with  St.  John  and  the  Virgin 
 mother,  who  must  have  sorely  needed  all  the  sym- 
 pathy and  help  they  could  render  her. 
 
 xix.  27).     Nor  did  she  withdraw  too  soon.     Deeper 
 depths  of  woe  her  son  has  yet  to  fathom,  and  she 
 was  probably  spared  the  anguish  of  hearing  the 
 cries  which  too  plainly  expressed  his  unequalled 
 sorrow.     The  sixth  hour  has  arrived,  and  a  moiety 
 of  the  hours  of  dying  are  now  passed.     But  nature 
 at  length  begins  to  sympathise  with  her  Lord— the 
 powers  of  moral  darkness  are  fast  culminating  for 
 their   triumph,    and   physical   darkness   for   three 
 hours  is  shed  over  the  land  as  an  emblem  of  their 
 victoiy.      When  the  Saviour  was  born  night  be- 
 came radiant  with   the  gloiy  of  a  heavenly  host 
 (Luke  ii.    8-14)  ;  now  when  he  is  dying  noon  is 
 blackened,   as  if  with  the  gloom  of  hell  (comp. 
 Luke  xxii.  53).     Eclipsed  is  the  Sun  of  Righteous- 
 ness in  the  awful  mystery  of  that  removal  of  his 
 divine  Father's  face,  which  wrung  from  him  the 
 disconsolate  cry — the  fourth  utterance — '  My  God, 
 my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me?'     We  may 
 not  attempt  to  penetrate  this  scene  with  a  curious 
 eye,  nor  rudely  lift  the  veil  which  hides  it  from  our 
 view.     The  Saviour's  suffering  is  not  to  be  guaged 
 by  ordinary  human  experience,  for  the  cause  which 
 produced  it  can  never  recur  to  any  man.     When 
 St.  Peter,  in  a  beautiful  passage  where  lie  reviews 
 the  Saviour's  passion,  refers  expressly  to  him  '  as 
 bearing  his  own  self  [alone]  our  sins  in  his  own 
 body  on   the   tree'    (i   Pet.   ii.   24),   he  discloses  to 
 %is  the  secret  of  so  transcendent  a  weight  of  woe.     Of 
 all  besides  of  woman  born  not  one  could  bear  that 
 burden — '  none  of  them  could  by  any  means  redeem 
 his  brother,  nor  give  to  God  a  ransom  for  him'  (Ps 
 xlix.  7).     And  where  even  in  the  Redeemer's  own 
 cup  can  we  find  another  drop  so  bitter  as  this  de- 
 spair?    In  Gethsemane  the   foretaste    of   it   was 
 sweetened  with  the  grace  of  an  angel's  help ;  but 
 on  Calvary  when   he  drank  the  full   draught  the 
 heavens  were  black,  and  no  helper  came  thence  to 
 'strengthen'    him.      No    wonder   that    under  the 
 scorcliing  fever  of  this  affliction  the  tortured  Jesus, 
 uttering  his  fifth  sentence  on  the  cross,  said,    '  I 
 thirst'  (John  xix.  28).     The  evangelist  sees  in  this 
 plaint  of  the    Saviour   the   accomplishment  of  a 
 prophecy  which  centuries  before  the  event  drew  an 
 affecting  portrait  of  the  suffering  Messiah  (Ps.  Ixix. 
 8-21).      In   the  awful  solitude  of  his  unassuaged 
 grief  he  felt  at  last  the  fatal  force  of  all  his  passion  ; 
 '  Reproach  hath  broken  my  heart,  and  I  am  full  of 
 heaviness  :    I   looked  for  some    to  take  pity,  but 
 there  was  no  man — and  for  comforters,  but  I  found 
 none'  (ver.  20).     The  last  moment  is  at  hand,  and 
 with  it   the  last  of  those  derisive   taunts   ('HXiai' 
 (pwvei  o§Tos,    Matt,    xxvii.    47),    which  vexed  his 
 righteous  soul,  fell  upon  his  ear.     But  just  at  that 
 instant,  amid  the  abounding  cruelties  of  the  pro- 
 tracted execution,  one  refreshing  act  of  compassion 
 is  observed.     One  man  dares  to  obey  the  instinct 
 of  a  better  feeling  than  his  fellows  (comp.  Matt, 
 xxvii.  49  with  48),  '  runs  and  takes  a  spunge,  fills 
 it  with  vinegar  [the  soldiers'  acid  drink],  raises  it  to 
 the  sufferer's  parched  lips  by  the  help  of  a  reed  or 
 stalk  of  the  hyssop  plant,  and  gives  him  to  drink.' 
 If  a  cup  of  cold  water  given  to  a  disciple  shall  not 
 lose  its  reward,  we  may  he  sure  that  this  drop  of 
 rough  mercy  presented  to  the  master  himself  in  his 
 last  extremity  -will  not  be  forgotten.      Now  that  the 
 end  is  come,  and  the  cup  is  drained,  Jesus  does  not 
 refuse  (and  it  is  the  second  instance)  the  proffered 
 relief.      '  He  received  the  vinegar' — Did  it  symbo- 
 lise the  last  of  the  dregs  of  his  sharp  and  bitter 
 cup  ? — uttered  tlie  sixth  and  seventh  of  the  cries  oJ 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 580 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 Calvary,  simultaneously  as  it  would  seem  (comp. 
 Johnxix.  30,  and  Luke  xxiii.  46),  but  'with  a  loud 
 voice  of  consciously  completed  victory  for  man,  and 
 of  most  loving  resignation  unto  God'  (Bishop  Elli- 
 cott,  after  Draseke  and  Stier),  'It  is  finished,' 
 '  Father,  into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit,' 
 then  meekly  bowed  his  head  and  gave  up  the  ghost. 
 Three  o'clock,  the  hour  of  the  evening  sacrifice, 
 was  the  moment  of  the  Lord's  death  (St.  Mark 
 mentions  the  stages  in  the  duration  of  the  passion, 
 see  chap.  xv.  vers.  25,  33,  34)  ;  and  again  does 
 external  nature  attest  the  great  event  by  unusual 
 convulsions.  'The  veil  of  the  Temple  was  rent 
 (the  moral  force  of  which  portent  is  explained  in 
 Heb.  X.  19-22),  the  earth  did  quake,  the  rocks 
 were  rent,  the  graves  opened,  and  many  bodies  of 
 the  saints  which  slept  arose  and  came  out  of  the 
 graves  after  his  resurrection  and  appeared  unto 
 many'  (Matt,  xxvii.  51-53).  The  effect  of  these 
 portentous  sights,  as  a  commentary  upon  that 
 agony  and  death,  was  intensely  great  on  all  that 
 saw  and  heard  them.  Who  can  tell  how  many 
 hearts  were  now  prepared  for  the  subsequent  con- 
 victions of  Pentecost  and  its  sequel  ?  '  All  the 
 people  that  came  together  to  that  sight  [of  the 
 dying  Redeemer],  beholding  the  things  which  were 
 done,  smote  their  breasts  and  returned'  (Luke  xxiii. 
 48) ;  the  echoes  of  their  own  frightful  imprecations 
 of  innocent  blood  on  their  children  and  themselves 
 had  scarcely  yet  died  upon  the  ear,  and  their  hearts 
 were  uneasy.  But  not  ye7vs  alone  were  stirred. 
 Three  of  the  evangelists  mention  as  one  of  the 
 most  striking  incidents  of  the  moment  the  convic- 
 tion produced  on  ihe  mind  of  the  centurion  in  com- 
 mand of  the  military  which  were  on  the  spot.  The 
 Gentile  Magi  did  homage  at  the  Saviour's  birth, 
 and  now  when  the  Temple  veil  is  rent,  and  the 
 way  to  the  hoHest  place  is  opened  to  all,  the  chief 
 of  the  Gentile  functionaries  honours  his  death  with 
 r.ot  only  a  declaration  of  the  late  sufferer's  inno- 
 cence (LukeJ,  but,  anticipating  the  devout  Cor- 
 nelius, with  the  very  first  expression  of  Gentile 
 belief  in  the  truth  of  a  divine  Messiah  of  which  we 
 read  (Matt.,  Mark).  In  the  centurion's  belief, 
 moreover,  the  whole  troop  seems  to  have  con- 
 curred, for  St.  Matthew  tells  us  that  '  t/ie}>  who 
 •were  with  him  watching  Jesus  .  . .  feared  greatly, 
 saying.  Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  God.'  This 
 centurion  and  Pilate  shortly  afterwards  had  an 
 interview  (Mark  xv.  44).  One  may  well  wonder 
 what  passed  between  them,  for  the  alarms  of  the 
 governor  before  the  execution,  and  the  impressions 
 of  the  soldier  after  it,  I'especting  the  wonderful  Man 
 whose  fate  had  moved  Jerusalem  so  intensely,  were 
 of  very  similar  character.  The  blood  of  the  inno- 
 cent, so  precious  to  the  penitent  in  all  ages,  brought 
 vengeance  on  two  at  least  of  those  who  imbrued 
 their  hands  in  shedding  it.  The  fallen  apostle, 
 when  he  saw  the  fatal  effect  of  his  treachery, 
 hastened  to  the  Sanhedrim,  returned  the  fee  of  his 
 sin,  was  goaded  to  desperation  by  the  harsh  taunts 
 with  which  they  heard  his  remorse,  and  by  a 
 suicidal  hand  met  death  even  before  the  execution 
 of  the  friend  whom  he  had  betrayed  (Matt,  xxvii. 
 3-10  ;  Acts  i.  18,  19.  See  also  Judas  Iscariot). 
 Upon  the  heathen  Pilate  the  recoil  of  vengeance 
 was  much  tardier.  The  emotions  of  his  conscience 
 were  allayed,  and  he  went  on  awhile  in  the  routine 
 of  his  government.  Two  deputations  waited  on 
 him  after  the  crucifixion,  of  very  different  character, 
 though   both   emanating  from    members   of    the 
 
 Sanhedrim.  One  of  these  was  undertaken  in 
 friendly  concern  for  the  honour  of  the  dead,  that 
 the  body,  which  had  providentially  escaped  the 
 mutilation  and  crushing  inflicted  on  the  others 
 (John  xix.  32-37),  might  be  rescued  from  the  felon's 
 grave  into  which  it  would  otherwise  have  been 
 hurriedly  cast  after  the  execution.*  Two  members 
 of  the  council,  who  had  vainly  protested  against  the 
 violence  of  the  majority,  undeterred  by  all  the 
 odium  to  which  their  singular  but  noble  conduct 
 exposed  them,  and  no  doubt  quickened  in  their 
 adherence  to  the  cause  of  the  outcast  by  the  por- 
 tents which  were  prognosticating  his  innocence  and 
 mysterious  greatness,  hastened  to  the  governor, 
 secured  the  sacred  body,  and  fulfilled  a  remarkable 
 prophecy  (Is.  liii.  9,  12)  by  consigning  it  to  a 
 princely  grave  (Matt,  xxvii.  60  ;  John  xix.  41.  See 
 also  Joseph  of  Arimathea  and  Nicodemus). 
 After  the  piety  of  these  admirable  persons  had 
 provided  a  sepulchre  worthy  of  the  dead,  the  faith- 
 ful group  of  holy  vi'omen,  who  had  witnessed  the 
 horrors  of  the  cross  at  a  distance,  now  draw  near 
 and  mournfully  inspect  the  tomb  wherein  their 
 heart's  treasure  of  love  was  deposited.  After  a 
 lingering  look  they  returned  home,  not  utterly 
 prostrated  by  their  sorrow  ('cast  down  but  not 
 destroyed,'  as  St.  Paul  would  describe  them,  2 
 Cor.  iv.  9),  but  able  in  the  midst  of  it  to  project 
 fresh  oflfices  of  ministry  for  him  from  whom  they 
 could  not  believe  that  death  had  severed  them  for 
 ever.  '  They  prepared  spices  and  ointments,'  St. 
 Luke  informs  us  (xxiii.  56).  The  voice  now  stilled 
 in  death  had,  only  a  few  days  ago,  bestowed  the 
 warmest  praise  on  Mary  of  Bethany,  when,  as  he 
 said,  'she  anointed  his  body  for  its  burial.'  We 
 have  no  doubt  that  this  ministiy  of  love,  so  well 
 designed  but  never  wanted,  was  no  less  worthy  of 
 his  emphatic  commendation.  This  most  eventful 
 day,  unrivalled  in  its  issues  by  any  other  day  through 
 which  the  sun  ever  ran  its  course,  now  ends  with 
 an  affecting  incident,  which  Holy  Scripture  has 
 rescued  from  oblivion  (see  Matt,  xxvii.  61).  When 
 their  companions  returned  to  their  homes  Mary 
 Magdalene  and  the  Virgin's  sister  and  namesake 
 remained  at  their  sacred  watch  and  ward,  '  sitting 
 over  against  the  sepulchre.'  Among  the  sym- 
 pathies of  the  human  heart  room  has  always  been 
 found  for  acts  of  pensive  piety  such  as  this,  even 
 when  bestowed  on  far  less  interesting  occasions. 
 No  one  reads  without  some  emotion  the  loving 
 vigils  over  her  dead  of  Rizpah  the  daughter  of 
 Aiah  (2  Sam.  xxi.  10).  With  still  more  elevated 
 fellow-feeling  do  we  honour  the  silent  grief  of  these 
 watchers  in  the  garden  of  the  sepulchre — a  touch- 
 ing contrast  to  the  sleepers  of  Gethsemane  !  We 
 do  not  suppose,  indeed,  that,  like  the  daughter  of 
 Aiah,  our  Alarys  spent  days  and  nights  at  the  tomb, 
 although  Friday  closes  and  Sunday  breaks  upon 
 their  holy  watch.  Saturday  brought  to  them  ob- 
 ligations which  their  piety  would  not  resist,  and 
 
 *  Mishna,  Sanhedrim,  vi.  5.  By  the  Roman 
 law,  however,  the  body  would  have  been  left  ex- 
 posed to  birds  of  prey  (Renan,  Vie  de  Jcstij,  who 
 quotes  Horace,  Epp.  i.  16,  48  ;  Juvenal,  xiv.  77  ; 
 Lucan,  -^i.  544 ;  Pliny,  xxxvi.  24 ;  Plutarch,  Cleo- 
 fiieitt's,  39;  Petronius,  Sat.,  cxi.,  cxii.)  The  Jew- 
 ish usage  would  be  allowed  to  prevail,  on  so  urgent 
 in  occasion  as  the  present  approach  of  the  Pass- 
 over [high]  sabbath. 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 581 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 so  we  suppose  that  at  its  earliest  dawn  they  rejoined 
 their  Galilean  friends. 
 
 Saturday,  i6tk  of  Nisan  {April  8). — What  a 
 contrast  does  the  silence  of  this  Sabbath-day  afford 
 to  the  long,  minute,  and  heart-stirring  events  of 
 yesterday.  All,  however,  was  not  peaceful,  how- 
 ever quiet.  Two  evangelists  refer  to  what  occurred. 
 St.  Matthew,  in  five  verses  (xxvii.  62-66),  tells  us 
 of  the  anxiety  and  restlessness  of  the  chief  priests 
 and  Pharisees,  while  St.  Luke,  in  few  but  graphic 
 words  (xxiii.  56),  informs  us  of  the  resignation  and 
 obedience  of  the  faithful  followers  of  Christ.  This 
 Passover- Sabbath  was  specially  sacred  (John  xix. 
 31)  ;  but  the  sanctions  neither  of  the  Law  nor  of 
 their  own  traditions  deterred  the  Sanhedrim  from 
 violating  its  holy  character  by  a  rancorous  activity 
 against  the  body  of  Jesus.  Though  they  had  slain 
 him,  they  could  not  repress  a  vague  fear  about  the 
 future.  So  they  went  in  deputation  to  the  governor 
 and  expressed  their  apprehensions  ;  they  did  not 
 hesitate  to  allude,  in  their  extravagant  manner,  to 
 the  Lord's  own  predictions  of  his  resurrection. 
 They  ill  disguise  their  fears  under  an  opprobrious 
 epithet  (Matt,  xxvii.  63),  '  that  deceiver,'  iKeivos  6 
 irXdvoi,  in  violation  of  the  manly  decency  which 
 has  found  expression  in  the  maxim  '  Z)e  mortuis  nil 
 nisi  bofium.'  Of  him  who  had  struck  a  death-blow 
 to  their  traditional  system  they  could  think  only 
 evil.  So  the  gospel-narrative  up  to  its  last  notice 
 of  these  enemies  of  Christ  consistently  records  the 
 rancour  and  impotence  of  their  latest  efforts  against 
 the  object  of  their  hatred.  Impotent  indeed  they 
 were !  Pilate,  though  receiving  their  deputation 
 with  characteristic  civility,  does  not  forget  their 
 recent  violence  to  himself.  They  had  taken  the 
 entire  business  into  their  ovm  hands.  They  had 
 insisted  on  the  death  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ;  their 
 demand  had  been  comphed  with  ;  with  themselves 
 must  rest  the  consequences.  If  they  thought  a 
 military  watch  necessary  as  a  sedative  to  their  fears 
 he  would  not  object  to  their  having  one.  Let  them 
 use  it  as  diligently  as  they  pleased.  '  So  they 
 went,'  says  the  evangelist,  'and  made  the  sepulchre 
 sure,  sealing  the  stone  and  setting  a  watch'  (ver. 
 66).  With  what  result  we  shall  soon  see  !  Re- 
 freshing it  is  to  turn  from  these  restless  and  anxi- 
 ous malignants  to  the  peaceful  sorrow  of  Jesus' 
 mourners.  Of  his  own  blessedness  *n  Paradise 
 (Luke  xxiii.  43)  ;  of  the  bliss,  moreover,  which  his 
 spirit  caused,  it  would  seem,  among  the  spirits  he 
 found  in  safe  keeping  there  (i  Pet.  iii.  18,  19)  ; 
 and  of  the  'rest  in  hope'  which  was  now  enjoyed 
 by  his  recently  tortured  but  now  liberated  and  im- 
 mortal body  (Acts  ii.  26,  31),  it  is  less  suitable  to 
 speak  in  an  historical  sketch  than  in  a  theological 
 dissertation.  We  cannot,  however,  refrain,  in 
 closing  this  history  of  the  wonderful  passion  week, 
 from  one  word  of  humble  and  adoring  contempla- 
 tion of  a  thrilling  and  awful  fact,  that,  while  apos- 
 tate Israel  was  desecrating  the  holiest  and  most 
 memorable  of  all  Jewish  Sabbaths,  and  forfeiting 
 its  claim  to  the  continuance  of  that  once  holy  and 
 happy  institution,  the  faithful  few,  who  '  rested  the 
 Sabbath-day  according  to  the  commandment,'  were 
 by  their  unobtrusive  piety  not  only  in  nearest  com- 
 munion with  the  soul  of  the  Son  of  Man  resting 
 from  all  its  sorrows,  but  in  best  training  for  the 
 higher  privilege  of  the  Christian  rest  and  festival, 
 the  new  Sabbath  of  the  Resurrection,  which  was 
 to  become  itself  the  type  of  that  eternal  rest 
 (xap^aTi.<x/j.6s)   which   remaineth   in  heaven,   after  I 
 
 life's  toils  are  over,  for  the  people  of  God  (Hob. 
 iv.  9). 
 
 Chap.  IV.  From  the  Resurrection  ok 
 Christ  to  his  Ascension.  —  Szinday,  i-jth  of 
 Nisa7i  (April  g). — 'Sometimes  be  curious  to  see 
 the  preparation  which  the  sun  makes,  when  he  is 
 coming  forth  from  his  chambers  of  the  east.'  Never 
 was  early  rising,  as  thus  recommended  in  the  quaint 
 eloquence  of  Jeremy  Taylor  (7%/)/ Z?'7v'«o-,  i.  i.  i), 
 so  grandly  rewarded  as  in  the  case  of  the  faithful 
 women  who,  on  the  first  Easter  morning,  antici- 
 pated the  sun-rise  in  their  visit  to  the  tomb  of  the 
 Crucified.  Like  him  of  old  (Ps.  cxi.x.  147)  they 
 '  prevented  the  dawn,'  and  at  the  earliest  gleam  of 
 twilight — '  the  hind  of  the  morning,'  as  the  Rabbins 
 call  it* — they  made  the  happy  discovery  that  Jesus 
 had  risen,  '  the  Sun  of  Righteousness,'  '  the  bright 
 and  morning  star,'  whose  Easter  glory  the  poet 
 Prudentius  described  (Ka^rifxepci'd,  I/ymn.  ad  in 
 cens.  Cer.  Paschal.) — 
 
 '  Non  sicut  tenebras  de  face  fulgida 
 Surgens  oceano  lucifer  imbuit,'  etc.,  etc.  .    .  , 
 '  Not  as  the  day-star  from  his  ocean-bed 
 Streaking  the  night  with  torch  of  glowing  red, 
 But  upon  earth  sad  with  its  dying  Lord 
 More  than  the  solar  day  hath  Christ  restored,'  etc. 
 
 Visit  of  the  Women  to  the  Sepulchre. — We  have 
 seen  how  the  female  disciples  of  Christ  suspended 
 their  offices  of  sorrovi^ing  love,  which  they  had  be- 
 gun on  Friday  evening,  in  order  to  keep  the  Sab- 
 bath (Luke  xxiii.  56).  Having  'rested'  at  the  call 
 of  duty,  and  gained,  no  doubt,  strength  for  their 
 pious  resolution,  they  resume  their  preparations,  on 
 the  expiration  of  the  holy  day  at  six  o'clock  (Mark 
 xvi.  i),  for  the  supplementary  embalming  of  the 
 sacred  body  (compare  John  xk.  39,  40,  with  the 
 two  passages  just  referred  to).  Besides  the  women 
 who  had  followed  the  Lord  from  Galilee,  there 
 were,  as  we  may  well  suppose,  not  a  few  earnest 
 hearts  of  Jerusalem  and  its  neighbourhood  who 
 would  unite  with  them  in  doing  honour  to  the  be- 
 loved dead.  St.  Luke  seems  to  imply  as  much  by 
 mentioning  'other  women  that  were  with  them' 
 (xxiv.  10,  the  al  Xonrala-uv  ai/rais  is  synonymous  with 
 the  Kai  Tives  ffi/v  avrah  of  ver.  I,t  and  need  not  be 
 
 *  This  ir\n\^l  Xni'''''X  was  the  first  of  the  four 
 stages  of  twilight  of  the  Jews  (Lightfoot,  IVorks 
 [Pitman],  xi.  455),  and  probably  answers  to  the 
 notes  of  time  used  by  all  the  evangelists.  Their 
 phrases  are  perhaps  identical  in  meaning,  and  would 
 present  no  difficulty,  were  it  not  that  St.  Mark 
 seems  to  define  his  \iav  Trpw't  by  dvareLXavTOi  rod 
 rjXiou  (xvi.  2).  As,  however,  the  Evangelist  could 
 only  have  meant  to  employ  the  terms  as  synony- 
 mous, we  get  rid  of  all  difficulty  by  making  avareiX- 
 avTos  Tov  ijXiov  embrace  the  whole  period  from  the 
 earliest  dawn  caused  by  the  sun's  approach  to  the 
 horizon  to  his  actual  rising.  Dr.  Robinson  {Bil>- 
 lioth.  Sacra,  ii.  168)  adduces  several  expressions 
 from  the  Septuagint,  in  which  the  two  phrases  of 
 St.  Mark  are  united,  the  union  designating  nothing 
 more  than  the  dawn — any  portion  of  the  '  morning 
 watch,'  which  the  Trpcot  of  Mark  xiii.  35  stands  for — 
 extending  trom  three  to  six  o'clock  A.M.  Isaiah's 
 poetical  description  of  Lucifer,  as  iriK'  (3,  'son  of 
 
 the  morning'  (xiv.  12),  is  in  the  LXX.  Il/jwt  di'o- 
 riKKwv. 
 
 \  Recent  critics,    Tischendorf,    Tregelles,    and 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 582 
 
 TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 limited  to  the  other  Galilean  women  in  addition  to 
 those  whose  names  are  given,  but  may  be  regarded 
 as  including  all  the  women,  whoever  they  may  have 
 been,  who  had  combined  their  testimony  of  the 
 resurrection  to  the  apostles).  If  we  can  hardly 
 imagine  that  the  virgin  mother  would  join  the  holy 
 company,  we  feel  no  such  restraint  respecting  Mary 
 of  Bethany  and  her  active  sister.  The  much- 
 serving  Martha  would  scarcely  be  absent  on  the 
 occasion  of  this  last  office  of  love.  Owing  to  their 
 numbers,  and  in  order  to  escape  public  notice, 
 they  probably  appointed  to  resort  to  the  sepulchre 
 by  different  ways,  in  separate  groups,  and  very 
 early  in  the  morning.  Mary  Magdalene,  in  the 
 intensity  of  her  devotion  to  him,  to  whom  she  owed 
 so  much  (Luke  viii.  2  ;  Mark  xvi.  9),  was  on  her 
 road,  'while  it  was  yet  dark'  (John.  xx.  l).  In 
 company  with  '  the  other  Maiy'  (Matt,  xxviii.  l), 
 v.'ho  had  been  her  companion  also  at  the  burial 
 (xxvii.  61)  and  the  cross  (56),  as  well  as  with  Sa- 
 lome (Mark  xvi.  i),  fresh,  in  all  probability,  from 
 the  side  of  the  afflicted  virgin,  they  proceeded  to 
 the  garden  of  the  sepulchre.*  Of  the  military 
 watch,  which  had  been  set  there  some  time  since 
 their  last  visit,  they  seem  to  have  had  no  know- 
 ledge ;  for  the  only  difficulty  they  talk  of  by  the 
 way  is  the  removal  of  the  large  stone  which  they 
 had  themselves  seen  placed  at  the  entrance  of  the 
 tomb,  when  the  Lord  was  consigned  to  it  on  Friday 
 (Mark  xvi.  3).  Little  did  they  dream  of  the 
 heavenly  interposition,  which  even  then  was  pre- 
 paring not  only  to  remove  their  embarrassment, 
 but  to  endue  them  with  an  unexpected  joy.  Never 
 did  any  precaution  of  human  power  more  signally 
 miscarry  than  at  this  moment  ! 
 
 '  Christ's  tomb  of  late  the  threefold  guard 
 Of  watch  and  stone  and  seal  had  barred  !' 
 
 The  Resurrection. — But  impotent  are  all  hind- 
 rances to  His  resurrection  !  Neither  Jewish  seals 
 nor  Roman  arms  avail !  The  first  Evangelist,  in  few 
 but  divinely  graphic  words,  narrates  how  heaven 
 met  all  this  defiance  of  the  powers  of  darkness  : 
 '  Behold  there  was  a  great  earthquake  ;  for  the 
 angel  of  the  Lord  descended  from  heaven  and 
 came  and  rolled  back  the  stone  from  the  door  and 
 sat  upon  it.  His  countenance  was  like  lightning 
 and  his  raiment  white  as  snow  :  and  for  fear  of  him 
 the  keepers  did  shake,  and  became  as  dead  men' 
 (xxviii.  2-4).  Whether  the  resurrection  took  place 
 at  this  point,  or  (as  the  ancient  opinion  of  the 
 church  concurrently  ran)  previous  to  the  miraculous 
 opening  of  the  tomb,  we  are  not  told  ;  whether  he 
 who  had  '  power  to  lay  down  his  life  and  power  to 
 take  it  again'  (John  x.  18)  arose  in  solitude  from 
 the  yet  unopened  grave  ;  or  whether,  as  Peter  was 
 afterwards  led  by  an  angel-hand  from  his  prison, 
 he  availed  himself  of  the  heavenly  agency  which 
 operated  in  the  earthquake  that  opened  his  tomb, 
 we  cannot  tell.  Nor  is  it  at  all  material  to  know 
 at  what  moment  the  Lord  arose.  The  fact  is  it- 
 self indisputable,  and  the  opened  sepulchre  and  its 
 
 Alford,  not  finding  the  Kal  rives  ahv  aiirais  of  ver. 
 I  in  codd.  NB,  omit  the  clause.  This  cannot 
 safely  be  done  against  AC'DEFHKMSUVXrAL 
 and  all  the  Syriac  versions. 
 
 *  Respecting  Joanna  and  her  company,  espe- 
 cially mentioned  by  St.  Luke,  the  reader,  for 
 brevity,  is  referred  to  the  section  below — Other 
 Women  at  the  Sepulchre. 
 
 sequel  of  wonders  were  meant  to  attest  the  grand 
 event.  When  the  Magdalene  and  her  two  com- 
 panions arrived  at  the  precincts  of  the  grave,  the 
 soldiers  of  the  watch  were  probably  quitting  the 
 spot  after  recovery  from  their  terrible  fright.  The 
 women  '  lifted  up  their  eyes'  (for  ava^\iy{/aaaL  is 
 St.  Mark's  word,  xvi.  4),  probably  on  entering  the 
 garden,  and  they  saw  that  the  huge  stone  was 
 rolled  away.  Mary  Magdalene,  in  the  keen  sus- 
 ceptibility of  her  grief,  instantly  conjectured  the 
 worst.  The  decamping  watch,  whom  she  pos- 
 sibly descried,  added  to  her  suspicion  that  the 
 sepulchre  had  been  violently  robbed  of  its  sacred 
 contents  by  ruthless  hands.  '  Then  she  runneth 
 and  cometh  to  Simon  Peter  and  to  the  other  dis- 
 ciple, whom  Jesus  loved,  and  saith  unto  them, 
 They  have  taken  away  the  Lord  out  of  the  sepulchre 
 and  we  know  not  where  they  have  laid  him'  (John 
 xx.  2).  After  the  Magdalene  had  thus  returned 
 to  the  city,  the  other  Mary  and  Salome  entered 
 the  sepulchre.  The  angel  of  the  earthquake  whom 
 the  terrified  guards  had  seen  sitting  in  awful  splen- 
 dour on  the  removed  stone  outside,  was  now 
 observed  by  the  amazed  and  trembling  women 
 within,  and  in  much  serener  aspect. 
 
 The  Angel  and  the  Women. — He  had  scared 
 the  soldiers  with  withering  fear  ;  he  now  soothes 
 the  affrighted  women  with  words  of  surpassing 
 consolation  :  '  Fear  j'^"  not  [the  vfiih  in  opposition 
 to  the  terror-stricken  guard]  :  I  know  that  ye  seek 
 Jesus  which  was  crucified.  He  is  not  here.  He 
 IS  risen'  (Matt.,  Mark).  To  give  clearness  to 
 their  conviction,  he  graciously  invites  them  to 
 survey  the  place  where  the  Lord  had  lain,  and 
 then  dismisses  them  with  a  message  to  his  disciples, 
 that  they  should  see  him  in  Galilee,  as  he  had  in- 
 deed appointed  before  his  death  (Matt.  xxvi.  32  ; 
 Mark.  xiv.  28).  This  reference  to  his  own  dis- 
 tinct appointment  with  them  is  remarkable  and 
 important — important,  as  helping  them  to  a  belief 
 in  his  resurrection,  when  they  should  recall  his 
 words  and  compare  them  with  the  angel's  message; 
 and  remarkable,  as  indicating  the  unswerving  ad- 
 vance of  his  purposed  mission  to  the  end.  How 
 appalling  the  events  which  had  happened  since 
 Thursday  evening,  when  he  said  :  '  After  I  am 
 risen,  I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee  ! '  Could 
 anything  better  tend  to  rally  the  prostrate  and 
 'scattered  sheep' of  his  fold  than  this  quiet  re- 
 sumption of  a  purpose,  which  Gethsemane  and 
 Calvary  and  the  grave  had  failed  to  drive  from  his 
 memory  ?  This  clause  of  the  message,  on  reflec- 
 tion, must  have  proved  to  the  disciples,  notwith- 
 standing their  tardiness  of  mind,  a  fruitful  germ 
 of  ultimate  conviction. 
 
 Message  to  Peter.  —  St.  Mark,  probably  from 
 St.  Peter's  own  information,  adds  a  very  beautiful 
 and  affecting  incident  of  the  angel's  message,  when 
 he  inserts  in  it  the  fallen  but  contrite  apostle's  own 
 name  ;  '  Go  your  way,  tell  his  disciples,  and  Peter, 
 that  he  goeth  before  you  into  Galilee  ! '  The  Lord 
 had  spared  a  yearning  look  of  pitiful  compassion 
 for  the  son  of  Jonas  in  the  midst  of  his  own  suffer- 
 ings. Death  quenched  not  that  love.  The  first 
 act  of  his  restored  life,  while  quitting  his  tomb, 
 was  to  give  his  angel  a  charge  concerning  his  dis- 
 ciple, whom  he  would  not  have  isolated  a  moment 
 from  his  brethren  in  the  thrilling  interest  which  the 
 glad  Easter  tidings  was  to  bring  to  them  all  J 
 Surely  this  kindly  care  for  Peter  must  have  pre- 
 sented to  the  minds  of  all  another  sign  of  the  iden- 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 583 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 dty  of  Him,  who  had  risen,  with  theif  dear  Lord 
 and  master  !  Commissioned  with  tliis  first  mes- 
 sage from  the  tomb,  the  messengers  '  departed 
 quickly  from  the  sepulclire  with  fear  and  great 
 joy,  and  did  run  to  bring  his  disciples  word' 
 (Matthew)  ;  so  intent  were  they  on  their  errand, 
 and  so  absorbed  (as  was  natural)  with  their  won- 
 drous subject,  that,  as  St.  Mark  takes  care  to  in- 
 form us,  they  stopped  not  by  the  way  to  impart  to 
 any  whom  they  met  the  grand  secret  of  their 
 breast  (xvi.  8). 
 
 Report  of  the  watch.  — Others,  however,  found 
 their  way  to  the  city  from  the  sepulchre,  who  were 
 more  communicative  of  their  wonderful  infomia- 
 tion.  St.  Matthew  tells  us'(xxviii.  ii)  that  some 
 of  the  terrified  watch  went  and  shewed  the  chief 
 priests  all  the  things  that  had  happened.*  These 
 malignant  enemies  of  Christ,  true  to  their  miserable 
 determination  to  resist  the  truth  to  the  last,  instantly 
 convene  a  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrim  either  in  full 
 body  or  in  committee,  and  after  deliberation  re- 
 solve upon  a  measure  which  brands  with  the  mark 
 of  an  ineffaceable  ignominy  the  desperate  effort  of 
 expiring  Judaism  to  check  the  progress  of  a  sacred 
 cause,  of  the  success  of  which  their  own  minds 
 could  not  but  entertain  painful  presentiments. 
 This  they  gave  proof  of  by  the  palpably  insincere 
 measures  which  the  priests  and  elders  adopted  to 
 neutralise  the  effect  in  the  popular  mind,  which 
 they  had  so  foully  tampered  with,  of  the  report  of 
 the  resurrection.  Having  seduced  the  traitor  Judas 
 with  a  bribe,  they  repeat  the  expedient  and  pollute 
 their  treasury  by  appropriating  out  of  it  a  large 
 sum  (Matt,  xxviii.  13)  to  induce  the  soldiei^s  to 
 propagate  their  lying  report  that  '  Christ's  disciples 
 had  come  in  the  night  and  stolen  him  away  while 
 they  slept.'  '  If  this  come  to  the  governor's  ears,' 
 said  the  miserable  schemers  to  their  dupes,  'we 
 will  persuade  him  and  secure  you.'  The  evangelist 
 concludes  his  account  of  this  humiliating  and  futile 
 effort  of  the  Sanhedrim  with  a  sentence  of  the 
 keenest  and  most  damaging  irony,  '  So  they  took 
 the  money  and  did  as  they  were  taught ;  and  this 
 saying  is  commonly  reported  among  the  Jews  until 
 this  day'  (ver.  15).  Of  this  last  statement  a  curious 
 and  offensive  illustration  occurs  in  the  Talmudic 
 tractate,  Toledoth  Jeschu,  which  is  full  of  the  spirit 
 of  Jesus-hating  Judaism.  (This  piece  of  blasphem- 
 ous ribaldry  is  reprinted  and  confuted  in  J.  C. 
 Wagenseil's  Tela  igiiea  Sataiue  [sub.  fin.]).  It  is 
 some  relief  to  discover  that  'some''  of  the  watch 
 only  put  themselves  in  the  hands  of  the  malignant 
 
 *  The  reader  will  not  fail  to  observe  how  strong 
 a  testimony  to  the  truth  of  the  7-esii7-nrtio!!,  from  a 
 free  and  independent  source,  we  have  in  this  report 
 of  the  guard.  God's  providence,  in  a  similarly  in- 
 dependent manner,  brought  about  the  most  satis- 
 factory attestation  of  the  death  of  Christ,  in  the 
 kind  of  official  announcement  of  it  which  the 
 centurion  made  to  the  civil  authority  of  Jerusalem. 
 The  three  following  passages  desei-ve  the  best  con- 
 sideration among  the  many  evidences  preserved  to 
 us  of  the  actual  death  and  resurrection  of  our  Lord 
 — Mark  xv.  44,  45  ;  John  xix.  32-35  ;  Matt,  xxviii. 
 II-15.  Moreover,  in  Matt,  xxvii.  63  we  have  an 
 acknowledgment  from  the  chief  priests  and  their 
 party  of  the  death  of  Jesus  ['whilst  he  was  yet 
 alive'],  while  in  vers.  63,  64,  there  occurs  an  un- 
 mistakeable  proof  of  the  apprehe7isioti  entertained 
 by  these  same  persons  of  his  resurrection. 
 
 hierarchs.  The  other  guards  appear  to  have  been 
 so  overcome  by  the  phenomena  of  the  sepulchre  as 
 to  have  recognised  the  true  state  of  the  case,  and  to 
 have  declined  being  a  party  to  a  project  which  was 
 as  stupid  and  self-refuting  as  it  was  insincere  and 
 malicious — which  required  them  to  have  been  asleep 
 and  yet  to  have  seen  thieves  and  tomb-riflers,  and 
 to  have  known  them  to  be  disciples  ! 
 
 Alary  Magdalene  and  the  tivo  Apostles. — We  turn 
 from  this  unhappy  attempt  to  nip  the  bud  of  the 
 great  Christian  mystery  to  the  wonderful  succession 
 of  proofs  which  soon  put  it  beyond  all  reasonable 
 doubt.  Mary  Magdalene  sought  out,  apparently 
 without  any  difficulty,  the  two  apostles  to  whom 
 she  betook  herself  in  her  bewilderment.  They 
 might  be  lodging  nearer  at  hand  than  the  others, 
 or  Mary  might  have  counted  on  a  special  sympathy 
 from  them.  The  promptitude  with  which  they 
 obeyed  her  summons  is  noticeable.  The  eager 
 alacrity  of  Peter,  who,  although  outrun  by  his 
 more  youthful  companion  in  their  hurried  course 
 to  the  garden,  was  the  first  to  enter  the  sepulchre, 
 profoundly  agrees  with  the  Saviour's  advance  to- 
 wards  him.  John  after\\'ards  followed  his  friend's 
 example,  and  the  result  of  their  combined  examina- 
 tion of  the  burial-place  corroborated  indeed  the 
 substance  of  the  Magdalene's  statement  that  the 
 body  was  removed,  but  it  seemed  at  the  same  time 
 to  correct  the  chief  impression  which  afflicted  her, 
 that  the  removal  was  the  work  of  enemies.  The 
 neat  and  orderly  condition  of  all  the  grave  clothes, 
 which  the  Evangelist  is  careful  to  mention,  as  if  in 
 refutation  of  all  doubt  that  the  tomb  had  been 
 robbed  by  either  friend  or  foe,  struck  the  two 
 apostles  with  a  surprise  which  led  to  a  conviction 
 of  all  the  truth.  St.  John,  at  least,  who  speaks 
 for  himself,  expressly  attributes  his  own  first  belief 
 of  the  resurrection  to  the  wonderfully  convincing 
 appearance  of  the  interior  of  the  tomb  (xx.  8).  We 
 do  not  hesitate  to  accept  this  higher  sense  of  St, 
 John's  iiriaTivaev  with  Lampe,  Neander,  Alford, 
 De  Wette,  Meyer,  Robinson,  and  Wordsworth, 
 although  opposed  to  Bengel,  Stier,  Ebrard,  Grotius, 
 andeven  Augustine,  who  merely  suppose  the  'belief 
 to  have  been  that  the  body  was  gone,  as  Maiy  had  told 
 them.  Striking  that  the  first  ray  of  the  Sun  of 
 Righteousness  should  have  flashed  upon  him  in  the 
 darkness  of  the  tomb  !  From  the  spark  of  that 
 light  of  the  sepulchre  with  what  'bright  beams  of 
 light '  has  not  the  church  of  the  risen  Christ  been 
 '  enlightened  by  the  doctrine  of  the  blessed  Apostle 
 and  Evangelist  St.  John  ! '  (See  Collect  for  St. 
 John^s  Day).  What  the  immediate  effect  of  the 
 sight  upon  Peter  was  we  are  not  told  by  his  brother 
 apostle.  If  the  latter  could  have  associated  his 
 friend  in  the  joy  of  his  own  faith,  he,  no  doubt, 
 gladly  would.  We  may  conclude  then,  from  his 
 silence,  that  Peter's  faith  was  yet  to  be  born,  St, 
 Luke  (xxiv.  12),  referring  either  to  this  or  a  later 
 visit  of  this  Apostle  to  the  tomb,  says  that  he 
 '  departed,  wondering  in  himself  at  what  was  come 
 to  pass'  (see  below). 
 
 Mary  Magdalene  at  the  Sepulchre  alone.  — Mary 
 Magdalene,  who  had  fetched  the  Apostles,  re- 
 mained at  the  sepulchre  after  their  return  home. 
 Overcome  with  the  idea  that  the  sacred  body  had 
 been  rudely  molested,  she  wept  as  she  stood  with- 
 out. Then,  vaiying  the  signs  of  her  grief,  she 
 stooped  down  and  gazed  at  the  spot  where  her 
 Lord  had  lain.  It  was  guarded  by  two  angels, 
 who  addressed  the  weeping  mourner  in  tones  of 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 584 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 kindly  concern:  'Woman,  why  weepest  tliou?' 
 Her  answer  proves  in  wliat  an  ecstasy  of  grief  her 
 loving  soul  was  wrapped.  Siie  seemed  hardly 
 conscious  of  the  dignity  of  the  holy  beings  before 
 her,  as  she  poured  out  her  complaint  in  impassioned 
 words  :  '  Because  they  have  taken  away  my  Lord, 
 and  I  know  not  where  they  have  laid  him.'  But 
 although  her  sorrow  bedims  her  sight,  it  does  not 
 becloud  her  faith.  This  seems  rather  to  increase 
 in  clearness.  To  the  Apostles  she  called  her 
 beloved  lost  one,  'the  Lord.'  She  now  appropri- 
 ates him  as  her  own,  '  My  Lord.'  As  the  penitent 
 of  Calvary  was  not  checked  by  the  sight  of  His 
 dying  agony  from  acknowledging  the  ^Lordship'' 
 of  Jesus,  so  our  Mary's  faith  amidst  the  lowliness 
 of  the  grave  dwells  loyally  on  the  self-same  attribute 
 of  greatness,  which  she  will  not  believe  to  have 
 been  lost  in  death  !  Such  allegiance  cannot  fail 
 of  its  reward,  nor  be  long  kept  waiting.  '  To-day 
 shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise' — was  not  a 
 prompter  requital  to  the  repentant  malefactor,  than 
 what  is  at  this  moment  in  store  for  the  loving 
 penitent  of  Magdala.  She  had  no  sooner  opened 
 her  grief  to  the  angels  than  she  was  destined  to 
 hear  the  echo  of  their  consolation  from  the  lips  of 
 her  Lord  himself !  She  turned  herself  back  [from 
 the  tomb]  and  saw  Jesus  standing  .  .  .  and  he 
 saith  unto  her  :  '  Woman,  why  weepest  thou  ; 
 whom  seekest  thou  ?'  The  Lord,  whom  she  did 
 not  at  once  recognise,  recalled  her  from  the  stupor 
 of  her  grief,  by  the  simple  salutation  '  Mary'!'  The 
 word  was,  no  doubt,  accompanied  with  a  voice 
 and  manner  which  reminded  her  of  his  former  love 
 and  grace.  Thtis  every  evidence  which  is  furnished 
 us  of  the  resurrection  conttects  him,  who  is  the  sub- 
 ject of  it,  with  old  a^sociatiofis.  It  was  the  indelible 
 memory  of  her  Lord,  impressed  on  her  mind  by 
 many  a  characteristic  feature  of  speech  and  action, 
 which  roused  Mary  to  the  instantaneous  conviction 
 that  none  but  her  beloved  could  have  pronounced 
 her  name  in  that  inimitable  tone.  Her  prompt 
 recognition  of  Jesus  was  accompanied  with  an 
 attempt,  an  excited  one  no  doubt,  to  embrace 
 him.  But  embraces  henceforth  must  be  spiritual ! 
 So  Christ  puts  a  double  honour  upon  his  disciple, 
 whose  simple  and  ardent  love  he  knows  to  be 
 equal  to  the  occasion  :  'Touch  me  not,'  he  says  in 
 effect,  '  your  faith  needs  not,  like  that  of  a  weaker 
 conviction,  to  be  helped  by  a  corporeal  embrace.' 
 To  us  the  Lord's  bearing  to  his  devoted  follower 
 of  Magdala  is  an  encomium  rather  than  a  repulse. 
 He  can  count  upon  her  faith  without  the  contact 
 which  was  needful  for  theisatisfaction  of  Thomas  ; 
 so  he  at  once  entrusts  to  her  the  message  which 
 should  announce  to  his  followers  not  his  return  to 
 life  merely,  but  his  approaching  ascension  to  his 
 Father.  Such  an  announcement  was  necessary ; 
 without  it  his  disciples  might  conclude  from  the 
 tenor  of  his  long  discourse  to  them  before  his 
 death,  that  his  present  return  to  life  was  his  final 
 appointment,  and  that  this  world  accordingly  was 
 the  '■place'  of  their  ultimate  glory  and  rest  with 
 himself  (John  xi v.  3;  xvi.  16;  xvii.  24).  Though, 
 therefore,  they  were  about  to  see  him  after  ''the 
 little  while'  of  his  absence  from  them  through 
 death,  yet  that  sight  would  be  itself  but  a  brief 
 one,  for  he  was  not  yet  ascended  to  his  Father, 
 but  was  on  the  way  to  Him  (comp.  John  xvi.  16 
 with  XX.  17).  We  therefore  discover  in  Mary 
 Magdalene's  case,  not  only  the  distinction  which 
 St.  Mark  assigns  to  her  of  being  the  first  to  behold 
 
 the  risen  Jesus  (xvi.  9),  but  the  yet  higher  privilege 
 of  receiving  from  him  the  sublimest  of  his  messages 
 to  his  disciples.  In  it  he  announces  his  approach- 
 ing ascension  to  heaven,  and  indicates  the  spiritual 
 relation  which  he  would  have  them  realise  as  his 
 'brethren' — children  of  'his  Father  and  their 
 Father,  his  God  and  their  God'  (John  xx.  17) 
 In  this  remarkable  message  the  apostles  would,  on 
 due  reflection,  find  the  best  possible  voucher  of 
 their  Lord's  resurrection.  It  contained  two  plain 
 references  to  his  former  teaching.  He  had  in 
 Galilee  in  a  pointed  manner  declared  the  principle 
 of  their  regenerate  relation  to  him  (Matt.  xii.  46- 
 50;  Mark  iii.  31-35);  and,  as  late  as  Thursday 
 evening,  he  had  profoundly  discoursed  to  them  of  his 
 departure  from  the  world  to  the  Father,  and  his  dis- 
 course had  at  the  time  deeply  impressed  them  (John 
 xvi.  29,  30).  How  could  Mary  Magdalene  have 
 had  any  idea  of  so  profound  a  truth,  unless  from 
 the  mouth  of  the  Lord  himself?  When,  however, 
 she  reported  to  his  late  companions  the  startling 
 fact  that  she  had  actually  seen  the  Lord  alive,  they 
 were  incredulous.  Prostrated  with  grief  (Mark 
 xvi.  10),  they  reflected  not  on  tht  probability  oi  \h& 
 story  which  their  earnest  friend  avouched ;  but  if 
 '  they  believed  not,'  as  St.  Mark  informs  us,  the 
 silence  of  St.  John  may  justify  the  supposition  that 
 Mary's  statement  would  at  least  produce  some  im- 
 pression on  their  minds  which  might  contribute 
 somewhat  to  ultimate  belief  (comp.  John  xx.  18). 
 But  other  influences  strangely  tending  to  the  same 
 result  are  at  hand.  The  other  Mary  and  Salome 
 were  on  their  way  to  the  disciples  to  relate  what 
 they  had  seen  and  heard  at  the  sepulchre,  since 
 their  companion  of  Magdala  had  left  them,  M'hen 
 they  were  met  by  the  risen  Saviour  (Matt,  xxviii.  9). 
 Seco7id  Appearance  of  Christ. — According  to  St. 
 Matthew  (xxviii.  8)  and  St.  Mark  (xvi.  8),  these 
 holy  women  had  quitted  the  tomb  with  fear  and 
 amazement,  though  not  unmixed  with  joy,  at  the 
 apparition  and  words  of  the  angel.  They  were,  no 
 doubt,  still  under  the  influence  of  these  emotions 
 when  Jesus  approached  them  (observe  the  virifv- 
 T-qaev  avrah,  and  contrast  it  with  the  mode  of 
 Christ's  approach  to  Maiy  Magdalene,  evidently 
 from  behind ;  iarpcL^t)  eh  to.  onLau),  Kal  ^eicpel  rbv 
 '\Tr)(Tovv  ecrrwra,  John  xx.  14) ;  for,  after  a  gracious 
 salutation  (xaipere),  in  which  he  seemed  to  sym- 
 pathise with  their  Joy,  as  before  he  had  soothed  the 
 tears  of  the  Magdalene  (yivai,  rl  /cXaleis),  he  bids 
 them  dismiss  their  fears  (p.7)  (po^eia'^e,  without  the 
 emphatic  vp-eh  of  the  angel ;  for  the  Lord  draws 
 no  contrast  and  makes  no  allusion  to  the  terrified 
 guard).  And  now  the  Lord  strikingly  demonstrates 
 his  intuition  of  human  character,  and  so  proves 
 himself  to  be  the  same  Jesus  whom  the  beloved 
 disciple  (ii.  24.  25)  described  as  '  knowing  all  men, 
 and  needing  not  that  any  should  testify  of  man  ; 
 for  he  knew  what  was  in  man.'  This  Mary  and 
 Salome  were  of  far  different  mould  from  their 
 friend  of  Magdala.  Equal,  no  doubt,  in  love  and 
 duty,  they  were  yet  inferior  to  her  in  firmness  of 
 character  and  grasp  of  faith.  So  the  Lord  having 
 calmed  their  timid  hearts  and  addressed  himself  to 
 their  joy,  at  once  permits  their  reverential  embrace 
 {eKpcLTTfcrav  ....  Kal  Trpoa'eKvvr]crav  auToi),  whereby 
 they  might  increase  their  faltering  faith  to  a  strong 
 conviction.  This  '  touch '  he  had,  as  we  have  seen, 
 forbidden  to  the  intrepid  and  unshrinking  Magda- 
 lene, as  unneeded  and  superfluous ;  while  on  a 
 later  occasion  we  shall  find  him  actually  command' 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 585 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 tug  a  contact  of  his  sacred  body,  to  satisfy  the  un- 
 reasonable doubts  of  the  tardiest  of  his  followers. 
 Having  graciously  accepted  the  homage  and 
 strengthened  the  faith  of  these  timorous  but  faith- 
 ful women,  Jesus  gives  them  an  embassy  to  his 
 apostles,  whom  he  again  salutes  with  the  endear- 
 ing name  of  brethren :  '  Go,  tell  my  brethren  that 
 they  go  before  me  into  Galilee  ;  there  shall  they 
 see  me.'  The  wisdom  of  these  words  is  apparent. 
 Christ  will  not  oppress  them,  with  the  expectation 
 of  a  sudden  appearance  among  them,  then  and 
 there.  To  retire  to  Galilee,  from  the  scene  of 
 their  present  sorrow,  would  allow  time  for  reflec- 
 tion and  recovery  ;  it  would  also,  like  the  angel's 
 message,  put  the  minds  of  the  apostles  into  a  train 
 of  recollecting  how  that  Jesus  had  himself  pro- 
 mised, while  he  was  with  them,  that  after  his  death 
 and  resurrection  he  would  see  them  again  in  Galilee 
 (Matt.  xxvi.  32) ;  nor  would  the  kindliness  of  his 
 salutation  be  without  its  influence — it  was  so  much 
 like  their  loving  master's  benevolent  heart  to  for- 
 give their  cowardly  desertion  of  him  in  his  hour  of 
 need  !  We  are  not  told,  however,  what  reception 
 was  given  to  this  message  ;  possibly  a  more  re- 
 spectful one  than  to  Mary  Magdalene's.  Four  of 
 the  eleven  apostles  were  sons  of  these  pious 
 messengers.  One  of  them  had,  by  a  personal 
 inspection  of  the  sepulchre,  raised  himself  out  of 
 the  desponding  incredulity  of  his  associates  into  a 
 frame  of  mind  which  would  induce  him  at  least  to 
 give  a  serious  attention  to  the  statement  of  his 
 mother  and  her  friend.  Added  to  which  the 
 testimony  of  these  women  was  a  weightier  one  than 
 that  of  the  Magdalene,  for  they  could  tell  of  what 
 their  '  hands  had  handled,'  as  well  as  of  what  their 
 eyes  had  seen  and  their  ears  had  heard. 
 
 Other  Women  at  the  Sepulchre. — It  cannot, 
 however,  be  denied,  that  the  incredulity  of  the 
 apostolic  company  was  in  general  extremely 
 obstinate.  Unpersuaded  by  the  mouth  of  the 
 three  witnesses,  who  have  thus  far  laboured  to 
 convince  them  of  the  glorious  truth,  which  they 
 had  discovered  that  Easter  morning,  they  reject 
 the  testimony  of  a  still  more  numerous  body  of 
 informants,  who  now  bring  similar  tidings  to  them, 
 but  with  varied  vouchers.  The  Galilean  women 
 mentioned  by  St.  Luke  (xxiv.  1-9)  have  been,  as 
 it  appears  to  us,  conclusively  shewn  by  some  care- 
 ful writers*  to  be  a  different  set  of  women  from 
 those  whose  movements  we  have  been  describing. 
 The  central  member  of  this  larger  group  is  Joanna, 
 the  wife  of  Chuza,  Herod's  steward.  Though 
 probably  they  acted  in  concert  with  their  pious 
 neighbours,  they  seem  to  have  moved  independ- 
 ently of  them.  They  on  Friday,  after  the  burial, 
 probably  made  that  inspection  of  the  tomb,  as  the 
 preliminary  step  in  their  pious  offices  to  the  dead 
 (Luke  xxiii.  55),  which  Mary  Magdalene  and  the 
 other  Mary  seem  to  have  postponed  until  Sunday 
 morning  (Matt,  xxviii.  i).  They  were  apparently 
 beforehand  with  them  also  in  their  provision  of 
 materials  for  embalming  the  sacred  body  ;  for  St. 
 Luke  informs  us  that  they  had  prepared  their  spices 
 and  unguents  before  the  Sabbath-day  (xxiii.  56), 
 
 *  We  would  especially  name  Mr.  Gilbert  West 
 {Observations  on  the  Hist.,  etc.,  of  the  Resurrection 
 of  Jesus  Christ  [sec.  i.-xi.]);  Dr.  Townson  (Dis- 
 courses  on  the  four  Gospels  [pp.  292-404]) ;  and 
 Mr.  Greswell  [Dissertations  on  the  Harmony,  etc. 
 [ed.  2],  vol.  iii.,  pp.  264-320). 
 
 while  it  is  clear  from  St.  Mark,  that  the  two  Marys 
 and  Salome  only  procured  their  sweet  spices,  and 
 that  by  purchase,  when  the  Sabbath  was  past  (xvi. 
 i).  This  diversity  of  circumstances  continues 
 throughout  the  narrative.  On  the  arrival  of  Joanna 
 and  her  party  at  the  tomb,  after  the  departure  of  the 
 other  women,  they  enter  the  opened  sepulchre,  not 
 invited  by  an  angel,  as  their  predecessors  had  been, 
 to  behold  the  evidence  of  Jesus  being  alive  (SefiTe, 
 rSere  Tbv  rbirov  dirov  Iksito,  Matt,  xxviii.  6),  but 
 intent  only  on  their  sad  mission  of  embalming  him 
 dead.  They  found  not  the  Lord's  body,  and  (full 
 proof  that  they  had  not  seen  their  friends  of 
 Salome's  group)  were  thrown  into  extreme  per- 
 plexity. While  they  were  indulging,  as  was 
 natural,  in  painful  surmises,  behold,  two  angels  in 
 human  shape  stood  by  them  in  shining  garments. 
 The  apparition  filled  them  with  fear,  and  they  fell 
 prostrate  to  the  ground.  The  three  first  visitors 
 to  the  sacred  vault  had  been  met  with  comfortable 
 words  ;  these  were  accosted  by  the  celestial  guards 
 in  tones  of  apparent  censure  :  '  Why  seek  ye  the 
 living  among  the  dead?'  as  if  in  gentle  reproof  of 
 their  coming  to  seek  for  Christ  in  the  tomb,  at  a 
 time  when  he  had  already  shewed,  or  was  now 
 shewing  himself  to  some  of  their  companions  con- 
 queror of  the  grave.  Not  to  depress  them,  how- 
 ever, with  over  much  sorrow,  the  angels  added  the 
 glorious  tidings:  'He  is  not  here,  but  is  risen.' 
 This  grand  announcement  is  not  received  by  these 
 faithful  women  with  the  strong  passion  of  grief, 
 which  the  Magdalene  had  displayed  ;  nor  with  the 
 conflicting  feelings  of  fear  and  joy  which  had  ex- 
 cited the  timorous  hearts  of  her  companions  ;  but 
 with  a  sedate  and  solemn  attention  which  en- 
 couraged their  heavenly  monitors  to  appeal  to  their 
 recollection  of  the  past  :  '  Remember  how  he  spake 
 unto  you,  when  he  was  yet  in  Galilee,  saying.  The 
 Son  of  Man  must  be  delivered  into  the  hands  of 
 sinful  men,  and  be  crucified,  and  the  third  day 
 rise  again.'  Of  all  the  angelic  announcements  this 
 most  clearly  connects  the  Christ  of  the  resurrection 
 with  the  Christ  of  the  preceding  period.  The 
 pious  listeners  were  collected  enough  to  remember 
 the  Lord's  prediction,  and  now  to  comprehend  its 
 meaning.  We  are  apt  to  think  that  greater  dis- 
 tinction was  put  on  the  other  women  by  Christ  in 
 vouchsafing  to  them  his  gracious  appearances. 
 But  may  we  not  discover  some  compensation  for 
 the  7tiant  of  that  honour  in  the  case  of  Joanna  ami 
 her  friends,  in  the  benediction  which  Christ  pro- 
 nounced afterwards  to  Thomas  :  '  Blessed  are  they 
 that  have  not  seen,  and  yet  have  believed  ?'  Though 
 not  expressly  sent  on  the  errand  like  their  prede- 
 cessors, these  excellent  persons,  having  found  their 
 Saviour,  in  the  promptitude  of  their  faith  returned 
 from  the  sepulchre,  and  made  apparently  (as  was 
 easy  for  them  in  their  larger  number)  a  much  wider 
 circulation  of  the  wonderful  intelligence  than  the 
 others  had  the  opportunity  of  doing  (Luke  xxiv.  9). 
 Incredulity  of  the  disciples. — Such  are  the  suc- 
 cessive evidences  of  the  resurrection  which  the 
 various  groups  of  the  ministering  women  brought 
 to  the  apostles.  They  were  vouchsafed  at  two  ap- 
 pearances of  Christ  himself,  and  three  apparitions 
 of  angels.  We  have  seen  how  varied  were  the 
 processes  of  conviction  in  the  case  of  the  women. 
 Uniform,  however,  was  the  effect  produced  by 
 their  different  reports  upon  the  men  ;  even  in- 
 varial^le  incredulity.  St.  Luke,  the  historian  of 
 this  incredulity,  expressly  mentions  the  successive 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 586 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 messengers,  who  came  freighted  with  the  mar- 
 vellous tidings— (i)  '  Mary  Magdalene,  and  (2) 
 Joanna,  and  (3)  Mary  the  mother  of  James,'  and 
 ■svhatever  other  women  respectively  accompanied 
 them  (see  xxiv.  10  ;  and,  for  this  distributive  sense 
 of  the  names,*  the  convincing  remarks  of  Dr. 
 Townson,  Discourses,  pp.  296,  394-400) ;  but  their 
 reports  were  uniformly  rejected — 'their  words 
 seemed  to  them  as  idle  tales,  and  they  believed 
 them  not.'  Some  allowance  must  in  charity  be 
 made  for  the  apostles.  They  never  had  under- 
 stood the  Lord's  plainest  predictions  of  '  the  de- 
 cease he  was  to  accomplish  at  Jerusalem;'  why 
 should  Messiah  die  (John  xii.  34)?  Before  they 
 had  learnt  to  solve  the  startling  question,  his  pain- 
 ful and  ignominious  death  dashed  their  fondest 
 hopes  to  tlie  ground,  and  they  were  scattered  like 
 sheep,  when  the  shepherd  is  smitten.  This  result 
 was  not  unforeseen  by  Jesus  (Matt.  xxvi.  31 ;  Mark 
 xiv.  27) ;  nay,  it  was  indicated  in  prophecy  (Zech. 
 xiii.'  7).  The  time  is  now  come  when  they  are  to 
 be  gathered  from  their  dispersion  ;  and  we  venture 
 to  think  that  the  gentle  means  employed  by  '  the 
 Good  Shepherd '  to  recall  them  from  the  consterna- 
 tion and  grief  into  which  his  death  had  plunged 
 them,  affords  an  irresistible  evidence  of  the  truth 
 of  the  resurrection,  by  the  illustration  it  yields,  at 
 every  step,  that  it  was  the  same  Jesus,  who  in 
 methods  of  characteristic  grace  and  kindness  to 
 his  disciples  was  carrying  out,  in  his  post-mortal 
 course,  the  purpose  and  counsel  which  he  so  often 
 announced  to  them  previous  to  his  death.  One 
 reflection  we  obviously  derive  from  this  incredulity 
 i)f  the  apostles.  How  unreasonable  is  the  objec- 
 tion which  makes  the  history  of  the  resurrection 
 an  invention  of  the  apostles  and  their  friends  ! 
 Some  (like  Mon.  Renan,  Vie  de  Jc'sus,  p.  434) 
 imagine  this  history  to  be  the  offspring  of  the 
 heated  imagination  of  Mary  Magdalene.  Others 
 (and  they  are  the  majority  of  the  neocritical  school) 
 find  in  the  Evangelists  a  legendary  summary  of 
 primitive  belief,  which  took  its  shape  from  the 
 fond  conceits  of  the  first  preachers  of  Christianity. 
 The  best  refutation  of  all  such  opinions  is  the 
 simple  narrative  of  the  Gospels.  This  narrative, 
 which  is  on  all  hands  accepted  as  the  basis  of  all 
 these  speculations,  proves  most  clearly  that  the 
 apostles  and  their  friends,  who  were  the  primitive 
 witnesses  of  the  resurrection,  were  anything  but 
 enthusiasts  and  framers   of  legends.     They  were 
 
 *  This  distributive  sense  of  the  names,  here 
 mentioned,  seems  to  us  to  be  very  strongly  indi- 
 cated in  the  evangelist's  careful  phraseology.  In 
 verse  9  he  says  of  the  women  who  had  seen  the 
 two  angels  at  the  sepulchre,  that  they  returned 
 and  reported  (d7r7777etXaj')  all  that  they  had  seen 
 and  heard  to  the  eleven  and  to  all  the  rest.  The 
 aorist,  which  here  expresses  their  siii^t^le  report,  is 
 in  direct  contrast  with  the  ^Xe70J'  of  the  next 
 verse,  an  imperfect  tense  which  well  indicates  the 
 repeated  announcements  of  the  several  women  as 
 they  came  back  one  after  the  other.  That  the 
 tenth  verse  is  briefly  recapitulaiy  of  the  various 
 reports  of  the  different  groups  of  women,  is  plain 
 from  its  structure — ^aav  U  ^  lAarila^^-ov'-i]  .  .  .  al 
 i\eyov  .  .  .  ravra.  In  like  manner  he,  in  verse 
 II,  describes  the  apostles'  persistent  incredulity  of 
 one  report  after  the  other  by  the  tense  of  repeti- 
 tion, TiirlffTovv  avrals,  q.  d.,  '  As  many  women  as 
 came,  from  time  to  time,  they  would  disbelieve.' 
 
 tardy-minded  men  ;  far  from  entertaining  a  preju- 
 dice  or  expectation  of  the  Lord's  restoration  from 
 death  ;  and  resisting  the  manifold  evidences  of  that 
 fact,  until  disbelief  became  unreasonable.  And  as 
 to  Maiy  Magdalene,  in  whose  '  haUucination '  the 
 newest  criticism  discovers  the  unsubstantial  founda- 
 tion of  all  subsequent  faith  in  the  resurrection  (  Vie 
 de  y^'sus.  I.e.),  it  happens,  that  that  noble-hearted 
 woman  (whose  loving  devotion  to  the  Saviour  is 
 sadly  caricatured  in  Mon.  Renan's  rhapsody), 
 though  blessed  with  almost  the  earliest  conviction 
 of  the  illustrious  truth  of  the  risen  Christ  (St. 
 John's  being  the  very  earliest),  could  induce  no 
 one  to  accept  her  testimony  ;  for  however  true  it 
 may  be  that  the  reports  brought  by  her  and  the 
 other  women  may  have  startled  the  eleven  out  of 
 the  first  inactivity  of  their  despair,  they  did  not 
 impart  any  conviction  to  the  apostles  ;  nor  is  it 
 upon  the  testimony  of  the  women,  much  less  any 
 one  of  them,  that  subsequent  Christians  received 
 their  faith.  The  strong-minded  St.  Paul  was  so 
 emphatic  in  his  belief  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
 as  to  base  the  whole  value  of  Christianity  upon  it 
 alone  (l  Cor.  xv.  14-18).  But  while  he  does  this 
 in  the  strongest  possible  terms,  he  in  the  most 
 studied  manner  excludes  Mary  Magdalene  and  all 
 the  other  women  as  witnesses  of  the  historical 
 fact  (comp.  verses  5-7). 
 
 Third  Appearance  of  Christ — to  Peter. — When 
 Joanna  ancl  her  companions  circulated  their  tem- 
 perate and  credible  report,  it,  no  doubt,  soon 
 reached  the  ears  of  that  apostle,  who  of  all  others, 
 we  may  well  suppose,  both  from  his  temperament 
 and  the  sad  memory  of  his  great  ingratitude,  was 
 the  most  restless  and  impatient.  We  have  seen 
 him  once  at  the  sepulchre  with  St.  John  and  Maiy 
 Magdalene.  This  is  the  visit  described  in  the 
 fourth  gospel  (xx.  3-10).  But  St.  Luke  mentions 
 a  hasty  visit  to  the  sepulchre  as  paid  by  St.  Peter 
 alone,  the  circumstances  of  which  are  so  different 
 from  the  former  (comp.  Luke  xxiv.  12),  as  to 
 justify  the  supposition  that  the  disquieted  apostle, 
 influenced  it  may  be  by  the  strong  view  of  his 
 friend  St.  John  in  favour  of  the  women's  reports, 
 went  again  (perhaps  unknown  to  any)  in  quest  of 
 that  conviction  which  he  would  gladly  cherish,  if 
 he  could  only  find  evidence  to  satisfy  him.  This 
 time  he  did  not  enter  the  sepulchre,  but  like  St. 
 John  on  the  former  occasion,  he  stooped  down,  if 
 haply  he  could  behold  at  least  the  vision  of  angels, 
 of  which  so  much  was  now  being  said  (comp.  Luke 
 xxiii.  23).  The  result  of  his  anxious  but  reverent 
 gaze  was  not  satisfactory  ;  and  St.  Luke — the  his- 
 torian of  the  incredulity — mildly  includes  the 
 amazed  apostle  among  the  instances  of  those  whose 
 minds,  though  disturbed,  were  as  yet  unconvinced 
 by  all  they  heard.  Once  more  'he  departed'  (un- 
 blessed by  that  angelic  service,  which,  though  not 
 permitted  to  announce  to  him  the  gospel,  as  it  had 
 to  the  women,  was  still  destined  to  protect  him 
 from  danger  when  he  should  have  to  preach  it  to 
 others — Acts  v.  19  ;  xii.  7),  'wondering  in  himself 
 at  that  which  was  come  to  pass.'  We  can  hardly 
 suppose  that  he  reached  his  home,  as  on  the  last 
 occasion  (John  xx.  10),  without  the  blessedness  of 
 that  full  conviction  which  was  in  store  for  his  per- 
 turbed heart,  for  we  have  the  assurance  of  St. 
 Paul  that  the  Lord  appeared  to  him  (i  Cor.  xv.  5), 
 and  that  appearance,  which  St.  Paul  puts  as  the 
 earliest  of  the  six  he  mentions,  must  have  taken 
 place  in  the  course  of  this  morning,  some  time  be- 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 587 
 
 JESaS  CHRIST 
 
 fore  mid-day,  as  may  be  gathered  from  St.  Luke's 
 reference  to  it  (xxiv.  34).  We  are  not  informed  of 
 the  details  of  this  interview,  nor  must  we  detain 
 ourselves  with  imagining  what  passed  between  the 
 deeply  penitent  disciple  and  his  most  gracious 
 master.  The  result  was  not  only  a  happy  one  to 
 him,  who  of  all  the  male  disciples  of  the  Lord  was 
 the  first  to  see  the  mighty  conqueror  of  death,  but 
 full  of  importance  to  the  entire  body  of  Christ's 
 scattered  followers,  as  tending  more  than  any  re- 
 corded incident  to  impress  on  them  that  faith  which 
 was  to  reunite  them. 
 
 Foicrth  Appearance — on  the  road  to  Emmaiis. — 
 One  of  the  most  beautiful  passages  of  the  post- 
 resurrection  life  of  Jesus  is  narrated  by  St.  Luke 
 (xxiv.  13-35)  with  so  vivid  a  portraiture  of  details 
 as  to  deter  us  from  the  attempt  to  reproduce  the 
 story,  lest  our  own  words  should  injure  the  effect 
 of  it.  In  perfect  contrast  to  his  third  appearance 
 to  St.  Peter,  over  which  a  veil  of  mystery  hangs, 
 we  have  here  a  full  revelation  of  Christ's  next 
 manifestation  of  himself  to  two  of  his  non-apostolic 
 followers  (of  the  seventy  perhaps),  as  they  were  on 
 their  way  to  Emmaus,  a  village  which  the  sacred 
 historian  describes  as  between  seven  and  eight 
 miles  from  Jerusalem.  Intensely  human  is  the 
 whole  tone  of  this  exquisite  narrative.  Cleopas 
 and  his  companion  were  deep  in  conversation  on 
 the  events  which  had  happened  during  the  Pass- 
 over, which  they  were  leaving  with  saddened  hearts. 
 Jesus,  joining  company  with  them,  hears  their 
 simple  but  earnest  commentaiy  on  his  own  life  and 
 death.  These  were  an  enigma  which  they  de- 
 spaired of  solving.  His  life,  in  deeds  and  words, 
 how  like — his  death,  in  pain  and  ignominy,  how 
 unlike — Messiah  !  And  then  the  third  day  was 
 come,  a  day  of  strange  foreboding  to  foe  and 
 friend  !  Foreboding,  which  was  now  indeed  fill- 
 ing their  soul  with  sickening  anxiety  ;  for  certain 
 women  had,  just  as  they  were  quitting  the  city, 
 actually  declared  that  they  had  at  the  tomb  seen  a 
 vision  of  angels,  which  said  that  he  was  alive  ;  a 
 report  which  they  could  not  credit,  because  certain 
 of  themselves,  having  visited  the  burial-place  to 
 test  the  women's  story,  had  utterly  failed  to  dis- 
 cover a  sight  of  Him,  although  they  found  his 
 grave  emptied  of  its  precious  charge  !  The  Lord, 
 who  is  as  a  stranger  to  them,  reproves  them  for 
 their  unbelief ;  sets  forth  Messiah's  sufferings  as 
 the  predestined  prelude  of  his  glory,  which  all  their 
 Scriptures,  Moses  and  the  prophets  alike,  might 
 have  taught  them  ;  kindles  in  their  tardy,  but  not 
 unloving  hearts,  a  strange  glow  of  warmest  interest, 
 as  he  adapts  his  wonderful  exposition  to  restore 
 their  drooping  hopes  ;  and,  having  by  this  time  ar- 
 rived at  their  house  and  accepted  their  hospitality, 
 he  reveals  himself  to  them  in  the  midst  of  their 
 consecrated  meal.  With  that  divine  and  awful 
 promptitude,  which  marks  all  his  movements  now, 
 Jesus  had  no  sooner  convinced  them  of  his  identity, 
 than  he  mysteriously  disappears  from  their  view 
 (6.<pa.vT0's  iyevero  dir'  avrQv,  ver.  31).  They  instantly 
 returned  to  the  city  and  discovered  their  fellow- 
 disciples  aroused  from  their  despondency ;  for  they, 
 too,  had  been  startled  by  the  increasingly  persua- 
 sive signs  of  the  Lord's  resurrection,  which  his  ap- 
 pearance to  Simon  Peter  had  produced  amongst 
 them.  Who  can  describe  the  thrilling  scene  at 
 that  moment,  when  the  meeting  of  the  disciples  is 
 aroused  with  the  successive  testimony  of  the  apostle 
 first,  and  then  of  the  two  from  Emmaus  ?    But  the 
 
 soul  of  the  reader  is  still  more  profoundly  moved 
 as  he  passes  on  through  St.  Luke's  most  ravishing 
 history.  The  Evangelist  has  occupied  us  alone  up 
 to  this  point.  St.  John  now  joins  in  the  narra- 
 tive*— for  a  still  greater  event  impends. 
 
 Fifth  Appea7-ance — to  ten  of  the  apostles  and  some 
 others.  — The  two  sacred  writers  together  omit 
 nothing  to  be  desired  in  a  perfect  description.  It 
 is  Sunday  evening.  The  sacred  company  are  as- 
 sembled in  the  hostile  city  with  closed  doors.  The 
 fear  of  the  Jews  without,  and  the  perturbations  of 
 their  own  hearts  within,  as  they  oscillated  between 
 the  despondency  of  the  last  three  days  and  the  in- 
 definite hopes  of  the  last  few  hours,  presented  a 
 case  of  painful  suspense  worthy  of  the  merciful  in- 
 terposition of  the  Heart-Comforter,  and  which  none 
 but  he  could  soothe !  How  timely  then  is  the 
 precious  record  of  the  two  evangelists  :  '  Jesus 
 himself  came  and  stood  in  the  midst  of  them  and 
 saith  unto  them,  Peace  be  unto  yon!''  The  last 
 convulsion  of  unbelief  arose  from  their  fright 
 rather  than  from  wilfulness.  Full  of  doubt  whether 
 more  than  the  spirit  of  him,  whose  body  had  been 
 so  wounded  and  pierced  upon  the  cross,  could  be 
 possibly  now  alive,  they  supposed  that  it  was  his 
 ghost  before  them  !  But  he  who  had  before 
 death,  at  death,  and  since  death,  borne  so  long 
 with  them  mildly  meets  this  new  development  of 
 their  flagging  faith.  'Why  are  ye  troubled,'  he 
 kindly  asks,  'and  why  do  these  thoughts  arise  in 
 your  hearts  ?  .  .  .  handle  me  and  see,  for  a 
 spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones  as  ye  see  me  have.' 
 The  last  remnants  of  their  incredulity  still  flick- 
 ered in  their  hearts.  Another  gracious  attempt  is 
 made  to  quench  it.  He  asked  for  meat  ;  they 
 gave  him  a  piece  of  their  simple  food  ;  he  took  it, 
 and  by  eating,  gave  them  the  best  proof  of  his  cor- 
 poreity (Luke).  '  Then,'  adds  the  fourth  Evan- 
 gelist with  exquisite  and  forcible  simplicity,  '  Then 
 were  the  disciples  glad  when  they  saw  the  Lord  ' 
 (xx.  20).  Having  thus,  by  the  gradual  steps  of 
 his  admirable  wisdom  and  gracious  longsuffering, 
 plucked  out  of  their  tardy  nature  the  last  fibres  of 
 unbelief  which  clasped  their  hearts,  he  begins 
 to  edify  and  instruct  them  for  their  glorious  work. 
 He  renews  his  peaceful  blessing  ;  opens  to  them 
 the  divine  credentials  of  their  mission  (John  xx. 
 21),  and  by  the  breath  of  his  mouth,  shedding  on 
 them  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  consecrates 
 them  to  the  sublimest  functions  of  ministry  in  his 
 now  approaching  kingdom  (vers.  22,  23).  With 
 this  august  ceremony  ends  the  first  and  most  won- 
 derful of  all  Easter  days,  during  which  the  Lord 
 vindicated  his  dominion  over  death  and  the  grave, 
 and,  by  the  most  interesting  process  of  psycho- 
 logical and  moral  suasion  anywhere  on  record,  beat 
 down  the  strongholds  of  the  most  obstinate  incre- 
 dulity which  had  settled  in  the  hearts  of  his  de- 
 jected followers.  Having  traced,  with  unavoidable 
 prolixity,  the  steps  by  wliich  they  mounted  to  the 
 
 *  St.  Mark  (xvi.  14)  only  refers  to  the  Lord's 
 rebuke  (at  this  same  appearance)  of  his  disciples' 
 unbelief,  in  so  strenuously  resisting  the  repeated 
 reports  of  the  women,  zvho  were  in  fact  his  own 
 ministers  for  leading  them  to  conviction.  This 
 verse  alone  of  St.  Mark,  as  it  seems  to  us,  is 
 synchronistic  with  the  longer  narratives  of  SS. 
 John  and  Luke.  These  Evangelists  omit  the  re- 
 buke, and  dwell  only  on  the  happy  fact  of  the  dis- 
 ciples' conviction  of  Christ's  return  to  life. 
 
TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 588 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 iuflexible  conviction  of  their  master's  resurrection, 
 we  may  hasten  to  the  end  of  our  grand  subject 
 with  greater  brevity. 
 
 Events  of  the  ensuing  week,  ending  with  the  Sixth 
 Appearatice — to  the  eleven,  and,  probably,  some  others. 
 —We  are  not  informed  of  any  other  intercourse  of 
 Christ  with  his  followers  during  the  remainder  of 
 the  week.  He  might  well  leave  them  to  ponder 
 over  the  revelations  of  the  Sunday.  We  cannot, 
 however,  suppose  that  those  who  had  had  the 
 nappiness  of  being  convinced  of  his  resurrection 
 would  be  indifferent  about  it.  There  was,  no 
 doubt,  much  effort  on  the  part  of  the  convinced  to 
 persuade  others  to  accept  the  truth.  St.  Mark 
 seems  to  intimate  as  much  with  respect  at  least  to 
 the  two  disciples  of  Emmaus  (xvi.  13).  Their 
 labours  were  not  always  successful ;  many  with- 
 held their  assent  from  their  testimony.  Even 
 among  the  eleven  there  was  still  one  unreclaimed 
 from  unbelief  '  The  same  man,'  says  Stier 
 {Words  of  the  Lord  Jesus  \Q\zx\C\,  viii.  177),  'who 
 once  would  die  with  Jesus  (John  xi.  16)  continues 
 resolutely  in  the  same  mind,  and,  as  much  as  in  him 
 lies,  will  not  rise  again  with  Jesus.'  Thomas  was 
 absent  when  Christ  on  Sunday  evening  appeared 
 to  his  brother-apostles,  and,  notwithstanding  their 
 express  assurance  to  him  that  they  had  seen  the 
 Lord,  he  was  so  oppressed  with  the  image  of  His 
 suffering  and  death  that  he  peremptorily  refused  to 
 believe  them,  unless  he  had  not  only  the  ocular 
 testimony,  which  after  all  might  have  misled  them 
 to  mistake  a  phantom  for  a  man,  but  the  demon- 
 stration of  touch  and  feeling  ;  if  he  could  see  and 
 touch  the  print  of  the  nails  which  he  had  so  surely 
 seen  fastening  the  sacred  hands  to  the  cross,  and 
 probe  with  his  hand  the  spear-wound  of  the  sacred 
 side,  he  would  be  convinced.  This  was  indeed  a 
 harsh  incredulity  !  And  for  a  week  did  the  un- 
 happy man  nurture  his  morbid  and  exaggerated 
 feelings  amidst  the  Easter  joy  of  his  brethren  ;  they 
 would  soon,  he  doubtless  thought,  be  disenchanted 
 of  their  spell,  and  would  then  relapse  to  his  level, 
 in  the  reminiscence  of  Calvary  and  the  gloom  of 
 the  grave.  How  painful  must  this  isolation  of 
 their  obstinate  brother  have  been  to  them  !  Their 
 grief,  however,  received  a  solace  on  the  next  Sun- 
 day, when  they  found  Thomas  actually  among 
 them,  on  an  occasion  from  the  like  of  which  they 
 had  themselves  obtained  their  conviction  and  joy. 
 Who  could  tell  whether  their  merciful  Master 
 would  not  repeat  his  consolatory  visit !  They  were 
 possibly  intent  on  these  thoughts,  when  Jesus  came, 
 the  doors  being  shut  as  before,  and  stood  in  the 
 midst  and  said,  Peace  be  unto  you.  Happy  omen 
 for  the  unbeliever,  whose  presence  there  argued 
 his  wish  to  believe!  '  But  long  time  is  not  allowed 
 him  ;  his  profound  shame  and  confusion  are  cut 
 short  in  grace,  and  the  Lord  presently  {Cito.)  pro- 
 ceeded to  his  milder  and  reconciling  humiliation — 
 he  gives  him  back  his  own  words,  for  he  knows 
 everything  !'  (Stier).  Did  Thomas,  thus  challenged 
 by  his  Lord,  make  the  offered  scrutiny  ?  Probably 
 not.  He  felt  a  gush  of  conviction  ;  the  gracious- 
 ness  of  Jesus  was  enough  to  subdue  him.  In 
 the  ardour  of  a  new  devotion,  he  exclaims,  '  My 
 Lord  and  my  God  ! '  The  spectacle  of  his  dear 
 Master's  restored  humanity  proved  him  conqueror 
 over  that  death  in  whose  grasp  he  blindly  feared 
 he  was  inextricably  bound  ;  and  so  vast  a  triumph 
 as  that  brought  with  it  the  conviction  that  he  was 
 nothing  short  of  divine !     Jesus  accepted  his  dis- 
 
 ciple's magnificent  confession,  as  aforetime  he  had 
 received  those  of  Nathanael  (John  i.  49)  and  Peter 
 (Matt.  xvi.  16) ;  but  the  blessing  which  he  accorded 
 him  was  a  modified  one.  How  should  it  not  be  ! 
 How  many  the  degrees  between  the  ready  and 
 modest  faith  of  the  beloved  disciple,  the  first 
 believer  in  the  glorious  resurrection,  and  the  tardy 
 and  hardly  achieved  conviction  of  Thomas  Didy- 
 mus  !  But  the  loss  of  the  primitive  doubter  is  our 
 gain,  for  his  incredulity  not  only  elicited  fresh  evi- 
 dence of  Christ's  resurrection,  and  another  illustra- 
 tion of  Christ's  graciousness— but  it  drew  from  the 
 Saviour  his  sanction  of  a  happy  truth,  a  great  law 
 of  belief  to  his  church  for  ever — '  Blessed  are  they 
 that  have  not  seen  and  yet  have  believed.''  As  we 
 walk  in  imagination  through  these  scenes  of  surpass- 
 ing beauty  and  interest,  we  may  be  apt  to  sigh  that 
 we  are  not  privileged  to  see  and  hear  what  the 
 first  disciples  saw  and  heard.  But  let  us  check 
 that  regret  in  the  blessed  compensation  which  the 
 Saviour  has  himself  provided  ;,well  assured  that, 
 in  the  administration  of  his  kingdom,  he  will  not 
 forget  his  own  considerate  principle,  and  accord 
 the  especial  blessing  on  the  prompt  and  loyal 
 believer,  who,  with  the  well-attested  word  of  God 
 in  his  hand,  foregoes  the  demonstration  of  sight 
 and  touch  (i  Pet.  i.  8)  ! 
 
 Christ  in  Galilee. — We  have  seen  the  stress 
 which  Jesus  repeatedly  placed  on  his  wish  to  meet 
 his  disciples  in  Galilee  after  his  resurrection  (see 
 Matt.  xxvi.  32  ;  xxviii.  "],  10  ;  Mark  xiv.  28  ;  xvi. 
 7).  In  this  old  scene  of  his  labours,  where  many 
 followers  had  latterly  gathered  around  him,  would 
 he  now  demonstrate  the  trnith  of  all  his  teaching 
 by  convincing  them  of  his  returTi  from  the  grave. 
 In  this  northern  province,  too,  was  the  home  ot 
 his  disciples  who  were  about  to  leave  Jerusalem  at 
 the  termination  of  the  passover ;  and  there  he 
 would  be  able  to  meet  them  often  in  the  privacy 
 which  his  mysterious  and  unworldly  communica- 
 tions required,  undistracted  by  the  turbulent  hos- 
 tility of  the  guilty  city.  In  obedience,  therefore, 
 to  his  command  by  the  women,  '  the  eleven 
 disciples  went  away  into  Galilee'  (Matt,  xxviii. 
 16).  The  Lord's  first  intei-view  with  them  was  in 
 a  place  full  of  old  associations ;  '  on  that  sea 
 where  everything  would  remind  them  of  Jesus — 
 the  smiling  bank  of  which,  and  even  its  dark 
 waves,  had  borne  his  holy  footsteps'  (Jakobi  in 
 Stier,  viii.  211). 
 
 Christ's  Seventh  Appearatice — the  Third  to  the 
 Apostles  (John  xxi.  13).  —  In  the  account  of  this 
 manifestation  we  have  another  exquisite  picture, 
 which  we  must  not  mar  by  a  paraphrase.  St 
 John  is  this  time  the  graphic  narrator  (xxi.  I-23), 
 and  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  his  beautiful  his- 
 tory. Many  points  will  interest  him.  The  manner 
 in  which  the  names  are  connected  is  remarkable 
 (Stier).  The  highly-favoured  Thomas,  and  the 
 much-forgiven  Peter,  occur  side  by  side,  so  that 
 the  two  men  who  severally  had  had  such  especial 
 experience  of  the  love  of  their  dear  Master  are 
 united  lovingly  together  in  this  scene — no  longer 
 one  of  probation,  but  of  fruition.  To  them  is 
 added  Nathanael,  guileless  from  the  very  first, 
 whose  home  in  Cana  would  suggest  the  first 
 miracle  of  the  ministry.  John's  mention  of  him- 
 self and  his  brother,  in  this  place  alone,  as  '  sons 
 of  Zebedee,''  carries  us  back  to  a  scene  of  like  cir- 
 cumstance, when  these  faithful  men,  obedient  to 
 Christ's  call,  left  their  father  (no  doubt  not  unwill- 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 589 
 
 TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 ing  to  be  so  left),  and  their  all,  to  become  '  fishers 
 of  men.'  We  before  remarked  on  the  sensation 
 produced  by  the  earlier  miracle.  What  a  tide  of 
 reminiscence  must  have  now  flowed  in  upon  the 
 memories  of  the  seven  by  this  recurrence  of  their 
 Master's  characteristic  power  and  kindness  !  As 
 a  mighty  work  designed  to  announce  the  return  of 
 the  Lost  One  to  life  and  to  Galilee,  could  any 
 means  have  answered  the  purpose  better,  on  the 
 shores  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias  ?  There  is  a  myste- 
 rious grandeur  in  the  manner  of  Christ's  '  mani- 
 festation of  himself  (St.  John's  phrase  is  very 
 expressive,  €(f>avipucriv  eavrdv,  xxi.  I  ;  icpavepiL'^rj 
 6  'IrjffoOs,  ver.  14  ['Id  grandius  sonat,  quam 
 icpdvrj,  appariiit^  says  Bengel] )  ;  not  to  mention 
 the  7}iystk  import  of  his  loving  supply  to  his  toil- 
 ing and  disappointed  disciples  of  an  abundant 
 capture ;  happy  omen  for  them,  when  they, 
 amidst  so  many  cares  and  trials,  should  require 
 his  help  in  their  endeavours  to  catch  men.  '  The 
 apostle  whom  Jesus  loved  is  the  first  to  recognise 
 the  Lord,  and  yet  (as  we  might  indeed  have 
 expected)  another  is  the  first  [in  his  characteristic 
 ardour]  to  greet  him.  He,  who  on  that  very  lake, 
 and  under  circumstances  strikingly  similar,  had  be- 
 sought his  holy  Master  to  depart  from  one  so  sin- 
 stained  (Luke  v.  8),  now  casts  himself  into  the 
 water,  and  is  the  first  to  kneel  at  the  divine  feet'  — 
 Bishop  EUicott,  Lectures,  p.  406.  After  the  mira- 
 culous draft  of  fishes,  the  Lord  dedicates  the  first- 
 fruits  of  it  to  giving  them  another  incontestible 
 proof  of  the  truth  of  his  corporeal  nature,  by 
 '  dining'  with  them  upon  the  shore.  After  the 
 meal,  Christ,  in  one  of  the  most  interesting  and 
 significant  scenes  of  this  portion  of  his  life,  restores 
 (or  rather  ratifies  his  former  restoration  of)  St. 
 Peter  to  the  eminent  position  from  which  he  had 
 fallen.  '  We  should  remember  that  Peter's  offence, 
 which  was  given  to  all,  and  which  corresponded  to 
 the  public  warning  given  before  all,  could  be  pro- 
 perly and  fully  forgiven  only  by  a  public  word  of 
 reconciliation'  (Stier).  Hence  the  significance  of 
 this  reinvestiture  of  the  apostle  to  the  pastoral 
 office,  which  he  had  forfeited.  Thrice  did  the 
 Lord  request,  and  thrice  did  his  earnest  and  heart- 
 smitten  disciple  reiterate,  the  confession  of  his  love 
 to  the  Master  whom  he  had  thrice  denied.  How 
 affecting  was  the  afflicted  apostle's  outburst  at  the 
 last,  when,  finding  his  mouth  fail  for  words,  he 
 appealed  to  his  Master's  own  knowledge  of  'all' 
 his  past  and  'all'  his  present  (Kiypte,  ab  iravra 
 olSas  !  John  xxi.  17)  ;  from  the  beginning  thou 
 hast  known  me  and  searched  me — known  me  as 
 the  son  of  Jonas  ;  called  me  Peter ;  drawn  me  to 
 thee  in  patience  ;  kindled  love  in  my  soul ;  warned 
 my  blindness ;  foreseen  and  forgiven  my  fall  ; 
 looked  both  before  and  since  thy  death  into  my 
 beart  with  eyes  of  grace  ;  Lord,  how  shouldest  thou 
 not  know  all  ?  Having  accepted  Peter's  genuine 
 comession  of  his  love,  Christ  prophetically  assures 
 him  how  great  a  demand  he  would  make  upon 
 that  love,  for  his  life  of  apostolic  service  would  be 
 terminated  with  a  martyr's  death !  The  scene 
 ends  with  the  Lord's  removal  from  it,  with  the 
 significant  request  to  his  disciple  to  ''follow  hitti' 
 (d.KoXov'^ei  HOI,,  ver.  19).  The  world  of  meaning 
 conveyed  herein  we  will  not  attempt  to  unfold. 
 Peter  instantly  obeyed,  followed  by  the  unbidden 
 but  always  welcome  St.  John.  Wishing  to  secui'e 
 Aim  as  his  dear  companion,  if  it  might  only  be  in 
 life  and  in  death,  the  eager  Peter,  with  a  touch  of 
 
 his  old  fonvardness,  too  curiously  inquires  about 
 his  future  also.  The  Lord  mildly  reproves  the 
 curiosity  by  only  half  gratifying  it.  He  recalls 
 Peter  to  his  own  case,  and  again  bids  him  with  in- 
 creased emphasis  to  follow  him  (this  time  it  is,  2(5 
 fioL  aKoXou'^et,  ver.  22).  St.  John  ends  his  narrative 
 with  an  exquisitely  artless  correction  of  a  popular 
 mistake  which  had  gone  abroad  respecting  his  own 
 supposed  immunity  from  death,  and  with  the 
 voucher  of  his  own  personal  knowledge  of  the  facts 
 which  he  has  just  described.  We  stay  not  to 
 defend  the  genuineness  of  this  beautiful  record, 
 which  is  contained  in  all  the  principal  MSS.  of  the 
 fourth  gospel,  and  of  which  the  internal  evidence 
 shews  it  to  be  from  St.  John's  pen  as  strongly  as 
 the  external — but  hasten  to  notice  the  next  great 
 event  in  this  period  of  our  Lord's  career. 
 
 Christ's  Eighth  Appearance. — Great  indeed  it 
 vi-as,  the  very  culmination  of  his  sacred  displays  of 
 himself.  St.  Matthew,  to  whom  we  owe  the  ac- 
 count of  it  (xxviii.  16-20),  seems  to  confine  the 
 interview  to  the  eleven.  But  it  is  his  manner  to 
 mention  salient  points,  and  to  imply  the  rest.  He 
 does  so  here,  for  by  informing  us  that  '  some 
 doubted''  among  the  persons  now  assembled,  he 
 suggests  the  idea  that  others  were  present  besides 
 the  apostles,  who,  after  all  the  scenes  through 
 which  we  have  been  following  them,  had  certainly 
 ceased  to  doubt.  We  conclude  then,  with  most 
 commentators,  that  the  present  meeting  was  at- 
 tended by  more  than  the  eleven,  and  was  in  truth 
 identical  with  that  to  which  St.  Paul  refers  (l  Cor. 
 XV.  6),  who  mentions  one  occasion  on  which  the 
 Lord  was  seen  by  '  more  than  five  hundred  bre- 
 thren at  once.'  That  occasion  was  the  present. 
 It  was  a  solemn  and  an  '  appointed'  congregation 
 of  all  the  Lord's  followers,  to  whom  he  would 
 vouchsafe  the  glorious  privilege  of  seeing  him 
 once  more  on  earth.  Galilee  would  contribute 
 most  of  them  ;  but  we  hardly  believe  that  the 
 faithful  of  the  southern  districts  would  be  absent. 
 The  excellent  women,  who  had  so  long  had  the 
 privilege  of  ministering  to  him  before  death,  hav- 
 ing themselves  been  elevated  to  the  happy  belief  of 
 his  resurrection,  would,  we  may  well  imagine,  be 
 especially  zealous  in  the  holy  office  of  pioneering 
 for  this  assembly,  to  which  they  were  in  some  de- 
 gree appointed  by  the  Lord  himself  and  his  angel 
 (see  Matt,  xxviii.  7;  xxviii.  10;  Mark  xvi.  7). 
 The  locality  was  a  mountain  of  Galilee,  probably 
 the  mount  of  the  beatitudes,  where,  as  we  have 
 seen,  a  large  number  of  persons  might  meet  on  a 
 plateau  of  one  of  its  slopes.  Mountains  are  the 
 sites  of  the  grandest  events  in  the  Lord's  career  on 
 earth.  On  a  mountain  was  he  tempted ;  on  a 
 mountain  did  he  expound  the  principles  of  his 
 kingdom,  as  well  as  choose  his  apostles  ;  on  a 
 mountain  was  he  transfigured  when  he  gave  his 
 select  witnesses  an  insight  of  his  glory ;  on  a 
 mountain  did  he  foretell  the  doom  of  Jerusalem 
 and  the  end  nf  the  world  ;  from  a  mountain  will 
 he  soon  ascend  to  heaven  ;  and  on  a  mountain 
 does  he  now  meet  the  full  conclave  of  his  followers, 
 to  prove  to  them  the  reality  of  his  dominion  over 
 death  by  the  only  public  attestation  he  ever  gave  of 
 the  truth  of  his  resurrection.  How  sublime  the 
 scene  !  Himself  the  centre  of  all,  with  the  holy 
 eleven  around  him  in  profoundest  adoration  (Matt, 
 xxviii.  17),  and  the  rest  either  prostrate  with  them 
 in  the  conviction  of  a  settled  faith,  or  conquering 
 'doubt'  bv  the  wondering  and  joyous  scrutiny  of 
 
TESUS  CHRIST 
 
 590 
 
 JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 strained  eyes  (see  Stier,  viii.  278).  How  thrilling 
 the  effect  when  Jesus  announced  to  them,  as  God's 
 final  and  full  ratification  of  all  his  work  and  passion 
 for  them,  the  mighty  words  :  '  All  power  is  given 
 unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth  ! '  On  anotJier 
 mountain  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  and  the  glory 
 of  them  were  once  offered  to  him  by  the  great 
 usurper,  as  the  guerdon  of  fealty  to  him.  Glorious 
 constancy,  which  disdained  the  glittering  bait,  and 
 earned  the  present  prize  of  omnipotence  in  heaven 
 as  well  as  earth  !  But  not  glorious  for  himself 
 alone  :  he  even  at  this  moment  lays  his  gracious 
 plans  for  making  his  followers  '  partakers  of  his 
 glory,'  by  issuing  from  this  Galilean  mount  of  re- 
 union his  great  evangelical  commission  for  gather- 
 ing from  all  nations  a  people  for  himself,  who, 
 disciplined  by  his  own  appointed  means,  and  blessed 
 by  his  own  abiding  presence,  shall  thus  be  organ- 
 ised for  the  eternal  fruition  of  his  everlasting  reign 
 (Rev.  i.  6  and  xi.  15  ;  comp.  with  Dan.  vii.  14). 
 When  we  were  contemplating  Christ's  ministry  in 
 Galilee  we  found  abundant  reason  for  congratulat- 
 ing that  rough  and  desp'sed  province  on  the  won- 
 drous grace  of  which  it  was  the  favoured  recipient. 
 Too  often  was  that  grace  despised  ;  but  yet  Christ 
 had  verified  the  promise  of  an  ancient  prophet 
 (Is.  ix.  I,  2).  But  have  we  not  in  the  Lord's 
 posthumous  grace  to  Galilee,  by  the  remarkable 
 event  we  have  just  contemplated,  a  still  more 
 glorious  accomplishment  of  the  great  seer's  words  ? 
 Ninth  Appcai-ance — to  James. — We  are  indebted 
 to  St.  Paul  for  the  knowledge  of  the  very  interest- 
 ing fact  that  the  Lord  vouchsafed  an  interview  with 
 one  of  the  two  apostles  who  bore  the  name  of 
 James.  There  are  some  whcs  have  thought  that  he 
 was  one  of  the  Emmaus  disciples,  and  that  Cleo- 
 phas  was  his  father,  and  that  therefore  his  sight  of 
 the  Saviour  was  on  the  day  of  the  resurrection. 
 It  is,  we  need  hardly  say,  fatal  to  this  view  that 
 the  two  disciples  are  by  St.  Luke  expressly  dis- 
 tinguished from  the  eleven  (xxiv.  33).  St.  Paul 
 probably  enumerates  his  six  appearances  of  Christ 
 171  order;  if  so,  we  must  place  Christ's  visit  to  this 
 solitary  apostle  after  the  full  meeting  of  his  dis- 
 ciples in  Galilee  (^Tretra,  i.e.,  subsequently  to  the 
 appearance  on  the  mountain,  wcp'Sr-rj  'laKw^ip,  i 
 Cor.  XV.  7)-  The  question,  which  James  enjoyed 
 this  signal  blessing,  is  not  so  easily  disposed  of. 
 Indeed,  it  is  impossible  to  solve  it.  The  greatly 
 preponderant  opinion  supposes  him  to  have  been 
 the  son  of  Alphseus,  and  the  Lord's  cousin.  The 
 story  of  the  apocryphal  gospel,  that  Christ  ap- 
 peared to  release  him  from  the  bond  of  a  rash  vow, 
 is  unworthy  of  the  least  attention.  In  the  Acts, 
 and  in  one  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  this  James  is 
 prominently  mentione^i"  in  connection  with  the 
 church  of  Jerusalem  (Acts.  xii.  17  ;  xv.  13  ;  xxi. 
 18  ;  Gal.  ii.  9),  of  which  ecclesiastical  tradition 
 makes  him  the  first  bishop,  designated  as  such  by 
 the  Lord  himself  (so  Theophylact  and  Photius  ; 
 see  Hammond  on  i  Cor.  xv.  7).  Whether  the 
 tradition  truly  illustrates  St.  Paul's  statement,  or 
 was  suggested  by  it,  we  cannot  tell.  It  is  not  too 
 much  to  suppose,  that  among  the  gracious  inten- 
 tions of  Christ's  love  to  ycnisalem,  he  might  have 
 singled  out  for  this  special  interview  his  relative, 
 the  son  of  his  mother's  sister,  and  imparted  to 
 him  some  of  that  wisdom  which  enabled  him  to 
 take  so  prominent  a  part  in  planting  the  gospel  in 
 '  the  Holy  City,'  and  to  allay  the  dangerous  schism 
 that  threatened  the  hifant  church  (Acts  xv.)     To 
 
 us,  however,  while  we  would  not  venture  to  reiret 
 this  prevalent  opinion,  there  seems  to  be  a  thrilling 
 interest  m  the  idea,  that  the  gracious  Jesus,  who 
 had  hin»self  tasted  the  pains  of  the  martyr's  death, 
 and  had  expressly  awarded  to  the  son  of  Zebedee 
 the  honourable  destiny  of  drinking  the  same  cup 
 and  receiving  the  same  baptism  of  suffering  with 
 himself  (Matt.  xx.  23  ;  Mark  x.  39),  did  now  in 
 truth  pay  this  mysterious  visit  to  James  the  Great, 
 to  strengthen  the  brother  of  '  the  disciple  whom  he 
 loved'  for  the  painful  but  blessed  prerogative  which 
 awaited  him,  of  being  the  very  first  to  win  the 
 martyr's  crown  among  his  twelve  apostles  ! 
 
 Tenth  Appearance,  at  the  time  of  the  Ascension. 
 — Having  accomplished  his  long-ordained  purpose 
 of  meeting  his  people  in  Galilee,  he  probably  inti- 
 mated to  them  that  Jerusalem  must  be  the  scene 
 of  his  last  sight  of  them  on  earth,  for  in  his  next 
 interview  with  them  we  find  him  request  his  dis- 
 ciples not  to  depart  from  that  city  (Acts  i.  4).  At 
 any  rate,  whether  expressly  bidden,  or  led  by  some 
 strange  mysterious  presentiment,  such  as  precedeu 
 the  translation  of  Elijah  in  the  minds  of  his  com- 
 panions and  pupils  (2  Kings  ii.  1-7),  the  apostles 
 betook  themselves  to  Jerusalem  with  hearts  full  of 
 exalted  expectations.  Taught  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
 which  he  had  breathed  upon  them  in  initial  grace, 
 they  had  doubtless  corrected  their  hopes  of  an 
 earthly  dominion.  A  kingdom,  however,  they 
 still  looked  for,  spiritual  in  character  and  strength, 
 having  Israel  for  the  focus  of  its  glory.  Of  '  the 
 things  of  that  kingdom'  they  had  been  hearing  for 
 forty  days  (Acts  i.  3)  in  the  recorded  and  unre- 
 corded (see  John  xx.  30)  communications  of  their 
 Lord.  They  seized  their  last  opportunity  earnestly 
 to  inquire  (enTjpwTwv  avTov  is  St.  Luke's  word, 
 Acts  i.  6)  whether  7102a  was  the  time  when  he 
 meant  to  set  up  his  promised  kingdom  {diroKa'^ia- 
 rdveis  T7]v  (iacn\elav  ;  I.e.)  In  his  gracious  answer 
 Christ  docs  not  reprove  their  question  as  7nate7iallv 
 erroneous,  but  corrects  their  views  as  to  the  ti7ne. 
 The  period  of  the  revelation  of  his  kingdom,  and 
 its  epochs  (x/3(5''oi's  7)  Kaipovi),  the  Almighty  Father, 
 to  whose  will  he  once  more  (as  always)  refers  every- 
 thing, reseiTes  in  his  own  power,  as  his  own  in- 
 communicable secret.  But  meanwhile  the  pre- 
 parations for  that  kingdom  must  be  made,  and 
 here  was  a  life-long  work  for  them  all.  To  em- 
 power them  for  that  work  he  would  endue  them 
 with  the  gifts  of  that  Spirit  of  which  they  had  often 
 heard  since  they  had  first  received  their  eai'liest 
 yearnings  for  a  new  life  from  his  faithful  forerunner, 
 whose  name  and  baptism  he  loves  once  more  to 
 acknowledge  (Acts  i.  5).  John  from  the  beginning 
 had  announced  the  grandest  of  Christ's  gifts  to 
 man  :  '  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost' 
 (Matt.  iii.  18;  Mark  i.  8;  Luke  iii.  16;  John  i. 
 33).  For  that  gift  they  were  now  to  tany  awhile  ; 
 it  would  soon  be  bestowed.  In  the  endowments 
 of  that  gift  they  should  go  forth  from  Jerusalem, 
 Judcea,  and  Samaria,  to  the  earth's  utmost  bounds  ; 
 unfurl  the  banner  of  their  Lord's  kingdom,  and 
 win  subjects  into  it.  As  Christ  was  opening  out 
 to  them  this  wonderful  future,  he  was  walking 
 towards  the  beloved  Bethany.  While  yet  on  the 
 eastern  slope  of  Olivet,  near  that  village,  he  was 
 in  the  act  of  once  more  blessing  his  disciples,  with 
 hands  upraised  towards  the  sky,  when,  lo  !  he  was 
 parted  from  them.  With  intense  and  adoring 
 gaze  they  beheld  him  as  he  was  rising  higher  and 
 higher  still  {dve(p^peTo  marks  the  giadual  ascent, 
 
JESUS  CHRIST 
 
 59J 
 
 JESUS 
 
 Lvike  xxiv.  51),  until  a  cloud  received  him  out  of 
 their  sight.  Two  angelic  monitors  restrained  their 
 curiosity  and  regret  by  the  consolatory  promise 
 that  '  ike  same  Jesus  should  return  in  the  same 
 manner  as  they  had  just  seen  him  ascend.'  O71- 
 ward!  has  ever  been  the  gospel  word.  From  the 
 incarnation  men's  look  was  directed  to  the  cross  ; 
 from  the  cross  to  the  resurrection  ;  from  the  resur- 
 rection to  the  ascension  ;  and  now  from  the  ascen- 
 sion to  the  ultimate  return.  The  cloud  hides  him 
 not  from  faith  ;  the  sacred  volume  ends  with  the 
 echo  of  the  promise  :  '  Even  so,  come,  Lord 
 Jesus'  (Rev.  xxii.  20).  Nay,  it  hides  him  not 
 from  sight !  From  his  mediatorial  throne  he  has 
 been  seen  by  his  holy  servants  in  their  need  and 
 peril.  The  protomartyr  saw  him  '  standing  at  the 
 right  hand  of  God  to  succour  all  that  suffer  for 
 him'  {Collect  for  St.  Stephen'' s  day),  and  the  be- 
 loved disciple  satv  him  ;  he  was  clad  with  gloiy 
 indeed  too  bright  for  mortal  eye  to  scan  without 
 alarm — but  he  was  the  same  gracious  Jesus  still ; 
 he  laid  his  right  hand  upon  the  affrighted  apostle, 
 and  calmed  his  fears  with  the  assurance  of  his  un- 
 changeable identity  :  '  saying.  Fear  not ;  I  am  the 
 first  and  the  last  ;  I  am  he  that  liveth  and  was 
 dead ;  and,  behold,  I  am  alive  for  evermore, 
 Amen;  and  have  the  keys  of  hell  and  of  death' 
 (Rev.  i.  13-18). 
 
 Authorities. — In  writing  this  sketch  of  the  Lord's 
 life  on  earth,  close  use  has  been  made  of  the  Sacred 
 Biographies  by  the  four  Evangelists,  especially  in 
 the  '■harmonised''  editions  of  Tischendorf  (^v/c/j/j- 
 Evangelica,  1854)  and  Robinson  [Harmony  of  the 
 Four  Gospels,  Tract  Society).  Greswell's  works 
 have  been  also  consulted,  especially  his  Harmony, 
 Dissertations  [2d  ed.],  and  papers  m  {\\e  Bibliotheca 
 Sacra  [1S45].  Besides  these,  more  or  less  use  has 
 been  made  of  Bp.  Ellicott's  Hitlseaii  Lectures  on 
 the  Life  of  Christ  [2d  ed.,  1861] ;  the  Commen- 
 taries of  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Burgon,  Is.  Wil- 
 liams, Rosenmiiller,  Bengel  {Gnomon),  Olshausen 
 [Clark],  DeWette,  Meyer,  Kuinoel,  Lange  [Clark], 
 and  Tholuck  [Clark]  ;  Stier's  Words  if  the  Lord 
 Jesus,  and  Words  of  the  Angels  [Clark] ;  Heng- 
 stenberg's  Christology  [Clark] ;  Anger's  Synopsis 
 Evangeliorum  [1S52]  ;  Clerici,  Ilarmonia  Evan- 
 gelica ;  Patritius,  De  Evangeliis  [1853]  ;  Das  Le- 
 beii  Jesu,  by  Lange,  by  Sepp,  by  Hofmann  {nach 
 den  Apokryphen),  by  Hase  (who  treats  most  fully 
 of  the  literature  on  the  subject),  and  by  Nean- 
 der  [Bohn] ;  Ewald's  C//rwi'?«;  Baumgarten's  Ge- 
 schichte  Jesu  ;  Bp.  Jeremy  Taylor's  Life  of  Christ ; 
 '  The  Messiah'  (an  anonymous  volume  published 
 by  Mr.  Murray) ;  Andrews'  Life  of  our  Lord  upon 
 the  Earth  [1S63] ;  Dr.  Macbride's  Lectitres  on  the 
 Diatessaron ;  Townson's  Discourses  on  the  Four 
 Gospels;  Wilson  on  the  New  Testament;  West 
 and  Michaelis  on  the  Resurrection ;  Sherlock's 
 Trial  of  the  Witnesses ;  De  Costa's  Four  Wit- 
 nesses ;  Griesbach's  Fo7ites  Evangeliorum  [In  his 
 Opuscula^  ;  the  Chronological  Works  of  Wieseler 
 andldeler;  Bvowne's  OrdoSrclorum;  Abp.  Thom- 
 son's Jesus  Ch/ist  [in  Smit'h^ s  Bil>l.  Diet.];  Licht- 
 enstein's  Jesus  Christus,  Abriss  seines  Lebens  [in 
 Herzog's  R.  E.,  vol.  vi.]  ;  Pearson  oJi  the  Creed ; 
 Bp.  Andrew's  Sermons  [folio]  ;  Bp.  Racket's  Ser- 
 mons [folio]  ;  the  Rabbinical  Works  of  Schoettgen, 
 Meuschen,  Lightfoot  [Pitman],  Ugolini  [/«  7%.?- 
 sauro\  Wagenseil,  and  Dr.  Gill  [Co?nmentary, 
 quarto  ed.,  1809].  Renan's  Vie  de  Jesus  has  been 
 consulted  latterly.     It  contains,  no  doubt,  much 
 
 illustrative  matter,  written  in  a  very  interesting 
 style.  The  author,  however,  throughout  his  work, 
 treats  our  Lord's  life  before  the  grave  (from  which, 
 alas  !  he  is  supposed  never  to  have  arisen)  in  an 
 entirely  rationalistic  point  of  view.  A  heathen 
 might  have  written  the  work,  so  utterly  are  the 
 phenomena  of  Christianity  in  its  miraculous  aspect 
 effaced  and  rejected  by  Mon.  Renan,  who,  pro- 
 fessing to  receive  the  four  gospels  as  his  authority, 
 retains  or  eliminates,  at  will,  whatever  pleases  or 
 embarrasses  his  critical  instinct  I 
 
 The  nature  of  the  subject  has  prohibited  a  con- 
 troversial cast  in  this  article  ;  it  may,  however,  be 
 not  improper  to  state,  that  this  newest  phase  of 
 scepticism  is  little  more  than  old  unbelief  in  a 
 modern  guise.  Old  works  not  only  of  our  own 
 authors  on  the  evidences,  but  of  M.  Renan's 
 own  countiymen  (especially  Dugiiet,  Principes  de 
 la  Foi  Chretienne,  pp.  ii.  iii. ),  supply  abundant 
 materials  for  refuting  the  assumptions  of  his  '  criti- 
 cism.'' These  are  being  well  applied  by  Renan's 
 opponents  in  France,  such  as  Freppel  {Examen 
 critique  de  la  Vie  de  Jesits  de  M.  Renan) ;  Poujouiat 
 {Examen  de  la  V.  de  J.) ;  Bp.  Plantier  of  Nimes 
 {Lnstruction  Fastorale  contre  un  ouvrage  intitule 
 V.  de  J.  par  Ernest  Renan).  In  M.  Nicholas' 
 Etudes  Philosophiques  sur  le  Christianisme  (vol. 
 iv.  chaps,  i.  ii.),  there  is,  by  anticipation,  much 
 help  for  answering  M.  Renan's  infidehty. — P.  H. 
 
 JESUS  ('IwoCs ;  Vy^\  j;iC'"in';),  son  of  Sirach, 
 called  among  the  Jews  S"1''D  JB  Ben-Sira,  the  cele- 
 brated author  of  the  Book  of  Sirach,  or  Ecclesiasti- 
 cus,  flourished  in  Jerusalem  about  B.  C.  310-270. 
 This  date  is  obtained  from  the  following  facts  : 
 I.  Ben  Sira  celebrates  in  xliv.  i-l.  21,  the  praises 
 of  Israel's  worthies  in  an  almost  chronological 
 order.  Beginning  with  Enoch,  he  continues  to 
 recount  the  deeds  or  mentions  the  names  of  Noah, 
 Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Moses,  Aaron,  Phinehas, 
 Joshua,  Caleb,  Samuel,  Nathan,  David,  Solomon, 
 Elijah,  Elisha,  Josiah,  Ezekiel,  Jeremiah,  the  twelve 
 Minor  Prophets,  Zerubbabel,  Nehemiah,  and  con- 
 cludes the  list  with  Simon,  son  of  Onias,  whom  he 
 mentions  next  to  Nehemiah.  Now,  it  is  morally 
 certain,  that  if  Ben  Sira  had  lived  in  the  days  of 
 Simon  II.,  B.C.  217,  and  had  terminated  his  cata- 
 logue of  national  benefactors  with  this  insignificant 
 high-priest,  he  would  most  assuredly  not  have 
 omitted  the  great  men  between  Nehemiah  and 
 Simon  II. ,  and  above  all  would  not  have  passed 
 over  with  silence  Simon  L,  whom  the  Jewish 
 nation  regarded  as  the  personification  of  goodness, 
 nobility,  and  grandeur,  and  whom  they  crowned 
 with  the  title,  \he  Just,  the  Pious.  From  the  regu- 
 larity of  the  catalogue,  therefore,  and  especially 
 from  the  extraordinaiy  terms  of  the  description,  it 
 is  evident  that  it  is  Simon  I.  (flour.  B.C.  370-300) 
 who  is  celebrated  next  to  Nehemiah,  and  that  Ben 
 Sira,  who  was  a  contemporary  of  Simon  [EcCLE- 
 SIASTICUS],  must  have  lived  about  310  B.C.  2.  The 
 Talmud  most  distinctly  describes  the  work  of  Ben 
 Sira  as  the  oldest  of  the  Apocryphal  books  (comp. 
 Tosifoth  Ldaim,  c.  ii.)  3.  It  had  a  general  cur- 
 rency and  was  quoted  at  least  as  early  as  150  B.C. 
 (comp.  Aboth.  i.  5  ;  Jvusalem  Nazier,  v.  3),  which 
 shows  that  it  must  have  existed  a  long  period  to 
 have  obtained  such  circulation  and  respect ;  and  4. 
 In  the  description  of  these  great  men,  and  through- 
 out the  whole  of  the  book,  there  is  not  the  slightest 
 
JETHER 
 
 592 
 
 JETHER 
 
 trace  of  those  Hagadic  legends  about  the  national 
 worthies  which  were  so  rife  and  numerous  two  cen- 
 turies before  Christ. 
 
 As  to  the  life  and  personal  character  of  Ben 
 Sira,  this  must  be  gathered  from  his  book,  as  it  is 
 the  only  source  of  information  which  we  possess 
 upon  the  subject.  Like  all  his  co-religionists,  he 
 was  trained  from  his  early  life  to  fear  and  love  the 
 God  of  his  fathers.  He  travelled  much  both  by 
 land  and  sea  when  he  grew  up,  and  was  in  frequent 
 perils  (Ecclus.  xxxiv.  ii,  12).  Being  a  diligent 
 student,  and  having  acquired  much  practical  know- 
 ledge from  his  extensive  travels,  he  was  entrusted 
 with  some  office  at  court,  and  his  enemies,  who 
 were  jealous  of  him,  maligned  him  before  the  king, 
 which  nearly  cost  him  his  life  (11.  6,  7).  To  us, 
 however,  his  religious  life  and  sentiments  are  of 
 the  utmost  importance,  inasmuch  as  they  describe 
 the  opinions  of  the  Jews  during  the  period  elapsing 
 between  the  O.  and  N.  T.  Though  deeply  pene- 
 trated with  the  fear  of  God,  which  he  declared  was 
 the  only  gloiy  of  man,  rich,  noble,  or  poor  (x. 
 22-24),  still  the  whole  of  Ben  Sira's  tenets  may  be 
 described  as  limited,  and  are  as  follows  :  Resigna- 
 tion to  the  dealings  of  Providence  (xi.  21-25)  ;  to 
 seek  truth  at  the  cost  of  life  (iv.  28)  ;  not  to  use 
 much  babbling  in  prayer  (vii.  14)  ;  absolute  obedi- 
 ence to  parents,  which  in  the  sight  of  God  atones 
 for  sins  (iii.  1-16;  vii.  27,  28);  humihty  (iiL 
 17-19;  X.  7-18,  28);  kindness  to  domestics  (iv. 
 30;  vii.  20,  21;  xxxhi.  30,  31);  to  relieve  the 
 poor  (iv.  1-9)  ;  to  act  as  a  father  to  the  fatherless, 
 and  a  husband  to  the  widow  (iv.  10)  ;  to  visit  the 
 sick  (vii.  35)  ;  to  weep  with  them  that  weep  (vii. 
 34)  ;  not  to  rejoice  over  the  death  of  even  the 
 greatest  enemy  (vii.  7),  and  to  forgive  sins  as  we 
 would  be  forgiven  (xxviii.  2,  3).  He  has  nothing 
 in  the  whole  of  his  book  about  the  immortality  of 
 the  soul,  a  future  judgment,  the  existence  of 
 spirits,  or  the  expectation  of  a  Messiah.  These 
 are  remarkable  facts. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JETHER  (ini).    I.  Exod.  iv.  18  (LXX.  'lo^6p ; 
 Vulg.  Jelhro;  Arab,  ^^jli',  Pesh.  ^o5ZL;  Targ. 
 
 Jon.  and  Samar.  Iin''),  the  father-in-law  of  Moses, 
 generally  called  Jethro.  This  abbreviated  form  is 
 enumerated  by  the  Midrash  as  the  first  of  the 
 seven  (or,  according  to  another  version,  eight) 
 names  by  which  this  Alidianite  priest  was  known 
 [viz.,  Jether  or  Jethro,  because  he  heaped  up  (ITnil) 
 good  deeds,  or  because  'he  added  a  Parasha  to 
 the  Torah;'  Cheber  ("l3n),  because  he  was  a 
 friend  of  the  Lord  ;  Chobeb  (2311),  because  he  was 
 beloved  by  the  Lord,  or  because  'he  loved  tlie 
 Torah  ;'  Reuel,  because  he  was  a  companion  (J/l) 
 to  the  Lord  ;  Petuel,  because  he  freed  himself 
 (1t2S)  from  Idolatry].  Indeed,  Jether  is  considered 
 his  original  name,  to  which,  when  he  became  a 
 believer  and  a  convert  to  the  faith,  an  additional 
 letter  (1)  was  affixed ;  exactly  as,  in  token  of  the 
 Divine  favour  and  grace,  a  H  was  added  to  Abram's 
 name,  which  thereby  became  Abraham ;  or  as 
 Sarai  was  called  Sarah,  in  consideration  of  her 
 merits ;  and  Hoshea  bin  Nun  was  called  Jehoshuah. 
 On  the  other  hand,  we  find  a  letter  taken  from  a 
 name,  if  its  owner  proved  less  worthy.  Ephron, 
 piSy,  is,  after  his  transaction  with  Abraham,  spelt 
 without  the  1,  Ephron ;  Jehonadab  became  after  his 
 evil  deed  Jonadab  (Beresh.  Rab.  ;  Jalkut,  etc.,  ad 
 loc.)  I 
 
 2.  Judg.  viii.  20  (LXX.  'le&^/j ;  Vulg.  JeiAe/  • 
 Arab.    .\jlj    Jathar).      The    eldest   of    Gideon's 
 
 seventy-one  sons.  All  we  learn  of  him  is,  that 
 when  asked  by  his  father  Gideon  to  avenge  the 
 death  of  his  uncles. at  Tabor  on  the  two  Midianite 
 kings  Zebach  and  Zalmunah,  who  had  fallen  into 
 his  hands  after  a  hot  pursuit,  Jether  'did  not  draw 
 the  sword,  for  he  was  afraid,  being  still  a  lad.' 
 According  to  Judg.  ix.  8  he  was  slain,  together 
 with  sixty-nine  of  his  brothers— Jonathan  alone 
 escaping — '  upon  one  stone '  at  Ofrah,  by  the 
 hands  of  Abimelech,  the  son  of  Gideon's  concu- 
 bine, of  Sichem. 
 
 3.  I  Kings  ii.  5,  32  (LXX.  'Ie3-6> ;  Vulg.  Jet/ier, 
 etc.) ;  the  father  of  Amasa  and  husband  of  Abigail, 
 David's  sister.  In  2  Sam.  xvii.  25,  however, 
 Amasa  is  described  as  the  son  of  a  man  whose 
 name  was  jfit/ira,  XirT*,  the  Isj-aclitc,  who  had 
 come  to  Abigail,  daughter  of  Nahash,  the  sister  of 
 Zerujah,  mother  of  Joab.  In  the  parallel  passage, 
 I  Chron.  ii.  17,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  called 
 '  Jether  the  Ishmaelite.''  Many  have  been  the 
 attempts  of  reconciling  these  discrepaiicies.  That 
 Jether  and  Jithra  were  in  reality  one  and  the  same 
 name  was  easily  recognised,  since  Jether  and 
 Jithro,  Tarshish  and  Tarshisha,  Geba  and  Gibea, 
 and  many  similar  instances,  shewed  the  frequent 
 occurrence  of  double  forms  of  Hebrew  proper 
 names.  Less  easily  disposed  of,  however,  was  the 
 difficulty  of  the  contradictory  epithets  of  'Israelite' 
 in  the  passage  of  Sam.,  and  of  '  Ishmaelite'  in  that 
 of  Chron.  The  Talmud  records  already  two 
 divergent  opinions  on  the  subject  ( Jer.  Jebam.  9,  c, 
 cf  Babli  Jeb.  77,  a.)  According  to  R.  Samuel  bar 
 Nachmani,  Jether  was  an  Ishmaelite  by  birth,  but 
 became  a  proselyte  :  hence  the  two  appellations. 
 Another  opinion  is,  that,  a  staunch  upholder  of 
 David's  reign,  he,  when  the  king's  descent  through 
 Ruth,  a  Moabite  woman,  was  made  a  pretext  by 
 some  of  his  antagonists  to  deprive  him  of  his 
 crown,  'girded  his  loins  like  an  Ishmaelite'  and 
 threatened  to  uphold  by  the  sword,  if  need  be,  the 
 authority  of  the  Halacha,  which  had  decided  that 
 '  a  Moabite  niati  but  not  a  Moabite  ■wo7nan,  an 
 Ammonite  man  but  not  an  Ammonite  -woman, 
 should  be  prohibited  from  entering  into  the  con- 
 gregation. Similarly  we  find  in  the  Targ.  to  i 
 Chron.  ii.  17  (Wilkins'  Edition — this  verse  belongs 
 to  those  wanting  in  Beck)  that  the  father  of 
 Amasa  was  Jether  the  Israelite,  but  that  he  was 
 called  Jether  tJie  Ishmaelite  because  he  aided  David 
 nX3i:;a  (  =  in  n^a)  before  the  tribunal  [Wilkins, 
 
 '' cimi  Arabibns\V\  Later  commentators  (Rashi, 
 Abrabanel,  David  Kimchi)  assume  that  he  was 
 an  Israelite  by  birth  but  dwelt  in  the  land  of 
 Ishmael,  and  was  for  this  reason  also  called  the 
 Ishmaelite ;  as  Obed  Edom  is  also  called  the 
 Gittite  (2  Sam.  vi.),  or  Hiram's  father  the  Zuri  or 
 Tyrian  (i  Kings  vi.)  David  Kimchi  also  adduces  a 
 suggestion  of  his  father,  to  the  effect  '  that  in  the 
 land  of  Ishmael  Jether  was  called  the  Israelite  from 
 his  nationality,  and  in  that  of  Israel  they  called 
 him  the  Ishmaelite  on  account  of  his  living  in 
 the  land  of  Ishmael.'  It  is  the  opinion,  however, 
 of  almost  all  modern  critics  (Thenius,  Bertheau, 
 etc.),  that  one  reading  only  is  correct,  viz.,  that  of 
 Chronicles,  that  these  attempts  at  explaining  the 
 discrepancy  are  as  futile  as  those  of  the  Vulg.  and 
 LXX.  at  solving  the  difficulty  by  substituting  in 
 Sam. '  Jezreeli'  for  '  Israelite,'  and  that  it  is  also  more 
 
JETHETH 
 
 593 
 
 JETHRO 
 
 natural  to  assume  that  some  ultra-patriotic  scribe 
 has  altered  the  '  Ishmaelite'  of  Chron.  into  the 
 '  Israelite'  of  Sam.,  than  that  the  latter  should  have 
 been  corrupted  into  the  former.  It  seems  remarlv- 
 able  enough — and  may  for  this  very  reason  have 
 been  recorded — that  the  sister  of  the  king  should 
 have  married  one  who  was  born  a  Gentile.  Atten- 
 tion has,  indeed,  been  drawn  of  old  to  the  peculiar 
 mode  in  which  Jether's  name  is  introduced  in 
 Samuel  as  that  of  'a  man,' — ' ei/ipkat. :  a  remark- 
 able man,  a  good  man'  (Kimchi).  The  Talmud 
 interprets  the  N2  as  denoting  that  the  rightful  mar- 
 riage between  Jether  and  Abigail  only  took  place 
 at  a  later  period,  that  is,  after  he  had  abjured 
 Idolatry.     [Abigail;  Amasa.] 
 
 4.  I  Chron.  ii.  32  ;  LXX.  'Ie3-^p;  Vulg.  Jeiker; 
 a  son  of  Jada,  nephew  of  Shamai,  and  brother  of 
 Jonathan,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.     He  died  without 
 
 5.  I  Chron.  iv.  17  ;  LXX.  'le^^p  ;  Vulg.  ydher 
 (identified  by  some — most  gratuitously — with  Am- 
 ram) ;  a  son  of  Ezra  and  brother  of  Mered,  Epher, 
 and  Jalon.  The  verse  in  which  it  occurs  is  evi- 
 dently corrupted,  and  the  commentators  have  tried 
 hard  to  restore  the  former  to  its  primitive  shape. 
 Miriam,  in  the  second  part  of  the  verse — explained 
 by  the  Targum  to  be  identical  with  Efrath — is 
 taken  by  many  to  be  a  male  name,  but  this  ex- 
 pedient no  more  renders  the  reading  clearer  than 
 the  transposition  of  the  end  of  ver.  18  and  ver.  17, 
 which  was  first  suggested  by  Wette.     [Miriam.] 
 
 6.  I  Chron.  vii.  38  ;  LXX.  'le^??/) ;  Al.  'le^^p  ; 
 Vulg.  Jether ;  one  of  the  heads  of  the  families — 
 26,000  in  number^of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  who 
 were  'choice  and  mighty  men  of  valour,  chiefs  of 
 the  princes.'  He  was  the  father  of  Jephuneh, 
 Pispah,  and  Ara.  Whether  he  be  identical  with 
 the  Jithra — spelt  in  Alex,  and  one  Kenn.  MS. 
 '  Jether' — who  is  mentioned  in  the  preceding  verse 
 as  one  of  the  sons  of  Zopha,  is  very  doubtful. 
 
 7.  Whether  the  Ithrites,  Ira  and  Gareb  (^"in\ 
 'Ea-£pa(os.  'Witpl,  'W^epl,  1e'^pLT7]s,  Jethrites,  Jeth- 
 rasus,  etc.),  mentioned  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  38,  etc., 
 were  natives  of  an  otherwise  unknown  place  called 
 Jether,  or  of  Jathir  "I^Jl'',  one  of  David's  places  of 
 refuge  (i  Sam.  xxx.  27),  or  descendants  of  one 
 Jether — the  least  probable  suggestion — cannot  now 
 be  determined. — E.  D. 
 
 JETHETH  (nn^ ;  'le^^p ;  yet/iet/t  [a  tent  stake  or 
 
 nail,  from  the  unused  rootin'',  'to  drive  in, 'the  name 
 
 being  a  contraction  of  mJT']).     One  of  the  eleven 
 
 sheikhs  or  heads  of  clans  (E.V. ,  'Dukes')  descended 
 from  Esau,  named  subsequently  to  the  list  of  '  the 
 kings  that  reigned  in  the  land  of  Edom,'  Gen. 
 xxxvi.  40,  I  Chron.  i.  5I)  'according  to  their 
 families,  after  their  places,  by  their  names,  and 
 according  to  their  habitations  in  the  land  of  their 
 possessions.'  No  trace  of  the  name  can  be  pointed 
 out  with  any  certainty  at  the  present  day. — E.  V. 
 
 JETHRO  (r\n\  Exod.  iii.    i  ;  ')n\  Exod.  iv. 
 
 18  ;  LXX.  'Io6l6p).     The  priest  and  Emir  (JHiD)  of 
 
 Midian,  possibly  a  descendant  of  Abraham  and 
 Keturah,  and  therefore  not  of  necessity  an  idola- 
 trous priest.  According  to  the  Midrash  (fol.  53, 
 54)  he  had  been  one  of  Pharaoh's  musicians,  and 
 had  got  possession  of  Adam's  staff,  which  had  be- 
 longed to  Joseph  ;  but  he  was  driven  from  Egypt 
 vol,  II.  * 
 
 because  he  opposed  the  decree  for  drowning  the 
 Israelitish  infants.  All  that  is  certain  about  him, 
 before  entering  into  the  vexed  question  of  his  iden- 
 tity with  or  relation  to  Raguel  and  Hobab,  is  (i) 
 that  he  was  the  father-in-law  (jrih)  of  Moses,   to 
 
 whom  he  gave  a  secure  and  honourable  home  dur- 
 ing his  flight  from  Egypt  (Exod.  iii.  i),  and  whom 
 he  suffered  to  return  to  Egypt  with  his  wife  and 
 family  (Exod.  iv.  18)  when  the  hour  for  the  deliver- 
 ance of  Israel  arrived  ;  and  (2)  that,  in  the  second 
 month*  after  the  exodus  he  came  to  visit  Moses, 
 bringing  with  him  Zipporah,  Gershom,  and  Elie- 
 ser,  who  had  apparently  been  sent  back  (Exod.  xviii. 
 2)  during  the  interval.  He  was  led  to  pay  this 
 visit  by  a  report  of  God's  mighty  deliverance  of  the 
 Israelites,  and  when  Moses  had  received  him  with 
 the  greatest  affection  and  respect  (ver.  7),  and  nar- 
 rated to  him  '  all  that  the  Lord  had  done,'  Jethro 
 acknowledged  the  supremacy  of  Jehovah  (ver.  11), 
 which  perhaps  he  had  known  but  dimly  before, 
 and  took  part  with  Aaron  and  the  elders  of  Israel 
 in  a  great  eucharistic  sacrifice,  which  may  have  been 
 intended  to  commemorate  his  fuller  admission  into 
 the  Jewish  religion.  The  next  morning  (ver.  13), 
 observing  the  overwhelming  judicial  labours  of 
 Moses,  he  recommended  a  most  wise  subdivision 
 of  labour,  which,  with  God's  approval  (ver.  23), 
 was  immediately  adopted.  After  this  he  departs 
 to  his  own  countiy,  and  we  hear  no  more  of  him. 
 The  events  which  furtlier  belong  to  his  life,  if  he 
 be  identified  with  Hol)ab,  will  be  found  under  that 
 name,  but  we  may  in  any  case  dismiss  without 
 further  notice  the  idle  suggestion  of  Gothe  that  his 
 dealings  with  the  Israelites  were  partly  influenced 
 by  a  selfish  regard  for  the  security  of  his  own  tribe. 
 A  certain  measure   of  obscurity  has  long  hung 
 
 over  the  names  Raguel  or  Reuel  (Heb.    ?Xiy"l), 
 
 Jethro,  and  Hobab  ;  nor  is  it  possible,  with  the 
 liibhcal  data,  to  arrive  at  any  final  conclusion. 
 Four  suppositions  are  possible  respecting  these 
 names — i,  that  they  are  three  different  names 
 of  the  same  person  ;  2,  that  they  are  the  names  of 
 three  different  persons  ;  3,  that  they  refer  to  ttuo 
 persons  only,  Jethro  being  identical  with  Reuel ; 
 or  4,  Jethro  and  Hobab  being  two  names  of  the 
 son  of  Reuel. 
 
 In  favour  of  I,  are  these  facts — (a)  All  three 
 names  are  similar  in  meaning,  and  might,  either  of 
 them,  have  been  mere  honorary  designations. 
 Raguel  means  'friend  of  God,'  a  natural  name  for 
 one  who  was  a  priest  or  prince  ;  Jethro  means  '  ex- 
 cellence,' and  Hobab  'beloved.'  (1^)  They  are 
 identified  in  the  Talmudic  tradition,  which  asserts 
 that  the  father-in-law  of  Moses  had  seven  names, 
 three  of  which  were  Reuel,  Hobab,  and  Jethro. 
 But,  on  the  other  hand,  why  should  three  names  be 
 used  for  the  same  person  ?  It  is  true  that  the  Jews 
 frequently  bore  two  names,  as  Jacob  and  Israel, 
 Esau  and  Edom,  Benjamin  and  Benoni,  Gideon 
 and  Jerubbaal,  Solomon  and  Jedidiah  ;  and,  to 
 take  a  still  closer  parallel,  we  find  Nehemiah  some- 
 times called  only  by  his  title,  '  the  Tirshatha' 
 (Neh.  viu.  8).  But  in  all  these  cases  we  are  in- 
 formed of  the  Qouble  name,  and  pains  are  taken  to 
 remove  all  ambiguity.     Nor  will  Eichhorn's  sug- 
 
 *  The  arguments  of  Aben  Ezra,  Rashbam,  and 
 others,  that  this  visit  belongs  to  the  second  year 
 after  the  exodus  are  untenable.  See  Kalisch  on 
 Exod.  xviii.  i. 
 
 2Q 
 
JETHRO 
 
 gestion  of  different  docnrnents  help  us  ;  because 
 even  if  such  were  proved  to  have  been  the  source 
 of  this  varied  nomenclature,  it  is  incredible  either 
 that  the  compiler  should  have  been  guilty  of  so 
 much  carelessness,  or  that  he  should  have  added 
 no  explanatory  note.  Besides  this,  Hobab  is  in 
 Num.  X.  29  distinctly  called  ^  the  son  £7/"Raguel.' 
 
 If  (2)  we  suppose  them  to  be  three  different  per- 
 sons we  are  met  by  the  impossibility  of  explaining 
 the  suppression  of  Jethro's  name  as  the  father  of 
 Zipporah  in  Exod.  ii.,  whereas  he  appears  promi- 
 nently in  Exod.  iii.  i.  We  shall  also  be  obliged  to 
 make  US  mean  'grandfather'  in  Exod.  ii.  18,  which 
 
 the  whole  tenor  of  the  context  here  renders  inad- 
 missible. For,  whatever  be  the  meaning  of  the 
 disputed  termjnn  (Exod.  iii.  l),  it  cannot  be  doubted 
 
 that  ydhro  always  appears  in  the  capacity  oi father, 
 and  not  brother  to  Zipporah.  If  indeed  we  could 
 accept  the  ingenious  conjecture  of  Ewald  [Gesch. 
 d.  I'olkes,  sec.  ii.  33)  that,  by  an  ancient  clerical 
 error  tlie  words  p  1"in^,  'Jethro  son  of,'  had 
 dropped  out  before  the  name  of  Reuel,  it  would 
 then  be  easy  with  the  Targum  Jonathan,  Aben 
 Ezra,  Rosenmiiller,  etc.,  to  assume  that  Jethro  was 
 Reuel's  son.  Since,  however,  there  is  no  trace  of 
 such  an  error,  we  conclude  (3)  that  Jethro  and 
 Reuel  are  identical,  a  view  supported  by  the  autho- 
 rity of  Josephus  [Antiq.  ii.  12.  I,  'le^e^Xaros  ^v 
 eTriK\7]p.a  tQ  'VayoorfK),  and  adopted  by  Von  Len- 
 gerke  {Kenaan,  i.  393),  Bertheau  [Gesch.  Isr.,  sec. 
 242),  Kalisch  {Exod.,  p.  35),  and  others.  The 
 difficulty  arising  from  the  unexplained  use  of  two 
 names  in  close  proximity  still  remains  ;  but  it  is 
 less  than  that  involved  by  any  other  view. 
 
 The  fourth  supposition — that  Jethro  is  identical 
 with  Hobab,  is  the  most  common  ;  nevertheless  it 
 seems  to  us  exceedingly  improbable.  It  rests 
 mainly  on  the  fact  that  in  Judg.  iv.  11*  Hobab  is 
 called  the  jnh  (A.  N .,  father -in -laid)  of  Moses.    It 
 
 is  true  that  jrin  generally  means  father-in-law,  and 
 
 this  is  alone  sufficient  to  account  for  the  identifica- 
 tion of  Jethro  with  Hobab  (Schoeib)  in  the  Moham- 
 medan traditions  (D'Herbelot,  Bibl.  Orient,  s.  v. 
 Schoaib  ;  Weil.  Bibl.  Leg.,  s.  168,  etc.)  But  it  is 
 certainf  from  Gen.  xix.  14,  if  not  from  2  Kings 
 viiL  27  and  other  passages,   that  jDn  may  mean 
 
 merely  'marriage-connection, 'and  therefore  brother- 
 in-law  (Jerome,  Cognatus).  Nothing  therefore 
 prevents  us  from  regarding  Hobab  as  the  son  of 
 Jethro  (or  Reuel,  Judg.  iv.  11),  OiW<\  brother-in-law 
 of  Moses,  a  view  which  is  rendered  absolutely 
 necessary  by  the  statements  that  Jethro  could  not 
 be  persuaded  to  stay  with  the  Israelites  (Exod. 
 xviii.  27),  whereas  Hobab  not  only  acted  as  their 
 hybeer,  or  caravan-guide,  in  the  desert,  but  actu- 
 ally accompanied  tliem  into  Palestine,  and  settled 
 among  them  (Judg.  iv.  11,'  i.  16.  See  Keni  ; 
 Kenites  ;  Rechauites). 
 
 We  therefore  infer  that  Jelln-o  and  Raguel  are 
 identical,  the  latter  being  his  local  title  as  a  'priest' 
 of  Midian,  and  the  former  the  name  by  which  he 
 
 'i9>i 
 
 JEW,  JEWS 
 
 ;*  Num.  X.    29  adds  nothing  to  this ;  for  there 
 'nn  may,   and  therefore  probably  does,  apply  to 
 
 Raguel. 
 
 t  Dr.  Kahscli  strangely  denies  this  {Exod. ,  p. 
 35). 
 
 was  best  known  to  the  Jews  ;  and  that  Hobab  was 
 his  son,  whom  he  left  to  act  as  a  guide  to  the  Is- 
 raelites on  his  own  return  to  his  native  land.  This 
 supposition  seems  required  by  the  conditions  of  the 
 case,  and  leaves  no  contradiction  in  the  Mosaic 
 narrative  (see  HoBAB ;  Jether  ;  Keni,  etc.) — 
 F.  W.  F. 
 
 JETUR  (l^to;,  perhaps  =  n^''p,  'an  encamp- 
 ment of  Nomads  ;'  'leroi;/),  and  in  I  Chron.  v.  19 
 'iTovpaioi ;  fctiir,  Itiircei),  a  son  of  Ishmael  who, 
 with  his  family,  occupied  and  colonised  the  pro- 
 vince of  Iturtea,  which  see  (Gen.  xxv.  15  ;  i 
 Chron.  i.  31).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 JEUSH   {mV^).     I.    (Sept.  'Ieo!)s.)    A   son  of 
 
 Esau  by  Aholibamah  (Gen.  xxxvi.  iS  ;  i  Chron.  i. 
 
 35,  Sept.  'Ieo(yX),  one  of  the  D''Q1?X,  or  heads  of 
 a  tribe  among  the  Edomites.  In  vers.  5  and  14 
 the  Chetib  is  t^'''^'',  but  there  is  a  K'ri  in  both 
 cases,  giving  t^iy\  2.  (Sept.  'laoi/s.)  Son  of  Bil- 
 han,  son  of  Jediael  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  head 
 of  a  house  and  a  man  of  valour  in  the  time  of 
 David  (i  Chron.  vii.  10,  11).  3.  (Sept.  'Iwas.)  A 
 Gershomite  Levite,  son  of  Shemei,  reckoned  along 
 with  his  brother  Beriah  as  one  house  in  the  census 
 taken  by  David  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  10,  it).  4.  (Sept. 
 'leoi/s. )  Son  of  Rehoboam  by  Abihail,  daughter 
 of  Eliab,  the  son  of  Jesse  (2  Chron.  xi.  19). — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 JEW,  JEWS  The  Cl^HV  D"''7in\  or  i3''n^n''_; 
 
 Chald.  J''N^1l^;  ;  Sept.  and  N.  T.  'iJuSaios,  ol  'lou- 
 
 5arot).  The  term  'Jew'  seems  to  have  come  into 
 use  first  as  the  designation  of  a  subject  of  the  king- 
 dom of  Judah  (2  Kmgs  xvi.  6 ;  xxv.  25  ;  Jer. 
 xxxii.  12  ;  xxxviii.  19  ;  xl.  II  ;  xliii.  9),  though  in 
 some  of  these  passages  it  is  probably  used  in  a 
 wider  sense  as  applicable  to  all  who  were  of  the 
 seed  of  Abraham,  and  such  is  undoubtedly  its 
 meaning  in  Jer.  xxxiv.  9.  After  the  return  from 
 the  Captivity  it  became  the  designation  of  the 
 whole  Israelitish  people  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xi.  5-  1), 
 a  consequence  probably  of  the  predominance  of 
 the  members  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  among 
 those  who  returned.  In  the  later  books  of  the 
 O.  T.  we  find  the  term  thus  frequently  used  and 
 even  extended  to  those  who  still  remained  dis- 
 persed among  the  Gentiles  (Ezra  iv.  12,  23  ;  v.  5  ; 
 vi.  8,  etc  ;  Neh.  i.  2  ;  ii.  16 ;  v.  i,  etc. ;  Dan.  iii. 
 8,  12  ;  Zech.  viii.  ;  Esth.  iii.  4,  6,  etc.) 
 
 In  the  N.  T.  ''[ovoaios  is  used  as  a  noun — i.  To 
 describe  a  descendant  of  Jacob,  a  member  of  the 
 Jewish  community  as  distinguished  from  one  of 
 Gentile  birth  (Mark  vii.  3;  Luke  xxiii.  51  ;  John 
 iv.  9  ;  Acts  xix.  33,  34,  etc.)  2.  To  indicate  one 
 who  adhered  to  the  Jewish  religion  and  modes  of 
 worship,  especially  as  distinguished  from  the  follow-  • 
 ers  of  Jesus  Christ  (Rom.  ii.  17  ;  iii.  i  ;  i  Cor.  ix. 
 20;  Gal.  ii.  15,  etc.)  3.  To  denote  one  who  truly 
 came  up  to  the  spiritual  idea  of  the  Jewish  institute, 
 who  was  a  true  son  of  the  covenant  in  its  higher,  its 
 spiritual  asjiect  (Rom.  ii.  28,  29;  Rev.  ii.  9).  The 
 phrase  01  'lovSaioi  sometimes  occurs  with  an  im- 
 plied allusion  to  the  antagonism  between  those  who 
 adhered  to  the  Mosaic  institute  and  those  who  em- 
 braced Christianity,  to  describe  those  who  came 
 forth  as  the  active  enemies  of  Christ  and  his  cause. 
 In  this  sense  it  is  used  especially  by  St.  John  in  his 
 Gospel :  and  in  this  sense  also  it  appears  to  be  em- 
 
JEW,  JEWS 
 
 595 
 
 JEW,  JEWS 
 
 ployed  in  Matt,  xxviii.  13,  and  in  Acts  xii.  3 ;  xx.  3. 
 By  the  classical  writers  the  term  'Jews'  is  used  as 
 the  proper  designation  of  the  Hebrew  people.  The 
 references  they  make  shew,  for  the  most  part,  utter 
 ignorance  both  of  the  history  and  character  of  the 
 people.  As  to  the  origin  of  the  name,  Justin 
 says  (xxxvi.  2)  :  Omnes  ex  nomine  Judse  qui  post 
 divisionem  decesserat,  Judteos  appellavit  (Israhel)  ; 
 Plutarch  makes  Judajus,  the  ancestor  of  the  Jews, 
 a  son  of  Typhon.  and  brother  of  Hierosolymus  {De 
 Isid.  et  Osh;  c.  31)  ;  Tacitus  [Hist.  v.  2)  connects 
 the  name  Juda^us  with  Ida,  a  mountain  in  Crete  ; 
 while  Dio  Cassius  (xxxvii.  17)  honestly  acknow- 
 ledges that  he  knows  not  whence  it  came  into  use. 
 The  most  important  statements  respecting  the  Jews 
 found  in  the  classical  writers  are  those  made  by 
 Tacitus  [Hist.  v.  4.  i  ;  v.  2)  ;  but  in  these  we  find 
 traces  of  ignorance  and  strong  prejudice.  The 
 national  pride  and  exclusiveness  of  the  Jews,  and 
 the  contempt  with  which  they  regarded  all  whom 
 they  stigmatised  as  '  the  uncircumcision,'  could  not 
 but  produce  a  reactive  effect  on  the  minds  of  men 
 of  other  nations  ;  and  this  appears  in  such  expres- 
 sions as  'teterrimagens,'  applied  to  them  by  Tacitus 
 (Hist.  V.  8.  2) ;  in  his  ascribing  to  them  '  adversus 
 omnes  alios  hostile  odium;'  and  in  such  statements 
 as  those  of  Juvenal  [Sat.  xiv.  103),  Diod.  Sic.  (Eclog. 
 xxxiv.  i),  Quintilian  [Inst.  iii.  7.  21),  Dio  Cassius 
 (xlix.  22),  and  Suetonius  {Nero.-x.\\.)  Strabo  (xvi. 
 p.  760)  charges  on  them  superstition  and  tyranny, 
 though  his  account  of  them  is  on  the  whole  more 
 favourable  than  those  of  the  preceding.  The  most 
 friendly  notice  of  them  by  any  of  the  classical 
 writers  is  that  of  Justin  (xxxvi.  I-3),  which  though 
 full  of  inaccuracies  is  on  the  whole  just  to  the  repu- 
 tation of  the  people.  It  is  not  to  be  expected  that 
 the  true  character  and  worth  of  the  Jewish  people 
 should  be  understood  by  the  heathen. 
 
 The  external  histoiy  of  the  Jews,  after  their  re- 
 turn from  the  Captivity,  and  their  full  settlement  in 
 their  own  land,  may  be  arranged  under  five  epochs. 
 T\iQfi?-st  is  that  of  the  Persian  supremacy,  reaching 
 from  B.C.  536  to  330,  when  the  Persian  kingdom 
 fell  with  Darius  Codomannus.  The  sccoiid  is  that 
 of  the  Greco-!Macedonian  rule,  from  330  to  167. 
 During  this  period  the  Jews  were  successively  sub- 
 ject to  the  Greek  kings  of  Egypt  (323-221),  then 
 alternately  to  those  of  Egypt  and  Syria,  and  ulti- 
 mately wholly  to  those  of  Syria  from  the  time  of 
 Seleucus  Philopator  to  that  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
 phanes.  The  third  is  that  of  the  struggle  for 
 freedom  and  national  independence,  the  age  of 
 the  Maccabees,  from  167  to  141.  The  fourth  is 
 that  of  national  independence  under  princes  of 
 their  own  nation,  from  141  to  63.  The  fifth  is 
 that  of  the  Roman  rule,  during  which  the  Jews 
 were  at  first  governed  immediately  by  princes  of 
 their  own  blood,  afterwards  by  princes  of  the 
 Idumasan  race,  and  ultimately  partly  by  Roman 
 ofiicers,  partly  by  tetrarchs  and  kings  of  the  family 
 of  Herod,  from  B.C.  63  to  A.D.  70,  when  Jerusalem 
 ■was  taken  (Jost,  Gesch.  der  Israelitcn  seit  der  Zcit  der 
 Maccabaer,  9  vols.,  Berl.  1820-28).  See  articles 
 Cyru.s  ;  Darius  ;  Alexander  ;  Antiochus  ; 
 Maccabees  ;  Herodian  Family  ;  Dispersion 
 OF  the  Jews  ;  Hellenists  ;  Jerusalem. 
 
 '  Through  the  whole  of  the  post-exilian  period,' 
 says  Winer  {Realw.,  s.  v.  Juden),  'the  religio-poli- 
 tical  character  of  the  Jews  remained  the  same  as 
 that  which  the  Israelites  had  gradually  assumed 
 during  the  exile ;  it  unmistakeably  stamped  itself 
 
 on  their  public  and  private  life,  and  its  develop- 
 ment was  sustained  even  by  the  trials  through 
 which  the  people  passed.  That  great  calamity  had 
 confirmed  what  all  the  better  prophets  had  so  often 
 foretold,  that  unfaithfulness  to  Jehovah,  and  defec- 
 tion from  the  law  of  their  fathers,  would  bring  the 
 people  to  their  fall.  Shame  and  repentance,  conse- 
 quently, seized  the  Israelites,  now  fully  roused  to 
 reflection ;  and  zeal  for  the  law  and  religion  be- 
 came the  general  watchword.  As  happens,  how- 
 ever, usually  with  the  mass,  this  zeal  attached  itself 
 chiefly  to  the  outward  and  visible,  degenerated 
 into  a  painful  regard  to  the  letter  ;  coxcombiy 
 was  allied  to  rude  particularism.  The  understand- 
 ing, cultivated  by  the  synagogue  worship,  which 
 was  directed  for  the  most  part  to  instruction,  ob- 
 tained  the  preponderance  over  feeling  and  living 
 intuition  ;  tradition  almost  wholly  suppressed  the 
 written  law ;  and  work-holiness  began  to  be  held 
 for  virtue.  With  all  this  there  nevertheless  crept 
 in  a  foreign  element,  not  only  in  manners  and 
 general  culture,  but  even  in  belief.  The  greater 
 their  zeal,  the  more  eagerly  did  they  seize  upon 
 Chaldaic  dogmas,  which  could  be  fastened  on  to 
 Mosaism,  or  only  seemed  to  be  explanatory  of  it  ; 
 and  though  over  against  the  Greek  philosophy  a 
 Jewish  learning  was  formed,  which  united  the 
 foreign  with  the  native  by  means  of  allegorical  in- 
 terpretation, and  set  forth  the  Scriptures  as  the 
 source  of  all  the  wisdom  of  the  world,  there  yet  im- 
 perceptibly crept  into  the  mind  strange  beliefs,  and 
 foreign  speculation  cast  the  simple  religion  of  their 
 fathers  into  the  shade.  Agriculture  ceased  to  be 
 the  main  source  of  wealth  for  the  nation,  partly  be- 
 cause this  no  longer  was  adapted  to  the  increased 
 population,  partly  because  the  Israelites  had  dur- 
 ing the  Captivity  acquired  a  taste  for  traffic,  and 
 found  in  the  situation  of  their  recovered  father- 
 land, and  in  the  extension  of  general  intercourse 
 among  the  nations,  a  stimulus  to  mercantile  pur- 
 suits. There  thus  arose  among  the  mass  of  the 
 post-exilian  Israelites  the  same  tendency  essentially 
 which  may  be  seen  in  the  dispersed  Jews  of  the 
 present  day,  only  now  in  a  more  marked  form, 
 and  exacerbated  by  the  loss  of  country  (comp. 
 Neander,  K.  C,  I.  i.  47  [E.  T.,  I.  47,  ff.]  ;  J.  W. 
 N.  Roringer,  de  miitati  Hehr.  iiigenii  post  redit. 
 e  Captiv.  Babylon,  ratiojie  et  causis,  Leid.  1S20; 
 De  Wette,  B'lbl.  TheoL,  sec.  64,  ff.  ;  Sittenlehre, 
 II.  69,  ff".)' 
 
 In  Jost's  Geschichte  d.  Judeuthiims,  3  vols.  8vo, 
 Leipz.  1857-59,  is  to  be  found  the  fullest  and  best 
 account  of  Judaism  as  a  system  of  national  and 
 speculative  development  (comp.  Zunz,  Gottesdieiisll. 
 Vortrdge  der  Juden,  Berl.  1S32  ;  also  Steinschneider, 
 Jewish  Literature  from  the  Mi  to  the  iMi  century, 
 Lond.  1857  ;  and  the  articles  Alexandria  ;  Edu- 
 cation; Haphthara;  Kabbala;  Synagogue; 
 Talmud  ;  and  the  articles  on  Jewish  writers  in 
 this  work). 
 
 From  "i-Iiin"'  are  formed  nn_^nS  a  Jezvess,  to  which 
 
 corresponds  the  N.  T.  'looSaia  which  is  used  not 
 only  of  Eunice,  the  mother  of  Tnnothy,  who  was 
 undoubtedly  of  Hebrew  descent  (Acts  xvi.  i, 
 comp.  2  Tim.  iii.  13),  but  also  of  Drusilla  the 
 daughter  of  Herod  Antipas  (Acts  xxiv.  24)  ;  DniiT 
 Jewish  (used  adverbially  of  the  Hebrew  language, 
 Is.  xxxvi.  13,  where  the  Sept.  has  Toi'Satcrri),  to 
 which  corresponds  the  N.  T.  'Ioi'3aV/.-6s  (applied  to 
 the  myths  and  legends  of  the  Rabbis,  Tit.  i.  14) 
 
JEWEL 
 
 596 
 
 JEZANIAH 
 
 and    'louSalVcos  (used  by  the  apostle  of  the  manner 
 of  Hfe  pecuhar  to  the  Jews,  Gal.  ii.  14) ;  andin'Tin 
 
 the  Hithpael  of  ^^^  to  Judaize  or  live  as  a  Jew 
 (Esth.  viii.  17  ;  Sept.  '\ovh6:i^ov ;  cf  Plut.,  V.  Cic. 
 c.  7),  answering  to  the  N.  T.  'Ioi;5at'feti'  (Gal.  ii. 
 14),  the  counterpart  of  '^Wrivi^eiv.  The  apostle 
 also  uses 'louSalff^is  to  describe  the  religious  sys- 
 tem and  usages  of  the  Jews  (Gal.  i.  13,  14).  Tliis 
 word  occurs  also  in  2  Maccab.  ii.  21 ;  viii.  I  ;  xiv. 
 38  ;  where  it  is  in  tacit  antithesis  to  dX\o(pyXifffJ.6s, 
 or  iWrjvLcrfJ.Ss  (2  Maccab.  iv.  13  ;  comp.  vi.  24).— 
 W.  L.  A. 
 JEWEL.    [Stones,  Precious.] 
 
 JEWELL,  John,  D.  D.  ,  was  born  at  Buden  in 
 Devonshire  1522  ;  was  sent  to  Oxford  at  13,  be- 
 came B.  A.  and  tutor  of  Merton  five  years  after- 
 wards, and  subsequently  professor  of  rhetoric  at 
 Corpus  Christi  College.  During  the  early  part  of 
 his  university  career,  while  Heniy  VIIL  was  still 
 livmg,  he  was  careful  not  to  take  an  open  or  decided 
 part  in  the  theological  controversies,  though  he  was 
 secretly  attached  to  the  principles  of  the  reforma- 
 tion, and,  as  far  as  opportunity  offered,  did  what  he 
 could  to  advance  them.  Upon  the  accession  of 
 Edward  VL  he  adopted  a  bolder  line,  and  on  the 
 visit  of  Peter  the  Martyr  to  Oxford  attached  himself 
 warmly  to  him.  With  the  death  of  Edward,  how- 
 ever, fortune  again  turned,  and  Jewell's  position 
 became  one  of  peril.  When  recantation  was  pro- 
 posed to  him,  he  hesitated  for  a  moment,  but  at 
 length  sought  safety  in  exile.  He  went  to  Frank- 
 fort, where  he  found  others  similarly  situated  with 
 himself;  thence  to  Strasburg,  where  he  again  met 
 with  Peter  Martyr,  and  assisted  him  in  some  of  his 
 works.  On  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  he  returned 
 to  England,  and  the  following  year,  1559,  was  raised 
 to  the  See  of  Salisbury.  Jewell  was  a  prelate  of 
 great  piety  and  erudition,  a  strenuous  and  deter- 
 mined adversary  of  tlie  Romish  Church,  and  an  in- 
 defatigable worker,  rising,  it  is  said,  at  four  and  not 
 retiring  to  rest  till  midnight.  In  his  Exposition  of 
 the  Two  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians, 
 Lond.  1594,  he  finds  ample  scope  for  his  anti- 
 Romanist  zeal ;  the  exposition  is  chiefly  polemical 
 and  practical.  His  best  known  work  is  Apologia 
 Ecclesice  Aiiglicainv,  translated  by  Lady  Bacon,  the 
 mother  of  Lord  Bacon.  Jewell  used  to  say  that  a 
 bishop  should  die  preaching,  and  it  was  literally 
 fulfilled  in  his  own  case,  for  he  was  seized  with  his 
 mortal  illness  when  on  a  preaching  tour  in  a  re- 
 tired portion  of  his  diocese,  and  died  Sept.  21, 
 1 57 1.  The  best  edition  of  Jewell's  works  is  that 
 by  Dr.  Jelf,  8  vols.  8vo,  Oxford  1848.— S.  L. 
 
 JEWRY,  the  rendering  of  "^^T\'^,  the  Chaldee 
 form  of  rnirT",  found  in  Dan.  v.  25.  It  is  equiva- 
 lent to  the  phrase  'Z««fif(/7«.f«//'  (min''  nOTX) 
 in  Is.  xix.  17.  Jewry  occurs  in  several  passages  in 
 the  A.  V.  of  the  Apocrypha,  being  retained  from 
 the  older  translations  ;  and  the  Greek  'loiiSala  is 
 so  translated  in  two  passages  of  the  N.  T.  (Luke 
 xxiii.  5  ;  John  vii.  i),  though  elsewhere  rendered 
 jfudcca  (see  Jun^A). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JEZANIAH,  occurring  in  its  shorter  form  IT'^T'' 
 
 (Jer.  xlii.    i),  and  the   longer  one  illT'JT''  (xl.   8), 
 
 is  t]ie  name  given  by  the  prophet  to  the  man  who, 
 in  the  history  (2  Kings  xxv.  23),  is  described  under 
 
 the  longer  name  of  Jaazaniah  (lIT'JTi*^)  as  one  of 
 Zedekiah's  captains  of  forces  (DvTin  """l^),  who, 
 
 when  Nebuchadnezzar's  army  took  Jerusalem,  fled 
 with  their  troops  to  \.\\f.  fields  (Jer.  xl.  7)  ;  that  is, 
 dispersed  for  fear  of  the  Chaldeans  throughout  the 
 country  fastnesses  at  home,  in  contradistinction  to 
 those  who  had,  at  an  earlier  period,  fled  to  the 
 neighbouring  states  of  Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon 
 for  refuge  (Jer.  xl.  11).  When  the  conqueror 
 wisely  appointed  the  prudent  and  estimable  Geda- 
 liah  to  govern  Judah  as  his  viceroy,  Jezaniah,  with 
 many  others,  gave  in  their  adhesion  to  the  new 
 government.  But  Gedaliah  fell  by  a  treachery 
 which  has  an  illustrative  parallel  in  the  massacre  of 
 Glencoe,  and  Jezaniah  was  one  of  those  who  re- 
 sented the  foul  deed  and  did  their  utmost  to  punish 
 the  author  of  it  (Jer.  xli.  11-14).  Fearful,  how- 
 ever, that  the  death  of  Gedaliah  would  involve 
 them  in  fresh  troubles  from  the  incensed  king  of 
 Babylon,  the  military  leaders,  including  our  Jeza- 
 niah, with  '  all  the  people  from  the  least  even  to 
 the  greatest,'  consulted  the  prophet  Jeremiah  as  to 
 what  coui'se  they  should  pursue.  He  gave  them 
 advice  which  was  not  only  in  accordance  with  the 
 will  of  God,  but  eminently  patriotic,  to  the  effect 
 that  they  should  remain  in  their  native  country. 
 We  have  elsewhere  related  the  insolent  rejection  of 
 the  prophet's  counsel,  and  the  migration  to  Egypt 
 which  followed  it  [Jeremiah  ;  Johanan].  Jeza 
 niah's  name  has  often  been  most  prominently  con- 
 nected with  these  discreditable  events,  as  if  under 
 the  name  of  Azariah  (Jer.  xliii.  2)  he  were  the  I'ery 
 ringleader  of  the  '  proud  men '  who  dared  to  defy 
 the  counsel  of  heaven  as  declared  by  Jeremiah.  To 
 us  this  opinion  seems  hardly  tenable.  It  is  based 
 on  the  fact  that  in  Jer.  xliii.  2  Azariah  is  described 
 as  the  son  of  Noshaiah,  the  same  description  being 
 in  xlii.  I  given  of  Jezaniah.  ''  jfezaniah,^  it  has  been 
 suggested,  might  have  been  easily  corrupted  into 
 '■Azariah''  (Hitzig  in  Jerem. ,  p.  335,  and  Smith's 
 Dirt,  of  Bible,  i.  1078).  Corruption  should  not  be 
 imputed  to  the  text,  except  in  palpable  instances. 
 This  is  not  such  a  case.  The  name  iT'liy  (Azariah) 
 is  sufficiently  distinct  from  TVliV  (Jezaniah)  to  have 
 preserved  its  independence,  and  there  is  no  sign 
 of  a  various  reading  of  Jer.  xliii.  2  to  be  found  in 
 Kennicott,  De  Rossi,  or  Houbigant.  Nor  does 
 the  retention  of  this  name,  as  that  of  a  separate 
 person  from  Jezaniah,  create  any  difficulty  in  exe- 
 gesis. There  is  no  more  difficulty  in  supposing 
 that  there  were  two  sons  of  Hoshaiah  connected 
 with  these  events  than  that  theie  were  two  sons  of 
 Kareah,  as  the  history  expressly  affirms  (Jer.  xl. 
 8,  where  indeed  another  set  of  brothers  besides  is 
 mentioned,  '  the  sons  of  Ephai  the  Netophathite'). 
 We  would  therefore  suppose  (with  Rosenmiiller, 
 Scholia  on  Jerem.,  p.  247)  that  the  impious  leader 
 ot  the  seditious  opponents  of  the  prophets  at  '  the 
 caravanserai  of  Chimham'  (Jer.  xli.  17)  was  a 
 brother  of  our  Jezaniah.  The  latter  was  possibly 
 not  a  participator  in  the  fatal  scheme  of  migrating 
 to  Egypt,  which  seems  to  have  originated  with 
 Azariah,  who  took  the  lead  even  of  Johanan  in  re- 
 plying to  the  prophet.  But  is  it  certain  that 
 Jezaniah  was  '  son  of  Hoshaiah,''  and  brother  of 
 Azariah  ?  If  corruption  of  the  text  is  to  be  thought 
 of  at  all,  may  not  the  name  Jezaniah  have  replaced 
 that  of  Azariah  in  Jer.  xlii.  i  ?  The  Septuagint. 
 thi-oughout  the  narrative  of  this  interview  with  the 
 prophet,  oviits  the  name  of  Jezaniah,  reading  '  Aza- 
 
JEZEBEL 
 
 597 
 
 TEZREEL 
 
 riah,  son  of  Maasiah'  ('Afixpiay  w6s  MaaeraLov,  or 
 'ilcraiov  in  one  MS.),  both  in  the  xlii.  and  xhii. 
 chapters  (LXX.,  chaps.  xHx.  and  1.)  It  is  some 
 confirmation  of  this,  that,  in  the  histoiy  {2  Kings 
 XXV.  23)  and  the  parallel  passage  of  the  prophet 
 (Jer.  xl.  8),  Jezaniah,  or  Jaazaniah,  is  called  ' //le 
 son  of  a  Maachathite''  CnDVSn'p),  and  that  the 
 
 Septuagint  in  both  places  agrees  with  the  Masoretic 
 text  ['Efoj'ias  vih%  tou  Ma;xaS-£  in  Jerem. ,  and'lefo- 
 vlas  vibs  TOU  Maxa'^l  in  Kings].  The  word  ren- 
 dered by  the  ge)itile  phrase  'a  Maachathite''  is 
 treated  as  a  proper  name  by  Gesenius  ( Thes.  in  loc. ) 
 and  De  Wette  ( Translat.  of  the  Bible).  Keil  unites 
 j3  with  the  longer  word  as  together  =  '  a  Maacha- 
 thite ;'  as  if  Jezaniah  was  himself  a  native  of 
 Maachah.  To  this  Thenius  (on  Kings,  in  loc.) 
 reasonably  objects,  and  translates  after  our  A.V. 
 '  sonofaMaachathite,'  making ///i'7^?//;(?;'of  Jezaniah, 
 rather  than  the  man  himself,  to  be  of  foreign  birth. 
 This  Maachah  was  on  the  north  frontier  of  Pales- 
 tine on  the  west  slope  of  Hermon.  It  is  mentioned 
 in  Josh.  xii.  4  as  a  province  of  the  old  kingdom  of 
 Bashan.  One  of  David's  mighty  men  of  war  was 
 'the  son  of  a  Maachathite'  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  34)  ;  so 
 that  there  is  no  difficulty  in  the  fact  that  the  son  of 
 a  foreigner  holds  a  high  commission  in  the  army  of 
 Zedekiah.— P.  II. 
 
 JEZEBEL    pnPX   \iwn-cohahited,    i.  q.    &\oxos 
 
 Plat.,   p.  249   B.,  intacta,  chaste:  comp.  Agnes, 
 
 Gesen. ;  contr.  from  72T"''3X  =^ father  of  the  heavenly 
 
 habitation,   an  epithet  of  Baal    corresponding  to 
 
 hnr  hv^,  Fiirst]  ;  Sept.  'Iefa;SeX  [the  name  is  the 
 same  as  the  modern  Isobel  or  Isabellal),  daughter 
 of  Ethbaal,  king  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  [Ethbaal], 
 and  consort  of  Ahab,  king  of  Israel  (b.c.  918). 
 This  unsuitable  alliance  proved  most  disastrous  to 
 the  kingdom  of  Israel ;  for  Jezebel  [whom  Jose- 
 phus  describes  as  yvvawv  dpaarripidv  re  Kal  to\- 
 fj.Tjpoi'  (Antiq.  viii.  13.  2)]  induced  her  weak  husband 
 not  only  to  connive  at  her  introducing  the  worship 
 of  her  native  idols,  but  eventually  to  become  him- 
 self a  worshipper  of  them,  and  to  use  all  the  means 
 in  his  power  to  establish  them  in  the  room  of  the 
 God  of  Israel.  This  was  a  great  enormity.  The 
 worship  of  the  golden  calves  which  previously  ex- 
 isted was,  however  mistakenly,  intended  in  honour 
 of  Jehovah ;  but  this  was  an  open  alienation  from 
 him,  and  a  turning  aside  to  foreign  and  strange 
 gods,  which,  indeed,  were  no  gods.  Most  of  the 
 particulars  of  this  bad  but  apparently  highly-gifted 
 woman's  conduct  have  been  related  in  the  notices 
 of  Ahab  and  Elijah.  From  the  course  of  her 
 proceedings  it  would  appear  that  she  grew  to  hate 
 the  Jewish  system  of  law  and  rehgion,  on  account 
 of  what  must  have  seemed  to  her  its  intolerance 
 and  its  anti-social  tendencies.  She  hence  sought 
 to  put  it  down  by  all  the  means  she  could  com- 
 mand ;  and  the  imbecility  of  her  husband  seems  to 
 have  made  all  the  powers  of  the  state  subservient 
 to  her  designs.  The  manner  in  which  she  acquired 
 and  used  her  power  over  Ahab  is  strikingly  shewn 
 in  the  matter  of  Naboth,  which,  perhaps,  more 
 than  all  the  other  affairs  in  which  she  was  engaged, 
 brings  out  her  true  character,  and  displays  the 
 nature  of  her  influence.  When  she  found  him 
 fretting  like  a  spoiled  child,  on  account  of  the  re- 
 fusal of  Naboth  to  gratify  him  by  selling  him  his 
 
 patrimonial  vineyard  for  a  '  garden  of  herbs,'  she 
 taught  him  to  look  to  her,  to  rely  upon  her  for  the 
 accomplishment  of  his  wishes  ;  and  for  the  sake  of 
 this  impression,  more  perhaps  than  from  savage- 
 ness  of  temper,  she  scrupled  not  at  murder  under 
 the  abused  forms  of  law  and  religion.  She  had  the 
 reward  of  her  unscrupulous  decisiveness  of  charac- 
 ter in  the  triumph  of  her  policy  in  Israel,  where, 
 at  last,  there  were  but  7000  people  who  had  not 
 bowed  the  knee  to  Baal,  nor  kissed  their  hand  to 
 his  image.  Nor  was  her  success  confined  to  Israel, 
 for  through  Athaliah — a  daughter  after  her  own 
 heart — who  was  married  to  the  son  and  successor 
 of  Jehoshaphat,  the  same  policy  prevailed  for  a 
 time  in  Judah,  after  Jezebel  herself  had  perished 
 and  the  house  of  Ahab  had  met  its  doom.  It 
 seems  that  after  the  death  of  her  husband,  Jezebel 
 maintained  considerable  ascendancy  over  her  son 
 Joram  ;  and  her  measures  and  misconduct  formed 
 the  principal  charge  which  Jehu  cast  in  the  teeth 
 of  that  unhappy  monarch,  before  he  sent  forth  the 
 arrow  which  slew  him.  The  last  effort  of  Jezebel 
 was  to  intimidate  Jehu  as  he  passed  the  palace,  by 
 warning  him  of  the  eventual  rewards  of  even  suc- 
 cessful treason.  It  is  eminently  characteristic  of 
 the  woman,  that  even  in  this  terrible  moment, 
 v.-hen  she  knew  that  her  son  was  slain,  and  must 
 have  felt  that  her  power  had  departed,  she  dis- 
 played herself  not  with  rent  veil  and  dishevelled 
 hair,  'but  tired  her  head  and  painted  her  eyes' 
 before  she  looked  out  at  the  window.  The  eunuchs, 
 at  a  word  from  Jehu,  having  cast  her  down,  she 
 met  her  death  beneath  the  wall  [Jehu]  ;  and  when 
 afterwards  the  new  monarch  bethought  him  that, 
 as  '  a  king's  daughter,'  her  corpse  should  not  be 
 treated  with  disrespect,  nothing  was  found  of  her 
 but  the  skull,  the  feet,  and  the  palms  of  her  hands. 
 The  dogs  had  eaten  all  the  rest.  B.C.  884  (i 
 Kings  xvi.  31;  xviii.  4,  13,  19  j  xxi.  5-25;  2 
 Kings  ix.  7,  22,  30-37)-— J-  K. 
 
 JEZREEL    (iji^pr),    '  what    God   planteth ;' 
 
 'leipaA,  'lefpar/X,  and  'laf^X  ;  Jezrael),  an  ancient 
 city  of  Canaan,  situated  on  the  western  declivity  of 
 Mount  Gilboa,  overlooking  the  great  plain  to  which 
 it  gave  the  name  Esd}'aelo7i.  On  the  northern  side 
 of  the  city,  between  the  parallel  ridges  of  Gilboa 
 z\\dMoreh.{r].ov/ caWedJebel ed-Diihy ;  seeMoREH), 
 lies  a  rich  valley,  an  offshoot  of  Esdraelon,  running 
 down  eastward  to  the  Jordan.  This  was  called  the 
 '  Valley  of  Jezreel ;'  and  Bethshan,  with  the  other 
 towns  in  and  around  the  valley,  was  originally  in- 
 habited by  a  fierce  and  warlike  race  who  had 
 '  chariots  of  iron'  (Josh.  xvii.  16).  The  region  fell 
 to  the  lot  of  Issachar,  but  neither  this  tribe  nor  its 
 more  powerful  neighbour  Ephraim,  was  able  to 
 drive  out  the  ancient  people  (xix.  18). 
 
 The  '  valley  of  Jezreel'  became  the  scene  of  one 
 of  the  most  signal  victories  ever  achieved  by  the 
 Israelites,  and  of  one  of  the  most  melancholy  de- 
 feats ever  they  sustained.  In  the  time  of  the 
 Judges,  the  Midianites,  Amalekites,  and  '  children 
 of  the  East,'  crossed  the  Jordan,  and  '  pitched  in 
 the  valley  of  Jezreel,'  almost  covering  its  green 
 pastures  with  their  tents,  flocks,  and  herds  (Judg. 
 vi.  33,  seq.)  Gideon  hastily  summoned  the  war- 
 riors of  Israel  round  his  standard,  and  took  up  a 
 position  on  the  lower  slopes  of  Gilboa,  close  to  the 
 '  well  of  Harod'  (vii.  i  ;  also  called  '  the  fountain 
 of  Jezreel,'  Harod),  about  a  mile  east  of  the  city. 
 The  story  of  Gideon's  lamps  and  pitchers,  his  night 
 
JEZREEL 
 
 598 
 
 JEZREEL 
 
 attack,  and  the  utter  rout  and  terrible  slaughter  of 
 the  enemy,  is  well  known. 
 
 Two  centuries  later  the  Philistines  took  up  the 
 identical  position  formerly  occupied  by  the  Midian- 
 ites,  and  the  Israelites  under  Saul  pitched  on 
 Gideon's  old  camping-ground  by  the  '  fountain 
 of  Jezreel'  (i  Sam.  xxix.  l-ii).  The  Israelites 
 were  defeated,  and  Saul  and  Jonathan,  with  the 
 flower  of  their  troops,  fell  on  the  heights  of  Gilboa 
 (xxxi.  1-6).    [Gilboa.] 
 
 The  valley  and  the  fountain  of  Jezreel  were  thus 
 the  scenes  of  stirring  events  in  early  Jewish  history, 
 but  it  is  not  till  long  afterwards  we  find  any  direct 
 reference  made  to  the  city,  though  it  appears  to 
 have  been  head  of  a  large  province  (2  Sam.  ii.  9  ; 
 iv.  4;  I  Kings  iv.  12).  It  was  during  the  reign  of 
 Ahab,  Jezreel  became  a  place  of  note.  He  built  a 
 palace  there,  and  made  it  one  of  the  royal  resi- 
 dences. After  Elijah's  sacrifice  and  the  slaughter 
 of  Baal's  prophets  on  Carmel,  Ahab  drove  in  his 
 chariot  across  the  plain  to  Jezreel,  and  Elijah, 
 '  girding  up  his  loins,'  ran  before  him,  like  the 
 groom  of  a  modern  eastern  prince,  a  distance  of 
 some  fifteen  miles  (i  Kings  xviii.  45,  46).  In 
 Jezreel,  Naboth  was  murdered  by  the  infamous  Je- 
 zebel, that  she  might  get  possession  of  his  ancestral 
 vineyard,  which  adjoined  the  royal  palace  (i  Kings 
 xxi.  I-16).  Here,  too,  in  fulfilment  of  prophecy 
 (vers.  17-23),  divine  vengeance  fell  on  the  guilty 
 house  of  Ahab.  Joram  his  son  was  slain  and  his 
 body  cast  into  the  vineyard  of  poor  Naboth 
 (2  Kings  ix.  23-26  ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  ix.  6.  4).  Here 
 Jezebel  was  thrown  out  of  a  window  and  devoured 
 by  dogs  in  the  streets  (2  Kings  ix.  30-37).  Here, 
 too,  the  whole  family  of  Ahab  were  murdered  by 
 Jehu  (x.  I-Il);  and  these  acts  of  horrid  cruelty 
 did  not  go  unpunished,  they  were  avenged  by  the 
 utter  extinction  of  the  family  of  Jehu,  and  the  final 
 overthrow  of  the  sinful  kingdom  of  Israel. 
 
 The  above  facts  and  predictions  help  to  illustrate 
 the  highly  figurative  references  to  Jezreel  by  the 
 prophet  Hosea.  '  And  the  Lord  said  unto  him, 
 call  his  name  Jezreel ;  for  yet  a  little  while  and  I 
 will  avenge  the  blood  of  Jezreel  upon  the  house  of 
 Jehu,  and  v/ill  cause  the  kingdom  of  the  house  of 
 Israel  to  cease,  and  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that 
 day,  that  I  will  break  the  bow  of  Israel  in  the 
 valley  of  Jezreel'  (i.  4,  5).  The  word  Jezreel  sig- 
 nifies '  God  will  scatter^  from  yiT,    '  to  scatter,' 
 
 and  7X,  '  God  ;'  and  this  was  the  divinely  appoint- 
 ed name  of  the  prophet's  son,  to  symbolize  the 
 ruin  that  was  soon  to  fall  on  the  house  of  Jehu  and 
 the  whole  kingdom  of  Israel.  The  Lord  had  pro- 
 mised that  Jehu's  descendants  should  occupy  the 
 throne  till  the  fourth  generation  (2  Kings  x.  30). 
 Two  of  these  had  passed  when  Hosea  wrote,  and 
 consequently  the  time  of  their  ruin  was  at  hand. 
 The  '  valley  of  Jezreel'  was  the  battle-field  of 
 Israel.  In  it  the  Israelites  attempted  to  withstand 
 the  first  attack  of  the  Assyrians,  and  being  over- 
 thrown, the  whole  kingdom  fell,  and  the  prophet's 
 words  were  fulfilled,  '  I  will  break  the  bow  of 
 Israel  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel.' 
 
 In  IIos.  i.  1 1  there  is  another  characteristic  play 
 upon  the  word  Jezreel.  The  root  JJIT  signifies 
 '  to  plant,^  or  '  j'c?^,'  as  well  as  '  to  scatter  ;' 
 hence,  referring  to  the  return  of  the  Israelites  from 
 captivity,  and  their  re-estal)lishment  in  Palestine, 
 he  says,  '  Great  shall  be  the  day  of  Jezreel,^  that 
 is    'the  &.z.y  oi  what  God  shall  plant ;''  namely,  the 
 
 Israelites  in  their  own  countiy.  In  the  same  sense 
 the  word  is  used  in  chap.  ii.  22,  '  And  the  earth 
 shall  respond  to  the  corn,  and  the  new  wine,  ana 
 the  oil  ;  and  they  shall  respond  to  Jezi-eel,''  that  is, 
 to  '  what  God  shall  plant''  (Gesenius,  Thesaurus, 
 s.  V.  ;  Henderson,  ad  loc.  ;  cf  Jer.  xxxi.  27). 
 
 With  the  fall  of  Ahab's  line  Jezreel's  glory  fell. 
 We  hear  no  more  of  it  in  the  Bible.  In  the  book 
 of  Judith  it  is  mentioned  imder  the  form  Esdrelon 
 ('Eo-Sp-^Xw;',  iv.  5),  and  is  said  '  to  face  the  great 
 plain,'  and  to  lie  near  the  northern  approaches  to 
 Jerusalem.  Joseplius  gives  various  forms  of  the 
 name  ('lepaTjXa,  'lfd/3a,  eXc,  Antiq.  viii.  13.  6  and  8; 
 15.  6;  see  Reland,  pp.  602,  863).  The  city  is  not 
 again  referred  to  till  the  4th  century  of  our  era, 
 when  Eusebius  and  Jerome  speak  of  it  as  a  noble 
 village  (iTricr7]fj.ordT7)  kw/xt]),  situated  in  the  great 
 plain  between  Scythopolis  and  Legio  (0/iomast. 
 s.  v.  yezrael)  ;  the  Jerusalem  Itinerary  locates  it 
 ten  miles  from  Scythopolis  {Vet.  Rom.  Itineraria, 
 p.  586).  In  the  time  of  the  crusades  the  Franks 
 called  it  Geriii,  and  the  Arabs  Zerin  (Will.  Tyr.  in 
 Gesta  Dei,  xxii.  26  ;  Bohadin,  Vita  Salad.,  p.  53). 
 The  name  and  the  situation  of  the  modern  village  of 
 Zerin  leave  no  doubt  as  to  its  identity  with  Jezreel. 
 
 Zerin  occupies  a  noble  site  on  the  western  point 
 of  mount  Gilboa,  about  loo  feet  above  the  plain. 
 It  overlooks  the  whole  expanse  of  Esdraelon  to 
 Carmel  and  the  hills  of  Galilee ;  and  from  it  we 
 can  look  down  the  broad  and  fertile  vale  of  Jezreel 
 to  the  tell  of  Bethshan,  and  away  beyond  it  and 
 beyond  the  Jordan  to  the  hills  of  Gilead.  It  was 
 up  this  valley  Jehu  came  when  the  kings  of  Israel 
 and  Judah  were  in  Jezreel.  The  watchman  of 
 Joram  saw  Jehu's  escort  in  the  distance,  and  a 
 messenger  was  sent  to  demand  who  came.  When 
 Jehu  drew  nigh  Joram  himself  went  out  to  meet 
 him  in  his  chariot.  The  line  of  the  old  road  can 
 be  traced  ;  it  descends  the  steep  slope,  and  enters 
 the  valley  near  a  fountain.  There,  probably,  the 
 vineyard  of  Naboth  was  situated,  and  there  Joram 
 was  killed.  The  king  of  Judah  turned  to  flee, 
 taking  the  road  toward  Engannim,  but  he,  too, 
 was  mortally  wounded  (Engannim  ;  see  in  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  ix.  6.  4). 
 
 Zerin  is  now  a  wretched  village.  It  contained, 
 when  the  writer  visited  it,  about  a  dozen  miserable 
 houses  and  a  shattered  tovi^er.  With  the  excep- 
 tion of  a  stone  sarcophagus,  and  some  large  caves, 
 perhaps  intended  for  granaries,  hewn  in  the  rocky 
 slopes,  there  are  no  traces  of  antiquity.  Jezreel  is 
 utterly  ruined.  As  the  writer  ri  de  away  from  it 
 he  saw  a  number  of  ravenous-looking  dogs  prowl- 
 ing among  the  tombs  in  the  little  cemetery,  which 
 painfully  revived  the  story  of  Jezebel  and  Ahab. 
 
 The  Plain  of  Esdraelon  took  its  name  from 
 the  city,  the  Hebrew  Jezreel  being  gradually  cot  • 
 rupted  into  the  Greek  'E(r5y07)\wj'.  It  is  one  of  the 
 richest  and  most  beautiful  plains  in  Palestine.  It 
 is  triangular  in  form  ;  the  base  on  the  east  extend- 
 ing 15  miles,  from  Jenin  to  Tabor  ;  one  side,  formed 
 by  the  hills  of  Galilee,  is  12  miles  long,  and  the 
 other,  formed  by  the  mountains  of  Samaria,  18 
 miles.  The  apex  is  a  narrow  pass  opening  into  the 
 plain  of  Acre.  In  early  spring  this  vast  expanse 
 is  green  as  a  meadow — the  few  spots  cultivated 
 green  with  young  com,  and  the  rest  with  grass  and 
 weeds.  This  is  that  '  plain  of  Megiddo'  where 
 Barak  triumphed  (Judg.  v.),  and  where  Josiah  re- 
 ceived his  death  wound  (2  Chron.  xxxv.) ;  per- 
 haps, too,  it  may  have  been  before  the  mind  of  the 
 
JIPHTAH 
 
 699 
 
 JOAE 
 
 Apostle  John,  when,  in  symbolic  vision,  he  de- 
 scribed the  final  conflict  between  the  hosts  of  good 
 and  evil,  who  were  gathered  in  a  place  '  called  in 
 the  Hebrew  tongue  Ar-Mageddon,^  that  is,  '  the 
 city'  (ly,   i.q.  T-j;)   'of  Megiddo'   (Rev.  xvi.  i6) 
 
 [Armageddon].  The  river  Kishon — '  that  ancient 
 river,'  so  fatal  to  Sisera — drains  it,  flowing  off  to 
 the  Mediterranean  through  the  plain  of  Acre 
 [Kishon]. 
 
 From  the  base  of  this  triangle  three  branches 
 stretch  out  eastward,  separated  by  the  parallel 
 ridges  of  Gilboa  and  Moreh.  The  central  branch 
 is  the  '  valley  of  Jezreel,' already  mentioned,  which 
 descends  in  green  slopes  to  the  Jordan,  having 
 Jezreel  and  Shunem  on  either  side  at  the  western 
 end,  and  Bethshan  m  tlie  centre,  near  the  eastern. 
 
 The  soil  of  Esdraelon  is  of  surpassing  richness, 
 as  is  now  shown  by  the  luxuriant  grass  and  gigantic 
 thistles.  It  was  the  frontier  of  Zebulun  ;  and  well 
 might  Moses  say,  '  Rejoice,  O  Zebulun,  in  thy 
 goings  out''  (Deut.  xxxiii.  i8)  ;  but  it  became  the 
 special  portion  of  Issachar,  which  the  dying  patri- 
 raxh  foreseeing,  said,  '  And  he  saw  that  rest  was 
 good,  and  the  land  that  jt  luas  pleasant,''  etc.  (Gen. 
 xlix.  15).  Esdraelon  with  all  its  fertility  is  now 
 desolate.  If  we  except  the  eastern  branches,  it 
 does  not  contain  a  single  inhabited  village  or  house, 
 and  not  one-tenth  of  it  is  cultivated.  It  is  the  home 
 of  the  wandering  Arab  to-day,  as  it  was  the  home 
 of  the  fierce  '  children  of  the  East'  in  the  days  of 
 Gideon.  From  time  immemoi-ial  foreign  invaders 
 have  swept  over  Esdraelon  ;  the  ancient  Canaan- 
 ites  in  their  iron  chariots  (Judg.  iv.  3-7),  the  Midian- 
 ites  and  Amalekites  with  their  vast  herds  (Judg. 
 vi.  3,  4),  the  Philistines  (l  Sam.  xxix.  I  ;  xxxi.  10), 
 the  Syrians  (i  Kings  xx.  26,  etc.),  the  Greeks,  the 
 Romans,  the  Crusaders,  and  the  French  {Hand- 
 book/or S.  and  P.,  p.  352  ;  Stanley,  .S".  and F., 
 340,  seq.)  Who  can  tell  of  what  momentous  events 
 it  is  yet  destined  to  be  the  theatre  ?  Its  modern 
 name  is  Merj  ibn  Amer,  '  The  meadow  of  the  son 
 of  Amer.' 
 
 In  addition  to  the  authorities  already  cited,  the 
 student  may  see  descriptions  of  Esdraelon  in  the 
 works  of  Robinson,  Van  de  Velde,  Thomson,  and 
 Miss  Martineau. 
 
 2.  ('Iap£i7X  ;  Alex.  'lefSpaA  ;  "Jezrael),  a  town  in 
 the  south  of  Judah,  grouped  with  Maon,  Carmel, 
 etc.  (Josh.  XV.  56),  and  consequently  situated 
 among  the  bleak  hills  some  eight  or  ten  miles  south 
 of  Hebron  It  is  only  mentioned  in  one  other 
 place,  as  the  residence  of  Ahinoam,  one  of  David's 
 wives  (i  Sam.  xxv.  43  ;  xxvii.  3).  The  site  has 
 not  been  identified. — ^j.  L.  P. 
 
 JIPHTAH  (nnSV  'he  opens;'  omitted  in  the 
 
 Frt//(r««textoftheLXX.  ;  Alex. 'le^a-a;  Jcphtha), 
 one  of  the  towns  allotted  to  Judah  in  the  Shephelah 
 or  plain  of  Philistia.  It  must  have  been  situated 
 near  to  Eleutheropolis,  as  the  name  occurs  in  a 
 group  of  towns  which  encircled  that  city  (Josh. 
 XV.  43).     The  site  is  unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JIPHTHAH-EL  (^X-nriQ';,  'God  opens;  Yai- 
 
 iparfK  and  "I'&ati^X  ;  Alex.  'Ie0S-a^X  ;  ytphtahel  a.xid 
 Jephthael).  The  Vatican  text  of  the  LXX.,  in 
 Josh.  xix.  14,  joins  the  word  'J,  'valley,'  with  the 
 proper  name,  thus  making  Yo.i<pa.T]K  ;  and  in  ver. 
 27  the  translators  appear  to  have  read  "'J31  instead 
 of  "•J2'l  ('and  in  the  valley'),  and  made  it  a  proper 
 
 name,  'E/i:7a?.  The  valley  of  Jiphthah-el  formed 
 part  of  the  boundary  between  Asher  and  Zebulun. 
 It  has  been  identified  as  follows. 
 
 Jotopata  was  a  celebrated  fortress  of  Galilee 
 [Jotapata].  It  stood  upon  the  hill  now  called 
 Tell  Jefdt,  about  two  miles  north-west  of  Cana  of 
 Galilee.  The  name  was  written  by  the  rabbins, 
 NnnSIJ,  t^nSSIX  nanV,  etc.  (Reland,  Pal.,  pp. 
 816,  868).  Now  we  know  that  the  Hebrew  letters 
 Yod  and  Gimel  are  sometimes  interchanged  (Ge- 
 senius,  Thesaia-us,  pp.  252,  557);  and  by  the 
 Galileans  the  gutturals  (i<  and  PI)  were  often  con- 
 founded (Lightfoot,  Opera,  ii.  p.  232) ;  hence  we 
 can  see  how  simply  nnC  might  be  corrupted  into 
 NDDJ,  etc. ,  from  which  came  the  Greek  'IwrdTrara, 
 and  the  Arabic  yefit. 
 
 It  is  evident  also,  from  the  topographical  details, 
 that  the  valley  of  Jiphthah-el  could  not  have  been 
 far  distant  from  Jefat ;  since  the  border  of  Asher 
 passed  from  the  promontory  of  Carmel  to  Zebulun, 
 then  to  the  valley  of  Jiphthah-el,  and  so  to  Cabul, 
 which  is  about  four  miles  north-west  of  Jefat 
 (Robinson,  B.  P.,  iii.  107  ;  see  Van  de  Velde's 
 Map).  We  are  thus  warranted  in  concluding  that 
 there  was  both  a  local  and  etymological  connection 
 between  yiphthah-el  and  yotapata.  Near  Jefat 
 the  great  valley  of  Abilin  takes  its  rise,  and  runs 
 south-westward  into  the  plain  of  Acre  ;  and  there 
 is  every  reason  to  believe  that  it  is  the  jiphthah-el 
 of  Scripture,  and  that  it  thus  forms  a  most  im- 
 portant landmark  by  which  to  define  the  boundaries 
 of  Asher  and  Zebulun  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
 326;  Ritter,  Pal.  und  Syr.,  iii.  768). 
 
 Dr.  Thomson  mentions  a  '  veiy  ancient  ruin 
 called  yiftah,  or  Giftah,'  lying  at  the  junction  of 
 the  vale  of  Kefr  Kenna  with  the  plain  of  Turan, 
 about  five  miles  north-east  of  Nazareth.  Guided 
 by  this,  he  identifies  the  plain  of  Turan  with 
 Jiphthah-el  (The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  426). 
 This  theoiy  is  inadmissible,  for  two  reasons — i. 
 Turan  is  a  plain,  to  which  the  Hebrew  word  K''J 
 would  not  be  applicable ;  it  would  be  called  '\>'\yi 
 or  T\'^'\>'2,.  2.  The  territory  of  Asher  could  never 
 have  extended  so  far  eastward. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 JOAB  (nsV,    God-fathered;  Sept.  'Iwd^),   one 
 
 of  the  three  sons  of  Zeruiah,  the  sister  of  David, 
 and  '  captain  of  the  host '  (generalissimo)  of  the 
 army  during  nearly  the  whole  of  David's  reign. 
 
 He  first  appears  associated  with  his  two  brothers, 
 Abishai  and  Asahel,  in  the  command  of  David's 
 troops  against  Abner,  who  had  set  up  the  claims 
 of  a  son  of  Saul  in  opposition  to  those  of  David, 
 who  then  reigned  in  Hebron.  The  armies  having 
 met  at  the  pool  of  Gibeon,  a  general  action  was 
 brought  on,  in  which  Abner  was  worsted.  In  his 
 flight  he  had  the  misfortune  to  kill  Joab's  brother, 
 tlie  swift-footed  Asahel,  by  whom  he  was  pursued 
 (2  Sam.  ii.  13-32).  The  consequences  of  this 
 deed  have  been  explained  elsewhere  [Abner  ; 
 Asahel].  Joab  smothered  for  a  time  his  resent- 
 ment against  the  shedder  of  his  brother's  blood  ; 
 but  being  whetted  by  the  natural  rivahy  of  posi- 
 tion between  him  and  Abner,  he  afterwards  made 
 it  the  instrument  of  his  policy  by  treacherously, 
 in  the  act  of  friendly  communication,  slaying 
 Abner,  at  the  very  time  when  the  services  of  the 
 latter  to  David,  to  whom  he  had  then  turned, 
 had  rendered  him  a  most  dangerous  rival  to  him 
 in  power  and  influence  (2  Sam.  iii.  22-27)  That 
 Abnei  had  at  first  suspected  that  Joab  would  take 
 
TOAB 
 
 600 
 
 JOACHIM 
 
 the  DOiition  of  blood-avenger  [Blood-Revenge] 
 is  clear,  from  the  apprehension  which  he  expressed 
 (2  Sam.  ii.  22)  ;  but  that  he  thought  that  Joab 
 had,  under  all  the  circumstances,  abandoned  this 
 position,  is  shewn  by  the  unsuspecting  readiness 
 with  which  he  went  aside  with  him  (2  Sam.  iii. 
 26-27) ;  and  that  Joab  placed  his  murderous  act  on 
 the  footing  of  vengeance  for  his  brother's  blood,  is 
 plainly  stated  in  2  Sam.  iii.  30 ;  by  which  it  also 
 appears  that  the  other  brother,  Abishai,  shared  in 
 some  way  in  the  deed  and  its  responsibilities.  At 
 the  same  time,  as  Abner  was  perfectly  justified  in 
 slaying  Asahel  to  save  his  own  life,  it  is  veiy 
 doubtful  if  Joab  would  ever  have  asserted  his  right 
 of  blood-revenge,  if  Abner  had  not  appeared  likely 
 to  endanger  his  influence  with  David.  The  king, 
 much  as  he  reprobated  the  act,  knew  that  it  had  a 
 sort  of  excuse  in  the  old  customs  of  blood-revenge, 
 and  he  stood  habitually  too  much  in  awe  of  his 
 impetuous  and  able  nephew  to  bring  him  to 
 punishment,  or  even  to  displace  him  from  his 
 command.  '  I  am  this  day  weak,'  he  said, 
 'though  anointed  king,  and  these  men,  the  sons 
 of  Zeruiah,  be  too  hard  for  me'  (2  Sam.  iii.  39  ; 
 2  Kings  ii.  5,  33). 
 
 Desirous  probably  of  making  some  atonement 
 before  David  and  the  public  for  this  atrocity,  in  a 
 way  which  at  the  same  time  was  most  likely  to 
 prove  effectual — namely,  by  some  daring  exploit,  he 
 was  th^  first  to  mount  to  the  assault  at  the  storm- 
 ing of  the  fortress  on  Mount  Zion,  which  had  re- 
 mained so  long  in  the  hands  of  the  Jebusites.  By 
 this  service  he  acquired  the  chief  command  of  the 
 army  of  all  Israel,  of  which  David  was  by  this 
 time  king  (2  Sam.  v.  6-10 ;   i  Chron.  xi.  4-9). 
 
 It  is  not  necessary  to  trace  the  subsequent  acts 
 of  Joab,  seeing  that  they  are  in  fact  the  public  acts 
 of  the  king  he  served.  And  he  served  him  faith- 
 fully ;  for  although  he  knew  his  power  over  David, 
 and  often  treated  him  with  little  ceremony,  there 
 can  be  no  doubt  that  he  was  most  truly  devoted 
 to  his  interests,  and  sometimes  rendered  him  good 
 service  even  against  his  own  will,  as  in  the  affair  at 
 Mahanaim  (2  Sam.  xix.  5-8).  But  Joab  had  no 
 principles  apart  from  what  he  deemed  his  duty  to 
 the  king  and  the  people,  and  was  quite  as  ready 
 to  sei-ve  his  master's  vices  as  his  virtues,  so  long  as 
 they  did  not  interfere  with  his  own  interests,  or 
 tended  to  promote  them  by  enabling  him  to  make 
 himself  useful  to  the  king.  His  ready  apprehen- 
 sion of  the  king's  meaning  in  the  matter  of  Uriah, 
 and  the  facility  with  which  he  made  himself  the 
 instrument  of  the  murder,  and  of  the  hypocrisy  by 
 which  it  was  covered,  are  proofs  of  this,  and  form 
 as  deep  a  stain  upon  his  character  as  his  own  mur- 
 ders (2  Sam.  xi.  14-25).  As  Joab  was  on  good 
 terms  with  Absalom,  and  had  taken  pains  to  bring 
 about  a  reconciliation  between  him  and  his  father, 
 we  may  set  the  higher  value  upon  his  firm  adhe- 
 sion to  David  when  Absalom  revolted,  and  upon 
 his  stern  sense  of  duty  to  the  king — from  whom  he 
 expected  no  thanks — displayed  in  putting  an  end 
 to  the  war  by  the  slaughter  of  his  favourite  son, 
 when  all  others  shnmk  from  the  responsibility  of 
 doing  the  king  a  service  against  his  own  will  (2 
 Sam.  xviii.  I- 14).  In  like  manner,  when  David 
 unhappily  resolved  to  number  the  people  Joab  dis- 
 cerned the  evil  and  remonstrated  against  it ;  and 
 although  he  did  not  venture  to  disobey,  he  per- 
 formed the  duty  tardily  and  reluctantly  to  afford 
 the  king  an  opportunity  of  reconsidering  the  matter, 
 
 and  took  no  pains  to  conceal  how  odious  the 
 measure  was  to  him  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  I -4).  David 
 was  certainly  ungrateful  for  the  services  of  Joab, 
 when,  in  order  to  conciliate  the  powerful  party 
 which  had  supported  Absalom,  he  offered  the 
 command  of  the  host  to  Amasa,  who  had  com- 
 manded the  army  of  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xix.  13). 
 But  the  inefficiency  of  the  new  commander,  in  the 
 emergency  which  the  revolt  of  Bichri's  son  pro- 
 duced, arising  perhaps  from  the  reluctance  of  the 
 troops  to  follow  their  new  leader,  gave  Joab  an 
 opportunity  of  displaying  his  superior  resources ; 
 and  also  of  removing  his  rival  by  a  murder  very 
 similar  to,  and  in  some  respects  less  excusable  and 
 more  foul  than  that  of  Abner  [Amasa].  Besides, 
 Amasa  was  his  own  cousin,  being  the  son  of  his 
 mother's  sister  (2  Sam.  xx.  1-13). 
 
 When  David  lay  on  his  deathbed,  and  a  demon- 
 stration was  made  in  favour  of  the  succession  of 
 the  eldest  surviving  son,  Adonijah,  whose  interests 
 had  been  compromised  by  the  preference  of  the 
 young  Solomon,  Joab  joined  the  party  of  the 
 natural  heir.  It  would  be  unjust  to  regard  this  as 
 a  defection  from  David.  It  was  nothing  more  or 
 less  than  a  demonstration  in  favour  of  the  natural 
 heir,  which,  if  not  then  made,  could  not  be 
 made  at  all.  But  an  act  which  would  have  been 
 justifiable,  had  the  preference  of  Solomon  been  a 
 mere  caprice  of  the  old  king,  became  criminal  as 
 an  act  of  contumacy  to  the  Divine  King,  the  real 
 head  of  the  government,  who  had  called  the  house 
 of  David  to  the  throne,  and  had  the  sole  right  of 
 detennining  which  of  its  members  should  reign. 
 When  the  prompt  measures  taken  under  the  direc- 
 tion of  the  king  rendered  this  demonstration  abor- 
 tive (i  Kings  i.  7),  Joab  withdrew  into  private  life 
 till  some  time  after  the  death  of  David,  when  the 
 fate  of  Adonijah,  and  of  Abiathar — whose  life  was 
 only  spared  in  consequence  of  his  sacerdotal  cha- 
 racter— warned  Joab  that  he  had  little  mercy  to 
 expect  from  the  new  king.  He  fled  for  refuge  to 
 the  altar ;  but  when  Solomon  heard  this,  he  sent 
 Benaiah  to  put  him  to  death  ;  and,  as  he  refused 
 to  come  forth,  gave  orders  that  he  should  be  slain 
 even  at  the  altar.  Thus  died  one  of  the  most  ac- 
 complished warriors  and  unscrupulous  men  that 
 Israel  ever  produced.  His  corpse  was  removed  to 
 his  domain  in  the  wilderness  of  Judah,  and  buried 
 there,  B.C.  1015  (l  Kings  ii.  5,  28-34). — ^J-  ^^ 
 
 Two  others  of  the  name  of  Joab  are  mentioned 
 in  the  O.  T. — viz.,  the  son  of  Seraiah  (i  Chron. 
 iv.  14),  who  was  chief  of  the  valley  of  Charashim 
 {artificers  or  craftsmen'),  so  called,  according  to  a 
 tradition  preserved  by  Jerome  {Qiiast.  in  Pa7-al.), 
 from  its  being  the  place  whence  the  builders  of  the 
 temple  were  brought  ;  and  the  Joab  who  is  named 
 along  with  Joshua  as  the  ancestor  of  a  family  re- 
 presented by  the  children  of  Pahath-Moab  (Ezra 
 ii.  6;  Neh.  vii.  11).  It  is  doubtful  whether  this 
 Joab  is  the  same  who  is  mentioned  Ezra  viii.  9 
 and  I  Esd.  viii.  35.  If  not,  another  Joab  must  be 
 added  to  the  list.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOACHIM  (LXX.  'IwaKelfi;  Vulg.  JoaUm). 
 According  to  a  Jewish  tradition  preserved  by 
 Clement  of  Alexandria,  this  was  the  name  given  to 
 Moses  by  his  parents  at  his  circumcision  (Strom. 
 lib.  i.  cap.  xxiii.)  In  the  A.  V.  it  occurs  in  this 
 form  twice  only.  i.  =Jehoiakim  (Bar.  i.  3).  2. 
 Son  of  Chelcias,  and  high-priest  in  the  reign  oi 
 Zedekiah  (Bar.  L  7).— S.  N. 
 
JOACIM 
 
 601 
 
 JOASH 
 
 ■  JOACIM  (LXX.  'Iwa/ci».  I.  (Vulg.  Jcacim) 
 i^Jehoiakim  (i  Esd.  i.  37,  38,  39).  2.  (Vulg. 
 Joachiit)  =  Jehoiachin  (l  Esd.  i.  43).  3.  (Vulg. 
 Joacim),  son  of  Zerubabel  (i  Esd.  v.  5).  This 
 passage,  however,  is  apparently  corrupt.  The 
 leaders  of  the  first  caravan  of  the  Jews  who  returned 
 from  Babylon  were,  as  is  well  known,  Zerubabel 
 and  the  high-priest  Jeshua,  but  here  Jeshua  and 
 Joacim  only  are  mentioned.  Moreover,  no  name 
 at  all  resembling  this  occurs  amongst  the  sons  of 
 Zerubabel  (l  Chron.  iii.  19).  Hence  some  have 
 suggested  that  the  words  '  Joacim  the  son  of,'  are 
 an  interpolation.  Others  identify  this  Joacim  with 
 Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua  (Neh.  xii.  10,  12),  and 
 propose  to  correct  the  text  into  'Joacim  his  son, 
 and.'  4.  (Vulg.  Eliakim,  ymcini.)  The  high- 
 priest  who  is  introduced  into  the  story  of  Judith 
 ( Ju'd.  iv.  6,  8,  14  ;  xv.  8),  but  whether  he  is  to  be 
 regarded  as  a  historical  character,  or  as  an  in- 
 vention of  the  writer  of  the  tale,  we  have  no 
 means  of  determining.  5-  (Vulg.  yoa/ciin.)  A 
 wealthy  Jew  of  Babylon,  the  husband  of  Susannah 
 (Sus.  i.  4,  6,  28,  29,  63).— S.  N. 
 
 JOAH  (nx'"l''>  y<:h(niah  is  a  brother,  i.e.,  a  con- 
 federate of  Jehovah),  a  name  of  frequent  occurrence 
 in  the  later  times  of  the  monarchy  among  the 
 Levites. 
 
 1.  2  Kings  xviii.  18,  26,  37,  'Iwds  ;  Alex.  'Iwo-a- 
 ipar  ;  ver.  37,  'Iwds  ;  Is.  xxxvi.  3,  II,  22,  'Iwdx  ; 
 Joseph.  'Iciaxos  ;  yoahe.  '  Joah,  the  son  of  Asaph 
 the  recorder,'  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  three 
 officers  of  state  sent  out  by  Hezekiah  to  receive  the 
 message  of  Sennacherib  by  his  general  Rabshakeh. 
 He  was  historiographer,  or  keeper  of  the  records 
 (T'3TKn ;    LXX. ,    in    Kings,    6   avafj-ifivriaKdyv,   in 
 
 Isaiah,  6  viroixvTjiiaToypdcpos ;  Vulg.  a  comnientariis, 
 cf  2  Sam.  viii.  16  ;  I  Kings  iv.  3),  to  Hezekiah, 
 whose  business  it  was  to  keep  the  Q^D'H  "'121  (i 
 
 Chron.  xxvii.  24),  or  '  chronicles,'  in  which  were 
 recorded  the  chief  events  of  each  year  of  the  reign 
 (cf  Esth.  vi.  l). 
 
 2.  'IwdjS  ;  Alex.  'Iwctx  ;  yoah  ;  appears  in  the 
 genealogy  of  the  Gershonite  branch  of  the  house 
 of  Levi  (i  Chron.  vi.  21).  If  we  compare  the 
 same  genealogy  as  given  vers.  42,  43,  Ethan  ap- 
 pears to  be  substituted  for  him  (see  Vatablus,  hi 
 loc),  but  it  is  probable  that  neither  catalogue  is 
 complete,  and  that  each  contains  some  names  that 
 do  not  appear  in  the  other. 
 
 3.  'Icod^  ;  yoaha ;  the  third  of  the  eight  sons 
 given  to  Obededom  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  4),  in  whose 
 house  the  ark  had  temporarily  halted  after  the 
 death  of  Uzzah,  as  an  evidence  of  the  Divine  favour, 
 'for  God  blessed  him,'  ver.  5  (cf.  2  Sam.  vi.  11), 
 '  all  mighty  men  of  valour,'  '  able  men  for  strength 
 in  the  service,'  vers.  6,  8.  They  belonged  to  the 
 Korhite  band  of  the  Levites,  and  to  them  and  the 
 rest  of  this  family,  sixty-two  in  all,  was  assigned 
 the  keeping  of  the  south  gate  of  the  Temple,  four 
 a  day,  and  '  the  house  of  Asuppim,'  ver.  15,  which, 
 though  the  Vulgate  translate  it  '  dovius  seniornm 
 concilium,^  was  probably  a  storehouse  in  the  outer 
 precincts  of  the  Temple. 
 
 4.  ''lioha.o.h ;  Alex.  'Iwd ;  yoah.  One  of  the 
 Gershonite  branch  of  the  Levites,  the  son  of  Zim- 
 mah,  and  father  of  Eden  (2  Chron.  xxix.  12).  The 
 LXX.,  however,  read  'lojSadS  6  rov  Ze/x^d^  /cat 
 'IwaSd^,  o^TOL  viol  'Iwaxd,  the  latter  clause  in  the 
 Alex,  standing  thus,  icai  'IcoSdv  6  rov  'Iwaxd.    Joah 
 
 and  Zimmah,  it  may  be  remarked,  occur  as  fathei 
 and  son  in  the  same  family  (i  Chron.  vi.  20,  21), 
 No.  2.  Bertheau,  Chronik,  p.  388,  is  of  opinion  that 
 '  Joah  ben  Zimmah'  stands  for  the  particular  Levite 
 family,  indicating  its  head  for  the  fime  being.  He 
 is  mentioned  as  taking  a  leading  part  in  the  reli- 
 gious reform  set  on  foot  by  Hezekiah,  by  purifying 
 the  Temple  from  the  pollutions  of  Ahaz. 
 
 5.  'loudx  ;  Alex.  'Iwds  ;  Joseph.  'IwdrTjs  ;  yoha. 
 'Joah  the  son  of  Joahaz,  the  recorder,'  i.e.,  keeper 
 of  the  records  to  King  Josiah  (see  i),  joined  with 
 Shaphan  the  scribe  (the  recurrence  of  the  name 
 probably  indicating  the  continuance  of  the  office  in 
 the  same  family)  and  Maaseiah  the  governor  of 
 Jerusalem  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  8).  The  three  were 
 appointed  by  Josiah  as  commissioners  to  superin- 
 tend the  repairs  of  the  Temple. — E.  V. 
 
 JOANNA  occurs  in  the  A.  V.  both  as  the  name 
 of  a  man  and  as  the  name  of  a  woman,  i.  ('Iwai'di' 
 T.  R.  'Iwa^'j'Ss.)  The  son  of  Rhesa,  and  one  of  the 
 ancestors  of  our  Lord.  Lord  A.  C.  Hervey  would 
 identify  him  with  Hananiah,  the  son  of  Zerub- 
 babel  (i  Chron.  iii.  19).  As  the  two  names  iT'Jjn 
 and  pn"'  have  the  same  meaning,  and  are  com- 
 pounded of  substantially  the  same  elements,  it  is 
 possible  that  these  may  have  been  transposed  in 
 reference  to  the  same  person.  But  what  is  gained 
 by  this  ?  There  is  still  the  difficulty  in  Luke's 
 genealogy  from  Rhesa's  appearing  as  the  father  of 
 Joanna,  and  Judah's  appearing  as  his  son,  neither  of 
 whom  is  named  in  the  list  of  Zerubbabel's  descend- 
 ants in  Chronicles.  The  former  of  these  difficulties 
 his  Lordship  gets  over  by  supposing  that  Rhesa  is 
 not  a  proper  name  at  all,  but  the  Chaldee  i^K'n, 
 
 a  title  of  the  princes  of  the  captivity  in  the  2d 
 or  3d  century  after  Christ,  which  some  Chris- 
 tian Jew,  deeming  it  appropriate  to  Zerubbabel, 
 inserted  in  the  form  'Yr\(jb,  over  against  his  name 
 in  Luke's  list,  whence  it  crept  into  the  text.  This 
 is  undoubtedly  ingenious,  but  a  reading  sustained 
 by  all  the  authorities  cannot  be  invalidated  on  con- 
 jectural grounds  such  as  this.  The  other  difficulty 
 is  disposed  of  more  violently.  The  Judah  of  Luke 
 is  identified  with  the  Hodaiah  of  i  Chron.  iii.  24  ; 
 Hodaiah  is  made  the  son  of  Shemaiah  (ver.  22) ; 
 and  Shemaiah  is  identified  with  Shimei  of  ver.  19. 
 For  such  extensive  amputation  of  the  text  no 
 authority  is  pleaded  ;  it  is  simply  proposed  as  get- 
 ting rid  of  a  difficulty.  But  after  all,  this  difficulty 
 is  not  thus  got  rid  of ;  it  is  only  shifted  ;  for  this 
 scheme  fails  to  connect  Judah  with  Zerubbabel, 
 who  was  the  mother,  and  not  the  father,  of  Shimei 
 (ver.  19).  Is  it  not  better  to  acknowledge  at  once 
 that  we  cannot  reconcile  the  genealogy  of  Luke  with 
 that  in  Chronicles  than  attempt  to  do  it  by  such  vio- 
 lent expedients  ?  [Genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ.] 
 2.  ('Iwdwa. )  The  wife  of  Chuza,  Herod's 
 steward  (Luke  viii.  3).  She  was  one  of  the  pious 
 women  who  contributed  to  the  support  of  Christ 
 during  his  personal  ministry  ;  and  of  those  who 
 went  to  the  sepulchre  to  embalm  his  body,  but 
 found  him  risen  from  the  dead  (Luke  xxiv.  10). 
 That  it  was  in  consequence  of  her  relation  to  Chuza 
 that  Herod  '  said  to  his  sovants.  This  is  John  the 
 Baptist'  (Matt.  xiv.  2),  as  Mr.  Blunt,  in  his  Coin- 
 cidences {y^.  270,  ed.  1847),  remarks,  is  a  supposition 
 on  which  nothing  can  be  built. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOASH  (E?KV,  God-gi-jen;  Sept.  'Iwds),  a  con- 
 traction of  Jehoash  (t^Xin'').     I.   Son  of  Aha- 
 
JO  ASH 
 
 802 
 
 JOASH 
 
 ziah  and  eighth  king  of  Judah,  who  began  to  reign 
 in  B.C.  878,  at  the  age  of  seven,  and  reigned  forty 
 years. 
 
 Joash,  when  an  infant,  was  secretly  saved  by  his 
 aunt  Jehoshebah,  who  was  married  to  the  high- 
 priest  Jehoiada,  from  the  general  massacre  of  the 
 family  by  Athaliah,  who  had  usurped  the  throne 
 [Athaliah  ;  Jehoiada].  By  the  high-priest  and 
 his  wife  the  child  was  privily  brought  up  in  tlie 
 chambers  connected  with  the  Temple  till  he  had 
 attained  his  eighth  year,  when  Jehoiada  deemed 
 that  the  state  of  affairs  required  him  to  produce 
 the  youthful  heir  of  the  throne  to  the  people,  and 
 claim  for  him  the  crown  which  his  grandmother 
 had  so  unrighteously  usurped.  Finding  the  influ- 
 ential persons  whom  he  consulted  favourable  to 
 the  design,  everything  was  secretly  but  admirably 
 arranged  for  producing  Joash,  and  investing  him 
 with  the  regalia,  in  such  a  manner  that  Athaliah 
 could  have  no  suspicion  of  the  event  till  it  actually 
 occurred.  On  the  day  appointed,  the  sole  surviv- 
 ing scion  of  David's  illustrious  house  appeared  in 
 the  place  of  the  kings,  by  a  particular  pillar  in  the 
 temple-court,  and  was  crowned  and  anointed  with 
 the  usual  ceremonies.  The  high-wrought  enthu- 
 siasm of  the  spectators  then  found  vent  in  clapping 
 of  hands  and  exulting  shouts  of  '  Long  live  the 
 king  !'  The  joyful  uproar  was  heard  even  in  the 
 palace,  and  brought  Athaliah  to  the  Temple,  from 
 which,  at  a  word  from  Jehoiada,  she  was  led  to 
 her  death. 
 
 Joash  behaved  well  during  his  non-age,  and  so 
 long  after  as  he  remained  under  the  influence  of 
 the  high-priest.  But  when  he  died  the  king  seems 
 to  have  felt  himself  relieved  from  a  yoke  ;  and  to 
 manifest  his  freedom,  began  to  take  the  contrary 
 course  to  that  which  he  had  followed  while  under 
 pupilage.  Gradually  the  persons  who  had  pos- 
 sessed influence  formerly,  when  the  house  of  David 
 was  contaminated  by  its  alliance  with  the  house  of 
 Ahab,  insinuated  themselves  into  his  councils,  and 
 ere  long  the  worship  of  Jehovah  and  the  observ- 
 ances of  the  law  were  neglected,  and  the  land  A\'as 
 defiled  with  idolatries  and  idolatrous  usages.  The 
 ]/rophets  then  uttered  their  warnings,  but  were  not 
 heard ;  and  the  infatuated  king  had  the  atrocious 
 ingratitude  to  put  to  death  Zechariah,  the  son  and 
 successor  of  his  benefactor  Jehoiada.  For  these 
 deeds  Joash  was  made  an  example  of  the  divine 
 judgments.  He  saw  his  realm  devastated  by  the 
 Syrians  under  Haz.ael  ;  his  armies  were  cut  in 
 pieces  by  an  enemy  of  inferior  numbers,  and  he 
 w&  even  besieged  in  Jerusalem,  and  only  preserved 
 his  capital  and  his  crown  by  giving  up  the  trea- 
 sures of  the  Temple.  Besides  this,  a  painful 
 malady  embittered  all  his  latter  days,  and  at  length 
 he  became  so  odious  that  his  own  sei-vants  con- 
 spired against  him,  and  slew  him  on  his  bed. 
 They  are  said  to  have  done  this  to  avenge  the 
 blood  of  Zechariah,  who  at  his  death  had  cried, 
 '  The  Lord  look  upon  it  and  require  it ;'  and  it  is 
 hence  proloable  that  public  opinion  ascribed  all 
 the  calamities  of  his  life  and  reign  to  that  infamous 
 deed.  Joash  was  buried  in  the  city  of  David  ;  but 
 a  place  in  the  sepulchre  of  the  kings  was  denied 
 to  his  remains  (2  Kings  xi.  ;  xii.  ;  2  Chron.  xxiv.) 
 
 2.  Son  and  successor  of  Jehoahaz  on  the  throne 
 of  Israel,  of  which  he  was  the  twelfth  king.  He 
 began  to  reign  in  B.C.  840,  and  reigned  sixteen 
 incomplete  years.  He  followed  the  example  of 
 his  predecessors  m  the  policy  of  keeping  up  the 
 
 worship  of  the  golden  calves ;  but,  apart  from 
 this,  he  bears  a  fair  character,  and  had  intervals, 
 at  least,  of  sincere  piety  and  true  devotion  to 
 the  God  of  his  fathers.  Indeed,  custom  and  long 
 habit  had  so  established  the  views  of  political  expe- 
 diency on  which  the  schismatical  establishments  at 
 Dan  and  Bethel  were  founded,  that  at  length  the 
 reprehension  which  regularly  recurs  in  the  record 
 of  each  king's  reign,  seems  rather  to  apply  to  it  as 
 a  mark  of  the  continuance  of  a  public  crime  than 
 as  indicative  of  the  character  or  disposition  of  the 
 reigning  prince,  which  is  to  be  sought  in  the  more 
 detailed  accounts  of  his  own  conduct.  These 
 accounts  are  favourable  with  respect  to  Joash.  He 
 held  the  prophet  Elisha  in  high  honour,  looking 
 up  to  him  as  a  father.  When  he  heard  of  his  last 
 illness  he  repaired  to  the  bed-side  of  the  dying 
 prophet,  and  was  favoured  with  promises  of  vic- 
 tories over  the  Syrians,  by  whom  his  dominions 
 were  then  harassed.  These  promises  were  accom- 
 plished after  the  prophet's  death.  In  three  signal 
 and  successive  victories  Joash  overcame  the  Syrians, 
 and  retook  from  them  the  towns  which  Hazael  had 
 rent  from  Israel. 
 
 These  advantages  rendered  the  kingdom  of 
 Israel  more  potent  than  that  of  Judah.  He,  how- 
 ever, sought  no  quarrel  with  that  kingdom  ;  but 
 when  he  received  a  defiance  from  Amaziah,  king 
 of  Judah,  he  answered  with  becoming  spirit  in 
 a  parable,  which  by  its  images  calls  to  mind  that 
 of  Jotham  [Paiiables]  :  the  cool  disdain  of  the 
 answer  must  have  been,  and  in  fact  was,  exceed- 
 ingly galling  to  Amaziah.  '  The  thistle  that  was 
 in  Lebanon  sent  to  the  cedar  that  was  in  Lebanon, 
 saying,  Give  thy  daughter  to  my  son  to  wife  ;  and 
 there  came  by  a  wild  beast  that  was  in  Lebanon, 
 and  trod  down  the  thistle.'  This  was  admirable  ; 
 nor  was  the  application  less  so  :  '  Thou  hast, 
 indeed,  smitten  Edom,  and  thine  heart  hath  lifted 
 thee  up  :  glory  of  this,  and  tarry  at  home ;  for 
 why  shouldest  thou  meddle  to  thy  hurt,  that  thou 
 shouldest  fall,  even  thou  and  Judah  with  thee  ?'  In 
 the  war,  or  rather  action,  which  followed,  Joash 
 was  victorious.  Having  defeated  Amaziah  at  Beth- 
 shemesh,  in  Judah,  he  advanced  to  Jerusalem, 
 broke  down  the  wall  to  the  extent  of  400  cubits, 
 and  carried  away  the  treasures  both  of  the  Temple 
 and  the  palace,  together  with  hostages  for  the 
 future  good  behaviour  of  the  crest-fallen  Amaziah. 
 Joash  himself  did  not  long  survive  this  victory  ;  he 
 died  in  peace,  and  was  buried  in  Samaria  (2  Kings 
 xiii.  9-25;  xiv.  1-17). — ^J.  K. 
 
 Five  others  of  the  name  of  Joash  are  mentioned 
 in  the  O.  T.,  viz. — I.  The  father  of  Gideon,  a  man 
 of  wealth  among  the  Abiezrites,  v/ho,  though  so  far 
 led  astray  by  the  prevailing  tendency  as  to  have  an 
 altar  dedicated  to  Baal  on  his  grounds,  was  the 
 first  to  applaud  the  act  of  his  son  in  destroying  that 
 altar  (Judg.  vi.  II,  29-31)  ;  2.  A  person  described 
 as  '  the  king's  son,'  to  whom  the  superintendence 
 of  the  royal  prison  was  entrusted  (2  Chron.  xviii. 
 25)  ;  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  he  was  a 
 brother  of  Ahab,  as  any  prince  of  the  blood-royal 
 might  be  called  '  the  king's  son  ;'  3.  A  descendant 
 of  Judah,  and  apparently  the  son  of  Shelah  (i 
 Chron.  iv.  22) ;  4.  A  Benjamite  who  resorted  to 
 David  at  Ziklag,  and  helped  him  against  the  rovers 
 to  whose  attacks  he  was  exposed  (l  Chron.  xii.  3, 
 21)  ;  5.  An  officer  of  David,  who  had  charge  of 
 the  cellars  of  oil  (l  Chron.  xxvii.  2S).  The  A.  V. 
 presents  another  Joash,  the  son  of  Becher  (i  Chron. 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 605 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 vii.  8)  ;  but  in  the  Heb.  this  name  is  different  from 
 the  preceding,  being  ^U)'^,  not  \^'i{V-     The  LXX. 
 
 also  makes  both  the  same,  'Iwds. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF.  We  shall  consider, 
 first,  the  contents  of  this  book  ;  secondly,  its  object ; 
 thirdly,  its  composition  ;  and,  lastly,  the  country, 
 descent,  and  age  of  its  author. 
 
 I.  Contents. — In  the  land  of  Uz,  belonging  to 
 the  northern  part  of  Arabia  Deserta,  lived  an  up- 
 right, pious  man,  called  Job.  For  his  sincere  and 
 perfect  devotedness,  God  had  amply  blessed  him 
 with  worldly  property  and  children  ;  but  on  Satan 
 obtaining  leave  fo  tempt  him,  he  suddenly  lost  the 
 fortune  of  his  life.  Ultimately  he  is  smitten  with 
 a  severe  and  painful  disease  ;  but  though  his  wife 
 moves  him  to  forsake  God,  he  still  continues  true 
 and  stanch  to  the  Lord.  Three  friends,  Eliphaz, 
 Bildad,  and  Zophar,  hear  of  his  calamities,  and 
 come  to  console  him.  His  distressed  state  excites 
 their  heartfelt  compassion  ;  but  the  view  which 
 they  take  of  its  origin  prevents  them  from  at  once 
 assisting  him,  and  they  remain  silent,  though  they 
 are  sensible  that  by  so  doing  they  further  wound 
 his  feelings.  Seven  days  thus  pass,  until  Job,  sus- 
 pecting the  cause  of  their  conduct,  becomes  dis- 
 composed and  breaks  silence.  His  first  observations 
 are  based  on  the  assertion — not,  indeed,  broadly 
 expressed — that  God  acts  harshly  and  arbitrarily  in 
 inflicting  calamity  on  men.  This  causes  a  discus- 
 sion between  him  and  his  friends,  which  is  divided 
 into  three  main  parts,  each  with  subdivisions,  and 
 embraces  the  speeches  of  the  three  friends  of  Job, 
 and  his  answers  :  the  last  part,  however,  consists 
 of  only  two  subdivisions,  the  third  friend,  Zopliar, 
 having  nothing  to  rejoin.  By  this  silence  the 
 author  of  the  book  generally  designates  the  defeat 
 of  Job's  friends,  who  are  defending  a  common 
 cause.  Taking  a  general  view  of  the  argument 
 which  they  urge  against  him,  they  may  be  con- 
 sidered as  asserting  the  following  positions  : — 
 
 1.  No  man  being  free  from  sin,  we  need  not 
 wonder  that  we  are  liable  to  calamities,  for  which 
 we  must  account  by  a  reference,  not  to  God,  but 
 to  ourselves.  From  the  miseiy  of  the  distressed, 
 others  are  enabled  to  infer  their  guilt ;  and  they 
 must  take  this  view  in  order  to  vindicate  divine 
 justice. 
 
 2.  The  distress  of  a  man  proves  not  only  that 
 he  has  sinned,  but  shews  also  the  degree  and  mea- 
 sure of  his  sin  ;  and  thus,  from  the  extent  of  cala- 
 mity sustained,  may  be  inferred  the  extent  of  sins 
 committed  ;  and  from  this  the  measure  of  impend- 
 ing misfortune. 
 
 3.  A  distressed  man  may  recover  his  former 
 happiness,  and  even  attain  to  greater  fortune  than 
 he  ever  enjoyed  before,  if  he  takes  a  warning  from 
 his  afflictions,  repents  of  his  sins,  reforms  his  life, 
 and  raises  himself  to  a  higher  degree  of  moral  rec- 
 titude. Impatience  and  irreverent  expostulation 
 with  God  serve  but  to  prolong  and  increase  punish- 
 ment ;  for,  by  accusing  God  of  injustice,  a  fresh 
 sin  is  added  to  former  transgressions. 
 
 4.  Though  the  wicked  man  is  capable  of  pro- 
 sperity, still  it  is  never  lasting.  The  most  awful 
 retribution  soon  overtakes  him  ;  and  his  transient 
 felicity  must  itself  be  considered  as  punishment, 
 since  it  renders  him  heedless,  and  makes  him  feel 
 misfortune  more  keenly. 
 
 In  opposition  to  *"bem  Job  maintains  : — 
 
 I.  The  most  uprignt  man  mav  be  highly  unfor- 
 
 tunate— more  so  than  the  inevitable  faults  and 
 shortcomings  of  human  nature  would  seem  to 
 imply.  There  is  a  savage  cruelty,  deserving  the 
 severities  of  the  divine  resentment,  in  inferring  the 
 guilt  of  a  man  from  his  distresses.  In  distributing 
 good  and  evil,  God  regaids  neither  merit  nor  guilt, 
 but  acts  according  to  liis  sovereign  pleasure.  His 
 omnipotence  is  apparent  in  every  part  of  the  crea- 
 tion ;  but  his  justice  cannot  be  seen  in  the  govern- 
 ment of  the  world  ;  the  afflictions  of  the  righteous, 
 as  well  as  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked,  are  evidence 
 against  it.  There  are  innumerable  cases,  and  Job 
 considers  his  own  to  be  one  of  them,  in  which  a 
 sufferer  has  a  right  to  justify  himself  before  God, 
 and  to  repine  at  his  decrees.  Of  this  supposed 
 right  Job  freely  avails  himself,  and  maintains  it 
 against  his  friends. 
 
 2.  In  a  state  of  composure  and  calmer  reflection, 
 Job  retracts,  chiefly  in  his  concluding  speech,  all 
 his  former  rather  extravagant  assertions,  and  says 
 that,  although  God  generally  afflicts  the  wicked 
 and  blesses  the  righteous,  still  there  are  exceptions 
 to  this  rule,  single  cases  in  which  the  pious  undergo 
 severe  trials  ;  the  inference,  therefore,  of  a  man's 
 guilt  from  his  misfortunes  is  by  no  means  warranted. 
 For  the  exceptions  established  by  experience  prove 
 that  God  does  not  always  distribute  prosperity  and 
 adversity  after  this  rule  ;  but  that  he  sometimes 
 acts  on  a  different  principle,  or  as  an  absolute  lord, 
 according  to  his  mere  will  and  pleasure. 
 
 3.  Humbly  to  adore  God  is  our  duty,  even  when 
 we  are  subject  to  calamities  not  at  all  deserved ; 
 but  we  should  abstain  from  harshly  judging  of  those 
 who,  when  distressed,  send  forth  complaints  against 
 God. 
 
 Both  parties  not  only  explain  their  principles 
 generally,  but  apply  them  to  the  case  which  had 
 caused  the  discussion.  At  first  the  friends  of  Job 
 only  hint,  but  in  the  course  of  the  discussion  they 
 broadly  assert,  that  his  very  great  afflictions  must 
 have  been  caused  by  equally  great  sins  ;  and  they 
 tax  him  with  crimes  of  which  they  suspect  him  to 
 have  been  guilty.  They  also  admonish  him  to  con- 
 fess and  repent  of  the  guilt  of  which,  by  the  divine 
 punishments  inflicted  on  him,  he  stood  already  con- 
 victed. If  he  should  follow  this  counsel,  they  pro- 
 mise him  a  return  of  prosperity  ;  but  if  he  proved 
 refractory,  they  threaten  him  with  divine  punish- 
 ments even  more  severe.  Job,  on  the  contrary, 
 represents  himself,  venial  frailties  excepted,  as  al- 
 together upright  and  innocent,  thinks  himself  un- 
 justly dealt  with  by  God,  and  reproaches  his  friends 
 with  heaping  on  him  unf^ounded  criminations,  with 
 a  view  of  ingratiating  themselves  with  the  Almighty, 
 who,  however,  would  visit  with  condign  punish- 
 ment such  busy,  meddling,  officious  vindicators  of 
 the  divine  government. 
 
 The  interest  of  the  narrative  is  kept  up  with  con- 
 siderable skill,  by  progressively  rising  and  highly 
 passionate  language.  At  first.  Job's  friends  charge 
 him,  and  he  defends  himself,  in  mild  terms  ;  but 
 gradually  they  are  all  betrayed  into  warmth  of  tem- 
 per, which  goes  on  increasing  until  the  friends  have 
 nothing  more  to  object,  and  Job  remains  in  pos- 
 session of  the  field.  The  discussion  then  seems  to 
 be  at  an  end,  when  a  fresh  disputant,  Elihu,  ap- 
 pears. Trusting  in  his  just  cause.  Job  had  proudly 
 opposed  God,  with  whom  he  expostulated,  and 
 whom  he  charged  with  injustice,  when  the  sense  of 
 his  calamities  should  have  led  him  to  acknowledge 
 the  sinfulness  of  human  nature,  and  humbly  to  sub- 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 604 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 mit  to  the  divine  dispensations.  Making  every 
 allowance  for  his  painful  situation,  and  putting  the 
 mildest  construction  on  his  expressions,  he  is  still 
 substantially  wrong,  and  could  not  therefore  be 
 suffered  to  remain  the  vanquisher  in  this  high  argu- 
 ment. He  had  silenced  his  friends,  but  the  gene- 
 ral issue  remained  to  be  settled.  Elihu  had  waited 
 till  Job  and  his  friends  had  spoken,  because  they 
 were  older  than  he  ;  but  when  he  saw  that  the 
 three  visitors  ceased  to  answer,  he  offers  himself  to 
 reason  with  Job,  and  shews  that  God  is  just  in  his 
 ways.      He  does  this  : 
 
 1.  From  the  nature  of  infiictmis. — He  begins  by 
 urging  that  Job  was  very  wrong  in  boasting  of  his 
 integrity,  and  making  it  appear  that  rewards  were 
 due  to  iiim  from  God.  How  righteous  soever  he 
 was,  he  still  had  no  claim  to  reward  ;  on  the  con- 
 trary, all  men  are  sinners  in  God's  eyes  ;  and 
 nobody  can  complain  that  he  suffers  unjustly,  for 
 the  very  greatest  sufferings  equal  not  his  immense 
 guilt.  Then  Elihu  explains  a  leading  point  on 
 which  he  differs  from  the  friends  of  Job  :  he  asserts 
 that  from  greater  sufferings  inflicted  on  a  person  it 
 was  not  to  be  inferred  that  he  had  sinned  more 
 than  others  afflicted  with  a  less  amount  of  calamity. 
 Calamities  were,  indeed,  under  all  circumstances, 
 punishments  for  sins  committed,  but  at  the  same 
 time  they  were  correctives  also  ;  and  therefore 
 they  might  be  inflicted  on  the  comparatively  most 
 righteous  in  preference  to  others.  For  he  who  was 
 most  loved  by  God,  was  also  most  in  danger  of 
 forgetting  the  sinfulness  inherent  in  all  men,  and, 
 consequently,  also  in  himself :  the  rather  because 
 sin  would  in  him  less  strongly  manifest  itself  If 
 the  object  of  afflictions  was  attained,  and  the  dis- 
 tressed acknowledged  his  sinfulness,  he  would 
 humble  himself  before  God,  who  would  bless  him 
 with  greater  happiness  than  he  ever  before  enjoyed. 
 But  he  who  took  not  this  view,  and  did  not  amend 
 his  ways,  would  be  ruined,  and  the  blame  would 
 rest  wholly  with  himself.  Consequently,  if  Job 
 made  the  best  of  his  misfortune,  God  would  render 
 him  most  happy  ;  but  if  he  continued  refractory, 
 punishment  would  follow  his  offences.  According 
 to  this  view,  the  truly  righteous  cannot  be  always 
 miserable ;  and  their  calamities,  which  God,  not 
 only  from  his  justice,  as  the  friends  of  Job  stated, 
 but  also  from  his  loz'e,  inflicts  temporarily  on  them, 
 are  only  the  means  employed  to  raise  them  to 
 higher  moral  rectitude  and  worldly  happiness. 
 The  end  shews  the  distinction  between  the  perverse 
 sinner,  and  the  righteous  man  subject  to  sinfulness. 
 
 2.  From  a  clear  conception  of  the  tiatiire  of  God. — 
 '  How  darest  thou,'  says  Elihu,  '  instead  of  hum- 
 bling thyself  before  God,  defy  him,  and  offer  to 
 reason  with  him  ?  The  whole  creation  shews  forth 
 his  majesty,  and  evinces  his  justice.  For  a  man  to 
 stand  up  against  Him  and  to  assert  that  he  suffers 
 innocently,  is  the  greatest  anthropomorphism,  be- 
 cause it  goes  to  deny  the  divine  majesty,  evident  in 
 all  the  facts  of  the  created  world,  and  including 
 God's  justice.  His  nature  being  one  and  indivi- 
 sible, it  cannot  on  one  side  exhibit  infinite  perfec- 
 tion, and  on  the  other  imperfection  :  each  example, 
 then,  of  God's  grandeur  in  the  creation  of  the 
 world  is  evidence  against  the  rash  accusers  of  God's 
 justice.  Thus  it  appears  that,  from  the  outset, 
 there  must  have  been  a  mistake  in  thy  calculation, 
 and  thou  must  the  rather  acknowledge  the  correct- 
 ness of  my  solution  of  the  question.  God  mi(st  be 
 lust — this  is  certain  from  the  outset ;  and  how  his 
 
 justice  is  not  impaired  by  calamities  inflicted  on 
 the  righteous  and  on  thyself,  I  have  already  ex- 
 plained.' 
 
 Job  had,  in  a  stirring  manner,  several  times, 
 challenged  God  to  decide  the  contest.  Elihu  sus- 
 pects the  approach  of  the  Lord,  when,  towards  the 
 end  of  his  speech,  a  violent  thunder-storm  arises, 
 and  God  answers  Job  out  of  the  whirlwind,  shew- 
 ing how  foolishly  the  latter  had  acted  in  offering 
 to  reason  with  Him,  when  lijs  works  proved  his 
 infinite  majesty,  and,  consequently,  his  absolute 
 justice.  Job  now  submits  to  God,  and  humbly 
 repents  of  his  offence.  Hereupon  God  addresses 
 Eliphaz,  Bildad,  and  Zophar,  declaring  unto  them 
 his  displeasure  at  their  unmerciful  dealing  with 
 their  friend,  the  consequences  of  which  could  only 
 be  avoided  by  Job  offering  a  propitiatory  sacrifice. 
 This  is  done,  and  the  Lord  grants  unto  Job  ample 
 compensation  for  his  sufferings. 
 
 IL  Design  of  the  Book. — We  here  assume 
 the  integrity  of  the  book  of  Job,  or  that  it  has  been 
 preserved  in  its  genuine,  unadulterated  state  ;  and 
 we  may  do  so  the  rather,  because  those  who  would 
 eliminate  single  portions,  must  still  allow  the  diffi- 
 culty of  showing  in  the  remainder  a  fixed  plan  and 
 leading  idea,  which  again  argues  against  them. 
 Moreover,  by  determining  the  design  of  the  book 
 the  best  foundation  is  laid  for  proving  its  integrity. 
 All  agree  that  the  object  of  the  book  is  the  solution 
 of  the  question,  how  the  afflictions  of  the  righteous 
 and  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked  can  be  consistent 
 with  God's  justice.  But  it  should  be  observed 
 that  the  direct  problem  exclusively  refers  to  the 
 first  point,  the  second  being  only  incidentally  dis- 
 cussed on  occasion  of  the  leading  theme.  If  this 
 is  overlooked,  the  author  would  appear  to  have 
 solved  only  one-half  of  his  problem  :  the  case  from 
 which  the  whole  discussion  proceeds  has  reference 
 merely  to  the  leading  problem.  There  is  another 
 fundamental  error  which  has  led  nearly  all  modern 
 interpreters  to  a  mistaken  idea  of  the  design  of  this 
 book.  Pareau  [De  Iinmortalitatis  not.  in  libro 
 fobi,  Deventer  1807,  p.  207)  is  the  only  one  who 
 saw  the  error  adverted  to,  and  partially  combated 
 it  with  success.  They  assume  that  the  problem 
 couldbesatisfactorily  solved  only  when  the  doctrines 
 of  immortality  and  retribution  had  been  first  esta- 
 blished, which  had  not  been  done  by  the  author  of 
 the  book  of  Job  :  a  perfect  solution  of  the  question 
 was  therefore  not  to  be  expected  from  him.  Some 
 assert  that  his  solution  is  erroneous,  since  retribu- 
 tion, to  be  expected  in  a  future  world,  is  transferred 
 by  him  to  this  life  ;  others  say  that  he  cut  the  knot 
 which  he  could  not  unloose,  and  has  been  satisfied 
 to  ask  for  implicit  submission  and  devotedness, 
 showmg  at  the  same  time  that  every  attempt  at  a 
 solution  must  lead  to  dangerous  positions  :  blind 
 resignation,  therefore,  was  the  short  meaning  of 
 the  lengthened  discussion. 
 
 On  nearer  examination,  however,  it  appears  that 
 the  doctrine  of  retribution  after  death  is  not  of  itself 
 alone  calculated  to  lead  to  a  solution  of  the  pro- 
 blem. In  contemplating  the  lives  of  the  righteous, 
 who  were  perfectly  embued  with  this  doctrine,  it 
 will  appear  that  they  also  struggled  with  doubts  ; 
 that  a  satisfactory  solution  of  the  question  is  to 
 be  derived  only  from  the  fundamental  doctrine 
 on  which  the  faith  in  retribution  rests ;  and  that 
 this  faith  is  shaken  where  it  has  not  the  necessary 
 basis.  The  belief  in  a  final  judgment  is  firm  and 
 rational  only  when  it  rests  on  the  belief  in  God's 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 605 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 continued  providential  government  of  the  world, 
 and  in  his  acting  as  sovereign  Lord  in  all  the  events 
 of  human  life.  If  God  is  holy  and  just,  he  must 
 also  have  the  will  to  manifest  these  qualities  in  our 
 present  life  by  his  bearing  towards  those  who  re- 
 present his  image  on  earth,  as  well  as  towards  those 
 who  renounce  it.  If  he  is  omnipotent,  notliing 
 can  in  this  life  prevent  him  from  exhibiting  his 
 justice  ;  but  if  this  is  not  manifested,  and  if  no 
 reason  can  be  given  for  which  he  at  times  defers 
 his  judgments,  the  belief  in  retribution  after  death 
 would  be  flimsy  and  shallow.  Woe  to  him  who 
 expects  in  a  future  world  to  be  supplied  with  every- 
 thing he  missed  here,  and  with  redress  for  all 
 injuries  sustained  !  He  deceives  himself.  His 
 God  was,  during  his  life  on  earth,  inactive,  shutting 
 himself  up  in  heaven  :  is  he  sure  that  his  God  will 
 iiereafter  be  better  disposed  or  more  able  to  protect 
 him  ?  As  his  essence  remains  the  same,  and  the 
 nature  of  sin  and  virtue  is  unchanged,  how  should 
 he  then  in  a  future  life  punish  the  former  and 
 reward  the  latter,  if  he  does  not  do  so  in  this  life  ! 
 Temporary  injustice  is  still  injustice,  and  destroys 
 the  idea  of  a  holy  and  just  God.  A  God  who  has 
 something  to  redress  is  no  God  at  all.  Lucian, 
 the  satirist,  composed  a  dialogue  entitled  Ze!)s 
 ^EXeyxifj-evos,  with  the  view  of  subverting  the  belief 
 in  Divine  Providence  ;  in  which  he  justly  finds 
 fault  with  that  God  who  allows  the  wicked  to  lead 
 a  happy  and  pleasant  life  in  order  that,  at  a  distant 
 time,  they  may  be  tortured  according  to  their 
 deserts,  and  who,  on  the  contrary,  exposes  the 
 righteous  to  infinite  misery,  that  in  remote  futurity 
 they  may  receive  the  reward  of  their  virtue.  Some 
 men  of  sense  among  the  heathens  displayed  deep 
 penetration  on  this  subject.  Claudian,  in  the  com- 
 mencement of  his  poem  against  the  wicked  Rufinus, 
 hints  that  doubts  had  been  often  entertained  of 
 Divine  Providence,  but  that  they  had  been  now 
 removed  by  the  downfall  of  Rufinus  : — 
 
 '  Abstulit  hunc  tandem  Rufini  poena  tumultum 
 Absolvitque  deos.     Jam  non  ad  culmina  rerum 
 Injustos  crevisse  queror.     Tolluntur  in  altum 
 Ut  lapsu  graviore  ruant.' 
 
 This  worldly  retribution  leads  him  to  a  firm  belief 
 in  that  after  death.  He  represents  Rufinus  de- 
 scended to  the  nether  world,  doing  penance  and 
 enduring  the  keenest  pains.  See  the  rich  collection 
 by  Barth  (in  his  N'otes  to  Claudian,  1078,  s.s. ) 
 of  those  passages  in  the  works  of  heathen  writers 
 in  which  doubts  of  future  retribution  are  raised  on 
 the  ground  of  disbelief  in  present  requitals.  Scrip- 
 ture knows  nothing  of  a  God  whose  power  admits 
 of  increase,  or  who  is  active  only  in  the  life  to  come  : 
 its  God  is  always  full  of  strength  and  vigour,  con- 
 stantly engaged  in  action.  God's  just  retribution 
 in  this  world  is  extolled  throughout  the  O.  T. 
 The  notion  of  return  accommodated  to  actions,  is 
 its  substance  and  centre.  It  is  particularly  urged 
 in  the  Pentateuch,  and  it  is  only  when  it  had  been 
 deeply  rooted  in  the  public  mind,  and  the  belief  in 
 future  requital  had  acquired  a  firm  and  solid  basis, 
 that  the  latter  doctrine,  which  in  the  books  of 
 Moses  is  but  dimly  hinted  at,  is  clearly  and  ex- 
 plicitly promulgated.  The  N.  T.  holds  out  to  the 
 righteous  promises  of  a  future  life,  as  well  as  of  the 
 present ;  and  our  Saviour  himself,  in  setting  forth 
 the  rewards  of  those  who,  for  his  sake,  forsook 
 everything,  begins  with  this  life  (Matt.  xix.  29). 
 A  nearer  examination  of  the  benedictions  contained 
 
 in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matt,  v.)  shows  thai 
 none  of  them  exclusively  refer  to  future  blessings  ; 
 the  judgment  of  the  wicked  is  in  his  view  proceed- 
 ing without  interruption,  and  therefore  his  examples 
 of  the  distribution  of  Divine  justice  in  this  world 
 are  mingled  with  those  of  requital  in  a  future  order 
 of  things.  The  Galileans,  whose  blood  Pilate  had 
 mingled  with  their  own  sacrifices  (Luke  xiii.  i), 
 were  in  Christ's  opinion  not  accidentally  killed  ; 
 and  he  threatens  those  who  would  not  repent,  that 
 they  should  in  like  manner  perish.  That  sickness 
 is  to  he  considered  as  a  punishment  for  sin,  we 
 are  clearly  taught  (John  v.  14  ;  Luke  v.  20,  24)  : 
 in  the  former  passage  it  is  threatened  as  punish- 
 ment for  sins  committed  ;  in  the  latter  it  is  healed 
 in  consequence  of  punishment  remitted.  Nay, 
 every  patient  restored  by  Christ,  who  acted  not  as 
 a  superior  kind  of  Hippocrates,  but  as  the  Saviour 
 of  men,  is  by  that  very  act  declared  to  be  a  sinner. 
 The  passage  in  John  ix.  2,  3,  which  is  often  ap- 
 pealed  to,  in  proof  that  our  Lord  did  not  consider 
 sickness  as  a  punishment  for  sin,  does  not  prove 
 this,  but  only  opposes  the  Jewish  position — founded 
 on  the  mistaken  doctrine  of  retribution — that  all 
 severe  sicknesses  and  infirmities  were  consequences 
 of  crimes.  But  what  is,  from  this  point  of  view, 
 the  solution  of  the  problem  regarding  the  sufferings 
 of  the  righteous  ?     It  rests  on  two  positions. 
 
 1.  Calamity  is  the  only  way  that  leads  to  the 
 i  kingdom  of  God.  Even  the  comparatively  righte- 
 ous are  not  without  sin,  which  can  be  eradicated 
 only  by  afflictions.  Via  c7-ucis  est  via  sahitis.  He 
 who  repents  will  attain  to  a  clearer  insight  into  the 
 otherwise  obscure  ways  of  God.  The  afflictions  of 
 the  pious  issue  at  once  from  God's  justice  and  love. 
 To  hnn  who  entertains  a  proper  sense  of  the  sinful- 
 ness of  man,  no  calamity  appears  so  great  as  not 
 to  be  deserved  as  a  punishment,  or  useful  as  a  cor- 
 rective. 
 
 2.  Calamity,  as  the  veiled  grace  of  God,  is  with 
 the  pious  never  alone,  but  manifest  proofs  of  Divine 
 favour  accompany  or  follow  it.  Though  sunk  in 
 misery,  they  still  are  happier  than  the  wicked,  and 
 when  it  has  attained  its  object,  it  is  terminated  by 
 the  Lord.  The  nature  of  acts  of  grace  differs  ac- 
 cording to  the  quality  of  those  on  whom  they  are 
 conferred.  The  consolations  offered  in  the  C3.  T. 
 are,  agreeably  to  the  weaker  judgment  of  its  pro- 
 fessors, derived  chiefly  from  external  circumstances ; 
 while  in  the  N.  T.  they  are  mainly  spiritual,  with- 
 out, however,  excluding  the  leading  external  helps. 
 This  difference  is  not  essential,  nc-  is  any  other, 
 the  restitutio  in  intes^rton  being  in  the  O.  T.  princi- 
 pally confined  to  this  life,  while  in  the  N.  T.  the 
 eye  is  directed  beyond  the  limits  of  this  world. 
 
 It  is  this,  the  alone  correct  solution  of  the 
 problem,  which  occurs  in  the  book  of  Job.  All 
 interpreters  allow  that  it  is  set  forth  in  Elihu's 
 speeches,  and,  from  the  following  observations,  it 
 will  appear  that  they  contain  the  opinion  of  the 
 author  : — i.  The  solution  cannot  be  looked  for  in 
 Job's  speeches  ;  for  God  proves  himself  gracious 
 towards  him  only  after  he  has  repented  and  humbled 
 himself.  The  author  of  the  book  says  (i.  22  ; 
 ii.  10;  comp.  iii.  i)  that  Job  had  charged  God 
 foolishly,  and  sinned  with  his  lips  ;  and  the  npuiTov 
 i/'eC6os,  the  materia  peccans,  in  his  speeches,  is 
 clearly  pointed  out  to  be,  that  '  he  was  righteous 
 in  his  own  eyes,  and  justified  himself  rather  than 
 God'  (xxxii.  I,  2).  To  gather  from  Job's  speeches 
 a  consistent  view  of  the  subject,  and  a  satisfactory 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 606 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 solution  of  the  question  mooted,  is  impossible  also 
 on  account  of  the  many  contradictions  in  them  ; 
 as,  for  instance,  when  he  says  at  one  time,  that 
 God's  justice  never  appears  in  the  government  of 
 the  world,  and  at  another,  that  it  generally  does 
 appear,  but  that  there  are  evident  exceptions  to  the 
 general  rule,  not  liable  to  objections.  Sound 
 principles  are  mixed  up  by  him  with  wrong  ones  ; 
 his  views  want  sifting,  and  the  correct  ideas  must 
 be  completed,  which,  even  in  his  concluding  ad- 
 dress, is  not  done  by  himself,  nor  is  it  performed 
 by  his  three  friends.  Job  continues  tc  be  embar- 
 rassed for  the  solution,  and  he  is  only  certain  of 
 this,  that  the  solution  of  his  friends  cannot  be  satis- 
 factory. Job  erred  chiefly  in  not  acknowledging 
 the  sin  inherent  in  him  ;  notwithstanding  his  in- 
 tegrity and  sincere  piety,  which  prevented  him 
 from  apprehending  the  object  of  the  calamity  in- 
 flicted on  him,  led  him  to  consider  God's  punish- 
 ments as  arbitrary,  and  made  him  despair  of  the 
 return  of  better  days.  The  greatness  of  his  suffer- 
 ings was  in  some  measure  the  cause  of  his  miscon- 
 ception, by  exciting  his  feelings,  and  preventing 
 him  from  calmly  considering  his  case.  He  was  in 
 the  state  of  a  man  tempted,  and  deserving  God's 
 indulgence.  He  had  received  considerable  provo- 
 cation from  his  friends,  and  often  endeavoured  to 
 soften  his  harsh  assertions  ;  which,  particularly  in 
 ch.  xxvii.,  leads  him  into  such  contradictions,  as 
 must  have  occurred  in  the  life  of  the  tempted  ;  he 
 is  loud  in  acknowledging  the  wisdom  of  God  (ch. 
 xxviii.),  and  raises  himself  at  times  to  cheering 
 hopes  (comp.  ch.  xix.)  But  this  can  only  excuse, 
 not  justify  him,  and  therefore  it  is  in  the  highest 
 "degree  honourable  to  him,  that  he  remains  silent, 
 when  in  Elihu's  speeches  the  correct  solution  of 
 the  question  is  given,  and  that  he  ultimately 
 acknowledges  his  fundamental  error  of  doing  justice 
 to  himself  only. 
 
 2.  The  solution  of  the  question  mooted  cannot 
 lae  contained  in  the  speeches  of  yob's  friends.  Their 
 demeanour  is  reproved  by  God,  and  represented  as 
 a  great  sin,  so  much  so,  indeed,  that  to  obtain 
 pardon  for  tiiem  Job  was  directed  to  offer  a  pro- 
 pitiatory sacrifice.  Their  error  proceeded  from 
 2,  crude  notion  of  sin  in  its  external  appearance  ; 
 and,  inferring  its  existence  from  calamity,  they 
 were  thus  led  to  condemn  the  afflicted  Job  as 
 guilty  of  heinous  crimes  (ch.  xxxii.)  The  moral 
 use  of  sufferings  was  unknown  to  them  ;  which 
 evidently  proved  that  they  themselves  were  not 
 j'et  purged  and  cleared  from  guilt.  If  they  had 
 been  sensible  of  the  nature  of  man,  if  they  had 
 understood  the?nstlves,  they  would,  on  seeing  the 
 misery  of  Job,  have  exclaimed,  '  God  be  merciful 
 to  us  sinners  ! '  There  is,  indeed,  an  important 
 correct  principle  in  their  speeches,  whose  centre  it 
 forms  ;  so  much  so,  that  they  mostly  err  only  in  the 
 application  of  the  general  truth.  It  consists  in  the 
 perception  of  the  invariable  connection  between 
 sin  and  misery,  which  is  indelilily  engrafted  on 
 the  heart  of  man,  and  to  which  many  ancient 
 authors  allude.  The  saying,  male  porta  male 
 dilabuntiir,  is  to  be  found  in  every  language.  The 
 problem  of  the  book  is  then  solved  by  properly 
 uniting  the  correct  positions  of  the  speeches  both 
 of  Job  and  his  friends,  by  maintaining  his  compara- 
 tive innocence,  and  by  tracing  the  errors  of  both 
 parties  to  a  common  source,  the  want  of  a  sound 
 insight  into  the  nature  of  sin.  Job  considers 
 himself  rigliteous,  and  not  deserving  of  such  inflic- 
 
 tions, because  he  had  not  committed  any  heinous 
 crime;  and  his  friends  fancy  they  must  assume 
 that  he  was  highly  criminal,  in  order  to  justify  his 
 misery. 
 
 3.  The  solution  of  the  question  at  issue  is  not 
 exclusively  given  in  the  addresses  of  God,  which 
 contain  only  the  basis  of  the  solution,  not  the 
 solution  itself.  In  setting  forth  his  majesty,  and 
 in  showing  that  imputing  to  him  injustice  is  repug- 
 nant to  a  correct  conception  of  his  nature,  these 
 addresses  establish  that  there  must  be  a  solution 
 which  does  not  impair  divine  justice.  This  is  not, 
 indeed,  the  solution  itself,  but  everything  is  thus 
 prepared  for  the  solution.  We  apprehend  that  God 
 Diiist  be  just,  but  it  remains  further  to  be  shown 
 how  he  can  be  just,  and  still  the  righteous  be 
 miserable. 
 
 Unless,  then,  we  are  disposed  to  question  the 
 general  result,  we  are,  by  the  arrangements  of  the 
 book,  led  to  the  speeches  of  Elihu  as  containing 
 the  solution  of  the  problem,  which  the  author, 
 moreover,  has  indicated  with  sufficient  clearness 
 by  making  the  commencement  and  end  of  the 
 narrative  agree  perfectly  with  those  speeches.  The 
 leading  principle  in  Elihu's  statement  is,  that 
 calamity  in  the  shape  of  trial  was  inflicted  even  on 
 the  comparatively  best  men,  but  that  God  allowed 
 a  favourable  turn  to  take  place  as  soon  as  it  had 
 attained  its  object.  Now  this  is  the  key  to  the 
 events  of  Job's  life.  Though  a  pious  and  righteous 
 man,  he  is  tried  by  severe  afflictions.  He  knows 
 not  for  what  purpose  he  is  smitten,  and  his  calamity 
 continues  ;  but  when  he  learns  it  from  the  addresses 
 of  Elihu  and  God,  and  humbles  himself,  he  is  re- 
 lieved from  the  burden  which  oppresses  him,  and 
 ample  prosperity  atones  for  the  afflictions  he  has 
 sustained.  Add  to  this,  that  the  remaining  portion 
 of  Elihu's  speeches,  in  which  he  points  to  God's 
 infinite  majesty  as  including  his  justice,  is  continuei/ 
 in  the  addresses  of  God  ;  that  Elihu  foretells  God'i 
 appearance  ;  that  he  is  not  punished  by  God  as  are 
 the  friends  of  Job  ;  in  fine,  that  Job  by  his  very 
 silence  acknowledges  the  problem  to  have  been 
 solved  by  Elihu  ;  and  his  silence  is  the  more  sig- 
 nificant because  Elihu  had  urged  him  to  defend 
 himself  (xxxiii.  32),  and  because  Job  had  repeatedly 
 declared  he  would  '  hold  his  peace,'  if  it  was  shown 
 to  him  wherein  he  had  erred  (vi.  24,  25  ;  xix.  4). 
 This  view  of  the  book  of  Job  has  among  modern 
 authors  been  supported  chiefly  by  Staudlin  [Beit- 
 rage  zitr  Hcligious  tind  Sittciilehere,  vol.  ii.  p.  133) 
 and  Stickel  {Das  Bitch  Hioh,  Leipzig  1842), 
 though  in  both  it  is  mixed  up  with  much  erroneous 
 matter  ;  and  it  is  further  confirmed  by  the  whole 
 O.  T.  giving  the  same  answer  to  the  question 
 mooted  which  the  speeches  of  Elihu  offer  :  in  its 
 concentrated  form  it  is  presented  in  Ps.  xxxvii., 
 xlix.,  Ixxiii. 
 
 From  these  considerations,  it  appears  that  those 
 interpreters  who,  with  Bernstein,  De  Wette,  and 
 Umbreit,  assum-e  tliat  the  book  of  Job  was  of  a 
 sceptical  nature,  and  intended  to  dispute  the  doc- 
 trine of  retribution  as  laid  down  in  the  other  books 
 of  the  O.  T. ,  have  entirely  misunderstood  it.  The 
 doctrine  of  divine  retribution  is  here  not  disputed, 
 but  strengthened,  as  the  case  under  consideration 
 required  that  it  should  be.  The  object  of  the 
 book  would  also  be  too  much  narrowed,  if  it  was 
 restricted  to  proving  that  the  doctrine  of  retribu- 
 tion, as  expounded  by  the  friends  of  Elihu,  was 
 erroneous.     The  speeches  of  Elihu  evidently  op- 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 607 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 pose  the  discourses  of  Job  in  stronger  terms  than 
 those  of  his  friends.  The  object  of  the  book  is 
 rather  to  explain  generally  the  nature  and  tendency 
 of  afflictions,  and  thereby  to  contribute  towards 
 the  attainment  of  their  design,  to  console  the 
 mind,  and  to  cheer  the  drooping  spirits.  It  is 
 difficult  for  men  to  understand  that  their  suffer- 
 ings, however  great,  are  still  under  that  degree 
 which  they  deserve.  To  consider  afflictions  as 
 proofs  of  divine  favour,  we  must  first  learn  to 
 bring  them  into  unison  with  divine  justice.  Upon 
 the  doctrine  of  retribution  after  death  our  author 
 does  not  enter ;  but  that  he  knew  it,  may  be  in- 
 ferred from  several  passages  with  great  proba- 
 bility ;  as,  for  instance,  chap.  xiv.  14,  '  if  a  man 
 die  shall  he  live  again  ?  All  the  days  of  my  ap- 
 pointed time  will  I  wait,  till  my  change  come.' 
 The  //"here  shows  that  the  writer  had  been  before 
 engaged  in  considering  the  subject  of  life  after 
 death  ;  and  when  such  is  the  case,  a  pious  mind 
 will  necessarily  indulge  the  hope,  or  will,  at  least, 
 have  an  obscure  presentiment  of  immortality.  The 
 truth,  also,  of  God's  unbounded  grace,  on  which 
 the  doctrine  of  immortality  is  based,  will  be  found 
 clearly  laid  down  in  chap.  xix.  Still  the  author 
 does  not  recur  to  this  hope  for  the  purpose  of 
 solving  his  problem ;  he  would  not  ground  it  on 
 something  in  itself  wanting  support  and  a  founda- 
 tion, namely,  that  which  is  presented  in  this  book. 
 The  doctrine  of  future  retribution,  if  not  sustained 
 by  the  belief  in  retribution  during  this  life,  is  truly 
 a  castle  in  the  air.  The  author  did  not  intend  in 
 his  discussion  to  exceed  the  limits  of  what  God 
 had  clearly  revealed,  and  this  was  in  his  time  con- 
 fined to  the  vague  notion  of  life  continued  after 
 death,  but  not  connected  with  rewards  and  punish- 
 ments. Explicitly  expressed,  then,  we  have  here 
 only  the  doctrine  of  a  Sheol  (see  the  collection  of 
 passages,  p.  123  sqq.  of  Pareau's  work  above 
 quoted),  which,  indeed,  is  not  erroneous  in  itself, 
 but  which  still  keeps  the  background  veiled. 
 
 Having  thus  established  the  design  of  the  book 
 of  Job,  it  remains  to  consider  the  view  taken  by 
 Ewald.  He  justly  rejects  the  common,  superficial 
 view  of  its  design,  which  has  recently  been  revived 
 and  defended  by  Hirzel  (see  his  Coiiimeittar,  Leip- 
 zig 1839),  and  which  represents  the  author  as  in- 
 tending to  shew  that  man  cannot  apprehend  the 
 plans  of  God,  and  does  best  to  submit  in  ignorance 
 without  repining  at  afflictions.  The  author  would 
 thus  be  rendered  liable  to  the  charge  of  having  cut 
 the  knot  which  he  could  not  loose.  When  this 
 view  was  first  set  up,  the  solution  of  one  of  the 
 most  important  religious  problems  was  very  un- 
 settled, and  the  public  mind  generally  remained  in 
 suspense  ;  in  accordance  with  which  state  of  feel- 
 ing this  opinion  is  framed  relating  to  the  design  of 
 the  book  of  Job.  The  alleged  theme  occurs  in  no 
 passage,  not  even  incidentally.  The  writers  in 
 question  chiefly  base  it  on  the  discourses  of  God  ; 
 and  so,  latterly,  does  Stickel,  who,  although  ac- 
 knowledging that  the  solution  of  the  problem  was 
 afforded  by  Elihu,  still  thinks  that  in  the  senti- 
 ments uttered  by  God  the  sufferer  was  ultimately 
 referred  to  human  short-sightedness  and  directed  to 
 be  silent,  the  author  of  the  book  distrusting  the 
 correctness  of  his  solution,  and  intending  at  all 
 events  to  vindicate  God's  justice.  Thus  they  en- 
 tirely misunderstand  the  main  point  in  the  dis- 
 courses of  God,  which  set  forth  his  infinite  majesty 
 with  a  view,  not  of  censurin"'  lob's  inquisitiveness 
 
 and  of  taxing  him  with  indiscretion,  but  of  shewing 
 that  it  was  foolish  to  divest  God  of  justice,  which 
 is  inseparable  from  his  essence.  His  searching  is 
 not  itself  blamed,  but  only  the  manner  of  it.  No- 
 where in  the  whole  book  is  simple  resignation 
 crudely  enjoined,  and  nowhere  does  Job  say  that 
 he  submits  to  such  an  injunction.  The  prologue 
 represents  his  sufferings  as  trials,  and  the  epilogue 
 declares  that  the  end  had  proved  this  ;  conse- 
 quently the  author  was  competent  to  give  a  theo- 
 dicee  with  reference  to  the  calamity  of  Job,  and  if 
 such  is  the  case  he  cannot  have  intended  simply 
 to  recommend  resignation.  The  Biblical  writers, 
 when  engaged  on  this  problem,  know  how  to 
 justify  God  with  reference  to  the  afflictions  of  the 
 righteous,  and  have  no  intention  of  evading  the 
 difficulty  when  they  recommend  resignation  (see 
 the  Psalms  quoted  above,  and,  in  the  N.  T.,  the 
 Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  ch.  xii. )  The  view  of  the 
 book  of  Job  alluded  to  would  isolate  it,  and  take 
 it  out  of  its  natural  connection.  Thus  far,  then, 
 we  agree  with  Ewald,  but  we  cannot  approve  of 
 his  own  view  of  the  design  of  the  book  of  Job. 
 According  to  his  system,  '  calamity  is  never  a 
 punishment  for  sins  committed,  but  always  a  mere 
 phantom,  an  imaginaiy  show,  above  which  we 
 must  raise  ourselves  by  the  consciousness  of  the 
 eternal  nature  of  the  human  mind,  to  which,  by 
 external  prosperity,  nothing  can  be  added,  and 
 from  which,  by  external  misfortune,  nothing  can 
 be  taken  away.  It  was  (says  Ewald)  the  merit  of 
 the  book  of  Job  to  have  prepared  these  sounder 
 views  of  worldly  evil  and  of  the  immortality  of 
 mind,  transmitting  them  as  fruitful  buds  to  pos- 
 terity.' Now  from  the  outset  we  may  be  sure  that 
 this  view  is  not  to  be  found  in  our  book.  Credit 
 has  always  been  given  to  Scripture  for  knowing 
 how  to  console  the  distressed — which  Ewald's  sys- 
 tem must  fail  to  do.  Let  it  be  offered  to  those 
 who  are  afflicted  with  severe  and  painful  illness, 
 and  it  will  prove  abortive.  Fictitious  sufferings 
 may  be  soothed  in  this  manner,  real  pains  certainly 
 not.  Consciousness  of  the  eternal  nature  of  our 
 mind  is  wanted  to  do  all ;  but  how  is  it  possible 
 when  the  mind  itself  is  depressed  ?  Turn  to  the 
 Psalms  :  do  we  find  in  them  shadowed  out  this 
 cold  consolation— the  doctrine  of  the  Stoics,  which 
 has  been  always  considered  to  be  opposed  to  that 
 of  Scripture?  Read  especially  Psalms  xxxvii., 
 xli. ,  and  Ixxiii.,  which  profess  to  treat  our  pro- 
 blem :  take,  in  the  N.  T.,  the  passage  in  Heb. 
 xii.  6,  and  you  wall  find  afflictions  considered  at 
 once  as  punishments  inflicted  by  divine  justice,  and 
 as  means  which  God's  love  employs  to  lead  us  to 
 higher  happiness.  '  Whom  the  Lord  loveth  he 
 chasteneth,  and  scourgeth  every  son  whom  he 
 receiveth.'  If  suffering  and  happiness  are  as 
 nothing,  and  have  no  reality,  wliy  promises  our 
 Saviour  rewards  to  his  followers,  and  why  threatens 
 he  the  wicked  with  punishment  (Matt.  xix.  16-30)? 
 Why  blesses  he  the  meek,  '  for  they  shall  inherit 
 the  earth'  (Matt.  v.  5)?  Why  says  he,  'seek  ye 
 first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his  righteousness, 
 and  all  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you' 
 (Matt.  vi.  33)?  If  righteousness  already  possesses 
 everything  and  lacks  nothing,  why  says  St.  Paul, 
 to  righteousness  are  held  out  the  promise  both  of 
 this  life  and  of  the  life  to  come  ?  Being  thus  im- 
 pressed against  Ewald's  view,  from  the  Scriptures 
 themselves,  we  also  find,  on  closer  inspection,  that 
 it  does  not  apply  to  the  book  of  Job.     To  make  it 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  01 
 
 fi08 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 appear  that  it  does,  he  exdudes  the  speeches  of 
 Eli'hu— which  seems  rather  suspicious  ;  but  what 
 he  objects  against  them  is  of  httle  importance,  and 
 has  been  proved  by  Stickel  to  be  erroneous.  Tak- 
 ing, however,  what  remains  of  the  book,  it  is  evi- 
 dent that  the  epilogue  is  decidedly  contrary  to 
 Ewald's  view.  Why  is  it  that  Job  receives  the 
 double  of  all  that  he  had  lost,  when,  judged  by 
 Ewald's  principles,  he  had  lost  nothing  ?  If  in 
 any  place,  it  is  in  the  epilogue  that  the  leading 
 idea  of  the  author  must  appear  ;  and  here  we  have 
 not  speeches,  whose  drift  might  admit  of  doubt, 
 but  acts,  divine  acts,  the  solution  of  the  question 
 by  facts.  Equally  irreconcilable  is  Ewald's  view 
 with  the  prologue.  The  opening  scene  is  in 
 heaven  ;  Satan  appears  before  God,  and  obtains 
 leave  to  tempt  Job.  This  enables  the  reader  from 
 (he  outset  to  see  clearer  into  the  case  under  con- 
 sideration than  did  Job  and  his  friends,  who  judged 
 only  according  to  what  passed  on  earth.  He  sus- 
 pects from  the  outset  what  will  be  the  end  of  the 
 narrative.  If  it  is  by  way  of  temptation  only  that 
 Job  is  subjected  to  misery,  this  cannot  be  lasting ; 
 but  if  it  cannot  and  must  not  be  lasting,  it  must  be 
 also  more  than  an  imaginary  phantom — it  must  be 
 reality.  We  might  easily  shew  further  that  the 
 view  referred  to  is  also  incompatible  with  the 
 speeches  of  Job,  who  never  renounces  happiness  ; 
 he  is  always  either  disconsolate  and  complains,  or 
 expresses  cheering  hopes  of  a  return  of  better  days  ; 
 he  either  despairs  of  God's  justice,  or  expects  him 
 to  prove  it  at  least  partially  by  his  rehabilitation. 
 We  might  likewise,  with  little  trouble,  prove  that 
 the  view  of  Ewald  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 
 speeches  of  God,  who  does  not  address  Job  in  ex- 
 hortations to  the  effect,  '  Be  insensible  of  thy  cala- 
 mity ;'  but,  '  Humble  thyself  before  me  ;  acknow- 
 ledge in  thy  severe  sufferings  my  justice  and  my 
 love,  and  thy  own  sinfulness,  and  procure  release 
 by  repentance.'  But  what  we  have  stated  on  this 
 head  may  be  deemed  sufficient. 
 
 HI.  Character  of  the  composition  of  the 
 Book. — On  this  subject  there  are  three  different 
 opinions  : — I.  Some  contend  that  the  book  con- 
 tains an  entirely  true  history.  2.  Others  assert 
 that  it  is  founded  on  a  true  history,  which  has  been 
 recast,  modified,  and  enlarged  by  the  author.  3. 
 The  third  opinion  is,  that  the  book  contains  a 
 narrative  entirely  imaginary,  and  constructed  by 
 the  author  to  teach  a  great  moral  truth. 
 
 The  first  view,  taken  by  numerous  ancient  in- 
 terpreters, is  now  abandoned  by  nearly  all  inter- 
 preters. It  seems,  however,  to  have  been  adopted 
 by  Josephus,  for  he  places  Job  in  the  list  of  the  his- 
 torical books  ;  and  it  was  prevalent  with  all  the 
 fathers  of  the  church.  In  its  support  four  reasons 
 are  adduced,  of  which  the  third  and  fourth  are 
 quite  untenable  ;  the  first  and  second  are  out- 
 weighed by  other  considerations,  which  render  it 
 impossible  to  consider  the  book  of  Job  as  an  en- 
 tirely true  history,  but  which  may  be  used  in  de- 
 fence of  the  second  view  alluded  to.  It  is  said, 
 I.  That  Job  is  (Ezek.  xiv.  14-20)  mentioned  as  a 
 public  character,  together  with  Noah  and  Daniel, 
 and  represented  as  an  example  of  piety.  2.  In  the 
 Epistle  of  James  (v.  11),  patience  in  sufferings  is 
 recommended  by  a  reference  to  Job.  3.  In  the 
 Greek  translation  of  the  Septuagint  a  notice  is  ap- 
 pended to  Gen.  xxxvi.  33,  which  states  that  Job  was 
 the  King  Jobab  of  Edom.  This  statement  is  too 
 late  to  be  relied  on,  and  originates  in  an  etymolo- 
 
 gical combination  ;  and  that  it  must  be  erroneous 
 rs  to  a  certain  extent  evident  from  the  contents  of 
 the  book,  in  which  Job  is  not  represented  as  a 
 king.  4.  Job's  tomb  continues  to  be  shewn  to 
 Oriental  tourists.  Now  the  fact  of  a  Job  having 
 lived  somewhere  would  not  of  itself  prove  that  the 
 hero  of  our  narrative  was  that  person,  and  that  this 
 book  contained  a  purely  historical  account.  More- 
 over, his  tomb  is  shown  not  in  one  place,  but  in 
 six,  and,  along  with  it,  the  dunghill  on  which  Job 
 is  reported  to  have  sat  ! 
 
 Against  this  view  it  must  be  remarked  generally, 
 that  the  whole  work  is  arranged  on  a  well-consi- 
 dered plan,  proving  the  author's  power  of  inde- 
 pendent invention  ;  that  the  speeches  are,  in  their 
 general  structure  and  in  their  details,  so  elaborate, 
 that  they  could  not  have  been  brought  out  in  the 
 ordinary  course  of  a  conversation  or  disputation  ; 
 that  it  would  be  unnatural  to  suppose  Job  in  his 
 distressed  state  to  have  delivered  such  speeches, 
 finished  with  the  utmost  care  ;  and  that  they  exhibit 
 uniformity  in  their  design,  fulness,  propriety,  and 
 colouring,  though  the  author,  with  considerable 
 skill,  represents  each  speaker  whom  he  introduces 
 arguing  according  to  his  character.  Moreover,  in 
 the  prologue  and  epilogue,  as  well  as  in  the  arrange- 
 ment of  the  speeches,  the  figures  3  and  7  constantly 
 occur,  with  the  decimal  number  formed  by  their 
 addition.  The  transactions  between  God  and  Satan 
 in  the  prologue  absolutely  require  that  we  should 
 distinguish  between  the  subject-matter  forming  the 
 foundation  of  the  work,  and  its  enlargement ;  which 
 can  only  be  done  when  a  poetical  principle  is  ac- 
 knowledged in  its  composition.  God's  speaking 
 out  of  the  clouds  would  be  a  miracle,  without  an 
 object  corresponding  to  its  magnitude,  and  having 
 a  merely  personal  reference,  while  all  the  other 
 miracles  of  the  O.  T.  are  in  connection  with  the 
 theocratical  government,  and  occur  in  the  midst  and 
 for  the  benefit  of  the  people  of  God.  This  argu- 
 ment, which  might  be  further  extended  without 
 much  difficulty,  proves  the  first  view  above  stated  of 
 the  book  of  Job  to  be  erroneous,  and  is  meant  to 
 support  the  second;  but  it  does  not  bear  on  the  third, 
 which  contends  that  the  narrative  is  an  entire  fiction, 
 without  any  admixture  of  real  facts.  The  latter 
 opinion  is,  indeed,  already  stated  in  the  Talmud, 
 which  says  that  Job  never  existed  ;  and  in  modem 
 times  it  has  been  defended  chiefly  by  Bernstein  ;  but 
 is  contrary  to  the  practice  which  anciently  prevailed, 
 when  writers  rarely  invented  the  subject  of  a  nar- 
 rative, and  rather  took  the  materials  furnished  by 
 tradition,  digesting,  enlarging,  and  modifying  them, 
 so  as  to  make  them  harmonize  with  the  leading 
 theme.  Taking  the  second  view,  we  must  still 
 abstain  from  undertaking  to  determine  what  the 
 poet  derived  from  tradition  and  what  he  added 
 himself,  since  we  know  not  how  far  tradition  had 
 already  embellished  the  original  fact.  The  separa- 
 tion of  the  historical  groundwork  from  the  poetical 
 embellishments  could  only  succeed,  if  the  same 
 history  had  been,  although  in  a  poetical  dress, 
 transmitted  to  us  by  several  narrators.  Would  any 
 person,  if  he  was  not  assisted  by  other  authorities, 
 undertake  to  determine  what  is  history,  and  what 
 is  fiction,  in  an  historical  romance  of  Walter  Scott, 
 or  in  an  historical  drama  of  Shakspeare  or  Schil- 
 ler ?  Ewald,  indeed,  had  the  courage  to  undertake 
 vindicating  for  history  certain  parts  of  our  narrative, 
 but  his  efforts  were  abortive,  as  we  shall  presently 
 show.     It  will  appear,  mdeefl,  that  exactly  those 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 609 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 particulars  which  Ewald  considers  historical  may 
 possibly  have  been  invented,  though  we  do  not 
 contend  that  they  really  were  so,  which  would  be 
 equally  presumptuous.  He  asserts,  i.  That  '  the 
 name  Job  is  not  invented  by  the  author  of  our 
 book.'  This  would  have  some  semblance  of  truth, 
 if  the  name  had  no  meaning  connecting  it  with 
 the  contents  of  the  narrative.  But  Job  means 
 in  Hebrew  '  the  assailed,'  and  may  be  traced  in 
 
 the  form  of  Iv'')  born,  113CJ',  intoxicated,  from 
 a^K,  to  attack ;  whence  also  2''1K,  t/ie  enemy,  and 
 n3''X,  enmity,  are  derived.  Ewald  observes,  in- 
 deed, that  the  import  of  the  word  is  not  very 
 apparent,  and  is  not  easily  discoverable  ;  but  when 
 U  strikes  us  at  once,  must  it  not  have  much  more 
 readily  occurred  to  Hebrew  readers  ?  The  sense 
 in  which  the  hero  of  the  book  is  called  '  the 
 assailed,'  appears  at  once  in  the  prologue,  where 
 Satan  obtains  leave  to  tempt  him.  2.  '  The  names 
 of  the  friends  of  Job  are  historical.'  As  to  the 
 name  Eliphaz,  it  occurs  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  4,  10,  12, 
 and  seems  to  be  taken  from  thence.  Adopting 
 names  in  this  manner  amounts  to  inventing  them. 
 3.  'It  is  a  fact  that  Job  lived  in  the  land  of  Uz, 
 which,  in  Hebrew  history,  is  distinguished  neither 
 in  itself  nor  its  inhabitants  ;  and  it  is  difficult  to 
 understand  why  the  author  selected  this  country, 
 if  he  was  not  led  to  it  by  history.'  We  shall  see 
 below  that  the  plan  of  the  author  required  him  to 
 lay  the  scene  without  Palestine,  but  still  in  its  im- 
 mediate neighbourhood  ;  which  led  him  to  Uz,  a 
 country  already  mentioned  in  Genesis.  This  ob- 
 servation applies  also  to  the  place  of  abode  of  Job's 
 friends,  which  could  not  be  Canaan,  but  must  be 
 in  its  vicinity  ;  wherefore  the  country  named  in 
 the  book  is  assigned  to  them.  4.  '  The  sickness 
 of  Job  is  an  historical  fact ;  he  was  afflicted  with 
 elephantiasis,  and  it  is  inconceivable  why  the 
 author  chose  this  disease,  which  is  of  rare  occur- 
 rence, if  he  had  not  drawn  this  particular  fact  from 
 real  histoiy-'  Now  the  reason  of  this  selection 
 was,  that  elephantiasis  is  a  most  awful  disease,  and 
 that  the  author  probably  knew  none  more  so  ;  and 
 persons  labouring  under  elephantiasis  were  gener- 
 ally considered  as  smitten  by  God  (Deut.  xxiv.  8, 
 9)  [Job's  Disease]. 
 
 These  are  all  the  particulars  which  Ewald  points 
 out  as  historical,  and  from  our  examination  of 
 them,  it  will  be  clear  that  we  must  confine  our- 
 selves to  contending  for  an  historical  foundation  of 
 the  book,  but  must  not  undertake  to  determine  the 
 exact  nature  of  the  groundwork  :  we  infer  the 
 character  of  the  composition  from  analogy,  but 
 cannot  prove  it  from  the  book  itself.  That  its 
 historical  framework  was  poetically  enlarged  by 
 the  author,  has  been  already  observed  by  Luther 
 (see  his  Tischreden,  or  Table  Talk,  p.  318).  As 
 for  the  rest,  the  subtility  displayed  in  explaining 
 opposite  views,  the  carefully  drawn  characters  of 
 the  persons  introduced,  and  their  animated  dis- 
 courses, lead  us  to  suppose  that  the  question  at 
 issue  had  previously  been  the  subject  of  various 
 discussions  in  presence  of  the  author,  who,  perhaps, 
 took  part  in  them.  Thus  there  would  be  an  histo- 
 rical foundation,  not  only  for  the  facts  related  in 
 the  book,  but  to  a  certain  extent  also  for  the 
 speeches. 
 
 IV.  Descent,  Country,  and  Age  of  the 
 Author. — Opinions  differed  in  ancient  times  as  to 
 the  nation  to  which  the  author  belonged ;  some 
 VOL.  II.  * 
 
 considering  him  to  have  been  an  Arab,  others  an 
 Israelite  ;  but  the  latter  supposition  is  undoubtedly 
 preferable.  For,  1st,  we  find  in  our  book  many 
 ideas  of  genuine  Israelite  growth  :  the  creation  of 
 the  world  is  described,  in  accordance  with  the 
 prevailing  notions  of  the  Israelites,  as  the  imme- 
 diate effect  of  divine  omnipotence  ;  man  is  formed 
 of  clay ;  the  spirit  of  man  is  God's  breath ;  God 
 employs  the  angels  for  the  performance  of  his 
 orders  ;  Satan,  the  enemy  of  the  chosen  children 
 of  God,  is  his  instrument  for  tempting  them  ;  men 
 are  weak  and  sinful ;  nobody  is  pure  in  the  sight 
 of  God  ;  moral  corruption  is  propagated.  There 
 is  promulgated  to  men  the  law  of  God,  which  they 
 must  not  infringe,  and  the  transgressions  of  which 
 are  visited  on  offenders  with  punishments.  More- 
 over, the  nether  world,  or  Sheol,  is  depicted  in 
 hues  entirely  Hebrew.  To  these  particulars  might, 
 without  much  trouble,  be  added  many  more  ;  but 
 the  deep -searching  inquirer  will  particularly  weigh, 
 2dly,  the  fact,  that  the  book  displays  a  strength 
 and  fervour  of  religious  faith,  such  as  could  only  be 
 expected  within  the  domain  of  revelation.  Mono- 
 theism, if  the  assertions  of  ancient  Arabian  authors 
 may  be  trusted,  prevailed,  indeed,  for  a  long  period 
 among  the  Arabs  ;  and  it  held  its  ground  at  least 
 among  a  portion  of  the  nation  till  the  age  of  Mo- 
 hammed, who  obtained  for  it  a  complete  triumph 
 over  polytheism,  which  was  spreading  from  Syria. 
 Still  the  God  of  the  Arabs  was,  as  those  of  the 
 heathens  generally  were,  a  retired  god,  dwelling 
 far  apart,  while  the  people  of  the  Old  Covenant 
 enjoyed  the  privilege  of  a  vital  communion  with 
 God;  and  the  warmth  with  which  our  author 
 enters  into  this  view,  incontrovertibly  proves  that 
 he  was  an  Israelite.  3dly,  As  regards  the  lan- 
 guage of  our  book,  several  ancient  writers  asserted 
 that  it  was  originally  written  m  the  Aramaean  or 
 Arabic  tongue,  and  afterwards  translated  into 
 Hebrew  by  "Moses,  David,  Solomon,  or  some  un- 
 known writer.  Of  this  opinion  was  the  author  of 
 the  Appendix  in  the  Septuagint,  and  the  compiler 
 of  the  tract  on  Job  added  to  the  works  of  Origen 
 and  Jerome  :  in  modern  times  it  has  been  chiefly 
 defended  by  Spanheiin,  in  his  Historia  Jobi.  But 
 for  a  translation  there  is  too  much  propriety  and 
 precision,  in  the  use  of  words  and  phrases  ;  the 
 sentences  are  too  compact,  and  free  from  redun- 
 dant expressions  and  members  ;  and  too  much 
 care  is  bestowed  on  their  harmony  and  easy  flow. 
 The  parallelism  also  is  too  accurate  and  perfect  for 
 a  translation,  and  the  whole  breathes  a  freshness 
 that  could  be  expected  from  an  original  work 
 only. 
 
 Sensible  of  the  weight  of  this  argument,  others, 
 as  Eichhorn,  took  a  medium  course,  and  assumed 
 that  the  author  was  a  Hebrew,  though  he  did  not 
 live  among  his  countrymen,  but  in  Arabia.  '  The 
 earlier  Hebrew  histoiy,'  they  say,  '  is  unknown  to 
 the  author,  who  is  ignorant  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
 Jacob.  In  portraying  nature,  also,  he  jjroves  him- 
 self always  familiar  with  Arabia,  while  he  is  silent 
 respecting  the  characteristics  of  Palestine.  With 
 Eg)'pt  he  must  have  been  well  acquainted  ;  whicli 
 can  be  accounted  for  better  by  supposing  him  to 
 have  lived  in  Araoia  than  in  Palestine.'  These 
 reasons  are,  howci^er,  not  cogent.  The  cause  why 
 the  author  did  not  enter  into  the  history  of  the 
 Hebrews,  and  the  nature  of  Palestine,  appears 
 from  his  design.  In  deciding  the  question  at  issue 
 he  waves  the  instruction  given  by  divine  revelation. 
 
 2  R 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 610 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 and  undertakes  to  perform  the  task  by  appealing 
 only  to  religious  consciousness  and  experience.  On 
 tire  plan  of  the  author  of  Ecclesiastes,  he  treats  the 
 question  as  one  of  natural  theology,  in  order  that 
 the  human  mind  might  arrive  at  its  solution  spon- 
 taneously, and  be  more  deeply  impressed.  He 
 would  not,  by  referring  to  a  few  passages  of  Scrip- 
 ture, overturn  errors  which  might  afterwards  spring 
 up  again  ;  but  they  should  be  exposed  and  de- 
 molished separately,  and  the  truth  then  be  found 
 by  uniting  the  correct  ingredients  of  opposite  views. 
 In  following  this  plan  the  author  intended  to 
 support  Scripture  ;  in  a  similar  manner  Pascal,  in 
 his  Pensees,  explains  the  nature  of  man  first  from 
 experience  only,  and  next  from  Scripture.  This 
 plan  is  indicated  by  the  scene  being  laid  not  in 
 Palestine,  but  among  a  people  quite  unconnected 
 with  its  inhabitants  ;  at  the  same  time  he  will  not 
 go  farther  than  his  object  required,  and  he  there- 
 fore chooses  the  /wwd-^/a/^  neighbourhood  of  Pales- 
 tine. Thus  the  placing  of  the  scene  in  a  foreign 
 country  is  not  historical,  but  proceeds  from  the 
 free  choice  of  the  author.  The  scene  being  laid  in 
 a  foreign  country,  the  portraying  of  life  and  nature 
 must  of  course  agree  with  that  country,  and  not 
 with  Palestine  (see  ch.  xl.  23).  It  may  no  doubt 
 be  said,  that  the  remarkable  vigour  and  sprightli- 
 ness"  of  the  author's  descriptions  of  the  scenery  and 
 people  justify  us  in  assuming  that  he  was  actually 
 acquainted  with  them  ;  but  this  cannot  be  asserted 
 as  quite  certain,  since  it  would  impair  the  high 
 idea  entertained  of  the  powers  of  poetry.  The 
 correctness  of  this  view  is  eminently  strengthened 
 by  the  manner  in  which  the  author  designedly  uses 
 the  names  of  God.  The  O.  T.  distinguishes  be- 
 tween Elohim,  the  abstract  God,  the  Deity,  on 
 the  one  hand,  and  Jehovah,  the  concrete  God,  with 
 whom  the  Israelites  had  made  a  covenant,  on  the 
 other  (Gen.  vi.  3,  4).  Now  the  latter  name  occurs 
 in  Job  generally,  where  the  author  himself  appears, 
 not  only  in  the  prologue  and  epilogue,  but  in  the 
 short  sentences  introducing  the  speakers,  as  in 
 xxxviii.  I  ;  xl.  I,  3,  6.  In  the  body  of  the  work, 
 however,  we  have  only  the  names  Elohim,  Eloah, 
 and  similar  terms,  with  the  exception  of  xii.  9, 
 where  Jehovah  occurs.  This  very  passage  argues 
 against  those  who,  from  the  distinct  names  of  God, 
 would  infer  that  the  prologue  and  epilogue  are 
 not  genuine.  Eichhorn  (see  Eiitleihing,  sec.  644, 
 a)  assumes  that  the  author  had,  by  his  particular 
 use  of  the  names  of  God,  intended  to  represent 
 himself  as  younger  than  the  other  interlocutors  ; 
 but  the  notion  of  the  name  Jehovah  having  come 
 later  into  general  use,  is  contrary  to  history,  and 
 we  must  then  arrive  at  this  result,  that  the  author 
 by  his  selection  of  the  names  of  God,  which  he 
 lends  to  the  interlocutors,  intended  to  express  his 
 design  of  waving  all  theocratic  principles.  The 
 few  passages  in  which  he  seems  to  abandon  this 
 design,  namely,  in  addition  to  that  quoted,  ch.  i. 
 21,  where  Job,  in  speaking  of  God,  uses  the  name 
 Jehovah,  make  it  appear  even  clearer.  By  thus 
 forgetting  himself,  he  betrays  the  fact  that  his 
 general  use  of  the  names  of  God  proceeds  from 
 designedly  forsakinp  the  usage  of  the  language. 
 The  context,  moreover  of  the  two  passages  in 
 which  he  sea/is  to  forget  himself  and  uses  the  name 
 Jehovah,  proves  that  this  change  is  judicioitsly 
 made,  the  detp  and  awful  sense  of  his  subject 
 promptmg  l.iru  to  un  elevated,  solemn  style,  to 
 which  the  name  Eloah  was  not  suitable.     And  if 
 
 there  is  design  in  the  selection  of  the  names  of 
 God,  why  not  also  in  the  selection  of  the  country 
 in  which  the  scene  is  laid  ?  This  may  be  assumed 
 the  rather,  because  history  says  nothing  of  Israel- 
 ites having  permanently  taken  up  their  residence 
 in  the  land  of  Uz,  and  because  other  circumstances 
 already  detailed  oblige  us  to  admit  that  the  author 
 was  not  only  an  Israelite  by  descent,  but  lived  also 
 in  the  midst  of  his  people,  and  enjoyed  the  advan- 
 tage of  a  religious  communion  with  them.  It 
 should  also  be  remembered,  that  the  author,  with- 
 out directly  mentioning  the  Pentateuch,  frequently 
 alludes  to  portions  of  it,  as  in  ch.  iii.  4,  to  Gen.  i. 
 3  ;  in  ch.  iv.  19,  and  xxxiii.  6,  to  Moses'  account  of 
 the  creation  of  man  ;  in  ch.  v.  14,  to  Deut.  xxxii. 
 32;  in  ch.  xxiv.  Ii,  to  Deut.  xxv.  4.  That  the 
 name  of  Eliphaz  the  Temanite,  one  of  the  three 
 friends  of  Job,  seems  also  to  have  been  taken  from 
 the  Pentateuch,  was  mentioned  above.  In  addi- 
 tion to  these  allusions  there  are  several  more  to 
 other  books  of  the  O.  T.,  as  the  Psalms  and 
 Proverbs — which  proves  that  the  author  must  not 
 be  severed  from  the  Israelite  communion.  From 
 what  we  have  stated  against  the  hypothesis  that 
 our  book  was  composed  in  Arabia,  a  judgment 
 may  be  formed  of  the  opinion  of  Hitzig  and  Hirzel, 
 who  assume  that  it  was  written  in  Egypt ;  the  sole 
 foundation  for  which  is,  that  the  author  shews 
 himself  perfectly  acquainted  with  that  countiy, 
 which  proves  him  to  have  been  a  long  observer 
 of  it.  Most  particulars  adduced  in  support  of  this 
 view  cannot  stand  a  close  examination.  Thus  it 
 is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  description  of  the 
 working  of  m.ines  in  ch.  xxviii.  must  necessarily 
 have  reference  to  Egypt  :  Phoenicia,  Arabia,  and 
 Edom  afforded  much  better  materials.  That  the 
 author  must  have  known  the  Egyptian  mausolea 
 rests  on  an  erroneous  interpretation  of  ch.  iii.  14, 
 \vhit,h  may  also  be  said  of  the  assertion  that  ch. 
 xxix.  18  refers  to  the  Egyptian  myths  of  the 
 Phoenix.  Casting  aside  these  arbitrarily  assumed 
 Egyptian  references,  we  have  only  the  following  : 
 — Our  author  knows  the  Egyptian  vessels  of  bul- 
 rushes, ix.  26;  the  Nile-grass,  viii.  12;  the 
 Nile-horse  (Behemoth),  and  the  crocodile  (Levia- 
 than), xi.  15,  xli.  I.  Now,  as  these  things  belong 
 to  the  more  prominent  peculiarities  of  a  neigh- 
 bouring country,  they  must  have  been  known  to 
 every  educated  Israelite  :  the  vessels  of  bulrushes 
 are  mentioned  also  in  Is.  xviii.  2.  Neither  are 
 we  disposed  to  adopt  the  compromising  view  of 
 Stickel,  who  assumes  that  the  author  wrote  his 
 book  in  the  Israelite  territory,  indeed,  but  close  to 
 the  frontier,  in  the  far  south-east  of  Palestine. 
 That  the  author  had  there  the  materials  for  his 
 descriptions,  comparisons,  and  imagery,  set  better 
 before  his  eyes,  than  anywhere  else,  is  true  ;  for 
 there  he  had  an  opportunity  of  observing  mines, 
 caravans,  diying  up  of  brooks,  etc.  But  this  is  not 
 sufficient  proof  of  the  author  having  lived  per- 
 manently in  that  remote  part  of  Palestine,  and  of 
 having  there  written  his  book  :  he  was  not  a  mere 
 copyist  of  nature,  but  a  poet  of  considerable  emin- 
 ence, endowed  with  the  power  of  vividly  rejiresent- 
 ing  things  absent  from  him.  That  he  lived  and 
 vvTOte  m  the  midst  of  his  nation,  is  proved  by  all 
 analogy  and  by  the  general  character  of  the  book. 
 It  looks  not  like  a  writing  composed  in  some 
 remote  corner  of  the  world,  where  the  question  at 
 issue  could  not  have  been  so  fully  discussed,  nor 
 have  created  such  a  deep  interest,    Jerusalem  was 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 611 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 the  metropolis  of  the  Jews  in  a  sense  quite  different 
 from  that  which  belongs  to  any  other  capital :  it 
 was,  by  order  of  God,  the  religious  centre  of  the 
 nation,  where  all  general  and  leading  measures  of 
 the  nation  originated,  and  to  which  all  pretending 
 to  distinction  and  superiority  resorted. 
 
 Proceeding  to  the  inquity  as  to  the  age  of  the 
 author  of  this  book,  we  meet  with  three  opinions  : 
 —  I.  That  he  lived  before  Moses,  or  was,  at  least, 
 his  contemporary.  2.  That  he  lived  in  the  time 
 of  Solomon,  or  in  the  centuries  next  following. 
 3.  That  he  lived  shortly  before,  or  during,  or  even 
 after  the  Babylonian  exile.  The  view  of  those 
 who  assert  the  book  to  have  been  written  long 
 after  the  Babylonian  exile,  can  be  supported,  as 
 Hirzel  justly  observes,  neither  by  the  nature  of  its 
 language  nor  by  reasons  derived  from  its  historical 
 gi-oundwork,  and  is  therefore  now  generally  re- 
 jected ;  but,  apart  from  this  opinion,  there  is,  in 
 those  remaining,  a  difference  as  to  the  date  of  no 
 less  than  1000  years. 
 
 We  must,  first,  declare  ourselves  decidedly 
 against  the  view  of  those  who — as  Le  Clerc  among 
 earlier  interpreters  ;  and  among  recent  expositors, 
 Bernstein,  Gesenius,  Umbreit,  and  De  Wette — 
 place  our  book  in  the  time  of  the  Chaldsean  exile. 
 They  were  led  to  this  conclusion  by  their  precon- 
 ceived opinion  that  the  doctrine  of  Satan,  who  is 
 introduced  in  the  piologue,  was  of  Chaldcean 
 origin  ;  which  has  also  induced  others,  while  con- 
 tending for  a  higher  antiquity  of  the  book,  to  pro- 
 nounce the  prologue,  at  least  the  scene  in  ch.  i. 
 6-12,  to  be  spurious;  or  losing  sight  of  the  poetical 
 character  of  the  prologue  as  well  as  of  the  speeches, 
 to  assert  that  the  Satan  of  this  book  was  different 
 from  the  Satan  of  later  times ;  or  finally,  to  assume 
 with  Stickel,  that  the  author  had  lived  in  a  place 
 where  he  could  be  impressed  with  Babylonian 
 opinions  before  they  had  spread  among  the  great 
 body  of  his  nation.  But  the  assertion,  that  the 
 doctrine  of  Satan  originated  among  the  Jews  dur- 
 ing the  Babylonian  exile,  and  was  derived  generally 
 from  Babylonian  suggestions,  has  been  shown  by 
 several  interpreters  to  be  erroneous,  and  very  re- 
 cently, by  Hengstenberg  {ALgy'pten  tend  die  Biicher 
 Mosis,  p.  164,  Si].)  This  opinion  was,  however, 
 suited  to  and  supported  by  those  who,  headed  by 
 Bernstein,  asserted  that  Job  was  a  symbolic  person- 
 age— a  personification  of  the  Jews  suffering  in  the 
 Exile — and  who  thus  gave  to  our  book  a  national 
 reference  and  meaning  ;  in  like  manner  as  some 
 had  before  introduced  a  preposterous  system  of 
 interpreting  psalms  containing  personal  lamenta- 
 tions, by  converting  them  into  national  lamenta- 
 tions, and  applying  to  them  the  principle  of  sym- 
 bolization.  Now,  in  the  book  of  Job  there  is 
 certainly  no  trace  of  national  reference  ;  and  it 
 would  be  absurd  to  assume  an  allegory  running 
 through  an  entire  work,  and  still  nowhere  mani- 
 festing its  presence.  It  is  said  by  other  interpreters, 
 that,  in  the  times  of  trouble,  during  the  Babylonian 
 exile,  first  originated  the  disheartening  view  of 
 human  life,  and  that  then  the  problem  of  our  book 
 first  engrossed  the  public  mind  ;  by  which  observa- 
 tion they,  by  way  of  compromise,  refer  its  com- 
 position to  that  period,  without  contending  for  a 
 symbolic  exposition.  But  the  sense  of  misery  and 
 of  the  nothingness  of  human  life,  is  found  among 
 all  nations,  ancient  and  modern,  cultivated  and  un- 
 cultivated :  Noah,  Jacob,  Moses,  complain,  and 
 as  old  as  suffering  must  be  the  question  of  the 
 
 seeming  disparity  in  the  distribution  of  good  and 
 evil,  and  how  this  disparity  can  be  reconciled  with 
 God's  justice.  It  is  frequently  under  consideration 
 in  the  Psalms. 
 
 Against  those  who  refer  the  composition  of  Job 
 to  the  time  of  the  Babylonian  exile,  militate,  first, 
 the  references  to  it  in  the  O.  T. ,  which  prove  that 
 it  was  before  this  period  a  generally  known  writing. 
 Thus,  in  Ezek.  xiv.  14-20,  are  mentioned  'three 
 men,  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job,'  as  examples  of 
 righteousness.  Mr.  Bernstein,  indeed,  in  defend 
 ing  his  hypothesis,  rejects  this  passage  as  spurious, 
 but  it  bears  every  mark  of  genuineness.  Further, 
 in  Jeremiah  xx.  14,  we  find  evidently  imitated 
 Job's  cursing  of  the  day  of  his  birth  (ch.  iii. )  Not 
 only  the  sentiments  but  the  words  are  often  the 
 same  ;  and  that  this  coincidence  is  not  accidental, 
 or  that  the  author  did  not  imitate  Jeremiah,  ap- 
 pears from  the  literary  character  of  each.  Jere- 
 miah shows  himself  throughout  dependent  on 
 ancient  writings,  whereas  our  author  is  quite 
 original  and  independent,  as  proved  by  Kuper 
 (see  yeremias  libroruin  sacro7-um  i7iterp7-es  atqjie 
 vindex,  p.  164,  sq.)  There  are  also  in  the  La- 
 inentations  of  Jeremiah  many  passages  clearly 
 alluding  to  our  book,  which  must  have  eminently 
 suited  his  taste  and  interested  him  (comp.  xvi.  13 
 with  Lam.  ii.  16;  and  xix.  8  with  Lam.  iii.  7,  9). 
 In  Isaiah  the  peculiar  use  of  S3^  (xl.  2)  refers  us 
 to  Job  i.  (comp.  x.  17;  xiv.  14);  and  the  double 
 received  from  God's  hand  alludes  to  the  end  of 
 the  history  of  Job,  who  is  there  considered  as  typi- 
 fying the  future  fate  of  the  church.  Is.  Ixi.  7, 
 '  In  their  land  they  shall  have  the  double,'  alludes 
 to  the  same  point ;  ch.  li.  9  depends  on  Job  xxvi. 
 13  ;  and  ch.  xix.  5>  almost  literally  agrees  with 
 Job  xiv.  II  (see  Kiiper,  p.  166).  Another  ex- 
 ample of  words  borrowed  from  Job  occurs  in  Ps. 
 cvii.  42,  where  the  second  part  of  the  verse  agrees 
 literally  with  Job  v.  16.  2.  A  most  decisive 
 reason  against  assigning  the  composition  of  Job  to 
 the  period  of  the  Exile  is  derived  from  the  lan- 
 guage, since  it  is  free  from  those  Chaldaisms  which 
 occur  in  the  books  written  about  that  time.  Eich- 
 horn  justly  observes,  'Let  him  who  is  fit  for  such 
 researches,  only  read,  first,  a  writing,  tainted  with 
 Aramasisms,  and  next  the  book  of  Job  :  they  will 
 be  found  diverging  as  east  and  west.'  There  is  no 
 example  of  an  independent,  original  work,  com- 
 posed in  pure  language,  after  the  Exile.  Zecha- 
 riah  indeed,  though  writing  after  the  Exile,  has 
 few  Chaldaisms ;  but  a  closer  inspection  shews 
 that  this  case  is  not  analogous  to  that  of  our  book. 
 The  comparative  purity  of  Zechariah's  language 
 can  be  accounted  for  by  his  constant  occupation 
 with  the  sacred  writings  of  the  period  before  the 
 Exile,  on  which  he  proves  himself  entirely  de- 
 pendent. 3.  Equally  conclusive  is  the  poetical 
 character  of  the  book.  The  Exile  might  produce 
 a  soft,  moving  poem,  but  could  not  give  birth  to 
 such  a  rich,  compact,  animated,  and  warm  composi- 
 tion as  ours,  breathing  youthful  freshness  through- 
 out. Ewald,  in  acknowledging  this,  says  justly, 
 '  The  high  skill  displayed  in  this  book  cannot  be 
 well  expected  from  later  centuries,  when  poetry 
 had  by  degrees  generally  dechned,  and  particularly 
 in  the  higher  art  required  by  large  compositions  ; 
 and  language  so  concise  and  expressive  as  that  of 
 our  author  is  not  found  in  writings  of  later  times.' 
 
 To  the  view  which  places  the  age  of  the  book 
 of  Job  in  the  time  of  the  Babylonian  exile,  is  most 
 
JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 612 
 
 JOB,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 opposed  that  which  assigns  the  composition  of  it 
 to  a  period  prior  to  Moses.  In  support  of  this 
 latter  view,  only  two  arguments  having  a  sem- 
 blance of  force  can  be  adduced,  and  they  will  not 
 bear  the  test  of  strict  inquiry.  It  is  said,  I. 
 '  There  is  in  the  book  of  Job  no  direct  reference 
 to  the  Mosaic  legislation  ;  and  its  descriptions  and 
 other  statements  are  suited  to  the  period  of  the 
 patriarchs ;  as,  for  instance,  the  great  authority 
 held  by  old  men,  the  high  age  of  Job,  and  fathers 
 offering  sacrifices  for  their  families— which  leads  to 
 the  supposition  that  when  our  book  was  written 
 no  sacerdotal  order  yet  existed.'  These  points, 
 however,  are  quite  intelligible,  if  the  design  of  the 
 book,  as  stated  above,  is  kept  in  view.  The 
 author  intended  not  to  rest  the  decision  of  the 
 question  at  issue  on  particular  passages  of  Scrip- 
 ture, but  on  religious  consciousness  and  experi- 
 ence. This  at  once  explains  why  he  places  the 
 scene  without  Palestine,  why  he  places  it  in  the 
 patriarchal  age,  and  why  he  avoids  the  use  of  tlie 
 name  Jehovah  ;  of  these  three  items  the  first  suf- 
 ficiently accounts  for  no  reference  being  made  to 
 the  Mosaic  legislation.  It  is  indeed  said,  that  for 
 an  author  of  a  later  period,  who  undertook  to 
 portray  earlier  times,  it  would  hardly  have  been 
 possible  to  perform  his  task,  without  occasionally 
 forgetting  his  roll.  But  it  is  not  easy  to  determine 
 what,  in  such  a  case,  is  possible.  What  might  be 
 expected  from  our  author  in  this  respect  may  be 
 inferred  from  his  skill  in  the  intentional  use  of  the 
 names  of  God — from  the  steadiness  with  which, 
 among  foreign  scenery,  he  proceeds  to  develop  his 
 subject — from  the  able  disposition  of  the  speeches, 
 and  the  nicely  drawing  of  the  characters  of  the  in- 
 terlocutors, who  are  always  represented  speaking 
 and  acting  in  conformity  with  the  part  assigned  to 
 them.  In  the  proper  execution  of  his  work  he 
 may  have  been  assisted  by  witnessing  abroad  the 
 patriarchal  life  of  nomades,  which,  in  its  essential 
 features,  is  always  the  same.  This  supposition  is 
 rendered  in  some  degree  probable,  from  the  de- 
 scriptions of  Arabia  being  exactly  agreeable  to  its 
 natural  condition,  and  being  even  more  specific 
 than  those  of  Egypt,  though  Hirzel  is  pleased  to 
 select  the  latter  country,  in  determining  where 
 the  author  of  our  hook  lived  and  composed  it.  2. 
 '  The  language  of  the  book  of  Job  seems  strongly 
 to  support  the  opinion  of  its  having  been  written 
 before  Moses.'  It  has  been  often  said,  that  no 
 writing  of  the  O.  T.  may  be  more  frequently  illus- 
 trated from  the  Arabic  than  this  book.  Jerome 
 observes  (/',''^^7/'.  in  Dait.)  'Jobum  cum  Arabica 
 lingua  plurimam  habere  societatem  ;'  and  Schultens 
 proved  this  so  incontrovertibly  that  Gesenius  was 
 rather  too  late  in  denying  the  fact  (see  his  Geschichte 
 der  Hcbrdischen  Sprache,  p.  33).  Now,  from  this 
 character  of  its  language  we  might  be  induced  to 
 infer,  that  the  work  was  written  in  the  remotest 
 times,  when  the  separation  of  the  dialects  had  only 
 begun,  but  had  not  yet  been  completed.  This 
 inference  would,  however,  be  safe  only  if  the  book 
 were  written  in  prose.  It  is  solely  from  works  of 
 this  class,  that  the  general  usage  of  the  language 
 prevailing  at  the  time  of  the  author  can  be  seen. 
 On  the  contrary,  the  selection  of  obsolete  and  rare 
 words  and  fonns,  with  the  Hebrews,  was  a  peculiar 
 feature  of  the  poetical  style,  and  served  to  distin- 
 guish it  from  the  usual,  haljitual  way  of  writing. 
 This  peculiarity  belongs  to  our  book  more  than  to 
 any   other;    which   may  be   explained    from    its  i 
 
 elevated  character  and  general  plan  ;  it  rises  above 
 commonplace  ideas  more  than  any  other  Hebrew 
 writing,  and  the  plan  of  the  author  made  it  incum- 
 bent on  him  to  impress  on  the  language,  as  much 
 as  possible,  an  antique  and  foreign  character. 
 
 The  most  complete  statement  of  the  reasons  in 
 support  of  the  opinion  that  the  book  of  Job  was 
 written  after  the  age  of  Moses,  may  be  found  in 
 Richter's  essay,  De  yEtate  Jobi  definienda,  re- 
 printed in  Rosenmiiller's  edition  of  Lowth's  Pne- 
 lediones  De  Poesi  Sacra  Heby-cEoriim :  in  which 
 he  maintains  that  it  was  written  in  the  age  of 
 Solomon.  Most  of  these  reasons,  indeed,  are 
 either  not  conclusive  at  all,  or  not  quite  cogent. 
 Thus  it  is  an  arbitrary  assumption,  proved  by 
 modern  researches  to  be  erroneous,  that  the  art  of 
 writing  was  unknown  previous  to  the  age  of  Moses. 
 The  assertion  too,  that  the  marks  of  cultivation 
 and  refinement  observable  in  our  book  belonged  to 
 a  later  age,  rests  on  no  historical  ground.  Fur- 
 ther, it  cannot  be  said,  that  for  such  an  early  time 
 the  language  is  too  smooth  and  neat,  since  in  no 
 Semitic  dialect  is  it  possible  to  trace  a  progressive 
 improvement.  The  evident  correspondence  also 
 between  our  book  and  the  Proverbs  and  Psalms  is 
 not  a  point  proving  with  resistless  force  that  they 
 were  all  written  at  the  same  time.  It  is,  indeed, 
 sometimes  of  such  a  kind,  that  the  authors  of  the 
 Proverbs  and  Psalms  cannot  be  exactly  said  to  have 
 copied  our  book  ;  but  it  may  be  accounted  for  by 
 their  all  belonging  to  the  same  class  of  writings, 
 by  tlie  very  great  uniformity  and  accordance  of 
 religious  conceptions  and  sentiments  expressed  in 
 the  O.  T.,  and  by  the  stability  of  its  religious 
 character. 
 
 Still  the  argument  derived  from  the  correspond- 
 ence between  our  book  and  the  Psalms  is  not  devoid 
 of  force  ;  for  the  accordance  of  ideas,  sentiments, 
 and  colouring  in  them  is  such  that  the  circum- 
 stances referred  to  cannot  be  considered  as  com- 
 pletely accounting  for  it.  There  are  passages  in 
 which  the  author  of  our  book  clearly  alludes  to 
 the  Psalms  and  Proverbs.  A  striking  example 
 of  this  Ivind  occurs  in  Ps.  xxxix.  13.  All  the 
 words  of  this  verse,  which,  as  they  conclude  the 
 psalm,  may  have  been  deeply  impressed  on  the 
 public  mind,  are  again  found  in  various  passages 
 of  the  book  of  Job,  whose  author  must  have  been 
 acquainted  with  that  psalm  (comp.  ch.  vii.  19 ; 
 xiv.  6;  X.  20,  21 ;  vii.  8,  21,  in  the  Hebrew  Bible). 
 The  whole  psalm  is  a  text-liook  for  the  speeches 
 of  Job.  The  argiunent,  also,  derived  from  the 
 skilful  plan  of  our  book  and  its  able  exposition, 
 must  be  allowed  its  weight  in  deciding  that  its 
 composition  is  not  to  be  assigned  to  an  age  prior 
 to  Moses  ;  though  we  must  not  forget  that  what  to 
 us  appears  to  be  art,  because  it  is  done  according 
 to  established  rules,  may  also  be  the  product  of  a 
 creative  genius.  But  a  conclusive  argument  against 
 assigning  so  early  a  date  to  the  composition  of  our 
 book  is  its  reflecting  and  inquiring  character.  A 
 didactic  poem  could  never  have  been  written  in  the 
 time  of  the  patriarchs ;  but  our  book  presents  a 
 strong  contrast  to  those  immature  conceptions  and 
 those  statements  which  strike  the  senses  but  do  not 
 appeal  to  reason,  whicli  are  of  so  frequent  occur- 
 rence in  Genesis.  The  notion  which  our  author 
 entertains  of  God,  of  his  omnipotence  and  omni- 
 presence, is  undoubtedly  more  refined  than  that 
 presented  in  the  books  of  Moses.  In  addition  to 
 this  it  should  be  observed,  that  from  many  indica- 
 
JOB'S  DISEASE 
 
 613 
 
 JOCHEBED 
 
 tions  the  problem  treated  in  our  book  was  at  the 
 time  of  its  composition  frequently  discussed  and 
 variously  solved.  We  have  observed,  indeed, 
 above,  that  it  is  as  old  as  the  cause  which  origin- 
 ated it ;  but  it  must  be  allowed  that  the  Mosaic 
 revelation,  with  its  leading  doctrine  concerning 
 retribution,  was  calculated  to  direct  the  attention 
 more  forcibly  towards  it  than  had  been  previously 
 the  case,  till  God  vouchsafed,  through  an  instru- 
 ment appointed  by  him,  to  promulgate  the  true 
 solution.  There  are,  moreover,  indirect  allusions 
 to  the  Pentateuch,  as  stated  above. 
 
 Summing  up  the  whole  of  our  investigations, 
 we  take  it  to  be  a  settled  point  that  the  book  of 
 Job  does  not  belong  to  the  time  of  the  Babylonian 
 exile  ;  and  it  is  nearly  equally  certain  that  it  was 
 not  composed  prior  to  the  time  of  Moses.  Could 
 it  then  have  been  written  in  some  age  preceding 
 Samuel  and  David  ?  It  is  only  with  them  that  a 
 new  period  of  sacred  literature  began  ;  and  our 
 book  is  related  to  products  of  that  period,  or  en- 
 larges on  them.  But  it  cannot  have  been  com- 
 posed later  than  Isaiah,  who  alludes  to  it.  Thus 
 we  come  to  this  general  determination  of  the  age 
 of  our  book,  that  it  was  written,  7iot  before  Samuel 
 and  David,  but  not  later  than  the  era  of  Isaiah. 
 With  this  result  we  must  rest  satisfied,  unless  we 
 would  go  beyond  the  indications  presented.  The 
 intermediate  period  offers  no  ground  on  which  we 
 can  safely  fix  the  composition  of  the  book  of  Job. 
 There  remains  then  uncertainty,  but  it  does  not 
 concern  an  important  point  of  religion.  The  signi- 
 ficancy  of  our  book  for  the  church  rests  on  the 
 evidence  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles  in  support 
 of  the  inspiration  of  the  whole  collection  of  the  O. 
 T.,  and  on  the  confirmation  which  this  external 
 evidence  has  at  all  times  received,  and  continues  to 
 receive,  from  the  internal  testimony,  among  the 
 true  believers  of  all  ages. — E.  W.  H. 
 
 [There  is  perhaps  no  single  book  of  Scrip- 
 ture of  which  so  many  versions  and  commentaries 
 have  been  published  as  that  of  Job,  or  respect- 
 ing which  a  greater  number  of  treatises  and  dis- 
 sertations have  been  written.  The  following  are 
 the  principal  examples  : — Mercer,  1573  ;  Drusius, 
 1636;  Abbott,  1640;  Spanheim,  1672;  Schmid, 
 1670 ;  Caryl,  1669;  Leigh,  1656,  1736,  1742; 
 Schultens,  1737;  Peters,  1751;  Chappelow,  1752; 
 Heath,  1756;  Scott,  1773;  Reiske,  1779;  Dathe, 
 1 789  ;  Garden,  1 796  ;  Eichhorn,  1 800  ;  Gaab, 
 1809;  Eliza  Smith,  1810;  Good,  1812  ;  Bridel, 
 1818 ;  Umbreit,  1824  (translated  in  the  Bibl. 
 Cabinet,  vols,  xvi.,  xix.)  ;  Rosenmiiller,  1824; 
 Fry,  1827;  Lange,  1831  ;  Knobel,  De  Carminis 
 Jobi,  etc.,  1835;  Ewald,  1836;  Arnheim,  1836; 
 Fackens,  1836;  Lee,  1837;  Wemyss,  1839;  Stickel, 
 1842;  Heiligstedt,  1847;  Hahn,  1850 ;  Schlott- 
 mann,  1851  ;  Hirzel,  1852;  Ewald,  1854;  Carey, 
 1858;  Conant,  1859;  Renan,  1859;  A.  B.  David- 
 son, vol.  i.,  1862.] 
 
 JOB'S  DISEASE.  The  opinion  that  the 
 malady  under  which  Job  suffered  was  elephan- 
 tiasis, or  black  leprosy,  is  so  ancient,  that  it  is 
 found,  according  to  Origen's  Hcxapla,  in  the 
 rendering  which  one  of  the  Greek  versions  has 
 made  of  ch.  ii.  7.  It  was  also  entertained  by 
 Abulfeda  [Hist.  Anteisl.  p.  26)  ;  and,  in  modern 
 times,  by  the  best  scholars  generally.  The  pas- 
 sages which  are  considered  to  indicate  this  disease 
 are  found  in  the  description  of  his  skin  burning 
 
 from  head  to  foot,  so  that  he  took  a  potsherd  tc 
 scrape  himself  (ii.  7,  8)  ;  in  its  being  covered  with 
 putrefaction  and  crusts  of  earth,  and  being  at  one 
 time  stiff  and  hard,  while  at  another  it  cracked  and 
 discharged  fluid  (vii.  5)  ;  in  the  offensive  breath 
 which  drove  away  the  kindness  of  attendants  (xix. 
 17)  ;  in  the  restless  nights,  which  were  either  sleep- 
 less or  scared  with  frightful  dreams  (vii.  13,  14; 
 XXX.  17)  ;  in  general  emaciation  (xvi.  8)  ;  and  in 
 so  intense  a  loathing  of  the  burden  of  life,  that 
 strangling  and  death  were  preferable  to  it  (vii.  15). 
 
 In  this  picture  of  Job's  sufferings,  the  state  of 
 the  skin  is  not  so  distinctly  described  as  to  enable 
 us  to  identify  the  disease  with  elephantiasis  in  a 
 rigorous  sense.  The  difficulty  is  also  increased  by 
 the  fact  that  jTlt^,  shcchiti,  is  generally  rendered 
 'boils.'  But  that  word,  according  to  its  radical 
 sense,  only  means  biir7ii}ig,  inflam>natio7i — a  hot 
 sense  of  pain,  which,  although  it  attends  boils  and 
 abscesses,  is  common  to  other  cutaneous  irritations. 
 Moreover,  the  fact  that  Job  scraped  himself  with 
 a  potsherd  is  irreconcilable  with  the  notion  that 
 his  body  was  covered  with  boils  or  open  sores,  but 
 agrees  very  well  with  the  thickened  state  of  the 
 skin  which  characterizes  this  disease. 
 
 In  this,  as  in  most  other  Biblical  diseases,  there 
 is  too  little  distinct  description  of  symptoms  to 
 enable  us  to  determine  the  precise  malady  in- 
 tended. But  the  general  character  of  the  com- 
 plaint under  which  Job  suffered,  bears  a  greater 
 resemblance  to  elephantiasis  than  to  any  other 
 disease  [Leprosy]. — W.  A.  N. 
 
 JOBAB  (an"")'' ;  Sept.  'Iw/3d/3).     i.   One  of  the 
 
 sons  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  29  ;  i  Chron.  i.  23).  The 
 site  of  his  tribe  has  not  been  ascertained,  as  no 
 name  answering  to  his  is  found  in  the  part  of 
 Arabia  occupied  by  the  descendants  of  Joktan. 
 Bochart  {Phaleg  ii.  29)  compares  the  "'Iw^a.plrai 
 whom  Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  p.  154)  places  on  the  Sacha- 
 litic  gulf,  and  suggests  that  this  should  be  read 
 'Iw^a/Strai.  Michaelis  [Spicil.  ii.  303)  and  Ge- 
 senius  approve  of  this,   as  also  of  the  suggestion 
 
 that  Jobab  =  /     >l  tt  a  desert,  from  i     -.t  to  hirwl 
 
 as  a  wild  beast ;  but  all  this  rests  on  very  slight 
 grounds. 
 
 2.  One  of  the  kings  of  Edom,  son  of  Zerah  of 
 Bozrah,  and  successor  of  Bela  (Gen.  xxxvi.  33,  34 ; 
 I  Chron.  i.  44,  45).  The  LXX.  identify  this  Jobab 
 with  the  patriarch  Job  (Append,  to  Job  xlii.) 
 
 3.  King  of  Madon,  one  of  the  northern  chiefs 
 who  joined  Jabin  in  the  attempt  to  oppose  Joshua, 
 and  were  routed  by  him  in  the  decisive  battle  of 
 Merom  (Josh.  xi.  i,  ff.) 
 
 4.  Head  of  a  house  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
 (l  Chron.  viii.  9). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOCHEBED  (n33i\  God-glorified;  Sept.  'Twxa- 
 
 j8^5),  wife  of  Amram,  and  mother  of  Miriam, 
 Moses,  and  Aaron.  In  Exod.  vi.  20,  Jochebed  is 
 expressly  declared  to  have  been  the  sister  of  Am- 
 ram's  father,  and  consequently  the  aunt  of  her 
 husband.  As  marriage  between  persons  thus  re- 
 lated was  afterwards  forbidden  by  the  law  (Lev. 
 xviii.  12),  various  attempts  have  been  made  to 
 show  that  the  relationship  was  more  distant  than 
 the  text  in  its  literal  meaning  indicates.  We  see 
 no  necessity  for  this.  The  mere  mention  of  the 
 relationship  implies  that  there  was  something  re. 
 
JOEL 
 
 614 
 
 JOEL,  BOOK  OF 
 
 markable  in  the  case  ;  but  if  we  shew  that  nothing 
 is  remarkable,  we  do  away  the  occasion  for  the 
 relationship  being  at  all  noticed.  The  fact  seems 
 to  be,  that  where  this  marriage  was  contracted, 
 there  was  no  law  forbidding  such  alliances,  but 
 they  must  in  any  case  have  been  unusual,  although 
 not  forbidden  ;  and  this,  with  the  writer's  know- 
 ledge that  they  were  subsequently  interdicted, 
 sufficiently  accounts  for  this  one  being  so  pointedly 
 mentioned.  The  candour  of  the  historian  in  de- 
 claring himself  to  be  sprung  from  a  marriage 
 afterwards  forbidden  by  the  law,  delivered  through 
 himself,  deserves  especial  notice. — J.  K. 
 
 JOEL  (PX'l'',  Whose  God  is  Jehovah,  i.  e. ,  a  wor- 
 shipper ofjehovah,  Gesen. ;  Sept.  'Iw^X).  i.  The 
 eldest  son  of  Samuel  the  prophet  (i  Sam.  viii.  2  ; 
 I  Chron.  vi.  33),  appointed  in  the  old  age  of  his 
 father,  along  with  his  brother  Abia,  a  judge  in  Beer- 
 sheba,  an  office  which  they  dishonoured  by  their  cor- 
 ruption and  profligacy,  and  thereby  paved  the  way 
 for  the  placing  of  the  government  in  the  hands  of 
 a  king  (l  Sam.  viii.  3-5)-  In  i  Chron.  vi.  12 
 [A.  V.  28],  Vashni  appears  as  the  name  of  Samuel's 
 eldest  son  ;  but  this  is  evidently  a  mistake,  arising 
 from  'Joel'  having  fallen  out  of  the  text,  and  ''Jti'1) 
 
 which  means  '  and  the  second,'  and  applies  to  Abia, 
 being  taken  as  a  proper  name.  Joel  was  the  father 
 of  Heman  the  singer  (i  Chron  vi.  33  ;  xv.  17). 
 Another  error  occurs  in  ver.  20  [A.  V.  36],  where 
 Joel  stands  for  Shaul  of  ver.  8  [A.  V.  24]. 
 
 2.  One  of  the  minor  prophets,  the  son  of  Pethuel. 
 Beyond  this,  nothing  is  known  with  certainty  con- 
 cerning him.  That  his  sphere  of  prophetic  activity 
 was  in  Judah,  may  be  gathered,  however,  from  his 
 own  book,  in  which  he  addresses  the  priests  as  in 
 the  midst  of  them  (Joel  i.  13,  14;  ii.  15,  17); 
 speaks  of  the  house  of  the  Lord  and  of  Zion  as 
 places  in  the  vicinity  of  which  he  was  (i.  9  ;  ii. 
 I,  23)  ;  and  dwells  exclusively  on  what  relates  to 
 Judah  and  Jerusalem  without  any  allusion  to  Israel. 
 This  throws  discredit  on  the  statement  of  Pseudo- 
 Epiphanius  {De  Vit  Proph.  c.  14),  that  he  was  of 
 the  tribe  of  Reuben,  and  was  buried  at  Bethhoron. 
 From  the  frequent  reference  which  he  makes  to 
 the  Temple,  its  offices,  and  services,  it  has  been 
 inferred  that  he  was  himself  a  priest ;  but  the  man- 
 ner in  which  he  addresses  the  priests  leads  rather 
 to  the  opposite  conclusion,  for  he  invariably  ad- 
 dresses them  as  a  body  to  which  he  himself  did  not 
 belong.  The  close  resemblance  between  parts  of 
 his  prophecy  and  parts  of  that  of  Amos  (comp. 
 Joel  iii.  16  with  Amos  i.  2  ;  Joel  iii.  18  with  Amos 
 ix.  13  ;  Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25,  with  Amos  iv.  6-9  ;  Joel 
 iii.  4-6  with  Amos  i.  6-10)  points  to  the  conclu- 
 sion that  they  were  nearly  contemporaries,  and  as 
 Amos  appears  to  have  connected  his  book  with 
 that  of  Joel  by  commencing  with  the  words  with 
 which  Joel  introduces  his  closing  utterance,  it  is 
 probable  that  Joel  was  the  earlier  of  the  two.  This 
 would  place  the  time  of  his  prophesying  somewhat 
 earlier  than  the  reign  of  Azariah  king  of  Judah, 
 during  which  Amos  prophesied.  Some,  however, 
 contend  for  an  earlier  date.  Thus  Credner,  Hit- 
 xig,  Ewald,  Keil,  and  others,  place  Joel  in  the  early 
 part  of  the  reign  of  Joash,  before  the  attack  of  the 
 Syrians  under  Hasael,  on  the  ground  that  had  this 
 event  preceded  his  writing,  he  would  have  included 
 (iii.  4)  the  Syrians  among  the  doomed  enemies  of 
 Judah,  as  Amos  includes  them  among  those  of 
 
 Israel.  But  it  might  as  well  be  argued  that  be- 
 cause Joel  does  not  include  Moab  and  Ammon  in 
 his  denunciation,  he  must  have  written  before  the 
 invasion  of  Judah  by  them  in  the  reign  of  Jehosha- 
 phat  (2  Chron.  xx.  i) ;  and,  moreover,  the  doom  of 
 Syria  was  incurred,  not  by  the  attack  upon  Judah, 
 in  which  the  Syrians  were  God's  instruments  to 
 punish  the  Jews  for  their  apostasy  (2  Chron  xxiv. 
 24),  but  by  their  oppression  of  Israel  (2  Kings 
 xiii.  22),  and  especially  by  the  cruelty  they  prac- 
 tised in  Gilead  (Amos  i.  3)  ;  so  that  it  did  not  fall 
 to  Joel  as  the  prophet  of  Judah  to  refer  to  them. 
 As  has  been  justly  remarked,  '  the  religious  aspect 
 of  the  single  invasion  of  Judah  by  this  band  of 
 Syrians  was  very  different  from  the  perpetual  hos- 
 tility of  the  Philistines,  or  the  malicious  cupidity  of 
 the  Phoenicians '  (Pusey,  Min.  Proph. ,  p.  96). 
 [Joel,  Book  of.] 
 
 3.  The  head  of  one  of  the  families  of  Simeon, 
 and  one  of  those  who  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  made 
 an  inroad  on  the  Hamites  in  Gedor  (Gerar  ?)  and 
 took  possession  of  their  pasture  lands  (i  Chron. 
 
 iv.  3S-4I)- 
 
 4.  A  descendant  of  Reuben  (i  Chron.  v.  4).  In 
 the  following  verses  his  descendants  to  the  seventh 
 generation  are  named,  and  as  the  latest  of  them 
 synchronises  with  the  Assyrian  invasion,  Bertheau 
 conjectures  {Die  Bitch,  der  Chronik,  p.  54)  that  Joel 
 must  have  lived  in  the  time  of  David. 
 
 5.  Chief  of  the  Gadiles  in  the  land  of  Bashan 
 (i  Chron.  v.  12). 
 
 6.  Son  of  Izrahiah,  one  of  the  chief  men  of  Issa- 
 char  (I  Chron.  vii.  3). 
 
 7.  Brother  of  Nathan,  one  of  David's  valiant 
 men  (i  Chron.  xi.  38).  In  2  Sam.  xxiii.  36  he  is 
 called  Igal  '  the  son  of  Nathan.'  That  by  a  cleri- 
 cal error  7X1''  should  be  confounded  with  7XJ^  is 
 easily  supposable,  but  which  is  the  true  reading 
 cannot  now  be  determined.  It  is  less  easy  to 
 account  for  the  one  passage  making  him  the  son 
 and  the  other  the  brother  of  Nathan.  The  former 
 is  probably  the  correct  statement,  as  it  is  not  usual 
 to  designate  men  from  their  brothers. 
 
 8-13.  Six  others  bearing  the  name  of  Joel  are 
 mentioned  in  the  O.  T.  (l  Chron.  xv.  7,  II  ;  xxiii. 
 8  ;  xxvi.  22 ;  xxvii.  20  ;  xxix.  1 2 ;  Ezra  x.  43 ;  Neh. 
 xi.  9).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOEL,  Book  of.  This  prophet  opens  his  com- 
 mission by  announcing  an  extraordinary  plague  of 
 locusts,  accompanied  with  extreme  drought,  which 
 he  depicts  in  a  strain  of  animated  and  sublime 
 poetry  under  the  image  of  an  invading  army.  The 
 fidelity  of  his  highly-wrought  description  is  corro- 
 borated and  illustrated  by  the  testimonies  of  Shaw, 
 Volney,  Forbes,  and  other  eminent  travellers,  who 
 have  been  eye-witnesses  of  the  ravages  committed 
 by  this  most  terrible  of  the  insect  tribe.  Their 
 accounts  tend  strongly,  we  think,  to  free  the  literal 
 interpretation  from  the  charge  of  being  '  the  great- 
 est exaggeration.'  It  is  also  to  be  observed  that 
 locusts  are  named  by  Moses  as  instruments  of  the 
 Divine  justice  (Deut.  xxviii.  38,  39),  and  by  Solo- 
 mi  in  in  his  prayer  at  the  dedication  of  the  Temj^le 
 (i  Kings  viii.  37).  In  the  second  chapter,  the 
 formidable  aspect  of  the  locusts — their  rapid  pro 
 gress — their  sweeping  devastation — the  awful  mur- 
 mur of  their  countless  throngs — their  instinctive 
 marshalling — the  irresistible  perseverance  with 
 which  they  make  their  way  over  every  obstacle 
 and  through  every  aperture — are  delineated  tvith 
 
JOEL,  BOOK  OF 
 
 615 
 
 JOHANAN 
 
 the  utmost  graphic  force.  Dr.  Hengstenberg  calls 
 in  question  the  mention  of  their  flight,  but,  as  it 
 appears  to  us,  without  adequate  reason.  He  con- 
 siders the  expression  'before  them,'  in  ch.  ii. ,  as 
 equivalent  to  '  before  they  rise  : '  but  in  the  third 
 
 verse  the  same  word  (VJCp)  occurs  twice,  evidently 
 in  the  sense  of  '  in  the  presence  of,'  '  in  their  front.' 
 The  eminent  critic  just  named  lays  great  stress  on 
 the  alleged  omission  of  this  particular,  which  he 
 considers  inexplicable,  unless  on  the  supposition 
 that  the  reality  presented  nothing  corresponding  to 
 it.  But  whether  this  characteristic  be  alluded  to 
 or  not,  the  argument  for  or  against  the  literal  inter- 
 pretation will  not  be  materially  affected.  Other 
 particulars  are  mentioned  which  literally  can  apply 
 only  to  locusts,  and  which,  on  the  supposition  that 
 the  language  is  allegorical,  are  explicable  only  as 
 being  accessory  traits  for  filling  up  the  picture 
 (Davidson's  Sacred  HennenetUics,  p.  310).  The 
 figurative  interpretation  has,  it  must  be  allowed, 
 the  support  of  antiquity.  It  was  adopted  by  the 
 Chaldee  paraphrast,  Ephrem  the  Syrian  (a.d.  350), 
 and  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Jerome  (A.D.  400). 
 Ephrem  supposes  that  by  the  four  different  denomi- 
 nations of  the  locusts  were  intended  Tiglath-pileser, 
 Shalmaneser,  Sennacherib,  and  Nebuchadnezzar. 
 The  Jews,  in  the  time  of  Jerome,  understood  by 
 the  first  term  the  Assyrians  and  Chaldeans  ;  by  the 
 second,  the  Medes  and  Persians  ;  by  the  third, 
 Alexander  the  Great  and  his  successors  ;  and  by 
 the  fourth,  the  Romans.  By  others,  however,  the 
 prophecy  was  interpreted  literally ;  and  Jerome 
 himself  appears  to  have  fluctuated  between  the  two 
 opinions,  though  more  inclined  to  the  allegorical 
 view.  Grotius  applies  the  description  to  tlie  in- 
 vasions by  Pul  and  Shalmaneser.  Holzhausen 
 attempts  to  unite  both  modes  of  interpretation, 
 and  applies  the  language  literally  to  the  locusts, 
 and  metaphorically  to  the  Assyrians.  It  is  singular, 
 however,  that,  if  a  hostile  invasion  be  intended, 
 not  the  least  hint  is  given  of  personal  injury  sus- 
 tained by  the  inhabitants  ;  the  immediate  effects 
 are  confined  entirely  to  the  vegetable  productions 
 and  the  cattle.  Dr.  Hengstenberg,  while  strongly 
 averse  from  the  literal  sense,  is  not  disposed  to 
 limit  the  metaphorical  meaning  to  any  one  event 
 or  class  of  invaders.  '  The  enemy,'  he  remarks, 
 'are  designated  only  as  noi'th  countries.  From 
 the  north,  however,  from  Syria,  all  the  principal 
 invasions  of  Palestine  proceeded.  We  have  there- 
 fore no  reason  to  think  exclusively  of  any  one  of 
 them.  Nor  ought  we  to  limit  the  prophecy  to  the 
 people  of  the  old  covenant.  Throughout  all 
 centuries  there  is  but  one  church  of  God  existing 
 in  unbroken  connection.  That  this  church,  during 
 the  first  period  of  its  existence,  was  concentrated 
 in  a  land  into  which  hostile  irruptions  were  made 
 from  the  north  was  purely  accidental.  To  make 
 this  circumstance  the  boundary-stone  of  the  fulfil- 
 ment of  prophecy  were  just  as  absurd  as  if  one 
 were  to  assert  that  the  threatening  of  Amos,  '  by 
 the  sword  shall  all  sinners  of  my  people  die,'  has 
 not  been  fulfilled  in  those  who  perished  after 
 another  manner'  {Christology,  Keith's  transl.,  iii. 
 104).     [Comp.  Pusey,  Minor  Proph.,  p.  99,  ff.] 
 
 The  prophet,  after  describing  the  approaching 
 judgments,  calls  on  his  countrymen  to  repent, 
 assuring  them  of  the  Divine  placability  and  readi- 
 ness to  forgive  (ii.  12-17).  He  foretels  the  re- 
 storation of  the  land  to  its  former  fertility,  and 
 
 declares  that  Jehovah  would  still  be  their  God 
 (ii.  18-26).  He  then  announces  the  spiritual 
 blessings  which  would  be  poured  forth  in  the 
 Messianic  age  (iii.  1-5,  Heb.  text  ;  ii.  28-32, 
 A.  V.)  This  remarkable  prediction  is  applied 
 by  the  Apostle  Peter  to  the  events  that  trans- 
 pired on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  16- 
 21).  In  the  last  chapter  (iv.  Heb.  text;  iii. 
 A.  v.),  the  Divine  vengeance  is  denounced  against 
 the  enemies  and  oppressors  of  the  chosen  people, 
 of  whom  the  Phoenicians,  Egyptians,  andEdomites, 
 are  especially  named.  A  minute  examination  of 
 these  predictions  would  exceed  our  limits ;  we 
 must  refer  the  reader  for  further  information  to  the 
 works  named  at  the  close  of  this  article. 
 
 The  style  of  Joel,  it  has  been  remarked,  unites 
 the  strength  of  Micah  with  the  tenderness  of  Jere- 
 miah. In  vividness  of  description  he  rivals  Nahum, 
 and  in  sublimity  and  majesty  is  scarcely  inferior  to 
 Isaiah  and  Habakkuk.  '  Imprimis  est  elegans, 
 clarus,  fusus,  fluensque ;  valde  etiam  sublimis,  acer, 
 fervidus'  (Lowth,  De  Sacra  Poesi  Hebr.  Prael.  xxi.) 
 
 The  canonicity  of  this  book  has  never  been  called 
 in  question. — J.  E.  R. 
 
 {Commentaries. — Leusden,  yoel  Explicatus,  Ul- 
 traj.  1657;  G.  T.  Baumgarten,  Hal.  1756;  Tur- 
 retine  (in  Tract,  de  SS.  inter pretat.,  0pp.  iii.  p. 
 104,  ff.,  edited  separately  by  Teller) ;  Pococke,  Oxf 
 1691;  Chandler,  Lond.  1741;  Eckermann,  1786; 
 Justi,  1792;  Scanborg,  Upsal  1806;  Credner,  1831; 
 Ewald,  Stuttg.  1840;  Meier,  Tiib.  1841 ;  Umbreit, 
 Hamb.  1844;  Henderson,  Lond.  1845  ;  Pusey,  Oxf. 
 1 861.  Comp.  also  Hengstenberg,  Christology,  E. 
 T.  [Clark],  i.  p.  285,  ff. ;  Niemeyer,  Characteristik 
 d.  Bibel,  V.  295-362 ;  Conn,  De  Chai-act.  Poet.  Joelis, 
 Tiib.  1783.] 
 
 JOGBEHAH  ^r\-^)^^,  perhaps  /.  q.  H^r,  'lofty; 
 
 from  naj,  'to  be  high;'  'Ie7e/3d\  ;  Alex.  Ze/3e^  ; 
 yegbaa),  a  town  in  the  territory  given  to  the  tribe 
 of  Gad,  east  of  the  Jordan.  It  appears  to  have 
 been  situated  high  up  (as  the  name  implies)  on  the 
 brow  of  the  mountain  ridge  which  overlooks  the 
 Jordan  valley  east  of  Jericho,  for  it  is  placed  be- 
 tween Bethnimrah  in  the  valley,  and  Jaazer,  which 
 stood  on  the  plateau  near  Heshbon  (Num.  xxxii. 
 35).  The  only  other  reference  to  it  is  in  the  ac- 
 count of  Gideon's  victory  over  the  host  of  Zebah 
 and  Zalmunna,  which  was  encamped  '  on  the  east 
 of  Nobah  and  Joghehah''  (Judg.  viii.  il).  The  site 
 is  unknown. 
 
 The  Septuagint  in  Num.  xxxii.  35  renders  the 
 word  nnnil'',  /cat  v^waav  avrds,  as  if  it  were  a  verb 
 and  pronoun,  instead  of  a  proper  name. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JOHANAN  (|jni\  Gift  of  Jehovah  ;  the  con- 
 tracted form  of  Jehohanan  ;  Sept.  ^\(j3va.v  and 
 ^\wa.vvav),  one  of  the  officers  who  came  and  recog- 
 nised Gedaliah  as  governor  of  Judcea  after  the  de- 
 struction of  Jerusalem,  and  who  appears  to  have 
 been  the  chief  in  authority  and  influence  among 
 them.  He  penetrated  the  designs  of  Ishmael 
 against  the  governor,  whom  he  endeavoured,  with- 
 out success,  to  put  upon  his  guard.  When  Ishmael 
 had  accomplished  his  design  by  the  murder  of 
 Gedaliah,  and  was  carrying  away  the  prmcipal 
 persons  at  the  seat  of  government  as  captives  to 
 the  Ammonites,  Johanan  pursued  him,  and  re- 
 leased them.  Being  fearful,  however,  that  the 
 Chaldeans  might  misunderstand  the  affair,  and 
 make  him  and  those  who  were  with  him  respon^ 
 
JOHLSOHN 
 
 616 
 
 JOHN  THE  APOSTLE 
 
 sible  for  it,  he  resolved  to  Avithdraw  for  safety  into 
 Egypt,  with  the  principal  persons  of  the  remnant 
 left  in  the  land.  Jeremiah  remonstrated  against  this 
 decision ;  but  Johanan  would  not  be  moved,  and 
 even  constrained  the  prophet  himself  to  go  with 
 them.  They  proceeded  to  Tahpanhes,  but  nothing 
 further  is  recorded  of  Johanan,  B.C.  588  (2  Kings 
 XXV.  23  ;  Jer.  xl.  8-16;  xh. ;  xlii.  ;  xliii.) — ^J.  K. 
 
 Nine  other  persons  of  this  name  are  mentioned 
 in  the  O.  T.  i.  (Sept.  'luavdv).  The  son  of  Aza- 
 riah  I.  and  father  of  Azariah  H.  (i  Chron.  v.  15,  16 
 [A.V.  vi.  9,  10])  [Azariah]  ;  2.  The  son  of  EHoe- 
 nai  (l  Chron.  iii.  24)  ;  3.  The  eldest  son  of  Josiah, 
 king  of  Judah  (i  Chron.  iii.  15)  ;  4.  A  Benjamite, 
 one  of  David's  captains,  who  joined  him  at  Ziklag 
 (l  Chron.  xii.  4)  ;  5.  Another  of  David's  followers, 
 one  of  the  Gadites,  whose  faces  were  like  the  faces 
 of  lions,  and  whose  feet  were  swift  as  roes  upon 
 the  mountains  (l  Chron.  xii.  12) ;  6.  The  father  of 
 Azariah,  an  Ephraimite  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  ;  in 
 the  Heb.  the  full  form  of  the  name  pnin""  yf/io- 
 hanen  (Sept.  'Iwoj'tjs)  is  given  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  12); 
 7.  The  chief  of  the  sons  of  Azgad,  who  returned 
 with  Ezra  (Ezra  viii.  12)  ;  8.  (pmri'')  The  son  of 
 Eliashib,  into  whose  chamber  Ezra  retired  to  mourn 
 the  transgression  of  those  who  had  been  seduced  to 
 marry  strange  wives  (Ezra  x.  6) ;  he  was  one  of  the 
 chief  of  the  fathers  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  (Neh.  xii. 
 23) ;  9-  (pnin'')  The  son  of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite, 
 and  the  husband  of  the  daughter  of  Meshullam  the 
 priest  (Neh.  vi.  18). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOHLSOHN,  J.  Joseph,  was  bom  in  Fulda, 
 1777.  Being  the  son  of  a  rabbi,  he  was  instructed 
 from  his  early  youth  in  the  original  language  of  the 
 O.  T.,  in  which  he  afterwards  greatly  distinguished 
 himself.  He  left  his  native  place  early  in  life,  and 
 went  to  Frankfort-on-the-Maine,  where  he  was 
 engaged  in  private  tuition  ;  he  afterwards  went  to 
 Kreuznach  and  became  Professor  of  Hebrew,  etc., 
 in  a  public  academy,  but  was  called  back,  in  1813, 
 by  the  Grand  Duke  to  the  professorial  chair  of 
 Hebrew  and  religion  in  the  Jewish  academy  at 
 Frankfort.  Here  he  at  once  began  his  public 
 literary  career,  and  published  (i)  a  valuable  work 
 on  the  fundamentals  of  the  Jewish  religio7i,  entitled 
 mn  ^B'lK*,  with  an  appendix  describing  the  man- 
 ners and  customs  of  the  Hebrews,  Frankfort-on- 
 the-Maine  1814;  second  ed.  1819.  (2)  A  chrono- 
 logical history  of  the  Bible,  in  Hebrew,  with  the 
 moral  sayings  of  the  Scriptures,  seven  Psalms 
 with  Kimchi's  Commentaiy,  a  Hebrew  Chresto- 
 
 mathy  with  notes,  and  a  glossary  called  nnSn 
 ni3K,  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1820 ;  second  ed. 
 1837.  (3)  The  Pentateuch  translated  into  German, 
 with  anttotations,  P'rankfort-on-the- Maine  1 83 1. 
 (4)  The  Sacred  Scriptures  of  the  Jetus,  translated 
 into  German,  with  annotations,  vol.  ii.  containing 
 Joshua,  Samuel,  and  Kings,  Frankfort-on-the- 
 Maine  1836.     (5)^  Hebrew  Grammar  for  schools, 
 
 entitled  \W7T\  ""TlDV  forming  a  second  part  to  the 
 new  ed.  of  the  Chrestomathy,  Frankfort-on-the- 
 Maine  1838.  (6)  A  Hebreiv  Lexicon,  giving  also  the 
 synonyms,  with  an  appendix  containing  an  explan- 
 ation of  the  abbreviations  used  in  the  Rabbinical 
 
 writings,  entitled  D"'^p  -|-ij?, Frankfort-on-the-Maine 
 1840.  (7)  A  historical  and  dogmatic  ttratise  on  cir- 
 cumcision, Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1843.  Johl- 
 sohn  died  in  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  in  1 851. 
 Comp.  Stein,  Der  Israel itische  Volkskhrer,  vol.  i., 
 
 Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1851,  p.  140,  ff.  ;  Fiirst, 
 Bibliotheca  Judaica,  vol.  ii.  p.  99,  etc. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JOHN  ('IwdwT/s),  the  same  name  as  Johanan. 
 It  occurs  in  the  Apocrypha  and  the  N.  T. 
 
 I.  The  father  of  Mattathias,  and  grandfather  oi 
 the  Maccabees  (i  Maccab.  ii.  l) ;  2.  The  son  of 
 Mattathias,  surnamed  Caddis  (i  Maccab.  ii.  2 ; 
 ix.  36,  38)  ;  3.  The  father  of  Eupolemos,  one  of 
 the  envoys  sent  to  Rome  by  Judas  Maccabreus  (l 
 Maccab.  viii.  1 7  ;  2  Maccab.  iv.  1 1 ) ;  4.  The  son 
 of  Simon,  surnamed  Hyrcanus  (l  Maccab.  xiii.  53  ; 
 xvi.  i)  ;  5.  An  envoy  from  the  Jews  to  Lysias  (2 
 Maccab.  xi.  1 7)  ;  [For  details  respecting  most  of 
 the  above,  see  article  Maccabees]  ;  6.  The  son  of 
 Zecharias  [John  the  Baptist]  ;  7.  The  son  of 
 Zebedee  [John  the  Apostle]  ;  8.  One  of  the 
 kindred  of  the  high-priest  who,  along  with  Annas, 
 Caiaphas,  and  Alexander,  sat  in  judgment  on  Peter 
 and  John  when  summoned  to  answer  for  what  they 
 had  done  in  curing  the  lame  man  and  preaching  to 
 the  people  (Acts.  iv.  6).  This  John  Lightfoot 
 supposes  to  be  the  Johanan  ben  Zaccai  mentioned 
 by  Talmudic  writers,  and  who  was  one  of  the  most 
 famous  men  of  that  time  {Hor.  Heb.  in  loc.)  ;  9, 
 John  Mark  [Mark].  — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOHN  THE  APOSTLE.  He  was  the  son  of 
 Zebedee,  a  fisherman,  and  of  Salome.  It  is  pro- 
 bable that  he  was  born  at  Bethsaida,  on  the  lake  of 
 Galilee.  His  parents  appear  to  have  been  in  easy 
 circumstances  ;  at  least,  we  find  that  Zebedee  em- 
 ployed hired  servants  (Mark  i.  20),  and  that  Salome 
 was  among  the  number  of  those  women  who  con- 
 tributed to  the  maintenance  of  Jesus  (Matt,  xxvii. 
 56).  We  also  find  that  John  received  Mary  into 
 his  house  after  the  death  of  Jesus.  Since  this 
 house  seems  to  have  been  situated  at  Jerusalem  (d7r' 
 eKeivTjs  TT]s  &pas,  John  xix.  27),  it  would  appear 
 that  he  was  the  owner  of  two  houses.  John's 
 acquaintance,  also,  with  the  high-priest  (xviii.  15) 
 seems  to  indicate  that  he  lived  at  Jerusalem,  and 
 belonged  to  the  wealthier  class.  We  may  suppose 
 that  from  a  tender  age  he  nourished  religious  feel- 
 ings, since  Salome,  who  evinced  so  much  love  for 
 Jesus,  probably  fostered  at  an  earlier  period  those 
 hopes  of  a  Messiah  which  she  expresses  in  Matt. 
 XX.  20 ;  and  we  find  that  he  entered  into  com- 
 munion with  the  Baptist  from  pure  motives.  The 
 occupation,  also,  of  a  fisherman  was  adapted  to 
 promote  holy  meditations,  since  it  would  frequently 
 lead  him  to  pass  whole  nights  in  stillness  upon  the 
 water,  amid  a  charming  country  similar  to  the 
 environs  of  the  lake  of  Locarno.  On  the  banks  of 
 the  Jordan  the  Baptist  directed  John  to  Jesus,  and 
 he  immediately  became  the  Lord's  disciple,  and 
 accompanied  him  on  his  return  to  Galilee.  Hav- 
 ing arrived  there,  he  at  first  resumed  his  trade,  but 
 was  afterwards  called  to  remain  permanently  with 
 the  Redeemer  (Luke  v.  5- 10).  Jesus  was  particu- 
 larly attached  to  John  (John  xiii.  23  ;  xix.  26 ;  xx. 
 2  ;  xxi.  7),  who  was  one  of  the  three  who  were 
 distinguished  above  the  other  apostles  (Matt.  xviL 
 I  ;  xxvi.  37  ;  Mark  v.  37).  After  the  ascension. 
 John  abode  at  Jerusalem,  where  Paul  met  him  or 
 his  third  journey,  about  the  year  52  (Gal.  ii.  3-9). 
 Since  he  had  undertaken  the  care  of  the  mother  of 
 Jesus,  we  cannot  well  suppose  that  he  left  Jeru- 
 salem before  Mary's  death  ;  and,  indeed,  we  find 
 that  about  the  year  58,  when  Paul  was  iA  Ephesus, 
 John  was  not  yet  living  there.  If  we  consider  the 
 great  importance  of  Ephesus  among  the  various 
 
JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 617 
 
 JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 diurches  of  Asia  Minor,  and  the  dangers  arising 
 .'rom  false  teachers,  wlio  were  prevalent  there  as 
 early  as  tlie  days  of  Paul  (Acts  xx.  29),  it  will 
 appear  likely  that  John  was  sent  to  Ephesus  after 
 Paul  had  left  that  scene,  about  the  year  65. 
 During  the  time  of  his  activity  in  Asia  Minor,  he 
 was  exiled  by  the  Roman  emperor  to  Patmos,  one 
 of  the  Sporadic  isles  in  the  ^gean  Sea,  where, 
 according  to  Revelations  i.  9,  he  wrote  the  Apoca- 
 lypse. Irenteus  (Adv.  Hce7\  v.  30),  and,  following 
 him,  Eusebius  {Hist.  Ecdes.  iii.  iS),  state  that 
 John  beheld  the  visions  of  the  Apocalypse  about 
 the  close  of  the  reign  of  Domitian.  If  this  state- 
 ment can  be  depended  upon,  the  exile  to  Patmos 
 also  took  place  under  Domitian,  who  died  A.  D. 
 96.  Tertuilian  {Prascr.  adv.  Hcer.,  c.  30)  relates 
 that  in  the  reign  of  Domitian  John  was  forcibly 
 conveyed  to  Rome,  where  he  was  thrown  into  a 
 cask  of  oil ;  that  he  was  miraculously  released,  and 
 then  brought  to  Patmos.  But  since  none  of  the 
 ancient  writers  besides  the  rather  undiscriminating 
 Tertuilian  relate  this  circumstance,  and  since  this 
 mode  of  capital  punishment  was  unheard  of  at 
 Rome,  we  ought  not  to  lay  much  stress  upon  it 
 (compare  Mosheim,  Disseriaiioties  ad  Historiam 
 Ecclesiasticam,  i.  p.  497,  sq.)  It  is,  however, 
 likely  that  John  was  called  to  suffer  for  his  faith, 
 since  Polycrates,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  writing  about 
 A.D.  200,  calls  him  fj-dprvs  (Euseb.  Jlist.  Eccles.  v. 
 24).  According  to  Eusebius  [Hist.  Eccles.,  iii.  20, 
 23),  he  returned  from  exile  during  the  reign  of 
 Nerva.  The  three  epistles  of  John,  as  also  the 
 affecting  account  concerning  his  fidelity  as  a  spiri- 
 tual pastor,  given  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus  {Quis 
 Dives  Sahnis  ?  c.  52),  testify  that  he  was  the  pastor 
 of  a  large  diocese.  John's  second  epistle,  ver.  12, 
 and  third  epistle,  ver.  14,  indicate  that  he  made 
 journeys  of  pastoral  visitation.  John  died  at 
 Ephesus  past  the  age  of  ninety,  in  the  reign  of  the 
 Emperor  Trajan.  According  to  Jerome,  he  was  a 
 hundred  years  old,  and  according  to  Suidas,  a 
 hundred  and  twenty. 
 
 If  we  endeavour  to  picture  to  ourselves  an  image 
 of  John  as  dravni  from  his  Gospel  and  his  Epistles, 
 aided  by  a  few  traits  of  his  life  preserved  by  the 
 fathers,*  he  appears  to  have  been  of  a  wise,  affec- 
 tionate, and  rather  feminine  character. 
 
 It  seems  that  originally  this  softness  of  disposi- 
 tion would  sometimes  blaze  up  in  wrath,  as  femi- 
 nine characters  in  general  feel  themselves  as 
 strongly  repelled  as  attracted.  An  instance  of  his 
 wrath  we  find  in  Luke  ix.  54,  sq.  We  trace  also 
 a  degree  of  selfishness  in  Mark  ix.  38  ;  x.  35. 
 Hence  it  appears  that  love,  humility,  and  mildness, 
 were  in  John  the  works  of  transforming  grace.  At 
 a  later  period  his  writings  indicate  not  only  mild- 
 ness, but  also  a  strict  moral  earnestness  (i  John  i. 
 6;  iii.  9-20 ;  v.  16;  2  John  10,  11). — A.  T. 
 
 JOHN,  Gospel  according  to.     i.  Gema'ne- 
 
 *  Jerome  {Comm.  ad  Gal.,  iii.  p.  314,  mart.) 
 relates  that  when  John  had  attained  a  great  age  he 
 was  so  feeble  that  he  could  not  walk  to  the  assem- 
 blies of  the  church  ;  he  therefore  caused  himself  to 
 be  carried  in  by  young  men.  He  was  no  longer 
 able  to  say  much,  but  he  constantly  repeated  the 
 words,  '  Little  children,  love  one  another.'  On 
 being  asked  why  he  constantly  repeated  this  one 
 saying,  he  replied,  '  Because  it  is  the  command  of 
 the  Lord  ;  and  enough  is  done  if  this  is  done.' 
 
 ftess.- — There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  fourth 
 gospel  was  from  the  beginning  received  in  the 
 church  as  the  production  of  the  apostle  whose 
 name  it  bears.  We  may  decline  to  accept  as  a 
 testimony  for  this  the  statement  at  the  close  of  the 
 Gospel  itself  (xxi.  24),  for  this  can  have  the  force 
 of  an  independent  testimony  only  on  the  supposi- 
 tion that  the  passage  was  added  by  another  hand  ; 
 and  though  there  is  an  evident  allusion  in  2  Pet.  i. 
 14  to  what  is  recorded  in  John  xxi.  18,  19,  yet  as 
 that  saying  of  the  Lord  was  one  which  tradition 
 would  be  sure  to  send  forth  among  the  brethren 
 (comp.  ver.  23),  it  cannot  be  inferred  from  Peter's 
 allusion  to  it  that  it  was  then  put  on  record  as  we 
 have  it  in  the  Gospel.  We  may  also  admit  that 
 the  passages  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic 
 Fathers  which  have  been  adduced  as  evidencing, 
 on  their  part,  acquaintance  with  this  Gospel  are 
 not  decisive ;  as  all  of  them  j>iay  owe  their  ac- 
 cordance with  John's  statements  to  the  influence 
 of  true  tradition,  or  to  the  necessary  resemblance 
 of  the  just  utterance  of  Christian  thought  and 
 feeling  by  different  men  ;  though  in  three  of  the 
 passages  cited  from  Ignatius  [Ad  Rom.  vii.  ;  Ad 
 Trail,  viii.  ;  and  Ad  Philad.  vii.)  the  coincidence 
 of  the  two  first  with  John  vi.  32,  ff ,  and  of  the 
 last  with  John  iii.  8,  is  almost  too  close  to  be 
 accounted  for  in  this  way*  (Ebrard,  Evang.  Joh., 
 p.  102  ;  Rothe,  Anfdnoe  der  Christl.  Kirche,  p. 
 715).  But  Eusebius  attests  that  this  Gospel  was 
 among  the  books  universally  received  in  the 
 church  {Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  25)  ;  and  it  cannot  be 
 doubted  that  it  formed  part  of  the  canon  of  the 
 churches,  both  of  the  East  and  West,  before  the 
 end  of  the  2d  century  [Canon].  It  is  in  the 
 Peshito,  and  in  the  Muratori  PVagment.  It  is 
 quoted  or  referred  to  by  Justin  Martyr  {Apol.  i. 
 52,  61  ;  ii.  6 ;  c.  Tryph.  105,  etc.  ;  comp.  Olshau- 
 sen,  Echtheit  der  Kan.  Evv.,  p.  304,  ff.)  ;  by  Ta- 
 tian  {Orat.  ad  Gvcecos,  4,  13,  19),  who,  indeed, 
 composed  a  Diatessaron  (Euseb.,  H.  E.,  iv.  29;. 
 Theod.,  HcFret.  Fab.,  i.  20),  in  preparing  which  he 
 must  have  had  this  Gospel  before  him  ;  in  the 
 Epistle  of  the  Church  at  Vienne  and  Lyons 
 (Euseb.  V.  l)  ;  by  Melito  of  Sardes  (see  Pitra, 
 Specileg.  Solinense,  i.,  Prolegom.  p.  5,  Paris  1852) ; 
 by  Athenagoras  {Leg.  pro  Christ,  ic)  ;  by  Apolli- 
 naris  {Frai^.  Chron.  Pasch.,  p.  14,  ed.  Dindorf)  ; 
 by  Polycrates,  Bishop  of  Ephesus  (Euseb.  H.  E. 
 V.  24)  ;  and  in  the  Clementine  Homilies  (xix.  22, 
 ed.  Dressel,  1853),  in  such  a  way  that  not  only  is 
 its  existence  proved,  but  evidence  is  afforded  of 
 the  esteem  in  which  it  was  held  as  canonical  from 
 the  middle  of  the  2d  century.  Still  more  precise 
 is  the  testimony  of  Theophilus,  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
 who  not  only  composed  a  Harmony  of  the  four 
 evangelists  (Hieron.,  De  viris  illust.  25  ;  Ep.  151, 
 ad  Algasiam),  but  in  an  extant  work  {Ad  Aiitol.  ii. 
 22)  expressly  quotes  John  i.  I  as  part  of  Holy 
 Scripture,  and  as  the  production  of  the  apostle, 
 whom  he  ranks  among  the  ■n-vevfj.aTocpdpoi.  More 
 important  still  is  the  testimony  of  Irenseus  {Har. 
 
 *  The  other  passages  usually  cited  from  the 
 Apostolic  Fathers  are,  Bamab.  Ep.  v.  vi.  xii. 
 (comp.  John  iii.  14)  ;  Herm.,  Past.,  Sim.  ix.  13 
 (comp.  John  x.  7,  9  ;  xiv.  6)  ;  Ignat.  Ad  Trail. 
 viii.  (comp.  John  vi.  51);  Ad  Magnes.  vii.  (comp. 
 John  xii.  49;  x.  30;  xiv.  ii).  See  Lardner, 
 Works,  vol.  ii. 
 
JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 618 
 
 JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 iii.  II.  3,  p.  218,  ed.  Grabe),  both  because  of  his 
 acquaintance  in  early  youth  with  Polycarp,  and 
 because  of  the  distinctness  and  unliesitating  confi- 
 dence with  which  he  asserts  tlie  Johannine  origin 
 of  this  Gospel.  To  these  testimonies  may  be 
 added  that  of  Celsus,  the  enemy  of  the  Christians, 
 who,  in  preparing  his  attack  upon  them,  evidently 
 had  the  four  canonical  gospels  before  him,  and  of 
 whose  citations  from  them  some  are  undoubtedly 
 from  that  of  John  (comp.  Olshausen,  bk.  cited,  p. 
 349,  355;  Liicke,  Comment,  i.  68,  ff. ,  3d  ed. )  ; 
 which  shews  that,  at  the  time  when  he  wrote,  this 
 Gospel  must  have  been  in  general  acceptance  by 
 the  Christians  as  canonical.  The  heretic  Mar- 
 cion,  also,  in  rejecting  this  gospel  on  dogmatical 
 grounds,  is  a  witness  to  the  fact,  that  its  canonical 
 authority  was  generally  held  by  the  Christians 
 (TertulL  c.  Mairioit,  iv.  5  ;  de  Came  Christi). 
 That  the  Gospel  was  recognised  as  canonical  by 
 the  Valentinians,  one  of  the  most  important  sects 
 of  the  2d  century,  is  placed  beyond  doubt  by  the 
 statement  of  IrenjKus  {Hicr.  iii.  11),  and  by  the 
 fact  that  it  is  quoted  by  Ptolemasus,  a  disciple  of 
 Valentinus  (Epiphan. ,  Hcvr.  xxxiii.  3),  and  was 
 commented  on  by  Heracleon,  another  of  his  dis- 
 ciples, both  of  whom  lived  about  the  middle  of 
 the  2d  century.  That  Valentinus  himself  knew 
 and  used  the  book  is  rendered  probable  by  this, 
 and  by  the  statement  of  TertuUian  {Dc  Prtrscr. 
 Hiir.  38),  that  Valentinus  accepted  the  Biblical 
 canon  entire,  though  he  perverted  its  meaning  ; 
 and  this  probability  is  raised  to  certainty  by  the 
 fact  that,  in  the  recently  discovered  work  of  Hip- 
 polytus,  Valentinus  is  found  twice  {PkilosopJt.  vi. 
 33,  34,  ed.  Miller)  citing  the  phrase  6  (ipx<j^v  tov 
 K6af.wv  TovTov,  as  applied  to  the  devil,  which  occurs 
 only  in  John's  Gospel,  and  repeatedly  there  (.xii. 
 31 ;  xiv.  30  ;  xvi.  11)  ;  and  also  quoting  the  say- 
 ing, John  X.  8,  as  the  word  of  Christ.  From  the 
 same  source,  also  (vii.  22,  27,  p.  232,  242),  we 
 learn  that  Basilides  was  acquainted  with  John's 
 Gospel,  and  cited  it ;  and  this  brings  us  up  to  the 
 beginning  of  the  2d  century,  within  a  short  time  of 
 the  apostle's  death. 
 
 This  concurrence  of  external  testimony  is  the 
 more  noticeable,  as  there  are  certain  peculiarities 
 in  the  fourth  gospel  which  would  have  thrown  sus- 
 picion on  its  genuineness  had  not  that  been  placed 
 beyond  doubt  by  the  knowledge  which  the  Chris- 
 tians had  of  its  having  proceeded  from  the  pen  of 
 John.  Of  these  are  the  prominence  given  to  the 
 extra-Galilean  ministry  of  our  Lord  ;  the  record 
 of  remarkable  miracles,  such  as  the  healing  of  the 
 impotent  man  (ch.  v.),  of  the  blind  man  (ch.  ix. ), 
 the  raising  from  the  dead  of  Lazarus,  and  others, 
 omitted  by  the  other  evangelists  ;  the  insertion  of 
 so  many  discourses  of  Jesus,  of  which  no  hint  is 
 found  in  the  other  gospels,  as  well  as  the  omission 
 of  remarkable  facts  in  the  evangelic  history,  espe- 
 cially the  institution  of  the  supper  and  the  agony 
 in  the  garden  ;  and  certain  important  apparent  dis- 
 crepancies between  this  and  the  synoptic  gospels. 
 In  perfect  keeping  with  this  assumption,  also,  is 
 the  entire  tone,  spirit,  and  character  of  the  Gospel ; 
 it  is  emphatically,  as  Clement  of  Alexandria  calls 
 it,  the  TTvevixaTiKov  evayy^Xiov,  and  breathes  through- 
 out the  spirit  which  was  characteristic  of  '  the  dis- 
 ciple whom  Jesus  loved.'  The  work  is  evidently 
 the  production  of  one  who  was,  as  the  writer  pro- 
 fesses to  be  (i.  14  [comp.  X  John  i.  I  ;  iv.  14] ; 
 xix.   35 ;    xxi.    24),    an   eye-witness   of  what   he 
 
 narrates  ;  and  there  is  a  simplicity,  a  naturalness, 
 and  a  vividness  in  the  whole  narrative  which  no 
 forger  of  a  later  age  could  have  attained — which 
 the  very  consciousness  of  composing  what  was  in- 
 tended to  be  an  imposition,  would  have  precluded. 
 The  remarkable  manner,  also,  in  which  the  writer 
 avoids  introducing  John  by  name  (ch.  xiii.  23  ; 
 xix.  26;  XX.  2,  3,  4;  xxi.  7,  24),  affords  addi- 
 tional evidence  that  John  himself  was  the  writer. 
 It  has  been  urged  also  by  some  (Bleek,  Ebrard, 
 Credner),  that  the  use  of  the  simple  'luiduvTjs, 
 without  in  any  case  the  addition  of  the  usual  c 
 BaTTTKTTrji,  to  designate  the  Baptist,  in  this  Gospel, 
 is  an  evidence  of  its  being  the  production  of  John 
 the  apostle,  on  the  ground  that,  '  supposing  the 
 apostle  not  to  be  the  writer,  one  would  expect  that 
 he  should,  like  the  Synoptists,  discriminate  the 
 Baptist  from  the  Apostle  by  this  epithet,  whereas, 
 supposing  the  apostle  himself  to  be  the  writer,  he 
 would  feel  less  prompted  to  do  so  '  (Bleek,  Einleit. 
 in  d.  N.  Z! ,  p.  148)  ;  but  to  this  much  weight 
 cannot  be  attached,  for  though  it  is  probable  that 
 a  writer  taking  his  materials  from  the  other  evan- 
 gelists would  have  designated  John  as  they  do,  and 
 tliough,  as  Meyer  suggests  {A'rit.  Exeg.  Comni. 
 iibcr  N.  T.,  Em.  ins  Ev.  des  yokannes,  p.  23),  it 
 is  probable  that  John,  who  had  been  a  disciple  of 
 the  Baptist,  might  prefer  speaking  of  him  by  the 
 name  by  which  he  had  been  accustomed  to  desig- 
 nate him  during  their  personal  intercourse,  rather 
 than  by  his  historical  name  ;  yet  as  we  cannot  tell 
 what  considerations  might  have  occurred  to  a  forger 
 writing  in  the  apostle's  name  to  induce  him  to  drop 
 the  distinctive  epithet,  it  is  hardly  competent  for  us 
 to  accept  this  omission  as  a  proof  ihaX  the  work  is 
 not  the  production  of  a  forger.  It  is  needless  to 
 press  every  mmute  particular  into  the  service  of  the 
 argument  for  the  genuineness  of  this  Gospel ;  it  is 
 impossible  to  read  it  without  feeling  that  it  is 
 Johannine  in  all  its  parts,  and  that,  had  it  been 
 the  production  of  any  other  than  the  apostle,  that 
 other  must,  in  mind,  spirit,  affection,  circum- 
 stances, and  character,  have  been  a  second  John. 
 
 It  is  only  comparatively  recently  that  any  attempt 
 has  been  made  to  impugn  the  genuineness  of  this 
 gospel.  The  work  of  Bretschneider,  entitled  Pro- 
 babilia  de  Evangelii  et  Epp.  Johannis  apost.  indole 
 et  origine.  Lips.  1820,  is  the  earliest  formal  attack 
 of  any  importance  made  upon  it ;  and  this  the 
 author  has  himself  assured  us,  was  made  by  him 
 with  a  view  of  anew  exciting  and  extending  inquiry 
 into  the  genuineness  of  the  Johannine  writings, 
 an  end  which,  he  adds,  has  been  gained,  so  that 
 the  doubts  he  suggested  may  be  regarded  as  dis- 
 charged {Dogmatik,  i.  p.  268,  3d  ed.  [Bret- 
 schneider]). Since  this  work  appeared,  the 
 claims  of  the  Gospel  have  been  opposed  by  Strauss 
 in  his  Lcben  Jesu ;  by  Weisse,  in  his  Evangelische 
 Geschichte ;  by  Liitzelberger  {Die  Kirchliche  Tra- 
 dition lib.  d.  Apost.  yoh.) ;  by  Baur  {Krit.  Unter- 
 such.  lib.  d.  Kanonischen  Evang.)  ;  by  Hilgenfeld 
 {Das  Evang.  ti.  die  Brie/e  Joh.  nach  ihrcm  Lchrbegr. 
 dargestellt),  and  by  others.  But  the  reasons  ad- 
 vanced by  these  writers  have  so  little  force,  and 
 have  been  so  thoroughly  replied  to,  that  even  in 
 Germany  the  general  opinion  has  reverted  to  the 
 ancient  and  catholic  belief  in  respect  of  the  author- 
 ship of  the  fourth  gospel.  The  reader  who  wislies 
 to  go  into  the  controversy  may  consult  with  ad- 
 vantage the  following  works  in  reply  to  those  above 
 Doted  :  Stein,  Autheniia  Ev.  Joh.  vindicata^  Bran- 
 
JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 (519 
 
 JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 denb.  1822  ;  Crome,  Probabilia  haud  probabilia, 
 oder  Widerlegung  dcr  von  Dr.  Bretschtteider  gegen 
 d.  aechtheit  des  Ev.  u.  d,  Br.  yoh.  erhobctien  Zweifel, 
 Leipz.  1824 ;  Hauff,  Die  Autheidie  ti.  d.  hobe 
 werth  d.  Ev.  Joh.,  Niirnberg  183 1  ;  and  in  the 
 Stud,  und  Krit.  for  1846,  p.  806 ;  Tholuck, 
 Glaiibii'iirdigkeit  der  Evang.  Gesch.  ;  Ebrard, 
 Krilik  d.  Evangel.  Geschichte,  Ziir.  1850,  2d  ed.  ; 
 Ewald,  yakrbuch,  iii.  p.  146,  v.  p.  178;  Meyer, 
 Krit.  Exeg.  Comm.  ii.  Th.  2  Abt,  Gott.  1856, 
 3d  ed.  ;  Bleek,  Einl.  in  d.  N.  T.,  Berl.  1862  ; 
 Davidson,  Introduction  to  the  IST.  T.,'\.  p.  233,  fif. 
 
 2.  Integrity. — Certain  portions  of  this  Gospel 
 ]iave  been  regarded  as  interpolations  or  later  addi- 
 tions, even  by  those  who  accept  the  Gospel  as  a 
 whole  as  the  work  of  St.  John.  One  of  these  is 
 the  closing  part  of  v.  2,  from  eKdexofJ-evwu,  and  the 
 whole  of  ver.  4,  in  regard  to  which  the  critical 
 authorities  fluctuate,  and  which  contain  statements 
 that  give  a  legendaiy  aspect  to  the  narrative,  such 
 as  belongs  to  no  other  of  the  miracles  related  in 
 the  gospels.  Both  are  rejected  by  Tischendorf  but 
 retained  by  Lachmann  ;  and  the  same  diversity  of 
 judgment  appears  among  interpreters,  some  reject- 
 ing both  passages  (Liicke,  Tholuck,  Olshausen), 
 others  retaining  both  (Bruckner),  others  rejecting 
 ver.  4,  but  retaining  ver.  2  (Ewald),  while  some 
 leave  the  whole  in  doubt  (De  Wette).  Another 
 doubtful  portion  is  the  section  relating  to  the 
 woman  taken  in  adultery  (vii.  53  ;  viii.  11).  This 
 is  regarded  as  an  interpolation,  because  of  the 
 deficiency  of  critical  evidence  in  its  favour  (see 
 Tischendorf  or  Alford,  in  toe),  and  because  of 
 reasons  founded  on  the  passage  itself,  viz.,  the 
 apparently  forced  way  in  which  it  is  connected  with 
 what  precedes  by  means  of  vii.  53  ;  the  interrup- 
 tion caused  by  it  to  the  course  of  the  narrative,  the 
 words  in  viii.  12  being  evidently  in  continuation  of 
 what  precedes  this  section  ;  the  alleged  going  of 
 Jesus  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  return  to  Jeru- 
 salem, which  would  place  this  occurrence  in  the 
 tast  residence  of  our  Lord  in  Jerusalem  (Luke  xxi. 
 37)  ;  the  absence  of  the  characteristic  usage  of  the 
 odf,  which  John  so  constantly  introduces  into  his 
 narratives,  and  for  which  we  have  in  this  section  5^ 
 used  as  John  generally  uses  oSv ;  and  the  presence 
 of  the  expressions  6p6pov,  iras  6  Xa6s,  Kadiaas 
 idiSaffKev  avrovs,  oi  ypa/JL/j-aTels  /cat  oi  cpapicraioi, 
 eTTLixlvnv,  dva/j.dpTir]Tos,  KaToXeiireadai,  and  Kara- 
 Kpiveiv,  which  are  foreign  to  John's  style.  On  the 
 other  side  it  is  urged  that  the  section  contains,  as 
 Calvin  says,  '  nihil  apostolico  spiritu  indignum,' 
 that  it  has  no  appearance  of  a  later  legend,  but 
 bears  every  trace  of  an  original  account  of  a  very 
 probable  fact,  and  that  it  has  a  considerable  amount 
 of  diplomatic  evidence  in  its  favour.  The  question 
 is  one  which  hardly  admits  of  a  decided  answer. 
 The  preponderance  of  evidence  is  undoubtedly 
 against  the  Johannine  origin  of  the  section,  and  it 
 has  consequently  been  regarded  as  an  interpolation 
 by  the  great  majority  of  critics  and  interpreters, 
 including  among  the  latter  Calvin,  Beza,  Tittmann, 
 Tholuck,  Olshausen,  Liicke,  and  Luthardt,  as 
 well  as  Grotius,  De  Wette,  Paulus,  and  Ewald. 
 At  the  same  time,  if  it  did  not  form  part  of  the 
 original  Gospel,  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  its 
 being  at  so  early  a  period  inserted  in  it.  From  a 
 passage  in  Eusebius  (Id.  E.  iii.  39)  some  have  con- 
 cluded that  Papias  inserted  it  from  the  Gospel  ac- 
 cordir.g  to  the  Hebrews  ;  but  it  is  not  certain  that 
 it  is  to  this  section  that  the  words  of  Eusebius 
 
 reler.  nor  is  it  certain  that  he  meant  to  say  thai 
 Papias  inserted  the  story  he  refers  to  in  the  Gospel. 
 More  important  than  either  of  these  portions  is 
 chap,  xxi.,  which  is  by  many  regarded  as  the  ad- 
 dition of  a  later  hand  after  the  apostle's  death. 
 This  opinion  rests  wholly  on  internal  grounds,  for 
 there  is_  no  evidence  that  the  Gospel  was  ever 
 known  in  the  church  without  this  chapter.  At 
 first  sight  it  certainly  appears  as  if  the  original 
 work  ended  with  ch.  xx. ,  and  that  ch.  xxi.  was  a 
 later  addition  ;  but  whether  by  the  apostle  himself 
 or  by  some  other  is  open  to  question.  The  absence 
 of  any  trace  of  the  Gospel  having  ever  existed 
 without  it  must  be  allowed  to  afford  strong  /rinia 
 facie  evidence  of  its  having  been  added  by  the 
 author  himself ;  still  this  is  not  conclusive,  for  the 
 addition  may  have  been  made  by  one  of  his  friends 
 or  disciples  before  the  work  was  in  circulation. 
 Grotius,  who  thinks  it  was  made  by  the  elders  at 
 Ephesus,  argues  against  its  genuineness,  especially 
 from  ver.  24;  but  though  the  language  there  has 
 certainly  the  appearance  of  being  rather  that  of 
 others  than  that  of  the  party  himself  to  whom  it 
 refers,  still  it  is  not  impossible  that  John  may  have 
 referred  to  himself  in  the  third  person,  as  he  does 
 for  instance  in  xix.  35,  and  as  for  the  use  of  the 
 pi.  oidapLev,  that  may  be  accounted  for  by  his  tacitly 
 joining  his  readers  with  himself,  just  as  he  assumes 
 their  presence  in  xix.  35.  There  is  more  difficulty 
 in  accepting  ver.  25  as  genuine,  for  such  a  hyper- 
 bolical mode  of  expression  does  not  seem  to  com- 
 port with  the  simplicity  and  sincerity  of  John  ; 
 but  there  seems  no  valid  reason  for  calling  into 
 doubt  any  other  part  of  the  chapter. 
 
 3.  Design.  —  At  the  close  of  the  Gospel  the 
 apostle  has  himself  stated  his  design  in  writing  it 
 thus  :  '  These  are  written  that  ye  might  believe 
 that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  that 
 believing  ye  might  have  life  through  his  name' 
 (xx.  31).  Taken  in  the  general  this  may  be  said 
 to  be  the  design  of  all  the  evangelical  narratives, 
 for  all  of  them  are  intended  to  produce  the  convic- 
 tion that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the  Messiah 
 promised  to  the  Fathers,  and  so  to  exhibit  Him  in 
 his  saving  power,  that  men  believing  on  Him  might 
 enjoy  that  life  which  He  had  come  to  bestow. 
 We  must  seek,  therefore,  John's  specific  design 
 either  in  some  special  occasion  which  he  sought  to 
 meet,  or  in  some  peculiarity  in  his  mode  of  pre- 
 senting the  claims  of  Jesus,  by  which  not  merely 
 his  Messiahship  should  be  evinced,  but  the  higher 
 aspect  of  his  Person,  and  the  spiritual  effects  of  his 
 working,  should  be  prominently  exhibited.  Pro- 
 bably both  of  these  concurred  in  the  apostle's 
 design  ;  and  we  shall  best  conceive  his  purpose 
 by  neither,  on  the  one  hand,  ascribing  to  him  a 
 merely  historical,  nor  on  the  other  a  purely  dog- 
 matical design.  It  is  an  old  and  still  prevalent 
 opinion  that  John  wrote  his  Gospel  to  supply  the 
 omissions  of  the  other  three ;  but  no  such  impres- 
 sion is  conveyed  by  the  Gospel  itself,  which  is  as 
 far  as  possible  from  having  the  appearance  of  a 
 mere  series  of  supplemental  notes  to  previously 
 existing  writings ;  indeed,  if  this  had  been  the 
 apostle's  purpose,  it  cannot  be  said  that  he  has  in 
 any  adequate  way  fulfilled  it.  Nor  is  there  any 
 ground  for  believing  that  it  was  a  poletnical  object 
 which  chiefly  prompted  him  to  write  this  Gospel, 
 though  such  has  often  been  suggested.  Thus 
 Irenaeus  {Hacr.  iii.  il.  i)  says  that  the  GospeJ 
 was  written  against  the  errors  of  Cerinthus.    Jeiome 
 
JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 620 
 
 JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 {De  vir.  ill.  9)  adds  the  Ebionites ;  and  later 
 writers  have  maintained  that  the  Gnostics  or  the 
 Doketae  are  the  parties  against  whom  the  polemic 
 of  the  apostle  is  here  directed.  All  this,  however, 
 is  mere  supposition,  for  which  there  is  no  real 
 basis.  Doubtless  in  what  John  has  written  there 
 is  that  which  furnishes  a  full  refutation  of  all 
 Ebionite,  Gnostic,  and  Doketic  heresy ;  but  that 
 to  confute  these  was  the  design  of  the  apostle,  as 
 these  writers  affirm,  cannot  be  proved.  [Gnostic] 
 At  the  same  time,  though  he  may  have  had  no 
 intention  of  formally  confuting  any  existing  heresy, 
 it  is  more  than  probable  that  he  was  stimulated  to 
 seek  by  means  of  this  record  to  counteract  certain 
 tendencies  which  he  saw  rising  in  the  church,  and  by 
 which  the  followers  of  Christ  might  be  seduced  from 
 that  simple  faith  in  Him  by  which  alone  the  true 
 Life  could  be  enjoyed.  Still  this  must  be  regarded, 
 at  the  utmost,  as  furnishing  only  the  occasion,  not 
 the  design,  of  his  writing.  The  latter  is  to  be 
 sought  in  the  effect  which  this  Gospel  is  fitted  to 
 produce  on  the  mind  of  the  reader  in  regard  to  the 
 claims  of  Jesus  as  the  Divine  Redeemer,  the  source  of 
 light  and  life  to  darkened  and  perishing  humanity. 
 With  this  view  St.  John  presents  Him  to  us  as  He 
 tabernacled  among  men,  and  especially  as  He 
 taught  when  occasion  called  forth  the  deeper  reve- 
 lations which  He,  as  the  word  who  had  come  forth 
 from  the  invisible  God  to  reveal  unto  men  the 
 Father,  had  to  communicate.  John's  main  design  is 
 a  theological  one  ;  a  consciousness  of  which  doubt- 
 less led  to  his  receiving  in  the  primitive  church 
 the  title  ko.t'  i^^xv  of  Qe6\oyo%.  But  the  histori- 
 cal character  of  his  writing  must  also  be  acknow- 
 ledged. As  one  who  had  been  privileged  to  '  com- 
 pany' with  Jesus,  he  seeks  to  present  Him  to  us  as 
 He  really  appeared  among  men,  in  very  deed  a 
 partaker  of  their  nature,  yet,  under  that  nature, 
 veiling  a  higher,  which  ever  and  anon  broke  forth 
 into  manifestation,  so  that  those  around  Him  '  be- 
 held his  glory  as  the  glory  of  the  Only  Begotten  of 
 the  Father'  (i.  14).  'There  is  here  no  history  of 
 Jesus  and  his  teaching  after  the  manner  of  the 
 other  evangelists  ;  but  there  is,  in  historical  form, 
 a  representation  of  the  Christian  faith,  in  relation 
 to  the  Person  of  Christ,  as  its  central  point,  and  in 
 this  representation  there  is  a  picture,  on  the  one 
 hand,  of  the  antagonism  of  the  world  to  the  truth 
 revealed  in  Him,  and  on  the  other  of  the  spiritual 
 blessedness  of  the  few  who  yield  themselves  to  Him 
 as  the  Light  of  Life'  (Reuss,  Gesch.  der  Heil.  Sch. 
 d.  N.  T.,  p.  204). 
 
 4.  Contenls.—ThQ  Gospel  begins  with  a  pro- 
 logue, in  which  the  author  presents  the  great  theme 
 of  which  his  subsequent  narrative  is  to  furnish  the 
 detailed  illustration — 'the  theological  programme 
 of  his  history,'  as  one  has  called  it,  and  which 
 another  has  compared  to  the  overture  of  a  musical 
 composition  in  which  the  leading  idea  of  the  piece 
 is  expressed  (i.  1-5).  The  historical  exposition 
 begins  with  ver.  6,  and  the  rest  of  the  book  may 
 be  divided  into  two  parts.  Of  these  the  former  (i. 
 6-xii.)  contains  the  account  of  our  Lord's  public 
 ministry  from  his  introduction  to  it  by  John  the 
 Baptist  and  his  solemn  consecration  to  it  by  God, 
 to  its  close  in  the  Passion  week.  In  this  portion 
 we  have  the  Saviour  presented  to  us  chiefly  in  his 
 manifestation  to  the  world  as  a  teacher  sent  from 
 God,  whose  mission  is  authenticated  by  signs  and 
 wonders,  and  whose  doctrines,  truly  divine,  trans- 
 cend in  their  spiritual  import  the  narrow  hmits  of 
 
 human  speculation,  and  can  be  comprehended  only 
 by  a  spiritual  discernment.  The  second  portion 
 (xiii.  -xxi. )  may  be  divided  into  two  parts,  the  one 
 of  which  is  introductory  to  the  other.  The  former 
 (xiii.  -xvii.)  presents  to  us  our  Lord  in  the  retirement 
 of  private  life,  in  his  intercourse  with  his  immediate 
 followers,  to  wliom  he  pours  out  his  soul  in  loving 
 counsel,  warning,  and  promise,  in  the  prospect  of 
 his  departure  from  them  ;  and  in  communion  with 
 his  heavenly  Father,  with  whom,  as  one  who  had 
 finished  the  work  he  had  received  to  do,  He  inter- 
 cedes for  those  whose  redemption  from  sin  and 
 evil  is  the  coveted  recompense  of  his  obedience. 
 To  this  succeeds  the  account  of  the  Passion,  and 
 the  appearances  of  Christ  to  his  disciples  after  his 
 resurrection  (xviii. -xxi. ),  which  forms  the  other  part 
 of  the  second  portion  of  the  book. 
 
 The  greater  part  of  the  book  is  occupied  with 
 the  discourses  of  our  Lord  ;  the  plan  of  the  evan- 
 gelist being  obviously  to  bring  the  reader  as  much 
 as  possible  into  personal  contact  with  Jesus,  and  to 
 make  the  latter  his  own  expositor.  Regarding  the 
 discourses  thus  reported,  the  question  has  arisen. 
 How  far  are  they  to  be  accepted  as  an  exact  report 
 of  what  Jesus  uttered  ?  and  in  reply  to  this  three 
 opinions  have  been  advanced  : — i.  That  both  in 
 substance  and  in  form  we  have  them  as  they  came 
 from  the  lips  of  Christ  ;  2.  That  in  substance  they 
 present  what  Christ  uttered,  but  that  the  form  in 
 which  they  appear  is  due  to  the  evangelist  ;  and  3. 
 That  they  are  not  the  discourses  of  Christ  in  any 
 proper  sense,  but  only  speeches  put  in  his  mouth 
 by  the  evangelist  to  express  what  the  latter  con- 
 ceived to  be  a  just  representation  of  his  doctrine. 
 Of  these  views  the  last  has  found  adherents  only 
 among  a  few  of  the  sceptical  school  ;  it  is  without 
 the  slightest  authority  from  the  book  itself,  is  irre- 
 concilable with  the  simplicity  and  earnestness  of 
 the  writer,  is  foreign  to  the  habits  and  notions  of 
 the  class  to  which  the  evangelist  belongs,  and  is 
 contradicted  by  the  frequent  explanations  which  he 
 introduces  of  the  sense  in  which  he  understood 
 what  he  reports  (comp.  ii.  19,  21  ;  vii.  38,  39  ; 
 xii.  32,  33,  etc.)  by  the  brief  notices,  which  evince 
 an  actual  reminiscence  of  the  scenes  and  circum- 
 stances amid  which  the  discourse  was  delivered 
 (ex.  gr.,  xiv.  31),  and  by  the  prophetic  announce- 
 ments of  his  impending  sufferings  and  death  ascribed 
 to  the  Saviour,  and  which  are  couched  in  language 
 such  as  he  might  naturally  use,  such  as  accounts 
 for  those  to  whom  he  spoke,  even  his  disciples,  not 
 understanding  his  meaning,  l^ut  such  as  it  is  utterly 
 incredible  that  one  not  desirous  of  reporting  his 
 very  words  should,  writing  after  the  fulfilment  of 
 these  predictions  impute  to  Him  (comp.  vii.  33-36  ; 
 viii.  21,  22;  x.  17-20 ;  xii.  23-36;  xiv.  1-4,  18, 
 28;  xvi.  16,  19,  etc.)  Some  of  these  considera- 
 tions are  of  weight  also  as  against  the  second  of 
 the  opinions  above  stated  ;  for  if  John  sought  merely 
 to  give  the  substance  of  the  Saviour's  teaching  in 
 his  own  words,  why  clothe  predictions,  the  meaning 
 of  which  at  the  time  of  his  writing  he  perfectly 
 understood,  in  obscure  and  difiicult  phraseology  ? 
 Why  especially  impute  to  the  speaker  language  of 
 which  he  feels  it  necessary  to  give  an  explanation, 
 instead  of  at  once  putting  the  intelligible  statement 
 in  his  discourse?  Undoubtedly  the  impression 
 wiiich  one  gets  from  the  narrative  is  that  John 
 means  the  discourses  he  ascribes  to  Jesus  to  be  re- 
 ceived as  faithful  reports  of  what  He  actually 
 uttered  ;  and  this  is  confirmed  when  one  compares 
 
JOHN,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 621 
 
 JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 
 
 his  report  of  John  the  Baptist's  sayings  with  tho?e 
 of  our  Lord,  the  character  of  tlie  one  being  totally 
 different  from  that  of  the  other.  To  this  view  it 
 has  been  objected  that  there  is  such  an  identity  of 
 style  in  the  discourses  which  John  ascribes  to  Christ 
 with  his  own  style,  both  in  this  Gospel  and  in  his 
 Epistles,  as  betrays  in  the  former  the  hand,  not  of 
 a  faithful  reporter,  but  of  one  who  gives  in  the 
 manner  natm-al  to  himself  the  substance  of  what 
 his  Master  taught.  In  this  there  is  some  force  ; 
 but  it  seems  fully  met  by  the  suggestion  that  John 
 was  so  imbued  with  the  veiy  mind  and  soul  of 
 Christ,  so  informed  by  his  doctrine,  and  so  filled 
 by  his  spirit,  that  his  own  manner  of  thought  and 
 utterance  became  the  same  as  that  of  Christ,  and 
 he  insensibly  wrote  and  spoke  in  the  style  of  his 
 L-ird.  Reuss  objects  to  this,  that  on  this  supposi- 
 tion the  style  of  Jesus  '  must  have  been  a  very  uni- 
 form and  sharply  defined  one,  and  such  as  excludes 
 the  very  different  style  ascribed  to  Him  by  the 
 Synoptists '  {Gesch.  der  H.  S.  dcs  N.  T.,  p.  203). 
 But  the  facts  here  are  overstated  ;  the  style  of  our 
 Lord's  discourses  in  John  is  by  no  means  perfectly 
 uniform  ;  nor  is  it  further  removed  from  that  as- 
 cribed to  Him  by  the  Synoptists,  than  the  difference 
 of  subject  and  circumstance  will  suffice  to  account 
 for.  As  for  the  objection  that  it  is  inconceivable 
 that  the  evangelist  could  have  retained  for  so  many 
 years  a  faithful  recollection  of  discourses  heard  by 
 him  only  once,  we  need  not,  in  order  to  meet  it, 
 resort  to  the  foolish  suggestion  of  Bertholdt,  that 
 he  had  taken  notes  of  them  at  the  time  for  his  own 
 behoof ;  nor  need  we  to  lay  stress  on  the  assur- 
 ance of  Christ  which  John  records,  that  the  Holy 
 Ghost  whom  the  Father  should  send  to  them  would 
 teach  them  all  things,  and  bring  all  things  to  their 
 remembrance  whatsoever  he  had  said  unto  them 
 (John  xiv.  26),  though  to  the  believer  this  is  a  fact 
 of  the  utmost  importance  :  it  will  suffice  to  meet 
 the  objection  if  we  suggest  that,  as  the  apostle  went 
 forth  to  the  world  as  a  witness  for  Christ,  he  did 
 not  wait  till  he  sat  down  to  write  his  Gospel  to 
 give  forth  his  recollections  of  his  Master's  words 
 and  deeds  ;  what  he  narrates  here  in  writing  is 
 only  what  he  must  have  been  repeating  constantly 
 during  his  whole  apostolic  career. 
 
 5.  Characteristics. — There  is  something  peculiar 
 in  the  Evangelist's  manner  of  writing.  His  lan- 
 guage betrays  traces  of  that  Hebraistic  character 
 which  belongs  generally  to  the  N.  T.  writers,  and 
 the  author  shews  his  Jewish  descent  by  various 
 incidental  indications.  But  he  writes  purer  Greek 
 than  most  of  the  others,  ?nd  his  freedom  from 
 Judaic  narrowness  is  so  marked  that  some  have 
 founded  on  this  an  argument  against  the  genuine- 
 ness of  the  book,  forgetting  that  the  experiences  of 
 the  apostle  in  his  more  advanced  years  would 
 materially  tend  to  correct  the  prejudices  and  party 
 leanings  of  his  earlier  career.  The  apostle's  style 
 is  marked  by  ease,  simplicity,  and  vividness  ;  his 
 sentences  are  linked  together  rather  by  inner 
 affinity  in  the  thoughts  than  by  outward  forms  of 
 composition  or  dialectic  concatenation  ;  they  move 
 on  one  after  the  other,  generally  with  the  help  of 
 an  ovv,  sometimes  of  a  /cat,  and  occasionally  of  a 
 oe ;  and  favourite  terms  or  phrases  are  repeated 
 without  regard  to  rhetorical  art.  The  author  wrote 
 evidently  for  Hellenist  readers ;  but  he  makes 
 no  attempt  at  Greek  elegance  or  that  wisdom  of 
 words  which  with  many  in  his  day  constituted  the 
 perfection  of  Greek  art. 
 
 6.  Time  and  place  of  ivritiitg. —  Ecclesiasticai 
 tradition  is  constant  and  uniform  in  affirming  that 
 this  Gospel  was  written  in  the  later  part  of  the 
 apostle's  life,  and  at  Ephesus ;  and  with  this  the 
 internal  evidence  fully  accords.  The  Gospel  bears 
 traces  ^f  having  been  written  at  a  distance  from 
 Palestine,  and  by  one  who  had  been  a  considerable 
 time  out  of  it ;  and  as  John  probably  did  not  take 
 up  his  residence  at  Ephesus  till  the  destruction  of 
 Jerusalem,  if  we  accept  the  tradition  which  makes 
 Ephesus  the  place  of  his  writing,  we  cannot  fix  the 
 time  earlier  than  in  the  last  decade  of  the  1st 
 century.  A  later  tradition  makes  Patmos  the  place 
 where  the  Gospel  was  written,  but  to  this  no  re- 
 gard is  due.  The  date  and  place  assigned  by  the 
 earlier  tradition  fall  in  with  the  fact  above  noticed 
 as  characteristic  of  this  Gospel,  viz.,  the  purer 
 Greek  in  which  it  is  written  and  the  freedom  from 
 Jewish  narrowness  which  the  author  exhibits. 
 
 7.  Com?ne!ttaries. — Of  patristic  commentaries 
 the  most  valuable  are  the  Exfosilion  of  Augustine 
 and  the  Homilies  of  Chrysostom  ;  and  next  to  these 
 the  compilations  of  Theophylact  and  Euthymius 
 Zigabenus.  Among  the  reformers  those  of  Calvin 
 and  Beza  are  chiefly  deserving  of  notice.  That  of 
 the  Roman  Catholic  Maldonatus  is  distinguished 
 by  originality,  accuracy,  and  penetration.  The 
 most  copious  is  that  of  Lampe,  1637,  3  vols.  4to, 
 which  in  respect  of  learning  leaves  little  to  be  de- 
 siderated. More  recent  works  are  those  of  Sem- 
 ler,  1771;  Mosheim,  1777;  Morus,  2d  ed.  180S  ; 
 Tittmann,  1816,  translated  in  the  Edi7iburgh  Bib- 
 lical Cabinet ;  Liicke,  1820,  3d  ed.  1840  ;  Tho- 
 luck,  1827,  6th  ed.  1844,  translated  by  Krauth  ; 
 Klee,  1829  ;  Matthrei,  1S37  ;  Baumgarten-Crusius, 
 1843  ;  Luthardt,  1853  ;  Ewald,  1S62  ;  Hengsten- 
 berg,  1863  ;  and  the  commentaries  in  the  more 
 general  works  of  Grotius,  Whitby,  De  Wette, 
 Olshausen,  Lange,  Alford,  Bloomfield,  and  Words- 
 worth. Much  may  be  gained  also  for  the  due 
 understanding  of  John's  writings  from  Schmid, 
 De  theologia  Joa7t.  Apost.,  Jen.  1800;  Frommann, 
 Der  Johan.  Lehrbegriff,  Leipz.  1839;  Koestlin, 
 Der  Lehrb.  der  Evang.  nnd  der  Br.  Jok.,  Berl. 
 1843;  Neander,  Apost.  Zeit.,  Th.  ii.,  E.  T.  ii. ; 
 Reuss,  Histoire  de  la  Theol.  Chrii.,  ii.  273-466. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOHN,  First  Epistle  of.  i.  Gemnneness. — 
 That  this  is  the  production  of  the  same  author 
 as  wrote  the  fourth  gospel,  is  so  manifest,  that 
 it  has  been  universally  admitted  (comp.  Hauff,  Die 
 Aiithentie  u.  der  hohe  werth  des  Evang.  Jokan., 
 p.  137,  ff.)  The  establishment  of  the  genuineness 
 of  the  one,  therefore,  involves  the  admission  of 
 that  of  the  other.  The  evidence,  however,  in 
 favour  of  the  epistle  is  sufficieiit  to  establish  its 
 claims,  apart  from  its  relation  to  the  Gospel. 
 Eusebius  informs  us  that  Papias  knew  and  made 
 use  of  it  [H.  E.  iii.  39)  ;  Polycarp  quotes  a  pas- 
 sage (iv.  3)  from  it  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians, 
 ch.  vii.  ;  Iren:eus  uses  it  (comp.  Adv.  Idcer.  iii. 
 15  ;  v.  8,  with  i  John  ii.  18  ;  iv.  i,  3  ;  v.  i)  ;  it 
 is  quoted  or  r-eferred  to  by  Clement  of  Alexandria 
 [Strom,  ii.  389)  and  Tertullian  [Scorpiac.  c.  22  ; 
 Adv.  Prax.  c.  15)  ;  and  Eusebius  assures  us  that 
 it  was  universally  and  always  acknowledged  in  the 
 church  [H.  E.  iii.  25-26).  It  is  found  in  the 
 Peshito  and  in  all  the  ancient  versions  ;  and  is  in- 
 cluded in  every  catalogue  of  the  canonical  books 
 which  has  come  down  to  us  (Lardner,  Works,  vol. 
 
JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 
 
 622 
 
 JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 
 
 vi.  p.  584).  With  this  the  internal  evidence  fully 
 accords.  The  work  is  anonymous,  but  the  Apostle 
 John  is  plainly  indicated  throughout  as  the  writer. 
 The  author  asserts  himself  to  have  been  an  imme- 
 diate disciple  of  Jesus,  who  testifies  what  he  him- 
 self had  seen  and  heard  (i.  1-4  ;  iv.  14)  ;  smd  this 
 assumption  is  sustained  throughout  in  a  way  so 
 natural  and  unaffected,  that  it  would  be  doing 
 violence  to  all  probability  to  suppose  that  it  could 
 have  been  attained  by  one  who  felt  that  he  was 
 practising  in  this  a  deliberate  imposition.  The  cir- 
 cumstances also  of  the  writer  to  which  he  alludes, 
 the  themes  on  which  he  chiefly  dwells,  and  the 
 spirit  his  writing  breathes,  are  all  such  as  fall  in 
 with  what  we  know  of  the  Apostle  John,  and  sug- 
 gest him  as  the  writer.  If  this  be  the  work  of  a 
 pretender,  he  has,  as  De  Wette  remarks  (Exeget. 
 Udb.),  '  shewn  incredible  subtlety  in  concealing  the 
 name  of  the  Apostle,  whilst  he  has  indirectly,  and 
 in  a  most  simple  natural  way,  indicated  him  as  the 
 writer.' 
 
 2.  Integrity.  —  The  genuineness  of  only  two 
 small  portions  of  this  writing  have  been  called  in 
 question,  viz.,  the  words  6  6/jLo\oywv  rbv  vibv  Kai 
 Tov  iraripa  'ix^i-  (ii.  23)  ;  and  the  words  ev  tQ 
 oupaviji  6  XlttTTjp,  6  A670S  Kal  t6  Hyiov  Hvevixa'  kclI 
 ovTOi  ol  TpeTs  'iv  elai.  Kal  jpeis  elcrtv  01  fxapTvpodv- 
 res  ev  rrj  yrj  (v.  7>  8).  The  former  of  these 
 is  omitted  in  the  Text.  Rec,  and  is  printed  in 
 italics  in  the  A.  V.  It  is,  however,  supported  by 
 sufficient  authority,  and  is  inserted  by  Griesbach, 
 Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Scholz,  etc.  The  latter 
 of  these  passages  has  given  rise  to  a  world-famous 
 controversy,  which  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  yet 
 ended  (Orme,  Memoir  of  the  Controversy  respecting 
 the  Heavenly  Witnesses,  Lond.  1830).  The  pre- 
 vailing judgment,  however,  of  all  critics  and 
 interpreters  is,  that  the  passage  is  spurious  (see 
 Griesbach,  Append,  ad  N.  T.,  ii.  1-25;  Tischen- 
 dorf on  the  passage  ;  Liicke,  Comment,  on  theEpp. 
 of  John  in  Biblical  Cabinet,  No.  xv.  etc.) 
 
 3.  For  whotn  written. — The  writer  evidently  had 
 in  his  eye  a  circle  of  readers  with  whom  he  stood 
 in  close  personal  relation.  Christians  apparently 
 who  were  living  in  the  midst  of  idolaters  (v.  21), 
 and  who  were  exposed  to  danger  from  false  specu- 
 lation and  wrong  methods  of  presenting  the  truths 
 of  Christianity  (ii.  22-26  ;  iv.  1-3;  v.  1-6,  etc.)  If 
 the  epistle  was  written  by  John  at  Ephesus,  we 
 may,  from  these  circumstances,  with  much  proba- 
 bility conclude  that  the  Christians  in  that  region 
 were  the  parties  for  whose  behoof  it  was  first  de- 
 signed. Augustine  [Qiuist.  Evangel,  ii.  39)  says  it 
 was  addressed  '  ad  Parthos,'  and  this  inscription 
 appears  in  several  MSS.  of  the  Vulg.,  and  has  been 
 defended  by  Grotius,  Paulus,  and  others,  as  giving 
 the  real  destination  of  the  epistle.  John,  however, 
 had  no  relations  with  the  Parthians  that  we  know 
 of;  nor  does  a  single  ancient  testimony  confirm 
 the  statement  of  Augustine,  except  on  the  part  of 
 later  writers  of  the  Latin  Church,  who  probably 
 simply  followed  him.  It  has  been  suggested  that, 
 as  the  second  epistle  is  by  some  of  the  ancients  de- 
 scribed as  TTphs  irapdivovs  (Clem.  Alex.,  Frag.,  ed. 
 Potter,  p.  loii),  this  may  have  been  changed  into 
 Trpfis  Hdpdov^,  and  by  mistake  applied  to  the  first 
 epistle  (Whiston,  Comment,  on  the  Cath.  Epp.  ; 
 liug,  Introd.,  p.  464,  Fosdick's  transl.)  This  is 
 possible,  but  not  very  probable.  The  suggestion 
 of  Wegscheider,  that  '  Ad  Parthos'  is  an  error  for 
 *  Ad   Sparsos,'   an   inscription   which  actually   is 
 
 found  in  several  MSS.  (Scholz,  Bibl.  Knt.  Reise, 
 p.  67),  is  ingenious,  and  may  be  correct. 
 
 4.  Characteristics. — Though  ranked  among  the 
 Catholic  epistles,  this  writing  has  nothing  of  the 
 character  of  an  epistle  ;  it  more  resembles  a  free 
 homily.  The  general  strain  is  admonitory,  and 
 the  author  seems  to  have  written  as  he  would  have 
 spoken  had  those  whom  he  addresses  been  present 
 before  him.  There  does  not  seem  to  be  any  exact 
 plan  in  the  book  ;  one  great  thought  pervades  it, 
 the  reality  of  Christ's  appearance  in  the  flesh,  and 
 the  all-sufficiency  of  his  doctrine  for  salvation,  a 
 salvation  which  manifests  itself  in  holiness  and 
 love ;  but  the  author  does  not  discuss  these  topics 
 in  any  systematic  or  logical  form  ;  he  rather  allows 
 his  thoughts  to  flow  out  in  succession  as  one  sug- 
 gests another,  and  clothes  them  in  simple  and 
 earnest  words  as  they  arise  in  his  mind.  Some 
 have  imputed  a  character  of  senility  to  the  work 
 on  this  account,  but  without  reason.  Under  a 
 simple  and  inartificial  exterior  there  lies  deep 
 thought ;  and  the  book  is  pervaded  by  a  su]i- 
 pressed  intensity  of  feeling  that  recals  the  youthful 
 Boanerges  in  the  aged  apostle.  The  mighty  power 
 that  is  in  it  has  drawn  to  it  in  all  ages  the  rever- 
 ence and  love  of  the  noblest  minds,  '  especially  of 
 those  who  more  particularly  take  up  Christianity 
 as  a  religion  of  love,  a  religion  of  the  heart'  (Liicke, 
 Int.,  p.  55). 
 
 5.  Relation  to  the  Fourth  Gospel. — The  close 
 affinity  between  this  epistle  and  John's  gospel  has 
 been  already  alluded  to  ;  in  style,  in  prevailing  for- 
 mulae of  expression,  in  spirit,  and  in  thought,  the 
 two  are  identical.  This  has  led  to  the  suggestion 
 that  both,  in  a  sense,  form  one  whole,  the  epistle 
 being  according  to  some  a  prolegomenon  to  the 
 Gospel,  according  to  others,  its  practical  conclu 
 sion,  and  according  to  others  its  commendatory  ac- 
 companiment. The  probability  is  that  both  were 
 written  at  the  same  period  of  the  author's  life,  and 
 that  they  both  contam  in  writing  what  he  had  been 
 accustomed  to  testify  and  teach  during  his  apostolic 
 ministry.  But  whether  any  closer  relation  than 
 this  exists  between  them  must  remain  matter  en- 
 tirely of  conjecture. 
 
 6.  Design. — That  the  apostle  sought  to  confirm 
 the  believers  for  whom  he  wrote  in  their  attach- 
 ment to  Christianity,  as  it  had  been  delivered  to 
 them  by  the  ambassadors  of  Christ,  is  evident  on 
 the  surface  of  the  epistle.  It  is  clear  also  that  he 
 had  in  view  certain  false  teachers  by  whose  arts  the 
 Christians  were  in  danger  of  being  seduced  from 
 the  faith  of  Jesus  as  the  incarnate  Son  of  God,  and 
 from  that  holy  and  loving  course  of  conduct  to 
 which  true  faith  in  Jesus  leads.  But  who  these 
 false  teachers  were,  or  to  what  school  they  be- 
 longed, is  doubtful.  It  is  an  old  opinion  that  they 
 were  Doketae  (Tertullian,  De  ca7ne  Christi,  i.  24  ; 
 Dionys.  Al.  ap.  Euseb.,  H.  E.  vii.  25)  ;  and  to  this 
 many  recent  inquirers  have  given  in  their  adher- 
 ence. Liicke,  who  strenuously  defends  this  view, 
 attempts  to  shew  that  Doketism  was  in  vogue  as 
 early  as  the  time  of  John  by  an  appeal  to  the  case 
 of  Cerenthus,  and  to  the  references  to  Doketism  in 
 three  of  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  {Ad  Smyrn.  2,  ff  ; 
 Ad  Trail,  ix.  ;  Ad  Eph.  vii.)  But  the  doctrine  of 
 Cerinthus  respecting  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ  was 
 not  Doketic  in  the  proper  sense  ;  and  the  passages 
 cited  from  Ignatius  are  all  subject  to  the  suspicion 
 of  being  interpolations,  as  none  of  them  are  found 
 in  the  Syriac  recension.     Liicke  lays  stress  also  on 
 
JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 
 
 62S 
 
 JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 
 
 the  words  iv  crapKl  iXrjXijdoTa  (iv.  2 ;  comp.  2  John 
 vii. )  as  indicating  an  express  antitliesis  to  the  doc- 
 trine of  the  Doketics  that  Christ  had  come  only 
 in  appearance.  It  may  be  doubted,  liowever, 
 whetlier  this  means  anything  more  than  that  Christ 
 had  really  come,  the  phrase  kv  aapKi  iXdellv  being 
 probably  a  famihar  technicaUty  for  this  among  tlie 
 Cliristians.  It  may  be  questioned  also  whether 
 the  passage  should  not  be  translated  thus  :  '  Every 
 spirit  which  confesseth  Jesus  Christ  having  [who 
 has]  come  in  the  flesh  is  of  God, '  rather  than  thus, 
 '  Every  spirit  which  confesseth  (/lal  Jesus  Christ  is 
 come,'  etc.  (for  bfj-oXoyeiv  with  the  accusative  see 
 John  ix.  22  ;  Acts  xxiii.  8  ;  Rom.  x.  9  ;  i  Tim. 
 vi.  12) ;  and  in  this  case  even  the  appearance 
 of  allusion  to  a  contraiy  doctrine  vanishes  (see 
 Bleek,  Einleii.  p.  593).  It  may  be  added  that  had 
 John  intended  to  express  a  direct  antithesis  to  Do- 
 ketism  he  would  hardly  have  contented  himself 
 with  merely  using  the  words  ev  capKl,  for  there  is 
 a  sense  in  which  even  the  Doketas  would  have  ad- 
 mitted this.  Besides  the  Doketse,  other  heretical 
 parties  have  been  suggested,  viz. ,  the  Judaisers,  the 
 Johannites,  or  disciples  of  the  Baptist,  the  Gnostics 
 as  such,  and  even  the  Montanists.  All  this,  how- 
 ever, is  mere  conjecture.  Perhaps  we  shall  best 
 enter  into  the  force  of  the  Apostle's  admonitions  if 
 we  view  them  without  relation  to  any  known  school 
 of  formal  heresy. 
 
 Commoitaries. — Augustine,  Tract  x.  in  yoannis 
 Ep.  ad  Parthos ;  BuUinger,  1532;  Semler,  1792; 
 Ballenstadt,  1802 ;  Rickli,  1S28.  For  commen- 
 taries on  all  the  three  Epistles  of  John,  see  end  of 
 next  article. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOHN,  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of. 
 Whilst  the  internal  evidence  arising  from  similarity 
 of  style  and  tone  of  thought  between  these  epistles 
 and  the  First  Epistle  of  John  strongly  supports  the 
 conclusion  that  all  are  from  the  same  pen,  the 
 external  evidence  for  their  genuineness  is  less 
 copious  and  decisive  than  that  for  the  first  epistle. 
 They  are  not  in  the  Peshito  version,  which  shews 
 that  at  the  time  it  was  executed  they  were  not 
 recognised  by  the  Syrian  churches  ;  and  Eusebius 
 places  them  among  the  avrCKeyoixeva.  {//.  E.  iii.  25). 
 The  llthver.  of  the  Second  Epistle,  however,  is 
 quoted  by  Irenseus  {Haer.  i.  16.  3)  as  a  saying  of 
 John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  meaning  thereby, 
 without  doubt,  the  apostle.  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
 in  referring  to  John's  first  epistle,  uses  the  words 
 'Iwawr;s  h  rfj  /xei^ovL  €TnaTo\rj,  which  shews  that 
 he  was  acquainted  with  at  least  two  epistles  of 
 John  ;  there  is  extant  in  a  Latin  translation  a  com- 
 mentary by  him  on  the  second  epistle  ;  and  as 
 Eusebius  and  Photius  both  attest  that  he  wrote 
 commentaries  on  all  the  seven  catholic  epistles,  it 
 would  appear  that  he  must  have  known  and  ac- 
 knowledged the  third  also.  Origen  speaks  of  the 
 Apostle  John  having  left  a  second  and  third  epistle, 
 which,  however,  he  adds,  all  did  not  accept  as 
 genuine  (//i  yoan.  ap.  Euseb.  vi.  25).  Dionysius 
 of  Alexandria  {Ibid.  vii.  25)  recognises  them  as 
 productions  of  the  same  John  who  wrote  the  Gospel 
 and  the  first  epistle  ;  and  so  do  all  the  later  Alexan- 
 drian writers.  Eusebius  himself  refers  to  them  in 
 his  Dem.  Evang.  iii.  5  without  hesitation,  as  John's ; 
 and  in  the  Synod  held  at  Carthage  (a.d.  256), 
 Aurelius,  Bishop  of  Chullabi,  confirmed  his  vote 
 by  citing  2  John  10,  ff.,  as  the  language  of  St.  John. 
 In  the  Muratori  Fragment,  which,  however,  in  the 
 
 part  relating  to  the  epistles  of  John  is  somewhat 
 confused  or  apparently  vitiated,  there  are  at  least 
 two  epistles  of  John  recognised,  for  the  author 
 uses  the  plural  in  mentioning  John's  epistles.  In 
 all  the  later  catalogues,  with  the  exception  of  the 
 Jambics  ad  Seleucum,  they  are  inserted  with  the 
 other  canonical  books  of  the  N.  T.  There  is  thus 
 a  solid  body  of  evidence  in  favour  of  the  genuine- 
 ness of  these  epistles  ;  that  they  were  not  univer- 
 sally known  and  received  is  probably  to  be  ac- 
 counted for  by  their  character  as  private  letters  to 
 individuals,  which  would  naturally  be  longer  of  com- 
 ing under  general  recognition  than  such  as  were  ad- 
 dressed to  churches  or  the  Christians  of  a  district. 
 
 The  only  antagonist  testimony  which  has  reached 
 us  from  antiquity  is  that  of  Jerome,  who  says  [De 
 vir.  illiist.  ix.  18)  that  both  epistles  were  commonly 
 reputed  to  be  the  production  not  of  John  the 
 Apostle,  but  of  John  the  Presbyter ;  confirmed  by 
 the  statement  of  Eusebius  (iii.  25)  that  it  was  doubt- 
 ful whether  they  were  the  production  of  the  evan- 
 gelist or  of  another  John.  On  this  it  may  be 
 observed — i.  That  the  statement  of  Jerome  is  cer- 
 tainly not  true  in  its  full  extent,  for  there  is  evidence 
 enough  that  both  in  his  own  time  and  before,  as 
 well  as  after  it,  the  general  belief  both  in  the  Latin 
 and  the  Greek  Churches  was  that  they  were 
 written  by  John  the  Apostle  ;  2.  Both  Jerome  and 
 Eusebius  concur  in  attesting  that  all  ascribed  these 
 epistles  either  to  John  the  Apostle  or  John  the 
 Presbyter  as  their  author  ;  which  may  be  accepted 
 as  convincing  evidence  that  they  are  not  forgeries 
 of  an  age  later  than  that  of  the  apostle ;  3.  The 
 question  being  between  John  the  Apostle  and 
 John  the  Presbyter,  we  may,  without  laying  stress 
 on  the  fact  that  the  existence  of  the  latter  is,  to 
 say  the  least,  involved  in  doubt  [John  the  Presby- 
 ter], call  attention  to  the  consideration  that, 
 whilst  the  use  of  the  expression  6  irpecr^vTepos  by 
 the  writer  of  the  second  epistle  may  have  given 
 rise  to  the  report  which  Jerome  and  Eusebius 
 attest,  there  lies  in  this  a  strong  evidence  that  the 
 writer  was  John  the  Apostle,  and  not  John  the 
 Presbyter  ;  for  it  is  quite  credible  that  the  former, 
 writing  in  his  old  age,  should  employ  the  term 
 TTpeajBuTepoi  to  express  this  fact  just  as  Paul  does 
 (Philem.  9),  and  as  Peter  does  (i  Ep.  v.  l),  whereas 
 it  is  incredible  that  the  latter,  with  whom  presbyter 
 was  a  title  of  office,  should,  in  writing  a  letter  to 
 an  individual,  designate  himself  thus,  inasmuch  as, 
 the  office  being  common  to  him  with  many  others, 
 the  title,  in  the  absence  of  his  name,  was  no 
 designation  at  all  ;  to  say  nothing  of  the  fact 
 that  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  members  of  the 
 irpecr^vT'fipiov  in  the  primitive  churches  ever  received 
 Trpea^vrepos  as  a  title,  any  more  than  the  members 
 of  the  church,  though  collectively  ot  dyioL  and  ol 
 a5e\<poi,  received  individually  dycoi  or  &5e\(pos  as 
 a  lille.  On  these  grounds  there  seems  no  reason 
 for  attaching  any  importance  to  the  opinion  or 
 tradition  reported  by  Jerome  ;  though  it  has  been 
 adopted  by  Erasmus,  Grotius,  Credner,  Jachmann 
 {Comm.  lib.  d.  Kathol.  Br.),  and  more  recently  by 
 Ebrard  (Olshausen's  Comment,  vi.  4,  E.  T.  vol.  x., 
 and  in  Herzog's  Encyc.  vi.  736). 
 
 The  second  epistle  is  addressed  to  one  whom  the 
 writer  calls  eKXeKTT]  Kvpia.  This  has  been  differently 
 understood.  By  some  it  has  been  regarded  as 
 designating  the  Church  collectively  ;  by  others  as 
 designating  a  particular  congregation ;  and  by 
 others  as  denoting  an  mdividual.     The  two  formei 
 
JOHN,  EPISTLES  OF 
 
 624 
 
 JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 
 
 opinions  are  rendered  improbable,  partly  by  the 
 reference  in  ver.  ii  to  the  children,  and  in  ver.  13 
 to  the  sister  of  the  party  addressed,  partly  by  the 
 want  of  any  authority  for  such  a  usage  of  the  term 
 Kvpia  as  would  thus  be  imputed  to  the  apostle. 
 Of  those  who  understand  this  of  an  individual, 
 some  take  both  terms  appellatively  (as  in  the  A.  V. , 
 '  elect  lady')  ;  some  take  the  foniier  as  a  proper 
 name  and  the  latter  as  appellative,  '  the  lady 
 Eclecta;'  and  some  reverse  this,  and  make  the 
 latter  the  proper  name  and  the  former  an  adjective, 
 'the  elect  Kyria.'  On  the  whole  this  last  seems 
 the  preferable  explanation.  Kyria  occurs  elsewhere 
 as  a  proper  name  ;  and  that  iKXeKri]  is  to  be  taken 
 ua  its  usual  signification  is  rendered  probable  by  its 
 being  applied  in  ver.  13  to  the  sister  of  the  party 
 addressed. 
 
 The  epistle  is  an  affectionate  address  to  an 
 esteemed  Christian  friend,  whom  the  apostle  con- 
 gratulates on  the  piety  of  her  children,  exhorts  to 
 continue  in  love  to  the  brethren,  and  warns  to  shun 
 erroneous  teachers,  especially  such  as  denied  that 
 Jesus  had  come  in  the  flesh.  At  the  time  of  writing 
 this  epistle  the  apostle  was  with  the  sister  of  Kyria, 
 but  expresses  a  hope  ere  long  to  see  the  latter,  and 
 converse  with  her  on  matters  of  which  he  could 
 not  then  write.  From  this  we  may  infer  either 
 that  the  apostle  was  at  the  time  on  a  journey  from 
 which  he  expected  erelong  to  return,  or  that  Kyria 
 resided  not  very  far  from  his  usual  residence,  and 
 that  he  intended  soon  to  pay  her  a  visit.  Adopt- 
 ing the  latter  hypothesis  as  the  more  probable,  and 
 viewing  it  in  connection  with  the  apostle's  styling 
 himself  irpeajBuTepos,  we  may  infer  that  the  epistle 
 was  written  from  Ephesus  in  the  later  part  of  the 
 apostle's  life. 
 
 The  t/iird  epistle  is  addressed  to  Gains,  a  Chris- 
 tian brother  noted  for  his  hospitality  to  the  saints. 
 Whether  this  be  one  of  those  mentioned  elsewhere 
 in  the  N.  T.  by  this  name  is  uncertain ;  he  ?nay 
 have  been  the  Gains  mentioned  Acts  xix.  28 
 [Gaius].  The  apostle  having  heard  of  his  kind 
 attentions  to  those  Christians  who  travelled  on  the 
 service  of  the  gospel,  writes  to  commend  him  for 
 this ;  and  at  the  same  time  animadverts  on  the 
 misconduct  of  one  Diotrephes,  who  had  usurped 
 undue  power  in  the  church  to  which  Gaius  be- 
 longed, and  was  exercising  it  in  a  way  opposed  to 
 the  mind  of  the  apostle,  and  in  opposition  to  his 
 authority.  He  mentions  especially  an  epistle  which 
 he  himself  had  written  to  the  church,  but  which 
 Diotrephes  apparently  had  rendered  fruitless  by 
 his  unhallowed  influence.  This  epistle  is  lost,  for 
 it  cannot  have  been  either  the  first  or  second  of 
 those  extant.  The  apostle  intimates  the  probability 
 of  his  soon  personally  visiting  the  church,  when 
 he  would  deal  with  Diotrephes  for  his  misconduct, 
 and  would  communicate  to  Gaius  many  things 
 of  which  he  could  not  then  write.  In  the  mean- 
 time he  exhorts  him  to  follow  that  which  is  good  ; 
 commends  one  Demetrius,  of  whom  we  know 
 nothing  further  ;  and  concludes  with  benediction 
 and  salutation.  The  epistle  was  probably  written 
 about  the  same  time  as  the  second,  and  at  Ephesus. 
 
 Commentaries  on  John's  epistles  :  —  Whiston, 
 Morns,  1786  ;  Oertel,  1795  ;  Hawkins,  1S08  ; 
 Paulus,  1829;  Sander,  1851  ;  Liicke  (translated 
 in  No.  1 5  of  the  Edinburgh  Bib.  Cabinet) ;  Dus- 
 terdieck,  1852;  Huther,  1855.  On  the  second 
 epistle,  Rambonnet,  Traj.  181 8.  On  the  third, 
 Heumaun  in  N'ov.  Syll.  i.  276. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOHN  THE  BAPTIST  (Gr.  '\<a6.vvri<i  h  pair 
 TicTT7)s,  or  simply  ''\u6.vv7is,  when  the  reference  is 
 clear,  as  in  Matt.  iii.  4;  iv.  12).  This  eminen' 
 individual  commonly  bears  the  honourable  title  ol 
 '  forerunner  of  the  Lord' — antecursor  et  prasparator 
 viarum  Domini  (TertuU.  adv.  Marc.  iv.  33)  ;  in 
 Greek,  7rp65pofj.os,  irpodyyeXos  Kvpiov.  The  ac- 
 counts of  him  which  the  gospels  present  are  frag- 
 mentary and  imperfect  :  they  involve  too,  some 
 difficulties  which  the  learned  have  found  it  hard  to 
 remove  ;  yet  enough  is  given  to  show  that  he  was 
 a  man  of  a  lofty  character,  and  that  the  relation  in 
 which  he  stood  to  Christianity  was  one  of  great 
 importance. 
 
 His  parents  were  Zacharias  and  Elisabeth,  the 
 latter  'a  cousin  of  Mary,'  the  mother  of  Jesus, 
 whose  senior  John  was  by  a  period  of  six  months 
 (Luke  i. )  The  exact  spot  where  John  was  born  is 
 not  determined.  The  rabbins  fix  on  Hebron,  in 
 the  hill-country  of  Judaea  ;  Paulus,  Kuinoel,  and 
 Meyer,  after  Reland,  are  in  favour  of  Jutta,  '  a  city 
 of  Judah.'  According  to  the  account  contained  in 
 the  first  chapter  of  Luke,  his  father,  while  engaged 
 in  burning  incense,  was  visited  by  the  angel  Gabriel, 
 who  informed  him  that  in  compliance  with  his 
 prayers  his  wife  should  bear  a  son,  whose  name  he 
 should  call  John — in  allusion  to  the  grace  thus 
 accorded.  A  description  of  the  manner  of  his 
 son's  life  is  given,  which  in  effect  states  that  he  was 
 to  be  a  Nazarite,  abstaining  from  bodily  indul- 
 gences, was  to  receive  special  favour  and  aid  of 
 God,  was  to  prove  a  great  religious  and  social  re- 
 former, and  so  prepare  the  way  for  the  long-expected 
 Messiah.  Zacharias  is  slow  to  believe  these  tidings, 
 and  seeks  some  token  in  evidence  of  their  truth. 
 Accordingly  a  sign  is  given  which  acts  also  as  a 
 punishment  of  his  want  of  faith — his  tongue  is  sealed 
 till  the  prediction  is  fulfilled  by  the  event.  Six 
 months  after  Elisabeth  had  conceived  she  received 
 a  visit  from  Mary,  the  future  mother  of  Jesus.  On 
 being  saluted  by  her  relation,  Elisabeth  felt  her 
 babe  leap  in  her  womb,  and,  being  filled  with  the 
 Holy  Spirit,  she  broke  forth  into  a  poetic  congratu- 
 lation to  Mary,  as  the  destined  mother  of  her  Lord. 
 At  length  Elisabeth  brought  forth  a  son,  whom  the 
 relatives  were  disposed  to  name  Zacharias,  after 
 his  father — but  Elisabeth  was  in  some  way  led  to 
 wish  that  he  should  be  called  John.  The  matter 
 was  referred  to  the  father,  who  signified  in  writing 
 that  his  name  was  to  be  John.  This  agreement 
 with  Elisabeth  caused  all  to  marvel.  Zacharias 
 now  had  his  tongue  loosed,  and  he  first  employed 
 his  restored  power  in  praising  God.  These  singu- 
 lar events  caused  universal  surprise,  and  led  people 
 to  expect  that  the  child  would  prove  a  distinguished 
 man. 
 
 The  parents  of  John  were  not  only  of  a  priestly 
 order,  but  righteous  and  devout.  Their  influence, 
 in  consequence,  in  the  training  of  their  son,  would 
 be  not  only  benign  but  suitable  to  the  holy  office 
 which  he  was  designed  to  fill.  More  than  this — 
 the  special  aids  of  God's  Spirit  were  with  him  (Luke 
 i.  66).  How  thoroughly  Zacharias  was  penetrated 
 with  his  parental  responsibility  and  the  future  dig- 
 nity of  his  son,  appears  from  the  'divine  song'  to 
 which  he  gives  utterance  ;  the  following  words  de- 
 serve notice  : — '  And  thou,  child,  shalt  be  called 
 the  prophet  of  the  Highest ;  for  thou  shalt  go  be- 
 fore the  face  of  the  Lord  to  prepare  his  ways ;  to 
 give  knowledge  of  salvation  unto  his  people  by  the 
 remission  of  their  sins,  through  the  tender  mercy 
 
JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 
 
 62c 
 
 JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 
 
 of  our  G'ld,  wherel)y  the  day-spring  from  on  high 
 hath  visited  us,  to  give  hght  to  them  that  sit  in 
 darkness  and  the  shadow  of  death,  to  guide  our 
 feet  in  the  way  of  peace.'  As  a  consequence  of  the 
 lofty  influences  under  which  he  was  nurtured,  the 
 child  waxed  strong  in  spirit.  The  sacred  writer 
 adds  that  '  he  was  in  the  deserts  till  the  day  of  his 
 showing  unto  Israel '  (Lute  i.  80).  The  apocry- 
 phal ^ro/i^z'.  yac,  ch.  xxii.,  states  that  his  mother, 
 in  order  to  rescue  her  son  from  the  murder  of  the 
 children  at  Bethlehem,  which  Herod  commanded, 
 fled  with  him  into  the  desert.  She  found  no  place 
 of  refuge  ;  the  mountain  opened  at  her  request, 
 and  gave  the  needed  shelter  in  its  bosom.  Zacha- 
 rias,  being  questioned  by  Herod  as  to  where  his 
 son  was  to  be  found,  and  refusing  to  answer,  was 
 slain  by  the  tyrant.  At  a  later  period  Elisabeth 
 died,  when  angels  took  the  youth  under  their  care 
 (Fabricius,  Cod.  Apochryph.,  p.  117,  seq.  ;  comp. 
 Kuhn,  Lebeii  yesii,  i.  163,  remark  4). 
 
 In  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  Emperor  Tiberius, 
 John  made  his  public  appearance,  exhibiting  the 
 austerity,  the  costume,  and  the  manner  of  life  of 
 the  ancient  Jewish  prophets  (Luke  iii.  ;  Matt.  iii. ) 
 His  raiment  was  camel's  hair  ;  he  wore  a  plain 
 leathern  girdle  about  his  loins  ;  his  food  was  that 
 the  desert  spontaneously  offered — locusts  and  wild 
 honey  from  the  rock.  Desert  though  the  place  is 
 designated,  the  country  where  he  began  his  mis- 
 sion— the  wild  mountainous  tract  of  Juda — lying 
 between  Jerusalem  and  the  Dead  Sea,  along  which 
 it  stretches,  was  not  entirely  destitute  of  means  for 
 supporting  human  existence  (Matt.  iii.  I-12  ;  Mark 
 i.  1-8  ;  Luke  iii.  1-20  ;  John  i.  28  ;  Justin  Martyr, 
 Dial,  ami  Tryph.,  c.  88).  Josephus,  in  his  Life 
 (ii.  2),  gives  an  account  of  one  of  his  instructors, 
 Uanus,  which  tlu^ows  light  on  John's  condition  in 
 tlie  desert  : — '  he  lived  in  the  desert,  and  had  no 
 other  food  than  what  gi^ew  of  its  own  accord,  and 
 bathed  himself  in  cold  water  frequently,  both  by 
 night  and  by  day.  I  imitated  him  m  these  things, 
 and  continued  with  him  three  years.' 
 
 The  burden  of  John's  preaching  bore  no  slight 
 resemblance  to  the  old  prophetic  exhortations, 
 whose  last  echo  had  now  died  away  for  centuries. 
 He  called  upon  the  Jewish  people  to  repent  {fj-era- 
 ^oelre),  to  change  their  minds,  their  dispositions, 
 and  affections,  and  thus  prepared  the  way  for  the 
 great  doctrine  promulgated  by  his  Lord,  of  the 
 necessity  of  a  spiritual  regeneration.  That  the 
 change  which  John  had  in  view  was  by  no  means 
 of  so  great  or  so  elevated  a  kind  as  that  which 
 Jesus  required,  is  very  probable  ;  but  the  particu- 
 lars into  which  he  enters  when  he  proceeds  to 
 address  classes  or  individuals  (Matt.  iii.  7,  seq.  ; 
 Luke  iii.  7,  seq.),  serve  fully  to  show  that  the  re- 
 novation at  which  he  aimed  was  not  merely  of  a 
 material  or  organic,  but  chiefly  of  a  moral  nature. 
 In  a  very  emphatic  manner  did  he  warn  the  eccle- 
 s'astical  and  philosophical  authorities  of  the  land 
 of  the  necessity  under  which  they  lay  of  an  entire 
 change  of  view,  of  aim,  and  of  desire  ;  declaring 
 in  explicit  and  awful  terms  that  their  pride  of 
 nationality  would  avail  them  nothing  against  the 
 coming  wrathful  visitation,  and  that  they  were 
 utterly  mistaken  in  the  notion  that  Divine  Provi- 
 dence had  any  need  of  them  for  completing  its  own 
 wise  purposes  (Luke  iii.  8,  9).  The  first  reason 
 assigned  by  John  for  entering  on  his  most  weighty 
 and  perilous  office,  was  announced  in  these  words — • 
 'the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand.'  It  was  his 
 VOL.  II.  * 
 
 great  work  to  prepare  the  mind  of  the  nation,  so 
 that  when  Jesus  himsell  came  they  might  be  a 
 people  made  ready  for  the  Lord.  What  was  the 
 exact  idea  which  John  intended  to  convey  by  the 
 terra  'kingdom  of  heaven'  it  is  not  easy,  at  least 
 in  the  space  before  us,  to  determine  with  satisfac- 
 tion. We  feel  ourselves,  however,  justified  in  pro- 
 testing against  the  practice  of  those  who  take  the 
 vulgar  Jewish  notion,  and  ascribe  it  to  John,  while 
 some  go  so  far  as  to  deny  that  our  Lord  himself, 
 at  the  first,  possessed  any  other.  The  reference 
 which  we  have  made  to  John's  addresses  to  his 
 auditors  suffices  to  show  that  there  was  an  ample 
 and  predominant  moral  element  in  his  conception 
 of  this  kingdom  ;  while,  if  he  entertained  the  vulgar 
 notion  of  the  Messiah,  why  his  urgency  in  behalf  of 
 /xerdvoia — an  entire,  internal  change?  Besides^ 
 does  the  fact  need  enforcement,  that  all  superior 
 minds — especially  those  that  are  enlightened  by  the 
 Divine  Spirit — have  both  correcter  and  noblei 
 views  than  the  bulk  of  their  contemporaries,  and 
 that  it  is  the  power  which,  under  God's  aid,  these 
 views  give  them,  that  sustains  them  in  their  duty 
 and  makes  their  efforts  successful  ?  If  John  really 
 came  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elias — if  he  re- 
 produced the  old  ardour  and  quickening  fore- 
 sight of  the  prophets,  he  must  have  gone  far 
 beyond  the  vulgar  conception  of  the  kingdom  of 
 God.  And  indeed  the  whole  tenor  of  his  teach- 
 ing seems  to  our  mind  intended  and  fitted  to  refine, 
 exalt,  and  expand  the  ordinary  Jewish  mind,  and 
 so  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  perfect  day  of 
 Christ. 
 
 Had  we  space  to  develop  the  moral  character  of 
 John,  we  could  show  that  this  fine,  stern,  high- 
 minded  teacher  possessed  many  eminent  qualities  ; 
 but  his  personal  and  official  modesty  in  keeping,  in 
 all  circumstances,  in  the  lower  rank  assigned  him 
 by  God,  must  not  pass  without  special  mention. 
 The  doctrine  and  manner  of  life  of  John  appear  to 
 have  roused  the  entire  of  the  south  of  Palestine, 
 and  people  flocked  from  all  parts  to  the  spot  where, 
 on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  he  baptised  thousands 
 unto  repentance.  Such,  indeed,  was  the  fame 
 which  he  had  gained,  that  '  people  were  in  expec- 
 tation, and  all  men  mused  in  their  hearts  of  John, 
 whether  he  were  the  Christ  or  not'  (Luke  iii.  15). 
 Had  he  chosen,  John  might  without  doubt  have 
 assumed  to  himself  the  higher  office,  and  risen  to 
 great  worldly  power.  But  he  was  faithful  to  his 
 trust,  and  never  failed  to  declare  in  tlie  fullest  and 
 clearest  manner,,  that  he  was  not  the  Christ,  but 
 merely  his  harbinger,,  and  that  the  sole  work  he 
 had  to  do  was  to  usher  in  the  day-spring  from 
 on  high. 
 
 The  more  than  prophetic  fame  of  the  Baptist 
 reached  the  ears  of  Jesus  in  his  Nazarene  dwelling, 
 far  distant  from  the  locality  of  John  (Matt.  ii.  22- 
 23).  The  nature  of  the  report — namely,  that  his 
 divinely-predicted  forerunner  had  appeared  in 
 Judtea— shewed  our  Lord  that  the  time  was  now 
 come  for  his  being  made  manifest  to  Israel.  Ac- 
 cordingly he  comes  to  the  place  where  John  is  to 
 be  baptized  of  him,  in  order  that  thus  he  might 
 fulfil  all  that  was  required  under  the  dispensation 
 which  was  about  to  disappear  (Matt.  iii.  13), 
 John's  sense  of  inferiority  inclines  him  to  ask 
 rather  than  to  give  baptism  in  the  case  of  Jesus, 
 who,  however,  wills  to  have  it  so,  and  is  accord- 
 ingly baptised  of  John.  Immediately  on  the  ter- 
 mination of  this  symbolical  act,  a  divine  attestation 
 
JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 
 
 626 
 
 JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 
 
 is  given  from  the  opened  vault  of  heaven,  declaring 
 Jesus  to  be  in  truth  the  long  looked-for  Messiah — 
 'This  is  my  beloved  Son,  in  vi^hom  I  am  well 
 pleased'  (Matt.  iii.  17).  The  events  which  are 
 found  recorded  in  John  i.  19,  sq.,  seem  to  have  hap- 
 pened after  the  baptism  of  Jesus  by  John.  This 
 appears  to  us  to  be  implied  in  the  past  character  of 
 the  narrative.  John  is  obviously  speaking  of  some- 
 thing over  and  gone  :  for  instance,  '  This  is  he  of 
 whom  I  said''  (not  I  say),  'after  me  cometh  a  man,' 
 etc.  ;  John's  testimony  had  already  been  borne 
 when  he  gave  his  reply  to  the  Sanhedrim.  It  was 
 therefore  prior  to  his  baptism  that  John  '  knew  him 
 not' — knew  not  kis  persoji,  though,  of  course,  he 
 knew  that  the  Messiah  was  on  the  point  of  com- 
 ing ;  and  though  John  and  Jesus  were  relatives, 
 yet,  considering  the  distance  at  which  they  dwelt 
 from  each  other,  and  the  habits  of  retirement  and 
 solitude  in  which  both  indulged,  there  is  no  diffi- 
 culty whatever  in  the  statement.  But  it  may  be 
 asked,  if  John  was  ignorant  of  the  person  of  Jesus, 
 how  he  could  acknowledge  his  superiority,  as  he 
 does  when  he  intimates  that  it  was  more  meet  he 
 should  receive  than  give  baptism.  This  difficulty 
 has  excited  much  attention.  The  reader  may  with 
 advantage  consult  the  very  learned  and,  for  the 
 most  part,  impartial  commentary  of  Liicke,  on  the 
 passage.  Our  view  is  this  :  the  relation  in  which 
 John  and  Jesus  stood  to  each  other  must  have  been 
 well  knov\?n  to  both.  When,  therefore,  Jesus  came 
 to  John,  he  would  naturally  declare  himself  to  be 
 the  intended  Messiah.  Such  a  declaration — thus 
 pointing  out  the  person — would,  of  course,  con- 
 ciliate belief  in  John's  mind,  and  might  naturally 
 prompt  the  self-abasing  language  which  he  em- 
 ploys when  requested  by  Jesus  to  give  him  baptism. 
 No  other  fact  than  such  an  assertion  would  com- 
 municate to  John's  mind,  could  justify  the  language 
 which  the  Baptist  uses,  since,  as  the  forerunner  of 
 the  Messiah,  he  was  second  to  him  only.  Still  the 
 divinely-promised  evidence  remained  to  be  given — • 
 '  upon  whom  thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending, 
 and  remaining  on  him,  the  same  is  he  which  bap- 
 tizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost'  (John  i.  33).  That 
 evidence  was  at  length  vouchsafed  after  the  bap- 
 tism, and  then  the  divine  and  human  testimony 
 concurred  in  giving  such  satisfaction  to  John's 
 mind  as  he  had  been  led  of  God  to  expect,  and 
 which  the  important  interests  at  stake  seem^i  to 
 demand. 
 
 In  the  testimony  which  John  bears  to  Jesu^,  as 
 recorded  by  the  Evangelist  John,  Winer,  in  his 
 Realwortointch,  finds  some  difficulty,  and  thinks 
 that  there  is  a  variation,  in  fact  a  contrariety,  be- 
 tween the  view  which  John  presents  of  the  person 
 and  work  of  our  Lord  and  that  which  the  other 
 evangelists  afford — a  view,  indeed,  of  vi'hich  the 
 Baptist  could  have  known  nothing,  but  which 
 came  from  the  Gnosticizing  colours  of  John's 
 mind.  We  again  refer  the  reader  to  Liicke's  valu- 
 able work.  But  what  has  already  been  remarked 
 will  have  shewn  that  Winer  and  others  are  in  error 
 in  the  supposition  which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  these 
 alleged  difficulties  and  variations — namely,  that 
 John  the  Baptist  had  no  idea  of  the  kingdom 
 of  God,  higher  or  more  far-reaching  than  that 
 which  was  prevalent  in  the  common  mind  of  Ju- 
 daea. It  is  in  the  words,  '  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God 
 which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world'  (John  i. 
 29.  36),  that  the  difficulty  is  thought  to  be  found. 
 <JVhat,  it  is  asked,  could  John  the  Baptist  have 
 
 known  of  this  assumed  function — the  remission  of 
 sins  ?  Liicke  has,  we  think,  satisfactorily  shewr 
 that  such  a  function  did  enter  into  the  prophetic  idea 
 of  the  Messiah  (Is.  liii. ),  or  at  least  into  that  concep- 
 tion of  him  which  the  authoritative  expounders  of 
 religious  truth  had  drawn  from  the  peculiar  language 
 of  prophecy.  And  this  is  unquestionably  certain, 
 that  '  the  remission  of  our  sins,  through  the  tender 
 mercy  of  our  God'  (Luke  i.  77),  did  form  a  part  of 
 the  conception  of  the  coming  Messiah  which  Za- 
 charias,  John's  father,  entertained  and  expressed 
 immediately  on  the  birth  of  his  son  ;  while  in  the 
 account  given  by  the  synoptical  evangelists  (Mat- 
 thew, Mark,  Luke),  to  the  effect  that  John  preached 
 '  the  baptism  of  repentance,  for  the  remissioti  of 
 sins '  (Luke  iii.  3),  adding  that  the  Christ  would 
 'baptize  ivith  the  Holy  Ghost  a)id  with  fii-e''  (Luke 
 iii.  16),  may  surely  be  found  the  essence  of  the 
 idea  conveyed  by  the  words,  '  Behold  the  Lamb  of 
 God,'  etc. 
 
 The  relation  which  subsisted  between  John  and 
 Jesus,  after  the  emphatic  testimony  above  recorded 
 had  been  borne,  we  have  not  the  materials  to  de- 
 scribe with  full  certainty. 
 
 It  seems  but  natural  to  think,  when  their 
 hitherto  relative  position  is  taken  into  account,  that 
 John  would  forthwith  lay  down  his  office  of  har- 
 binger, which,  now  that  the  Sun  of  Righteousness 
 himself  had  appeared,  was  entirely  fulfilled  and  ter- 
 minated. Such  a  step  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
 taken.  On  the  contrary,  the  language  of  Scripture 
 seems  to  imply  that  the  Baptist  church  continued 
 side  by  side  with  the  Messianic  (Matt.  xi.  3  ;  Luke 
 vii.  19  ;  Matt.  ix.  14 ;  Luke  xi.  i  ;  John  iii.  23), 
 and  remained  long  after  John's  execution  (Acts  xix. 
 3).  Indeed,  a  sect  which  bears  the  name  of 
 'John's  disciples,'  exists  to  the  present  day  in  the 
 East,  whose  sacred  books  are  said  to  be  pervaded  by 
 a  Gnostic  leaven.  They  are  hostile  alike  to  Judaism 
 and  Christianity,  and  their  John  and  Jesus  are  alto- 
 gether different  from  the  characters  bearing  these 
 names  in  our  evangelists.  Still,  though  it  has  been 
 generally  assumed  that  John  did  not  lay  down  his 
 office,  we  are  not  satisfied  that  the  N.  T.  esta- 
 blishes this  alleged  fact.  John  may  have  ceased  to 
 execute  his  own  peculiar  work,  as  the  forerunner, 
 but  may  justifiably  have  continued  to  bear  his  most 
 important  testimony  to  the  Messiahship  of  Christ  ; 
 or  he  may  even  have  altogether  given  up  the  duties 
 of  active  life  some  time,  at  least,  before  his  death  ; 
 and  yet  his  disciples,  both  before  and  after  that 
 event,  may  have  maintained  their  individuality  as  a 
 religious  communion.  Nor  will  the  student  of  the 
 N.  T.  and  of  ecclesiastical  history,  who  knows  how 
 grossly  a  teacher  far  greater  than  John,  was,  both 
 during  his  life  and  after  his  crucifixion,  misun- 
 derstood and  misrepresented,  think  it  impossible 
 that  some  misconception  or  some  sinister  motive 
 may  have  had  weight  in  preventing  the  Baptist 
 church  from  dissolving  and  passing  into  thai  of 
 Christ. 
 
 It  was,  not  improbably,  with  a  view  to  remove 
 some  error  of  this  kind  that  John  sent  the  embassy 
 of  his  disciples  to  Jesus  which  is  recorded  in  Matt. 
 xi.  3  ;  Luke  vii.  19.  The  spiritual  course  which 
 the  teachings  of  Jesus  were  more  and  more  taking, 
 and  the  apparent  failure,  or  at  least  uneasy  post- 
 ponement of  the  promised  kingdom  in  the  popular 
 sense,  especially  the  fact  that  their  esteemed  mas- 
 ter lay  in  prison,  and  was  in  imminent  danger  of 
 losing  liis  life,  may  well  have  led  John's  disciples 
 
JOHN  THE  BAPTIST 
 
 627 
 
 JOHN  THE  PRESBYTER 
 
 to  doubt  if  Jesus  were  in  truth  the  expected  Mts-  | 
 siah.     Appearances,  to  them,  were  purely  adverse.  | 
 What  step  so  fit  on  the  part  of  their  master,  as  I 
 tliat  he  should  send  them  to  Jesus  himself?     No  | 
 intimation  is  found   in   the    record  that  John  re-  j 
 quired  evidence  to  give  him  satisfaction  ;  and  all  | 
 the  language  that  is  used  is  proper  and  pertinent 
 if  we  suppose  that  the  doubt  lay  only  in  the  minds 
 of  his  disciples.     That  the  terms   employed  ad- 
 mit the  interpretation  that  John  was  not  without 
 some  misgivings  (Luke  vii.   23  ;  Matt.   xi.  6),  we 
 are  free  to  allow.     And  if  any  doubt  had  grown 
 up  in  the  Baptist's  mind    it  was    most   probably 
 owing  to  the  defective    spirituality  of  his  views  ; 
 for  even  of  him  Jesus  has  declared,    'he  that  is 
 least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  greater  than  he' 
 (Matt.  xi.   11).      Were  this  the  case,   it  would   of 
 itself  account   not  only  for  the   embassy  sent  by 
 John  to  Jesus,  but  also  for  the  continuance  and 
 perpetuation  of  John's  separate  influence  as    the 
 founder  of  a  sect. 
 
 The  manner  of  John's  death  is  too  well  known 
 to  require  to  be  detailed  here  (Matt.  iv.  12  ;  xiv. 
 3  ;  Luke  iii.  19  ;  Mark  vi.  17  ;  Joseph.  A>itiq. 
 xviii.  5.  2).  He  reproved  a  tyrant  for  a  heinous 
 crime,  and  received  his  reward  in  decapitation. 
 Josephus,  however,  assigns  a  somewhat  different 
 cause  for  this  execution  from  that  given  in  the 
 gospels.  The  passage  bears  forcible  evidence  to 
 the  general  truth  of  the  evangelical  narrative  re- 
 spectmg  John,  and  therefore  we  transcribe  it  : — 
 '  Now  some  of  the  Jews  thought  that  the  destruc- 
 tion of  Herod's  army  came  from  God,  and  that  very 
 justly,  as  a  punishment  of  wliat  he  did  against 
 John  that  was  called  the  Baptist ;  for  Herod  slew 
 him,  although  he  was  a  good  man,  and  commanded 
 the  Jews  to  exercise  virtue,  both  as  to  righteousness 
 one  towards  another,  and  piety  towards  God,  and 
 so  to  come  to  baptism.  Now  when  others  came  in 
 crowds  about  him — for  they  were  greatly  moved  by 
 hearing  his  words — Herod,  who  feared  lest  the 
 great  influence  John  had  over  the  people  might  put 
 it  into  his  power  and  inclination  to  raise  a  rebellion 
 (for  they  seemed  ready  to  do  any  thing  he  should 
 advise),  thought  it  best,  by  putting  him  to  death,  to 
 prevent  any  mischief  he  might  cause,  and  not  bring 
 himself  into  difficulties  by  sparing  a  man  who 
 might  make  him  repent  of  it  when  it  should  be  too 
 late.  Accordingly  he  was  sent  a  prisoner,  out  of 
 Herod's  suspicious  temper,  to  Machaerus,  the 
 castle  I  before  mentioned,  and  was  there  put  to 
 death.' 
 
 There  is  no  contrariety  between  this  account  and 
 that  which  is  given  in  the  N.  T.  Both  may  be 
 true  :  John  was  condemned  in  the  mind  of  Herod 
 on  political  grounds,  as  endangering  his  position, 
 and  executed  on  private  and  ostensible  grounds,  in 
 order  to  gratify  a  malicious  but  powerful  woman. 
 The  Scriptural  reason  was  but  the  pretext  for  carry- 
 ing into  effect  the  determinations  of  Herod's  cabi- 
 net. That  the  fear  of  Herod  was  not  without  some 
 ground  may  be  seen  in  the  popularity  which  John 
 had  gained  (Mark    xi.   32  ;    Lardner,    Works,  vi. 
 
 483)- 
 
 The  castle  of  MacliKrus,  where  John  was  im- 
 prisoned and  beheaded,  was  a  fortress  lying  on  the 
 southern  extremity  of  Perasa,  at  the  top  of  the  lake 
 Asphaltites,  between  the  dominions  of  Herod  and 
 Aretas,  king  of  Arabia  Petriea,  and  at  the  time  of 
 our  history  appears  to  have  belonged  to  the  former 
 (Lardner,  vi.  483).    According  to  the  Scripture  ac- 
 
 count, the  daughter  of  Herodias  obtained  the 
 Baptist's  head  at  an  entertainment,  without  delay. 
 How  could  this  be,  when  Machajrus  lay  at  a  dis- 
 tance from  Jerusalem  ?  The  feast  seems  to  have 
 been  made  at  Machcerus,  which,  besides  being  a 
 stronghold,  was  also  a  palace,  built  by  Herod  the 
 Great,  and  Herod  himself  was  now  on  his  route 
 towards  the  territories  of  Aretas,  with  whom  he 
 was  at  war.  Bishop  Marsh  {Lecture  xxvi. )  re- 
 marks, that  the  soldiers  who,  in  Luke  iii.  14,  are 
 said  to  have  come  to  John  while  baptizing  in  the 
 Jordan,  are  designated  by  a  term  (crrpaTevd/xevoL, 
 not  aTpaTLuiTai.)  which  denotes  persons  actually  en- 
 gaged in  war,  not  merely  soldiers.  In  the  same 
 way,  in  Mark  vi.  27,  the  officer  sent  to  bring  John's 
 head  bears  a  military  title — o-TreKovXaTup.  These 
 minute  indications  are  quite  accordant  with  the  fact 
 that  Herod  was  then  making  war  on  Aretas,  as  ap- 
 pears from  Josephus  [Aiitiq.  xviii.  5-  i)»  ^.nd  afford 
 a  vei-y  strong  evidence  of  the  credibility  of  the 
 sacred  narratives,  by  shewing  that  the  authors  de- 
 scribed what  was  actually  proceeding  before  their 
 own  eyes.  We  also  see  a  reason  why  Herodias 
 was  present  on  this  occasion,  since  she  was  Herod's 
 paramour,  and  had,  '  like  another  Helen,'  led  to 
 the  war. 
 
 John  the  Baptist  is  mentioned  in  the  Koran, 
 with  much  honour,  under  the  name  of  Jahia 
 (see  Hottinger,  Historia  Orientalis,  pp.  144-149, 
 Tiguri  1660). 
 
 The  literature  connected  with  the  subject  of  this 
 article,  to  be  found  in  foreign  writers,  is  very  rich. 
 Besides  the  works  already  named,  the  following 
 may  be  consulted  :  Hase  {Leben  Jesii,  3  Aufl., 
 Leipzig  1840,  p.  80),  who,  together  with  Walch 
 {Bibliothcca  Tkeologica,  iii.  402),  gives  the  chief 
 authorities  ;  Witsii  Exerc.  de  J-oanne  Bapt.  in  his 
 Miscell.  Sacra,  ii.  367  ;  J.  G.  E.  Leopold,  Jo- 
 haiDies  der  Tdufer,  Hannov.  1825  ;  Usteri,  Nach- 
 richten  voti  yohatnies  de»i  Tdufer,  in  the  Sttidien 
 und  Kritiken,  1829,  part  iii.  p.  439;  L.  von  Roh- 
 den,  Johajiiies  der  Tdufer,  Liibeck  1838  ;  Nean- 
 der.  Das  Leben  Jesu,  Hamb.  1837,  p.  49,  E.  T., 
 p.  45,  ff  The  ecclesiastical  traditions  touching 
 John  may  be  found  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum,  iv. 
 687-846  ;  and,  in  a  compendious  form,  in  Tille- 
 mont,  Mhjwires,  i.  82-108,  472-505. — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 JOHN  THE  PRESBYTER.  The  important 
 place  which  has  been  assigned  by  some  to  this  in- 
 dividual as  the  writer  of  certain  books  in  the  sacred 
 canon,  renders  it  proper  that  some  notice  should 
 be  taken  of  him  in  this  work.  As  his  existence 
 has  been  wholly  denied  by  some,  whilst  it  has  been 
 assumed  as  unquestionable  by  others,  we  shall 
 best  serve  the  interests  of  the  reader  by,  in  the  first 
 instance,  setting  before  him  in  order  all  the  state- 
 ments occurring  in  ancient  Christian  writers  re- 
 specting the  object  of  our  inquiry. 
 
 The  earliest  testimony  is  that  of  Papias  (Euseb., 
 H.  E.  iii.  39),  who  says,  speaking  of  the  efforts  he 
 made  to  establish  himself  with  certainty  in  Chiis- 
 tian  truth,  '  Whenever  any  one  arrived  who  had 
 had  intercourse  with  the  elders  (tos  Trpetr/SuTf'pois), 
 I  made  inquiry  concerning  the  declarations  of 
 these  ;  what  Andrew,  what  Peter,  or  Philip,  or 
 Thomas,  or  James,  or  John,  or  Matthew,  or  any 
 other  of  the  disciples  of  the  Lord  said,  as  also  what 
 Aristion  and  John  the  Presbyter,  disciples  of  the 
 Lord,  say.  For  I  believed  that  I  should  not  derive 
 so  much  advantage  from  books  as  from  living  and 
 
JOHN  THE  PRESBYTER 
 
 628 
 
 JOKMEAM 
 
 abiding  discourse.'*  In  reporting  this,  Eusebius 
 remarks  tliat  Papias  purposely  adduces  the  name 
 John  twice,  first  in  connection  with  Peter,  James, 
 and  Matthew,  where  only  the  Apostle  can  be  in- 
 tended, and  again,  along  with  Aristiun,  where 
 he  distinguishes  him  by  the  title  of  '  The  Presby- 
 ter.' Eusebius  goes  on  to  say  that  this  confirms 
 the  report  of  those  who  relate  that  there  were  two 
 men  in  Asia  Minor  who  bore  that  name  and  had  been 
 closely  connected  with  Christ,  and  that  two  tombs 
 had  been  found  in  Ephesus  bearing  the  name  of 
 John.  In  another  part  of  his  history  (vii.  25),  Euse- 
 bius cites  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  about 
 the  middle  of  the  3d  century,  as  uttering  the 
 same  tradition  concerning  the  fi-nding  of  the  two 
 tombs  at  Ephesus  inscribed  with  the  name  of  John, 
 and  as  ascribing  to  John  the  Presbyter  the  author- 
 ship of  the  Apocalypse  ;  an  opniion  to  which 
 Eusebius  himself  inclined  (iii.  39).  Jerome  {De 
 vir.  ill.,  c.  9)  reports  the  opinion  of  some  that  the 
 second  and  third  epistles  of  John  are  the  produc- 
 tion of  John  the  Presbyter,  '  cujus  et  hodie  al- 
 terum  sepulcrum  apud  Ephesum  ostenditur,  etsi 
 nonnulli  putant  duas  memorias  ejusdem  Johannis 
 evangelistse  esse.'  An  earlier  testimony,  that  of 
 the  Apostolical  Constitutions  (vii.  36),  declares  that 
 there  was  a  second  John  who  was  bishop  of  Ephe- 
 sus after  St.  John,  by  whom  he  was  instituted  in 
 this  office. 
 
 Such  is  the  evidence  in  favour  of  the  existence  of 
 John  the  Presbyter.  On  examining  it  we  find—  i. 
 Mliat  Papias  knew  a  disciple  of  our  Lord  named 
 John,  distinct  from  the  Evangelist,  and  known  as 
 6  irpea-puTepoi  'Iwdwijs  ;  but  Papias  says  nothing  of 
 his  being  bishop  of  Ephesus  or  of  his  being  at 
 Ephesus  at  all.  2.  That  there  was  a  bishop  at 
 Ephesus  of  the  name  of  John,  who  was  the  suc- 
 cessor of  the  apostle  John  there.  3.  That  there 
 was  a  tradition  that  two  tombs  were  found  at 
 Ephesus  bearing  the  name  of  John,  one  of  which 
 was  supposed  to  be  that  of  the  apostle,  the  other 
 that  of  the  presbyter.  4.  That  this  supposition 
 did  not  obtain  universal  acceptance,  and  was  by 
 Eusebius  held  so  doubtful  that  he  appeals  to  the 
 statement  of  Papias  as  supporting  it.  This  tradi- 
 tion, consequently,  must  be  discounted  ;  and  in 
 that  case  there  remains  only  the  statement  of  Papias 
 that  he  knew  one  John  the  Presbyter  who  had  been 
 a  disciple  of  the  Lord,  and  the  statement  of  the 
 Apostolical  Constitutions  that  there  was  a  bishop  at 
 Ephesus  of  the  name  of  John,  who  was  instituted 
 to  his  office  by  the  apostle.  As  there  is  nothing  to 
 prove  that  these  two  were  the  same  person,  the 
 testimony  of  the  Constitutions  must  also  be  dis- 
 counted in  our  present  inquiry  ;  and  consequently, 
 the  statement  of  Papias  remains  as  the  sole  direct 
 evidence  for  the  existence  of  John  the  Presbyter. 
 
 To  this  evidence  there  is  opposed — i.  The  nega- 
 tive evidence  arising  from  the  silence  of  all  other 
 ancient  authorities,  especially  the  silence  of  Poly- 
 crates,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  who,  in  a  list  of  emi- 
 nent teachers  and  bishops  in  Asia  Minor,  preserved 
 by  Eusebius  (//.  £.,  v.  24),  makes  no  mention  of 
 John  the  Presbyter  ;  and  2.  The  positive  evidence 
 afforded  by  the  statement  of  Irenasus,  who  not  only 
 omits  all  mention  of  the  Presbyter,  but  says  that 
 Papias  was  a  hearer  of  John  the  apostle,  along 
 
 *  In  what  follows  Papias  reports  what  he  heard 
 from  John  concerning  the  authorship  of  the  Gospels 
 of  Mark  and  Matthew. 
 
 with  Polycarp  (Ailv.  Haer.  v.  33).  This  counta 
 evidence  has  appeared  to  some  so  strong  that  they 
 have  thought  it  sufficient  to  set  aside  that  of 
 Papias,  who,  they  remind  us,  is  described  by 
 Eusebius  as  a  man  of  a  very  small  intellect  {<T(p68pa 
 a/xiKphs  rbv  vovv,  H.  E.,  in.  39).  But  this  seems 
 going  too  far.  Papias  describes  himself  as  a  hearer 
 of  the  Presbyter  John  (Euseb.  v.  24),  and  in  this 
 he  could  hardly  be  mistaken,  whatever  was  his  de- 
 ficiency in  intellectual  power  ;  whereas  it  is  veiy 
 possible  that  Irenceus  may  have  confounded  the 
 presbyter  with  the  apostle,  the  latter  of  whom 
 would  be  to  his  mind  much  more  familiar  than  the 
 former.  The  silence  of  Polycrates  may  be  held 
 proof  sufficient  that  no  John  the  Presbyter  was 
 bishop  of  Ephesus  or  famed  as  a  teacher  of 
 Christianity  in  Asia  Minor  ;  but  as  Papias  does 
 not  attest  this,  his  testimony  remains  unaffected  by 
 this  conclusion. 
 
 On  the  whole,  the  existence  of  a  John  the  Pres- 
 byter seems  proved  by  the  testimony  of  Papias  ; 
 but  beyond  this  and  the  fact  that  he  was  a  disciple 
 of  the  Lord,  nothing  is  certainly  known  of  him. 
 Credner  contends  that  irp€aj36T€pos  is  to  be  taken 
 in  its  ordinary  sense  of  '  older,'  and  that  it  was  ap- 
 plied to  the  person  mentioned  by  Papias,  either 
 because  he  was  the  senior  of  St.  John,  or  because 
 he  arrived  before  him  in  Asia  Minor  ;  but  this  is 
 improbable  in  itself,  and  had  Papias  meant  to  inti- 
 mate this  he  would  not  have  simply  called  himoTrpecr- 
 j3iiTepos  ^ludw-qs.  In  his  statement  vpeajBuTepos  is 
 plainly  opposed  to  oiTrdaToXos  as  a  distinctive  title 
 of  office.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOIADA   (yT'i"'  ;    Sept.   'IwSa^  'Iw5d ;    Alex. 
 
 'IwciSd).  A  Jewish  high-priest,  son  and  successor 
 of  Eliashib,  and  father  of  Jonathan  or  Johanan,  by 
 whom  he  was  succeeded  (Neh.  xii.  10,  II,  22). 
 Another  of  his  sons  married  the  daughter  of  San- 
 ballat  the  Horonite,  and  was  expelled  by  Nehe- 
 miah  (Neh.  xiii.  28). — + 
 
 JOIAKIM  (D'^ip'''!'' ;    Sept.   'JwaKip.),   a  Jewish 
 
 high-priest,  father  of  Eliashib  and  grandfather  of 
 Joiada.  His  father  was  Jeshua,  the  colleague  of 
 Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  10). — f 
 
 JOKDEAM  (DJ^1p\  perhaps  'possessed  by  the 
 people,^  from  the  root  Tr\\>  ;  ^ kpiKap. ;  Alex.  'le/c- 
 
 T    T 
 
 5ad,a  ;  yacadaam) ,  a  town  of  the  south  of  Judah, 
 near  Juttah  and  Carmel  (Josh.  xv.  5,  6).  Euse- 
 bius calls  it  Te/v5ad5  ;  but  he  does  not  appear  to 
 have  known  anything  of  it,  and  its  site  is  still  un- 
 known.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 JOKIM  (D'^pi'' ;  Sept.  'Iwa/fiyu),  one  of  the  sons 
 
 of  Shelah  (i  Chron.  iv.  22).     [Jashubi-Lehem.] 
 
 JOKMEAM    (DyDp\    'gathered  of  the  people^ 
 
 from  nop  ;  ^JeK/madv ;  yeeinaam),  one  of  the  cities 
 given  to  the  Kohathites  out  of  the  tribe  of  Eph- 
 raim  [i  Chron.  vi.  68  (53)].  It  is  worthy  of  note 
 that  the  parallel  passage  in  Josh.  xxi.  22  has  Kib- 
 zaim  instead  of  Jokmeam.  This  may  be  accounted 
 for  either  by  a  change  in  the  name  of  the  city — no 
 uncommon  occurrence  in  Palestine,  or  by  an  error 
 of  a  scribe,  the  letters  of  the  two  names  bearing 
 considerable  resemblance  to  each  other  (DyDp% 
 D''^*2p),  and  even  more  in  the  ancient  than  in  the 
 modern  characters.     The  site  of  Jokmeam  is  un- 
 
JOKNEAM 
 
 629 
 
 JONADAB 
 
 known.  There  is  a  yokvieam  mentioned  in  the 
 Hebrew  text  of  i  Kings  iv.  12,  but  it  was  mani- 
 festly situated  at  the  western  extremity  of  Esdraelon, 
 and  was  no  doubt  identical  with  Jokneam,  as  the 
 translators  of  our  A.  V.  appear  to  have  thought 
 (Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  115).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 JOKNEAM   (Dy3p\    ' possessed  by  the  people ;' 
 
 'IeK6/x,  'leK^ciJ',  Made;  Alex.  'leKOfd^,  'le/cm/x; 
 jfjuhanatt,  Jcchonam,  yeciiam),  an  ancient  royal 
 Canaanitish  city,  situated  at  the  base  of  Mount 
 Carmel  ;  whence  its  name,  Jokneam  of  Carmel 
 (Josh.  xii.  22).  It  was  given  to  the  Levites  out  of 
 the  tribe  of  Zebulun  (xxi.  34).  Two  other  pas- 
 sages in  which  it  is  mentioned  tend  to  define  its 
 exact  position.  In  describing  the  border  of  Zebu- 
 Urn,  Joshua  says  :  '  It  went  up  toward  the  sea  and 
 Maralah,  and  reached  to  Dabbasheth,  and  reached 
 to  the  river  that  is  before  Jokneam''  (xix.  11). 
 This  river  was  doubtless  the  Kishon.  Again,  in 
 I  Kings  iv.  12,  the  district  of  one  of  Solomon's 
 purveyors  is  thus  described  :  To  Baana  pertained 
 '  Taanach  and  Megiddo,  and  all  Beth-shean,  which 
 is  by  Zartanah  beneath  Jezreel,  from  Beth-shean  to 
 Abelmeholah,   even  imto  beyond  Jokneam    ("I3J?D 
 
 Qyt^pip).'  Baana  thus  held  the  great  plain  from 
 Beth-shean  at  the  eastern  extremity,  to  Jokneam  at 
 the  western.  It  is  true  the  Hebrew  text  in  this 
 IDassage  reads  Jokmeam,  but  from  the  passage  it  is 
 evident  reference  is  made  to  the  city  at  the  base  of 
 Carmel,  and  not  to  Jokmeatn  of  Ephraim  [Jok- 
 meam]. The  letters  J3  and  3  are  often  inter- 
 changed in  Hebrew. 
 
 Dr.  Robinson  has  satisfactorily  identified  Jok- 
 neam with  Tell  Kaimdn,  a  conspicuous  little  hill, 
 covered  with  ruins,  situated  at  the  western  ex- 
 tremity of  Esdraelon,  on  the  south  bank  of  the 
 Kishon,  and  close  to  the  base  of  Carmel.  It 
 commands  the  main  pass  leading  through  the  hills 
 from    Esdraelon   to    Sharon.     The   Arabic   name 
 
 Kaim6n  (    .fc^jo)  is  evidently  identical  with  the 
 
 Ka/xfjLwud  of  Eusebius,  which  lay  in  the  great  plain, 
 six  miles  from  Legio,  on  the  way  to  Ptolemais 
 {Onomast.  s.  v.  Car/ion);  and  it  is  a  corruption  of 
 the  Hebrew  DJ?3p''.  The  Vod  is  dropped,  as  in 
 Zerin  for  Jezreel ;  the  Nufi  is  changed  to  Mem  ; 
 the  Ayin  probably  was  omitted  in  the  Galilean 
 dialect — thus  the  change  was  effected  (Lightfoot, 
 Opera,  ii.  233;  Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  115).  The 
 corruption  must  have  taken  place  at  at  early  date, 
 for  in  the  book  of  Judith  (vii.  3)  we  have  Ki/a/tdi' 
 (see  Van  de  Velde,  Travels,  i.  331;  Memoir,  p. 
 326). -J.  L.  P. 
 
 JOKSHAN  (|C'p\>w/^r;  Sept.  'le^dv),  second 
 
 son  of  Abraham  and  Keturah,  whose  sons  Sheba 
 and  Dedan  appear  to  have  been  the  ancestors  of 
 the  Sabaeans  and  Dedanites,  who  peopled  a  part  of 
 Arabia  Felix  (Gen.  xxv.  2,  3)  [Arabia].  Knobel 
 {Genes.,  p.  188)  suggests  that  the  name  Jokshan 
 may  have  passed  into  jc^'p,  Kashan,  and  that  his 
 descendants  were  the  Kacro-awTat  of  Ptolemy  (vi. 
 7.  6)  and  Steph.  Byzant.  (s.  h.  v.),  the  Kao-avSpeis 
 of  Agatharchides  (p.  60,  Huds.),  the  Vaca.vhpa.'i 
 of  Diod.  Sic.  (iii.  44),  and  the  Casani  or  Gasani 
 of  Pliny  {Nat.  Hist.,  vi.  32)  ;  who  dwelt  by  the 
 Red  Sea,  to  the  south  of  the  Kinsedokolpites, 
 and  extended  to  the  most  northern  of  the  Jok- 
 tanites.  — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOKTAN  (IDp^\  small;  Sept.   '\tKT6.i>),  one  of 
 
 the  sons  ol  Eber,  a  descendant  from  Shem  (Gen. 
 X.  25-26),  and  the  supposed  progenitor  of  many 
 •^ribes  in  Southern  Arabia.  The  Arabians  call  him 
 Kahtan,  and  recognise  him  as  one  of  the  principal 
 founders  of  their  nation.  Edrisi  mentions  a  town 
 in  Yemen  called  Baishat  Jaktan,  which  Niebuhr 
 conjectures  may  be  the  modern  Kahtan  [Arabie, 
 ii.  117).  The  Arabic  Kahtan,  which  is  commonly 
 represented  as  a  dialectical  corruption  of  Joktan. 
 seems  rather  to  be  a  significant  name  given  to  him 
 by  the  Arabs.  An  Arabic  writer  quoted  by  Mr. 
 E.  S.  Poole  (Smith's  Dictionary,  \.  II18),  says 
 he  '  was  named  Kahtan  only  because  of  his  suffer- 
 ing from  drought'  (_,ll-?j.,'*,   from  ii^J,  inopia 
 
 pliiviiE  laboravit).  There  seems  no  ground  for 
 doubting  that  the  descendants  of  the  Arab  Kahtan 
 are  Joktanites.  See  Schultens,  Hist.  Impeiii  "Joc- 
 tanid.  in  Ambia  Felice;  Pococke,  Spec,  Hist. 
 Arab.,  pp.  3,  38  ;  Bochart's  Phaleg,  iii.  15 
 [Arabia].— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOKTHEEL  (^Nrip\   '  sjtbdiied  of  God;  from 
 
 nnp,  an  old  root  =  Uo  ;  'laxa/jeTjX  ;  Alex.   'leX" 
 
 ^ai\K  ;  Jecthel),  a  town  of  Judah,  situated  in  {he 
 plain  of  Philistia  (Sheplielah),  and  apparently  not 
 far  distant  from  Lachish  (Josh.  xv.  38).  It  has  not 
 been  identified. 
 
 2.  ('Ie^0T7X;  Alex.  'le/c^oijX  ;  Jectehel.)  The 
 name  given  by  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah,  to  Selah, 
 or  Petra,  the  capital  of  Edom,  to  shew  that  he  had 
 captured  it.  We  read  in  2  Kings  xiv.  7  :  '  He 
 slew  of  Edom,  in  the  valley  of  Salt,  ten  thousand, 
 and  took  Selah  by  war,  and  called  the  name  of  it 
 Joktheei;  that  is,  '■subdued  of  GodJ  The  date  of 
 this  victory  was  about  B.C.  830  (see  Amaziah  and 
 Selah  ;  and  for  some  additional  details  of  the  cap- 
 ture, 2  Chron.  xxv.  il). — ^J.  T.  P. 
 
 JOMTOB  LIPMANN  MUHLHAUSEN, 
 [Lipmann.] 
 
 JONA  B.  GANACH.  [Ibn  Ganach.] 
 JONADAB  (m^V,  contraction  of  nyin\  God- 
 impelled;  Sept.  'IwraSd/S).  I.  A  nephew  of  David, 
 a  crafty  person,  whose  counsel  suggested  to  his 
 cousin  Amnon  the  means  by  which  he  accom- 
 plished his  abominable  design  upon  his  half-sister 
 Tamar  (2  Sam.  xiii.  4,  5). 
 
 2.  A  son  or  descendant  of  Rechab,  the  progeni- 
 tor of  those  nomadic  Rechabites  who  held  them- 
 selves bound  by  a  vow  to  abstain  from  wine,  and 
 never  to  relinquish  the  nomadic  life.  The  principle 
 on  which  the  tribe  acted  may  be  considered  else- 
 where [Rechabites].  Jonadab  was  at  the  head 
 of  this  tribe  at  the  time  when  Jehu  received  his 
 commission  to  exterminate  the  house  of  Ahab,  and 
 is  supposed  to  have  added  to  its  ancient  austerities 
 the  inhibition  of  wine.  He  was  held  in  great 
 respect  among  the  Israelites  generally  :  and  Jehu, 
 alive  to  the  importance  of  obtaining  the  counte- 
 nance and  sanction  of  such  a  man  to  his  proceed- 
 ings, took  him  up  in  his  chariot,  when  on  his  road 
 to  Samaria  to  complete  the  work  he  had  begun  at 
 Jezreel.  The  terms  of  the  colloquy  which  took 
 place  on  this  occasion  are  rather  remarkable. 
 Perceiving  Jonadab,  he  saluted  him,  and  called 
 out,  '  Is  thine  heart  right,  as  my  heart  is  with  th\ 
 
JONAH 
 
 630 
 
 JONAH 
 
 heart?'  Jonadab  answered,  'It  is.'  Then  said 
 Jehu,  '  If  it  be,  give  me  thine  hand  '  And  he 
 gave  him  his  hand,  and  was  taken  up  into  the 
 chariot,  Jehu  inviting  him  to  '  Come  and  see  my 
 zeal  for  the  Lord'  {2  Kangs  x.  15-17;  Jer.  xxxv. 
 6-10).  It  would  seem  that  the  Rechabites  were  a 
 branch  of  the  Kenites,  over  another  branch  of  whom 
 Heber  was  chief  in  the  time  of  Deborah  and  Barak 
 (Judg.  iv.  II,  17)  :  and  as  it  is  expressly  said  that 
 Jonadab  went  out  to  meet  Jehu,  it  seems  probable 
 that  the  people  of  Samaria,  alarmed  at  the  menac- 
 ing letter  which  they  had  received  from  Jehu,  had 
 induced  Jonadab  to  go  to  meet  and  appease  him 
 on  the  road.  His  venerated  character,  his  rank  as 
 the  head  of  a  tribe,  and  his  neutral  position,  well 
 qualified  him  for  this  mission  ;  and  it  was  quite  as 
 much  the  interest  of  Jonadab  to  concihate  the  new 
 dynasty,  in  whose  founder  he  beheld  the  minister 
 of  the  divine  decrees,  as  it  was  that  of  Jehu  to 
 obtain  his  concurrence  and  support  in  proceedings 
 which  he  could  not  but  know  were  likely  to  render 
 him  odious  to  the  people. — ^J.  K. 
 
 JONAH  (nyT" ;  Sept.  'Iwj/as),  the  fifth  in  order 
 
 of  the  minor  prophets.  No  era  is  assigned  to  him 
 in  the  book  of  his  prophecy,  yet  there  is  little 
 doubt  of  his  being  the  same  person  who  is  spoken 
 of  as  the  son  of  Amittai  in  2  Kings  xiv.  25.  The 
 Jewish  doctors,  followed  by  some  of  the  fathers, 
 have  supposed  him  to  be  the  son  of  the  widow  of 
 Sarepta  :  '  Now  by  this  I  know,'  said  she  to  Elijah, 
 '  that  thou  art  a  man  of  God,  and  that  the  word 
 of  the  Lord  in  thy  mouth  is  truth'  DOX  (i  Kings 
 xvii.  24).  The  restored  child  was  thenceforward 
 named  ^nON"p,  a  title  which  was  to  preserve  the 
 memory  of  his  miraculous  resuscitation  (Hieron. 
 PrcB/at.  in  yoiiam).  His  birthplace  was  Gath- 
 hepher,  in  the  tribe  of  Zebulun.  In  that  place, 
 according  to  Jerome,  his  grave  was  pointed  out, 
 and  El-Meshad  is  identified  by  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
 tion with  Gath-hepher.  Jonah  flourished  in  the 
 beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II.,  and  pre- 
 dicted the  successful  conquests,  enlarged  territory, 
 and  brief  prosperity  of  the  Israelitish  kingdom 
 under  that  monarch's  sway.  The  oracle  itself  is 
 not  extant,  though  Hitzig  has,  by  a  novel  process 
 of  criticism,  amused  himself  with  a  fancied  dis- 
 covery of  it  in  chaps,  xv.  and  xvi.  of  Isaiah.  Hit- 
 zig, Des  Proph.  jfini.  Orakel  iiber  Moab  kritisch- 
 viiididrt,  etc.,  Heidelberg  1831. 
 
 The  book  of  Jonah  contains  an  account  of  the 
 prophet's  commission  to  denounce  Nineveh,  and 
 ol  his  refusal  to  undertake  the  embassy — of  the 
 method  he  employed  to  escape  the  unwelcome 
 task  [Tarshish],  and  the  miraculous  means  which 
 God  usf.d  to  curb  his  self-willed  spirit,  and  subdue 
 his  petulant  and  querulous  disposition.  The  third 
 and  fourth  chapters  briefly  detail  Jonah's  fulfilment 
 of  the  divine  command,  and  present  us  with  another 
 exemplification  of  his  refractory  temper.  His  at- 
 tempt to  flee  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  must 
 have  sprung  from  a  partial  insanity,  produced  by 
 the  excitement  of  distracting  motives  in  an  irascible 
 and  melancholy  heart.  The  temerity  and  folly  of 
 the  fugitive  could  scarcely  be  credited,  if  they  had 
 not  been  equalled  by  future  outbreaks  of  a  similar 
 peevish  and  morbid  infatuation.  Dr.  Pusey's 
 diluted  interpretation  of  the  phrase  mn''  "'JSD, 
 as  if  it  signified  only  an  evasion  of  the  mission,  or 
 that  he  fled  from  officially  standing  in  the  divine 
 presence,  does  not  relieve  us  of  the  difficulty.     It 
 
 was  as  absurd  in  Hebrew  creed  to  attempt  to 
 escape  the  divine  omnipotence  as  it  was  to  elude 
 the  divine  omnipresence.  But  men  in  certain 
 moods  have  often  tried  to  do  what  their  theology 
 tells  them  is  utterly  in  vain,  and  such  actions  done 
 against  a  conviction  of  their  vanity  is  yet  no  proof 
 of  theoretic  unbelief. 
 
 The  history  of  Jonah  is  certainly  striking  and 
 extraordinary.  His  mission  was  to  a  distant  city, 
 brought  about  that  time  into  closer  connection 
 with  Israel.  There  is  no  precise  parallel  to  it,  for 
 the  mission  of  Elisha  to  Damascus  is  not  quite 
 analogous.  But  is  any  act  of  God  to  be  suspected 
 if  it  happen  to  want  a  direct  historical  parallel? 
 Must  we  reject  every  apparent  anomaly  in  the 
 procedure  of  him  whose  'ways  are  not  our  ways?' 
 The  Divine  Bemg  had  made  himself  known  tc 
 other  nations  in  various  forms ;  as  in  Egypt  by 
 Moses  and  his  wonders,  and  in  Philistia  by  the 
 captivity  of  his  ark.  The  influence  of  the  theocracy 
 on  surrounding  countries  might  be  extended  in  a 
 variety  of  ways,  and  Jonah's  refusal  of  the  message 
 is  as  suggestive  as  his  subsequent  performance  of  it. 
 
 The  extraordinary  character  given  to  Jonah  in 
 this  book  is  so  unflattering  to  the  well-known, 
 national  pride  and  partialities,  that  it  is  a  pre- 
 sumption in  favour  of  its  historic  reality.  The 
 tale  of  the  prophet's  flight  is  true  to  life  ; — the 
 sudden  departure  to  the  westward — the  paying  of 
 the  fare  when  he  took  ship — the  different  effects 
 produced  by  the  storm  on  the  crew  and  their  pas- 
 senger— they  in  their  panic  crying  to  their  gods, 
 and  he  fast  asleep  'in  the  sides  of  the  ship' 
 wearied  out  with  anxiety  and  terror — his  convic- 
 tion that  Jehovah  had  overtaken  him,  and  his 
 sullen  resignation  to  his  fate — the  casting  of  the 
 lots,  and  the  dialogue  that  followed — the  reluctance 
 of  the  sailors  to  do  an  act  of  murder  for  their  own 
 safety,  even  though  the  prophet  had  enjoined  them 
 — their  prayer  to  Jonah's  God  in  their  extremity — - 
 the  casting  out  of  Jonah — the  calm  that  followed, 
 and  the  effect  on  the  simple  mariners — their  de- 
 voutness  and  their  sacrifice,  not  now  to  their  own 
 divinities,  but  to  Jehovah. 
 
 What  is  said  about  the  size  of  Nineveh  also  is  in 
 accordance  with  fact.  It  was  '  an  exceeding  great 
 city  of  three  days'  journey.'  Built  in  the  form  of 
 a  parallelogram,  it  made,  according  to  Diodorus 
 (ii.  7),  a  circuit  of  480  furlongs,  or  about  60  miles. 
 It  has  been  usual,  since  the  publication  of  Layard's 
 N^ineveh,  to  say  that  the  great  ruins  of  Koyunjik, 
 Nimrud,  Keremles,  and  Khorsabad,  form  such  a 
 parallelogram,  the  distances  from  north  to  south 
 being  about  18  miles,  and  from  east  to  west  about 
 12  ;  the  longer  sides  thus  measuring  36  miles,  and 
 the  shorter  ones  24.  But  against  this  view  Pro- 
 fessor Rawlinson  has  recently  urged,  with  con- 
 siderable force,  that  the  four  great  ruins  bore 
 distinct  local  titles  ;  that  Nimrud,  identified  with 
 Calah,  is  mentioned  in  Scripture  as  a  place  so  far 
 separated  from  Nineveh,  that  'a  great  city' — 
 Resen — lay  between  them  (Gen.  x.  12);  that  there 
 are  no  signs  of  a  continuous  town  ;  and  that  the 
 four  sites  are  fortified  '  on  what  would  be  the  in- 
 side of  the  city.'  Still  Nineveh,  as  represented  by 
 the  ruins  of  Koyunjik  and  Nebbi-Yunus,  or  Tomb 
 of  Jonah,  was  of  an  oblong  shape,  with  a  circuit 
 of  about  eight  miles,  and  was  therefore  a  place 
 of  unusual  size — '  an  exceeding  great  city.'  The 
 phrase,  '  three  days'  journey,'  may  mean  that  it 
 would  take  that  time  to  traverse  the  city  and  pro 
 
JONAH 
 
 631 
 
 JONAH 
 
 claim  through  all  its  localities  the  divine  message ; 
 and  the  emphatic  point  then  is,  that  at  the  end  of 
 his  first  day's  journey  the  preaching  of  Jonah  took 
 effect.  The  clause,  '  that  cannot  discern  their 
 right  hand  from  their  left  hand,'  probably  denotes 
 children,  and  120,000  of  these  might  represent  a 
 Dopulation  of  more  tlian  half  a  million  [Nineveh]. 
 Rawlinson's  Five  Great  Monarchies,  vol.  i.  p.  310  ; 
 Sir  Henry  Rawlinson's  Com7nent.  07t  Cuneif.  In- 
 scripl.,  p.  17  ;  Captain  Jones'  Topography  of  Nine- 
 veh ;  Journal  of  Asiatic  Society,  vol.  xv.  p.  298. 
 Jonah  entered  the  city  '  a  day's  journey,'  that  is, 
 probably  went  from  west  to  east  uttering  his  in- 
 cisive and  terrible  message.  The  sublime  audacity 
 of  the  stranger — the  ringing  monotony  of  his  sharp 
 short  cry — had  an  immediate  effect.  The  people 
 believed  God,  and  oroclaimed  a  fast,  and  man  and 
 beast  fasted  alike.  The  exaggeration  ascribed  to 
 this  picture  adds  to  its  credibility,  so  prone  is  Ori- 
 ental nature  to  extremes.  If  the  burden  of  Jonah 
 was  to  have  any  effect  at  all,  one  might  say  that  it 
 must  be  profound  and  immediate.  It  was  a  panic 
 ■ — -we  dare  not  call  it  a  revival,  or  with  Dr.  Pusey, 
 dignify  it  into  conversion.  There  was  plainly  no 
 permanent  result.  After  the  sensation  had  passed 
 away,  idolatry  and  rapacity  resumed  their  former 
 sway,  as  is  testified  by  the  prophets  Isaiah,  Nahum, 
 and  Zephaniah.  Yet  the  appalled  conscience  of 
 Nineveh  did  confess  its  '  evil  and  its  violence,'  as 
 it  grovelled  in  the  dust.  Various  causes  may  have 
 contributed  to  deepen  this  consternation  —  the 
 superstition  of  the  people,  and  the  sudden  and  un- 
 explained appearance  of  the  foreigner  with  his 
 voice  of  doom.  '  The  king,'  as  Layard  says, 
 '  might  believe  him  to  be  a  special  minister  from 
 the  supreme  deity  of  the  nation,'  and  it  was  only 
 '  when  the  gods  themselves  seemed  to  interpose 
 that  any  check  was  placed  on  the  royal  pride  and 
 lust.'  Layard  adds,  '  It  was  not  necessary  to  the 
 effect  of  his  preaching  that  Jonah  should  be  of  the 
 religion  of  the  people  of  Nineveh.  I  have  known 
 a  Christian  priest  frighten  a  whole  Mussulman 
 town  to  tents  and  repentance  by  publicly  pro- 
 claiming that  he  had  received  a  divine  mission  to 
 aimounce  a  coming  earthquake  or  plague'  [Nine- 
 veh and  Babylon,^.  632).  The  compulsory  mourn- 
 ing of  the  brute  creation  has  at  least  one  analogy 
 in  the  lamentation  made  over  the  Persian  General 
 Masistius  :  '  The  horses  and  beasts  of  burden  were 
 shaved'  (Herodotus,  ix.  24).  According  to  Plu- 
 tarch also,  Alexander  commanded  the  observance 
 of  a  similar  custom  on  the  death  of  Hephssstion. 
 Therefore,  in  the  accessories  of  the  narrative  there 
 is  no  violation  of  probability — all  is  in  accordance 
 with  known  customs  and  facts. 
 
 The  characteristic  prodigy  of  the  book  does  not 
 resemble  the  other  miraculous  phenomena  recorded 
 in  Scripture.  Yet  we  must  believe  in  its  literal 
 occurrence,  as  the  Bible  affords  no  indication  of  its 
 being  a  myth,  allegory,  or  parable.  On  the  other 
 hand,  our  Saviour's  pointed  and  peculiar  allusion  to 
 it  is  evidence  of  its  reality  (Matt.  xii.  40).  The 
 Pharisees  asked  a  sign — arnj.eiou — or  supernatural 
 token — some  signal  and  brilliant  proof  of  his  mis- 
 sion. He  refuses  such  a  sign  in  their  sense  of  it,  but 
 adds  that  the  sign  of  Jonah  shall  be  given  them  : 
 '  For  as  Jonas  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the 
 whale's  belly,  so  also  shall  the  Son  of  Man  be  three 
 days  and  three  nights  in  the  heart  of  the  earth. '  To 
 say  that  such  words  ais  '  only  put  mto  the  mouth' 
 of  Jesus,  as  Paulus,  De  Wette,  Strauss,  and  Krabbe 
 
 affirm,  at  once  gainsays  all  critical  evidence,  and 
 puts  an  end  to  all  reasoning  on  the  point.  Hold- 
 ing, however,  that  Jesus  spoke  them,  and  there  is 
 the  same  proof  that  he  spoke  them  as  that  he  spoke 
 any  other  sentence  ascribed  to  him  in  the  gospels, 
 we  maintain,  that  the  arifielov  is  not  Jonah's  call  to 
 repentance,  but  his  miraculous  presei-vation.  The 
 context  plainly  implies  it,  and  warrants  us  to  give 
 to  (TriixeLov  the  meaning  of  a  miracle  or  supernatural 
 token.  Not  that  Jonah,  in  the  strict  theological 
 sense,  was  a  type  of  Christ — but  this  wonder  of 
 his  life  had  in  itself,  and  in  its  lessons,  a  striking 
 resemblance  to  that  great  event  in  Christ's  career 
 which  proved  the  divinity  of  his  mission,  and  the 
 perfection  of  his  mediatorial  work.  The  preaching 
 of  Jonah  referred  to  in  verse  41  is  indeed  connected 
 with  the  sign,  but  is  distinct  from  it,  and  brings  out 
 another  aggravation  of  Pharisaic  unbelief  The 
 denial  of  the  possibility  or  probability  of  this 
 miracle,  or  of  other  miracles,  limits  omnipotence, 
 while  it  deifies  the  uniformity  of  nature,  and  indues 
 of  the  sovereign  ruler  from  our  own  self-iniposea 
 conceptions  of  his  ways  and  works.  The  opinion 
 of  the  earlier  Jews  (Tobit  xiv.  4  ;  Joseph.  Antiq. 
 ix.  10.  2)  is  also  in  favour  of  the  literality  of  the  ad- 
 venture. It  requires  less  faith  to  credit  this  simple 
 excerpt  from  Jonah's  biography,  than  to  believe 
 the  numerous  hypotheses  that  have  been  invented 
 to  deprive  it  of  its  supernatural  character.  In 
 vindication  of  its  reality,  it  may  be  argued  too. 
 that  the  allusions  of  Christ  to  Old  Testament 
 events  on  similar  occasions  are  to  actual  occur- 
 rences (John  iii.  14 ;  vi.  48) ;  that  the  purpose 
 which  God  had  in  view  justified  his  miraculous 
 interposition  ;  and  that  this  miracle  must  have 
 had  a  salutary  effect  both  on  the  minds  of  the 
 Ninevites  and  on  the  people  of  Israel.  Neither  is 
 the  character  of  Jonah  improbable.  Many  reasons 
 might  induce  him  to  avoid  the  discharge  of  his  pro- 
 phetic duty — fear  of  being  thought  a  false  prophet, 
 scorn  of  a  foreign  and  hostile  race,  desire  for  theii 
 utter  destruction,  and  a  false  dignity  which  might 
 reckon  it  beneath  him  to  officiate  among  uncir- 
 cumcised  idolaters  (Laberenz,  De  Vera  lib.  Jona 
 Interp.,  Fulda  1836). 
 
 Some,  who  cannot  altogether  reject  the  reality 
 of  the  narrative,  suppose  it  to  have  had  a  historical 
 basis,  though  its  present  form  be  fanciful  or  mythi- 
 cal. Such  an  opinion  is  the  evident  result  of  a 
 mental  struggle  between  receiving  it  as  a  real 
 transaction  and  regarding  it  as  wholly  a  fiction. 
 (Blasche,  Grimm,  Ucbersetz.  p.  61,  and  Abarbanel, 
 regard  it  as  a  dream  produced  in  that  sleep  which 
 fell  upon  Jonah  as  he  lay  in  the  sides  of  the  ship). 
 The  opinion  of  the  famous  Herman  von  der  Hardt, 
 in  his  Jo7ias  in  hue,  and  other  similar  productions, 
 a  full  abstract  of  which  is  given  by  Rosenmiiller 
 [Prolegom.  in  Jonam.,  p.  19),  was,  that  the  book 
 is  a  historical  allegory,  descriptive  of  the  fate  of 
 Manasseh,  and  Josiah  his  grandson,  kings  of  Judah. 
 The  fancy  of  this  eccentric  author  has  found  ample 
 gratification.  Tarshish,  according  to  him,  repre- 
 sents the  kingdom  of  Lydia  ;  the  ship,  the  Jewish 
 republic,  whose  captain  was  Zadok  the  high-priest ; 
 while  the  casting  of  Jonah  into  the  sea  symbol- 
 ized the  temporaiy  captivity  of  Manasseh  in  Baby- 
 lon. We  cannot  say,  with  Rosenmiiller,  that  this 
 theory  deserves  even  the  praise  of  ingenious  fiction. 
 That  the  book  is  an  allegory,  is  the  opinion  of 
 Bertholdt,  Rosenmiiller,  Gesenius,  and  Wmer— - 
 an  allegory  based  upon  the  Phoenician   Myth  ot 
 
JONAH 
 
 632 
 
 JONAH 
 
 Hercules  and  the  Sea-monster.  Less,  in  his  tract. 
 Von  Historischen  Styl  der  Urwelt,  supposed  that 
 all  difficulty  might  be  removed  by  imagining  that 
 Jonah,  when  thrown  into  the  sea,  was  taken  up  by 
 a  ship  having  a  large  fish  for  a  figure-head — a 
 theory  somewhat  more  pleasing  than  the  hypothesis 
 of  Anton,  who  fancied  that  the  prophet  took  refuge 
 in  the  interior  of  a  dead  whale  floating  near  the 
 spot  where  he  was  cast  overboard  (Rosenm.  Pi-o- 
 legoni.  in  jfon.,  p.  328).  Not  unlike  the  opinion  of 
 Less  is  that  of  Charles  Taylor,  in  his  Fragments 
 affixed  to  CaXmeih  Dictionary,  No.  cxlv.,  that  JT 
 signifies  a  life-preserver,  a  notion  which,  as  his 
 manner  is,  he  endeavours  to  support  by  myth- 
 ological metamorphoses  founded  on  the  form  and 
 names  of  the  famous  fish-god  of  Philistia.  But 
 many  regard  the  book  as  a  mere  fiction  with  a  moral 
 design— the  grotesque  coinage  of  a  Hebrew  im- 
 agination. This  opinion,  variously  modified,  seems 
 to  be  that  of  Semler,  Michaelis,  Herder,  Staudlin, 
 Eichhom,  Augusti,  Meyer,  Pareau,  Hitzig,  and 
 Mauier.  On  the  other  hand,  the  historical  charac- 
 ter of  the  narrative  is  held  by  Hess,  Lilienthal, 
 Sack,  Reindl,  Havemick,  Hengstenberg,  Laberenz, 
 Baumgarten,  Delitzsch,  Welte,  Stuart,  and  Keil, 
 Einleitnng,  sec.  89.  (See  Friedrichsen  Krit.  iiber- 
 sicht  der  verschied.  Ansichten  zmt  d.  Buck  Jona, 
 2d  ed.  1 84 1.)  There  are  others  who  allow,  as  De 
 Wette  and  Knobel,  that  Jonah  was  a  real  person, 
 but  hold  that  the  book  is  made  up,  for  didactic 
 purposes,  of  legendary  stories  which  had  gathered 
 around  him.  Bunsen  maintains  that  the  hymn  in 
 the  second  chapter  is  a  genuine  poem  composed  by 
 Jonah  on  an  occasion  of  shipwreck  and  deliverance, 
 and  that  it  suggested  the  narrative  which  now  im- 
 beds it. 
 
 The  plain  literal  import  of  the  narrative  being 
 set  aside,  the  supposed  design  of  it  has  been 
 very  variously  interpreted.  Michaelis,  Semler,  and 
 Bleek,  virtually  suppose  the  purpose  of  the  nar- 
 rative to  be  the  injustice  of  the  arrogance  and 
 hatred  cherished  by  the  Jews  towards  other  nations. 
 Eichhom  and  Jahn  think  its  design  was  to  teach 
 the  Jews  that  other  people  with  less  privileges  ex- 
 celled them  in  pious  obedience.  Hezel  argues 
 that  this  episode  was  meant  to  solace  and  excite 
 the  prophets  under  the  discharge  of  difficult  and 
 dangerous  duties ;  while  Paulus  {Memorabilia,  vi. 
 32,  sqq.)  maintains  that  the  object  of  the  author  of 
 '}onah  is  to  impress  the  fact  that  God  remits  punish- 
 ment on  repentance  and  reformation.  Similar  is 
 the  idea  of  Kimchi  and  Pareau.  Krahmer  thinks 
 that  the  theme  of  the  writer  is  that  God's  kindness 
 to  penitents  extends  to  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews. 
 Maurer  adheres  to  the  opinion  that  it  inculcates 
 the  sin  of  not  obeying  God,  even  in  pronouncing 
 severe  threatenings  on  a  heathen  people ;  and 
 lastly,  Koster  {Die  Prophelen  des  A.  und  N.  T., 
 Leipz.  1839)  favours  the  malignant  insinuation  that 
 its  chief  end  was  to  save  the  credit  of  the  prophets 
 among  the  people,  though  their  ])redictions  against 
 foreign  nations  might  not  be  fulfilled,  as  Nineveh 
 was  preserved  after  being  so  menaced  and  doomed. 
 While  the  book  embodies  several  of  these  truths, 
 the  prophet's  mission  had  also  a  direct  bearing  on 
 the  profligacy,  impenitence,  and  danger  of  his  own 
 people.  I 
 
 Much  profan**  wit  has  been  expended,  very  un- 
 necessarily and  very  absurdly,  on  the  miraculous 
 means  of  Jonah's  deliverance.  It  is  simply  said, 
 'The  Lord  had  prepared  a  great  fish  to  swallow  up 
 
 Jonah.'  Now  the  species  of  marine  animal  is  no! 
 defined,  and  the  Greek  k^tos  is  often  used  to  specify, 
 not  the  genus  whale,  but  any  large  fish  or  sea- 
 monster.  All  objections  to  its  being  a  whale 
 which  lodged  Jonah  in  its  stomach  from  its  strait 
 ness  of  throat,  or  rareness  of  haunt  in  the  Mediter- 
 ranean, are  thus  removed.  Hesychius  defines  /ctjtos 
 as  daXdacnos  Ixdy^  Tra/j.fieyidrjs.  Eustathius  ex- 
 plains its  correspondent  adjective  KTjTwecrcrav  by 
 fxe-yakriv,  in  the  Homeric  line  {Iliad,  ii.  581) — 
 
 ol  5'  elxov  Ko'ikrjv  AaK€5ai/j.ova  KTjTiLeaaav. 
 
 Diodorus  Siculus  speaks  of  terrestrial  monsters  as 
 ktjtuSt]  ftSa,  and  describes  a  huge  fish  as  ktjtoj 
 diriffTov  t6  fj-eyedos.  The  Scripture  speaks  only  of 
 an  enormous  fish,  which  under  God's  direction 
 swallowed  the  prophet,  and  does  not  point  out  the 
 species  to  which  the  monster  belonged.  There  is 
 no  ground  for  the  supposition  of  Bishop  Jebb,  that 
 the  asylum  of  Jonah  was  not  in  the  stomach  of  a 
 whale,  but  in  a  cavity  of  its  throat,  which,  accord- 
 ing to  naturalists,  is  a  very  capacious  receptacle, 
 sufficiently  large,  as  Captain  Scoresby  asserts,  to 
 contain  a  merchant  ship's  jolly-boat  full  of  men 
 {Sacred  Lito-ahire,  p.  178).  Since  the  days  of 
 Bochart  it  has  been  a  common  opinion  that  the  fish 
 was  of  the  shark  species.  Lamia  canis  carcharias, 
 or 'sea-dog'  (Bochart,  Oj).  iii.  72;  Calmet's  Z>/j'- 
 seiiation  stir  Jon.)  Entire  human  bodies  have 
 been  found  in  some  fishes  of  this  kind.  The 
 stomach,  too,  has  no  influence  on  any  living  sub- 
 stance admitted  into  it.  Granting  these  facts  as 
 proof  of  what  is  termed  the  economy  of  miracles, 
 still  must  we  say,  in  reference  to  the  supernatural 
 preservation  of  Jonah,  '  Is  anything  too  hard  for 
 the  Lord?'  We  cannot  accede  to  the  system  of 
 Gale,  Huet,  Bryant,  Faber,  and  Taylor,  in  tracing 
 all  pagan  fiction,  legend,  and  mythology,  to  Scrip- 
 ture facts  and  events.  The  miraculous  incident  of 
 this  book  is  unlike  in  many  particulars  the  story  of 
 Arion  and  the  dolphin  (Herodot.  i.  24),  or  the 
 wild  adventure  of  Hercules  in  regard  to  Hermione, 
 which  is  referred  to  in  Lycophron  {Cassajidra,  v. 
 33).  The  same  assertion  may  be  made  of  the 
 myth  of  Perseus  and  Andromeda  and  the  Baby- 
 lonian fable  of  the  sea  monster  Oannes — a  name 
 not  imlike  that  of  Jonah.  Cyrillus  Alex.,  how- 
 ever, in  his  Comment,  in  Jon.,  notices  some  simili- 
 tude between  the  incident  of  Jonah  and  the  fabled 
 enterprise  of  the  son  of  Alcmena.  Compare,  too. 
 Theophylact  {0pp.,  tom.  iv.  p.  189). 
 
 On  what  portion  of  the  coast  Jonah  was  set 
 down  in  safety  we  are  not  infoimed.  The  opinions 
 held  as  to  the  peculiar  spot  by  the  Rabbins  and 
 other  similar  expositors  need  not  to  be  repeated. 
 The  prophet  proceeded,  on  receiving  a  second 
 commission,  to  fulfil  it.  The  second  commission 
 was  sharper  and  more  determinate  than  the  ori- 
 ginal one.  The  fearful  menace  had  the  desired 
 effect.  The  city  humbled  itself  before  God,  and 
 a  respite  was  vouchsafed.  The  king  (Pul,  ac- 
 cording to  Usher)  and  his  people  fasted,  and 
 their  penitence  was  accepted.  The  spirit  of  Jonah 
 was  chafed  that  the  doom  which  he  had  uttered 
 was  not  executed.  He  retired  to  a  station  out 
 of  the  city  whence  he  might  witness  the  threat- 
 ened catastrophe.  Under  the  shadow  of  a  gourd 
 prepared  by  God  he  reclined,  v.-hile  Jehovah 
 taught  him  by  the  growth  and  speedy  death  of 
 this  plant,  and  his  attachment  to  it,  a  sublime 
 lesson  of  patient  and  forgiving  generosity.     The 
 
JONAH 
 
 633 
 
 JONATHAN 
 
 gourd,  P''p"'p,  was  probably  the  Ricinus,  whose 
 name  Kiki  is  yet  preserved  in  some  of  the  tongues 
 of  the  East.  The  Sept.  renders  it  Ko\oK\jvdr\. 
 Jerome  translates  it  hedera,  but  against  his  better 
 judgment,  and  for  fear  of  giving  offence  to  the 
 critics  of  his  age,  as  he  quietly  adds  in  justifica- 
 tion of  his  less  preferable  rendering,  '  sed  timuimus 
 grammaticos.'  It  is  impossible  to  determine  the 
 king  who  reigned  in  Nineveh  at  the  period  of 
 Jonah's  mission.  Layard  (Nina'ch,  ii.  249)  sup- 
 poses that  the  visit  of  the  prophet  took  place  during 
 the  second  dynasty,  which  may  have  commenced 
 747  B.  C. ;  but  Jeroboam  H.,  under  whom  or  at  the 
 beginning  of  whose  reign  Jonah  prophesied,  began 
 to  reign  825  B.  C.  The  earlier  Assyrian  dynasty 
 was  also  a  mighty  one,  and  to  one  of  its  kings 
 Jonah  may  have  been  sent — perhaps  to  Iva-lush 
 HI.,  supposed  by  some  to  be  the  Pul  of  Scrip- 
 ture. The  name  of  Jehu,  grandfather  of  Jero- 
 boam II.,  has  been  discovered  on 'an  obelisk,  in 
 connection  with  Shalmanubar  grandfather  of  Iva- 
 lush. 
 
 The  book  of  Jonah  is  a  simple  narrative,  with  the 
 exception  of  the  prayer  or  thanksgiving  in  chap.  ii. 
 Its  style  and  mode  of  narration  are  uniform.  There 
 are  no  traces  of  compilation,  as  Nactigall  supposed. 
 The  prayer  contains,  indeed,  not  only  imagery 
 peculiar  to  itself,  but  also  such  imagery  as  at  once 
 was  suggested  to  the  mind  of  a  pious  Hebrew  pre- 
 served in  circumstances  of  extreme  jeopardy.  On 
 this  principle  we  account  for  the  similarity  of  some 
 portions  of  its  phraseology  to  portions  of  Ps.  xxx., 
 xxxi. ,  xlii. ,  Ixix.,  cxx. ,  cxxx.,  etc.  The  language 
 in  such  places  had  been  hallowed  by  frequent  usage, 
 and  had  become  the  consecrated  idiom  of  a  dis- 
 tressed and  succoured  Israelite.  The  prayer, 
 allowed  by  many  to  be  original,  is  thus  based  on 
 theocratic  language  which  the  saints  used  in  com- 
 mon, and  is  well  adapted  to  Jonah's  strange  and 
 perilous  situation — uttered  by  him  in  the  whale's 
 belly  and  afterwards  recorded  by  himself  It  is 
 mere  guesswork  to  say  that  the  psalms  refeixed  to 
 were  imitated  from  it,  and  there  is  no  proof  of  its 
 being  a  collection  of  excerpts  or  an  anthology. 
 That  the  book  of  Jonah  has  a  place  among  the  pro- 
 phets shows  the  opinion  held  of  it  by  those  who 
 formed  the  canon.  It  has,  however,  this  anomaly, 
 as  Stahelin  remarks,  '  that  it  is  not  a  prophecy,  but 
 the  histoiy  of  a  prophecy'  (Specielle  Emieitung,  p. 
 360,  1862).  But  the  lesson  for  the  people  and  for 
 all  time  lies  as  much  in  the  circumstances  as  in  the 
 brief  oracle  which  Jonah  repeated.  There  is  little 
 reason  either  for  dating  the  composition  of  this 
 book  later  than  the  age  of  Jonah,  or  for  supposing 
 it  the  production  of  another  than  the  prophet  him- 
 self (Vance  Smith,  Proph.  relating  to  Ninn'ek,  p. 
 252).  The  book  does  not,  indeed,  claim  Jonah  for 
 its  author,  but  to  his  authorship  its  use  of  the  third 
 person  in  speaking  of  him  can  be  really  no  objection. 
 The  Chaldteisms  which  Jahn  and  others  find  in  it 
 may  be  accounted  for  by  the  nearness  of  the  canton  of 
 Zebulun,  to  which  Jonah  belonged,  to  the  northern 
 territory,  whence  by  national  intercourse  Aramaic 
 peculiarities  might  be  insensibly  borrowed.  Thus 
 we  have  nj''SD — a  ship  with  a  deck — not  the  more 
 
 common  Hebrew  term  ;  y^ — a  foreign  title  applied 
 
 to  the  captain ;  ri3)0,  to  appoint — found  however 
 
 in  Ps.  Ixi.,  a  psalm  which  Hupfeld  without  any 
 valid  grounds   places  after  the   Babylonish   cap- 
 
 tivity ;  *10X,  to  command,  as  in  the  later  books  : 
 Dytp,  command,  referring  to  the  royal  decree,  and 
 probably  taken  from  the  native  Assyrian  tongue ; 
 ^rin,  to  row,  a  nautical  term  ;  and  the  abbreviated 
 
 form  of  the  relative,  which  however  occurs  in 
 other  books,  etc. 
 
 As  for  the  date  of  the  book,  Gesenius,  Ewald, 
 and  many  others,  place  it  after  the  exile,  Bleek  in 
 the  Persian  times,  and  Hitzig  in  the  period  of  the 
 Maccabees.  Yet  Ewald  admits  that  the  conclusion 
 of  the  book  is  in  the  true  prophetic  style.  There 
 is  no  force  in  the  assertion  that  the  phrase  '  Nine- 
 veh was  an  exceeding  great  city '  implies  that  it 
 had  long  perished,  the  language  is  only  in  accord- 
 ance with  the  common  idiom  of  narrative  (Keil, 
 Einleitmtg,  sec.  90).  Sharpe  (Bonomi,  Ninez'ch 
 and  its  palaces,  p.  73)  places  the  book  in  the  reign 
 of  Josiah,  as  if  the  partial  overthrow  of  Nineveh 
 by  Nabopolassar  were  connected  with  Jonah's 
 prophecy,  and  the  purport  of  his  book  were  to 
 explain  the  divine  justice  in  sparing  it.  With 
 as  much  probability  the  overthrow  menaced  by 
 Jonah  and  warded  off  for  a  season  by  repent- 
 ance, may  have  come  upon  the  city  at  the  conclu- 
 sion of  the  first  dynasty,  for  the  first  king  of  the 
 second  dynasty  seems  to  have  been  a  usurper, 
 since,  unlike  his  royal  predecessors,  he  makes  no 
 mention  of  his  ancestors  [Assyria].  The  book 
 seems  to  be  but  a  fragment,  though  the  commenc- 
 ing 1,  i.  I,  which  refers  to  prior  things,  will  not  oi 
 itself  prove  a  literary  connection  with  some  ante- 
 cedent and  unreported  oracles  (Ezek.  i.  i),  nor  can 
 we  assign  it  the  deeper  logical  meaning  which 
 Pusey  gives  it.  Apocryphal  prophecies  ascribed  to 
 Jonah  may  be  found  in  the  pseudo-Epiphanius  [Dt 
 Vitis  Proph.,  c.  16),  and  the  C/wonic.  Paschale. 
 
 Among  the  numerous  commentators  on  Jonah 
 may  be  noticed  Archbishop  Abbot,  Exposition  of 
 Jonah,  1600;  Crocius,  Conwient.  in  Joyiam.,  Cas- 
 sellis  1656  ;  J.  Gerhardi,  Annot.  in  Proph.  Amos 
 et  Jon.  etc..  Frag.  1692  ;  Leusden,  Jonas  Illustra- 
 tiis,  l6g2;  Lessing,  Observat.  in  Vatic.  Jon.,  1782; 
 Grimm,  Der  Proph.  Jonas  Uebersetz.,  1798  ;  For- 
 biger,  Prolusio,  etc.,  1827  ;  Krahmer,  Das  B.  Jon. 
 Hist.  Krit.  tmtersucht,  Cassel  1839;  Henderson, 
 Minor  Prophets,  1845  ;  Goldhorn,  Exciirs.,  1803  ; 
 Hitzig,  die  Zwolf  kl.  propheten,  1852,  2d  ed. ; 
 Drake's  Notes  on  'Jonah  and  Hosea,  1853  ;  Schreg, 
 Die  kleineti  propheten,  1 854 ;  Pusey,  Mitior  Pro- 
 phets, 1861;  Kaulen,  Liber  JoiicE Froph.,Mo^n\\'x. 
 1862. — ^J.  E.  See  also  Raleigh's  Story  of  the  Pro- 
 phet 'Jonah. 
 
 JONATHAN  ()nj^\  or  jn3in\  JEHONATHAN, 
 
 Given  by  fehovah  ;  comp.  Theodorus  ;  Sept.  'Iwcd- 
 ^a^).  I.  A  Levite  descended  from  Gershom,  the 
 son  of  Moses  ( Judg.  xviii.  30).  It  is,  indeed,  said, 
 in  our  common  copies,  that  the  Gershom  from 
 whom  this  Jonathan  sprang  was  '  the  son  of  Man- 
 asseh  ;'  but  it  is  on  very  good  grounds  supposed 
 that  in  the  name  Moses  (HE'D),  the  single  letter 
 n  (J)  has  been  interpolated,  changing  it  into  Man- 
 asseh  (ntJ'JD))  in  order  to  save  the  character  of  the 
 great  lawgiver  from  the  stain  of  having  an  idolater 
 among  his  immediate  descendants.  The  singular 
 name  Gershom,  and  the  date  of  the  transaction, 
 go  tar  to  establish  this  view.  Accordingly,  the  Vul- 
 gate,  and  some  copies  of  the  Septuagint,  actually 
 exhibit  the  name  of  Moses  instead  of  Manasseh. 
 The  interpolation,  however,  has  been  very  timidly 
 
JONATHAN 
 
 684 
 
 JONATHAN 
 
 executed.  The  letter  J  was  originally  placed  £fbove 
 the  line  of  the  other  letters  (as  it  now  appears  in 
 the  printed  Hebrew  Bibles),  as  if  rather  to  suggest 
 than  to  make  an  alteration  ;  but  in  process  of  time 
 the  letter  sunic  down  into  the  body  of  the  word. 
 The  Hebrew  writers  themselves  admit  the  fact  of 
 the  interpolation,  and  allege  the  intention  to  veil 
 the  disgrace  of  Moses,  by  suggesting  a  figurative 
 descent  from  Manasseh.  The  history  of  this  Jona- 
 than is  involved  in  the  narrative  which  occupies 
 Judg.  xvii.,  xviii.  ;  and  is  one  of  the  two  accounts 
 which  form  a  sort  of  appendix  to  that  book.  The 
 events  themselves  appear  to  have  occurred  soon 
 after  the  death  of  Joshua,  and  of  the  elders  who 
 outlived  him,  when  the  government  was  in  a  most 
 unsettled  state.  Its  proper  place,  in  the  chronolo- 
 gical order,  would  have  been  between  the  second 
 and  third  chapters  of  the  book. 
 
 Jonathan,  who  was  resident  at  Bethlehem,  lived 
 at  a  time  when  the  dues  of  the  sanctuary  did  not 
 afford  a  livelihood  to  the  numerous  Levites  who 
 had  a  claim  upon  them  ;  and  belonged  to  a  tribe 
 destitute  of  the  landed  possessions  which  gave  to 
 all  others  a  sufficient  maintenance.  He,  therefore, 
 went  forth  to  seek  his  fortune.  In  Mount  Ephraim 
 he  came  to  'a  house  of  gods,'  which  had  been 
 established  by  one  Micah,  who  wanted  nothing 
 but  a  priest  to  make  his  establishment  complete 
 [Micah].  This  person  made  Jonathan  what  was 
 manifestly  considered  the  handsome  offer  of  en- 
 gaging him  as  his  priest  for  his  victuals,  a  yearly 
 suit  of  clotlies,  and  ten  shekels  (twenty-five  shil- 
 lings) a  year  in  money.  Here  he  lived  for  some 
 time,  till  the  Danite  spies,  who  were  sent  by  their 
 tribe  to  explore  the  north,  passed  this  way  and 
 formed  his  acquaint-ance.  When,  not  long  after, 
 the  body  of  armed  Danites  passed  the  same  way 
 when  going  to  settle  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan, 
 the  spies  mentioned  Micah's  establishment  to  them  ; 
 on  which  they  went  and  took  away  not  only  '  the 
 ephod,  the  teraphim,  and  the  graven  image,'  but 
 the  priest  also,  that  they  might  set  up  the  same 
 worship  in  the  place  of  which  they  were  going  to 
 take  possession.  Micah  vainly  protested  against 
 this  robbery ;  but  Jonathan  himself  was  glad  at 
 the  improvement  in  his  prospects,  and  from  that 
 time,  even  down  to  the  captivity,  he  and  his  de- 
 scendants continued  to  be  priests  of  the  Danites  in 
 the  town  of  Laish,  the  name  of  which  they  changed 
 to  Dan. 
 
 1  here  is  not  any  reason  to  suppose  that  this 
 establishment,  whether  in  the  hands  of  Micah  or 
 ot  fhe  Danites,  involved  an  apostasy  from  Jehovah. 
 It  appears  rather  to  have  been  an  attempt  to 
 localise  or  domesticate  His  presence,  under  those 
 symbols  and  forms  of  service  which  were  common 
 among  the  neighbouring  nations,  but  were  for- 
 bidden to  the  Hebrews.  The  offence  here  was 
 two-fold, — the  establishment  of  a  sacred  ritual 
 different  from  the  only  one  which  the  law  recog- 
 nised, and  the  worship  by  symbols,  naturally  lead- 
 ing to  idolatry,  with  the  ministration  of  one  who 
 could  not  legally  be  a  priest,  but  only  a  Levite, 
 and  under  circumstances  in  which  no  Aaronic 
 priest  could  legally  have  officiated.  It  is  more 
 than  likely  that  this  establishment  was  eventually 
 merged  in  that  of  the  golden  calf,  which  Jeroboam 
 set  up  in  this  place,  his  choice  of  which  may  very 
 possibly  have  been  determined  by  its  being  already 
 in  possession  of  '  a  house  of  gods.' 
 
 2.  The  eldest  son  of  Saul,  king  of  Israel,  and 
 
 consequently  heir  apparent  of  the  throne  which 
 David  was  destined  to  occupy  (l  Sam.  xiv.  9  ; 
 I  Chron.  viii.  33  ;  ix.  39).  The  war  with  the 
 Philistines,  which  occupied  the  early  part  of  his 
 father's  reign,  afforded  Jonathan  more  than  one 
 opportunity  of  displaying  the  chivalrous  valour  and 
 the  princely  qualities  with  which  he  was  endowed. 
 His  exploit  in  surprising  the  Philistine  garrison  at 
 Michmash,  attended  only  by  his  armour-bearer,  is 
 one  of  the  most  daring  which  history  or  even  ro- 
 mance records  (l  Sam.  xiv.  I -14).  His  father 
 came  to  follow  up  this  victory,  and  in  the  ensuing 
 pursuit  of  the  confounded  Philistines,  Jonathan, 
 spent  with  fatigue  and  hunger,  refreshed  himself 
 with  some  wild  honey  which  he  found  in  a  wood 
 through  which  he  passed.  He  knew  not  that  his 
 father  had  rashly  vowed  to  put  to  death  any  one 
 who  touched  a  morsel  of  food  before  night.  When 
 the  fact  transpired,  Saul  felt  himself  bound  to  exe- 
 cute his  vow  even  upon  his  gallant  son  ;  but  the 
 people,  with  whom  the  young  prince  was  a  great 
 favourite,  interposed,  saying,  '  Shall  Jonathan  die, 
 who  hath  wrought  this  great  salvation  in  Israel? 
 God  forbid !  As  the  Lord  liveth,  there  shall  not 
 one  hair  of  his  head  fall  to  the  ground  ;  for  he 
 hath  wrought  with  God  this  day'  (i  Sam.  xiv. 
 16-52). 
 
 Jealousy  and  every  mean  or  low  feeling  were 
 strangers  to  the  generous  heart  of  Jonathan. 
 Valiant  and  accomplished  himself,  none  knew 
 better  how  to  acknowledge  valour  and  accomplish- 
 ment in  others.  The  act  of  David  in  meeting  the 
 challenge  of  Goliath,  and  in  overcoming  that  huge 
 barbarian,  entirely  won  his  heart ;  and  from  that 
 day  forward  the  son  of  Jesse  found  no  one  who 
 loved  him  so  tenderly,  who  admired  his  high  gifts 
 with  so  much  enthusiasm,  or  who  risked  so  much 
 to  preserve  him  from  harm,  as  the  very  prince 
 whom  he  was  destined  to  exclude  from  a  throne. 
 Jonathan  knew  well  what  was  to  happen,  and  he 
 submitted  cheerfully  to  the  appointment  which  gave 
 the  throne  of  his  father  to  the  young  shepherd  of 
 Bethlehem.  In  the  intensity  of  his  love  and  confi- 
 dence he  shrank  not  to  think  of  David  as  his  des- 
 tined king  and  master ;  and  his  dreams  of  the 
 future  pictured  nothing  brighter  than  the  day  in 
 which  David  should  reign  over  Israel,  and  he  be 
 one  with  him  in  friendship,  and  next  to  him  in 
 place  and  council — not  because  he  was  covetous 
 even  of  this  degree  of  honour,  but  because  '  next 
 to  David '  was  the  place  where  he  wished  always 
 to  be,  and  where  he  desired  to  rest. 
 
 When  Saul  began  to  hate  David  as  his  intended 
 successor,  he  was  highly  displeased  at  the  friend- 
 ship which  had  arisen  between  him  and  his  son. 
 This  exposed  Jonathan  to  much  contumely,  and 
 even  to  danger  of  life  ;  for,  once  at  least,  the  king's 
 passion  against  him  on  this  account  rose  so  high 
 that  he  cast  a  javelin  at  him  '  to  smite  him  to  the 
 wall.' 
 
 This  unequivocal  act  taught  Jonathan  that  the 
 court  of  Saul  was  no  safe  place  for  David.  He 
 told  him  so,  and  they  parted  with  many  tears. 
 David  then  set  forth  upon  those  wanderings  among 
 strangers  and  in  solitaiy  places,  which  lasted  all 
 the  time  of  Saul.  The  friends  met  only  once  more. 
 Saul  was  in  pursuit  of  David  when  he  was  in  the 
 wilderness  of  Ziph  ;  and  Jonathan  could  not  for- 
 bear coming  to  him  secretly  in  the  wood  to  give 
 him  comfort  and  encouragement  (i  Sam.  xxiii. 
 16-1SJ.     Nothing  more  is  related  of  Jonathan  tiU 
 
JONATHAN  B.   UZZILL 
 
 635 
 
 JONATHAN  B.  UZZIEL 
 
 both  he  and  his  father  lost  their  lives  in  the  fatal 
 battle  of  Gilboa,  combating  against  the  enemies  of 
 their  country.  When  informed  of  this  catastrophe, 
 David  uttered  a  lamentation  over  his  lost  friend, 
 than  which  there  is,  perhaps,  nothing  in  Hebrew 
 poetry  more  beautiful  and  touching,  nothing  more 
 complete  as  a  whole,  or  more  full  of  fine  images 
 and  tender  thoughts. — ^J.  K. 
 
 3.  Son  of  Shimeah  and  nephew  of  David,  fa- 
 mous for  having  encountered  and  slain  a  Philistine 
 giant  of  Gath  (2  Sam.  xxi.  21  ;  i  Chron.  xx.  7). 
 It  is  probably  the  same  person  who  is  mentioned 
 I  Chron.  xxvii.  32  as  one  of  David's  officers,  and 
 who  is  there  described  as  a  wise  man  and  a  scribe. 
 The  word  used  there  to  indicate  his  relationship  to 
 David  is  "jn,  a  word  which,  though  commonly 
 applied  to  a  father's  brother,  properly  denotes 
 simple  relationship  of  any  kind,  and  may  therefore 
 be  used  for  nephew  as  well  as  for  uncle. 
 
 4.  The  son  of  Abiathar  the  high-priest,  who, 
 from  the  only  two  occasions  on  which  his  name  is 
 introduced,  may  be  regarded  as  especially  distin- 
 guished by  his  qualities  as  a  swift  and  trustworthy 
 messenger  (2  Sam.  xv.  36  ;   i  Kings  i.  42,  43). 
 
 5.  The  son  of  Jehoiada  and  his  successor  in  the 
 priesthood  (Neh.  xii.  11).  In  vers.  22  and  23  of 
 this  chap,  he  is  called  Johanan,  and  it  is  recorded 
 that  the  catalogue  of  the  heads  of  houses  among 
 the  Levites  was  kept  in  a  book  of  chronicles  up  to 
 his  time.  What  the  meaning  of  this  statement 
 may  be  is  not  very  clear,  for  the  writer  himself  in- 
 forms us  of  lists  continued  till  the  reign  of  Darius 
 the  Persian.  Bertheau  proposes  to  connect  the 
 latter  clause  of  ver.  23  with  ver.  24,  and  to  read  thus 
 — '  And  to  the  days  of  Johanan  the  son  of  Elia- 
 shib  were  heads  of  the  Levites,  Hashabiah,'  etc. 
 Josephus,  who  also  calls  him  John,  records  the 
 slaughter  by  him  of  his  brother  Jesus  in  the  temple 
 in  a  fit  of  passion,  excited  by  the  latter  making 
 pretensions  to  the  priesthood  ;  a  crime  which,  he 
 says,  was  punished  by  God  by  the  oppression  of 
 the  nation  and  the  profanation  of  the  temple  by 
 the  Persians  [Antiq.  xi.  7.  i). 
 
 Other  persons  of  the  name  of  Jonathan  are  men- 
 tioned 2  Sam.  xxiii.  32  ;  comp.  i  Chron.  xi.  34 ; 
 Esd.  viii.  6  ;  x.  15  ;  Neh.  xii.  14  ;  xii.  35  ;  Jer. 
 xi.  b;  I  Maccab.  ix.  19;  xiii.  11  ;  2  Maccab.  i. 
 23.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JONATHAN  B.  UZZIEL  6s>ny  p  jnjin^), 
 
 the  celebrated  translator  of  the  Pentateuch  and 
 Prophets  into  Chaldee,  was  the  distinguished 
 disciple  of  Hillel  I.,  and  therefore  flourished  about 
 30  B.C.  [Education].  He  was  the  first  of  those 
 thirty  disciples  of  Hillel  who,  in  the  language  of 
 the  Talmud,  '  were  worthy  to  possess  the  power  of 
 stopping  the  sun  like  Joshua,'  and  '  when  he  sat 
 studying  the  Scriptures,  every  bird  which  happened 
 to  fly  over  his  head  was  burned  or  converted  into 
 a  Seraph'  (Siicca  28,  a;  Baba  Bathra  134,  a). 
 His  expositions  were  those  of  the  three  last 
 prophets,  viz.,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi, 
 which  had  been  orally  transmitted,  and  the  high 
 esteem  in  which  they  were  held  by  the  nation 
 may  be  gathered  from  the  following  description  in 
 the  Talmud : — '  When  the  illuminating  sun  arose 
 upon  the  dark  passages  of  the  Prophets,  through 
 this  translation,  the  length  and  breadth  of  Palestine 
 were  agitated,  and  eveiywhere  the  voice  of  God 
 
 (Pip  nn)  or  the  voice  of  the  people  {vox  popjili  vox 
 del)  was  heard  asking,  '  Who  has  disclosed  these 
 
 mysteries  to  the  sons  of  men?'  With  great  humil 
 ity  and  becoming  modesty,  Jonathan  b.  UzzieJ 
 answered,  '  I  have  disclosed  thy  mysteries  ;  but 
 thou,  O  Lord,  knowest  that  I  have  not  done  it  to 
 get  glory  for  myself  or  for  the  house  of  my  father ; 
 but  for  thy  glory's  sake,  that  discussion  might  not 
 increase  in  Israel"  {Megilla  3,  a).  From  these 
 notices  in  the  Talmud,  it  will  be  seen  that  he  is 
 only  described  as  the  Chaldee  translator  of  the 
 Prophets ;  and,  indeed,  it  is  distinctly  declared  in 
 the  last  quoted  passage  that  when  Jonathan  wanted 
 also  to  translate  the  Hagiographa  (D''2'inD),  the 
 same  voice  from  Heaven  pip  03)  emphatically  for- 
 bade it  n'''''^)  because  of  the  great  Messianic 
 mysteries  contained  therein  (fl^ti'D  X\>  T\^1  D^Xl), 
 especially  in  the  book  of  Daniel  (comp.  Rashi  in 
 loco).  But  as  tradition  has  also  ascribed  to  him 
 the  paraphrase  of  the  Pentateuch  which  is  known 
 by  the  name  of  Pscudo-Jonaihan,  and  the  Targum 
 of  the  Five  Megilloth,  and  as  the  student  will 
 naturally  look  for  an  account  of  the  editions  of,  and 
 the  literature  on  these  paraphrases  under  the  name 
 which  they  bear,  it  is  deemed  best  to  describe  them 
 here. 
 
 77ie  [reputed)  pa7vphrase  of  yonathan   on   the 
 
 Pentateuch  (minn  ^JJ?  jnJV  D13"in),  as  has  been 
 shewn  with  great  learning  and  reason  in  a  Prize 
 Essay  by  Seligsohn  and  Traub  (Frankel's  Monat- 
 schrift,  vol.  vi.,  Leipzig  1857,  pp.  96-II4,  138-149), 
 was  made  in  the  middle  of  the  7th  century,  by 
 some  one  who  was  anxious  to  make  a  complete 
 version  of  what  is  called  the  Jenisale/ii  or  Pales- 
 tine Targum  [''t^h^'V!^  U\T\T\),  which  in  reality  is 
 nothing  but  desultory  glosses  on  Onkelos'  para- 
 phrase. The  Targum  thus  based  upon  the  ancient 
 Jerusalem  fragments  was  at  first  called  Targum 
 jferusale^ii,  and  afterwards  obtained  the  name  of 
 Targum  Jonathan,   by  erroneously  resolving   the 
 
 abreviation  """n  = ''D^t^^'n''  U\T\T\  into  IDJIH''  DIJID. 
 This  so-called  paraphrase  of  Jonathan  b.  Uzziel 
 on  the  Pentateuch,  was  first  published  in  Venice 
 1590-91,  with  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Pentateuch, 
 the  paraphrase  of  Onkelos,  the  fragments  of  the 
 Jerusalem  glosses,  the  commentaries  of  Rashi  and 
 Jacob  b.  Asher,  then  in  Basle  1607,  Hanau  16 14, 
 Amsterdam  1640,  Prague  1646,  etc.,  etc.,  and  has 
 lately  been  printed,  with  a  commentary,  in  the 
 beautiful  edition  of  the  Pentateuch  with  the  Rab- 
 binic commentaries,  Vienna  1859.  Explanations 
 of  this  Targum  were  also  written  by  David  b. 
 Jacob,  Prague  1609  ;  Feiwel  b.  David  Secharja, 
 Hanau  1614;  Mordecai  Kremsier,  Amsterdam 
 167 1.  It  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Chevallier 
 in  Walton's  Polyglott.  The  first  volume  of  an 
 English  translation,  containing  Genesis  and  Exodus, 
 has  just  been  published  by  Etheridge  (Longman 
 1862)  ;  but  the  masterly  treatises  on  this  Pseudo- 
 Jonathan  are  by  Seligsohn  and  Traub,  already 
 quoted,  and  by  Frankel,  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  reli- 
 giose Intei-esse  d.  yudenthu?ns,  1846,  p.  100,  etc. 
 Comp.  also  Wiener,  De  Jonathanis  in  Penta- 
 teuchum  paraphrasi  chaldaica,  Erlangen  1823  ; 
 Petermann,  De  dicahus  Pentateuchi  paraphrasibus 
 chaldaicis,  Berlin  1S29. 
 
 The  [reputed]  pa?-aph  rase  of  Jonathan  on  the  Five 
 Megilloth,  is  perhaps  of  a  still  later  date,  and  has 
 most  probably  been  compiled  by  several  indivi- 
 duals from  ancient  materials.  It  is  generally 
 published  with  the  Hebrew  text  of  these  Alegilloih 
 
JONES 
 
 S36 
 
 TOPPA  AND  JAPHO 
 
 in  the  Jewish  editions  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  is 
 contained  in  all  the  Rabbinic  Bibles.  A  rhymed 
 version  of  the  whole  of  this  paraphrase  by  Jacob  b. 
 Samuel,  also  called  Koppelmann  b.  Bonem,  was 
 published  about  1584.  A  Latin  version  of  it  is 
 given  in  Walton's  Polyglott.  Gill  has  given  an 
 English  translation  of  the  entire  paraphrase  on  the 
 Song  of  Songs  (Comment  on  the  So7ig,  172S). 
 Ginsburg  translated  the  first  chapter  of  the  para- 
 phrase on  the  Song  {Comment  on  the  Song,  p.  29, 
 etc.),  and  the  whole  of  the  paraphrase  on  Eccle- 
 siastes  [Comment  on  Ecclesiastes,  p.  503,  etc.) 
 There  are  Hebrew  commentaries  on  this  para- 
 phrase by  Mordecai  Lorca,  Cracow  1580,  and 
 Chajim  Feivel,  Berlin  1705. 
 
 The  paraphrase  of  Jonathan  on  the  Prophets 
 (CJIinXI  D'':C\S"1  D''X"'33  DlJin)  embraces  Joshua, 
 Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel, 
 and  the  twelve  minor  Prophets.  The  importance 
 of  this  version  may  be  judged  of  not  only  from  the 
 opinion  of  the  ancient  Jews,  that  it  embodies  the 
 expositions  of  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi, 
 but  from  the  fact  that  it  contains  numerous  ancient 
 readings  which  are  undoubtedly  genuine,  and  which 
 relieve  many  an  obscure  passage  in  the  Prophets 
 from  the  constrained  and  unnatural  interpretations 
 forced  upon  it  by  critics  who  are  determined  to  j 
 adhere  to  manifest  textual  corruptions.  A  most  | 
 interesting  and  instructive  list  of  these  readings  of 
 Jonathan  b.  Uzziel,  and  by  no  means  an  exhaustive 
 
 one,  is  given  in  the  Hebrew  Annual  entitled  pprtH, 
 vol.  i.,  Lemberg  1852,  p.  109,  etc.  This  para- 
 phrase is  printed  in  all  the  Rabbinic  Bibles,  and  is 
 given  in  the  Polyglotts  of  Antwerp  1572,  Paris 
 1645,  London  1657,  etc.,  with  a  Latin  translation. 
 Comp.  Bartolocci,  Bibliotheca  Magna  Rabbinica, 
 vol.  iii.  p.  78S,  etc. ;  Wolf,  Bibliotheca  Hebraa,  vol. 
 ii.  p.  1 1 59- 1 19 1  ;  Zunz,  Die  Gottesdienstlichen 
 Vortrdge  der  Jiiden,  Berlin  1832,  p.  61-82  ;  Fiirst, 
 Bibliotheca  Jtidaica,  vol.  ii.  p.  105- 107  ;  Stein- 
 schneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bod- 
 leia7ia,  col.  167,  and  the  works  quoted  in  this 
 article. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JONES,  Jeremiah,  was  born  in  1693,  and  died 
 in  1724.  He  was  educated  for  the  ministry  among 
 the  dissenters,  and  was  for  some  time  pastor  of  a 
 congregation  at  Forest  Green,  Avening,  Glouces- 
 tershire. He  had  also  an  academy  at  Nailsworth 
 in  that  neighbourhood,  where  he  resided.  His 
 leisure  time  was  devoted  to  Biblical  studies.  Li 
 1719  he  published  A  Vindication  of  St.  Matthew's 
 Gospel  fro/n  Mr.  Whistoti's  charge  0/ Dislocations, 
 etc.,  in  which  he  maintains,  with  much  ability  and 
 learning,  the  integrity  of  the  existing  text  of  that 
 gospel,  and  offers  some  valuable  remarks  on  the 
 harmony  of  the  four  gospels.  At  his  death  he  left 
 in  MS.  the  work  on  which  his  fame  principally 
 rests,  his  New  and  Full  Method  of  Settling  the 
 Canonical  Authority  of  the  N.  T.  This  was  pub- 
 lished in  1726  in  2  vols.  8vo,  followed  afterwards 
 by  a  third  vol.  This  work,  along  with  his  disser- 
 tation on  Matthew,  has  been  recently  issued  in  a 
 correct  and  elegant  edition  from  the  Clarendon 
 Press,  Oxford  1827.  The  writings  of  Jones  are 
 marked  by  sound  erudition,  careful  citation,  and 
 judicious  inference.- — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOPPA  and  JAPHO  (ID^  and  XiD\  'beauty;' 
 
 in  the  LXX.   and  N.   T.  'Uirir-n  ;   Vulg.   Joppe), 
 one  of  the  most  ancient  and  important  sea-port 
 
 towns  of  Palestine,  situated  on  the  coast  of  the 
 Mediterranean,  in  lat.  32°  2',  and  long.  E.  34° 
 47',  about  30  geographical  miles  from  Jenisalem, 
 and  nearly  midway  between  the  promontory  of 
 Carmel  and  Gaza.  Various  accounts  have  been 
 given  of  the  origin  and  meaning  of  the  name. 
 Some  derive  it  from  the  Heb.  HS'',  'beautiful;' 
 others  from  Japhet,  the  son  of  Noah  ;  classic  au- 
 thors from  'loTFij,  the  daughter  of  Aeolus  (see 
 Reland,  p.  864-65). 
 
 The  first  mention  of  Japho  is  in  the  description 
 given  by  Joshua  of  the  boundaries  of  Dan,  of 
 which  it  was  one  of  the  marks  (xix.  46).  We  hear 
 no  more  of  it  till  the  time  of  Solomon.  That  wise 
 monarch  was  the  father  of  Jewish  commerce,  and 
 he  resolved  to  imitate  the  Phoenicians  in  building 
 navies  and  founding  sea-ports.  By  him,  probably, 
 Jnppa  was  made  the  port  of  the  Jewish  capital, 
 and  the  western  outlet  of  its  trade,  as  Eziongeber 
 was  the  eastern.  When  building  the  Temple  he 
 employed  Tyrian  workmen  to  fell  timber  in  the 
 pine  and  cedar  forests  of  Lebanon  ;  they  conveyed 
 it  '  in  floats  by  sea  to  foppa,^  whence  it  was  carried 
 to  Jerusalem  (2  Chron.  ii.  16).  At  Joppa  Jonah 
 embarked  for  Tarshish,  in  his  vain  attempt  to 
 escape  an  unpleasant  mission  to  Nineveh  (Jonah  i. 
 3).  During  the  captivity  the  situation  of  the  city, 
 and  its  commercial  importance,  appear  to  have 
 saved  it  from  ruin.  On  the  return  of  the  Jews, 
 Ezra  tells  us  that  they  gave  'meat,  and  drink,  and 
 oil  to  them  of  Zidon,  and  to  them  of  Tyre,  to 
 bring  cedar-trees  from  Lebanon  to  the  sea  of  Joppa,'' 
 for  rebuilding  the  House  of  the  Lord  (iii.  7). 
 
 After  the  close  of  O.  T.  history  Joppa  rose  in 
 importance.  The  sea  was  then  beginning  to  be  the 
 highway  of  nations.  Greece,  Egypt,  Persia,  and 
 .some  of  the  little  kingdoms  of  Asia  Minor  had  their 
 fleets  for  commerce  and  war.  Joppa  was  the  only 
 port  in  Palestine  proper  at  which  foreign  ships 
 could  touch  ;  it  was  thus  not  only  the  shipping 
 capital,  but  the  key  of  the  whole  country  on  llie 
 sea-board.  During  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees  it 
 was  one  of  the  principal  strongholds  of  Palestine  (i 
 Maccab.  x.  75  ;  xiv.  5,  34 ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  15. 
 i).  It  would  seem  that  Jews  then  constituted 
 only  a  minority  of  the  population  ;  and  the  foreign 
 residents — Greeks,  Egyptians,  and  Syrians — were 
 so  rich  and  powerful,  and  so  aided  by  the  fleets  of 
 their  own  nations,  as  to  be  able  to  rule  the  city. 
 On  one  occasion  they  enticed  200  Jews  on  board 
 ships,  and  threw  them  into  the  sea.  For  this  act 
 of  cruelty  Judas  Maccabjeus  took  signal  revenge. 
 Attacking  the  town  by  night,  he  burned  all  the 
 shipping  with  every  human  being  on  board  (2 
 Maccab.  xii.  3-7).  The  Maccabsean  princes  subse- 
 quently strengthened  the  fortifications,  placed  a 
 garrison  in  the  citadel,  and  retained  Joppa  in  their 
 hands  as  the  chief  port  of  their  little  kingdom  (i 
 Maccab.  xii.  34;  xiii.  11  ;  xiv.  5). 
 
 When  Pompey  invaded  Palestine  (B.C.  63),  Joppa 
 was  among  the  first  cities  captured  and  annexed  to 
 the  Roman  province  of  Syria,  doubtless  because  it 
 was  deemed  wise  to  secure  such  an  important  sea- 
 port (Joseph.  Antiq,  xiv.  4.  4).  After  the  fall  of 
 Antony  and  Cleopatra,  Csesar  gave  Joppa,  with 
 other  cities,  to  Herod  the  Great  (xv.  7.  3).  Herod 
 founded  Csesarea  Palaestina  on  the  coast  a  little 
 south  of  Carmel,  fonned  a  harbour  there  at  vast 
 expense,  and  made  it  the  capital  of  his  kingdom. 
 After  Herod's  death  Joppa  passed  into  the  handa 
 of  Archelaus  (xvii.  II.  4)  ;  but  on  his  deposition 
 
rOPPA  AND  JAPHO 
 
 637 
 
 JOPPA  AND  JAPHO 
 
 (a. D.  6)  the  whole  of  Palestine  was  annexed  to  the    trade  (Strabo,   xvi.  2.   34).     "When  Peter  visited 
 
 RomRU  province  of  Syria,   and  placed  under  the 
 immediate  nile  of  a  deputy. 
 
 Joppa  was  virtually  a  Roman  town  in  the  time 
 of  the  apostles.  The  population  was  mixed,  as  is 
 the  case  in  all  sea-ports — Greeks,  Syrians,  Phoe- 
 nicians, and  Egyptians,  with  a  few  Roman  officials, 
 and  a  large  Jewish  community,  chiefly  engaged  in 
 
 Lydda,  ten  miles  distant  across  the  plain  of  Sharon, 
 the  Christians  of  Joppa  sent  for  him,  fondly  hoping 
 that  he  would  be  able  to  restore  to  them  the  dead 
 Tabitha.  He  came  and  raised  her ;  and  while 
 staying  there  with  'one  Simon  a  tanner,  whose 
 house  was  by  the  sea-side,'  and  while  praying  on 
 the  house-top,  he  saw  that  remarkable  vision  which 
 
 291.  Jaffa. 
 
 shewed  him  that  the  distinction  between  Jew  and  ' 
 Gentile  was  for  ever  removed  by  the  Gospel  (Acts 
 ix.  36-43  ;  X.  9-18).  I 
 
 During  the  last  Jewish  war  Joppa  suffered  ; 
 severely.  Cestius,  marching  from  the  north,  sud-  \ 
 denly  captured  the  city,  and  massacred  upwards  of ', 
 8000  of  its  inhabitants  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jitd.  ii.  18.  i 
 10).  A  few  years  later  bands  of  pirates,  taking  ' 
 advantage  of  the  disturbed  state  of  the  country,  I 
 rebuilt  Joppa,  established  themselves  there,   and 
 
 extended  their  ravages  over  the  whole  sea  from 
 Cilicia  to  Egypt.  The  attention  of  Vespasian  was 
 at  length  drawn  to  them,  and  he  took  their  strong- 
 hold, and  when  the  people  fled  to  their  ships  a 
 storm  rose,  dashed  them  to  pieces  on  the  rocky 
 shore,  so  that  not  a  single  man  escaped.  The 
 houses  and  fortifications  were  then  razed  to  the 
 ground  (Id.  iii.  9.  2-4). 
 
 Joppa   is    mentioned   by   many    of    the    classic 
 authors  ;  and  some  of  them  assign  to  it  a  wondrous 
 
JOrPA  AND  JAPHO 
 
 638 
 
 JORAM 
 
 antiquity,  affirming  tliat  it  existed  before  the  flood 
 (Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  v.  14).  It  was  mainly,  however, 
 in  connection  with  the  fable  of  Andromeda  that 
 Joppa  was  known  to  Greeks  and  Romans.  Pliny 
 tells  us  that  '  in  front  of  tlie  city  hes  a  rock  upon 
 which  they  point  out  the  vestiges  of  the  chains  by 
 which  Andromeda  was  bound,'  when  she  was  res- 
 cued, and  the  sea-monster  slain  by  Perseus  [Hist. 
 Nat.  I.e.  ;  Apollod.  ii.  4.  3  ;  Strabo,  xvi.  2.  28  ;  i. 
 2.  35  ;  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  iii.  9.  3  ;  Jerome,  /;/  Jon.  i). 
 
 Joppa  must  have  soon  revived  again.  In  the 
 4th  century  Eusebius  calls  it  a  city  {Onomast.  s.  v.)  ; 
 and  it  was  then  made  the  seat  of  a  bishopric,  an 
 lionour  which  it  retained  till  the  conquest  of  the 
 country  by  the  Saracens  (Reland,  p.  868  ;  S.  Paul, 
 Geogr.  Sac.  p.  305).  Joppa  has  been  the  landing- 
 place  of  pilgrims  going  to  Jerusalem  for  more  than 
 a  thousand  years,  from  Arculf  in  the  7th  century 
 to  His  Royal  Highness  the  Prince  of  Wales  in  the 
 19th  ;  and  it  is  mentioned  in  almost  all  the  itine- 
 raries and  books  of  travel  in  the  Holy  Land  which 
 have  appeared  in  different  languages  {Early  Travels 
 in  Pal.,  pp.  10,  34,  142,  286).  During  the  Cru- 
 sades Joppa  was  several  times  taken  and  retaken 
 by  Franks  and  Saracens.  Saladin  destroyed  its 
 fortifications,  and  Richard  of  England  rebuilt  them 
 [Itiiiei-ary  of  Richard  I.,  iv.  23  and  26  ;  vi.  13  and 
 18).  After  the  close  of  the  Crusades  Joppa  fell  to 
 ruin.  In  the  13th  century  it  did  not  contain  a 
 single  habitable  house.  Bertrandon  de  la  Brou- 
 quiere  says  of  it  in  that  age — •'  It  formerly  belonged 
 to  the  Christians,  and  was  then  strong  ;  at  present 
 it  is  entirely  destroyed,  having  only  a  few  tents 
 covered  with  reeds,  whither  pilgrims  retire  to 
 shelter  themselves  from  the  heat  of  the  sun'  {Early 
 Travels  in  Pal.,  Bohn,  p.  286).  It  soon  after- 
 wards began  to  revive,  and  has  since  attained  to 
 something  of  its  ancient  importance.  In  the  year 
 1797  it  was  taken  by  the  French,  and  upon  that 
 occasion  the  conquerors  were  guilty  of  an  act  of 
 cruelty  fortunately  rare  in  modern  warfare.  A 
 body  of  4000  Albanians,  who  held  a  strong  position 
 in  the  town,  surrendered  on  promise  of  having 
 their  lives  spared.  The  promise  was  given,  and 
 yet  the  whole  4CKX)  were  afterwards  pinioned  and 
 shot  on  the  strand  !  Another  tragedy  perpetrated 
 at  Joppa  by  Napoleon  is  not  only  an  everlasting 
 disgrace  to  the  man,  but  it  leaves  a  dark  stain  on 
 the  histoiy  of  a  civilized  nation.  When  compelled 
 to  retreat  to  Egypt,  between  400  and  500  French 
 soldiers  lay  ill  of  the  plague  in  the  hospitals  of 
 Joppa.  They  could  not  be  removed,  and  Na- 
 poleon ordered  them  to  be  poisoned!  {Handbook  for 
 S.  and  P.,  p.  288). 
 
 Yafa  is  the  modern  name  of  Joppa,  and  is  identi- 
 cal with  the  old  Hebrew  Japho  (\j\,i  =  {<is'>).     It 
 
 contains  about  5CXX)  inhabitants,  of  whom  1000 
 are  Christians,  about  150  Jews,  and  the  rest 
 Muslems.  It  is  beautifully  situated  on  a  little 
 rounded  hill,  dipping  on  the  west  into  the  waves 
 of  the  Mediterranean,  and  on  the  land  side  encom- 
 passed by  orchards  of  orange,  lemon,  apricot,  and 
 other  trees,  which  for  luxuriance  and  beauty  are  not 
 surpassed  in  the  world.  They  extend  for  several 
 miles  across  the  great  plain.  Like  most  Oriental 
 towns,  however,  it  looks  best  in  the  distance.  The 
 houses  are  huddled  together  without  order  ;  the 
 streets  are  narrow,  crooked,  and  filthy ;  the  town 
 is  so  crowded  along  the  steep  sides  of  the  hill  that 
 the  rickety  dwellings  in  the  upper  part  seem  to  be 
 
 toppling  over  on  the  flat  roofs  of  those  below.  It 
 has  no  port,  and  it  is  only  under  favourable  circum- 
 stances of  wmd  and  weather,  vessels  can  ride  at 
 anchor  a  mile  or  so  from  the  shore.  There  is  a 
 place  on  the  shore  which  is  called  'the  harboui.' 
 It  consists  of  a  strip  of  water  from  fifteen  to  twenty 
 yards  wide  and  two  to  three  deep,  enclosed  on  the 
 sea  side  by  a  ridge  of  low  and  partially  sunken 
 rocks.  It  may  afford  a  little  shelter  to  boats,  but 
 it  is  worse  than  useless  so  far  as  commerce  is  con- 
 cerned. The  town  is  defended  by  a  wall,  on  which 
 a  few  old  guns  are  mounted.  With  the  exception 
 of  a  few  broken  columns  scattered  about  the  streets, 
 and  through  the  gardens  on  the  southern  slope  of 
 the  hill,  and  the  large  stones  in  the  foundations  of 
 the  castle,  Joppa  has  no  remains  of  antiquity  ;  and 
 none  of  its  modern  buildings,  not  even  tire  reputed 
 '  house  of  Simon  the  tanner,'  which  the  monks 
 show,  are  worthy  of  note.  The  town  has  still  a 
 considerable  trade  as  the  port  of  Jerusalem,  and 
 its  fruits  are  reckoned  the  best  in  Syria. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JORAH  (nii' ;  Sept.  'Iw/sd),  the  ancestor  of  the 
 
 Benei  Jorah,  or,  as  they  are  elsewhere  called,  the 
 Benei-Hariph,  a  company  of  112  persons  who 
 came  up  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezra  ii. 
 18  ;  Neh.  vii.  24).  Whether  Jorah  or  Hariph 
 (1~in)  is  the  correct  form,  or  whether  both  are  not 
 errors  for  CIH,  Hariin,  is  uncertain.     In  the  Syr. 
 
 for  1"in  there  is  LDJQjo,  Chnroni,  in  Neh.  vii.  24  ; 
 
 and  the  Cod.  Alex,  has  here  'Apel/x,  which,  when 
 compared  with  Ezra  x.  31,  favours  the  conclusion 
 that  the  proper  reading  in  all  the  passages  is 
 D''-in.— t. 
 
 JORAM  (D"li^ ;  Sept.  'Iwpdfi,  a  contraction  of 
 
 Jehoram),  ninth  king  of  Israel,  son  of  Ahab,  and 
 successor  to  his  elder  brother  Ahaziah,  who  died 
 childless.  He  began  to  reign  B.  C.  896,  and  reigned 
 twelve  years  (2  Kings  i.  17  ;  iii-  i).  Jorain  adhered 
 to  the  sinful  policy  of  Jeroboam  in  the  matter  of  the 
 golden  calves  ;  but,  although  his  mother  Jezebel 
 was  still  alive,  he  discontinued  the  dark  idolatries 
 of  Baal  which  she  had  introduced  and  maintained 
 at  such  high  cost  of  guilt  and  blood  to  the  nation. 
 The  Moabites  had  been  tributary  to  the  crown 
 of  Israel  since  the  separation  of  the  two  kingdoms. 
 But  king  Mesha  deemed  the  defeat  and  death  of 
 Ahab  so  heavy  a  blow  to  the  power  of  Israel  that 
 he  might  safely  assert  his  independence.  He  ac- 
 cordingly did  so,  by  withholding  his  tribute  of 
 '  100,000  lambs  and  100,000  rams  with  the  wool.' 
 The  short  reign  of  Ahaziah  had  afforded  no  oppor- 
 tunity for  any  operations  against  the  revolters  ;  but 
 the  new  king  hastened  to  reduce  them  again  under 
 the  yoke  they  had  cast  off.  The  good  king  of 
 Judah,  Jehoshaphat,  was  too  easily  induced  to  take 
 a  part  in  the  war.  He  perhaps  feared  that  the 
 example  of  Moab,  if  allowed  to  be  successful,  might 
 seduce  into  a  similar  course  his  own  tributary,  the 
 king  of  Edom,  whom  he  now  summoned  to  join  in 
 this  expedition.  The  deliverance  of  the  allies  from 
 perishing  from  lack  of  water,  and  the  signal  over- 
 throw of  the  Moabites  at  the  word  of  Elisha,  have 
 been  already  described  under  Elisha  and  Jeho- 
 shaphat. 
 
 After  this  a  more  redoubtable  enemy,  Benhadad, 
 king  of  Syria,  occupied  for  a  long  time  the  atten- 
 tion and  strength  of  the  king.  In  the  sacred  re- 
 cords the  more  striking  events  of  this  war  seem  to 
 
JORDAN 
 
 639 
 
 JORDAN 
 
 be  recorded  for  the  sake  of  shewing  forth  the  great 
 acts  of  Elisha,  and  they  have  therefore  been  re- 
 lated under  his  name.  It  suffices  here  to  indicate 
 that  they  consisted  in  the  Syrian  king  being  con- 
 strained to  temiinate  one  campaign  in  consequence 
 of  all  his  plans  being  made  known  by  the  prophet 
 to  the  king  of  Israel  (2  Kings  vi.  1-23) ;  and  in  the 
 deliverance  of  Samaria,  according  to  the  jirediction 
 of  the  prophet,  from  a  horrible  famine,  caused  by 
 the  city  being  besieged  by  the  Syrians  (2  Kings  vi. 
 24-33  ;  ^"•)  ^^  interval  of  the  war  also  afforded 
 occasion  for  the  remarkable  cure  of  Naaman,  the 
 Syrian  leper,  by  the  same  prophet  (2  Kings  v.) 
 [Naaman].  These  events  serve  to  manifest  the 
 uncertain  character  of  Joram,  and  the  too  strong 
 influence  of  instant  circumstances  upon  his  faith 
 and  conduct.  So  in  his  conduct  to  Elisha,  we 
 find  him  at  one  time  obedient  to  the  prophet,  and 
 full  of  respectful  admiration  of  his  office  and  cha- 
 racter; and  at  another  time  devoting  his  head  to  de- 
 struction, sending  messengers  to  put  him  to  death, 
 and  then  starting  himself  after  them — probably  to 
 prevent  his  own  orders  from  being  executed  (2 
 Kings  vi.  31-33)- 
 
 After  the  death  of  Benhadad,  Joram  found  a  new 
 and  active  enemy  in  his  murderer  and  successor, 
 Hazael.  During  the  illness  of  Benhadad,  the  king 
 of  Israel  seems  to  have  employed  himself  in  strength  - 
 ening  his  eastern  frontier  against  the  Syrians,  and  ! 
 in  fortifying  Ramoth-Gilead,  which  had  fallen  into 
 his  hands,  and  which  his  father  had  perished  in  the 
 attempt  to  recover  from  the  Syrians.  This  strong 
 fortress  henceforth  became  the  head-quarters  of  the 
 operations  beyond  the  river.  Hazael  was  scarcely 
 settled  on  the  throne  before  he  took  arms,  and 
 marched  against  Ramoth,  in  the  environs  of  which 
 the  Israelites  sustained  a  defeat,  and  the  king  was 
 wounded.  He  returned  to  Jezreel  to  be  healed  of 
 his  wounds,  leaving  the  army  in  the  charge  of  Jehu, 
 one  of  his  ablest  and  most  active  generals.  It  was 
 in  this  interval  that  Jehu  was  anointed  king  of 
 Israel  by  the  messenger  of  Elisha,  and  immediately 
 proceeded  to  Jezreel  to  fulfil  his  commission  to  ex- 
 terminate the  house  of  Ahab.  The  king,  who 
 went  forth  from  the  city  to  meet  him  when  the 
 watchman  on  the  tower  of  Jezreel  announced  his 
 approach,  was  slain  under  the  circumstances  de- 
 scribed in  the  article  Jehu  ;  and  Ahaziah,  the  king 
 of  Judah,  who  was  at  Jezreel  on  a  visit  to  his  sick 
 cousin,  shared  his  fate  (B.C.  884).  With  Joram 
 ended  the  dynasty  of  Ahab,  which  reigned  forty- 
 four  years  in  Israel  (2  Kings  viii.  25-29  ;  ix.  1-20). — 
 J.  K. 
 
 JORDAN    (|T1\   always  with   the  article   in 
 
 prose,  jTi'n  ;  6  'lopSdvTjs ;  yordanis),  the  chief  and 
 
 most  celebrated  river  of  Palestine,  flowing  through 
 a  deep  valley  down  the  centre  of  the  country  from 
 north  to  south. 
 
 The  name. — Jordatt  may  be  rendered  'the  de- 
 scender,'' from  the  root  "IT',  '  to  descend ' — a  name 
 
 most  applicable  to  it,  whether  we  consider  the 
 rapidity  of  its  current,  or  the  great  depth  of  the 
 valley  through  which  it  runs.  From  whatever 
 part  of  the  country  its  banks  are  approached,  the 
 '  descent'  is  long  and  steep.  That  this  is  the  true 
 etymology  of  the  word  seems  evident  from  an 
 incidental  remark  in  Josh.  iii.  16,  where,  in  de- 
 scribing the  effect  of  the  opening  of  a  passage  for 
 the    Israelites,   the   word   used   lor   the    '  coming 
 
 down'  of  the  waters  (CTlTI  D'^DH)  is  exactly 
 the  same  as  the  name  of  the  river  (pl^H  ;  see 
 Stanley,  ^.  and  P.,  279,  note).  Other  derivations 
 have  been  given.  Some  say  it  is  compounded  of 
 "IN^,  '  a  river,'  and  p,  the  name  of  the  city  where 
 it  rises,  but  this  etymology  is  impossible,  for  the 
 word  p~l^  has  no  relation  to  the  name  of  the  city 
 
 p  (Reland,  Pal.,  p.  271).     Another  view  is,  that 
 
 the  river  having  two  sources,  the  name  of  the  one 
 was  Jor,  and  of  the  other  Dan ;  hence  the  united 
 stream  is  called  Jordan.  So  Jerome,  'Jordanes 
 oritur  ad  radices  Libani ;  et  habet  duos  fontes, 
 unum  nomine  Jor,  et  alterum  Dan ;  qui  simul 
 mixti  Jordanis  nomen  efficiunt'  {Conini.  in  Matt. 
 xvi.  13).  This  theory  has  been  copied  by  Adam- 
 nanus  {De  Loc.  Sanct.  ii.  19),  William  of  Tyre 
 (xiii.  18),  Brocardus  (3),  Adrichomius  (p.  109), 
 and  others  ;  and  the  etymology  seems  to  have 
 spread  among  the  Christians  in  Palestine,  from 
 whom  Burckhardt  heard  it  ( Travels  in  Syria,  pp. 
 42,  43  ;  see  Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  412,  note).  The 
 Greeks  called  the  river  'Io/)5df7;s ;  but  Pausanias 
 has    'W/sSai/os.     Arab   geographers    call   it   either 
 
 ..t>A'\  {El-Urdon),  which   is   equivalent  to   the 
 
 Hebrew  pTH  ;  or  'i,x>J^\  {Esh-shei-iah),  which 
 
 signifies  '  the  watering-place  ; '  and  this  latter  is  the 
 name  almost  universally  given  to  it  by  the  modern 
 Syrians,  who  sometimes  attach  the  appellative  el- 
 Kebir,  '  the  great,'  by  way  of  distinction. 
 
 Sources. — The  snows  that  deeply  cover  Hermon 
 during  the  whole  winter,  and  that  still  cap  its 
 glittering  summit  during  the  hottest  days  of  summer, 
 are  the  real  sources  of  the  Jordan.  They  feed  its 
 perennial  fountains  ;  and  they  supply  from  a  thou- 
 sand channels  those  superabundant  waters  which 
 make  the  river  '  overflow  all  its  banks  in  harvest 
 time'  (Josh.  iii.  15).  The  Jordan  has  two  historical 
 sources.  In  the  midst  of  a  rich  but  marshy  plain, 
 lying  between  the  southern  prolongation  of  Her- 
 mon and  the  mountains  of  Naphtali,  is  a  low  cup- 
 shaped  hill,  thickly  covered  with  shrubs.  On  it 
 once  stood  Dan,  the  northern  border-city  of  Pales- 
 tine ;  and  from  its  western  base  gushes  forth  the 
 great  fountain  of  the  Jordan.  The  waters  at  once 
 form  a  large  pond  encircled  with  rank  grass  and 
 
 '  jungle — now  the  home  of  the  wild  boar — and  then 
 flow  off  southward.  Within  the  rim  of  the  cup, 
 beneath  the  spreading  branches  of  a  gigantic  oak, 
 is  a  smaller  spring.     It  is  fed   doubtless  by  the 
 
 I  same  source  ;  and  its  stream,  breaking  through  the 
 rim,  joins  its  sister,  and  forms  a  river  some  forty 
 
 ]  feet  wide,  deep  and  rapid.  The  modern  name  of 
 the  hill  is  Tell  el-Kady,  'the  hill  of  the  judge;' 
 and  both  fountain  and  river  are  called  Leddan — 
 
 j  evidently  the  name  Dan  corrupted  by  a  double 
 
 I  article,  El-ed-Dan  (Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  394; 
 Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  214;  and 
 in  Bibliotheca  Sac.  for  1846,  p.  196).  Josephus 
 calls  this  stream  '  Little  Jordan  '  (to;'  y-Mphv  'lop- 
 SdvTiv,  Bell.  Jiid.  iv.  I.  l) ;  but  it  is  the  principal 
 source  of  the  river,  and  the  largest  fountain  m 
 Syria. 
 
 Four  miles  east  of  Tell  el-Kady,  on  a  lower 
 terrace  of  Hermon,  amid  forests  of  oak,  lie  the 
 ruins  of  Banias,  the  ancient  Cassarea-PhiUppi,  and 
 more  ancient  Panium.  Beside  the  ruins  is  a  lofty 
 cliff  of  red  limestone,  having  a  large  fountain  at  its 
 
JORDAN 
 
 640 
 
 JORDAN 
 
 base.  Beneath  the  cliff  there  was  formerly,  as 
 Josephus  tells  us,  a  gloomy  cave,  and  within  it  a 
 yawning  abyss  of  unfathomable  depth,  filled  with 
 water.  This  was  the  other  source  of  the  Jordan 
 {Bell.  "Jiid.  i.  21.  3).  A  temple  was  erected  over  the 
 cave  by  Herod,  and  its  ruins  now  fill  it  and  conceal 
 the  fountain.  From  it  a  foaming  torrent  still 
 bursts,  and  dashes  down  to  the  plain  through  a 
 narrow  rocky  ravine,  and  then  glides  swiftly  on 
 till  it  joins  the  other  about  four  miles  south  of  Tell 
 el-Kady  (Robinson,  iii.  397  ;  Handbook  for  S.  and 
 P.,  p.  446). 
 
 Such  are  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  of  which 
 Stanley  well  says — '  It  is  not  always  that  the 
 sources  of  great  rivers  correspond  to  the  future 
 course  of  their  progeny.  But  those  of  the  Jordan 
 meet  every  requirement.  Geographically  they  might 
 be  perhaps  sought  elsewhere  ;  but  historically  the 
 sight  of  the  springs  which  we  have  now  reached  at 
 once  vindicates  and  explains  their  claims'  {S.  and  P., 
 p.  3S6).  They  are  in  truth  noble  fountains  ;  and 
 their  crystal  waters  burst  forth  in  the  very  centre 
 of  the  richest  and  grandest  scenery  in  all  Palestine. 
 It  seems  fitting,  too,  that  the  river  in  which  the 
 Son  of  Man  was  baptised  should  spring  from  that 
 mountain  whose  summit  was  the  only  spot  on  earth 
 where  his  divine  glory  was  manifested  in  the  Trans- 
 figuration (Porter's  Damascus,  i.  p.  306). 
 
 The  Jordan  has  also  a.  fabled  fountain,  thus  de- 
 scribed by  Josephus  :—'  Apparently  Panium  is  the 
 source  of  the  Jordan  ;  but  the  water  is,  in  reality, 
 conveyed  thither  unseen  by  a  subterranean  channel 
 from  Phiala,  as  it  is  called,  which  lies  not  far  from 
 the  high  road,  on  the  right  as  you  ascend  to  Tra- 
 chonitis,  at  the  distance  of  120  stadia  from  Csesarea 
 .  .  .  That  the  Jordan  hence  derived  its  origin 
 tvas  formerly  unknown,  until  it  was  ascertained  by 
 Philip,  Tetrarch  of  Trachonitis  ;  who,  having 
 thrown  chaff  into  Phiala,  found  it  cast  out  at 
 Panium'  {Bell.  jfud.  iii.  10.  7).  The  lake  here  re- 
 ferred to  appears  to  be  Burket  er-Ram,  which 
 Robinson  visited  and  described  {B.  P.,  iii.  399). 
 The  legend  has  no  foundation  in  reality. 
 
 Other  fountains  in  this  region,  though  unnamed 
 in  history,  contriljute  much  to  the  Jordan.  The 
 chief  of  these,  and  the  highest  perennial  source  of 
 the  Jordan,  is  in  the  bottom  of  a  valley  at  the 
 western  base  of  Hermon,  a  short  distance  from 
 the  town  of  Hasbeiya  and  twelve  miles  north  of 
 Tell  el-Kady.  The  fountain  is  in  a  pool,  at  the 
 foot  of  a  basalt  cliff;  the  stream  from  it,  called 
 Hasbdny  (from  Hasbeiya),  flows  through  a  narrow 
 glen  into  the  plain,  and  falls  into  the  main  stream 
 about  a  mile  south  of  the  junction  of  the  Leddan 
 and  Baniasy.  The  relative  size  of  the  three  streams 
 Robinson  thus  estimates — 'That  from  Banias  is 
 twice  as  large  as  the  Hasbany  ;  while  the  Leddan 
 is  twice,  if  not  three  times,  the  size  of  that  from 
 Banias'  {B.  P.,  iii.  395).  The  united  river  flows 
 southward  through  the  marshy  plain  for  six  miles, 
 and  then  falls  into  lake  Huleh,  called  in  Scripture 
 'The  Waters  of  Merom'  [Merom]. 
 
 Besides  these  a  considerable  stream  comes  down 
 from  the  plain  of  Ijon,  west  of  the  Hasbany  ;  and 
 two  large  fountains  (called  Balat,  and  Mellahah), 
 burst  forth  from  the  base  of  the  mountain-chain  of 
 Naphtali.  Such,  then,  are  the  sources,  and  such  is 
 the  gradual  formation  of  the  Jordan  {Handbook  for 
 S.  a7!d P.,  p.  436). 
 
 Pkysical  features  of  the  Jordan  and  its  valley.  — 
 The  most  remarkable  feature  of  the  Jordan  is,  that 
 
 throughout  nearly  its  entire  course  it  is  below  tht 
 level  of  the  sea.  Its  valley  is  thus  like  a  huge 
 fissure  in  the  earth's  crust.  The  following  measure 
 ments,  taken  from  Van  de  Velde's  Memoir  of  Map, 
 will  give  the  best  idea  of  the  depression  of  this  sin- 
 gular  valley  : — 
 
 Fountain  of  Jordan  at  Hasbeiya,  1 700  ft.  elevation. 
 ,,             ,,             Banias,       1147  ,, 
 
 Dan,  647  „ 
 
 The  Lake  Huleh,    .     .     about    120  ,, 
 
 The  Lake  of  Tiberias,  .  .  650  ft.  depression. 
 The  Dead  Sea, 1312  ,, 
 
 There  must  be  some  error  in  the  elevations  of 
 the  fountains  as  here  given.  Lake  Hflleh  is  en- 
 compassed by  a  great  plain,  extending  to  Dan  , 
 and  as  it  appears  to  the  eye  almost  level,  it  is  im- 
 possible there  could  be  a  difference  of  500  feet  in 
 the  elevations  of  the  fountain  and  the  lake.  The 
 writer  estimated  it  on  the  spot  at  not  above  loo 
 feet  ;  and  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  von  Wilden- 
 bruch  makes  it  by  measurement  537  feet,  and  De 
 Bertou  344. 
 
 The  general  course  of  the  Jordan  is  due  south. 
 From  their  fountains  the  three  streams  flow  south 
 to  the  points  of  junction,  and  continue  in  the  same 
 direction  to  the  Hiileh  ;  and  from  the  southern  ex- 
 tremity of  this  lake  the  Jordan  again  issues  and  re- 
 sumes its  old  course.  For  some  two  miles  its 
 banks  are  flat,  and  its  current  not  very  rapid  ;  but 
 on  passing  through  Jisr  Benat  Yakflb  ('  The  bridge 
 of  Jacob's  daughters'),  the  banks  suddenly  con- 
 tract, and  rise  high  on  each  side,  and  the  river 
 dashes  in  sheets  of  foam  over  a  rocky  bed,  re- 
 bounding from  cliff  to  cliff  in  its  mad  career.  Here 
 and  there  the  retreating  banks  have  a  little  green 
 meadow,  with  its  fringe  of  oleanders  all  wet  and 
 glistening  with  spray.  Thus  it  rushes  on,  often 
 winding,  occasionally  doubling  back  like  the  coils 
 of  a  serpent,  till,  breaking  from  rocky  barriers,  it 
 enters  the  rich  plain  of  Batihah,  where  on  the 
 left  bank  stand  the  ruins  of  Bethsaida  [BethsaidaJ 
 The  stream  now  expands,  and  glides  lazily  along 
 till  it  falls  on  the  still  bosom  of  the  sea  of  Galilee. 
 Between  Bethsaida  and  the  sea,  the  Jordan  averages 
 about  twenty  yards  in  width,  and  flows  sluggishly 
 between  low  alluvial  banks.  Bars  of  sand  extend 
 across  its  channel  here  and  there,  at  which  it  is 
 easily  forded  {Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  p.  426  ; 
 Robinson,  ii.  414,  seq.  ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  315). 
 From  Jisr  Benat  Yakub  the  distance  is  only  seven 
 miles  ;  and  yet  in  that  distance  the  river  falls  700 
 feet.  The  total  length  of  the  section  between  the 
 two  lakes  is  about  eleven  miles  as  the  crow  flies. 
 
 An  old  tradition  tells  us  that  the  Jordan  flows 
 direct  through  the  sea  of  Galilee  without  mingling 
 with  its  waters.  The  origin  of  the  story  may  be 
 the  fact  that  the  river  enters  the  lake  at  the  nor- 
 thern extremity,  and  leaves  it  at  a  point  exactly 
 opposite  at  the  southern,  without  apparent  increase 
 or  diminution. 
 
 The  third  section  of  the  river,  lying  between  the 
 sea  of  Galilee  and  the  Dead  Sea,  is  the  Jordan  of 
 Scripture  ;  the  other  two  sections  not  being  di- 
 rectly mentioned  either  in  the  O.  T.  or  N.  T. 
 Until  the  last  few  years  little  was  known  of  it. 
 The  notices  of  ancient  geographers  are  not  full. 
 Travellers  had  crossed  it  at  several  points,  but  all 
 the  portions  between  these  points  were  unknown. 
 When  the  remarkable  depression  of  the  Dead  Sea 
 was  ascertained  by  trigonometrical  measurement, 
 
JORDAN 
 
 641 
 
 JORDAN 
 
 and  when  it  was  showTi  that  the  Jordan  must  have 
 a  fall  of  1400  feet  in  its  short  course  of  about  lOO 
 miles,  the  measurements  were  called  in  question  by 
 that  distinguished  geographer  Dr.  Robinson,  in  a 
 paper  read  before  the  Royal  Geographical  Society 
 in  1847  (Journal,  vol.  xviii.,  part  2).  In  that 
 same  year  Lieut.  Molyneux,  R.N.,  conveyed  a 
 boat  from  the  sea  of  Galilee  to  the  Dead  Sea, 
 mostly  in  the  river,  but  in  places  on  the  backs  of 
 
 camels,  where  rocks  and  rapids  prevented  naviga- 
 tion. Owing  to  the  hostility  of  the  Arabs  the  ex- 
 pedition was  not  successful ;  and  the  Jordan  was 
 not  yet  explored.  Lieut.  Lynch  of  the  United 
 States  Navy  headed  a  much  more  successful  expe- 
 dition in  1848,  and  was  the  first  fully  to  describe 
 the  course,  and  fully  to  solve  the  mysteries  of  the 
 Jordan.  His  Official  Report  is  the  standard  work 
 on  the  river.     Molyneux's  paper  in  the  Journal  oj 
 
 292.  Jordan  by  Moonlight. 
 
 the  R.    Geog.    Society  also   contains    some   useful 
 matter  (vol.  xviii.,  part  2). 
 
 The  valley  through  which  this  section  of  the 
 Jordan  flows  is  a  long,  low  plain,  running  from 
 north  to  south,  and  shut  in  by  steep  and  rugged 
 parallel  ridges  ;  the  eastern  ridge  rising  fully  5CX)o 
 feet  above  the  river's  bed  ;  and  the  western  about 
 3000.  This  plain  is  the  ' great  plain'  of  the  later 
 Jews;  the  '  great  desert'  {ttoWtiv  ipriiJ.ia.v)  of  Jose- 
 phus ;  the  '  Aidon '  or  '  channel  of  the  Greek  geo- 
 vou  II.  * 
 
 graphers  ;  and  the  '  G/iar'  or  '  sunken  p lam  of 
 the  modern  Arabs  (Stanley,  p.  277  ;  Joseph.  Bell. 
 Jud.  iii.  9.  7;  iv.  8.  2;  Reland,  Pal.,  p.  305, 
 161  -;77,  seq.)  It  is  about  six  nnles  wide  at  its 
 northern  end,  but  it  gradually  expands  until  it 
 attains  a  width  of  upwards  of  twelve  at  Jericho. 
 Its  sides  are  not  straight  lines,  nor  is  its  surface 
 perfectly  level.  The  mountains  on  each  side  here 
 and  there  send  out  rocky  spurs,  and  long  low  roots 
 far  into  it.     Winter  torrents,  descendmg  from  wild 
 
JORDAN 
 
 642 
 
 JORDAN 
 
 ravines,  cut  deeply  through  its  soft  strata.  As  a 
 whole  it  is  now  a  desert.  In  its  northern  division, 
 above  the  fords  of  Succoth,  small  portions  are 
 cultivated  around  fountains,  and  along  the  banks 
 of  streamlets,  where  irrigation  is  easy  ;  but  all  the 
 rest  is  a  wilderness — in  spring  covered  with  rank 
 grass  and  thistles,  but  in  summer  parched  and  bare. 
 The  southern  section — known  as  the  '  plain  of 
 Jericho ' — is  different  in  aspect.  Its  surface  is 
 covered  with  a  white  nitrous  crust,  like  hoar  frost, 
 through  which  not  a  blade  of  grass  or  green  herb 
 springs.  Nothing  could  be  imagined  more  dreary 
 or  desolate  than  this  part  of  the  plain. 
 
 Down  the  midst  of  the  plain  winds  a  ravine, 
 vai-ying  from  200  yards  to  half  a  mile  in  breadth, 
 and  from  40  to  150  feet  in  depth.  Through  this 
 the  Jordan  flows  in  a  tortuous  course,  now  sweep- 
 ing the  western,  and  now  the  eastern  bank  ;  now 
 making  a  wide,  graceful  curve,  and  now  doubling 
 Iiack  ;  but  eveiywhere  fringed  by  a  narrow,  dense 
 border  of  trees  and  shrubs.  The  river  has  thus 
 two  distinct  lines  of  banks.  The  first  or  lower 
 banks  confine  the  stream,  and  are  from  five  to  ten 
 feet  high,  the  height  of  course  decreasing  in  spring 
 when  the  river  is  high  ;  the  second  or  upper  are  at 
 some  distance  from  the  channel,  and  in  places  rise 
 to  a  height  of  150  feet.  The  scenery  of  the  river 
 is  peculiar  and  striking.  Lynch  thus  describes  the 
 ui)per  section  :  'The  liigh  alluvial  terraces  on  each 
 side  were  everywhere  shaped  by  the  action  of  the 
 winter  rains  into  numbers  of  conical  hills,  some  of 
 them  pyramidal  and  cuneiform,  presenting  the  ap- 
 pearance of  a  giant  encampment.  This  singular 
 conformation  extended  southward  as  far  as  the  eye 
 could  reach.  At  intervals  I  caught  a  glimpse  of 
 the  river  in  its  graceful  meanderings,  sometimes 
 glittering  like  a  spear-head  through  an  opening  in 
 the  foliage,  and  again  clasping  some  httle  island  in 
 its  shining  arms,  or,  far  away,  snapping  with  the 
 fierceness  and  white  foam  of  a  torrent  by  some  pro- 
 jecting point.  .  .  .  The  banks  were  fringed 
 ■>\  ith  the  laurustinus,  the  oleander,  the  willow,  and 
 the  tamarisk,  and  farther  inland,  on  the  slope  of 
 the  second  terrace,  grew  a  small  species  of  oak,  and 
 the  cedar.' 
 
 The  Jordan  issues  from  the  Sea  of  Galilee  close 
 to  the  hills  on  the  western  side  of  the  plain,  and 
 sweeps  round  a  little  peninsula,  on  which  lie  the 
 ruins  of  Taricha;a  [Handbook,  p.  321  ;  Robinson, 
 i-  53^)-  The  stream  is  about  100  feet  wide,  and 
 the  current  strong  (Lynch).  A  short  distance 
 down  are  the  remains  of  a  Roman  bridge,  whose 
 fallen  arches  greatly  obstruct  the  river,  and  make  it 
 dash  through  in  sheets  of  foam.  Below  this  are 
 several  weirs,  constructed  of  rough  stones,  and  in- 
 tended to  raise  the  water,  and  turn  it  into  canals, 
 so  as  to  irrigate  the  neighbouring  plain  (Molyneux). 
 Five  miles  from  the  lake  the  Jordan  receives  its 
 largest  tributary,  the  Shcriat  d-MaiidliAr  (the 
 Hicromax  of  the  Greeks),  v/hich  drains  a  large 
 section  of  Bashan  and  Gilead.  This  stream  is  130 
 feet  wide  at  its  mouth.  Two  miles  farther  is  Jisr 
 el-Mejamia,  the  only  bridge  now  standing  on  the 
 lower  Jordan.  It  is  a  quaint  structure  ;  one  large 
 pointed  arch  spanning  the  stream,  and  double  tiers 
 of  smaller  arches  supporting  the  roadway  on  each 
 side.  ^  The  river  is  here  deep  and  impetuous, 
 breaking  over  high  ledges  of  rocks. 
 
 Below  this  point  the  ravine  inclines  eastward  to 
 the  centre  of  the  plain,  and  its  banks  contract. 
 Its  sides  are  bare  and  \yhite.  and  the  chalky  strata 
 
 are  deeplv  furrowed.  The  margin  of  the  river  has 
 still  its  beautiful  fringe  of  foliage  ;  and  the  little 
 islets  which  occur  here  and  there  are  covered  with 
 shrubbeiy.  Fifteen  miles  south  of  the  bridge, 
 Wady  Ydbes  (so  called  from  y(Z(5t,'j/^-Gilead),  con- 
 taining a  winter  torrent,  falls  in  from  the  east. 
 A  short  distance  above  it  a  barren  sandy  island 
 divides  the  channel,  and  with  its  bars  on  each  side 
 forms  a  ford,  probably  the  one  by  which  Jacob 
 crossed,  as  the  site  of  Succoth  has  been  identified 
 on  the  western  bank  [Succoth].  The  plain  round 
 Succoth  is  extensively  cultivated,  and  abundantly 
 watered  by  fountains  and  streamlets  from  the 
 adjoining  mountains.  The  richness  of  the  soil  is 
 wonderful.  Dr.  Robinson  says,  '  the  grass  inter- 
 mingled with  tall  daisies,  and  wild  oats,  reached  to 
 our  horses'  backs  ;  while  the  thistles  sometimes 
 overtopped  the  riders'  heads.  All  was  now  dry, 
 and  in  some  places  it  vi'as  difficult  to  make  our  way 
 through  this  exuberant  growth'  (iii.  p.  313).  Jacob 
 exercised  a  wise  choice  when  '  he  made  booths  for 
 his  cattle'  at  this  favoured  spot  (Gen.  xxxiii.  17). 
 No  other  place  in  the  great  plain  equals  it  in  rich- 
 ness. The  ravine  of  the  Jordan  is  here  150  feet 
 below  the  plain,  and  shut  in  by  steep  bare  banks 
 of  chalky  strata  (Robinson,  I.e.,  p.  316). 
 
 About  nine  miles  below  Succoth,  and  about 
 half-way  between  the  lakes,  the  Jabbok,  the  only 
 other  considerable  tributary,  fahs  into  the  Jordan, 
 coming  down  through  a  deep  wild  glen  in  the 
 mountains  of  Gilead  Qabbok].  When  Lynch 
 passed  (April  17),  it  was  'a  small  stream  trickling 
 down  a  deep  and  wide  torrent  bed  .  .  .  There 
 was  another  bed,  quite  dry,  shewing  that  in  times 
 of  freshet  there  were  two  outlets.'  Lynch  gives 
 some  good  pictures  of  the  scenery  above  the  junc- 
 tion. '  The  plain  that  sloped  away  from  the  bases 
 of  the  hills  was  broken  into  ridges  and  multitudin- 
 ous cone-like  mounds  ...  A  low,  pale,  yellow 
 ridge  of  conical  hills  marked  the  termination  of  the 
 higher  terrace,  beneath  which  swept  gently  this 
 low  plain,  with  a  similar  undulating  surface,  half 
 redeemed  from  barrenness  by  sparse  verdure  and 
 thistle-covered  hillocks.  Still  lower  was  the  valley 
 of  the  Jordan — its  banks  fringed  with  perpetual 
 verdure — winding  a  thousand  graceful  mazes  .  .  . 
 its  course  a  bright  line  in  this  cheerless  waste.' 
 
 Below  the  Jabbok  the  fall  of  the  river  is  still 
 greater  than  above  ;  but  there  is  less  obstruction 
 from  rocks  and  cliffs.  The  jungles  along  the 
 banks  become  denser,  the  sides  of  the  river-glen 
 more  regular,  and  the  plain  above  more  dreary  and 
 desolate. 
 
 On  approaching  the  Dead  Sea,  the  plain  of  the 
 Jordan  attains  its  greatest  breadth — about  12  miles. 
 The  mountain  ranges  on  each  side  are  higher,  more 
 rugged,  and  more  desolate.  The  plain  is  coated 
 with  a  nitrous  crust,  like  hoar-frost ;  and  not  a 
 tree,  shrub,  or  blade  of  grass  is  seen  except  by 
 fountains  or  rivulets.  The  glen  winds  like  a  ser- 
 pent through  the  centre,  between  two  tiers  of 
 banks.  The  bottom  is  smooth,  and  sprinkled  on 
 the  outside  with  stunted  shrubs.  The  river  winds 
 in  ceaseless  coils  along  the  bottom,  now  touching 
 one  side  and  now  another,  with  its  beautiful  border 
 of  green  foliage,  looking  all  the  greener  from  con- 
 trast with  the  desert  above.  The  banks  are  of  soft 
 clay,  in  places  ten  feet  high  ;  the  stream  varies 
 from  80  to  150  feet  in  breadth,  and  from  5  to 
 12  in  depth.  Near  its  mouth  the  current  becomes 
 more  sluggish,  and  the  stream  expands.      When; 
 
JORDAN 
 
 643 
 
 JORDAN 
 
 Wady  Hesban  falls  in,  Lynch  found  the  river  150 
 feet  wide  and  II  deep,  'the  current  four  knots.' 
 Farther  down  the  banks  are  low  and  sedgy  ;  the 
 width  gradually  increases  to  180  yards  at  its  mouth  ; 
 but  the  depth  is  only  three  feet  (Lynch,  Official 
 Report,  Handbook,  pp.  195-197  ;  Robinson,  i.  538, 
 seq.  ;  Stanley,  p.  290). 
 
 Lynch  in  a  few  words  explains  the  secret  of  the 
 great  and  almost  incredible  fall  in  the  Jordan. 
 '  The  great  secret  is  solved  by  the  tortuous  course 
 of  the  Jordan.  In  a  space  of  60  miles  of  latitude, 
 and  four  or  five  of  longitude,  the  Jordan  traverses 
 at  least  200  miles  .  .  .  We  have  plunged  down 
 twenty-seven  threatening  rapids,  besides  a  great 
 many  of  lesser  magnitude.' 
 
 (In  addition  to  the  works  cited  on  the  physical 
 features  of  the  Jordan,  the  following  afford  impor- 
 tant information  : — Journal  of  R.  Geog.  Society, 
 xviii.,  part  2,  articles  by  Robinson,  Petermann, 
 and  Molyneux  ;  Berton  in  Btdletin  de  la  Soc.  Geo- 
 graph.  de  Paris,  xii.  166,  seq.  ;  Wildenbruch,  Mo- 
 natsberichte  der  GessellschaftfiirErdkitnde  zii  Berlin, 
 1845-46.  A  clear  summary  of  all  known  about  the 
 Jordan  up  to  1850  is  given  by  Ritter  in  Paldstina 
 utid  Syrien,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  152-556.  Where  facts 
 are  stated  and  scenery  is  described,  without  citing 
 authorities,  the  writer  is  giving  his  o\vn  personal 
 observations. ) 
 
 The  Fords  of  the  Jordan  have  always  been  im- 
 portant in  connection  with  the  history  of  the  country. 
 The  three  streams  which  flow  from  the  fountains 
 are  fordable  at  almost  every  point.  It  is  south  of 
 lake  Huleh  that  the  river  begins  to  form  a  serious 
 barrier.  The  bridge  called  Jisr  Bendt  YaMb  has 
 for  centuries  been  the  leading  pass  from  Western 
 Palestine  to  Damascus.  The  first  reference  to  it 
 is  in  A.D.  1450  {Reissbuch  des  Heil.  Landes,  p.  451 ; 
 Robinson,  ii.  441);  though,  as  early  as  the  Cru- 
 sades, a  '  Ford  of  Jacob '  ( Vadiiin  Jacob,  Will. 
 Tyr.  Hist,  xviii.  13)  is  mentioned,  and  was  rec- 
 koned a  most  important  pass.  The  bridge  was  pro- 
 bably built  during  the  15  th  century,  when  the 
 caravan  road  was  constructed  from  Damascus  to 
 Egypt  (Handbook,  ii.  466).  The  origin  of  the  name, 
 '  Bridge  of  Jacob's  daughters,'  is  unknown.  Per- 
 haps this  place  may  have  been  confounded  with  the 
 ford  of  Succoth,  where  the  patriarch  crossed  the 
 Jordan,  or  perhaps  the  'Jacob'  referred  to  was 
 some  Muslem  saint  or  Turkish  pasha  (Ritter,  Pal. 
 und Syr.,  269,  seq.) 
 
 Between  Bethsaida-Julias  and  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
 there  are  several  fords.  The  river  is  there  shallow 
 and  the  current  sluggish.  At  this  place  the  mul- 
 titudes that  followed  our  Lord  from  Capernaum 
 and  the  neighbourhood  were  able  to  cross  the  river 
 to  where  he  fed  the  5000  (Mark  vi.  32,  seq.  ;  Robin- 
 son, ii.  414). 
 
 The  first  ford  on  the  southern  section  of  the 
 Jordan  is  about  half  a  mile  from  the  lake,  where 
 the  ruins  of  the  Roman  bridge  now  lie.  It  was  the 
 means  of  communication  between  Tiberias  and 
 Gadara  ;  and  it  was  doubtless  at  this  point  our 
 Lord  crossed  when  he  went  from  Galilee  to 
 JudiKa  '  by  the  farther  side  of  Jordan'  (Mark  x.  i ; 
 Matt.  xix.  I,  2).  yisr  d-McjAmia  is  a  Saracenic 
 bridge  on  an  old  caravan  route  from  Damascus  to 
 Egypt.  Probably  a  Roman  bridge  may  have  stood 
 at  the  same  place,  connecting  Scythopolis  with  the 
 other  cities  of  Decapolis.  There  is  no  ford  here. 
 At  a  point  east  of  the  ruins  of  Scythopolis,  ten 
 miles  below  the  bridge,  the  river  is  now  fordable  ; 
 
 but  the  passage  is  deep  and  dangerous  (Robinson, 
 iii.  325  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  137). 
 
 At  Succoth  is  one  of  the  best  and  most  important 
 fords  over  the  Jordan.  Here  Jacob  crossed  with 
 his  cattle.  This,  too,  is  in  all  probability  the  Beth- 
 baj-ah,  '  house,  or  ford  of  passage,'  where  the  Is- 
 raelites intercepted  the  routed  Midianites  (Judg. 
 vii.  24).  It  is  still  the  place  at  which  the  eastern 
 Bedawin  cross  in  their  periodical  invasions  of  Es- 
 draelon.  From  Succoth  to  the  mouth  of  the 
 Jabbok  the  river  becomes  very  low  during  the 
 summer,  and  is  fordable  at  many  points.  At  one 
 spot  are  the  remains  of  a  Roman  bridge  (Moly- 
 neux, pp.  115,  seq.  ;  Lynch,  April  16  ;  Burckhardt, 
 pp.  344,  seq. )  Ten  miles  south  of  the  Jabbok  there 
 is  a  noted  ford  on  the  road  from  Nabulus  to  Es- 
 Salt.  Traces  of  a  Roman  road  and  bridge  were 
 here  discovered  by  Van  de  Velde  [Memoir,  p.  124). 
 The  only  other  fords  of  note  are  those  in  the  plain 
 of  Jericho,  one  above  and  one  below  the  pilgrims' 
 bathing-place.  They  are  much  deeper  than  those 
 higher  up,  and  when  the  river  is  swollen  they  be- 
 come impassable. 
 
 Historical  Notices. — The  first  notice  of  the  Jor- 
 dan is  in  the  story  of  the  separation  of  Abraham 
 and  Lot  ; — Lot  '  beheld  all  the  plain  of  Jordan, 
 that  it  was  well  watered  everywhere,  before  the 
 Lord  destroyed  Sodom  and  Gomorrah'  (Gen.  xiii. 
 10).  The  section  of  the  valley  visible  from  the 
 heights  of  Bethel,  where  the  patriarchs  stood,  was 
 the  plain  of  Jericho  and  southward  over  a  part  of 
 the  Dead  Sea.     The  '  plain,'  or  '  ci?rle''  ("133),  of 
 
 the  Jordan  must  have  been  different  then  from  what 
 it  is  now.  It  is  now  a  parched  desert — then  it  was 
 well  watered  everywhere.  The  waters  of  nume- 
 rous springs,  mountain  torrents,  and  probably  of 
 the  Jordan,  raised  by  weirs  such  as  are  seen  at  its 
 northern  end,  were  used  by  the  old  Phoenician  in- 
 habitants in  the  in-igation  of  the  vast  plain.  The 
 curse  had  not  yet  come  upon  it  ;  the  fire  of  heaven 
 had  not  yet  passed  over  it  ;  the  Lord  had  not  yet 
 destroyed  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  (Stanley,  p.  215). 
 It  is  manifest  that  some  great  physical  change  was 
 produced  in  the  valley  by  the  convulsion  at  the  de- 
 struction of  the  cities.  The  bed  of  the  Dead  Sea 
 was  probably  lowered,  and  a  greater  fall  thus  given 
 to  the  river  ;  but  this  subject  will  be  considered 
 elsewhere  [Sea].  . 
 
 Another  wonderful  epoch  in  the  Jordan's  history 
 was  the  passage  of  the  Israelites.  They  were  en- 
 camped on  the  'plains  of  Moab' — on  the  broad 
 plain  east  of  the  river,  extending  along  the  northern 
 shore  of  the  sea  to  the  foot  of  the  mountains.  It 
 was  harvest-time — the  beginning  of  April — when 
 the  rains  were  still  falling  heavily  in  Hermon,  and 
 the  winter  snows  were  melting  under  the  rays  of 
 the  warm  sun,  and  when  a  thousand  mountain 
 torrents,  thus  fed,  swept  into  the  Jordan,  and  made 
 it  '  overflow  all  its  banks  ; '  or,  as  the  Hebrew 
 literally  signifies,  made  it  'full  up  to  all  its  banks' 
 
 (Vnnr^^'^V  S^C  ;  see  Robinson,  B.  R.,  i.  540) ; 
 that  is,  perhaps,  up  not  merely  to  the  banks  of  the 
 stream  itself,  but  up  to  the  banks  of  the  glen  ; 
 covering,  as  it  still  does  in  a  few  places  (Molyneux, 
 p.  1x6  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  125),  the  whole 
 bottom  of  the  glen,  and  thus  rendering  the  fords 
 impassable  for  such  a  host  as  the  Israelites.  There 
 can  be  no  doubt  that  in  ancient  times  the  Jordan 
 rose  higher  than  it  does  now.  When  the  country 
 was  more  thickly  wooded,  and  more  extensively 
 
JORDAN 
 
 644 
 
 JOSEPH 
 
 cultivated,  more  rain  and  more  snow  must  have 
 fallen.  There  are  wet  seasons  even  yet,  when  the 
 river  rises  several  feet  more  than  ordinarily  (Reland, 
 p.  273  ;  Raumer,  Pal.,  p.  61,  2d  ed.)  The  open- 
 ing of  a  passage  through  the  river  at  such  a  season 
 was  the  greater  miracle.  Had  it  been  late  in 
 summer,  it  might  have  been  thought  that  natural 
 causes  operated  ;  but  in  harvest — the  time  of  the 
 overflow — the  finger  of  God  must  have  been  mani- 
 fest to  all.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  at  this 
 same  spot  the  Jordan  was  afterwards  twice  miracu- 
 lously opened— by  Elijah  and  Elisha  (2  Kings  ii. 
 8,  14). 
 
 At  a  later  period  it  was  considered  a  feat  of  high 
 daring  that  a  party  of  David's  '  mighty  men' 
 crossed  the  Jordan  'in  the  first  month  (April), 
 when  it  had  overflown  all  its  banks,'  and  subdued 
 their  enemies  on  the  east  side  (i  Chron.  xii.  15). 
 Jeremiah  speaks  of  the  lions  '  coming  up'  from  the 
 '  swellings  of  the  Jordan  ;'  but  the  Hebrew  word 
 jiW,  signifies  'beauty'  or  'glory;'  and  refers  to  the 
 
 dense  jungles  and  verdant  foliage  of  its  banks  ; 
 these  jungles  are  impenetrable  except  to  the  wild 
 beasts  that  dwell  there.  No  allusion  is  made  to 
 the  rise  or  overflow  of  the  river  (Gesenius,  Thesau- 
 rus, s.  V.  ;  Robinson,  i.  540).  The  writer  has 
 often  seen  wild  swine,  hysenas,  and  jackals,  and 
 also  the  tracks  of  panthers,  on  the  banks  of  the 
 Jordan  (cf  Molyneux,  p.  118). 
 
 The  passage  of  the  river  by  King  David  in  his 
 flight  from  Absalom  has  one  peculiarity— a  ferry- 
 boat was  used  to  convey  his  household  over  the 
 channel  (2  Sam.  xix.  18).  The  passage  was  pro- 
 bably  effected  at  one  of  the  fords  in  the  plain  of 
 Tericho.  The  word  may  simply  signifies  a  thing 
 for  crossing — it  may  have  been  a  '  boat,'  or  a 
 '  raft,'  or  a  few  inflated  skins,  such  as  are  repre- 
 sented on  the  monuments  of  Nineveh,  and  are  still 
 used  on  the  Euphrates  and  the  Jordan. 
 
 Naaman's  indignant  depreciation  of  the  Jordan, 
 as  compared  with  the  '  rivers  of  Damascus,'  is  well 
 known.  The  rivers  of  Damascus  water  its  great 
 plain,  converting  a  desert  into  a  paradise  ;  the 
 Jordan  rolls  on  in  its  deep,  deep  bed,  useless  to  the 
 Sea  of  Death. 
 
 The  great  event  of  the  N.  T.  history  enacted  at 
 the  Jordan,  was  the  baptism  of  our  Lord.  This  has 
 made  it  the  queen  of  rivers,  and  has  given  it  the 
 title  '  sacred.'  The  exact  spot  is  disputed.  The 
 topography  and  the  incidents  of  the  narrative,  both 
 before  and  after  the  baptism,  unquestionably  point 
 to  the  same  place,  already  famous  as  the  scene  of 
 three  miracles  {Handbook,  p.  198).  In  commemo- 
 ration of  the  baptism,  the  Christian  pilgrims  who 
 assemble  at  Jerusalem  at  Easter,  visit  the  Jordan 
 m  a  body  and  bathe  at  this  spot  '(Stanley,  p. 
 308). 
 
 The  references  to  the  Jordan  in  the  writmgs  of 
 Josephus  contain  nothing  of  importance  beyond 
 what  has  been  already  mentioned  in  connection 
 with  the  fountains  and  the  physical  features. 
 Greek  and  Roman  geographers  seem  to  have 
 known  but  little  of  the  river.  Pliny  praises  its 
 beauty,  and  states  that,  with  the  greatest  reluc- 
 tance, as  it  were,  it  moves  onward  toward  Asphal- 
 tites,  a  lake  of  gloomy  and  unpropitious  nature, 
 by  which  it  is  at  last  swallowed  up'  [H.  N.,  v. 
 15).  Strabo  makes  the  singular  assertion  that  it  is 
 '  navigated  upwards  with  vessels  of  burden  !'  Of 
 course,  he  can  only  refer  to  the  Sea  of  Galilee 
 
 (xvi.  2,  16).  Pausanias  tells  how  strangely  the 
 river  disappears  in  the  Dead  Sea  (book  v.  7.  4). 
 
 Such,  then,  is  the  river  Jordan,  without  any 
 parallel,  historical  or  physical,  in  the  whole  world. 
 A  complete  river  beneath  the  level  of  the  sea ! 
 Disappearing  in  a  lake  which  has  no  outlet,  which 
 could  have  none,  and  which  originated  in  a 
 miracle  !  Thrice  were  its  waters  divided  by  the 
 direct  agency  of  God,  that  his  servants  might  pass 
 in  safety  and  comfort.  ,  In  whatever  light  we 
 regard  it,  the  Jordan  stands  alone.  — J.  L.  P. 
 
 JORKOAM  (DVipT  ;  Sept. 'leKXdc;  Alex.  'lep- 
 
 Kadv),  a  place  of  which  Rekem,  a  descendant  of 
 Caleb,  was  chief  (l  Chron.  ii.  44).  From  the  form 
 of  the  word  in  the  LXX.,  Bertheau  conjectures 
 that  Djnp',  'Jokdea77i,  may  be  the  proper  reading. 
 Neither  name  has  been  identified  with  any  known 
 
 locality.       [JOKDEAM.] 
 
 JOSABAD.       [JOZABAD.] 
 
 JOSEPH  (PlD'T" ;    Sept.  'Ico<t#),  son  of  Jacob 
 
 and  Rachel,  born  under  peculiar  circumstances,  as 
 may  be  seen  in  Gen.  xxx.  22  ;  on  which  account, 
 and  because  he  was  the  son  of  his  old  age  (xxxvii. 
 3),  he  was  beloved  by  his  father  more  than  were 
 the  rest  of  his  children,  though  Benjamin,  as  being 
 also  a  son  of  Jacob's  favourite  wife,  Rachel,  was 
 in  a  peculiar  manner  dear  to  the  patriarch.  The 
 partiality  evinced  towards  Joseph  by  his  father  ex- 
 cited jealousy  on  the  part  of  his  brethren,  the  rather 
 that  they  were  born  of  different  mothers  (xxxvii.  2). 
 Joseph  had  reached  his  seventeenth  year,  having 
 hitherto  been  engaged  in  boyish  sports,  or  aiding 
 in  pastoral  duties,  when  some  conduct  on  the  part 
 of  '  the  sons  of  Bilhah  and  the  sons  of  Zilpah,  his 
 father's  wives,'  seems  to  have  been  such  as  in  the 
 opinion  of  Joseph  to  require  the  special  attention 
 of  Jacob,  to  whom,  accordingly,  he  communicated 
 the  facts.  This  regard  to  virtue,  and  this  mani- 
 festation of  filial  fidelity,  greatly  increased  his 
 brothers'  dislike,  who  henceforth  '  hated  him,  and 
 could  not  speak  peaceably  unto  him '  (xxxvii.  4). 
 Their  aversion,  however,  was  carried  to  the  highest 
 pitch  when  Joseph  acquainted  them  with  two 
 dreams  that  he  had  had,  to  the  effect — the  first, 
 that  while  he  and  they  were  binding  sheaves,  his 
 sheaf  arose  and  stood  erect,  while  theirs  stood 
 round  and  did  obeisance  to  his ;  the  second,  that 
 '  the  sun  and  the  moon  and  the  eleven  stars  paid  him 
 homage.'  These  dreams  appeared  to  indicate  that 
 Joseph  would  acquire  pre-eminence  in  the  family, 
 if  not  sovereignty ;  and  while  even  his  fathei  re- 
 buked him,  his  brothers  were  filled  with  envy. 
 Jacob,  however,  was  not  aware  of  the  depth  of 
 their  ill  will;  so  that  on  one  occasion,  having  a 
 desire  to  hear  intelligence  of  his  sons,  who  were 
 pasturing  their  flocks  at  a  distance,  he  did  not 
 hesitate  to  make  Joseph  his  messenger  for  that 
 purpose.  His  appearing  in  view  of  his  brothers 
 was  the  signal  for  their  malice  to  gain  head.  They 
 began  to  devise  means  for  his  immediate  destruc- 
 tion, which  they  would  unhesitatingly  have  effected, 
 but  for  his  half-brother,  Reuben,  who,  as  the 
 eldest  son,  might  well  be  the  party  to  interfere  on 
 behalf  of  Joseph.  A  compromise  was  entered 
 into,  in  virtue  of  which  the  youth  was  stripped  of 
 the  distinguishing  vestments  which  he  owed  to  his 
 father's  affection,  and  cast  into  a  pit.  Having 
 performed  this  evil  deed,  and  while  they  were  tak- 
 
JOSEPH 
 
 645 
 
 JOSEPH 
 
 ing  refreshment,  the  brothers  beheld  a  caravan  of 
 Arabian  merchants,  who  were  bearing  the  spices 
 and  aromatic  gums  of  India  down  to  the  well- 
 known  and  much-fiequented  mart,  Egypt.  Judah 
 on  this  feels  a  bitter  emotion  arise  in  his  mind,  and 
 proposes  that,  instead  of  allowing  Joseph  to  perish, 
 they  should  sell  him  to  the  merchants,  whose  trade 
 obviously  from  this  embraced  human  beings  as  well 
 as  spicery.  Accordingly  the  unhappy  young  man 
 was  sold  for  a  slave,  to  be  conveyed  by  his  masters 
 into  Egypt.  While  on  his  way  thither,  Reuben  re- 
 turned to  the  pit,  intending  to  rescue  his  brother, 
 and  convey  him  safely  back  to  their  father.  Joseph 
 was  gone.  On  which  Reuben  went  to  the  wicked 
 young  men,  who,  not  content  with  selling  a  brother 
 into  slavery,  determined  to  punish  their  father  for 
 his  partiality  towards  the  unoffending  sufferer. 
 With  this  view  they  dipped  Joseph's  party-coloured 
 garment  in  the  blood  of  a  kid  and  sent  it  to  Jacob, 
 in  order  to  make  him  believe  that  his  favourite 
 child  had  been  torn  to  pieces  by  some  wild  beast. 
 The  trick  succeeded,  and  Jacob  was  grieved  beyond 
 measure. 
 
 Meanwhile  the  merchants  sold  Joseph  to  Poti- 
 phar,  an  officer  of  Pharaoh's,  and  captain  of  the 
 royal  guard,  who  was  a  native  of  the  country.  It 
 is  by  no  means  easy  to  determine  who  at  this  time 
 was  the  Pharaoh,  or  ruling  monarch,  though,  what 
 is  far  more  important,  the  condition  of  the  country, 
 and  therein  the  progress  of  civilization,  are  in  cer- 
 tain general  and  important  features  made  clear  in 
 the  course  of  the  narration.  According  to  Syn- 
 cellus,  however,  the  general  opinion  in  his  day 
 was  that  the  sovereign's  name  who  ruled  Egypt 
 at  the  time  of  the  deportation  of  Joseph  was 
 Aphophis. 
 
 In  Potiphar's  house  Joseph  enjoyed  the  highest 
 confidence  and  the  largest  prosperity.  A  higher 
 power  watched  over  him  ;  and  whatever  he  under- 
 took succeeded,  till  at  length  his  master  gave 
 every  thing  into  his  hands.  The  Hebrew  race 
 have  always  been  remarkable  for  personal  beauty, 
 of  which  Joseph  seems  to  have  had  an  unusual 
 share.  This  fact  explains,  if  it  cannot  palliate, 
 the  conduct  of  Potiphar's  wife,  who  tried  every 
 means  to  bring  the  uncontaminated  and  pure- 
 minded  youth  to  fulfil  her  unchaste  desires.  Foiled 
 in  her  evil  wishes,  she  resolved  to  punish  Joseph, 
 who  thus  a  second  time  innocently  brings  on  him- 
 self the  vengeance  of  the  ill-disposed.  Charged 
 with  the  very  crime  to  which  he  had  in  vain  been 
 tempted,  he  is,  with  a  fickleness  characteristic  of 
 Oriental  lords,  at  once  cast  into  the  state  prison. 
 
 The  narrative,  which  is  obviously  constructed 
 in  order  to  shew  the  workings  of  divine  Providence, 
 and  may  not  impossibly  have  received  some  shape 
 or  hue  from  the  predominant  idea,  states,  however, 
 that  Joseph  was  not  left  without  special  aid,  in 
 consequence  of  which  he  gained  favour  with  the 
 keeper  of  the  prison  to  such  an  extent  that  every 
 thing  was  put  under  his  direction.  If  the  sudden- 
 ness and  magnitude  of  this  and  other  changes  in 
 the  lot  of  Joseph  should  surprise  any  one,  the  feel- 
 ing will  be  mainly  owing  to  his  want  of  acquaint- 
 ance with  the  manners  and  customs  of  the  East, 
 where  vicissitudes  not  less  marked  and  sudden 
 than  are  those  presented  in  our  present  history  are 
 not  uncommon  ;  for  those  who  come  into  the 
 charmed  circle  of  an  Eastern  court,  especially  if 
 they  are  persons  of  great  energy  of  character,  are 
 subject  to  the  most  wonderful  alternations  of  for- 
 
 tune, the  slave  of  to-day  being  the  vizier  of  to* 
 morrow. 
 
 Among  the  many  advantages  secured  to  pos 
 terity  by  this  interesting  and  admirable  narrative 
 regarding  the  patriarch  Joseph,  is  an  intimate  ac- 
 quaintance  (so  far  as  it  goes)  with  the  state,  at  the 
 time  to  which  it  refers,  of  civilization  in  Egypt. 
 In  the  part  at  which  we  are  now  arrived,  we  read 
 of  '  the  chief  of  the  butlers '  and  '  the  chief  of  the 
 bakers;'  officers  who  vouch,  by  the  duties  which 
 they  had  to  discharge,  for  the  advanced  and  com- 
 plex condition  of  society  in  which  their  services 
 were  required  and  supplied.  How  true  and  trust- 
 worthy, too,  the  Biblical  narrative  is,  may  be 
 learned  by  an  implication  which  is  here  offered. 
 The  head-butler  had  a  dream  in  which  he  saw  a 
 vine.  On  the  authority  of  Herodotus  and  others, 
 it  was  long  denied  that  the  vine  grew  in  Egypt  ; 
 and  if  so,  the  imagery  of  the  butler's  dream  would 
 hardly  have  been  appropriate.  Wilkinson,  however, 
 has  shewn  beyond  a  question  that  vines  did  grow 
 in  Egypt,  and  thus  not  only  removed  a  doubt,  but 
 given  a  positive  confirmation  of  the  sacred  record 
 {Maimers  of  the  Anc.  Egypt,  ii.  152). 
 
 The  two  regal  officers  just  mentioned  had,  while 
 in  prison  with  Joseph,  each  one  a  dream,  which 
 Joseph  inteqDreted  correctly.  The  butler,  whose 
 fate  was  auspicious,  promised  the  young  Hebrew 
 to  employ  his  influence  to  procure  his  restoration 
 to  the  free  air  of  day  ;  but  when  again  in  the 
 enjoyment  of  his  'butlership,'  'he  forgat '  Joseph 
 (xl. )  Pharaoh  himself,  however,  had  two  dreams, 
 which  found  in  Joseph  a  successful  expounder ; 
 for  the  butler  remembered  the  skill  of  his  prison- 
 companion,  and  advised  his  royal  master  to  put  it 
 to  the  test  in  his  own  case.  Pharaoh's  dream,  as 
 interpreted  by  Joseph,  foreboded  the  approach  of 
 a  seven  years'  famine  ;  to  abate  the  evils  of  which 
 Joseph  recommended  that  some  'discreet  and  wise' 
 man  should  be  chosen  and  set  in  full  power  over 
 the  land  of  Egypt.  The  monarch  was  alarmed, 
 and  called  a  council  of  his  advisers.  The  wisdom 
 of  Joseph  was  recognised  as  of  divine  origin  and 
 supereminent  value  ;  and  the  king  and  his  ministers 
 (whence  it  appears  that  the  Egyptian  monarchy — 
 at  Memphis — was  not  despotic,  but  constitutional) 
 resolved  that  Joseph  should  be  made  (to  borrow  a 
 term  from  Rome)  Dictator  in  the  approaching  time 
 of  need.  '  And  Pharaoh  said  unto  Joseph,  Foras- 
 much as  God  hath  shewed  thee  all  this,  there  is  none 
 so  discreet  and  wise  as  thou  art.  Thou  shalt  be  over 
 my  house,  and  according  unto  thy  word  shall  all 
 my  people  be  ruled  :  only  in  the  throne  will  I  be 
 greater  than  thou.  See,  I  have  set  thee  over  all 
 the  land  of  Egypt.  And  Pharaoh  took  off  his 
 ring  and  put  it  upon  Joseph's  hand,  and  arrayed 
 him  in  vestures  of  fine  linen,  and  put  a  gold  chain 
 about  his  neck  ;  and  he  made  him  to  ride  in  the 
 second  chaiiot  which  he  had ;  and  they  cried  be- 
 fore him.  Bow  the  knee.  And  Pharaoh  said  unto 
 Joseph,  I  am  Pharaoh,  and  without  thee  shall  no 
 man  lift  up  his  hand  or  foot  in  all  the  land  of 
 Egypt.  And  Pharaoh  called  Joseph's  name 
 Zaphnath-paaneah  ('saviour  of  the  world;'  comp. 
 Jablonsky,  Opusc.  i.  207,  sq. ) ;  and  he  gave  him 
 to  wife  Asenath,  the  daughter  of  Poti-pherah, 
 priest  of  On.  And  Joseph  went  out  over  all  the 
 land  of  Egypt'  (xli.  39,  .f^.)  It  has  been  sup- 
 posed that  Joseph  was  taken  into  the  priestly  order, 
 and  thus  ennobled.  The  Biblical  narrative  does 
 not  support  this  opinion,  though  it  leaves  it  with- 
 
JOSEPH 
 
 646 
 
 JOSEPH 
 
 out  a  doubt  that  in  reality,  if  not  in  form  as  well, 
 the  highest  trust  and  the  proudest  honours  of  the 
 state  were  conferred  on  one  so  recently  a  Hebrew 
 slave. 
 
 Seven  years  of  abundance  afforded  Joseph  op- 
 portunity to  carry  into  effect  such  plans  as  secured 
 an  ample  provision  against  the  seven  years  of  need. 
 The  famine  came,  but  it  found  a  prepared  people. 
 The  visitation  did  not  depend  on  any  mere  local 
 causes,  for  'the  famine  was  over  all  the  face  of 
 the  earth  ; '  '  and  all  countries  came  into  Egypt  to 
 Joseph  to  buy  corn'  (ver.  56,  57).  Among  these 
 customers  appeared  ten  brethren,  sons  of  the 
 Hebrew  Jacob.  They  had  of  necessity  to  appear 
 before  Joseph,  whose  licence  for  the  purchase  of  com 
 was  indispensable.  Joseph  had  probably  expected 
 to  see  them,  and  he  seems  to  have  formed  a  deli- 
 berate plan  of  action.  His  conduct  has  brought 
 on  him  the  always  ready  charges  of  those  who 
 would  rather  impeach  than  study  the  Bible,  and 
 even  friends  of  that  sacred  book  have  hardly  in 
 this  case  done  Joseph  full  justice  (Niemeyer, 
 Cka}'akt.  ii.  366 ;  Heuser,  Diss,  non  itihiimaniter 
 sed  frudeutissime  yoseplmm  cum  fratribiis  fe- 
 cisse,  Hal.  1773).  Joseph's  main  object  appears 
 to  have  been  to  make  his  brothers  feel  and  recog- 
 nise their  guilt  in  their  conduct  towards  him. 
 For  this  purpose  suffering,  then  as  well  as  now, 
 was  indispensable.  Accordingly  Joseph  feigned 
 not  to  know  his  brothers,  charged  them  with  being 
 spies,  threatened  them  with  imprisonment,  and 
 allowed  them  to  return  home  to  fetch  their  younger 
 brother,  as  a  proof  of  their  veracity,  only  on  condi- 
 tion that  one  of  them  should  remain  behind  in 
 chains,  with  a  prospect  of  death  before  him  should 
 not  their  words  be  verified.  Then  it  was,  and  not 
 before,  that  'they  said  one  to  another.  We  are 
 verily  guilty  concerning  our  brother,  in  that  we  saw 
 the  anguish  of  his  soul  and  would  not  hear  ;  there- 
 fore is  this  distress  come  upon  us.  And  Reuben 
 said.  Spake  I  not  unto  you,  saying.  Do  not  sin 
 against  the  child,  and  ye  would  not  hear  ?  there- 
 fore, behold  also  his  blood  is  required'  (xlii.  21). 
 On  which,  after  weeping  bitterly,  he  by  common 
 agreement  bound  his  brother  Simeon,  and  left  him 
 in  custody.  How  deeply  concerned  Joseph  was 
 for  his  family,  how  true  and  affectionate  a  heart  he 
 had,  may  be  learned  from  the  words  which  escape 
 from  the  brothers  in  their  entreaty  that  Jacob 
 would  allow  Benjamin  to  go  into  Egypt,  as  re- 
 quired by  Joseph  :  'The  man  asked  us  straitly  of 
 our  state  and  of  our  kindred,  saying,  Is  your  father 
 yet  ahve?  have  ye  another  brother?'  (xliii.  7).  At 
 length  Jacob  consents  to  Benjamin's  going  in  com- 
 pany with  his  brothers :  'And  God  Almighty  give  you 
 mercy  before  the  man,  that  he  may  send  away  your 
 other  brother,  and  Benjamin.  If  I  be  bereaved  of 
 my  children,  I  am  bereaved '  (ver.  14).  Thus  pro- 
 vided, with  a  present  consisting  of  balm,  honey, 
 spices  and  myrrh,  nuts  and  almonds,  and  with 
 double  money  in  their  hands  (double,  in  order  that 
 they  might  repay  the  sum  which  Joseph  had  caused 
 to  be  put  into  each  man's  sack  at  their  departure, 
 if,  as  Jacob  supposed,  '  it  was  an  oversight '),  they 
 went  again  down  to  Egypt  and  stood  before  Joseph 
 (xliii.  15) ;  and  there,  too,  stood  Benjamin,  Joseph's 
 beloved  brother.  The  required  pledge  of  truthful- 
 ness was  given.  If  it  is  asked  why  such  a  pledge 
 was  demanded,  since  the  giving  of  it  caused  pain 
 to  Jacob,  the  answer  may  be  thus :  Joseph  knew 
 not  how  to  demean  himself  towards  his  family  until 
 
 he  ascertained  Its  actual  condition.  That  know- 
 ledge he  could  hardly  be  certain  he  had  gained 
 from  the  mere  words  of  men  who  had  spared  his 
 life  only  to  sell  himself  into  slavery.  How  hftd 
 these  wicked  men  behaved  towards  his  venerable 
 father?  His  beloved  brother  Benjamin,  was  he 
 safe  ?  or  had  he  suffered  from  their  jealousy  and 
 maHce  the  vv^srse  fate  with  which  he  himself  had 
 been  thre^tsnftd  ?  Nothing  but  the  sight  of  Ben- 
 jamin could  answer  these  questions  and  resolve 
 these  doubts. 
 
 Benjamin  had  come,  and  immediately  a  natural 
 change  took  place  in  Joseph's  conduct  :  the  brother 
 began  to  claim  his  rights  in  Joseph's  bosom.  Jacob 
 was  safe,  and  Benjamin  was  safe.  Joseph's  heart 
 melted  at  the  sight  of  Benjamin  :  '  And  he  said  to 
 the  ruler  of  his  house.  Bring  these  men  home,  and 
 slay  and  make  ready,  for  these  men  shall  dine  with 
 me  at  noon'  (xliii.  16).  But  guilt  is  always  the 
 ready  parent  of  fear.  Accordingly  the  brothers 
 expected  nothing  but  being  reduced  to  slavery. 
 When  taken  to  their  own  brother's  house  they  ima- 
 gined they  were  being  entrapped.  A  colloquy  en- 
 sued between  them  and  Joseph's  steward,  whence 
 it  appeared  that  the  money  put  into  their  sacks,  to 
 which  they  now  attributed  their  peril,  was  in  truth 
 a  present  from  Joseph,  designed,  after  his  own 
 brotherly  manner,  to  aid  his  family  in  their  actual 
 necessities.  The  steward  said,  '  Peace  be  to  you, 
 fear  not :  your  God  and  the  God  of  your  father 
 hath  given  you  the  treasure  in  your  sacks.  I  had 
 your  money '  (ver.  23). 
 
 Noon  came,  and  with  it  Joseph,  whose  first  ques- 
 tion regarded  home  :  '  He  asked  them  of  their 
 welfare,  and  said.  Is  your  father  well,  the  old  man 
 of  whom  ye  spake  ?  is  he  yet  alive?  And  he  lifted 
 up  his  eyes  and  saw  his  brother  Benjamin,  his 
 mother's  son,  and  said,  Is  this  your  younger 
 brother  ?  And  he  said,  God  be  gracious  unto 
 thee,  my  son  ! '  '  And  Joseph  made  haste,  for  his 
 bowels  did  yearn  upon  his  brother,  and  he  sought 
 where  to  weep,  and  he  entered  into  his  chamber  and 
 wept  there.'     Does  this  look  like  harshness? 
 
 The  connection  brings  into  view  an  Egyptian 
 custom,  which  is  of  more  than  ordinary  importance, 
 in  consequence  of  its  being  adopted  in  the  Jewish 
 polity  :  '  And  they  set  on  (food)  for  him  by  him- 
 self (Joseph),  and  for  them  by  themselves  (the 
 brethren),  and  for  the  Egyptians  which  did  eat 
 with  them,  by  themselves  :  because  the  Egyptians 
 might  not  eat  bread  with  the  Hebrews ;  for  that  is 
 an  abomination  with  the  Egyptians'  (ver.  32). 
 This  passage  is  also  interesting,  as  proving  that 
 Joseph  had  not,  in  his  princely  grandeur,  become 
 ashamed  of  his  origin,  nor  consented  to  receive 
 adoption  into  a  strange  nation  :  he  was  still 
 a  Hebrew,  waiting,  like  Moses  after  him,  for  the 
 proper  season  to  use  his  power  for  the  good  of  his 
 own  people. 
 
 Other  customs  appear  in  this  interesting  narra- 
 tive :  '  And  they  (the  brothers)  sat  before  him 
 (Joseph),  the  first-born  according  to  his  birthright, 
 and  the  youngest  according  to  his  youth.'  'And 
 he  sent  messes  (delicacies)  unto  them  from  before 
 him  ;  but  Benjamin's  mess  was  five  times  so  much 
 as  any  of  theirs'  (ver.  32,  33).  Fear  had  now 
 given  place  to  wonder,  and  wonder  at  length 
 issued  in  joy  and  mirth  (comp.  ver.  18,  33,  34). 
 Thus  ended  the  second  act  in  the  drama.  Another 
 now  opens. 
 
 Joseph,  apparently  with  a  view  to  ascertain  how 
 
JOSEPH 
 
 647 
 
 JOSEPH 
 
 far  his  brethren  were  faithful  to  their  father,  hit 
 upon  a  plan  which  would  in  its  issue  serve  to  shew 
 whether  they  would  make  any,  and  what,  sacrifice, 
 in  order  to  fulfil  their  solemn  promise  of  restoring 
 Benjamin  in  safety  to  Jacob.  Accordingly  lie 
 orders  not  only  that  every  man's  money  (as  before) 
 should  be  put  in  his  sack's  mouth,  but  also  that 
 his  '  silver  cup,  in  which  my  lord  drinketh,  and 
 whereby  he  divmeth,'  should  be  put  in  the  sack's 
 mouth  of  the  youngest.  The  brethren  leave,  but 
 are  soon  overtaken  by  Joseph's  steward,  who 
 charges  them  with  having  surreptitiously  carried  otf 
 this  costly  and  highly-valued  vessel.  They  on 
 their  part  vehemently  repel  the  accusation,  adding, 
 '  With  whomsoever  of  thy  servants  it  be  found,  both 
 let  him  die,  and  we  also  will  be  my  lord's  bond- 
 men.' A  search  is  made,  and  the  cup  is  found  in 
 Benjamin's  sack.  Accordingly  they  return  to  the 
 city.  And  now  comes  the  hour  of  trial :  Would 
 they  purchase  their  own  liberation  by  surrendering 
 Benjamin?  After  a  most  touching  interview,  in 
 which  they  prove  themselves  worthy  and  faithful, 
 Joseph  declares  himself  unable  any  longer  to  with- 
 stand the  appeal  of  natural  affection.  On  this  oc- 
 casion Judah,  who  is  the  spokesman,  shews  the 
 deepest  regard  to  his  aged  father's  feelings,  and 
 entreats  for  the  liberation  of  Benjamin  even  at  the 
 price  of  his  own  liberty.  In  the  whole  of  litera- 
 ture we  know  of  nothing  more  simple,  natural, 
 true,  and  impressive ;  nor,  while  passages  of  this 
 kind  stand  in  the  Pentateuch,  can  we  even  under- 
 stand what  is  meant  by  termmg  that  collection  of 
 writings  'the  Hebrew  national  epic,'  or  regarding 
 it  as  an  aggregation  of  historical  legends.  If  here 
 we  have  not  history,  we  can  in  no  case  be  sure  that 
 history  is  before  us  (xliv. ) 
 
 Most  natural  and  impressive  is  the  scene  also 
 which  ensues,  in  which  Joseph,  after  informing  his 
 brethren  who  he  was,  and  inquiring,  first  of  all, 
 'Is  my  father  alive?'  expresses  feelings  free  from 
 the  slightest  taint  of  revenge,  and  even  shews  how, 
 under  Divine  Providence,  the  conduct  of  his 
 brothers  had  issued  in  good — '  God  sent  me  before 
 you  to  preserve  a  posterity  in  the  earth,  and  to 
 save  your  lives  by  a  great  deliverance.'  Five  years 
 had  yet  to  ensue  in  which  '  there  would  be  neither 
 earing  nor  harvest ;'  and  therefore  the  brethren 
 were  directed  to  return  home  and  bring  Jacob 
 down  to  Egypt  with  all  speed.  *  And  he  fell  upon 
 his  brother  Benjamin's  neck  and  wept  ;  and  Ben- 
 jamin wept  upon  his  neck.  Moreover,  he  kissed 
 all  his  brethren  and  wept  upon  them  ;  and  after 
 that  his  brethren  talked  with  him'  (xlv.  14,  15). 
 
 The  nevi^s  of  these  striking  events  was  carried  to 
 Pharaoh,  who  being  pleased  at  Joseph's  conduct, 
 gave  directions  that  Jacob  and  his  family  should 
 come  forthwith  into  Egypt — '  I  will  give  you  the 
 good  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  ye  shall  eat  the  fat 
 of  the  land  ;  regard  not  your  stuff,  for  the  good  of 
 all  the  land  is  yours.'  The  brethren  departed, 
 being  well  provided  for — '  And  to  his  father  Joseph 
 sent  ten  asses  laden  with  the  good  things  of  Egypt, 
 and  ten  she  asses  laden  with  corn  and  bread  and 
 meat  for  his  father  by  the  way.' 
 
 The  intelligence  which  they  bore  to  their  father 
 was  of  such  a  nature  that  'Jacob's  heart  fainted, 
 for  he  believed  them  not.'  When,  however,  he 
 had  recovered  from  the  thus  naturally  told  effects 
 of  his  surprise,  the  venerable  patriarch  said, 
 '  Enough  ;  Joseph  my  son  is  yet  alive :  I  will  go 
 and  see  him  before  I  die'  (xlv.  26,  28). 
 
 Accordingly  Jacob  and  his  family,  to  the  num 
 ber  of  threescore  and  ten  souls,  go  down  to  Egypt, 
 and  by  the  express  efforts  of  Joseph,  are  allowed 
 to  settle  in  the  district  of  Goshen,  where  Joseph 
 met  his  father  :  '  And  he  fell  on  his  neck,  and 
 wept  on  his  neck  a  good  while.'  There  Joseph 
 '  nourished  his  father  and  his  brethren,  and  all  his 
 father's  household,  with  bread,  according  to  their 
 families'  (xh'ii.  12). 
 
 Meanwhile  the  predicted  famine  was  pauperising 
 Egypt.  The  inhabitants  found  their  money  ex- 
 hausted, and  their  cattle  and  substance  all  gone, 
 being  parted  with  in  order  to  purchase  food  from 
 the  public  granaries,  until  at  length  they  had  no- 
 thing to  give  in  return  for  sustenance  but  them- 
 selves. '  Buy  us  ' — they  then  imploringly  said  to 
 Joseph — '  and  our  land  for  bread,  and  we  and  our 
 land  will  be  slaves  unto  Pharaoh.'  '  And  Joseph 
 bought  all  the  land  of  Egypt  for  Pharaoh,  so  the 
 land  became  Pharaoh's.  The  people,  too,  'Joseph 
 removed  to  cities  from  one  end  of  the  borders  of 
 the  land  to  the  other  end. '  Religion,  however,  was 
 too  strong  to  submit  to  these  political  and  social 
 changes,  and  so  the  priests  still  retained  their  land, 
 being  supplied  with  provisions  out  of  the  common 
 store  gratuitously.  The  land,  which  was  previously 
 the  people's  own,  was  now  let  to  them  on  a  tenancy, 
 at  the  rent  of  one-fifth  of  the  produce  :  the  land  of 
 the  priests  being  exempted. 
 
 This  is  one  of  the  greatest,  if  not  the  greatest, 
 social  revolution  recorded  in  history.  Under  the 
 pressure  of  famine  an  entire  nation  is  reduced  from 
 freedom  to  dependence ;  while  the  population, 
 which  had  been  ajiparently  limited  to  certain  dis- 
 tricts, was  distributed  all  over  the  land  on  different 
 spots. 
 
 At  this  distant  period  it  may  not  be  easy  to 
 understand  and  explain  the  entire  conduct  observed 
 by  Joseph  in  this  crisis  of  the  nation's  fate ;  but 
 we  must  protest  against  the  application  to  it  of 
 measures  of  judgment  which  are  derived  from 
 modern  notions,  and  the  pure  and  lofty  morality 
 of  the  Gospel.  If  a  great  change  was  suddenly 
 effected  in  the  social  condition  of  the  people,  we 
 are  not  hastily  to  conclude  that  the  change  was  for 
 tiie  worse,  es]iecially  considering  that  a  very  long 
 and  grievous  famine  had  afflicted  so  fertile  a  land 
 as  Egypt  under  the  previously  existing  social  con- 
 dition. And  if  an  opportunity  was  taken  to  in- 
 crease the  royal  power  over  the  nation,  it  cannot 
 be  denied  that  the  nation  was  saved  from  impend- 
 ing destruction  by  the  foresight,  wisdom,  and  bene- 
 volence of  the  Hebrew  vizier. 
 
 Joseph  had  now  to  pass  through  the  mournful 
 scenes  which  attend  on  the  death  and  burial  of  a 
 father.  Having  had  Jacob  embalmed,  and  seen 
 the  rites  of  mourning  fully  observed,  the  faithful 
 and  affectionate  son — leave  being  obtained  of  the 
 monarch — proceeded  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  in 
 order,  agreeably  to  a  promise  which  the  patriarch 
 had  exacted,  to  lay  the  old  man's  bones  with  those 
 of  his  fathers,  in  the  'field  of  Ephron  the  Hittite.' 
 Having  performed  with  long  and  bitter  mourning 
 Jacob's  funeral  rites,  Joseph  returned  into  Egypt. 
 The  last  recorded  act  of  his  life  forms  a  most  be- 
 coming close.  After  the  death  of  their  father,  his 
 brethren,  unable,  like  all  guilty  people,  to  forget 
 their  criminality,  and  characteristically  finding  it 
 difficult  to  think  that  Joseph  had  really  forgiven 
 them,  grew  afraid  now  they  were  in  his  power, 
 that  he  would  take  an   opportunity  of  inflicting 
 
JOSEPH 
 
 648 
 
 JOSEPH 
 
 some  punishment  on  them.  They  accordingly  go 
 into  his  presence,  and  in  imploring  terms  and  an 
 abject  manner,  entreat  his  forgiveness.  '  Fear  not ' 
 —this  is  his  noble  reply — '  I  will  nourish  you  ana 
 your  little  ones.' 
 
 Joseph  lived  an  hundred  and  ten  years,  kind  and 
 gentle  in  his  affections  to  the  last ;  for  we  are  told, 
 '  The  children  of  Machir,  the  son  of  Manasseh, 
 were  brought  up  upon  Joseph's  knees '  (1.  23).  And 
 so  having  obtained  a  promise  from  his  brethren, 
 that  when  the  time  came,  as  he  assured  them  it 
 would  come,  that  God  should  visit  them,  and 
 'bring  them  unto  the  land  which  he  sware  to 
 Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and  to  Jacob,'  they  would 
 carry  up  his  bones  out  of  Egypt,  Joseph  at  length 
 '  died,  and  they  embalmed  him,  and  he  was  put  in 
 a  coffin '  (1.  26).  This  promise  was  religiously  ful- 
 filled. His  descendants,  after  carrying  the  corpse 
 about  with  them  in  their  wanderings,  at  length  put 
 it  in  its  final  resting-place  in  Shechem,  in  a  parcel 
 of  ground  that  Jacob  bought  of  the  sons  of  Hamor, 
 which  became  the  inheritance  of  the  children  of 
 Joseph  (Josh.  xxiv.  32). 
 
 By  his  Egyptian  wife  Asenath,  daughter  of  the 
 high-priest  of  Heliopolis,  Joseph  had  two  sons, 
 Manasseh  and  Ephraim  (Gen.  xli.  50,  seq.),  whom 
 Jacob  adopted  (Gen.  xlviii.  5),  and  who  accord- 
 ingly took  their  place  among  the  heads  of  tke 
 twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  Among  other  authorities 
 the  following  may  be  consulted  : — Wolfenb.  Frag- 
 meni ;  Less,  Geschichte  der  Rel.  i.  267  ;  J.  T. 
 Jacobi,  Sdmmil.  Sclinft.  3  thl.  ;  Hess,  Gesch.  der 
 Palriarch.  ii.  324 ;  Niemeyer,  Charakt.  ii.  340  ; 
 All^.  Welthist.  ii.  322;  Heeren,  Ideen.  ii.  551. — 
 J.  R.  B. 
 
 JOSEPH,  '  the  husband  of  Mary,  of  whom  was 
 born  Jesus,  who  is  called  Christ '  (Matt.  i.  16).  By 
 Matthew  he  is  said  to  have  been  the  son  of  Jacob, 
 whose  lineage  is  traced  by  the  same  writer  through 
 David  up  to  Abraham.  Luke  represents  him  as 
 being  the  son  of  Heli,  and  traces  his  origin  up  to 
 Adam.  This  is  not  the  place  to  attempt  to  recon- 
 cile these  two  accounts,  as  it  would  lead  to  discus- 
 sion and  detail,  for  which  we  have  not  space  :  but 
 it  may  be  mentioned  that  Luke  appears  to  have  had 
 some  specific  object  in  view,  since  he  introduces  his 
 genealogical  line  with  words  of  peculiar  import : — 
 'Jesus  being  (as  was  supposed)  the  son  of  Joseph, 
 which  was  the  son  of  Heli'  (Luke  iii.  23)  —  ojs 
 iyoij.i^€To,  'as  was  supposed,'  in  other  terms,  as 
 accounted  by  law,  as  enrolled  in  the  family  re- 
 gisters ;  for  Joseph,  being  the  husband  of  Mary, 
 became  thereby,  in  law  (vdfios),  the  father  of  Jesus. 
 And  as  being  the  legal  father  of  Jesus,  he  might 
 have  his  origin  traced  in  the  line  of  Mary's  family, 
 as  well  as  in  that  of  his  own. 
 
 The  statements  of  Holy  Writ  m  regard  to 
 Joseph  are  few  and  simple.  According  to  a  custom 
 among  the  Jews,  traces  of  which  are  still  found, 
 such  as  hand-fasting  among  the  Scotch,  and  be- 
 trothing among  the  Germans,  Joseph  had  pledged 
 his  faith  to  Maiy  ;  but  before  the  marriage  was 
 consummated  she  proved  to  be  with  child.  Grieved 
 at  this,  Joseph  was  disposed  to  break  off  the  con- 
 nection ;  but,  not  wishing  to  make  a  public  ex- 
 ample of  one  whom  he  loved,  he  contemplated  a 
 private  disruption  of  their  bond.  From  this  step, 
 however,  he  is  deterred  by  a  heavenly  messenger, 
 who  assures  him  that  Mary  has  conceived  under 
 a  divine  influence.     'And  she  shall  bring  forth  a 
 
 son,  and  thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus ;  for  he 
 shall  save  his  people  from  their  sins'  (Matt.  i.  18, 
 sq. ;  Luke  i.  27).  To  this  account  various  objec- 
 tions have  been  taken  ;  but  most  of  them  are 
 drawn  from  the  ground  of  a  narrow,  short-sighted, 
 and  half-informed  rationalism,  which  judges  eveiy- 
 Ihing  by  its  own  small  standard,  and  either  denies 
 miracles  altogether,  or  admits  only  such  miracles 
 as  find  favour  in  its  sight ;  attempting  not  to  learn 
 what  Christianity  is,  nor  what  was  suitable  and 
 proper  in  the  days  of  Christ,  but  to  construct  a 
 Christianity  of  its  own,  and  then  to  impose  the  new 
 creation  on  the  writers  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  pri- 
 mitive church. 
 
 Joseph  was  by  trade  a  carpenter,  in  which  busi- 
 ness he  probably  educated  Jesus.  In  Matt.  xiii. 
 55,  we  read,  '  Is  not  this  the  son  of  the  carpenter?' 
 and  in  Mark  vi.  3,  '  Is  not  this  the  carpenter,  the 
 son  of  Mary  ?  '  The  term  employed,  reKTwv,  is  of 
 a  general  character  (from  revxc^,  'I  form'),  and 
 may  be  fitly  rendered  by  the  English  word  '  arti- 
 ficer' or  'artizan,'  signifying  any  one  that  labours 
 in  the  y^z/v/cation  {faber  in  Latin)  of  articles  of 
 ordinary  use,  whatever  the  material  may  be  out  of 
 which  they  are  made.  Accordingly,  sometimes  it 
 denotes  a  smith  as  well  as  a  carpenter  or  joiner, 
 and  in  the  Septuagint  the  additional  term  'iron' 
 {cnhripov)  or  '  wood '  [tvKijiv)  is  employed,  in  order 
 to  denote  its  specific  application.  If  some  doubt 
 may  exist  whether  '  carpenter '  is  the  necessary 
 rendering  of  the  word  when  applied  to  Joseph,  yet 
 there  is  no  impropriety  in  that  rendering,  for  not 
 seldom  the  word,  when  used  without  any  explana- 
 tory addition,  has  that  signification.  Schleusner 
 {ill  voc. )  asserts  that  the  universal  testimony  of  the 
 ancient  church  represents  our  Lord  as  being  a  car- 
 penter's son.  This  is,  indeed,  the  statement  of 
 Justin  Martyr  {Dial,  cum  TrypJwne,  sec.  88),  for 
 he  explains  the  term  riKrwv,  which  he  applies 
 to  Jesus,  by  saying  that  he  made  Stporpa  Kal 
 tvyd,  plo7(ghs  and  yokes  ;  but  Origen  in  replying  to 
 Celsus,  who  indulged  in  jokes  against  the  humble 
 employment  of  our  Lord,  expressly  denied  that 
 Jesus  was  so  termed  in  the  Gospels  (see  the  pas- 
 sage cited  in  Otho's  yicstiti  Martyr,  tom.  ii.  p.  306, 
 Jenre  1843) — a  declaration  which  suggests  the  idea 
 that  the  copies  which  Origen  read  differed  from 
 our  own  ;  while  Hilarius,  on  Matthew  (quoted  in 
 Simon's,  Diciionnaire  de /a  BiMe,  i.  691),  asserts,  in 
 terms  which  cannot  be  mistaken,  that  Jesus  was  a 
 smith  {ferrjim  igncvinccntis,  massamqitefonnantis, 
 etc.)  Of  the  same  opinion  was  the  venerable 
 Bede  ;  while  others  have  held  that  our  Lord  was  a 
 mason,  and  Cardinal  Cajetan  that  he  was  a  gold- 
 smith. 
 
 The  last  notion  probably  had  its  origin  in  those 
 false  associations  of  more  modern  times  which  dis- 
 parage hand-labour.  Among  the  ancient  Jews  all 
 handicrafts  were  held  in  so  much  honour,  that 
 they  were  learned  and  pursued  by  the  first  men  ot 
 the  nation. 
 
 Jewish  tradition  {Hieros.  Schaph.  c.  14)  names  the 
 father  of  Jesus  J^T'l^D,  Phenedira,  and  represents 
 him  (Orig.  c.  Cels.  \.  31)  as  a  rough  soldier,  who 
 became  the  father  of  Jesus,  after  Mary  was  be- 
 trothed to  Joseph.  Another  form  of  the  legend 
 sets  him  forth  {Tolcd.  Jeschu,  p  3,  ed.  Wagenseil ; 
 Epiphan.  H(Tr.  78.  7)  under  the  name  of  Pandira. 
 Christian  tradition  makes  Joseph  an  old  man  when 
 first  espoused  to  Mary  (Epiphan.  Hccr.  78.  7), 
 being  no  less  than  eighty  years  of  age,  and  falher 
 
JOSEPH  OF  ARIMATHEA 
 
 649 
 
 JOSEPH  CALLED  BARSABAS 
 
 of  four  sons  and  two  daughters.  [Conip.  the  Apo- 
 cryphal Gospels,  especially  the  Pivtavaitoelitim  ya- 
 cobi,  whence  all  the  traditionary  stories  concerning 
 Christ  are  derived.]  Theophylact,  on  Matt.  xiii. 
 55,  says  that  Jesus  Christ  had  brothers  and  sisters, 
 all  children  of  Joseph,  whom  he  had  by  his  sister- 
 in-law,  wife  of  his  brother  Cleophas,  who  having 
 died  without  issue,  Joseph  was  obliged  by  law  to 
 marry  his  widow.  Of  the  sons,  James,  the  brother 
 of  the  Lord,  was,  he  states,  the  first  bishop  of 
 Jerusalem.  Eusebius  [Hist.  Eccles.  ii.  i)  agrees  in 
 substance  with  Theophylact ;  so  also  does  Epi- 
 phanius,  adding  that  Joseph  was  fourscore  years 
 old  when  he  married  Mary.  Jerome,  from  whom 
 it  appears  that  the  alleged  mother's  name  was 
 Escha,  opposes  this  tradition,  and  is  of  opinion 
 that  what  are  termed  the  brothers  of  Jesus  were 
 really  his  cousins.  The  painters  of  Christian  anti- 
 quity conspire  with  the  writers  in  representing 
 Joseph  as  an  old  man  at  the  period  of  the  birth  of 
 our  Lord — an  evidence  which  is  not  to  be  lightly  re- 
 jected, though  the  precise  age  mentioned  may  be 
 but  an  approximation  to  fact. 
 
 Another  account  (Niceph.  ii.  3)  gives  the  name 
 of  Salome  as  that  of  Joseph's  first  wife,  who  was 
 related  to  the  family  of  John  the  Baptist. 
 
 It  is  not  easy  to  determine  when  Joseph  died. 
 That  event  may  have  taken  place  before  Jesus  en- 
 tered on  his  public  ministry.  This  has  been  argued 
 from  the  fact,  that  his  mother  only  appeared  at  the 
 feast  at  Cana  in  Galilee.  The  premises,  however, 
 hardly  bear  out  the  inference.  With  more  force  of 
 argument,  it  has  been  alleged  (Simon,  Diet,  de  la 
 Bible)  that  Joseph  must  have  been  dead  before  the 
 crucifixion  of  Jesus,  else  he  would  in  all  probability 
 have  appeared  with  Mary  at  the  cross.  Certainly 
 the  absence  of  Joseph  from  the  public  life  of  Christ, 
 and  the  absence  of  reference  to  him  in  the  dis- 
 courses and  history,  while  '  Mary '  and  '  his 
 brethren '  not  unfrequently  appear,  afford  evidence 
 not  only  of  Joseph's  death,  but  of  the  inferior  part 
 which,  as  the  legal  father  only  of  our  Lord, 
 Joseph  might  have  been  expected  to  sustain.  So 
 far  as  our  scanty  materials  enable  us  to  form  an 
 opinion,  Joseph  appears  to  have  been  a  good, 
 kind,  simple-minded  man,  who,  while  he  afforded 
 aid  in  protecting  and  sustaining  the  family,  would 
 leave  Mary  unrestrained  to  use  all  the  impressive 
 and  formative  influence  of  her  gentle,  affectionate, 
 pious,  and  thoughtful  soul.  Those  who  may  wish 
 to  pursue  this  subject  in  its  details,  we  refer  to  the 
 following  works  : — J.  T.  Meyer,  Num  yos.  tempore 
 Nativ.  C.  fuerit  senex  decTepitiis ;  Hist,  yoseph. 
 fabri  lif^nar.,  Arab.  ed.  G.  Wallin,  a  Latin  trans- 
 lation of  which  may  be  found  in  Fabricii  Pseiide- 
 pigr.  i.  309.  [The  original,  with  a  translation  and 
 notes,  is  given  in  Hirtii  Aniholog.  Arab.,]en.  1774, 
 p.  41 J  The  traditions  respecting  Joseph  are 
 collected  in  Act.  Sanct.  iii.  p.  4,  sq.;  there  is  a  Life 
 of  Joseph  written  in  Italian  by  Affaitati. — J.  R.  B. 
 
 JOSEPH  OF  ARIMATHEA.  The  name 
 Arimathea  denotes  probably  the  place  where 
 Joseph  was  born,  not  that  where  he  resided.  We 
 make  this  remark  because  Michaelis  [Begi-iibiiiss- 
 und  auferstehnngs-gesch.  Ckristi,  p.  44,  translated 
 into  English)  states  it  as  his  opinion  that  it  was  un- 
 likely that  Joseph  possessed  a  burial-place  in  or 
 near  Jerusalem,  since  that  city  was  not  his  ordinary 
 abode.  So  easy  is  it  to  be  led  away  by  modem 
 associations  in  interpreting  the  Scripture  that  even 
 
 a  man  of  Michaelis'  learning  could  allow  Germany 
 to  overpower  Palestine,  and  modern  days  to  give 
 their  colouring  to  ancient  ones,  and  thus  hold  that 
 '  of  Arimathea  '  must  of  necessity  denote  the  resi- 
 dence and  not  the  birth-place  of  Joseph  ;  whereas 
 a  little  reflection  might  have  taught  him  that  in 
 a  measure  in  his  own  times,  and  fully  so  in  the 
 days  of  our  Lord,  such  a  form  of  speech  indicated 
 rather  a  man's  birth-place  than  his  customary 
 abode. 
 
 Arimathea  lay  in  the  territory  of  Benjamin,  on 
 the  mountain  range  of  Ephraim,  at  no  great  dis- 
 tance south  of  Jerusalem  (Josh,  xviii.  25  ;  Judg. 
 iv.  5),  not  far  from  Gibeah  (Judg.  xix.  13  ;  Is.  x. 
 29  ;  Hos.  v.  8). 
 
 Joseph  was  a  secret  disciple  of  Jesus—'  an 
 honourable  counsellor  {^ovKevT-qs),  who  waited  for 
 the  kingdom  of  God'  (Mark  xv.  43),  and  who,  on 
 learning  the  death  of  our  Lord,  '  came  and  went 
 in  boldly  unto  Pilate,  and  craved  the  body  of 
 Jesus.'  Pilate  having  learned  from  the  centurion, 
 who  commanded  at  the  execution,  that  'Jesus  was 
 actually  dead,'  gave  the  body  to  Joseph,  who  took 
 it  down  and  wrapped  his  deceased  Lord  in  fine 
 linen  which  he  had  purchased  for  the  purpose  ; 
 after  which  he  laid  the  corpse  in  a  sepulchre 
 which  was  hewn  out  of  a  rock,  and  rolled  a  stone 
 unto  the  door  of  the  sepulchre  (Mark  xv.  43,  seq.) 
 From  the  parallel  passages  in  Matthew  (xxvii.  57, 
 seq.),  Luke  (xxiii.  50,  seq.),  and  John  (xix.  38, 
 seq.),  it  appears  that  the  body  was  previously  em- 
 balmed at  the  cost  of  another  secret  disciple, 
 Nicodemus,  and  that  the  sepulchre  was  new, 
 '  wherein  never  man  before  was  laid  ;'  also  that  it 
 lay  in  a  garden,  and  was  the  property  of  Joseph 
 himself  This  garden  was  '  in  the  place  where 
 Jesus  was  crucified.'  Luke  describes  the  character 
 of  Joseph  as  '  a  good  man  and  a  just,'  adding  that 
 '  he  had  not  consented  to  the  counsel  and  deed  of 
 them,'  i.e.,  of  the  Jewish  authorities.  From  this 
 remark  it  is  clear  that  Joseph  was  a  member  of  the 
 Sanhedrim  :  a  conclusion  which  is  corroborated  by 
 the  epithet  '  counsellor,'  applied  to  him  by  both 
 Luke  and  Mark.  Whether  or  not  Joseph  was  a 
 priest,  as  Lightfoot  [Hor.  Heb.  p.  669)  thought, 
 there  is  not  evidence  to  determine.  Various 
 opinions  as  to  his  social  condition  may  be  found 
 in  Thiess  [Krit.  Comment,  ii.  149).  Tradition 
 represents  Joseph  as  having  been  one  of  the 
 Seventy,  and  as  having  first  ]ireached  the  Gospel 
 in  our  own  country  (Ittig,  Diss,  de  Pat.  Apostol., 
 sec.  13  ;  Assemani,  Biblioth.  Orient,  iii.  I.  319, 
 seq.)     [Golgotha.] — J.  R.  B. 
 
 JOSEPH  CALLED  BARSABAS  was  one  of  the 
 two  persons  whom  the  primitive  church,  immedi- 
 ately after  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  nominated, 
 praying  that  the  Holy  Spirit  would  show  which  of 
 them  should  enter  the  apostolic  band  in  place  of 
 the  wretched  Judas.  On  the  lots  being  cast,  it 
 proved  that  not  Joseph,  but  Matthias,  was  chosen. 
 
 Joseph  bore  the  honourable  surname  of  Justus, 
 which  was  not  improbably  given  him  on  account 
 of  his  well-known  probity.  He  was  one  of  those 
 who  had  '  companied  with  the  Apostles  all  the 
 time  that  the  Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out  amongst 
 them,  beginning  from  the  baptism  of  John,'  until 
 the  ascension  (Acts  i.  15,  seq.)  Tradition  also 
 accounted  him  one  of  the  Seventy  (Euseb.  Hist. 
 Eccles.  i.  12).  The  same  historian  relates  (iii.  39), 
 on  the  authority  of  Papias,  tliat  Joseph  the  Just 
 
JOSEPH  B.  CHIJA 
 
 650 
 
 JOSEPH  B.  SHEMTOV 
 
 '  drank  deadly  poison,  and  by  the  grace  of  God 
 sustained  no  harm.'  It  has  been  maintained  that 
 he  is  the  same  as  Joses  surnamed  Barnabas,  men- 
 tioned in  Acts  iv.  36  (Heinrichs,  C«  Acts  i.  23  ; 
 Ullmann,  in  the  Theolog.  Stud,  und  Kritik,  i.  377) ; 
 but  the  manner  in  whicli  the  latter  is  characterized 
 seems  to  point  to  a  different  person. — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 JOSEPH  B.  CHIJA  (N''''n  "12  PlDVI),  also 
 called  Joseph  Coeais  =  "linj  ''JD,  great  in  light,  a 
 euphemic  antiphrasis  for  a  pious  blind  man,  in 
 the  Talmud  is  simply  styled  R.  Joseph.  This  dis- 
 tinguished president  of  the  College  at  Pumbadita, 
 and  reputed  translator  of  the  Hagiographa  into 
 Chaldee,  was  born  in  Babylon  about  A.  D.  270.  He 
 was  a  disciple  of  Jehudah  b.  Jecheskel,  founder  and 
 president  of  the  College  at  Pumbadita,  and  fellow- 
 student  of  the  celebrated  Rabba  b.  Nachmani, 
 commonly  called  Rabba,  the  reputed  author  of  the 
 Midrash  Rabba,  or  the  traditional  commentaiy  on 
 Genesis,  with  whom  he  formed  an  intimate  friend- 
 ship which  lasted  all  their  lifetime.  At  the  death 
 of  their  teacher  (a.D.  299)  both  disciples  were 
 named  by  the  students  as  successors  to  the  presi- 
 dency of  the  college,  but  both  of  them  declined  the 
 honour,  whereupon  Chasda  was  elected,  and  when, 
 after  occupying  this  high  position  for  two  years, 
 Chasda  died,  Rabba  and  Joseph  were  again  respect- 
 ively urged  to  take  this  office.  Joseph  again 
 refused  the  office,  but  his  friend  Rabba  accepted  it 
 (a.D.  309),  and  when,  after  holding  it  for  about 
 twenty-two  years,  he  died,  Joseph  at  last  yielded  and 
 was  installed  as  president  of  the  College  at  Pum- 
 badita about  330 ;  but  he  was  not  permitted  to 
 occupy  long  this  distinguished  position,  for  he  died 
 in  the  third  year  of  his  Rectorate,  about  A.  D.  333 
 [Education].  His  learning  was  so  extensive,  and 
 his  knowledge  of  the  traditional  lore  was  so  pro- 
 found, that  he  obtained  the  appellation  of  Sinai 
 ("'J''D),  that  is,  one  who  is  acquainted  with  all  the 
 traditions  in  succession  since  the  giving  of  the 
 Law  on  Sinai  (Horajoth  14,  a ;  Sanhedrim  42, 
 a).  One  of  his  favourite  studies  was  the  Jewish 
 Theosophy,  the  mysteries  of  which,  being  con- 
 tained in  the  vision  of  Ezekiel  respecting  the 
 throne  of  God  (H^DID  nC'J?D),  he  endeavoured 
 to  propound  (Chagiga  18,  a).  Another  depart- 
 ment of  his  studies,  which  is  of  great  interest 
 to  the  Biblical  student,  was  the  rendering  of 
 the  Hebrew  Scriptures  in  Chaldee.  From  the 
 twelve  passages  of  his  version  which  are  quoted  in 
 the  Talmud  (compr  Moed  Katon  26,  a  ;  Pesachim 
 68,  a;  Menachoth  no,  a;  Joma  32,  b;  77,  b; 
 Aboda  Sara  44,  a  ;  Kiddushin  13,  a ;  72,  b ; 
 Nedarim  38,  a  ;  Baba  Kama  3,  b  ;  Berachoth  28, 
 a)  it  is  evident  that  he  translated  Kings,  Isaiah, 
 Jeremiah,  Hosea,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Zephaniah,  and 
 Zechariah,  since  these  passages  are  from  these 
 books,  and  are  distinctly  cited  with  the  declara- 
 tion ^DV  m  DJIDDia,  as  R.  Joseph  has  rendered 
 it  into  Chaldee.  These  renderings  are  almost 
 exactly  the  same  that  are  given  in  the  Targtim  of 
 Jonathan  b.  Uzziel,  a  fact  which  has  led  some  to 
 suppose  that  this  Targum  ascribed  to  Jonathan 
 is  in  reality  Joseph's.  But  there  is  no  necessity  for 
 such  a  conclusion,  since  we  are  expressly  told  that 
 Jonathan's  Targum  embodied  the  traditional  ren- 
 derings of  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi  [Jona- 
 than B.  Uzziel],  and  that  Joseph  also  was  the 
 depository  of  the  ancient  traditions.  The  identity 
 of  the  renderings  is  therefore  to  be  ascribed  to  the 
 
 identity  of  the  ancient  source  from  which  both  para- 
 phrasts  drew  their  information.  That  a  Chaldee 
 paraphrase  of  the  Prophets  existed  before  Joseph 
 made  his,  is  moreover  evident  from  the  fact  that  he 
 himself  declares  on  several  occasions,  when  dis- 
 cussing the  meaning  of  a  difficult  passage  in  the 
 
 Scriptures,  NjyT'  nin  \<h  K"ip  \sm  XDUin  ^h'oh^ 
 
 ~\t2^\>  "'XO,  ^ifwe  had  not  the  Idrginn  on  this  pas- 
 sage we  should  not  know  what  it  means''  (Sanhedrin 
 94,  a  ;  Moed  Katon  28,  b  ;  Megilla  3,  a).  But 
 though  the  quotations  in  the  Talmud  from  Joseph's 
 Chaldee  paraphrase  are  restricted  to  the  Prophets, 
 yet  the  version  in  our  Rabbinic  and  Polyglott  Bibles, 
 which  is  now  ascribed  to  him,  is  that  of  the  Hagio- 
 grapha, i.  e. ,  Psalms,  Proverbs,  and  Job.  Rashi 
 on  Kiddushin  13  a,  and  Tossafoth  on  Baba  Kama, 
 indeed  deny  that  he  made  any  Chaldee  para- 
 phrase at  all,  and  say  that  he  was  simply  conver- 
 sant with  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  b.  Uzziel  on  the 
 
 prophets  (jn:jr  DJ-iDK'  D^N^nj  DiJ-ina  •'pa  n\m 
 
 PX"'Ty  p),  but  this  is  contrary  to  the  meaning  of  the 
 phrase  IDT*  21  Ui'\r\^12,  as  J'oseph  translates,  ^.vith 
 which  the  quotations  from  his  Targum  are  always 
 introduced.  In  his  advanced  life  Joseph  became 
 totally  blind  and  also  lost  his  memory,  which 
 greatly  afflicted  him  and  ruffled  his  temper,  as  he 
 could  not  remember  his  own  sayings  ahout  the 
 traditions  of  the  fathers  (Erub.  10,  a  ;  Nedarim 
 41,  a;  Baba  Bathra  134,  b;  Pesachim  113,  b; 
 Succa  29,  a). 
 
 His  paraphrase  on  the  Hagiographa  is  contained 
 in  all  the  Rabbinic  Bibles,  and  is  given  with  a  Latin 
 translation  in  the  Polyglotts  of  Antwerp  (1572), 
 Paris  (1645),  London  (1657),  etc.  Comp.  Bar- 
 tolocci,  Bibliotheca  Magna  Rabbin ica,  vol.  iii.,  p. 
 814;  Wolf,  Bibliotheca  Hebnra,  vol.  ii.,  p.  1171- 
 1181;  Zunz,  Die  Gottesdienstlichen  Vortrdge  der 
 Juden,  Berhn  1832,  p.  65,  etc.;  Fiirst,  Kiiltur und 
 Literaturgeschichte  der  Juden  i}i  Asien,  Leipzig 
 1849,  p.  144-155  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden, 
 vol.  iv.,  Berlin  1853,  p.  408,  ff ;  553,  ff ;  Lebrecht 
 and    Cassel,   in   Ersch   und   Gruber''s   Allgemeine 
 
 Bit 
 
 Schneider,    Catalogns  Libr.    Hebr.    in   Bibliotheca 
 Bodleiana,  col.  169. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JOSEPH  B.  GORION.     [Josippon.] 
 
 JOSEPH  B.  SHEMTOV,  a  distinguished  phi- 
 losopher, polemic,  and  commentator,  flourished  in 
 the  middle  of  the  15th  century  in  Spain.  Besides 
 his  numerous  philosophical  works,  which  form  im- 
 portant contributions  to  the  hibtory  of  Jewish  philo- 
 sophy, Joseph  b.  Shemtov  wrote — ( i )  A  commentary 
 on  the  celebrated  Epistle  of  Prophiat  Duran  against 
 Christianity  [Prophiat  Duran],  published  in  Con- 
 stantinople 1577,  and  in  Geiger's  DTIIi"'!  f31p, 
 Breslau  1S44;  (2)  A  course  of  homilies  delivered 
 in  the  Synagogue  on  different  Sabbaths  on  various 
 portions  of  the  Bible,  entitled  NllpH  pi?,  the  e)'C  oj 
 the  reader,  still  in  MS.  in  the  Bodleian  Library  at 
 Oxford,  Cod.  Michael  581  ;  (3)  A  commentaiy  on 
 Lamentations,  composed  at  Medina  del  Campo  in 
 the  year  1441,  MS.  by  De  Rossi,  No.  177  ;  (4)  A 
 commentary  on  Genesis  i.  l-vi.  8,  being  the  Sab- 
 batic lesson  which  commences  the  Jewish  yeai 
 [Haphtaka]  ;  and  (5)  An  exposition  of  Deut.  xv. 
 1 1.  Comp.  Steinschneider,  in  Ersch  und  Gruber'i 
 Allgemeine  Encyklopddie,  sec.  ii.,  vol.  xxxi.,  p. 
 87-93  j  Catalogns  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bod' 
 leiana,  col.  1529. — C.  D.  G. 
 
JOSEPH  JOEL  661 
 
 JOSEPH   JOEL.       [WiTZENHAUSEN.] 
 
 JOSEPH  TAITATZAK.     [Taitatzak.] 
 
 JOSEPHUS,  Flavius,  the  celebrated  Jewish 
 historian,  was  born  at  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  37,  in  the 
 first  year  of  Caius  (Caligula).  His  father  was  a 
 priest  of  theyfrj^  course,  and  his  mother  belonged 
 to  the  royal  Asmonasan  family ;  he  appeals  to  pub- 
 lic documents  in  proof  of  his  genealogy,  at  which 
 some  of  his  cotemporaries  seem  to  have  sneered 
 (Bios,  ed.  Havercamp,  ii.  i,  sec.  i).  The  only  au- 
 thority for  the  outline  of  his  life  is  his  own  self-lau- 
 datoiy  autobiography  ;  but  in  spite  of  the  egregious 
 vanity  which  marks  eveiy  page  of  that  perform- 
 ance, he  does  not  seem  to  have  wilfully  perverted 
 any  facts.  He  tells  us  that  even  at  the  age  of  four- 
 teen he  was  so  remarkable  for  learning  that  even 
 the  high-priests  and  chief  men  of  the  city  came  to 
 inquire  *  of  him  about  minute  questions  of  the  law. 
 After  a  careful  examination  of  the  tenets  held  by 
 the  three  chief  sects  of  Jews — Pharisees,  Sadducees, 
 and  Essenes — and  after  residing  three  years  in  the 
 desert  with  the  ascetic  eremite  Banus,  he  embraced 
 Pharisaism,  which,  he  says,  resembled  the  Stoic 
 philosophy  {Vii.  2).  At  the  age  of  twenty-six 
 (a.D.  63)  he  sailed  to  Rome  to  plead  the  cause  of 
 some  imprisoned  Jewish  priests.  Like  St.  Paul  he 
 was  shipwrecked,  but  after  a  night's  swimming  (cf. 
 2  Cor.  xi.  25)  +  was  picked  up  by  a  Cyrenian  vessel, 
 and  through  the  friendship  of  the  actor  Aliturus 
 obtained  the  patronage  of  Poppea,  who  gained  his 
 cause  for  him,  and  dismissed  him  with  great  gifts 
 (Vit.  3;  cf.  Antiq.  xx.  8.  Ii).  About  the  time  of 
 his  return  (A.  D.  66)  the  Jewish  insurrection  broke 
 out,  the  causes  of  which  he  very  obscurely  describes, 
 although  the  greater  part  of  his  autobiography,  as 
 well  as  much  of  the  book  on  the  Jewish  war,  is 
 occupied  with  this  portion  of  his  history.  Al- 
 though he  despaired  from  the  first,  and  advised  his 
 countrymen  to  submission,  he  accepted  the  com- 
 mand in  Galilee,  and  has  given  us  a  most  graphic 
 account  of  the  numerous  plots  and  perils  in  which 
 he  was  entangled  during  the  brilliant  and  stormy 
 period  of  his  life  as  a  general  {Vit.  4-74).  After 
 displaying  consummate  courage  and  ability  in 
 putting  Galilee  in  a  state  of  defence,  and  in  resist- 
 ing the  Romans,  he  finally  threw  himself  into 
 Jotapata,  which  was  taken  after  a  splendid  defence 
 of  forty-seven  days.  He  hid  himself  with  forty 
 others  in  a  cave,  and,  being  betrayed,  refused  to 
 surrender  on  a  promise  of  safety.  Against  his 
 wishes  they  all  determined  to  commit  suicide,  but 
 at  his  proposal  finally  agreed  to  kill  each  other  by 
 lot,  when  (by  whatever  means)  he  and  another 
 alone  survived.  They  surrendered  to  the  Romans, 
 and  Vespasian  put  him  in  chains,  intending  to  send 
 him  to  Nero,  a  fate  which  he  avoided  by  prophesy- 
 ing (for  he  distinctly  claims  a  prophetic  gift,  Bell, 
 yiid.  iii.  8.  9)  Vespasian's  future  elevation  to  the 
 purple.  After  three  years  of  lenient  imprisonment 
 (A.D.  70)  his  prophecy  came  true,  and  his  chains 
 were  cut  off  by  order  of  Titus  [Bell.  ytid.  iv.  lO.  7). 
 
 *  The  suggestion  of  Paret  (Herzog,  Encykl.  s.v. ), 
 that  in  this  narrative  Josephus  had  an  eye  to  Luke 
 ii.  46,  47,  is  extremely  probable,  and  if  so,  it 
 throws  light  on  the  character  of  the  man, 
 
 +  There  is,  however,  no  ground  for  identifying 
 the  voyage  of  Josephus  with  that  of  St.  Paul,  as  is 
 done  by  Ottius,  Spicileg.  ex  yosepho. 
 
 JOSEPHUS 
 
 Pie  took  part  in  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  was 
 once  struck  senseless  by  a  stone  while  urging  the 
 Jews  to  surrender.  He  was  enabled  by  the  patron- 
 age of  Titus  to  save  the  lives  of  his  brother  and 
 fifty  other  Jews,  and  to  rescue  from  destruction  a 
 valuable  copy  of  the  Scriptures.  Detested  as  he 
 was,  and  suspected  of  double  treachery  both  by 
 Jews  and  Romans,  subjected  to  endless  accusations 
 and  attacks,  his  life  must  have  been  sufficiently 
 burdensome,  but  the  position  of  a  renegade  was 
 rendered  supportable  by  imperial  favour,  and  pro- 
 bably by  unlimited  self-approbation.  After  the 
 fall  of  Jerusalem  he  lived  as  a  court-pensioner, 
 comfortably  following  his  literary  pursuits,  and  sur- 
 viving till  the  early  years  of  Trajan's  reign  (about 
 A.D.  103)  in  contented  and  wealthy  infamy.  For 
 all  these  facts,  and  many  others  of  a  more  directly 
 personal  character,  such  as  his  three  marriages,  the 
 names  of  his  sons,  etc.,  see  the  seventy-six  chapters 
 of  his  life,  and  the  following  passages  of  his  other 
 works,  C.  Apion.  i.  9.  10  ;  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  ;  Proceni 
 ii.  20_.  3,  sqq.,  21.  2,  sqq.  ;  iii.  7.  13,  sqq.,  8.  I,  sqq., 
 9  ;  vi.  5  ;  Antiq.  ed.  Plavercamp,  vok  i.,  pp.  5, 
 228,  536,  545,  682,  982  ;  Suid.,  s.v.  'I(io-)77ros. 
 
 Josephus  is  one  of  those  men  for  whose  chai-ac- 
 ters,  in  spite  of  their  learning,  their  ability,  and 
 even  their  good  qualities,  it  is  impossible  to  feel 
 any  respect.  An  almost  girlisli  conceit  is  every- 
 where visible  in  his  narrative  of  his  own  proceed- 
 ings ;  and  a  consciousness  of  his  own  importance 
 often  betrays  him  into  a  superstition  quite  alien  to 
 the  natural  tone  of  his  mind  {Bell.  Jiid.  iii.  8.  o  ; 
 Vit.  15,  42,  75,  etc.)  Cunning,  worldliness,  and  a 
 vulgar  desire  for  external  prosperity,  appear  in  him 
 throughout  his  life.  He  was  a  fulsome  flatterer  of 
 the  great,  and  was  not  even  ashamed  to  assume  the 
 name  of  Flavius,  as  though  he  had  been  a  freed- 
 man  of  Titus.  He  was  a  strange  mixture  of  the 
 bigoted  Pharisee  and  the  time-serving  Herodian, 
 and  he  mingles  the  national  pride  of  the  i)atriot 
 with  the  apostasy  of  a  traitor.  The  worst  stain  on 
 his  character  is  his  desertion  of  his  country  in  the 
 hour  of  her  sorest  need  ;  and  the  fact  that  he  was 
 eager  to  kiss  the  hands  that  were  reeking  with  her 
 blood,  and  to  sing  the  praises  of  the  men  for  whom 
 his  countiymen  could  find  no  curse  too  deep  or 
 loud.  While  yiidea  Captiva  wept  under  her  deso- 
 late palm-tree,  he  could  live  in  splendour  in  the 
 house  assigned  to  him  by  her  conquerors,  enjoy  a 
 share  of  their  booty,  and  boast  of  their  patronage 
 ( Vit.  76)  ;  while  his  countrymen  were  dead,  de- 
 graded, or  enslaved,  this  '  nescio  quis  Arabarches  ' 
 (Juv.  i.  130)  could  bear  to  see  his  own  triumphal 
 statue  set  up  among  their  oppressors,  and  could 
 '  sit  as  a  congratulating  guest,  offering  homage 
 and  adoring  cringes,  whilst  the  triumphal  pageant 
 for  Judea  ravaged,  and  Jerusalem  burned,  filled  the 
 hours  of  a  long  summer's  day  ere  it  unfolded  its 
 pomps  before  him'  {Bell.  Jnd.,  vii.  5.  5-7). 
 
 Josephus  was  an  admirable  writer.  Although 
 he  could  not  pronounce  Greek  well,  he  writes  it 
 with  singular  purity  (Niebuhr,  Lectui-es  on  Rom. 
 Hist,  iii.  205),  with  the  exception  of  a  few  con- 
 stant errors  ;  and  he  is  fairly  entitled  to  his  own 
 claim  of  possessing  the  highest  qualifications  for  a 
 Greek  writer  of  Jewish  history  {Antiq.  xx.  12.  i), 
 as  well  as  to  St.  Jerome's  complimentary  designa- 
 tion of  him  as  '  Grzecus  Livius'  {Epist.  ad Eiistoch.) 
 '  His  work,'  says  Niebuhr  {Ancient  Hist.  iii.  455), 
 '  is  one  of  the  most  charming  and  interesting 
 books,  and  is  read  a  great  deal  too  little.'     Never- 
 
JOSEPHUS 
 
 652 
 
 JOSEPHUS 
 
 tlieless,  he  is  hardly  deserving  of  the  epithet  0iXa- 
 \rj()rjs,  so  often  bestowed  on  him  (Suid.  s.  v. 
 'ldi(Tr]Tros ;  Isidor  Pelusiot.  iv.,  £/>.  75  ;  '  dihgen- 
 tissimus  et(pi\a\rjd^aTaTos, ]os.  Scaliger,  DeEmotd. 
 Temp.  Prcef.,  etc.)  ;  for  though  he  understood  the 
 duty  and  importance  of  veracity  to  the  liistorian 
 [Atitiq.  xiv.  I.I;  Bell.  Jttd.  \.  I  ;  c.  Ap.  i.  19), 
 yet  '  he  is  often  untrue,  and  his  archgeology 
 abounds  in  distortions  of  historical  facts,  and  in 
 falsifications  which  arise  from  his  inordinate  na- 
 tional pride  ;  and  wherever  he  deals  in  numbers, 
 he  shews  his  Oriental  love  of  exaggeration'  (Nie- 
 buhr,  Lect.  Rom.  Hist.,  1.  c. ).  Hence  his  narra- 
 tive, even  of  events  sufficiently  near  his  own  times, 
 requires  constant  correction  (Prideaux,  Connection, 
 i.  44,  341,  542,  ii.  passim).  Yet  he  has  received 
 very  hard  measure  at  the  hands  of  Baronius  and 
 other  writers,  and  we  must  agree  with  Casaubon 
 (Exerc.  xx.  2),  that  his  works  have  been  presei-ved 
 to  us  by  a  singular  providence,  and  throw  a  flood 
 of  light  on  Jewish  affairs. 
 
 It  is  hardly  possible  to  overrate  the  importance 
 of  Josephus  to  the  theologian.  The  numberless 
 references  to  all  his  writings  in  this  volume  will 
 shew  how  indispensable  he  is,  and  how  constantly 
 his  works  elucidate  the  histoiy,  geography,  and 
 archaeology  of  Scripture.  Yet,  in  spite  of  his  con- 
 stant assertions  {Antiq.  x.  Ii),  he  can  have  had  no 
 real  respect  for  the  writings  which  he  so  largely 
 illustrates.  If  he  had  felt,  as  a  Jew,  any  deep  or 
 religious  appreciation  of  the  O.  T.  history,  which 
 he  professes  to  follow  {oh^kv  irpodeh  oi)5'  a5  irapa- 
 \iwwv,  Antiq.  i.  proccm),  he  would  not  have  tam- 
 pered with  it  as  he  does,  mixing  it  with  pseudo- 
 philosophical  fancies  (r.  Ap.  i.  10),  with  groundless 
 Jewish  Agadoth  or  traditions  (such  as  the  three 
 years'  war  of  Moses  with  the  Ethiopians,  the  love 
 of  Tharbis  for  him,  etc. — Antiq.  ii.  10.  2),  and 
 with  quotations  from  heathen  writers  of  very 
 doubtful  authority  {Antiq.  viii.  5.  3,  etc.  ;  see  Van 
 Dale,  De  Aristea,  p.  211).  Moreover,  he  con- 
 stantly varies  from  the  sacred  text  in  numbers  {e.g. , 
 in  his  entire  chronology),  and  in  names,  so  that  in 
 his  genealogy  of  the  high-priests,  '  scarce  five  of 
 the  names  agree  with  anything  that  we  have  in 
 Scripture '  (Prideaux,  Connect,  i.  44).  The  worst 
 charge,  however,  against  him,  is  his  constant 
 attempt,  by  alterations  and  suppressions  (and  espe- 
 cially by  a  rationalistic  method  of  dealing  with 
 miracles,  which  contrasts  strangely  with  his  credu- 
 lous fancies),  to  make  Jewish  history  palatable  to 
 Greeks  and  Romans,  to  such  an  extent  that  J. 
 Ludolfus  calls  him  ^ /abulator  scrpius  quam  histo- 
 ricus''  [Hist.  Ethiop.,  p.  230).  Thus  he  omits  all 
 the  most  important  Messianic  prophecies ;  he 
 manipulates  the  book  of  Daniel  in  a  most  unsatis- 
 factory manner  {Antiq.  ix.  11);  he  speaks  in  a 
 very  loose  way  about  Moses  and  Abraham  {Antiq. 
 L  8.  I  ;  f.  Ap.  ii.  15)  ;  and  though  he  can  swallow 
 the  romance  of  the  pseudo-Aristeas,  he  rationalises 
 the  account  of  the  Exodus  and  Jonah's  whale 
 {Antiq.  ii.  16.  5  ;  ix.  10.  2).  On  the  whole  sub- 
 ject of  his  credibility  as  a  writer,  his  omissions,  his 
 variations,  and  his  panderings  to  ethnic  taste,  see 
 J.  A.  Fabricius,  De  Joseph,  et  ejus  Scriptu,  in  Hud- 
 son's ed. ;  Van  Dale,  De  Aristed,  x.,  xi.  ;  De  Idolo- 
 latrid,  vii.  ;  Brinch,  Examejt  Hist.  Flav.  yosep/io, 
 in  Havercamp,  ii.  309,  sq. ;  Ottius,  Spicilegium  ex 
 Josepho ;  Ittigius,  Prolegomena ;  Usher,  Epist. 
 ad  Lud.  Cappellum,  p.  42  ,  V/histon's  Disserta- 
 tions, etc. 
 
 Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  Josephus 
 was  no  Christian  {o/Kiardv  tQ  IijtroO  ws  Xpi,aT(^, 
 Orig.  c.  Cels.  i.  35)  ;  the  whole  tone  of  his  mind 
 was  alien  from  the  noble  simplicity  of  Christian 
 belief,  and,  as  we  have  seen  already,  he  was  not 
 even  a  good  Jew.  Whatever,  therefore,  may  be 
 thought  about  the  passages  alluding  to  John  the 
 Baptist  *  {Antiq.  xviii.  5.  2),  and  James,  '  the 
 Lord's  brother'  {Id.  xx.  9.  i),  which  maypossiblyt 
 be  genuine,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that 
 the  famous  allusion  to  our  Lord  {Antiq.  xviii.  3. 
 3),  is  either  absolutely  spurious,  or  largely  inter- 
 polated. The  silence  of  Josephus  on  a  subject  of 
 such  importance,  and  with  which  he  must  have 
 been  so  thoroughly  acquainted,  is  easily  explicable, 
 and  it  is  intrinsically  much  more  probable  that  he 
 should  have  passed  over  the  subject  altogether  (as 
 is  done  also  by  his  cotemporaiy  Justus  of  Tiberia, 
 Phot.  Cod.  Bibl.  33),  than  that  he  should  only 
 have  devoted  to  it  a  few  utterly  inadequate  lines  ; 
 and  even  if  he  had  been  induced  to  do  this  by 
 some  vague  hope  of  getting  something  by  it  from 
 Christians  like  Flavius  Clemens,  he  certainly 
 would  not  have  expressed  himself  in  language  so 
 strong  as  €t7e  &v5pa  avrbv  X^yeiv  XPVi  ^-^d  still  less 
 would  he  have  vouched  for  the  Messiahship,  the 
 miracles,  or  the  resurrection.  Justin,  TertuUian, 
 Chrysostom,  Origen,  and  even  Photius,  knew 
 nothing  of  the  passage,  nor  does  it  appear  till  the 
 time  of  Eusebius  {Hist.  Ecc,  i.  2  ;  Dem.  Evang., 
 iii.  5),  a  man  for  whom  Niebuhr  can  find  no 
 better  name  than  '  a  detestable  falsifier,'  and 
 whose  historical  credibility  is  well  nigh  given  up. 
 Whether  Eusebius  forged  it  himself,  or  borrowed 
 it  from  the  marginalia  of  some  Christian  reader, 
 cannot  be  determined,  but  that  Josephus  did  not 
 write  it  may  be  regarded  as  settled.  Nay,  the  very 
 next  section  {Afitiq.  xvii.  3.  4)  is  a  disgusting  story, 
 wholly  irrelevant  to  the  tenor  of  the  narrative,  and 
 introduced  in  all  probability  for  the  sole  purpose 
 of  a  blasphemous  parody  on  the  miraculous  con- 
 ception, such  as  was  attempted  by  various  rabbini- 
 cal writers  {e.g.,  Sepher  Toledoth  Jeshua  ;  see 
 Wagenseil,  Tela  Ign.  Satan.  ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Joseph.) 
 That  Josephus  intended  obliquely  to  discredit  some 
 of  the  chief  Christian  doctrines,  by  representing 
 them  as  having  been  anticipated  by  the  Essenes, 
 seems  by  no  means  improbable  (De  Quincey's 
 Works,  ix..  The  Essenes).  For  a  compendium  of 
 the  abundant  literature  on  those  questions,  see 
 Gieseler,  Eccl.  Hist.,  sec.  34.  The  chief  treatises 
 are,  Daubuz,  Pro  testinionio  El.  jfos.  de  Jesii  Christ, 
 Lond.  1706;  reprinted  in  Havercamp.  Bohmert, 
 iiher  der  El.  Jos.  ZengJiiss  von  Christo,  Leipz. 
 1823  ;  Le  Moyne,  Var.  Sacr.  ii.  931  ;  Heinichen, 
 Excurs.  i.  ad  Euseb.  H.  E.  vol.  iii.  p.  331. 
 
 The  works  of  Josephus  are— i.  De  Bella  yu- 
 daico,  or  mpl  aXd-ffeus,  in  seven  books,  translated 
 by  himself  from  the  Syro-Chaldee.  2.  'lovSaiKi^ 
 ' ApxaioXoyla,  in  twenty  books  (A.  D.  95),  an  apolo- 
 getic paraphrase  of  Scripture  history  for  Gentiles. 
 3.  The  Autobiography,  in  seventy-six  chapters.  4. 
 Against  Apion,  a  treatise  of  immense  learning  (Jer., 
 
 *  It  is  by  no  means  impossible  that  Josephus 
 may  have  leamt  from  Banus  a  respect  for  John 
 the  Baptist  (  Vit.  2). 
 
 +  The  latter  passage,  however,  was  early  tarn- 
 peredwith  by  Chr'stians  (Orig.,  Comment,  ad  Matt., 
 ed.  Rothom.,  p.  223  ;  c.  Celsum.,  i.,  p.  35  ;  ii.,  p. 
 69.,  ed.  Cant.  ;  Euseb.,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ii.  23). 
 
JOSES 
 
 653 
 
 JOSHUA 
 
 3«'  Magft.  Orat.,  Ep.  83)  on  the  antiquity  and 
 nobility  of  the  Jews.  The  Fota'th  of  Maccabees  {d% 
 MaKKa^alovs  \6yos)  is  doubted,  and  the  wepi  irdi'- 
 Tos  is  spurious.  Other  books  which  he  contem- 
 plated writing  ( On  God,  On  the  Laws,  On  Customs, 
 Aiitiq.  XX.  II.  2;  viii.  lo ;  iv.  8.  2,  etc.)  were 
 either  never  written  or  have  been  lost.  The  best 
 editions  of  Josephus  are — Hudson's,  1720  ;  Haver- 
 camp's,  1726;  Richter,  1827;  Dindorf,  1845; 
 Bekker,  1855.  There  are  English  translations 
 by  Whiston,  Lodge,  L'Estrange,  and  Traill. — 
 F.  W.  F. 
 
 JOSES  ('Iwo-^s).  I.  An  ancestor  of  our  Lord 
 (Luke  iii.  29  ;  A.  V.  yose).  The  best  authorities 
 read  ''\r\(yov  here.  2.  Son  of  Mary  and  Cleopas, 
 and  brother  of  James  the  Less,  of  Simon,  and  of 
 Jude,  and,  consequently,  one  of  those  who  are 
 called  the  'brethren'  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  xiii.  55  ; 
 xxvii.  56  ;  Mark  vi.  3  ;  xv.  40,  47).  Whether  any 
 of  these  brothers  vi-as  an  apostle  has  been  disputed 
 [Jesus  Christ  ;  James,  3  ;  Jude,  Epistle  of]. 
 If  one  was,  two  at  least  were,  James  and  Jude,  and 
 it  is  supposed  by  some  Simon  also.  This  is  not  at 
 all  probable  on  the  face  of  it.    3.  [Barnabas]. 
 
 JOSHUA  mi}\r\\  Wr\\,  or  '!iW\  whose  help 
 
 is  yehovah,  or  ychovah  is  help  ;  comp.  the  German 
 name  GotthilJ ;  Sept.,  N.  T.,  and  Joseph.,  'IrytroOs). 
 I.  The  son  of  Nun,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  the 
 assistant  and  successor  of  Moses.  His  name  was 
 originally  yC^'1^  (Hoshea),  salvation  (Num.  xiii. 
 8) ;  and  it  seems  that  the  subsequent  alteration 
 of  it  by  Moses  (Num.  xiii.  16)  was  significant, 
 and  proceeded  on  the  same  principle  as  that  of 
 Abram  into  Abraham  (Gen.  xvii.  5),  and  of  Sarai 
 into  Sarah  (Gen.  xvii.  15). 
 
 According  to  the  Tseiitach  David,  Joshua  was 
 born  in  Egypt,  in  the  year  of  the  Jewish  era  2406 
 (B.C.  1537).  In  the  Bible  he  is  first  mentioned  as 
 being  the  victorious  commander  of  the  Israelites 
 in  their  battle  against  the  Amalekites  at  Rephidim 
 (Exod.  xvii.  8-16).  He  distinguished  himself  by 
 his  courage  and  intelligence  during  and  after  the 
 exploration  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  on  which  occa- 
 sion he  represented  his  tribe,  which  was  that  of 
 Ephraim  (Num.  xiii.,  xiv.)  Moses,  with  the  divine 
 sanction,  appointed  him  to  command  the  Israelites, 
 even  during  his  own  lifetime  (Num.  xxvii.  18-23  ! 
 Deut.  iii.  28  ;  xxxi.  23).  After  the  death  of  Moses 
 he  led  the  Israelites  over  the  Jordan,  fortified  a 
 camp  at  Gilgal  (Josh.  ix.  6  ;  x.  6-43),  conquered 
 the  southern  and  middle  portions  of  Canaan  (vi.  -x.), 
 and  also  some  of  the  northern  districts  (ix. )  But 
 the  hostile  nations,  although  subdued,  were  not  en- 
 tirely driven  out  and  destroyed  (xiii.  ;  xxiii.  13  ; 
 Judg.  i.  27-35).  ^"  the  seventh  year  after  enter- 
 ing the  land,  it  was  distributed  among  the  various 
 tribes,  which  then  commenced  individually  to  com- 
 plete the  conquest  by  separate  warfare  (xv.  13, 
 seq. ;  xvi.  10 ;  xvii.  12,  seq.)  Joshua  died  no 
 years  old  (B.C.  1427),  and  was  buried  at  Timnath- 
 serah  (Josh,  xxiv.),  on  Mount  Ephraim.  Accord- 
 ing to  the  Archceologia  or  Antiqnitics  of  Josephus, 
 (v.  I.  29),  Joshua  commanded  the  Jews  twenty-five 
 years,  but,  according  to  other  Jewish  chronologers, 
 twenty-seven  years.  The  Tsemach  David,  on  the 
 years  of  the  Jewish  era  2489  and  2496,  remarks  : — 
 '  It  is  written  in  the  Seder  Olam  that  Joshua  judged 
 Israel  twenty-eight  years,  commencing  from  the  year 
 2488,  immediately  from  the  death  of  Moses,  to  the 
 
 year  2516.  This,  however,  would  not  be  known 
 to  us  but  for  cabbalistic  tradition,  but  in  some  de- 
 gree also  by  reasoning,'  etc.  Hottinger  {S?negtna, 
 p.  469)  says  :— '  According  to  the  Midrash,  Rahab 
 was  ten  years  old  when  the  Israelites  left  Egypt ; 
 she  played  the  whore  during  the  forty  years  in 
 which  the  Israelites  were  in  the  desert.  She  be- 
 came the  wife  of  Joshua,  and  eight  prophets 
 descended  from  her,  viz.,  Jeremiah,  M  abasia,  Han- 
 amael,  Shallum,  Baruch,  Ezekiel.  Some  say  also 
 that  Huldah  the  prophetess  was  her  descendant.' 
 Some  chronologers  have  endeavoured  to  reduce 
 the  rule  of  Joshua  to  seventeen,  and  others  to 
 twenty-one  years. 
 
 There  occur  some  vestiges  of  the  deeds  of  Joshua 
 in  other  historians  besides  those  of  the  Bible.  Pro- 
 copius  mentions  a  Phoenician  inscription  near  the 
 city  of  Tingis  in  Mauritania,  the  sense  of  which  in 
 Greek  was  :—  H/uers  ec/xey  o\  cfyvyovres  diro  irpocrJjTrov 
 'lijcroO  Tov  XjicTTov  viov  'Navf; — '  We  are  those  who 
 fled  before  the  face  of  Joshua  the  robber,  the  son 
 of  Nun'  {De  Bell.  Vandal.,  ii.  10).  Suidas  (sub 
 voce  H-avadv)  : — i]/j.€LS  eafiev  HavavaToi  oOs  iSiw^ev 
 'Irjffovs  6  Xt/cttjs — '  We  are  the  Canaanites  whom 
 Joshua  the  robber  persecuted.'  Compare  Fabricii 
 Codex  Pseudepigraphns  Veteris  Testamenti,  i.  889, 
 seq.,  and  the  doubts  respecting  this  statement  in 
 Dale,  De  0?-igine  et  Frogressti  Idolatj-iie,  p.  749, 
 seq. 
 
 The  Samaritans,  who  for  dogmatical  purposes 
 endeavoured  to  depreciate  the  authority  of  persons 
 mentioned  in  the  latter  books  of  the  O.  T. ,  such  as 
 Eli,  Samuel,  Zeinibbabel,  and  others,  had  no  such 
 interest  to  attack  the  person  of  Joshua.  Eulogius, 
 according  to  Photius  [Codex,  p.  230),  states  :  'Ymv 
 "ZaixapnTCov  rb  ttX^^os  ot  fj.^p  'It^o-oOj'  to;'  Navrj 
 eSo^a^ov  elvai  irepl  o5  Mwvarjs  eiTre,  Trpocprjrrjv  ijfjuv 
 dvaaTTjaeL  Kvpios,  etc.— (Comp.  Lampe,  Comfnent. 
 in  Evangeliiini  yohannis,  vol.  i.,  p.  748.)  The 
 Samaritans  even  endeavoured  to  exalt  the  memory 
 of  Joshua  by  making  him  the  nucleus  of  many 
 strange  legends  which  they  embodied  into  their 
 Arabic  book  of  Joshua,  a  work  which  seems  to  have 
 been  compiled  in  the  middle  ages,  and  is  quoted 
 by  the  Rabbinical  chroniclers  of  that  period,  R. 
 Samuel  Schullam  (yuchasin,  154;  Shalshelcth 
 Hakkabbalah,  p.  96),  Hottinger  {Historia  0?'i- 
 en talis,  p.  60,  sq.),  Zunz  [Gottesdienstliche  Vortriige 
 der  yitden,  p.  140).  Reland  supposed  that  this 
 book  was  written  at  an  earlier  period,  and  aug- 
 mented in  the  middle  ages  ;  but  it  is  more  likely 
 that  the  whole  is  a  late  compilation. 
 
 A  letter  of  Shaubech,  'lZl1t^',  king  of  Armenia 
 Minor,  in  the   Samaritan  book   of  Joshua  (chap. 
 
 xxvi.),  styles  Joshua  7"inNp?X  n^PK,  It'p^ts  /«'- 
 cussor,  '  the  murderous  wolf ; '  or,  according  to 
 another  reading  in  the  book  yuchasin  (p.  154, 
 f  i),  and  in  the  Shalsheleth  Hakkabbalah  (p.  96), 
 niDIJ?  3ST,  lupus  vespertinus,  '  the  evening  wolf 
 (comp.  Hab.  i.  8  ;  Hottinger,  Historia  Orientalis, 
 Tiguri  1 65 1,  p.  40,  seq.;  Buddeus,  Hist.  Eccles., 
 p.  964,  seq.)  A  comparison  of  Hercules,  accord- 
 ing to  the  Phoenician  and  Greek  mythology,  with 
 Joshua,  has  been  attempted  by  Hercklitz  (Quod 
 Hercules  ide/n  sit  ac  yosua,  Lipsise  1706,  4to). — 
 C.  H.  F.  B. 
 
 2.  The  Bethshemite  in  whose  field  the  cart  con- 
 taining the  ark  of  the  Lord  rested  when  the  ark 
 was  brought  up  from  among  the  Philistines.  In 
 this  held  a  memorial  stone  long  stood  commemor- 
 
JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 654 
 
 JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 ating  the  occurrence  (i  Sam.  vi.  14,  18).     For  1J?"1 
 
 72X  we  should  probably  read  pX  HVI  (so  LXX., 
 
 Targ.,  3  codd.  of  Kennicott,  and  I  of  De  Rossi), 
 '  And  a  witness  [thereof]  is  the  great  stone  .  .  . 
 unto  this  day.' 
 
 3.  A  governor  in  Jerusalem  after  whom  a  gate 
 in  the  city  was  named  (2  Kings  xxiii.  8).  This 
 cannot  have  been  one  of  the  city  gates,  as  no  such 
 name  was  borne  by  any  of  them.  We  must  there- 
 fore regard  it  as  a  gate  within  the  city,  probably 
 one  made  by  Joshua  for  the  purpose  of  affording  a 
 private  entrance  into  the  citadel,  where,  as  gover- 
 nor, he  doubtless  resided,  and  where  there  may 
 have  been  some  place  of  idolatrous  worship.  The 
 city  gate  mentioned  in  this  verse  is  apparently  the 
 gate  Gennath,  by  which  access  to  the  citadel  was 
 obtained  from  the  valley  of  Gihon,  the  modern 
 Jaffa  Gate.  The  gate  of  Joshua  was  probably  a 
 smaller  gate  on  the  left  hand  side  of  the  main  gate 
 as  one  entered  the  city. 
 
 4.  The  first  of  the  high-priests  after  the  Cap- 
 tivity. In  Ezra  ii.  2  ;  iii.  2,  the  name  is  spelt 
 Jeshua  (JJIK''').     He  was  the  son  of  Jehozadak,  and 
 
 was  probably  born  in  Babylon,  as  his  father  was 
 one  of  those  carried  into  captivity  by  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar (i  Chron.  vi.  15).  His  father  having  died 
 in  exile,  it  fell  to  Joshua,  of  hereditaiy  right, 
 to  assume  the  place  and  functions  of  the  high- 
 priest  when  the  people  were  restored  to  their  own 
 land.  Associated  with  Zerubbabel,  he  acted  as 
 chief  among  the  leaders  of  those  who,  availing 
 themselves  of  the  decree  of  Cyrus,  returned  to 
 Jerusalem  ;  and  he  took  a  principal  part  in  the  re- 
 building of  the  Temple,  and  the  repairing  of  the 
 city.  After  the  interruption  caused  by  the  efforts 
 of  the  enemies  of  the  Jews,  he  and  Zerubbabel 
 resumed  the  work  in  obedience  to  the  summons  of 
 Haggai  and  Zechariah,  and  happily  completed  it. 
 For  his  services  in  this  respect  he  is  praised  among 
 the  famous  men  by  the  Son  of  Sirach  (Ecclus. 
 xlix.  12).  Of  his  life  subsequent  to  this  event  we 
 have  no  information.  The  Chron.  Alex,  places 
 his  death  in  the  fifty-third  year  of  his  high-priest- 
 hood. In  the  prophecies  of  Zechariah  (iii.,  and  vi. 
 8-14)  he  is  set  forth  as  typically  representing  the 
 Messiah  (comp.  Hengstenberg,  Christology,  iii. 
 317,  ff. ;  349,  ff.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOSHUA,  Book  of.  The  first  in  order  of  the 
 D'lJiK'Nn  D''X''2J  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  i.  Con- 
 tents. —  This  book  contains  an  account  of  the 
 fortunes  of  the  Israelites  from  the  death  of  Moses 
 to  that  of  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun.  Beginning 
 with  the  appointment  of  Joshua  to  succeed  Moses 
 as  the  leader  of  the  people,  it  proceeds  to  describe 
 the  arrangements  made  by  Joshua  in  prospect  of 
 passing  over  Jordan  (i.-ii.)  ;  the  crossing  of  the 
 river,  and  the  setting  up  of  a  memorial  on  the 
 further  side  at  Gilgal  (iii.  -iv. )  ;  the  dismay  which 
 this  occasioned  to  the  Canaanites  (v.  i) ;  the  cir- 
 cumcision pf  the  males  among  the  people,  that  rite 
 having  been  neglected  in  the  wilderness ;  the 
 observance  of  the  Passover  by  them  in  the  camp 
 at  Gilgal ;  the  ceasing  of  the  manna  on  the  day 
 after  they  had  entered  Canaan  (v.  2-12)  ;  the 
 encouragement  given  to  Joshua  to  proceed  on  his 
 enterprise  by  the  appearance  of  an  angel  to  him 
 (v.  13-15)  ;  the  siege  and  capture  of  Jericho  (vi. )  ; 
 the  defeat  of  the  Israelites  at  Ai  (viL) ;  the  taking  of 
 
 Ai  (viii.  1-29)  ;  the  writing  of  the  law  on  tables  of 
 stone,  and  the  solemn  repetition  from  Ebal  and 
 Gerizim  of  the  blessings  and  the  curses  which 
 Moses  had  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  (viii.  30- 
 315)  ;  the  confederation  of  the  kings  of  Northern 
 Canaan  against  the  Israelites  ;  the  cunning  device 
 by  which  the  Gibeonites  secured  themselves  from 
 being  destroyed  by  the  Israelites  ;  the  indignation 
 of  the  other  Canaanites  against  the  Gibeonites, 
 and  the  confederation  of  the  kings  aromid  Jeru- 
 salem against  Joshua,  with  their  signal  defeat  by 
 him  (ix.-x. )  ;  the  overthrow  at  the  waters  of 
 Megiddo  of  the  great  northern  confederacy,  with 
 the  destruction  of  the  Anakim  (xi.)  ;  the  list  of 
 kings  whose  country  the  Israelites  had  taken  under 
 Moses  and  Joshua  (xii.)  ;  the  division  of  the 
 country,  both  the  parts  conquered  and  those  yet 
 remaining  under  the  power  of  the  Canaanites, 
 among  the  different  tribes,  chiefly  by  lot ;  the 
 setting  up  of  the  tabernacle  in  Shiloh  ;  the  ap- 
 pointment of  cities  of  refuge  and  of  cities  for  the 
 Levites  ;  the  return  of  the  Reubenites,  the  Gad-' 
 ites,  and  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh,  to  their 
 possessions  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  after  the 
 settlement  of  their  brethren  in  Canaan  (xiii. -xxii.)  ; 
 and  the  farewell  addresses  of  Joshua  to  the  people, 
 his  death  and  burial  (xxiii. -xxiv.)  The  book 
 naturally  divides  itself  into  two  parts  ;  the  former 
 (i.-xii.)  containing  an  account  of  the  conquest  of 
 the  land;  the  latter  (xiii. -xxiv.)  of  the  division  of 
 it  among  the  tribes.  These  are  frequently  distinc- 
 tively cited  as  the  historical  and  the  geographical 
 portions  of  the  book. 
 
 2.  Design. — The  design  of  the  book  is  mani- 
 festly to  furnish  a  continuation  of  the  history  of  the 
 Israelites  from  the  point  at  which  it  is  left  in  the 
 closing  book  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  at  the  same 
 time  to  illustrate  the  faithfulness  of  Jehovah  to  his 
 word  of  promise,  and  his  grace  in  aiding  his 
 people  by  miraculous  interference  to  obtain  posses- 
 sion of  the  land  promised  to  Abraham.  The 
 ground  idea  of  the  book,  as  Maurer  (Comment.,  p. 
 3)  observes,  is  furnished  by  God's  declaration  to 
 Joshua,  recorded  i.  5,  6,  that  the  work  which 
 Moses  commenced  he  should  finish  by  subduing 
 and  dividing  to  the  tribes  of  Israel  the  promised 
 land.  The  book,  therefore,  may  be  regarded  as 
 setting  forth  historically  the  grounds  on  which  the 
 claims  of  Israel  to  the  proprietorship  of  the  land 
 rested  ;  and  as  possessing,  consequently,  not  merely 
 an  historical,  but  also  a  constitutional  and  legal 
 worth.  As  illustrating  God's  grace  and  power  in 
 dealing  with  his  people,  it  possesses  also  a  religious 
 and  spiritual  interest. 
 
 3.  Structtire. — On  this  head  a  variety  of  opinions 
 have  been  entertained.      It  has  been  asserted — 
 
 1.  That  the  book  is  a  collection  of  fragments 
 from  different  hands,  put  together  at  different 
 times,  and  the  whole  revised  and  enlarged  by  a 
 later  writer.  Some  make  the  number  of  sources 
 whence  these  fragments  have  been  derived  ten 
 (Herwerden,  Disp.  de.  Libro  ybs.,  Groning.  1826); 
 others ^z'd-,  including  the  reviser  (Knobel,  Exeget. 
 Hdb.  pt.  13  ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  de>-  Is}-ael.,  i.  73, 
 ff.)  ;  while  others  content  themselves  with  three 
 (Bleek,  Einleit.  his.  A.  T.,  p.  325). 
 
 2.  That  it  is  a  complete  and  uniform  composition, 
 interspersed  with  glosses  and  additions  more  or 
 less  extensive. 
 
 3.  That  the  first  part  is  the  composition  of  one 
 author ;    but   the   second   betrays    indications   ol 
 
JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 655 
 
 JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 being  a  compilation  from  various  sources  (Haver- 
 nick,  Einleit.  II.  i.  p.  34), 
 
 4.  That  the  book  is  complete  and  uniform 
 throughout,  and,  as  a  whole,  is  the  composition  of 
 one  writer. 
 
 It  is  impossible  here  to  enter  into  all  the  details 
 of  this  discussion.  The  reader  will  find  these 
 fully  presented  by  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ins  A.  T., 
 4th  and  subsequent  editions  ;  Havernick,  Einleit. 
 2ter  Th.  Abt.  i.  p.  i,  ff.  ;  Konig,  Alt-testaincntl. 
 Sludien,  i.  p.  4,  ff.  ;  Maurer,  Ccvnmejit.  ;  Keil, 
 Commeni.,  E.  T.,  p.  3,  ff.  ;  Bleck,  Einl.  ins 
 A.  T.,  p.  311,  ff.  ;  Knobel,  in  the  Exeget.  Hand- 
 buch,  pt.  13  ;  and  Davidson,  Introd.  to  the  O.  T., 
 i.  p.  412.  It  may  suffice  here  to  notice  a  few  of  the 
 grounds  on  which  principally  the  unity  of  the  l)ook 
 has  been  denied.  These  are  found  partly  in 
 alleged  double  narratives  of  the  same  event,  partly 
 in  supposed  discrepancies  of  statement,  and  partly 
 in  marked  differences  of  phraseology  and  style  in 
 different  parts  of  the  book. 
 
 The  events  so  alleged  to  be  twice  narrated  in 
 this  book  are,  Joshua's  decease,  ch.  xxiii.  and 
 xxiv.  ;  the  command  to  appoint  twelve  men,  one 
 out  of  each  tribe,  in  connection  with  the  passing 
 over  Jordan  (iii.  12  ;  iv.  3)  ;  the  stoning  of  Achan 
 and  his  dependants  (vii.  25)  ;  the  setting  of  an 
 ambush  for  the  taking  of  Ai  (viii.  9,  12)  ;  the  rest 
 from  war  of  the  land  (xi.  23  ;  xiv.  15)  ;  the  com- 
 mand to  Joshua  concerning  dividing  the  land  (xiii. 
 6,  ff )  ;  and  the  granting  of  Hebron  to  Caleb  (xiv. 
 13  ;  XV.  13).  This  list  we  have  transcribed  from 
 Knobel  [Kritik  dcs  Pentat.  tmd  Josua,  Exeget.  Hdl>., 
 xiii.  p.  498).  On  referring  to  the  passages,  the 
 reader  will  probably  be  surprised  that  they  should 
 be  gravely  adduced  as  instances  of  repetition,  such 
 as  can  be  accounted  for  only  by  the  hypothesis 
 of  different  authors.  What  evidence,  for  instance, 
 is  there  that  the  address  of  Joshua  reported  in  ch. 
 xxiv.  is  a  repetition  of  the  address  reported  in  ch. 
 xxiii.  ?  Is  it  incredible  that  Joshua  should  have 
 tivice  assembled  the  representatives  of  the  people, 
 to  address  them  before  his  decease  ?  May  he  not 
 have  felt  that,  spared  beyond  his  expectation,  it 
 behoved  him  to  avail  himself  of  the  opportunity 
 thus  afforded  to  address  once  more  to  the  people 
 words  of  counsel  and  admonition  ?  This  surely  is 
 more  probable  than  that  these  two  chapters  con- 
 tain different  reports  of  the  same  speech.  In  the 
 case  of  the  grant  to  Caleb  of  Hebron,  there  is  un- 
 doubtedly a  repetition  of  the  same  fact ;  but  it  is 
 ■^uch  a  repetition  as  might  proceed  from  the  same 
 pen ;  for  the  two  statements  are  made  in  different 
 connections,  the  one  in  connection  with  Caleb's 
 personal  merits,  the  other  in  connection  with  the 
 boundaries  and  occupation  of  the  portion  allotted 
 to  Judah.  The  taking  of  Ai  will  be  considered 
 further  on.  As  for  the  other  instances,  we  leave 
 them  to  the  judgment  of  our  readers. 
 
 Of  the  alleged  discrepancies^  one  on  which  much 
 stress  has  been  laid  is,  that  in  various  parts  of  the 
 book  Joshua  is  said  to  have  subdued  the  whole 
 land  and  destroyed  the  Canaanites  (xi.  10 ;  xii.  7, 
 ff.  ;  xxi.  43  ;  xxii.  4),  whereas  in  others  it  is  stated 
 that  large  portions  of  the  land  were  not  con- 
 quered by  Joshua  (xiii.  I,  ff;  xvii.  14,  ff.  ;  xviii. 
 3,  ff.  ;  xxiii.  5-12).  Now,  at  first  sight,  the  dis- 
 crepancy here  appears  very  manifest  and  somewhat 
 serious.  It  is  wortliy  of  note,  however,  in  the 
 outset,  that  it  is  a  discrepancy  which  pervades  the 
 book,  and  on  which,   consequently,   no  argument 
 
 for  diversity  of  authorship,  as  between  the  firsl 
 and  the  second  parts  of  it,  can  be  built.  Is  it, 
 then,  of  such  a  kind  as  to  prove  that  the  whole 
 book  is  a  compilation  of  fragments  ?  This  will 
 hardly  be  affirmed  by  any  one  who  reflects  that  a 
 discrepancy  of  this  sort  is  of  a  kind  so  obvious, 
 that  it  is  exactly  such  as  a  compiler,  coolly  survey- 
 ing the  materials  he  is  putting  together,  would  at 
 once  detect  and  eliminate ;  whereas  an  original 
 writer  might  write  so  as  to  give  the  appearance  of 
 it  from  looking  at  the  same  object  from  different 
 points  of  view  in  the  course  of  his  writing.  It  is  on 
 this  latter  hypothesis  alone,  we  thmk,  that  the 
 phenomenon  before  us  is  to  be  accounted  for. 
 Viewed  in  relation  to  purpose  and  effect,  the  land 
 was  conquered  and  appropriated  ;  Israel  was 
 settled  in  it  as  master  and  proprietor,  the  power  of 
 the  Canaanites  was  broken,  and  God's  covenant  to 
 his  people  was  fulfilled.  But  through  various 
 causes,  chiefly  the  people's  own  fault,  the  work 
 was  not  literally  completed  ;  and  therefore,  viewed 
 in  relation  to  what  ought  to  have  been  done  and 
 what  might  have  been  done,  the  historian  could 
 not  but  record  that  there  yet  remained  some 
 enemies  to  be  conquered,  and  some  portions  of  the 
 land  to  be  appropriated.  To  find  in  such  differ- 
 ences of  statement  discrepancies  fatal  to  the  unity 
 of  authorship  in  the  book,  seems  really  being 
 critical  overmuch,  critical  to  the  extent  of  being 
 captious.  Supposing  a  historian  were  to  narrate 
 that  William  the  Conqueror  subdued  all  England, 
 and  yet  afterwards  to  tell  us  of  the  numbers  of 
 Anglo-Saxons  who  refused  to  acknowledge  his 
 rule,  and  the  consequent  revolts  on  the  part  of  the 
 English  which  disturbed  his  reign,  would  any 
 reader  be  at  a  loss  how  to  reconcile  his  statements? 
 or  would  any  candid  and  intelligent  man  resort 
 to  the  violent  hypothesis  that,  because  of  these 
 diverse  statements,  the  unity  of  the  book  must  be 
 impeached,  and  the  authorship  of  it  parcelled  out 
 among  different  annalists  ?  Why,  then,  apply  to 
 the  sacred  historian  a  test  which  all  would  declare 
 unsound  and  unfair  if  applied  to  writers  of  secular 
 history  ? 
 
 Another  apparent  discrepancy  has  been  found 
 between  xxii.  2  and  xxiv.  14,  23.  How,  it  is 
 asked,  could  there  be  'gross  idolatiy'  amongst  a 
 people  who  had  in  all  things  conformed  to  the  law 
 of  God  given  by  Moses  ?  This  difficulty  is  dealt 
 with  by  Augustine  (Qncest.  in  Jos.,  qu.  29),  who 
 solves  it  by  understanding  the  injunction  of  Joshua 
 to  refer  to  alienation  of  heart  on  the  part  of  the 
 people  from  God  : — '  Non  ait  Et  nunc  auferte  deos 
 alienos  siqui  sint  in  vobis ;  sed  omnino  tanquam 
 sciens  esse.  Qui  sunt,  inquit,  in  vobis.  Proinde 
 Propheta  sanctus  in  cordibus  eonim  esse  cernebat 
 cogitationes  de  Deo  alienas  a  Deo,  et  ipsas  admo- 
 nebat  auferri.'  This  explanation  is  followed  in 
 substance  by  Calvin  and  others  ;  and  it  is  appa- 
 rently the  true  one.  Had  Joshua  known  that 
 '  gross  idolatry'  was  practised  by  the  people,  he 
 would  have  taken  vigorous  measures  before  this  to 
 extirpate  it.  But  against  secret  and  heart  idolatry 
 he  could  use  only  words  of  warning  and  counsel. 
 
 Another  discrepancy  is  thus  set  forth  by  Dr. 
 Davidson  (Introd.  i.  p.  415)— 'It  is  related  that 
 the  people  assembled  at  Sichem,  'under  an  oak 
 that  was  by  the  sanctuaiy  of  the  Lord,'  and  '  they 
 presented  themselves  before  God,'  implying  that 
 the  tabernacle  and  ark  were  there.  But  we  know 
 from   xviii.    i   that    the  tabernacle   had   been   re- 
 
JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 656 
 
 JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 moved  from  its  former  place  at  Gilgal  to  Shiloli, 
 where  it  remained  for  a  long  period  after  Joshua's 
 death  (i  Sam.  iii.  21  ;  iv.  3).'  Here  are  seve- 
 ral mistakes.  The  phrase  'before  God'  {''Jp? 
 D^"i?^{^)  does  not  necessarily  mean    '  before   the 
 
 ark  of  the  Lord'  (comp.  Gen.  xxvii.  7;  Judg.  xi. 
 II  ;  XX.  I  ;  I  Kings  xvii.  I,  etc.  ;  Hengstenberg, 
 Beitr.,  Bd.  iii.  43)  ;  and  it  is  not  related  that  '  the 
 people  assembled  under  an  oak  that  was  by  the 
 sanctuary  of  the  Lord,'  but  that  Joshua  'took  a 
 great  stone  and  set  it  up  there  under  the  oak  that 
 was  within  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord'  (xxiv.  26). 
 The  oak  referred  to  was  probably  a  well-known  one 
 that  stood  within  the  spot  which  had  been  the  first 
 sanctuary  of  the  Lord  in  Canaan  (Gen.  xii.  6,  7), 
 and  where  the  nation  had  been  convened  by  Joshua, 
 on  first  entering  the  promised  land,  to  listen  to  the 
 words  of  the  law  (Josh.  viii.  30-35).  No  place 
 more  fitting,  as  the  site  of  a  memorial  stone  such  as 
 Joshua  is  here  said  to  have  set  up,  could  be  found. 
 
 These  are  the  only  discrepancies  that  have  even 
 the  appearance  of  seriously  affecting  the  claim  of 
 the  book  to  be  regarded  as  the  work  of  one  author 
 throughout.  The  others,  which  have  been  dis- 
 covered and  urged  by  some  recent  critics  in  Ger- 
 many, are  such  that  it  seems  unnecessary  to  take 
 up  space  by  noticing  them.  The  reader  will  find 
 them  noted  and  accounted  for  in  the  Introduction 
 to  Keil's  Coiiivieuiary  on  Joshua,  p.  9,  ff. 
 
 The  alleged  differences  of  pin-aseology  and  style 
 in  different  parts  of  the  book  might  deserve  more 
 extended  notice,  were  it  not  for  the  very  unsatis- 
 factory state  in  which  this  method  of  inquiry  as 
 yet  is.  Without  doubt,  it  is  true  that,  if  it  can 
 be  shewn  that  these  differences  are  such  as  to 
 indicate  diversity  of  authorship,  the  argument  must 
 be  admitted  as  legitimate,  and  the  conclusion 
 as  valid  ;  but  before  dealing  with  such  questions, 
 it  would  be  well  if  it  were  settled  on  some  scien* 
 tific  basis  what  is  the  competent  test  in  such  a 
 case,  what  kind  and  amount  of  difference  in 
 phraseology  and  style  are  sufficient  to  prove  a 
 diversity  of  authorship.  On  this  head  critics  seem 
 wholly  at  sea  ;  they  have  no  common  standard  to 
 which  to  appeal ;  and  hence  their  conclusions  are 
 frequently  determined  by  purely  personal  leanings 
 and  subjective  affections,  and  hardly  any  two  of 
 them  agree  in  the  judgment  at  which  they  arrive. 
 This  is  i-emarkably  the  case  with  the  instances 
 which  have  been  adduced  from  the  book  before  us. 
 Of  these,  some  are  of  such  a  kind  as  to  render  an 
 argument  from  them  against  the  unity  of  the  book 
 little  better  than  puerile.  Thus  we  are  told  that 
 in  some  places  the  word  ty^X)  is  used  for  a  tribe, 
 
 while  in  others  HtSD  is  used,  and  this  is  employed 
 
 as  a  test  to  distinguish  one  fragment  from  another. 
 Accordingly,  for  instance,  in  oh.  xviii.  vers.  2,  4, 
 7,  are  pronounced  to  belong  to  one  writer,  and 
 ver.  1 1  to  another ;  which  is  just  as  if  an  author, 
 in  giving  an  account  of  the  rebellion  of  1745, 
 should  speak  in  the  same  chapter,  first  of  a  body  of 
 Highlanders  as  a  clan,  and  them  of  the  same  as  a 
 sept,  and  some  critic  were  to  come  after  him  and  say, 
 '  This  could  not  have  been  written  by  one  author, 
 for  he  would  not  have  called  the  same  body  by  dif- 
 ferent names.'     Could  it  be  shewn  that  either  DIE^ 
 
 or  ntSD  is  a  word  introduced  into  the  language  for 
 
 the  first  time  at  a  date  much  later  than  the  age  of 
 
 Joshua,  while  the  other  word  had  then  become 
 obsolete,  an  argument  of  some  weight,  and  such 
 as  a  scholar  like  Bentley  might  have  employed, 
 would  have  been  advanced ;  but  to  attempt  to 
 assign  parts  of  the  same  chapter  to  different 
 authors  and  to  different  epochs,  simply  because 
 synonymous  appellations  of  the  same  object  are 
 employed,  is  nothing  better  than  sheer  trifling. 
 Again,  it  is  said  that  '  the  historical  parts  have  the 
 
 rare   word   flpPriD,   inheritance*  (xi.  23  ;   xii.   7  ; 
 
 xviii.  10),  which  does  not  appear  in  the  geographical 
 sections'  (Davidson,  i.  417).  Is  ch.  xviii.,  then, 
 not  in  the  geographical  part  of  the  book  ?  or  does 
 a  part  become  geographical  or  historical  as  suits 
 the  caprice  or  the  preconceived  theory  of  the  critic? 
 '  Similarly,    the    geographical    portion    has   p"l"* 
 
 ilT'T',  Jordan  by  yericho,  xiii.  32 ;  xvi.  I ,  xx.  8 ; 
 
 a  mode  of  expression  wanting  in  the  historical' 
 [Ibid.)  True;  but  suppose  there  was  no  occasion 
 to  use  the  phrase  in  the  historical  portions,  what 
 then  ?  Are  they,  therefore,  from  a  different  pen  from 
 that  which  produced  the  geographical  ?  '  Again, 
 in    the   historical   parts   occur  the  words,    D^jnb 
 
 D'l?!!  [D''jn3n],  the  priests,  the  Levites  (iii,  3  ;  viii. 
 
 33)  ;  or  simply  '^^yp\'Z,  priests  (iii.  6,  15  ;  vi.  4,  6, 
 
 etc.) ;  but  in  the  geographical  sections  the  same 
 persons  are  termed  sons  of  Aaron  (xxi.  4,  10,  13, 
 19) '  (Ibid.)  Is  there  not,  however,  a  reason  for 
 this  in  the  fact  that,  as  it  was  in  virtue  of  their 
 being  descended  from  Aaron,  and  not  in  virtue  of 
 their  being  priests,  that  the  Kohathites  received 
 their  portion,  it  was  more  proper  to  designate 
 them  '  children  of  Aaron,  of  the  Levites,'  than 
 'priests,'  or  'the  priests  the  Levites.'  David- 
 son scouts  this  explanation  as  one  which  '  only 
 betrays  the  weakness  of  the  cause.'  We  confess 
 ourselves  unable  to  see  this  ;  the  explanation  is,  in 
 oui  judgment,  perfectly  valid  in  itself,  and  suffi- 
 cient for  the  end  for  which  it  is  adduced  ;  and  he 
 I  has  made  no  attempt  to  show  that  it  is  otherwise. 
 All  he  says  is,  '  The  former  is  a  Deuteronomistic 
 expression  ;  the  latter  Elohistic'  What  this  is 
 meant  to  convey  we  are  at  a  loss  to  determine,  for 
 the  only  other  places  in  which  the  phrase  '  sons  of 
 Aaron'  occurs  is  in  connection  with  the  names  of 
 Nadab  and  Abihu,  who  were  sons  of  Aaron  by  im- 
 mediate descent,  and  must  have  been  so  described 
 by  any  writer,  whether  Deuteronomist  or  Elohist. 
 A  number  of  other  words  are  adduced  by  the 
 opponents  of  the  unity  of  the  book  of  Joshua,  for 
 the  purpose  of  showing  that  it  includes  fragments 
 from  different  authors.  On  these  we  do  not  linger. 
 There  are  two  considerations  which  seem  to  us 
 entirely  to  destroy  their  force  as  evidences  for  that 
 which  they  are  adduced  to  prove.  The  one  of 
 these  is  that,  according  to  Ewald,  '  the  later  his- 
 torians imitated  the  words  and  phraseology  of  those 
 who  preceded  them,  and  moreover,  that  they  fre- 
 quently altered  the  phrases  which  they  found  in 
 the  earlier  documents.'  On  this  Kurz  (from  whom 
 we  borrow  the  statement)  remarks  with  great  force 
 — '  If  that  was  the  case,  we  can  no  longer  thmk  of 
 peculiarities   of   style   as    characteristic   signs   by 
 
 *  n'pPnO  happens  to  be  the //«;'«/  of  DppnJD, 
 
 which  signifies,  not  inheritance,  but  division,  or 
 course. 
 
JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 657 
 
 JOSHUA.  BOOK  OF 
 
 which  the  different  sources  may  be  distinguished. 
 His  entire  theoiy  is  therefore  built  on  sand'  {Com- 
 vteiit.  on  Josh.,  Inlrod.,  p.  9,  E.  T.)  The  other 
 observation  we  would  make  is,  that  supposing  it 
 made  out  by  indubitable  marks  that  the  book  of 
 Joshua  has  undergone  a  careful  revision  by  a  later 
 editor,  who  has  altered  expressions  and  interpo- 
 lated brief  statements  that  would  not  seriously 
 impeach  the  unity  of  the  book,  it  would  still 
 remain  substantially  the  work  of  one  author.  We 
 cannot  forbear  adding  that,  in  all  such  inquiries, 
 more  faith  is  to  be  placed  on  a  sound  literary  per- 
 ception and  taste,  than  on  those  minutiae  of  expres- 
 sion and  phraseology  on  which  so  much  stress  has 
 of  late  been  laid  by  some  of  the  scholars  of  Ger- 
 many and  their  followers  in  this  country.  The 
 impression  undoubtedly  left  on  the  mind  of  the 
 reader  is,  that  this  book  contains  a  continuous  and 
 uniform  narrative ;  and  its  claims  in  this  respect 
 can  be  brought  into  doubt  only  by  the  application 
 to  it  of  a  species  of  criticism  which  would  produce 
 the  same  result  were  it  applied  to  the  histories  of 
 Livy,  the  commentaries  of  Cffisar,  or  any  other 
 ancient  work  of  narrative. 
 
 4.  Date  of  Composition.  —  This  can  be  only 
 approximately  determined.  Of  great  value  for  this 
 purpose  is  the  frequent  use  of  the  phrase,  '  until 
 this  day,'  by  the  writer,  in  reference  to  the  dura- 
 tion of  certain  objects  of  which  he  writes.  The 
 use  of  such  a  phrase  indicates  indubitably  that  the 
 narrative  was  written  while  the  object  referred  to 
 was  still  existing.  It  is  a  phrase,  also,  which  may 
 be  used  in  reference  to  a  very  limited  period  ;  as, 
 for  instance,  when  Joshua  uses  it  of  the  period  up 
 to  which  the  two  tribes  and  a  half  had  continued 
 with  their  brethren  (xxii.  3),  or  when  he  uses  it  of 
 the  period  up  to  which  the  Israelites  had  been 
 suffering  for  the  iniquity  of  Peor  (xxii.  17)  ;  comp. 
 also  xxiii.  8,  9.  Now,  we  find  this  phrase  used 
 by  the  historian  in  cases  where  the  reference  is 
 undoubtedly  to  a  period  either  within  the  lifetime 
 of  Joshua,  or  not  long  after  his  death.  Thus  it  is 
 used  in  reference  to  the  stones  which  Joshua  set  up 
 in  the  midst  of  Jordan,  in  the  place  where  the 
 priests  had  stood  as  the  people  passed  over  (iv.  9), 
 and  which  we  cannot  suppose  remained  in  that 
 position  for  a  very  long  time ;  it  is  used  also  of 
 Rahab's  dwelling  in  the  midst  of  Israel  (vi.  25), 
 which  must  have  ceased,  at  the  furthest,  very  soon 
 after  Joshua's  death  ;  also  of  Caleb's  personal  pos- 
 session of  Hebron  (xiv.  14),  which  of  course 
 terminated  soon  after  the  time  of  Joshua.  From 
 these  notices  we  infer  that  the  book  ;;/(7>'have  been 
 written  during  Joshua's  lifetime,  and  cannot  have 
 been  written  long  after.  With  this  falls  in  the  use  of 
 the  first  person  in  the  reference  to  the  crossing  of  the 
 Jordan  (v.  i),  where  one  who  was  present  on  the 
 occasion  is  evidently  the  writer.  To  the  same  effect 
 is  the  fact,  that  no  allusion  is  anywhere  made  to  any- 
 tiring  that  is  known  to  have  been  long  posterior  to 
 the  time  of  Joshua.  From  all  this  we  may  infer, 
 that  the  book  was  wTitten  not  later  than  a  quarter 
 of  a  centuiy  at  furthest,  after  the  death  of  Joshua. 
 
 Several  words  occurring  in  this  book  have  been 
 adduced  as  belonging  to  the  later  Hebrew,  and  as, 
 consequently,  indicating  a  later  date  of  compo- 
 sition for  the  book  than  the  age  of  Joshua,  or  that 
 immediately  succeeding.  But  it  strikingly  shews 
 the  precarious  basis  on  which  all  such  reasoning 
 rests,  that  words  are  pronounced  archaic  or  late, 
 just  as  it  suits  the  purpose  of  the  inquirer ;  what 
 VOL.  II.  * 
 
 De  Wette  calls  late  being  declared  to  be  ancient 
 by  Hiivernick  and  Keil,  and  what  Havernick  and 
 Keil  call  ancient  being  again  pronounced  late  by 
 Knobel  and  Davidson  ;  and  with  equal  absence  of 
 any  show  of  reason  on  both  sides.  One  thing  of 
 importance,  however,  is,  that  whether  the  writer 
 has  used  what  modern  scholars,  judging  ^/;wrz, 
 call  later  forms  or  not,  he  has  undoubtedly  made 
 no  allusions  to  later  facts,  and  so  has  given  evi- 
 dence of  antiquity  which  common  sense  inquirers 
 can  appreciate. 
 
 5.  Author. — Assuming  that  the  book  is  the  pro- 
 duction of  one  writer,  and  that  it  was  written 
 about  the  time  above  suggested,  the  question 
 arises,  To  whom  is  it  to  be  ascribed  ?  That  it  is 
 the  work  of  Joshua  himself  is  the  tradition  of  the 
 Jews  {Baba  Bathra,  cap.  i.  fol.  14,  B)  ;  and  this 
 has  been  embraced  by  several  Christian  writers, 
 and  among  others  in  recent  times,  by  Konig,  and, 
 as  respects  the  first  half  of  the  book,  by  Haver- 
 nick. That  this  might  have  been  the  case  as 
 respects  all  but  the  concluding  section  of  the  book, 
 cannot  be  denied  ;  but  the  reasons  which  have 
 been  adduced  in  support  of  it  have  not  appeared 
 sufficient  to  the  great  majority  of  critics.  These 
 may  be  briefly  noticed  here.  From  xxiv.  26, 
 where  it  is  said  that  Joshua  '  wrote  these  words  in 
 the  book  of  the  law,'  it  is  inferred  that  whether  by 
 '  these  words,'  we  are  to  understand  all  the  pre- 
 ceding part  of  the  book,  or  only  the  things  nar- 
 rated in  the  last  two  chapters,  it  may  be  alike 
 concluded  that  Joshua  is  the  author  of  the  book  ; 
 on  the  former  supposition,  from  direct  assertion ; 
 on  the  latter,  from  the  consideration  that,  if  he 
 wrote  the  last  two  chapters  in  the  Thorah,  the  pre- 
 sumption is  that  he  wrote  the  whole  book.  But  it 
 is  probable  that  it  is  to  the  covenant  which  Joshua 
 made  with  the  people  as  expressed  in  his  farewell 
 addresses  to  them,  that  reference  is  made  in  this 
 passage,  and  not  to  the  preceding  narrative,  either 
 in  whole  or  in  part ;  and  if  so,  the  inference  is,  that 
 as  the  writing  of  that  part  alone  is  ascribed  ta 
 Joshua,  the  rest  of  the  book  is  not  from  his  pen. 
 Again,  it  has  been  contended  that,  in  the  account 
 of  the  death  and  burial  of  Joshua,  which  must,  ol 
 course,  have  been  written  by  some  other  than 
 Joshua  himself,  the  style  is  so  different  as  to  render 
 It  probable  that  Joshua  wrote  the  rest  of  the  book 
 (Jahn,  Introd.,  p.  243).  But  an  argument  of  this 
 sort  is  always  very  uncertain,  especially  in  the  case 
 of  a  book  which  has  appeared  to  some  critics  to 
 present  traces  of  differcnt  styles  throughout ;  to  say 
 nothing  of  the  consideration  that  it  is  assuming 
 more  than  can  be  conceded,  that,  supposing  a  di- 
 versity of  style  made  out,  the  only  way  of  account- 
 ing for  that  is,  that  the  writer  of  the  book  was 
 dead  before  the  concluding  portion  was  added.  As 
 for  the  title  of  honour  given  to  Joshua,  xxiv.  29, 
 where  he  is  called  ri'lH"'  *13j;,  a  title  nowhere  else 
 
 bestowed  on  him  throughout  the  book,  one  can 
 hardly  infer  from  this  that  its  absence  in  the  earlier 
 part  of  the  book  is  a  proof  that  that  part  was 
 written  by  Joshua  himself.  He  might  indeed  have 
 from  modesty  refrained  from  using  such  a  desig- 
 nation ;  but  such  a  title  comes  in  more  appropri- 
 ately in  connection  with  the  death  of  one  who 
 has  faithfully  served  his  generation  by  the  will  of 
 God,  than  it  does  in  the  narrative  of  his  exploits, 
 and  consequently,  whilst  the  historian,  in  record- 
 ing the  events  of  Joshua's  life,  may  have  refrained 
 
 2  u 
 
JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 658 
 
 JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 from  any  such  designation,  he  may  have  felt  him- 
 self at  perfect  liberty  to  bestow  it  on  him  when 
 narrating  his  death.  Stress  has  also  been  laid  on 
 the  use  of  the  first  person  in  v.  I,  6  ;  but  though 
 the  use  of  the  '  we'  in  the  former  passage  indicates 
 that  the  writer  was  one  of  those  who  passed  over, 
 it  does  not  necessarily  prove  that  the  writer  was 
 Joshua  ;  and  in  the  latter  passage,  the  'us'  stands 
 evidently  for  the  nation  as  such,  and  might  have 
 been  used  by  an  Israelite  at  any  period  of  the 
 national  existence.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are 
 statements  in  the  book  which  seem  incom]iatible 
 with  the  supposition  that  it  was  written  by  Joshua 
 himself.  Such  is  the  account  of  the  capture  of 
 Hebron  by  Caleb,  of  Debir  by  Othniel  (xv.  13- 
 19),  and  of  Leshem  by  the  Danites  ;  events  which, 
 as  we  leam  from  Judg.  i.  15,  did  not  take  place 
 till  after  Joshua's  death.  Again,  when  Josh.  xv. 
 63  is  compared  with  Judg.  i.  21,  it  seems  evident 
 that  the  event  narrated  took  place  after  the  time  of 
 Joshua,  for,  according  to  the  author  of  Judges,  it 
 occurred  subsequent  to  the  assault  on  Jerusalem 
 mentioned  Judg.  i.  8,  and  this  is  distinctly  referred 
 to  the  period  after  Joshua's  death.  It  is  probable, 
 also,  that  such  notices  as  those  contained  Josh, 
 xiii.  2-5  (comp.  Judg.  iii.  3),  Josh.  xvi.  10  (comp. 
 Judg.  i.  29),  and  Josh.  xvii.  Ii  (comp.  Judg.  i.  27, 
 28),  relate  to  a  period  subsequent  to  that  of 
 Joshua.  That  the  account  of  Joshua's  death  and 
 burial,  of  the  interment  of  the  bones  of  Joseph, 
 and  of  the  burial  of  Eleazar  (xxiv.  29-33),  was  not 
 written  by  Joshua,  all  admit  as  a  matter  of  course ; 
 but,  if  it  be  also  admitted  that  Joshua  did  not 
 write  the  rest  of  the  book,  there  is  no  need  for 
 supposing  the  author  of  these  verses  to  be  different 
 from  the  author  of  the  book.  Who  this  was  we 
 can  only  conjecture.  There  seems  no  serious  ob- 
 jection to  the  suggestion  of  Keil  that  he  was  one 
 of  the  elders  who  lived  for  some  time  after  Joshua, 
 and  who  had  seen  all  the  works  of  Jehovah  which 
 He  had  done  for  Israel  (xxiv.  31  ;  Judg.  ii.  7), 
 '  and  who  occupied  himself  at  the  close  of  his  life 
 with  writing  down,  partly  from  recollection,  and 
 partly  also  from  contemporary  documents  and 
 other  written  notices,  the  things  which  he  himself 
 had  witnessed'  (p.  47).  In  this  case  the  title  which 
 the  book  bears  must  be  referred  to  the  principal 
 subject  of  the  book,  and  not  to  the  author  of  it. 
 
 6.  Credibility. — That  the  narrative  contained  in 
 this  book  is  to  be  accepted  as  a  trustworthy  ac- 
 count of  the  transactions  it  records,  is  proved  alike 
 by  the  esteem  in  which  it  was  always  held  by  the 
 Jews  ;  by  the  references  to  events  recorded  in  it  in 
 the  national  sacred  songs  (comp.  Ps.  xliv.  2-4 ; 
 Ixxviii.  54,  55;  Ixviii.  13-15  ;  cxiv.  1-8;  Hab.  iii. 
 8-13),  and  in  other  parts  of  Scripture  (comp.  Judg. 
 xviii.  31  ;  I  Sam.  i.  3,  9,  24;  iii.  21  ;  Is.  xxviii.  21  ; 
 Acts  vii.  45 ;  Heb.  iv.  8 ;  xi.  30-32  ;  Jam.  ii.  25) ;  by 
 the  traces  which,  both  in  the  historical  and  in  the 
 geographical  portions,  may  be  found  of  the  use  by 
 the  writer  of  contemporary  documents  ;  by  the 
 minuteness  of  the  details  which  the  author  fur- 
 nishes, and  which  indicates  familiar  acquaintance 
 with  what  he  records  ;  by  the  accuracy  of  his  geo- 
 graphical delineations,  an  accuracy  which  the 
 results  of  modern  investigation  are  increasingly  de- 
 monstrating ;  by  the  fact  that  the  tribes  never  had 
 any  dispute  as  to  the  boundaries  of  their  respective 
 territories,  but  adhered  to  the  arrangements  speci- 
 fied in  this  book  ;  and  by  the  general  fidelity  to 
 historical  consistency  and  probability  which  the 
 
 book  displays    (Havernick,   Eiul.,   sec.    148,   ff.) 
 
 Some  of  the  narratives,  it  is  true,  are  of  a  mira- 
 culous kind,  but  such  are  wholly  in  keeping  with 
 the  avowed  relation  to  the  Almighty  of  the  people 
 whose  history  the  book  records,  and  they  can  be 
 regarded  as  unhistorical  only  on  the  assumption 
 that  all  miracles  are  incredible  ;  a  question  we 
 cannot  stop  to  discuss  here  [Miracles].  In  the 
 list  of  such  miraculous  interpositions  we  do  not  in- 
 clude the  standing  still  of  the  sun,  and  the  staying 
 of  the  moon,  recorded  in  ch.  x.  12,  13.  That 
 passage  is  apparently  wholly  a  quotation  from  the 
 book  of  Jashar,  and  is  probably  a  fragment  of  a 
 poem  composed  by  some  Israelite  on  the  occasion  ; 
 it  records  in  highly  poetical  language  the  gracious 
 help  which  God  granted  to  Joshua  by  the  retard- 
 ing of  the  approach  of  darkness  long  enough  to 
 enable  him  to  complete  the  destruction  of  his 
 enemies ;  and  is  no  more  to  be  taken  literally  than 
 is  such  a  passage  as  Ps.  cxiv.  4-6,  where  the  Red 
 Sea  is  described  as  being  frightened  and  fleeing, 
 and  the  mountains  as  skipping  like  rams  [Jashar, 
 Book  of].  That  God  interposed  on  this  occasion 
 to  help  his  people  we  do  not  doubt  ;  but  that  he 
 interposed  by  the  working  of  such  a  miracle  as  the 
 words  taken  literally  would  indicate,  we  see  no 
 reason  to  believe. 
 
 The  account  given,  ch.  viii.  I,  ff.,  of  the  taking 
 of  Ai  has  been  much  dwelt  upon  as  presenting  a 
 narrative  which  is  unhistorical.  It  must  be  con- 
 fessed that  very  considerable  obscurity  hangs  over 
 this  portion  of  the  book.  It  is  incredible  that 
 Joshua  sent  hvo  bodies  of  men,  one  comprising 
 30,000  soldiers,  the  other  5000,  to  lie  in  ambush 
 against  the  city,  while  he  himself  advanced  on  it 
 with  the  main  body  of  his  army  ;  and  yet  this 
 seems  to  be  what  the  narrative  states.  What  in- 
 creases the  improbability  here  is  that  the  larger 
 body  is  never  mentioned  as  having  come  into 
 action  at  all,  for  the  whole  exploit  was  accom- 
 plished by  the  5°°°  ^'^'^  those  who  were  with 
 Joshua.  If  the  case  were  stated  thus  :  That 
 Joshua  took  30,000  of  his  warriors,  and  of  these 
 sent  away  5000  to  lie  in  ambush,  while  he  with 
 the  remaming  25,000  advanced  against  the  city ; 
 the  narrative  would  be  perfectly  simple  and  cre- 
 dible. But  as  the  text  stands  it  is  impossible  to 
 extract  such  a  statement  from  it.  The  difficulty 
 here  has  been  often  confessed  by  interpreters  ;  but 
 no  satisfactory  solution  of  it  has  been  offered. 
 The  suggestion  that  vers.  12  and  13  are  a  mar- 
 ginal gloss  which  has  been  supposed  to  creep  into 
 the  text,  leaves  the  narrative  burdened  with  the 
 improbable  statement  that  30,000  men  could  ad- 
 vance on  Ai  in  daylight,  and  lie  concealed  in  its 
 immediate  neighbourhood  for  several  hours  with- 
 out their  presence  being  suspected  by  the  inha- 
 bitants. Still  less  probable  seems  the  suggestion 
 that  in  these  verses  we  have  a  fragment  of  an  older 
 record  ;  for  unless  we  suppose  the  fragment  to 
 have  inserted  itself  in  the  middle  of  the  other 
 narrative,  and  the  whole  book  to  have  formed 
 itself  by  a  fortuitous  concourse  of  fragments,  much 
 after  the  manner  in  which  the  Epicureans  supposed 
 the  universe  to  have  been  fomied  from  a  fortuitous 
 concourse  of  atoms,  we  must  presume  it  was  in- 
 serted intentionally  by  some  intelligent  compiler  ; 
 and  such  an  insertion  is  just  what  no  intelligent 
 compiler  would  make.  Keil  labours  to  shew  that 
 from  the  peculiar  style  of  Shemitic  narrative  it  is 
 competent  to  supply,  in  ver.  3,  in  thought,  from 
 
JOSHUA,  BOOK  OF 
 
 659 
 
 JOSIAH 
 
 Ihe  subsequent  narrative,  that  Joshua  selected  from 
 the  30,000  whom  he  took  5000,  whom  he  sent 
 away  by  night ;  but  there  appears  to  us  too  much 
 m  this  of  special  pleading  in  order  to  escape  a 
 difficulty  to  make  it  acceptable.  We  prefer  to 
 admit  our  inability  to  solve  the  difficulty ;  at  the 
 same  time  maintaining  that  it  would  be  unrea- 
 sonable on  this  account  to  relinquish  our  confi- 
 dence on  the  general  credibility  of  the  book. 
 
 7.  Relation  to  the  Pentateicch. — The  Pentateuch 
 brings  down  the  history  of  the  Israelites  to  the 
 death  of  Moses,  at  which  it  naturally  terminates. 
 The  book  of  Joshua  takes  up  the  histoiy  at  this 
 point,  and  continues  it  to  the  death  of  Joshua, 
 which  furnishes  another  natural  pause.  From  re- 
 semblance between  the  language  and  forms  of 
 expression  used  by  the  author  of  the  book  of 
 Joshua,  and  those  found  in  Deuteronomy,  it  has 
 been  supposed  that  both  are  to  be  ascribed,  in 
 part  at  least,  to  the  same  writer.  This,  of  course, 
 proceeds  on  the  supposition  that  the  book  of 
 Deuteronomy  is  not  the  composition  of  Moses  ;  a 
 question  on  which  it  would  be  out  of  place  to  enter 
 here  [Deuteronomy  ;  Pentateuch].  It  may 
 suffice  to  observe,  that  whilst  it  is  natural  to  expect 
 that  many  similarities  of  phraseology  and  language 
 would  be  apparent  in  works  so  nearly  contempo- 
 raneous as  that  of  Deuteronomy  and  that  of  Joshua ; 
 there  are  yet  such  differences  between  them  as 
 may  seem  to  indicate  that  they  are  not  the  produc- 
 tion of  the  same  writer.  Thus,  in  the  Pentateuch, 
 vre  have  the  word  Jericho  always  spelt  in"!'',  whilst 
 
 in  Joshua  it  is  always  ilT'"!'' ;  *  in  Deuteronomy  we 
 have  Wp  ?S  (iv.  24;  v.  9;  vi.  15),  in  Joshua 
 ^'\l\>  ^X  (xxiv.  19) ;  in  Deut.  the  inf.  of  N^\  to 
 fear,  is  nST"  (iv.  10;  v.  26;  vi.  24,  etc.),  in  Josh. 
 it  is  NT"  (xxii.  25) ;  in  Detit.  we  have  warriors  de- 
 scribed as  7TI  ''J3  (iii-  18),  whilst  in  Josh,  they  are 
 called  ^ipin  ''"1U|I  (i-  14;  vi.  2,  etc.)  We  have 
 also  in  Joshua  the  peculiar  formula  Iti'XI!!  lOT, 
 
 which  nowhere  occurs  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  only 
 Si  iOT  (Lev.   XX.  9,  II,  12,   etc.);  the  expression 
 
 ^"IXn   72   lilX  (iii-    iij    13))  which  occurs   again 
 
 only  in  Zech.  vi.  5  ;  the  phrase,  '  the  heart  melted' 
 (ii.  II;  V.  I ;  vii.  5) ;  etc.  In  the  Pentateuch  also 
 we  find  the  usage  in  respect  of  the  third  personal 
 pronoun   feminine   fluctuating   between    N^'^    and 
 
 N^n  ;  in  the  book  of  Joshua  the  usage  is  fixed 
 down  to  STl,  which  became  the  permanent  usage 
 of  the  language.  We  find  also  that  in  the  Penta- 
 teuch the  demonstrative  pronoun,  with  the  article, 
 
 sometimes  appears  in  the  form  PNH,  while  in  Joshua 
 
 and  elsewhere  it  is  always  n?Xn.     The  evidence 
 
 here  is  the  same  in  effect  as  would  accrue  in  the 
 
 *  In  some  editions  the  word  is  written  ini^,  in 
 
 eh.  ii.  I,  3  ;  iv.  13,  etc.  Keil  calls  this  in  ques- 
 tion, saying,  '  I  have  not  met  with  this  form  in 
 any  of  the  editions  issued  by  J.  H.  Michaelis  and 
 Hahn.'  It  is  found,  however,  in  the  edition  of 
 Leusden,  Amst.  1667,  and  that  of  Jablonski,  Ber. 
 1690,  and  Kennicott  reports  it  as  the  reading  of 
 several  codices. 
 
 case  of  Latin  writers  from  the  use  of  ipus  and  ipse. 
 otitis  and  ille.  ' 
 
 8.  Sama)-itan  Book  of  Joshua. — Hottinger,  in 
 his  Historia  Orientalis,  p.  60,  ff  (comp.  also 
 Fabricius,  Codex  Apocr.  Vet.  Test.,  p.  876,  ff. ), 
 has  given  an  account  of  this  work  from  Rabbinical 
 sources.  It  seems  to  have  been  originally  com- 
 posed in  Arabic,  though  alleged  to  have  been 
 translated  into  Arabic  from  the  Samaritan  (see 
 Eodiger  in  the  Plall.  Allg.  Lit.  Zeit.  for  1848, 
 No.  217,  ff.),  and  bears  evident  marks  of  having 
 been  written  subsequent  to  the  Coran,  probably  as 
 late  as  the  13th  century.  It  contains  a  compila- 
 tion from  the  canonical  books  of  Moses  and  Joshua, 
 mixed  up  with  much  legendary  matter.  An  edi- 
 tion, from  the  only  MS.  extant,  appeared  in 
 1848  at  Leyden,  with  the  title  Liber  Jostue : 
 Chroniatm  Samaritanum ;  edidit,  latine  vertit, 
 etc.,  T.  G.  J.  JuynboU.  It  seems  never  to  have 
 been  recognised  by  the  Samaritans  themselves  (De 
 Wette,  Einl.,  sec.  171). 
 
 9.  Cninvieiitaries. — There  is  an  explanation  ot 
 the  Book  of  Joshua  in  the  works  of  Ephraem 
 Syrus  {0pp.  Syr.,  vol.  i.),  also  Questions  on  it  in 
 the  works  of  Theodoret  and  Augustine.  The 
 Hebrew  commentary  of  Rashi  was  published  with 
 a  Latin  translation  by  Breithaupt,  Goth.  17 14. 
 The  most  valuable  of  ihe  commentaries  since  the 
 Reformation  are  those  of  Masius,  1574;  Chytrreus, 
 1592;  Calvin,  1667;  Osiander,  1681  ;  Corn,  a 
 Lapide,  1718;  Maurer,  1831 ;  Rosenmiiller  (in 
 \i\%  Scholia,  P.  ix.  vol.  i),  1833;  Bush,  1838; 
 Keil,  1847,  translated  into  English  by  Martin, 
 1857.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOSHUA,  OR  JESHUA  B.  JEHUDAH,  called 
 in  Arabic  Abidfarag Forkan  Lbn  Assad  (J-|S^J<  12X 
 *1DX  pX  INp'ilQ),  and  quoted  by  lbn  Ezra  by  the 
 simple  name  /i'.  Joshua  (nyiC'l''  'I),  a  distinguished 
 Karaite  philosopher,  grammarian,  and  commenta- 
 tor, who  flourished  in  the  nth  century,  and  who, 
 from  his  great  piety  and  extensive  knowledge,  ob- 
 tained the  honourable  appellation  of  the  aged,  or 
 presbyter  [Ha-Sakeii,  Al-Shaich).  He  wrote  ex- 
 positions of  the  whole  O.  T.,  which  are  still  in 
 MS.  The  only  fragments  printed  are  given  by 
 lbn  Ezra  on  Gen.  xxviii.  12  ;  xlix.  27  ;  Exod.  iii. 
 2,  13  ;  iv.  4 ;  vi.  3,  13  ;  vii.  3,  12 ;  viii.  22  ;  x.  6 ; 
 xii.  5  ;  XV.  4  ;  xvii.  16  ;  xxi.  37  ;  xxii.  7  ;  xxxv.  5  ; 
 Lev.  xvi.  I ;  Hos.  v.  7  ;  Joel  iii.  I ;  Amos  ix.  10 ; 
 Obad.  17;  Jonah  iii.  3;  Micah  ii.  7;  vii.  12; 
 Hab.  ii.  7  ;  Zeph.  iii.  i ;  Hag.  ii.  10 ;  Mai.  ii.  6  ; 
 Dan.  i.  3  ;  ii.  4  ;  iv.  17  ;  vii.  9  ;  xii.  2  ;  Ps.  ixxxviii. 
 I  ;  cix.  8  ;  ex.  3  ;  cxix.  160  ;  cxxii.  i  ;  cxlix.  6. 
 Comp.  Delitzsch,  in  Aaron  b.  Elias,  D^TI  J'y,  Leip- 
 zig 1844,  p.  315,  ff. ;  Pinsker,  Lickute  lurdinoniot, 
 Vienna  i860,  text,  p.  117  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der 
 Juden,  vol.  vi. ,  Leipzig  1861,  p.  94,  etc. 
 
 JOSIAPI  (in>:rN\  Jehmah  heals;  Sept.  To^o-ias). 
 
 I.  Seventeenth  king  of  Judah,  and  son  of  Amon, 
 whom  he  succeeded  on  the  throne  in  B.C.  698,  at 
 the  early  age  of  eight  years,  and  reigned  thirty-one 
 years. 
 
 As  Josiah  thus  early  ascended  the  throne,  we 
 may  the  more  admire  the  good  qualities  which  he 
 manifested,  seeing,  as  Coquerel  remarks,  '  qu'il  est 
 difficile  de  recevoir  une  bonne  education  sur  le 
 trone'  (Biographic  Sacrce,  p.  305).  Avoiding  the 
 example  of  his  immediate  predecessors,  he  '  did 
 that  which  was  right  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  and 
 
JOSIAII 
 
 C60 
 
 JOSIPPON  B.  GORION 
 
 walked  in  all  the  ways  of  David  his  father,  and 
 turned  not  aside  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left ' 
 (2  Kings  xxii.  i,  2  ;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  i,  2).  So 
 early  as  the  sixteenth  year  of  his  age  he  began  to 
 manifest  that  enmity  to  idolatry  in  all  its  fonns 
 which  distinguished  his  character  and  reign  ;  and 
 he  was  not  quite  twenty  years  old  when  he  pro- 
 claimed open  war  against  it,  although  more  or  less 
 favoured  by  many  men  of  rank  and  influence  in 
 the  court  and  kingdom.  He  then  commenced  a 
 tliorough  purification  of  the  land  from  all  taint  of 
 idolatry,  by  going  about  and  superintending  in 
 person  the  operations  of  the  men  who  were  em- 
 ployed in  breaking  down  idolatrous  altars  and 
 images,  and  cutting  clown  tlie  groves  which  had 
 been  consecrated  to  idol-worship.  His  detestation 
 of  idolatry  could  not  have  been  more  strongly 
 expressed  than  by  ransacking  the  sepulchres  of  the 
 idolatrous  priests  of  former  days,  and  consuming 
 their  bones  upon  the  idol  altars  before  they  were 
 overturned.  Yet  this  operation,  although  unex- 
 ampled in  Jewish  history,  was  foretold  326  years 
 before  Josiah  was  born,  by  the  prophet  who  was 
 commissioned  to  denounce  to  Jeroboam  the  future 
 punishment  of  his  sin.  He  even  named  Josiah  as 
 the  person  by  whom  this  act  was  to  be  performed ; 
 and  said  that  it  should  be  performed  in  Beth-el, 
 which  was  then  a  part  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  ( i 
 Kings  xiii.  2).  All  this  seemed  much  beyond  the 
 range  of  human  probabilities.  But  it  was  per- 
 formed to  the  letter ;  for  Josiah  did  not  confine  his 
 proceedings  to  his  own  kingdom,  but  went  over  a 
 considerable  part  of  the  neighbouring  kingdom  of 
 Israel,  which  then  lay  comparatively  desolate,  with 
 the  same  object  in  view  ;  and  at  Beth-el,  in  parti- 
 cular, executed  all  that  the  prophet  had  foretold 
 (2  Kings  xxiii.  1-19;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  3-7,  32). 
 In  these  proceedings  Josiah  seems  to  have  been 
 actuated  by  an  absolute  hatred  of  idolatiy,  such  as 
 no  other  king  since  David  had  manifested,  and 
 which  David  had  scarcely  occasion  to  manifest  in 
 the  same  degree. 
 
 In  the  eighteenth  year  of  his  reign  and  the 
 twenty-sixth  of  his  age,  when  the  land  had  been 
 thoroughly  purified  from  idolatry  and  all  that  be- 
 longed to  it,  Josiah  proceeded  to  repair  and  beau- 
 tify the  temple  of  the  Lord.  In  the  course  of  this 
 pious  labour,  the  high-priest  Hilkiah  discovered  in 
 the  sanctuary  a  volume,  which  proved  to  contain 
 the  books  of  Moses,  and  which,  from  the  terms 
 employed,  seems  to  have  been  considered  the  ori- 
 ginal of  the  law  as  written  by  Moses.  [HiLKlAH.] 
 It  appears  that  the  king  was  greatly  astonished 
 when  some  parts  of  this  were  read  to  him.  It  is 
 manifest  that  he  had  previously  been  entirely  ignor- 
 ant of  much  that  he  then  heard  ;  and  he  rent 
 his  clothes  in  consternation  when  he  found  that, 
 with  the  best  intentions  to  serve  the  Lord,  he  and 
 all  his  people  had  been  living  in  the  neglect  of 
 duties  which  the  law  declared  to  be  of  vital  im- 
 portance. It  is  difficult  to  account  for  this  ignor- 
 ance. Some  suppose  that  all  the  copies  of  the 
 law  had  perished,  and  that  the  king  had  never 
 seen  one.  But  this  is  very  unlikely  ;  but  liowever 
 scarce  complete  copies  may  have  been,  the  pious 
 king  was  likely  to  have  been  the  possessor  of  one. 
 The  probability  seems  to  be  that  the  passages  read 
 were  those  awful  denunciations  against  disobedi- 
 ence with  which  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  con- 
 cludes, and  which  from  some  cause  or  other  the 
 king  had  never  before  read,  or  which  had  never 
 
 before  produced  on  his  mind  the  same  strong  convic 
 tion  of  the  imminent  dangers  under  which  the  nation 
 lay,  as  now  vdieu  read  to  him  from  a  volume  in- 
 vested with  a  character  so  venerable,  and  brought 
 with  such  interesting  circumstances  under  his  notice. 
 
 The  king  in  his  alarm  sent  to  Huldah  '  the  pro- 
 phetess,' for  her  counsel  in  this  emergency  [HuL- 
 DAH]  :  her  answer  assured  him  that,  although  the 
 dread  penalties  threatened  by  the  law  had  been 
 incurred  and  would  be  inflicted,  he  should  be 
 gathered  in  peace  to  his  fathers  before  the  days  of 
 punishment  and  sorrow  came. 
 
 It  was  perhaps  not  without  some  hope  of  avert- 
 ing this  doom  that  the  king  immediately  called  the 
 people  together  at  Jerusalem,  and  engaged  them  in 
 a  solemn  renewal  of  the  ancient  covenant  with 
 God.  When  this  had  been  done,  the  Passover 
 was  celebrated  with  careful  attention  to  the  direc- 
 tions given  in  the  law,  and  on  a  scale  of  unex- 
 ampled magnificence.  But  all  was  too  late ;  the 
 hour  of  mercy  had  passed;  for  'the  Lord  turned 
 not  from  the  fierceness  of  his  great  wrath,  where- 
 with his  anger  was  kindled  against  Judah'  (2  Kings 
 xxii.  3-20;  xxiii.  21-27;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  8-33; 
 XXXV.  1-19). 
 
 That  removal  from  the  world  which  had  been 
 promised  to  Josiah  as  a  blessing  was  not  long  de- 
 layed, and  was  brought  about  in  a  way  which  he 
 had  probably  not  expected.  His  kingdom  was  tri- 
 butaiy  to  the  Chaldaean  empire ;  and  when  Pha- 
 raoh-necho,  king  of  Egypt,  sought  a  passage 
 tlirough  his  territories,  on  an  expedition  against  the 
 Chaldseans,  Josiah,  with  a  very  high  sense  of  the 
 obligations  which  his  vassalage  imposed,  refused  to 
 allow  the  march  of  the  Egyptian  army  through  his 
 dominions,  and  prepared  to  resist  the  attempt  by 
 force  of  arms.  Necho  was  very  unwilling  to  en- 
 gage in  hostilities  with  Josiah  :  the  appearance  of 
 the  Hebrew  army  at  Megiddo,  however,  brought 
 on  a  battle,  in  which  the  king  of  Judah  was  so 
 desperately  wounded  by  arrows  that  his  attendants 
 removed  him  from  the  war-chariot,  and  placed  him 
 in  another,  in  which,  apparently,  he  died  whilst 
 being  taken  to  Jerusalem  (comp.  2  Kings  xxiii. 
 30  ;  2  Chron.  xxxv.  24).  No  king  that  reigned 
 in  Israel  was  ever  more  deeply  lamented  by  all  his 
 subjects  than  Josiah  :  and  we  are  told  that  the 
 prophet  composed  on  the  occasion  an  elegiac  ode, 
 which  was  long  preserved  among  the  people,  but 
 which  is  not  now  in  existence  (2  Kings  xxiii. 
 29-37  ;  2  Chron.  xxxv.  20-27). — J-  I*^* 
 
 2.  The  son  of  Zephaniah,  to  whose  house  the 
 prophet  Zechariah  was  commanded  to  conduct  the 
 delegates  from  the  Israelites  in  Babylon,  that  they 
 might  assist  at  the  crowning  of  Joshua  the  high- 
 priest  (Zech.  vi.  10).  Josiah  was  probably  the 
 treasurer  of  the  temple  ;  and  in  his  house  the  dele- 
 gates had  apparently  deposited  their  gifts,  from 
 which  the  materials  of  the  crown  were  to  be  taken. 
 In  ver.  14  Josiah  is  called  Hen,  as  Heldai  is  called 
 Helem  ;  both  having  apparently  double  names. 
 Some,  indeed,  would  translate  \T].faz>oti!',  and  ex- 
 plain it  of  the  hospitality  shewn  by  Josiah  to  the 
 delegates  ;  but  this  is  forced  and  unnecessary. 
 Josiah's  father  was  probably  the  Zephaniah  men- 
 tioned 2  Kings  XXV.  18  as  a  priest  of  the  second 
 rank,  and  as  one  of  those  carried  captive  to  Babylon. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOSIPPON  B.  GORION  (JVilJ  ppS'-DI"'),  also 
 called  Joseph  b.   Gorion,  the  reputed  author  oi 
 
JOSIPPON  B.  GORION 
 
 661 
 
 JOSIPPON  B.  GORION 
 
 the  celebrated  Hebrew  Chronicle  entitled  "IDD 
 JIQ^DV  the  book  of  Josippon,  or  n^^H  pD''D"l''  the 
 Heh}-ci.u  Josippon.  This  chronicle  consists  of  six 
 books,  begins  its  record  with  Adam,  explains  the 
 genealogical  table  in  Gen.  xi. ,  then  passes  on  to 
 the  history  of  Rome,  Babylon,  Cyrus,  and  the  fall 
 of  Babel,  resumes  again  the  history  of  the  Jews, 
 describes  the  times  of  Daniel,  Zeriibbabel,  Esther, 
 etc. ;  gives  an  account  of  Alexander  the  Great,  his 
 connection  with  the  Jews,  his  exploits,  and  expedi- 
 tions of  his  successors,  and  then  continues  the 
 histoiy  of  the  Jews,  of  Heliodorus'  assault  on  the 
 Temple,  the  translation  of  the  O.  T.  into  Greek, 
 the  deeds  of  the  Maccabees,  the  events  of  the 
 Herodians,  and  the  last  war  which  terminated  in 
 the  destruction  of  the  Temple  by  Titus.  The 
 authorities  quoted  in  this  remarkable  book  are — i, 
 Nicolaus  the  Damascene ;  2,  Strabo  of  Cappadocia ; 
 
 3,  Titus  Livius ;  4,  Togthas  of  Jerusalem;  5, 
 Porophius  of  Rome;  6,  The  History  of  Alexander, 
 written  in  the  year  of  his  death  by  Magi ;  7,  The 
 book  of  the  antediluvian  patriarch  Cainan  b.  Enos  ; 
 8,  Books  of  the  Greeks,  Medians,  Persians,  and 
 Macedonians  ;  9,  Epistle  of  Alexander  to  Aris- 
 totle about  the  wonders  of  India ;  10,  Treaties  of 
 alliance  of  the  Romans;  11,  Cicero,  who  was  in 
 the  Holy  of  Holies  of  the  Temple,  during  the  reign 
 of  Pompejus  ;  12,  The  intercalaiy  years  of  JuHus 
 Caesar,  composed  for  the  Nazarites  and  Greeks ; 
 13,  The  chronicles  of  the  Roman  Emperors ;  14, 
 The  constitutional  diploma  which  Vespasian  vene- 
 rated so  highly  that  he  kissed  every  page  of  it ;  15, 
 The  Alexandrian  Library  with  its  995  volumes  ; 
 16,  Jewish  histories  which  are  lost;  and  17,  The 
 national  traditions  which  have  been  transmitted 
 orally. 
 
 As  to  the  author  and  date  of  this  book,  the 
 greatest  divergency  of  opinions  prevails  amongst 
 scholars.  The  writer  himself  says  that  he  is  the 
 priest  of  Jerusaletn,  i.e..  Flavins  Josephus,  and 
 that  he  was  appointed  governor  of  the  whole  Jew- 
 ish nation  by  Titus  (pp.  68,  157,  164,  367,  673, 
 ed.  Breithaupt),  and  this  has  been  the  unanimous 
 opinion  of  the  most  learned  Jewish  writers  since 
 the  days  of  Saadia  (A.  D.  950).  It  is  quoted  as  the 
 genuine  production  of  Flavins  Josephus  by  the 
 celebrated  Rashi  (on  2  Kings  xx.  13;  Is.  xxi.  4; 
 xxxix.  2 ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  1 7 ;  Hag.  ii.  7 ;  Zech.  ix. 
 14;  Dan.  V.  I  ;  vi.  29;  vii.  6;  viii.  Ii,  21  ;  xi.  2, 
 
 4,  16,  17,  29);  Ibn  Ezra  (on  Gen.  xxxvii.  25;  Is. 
 ii.  2  ;  Hos.  xiv.  2 ;  Hag.  ii.  9 ;  Ps.  xlix.  20 ;  cxx. 
 5 ;  Dan.  ii.  39 ;  xi.  3) ;  Kimchi  (Lex.  art.  3J3 
 ^'C));  Pseudo- Saadia  (on  Dan.  ix.  27);  De 
 Rossi  {Meor  Eiiaini,  ed.  Mantua  1574,  c.  xix.,  p. 
 86,  b) ;  and  a  host  of  other  scholars,  both  Jewish 
 and  Christian.  But  Zunz  {Zeitschrift,  Berlin 
 1822,  p.  300)  has  tried  to  show  that  this  Josippon 
 is  ignorant  of  history.  He  says,  ex.gr.,  that  Titus 
 executed  the  high-priest  Ishmael  b.  Elisa  (p.  888), 
 makes  Ptolemy  Lagi  and  Antigonus  identical  (p. 
 
 153),  Ptolemy  and  ""070  separate  persons  (p.  176), 
 etc.  ;  he  sometimes  forgets  to  simulate  Josephus 
 (comp.  pp.  443,  446,  452,  510,  524,  370,  373, 
 25O1  334i  35O'  where  he  quotes  the  Latin  transla- 
 tion of  Josephus  as  belonging  to  somebody  else, 
 and  from  p.  677  speaks  of  Josephus  as  a  third 
 person) ;  he  speaks  of  later  nations  and  countries, 
 viz.,  of  Campagna  (p.  7),  Romagna  (p.  20),  Sor- 
 rento (p.  19),  Trani  (p.  869),  Tessino  (p.  6),  Po 
 {ibid.),  Candia  (p.  163),  the  Danes  (p.  745),  Turko- 
 
 mans (p.  92),  the  Goths  in  Spain  (p.  221);  he  alsc 
 describes  the  coronation  of  an  emperor,  speaks 
 of  popes  and  bishops  (p.  671).  Zunz  therefore 
 concludes  that  the  writer  was  a  French  Jew,  who 
 flourished  in  the  9th  centuiy,  that  this  deceiver 
 made  the  fragments  of  the  genuine  Josephus  which 
 had  been  translated  into  Hebrew  the  basis  of  his 
 work,  and  that  he  made  use  of  other  apocryphal 
 writings  and  his  own  imagination  to  fill  up  the  gaps, 
 and  that  subsequent  hands  have  made  all  manner 
 of  interpolations  into  it.  In  his  notes  on  Benjamin 
 of  Tudela  (ed.  Asher,  1841,  vol.  ii. ,  p.  246),  how- 
 ever, Zunz  speaks  of  Josippon  b.  Gorion  in  more 
 respectful  terms,  regards  him  as  ^  the  [Hebrew] 
 translator  and  editor  of  Josephus,'  and  says  that 
 '  he  lived  in  Italy  about  the  middle  of  the  latter 
 half  of  the  loth  century,  and  that  his  accounts  of 
 several  nations  of  his  time  are  as  important  as  his 
 orthography  of  Italian  towns  is  remarkable. '  Stein- 
 schneider,  who  also  assigns  its  birth  to  the  loth 
 century  and  to  northern  Italy,  describes  the  book 
 as  '  the  Hebrew  edition  of  the  Latin  Hegesippus,' 
 and  'as  an  offshoot  from  the  fully  developed  Mid- 
 rash  of  Arabian  and  Latin  literature'  (feivish 
 Literatttre,  London  1S57,  p.  77);  whilst  Graetz 
 maintains  that  it  is  a  Hebrew  translation  of  an 
 Arabic  book  of  Maccabees,  entitled  (Tarich  AL 
 Makkabain,  Jussuff  Ibn  G'org'on)  History  oj 
 the  Maccabees  of  Joseph  b.  Gorion,  which  has  partly 
 been  published  in  the  Polyglotts  (Paris  1645  ;  Lon- 
 don 1657)  under  the  title  of  the  Arabic  book  of 
 Maccabees,  and  which  is  to  be  found  complete  in 
 two  MSS.  in  the  Bodleian  (Uri  Catalogue,  Nos. 
 782,  829),  and  that  the  translator,  an  Italian  Jew, 
 has  made  additions  to  it  and  displayed  great  skill 
 in  his  Hebrew  style  ( Geschichte  der  Juden,  v. 
 281). 
 
 The  first  edition  of  this  work  appeared  in  Mantua 
 1476- 1479,  with  a  preface  by  Abraham  b.  Salomon 
 Conato.  A  reprint  of  this  edition  (the  text  vitiated), 
 with  a  Latin  version  by  Munster,  was  published  at 
 Basle,  1 541.  There  appeared  an  edition  from  a 
 MS.  containing  a  somewhat  different  version  of 
 the  work,  and  divided  into  ninety-seven  chapters, 
 edited  by  Tam  Ibn  Jachja  b.  David,  Constanti- 
 nople 1510.  New  editions  of  it  were  published  in 
 Venice  1544;  Cracow  1589;  Frankfort-on-the- 
 Maine  1689;  Amsterdam  1723;  Prague  1784; 
 Zolkiew  1805  ;  Vilna  1819.  It  was  partly  trans- 
 lated into  Arabic  by  Zechariah  ben  Said  el-Temeni 
 about  1223  ;  and  into  English  by  Peter  Mor\vyng, 
 London  1558,  1561,  1575,  1579,  1602.  There  are 
 two  other  Latin  translations,  besides  the  one  by 
 Munster,  1541;  one  was  made  by  our  countryman 
 the  learned  orientalist  John  Gagnier,  Oxford  1706, 
 and  one  by  Breithaupt,  the  last  has  also  the  He- 
 brew text  and  elaborate  notes,  and  will  always 
 continue  the  students'  edition.  We  have  German 
 translations  by  Michael  Adam,  Zurich  1546  ;  Moses 
 b.  Bezaliel,  Prague  1607  ;  Abraham  b.  Mordecai 
 Cohen,  Amsterdam  1661;  Seligmann  Reis,  Frank- 
 fort-on-the-Maine  1707.  Comp.  Zunz,  Zeitschrift 
 fiir  Wissetischaft  des  Jtidenthtans,  Berlin  1822,  p. 
 300,  ff.  ;  £)ie  Gottesdienstlichen  Vortnige  der  yude?!, 
 Berlin  1832,  p.  146-154;  Delitzsch,  Ztir  Geschichte 
 der  jiidischeti  Poesie,  Leipzig  1836,  p.  37-40;  Car- 
 moly  itt  fosfs  Annalen,  vol.  i.,  Frankfort-on-the- 
 Maine  1839,  p.  149,  ff. ;  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Judaica, 
 vol.  ii.,  p.  111-114  ;  Steinschneider,  Catalcgtis Libr. 
 Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodieiana,  col.  1 547- 1 552. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
JOST 
 
 662 
 
 JOT  AND  TITTLE 
 
 JOST,  Isaac  Marcus,  the  ornament  of  modern 
 Jews,  the  first  Israelite  who,  since  the  days  of 
 josephus,  wrote  the  history  of  God's  ancient 
 people,  was  bom  in  Bernburg,  Feb.  22,  1793,  of 
 very  poor  Jewish  parents.  At  the  tender  age  of 
 five,  he,  being  the  only  brother  ot  eleven  sisters, 
 had  to  become  the  guide  of  his  blind  father,  a  duty 
 which  he  performed  for  five  years  with  the  utmost 
 filial  affection  ;  and  when  his  father  died  in  1S03, 
 Jost  came  to  Wolfenbiittel,  where  his  grandfather 
 lived,  and  where  he  was  received  into  Samson's 
 Institute.  Here  he  spent  four  years  (1S03-1807) 
 studying  Hebrew  and  the  Talmud  under  great 
 deprivations  and  sufferings.  A  new  epoch,  how- 
 ever, commenced  in  the  studies  of  Jost  when  this 
 institution  was  entrusted  to  the  management  of 
 Ehrenberg,  towards  the  end  of  1807.  It  was  then 
 that  Jost,  at  the  age  of  thirteen,  was  for  the  first 
 time  properly  instructed  in  German,  which  was 
 his  mother  tongue,  and  that  his  unquenchable  de- 
 sire to  learn  other  languages  was  kindled.  Favoured 
 with  the  friendship  of  a  fellow-inmate  alike  poor 
 and  thirsting  for  knowledge,  and  that  no  less  a 
 youth  than  Leopold  Zunz,  Jost  and  his  friend 
 eagerly  prosecuted  their  studies  during  the  winter 
 of  1 808- 1 809  labouring  to  acquire  as  much  of 
 Latin  and  Greek  as  would  fit  them  for  entering  the 
 Gymnasium.  '  Whole  nights,'  he  touchingly  re- 
 cords, '  have  we  laboured  by  the  tapers  which  we 
 made  ourselves  from  the  wax  that  ran  down  the 
 big  wax  candles  in  the  synagogue.  By  hard  study 
 we  succeeded  in  bringing  it  so  far  in  the  course  of 
 the  six  months  terminating  with  April  1809,  that 
 we,  Zunz  in  Wolfenbiittel,  and  I  in  Brunswick,  were 
 put  in  the  senior  class  in  the  Gymnasium.'  Jost  re- 
 mained in  the  Gymn.asium  at  Brunswick  till  1813, 
 acquiring  a  wonderful  knowledge  of  Latin  and 
 Greek,  as  well  as  of  some  modern  languages,  dur- 
 ing these  four  years,  and  then  went  to  the  Uni- 
 versity at  Gbttingen,  where  he  most  diligently 
 devoted  himself  in  1814-1816  to  the  study  of  his- 
 tory, philology,  philosophy,  and  theology.  In 
 1816,  at  the  age  of  twenty-three,  he  undertook  the 
 management  of  a  civil  and  commercial  school  at 
 Berlin,  which  consisted  of  both  Jewish  and  Chris- 
 tian youths,  and  to  which  he  continued  to  devote 
 his  energies  till  1833,  though  all  the  Christian 
 students  were  ordered,  by  a  ministerial  decree,  to 
 leave  it  in  1819.  It  was  here,  during  his  seventeen 
 years  attending  to  the  school,  that  he  published — 
 il)  his  gigantic  historical  work,  entitled,  Geschichte 
 der  Jsracliten  sett  der  Zeit  der  Maccabder  bis  atif 
 unset e  Tage,  9  vols.,  Berlin  1820-1828;  (2)  Allge- 
 meine  Geschichte  des  Israelitischen  Volkes,  etc.,  2 
 vols.,  Berlin  1831-1832,  being  an  abridgment, 
 with  corrections  of  the  former  work  ;  and  (3)  TW^ 
 ViWO  •'"no,  the  Mishna,  with  the  Hebrew  text 
 and  vowel  points,  accompanied  by  a  German  trans- 
 lation, a  rabbinic  commentary  and  German  anno- 
 tations, 6  vols.,  Berlin  183 2- 1834.  His  hterary 
 fame,  as  well  as  the  great  ability  he  displayed  in 
 the  management  of  the  school  at  Berlin,  made  the 
 directors  of  the  Jewish  High  School  at  Frankfort- 
 on-the-Maine  offer  to  him  the  office  of  head- 
 master, which  he  accepted  in  1835,  and  held  to 
 the  end  of  his  life.  Whilst  discharging  his  schol- 
 astic duties  Jost  vigorously  prosecuted  his  literary 
 researches,  and  started  in  1839,  {4)  Israelitische 
 Annate?!,  a  weekly  journal  for  Jewish  history, 
 literature,  etc.,  of  which  appeared  three  volumes, 
 Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1839-1841.     It  is  not  too 
 
 much  to  say  that,  in  this  journal,  to  which  some 
 of  the  greatest  Jewish  literati  contributed,  the  stu- 
 dent of  Biblical  exegesis,  Hebrew  grammar,  or  ol 
 Jewish  antiquities  and  history,  will  find  materials 
 which  he  will  rarely  meet  with  elsewhere,  as  may 
 be  seen  from  the  frequent  references  to  it  in  this 
 Cyclopivdia.  The  same  year  in  which  this  journal 
 was  discontinued,  Jost,  in  conjunction  with  Creize- 
 nach,  started  (5)  a  Hebrew  periodical,  of  which 
 appeared  two  volumes,  entitled,  jV^',  Ephemerides 
 hebra'icte  s.  collcctio  dissertationum  viaxirne  theolo- 
 gicariim,  vai'iortinnjue  hebraicoriim  scripforiiin,  ad 
 ordinem  fnensittm  liinariuin  disposita,  Frankfort- 
 on-the-Maine  1841-1842.  This,  like  the  former 
 journal,  is  a  very  important  contribution  to  Bibli- 
 cal and  Jewish  literature,  and  will  always  be  read 
 with  great  pleasure  by  the  lover  of  the  sacred 
 language,  owing  to  the  beautiful  Hebrew  style  in 
 which  it  is  written.  All  this  time,  however,  Jost 
 was  labouring  at  his  grand  history  of  the  Jews,  of 
 which  he  published  (6),  in  1846-1847,  three  more 
 parts,  under  the  title  Nciiere  Geschichte  der  Israel- 
 itcti,  etc.,  being  a  continuation,  and  forming  a 
 tenth  volume,  of  his  great  historical  work  ;  and  in 
 1857-1859  he  embodied  all  his  historical  and  criti- 
 cal researches,  in  which  he  was  engaged  the  whole 
 of  his  life,  in  (7)  the  Geschichte  des  Judenthiims  tmd 
 seiner  Secten,  published  in  three  volumes  by  the 
 Iitsiitut  zur  Forderung  der  Israelitischen  Literatur, 
 in  Leipzig.  This  work  is  a  cyclopredia  of  Jew- 
 ish history  and  Biblical  literature,  containing  the 
 ripest  scholarship  of  the  19th  century.  It  would 
 be  impossible  to  catalogue  the  numberless  articles 
 which  Jost  contributed  to  various  periodicals,  all 
 bearing  more  or  less  upon  the  history  of  the  Jews, 
 and  upon  Scriptural  subjects  ;  some  of  them  are 
 frequently  referred  to  in  this  Cyclopcvdia.  After 
 enriching  the  world  for  upwards  of  forty  years 
 from  his  aljundant  stores  of  sacred  literature,  this 
 noble  descendant  of  Abraham  died  November  20, 
 i860,  in  his  sixty-seventh  year. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JOT  AND  TITTLE.  The  force  of  these  ex- 
 pressions, which  are  used  figm-atively  in  Scri[)ture 
 (Matt.  V.  18;  Luke  xvi.  17)  to  represent  the 
 minutest  part,  will  be  seen  when  their  form  and 
 proverbial  use  among  the  rabbins  are  described. 
 lod,  or  Yod,  which  is  the  proper  meaning  of 'JcDra, 
 being  the  smallest  letter  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet 
 C),  is  constantly  used  in  the  rabbinical  writings 
 to  denote  the  smallest,  or  the  most  insignificant 
 thing.  Thus,  the  conscious  insignificance,  and  yet 
 the  importance,  of  this  small  letter  "i,  is  beautifully 
 described  in  one  of  the  Midrashic  parables  as  fol- 
 lows : — '  R.  Josua  b.  Karchah  said  the  lod  which 
 God  took  from  the  name  Sarah  was  divided  [into 
 two  Hes},  one  D  was  left  for  Sarah  (Hlt^'),  and  the 
 other  was  given  to  Abram  (D"l3i<),  when  his  name 
 was  changed  into  Abraham  (Dn"l3S).  K-  Simon 
 b.  Jachai  remarked,  the  lod,  which  was  thus  divided 
 from  the  name  Sarai,  complained  before  the  throne 
 of  God,  saying  :  Lord  of  the  universe,  is  it  because 
 that  I  am  the  smallest  of  all  the  letters  (HJOp  ""JXtJ^ 
 nVmXQC^*)  that  thou  hast  taken  me  away  from  the 
 name  of  the  righteous  woman  ?  Whereupon  the 
 Lord  said,  hitherto  thou  hast  been  in  the  name  of 
 a  woman,  and  wast  the  last  of  the  letters  C'ltJ'),  now 
 thou  shalt  be  in  the  name  of  a  man,  and  be  the 
 first  of  the  letters.  This  is  it  which  is  written,  that 
 Moses  called  Ilosea  (j;L"in)  Joshita  (W'\n\  Num. 
 xiii.  16),  putting  the  lod  before  it'  (comp.  Mid- 
 
JOTAPATA 
 
 663 
 
 JOTHAM 
 
 rash  Rahba  and  Jalktit  on  Gen.  xvii.  5).  The 
 figurative  use  of  the  letter  lod  to  express  tliat  which 
 is  small,  may  also  be  seen  from  the  fact,  that  a 
 small  city  was  called  lod,  because  this  is  the 
 smallest  letter  of  the  alphabet   (11'"'  r\'0^sy  "Tiy 
 
 nmisa  r\:^\^p  nvc^  Dt:'  hv  t\iv:,\)  x\ni :  comp. 
 
 Rashi  on  Taaiiith  21,  b),  and  from  the  phrase, 
 '  J  saw  a  city  come  forth  from  a  LuV  (w^p  Dip  nV 
 XJ''fn,  Kiddushin  16,  b).  Still  more  insignificant 
 is  the  tittle  Kepala,  or  the  different  ornaments  of  tiie 
 letters,  called  in  the  Talmud  D^IJl^,  D''JVf,  and 
 pjn,  and  D''\"lp,  inasmuch  as  these  ornaments  are 
 smaller  even  than  the  ■•,  and  form  no  essential  part 
 of  the  letter,  which  is  complete  without  them. 
 Aluch  stress,  however,  has  been  laid  upon  these 
 ornaments  from  time  immemorial,  and  the  Talmud 
 specifies  seven  letters,  each  of  which  must  be  orna- 
 mented on  the  top  with  these  piVf.  To  shew 
 what  these  ornaments  are,  and  that  they  form  no 
 part  of  the  letters,  we  shall  give  these  seven  letters, 
 both  ornamented  and  without  the  ornaments. 
 
 K  J  r  J  to    y    ^ 
 
 Other  letters  again  have  the  D''jn,  and  Maimonides 
 gives  every  word  which  is  to  be  written  with  this 
 ornament  in  the  four  passages  of  the  Pentateuch  to 
 be  enclosed  in  the  phylacteries  [Phylactery],  of 
 
 which  the  following  is  a  specimen — niStSV'tO?  V'ni. 
 Now,  from  this  it  will  be  seen  that  the  meaning 
 of  our  Saviour  in  Matt.  v.  18  and  Luke  xvi.  17  is, 
 that  not  only  shall  the  '',  the  smallest  letter  of  the 
 alphabet,  not  fail  to  fulfil  its  design  in  the  word 
 of  God,  but  even  the  ornament,  this  insignificant 
 stroke,  which  is  smaller  still  both  in  size  and  pur- 
 pose than  the  "•,  shall  not  pass  away.  A  striking 
 illustration  of  this  phrase  is  given  in  one  of  the  Tal- 
 mudic  allegories,  which  is  as  follows  : — Once  upon  a 
 time  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  fell  down  before  the 
 throne  of  God,  and  bitterly  exclaimed,  O  Lord  of  the 
 universe,  thou  hast  laid  down  in  me  thy  Law,  but 
 remember,  that  if  the  least  thing  is  altered  therein, 
 the  whole  of  it  must  falL  Now  King  Solomon 
 labours  to  expunge  the  letter  "•,  for  it  is  written, 
 
 D"'ti'3  V  n^T'  J\?,  he  shall  not  multiply  wives  to  him- 
 self (Deut.  xvii.  17),  as  by  the  omission  of  the  '' 
 the  prohibition  ceases.  ^Yhereupon  the  Lord 
 answered,  Solomon,  and  thousands  like  him,  shall 
 perish,  but  not  even  the  tittle  or  ornament  of  the  lod 
 
 shall  pass  away  frot>t  the  Law  (I^S  "ll""  ?£}>  IXIpl 
 
 l!D3?3)  Jerusalem  Sanhedrin  20,  b).  This  passage 
 ra»iders  it  unnecessary  to  refute  the  opinion  that 
 Xfp'va:  are  the  little  turns  of  tlie  strokes,  the  points 
 or  the  corners  of  letters  by  which  one  letter  differs 
 from  another  similar  to  it,  which  is  advanced  by 
 Origen  (comp.  Ps.  xxxiii.),  rCbv  croix's^l.wv  irap^  E/3- 
 palots,  Xe7cj  6^  tov  x^-'P  '^"^  ''"o^  §7)d  (3  and  3), 
 TToWrjV  6/j.oi6T7jTa  aw^ovTWv,  tbs  Kara  pLijo^v  dWrj- 
 Xijjv  5iaWdTTeiv  rj  /S/jaxeia  Kepaig.  p-ovri,  and  has 
 been  espoused  by  almost  all  modern  critics.  Comp. 
 Menachoth  29,  b  ;  Maimonides,  lod  Ha-Chezaka 
 Hilchoth  Tefillin,  section  ii.  8-10  ;  Hilchoth  Sepher 
 Tora,  section  vii. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JOTAPATA,  a  fortress  in  Galilee,  in  which 
 Josephus,  by  whom  it  had  been  strongly  forti- 
 fied, resisted  for  a  considerable  time  the  assault  of 
 the  Romans  under  Vespasian,  but  was  ultimately 
 
 defeated  and  taken  prisoner  {De  Bell.  'Jud.  u.  20. 
 6  ;  iii.  6.  7  ;  Vita,  sec.  37).  Josephus  describes  it 
 as  situated  on  a  precipitous  rock  of  great  height, 
 and  accessible  only  on  the  northern  side,  and  as  so 
 surrounded  by  mountains  that  it  cannot  be  descried 
 until  it  is  actually  approached  {Bell.  Jud.  iii.  7.  7). 
 It  has  been  identified  with  Jefat,  '  a  high  round  tell 
 perfectly  regular  and  isolated,  except  that  it  is  con- 
 nected with  the  northern  hills  by  a  low  ridge  or 
 neck'  (Robinson,  Lat.  Bib.  Res.,  p.  105).  It  is 
 shut  in  by  mountains,  and  lies  to  the  N.E.  of 
 Kaukab  and  about  ten  miles  to  the  N.W.  of  Naza- 
 reth, in  long.  35°  15'  E.,  lat.  32°  52'  N.  It  is  the 
 NnnSIJ,  Gopatata,  of  the  Talmud  (Reland,  Pal. 
 8l6,  867).      [JlPHTAH-EL.] — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOTBAH    (nntp^ ;   Sept.  'leripa ;   'Alex.  'le- 
 
 TttxctX),  the  residence  of  Haruz,  the  father  of 
 Meshullemeth,  queen  of  Manasseh,  and  mother  of 
 Anion,  king  of  Judah  (2  Kings  xxi.  19).  Josephus 
 calls  it  'Ia/3dT77  [Antiq.  x.  3.  2).  It  is  probably  the 
 same  place  as  the  following. 
 
 JOTBATH,  OR  JOTBATHAH  (nri3L5^ ;  Sept. 
 
 'ErejSa^S  ;  Alex.  'leTe^addv),  one  of  the  stations  of 
 the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  (Num.  xxxiii.  33  ; 
 Deut.  x.  7).  In  the  latter  passage  it  is  described 
 as  '  a  land  of  rivers  of  waters,'  i.  e.,  of  gorges  or 
 defiles,  through  which  brooks  flowed.  On  the 
 western  side  of  the  Arabah  there  are  several  spots 
 where  the  Wadys  converge,  and  one  of  these  is 
 probably  the  locality  indicated. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOTHAM    (DniS    Jehovah   is  upright;  Sept. 
 
 ^lwa.6afx).  I.  The  youngest  of  Gideon's  seventy 
 legitimate  sons  ;  and  the  only  one  who  escaped 
 when  the  rest  were  massacred  by  the  order  of 
 Abimelech.  When  the  fratricide  was  made  king 
 by  the  people  of  Shechem,  the  young  Jotham  was 
 so  daring  as  to  make  his  appearance  on  Mount 
 Gerizim  for  the  purpose  of  lifting  up  a  protesting 
 voice,  and  of  giving  vent  to  his  feelings.  This  he 
 did  in  a  beautiful  parable,  wherein  the  trees  are 
 represented  as  making  choice  of  a  king,  and  be- 
 stowing on  the  bramble  the  honour  which  the 
 cedar,  the  olive,  and  tlie  vine  would  not  accept. 
 The  obvious  application,  which  indeed  Jotham 
 failed  not  himself  to  point  out,  must  have  been 
 highly  exasperating  to  Abimelech  and  his  friends  ; 
 but  the  speaker,  as  soon  as  he  had  delivered  his 
 parable,  fled  to  the  town  of  Beer,  and  remained 
 there  out  of  his  brother's  reach.  We  hear  no  more 
 of  him  ;  but  three  years  after,  if  then  living,  he 
 saw  the  accomplishment  of  the  malediction  he  had 
 pronounced  (Judg.  ix.  5"2i)- 
 
 2.  The  tenth  king  of  Judah,  and  son  of  Uzziah, 
 v.'hom  he  succeeded  in  B.C.  758,  at  the  age  of 
 twenty-five  :  he  reigned  sixteen  years.  His  father 
 having  during  his  last  years  been  excluded  by 
 leprosy  from  public  life  [UzziAH],  the  government 
 was  administered  by  his  son.  Jotham  profited  by 
 the  experience  which  the  reign  of  his  father,  and 
 of  the  kings  who  preceded  him,  afforded,  and  he 
 ruled  in  the  fear  of  God,  although  he  was  unable 
 to  correct  all  the  corrupt  practices  into  which  the 
 people  had  fallen.  His  sincere  intentions  were 
 rewarded  with  a  prosperous  reign.  He  was  suc- 
 cessful in  his  wars.  The  Ammonites,  who  had 
 '  given  gifts'  as  a  sort  of  tribute  to  Uzziah,  but  had 
 ceased  to  do  so  after  his  leprosy  had  incapacitated 
 him  from  governing,  were  constrained  by  Jotham 
 
JOZABAD,  OR  JOSABAD 
 
 664 
 
 JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 to  pay  for  three  years  a  heavy  tribute  in  silver, 
 wrheat,  and  barley  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  8 ;  xxvii.  5,  6). 
 Many  important  public  works  were  also  under- 
 taken and  accomplished  by  Jotham.  The  principal 
 gate  of  the  temple  was  rebuilt  by  him  on  a  more 
 magnificent  scale  ;  the  quarter  of  Ophel,  in  Jeru- 
 salem, was  strengthened  by  new  fortifications ; 
 various  towns  were  built  or  rebuilt  in  the  moun- 
 tains of  Judah  ;  and  castles  and  towers  of  defence 
 were  erected  in  the  wilderness.  Jotham  died  greatly 
 lamented  by  his  people,  and  was  buried  in  the 
 sepulchre  of  the  kings  (2  Kings  xv.  38  ;  2  Chron. 
 xxvii.  7-9). — ^J.  K. 
 
 JOZABAD,  OR  JOSABAD  (inTi'' ;  Sept.  'I«- 
 
 ta^dd;  Alex.  'IwfajSdS).  I.  The  Gederathite, 
 one  of  the  mighty  men  who  came  to  David  at 
 Ziklag  (I  Chron.  xii.  4).  2,  3.  Two  captains  of 
 the  thousands  of  Manasseh  who  went  over  to 
 David  at  Ziklag,  and  aided  him  to  repress  the 
 bands  of  brigands  or  marauders  in  the  wilderness 
 (i  Chron.  xii.  20).  The  LXX.  distinguish  the 
 latter  of  these  by  calling  him  ^Iwaa^aid.,  Alex. 
 'Iwfa/3^5.  4.  An  overseer,  under  Cononiah  and 
 Shimei,  of  the  chambers  in  which  were  deposited 
 the  tithes  and  other  offerings  collected  by  order  of 
 Hezekiah  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  13).  5.  A  chief  of  the 
 Levites  who  took  part  rn  the  preparations  for  the 
 Passover  celebrated  by  Josiah  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  9). 
 The  recurrence  of  the  same  names  here,  or  in 
 xxxi.  12-15,  ^'^^  t^6  frequent  recurrence  through 
 the  history  of  the  same  names,  has  led  to  the  sug- 
 gestion that  these  are  not  so  much  personal  names 
 as  names  of  Levitical  or  priestly  families  (Bertheau, 
 Exeget.  Hdb.  in  loc.)  This  may  account  for  a 
 double  name  so  frequently  occurring  for  the  same 
 person.  6.  The  son  of  Jeshua,  a  Levite  who 
 assisted  at  the  weighing  of  the  precious  materials 
 belonging  to  the  temple-service  which  were  brought 
 back  from  Babylon  (Ezra  viii.  33).  In  I  Esdras 
 viii.  63  he  is  called  Josabad  ('lwcra/356s ;  Alex. 
 'Iw<7aj35as).  7.  One  of  the  sons  of  Pashur,  a  priest 
 who  had  married  a  strange  woman  after  the  retura 
 from  Babylon  (Ezra  x.  22).  In  I  Esdras  ix.  22  he 
 iscalled 'fi/c6557\os(A.  V.  Ocidelus).  8.  A  Levite 
 who  had  also  married  a  strange  woman  (Ezra  x. 
 23).  He  is  called  'Iwfa^<f5os  in  I  Esdras  ix.  23, 
 and  is  probably  the  person  mentioned,  Neh.  viii.  7, 
 as  one  of  those  who  interpreted  to  the  people  the 
 reading  of  the  law,  and,  xi.  16,  as  presiding  over 
 the  outward  work  of  the  temple  ;  perhaps  also  the 
 same  as  No.  6,  though  this  is  doubtful. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JOZACHAR   (1311'';    Sept.    'Utipx^p;    Alex. 
 
 'Iwfaxctp),  one  of  the  two  conspirators  by  whom 
 Joash,  king  of  Judah,  was  slain  (2  Kings  xii.  21). 
 In  the  parallel  passage  in  2  Chron.  (xxiv.  26)  he  is 
 called  Zobad,  which  is  probably  a  clerical  eiTor, 
 the  omission  of  the  V  being  accounted  for  by 
 ji^JJ  preceding  it,  and  the  "1  and3  being  confounded 
 with  T  and  2.  Jozachar  was  the  son  of  an  Am- 
 tnonitess. — + 
 
 JUBAL    (?3V,   jubilum,    i.e.,    tnusic ;    Sept. 
 
 •ToujSctX),  one  of  Cain's  descendants,  son  of  Lamech 
 and  Adah.  He  is  described  as  the  inventor  of  the 
 1133,  kimior,  and  the  HJIV,  tigab,  rendered  in  our 
 version  'the  harp  and  the  organ,'  but  perhaps 
 more  properly  'the  lyre  and  mouth-organ,'  or 
 Pandean  pipe  (Gen.  iv.  21).     [Music.]— J.  K. 
 
 JUBILEE,  The  Year  of  (^nVH  T\1'^,  ot 
 simply  P3\">j  and  "lin  T\l'^ ;  Sept.  eVoj  t7>  d,(\>i- 
 crews,  &(pecns  ;  Vulg.  ainius  jubilei,  ox  jubilais),  the 
 half  centurial  festival,  the  institution  of  which  is 
 contained  in  Lev.  xxv.  8-16,  23-55  5  xxvii.   16-25. 
 
 I.  Na7)ie  and  its  signification. — The  etymology 
 of  this  word  is  greatly  disputed.  According  to 
 the  reputed  Targum  of  Jonathan*  on  Josh.  vi. 
 5-9,  the  Talmud  {Rosh  Ha-Shana  26,  a),  Rashi, 
 Ibn  Ezra  {on  Exod.  xix.  13),  Kimchi  \on  Josh.  v. 
 
 6,  and  Lex.  s.  v.),  Parchon  [Lex.  s.  v.),  etc.,  73V 
 primarily  signifies  a   7-am,\  then  metonymically 
 
 stands  for  ?3Vn  pp,  the  horn  of  a  ram  (comp. 
 Exod.  xix.  13  with  Josh.  vi.  5),  and,  like  the 
 Latin  buccina,  denotes  also  the  sound  produced  by 
 
 the  horn.  Thus  the  name  731''  JIJCJ',  the  year  oj 
 blowing  the  horn,  exactly  corresponds  to  nyilD  D'C, 
 the  day  of  blowing  t/ie  horn,  the  appellation  given 
 to  \.\iQ  fiast  0/  the  N'ew  Year  (Num.  xxix.  l),  and, 
 like  it,  is  given  to  this  festival,  because  it  is  an- 
 nounced by  the  blast  of  the  horn  (nVpn  DK'  ?V 
 "ISIK^,  Rashi).  Luther  has  therefore  rightly  trans- 
 lated it  Halljahr.     According  to  another  ancient 
 
 interpretation,  73II  is  from  73"',  to  emit,  to  liberate, 
 and,  like  "ITn,  is  primarily  used  as  a  concrete  for 
 one  who  is  at  liberty,  and  then,  like  "im,  is  used 
 abstractly  for  freedom,  liberty  (comp.  Hitzig  on 
 Jer.  xxxiv.  8).  This  suits  Lev.  xxv.  10,  and  is 
 given  by  the  Sept.  (fi^eirts),  Joseph.  [Antiq.  iii. 
 12.  3),  Ibn  Ezra  on  Lev.  xxv,    13,  etc.     Others, 
 
 *  Kalisch's  assertion  {Historical  and  Critical 
 Comvientaiy   on   Exodus,   p.    335)   that    Onkelos 
 
 takes  73I!''  to  mean  ram  (Ji{~l31))  is  incorrect,  as 
 this  paraphrast  simply  renders  it  by  N"lS"lt^  (comp. 
 Onkelos  on  Exod.  xix.  13) ;  it  is  the  reputed  Tar- 
 gum of  Jonathan  which  has  X"''13T   ]lpl  N'^IDti' 
 
 for  the  Hebrew  D''^3Vn  nilSIC  (comp.  Josh.  vi. 
 5,  etc.) 
 
 +  When  Mr.  S.  Clark,  the  writer  of  the  article 
 Jubilee  in  Smith's  Dictionaty  of  the  Bible,  con- 
 temptuously rejects  this  explanation  on  the  sup- 
 position that  it  toot  its  origin  '  from  the  strange 
 nonsense  which  some  of  the  rabbis  in  early  times 
 began  to  talk  respecting  the  ram  which  was  sacri- 
 ficed in  the  place  of  Isaac,'  and  states  that  '  R. 
 Akiba,  to   connect  this  with  the  jubilee,  affirms 
 
 that  73!)''  is  the  Arabic  for  a  ram,'  we  can  only  say 
 that  this  explanation  has  not  derived  its  source 
 from  this  Hagadic  legend,  but,  on  the  contraiy, 
 that  the  legend  was  suggested  by  it ;  that  R. 
 Akiba,  in  his  remark,  '  In  going  to  Arabia  I 
 found   that  they  called  a   ram  jubla'   ("'31  *^D.S 
 
 N^v  xisn^  piip  vn  ^•'31:;^  ''n3^^:^'3  n3^'?j;), 
 
 does  not  at  all  attempt  to  connect  it  with  the 
 jubilee,  since  this  'strange  nonsense'  is  not  even 
 mentioned  in  the  discussion  in  the  Talmud,  as 
 may  be  seen  by  a  reference  to  the  passage  in  Rosh 
 Ha-Shana  26,  a ;  that  no  less  an  authority  than 
 
 Fiirst  most  unhesitatingly  affirms  that  731''  does 
 mean  ram,  though  he  does  not  derive  the  name  of 
 the  festival  in  question  from  this  sense  of  the  word 
 (comp.  Lex.  s.  v.) ;  and  that  even  Ewald  does  not 
 treat  this  explanation  with  contempt  (comp.  Dit 
 Alterthiimer  d.  Volkes  Israel,  1854,  p.  417,  note). 
 
JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 G65 
 
 JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 again,  regard  ?3''  as  onomatopoetic,  like  tlie  Latin 
 jubilare,  denoting  to  be  jubilant,  so  the  Vulg.,  Gese- 
 nius  {Lex.  s.  v.),  etc.  Whilst  most  modern  critics  de- 
 rive 731''  from  p^i,  to  floxv  impetiioiisly,  and  hence 
 assign  to  it  the  meaning  of  the  loud  or  impetuous 
 sound,  streaming  forth  from  the  trumpet,  and  pro- 
 claiming this  festival.  This  idea,  though  obtained 
 in  a  different  way,  is  the  same  a?  the  traditional 
 one  which  we  have  given  first.  It  is  also  called 
 im  T\y^,  the  year  of  freedom  (Ezek.  xlvi.  17),  be- 
 cause eveiy  slave  was  set  at  liberty  at  jubilee,  and 
 freely  returned  to  his  family  and  the  patrimony  of 
 his  father  (comp.  Lev.  xxv.  10). 
 
 2.  The  laws  connected  with  this  festival. — The 
 laws  respecting  the  jubilee  embrace  the  following 
 three  main  enactments — (i.)  Rest  for  the  soil ;  (2.) 
 Reversion  of  landed  property  to  its  original  owner, 
 who  had  been  driven  by  poverty  to  sell  it ;  and 
 (3.)  Manumission  of  those  Israelites  who  through 
 poverty  or  otherwise  had  become  slaves. 
 
 The  first  enactment,  which  is  comprised  in  Lev. 
 xxv.  II,  12,  enjoins  that,  as  on  the  Sabbatical  year, 
 the  soil  is  to  be  at  rest,  and  that  there  should  be 
 no  tillage  nor  harvest  during  the  jubilee  year.  The 
 Israelites,  however,  were  permitted  to  fetch  the 
 spontaneous  produce  of  the  field  for  their  imme- 
 diate wants  (nriNnn  nx  li'^xn  rp;^':\  p),  but 
 
 not  to  lay  it  up  in  their  storehouses. 
 
 The  second  enactment,  which  refers  to  the  rever- 
 sion of  landed  property,  is  comprised  in  Lev.  xxv. 
 13-34 ;  xxvii.  16-24.  The  Mosaic  law  enacted 
 that  the  promised  land  should  be  divided  by  lots, 
 in  equal  parts,  among  the  Israelites,  and  that  the 
 plot  which  should  thus  come  into  the  possession 
 of  each  family  was  to  be  absolutely  inalienable,  and 
 for  ever  continue  to  be  the  property  of  the  de- 
 scendants of  the  original  possessor.  When  a  pro- 
 prietor, therefore,  being  pressed  by  poverty,  had 
 to  dispose  of  a  field,  no  one  could  buy  it  of  him 
 for  a  longer  period  than  up  to  the  time  of  the  next 
 jubilee,  when  it  reverted  to  the  original  possessor, 
 or  to  his  family.  Hence  the  sale,  properly  speak- 
 ing, was  not  of  the  land,  but  of  the  produce  of  so 
 many  years,  and  the  price  was  fixed  according  to 
 the  number  of  years  (nxnn  '•JK')  up  to  the  next 
 jubilee,  so  as  to  prevent  any  injustice  being  done 
 to  those  who  were  compelled  by  circumstances  to 
 part  temporarily  with  their  land  (Lev.  xxv.  15,  16). 
 The  lessee,  however,  according  to  Josephus,  could 
 claim  some  compensation  if  he  had  great  outlays 
 en  the  field  just  before  lie  was  required  by  the  law 
 of  jubilee  to  return  it  to  its  owner  (comp.  Antiq. 
 iii.  12.  3).  But  even  before  the  jubilee  year  the 
 original  proprietor  could  recover  his  field,  if  either 
 his  own  circumstances  improved,  or  if  his  next  of 
 
 kin  (PX3)  could  redeem  it  for  him  by  paying  back 
 according  to  the  same  price  which  regulated  the 
 purchase  (Lev.  xxv.  26,  27).  In  the  interests  of 
 the  purchaser,  however,  the  Rabbinical  law  enacted 
 that  this  redemption  should  not  take  place  before 
 he  had  the  benefit  of  the  field  for  two  productive 
 years  (so  the  Rabbins  understood  nX13n  ''Jti'),  ex- 
 clusive of  a  Sabbatical  year,  a  year  of  barrenness, 
 and  of  the  first  harvest,  if  he  happened  to  buy  the 
 plot  of  land  shortly  before  the  seventh  month,  i.  e. , 
 with  the  ripe  fruit  [Erackin,  ix.  i ;  Maimonides, 
 Hikhoth  Skmita  Ve-Jobel,  xi.  10-13).  -^^  poverty 
 is  the  only  reason  which  the  law  supposes  might 
 lead  one  to  part  with  his  field,  the  Rabbins  enacted 
 
 that  it  was  not  allowable  for  any  one  to  sell  hia 
 patrimony  on  speculation  (comp.  Maimonides, 
 Hilchoth  Shniita  Ve-Jobel,  xi.  3).  Though  nothino- 
 is  here  said  about  fields  which  were  f;ivcn  away  by 
 the  proprietors,  yet  there  can  be  no  doubt,  as  Mai 
 monides  says  {Ibid.,  xi.  10),  that  the  same  law  is 
 intended  to  apply  to  gifts  (comp.  Ezek.  xlvi.  17), 
 but  not  to  those  plots  of  land  which  came  into  a 
 man's  possession  through  marriage  with  an  heiress 
 (comp.  Num.  xxxvi.  4-9 ;  Alishna  Berachoth,  viii. 
 10).  Neither  did  this  law  apply  to  a  house  in  a 
 walled  city.  Still  the  seller  had  the  privilege  to 
 redeem  it  at  any  time  within  a  full  year  from  the 
 day  of  the  sale.  After  the  year  it  lecame  the 
 absolute  property  of  the  purchaser  (Lev.  xxv.  29, 
 30*).  As  this  law  required  a  more  minute  defini- 
 tion for  practical  purposes,  the  Rabbins  determined 
 that  this  right  of  redemption  might  be  exercised  from 
 the  very  first  day  of  the  sale  to  the  last  day  which 
 made  up  the  year.  Moreover,  as  the  purchaser 
 sometimes  concealed  himself  towards  the  end  of 
 the  year,  in  order  to  prevent  the  seller  from  re 
 deeming  his  house,  it  was  enacted,  that  the  original 
 proprietor  should  hand  over  the  redemption-money 
 to  the  powers  that  be  when  the  purchaser  could 
 not  be  found,  break  open  the  doors,  and  take  pos- 
 session of  the  house ;  and,  if  the  purchaser  died 
 during  the  year,  the  original  proprietor  could  re- 
 deem it  from  the  heir  (comp.  Mishna  Erachin,  ix. 
 3,  4 ;  Maimonides,  Hilchoth  Shmita  Ve-Jobel,  xii. 
 1-7).  Open  places,  however,  which  are  not  sur- 
 rounded by  walls,  belong  to  landed  property,  and, 
 like  the  cultivated  land  on  which  they  stand,  are 
 subject  to  the  law  of  jubilee,  and  must  revert  to 
 their  original  proprietors  (Lev.  xxv.  31).  But 
 although  houses  m  open  places  are  thus  treated  like 
 fields,  yet,  according  to  the  Rabbinic  definition, 
 the  reverse  'S  not  to  be  the  case,  i.  e.,  fields  or  other 
 places  not  built  upon  in  walled  cities  are  not  to  be 
 treated  as  cities,  but  come  under  the  jubilee  law  of 
 fields  (comp.  Erachin,  ix.  5).  The  houses  of  the 
 Levites,  in  the  forty-eight  cities  given  to  them 
 (comp.  Num.  xxxv.  1-8),  were  exempt  from  this 
 general  law  of  house  property.  Having  the  same 
 value  to  the  Levites  as  landed  property  had  to  the 
 other  tribes,  these  houses  were  subject  to  the  jubilee 
 law  for  fields,  and  could  at  any  time  be  redeemed 
 (comp.  Lev.  xxv.  32  ;  Erachin'xy..  8),  so  that,  even 
 if  a  Levite  redeemed  the  house  which  his  brother  Le- 
 
 *  There  is  an  apparent  contradiction  in  the 
 original  Hebrew  between  verses  29  and  30 — for  in 
 the  former  the  house  is  described  as  being  in  a 
 walled  city  (HDirj  "T'y),  whilst  in  the  latter  it  is 
 spoken  of  as  being  in  a  city  without  a  wall  ("l"'y 
 
 niOin    S?   Ili'X).     But  this  has  evidently  arisen 
 
 from  a  confusion  of  the  relative  pronotm  p  with  its 
 
 homonym  sS  t!>^  negative  paj-ticle,  of  which  there 
 are  many  instances  (comp.  Exod.  xxi.  8 ;  Lev.  xi. 
 2 1 ;  and  the  article  Keri  of  this  Cyclopcrdia).  The 
 Keri,  or  the  marginal  reading,  has  therefore  given 
 the  right  reading,  which  is  also  to  be  found  in  the 
 Sept.,  Chaldee,  etc.,  etc.  Some  of  the  Rabbins, 
 however,  defend  the  textual  reading,  and  say  that 
 it  speaks  of  cities  which  had  no  walls  prior  to 
 Joshua's  conquering  the  land,  but  which  were 
 walled  round  afterwards  (comp.  Rashi  011  lei'. 
 xxv.  30,  31;  Maimonides,  Hilchoth  Shmita  V"' 
 Jobel,  xii.  15), 
 
JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 666 
 
 JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 vite  was  obliged  to  sell  through  poverty,  the  general 
 law  of  house  property  is  not  to  obtain,  even  among 
 the  Levites  themselves,  but  they  are  obliged  to  treat 
 eacli  other  according  to  the  law  of  landed  property. 
 Thus,  for  instance,  the  house  of  A,  which  he,  out 
 of  poverty,  was  obliged  to  sell  to  the  non-Levite  B, 
 and  was  redeemed  from  him  by  a  Levite  C,  reverts 
 in  the  jubilee  year  from  C  to  the  original  Levitical 
 proprietor  A.  This  seems  to  be  the  most  ]3robable 
 meaning  of  the  enactment  contained  in  Lev.  xxv. 
 33,  and  it  does  not  necessitate  us  to  insert  into  the 
 
 text  the  negative  particle  {^?  before  75<J'',  as  is  done 
 b}'  the  Vulgate,  Houbigant,  Ewald  {Alterthiimer, 
 p.  421),  Knobel,  etc.,  nor  need  we,  with  Rashi, 
 
 Ibn  Ezra,  etc.,  take  PS3  hi  the  unnatural  sense  of 
 htiyiug.  The  lands  in  the  suburbs  of  their  cities 
 tiie  Levites  were  not  permitted  to  part  with  under 
 any  condition,  and  therefore  did  not  come  under 
 the  law  of  jubilee  {Ibid.,  ver.  34).  The  only  excep- 
 tion to  this  general  law  were  the  houses  and  the 
 fields  consecrated  to  the  Lord,  or  to  the  support  of 
 the  sanctuary.  If  these  were  not  redeemed  before 
 the  ensuing  jubilee,  instead  of  reverting  to  their 
 original  proprietors  they  at  the  jubilee  became  for 
 ever  the  property  of  the  priests  (Lev.  xxvii.  20,  21). 
 The  conditions,  however,  on  which  consecrated 
 property  could  be  redeemed  were  as  follows  :  A 
 house  thus  devoted  to  the  Lord  was  valued  by  the 
 priest,  and  the  donor  who  wished  to  redeem  it  had 
 to  pay  one-fifth  m  addition  to  this  fixed  value  (Lev. 
 xxvii.  14,  15).  And  a  field  was  valued  according 
 to  the  number  of  homers  of  barley  which  could  be 
 sown  thereon,  at  the  rate  of  fifty  silver  shekels  of 
 the  sanctuary  for  each  homer  for  the  whole  fifty 
 years,  deducting  from  it  a  proportionate  amount 
 for  the  lapse  of  each  year  (Lev.  xxvii.  16-18).  Ac- 
 cording to  the  Talmud  the  fiftieth  year  was  not 
 counted.  Hence,  if  any  one  wished  to  redeem  his 
 field,  he  had  to  pay  one-fifth  in  addition  to  the 
 regular  rate  of  a  siia  (shekel),  and  a  pundium  = 
 i-^'Sih.scla,  per  annum,  for  every  homer,  the  surplus 
 pundium  being  intended  for  the  forty-ninth  year. 
 No  one  was  therefore  allowed  to  sanctify  his  field 
 during  the  year  which  immediately  preceded  the 
 jubilee,  for  he  would  then  have  to  pay  for  the  whole 
 forty-nine  years,  because  months  could  not  be  de- 
 ducted from  the  sanctuaiy,  and  the  jubilee  year 
 itself  was  not  counted  (il//j//««  j£';-^t7//«,  vii.  i).  If 
 one  sanctified  a  field  which  he  had  purchased, 
 /'.  e.,  not  freehold  property,  it  reverted  to  the  ori- 
 ginal proprietor  in  the  year  of  jubilee  (Lev.  xxvii. 
 22-24). 
 
 The  third  enactment  relates  to  the  manumission 
 of  those  Israelites  who  had  become  slaves,  and  is 
 comprised  in  Lev.  xxv.  39-54.  All  Israelites  who 
 through  poverty  had  sold  themselves  as  slaves  to 
 their  fellow  Israelites  or  to  the  foreigners  resident 
 among  them,  and  who,  up  to  the  time  of  the  jubilee, 
 had  neither  completed  their  sL\  years  of  servitude, 
 nor  redeemed  themselves,  nor  been  redeemed  by 
 tlieir  relatives,  were  to  be  set  free  in  the  jubilee,  to 
 return  with  their  children  to  their  family  and  to 
 the  patrimony  of  their  fathers.  Great  difficulty  has 
 been  experienced  in  reconciling  the  injunction  here, 
 that  in  the  jubilee  all  slaves  are  to  regain  their  free- 
 dom, with  Lxod.  xxv.  6,  where  it  is  enacted,  that 
 those  bondmen  who  refuse  their  liberty  at  the 
 expiration  of  the  appointed  six  years'  servitude,  and 
 submit  to  the  boring  of  their  ears,  are  to  be  slaves 
 
 for  ever  i^ib^h  n3J?"l).  Josephus  {Antiq.  iv.  8.  28), 
 the  Mishna  {Kidushin,  i.  3);  and  Talmud  {Ibid. 
 14,  15),  Rashi,  Ibn  Ezra,  Maimonides  {HiUhoth 
 Avadim,  iii.  6),  and  most  Jewish  interpreters, 
 who  are  followed  by  Ainsworth,  Bp.  Patrick,  and 
 
 other  Christian  commentators,  take  DPyb  to  denote 
 till  the  Jubilee,  maintaining  that  the  slaves  who 
 submitted  to  have  their  ears  bored  are  included  in 
 this  general  manumission,  and  thus  try  to  escape 
 the  difficulty.      But  against   this  is  to  be  urged, 
 
 that,  I.  The  phrase  DpJ??  H^J?  is  used  in  Lev.  xxv. 
 46  for  perpetual  servitude,  which  is  unaffected  by 
 the  year  of  jubilee.  2.  The  declaration  of  the 
 slave  that  he  will  not  have  his  freedom,  in  Exod. 
 xxi.  5,  unquestionably  shews  that  perpetual  slavery 
 is  meant.  3.  Servitude  till  the  year  of  jubilee  is 
 not  at  all  spoken  of  in  Lev.  xxv.  40-42  as  some- 
 thing contemptible,  and  could  therefore  not  be  the 
 punishment  designed  for  him  who  refused  his  free- 
 dom, especially  if  the  year  of  jubilee  happened  to 
 occur  two  or  three  years  after  refusing  his  freedom  ; 
 and  that  it  is  bondage  beyond  that  time  which  is 
 characterised  as  real  slavery  ;  and  4.  The  jubilee, 
 without  any  indication  whatever  from  the  lawgiver, 
 is  here,  according  to  this  explanation,  made  to  give 
 the  slave  the  right  to  take  with  him  the  maid  and 
 the  children  who  are  the  property  of  the  master — 
 the  very  right  which  had  previously  been  denied 
 to  him.  Ewald  therefore  (Alteiihiimer,  p.  421), 
 and  others,  conclude  that  the  two  enactments  be- 
 long to  different  periods,  the  manumission  of  slaves 
 in  the  year  of  jubilee  having  been  instituted  when 
 the  law  enjoining  the  liberation  of  slaves  at  the 
 expiration  of  six  years  had  become  obsolete ; 
 M'hilst  Knobel  (Comment,  on  Exod.  xxi.  6)  regards 
 this  jubilee  law  and  the  enactments  in  Exod.  xxi.  5> 
 6,  as  representing  one  of  the  many  contradictions 
 which  exist  between  the  Jehovistic  and  Elohistic 
 portions  of  the  Pentateuch.  All  the  difficulties, 
 however,  disappear,  when  the  jubilee  manumission 
 enactment  is  regarded  as  designed  to  supplement 
 the  law  in  Exod.  xxi.  2-6.  In  the  latter  case  the 
 regular  period  of  setvitude  is  fixed,  at  the  expiration 
 of  which  the  bondman  is  ordinarily  to  become  free, 
 whilst  Lev.  xxv.  39-54  institutes  an  additional  and 
 extraordiimry  period,  when  those  slaves  who  had 
 not  as  yet  completed  their  appointed  six  years  of 
 servitude,  at  the  time  of  jubilee,  or  had  not  for- 
 feited their  right  of  free  citizenship  by  spontaneously 
 submitting  to  the  yoke  of  bondage,  and  becoming 
 
 slaves  for  ever  (Dpj;  *13y),  are  once  in  every  fifty 
 years  to  obtain  their  freedom.  The  one  enactment 
 refers  to  the  freedoDi  of  each  individual  at  different 
 days,  weeks,  months,  and  years,  inasmuch  as  hardly 
 any  twenty  of  them  entered  on  their  servitude  at 
 exactly  the  same  time,  whilst  the  other  legislates 
 for  a  general  manumission,  which  is  to  take  place 
 at  exactly  the  same  time.  The  enactment  in  Lev. 
 xxv.  39-54,  therefore,  takes  for  granted  the  law 
 in  Exod.  xxi.  2-6,  and  begins  where  the  latter 
 ends,  and  does  not  mention  it  because  it  simply 
 treats  on  the  influence  of  jubilee  upon  slavery. 
 
 That  there  must  also  have  been  a  perfect  remis- 
 sion of  debts  in  the  year  of  jubilee  is  self-evident, 
 for  it  is  implied  in  the  fact  that  all  persons  who 
 were  in  bondage  for  debt,  as  well  as  all  the  landed 
 property  of  debtors,  were  freely  returned.  Whe- 
 ther debts  generally,  for  which  there  were  no  such 
 pledges,  were  remitted,  is   a  matter  of  dispute. 
 
JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 667 
 
 JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 Josephus  positively  declares  that  they  were  {Aniiq. 
 xiii.  2.  3),  whilst  Maimonides  {Hilchoih  Shniita  Ve- 
 jfobel,  X.  16)  as  positively  denies  it.* 
 
 3.  The  time  and  manner  hi  xvhich  the  jubilee  was 
 celebrated. — According  to  Lev.  xxv.  8-1 1,  it  is  evi- 
 dent that  49  years  are  to  be  counted,  and  that 
 at  the  end  thereof  the  fiftieth  year  is  to  be  cele- 
 brated as  the  jubilee.  Hence  the  jubilee  is  to 
 follow  immediately  upon  the  Sabbatic  year,  so  that 
 there  are  to  be  two  successive  fallow  years.  This 
 is  also  corroborated  by  ver.  21,  where  it  is  pro- 
 mised that  the  produce  of  the  sixth  year  shall 
 suffice  for  three  years,  i.  e.,  49,  50,  and  51,  or  the 
 two  former  years,  which  are  the  Sabbatic  year  and 
 the  jubilee,  and  the  immediately  following  year,  in 
 which  the  ordinary  produce  of  the  preceding  year 
 would  be  wanting.  Moreover,  from  the  remark  in 
 »'er.  22,  it  would  appear  that  the  Sabbatic  year, 
 like  the  jubilee,  began  in  the  autumn,  or  the  month 
 of  Tishri,  which  commenced  the  civil  ye:ir  [Year  ; 
 Sabbatic  Year],  when  it  was  customary  to  begin 
 sowing  for  the  ensuing  year.  At  all  events,  ver.  9 
 distinctly  says,  that  the  jubilee  is  to  be  proclaimed 
 by  the  blast  of  the  trumpet  '  on  the  tenth  of  the 
 seventh  month,  on  the  day  of  atonement,'  which  is 
 Tishri  [ATONEMENT,  day  of  ;  Festivals].  The 
 opinion  that  the  Sabbatic  year  and  the  jubilee  were 
 distinct,  or  that  there  were  titw  fallmv  years,  is  also 
 entertained  by  the  Talmud  [Rosh  Ha-Shana,  8  b, 
 9  a)  ;  Philo  (On  the  Decalogue,  xxx.)  ;  Josephus, 
 and  many  other  ancient  writers.  It  must,  however, 
 be  borne  in  mind,  that  though  there  was  to  be  no 
 sowing,  nor  any  regular  harvest,  during  these  two 
 years,  yet  the  Israelites  were  allowed  to  fetch  from 
 the  fields  whatever  they  wanted  (Lev.  xxv.  12). 
 That  the  fields  did  yield  a  crop  in  their  second  fal- 
 low year  is  most  unquestionably  presupposed  by 
 the.  prophet  Isaiah  (xxxvii.  30).  Palestine  was,  at 
 all  events,  not  less  fruitful  than  Albania,  in  which 
 .Strabo  tells  us  (lib.  xi.  c.  iv.  sec.  3),  'the  ground 
 that  has  been  sowed  once  produces  in  many  places 
 two  or  three  crops,  the  fruit  of  which  is  even  fifty- 
 fold.'  It  must  however  be  remarked,  that  many, 
 from  a  very  early  period  down  to  the  present  day, 
 have  taken  the  jubilee  year  to  be  identical  with  the 
 seventh  Sabbatic  year.  Thus  the  Book  of  Jubi- 
 lees, which  dates  prior  to  the  Christian  era  [Jubi- 
 lees, Book  of],  divides  the  Biblical  history  from 
 the  creation  to  the  entrance  of  the  Israelites  into 
 Canaan  into  fifty  jubilees  of /(7;-/j'-«/«^  years  each, 
 which  shews  that  this  view  of  the  jubilee  must  have 
 been  pretty  general  in  those  days.  Some  Rabbins 
 in  the  Talmud  [Erachin,  12  b,  with  33  a),  as 
 well  as  many  Christian  writers  (Scaliger,  Peta- 
 vius.  Usher,  Cunreus,  Calvitius,  Gatterer,  Frank, 
 Schroeder,  Hug,  Rosenmiiller),  support  the  same 
 view.  As  to  the  remark,  '  ye  shall  hallow  the 
 fiftieth  year''  (ver.  10),  '  a  jubilee  shall  X\\-a.i  fiftieth 
 year  be  unto  you'  (ver.  11),  it  is  urged  that  this  is 
 in  accordance  with  a  mode  of  speech  which  is 
 common  to  all  languages  and  ages.  Thus,  we  call 
 a  week  eight  days,  including  both  Sundays,  and  the 
 best  classical  writers  called  an  olympiad  by  the 
 
 *  Mr.  Clark  (Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 
 s.  V.  Jubilee)  is  mistaken  in  saying  that  the  Mishna, 
 Shebiith,  cap.  x.,  is  of  the  same  opinion,  viz.,  'that 
 the  remission  of  debts  was  a  point  of  distinction 
 between  the  -Sabbatical  year  and  the  jubilee.'  The 
 Mishna  in  the  passage  referred  to  does  not  even 
 mention  the  iiame jubilee. 
 
 name  of  quinqiienniiim,  though  it  only  contained 
 four  entire  years.  Moreover,  the  sacred  mimber 
 seven,  or  the  Sabbatic  idea,  which  underlies  all  the 
 festivals,  and  connects  them  into  one  chain,  the  last 
 link  of  which  is  the  jubilee,  corroborates  this 
 view,  inasmuch  as  we  have — I.  A  Sabbath  of 
 days  ;  2.  A  Sabbath  of  weeks  (the  seventh  weeka.he.x 
 the  passover  being  the  Sabbath  week,  as  the  first 
 day  of  it  is  the  festival  of  weeks)  ;  3.  A  Sabbath  of 
 months  (inasmuch  as  the  seventh  7?ionth  has  both  a 
 festival  and  a  fast,  and  with  its  first  day  begins  the 
 civil  year)  ;  4.  A  Sabbath  of  years  (the  seventh 
 year  is  the  Sabbatic  year)  ;  and  5.  A  Sabbath  of 
 Sabbaths,  inasmuch  as  the  seventh  Sabbatic  year  is 
 the  jubilee. 
 
 As  the  observance  of  the  jubilee,  like  that  of  the 
 Sabbatical  year,  was  only  to  become  obligatory 
 when  the  Israelites  had  taken  possession  of  the 
 promised  land,  and  cultivated  the  land  for  that 
 period  of  5'ears,  at  the  conclusion  of  which  the 
 festival  was  to  be  celebrated,  the  ancient  tradition 
 preserved  in  the  Talmud  seems  to  be  correct,  that 
 the  first  Sabbatical  year  was  in  the  one-and- 
 twentieth,  and  the  first  jubilee  in  the  sixty-fourth, 
 year  after  the  Jews  came  into  Canaan,  for  it  took 
 them  seven  years  to  conquer  it,  and  seven  yeai^s 
 more  to  distribute  it  (Erachin,  xii.  6  ;  Maimonides, 
 Hilchoth  Shmita  Ve-Jobel,  x.  2).  The  Bible  says 
 nothing  about  the  manner  in  which  the  jubilee  is 
 to  be  celebrated,  except  that  it  should  be  pro- 
 claimed by  the  blast  of  a  trumpet.  As  in  many 
 other  cases,  the  lawgiver  leaves  the  practical  ap- 
 plication of  this  law,  and  the  necessarily  compli- 
 cated arrangements  connected  therewith,  to  the 
 elders  of  Israel.  Now  tradition  tells  us  that  the 
 trumpets  used  on  this  occasion,  like  those  of  the 
 feast  of  trumpets,  or  new  year,  were  of  rams' 
 horns,  straight,  and  had  their  mouth-piece  covered 
 with  gold  (Mishna  Kosh  Ha-Shana,  iii.  2  ;  Maimo- 
 nides, Hilchoth  Shmita  Ve-Jobel,  x.  11),  that  every 
 Israelite  blew  nine  blasts  so  as  to  make  the  trum- 
 pet literally  'sound  throughout  the  land'  (Lev. 
 xxv.  9)  ;  and  that  'from  the  feast  of  trumpets,  or 
 new  year  [i.e.,  Tishri  i],  till  the  day  of  atone- 
 ment [i.e.,  Tishri  10],  the  slaves  were  neither  manu- 
 mitted to  return  to  their  homes  nor  made  use  of 
 by  their  masters,  but  ate,  drank,  and  rejoiced,  and 
 wore  garlands  on  their  heads ;  and  when  the  day 
 of  atonement  came  the  judges  blew  the  trumpet, 
 the  slaves  were  manumitted  to  go  to  their  homes, 
 and  the  fields  were  set  free'  (Rosh  Ha-Shana,  8  b  ; 
 Maimonides,  Hilchoth  Shmita  Ve-Jobel,  x.  14). 
 Though  the  Jews,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  can- 
 not now  celelorate  the  jubilee,  yet  on  the  evening  of 
 the  day  of  atonement,  the  conclusion  of  the  fast  is 
 announced  in  all  the  synagogues  to  the  present  day 
 by  the  blast  of  the  Shophar  =^\iVix\\,  which,  according 
 to  the  rabbins,  is  intended  to  commemorate  the 
 ancient  jubilee  proclamation  (Orach  Chajim,  cap. 
 Dcxxiii.  sec.  6,  note). 
 
 Because  the  Bible  does  not  record  any  particular 
 instance  of  the  public  celebration  of  this  festival, 
 Michaelis,  Winer,  etc.,  have  questioned  whether 
 the  law  of  jubilee  ever  came  into  actual  operation  ; 
 whilst  Kranold,  Hupfeld,  etc.,  have  positively 
 denied  it.  The  following  considerations,  however, 
 speak  for  its  actual  observance  : — i.  All  the  other 
 Mosaic  festivals  have  been  observed,  and  it  is 
 therefore  surpassing  strange  to  suppose  that  the 
 jubilee  which  is  so  organically  connected  with 
 them,  and  is  the  climax  of  all  of  them,  is  the  only 
 
JUBILEE,  THE  YEAR  OF 
 
 668 
 
 JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 one  that  never  was  observed ;  2.  The  law  about 
 the  inalienability  of  landed  property,  which  was  to 
 be  the  result  of  the  jubilee,  actually  obtained 
 among  the  Jews,  thus  shewing  that  this  festival 
 must  have  been  observed.  Hence  it  was  with  a 
 view  of  observing  the  jubilee  law  that  the  right  of 
 an  heiress  to  marry  was  restricted  (Num.  xxxvi.  4, 
 6,  7)  ;  and  it  was  the  observance  of  this  law,  for- 
 bidding the  sale  of  land  in  such  a  manner  as  shall 
 prevent  its  reversion  to  the  original  owner  or  his 
 heir  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  that  made  Naboth  refuse 
 to  part  with  his  vineyard  on  the  solicitation  of 
 King  Ahab  (l  Kings  xxi.  1-4).  3.  From  Ezek. 
 xlvi.  17,  where  even  the  king  is  reminded  that  if 
 he  made  a  present  of  his  landed  property  to  any  of 
 his  servants  it  could  only  be  to  the  jubilee  year, 
 when  it  must  revert  to  him,  it  is  evident  that  the 
 jubilee  was  observed.  Allusions  to  the  jubilee  are 
 also  to  be  found  in  Is.  Ixi.  I,  2  ;  Neh.  v.  1-19. 
 4.  This  observance  of  the  jubilee  is  attested  by  the 
 unanimous  voice  of  Jewish  tradition.  This  unani- 
 mity of  opinion,  however,  only  extends  to  the  ob- 
 servance of  the  jubilee  prior  to  the  Babylonish 
 captivity,  for  many  of  the  later  rabbins  affirm  that 
 it  was  not  kept  after  the  captivity.  But  in  the 
 Seder  Olam  (cap.  xxx.),  the  author  of  which  lived 
 shortly  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  we  are 
 positively  assured  that  it  was  observed.  Josephus 
 too  [Antiq.  iii.  12,  sec.  3)  speaks  of  it  as  being 
 permanently  observed.  This  is,  moreover,  con- 
 firmed by  Diodorus  Siculus  (lib.  xl.),  who  tell  us 
 that  the  Jews  cannot  dispose  of  their  own  patri- 
 mony lhiov%  KXripovs  TTuXelv,  as  well  as  by  the  fact 
 that  we  have  distinct  records  of  the  law  respecting 
 the  redemption  of  houses  in  cities  without  walls, 
 which  forms  an  integral  part  of  the  jubilee  law, 
 being  strictly  observed  to  a  very  late  period  {Era- 
 chin,  31b;  Baba  Kama,  82  b). 
 
 4.  Design  and  importance  of  the  Jubilee.  — The 
 design  of  this  institution  is  that  those  of  the  people 
 of  God  who,  through  poverty  or  other  adverse  cir- 
 cumstances, had  forfeited  their  personal  liberty  or 
 property  to  their  fellow-brethren,  should  have 
 their  debts  forgiven  by  their  co-religionists  every 
 half  centuiy,  on  the  great  day  of  atonement,  and 
 be  restored  to  their  families  and  inheritance  as 
 freely  and  fully  as  God  on  that  very  day  forgave 
 the  debts  of  his  people  and  restored  them  to  per- 
 fect fellowship  with  himself,  so  that  the  whole 
 community,  having  forgiven  each  other  and  being 
 forgiven  by  God,  might  return  to  the  original 
 order  which  had  been  disturbed  in  the  lapse  of 
 time,  and  being  freed  from  the  bondage  of  one 
 another  might  unreservedly  be  the  servants  of  him 
 who  is  their  redeemer.  The  aim  of  the  jubilee, 
 therefore,  is  to  preserve  unimpaired  the  essential 
 character  of  the  theocracy,  to  the  end  that  there 
 be  no  poor  among  the  people  of  God  (Deut.  xv.  4). 
 Hence  God,  who  redeemed  Israel  from  the  bon- 
 dage of  Egypt  to  be  his  peculiar  people,  and  al- 
 lotted to  them  the  promised  land,  will  not  suffer 
 any  one  to  usurp  his  title  as  Lord  over  those  whom 
 he  owns  as  his  o\vn.  It  is  the  idea  of  grace  for  all 
 the  suffering  children  of  man,  bringing  freedom  to 
 the  captive  and  rest  to  the  weary  as  well  as  to  the 
 earth,  which  made  the  year  of  jubilee  the  symbol 
 
 of  the  Messianic  year  of  grace  (mnv  )1i*")  fUK', 
 Is.  Ixi.  2),  when  all  the  conflicts  in  the  universe 
 shall  be  restored  to  their  original  harmony,  and 
 when  not  only  we,  who  have  the  first-fruits  of  the 
 
 Spirit,  but  the  whole  creation,  which  groaneth 
 and.  travaileth  in  pain  together  until  now,  shall  be 
 restored  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  sons  ol 
 God  (comp.  Is.  Ixi.  1-3 ;  Luke  iv.  21  ;  Rom.  viii. 
 18-23  ;  Heb.  iv.  9). 
 
 Theimporta}tceoi\h\s  institution  will  be  apparent 
 if  it  is  considered  what  moral  and  social  advantages 
 would  accrue  to  the  community  from  the  sacred 
 observance  of  it.  I.  It  would  prevent  the  accu- 
 mulation of  land  on  the  part  of  a  few  to  the  detri- 
 ment of  the  community  at  large.  2.  It  would 
 render  it  impossible  for  any  one  to  be  born  to  ab- 
 solute poverty,  since  every  one  had  his  hereditary 
 land.  3.  It  would  preclude  those  inequalities 
 which  are  produced  by  extremes  of  riches  and 
 poverty,  and  which  make  one  man  domineer  over 
 another.  4.  It  would  utterly  do  away  with  slavery. 
 5.  It  would  afford  a  fresh  opportunity  to  those 
 who  were  reduced  by  adverse  circumstances  to 
 begin  again  their  career  of  industry,  in  the  patri- 
 mony which  they  had  temporarily  forfeited.  6. 
 It  would  periodically  rectify  the  disorders  which 
 crept  into  the  state  in  the  course  of  time,  preclude 
 the  division  of  the  people  into  nobles  and  plebeians, 
 and  preserve  the  theocracy  inviolate. 
 
 5.  Literature. — The  Mishna,  Erachin,  ch.  viii.- 
 ix.,  gives  very  important  enactments  of  a  very 
 ancient  date  respecting  the  jubilee.  In  Maimo- 
 nides,  lod  Ha-Chezaka,  Hilchoth  Shmita  Ve-Jobel, 
 ch.  x.-xiii. ,  an  epitome  will  be  found  of  the  Jewish 
 information  on  this  subject,  which  is  scattered 
 through  the  Talmud  and  Midrashim.  Of  the 
 modern  productions  are  to  be  mentioned  the 
 valuable  treatises  of  Cunaeus,  De  Rep.  Hebr.,  ch.  2, 
 sec.  iv. ,  in  the  Critici  Sacri,  vol.  ix.,  p.  278,  sq.  ; 
 and  Meyer,  De  Tefupor.  et  Diebtcs  Hebraorum,  1755, 
 p.  341-360;  Carpzov,  Apparatus  Historico-Criti- 
 cus,  p.  447,  sq.  ;  Michaelis,  Commetitaries  on  the 
 Laws  of  Moses,  English  version,  London  1 8 14,  vol. 
 i.  art.  Ixxxiii.,  p.  376,  sq.  ;  Ideler,  Handbtich  det 
 Chronologic,  vol.  i.,  Berlin  1825,  p.  502,  sq.  ;  the 
 excellent  prize  essays  of  Kranold,  De  Anno  Hcbr. 
 JubilcEO,  Gottingen  1837,  and  Wolde,  De  Anno 
 Hebr.  jfubilceo,  Gottingen  1837  ;  Bahr,  Symbolik 
 des  Mosaischen  Ciiltus,  vol.  ii.,  Heidelberg  1839, 
 p.  572,  sq.  ;  Ewald,  Die  Alterthtimer  des  Volkes 
 Israel,  Gottingen  1854,  p.  415,  sq ;  Saalschiitz, 
 Das  Mosaische  Recht,  vol.  i.,  Berlin  1853,  ch.  xiii., 
 p.  141,  etc.  ;  and  by  the  same  learned  author, 
 Archdologie  der  Hebriier,  vol.  ii. ,  Konigsberg  1856, 
 ch.  Ixvi.,  sec.  3,  p.  224,  etc.  ;  Herzfeld,  Geschichti 
 des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  i.,  Nordhausen  1855,  p. 
 463,  etc.  ;  Keil,  Handbtich  der  Biblischen  Archdo- 
 logie, Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1858,  vol.  i.  p.  374, 
 etc.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 JUBILEES,  Book  of.  This  Apocryphal  or 
 Hagadic  book,  which  was  used  so  largely  in  the 
 ancient  church,  and  was  still  known  to  the  Byzan- 
 tines, but  of  which  both  the  original  Hebrew  and 
 the  Greek  were  afterwards  lost,  has  recently  been 
 discovered  in  an  Ethiopic  version  in  Abyssinia. 
 
 I.    Title  of  the  Book,  atid  its  sigtiifcatioft. — The 
 
 book  is  called  t&  'Iw^ST/XaFa  =  niPniTl  ISD,  the 
 Jubilees  or  the  book  of  Jubilees,  because  it  divides 
 the  period  of  the  Biblical  history  upon  which  it 
 treats,  i.  e.,  from  the  creation  to  the  entrance  of 
 the  Israelites  into  Canaan,  into  fifty  Jubilees  of  forty- 
 nine  years  each,  equal  to  2450  years,  and  carefully 
 describes  every  event  according  to  the  Jubilee,  Sab- 
 batic year,  or  year  in  which  it  transpired,  as  stated 
 
JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 in  the  inscfiption  :  '  These  are  the  words  of  the 
 division  of  the  days  according  to  the  law  and  the 
 testimony,  according  to  the  events  of  the  years  in 
 Sabbatic  years  and  in  Jubilees,  etc'  It  is  also 
 called  by  the  Fathers  ij  XeTTTTj  F^vecns,  XeirTia-yive- 
 cris,  fxiKpoy^veais ;  to,  XeirTo,  Tevicrews,  =  ri''t/'X"l2 
 ND1T,  i.  e. ,  t//e  sinall  Genesis,  compenditim  of 
 Genesis,  because  it  only  selects  certain  portions  of 
 Genesis,  although  through  its  lengthy  comments 
 upon  these  points  it  is  actually  longer  than  this 
 canonical  book  (comp.  Epiphanius,  Adv.  Haer., 
 lib.  I.,  tom.  iii.,  cap.  vi.,  ed.  Petav. ;  G.  Syncellus, 
 p.  8) ;  or  according  to  Ewald's  rendering  of  it,  to, 
 XewTo,  (stihtilia,  miuuta)  V^veais,  because  it  divides 
 the  history  upon  which  it  treats  into  very  minute 
 and  small  periods  {Geschicltte  des  Volkes  Israel, 
 i.  271)  ;  it  is  called  by  St.  Jerome  the  Apocryphal 
 Genesis  (see  below,  sec.  3),  and  it  is  also  styled  17 
 rod  Mcoucr^ws  aTTOKoXvipLs,  the  Apocalypse  of  Moses, 
 by  George  Syncellus  and  Cedrenus,  because  tiie 
 book  pretends  to  be  a  revelation  of  God  to  Moses, 
 and  is  denominated  '  the  book  of  tlie  division  of  days'" 
 by  the  Abyssinian  Church,  from  the  first  words  of 
 the  inscription. 
 
 2.  Design  and  Contents  of  the  Book. — This  Apo- 
 ciyphal  book  is  designed  to  be  a  commentary  on 
 the  canonical  books  of  Genesis  and  Exodus,  (i) 
 It  fixes  and  arranges  more  minutely  the  chronology 
 of  the  Biblical  history  from  the  creation  to  the  en- 
 trance of  the  Israelites  into  Canaan  ;  (2)  Solves  the 
 various  difficulties  to  be  found  in  the  narratives  of 
 these  canonical  books  ;  (3)  Describes  more  fully 
 events  which  are  simply  hinted  at  in  the  sacred  his- 
 tory of  that  early  period  ;  and  (4)  Expatiates  upon  the 
 religious  observances,  such  as  the  Sabbath,  the  fes- 
 tivals, circumcision,  sacrifices,  lawful  and  unlawful 
 meats,  etc.  etc.,  setting  forth  their  sacred  character, 
 as  well  as  our  duty  to  keep  them,  by  shewuig  the  high 
 antiquity  of  these  institutions,  inasmuch  as  they  have 
 been  sacredly  observed  by  the  patriarchs,  as  may  be 
 seen  from  the  following  notice  of  these  four  points. 
 
 a.  In  its  chronological  arrangements  we  find  that 
 it  places  the  deluge  in  1353  A.M.  (Jubil.  vi.  61),  and 
 the  exodus  in  the  year  2410  A.M.  (iv.  10.)  This, 
 with  the  forty  years'  sojourn  in  the  wilderness, 
 yields  fifty  jubilees  of  forty-nine  years  each  from 
 the  creation  to  the  entrance  into  Canaan,  /.  e.  2450, 
 and  also  allows  a  new  jubilee  period  to  commence 
 mimediately  upon  the  entering  of  the  Israelites  into 
 the  promised  land.  Though  in  the  calculations  of 
 this  period  the  book  of  Jubilees  agrees  in  its  parti- 
 culars with  the  Hebrew  text  of  Genesis  and  Exodus, 
 yet  it  differs  from  the  canonical  text  both  as  to  the 
 time  of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  and  the  years  in  which 
 the  ante  and  post-diluvian  patriarchs  begat  their 
 children.  Thus  Jared  is  said  to  have  lived  62  in- 
 stead of  162  years  before  Enoch  was  bom,  Me- 
 thuselah was  67  instead  of  187  at  the  birth  of 
 Lamech,  and  Lamech  again  was  53  instead  of  182 
 when  he  begat  Noah ;  agreeing  partly  with  the 
 Sainaritan  Pentateuch,  and  partly  with  the  Septua- 
 gint  in  their  statements  about  these  ante-diluvian 
 patriarchs.  In  the  chronology  of  the  post-diluvian 
 patriarchs,  however,  the  book  of  Jubilees  deviates 
 from  these  versions,  and  says  that  Arphaxad  begat 
 Cainan  when  74-75  ;  after  the  deluge,  Cainan  begat 
 Salah  when  57,  Salah  begat  Eber  wlien  67,  Eber 
 begat  Peleg  when  68,  Peleg  begat  Reu  when  61, 
 the  birth  of  Serug  is  omitted,  but  Serug  is  said  to 
 have  begat  Nahor  in  the  year  1 16  after  the  birth 
 of  Reu,  and  Nahor  begat  Terah  in  his  62d  year 
 
 633  JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 (comp.  Jubil.  iv.  40,  etc.)  The  going  down  intc 
 Egypt  is  placed  about  2172-2173  a.m.  (Jubil.  xlv. 
 1-3),  so  that  when  we  deduct  it  from  2410,  in  which 
 year  the  exodus  is  placed,  there  remains  for  the  so- 
 journ in  Egypt  238  years.  In  the  description  of 
 the  lives  of  Noah,  Abraham  (xxiii.  23),  Isaac 
 (xxxvi.  49-52),  Jacob  (xlv.  40-43),  and  Joseph 
 (xlvi.  9-15),  the  chronology  agrees  with  the  Hebrew 
 text  of  Genesis. 
 
 b.  Of  the  difficulties  in  the  sacred  narrative  which 
 the  book  of  Jubilees  tries  to  solve,  may  be  men- 
 tioned that  it  accounts  for  the  serpent  speaking  to 
 Eve,  by  saying  that  all  animals  spoke  before  the 
 fall  in  paradise  (comp.  Gen.  i.  i  with  Jubil.  iii.  98); 
 explains  very  minutely  whence  the  first  heads  of 
 families  took  their  wives  (Jubil.  iv.  24,  71,  100, 
 etc.);  how  far  the  sentence  of  death  pronounced 
 in  Gen.  ii.  17  has  been  fulfilled  literally  (iv.  99, 
 etc.) ;  shews  that  the  sons  of  God  who  came  to  tlie 
 daughters  of  men  were  angels  (v.  3)  ;  with  what 
 help  Noah  brought  the  animals  into  the  ark  (v. 
 76)  ;  wherewith  the  tower  of  Babel  was  destroyed 
 (x.  87) ;  why  Sarah  disliked  Ishmael  and  urged 
 Abraham  to  send  him  away  (xvii.  13)  ;  why  Re- 
 becca loved  Jacob  so  dearly  (xix.  40-84)  ;  how  it 
 was  that  Esau  came  to  sell  his  birthright  for  a  mess 
 of  pottage  (xxiv.  5-20) ;  who  told  Rebekah  (Gen. 
 xxvii.  42)  that  Esau  determined  to  kill  Jacob 
 (xxxvii.  I,  etc.);  how  it  was  that  he  afterwards 
 desisted  from  his  determination  to  kill  Jacob  (xxxv. 
 29-105);  why  Rebekah  said  (Gen.  x.xvii.  45)  that 
 she  would  be  deprived  of  both  her  sons  in  one  day 
 (xxxvii.  9) ;  why  Er  Judah's  first-born  died  (xli. 
 1-7);  why  Onan  would  not  redeem  Tamar  (xli. 
 II-13);  why  Judah  was  not  punished  for  his  sin 
 with  Tamar  (xli.  57'^7)  >  '^''^Y  Joseph  had  the 
 money  put  into  the  sacks  of  his  brethren  (xlii. 
 71-73) ;  and  how  Moses  was  nourished  in  the  ark 
 (xlvii.  13),  and  that  it  was  not  God  but  the  chief- 
 mastemah,  HDIDti'Q,  the  enemy  who  hardened  the 
 hearts  of  the  Egyptians  (xlviii.  58). 
 
 c.  Instances  where  ei'cnts  which  are  b)-iefly  men- 
 tioned  or  simply  hinted  at  in  the  canonical  book  of 
 Genesis,  and  which  seem  to  refer  to  another  narra- 
 tive of  an  earlier  or  later  date,  are  given  more  fully 
 in  the  book  of  Jubilees,  will  be  found  in  Jubil. 
 xvi.  39-101,  where  an  extensive  description  is  given 
 of  the  appearance  of  the  angels  to  Abraham  and 
 Sarah  as  a  supplement  to  Gen.  xviii.  14  ;  in  Jubil. 
 xxxii.  5-38,  50-53,  where  Jacob  is  described  as 
 giving  tithes  of  all  his  possessions,  and  wishing  to 
 erect  a  house  of  God  in  Bethel,  which  is  a  fuller 
 description  of  that  hinted  at  in  Gen.  xxviii.  22  ;  in 
 Jubil.  xxxiv.  4-25,  where  Jacob's  battle  with  the 
 seven  kings  of  the  Amorites  is  described,  to  which 
 allusion  is  made  in  Gen.  xlviii.  22. 
 
 d.  As  to  the  religious  observances,  we  are  told 
 that  tlie  Feast  of  Weeks,  or  Pentecost  (Oni^an  D"l"' 
 myinti',  T'^pn  jn),  is  contained  in  the  covenants 
 which  God  made  with  Noah  and  Abraham  (comp. 
 Jubil.  vi.  56-60  with  Gen.  i.x.  8-17;  xiv.  51-54  with 
 Gen.  XV.  18-21)  ;  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  first 
 celebrated  by  AlDraham  at  Beersheba  (Jubil.  xvi. 
 61-101);  the  concluding  Festival  (m^T  '•yOtJ'), 
 which  is  on  the  23d  of  Tishri,  continuing  the  Feast 
 ofTabenuicles  [Festivals],  was  instituted  by  Jacob 
 (Jubil.  xxxii.  87-94)  after  his  vision  at  Bethel  (Gen. 
 xxxv.  9-14) ;  and  that  the  mourning  on  the  Day  oj 
 Atonement  (T'SD  DV)  was  instituted  (Lev.  xvi.  29) 
 to  commemorate  the  mourning  of  Jacob  over  the 
 loss  of  Joseph  (Jubil.  xxxiv.  50-60). 
 
JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 670 
 
 JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 The  German  version  by  Dillmann,  through  which 
 this  book  has  recently  been  made  known  to  Euro- 
 peans, has  been  divided  by  the  erudite  translator 
 \\\\.o  fifty  chapters,  but  not  into  verses.  The  refer- 
 ences in  this  article  are  to  those  chapters,  and  the 
 lines  of  the  respective  chapters. 
 
 3.   Author  and  Original  Language  of  the  Book. 
 —That  the  author  of  this  book  was  a  Jew  is  evi- 
 dent from — (i)   His  minute  description  of  the  Sab- 
 bath and   festivals,   as  well   as   all    the    Rabbinic 
 ceremonies  connected  therewith  (1.  19-33,  49-6o)) 
 which  developed  themselves  in  the  course  of  time, 
 and  whiclv  we  are  told  are  simply  types  described 
 by  Moses  from  heavenly  archetypes,  and  have  not 
 only  been  kept  by  the  angels  in  heaven,  but  are 
 binding  upon   the  Jews  world  without  end  ;    (2) 
 The  elevated  position  he  ascribes  to  the  Jewish 
 people  (ii.    79-91  ;  xvi.   50-56),   ordinary  Israelites 
 are  in  dignity  equal  to  angels  (xv.  72-75),  and  the 
 priests  are  like  the  presence-angels  (xxxi.  47-49), 
 over  Israel  only  does  the  Lord  himself  rule,  whilst 
 he  appointed  evil  spirits  to  exercise  dominion  over 
 all  other  nations  (xv.  80-90)  ;  and  (3)  The  many 
 Hagadic  elements  of  this  book  which  are  still  pre- 
 served in  the  Talmud  and  Midrashim.     Comp.  for 
 instance  Jubil.   i.    116,  where  the  presence-angel, 
 piDLSD,    D''JSn  'y\^,   is  described  as  having   pre- 
 ceded the  hosts  of  Israel,  with  Sanhedrim  38,  b  ; 
 the  description  of  the  creation  of  paradise  on  the 
 third  day  {Jubil.   ii.   37  with  Bereshith  Rabba,   c. 
 XV.) ;  the  twenty-two  generations   from   Adam  to 
 Jacob  [Jubil.  ii.  64,  91,  with  Bereshith  Rabba  and 
 Midrash  Tadshe,    169);  the  animals  speaking  be- 
 fore the  fall  {Jubil.  iii.  98  with  the  Midrashim) ; 
 the  remark  that   Adam  lived   70  years  less  than 
 1000  years  in  order  that  the  declaration  might  be 
 fulfilled  'in  the  day  in  which  thou  eatest  thereof 
 thou  shalt  die,'  since  looo  years  are  as  one  day  with 
 the  Lord  {Jubil.  iv.  99  with  Bereshith  Rabba,  c. 
 xix. ;  Justin.  Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  p.  278,  ed.  Otto) ;  the 
 causes  of  the  deluge  {Jubil.  v.  5-20  with  Bereshith 
 Rabba,  c.  xxxi. ) ;  the  declaration  that  the  beginning 
 of  the  first,  fourth,  seventh,  and  tenth  months,  are 
 to  be  celebrated  as  festivals,  being  the  beginning  of 
 the  four  seasons  called  JllSpn,  and  having  already 
 been   observed   by   Noah    {Jubil.   vi.   31-95   with 
 Pirke  d.  R.  Eliezer,  cap.  viii. ;  Pseudo-Jonathan  on 
 Gen.  viii.  22) ;  the  statement  that   Satan  induced 
 God  to  ask  Abraham  to  sacrifice  his  son  {Jubil. 
 xvii.  49-53  with  Sanhedrim  89,  b) ;  that  Abraham 
 was  tempted  ten  times  {Jubil.  xix.  22  with  Mishna, 
 A  both  v.   3  ;    Targtmi  Jerusalem  on  Gen.  xxii.  I, 
 etc.);  and  that   Joseph  spake   Hebrew  when   he 
 made  himself  known  to  his  brothers  {Jubil.  xliii. 
 54  with  Bereshith  Rabba,  cap.  xciii.)     As,  how- 
 ever, some  of  the  practices,  rites,  and  interpreta- 
 tions given  in  this  book  are  at  variance  with  the 
 traditional  expositions  of  the  Rabbins,   Beer  is  of 
 opinion  that  the  writer  was  a  Dosithean  who  was 
 anxious  to  bring  about  a  fusion  of  Samaritanism 
 and  Rabbinic-Judaism,  by  making  mutual  conces- 
 sions {Das  Buch  d.  Jubilden,  pp.  61,  62) ;  Jellinek 
 again  thinks  that  he  was  a7i  Esscne,  and  wrote  this 
 book  against  the  Pharisees,  who  maintained  that 
 the  beginning  of  the  month  is  to  be  fixed  by  obser- 
 vation and  not  by  calculation  CS  ^y  CHnn  KnT'p 
 IT'^Sin),  and  that  the  Sanhedrim  had  the  power  of 
 ordaining  intercalary  years  [HiLLEL  II.],  adducing 
 in  corroboration  of  this  view  the  remark  in  Jubil. 
 vi.  95-133,  the  chronological  system  of  the  author, 
 
 which  is  based  upon  heptades  ;  and  the  strict  obser- 
 vance of  the  Sabbath,  which  as  an  Essene  loving 
 the  sacred  number  seven,  he  urges  upon  every 
 Israelite  (comp.  Jubil.  ii.  73-135 ;  iv.  19-61 ;  Bet. 
 Ha-jMidrash,  iii.  p.  xi.)  Whilst  Frankel  maintains 
 that  the  writer  was  an  Egj'ptian  Jew,  and  a  priest 
 at  the  temple  in  Leontopolis,  which  accounts  for 
 his  setting  such  a  high  value  upon  sacrifices,  and 
 tracing  the  origin  of  the  festivals  and  sacrifices  to 
 the  patriarchs  {Monatschrift,  v.  p.  396). 
 
 Notwithstanding  the  difference  of  opinion  as  to 
 which  phase  of  Judaism  the  author  belonged,  all 
 agree  that  this  book  was  written  in  Hebrew,  that 
 it  was  afterwards  translated  into  Greek,  and  that  the 
 Ethiopic,  of  which  Dillmann  has  given  a  German 
 version  is  made  from  tlie  Greek.  Many  of  the 
 expressions  in  the  book  can  only  be  understood  by 
 retranslating  them  into  Hebrew.  Thus,  for  in- 
 stance, the  remarks  '  ttnd  es  giebt  keiiie  Ueberge- 
 HUNG'  (Jubil.  vi.  loi,  102),  "■  und  sie  sollen  keine7t 
 7(7^  uebergehen'  (vi.  107),  become  intelligible 
 when  we  bear  in  mind  that  the  original  had  "l12''y, 
 intercalation.  Moreover,  the  writer  designates  the 
 wives  of  the  patriarchs  from  the  family  of  Seth  by 
 names  which  express  beauty  and  virtue  in  Hebreiv , 
 Seth  married  Azurah,  HllVy,  7-estrain;  Jared 
 married  Beracha,  HDIQ,  blessing;  Enoch  and  Me- 
 thuselah married  wives  of  the  name  of  Adni,  HJiy, 
 pleasure;  whilst  Cain  married  his  sister  Avan,  JIS, 
 
 vice  (Jubil.  iv.  24-12S).  The  words  1ny3t^•J  U, 
 Gen.  xxii.  16,  are  rendered  in  the  book  of  Jubil. 
 (xvii.  42),  bei  nieinem  Plaicpte,  which  is  the  well- 
 known  Palestinian  oath,  ^C^'N■1,  ''t^'^<"l  "'TI^  (comp. 
 Sanhedrim,  2,  3,  al.),  and  which  no  Greek  writer 
 would  use,  especially  as  the  Sept.  has  not  got  it 
 here.  There  are  also  other  renderings  which  shew 
 that  the  writer  had  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  before 
 him  and  not  the  Sept.,  a  fact  which  is  irreconcil- 
 able on  the  supposition  that  he  was  a  Greek  Jew, 
 or  wrote  in  Greek,  as  he  would  undoubtedly  have 
 used  the  Sept.  Thus,  for  instance,  the  book  of 
 Jubil.  xiv.  9,  10,  has  '  der  aus  deinem  Leibe 
 hervorgeht,'  which  is  a  literal  translation  of  the 
 Hebrew  yV^t^  N^""  "W^-'is,  Gen.  xv.  4 ;  otherwise 
 the  Sept.  6s  e^eXevaeraL  €k  crov  :  Jubil.  xiv.  29  has 
 '■  aber  Abram  WEHRTE  SIE  AB,'  so  the  Hebrew  ^ti'*! 
 
 D~l3X  DniX  (Gen.  xv.  1 1),  not  the  Sept.  /cai  crwe/cd- 
 
 a-io-ej/  aiiToh  "A^pafi  (comp.  also  book  of  Jubil.  xv, 
 17  with  Sept.  Gen.  xvii.  7  ;  xv.  43  with  Sept.  xvii. 
 17  ;  XV.  46  with  Sept.  xvii.  19).  To  these  is  to 
 be  added  the  testimony  of  St.  Jerome,  who  remarks 
 upon  riD"),  hoc  verbum,   quantum   memoria   sug- 
 
 gerit,  nusquam  alibi  in  scripturis  Sanctis  apud  He- 
 brseos  invenisse  me  novi,  absque  libro  apocrypho, 
 qui  a  Gnecis  fuKpoyiveais  appellatur.  Ibi  in  sedi- 
 ficatione  turris  pro  stadio  ponitur,  in  quo  excer- 
 centur  pugiles  et  athlete  et  cursorum  velocitas 
 comprobatur  (comp.  In  epistola  ad  Fabiolani  de 
 mansionibjis,  Mansio  xviii.  on  Num.  xxxiii.  21,  22) ; 
 and  again  (Mansio  xxiv.  on  Num.  xxxiii.  27,  28), 
 hoc  eodem  vocabulo  (IT^n)  et  iisdem  literis  scrip- 
 
 tum  invenio  patrem  Abraham,  qui  in  supradicto 
 apocrypho  Geneseos  volumine  abactis  corvis,  qui 
 hominum  frumenta  vastabant,  abactoris  vel  depul- 
 soris  sortitus  est  nomen  ;  as  well  as  the  fact  that 
 portions  of  the  book  are  still  extant  in  Hebrew 
 (comp.  Jellinek,  Bet  Ha-Midrash,  vol.  iii.  p.  ix. 
 etc. )  The  agreement  of  many  passages  with  the 
 Sept.  when  the  latter  deviates  from  the  Hebrew,  is, 
 
JUBILEES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 672 
 
 JUD^A  AND  JUDEA 
 
 as  Dillmann  observes,  to  be  ascribed  to  the  trans- 
 lator who,  when  rendering  it  into  Greek  used  the 
 Sept.  (Ewald,  Jahrbuch,  iii.  p.  90). 
 
 4.  Date  and  Importance  of  the  Book. — That  this 
 book  was  written  before  the  destruction  of  the 
 Temple  is  evident,  not  only  from  its  description  of 
 the  sacrifices  and  the  services  performed  therein, 
 but  from  its  whole  complexion,  and  this  is  admitted 
 by  all  who  have  written  on  it.  Its  exact  date,  how- 
 ever, is  a  matter  of  dispute.  Kniger  maintains 
 that  it  was  written  between  332-320  B.C. ;  Dillmann 
 and  Frankel  think  that  it  was  written  in  the  first 
 century  before  Christ ;  whilst  Ewald  is  of  opinion 
 that  it  originated  about  the  birth  of  Christ.  The 
 medium  of  the  two  extremes  is  the  most  probable. 
 
 The  importance  of  this  book  can  hardly  be  over- 
 rated, when  we  remember  that  it  is  one  of  the  very 
 few  Biblical  works,  written  between  the  close  of 
 the  O.  T.  canon  and  beginning  of  the  N.  T.,  which 
 have  come  down  to  us.  There  are,  however, 
 several  other  considerations  whicli  render  this  book 
 a  most  important  contribution,  both  to  the  in- 
 terpretation of  the  Bible  and  to  the  history  of 
 Jewish  belief  anterior  to  the  Christian  era.  i. 
 Many  portions  of  it  are  literal  translations  of  the 
 book  of  Genesis,  and  therefore  enable  us  to  see  in 
 what  state  the  Hebrew  text  was  at  that  age,  and 
 furnish  us  with  some  readings  which  are  preferable 
 to  those  given  in  the  textics  receptiis,  e.g.,  Jubil. 
 xvii.   17  shows  that  the  correct  reading  of  Gen. 
 
 xxi.  II  is  inrOX  mX  i?yi  1J2  mX  ^y,  which  is 
 corroborated  by  the  verse  immediately  following. 
 2.  It  shows  us  that  the  Jews  of  tliat  age  believed 
 in  the  survival  of  the  soul  after  the  death  of  the 
 body  (xxiii.  1 15),  though  the  resurrection  of  the  body 
 is  nowhere  mentioned  therein  ;  that  they  believed 
 in  the  existence  of  Satan,  tlie  prince  of  legions  of 
 evil  spirits,  respecting  which  so  little  is  said  in  the 
 O.  T.  and  so  much  in  the  New  ;  and  that  these 
 evil  spirits  have  dominion  over  men,  and  are  often 
 the  cause  of  their  illnesses  and  death  (x.  35-47  ; 
 xlix.  7-10).  3.  It  shows  us  what  the  Jews  believed 
 about  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  great  day 
 of  judgment  (xxxiii.  37-118).  4.  It  explains  the 
 statements  in  Acts  vii.  53  ;  Gal.  iii.  19  ;  Heb.  ii.  2, 
 which  have  caused  so  much  difficulty  to  interpreters, 
 by  most  distinctly  declaring  that  the  law  was  given 
 through  the  presence  angel  (i.  99-102).  5-  There 
 can  hardly  be  any  doubt  tliat  it  is  quoted  in  the 
 N.  T.  (comp.  2  Pet.  ii.  4 ;  Jude  6,  with  Jubil.  iv. 
 76  ;  V.  3,  20). 
 
 5.  Literature. — It  has  already  been  remarked 
 that  the  Hebrew  original  of  this  book  is  lost. 
 Chapters  xxxiv.  and  xxxv.  are,  however,  preserved 
 from  Alidrash  Vajisau  in  Midrash  yalkut  Sab- 
 batic, %e.c\.\on  Bereshiih,  cxxxiii.,  as  has  been  pointed 
 out  by  Jellinek  (see  below)  ;  and  Treuenfels  has 
 shown  parallels  between  other  parts  of  the  book  of 
 Jubilees  and  the  Hagada  and  Ivlidrashim  in  Liter- 
 aturblati  des  Orients,  1846,  p.  81,  ff.  The  Greek 
 version  of  this  book,  which  was  made  at  a  very 
 early  period  of  the  Christian  era,  as  is  evident  from 
 Jiecognit.  Clement.,  cap.  xxx.-xxxii.,  though  Epi- 
 phanius  [Adv.  Haer.  lib.  i. ,  cap.  iv.  vi. ;  lib.  ii. ; 
 tom.  ii.,  cap.  Ixxxiii.  Ixxxiv. )  and  St.  Jerome  [in 
 Hpistola  ad  Fabiolam  de  ?nansionibics,  Mansio  xviii. 
 on  Num.  xxxiii.  21,  22;  Mansio  xxiv.  on  Num. 
 xxxiii.  27,  28)  are  the  first  who  mention  it  by  name, 
 was  soon  lost  in  the  Western  Church,  but  it  still 
 existed  in  the  Eastern  Church,  and  was  copiously 
 
 used  in  the  Chronographia  of  Georgius  Syncellua 
 and  Georgius  Credrenus,  and  quoted  several  times 
 by  Joannes  Zanoras  and  Michael  Glycas,  Byzan- 
 tine theologians  and  historians  of  the  nth  and 
 1 2th  centuries  (comp.  Fabricius,  Codex  Psetcd-epi- 
 graph.  V.  Test.,  851-863  ;  Dillmann  /«  Ewald' 3 
 yahrb.  iii.  94,  ff. )  From  that  time,  however,  the 
 Greek  version  was  also  lost,  and  the  book  of  Jubilees 
 was  quite  unknown  to  Europeans  till  1S44,  when 
 Ewald  announced  in  Der  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  Kunde 
 des  Morgenlandes,  pp.  1 76- 1 79,  that  Dr.  Krapff  had 
 found  it  preserved  in  the  Abyssinian  church  in  an 
 Ethiopic  translation,  and  brought  over  a  MS.  copy 
 which  was  made  over  to  the  Tubingen  University. 
 This  Ethiopic  version  was  translated  into  German 
 by  Dillmann  in  Eivald''s  yahrbiicJicr,  vols,  ii.,  pp. 
 230-256,  and  iii.,  pp.  I-96,  Gottingen  1851-1853; 
 and  Ewald  at  once  used  its  contents  for  the  new 
 edition  of  his  Geschichte des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  i.,  Got- 
 tingen 1851,  p.  271  ;  vol.  ii.  (1853),  p.  294.  This 
 was  seasonably  followed  by  Jellinek's  edition  of 
 tlie  Midrash  Vajisau,  with  an  erudite  preface  ;  Beth 
 Ha- Midrash,  vol.  iii.,  Leipzig  1855  ;  by  the  learned 
 treatises  of  Beer,  Das  Buch  der  yubilden  und 
 sein  Verhiillniss  zu  den  Midraschim,  1856;  and 
 Frankel,  Das  Buch  der  yubilden,  Monatschrift 
 fiir  Geschichte  und  Wissenschaft  des  yudenthums, 
 V.  pp.  311-316;  380-400;  and  another  masterly 
 production  by  Beer,  entitled  Noch  ein  Wort  iiber 
 das  Buch  der  yubilden,  in  FrankeVs  Monatschrift, 
 1857  ;  and  strictures  on  the  works  of  Jellinek, 
 Beer,  and  Frankel,  by  Dillmann,  /«  Zeitsch^-ift 
 der  Deutschen  moigenlixndischett  Gesellschaft,  xi., 
 Leipzig  1857,  p.  161,  ff.  Kriiger,  too,  published 
 an  article  on  Die  Chronologic  im  Buche  der  yubilden , 
 Zeitschrift  der  Deutschen  morgenldndischen  Gesell- 
 schaft, vol.  xii.,  Leipzig  1858,  p.  279,  ff. ;  and 
 Dillmann  has  at  last  published  the  Ethiopic  itself, 
 Kiel  and  London  1859. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JUDA.  This  name  occurs  three  times  in  the 
 A.  V.  instead  of  Judas  (Mark  vi.  3  [comp.  Matt. 
 xiii.  55,  where  the  same  person  is  called  Judas  in 
 the  A.  v.]  ;  Luke  iii.  26,  30  ;  in  all  which  pas- 
 sages 'lotySa  is  the  genitive  of  'loi^Sas),  and  four 
 times  for  the  patriarch  Judah  (Luke  iii.  33  ;  Heb. 
 vii.  14  ;  Rev.  v.  3  ;  vii.  5). — t 
 
 JUD/E  LEO.     [LeoJud/E.] 
 
 JUD^A  AND  JUDEA.  Ezra  employs  the 
 Chaldee  word  Yehfid,   'V,T\\  (=  Heb.   nniH^),  to 
 
 denote  the  whole  country  in  which  the  Jews 
 settled  after  the  return  from  captivity  (Ezra  v.  I  ; 
 Sept.  'louSa,  yudcea)  ;  and  he  calls  it  the  '  pro- 
 vince of  Judea'  (i?n3''"ID  'Wi']  ;  tv^  'lov^alav  x^- 
 pav  ;  Juderam  Provinciani).  Daniel  uses  the  word 
 in  the  same  sense,  to  denote  the  land  of  the  Jews 
 generally  (ch.  ii.  25  ;  and  v.  13,  where  it  is  ren- 
 dered in  our  A.  V.  both  yudah  and  Jewry).     In 
 
 Arabic  the  word    YehM,  t^.^,  is  applied  exclu- 
 
 sively  to  the  Jews  as  a  people. 
 
 In  the  time  of  Daniel  and  Ezra  this  word  had 
 no  definite  and  well  understood  geographical  signi- 
 fication. It  was  the  name  given  by  foreigners  to 
 the  country  which  was  considered  the  home  of  the 
 Jews.  Its  origin  is  easily  traced.  When  the  people 
 were  divided  under  Rehoboam,  ten  tribes  chose 
 Jeroboam  for  their  king,  and  called  his  kingdom 
 '  Israel ;'  the  two  tribes  who  held  by  Rehoboam 
 
TUD^A  AND  JUDEA 
 
 672 
 
 JUD.^A  AND  JUDEA 
 
 called  their  kingdom  '  Jitda/i,^  because  it  was 
 mainly  made  up  of  the  people  and  possessions  of 
 that  powerful  tribe  (l  Kings  xii.  20,  23,  27).  This 
 kingdom,  being  so  closely  connected  with  the 
 tribe,  will  be  treated  of  in  the  Art.  Judah. 
 
 The  kingdom  of  Israel  was  overthrown  by  the 
 Assyrians  in  B.C.  721  ;  Judah  survived  it  133  years. 
 During  this  period  the  name  *  Judah'  became 
 identified  with  the  Jewish  nation,  and,  among 
 foreigners,  with  the  whole  country  in  which  they 
 dwelt,  that  is,  with  all  Palestine.  By  the  Jews 
 themselves,  a  distinction  was  made  between  Judah 
 and  Samaria,  but  among  strangers  it  was  over- 
 looked. Hence,  during  the  captivity  the  name 
 Yt'kud  Oin^),  or  '  Judea,'  as  it  is  in  the  English 
 version,  was  applied  in  Babylon  to  the  whole  of 
 Palestine.  And  after  the  captivity,  though  a  con- 
 siderable portion  of  the  '  Ten  Tribes'  returned 
 with  the  others,  and  though  many  of  them  settled 
 in  their  ancient  country  (Ezra  i.  5  ;  x.  5  ;  i  Chron.  ix. 
 3  ;  Nell.  vii.  73  ;  see  Prideaux,  Cotuiedion,  \.  128), 
 yet  the  name  Judah,  or  Judea,  continued  to  be 
 applied  to  all  Palestine,  and  more  especially  that 
 section  west  of  the  Jordan  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xi.  5. 
 7).  The  whole  province  over  which  the  Persian 
 satrap  ruled  was  called  '  Judah'  (min"' ;  Hag.  i. 
 I,  14;  ii.  2  ;  cf.  Esther  viii.  9  ;  Herodot.  iii.  91). 
 
 These  facts  will  account  for  the  somewhat  vague 
 manner  in  which  the  Greek  word  'loiySata,  Jiidtra, 
 is  used  by  Josephus,  by  classic  authors,  and  even 
 in  a  few  places  by  the  writers  of  the  N.  T.  Thus 
 Josephus  says,  '  Canaan  inhabited  the  country  no2u 
 called  Jiidira,  and  called  it  from  his  own  name 
 Canaan'  (Antiq.  i.  6.  2).  In  another  place  he 
 speaks  of  'Judaea  beyond  Jordan'  (r^s  'Iou5a/as 
 nipav  ToD  ^lopddvov  ;  Antiq.  xii.  4.  n;  Reland, 
 Pal.,  p.  32),  which  is  identical  with  that  expression 
 in  Matthew  about  which  there  has  been  so  much 
 controversy — 'Jesus  departed  from  Galilee,  and 
 came  into  the  coasts  of  Jndira  beyond  Jordan '  (rd 
 6'pia  TTis  'louSatas  iripav  rod  ^lopSdvov,  Matt.  xix. 
 l).  Ptolemy  begins  one  of  his  chapters,  '  Syrian 
 Palestine,  which  is  also  called  Judcca  (tjti.s  Kal  'loi;- 
 Saia  KaXeiraL,  v.  16) ;  and  Luke,  in  Actsxxviii.  21, 
 evidently  puts  '  Judeea'  for  Palestine  (see  Reland, 
 pp.  35,  47,  etc.,  where  other  examples  are  cited). 
 
 Before  the  commencement  of  our  era,  Palestine 
 was  divided  into  three  distinct  provinces — Galilee, 
 Samaria,  and  Jiida:a  (John  iv.  3-5  ;  Reland,  pp. 
 177,  seq.  ;  Strabo,  xvi.  2.  34,  seq.,  p.  759)  ;  and 
 of  these  divisions  Josephus  gives  a  detailed  account 
 {Bell.  Jiid.  iii.  3).  Judrea  lay  on  the  south,  and 
 extended  from  the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea  on  the 
 east,  to  the  Mediterranean  on  the  west  ;  and  from 
 about  the  parallel  of  Shiloh  on  the  north,  to  the 
 wilderness  on  the  south  ;  and  also  included,  appa- 
 rently, a  strip  of  coast  running  as  far  north  as 
 Ptolemais  (Josephus,  /.  c.)  This  was  the  province 
 usually  meant  by  the  term  '■Jiidcea '  in  the  N.  T. 
 (Luke  V.  17  ;  Matt.  iv.  25  ;  John  iv.  47,  54,  etc.) ; 
 but  sometimes  the  word  is  used  in  a  wider  sense. 
 Thus,  in  Luke  i.  5,  Herod  is  called  king  of  Judaea; 
 that  is,  the  general  name  Judrea  is  given  to  his 
 whole  kingdom,  which  included  all  Palestine  both 
 east  and  west  of  the  Jordan  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  8. 
 I,  seq.)  Josephus  also  says  that  part  of  Idumea 
 was  embraced  in  Judsea  (Bell.  Jitd.  iii.  3.  5).  The 
 southern  part  of  Palestine,  between  Hebron,  Beer- 
 sheba,  and  Gaza,  was  then  called  Idumea  [Idu- 
 mea], and  thus  formed  part  of  the  proper  province 
 of  Judsa. 
 
 The  territory  anciently  allotted  to  the  tribe  of 
 Judah  was  divided  by  its  natural  conformation  into 
 three  sections  : — The  Shephelah,  the  Mountaitis, 
 and  the  Arabah  (Josh.  xi.  16;  xv.  6;  xviii.  18; 
 XV.  33,  48).  In  like  manner,  the  later  Jews 
 divided  Judaea  into  three  corresponding  sections — 
 Plain,  Mountain,  and  Valley.  The  '  Plain'  in- 
 cluded Philistia  and  part  of  Sharon  ;  the  '  Moun- 
 tain' was  the  central  ridge  on  which  Jerusalem 
 stands;  and  the  'Valley'  lay  along  the  shore  of 
 the  Dead  Sea  between  Engedi  and  Jericho  (Reland, 
 p.  176;  see  the  Jewish  authorities  there  cited). 
 
 In  the  N.  T.,  however,  only  two  natural  divi- 
 sions are  mentioned — the  mountain  or  '  hill  country 
 of  Judcea'  (kv  oXtj  t-q  dpeiv^  r-^s  'lonSat'as,  Luke  i. 
 65),  and  the  '  Wilderness  of  Judjea'  (ev  rrj'  eprificp 
 TTJs  'lovdaias,  Matt.  iii.  i).  The  'hill  country' 
 embraced  the  crown  of  the  mountain  ridge  around 
 Jerusalem,  and  southwards.  This  was  the  native 
 country  of  the  Baptist  (Luke  i.  39  ;  Alford,  in  loc.) 
 The  '  Wilderness  of  Judaea,'  or,  emphatically, 
 *  The  Wilderness,'  as  it  is  termed  in  the  narrative 
 of  our  Lord's  temptation  (ttjj'  ipTj/xof,  Matt.  iv.  i), 
 is  that  wild  and  desolate  region  along  the  whole 
 eastern  slope  of  the  mountains,  from  the  brow  of 
 the  ridge  at  Bethany,  Bethlehem,  and  Tekoa, 
 down  to  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.  For  the 
 physical  geography  of  this  region,  see  Palestine  ; 
 and  for  its  history,  Jerusalem  (see  also  Desert). 
 
 That  section  of  Judaea  which  formed  the  scene 
 of  a  part  of  our  Lord's  labours,  teachings,  and 
 sufferings,  was  '  a  hill  country  ; '  a  land  of  vine- 
 yards, olive  groves,  and  fig-orchards,  which 
 flourished  luxuriantly  in  the  deep  glens  and  along 
 the  terraced  sides  of  the  limestone  hills.  The 
 '  Wilderness,'  where  he  was  tempted,  and  through 
 which  he  travelled  from  Jericho  to  Bethany,  was 
 a  land  of  sheep  and  shepherds,  and  daring  outlaws 
 (Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  pp.  184,  248).  This 
 had  a  marked  effect  on  our  Lord's  teaching,  and 
 on  the  illustrations  and  parables  he  employed,  as 
 is  seen  by  a  careful  study  of  the  gospel  of  John, 
 which  chiefly  relates  those  incidents  that  occurred 
 in  Judffia.  The  parables  of  the  vineyard  (Matt 
 xxi.  28),  of  the  fig-trees  (xxi.  19  ;  Luke  xxi.  29, 
 etc.),  of  the  good  Samaritan  (Luke  x.  30,  seq.), 
 and  of  the  good  shepherd  (John  x. ),  were  all  told 
 in  Judaea,  where  Christ  could  point  to  the  scenes, 
 and  where  the  auditors  were  familiar  with  every 
 circumstance  of  the  stories  ;  there,  too,  among  the 
 vine-clad  hiHs  of  Judaea,  was  given  that  most  beau- 
 tiful of  all  his  illustrations  of  divine  truth — '  I  am 
 the  true  vine,  and  my  father  is  the  husbandman,' 
 etc.  (John  xv  ;  see  Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  p.  412). 
 Judffia  has  changed.  Its  glory  and  its  beauty  are 
 departed.  Its  hills  are  now  scantily  clothed  with 
 grayish  and  brown  shrubs,  intermixed  with  aro- 
 matic plants  and  bright  flowers  ;  and  their  sides 
 are  broken  by  concentric  rings  of  white  rocks,  and 
 great  piles  of  white  stones,  which  make  them  look 
 painfully  desolate.  Here  and  there  is  a  deep  glen 
 bordered  with  belts  of  olives,  and  its  banks  above 
 green  with  the  foliage  of  the  oak  ;  but  the  noble 
 forests  are  gone  ;  the  vegetation  that  resulted  from 
 careful  irrigation  is  gone;  the  terraces  that  supported 
 the  soil  on  the  hill-sides  are  broken ;  and  instead  of 
 spreading  vine  and  fig-tree,  we  have  now  naked 
 rocks,  and  confused  heaps  of  stones.  The  ancient 
 populousness  of  this  mountain  region  is  manifest 
 still  in  the  vast  number  of  ruined  towns  and 
 villages  which  everywhere  stud  the  landscai)e.    '  Id 
 
JUDAH 
 
 673 
 
 TRIBE  &  POSSESSIONS  OF 
 
 Judaea  we  may  now  wander  for  miles  together 
 without  seeing  a  vestige  of  present  habitation,  save 
 the  httle  goat-pen  on  the  hill-side,  and  the  groups 
 of  sheep  and  goats  round  the  fountains  ;  but  there 
 is  scarcely  a  hill-top  that  is  not  crowned  with 
 ruins,  and  there  is  scarcely  a  fountain  where  frag- 
 ments of  walls  and  scattered  heaps  of  stones  do 
 not  indicate  the  sites  of  former  dwellings.  The 
 light  Saracenic  arch,  the  stately  Roman  column, 
 and  the  massive  Jewish  substruction,  lead  us  up  by 
 a  regular  architectural  chronology  to  the  rude 
 'cairns'  of  the  mountain  regions,  and  the  rounded 
 tells  of  the  plains — the  vestiges  of  primitive  Canaan- 
 itish  cities'  (Handbook  for  S.  and  F.,  p.  184).  In 
 addition  to  the  works  already  referred  to,  some 
 good  descriptions  of  Judasan  scenery  and  antiqui- 
 ties will  be  found  in  Keith  on  Prophecy,  Van  de 
 Velde's  Travels,  Thomson's  The  Land  and  the 
 Book,  Olin's  Travels,  and  Wilson's  Lajids  of  the 
 Bible.  Its  history  is  sketched  by  Robinson,  Bibli- 
 cal Researches ;  and  Kitto,  Pictorial  History  of 
 Palestine. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 JUDAH     (nnin\     celebrated;    Sept.    'lovBas), 
 
 fourth  son  of  Jacob  and  Leah  (b.c.  I755)-  The 
 narrative  in  Genesis  brings  this  patriarch  more  be- 
 fore the  reader,  and  makes  known  more  of  his  his- 
 tory and  character,  than  it  does  in  the  case  of  any 
 other  of  the  twelve  sons  of  Jacob,  with  the  single 
 exception  of  Joseph.  It  is  indeed  chiefly  in  con- 
 nection with  Joseph  that  the  facts  respecting  Judah 
 transpire  ;  and  as  they  have  already  been  given  in 
 the  articles  Jacob  and  Joseph,  it  is  only  necessary 
 to  indicate  them  shortly  in  this  place.  It  was  Ju- 
 dah's  advice  that  the  brethren  followed  when  they 
 sold  Joseph  to  the  Ishmaelites,  instead  of  taking 
 his  life.  By  the  light  of  his  subsequent  actions  we 
 can  see  that  his  conduct  on  this  occasion  arose 
 from  a  generous  impulse,  although  the  form  of  the 
 question  he  put  to  them  has  been  sometimes  held 
 to  suggest  an  interested  motive  : — '  What  profit  is 
 it  if  we  slay  our  brother  and  conceal  his  blood  ? 
 Come,  let  us  sell  him,'  etc.  (Gen.  xxxvii.  26,  27). 
 
 Not  long  after  this  Judah  withdrew  from  the  pa- 
 ternal tents,  and  went  to  reside  at  AduUam,  in  the 
 country  which  afterwards  bore  his  name.  Here  he 
 married  a  woman  of  Canaan,  called  Shuah,  and  had 
 by  her  three  sons,  Er,  Onan,  and  Shelah.  When  the 
 eldest  of  these  sons  becaine  of  fit  age,  he  was  mar- 
 ried to  a  woman  named  Tamar,  Init  soon  after  died. 
 As  he  died  childless,  the  patriarchal  law,  after- 
 wards adopted  into  the  Mosaic  code  (Deut.  xxv. 
 6),  required  him  to  bestow  upon  the  widow  his 
 second  son.  This  he  did  ;  but  as  Onan  also  soon 
 died  childless,  Judah  became  reluctant  to  bestow 
 his  only  surviving  son  u]"on  this  woman,  and  put 
 her  off  with  the  excuse  that  he  was  not  yet  of  suffi- 
 cient age.  Tamar  accordingly  remained  in  her 
 father's  house  at  Adullam.  She  had  the  usual 
 passion  of  Eastern  women  for  offspring,  and  could 
 not  endure  the  stigma  of  having  been  twice  mar- 
 ried without  bearing  children,  while  the  law  pre- 
 cluded her  from  contracting  any  alliance  but  that 
 which  Judah  withheld  her  from  completing. 
 
 Meanwhile  Judah's  wife  died,  and  after  the  time 
 of  mourning  had  expired,  he  went,  accompanied  by 
 his  friend  Hirah,  to  attend  the  shearing  of  his 
 sheep  at  Timnath  in  the  same  neighbourhood. 
 These  circumstances  suggested  to  Tamar  the 
 strange  thought  of  connecting  herself  with  Judah 
 himself,  under  the  guise  of  a  loose  woman, 
 vol..  II.  * 
 
 Having  waylaid  him  on  the  road  to  Timnath, 
 she  succeeded  in  her  object,  and  when  the  conse- 
 quences began  to  be  manifest  in  the  person  of 
 Tamar,  Judah  was  highly  enraged  at  her  crime, 
 and,  exercising  the  powers  which  belonged  to  him 
 as  the  head  of  the  family  she  had  dishonoured,  he 
 commanded  her  to  be  brought  forth,  and  com- 
 mitted to  the  flames  as  an  adulteress.  But  when 
 she  appeared,  she  produced  the  ring,  the  bracelet, 
 and  the  staff,  which  he  had  left  in  pledge  with  her; 
 and  put  him  to  confusion  by  declaring  that  they 
 belonged  to  the  father  of  her  coming  offspring. 
 Judah  acknowledged  them  to  be  his,  and  confessed 
 that  he  had  been  wrong  in  withholding  Shelah 
 from  her.  The  result  of  this  painful  affair  was  the 
 birth  of  two  sons,  Zerah  and  Pharez,  from  whom, 
 with  Shelah,  the  tribe  of  Judah  descended.  Pharez 
 was  the  ancestor  of  the  hue  from  which  David,  the 
 kings  of  Judah,  and  Jesus  came  (Gen.  xxxviii.  ; 
 xlvi.  12 ;  I  Chron.  ii.  3-5  ;  Matt.  i.  3 ;  Luke  ni. 
 
 33)- 
 
 These  circumstances  seem  to  have  disgusted 
 Judah  with  his  residence  in  towns  ;  for  we  find 
 him  ever  afterwards  at  his  father's  tents.  His  ex- 
 perience of  life,  and  the  strength  of  his  character, 
 appear  to  have  given  him  much  influence  with 
 Jacob  ;  and  it  was  chiefly  from  confidence  in  him 
 that  the  aged  father  at  length  consented  to  allou 
 Benjamin  to  go  down  to  Egypt.  That  this  confi- 
 dence was  not  misplaced  has  already  been  shewn 
 [Joseph]  ;  and  there  is  not  in  the  whole  range  of 
 literature  a  finer  piece  of  true  natural  eloquence 
 than  that  in  which  Judah  offers  himself  to  re- 
 main as  a  bond-slave  in  the  place  of  Benjamin, 
 for  whose  safe  return  he  had  made  himself  respon- 
 sible to  his  father.  The  strong  emotions  which  it 
 raised  in  Joseph  disabled  him  from  keeping  up 
 longer  the  disguise  he  had  hitherto  maintained,  and 
 there  are  few  who  have  read  it  without  being,  like 
 him,  moved  even  to  tears. 
 
 We  hear  nothing  more  of  Judah  till  he  received, 
 along  with  his  brothers,  the  final  blessing  of  his 
 father,  which  was  conveyed  in  lofty  language, 
 glancing  far  into  futurity,  and  strongly  indicative 
 of  the  high  destinies  which  awaited  the  tribe  that 
 was  to  descend  from  him. 
 
 Addendiun.- — In  character,  Judah  appears  to 
 have  been  ambitious,  designing,  and  somewhat 
 unscrupulous.  He  acquired  at  an  early  period 
 considerable  ascendancy  over  his  brethren,  and 
 some  influence  also  over  his  father.  His  tact  and 
 talent  were  displayed  in  obtaining  Jacob's  con- 
 sent to  send  Benjamin  to  Egypt,  and  still  more  in 
 l^leading  for  him  before  Joseph.  Judah  was,  ii: 
 fact,  the  leading  man  in  Jacob's  household ;  and 
 he  prepared  the  way  for  making  his  tribe  the  lead- 
 ing tribe  in  Israel.  There  seems  to  be  an  acknow- 
 ledgment of  his  ascendancy,  and  a  prediction  of 
 its  continuance,  in  Jacob's  blessing  : — '  Judah  is  a 
 lion's  whelp  .  .  .  who  shall  rouse  him  ?  The 
 sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  law- 
 giver from  between  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come' 
 (Gen.  xlix.  9,  10).  Tlie  knowledge  that  the  Shiloh 
 — the  Great  Deliverer — was  to  spring  from  this 
 tribe,  doubtless  tended  to  increase  its  influence. — 
 J.  L.  R 
 
 JUDAH,  Tribe  and  Possessions  of.  At 
 the  Exodus,  the  tribe  of  Judah  numbered  74,600 
 adult  males,  being  11,900  more  than  the  largest 
 of  the  other  tribes,  and  1900  more  than  Ephraim 
 
 2  X 
 
JUDAH,  TRIBE  &  POSSESSIONS  OF     674     JUDAH,  TRIBE  &  POSSESSIONS  OF 
 
 and  Manasseh  together  (Num.  i.)  When  the 
 Israehtes  were  marshalled  in  the  wilderness  by 
 the  command  of  God,  the  tribe  of  Judah  had  as- 
 signed to  it  the  post  of  honour,  on  the  east  side  of 
 the  tabernacle  ;  and  was  made  chief  of  the  first  of 
 the  four  grand  divisions  of  the  host.  In  marching, 
 Judah  always  led  the  van  (Num.  ii.  3,  9  ;  x.  14). 
 It  is  a  singular  fact,  that  the  two  tribes  which 
 afterwards  became  the  chief  in  Israel,  were  those 
 whose  spies  brought  back  a  true  report  of  Canaan 
 to  Moses  in  Paran.  The  spies  were  Caleb  of 
 Judah,  and  Joshua  of  Ephraim  (Num.  xiii.  6,  8, 
 30 ;  xiv.  6).  The  faithfulness  of  Caleb  was  not 
 left  without  its  reward.  The  sin  of  Achan  at  the 
 taking  of  Jericho  left  a  stain  upon  the  tribe,  and 
 brought  calamity  on  the  whole  host  (Josh,  vii.) 
 
 Judah  was  the  first  tribe  which  received  its 
 allotted  possessions  west  of  the  Jordan,  and  its 
 territory  is  described  with  more  accuracy  and 
 greater  detail  than  that  of  any  other.  It  is  re- 
 markable, too,  that  this  territory  included  fully 
 oue-fhird  of  the  whole  land.  The  boundaries  are 
 very  minutely  given  by  Joshua,  and  the  principal 
 towns  are  all  named  (chap.  xv. )  Its  eastern 
 boundary  was  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Arabah,  and 
 its  western  the  Mediterranean  (vers.  5,  12).  On 
 the  north  the  border  ran  from  the  mouth  of  the 
 Jordan,  by  Jericho,  Jerusalem,  Kirjath-jearim, 
 Bethshemesh,  Ekron,  and  Jabneel,  to  the  coast. 
 The  southern  border  cannot  now  be  so  accurately 
 defined,  because  the  region  through  which  it  ran  is 
 to  a  great  extent  unexplored,  and  the  sites  of  the 
 places  named  are  unknown.  It  is  said  to  begin  at 
 '  the  shore  of  the  Salt  Sea,  and  from  the  bay  that 
 looks  southward  ; '  but  it  is  clear  from  what  follows 
 that  the  line  ran  due  sotcih  from  that  point,  through 
 the  Arabah,  as  far  as  Kadesh-barnea  (35  miles), 
 where  it  turned  westward,  and  extended  apparently 
 in  nearly  a  straight  line  to  the  River  of  Egypt, 
 now  IVady-el-Arish,  50  miles  south-west  from 
 Gaza  (vers.  2-4).  The  country  thus  defined  was 
 65  miles  long,  and  averaged  about  50  in  breadth. 
 But  while  this  large  tract  was  nominally  allotted  to 
 Judah,  the  portion  of  it  available  for  actual  settle- 
 ment was  comparatively  small,  not  amounting  to 
 above  one-third  of  the  whole.  On  the  east,  extend- 
 ing along  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Arabah,  from  north 
 to  south,  was  'the  Wilderness'  ("lilD,  Josh.  xv. 
 6),  averaging  15  miles  in  breadth,  a  wild,  barren, 
 uninhabitable  region,  fit  only  to  afford  scanty  pas- 
 turage for  sheep  and  goats,  and  a  secure  home  for 
 leopards,  bears,  wild-goats,  and  outlaws  (l  Sam. 
 xvii.  34;  Mark  i.  13 ;  I  Sam.  xxii.  i,  seq.)  Dif- 
 ferent sections  of  it  were  called  by  different  names, 
 as,  'Wilderness  of  Engedi'  (i  Sam.  xxiv.  i)  ; 
 '  Wilderness  of  Judah'  (Judg.  i.  16)  ;  '  Wilderness 
 of  Maon'  (i  Sam.  xxiii.  24  ;  see  art.  Desert).  It 
 was  the  training-ground  of  the  shepherd-warriors 
 of  Israel,  where  '  David  and  his  mighty  men'  were 
 braced  and  trained  for  those  feats  of  daring  courage 
 which  so  highly  distinguished  them.  [Bethlehem; 
 David.] 
 
 On  the  west  of  Judah's  allotted  territory  was  the 
 Plain  of  Philistia,  called  the  Shcphelah,  or  '  low 
 country,'  in  the  Bible  (Josh.  xv.  33,  etc.)  It 
 extended  from  Joppa  to  Gaza,  and  embraced  the 
 whole  of  that  noble  plain  which  constituted  far  the 
 richest  portion  of  the  land.  The  people  of  Judah 
 were  properly  mountaineers,  accustomed  to  light 
 guerilla  warfare  ;  and  they  could  not  withstand  in 
 the  open  plain  the  shock  of  the  Philistines'  war- 
 
 chariots,  and  the  heavy  panoply  of  their  mailed 
 champions.  The  Shephelah  was  thus  worse  than 
 useless  to  Judah,  for  it  involved  the  tribe  in  in- 
 creasing and  devastating  wars.  They  never  com- 
 pletely conquered,  nor  attempted  to  colonize  it. 
 
 The  real  possessions  of  Judah,  therefore,  con- 
 sisted only  of  the  central  mountain  range,  the  hill 
 cozcntry,  with  its  terraced  slopes  and  peaks  all 
 clothed  in  the  rich  foliage  of  the  vine  ;  and  its  long 
 winding  glens,  running  down  between  rocky  ridges 
 into  the  Shephelah,  their  sides  covered  with  olives 
 and  figs,  and  their  winter  brooks  running  through 
 corn-fields  below ;  and  its  southern  declivities 
 breaking  into  undulating  downs,  and  broad  steppes 
 of  pasture-land,  out  towards  Beer-sheba. 
 
 And  even  this  comparatively  narrow  strip  of 
 mountain  and  hill  Judah  was  eventually  compelled 
 to  share  with  two  other  tribes.  Dan  got  a  section 
 of  the  very  best  of  the  western  declivities,  where 
 the  mountains  break  down  in  long  terraced  spurs, 
 and  rich  intervening  vales,  to  the  plain  beneath 
 Zorah  and  Bethshemesh  [Dan].  In  fact,  Judah's 
 real  border  does  not  seem  to  have  gone  farther 
 west  in  this  direction  than  Kirjath-jearim  (Judg. 
 xiii.  25;  xviii.  12;  Josh.  xix.  40-46).  Simeon 
 again  obtained  a  large  part  of  that  splendid  pasture 
 land  which  Joshua  calls  the  South,  and  which  lay 
 near  Beer-sheba,  and  towards  the  coast  of  Edom 
 (xv.  21  ;  xix.  2-8).  'Of  the  portion  of  the  chil- 
 dren of  Judah  was  the  inheritance  of  the  children 
 of  Simeon  ;  for  the  part  of  the  children  of  Judah 
 was  too  much  for  them '  (ver.  9).  These  southern 
 pasture-lands  were  the  favourite  camping-grounds 
 of  the  old  patriarchs,  as  they  still  are  of  those 
 nomad  tribes  that  frequent  the  southern  border  of 
 Palestine  (Robinson,  B.  R.) 
 
 These  partitions  of  its  allotted  territoiy,  while 
 they  curtailed  its  extent,  tended  in  the  end  greatly 
 to  strengthen  the  position,  and  increase  the  power 
 of  Judah.  Dan  defended  the  western  border 
 against  the  inroads  of  the  Philistines,  with  a  brave 
 and  well-trained  band  of  soldiers  ;  having  esta- 
 blished, as  it  seems,  a  permanent  camp  on  the 
 commanding  height  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol 
 (Judg.  xiii.  25;  xvi.  31  ;  xviii.  12;  see  Dan). 
 Simeon  bore  the  brunt  of  all  attacks  and  forays 
 made  on  the  southern  border  by  the  tribes  of  the 
 great  '  Wilderness  of  Wandering. '  And  when  the 
 Edomites  attempted  to  penetrate  Judah,  Simeon 
 could  always  check  them  by  an  attack  upon  their 
 flank. 
 
 The  broad  summit  of  the  mountain  ridge  be- 
 tween Jerusalem  and  Juttah  was  the  home  and 
 stronghold  of  Judah.  On  every  side  the  aji- 
 proaches  to  it  were  difficult,  and  the  passes  easily 
 defended.  The  towns  and  villages,  too,  were  gene- 
 rally perched  on  the  tops  of  hills,  or  on  rocky 
 slopes.  The  resources  of  the  soil  were  great. 
 The  country  was  rich  in  corn,  wine,  oil,  and  fruits ; 
 and  the  daring  shepherds  were  able  to  lead  their 
 flocks  far  out  over  the  neighbouring  plains  and 
 through  the  mountains.  During  the  wars  of 
 Joshua  two  men  distinguished  themselves  by  suc- 
 cessful excursions,  the  aged  Caleb,  and  his  nephew 
 Othniel.  Caleb  took  Hebron  from  the  giant 
 Anakim  ;  and  Othniel  captured  Debir,  and  as  a 
 reward  for  his  valour  got  Caleb's  daughter  with  a 
 rich  dowry  (Josh.  xv.  13-19). 
 
 During  the  rule  of  the  Judges  the  tribe  of  Judah 
 was  mainly  occupied  in  completing  the  conquest  of 
 the  territory.     A  few  strongholds  in  the  niountains 
 
JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 
 
 675 
 
 JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 
 
 still  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites  ; 
 these  they  took,  and  they  also  made  a  successful 
 expedition  into  Philistia,  capturing  Gaza,  Askelon, 
 and  Ekron,  though  they  were  unable  to  establish 
 permanent  settlements  there.  In  all  these  expedi- 
 fions  they  were  aided  by  the  tribe  of  Simeon 
 (Judg.  i. )  In  fact,  it  would  seem  that  both  Dan 
 and  Simeon,  being  closely  connected  with  Judah 
 by  geographical  position,  and  being  to  a  great  ex- 
 tent dependent  upon  it  for  aid  in  times  of  pressing 
 danger,  ranged  themselves  under  Judah's  banner, 
 and  in  the  end  became  to  a  large  extent  amalga- 
 mated with  that  tribe.  Judah  thus  began  gradu- 
 ally to  assume  the  headship  of  a  southern  confede- 
 racy, which  interfered  little,  if  at  all,  with  the 
 affairs  of  the  more  distant  tribes,  but  acted  inde- 
 pendently in  the  management  of  its  own.  The 
 only  case  in  which  Judah  appears  in  its  natural 
 place  during  a  period  of  nearly  400  years,  is  in 
 the  war  against  Benjamin,  when  it  was  divinely 
 appointed  to  lead  the  van  (Judg.  xx.  18).  Strongly 
 established  amid  the  fastnesses  of  its  own  moun- 
 tains, and  having  its  frontiers  defended  by  Dan 
 and  Simeon,  Judah  remained  at  rest,  gradually  ac- 
 quiring that  power,  wealth,  and  influence  which  in 
 the  end  gave  it  a  decided  supremacy.  When 
 David  was  banished  from  the  court  of  Saul  he 
 found  an  asylum  in  the  dominions  of  his  own  tribe ; 
 and  the  manner  in  which  he  was  able  to  evade  the 
 troops  of  the  enraged  monarch  was  probably  as 
 much  owing  to  the  sympathy  of  his  brethren  as  to 
 the  nature  of  the  country.  On  the  death  of  Saul 
 David  removed  to  Hebron  :  '  And  the  men  of 
 Judah  came,  and  there  they  anointed  David  king 
 over  the  house  of  Judah'  (2  Sam.  ii.  1-4).  They 
 had  no  consultation  with  the  other  tribes ;  and  this 
 was  the  first  step  toward  the  establishment  of  an 
 independent  kingdom.  Ephraim  was  the  rival  of 
 Judah,  and  was  the  only  tribe  which  shewed  any 
 disposition  to  dispute  its  supremacy.  The  exist- 
 ence of  the  sacerdotal  establishment  at  Shiloh  may 
 have  tended  to  encourage  the  claims  of  Ephraim. 
 But  when  Judah  placed  David  on  the  throne,  and 
 when  the  priests  and  tabernacle  were  removed  to 
 Jerusalem,  Judah  exulted,  and  Ephraim  was  pro- 
 portionably  dissatisfied.  Probably  the  division  of 
 Israel  into  two  kingdoms  may  thus  be  traced  to 
 the  rivalry  of  these  powerful  tribes.  When  the 
 kingdom  was  divided  under  Rehoboam  and  Jero- 
 boam, the  history  of  Judah  as  a  tribe  lapsed  into 
 that  oi  Judah  as  a  kingdom. — ^J.  L.  P, 
 
 JUDAH,  Kingdom  of.  When  the  territory  of 
 all  the  rest  of  Israel,  except  Judah  and  Benjamin, 
 was  lost  to  the  kingdom  of  Rehoboam,  a  special 
 single  name  was  needed  to  denote  that  which  re- 
 mained to  him  ;  and  almost  of  necessity  the  word 
 "Judah  received  an  extended  meaning,  according  to 
 which  it  comprised  not  Benjamin  only,  but  the 
 priests  and  Levites,  who  were  ejected  in  great 
 numbers  from  Israel,  and  rallied  round  the  house 
 of  David.  At  a  still  later  time,  when  the  nation- 
 ality of  the  ten  tribes  had  been  dissolved,  and 
 every  practical  distinction  between  the  ten  and  the 
 two  had  vanished  during  the  captivity,  the  scat- 
 tered body  had  no  visible  head,  except  in  Jeru- 
 salem, which  had  been  re-occupied  by  a  portion  of 
 JiidaJUs  exiles.  In  consequence  the  name  Judah 
 (or  Jew)  attached  itself  to  the  entire  nation  from 
 about  the  epoch  of  the  restoration.  [Jew.]  But 
 in  this  article  Judah  is  understood  of  the  people 
 
 over  which  David's  successors  reigned,  from  Reho- 
 boam to  Zedekiah.  [For  the  dates,  see  article 
 Chronology.] 
 
 When  the  kingdom  of  Solomon  became  rent 
 with  intestine  war,  it  might  have  been  foreseen  that 
 the  Edomites,  Moabites,  and  other  surrounding 
 nations  would  at  once  refuse  their  accustomed 
 tribute,  and  become  again  practically  independent  ; 
 and  some  irregular  invasion  of  these  tribes  might 
 have  been  dreaded.  It  was  a  mark  of  conscious 
 weakness,  and  not  a  result  of  strength,  that  Reho- 
 boam fortified  fifteen  cities  (2  Chron.  xi.  5- 11),  in 
 which  his  people  might  find  defence  against  the 
 irregular  annies  of  his  roving  neighbours.  But  a 
 more  formidable  enemy  came  in  Shishak,  king  of 
 Egypt,  against  whom  the  fortresses  were  of  no 
 avail  (xii.  4),  and  to  whom  Jerusalem  was  forced 
 to  open  its  gates  ;  and,  from  the  despoiling  of  his 
 treasures,  Rehoboam  probably  sustained  a  still 
 greater  shock  in  its  moral  effect  on  the  Moabites 
 and  Edomites,  than  in  the  direct  loss  ;  nor  is  it 
 easy  to  conceive  that  he  any  longer  retained  the 
 commerce  of  the  Red  Sea,  or  any  very  lucrative 
 trade.  Judged  of  by  the  number  of  soldiers  re- 
 counted in  the  Chronicles,  the  strength  of  the  early 
 kings  of  Judah  must  have  been  not  only  great,  but 
 rapidly  increasing.  The  following  are  the  armies 
 there  given  : — 
 
 Rehoboam  gathered  180,000  chosen  men  (2 
 Chron.  xi.  i).  (Shishak  attacked  him  with 
 60,000  horse,  1 200  chariots,  besides  infantry.) 
 Abijah  set  in  array  400,000  valiant  men  (xiii.  3, 
 17),  and  slew  500,000  of  Jeroboam's  800,000  in 
 one  battle.  Asa  had  300,000  heavy  armed,  and 
 280,000  light  armed  men  (xiv.  8).  (Zerah  in- 
 vaded him  with  1,000,000  men  and  300  chariots.) 
 Jehoshaphat  kept  up  : — • 
 
 300,000  under  Adnah, 
 
 280,000  under  Jehohaan, 
 
 200,000  under  Amasiah, 
 
 200,000  (light  armed)  under  Eliadah, 
 
 180,000  under  Jehczabad  (xvii.  14-19). 
 
 Total     1,160,000  for  field  service. 
 
 '  These  waited  on  the  king  ;'  besides  the  garrisons 
 '  in  the  fenced  cities.' 
 
 After  Jehoshaphat  followed  the  calamitous  affi- 
 nity with  the  house  of  Ahab,  and  the  massacres  of 
 both  families.  Under  Jehoiada  the  priest,  and 
 jehoash  his  pupil,  no  martial  efforts  were  made  ; 
 but  Amaziah  son  of  Jehoash,  after  hiring  100,000 
 Israelites  to  no  purpose,  made  war  on  the  Edom- 
 ites, slew  10,000,  and  threw  10,000  more  down 
 from  the  top  of  their  rock  (xxv.  5,  6,  il,  12).  His 
 own  force  in  Judah,  from  twenty  years  old  and 
 upwards,  was  numbered  at  only  300,000  choice 
 men,  able  to  handle  spear  and  shield.  His  son 
 Uzziah  had  2600  military  officers,  and  307,500 
 men  of  war  (xxvi.  12,  13).  Ahaz  lost,  in  a  single 
 battle  with  Pekah,  120,000  valiant  men  (xxviii.  6), 
 after  the  severe  slaughter  he  had  received  from 
 Rezin  king  of  Syria  ;  after  which  no  further  mili- 
 tary strength  is  ascribed  to  tlie  kings  of  Judah.  As 
 to  all  these  numbers  the  Vatican  Sept.  agrees  with 
 the  received  Hebrew  text. 
 
 These  figures  have  caused  no  small  perplexity, 
 and  have  suggested  to  some  the  need  of  conjectural 
 emendation.  But  if  they  have  been  corrupted,  it 
 is  by  system,  and  on  purpose  ;  for  there  is  far  top 
 great  uniformity  in  them  to  be  the  result  of  acci- 
 
JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 
 
 676 
 
 JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 
 
 (lent.  It  perhaps  deserves  remark,  that  in  the 
 book  of  Kings  no  numbers  of  such  startling  mag- 
 nitude are  found.  The  army  ascribed  to  Reho- 
 boam  (i  Kings  xii.  2i)  is,  indeed,  as  in  Chronicles, 
 180,000  men  ;  but  if  we  explain  it  of  those  able  to 
 fight,  the  number,  though  certainly  large,  may  be 
 dealt  with  historically.  See  the  article  on  David, 
 vol.  i.  page  641. 
 
 As  the  most  important  external  relations  of 
 Israel  were  with  Damascus,  so  were  those  of 
 Judah  with  Edom  and  Egypt.  Some  revolution 
 in  the  state  of  Egypt  appears  to  have  followed  the 
 reign  of  Shishak.  Apparently  the  country  must 
 have  fallen  under  the  power  of  an  Ethiopian 
 dynasty  ;  for  the  name  of  the  Lubim,  who  ac- 
 companied Zerah  in  his  attack  on  Asa,  is  gene- 
 rally regarded  as  proving  that  Zerah  was  from 
 Sennaar,  the  ancient  Meroe.  But  as  this  invasion 
 was  signally  repulsed,  the  attempt  was  not  re- 
 peated ;  and  Judah  enjoyed  entire  tranquillity  from 
 that  quarter  until  the  invasion  of  Pharaoh-necho. 
 In  fact,  it  may  seem  that  this  success  assisted  the 
 reaction,  favourable  to  the  power  of  Judah,  which 
 was  already  begun,  in  consequence  of  a  change  in 
 the  policy  of  Damascus.  Whether  Abijah  had 
 been  in  league  with  the  father  of  Benhadad  I.  (as 
 is  generally  inferred  from  i  Kings  xv.  19)  may  be 
 doubted  ;  for  the  address  cannot  be  rendered,  ''Let 
 there  be  a  league  between  me  and  thee,  as  there  ivas 
 between  my  father  and  thine  ;'  and  it  possibly  is 
 only  a  hyperbolical  phrase  of  friendship  for,  '  Let 
 us  be  in  close  alliance  ;  let  us  count  our  fathers  to 
 have  been  allies.'  However  this  may  be,  Asa 
 bought,  by  a  costly  sacrifice,  the  sei"viceable  aid  of 
 the  Damascene  king.  Israel  was  soon  distressed, 
 and  Judah  became  once  more  formidable  to  her 
 southern  neighbours.  Jehoshaphat  appears  to  have 
 reasserted  the  Jewish  authority  over  the  Edomites 
 without  war,  and  to  have  set  his  own  viceroy  over 
 them  (i  Kings  xxii.  47).  Intending  to  resume  the 
 distant  commerce  which  had  been  so  profitable  to 
 Solomon,  he  built  ships  suitable  for  long  voyages 
 ('  ships  of  Tarshish'  as  they  are  rightly  called  in  i 
 Kings  xxii.  48 — a  phrase  which  the  Chronicler  has 
 misunderstood,  and  translated  into  '  ships  to  go  to 
 Tarshish,'  2  Chron.  xx.  36)  ;  but  not  having  the 
 advantage  of  Tyrian  sailors,  as  Solomon  had,  he 
 lost  the  vessels  by  violent  weather  before  they  had 
 sailed.  Upon  this  Ahaziah,  king  of  Judah,  offered 
 the  service  of  his  own  mariners,  probably  from  the 
 tribe  of  Asher,  and  others  accustomed  to  the  Medi- 
 terranean ;  but  Jehoshaphat  was  too  discouraged 
 to  accept  his  offer,  and  the  experiment  was  never 
 renewed  by  any  Hebrew  king.  The  Edomites,  who 
 paid  only  a  forced  allegiance,  soon  after  revolted 
 from  Jehoram,  and  elected  their  own  king  (2  Kings 
 viii.  20,  22).  At  a  later  time  they  were  severely 
 defeated  by  Amaziah  (2  Kings  xiv.  7),  whose  son, 
 Uzziah,  fortified  the  town  of  Elath,  intending,  pro- 
 bably, to  resume  maritime  enterprise  ;  but  it  re- 
 mained a  barren  possession,  and  was  finally  taken 
 from  them  by  Rezin,  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Kings 
 xvi.  6).  The  Philistines,  in  these  times,  seem  to 
 have  fallen  from  their  former  greatness,  their  league 
 having  been  so  long  dissolved.  The  most  remark- 
 able event  in  which  they  are  concerned  is  the 
 assault  on  Jerusalem,  in  the  i-eign  of  Jehoram  (2 
 Chron.  xxi.  16,  17). 
 
 It  is  strikingly  indicative  of  the  stormy  scenes 
 through  which  the  line  of  David  passed,  that  the 
 treasures  of  the  king  and  of  tlie  Temple  were  so 
 
 often  plundered  or  bargained  away.  First,  undet 
 Rehoboam,  all  the  hoards  of  Solomon,  consecrated 
 and  common  alike,  were  carried  off  by  Shishak 
 (i  Kings  xiv.  26).  Two  generations  later,  Asa 
 emptied  out  to  Benhadad  all  that  had  since  accu- 
 mulated 'in  the  house  of  Jehovah  or  in  the  king's 
 house.'  A  third  time,  when  Hazael  had  taken 
 Gath,  and  was  preparing  to  march  on  Jerusalem, 
 Jehoash,  king  of  Judah,  turned  him  away  by  send- 
 ing to  him  all  '  that  Jehoshaphat,  Jehoram,  Aha- 
 ziah, and  Jehoash  himself  had  dedicated,  and  all 
 the  gold  that  was  found  in  the  treasures  of  the 
 house  of  Jehovah  and  in  the  king's  house'  (2  Kings 
 xii.  18).  In  the  very  next  reign,  Jehoash,  king  of 
 Israel,  defeated  and  captured  Amaziah,  took  Jeru- 
 salem, broke  down  the  walls,  carried  off  hostages, 
 and  plundered  the  gold  and  silver  deposited  in  the 
 Temple  and  in  the  royal  palace  (2  Kings  xiv.  1 1-14). 
 A  fifth  sacrifice  of  the  sacred  and  of  the  royal  trea- 
 sure was  made  by  Ahaz  to  Tiglath-pileser  (2  Kings 
 xvi.  8).  The  act  was  repeated  by  his  son  Hezekiah 
 to  Sennacherib,  who  had  demanded  '  300  talents 
 of  silver  and  30  talents  of  gold.'  It  is  added, 
 '  Hezekiah  cut  off  the  gold  which  he  had  overlaid, 
 from  the  doors  of  the  temple  and  from  the  pillars' 
 (2  Kings  xviii.  14-16).  In  the  days  of  Josiah,  as 
 in  those  of  Jehoash,  the  Temple  appears  to  have 
 been  greatly  out  of  repair  (xii.  and  xxii.)  ;  and 
 when  Pharaoh-necho,  having  slain  Josiah,  had  re- 
 duced Judah  to  submission,  the  utmost  tribute  that 
 could  be  exacted  was  100  talents  of  silver  and  one 
 talent  of  gold.  Even  this  sum  was  obtained  by 
 direct  taxation,  and  no  allusion  is  made  to  any 
 treasure  at  all,  either  in  the  temple  or  in  the  king's 
 house.  It  is  the  more  extraordinary  to  find  expres- 
 sions used  when  Nebuchadnezzar  took  the  city, 
 which  at  first  sight  imply  that  Solomon's  far-famed 
 stores  were  still  untouched.  '  Nebuchadnezzar 
 carried  out  all  the  treasures  of  the  house  of  Jehovah 
 and  of  the  king's  house,  and  cut  in  pieces  all  the 
 vessels  of  gold  which  Solomon  had  made  in  the 
 temple  of  Jehovah'  (2  Kings  xxiv.  13).  They  must 
 evidently  have  been  few  in  number,  for  in  I  Kings 
 xiv.  26,  'all'  must,  at  least,  mean  'nearly  all:' 
 '  Shishak  took  away  the  treasures  of  the  house  of 
 Jehovah,  and  of  the  king's  house  ;  he  even  took 
 away  «//.'  Yet  the  vessels  of  gold  and  silver  taken 
 away  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  restored  by  (^yrus, 
 are  reckoned  5400  in  number  (Ezra  i.  Ii). 
 
 The  severest  shock  which  the  house  of  David 
 received  was  the  double  massacre  which  it  endured 
 from  Jehu  and  from  Athaliah.  After  a  long  mi- 
 nority, a  youthful  king,  the  sole  surviving  male 
 descendant  of  his  great-grandfather,  and  reared 
 under  the  paternal  rule  of  the  priest  Jehoiada,  to 
 whom  he  was  indebted  not  only  for  his  throne,  but 
 even  for  his  recognition  as  a  son  of  Ahaziali,  was 
 not  in  a  situation  to  uphold  the  royal  authority. 
 That  Jehoash  conceived  the  priests  to  have  abused 
 the  power  which  they  had  gained,  sufiiciently  ap- 
 pears in  2  Kings  xii.,  where  he  complains  that  they 
 had  for  twenty-three  years  appropriated  the  money, 
 which  they  ought  to  have  spent  on  the  repairs  of 
 the  Temple.  Jehoiada  gave  way  ;  but  we  see  here 
 the  beginning  of  a  feud  (hitherto  unknown  in  the 
 house  of  David)  between  the  crown  and  the  priestly 
 order ;  which,  after  Jehoiada's  death,  led  to  the 
 murder  of  his  son  Zachariah.  The  massacre  of  the 
 priests  of  Baal,  and  of  Athaliah,  grand-daughter  of 
 a  king  of  Sidon,  must  also  have  destroyed  cordiality 
 betv/een  the  Phoenicians  and  the  kingdom  of  Judah  • 
 
JUDAH,  KINGDOM  OF 
 
 677 
 
 JUDAS 
 
 and  when  the  victorious  Hazael  liad  subjugated  all 
 Israel  and  shewed  himself  near  Jerusalem,  Jehoash 
 could  look  for  no  help  from  without,  and  had  neither 
 the  faith  of  Hezelviah  nor  a  prophet  like  Isaiah  to 
 su]3port  him.  The  assassination  of  Jehoash  in  his 
 bed  by  '  his  own  servants'  is  described  in  the  Chro- 
 nicles as  a  revenge  taken  upon  him  by  the  priestly 
 party  for  his  murder  of  'the  sons'  of  Jehoiada ; 
 and  the  same  fate,  from  the  same  influence,  fell 
 upon  his  son  Amaziah,  if  we  may  so  interpret  the 
 words  in  2  Chron.  xxv.  27  :  '  From  the  time  that 
 Amaziah  turned  away  from  following  Jehovah  they 
 made  a  conspiracy  against  him,'  etc.  Thus  the 
 house  of  David  appeared  to  be  committing  itself, 
 like  that  of  Saul,  to  permanent  enmity  with  the 
 priests.  The  wisdom  of  Uzziah,  during  a  long 
 reign,  averted  this  collision,  though  a  symptom  of 
 it  returned  towards  its  close.  No  further  mischief 
 from  tliis  cause  followed,  until  the  reign  of  his 
 grandson,  the  weak  and  unfortunate  Ahaz  :  after 
 which  the  power  of  the  kingdom  rapidly  mouldered 
 away.  On  the  whole,  it  would  appear  that,  from 
 Jehoiada  downward,  the  authority  of  the  priests  was 
 growing  stronger,  and  that  of  the  crown  weaker ; 
 for  the  king  could  not  rule  successfully,  except  by 
 submitting  to  (what  we  might  call)  '  the  constitu- 
 tional check'  of  the  priests  ;  and  although  it  is 
 reasonable  to  believe  that  the  priests  became  less 
 simple-minded,  more  worldly,  and  less  religious, 
 as  their  order  advanced  in  authority  (whence  the 
 keen  rebukes  of  them  by  the  prophets),  it  is  not 
 the  less  certain  that  it  was  desirable  for  Judah, 
 both  in  a  temporal  and  a  spiritual  sense,  to  have 
 the  despotic  power  of  the  king  subjected  to  a  strong 
 priestly  pressure. 
 
 The  struggle  of  the  crown  against  this  control 
 was  perhaps  the  most  immediate  cause  of  the  ruin 
 of  Judah.  Ahaz  was  probably  less  guided  by  policy 
 than  by  superstition,  or  by  architectural  taste,  in 
 erecting  his  Damascene  altar  (2  Kings  xvi.  10-18). 
 But  the  far  more  outrageous  proceedings  of  Ma- 
 nasseh  seem  to  have  been  a  systematic  attempt  to 
 extirpate  the  national  religion  because  of  its  sup- 
 porting the  priestly  power ;  and  the  *  innocent 
 blood  veiy  much,'  which  he  is  stigmatized  for  shed- 
 ding (2  Kings  xxi.  16),  was  undoubtedly  a  sangui- 
 nary attack  on  the  party  opposed  to  his  impious 
 and  despotic  innovations.  The  storm  which  he 
 had  raised  did  not  burst  in  his  lifetime  ;  but,  two 
 years  after,  it  fell  on  the  head  of  his  son  Amon  ; 
 and  the  disorganization  of  the  kingdom  which  his 
 madness  had  wrought  is  commemorated  as  the 
 cause  of  the  Babylonish  captivity  (2  Kings  xxiii.  26 ; 
 xxiv.  3,  4).  It  is  also  credible  that  the  long-con- 
 tinued despotism  had  greatly  lessened  patriotic 
 spirit ;  and  that  the  Jewish  people  of  the  declining 
 kingdom  were  less  brave  against  foreign  invaders 
 than  against  kindred  and  neighbour  tribes  or  civil 
 opponents.  Faction  had  become  very  fierce  within 
 Jerusalem  itself  (Ezek.  xxii.),  and  civil  bloodshed 
 was  common.  Wealth,  where  it  existed,  was 
 generally  a  source  of  corruption,  by  introducing 
 foreign  luxury,  tastes,  manners,  superstitions,  im- 
 morality, or  idolatry ;  and  when  consecrated  to 
 pious  purposes,  as  by  Hezekiah  and  Josiah,  pro- 
 duced little  more  than  a  formal  and  exterior  re- 
 ligion. 
 
 Thoroughly  to  understand  the  political  working 
 of  the  monarchy,  we  ought  to  know,  i.  What  con- 
 trol the  king  exercised  over  ecclesiastical  appoint- 
 ments ;  2.   How  the  Levites  were  supported  when 
 
 ejected  from  Israel ;  3.  What  proportion  of  them 
 acted  as  judges,  lawyers,  and  scribes,  and  how  far 
 they  were  independent  of  the  king.  Tlie  nature 
 of  the  case,  and  the  precedent  of  David,  may  satisfy 
 us  that  the  king  appointed  the  high-priest  at  his 
 own  pleasure  out  of  the  Aaronites  ;  but  (as  Henry 
 II.  of  England  and  hundreds  of  monarchs  besides 
 have  found)  ecclesiastics  once  in  office  often  dis- 
 ap])oint  the  hopes  of  their  patron,  and  to  eject 
 them  again  is  a  most  dangerous  exertion  of  the 
 prerogative.  The  Jewish  king  would  naturally 
 avoid  following  the  law  of  descent,  in  order  to  pre- 
 serve his  riglit  of  election  unimpaired  ;  and  it  may 
 be  suspected  that  the  line  of  Zadok  was  rather 
 kept  in  the  background  by  royal  jealousy.  Hilkiah 
 belonged  to  that  line  ;  and  if  any  inference  can  be 
 drawn  from  his  genealogy,  as  given  in  i  Chron. 
 vi.  8-15,  it  is,  that  none  of  his  ancestors  between 
 the  reigns  of  Solomon  and  Josiah  held  the  high- 
 priesthood.  Even  Azariah,  who  is  named  in  2 
 Chron.  xxxi.  10  as  of  the  line  of  Zadok,  is  not 
 found  among  Hilkiah's  progenitors.  Jehoiada, 
 the  celebrated  priest,  and  Urijah,  who  was  so  com- 
 plaisant to  the  innovating  Ahaz  (2  Kings  xvi.), 
 were  of  a  different  family.  It  would  seem  that  too 
 many  high-priests  gained  a  reputation  for  subser- 
 vience (for  it  often  happens  in  history  that  the 
 ecclesiastical  heads  are  more  subservient  to  royalty 
 than  the  mass  of  their  order) ;  so  that,  after  Hil- 
 kiah, the  race  of  Zadok  became  celebrated  for  up- 
 rightness, in  invidious  contrast  to  the  rest  of  the 
 priests;  and  even  the  Levites  were  regarded  as 
 more  zealous  than  the  generality  of  the  Aaronites 
 (2  Chron.  xxix.  34).  Hence  in  Ezekiel  and  other 
 late  writers,  the  phrase  '  the  priests  the  sons  of 
 Zadok,'  or  even  '  the  priests  the  Levites,'  is  a  more 
 honourable  title  than  'the  priests  the  sons  of  Aaron.' 
 Hilkiah's  name  seems  to  mark  the  era  at  which  (by 
 a  reaction  after  the  atrocities  of  Manasseh  and 
 Amon)  the  purer  priestly  sentiment  obtained  its 
 triumph  over  the  crown.  But  the  victory  came 
 too  late.  Society  was  corrupt  and  convulsed  with- 
 in, and  the  two  great  powers  of  Egypt  and  Babylon 
 menaced  it  from  without.  True  lovers  of  their 
 God  and  of  their  country,  like  Jeremiah,  saw  that 
 it  was  a  time  rather  for  weeping  than  for  action  ; 
 and  that  the  faithful  must  resign  themselves  to  the 
 bitter  lot  which  the  sins  of  their  nation  had  earned. 
 — F.  W.  N. 
 
 JUDAS  is  merely  the  Greek  form  of  the  He- 
 brew name  Judah.  The  Septuagint,  however, 
 represents  Judah  by  'Ioi;5a,  Jiida,  and  this  we  find 
 also  in  the  N.  T.  [Juda]. 
 
 1.  The  son  of  Mattathias  [Maccabees]. 
 
 2.  The  son  of  Calphi,  a  Jewish  officer  under 
 Jonathan  (i  Maccab.  xi.  70). 
 
 3.  A  Jew  high  in  office  at  the  time  when  the 
 letter  was  sent  by  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem  to  Aristo- 
 bulus  and  to  their  brethren  in  Egj'pt  (2  Maccab. 
 i.  10).  Some  identify  this  Judas  with  Judas  the 
 Essene  mentioned  by  Josephus  {Antiq.  xiii.  Ii.  2; 
 Bell.  Jiid.  i.  3.  5),  but  Josephus  speaks  of  the  letter 
 as  'lo^Sas  rts,  phraseology  which  he  would  hardly 
 have  applied  to  one  holding  so  eminent  a  position 
 as  the  Judas  before  us.  Grotius  makes  him  a  re- 
 lation of  John  Hyrcanus  and  his  lieutenant,  refer- 
 ring to  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  16.  17  ;  but  there  is  no 
 such  passage,  nor  does  Josephus  anywhere  men- 
 tion such  a  person.  De  Wette  concludes  that  this 
 Judas  is  otherwise  unknown,  while  a  large  number 
 
JUDAS 
 
 678 
 
 JUDAS 
 
 of  interpreters  identify  him  with  Judas  Maccabseus. 
 Calovius  objects  to  this  that  the  chronology  is 
 against  it,  Judas  Maccabseus  having  died  in  152, 
 that  is,  thirty-six  years  before  the  writing  of  this 
 letter.  This  of  course  would  be  a  fatal  objection 
 were  it  well  founded  ;  but  no  precise  date  is  borne 
 by  the  letter  itself,  and  from  the  statement  in  ver. 
 1 1  it  seems  probable  that  it  was  written  soon  after 
 tidings  had  come  of  the  death  of  Antiochus  IV. 
 Epiphanes.  But  this  occurred  in  the  year  164  B.C., 
 so  that  Judas  was  alive  at  the  time  the  letter  was 
 written.  Calovius  was  betrayed  into  mistake  by 
 taking  the  date  in  ver.  9  as  the  date  of  the  second 
 epistle,  whereas  it  belongs  to  the  first  (Grimm, 
 Exes^.  Haitdb.,  in  loc.) 
 
 4.  A  son  of  Simon  and  brother  of  John  Hyrcanus, 
 who  was  murdered  along  with  his  father,  or,  accord- 
 ing to  Josephus,  soon  afterwards  (l  Maccab.  xvi. 
 2,  15,  ff.  ;  Joseph,  Antiq.  xiii.  8.  l). 
 
 5.  One  of  the  twelve  apostles,  called  also  LEB- 
 B^US  or  THADD^US  (Matt.  x.  4 ;  Mark  iii. 
 18),  and  commonly  named  Jude.  We  are  not  in- 
 formed as  to  the  time  of  the  vocation  of  the  Apostle 
 Jude  to  that  dignity.  Indeed,  the  only  circumstance 
 relating  to  him  which  is  recorded  in  the  Gospels 
 consists  in  the  question  put  by  him  to  our  Lord 
 (John  xiv.  22).  'Judas  saith  unto  him  (not  Is- 
 cariot),  Loi'd,  how  is  it  that  thou  wilt  manifest  thy- 
 self to  us,  and  not  unto  the  world  ?'  Nor  have  we 
 any  account  given  of  his  proceedings  after  our 
 Lord's  resurrection,  for  the  traditionary  notices 
 which  have  been  preserved  of  him  rest  on  no  very 
 certain  foundation.  It  has  been  asserted  that  he 
 was  sent  to  Edessa,  to  Abgarus,  king  of  Osroene 
 (Jerome,  Amiot.  in  Matt.),  and  that  he  preached 
 in  Syria,  Arabia,  Mesopotamia,  and  Persia ;  in 
 which  latter  country  he  suffered  martyrdom  (Lard- 
 ner's  Hist,  of  the  Apostles).  Jude  the  apostle  is 
 commemorated  in  the  Western  church,  together 
 with  the  Apostle  Simon  (the  name,  also,  of  one  of 
 our  Lord's  brethren),  on  the  8th  of  October. 
 
 6.  The  Lord's  Brother. — It  has  been  dis- 
 puted whether  the  person  so  named  is  distinct  from 
 the  Apostle  Jude,  or  the  same  with  him.  The 
 question  is  involved  in  considerable  obscurity,  but 
 the  balance  of  evidence  seems  to  be  in  favour  of 
 their  being  different.     [James  ;  Jude,  Ep.  of.] 
 
 7.  Anotherof  the  twelve  apostles,  the  son  of  Simon 
 (John  vi.  71  ;  xiii.  2,  26),  called  also  ISCARIOT 
 l^lffKapiuTrjs),  probably  from  Kerioth  {Iscariot 
 =  ni''"lp  ^''H  ;  comp.  T(7TO|3os  =  y\l2  t^"'5<,  a  man 
 
 of  Tob,  ap.  Joseph.  Antiq.  vii.  6.  l).  According 
 to  the  reading  of  John  vi.  71  ;  xiii.  26,  approved 
 by  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf,  his  father  Simon 
 bore  the  same  designation.  In  the  list  of  the 
 apostles  given  by  the  Synoptists,  Judas  stands  last 
 (Matt.  X.  4;  Mark  iii.  19  ;  Luke  vi.  16)  ;  and  the 
 evangelists  usually  fix  on  him  the  mark  of  his  great 
 crime  by  the  addition  of  the  words  '  the  traitor,' 
 or  'who  also  betrayed  him.'  According  to  John 
 (xii.  4-6),  he  had  the  charge  of  the  common  fund 
 out  of  which  the  wants  of  Christ  and  his  immediate 
 followers  were  supplied,  a  trust  which  he  abused 
 for  selfish  ends.  But  all  his  other  iniquities  are 
 lost  in  the  enormous  crime  which  has  affixed  a 
 perpetual  infamy  to  his  name,  the  betrayal  of  his 
 Master  to  his  enemies  for  thirty  dp7i'/)ia,  or  shekels 
 of  silver — not  quite  £4  sterling.  This  money  he, 
 shaken  with  remorse  when  he  saw  the  result  of  his 
 treason  in  the  condemnation  of  his   Master,   re- 
 
 turned to  the  Sanhedrim  ;  by  whom  it  was  ex- 
 pended in  the  purchase  of  a  piece  of  land  formerly 
 called  '  the  potters'  field,'  but  after  that  '  the  field 
 of  blood'  [Aceldama].  This  name  it  received 
 from  the  tragic  circumstances  connected  with  the 
 purchase  of  it,  especially  the  death  of  Judas  him- 
 self, who,  harassed  by  remorse,  went  and  hanged 
 himself,  and  falling  headlong  (probably  from  the 
 breaking  of  the  rope  by  which  he  was  suspended), 
 burst  asunder  and  his  bowels  gushed  out  (Acts  i.  18). 
 The  extraordinary  nature  of  Judas's  crime  in 
 betraying  his  Master,  has  prompted  inquiry  as  to 
 the  motives  by  which  he  was  actuated  to  commit 
 it.  On  this  subject  the  following  observations  are 
 retained  from  the  first  edition  of  this  work  : — 
 '  The  only  conceivable  motives  for  the  conduct  of 
 Judas  are,  a  sense  of  duty  in  bringing  his  Master 
 to  justice,  resentment,  avarice,  dissatisfaction  with 
 the  procedure  of  Jesus,  and  a  consequent  scheme 
 for  the  accomplishment  of  his  own  views.  With 
 regard  to  the  first  of  these  motives,  if  Judas  had 
 been  actuated  by  a  sense  of  duty  in  bringing  his 
 Master  to  justice  for  anything  censurable  in  his 
 intentions,  words,  or  actions,  he  would  certainly 
 have  alleged  some  charge  against  him  in  his  first 
 interview  with  the  chief-priests,  and  they  would 
 have  brought  him  forward  as  a  witness  against 
 Jesus,  especially  when  they  were  at  so  great  a  loss 
 for  evidence  ;  or  they  would  have  reminded  him  of 
 his  accusations  when  he  appealed  to  them  after  our 
 Lord's  condemnation,  saying,  '  I  have  sinned  in 
 that  I  have  betrayed  innocent  blood' — a  confession 
 which  amounts  to  an  avowal  that  he  had  never 
 seen  anything  to  blame  in  his  Master,  but  every- 
 thing to  approve.  Moreover,  the  knowledge  of 
 the  slightest  fault  in  Jesus  would  have  served,  at 
 least  for  the  present,  to  tranquillise  his  own  feel- 
 ings, and  prevent  his  immediate  despair.  The 
 chief-priests  would  also  most  certainly  have  alleged 
 any  charge  he  had  made  against  Jesus  as  a  justi- 
 fication of  their  conduct,  when  they  afterwards 
 endeavoured  to  prevent  his  apostles  from  preach- 
 ing in  his  name  (Acts  iv.  15-23  ;  v.  27,  28-40). 
 The  second  motive  supposed,  namely,  that  of 
 resentment,  is  rather  more  plausible.  Jesus  had 
 certainly  rebuked  him  for  blaming  the  woman  who 
 had  anointed  him  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper, 
 at  Bethany  (comp.  Matt.  xxvi.  8-17  ;  John  xii.  4, 
 5)  :  and  Matthew's  narrative  seems  to  connect  his 
 going  to  the  chief-priests  with  that  rebuke  (ver. 
 14).  '  Then  one  of  the  twelve,  called  Judas 
 Iscariot,  went  unto  the  chief-priests ; '  but  closer 
 inspection  will  convince  the  reader  that  those 
 words  are  more  properly  connected  with  ver.  3. 
 Besides,  the  rebuke  was  general,  '  Why  trouble  ye 
 the  woman?'  Nor  was  it  nearly  so  harsh  as  that 
 received  by  Peter,  'Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan' 
 (Matt.  xvi.  23),  and  certainly  not  so  public  (Mark 
 viii.  32,  33).  Even  if  Judas  had  felt  ever  so  much 
 resentment,  it  could  scarcely  have  been  his  sole 
 motive  ;  and  as  nearly  two  days  elapse  between  his 
 contract  with  the  chief-priests  and  its  completion,  it 
 would  have  subsided  during  the  interval,  and  have 
 yielded  to  that  covetousness  which  we  have  every 
 reason  to  believe  was  his  ruling  passion.  St.  John 
 expressly  declares  that  Judas  '  was  a  thief,  and 
 had  the  bag,  and  bare  (that  is,  conveyed  away 
 from  it,  stole,  i§6.<STa^iv)  what  was  put  therein' 
 (xii.  6  ;  comp.  xx.  15  in  the  original,  and  see  a  simi- 
 lar use  of  the  word  in  Apollod.  ii.  6.  2  ;  iii.  3.  3  ; 
 Joseph,  p.  402.  39,  ed.  Huds.)     This  rebuke,  or 
 
JUDAS 
 
 679 
 
 JUDAS 
 
 rather  certain  circumstances  attending  it,  might 
 have  determined  him  to  act  as  he  did,  but  is 
 insufficient,  of  itself,  to  account  entirely  for  his 
 conduct,  by  whicli  he  endangered  all  his  expecta- 
 tions of  worldly  advancement  from  Jesus,  at  the 
 very  moment  when  they  seemed  upon  the  verge  of 
 being  fulfilled.  It  is,  indeed,  a  most  important 
 feature  in  the  case,  that  the  hopes  entertained  by 
 Judas,  and  all  the  apostles,  from  their  Master's 
 expected  elevation,  as  the  Messiah,  to  the  throne 
 of  Judoea,  and,  as  they  believed,  to  the  empire  of 
 the  whole  world,  were  never  more  steadfast  than  at 
 the  time  when  he  covenanted  with  the  chief-priests 
 to  deliver  him  into  their  hands.  Nor  does  the 
 theory  of  mere  resentment  agree  with  the  terms  of 
 censure  in  which  the  conduct  and  character  of 
 Judas  are  spoken  of  by  our  Lord  and  the  evange- 
 lists. Since,  then,  this  supposition  is  insufficient, 
 we  may  consider  another  motive  to  which  his 
 conduct  is  more  commonly  ascribed,  namely, 
 covetousness.  But  if  by  covetousness  be  meant 
 the  eager  desire  to  obtain  '  the  thirty  pieces  of 
 silver,'  with  which  the  chief  priests  '  covenanted 
 with  him'  (Matt.  xxvi.  15),  it  presents  scarcely  a 
 less  inadequate  motive.  Can  it  be  conceived  that 
 Judas  would  deliberately  forego  the  prospect  of 
 immense  wealth  from  his  Master,  by  delivering 
 him  up  for  about  four  pounds  ten  shillings  of  our 
 money,  upon  the  highest  computation,  and  not 
 more  than  double  in  value,  a  sum  which  he 
 might  easily  have  purloined  from  the  bag?  Is  it 
 likely  that  he  would  have  made  such  a  sacrifice  for 
 any  further  sum,  however  large,  which  we  may 
 suppose  "■  i\\ey promised  him'  (Mark  xiv.  Ii),  and 
 of  which  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  might  have  been 
 the  mere  earnest  (Luke  xxii.  5)  ?  Had  covetous- 
 ness been  his  motive,  he  would  have  ultimately 
 applied  to  the  chief-priests,  not  to  bring  again  the 
 thirty  pieces  of  silver  with  the  confession,  '  I  have 
 sinned  in  that  I  have  betrayed  the  innocent  blood' 
 (Matt,  xxvii.  4),  but  to  demand  the  completion  of 
 their  agreement  with  him.  We  are  now  at  liberty 
 to  consider  the  only  remaining  motive  for  the  con- 
 duct of  Judas,  namely,  dissatisfaction  with  the 
 procedure  of  his  Master,  and  a  consequent  scheme 
 for  the  furtherance  of  his  own  views.  It  seems 
 to  us  likely,  that  the  impatience  of  Judas  for  the 
 accomplishment  of  his  worldly  views,  which  we 
 conceive  to  have  ever  actuated  him  in  following 
 Jesus,  could  no  longer  be  restrained,  and  that  our 
 Lord's  observations  at  Bethany  served  to  mature 
 a  stratagem  he  had  meditated  long  before.  He 
 had  no  doubt  been  greatly  disappointed  at  seeing 
 his  Master  avoid  being  made  a  king,  after  feeding 
 the  five  thousand  in  Galilee.  Many  a  favourable 
 crisis  had  he  seemed  to  lose,  or  had  not  dared  to 
 embrace,  and  now  while  at  Bethany  he  talks  of  his 
 burial  (John  xii.  7)  ;  and  th(jugh  none  of  his 
 apostles,  so  firm  were  their  worldly  expectations 
 from  their  Master,  could  clearly  understand  such 
 'sayings'  (Luke  xviii.  34);  yet  they  had  been 
 made  '  exceeding  sorry'  by  them  (Matt.  xvii.  23). 
 At  the  same  time,  Judas  had  long  been  convinced 
 by  the  miracles  he  had  seen  his  Master  perform 
 that  he  was  the  Messiah  (John  vii.  31).  He  had 
 even  heard  him  accept  this  title  from  his  apostles 
 in  private  (Matt.  xvi.  16).  He  had  promised  them 
 that  when  he  should  '  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his 
 glory,- they  should  sit  upon  twelve  thrones  judging 
 the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel'  (Matt.  xix.  28).  Yet 
 xiow,  when  everything  seemed  most  favourable  to 
 
 the  assumption  of  empire,  he  hesitates  and  de- 
 sponds.  In  his  daily  public  conferences,  too,  with 
 the  chief-priests  and  Pharisees,  he  appears  to 
 offend  them  by  his  reproofs,  rather  than  to  con- 
 ciliate their  favour.  Within  a  few  days,  the 
 people,  who  had  lately  given  him  a  triumphal 
 entry  into  the  city,  having  kept  the  passover, 
 would  be  dispersed  to  their  homes,  and  Judas  and 
 his  fellow-apostles  \x,  perhaps,  required  to  attend 
 their  Master  on  another  tedious  expedition  through 
 the  country.  Hence  it  seems  most  probable  that 
 Judas  resolved  upon  the  plan  of  delivering  up  his 
 Master  to  the  Jewish  authorities,  when  he  would 
 be  compelled,  in  self-defence,  to  prove  his  claims, 
 by  giving  them  the  sign  from  heaven  they  had  so 
 often  demanded  ;  they  would,  he  believed,  elect 
 him  in  due  form  as  the  King  Messiah,  and  thus 
 enable  him  to  reward  his  followers.  He  did, 
 indeed,  receive  from  Jesus  many  alarming  admoni- 
 tions against  his  design  ;  but  the  plainest  warnings 
 are  lost  upon  a  mind  totally  absorbed  by  a  pur- 
 pose, and  agitated  by  many  violent  passions.  The 
 worst  he  could  permit  hmiself  to  expect,  was  a 
 temporary  displeasure  for  placing  his  master  in  this 
 dilemma  ;  but  as  he  most  likely  believed,  judging 
 from  himself,  that  Jesus  anticipated  worldly  ag- 
 grandizement, he  might  calculate  upon  his  forgive- 
 ness when  the  emergency  should  have  been  trium- 
 phantly surmounted.  Nor  was  this  calculation 
 wholly  unreasonable.  Many  an  ambitious  man 
 would  gladly  be  spared  the  responsibility  of  grasp- 
 ing at  an  empire,  which  he  would  willingly  find  forced 
 upon  him.  Judas  could  not  doubt  his  Master's  ability 
 to  extricate  himself  from  his  enemies  by  miracle. 
 He  had  known  him  do  so  more  than  once  (Luke 
 iv.  30  ;  John  viii.  59  ;  x.  39).  Hence  his  directions 
 to  the  officers  to  '  hold  him  fast,'  when  he  was 
 apprehended  (Matt.  xxvi.  48).  With  other  Jews 
 he  believed  the  Messiah  would  never  die  (John 
 xii.  34)  ;  accordingly,  we  regard  his  pecuniary 
 stipulation  with  the  priests  as  a  mere  artful  cover 
 to  his  deeper  and  more  comprehensive  design ; 
 and  so  that  he  served  their  purpose  in  causing  the 
 apprehension  of  Jesus,  they  would  little  care  to 
 scrutinize  his  motive.  All  they  felt  was  being 
 'glad'  at  his  proposal  (Mark  xiv.  11),  and  the 
 plan  appeared  to  hold  good  up  to  the  very  moment 
 of  our  Lord's  condemnation  ;  for  after  his  appre- 
 hension his  miraculous  power  seemed  unabated, 
 from  his  healing  Malchus.  Judas  heard  him  de- 
 clare that  he  could  even  then  '  ask,  and  his  father 
 would  give  him  twelve  legions  of  angels'  for  his 
 rescue.  But  when  Judas,  who  awaited  the  issue 
 of  the  trial  with  such  different  expectations,  saw 
 that  though  Jesus  had  avowed  himself  to  be  the 
 Messiah,  he  had  not  convinced  the  Sanhedrim  ; 
 and,  instead  of  extricating  himself  from  their  power 
 by  miracle,  had  submitted  to  be  '  condemned,  buf- 
 feted, and  spit  upon'  by  his  judges  and  accusers  ; 
 then,  it  should  seem,  he  awoke  to  a  full  view  of  all 
 the  consequences  of  his  conduct.  The  prophecies 
 of  the  O.  T.,  'that  Christ  should  suffer,'  and  of 
 Jesus,  concerning  his  own  rejection  and  death, 
 flashed  on  his  mind  in  their  true  sense  and  full 
 force,  and  he  found  himself  the  wretclied  instru- 
 ment of  their  fulfilment.  He  made  a  last  desperate 
 effort  to  stay  proceedings.  He  presented  himself 
 to  the  chief-priests,  offered  to  return  the  money, 
 confessed  that  he  had  sinned  in  that  he  had  betrayed 
 the  innocent  blood,  and  upon  receiving  their  heart- 
 less answer,  was  wrought  into  a  phrenzy  of  despair, 
 
JUDAS 
 
 680 
 
 JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 during  which  he  committed  suicide.  There  is 
 much  significancy  in  these  words  of  Matt,  xxvii.  3, 
 '  Then  Judas,  when  he  saw  he  was  condemned,^  not 
 expiring  on  the  cross,  '  repented  himself,'  etc.  If 
 such  be  the  true  hypothesis  of  his  conduct,  then, 
 however  culpable  it  may  have  been,  as  originating 
 in  the  most  inordinate  covetousness,  impatience  of 
 the  procedure  of  Providence,  crooked  policy,  or 
 any  other  bad  quality,  he  is  certainly  absolved 
 from  the  direct  intention  of  procuring  his  Master's 
 death.  '  The  difference, '  says  Archbishop  Whately, 
 '  between  Iscariot  and  his  fellow-apostles  was,  that 
 though  they  all  had  the  same  expectations  and  con- 
 jectures, he  dared  to  act  on  his  conjectures,  depart- 
 ing from  the  plain  course  of  his  known  duty  to 
 follow  the  calculations  of  his  worldly  wisdom,  and 
 the  schemes  of  his  worldly  ambition'  [Discourse  on 
 the  Treason  of  Judas  Iscariot,  and  Notes,  annexed 
 to  Essays  on  some  of  the  Dangers  to  Christia^i  Faith, 
 Lond.  1 839  ;  comp.  Lectures  on  the  Characters  of 
 the  Apostles,  by  the  same  ;  see  also  Whitby  on 
 Matt,  xxvii.  3,  for  the  opinions  of  Theophylact, 
 and  some  of  the  Fathers  ;  Bishop  Bull's  Sermons, 
 ii.  and  iii..  On  some  Important  Points,  vol.  i.,  Lond. 
 1713  ;  Hales's  A'^rM  Analysis  of  Chrotiology,  vol.  ii. 
 b.  ii.  pp.  877,  878 ;  Macknight's  Harrnony  of  the 
 Gospels,  vol.  ii.  pp.  427-30,  Lond.  1822;  Rosen- 
 miiller,  Kuinoel,  in  loc.) — [J.  F.  D.]' 
 
 8.  A  Jew  of  Damascus  with  whom  Paul  lodged 
 in  a  street  called  '  Straight.'  This  street  has  been 
 identified  with  the  '  Street  of  Bazaars,'  the  princi- 
 pal street  in  the  modern  Damascus,  and  one  of  the 
 busiest  scenes  of  commerce  within  that  city  (Wil- 
 son, Lands  of  the  Bible,  ii.  351  ;  Porter,  Five  Years 
 in  Damascus,  i.  43  ;  Stanley,  Sin.  and  Pal.  412). 
 Robinson  seems  to  speak  doubtingly  on  this  point 
 {Cat.  Bib.  Res.,  p.  455). 
 
 9.  Surnamed  Barsabas  (Acts  xv.  22,  27-35),  ^ 
 disciple  who,  along  with  Silas,  was  appointed  to 
 accompany  Paul  and  Barnabas  in  their  tour  among 
 the  churches,  to  deliver  the  decrees  of  the  apostles 
 and  elders.  He  and  Silas  are  described  as  chosen 
 men  of  the  apostles'  own  company,  as  chief  men 
 among  the  brethren,  and  as  prophets.  Beyond 
 this  notice,  nothing  is  known  of  Judas,  son  of  Bar- 
 sabas. Grotius  suggests  that  he  may  have  been  a 
 brother  of  Joseph  Barsabas  (Acts  i.  23),  which 
 seems  not  improbable.  Schott  supposes  that  Sabas 
 or  Zabas  is  an  abridged  form  of  Zebedee,  and  that 
 Barsabas,  or  Son  of  Zabas,  was  the  designation  of 
 Jude,  a  brother  of  the  elder  James  and  John.  The 
 occurrence  of  the  same  name,  however,  in  the  case 
 of  Joseph  Barsabas  throws  doubt  on  this  hypothesis. 
 
 10.  The  Galilean  (6  VaXCKoXos,  Acts  v.  35  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  I.  6  ;  xx.  5.  2  ;  De  Bell.  Jud. 
 ii.  8.  i),  called  also  by  Josephus  The  Gaulonite 
 i^a.v\aviT-r\%  dv/jp,  Antiq.  xviii.  I.  i)  ;  the  former 
 designation  being  derived  from  the  place  of  his 
 education  or  usual  residence,  the  latter  from  the 
 place  of  his  birth,  which,  Josephus  says  [I.e.),  was 
 the  town  of  Gamala  (cf.  Krebs,  Obss.  in  N.  T.  ex 
 Joseph,  p.  181).  When  the  property  census  was 
 ordered  by  Augustus  (a.  d.  6)  during  the  prefecture 
 of  Pub.  Sulp.  Quirinus,  Judas,  in  conjunction  with 
 one  Sadok  or  Saduk,  a  Pharisee,  headed  a  revolt 
 agifinst  the  Roman  supremacy,  calling  u]ion  his 
 countrymen,  as  the  people  of  God,  not  ignobly  to 
 submit  to  human  despotism.  He  aimed  at  nothing 
 short  of  a  complete  restoration  of  the  theocratic 
 polity  and  order  of  the  nation  as  laid  down  in  the 
 Law  of  Moses   (Joseph.   Antiq.  xviii.    1.6).     A 
 
 large  body  of  ardent  adherents  flocked  to  his  stan- 
 dard ;  but  they  were  easily  dispersed  by  Quirinus, 
 and  Judas  himself  was  destroyed  (Acts  v.  37).  His 
 spirit  descended,  however,  on  his  children,  two  ot 
 whom  were  crucified  under  Tiberius  Alexander, 
 and  a  third,  who  gave  himself  out  as  the  Messiah, 
 was  also  put  to  death  (Joseph.  Afttiq.  xx.  5.2; 
 Bell.  yud.  ii.  17.  8,  9).  In  Judas,  also,  may  be 
 recognised  the  first  outburst  of  the  spirit  which 
 afterwards  showed  itself  in  the  Zealots  and  the  Si- 
 carii ;  in  fact,  from  his  time  forward  to  the  destruc- 
 tion of  Jerusalem  and  the  scattering  of  the  Jewish 
 race,  the  outer  history  of  the  Jews  is  chiefly  a  record 
 of  the  struggle  of  those  who  were  zealous  for  the 
 law  against  the  encroachments  of  Roman  power 
 and  Hellenic  culture.  — W.  L.  A. 
 
 JUDE,  Epistle  of.  The  last  in  order  in  the 
 Canon  of  the  Catholic  epistles. 
 
 I.  Canofiicity. — This  epistle  is  not  cited  by  any 
 of  the  apostolic  Fathers ;  the  passages  which  have 
 been  adduced  as  containing  allusions  to  it  (Herm., 
 Past.  Vis.,  iv.  3  ;  Clem.  Rom.,  Ep.  ad  Cor.,  ch. 
 xi.  ;  Polycarp,  Ep.  ad  Phil.,  ch.  iii.)  presenting 
 no  certain  evidence  of  being  such.  It  is,  however, 
 formally  quoted  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  [Ple- 
 dag,  iii.,  p.  239,  ed.  Sylburg.  ;  Strom,  iii.  p.  431), 
 and  Eusebius  testifies  (//.  E.,  vi.  14)  that  he 
 treated  it  in  his  Hypotyposes ;  it  is  also  treated 
 in  the  Adumbrationes,  ascribed  to  Clement,  and 
 preserved  in  a  Latin  version.  TertuUian  refers  to 
 the  epistle  as  that  of  Jude  the  Apostle  {De  Habit. 
 Mulieb.,  ch.  iii.)  It  appears  in  the  Muratori 
 Fragment  among  the  Canonical  books.  Origen 
 repeatedly  refers  to  it,  and  occasionally  as  the 
 work  of  the  Apostle  Jude  (Hom.  in  Matt.,  xiii. 
 55,  0pp.,  ed.  De  la  Rue,  iii.  p.  403  ;  Com.  in 
 Ep.  ad  Rom.,  0pp.  iv.  p.  519;  Horn,  in  Jos., 
 0pp.  ii.  p.  411  ;  De  Princip.,  0pp.  i.  p.  138, 
 etc.)  ;  though  in  one  place  he  speaks  as  if  doubts 
 were  entertained  by  some  as  to  its  genuineness  {in 
 Matt.  xxii.  23  ;  0pp.  iii.  p.  814).  It  is  not  in 
 the  Peshito,  and  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
 known  to  the  Syrian  churches  before  the  4th  cen- 
 tury, near  the  close  of  which  it  is  quoted  by  Eph- 
 raem  Syrus  {0pp.  Syr.,  i.  p.  136).  Eusebius 
 ranks  it  among  the  Antilegomena,  but  this  rather 
 because  it  was  not  universally  known  than  be- 
 cause where  known  it  was  by  any  regarded  with 
 suspicion  {Hist.  Eccl.,  ii.  23;  iii.  25).  By  Jerome 
 it  is  referred  to  as  the  work  of  an  apostle  (/«  Tit. 
 i.  ;  Ep.  ad  Paulin,  iii.),  and  he  states  that,  though 
 suspected  by  some,  in  consequence  of  containing  a 
 quotation  from  the  Apocryphal  book  of  Enoch,  it 
 had  obtained  such  authority  as  to  be  reckoned 
 part  of  the  canonical  Scriptures  {Catal.  Script. 
 Eccl.)  From  the  4th  century  onwards,  the  place 
 thus  conceded  to  it  remained  unquestioned  (Jessien, 
 De  avdevrlq.  Ep.  J-udcr  Comm.  Crit.,  Lips.  1821  ; 
 Arnaud,  Recherches  Critiques  sur  Pep.  de  Jude, 
 etc.,  Strasb.  1851). 
 
 There  is  nothing  in  the  epistle  itself  to  cast  sus- 
 picion on  its  genuineness  ;  on  the  contrary,  it 
 rather  impresses  one  with  the  conviction  that  it 
 must  have  proceeded  from  the  writer  whose  name 
 it  bears.  Another,  forging  a  work  in  his  name, 
 would  have  hardly  omitted  to  make  prominent  the 
 personality  of  Judas,  and  his  relation  to  our  Lord, 
 neither  of  which  comes  before  us  in  this  epistle 
 (Bleek,  Einl.  in  d.  N.  T.,  p.  557). 
 
 2.  Author. — The  writer  designates  himself  Judas, 
 
jUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 681 
 
 JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 '  the  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  brother  of 
 James.'  The  former  of  these  designations  affords 
 no  help  in  determining  whether  the  writer  was  the 
 Apostle  Jude  or  another  person  of  the  same  name; 
 for  the  phrase  SoOXos  'I.  X.  is  neither  peculiar  to 
 an  apostle,  nor  does  it  exclude  the  supposition 
 that  the  party  to  whom  it  is  applied  was  an 
 apostle.  It  is  to  the  other  designation  that  we 
 must  look  for  the  decision  of  this  question.  Now, 
 were  we  sure  that  'Jude  the  brother  of  James'  is 
 the  same  person  who  is  designated  'Jude  of 
 James'  (lovdas  ^laKw^ov)  by  Luke  (vi.  i6  ;  Acts  i. 
 13),  the  evidence  that  the  writer  of  this  epistle  was 
 the  Apostle  Jude  would  be  conclusive.  But 
 there  are  difficulties  in  the  way  of  this  conclusion. 
 For  one  thing,  the  words  'loi;5as  'laKiL^ov  are 
 more  naturally  in  accordance  with  the  usage 
 of  the  language,  translated  'Jude,  the  son  of 
 James,'  than  'Jude,  the  brother  of  James.'  It  is, 
 moreover,  extremely  improbable  that  an  apostle 
 of  the  Lord  would,  in  writing  an  epistle  of  warn- 
 ing and  reproof  to  Christians,  designate  himself  by 
 his  family  relationship  to  a  fellow-creature,  instead 
 of  assuming  the  authority  which  his  divine  com- 
 mission as  an  apostle  would  have  at  once  expressed 
 and  claimed.  To  this  it  may  be  added  that,  in 
 ver.  1 7th,  the  writer  seems  to  speak  of  the  apostles 
 of  the  Lord  as  a  class  to  which  he  himself  did  not 
 belong ;  for  though  one  of  their  number  might 
 have  expressed  himself  as  the  writer  does  here, 
 the  probability  is  on  the  other  side.  If  on  these 
 grounds  we  conclude  that  the  writer  of  this  epistle 
 was  not  the  Apostle  Jude,  we  are  led  to  inquire 
 whether  he  may  not  be  the  other  Jude  mentioned 
 in  the  gospels  as  among  '  the  brethren  of  Jesus ' 
 (Matt.  xiii.  55),  and  as  a  younger  brother  of  James. 
 This  would  remove  all  difficulty,  were  it  not  that  it 
 remains  in  dispute  whether  the  two  brothers,  James 
 and  Judas,  who  were  apostles,  are  not  identical 
 with  the  James  and  Judas  who  were  among  the 
 brethren  of  our  Lord.  Into  this  question  we  can- 
 not enter  minutely  here,  but  must  refer  for  details 
 to  other  articles  in  this  book  where  both  sides  of 
 the  question  are  advocated  [James,  3  ;  James, 
 Epistle  of  ;  Jesus  Christ].  Our  own  opinion 
 inclines  to  the  view  that  the  brethren  of  our  Lord 
 were  really  sons  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  and  conse- 
 quently, that  James  the  son  of  Cleophas,  and 
 Judas  [the  son]  of  James,  who  were  apostles,  are 
 not  to  be  identified  with  the  persons  bearing  the 
 same  names  among  the  brethren  of  our  Lord.  We 
 incline  also  to  think,  that  the  James  who  presided 
 over  the  church  at  Jerusalem  was  not  the  surviv- 
 ing apostle  of  that  name,  but  the  other  James, 
 '  the  Lord's  brother,'  as  he  is  expressly  termed 
 (Gal.  i.  19).  The  question  may  be  thus  briefly 
 stated.  Discounting  James  the  son  of  Zebedee, 
 respecting  whom  there  is  no  dispute,  the  other 
 Jameses  and  the  Judes  (omitting  Judas  Iscariot) 
 may  be  placed  thus  : — 
 
 L  James,  son  of  Alphseus  )   .         , 
 
 Jude  of  James  )      " 
 
 II.  James,   President   of> 
 the  church  at  Jeru-  | 
 
 salem  !-  Brethren  of  the  Lord. 
 
 Jude,  the  brother  of 
 James  J 
 
 The  question  is.  Are  the  persons  in  No.  I.  the 
 same  as,  or  different  from,  the  persons  in  No.  II.  ? 
 Two  objections  occur  to  their  being  identified  : — 
 
 I.  That  for  this  purpose  we  must  render  'Ioi55as 
 'laKw^oy  in  an  unusual  way,  supplying  dSeXcpos, 
 and  not  vl6s ;  and  2.  That  we  must  understand  the 
 phrase  '  brethren  of  the  Lord,'  as  meaning  his 
 'cousins,'  or  'near  relations.'  The  former  of 
 these  objections  is  not  of  serious  weight,  because 
 instances  can  be  produced  in  which  other  terms  of 
 relationship  besides  that  of  son  were  left  to  be 
 supplied  in  similar  ellipses  ;  and  in  such  a  case  as 
 that  before  us,  the  principle  which  Winer  lays 
 down  may  be  held  to  operate,  '  that  where  ac- 
 quaintance with  the  family  circumstances  of  any  is 
 presupposed,  the  relationship  of  father,  brother, 
 servant,  may  be  so  expressed,  as  well  as  that  of 
 son'  (Gratum.,  sec.  66).  The  latter  of  the  above 
 objections  is  of  more  weight  ;  for  though  the 
 Hebrew  usage  admits  of  a  liberal  construction  of 
 terms  of  relationship,  yet  when  we  find  that  the 
 breth)-en  of  Jesus  are  associated  with  his  mother 
 and  his  sisters  (Matt.  xiii.  55,  56),  and  when  it  is 
 expressly  mentioned  that  his  brethren  believed  not 
 on  him  (John  vii.  5),  a  statement  which  cannot  be 
 meant  to  apply  to  persons  who  were  actually  of 
 the  number  of  his  select  disciples  ;  the  strong  pro- 
 bability is,  that  the  persons  so  designated  were 
 really  the  sons  of  Joseph  and  Maiy,  and  so  uterine 
 brothers  of  Jesus.  On  the  other  side,  it  is  objected 
 that  James  the  Lord's  brother  is  called  an  apostle 
 (Gal.  i.  19),  and  that  several  of  the  Fathers  speak 
 of  Jude,  the  author  of  this  epistle,  as  an  apostle. 
 On  this,  however,  much  cannot  be  built,  for  the 
 term  '  apostle'  is  used  occasionally  in  the  N.  T.  in 
 a  lax  way,  as  applicable  to  persons  who  were  asso- 
 ciated with  the  apostles  in  their  work  (Acts  xiv. 
 14  ;  Rom.  xvi.  7)  ;  and  persons  who  sustained  the 
 honourable  position  of  being  the  Lord's  brothers, 
 would-  be  especially  likely  to  be  regarded  by  a 
 later  age  as  standing  on  a  par  with  the  apostles, 
 and  worthy  of  receiving  that  designation.  On  the 
 whole,  we  conclude  that  the  writer  of  this  epistle 
 was  not  Jude  the  apostle  (properly  so  called),  but 
 Jude  the  Lord's  brother,  the  son  of  Joseph,  as  he 
 is  expressly  designated  by  Clement  of  Alexandria 
 {Adiimbr.,  sub  init. )  His  reason  for  describing 
 himself  as  '  the  brother  of  James,'  was  probably 
 that  James,  from  his  peculiar  position,  was  more 
 extensively  and  influentially  known  than  Jude  him- 
 self was.  If  any  should  ask,  Why  did  Jude,  if  he 
 was  indeed  the  Lord's  brother,  not  present  this  his 
 higher  relationship,  rather  than  that  which  he  bore 
 to  James,  as  a  claim  upon  the  regard  of  those  to 
 whom  he  wrote  ?  the  answer  may  be  given  in  the 
 words  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  :  — '  Judas  qui 
 catholicam  scripsit  epistolam  frater  filiorum  Joseph 
 exstans,  valde  religiosus,  cum  sciret  propinquitatem 
 Domini,  non  tamen  dixit  se  ipsum  fratrem  ejus  esse, 
 sed  quid  dixit  ?  Judas  servits  Jesn  Christi,  utpote 
 domini ;  frater  auteni  Jacobi'  (Loc.  cit.)  The 
 Lord  Himself  had  taught  his  followers  that  rela- 
 tionship to  him  according  to  the  flesh  was  of  very 
 inferior  importance  to  spiritual  relationship  to  him 
 (Matt.  xii.  48-50 ;  Luke  xi.  27,  28)  ;  and  we  may 
 believe  that  none  of  those  who  had  imbibed  the 
 spirit  of  his  teaching  would  have  so  much  as 
 thought  of  resting  on  their  earthly  affinity  to  him 
 for  any  portion  of  that  authority  which  they  sought 
 to  attach  to  their  teaching.  So  utterly  foreign  is 
 this  from  the  spirit  of  the  apostolic  writers,  that, 
 as  has  been  justly  remarked,  '  had  such  a  designa- 
 tion as  (i5eX06s  toO  Kvplov  been  found  in  the 
 address  to   an   epistle,   it  would   have  formed  a 
 
JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 682 
 
 JUDE,  EPISTLE  OF 
 
 strong  (i  priori  objection  to  its  authenticity '  (Al- 
 ford,  Gr.  Test.,  iv.  2  ;  Prolegg.  190).  Whilst, 
 however,  we  ascribe  the  authorship  of  this  epistle 
 to  one  who  was  not  an  apostle,  there  is  nothing  in 
 the  epistle  unworthy  of  an  apostle's  pen. 
 
 3.  Contents  and  Design. — The  epistle  com- 
 mences with  an  assertion  of  the  necessity  of  zeal 
 for,  and  steadfastness  in,  the  faith  once  delivered 
 to  the  saints  ;  the  writer  then  warns  his  readers 
 against  some  who  had  crept  in  unawares,  and 
 were  insinuating  doctrines  of  an  unwholesome 
 kind ;  instances  are  adduced  of  the  danger  of 
 apostasy,  rebellion,  and  laxity  of  moral  principle  ; 
 a  contrast  is  instituted  between  the  dogmatism  and 
 audacity  of  the  teachers  he  has  in  view,  and  the 
 gentleness  and  modesty  with  which  the  highest  of 
 God-fearing  beings  speak  ;  these  wicked  persons 
 are  then  strongly  denounced,  and  their  evil  end 
 predicted  ;  the  believers  are  exhorted  to  continue 
 in  the  faith  of  the  gospel,  in  humble  dependence 
 on  promised  grace,  and  in  pious  efforts  to  preserve 
 others  from  the  snares  of  the  false  teachers ;  and 
 the  whole  concludes  with  a  solemn  doxology  to  the 
 only  wise  God  our  Saviour.  The  design  of  such 
 a  train  of  thought  is  obviously  to  put  the  believers 
 to  whom  the  epistle  was  addressed  on  their  guard 
 against  the  misleading  efforts  of  certain  pei'sons  to 
 whose  influence  they  were  exposed.  Who  these 
 persons  were,  or  to  what  class  of  errorists  they 
 belonged,  can  only  be  matter  of  conjecture.  Some, 
 indeed  (De  Wette,  Schwegler,  Bleek),  think  the 
 persons  alluded  to  held  no  peculiar  opinions,  and 
 were  simply  men  of  lax  morals  ;  but,  from  the 
 manner  in  which  the  writer  refers  to  them,  it  is 
 evident  that  they  were,  to  use  the  words  of  Dorner 
 {Entwickelungsgesch.,  i.  104,  E.  T.  i.  72),  'not 
 merely  practically  corrupt,  but  teachers  of  error  as 
 well.'  Their  opinions  seem  to  have  been  of  an 
 antinomian  character  (vers.  4,  18,  19),  but  there  is 
 nothing  to  connect  them,  except  in  a  very  vague 
 and  distant  way,  with  any  of  the  later  gnostic 
 systems.  The  writer  formally  charges  them  with 
 '  denying  the  only  Lord  God,  and  our  Lord  Jesus 
 Christ,'  language  which  De  Wette  admits  usually 
 applies  to  error  of  doctrine,  but  which  here  he, 
 without  any  reason,  would  understand  of  feeling 
 and  conduct.  The  licentious  courses  in  which 
 they  indulged  led  Clement  of  Alexandria  to  think 
 that  they  were  the  prototypes  of  the  Carpocratians 
 and  such  like  :  '  Of  these,  and  such  as  these,'  he 
 says,  '  I  think  that  Jude  spoke  prophetically  in  his 
 epistle'  [Strom,  iii.  p.  431,  Sylb.)  ;  but  this  does 
 not  imply  that  they  had  formed  a  system  like  that 
 of  the  Carpocratians,  but  only  that  the  notions 
 and  usages  of  the  one  adumbrated  those  of  the 
 other.  Perhaps  there  have  been  in  all  ages  per- 
 sons who  have  sought  by  perverted  doctrine  to 
 gain  a  sanction  for  sensual  indulgence  ;  and  such 
 undoubtedly  were  found  disturbing  the  peace  and 
 corrupting  the  purity  of  the  churches  of  Christ  in 
 different  places  as  early  as  the  second  half  of  the 
 1st  centuiy.  The  persons  against  whom  Jude 
 writes  were  apparently  of  this  class  ;  but  in  their 
 immorality,  the  practical  element  was  more  promi- 
 nent than  the  speculative. 
 
 4.  T/ie  Parties  to  ivJiom  the  Epistle  is  addressed 
 are  described  by  the  writer  as  '  the  called  who  are 
 sanctified*  in  God  the  Father,  and  kept  for  Jesus 
 
 *  The  reading  rjyairTj/x^vois  for  that  of  the  T.  R. 
 ijytacTfj.^i'OLs,  has  been  adopted  on  diplomatic  evi- 
 
 Christ.'  Beyond  this  general  intimation  that  they 
 were  Christians,  however,  nothing  more  is  said  to 
 guide  us  to  an  acquaintance  with  them.  From  the 
 resemblance  of  some  parts  of  this  epistle  to  the 
 Second  of  Peter,  it  has  been  inferred  that  it  was 
 sent  to  the  same  parties  in  Asia  Minor,  and  with  a 
 view  of  enforcing  the  apostle's  admonitions  ;  whilst 
 others,  from  the  strongly  Jewish  character  of  the 
 writing,  infer  that  it  was  addressed  to  some  body 
 of  Jewish  Christians  in  Palestine.  But  neither  of 
 these  inferences  rests  on  a  strong  basis ;  for  one 
 might  as  well  conclude  from  the  resemblances 
 between  this  epistle  and  that  of  Peter,  that  they 
 were  7iot  addressed  to  the  same  parties  (which 
 would  seem  to  be  superfluous),  as  that  they  were  ; 
 and  the  Jewish  colouring  of  the  epistle  may  be  due 
 to  the  author,  and  have  no  relation  to  his  readers. 
 From  the  fact  that  the  parties  addressed  seem  to 
 have  been  surrounded  by  a  large  and  wicked  popu- 
 lation, some  have  supposed  they  may  have  dwelt  in 
 Corinth;  while  others  suggest  one  of  the  commer- 
 cial cities  of  Syria.  But  all  this,  as  well  as  the  sup- 
 position that  they  dwelt  in  Egypt,  is  mere  conjecture. 
 
 5.  The  time  when  and  the  p/aee  at  which  the 
 e]")istle  was  written,  cannot  be  exactly  determined. 
 From  the  allusion,  however,  to  the  preaching  of 
 the  apostles,  we  may  infer  that  it  was  among  the 
 later  productions  of  the  apostolic  age  ;  for  it  was 
 written  whilst  persons  were  still  alive  who  had 
 heard  apostles  preach,  but  when  this  preaching 
 was  beginning  to  become  a  thing  of  the  past  (ver. 
 1 7).  '  It  is  not  credible,'  says  Huther  (in  Meyer's 
 Krit-Exeget.  Commentar,  12th  Abt. ,  p.  188), 
 '  that  Judas  would  refer  to  the  preaching  of  the 
 apostles  as  already  past,  if  these  were  still  at  the 
 height  of  their  apostolic  working.'  As  the  writer, 
 in  speaking  of  the  divine  judgments,  makes  no 
 allusion  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  it  has  been 
 inferred  that  this  catastrophe  had  not  occurred 
 when  he  wrote  ;  but  on  this  much  stress  cannot  be 
 laid,  because  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  not 
 traceable  to  the  divine  wrath  against  the  particular 
 class  of  sins  which  Jude  seeks  to  expose,  and 
 therefore  might  be  passed  over  by  him  as  not  a 
 case  exactly  in  point.  Attempts  have  been  made 
 to  prove  a  late  date  for  the  epistle,  from  an  alleged 
 quotation  in  it  from  the  Apocryphal  book  of 
 Enoch  (ver.  13)  ;  but  it  is  by  no  means  certain 
 tliat  the  passage  is  a  quotation  from  the  book  of 
 Enoch,  and  scholars  have  yet  to  settle  when  the 
 book  of  Enoch  was  written ;  so  that  from  this 
 nothing  can  be  inferred  as  to  the  date  of  this 
 epistle.  As  to  the  place  where  it  was  written, 
 there  is  not  ground  for  even  a  plausible  conjecture. 
 
 6.  C(?w;«67//rtr/>j-. —Besides  those  of  Jacques  Lc 
 Fevre  d'Estaples  (Antw.  1540),  Calvin,  and  Es- 
 tius,  may  be  mentioned  those  of  Junius,  Leyd. 
 1599;  Perkins,  Lond.  1606;  Jenkyn,  Lond. 
 1652,  new  edition  by  Sherman ;  Martin,  Lips. 
 1694;  Schmidt,  Lips.  1768;  Semler,  1784; 
 Ilasse,  Jena  17S6;  Carpzov,  Hal.  1790  ;  Hart- 
 mann,  Cbthen  1793;  Haenlein,  ErI.  1799,  1S04; 
 Laurmann,  Groning.  1818  ;  Stier,  Ber.  1S50; 
 Ranipf,  Sulzb.  1S54;  and  the  expositions  in  the 
 general  works  of  De  Wette,  Meyer,  Alford,  and 
 Lange.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 dence  by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  and  Alford ; 
 but  the  difficulty  of  giving  any  just  meaning  to  the 
 clause  with  this  reading  has  led  De  Wette  and 
 others  to  reject  it. 
 
JUDGES 
 
 683 
 
 JUDGES 
 
 JUDGES.  This  name  is  applied  to  fifteen  per- 
 sons who  at  intervals  presided  over  the  affairs  of 
 the  Israelites  during  the  450  years  which  elapsed 
 from  the  death  of  Joshua  to  the  accession  of  Saul. 
 The  term  ytcdges,  used  in  the  English  Bibles,  does 
 
 not  exactly  represent  the  original  D''LiQtJ^  shophetim, 
 
 i.e.,  'rulers  of  the  people,'  from  t3QK',  which  is 
 not  synonymous  with  ^^^  judicare,  but  signifies,  in 
 
 its  general  acceptation,  catisam  alicujus  agere, 
 /■z/^;-/' (see  Bertholdt,  Theolog.  Litt.  Blatt.,  vii.  1,  sq.; 
 comp.  Gesenius,  s.  v.  t32t^').  The  station  and 
 office  of  these  shophetim  are  involved  in  great  ob- 
 scurity, partly  from  the  want  of  clear  intimations 
 in  the  history  in  which  their  exploits  and  govern- 
 ment are  recorded,  and  partly  from  the  absence  of 
 parallels  in  the  history  of  other  nations,  by  which 
 our  notions  might  be  assisted.  In  fact,  the  govern- 
 ment of  the  judges  forms  the  most  singular  part  of 
 the  Hebrew  institutions,  and  that  which  appears 
 most  difficult  to  comprehend.  The  kings,  the 
 priests,  the  generals,  the  heads  of  tribes — all  these 
 offer  some  points  of  comparison  with  the  same 
 functionaries  in  other  nations  ;  but  the  judges  stand 
 alone  in  the  history-  of  the  world  :  and  when  we 
 think  that  we  have  found  officers  resembling  them 
 in  other  nations,  the  comparison  soon  breaks  down 
 in  some  point  of  importance,  and  we  still  find  that 
 nothing  remains  but  to  collect  and  arrange  the  con- 
 cise intimations  of  the  sacred  text,  and  draw  our 
 conclusions  from  the  facts  which  it  records. 
 
 The  splendid  administrations  of  Moses  and  of 
 Joshua  so  fill  the  mind  of  the  reader  of  Scripture, 
 that  after  their  death  a  sense  of  vacancy  is  experi- 
 enced, and  we  wonder  how  it  happens  that  no 
 successor  to  them  was  appointed,  and  how  the 
 machineiy  of  tlie  government  was  to  be  carried  on 
 without  some  similar  leaders.  But  when  we  come 
 to  examine  the  matter  more  closely,  we  perceive 
 that  the  offices  filled  by  Moses  and  Joshua,  whose 
 presence  was  so  essential  for  the  time  and  the  occa- 
 sion, were  not  at  all  involved  in  the  general  ma- 
 chinery of  the  Hebrew  government.  These  persons 
 formed  no  part  of  the  system  :  they  were  specially 
 appointed  for  particular  services,  for  the  perform- 
 ance of  which  they  were  invested  with  extraordi- 
 nary powers ;  but  when  their  mission  was  accom- 
 plished, society  reverted  to  its  permanent  institutions 
 and  its  established  forms  of  government.  It  is, 
 therefore,  in  the  working  of  these  institutions,  after 
 the  functions  of  the  legislator  and  the  military 
 leader  had  ceased,  that  we  must  look  for  the  cir- 
 cumstances that  gave  rise  to  the  extraordinary 
 leaders  which  engage  our  present  attention.  Now 
 we  shall  find  that,  apart  fi'om  such  offices  as  those 
 of  Moses  and  Joshua,  a  very  excellent  provision 
 existed  for  the  government  of  the  chosen  people, 
 both  as  regarded  the  interests  of  the  nation  gene- 
 rally, as  well  as  of  the  several  tribes. 
 
 To  this  latter  branch  of  the  government  it  is  im- 
 portant to  draw  particular  attention,  because,  as  it 
 existed  before  the  law,  and  is  assumed  throughout 
 as  the  basis  of  the  theocratical  constitution,  we 
 hear  but  little  of  it  in  the  books  of  Moses,  and 
 are  apt  to  lose  sight  of  it  altogether.  This  part  of 
 the  subject  belongs,  however,  to  the  art.  Tribe  ; 
 and  it  suffices  to  mention  in  this  place  that  every 
 tribe  had  its  own  hereditary  chief  or  '  prince,'  who 
 presided  over  its  affairs,  administered  justice  in  all 
 ordinary  cases,  and  led  the  troops  in  time  of  war. 
 
 His  station  resembled  that  of  the  Arabian  emirs,  01 
 rather,  perhaps,  of  the  Khans  of  the  Tartar  tribes 
 inhabiting  Persia  and  the  countries  further  east.  He 
 vi'as  assisted  in  these  important  duties  by  the  sub- 
 ordinate officers,  the  chiefs  of  families,  who  formed 
 his  council  in  such  matters  of  policy  as  affected 
 their  particular  district,  supported  his  decisions  in 
 civil  or  criminal  inquiries,  and  commanded  under 
 him  in  the  field  of  battle  (Num.  xxvi.,  xxvii. ;  Josh, 
 vii.  16-18).  This  was,  in  fact,  the  old  patriarchal 
 government,  to  which  the  Hebrews  were  greatly 
 attached.  It  seems  to  have  been  sufficient  for  all 
 the  purposes  of  the  separate  government  of  the 
 tribes ;  but,  as  we  find  in  similar  cases,  it  was  de- 
 ficient in  force  of  cohesion  among  the  tribes,  or  in 
 forming  them  into  a  compacted  nation.  In  fact,  it 
 was  an  institution  suited  to  the  wants  of  men  who 
 live  dispersed  in  loosely  connected  tribes,  and  not 
 to  the  wants  and  exigencies  of  a  nation.  It  was  in 
 pi-inciple  segregative,  not  aggregative ;  and  al- 
 though there  are  traces  of  united  agreement 
 through  a  congress  of  delegates,  or  rather  of 
 national  chiefs  and  elders  of  the  tribes,  this  was  an 
 inefficient  instrument  of  general  government,  see- 
 ing that  it  was  only  applicable  or  applied  to  great 
 occasions,  and  could  have  no  bearing  on  the  nume- 
 rous questions  of  an  administrative  nature  which 
 arise  from  day  to  day  in  every  state,  and  which 
 there  should  somewhere  exist  the  power  to  arrange 
 and  determine.  This  defect  of  the  general  govern- 
 ment it  was  one  of  the  objects  of  the  theocratical 
 institutions  to  remedy. 
 
 Jehovah  had  taken  upon  himself  the  function  of 
 king  of  the  chosen  people,  and  he  dwelt  among 
 them  in  his  palace-tabemacle.  Here  he  was  always 
 ready,  through  his  priest,  to  counsel  them  in  mat- 
 ters of  general  interest,  as  well  as  in  those  hav- 
 ing reference  only  to  particular  tribes  \  and  to 
 his  court  they  were  all  required  by  the  law  to 
 repair  three  times  every  year.  Here,  then,  was 
 the  principle  of  a  general  administration,  calcu- 
 lated and  designed  to  unite  the  tribes  into  a 
 nation,  by  giving  them  a  common  government  in 
 all  the  higher  and  more  general  branches  of  ad- 
 ministration, and  a  common  centre  of  interest  for 
 all  the  political  and  ecclesiastical  relations  of  the 
 community. 
 
 It  was  on  this  footing  that  the  law  destined  the 
 government  of  the  Hebrews  to  proceed,  after  the 
 peculiar  functions  of  the  legislator  and  the  con- 
 queror had  been  fulfilled. 
 
 The  fact  is,  however,  that,  through  the  perver- 
 sity of  the  people,  this  settlement  of  the  general 
 government  on  theocratical  principles  was  not  car- 
 ried out  in  its  proper  form  and  extent ;  and  it  is 
 in  this  neglect  we  are  to  seek  the  necessity  for 
 those  officers  called  Judges,  who  were  from  time 
 to  time  raised  up  to  correct  some  of  the  evils  which 
 resulted  from  it.  It  is  very  evident,  from  the  whole 
 history  of  the  judges,  that  after  the  death  of 
 Joshua  the  Israelites  threw  themselves  back  upon 
 the  segregative  principles  of  their  government  by 
 tribes,  and  all  but  utterly  neglected,  and  for  long 
 periods  did  utterly  neglect,  the  rules  and  usages 
 on  which  the  general  government  was  established. 
 There  was,  in  fact,  no  human  power  adequate  to 
 enforce  them.  They  were  good  in  themselves, 
 they  were  gracious,  they  conferred  high  privileges; 
 but  they  were  enforced  by  no  sufficient  authority. 
 No  one  was  amenable  to  any  tribunal  for  neglect- 
 ing the  annual  feasts,  or  for  not  referring  the  direC' 
 
JUDGES 
 
 684 
 
 JUDGES 
 
 don  of  public  affairs  to  the  Divine  King.  Omissions 
 on  these  points  involved  the  absence  of  the  divine 
 protection  and  blessing,  and  were  left  to  be  pun- 
 ished by  their  consequences.  The  man  who  obeyed 
 in  this  and  other  things,  was  blessed ;  the  man  who 
 did  not,  was  not  blessed  ;  and  general  obedience 
 was  rewarded  with  national  blessing,  and  general 
 disobedience  with  national  punishment.  The  enor- 
 mities and  transgressions  into  which  the  people 
 fell  in  consequence  of  such  neglect,  which  left  them 
 an  easy  prey  to  idolatrous  mfluences,  are  fully  re- 
 corded in  the  book  of  Judges.  The  people  could 
 not  grasp  the  idea  of  a  Divine  and  Invisible  King  : 
 they  could  not  bring  themselves  to  recur  to  him  in 
 all  those  cases  in  which  the  judgment  of  a  human 
 king  would  have  determined  the  course  of  action, 
 or  in  which  his  arm  would  have  worked  for  their 
 deliverance.  Therefore  it  was  that  God  allowed 
 them  judges,  in  the  persons  of  faithful  men,  who 
 acted  for  the  most  part  as  agents  of  the  divine  will, 
 regents  for  the  Invisible  King  ;  and  who,  holding 
 their  commission  directly  from  him,  or  with  his 
 sanction,  would  be  more  inclined  to  act  as  depend- 
 ent vassals  of  Jehovah  than  kings,  who,  as  mem- 
 bers of  royal  dynasties,  would  come  to  reign  with 
 notions  of  independent  rights  and  royal  privileges, 
 which  would  draw  away  their  attention  from  their 
 true  place  in  the  theocracy.  In  this  greater  de- 
 pendence of  the  judges  upon  the  Divine  King  we 
 see  the  secret  of  their  institution.  The  Israelites 
 were  disposed  to  rest  upon  their  separate  interests 
 as  tribes  ;  and  having  thus  allowed  the  standing 
 general  government  to  remain  inoperative  through 
 disuse,  they  would  in  cases  of  emergency  have  been 
 disposed  '  to  make  themselves  a  king  like  the 
 nations,'  had  their  attention  not  been  directed  to 
 the  appointment  of  officers  whose  authority  could 
 rest  on  no  tangible  right  apart  from  character  and 
 services  ;  which,  with  the  temporaiy  nature  of  their 
 power,  rendered  their  functions  more  accordant 
 with  the  principles  of  the  theocracy  than  those  of 
 any  other  public  officers  could  be.  And  it  is  pro- 
 bably in  this  adaptation  to  the  peculiar  circum- 
 stances of  the  Hebrew  theocracy  that  we  shall 
 discover  the  reason  of  our  inability  to  find  any 
 similar  office  among  other  nations.  In  being  thus 
 peculiar  it  resembled  the  Dictatorship  among  the 
 Romans  ;  to  which  office  indeed  that  of  the  judges 
 has  been  compared  ;  and  perhaps  this  parallel  is 
 the  nearest  that  can  be  found.  But  there  is  this 
 great  difference,  that  the  dictator  laid  down  his 
 power  as  soon  as  the  crisis  which  had  called  for  its 
 exercise  had  passed  away,  and  in  no  case  could 
 this  unwonted  supremacy  be  retained  beyond  a 
 limited  time  (I.iv.  i.x.  34)  ;  but  the  Hebrew  judge 
 remained  invested  with  his  high  authority  during 
 the  whole  period  of  his  life  ;  and  is  therefore  usu- 
 ally described  by  the  sacred  historian  as  presiding 
 to  the  end  of  his  days  over  the  tribes  of  Israel, 
 amid  the  peace  and  security  which  his  military 
 skill  and  counsels  had,  under  the  divine  blessing, 
 restored  to  the  land. 
 
 Having  thus  traced  the  origin  of  the  office  to  the 
 circumstances  of  the  times  and  the  condition  of  the 
 people,  it  only  remains  to  inquire  into  the  nature 
 of  tlie  office  itself,  and  the  powers  and  privileges 
 which  were  connected  with  it.  This  is  by  no 
 means  an  easy  task,  as  the  nature  of  the  record 
 enables  us  to  perceive  better  what  they  were  not 
 than  what  they  were,  what  they  could  not  than 
 what  they  could  accomplish. 
 
 It  is  usual  to  consider  them  as  commencing  their 
 career  with  military  exploits  to  deliver  Israel  from 
 foreign  oppression  ;  but  this  is  by  no  means  invari- 
 ably the  case.  Eli  and  Samuel  were  not  military 
 men;  Deborah  judged  Israel  before  she  planned 
 the  war  against  Jabin  ;  and  of  Jair,  Ibzan,  Elon, 
 and  Abdon,  it  is  at  least  uncertain  whether  they 
 ever  held  any  military  command.  The  command 
 of  the  army  can  therefore  be  scarcely  considered 
 the  distinguishing  characteristic  of  these  men,  or 
 military  exploits  the  necessary  introduction  to  the 
 office.  In  many  cases  it  is  true  that  military  achieve- 
 ments were  the  means  by  which  they  elevated  them- 
 selves to  the  rank  of  judges  ;  but  in  general  the 
 appointment  may  be  said  to  have  varied  with  the 
 exigencies  of  the  times,  and  with  the  particular 
 circumstances  which,  in  times  of  trouble,  would 
 draw  the  public  attention  to  persons  who  appeared 
 suited,  by  their  gifts  or  influence,  to  advise  in 
 matters  of  general  concernment,  to  decide  in  ques- 
 tions arising  between  tribe  and  tribe,  to  administer 
 public  affairs,  and  to  appear  as  their  recognised 
 head  in  their  intercourse  with  their  neighbours  and 
 oppressors.  As  we  find  that  many  of  these  judges 
 arose  during  times  of  oppression,  it  seems  to  us 
 that  this  last  circumstance,  which  has  never  been 
 taken  into  account,  must  have  had  a  remarkable  in- 
 fluence in  the  appointment  of  the  judge.  Foreigners 
 could  not  be  expected  to  enter  into  the  pecuHarities 
 of  the  Hebrew  constitution,  and  would  expect  to 
 receive  the  proposals,  remonstrances,  or  complaints 
 of  the  people  through  some  person  representing  the 
 whole  nation,  or  that  part  of  it  to  which  their  inter- 
 course applied.  The  law  provided  no  such  officer 
 except  in  the  high-priest ;  but  as  the  Hebrews 
 themselves  did  not  recognise  the  true  operation  of 
 their  theocracy,  much  less  were  strangers  likely  to 
 do  so.  On  the  officer  they  appointed  to  represent 
 the  body  of  the  people,  under  circumstances  which 
 compelled  them  to  deal  with  foreigners  mightier 
 than  themselves,  would  naturally  devolve  the  com- 
 mand of  the  army  in  war,  and  the  administration 
 of  justice  in  peace.  This  last  was  among  ancient 
 nations,  as  it  is  still  in  the  East,  regarded  as  the 
 first  and  most  important  duty  of  a  ruler,  and  the 
 interference  of  the  judges  was  probably  confined  to 
 the  cases  arising  between  different  tribes,  for  which 
 the  ordmary  magistrates  would  find  it  difficult  to 
 secure  due  authority  to  their  decisions. 
 
 In  nearly  all  the  instances  recorded,  the  appoint- 
 ment seems  to  have  been  by  the  free  unsolicited 
 choice  of  the  people.  The  election  of  Jephthah, 
 who  was  nominated  as  the  fittest  man  for  the  exist- 
 ing emergency,  probably  resembled  that  which  was 
 usually  followed  on  such  occasions  ;  and  probably, 
 as  in  his  case,  the  judge,  in  accepting  the  office, 
 took  care  to  make  such  stipulations  as  he  deemed 
 necessary.  The  only  cases  of  direct  divine  appoint- 
 ment are  those  of  Gideon  and  Samson,  and  the  last 
 stood  in  the  peculiar  position  of  having  been  from 
 before  his  birth  ordained  '  to  begin  to  deliver  Israel.' 
 Deborah  was  called  to  deliver  Israel,  but  was  al- 
 ready a  judge.  Samuel  was  called  by  the  Lord  to 
 be  a  prophet,  but  not  a  judge,  which  ensued  from 
 the  high  gifts  which  the  people  recognised  as  dwell- 
 ing in  him  ;  and  as  to  Eli,  the  office  of  judge  seems 
 to  have  devolved  naturally,  or  rather  ex  officio,  upon 
 him  ;  and  his  case  seems  to  be  the  only  one  in 
 which  the  high-priest  appears  in  the  charactet 
 which  the  theocratical  institutions  designed  for 
 him. 
 
JUDGES 
 
 685 
 
 JUDGES 
 
 The  following  clear  summary  of  their  duties  and 
 privileges  is  from  Jahn  {Biblisches  Archdologie,  th. 
 ii.  bd.  I,  sec.  22  ;  Stowe's  ^I'anslation,  ii.  86)  : — 
 '  The  office  of  judges  or  regents  was  held  during 
 life,  but  it  was  not  hereditary,  neither  could  they 
 appoint  their  successors.  Their  authority  was 
 limited  by  the  law  alone ;  and  in  doubtful  cases 
 they  were  directed  to  consult  the  Divine  King 
 through  the  priest  by  Urim  and  Thummim  (Num. 
 xxvii.  21).  They  were  not  obliged  in  common 
 cases  to  ask  advice  of  the  ordinary  rulers  ;  it  was 
 sufficient  if  these  did  not  remonstrate  against  the 
 measures  of  the  judge.  In  important  emergencies, 
 however,  they  convoked  a  general  assembly  of  the 
 rulers,  over  which  they  presided  and  exerted  a 
 powerful  influence.  They  could  issue  orders,  but 
 not  enact  laws ;  they  could  neither  levy  taxes  nor 
 appoint  officers,  except  perhaps  in  the  army.  Their 
 authority  extended  only  over  those  tribes  by  whom 
 they  had  been  elected  or  acknowledged  ;  for  it  is 
 clear  that  several  of  the  judges  presided  over  sepa- 
 rate tribes.  There  was  no  income  attached  to  their 
 office,  nor  was  there  any  income  appropriated  to 
 them,  unless  it  might  be  a  larger  share  in  the  spoils, 
 and  those  presents  which  were  made  them  as  testi- 
 monials of  respect  (Judges  viii.  24).  They  bore  no 
 external  marks  of  dignity,  and  maintained  no  retinue 
 of  courtiers,  though  some  of  them  were  very  opu- 
 lent. They  were  not  only  simple  in  their  manners, 
 moderate  in  their  desires,  and  free  from  avarice 
 and  ambition,  but  noble  and  magnanimous  men, 
 who  felt  that  whatever  they  did  for  their  country 
 was  above  all  reward,  and  could  not  be  recom- 
 pensed ;  who  desired  merely  to  promote  the  public 
 good,  and  who  chose  rather  to  desei"ve  well  of  their 
 countiy  than  to  be  enriched  by  its  wealth.  This 
 exalted  patriotism,  like  everything  else  connected 
 with  politics  in  the  theocratical  state  of  the  He- 
 brews, was  partly  of  a  religious  cliaracter,  and  those 
 regents  always  conducted  themselves  as  the  officers 
 of  God ;  in  all  their  enterprises  they  relied  upon 
 Him,  and  their  only  care  was,  that  their  countiy- 
 men  should  acknowledge  the  authority  of  Jehovali, 
 their  invisible  king  (Judges  viii.  22,  sq.  ;  comp. 
 Heb.  xi.)  Still  they  were  not  without  faults, 
 neither  are  they  so  represented  by  their  historians  ; 
 they  relate,  on  the  contrary,  with  the  utmost  frank- 
 ness, the  great  sins  of  which  some  of  them  were 
 guilty.  They  were  not  merely  deliverers  of  the 
 state  from  a  foreign  yoke,  but  destroyers  of  idolatiy, 
 foes  of  pagan  vices,  promoters  of  the  knowledge 
 of  God,  of  religion,  and  of  morality  ;  restorers  of 
 theocracy  in  the  minds  of  the  Hebrews,  and  power- 
 ful instruments  of  Divine  Providence  in  the  promo- 
 tion of  the  great  desigii  of  preserving  the  Hebrew 
 constitution,  and,  by  that  means,  of  rescuing  the 
 true  religion  from  destruction.' 
 
 The  same  writer,  in  the  ensuing  section,  gives  a 
 clear  view  of  the  general  condition  of  the  Hebrews 
 in  the  time  of  the  judges.  '  By  comparing  the 
 periods  during  which  the  Hebrews  were  oppressed 
 by  their  enemies,  with  those  in  which  they  were 
 independent  and  governed  by  their  own  constitu- 
 tion, it  is  apparent  that  the  nation  in  general  ex- 
 perienced much  more  prosperity  than  adversity  in 
 the  time  of  the  judges.  Their  dominion  continued 
 four  hundred  and  fifty  years  ;  but  the  whole  time 
 of  foreign  oppression  amounts  only  to  one  hundred 
 and  eleven  years,  scarcely  a  fourth  part  of  that 
 period.  Even  during  these  one  hundred  and  eleven 
 years,  the  whole  nation  was  seldom  under  the  yoke 
 
 at  the  same  time,  but  for  the  most  part  separate 
 tribes  only  were  held  in  servitude  ;  nor  were  their 
 oppressions  always  very  severe ;  and  all  the  cala- 
 mities terminated  in  the  advantage  and  glory  of  the 
 people,  so  soon  as  they  abolished  idolatry  and  re- 
 turned to  their  King,  Jehovah.  Neither  was  the 
 nation  in  such  a  state  of  anarchy  at  this  time  as 
 had  been  generally  supposed.  There  were  regular 
 judicial  tribunals  at  which  justice  could  be  obtained  ; 
 and  when  there  was  no  supreme  regent,  the  public 
 welfare  was  provided  for  by  the  ordinary  rulers' 
 (Ruth  iv.  I  - 1 1 ;  Judges  viii.  22 ;  x.  1 7,  1 8  ;  xi.  i  - 1 1 ; 
 I  Sam.  iv.  i  ;  vii.  1-2). 
 
 '  These  times  would  certainly  not  be  considered 
 so  turbulent  and  barbarous,  much  less  would  they 
 be  taken,  contrary  to  the  clearest  evidence  and  to 
 the  analogy  of  all  history,  for  a  heroic  age,  if  they 
 were  viewed  without  the  prejudices  of  a  precon- 
 ceived hypothesis.  It  must  never  be  forgotten  that 
 the  book  of  Judges  is  by  no  means  a  complete  his- 
 tory. This  no  impartial  inquirer  can  ever  deny. 
 It  is,  in  a  manner,  a  mere  register  of  diseases,  from 
 which,  however,  we  have  no  right  to  conclude  that 
 there  were  no  healthy  men,  much  less  that  there 
 were  no  healthy  seasons  ;  since  the  book  itself,  for 
 the  most  part,  mentions  only  a  few  tribes  in  which 
 the  epidemic  prevailed,  and  notices  long  periods 
 during  which  it  had  universally  ceased.  Whatever 
 may  be  the  result  of  more  accurate  investigation,  it 
 remains  undeniable  that  the  condition  of  the  He- 
 brews during  this  period  perfectly  corresponds 
 throughout  to  the  sanctions  of  the  law  ;  and  they 
 were  always  prosperous  when  they  complied  with 
 the  conditions  on  which  prosperity  was  promised 
 them  ;  it  remains  undeniable  that  the  government 
 of  God  was  clearly  manifested,  not  only  to  the 
 Hebrews,  but  to  their  heathen  neighbours  ;  that 
 the  fulfilling  of  the  promises  and  threatenings  of 
 the  law  were  so  many  sensible  proofs  of  the  uni- 
 versal dominion  of  the  Divine  King  of  the  Hebrews  ; 
 and,  consequently,  that  all  the  various  fortunes  of 
 that  nation  were  so  many  means  of  preserving  the 
 knowledge  of  God  on  the  earth.  The  Hebrews 
 had  no  sufficient  reason  to  desire  a  change  in  their 
 constitution  ;  all  required  was,  that  they  should 
 observe  the  conditions  on  which  national  prosperity 
 was  promised  them.' 
 
 The  chronolog)'  of  the  period  in  which  the  judges 
 ruled  is  beset  with  great  and  perhaps  insuperable 
 difficulties.  There  are  intervals  of  time  the  extent 
 of  which  is  not  specified  ;  as,  for  instance,  that 
 from  Joshua's  death  to  the  yoke  of  Cushan  Risha- 
 thaim  (ii.  8)  ;  that  of  the  rule  of  Shamgar  (iii.  31)  ; 
 that  between  Gideon's  death  and  Abimelech's  ac- 
 cession (viii.  31,  32)  ;  and  that  of  Israel's  renewal 
 of  idolatiy  previous  to  their  oppression  by  the 
 Ammonites  (x.  6,  7).  Sometimes  round  numbers 
 seem  to  have  been  given,  as  forty  years  for  the 
 rule  of  Othniel,  forty  years  for  that  of  Gideon, 
 and  forty  years  also  for  the  duration  of  the  oppres- 
 sion by  the  Philistines.  Twenty  years  are  given 
 for  the  subjection  to  Jabin,  and  twenty  years  for 
 the  government  of  Samson  ;  yet  the  latter  never 
 completely  conquered  the  Philistines,  who,  on  the 
 contrary,  succeeded  in  capturing  him.  Some  judges, 
 who  are  commonly  considered  to  have  been  succes- 
 sive, were  in  all  probability  contemporaneous,  and 
 ruled  over  different  districts.  Under  these  circum- 
 stances, it  is  impossible  to  fix  the  date  of  each  par- 
 ticular event  in  the  book  of  Judges  ;  but  attempts 
 have  been  made  to  settle  its  general  chronologj', 
 
JUDGES 
 
 686 
 
 JUDGES 
 
 of  which  we  must  in  this  place  mention  the  most 
 successful. 
 
 The  whole  period  of  the  judges,  from  Joshua 
 to  Eli,  is  usually  estimated  at  299  years,  in  order 
 to  meet  the  480  years  which  (i  Kings  vi.  i)  are 
 said  to  have  elapsed  from  the  departure  of  the 
 Israelites  from  Egypt  to  the  foundation  of  the 
 temple  by  Solomon.  But  St.  Paul  says  (Acts 
 xiii.  20),  '  God  gave  unto  the  people  of  Israel 
 judges  about  the  space  of  450  years  until  Samuel, 
 the  prophet.'  Again,  if  the  number  of  years  spe- 
 cified by  the  author  of  our  book,  in  stating  facts, 
 is  summed  up,  we  have  410  years,  exclusive  of 
 those  years  not  specified  for  certain  intervals  of 
 time  above  mentioned.  In  order  to  reduce  these 
 410  years  and  upwards  to  299,  events  and  i^eigns 
 must,  in  computing  their  years  of  duration,  either 
 be  entirely  passed  over,  or,  in  a  most  arbitrary 
 way,  included  in  other  periods  preceding  or  subse- 
 quent. This  has  been  done  by  Archbishop  Usher, 
 whose  peculiarly  faulty  system  has  been  adopted 
 in  the  Authorized  Version  of  the  Scriptures.  He 
 excludes  the  repeated  intervals  during  which  the 
 Hebrews  were  in  subjection  to  their  enemies,  and 
 reckons  only  the  years  of  peace  and  rest  which  were 
 assigned  to  the  successive  judges.  For  example, 
 he  passes  over  the  eight  years  of  servitude  inflicted 
 upon  the  Hebrews  by  Cushan-rishathaim,  and, 
 without  any  interruption,  connects  the  peace  ob- 
 tained by  the  victories  of  Othniel  with  that  which 
 had  been  conferred  on  the  land  by  the  government 
 of  Joshua ;  and  although  the  sacred  historian  re- 
 lates in  the  plainest  terms  possible  that  the  children 
 of  Israel  served  the  king  of  Mesopotamia  eight 
 years,  and  were  afterwards  delivered  by  Othniel, 
 who  gave  the  land  rest  forty  years,  the  archbishop 
 maintains  that  the  forty  years  now  mentioned 
 began,  not  after  the  successes  of  this  judge,  but 
 immediately  after  the  demise  of  Joshua.  Nothing 
 certainly  can  be  more  obvious  than  that  in  this 
 case  the  years  of  tranquillity  and  the  years  of  op- 
 pression ought  to  be  reckoned  separately.  Again, 
 we  are  informed  by  the  sacred  writer,  that  after  the 
 death  of  Ehud  the  children  of  Israel  were  under 
 the  oppression  of  Jabin  king  of  Hazor  for  twenty 
 years,  and  that  afterwards,  when  their  deliverance 
 was  effected  by  Deborah  and  Barak,  the  land  had 
 rest  forty  years.  Nothing  can  be  clearer  than  this  ; 
 yet  Usher's  system  leads  him  to  include  the  twenty 
 years  of  oppression  in  the  forty  of  peace,  making 
 both  but  forty  years.  All  this  arises  from  the 
 obligation  M'hich  Usher  unfortunately  conceived 
 himself  under  of  following  the  scheme  adopted  by 
 the  Masoretic  Jews,  who,  as  Dr.  Hales  remarks, 
 have  by  a  curious  invention  included  the  four  first 
 servitudes  in  the  years  of  the  judges  who  put  an  end 
 to  them,  contrary  to  the  express  declarations  of 
 Scripture,  which  represents  the  administrations  of 
 the  judges,  not  as  synchronising  with  the  sei-vitudes, 
 but  as  succeeding  them.  The  Rabbins  were  indeed 
 forced  to  allow  the  fifth  servitude  to  have  been 
 distinct  from  the  administration  of  Jephthah, 
 because  it  was  too  long  to  be  included  in  that 
 administration  ;  but  they  deducted  a  year  from  the 
 Scripture  account  of  the  servitude,  making  it  only 
 six  instead  of  seven  years.  They  sank  entirely  the 
 sixth  servitude  of  forty  years  under  the  Philistines, 
 because  it  was  too  long  to  be  contained  in  Samson's 
 administration  ;  and,  to  crown  all,  they  reduced 
 Saul's  reign  of  forty  years  to  two  years  only. 
 
 The  necessity  for  all  these  tortuous  operations 
 
 has  arisen  from  a  desire  to  produce  a  conformity 
 with  the  date  in  i  Kings  vi.  i,  which,  as  already 
 cited,  gives  a  period  of  only  480  years  from  the 
 exode  to  the  foundation  of  Solomon's  temple.  As 
 this  date  is  incompatible  with  the  sum  of  the  dif- 
 ferent numbers  given  in  the  book  of  Judges,  and  as 
 it  differs  from  the  computation  of  Josephus  and  of 
 all  the  ancient  writers  on  the  subject,  whether 
 Jewish  or  Christian,  it  is  not  unsatisfactory  to  find 
 grounds  which  leave  this  text  open  to  much  doubt 
 and  suspicion.  We  cannot  here  enter  into  any 
 lengthened  proof;  but  that  the  text  did  not  exist 
 in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  copies  of  the  Scripture 
 till  nearly  three  centuries  after  Christ,  is  evident 
 from  the  absence  of  all  reference  to  it  in  the  works 
 of  the  learned  men  who  composed  histories  of  the 
 Jews  from  the  materials  supplied  to  them  in  the 
 sacred  books.  This  may  be  shewn  by  reference  to 
 various  authors,  who,  if  the  number  specified  in  it 
 had  existed,  could  not  fail  to  have  adduced  it.  In 
 particular,  it  is  certain  that  it  did  not  exist  in  the 
 Hebrew  or  Greek  Bibles  in  the  days  of  Josephus  ; 
 for  he  alludes  to  the  verse  in  which  it  is  contained 
 without  making  the  slightest  observation  in  regard 
 to  it,  although  the  period  which  he,  af  the  same 
 time,  states  as  having  elapsed  between  the  exode 
 and  the  foundation  of  the  temple,  is  directly  at 
 variance  with  it  to  the  extent  of  not  less  than  1 12 
 years  [Antiq.  viii.  3).  If  the  number  '480  years' 
 had  then  existed  in  the  text,  he  could  not,  while 
 referring  to  the  passage  where  it  is  now  inserted, 
 have  dared  to  state  a  number  so  very  different. 
 Then  we  have  the  testimony  of  St.  Paul  (Acts  xiii. 
 20),  who  makes  the  rule  of  'the  judges  until 
 Samuel'  extend  over  450  years,  which,  with  the 
 addition  of  ascertained  numbers,  raises  the  amount 
 for  the  whole  period  to  592  years.  This  evidence 
 seems  so  conclusive  that  it  is  scarcely  necessaiy  to 
 add  any  other;  but  it  may  be  mentioned  that 
 Origen,  in  his  Com?iie)itary  oti  St.  yb/m,  cites 
 I  Kings  vi.  i,  and  even  mentions  the  year  of 
 Solomon's  reign,  and  the  month  in  which  he  began 
 to  build  the  temple,  without  the  slightest  notice 
 of  the  number  of  years  (as  now  stated  in  the  text) 
 vi^hich  intervened  between  that  event  and  the  exode. 
 It  has  consequently  been  inferred,  with  good  reason, 
 that  in  A.  D.  230,  when  Origen  wrote,  the  interpo- 
 lation of  the  date  in  question  had  not  yet  taken 
 place.  Eusebius,  however,  in  his  Chrojiicon,  written 
 about  A.  D.  325,  does  use  the  date  as  the  basis  of 
 a  chronological  hypothesis  ;  whence  it  is  inferred 
 that  the  date  was  inserted  about  the  beginning  of 
 the  4th  century,  and  probably  under  the  direc- 
 tion of  the  Masoretic  doctors  of  Tiberias.  It  is 
 also  to  be  remarked  that  Eusebius,  in  the  Prcep. 
 Evangelica,  a  work  written  some  years  after  the 
 C/ironicoji,  and  in  all  his  other  works,  uses  the 
 more  common  and  ancient  system  of  dates. 
 
 It  may  also  be  remarked  that  even  the  ancient 
 versions,  as  they  at  present  exist,  do  not  agree  in 
 the  number.  The  present  copies  of  the  Septuagint, 
 for  instance,  have  440,  not  4S0  years  ;  on  which 
 and  other  grounds  some  scholars,  who  have  hesi- 
 tated to  regard  the  text  as  an  interpolation,  have 
 deemed  themselves  authorized  to  alter  it  to  592 
 years  instead  of  480,  producing  in  this  way  the 
 same  result  which  would  be  obtained  if  the  text 
 had  no  existence.  This,  it  has  been  already  re- 
 marked, is  the  number  given  by  Josephus  {Antiq. 
 viii.  3.  i),  and  is  in  agreement  with  the  statement 
 of  Sl   Paul.     The  computation   cf  the  Jews  in 
 
JUDGES 
 
 687 
 
 JUDGES 
 
 China  lias  also  been  produced  in  support  of  it  (see 
 Isaac  Voss,  Dissert,  dc  LXX.  Iiiiei-p.  eonimqiie 
 translatioiie  et  chrofwiogia,  Hagte  Comit.  1664.  4; 
 Michaelis,  Orientalische  Bibliothek,  v.  81).  There 
 would  then  be  for  the  period  from  Moses's  death 
 to  Saul's  accession  46S  years,  and  the  whole  period 
 of  the  judges  from  the  death  of  Joshua  to  that  of 
 Samuel  might  be  estimated  at  450  years,  agreeably 
 to  Acts  xiii.  20.  If  we  add  to  these  450  years 
 forty  years  for  the  march  in  the  desert,  eighty-four 
 years  for  the  reign  of  Saul,  David,  and  Solomon, 
 until  the  foundation  of  the  temple,  the  amount 
 would  be  574  years.  For  the  time  when  Joshua 
 acted  as  an  independent  chieftain,  eighteen  years 
 may  be  counted,  which  added  to  574  would  make 
 up  the  above  number  of  592  years  (comp.  Michaelis, 
 Orientalische  Bibliotkek,  v.  228,  whose  arrange- 
 ment of  years  differs  in  some  points  from  the 
 above).  It  must,  however,  be  observed  that  the 
 number  of  450  years  represents  only  the  sum  total 
 of  all  chronologically  specified  facts  of  our  book 
 down  to  the  death  of  Eli,  and  does  not  include  the 
 
 intervals  of  time  of  which  the  years  are  not  given. 
 The  statement  of  Joseplius  above  referred  to  re=t3 
 only  on  his  own  individual  computation,  and  is 
 contrary  to  another  statement  of  the  same  author 
 {Antiq.  xx.   lO  ;   Cont.  Apion.,  ii.  2). 
 
 One  of  the  latest  attempts  towards  settling  the 
 chronology  of  the  Judges  is  that  of  Dr.  Keil,  in 
 his  work  Dorptsche  Beitrdge  zii  den  Theologischen 
 IVissenschaflen,  or,  '  Contributions  towards  the 
 furtherance  of  the  theological  sciences,'  by  profes- 
 sors of  the  university  of  Dorpat.  He  supports  the 
 number  of  480  years  in  i  Kings  vi.  I,  and  from 
 the  invasion  of  Cushan-rishathaim  to  Jair  (Judg. 
 iii.  X.)  retains  the  chronological  statements  of  our 
 book  for  events  which  he  considers  successive. 
 But  the  period  of  the  domination  of  the  Philistines 
 over  the  (western)  Israelites  until  the  death  of  Saul, 
 a  space  of  seventy-nine  years,  he  considers  con- 
 temporaneous with  the  time  of  oppression  and 
 deliverance  of  the  eastern  and  northern  tribes,  for 
 which  (Judg.  X.  12)  are  reckoned  forty  years.  He 
 next  estimates  the  period  from  the  distribution  of 
 
 ] 
 
 Hales. 
 
 Jackson. 
 
 ^' 
 
 1 
 
 2. 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 Usher. 
 
 3 
 
 0 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 
 Yrs. 
 
 B.C. 
 
 Years. 
 
 B.C. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Yrs. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 B.C. 
 
 Exode  to  death  of  Moses. 
 
 40 
 
 1648 
 
 40 
 
 1593 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 149 1 
 
 Joshua  (and  the)      .         .          ) 
 Elders     .         .         .         .          \ 
 
 26 
 
 I  60S] 
 
 25 
 
 25 
 
 27 
 
 27 
 
 145  I 
 
 First  Division  of  Lands    . 
 
 1602    J- 
 
 27 
 
 1553 
 
 Second  Division  of  Lands 
 
 1596    1 
 
 64m 
 
 1444 
 
 Anarchy  or  Interregnum  . 
 
 10 
 
 I582J 
 
 2 
 
 I.   Servitude,  Mesopotam.    . 
 
 8 
 
 1572 
 
 "s 
 
 1526 
 
 8 
 
 18 
 
 8 
 
 8) 
 
 40 
 
 I4I3 
 
 I.   Othniel       .... 
 
 40 
 
 1564 
 
 40 
 
 I518 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40  i 
 
 1405 
 
 II.   Servitude,  Moabit. 
 
 18 
 
 1524 
 
 18 
 
 1478 
 
 18 
 
 18 
 
 ) 
 
 1343 
 
 2.  Ehud  (and)          .         .          ) 
 
 3.  Shamgar    .         .         .          j 
 
 80 
 
 1506 
 
 80 
 
 1460 
 
 So 
 
 jSo 
 
 80 
 I 
 
 80 
 
 omitted. 
 
 [80 
 
 1323 
 
 III.   Servitude,  Canaanit. 
 
 20 
 
 1426 
 
 20 
 
 1380 
 
 20 
 
 20 
 
 20 
 
 20  ) 
 
 1285 
 
 4.   Deborah  and  Barak     , 
 
 40 
 
 1406 
 
 40 
 
 1360 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40  i 
 
 40 
 
 1265 
 
 IV.   Servitude,  Midian. 
 
 7 
 
 1368 
 
 7 
 
 1320 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 1\ 
 
 1252 
 
 5.   Gideon        .... 
 
 40 
 
 1359 
 
 40 
 
 I3I3 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40  \ 
 
 40 
 
 1245 
 
 6.   Abimelech. 
 
 3 
 
 I3I9 
 
 3 
 
 1273 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 92m 
 
 1236 
 
 7.  Tola 
 
 8.  Jair 
 
 23 
 22 
 
 I316 
 1293 
 
 22 
 22 
 
 1270 
 
 1248 
 
 22 
 22 
 
 22 
 22 
 
 22 
 22 
 
 23! 
 
 22  \ 
 
 48 
 
 1232 
 I2IO 
 
 V.   Servitude,  Ammon. 
 
 18 
 
 I27I 
 
 iS 
 
 1226 
 
 18 
 
 18 
 
 18 
 
 18) 
 
 6 
 
 1206 
 
 9.  Jephthah    .... 
 
 6 
 
 1253 
 
 6 
 
 1208 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 6i 
 
 I188 
 
 10.   Ibzan         .... 
 
 7 
 
 1247 
 
 7 
 
 1202 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 1 182 
 
 II.   Elon          .... 
 
 10 
 
 1240 
 
 10 
 
 I  195 
 
 10 ) 
 
 10 
 
 10  > 
 
 25 
 
 "75 
 
 12.  Abdon      .... 
 
 8 
 
 1230 
 
 8 
 
 I  185 
 
 A 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 8  ) 
 
 1 165 
 
 VI.  Servitude,  Philist.    20    ) 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 20  ( 
 
 13.   Samson     .         .         .  20    J 
 
 40 
 
 1222 
 
 40 
 
 II77 
 
 40 
 
 20 
 
 20 
 
 Interregnum    .... 
 
 40 
 
 r 
 
 40 
 
 14-   Eli  .          .         .         .     30  ) 
 
 1182 
 
 20* 
 
 "37 
 
 20t 
 
 40 
 
 20 
 
 40) 
 
 1157 
 
 Samuel  called  as  a  prophet  10  \ 
 
 40 
 
 VII.   Servitude  or  Anarchy 
 
 20 
 
 1 142 
 
 20 
 
 1117 
 
 20I 
 
 15.   Samuel     .... 
 
 12 
 
 1 122 
 
 20 
 
 1097 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 ... 
 
 21 
 
 1116 
 
 .Samuel  and  Saul     .         .  18    ) 
 
 s  — 
 
 40 
 
 18 
 
 Saul        .         .         .         .  22    1 
 
 40 
 
 1 1 10 
 
 (  20 
 
 1077 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 1095 
 
 David     ..... 
 
 40 
 
 1070 
 
 40 
 
 1057 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40) 
 
 43 
 
 1055 
 
 Solomon  to  Found,  of  the  Temple 
 
 3 
 
 1030 
 
 3 
 
 1017 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 3S 
 
 1014 
 
 Exode  to  Found,  of  Temple    . 
 
 621 
 
 1027 
 
 579 
 
 1014 
 
 5914 
 
 592 
 
 612 
 
 600 
 
 4784 
 
 1012 
 
 *  Samson  and  Eli  are  supposed  to  have  been 
 judges  simultaneously  during  20  years  of  this 
 period. 
 
 t  Besides  the  20  years  under  the  sixth  servi- 
 tude. 
 
JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 683 
 
 JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 the  land  under  Joshua  to  the  invasion  by  the  king 
 of  Mesopotamia  at  ten  years,  and  the  period  from 
 the  time  when  the  Phihstines  were  conquered  until 
 the  death  of  Saul  at  thirty-nine  years,  thus  making 
 up  the  above  number  of  480  years.  In  this  attempt 
 at  settling  the  chronology  of  the  book  of  Judges 
 Dr.  Keil  evinces  great  ingenuity  and  learning  ;  but 
 it  appears  that  his  computations  rest  on  historical 
 and  chronological  assumptions  which  can  never  be 
 fully  established.  In  order  satisfactorily  to  settle 
 tiie  chronology  we  lack  sufficient  data,  and  the 
 task  has  therefore  been  abandoned  by  the  ablest 
 modern  critics,  as  Eichhorn,  De  Wette,  and  others. 
 Notliing  beyond  general  views  is  attainable  on  this 
 subject. 
 
 Having  explained  this  matter,  it  only  remains 
 to  arrange  the  different  systems  of  the  chronology 
 of  this  period  so  as  to  exhibit  them  in  one  view  to 
 the  eye  of  the  reader.  It  has  been  deemed  right, 
 for  the  better  apprehension  of  the  differences,  to 
 make  the  table  embrace  the  whole  period  from  the 
 exode  to  the  building  of  Solomon's  temple.  The 
 headings  are  taken  .from  Hales,  simply  because, 
 from  being  the  most  copious,  they  afford  a  frame- 
 work within  which  all  the  explanations  may  be 
 inserted. 
 
 The  authorities  for  this  table  are :  Joseph.  Aniig. 
 V.  I. -10;  Theophilus,  Bp.  of  Antioch,  A.D.  330, 
 Epist.  ad  Autolycum,  iii. ;  Eusebius,  A.D.  330,  Pra- 
 paratio  Evangclica,  x.  14;  Usher,  1650,  Chrono- 
 logia  Sacra,  p.  71  ;  Jackson,  1752,  Chronological 
 Antiquities,  p.  145  ;  Hales,  iSii,  Analysis  of  Chro- 
 nologv,  i.  loi  ;  Russell,  1S27,  Connection  of  Sacred 
 and  Profane  Histoiy,  i.  147.  In  the  last  work  the 
 full  tables,  with  others,  are  given  ;  and  we  have 
 here  combined  them  for  the  sake  of  comparison. 
 Other  authorities  on  the  subject  of  this  article  are  : 
 Herzfeld,  Chronologia  Jiidicnm,  Berok  1836;  ]\Iol- 
 denhauer,  Gedanken  iiber  die  Zeitrechnnng  iin  Biich 
 der  Richter,  p.  15,  sq.  ;  Ditmar,  Geschichte  der 
 Israeiiten,  p.  91  ;  Hug,  in  the  Freiburger  Zeit- 
 schrift,  i.  p.  129,  sq.  ;  Carpzov,  Tntroduct.  V.  T., 
 i.  169  ;  Simon,  Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  Test. ;  Jahn, 
 Bibl.  Archdolog.  ii.  i.  85  ;  De  Wette,  Lehrbuch, 
 p.  30.     [Chronology.] — J.  K. 
 
 JUDGES,  Book  of,  the  third  in  the  list  of  the 
 historical  compositions  of  the  O.  T.  It  consists  of 
 two  divisions,  the  first  comprising  chaps,  i.  -xvii.  ; 
 the  second,  being  an  appendix,   chaps,  xvii. -xxi. 
 
 I.  Plan  of  the  Book.  — That  the  author,  in 
 composing  this  work,  had  a  certain  design  in  view, 
 is  evident  from  ch.  ii.  11-23,  where  he  states  the 
 leading  features  of  his  narrative.  He  introduces  it 
 by  relating  (ch.  i. )  the  extent  to  which  the  wars 
 against  the  Canaanites  were  continued  after  the 
 death  of  Joshua,  and  what  tribes  had  spared  them 
 in  consideration  of  a  tribute  imposed  ;  also  by  allud- 
 ing (ch.  ii.  l-io)  to  the  benefits  which  Jehovah  had 
 conferred  on  them,  and  the  distinguished  protection 
 with  which  he  had  honoured  them.  Next  he  states 
 his  leading  object,  namely,  to  prove  that  the  cala- 
 mities to  which  the  Hebrews  had  been  exposed 
 since  the  death  of  Joshua  were  owing  to  their 
 apostasy  from  Jehovah,  and  to  their  idolatry. 
 'They  forsook  the  Lord,  and  served  Baal  and 
 Ashtaroth'  (ch.  ii.  13);  for  which  crimes  they  were 
 deservedly  punished  and  greatly  distressed  (ch.  ii. 
 15).  Nevertheless,  when  they  repented  and  obeyed 
 again  the  commandments  of  the  Lord,  he  delivered 
 them  out  of  the  hand  of  their  enemies  by  the  Sho- 
 
 phctivt  whom  he  raised  up,  and  made  them  prosper 
 (ch.  ii.  16-23).  To  illustrate  this  theme,  the  author 
 collected  several  fragments  of  the  Hebrew  histoiy 
 during  the  period  between  Joshua  and  Eli.  Some 
 episodes  occur  ;  but  in  arguing  his  subject  he  never 
 loses  sight  of  his  leading  theme,  to  which,  on  the 
 conti-ary,  he  frequently  recurs  while  stating  facts, 
 and  shows  how  it  applied  to  them  ;  the  moral 
 evidently  being,  that  the  only  way  to  happiness  was 
 to  shun  idolatry  and  obey  the  commandments  of 
 the  Lord.  The  design  of  the  author  was  not  to 
 give  a  connected  and  complete  histoiy  of  the  He- 
 brews in  the  period  between  Joshua  and  the  kings  ; 
 for  if  he  had  intended  a  plan  of  that  kind,  he  would 
 also  have  described  the  state  of  the  domestic  affairs 
 and  of  the  government  in  the  several  tribes,  the  re- 
 lation in  which  they  stood  to  each  other,  and  the 
 extent  of  power  exercised  by  a  judge ;  he  would 
 have  further  stated  the  number  of  tribes  over  whom 
 a  judge  ruled,  and  the  number  of  years  during 
 which  the  tribes  were  not  oppressed  by  their 
 heathen  neighbours,  but  enjoyed  rest  and  peace. 
 The  appendix,  containing  two  narratives,  further 
 illustrates  the  lawlessness  and  anarchy  prevailing  in 
 Israel  after  Joshua's  death.  In  the  first  narrative 
 (chaps,  xvii. -xviii. ),  a  rather  wealthy  man,  Micah, 
 dwelling  in  Mount  Ephraim,  is  introduced.  He 
 had  a  'house  of  gods,'  and  molten  and  graven 
 images  in  it,  which  he  worshipped.  After  having, 
 at  an  annual  salary,  engaged  an  itinerant  Levite  to 
 act  as  his  priest  and  to  settle  in  his  family,  the 
 Danites,  not  having  as  yet  an  inheritance  to  dwell 
 in,  turn  in  thither,  seize  the  images,  and  take  the 
 priest  along  with  them.  They  then  establish 
 idolatry  at  Leshem,  or  Laish,  in  Coele-Syria,  which 
 they  conquered,  smiting  the  quiet  and  secure  in- 
 habitants with  the  edge  of  the  sword.  The  second 
 narrative  (chaps,  xix. -xxi. )  first  gives  an  account  of 
 the  brutal  and  criminal  outrage  committed  by  the 
 Benjamites  of  Gibeah  against  the  family  of  a  Levite 
 dwelling,  in  the  age  immediately  subsequent  to 
 Joshua's  death,  on  the  side  of  Mount  Ephraim ; 
 and  next  relates  its  consequence,  a  liloody  civil  war, 
 in  which  all  the  tribes  joined  against  the  tribe  of 
 Benjamin  and  nearly  destroyed  it.  The  appendix 
 then  does  not  continue  the  history  of  the  first  sixteen 
 chapters,  and  may  have  an  author  different  from 
 him  who  composed  the  first  division  of  the  book, 
 to  which  inquiry  we  now  turn. 
 
 2.  Author. — If  the  first  and  second  divisions 
 had  been  by  the  same  author,  the  chronological  in- 
 dications would  also  have  been  the  same.  Now 
 the  author  of  the  second  division  always  describes 
 the  period  of  which  he  speaks  thus  :  '  In  those  days 
 there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  but  every  man  did  that 
 which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes '  (ch.  xvii.  6  ; 
 xviii.  I  ;  xix.  I ;  xxi.  25) ;  but  this  expression  never 
 once  occurs  in  the  first  division.  If  one  author  had 
 composed  both  divisions,  instead  of  this  chronolo- 
 gical formula,  we  should  rather  have  expected, 
 '  In  the  days  of  the  Shophetim,'  '  At  a  time  when 
 there  was  no  Shophet,'  etc.,  whicli  would  be  con- 
 sonant with  the  tenor  of  the  first  sixteen  chapters. 
 The  style  also  in  the  two  divisions  is  different,  and 
 it  will  be  shewn  that  the  appendix  %\-as  written 
 much  later  than  the  first  part.  All  modern  critics, 
 then,  agree  in  this,  that  the  author  of  the  first 
 sixteen  chapters  of  our  book  is  different  from  him 
 who  composed  the  appendix  (see  L.  Bertholdt, 
 Histonscli-Kritische  Eiitleitiing  in  die  sdvnntlichen 
 Schriften  des  A,  und  N.  T.,  p.  876;  Eichhorn's 
 
JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 639 
 
 JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 Einleihing  in  das  A.  T.,  iii.  sec.  457).  The 
 authorship  of  the  first  sixteen  chapters  has  been 
 assigned  to  Joshua,  Samuel,  and  Ezra.  That 
 they  were  not  written  by  Joshua  appears  from  the 
 difference  of  the  method  of  relating  subjects,  as 
 well  as  from  the  difference  of  the  style.  In  the  book 
 of  Joshua  there  is  a  continual  reference  to  the  law 
 of  Moses,  which  is  much  less  frequent  in  the  book 
 of  Judges  ;  and  in  Joshua,  again,  there  are  no 
 such  inferences  from  history  as  are  common  in 
 Judges  (ch.  iii.  i,  4;  viii.  27;  ix.  56).  The  style  of 
 the  book  of  Joshua  is  neater  than  that  of  Judges; 
 the  narration  is  more  clear,  and  the  arrangement 
 is  better  (comp.  ch.  i.  10,  II,  20,  with  Josh.  xiv. 
 6-15,  and  XV.  13-19  ;  also  ch.  ii.  7-10,  with  Josh, 
 xxiv.  29-31).  That  the  book  of  Judges  was  com- 
 posed by  Samuel  is  an  invention  of  the  Talmudists, 
 unsupported  by  any  evidence  ;  nor  will  the  opinion 
 that  it  was  written  by  Ezra  be  entertained  by  any 
 who  attentively  peruses  the  original.  For  it  has  a 
 phraseology  of  its  own,  and  certain  favourite  ideas, 
 to  which  it  constantly  reverts,  but  of  which  there 
 is  not  a  trace  in  Ezra.  If  Ezra  had  intended  to 
 continue  the  history  of  the  Hebrews  from  Joshua 
 down  to  Eli  in  a  separate  work,  he  would  not 
 have  given  a  selection  of  incidents  to  prove  a 
 particular  theme,  but  a  complete  history.  The 
 orthography  of  the  book  of  Ezra,  with  many 
 phases  characteristic  of  his  age,  do  not  appear  in 
 the  book  of  Judges.  The  prefix  ^  occurs,  indeed 
 (ch.  V.  7  ;  vi.  17 ;  vii.  12  ;  viii.  26) ;  but  this  cannot 
 be  referred  to  in  proof  that  the  language  is  of  the 
 time  of  Ezra,  for  it  belonged  to  the  dialect  of  North 
 Palestine,  as  Ewald  and  others  have  proved.  HD, 
 instead  of  "lt^S>  is  found  also  in  Deut.  xxiii.  3. 
 Forms  like  D^DOy,  ver.  14,  and  3T,  ver.  28, 
 PID,  ver.  10,  non,  ver.  11,  resemble  Chaldaisms, 
 but  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  poetical  style  of 
 the  song  of  Deborah.     The  forms  TlX  (ch.  xvii.  2), 
 
 and  tJ'JPS  (ch.  xix.  i),  belonging  to  a  late  age  of  the 
 Hebrew  language,  may  be  considered  as  changes 
 introduced  by  copyists  (see  Ottmar,  in  Henke's 
 Magazin,  vol.  iv.  ;  W.  M.  L.  de  Wette,  Lehrbuch 
 der  EinleitiDig  in  die  Bibel,  Berlin  1833-39,  2 
 vols.  Svo). 
 
 But  though  we  cannot  determine  the  authorship 
 ot  the  book  of  Judges,  still  its  age  may  be  deter- 
 mined from  internal  evidence.  The  first  sixteen 
 chapters  must  have  been  written  under  Saul,  whom 
 the  Israelites  made  their  king  in  the  hope  of  im- 
 proving their  condition.  Phrases  used  in  the 
 period  of  the  Judges  may  be  traced  in  them,  and 
 the  author  must  consequently  have  lived  near  the 
 time  when  they  were  yet  current.  He  says  that  in 
 his  time  '  the  Jebusites  dwelt  with  the  children  of 
 Benjamin  in  Jerusalem'  (ch.  i.  21) ;  now  this  was 
 the  case  only  before  David,  who  conquered  the 
 the  town  and  drove  out  the  Jebusites.  Conse- 
 quently, the  author  of  the  first  division  of  the  book 
 of  Judges  must  have  lived  and  written  before 
 David,  and  under  king  Saul.  If  he  had  lived 
 under  David,  he  would  have  mentioned  the  cap- 
 ture of  Jerusalem  by  that  monarch,  as  the  nature 
 of  his  subject  did  not  allow  him  to  pass  it  over  in 
 silence.  The  omission,  moreover,  of  the  history, 
 not  only  of  Samuel  but  also  of  Eli,  indicates  an 
 author  who,  living  in  an  age  very  near  that  of  Eli, 
 considered  his  history  as  generally  known,  because 
 so  recent.  The  exact  time  when  the  appendix  was 
 added  to  the  book  of  Judges  cannot  indeed  be  de- 
 VOL.  II.  * 
 
 termined,  but  its  author  certainly  lived  in  an  age 
 much  later  than  that  of  the  recorded  events.  In 
 his  time  the  period  of  the  events  which  he  relates 
 had  been  long  forgotten :  which  may  be  inferred 
 from  the  frequent  chronological  formula,  '  in  those 
 days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel'  (ch.  xvii.  6)  ;  and 
 certain  particulars  of  his  narrative  could  no  longer  be 
 ascertained,  which  caused  him  to  omit  the  name  of 
 the  Levite  whose  history  is  given  in  ch.  xix.  In  his 
 time  also  the  house  of  God  was  no  longer  in  Shiloh 
 (ch.  xviii.  31)  ;  and  it  will  be  recollected  that  it 
 was  David  who  brought  the  ark  to  Jerusalem.  The 
 author  knew  also  that  the  posterity  of  Jonathan 
 were  priests  of  the  graven  image  in  Dan,  or  Laish, 
 '  until  the  day  of  the  captivity  of  the  land,'  ^y 
 pNH  m^J  QV  (ch.  xviii.  30).  This  latter  cir- 
 cumstance proves,  as  already  observed  by  Le 
 Clerc  and  others,  that  the  appendix  was  not  pub- 
 lished until  after  the  Babylonian  captivity,  or 
 at  least  until  after  that  of  Israel  by  Shalmaneser 
 and  Esar-haddon.  It  cannot  be  understood  of 
 the  domination  of  the  Philistines  over  the  Israel- 
 ites, which  would  very  improperly  be  called  ni7J 
 J^IXn,  this  expression  always  implying  the  deport- 
 ation of  the  inhabitants  of  a  country.  The  circum- 
 stance that  the  author  in  mentioning  Shiloh,  adds, 
 '  which  is  in  the  land  of  Canaan '  (ch.  xxi.  12),  and 
 that  the  topographical  description  of  the  site  of 
 Shiloh  is  given  (ch.  xxi.  19),  has  led  some  inter- 
 preters to  assert  that  the  author  of  the  appendix 
 must  have  been  a  foreigner,  as  to  an  Israelite  such 
 remarks  would  have  appeared  trivial  (see  Briefe 
 ei>iiger  Holldndischen  Goltesge/ekrten  iiberR.  Sivioii's 
 kritische  Geschichte  des  A.  T.,  edited  by  Le  Clerc 
 at  Zurich,  p.  490).  The  inference  is  certainly 
 specious,  but  to  judge  of  it  duly  we  must  look  at 
 the  context.  The  first  passage  runs  thus :  '  And 
 they  found  among  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh-gilead 
 four  hundred  young  virgins  that  had  known  no 
 man,  and  they  brought  them  unto  the  camp  to 
 Shiloh,  which  is  in  the  land  of  Canaan.''  The 
 second  passage  is  :  '  There  is  a  feast  of  the  Lord  in 
 Shiloh  yearly,  in  a  place  which  is  on  the  north  side 
 of  Bethel,  on  the  east  side  of  the  highway  that  goes 
 up  from  Bethel  to  Shechem,  and  on  the  south  of 
 Lebonah.'  It  appears  that  in  the  first  passage 
 Shiloh  is  opposed  to  Jabesh  in  Gilead,  a  town 
 without  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  that  this  led  the 
 author  to  add  to  Shiloh  that  it  was  in  Canaan. 
 The  second  passage  describes  not  the  site  of  Shiloh, 
 but  of  a  place  in  its  neighbourhood,  where  an 
 annual  feast  was  celebrated,  when  the  daughters  of 
 Shiloh  came  out  to  dance,  to  sing,  and  to  play  on 
 instruments  of  music.  The  author  thus  enabled 
 his  readers,  and  all  those  who  had  never  been  at 
 Shiloh,  to  form  a  distinct  idea  of  the  festival,  and 
 to  find  its  scene  without  the  employment  of  a 
 guide ;  his  topographical  observation  was  calcu- 
 lated to  raise  the  interest  of  his  narrative,  and 
 was  consequently  very  proper  and  judicious.  It 
 cannot,  therefore,  authorize  us  to  infer  that  he  was 
 a  foreigner. 
 
 3.  Character  of  the  Book. — Parts  of  the  work 
 are  undoubtedly  taken  from  ancient  records  and 
 genealogies,  others  from  traditions  and  oral  in- 
 formation. From  ancient  authentic  documents 
 are  probably  copied  the  song  of  Deborah  (ch.  v.), 
 the  beautiful  parable  of  Jotham  (ch.  ix.  8- 1 5),  and 
 the  beginning  of  Samson's  epinician,  or  triumphal 
 poem   (ch.    xv.    16).       In   their  genealogies   the 
 
 2  Y 
 
JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 690 
 
 JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 Hebrews  usually  inserted  also  some  historical 
 accounts,  and  from  this  source  may  have  been 
 derived  the  narrative  of  the  circumstances  that 
 preceded  the  conception  of  Samson,  which  were 
 given  as  the  parents  related  them  to  others  (ch. 
 xiii. )  These  genealogies  were  sometimes  further 
 illustrated  by  tradition,  and  several  incidents  in 
 the  history  of  Samson  appear  to  have  been  derived 
 from  this  kind  of  information.  But  on  many 
 points  tradition  offered  nothing,  or  the  author 
 rejected  its  information  as  not  genuine,  and  un- 
 worthy of  belief.  Thus  it  is  that  of  Tola,  Jair, 
 Ibzan,  Elon.  and  Abdon,  the  author  gives  only 
 the  number  of  years  that  they  governed  and  the 
 number  of  their  children,  but  relates  none  of  their 
 transactions  (ch.  x.  1-5;  xii.  S,  9,  li,  13).  In 
 some  instances  the  veiy  words  of  the  ancient  docu- 
 ments which  the  author  used  seem  to  have  been 
 preserved ;  and  this  proves  the  care  with  which 
 he  composed.  Thus  in  the  first  division  of  our 
 book,  but  nowhere  else,  rich  and  powerful  men 
 are  described  as  men   riding   on   ass-colts   D''3DT 
 
 D''")'']?  7]}  (ch.  X.  4;  xii.  14,  etc.)  It  is  remark- 
 able that  this  phrase  occurs  also  in  the  song  of 
 Deborah,  which  is  supposed  to  have  been  written 
 out  in  her  time  (ch.  v.  9,  10)  :  '  My  heart  is 
 towards  the  governors  of  Israel,  that  offered  them- 
 selves willingly  among  the  people.  Speak  ye  t/iai 
 ride  on  ivhite  asses,  ye  that  sit  in  judgment.'  In  the 
 appendix  also  of  this  book,  but  nowhere  else,  a 
 priest  has  the  honoraiy  title  of  father  given  him  (ch. 
 xvii.  10  ;  xviii.  19).  But  though  the  author  some- 
 times retained  the  words  of  his  sources,  still  the 
 whole  of  the  composition  is  written  in  a  parti- 
 cular style,  distinguishing  it  from  all  other  books 
 of  the  O.  T.  The  idea  of  the  Israelites  being 
 overcome  by  their  enemies,  he  expresses  often  in 
 this  way  :  '  The  anger  of  the  Lord  was  hot 
 against  Israel,  and  he  sold  them  into  the  hands  of 
 
 their  enemies,'  T2  D^SJp'l  ^i?"J^)?  ^]^\  1^'  "lD'!l 
 Drfll^lX  (ch.  ii.  14;  iii.  8;  iv.  2;  x.  7).  A  cour- 
 ageous and  valiant  warrior  is  described  as  a  person 
 upon    whom    rests    the    spirit   of   Jehovah,    Tin"! 
 
 Ivy  n'ln^  nil  or  as  a  person  whom  the  spirit 
 of  Jehovah  clothed,  liyia  nS  TW^?  r\^r\\  Hn, 
 (ch.  vi.  34 ;  xi.  29  ;  xiv.  6,  19  ;  xv.  14,  etc.) 
 
 4.  Authority  of  the  Book.  — It  was  published 
 at  a  time  when  the  events  related  were  generally 
 known,  and  when  the  veracity  of  the  author 
 could  be  ascertained  by  a  reference  to  the  original 
 documents.  Several  of  its  narratives  are  confirmed 
 by  the  books  of  Samuel  (comp.  Judg.  iv.  2  ;  vi. 
 14  ;  xi.,  with  I  Sam.  xii.  9-12  ;  Judg.  ix.  53  with  2 
 Sam.  xi.  21).  The  Psalms  not  only  allude  to  the 
 book  of  Judges  (comp.  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  11  with  Judg.  vh. 
 25),  but  copy  from  it  entire  verses  (comp.  Ps. 
 Ixviii.  8,  9  ;  xcvii.  5  with  Judg.  v.  4,  5).  Philo 
 and  Josephus  knew  the  book,  and  made  use  of  it 
 in  their  own  compositions.  The  N.  T.  alludes  to 
 it  in  several  places  (comp.  I\Iatt.  ii.  13-23  with 
 Judg.  xiii.  5  ;  xvi.  17  ;  Acts  xiii.  20  ;  Heb.  xi. 
 32).  This  external  evidence  in  support  of  the  au- 
 thority of  the  book  of  Judges  is  corroborated  by 
 many  internal  proofs  of  its  authenticity.  All  its 
 narratives  are  in  character  with  the  age  to  which 
 they  belong,  and  agree  with  the  natural  order  of 
 things.     We  find  here  that  shortly  after  the  death 
 
 of  Joshua  the  Hebrew  nation  had,  by  several  vic- 
 tories, gained  courage  and  become  valorous  (ch.  i. 
 and  xix.);  but  that  it  afterwards  turned  to  agricul- 
 ture, preferred  a  quiet  life,  and  allowed  the  Ca- 
 naanites  to  reside  in  its  territory  in  consideration  of 
 a  tribute  imposed  on  ihem,  when  the  original  plan 
 was  that  they  should  be  expelled.  This  changed 
 their  character  entirely  ;  they  became  effeminate 
 and  indolent — a  result  which  we  find  in  the  case  of 
 all  nations  who,  from  a  nomadic  and  warlike  life, 
 turn  to  agriculture.  The  intercourse  with  their 
 heathen  neighbours  frequently  led  the  uncultivated 
 Hebrews  to  idolatry  ;  and  this,  again,  further 
 prepared  them  for  servitude.  They  were  conse- 
 quently overpowered  and  oppressed  by  their  heathen 
 neighbours.  The  first  subjugation,  indeed,  by  a 
 king  of  Mesopotamia,  they  endured  but  eight  years ; 
 but  the  second,  more  severe,  by  Eglon,  lasted 
 longer  :  it  was  the  natural  consequence  of  the  pub- 
 lic spirit  having  gradually  more  and  wore  declined, 
 and  of  Eglon  having  removed  his  residence  to 
 Jericho  with  a  view  of  closely  watching  all  their 
 movements  (Joseph.  Antiq.  v.  4).  When  Ehud 
 sounded  the  trumpet  of  revolt,  the  whole  nation 
 no  longer  rose  in  arms,  but  only  the  inhabitants  of 
 Mount  Ephraim  (ch.  iii.  27)  ;  and  when  Barak 
 called  to  arms  against  Sisera,  many  tribes  remained 
 quietly  with  their  herds  (ch.  v.  14,  15,  26,  28). 
 Of  the  32,000  men  who  offered  to  follow  Gideon, 
 he  could  make  use  of  no  more  than  300,  this  small 
 number  only  being,  as  it  would  seem,  filled  with 
 true  patriotism  and  courage.  Thus  the  people  had 
 sunk  gradually,  and  deserved  for  forty  years  to 
 bear  the  yoke  of  the  Philistines,  to  whom  they  had 
 the  meanness  to  deliver  Samson,  who,  however, 
 loosed  the  cords  with  which  he  was  tied,  and  killed 
 a  large  number  of  them  (ch.  xv. )  It  is  impossible 
 to  consider  such  an  historical  work,  which  per- 
 fectly agrees  with  the  natural  course  of  things,  as  a 
 fiction  :  at  that  early  period  of  authorship,  no 
 writer  could  have,  from  fancy,  depicted  the  charac- 
 ter of  the  Hebrews  so  conformably  with  nature 
 and  established  facts.  All  in  this  book  breathes 
 the  spirit  of  the  ancient  world.  Martial  law  we 
 find  in  it,  as  could  not  but  be  expected,  hard  and 
 wild.  The  conquered  people  are  subjected  to 
 rough  treatment,  as  is  the  case  in  the  wars  of  all 
 uncivilized  people  ;  the  inhabitants  of  cities  are  de- 
 stroyed wholesale  (ch.  viii.  16,  17  ;  xx.)  Hospi- 
 tality and  the  protection  of  strangers  received  as 
 guests  is  considered  the  highest  virtue  :  a  father 
 will  rather  resign  his  daughter  than  allow  violence 
 to  be  done  to  a  stranger  who  stops  in  his  house  for 
 the  night  (ch.  xix.  ;  comp.  Gen.  xix.) 
 
 In  the  state  of  oppression  in  which  the  Hebrews 
 often  found  themselves  during  the  period  from 
 Joshua  to  Eli,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  men, 
 filled  with  heroism,  should  now  and  then  rise  up 
 antl  call  the  people  to  arms  in  order  to  deliver 
 them  from  their  enemies.  Such  valiant  men  are 
 introduced  by  our  author,  and  he  extols  them 
 indeed,  highly  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  not 
 silent  respecting  their  faults,  as  may  be  seen  in 
 tlie  instances  of  Ehud,  whom  he  reports  to  have 
 murdered  a  king  to  recover  liberty  for  his  country 
 (ch.  iii.  16,  sq.)  ;  of  Gideon,  who  is  recorded  to 
 have  punished  the  inhabitants  of  Succoth  and 
 Penuel  cruelly,  for  having  refused  bread  to  his 
 weary  troops  (ch.  viii.  16,  17)  ;  and  of  Jephthah, 
 who  vows  a  vow  that  if  he  should  return  home  as 
 a  conqueror  of  the  Ammonites,  he  would  offer  as 
 
JUDGES,  BOOK  OF 
 
 691 
 
 JUDGMENT-HALL 
 
 a  bui'nt-offering  whatever  should  first  come  out  of 
 the  door  of  his  house  to  meet  him  :  in  consequence 
 of  this  inconsiderate  vow,  his  only  daugliter  is 
 sacrificed  by  a  savage  father,  who  tlius  becomes  a 
 gross  offender  agairrst  the  Mosaic  law,  which  ex- 
 pressly forbids  human  immolations  (ch.  xi.  34). 
 This  cannot  be  a  fiction  ;  it  is  no  panegyric  on 
 Israel  to  describe  them  in  the  manner  the  author 
 has  done.  And  this  frank,  impartial  tone  pervades 
 the  -i^'hole  work.  It  begins  with  displaying  the 
 Israelites  as  a  refractoiy  and  obstinate  people, 
 and  the  apjiendix  ends  with  the  statement  of  a 
 crime  committed  by  the  Benjamites,  which  had 
 the  most  disastrous  consequences.  At  the  same 
 time  due  praise  is  bestowed  on  acts  of  gene- 
 rosity and  justice,  and  valiant  feats  are  carefully 
 recorded. 
 
 But  are  not  the  exploits  of  its  heroes  exaggerated 
 in  our  book,  like  those  of  Sesostris,  Semiramis, 
 and  Hercules?  Their  deeds  are,  no  doubt,  often 
 splendid  ;  but  they  do  not  surpass  belief,  provided 
 we  do  not  add  to  the  narrative  anything  which  the 
 original  text  does  not  sanction,  nor  give  to  parti- 
 cular words  and  phrases  a  meaning  which  does  not 
 belong  to  them.  Thus,  when  we  read  that  '  Sham- 
 gar  s!e7u  of  the  Philistines  600  men'  (ch.  iii.  31),  it 
 would  have  been  more  correct  if  the  Hebrew  7]''1 
 had  been  rendered  by  'put  to  flight;'  and  it  should 
 be  further  recollected,  that  Shamgar  is  not  stated 
 to  have  been  alone  and  unassisted  in  repelling  the 
 enemy :  he  did  it,  no  doubt,  supported  by  those 
 brave  men  whose  leader  he  was.  It  frequently 
 happens  that  to  the  leader  is  attributed  what  has 
 been  performed  by  his  followers.  We  find  (i  Sam. 
 xiii.  3)  that  Jonathan  repulsed  the  Philistines,  and  no 
 one  doubts  that  it  was  done  by  the  looo  men  men- 
 tioned in  the  beginning  of  the  chapter.  We  read 
 also  (l  Sam.  xviii.  7)  that  'Saul  has  slain  his 
 thousands,  and  David  his  ten  thousands,'  but  of 
 course  with  the  assistance  of  troops  ;  and  many 
 more  passages  of  the  O.  T.  are  to  be  interpreted  on 
 the  same  principle,  as  i  Sam.  xviii.  27  ;  2  Sam. 
 viii.  2.  Nor  can  it  offend  when,  in  the  passage 
 quoted  above,  it  is  said  that  Shamgar  repelled  the 
 Philistines  with  an  ox-goad  ;  for  this  was  exactly 
 the  weapon  which  an  uncultivated  Oriental  warrior, 
 who  had  been  brought  up  to  husbandry,  would 
 choose  in  preference  to  other  instruments  of  offence. 
 From  the  description  which  travellers  give  of  it,  it 
 appears  to  have  been  well  suited  to  such  a  purpose 
 [Agriculture].  It  is,  however,  chiefly  the  pro- 
 digious strength  of  Samson  which  to  very  many 
 readers  seems  exaggerated,  and  surpassing  all  be- 
 lief. He  is,  e.  g.,  reported  to  have,  unarmed,  slain 
 a  lion  (ch   xiv.  5,  6) ;  to  have  caught  300  jackals 
 
 (DvyiC'),  bound  their  tails  to  one  anothei",  put  a 
 firebrand  between  two  tails,  and  let  them  go  into 
 the  standing  corn  of  the  Philistines,  which  was  thus 
 burnt  up  (ch.  xv.  4,  5,  8)  ;  to  have  broken,  with 
 perfect  ease,  the  new  cords  with  which  his  arms 
 were  bound,  etc.  (ch.  xv.  14  ;  xvi.  7-9,  11).  Now, 
 there  is  in  these  and  other  recorded  feats  of  Sam- 
 son nothing  which  ought  to  create  difficulty,  for 
 histoiy  affords  many  instances  of  men  of  extra- 
 ordinary strength,  of  whom  Goliath  among  the 
 Philistines  is  not  the  least  remarkable  ;  and  for 
 others  we  refer  to  T.  Ludolf,  Historia  ^Ethiopia, 
 i.  10;  to  the  Ada  Dei  per  Francos,  i.  75,  314; 
 and  to  Schillinger,  Missionsbericht,  iv.  79.  Lions 
 were  also  slain  by  other  persons  miassisted,  as  by 
 
 David  (i  Sam.  xvii.  36)  and  Benaiah  (2  Sam.  xxiil 
 20).  The  explanation  of  Samson's  other  great  ex- 
 ploits will  be  found  under  his  name  [Samson].  It 
 will  be  easy  to  show  that,  when  properly  under- 
 stood, they  do  not  necessarily  exceed  the  limits  of 
 human  power.  Extraordinary  indeed  they  were  ; 
 but  they  are  not  alleged  by  the  Scripture  itself  to 
 have  been  supernatural.  Those,  however,  who  do 
 hold  them  to  have  been  supernatural  cannot  reason- 
 ably take  exception  to  them  on  the  ground  of  their 
 extraordinary  character.  A  cautious  reader  may, 
 perhaps,  resolve  on  abstaining  entirely  from  giving 
 his  views  of  Samson's  feats  ;  but,  at  all  events,  he 
 will  not  presume  to  say  that  they  exceed  human 
 power,  and  are  fabulous.  He  may  say  that  they 
 do  not  necessarily  exceed  human  power,  and  are 
 therefore  neither  supernatural  on  the  one  hand,  nor 
 fabulous  on  the  other  ;  or  if  he  believes  them  above 
 human  power,  he  must  admit  that  they  are  super- 
 natural, and  will  have  no  right  to  conclude  that 
 they  are  fabulous.  Considering  the  very  remote 
 period  at  which  our  book  was  written — considering 
 also  the  manner  of  viewing  and  describing  events 
 and  persons  which  prevailed  with  the  ancient  He- 
 brews, and  which  veiy  much  differs  from  that  of 
 our  age — taking,  moreover,  into  account  the  brevity 
 of  the  narratives,  which  consist  of  historical  frag- 
 ments, we  may  well  wonder  that  there  do  not 
 occur  in  it  more  difficulties,  and  that  not  more 
 doubts  have  been  raised  as  to  its  historical  au- 
 thority (see  Herder,  Geist  der  Hcbriiischcn  Poesie, 
 ii.  250,  59  ;  Eichhorn,  Repertoriicm  der  Bibliscken 
 tind  Morgenldndischen  Litterahir,  vii.  78). — ^J.  v.  H. 
 {^Commentaries, — Bucer,  1554;  P.  Martvr,  1567; 
 Strigel,  1586;  Chytraeus,  15S9;  Serrarius,  1609; 
 Osiander,  1682;  Schmidt,  1684,  3d  ed.  1706;  Le 
 Clerc,  1708;  Rosenmiiller,  1S35  ;  Studer,  1835, 
 2d  ed.  1S42;  Bush,  1838,  Lond.  1840 ;  IJertheau, 
 1845.  Selections  from  the  Rabbinical  commentary 
 of  Tanchum  have  been  iJublished  by  Schnurrer, 
 Tiib.  1791,  and  Haarbriicker,  Hal.  1S42.  For 
 notes  on  Deborah's  Song  (v.  1-3 1),  see  Schnurrer, 
 Dissert.,  i:'\\\:i.  1775  ;  reprinted  in  his Z'/'w^;-//.  PhilL, 
 Gotha  1790;  Kohler  in  Eichhorn's  Repertorinm, 
 vi.  p.  163  ;  Holmann,  Com.  in  Car.  Deb.,  Lips. 
 1818  ;  Kalkar,  De  Cant.  Deb.,  Alt.  1833  ;  Lowth, 
 Pnrlect.  xiii.,  xxviii.,  et.  al.;  Herder,  Geist  der  Heb. 
 Foes.,  Th.  2  ;  Robinson  in  the  £ibl.  Peperto7y, 
 No.  iii.,  etc.] 
 
 JUDGMENT-HALL.  liparnhpLov  occurs  Matt. 
 xxvii.  27 ;  Mark  xv.  16 ;  John  xviii.  28,  33 ; 
 xix.  9  ;  Acts  xxiii.  35  ;  Phil.  i.  13  ;  in  all  which 
 places  the  Vulgate  has  pratoriuin.  The  English 
 version,  however,  uses  praetorium  but  once  only, 
 and  then  unavoidably,  Mark  xv.  16,  'The  hall 
 called  Prastorium.'  In  all  the  other  instances  it 
 gives  an  explanation  of  the  word  rather  than  a 
 translation  :  thus.  Matt,  xxvii.  27,  '  the  common- 
 hall;'  margin,  'or  governor's  house:'  John  xviii. 
 28,  33,  'the  judgment-hall;'  margin,  'or  Pilate's 
 house:'  Phihp.  i.  13,  'the  palace;'  margin,  'or 
 Caesar's  court.'  The  object  of  the  translators,  pro- 
 bably, was  to  make  their  version  intelligible  to  the 
 mere  English  reader,  and  to  exhibit  the  various 
 senses  in  which  they  considered  the  word  to  be 
 used  in  the  several  passages.  It  is  plainly  one  of 
 the  many  Latin  words  to  be  found  in  the  N.  T. 
 [Latinisms],  being  the  word  pra:torium  in  a  Greek 
 dress,  a  derivative  from  prator;  which  latter,  from 
 praeo,  '  to  go  before,'  was  originally  applied  by  the 
 
JUDGMENT-HALL 
 
 692 
 
 JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 Romans  to  a  military  officer — the  general.  But 
 because  the  Romans  subdued  many  countries  and 
 reduced  them  to  provinces,  and  governed  them 
 afterwards,  at  first  by  the  generals  who  had  sub- 
 dued them,  or  by  some  other  military  commanders, 
 the  word  praetor  came  ultimately  to  be  used  for  any 
 civil  governor  of  a  province,  whether  he  had  been 
 engaged  in  war  or  not ;  and  who  acted  in  the 
 capacity  of  Chief  Justice,  having  a  council  associ- 
 ated with  him  (Acts  xxv.  12).  Accordingly  the 
 word  prffitorium,  also,  which  originally  signified 
 the  general's  tent  in  a  camp,  came  at  length  to  be 
 applied  to  the  residence  of  the  civil  governor  in 
 provinces  and  cities  (Cic.  Verr.  ii.  v.  12) ;  and 
 being  properly  an  adjective,  as  is  also  its  Greek 
 representative,  it  was  used  to  signify  whatever  ap- 
 pertained to  the  praetor  or  governor  ;  for  instance, 
 his  residence,  either  the  whole  or  any  part  of  it,  as 
 his  dwelling-house,  or  the  place  where  he  adminis- 
 tered justice,  or  even  the  large  enclosed  court  at 
 the  entrance  to  the  praetorian  residence  (Bynteus, 
 De  Moi'tejes.  Christ.,  ii.  407,  Amst.  1696). 
 
 These  observations  serve  to  elucidate  the  several 
 uses  of  the  word  in  the  N.  T.,  which  have,  how- 
 ever, much  exercised  the  ingenuity  and  research  of 
 many  eminent  scholars,  as  may  be  seen  upon 
 referring  to  Pitisci,  Lex.  Antiq.  Romaii.,  s.  v.  '  Pr£e- 
 torium.'  Upon  comparing  the  instances  in  which 
 the  evangelists  mention  the  prtetorium,  it  will  be 
 seen,  first,  that  it  was  the  residence  of  Pilate  ;  for 
 that  which  John  relates  in  ch.  xviii.  28,  '  Then  led 
 they  Jesus  from  Caiaphas  into  the  prKtorium,'  etc., 
 is  most  certainly  the  same  incident  which  Luke 
 relates  in  ch.  xxiii.  i,  'And  the  whole  multitude 
 arose  and  led  him  to  Pilate,'  etc.  A  collation  of 
 the  subsequent  verses  in  each  passage  will  place 
 this  point  beyond  doubt.  Nonnus  says,  that  leav- 
 ing the  house  of  Caiaphas,  they  took  Jesus  e:s 
 Zbixov  ijyefxdfos,  '  to  the  governor's  house.'  This 
 residence  of  Pilate  seems  to  have  been  the  magnifi- 
 cent palace  built  by  Herod,  situated  in  the  north 
 part  of  the  upper  city,  west  of  the  temple  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xv.  9.  3),  and  overlooking  the  temple  (xx. 
 8.  11).  The  reasons  for  this  opinion  are,  that  the 
 Roman  procurators,  whose  ordinary  residence  was 
 at  Cresarea  (Acts  xxiii.  23,  etc.  ;  xxv.  i,  etc.),  took 
 up  their  residence  in  this  palace  when  they  visited 
 Jerusalem,  their  tribunal  being  erected  in  the  open 
 court  or  area  before  it.  Thus  Josephus  states  that 
 Florus  took  up  his  quarters  at  the  palace  [kv  roh 
 jSatrtXeioij  avXl^eTai)  ;  and  on  the  next  day  he  had 
 his  tribunal  set  up  before  it,  and  sat  upon  it  {Dc  Bell. 
 Jud.  ii.  14.  8).  Philo  expressly  says  that  the  palace, 
 which  had  hitherto  been  Herod's,  was  now  called  tt\v 
 olKiav  Twv  €iriTp6irwv,  '  the  house  of  the  praetors ' 
 (Legal,  ad  Caium,  p.  1033,  ed.  Franc.)  Secondly, 
 the  word  is  applied  in  the  N.  T.,  by  synecdoche,  to 
 a  particular  part  of  the  praetorian  residence.  Thus, 
 Matt,  xxvii.  27,  and  Mark  xv.  16,  '  And  the  sol- 
 diers led  Jesus  away  into  the  hall  called  Praetorium, 
 and  gathered  unto  them  the  whole  band,  and  they 
 clothed  him  with  purple,'  etc.  ;  where  the  word 
 rather  refers  to  the  court  or  area  in  front  of  the 
 praetorium,  or  some  other  court  where  the  procu- 
 rator's guards  were  stationed.  In  John  xix.  9,  the 
 word  seems  applied,  when  all  the  circumstances 
 are  considered,  to  VWzie's  private  examination  room. 
 In  like  manner,  when  Felix  '  commanded  Paul  to 
 be  kept  in  Herod's  praetorium'  (Acts  xxiii.  35),  the 
 words  apply  not  only  to  the  whole  palace  originally 
 built  at  Caesarea  by  Herod,  and  now  most  likely 
 
 inhabited  by  the  praetor,  but  also  to  the  heep  or 
 do7ijoii,  a  prison  for  confining  offenders,  such  as 
 existed  in  our  ancient  royal  palaces,  and  grand 
 baronial  castles.  Thirdly,  in  the  remainmg  in- 
 stance of  the  word,  Phil.  13,  '  So  that  my  bonds 
 in  Christ  are  manifest  in  all  the  prajtorium,' 
 '  palace,'  it  is,  in  the  opinion  of  the  best  com- 
 mentators, used  by  hypallage  to  signify  the  prcE- 
 torian  camp  at  Rome,  a  select  body  of  troops 
 constituted  by  Augustus  to  guard  his  person  and 
 to  have  charge  of  the  city,  the  '  cohortes  praetori- 
 anae'  (Suet.  Tib.  37  ;  Claud.  lO  ;  Ner.  8  ;  Tacitus, 
 A7inal.  xii.  69)  ;  so  that  the  words  of  the  apostle 
 really  mean,  '  My  bonds  in  Christ  are  manifest 
 to  all  the  prffitorians,  and  by  their  means  to  the 
 public  at  large'  (Bloomfield's  Receiisio  Sytiopt.,  in 
 loc.)  The  praefect  of  this  camp  was  the  crrpaTo- 
 iriMpxr}^  to  whose  charge  Paul  was  committed 
 (Acts  xxviii.  16),  as  the  younger  Agrippa  was  once 
 imprisoned  by  this  officer  at  the  express  command 
 of  the  emperor  Tiberius  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  6, 
 6  ;  Olshausen,  Topogr.  des  alt.  yerusalem,  sec.  iii. 
 9  ;  Perizonius,  De  Origine  et  Signijicatione  et  tisu 
 vocwn  Frcetoris  et  Pnetorii,  Frank.  1690  ;  Perizo- 
 nius, Disqiiisitio  cum  Ulrica  Hiihcro,  Lugdun.  Bat. 
 1 696 ;  Shorzius,  De  Prcetorio  Pilati  in  Exercit. 
 Phil.,  Hag.  Com.  1774  ;  Zornius,  Opuscida  Sacra, 
 ii.  699  ;  Winer,  Pibl.  Peal-  Worterbiich,  art. 
 '  Richthaus.'— J.  F.  D. 
 
 JUDITH  (nnin'';  'lovm,  'lovSeie,  'lovdve— 
 
 Jewess,  the  feminine  of  il^HV  comp.  Jer.  xxxvL 
 
 14,  21),  the  widow  of  Manasses  of  Bethulia,  and 
 heroine  of  the  apocryphal  book  which  bears  her 
 name  and  describes  her  as  a  lineal  descendant  of 
 Simeon  the  second  son  of  Jacob  (viii.  i,  2  ;  ix.  2). 
 Like  her  progenitor,  Judith,  who  is  so  celebrated 
 for  piety  (viii.  6),  beauty  (xi.  21),  chastity,  and 
 valour  (xvi.  22,  etc.),  made  no  scruple  whatever  of 
 employing  unworthy  means  to  avenge  the  honour 
 of  the  Jewish  nation.  This,  however,  did  not 
 deter  St.  Jerome  and  others  from  regarding  her 
 victory  as  a  type  of  the  church  overcoming  the 
 devil  (cf  Ep.  xxii.  21,  p.  105  ;  Ixxix.  11,  p.  508). 
 According  to  the  Vulg.,  Judith  was  the  daughter 
 of  A/erari,  or  more  properly  Beari  (nN3),  as  the 
 Hebrew  recension  has  it  ;  the  latter  also  places 
 her  in  the  days  of  Maccabaeus,  which  is  un- 
 doubtedly correct  [Judith,  Book  of]. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 JUDITH,  The  Book  of,  is  one  of  the  most 
 interesting  of  the  Apocryphal  books,  and  has 
 called  forth  a  greater  variety  of  opinions  amongst 
 interpreters  since  the  days  of  the  Reformation, 
 than  almost  any  other  of  the  Deutero-canonical 
 productions. 
 
 I.  Title  and  position  of  the  Book. — The  book  is 
 called  Judith,  'lovdid,  or  Judeth,  'Jovdrje,  after  its 
 heroine,  whose  name   is   described  as  n''n^n^  = 
 
 ye7uess.  St.  Jerome's  opinion,  that  it  is  so  called 
 because  Judith  was  the  authoress  of  it  ( Comment. 
 in  Agg.,  i.  6),  is  rightly  rejected  by  every  scholar. 
 In  the  MSS.  of  the  Alexandrine  version,  the  Vul- 
 gate, and  in  Wyclifif's  translation,  Judith  is  placed 
 between  Tobit  and  Esther.  This  is  followed  by 
 Coverdale,  the  Geneva  version,  the  Bishops'  Bible, 
 and  the  A.  V.,  where,  from  the  nature  of  the 
 division,  it  is  put  between  Tobit  and  the  Apocry- 
 phal Esther.  In  the  Vatican  copies  it  is  placed 
 between  Tobit  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  ;  in 
 
JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 693 
 
 JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 ihe  Zurich  Bible,  between  Baruch  and  the  Apoc- 
 ryphal Esther  ;  whilst  Luther  puts  it  at  the  head 
 of  the  Apocryphal  books. 
 
 2.  Design  and  contents  of  the  Book. — The  design 
 of  this  book  is  to  shew  that  as  long  as  God's 
 people  walk  in  his  commandments  blamelessly,  no 
 matter  how  distressing  the  circumstances  in  which 
 they  may  temporarily  be  placed,  the  Lord  will  not 
 suffer  the  enemy  to  triumph  over  them,  but  will  in 
 due  time  appear  for  their  deliverance,  and  cause 
 even  those  who  are  not  Jews  to  acknowledge  that 
 the  God  of  Israel  is  the  only  true  God.  To  see 
 the  development  of  this  design,  as  well  as  to 
 enable  the  reader  to  enter  into  the  difficulties  of 
 the  book,  we  give  the  following  analysis  of  its 
 contents  : — 
 
 In  the  twelfth  year  of  his  reign,  Nebuchadnezzar, 
 king  of  Assyria  in  Nineveh,  assisted  by  the  nations 
 who  dwelled  in  the  hill-country,  by  Euphrates, 
 Tigris,  Hvdaspes,  and  by  the  plain  of  Arioch;  king 
 of  the  Elymeans,  made  war  against  Arphaxad, 
 king  of  Media,  who  had  fortified  himself  in  Ecba- 
 tana  (i.  I-7);  and,  despite  the  inhabitants  of  the 
 countriesof  the  west,  Persia,  Libanus,  Anti-libanus, 
 Carmel,  Galaad,  Galilee,  Esdrslon,  Samaria,  etc., 
 refusing  their  aid  (8-12),  conquered  Arphaxad, 
 and  returned  home  to  Nineveh  in  the  seventeenth 
 year  of  his  reign  (13-16).  The  following  year,  de- 
 termined to  carry  out  his  resolution  to  wreak  his 
 vengeance  on  those  nations  who  refused  their  aid, 
 he  dispatched  his  chief  general  Holofernes,  at  the 
 head  of  120,000  infantry  and  12,000  cavalry  (ii.  i- 
 22),  who  soon  subdued  Mesopotamia,  Syria,  Libya, 
 Cilicia,  and  Idumoea  (ii.  23  ;  iii.  8),  and  marched 
 on  JudiTsa  (9,  10).  But  the  children  of  Israel,  who 
 had  newly  returned  from  the  captivity,  having 
 heard  of  Holofernes'  atrocities,  and  being  afraid  of 
 his  despoiling  the  temple,  determined  to  resist  the 
 enemy.  They  at  once  took  possession  of  the  high 
 mountains,  and  fortified  villages  (iv.  1-5),  whilst 
 the  inhabitants  of  Bethulia  and  Betomestham, 
 according  to  the  command  of  the  high-priest 
 Joachim,  guarded  the  passes  of  the  mountains  near 
 Dothaim  (6-S) ;  and,  having  made  all  the  necessary 
 preparations,  held  a  solemn  fast  and  prayed  to  God 
 for  protection  (9-15).  Enraged  at  their  audacity 
 in  preparing  to  fight  against  him,  Holofernes  made 
 inquiries  of  the  chiefs  of  Ammon  and  Moab  who 
 this  people  was  (v.  1-4).  Achior,  the  leader  of  the 
 Ammonites,  then  gives  him  the  history  of  the  Jews, 
 and  tells  him  that  no  power  could  vanquish  them 
 unless  they  sin  against  their  God  (5-21).  The 
 proud  army,  however,  becomes  exceedingly  angry 
 with  this  statement  (vi.  1-9),  and  Holofernes  orders 
 Achior  to  be  thrown  into  the  Jewish  camp,  in 
 order  that  he  may  be  destroyed  in  the  general  de- 
 struction which  was  impending  over  the  people 
 whom  he  described  as  invincible  (10-13).  The 
 Jews  pick  him  up,  and  lead  him  to  the  governor 
 of  Bethulia,  to  whom  he  relates  this,  and  who 
 comforts  him  (14-21).  The  next  day  Holofernes 
 marches  against  Bethulia,  takes  the  mountain 
 passes,  seizes  all  the  supplies  of  water  (vii.  1-7), 
 and  lays  siege  to  the  city  (8-19),  which  lasts  forty 
 days,  when  the  famishing  people  urge  upon  the 
 governor  Ozias  to  surrender  it,  and  he  decides  to 
 do  so  unless  relieved  within  five  days  (20-32).  The 
 pious  widow  Judith,  however,  denounces  this  de- 
 cision as  tempting  the  Almighty  (viii.  1-31),  and 
 conceives  a  plan  for  delivering  the  people  (32-36). 
 Having  prayed  to  the  God  of  her  fathers  for  the 
 
 overthrow  of  the  enemy  (ix.  1-14),  she  arrays  her> 
 self  in  rich  attire,  and,  accompanied  by  her  maid, 
 who  carries  a  bag  of  provision,  goes  to  the  camp 
 of  Holofernes  (x.  i-ii).  The  guards,  seeing  this 
 beautiful  woman,  and  hearing  her  story,  conduct 
 her  to  the  general  (12-23),  whom  she  tells  that  the 
 Jews  would  now  be  vanquished,  because  they  had 
 sinned  against  God  in  eating  the  victuals  conse- 
 crated to  the  Temple  (xi.  1-15) ;  that  she  had  fled 
 from  the  impending  destruction,  and  would  shew 
 him  the  access  to  the  city,  only  requesting  that  she 
 should  be  permitted  to  go  out  of  the  camp  to  pray 
 in  the  night  (16-19).  Holofernes,  smitten  with 
 her  charms,  gives  her  a  sumptuous  entertainment, 
 and  invites  her  to  remain  within  the  tent  that 
 night  (xii.  1-20).  When  heavily  asleep  in  conse- 
 quence of  having  drunk  too  freely,  Judith  seizes  his 
 falchion,  strikes  off  his  head,  gives  it  to  her  maid 
 outside,  who  puts  it  in  the  bag  which  contained 
 the  provisions  ;  they  both  leave  the  camp  as  usual 
 under  the  pretence  of  devotion,  and  return  to 
 Bethulia,  displaying  the  head  of  Holofernes, 
 amidst  the  rejoicings  and  thanksgivings  of  the 
 people  (xiii.  1-20).  Achior,  hearing  of  this  won- 
 derful deliverance,  is  at  once  converted  to  Judaism, 
 whilst  Judith  counsels  the  Israelites  to  surprise  the 
 enemy  next  morning  (xiv.  I- 10),  who,  being  panic- 
 stricken  at  the  loss  of  their  general,  are  soon  dis- 
 comfited, leaving  immense  spoil  in  the  hands  of 
 the  Jews  (xiv.  ii-xv.  11).  The  women  of  Israel 
 then  express  their  gratitude  to  their  sister  (12-13), 
 whilst  Judith  bursts  forth  in  a  sublime  song  of 
 praise  to  the  God  of  their  salvation  (xvi.  I-17), 
 whereupon  all  of  them  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  wor- 
 ship the  Lord  with  sacrifices  and  feastings  (18-20). 
 Judith  afterwards  returns  to  her  native  place, 
 Bethulia,  manumits  her  maid,  and  dies  at  the 
 advanced  age  of  105  years,  greatly  lamented  by  all 
 the  nation,  whose  peace  no  enemy  dared  to  disturb 
 for  a  long  time  (21-25). 
 
 3.  Original  language,  versions,  condition  of  the 
 texts,  etc. — That  this  book  was  originally  written 
 in  Hebrew  or  Syro-Chaldaic,  is  distinctly  declared 
 by  St.  Jerome,  who  says  that  '  Judith  is  read  by 
 the  Jews  among  the  Hagiographa  .  .  .  and,  being 
 written  in  Chaldee  (Chaldeo  sermone  conscriptus), 
 is  reckoned  among  the  histories,'  and  that  he  had 
 used  a  Chaldee  codex  to  correct  thereby  the  vitiated 
 readings  of  the  MSS.  {Praf.  ad  j^id.)  This  is, 
 moreover,  corroborated  by  the  Byzantine  historian 
 John  Malalas  (fl.  circa  A.D.  880),  who,  having  em- 
 bodied the  contents  of  Judith  in  his  Chronographia, 
 remarks,  TaOra  5^  iv  rats  'E^paiKals  €ix<pipeTa(. 
 ypacpals  (tom.  i.,  p.  203,  ed.  Oxon.,  1 691).  Be- 
 sides, the  Greek  contains  unmistakeable  indications 
 that  it  was  made  from  a  Hebrew  or  Aramaean  ori- 
 ginal, e.g.,  giving  the  Hebrew  use  of  the  relative  iv 
 (3  diirpi^ev  iv  aiirifi  (x.  2),  Cov  to  ^rX'^S-oj  avTu>v 
 (xvi.  4),  the  literal  rendering  of  rUPID^,  iv  ttj 
 irape/j-jSoXy  (xii.  7),  which  has  occasioned  so  much 
 difficulty  to  interpreters,  but  which  is  easy  enough 
 when  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  the  Hebrew  pre- 
 position n  signifies  at,  by,  near ;  the  many  He- 
 braisms (i.  7,  16  ;  ii.  5,  7,  18,  23  ;  iii.  3,  ID  ;  iv. 
 2,  6,  II,  13;  v.  9,  12,  14,  16,  18;  vii.  15,  18; 
 ix.  8  ;  X.  7,  23  ;  xi.  5,  16  ;  xii.  13,  20  ;  xiv.  19)  ; 
 and  the  mistranslations  of  the  Hebrew  (i.  8  ;  ii.  2 ; 
 iii.  I,  9,  10  ;  v.  15,  18;  viii.  27  ;  xv.  11).  Origen 
 was  therefore  misinformed  when  he  was  told  thai 
 Judith  did  not  exist  in  Hebrew  {jr^pl  Tw^ia  T]fj.a.s 
 iXPV"  iyvwKevai    drt   ri^   Iw^lq.    oi>   xP'^'''''o.i    otiSi 
 
JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 694 
 
 JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 ry  'louSiS-  ovd^  yap  'ixovai.  avra  Kal  iv  'Attokp^- 
 (poLi  KjSpal'aTal,  (hs  d7r'  avrQv  fji,a^6;>Tes  eyvw- 
 Kafxev,  Ep.  ad  Afric,  sec.  13).  The  Old  Latin 
 and  the  Syriac  versions  v/ere  made  from  the  Sept., 
 which,  however,  does  not  represent  a  fixed  Hebrew 
 or  Arameean  original  text,  as  may  be  seen  from 
 the  various  recensions  of  it  differing  greatly  from 
 each  other.  Tliis  is  moi-eover  corroborated  by 
 the  fact  that  the  Old  Latin,  the  MSS.  of  which 
 also  deviated  greatly  from  each  other,  and  which 
 St.  Jerome  corrected  according  to  an  Aramrean 
 codex,  differs  materially  from  the  Sept.,  sometimes 
 having  more  than  the  latter  (comp.  Vulg.  iv.  8-15 
 with  Sept.  iv.  10;  Vulg.  v.  11,  12  with  Sept.  v. 
 II-16;  Vulg.  V.  26-29  with  Sept.  v.  23-25  ;  Vulg. 
 vi.  15-19  with  Sept.  vi.  19  ;  Vulg.  vii.  18-20  with 
 Sept.  vii.  29)  :  sometimes  less  (comp.  Vulg.  vii. 
 9,  ff.,  with  Sept.  vii.  8-15;  Vulg.  v.  11,  ff,  with 
 Sept.  V.  17-22;  Vulg.  ix.  5-7,  II,  ff.,  with  Sept. 
 ix.  7,  10).  Sometimes  the  names  are  different 
 (comp.  i.  6,  8,  9;  iv.  5  ;  viii.  i)  ;  and  sometimes 
 the  numbers  (i.  2  ;  ii.  i  ;  vii.  2,  etc.)*  There 
 are  also  extant  several  Hebrew  recensions  of 
 Judith.  Three  of  these  have  been  published  by 
 Jellinek  in  his  Beth  Ha-Midrash,  vols.  i.  and  ii., 
 Leipzig  1853,  and  the  one  which  comes  nearest  to 
 the  Greek  and  Latin  versions  certainly  removes  all 
 the  difficulties  against  the  historical  character  of 
 the  book  contained  in  those  versions.  1"  Coverdale 
 and  the  Bishops'  Bible,  following  Luther  and  the 
 Zurich  Bible,  have  translated  from  the  Vulgate, 
 whilst  the  Geneva  version,  which  is  followed  by 
 the  A.  v.,  has  a  translation  of  the  Greek  text. 
 The  analysis  in  this  article  is  also  of  the  Greek 
 text. 
 
 4.  Historical  cJiaracter  of  the  Book. — There  are 
 three  theories  about  the  nature  of  this  book — a. 
 That  it  records  actual  history ;  b.  That  it  is  pure 
 fiction  ;  and  c.  That  it  is  a  mixture  of  history  and 
 fiction. 
 
 a.  Up  to  the  time  of  the  Reformation  the  view 
 that  this  book  records  actual  history  was  univer- 
 sally entertained.  The  difference  of  opinion  which 
 obtained  during  those  fifteen  centuries,  and  which 
 still  exists  among  the  defenders  of  its  historical 
 character,  is  about  the  precise  time  when  these 
 events  occurred,  involving  as  a  necessary  conse- 
 quence the  identification  of  the  principal  characters, 
 etc.  etc.  The  limits  of  the  range  of  time  within 
 which  they  have  been  alternately  placed  are  7S4 
 B.C. — 117  A.D.  The  most  ancient  opinion,  how- 
 ever, is,  that  the  circumstances  here  described  oc- 
 curred after  the  Babylonish  captivity,  which  is  sup- 
 ported by  the  book  itself  (comp.  iv.  3  ;  v.  18,  19, 
 Sept.  ;  V.  22,  23,  Vulg.)  Still,  as  it  does  not  tell 
 who  this  Nebuchadnezzar  was,  the  advocates  of  this 
 view  have  tried  to  identify  him  with  every  Persian 
 monarch  in  succession.  Thus,  St.  Augustine  {De 
 Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  16),  and  others,  take  him  to  be 
 Camhyses ;  Julius  Africanus  and  Georgius  Syn- 
 cellus  regard  him  as  Xerxes ;  Mercator,  Estius,  etc., 
 
 *  A  veiy  minute  collation  of  the  variations  be- 
 tween the  Vulgate  and  the  Sept.  is  given  by 
 Capellus,  Commentarii  el  Nota:  Critica  in  V.  T., 
 Amstel.  1689,  p.  574,  etc.  ;  and  Eichhom,  Ein- 
 leituiig  in  die  apokryphische^i  Schriften,   p.  318, 
 
 t  They  are  called  HDian!?  KniD.  TTWrX'  r\m^ 
 {Beth  Ha-A/idrash,  i.  p.  130- 136),  and  T\UV^ 
 nniiT'  (vol.  ii.  p.  12-22), 
 
 make  him  to  be  Darius  Hystaspes ;  whilst  Sulpi- 
 cius,  Severus,  and  others,  identify  him  with  Arta- 
 xerxes  Ochus  (comp.  Suidas,  s.  x>.  Judii'H  , 
 Bellarm. ,  de  Verb.  Dei,  i.  12  ;  Scholz,  Einleitun;^ 
 in  die  Heiligen  Schriften,  ii.  58S,  ff )  Against  this 
 view,  however,  is  to  be  urged,  that,  i.  All  these 
 monarchs  inherited  the  provinces  which  are  de- 
 scribed in  this  book  as  having  been  conquered  for 
 them  by  Holofernes,  thus  precluding  the  identity 
 of  any  one  of  them  with  Nebuchadnezzar.  2. 
 Nineveh,  which  is  here  mentioned  as  the  capital  of 
 Neljuchadnezzar's,  or  the  Assyrian  empire,  was 
 destroyed  before  the  Babylonish  captivity,  and  no 
 Assyrian  or  Median  kingdom  existed  during  the 
 post-exile  period.  3.  The  Persians,  Syrians,  Phoe- 
 nicians, Cilicians,  and  Egyptians,  are  described  as 
 subject  to  the  Assyrians,  which  could  not  have 
 been  after  the  captivity  of  Judali,  when  the 
 Assyrian  empire  was  wholly  extinguished,  and  the 
 Persians,  instead  of  being  subject  to  the  Assyrians, 
 had  made  themselves  lords  over  them,  and  all  the 
 other  nations  of  the  East,  from  the  Hellespont  to 
 the  river  Indus.  4.  There  is  no  point  of  time 
 except  the  Maccabasan  period  when  the  evenis 
 here  recorded  could  possibly  have  occurred,  since 
 the  Jews  were  subject  to  the  Persians  for  207 
 years,  then  were  under  the  dominion  of  Alexander 
 the  Great,  and  finally  under  the  Ptolemies  and  the 
 kings  of  Syria  till  they  obtained  their  independence 
 through  Judas  Maccabjeus,  B.C.  164.  To  escape 
 these  difficulties,  and  more  especially  to  obtain  a 
 point  of  time  suitable  for  these  events.  Usher, 
 Lloyd,  Calmet,  Montfaucon,  Prideaux,  Whiston, 
 Wolff,  etc.,  maintain  that  they  occurred  before  the 
 exile,  either  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  Manasseh, 
 Amon,  Josiah,  or  Jehoiakim.  The  general  opinion, 
 however,  is,  that  the  story  is  to  be  placed  under 
 Manasseh,  and  as  Calmet,  Montfaucon,  Prideaux, 
 Whiston,  and  others,  will  have  it,  after  this 
 monarch's  return  from  Babylon.  Accordingly, 
 the  events  recorded  in  the  book  of  Judith,  and  the 
 collateral  circumstances,  occurred  in  the  following 
 order  of  time  : — ■ 
 
 Birth  of  Judith  .... 
 
 Manasseh  begins  to  reign    . 
 
 He  is  taken  prisoner  to  Babylon 
 and  sent  back  to  Judrea  . 
 
 War  between  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
 Arphaxad       .... 
 
 Victory  of  Nebuchadnezzar  over 
 Arphaxad       .... 
 
 Expedition  of  Holofernes  and  siege 
 of  Bethulia      .... 
 
 Death  of  Manasseh     . 
 
 Amon  his  son  begins  to  reign 
 
 Amon  is  murdered  for  his  wicked- 
 ness       ..... 
 
 Josiah  his  son  succeeds  him,  being 
 eight  years  old 
 
 Death  of  Judith,  aged  105  years. 
 
 Battle  of  Megiddo  and  death  of 
 King  Josiah    .... 
 
 The  last  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Ne- 
 buchadnezzar 
 
 Destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  cap- 
 tivity of  the  Jews    . 
 
 The  Nebuchadnezzar  of  this  book  is,  according 
 to  this  theory,  Saosduchinus,  who  succeeded  his 
 father  Esarhaddon  in  the  kingdom  of  Assyria  and 
 
 A.M. 
 3285 
 
 B.C. 
 719 
 
 3306 
 
 698 
 
 3328 
 
 676 
 
 3347 
 
 657 
 
 3347 
 
 657 
 
 3348 
 
 656 
 
 3361 
 
 643 
 
 3361 
 
 643 
 
 3363 
 
 641 
 
 3363 
 
 641 
 
 3390 
 
 614 
 
 3394 
 
 610 
 
 3414 
 
 590 
 
 3416 
 
 558 
 
JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 695 
 
 JUDITH,  THE  BOOK  OF 
 
 Babylon  in  the  31st  year  of  Manasseh's  reign,  and 
 Arphaxad  is  Deioces  king  of  Media.  But  tliis 
 /rt'-^jr//tf  view  again  incurs  the  following  objections: 
 I.  It  makes  Judith  to  be  sixty-three  years  old  at  the 
 time  when  she  is  described  as  '■a fair  damseV  (17  tto.l- 
 SiaKT]  Tj  KaXrj)  captivating  Holofernes  (xii.  13)  and 
 ravishing  the  hearts  of  many  who  desired  to  marry 
 her  (xvi.  22).  2.  It  is  absolutely  inconsistent  with 
 chap.  xvi.  23,  where  we  are  expressly  told  that 
 '  there  was  none  that  made  the  children  of  Israel 
 afraid  in  the  days  of  Judith,  nor  a  long  time  after 
 her  death.'  For  even  if  we  take  the  words  '  a  long 
 time  after  her  death '  to  mean  no  more  than  twenty 
 years,  this  would  bring  Judith's  death  to  twenty  years 
 before  the  disastrous  battle  of  Megiddo,  wherein 
 Josiah  was  mortally  wounded,  whereas  this  hypo- 
 thesis places  her  death  only  four  years  before  this 
 calamitous  event.  This  inconsistency  is  still  more 
 glaring  according  to  the  calculations  of  Prideaux, 
 who  maintains  that  Judith  could  not  have  been 
 more  than  forty-five  years  of  age  when  she  capti- 
 v'ated  Holofernes,  as  this  carries  down  her  death  to 
 the  4th  year  of  Zedekiah,  when  the  state  of  the  Jews 
 had  been  exceedingly  disturbed  for  several  years  by 
 the  Babylonians,  and  actually  brings  the  period  in- 
 volved in  the  '  tong  lime  after  her  death '  beyond 
 the  total  subversion  of  the  Jewish  state.  3.  Judith 
 affirms  that  there  was  no  Jew  to  be  found  in  any 
 city  who  worshipped  idolatry  (viii.  17,  18),  which  is 
 incompatible  with  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  Amon, 
 and  the  first  eight  years  of  Josiah  (comp.  2  Chron. 
 xxxiii.  14-17)  ;  4.  Holofernes,  the  chief  officer  of 
 the  Assyrian  army,  who  had  only  recently  invaded 
 Judrea  and  taken  Manasseh  prisoner,  must  snrely 
 have  known  something  about  the  Jews,  yet  he  is 
 described  as  being  utterly  ignorant  of  the  very 
 name  of  this  Jewish  monarch,  as  not  knowing  the 
 people  and  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and  being  obliged 
 to  ask  for  some  information  about  them  from  the 
 Amorite  chief  (v.  1-3)  ;  5.  The  Jewish  state  is 
 represented  as  being  under  the  government  of  a 
 high-priest  and  a  kind  of  Sanhedrim  (vi.  6-14  ; 
 XV.  8),  which  is  only  compatible  with  \\^&  post-exile 
 period,  when  the  Jews  had  no  king ;  and,  6.  The 
 book  itself  distinctly  tells  us  in  chap.  iv.  3,  and  v. 
 18,  that  the  events  transpired  after  the  captivity,  as 
 is  rightly  interpreted  by  the  compilers  of  the  mar- 
 ginal references  of  the  A.  V.,  who,  on  this  passage, 
 refer  to  2  Kings  xxv.  9-1 1,  and  Ezra  i.  1-3. 
 
 /'.  The  difficulty  of  taking  the  book  to  record, 
 either  pre-exile  or  post-exile  history,  made  Luther 
 view  it  as  '  a  religions  fiction  ox  poem,  written  by  a 
 holy  and  ingenious  man,  who  depicts  therein  the 
 victory  of  the  Jewish  people  over  all  their  enemies, 
 which  God  at  all  times  most  wonderfully  vouch- 
 safes. .  .  .  Judith  is  the  Jewish  people, 
 represented  as  a  chaste  and  holy  widow,  which  is 
 always  the  character  of  God's  people.  Holofernes 
 is  the  heathen,  the  godless  or  unchristian  lord  of 
 all  ages,  whilst  the  city  of  Bethulia  denotes  a  virgin, 
 indicating  that  the  believing  Jews  of  those  days 
 were  the  pure  virgins '  (  Vorrede  anfs  Buck  Jnditli). 
 Grotius,  elaborating  upon  this  idea,  regards  it  as  a 
 paraboHc  description  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes'  as- 
 sault on Judrea^' Judith  'vitheJezvishpeopleiX^'X^XS*') ; 
 
 Bethulia  is  the  temple  (n"'?N  T\'''2),  the  sword  which 
 went  out  of  it,  the  prayers  of  the  saints  ;  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar signifies  the  devil ;  Assyria  is  pride,  the 
 deviVs  kingdom  ;  Holofernes  is  the  deviPs  instru- 
 ment (t>'nj  ^D?^J  Uctot  so-pentis,  minister  diaboli); 
 
 the  widow  is  the  helplessness  of  the  Jeivish  people 
 under  the  tyranny  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes ;  Joachim 
 or  Eliakim  signifies  God  will  arise  (Dip  niH^  or 
 
 Dip''  ?X)  to  defend  Judeea  and  cut  off  the  instru- 
 ment of  the  devil  who  would  have  her  corrupted.' 
 Many  of  the  modern  writers  who  regard  it  as  con- 
 taining pure  fiction  call  it  either  drama  (Buddeus), 
 epopee  (ArtropDsus,  Moreus,  von  Niebuhr,  etc.), 
 a'pologue  (Babor),  didactic  poem  (Jahn),  moral  fic- 
 tion (Bauer),  or  romance  (Berthold). 
 
 c.  As  the  book  itself,  however,  gives  no  intima- 
 tion whatever  that  it  is  a  fiction  or  an  allegory,  but, 
 on  the  contrary,  purports  to  be  real  history,  as  is 
 evident  from  its  minute  geographical  (i.  7  ;  ii.  21, 
 ff  ;  iii.  9,  ff.  ;  iv.  4,  6,  ff.),  historical  (i.  5,  ff ), 
 and  chronological  (i.  13,  16;  viii.  4;  xvi.  23)  de- 
 scriptions, Gutmann,  Herzfeld,  Keil,  and  others, 
 take  it  to  contain  a  substance  of  truth  embellished 
 with  fiction.  And  this  view  is  supported  by  the 
 fact  that,  I.  Notwithstanding  the  arbitraiy  and  un- 
 critical manner  in  which  the  Deutero-canonical  his- 
 torians dispose  of  their  materials,  they  have  always 
 a  certain  amount  of  truth,  around  which  they  clus 
 ter  the  traditional  embellishments  ;  2.  A  summary 
 of  the  contents  of  Judith  is  given  in  the  ancient 
 Jewish  prayers  for  the  first  and  second  Sabbaths  of 
 the  Feast  of  Dedication — beginning  with  ij    ini5< 
 
 nCTll  ■'2  n23J<  and  ^SIJI  J;''•t^'1D  pS— amongst  the 
 events  which  occurred  in  the  time  of  Antiochus 
 Epiphanes,  and  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  Jews 
 would  make  it  the  basis  of  thanksgiving  when  the 
 deliverance  was  never  wrought,  and  the  whole  of 
 it  was  nothing  but  a  fiction  ;  and,  3.  There  are  an- 
 cient Midrashim  which  record  the  facts  indepen- 
 dently of  the  book  of  Judith.  There  is  one  in 
 particular  which  gives  a  better  recension  of  this 
 book  than  either  the  Sept.  or  the  Vulg.,  bears 
 as  much  resemblance  to  the  Sept.  and  Vulg. 
 as  these  two  versions  bear  to  each  other,  and  re- 
 moves many  of  the  difficulties  against  its  historical 
 truthfulness,  inasmuch  as  it  begins  with  chap.  v.  5, 
 and  thus  shews  that  the  Sept.,  from  which  the 
 other  versions  were  made,  has  put  together  two 
 different  records. 
 
 5.  Author  and  Date. — The  difference  of  opinion 
 upon  this  subject  is  as  great  as  it  is  upon  the  charac- 
 ter of  the  book.  Whilst  Wolff  and  others  ascribe 
 the  authorship  to  Achior,  B.C.  636-629;  Iluetius 
 (in  Prcep.  Evang.  p.  217),  Calmet  {Disse?t.  Prcelim. 
 p.  142),  etc.,  to  Joshua,  the  son  of  Josedech,  the 
 companion  of  Zerubbabel,  B.C.  536-515;  St. 
 Jerome,  etc.,  to  Judith  herself;  Ewald,  Vaihinger, 
 etc.,  to  the  time  of  John  Hyrcanus,  B.C.  130-12S  ; 
 Volkmar,  who  takes  it  to  be  an  allegorical  de- 
 scription of  the  victory  of  Judteas  over  Quietus,  the 
 delegate  of  Trajan,  maintains  that  it  was  written 
 for  the  twelfth  of  Adar  a.d.  ii 7-1 18  to  commemo- 
 rate this  day  (DU^IID  DV).  The  fact,  however, 
 that  there  are  several  records  or  recensions  of  the 
 events  contained  in  the  book  of  Judith  proceeding 
 from  different  authors,  and  deviating  materially 
 from  each  other,  precludes  the  possibility  of  ascer 
 taining  whose  productions  they  are.  All  that  can 
 be  said  with  certainty  is,  that  thev  all  emanate  from 
 a  Palestinian  source.  As  the  circumstances  re- 
 corded are  most  plainly  declared  by  the  more 
 trustworthy  Hebrew  copies,  and  in  the  Jewish  pray- 
 ers, to  have  occurred  in  the  Maccabaean  struggles 
 for  independency  {ciixa  170-160  B.C.),  the  first  and 
 shortest  record  of  them  which  was  used  for  liturgi^ 
 
JULIA 
 
 696 
 
 JUNIUS 
 
 cal  purposes  must  be  contemporary  with  the  events 
 themselves.  The  poetical  genius  of  the  nation, 
 however,  soon  embellished  the  facts  in  various  ways, 
 and  hence  the  different  recensions.  The  Greek 
 version  contained  in  the  Sept.  must  have  been 
 made  at  a  much  later  period,  since  the  author  of  it 
 was  already  ignorant  of  the  time  when  these  cir- 
 cumstances occurred,  and,  as  we  have  seen,  mixed 
 up  two  totally  different  records  narrating  events  of 
 different  periods  of  the  Jewish  history. 
 
 6.  Canonicity  of  the  Book. — Though  the  events 
 recorded  in  Judith  are  incorporated  in  the  hymnal 
 service  of  the  Jews  called  011^%  yet  the  book  it- 
 self was  never  in  the  Jewish  canon.  The  distinc- 
 tion, however,  which  the  Jewish  synagogue  kept  up 
 between  treating  the  book  with  respect  and  putting 
 it  into  the  canon,  could  not  be  preserved  in  the 
 Christian  church.  Hence  Judith,  which  was  at 
 first  quoted  with  approbation  by  Clemens  Romanus 
 {,Ep.  c.  55),  was  gradually  cited  on  an  equality  with 
 other  Scripture  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus  {Strom. 
 iv.),  Tertullian(Z>^3/(7w^.  c.  17),  Kmhrose  (DeOJi. 
 Minist.  iii.  13),  and  Augustine  {De  Doctrina  Chris- 
 tiana, ii.  8),  and  finally  was  canonised,  in  the  councils 
 of  Carthage,  by  Innocent  I.  of  Rome,  under  Gela- 
 sius,  and  of  Trent.  Some  will  have  it  that  this 
 book  is  quoted  in  the  N.  T.  (comp.  Judith  viii.  4, 
 ff.,  with  I  Cor.  ii.  10,  ff.  ;  Judith  ix.  12  with  Acts 
 iv.  24  ;  Judith  xvi.  17  with  Matt.  xii.  42,  50). 
 
 7.  Literature. — The  three  Midrashimin  Jellinek's 
 Beth  Ha-Midrash,  vols.  i.  and  ii.,  Leipzig  1853  '■> 
 Montfaucon,  La  Verite  de  V Histoire  de  Judith, 
 Paris  1690;  Capellus,  Comment,  et  Notae  Crit.  in 
 V.  T. ,  p.  459  ;  Arnald,  the  Apocrypha  in  Patrick 
 Lawth  and  Whitby's  Comtnent.  ;  Du  Pin,  History 
 e/the  Canon,  vol.  i.,  London  1699,  pp.  10,  ff.,90, 
 ^.  ;  Eichhorn,  Eiuleitun^  iii  die  Apocryphischen 
 Schriften  des  Alien  Testaments,  Leipzig  1795,  p. 
 291,  ff.  ;  Prideaux,  The  Old  and  A^eia  Testaments 
 cofinected,  ed.  181 5,  vol.  i.,  p.  60,  ff.  ;  Whiston, 
 Sacred  //istory  of  the  Old  atid  New  Testament,  vol. 
 i.,  p.  202  ;  Reuss,  ?'«  Ersch  und  Cruder'' s  Eticy- 
 klopddie,  sec.  ii.,  vol.  xxviii.,  p.  98,  ff.  ;  Fritzsche, 
 Kurzgefasstes  exegeiisches  Handbuch  zu  den  Apokry- 
 pken  des  A.   T,  Leipzig  1853,  vol.  ii.,  p.  II3,  ff.  ; 
 
 77/1?  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature,  1856,  p.  342,  ff. ; 
 Vaihinger,  in  Herzog  Real-Encyklopddie,  vol.  vii., 
 p.  13s,  ff.  ;  Keil,  Einleiiung  in  d.  A.  T,  ed. 
 1859,  p.  698  ;  Volkmar,  Das  Buch  Judith,  Tubin- 
 gen i860 ;  Wolff,  Das  Buch  Judith,  Leipzig 
 1861.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 JULIA  ('loyXia,  a  name  common  among  the 
 Romans),  a  Christian  woman  of  Rome,  to  whom 
 St.  Paul  sent  his  salutations  (Rom.  xvi.  15)  ;  she 
 is  named  with  Philologus,  and  is  supposed  to  have 
 been  his  wife  or  sister.  Some  have  supposed  this 
 to  be  the  name  of  a  man,  but  the  analogy  of  the 
 following  words,  '  Nereus  and  his  sister,'  is  against 
 this. 
 
 JULIUS  (ToiJXios),  the  centurion  who  had  the 
 charge  of  conducting  Paul  as  a  prisoner  to  Rome, 
 and  who  treated  him  with  much  consideration  and 
 kindness  on  the  way  (Acts  xxvii.  i,  3).  [Augus- 
 tus' Band.] 
 
 JUNIAS  ('lowks),  a  person  who  is  joined  with 
 Andronicus  in  Rom.  xvi.  7.  It  is  disputed  whether 
 'lowtav  here  is  the  name  of  a  woman  (Junia),  or 
 of  a  man  {Junius  or  Junianus).  Both  names 
 were  common,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  passage 
 
 to  determine  which  should  be  preferred  here. 
 Grotius  follows  Chrysostom  in  adopting  the  for- 
 mer, but  the  majority  of  interpreters  prefer  the 
 latter.  The  apostle  describes  the  party  named  as, 
 with  Andronicus,  a  relation  of  his  own,  and  as 
 held  in  esteem  among  the  apostles.  They  also 
 shared  with  the  apostle  in  one  of  his  imprison- 
 ments, but  which  is  unknown. — -W.  L.  A. 
 
 JUNIPER.       [ROTHEM.] 
 
 JUNIUS,  FRAN901S  DU  Jon,  a  French  scholar 
 and  theologian,  was  born  at  Bourges,  May  1st, 
 1545.  Having  studied  jurisprudence  in  his  native 
 town,  he  repaired  to  Lyons,  hoping  to  join  there 
 the  ambassador  whom  the  king  sent  to  Con- 
 stantinople. But  he  was  too  late.  Having  re- 
 mained some  time  in  the  place,  he  returned  to 
 Bourges.  He  then  repaired  to  Geneva,  with  the 
 intention  of  devoting  himself  to  the  study  of  theo- 
 logy. In  1565  he  became  minister  of  the  Walloon 
 Church  at  Antwerp  ;  and  was  afterwards  Protes- 
 tant pastor  at  Limbourg,  whence  he  went  to 
 Heidelberg,  and  superintended  a  small  church  in 
 the  neighbourhood.  In  1568  he  went  to  the  Low 
 Countries,  and  officiated  as  chaplain  to  the  Prince 
 of  Orange.  Returning  to  his  church  in  the  Palati- 
 nate, he  remained  there  till  1573,  when  the  elector 
 Palatine  Frederick  III.  called  him  to  Heidelberg 
 to  work  upon  a  Latin  version  of  the  O.  T.  along  with 
 Tremellius.  In  1578  he  was  sent  to  Neustadt, 
 where  he  taught  in  the  college  newly  established 
 by  the  elector,  for  sixteen  months.  Repairing 
 thence  to  Otterbourg,  in  order  to  found  a  Re- 
 formed Church,  he  returned  to  Neustadt,  whence 
 he  was  called  to  the  chair  of  theology  at  Heidel- 
 berg. Having  been  taken  to  France  by  the  Duke 
 de  Bouillon,  he  was  charged  by  Henry  IV.  with  a 
 mission  to  Germany.  Returning  to  his  native 
 country  with  the  purpose  of  settling  at  Bourges, 
 he  was  requested  by  the  magistrates  of  Leyden,  as 
 he  passed  through  their  city,  to  accept  the  chair  of 
 theology.  He  died  there  of  the  plague,  October 
 13th,  1602. 
 
 Junius  was  a  man  of  extensive  erudition.  He 
 was  well  acquainted  with  the  ancient  languages  ; 
 and  as  a  theologian,  was  distinguished  by  good 
 judgment,  moderation,  and  tolerance.  His  dispo- 
 sition was  kindly  and  benevolent.  The  number 
 and  character  of  his  works  shew  vast  industry 
 and  multifarious  learning. 
 
 His  principal  work,  which  he  executed  in  con- 
 junction with  Tremellius,  was  his  Latin  translation 
 of  the  O.  T.  It  appeared  in  five  parts,  the  first 
 containing  the  five  books  of  Moses,  Frankfurt 
 1575,  folio  ;  the  second,  embracing  the  historical 
 books,  1576  ;  the  third,  the  poetical  books,  1579  ; 
 the  fourth,  the  prophets,  1579  ;  and  the  fifth,  the 
 Apocryphal  books,  1579.  After  the  death  of 
 Tremellius,  the  translation  was  revised  by  his 
 colleague  and  printed  at  London,  1584,  8vo.  In 
 the  course  of  twenty  years  it  passed  through 
 twenty  editions,  and  was  printed  for  the  last  time 
 at  Zurich,  1764,  8vo.  Junius  lived  to  superintend 
 a  third  edition,  1596,  folio;  but  the  best  is  that 
 called  the  seventh,  published  in  1624,  folio,  con- 
 taining a  good  index  by  Paul  Tossanus.  The 
 index  was  published  in  a  volume  by  itself  at  Frank- 
 furt, 1687,  folio,  and  repeatedly  after.  The  trans- 
 lation cannot  be  called  elegant.  It  is  too  literal, 
 and  is  sometimes  obscure  on  that  account.  It  is 
 also  disfigured  with  useless  glosses  and  rabbinica' 
 
JUNIUS 
 
 697 
 
 JUPITER 
 
 traditions.  He  wrote  besides,  Apocalypseos  Ana- 
 lysis, 1592;  Gratn/natica  Lingua  Hebrcice,  1593, 
 3d  edition ;  Acta  Aposiolorum  et  epislolce  2  S. 
 Paulli  ad  Corinth,  ex  Arabica  translatione  Latine 
 reddita ;  Pivcatackvia  ad  V.  T.  interpretationem  ; 
 Praledioncs  in  3  priora  capita  Geneseos ;  Expli- 
 catio  4  prio7'um  psalmomm ;  Psahnns  loi,  sen 
 principis  Christiani  institiitio ;  Co77i7nent.  i/t  Eze- 
 chielem  ;  Expositio  Da/tielis  ;  Lectio7ies  in  Jo7ia77i ; 
 Sacra  Parallela ;  Notts  /«  epistola/n  S.  Judo;. 
 His  Opera  theologica  appeared  at  Geneva,  1613, 
 2  vols,  folio,  containing  an  autobiography  written 
 about  1592,  with  curious  particulars  of  his  life. — 
 S.  D. 
 
 JUNIUS,  Francis,  son  of  the  preceding,  was 
 born  at  Heidelberg,  1589.  In  early  life  he  studied 
 mathematics  with  a  view  to  the  military  profes- 
 sion ;  but  the  peace  of  1609  caused  him  to  turn  his 
 attention  to  literature  and  theology.  After  finish- 
 ing his  studies  he  went  to  France  to  visit  his 
 parents.  In  1620  he  came  over  to  England,  and 
 was  received  into  the  house  of  the  Earl  of  Arundel, 
 where  he  lived  as  his  librarian  for  thirty  years.  In 
 1650  he  returned  to  the  Continent,  in  order  to 
 pass  some  time  in  the  bosom  of  his  family.  For 
 two  years  he  lived  in  Friesland,  in  a  district  where 
 the  ancient  Saxon  tongue  was  preserved,  that  he 
 might  study  the  language.  In  1675  he  returned 
 to  England,  and  in  1676  went  to  Oxford,  whence 
 he  retired  to  Windsor,  to  his  nephew  Isaac  Vos- 
 sius,  and  died  there,  November  19,  1677. 
 
 Junius  the  younger  was  a  very  learned  philolo- 
 gian,  simple  and  pure  in  his  manners,  without 
 ambition.  He  is  said  to  have  studied  fourteen 
 hours  a  day,  and  to  have  suffered  no  inconvenience 
 from  so  sedentary  a  life.  He  wrote  De  pictu7-a 
 Vete/'U7n,  Y\hr\  iii.,  Amsterdam  1637,  4to  ;  Obsez-va- 
 tiones  i/t  lVille7-a7/ii  Pa7-aph7-asi/7i  F7-a7icica/7i  Ca7i- 
 tici  Ca7itico7'U7}i,  1655,  Amsterdam,  8vo  ;  A71710- 
 tatio7ies  i7t  har77i07iia77i  lati7io-f7U7icica77i  qiiatuor 
 eva7igelistarum  lati7ie  a  Tatian.  co7ifecta7>i,  Amster- 
 dam 1655,  8vo;  QuaticorD.  N.  y.  C.  Evangeliona/t 
 Ve7'sio7ies  pe7-a7itiqua  dticE,  gothica  scilicet  et  anglo- 
 saxo7iica,  etc.  ;  Accedit  et  glossariian  gotJiicn77i:  ciii 
 prtetnittiticr  alphahetii77i  gothicu77i  7-ii/iicic7/i,  a7iglo- 
 saxo7iiciu7i,  etc.,  Dordrechti  1655,  4to;  Cccdenio7iis 
 Paraph rasis poet ica  Ge7ieseos,  Amsterdam  1655,  4to. 
 His  Etymologicnm  A7iglica7na7i  was  edited  by 
 Edward  Lye,  Oxford  1743,  folio. — S.  D. 
 
 JUPITER  (Zei^s,  LXX.),  the  father  and  king 
 of  gods  and  men,  and  the  supreme  ruler  of  the 
 Hellenic  race,  to  whom  the  Jews,  under  Antiochus 
 IV.  Epiphanes,  were  to  be  compelled  to  do  honour. 
 It  is  stated  in  2  Maccab.  vi.  1,2,  '  that  the  king 
 sent  an  old  man  of  Athens*  ^ kQy]v(xiov,  LXX. ; 
 A7ttioche7inm,  Vulg.)  to  compel  the  Jews  to  de- 
 part from  the  laws  of  their  fathers,  and  not  to  live 
 after  the  laws  of  God;  and  to  pollute  also  the 
 Temple  in  Jerusalem,  and  to  call  it  the  temple  of 
 Jupiter  Olympius  (Ai6s  'OXutt'Trioi;),  and  that  in 
 Gerizim,  of  Jupiter  the  defender  of  strangers  (Atos 
 Sevtou,  LXX. ;  hospitalis,  Vulg.),  as  they  did  de- 
 sire that  dwelt  in  the  place.'  Olympius  was  a 
 very  common  epithet  of  Zeus,  and  he  is  sometimes 
 simply  called    'OXv/xirioi    (Hom.    //.,    xix.    108). 
 
 *  Some  say  '  an  old  man,  Atheneas '  (cf  Smith's 
 Did.  of  the  Bible,  art.  Jerusalem,  vol.  i.,  p. 
 1000) ;  but  Grotius,  following  the  Latin,  suggests 
 instead  of  ^ kQr\va.lov  to  read  '' K.vri.oxei.ov. 
 
 Olympia  was  the  name  of  the  temple  and  sacred 
 grove  of  Zeus  Olympius,  and  it  was  here  that  the 
 famous  statue  of  gold  and  ivory,  the  work  of  Phei- 
 dias,  was  erected.  Caligula  attempted  to  have 
 this  statue  transferred  to  Rome,  and  it  was  only 
 preserved  in  its  place  by  the  assurance  that  it  would 
 not  bear  removal  (Joseph.  A7itiq.  xix.  i.  i).  An- 
 tiochus Epiphanes,  as  related  by  Athenaus,  sur- 
 passed all  other  kings  in  his  worship  and  veneration 
 of  the  gods,  so  that  it  was  impossible  to  count  the 
 number  of  the  statues  he  erected.  His  especial 
 favourite  was  Zeus.  He  commenced,  in  B.C.  174, 
 the  completion  of  the  temple  of  Zeus  Olympius  at 
 Athens  (Polyb.  Reliq.  xxvi.  10  ;  Livy,  Hist.  xli.  20), 
 and  associated  the  worship  of  Jupiter  with  that  ot 
 Apollo  at  Daphne,  erecting  a  statue  to  the  former 
 god  resembling  that  of  Pheidias  at  Olympia  (Amm. 
 Marcell. ,  xxii.  13.  i).  Games  were  celebrated  at 
 Daphne  by  Antiochus,  of  which  there  is  a  long 
 account  in  Polybius  {Reliq.  xxxi.  3)  and  Atheneeus 
 (v.  5).  Coins  also  were  struck  referring  to  the  god 
 and  the  games  (Mionnet,  vol.  v.,  p.  215;  Miiller, 
 A/itiq.  A7itioch.,  pp.  62-64).  On  the  coins  of  Elis 
 the  wreath  of  wild  olive  (Kbrivo^)  distinguishes  Zeus 
 Olympius  from  the  Dodonasan  Zeus,  who  has  an 
 oak  wreath. 
 
 Antiochus,  after  compelling  the  Jews  to  call  the 
 temple  of  Jerusalem  the  temple  of  Jupiter  Olym- 
 pius, built  an  idol  altar  upon  the  altar  of  God. 
 Upon  this  altar  swine  were  offered  every  day,  and 
 the  broth  of  their  flesh  was  sprinkled  about  the 
 temple  (i  Maccab.  i.  47 ;  2  Maccab.  vi.  5  ;  Joseph. 
 A7itiq.  xii.  5.  4;  xiii.  8.  2;  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  i.  2).  The 
 idol  altar  which  was  upon  the  altar  of  God  [rhv^wfibv 
 Ss  TjveTrl  Tov  dvcMarripLov)  was  considered  by  the  Jews 
 to  be  the  'abomination  of  desolation'  {jBd^Xvy/xa 
 Tjjs  iprj/xwaewi,  I  Maccab.  i.  54)  foretold  by  Daniel 
 (xi.  31  ;  xii.  11)  and  mentioned  by  our  Lord  (Matt. 
 xxiv.  15).  Many  interpretations  of  the  meaning  of 
 this  prophecy  have  been  given.  [ABOMINATION 
 OF  Desolation.] 
 
 The  grove  of  Daphne  was  not  far  from  Antioch 
 {Adcpvr)  7]  irpos  ^AvTidxeiav,  2  Maccab.  iv.  33 ; 
 Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  i.  12.  15),  and  at  this  city  Anti- 
 ochus Epiphanes  erected  a  temple  for  the  worship  of 
 Jupiter  Capitolinus  [Daphne].  It  is  described  by 
 Livy  as  having  its  walls  entirely  adorned  with  gold 
 (xli.  20).  To  Jupiter  Capitolinus  the  Jews,  after 
 the  taking  of  Jerusalem,  in  whatever  country  they 
 might  be,  were  compelled  by  Vespasian  to  pay  two 
 drachmae  [Drachm],  as  they  used  to  pay  to  the 
 temple  at  Jerusalem  Qoseph.  Bell.  Jud.  vii.  6.  6; 
 Dion  Cass.  Ixvi.  7).  Hadrian,  after  the  second 
 revolt  of  the  Jews,  erected  a  temple  to  Jupiter 
 Capitolinus  in  the  place  where  the  temple  of  God 
 formerly  stood  (Dion  Cass.  Ixix.  12).  There  is, 
 probably,  reference  made  to  Jupiter  Capitolinus 
 in  Dan.  xi.  38,  alluding  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
 '  But   in   his   estate   shall  he  worship  the  god  ol 
 
 forces'  (fortresses,  n"'^yO  '•nSx,  cf.   Gesen.   s.  v. 
 
 liyiD,  p.  loii),  for  under  this  name  Jupiter  was 
 
 worshipped  by  the  victorious  general  on  his  return 
 from  a  campaign,  and  it  was  in  honour  of  Jupiter 
 Capitohnus  that  he  celebrated  his  triumph.  Other 
 conjectures  have  been  made  relative  to  this  pas- 
 sage, but  the  opinion  of  Gesenius  seems  most 
 probable.     [Mauzzim.] 
 
 In  the  passage  from  2  Maccab.  above  quoted  a 
 temple  was  also  ordered  to  be  set  up  to  Zeus  Xeuius 
 
JURIEU 
 
 698 
 
 JURIEU 
 
 on  Mount  Gerizim.  Josephus  gives  a  different 
 account.  He  relates  that  the  Samaritans,  who, 
 wnen  it  pleased  them,  denied  that  they  were  of  the 
 kindred  of  the  Jews,  wrote  to  Antiochus  the  god 
 {debs  on  coins)  Epiphanes,  begging  him  to  allow 
 the  temple  on  Mount  Gerizim,  which  had  no 
 name  (avdu'vfj.ov  iepbu  ;  cf  '  Ye  worship  ye  know 
 not  what,'  John  iv.  22),  to  be  called  the  temple  of 
 Jupiter  Hellenius  {A7ttiq.  xii.  5.  5).  This  petition 
 is  said  to  have  been  granted.  The  epithet  Sei'ios 
 is  given  to  Zeus  as  the  supporter  of  hospitality  and 
 the  friend  of  strangers  (Plutarch,  A?>iato}:  20;  Xen. 
 Anab.  iii.  2.  4;  Virg.  yEn.  i.  735,  etc.),  and  it  is 
 explained  in  2  Maccab.  by  the  clause  '  as  they  did 
 desire  (A.  V.  ;  Kadws  iTvyx<}-vov,  as  they  were ;  proitt 
 eraiit  hi,  Vulg.  [as  they  were])  who  dwelt  in  the 
 place.'  Ewald  supposes  that  Jupiter  was  so  called 
 on  account  of  the  hospitable  disposition  of  the 
 Samaritans  {Geschichtc,  iv.  p.  339,  note),  whilst  Jahn 
 suggests  that  it  was  because  the  Samaritans  in  their 
 letter  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes  said  that  they  were 
 strangers  in  that  country  {Hebrew  Coinmoinvcalth, 
 vol.  i.  p.  319).  Grotius  says  because  the  dwellers 
 of  the  place  were  pilgrims  from  the  regions  of 
 Mysia  and  Mesopotamia,  specially  referring  to 
 theii-  idolatrous  practices  (2  Kings  xvii.  24,  sq.) 
 
 The  appearance  of  the  gods  upon  earth  was  very 
 commonly  believed  among  the  ancients.  Accord- 
 ingly we  find  that  Jupiter  and  Mercury  are  said  to 
 have  wandered  in  Phrygia,  and  to  have  been  enter- 
 tained by  Baucis  and  Philemon  (Ov.  RIet.  viii.  611, 
 sq.)  Hence  the  people  of  Lycaonia,  as  recorded 
 in  the  Acts  (xiv.  11),  cried  out  'The  gods  have 
 come  down  to  us  in  the  likeness  of  men ;  and  they 
 called  Barnabas,  Jupiter,  and  Paul,  Mercurius,  be- 
 cause he  was  the  chief  speaker.'  Barnabas  was 
 probably  identified  with  Jupiter,  not  only  because 
 Jupiter  and  Mercury  were  companions  (Ov.  Fast. 
 V.  495),  but  because  his  personal  appearance  was 
 majestic  (Chrysostom,  Horn.  xxx. ;  Alford,  Acts 
 xiv.  12).  Paul  was  identified  with  Mercury  as  the 
 speaker,  for  this  god  was  the  god  of  eloquence 
 (Horat.  lib.  i.  od.  x.  5,  etc.)  [Mercurius J  The 
 temple  of  Jupiter  at  Lystra  appears  to  have  been 
 outside  the  gates  {tov  Aios  rov  oVroj  irph  rr\% 
 7r6X€a>s,  Acts  xiv.  13),  as  was  frequently  the  custom 
 (Strab.  xiv.  4  ;  Herod,  i.  26),  and  the  priest  being 
 summoned,  oxen  and  garlands  were  brought,  in 
 order  to  do  sacrifice  with  the  people  to  Paul  and 
 Barnabas,  who,  filled  with  horror,  restrained  the 
 people  with  great  difficulty.  It  is  well  known  that 
 oxen  were  wont  to  be  sacrificed  to  Jupiter  (//.  ii. 
 402;  Virg.  ALn.  iii.  21;  ix.  627;  Xen.  Cyrop. 
 vii.  3,  II,  etc.) 
 
 The  word  Ei}5fa  (fair  or  fine  weather)  is  derived 
 from  65  and  Ato.  Jupiter,  as  lord  of  heaven,  had 
 power  over  all  the  changes  of  the  weather.  The 
 Latins  even  used  his  name  to  signify  the  air — sub 
 Dio  (Hor.  lib.  ii.  od.  iii.  23),  sub  Jove  frigido  (Hor. 
 lib.  i.  od.  i.  25,  etc. ;  comp.  '  the  image  which  fell 
 down  from  Jupiter,'  A.V. ;  koX  rov  StoTreroOs,  Acts 
 xix.  35).  The  word  evUa.  occurs  in  Matt.  xvi.  2, 
 and  in  Ecclus.  iii.  15.  (For  a  full  account  of 
 Jupiter  and  Zeus,  see  Smith's  Did.  of  Biog-raphy, 
 s.  vv.  ;  and  for  a  list  of  the  epithets  applied  to  this 
 god,  see  Rawlinson,  Herod,  vol.  i.,  appendix,  p. 
 680.)— F.  W.  M. 
 
 JURIEU,  Pierre,  was  born  at  Mer,  near 
 Blois,  December  24,  1637,  of  which  place  his 
 father  was  Protestant  minister.     He  commenced 
 
 his  studies  at  Saumur,  where  he  became  M.A. 
 when  barely  nineteen,  and  continued  them  in 
 Holland  and  England,  in  which  latter  countiy, 
 according  to  Moreri,  he  received  Episcopal  ordina- 
 tion, but  on  being  recalled  to  succeed  his  father  in 
 the  pastorate  at  Mer,  was  reordained  according  to 
 the  Genevan  form.  He  was  already  known  as  a 
 distinguished  scholar,  and  was  chosen  professor  of 
 theology  in  the  university  of  Sedan  in  1674,  where 
 he  shortly  afterwards  obtained  the  chair  of  philo- 
 sophy for  the  famous  Bayle,  whose  correspond- 
 ence with  his  favourite  pupil  Basnage  had  caused 
 him  to  entertain  a  high  opinion  of  his  abilities. 
 The  university  of  Sedan  having  been  suppressed  by 
 Louis  XIV.  in  1681,  Jurieu  followed  his  colleague 
 Bayle  to  Rotterdam,  where  he  became  pastor  of 
 the  Walloon  Church,  and  then,  by  Bayle's  influ- 
 ence, professor  of  theology  in  the  newly  established 
 academy.  While  resident  in  France  he  had  made 
 himself  known  as  one  of  the  ablest  and  most 
 zealous  defenders  of  the  reformed  faith,  though  the 
 ardour  with  which  he  maintained  the  necessity  of 
 baptism  for  salvation  had  displeased  the  leaders  of 
 the  Protestant  Church,  by  whom  his  thesis  was 
 condemned  at  the  synod  of  Saintonge.  His 
 natural  irritability  was  much  exasperated  by  the 
 revocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantes  in  1685,  which 
 deprived  him  of  all  hope  of  returning  to  France, 
 and  his  life  was  thenceforward  one  perpetual  scene 
 of  varying  controversy,  in  which  friend  or  foe, 
 Protestant  or  Catholic,  received  the  same  severe 
 handling,  and  were  denounced  with  a  rancorous 
 hostility  very  unbecoming  a  Christian  minister. 
 His  suspicious  irritability  at  last  amounted  to  a 
 disease,  under  which  both  his  mental  and  bodily 
 powers  gradually  gave  way,  and  after  a  languishing 
 illness  of  some  years,  he  died  at  Rotterdam,  Januaiy 
 II,  1713,  at  the  age  of  seventy-five.  His  private 
 life  was  characterised  by  many  virtues.  His  bene- 
 ficence exceeded  his  means,  and  he  employed  his 
 considerable  influence  with  foreign  courts  for  the 
 relief  of  the  sufferings  of  his  exiled  Protestant 
 brethren. 
 
 As  an  author,  his  fame  rests  chiefly  on  his  con- 
 troversial writings,  which,  apart  from  their  undue 
 harshness,  sometimes  amounting  to  rancour  to- 
 wards his  adversaries,  merit  much  commendation. 
 His  learning  was  profound  ;  his  quotations  exact ; 
 and  his  acuteness  in  discovering  the  weak  points  in 
 the  writings  of  his  antagonists  very  considerable. 
 None  of  his  works  deal  with  Scripture  definitely, 
 but  they  are  held  in  esteem  by  theologians  of  every 
 school  as  a  storehouse  of  exact  learning  to  be  used 
 with  advantage  in  illustration  and  expcsition  of 
 Holy  Writ.  The  principal  of  them  are — (i.)  Pre- 
 servatif  contre  le  chattgemeiif  de  religion,  Rouen 
 1680,  in  reply  to  Bossuet's  Exposition  de  la  Foi ; 
 (2. )  Politique  dii  clerge  de  France  pour  deiruire  la 
 7-eligion  protestante,  Amst.  1681 ;  and  its  sequel 
 (3.)  Les  derniers  efforts  de  Pinjiocence  affligee,  Rott. 
 1682  ;  (4.)  Histoire  de  Calvinis?ne  et  dii  Papisme 
 mise  en  paralL'le,  a  reply  to  Maimbourg,  Rott. 
 1682;  (5)  H Esprit  de  M.  Arnaidd,  Rott.  1684; 
 and  (6.)  Jitstification  de  la  morale  des  Pe/ortnes, 
 Hag.  1685  ;  (7.)  V accomplisscinent  des  propheties, 
 Rott.  1686,  a  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse,  fix- 
 ing the  downfall  of  the  Papacy  in  less  than  three 
 years  and  a  half;  followed  in  1688  by  (8.)  Lettres 
 Pastorales  aiix  fidbles  de  France  ;  (9. )  Le  Tableau 
 du  Socinianisme,  Hague  1691,  answered  by  Jaque- 
 lot ;  (10.)  La  religion  du  Latitudinare,  Rott.  1696. 
 
JUSHAB-HESED 
 
 699 
 
 KABBALAH 
 
 a  violent  attack  on  Saurin  for  supposed  antitrini- 
 tarian  views;  (li.)  Examen  de  PEucharistie  de 
 VEglke  Romain,  Rott.  1683  ;  (12.)  Traitc  de  ttio- 
 rrt/i',  Hague  1687  ;  (13.)  Traiie  de  P amour  de  Diai, 
 Rott.  1700;  (14.)  Histoire  critiipce  des  dognics  et 
 des  cultes,  Amst.  1704,  perhaps  his  most  valuable 
 work,  which  has  been  translated  into  English. 
 Jurieu  also  condensed  Sarpis'  History  of  the  Coun- 
 cil of  Trent,  which  was  published  at  Geneva  in 
 1682.— E.  V. 
 
 JUSHAB-HESED  ppn  n'JT,  Mercy  is  re- 
 turned; LXX.  'A(ro/3^5;  Alex.  'Ao-o/Sa^o-S ;  Vulg. 
 yosab-hesed),  usually  regarded  as  the  proper  name 
 of  one  of  the  returned  captives,  son  of  Zerubbabel 
 (i  Chron.  iii.  20)  ;  and  if  so,  given  most  probably 
 in  anticipation  of  the  return  of  the  captivity,  and 
 expressive,  therefore,  of  faith  in  the  divine  promise 
 and  prophecy,  as  well  as  designed  to  mark  and 
 commemorate  the  mercy  of  God  returned  to  Israel 
 to  restore  them  to  their  own  land. 
 
 Why  the  five  children  of  this  verse  should  be 
 reckoned  separately  from  the  three  named  in  the 
 19th  has  been  considered  a  great  difficulty  ;  and  it 
 has  been  suggested  that  these  five  were  sons  of 
 Zenibbabel  by  a  different  wife,  or  that  they  were 
 born  after  the  return  from  captivity.  A  more 
 likely  conjecture  is,  that  the  text  in  this  place  is 
 corrupt,  which  derives  confirmation  from  the  cir- 
 cumstance that  the  conjunction  "1,  and,  is  omitted 
 before  Jushab-Hesed,  although  occurring  before 
 every  other  name  in  the  two  verses.  Dathe  makes 
 two  names  of  Jushab-Hesed.  It  is  probably  not  a 
 proper  name  at  all,  but  a  phrase  expressive  of 
 gratitude.  And  we  hazard  the  additional  conjec- 
 ture, that  t^isn,  five,  of  ver.  20,  has,  by  a  blunder  I 
 
 of  the  scribe,  changed  places  with  XW'^,  six,  of 
 
 ver.  22  ;  for  Shemaiah  has  in  reality  only  five  sons, 
 while,  if  we  take  Jushab-Hesed  as  just  proposed, 
 Zerubbabel  has  six. — I.  J. 
 
 JUSTI,  Karl  Wilhelm,  a  Protestant  theolo- 
 gian, was  born  at  Marburg,  14th  January  1767. 
 After  studying  for  some  years  in  his  native  place 
 and  at  Jena,  he  became  a  private  tutor  at  Metzlar, 
 whence  he  removed  to  Marburg  as  a  preacher  in 
 one  of  the  churches  there,  1790.  In  1793  he  was 
 chosen  professor  of  philosophy  in  the  university. 
 In  1 801  he  was  appointed  archdeacon  ;  soon  after 
 Superintendent  and  Consistorialrath.  In  18 14  he 
 was  made  Oberpfarrer ;  and  in  1 822  professor  of 
 theology.  He  died  7th  August  1S46.  Justi  de- 
 voted himself  to  the  explanation  of  the  O.  and  N. 
 T.,  after  the  method  of  Eichhorn  and  Herder,  to 
 whom  he  was  by  no  means  equal  in  genius.  He 
 was  a  man  of  erudition,  taste,  and  liberality, 
 superficial  rather  than  profound.  The  prophets  of 
 the  O.  T.  occupied  his  chief  attention.  He  pub- 
 lished Nationalgesdtige  der  Hebrder,  1803- 18 18,  3 
 vols.  ;  an  enlarged  edition  of  Herder's  Geist  der 
 Hebrdische poesie,  1829,  2  vols. ;  Blninen  althebrd- 
 ischer  Dichtkunst,  1809,  2  vols.  ;  and  Sionitischen 
 Harfetikldnge,  1829.— S.  D. 
 
 JUSTUS  ('loCo-Tos).  I.  Sumamed  Barsabas. 
 [Joseph.]  2.  A  Christian  at  Corinth,  with  whom 
 Paul  lodged  (Acts  xviii.  7).  3.  Called  also 
 Jesus,  a  believing  Jew,  who  was  with  Paul  at 
 Rome  when  he  wrote  to  the  Colossians  (Col.  iv. 
 11).  The  apostle  names  him  and  Marcus  as  being 
 at  that  time  his  only  fellow-labourers. 
 
 JUTTAH  (nnV;  'Irac;  Alex.  lerrci ;  Jota- 
 in  Josh.  xxi.  16,  ni3^  ;  1a.vv  ;  Jcla — perhaps  'in- 
 clined' from  nt23),  an  ancient  town  of  Judah, 
 mentioned  in  the  group  with  Maon  and  Carmel 
 (Josh.  XV.  55).  It  was  allotted  to  the  priests  (xxi. 
 16).  Reland  suggests  that  this  may  be  the  Tr6\ts 
 ''lovla  of  Luke,  the  native  place  of  John  the  Bap- 
 tist (i.  39).  Reland  would  translate  the  phrase 
 'city  of  Jutah,'  the  Greek  5  taking  the  place  of  the 
 Hebrew  L3,  or  perhaps  'loi'Sa  being  adopted  as  a 
 softer  form  than  ''lovra.  (Reland,  Pal.,  p.  870). 
 Jutta  was  a  sacerdotal  city,  and  Zacharias  was  of 
 the  priestly  line.  Joshua  says  that  Juttah  was  in 
 the  'mountains'  of  Judah  (xv.  48);  and  Luke 
 states  that  Mary  went  into  '  the  hill  country '  (ei's 
 TTiv  opeivriv).  So  far  Reland's  view  appears  pro- 
 bable. But  it  is  only  a  hypothesis  ;  and  it  seems 
 more  natural  to  render  ei's  ttoXlv  'lovda,  '  to  a  city 
 of  Judah,'  than  '  to  the  city  of  Jutah  '  (cf.  Matt.  ii. 
 6),  especially  as  no  place  of  residence  is  mentioned 
 for  Zacharias  in  ver.  23  (Alford,  in  loc.)  In  the 
 time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  Juttah  (called  by 
 them  ''lerrdv,  and  fctan ;  Onojnast.,  s.  v.)  was  a 
 very  large  village,  eighteen  miles  from  Eleuthero- 
 polis  southward,  on  the  road  to  Darom.  There 
 can  be  no  doubt  of  its  identity  with  the  modern 
 
 Yiitta  (II2.'),  a  large  village  situated  on  the  decli- 
 vity of  a  hill  about  five  miles  south  of  Hebron 
 (Robinson,  B.  R.,  i.  494,  note;  ii.  206,  note). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 K. 
 
 KAB.     [Cab  ;  Weights  and  Measures.] 
 
 KABBALAH  (H^Dp),  the  celebrated  system  of 
 religious  philosophy,  or  more  properly  theosophy, 
 which  has  played  so  important  a  part  in  the  theo- 
 logical and  exegetical  literature  of  both  Jews  and 
 Christians  ever  since  the  middle  ages.  , 
 
 1.  Name  and  its  signification. — The  term  '\w1\> 
 
 (from  7lp,  to  receive),  properly  denotes  reception, 
 then  a  doctrine  received  by  oral  tradition.  The 
 difference  between  it  and  the  word  iTlIDD  (from 
 IDD,  to  delivc!-)  is,  that  the  former  expresses  the 
 act  of  receiving,  whilst  the  latter  denotes  the  act 
 of  giving  over,  surrendering,  transmitting.  The 
 Kabbalah  is  also  called  by  some  mnDJ  rUDDH, 
 secret  wisdom,  because  it  pretends  to  be  a  very 
 ancient  and  secret  tradition,  and  |"n,  grace,  from 
 the  initials  of  these  two  words. 
 
 2.  The  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Kabbalah. 
 ■ — The  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Kabbalah  are  as 
 follows  : — God  is  above  eveiything,  even  above 
 being  and  thinking.  It  cannot,  therefore,  be  said 
 of  him  that  he  has  either  a  will,  intention,  desire, 
 thought,  language,  or  action,  since  these  properties, 
 which  adorn  man,  have  limits,  whereas  God  is  in 
 every  way  boundless,  because  he  is  perfect.  Owing 
 to  this  boundlessness  of  his  nature,  which  neces- 
 sarily implies  absolute  unity  and  immutability,  and 
 that  there  is  nothing  without  him,  i.e.,  that  the  rb 
 Trdv  is  in  him,  he  is  called  En  Soph  =  without  end, 
 boundless,  and  can  neither  be  comprehended  by  the 
 intellect  nor  described  with  words,  for  there  is 
 nothing  which  can  grasp  and  depict  him  to  us. 
 In  this  incomprehensibility  or  boundlessness,  Go'i, 
 
KABBALAH 
 
 700 
 
 KABBALAH 
 
 or  the  En  Soph  (TlD  pS),  is  in  a  certain  sense  not 
 existent  (^N)  ;  since,  as  far  as  our  mind  is  con- 
 cerned, that  which  is  incomprehensible  does  not 
 exist.  Hence,  without  making  liimself  compre- 
 hensible, his  existence  could  never  have  been 
 known.  He  had,  therefore,  to  become  active  and 
 creative  in  order  that  his  existence  might  become 
 perceptible. 
 
 But  since,  on  the  one  hand,  the  will  to  create, 
 which  implies  limit,  and  the  circumscribed  and  im- 
 perfect nature  of  this  world,  preclude  the  idea  of 
 taking  it  as  the  direct  creation  of  him  who  can  have 
 no  will,  nor  produce  anything  but  what  is  like 
 himself,  boundless  and  perfect  ;  and  since,  on  the 
 other  hand,  the  beautiful  design  and  order  displayed 
 in  the  world,  which  plainly  indicate  an  intelligent 
 and  active  will,  forbid  us  to  regard  it  as  the  off- 
 spring of  chance,  the  En  Soph  must  be  viewed  as 
 the  Creator  of  the  world  in  ati  indirect  manner, 
 through  the  medium  of  ten  Sephiroth  (nP''DD)  *  or 
 intelligences,  which  emanated  from  the  En  Soph  in 
 the  following  manner. 
 
 From  his  infinite  fulness  of  light  the  En  Soph 
 sent  forth  at  first  one  spiritual  substance  or  intelli- 
 gence ;  this  intelligence,  which  existed  in  the  En 
 Soph  from  all  eternity,  and  which  became  a  reality 
 by  a  mere  act,  contained  the  nine  other  intelligences 
 or  Sephiroth.  Great  stress  is  laid  upon  the  fact 
 that    the   first  Sephira  was   not  created,   but  was 
 
 simply  an  emanation  (nP^^S) ;  and  the  difference 
 between  creation  and  emanation  is  thus  defined, 
 that  in  the  former  a  diminution  of  strength  takes 
 place,  whilst  in  the  latter  this  is  not  the  case. 
 From  the  first  Sephira  emanated  the  second,  from 
 the  second  the  third,  from  the  third  the  fourth, 
 and  so  on,  one  proceeding  from  the  other,  till  the 
 number  ten.  These  ten  Sephiroth  form  among 
 themselves,  and  with  the  En  Soph,  a  strict  unity, 
 and  simply  represent  different  aspects  of  one  and 
 the  same  Being,  just  as  the  flame  and  sparks  which 
 proceed  from  the  fire,  and  which  appear  different 
 things  to  the  eye,  form  only  different  manifestations 
 of  one  and  the  same  fire.  Differing  thus  from  each 
 other  simply  as  different  colours  of  the  same  light, 
 all  the  ten  emanations  alike  partake  of  the  perfec- 
 tions of  the  En  Soph.  They  are  boundless,  and 
 yet  constitute  the  first  finite  things,  so  that  they  are 
 both  infinite  and  finite.  They  are  infinite  and 
 perfect  like  the  En  Soph  when  he  imparts  his  ful- 
 ness to  them,  and  finite  and  imperfect  when  that 
 fulness  is  withdrawn  from  them.  The  finite  side 
 in  the  emanation  of  the  Sephiroth  is  absolutely 
 necessary,  for  thereby  the  incomprehensible  En 
 Soph  makes  his  existence  known  to  the  human 
 intellect,  which  can  only  grasp  that  which  has 
 measure,   limit,   and   relation.      From    their  finite 
 
 *  Both  the  etymology  and  the  exact  meaning  of 
 the  word  PIT'SD  (plur.  mi'SD)  are  matter  of  dis- 
 pute. R.  Asariel,  the  first  Kabbalist,  derives  it 
 from  1DD,  to  7inmher,  whilst  later  Kabbalists 
 derive  it  in  turn  from  T'SD,  Saphir,  from  D"'Dt^'n 
 
 ?K  Tl33  D''"IDDD  (Ps.  xix.  i),  and  from  the  Greek 
 a<\)aipa.i.,  and  are  not  at  all  certain  whether  to  regard 
 the  Sephiroth  as  principles  (dpx"'))  or  as  S2ibstances 
 (i/TTotTTdereis),  or  as  potencies,  pozvtrs  (5i;j'd|Uets),  or  as 
 intelligent  worlds  {Kdcr/J-oi  foijTLKoi),  or  as  attiibutes, 
 or  as  entities  (mb^y),   or  as  organs  of  the  Deity 
 
 side  the  Sephiroth  may  even  be  called  bodily,  and 
 this  renders  it  possible  for  the  En  Soph,  who  is 
 immanent  in  them,  to  assume  a  bodily  form. 
 
 The  ten  Sephiroth,  every  one  of  which  has  its 
 own  name,  are  divided  into  three  groups  of  three 
 Sephiroth  each,    respectively    operating   upon  the 
 
 three  worlds,    viz.,   the  world  of  intellect    (dSj? 
 
 ^^tJTl),  the  world  of  souls  ({J'Qjn  D^J?),  and  the 
 
 world  of  matter  (yatOH  D?iy)-  The  first  group 
 operates  upon  the  intellectual  world,  and  consists 
 
 of  Sephiroth  I,  denominated  ina,  Th'H'O  Dll,  tin 
 inscrutable  height  or  the  crown  ;  2,  called  HD^n, 
 the  creative  wisdom  ;  and  3,  called  nj^2,  the  con- 
 ceiving intellect.  From  the  first  Sephira  the  divine 
 power  proceeds,  from  the  second  the  angelic  beings, 
 as  well  as  the  Jewish  revelation  (miri),  and  from 
 the  third  the  prophetic  inspiration.  The  second 
 group  exercises  its  power  upon  the  moral  world, 
 and  consists  of  Sephiroth  4,  called  TDH,  iiijinitt 
 love;  5,  called  n"l13J,  '^V\^,  divine  justice,  ox  judicial 
 power ;  and  6,  which  is  called  mNDD,  beauty, 
 and  is  the  connecting  link  between  the  opposite 
 Sephiroth  4  and  5.  The  third  group  exercises  its 
 power  upon  the  material  world,  and  consists  of 
 Sephiroth  7,  called  nV3,  Jinnness ;  8,  called  "WTi, 
 splendour  ;  and  9,  which  is  called  HID'',  the  primary 
 foundation,  and  is  the  connecting  link  between  the 
 two  opposite  Sephiroth,  7  and  8.     Sephira  10  is 
 
 called  ri13<'D,  kingdom,  and  denotes  Providence  or 
 the  revealed  Deity  (ny^C^)  which  dwells  in  the 
 midst  of  the  Jewish  people,  goes  with  them  and 
 protects  them  in  all  their  wanderings  and  captivities. 
 The  first  triad  is  placed  above,  and  the  second  and 
 third  triads,  with  the  unit,  are  put  below,  in  such 
 a  manner  that  the  four  Sephiroth  called  crown, 
 beauty,  foundation,  and  kingdom,  form  a  central 
 perpendicular  line  denominated  the  middle  pillar 
 Cy^kDK  niDJ?).  This  division  yields  three  different 
 forms  in  which  the  ten  Sephiroth  are  represented 
 by  the  Kabbalists,  and  which  we  subjoin  in  order 
 to  make  the  description  more  intelligible. 
 
 The  first  represents  an  inverted  tree  called  Y^ 
 D'^TI,  the  tree  of  life,  whilst  the  second  and  third 
 are  human  figures  called  jIDTp  DHN,  the  primeval 
 man.  Yet,  notwithstanding  the  different  appear- 
 ance of  these  three  forms,  the  Sephiroth  are  so 
 arranged  that  the  three  triads  and  the  middle  pillar 
 are  to  be  distinguished  in  each  one  of  them. 
 
 These  Sephiroth,  or  God  through  them,  created 
 the  lower  and  visible  world,  of  which  everything 
 has  its  prototype  in  the  upper  world.  '  The  whole 
 world  is  like  a  gigantic  tree  full  of  branches  and 
 leaves,  the  root  of  which  is  the  spiritual  world  of 
 the  Sephiroth  ;  or  it  is  like  a  firmly  united  chain, 
 the  last  link  of  which  is  attached  to  the  upper 
 world ;  or  like  an  immense  sea,  which  is  being 
 constantly  filled  by  a  spring  everlastingly  gushing 
 forth  its  streams.'  The  Sephiroth,  through  the 
 divine  power  immanent  in  them,  uphold  the  world 
 which  they  have  created,  and  transmit  to  it  the 
 divine  mercies  by  means  of  twelve  channels  (nillJV). 
 This  transmission  of  the  divine  mercies  can  be 
 accelerated  by  prayer,  sacrifices,  and  religious  ob- 
 sei-vances  ;  and  the  Jewish  people,  by  virtue  of  the 
 revelation,  and  the  613  commandments  given  to 
 them  [Education],  have  especially  been  ordained 
 to  obtain  these  blessings  (yCti')  for  the  whole  world. 
 I  Hence   the  great   mysteries  of  the  Jewish  ritual 
 
The  Endless 
 
 Kingdom     )     3  nr3 
 
 Intelligence 
 
 sTna 
 
 Justice 
 
 Crown 
 
 Note.— The  first  Sephira 
 
 is  also  called  D^VD  D1"l,  the 
 inscrutable  height ;  the  fourth 
 
 npnj,  g>-eatness ;  the  fifth 
 n~n2J,  judicial  power  ;  and 
 the  tenth  nj''3CJ',  Shechinah. 
 
 rnNED  6 
 
 Beauty 
 
 \Foundation 
 
 niD^o  ic 
 
 Kingdom 
 
 "ina 
 
 Cro\yn 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 nj^a 
 
 n»Dn 
 
 Intelligence 
 
 Wisdom 
 
 3 
 
 ' 
 
 1 
 
 (    ins 
 
 ion 
 
 Justice 
 
 Love 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 n-xsn 
 
 Beauty 
 6 
 
 nin 
 
 nv; 
 
 Splendour 
 
 Firmness 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 niD* 
 
 Foundation 
 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 mj^o 
 
 Kingdom 
 
 ID 
 
KABBALAH 
 
 702 
 
 KABBALAH 
 
 (nP"'Snn  IID)  ;  hence  the  profound  secrets  con- 
 tained in  every  word  and  syllable  of  the  formulary 
 of  prayers  ;  and  hence  the  declaration  that  '  the 
 pious  constitute  the  foundation  of  the  world'  {pHi* 
 nb)]}  niD").  Not  only  does  i/ie  En  Soph  reveal 
 himself  through  the  Sephiivth,  but  he  also  becomes 
 incarnate  in  them,  which  accounts  for  the  anthropo- 
 morphisms of  Scripture  and  the  Hagada.  Thus, 
 when  it  is  said  that  '  God  spake,  descended  upon 
 earth,  ascended  into  heaven,  smelled  the  sweet 
 smell  of  sacrifices,  repented  in  his  heart,  was 
 angry,'  etc.,  or  when  the  Hagadic  works  describe 
 the  body  and  the  mansions  of  God,  etc.,  all  this 
 does  not  refer  to  the  En  Soph,  but  to  these  inter- 
 mediate beings.  These  Sephiroth  again  became 
 incarnate  in  the  patriarchs,  ex.  gr.,  Sephira  4, 
 loz'e  was  incarnate  in  Abraham  ;  5,  pozver  in  Isaac  ; 
 6,  beauty  in  Jacob  ;  7,  firmness  in  Moses  ;  8, 
 splendour  in  Aaron  ;  9,  foundation  in  Joseph  ;  10, 
 kingdom  in  David ;  and  constitute  the  chariot 
 throne  (H^DID).  Hence  the  remark  of  the 
 Hagada,  '  the  fathers  form  the  chariot  -  throne  of 
 the  Lord.' 
 
 The  psychology  of  the  Kabbalah  is  one  of  its 
 most  important  features.  All  human  souls  are 
 pre-existent  in  the  world  of  the  Sephiroth,  and  are, 
 without  an  exception,  destined  to  inhabit  human 
 bodies,  and  pursue  their  course  upon  earth  for  a 
 certain  period  of  probation,  l^,  notwithstanding 
 its  union  with  the  body,  the  soul  resists  all  earthly 
 trammels,  and  remains  pure,  it  ascends  after  death 
 into  the  spiritual  kingdom,  and  has  a  share  in  the 
 world  of  Sephiroth.  But  if,  on  the  contrary,  it 
 becomes  contaminated  by  that  which  is  earthly, 
 the  soul  must  inhabit  the  body  again  and  again 
 
 (")13''yj  ?13P''3)  till  it  is  able  to  ascend  in  a  purified 
 state,  through  repeated  trial.*  The  apparently 
 undeserved  sufferings  which  the  pious  have  some- 
 times to  endure  here  below  are  simply  designed  to 
 purify  their  souls.  Hence  God's  justice  is  not  to 
 be  impugned  when  the  righteous  are  afflicted  and 
 the  wicked  prosper.  This  doctrine  of  the  trans- 
 migration of  souls  is  supported  by  an  appeal  to 
 the  injunction  in  the  Bible,  that  a  man  must  marry 
 the  widow  of  his  brother  if  he  died  without  issue, 
 inasmuch  as  by  this  is  designed,  say  the  Kabbalists, 
 that  the  soul  of  the  departed  one  might  be  born 
 again,  and  finish  its  earthly  course.  Very  few  new 
 souls  enter  into  the  world,  because  many  of  the 
 old  souls  which  have  already  inhabited  bodies  have 
 to  re-enter  those  who  are  born,  in  consequence  of 
 their  having  polluted  themselves  in  their  previous 
 bodily  existence.  This  retards  the  great  redemp- 
 tion of  Israel,  which  cannot  take  place  till  all  the 
 pre-existent  souls  have  been  born  upon  earth, 
 because  the  soul  of  the  Messiah,  which,  like  all 
 other  souls,  has  its  pre-existence  in  the  world  of  the 
 spirits  of  the  Sephiroth,  is  to  be  the  last  bom  one 
 at  the  end  of  days,  which  is  supported  by  an  appeal 
 
 to  the  Talmud  (n1Dt^•Jn  ^  1b^E^'  "ly  S2  TlT  p  ^X 
 IIJi^L/*,  fcbamoth  63,  a.)      Then  the  great  Jubilee 
 
 year  (pHJin  ?31'')  will  commence,  when  the  whole 
 pleroma    of    souls    (n"110t^'J^  IVIX);  cleansed  and 
 
 *  Nachmanides  (on  Job  xxxviii.  29)  and  later 
 Kabbalists  restrict  the  transmigration  of  the  soul 
 into  another  body  to  three  times,  and  appeal  to  the 
 
 words  -inj  Dj;  ^'^y  coys  h^  ^ys''  n^x*  b  \r\ 
 
 (Job  xxxviii.  29)  in  support  of  this  restriction. 
 
 purified  and  released  from  earth,  shall  ascend,  in 
 glorious  company,  into  heaven. 
 
 3.  Origin,  date,  and  design  of  the  Kabbalah, 
 and  its  relation  to  Platonic  and  Neo-Platonic 
 philosophy. — The  origin  and  date  of  this  theosophy 
 have  been  greatly  obscured  by  modern  writers, 
 who,  in  their  description  of  the  Kabbalah,  con- 
 found its  doctrines  with  the  yezuish  mysticism  pro- 
 pounded in  the  works  called  the  Alphabet  of  R.Akiba 
 
 (sTpy  'in  sn^n  xs^x  or  ntpj?  'nn  nvmx), 
 
 the  description  of  the  body  of  God  (HDIp  liyC), 
 
 and  the  delineation  of  the  heavenly  temples  (Hv^Tl)- 
 Even  the  book  Jetzira  (H-fV  "ISD)*  does  not 
 contain  the  doctrines  of  the  Kabbalah.  All  these 
 productions,  and  others  of  a  similar  nature  so 
 frequently  quoted  by  writers  who  give  an  analysis 
 of  the  Kabbalah,  know  nothing  of  the  Sephiroth, 
 and  of  the  speculations  about  the  En  Soph,  or  the 
 being  of  God,  which  constitute  the  essence  of  the 
 Kabbalah.  Nevertheless,  these  works  are  un- 
 questionably to  be  regarded  as  having  called  the 
 Kabbalah  into  existence,  by  the  difficulty  in  which 
 they  placed  the  Jews  in  the  south  of  France,  and 
 in  Catalonia,  who  believed  in  them  almost  as  mvich 
 as  in  the  Bible,  and  who  were  driven  to  contrive 
 this  system  whereby  they  could  explain  to  them- 
 selves, as  well  as  to  their  assailants,  the  gross 
 descriptions  of  the  Deity,  and  of  the  plains  of 
 heaven,  given  in  these  Hagadic  productions.  Being 
 unable  to  go  to  the  extreme  of  the  rigid  literalists 
 of  the  north  of  France  and  Germany,  who,  without 
 looking  for  any  higher  import,  implicitly  accepted 
 the  difficulties  and  anthropomorphisms  of  the  Bible 
 and  Hagada  in  their  most  literal  sense  ;  or  to  adopt 
 the  other  extreme  of  the  followers  of  Maimonides, 
 who  rejected  altogether  the  Hagadic  and  mystical 
 writings,  and  rationalized  the  Scriptures,  Isaac  the 
 
 blind  contrived  (n^npH  ''nX  linj  ''JD  pH^'-'n), 
 and  his  two  disciples,  Ezra  and  Azariel  of  Zerona, 
 developed,  the  Kabbalah  (about  1200- 1230),  which 
 steers  between  these  two  extremes.  By  means  of 
 the  Sephiroth  all  the  anthropomorphisms  in  the 
 Bible,  in  the  Hagada,  and  even  in  the  Shiur  Koma, 
 are  at  once  taken  from  the  Deity,  and  yet  l.'.erally 
 explained  ;  whilst  the  sacrificial  institutions,  the 
 precepts,  and  the  ritual  of  the  Bible  and  Talmud, 
 receive  at  the  same  time  a  profound  spiritual  im- 
 port. The  Kabbalah  is  therefore  a  hermeneutical 
 system,  which  originated  about  1200-1230  to  oppose 
 the  philosophical  school  of  Maimonides. 
 
 The  relationship  between  the  Kabbalah  and  Neo- 
 Platonism   is   apparent.       The  Kabbalah   elevates 
 
 *  The  Othijoth  ofR.  Akiba  and  He-Chaloth  have 
 been  published  by  Jellinek,  Beth  Ha-Rlidrash, 
 vol.  ii.,  Leipzig  1853,  p.  40-47;  vol.  iii.,  Leipzig 
 1855,  p.  12-64,  83-108  ;  Shiiir  Koma  is  contained 
 in  the  S-pher  Raziel,  published  in  Amsterdam  1701. 
 A  masterly  dissertation  on  these  works,  and  on 
 Jewish  mysticism  in  general,  written  by  Graetz, 
 has  been  published  in  Frankel's  Afonatschrift,  vol. 
 viii.,  Leipzig  1859,  p.  67,  ff  ;  103,  ff.  ;  140,  ff. 
 The  book  Jetzira  has  been  published,  with  five 
 commentaries,  in  Mantua  1562 ;  with  a  Latin 
 translation  and  notes  by  Rittangelius,  Amsterdam 
 1642  ;  and  with  a  German  translation  and  notes  bj 
 Meyer,  Leipzig  1830.  Comp.  also  Steinschneider, 
 Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana 
 Col;  335-337.  552,  639-641. 
 
KABZEEL 
 
 703 
 
 KADESH  AND  KADESH-BARNEA 
 
 God  above  being  and  thinking  ;  so  Neo-Platonism 
 {iir^Keiva  ovcrias,  ivepyelas,  vov  Kal  vorjcreuis) .  The 
 Kabbalah  denies  all  divine  attributes  ;  so  Neo- 
 Platonism.  The  Kabbalah,  like  Neo-Platonism, 
 places  intelligent  principles  or  substances  between 
 the  Deity  and  the  world.  The  Kabbalah  teaches 
 that  the  Sephiroth  which  emanated  from  God  are 
 not  equal  to  God.  Neo-Platonism  teaches  that  the 
 substances  vav's,  ^vxv^  and  (puais,  which  proceeded 
 from  one  bemg,  are  not  equal  to  their  origin  [oi'iilaov 
 6^  rb  TTpo'Cov  ri2  ixeivavTL).  In  classifying  the  Sephi- 
 ?-oth,  the  Kabbalah  has  adopted  the  division  into 
 three  great  world  spheres,   vovs,  ^Oxv,  ^nd  (pvcris 
 
 (btrn  nhy,  t:'Djn  chy-  and  ynon  Di^iy),  and 
 
 employs  the  forms  t;'J-|VD,  y^OVO,  and  ^2U\'t2- 
 The  comparison  between  the  emanation  of  Ihe 
 Sephiroth  from  the  En  Soph,  and  the  rays  proceed- 
 ing from  hght  to  describe  immanency  and  perfect 
 unity,  is  the  same  as  the  Neo- Platonic  figure  em- 
 ployed to  illustrate  the  emanations  from  the  one 
 Being  {olov  €k  <}>wTbs  r-ijc  i^  avrov  irep'CKap.-'piv).  The 
 doctrine  of  the  Kabbalah,  that  most  of  the  souls 
 which  enter  the  world  have  occupied  bodies  upon 
 this  earth  before,  is  Neo-Platonic  (comp.  Zeller, 
 Geschichte  der  Philosophie,  vol.  iii. ,  part  ii. ,  p.  944). 
 4.  Literature. — Asariel,  Commentary  on  the  doc- 
 trine of  the  Sephiroth  (niT'SD  "S^'V  C'lT'D)  in 
 questions  and  anstuers,  Warsaw  179S,  and  Berlin 
 1850  ;  and  by  the  same  author.  Commentary  on 
 the  Song  of  Songs,  Altona  1763,  falsely  ascribed  to 
 Nachmanides.  These  works  are  most  essential  to 
 a  proper  understanding  of  the  Kabbalah,  inasmuch 
 as  Asariel  was  the  first  Kabbalist.  The  celebrated 
 Sohar,  Mantua  1558- 1560,  Lublin  1623 -1624, 
 Sulzbach  16S4,  Amsterdam  1715,  and  1728  ;  Zunz, 
 Die  gottesdienstlichen  Vortrdge  der  yiiden,  Berlin 
 1832,  p.  402,  ff  ;  Landauer,  in  Literaturblatt  des 
 Orients,  vol.  vii.,  1845  ;  vol.  viii.,  p.  812,  ff.  ; 
 Franck,  La  Kabbale,  on  la  philosophie  religieuse  des 
 Jiiifs,  Par.  1S42  ;  Ubersetzt  von  Jellinek,  Leipzig 
 1844  ;  Joel,  Die  Religionsphilosophie  des  Sohar, 
 Leipzig  1849;  Jellinek,  Moses  ben  Scheni-Tob  de 
 Leon,  Leipzig  185 1  ;  Beitrdge  znr  Geschichte  der 
 Kabbala,  Leipzig  1852 ;  Ansivahl  Kabhalischer 
 Mystik,  Leipzig  1853  ;  and  Philosophie  tend  Kab- 
 balah, Leipzig  1854;  Steinschneider,  fewish  Litera- 
 ture, London  1857,  p.  104-115,  299-309;  Munk, 
 Melanges  de  philosophic  yuive  et  Arabe,  Paris  1859, 
 p.  190,  ff.  ;  and  especially  the  masterly  analysis  of 
 the  Sohar  by  Ignaz  Stern,  Be7i  Chananja,  vols. 
 i.  -V. ;  the  lucid  treatise  of  Graetz,  Geschichte  der 
 Juden,  vol.  vii.,  442-459  ;  and  the  able  review  of  it 
 by  Dr.  Low,  Ljen  Chananja,  vi.  p.  325,  ff., 
 Leipzig  1863,  p.  73-S5. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 KABZEEL  6svnip,  '  God  gathers  ;'  Bato-eXeTjX 
 
 and  Ka/3e(Te?7X;  Alex.  Kacr^ei7X  ;  Cabseel),  a  town 
 on  the  south-eastern  frontier  of  Judah,  near  the 
 border  of  Edom  (Josh.  xv.  21).  It  could  not  have 
 been  far  distant  from  Kadesh.  It  is  probably  the 
 same  town  which  is  mentioned  as  the  native  place 
 of  Benaiah,  one  of  David's  'mighty  men'  (2  Sam. 
 xxiii.  20  ;   i  Chron.  xi.  22).     There  is  a  yekabzeel 
 
 (?NV3p\  omitted  in  the  Vat.  text  of  the  Sept.  ; 
 Ale.K.  Kapa-ei)\  ;  Cabseel)  mentioned  by  Nehemiah 
 among  the  villages  of  Judah  reoccupied  after  the 
 captivity,  which  seems  to  be  identical  with  the 
 Kabzeel  of  Joshua  (Neh.  xi.  25).  The  name  does 
 not  again  appear  in  history,  and  the  site  has  not 
 
 been  identified.  It  was  apparently  one  of  those 
 shepherd  settlements  which  the  Israelites  held  on 
 the  borders  of  the  desert ;  and  the  name  may  have 
 indicated  the  'gathering'  of  the  flocks. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KADES  (KaST^s ;  Syr.  wj*^^),  a  place  men- 
 tioned, Judith  i.  9,  among  those  to  which  Nebu- 
 chadnezzar sent  a  summons  to  the  people  to  join 
 him  against  Arphaxad,  king  of  the  Medes.  It 
 was  probably  the  Kedesh  mentioned  Josh.  xv.  23 
 [Kedesh  i].— W.  L.  a. 
 
 KADESH  and  KADESH-BARNEA  ^Ip, 
 'Holy'  or  '  Holy  -  places  ;'  yj"l3  ^.7^  '  ^'^°-^Vh 
 KdSr/s  Bapvrj ;  Cades,  Cades-barne).  This  ancient 
 place  has  given  rise  to  much  controversy.  Some 
 maintain  that  Kadesh  and  Kadesh-barnea  are  dif- 
 ferent places,  and  that  even  the  single  name  Kadesh 
 is  not  always  applied  in  Scripture  to  the  same  place. 
 One  Kadesh,  they  say,  was  situated  in  the  wilder- 
 ness of  Paran,  and  is  mentioned  in  Num.  xiii.  26 ; 
 another  in  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  mentioned  in 
 Num.  XX.  I,  and  xxxiii.  36 ;  and  the  former  is 
 identical  with  Kadesh-Barnea  (Num.  xxxii.  8), 
 from  which  the  spies  were  sent  out  (Wells's  Geo- 
 graphy of  the  O.  T,  i.  274;  Reland,  Pal.  p.  115). 
 The  site  of  Kadesh,  too,  has  been  disputed  by 
 th(jse  who  admit  that  there  is  only  one  place  of 
 that  name.  Mr.  Rowlands,  who  is  followed  by 
 Williams  [Holy  City,  i.  465,  seq.,  2d  ed.)  and  Pro- 
 fessor Tuch  [Zeitschr.  der  Morgenl.  Gesellsch.  i. 
 179),  locates  it  in  the  midst  of  the  desert  of  Tih, 
 about  foity-five  miles  south  of  Beersheba.  lie 
 was  evidently  misled,  however,  by  a  fancied  re- 
 semblance in  names  (see  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  May 
 1849,  p.  377,  seq.)  Raumer  places  it  at  Ain  Hash, 
 in  the  Arabah,  twenty  miles  south  of  the  Dead  Sea 
 (see  Keil  on  Josh.  x.  41)  ;  Robinson  at  Ain  el- 
 Weibeh  [B.  R.  ii.  195);  and  Stanley  at  Petra  {S.  and 
 P-1  ?•  95;  Jewish  Church,  p.  I  So).  The  points 
 at  issue  will  be  best  solved  by  a  careful  examina- 
 tion of  the  topographical  notices  of  Kadesh  given 
 in  the  Bible.  The  identification  of  Kadesh  is  highly 
 important  in  a  geographical  point  of  view,  as  it 
 enables  us  to  trace  with  considerable  exactness  the 
 routes  of  the  Israelites.  Next  to  Sinai  it  was  un- 
 questionably the  most  important  stage  in  their 
 journeyings,  and  the  scene  of  some  of  the  most  re- 
 markable events.  At  Kadesh  the  spies  were  sent 
 out ;  there  the  first  expedition  against  the  Canaanites 
 was  marshalled,  which  resulted  in  such  calamites  ; 
 there  the  Israelities  turned  back  disheartened  to 
 the  desert  again.  To  Kadesh  they  again  returned 
 after  an  interval  of  thirty-eight  years'  wandering  ; 
 there  Miriam  died ;  and  there,  after  a  long  resi- 
 dence, the  people  turned  back  a  second  time,  being 
 refused  a  passage  through  Moab  (Num.  xiii.  26 ; 
 XX.  I,  seq.) 
 
 The  first  notice  of  Kadesh  occurs  in  the  story 
 of  the  capture  of  Sodom  by  the  eastern  kings 
 (Gen.  xiv. )  The  '  four  kings  '  first  invaded  Bashan, 
 taking  Ashteroth-Karnaim ;  then  they  marched 
 southward  through  Moab  to  Mount  Seir,  or  Edom, 
 and  having  overrun  the  whole  of  that  country, 
 they  turned  back  '  and  came  to  En-Mishpat,  which 
 is  Kadesh  ;'  and  then  they  continued  northward  up 
 the  Arabah  to  the  plain  of  Sodom.  En-Mishpat, 
 'spring  of  judgment'  (DBDD  pj? ;  ^W  ■^t\t^v  rrji 
 KpLaeus  ;  fontem  Misphat),  was  doubtless  a  noted 
 gathering-place   of  the   southern    nomads,   vi'here 
 
KADESH  AND  KADESH-BARNEA        704        KADESH  and  KADESH-BARNEA 
 
 they  perhaps  had  an  oracle,  and  where  tliey  as- 
 sembled to  consult  the  deity  and  to  pay  their  vows  ; 
 hence  it  came  to  be  called  Kadesh,  '  the  Holy 
 Place.'  Its  position  is  indicated  in  the  sacred  nar- 
 rative. Having  traversed  all  Mount  Seir  '  unto 
 Paran,'  which  lay  on  the  west  side  of  the  Arabah, 
 the  kings  evidently  turned  northward  toward  So- 
 dom, and  would  thus  naturally  follow  the  course 
 of  the  Arabah  ;  in  it,  therefore,  Kadesh  appears 
 to  have  been  situated.  It  continued  to  be  a  place 
 of  note  during  the  whole  period  of  the  patriarchs 
 (Gen.  xvi.  14  ;  xx.  l). 
 
 There  is  some  difficulty  in  connection  with  the 
 next  notice  we  find  of  Kadesh.  We  read,  in  Num. 
 xii.  16,  that '  the  people  removed  from  Hazeroth,  and 
 pitched  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran.'  From  thence 
 the  twelve  spies  were  sent  out  (xiii.  3) ;  '  and  they 
 returned  from  searching  the  land  after  forty  days. 
 And  they  went  and  came  to  Moses,  and  to  all  the 
 congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel,  unto  the 
 wilderness  of  Paran,  to  Kadesh''  (vers.  25,  26). 
 From  this  it  might  seem  that  Kadesh  was  only  a 
 single  journey  from  Hazeroth,  which  we  know  was 
 only  four  days'  march  from  Sinai  [Hazeroth].  But 
 an  examination  of  Deut.  i.  19-21,  and  Num.  xxxiii. 
 lS-36,  shows  that  between  Hazeroth  and  Kadesh 
 there  were  a  great  many  intervening  stations. 
 These  the  historian,  in  Num.  xii.,  passes  over,  in 
 order  to  group  together  the  leading  events.  The 
 principal  stations  he  groups  together  in  chap,  xxxiii. 
 
 Kadesh  lay  on  the  southern  border  of  Canaan. 
 After  the  return  of  the  spies,  who  made  their  search 
 during  the  vintage  (August)  of  the  second  year  of 
 the  Exodus  [Wandering],  and  after  the  defeat  of 
 the  sinful  people  by  the  Canaanites  (Num.  xiv.  45), 
 they  were  ordered  to  turn  back  from  Kadesh  '  into 
 the  wilderness,  by  the  way  of  the  Red  Sea '  (Deut. 
 i.  40).  This  incidental  notice  affords  also  a  slight 
 indication  of  the  situation  of  Kadesh.  '  The  way  of 
 the  Red  Sea'  is  doubtless  the  valley  of  Arabah,  and 
 this  is  the  natural  road  to  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  from 
 Kadesh-Mishpat,  situated  as  it  was  on  the  borders  of 
 Edom.  Again,  in  the  list  of  the  journeys  contained 
 in  Num.  xxxiii.,  which  seems  to  fill  up  the  blank  left 
 in  chap,  xii.,  we  find  that  in  going  from  Ezion- 
 gaber  towards  Canaan  they  came  to  Kadesh  (ver. 
 36)  ;  and  this  Kadesh,  we  know,  was  on  the  borders 
 of  Edom,  not  far  from  Mount  Hor  (cf  ch.  xx.  16). 
 Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  in  going  from  the  wilder- 
 ness of  Sinai  to  Kadesh  the  Israelites  passed  up  the 
 Arabah,  at  the  southern  end  of  which  Ezion-gaber 
 stood  ;  and  in  going  back  from  Kadesh  to  the 
 wilderness  they  passed  down  it.  And  this  leads  to 
 the  conclusion  that  En-Mishpat  Kadesh,  whence 
 the  spies  were  sent,  and  Kadesh-Bamea,  were  both 
 in  or  very  close  to  the  Arabah,  near  the  borders 
 of  Moab,  and  therefore  most  probably  identical. 
 
 There  is  one  objection  to  this  view.  The  Kadesh 
 from  which  the  spies  were  sent  was  in  the  wilder- 
 ness of  Paran  (Num.  xiii.  26) ;  Kadesh-Barnea 
 was  in  the  wilderness  of  Zin  (xx.  i).  This  is  easily 
 removed.  Paran  was  the  general  name  for  the 
 whole  desert  west  of  the  Arabah,  extending 
 from  Palestine  to  Sinai  (Gen.  xxi.  21 ;  Num.  x. 
 12;  xii.  16;  I  Sam.  xxv.  i).  It  even  seems  to 
 have  included  the  Arabah,  reaching  to  the  very 
 base  of  Mount  Seir  (Gen.  xiv.  6).  Zin  was  a 
 specific  name  for  that  part  of  the  Arabah  which 
 bordered  on  Edom  and  Palestine  (Num.  xiii.  21; 
 xxxiv.  3,  4;  Josh.  XV.  1-3).  If  Kadesh  was  situ- 
 ated on  the  western  side  of  the  Arabah,  then  it 
 
 might  be  reckoned  either  to  Paran  or  to  Zin;  or, 
 if  we  agree  with  Keil,  Delitzsch,  and  others  (Keil 
 on  Josh.  X.),  that  Paran  was  the  general  name  for 
 the  whole,  and  Zin  the  specific  name  of  a  portion, 
 the  objection  is  removed  at  once. 
 
 One  or  two  other  topographical  notices  tend  to 
 fix  the  position  still  more  definitely.  Moses  says, 
 in  his  message  to  the  Edomites,  '  Behold,  we 
 are   in    Kadesh,   a  city   in   the  titterniost  of  thy 
 
 border'  ("l^UJ  TW\>  Tij;,  literally,  'a  city  of  thi 
 extremity  of  thy  border,'  Num.  xx.  16).  It  must 
 thus  have  stood  upon,  not,  however,  within,  the 
 border  of  Edom  ;  but  the  Arabah,  or  wilderness 
 of  Zin,  was  the  border  of  Edom  ;  and  hence  Kadesh 
 must  be  looked  for  in  it.  Again,  it  was  one  of  the 
 chief  landmarks,  at  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  of  the 
 south-eastern  border  of  the  Israelitish  territoi"y 
 (Num.  xxxiv.  4),  and  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh. 
 XV.  3),  which  reached  'to  the  border  of  Edom' 
 
 (DnS  S3J"^X ;  Josh.  XV.  i).  It  was,  besides, 
 within  a  short  distance  of  Mount  Hor,  whose  posi- 
 tion is  well  known  [Hor].  All  these  facts  and 
 notices  tend  to  fix  the  site  of  Kadesh  in  the  valley 
 of  Arabah,  to  the  west  of  Mount  Hor,  or  Petra ; 
 and  they  are  fatal  to  the  theories  of  Rowlands  and 
 Stanley. 
 
 There  was  a  fountain  (PJ?),  and  a  very  noted  one, 
 at  Kadesh.  Fountains  are  permanent  landmarks, 
 and  in  this  region  they  are  very  rare.  Now,  there 
 is  one  spot,  and  apparently  only  one,  to  which  all 
 these  notices  point  as  the  site  of  Kadesh  ;  and  that 
 is  Ain  el-  Weibeh.  Here  is  a  copious  fountain,  to 
 this  day  one  of  the  most  important  watering-places 
 in  the  great  valley.  It  is  situated  on  the  western 
 border  of  the  Arabah,  north-west  of  Petra.  From 
 it  Mount  Hor  is  seen  to  fine  advantage,  towering 
 in  lone  majesty  at  the  distance  of  about  twenty  miles. 
 '  We  were  much  struck,'  says  Dr.  Robinson,  'whde 
 at  Weibeh,  with  the  entire  adaptedness  of  its  posi- 
 tion to  the  scriptural  account  of  the  proceedings  of 
 the  Israelites  on  their  second  arrival  at  Kadesh. 
 There  was  at  Kadesh  a  fountain,  called  also  En- 
 Mishpat;  this  was  then  either  partially  dried  up, 
 or  exhausted  by  the  multitude,  so  that  there  was 
 no  water  for  the  congregation.  By  a  miracle  water 
 was  brought  forth  abundantly  out  of  the  rock. 
 Moses  now  sent  messengers  to  the  king  of  Edom, 
 informing  him  that  they  were  '  in  Kadesh,  a  city  in 
 the  uttermost  of  his  border ;'  and  asking  leave  to 
 pass  through  his  country,  so  as  to  continue  their 
 course  around  Moab  and  approach  Palestine  from 
 the  east.  This  Edom  refused ;  and  the  Israelites 
 accordingly  marched  to  Mount  Hor,  where  Aaron 
 died ;  and  then  along  the  Arabah  to  the  Red  Sea. 
 Here  all  these  scenes  were  before  our  eyes.  Here 
 was  the  fountain,  even  to  this  day  the  most  fre- 
 quented watering-place  in  all  the  Arabah.  On  the 
 north-west  is  the  mountain,  by  which  the  Israelites 
 had  formerly  assayed  to  ascend  to  the  land  of 
 Palestine,  and  were  driven  back.  Over  against  us 
 lay  the  land  of  Edom  ;  we  were  in  its  uttermost 
 border  ;  and  the  great  Wady  el-Ghuweir,  affording 
 a  direct  and  easy  passage  through  the  mountains  to 
 the  table-land  above,  was  directly  before  us  ;  while 
 farther  in  the  south.  Mount  Hor  formed  a  pro- 
 minent and  striking  object'  (B.  R.  ii.  174,  sq.) 
 
 The  traditions  preserved  by  Josephus,  the  Tal- 
 mudists,  Eusebius,  and  Jerome,  which  Professor 
 Stanley  adduces  as  tending  to  prove  the  identity  of 
 Petra  and  Kadesh,  certainly  show  that  the  two 
 
KADKOD 
 
 705 
 
 KADMONITES 
 
 places  were  near  each  other,  and  closely  linked  to- 
 gether by  the  facts  of  Israelitish  history ;  but  farther 
 than  this  they  do  not  go  [S.  and  P.,  95).  Kadesh 
 appears  to  have  been  known  to  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome,  and  they  clearly  distinguish  it  from  Petra. 
 The  former  says,  Ba/jc-^,  avr-q  iari  tt}  KdS?;?  "Rapvy 
 iv  iprj/xuiTTJ  TTdpaTeivovar]  Ilerpa  iroXet. ;  and  Jerome 
 translating  '  Barne,  /laee  ipsa  est,  quae  et  Cades 
 Barne  in  deserto,  qtiod  extenditur  usque  ad  iirbein 
 Petram^  [Onomast.,  s.w.  Barne).  In  his  Commen- 
 tary on  Gen.  xiv.  7,  Jerome  writes  '  Significat  autein 
 locum  apiid  Petrani,  qui  fans  judicii  noiuinatur ; 
 quiaibiDeus populum  judicavit ;''  and  again  he  says, 
 '  Cades,  ubi  Jons  est  judicii,  et  Cadesbarne  in  deserto 
 quae  conjungitur  civitali  Petra  in  Arabia''  {0 no- 
 mast.,  s.v.  Cades).  The  local  traditions  which  now 
 linger  round  Petra  are  far  too  obscure  to  have  any 
 influence  on  a  question  of  topography.  One  fact 
 alone  is  final  against  the  identification  of  Petra  and 
 Kadesh.  The  former  is  ten  miles  within  the 
 border  of  EJom,  and  in  the  very  heart  of  Mount 
 Seir  ;  whereas  Kadesh  was  on  the  border  of  the 
 territory  of  Judali,  and  became  apparently  one  of 
 the  cities  of  that  tribe  (Josh.  xv.  3,  23.  See,  how- 
 ever, Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  pp.  94-97). 
 
 Kadesh  is  called  a  city  (Num.  xx.  16,  T*!?) ;  and 
 it  is  the  only  station  of  the  Israelites  so  called. 
 The  houses  were  probably  constructed  rudely  and 
 slightly,  like  those  of  the  semi-nomad  tribes  of  the 
 Sinai  Peninsula ;  and  we  have  no  notice  whatever 
 of  the  inhabitants.  There  are  no  ruins  round  or 
 near  the  fountain  of  El-Weibeh.  The  Israelites 
 were  unquestionably  twice  at  Kadesh,  and  remained 
 there  on  each  occasion  for  a  considerable  time. 
 They  came  here  about  July  of  the  second  year  of 
 the  Exodus,  and  again  about  the  same  time  of  the 
 fortieth  year  (Num.  xii.  16;  xiii.  26;  xx.  i,  etc.) 
 During  the  intervening  thirty-eight  years  they 
 wandered  through  the  desert ;  and  of  the  journey- 
 ings  during  that  period,  no  account  is  given. 
 Moses,  in  summing  up  the  principal  journeys 
 (Num.  xxxiii. ),  enumerates  the  stations  as  far  as 
 Kadesh,  to  which  they  proceeded  after  the  giving 
 of  the  Law  on  Sinai  ;  then  he  passes  over  the 
 whole  interval  of  the  thirty-eight  years,  during  which 
 the  curse  was  upon  them,  and  takes  up  the  narra- 
 tive again  when  they  visit  Kadesh  the  second  time, 
 and  leads  them  on  to  Canaan.  During  this  second 
 visit  Miriam  dies,  and  Jerome  speaks  of  her  tomb  as 
 still  shown  there  in  his  day  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Cades) ; 
 Moses  and  Aaron  bring  water  from  the  rock,  and 
 in  doing  so  sinned  so  heinously  that  the  Lord  would 
 not  permit  them  to  enter  Canaan.  The  fountain 
 opened  was  appropriately  named  Meribah,  'strife.' 
 After  this  sad  event,  and  the  refusal  of  Edom  to 
 grant  them  a  passage,  '  the  whole  congregation 
 journeyed  from  Kadesh  and  came  unto  Mount 
 Hor'  (Num.  xx.  I-22) ;  and  we  hear  of  Kadesh  no 
 more  except  as  a  mark  of  the  boundary  of  Palestine. 
 ~J.  L.  P. 
 
 KADKOD  (n3"13).     This  word  occurs  Is.  liv. 
 
 12,  and  Ezek.  xxvii.  16  ;  in  both  of  which  places 
 it  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  by  agate,  with  the  mar- 
 ginal note  on  the  latter  passage,  '  Heb.  chryso- 
 prase.'  The  LXX.  has  in  the  former  passage 
 laaizi.v,  jasper,  whilst  in  the  latter  the  translator 
 has  retained  the  original  word,  which  he  seems  to 
 have  read  "1D1D  ;  Gr.  yiopxop,  and  to  have  taken 
 for  the  name  of  a  place.  The  Vulg.  also  retains 
 the  original  word  here,  reading  it   Chodchod,  but 
 
 VOL.   II.  * 
 
 in  the  other  passage  it  follows  the  LXX.,  and 
 gives  jaspidem.     The  Targ.   gives  in  both  places 
 
 |vi1D)  pearls ;  the  Syr.  in  Is.  has  .Q.2irDJ5, 
 of  jaspers,  and  in  Ezek.  \2lL0u^,  which  is  ren- 
 dered in  the  London  Polyglott,  acupietum.  It  is 
 evident  that  great  uncertainty  prevailed  as  to  the 
 real  meaning  of  the  original  word  ;  and,  indeed, 
 Jerome  confesses  that  he  has  not  been  able  to  find 
 what  the  word  means  ('  quid  significat  usque  in 
 prsesentiam  invenire  non  potui').  Rosenmuller 
 argues  that,  from  its  being  used  by  Isaiah  as  mate- 
 rial for  windows,  it  must  be  a  stone  of  a  chrystal- 
 line  character  ;  but  the  force  of  this  is  greatly 
 destroyed  by  the  uncertainty  attaching  to  the 
 meaning  of  the  word  nitr'DCS  Shemashoth,  used 
 by  Isaiah,  and  which  the  more  recent  interpreters 
 generally  prefer  to  take  in  the  sense  of  battlements 
 (Sept.  e7rdX^£is)  to  that  oiwindo^as.  The  prevailing 
 opinion  is,  that  the  Kadkod  was  a  species  oi  ruby ; 
 but   this   rests  solely  on    the  resemblance   to  the 
 
 Arabic  word  xJ^J^,  Kadzkadzat,  which  signifies, 
 
 according  to  the  Kamus,  vivid  redness,  and  cannot 
 be  accepted  as  conclusive.  The  Hebrew  root 
 from  which  '\yX2  is  said  to  be  derived  is  the  obso- 
 lete T13,  signifying,  it  is  said,  to  strike  fire,  so  that 
 
 Kadkod  would  convey  the  idea  of  a  sparkling 
 gem  ;  but  this  tells  us  nothing  as  to  the  kind  of 
 gem  it  denoted,  and  besides,  like  various  other 
 such  etymologies  in  Hebrew  lexicons,  the  reason- 
 ing is  wholly  in  a  circle,  the  meaning  assigned  to 
 the  verb  being  derived  from  the  noun,  and  that 
 assigned  to  the  noun  being  derived  from  the  verb. 
 The  Targ.  Jon.  on  Exod.  xxxix.  11,  gives  pTlDl^, 
 
 Kadkudin,  as  the  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  D7nV 
 Yakalotn,  and  as  this  was  a  stone  of  the  flint 
 family,  and  as  the  agate  belongs  to  the  same 
 family,  the  A.  V.  is  probably  not  far  wrong  in  its 
 rendering. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KADMIEL  (^X'pip  ;  Sept.  KaZfiL-q\).  Whe- 
 ther this  is  the  name  of  a  person  or  of  a  class 
 among  the  Levites  is  uncertain.  From  the  pas- 
 sages in  which  it  first  occurs  (Ezra  ii.  40 ;  Neh. 
 vii.  43),  it  might  be  concluded  that  it  is  the  proper 
 name  of  the  Levite  who  was  president  of  one  of  the 
 classes  of  the  Levites  in  the  time  of  Zerubbabel  ; 
 but  in  Neh.  ix.  4,  5,  and  x.  9,  it  appears  rather  as 
 the  designation  of  a  class  than  of  a  person.  In 
 Neh.  xii.  24  it  is  undoubtedly,  as  the  text  stands, 
 the  name  of  a  person  ;  but  a  comparison  of  this 
 passage  with  Neh.  x.  9,  xii.  8,  and  Ezra  ii.  40, 
 leads  to  the  conclusion  that  p  here  should  pro- 
 bably be  omitted.  Probably  this  name,  as  well  as 
 the  others  with  which  it  is  joined,  was  originally 
 the  name  of  the  person  presiding  over  one  of  the 
 Levitical  classes,  and  came  subsequently  to  denote 
 the  class  over  which  he  presided. — W.  L.  A, 
 
 KADMONITES    ^JDlp,    '  Eastern  ;'   KeSyuwy- 
 
 oLoi ;  Cedmoncei),  one  of  the  tribes  which  inhabited 
 the  country  given  in  covenant  promise  to  Abraham. 
 The  word  Kadmoni  occurs  only  in  Gen.  xv.  19. 
 The  Jerusalem  Targum  has  in  this  passage,  '  All 
 the  children  of  the  East'  (Reland,  p.  141) ;  and 
 some  of  the  Talmudists  suppose  the  Nabatheans 
 are  meant  (/(/.,  p.  94)  ;  but  this  is  impossible,  since 
 the  Nabatheans  were   Ishmaelites,   and  the  Kad- 
 
 2  Z 
 
KALAMOS 
 
 ror> 
 
 KALI 
 
 monites  are  mentioned  as  living  in  the  time  of 
 Abraham.  The  country  included  in  the  promise 
 extended  from  '  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the  river 
 Euphrates'  (Gen.  xv.  i8).  Of  the  tribes  mentioned 
 it  would  seem  probable  that  the  Kadmonites  lived 
 beyond  the  bounds  of  Canaan  proper,  that  is,  in 
 Arabia  or  towards  the  Euphrates  ;  because,  though 
 the  tribes  of  Canaan  are  often  enumerated  after- 
 wards, the  Kadmonites  are  never  alluded  to.  (See 
 Exod.  iii.  17;  xiii.  5  ;  xxiii.  23 ;  Deut.  vii.  i  ;  Josh, 
 iii.  10,  etc.)  Perhaps,  therefore,  the  Kadmonites, 
 as  the  name  would  seem  to  imply,  were  a  tribe, 
 or  number  of  tribes,  living  to  the  '  east '  of  Canaan  ; 
 and  the  name  would  thus  be  equivalent  to  Bene 
 Kedem,  which  occurs  frequently  in  Bible  history 
 (A.  v.,  'people'  or  'children  of  the  east :'  Gen. 
 xxix.  I  ;  Judg.  vi.  3.  See  Benei-Kedem).  This 
 is  the  opinion  of  Wells  {Geog.  i.,  p.  170),  Kalisch 
 {Gen.,  ad  loc. ),  Ritter(/'a/.  und Syr.,  ii.  138),  and 
 Lightfoot,  who  quotes  the  traditions  of  the  Tal- 
 mudists  {Opera,  ii.  429).  Bochart  advances  a 
 theory  more  curious  than  credible.  The  Cad- 
 monites  were  the  same  as  the  Hivites,  and  were  so 
 called  because  they  dwelt  under  mount  Hermon, 
 which  is  the  most  easterly  part  of  Canaan.  Cad- 
 monite  is  thus  identical  with  H'ermonite ;  and  hence 
 he  concludes  that  Cadinjis  was  a  Cadmonite,  and 
 that  his  wife  Hermione  derived  her  name  from  her 
 native  place  Hermon  {Opera,  i.  447). — J.  L.  P. 
 
 KALAMOS  (Kd\a/xos).     [ICaneh.] 
 
 KALI  (vp,  K  vp).    This  word  occurs  in  several 
 
 pass.ages  of  the  O.  T.,  in  all  of  which,  in  the  A. 
 V. ,  it  is  translated  parched  corn.  The  correctness 
 of  this  translation  has  not,  however,  been  assented 
 to  by  all  commentators.  The  Syr.  Targ.  Onk. 
 and  Jon.,  use  the  Hebrew  word,  Lev.  xxiii.  14; 
 I  Sam.  xvii.  17;  xxv.  18;  2  Sam.  xvii.  28. 
 Arias  Montanus  and  others  render  kali  by  the 
 word  tostum,  considering  it  to  be  derived  from 
 
 npp,  which  in  the   Hebrew  signifies  iorrere,   '  to 
 
 toast'  or  'parch.'     So  in  the  Arabic     Jj,  kali, 
 
 signifies  anything  cooked  in  a  frjring-pan,  and  is 
 applied   to   the   common   Indian  dish  which   by 
 
 Europeans  is  called  currie  or  curry.        Jljj  kalee, 
 
 and  \ .  Xs  kalla,  signify  one  that  fries,  or  a  cook. 
 
 From  the  same  root  is  supposed  to  be  derived  the 
 word  kali  or  aPkali,  now  so  familiarly  known  as 
 alkali,  which  is  obtained  from  the  ashes  of  burnt 
 vegetables.  But  as  in  the  various  passages  of 
 Scripture  where  it  occurs,  kali  is  without  any 
 adjunct,  different  opinions  have  been  entertained 
 respecting  the  substance  which  is  to  be  understood 
 as  having  been  toasted  or  parched.  By  some  it  is 
 supposed  to  have  been  corn  in  general ;  by  others, 
 only  wheat.  Some  Hebrew  writers  maintain  that 
 flour  or  meal,  and  others,  that  parched  meal,  is 
 intended,  as  in  the  passage  of  Ruth  ii.  14,  where 
 the  Septuagint  translates  kali  by  dXipirov,  and  the 
 Vulate  by  poletita.  A  difficulty,  however,  occvn-s 
 in  the  case  of  2  Sam.  xvii.  28,  where  the  word 
 occurs  twice  in  the  same  verse.  We  are  told  that 
 Shobi  and  others,  on  David's  arrival  at  Mahanaim, 
 in  the  further  limit  of  the  tribe  of  Gad,  '  brought 
 beds,  and  basins,  and  earthen  vessels,  and  wheat, 
 and  barley,   and  flour,   and  parched  corn    (kali), 
 
 and  beans,  and  lentils,  and  parched  pulse  (kali), 
 and  honey,  and  butter,  and  sheep,  and  cheese  of 
 kine,  for  David  and  for  the  people  that  were  with 
 him  to  eat.'  This  is  a  striking  representation  of 
 what  may  be  seen  every  day  in  the  East  :  when  a 
 traveller  arrives  at  a  village,  the  common  light 
 beds  of  the  country  are  brought  him,  as  well  as 
 earthen  pots,  with  food  of  different  kinds.  The 
 meaning  of  the  above  passage  is  explained  by  the 
 statement  of  Hebrew  writers,  that  there  are  two 
 kinds  of  kali — one  made  of  parched  corn,  the 
 other  ol  parched  pulse  ;  see  R.  Salomon,  ex  Avoda 
 Zarah,   fol.    xxxviii.    2,   as  quoted  by  Celsius  (ii. 
 
 -33)- 
 
 There  is  no  doubt  that  in  the  East  a  little  meal, 
 either  parched  or  not,  mixed  with  a  little  water, 
 often  constitutes  the  dinner  of  the  natives,  espe- 
 cially of  those  engaged  in  laborious  occupations, 
 as  boatmen  while  dragging  their  vessels  up  rivers, 
 and  unable  to  make  any  long  delay.  Another 
 principal  preparation,  much  and  constantly  in  use 
 in  Western  Asia,  is  burgotil,  that  is,  corn  first 
 boiled,  then  bruised  in  the  mill  to  take  the  husk 
 off,  and  afterwards  dried  or  parched  in  the  sun. 
 In  this  state  it  is  preserved  for  use,  and  employed 
 for  the  same  purposes  as  rice  (Robinson,  B.  R.,  iu 
 394).  The  meal  of  parched  corn  is  also  much 
 used,  particularly  by  travellers,  who  mix  it  with 
 honey,  butter,  and  spices,  and  so  eat  it ;  or  else 
 mix  it  with  water  only,  and  drink  it  as  a  draught, 
 the  refrigerating  and  satisfying  qualities  of  v/hich 
 they  justly  extol  {Picto)-ial  Bible,  ii.  p.  537). 
 Parched  grain  is  also,  no  doubt,  very  common. 
 Thus,  in  the  bazaars  of  India,  not  only  may  rice 
 be  obtained  in  a  parched  state,  but  also  the  seeds 
 of  the  Nymphcea,  and  of  the  Nelumbsium  Specio- 
 siiin,  or  bean  of  Pythagoras,  and  most  abundantly 
 the  pulse  called  gram  by  the  English,  on  which 
 their  cattle  are  chiefly  fed.  This  is  the  Cicer  Arie- 
 tinum  of  botanists,  or  chick-pea,  which  is  common 
 even  in  Egypt  and  the  south  of  Europe,  and  may 
 be  obtained  everywhere  in  India  in  a  parched  state, 
 under  the  name  of  chebenne.  We  know  not 
 whether  it  be  the  same  pulse  that  is  mentioned  in 
 the  article  Dove's  Dung,  a  sort  of  pulse  or  pea, 
 which  appears  to  have  been  very  common  in 
 Judaea.  Belon  {Observat.,  ii.  53)  informs  us  that 
 large  quantities  of  it  are  parched  and  dried,  and 
 stored  in  magazines  at  Cairo  and  Damascus.  It 
 is  much  used  during  journeys,  and  particularly  by 
 the  great  pilgrim  caravans  to  Mecca. 
 
 Considering  all  these  points,  it  does  not  appear 
 to  us  by  any  means  certain  that  kali  is  correctly 
 translated  '  parched  corn'  in  all  the  passages  of 
 Scri]iture.  Bochart  says  {Hieroz.  part  ii.  lib.  i.  c. 
 7),  'Kali  ab  Hieronymo  x&d.dxiViX  frixuin  ciccr  ;'' 
 and  to  show  that  it  was  the  practice  among  the 
 ancients  to  parch  the  cicer,  he  quotes  Plautus 
 {Bacch.  iv.  5.  7)  :  '  Tam  frictum  ego  ilium  reddam, 
 quam  frictum  est  cicer;'  also  Horace  {De  Arte 
 Poctica,  1.  249)  and  others  :  and  shows  from  the 
 writings  of  the  Rabbins  that  kali  was  also  applied 
 to  some  kind  of  pulse.  The  name  kali  seems, 
 moreover,  to  have  been  widely  spread  through 
 Asiatic   countries.      Thus   in   Shakspeare's  Hui- 
 
 dce  Dictionary,        uJj    kalae,    from    the    Sanscrit 
 
 c^'^!)!/  {       translated  ptilse — leguminous  seeds 
 
 in  general.     The  present  writer  found  it  applied 
 in  the  Himalayas  to  the  common  field- pea,  and 
 
KANAH 
 
 707 
 
 KANEH 
 
 has  thus  mentioned  it  elsewhere  :  '  Pisiim  arvense. 
 Cultivated  in  the  Himalayas,  also  in  the  plains  of 
 north-west  India,  found  wild  in  the  Khadie  of  the 
 Jumna,  near  Delhi ;  the  corra  nnittur  of  the  na- 
 tives, called  Kullae  in  the  hills'  {Illitst.  of  Hima- 
 layan Botany,  p.  200).  Hence  we  are  disposed  to 
 consider  the  pea,  or  the  chick-pea,  as  more  correct 
 than  parched  corn  in  some  of  the  above  passages 
 of  Scripture. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KANAH  (HJp,    'a  reed;'  XeX/cavd,   in  Josh. 
 
 xvi.  8,  is  formed  by  connecting  the  two  last  letters 
 
 of  ?nj  ['  river']  to  the  proper  name  ;  Alex.  Kara  ; 
 in  Josh.  xvii.  9,  Kapavd ;  Alex.  Kafd  ;  ifi  vallem 
 anmdineti),  a  river  running  into  the  Mediterranean, 
 and  forming  part  of  the  boundaiy  line  between  the 
 tribes  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  (Josh.  xvi.  8  ; 
 xvii.  9).  It  is  not  again  mentioned  in  Scripture. 
 Eusebius  and  Jerome  merely  notice  it  as  '  Cana  in 
 the  tribe  of  Ephraim,'  and  '  Cane  in  the  tribe  of 
 Manasseh'  {Onomast.,  s.  v.)  There  is  a  Wady 
 Kanak  which  takes  its  rise  in  the  plain  of  Mukhna, 
 south  of  Nabulus,  and  runs  south-west  till  it  joins 
 Nahr-el-Aujeh,  and  falls  into  the  sea  about  four 
 miles  north  of  Joppa.  This  Dr.  Robinson  would 
 identify  with  the  river  JCanah  (B.  R.  iii.  135) ; 
 but  it  is  evidently  much  too  far  south.  The  river 
 Kanah  was  on  tlie  northern  border  of  Ephraim ; 
 Wady  Kanah  runs  through  the  centre  of  that  ter- 
 ritory.    Schwartz  and  Van  de  Velde  suppose  that 
 
 a  streamlet  called  Kazab  {Kisdb,  i     >l-,^'v  '  reeds ') 
 
 is  the  Kanah  of  Scripture ;  but  though  the  name 
 seems  to  favour  the  identity,  the  situation  is  too  far 
 south,  running  as  it  does  througli  Wady  Shair,  in 
 the  parallel  of  Samaria  (Van  de  Velde,  l^Ievioir, 
 p.  327,  and  see  his  map).  The  Nahr  el-Akhdar, 
 a  small  stream  which  rises  in  the  mountains  south 
 of  Megiddo,  flows  across  the  plain  of  Sharon,  and 
 falls  into  the  Mediterranean  about  two  miles  south 
 of  the  ruins  of  Caesarea,  would  answer  better  to  the 
 position  of  Kanah.  Its  banks  are  low,  marshy, 
 and  covered  with  jungles  of  '  reeds,'  from  which 
 it  may  have  taken  its  ancient  name  ;  and  this  ap- 
 pears to  be  the  stream  which  Bohadin  in  his  Life 
 
 of  Saladin  calls  Nahr   el-Kasab   (( 
 
 'the  river  of  reeds  ;'  p.  191,  ed.  Schultens) 
 
 2.  A  town  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  28,  Kai'^di'; 
 Alex.  Kai-d  ;  Cana)  on  its  northern  border.  Euse- 
 bius confounds  it  with  Cana  of  Galilee ;  but  it  must 
 have  been  much  farther  north,  as  it  is  mentioned 
 in  connection  with  Sidon  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Cana). 
 There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  identical  with  the 
 village  of  Kana,  situated  on  the  side  of  the  moun- 
 tain range  about  three  hours  east  by  south  of  Tyre. 
 It  is  a  modern  village,  containing  about  300  families, 
 with  no  traces  of  ruins.  About  a  mile  north  of  it 
 is  a  very  ancient  site,  strewn  with  ruins,  some  of 
 them  of  colossal  proportions ;  and  in  the  side  of  a 
 ravine  not  far  distant  are  some  singular  figures  of 
 men,  women,  and  children,  cut  on  the  side  of  a 
 cliff  (Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  200; 
 Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  pp.  395,  442;  Robinson, 
 B  F.,  ii.  455  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  327). 
 
 KANEH  (njp)  occurs  in  several  places  of  the 
 
 O.  T.,  in  all  of  which,  in  the  A.  V.,  it  is  trans- 
 lated reed ;  as  in  i  Kings  xiv.  15  j  2  Kings  xviii. 
 
 21  ;  Job  xl.  21  ;  Is.  xix.  6;  xxxv.  7  ;  xxxvi.  6; 
 xHi.  3  ;  Ezek.  xxix.  6.  The  Hebrew  Kaneh 
 would  seem  to  be  the  original  of  the  Greek  k6.vv<x, 
 the  Latin  canjia,  and  the  modern  camia,  canine, 
 cane,  etc.,  signifying  a  'reed'  or  '  cane,' also  a 
 fence  or  mat  made  of  reeds  or  rushes  :  the  Latin 
 word  also  denotes  the  sugar-cane,  a  pipe,  etc. 
 Hence  the  term  appears  to  have  been  used  in  a 
 general  sense  in  ancient  as  well  as  in  modem 
 times.  Thus  we  find  in  Hakluyt,  '  Then  they 
 pricke  him  (the  elephant)  with  sharp  canes  -f  (Mil- 
 ton {Par.  Lost.,  iii.  439)  describes  the  Tatars  as 
 driving — 
 '  With  sails  and  wind  their  cany  waggons  light ; ' 
 
 Grainger  also,  when  referring  to  the  Indians,  as 
 described  by  Lucan,  says,  '  That  sucke  sweete 
 liquor  from  their  sugar-canes.'  In  later  times  the 
 term  cane  has  been  applied  more  particularly  to 
 the  stems  of  the  Cahnnics  Rotang,  and  other  species 
 of  rattan  canes,  which  we  have  good  grounds  for 
 believing  were  unknown  to  the  ancients,  notwith- 
 standing the  opinion  of  Sprengel  [Hist.  Rei  ILerb. 
 i.  171),  '  Ctesias  duo  genera  KaXd/xoD  facit,  marem 
 sine  medulla  et  feminam  ea  praeditam,  banc  sine 
 dubio  Calatmtm  Rotang,  illam  Bambusam.  nostram. 
 Repetit  ea  Plinius  (xvi.  36).' 
 
 The  Greek  word  /cdXa/u.05  appears  to  have  been 
 considered  the  proper  equivalent  for  the  Hebrew 
 Katieh,  being  the  term  used  by  St.  Matthew  (xii. 
 20),  when  quoting  the  words  of  Isaiah  (xlii.  3), 
 '  A  bruised  reed  (Kaneh)  shall  he  not  break.' 
 The  Greek  word  Latinized  is  well  known  in  the 
 forms   of  calamus  and   culnms.      Both   seem    to 
 
 stand  related  to  the  Arabic  ^Jj  iahn,  signifying  a 
 
 'reed'  or  'pen,'  also  a  weaver's  reed,  and  even 
 cutting  of  trees  for  planting  or  grafting  ;  comp.  the 
 
 Sanscrit  cK  (Vy  LI  kabn,  having  the  same  sig- 
 nification. The  German  halm,  and  the  English 
 haulm,  usually  applied  to  the  straw  or  stems  of 
 grasses,  would  seem  to  have  the  same  origin. 
 The  Greek  KaXauos,  and  the  Latin  ca/amns,  were 
 used  with  as  wide  a  signification  as  the  Oriental 
 halm,  and  denoted  a  reed,  the  stalk  or  stem  of 
 corn,  or  anything  made  therefrom,  as  a  pen,  an 
 arrow,  a  reed-pipe.  KdXafxos  is  also  applied  to 
 any  plant  which  is  neither  shrub,  bush  (iiXi?),  nor 
 tree  (SevSpoi^)  (see  Liddell  and  Scott's  Greek  Lex.) 
 So  calamus  means  any  twig,  sprig,  or  scion  ; 
 comp.  Pliny  xvi.  14.  24 ;  xxiv.  14.  75  ;  and  in 
 India  we  every  day  hear  the  expression,  '  kalm 
 lugana,'  i.  e.,  'to  apply'  or  'fix'  a  graft. 
 
 Such  references  to  the  meaning  of  these  words 
 in  different  languages  may  appear  to  have  little 
 relation  to  our  present  subject ;  but  KaXafxos  occurs 
 very  frequently  in  the  N.  T.,  and  apparently  with 
 the  same  latitude  of  meaning  :  thus,  in  the  sense 
 of  a  reed  or  culm  of  a  grass.  Matt.  xi.  7  ;  Luke 
 vii.  24,  '  A  reed  shaken  by  the  wind  ;'  of  a  pen,  in 
 3  John  13,  '  But  I  will  not  -with  pen  (/cdXa/xos)  and 
 ink  write  unto  thee  ;'  Matt,  xxvii.  29,  '  Put  a  reed 
 in  his  right  hand ; '  ver.  30,  '  took  the  reed  and 
 smote  him  on  the  head  ;  and  in  Mark  xv.  19,  it 
 may  mean  a  reed  or  twig  of  any  kind.  So  also  in 
 Matt,  xxvii.  48,  and  Mark  xv.  36,  where  it  is  said 
 that  they  filled  a  sponge  with  vinegar,  and  put  it 
 on  a  reed,  while  in  the  parallel  passage,  John  xix. 
 29,  it  is  said  that  they  filled  a  sponge  with  vinegar, 
 and  put  it  upon  hyssop,  and  put  it  to  his  mouth. 
 
KANEH 
 
 708 
 
 KANEH  BOSEM 
 
 Fiom  which  it  is  probable  that  the  term  KoXafios 
 was  apphed  by  both  the  Evangelists  to  the  stem  of 
 the  plant  named  hyssop,  whatever  this  may  have 
 been,  in  like  manner  as  Pliny  applied  the  term 
 Calamus  to  the  stem  of  a  bramble. 
 
 In  most  of  the  passages  of  the  O.  T.  the  word 
 Kaiieh  seems  to  be  applied  strictly  to  reeds  of 
 different  kinds  growing  in  water,  that  is,  to  the 
 hollow  stems  or  culms  of  grasses,  which  are  usually 
 weak,  easily  shaken  about  by  wind  or  by  water, 
 fragile,  and  breaking  into  sharp-pointed  splinters. 
 Comp.  I  Kings  xiv.  15  ;  Job.  xl.  21  ;  Is.  xix.  6  ; 
 XXXV.  7)  2  Kings  xviii.  21  ;  Is.  xx.wi.  6;  and 
 Ezek.  xxix.  7,  etc. 
 
 293.  Arundo  donax. 
 
 In  order  to  determine  what  particular  kinds  of 
 reed-like  plants  are  intended  in  these  several  pas- 
 sages, the  preferable  mode  is  probably  first  to 
 ascertain  the  plants  to  which  the  above  names 
 were  applied  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  and 
 particularly  those  which  are  indigenous  in  Syria 
 and  Egypt.  Dioscorides  describes  the  different 
 kinds  in  his  chapter  irept  KaXd/j-ov  (i.  114).  i.  Kd- 
 Xayuos  6  paffT6s,  or  the  Anciido  farcta,  of  which 
 arrows  are  made  {Anaido  ajrnaria  ?)  2.  The 
 female,  of  which  reed  pipes  were  made  {A.  do- 
 nax ?)  3.  Hollow,  with  frequent  knots,  fitted 
 for  writing,  probably  a  species  of  Sacchanitn.  4. 
 Thick  and  hollow,  growing  in  rivers,  which  is 
 called  donax,  and  also  Cypria  {Arundo  donax). 
 5.  Phragmita  {Arimdc  Phragmiies),  slender,  light- 
 coloured,  and  well-kno\vn.  6.  The  reed  called 
 Phleos  (Arundo  ampelodes}7ios  Cyrillii).  (Flora 
 Ncapol.  t.  xii.)  These  are  all  described  (I.e.)  im- 
 mediately before  the  Papyrus,  while  KaXa/xos  dpw- 
 uariKds  is  described  in  a  different  part  of  the  book. 
 
 namely,  in  ch.  1 7,  along  with  spices  and  perfumes. 
 The  Arabs  describe  the  different  kinds  of  reed 
 
 under  the  head  of  ^    ^.^V  Knsb,  or  Kiissub,  of 
 
 which  they  give  Kalamus  as  the  synonymous 
 Greek  term.  Under  the  head  of  Kussub,  both 
 the  Bamboo  and  the  Arundo  are  included  as 
 varieties,  while  Kiisb-al-Sukr  is  the  sugar-cane,  or 
 Saccharum  ojfficinaruni,  and  Kitsb-el-Zurireh  ap- 
 pears to  be  the  Calamus  aromaticus  [Kaneh- 
 bosem].  All  these  were,  no  doubt,  partially 
 known  to  the  ancients.  Pliny  mentions  what 
 must  have  been  the  Bamboo,  as  to  be  seen  of  a 
 large  size  in  temples. 
 
 From  the  context  of  the  several  passages  of 
 Scripture  in  which  Kaneh  is  mentioned,  it  is  evi- 
 dent that  it  was  a  plant  growing  in  water  ;  and  we 
 have  seen  from  the  meaning  of  the  word  in  other 
 languages  that  it  must  have  been  applied  to  one  of 
 the  true  reeds  ;  as,  for  instance,  Arundo  ALgyptiaca 
 (perhaps  only  a  variety  of  A.  donax),  mentioned 
 by  M.  Bove  as  growing  on  the  banks  of  the  Nile  ; 
 or  it  may  have  been  the  Arundo  isiaca  of  Delile, 
 which  is  closely  allied  to  A.  Phragmites,  the  Canna 
 and  Canne  of  the  south  of  Europe,  which  has  been 
 already  mentioned  under  Agmon. 
 
 In  the  N.  T.  KdXa/xos  seems  to  be  applied  chiefly 
 to  plants  growing  in  dry  and  even  barren  situa- 
 tions, as  in  Luke  vii.  24.  To  such  passages,  some 
 of  the  s]iecies  of  reed-like  grasses,  with  slendet 
 stems  and  light  flocculent  inflorescence,  formerly 
 referred  to  Sacc/iarum,  but  now  separated  as  dis- 
 tinct genera,  are  well  suited  ;  as,  for  instance,  /m- 
 perata  cyli>idrica  (Arundo  epigeios,  Forsk.),  the 
 hulfeh  of  the  Arabs  ;  which  is  found  in  such  situa- 
 tions, as  by  Desfontaines  in  the  north  of  Africa,  by 
 Delile  in  Lower  Egypt,  by  Forskal  near  Cairo  and 
 Rosetta.  Bove  mentions  that  near  Mount  Sinai, 
 '  Dans  les  deserts  qui  environnent  ces  montagnes, 
 j'ai  trouve  plusieurs  Saccharum,'  etc.  In  India, 
 the  natives  employ  the  culm  of  different  species 
 of  this  genus  for  making  their  reed  -  pens  and 
 arrows. 
 
 Hence,  as  has  already  been  suggested  by  Rosen- 
 miiller,  the  noun  Katieh  ought  to  be  restricted  to 
 reeds,  or  reed-like  grasses,  while  Agmon  may  indi- 
 cate the  more  slender  and  delicate  grasses  or  sedges 
 growing  in  wet  situations,  but  which  are  still  tough 
 enough  to  be  made  into  ropes. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KANEH  BOSEM  (Dtrh  T\p_,  'reed  of  fra- 
 grance') and  Kaneh  Hattob  (QltSH  HJp,  calamus 
 
 bonus,  'good'  or  'fragrant  reed')  appear  to  have 
 reference  to  the  same  substance.  It  is  mentioned 
 under  the  name  of  kaneh  boscm  in  Exod.  xxx.  23, 
 and  under  that  of  kaneh  hattob  in  Jer.  vi.  20.  It  is 
 probably  intended  also  hy  kaneh  ('reed')  simply 
 in  Cant.  iv.  14 ;  Is.  xliii.  24  ;  and  Ezek.  xxvii.  19  ; 
 as  it  is  enumerated  with  other  fragrant  and  aro- 
 matic substances.  From  the  passages  in  which  it 
 is  mentioned  we  learn  that  it  was  fragrant  and 
 reed-like,  and  that  it  was  brought  from  a  far 
 country  (Jer.  vi.  20  ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  19). 
 
 In  Dioscorides,  bk.  i.  c.  17,  a  /cdXa/xos  d/JW/naTt- 
 a:6s  is  described  among  the  aromata,  immediately 
 after  Xxor^/oy.  It  is  stated  to  be  a  produce  of  India, 
 of  a  tawny  colour,  much  jointed,  breaking  into 
 splinters,  and  having  the  hollow  stem  filled  with 
 jiith,  like  the  web  of  a  spider  ;  also  that  it  is  mixed 
 with  ointments  and  fumiiiations  on  account  of  its 
 
KANEH  BOSEM 
 
 709 
 
 KANEH  BOSEM 
 
 odour.  Hippocrates  was  acquainted  with  appa- 
 rently the  same  substance,  which  he  calls  Kd\a/j.os 
 ei}u!67;s  and  o'xoi^'cs  evoa/xos,  also  Ka\a/j.os  crxo'^'os  : 
 though  it  is  impossible  to  say  that  the  o-xoifos  of 
 Dioscorides,  or  schoenanthus,  is  not  intended  by 
 some  of  these  names.  Theophrastus  describes 
 both  the  calamus  and  schoenus  as  natives  of  Syria, 
 
 294.  Andropogon  calamus  aromaticus. 
 
 or  more  precisely,  of  a  valley  between  Mount 
 Lebanon  and  a  small  mountain,  where  there  is  a 
 plain  and  a  lake,  in  parts  of  which  there  is  a 
 marsh,  where  they  are  produced,  the  smeil  being 
 perceived  by  any  one  entering  the  place.  This 
 account  is  virtually  followed  by  Phny,  though  he 
 also  mentions  the  sweet  calamus  as  a  produce  of 
 Arabia.  Polybius  also  (v.  45)  says  that  in  the 
 valley  between  the  Libanus  and  Anti-Libanus  the 
 narrowest  part  is  covered  by  a  lake  with  marshy 
 ground,  from  whence  are  gathered  aromatic  reeds, 
 ef  5iv  6  ixvpe^piKOi  Keiperai  KaXafios.  Strabo  men- 
 tions that  the  calamus  grows  in  the  country  of 
 the  Sabpei  (xvi.  4) ;  but  speaking  of  Ccele-Syria 
 and  its  mountains,  Libanus  and  Anti-Libanus,  he 
 says  (xvi.  2),  '  It  is  intersected  by  rivers,  irrigating 
 a  rich  country,  abounding  in  all  things.  It  also 
 contains  a  lake,  which  produces  the  aromatic  rush 
 {crxoivos)  and  reed  (\d\a/xos).  There  are  also 
 marshes.  The  lake  is  called  Gennesaritis.  The 
 balsam  also  grows  here.'  But  how  little  depend- 
 ence is  to  be  placed  upon  the  statements  of  those 
 who  do  not  pay  special  attention  to  the  localities 
 of  plants,  might  be  made  evident  by  quotations 
 from  several  modern  authors,  who  often  mistake 
 the  last  place  of  export  for  the  native  country  of  a 
 plant,  and  sometimes  even  place  in  the  Old  World 
 plants  which  are  only  found  in  America. 
 
 That  there  may  be  some  moderately  sweet- 
 scented  grass,  or  rush  -  like  plant,  such  as  the 
 Acorns  Calamus  of  botanists  (long  used  as  a  sub- 
 stitute for  the  true  calamus),  in  the  flat  country  be- 
 tween Libanus  and  Anti-Libanus,  is  quite  possible  ; 
 but  we  have  no  proof  of  the  fact.  Burckhardt,  in 
 that  situation,  could  find  only  ordinary  rushes  and 
 reeds.  Though  Theophrastus,  Polybius,  and  Strabo, 
 mention  this  locality  as  that  producing  the  calnmus, 
 yet  Strabo,  Diodorus  Siculus,  and  others,  even  in- 
 cluding Pliny,  give  Arabia,  or  the  country  of  the 
 Sabreans,  as  that  which  produced  the  aromatic 
 reed;  while  Dioscorides,  the  only  author  ^^ho 
 writes  expressly  of  the  drugs  known  to  the  an- 
 cients, mentions  it  being  the  produce  of  Ind'a. 
 Bochart  argues  against  India  being  the  sole  country 
 producing  calamus,  because  he  supposes  that  it 
 could  not  have  been  open  to  commerce  in  those 
 early  times  (Ilieroz.,  pars.  ii.  lib.  v.  c.  6).  Dr. 
 Vincent,  on  the  contrary  {Periphts  of  the  Eiy- 
 thraaii  Sea,  ii.  365),  says,  '  So  far  as  a  pri\  at-e 
 opinion  is  of  weight,  I  am  fully  persuaded  that 
 this  line  of  communication  with  the  East  is  the 
 oldest  in  the  world — older  than  Moses  or  Abra- 
 ham.' Indeed,  it  is  now  generally  acknowledged 
 that  India  and  Eg)'pt  must  have  had  commercial 
 intercourse  during  the  flourishing  state  of  the  king- 
 dom of  the  Pharaohs.  For  in  this  way  only  can 
 we  account  for  numerous  Indian  products  being 
 mentioned  in  the  Bible,  and  for  their  being  known 
 to  the  early  Greek  writers.  Many  of  these  sub- 
 stances are  treated  of  under  their  respective  heads 
 in  this  work. 
 
 The  author  of  the  present  article,  in  his  Essay 
 on  the  Antiqtcity  of  Hindoo  Medicine,  p.  33,  re- 
 marks, '  With  this  (that  is,  the  true  Spikenard 
 or  Nard)  has  often  been  confounded  another  far- 
 famed  aromatic  of  Eastern  climes,  that  is,  the  true 
 calamus  aromaticus,  KciXafMos  apwfiariKds  of  Dios- 
 corides, said  by  him  to  grow  in  India.  This  he 
 describes  immediately  after  (rxoij/os,  translated 
 jtinc2is  odoratus,  a  produce  of  Africa  and  Arabia, 
 and  generally  acknowledged  by  botanists  to  be  the 
 andropogon  schananthus,  or  lemon-grass,  a  native 
 both  of  Arabia  and  India,  perhaps  also  of  Africa. 
 The  calamus  aromaticus,  immediately  following  this, 
 stated  to  be  also  a  native  of  India,  and  among  other 
 uses  being  mixed  with  ointments  on  account  of  its 
 odour,  appears  to  me  to  have  been  a  plant  allitd 
 to  the  former.  There  is  no  plant  which  more 
 closely  coincides  with  every  thing  that  is  required — 
 that  is,  correspondence  in  description,  analogy  to 
 (Txo^vo^,  the  possession  of  remarkable  fragrance  and 
 stimulant  properties,  being  costly,  and  the  produce 
 of  a  far  country — than  the  plant  which  yields  the 
 fragrant  grass-oil  of  Namur  [Calcutta  Med.  Trans., 
 vol.  i.  p.  367).  This  oil  has  been  already  described 
 by  Mr.  Hatchett  [On  the  Spikenard  of  the  Ancients), 
 who  refers  it  to  andropogon  Iwarancusa.  It  is 
 derived,  however,  as  appears  by  specimens  in  my 
 possession,  from  a  different  plant ;  to  which,  be- 
 lieving it  to  be  a  new  species,  I  have  given  the 
 name  of  andropogon  calamus  aromaticus'  (p.  34). 
 'This  species  is  Vound  in  Central  India,  extends 
 north  as  far  as  Delhi,  and  south  to  between  the 
 Godavery  and  Nagpore,  where,  according  to  Dr. 
 Malcolmson,  it  is  called  spear-grass.  The  speci- 
 mens which  Mr.  H.  obtained  from  Mr.  Swinton, 
 I  have  had  an  opportunity  of  examining  :  they  are 
 identical  with  my  own  from  the  same  part  of  India' 
 (Royle,  Illust.  Himal.  Bot.,  p.  425). 
 
KARCOM 
 
 710 
 
 KARCOM 
 
 As  this  plant  is  a  true  grass,  it  has  necessarily 
 reed-like  stems  (the  ffvpiyyia  of  Dioscorides).  They 
 are  remarkable  for  their  agreeable  odour  :  so  are 
 the  leaves  when  bruised,  and  also  the  delightfully 
 fragrant  oil  distilled  from  them.  Hence  it  appears 
 more  fully  entitled  to  the  commendations  which 
 the  calatnus  aromaticiis  or  sweet-cane  has  received, 
 than  any  other  plant  that  has  been  described,  even 
 the  attar  of  roses  hardly  excepted.  That  a  grass 
 similar  to  the  fragrant  andropogon,  or  at  least  one 
 growing  in  the  same  kind  of  soil  and  climate,  was 
 employed  by  the  ancients,  we  have  evidence  in  the 
 fact  of  the  Phoenicians  who  accompanied  Alexander 
 in  his  march  across  the  arid  country  of  Gedrosia 
 having  recognised  and  loaded  their  cattle  with  it, 
 as  one  of  the  perfumes  of  commerce.  It  is  in  a 
 similar  country,  that  is,  the  arid  plains  of  Central 
 India,  that  the  above  andropogon  calamus  arotnati- 
 ciis  is  found,  and  where  the  fragrant  essential  oil  is 
 distilled  from  its  leaves,  culms,  and  roots  {Essay  on 
 Hindoo  Medicine,  p.  142). 
 
 If  we  compare  the  foregoing  statement  with  the 
 different  passages  of  Scripture,  we  shall  find  that 
 this  fragrant  grass  answers  to  all  that  is  required. 
 Thus,  in  Exod.  xxx.  23,  the  fragrant  reed,  along 
 with  the  principal  spices,  such  as  myrrh,  sweet 
 cinnamon,  and  cassia,  is  directed  to  be  made  into 
 an  oil  of  holy  ointment.  So  the  calanuis  arotnati- 
 cus  may  be  found  mentioned  as  an  ingredient  in 
 numerous  fragrant  oils  and  ointments,  from  the 
 time  of  Theophrastus  to  that  of  the  Arabs.  Its 
 essential  oil  is  now  sold  in  the  shops,  but  under  the 
 erroneous  name  of  oil  of  spikenard,  which  is  a  very 
 different  substance.  [Nard.  ]  In  Cant.  iv.  14  it 
 is  mentioned  along  with  spikenard,  saffron,  cinna- 
 mon, trees  of  frankincense,  myrrh,  and  aloes. 
 Again,  its  value  is  indicated  in  Is.  (xliii.  24),  '  thou 
 hast  bought  me  no  sweet  cane  with  money  ; '  and 
 that  it  was  obtained  from  a  distant  land  is  indi- 
 cated in  Jer.  vi.  20,  '  to  what  purpose  cometh  there 
 to  me  incense  from  Sheba,  and  the  sweet  cane 
 from  a  far  country  ?'— while  the  route  of  the  com- 
 merce is  pointed  out  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  19,  '  Dan  also 
 and  Javan  going  to  and  fro  occupied  in  thy  fairs  : 
 bright  iron,  cassia,  and  calamus  were  in  thy  market.' 
 To  the  Scripture  notices,  then,  as  well  as  to  the 
 description  of  Dioscorides,  the  tall  grass  which 
 yields  the  fragrant  grass-oil  of  Central  India  answers 
 in  every  respect  :  tlie  author  of  this  article  conse- 
 quently named  and  figured  it  as  the  Ka7ieh  bosem 
 in  his  Illiislr.  of  Himal.  Botany,  p.  425,  t.  97. — 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 KARCOM  (D3"13  ;  Sept.    /cpiKos)    occurs  only 
 
 once  in  the  O.  T.,  viz.,  in  Cant.  iv.  14,  where  it  is 
 mentioned  along  with  several  fragrant  and  stimu- 
 lant substances,  such  as  spikenard,  calamus,  and 
 cinnamon,  trees  of  frankincense,  myrrh,  and  aloes 
 (ahalim)  ;  we  may,  therefore,  suppose  that  it  was 
 some  substance  possessed  of  similar  properties. 
 The  name,   however,  is  so  similar  to  the  Persian 
 
 X  C  karka/n,  and  both  to  the  Greek  Kp6Kos,  that 
 
 we  have  no  difficulty  in  tracing  the  Hebrew  karcoin 
 to  the  modern  crocus  or  saffron  ;  but,  in  fact,  the 
 most  ancient  Greek  translators  of  the  O.  T.  con- 
 sided  KpbKoz  as  the  synonym  for  karcom.  It  is  also 
 probable  that  all  three  names  had  one  common 
 Origin,  saffron  having  from  the  earliest  times  been 
 cultivated  in  Asiatic  countries,  as  it  still  is  in  Persia 
 and  Cashmere.     Crocus  is  mentioned  by  Homer, 
 
 Hippocrates,  and  Theophrastus.  Dioscorides  de- 
 scribes the  different  kinds  of  it,  and  Pliny  stales 
 that  the  benches  of  the  public  theatres  were  strewed 
 with  saffron  ;  indeed  '  the  ancients  frequently  made 
 use  of  this  flower  in  perfumes.  Not  only  saloons, 
 theatres,  and  places  which  were  to  be  filled  with  a 
 pleasant  fragrance,  were  strewed  with  this  sub- 
 stance, but  all  sorts  of  vinous  tinctures  retaining 
 the  scent  were  made  of  it,  and  this  costly  perfume 
 was  poured  into  small  fountains,  which  diffused  the 
 odour  which  was  so  highly  esteemed.  Even  fruit 
 and  confitures  placed  before  guests,  and  the  orna- 
 ments of  the  rooms,  were  spread  over  with  it.  It 
 was  used  for  the  same  purposes  as  the  modern  pot- 
 pourri'  (Rosenmiiller,  Bibl.  Bot.,  p.  138).  In  the 
 present  day  a  very  high  price  is  given  in  India  for 
 saffron  imported  from  Cashmere  ;  native  dishes  are 
 often  coloured  and  flavoured  with  it,  and  it  is  in 
 high  esteem  as  a  stimulant  medicine.  The  com- 
 mon name,  saffron,  is  no  doubt  derived  from  the 
 
 Arabic  .SJiz],  zafran,  as  are  the  corresponding 
 terms  in  most  of  the  languages  of  Europe. 
 
 295.  Crocus  sativus. 
 
 Nothing,  therefore,  was  more  likely  than  that 
 saffron  should  be  associated  with  the  foregoing 
 fragrant  substances  in  the  passage  of  Canticles, 
 as  it  still  continues  to  be  esteemed  by  Asiatic 
 nations,  and,  as  we  have  seen,  to  be  cultivated 
 by  them.  Hasselquist  also,  in  reference  to  this 
 Biblical  plant,  describes  the  ground  between 
 Smyrna  and  Magnesia  as  in  some  places  covered 
 with  saffron,  and  Rauwolf  mentions  gardens  and 
 fields  of  crocus  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Aleppo, 
 and  particularizes  a  fragrant  variety  in  Syria. 
 
 The  name  saffron,  as  usually  applied,  does  not 
 denote  the  whole  plant,  nor  even  the  whole  flower 
 of  crocus  sativus,  but  only  the  stigmas,  with  part 
 of  the  style,  which,  being  plucked  out,  are  carefully 
 dried.  These,  when  prepared,  are  dry,  naiTow, 
 thread-like,  and  twisted  together,  of  an  orange- 
 yellow  colour,  having  a  peculiar  aromatic  and 
 penetrating  odour,  with  a  bitterish  and  somewhat 
 aromatic  taste,  tinging  the  mouth  and  saliva  of  a 
 yellow  colour.  Sometimes  the  stigmas  are  pre- 
 pared by  being  submitted  to  pressure,  and  thus 
 made   into  what  is  called  cake  saffron,  a  form  in 
 
KAREM 
 
 711 
 
 KARPAS 
 
 which  it  is  still  imported  from  Persia  into  India. 
 Hay  safifron  is  oVjtained  in  this  country  chiefly  from 
 France  and  Spain,  thougli  it  is  also  sometimes 
 prepared  from  the  native  crocus  cultivated  for  this 
 purpose.  Saffron  was  formerly  highly  esteemed  as 
 a  stimulant  medicine,  and  still  enjoys  high  repute 
 in  Eastern  countries,  both  as  a  medicine  and  as  a 
 condiment. — J.  F.  R. 
 
 KAREM  {Kap4/j.).  In  the  Septuagint  version  a 
 group  of  eleven  towns  is  inserted  between  vers.  59 
 and  60  of  Josh,  xv.,  and  among  these  is  Karem. 
 This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  the  question  of  the 
 genuineness  of  that  passage.  It  is  enough  to  say 
 that  it  does  not  occur  in  any  Hebrew  MS.  ;  that 
 Jerome  affirms  that  it  does  not  exist  in  the  Hebrew, 
 nor  in  any  version  besides  the  LXX.  ;  that  it  does 
 exist  now,  and  always  has  existed,  in  the  various 
 codices  of  the  LXX.  Jerome  thinks  the  passage 
 genuine,  but  wilfully  omitted  by  Jewish  copyists 
 {^Comment,  in  Mich.  v.  2);  Clericus  and  Capellus 
 also  think  it  genuine,  but  omitted  by  Homoiotchuton 
 {Crit.  Sac.  iv.  5.  3)  ;  Buxtorf,  Rosenmiiller,  and 
 others,  pronounce  it  spurious.  There  can  be  no 
 doubt  that  these  towns  are  all  situated  in  the  dis- 
 trict lying  between  Bethzur  and  Jerusalem,  and 
 none  of  the  other  groups  contain  any  town  in  that 
 district.  Karem  is  doubtless  identical  with  the 
 modern  Ain  Kdrcrn,  a  little  village  situated  on  the 
 left  bank  of  Wady  Beit  Hanina,  three  and  a  half 
 miles  west  of  Jerusalem.  It  is  the  reputed  birth- 
 place of  John  the  Baptist.  It  contains  a  convent 
 and  church ;  the  latter  is  said  to  occupy  the  site  of 
 the  house  of  Zacharias.  A  grotto  beneath  the 
 church  has  the  following  legend  inscribed  on  a  slab 
 in  the  floor  : — '  Hie  Prsecursor  Domini  natus  est ' 
 (Quaresmius,  ii.  709,  seq.;  Handbook  for  S.  and  P., 
 p.  233  ;  Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  2725  '^xhon,  Lands 
 of  the  Bible,  ii.  266).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 KARKAA  ir\'^\>'Sv:ir\,  with  the  art.  and  H  local, 
 
 T  T  :  — 
 
 'floor,'  and  perhaps  'flat;'  KaS?;?  ;  Carcaa),  a 
 place  on  the  southern  border  of  Judah,  situated  on 
 the  high  table-land  west  of  Kadesh-barnea  (Josh. 
 XV.  3).  It  is  not  again  mentioned,  and  the  site  is 
 unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KARKOR  Op"lp_,  '  level  ground'  =  j     i;  Ka/)- 
 
 Kop ;  Alex.  Kap/cd ;  omitted  in  the  Vulgate),  a  place 
 on  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan  to  which  Zeba  and  Zal- 
 munna  fled  with  their  army  when  defeated  by  Gideon 
 (Judg.  viii.  10).  Its  situation  is  not  described,  but 
 we  read  that  when  Gideon  pursued  them,  he  'v/ent 
 lip  (from  the  ford  at  Succoth)  by  the  way  of  them 
 that  dwell  in  tents,  on  the  east  of  Nobah  and  Jog- 
 behah'  (ver.  11).  It  must  therefore  have  been 
 somewhere  on  the  level  plateau  of  Mishor,  near 
 the  eastern  border  of  Moab  [Jogbehah].  Euse- 
 bius  and  Jerome  mention  it  as  in  their  day  a  castle 
 {(ppodpiov)  a  day's  journey  distant  from  Petra  (Ono- 
 mast.,  s.v.  Carcar).  The  site  is  now  unknown  ; 
 but  that  assigned  to  it  by  Eusebius  seems  too  far 
 south.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 KARPAS  (DSna)  occurs  in  the  book  of  Esther 
 
 (i.  6),  in  the  description  of  the  hangings  '  in  the 
 court  of  the  garden  of  the  king's  palace,'  at  the 
 time  of  the  great  feast  given  in  the  city  Shushan, 
 or  Susan,  by  Ahasuerus,  who  '  reigned  from  India 
 even  unto  Ethiopia,'     We  are  told  that  there  were 
 
 white,  green  {karpas),  and  blue  hangings  fastened 
 with  cords  of  fine  linen  and  purple  to  silver  rincrs 
 and  pillars  of  marble.  Karpas  is  translated  gi-een 
 in  our  version,  on  the  authority,  it  is  said,  '  of  the 
 Chaldee  paraphrase,'  where  it  is  interpreted  leek- 
 g)-cen.     Rosenmiiller  and  others  derive  the  Hebrew 
 
 word   from    the    Arabic    .  . ^  \  C ,    kurifs,    which 
 
 signifies  '  garden-parsley,'  apitan  petroseliniun,  as 
 if  it  alluded  to  the  green  colour  of  this  plant ;  at 
 the  same  time  arguing  that  as  '  the  word  karpas  is 
 placed  between  two  other  words  which  undoubtedly 
 denote  colours,  viz.,  the  ivhite  and  the  picrple-bhie, 
 it  probably  also  does  the  same.'  But  if  two  of  the 
 words  denote  colours,  it  would  appear  a  good 
 reason  why  the  third  should  refer  to  the  substance 
 which  was  coloured.  This,  there  is  little  doubt, 
 is  what  was  intended.  If  we  consider  that  the 
 occurrences  related  took  place  at  the  Persian  court 
 at  a  time  when  it  held  sway  even  unto  India,  and 
 that  the  account  is  by  some  supposed  to  have  been 
 originally  written  in  the  ancient  language  of  Persia, 
 we  may  suppose  that  some  foreign  words  may  have 
 been  introduced  to  indicate  even  an  already  well- 
 known  substance  :  but  more  especially  so  if  the 
 substance  itself  was  then  first  made  known  to  the 
 Hebrews. 
 
 The  Hebrew  karpas  is  very  similar  to  the  Sans- 
 crit karpasH7n,  karpasa,  or  karpase,  signifying  the 
 cotton-plant.  Celsius  [Hierobot.  i.  159)  states  that 
 the  Arabs  and  Persians  have  karphas  and  kirbas  as 
 names  for  cotton.  These  must  no  doubt  be  derived 
 from  the  Sanscrit,  while  the  word  kapas  is  now 
 applied  throughout  India  to  cotton  with  the  seed, 
 and  may  even  be  seen  in  English  prices-current. 
 Kctp'Tracros  occurs  in  the  Periplus  of  Arrian,  who 
 states  that  the  region  about  the  Gulf  of  Barygaze, 
 in  India,  was  productive  of  carpastis,  and  of  the 
 fine  Indian  muslins  made  of  it.  The  word  is  no 
 doubt  derived  from  the  Sanscrit  karpasa,  and 
 though  it  has  been  translated  fne  mas/in  by  Dr. 
 Vincent,  it  may  mean  cotton  cloths,  or  calico  in 
 general.  Mr.  Yates,  in  his  valuable  work,  Tex- 
 triman  Antiijiioriim,  states  that  the  earliest  notice 
 of  this  Oriental  name  in  any  classical  author  which 
 he  has  met  with,  is  the  line  '  Carbasina,  molochma, 
 ampelina'  of  Csecilius  Statins,  who  died  B  c.  169. 
 Mr.  Yates  infers  that  as  this  poet  translated  from 
 the  Greek,  so  the  Greeks  must  have  made  use  of 
 muslins  or  calicoes,  etc.,  which  were  brought  from 
 India  as  early  as  200  years  B.C.  See  his  work,  as 
 well  as  that  of  Celsius,  for  numerous  quotations 
 from  classical  authors,  where  carbasus  occurs ; 
 proving  that  not  only  the  word,  but  the  substance 
 which  it  indicated,  was  known  to  the  ancients 
 subsequent  to  this  period.  It  might,  indeed  must, 
 have  been  known  long  before  to  the  Persians,  as 
 constant  communication  took  place  by  caravans 
 between  the  north  of  India  and  Persia,  as  has  been 
 clearly  shewn  by  Heeren.  Cotton  was  known  to 
 Ctesias,  who  lived  so  long  at  the  Persian  court. 
 
 Nothing  can  be  more  suitable  than  cotton,  white 
 and  blue,  in  the  above  passage  of  Esther,  as  the 
 writer  of  this  article  long  since  (1837)  remarked  in  a 
 note  in  his  Essay  on  the  Antiquity  of  Hindoo  Medi- 
 cine, p.  145  :  '  Hanging  curtains  made  with  calico, 
 usuallyin  stripes  of  different  colours  and  padded  with 
 cotton,  called  purdahs,  are  employed  throughout 
 India  as  a  substitute  for  doors.'  They  mav  be  seen 
 used  for  the  very  purposes  mentioned  in  the  text  ir 
 
KARTAH 
 
 712 
 
 KEDAR 
 
 the  court  of  the  King  of  Delhi's  palace,  where,  on  a 
 paved  mosaic  terrace,  rows  of  splendid  pillars  sup- 
 port a  light  roof,  from  which  hang  by  rings  im- 
 mense padded  and  striped  curtains,  which  may  be 
 rolled  up  or  removed  at  pleasure.  These  either 
 increase  light  or  ventilation,  and  form,  in  fact,  a 
 kind  of  movable  wall  to  the  building,  which  is 
 used  as  one  of  the  halls  of  audience.  This  kind  of 
 structure  was  probably  introduced  by  the  Persian 
 conquerors  of  India,  and  therefore  may  serve  to 
 explain  the  object  of  the  colonnade  in  front  of 
 the  palace  in  the  ruins  of  Persepolis  [Cotton]. — 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 KARTAH  (nmip,  'city;'  Kd57?s;  Alex.  Kd/sSha; 
 
 Cartha),  a  city  of  Zebulun,  assigned  to  the  Levites 
 together  with  Jokneam  (Josh.  xxi.  34).  It  is  not 
 again  mentioned  in  Scripture.  The  parallel  pas- 
 sage in  I  Chron.  vi.  77,  has  Rimnion  and  Tabor 
 instead  of  Jokneam  and  Kartah  ;  but  the  Alex. 
 Codex  of  the  LXX.  reads  as  in  Joshua.  The 
 town  does  not  seem  to  have  been  known  to  Euse- 
 bius  and  Jerome  {Onomast.,  s.v.  Cartha).  Van 
 de  Velde  suggests  that  it  may  be  identical  with  el- 
 Harti,  a  village  with  traces  of  antiquity  on  the 
 banks  of  the  Kishon  at  the  base  of  Carmel,  and 
 only  a  few  miles  north-vi'est  of  the  site  of  Jokneam 
 {Memoir,  p.  327).  The  names,  however,  are  radi- 
 cally different. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KARTAN  (jmp,  an  ancient  dual  form,   '  two 
 
 towns ; '  Qcfifxicv  ;  Alex.  'Noe/x/xwi' ;  Carthan),  one 
 of  the  three  cities  assigned  to  the  Levites  out  of  the 
 tribe  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xxi.  32).  The  parallel 
 passage  m  l  Chron.  vi.  76  (61)  reads  Kirjathaim, 
 which  IS  just  the  same  word  differently  inflected 
 (D''n''"lp,    'two   towns;'  Kayom^aiV).     Nothing  is 
 
 known  of  its  history  or  site.  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
 only  mention  it  as  a  Levitical  city  of  Naphtali 
 {Onomast.,  s.v,  Cartham). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KATTATH  (n^p  =  njtpp,  '  small ;' KaTai/d^ ; 
 Alex.  KaTTda- ;  Cateth),  a  town  of  Zebulun  (Josh. 
 xix.  15).  Gesenius  and  Rosenmiiller  suggest  that 
 Kattath  is  the  same  as  Kitron  (jlipp),  which  is 
 
 mentioned  in  Judg.  i.  30  ;  but  there  is  no  evidence 
 for  this.  Kattath  has  not  been  identified,  and  we 
 have  no  data  to  fix  its  site. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KEACH,  Benjamin,  a  distinguished  divine  of 
 the  Baptist  denomination,  was  born  in  Bucking- 
 hamshire, Feb.  29,  1640,  and  died  in  Southward, 
 July  18,  1704.  His  parents,  too  poor  to  give  him 
 a  liberal  education,  intended  him  for  business,  but 
 his  aspirations  were  after  literature,  and  he  eagerly 
 devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures.  At 
 the  age  of  fifteen  he  joined  the  Baptist  church  in 
 Winslow,  and  three  years  afterwards  was  chosen 
 by  the  members  of  the  same  church  as  their  pastor. 
 After  the  restoration,  in  common  with  multitudes, 
 he  suffered  persecution.  Finding  no  rest  from  in- 
 formers in  the  country,  he  sought  refuge  in  London, 
 where,  with  his  wife  and  family,  he  arrived  penni- 
 less, having  been  robbed  on  the  way.  Soon  after  he 
 was  ordained  pastor  of  a  small  society  which  met 
 in  a  private  house  in  Tooley  Street.  His  congre- 
 gation, however,  increased,  and  erected  a  com- 
 modious house  of  worship  in  Horsely  Down, 
 Southwark,  where  Dr.  Gill  afterwaras  preached. 
 He  was  very  popular ;   and  his   congregation  at 
 
 length  averaged  one  thousand  persons.  His  pen 
 was  ever  active.  He  published  forty-three  works, 
 of  which  sixteen  were  controversial,  nine  poetical, 
 and  eighteen  practical  and  expository.  The  works 
 by  which  he  is  usually  known  are  : — Tropologia; 
 or  a  Key  to  Open  the  Scripture  Metaphors  and 
 Types,  London  1682,  best  ed.  1779,  reprinted  in 
 Ireland  1856,  i  vol.  imp.  8vo ;  2.  Gospel  Mysteries 
 Revealed ;  or  an  Exposition  of  all  the  Parables,  and 
 many  express  Similitudes,  co7itained  in  the  Four 
 Evangelists,  1701,  folio  ;  1815,  4  vols.  8vo  ;  1856, 
 I  vol.  royal  8vo.  Mingled  with  unquestioned 
 reverence  for  the  divine  word,  and  much  good 
 material  of  which  the  judicious  student  may  avail 
 himself  with  advantage,  there  is  a  large  amount  of 
 fanciful  exposition  and  of  unwise  spiritualising  in 
 these  volumes. — I.  J 
 
 KEDAR   ("inp,    'black;'  Yi.-r\Up;   Cedar),  the 
 
 second  son  of  Ishmael  and  founder  of  one  of  the 
 most  distinguished  tribes  of  Arabia  (Gen.  xxv.  13- 
 16).  The  word  Kedar  signifies  'black,'  and  the 
 tents  of  the  tribe,  like  all  those  of  the  Bedawin  of 
 the  present  day,  were  black  (Cant.  i.  5)  5  hence 
 some  have  supposed  that  the  name  was  given  to 
 the  tribe  because  of  the  colour  of  their  tents. 
 Others  think  that  the  name  originated  in  the  dark- 
 ness of  their  complexion  (Bochart,  Opera,  i.  216). 
 This  is  all  mere  conjecture.  The  name  was  first 
 borne  by  the  son  of  Ishmael;  but  whether  it 
 originated,  like  that  of  Esau,  in  any  peculiarity  in 
 the  child,  or  in  any  event  in  his  after  life,  we 
 cannot  tell.  The  tents  of  all  the  nomad  tribes  of 
 Arabia  are  black,  and  the  colour  of  their  skin  is 
 uniformly  of  a  light  bronze  hue,  so  that  the  name 
 Kedar  was  in  these  respects  no  more  applicable  to 
 one  tribe  than  another. 
 
 The  'children  of  Kedar'  (Tip  ""JS,  Is.  xxi.  17) 
 were  well  known  to  the  Israelites,  and  are  more 
 frequently  spoken  of  in  Scripture  than  any  of  the 
 other  Arab  tribes.  Several  particulars  are  men- 
 tioned calculated  to  illustrate  their  mode  of  life,  and 
 to  indicate  their  place  of  abode.  They  dwelt 
 chiefly  in  tents  (Ps.  cxx.  5),  though  some  of  them 
 occupied  cities  and  villages  C^iy  and  D''"lVn ;  Is. 
 xlii.  11)  in  the  midst  of  the  wilderness  of  Arabia, 
 apparently  in  a  mountainous  and  rocky  district. 
 They  were  rich  in  flocks  :  '  All  the  flocks  of  Kedar 
 shall  be  gathered  together  unto  thee'  (Is.  Ix.  7); 
 in  camels  and  cattle :  '  Their  camels  shall  be  a 
 booty  and  the  multitude  of  their  cattle  a  spoil' 
 ( Jer.  xlix.  32) ;  and  with  these  they  supplied  the 
 marts  of  Tyre  during  the  period  of  its  glory  and 
 power  (Ezek.  xxvii.  21).  The  children  of  Kedar 
 were  also  celebrated  as  warriors.  Isaiah,  when 
 foretelling  their  fall,  says,  '  All  the  glory  of  Kedar 
 shall  fail,  and  the  residue  of  the  number  of  archers, 
 the  mighty  men  of  the  children  of  Kedar'  (xxi. 
 16,  17). 
 
 Guided  by  these  notices,  we  infer  that  the 
 tribe  of  Kedar  had  its  nucleus  in  the  hill  country, 
 north  of  Medina,  where  there  are  still  villages  and 
 fortresses,  and  that  their  pasture-grounds  extended 
 to  the  eastern  borders  of  Syria  on  the  one  side,  and 
 on  the  other  to  the  shore  of  the  Red  Sea,  some  of 
 the  islands  in  which  they  appear  to  have  occupied 
 (Is.  xlii.  II,  12;  Forster's  Geography  of  Arabia,  i. 
 242,  sq.)  Pliny  speaks  of  an  Arab  tribe  called 
 Cedrei,  as  dwelling  in  this  region,  and  adjoining  the 
 Nabatheans  (//.  N.  v.  12);  there  can  be  no  doubt 
 of  their  identity   with    the    children    of    Kedar. 
 
KEDEMOTH 
 
 713 
 
 KEDESH 
 
 Ptolemy  calls  them  Darrae  [Geog.  vi.  7),  evidently 
 a  corruption  of  the  ancient  Hebrew ;  and  Forster 
 supposes  that  it  is  the  same  people  Arrian  refers  to 
 as  the  Kanraitae,  which  he  thinks  should  be  read 
 Kadraitae  [Geog.  of  Arabia,  i.  247).  A  very 
 ancient  Arab  tradition  states  that  Kedar  settled  in 
 the  Hedjaz,  the  country  round  Mecca  and  Medina, 
 and  that  his  descendants  have  ever  since  ruled  there 
 (Abulfedae  Hist.  Anteislainica,  ed.  Fleischer,  \y. 
 192).  From  Kedar  sprung  the  distinguished  tribe 
 of  Koreish,  to  which  Mohammed  belonged. 
 
 The  Ishmaelites  are  well  known  to  be  an  un- 
 changing people.  Their  customs  and  national 
 characteristics  they  have  retained  unchanged  from 
 the  earliest  ages.  Every  tribe  also  clings  with  a 
 wonderful  tenacity  to  the  homes,  fountains,  and 
 pasture  lands  of  their  ancestors.  There  can  be 
 little  doubt,  therefore,  that  the  tradition  is  true 
 that  the  Hedjaz  is  still  peopled  by  Kedarite  tribes, 
 though  the  name  has  disappeared.  The  Kedarites 
 were  distinguished  among  all  the  Ishmaelites  for 
 the  fierceness  of  their  character,  and  their  skill  in 
 arms.  'Woe  is  me,'  writes  the  Psalmist,  'that  I 
 dwell  in  the  tents  of  Kedar.  My  soul  hath  long 
 dwelt  with  him  that  hateth  peace.  I  am  for  peace ; 
 but,  when  I  speak,  they  are  for  war''  (cxx.  5). 
 Isaiah,  too,  celebrates  the  glory  of  Kedar,  namely, 
 '  its  archers,^  and  its  '  mighty  men'  (xxi.  17).  It  is 
 a  remarkable  fact,  that  at  the  present  time  the 
 inhabitants  of  the  Hedjaz  are  composed  of  the 
 powerful  and  warlike  tribe  called  Beni  Ilarb, 
 '  children  of  ivar ;''  some  of  whom  live  in  villages 
 and  towns,  but  most  of  them  in  tents.  Burck- 
 hardt  says  they  can  muster  about  40,000  match- 
 locks, and,  next  to  the  Anezes,  they  '  constitute  the 
 most  formidable  association  of  Bedawin  in  Arabia' 
 (Notes  Oft  the  Bedouin  and  IVahabys,  p.  234). 
 They  are  still  rich  in  flocks  and  herds  ;  and  they 
 dwell  in  safety  among  their  native  hills,  just  as 
 their  forefathers  did  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah,  who 
 says  of  them,  '  Get  you  up  unto  the  wealthy 
 nation  that  dwelleth  without  care,  which  have 
 neither  gates  nor  bars,  which  dwell  alone.  And 
 their  camels  shall  be  a  booty,  and  the  multitude  of 
 their  cattle  a  spoil'  (xlix.  31,  32).  Thus  we  find 
 the  descendants  of  Kedar,  the  son  of  Ishmael,  re- 
 taining through  nearly  four  thousand  years  the  very 
 possessions  originally  occupied  by  their  founder  ; 
 and  retaining  also  their  national  characteristics, 
 habits,  and  even  property.  This  is  just  another 
 proof  of  the  literal  fulfilment  of  the  prophetic  pro- 
 mise regarding  Ishmael — '  He  will  be  a  wild  man  ; 
 his  hand  against  every  man,  and  every  man's  hand 
 against  him  ;  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  presence  of 
 all  his  brethren'  (Gen.  xvi.  12).  In  addition  to 
 the  valuable  works  of  Forster  and  Burckhardt 
 already  referred  to,  the  student  may  consult  Re- 
 land,  Falast.,  p.  96,  seq ;  Wellsted,  Travels  in 
 Arabia,  ii.  231,  seg ;  Wallin's  Journey  through 
 Arabia,  in  Journal  of  R.  Geog.  Soc,  vols.  xx. 
 and  xxiv.  ;  Bochart,  Opera,  i.  pp.  142,  214. — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 KEDEMOTH   (n'lOnp,    'beginnings,'  or  per- 
 
 haps  '  eastern  ;'  KeSa/tcoS-,  Ba/ceSyttciS-,  and  Ka5- 
 /uci^ ;  Alex.  Ke5wc63-,  Ke57;/ia>3-,  and  Ka^TySciS-  ; 
 Cadeinoth),  a  town  on  the  eastern  side  of  Moab, 
 near  the  river  Arnon,  with  a  'wilderness'  or  '  pas- 
 ture land'  ("1210)  encircling  it,  called  by  the  same 
 name  (Deut.  ii.  24-26).  It  was  assigned  to  the 
 tribe  of  Reuben  (Josh.  xiii.  18),  and  was  one  of 
 
 the  cities  given  out  of  that  tribe  to  the  Levites  (l 
 Chron.  vi.  79).  The  name  may  probably  have 
 originated  in  the  situation  of  the  Kedemoth,  on  the 
 '  eastern '  border  of  Canaan.  The  site  is  not 
 known,  nor  has  the  district  around  it  been  ex- 
 plored.—J.  L.  P. 
 
 KEDESH   (ti'lp,    'sanctuary;'  KdS???,  KdSes; 
 
 Alex.  K^Ses  ;  Cades),  i.  A  town  on  the  south- 
 eastern border  of  Judah,  near  the  confines  of  Edom 
 (Josh.  XV.  23).  In  Josh.  xv.  3,  Kadesh-barnea  is 
 mentioned  as  a  border  city  of  Judah  towards  Edom  ; 
 and  then  in  ver.  23  the  writer  says  '  the  uttermost 
 cities  of  the  tribe  of  the  children  of  Judah,  toward 
 the  coast  of  Edom  southward,  were,' — and  among 
 them  is  Kedesh.  The  words  are  indentical  in  He- 
 brew, though  differently  pointed,  and  it  may, 
 therefore,  be  safely  concluded  that  Kedesh  and 
 Kadesh-barnea  are  identical.     [Kadesh-BARNEA.] 
 
 2.  (KeSes ;  Alex.  K^See  ;  Cedes),  a  town  of  Issa- 
 char  allotted  to  the  Levites  (i  Chron.  vi.  72  (57). 
 The  parallel  passage  in  Josh.  xxi.  28  has  Kishon 
 (fVC'p  ;  Kio-w;/ ;  Alex.  Ktcrtwi').      Keil  remarks  that 
 
 the  reading  Kedesh  in  Chronicles  is  probably  an 
 error  ;  it  is  much  more  probable  that  for  some 
 reason  or  other  the  original  name  was  changed,  or 
 that  the  city,  like  many  others,  had  two  names. 
 
 [KiSHON.] 
 
 3.  Kedesh  -  Naphtali    (vriD3  CHp  ;    EdS?;? 
 
 m^p^aXi) ;  also  called  Kedesh  in  Galilee  (Josh, 
 xxi.  32)  and  simply  Kedesh  (Josh.  xix.  37),  an 
 ancient  Canaanitish  town  allotted  to  the  tribe  of 
 Naphtali  (/.  c.),  and  subsequently  assigned  to  the 
 Levites,  and  made  one  of  the  three  cities  of  refuge 
 west  of  the  Jordan  (Josh.  xxi.  32).  It  seems  to 
 have  been  a  'sanctuary'  of  the  old  Canaanites  ; 
 and  the  Israelites,  while  they  retained  the  name 
 denoting  its  character,  made  it  in  some  respect 
 their  '  sanctuary'  also.  It  was  emphatically  Kedesh 
 Naphtali,  '  the  holy  place  of  Naphtali,'  and  the 
 asylum  of  all  northern  Palestine.  Kedes'.:  was 
 principally  celebrated  as  the  home  of  Barak,  and 
 the  gathering-place  of  that  noble  band  of  patriots 
 who,  on  the  banks  of  the  Kishon,  freed  Israel  from 
 the  power  of  the  king  of  Hazor  and  his  general 
 Sisera  (Judg.  iv.)  Kedesh  lay  on  the  northern 
 frontier  of  Palestine,  and  had  to  bear  the  brunt  of 
 the  first  incursion  of  the  Assyrians.  With  other 
 cities  round  it — Dan,  Ijon,  Abel,  etc. — it  was  cap- 
 tured by  Tiglath-pileser,  and  its  inhabitants  carried 
 away  to  Assyria  (2  Kings  xv.  29).  The  city  ap- 
 pears no  more  in  sacred  history  ;  but  until  this  day 
 it  has  never  been  wholly  destroyed  or  desolated. 
 We  read  of  it  during  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees 
 (i  Maccab.  xi.  63),  when  it  was  reckoned  a  town 
 of  Galilee.  Josephus  calls  it  t)  K^Seo-a  (Antiq.  v. 
 I.  18),  and  describes  it  as  situated  on  the  confines 
 of  the  countiy  of  Tyre  in  Upper  Galilee  (xiii.  5.  6). 
 In  his  time  it  appears  to  have  passed  into  the  hands 
 of  the  Tyrians  [Bell.  Jtid.  ii.  18.  i) ;  though  Reland 
 supposes,  without  any  real  grounds,  that  there  was 
 another  Kedesh  near  Tyre  {Pal.,  p.  697).  Euse- 
 bius  tells  us  that  it  is  called  KuStxro-is,  and  is 
 situated  eight  miles  from  Tyre,  near  Paneas  {Ono- 
 mast.,  s.  V.  Cedes).  In  the  12th  century  Benjamin  of 
 Tudela  visited  Kedesh,  and  founa  there  the  tomb 
 of  Barak  and  several  Jewish  saints  [Early  Travels 
 in  Pal.,  89). 
 
KEDRON 
 
 714 
 
 KEILAH 
 
 Kedesh  still  retains  its  ancient  name  under  the 
 
 Arabic  form  Kedes  (/yj  Jc)-     The  site  is  beautiful. 
 
 High  up  among  the  mountains  of  Naphtali  is  a 
 little  green  plain,  embosomed  in  wooded  hill  tops. 
 On  its  western  side  is  a  rounded  tell,  on  which  the 
 modern  village  stands.  From  the  tell  a  low  nar- 
 row ridge  projects  into  the  plain,  with  flat  top  and 
 steep  sides,  covered  with  rank  vegetation.  Both 
 ridge  and  tell  are  strewn  with  ruins  ;  a  large  column 
 stands  in  the  centre  of  the  village,  and  two 
 others  lie  beside  it.  On  the  eastern  slope  are 
 heaps  of  hewn  stones,  large  sarcophagi,  broken 
 pillars,  and  other  remnants  of  former  grandeur — 
 here  lying  on  piles  in  tobacco  gardens,  and  there 
 strewn  thickly  over  the  surface,  half  covered  with 
 rubbish  and  rank  weeds.  In  the  plain,  at  the 
 northern  base  of  the  ridge,  round  a  little  fountain,  he 
 the  most  interesting  remains  of  Kedesh.  A  number 
 of  sarcophagi  serve  the  purpose  of  water-troughs. 
 Near  these  are  the  ruins  of  two  beautiful  buildings, 
 but  whether  mausoleums,  temples,  or  synagogues, 
 it  is  difficult  to  determine.  Between  them  is  a  very 
 remarkable  group  of  sarcophagi  standing  on  a  mas- 
 sive platform  of  solid  masonry.  They  were  pro- 
 fusely ornamented  with  sculptures,  now  so  much 
 defaced  that  the  writer,  who  visited  Kedes  in  1858, 
 could  not  make  out  the  subjects.  These  are  doubt- 
 less the  tombs  of  which  Benjamin  of  Tudela  and 
 Brocardus  speak  (chap,  vii.,  p.  173)  ;  and  they  shew 
 that  down  to  a  comparatively  late  period  the  Jews 
 still  regarded  Kedesh  as  a  sanctuaiy.  (See  Hand- 
 hook  for  S.  and  P.,  p.  443;  Robinson,  £.  R.,  iii. 
 pp.  367-369;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  332,  382;  Lec- 
 tures on  Jewish  Church,  317.)  Kedes  is  now  a 
 small  and  miserable  village,  but  the  situation  is  de- 
 lightful, the  air  pure  and  bracing,  and  the  view,  es- 
 pecially towards  the  north-east,  where  Hermon  rises 
 over  the  wooded  height,  rich  and  grand.  The 
 plain  beside  Kedes  and  the  surrounding  hills  are 
 thinly  covered  with  terebinth  and  oak  forests, 
 among  which  the  writer  saw  at  several  places  tlie 
 black  tents  of  a  nomad  tribe  which  frequents  this 
 region.  In  the  narrative  of  Barak's  triumph  we 
 read  that  '  Heber  the  Kenite  .  .  .  had  severed 
 himself  from  the  Kenites  (who  were  settled  in  the 
 south  of  Palestine,  Judg.  i.  16),  and  pitched  his 
 tent  at  the  terebinths  of  Zaanaitn  (or  'of  the  wan- 
 derers;' E.  V.  'the  plain  of  Zaanaim,'  |i^S"7y 
 D''ilJ?V3  ;  ?ws  5/)i;6s  TrXeopeKTovvruv  ;  Alex,  irpbi  opvv 
 
 avairavoixivuv),  ^  which  is  by  Kedesh''  (Judg.  iv.  11). 
 The  features  of  the  country,  and  the  state  of  the 
 people,  do  not  seem  to  be  much  changed  since  the 
 days  of  Barak. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KEDRON.     [KiDRON.] 
 
 KEEPER.     Five  Hebrew  words  are  thus  trans- 
 lated in  the  A.  V. 
 
 1.  ipj,    from   "1Li3,   ciistodivit,    servavit ;    only 
 
 employed  for  a  keeper  of  a  vineyard.  Cant.  i.  6 ; 
 viii.  II.     Akin  to  this  is — 
 
 2.  ip,  from  "IVJ,  Job  xxvii.  18  :— '  As  a  booth 
 
 that  the  keeper  maketh  ;'  cf.  Prov.  xxvii.  18;  Is. 
 xxvii.  3.  The  word  is  elsewhere  rendered  '  watch- 
 man,' 2  Kings  xvii.  9  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  6 ;  or  '  watcher,' 
 Jer.  iv.   16. 
 
 3.   nj?"1,    '  a  shepherd,'  from    HJ?"!,    '  pavit,'    of 
 
 Abel,  Gen.  iv.  2  ;  Moses,  Exod.  iii.  i  ;  David,  i 
 Sam.  xvi.  II  ;  xvii.  34.  The  word  is  almost 
 always  translated  'shepherd,'  either  actual,  Exod. 
 ii.  17;  I  Sam.  xxv.  7  ;  or  metaphorical,  as  of  Cyrus, 
 Is.  xliv.  28  ;  and  of  Jehovah,  Ps.  xxiii.  i  ;  Ixxx.  i 
 (2);  but  sometimes  'pastor'  (only  in  Jer.),  Jer. 
 iii.  15;  x.  21;  or  'herdman,'  Gen.  xiii.  7,  8; 
 xxvi.  20. 
 
 4-  "IDK',  from  "OtJ')  custodivit,  servavit ;   used 
 
 frequently  in  such  phrases  as,  '  keeper  of  the  door 
 or  gate,'  2  Kings  xxii.  4  ;  Neh.  xiii.  22  ;  Esther 
 vi.  2  ;  Jer.  Iii.  24  ;  '  of  the  wardrobe,'  2  Kings  xxii. 
 14  ;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  22  ;  'of  the  watch,'  2  Kings 
 xi.  5  ;  '  of  the  women,'  Esther  ii.  3,  8,  14.  It 
 is  often  translated  'watchman,'  Is.  xxi.  11,  12; 
 Ps.  cxxvii.  I  ;  and  is  used  of  Jehovah,  Ps.  cxxi.  3, 
 4,  5,  etc. 
 
 5.  it/',    'a  prince,'  or   'captain,'  only  in  Gen. 
 
 xxxix.  21,  22,  23,  as  'keeper  of  the  prison  ;'  the 
 same  word  being  used  of  Potiphar,  '  captain  of 
 the  guard,'  Gen.  xxxix.  i  ;  xl.  3  ;  and  of  the  '  chief 
 of  the  butlers  and  chief  of  the  bakers,'  Gen.  xl.  2. 
 — E.  V. 
 
 KEHELATHAH  (nn^^Hp,  i.q.,  H^Hp,  'assem- 
 bly;' Ma/ceXXd3- ;  Alex.  Mct/ceXd^  ;  Ceelatha),  one 
 of  the  stations  of  the  Israelites  between  Sinai  and 
 Kadesh.  It  is  only  mentioned  in  Num.  xxxiii.  22. 
 There  are  no  data  by  which  to  determine  the  site. 
 The  name  may  have  originated  in  some  extraordi' 
 nary  assembly  of  the  people. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 KEIL,  Karl  Aug.  Gottl.,  was  born  at 
 Grossenhain,  23d  April  1 754,  and  died  at  Leipsic, 
 ■svhere  he  was  professor  of  theology,  22d  April 
 1818.  His  writings  are  chiefly  Hermeneutical. 
 In  1810  he  published  Lehrbiich  d.  Herfneneutik, 
 which  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Emmerling, 
 Eletnenta  Her.  Novi  Test.,  Lips.  181 1.  After  his 
 death,  his  occasional  writings  were  collected  and 
 published  under  the  title  of  Opuscula  Academica, 
 by  J.  D.  Goklhom,  Lips.  1821.  Besides  treatises 
 on  topics  of  Hermeneutical  interest,  this  volume 
 contains  several  exegetical  essays,  and  an  elaborate 
 dissertation,  De  Platonica  philosophicB  ad  theol. 
 Christ,  apnd  vet.  eccles.  scriptores  ratione.  Keil  is  a 
 perspicuous  writer,  and  his  works,  though  cold 
 and  formal,  are  full  of  good  sense  and  solid  learn- 
 ing.—W.  L.  A. 
 
 KEILAH  {rb'li'O,  perhaps /V-,  i>'xL'>  'fortress;' 
 
 Kel'Xd^  and  Kei'Xd  ;  Alex.  KeetXd  ;  Ceila),  a  city 
 of  Judah,  situated  in  the  Shephelah  or  plain  of 
 Philistia,  near  Mareshah  and  Nezib  (Josh.  xv.  33, 
 44).  When  David  was  a  refugee  from  the  Israel- 
 itish  court,  Keilah  was  attacked,  and  its  threshing- 
 floors  plundered  by  the  Philistines.  The  inhabi- 
 tants appear  to  have  taken  refuge  within  their 
 walls.  News  was  brought  to  David  ;  he  '  went 
 dinvn '  from  the  mountains  of  Judah,  defeated  the 
 Philistines,  took  away  their  cattle,  and  relieved 
 Keilah  (i  Sam.  xxiii.  1-5).  David  and  his  600 
 followers  settled  for  a  time  in  the  town  ;  but  when 
 an  attack  was  threatened  by  Saul  he  discovered 
 that  the  ungrateful  inhabitants  were  resolved  to  be- 
 tray him ;  and  so  '  David  and  his  men  .  .  .  aros  i 
 and  departed  out  of  Keilah,  and  went  whitherso- 
 
KELEB 
 
 715 
 
 KEMVEL 
 
 ever  they  could  go'  (vers.  6-13).  Keilah  was  one 
 of  the  places  reoccupied  after  the  captivity  (Neh.  iii. 
 17,  l8).  Josephus  calls  the  city  KiXXa  ;  and  Euse- 
 bius  describes  it  as  still  a  village  called  KrjXd,  seven- 
 teen miles  east  of  Eleutheropolis  toward  Hebron  ; 
 but  Jerome  makes  it  only  aj^/ii  miles  (^O)toinast., 
 s.v.  Ceila).  They  both  state  that  it  contained  the 
 tomb  of  the  prophet  Habakkuk  (see  also  s.v.  Echela). 
 The  city  and  tomb  are  mentioned  by  Sozomen 
 {Hist.  vii.  29;  Reland,  Pal.,  p.  698).  Eight 
 Roman  miles  from  Beit  Jibrim,  the  ancient  Eleu- 
 theropolis, on  the  way  to  Hebron,  is  a  large  ruined 
 tower  or  castle  called  Kela.  It  stands  on  a  pro- 
 jecting cliff  on  the  right  bank  of  Wady  el-Feranj 
 (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  328  ;  cf.  Robinson, 
 B.  R.,  iii.  71).  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  this 
 is  the  long-lost  Keilah.  The  situation  corresponds 
 exactly  to  the  incidental  notices  in  the  Bible,  and 
 the  statements  of  Jerome. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KELEB    (373 ;    Sept.    KVibv,    Kvvdpiov).      This 
 
 word  probably  is  onomatopoetic,  and  is  applied 
 to  the  canine  species  from  the  peculiar  sound  of 
 their  cry;  comp.  Germ.  Kliiffeu,  and  Eng.    Yelp. 
 
 Bochart  compares  it  with  the  Arab.  /  >.\Cj  Kelub, 
 a  hook  or  trident,  and  (,2j\i^,  cullabath,  tojtgs 
 (more  properly  ^lJLvli3^,  elhdbatdnt)  ;  and  says, 
 
 '  Canis  indidem  373  dictus  a  firmitate  dentium 
 quibus  morsus  tenacitas  tanta  est  ut  harpaginum  et 
 forcipum  instar  videri  queat'  {Hieroz.,  part  I.  bk. 
 i.   c.  9)  ;  but  it  is  more  likely  that  tlaese  words 
 
 are  derived  themselves  from  the  Arabic   1^  ^A^. 
 
 kelb,  a  rave?ious  animal,  applied  to  both  the  lion 
 and  the  dog.  The  dog  was  used  by  the  Hebrews 
 for  the  purpose  of  watching  houses  (Is.  Ivi.  10) 
 and  flocks  (Job  xxx.  i  [Herds  and  Flocks]). 
 At  a  later  period  we  find  dogs  also  accompanying 
 their  masters  in  their  journeys  (Tob.  v.  16  ;  xi.  4). 
 There  were,  however,  then  as  now,  throughout 
 the  East,  large  numbers  of  unappropriated  dogs, 
 which  wandered  in  troops  through  the  cities  and 
 villages  seeking  food  (i  Kings  xiv.  11  ;  xvi.  4;  2 
 Kings  ix.  10).  '  There  is,'  says  Col.  Hamilton 
 Smith,  '  in  Asia,  still  extant  one,  perhaps  more  than 
 
 296.  Wild  Dog. 
 
 one,  species,  that  never  have  been  the  companions 
 of  man,  and  there  are  races  of  uncertain  origin,  that 
 may  have  been  formerly  domesticated,  but  which 
 are  now  feral,  and  as  fierce  as  wolves  ;  while,  from 
 the  particular  opinions  of  Oriental  nations,  there 
 are  others,  exceedingly  numerous,  neither  wild  nor 
 domesticated,  but  existing  in  all  the  cities  and 
 towns  of  the  Levant,  without  owners  ;  feeding  on 
 carrion  and  offals,  and  still  having  the  time  instinct 
 
 of  protecting  property,  guarding  the  inhabitants  of 
 the  district  or  quarter  where  they  are  tolerated  ; 
 and  so  far  cherished,  that  water  and  some  food  are 
 not  unusually  placed  within  their  reach. 
 
 '  The  true  wild  species  of  Upper  and  Eastern 
 Asia  is  a  low,  sharp-nosed  reddish  cur-do"  not 
 unlike  a  fox,  but  with  less  tail.  In  Persia  and 
 Turkey  there  exists  a  larger  dog,  resembling  a 
 wolf,  exceedingly  savage.  Both  are  gregarious, 
 hunt  in  packs,  but  are  occasionally  seen  alone. 
 They  are  readily  distinguislied  from  a  wolf  by 
 their  shorter  unfurnished  tails. 
 
 'The  street-dog,  without  master,  apparently  de- 
 rived from  the  rufous-cur,  and  in  Egypt  partaking 
 of  the  mongrel  greyhound,  often  more  or  less  bare, 
 with  a  mangy  unctuous  skni,  frequently  with  seve- 
 ral teeth  vanting,  was,  as  it  now  is,  considered  a 
 defiling  animal.  It  is  to  animals  of  this  class, 
 which  no  doubt  followed  the  camp  of  Lrael,  and 
 hung  on  its  skirts,  that  allusion  is  moie  particu- 
 larly made  in  Exod.  xxii.  31  ;  for  the  same  custom 
 exists  at  this  day,  and  the  race  of  street-dogs  still 
 retain  their  ancient  habits.  A  portion  of  the 
 Cairo  packs  annually  become  /ladgis,  and  go  and 
 return  with  the  caravan  to  Mecca,  while  others 
 come  from  Damascus,  acting  in  the  same  manner  ; 
 and  it  is  known  that  the  pilgrims  from  the  banks 
 of  the  Indus  are  similarly  attended  to  Kerbela  : 
 indeed,  eveiy  caravan  is  so,  more  or  less,  by  these 
 poor  animals.  But  with  regard  to  the  dogs  that 
 devoured  Jezebel,  and  licked  up  Ahab's  blood  (i 
 Kings  xxi.  23),  they  may  have  been  of  the  wild 
 races,  a  species  of  which  is  reported  to  have  parti- 
 cularly infested  the  banks  of  the  Kishon  and  the 
 district  of  Jezreel'  (comp.  Stanley,  Sin.  and Fal., 
 350).  The  dog  amorg  the  Hebrews  was  despised 
 and  held  unclean  (Is.  Ixvi.  3)  ;  and  hence  the 
 name  was  used  as  a  term  of  reproach  and  con- 
 tempt (2  Kings  viii.  13),  just  as  it  is  still  in  the 
 East  among  the  Mohammedans,  who  apply  this 
 name  to  Christians.  It  was  also  applied  to  men  of 
 fierce  and  audacious  character  (i  Sam.  xxiv.  14  ; 
 2  Sam.  xvi.  9  ;  Ps.  xxii.  16,  etc.)  From  the  im- 
 ]  udicity  of  the  dog,  the  name  was  applied  to  male 
 prostitutes  (Deut.  xxiii.  18  [19];  see  Rosenmiiller, 
 in  loc.  ;  comp.  KiVes,  Rev.  xxii.  15).  '  In  Egypt, 
 anterior  to  the  Christian  era,  domestic  dogs  were 
 venerated  ;  they  continued  to  be  cherished  till  the 
 Arabian  conquest,  when  they,  like  the  unowned 
 street-dogs,  fell  under  the  imprecation  of  Moham- 
 med, who  with  reluctance,  though  with  good 
 policy,  modified  his  denunciations  and  sentence  of 
 destruction  in  favour  of  hunting-dogs,  and  even 
 permitted  game  killed  by  them  to  be  eaten  under 
 certain  conditions  (Jardine's  Katiiralisi' s  Library, 
 vols.  ix.  and  x. ,  which  contain  the  Canidse).  We 
 figure  a  specimen  of  Feral,  or  wild  dog,  copied 
 from  a  large  Persian  picture  in  the  library  of  the 
 Hon.  East  India  Company.  In  this  picture  the 
 Shah  and  his  sons  are  seen  killing  game,  and 
 among  the  rest  the  dogs  in  question'  (C.  H.  S.)  — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 KEMUEL  (f'^<10p,  congregation  of  God  ;  Sept. 
 
 KatiovrjX).  I.  The  third  son  of  Nahor,  Abra- 
 ham's brother,  by  Milcah,  Gen.  xxii.  21,  'the 
 father  of  Aram,'  who  is  erroneously  identified  by 
 the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  with  the  progenitor  of  the 
 Syrian  people,  Trarepa  'Zvpojv,  '  patrem  Syrorum.' 
 The  name  Aram,  however,  was  of  much  earlier 
 date,  Gen.  x.  22,  23  ;  and  we  should  rather  look 
 
KENATH 
 
 716 
 
 KENITE 
 
 for  Kemuel's  progeny  in  the  tribe  of  Ram,  to  'tlie 
 kindred'  of  which  Elihn,  the  son  of  Bavachel,  the 
 descendant  of  Kemuel's  brother  Buz,  belonged, 
 Job  xxxii.  2. 
 
 2.  The  son  of  Shiphtan,  '  prince  (X'ti*3)  of  the 
 
 tribe  of  Ephraim,'  one  of  the  ten  chiefs  chosen  to 
 allot  the  land  of  Canaan  among  the  tribes,  Num. 
 xxxiv.  24. 
 
 3.  The  father  of  Hashabiah,   '  ruler   ( Ti^)    of 
 
 the  tribe  of  Levi,'  in  the  time  of  David,  I  Chron. 
 xxvii.  17.  If  this  Hashabiah  is  the  same  with  the 
 one  mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter,  i  Chron. 
 xxvi.  30,  who,  with  1700  of  his  kinsmen,  had 
 oversight  of  secular  and  religious  matters  under 
 David  in  the  western  part  of  the  trans-Jordanic 
 district,  Kemuel  must  have  been  a  descendant  of 
 Hebron  the  son  of  Kohath. — E.  V. 
 
 KENATH    (DJp,     '  possession ; '    KadS-    and 
 
 KamS- ;  Alex.  KaawS- ;  Chanath),  a  strong  city 
 of  Bashan,  situated  in  the  province  of  Argob 
 (Num.  xxxii.  42  ;  i  Chron.  ii.  23  ;  of  Deut.  iii. 
 14).  It  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  '  three- 
 score great  cities,  fenced  with  high  walls,  gates, 
 and  bars'  (Deut.  iii.  3,  4),  which  Jair  captured. 
 Nobah,  a  Manassite,  headed  a  separate  expedition 
 against  Kenath,  took  it,  and  called  it  Nobah  (Num. 
 I.e.)  The  new  name  it  retained  for  at  least  two 
 hundred  years,  for  when  Gideon  passed  '  by  the 
 way  of  them  that  dwell  in  tents,'  in  pursuit  of  the 
 kings  of  Midian,  he  went  east  of  Nobah  (Judg. 
 viii.  11)  ;  but  we  hear  no  more  of  it  in  Scripture. 
 It  lay  on  the  eastern  border  of  Manasseh,  among 
 mountains,  on  the  confines  of  a  wild  province,  and 
 exposed  to  the  incursions  of  the  desert  tribes  ;  the 
 Jews,  therefore,  probably  either  abandoned  or 
 were  driven  out  of  it  at  an  early  period.  Josephus 
 calls  the  city  Canatha,  and  locates  it  in  Coelesyria 
 (Kai'aa-d,  Bell.  Jud.  i.  19.  2).  In  his  time  it  was 
 inhabited  by  Arabians,  who  defeated  the  troops 
 led  against  them  by  Herod  the  Great.  Ptolemy 
 also  places  it  in  Ccelesyria  {Geos^.,  v.  13),  and 
 Pliny  makes  it  one  of  the  cities  of  Decapoli.s  {Hist. 
 Nat.,  V.  15).  Eusebius'  notice  of  it  is  important 
 as  tending  to  define  its  exact  position,  and  to  iden- 
 tify the  Kenath  of  the  Hebrews,  the  Canatha  of 
 the  Greeks,  and  the  modern  Kunawat.  He  thus 
 writes  :  — '  Canath,  a  village  of  Arabia,  now  called 
 Canatha  (Kafa^d),  to  which  Nobah  gave  his  own 
 name  ;  it  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  It 
 is  now  situated  in  the  province  of  Trachonitis, 
 near  Bostra'  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Canath).  In  the 
 Pentinger  Tables  it  is  placed  on  the  road  leading 
 from  Damascus  to  Bostra,  twenty  miles  from  the 
 latter  (Reland,  Pal.  p.  421).  It  became  the  seal 
 of  a  bishopric  in  the  fifth  century  {Id.,  p.  682). 
 
 The  above  data  clearly  prove  that  the  modern 
 Kttnaiudt  is  the  Kenath  of  the  Bible.  It  is  beauti- 
 fully situated  in  the  midst  of  oak  forests,  on  the 
 western  declivities  of  the  mountains  of  Bashan, 
 twenty  miles  north  of  Bozrah.  The  ruins,  which 
 cover  a  space  a  mile  long  and  half  a  mile  wide,  are 
 among  the  finest  and  most  interesting  east  of  the 
 Jordan.  They  consist  of  temples,  palaces,  theatres, 
 towers,  and  a  hippodrome  of  the  Roman  age  ;  one 
 or  two  churches  of  early  Christian  times,  and  a  great 
 number  of  massive  private  houses,  with  stone  roofs 
 and  stone  doors,  which  were  probably  built  by  the 
 ancient  Rephaim.  The  city  walls  are  in  some  places 
 nearly  perfect.     In  front  of  one  of  the  most  beauti- 
 
 ful of  the  temples  the  writer  discovered  a  colossal 
 head  of  Ashteroth,  a  deity  which  seems  to  have  been 
 worshipped  here  before  the  time  of  Abraham,  as 
 one  of  the  chief  cities  of  Bashan  was  then  called 
 Ashteroth-Carnaim  (Gen.  xiv.  5).  Kunawat  is 
 now  occupied  by  a  few  families  of  Druses,  who  find 
 a  home  in  the  old  houses.  (Burckhardt,  Travels 
 in  Syria,  pp.  82,  seq.  ;  Porter's  Damascics,  ii.  pp. 
 87-115;  Ritter,  Pal.  und  Syr.,  ii.  pp.  931-939; 
 Buckingham,  Travels  atnong  the  Arab  Tribes,  p. 
 240.  )-J.  L.  P. 
 
 KENAZ  (fjp, perhaps  ' hunting '=j^AJ;  KeJ'^i'; 
 
 Alex. ,  in  i  Chron.  i.  36,  Kef^f ;  Cenez) ,  a  grandson 
 of  Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  11),  and  the  founder  of  a 
 family  or  tribe  among   the  Edomites.     Kenaz  is 
 
 styled  one  of  the  Dukes  C'DI^JX,  literally  '  leaders,' 
 
 probably  equivalent  to  the  modern  Arabic  Shiekhs) 
 of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  15,  42).  The  descendants 
 of  Esau  did  not  all  settle  within  the  limits  of  Edom. 
 The  Itureans  migrated  northward  to  the  borders  of 
 Damascus  ;  Amalek  settled  in  the  desert  between 
 Egypt  and  Palestine  ;  Teman  went  eastward  into 
 Arabia.  We  are  justified,  therefore,  in  inferring 
 that  Kenaz  also  may  have  led  his  family  and  fol- 
 lowers to  a  distance  from  Mount  Seir.  Dr.  Wells 
 suggests  that  the  Kenezzites  mentioned  in  Gen.  xv. 
 19  were  the  descendants  of  Kenaz  {Geogr.  i.  169). 
 Mr.  Forster  adopts  this  view  ;  but  it  is  clearly  at 
 variance  with  the  scope  of  the  Mosaic  narrative. 
 The  words  of  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham 
 were  :  '  Unto  thy  seed  have  I  given  this  land,  from 
 the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the  great  river,  the  river 
 Euphrates,  the  Kenites,  and  the  Kenizzites,^  etc., 
 plainly  implying  that  these  tribes  then  occupied 
 the  land,  whereas  Kenaz,  the  grandson  of  Esau, 
 was  not  born  for  a  century  and  a  half  after  the 
 Kenizzites  were  thus  noticed.  Forster's  idea  that 
 the  promise  to  Abraham  was  proleptical  cannot  be 
 entertained. 
 
 Forster  maintains  that  the  tribe  of  Kenaz,  or  Al- 
 Kenaz  with  the  Arabic  article  prefixed,  are  identi- 
 cal with  the  Laekeni  or  Laeeni  of  Ptolemy,  a  tribe 
 dwelling  near  the  shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf  {Geog. 
 vi.  7) ;  and  these  he  would  further  identify  with  the 
 
 Aenezes  (properly  Anezeh,  i!J^^),  the  largest  and 
 
 most  powerful  tribe  of  Bedawin  in  Arabia.  It  is 
 possible  that  the  Hebrew  Qoph  (p)  may  have  been 
 
 changed  into  the  Arabic  Ain  (c)  ;  in  other  re- 
 spects the  names  are  identical.  The  Aenezes  cover 
 the  desert  from  the  Euphrates  to  Syria,  and  from 
 Aleppo  on  the  north  to  the  mountains  of  Nejd  on 
 the  south.  It  is  said  that  they  can  bring  into  the 
 field  10,000  horsemen,  and  90,000  camel-riders, 
 and  they  are  lords  of  a  district  some  40,000  square 
 miles  in  area  (Forster,  Geography  of  Arabia,  ii.  43  ; 
 Burckhardt,  Notes  on  the  Bedouins  and  IVahabys, 
 I,  S(j.;  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  pp.  536,  sq). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 KENITE  Crpn  and  ''Jp  in  i  Sam.  xxvii.  10; 
 
 iKevaloi;  Cinceoi),  a  tribe  of  people  who  originally 
 inhabited  the  rocky  and  desert  region  lying  between 
 Southern  Palestine  and  the  mountains  of  Sinai  ad- 
 joining— and  even  partly  intermingling  with — the 
 Amalekites  (Num.  xxiv.  21  ;  i  Sam.  xv.  6).  In  the 
 time  of  Abraham  they  possessed  a  part  of  that 
 
KENITES 
 
 717 
 
 KEXNICOTT 
 
 country  which  the  Lord  promised  to  him  (Gen.  xv. 
 19),  and  wliich  extended  from  Egypt  to  the  Eu- 
 phrates (ver.  18).  At  the  Exodus  the  Kenites 
 pastured  their  flocks  round  Sinai  and  Horeb. 
 Jethro,  Moses'  father-in-law,  was  a  Kenite  (Judg. 
 i.  16);  and  it  was  when  Moses  kept  his  flocks  on 
 the  heights  of  Horeb,  that  the  Lord  appeared  to 
 him  in  the  burning  bush  (Exod.  iii.  i,  2).  Now 
 Jethro  is  said  to  have  been  '  priest  of  Midian  ' 
 (ver.  l),  and  a  '  Midianite'  (Num.  x.  29);  hence 
 we  conclude  that  the  Midianites  and  Kenites  were 
 identical.  It  seems,  however,  that  there  were  tvi'o 
 distinct  tribes  of  Midianites,  one  descended  from 
 Abraham's  son  by  Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  2),  and  the 
 other  an  older  Arabian  tribe  [Midianites].  If 
 this  be  so,  then  the  Kenites  were  the  older  tribe. 
 They  were  nomads,  and  roamed  over  the  country 
 on  the  northern  border  of  the  Sinai  peninsula, 
 and  along  the  eastern  shores  of  the  Gulf  of  Aka- 
 bah.  This  region  agrees  well  with  the  prophetic 
 description  of  Balaam: — 'And  he  looked  on  the 
 Kenites,  and  said.  Strong  is  thy  dwelling-place, 
 and  thou  puttest  thy  nest  in  a  rock '  (Num.  xxiv. 
 21).  The  wild  and  rocky  mountains  along  the 
 west  side  of  the  valley  of  Arabah,  and  on  both 
 shores  of  the  gulf  of  Akabah,  were  the  home  of 
 the  Kenites. 
 
 The  connection  of  Moses  with  the  Kenites,  and 
 the  friendship  shewn  by  that  tribe  to  the  Israelites 
 in  their  journey  through  the  wilderness,  had  an  im- 
 portant influence  upon  their  after  history.  Moses 
 invited  Jethro  to  accompany  him  to  Palestine  ;  he 
 declined  (Num.  x.  29-32) ;  but  a  portion  of  the 
 tribe  afterwards  joined  the  Israelites,  and  had  as- 
 signed to  them  a  region  on  the  southern  border  of 
 Judah,  such  as  fitted  a  nomad  people  (Judg.  i.  16). 
 There  they  had  the  Israelites  on  the  one  side,  and 
 the  Amalekites  on  the  other.  One  family  of  them, 
 separating  themselves  from  their  brethren  in  the 
 south,  migrated  away  to  northern  Palestine,  and 
 pitched  their  tents  beneath  the  oak  trees  on  the 
 upland  grassy  plains  of  Kedesh-Naphtali  (Judg. 
 iv.  11).  And  it  was  here  that  Jael,  the  wife  of 
 Heber  their  chief,  slew  Sisera,  who  had  sought  re- 
 fuge in  her  tent  (vers.  17-21).  It  would  appear 
 from  the  narrative  that  while  the  Kenites  preserved 
 their  old  friendly  intercourse  with  the  Israelites, 
 they  were  also  at  peace  with  the  enemies  of  Israel, 
 — with  the  Canaanites  in  the  north  and  the  Amale- 
 kites hi  the  south.  When  Saul  marched  against 
 the  Amalekites,  he  warned  the  Kenites  to  separate 
 themselves  from  them,  for,  he  said,  '  Ye  shewed 
 kindness  to  all  the  children  of  Israel  when  they 
 came  up  out  of  Egypt'  (i  Sam.  xv.  6).  The 
 Kenites  still  retained  their  possessions  in  the  south 
 of  Judah  during  the  time  of  David  ;  but  we  hear 
 no  more  of  them  in  Scripture  history.  In  the 
 Targums,    instead    of    Kenites   we   find   Shabnai 
 
 ("'XJD?2J'))  and  the  Talmudists  generally  represent 
 them  as  an  Arabian  tribe  (Lightfoot,  Opera,  ii. 
 429  ;  Reland,  Pal.  140).  Procopius  describes  the 
 Kenites  as  holding  the  country  about  Petra  and 
 Cades  (Kadesh),  and  bordering  on  the  Amalekites 
 (ad  Gen.  xv.  ;  see  Reland,  p.  81).  The  name  has 
 long  since  disappeared  ;  but  probably  the  old  Ke- 
 nites are  represented  by  some  of  the  nomad  tribes 
 that  still  pasture  their  flocks  on  the  southern  frontier 
 of  Palestine  (See  A.  Murray,  Comm.  de  Kinaeis, 
 Hamb.  1718;  Winer,  Biblisch.  Real-Worterhich, 
 s.  V.  Kenita-).—].  L.  P. 
 
 KENEZITE  OR  KENIZZITE  C-TJp,  'hunter;' 
 Ke;'eiatot ;  Cenezaoi).  I.  One  of  the  ancient  tribes 
 which  inhabited  the  country  given  in  covenant-pro- 
 mise to  Abraham  (Gen.  xv.  19).  The  sacred 
 writer  gives  no  information  as  to  what  part  of  the 
 country  they  inhabited  ;  but  as  they  are  not  men- 
 tioned among  the  tribes  of  Canaan  who  were 
 actually  dispossessed  by  the  Israelites  (Exod.  iii. 
 8  ;  Josh.  iii.  10 ;  Judg.  iii.  5),  we  may  infer  that 
 the  Kenizzites  dwelt  beyond  the  borders  of  those 
 tribes.  The  whole  country  from  Egypt  to  the 
 Euphrates  was  promised  to  Abraham  (Gen.  xv. 
 18);  the  country  divided  by  lot  among  the  twelve 
 tribes  extended  only  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  and 
 consequently  by  far  the  larger  portion  of  the  '  land 
 of  promise  '  did  not  then  become  '  the  land  of  pos- 
 session,' and  indeed  never  was  occupied  by  the 
 Israelites,  though  the  conquests  of  David  probably 
 extended  over  it.  Bochart  supposes  that  the  Keniz- 
 zites had  become  extinct  between  the  times  of 
 Abraham  and  Joshua.  It  is  more  probable  that 
 they  inhabited  some  part  of  the  Arabian  desert  on 
 the  confines  of  Syria  to  which  the  expeditions  of 
 Joshua  did  not  reach  (see  Bochart,  Opera,  i.  307). 
 This  is  the  view  of  the  Talmudists,  as  may  be  seen 
 in  the  quotation  from  their  writings  given  by  Light- 
 foot  {Opera,  ii.  429).  Forster's  theory  that  the 
 Kenizzites  were  descended  from  Kenaz,  Esau's 
 grandson,  is  altogether  untenable  (see,  however, 
 Geography  of  Arabia,  ii.  43). 
 
 2.  A  patronymic  of  Caleb  (Num.  xxxii.  12 ; 
 Josh.  xiv.  6).  In  the  A.  V.  this  is  ^x\\X.^n  Kenezite, 
 but  it  ought  to  be  Kenizzite  ^\l\>).  Ewald  main- 
 tains that  Caleb  really  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  the 
 Kenizzites,  and  was  an  adopted  Israelite  {Isr. 
 Gesch.  i.  29S).  Prof.  Stanley  {Lectures  on  Jewish 
 Church,  p.  260)  and  Lord  Arthur  Hervey  (Smith's 
 Diet,  of  the  Bible,  s.  v.  Caleb)  hold  the  same  view, 
 and  regard  Caleb  as  oi  IduincEan  origin,  and  de- 
 scended from  Kenaz,  Esau's  grandson.  But  a 
 careful  study  of  sacred  history  proves  that  the 
 Edomites  and  Israelites  had  many  names  in  com- 
 mon ;  and  the  patronymic  Kenizzite  is  derived 
 from  an  ancestor  called  Kenaz,  whose  name  is 
 mentioned  in  Judg.  i.  13,  and  who  was  per- 
 haps Caleb's  grandfather.  (See  Art.  Caleb). — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 KENNICOTT,  Benjamin,  D.D.,  one  of  the 
 most  eminent  Biblical  scholars,  English  or  foreign, 
 was  born  at  Totness  in  Devonshire,  April  4,  1 7 1 8. 
 His  father  was  parish  clerk,  and  master  of  a 
 charity  school,  in  which  latter  situation  Benjamin 
 succeeded  him  at  an  early  period,  continuing  to 
 discharge  the  duties  of  his  humble  office  till  1744, 
 when,  having  previously  given  proof  of  possessing 
 superior  talents,  he  was,  through  the  kindness  of 
 several  gentlemen  in  the  neighbourhood,  who 
 opened  a  subscription  for  the  purpose,  enabled  to 
 enter  the  university  of  Oxford.  He  entered  at 
 Wadham  College,  and  apphed  himself  to  the  study 
 of  divinity  and  Hebrew  with  diligence  and  success. 
 While  an  undergraduate,  he  published — Tzoo 
 Dissertations  :  i.  On  the  Tree  of  Life  in  Paradise, 
 liiiih  some  Observations  on  the  Fall  of  Man  ;  2.  On 
 the  Oblations  of  Cain  and  Abel,  8vo,  which  came 
 to  a  second  edition  in  1747,  and  procured  him  the 
 distinguished  honour  of  a  Bachelor's  degree  before 
 the  statutable  time,  and  without  the  usual  fees. 
 Shortly  afterwards  he  was  elected  Fellow  of  Evetei 
 
KENNICOTT 
 
 718 
 
 KENNICOTT 
 
 College,  and  in  1 750  took  his  degree  of  M.  A.  He 
 was  appointed  librarian  of  Radcliffe  Library,  and 
 made  D.  D.  in  1767.  He  was  also  canon  of  Christ 
 Cliurch,  and  rector  of  Culham  in  Oxfordshire, 
 and  was  subsequently  presented  to  the  living  of 
 Mynhenyote,  in  Cornwall,  which,  however,  as  he 
 was  unable  to  visit  it,  he  resigned  two  years  before 
 his  death.  He  continued  to  reside  at  Oxford  till 
 the  last,  and  died  of  a  lingering  illness,  Sept.  18, 
 
 1783- 
 
 No  man  has  done  more  than  Kennicott  to 
 advance  the  cause  of  Biblical  science  in  the  de- 
 partment of  the  O.  T.,  upon  which  all  his  labours 
 were  concentrated.  His  great  work,  to  be  imme- 
 diately named,  was  preceded,  and  its  way  prepared, 
 by  his  dissertations,  entitled.  The  State  of  the 
 Printed  Hebrew  Text  of  the  O.  T.  Considered, 
 Oxford  1753  ;  1759,  2  vols.  8vo.  In  these  disser- 
 tations he  evinces  the  necessity  of  the  work  upon 
 which  he  had  set  his  heart,  by  refuting  the  popular 
 notion  of  the  '  absolute  integrity'  of  the  Hebrew 
 text.  The  first  contains  '  a  comparison  of  i  Chron. 
 xi.  with  2  Sam.  v.  and  xxiii. ,  and  observations 
 on  seventy  MSS.,  with  an  extract  of  mistakes 
 and  various  readings.'  The  second  vindicates  the 
 Samaritan  Pentateuch,  proves  the  printed  copies 
 of  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  (the  accordance  of 
 which  with  the  text  of  the  O.  T.  was  boasted  of 
 as  evincing  the  purity  of  the  latter)  to  be  corrupt ; 
 ascertains  the  sentiments  of  the  Jews  on  the 
 Hebrew  text ;  gives  an  account  of  the  Hebrew 
 MSS.  known  to  be  extant,  and  furnishes  a  cata- 
 logue of  one  hundred  Hebrew  MSS.  preserved  in 
 the  public  libraries  at  Oxford,  Cambridge,  and  the 
 British  Museum.  'This  work,  as  might  reason- 
 ably be  expected,  was  examined  with  great 
 severity  at  home  and  abroad.'  In  1760  Dr.  K. 
 issued  his  proposals  for  collating  all  the  Hebrew 
 MSS.  made  before  the  invention  of  printing,  which 
 could  be  discovered  in  the  British  Isles  or  in 
 foreign  countries.  Liberal  subscriptions  were 
 raised  for  defraying  the  expenses  which  such  a  work 
 necessarily  involved.  The  name  of  King  George 
 III.  headed  the  list.  Dr.  Seeker,  Bishop  of  Ox- 
 ford, afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  was 
 among  his  first  subscribers.  The  subscriptions 
 amounted  in  all  to  nearly  ^10,000.  Dr.  K. ,  who 
 published  annually  an  account  of  the  progress 
 of  collation,  was  assisted  in  his  work  by  many 
 learned  men,  especially  by  Professor  Bruns,  of  the 
 University  of  Helmstadt,  who  not  only  collated 
 MSS.  in  Germany,  but  also  travelled  into  Switzer- 
 land and  Italy  for  the  same  purpose.  More  than 
 600  Hebrew  MSS.,  and  16  MSS.  of  the  Samaritan 
 Pentateuch,  were  either  wholly  or  partially  collated. 
 To  the  collation  of  MSS.  was  also  added  a  colla- 
 tion of  the  most  distinguished  printed  editions  of 
 the  Hebrew  Bible.  Dr.  K.  also  availed  himself  of 
 quotations  from  the  Hebrew  Bible  in  the  works  of 
 rabbinical  writers,  especially  the  Talmud.  At 
 length,  sixteen  years  after  the  publication  of  his 
 proposals,  appeared  the  first,  and  four  years  subse- 
 quently, the  second,  vol.  of  his  magnificent  edition 
 of  the  Hebrew  Bible  :  Vetus  Testanientuin  Hebrai- 
 cum  aim  variis  Lectionibus,  Oxonii  1776,  17805  2 
 vols,  folio.  The  text  is  that  of  Van  der  Hooght  ; 
 '  but  as  variations  in  the  points  were  disregarded 
 in  the  collation,  the  points  were  not  added  to  the 
 text.'  The  various  readings  are  printed  at  the  foot 
 of  the  page.  In  the  Pentateuch  the  deviations  of 
 the  Samaritan  text  were  printed  in  a  column  parallel 
 
 to  the  Hebrew.  To  the  second  vol.  Dr.  K.  an- 
 nexed his  Dissertatio  Generalis  (answering  to  Pro- 
 legomena in  similar  works,  afterwards  reprinted 
 separately),  containing  an  account  of  the  MSS. 
 and  other  authorities  collated  for  this  edition,  and 
 also  a  review  of  the  Hebrew  text,  divided  into 
 periods,  and  beginning  with  the  formation  of  the 
 Hebrew  canon  after  the  return  of  the  Jews  from 
 the  Babylonian  captivity,  '  a  work  of  great  interest 
 to  every  Biblical  scholar'  (Home's  Bib.  Bibliog.  ; 
 Marsh's  Divinity  Lectures,  part  2  ;  Encyc.  Brit. ; 
 Davidson's  Bib.  Crit. ;  Eng.  Cyc.) 
 
 The  faults  attaching  to  this  great  work  of  Kenni- 
 cott are  thus  summarised  by  Dr.  Davidson  : — '  He 
 neglected  the  Massorah  as  if  it  were  wholly  worth- 
 less. In  specifying  his  sources,  he  is  not  always 
 consistent  or  uniform  in  his  method.  Some  R^SS. 
 are  only  partially  examined.  Neither  was  he  very 
 accurate  in  extracting  various  readings  from  his 
 copies.  Where  several  letters  are  wanting  in  MSS. 
 there  is  no  remark  indicating  whether  the  defect 
 should  be  remedied,  and  hotu.  The  MSS.  cor- 
 rected by  a  different  hand  are  rejected  without 
 reason.  Old  synagogue  MSS.  are  neglected,  though 
 they  would  have  contributed  to  the  value  of  the 
 various  readings.  Van  der  Hooght's  text  is  not 
 accurately  given,  since  the  marginal  Kris,  the 
 vowel  points,  and  the  accents,  have  been  left  out. 
 The  Samaritan  text  should  have  been  given  in 
 Samaritan  letters,  that  readers  might  see  the  origin 
 of  many  of  the  various  readings.  The  edition 
 wants  extracts  from  ancient  versions,  which  is  a 
 serious  defect.  His  principles,  or  rules,  for  judging 
 Hebrew  MSS.,  and  determining  the  age,  quality, 
 or  value,  are  defective.  In  applying  his  copious 
 materials  he  often  errs.  He  proceeds  too  much  on 
 the  assumption  that  the  Massoretic  text  is  corrupt 
 where  it  differs  from  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
 and  ancient  versions,  and  therefore  sets  about  re- 
 forming it  where  it  is  authentic  and  genuine'  {Bib. 
 Crit.,  2d  ed.,  p.  154-55).  Yet  Dr.  D.  asserts  : — 
 '  There  can  be  no  douljt  that  Kennicott  was  a  most 
 laborious  editor.  To  him  belongs  the  great  merit 
 of  bringing  together  a  large  mass  of  critical  ma- 
 terials .  .  .  The  task  of  furnishing  such  an  apparatus, 
 drawn  from  so  many  sources,  scattered  through 
 the  libraries  of  many  lands,  was  almost  herculean  ; 
 and  the  learned  author  is  entitled  to  all  the  praise 
 for  its  accomplishment'  {do.) 
 
 It  did  not,  however,  realize  the  expectations 
 which  many  had  entertained  respecting  it ;  for 
 the  majority  of  the  various  readings  were  found  to 
 be  trifling,  of  little  or  no  value  to  amend  the  sacred 
 text.  But  this  was  not  the  fault  of  the  editor,  but 
 the  praise  of  the  Jewish  transcribers,  whose  ac- 
 curacy preserved  them  from  many  serious  blunders 
 in  the  performance  of  their  task  ;  but  due  specially 
 to  the  influence  of  the  Massorah,  which  has  truly 
 been  a  '  hedge'  around  the  text  of  the  sacred 
 books. 
 
 To  the  preceding  works  of  Dr.  K.  we  add  the 
 following  : — Critica  Sacra,  a  short  Introduction  to 
 Hebrew  Criticism,  London  1774,  8vo  ;  Benfirnini 
 Keiuiicotti  Epistola  ad  yah.  Dav.  Afichaelet?i  de  cen- 
 snra  priini  Tomi  Bihlio/um  Hebraicornm  nuper 
 editi,  in  Bibliotheca  ejus  Orientali,  parte  xi. ,  Oxon. 
 1777,  8vo  ;  Editionis  Veteris  Testamenti  Hebraici, 
 cum  Variis  Lectionibus  brezis  Defensio  contra  Ephe- 
 tneridum  Goetengensinm  Criminationes,  Oxon.  1 782, 
 8vo  ;  and  a  posthumous  work  entitled.  Remarks 
 on  Select  Passages  in  the  Old  Testametit ;  to  which 
 
KERACH 
 
 719 
 
 KERI  AND  XETHIV 
 
 an  added  Eight  Sertnotts,  Oxford  1787,  Svo.  More 
 than  one  hundred  pages  of  th'.s  work  are  occupied 
 with  a  translation  of  thirty-two  psahns,  and  critical 
 notes  on  the  entire  book.  It  is  worthy  of  the 
 author's  reputation. — I.  J. 
 
 KERACH  (1"lp).     This  word,  which  properly 
 
 means  frost  (Gen.  xxxi.  40  ;  Jer.  xxxvi.  30),  and 
 thence  ice  (Job  xxxvii.  10;  xxxviii.  29),  is  used  by 
 Ezekiel  (i.  22)  to  describe  the  appearance  of  the 
 pavement  on  wiiich  stood  the  throne  of  God. 
 Some  interpreters  would  retain  the  meaning  ice 
 here  as  agreeing  better  with  the  epithet  t{"li3n,  the 
 
 terrible,  or  awful ;  but  there  is  nothing  specially 
 terrible  in  ice,  for  though  it  may  cause  to  shudder, 
 that  is  with  cold,  not  with  fear.  All  the  ancient 
 interpreters  understand  crystal  to  be  the  meaning 
 here,  and  with  this  most  modern  expositors  agree. 
 This  is  confirmed  by  the  parallel  passage  Rev.  iv. 
 6  ;  comp.  Exod.  xxiv.  10.  Michaelis,  in  a  disser- 
 tation, Naturalia  qitccdam  et  artificialia  Cod  Sac. 
 ex  Alcorano  illiistrans,  published  in  Pott's  Sylloge 
 Comment.  Theoll.,  vol.  ii.,  adduces  (p.  54)  a  pas- 
 sage from  the  Koran  (xxvii.  41),  in  which  the 
 throne  of  Solomon  is  represented  as  placed  on  a 
 floor  of  crystal  so  pure  that  the  Queen  of  Sheba 
 thought  it  was  water,  and  prepared  to  wade 
 through  it  (see  Lane's  Selections  from  the  Kurdn, 
 p.  240). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KERCHIEFS.     This  is  the  rendering  in  the 
 A.  V.  of  the  Hebrew  word  Jl'iriBDO,  which  occurs 
 
 only  in  Ezek.  xiii.  18,  21  ;  LXX.  iTri^okaia  •  Sym. 
 iiwavxfvia  ;  Vulg.  cervicalia ;  Chald.  piDI^DS, 
 idola,  imagines  idololatriar,  s.   species  vela/nimiin 
 
 (Castell,  s.  V.  inS) ;  Syr.  "j^O  m  oZ,  tecta,  oferi- 
 
 menta.  There  is  difference  of  opinion  as  to  what 
 these  mispachoth  were.  Kimchi,  who  is  followed 
 by  Schroeder  {Devest,  mulieb.  Hebr.,  p.  266),  and 
 Havernick  (z'w  loc),  says  they  were  long  loose  robes 
 such  as  the  goddesses  are  represented  as  wearing 
 {pepla),  and  in  which  the  women  referred  to  by  the 
 prophet  wrapped  the  whole  person,  from  head  to 
 foot.  With  this  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  and  the 
 Syr.  accords.  Rosenmiiller,  Gesenius.  and  others, 
 understand  by  the  word  cushions  or  mattresses  on 
 which  one  might  recline ;  Henderson,  whilst  render- 
 ing it  by  cushions,  prefers,  in  his  note,  the  meaning 
 coverlets  or  quilts  ;  while  Hitzig  thinks  they  were  the 
 
 Jewish  n  vD,  tallith,  the  long  white  cloth  with  which 
 the  worshipper  covered  his  head  during  prayer. 
 In  favour  of  our  understanding  the  word  of  some- 
 thing flowing  and  flexible,  like  a  veil,  loose  robe, 
 or  cloth,  are  the  etymology  of  the  word  (from 
 nSD,  iofo-cv  or  spread  out),  and  the  statement  in 
 ver.  21  that  these  mispachoth  were  to  be  tor7i. 
 The  affinity  of  the  word  with  rWlDtDD,  which 
 undoubtedly  designates  some  such  loose  garment 
 as  that  in  which  Oriental  women  wrap  themselves 
 from  head  to  foot  (Ruth  iii.    15  ;  Is.  iii.  22),  and 
 
 the  statement  that  these  mispachoth  were  C'N"'  ?y 
 
 nDip"?b,  induce  us  to  give  the  preference  to  the 
 
 meaning  given  by  Kimchi.  These  words  can 
 hardly  be  translated  '  on  the  head  of  every  height,' 
 so  as  to  mean  '  on  the  head  of  men  of  every  heigh  t ; ' 
 they  are  better  taken  thus,  '  robes  of  every  length 
 on  the  head/  i.e.,  these  luxurious  and  hcentious 
 
 women  made  use  of  elegant  and  well-fitting  robes 
 to  effect  their  purpose.  — VV.  L.  A. 
 
 KEREN-HAPPUCH  Cq^Sn  j^p),  the  name  of 
 the  third  daughter  born  to  Job  after  his  trial. 
 In  the  Sept.  the  word  is  rendered  by  K^pas  ajxaK- 
 deias,  Amaithea's  Horn,  or  Cornucopia,  alluding 
 to  the  fable  of  Amalthea,  to  whom  Zeus  gave  a 
 horn  endowed  with  the  power  of  becoming  filled 
 with  whatever  the  possessor  desired.  Recent 
 interpreters  have  generally  followed  the  Vulgate 
 rendering  Cornu-  Stibii,  '  Horn  of  Stibium,  used 
 as  a  pigment  to  adorn  the  eye-brows  of  women  in 
 Arabia,  and  as  a  collyrium  to  give  lustre  to  the 
 eyes'  (Lee,  Commentary,  p.  554).  Ewald  gives 
 the  inelegant  rendering,  Schmink-bilchsen,  paint- 
 box, or  rouge-pot,  and  Renan  the  no  less  inelegant 
 one,  Botte  de  fard.  It  is  not  easy  for  us  to 
 conceive  how  such  a  name  should  come  to  be 
 bestowed  o.n  a  beautiful  girl.  Rosenmiiller  says  it 
 was  '  a  prsestantia  formte,  quod  natural!  sua  forma 
 ^^que  venusta  esset  et  omata  ac  eac  mulieres  quas 
 stibio  oculos  fucant.'  But  this  is  surely  very  far- 
 fetched. Does  not  "]1S  mean  generally  something 
 ornamented  or  made  artificially  beautiful  (comp. 
 Is.  liv.  II,  where  it  is  used  of  building/^r  07-dinem, 
 Vulg.,  HvOpaKo.  Sept.),  and  i  Chron.  xxix.  2,  where 
 it  designates  some  kind  of  stone  artificially  beauti- 
 fied) ?  and  may  not  Job's  daughter's  name  thus 
 mean  Horn  of  adortiment,  or  Horn  of  beauty  ? — 
 surely  a  better  name  for  a  damsel  of  surpassing 
 loveliness  than  either  Horn  of  Plenty  or  Horn  of 
 Stibium,  to  say  nothing  of  Paint-box  or  Rouge-pot. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KERI  and  KETHIV  (n''n31  "'Ip,  plural  '{'''^p 
 pTl^l),  so  frequently  found  in  the  margins  and 
 foot-notes  of  the  Hebrew  Bibles,  exhibit  the  most 
 ancient  various  readings,  and  constitute  the  most 
 important  portion  of  the  critico-exegetical  appa- 
 ratus bequeathed  to  us  by  the  Jews  of  olden  times 
 [Massorah]. 
 
 I.  Signification,  classification,  and  mode  of  indi- 
 cation of  the  Keri  and  Hethiv. — The  word  '•"Ip  may 
 
 either  be  the  imperative  or  participle  passive  of  the 
 Chaldee  verb  N"lp,  to  call  out,  to  read,  and  hence 
 
 may  signify  Read,  or  It  is  read,  i.  e.,  the  word 
 in  question  :  DTllS,  '\%  participle  passive  oi  the  Chal- 
 dee verb  3n!Zl,  to  write,  and  signifies.  It  is  ivritten, 
 
 i.  e.,  the  word  in  question  in  the  text.  Those  who 
 prefer  taking  the  word  ''"Ip  as  participle,  do  so  on 
 
 the  ground  that  it  is  more  consonant  with  its  com- 
 panion 2TI3,  which  is  the  participle  passive.    The 
 
 Rabbins  also  call  the  Keri  ^{"IpD,  and  tlie  Kethiv 
 miDJD.  The  different  readings  exhibited  in  the 
 Keri  and  Kethiv  may  be  divided  into  three  general 
 classes :  /.  Words  read  differently  to  what  they 
 are  written,  arising  from  the  omission,  insertion,  ex- 
 changing, or  transposition  of  a  single  letter  (H^D^ 
 QTlDI  """Ip,  ''"Ipl),   or   Variations ;   ii.   Words  read 
 
 but  not  written  in  the  text  (ITlS  sh  '•Hp),  or  In- 
 se7-tions  of  entire  words ;  and  iii.  Words  written  in 
 
 the  text,  but  not  read  Cilp  X?1  2^13))  or  Omissiotis 
 of  entire  words. 
 
 i.  The  first  general  class  (^TlSI  ""Ip)  comprises 
 the  bulk  of  the  various  readings,  and  consists  of— 
 a,  Corrections  of  errors   arising  from  mistaking 
 
KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 720 
 
 KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 homonyms,  e.  g. ,  Up,  the  negative  particle,  for  the 
 
 similarly  sounding  17,  the  proiwim,  of  which  we 
 have  fifteen  instances  (comp.  Exod.  \xi.  8  ;  Lev. 
 xi.  21  ;  XXV.  30  ;  I  Sam.  ii.  3  ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  18  ; 
 2  Kings  viii.  10  ;  Ezra  iv.  2  ;  Job  xiii.  1 5  ;  xh.  4  ; 
 Ps.  c.  3  ;  cxxxix.  16  ;  Prov.  xix.  7  ;  xxvi.  2  ;  Is. 
 ix.  2  ;  Ixiii.  9),  and  two  instances  in  which  the 
 reverse  is  the  case  (i  Sam.  ii.  16;  xx.  2).  Besides 
 being  noticed  in  tlieir  respective  places,  the  Mas- 
 sorah  also  enumerates  them  all  on  Lev.  xi.  15. 
 The  Talmud,  Sopherim  vi.,  gives  three  additional 
 ones,  viz.,  i  Chron.  xi.  21  ;  Job  vi.  2i  ;  Is.  xlix.  5. 
 
 py  for  7X)  of  which  we  have  four  instances  ( i  Sam. 
 xx.  24  ;  I  Kings  i.  33  ;  Job  vii.  i  ;  Is.  Ixv.  7  > 
 Ezek.  ix.  5).—^,  Errors  arising  from  mistaking  tire 
 letters  which  resemble  each  other,  e.  g.,  3  for  D 
 (comp.  Prov.  xxi.  29)  ;  3  for  T  (Ezek.  xxv.  7)  ;  1 
 for  "[  (l  Sam.  iv.  13)  ;  T  for  'H,  of  which  the 
 Massorah  on  Prov.  xix.  19,  and  Jer.  xxi.  40, 
 gives  four  instances  (2  Sam.  xiii.  37  ;  2  Kings  xvi. 
 6  ;  Jer.  xxi.  40 ;  Prov.  xix.  19)  ;  H  for  D  (Jer. 
 xxviii.  I  ;  xxxii.  i)  ;  H  for  D  (2  Sam  xxiii.  13)  ; 
 n  for  n,  of  which  the  Massorah  on  Prov.  xx.  21 
 gives  four  instances  (2  Sam.  xiii.  37  ;  Prov.  xx.  21  ; 
 Song  of  Songs  i.  17  ;  Dan.  ix.  24) ;  D  for  ^  (i  Sam. 
 xiv.  32)  ;  "I  for  *  in  innumerable  instances  ;  D  for  3 
 in  eleven  cases  (Josh.  iv.  18  ;  vi.  5,  15  ;  i  Sam.  xi. 
 6,  9  ;  2  Sam.  v.  24  ;  2  Kings  iii.  24  ;  Ezra  viii.  14  ; 
 Neh.  iii.  20;  Estii.  iii.  4;  Job  xxi.  13)  ;  D  for  H 
 (Is.  XXX.  32)  ;  V  for  y  (2  Kings  xx.  4)  ;  1  for  T 
 twice  (Jer.  ii.  20  ;  Ezra  viii.  14)  ;  n  for  n  (Eccl. 
 xii.  6)  ;  n  for  H  (2  Kings  xxiv.  14  ;  xxv.  17  ;  Jer. 
 Iii.  21). — c.  Errors  arising  from  exchanging  let- 
 ters which  belong  to  the  same  organs  of  speech, 
 e.g.,  2  for  JD,  of  which  the  Keri  exhibits  one 
 instance  (Josh.  xxii.  7),  and  vice  versa,  of  which 
 the  Great  Massorah,  under  letter  3,  gives  six  in- 
 stances (Josh.  iii.  16;  xxiv.  15  ;  2  Kings  v.  12; 
 xii.  10  ;  xxiii.  33  ;  Dan.  xi.  18)  ;  H  for  N  (2  Kings 
 xvii.  21);  y  for  N  (i  Sam.  xx.  24;  i  Kings  i. 
 33  ;  Job  vii.  i  ;  Is.  Ixv.  7  ;  Ezek.  ix.  5)  ;  D  for  Q 
 (Is.  Ixv.  4). — d,  Errors  arising  from  the  trans- 
 position of  letters,  which  the  Massorah  designates 
 iniNDI  DTpID,  and  of  which  it  gives  sixty-two 
 cases,  as,  for  instance,  the  textual  reading  or  the 
 
 Kethiv  is  PHSn,  the  tent,  and  the  marginal  read- 
 ing  or   the  Keri,   transposing   the   letters    ?   and 
 
 n,  has  n?Xn  these  (comp.  Josh.  vi.  13  ;  xx.  8 ; 
 xxi.  27;  Judg.  xvi.  26;  I  Sam,  xiv.  27;  xix. 
 18,  22,  23  (twice)  ;  xxvii.  8 ;  2  Sam.  iii.  25 ; 
 xiv.  30;  xvii.  16;  xviii.  8;  xx.  14;  xxiv.  16; 
 I  Kings  vii.  45  ;  2  Kings  xi.  2  ;  xiv.  6  ;  I 
 Chron.  i.  46  ;  iii.  24  ;  xxvii.  29  ;  2  Chron.  xvii. 
 8;  xxix.  8 ;  Ezra  ii.  46 ;  iv.  4  ;  viii.  17  ;  Neh.  iv. 
 7;  xii.  14;  Esther  i.  5,  16;  Job  xxvi.  12;  Ps. 
 Ixxiii.  2  ;  cxxxix.  6  ;  cxlv.  6  ;  Prov.  i.  27  ;  xiii.  20; 
 xix.  16;  xxiii.  5,  26;  xxxi.  27;  Eccl.  ix.  4;  Is>. 
 xxxvii.  30;  Jer.  ii.  25  ;  viii.  6;  ix.  7;  xv.  4;  xvii. 
 23;  xxiv.  9;  xxix.  18,  23;  xxxii.  23;  xlii.  20 ; 
 1.  15  ;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  14;  xl.  15  ;  xlii.  16;  xliii.  15, 
 16;  Dan.  iv.  9;  v.  7,  16  (twice),  29). — e.  Errors 
 arising  from  the  small  letter  ''  being  dropt  before  the 
 pronominal  "I  from  plural  nouns,  and  making  them 
 to  be  singular,  of  whicli  there  are  a  hundred  and 
 thu'teen  instances  (Gen.  xxxiii.  4 ;  Exod.  xxvii. 
 II;  xxviii.  28;  xxxii.  19;  xxxix.  4,  33;  Lev.  ix. 
 22  ;  xvi.  21  ;  Num.  xii.  3  ;  Deut.  ii.  33  ;  vii.  9  ; 
 viii.  2 ;  xxvii.  10 ;  xxxiii.  9  ;  Josh.  iii.  4  ;  viii.  1 1  ; 
 xvi,  3  ;  Ruth  iii.  14 ;  i  Sam.  ii.  9,  10  (twice) ;  iii. 
 
 18;  viii.  3;  x.  21;  xxii.  13;  xxiii.  5;  xxvi.  7 
 (twice),  II,  16;  xxix.  5  (twice);  xxx.  6;  2  Sam. 
 i.  1 1 ;  ii.  23 ;  iii.  12  ;  xii.  9,  20 ;  xiii.  34 ;  xvi.  8  j 
 xviii.  7,  18  ;  xix.  19  ;  xx.  8 ;  xxiii.  9,  li  ;  xxiv.  14, 
 22;  I  Kings  v.  17;  X.  5  ;  xviii.  42;  2  Kings  iv. 
 34  ;  V.  9  ;  xi.  18  ;  Ezra  iv.  7  ;  Job  ix.  13  ;  xiv.  5  ; 
 XV.  15  ;  xx.  II  ;  xxi.  20;  xxiv.  I  ;  xxvi.  14  ;  xxxi. 
 20;  xxxvii.  12;  xxxviii.  41  ;  xxxix.  26,  30 ;  xl. 
 17;  Ps.  x.  5;  xxiv.  6;  Iviii.  8;  cvi.  45;  cxlvii. 
 19;  cxlviii.  2;  Prov.  vi.  13  (twice);  xxii.  24; 
 xxvi.  24  ;  Is.  Hi.  5  ;  Ivi.  lO  ;  Jer.  xv.  8 ;  xvii.  10, 
 II  ;  xxii.  4;  xxxii.  4;  Iii.  33  ;  Lam.  iii.  22,  32, 
 39  ;  Ezek.  iii.  20  ;  xvii.  21  ;  xviii.  23,  24  ;  xxxi.  5 ; 
 xxxiii.  13,  16;  xxxvii.  16  (twice),  19;  xl.  6,  22 
 (twice),  26;  xliii.  11  (thrice),  26;  xliv.  5;  xlvii. 
 II;  Dan.  xi.  lO ;  Amos  ix.  6;  Obad.  v.  ii; 
 Hab.  iii.  14*) ;  as  well  as  from  the  insertion  of 
 "•  before  the  pronominal  1  and  before  the  pro- 
 nominal "]  in  singular  nouns,  and  making  them 
 plural  ;  the  Ke7-i  exhibits  seven  instances  of  the 
 former  (l  Kings  xvi.  26  ;  Ps.  cv.  18,  28  ;  Prov. 
 xvi.  27;  xxi.  29;  Eccl.  iv.  17  ;  Dan.  ix.  12)  and 
 eight  of  the  latter  in  the  word  "I3T  (Judg.  xiii.  17  ; 
 
 1  Kings  viii.  26 ;  xxii.  13  ;  Ps.  cxix.  147,  161;  Jer.  xv. 
 16  (twice);  Ezrax.  12). — -f.  Errors  of  a  grammatical 
 nature,  arising  from  dropping  the  article  H,  where 
 it  ought  to  be,  of  which  the  Keri  exhibits  fourteen 
 instances  (l  Sam.  xiv.  32 ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  9 ;  I 
 Kings  iv.  7  ;  vii.  20 ;  xv.  18 ;  2  Kings  xi.  20 ;  xv. 
 25  ;  Is.  x.xxii.  15  ;  Jer.  x.  13  ;  xvii.  19  ;  xl.  3  ; 
 Iii.  32;  Lam.  i.  18;  Ezek.  xviii.  20),  or  from  the 
 insertion  of  it  where  it  ought  not  to  be,  of  which 
 there  are  ten  instances  (l  Sam.  xxvi.  12  ;  i  Kings 
 xxi.  8  ;  2  Kings  vii.  I2,  13  ;  xv.  25  ;  Eccl.  vi.  10; 
 X.  3,  20  ;  Is.  xxix.  II  ;  Jer.  xxxviii.  11)  ;  or  from 
 the  dropping  of  the  H  after  "lyj,  or  writing  XIH 
 instead  of  NTI  when  used  as  feminines  or  any  other 
 letter. — g.  Errors  arising  from  the  wrong  division 
 of  words,  e.g.,  the  first  word  having  a  letter  which 
 belongs  to  the  second,  exhibited  by  the  Keri  in 
 three  instances,  and  stated  in  the'iMassorah  on  2 
 Sam.  V.  2  (2  Sam.  v.  2  ;  Job.  xxxviii.  12;  Lam. 
 iv.  16),  or  the  second  word  having  a  letter  which 
 belongs  to  the  first,  of  which  there  are  two  in- 
 stances (i  Sam.  xxi.  12 ;  Ezra  iv.  12)  ;  or  one 
 word  being  divided  into  two  separate  v/ords,  of 
 which  the  Massorah  on  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  mentions 
 eight  instances  (Judg.  xvi.  25;  I  Sam.  ix.  i; 
 xxiv.  8  ;  I  Kings  xviii.  5  ;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  6 ;  Is. 
 ix.  6  ;  Lam.  i.  6 ;  iv.  3),  or  two  separate  words 
 being  written  as  one,  exhil)ited  by  the  Keri  m  fifteen 
 instances  (Gen.  xxx.  1 1  ;  Exod.  iv.  2  ;  Deut.  xxxiiL 
 
 2  ;  I  Chron.  ix.  4  ;  xxvii.  12  ;  Neh.  ii.  23  ;  Job 
 xxxviii.  I ;  xl.  6  ;  Ps.  x.  lo ;  Iv.  16  ;  cxxiii.  4  ;  Is. 
 iii.  15;  Jer.  vi.  29;  xviii.  3;  Ezek.  viii.  6). — k, 
 Exegetical  Keris  or  marginal  readings  which  substi- 
 tute euphemisms  for  the  cacaphonous  terms  used  in 
 the  text,  in  accordance  with  the  injunction  of  the 
 ancient  sages,  that  '  all  the  verses  wherein  indecent 
 expressions  occur  are   to    be  replaced  by  decent 
 
 words,  e.g.,  rxhl'O'^  by  nj23t^"'  [of  which  the  Keri 
 exhibits  four  instances,  viz.,  Deut.  xxviii.   30  :  Is. 
 
 xiii.  16;  Jer.  iii.  2;  Zech.  xiv.  2],  D"'P1Dy  by 
 D^lintO  [of  which  the  Keri  exhibits  six  instances, 
 viz.,  Deut.  xxviii.  27  ;  i  Sam.  v.  6,  9  ;  vi.  4,  5> 
 17;  omitting,  however,  i  Sam.  v.  12];  D'^JVIH 
 by  D^JVm  [of  which  the  Keri  exliibits   one   in- 
 
 *  It  is  very  strange  that  the  Massorah  Magna 
 only  enumerates  fifty-sbc  of  these  instances. 
 
 I 
 
KF:RI  and  kethiv 
 
 721 
 
 KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 stances,  viz.,  2  Kings  vi.  25];  Drflin  by  DflXIV 
 [of  which  the  Keri  exhibits  two  instances,  2  Kings 
 xviii.   27 ;    Is.   xxxvi.    12] ;    DH'-r:;'  ''D''D  by  "'D''D 
 
 DrivJ"!  [of  which  the  Keri  exhibits  two  instances, 
 
 2  Kings  xviii.    27  ;   Is.   xxxvi.    12]  ;  nii^inJD?  by 
 
 JTlXyiD?  [of  which  there  is  one  instance,  2  Kings 
 x.  27,  comp.  Megilla  25,  /;].' 
 
 The  manner  in  which  this  general  class  of  various 
 readings  is  indicated  is  as  follows  :  The  variations 
 specified  under  a  and  b,  not  affecting  the  vowel 
 points,  are  simply  indicated  by  a  small  circle  or 
 asterisk  placed  over  the  word  in  the  text  (^Tl^), 
 which  directs  to  the  marginal  reading  (''"Ip),  where 
 the  emendation  is  given,  as  for  instance  the  Kdlilv 
 
 in  Exod.  xxi.  8  is  N?,  in  l  Sam.  xx.  24  Pj),  and  in 
 Prov.  xxi.  29  p^^,  and  the  marginal  gloss  remarks 
 
 'p  "1?,  'p  ?5<,  'p  pT,  the  'p  being  an  abbreviation  for 
 ^"Ip.  In  the  variations  specified  under  c  and  d, 
 where  the  different  letters  of  the  Kethiv  and  the 
 Keri  require  different  vowel  points,  the  abnormal 
 textual  reading,  or  the  Kethiv^  has  not  only  the 
 small  circle  or  asterisk,  but  also  takes  the  vowel 
 points  which  belong  to  the  normal  marginal  read- 
 ing, or  the  Keri,  e.g.,  the  appropriate  pointing  of 
 the  textual   reading,    or    the   Kethiv   in   2   Kmgs 
 
 xvii.  21  is  i^TI,  but  it  is  pointed  t^"!.*),  because  these 
 
 vowel  signs  belong  to  the  marginal  reading,  or  the 
 Keri  rn""!,  which  it  is  intended  should  accompany 
 the  vowel  points  in  the  text.  The  same  is  the 
 case  with  the  textual  reading  in  2  Sam.  xiv.  30, 
 which,  according  to  the  marginal  reading,  exhibits 
 a  transposition  of  letters,  and  which  can  hardly  be 
 
 pronounced  with  its  textual  points  ITn^Jfini,  be- 
 cause these  vowel-signs  belong  to  the  Keri  n'in''Vn"|. 
 Whilst  in  the  variations  specified  under  e,  f,  g,  and 
 h,  which  involve  an  addition  or  diminution  of 
 letters,  and  which  have  therefore  either  more  or 
 fewer  letters  than  are  required  by  the  vowel-points 
 of  the  Keri,  a  vowel  sign  is  sometimes  given  with- 
 out any  letter  at  all,  or  two  vowel  signs  have  to  be 
 attached  to  one  letter,  and  sometimes  a  letter  has 
 to  be  without  any  vowel  sign  ;  the  variation  itself 
 being  either  indicated  in  the  margin  by  the  exhibi- 
 tion of  the  entire  word  which  constitutes  the 
 different  reading,  or  by  the  simple  remark  that  such 
 and  such  a  letter  is  wanting,  or  is  redundant. 
 Thus,  for  instance.  Lam.  v.  7,  which,  according  to 
 the  Massorah,  exhibits  two  of  the  twelve  instances 
 where  the  1  conjunctive  has  been  dropped  from  the 
 beginning  of  words  (comp.  also  2  Kings  iv.  7;  Job 
 ii.  7  ;  Prov.  xxiii.  24 ;  xxvii.  24 ;  Is.  Iv.  13  ;  Lam. 
 ii.  2  ;  iv.  16  ;  v.  3,  5  ;  Dan.  ii.  43),  the  textual 
 reading  or  the  Kethiv  is  IjnjX"  DJ''X'',  and  the  mar- 
 ginal reading  or  the  Keri  'p  OVXI,  'p  "IJnJXI,  the 
 vowel  sign  of  the  conjunction  from  the  margin  is 
 inserted  in  the  text  under  the  little  circle,  and  con- 
 sequently has  no  letter  at  all  ;  in  Jer.  xlii.  6,  again, 
 where  the  textual  reading  is  13X,  and  the  marginal 
 reading  "UIUX,  and  the  Kethiv,  which  has  only 
 three  letters,  takes  the  vowel  signs  of  the  Ken, 
 which  has  five  letters,  it  is  pointed  'IJN,  with  two 
 
 different  vowel  points  attached  to  the  one  1  ;  whilst 
 in  2  Kings  vii.  15,  where  the  reverse  is  the  case,  the 
 marginal  reading  havnig  fewer  letters,  and  hence 
 fewer  vowels  than  the  textual  reading,  which  takes 
 VOL.  II.  * 
 
 the  vowel  signs  of  the  former,  the  Kethiv  is  pointed 
 DTSriilB,  and  the  H  has  no  vowel  sign  at  all. 
 There  is  a  peculiarity  connected  with  the  marginal 
 mdication  of  those  words  the  variations  of  which 
 consist  in  the  diminution  or  addition  of  a  single 
 letter.  When  a  letter  is  dropt  from  a  word  in 
 the  text  (^TlS),  the  whole  word  is  given  in  the 
 marginal  reading  Clp),  with  the  letter  in  question, 
 and  the  remark  ''Read  so;''  as,  for  instance,  i 
 Sam.  xiv.  32  ;  Prov.  xxiii.  24,  where  the  H,  ac- 
 cording to  the  Massorah,  is  dropt  from  7Pt^'^,  and 
 
 1  from  IpVlj  as  indicated  by  7?tJ^°  and  PV" ;  the 
 
 marginal  glosses  are'p  77^'\\,  'p  IpVl  ;  but  when 
 the  reverse  is  the  case,  if  a  letter  has  crept  into  a 
 word,  the  whole  word  is  not  given  in  the  marginal 
 gloss,  but  it  is  simply  remarked  that  such  and  such 
 a  letter  is  redundant  O'Tl''),  or  is  not  to  be  read 
 
 Clp  X?),  as,  for  instance,  in  Eccles.  x.  20 ;  Neh. 
 ix.  17,  where  the  H,  according  to  the  Massorah, 
 has  crept  in  before  Q''D33,  and  1  before  TDn,  the 
 marginal  gloss  simply  remarks  Tl  ~l''n\  '1  "iTl^. 
 Upon  this  point,  however,  the  greatest  inconsist- 
 ency is    manifested    in    the    Massoretic    glosses ; 
 
 comp.,  for  instance,  the  Kethii>  V3''y  and  "jvJ"! 
 in  Eccles.  iv.  8,  17,  both  of  which,  according  to 
 the  Keri,  have  a  redundant  '',  and  are  singular 
 nouns,  yet  the  Massoretic  note  upon  the  former  is 
 'p  lyy,  exhibiting  the  whole  word,  whilst  on  the 
 latter  it  simply  remarks  '^  ITl''. 
 
 //.  The  second  class  pTlS  N?1  ''Ip),  which  com- 
 prises entire  words  omitted  from  the  text,  exhibits 
 ten  such  instances  which  occur  in  the  Hebrew 
 Bible,  as  follows,  Judg.   xx.    13  ;  Ruth  iii.   5,  17  ; 
 
 2  Sam.  viii.  3  ;  xvi.  23  ;  xviii.  20  ;  2  Kings  xix.  31, 
 37  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  38  ;  1.  29.  Besides  being  noted  in 
 the  marginal  glosses  on  the  respective  passages, 
 these  omissions  are  also  given  in  the  Massorah  on 
 Deut.  i.  and  Ruth  iii.  16.  They  are  also  enume- 
 rated in  the  Talmud,  Tract  Sopherim,  vi.  8,  and 
 in  Nedarim  37,  b.  In  Nedarim,  however,  the 
 passage  which  refers  to  this  subject  is  as  follows, 
 
 '  the  insertion  of  words  in  the  text  (pTl3  X?")  P''"lp) 
 is  exhibited  in  niS  [2  Sam.  viii.   3] ;  C'^X  [ibid. 
 
 xvi.    23]  ;   D''Xn  [Jer.    xxxi.   38]  ;  rh  {.H'id.  1.  29]  ; 
 
 nX  [Ruth  ii.  11] ;  ipx  [ibid.  iii.  5,  17] ;'  thus  omit- 
 ting four  instances — viz.,  Judg.  xx.  13  ;  2  Sam.  xviii. 
 20;  2  Kings  xix.  31,  37;  and  adding  one — viz., 
 Ruth  ii.  II,  which  is  neither  given  by  the  Massorah 
 nor  in  Sopherim. 
 
 This  class  of  variations  is  indicated  by  a  small 
 circle  or  asterisk  placed  in  the  text  with  the  vowel- 
 signs  of  the  word  which  is  wanting,  referring  to 
 the  margin,  where  the  word  in  question  is  given. 
 Thus,  for  mstance,  in  Judg.  xx.  13,  where,  accord- 
 ing tO' the  Keri,  the  word  ''J3  is  omitted,  the  Kethiv 
 
 is  (?3^33  °  13X  Vb\  upon  which  the  marginal  gloss 
 
 remarks  n^DD  xh  np  ''J3. 
 
 7ii.  Of  the  third  class  {"^"^p  XP1  HTl^),  exhibiting 
 entire  coords  which  have  crept  into  the  text,  there 
 are  eight  instances,  as  follows,  Ruth  iii.  12  ;  2 
 Sam.  xiii.  33  ;  xv.  21  ;  2  Kings  v.  18 ;  Jer.  xxxviii. 
 16;  xxxix.  12;  Ii.  3;  Ezek.  xlviii.  16.  These 
 variations  are  not  only  noted  in  the  marginal 
 glosses  on  the  respective   passages,   but  are  also 
 
 3  A 
 
KERI  AND  KETIIIV  7 
 
 given  in  the  Massorah  on  Ruth  iii.  12.  The 
 passage  in  Nedarim  27,  b,  which  speaks  of  this 
 class  of  variations,  remarking,  '  words  which  are 
 
 found  in  the  text,  but  are  not  read  (JJPI  pTlD 
 X'^'^\>)  are  exhibited  in  NJ  [2  Kings  v.  18] ;  flSI 
 [Jen  xxxii.  11];  -[-iTi  {ibid.  U.  3];  C^DH  [Ezek. 
 xlviii.  16]  ;  DX  [Ruth  iii.  12],'  omits  2  Sam.  xiii. 
 33  ;  XV.  21  ;  and  Jen  xxxviil.  16  ;  xxxix.  12  ;  and 
 adds  Jen  xxxii.  11,  which  does  not  exist  in  the 
 Massorah  ;  whilst  Sopherim  vi.  9,  which  remarks 
 
 CJ'On  TlT'  ^NIJ  mpon  ■^E^'^5^  JIJOX,  referring  to 
 2  Sam.  xiii.  33  ;  Jen  xxxix.  12  ;  2  Sam.  xv.  21  ; 
 Ruth  iii.  12;  Jen  li.  3  ;  Ezek.  xlviii.  16;  omits  2 
 Kings  V.  18  and  Jen  xxxviii.  16. 
 
 This  class  of  variations  is  not  uniformly  indi- 
 cated in  the  difiFerent  editions  of  the  Bible.  Gene- 
 rally the  word  in  question  has  no  vowel  signs,  but 
 an  asterisk  or  small  circle  is  put  over  it,  referring 
 to  the  margin,  where  it  is  simply  remarked  3^n3 
 
 2  KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 "•"Ip  XP1,  written  in  the  text  but  not  read ;  in  one  01 
 two  instances,  however,  the  word  itself  is  repeated 
 in  the  margin,  as  in  2  Kings  v.  18,  where  we  have 
 
 it  """Ip  X?1  HTID  i<3,  the  word  XJ  is  written  in  the 
 text  but  7iot  read. 
 
 2.  Number  a7id position  of  the  Keri  and  Kethiv. 
 — A  great  difference  of  opinion  prevails  about  the 
 number  and  position  of  these  various  readings. 
 The  Talmud,  as  we  have  shewn  above,  and  the 
 early  Jewish  commentators,  mention  variations 
 which  do  not  exist  in  the  Keris  and  Kethivs  of  the 
 Massorah.  This,  however,  is  beyond  the  aim  of 
 the  present  article,  which  is  to  investigate  the  Keri 
 and  Kethiv  as  exhibited  in  the  Massorah  and  in  the 
 editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  From  a  careful 
 perusal  and  collation  of  the  Massorah,  as  printed 
 in  the  Rabbinic  Bibles,  we  find  the  following  to  be 
 the  number  of  the  Keris  and  Kethivs  in  each  book, 
 according  to  the  order  of  the  Hebrew  Bible : — 
 
 Genesis 
 
 24 
 
 2  Kings . 
 
 80 
 
 Habbakuk 
 
 2 
 
 Lamentations  . 
 
 28 
 
 Exodus 
 
 12 
 
 Isaiah     . 
 
 55 
 
 Zephaniah 
 
 I 
 
 Ecclesiastes 
 
 n 
 
 Leviticus    . 
 
 5 
 
 Jeremiah 
 
 148 
 
 Haggai  . 
 
 I 
 
 Esther      . 
 
 14 
 
 Numbers    . 
 
 II 
 
 Ezekiel  . 
 
 143 
 
 Zechariah 
 
 7 
 
 Daniel 
 
 129 
 
 Deuteronomy 
 
 24 
 
 Hosea    . 
 
 6 
 
 Malachi 
 
 I 
 
 Ezra 
 
 33 
 
 Joshua 
 
 38 
 
 Joel 
 
 1 
 
 Psalms   . 
 
 74 
 
 Nehemiah 
 
 28 
 
 Judges 
 
 22 
 
 Amos     . 
 
 3 
 
 Proverbs 
 
 70 
 
 I  Chronicles 
 
 41 
 
 I  Samuel    . 
 
 73 
 
 Obadiah 
 
 I 
 
 Job 
 
 54 
 
 2  Chronicles     . 
 
 39 
 
 2  Samuel  . 
 
 99 
 
 Micah     . 
 
 4 
 
 Song  of  Songs 
 
 5 
 
 I  Kings 
 
 49 
 
 Nahum  . 
 
 4 
 
 Ruth      . 
 
 13 
 
 Total 
 
 1353 
 
 The  disparity  between  Abravanel's  calculations 
 about  the  number  of  Keris  and  Kethivs,  leading 
 him  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Pentateuch  has  65, 
 Jeremiah  81,  and  i  and  2  Samuel  138  {Intro- 
 ductio7i  to  Jeremiah),  and  the  numbers  which  we 
 have  stated  as  existing  in  these  books,  is  easily 
 accounted  for  when  it  is  remembered  that  this 
 erudite  commentator  died  fifteen  years  before  the 
 laborious  Jacob  b.  Chajim  collated  and  published 
 the  Massorahs  on  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  [Abra- 
 VANEL ;  Jacob  b.  Chajim],  and  therefore  had  no 
 opportunity  of  consulting  them  carefully.  But 
 we  find  it  far  more  difficult  to  account  for  the 
 serious  difference  in  the  calculations  of  later  writers 
 and  our  results,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  following 
 table.     (See  on  p.  723.) 
 
 For  the  collation  of  Bomberg's  Bible,  the 
 riantin  Bible,  and  the  Antwerp  Bible,  we  are 
 indebted  to  the  tables  exhibited  in  Cappellus' 
 Critica  Sacra,  p.  70,  and  Walton's  Prolegomena 
 (ed.  Cantabrigias  1828,  vol.  i.,  p.  473);  and 
 though  we  have  been  able  by  our  arrangement  to 
 correct  their  blunder  in  representing  Ellas  Levita 
 as  separating  the  Five  Megilloth  from  the  Hagio- 
 grapha,  and  giving  the  number  of  Keris  to  be  329 
 exclusive  of  the  Megilloth  ;  yet  we  were  obliged 
 to  describe  the  Megilloth  apart  from  the  Hagio- 
 grapha,  to  which  they  belong  according  to  the 
 Jewish  order  of  the  Canon.  Elias  Levita's  own 
 words  on  the  numbers  are  as  follows  : — •'  I  counted 
 the  Keris  and  Kethivs  several  times,  and  found  that 
 they  were  in  all  848  ;  of  these,  65  are  in  the  Pen- 
 tateuch, 454  in  the  Prophets,  and  329  in  the  Hagio- 
 grapha.  It  is  surprising  that  there  should  only  be 
 65  in  the  Pentateuch,  22  of  which  refer  to  the 
 single  word  Hiyj,  which  is  "lyj  in  the  Kethiv,  and 
 myj  in  the  Keri  ;  that  the  book  of  Joshua,  which 
 in  quantity  is  about  a  tenth  part  of  the  Pentateuch, 
 should  have  32 ;  and  that  the  books  of  Samuel,  which 
 
 are  merely  about  a  fourth  the  size  of  the  Pentateuch, 
 should  contain  133'  {Massoreth  Ha-Massoreth,  ed. 
 Sulzbach  1771,  p.  8,  seq.)  It  will  be  seen  from 
 this  extract  that  Elias  Levita  not  only  gives  six 
 Keris  less  in  Joshua  than  we  have  given,  but  also 
 differs  from  Abravanel  in  the  number  of  Keris  to 
 be  found  in  the  books  of  Samuel. 
 
 3.  Origin  and  date  of  the  Keri  and  Kethiv. — 
 The  Talmud  traces  the  source  of  these  variations 
 to  Moses  himself,  for  we  are  distinctly  told  in 
 Nedarim  37  b,  that  '  the  pronunciation  of  certain 
 words  according  to  the  scribes  (CIQID  ^<^pO),  the 
 emendations  of  the  scribes  (D''"i21D  TlLDJ?),  the  not 
 
 reading  of  words  which  are  in  the  text  (X?1  ^TlS 
 ■"Tp),  and  the  reading  of  words  which  are  not  in 
 
 the  text  (3^n3  N71  """Ip),  etc.,  are  a  law  of  Moses 
 from  Sinai.'  Jacob  b.  Chajim  defends  this  view 
 in  his  elaborate  introduction  to  the  Rabbinic  Bible. 
 Elias  Levita,  who  also  exposes  this  Talmudic 
 declaration,  explains  it  as  follows  : — '  The  Keri 
 and  Kethiv  of  the  Pentateuch  only  are  a  law  of 
 Moses  from  Mount  Sinai,  and  the  members  of  the 
 Great  Synagogue,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi, 
 Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael,  Azariah,  Ezra,  Nehe- 
 miah, Mordecai,  and  Zerubbabel,  and  other  wise 
 men  from  the  craftsmen  and  artizans  (CIHriD 
 "IJDDni)  to  the  number  of  a  hundred  and  twenty, 
 wrote  down  the  Keri  and  the  Kethiv  according  to 
 the  tradition  which  they  possessed,  that  our  teacher 
 Moses,  peace  be  with  him,  read  words  differently 
 to  what  they  were  written  in  the  text  for  one  of 
 those  mysteries  which  they  knew,  that  Moses 
 transmitted  this  mystery  to  Joshua,  Joshua  to  the 
 elders,  the  elders  to  the  prophets,  etc.,  and  they 
 put  down  in  the  margin  as  his  readings,  Ezra  act- 
 ing as  a  scribe.  In  the  same  manner  they  pro- 
 ceeded in  tire  Prophets  and  Hagiographa  with 
 every  word  respecting  which  they  had  a  tradition 
 
KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 723 
 
 KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 Bomberg's  second 
 edition  of  the  bible 
 
 1524-1525- 
 
 The  Plantin  Bible, 
 1566. 
 
 The  Antwerp  or 
 Royal  Bible,  1572. 
 
 Elias  Levita. 
 
 Our  Results. 
 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 I       mTTi^ 
 
 Pentateuch. 
 74               'np 
 
 1  mnTi^ 
 
 2  nn^DH 
 
 Pentateuch. 
 69                "»-lp 
 I            niT'n'' 
 
 I       mT-Dn 
 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 65           'np 
 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 76           np 
 
 74 
 
 77 
 
 71 
 
 65 
 
 76 
 
 Earlier  Prophets. 
 337               'np 
 
 1 1        niiTi'' 
 2       niT-Dn 
 
 Earlier  Prophets. 
 
 239           'np 
 5       niT-Dn 
 
 Earlier  Prophets. 
 
 277                '^^P 
 
 18       niiTi'' 
 5       nn^Dn 
 
 Earlier  Prophets. 
 
 Earlier  Prophets. 
 361                'np 
 
 350 
 
 269 
 
 300 
 
 361 
 
 Later  Prophets. 
 
 348           'np 
 2        nn^n^ 
 
 Later  Prophets. 
 250                'np 
 
 25        nnTi'' 
 I       niT'Dn 
 
 Later  Prophets. 
 347                'np 
 
 II        nnTi^ 
 nn^Dn 
 
 Later  Prophets. 
 
 Later  Prophets. 
 
 377            'np 
 
 350 
 
 276 
 
 358 
 
 454 
 
 377 
 
 Five  Megilloth. 
 51                'np 
 
 II        nnw 
 
 Five  Megilloth. 
 43                'np 
 
 14       nn^n^ 
 
 Five  Megilloth. 
 48             'np 
 
 8       nn^n^ 
 
 Five  Megilloth. 
 
 Five  Megilloth. 
 
 71           'np 
 
 62 
 
 57 
 
 56 
 
 71 
 
 Hagiograph. 
 
 362           'np 
 
 60        nnTi^ 
 
 I       niT'Dn 
 
 Hagiograph. 
 
 1S7            np 
 
 34        ni-iTi^ 
 
 I       nn''Dn 
 
 Hagiograph. 
 242                'np 
 
 20       niiTi^ 
 I       nn^Dn 
 
 Hagiograph. 
 
 Hagiograph. 
 46S                '>-\^ 
 
 423 
 
 222 
 
 263 
 
 329 
 
 848 
 
 468 
 
 1353 
 
 1 
 
 1259 
 
 901 
 
 1048 
 
 orally  transmitted  from  the  prophets  and  the  sages, 
 that  It  was  read  differently  to  what  it  was  in'the 
 text.  But  they  required  no  tradition  for  the  post- 
 e.xile  books,  as  the  authors  themselves  were  pre- 
 sent with  them  ;  hence,  whenever  they  met  with  a 
 word  which  did  not  seem  to  harmonize  with  the 
 context  and  the  sense,  the  author  stated  to  them 
 the  reason  why  he  used  such  anomalous  expres- 
 sions, and  they  wrote  down  the  word  in  the  margin 
 as  It  should  be  read'  (A/assoreth  Ha-Massorcfh,  fol. 
 »  b,  ff.)  Mendelssohn  in  his  valuable  introduc- 
 tion to  his  translation  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  most 
 of  the  ancient  Jewish  writers,  propounded  the  same 
 view.  It  is  in  accordance  with  this  recondite  sense 
 ascribed  to  the  origin  of  the  Keri  and  Kethw 
 that  Rashi  remarks  on  Gen.   viii.  16,  nTl^  N^jIH 
 
 D^i:n  DJ^N  DN  xvin  is>»'>d^  qh^  mnx  np  x^'^n 
 
 LI{],1  ^f^"^  "^^'^  5  '  the  Keri  is  NVIH,  tke  Keihiv 
 JNi-'H,  because  he  was  first  to  tell  them  to  i;o  out  ■ 
 but  if  they  should  refuse  to  go,  he  7vas  'to  make 
 them  go.  Kimchi,  however,  is  of  the  opposite 
 opinion.  So  far  from  believing  that  these  varia- 
 tions proceeded  from  the  sacred  writers  themselves, 
 who  designed  to  convey  thereby  various  mysteries' 
 he  maintains  that  the  Keri  and  Kethiv  originated 
 
 after  the   Babylonish  captivity,   when    the  sacred 
 books  were  collected  by  the  members  of  the  Great 
 -Synagogue.     These  editors  of  the  long-lost  and 
 inutilated  inspired  writings  '  found  different  read- 
 ings in  the  volumes,  and  adopted  those  which  the 
 nia)ority  of  copies  had,  because  they,  accordincr  to 
 their  opinion,  exhibited  the  true  readings.     In  some 
 places  they  wrote  down  one  word  in  the  text  without 
 putting  the  vowel  signs  to  it,  or  noted  it  in  the  mar- 
 gin without  inserting  it  in  the  text ;  whilst  in  other 
 places   they  inserted   one  reading  in    the    marcrin 
 and  another  in  the  text'  (Introduction  to  his  Com- 
 ment, on  Joshua).     Ephodi  (flor.  1391-1403)    who 
 maintains  the  same  view,  remarks  that  Ezra  and 
 Ills  followers  '  made  the  Keri  and  Kethiv  on  every 
 passage  m  which  they  found  some  obliterations  and 
 confusion,  as  they  were  not  sure  what  the  precise 
 reading  was.'     Abravanel,  who  will  neither  admit 
 that  the  Kens  and  Kethivs  proceeded  from  the  sacred 
 writers  themselves,  nor  that  they  took  their  rise  from 
 the  imperfect  state  of  the  codices,  propounds  a  new 
 theory.    According  to  him,  Ezra  and  his  followers 
 who  undertook  the  editing  of  the  Scriptures,  found 
 the  sacred  books  entire  and  perfect,  but  in  perusin" 
 tliem  these  editors  discovered  that  they  contained 
 irregular  expressions,  and  loose  and  ungrammatical 
 
KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 724 
 
 KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 phrases,  arising  from  the  carelessness  and  ignorance 
 of  the  inspired  writers.  '  Ezra  had  therefore  to 
 explain  these  words  in  harmony  with  the  connec- 
 tion, and  this  is  the  origin  of  the  Keri  which  is 
 found  in  the  margin  of  the  Bible,  as  this  holy 
 scribe  feared  to  touch  the  words  which  were 
 spoken  or  written  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  These 
 remarks  he  made  on  his  own  account  to  explain 
 those  anomalous  letters  and  expressions,  and  put 
 them  in  the  margin  to  indicate  that  the  gloss  is  his 
 own.  Now,  if  you  examine  the  numerous  Keris  and 
 Kethivs  in  Jeremiah,  and  look  into  their  connection, 
 you  will  find  them  all  to  be  of  this  nature,  viz., 
 tliat  they  are  to  be  traced  to  Jeremiah's  careless  and 
 blundering  writing.  .  .  .  From  this  you  may  learn 
 that  the  books  which  have  most  Keris  and  Kethivs 
 show  that  their  authors  did  not  know  how  to  speak 
 correctly  or  to  write  properly'  (Introduction  to  his 
 Comment,  on  yereiniah).  Though  Abravanel's 
 hypothesis  has  more  truth  in  it  than  the  other 
 theories,  yet  it  is  only  by  a  combination  of  the 
 three  views  that  the  origin  of  the  Keri  and  Kethiv 
 can  be  traced  and  explained.  For  there  can  be  no 
 doubt  that  some  of  the  variations,  as  the  Talmud, 
 Rashi,  etc.,  declare,  have  been  transmitted  by  tra- 
 dition from  time  immemorial,  and  have  their  origin 
 in  some  recondite  meaning  or  mysteries  attached 
 to  the  passages  in  question  ;*  that  some  again,  as 
 Kimchi,  Ephodi,  etc.,  rightly  maintain,  are  due  to 
 the  blunders  and  corruptions  which  have  crept  into 
 the  text  in  the  course  of  time,  and  which  the  spiri- 
 tual guides  of  the  nation  tried  to  rectify  by  a  com- 
 parison of  codices,  as  is  also  admitted  by  the 
 Talmud  (comp.  yeriisalem  Megillah,  iv.  2  ;  Sof  he- 
 rim,  vi.  4)  ;  and  that  others,  again,  as  Abravanel, 
 remarks,  are  owing  to  the  carelessness  of  style, 
 ignorance  of  idioms  and  provincialisms,  which  the 
 editors  and  successive  interpreters  of  the  Hebrew 
 canon  discovered  in  the  different  books,  or,  more 
 properly  speaking,  which  were  at  variance  with 
 the  grammatical  rules  and  exegetical  laws  deve- 
 loped in  aftertime  by  the  Massorites.  Such,  how- 
 ever, was  their  reverence  for  the  ancient  text,  that 
 these  IMassorites  who  made  the  new  additions 
 to  it,  left  the  text  itself  untouched  in  the  very 
 places  where  they  believed  it  necessary  to  follow 
 another  explanation  or  reading,  but  simply  in- 
 serted the  emendation  in  the  margin.  Hence  the 
 distinction  between  the  ancient  text  as  it  was 
 xvritten,  or  Kethiv  (DTlD),  and  the  more  modern 
 emended  reading,  or  A'm  Clp)  ;  and  hence,  also, 
 the  fact  that  the  Keri  is  not  inserted  in  the  syna- 
 
 *  As  instances  may  be  quoted,  the  (TDD)  tex- 
 tual reading  D''^3  =  D''Na  *'}p,  two  princes,  in  Gen. 
 
 xxv.  23,  which  ancient  tradition  refers  to  the  two 
 friends,  the  emperor  Antoninus  and  R.  Jehudah 
 the  Prince  (N'^C^JH  miH^  '1),  who  lived  like  mag- 
 nates, and  the  Clp)  marginal  reading  D''1J,  nations 
 (comp.  Berachoth  57  b,  which  explains  the  other- 
 wise unintelligible  remarks  of  Rashi  on  Gen.  xxv. 
 2-^),  Num.  i.  16,  where  "'Nllp  is  substituted  for 
 ''X'lp,  and  Num.  xxvi.  9,  where,  on  the  contrary, 
 ''N''"1p  is  substituted  for  ""Xllp,  to  distinguish  be- 
 tween the  former,  wlio  were  called  to  everything 
 tliat  was  honourable  in  the  community  (D''N"lpjn 
 
 rnvi^  nnti'n  nai  ^5^^),  and  the  latter,  who 
 incited  the  children  of  Israel  against  Moses  (comp. 
 Rashi,  in  loco). 
 
 gogal  scrolls,  though  it  is  followed  in  the  public 
 reading  of  the  Scriptures. 
 
 4.  Imp07-tance  of  the  Keri  and  Kethiv,  especially 
 as  relating  to  the  English  versions  of  the  Hebrew 
 Scriptti7'es. — Some  idea  of  the  importance  of  the 
 Keri  and  Kethiv  may  be  gathered  from  the  following 
 analysis  of  the  seventy-six  variations  which  occur  in 
 the  Pentateuch.  Of  the  seventy-six  Keris,  twenty- 
 one  give  my3  instead  of  "lyj  (Gen.  xxiv.  14,  16, 
 28,  55j  57;  xxxiv.  3  [twice],  12;  Deut.  xxii.  15 
 [twice],  16,  20,  21,  23,  24,  25,  26  [twice],  27,  28, 
 29),  which  was  evidently  epicene  in  earlier  periods 
 (comp.  Gesenius,  Gramm.,  sec.  23,  sec.  32,  6; 
 Ewald,  Lehrbiich,  sec.  175,  b) ;  fifteen  have  the 
 plural  termination  V  affixed  to  nouns  instead  ot 
 
 the  singular  i  in  the  text  (Gen.  xxxiii.  4 ;  Exod. 
 xxvii.  II;  xxviii.  28;  xxxii.  19;  xxxix.  4,  33; 
 Lev.  ix.  22;  xvi.  21  ;  Num.  xii.  3;  Deut.  ii.  33; 
 V.  xo ;  vii.  9  ;  viii.  2  ;  xxvii.  10  ;  xxxiii.  9),  which 
 some  think  is  no  real  variation,  since  in  earlier 
 periods  the  termination  1  was  both  singular  and 
 plural,    just   as    nj2    stands    for   both   "'"133   and 
 
 ■•IJIZl ;  seventeen  give  more  current  and   uniform 
 
 forms  of  words  (Gen.  viii.  17  ;  x.  19  ;  xiv.  8  ;  xxiv. 
 33  with  1.  26  ;  xxv.  23  with  xxxv.  1 1  ;  xxvii.  3 
 with  5,  7  ;  xxvii.  29  with  the  same  word  in  the 
 next  clause  ;  xxxvi.  6,  14,  with  ver.  18  ;  xxxix.  20, 
 22  ;  xliii.  28  with  xxvii.  29  ;  Exod.  xvi.  2  ;  xvi.  7 
 with  Num.  xvi.  1 1 ;  Num.  xiv.  36  with  xv.  24 ; 
 Num.  xxi.  32  with  xxxii.  39  ;  xxxii.  7  with  xxx.  6; 
 Deut.  xxxii.  13  with  Amos  iv.  13)  ;  five  substi- 
 tute the  termination  third  person  singular,  1  for 
 n  (Gen.  xlix.  1 1  [twice] ;  Exod.  xxii.  26 ;  xxxii. 
 17  ;  Num.  X.  36),  which  is  a  less  common  prono- 
 minal suffix  (comp.  Gesenius,  Gramm.,  sec.  91  ; 
 Ewald,  Lehrbicch,  sec.  247,  a) ;  two  make  two  words 
 
 of  one  (Gen.  xxx.  1 1 ;  Exod.  iv.  2) ;  two  have  VPtJ* 
 
 instead  of  Ipti'  (Exod.  xvi.  13  :  Num.  xi.  32) ; 
 three  give  plural  verbs  instead  of  singular  (Lev. 
 xxi.  5  ;  Num.  xxxiv.  4 ;  Deut.  xxxi.  7),  which  are 
 no  doubt  an  improvement,  since  Num.  xxxiv.  4  is 
 evidently  a  mistake,  as  may  be  seen  from  a  com- 
 parison of  this  verse  with  verse  5  ;  three  substitute 
 
 the  relative  pronoun  "17  for  the  negative  particle 
 
 X?  (Exod.  xxi.  8;  Lev.  xi.  21  ;  xxv.  30),  which  is 
 very  important ;  two  substitute  euphemisms  for 
 cacophonous  expressions  (Deut.  xxviii.  27,  30)  ; 
 and  two  are  purely  traditional,  viz.,  Num.  i.  16  ; 
 xxvi.  9,  which  are  explained  in  the  note  of  the  pre- 
 ceding section.  The  Pentateuch,  however,  can 
 hardly  be  regarded  as  giving  an  adequate  idea  of 
 the  importance  of  the  Keri  and  Kethiv,  inasmuch 
 as  the  Jews,  regarding  the  law  as  more  sacred  than 
 any  other  inspired  book,  guarded  it  against  being 
 corrupted  with  greater  vigilance  than  the  rest  of 
 the  canon.  Hence  the  comparatively  few  and  un- 
 important Keris  when  contrasted  with  those  occur- 
 ring in  the  other  volumes.  Still,  the  Pentateuch 
 contains  a  few  specimens  of  almost  all  the  diffei'ent 
 Keris. 
 
 As  to  the  question  how  far  our  English  versions 
 have  been  influenced  by  the  7'Jeri  and  Kethiv? 
 this  will  best  be  answered  by  a  comparison  of  the 
 translations  with  the  more  striking  variations  which 
 occur  in  the  Prophets  and  Hagiographa. 
 
 In  Josh.  v.  I,  the  textual  reading  is,  '  till  7i>e 
 were  passed  over'  ("I3"l3y) ;  the  Keri  has  DISV, 
 'until  they  passed  over;'  and  though  the  Sept., 
 
KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 725 
 
 KERI  AND  KETHIV 
 
 Vulg.,  Chaldee,  Luther,  the  Zuricli  Bible,  Cover- 
 dale,  the  Bishops'  Bible,  the  Geneva  Version,  etc., 
 adopt  the  Keri,  the  A.  V.,  following  Kimchi,  ad- 
 heres to  the  Kethiv ;  whilst  in  Josh.  vi.  7,  where 
 the  textual  reading  is,  '  and  they  said  (nOX^I)  unto 
 the  people,'  and  the  marginal  emendation  is,  '  and 
 he  said'  ("iDX^"!),  and  where  the  Vulg.,  Chaldee, 
 Luther,  the  Zurich  Bible,  Coverdale,  the  Bishops' 
 Bible,  and  the  Geneva  Version,  again  adopt  the 
 Keri,  as  in  the  former  instance,  the  A.  V.  abandons 
 the  textual  reading,  and  espouses  the  emendation. 
 In  Josh.   XV.   47,   again,   where  the  Keri   is   '  the 
 
 bordering  sea  (713jn  DT!)  and  its  territory;'  and 
 
 the  Kethiv  has,  '  and  the  great  sea  (^liH  DTI)  and 
 the  territory,'  whicii  is  again  followed  by  the 
 ancient  versions  and  the  translations  of  the  Re- 
 formers, the  A.  v.,  without  taking  any  notice  of 
 the  textual  reading  in  the  margin,  as  in  Josli.  viii. 
 16,  adopts  the  emendation  ;  whereas  in  Josh.  xv. 
 53  the  A.  V.  follows  the  textual  reading  (013^) 
 Jamim,  noticing  however  the  emendation  (DIJ^) 
 Jamts  in  the  margin.  All  the  ten  emendations  of 
 the  second  class,   which  propose  the  insertion  of 
 
 entire  words  into  the  text  (QTia  NP1  ''"lp)>  are 
 adopted  in  the  A.  V.  without  the  slightest  indica- 
 cation  by  the  usual  italics  that  they  are  not  in  the 
 text.     Of  the  eight  omissions  of  entire  words  in  the 
 
 third  class  Clp  N?1  ^TlD),  nothing  decisive  can  be 
 said,  inasmuch  as  six  of  them  refer  to  simple 
 particles,  and  they  might  either  be  recognised  by 
 the  translators  or  not  without  its  being  discernible 
 in  the  version.  The  only  two  instances,  however, 
 vt'here  there  can  be  no  mistake  (Jer.  xli.  3  ;  Ezek. 
 xlviii.  16)  clearly  shew  that  the  A.  V.  follows  the 
 marginal  gloss,  and  accordingly  rejects  the  words 
 which  are  in  the  text.  Had  the  limits  of  this 
 article  allowed  it,  we  could  have  shewn  still 
 more  unquestionably,  that  though  the  A.  V.  gene- 
 rally adopts  the  marginal  emendations,  yet  in 
 many  instances  it  proceeds  most  arbitrarily,  and 
 adheres  to  the  textual  reading  ;  and  that,  with  very 
 few  exceptions,  it  never  indicates  by  italics,  or  in 
 the  margin,  the  difference  between  the  textual  and 
 the  marginal  readings. 
 
 Inattention  to  the  Keri  and  Kethiv  has  given 
 rise  to  the  most  fanciful  and  absurd  expositions,  of 
 which  the  following  may  serve  both  as  a  specimen 
 and  a  warning.  In  looking  at  the  text  of  the 
 Hebrew  Bibles,  it  will  be  seen  that  there  is  a  final 
 
 Mem  (D)  in  the  middle  of  the  word  n3~lD?,  Is.  ix. 
 6.  We  have  already  alluded  to  the  fact  that  it 
 exhibits  one  of  the  fifteen  instances  where  the 
 Kethiv,  or  the  textual  reading,  is  one  word,  and 
 the  Keri,  or  the  emended  reading,  proposes  two 
 
 words  {vide  supra,  sect.  3).  Accordingly,  n^lD? 
 stands  for  n31  DP  =  DH?,  i.e.,  ^ to  them  the  do- 
 minion shall  be  great,''  corresponding  to  the  com- 
 mon abbreviation   DH  for  DHZl.     The  question  is 
 
 ,  T  V    T 
 
 not  whether  D?  niay  be  considered  as  an  abbrevia- 
 tion of  DHP,  seeing  there  are  no  other  examples  of 
 it ;  suffice  it  to  say,  that  Jewish  scribes  and  critics  of 
 ancient  times  took  it  as  such,  just  as  they  regarded 
 
 D?N"lX   (Is.   xxxiii.   7)  as  a  contraction  of  D?  = 
 
 DH?  nX"lN  (comp.  the  Syriac,  the  Chaldee,  Aquila, 
 Symmachus,  Theodotion,  Vulgate,  Elias  Levita, 
 etc.) ;  and  that  the  Sept.  read  it  as  two  words  {i.e.. 
 
 n31  T\?).  Subsequent  scribes,  however,  found 
 it  either  to  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  primi- 
 tive reading,  or  with  their  exegetical  rules,  as  well 
 as  with  the  usage  of  the  propliet  himself  (comp. 
 Is.  xxxiii.  23),  to  read  it  as  one  word  ;  but  their 
 extreme  reverence  for  the  text  prevented  them 
 from  making  this  alteration  without  indicating  that 
 some  codices  have  two  words.  Hence,  though 
 they  joined  the  two  words  together  as  one,  they 
 yet  left  the  final  Mem  to  exhibit  the  variation.  An 
 example  of  the  reverse  occurs  in  Neh.  ii.  13,  where 
 D^VnSDn  has  been  divided  into  two  words,  tDH 
 D''i'1~lQ,  and  where  the  same  anxiety  faithfully  to 
 exhibit  the  ancient  reading  has  made  the  editors  of 
 the  Hebrew  canon  retain  the  medial  Meni  at  the 
 end  of  the  word.  It  was  to  be  expected  that  those 
 Jews  who  regard  both  readings  as  emanating  from 
 the  Holy  Ghost,  and  as  designed  to  convey  some 
 recondite  meaning,  would  find  some  mysteries  in 
 
 this  final  Mem  in  the  middle  of  n^lO?-  Hence  we 
 find  in  the  Talmud  {Sanhedriti  94)  the  following 
 remark  upon  it,  '  Why  is  it  that  all  the  Mems  in 
 the  middle  of  a  word  are  open  \i.e.  O]  and  this  one 
 is  closed  \i.e.  D]  ?  The  Holy  One,  blessed  be  he  ! 
 wanted  to  make  Hezekiah  the  Messiah,  and  Sen- 
 nacherib Gog  and  Magog  ;  whereupon  Justice 
 pleaded  before  the  presence  of  the  Holy  One, 
 blessed  be  he  !  Lord  of  the  World,  what  David 
 the  king  of  Israel,  who  sang  so  many  hymns  and 
 praises  before  thee,  wilt  thou  not  make  him  the 
 Messiah,  but  Hezekiah,  for  whom  thou  hast  per- 
 formed all  those  miracles,  and  who  has  not  uttered 
 one  song  before  thee,  wilt  thou  make  him  the 
 Messiah?  Therefore  has  the  Mem  been  closed.' 
 Ibn  Ezra  again  tells  us  that  the  scribes  (not  he 
 himself,  as  Gill  erroneously  states)  see  in  it  an  allu- 
 sion to  the  recession  of  the  shadow  on  the  dial  in 
 Hezekiah's  time  ;  whilst  Kimchi  will  have  it  that 
 it  refers  to  the  '  stopping  up  of  the  breaches  in  the 
 walls  of  Jerusalem,  which  are  broken  down  during 
 the  captivity,  and  that  this  will  take  place  in  the 
 days  of  salvation,  when  the  kingdom  which  had 
 been  shut  up  till  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  will 
 be  opened.'  But  that  Christian  expositors  should 
 excel  these  mystical  interpretations  is  surpassing 
 strange.  What  are  we  to  say  to  Galatinus,  who 
 submits  that  this  Mem,  being  the  cypher  of  600, 
 intimates  that  six  hundred  years  after  this  prophecy 
 the  birth  of  Christ  was  to  take  place  ?  or  to  the 
 opinion  which  he  quotes,  that  the  name  D''~iK) 
 ^~lt^*,  Maria  Domina,  or  that  the  perpetual  vir- 
 ginity of  Mary  is  thereby  indicated  (lib.  vii.  c.  xiii. )  ? 
 Or  to  Calvin,  who  thinks  that  it  denotes  the  close 
 and  secret  way  whereby  the  Messiah  should  come 
 to  reign  and  set  up  his  kingdom  ?  or  to  the  opinion 
 which  he  mentions,  that  it  indicates  the  exclusion 
 of  the  Jews  from  the  Messiah's  kingdom  for  their 
 unbelief?  Or  to  the  conjecture  of  Gill,  that  '  it  may 
 denote  that  the  government  of  Christ,  which  would 
 be  for  a  time  straitened,  and  kept  in  narrow  bounds 
 and  limits,  should  hereafter  be  throughout  the 
 world,  to  the  four  corners  of  it,  to  be  firm  and 
 stable,  perfect  and  complete,  which  the  figure  of 
 this  letter,  being  shut,  and  four-square,  may  be  an 
 emblem  of?' 
 
 It  only  remains  to  be  added,  that  there  are  some 
 words,  which  are  always  read  differently  i^'^'^)  to 
 what  they  are  written  in  the  text  (QTlS),  and 
 which,  from  the  frequency  of  their  occurrence,  have 
 only  the  vowel  signs  of  the  proposed  Keri,  without 
 
KERIOTH,  KIRIOTH 
 
 726 
 
 KERIOTH,  KIRIOTH 
 
 the  latter  being  exhibited  in  the  marginal  gloss. 
 These  are,  a,  The  name  nin"',  which  has  always  the 
 
 vowel  signs  of  ""jix,  and  is  pronounced  with  these 
 
 vowels,   i.e.,  niHS   except  when  it  precedes  this 
 
 name  itself,  in  which  case  it  has  the  vowel  signs  of 
 
 D^'i^X,  i-  e-,  nin"";   h,  The  name  Jerusalem,  when, 
 
 as  in  the  earlier  books  of  Scripture,  it  is  written  with 
 a  Jod  before  the  Mem,  has  never  its  own  points, 
 
 ;.  e.,  xiypT^  or  D~,  but  has  the  vowel  signs  of 
 D  vt^ll^)  and  is  read  so  ;    c.  The  word  N^H,  which 
 
 was  epicene  in  earlier  periods,  is  always  pointed 
 t<in  in  the  Pentateuch,  when  it  is  used  as  feminine, 
 
 to  make  it  conformable  to  the  later  feminine  form 
 N^n  ;  and  d.  The  name  "IDti'Ei*^  is  always  furnished 
 with  the  vowels  belonging  to  the  Keri  13^'''  with 
 
 one  Shm. 
 
 5.  Literature. — One  of  the  earliest  attempts 
 freely  to  discourse  upon  the  origin  and  value  of  the 
 Keri  and  Kethiv,  is  that  of  Kimchi,  in  the  Introduc- 
 tion to  his  Commentary  on  Joshua  ;  Abravanel,  too, 
 has  a  lengthy  disquisition  on  this  subject,  in  the 
 Introduction  to  his  Cotnmentajy  on  Jeremiah.  He 
 was  followed  by  the  laborious  Jacob  B.  Chajim, 
 who  fully  discusses  the  A'eri  and  Kethiv  in  his  cele- 
 brated Introduction  to  the  Rabbittic  Bible,  translated 
 by  Ginsburg  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Litej'atiire  for 
 July  1863  ;  and  by  the  enidite  and  bold  Elias  Le- 
 vita,  who  gives  a  very  lucid  account  of  the  Keri  and 
 Kethiv,  in  his  Massoreth  Ha-Massoreth,  ed.  Sulz- 
 bach,  1 77 1,  pp.  8  a,  ff.,  21  a,  ff.  Of  Christian 
 writers  are  to  be  mentioned  the  masterly  treatises 
 by  Cappellus,  Critica  Sacra,  lib.  iii.  cap.  ix.,  seq.  ; 
 Buxtorf,  Tiberias,  cap.  xiii.  ;  Buxtorf  the  younger, 
 Anticritica,  Basileae  1653,  cap.  iv.  p.  448-509 ; 
 Hilleri  De  Arcano  Ketliib  et  Keri,  Tub.  1692  ; 
 Walton,  Biblia  Polyglotta,  Proleg.,  Cantab.  1828, 
 vol.  i.  p.  412.  seq.  ;  Wolf,  Bibliotheca  Hebrcea,  ii. 
 p.  507-533  ;  Frankel,  Vorstudien  zu  der  Septua- 
 ginta,  Leipzig  1841,  p.  219,  seq. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 KERIOTH,  KIRIOTH  (Hinip,   'cities'),     i. 
 
 A  town  on  the  southern  border  of  Judah,  towards 
 Edom.  It  is  only  mentioned  in  Josh.  xv.  25. 
 The  LXX.  reads  al  irdXeis  (Alex.  7r6\£s)  ^Aaepwv, 
 thus  translating  the  clause,  '  cities  of  Hezron.' 
 The  Syriac  version  follows  the  LXX.  ;  but  the 
 whole  scope  of  the  Hebrew  shews  that  Kerioth  is 
 a  proper  name,  and,  if  connected  with  Hezron,  as 
 Reland  thinks  it  ought  to  be,  it  would  make 
 Kerioth- Hezron,  like  Hazar-Gaddah  (ver.  27),  the 
 name  of  the  place  (but  see  Keil  o)i  yoshua,  ad  loc.) 
 Jerome  in  the  Vulgate  translates  the  passage, 
 '  Carioth,  Hesron,  hac  est  Asor ;''  but  he  does  not 
 mention  it  in  the  Onomasticot:.  Reland  suggests 
 that  Judas  Iscariot  got  his  name  from  this  place, 
 deriving  Iscariot  from  nVTp  t^'''X,  '  a  man  of 
 Kerioth'  (Pal.,  p.  700;  see  also  Winer,  R.  W.,  s. 
 V.  Kerioth).  Robinson  saw  a  ruined  place  called 
 Kuryetein,  about  fifteen  miles  south  of  Hebron, 
 which,  he  suggests,  may  occupy  the  site  of  Kerioth 
 {B.  R.,  ii.  loi).  Though  these  ruins  do  not  lie 
 quite  so  far  south  as  would  seem  to  be  indicated 
 by  the  sacred  writer,  yet  they  may  possibly  be 
 those  of  Kerioth.  Moladah  and  Ain  are  men- 
 tioned in  the  same  group  (ver.  26,  32),  and  their 
 
 sites  are  not  far  distant  from  Kuryetein.     Kiir- 
 
 ydein  is  the  Arabic  dual  of  Kuryah  (i'j  ^),  and 
 
 signifies  '  two  towns  ; '  it  is  thus  nearly  equivalent 
 to  the  Hebrew  Kerioth. 
 
 2.  A  town  of  Moab  (KaptuiS- ;  Carioth),  men- 
 tioned by  Jeremiah  in  connection  with  Beth-gamul 
 and  Bozrah  (xlviii.  24).  It  would  also  appear, 
 from  an  incidental  notice,  that  it  was  one  of  the 
 strong  cities  of  Moab  : — '  Kerioth  is  taken,  and 
 the  strongholds  are  surprised,'  etc.  (ver.  41). 
 Amos  says,  in  pronouncing  a  prophetic  curse  : — • 
 '  I  will  send  a  fire  upon  Moab,  and  it  shall  devour 
 the  palaces  oi  Kirioth''  (ii.  2).  Though  the  A.  V. 
 has  Kirioth,  yet  the  Hebrew  word  is  the  same  as 
 in  Jeremiah,  Jl'l'lp  >  the  only  difference  is,  it  has 
 
 the  article.  The  LXX.  renders  this  clause  rd 
 S-f/ueXta  tQv  iroKewv  avTrjS  ;  but  the  Vulgate  has 
 ades  Carioth,  which  is  doubtless  the  true  render- 
 ing. Bozrah  and  Beth-gamul  being  identified  with 
 Busrah  and  Um  el-Jemdl,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
 as  to  the  site  of  Kerioth.  Six  miles  east  of  Bus- 
 rah, at  the  foot  of  the  mountain  range  of  Bashan, 
 
 stands  Kureiyeh,  whose  name  (i^  j  =  fT'lp,  pi. 
 
 nVTp)  at  once  suggests  identity  with  the  ancient 
 Kerioth  ;  and  its  proximity  to  two  other  cities  of 
 Moab  appears  to  put  the  matter  beyond  doubt. 
 Moab  was  a  wide  region,  extending  from  the 
 eastern  shores  of  the  Dead  Sea  away  to  the 
 borders  of  Arabia.  The  land  of  JUishor  (J*~)K 
 "lJ^"'Dn,  A.  v.,  'the  plain  countiy'),  upon  which 
 Jeremiah  pronounced  the  curse  (xlviii.  21),  was 
 that  great  table-land  running  from  the  top  of  the 
 mountain-ridge  which  shuts  in  the  Dead  Sea,  to 
 Arabia  on  the  east,  and  Bashan  on  the  north. 
 Here  stood  the  doomed  cities— far  apart,  as  would 
 appear  from  the  words,  '  And  upon  all  the  cities 
 of  the  land  of  Moab,  far  and  near''  (ver.  24). 
 Kerioth  was  situated  in  the  most  remote  part  of 
 the  Mishor  towards  Bashan.  Kureiyeh  stands  in 
 a  broad  valley  where  the  mountain-chain  sinks 
 down  into  the  plain.  The  ruins  are  about  three 
 miles  in  circuit.  There  are  no  buildings  of  great 
 size  or  beauty  now  standing  ;  but  in  the  streets 
 and  lanes  are  many  broken  columns  ;  and  beside  a 
 cistern  in  the  centre  of  the  town  is  a  singular  struc- 
 ture, consisting  of  a  stone  roof  supported  by  a 
 triple  colonnade,  underneath  which  are  ranges  of 
 benches  rising  up  like  those  of  a  theatre.  A 
 Greek  inscription  on  one  of  the  benches  states  that 
 the  cistern  (Xi/j-vr])  was  made  in  the  year  190  (a.d. 
 296).  The  private  houses  of  Kureiyeh  are  singu- 
 larly interesting.  Their  walls  are  from  four  to 
 eight  feet  thick,  built  of  massive  squared  blocks  of 
 basalt.  The  roofs  are  formed  of  stone  slabs  care- 
 fully hewn,  reaching  from  wall  to  wall.  The 
 doors  are  also  of  stone,  and  hung  upon  pivots  pro- 
 jecting above  and  below.  These  houses,  simple, 
 massive,  and  imperishable,  bear  the  marks  of  the 
 highest  antiquity.  Similar  structures  are  found  in 
 all  the  old  cities  of  Bashan  ;  and  the  conclusion 
 seems  unavoidable  that  these  are  the  very  houses 
 originally  built  and  occupied  by  the  giant  Rephaim 
 [see  Trachonitis  ;  Kenath  ;  Bozrah].  When 
 the  writer  visited  Kerioth  in  1853,  upwards  of  a 
 hundred  of  these  ancient  houses  were  inhabited  ; 
 and  he  estimated  that  at  least  as  many  more  still 
 stand,  perfect  and  habitable,  but  now  used  as  folds 
 for  flocks  and  stables  for  camels.     Kerioth  must 
 
KESEPH 
 
 727 
 
 KETHEM 
 
 have  been  a  strong  city.  The  country  around  it  is 
 thickly  covered  with  rugged  rocks ;  the  passes 
 tlirough  them  are  intricate  and  easily  defended  ; 
 and  the  traces  of  massive  ramparts  are  still  visible 
 (see  Porter's  Damascus^  ii.  pp.  191-98;  Burck- 
 hardt's  Travels  in  Syria,  p.  103  ;  Buckingham's 
 Arab  Tribes,  p.  213).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 KESEPH  (^D3),  the  Hebrew  word  for  silver, 
 
 whether  in  the  ore,  in  bars,  or  coined.  Silver  is 
 commonly  mentioned  along  with  gold  in  the  Bible, 
 as,  next  to  it,  the  most  precious  of  metals.  It  is 
 found  native  in  veins  ramifying  through  various 
 kinds  of  stone ;  hence,  perhaps,  the  allusion  in 
 Job  xxviii.  I  (cf.  RosenmiUler,  in  loc.)  Silver  is 
 generally  obtained  mixed  with  dross,  and  is  puri- 
 fied by  fire,  or  drawn  off  by  the  lead  in  a  crucible ; 
 allusions  to  this  are  in  Ps.  xii.  6 ;  Prov.  xvii.  3  ; 
 xxvii.  21  ;  Is.  i.  25  ;  Ezek.  xxii.  22;  Zech.  xiii.  9; 
 Mai.  iii.  3.     The  separated  silver  was  called  TD3 
 
 ppTD,  refined  silver,  i  Chron.  xxix.  4 ;  Ps.  xii.  6  ; 
 
 Prov.  x.  20.  Silver  was  brought  to  Tyre  from 
 Tarshish  (Ezek.  xxvii.  12),  and  mention  is  made 
 of  silver  beat  out  into  plates  (yp"lD"3)  as  imported 
 
 from  the  same  locality  (Jer.  x.  9).  Assuming  that 
 Tarshish  was  in  Spain,  this  falls  in  with  the 
 notices  we  have  in  ancient  authors  of  the  abun- 
 dance of  silver  in  that  country  (Heeren,  Idem,  p. 
 64). 
 
 There  is  no  mention  of  this  metdl  in  Scripture 
 until  the  time  of  Abraham.  Before  that  time 
 brass  and  iron  appear  to  have  been  the  only 
 metals  in  use  (Gen.  iv.  22).  Abraham  was  rich  in 
 gold  and  silver,  as  well  as  in  flocks  and  herds,  and 
 silver  in  his  day  was  in  general  circulation  as 
 money,  but  it  was  uncoined,  and  estimated  always 
 by  weight.  Coined  money  was  not  in  use  among 
 the  Israelites  until  an  advanced  period  of  their 
 history  ;  indeed,  as  late  as  the  time  of  Jeremiah, 
 we  find  silver  weighed  in  payment  of  a  purchase 
 (Jer.  xxxii.  9,  10).  The  only  mention  of  gold  as  a 
 medium  of  exchange  is  in  i  Chron.  xxi.  25.  The 
 Romans  are  said  to  have  had  only  copper  money 
 until  within  five  years  of  the  first  Punic  war,  when 
 they  began  to  coin  silver  (Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  xxxiii. 
 3,  13).  Their  coins  were  extensively  introduced 
 into  Judtea  after  it  became  a  Roman  province. 
 
 Silver  was  largely  used  by  the  Jews  in  the 
 manufacture  of  articles  of  ornament  (comp.  Gen. 
 xxiv.  53  ;  Prov.  xxv.  1 1  ;  Cant.  i.  1 1  ;  Zech.  vi. 
 11),  and  of  various  vessels  for  domestic  purposes, 
 and  also  for  the  service  of  the  temple  (Gen.  xliv. 
 2;  Num.  vii.  13  ;  x.  2;  i  Chron.  xxviii.  15-17; 
 Exod.  XX.  23  ;  Is.  xl.  19  ;  Hosea  xiii.  2  ;  Habak. 
 ii.  19).  Many  of  the  idols  and  other  objects  be- 
 longing to  the  idolatrous  nations  are  stated  to 
 have  been  of  silver.  This  metal  was  so  abundant 
 as  to  be  little  thought  of  in  the  days  of  Solomon 
 (i  Kings  X.  21,  27). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KESITAH  (n£2''b'p).  The  meaning  and  deri- 
 vation of  this  word,  which  only  occurs  thrice  in 
 the  O.  T.,  has  been  a  .subject  of  much  controversy. 
 The  places  where  it  is  found — Gen.  xxxiii.  19,  re- 
 cording Jacob's  purchase  of  a  piece  of  ground  at 
 Shechem ;  Josh.  xxiv.  32,  a  verbal  repetition  from 
 Genesis  ;  and  Job  xiii.  11,  where  the  presents  made 
 to  Job  by  his  friends  are  specified  and  it  is  joined 
 with  rings  of  gold — indicate  either  the  name  of  a 
 
 coin,  or  of  some  article  used  in  barter.  The  priu' 
 cipal  explanations  of  the  word  are — 
 
 I .  That  of  the  LXX. ,  and  all  ancient  versions, 
 which  render  it  'a  lamb,'  either  the  animal  itself, 
 or  a  coin  bearing  its  impress  (Hottinger,  Di^s.  de 
 Numm.  Orient!),  a  view  which  has  been  revived  in 
 modern  times  by  the  Danish  Bishop  Munter  in  a 
 treatise  published  at  Copenhagen  1824,  and  more 
 recently  still  by  Mr.  James  Yates,  Proc.  of  Numism. 
 Soc,  1837-8,  p.  141.  The  entire  want  of  any  ety- 
 mological ground  for  this  interpretation  has  led 
 Bochart  {Hierozoic,  i.  1.  2,  c.  3)  to  imagine  that 
 there  had  been  a  confusion  in  the  text  of  the 
 LXX.  between  eKarbv  fivQiv  and  eKarhv  dfivwv,  and 
 that  this  error  has  passed  into  all  the  ancient  ver- 
 sions, which  may  be  supported  by  the  singular  fact 
 that  in  Gen.  xxxi.  7,  41,  we  find  Cl"'ib  mUV  (A.  V. 
 
 '  ten  times,'  njQ  however  more  usually  standing 
 for  a  particular  weight)  translated  by  the  LXX. 
 S^Ka  dfj.uuii',  which  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  on 
 any  supposition  save  that  of  a  mistake  of  the  copyist 
 for  ixvQjv. 
 
 2.  Others,  adopting  the  rendering  'lamb,'  have 
 imagined  a  reference  to  a  weight  formed  in  the 
 shape  of  that  animal,  such  as  we  know  to  have 
 been  in  use  among  the  Egyptians  and  Assyrians, 
 imitating  bulls,  antelopes,  geese,  etc.  (see  Wil- 
 kinson's Anc.  Egypt.,  ii.  10  ;  Layard,  Ninev.  and 
 Babvl.,  pp.  600-602;  Lepsius,  Denkin.  iii.  plate 
 39,  No.  3). 
 
 3.  Faber,  in  the  German  edition  of  Harmer''s 
 Obs.,  th.  ii.,  pp.  15-19,  quoted  by  Gesenius,  con- 
 nects it  with  the  Syriac  ]  A,m  n^  Heb.  DDp,   '  a 
 
 vessel,'  an  etymology  accepted  by  Grotefen'd,  vide 
 inf.,  and  considers  it  to  have  been  either  a  measure 
 or  a  silver  vessel  used  in  barter,  cf.  ^lian,  V.  H., 
 i.  22. 
 
 4.  The  most  probable  view,  however,  is  that  sup- 
 ported by  Gesenius,  Rosenmiiller,  Jahn,  Kalisch, 
 and  the  majority  of  the  soundest  interpreters,  that 
 it  was,  in  Grotefend's  words  (Munisfn.  Chron.,  vol. 
 ii.  p.  248),  '  merely  a  silver  weight  of  undetermined 
 size,  just  as  the  most  ancient  shekel  was  nothing 
 more  than  a  piece  of  rough  silver  without  any 
 image  or  device.'     The  lost  root  was  perhaps  akin 
 
 to  the  Arabic  la^j^  'he  divided  equally.'  Bo- 
 chart, however  {n.s.),  is  disposed  to  alter  the  punc- 
 tuation of  the  Shin,  and  to  connect  the  word  with 
 tJC'p,  'truth,'  adding  'potuit  "p  id  est  vera  dici 
 
 moneta  qurecunque  habuit  justum  pondus,  aut  etiam 
 moneta  sincera  et  dKij3ST]\os.' 
 
 According  to  Rabbi  Akiba,  quoted  by  Bochart, 
 a  certain  coin  bore  this  name  in  comparatively 
 modern  times  ;  so  that  he  would  render  the  word 
 by  ''pJl,  ddvaKes. — E.  V. 
 
 KETHEM  (Dri3),  a  word   occurring  in  the 
 
 poetical  portions  of  the  O.  T.  and  in  the  A.  V.,  when 
 standing  by  itself  translated  fi/!e  gold  (Job  xxxi. 
 24;  Prov.  xxv.  12).  It  is  sometimes  joined  with 
 "I^SiX  (Job  xxviii.  16  ;  Ps.  xlv.  10  [9] ;  Is.  xiii.  12), 
 
 and  sometimes  with  tS^iX  (Job  xxviii.  19  ;  Cant.  v. 
 
 II ;  Lam.  iv.  I ;  Dan.  x.  5).  The  Greek  translators 
 of  job  and  Proverbs  seem  to  have  regarded  it  as  a 
 precious  stone,  for  in  the  one  place  they  render  it 
 by  X'iOii:  TroXureXeT,  and  in  the  other  by  adpSiop 
 TToXvTeXh.     Rosenmiiller    (Bib.    Mineral,  p.  47) 
 
KETTLE 
 
 728 
 
 KETZACH 
 
 derives  it  from  an  Arabic  root  signifying  to  con- 
 ceal (jfj^,  Kaiam),  and  with   this   Lee  accords. 
 
 The  latter  says,  '  I  am  inchned  to  think  that  the 
 best,  finest,  most  compact  gold,  or  that  usually 
 brought  from  Ophir,  is  intended'  [Coviment.  on  Job, 
 p.  403). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KETTLE  (11^).  The  word  only  occurs  once 
 in  the  A.  V.  (i  Sam.  ii.  14),  where  it  is  associated 
 with  other  vessels  of  a  similar  purpose  ('  Quae 
 discrepabant  vel  materia  vel  figura  vel  usu,'  Vat- 
 ablus),  between  which  it  is  probably  hopeless  now 
 to  distinguish. 
 
 The  word  TiT  is  rendered  '  pot,'  Job  xli.  20 ; 
 Ps.  Ixxxi.  6  (7);  'caldron,'  2  Chron.  xxxv.  13; 
 and  'basket,'  2  Kings  x.  7  ;  Jer.  xxiv.  2. — E.  V. 
 
 KETURAH    (nnitJip,     hicmse ;     Sept.    Xer- 
 
 Tovpa),  the  second  wife,  or,  as  she  is  called  in  i 
 Chron.  i.  32,  the  concubine  of  Abraham,  by  whom 
 he  had  six  sons,  Zimran,  Jokshan,  Medan,  Midian, 
 Ishbak,  and  Shuah,  whom  he  lived  to  see  grow 
 to  man's  estate,  and  whom  he  established  '  in  the 
 East  country,'  that  they  might  not  interfere  with 
 Isaac  (Gen.  xxv.  1-6).  As  Abraham  was  100 
 years  old  when  Isaac  was  bom,  who  was  given  to 
 him  by  the  special  bounty  of  Providence  when 
 *he  was  as  good  as  dead'  (Heb.  xi.  12),  as  he  was 
 140  years  old  when  Sarah  died  ;  and  as  he  him- 
 self died  at  the  age  of  175  years, — it  has  seemed 
 improbable  that  these  six  sons  should  have  been 
 bom  to  Abraham  by  one  woman  after  he  was  140 
 years  old,  and  that  he  should  have  seen  them  all 
 grow  up  to  adult  age,  and  have  sent  them  forth  to 
 form  independent  settlements  in  that  last  and 
 feeble  period  of  his  life.  If  Isaac  was  born  to  him 
 out  of  the  course  of  nature  when  he  was  100  years 
 old,  how  could  six  sons  be  born  to  him  in  the 
 course  of  nature  after  he  was  140?  It  has  there- 
 fore been  suggested  by  good  commentators,  that 
 as  Keturah  is  called  Abraham's  '  concubine '  in 
 Chronicles,  and  as  she  and  Hagar  are  probably  in- 
 dicated as  his  '  concubines '  in  Gen.  xxv.  6,  Ketu- 
 rah had  in  fact  been  taken  by  Abraham  as  his 
 secondary  or  concubine-wife  before  the  death  of 
 Sarah,  although  the  historian  relates  the  incident 
 after  that  event,  that  his  leading  narrative  might 
 not  be  interrupted.  According  to  the  standard 
 of  morality  then  acknowledged,  Abraham  might 
 quite  as  properly  have  taken  Keturah  before  as 
 after  Sarah's  death  ;  nor  can  any  reason  why  he 
 should  not  have  done  so,  or  why  he  should  have 
 waited  till  then,  be  conceived.  This  explanation 
 obviates  many  difficulties,  and  does  not  itself  con- 
 tain any.     [Abraham.] — J.  K. 
 
 Addendum.- — From  Keturah  descended  the  pro- 
 genitors of  several  of  the  Aral)  tribes  (Muir,  Life 
 of  Mohaiinned  I.,  cxii.)  M.  Caussin  de  Perceval 
 thinks  that  the  Bani  Katoora,  an  Arab  tribe  who 
 settled  at  Mecca  with  the  Jorhomites,  are  direct 
 descendants  of  Keturah,  but  he  has  no  ground  for 
 this  except  the  similarity  of  the  names.  It  is  im- 
 probable that  where  so  many  tribes,  descended  from 
 Keturah's  sons,  took  the  names  of  their  respective 
 progenitors,  one  should  have  been  distinguished  by 
 the  name  of  the  one  mother  of  the  whole  ;  and 
 besides,  the  Bani  Katoora  came  from  the  south, 
 whereas  the  descendants  of  Keturah  seem  to  have 
 resided  in  the  north  of  the  peninsula.  The 
 Midianites,  the  Dedanites,  the  Shebnites,  are  the 
 
 descendants  of  Keturah  connected  with  Arab  asso- 
 ciations.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 KETZACH     (nVp  ;     Sept.     p.eK6.veiov),     also 
 
 written  Kezach  and  Ketsah,  occurs  only  in 
 Is.  xxviii.  25,  27,  and  is  translated  fitches,  that 
 is,  vetches,  in  the  A.  V.  It  is  no  doubt  from  the 
 difficulty  of  proving  the  precise  meaning  of  ket- 
 zach,  that  different  plants  have  been  assigned  as 
 its  representative.  But  if  we  refer  to  the  con- 
 text, we  learn  some  particulars  which  at  least 
 restrict  it  to  a  certain  group,  namely,  to  such  as 
 are  cultivated.  Thus,  ver.  25,  '  When  he  (the 
 ploughman)  hath  made  plain  the  face  thereof, 
 doth  he  not  cast  abroad  the  fitches  ifetzach)':'' 
 And  again,  ver.  27,  '  For  the  fitches  are  not 
 threshed  with  a  threshing  instrument,  neither  is  a 
 cart-wheel  turned  about  upon  the  cummin  ;  but 
 fitches  are  beaten  out  with  a  staff,  and  the  cumin 
 with  a  rod.'  From  which  we  learn  that  the  grain 
 called  ketzach  was  easily  separated  from  its  capsule, 
 and  therefore  beaten  out  with  a  stick. 
 
 Although  ketzach,  in  Chaldee  kizcha,  is  always 
 acknowledged  to  denote  some  seed,  yet  interpreters 
 have  had  great  difficulty  in  determining  the  parti- 
 cular kind  intended — some  translating  it  peas, 
 others,  as  Luther  and  the  A.  V.,  vetches,  but 
 without  any  proof.  Meibomius  considers  it  to  be 
 the  ivhite  poppy,  and  others,  a  black  seed.  This 
 last  interpretation  has  the  most  numerous,  as  well 
 as  the  oldest,  authorities  in  its  support.  Of  these 
 a  few  are  in  favour  of  the  black  poppy-seed,  but 
 the  majority,  of  a  black  seed  common  in  Egypt, 
 etc.  (Celsius,  Hierobot.  ii.  70).  The  Sept.  trans- 
 lates it  ix€\6.vQlov,  the  Vulg.  git,  and  Tremellius 
 nielanthiutn,  while  the  Arabic  has  shoonez.  All 
 these  mean  the  same  thing,  namely,  a  very  black- 
 coloured  and  aromatic  seed,  still  cultivated  and  in 
 daily   employment    as   a  condiment   in   the    East 
 
 (Pliny,  XX.  17,  71  ;  Dioscor. ,  iii.  93).     The  Lj«Jj, 
 
 shoonez,  of  the  Arabs  is,  moreover,  the  same  plant 
 or  seed  which  is  usually  called  'black  cumin.' 
 So  one  kind  of  cumin  is  said  by  Dioscorides  to 
 have  seeds  like  those  of  melanthion  or  nigella.  It 
 was  commonly  cultivated  in  Egypt,  and  P.  Alpinus 
 mentions  it  as  '  Suneg  .(Egyptiis.'  The  Arabs, 
 besides  shoonez,  also  call  it  hub-alsouda,  and  the 
 Persians  seah  dana,  both  words  signifying  black 
 seed.  One  species,  named  N.  Indica  by  Dr.  Rox- 
 burgh, is  called  kala  jeera  in  India,  that  is,  black 
 zeera  or  cumin,  of  the  family  of  Ranupculace.'e. 
 'Nigella  sativa  is  alone  cultivated  in  India,  as  in 
 most  eastern  countries,  and  continues  in  the  pre- 
 sent day,  as  in  the  most  ancient  times,  to  be  used 
 both  as  a  condiment  and  as  a  medicine'  [Illust. 
 Himal.  Bot.,  p.  46).  If  we  consider  that  this 
 appears  to  have  been  always  one  of  the  cultivated 
 grains  of  the  East,  and  compare  the  character  of 
 nigella  with  the  passages  in  which  ketzach  is  men- 
 tioned, we  shall  find  that  the  former  is  applicable 
 to  them  all.  Indeed,  Bartenora  states,  that  the 
 barbarous  or  vulgar  name  of  the  kezach  was  nielle, 
 that  is,  nigella.  The  various  species  of  nigella  are 
 herbaceous  (several  of  them  being  indigenous  in 
 Europe,  others  cultivated  in  most  parts  of  Asia), 
 with  their  leaves  deeply  cut  and  linear,  their 
 flowers  terminal,  most  of  them  having  under  the 
 calyx  leafy  involucres  which  often  half  surround 
 the  flower.  The  fruit  is  composed  of  five  or  six 
 capsules,  which  are  compressed,  oblong,  pointed, 
 
KETZIOTH 
 
 729 
 
 KEUCHENIUS 
 
 sometimes  said  to  be  hornlike,  united  below,  and 
 divided  into  several  cells,  and  enclosing  numerous, 
 angular,  scabrous,   black -coloured  seeds.      From 
 
 297.  Nigella  sativx 
 
 the  nature  of  the  capsules,  it  is  evident,  that  when 
 they  are  ripe,  the  seeds  might  easily  be  shaken  out 
 by  moderate  blows  of  a  stick,  as  is  related  to  have 
 been  the  case  with  the  ketzach  of  the  text. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KETZIOTH  (niyVp)  is  translated  Cassia  in 
 
 the  A.  v.,  and  is  said  to  be  derived  from  J?Vp, 
 to  cut  off:  it  therefore  denotes  '  pieces  cut  off,' 
 or  'fragments,'  and  hence  is  applicable  to  cassia. 
 But  many  of  these  derivations  have  often  been 
 traced  out  in  ignorance  of  the  names  and  pro- 
 perties of  the  various  substances  known  to  the 
 nations  of  antiquity.  Cassia  is  mentioned  in  three 
 places  (Exod.  xxx.  24  ;  Ezek.  xxvii.  19  ;  and  in 
 Ps.  xlv.  8),  in  conjunction  with  myrrh,  cinnamon, 
 sweet  calamus,  and  ahalim,  or  eaglewood.  All 
 these  are  aromatic  substances,  and,  with  the  ex- 
 ception of  myrrh,  which  is  obtained  from  Africa, 
 are  products  of  India  and  its  islands.  It  is  pro- 
 bable, therefore,  that  ketzioih  is  of  a  similar  nature, 
 and  obtained  from  the  same  countries.  Both 
 cinnamon  [Kinnamon]  and  cassia  [Kiddah]  were 
 no  doubt  known  to  the  ancients,  and  this  is  one 
 step  of  the  investigation  ;  but  to  prove  that  the 
 Hebrew  words  are  correctly  translated  is  another, 
 which  must  be  proceeded  with  before  we  can  infer 
 that  the  kiddah  of  Exod.  xxx.  24  and  Ezek.  xxvii. 
 19,  and  the  ketzioth  of  Ps.  xlv.  8,  both  signify  the 
 same  thing.  This  has  not  been  the  opinion  of 
 several  translators  and  commentators  ;  the  first 
 having  been  variously  rendered  iris,  stacte,  costus, 
 ginger,  canna,  fistula,  amber,  ketziah,  and  cassia ; 
 while  ketzioth,  or  ketziah,  has  been  rendered  cassia, 
 acacia,   amber,  ginger,   and   aloes.      The  Arabic 
 
 translator  has  considered  it  synonymous  with  the 
 Arabic  name  salicha,  which  is  no  doubt  applied  to 
 cassia. 
 
 Ketzioth  occurs  only  once,  in  Ps.  xlv.  8  :  *  All 
 thy  garments  smell  of  myrrh,  and  aloes  {ahalim), 
 and  cassia  {ketzioth)'  It  has  been  observed,  with 
 reference  to  this  passage,  that  '  The  garments  of 
 princes  are  often  embued  with  costly  perfumes, 
 those  of  the  high-priests  were  anointed  with  holy 
 ointment.'  We  have  seen  above  that  ketzioth  has 
 been  variously  translated,  but  no  one  seems  to 
 have  noticed  the  resemblance  of  this  word  to  the 
 kooth  and  koost  of  the  Arabs,  of  which  Kooshta  is 
 said  to  be  the  Syriac  name,  and  from  which  there 
 is  little  doubt  that  the  k6o-tos  of  the  Greeks,  and 
 costiis  of  the  Latins,  are  derived. 
 
 Koo-ros  is  en-amerated  by  Theophrastus  {Hist. 
 PL  ix.  7)  among  the  fragrant  substances  employed 
 in  making  ointment.  Three  kinds  of  it  are  de- 
 scribed by  Dioscorides,  among  his  Ajv/nata  (i. 
 15),  of  which  the  Arabian  is  said  to  be  the  best, 
 the  Indian  to  hold  the  second  place,  and  the 
 Syrian  the  third.  Pliny  mentions  only  two  kinds 
 (.\v.  12),  '  duo  sunt  ejus  genera— nigrum,  et  quod 
 melius,  candicans.'  The  Persian  writers  on  Ma- 
 teria Medica  in  use  in  India,  in  giving  the  above 
 synonyms,  evidently  refer  to  two  of  the  three 
 kinds  of  Costus  described  by  Dioscorides,  one 
 being  called  Koost  Hindee,  and  the  other  Koost 
 Arabee.  The  writer  of  this  article  obtained  both 
 these  kinds  in  the  bazaars  of  India,  and  found, 
 moreover,  that  the  koot  or  koost  of  the  natives  was 
 often,  by  European  merchants,  called  Indian  orris, 
 /.  e..  Iris  root,  the  odour  of  which  it  somewhat 
 resembles.  Subsequently  he  ascertained  that  this 
 article  was  known  in  Calcutta  as  Ptichitk,  the  name 
 under  which  it  is  exported  to  China.  The  iden- 
 tity of  the  substance  indicated  by  these  various 
 names  was  long  ago  ascertained,  though  not  then 
 known  to  the  present  writer.  Thus  Garcias  ab 
 Horto,  '  Est  ergo  Costus  dictus  Arabibus  Cost  aut 
 Cast :'' — 'In  Malacca,  ubi  ejus  plurimus  est  usus, 
 Pucho,  et  inde  vehitur  in  Sinarum  regionem.' 
 Having  obtained  the  koost  in  the  north-western  pro- 
 vinces of  India,  the  writer  traced  it  afterwards  as  one 
 of  the  substances  brought  across  the  Indus  from 
 Lahore  {lllust.  Himal.  Bot,  p.  360).  When  Dr. 
 Falconer  proceeded  on  his  journey  to  Cashmere, 
 he  was  requested  to  make  inquiries  respecting  this 
 substance,  and  he  discovered  that  it  was  exported 
 from  that  valley  in  large  quantities  into  the  Pun- 
 jab ;  whence  it  finds  its  way  to  Bombay  (as  in  the 
 time  of  Pliny  to  Patala)  and  Calcutta,  for  export 
 to  China,  where  it  is  highly  valued  as  one  of  the 
 ingredients  in  the  incense  which  the  Chinese  burn 
 in  their  temples  and  private  houses.  Finding  the 
 plant  to  belong  to  a  new  genus,  he  named  it  Aiick- 
 landia,  in  compliment  to  the  Governor-General  of 
 India,  and  the  species  Aiicklandia  Costus  {Limt. 
 Trans,  xix.  23).  Considering,  therefore,  that 
 costus  was  one  of  the  articles  of  ancient  commerce 
 and  is  mentioned  by  Theophrastus  as  employed  in 
 the  composition  of  perfumed  unguents,  and  con- 
 sidering the  similarity  of  the  Syriac  kooshta,  and 
 the  Arabic  kast,  to  the  ketzioth  of  Scripture,  and 
 from  their  correspondence  in  properties  and  uses, 
 the  latter  appears  more  likely  to  be  the  costus  of 
 the  ancients,  than  cassia,  for  which  there  is  another 
 name  [Kiddah]. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KEUCHENIUS,    Petrus,    a   learned    Dutch 
 
KEY 
 
 730 
 
 KIDDAH 
 
 theologian,  was  bom  at  Bois-le-Duc,  22d  August 
 1654,  and  studied  at  Leyden  and  Utrecht,  where 
 he  had  Spanheim,  Le  Moyne,  Witsius,  andLeus- 
 den  for  his  teachers  ;  and  was  successively  minister 
 at  Alem,  Tiel,  and  Arnheim,  at  which  last  place 
 he  died  27th  March  1689.  He  wrote  Annotata  in 
 omnes  N.  T.  lihros,  the  second  and  only  complete 
 edition  of  which,  superintended  by  Alberti,  ap- 
 peared at  Leyden  in  1755.  The  author's  aim  in 
 these  annotations  is  to  throw  light  on  the  N.  T. 
 by  determining  the  sense  in  which  words  and 
 phrases  were  used  at  the  time  it  was  written,  and 
 among  those  with  whom  its  writers  were  familiar. 
 For  this  purpose  he  compares  the  language  of  the 
 N.  T.  with  that  of  the  LXX.,  and  calls  in  aid 
 from  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac  versions.  His  notes 
 are  characterised  by  sound  learning  and  great  good 
 sense.  Alberti  commends  in  strong  terms  his 
 erudition,  his  candour,  solidity,  and  impartiality. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 KEY,  nriDO.     The  only  passage  in  which  we 
 
 read  of  a  key  being  employed  is  Judg.  iii.  25, 
 where  we    find   Eglon,  after   his   assassination  of 
 
 Ehud,  bolting  and  barring  (py3)  the  door,  which 
 could  not  be  opened  again  until  the  sei-vants 
 brought  '  the  key'  (the  A.  V.  omits  the  article), 
 and  pushed  back  the  bar.  This  corresponds  with 
 what  we  know  of  the  construction  of  early  Orien- 
 tal locks,  which  consisted  merely  of  a  wooden 
 slide,  drawn  into  its  place  by  a  string,  and  fas- 
 tened there  by  teeth  or  catches  ;  the  key  being  a 
 bit  of  wood,  crooked  like  a  sickle,  which  lifted  up 
 the  slide  and  extracted  it  from  its  catches,  after 
 which  it  was  drawn  back  by  the  string.  At  a 
 later  period,  when  iron  came  into  general  use,  keys 
 were  made  of  that  metal,  and  Sir  G.  Wilkinson, 
 A  lie.  Eg)'ptians,  ii.  109,  ff.,  gives  a  drawing  of  one 
 found  at  Thebes,  about  five  inches  long,  with  three 
 teeth  projecting  from  a  bar  at  right  angles  to  the 
 shank.  But  even  in  the  present  day,  as  in  Theve- 
 not's  time,  both  locks  and  keys  are  of  wood,  and 
 the  former  are  of  so  clumsy  a  construction  that  they 
 can  be  easily  opened  without  the  key,  as  '  a  little 
 paste  on  the  end  of  the  finger  will  do  the  job  as 
 well.'  An  allusion  to  this  has  been  seen  in  Cant. 
 V.  4,  5  (Jahn,  Heb.  Ant.;  Harmer,  Obs.,  vol.  i. 
 394  ;  Wilkinson,  ?<.j.)  The  'key  on  the  shoulder' 
 is  used  as  the  emblem  of  official  dignity,  cor- 
 responding to  the  chamberlain's  keys  of  modern 
 days,  in  the  case  of  Eliakim,  Is.  xxii.  22,  when 
 he  succeeded  Shebna,  on  his  degradation,  as 
 master  of  the  king's  household,  Is.  xxii.  15-20 ; 
 xxxvi.  3.  The  expression  is  transferred  in  a 
 mystical  or  spiritual  sense  to  Christ,  Rev.  iii.  7  ; 
 cf.  i.  18. 
 
 The  Rabbins  say  that  God  has  resei-ved  to  him- 
 self four  keys,  entrusting  them  to  none,  no  not  to 
 the  angels — those  of  rain,  the  grave,  fruitfidness, 
 and  barrenness.  ^ — E.  V. 
 
 KEZIZ,  Valley  of  (}*7P  ppy,  '  Valley  of  the 
 
 End,'  or,  perhaps,  ' oi Desiriiction  ;'  Sept.  'A^ff- 
 aa'is,  by  combining  the  two  Hebrew  words  ;  Alex. 
 ' klxeKKaaek ;  vallis  Casts).  After  describing  the 
 boundaries  of  Benjamin,  Joshua  enumerates  its  chief 
 cities  :— '  Now  the  cities  of  the  tribe  of  the  children 
 of  Benjamin  were  Jericho,  and  Beth-hoglah,  and 
 the  Valley  of  Keziz,'  etc.  (xviii.  21).  There  can  be 
 no  doubt  that  the  A .  V.  is  here  wrong  in  1  ranslat- 
 
 ing,  with  the  Vulgate,  the  word  Emek  (pttj?)  ;  it 
 is  as  much  a  part  of  the  proper  name  as  Beth  {n''3, 
 'house')  in  the  preceding  word.  '  The  name  ol 
 the  town  was  Emek-keziz,  as  it  is  rendered  in  the 
 Septuagint.  It  must  have  stood  in  the  Jordan 
 valley  near  Jericho  ;  but  the  site  is  now  unknown. 
 -J.  L.  P. 
 
 KIBROTH  -  HATTAAVAH  (Hl^xrin  nn3p, 
 
 '  graves  of  lust ; '  Mv-fuj-ara  rijs  iTrc'ini/j.Las ;  Septilcra 
 coiictipiscenticE).  The  origin  of  this  name  was  as 
 follows  : — After  the  giving  of  the  law  at  Sinai,  the 
 Israelites  marched  three  days,  and  then  rested. 
 The  people  murmured  for  some  reason,  and  fire 
 from  heaven  consumed  a  number  of  them;  hence 
 the  station  was  called  Taberah,  'burning.'  Again 
 murmuring  arose  among  '  the  mixed  multitude,' 
 who  craved  for  flesh-meat ;  and  the  Israelites 
 cried,  weeping,  '  Who  shall  give  us  flesh  to  eat  V 
 '  And  there  went  forth  a  wind  from  the  Lord,  aijd 
 brought  quails  from  the  sea,  and  let  them  fall  by 
 the  camp,  as  it  were  a  day's  journey  on  this  side, 
 and  a  day's  journey  on  the  other  side,'  etc.  The 
 people  killed  and  ate,  '  and  while  the  flesh  was 
 yet  between  their  teeth,  ere  it  was  chewed  .... 
 the  Lord  smote  the  people  with  a  very  great 
 plague.  And  he  called  the  name  of  that  place 
 Kibroth-hattaavah,  because  there  they  buried  the 
 people  that  lusted'  (Num.  xi.  I -35).  The  same 
 encampment  was  thus  called  by  two  names  (cf. 
 Num.  xxxiii.  16  ;  Deut.  ix.  22).  It  lay  between 
 Sinai  and  Hazeroth ;  three  days  from  the  former, 
 and  one  from  the  latter.  If  Hazeroth  be  identi- 
 fied with  Ain  el-Hudherah  [Hazeroth],  there 
 can  be  little  difficulty  in  fixing  the  site  of  Kibroth. 
 The  camp  must  have  been  situated  amid  those 
 dreary  sand-hills  and  parched  naked  valleys  which 
 extend  for  miles  away  to  the  south-west  of  el- 
 Hudherah  [Wandering].  See  also  Robinson,  B. 
 R.,  i.  150;  Handbook  far  S.  and  P.,  37;  Stanley, 
 S.  a7id P.,  pp.  79,  seq.) — J.  L.  P. 
 
 KIBZAIM  (D"'Vap,  '  two  heaps  ;'  omitted  in  the 
 
 Vatican  text  of  the  LXX.  ;  Alex.  Ka^ffael/j,),  a  city 
 of  Ephraim  assigned  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  22). 
 The  parallel  passage  in  i  Chron.  vi.  68  has  ^oh- 
 vteam,  which  was  probably  another  name  for  the 
 same  place  [see  Jokmeam].— J.  L.  P. 
 
 KID.     [Gedi;  Ez.] 
 
 KIDDAH  (mp),  as  well  as  Ketzioth,  is  ren- 
 dered Cassia  in  our  A.  V. ;  but  translators  do  not 
 uniformly  coincide  in,  though  the  great  majority 
 are  in  favour  of,  this  interpretation.  It  is  well 
 known  that  the  Greeks  were  acquainted  with  seve- 
 ral varieties  of  cassia  ;  and  as  one  of  these  was 
 called  kitto,  KiTTili  (Dioscor.  i.  12),  this  has  been 
 thought  to  be  the  same  word  as  the  Hebrew  mp, 
 
 from  TTp,   in  Arabic  Ss,  to  split,   hew,   or  tear 
 
 anything  lengthwise,  as  must  be  done  in  separating 
 cassia  bark  from  the  tree.  But  it  does  not  follow 
 that  this  is  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  origin  of 
 the  name  of  an  Eastern  product.  The  word  occurs 
 first  in  Exod.  xxx.  24,  where  cassia  (kiddah)  is 
 mentioned  in  connection  with  olive  oil,  pure  myrrh, 
 sweet  cinnamon,  and  sweet  calamus  ;  secondly,  in 
 Ezek.  xxvii.  19,  where  Dan  and  Javan  are  described 
 as  bringing  bright  iron,  cassia  {kiddah),  and  cala- 
 mus to  the  markets  of  Tyre.     There  is  no  reason 
 
KIDDER 
 
 731 
 
 KIDRON 
 
 why  the  substance  now  called  cassia  xttight  not 
 have  been  imported  from  the  shores  of  India  into 
 Egypt  and  Palestine.  Considerable  confusion  has, 
 however,  been  created  by  the  same  name  having 
 been  applied  by  botanists  to  a  genus  containing  the 
 plants  yielding  senna,  and  to  others,  as  the  cassia 
 fistula,  which  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  original 
 cassia.  Cassia-buds,  again,  though  no  doubt  pro- 
 duced by  a  plant  belonging  to  the  same,  or  to 
 some  genus  allied  to  that  producing  cinnamon  and 
 cassia,  were  probably  not  known  in  commerce  at 
 so  early  a  period  as  the  two  latter  substances. 
 There  is  some  difficulty  also  in  determining  what 
 the  ancient  cassia  was.  The  author  of  this  article, 
 in  his  Antiquity  of  Hindoo  Medici ?it\  p.  84,  has 
 already  remarked,  '  The  cassia  of  the  ancients  it  is 
 not  easy  to  determine  ;  that  of  commerce,  Mr. 
 Marshall  says,  consists  of  only  the  inferior  kinds 
 of  cinnamon.  Some  consider  cassia  to  be  dis- 
 tinguished from  cinnamon  by  the  outer  cellular 
 covering  of  the  bark  being  scraped  off  the  latter, 
 but  allowed  to  remain  on  the  former.  This  is, 
 however,  the  characteristic  of  the  (Cochin-Chinese) 
 cijinamonium  aroniaticum,  as  we  are  informed  by 
 Mr.  Crawford  {Embassy  to  Siani,  p.  470)  that  it  is 
 not  cured,  like  that  of  Ceylon,  by  freeing  it  from 
 the  epidermis.'  There  is,  certainly,  no  doubt  that 
 some  cassia  is  produced  on  the  coast  of  Malabar. 
 The  name  also  would  appear  to  be  of  Eastern  ori- 
 gin, as  kasse  koronde  is  one  kind  of  cinnamon,  as 
 mentioned  by  Burmann  in  his  Flora  Zeylonica ; 
 but  it  will  be  preferable  to  treat  of  the  whole  sub- 
 ject in  connection  with  cinnamon  [Kinnamon]. — 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 KIDDER,  Richard,  D.D.,  successively  pre- 
 bend of  Norwich,  dean  of  Peterborough,  and  bishop 
 of  Bath  and  Wells.  He  was  bom  about  the  year 
 1635,  and,  according  to  Anthony  Wood  (Allien. 
 Oxon.,  vol.  ii..  Fasti  123),  at  Brighton.  He  was 
 admitted  sizar  of  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge, 
 in  June  1649,  took  the  degree  of  B.  A.  in  1652, 
 and  was  elected  fellow  of  his  college  in  1655.  In 
 1662  he  was  ejected  for  nonconformity  from  the 
 vicarage  of  Stanground,  in  Huntingdonshire,  but 
 conforming  soon  after,  he  was  presented  in  1664  to 
 the  rectory  of  Raine,  in  Essex.  In  1674  the  Mer- 
 chant Taylors'  Company  gave  him  the  rectory  of 
 St.  Martin's  Outwich.  In  1681  he  was  made  pre- 
 bend of  Norwich,  and  in  1689  dean  of  Peter- 
 borough ;  two  years  afterwards,  on  the  deprivation 
 of  Ken,  he  was  raised  to  the  see  of  Bath  and  Wells. 
 He  died  Nov.  26,  1703,  at  Wells,  being  killed  in 
 bed  by  the  fall  of  a  stack  of  chimneys  occasioned 
 by  the  great  storm.     His  Biblical  writings  are — 
 
 1.  A  Commentary  07t  the  Five  Books  of  Moses ; 
 with  a  dissertation  concej'ning  the  aidhor  or  writer 
 of  the  said  books,  and  a  general  argument  to  each, 
 Lond.  1694,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  notes  are  exceed- 
 ingly brief,  and  of  no  great  value  ;  the  introductory 
 dissertation  is  the  most  useful  part  of  the  work. 
 
 2.  A  Demonstration  of  the  Messias ;  in  which  the 
 truth  of  the  Christian  religion  is  proved  against  all 
 the  enemies  thei'eof ;  but  especially  the  Jews,  Lond. 
 17^5)  3  ■vols.  8vo ;  2d  edition,  1726,  fol.  This 
 work  claims  to  be  mentioned  here  because  of  the 
 numerous,  and  oftentimes  full,  discussions  of  im- 
 portant and  difficult  scriptural  passages  which 
 it  contains.  3.  Critical  remarks  on  some  diffi- 
 cult Passages   of  Scripture,    Lond.    1725,    8vo.— 
 
 s.  n: 
 
 KIDRON,  in  N.  T.    Cedron  (|^"l1p,    '  turbid ;' 
 
 LXX.  and  N.  T.,  KeSpciv;  Cedron).  In  ever^ 
 instance,  except  one,  in  which  this  name  is  men- 
 tioned in  the  O.  T.,  the  word  nakhal  (PHJ,  A.  V. 
 '  brook')  is  joined  to  it.  This  word  appears  to  be 
 exactly  equivalent  to  the  Arabic  zvady  (^(jU  o"-' 
 S\%)i  which  signifies  a  'valley'  or  '  ravine,'  either 
 
 with  or  without  a  river ;  the  proper  word  foir 
 '  river'  itself,   both  in  Hebrew  and  Arabic,  being 
 
 nahar  (")nj,    -gj),  which  is  never  applied  to  the 
 
 Kidron.  In  2  Kings  xxiii.  4,  the  '  fields  of  Kidron' 
 are  mentioned,  and  reference  is  made  to  the  culti- 
 vated ground  in  the  bottom  of  the  Kidron  valley. 
 The  word  7iakhal  is  uniformly  rendered  x^''-l^°-PP°^ 
 by  the  LXX.,  and  in  John  xviii.  i,  the  only  pas- 
 sage of  the  N.  T.  in  which  the  Kidron  is  men- 
 tioned, it  is  called  x^'Ma/Jpos  rCov  KeSpwP.  Xei- 
 juappos  signifies  a  '  winter  stream' — a  stream  formed 
 or  swollen  by  winter  rain  or  snow,  and  in  this  re- 
 spect it  is  applicable  to  the  Kidron  ;  but  Josephus 
 usually  applies  to  it  the  still  more  appropriate 
 name  <pdpay^,  '  chasm'  or  '  ravine'  {Antiq.  ix. 
 7.  3).  In  the  Vulgate  the  uniform  rendering  is 
 torrens  Cedron,  except  in  2  Kings  xxiii.  6,  where 
 it  is  convallis,  which  is  much  more  appropriate. 
 The  term  '  brook'  in  our  A.  V.  is  an  unfortunate 
 translation,  for  it  must  convey  to  ordinary  readers 
 a  totally  wrong  idea  of  the  Kidron. 
 
 The  Kidron  is  a  mountain  ravine,  in  most 
 places  narrow,  with  precipitous  banks  of  naked 
 limestone  ;  but  here  and  there  its  banks  have  an 
 easy  slope,  and  along  its  bottom  are  strips  of  land 
 capable  of  cultivation.  It  contains  the  bed  of  a 
 streamlet,  but  during  the  whole  summer,  and  most 
 of  the  winter,  it  is  perfectly  dry  ;  in  fact,  no  water 
 runs  in  it  except  when  heavy  rains  are  falling  in 
 the  mountains  round  Jerusalem. 
 
 On  the  broad  summit  of  the  mountain-ridge  of 
 Judaea,  a  mile  and  a  quarter  north-west  of  Jeru- 
 salem, is  a  slight  depression ;  this  is  the  head  of 
 the  Kidron.  The  sides  of  the  depression,  and  the 
 elevated  ground  around  it,  are  whitened  by  the 
 broad  jagged  tops  of  limestone  rocks,  and  almost 
 every  rock  is  excavated,  partly  as  a  quariy,  and 
 partly  to  form  the  fagade  of  a  tomb.  The  valley, 
 or  depression,  runs  for  about  half  a  mile  towards 
 the  city ;  it  is  shallow  and  broad,  dotted  with 
 corn-fields,  and  sprinkled  with  a  few  old  olives.  It 
 then  bends  eastward,  and  in  another  half  mile  is 
 crossed  by  the  great  northern  road  coming  down 
 from  the  hill  Scopus.  On  the  east  side  of  the 
 road,  and  south  bank  of  the  Kidron,  are  the  cele- 
 brated To7iihs  of  the  Kings.  The  bed  of  the  valley 
 is  here  about  half  a  mile  due  north  of  the  city  gate. 
 It  continues  in  the  same  course  about  a  quarter  of 
 a  mile  farther,  and  then,  turning  south,  opens  into 
 a  wide  basin  containing  cultivated  fields  and  olives. 
 Here  it  is  crossed  diagonally  by  the  road  from 
 Jerusalem  to  Anathoth.  As  it  advances  southward, 
 the  right  bank,  forming  the  side  of  the  hill  Bezetha, 
 becomes  higher  and  steeper,  with  occasional  preci- 
 pices of  rock,  on  which  may  be  seen  a  few  frag- 
 ments of  the  ancient  city  wall  ;  while,  on  the  left, 
 the  base  of  Olivet  projects,  greatly  narrowing  the  val- 
 ley. Opposite  St.  Stephen's  gate  the  depth  is  fully 
 roo  feet,  and  the  breadth  not  more  than  400  feet. 
 The  olive  trees  in  the  bottom  are  so  tliickly  clus- 
 
KIDRON 
 
 KIDRON 
 
 fered  as  to  form  a  shady  grove  ;  and  their  massive 
 trunks  and  gnarled  boughs  give  evidence  of  great 
 age.  This  spot  is  shut  out  from  the  city,  from  the 
 view  of  ]HibHc  roads,  and  from  the  notice  and  in- 
 terruptions of  wayfarers.  May  not  this  be  the  site 
 cf  Gethsemane,  rather  than  tlie  more  pulihc  tradi- 
 tional site  some  distance  farther  down  ?  [Gethse- 
 mane.] A  zigzag  path  descends  the  steep  bank 
 from  St.  Stephen's  gate,  crosses  the  bed  of  the 
 valley  by  an  old  bridge,  and  then  branches.  One 
 branch  leads  direct  over  the  top  of  Olivet.  This 
 path  has  a  deep  historical  interest  ;  it  was  by  it  that 
 David  went  when  he  fled  from  Absalom : — 'The  king 
 passed  over  the  brook  Kidron,  and  all  the  people 
 passed  over,  toward  the  way  of  the  wilderness'  (2 
 Sam.  XV.  23).  [Olivet.]  Another  branch  runs 
 round  the  southern  shoulder  of  the  hill  to  Bethany, 
 and  it  has  a  deep  sacred  interest,  for  it  is  the  road 
 of  Christ's  triumphal  entry  (Matt.  xxi.  i,  seq.  ; 
 Luke  xix.  37).  Below  the  bridge  the  Kidron  be- 
 comes still  narrower,  and  here  traces  of  a  torrent 
 bed  first  begin  to  appear.  Three  hundred  yards 
 farther  down,  the  hills  on  each  side^Moriah  on  the 
 right  and  Olivet  on  the  left — rise  precipitously  from 
 the  torrent  bed,  which  is  spanned  by  a  single  arch. 
 On  the  left  bank  is  a  singular  group  of  tombs,  com- 
 prising those  of  Absalom,  Jehoshaphat,  and  St. 
 Jamer,  (now  so  called)  ;  while  on  the  right,  150  feet 
 overhead,  towers  the  south-eastern  angle  of  the 
 temple  wall,  most  probably  the  '  pinnacle'  on 
 which  our  Lord  was  placed  (Matt.  iv.  5).  The 
 ravine  runs  on,  narrow  and  rocky,  for  500  yards 
 more  ;  there,  on  its  right  bank,  in  a  cave,  is  the 
 fountain  of  the  Virgin  ;  and  higher  up  on  the  left, 
 perched  on  the  side  of  naked  cliffs,  the  ancient  vil- 
 lage of  Siloam.  A  short  distance  farther  down,  tlie 
 valley  of  the  Tyrcpean  falls  in  from  the  right,  de- 
 scending in  terraced  slopes,  fresh  and  green,  from 
 the  waters  of  the  Pool  of  Siloam.  The  Kidron 
 here  expands,  affording  a  level  tract  for  cultivation, 
 and  now  covered  with  beds  of  cucumbers,  melons, 
 and  other  vegetables.  Here  of  old  was  the  '  King's 
 Garden'  (Neh.  iii.  15).  The  level  tract  extends 
 down  to  the  mouth  of  Hinnom,  and  is  about  200 
 yards  wide.  A  short  distance  below  the  junc- 
 tion of  Hinnom  and  the  Kidron  is  the  fountain  of 
 En-Rogel,  now  called  Bir  Ayub,  '  tlie  Well  of 
 Job.'  The  length  of  the  valley  from  its  head  to 
 En-Rogel  is  2f  miles,  and  here  the  historic  Kidron 
 may  be  said  to  terminate.  Every  reference  to  the 
 Kidron  in  the  Bible  is  made  to  this  section.  David 
 crossed  it  at  a  pomt  opposite  the  city  (i  Sam.  xv. 
 23)  ;  it  was  the  boundary  beyond  which  Solomon 
 forbad  Shimei  to  go  on  pain  of  death  (i  Kings  ii. 
 37)  ;  it  was  here,  probably,  near  the  mouth  of 
 Hinnom,  that  Asa  destroyed  the  idol  which  Ma- 
 achah  his  mother  set  up  (xv.  13)  ;  and  it  seems  to 
 have  been  at  the  same  spot,  '  in  the  fields  of 
 Kidron,'  that  King  Josiah  ordered  the  vessels  of 
 Baal  to  be  burned  (2  Kings  xxiii.  4).  It  would 
 seem  from  2  Kings  xxiii.  6,  that  a  portion  of  the 
 Kidron,  apparently  near  the  mouth  of  Hinnom, 
 was  used  as  a  burying-ground.  The  sides  of  the 
 surroundmg  cliffs  are  filled  with  ancient  rock  tombs ; 
 and  the  greatest  boon  the  dying  Jew  now  asks  is, 
 that  his  bones  be  laid  in  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat. 
 The  whole  of  the  left  bank  of  the  Kidron,  oppo- 
 site the  temple  area,  far  up  the  side  of  Olivet,  is 
 paved  with  the  white  tombstones  of  Jews.  This 
 singular  longing  is  doubtless  to  be  ascribed  to  the 
 opinion  which  the  Jews  entertain  that  the  Kidron 
 
 is  Ihe  valley  of  yehoshaphat  mentioned  by  Joel  (iii. 
 2).  This  opinion,  which  has  given  its  modern  name 
 to  the  valley,  has  been  considered  in  the  article 
 Jehoshaphat  (Reland,  Pal,  pp.  294-96;  Robin- 
 son, B.  R.,  i.  268-73  ;  Ritter,  Pal.  iind  Syr.,  ii. 
 598-610  ;  Handbook  for  S.  and  P.,  i.  pp.  101-2). 
 
 Below  En-Rogel  the  Kidron  has  little  of  his- 
 torical or  sacred  interest.  It  runs  in  a  winding 
 course  east  by  south,  through  the  Wilderness  of 
 Judffia,  to  the  Dead  Sea.  For  about  a  mile  below 
 En-Rogel  the  bottom  of  the  valley  is  cultivated  and 
 thickly  covered  with  olive  trees.  Farther  down  a 
 few  fields  of  corn  are  met  with  at  intervals,  but 
 these  soon  disappear,  and  the  ravine  assumes  the 
 bleak  and  desolate  aspect  of  the  surrounding  hills. 
 About  seven  miles  from  Jerusalem  the  features  of 
 the  valley  assume  a  much  wilder  and  grander  form. 
 Hitherto  the  banks  have  been  steep,  with  here  and 
 there  a  high  precipice,  and  a  jutting  cliff,  givmg 
 variety  to  the  scene.  Now  they  suddenly  contract 
 to  precipices  of  naked  rock  nearly  300  feet  in 
 height,  which  look  as  if  the  mountain  had  been 
 torn  asunder  by  an  earthquake.  About  a  mile  far- 
 ther, on  the  side  of  this  frightful  chasm,  stands  the 
 convent  of  St.  Saba,  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
 buildings  in  Palestine,  founded  by  the  saint  whose 
 name  it  bears,  in  the  year  A.  D.  439  (see  Handbook, 
 i.  p.  204;  Ritter,  ii.  608,  seq.)  The  sides  of  the 
 chasm  both  above  and  below  the  convent  are  filled 
 with  caves  and  grottos,  once  the  abode  of  monks 
 and  hermits  ;  and  from  these  doubtless  this  section 
 of  the  valley  has  got  its  modern  name,  Wady  er- 
 Raheb,  '  Monk's  Valley'  (Wolcott,  Researches  in 
 Pal.,  in  Biblical  Cabinet,  vol.  xliii.  p.  38).  Below 
 Mar  Saba  the  valley  is  called  Wady  en-Nar, 
 '  Valley  of  Fire' — a  name  descriptive  of  its  aspect, 
 for  so  bare  and  scorched  is  it,  that  it  seems  as  if  it 
 had  participated  in  the  doom  of  Sodom.  It  runs 
 on,  a  deep,  narrow,  wild  chasm,  until  it  breaks 
 through  the  lofty  line  of  cliffs  at  Ras  el-Feshkhah 
 on  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  {Handbook,  i.  245  ; 
 Robinson,  B.  R.,  i.  531). 
 
 It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  head  of  the  Kidron 
 is  just  on  the  verge  of  the  water-shed  of  the  moun- 
 tain-chain of  Judah,  about  2600  feet  above  the  sea. 
 Its  length,  as  the  crow  flies,  is  only  twenty  miles, 
 and  yet  in  this  short  space  it  has  a  descent  of  no 
 less  than  3912  feet — the  Dead  Sea  having  a  depres- 
 sion of  13 1 2  feet  (cf.  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
 pp.  179,  182;  Ritter,  I.e.) 
 
 Various  opinions  have  been  formed  regarding  the 
 origin  of  the  name  Kidron.  Some  derive  it  from 
 the  root  "lip,  '  to  be  black' (Gesenius,  Thesaiirtis ; 
 Stanley,  S.  and  P.) ;  but  they  are  not  agreed  as  to 
 the  cause  of  this  name.  It  may  arise  from  the 
 gloominess  of  the  glen,  or  from  the  '  turbid' 
 stream  ;  or  from  the  blood  and  refuse  of  the 
 temple  sacrifices  running  into  it  (Reland,  p.  294). 
 Others  think  that  it  was  so  called  from  Cedar  trees 
 which  grew  in  it.  This  is  founded  on  the  reading 
 in  the  Text  Ree.  of  John  xviii.  i,  tQ)v  KeSpthv, 
 which  would  seem  to  he.  the  gen.  pi.  of  t)  K^Spos, 
 '  a  cedar-tree'  (Lightfoot,  Opera,  ii.  667).  There 
 can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that  Kebpi.cv  is  just  the 
 Greek  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  Imp.  It  is  not 
 so  easy  to  account  for  the  tCjv  if  it  be  genuine.  It 
 is  important  to  note,  however,  that  some  of  the 
 best  MSS.  have  tov,  a  reading  which  Lachmann 
 adopts.     The  Cod.  Sinait.  has  tov  KeSpov. 
 
 It  was  doubtless  the  Kidron  valley  which  was  in 
 the  mind  of  the  prophet  Ezekiel  when  he  described 
 
KIKAYON 
 
 r33 
 
 KIKAYON 
 
 the  vision  of  the  holy  and  healing  waters  flowing 
 from  the  temple  through  the  desert  into  the  sea 
 (xlvii.  8  ;  of.  Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible,  ii.  32  ; 
 Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  288).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 KIKAYON  (|Vp''p)  occurs  only  in  Jonah  iv., 
 
 where  it  is  several  times  mentioned,  as  in  ver.  6,  7, 
 9,  10.  It  is  translated  gourd  in  our  A.  V.,  pro- 
 bably from  the  koXokwOt]  of  the  Sept. ,  often  ren- 
 dered citcurbita.  In  the  margin  of  the  English 
 Bible,  Palmerist  is  given.  In  the  Vulg.  kikayoii 
 is  translated //£'rf£';-rt,  'ivy.'  Neither  the  gourd  nor 
 ivy  is  considered  by  modem  writers  to  indicate  the 
 plant  intended ;  Mhich  is  remarkable  for  having 
 given  rise  to  some  fierce  controversies  in  the  early 
 ages  of  the  Church.  The  difficulties  here,  however, 
 do  not  appear  to  be  so  great  as  in  many  other  in- 
 stances. But  before  considering  these,  it  is  desir- 
 able to  ascertain  what  are  the  characteristics  of  the 
 plant  as  required  by  the  text.  We  are  told,  '  The 
 Lord  God  prepared  a  gourd  (kikayoii),  and  made 
 it  to  come  over  Jonah,  that  it  might  be  a  shadow 
 over  his  head,'  etc.  (ver.  6).  '  But  God  prepared 
 a  worm  when  the  morning  rose  the  next  day,  and 
 it  smote  the  gourd  that  it  withered'  (ver.  7).  And 
 in  ver.  10  it  is  said  of  the  gourd  that  it  '  came  up 
 in  a  night,  and  perished  in  a  night.'  Hence  it  ap- 
 pears that  the  growth  of  the  kikayon  was  miracu- 
 lous, but  that  it  was  probably  a  plant  of  the 
 country,  being  named  specifically  ;  also  that  it  was 
 capable  of  affording  shade,  and  might  be  easily  de- 
 stroyed. There  does  not  appear  anything  in  this 
 account  to  warrant  us  in  considering  it  to  be  the 
 ivy,  which  is  a  plant  of  slow  growth,  cannot  sup- 
 port itself,  and  is,  moreover,  not  likely  to  be 
 found  in  the  hot  and  arid  country  of  ancient  Nine- 
 veh, though  we  have  ourselves  found  it  in  more 
 southern  latitudes,  but  only  in  the  temperate  cli- 
 mate of  the  Himalayan  Mountains.  The  ivy  was 
 adduced  probably  only  from  the  resemblance  of  its 
 Greek  name,  KLcrabs,  to  kikayon.  That  the  kikayon 
 was  thought  to  be  a  gourd,  seems  to  have  arisen 
 
 from  the  kiki  of  the  Egyptians  being  the   c.t<^, 
 
 khenva,  of  the  Arabs,  often  incorrectly  written 
 keroa,  that  is,  without  the  aspirate,  which  makes 
 
 it  very  similar  to  c  J,  kura,  when  written  in  Ro- 
 man characters  ;  which  last  in  the  East  is  applied 
 to  the  gourd  or  pumpkin  (Avicenna,  c.  622),  and 
 is  probably  the  Lagenaria  vulgaris.  Many  modern 
 authors  mistake  the  one  for  the  other.  To  this 
 plant,  no  doubt,  the  following  passages  refer  : 
 '  The  Christians  and  Jews  of  Mosul  (Nineveh)  say 
 it  was  not  the  keroa  whose  shadow  refreshed  Jonah, 
 but  a  sort  of  gourd,  el-kera,  which  has  very  large 
 leaves,  very  large  fruit,  and  lasts  but  about  four 
 months'  (Niebuhr,  Arabic,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Har- 
 ris). So  Volney  :  '  Whoever  has  travelled  to  Cairo 
 or  Rosetta  knows  that  the  species  of  gourd  called 
 kerra  will,  in  twenty-four  hours,  send  out  shoots 
 near  four  inches  long'  {Trav.  i.  71). 
 
 The  Hebrew  name  kikayon  is  so  similar  to  the 
 kiki  of  Dioscorides,  that  it  was  early  thought  to  in- 
 dicate the  same  plant.  Dioscorides  (iv.  164,  Trept 
 KiKews)  states  that  the  kiki,  or  croton,  is  called  wild 
 sesamum  by  some  : — '  Ricini  autem  nomen  accepit 
 a  similitudine  quee  est  illius  semini  cum  ricino  ani- 
 mali.  Arbuscula  est  parvee  ficus  altitudine,  foliis 
 platani,  truncis  ramisque  cavis  in  calami  modum. 
 
 semine  in  uvis  asperis.  Ex  eo  oleum  kikinum  ex- 
 primitur,  cibis  quidem  ineptum  ;  sed  alias  et  ad 
 lucernas  et  emplastra  utile.'  Thus  giving  in  a  few 
 words  a  graphic  description  of  Ricinus  eominunis, 
 
 298.  Ricinus  communis. 
 
 or  castor-oil  plant,  of  which  the  seeds  have  some 
 resemblance  to  the  insect  commonly  called  tick  in 
 English,  and  which  is  found  on  dogs  and  other 
 animals.  It  has  also  been  called  Fentadactylus 
 and  Palma  Christi,  from  the  palmate  division  of 
 its  leaves.  It  was  known  at  much  earlier  times,  as 
 Hippocrates  employed  it  in  medicine  ;  and  Hero- 
 dotus mentions  it  by  the  name  of  aLWiKinrpLov  (ii. 
 94)  when  speaking  of  Egypt.  That  it  has  been 
 known  there  from  the  earliest  times  is  evident 
 from  Caillaud  having  found  castor-oil  seeds  in 
 some  very  ancient  sarcophagi.     That  the  Arabs 
 
 considered  their   c,  ^,  khenva,   to  be  the  same 
 
 plant,  is  evident  from  Avicenna  on  this  article,  or 
 khitwaa  of  the  translation  of  Plempius  (p.  301): — 
 '  Plantum  hoc,  scribit  Dioscorides,  quidam  crotona 
 appellant,  hoc  est  ricinum,  a  similitudine  quae  est 
 illius  semini  cum  ricino  animali.'  So  Serapion 
 (iii.  c.  79): — •'  Cherva  sive  kerua,  sicuti  ejus  oleum, 
 oleum  kichas.''  This  oil  was  not  only  employed  by 
 the  Greeks,  but  also  by  the  Jews,  being  the  |JDCy 
 \>'''\>,  kik-6A  of  the  Talmudists,  prepared  from  the 
 seeds  of  the  ricinus  (Rosenmiiller,  p.  127).  Lady 
 Calcott  states  that  the  modern  Jews  of  London  use 
 this  oil,  by  the  name  of  oil  of  kik,  for  their  Sab- 
 bath lamps,  it  being  one  of  the  five  kinds  of  oil 
 which  their  traditions  allow  them  to  emj^loy. 
 
 Having  ascertained  that  the  kiki  of  the  Greeks 
 is  what  is  now  called  Ricinus  communis,  we  sliall 
 find  that  its  characters  correspond  with  everything 
 that  is  required,  except  the  rapidity  of  growth, 
 which  must  be  granted  was  miraculous.  Dr. 
 Harris  indeed  states  that  the  passage  means,  '  Son 
 of  the  night  it  was,  and  as  a  son  of  the  night  it 
 died  ;'  and  that,  therefore,  we  are  not  compelled 
 to  believe  that  it  grew  in  a  single  night,  but  rather. 
 
KIMCIII 
 
 734 
 
 KIMCHI 
 
 hy  a  strong  Oriental  figure,  that  it  was  of  rapid 
 growtli.  This,  there  is  no  doubt,  it  is  highly  sus- 
 ceptible of  in  warm  countries  where  there  is  some 
 moisture.  It  attains  a  considerable  size  in  one 
 season  ;  and  though  in  Europe  it  is  only  known  as 
 a  herb,  in  India  it  frequently  may  be  seen,  espe- 
 cially at  the  margins  of  fields,  the  size  of  a  tree. 
 So  at  Busra  Niebulir  saw  an  el-keroa  which  had  the 
 form  and  appearance  of  a  tree.  The  stems  are 
 erect,  round,  and  hollow  ;  the  leaves  broad,  pal- 
 mate, 5  to  8  or  lo  lobed,  peltate,  supported  on 
 long  foot-stalks.  The  flowers  in  terminal  panicles ; 
 the  lower,  male  ;  the  upper,  female.  Capsule  tri- 
 coccous,  covered  with  spines.  The  seeds  are  ob- 
 long, oval,  externally  of  a  greyish  colour,  but 
 mottled  with  darker-coloured  spots  and  stripes. 
 From  the  erect  habit,  and  the  breadth  of  its  foliage, 
 this  plant  throws  an  ample  shade,  especially  when 
 young.  From  the  softness  and  little  substance  of 
 its  stem,  it  may  easily  be  destroyed  by  insects, 
 which  Rumphius  describes  as  sometimes  being  the 
 case.  It  would  then  necessarily  diy  up  rapidly. 
 As  it  is  well  suited  to  the  country,  and  to  the  pur- 
 pose indicated  in  the  text,  and  as  its  name  kiki 
 is  so  similar  to  kikayon,  it  is  doubtless  the  plant 
 which  the  sacred  penman  had  in  view. — J.  F.  R. 
 
 KIMCHI,  David  b.  Joseph,  commonly  called 
 by  the  Jews  Redak,  from  the  initial  letters  p"Tl  = 
 TlDp  TlTl,  li.  David  A'imc/ii,  was  born  in  Nar- 
 bonne  in  ii6o,  and  died  about  1235.  Veryhttle  is 
 known  of  the  private  life  of  this  celebrated  com- 
 mentator, grammarian,  and  lexicographer,  who  is 
 justly  regarded  as  the  teacher  of  Hebrew  of  both 
 Jews  and  Christians  throughout  Europe.  He 
 wrote — (i.)  A  Comme7itary  oti  the  Pentateuch  (tJ'112 
 
 minn  py),  of  which,  however.  Genesis  only  has 
 been  published  by  A.  Ginzburg,  Pressburg  1842, 
 cap.  i.  I -10  being  supplied  by  Kirchheim  from  the 
 writings  of  Kimchi,  as  the  MS.  was  defective  ;   (2.) 
 
 A  Commentary  on  the  Earlier  Pt-ophets  (7^  E^'1"1S 
 n''J"lK^X1  n''K''aJ),  i.e.,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel, 
 and  Kings,  printed  in  the  Rabbinical  Bibles  edited 
 by  Jacob  b.  Chajim,  Venice  1525,  1548;  Buxtorf 
 1619;  and  Frankfurter  1724-27;  (3.)  A  Com- 
 mentary on  the  Later  Prophets  (D''5<''3J  Py  t^llS 
 D"'J1"inS),  i.e.,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  tlie 
 minor  prophets,  also  given  in  the  Rabbinical 
 Bibles  ;  (4. )  A   Cofjnnentary  on  the  Psalms  (SJ^llS 
 
 Dviin  Py),  first  printed  in  1477,  reprinted  several 
 times,  and  also  given  in  the  Rabbinical  Bibles  of 
 Jacob  b.  Chajim,  but  not  in  those  edited  by  Bux- 
 torf and  Frankfurter  ;   (5.)  A  Commenta7y  on  Ruth 
 
 (nn  n^^iD  ^y  tJ'nD),  published  for  the  first  time 
 by  Mercier,   Paris   1563;  (6.)  A    Com,7nentary  on 
 
 Chronicles  (D''0''n  nm  ^y  ti'lID),  given  in  the  Rab- 
 binical Bibles  ;   (7.)  A   Comme?ita7y  on  Job  ^~\ti 
 
 nVN  Py),  which  has  not  yet  been  published  ;  (8.) 
 The  celebrated  work  called  Michlol  (?"|?3D),  or 
 Perfection,  which  consists  of  two  parts — a.  A  He- 
 brew Grammar  (pllplH  p?n),  usually  bearing  the 
 name  Michlol,  edited  with  notes  by  Elias  Levita, 
 Venice   1545,  and  by  M.    Hechim,  Furth  1793  ; 
 
 and  (9.)  h.  A  Hebrew  Lexicon  ^y}iX\  pPH),  com- 
 monly called  The  Book  of  Roots  (D'^t^'lt^n  "IDD), 
 the  best  editions  of  which  are  by  Elias  Levita, 
 Venice  1546,  and  Biesenthal  and  Lebrecht,  Berlin 
 
 1847  ;   (lO.)  A  Refutation  of  Christianity  (riQItJTi 
 
 D''"l^*13-'),  in  which  he  tries  to  explain  away  some 
 Messianic  Psalms,  printed  together  with  the  cele- 
 brated Aitzachon  (pPlVJ)  of  Lippmann,  Amster- 
 dam 1709,  1711  ;  Konigsberg  1847;  and  (11.) 
 Another  polemical  work  called  HDI,  also  printed 
 with  the  Nitzachon. 
 
 Kimchi  does  not  pretend  to  originality ;  he 
 frankly  says,  in  his  introduction  to  the  Michlol, 
 that  his  aim  is  to  exhibit  the  results  of  the  mani- 
 fold and  extensive  labours  of  his  numerous  prede- 
 cessors. Hence  his  lexicon  is,  to  a  great  extent,  a 
 translation  of  Ibn  Ganach's  Book  of  Roots  [Ibn 
 Ganach],  and  hence  his  repeated  quotations  from 
 Saadia,  ibn  Koriesh,  Chajug,  Ibn  Ganach,  Ibn  Ge- 
 birol,  Ibn  Giath,  Ibn  Balaam,  Gikatilla,  and  many 
 others.  But  though  his  claims  are  modest,  yet  his 
 merits  are  great.  He  was  the  first  who  discovered 
 the  distinction  between  the  long  and  short  vowels, 
 whereby  the  understanding  of  the  changing  of 
 vowels  has  been  greatly  facilitated.  He  moreover 
 defended  a  simple,  natural,  and  grammatical  exe- 
 gesis, at  a  time  when  most  of  his  Jewish  brethren 
 were  enamoured  of  Hagadic,  Kabbalistical,  and 
 astrological  interpretations.  It  is,  therefore,  not  to 
 be  wondered  at  that  he  became  so  eminent  among 
 his  brethren,  that  they  applied  to  him,  by  a  play  of 
 words,  the  saying  in  the  Mishna  [Ahoth.  iii.  17),  DN 
 rmn  pN  nop  pX,  no  ICimchi,  no  nnderstanditig 
 of  the  Scriptures.  Equally  great  was  his  reputation 
 amongst  Christians  after  the  revival  of  learning, 
 and  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  notwithstand- 
 ing his  hostility  to  Christianity,  which  is  displayed 
 throughout  his  commentaries,*  and  which  arose 
 from  the  persecutions  the  Jews  had  to  endure  from 
 tlie  Crusaders  in  the  name  of  Christ.  The  first 
 Hebrew  lexicons  or  glossaries  compiled  by  Chris- 
 tians, as  well  as  the  grammars  and  the  notes 
 accompanying  the  Latin  Bibles  of  Munster  and 
 Stephen,  are  derived  from  Kimchi.  Excerpts  of 
 his  Commentary  on  Isaiah  were  translated  into 
 Latin  by  Munster,  and  a  Latin  version  of  the 
 whole  of  it  was  pul^lished  by  Malanimeus,  Flo- 
 rence 1774-  Leusden  published  Latin  versions  of 
 Joel  (Utrecht  1656)  ;  and  Jonah  (Utrecht  1657). 
 De  Muis  published  a  Latin  translation  of  Malachi 
 (Paris  1618).  Vehe  published  a  German  transla- 
 tion of  Amos,  Col.  1581;  and  Dr.  M'Caul  trans- 
 lated the  Commentary  on  Zechariah  into  English 
 (London  1837).  A  Latin  translation  of  the  Com- 
 mentary on  the  Psalms  was  made  by  Janvier 
 (Constanz  1544)-  The  grammatical  part  of  his 
 work  called  the  Michlol  was  translated  into  Latin 
 by  Guidacier,  Paris  1540  ;  and  a  Latin  version  of 
 the  roots  was  published  in  1535.  Comp.  Stein- 
 schneider,  Catalos^iis  Lib.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bod- 
 leiana,  col.  86S-S75  ;  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  fiidaica, 
 ii.  p.  183,  scq.  ;  the  masterly  biography  of  Kimchi 
 by  Geiger  in  Ozar  Nech?nad,  Vienna  1857,  p.  I57j 
 seq.—C.  D.  G. 
 
 *  Many  of  these  passages  have  been  struck  out 
 by  the  Inquisition,  and  do  not  exist  in  the  present 
 editions  of  Kimchi's  Commentaries.  Pococke  has 
 collected  all  the  passages  which  have  been  omitted 
 from  the  Prophets,  some  of  which  he  found  in  the 
 Editio  Pisavrensis  (Pesaro  15 15),  and  some  in 
 two  MSS.  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  and  given 
 tliem  in  Not.  ad  Portam  Mosis,  in  his  Theological 
 Works,  ed.  London,  1740,  vol.  i.  p.  241,  seq. 
 
KIMCHI 
 
 735 
 
 KINDRED 
 
 KIMCHI,  Joseph  b.  Isaac,  also  called  Mcstre 
 Petit,  the  father  of  the  preceding  writer,  was  com- 
 pelled to  leave  Spain  on  account  of  the  persecu- 
 tions to  which  the  Jews  were  subject  by  the  Mo- 
 hammedans, settled  in  Narbonne,  where  he  died 
 about  I  iSo.  He  devoted  his  whole  life  to  the  science 
 of  the  Hebrew  language  and  Biblical  exegesis,  and 
 succeeded,  by  his  clear  and  independent  judgment, 
 in  creating  a  new  epoch  in  the  study  of  the  He- 
 brew Scriptures  among  his  brethren  in  southern 
 France,  by  introducing  there  the  learning  of  Spain, 
 and  continuing  the  labours  of  Ibn  Ezra.  He  wrote — 
 (i.)  A  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch,  entitled  "13D 
 rniri)  TIu  Book  of  the  Laxv,  which  is  lost,  except 
 fragments  of  it  extant  in  MS.,  De  Rossi  i66,  and 
 in  the  quotation  of  his  son  D.  Kimchi.  (2.)  A  Com- 
 mentary on  the  Earlier  Prophets  called  njpDil  "12D, 
 The  Bill  of  Picrckase,  in  allusion  to  Jer.  xxxii.  11. 
 (3.)  A  Commentary  on  the  Later  Prophets,  called 
 
 ■•l^jn  "IQD,  The  Unfolded  Book,  in  allusion  to  Jer. 
 xxxii.  14.  These  works,  too,  have  not  as  yet  come 
 to  light,  and  we  only  know  them  through  the  nu- 
 merous quotations  from  them  dispersed  through  Da- 
 vid Kimchi's  Commentaries  on  the  Prophets.  (4. ) 
 A  Commentary  on  Job,  a  defective  MS.  of  which  is 
 both  in  the  Bodleian  Library  and  at  Munich,  260. 
 (5.)  A  Commentai-y  on  Proverbs,  a  perfect  MS.  of 
 which  exists  in  the  Munich  Library,  No.  242.  (6. ) 
 A  Hebrew  Grammar  called  jn^T  'IDD,  The  Book  of 
 Remembrance,  which  is  the  first  written  by  a  Jew  in 
 a  Christian  country,  and  is  quoted  by  D.  Kimchi 
 in  the  Michlol,  XJp  b.      (7.)   Another  grammatical 
 
 work,  entitled  L2pS"I  11311  "IDD,  also  quoted  in 
 the  Michlol  Ipp  a.  Both  as  a  commentator  and  a 
 grammarian  Joseph  Kimchi  deserves  the  highest 
 praise,  and  though  his  works  still  remain  unpub- 
 lished, his  contributions  to  Biblical  literature  pro- 
 duced a  most  beneficial  influence,  inasmuch  as  they 
 prepared  the  way  in  Christian  countries  for  a  literal 
 and  sound  exegesis.  His  son,  D.  Kimchi,  who 
 constantly  quotes  him,  both  in  his  commentaries 
 and  under  almost  every  root  of  his  Hebrew  Lexi- 
 con, has  familiarised  the  Hebrew  student  with  the 
 grammatical  and  exegetical  principles  of  this  de- 
 servedly esteemed  Hebraist.  Comp.  Biesenthal 
 and  Lebrecht's  edition  of  D.  Kimchi's  Radicnm 
 Liber,  Berlin  1847,  col.  xxiv.  seq. ;  and  Geiger's 
 excellent  Treatise  in  Ozar  Nechmad,  i. ,  Vienna  1 856, 
 p.  97-119.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 KIMCHI,  Moses  b.  Joseph,  also  o.'sW&di.  Remak, 
 from  the  initial  letters  p"D"l=''n?Op  HC^'D  '1,  R. 
 Moses  Kimchi,  the  eldest  son  of  the  preceding 
 writer,  flourished  about  1 160- 1 170.  "Though  far 
 below  his  father  and  brother,  yet  he  has  also  distin- 
 guished himself  as  a  commentator  and  grammarian. 
 He  wrote — (i.)  A  Commentary  on  Proverbs  (tiTlQ 
 
 vDD  "IDD),  printed  in  the  Rabbinic  Bibles  of 
 Jacob  b.  Chajim,  Venice  1526,  1548  ;  Buxtorf, 
 Basel  1619;  and  Frankfurter,  Amsterdam  1724-27; 
 which  has  been  falsely  ascribed  to  Ibn  Ezra.  Comp. 
 Reifmann  \n  Literaturblatt  des  Orients,  1841,  750- 
 751;  Zion,  vol.  i. ,  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1841,  p. 
 76;  Lippmann,  in  Zion,  vol.  ii.,  Frankfort-on-the- 
 Maine  1S42,  p.  113-1 17  ;  129-133;  155-157;  171- 
 174  ;  185-188.  (2.)  A  Commentary  on  Ezra  and 
 Nehemiah,  also  printed  in  the  Rabbinical  Bibles, 
 and  erroneously  attributed  to  Ibn  Ezra.     (3.)  A 
 
 grammatical   work,    entitled  nyin  "h^l^  HPHO, 
 
 yoiirney  on  the  Paths  of  ICnoxvledoe,  which  became 
 a  manual  for  both  Jews  and  Christians  who  were 
 anxious  to  acquire  the  rudiments  of  Hebrew  gram- 
 mar, through  the  recommendation  of  Elias  Levita, 
 who  annotated  and  edited  it  in  1508.  It  was  after- 
 wards published,  with  a  Latin  translation,  by  Seb. 
 Munster,  Basel  1531,  and  was  published  at  diffe- 
 rent times  in  various  places,  with  diverse  additions 
 and  modifications.  The  chief  merit  of  this  little 
 volume  consists  in  the  fact,  that  M.  Kimchi  was  the 
 first  to  employ  therein  the  word  ^pQ  as  a  para- 
 digm of  the  regular  verbs,  instead  of  the  less  ap- 
 propriate verb  mediit  gidtiiralis  pyS,  which  had 
 been  used  by  his  predecessors  in  imitation  of  Arabic 
 grammarians.  (4.)  A  grammatical  treatise  on  the 
 anomalous  expressions  entitled  nti'13nn  "ISD, 
 quoted  by  D.  Kimchi  in  the  Michlol.  Comp.  Bie- 
 senthal and  Lebrecht's  edition  of  D.  Kimchi's  Ra- 
 dicnm  Liber,  Berlin  1847,  col.  xxxviii. ,  seq.  ;  Fiirst, 
 Bibliotheca  Jiidaica,  ii.  187,  seq.  ;  Steinschneider, 
 Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleia7ta,  col. 
 1 838- 1 844;  by  the  same  author,  Bibliographisches 
 Handbuch,  Leipzig  1859,  p.  74,  ff.  ;  and  the  excel- 
 lent treatise  of  Geiger,  Ozar  Nechmad,  vol.  ii., 
 Vienna  1857,  p.  17,  ff.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 KIMMOSH  (C^lSp)  occurs  Is.  xxxiv.  13,  Hos. 
 
 ix.  6;  and  in  the  pi.   D"'Ji5i'?3p,    Prov.  xxiv.  31, 
 
 where  it  is  mentioned  along  with  chand,  which  we 
 believe  to  indicate  charlock.  The  field  of  the 
 slothful  is  there  described  as  being  gro\vn  over 
 with  thorns  {charullim),  '  and  nettles  [^kimshon) 
 had  covered  the  face  thereof.'  In  Isaiah  it  is  said, 
 '  And  thorns  {choach)  shall  come  up  in  the  palaces, 
 nettles  {kimosh)  and  brambles  in  the  fortresses 
 thereof  Hos.  ix.  6,  '  The  pleasant  places  for 
 their  silver,  nettles  (kimosh)  shall  possess  them  ; 
 thorns  [choach)  shall  he  in  their  tabernacles.' 
 
 Though  different  interpretations  have  been  given 
 of  this  word,  as  thorns,  thistles,  wild  chamomile, 
 etc.,  the  greatest  number  of  authors  have  united 
 in  adopting  nettles,  chiefly  in  consequence  of  the 
 authority  of  Jewish  writers.  Thus,  Rosenmiiller 
 says,   Rabbi  Tanchum,   on   Hos.   ix.  6,  explains 
 
 kimosh  by  the  common  nettle,  ^ySj^j  in  Pococke's 
 
 Comment,  on  Hosea.  So  R.  Ben  Melech,  as  quoted 
 and  translated  by  Celsius  [Ilierobot.  ii.  p.  20';), 
 '  ex  antiquioribus  Ebr^is,  ad  Proverb,  xxiv.  31, 
 species  est  spinariim,  et  dicititr  vidgo  Urtica. '  Nettles 
 no  doubt  spring  up  rapidly  in  deserted  as  in  in- 
 habited places,  in  fields,  ditches,  and  road  sides, 
 but  most  frequently  where  there  is  some  moisture 
 in  the  soil  or  climate.  Though  they  are  found  in 
 tropical  situations,  as  well  as  in  temperate  climes, 
 yet  the  springing  up  of  nettles  in  deserted  places 
 is  rather  an  European  than  an  Oriental  idea. 
 Though  kimosh  has  not  yet  been  proved  to  indicate 
 the  nettle,  this  plant  has  been  received  by  the  rab- 
 bins, and  is  as  well  suited  to  the  passages  in  which 
 it  occurs  as  any  other  which  has  hitherto  been  sug- 
 gested.— ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KINAH  i^'^i'^p,  'lamentation;'  'I/cdya ;  Alex. 
 Kim ;  Cina),  a  place  on  the  southern  border  of 
 Judah,  towards  Edom  (Josh.  xv.  22).  It  is  only 
 once  mentioned,  and  its  site  is  unknown. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KINDRED.  Five  Hebrew  words  are  thv,s 
 translated  in  the  A.  V. :— 
 
KINDRED 
 
 736 
 
 KING 
 
 1.  nnS'C'D-  This  word  answers  to  the  Lathi 
 gens,  only  that  it  more  distinctly  includes  the  idea 
 of  original  affinity  or  derivation  from  a  common 
 stock  ;  it  corresponds  exactly  with  our  word  clan. 
 It  is  used  of  the  different  tribes  of  the  Canaanites 
 (Gen.  X.  i8);  of  the  subdivisions  of  the  Hebrew 
 people  (Exod.  vi.  14;  Num.  i.  20,  etc.);  some- 
 times for  one  of  the  tribes  (Josh.  vii.  1 7  ;  Judg. 
 xiii.  2,  etc.),  and  in  the  later  books  tropically  for 
 a  people  or  nation  (Jer.  viii.  3  ;  xxv.  9  ;  Ezek.  xx. 
 32  ;  Micah  ii.  3).  'I'he  passages  in  which  it  is 
 translated  kindred  in  the  A.  V.  are  Gen.  xxiv.  41  ; 
 Josh.  vi.  23  ;  Ruth  ii.  3  ;  Job  xxxii.  2  ;  in  all  of 
 which  it  refers  to  relationship  by  consanguinity, 
 more  or  less  remote. 
 
 2.  TilhS'O-  This  word,  from  IpS  conveys  pri- 
 marily the  idea  of  birth,  nativity ;  hence  a  person 
 born,  a  child  (Gen.  xxviii.  9;  Lev.  xvih.  9,  11), 
 ?indi  persons  of  the  same  family  or  lineage  (Gen.  xii. 
 
 1  ;  xxiv.  4 ;  xxxi.  3  ;  xliii.  7  ;  Num.  x.  30  ;  Esth. 
 ii.  10 ;  viii.  6,  in  all  which  passages  it  is  translated 
 kindred  in  the  A.  V.)  In  some  of  these  instances, 
 however,  the  kinship  is  only  the  remote  one  of 
 common  nationality  arising  out  of  common  descent. 
 
 3-  nyi'lD,  fi'om  j;T>,  to  kno7v,  is  used  to  express 
 blood-relationship  in  Ruth  iii.  2  ;  comp.  yi'lO  (Ruth 
 ii.  I ;  Prov.  vii  4). 
 
 4.  n^X2-    By  this  word  is  properly  designated 
 
 such  near  relationship  by  blood  as  would  confer 
 
 the  rights  and  obligations  of  a  PSJ  or  kinsman, 
 avenger,  and  redeemer,  on  the  party  [Kinsman]. 
 As  commonly  used,  however,  it  denotes  either  the 
 thing  redeemed  (Ruth  iv.  6),  or  the  right  of  re- 
 deeming (Lev.  xxv.  29,  etc.),  or  the  redemption 
 price  (Lev.  xxv.  26,  etc.)  The  only  passage  in 
 which  it  is  translated  kindred  m  the  A.  V.  is  Ezek. 
 xi.  15.      Hengstenberg  {Christol.  iii.  9,  E.  T.)  and 
 
 Havernick  [Comment,  in  loc.)  contend  that  il?X3 
 is  to  be  taken  here  not  in  the  sense  of  relationship, 
 but  in  that  of  suretyship  or  substitutionary  action, 
 and  they  would  translate  the  passage,  'Thy  bre- 
 thren are  the  men  of  thy  suretyship,'  or  '  re- 
 demption,' i.e.,  the  men  whom  it  lies  on  them  to 
 redeem  or  act  for.     The  LXX.  seem  to  have  read 
 
 ^nP'lS)  for  they  give  atxynaXwutas  here. 
 
 5.  nS.    This,    which  properly  means    brother, 
 
 occurs  only  once  with  the  rendering  kindred  in  the 
 A.  v.,  in  I  Chron.  xii.  29.  It  is  frequently  used 
 elsewhere  in  a  wide  sense,  and  may  be  understood 
 of  nearly  all  collateral  relationships  whatever, 
 whether  by  consanguinity,  affinity,  or  simple  asso- 
 ciation [Brother].     From  this  comes  HinX,  bro- 
 
 ihc7-hood  (Zech.  xi.  14). 
 
 Besides  these  terms,  the  Hebrews  expressed  con- 
 sanguinity by  such  words  and    phrases  as  "lt^'3, 
 
 piesh   (Gen.  xxxvii.  27  ;  Is.  Iviii.  7) ;  i"}C>ai  '"pyj?, 
 
 my  bone  and  fny  flesh  (Gen.  xxix.  14  ;  Judg.  ix.  2  ; 
 
 2  Sam.  V.  I,  etc.);  -\V^^, flesh  (Lev.  xvih.  12,  13,  ' 
 
 etc.  ;  Num.  xxvii.  41),  with  msti',  coll.  kins-  [ 
 women  (Lev.  xviii.  17)  ;  and  i"lb'3  "IX^,  fli-'^^i  of  ^ 
 his  flesh  (A.  V.,  near  of  kin.  Lev.  xviii.  6  ;  nigh  of, 
 kin,  xxv.  49).  I 
 
 For  illustration  of  the  special  names  of  kindred 
 
 among  the  Hebrews,  see  articles  Father,  Bro- 
 ther, etc.  ;  see  also  Affinity,  Kinsman,  Mar- 
 riage.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 KINE,  I.  CSpX  (Deut.  vii.  13 ;  xxviii.  4 ; 
 Ps.  viii.  8),  found  only  in  plural,  common  gender. 
 Derived  from  ^ibs,  '  assuevit,'  denoting  cattle  tamed 
 and  accustomed  to  the  yoke. 
 
 2.  1p3,  collective,  common  gender,  the  ordinary 
 
 word  throughout  the  Bible  for  a  herd  of  oxen, 
 without  distinction  of  age  or  sex  ;  the  word  for 
 an  individual  being  "Vi^  (cf.  Exod.  xxi.  37  [xxii.  i]), 
 so  called  from  breaking  up  the  ground  in  plough- 
 ing, or,  according  to  Ewald,  from  dividing  the 
 hoof. 
 
 3.  nnS,  the  feminine  plural  of  ~iS,  a  bullock, 
 
 once  only  (Amos  iv.  i),  metaphorically  for  the  luxu- 
 rious hard-hearted  ladies  of  Samaria. — E.  V. 
 
 KING,  a  title  applied  in  the  Scriptures  to  men 
 (Luke  xxii.  25  ;  I  Tim.  ii.  i,  2  ;  I  Pet.  ii.  13-17), 
 to  God  (I  Tim.  i.  17  ;  vi.  15,  16},  and  to  Christ 
 (Matt,  xxvii.  11  ;  Luke  xix.  38;  John  i.  49;  vi. 
 15  ;  xviii.  32-37) — to  men,  as  invested  with  regal 
 authority  by  their  fellows  ;  to  God,  as  the  sole 
 proper  sovereign  and  ruler  of  the  universe  ;  and  to 
 Christ,  as  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God,  the  King 
 of  the  Jews,  the  sole  Head  and  Governor  of  his 
 church.  The  kingdom  of  Christ,  in  Luke  i.  32, 
 33,  is  declared  to  be  without  end  ;  whereas,  in 
 I  Cor.  XV.  28,  we  are  taught  that  it  will  have  a 
 period  when  God  shall  be  all  in  all.  The  con- 
 tradiction is  only  in  form  and  appearance.  The 
 kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  considered  as  a  media- 
 torial instrumentality  for  effecting  the  salvation  of 
 the  world,  will  of  course  terminate  when  the  pur- 
 poses for  which  it  was  established  shall  have  been 
 accomplished  ;  while  the  reign  of  the  Son  of  God, 
 associated  with  his  Father  in  the  empire  of  the 
 world,  will  last  as  long  as  that  empire  itself,  and 
 never  cease,  so  long  as  the  effects  endure  which 
 the  redemption  of  the  world  shall  produce  alike  in 
 its  remotest  as  in  its  nearer  consequences. 
 
 Regal  authority  was  altogether  alien  to  the  insti- 
 tutions of  Moses  in  their  original  and  unadulterated 
 form.  Their  fundamental  idea  was  that  Jehovah 
 was  the  sole  king  of  the  nation  (i  Sam.  viii.  7)  : 
 to  use  the  emphatic  words  in  Is.  xxxiii.  22,  '  The 
 Lord  is  our  judge,  tlie  Lord  is  our  lawgiver,  the 
 Lord  is  our  king.'  This  important  fact,  however, 
 does  not  rest  on  the  evidence  of  single  texts,  but 
 is  implied  in  the  entire  Pentateuch,  not  to  say 
 the  whole  of  the  O.  T.  The  Scriptural  state- 
 ments or  implications  are  as  follows  : — God  is  the 
 creator  of  the  world  ;  he  saved  a  remnant  from 
 the  flood  ;  towards  the  descendants  of  Noah  he 
 manifested  his  special  favour  ;  to  Abraham,  Isaac, 
 and  Jacob,  he  promised  a  land  flowing  with  milk 
 and  honey.  In  the  fulness  of  time  he  accomplished, 
 by  apparently  the  most  unlikely  and  imtoward 
 means,  the  oath  which  he  more  than  once  sware 
 to  the  fathers  of  Israel  ;  so  that  eventually,  having 
 furnished  his  people  with  a  complete  code  of  laws, 
 he  put  them  in  possession  of  the  promised  territory, 
 assuming  the  government,  and  setting  forth  sanc- 
 tions alike  of  ample  good  and  terrible  ill,  in  order 
 to  keep  the  people  loyal  to  himself  as  to  the  only 
 Creator  and  God  of  the  universe,  and  specially  as 
 their  supreme  sovereign. 
 
KING 
 
 737 
 
 KING 
 
 We  consider  it  as  a  sign  of  that  self-confidence 
 and  moral  enterprise  which  are  produced  in  great 
 men  by  a  consciousness  of  being  what  they  profess, 
 that  Moses  ventured,  with  his  half-civilized  hordes, 
 on  the  bold  experiment  of  founding  a  society  with- 
 out a  king,  and  that  in  the  solicitude  which  he 
 must  have  felt  for  the  success  of  his  great  under- 
 taking, he  forewent  the  advantages  which  a  regal 
 government  would  have  afforded.  Nor  is  such  an 
 attempt  a  little  singular  and  novel  at  a  period  and 
 in  a  part  of  the  world  in  which  royalty  was  not  only 
 general,  but  held  in  the  greatest  respect,  and  some- 
 times rose  to  the  very  height  of  pure  despotism. 
 Its  novelty  is  an  evidence  of  the  divine  original 
 to  which  Moses  refened  all  his  polity.  Equally 
 honourable  is  the  conduct  of  Moses  in  denying  to 
 his  lower  nature  the  gratifications  which  a  crown 
 would  have  imparted — we  say  denying  himself,  be- 
 cause it  is  beyond  a  question  that  the  man  who 
 rescued  the  Jews  from  bondage  and  conducted 
 them  to  the  land  of  Canaan,  might,  had  he  chosen, 
 have  kept  the  dominion  in  his  own  hands,  and  trans- 
 mitted a  crown  to  his  posterity.  If  Washington, 
 at  this  late  period  of  human  history,  after  the  accu- 
 mulating experience  of  above  three  thousand  years 
 has  added  its  sanctions  to  the  great  law  of  dis- 
 interested benevolence,  is  held  deserving  of  high 
 honour  for  having  preferred  to  found  a  republic 
 rather  than  attempt  to  build  up  a  throne,  surely 
 very  unequal  justice  is  done  to  Aloses,  if,  as  is  too 
 generally  the  case,  we  pass  in  neglect  the  extra- 
 ordinary fact  that,  with  supreme  power  in  his 
 hands,  and,  to  all  appearance,  scarcely  any  hin- 
 drance to  the  assumption  of  regal  splendour,  the 
 great  Hebrew  patriot  and  legislator  was  content  to 
 die  within  sight  of  the  land  of  promise,  a  simple, 
 unrewarded,  unhonoured  individual,  content  to  do 
 God's  work  regardless  of  self.  It  is  equally  obvious 
 that  this  self-denial  on  the  part  of  Moses,  this 
 omission  to  create  any  human  kingship,  is  in  entire 
 accordance  with  the  import,  aim,  and  spirit  of  the 
 Mosaic  institutions,  as  being  divine  in  their  origin, 
 and  designed  to  accomplish  a  special  work  of  Pro- 
 vidence for  man  ;  and  therefore  affords,  by  its  con- 
 sistency with  the  very  essence  of  the  system  of 
 which  it  forms  a  part,  a  very  forcible  argument  in 
 favour  of  the  divine  legation  of  Moses. 
 
 That  great  man,  however,  well  knew  what  were 
 the  elements  with  which  he  had  to  deal  in  framing 
 institutions  for  the  rescued  Israelites.  Slaves  they 
 had  been,  and  the  spirit  of  slavery  was  not  yet 
 wholly  eradicated  from  their  souls.  They  had,  too, 
 witnessed  in  Egypt  the  more  than  ordinary  pomp 
 and  splendour  which  environ  a  throne,  dazzling 
 the  eyes  and  captivating  the  heart  of  the  uncul- 
 tured. Not  improbably  the  prosperity  and  abun- 
 dance which  they  had  seen  in  Egypt,  and  in  which 
 they  had  been,  in  a  measure,  allowed  to  partake, 
 might  have  been  ascribed  by  them  to  the  regal 
 form  of  the  Egyptian  government.  Moses  may 
 well,  therefore,  have  apprehended  a  not  very  re- 
 mote departure  from  the  fundamental  type  of  his 
 institutions.  Accordingly  he  makes  a  special  pro- 
 vision for  this  contingency  (Deut.  xvii.  14),  and 
 labours,  by  anticipation,  to  guard  against  the  abuses 
 of  royal  power.  Should  a  king  be  demanded  by 
 the  people,  then  he  was  to  be  a  native  Israehte ; 
 he  was  not  to  be  drawn  away  by  the  love  of  show, 
 especially  by  a  desire  for  that  regal  display  in  which 
 horses  have  always  borne  so  large  a  part,  to  send 
 down  to  Egypt,  still  less  to  cause  the  people  to 
 
 vol,   II. 
 
 return  to  that  land  ;  he  was  to  avoid  the  corrupting 
 influence  of  a  large  harem,  so  common  among 
 Eastern  monarchs  ;  he  was  to  abstain  from  amass- 
 ing silver  and  gold  ;  he  was  to  have  a  copy  of  the 
 law  made  expressly  for  his  own  study — a  study 
 which  he  was  never  to  intermit  till  the  end  of  his 
 days  ;  so  that  his  heart  might  not  be  lifted  up 
 above  his  brethren,  that  he  might  not  be  turned 
 aside  from  the  living  God,  but  observing  the  divine 
 statutes,  and  thus  acknowledging  himself  to  be  no 
 more  than  the  vicegerent  of  heaven,  he  might  enjoy 
 happiness,  and  transmit  his  authority  to  his  descend- 
 ants. 
 
 This  passage  has,  indeed,  been  pronounced  to 
 stand  apart  from  any  connection  in  the  Pentateuch, 
 and  to  betray  a  much  later  hand  than  that  of 
 Moses.  If  our  view  is  correct,  it  has  a  very  ob- 
 vious connection,  and  proceeds  from  the  Hebrew 
 legislator  himself  Nor  can  it,  we  think,  be  denied 
 that  the  reason  is  by  no  means  an  unlikely  nor  in- 
 sufficient one,  by  which  we  have  supposed  Moses 
 to  have  been  prompted  in  promulgating  the  provi- 
 sional and  contingent  arrangements  which  are  found 
 in  the  passage  under  consideration.  Most  emphati- 
 cally is  the  act  of  taking  a  king  ascribed  by  Moses 
 to  the  people  themselves,  whom  he  represents  as 
 being  influenced  by  considerations  not  dissimilar  to 
 those  which  we  have  assigned  :  '  When  thou,'  etc. 
 '  and  shalt  say,  Izvill  set  a  king  ca'cr  vie,  like  as  all 
 the  nations  that  are  about  vie.^  ^\'iner,  however, 
 from  whom  {Real-woiterb. )  wehave  taken  this  objec- 
 tion, argues  in  opposition  to  Staudlin  (Bertholdt's 
 Theol.  yonrn.,  iii.  259,  361,  sq.),  that  if  Moses 
 had  antici]ialed  a  demand  for  a  king,  he  would 
 have  made  provision  for  such  a  demand  at  an  ear- 
 lier period — a  remark  which  rests  on  no  evidence 
 of  verisimilitude  whatever,  the  opposite  of  the  sup- 
 posed course  being  just  as  prolJable.  Besides,  it 
 may  be  affirmed,  without  the  possibility  of  receiving 
 any  contradiction  but  that  of  mere  assertion,  that 
 he  made  the  provision  as  soon  as  he  foresaw  the 
 probable  need.  Less  solid,  if  possible,  is  Winer's 
 other  argument,  namely,  tiiat  in  the  passage  (i  Sam. 
 viii.)  in  which  are  recorded  the  people's  demand  of 
 a  king,  and  the  prophet  Samuel's  reply,  no  trace 
 is  found  of  a  reference  to  the  alleged  Mosaic  law 
 on  the  point.  A  reference  in  form  Winer  could 
 scarcely  expect  ;  a  reference  in  substance  we  see 
 very  clearly.  We  have  not  room  to  go  into  particu- 
 lars, but  recommend  the  reader  carefully  to  com- 
 pare the  two  passages. 
 
 The  Jewish  polity,  then,  was  a  sort  of  sacer- 
 dotal republic— we  say  sacerdotal,  because  of  the 
 great  influence  which,  fiom  the  first,  the  priestly 
 order  enjoyed,  having  no  human  head,  but  being 
 under  the  special  supervision,  protection,  and  guid- 
 ance of  the  Almighty.  The  nature  of  the  conse- 
 quences, however,  of  that  divine  influence  avowedly 
 depended  on  the  degree  of  obedience  and  the  ge- 
 neral faithfulness  of  the  nation.  The  good,  there- 
 fore, of  such  a  superintendence  in  its  immediate 
 results  was  not  necessary,  but  contingent.  The 
 removal  of  Moses  and  of  Joshua  by  death  soon  left 
 the  people  to  the  natural  results  of  their  own  con- 
 dition and  character.  Anarchy  ensued.  Noble 
 minds  indeed,  and  stout  hearts,  appeared  in  those 
 who  were  termed  Judges  ;  but  the  state  of  the 
 country  was  not  so  satisfactory  as  to  prevent  an 
 unenlightened  people,  having  low  and  gross  affec- 
 tions, from  preferring  the  glare  of  a  crown  and 
 the  apparent  protection  of  a  scepti-e,  to  the  invi- 
 
KING 
 
 ^38 
 
 KING 
 
 sible,  and  therefore  mostly  unrecognised,  arm  of 
 Omnipotence.  A  king,  accordingly,  is  requested. 
 The  misconduct  of  Samuel's  sons,  who  had  been 
 made  judges,  was  the  immediate  occasion  of  the 
 demand  being  put  forth.  The  request  came  with 
 authority,  for  it  emanated  from  all  the  elders  of 
 Israel,  who,  after  holding  a  formal  conference, 
 proceeded  to  vSamuel,  in  order  to  make  him  ac- 
 quainted with  their  wish.  Samuel  was  displeased  ; 
 but  having  sought  in  prayer  to  learn  the  divine 
 will,  he  is  instructed  to  yield  to  the  demand 
 on  a  ground  which  we  should  not  assuredly  have 
 found  stated,  had  the  book  in  which  it  appears 
 been  tampered  with  or  fabricated  for  any  courtly 
 purposes  or  any  personal  ends,  whether  by  Samuel 
 himself,  or  by  David,  or  any  of  his  successors — 
 '  for  they  have  not  rejected  thee  (Samuel),  but 
 they  have  rejected  me,  that  I  should  not  reign 
 over  them'  (ver.  7,  see  also  ver.  8).  Samuel  is, 
 moreover,  directed  to  '  protest  solemnly  unto  them, 
 and  show  them  the  manner  of  the  king  that  shall 
 reign  over  them.'  Faithfully  does  the  prophet 
 depict  the  evils  which  a  monarchy  would  inflict 
 on  the  people.  In  vain  :  they  said,  '  Nay,  but 
 we  will  have  a  king  over  us.'  Accordingly,  Saul 
 the  son  of  Kish,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  was  by 
 divine  direction  selected,  and  privately  anointed  by 
 Samuel  '  to  be  captain  over  God's  inheritance  :' 
 thus  he  was  to  hold  only  a  delegated  and  subordi- 
 nate authority.  Under  the  guidance  of  Samuel, 
 Saul  is  subsequently  chosen  by  lot  from  among 
 the  assembled  tribes  ;  and  though  his  personal 
 appearance  had  no  influence  in  the  choice,  yet 
 when  he  was  plainly  pointed  out  to  be  the  indi- 
 vidual designed  for  the  sceptre,  Samuel  called 
 attention  to  those  qualities  which  in  less  civihzed 
 nations  have  a  preponderating  influence,  and  are 
 never  without  eff"ect,  at  least,  in  supporting  '  the 
 divinity  which  doth  hedge  a  king  :'  '  See  ye  him 
 whom  the  Lord  hath  chosen,  that  there  is  none 
 like  him  among  all  the  people,'  for  he  was  higher 
 than  any  of  the  people  from  his  shoulders  and 
 upward ;  '  and  all  the  people  shouted,  God  save 
 the  king.' 
 
 Emanating  as  the  royal  power  did  from  the  de- 
 mand of  the  people  and  the  permission  of  a 
 prophet,  it  was  not  likely  to  be  unlimited  in  its 
 extent  or  arbitrary  in  its  exercise.  The  govern- 
 ment of  God,  indeed,  remained,  being  rather  con- 
 cealed and  complicated  than  disowned,  much  less 
 superseded.  The  king  ruled  not  in  his  own  right, 
 nor  in  virtue  of  the  choice  of  the  people,  but  by 
 concession  from  on  high,  and  partly  as  the  servant 
 and  partly  as  the  representative  of  the  theocracy. 
 How  insecure,  indeed,  was  the  tenure  of  the  kingly 
 power,  how  restricted  it  was  in  its  authority, 
 appears  clear  from  the  comparative  facihty  with 
 which  the  crown  was  transferred  from  Saul  to 
 David ;  and  the  part  which  the  prophet  Samuel 
 took  in  effecting  that  transference  points  out  the 
 quarter  where  lay  the  power  which  limited,  if  it 
 did  not  primarily,  at  least,  control  the  royal 
 authority.  It  must,  however,  be  added,  that  if 
 religion  narrowed  this  authority,  it  also  invested  it 
 with  a  sacredness  which  could  emanate  from  no 
 other  source.  Liable  as  the  Israelite  kings  were 
 to  interference  on  the  part  of  priest  and  prophet, 
 they  were,  by  the  same  divine  power,  shielded 
 from  the  unholy  hands  of  the  profane  vulgar ; 
 and  it  was  at  once  impiety  and  rebellion  to  do 
 injury  to  '  the  Lord's  anointed '  (Ps.  ii.  6,  7,  s^.) 
 
 Instances  are  not  wanting  to  corroborate  and  ex- 
 tend these  general  observations.  When  Saul  was 
 in  an  extr^iity  before  the  Philistines  (i  Sam. 
 xxviii.),  he  resorted  to  the  usual  methods  of  obtain- 
 ing counsel :  '  Saul  inquired  of  the  Lord,  the  Lord 
 answered  him  not,  neither  by  dreams,  nor  by 
 Urim,  nor  by  prophets.'  So  David,  when  in  need 
 of  advice  in  war  (i  Sam.  xxx,  7),  resorted  to 
 Abiathar  the  priest,  who,  by  means  of  the  ephod, 
 inquired  of  the  Lord,  and  thereupon  urged  the 
 king  to  take  a  certain  course,  which  proved  suc- 
 cessful (see  also  2  Sam.  ii.  i).  Sometimes,  indeed, 
 as  appears  from  i  Sam.  xxviii.,  it  was  a  prophet 
 who  acted  the  part  of  prime  minister,  or  chief 
 counsellor,  to  the  king,  and  who,  as  bearing  that 
 sacred  character,  must  have  possessed  very  weighty 
 influence  in  the  royal  divan  (i  Kings  xxii.  7,  ^17.) 
 We  must  not,  however,  expect  to  find  any  definite 
 and  permanent  distribution  of  power,  any  legal 
 determination  of  the  royal  prerogatives  as  disclri- 
 minated  from  the  divine  authority ;  circumstances, 
 as  they  prompted  certain  deeds,  restricted  or  en- 
 larged the  sphere  of  the  monarch's  action.  Thus, 
 in  I  Sam.  xi.  4,  s^.,  we  find  Saul,  in  an  emergency, 
 assuming,  without  consultation  or  deliberation,  the 
 power  of  demanding  something  like  a  levy  eti 
 masse,  and  of  proclaiming  instant  war.  With  the 
 king  lay  the  administration  of  justice  in  the  last 
 resort  (2  Sam.  xv.  2;  I  Kings  iii.  16,  s^.)  Ha 
 also  possessed  the  power  of  life  and  death  (2  Sam, 
 xiv. )  To  provide  for  and  superintend  the  public 
 worship  was  at  once  his  duty  and  his  highest 
 honour  (i  Kings  viii. ;  2  Kings  xii.  7  ;  xviii.  4 ; 
 xxiii.  i).  One  reason  why  the  people  requested  a 
 king  was,  that  they  might  have  a  recognised  leader 
 in  war  (i  Sam.  viii.  20).  The  Mosaic  law  offered 
 a  powerful  hindrance  to  royal  despotism  (1  Sam. 
 X.  25).  The  people  also,  by  means  of  their  elders, 
 formed  an  express  compact,  by  which  they  stipu- 
 lated for  their  rights  (i  Kings  xii.  4),  and  were 
 from  time  to  time  appealed  to,  generally  in  cases 
 of  'great  pith  and  moment'  (i  Chron.  xxix.  i  ;  2 
 Kings  xi.  17  ;  Joseph.  De  Bell.  Jttd.  ii.  I.  2). 
 Nor  did  the  people  fail  to  interpose  their  will, 
 where  they  thought  it  necessary,  in  opposition  to 
 that  of  the  monarch  (i  Sam.  xiv.  45).  The  part 
 which  Nathan  took  against  David  shews  how  effec- 
 tive, as  well  as  bold,  was  the  check  exerted  by  the 
 prophets  ;  indeed,  most  of  the  prophetic  history  is 
 the  history  of  the  noblest  opposition  ever  made  to 
 the  vices  alike  of  royalty,  priesthood,  and  people. 
 If  needful,  the  prophet  hesitated  not  to  demand  an 
 audience  of  the  king,  nor  v^'as  he  dazzled  or  de- 
 terred by  royal  power  and  pomp  (i  Kings  xx.  22, 
 38;  2  Kings  i.  15).  As,  however,  the  monarch 
 held  the  sword,  the  instrument  of  death  was  some- 
 times made  to  prevail  over  every  restraining  influ- 
 ence (i  Sam.  xxii.  17). 
 
 Alter  the  transfer  of  the  crown  from  Saul  to 
 David,  the  royal  power  was  annexed  to  the  house 
 of  the  latter,  passing  from  father  to  son,  with  pre- 
 ference to  the  eldest  bom,  though  he  might  be  a 
 minor.  Jehoash  was  seven  years  old  when  he 
 began  to  reign  (2  Kings  xi.  21).  This  rule  was 
 not,  however,  rigidly  observed,  for  instances  are 
 not  wanting  in  which  nomination  of  a  younger  son 
 gave  him  a  preferable  title  to  the  crown  (i  Kings 
 i.  17 ;  2  Chron.  xi.  21)  :  the  people,  too,  and 
 even  foreign  powers,  at  a  later  period,  interrupted 
 the  regular  transmission  of  royal  authority  (2 
 Kings  xxL   24 ;   xxiii.   30,  34 ;   xxiv.    1 7).      The 
 
KING 
 
 739 
 
 KING 
 
 ceremony  of  anointing,  which  was  observed  at 
 least  in  the  case  of  Saul,  David,  and  Solomon 
 (l  Sam.  X.  I  ;  XV.  I  ;  xvi.  I,  12,  13  ;  2  Sam.  ii. 
 4 ;  I  Kings  i.  34 ;  I  Chron.  xxix.  22),  and  in 
 which  the  prophet  or  high-priest  who  performed 
 the  rite  acted  as  the  representative  of  the  theocracy 
 and  the  expounder  of  the  will  of  heaven,  must 
 have  given  to  the  spiritual  power  very  considerable 
 influence ;  and  both  m  this  particular  and  in  the 
 very  nature  of  the  observance  directs  the  mind  to 
 Egypt,  where  the  same  custom  prevailed,  and 
 where  the  power  of  the  priestly  caste  was  immense 
 (Wilkinson's  Ancient  Egyptians,  v.  279).  Indeed, 
 the  ceremony  seems  to  have  been  essential  to  con- 
 stitute a  legitimate  monarch  (2  Kings  xi.  12  ;  xxiii. 
 30)  ;  and  thus  the  authorities  of  the  Jewish  church 
 held  in  their  hands,  and  had  subject  to  their  will, 
 a  most  important  power,  which  they  could  use 
 either  for  their  own  purposes  or  the  common  good. 
 In  consequence  of  the  general  observance  of  this 
 ceremony,  the  term  '  anointed,'  '  the  Lord's 
 anointed'  (i  Sam.  ii.  10 ;  xvi.  6;  xxiv.  6;  2 
 Sam.  xix.  21  ;  Ps.  ii.  2  ;  Lam.  iv.  20),  came  to 
 be  employed  in  rhetorical  and  poetical  diction  as 
 equivalent  in  meaning  to  the  designation  king. 
 We  have  seen  in  the  case  of  Saul  that  personal 
 and  even  external  qualities  had  their  influence  in 
 procuring  ready  obedience  to  a  sovereign ;  and 
 further  evidence  to  the  same  effect  may  be  found 
 in  Ps.  xlv.  3  ;  Ezek.  xxviii.  12  ;  such  qualities 
 would  naturally  excite  the  enthusiasm  of  the 
 people,  who  appear  to  have  manifested  their  ap- 
 proval by  acclamations  (l  Sam.  x.  24  ;  i  Kings  i. 
 25;  2  Kings  ix.  13;  xi.  12  ;  2  Chron.  xxiii.  11  ; 
 see  also  Joseph.  De  Bell.  Jud.,  i.  33.  9).  Jubi- 
 lant music  formed  a  part  of  the  popular  rejoicings 
 (l  Kings  i.  40)  ;  thank-offerings  were  made  (1 
 Kings  i.  25) ;  the  new  sovereign  rode  in  solemn 
 procession  on  the  royal  mule  of  his  predecessor 
 (i  Kings  i.  38),  and  took  possession  of  the  royal 
 harem — an  act  which  seems  to  have  been  scarcely 
 less  essential  than  other  observances  which  appear 
 to  us  to  wear  a  higher  character  (i  Kings  ii.  13, 
 22  ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  22).  A  numerous  harem,  indeed, 
 was  among  the  most  highly  estimated  of  the  royal 
 luxuries  (2  Sam.  v.  13  ;  i  Kings  xi.  I  ;  xx.  3).  It 
 was  under  the  supervision  and  control  of  eunuchs, 
 and  passed  from  one  monarch  to  another  as  a  part 
 of  the  crown  property  (2  Sam.  xii.  8).  The  law 
 (Deut.  xvii.  17),  foreseeing  evils  such  as  that  by 
 which  Solomon,  in  his  later  years,  was  turned 
 away  from  his  fidelity  to  God,  had  strictly  for- 
 bidden many  wives ;  but  Eastern  passions  and 
 usages  were  too  strong  for  a  mere  written  prohibi- 
 tion, and  a  corrupted  religion  became  a  pander  to 
 royal  lust,  interpreting  the  divine  command  as 
 sanctioning  eighteen  as  the  minimum  of  wives  and 
 concubines.  In  the  original  distribution  of  the 
 land,  no  share,  of  course,  was  reserved  for  a  merely 
 possible  monarch  ;  yet  the  kings  were  not  without 
 several  sources  of  income.  In  the  earlier  periods 
 of  the  monarchy  the  simple  manners  which  pre- 
 vailed would  render  copious  revenues  unnecessary  ; 
 and  a  throne  which  was  the  result  of  a  spontaneous 
 demand  on  the  part  of  the  people,  would  easily 
 find  support  in  free-will  offerings,  especially  in  a 
 part  of  the  world  where  the  great  are  never  ap- 
 proached without  a  present.  There  seems  also 
 reason  to  conclude  that  the  amount  of  the  contri- 
 butions made  by  the  people  for  the  sustenance  of 
 the  monarch  depended,  in  a  measure,  on  the  de- 
 
 gree of  popularity  which,  in  any  particular  case,  he 
 enjoyed,  or  the  degree  of  service  which  he  obviously 
 rendered  to  the  state  (i  Sam.  x.  27  ;  xvi.  20  ;  2 
 Sam.  viii.  II  ;  i  Kings  x.  10,  25,  sq.)  That  pre- 
 sents of  small  value  and  humble  nature  were  not 
 despised  or  thought  unfit  for  the  acceptance  of 
 royalty,  may  be  learnt  from  that  which  Jesse  sent 
 to  Saul  (i  Sam.  xvi.  20),  'an  ass,  with  bread  and 
 a  bottle  of  wine,  and  a  kid.'  The  indirect  detail 
 '  of  the  substance  which  was  king  David's,'  found 
 in  I  Chron.  xxvii.  25,  sq.  (comp.  I  Sam.  viii.  14 ; 
 2  Chron.  xxvi.  10,  sq.),  shews  at  how  early  a 
 period  the  Israelitish  throne  was  in  possession  of 
 very  large  property,  both  personal  and  real.  The 
 royal  treasury  was  replenished  by  confiscation,  as 
 in  the  case  of  Naboth  (i  Kings  xxi.  16  ;  comp. 
 Ezek.  xlvi.  16,  sq.;  2  Sam.  xvi.  4).  Nor  were 
 taxes  unknown.  Samuel  had  predicted  (l  Sam. 
 viii.  15),  '  He  will  take  the  tenth  of  your  seed  and 
 of  your  vineyards,'  etc.  ;  and  so  in  other  passages 
 (l  Kings  V.  13  ;  ix.  21)  we  find  that  levies  both  of 
 men  and  money  were  made  for  the  monarch's  pur- 
 poses ;  and,  in  cases  of  special  need,  these  exac- 
 tions were  large  and  rigorously  levied  (2  Kings 
 xxiii.  35),  as  when  Jehoiakim  'taxed  the  land  to 
 give  the  money  according  to  the  commandment  of 
 Pharaoh  ;  he  exacted  the  silver  and  the  gold  of  the 
 people  of  the  land,  of  every  one  according  to  his 
 taxation.'  So  long,  however,  as  the  native  vigour 
 of  a  young  monarchy  made  victory  easy  and  fre- 
 quent, large  revenues  came  to  the  king  from  the 
 spoils  of  war  (2  Sam.  viii.  2,  sq.)  Commerce  also 
 supplied  abundant  resources  (i  Kings  x.  15).  In 
 the  14th  verse  of  the  chapter  last  referred  to,  it  is 
 said  that  '  the  weight  of  gold  that  came  to  Solo- 
 mon in  one  year  was  six  hundred  three  score  and 
 six  talents  of  gold.'  In  the  same  connection  we 
 find  particulars  which  give  a  high  idea  of  Solomon's 
 opulence  and  splendour  :  '  Two  hundred  targets 
 of  beaten  gold,  each  of  six  hundred  shekels  ;  three 
 hundred  shields  of  beaten  gold,  of  three  pounds  of 
 gold  each  ;  a  great  throne  of  ivory,  overlaid  with 
 the  best  gold  ;  drinking-vessels  of  gold  :  silver  was 
 accounted  nothing  of  in  Solomon's  days.'  A  navy 
 is  also  spoken  of,  which  was  at  sea  with  the  navy 
 of  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre  :  this  navy  came  once  in 
 every  three  years,  bringing  gold  and  silver,  ivoiy, 
 apes,  and  peacocks.  '  So  king  Solomon  exceeded 
 all  the  kings  of  the  earth  for  riches.' 
 
 According  to  Oriental  custom,  much  ceremony 
 and  outward  show  of  respect  were  observed. 
 Those  who  were  intended  to  be  received  with 
 special  honour  were  placed  on  the  king's  right 
 hand  (i  Kings  ii.  19).  The  most  profound 
 homage  was  paid  to  the  monarch,  which  was  re- 
 quired not  meiely  by  common  usage,  but  by  the 
 voice  of  religious  wisdom  (Prov.  xxiv.  21) — a  re- 
 quirement which  was  not  unnatural  in  regard  to  an 
 office  that  was  accounted  of  divine  origin,  and  to 
 have  a  sort  of  vice-divine  authority.  Those  who 
 presented  themselves  before  the  royal  presence  fell 
 with  their  face  towards  the  ground  till  their  fore- 
 head touched  it  (i  Sam.  xxv.  23  ;  2  Sam.  ix.  6  ; 
 xix.  18),  thus  worshipping  or  doing  obeisance  to 
 the  monarch,  a  ceremony  from  which  even  the 
 royal  spouse  was  not  exempted  (l  Kings  i.  16) 
 A  kiss  was  among  the  established  tokens  of  rever- 
 ence (i  Sam.  X.  I  ;  Ps.  ii.  12),  as  were  also  hyper- 
 bohcal  wishes  of  good  (Dan.  ii.  4  ;  iii.  9).  Serious 
 offences  against  the  king  were  punished  with  death 
 (l  Kings  xxi.  10). 
 
KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 (40 
 
 KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 Deriving  their  power  originally  from  the  wishes 
 of  the  people,  and  being  one  of  the  same  race,  the 
 Hebrew  kings  were  naturally  less  despotic  than 
 other  Oriental  sovereigns,  mingled  more  with  their 
 subjects,  and  were  by  no  means  difficult  of  access 
 (2  Sam.  xix.  8  ;  l  Kings  xx.  39  ;  Jer.  xxxviii.  7  ; 
 I  Kings  iii.  16  ;  2  Kings  vi.  26  ;  viii.  3).  After 
 death  the  monarchs  were  interred  in  the  royal 
 cemetery  in  Jerusalem  :  '  So  David  slept  with  his 
 fathers,  and  was  buried  in  the  city  of  David'  (i 
 Kings  ii.  10;  xi.  43;  xiv.  31).  But  bad  kings 
 were  excluded  '  from  the  sepulchres  of  the  kings  of 
 Israel'  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  27).  In  I  Kings  iv.  will 
 be  found  an  enumeration  of  the  high  ofificers  of 
 state  under  the  reigir  of  Solomon  (see  also  I  Kings 
 X.  5;  xii.  18;  xviii.  3  ;  2  Kings  viii.  6;  x.  22; 
 xviii.  18;  xix.  2;  l  Chron.  xxvii.  25  ;  Is.  xxii. 
 15  ;  Jer.  Iii.  25).  The  misdeeds  of  the  Jewish 
 crown,  and  the  boldness  with  which  they  were 
 reproved,  may  be  seen  exemplified  in  Jer.  xxii.  : 
 '  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Execute  judgment  and 
 righteousness,  and  do  no  wrong  ;  do  no  violence 
 to  the  stranger,  the  fatherless,  nor  the  widow ; 
 neither  shed  innocent  blood.  But  if  ye  will  not 
 hear  these  words,  this  house  shall  become  a  deso- 
 lation,' etc.  Reference  on  the  subject  here  treated 
 of  may  be  made  to  Schickard,  yits  Rcgiin?i  Ilebrccor. , 
 Tiibing.  1621  ;  Carpzov,  Appar.  CriL,  p.  52  ; 
 Michaelis,  Afos.  Rechi,  i.  29S ;  Othon.,  Lex. 
 Rabbin,  p.  575. — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 KINGS,  Books  of.  The  two  books  of  Kings 
 formed  anciently  but  one  book  in  the  Jewish 
 Scriptures.  The  present  division,  following  the 
 Septuagint  and  Latin  versions,  has  been  common  in 
 Hebrew  Bibles  since  the  Venetian  editions  of  Bom- 
 berg.  That  the  book  was  originally  an  unbroken 
 treatise  is  affirmed  by  Origen  and  Jerome,  Melito  of 
 Sardis,  and  Josephus.  (Thus  Origen,  apud  Euseb. 
 Pi'aep.  Evaiig:  vi.  25,  'RaaiKdwv  TpiTTj  Kal  TerdpTT), 
 iv  evi  Ova/ii/jiiXex  Aa/3t5  ;  Hieronym.  Prolog.  Gal.  ; 
 Joseph.  Coiit.  Apion.  i.  8.)  Great  stress  cannot 
 always  be  laid  on  the  Jewish  forms  of  the  sacred 
 l^ooks,  as  they  were  arranged  so  as  to  correspond 
 with  the  letters  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet.  The  old 
 Jewish    name   was  borrowed,  as  usual,  from  the 
 
 commencing  words  of  the  book,  IH  "IPDHI, 
 Grrecized  as  in  the  quotation  given  from  Eusebius. 
 The  Septuagint  and  Vulgate  now  number  them  as 
 the  third  and  fourth  books  of  Kings,  reckoning  the 
 two  books  of  Samuel  the  first  and  second.  The 
 separation  of  Kings  into  two  books  is  so  awkwardly 
 made,  that  it  divides  the  lives  of  Ahaziah  and 
 Elijah,  and  carries  over  a  portion  of  them  into  the 
 
 second  book.  Their  present  title,  D''3?J3,  '^aaCkdwv, 
 Regum,  has,  in  the  opinion  of  Havernick,  respect 
 more  to  the  formal  than  essential  character  of  the 
 composition  [Einieiiiiitg,  sec.  16S).  Yet  under  such 
 forms  of  government  as  those  of  Judah  and  Israel 
 the  royal  person  and  name  are  intimately  associated 
 with  all  national  acts  and  movements,  legal  de- 
 cisions, warlike  preparations,  domestic  legislation, 
 and  foreign  policy.  The  reign  of  an  Oriental  prince 
 is  identified  with  the  history  of  his  nation  during 
 the  period  of  his  sovereignty.  More  especially  in 
 ihe  theocratic  constitution  of  the  Jewish  realm  the 
 character  and  personal  influence  of  the  monarch 
 were  an  important  element  of  national  history,  and, 
 of  necessity,  had  considerable  influence  on  the  fate 
 and  fortunes  of  the  people. 
 
 The  books  of  Kings  contain  the  brief  annals  of 
 a  long  period,  from  the  accession  of  Solomon  till 
 the  dissolution  of  the  kingdom.  The  first  chapters 
 describe  the  reign  of  Solomon  over  the  united 
 kingdom,  and  the  revolt  under  Rehoboam.  The 
 history  of  the  rival  states  is  next  narrated  in  parallel 
 sections  till  the  period  of  Israel's  downfall  on  the 
 invasion  of  Shalmanezer.  Then  the  remaining 
 years  of  the  principality  of  Judah  are  recorded  till 
 the  conquest  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  commence- 
 ment of  the  Babylonish  captivity.  In  the  article 
 Israel,  the  period  comprised  has  been  exhibited 
 under  the  name  and  reign  of  the  kings  who  are  men- 
 tioned in  these  books  ;  and  there  also,  and  in  the 
 article  Judah,  the  chronology  of  the  books  has  been 
 sufficiently  considered.     [See  Israel  ;  Judah.] 
 
 The  contents  of  the  narrative  exhibit  many  points 
 of  interest.  The  first  book  begins  in  sequel  to 
 those  of  Samuel,  with  the  death  of  King  David  and 
 the  means  taken  to  secure  the  succession  of  Solomon 
 against  the  primogeniture  of  Adonijah.  Then 
 follow  the  erection  and  dedication  of  the  Temple ; 
 the  glories  of  the  wise  king ;  the  visit  of  the  Queen 
 of  Sheba  ;  the  disruption  under  Rehoboam  ;  the 
 invasion  of  Judah  by  Shishak  ;  the  idolatrous  policy 
 of  Jeroboam  as  the  head  of  the  ten  revolted  tribes, 
 and  the  doom  of  his  house  on  account  of  hij 
 apostasy  ;  the  short  and  disturbed  reigns  of  several 
 of  his  successors  ;  the  wicked  government  of  Ahab 
 and  his  unscrupulous  foreign  queen ;  the  grand 
 episode  of  Elijah,  and  the  alliances  and  fleet  of 
 Jehoshaphat.  The  second  book  opens  with  the 
 translation  of  Elijah  and  the  entrance  on  office  of 
 Elisha,  second  in  greatness  only  to  his  predecessor, 
 and  records,  among  many  other  things,  the  siege  of 
 Samaria  ;  the  reforming  zeal  of  Jehu  ;  the  energetic 
 administration  of  Jeroboam  II.  ;  the  invasion  of 
 Shalmanezer;  the  treason  of  Athaliah  ;  the  restora- 
 tion of  the  Temple  under  Jehoiada  ;  the  end  of  the 
 kingdom  of  Israel  under  Hoshea ;  the  lustre  thrown 
 by  the  good  king  Josiah  over  the  last  years  of  the 
 kingdom  of  Judah  ;  the  fatal  field  of  Megiddo, 
 which  led  to  a  series  of  disasters ;  the  interference 
 of  Piiaraoh-Necho,  and  the  ultimate  overthrow  and 
 exile  of  the  nation  under  Zedekiah.  The  kingdom 
 of  Israel  lasted  about  254  years,  probably  from  975 
 to  721  B.C.,  and  that  of  Judah  survived  135  years 
 longer,  lasting  probably  from  975  to  586  B.C. 
 (Lepsius,  Konigsb.  d.  ALgypt.,  p.  107  ;  Bosanquet, 
 Transactions  of  ihe  Chronological  Institute,  vol.  ii., 
 pt.  4).  The  narrative  of  those  books,  therefore, 
 extends  over  a  period  of  more  than  400  years.  But 
 it  is  not  easy  to  work  out  a  satisfactory  chronology 
 on  all  points,  whether  we  hold  or  give  up  the 
 formal  date  of  the  building  of  the  Temple  as  given 
 in  I  Kings  vi.  I.  Nor  needs  such  difficulty  create 
 surprise.  The  coincidence  of  the  year  of  the  one 
 sovereign's  accession  with  a  parallel  year  in  the 
 reign  of  the  rival  sovereign  is  usually  given  ;  but 
 the  epochs  appear  to  be  computed  sometimes  by 
 current  and  sometimes  by  complete  years.  There 
 are  interregna  and  periods  of  anarchy,  especially  in 
 Israel  ;  and  the  letters  used  as  numerical  symbols 
 are  liable  to  be  mistaken  by  transcribers.  Thus,  on 
 the  one  hand,  eleven  years  of  anarchy  are  supposed 
 by  many  to  have  happened  after  the  reign  of  Jero- 
 boam II.,  and  nine  years  of  a  similar  kind  prior  to 
 the  accession  of  Hoshea.  To  equalise  the  result, 
 Ewald  and  Thenius,  on  the  other  hand,  lengthen 
 the  reigns  of  Jeroboam  and  Pekah.  Lepsius  and 
 Bunsen  propose  a  somewhat  similar  solution.     The 
 
KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 741 
 
 KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 mention  of  several  foreign  princes  in  connection 
 with  the  Hebrew  sovereigns  affords  also  some 
 chronological  data.  Thus  the  fifth  year  of  Reho- 
 boam  synchronises  with  some  portion  of  the  reign 
 of  Shishak  ;  Hoshea  sought  alliance  with  So,  king 
 of  Egypt ;  the  fourteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Heze- 
 kiah  brings  into  prominence  both  Sennacherib  and 
 Tirhakah ;  and  Josiah  is  linked  with  Pharaoh- 
 Necho.  Yet,  after  all  the  labours  of  Jjunsen,  Lep- 
 sius,  Hincks,  and  other  scholars,  there  remains 
 considerable  doubt  as  to  certain  points,  and  only 
 an  approximation  to  accuracy  can  really  be  ob- 
 tained. See  Chronology  ;  Browne's  Ordo  Sa- 
 clontin,  chap,  iv.,  p.  221  ;  Ewald,  Geschkhte  des 
 Volkcs  Israel,  iii.  I,  p.  261 ;  Bunsen,  ALgyptens 
 Stelle,  iv.  p.  381  ;  Ussher,  Annales  Vd.  Test., 
 "Works,  vol.  viii.  p.  108,  Dublin. 
 
 There  are  some  peculiarities  in  this  succinct 
 history  worthy  of  attention.  It  is  very  brief,  but 
 very  suggestive.  It  is  not  a  biography  of  the 
 sovereigns,  not  a  mere  record  of  political  occur- 
 rences, nor  yet  an  ecclesiastical  register.  King, 
 church,  and  state,  are  all  comprised  in  their  sacred 
 relations.  It  is  a  theocratic  history,  a  retrospective 
 survey  of  the  kingdoms  as  existing  under  a  theo- 
 cratic government.  The  character  of  the  sovereign 
 is  tested  by  his  fidelity  to  the  religious  obligations 
 of  his  office,  and  this  decision  in  reference  to  his 
 conduct  is  generally  added  to  the  notice  of  his  ac- 
 cession. The  new  king's  religious  character  is 
 generally  portrayed  by  its  similarity  or  opposition 
 to  the  way  of  David,  of  his  father,  or  of  Jeroboam 
 son  of  Nebat,  '  who  made  Israel  to  sin.'  Ecclesi- 
 astical affairs  are  noticed  with  a  similar  purpose, 
 and  in  contrast  with  past  or  prevalent  apostasy, 
 especially  as  manifested  in  the  popular  superstitions, 
 whose  shrines  were  on  the  '  high  places.'  Political 
 or  national  incidents  are  introduced  in  general  for 
 the  sake  of  illustrating  the  influence  of  religion  on 
 civic  prosperity ;  of  showing  how  the  theocracy 
 maintained  a  vigilant  and  vengeful  guardianship 
 over  its  rights  and  privileges — adherence  to  its  prin- 
 ciples securing  peace  and  plenty,  disobedience  to 
 them  bringing  along  with  it  sudden  and  severe  re- 
 tribution. The  books  of  Kings  are  thus  a  verifica- 
 tion of  the  Mosaic  warnings,  and  the  author  of 
 them  has  kept  this  steadily  in  view.  He  has  given 
 a  brief  history  of  his  people,  arranged  under  the 
 various  political  chiefs  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
 show  that  the  government  was  essentially  theocratic, 
 that  its  spirit,  as  developed  in  the  Mosaic  writings, 
 was  never  extinct,  however  modified  or  inactive  it 
 might  sometimes  appear.  So  that  these  books  ap- 
 pear in  a  religious  costume,  quite  different  from  the 
 foi-m  they  would  have  assumed  either  as  a  political 
 or  an  ecclesiastical  narrative.  In  the  one  case  legis- 
 lative enactments,  royal  edicts,  and  popular  move- 
 ments, vi'ould  have  occupied  a  prominent  place  ;  in 
 the  other,  sacerdotal  arrangements,  Levitical  service, 
 music  and  pageantry,  would  have  filled  the  leading 
 sections  of  the  treatise.  In  either  view  the  points 
 adduced  would  have  had  a  restricted  reference  to 
 the  palace  or  the  Temple,  the  sovereign  or  the 
 pontiff,  the  court  or  the  priesthood,  the  throne  or 
 the  altar,  the  tribute  or  tithes,  the  nation  on  its 
 farms  or  the  tribes  in  the  courts  of  the  sacred  edifice. 
 But  the  theocracy  conjoined  both  the  political  and 
 religious  elements,  and  the  inspired  annalist  unites 
 them  as  essential  to  his  design.  The  hand  of 
 Jehovah  is  continually  acknowledged.  The  chief 
 organ  of  theocratic  influence  enjoys  also  peculiar 
 
 prominence.  We  refer  to  the  incessant  agency 
 of  the  prophets,  their  great  power  and  peculiar 
 modes  of  action  as  detailed  by  the  composer  of  the 
 books  of  Kings.  They  interfered  with  the  suc- 
 cession of  Solomon,  and  their  instrumentality  ^^•as 
 apparent  in  the  great  schism.  They  stirred  up  the 
 people  to  a  sense  of  duty,  and  they  braved  the 
 sovereign  when  carrying  out  unconstitutional 
 measures.  The  balance  of  power  was  in  their 
 hands  ;  the  regal  dignity  seemed  to  be  sometimes 
 at  their  disposal.  In  times  of  emergency  they  dis- 
 pensed with  usual  modes  of  procedure,  and  assumed 
 an  authority  with  whicli  no  subject  in  an  ordinary 
 state  can  safely  be  intrusted,  executing  the  law  with 
 a  summary  promptness  which  rendered  opposition 
 impossible,  or  at  least  unavailing.  They  felt  their 
 divine  commission,  and  that  they  were  the  cus- 
 todiers of  the  rights  of  Jehovah.  At  the  same 
 time  they  protected  the  interests  of  the  nation,  and, 
 could  we  divest  the  term  of  its  association  with  un- 
 principled turbulence  and  sedition,  we  would,  like 
 Winer,  style  them  the  demagogues  of  Israel  (Winer, 
 Reahvori.  art.  Prophet).  The  divine  prerogative 
 was  guarded  by  them  v/ith  sacred  jealousy,  as  well 
 from  royal  usurpation  as  from  popular  invasion  ; 
 and  the  interests  of  the  people  were  as  religiously 
 protected  against  encroachments,  too  easily  made 
 under  a  form  of  government  which  had  not  the 
 safeguard  of  popular  representation  or  the  check 
 of  aristocratic  privilege.  The  priesthood  became 
 in  many  instances,  though  there  are  some  illustrious 
 exceptions,  merely  the  creature  of  the  crown,  and 
 therefore  it  became  the  prophdenthum  to  assert  its 
 dignity  and  stand  forth  as  the  majestic  embassy  of 
 heaven. 
 
 The  tnith  of  these  sentiments,  as  to  the  method, 
 design,  and  composition  of  the  books  of  Kings,  is 
 confirmed  by  ample  evidence. 
 
 1.  Large  space  is  occupied  with  the  building  of 
 the  Temple — the  palace  of  the  Divine  Protector — 
 his  throne  in  it  being  above  the  mercy-seat  and  be- 
 tween the  cherubim  (ch.  v. -viii. )  Care  is  taken  to 
 record  the  miraculous  phenomenon  of  the  descent 
 of  the  Shekinah  (ch.  viii.  10).  The  prayer  of 
 Solomon  at  the  dedication  of  the  house  is  full  of 
 theocratic  views  and  aspirations. 
 
 2.  Reference  is  often  made  to  the  Mosaic  Law 
 with  its  provisions  ;  and  allusions  to  the  earlier 
 history  of  the  people  frequently  occur  (i  Kings  ii. 
 3;  iii.'  14;  vi.  II,  12;  viii.  56,  etc.  ;  2  Kings  x. 
 31  ;  xiv.  6  ;  xvii.  13,  15,  37  ;  xviii.  4-6  ;  xxi.  1-8). 
 Allusions  to  the  Mosaic  code  are  found  more  fre- 
 quently toward  the  end  of  the  second  book,  when 
 the  kingdom  was  drawing  near  its  termination,  as 
 if  to  account  for  its  decay  and  approaching  fate. 
 
 3.  Phrases  expressive  of  Divine  interference  are 
 frequently  introduced  (i  Kings  xi.  31  ;  xii.  15  ; 
 xhi.  I,  2,  9  ;  and  xx.  13,  etc.) 
 
 4.  Prophetic  interposition  is  a  veiy  prominent 
 theme  of  record.  It  fills  the  vivid  foreground  of 
 the  historical  picture.  Nathan  was  occupied  in 
 the  succession  of  Solomon  (i  Kings  i.  45)  ;  Ahijah 
 was  concerned  in  the  revolt  (xi.  29-40).  She- 
 maiah  disbanded  the  troops  which  Rehoboam  had 
 mustered  (xii.  21-24).  Ahijah  predicted  the  ruin  of 
 Jeroboam,  whose  elevation  he  had  promoted  (xiv. 
 5-16).  Jehu  the  prophet  doomed  the  house  _  of 
 Baasha  (xvi.  i).  The  reign  of  Ahab  and  Ahaziah 
 is  marked  by  the  bold,  rapid,  mysterious  move- 
 ments of  Elijah.  Under  Ahab  occurs  the  predic- 
 tion of  Micaiah  (xxii.  8).     The  actions  and  oracles 
 
KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 742 
 
 KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 of  Elisha  form  the  marvellous  topics  of  narration 
 under  several  reigns.  The  agency  of  Isaiah  is 
 also  recognised  (2  Kings  xix.  20 ;  xx.  16).  Be- 
 sides I  Kings  xiii.  presents  another  instance  of 
 prophetic  operation  ;  and  in  xx.  35,  the  oracle  of 
 an  unknown  prophet  is  also  rehearsed.  Huldah 
 the  prophetess  was  an  important  personage  under 
 the  government  of  Josiah  (2  Kings  xxii.  14).  Care 
 is  also  taken  to  report  the  fulfilment  of  striking 
 prophecies,  often  in  the  phrase,  '  according  to  the 
 word  of  the  Lord'  (i  Kings  xii.  15;  xv.  29; 
 xvi.  12;  2  Kings  ix.  36;  xxiii.  15-18;  xxiv.  2). 
 Thus,  the  Old  Syriac  version  prefixes,  '  Here  fol- 
 lows the  book  of  the  kings  who  flourished  among 
 the  ancient  people  ;  and  in  this  is  also  exhibited 
 the  history  of  the  prophets  who  flourished  during 
 their  times.' 
 
 5.  Theocratic  influence  is  recognised  both  in  the 
 deposition  and  succession  of  kings  (i  Kings  xiii. 
 33  :  XV.  4,  5,  29,  30;  2  Kings  xi.  17,  etc.)  Com- 
 pare on  the  whole  of  tliis  view  Havernick,  Einleit., 
 sec.  168;  Jahn,  Introduct.,  sec.  46;  Gesenius, 
 Ueber  Jes.,  vol.  i.  p.  934;  Keil,  Einleit.,  sec.  56; 
 Stahelin,  Spec.  Einleit.,  p.  124.  It  is  thus  apparent 
 that  the  object  of  the  author  of  the  books  of  Kings 
 was  to  describe  the  history  of  the  kingdoms,  espe- 
 cially in  connection  with  the  theocratic  element. 
 This  design  accounts  for  what  de  Wette  (Einleit., 
 sec.  185)  characteristically  terms  der  steife  prophe- 
 tische  pragmatismiis,  and  for  the  frequent  myths 
 which  this  writer  and  others  find  in  these  books. 
 
 These  truths  are  plainly  developed  in  the  annals 
 of  the  royal  succession  of  the  northern  and  larger 
 kingdom  of  Israel.  One  son  only  of  Jeroboam  died 
 a  natural  death,  the  rest  were  given  over  to  the 
 dogs  and  birds.  His  successor  Nadab  fell  by  the 
 hand  of  Baasha,  '  of  the  house  of  Issachar,'  and 
 Elah  the  son  of  Baasha  was  assassinated  by  Zimri, 
 who  put  to  death  also  '  his  kinsfolk  and  friends.' 
 After  a  reign  of  a  few  days,  Zimri,  to  avoid  the 
 vengeance  of  Omri  his  rival,  '  burned  the  king's 
 house  over  him  with  fire  and  died.'  Omri  triumphed 
 over  his  competitor  Tibni,  and  '  did  worse  than 
 all  that  were  before  him.'  Ahab  his  son  '  sold 
 himself  to  work  wickedness,'  and  fell  in  ignoble 
 disguise  at  Ramoth-Gilead.  Jehu  extirpated  the 
 house  of  Ahab  ;  Jehoahaz  was  a  vassal  of  Hazael, 
 though  Jehoash  and  the  second  Jeroboam  were 
 somewhat  more  prosperous.  But  Jeroboam's  son 
 Zachariah  was  murdered  by  Shallum,  and  Shal- 
 lum,  after  a  month's  reign,  was  in  turn  murdered 
 byMenahem.  Menahem  bribed  off  the  Assyrian 
 king,  and  his  son  Pekahiah  had  reigned  but  two 
 years  when  he  was  slain  by  Pekah,  who  soon 
 met  the  same  fate  from  Hoshea,  the  last  of  the 
 kings.  How  could  a  country  prosper  under  a 
 govenmient  so  unsettled,  and  of  which  so  many  of 
 its  heads  were  crowned  assassins  and  usurpers  ? 
 And  all  this  though  it  was  the  scene  of  the  labours 
 of  Elijah,  Elisha,  Jonah,  Hosea,  and  Amos.  In 
 the  other,  or  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  several  of  its 
 sovereigns  walked  in  the  ways  of  David,  and  their 
 prosperous  reigns  are  joyously  recorded.  Jeho- 
 shaphat,  Hezekiah,  and  Josiah,  are  specially  noted ; 
 and  while  several  of  the  worse  monarchs  were 
 assassinated,  the  succession  still  remained  in  the 
 house  of  David.  But  the  idolatries  of  Solomon  are 
 not  overlooked  any  more  than  those  of  Jeroboam, 
 and  the  book  which  describes  the  glory  of  the 
 temple  tells  also  of  its  overthrow. 
 
 The  authorship  as  well  as  tlie  age  of  this  histoiy 
 
 may  admit  of  several  suppositions.  Whatever 
 were  the  original  sources,  the  books  are  evidently 
 the  composition  of  one  writer.  The  style  is  gene- 
 rally uniform  throughout.  The  same  forms  of  ex- 
 pression are  used  to  denote  the  same  thing,  e.g., 
 the  male  sex  (i  Kings  xiv.  10,  etc.) ;  the  death  and 
 burial  of  a  king  (l  Kings  xi.  43,  etc.)  ;  modes  of 
 allusion  to  the  law  (i  Kings  xi.  Il);  fidelity  to 
 Jehovah  (l  Kings  viii.  63,  etc.)  ;  God's  selection  of 
 Jerusalem  (i  Kings  viii.  16)  ;  and  the  references  to 
 the  high  places  (i  Kings  iii.  2)  ;  (De  Wette,  Ein- 
 leit., sec.  184,  a;  Havernick,  Einleit.  sec.  171). 
 Similar  idioms  are  ever  recurring,  so  as  to  produce 
 a  uniformity  of  style  (Monotonie  der  Darstelhtng, 
 Havernick,  /.  <r.)  Expressions  which  seem  prover- 
 bial are  repeated  in  the  same  terms,  as  the  phrase, 
 '  shut  up  and  left'  (l  Kings  xiv.  10 ;  2  Kings  ix.  8). 
 There  is  not,  however,  perfect  sameness  of  style  in 
 all  places.  There  are  also  apparent  discrepancies, 
 but  the  solution  must  have  been  evident  to  the 
 compiler.  Thus  I  Kings  xxi.  19,  containing  the 
 doom  of  Ahab,  '  in  the  place  where  dogs  licked  the 
 blood  of  Naboth  shall  dogs  lick  thy  blood,  even 
 thine,'  is  often  said  to  be  opposed  to  i  Kings  xxii. 
 38,  where  the  prophecy  is  said  to  have  been  ful- 
 filled when  the  armour  of  the  deceased  Ahab  was 
 washed  at  Samaria.  But  the  fulfilment  was  yet 
 waiting  its  culmination  in  the  fate  of  Joram  his  son, 
 whose  corpse  was  '  cast  into  that  plat  of  ground' 
 by  Jehu,  who  said  at  the  time  to  his  comrade, 
 '  remember  how  that  when  I  and  thou  rode  to- 
 gether after  Ahab  his  father,  the  Lord  laid  this 
 burden  on  him'  (2  Kings  x.  25,  26).  The  retribu- 
 tion, as  to  its  degradation,  was  fulfilled  in  the 
 father,  and  as  to  its  locality  in  the  son.  The 
 phrase,  '  unto  this  day,'  is  often  used  proverbially, 
 and  not  with  strict  reference  to  subsequent  reality. 
 It  seems  to  be  repeated  as  it  occurred  in  the  ori- 
 ginal archives  out  of  which  the  books  have  been 
 compiled.  The  repetitions,  as  i  Kings  ix.  27,  2S, 
 and  X.  22,  are  inserted  from  a  different  point  of 
 view  ;  or,  as  in  2  Kings  xiii.  12,  13,  compared  wuh 
 xiv.  15,  16,  the  passages  may  have  been  inserted 
 from  erroneous  transcription.  We  have  not  the 
 perfect  and  colourless  i^edaction  of  a  modern  abridg- 
 ment, in  which  all  anomalies  are  smoothed  down, 
 all  chasms  neatly  bridged  over,  and  seeming  con- 
 tradictions displaced  or  explained  ;  but  we  have  the 
 varied  style,  loose  connection,  abrupt  transitions, 
 and  occasional  repetitions  and  dislocations,  of  an 
 honest  and  artless  compiler,  whose  work  is  not  to 
 interpret  but  to  narrate. 
 
 The  sources  whence  the  historic  information 
 has  been  derived  have  been  variously  given.  That 
 annals  contemporary  with  the  events  which  they 
 describe  were  written  in  the  early  period  of  the 
 Jewish  state,  may  be  at  once  admitted.  Eichhom 
 supposes  that  the  sources  of  '  Kings  were  private 
 historical  works  {Einleit.,  sec.  482).  De  Wette, 
 from  the  legends  related  in  them,  cannot  believe 
 them  to  be  official  documents.  Bertholdt,  Haver- 
 nick, and  Movers,  hold  that  the  books  are  extracts 
 from  the  public  annals  (comp.  Havernick,  sec.  169). 
 The  inspired  historiographer  refers  his  readers  to 
 these  sources  of  evidence  in  such  frequent  phrases 
 as  """iZn  "irr*!,  and  '  the  rest  of  the  acts.'  Such  a  refe- 
 rence is  made  especially  to  the  sources,  when  other 
 royal  acts  than  those  narrated  in  the  books  of  Kings 
 are  glanced  at.  These  sources  are  styled  the  book 
 of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah,  or  Israel 
 Similar  phraseology  is  used  in  Esther  x.  2  ;  vi.  I, 
 
KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 743 
 
 KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 to  denote  the  official  annals  of  the  Pei-sian  empire. 
 Public  documents  are  spoken  of  in  the  same  way 
 (Neh.  xii.  23).  There  is  little  reason  to  suppose 
 that  the  book  referred  to  in  this  last  passage  is  that 
 styled  Chronicles  in  our  copy  of  the  Scriptures  (Mo- 
 vers, Chronik,  sec.  234).  Therefore  we  infer  that 
 the  '  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings,'  so  often 
 alluded  to,  was  an  authentic  document — public  and 
 official  state  papers. 
 
 That  the  prophets  themselves  were  employed  in 
 recording  contemporaneous  events,  is  evident  from 
 I  Chron.  xxix.  29  ;  2  Chron.  xx.  34,  etc.  In  the 
 course  of  the  narrative  we  meet  with  many  instances 
 of  description,  having  the  freshness  and  form  of 
 nature,  and  which  are  apparently  direct  quotations 
 from  some  journal,  written  by  one  who  testified 
 what  he  had  seen  (i  Kings  xx.  10  ;  2  Kings  xii. 
 15  ;  xiv.  8).  Thus  we  have  in  those  books,  for 
 the  period  of  David,  '  the  book  of  Samuel  the  seer, 
 the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  and  the  book  of 
 Gad  the  seer ;'  and  these  may  have  been  the  source 
 and  authority  of  the  '  Acts  of  David  the  king,'  re- 
 ferred to  in  I  Chron.  xxix.  29.  The  '  Book  of  the 
 Acts  of  Solomon'  seems  to  have  been  a  separate 
 independent  document,  and  may  have  had  its  origin 
 in  the  works  referred  to  in  2  Chron.  ix.  29,  as  in 
 '  the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  and  in  the  pro- 
 phecy of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  and  in  the  visions 
 of  Iddo  the  seer.'  There  are  several  Hebrew  words 
 peculiar  to  the  account  of  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
 and  found  nowhere  else  in  Kings.  It  is  therefore 
 wrong,  as  Bleek  says,  on  the  part  of  Stahelin  and 
 De  Wette,  to  assign  Solomon's  consecration-prayer 
 to  the  period  of  the  captivity.  In  the  same  books 
 of  Chronicles,  the  prophetic  annalists  are  named  in 
 connection  with  many  of  the  kings — Shemaiah  and 
 Iddo  with  Rehoboam,  Jehu  the  son  of  Hanani  with 
 Jehoshaphat,  Isaiah  with  Uzziah  and  Hezekiah, 
 Azariah  the  son  of  Oded  with  Asa,  Micaiah  tlie 
 son  of  Imlah  with  Ahab,  and  Jeremiah  with 
 Josiah.  No  less  than  thirteen  of  such  works — or 
 contemporary  annals — are  mentioned  in  the  books 
 of  Chronicles,  besides  the  ordinary  and  oft-recur- 
 ring authority,  '  The  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of 
 the  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah." — Rawlinson's 
 Bampton  Lecture,  Lect.  iii.  The  stories  of  Elijah 
 and  Elisha  appear  to  have  been  distinct  and  sepa- 
 rate compositions  incorporated  into  the  narrative. 
 
 Besides  being  virtually,  and  in  source,  the  work 
 of  contemporary  writers  or  prophets,  these  books 
 receive  confirmatory  evidence  of  their  historical 
 verity  from  external  or  profane  sources.  On  the 
 one  hand,  Shishak  and  his  conquest  of  Judah,  So 
 or  Sevek,  Tirhakah  of  Cush,  and  Pharaoh-Necho, 
 are  distinctly  deciphered  on  the  Egyptian  monu- 
 ments. On  the  other  hand,  the  names  of  Jehu, 
 Menahem,  Hezekiah,  and  Manasseh,  are  found  on 
 the  Assyrian  tablets,  along  with  the  names  of 
 Tiglath-pileser,  Shalmaneser,  Sargon,  and  Senna- 
 cherib, who  records  at  length  his  victory  over  many 
 towns  of  Israel,  and  the  immense  tribute  paid  to 
 him  by  Hezekiah.  Among  the  tributaries  of  Esar- 
 haddon  appears  Manasseh  king  of  Judah.  The 
 Tyrian  annals,  as  preserved  by  Menander,  and 
 the  fragmentary  notices  of  Syria  found  in  ancient 
 authors,  are  in  general  harmony  with  the  Scripture 
 annals.  It  is  not  to  be  forgotten  also,  that  the 
 historical  incidents  of  these  books  receive  confirma- 
 tory illustration  from  the  prophets  of  the  O.  T.  A 
 portion  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  is  historical,  and 
 light  is  cast  on  the  same  subjects  by  many  allu- 
 
 sions to  manners  and  social  condition  in  Amos  and 
 Hosea.  Though  there  appears  to  be  occasional 
 exaggeration  in  numbers,  arising  from  the  blunders 
 of  transcribers,  yet  the  credibility  of  the  history 
 rests  upon  a  sure  and  unbroken  foundation.  What 
 neologists  style  their  mythical  character  or  colour- 
 ing, furnishes  to  every  believer  in  the  reality  of 
 tlie  theocratic  government  established  by  Moses, 
 continued  evidence  that  the  Jews  were  God's  pecu- 
 liar people,  and  that  Jehovah  was  their  sovereign 
 (Hiivernick,  sec.  170 ;  Hengstenberg,  Beitr.,  iu 
 169).  The  miraculous  element  is  so  imbedded  in 
 the  history,  that  the  history  depends  upon  it,  and 
 cannot  be  well  understood  without  it.  The  super- 
 natural is  all  the  more  credible,  if  it  be  adapted  to 
 the  age  and  people,  and  its  manifestations  be  ever 
 in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the  theocracy,  or  in 
 vindication  of  its  claims. 
 
 As  to  what  has  been  termed  the  anti-Israelitish 
 spirit  of  the  work  (Bertholdt,  Einleit.,  p.  949),  we 
 do  not  perceive  it.  Eichhorn  affirmed  that  Judah 
 was  introduced  only  on  account  of  the  synchronisms 
 [Einleit.,  iii.  p.  542).  But  truth  required  that  the 
 kingdom  of  Israel  should  be  described  in  its  real 
 character.  Idol-worship  was  connected  with  its 
 foundation  ;  moscholatry  was  a  state  provision  ; 
 fidelity  obliged  the  annalist  to  state  that  all  its 
 kings  patronized  the  institutions  of  Bethel  and 
 Dan,  while  eight,  at  least,  of  the  Jewish  sovereigns 
 adhered  to  the  true  religion  ;  and  that  the  majority 
 of  its  kings  perished  in  insurrection,  while  those  of 
 Judah  were,  in  general,  exempted  from  seditious 
 tumults  and  assassination. 
 
 Now,  the  compiler  from  these  old  documents — 
 he  who  shaped  them  into  the  form  which  they  have 
 in  our  present  books  of  Kings — must  have  lived  in 
 a  late  age.  The  Second  Book  of  Kings  concludes 
 with  an  account  of  the  liberation  of  Jehoiachin, 
 king  of  Judah,  from  prison  in  Babylon.  Jahn 
 and  Havemick  place  the  composition  of  '  Kings  ' 
 in  the  reign  of  Evil-merodach  ;  De  Wette,  and 
 Keil  virtually,  towards  the  end  of  the  Captivity. 
 Instances  of  later  phraseology  occurring  in  the 
 books  of  Kings  are  given  by  De  Wette  (sec.  185), 
 But  the  majority  of  his  instances  do  not  prove  his 
 opinion.  Many  of  the  words  and  forms  of  spelling 
 instanced  by  him  are  found  also  in  some  of  the 
 earlier  books.   Thus  the  forms  ""nK  for  nX,  and  iDlN 
 
 for  inx,  found  in  Kings,  are  found  also  in  the 
 
 earlier  books — the  former  in  Judges  xvii.  2,  and 
 the  latter  in  Leviticus  xv.  18,  etc.  The  Chaldee 
 official  title  2")  (2  Kings  xxv.  8)  is  given  appro- 
 priately to  a  Chaldee  general.  The  use  of  the 
 distinctive  term  TT'Tin'',  in  2  Kings  xviii.   26,  was 
 
 necessitated  by  the  request  of  Eliakim  that  Rab- 
 shakeh  should  speak  not  in  the  tongue  of  the 
 people  but  in  his  native  Aramaean.  The  lists 
 of  later  words  given  by  Stahelin  only  prove  that 
 the  period  of  the  exile  is  the  most  probable  date  of 
 composition.  There  are  indeed  some  peculiar  terms 
 occurring  in  Kings  which  seldom  or  never  occur  in 
 the  other  books,  though  occasionally  in  Chronicles 
 and  the  parallel  sections  of  Isaiah.  Calmet  ascribes 
 the  authorship  to  Ezra.  Jewish  traduion  makes 
 Jeremiah  the  author  (Z?fl^i7-^a///ra,  fol.  15.  i).  This 
 opinion,  adopted  by  Grotius,  and  lately  revindicated 
 by  Havemick  and  Graf,  certainly  appears  the  more 
 probable.  Thenius  conjectures  that  the  author  was 
 a  pupil  of  Jeremiah  ;   Stahelin  that  he  may  have 
 
KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 744 
 
 KINGS,  BOOKS  OF 
 
 been  an  imitator ;  and  Keil,  that  lie  was  a  citizen 
 of  Judah,  long  in  the  Babylonian  exile,  and  filled 
 with  the  prophetic  spirit.  There  is  considerable 
 linguistic  affinity  between  the  books  of  Kings  and 
 the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  (Kiiper,  Jeran.  p.  56). 
 
 Kings.  Jeremiah. 
 
 2  K.  xvii.  14  .     »  .  vii.  26. 
 
 1  K.  ix.  8     .  .     .  .  xxii.  8. 
 
 2  K.  xxiv.-xxv.        .  .  hi. 
 
 1  K.  ii.  4;  viii.  25  ;  xxxiii.    17  ;  xiii.    13  ; 
 ix.  5.  xvii.  25. 
 
 2  K.  xxi.  12        ...     xix.  3. 
 
 In  the  absence  of  certain  evidence  this  opinion 
 may  be  deemed  the  most  likely,  and  is  a  more  simple 
 theory  than  that  of  Movers,  who  supposes  that 
 Jeremiah  compiled  a  more  ancient  production — a 
 book  of  Kings — the  source  of  our  present  treatise. 
 It  explains  the  close  similarity  of  the  books  of 
 Kings  and  Jeremiah  in  spirit,  style,  and  tendency, 
 more  easily  and  more  satisfactorily  than  the  sup- 
 position of  De  Wette,  or  any  other  conjecture  of 
 like  nature.  Objections  against  this  opinion,  from 
 the  hasty  way  in  which  Jeremiah  has  described  his 
 own  times,  admit  of  an  easy  solution.  Contem- 
 poraries were  familiar  with  his  life  and  times,  while 
 his  own  prophecy  contains  some  of  the  desired  in- 
 formation. Another  objection,  that  Jeremiah  could 
 not  have  lived  longer  than  Evil-merodach,  is  no- 
 ticed and  refuted  by  Havernick  [Ueber  Daniel,  p. 
 14).  The  age  of  the  Jewish  tradition  as  to  the 
 authorship  of  the  books  of  Kings  may  be  inferred 
 from  the  fact  that  they  are  placed  among  the  D''K''31 
 The  conjecture  of  Gesenius  that  the  book  was  written 
 in  Babylon  gathers  no  proof  from  the  phrase  "I2y 
 
 iriiiri  (i  Kings  iv.  24),  as  if  it  meant  on  the  other 
 
 or  west  side  of  the  river,  and  was  employed  by 
 one  living  to  the  east  of  the  Euphrates  ;  for  the 
 ])hrase  is  not  uniform  in  meaning  (Josh.  i.  14,  etc.) 
 The  idiom  seems  to  have  acquired  a  geographical 
 currency,  without  any  exact  allusion  to  the  locality 
 of  the  person  using  it. 
 
 It  has  been  sometimes  thought,  as  by  Thenius, 
 that  the  books  of  Samuel  were  the  production  of 
 the  same  redactor  who  composed  the  books  of 
 Kings.  Both  compositions  form  a  history  almost 
 contiguous,  though  2  Sam.  xx.  -xxiv.  is  evidently 
 an  appendix.  That  there  should  be  many  points 
 of  similarity  in  two  works  of  history  on  kindred 
 themes,  and  having  a  similar  purpose  in  view,  sur- 
 prises no  one.  The  close  philological  affinity  on 
 wliich  Stahelin  insists  so  much  (Spec.  Ehtleit, 
 sec.  36),  may  thus  be  easily  accounted  for.  Yet 
 th«!re  are  also  points  of  dissimilarity.  The  lan- 
 guage of  'Samuel'  has  few^  marks  of  later  usage  ; 
 the  style  has  more  traces  of  an  early  age  about 
 it.  The  books  of  Samuel  have  not  the  compact- 
 ness and  symmetry  of  the  books  of  Kings.  The 
 greater  portion  of  them  seems  to  be  an  original 
 work,  rather  than  a  compilation.  Vaihinger  (art. 
 Konige,  BUcher  der,  in  Herzog's  Encyclo.)  holds 
 that  Judges,  as  well  as  Samuel  and  Kings,  are 
 the  production  of  one  author.  Ewald  [Geschich., 
 i.  175)  also  thinks  that  from  Judges  to  2  Kings 
 the  hand  of  one  author  is  apparent.  But  the 
 instances  adduced  by  Vaihinger  will  not  suffice 
 as  proofs.  The  allusions  in  very  similar  language 
 to  an  event  so  singular  and  of  such  national 
 interest  as  the  Exodus  in  Judges  ii.  i-S,  and  2 
 Kings  xvii.   7  ;   the  like  terms  in  which  religious 
 
 apostasy  is  described  in  Judg.  xi.  17,  and  2  Kings 
 xvii.  13,  are  insufficient  to  warrant  the  conclusion. 
 Nor  will  the  use  of  CySH,  signifying  to  provoke 
 
 to  anger,  as  found  in  Judges  ii.  12  and  2  Kings 
 xvii.  II,  17,  give  any  additional  proof  of  sameness 
 of  style,  for  the  verb  is  found  elsewhere,  as  in 
 Deut.  xxxi.  29 ;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  58 ;  Hosea  xii.  14. 
 The  same  maybe  said  of  the  other  phrase,  'to 
 deliver  into  the  hand  of  spoilers,'  which  in  Kings 
 may  have  been  copied  from  the  earlier  book  and 
 applied  to  a  similar  juncture  in  the  history  of  their 
 sin  and  punishment.  There  are,  indeed,  many 
 points  of  similarity  between  Samuel  and  Kings, 
 repeated  turns  of  idiomatic  expression  which  may 
 not  prove  identity  of  authorship,  but  only  shew  that 
 the  compiler  of  the  later  books  regarded  the  earlier 
 one  as  his  model. 
 
 The  relation  of  Kings  to  Chronicles  need  not 
 be  dwelt  on  [see  Chronicles].  In  Kings  we  have 
 some  things  not  in  Chronicles — as  the  attempt  to 
 secure  the  throne  by  Adonijah  ;  David's  last  charge ; 
 the  deposition  of  Abiathar,  and  the  execution  of 
 Joab  ;  the  marriage  of  Solomon  with  Pharaoh's 
 daughter  ;  his  judgment  in  the  case  of  the  two 
 harlots  ;  the  organisation  of  his  royal  household  ; 
 his  idolatries,  and  his  enemies,  etc.  On  the 
 other  hand,  many  things  passed  over  in  Kings  are 
 detailed  in  Chronicles — such  as  David's  prepara- 
 tions for  building  the  Temple  ;  the  orders  and 
 arrangements  of  the  Levites ;  the  expostulation 
 of  Azariah  with  Asa ;  Jehoshaphat's  reforming 
 energy ;  and  Hezekiah's  passover,  etc.  etc.  In 
 point  of  number  the  books  of  Kings  give  generally 
 smaller  figures  than  Chronicles,  as  i  Kings  v.  16 
 comp.  with  2  Chron.  ii.  18;  I  Kings  vii.  26 
 comp.  with  2  Chron.  iv.  5  ;  I  Kings  ix.  28 
 comp.  with  2  Chron.  viii.  18 ;  2  Kings  viii.  26 
 comp.  with  2  Chron.  xxii.  2.  In  the  case  of 
 Jehoiachin  in  Kings,  ten  years  are  added  to  his 
 age  at  his  accession,  2  Kings  xxiv.  8  comp.  with 
 2  Chron.  xxxvi.  9.  I  Kings  iv.  26  presents  an 
 enormous  exaggeration  (2  Chron.  ix.  25),  giving 
 according  to  the  present  reading  40,000  for  4000 
 
 —having  W'V':^~\^  for  nyn"it<. 
 
 The  age  of  the  books  of  Kings  may  be  inter- 
 mediate between  the  early  books  of  Samuel  and 
 the  later  ones  of  Chronicles.  The  extraordinary 
 handling  of  the  books  of  Kings  in  the  Septuagint 
 has  been  often  remarked  on.  There  are  trans- 
 positions, which  only  obscure  the  order  of  the 
 narrative,  some  omissions,  and  several  additions  ; 
 one  especially  containing  sentences  of  some  length 
 with  regard  to  Jeroboam.  There  are  also  mis- 
 renderings  and  translations  which  would  seem  to 
 imply  a  different  Hebrew  reading.  The  matter  is 
 fully  gone  into  by  Thenius  {die  Biicher  dcr  ICdnige 
 erklii7-t ;  Einleit.  p.  17).  We  need  not  wonder 
 that  the  books  of  Kings,  containing  the  history  of 
 the  covenant  people,  are  so  often  referred  to  in  the 
 N.  T.  Our  Lord  himself  alludes  to  Solomon's 
 glory  ;  to  the  visit  of  the  queen  of  Sheba  ;  to  the 
 widow  of  Sarepta,  and  Elijah's  mission  to  her ; 
 and  to  Naaman  the  Syrian  in  the  days  of  Elisha 
 (Matt.  vi.  29 ;  xii.  42 ;  Luke  iv.  25-27).  The 
 rough  robe  of  Elijah  and  his  complaint,  the  great 
 drought,  and  the  resuscitation  of  the  Shunamite's 
 child,  are  also  referued  to  (Mark  i.  6  ;  Rom.  xi.  3  ; 
 James  v.  17  ;  Heb.  xi.  35). 
 
 The  '  Introductions '  referred  to  in  the  course  of 
 this  article  may  be  consulted.     Modem  commen- 
 
KING'S  DALE 
 
 745 
 
 KINNAMON 
 
 tators  upon  '  Kings '  are  scarce,  and  there  are  not 
 many  old  ones  ;  Theodoret,  QucEstiones  in  libros 
 Hi.  et  iv.  Rcgnorum,  Opera,  vol.  i.  ;  Seb.  Leon- 
 hardi 'TTrojai'Tjiitara,  in  Libb.  Reg.,  Erf.  1606,  Lips. 
 1610-14;  Seb.  Schmidii  Annot.  in  Lib.  Reg., 
 Strasb.  1687  ;  the  various  authors  in  the  Critici 
 Sacri ;  Cornelius  a  Lapide,  Conivtent.,  Opera,  vol. 
 ii.,  1718  ;  Maurer,  Coiiunent.  Critiais,  vol.  i., 
 Lipsias  1835  ;  Keil,  Coinmentar  iiber  der  Biichcr 
 d.  Kdnige,  Moskau  1846  ;  Thenius,  die  Biicher  d. 
 Konige  ei kldrt,  Leipzig  1849. — J.  E. 
 
 KING'S   DALE   n^isn   p»y ; 
 
 eSt 
 
 TO     ■KidlOV     TiOl> 
 
 BaaiK^uv  ;  vallis  regis).  In  only  two  passages  of 
 Scripture  is  this  place  mentioned,  and  from  neither 
 of  them  can  we  get  any  mformation  as  to  its  posi- 
 tion. When  Abraham  was  returning  with  tlie 
 spoil  of  Sodom,  the  king  of  Sodom  went  out  to 
 meet  him  '  at  the  valley  of  Shaveh,  which  is  the 
 king's  dale'  (Gen.  xiv.  17)  ;  and  in  the  narrative  of 
 the  death  of  Absalom,  the  incidental  remark  is  in- 
 serted by  the  historian — '  Now  Absalom  in  his 
 lifetime  had  reared  up  for  himself  a  pillar  which  is 
 in  the  king's  dale'  (2  Sam.  xviii.  18). 
 
 We  have  no  direct  indication  of  the  geogra- 
 phical position  of  the  king's  dale  either  in  the 
 Bible  or  any  ancient  author.  Some  have  sup- 
 posed that  it  is  identical  with  the  valley  of  Jeho- 
 shaphat  or  Kidron  ;  and  that  the  well-known 
 monument,  now  called  the  tomb  of  Absalom,  is 
 the  pillar  raised  by  that  prince  (Benjamin  of 
 Tudela,  in  Early  Travels  in  Palestine,  p.  84 ; 
 Raumer,  Pal.,  p.  303  ;  Barclay,  City  of  Great 
 King,  p.  92).  The  style  of  the  monument,  which 
 is  of  the  later  Roman  age,  makes  this  theory  impos- 
 sible ;  and  the  name  given  to  the  valley,  Einek  (pDJ? 
 
 \XiT\\  mC-'),  proves  that  a  'plain'  or  'broad 
 valley'  was  meant,  and  not  a  ravine  like  the  Kid- 
 ron. Others  locate  the  king's  dale  at  Beersheba, 
 others  at  Lebanon  (Reland,  Pal.,  p.  357),  others 
 near  the  Jordan  (Stanley,  Lectures  on  the  Jrcvish 
 Church,  p.  44).  But  if  we  identify  Salem  with 
 Jerusalem,  then  doubtless  the  king's  dale  was  close 
 to  that  city  ;  and  it  seems  highly  probable  besides 
 that  Absalom  should  have  raised  his  memorial 
 pillar  in  the  vicinity  of  the  capital  (Krafft,  Die 
 Topographie  Jeriisalerns,  p.  88).  Josephus  says 
 that  Absalom's  marble  pillar  in  the  king's  dale  was 
 /zw(7y;/:;7c>;/^j  distant  from  Jerusalem  [Aiitiq.  vii.  10. 
 3).  Let  it  be  observed  also  that  the  other  name  of 
 the  king's  dale,   Shaveh  (niK'),    signifies  'a  level 
 
 place,'  a  'plain.'  Now  in  the  immediate  neigh- 
 bourhood of  Jerusalem  there  is  one  place,  and 
 only  one,  which  appears  to  answer  to  these  indica- 
 tions, and  it  is  the  Plain  of  Rephaim.  It  is  on  the 
 direct  route  from  the  north  to  Hebron  ;  a  practi- 
 cable road  leads  down  from  it  through  the  wilder- 
 ness to  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea ;  and  it  is  so 
 close  to  Jerusalem  that  Melchisedec,  from  the 
 heights  of  Zion,  could  both  see  and  hear  the 
 joyous  meeting  of  the  princes  of  Sodom  with  the 
 victorious  band  of  Abraham,  and  the  reclaimed 
 captives  (cf.  Kurtz,  Hist,  of  the  Old  Covenant,  i. 
 218  ;  Wilson,  La7ids  of  the  Bible,  i.  488  ;  Kalisch 
 on  Gen.  xiv.  17). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KINNAMON   (p03ip),  translated  'cinnamon,' 
 
 occurs  in  three  places  of  Scripture ;  first,  about 
 1600  years  before  the  Christian  era,  in  Exod.  xxx. 
 23,  where  it  is  enumerated  as  one  of  the  in^jredi- 
 
 ents  employed  in  the  preparation  of  the  holy 
 anointing  oil.  It  is  next  mentioned  in  Prov.  vii. 
 17,  again  in  Cant.  iv.  14,  while  in  Rev.  xviii.  13, 
 among  the  merchandise  of  Babylon,  we  have  '  cin- 
 namon, and  odours,  and  ointments,  and  frankin- 
 cense.' In  the  earliest  notice  it  is  called  kinna?non 
 besem,  or  'sweet  cinnamon.'  Dr.  Vincent  is  in- 
 clined to  consider  khennah  besem  and  khinnamon 
 besem  as  derived  from  the  same  root. 
 
 Many  writers  have  doubted  whether  the  kinna- 
 mon  of  the  Hebrews  is  the  same  article  that  we 
 now  call  cinnamon.  Celsius  quotes  R.  Ben  Melech 
 [ad  Cant.  iv.  14)  and  Saadias  (Exod.  xxx.)  as  con- 
 sidering it  to  be  the  Lign  Aloe,  or  Agallochnm. 
 Others  have  doubted  whether  our  cinnamon  Mas 
 at  all  known  to  the  ancients.  But  the  same  thing 
 has  been  said  of  almost  every  other  drug  which  is 
 noticed  by  them.  If  we  were  to  put  faith  in  all 
 these  doubts,  we  should  be  left  without  any  sub- 
 stances possessed  of  sufficiently  remarkable  pro- 
 perties to  have  been  articles  of  ancient  commerce. 
 The  word  Kiwd/xw/j-ov  occurs  in  many  of  the  Greek 
 authors,  as  Herodotus,  Hippocrates,  Theophrastus, 
 Dioscorides,  Galen,  etc.  The  first  of  these,  writ- 
 ing 400  years  before  the  Christian  era,  describes 
 cinnamon  as  a  product  of  Arabia,  and  of  cinnamon 
 he  says,  '  which  we,  as  instructed  by  the  Phoeni- 
 cians, call  Kivudfj.ojfj.ov.'  He  states,  moreover,  that 
 the  Arabians  were  unacquainted  with  the  particular 
 spot  in  which  it  was  produced,  but  that  some  as- 
 serted it  grew  in  the  region  where  Bacchus  was 
 educated.  From  all  this  we  can  only  infer  that  it 
 was  the  production  of  a  distant  country,  probably 
 India,  and  that  it  was  obtained  by  the  route  of  the 
 Red  Sea.  Theophrastus  (ix.  5)  gives  a  fuller  but 
 still  fabulous  account  of  its  production,  and  it  is 
 not  until  the  time  of  Dioscorides,  Galen,  and  the 
 Periplus  of  the  Erythraean  sea,  that  we  get  more 
 definite  information.  Galen  says  that  cassia  and 
 cinnamon  are  so  much  alike  that  it  is  not  an  easy 
 matter  to  distinguish  the  one  from  the  other.  This 
 is  a  difficulty  that  still  continues  to  be  experienced. 
 Dioscorides  (i.  12)  says  that  cassia  grows  in  Arabia, 
 and  that  there  are  several  kinds  of  it ;  and  of  cinna- 
 mon he  states  also  (i.  13)  that  there  are  several 
 species,  named  from  the  different  places  where  it 
 is  procured.  But  the  best  sort  is  that  which  is  like 
 the  cassia  of  Mosylon,  and  is  itself  called  Mosyllitic, 
 or  as  Pliny  says,  '  Portus  Mosyllites  quo  cinnamo- 
 mum  devehitur'  (vi.  29).  Several  kinds  are  de- 
 scribed by  Dioscorides,  and  no  fewer  than  ten 
 kinds  in  the  Periplus  of  Arrian  (vid.  Vincent, 
 Periplus,  ii.  p.  711),  and  among  these  the  II/cX^- 
 ponpa,  from  the  Greek  cr/cXT/pos,  'hard,'  which  he 
 translates  '  xylocassia,'  or  'wood  cinnamon,'  and 
 states  to  be  'a  term  which  occurs  frequently,  and 
 perhaps  distinguishes  the  cassia  lignea  (wood  cin- 
 namon) from  the  cassia  fistula  (cantiella,  or  pipe 
 cinnamon).' 
 
 Cinnamon  of  the  best  quality  is  imported  in  the 
 present  day  from  Ceylon,  and  also  from  the  Mala- 
 bar coast,  in  consequence  of  the  cinnamon  plant 
 ( Cinnamomiun  Zeylanicum)  having  been  introduced 
 there  from  Ceylon.  An  inferior  kind  is  also  ex- 
 ported from  the  peninsula  of  India,  the  produce  of 
 other  species  of  cinna>?iomn?n,  according  to  Dr. 
 Wight.  From  these  countries  the  cinnamon  and 
 cassia  of  the  ancients  must  most  likely  have  been 
 obtained,  though  both  are  also  produced  in  the 
 islands  of  Sumatra  and  Boraeo,  in  China,  and  in 
 Cochinchina. 
 
KINNIM 
 
 746 
 
 KINNIM 
 
 Cassia  bark,  as  we  have  seen,  was  distinguished 
 with  difficulty  from  cinnamon  by  the  ancients.  In 
 the  present  day  it  is  often  sold  for  cinnamon  ;  in- 
 deed, unless  a  purchaser  specify  true  cinnamon,  he 
 
 293.   Laurus  kinnamomum. 
 
 will  probably  be  supplied  with  nothing  but  cassia. 
 It  is  made  up  into  similar  bundles  with  cinnamon, 
 has  the  same  general  appearance,  smell,  and  taste  ; 
 but  its  substance  is  thicker  and  coarser,  its  colour 
 darker,  its  flavour  much  less  sweet  and  fine  than 
 
 300.   Kinnamomutn  cassia. 
 
 that  of  Ceylon  cinnamon,  while  it  is  more  pun- 
 gent, and  is  followed  by  a  bitter  taste  ;  it  is  also 
 less  closely  quilled,  and  breaks  shorter  than  genu- 
 ine cinnamon.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt, 
 as  cinnamon  and  cassia  were  known  to  the  Greeks, 
 that  they  must  have  been  known  to  the  Hebrews 
 also,  as  the  commerce  with  India  can  be  proved  to 
 have  been  much  more  ancient  than  is  generally 
 supposed  [KiDDAHJ. — J.  F.  R. 
 
 KINNIM  (D33  and  D^33,  Exod.  viii.   16,   17, 
 
 18  :  of.  Heb.  12,  13,  14;  Ps.  cv.  31 ;  Sept.  o-m^es 
 or  a'Kj'iTres  ;  Vulg.  cyniphcs  and  scyniphcs :  Wisd. 
 xix.  10  ;  Sept.  crKvl-rra  ;  Alex.  Aid.  (TKvicpas  ;  Vulg. 
 tiiHscas).  The  name  of  the  creature  employed  in 
 tlie  third  plague  upon  ligypt,  miraculously  pro- 
 duced from  the  dust  of  the  land.  Its  exact  nature 
 has  been  much  disputed.  Those  who  reason  from 
 the  root  of  the  word  in  the  Hebrew  text,  and  as- 
 
 sume it  to  be  derived  from  JID,  to  fix,  settle,  or 
 stablish,  infer  lice  to  be  meant,  from  their  fixing 
 themselves  on  mankind,  animals,  etc.  The  mean- 
 ing of  the  root  is,  however,  too  general  to  afford 
 by  itself  any  assistance  in  ascertaining  the  particu- 
 lar species  intended.  Dr.  A.  Clarke  has  further 
 inferred  from  the  words  '  in  man  and  in  beast,' 
 that  it  was  the  acartis  sartgtiisi/gus,  or  '  tick'  (Com- 
 nie)it.  oil  Exod.  viii.  16).  But  since  it  is  spoken 
 of  as  an  Egyptian  insect,  the  name  for  it  may  be 
 purely  Egyptian,  and  may  have  no  connection 
 with  any  Hebrew  root  (Michaelis,  Siippl.  ad  Lex., 
 n.  1 1 74).  However  this  maybe,  the  preposition 
 from  which  Dr.  Clarke  argues  is  too  various  in 
 meaning  to  assist  his  hypothesis.  Nor  is  it  certain 
 whether  the  word  is  singular  or  plural.  The  varia- 
 tion, both  in  letters  and  points,  seems  to  betoken 
 uncertainty  somewhere,  though  Gesenius  takes  D33 
 in  the  collective  sense.  Michaelis  also  remarks 
 that  if  it  be  a  Hebrew  word  for  lice,  it  is  strange 
 that  it  should  have  disappeared  from  the  cognate 
 tongues,  the  Aramaic,  Samaritan,  and  Ethiopic. 
 The  rendering  of  the  Septuagint  seems  highly 
 valuable  when  it  is  considered  that  it  was  given  by 
 learned  Jews  resident  in  Egypt,  that  it  occurs  in 
 the  most  ancient  and  best  executed  portion  of  that 
 version,  and  that  it  can  be  elucidated  by  the  writ- 
 ings of  ancient  Greek  naturalists,  etc.  Thus  Aris- 
 totle, who  was  nearly  contemporary  with  the 
 Septuagint  translators  of  Exodus,  mentions  the 
 kj-Zttes  (the  aKv^^es  of  the  Septuagint)  among  in- 
 sects able  to  distinguish  the  smell  of  honey  (J/isf. 
 Animal.,  iv.  8),  and  refers  to  species  of  birds 
 which  he  calls  irKvnro<pd'ya,  that  live  by  hunting 
 (TKviires  (viii.  6).  '  The  Kvlnes  are  born  in  certain 
 trees,  as  the  oak,  the  fig-tree,  and  they  seem  to 
 subsist  upon  the  svi'eet  moisture  which  is  collected 
 under  the  bark.  They  are  also  produced  on  some 
 vegetables'  {///st.  Plant.,  iv.  17,  and  ii.  ?///.)  This 
 description  applies  to  aphides,  or  rather  to  the 
 various  species  of  '  gall  flies'  {Cynips,  Linn.) 
 Hesychius,  in  the  beginning  of  the  third  century, 
 explains  OKvixp,  ^uiov  -xXupbv  re  TiTpdinepov,  '  a 
 green  four-winged  creature,'  and  quotes  Phrynichus 
 as  applying  the  name  to  a  sordid  wretch,  and  adds, 
 dirb  Tov  6rjpLdiov  rod  iv  toIs  ^v\ois,  rod  Kara,  ^pax^i 
 avTOL  KareadiovTos,  '  from  the  little  creature  among 
 trees,  which  speedily  devours  them.'  Philo  (a.  D. 
 40)  and  Origen  in  the  second  century,  who  both 
 lived  in  Egypt,  describe  it  in  terms  suitable  to  the 
 gnat  or  mosquito  (Philo,  Vita  Jl/osis,  i.  97.  2,  ed. 
 Mangey;  Origen,  I/omilia  tertia  in  Exod.);  as 
 does  also  Augustine  in  the  third  or  fourth  century 
 {De  Convenientia,  etc.)  But  Theodoret,  in  the 
 same  age,  distinguishes  between  a-Kviirfs  and  ku-vu- 
 TTes  (  Vita  yacold).  Suidas  (A.  D.  1  lOO)  says,  ^Kvlxp, 
 ^Q>ov  KwvwvwSes,  'resembling  gnats,'  and  adds, 
 ^ari  yap  6  aKvlrp  fwoc  fxiKpbv  ^v\o<pdyov,  'a  little 
 creature  that  eats  wood.'  These  Christian  fathers, 
 however,  give  no  authority  for  their  explanations  ; 
 and  Bochart  remarks  that  they  seem  to  be  speak, 
 ing  of  gnats  under  the  name  aKf'iwes,  which  word, 
 he  conjectures,  biassed  them  from  its  resemblance 
 to  the  Hebrew.  Schleusner  adds,  '  Glossema  in 
 Octatench.  aKVi<pes,  iQa  /niKpa  inrb  rovs  KcifcoTraj 
 (less  than  gnats).  Lex.  Cyrilli,  MS.  Brem.  aKvi<p€s 
 tcov<pid  iffTLv  ioLKora  KibvwipLv  (very  small  creatures 
 like  gnats').  From  this  concurrence  of  testimony 
 it  would  appear,  that  not  lice,  but  some  species 
 of  gnats  is  the  proper  rendering,  though  the 
 ancients,  no  doubt,  included  other  species  of  in- 
 
KINNIM 
 
 747 
 
 KINSMAN 
 
 sects  under  the  name.  Mr.  Bryant,  however,  gives 
 a  curious  turn  to  the  evidence  derived  from  ancient 
 naturahsts.  He  quotes  Theophrastus,  and  admits 
 that  a  Greek  must  be  the  best  judge  of  the  mean- 
 ing of  tlie  Greek  word,  but  urges  that  the  Septua- 
 gint  translators  concealed  the  meaning  of  the  He- 
 brew word,  which  he  labours  to  prove  is  lice,  under 
 the  word  they  have  adopted,  for  fear  of  offending 
 the  Ptolemies,  under  whose  inspection  they  trans- 
 lated, and  the  Egyptians  in  general,  whose  detes- 
 tation of  lice  was  as  ancient  as  the  time  of  Hero- 
 dotus (ii.  37),  (but  who  includes  tX  dWo  /xvaapdv, 
 '  any  ot/wr  foul  creature'),  and  whose  disgust,  he 
 thinks,  would  have  been  too  much  excited  by 
 reading  that  their  nation  once  swarmed  with  those 
 creatures  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  servants 
 of  the  God  of  the  Jews  {Plagties  of  Egypt,  Lond. 
 1794,  p.  56,  etc.)  This  suspicion,  if  admitted, 
 upsets  all  the  previous  reasoning.  It  is  also  incon- 
 sistent with  Bryant's  favourite  hypothesis,  that  the 
 plagues  of  Egypt  were  so  adapted  as  to  afford  a 
 practical  mortification  of  the  prejudices  of  the 
 Egyptians.  Nor  could  a  plague  of  lice,  upon  his 
 own  principles,  have  been  more  offensive  to  them 
 than  the  plague  on  the  river  Nile,  and  the  frogs, 
 etc.,  which  he  endeavours  to  show  were  most  sig- 
 nally opposed  to  their  religious  notions.  Might  it 
 not  be  suggested  with  equal  probability  that  the 
 Jews  in  later  ages  had  been  led  to  interpret  the  word 
 lice  as  being  peculiarly  humiliating  to  the  Egypt- 
 ians? (see  Joseph.  Aiitiq.  ii.  14.  3,  who,  however, 
 makes  the  Egyptians  afflicted  with  phtJiiriasis) 
 The  rendering  of  the  Vulgate  affords  us  no  assist- 
 ance, being  evidently  formed  from  that  of  the 
 Septuagint,  and  not  being  illustrated  by  any  Ro- 
 man naturalist,  but  found  only  in  Christian  Latin 
 writers  (see  Facciolati,  iii  voc.)  The  other  ancient 
 versions,  etc.,  are  of  no  value  in  this  inquiry.  They 
 adopt  the  popular  notion  of  the  times,  and  Bo- 
 chart's  reasonings  upon  them  involve,  as  Rosen- 
 miiller  (apud  Bochart)  justly  complains,  many 
 unsafe  permutations  of  letters.  If,  then,  the  Sep- 
 tuagint be  discarded,  we  are  deprived  of  the  highest 
 source  of  information.  Bochart  also  reasons  upon 
 the  similarity  of  the  word  CJ^  to  Kduides,  the 
 word  in  Aristotle  for  the  eggs  of  fleas,  lice,  bugs, 
 etc.,  whether  infesting  mankind  or  beasts  (vi.  26), 
 hut  which  is  not  more  like  it  than  KiLvuires  ;  and  an 
 enthusiast  in  etymology  might  remark  that  Kovides 
 means  both  '  dust'  and  '  lice,'  which  Scaliger 
 explains  lendes,  '  nits,'  ab  exigiiitate  sitniles  piil- 
 rwi,  '  from  their  minuteness,  like  dust'  (p.  518). 
 It  is  strange  that  it  did  not  occur  to  Bochart  that 
 if  the  plague  had  been  lice,  it  would  have  been 
 easily  imitated  by  the  magicians,  which  was  at- 
 tempted by  them,  but  in  vain  (Exod.  viii.  18). 
 Nor  is  the  objection  valid,  that  if  this  plague  were 
 gnats,  etc.,  the  plague  of  flies  would  be  antici- 
 pated, since  the  latter  most  likely  consisted  of  one 
 particular  species  having  a  different  destination 
 [Fly]  ;  whereas  this  may  have  consisted  of  not 
 only  mosquitoes  or  gnats,  but  of  some  other  species 
 which  also  attack  domestic  cattle,  as  the  ces/nts, 
 or  tabaniis,  or  zimb  (Bruce's  Travels,  ii.  3i5t  8vo)  ; 
 on  which  supposition  these  two  plagues  would  be 
 sufficiently  distinct. 
 
 But  since  mosquitoes,  gnats,  etc.,  have  ever 
 been  one  of  the  evils  of  Egypt,  there  must  have 
 been  some  peculiarity  attending  them  on  this  occa- 
 sion, which  proved  the  plague  to  be  '  the  linger  of 
 God.'     From  tlie  next  chapter,  ver.  31,  it  appears 
 
 that  the  flax  and  the  barley  were  smitten  by  the 
 hail ;  that  the  former  was  beginning  to  grow,  and 
 that  the  latter  was  in  the  ear — which,  according  to 
 Shaw,  takes  place  in  Egypt  in  March.  Hence  the 
 D''OD  would  be  sent  about  February,  i.  e. ,  before 
 the  increase  of  the  Nile,  which  takes  place  at  the 
 end  of  May,  or  beginning  of  June.  Since,  then, 
 the  innumerable  swarms  of  mosquitoes,  gnats,  etc., 
 which  every  year  affect  the  Egyptians,  come,  ac- 
 cording to  Hasselquist,  at  the  increase  of  the  Nile, 
 the  appearance  of  them  in  February  would  be  as 
 much  a  variation  of  the  course  of  nature  as  the 
 appearance  of  the  astriis  in  January  would  be  in 
 England.  They  were  also  probably  numerous  and 
 fierce  beyond  example  on  this  occasion  ;  and  as 
 the  Egyptians  would  be  utterly  unprepared  for 
 them  (for  it  seems  that  this  plague  was  not  an- 
 nounced), the  effects  would  be  signally  distressing. 
 Bochart  adduces  instances  in  which  both  mankind 
 and  cattle,  and  even  wild  beasts,  have  been  driven 
 by  gnats  from  their  localities.  It  may  be  added, 
 that  the  proper  Greek  name  for  the  gnat  is  i/xTris, 
 and  that  probably  the  word  kiJovu^,  which  much 
 resembles  Kviip,  is  appropriate  to  the  mosquito. 
 Hardouin  observes,  that  the  oi  Kinires  of  Aristotle 
 are  not  the  ifiirldes,  which  latter  is  by  Pliny  always 
 rendered  ciiUces,  but  which  word  he  employs  with 
 great  latitude  [Gnat].  For  a  description  of  the 
 evils  inflicted  by  these  insects  upon  man,  see  Kirby 
 and  Spence,  Introduction  to  Entomology,  Lond. 
 1828,  i.  115,  etc.  ;  and  for  the  annoyance  they 
 cause  in  Egypt,  Maillet,  Description  de  P Egypte 
 par  I'Abbe  Mascrier,  Paris  1755,  xc.  37  ;  Forskal, 
 Descript.  Animal.,  p.  85.  Michaelis  proposed  an 
 inquiry  into  the  meaning  of  the  word  aKultpes  to  the 
 Societe  des  Savants,  with  a  full  description  of  the 
 qualities  ascribed  to  them  by  Philo,  Origen,  and 
 Augustine  {Rectceil,  etc.,  Amst.  1744).  Niebuhr 
 inquired  after  it  of  the  Greek  patriarch,  and  also 
 of  the  metropolitan  at  Cairo,  who  thought  it  to 
 be  a  species  of  gnat  found  in  great  quantities  in 
 the  gardens  there,  and  whose  bite  was  extremely 
 painful.  A  merchant  who  was  present  at  the 
 inquiry  called  it  dnbdb-elkeb,  or  the  dog-fly  {De- 
 scription de  V Arabic,  Pref.  pp.  39,  40).  Besides 
 the  references  already  made,  see  Rosenmiiller, 
 Scholia  in  Exod.  ;  Michaelis,  Sitppl.  ad  Lex. 
 Hebi-aic,  p.  1203,  sq.  ;  Oedmann,  Verm.  Samml. 
 aiis  der  Natiirkiinde,  i.  6.  74-91  ;  Bakerus,  An- 
 notat.  in  Et.  M.,  ii.  1090;  Harenberg,  Obsei-v. 
 Crit.  de  Insectis  ^Egyptian  infestantibiis  in  Miscell. 
 Lips.  Nov.,  ii.  4.  617-20;  Winer,  Biblisches  Real- 
 loortei-btich,  art.  '  Miicken.' — ^J.  F.  D. 
 
 KINSMAN.  Of  the  four  Hebrew  words  thus 
 translated  in  the  A.  V.,  three,  "ItsC^  (Num.  xxvii. 
 
 II),  J?niD  (Ruth  ii.  I),  and  3i"lp  (Ps.  xxxviii.  12 
 [11];  Job  xix.  14,  A.  V.  'kinsfolk'),  indicate 
 simple  relationship.  The  remaining  one,  ?Nil, 
 along  with  that,  implies  certain  obligations  arising 
 out  of  that  relationship. 
 
 The  term  7^i  is  derived  by  the  lexicographers 
 from  the  verb  ^X2,  to  redeem.  That  the  two  are 
 closely  connected  is  certain,  but  whether  the  mean- 
 ing of  the  verb  is  derived  from  that  of  the  noun, 
 or  the  converse,  may  be  made  matter  of  question. 
 The  comparison  of  the  cognate  dialects  leads  to 
 the  conclusion  that  the  primary  idea  lying  at  the 
 
KINSMAN 
 
 748 
 
 KIPLING 
 
 basis  of  both  is  that  of  coming  to  the  help  or  rescue 
 o/ofte,  hence  givittg protection,  redeeming,  avenging. 
 
 Comp.   Ar.   ,\\s>-,  i'vit,  venit ;   ^Jl?^,  circmnivit, 
 
 obivit ;    Syr.  ^i<f»  misertus  est,  protexit.     In  this 
 
 case  the  ?K!l  of  the  O.  T.  would,  in  fundamental 
 concept,  answer  pretty  nearly  to  the  TrapaKk-qros 
 of  the  N.  T. 
 
 The  Goel  among  the  Hebrews  was  the  nearest 
 male  blood  relation  alive.  To  him,  as  such, 
 three  rights  specially  belonged,  and  on  him  corre- 
 sponding duties  devolved  towards  his  next  of  kin. 
 
 1.  When  an  Israelite  through  poverty  sold  his 
 inheritance  and  was  unable  to  redeem  it,  it  de- 
 volved upon  one  of  his  kin  to  purchase  it  (Lev. 
 XXV.  25-28;  Ruth  iii.  ;  iv.)  So  also,  when  an 
 Israelite  had  through  poverty  sold  himself  into 
 slavery,  it  devolved  upon  the  next  of  kin  as  his 
 Goel  to  ransom  him  in  the  Jubilee  year  (Lev. 
 XXV.  47,  ff.  [Jubilee,  Year  of]).  In  allusion  to 
 this,  God  is  frequently  represented  as  the  Goel  of 
 His  people,  both  as  He  redeems  them  from  tem- 
 poral bondage  (Exod.  vi.  6;  Is.  xliii.  I;  xlviii.  20; 
 Jer.  1.  34;  etc.)  and  from  the  bondage  of  sin  and 
 evil  (Is.  xli.  14  ;  xliv.  6,  22  ;  xlix.  7  ;  Ps.  ciii.  4  ; 
 Job  xix.  25  ;  etc.)  In  some  of  these  passages 
 there  is  an  obvious  Messianic  reference,  to  which 
 the  fact  that  our  redemption  from  sin  has  been 
 effected  by  One  who  has  become  near  of  kin  to  us 
 by  assuming  our  nature  gives  special  force  (comp. 
 Heb.  ii.  14). 
 
 2.  When  an  Israelite  who  had  wronged  any  one 
 sought  to  make  restitution  but  found  that  the 
 party  he  had  wronged  was  dead  without  leaving  a 
 son,  it  fell  to  the  next  of  kin  of  the  injured  party, 
 as  his  Goel,  to  represent  him  and  receive  the  repara- 
 tion (Num.  v.  6,  ff.)  The  law  provided  that  in 
 case  of  his  having  no  one  sufficiently  near  of  kin  to 
 act  for  him  in  this  way,  the  property  restored  should 
 go  to  the  priest  as  representing  Jehovah  the  King 
 of  Israel ;  a  provision  which  the  Jews  say  indicates 
 that  the  law  has  reference  to  strangers,  as  '  no 
 Israelite  could  be  without  a  redeemer,  for  if  any 
 one  of  his  tribe  was  left  he  would  be  his  heir' 
 (Maimon.  in  Baha  Kama,  ix.  Ii). 
 
 3.  The  most  striking  office  of  the  Goel  was  that 
 of  acting  as  the  avenger  of  blood  in  case  of  the 
 
 murder  of  his  next  of  kin  ;  hence  the  phrase  ?N'3 
 
 Cnn,    i/ie  blood  -  avenger.      In    the   heart   of  man 
 
 there  seems  to  be  a  deep-rooted  feeling  that  where 
 human  life  has  been  destroyed  by  violence,  the 
 offence  can  be  expiated  only  by  the  life  of  the 
 murderer.  Hence  in  all  nations  where  the  rights 
 of  individuals  are  not  administered  by  a  general 
 executive  acting  under  the  guidance  of  law,  the 
 rule  obtains  that  where  murder  has  been  committed 
 the  right  and  duty  of  retaliation  devolves  on  the 
 kindred  of  the  murdered  person.  Amongst  the 
 Shemitic  tribes  this  took  the  form  of  a  personal 
 obligation  resting  on  the  nearest  of  kin  ;  a  custom 
 which  still  ]irevails  among  the  Arabs  (Niebuhr, 
 Des.  d''Arabie,  ch.  7).  This  deep-rooted  feeling 
 and  established  usage  the  Mosaic  legislation  sought 
 to  place  under  such  regulations  as  would  tend  to 
 prevent  the  excesses  and  disorders  to  which  per- 
 sonal retaliation  is  apt  to  lead,  without  attempting 
 
 to  preclude  the  indulgence  of  it.*  Certain  cities  of 
 refuge  were  provided  to  which  the  manslayer  might 
 endeavour  to  escape.  If  the  Goel  overtook  him 
 before  he  reached  any  of  these  cities  he  might  put 
 him  to  death  ;  but  if  the  fugitive  succeeded  in 
 gaining  the  asylum  he  was  safe  until  at  least  an  in- 
 vestigation had  been  instituted  as  to  the  circum- 
 stances of  the  murder.  If  on  inquiry  it  was  found 
 that  the  party  had  been  guilty  of  deliberate  mur- 
 der, the  law  delivered  him  up  to  the  Goel  to  be  put 
 to  death  by  him  in  any  way  he  pleased  ;  but  if  the 
 murder  was  accidental  the  manslayer  was  entitled 
 to  the  protection  of  the  asylum  he  had  reached 
 [Asylum  ;  Cities  of  Refuge].  He  was  sa'e, 
 however,  only  within  its  precincts,  for  if  the  G*"  el 
 found  him  beyond  these  he  was  at  liberty  to  kill 
 him.  Among  some  of  the  Oriental  nations  the 
 right  of  blood-revenge  might  be  satisfied  by  the 
 payment  of  a  sum  of  money  ;  but  tliis  practice, 
 which  obviously  gave  to  the  rich  an  undue  advan- 
 tage over  the  ]ioor  in  matters  of  this  sort,  the  law 
 of  Moses  absolutely  prohibits  (Num.  xxxv.  31). 
 
 From  the  narrative  in  Ruth  iii.  and  iv.  it  has 
 been  concluded  that  among  the  duties  of  the  Goel 
 was  that  of  marrying  the  widow  of  a  deceased 
 kinsman  so  as  to  raise  up  seed  to  the  deceased  ; 
 thus  identifying  the  office  of  the  Goel  with  that  of 
 the  Levir,  as  provided  for  Deut.  xxv.  5-10  [Mar- 
 riage]. But  the  levirate  law  expressly  limits  the 
 obligation  to  a  brother,  and,  according  to  the 
 Jewish  commentators,  to  a  full  brother  by  the 
 father's  side  (Maimonides,  quoted  by  Othon,  Lex. 
 Rabbin.  Phil.,  p.  372),  and  in  this  relation  neither 
 Boaz  nor  the  other  kinsman  stood  to  Elimelech  or 
 his  sons.  It  is  further  evident  that  the  question 
 here  v^'as  one  of  right  rather  than  one  of  duty,  and 
 that  the  kinsman  who  waived  his  right  incurred  no 
 disgrace  thereby,  such  as  one  who  declined  to  fulfil 
 the  levirate  law  incurred.  The  nearest  kinsman 
 had  the  right  to  redeem  the  land,  and  the  redemp- 
 tion of  the  land  probably  involved  the  marrying  of 
 the  widow  of  the  deceased  owner,  according  to 
 usage  and  custom ;  but  the  law  did  not  enjoin 
 this,  nor  did  the  Goel  who  declined  to  avail  him- 
 self of  his  right  come  under  any  penalty  or  ban. 
 The  case  of  the  Goel,  and  that  of  the  Levir,  would 
 thus  be  the  converse  of  each  other  :  the  Goel  had 
 a  right  to  purchase  the  land,  but  in  so  doing  came 
 under  an  obligation  from  custom  to  marry  the 
 widow  of  the  deceased  owner  ;  the  Levir  was  bound 
 to  marry  the  widow  of  his  deceased  brother,  which 
 involved,  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  redemption  ot 
 his  property  if  he  had  sold  it  (see  Winer,  Real- 
 7i'drtb.,  s.  V.  Ruth  ;  Selden,  De  Snccess.  in  bo7i.  de- 
 funct., c.  15  ;  Benary,  De  HebrcEoru77i  Leviratn, 
 p.  19,  ff . ;  Bertheau,  Exeget.  Hdb.  zum  A.  T., 
 Lief.  6,  p.  249  ;  Michaelis,  On  the  Laws  of  Moses, 
 vol.  ii.  p.  129,  ff.,  E.  T.)  -W.  L.  A. 
 
 KIPLING  (Thomas),  a  native  of  Yorkshire, 
 educated  at  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  where 
 he  graduated  as  B.  A.  in  1768,  and  became  D.  D. 
 in  1 784,  and  filled  the  office  of  Deputy  Regius  Pro- 
 fessor of  Divinity  under  Bishop  Watson.  In  1 792 
 he  preached  the  Boyle  Lectures,  which  were  not 
 published.  In  1793  he  brought  out  at  the  Univer- 
 sity Press  a  very  handsome  edition  of  the  famous 
 
 *  Mohammed  also  sought  to  bring  the  practice 
 imder  restraint  without  forbidding  it  (see  Koran^ 
 ii.  173-5;  xvii.  33). 
 
KIPPOD 
 
 74S 
 
 KIR 
 
 •  Codex  Bezse,'  with  fac-simile  types  {Ccxfex  Bezcr, 
 Quadratis  Uteris,  Grcrco-Latinis,  2  vols.  fol. ),  which 
 was  immediately  assailed  with  a  virulence  amount- 
 ing to  personal  hostility  by  the  party  which  had 
 espoused  the  cause  of  the  once  notorious  Frend, 
 who  was  banished  the  university  for  Unitarianism, 
 and  in  whose  case  Kipling  had  come  forward  as 
 promoter,  or  public  prosecutor.  Dr.  Edwards,  the 
 leader  of  the  party,  charged  him  with  ignorance 
 and  want  of  fidelity.  But  though  his  Prolego- 
 mena do  not  manifest  much  accurate  scholarship, 
 and  he  commits  the  serious  error  of  printing  the 
 cor'ections  instead  of  the  original  reading  ot  the 
 text,  which  he  relegated  to  the  notes  at  the  end, 
 Tregelles  {/////W.  to  Text.  Cril.  of  N.  7:)  allows 
 that  he  '  appears  to  have  used  scrupulous  exactitude 
 in  performing  his  task  efficiently  according  to  the 
 plan  which  he  had  proposed  to  himself.'  He  was 
 rewarded  with  the  deanery  of  Peterborough,  in 
 which  dignity  he  died  in  1S22. — E.  V. 
 
 KIPPOD  ^^'^X>)-     This  name  occurs  but  three 
 
 times  in  Scripture  (Is.  xiv.  23  ;  xxxiv.  1 1 ;  and 
 Zeph.  ii.  14),  and  has  been  variously  interpreted — 
 owl,  osprey,  tortoise,  porcupine,  otter,  and,  in  the 
 Arabic,  bustard.  Bochart,  Shaw,  Lowth,  and 
 other  great  authorities,  have  supported  the  opinion 
 that  it  refers  to  the  porcupine.  The  main  sti'ess  of 
 their  argument  seems  to  depend  upon  the  com- 
 ponent parts  of  the  original  word,  of  which  the 
 first  syllable  is  said  to  be  derived  from  HJp,  kana, 
 'spine;'  in  confirmation  of  which  Bochart,  with 
 his  wonted  learning,  cites  the  Chaldee,  Hebrew, 
 Arabic,  and  Ethiopian  names  of  the  porcupine  and 
 hedgehog,  which  apparently  confirm  his  opinion  ; 
 but  although  derivations,  when  they  are  supported 
 by  apparent  identity  of  meaning  in  other  kindred 
 languages,  may  satisfy  the  judgment  of  mere  philo- 
 logists, something  more  will  be  demanded  by 
 naturalists,  who,  looking  for  more  positive  indica- 
 tions than  apparent  synonyma  and  inferential  deri- 
 vation, have  recourse  mainly  to  the  context  for 
 the  real  conditions,  which  must  determine  the 
 meaning  of  disputed  terms.  Now,  in  Is.  xiv.  23, 
 '  I  will  make  it  a  possession  for  the  kippod  (bit- 
 tern), and  pools  of  water,'  etc.,  the  words  are 
 plain  and  natural.  Marshes  and  pools  are  not  the 
 habitation  of  hedgehogs,  for  they  shun  water.  In 
 Is.  xxxiv.  II,  it  is  said,  'The  cormorant  (Sterna 
 caspia)  and  the  kippod  (bittern)  shall  possess  it, 
 t!ie  o.vl  also  and  the  raven  shall  dwell  in  it,'  etc.  ; 
 that  is,  in  the  ruins  of  Idumrea.  Here,  again,  the 
 version  is  plain,  and  a  hedgehog  most  surely  would 
 be  out  of  place.  Zeph.  ii.  14,  '  Both  the  cor- 
 morant (Sterna  caspia)  and  the  kippod  (bittern) 
 shall  lodge  in  the  upper  lintels  of  it ;  and  their 
 voice  shall  sing  in  the  windows,'  etc.  Surely  here 
 kippod  cannot  mean  the  hedgehog,  a  nocturnal, 
 grovelling,  worm-eating  animal,  entirely  or  nearly 
 mute,  and  incapable  of  climbing  up  walls  ;  one 
 that  does  not  haunt  ruins,  but  earthy  banks  in 
 wooded  regions,  and  that  is  absolutely  solitary  in 
 its  habits.  We  thus  see  that  the  arguments  respect- 
 ing kippod,  supplied  by  kephud,  or  kephod — for 
 we  find  these  various  readings — are  all  mere  specu- 
 lations, producing  at  best  only  negative  results. 
 Those  drawn  from  indications  of  manners,  such  as 
 the  several  texts  contain,  are,  on  the  contrary, 
 positive,  and  leave  no  doubt  that  the  animal  meant 
 is  not  a  hedgehog,  nor  even  a  mammal,  but  a  bird. 
 Hence,  though  we  admit  the  assumed  root  of  the 
 
 denomination,  still  it  must  bear  an  interpretation 
 which  is  applicable  to  one  of  tlie  feathered  tribes, 
 probably  to  certain  wading  species,  which  have, 
 chiefly  on  the  neck,  long  pointed  feathers,  more  or 
 less  speckled.  The  Arabian  bustard,  Otis  hotibara, 
 might  be  selected,  if  it  were  not  that  bustards  keep 
 always  in  dry  deserts  and  uplands,  and  that  they 
 never  roost,  their  feet  not  admitting  of  perching, 
 but  rest  on  the  ground.  We  think  the  term  most 
 applicable  to  the  heron  tribes,  whose  beaks  are 
 formidable  spikes  that  often  kill  hawks  ;  a  fact 
 well  known  to  Eastern  hunters.  Of  these  Aycti- 
 corax  Europcviis,  or  common  night  heron,  with  its 
 pencil  of  white  feathers  in  the  crest,  is  a  species, 
 not  uncommon  in  the  marshes  of  Western  Asia  ; 
 and  of  several  species  of  bittern,  Ardea  [botaierus) 
 stellaris  has  pointed  long  feathers  on  the  neck  and 
 breast,  freckled  with  black,  and  a  strong  pointed 
 bill.  After  the  breeding-season  it  migrates  and  passes 
 the  winter  in  the  south,  frequenting  the  marshes 
 and  rivers  of  Asia  and  Europe,  where  it  then  roosts 
 high  above  ground,  uttering  a  curious  note  before 
 and  after  its  evening  flight,  veiy  distinct  from  the 
 booming  sound  produced  by  it  in  the  breeding- 
 season,  and  while  it  remains  in  the  marshes. 
 Though  not  building,  like  the  stork,  on  the  tops  of 
 houses,  it  resorts,  like  the  heron,  to  ruined  struc- 
 tures, and  we  have  been  informed  that  it  has  been 
 seen  on  the  summit  of  Tauk  Kesra  at  Ctesiphon. — 
 C.  H.  S. 
 
 KIR  (T'p,  'a  wall ;'  Cyrene),  the  place  to  which 
 
 the  inhabitants  of  Damascus  were  carried  captive 
 by  the  king  of  Assyria  (2  Kings  xvi.  9).  It  is 
 worthy  of  note  that  in  the  four  passages  in  which 
 alone  this  word  occurs  in  Scripture,  the  authors  of 
 the  Septuagint  mistook  its  meaning  or  omitted  it. 
 They  omit  it  in  2  Kings  xvi.  9  ;  in  Is.  xxii.  6  they 
 render  it  a\ivajyw^y\,  perhaps  mistaking  it  for  ""p  ; 
 in  Amos  i.  5  they  translate  kviK\-r\TO'i,  probably 
 reading  N''"lp  ;  and  in  Amos  ix.  7  *hey  have  ^Sdpos, 
 deriving  it  from  ~i1p,  'to  dig.'  No  indication  is 
 given  of  the  geographical  position  of  Kir,  nor  can 
 we  learn  from  Scripture  whether  it  was  a  city  or 
 district.  Some  suppose  that  Kir  is  identical  with 
 the  Kovpva,  or  Ctiriia,  of  Ptolemy,  a  city  of 
 Media  on  the  river  Mardus  (Ptolemy,  vi.  2  ;  Bo- 
 chart, Opera,  i.  294  ;  Winer,  R.  IF.,  s.  v.)  Others 
 think  that  Kir  was  a  province  or  district  along  the 
 banks  of  the  river  Cyrus,  which  flows  down  from 
 the  loftiest  summits  of  the  Caucasus  range  into  the 
 Caspian  Sea  (Pliny,  H.  N.,  vi.  10 ;  Ptol.  v.  12). 
 This  river  lies  on  the  extreme  northern  frontier  of 
 ancient  Assyria.  It  still  retains  its  ancient  name, 
 Kt'ir  (Bonomi,  Ninei'eh,  pp.  47,  71).  Isaiah  men- 
 tions Elam  and  Kir  together  (/.  c.),  and  hence 
 Keil  (on  2  Kings  xvi.  9)  thinks  it  more  natural  to 
 identify  the  latter  with  Curna  of  Media,  or  with 
 XapivT],  also  a  city  of  Media  (Ptol.  vi.  2),  now 
 called  Kerend  (Ritter,  Erdkiinde  ix.  391).  The 
 latter  supposition  is  adopted  by  Vitringa  (apud  Is. 
 xxii.  6),  and  seems  to  be  supported  by  tlie  Targum, 
 which  has  X3''"lp  ;  it  would  also  locate  Elam  and 
 Kir  close  together,  as  the  former  lay  along  the 
 southern  border  of  Media,  whereas  the  river  Cyrus 
 lies  north  of  Media.  It  is  now  impossible  satisfac- 
 torily to  settle  the  question  ;  we  cannot  even  state 
 with  certainty  whether  the  Kir  of  2  Kings  is  iden- 
 tical with  that  of  Isaiah  ;  the  latter  may  perhaps 
 have  been  in  Media  near  Elam,  and  the  former  on 
 the  banks  of  the  Cyrus. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
KIR-HARESH 
 
 750 
 
 KIRJATH-ARBA 
 
 KIR-HARESH,  KIR-HERES,  KIR-HARA- 
 SETH,  KIR-HARESETH,  and  OR-MOAB 
 (bnn  T*!?,  Is.  xvi.  II  ;  t>-\ni'^p,  Jer.  xlviii.  31, 
 
 36 ;  Tp^n  -fp,  2  Kings  iii.   25  ;  nb^in  T'i?,  Is- 
 
 xvi.    7,    SeS-;  2XiO"Tp,  Is.   xv.    l),  a  strong  city 
 
 of  Moab.  It  is  remarkable  that  in  not  a  single 
 instance  does  the  Vulgate  version  render  this 
 as  a  proper  name ;  and  the  authors  of  the 
 LXX.  only  make  it  a  proper  name  in  one  pas- 
 sage. Is.  xvi.  7,  and  there  corruptly.  Kir  was 
 one  of  the  chief  fortresses  and  cities  of  Moab  ; 
 and  the  w^ord  /ie/rs  or  hareseth  would  seem  to 
 imply  that  its  wall  was  built  of  'brick.'  When 
 Joram  king  of  Israel  invaded  Moab,  Kir  was  the 
 only  city  left  standing  in  the  whole  country  ;  and 
 it  was  saved  by  an  act  of  savage  cruelty,  which  is 
 recorded  in  2  Kings  iii.  25-27.  In  the  Chaldee 
 paraphrase  Kir-Moab  of  Isaiah  is  rendered  ND"13 
 3Xlbn,  Kerakka  of  Moab ;  and  in  2  Mac.  xii.  17 
 the  city  is  called  XdpaKa.  Ptolemy  (v.  17)  has  it 
 XapaKuifxa,  and  Steph.  Byzant.  Xapa\'/xtD/3a.  The 
 city  became  the  seat  of  a  bishopric  in  the  province 
 oi  PalcEstina  Tei-tia  (Reland,  p.  705).  The  Crusa- 
 ders captured  it,  rebuilt  its  fortifications,  and,  mis- 
 taking it  for  Petra,  established  there,  in  a.d.  I167, 
 a  Latin  bishopric  of  that  name  (Will.  Tyr.  xi.  26  ; 
 XV.  21  ;  Jacobi  de  Vitri.  in  Gesta  Dei,  ch.  Ivi.  p. 
 1077  ;  cf.  Winer,  R.  fV.,  s.  v.  ;  Robinson,  B.  R., 
 ii.  166).  There  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  identity  of 
 Kir  and  Kharacca  with  the  Kerak  of  Arab  geogra- 
 phers (Schultens,  Index  Geogr.  in  Vit.  Salad,  s.  v. 
 Caracha),  and  the  modern  village  of  that  name. 
 
 Kerak  stands  on  the  top  of  a  rocky  hill  about 
 ten  miles  from  the  south-east  corner  of  the  Dead 
 Sea,  and  near  the  southern  frontier  of  Moab.  The 
 hill  is  encompassed  by  deep  narrow  ravines,  be- 
 yond which  rise  loftier  mountains,  shutting  it  in  on 
 all  sides  except  the  west,  where  a  sublime  glen 
 descends  3000  feet  to  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
 The  city  was  at  one  time  strongly  fortified  ;  and  is 
 still  enclosed  by  a  half  ruinous  wall,  flanked  by 
 seven  massive  towers.  Originally  there  were  but 
 two  entrances,  one  on  the  north,  the  other  on  the 
 south,  and  both  tunnelled  through  the  rock  for  a 
 distance  of  nearly  a  hundred  feet.  On  the  western 
 side  stands  the  citadel,  a  strong  building,  separated 
 from  the  town  by  a  deep  moat  hewn  in  the  rock. 
 It  appears  to  have  been  built  by  the  Crusaders. 
 Within  it  is  a  ruinous  church,  on  whose  walls  are 
 a  few  traces  of  rude  paintings.  The  present  popu- 
 lation numbers  about  3000,  one-third  of  whom 
 are  Greek  Christians.  Their  strong  position, 
 numbers,  and  valour,  make  them  the  rulers  of  a 
 large  district,  and  almost  independent  of  the  Turk- 
 ish government.  {Handbook  foi- S.  and  P.,\.  pp. 
 59,  seq.  ;  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  387  ;  De  Saulcy, 
 Journey  round  the  Dead  Sea,  i.  366-98  ;  Lynch, 
 Expedition,  pp.  263,  seq.,  English  ed.) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KIRJATII  (nnp).  This  word  means  town  or 
 city,  and  is  much  used  in  the  formation  of  names  of 
 places,  like  our  own  tozon.  The  following  are  the 
 principal  places  distinguished  by  this  term : — 
 
 I.  KiRjATH,  a  town  belonging  to  the  tribe  of 
 Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  28).  It  is  identified  by 
 Rosenmiiller  and  others  with  Kirjath-jearim,  but 
 v.  Raumer  and  Keil  object  to  this  on 'the  ground 
 that  Kirjath-jearim  is  not  only  reckoned  among 
 the  cities  of  Judah  (xv.  60),  but  is  expressly  called 
 
 the  city  of  the  children  of  Judah.  Eusebius  {Ono- 
 niast.,  s.  V.  YiapLdd)  says  Kirjath  was  a  city  under 
 the  metropolis  of  Gabatha  (Gibeah) ;  but  this  gives 
 us  no  clue  to  its  site. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 2.     KiRJATHAIM,    KiRIATHAIM     (D^n^lp,     *  twO 
 
 cities,'  or  'double  city;'  Ka/siaS-d/i  ;  Alex.  Kapta- 
 a-ai/oi ;  Cariathaini).  i.  A  city  of  Reuben,  situated 
 a  little  to  the  south  of  Heshbon  (Num.  xxxii. 
 37).  Though  taken  and  rebuilt  by  this  tribe,  it 
 was  again,  on  the  decline  of  Jewish  power,  occu- 
 pied by  the  Moabites  ;  and  in  pronouncing  a  pro- 
 phetic curse  on  that  nation  Jeremiah  mentions 
 Kirjathaim  with  Nebo,  Heshbon,  and  some  other 
 principal  cities  (xlviii.  i,  23).  It  appears  from  an 
 incidental  statement  of  Ezekiel  that  Kirjathaim 
 was  on,  or  near,  the  frontier  of  Moab.  '  There- 
 fore, behold,  I  will  open  the  shoulder  of  Moab 
 from  its  cities  on  its  frontiers  .  .  .  Beth-jeshimoth, 
 Baal-meon,  and  to  Kiriathaim'  (xxv.  9).  The 
 reading  in  this  passage  is  nDri''~lp"l,  which  is  in- 
 tended for  CTT'lp,  with  H  local  added,  as  is  seen 
 in  the  Keri ;  the  LXX.,  however,  renders  it  7r6Xews 
 Tva.pa^aXa.aaia.'i,  '  of  the  maritime  city,'  having  read 
 D''  '  sea,'  instead  of  the  termination  HD. 
 
 Kiriathaim  is  mentioned  by  both  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome,  who  state  that  in  their  day  it  was  a  large 
 Christian  village,  situated  ten  miles  west  of  Medeba, 
 and  called  Coraiatha  (KapiadLei/x,  according  to  Eu- 
 sebius, Ononiast.,  s.  v.  Cariathaini).  About  eleven 
 miles  south-west  of  the  ruins  of  Medeba  is  a  ruined 
 village  called  Kureiydt,  which  is  doubtless  identical 
 with  the  Coraiatha  of  Jerome,  and  most  probably 
 with  Kiriathaim.  It  lies  on  the  south-western 
 slope  of  Jebel  Attarus.  It  was  visited  by  Seetzen 
 [Keise,  ii.  342;  cf  Ritter,  Fal.  tend  Syr.,  ii.  583). 
 Burckhardt  thought  that  the  ruins  of  Et-Teym, 
 some  miles  farther  north,  might  be  Kiriathaim 
 {Travels  in  Syria,  p.  367  ;  Ritter,  id.  p.  I1S5). 
 
 Kiriathaim  is  one  of  the  oldest  of  Bible  cities. 
 It  was  on  the  '■plain  of  Kiriathaim^  (A.  V. 
 Shaveh-Kiriathaim,  which  see)  that  the  Emims 
 were  smitten  by  the  eastern  kings  who  plundered 
 Sodom  (Gen.  xiv.  5).  Burckhardt  tells  us  that  a 
 icw  miles  south  of  Kureiyat  is  a  level  plateau,  still 
 called  el-Koiira,  '  a  term  often  applied  in  Syria  to 
 plains. '  He  would  identify  it  with  the  '  Plain  of 
 Moab'  {Travels  in  Syria,  p.  371). 
 
 ii.  A  town  of  Naphtali  allotted  to  the  I  evites 
 (i  Chron.  vi.  76  [61]).  The  parallel  passage  in 
 Josh.  xxi.  32  has  IvARTAN,  which  see. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 3.   Kirjath-Arba  (nillN  "p ;  Sept.  iroXis  'A^- 
 
 ^6k,  TToKis  'Apyo^,  KapiadappSK),  the  name  of 
 Hebron  previous  to  the  conquest  of  Canaan  by 
 the  Israelites  (Gen.  xxiii.  2  ;  xxxv.  27  ;  Josh.  xiv. 
 15;  XV.  13,  54;  XX.  7;  xxi.  11),  and  which  was 
 apparently  still  in  the  use  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah 
 (Neh.  xi.  25).  There  is  reason  to  beheve  that 
 Hebron  was  the  original  name  of  the  place,  that 
 this  was  by  the  Canaanites  changed  into  Kirjath- 
 Arba,  and  that  the  Israelites  when  they  took  it 
 restored  the  ancient  name  (Hengstenberg,  Beitr. 
 iii.  187,  ff )  Sir  J.  Maundeville  says  that  in  his 
 time  the  place  was  called  by  the  Saracens  '  Kari- 
 carba,  that  is,  the  Place  of  Patriarchs,'  and  by  the 
 Jews  'Arbothe'  {Early  Trav.  i)i  Palestine,  p.  161). 
 The  partial  resemblance  of  these  names  to  Kir- 
 jatharba  is  probably  purely  accidental.  Whether 
 the  y21S  in  this  word  is  a  proper  name  or  the 
 numeral  y2;«r,  has  been  made  matter  of  question. 
 
KIRJATH-BAAL 
 
 751 
 
 KISHON 
 
 Jerome  received  from  the  Jews  the  tradition  that 
 the  city  was  called  '  of  four,'  because  there  Adam, 
 Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  had  been  buried  ;  and 
 this  he  not  only  mentions  in  various  parts  of  his 
 writings,  but  has  introduced  into  the  text  of  the 
 Vulgate  :  Adamus  maximus  ibi  inter  Enakim  situs 
 est  (Josh.  xiv.  15),  and  in  the  Onomast.  he  ren- 
 ders it  by  vilhila  qiiattnor ;  but  the  older  tra- 
 dition was  that  Arba  was  the  name  of  a  man, 
 one  of  the  famous  ancestors  of  the  Anaqim,  for 
 there  is  no  other  way  of  making  sense  of  Josh. 
 
 xiv.  15,  than  by  taking  the  words  pHJil  DTXH 
 Nin  D^pjyn,  '  the  great  man  among  the  Anaqim 
 was  he,'  as  in  apposition  to  and  descriptive  of 
 Arba  (comp.  xxi.  11).  It  is  true  that  the  naming 
 of  cities  after  individuals  rarely  occurs  in  the  O. 
 T. ;  but  Arba  was,  doubtless,  a  heroic  person  in 
 the  esteem  of  the  Canaanites,  and  the  case  of 
 Kirjath-Baal  shews  that  the  names  of  deities  and 
 deified  heroes  might  be  so  employed  [Hebron]. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 4.  Kirjath-Baal  pya  "p ;  Sept.  Kapid^  BdaX ; 
 
 BaaPs  town),  the  place  commonly  called  Kirjath- 
 Jearim  (Josh.  xv.  60;  xviii.  14). 
 
 ,    5.   KiRJATH-HuzOTH  (PiVn  "p ;    Sept.   ir6\eis 
 
 iwaijXewv),  the  place  to  which  Balaam  was  con- 
 ducted by  Balak  to  offer  sacrifice  (Num.  xxii.  39). 
 Knobel  identifies  it  with  the  Kereiyat  of  Burck- 
 hardt  on  the  ridge  of  the  Jebel  Attarus  to  the  east 
 of  the  Dead  Sea,  or  the  ruins  described  by  Seetzen 
 as  bearing  the  name  of  el  Koerriot,  near  the  same 
 locality,  if  the  two  be  not  the  same. 
 
 6.  Kirjath-Jearim  (D''^y''  JT'lp,  city  afforests; 
 
 Sept.  Kapiadiapifi ;  also  Kirjath-Arim  (Ezra  ii. 
 25),  one  of  the  towns  of  the  Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix. 
 17).  It  was  to  this  place  that  the  ark  was  brought 
 from  Bethshemesh,  after  it  had  been  removed  from 
 the  land  of  the  Philistines,  and  where  it  remained 
 till  removed  to  Jerusalem  by  David  (i  Sam.  vii.  ; 
 I  Chron.  xiii.)  This  was  one  of  the  ancient  sites 
 which  were  again  inhabited  after  the  exile  (Ezra  ii. 
 25;  Neh.  vii.  29).  Eusebius  and  Jerome  speak 
 of  it  as  being  in  their  day  a  village  nine  miles 
 from  Diospolis  (Lydda),  on  the  road  to  Jerusalem. 
 Dr.  Robinson  thinks  it  possible  that  the  ancient 
 Kirjath-jearim  may  be  recognised  in  the  present 
 Kuryet-el-Enab.  The  first  part  of  the  name  (Kir- 
 jath,  Kuryet,  signifying  city)  is  the  same  in  both, 
 and  is  most  probably  ancient,  being  found  in 
 Arabic  proper  names  only  in  Syria  and  Palestine, 
 and  not  very  frequently  even  there.  The  only 
 change  has  been,  that  the  ancient  '  city  of  forests' 
 has,  in  modern  times,  become  the  '  city  of  grapes.' 
 The  site  is  also  about  three  hours,  or  nine  Roman 
 miles  from  Lydda,  on  the  road  to  Jerusalem,  and 
 not  very  remote  from  Gibeon,  from  which  Kirjath- 
 jearim  could  not  well  have  been  distant.  So  close 
 a  correspondence  of  name  and  position  seems  to 
 warrant  the  conclusion  of  Dr.  Robinson  in  favour 
 of  Kuryet-el-Enab.  This  place  is  that  which  eccle- 
 siastical tradition  has  identified  with  the  Anathoth 
 of  Jeremiah,  which  Dr.  Robinson  refers  to  Anata 
 [Anathoth].  It  is  now  a  poor  village,  its  prin- 
 cipal buildings  being  an  old  convent  of  the  Mino- 
 rites, and  a  Latin  church.  The  latter  is  now  de- 
 serted, but  not  in  ruins,  and  is  said  to  be  one  of 
 the  largest  and  most  solidly  constructed  churches 
 in  Palestine  (Robinson,  ii.  109;  334-337). — ^J.  K. 
 
 7.  Kirjath-Sannah  {city  of /'alms;  Josh.  xv. 
 49),  otherwise  Kirjath-sepher  (city  of  the  book),  a 
 city  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  called  alsoDEBlR,  which 
 see  (Josh.  xv.  15,  16;  Judg.  i.  ii,  12). 
 
 KIR-MOAB  (2XiD~~l''p).  '  the  toivn,  stroiigJiolJ, 
 
 or  citadel  of  Moab ;''  Sept.  rh  re^xos  ttjs  Mcoa^i- 
 Tidos;  Is.  XV.  l)  [Kir-HARESETH]. 
 
 KISH    (\y^\);   Sept.    and   N.    T.   Kt's).      The 
 
 name  of  four  persons  mentioned  in  the  O.  T.,  of 
 whom  the  most  important  was  the  father  of  Saul, 
 the  first  king  of  Israek  He  was  a  Benjamite  of 
 Gibeah,  the  son  of  Ner,  and  the  grandson  of 
 Jehiel  or  Abiel  (i  Sam.  xiv.  51  ;  I  Chron.  ix.  35). 
 One  of  his  uncles  also  bore  the  name  of  Kish 
 (i  Chron.  ix.  36).  This  was  the  name  also  of  the 
 great-grandfather  of  Mordecai,  who  was  taken 
 captive  at  the  time  Jeremiah  was  carried  to  Baby- 
 lon (Esther  ii.  5);  and  of  a  Merarite  (l  Chron. 
 xxiii.  21 ;  xxiv.  29),  who  is  also  called  KiSHi 
 (i  Chron.  vi.  44)  and  Kushaiah  (i  Chron.  xv. 
 17);  the  ancestor  of  Jeduthim  or  Ethan  [JEDU- 
 thun]. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KISHION  and  KISHON  (ji'^t^'p,  'hardness;' 
 Kiauv  ;  Alex.  Kiaiii:' ;  Cesion),  a  town  of  Issachar, 
 apparently  situated  in  the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
 where  most  of  those  with  which  it  is  grouped  also 
 stood  (Josh.  xix.  20).  It  was  one  of  four  allotted 
 to  the  Levites  (xxi.  28).  It  is  called  Kedesh  in 
 I  Chron.  vi.  72,  which  may  perhaps  have  been  a 
 later  name  for  it  [Kedesh].  Some  think  that 
 Kishon  owes  its  name  to  the  more  celebrated  river 
 Kishon  ;  and  others  that  it  took  its  name  from  the 
 river.  The  two  names,  however,  though  similar 
 in  sound,  have  different  roots,  JVL^'p  coming  from 
 rwp>  '  to  be  hard  ;'  and  i'lK'''p,  from  np,  '  to  be 
 bent  as  a  bow'  (cf.  Gesenius,  Thesaurus ;  Keil  on 
 Josh,  ad  loc.)  The  site  of  the  town  is  unknown. 
 -J.  L.  P. 
 
 KISHON  (i^&p,  '  tortuous,'  from  ^\\>,  '  to  be 
 bent  ;'  KtcrtDi',  \\i.a<jQ>v  ;  Alex.  KtcrcDj' and  KetcrtSc  ; 
 Cison),  a  celebrated  river  of  Palestine,  which  drains 
 nearly  the  whole  plain  of  Esdraelon,  and  falls  into 
 the  Mediterranean  near  the  northern  base  of  Mount 
 Carmel.  The  Kishon  has  a  vast  number  of  little 
 branches  or  tributaries  falhng  into  it  from  the  hills 
 on  the  north  and  south  sides  of  the  plain.  Its 
 highest  sources  on  the  north-east  are  at  Tabor,  as 
 is  stated  by  Jerome  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Cison).  This 
 has  been  denied  by  Shaw  {Travels,  i.  168),  but  its 
 truth  has  been  satisfactorily  established  by  many 
 recent  travellers  (Robinson,  B.  R.,  ii.  356,  363  ; 
 Munro,  Stmimer  Ramble,  i.  281).  The  watershed 
 on  this  part  of  the  plain  might  be  defined,  with  a 
 near  approach  to  accuracy,  by  a  line  drawn  from 
 the  base  of  Tabor  to  the  village  of  Nain  on  the 
 opposite  hill ;  on  the  west  side  of  that  line  the 
 water  flows  to  the  Mediterranean  through  the 
 Kishon  ;  on  the  east  to  the  Jordan.  During  the 
 summer  all  the  water-courses  are  perfectly  dry,  but 
 when  the  heavy  rains  of  winter  and  early  spring 
 fall,  large  torrents  rush  down  from  Tabor  and  the 
 hills  of  Galilee,  speedily  fill  the  deep  miry  beds  in 
 the  alluvial  plain,  and  render  the  passage  of  them 
 both  difficult  and  dangerous.  In  the  end  of  March 
 1858  the  writer  travelled  from  Nazareth  to  Jenin  ; 
 ram  had  fallen  for  two  days  before,  ar.d  he  had 
 
KISHON 
 
 752 
 
 KISHUIM 
 
 extreme  difficulty  in  crossing  one  of  the  channels 
 through  which  a  considerable  stream  was  flowing 
 westward  (cf.  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book, 
 p.  434,  English  ed.)  The  soil  of  the  whole  plain 
 is  so  soft  and  deep,  and  the  natural  drainage  so 
 defective,  that  a  fall  of  rain  converts  large  sections 
 of  it  into  dangerous  swamps.  During  the  battle 
 between  the  French  and  the  Arabs,  on  April  i6th, 
 1799,  many  of  the  latter  are  said  to  have  been 
 drowned  in  the  stream  which  flows  westward 
 through  the  plain  from  Deburieh,  at  the  foot  of 
 Tabor  (Burckhardt,  Travels  in  Syria,  p.  339  ;  cf. 
 Robinson,  ii.  363).  The  highest  source  of  the 
 Kishon  on  the  south-east  is  the  large  fountain  of 
 Jenin,  the  ancient  En-gannim,  the  water  from 
 which,  increased  by  a  number  of  the  streamlets 
 from  the  surrounding  hills,  flows  westward  across 
 the  plain  through  a  deep  channel,  during  the  winter 
 months ;  but  in  summer  this  channel,  like  the 
 northern  one,  is  perfectly  dry  (Van  de  Velde, 
 Travels,  i.  362 ;  Thomson,  435).  The  two  channels 
 unite  at  a  point  a  few  miles  north  of  the  site  of 
 Megiddo.  The  channel  of  the  united  stream  is 
 here  deep  and  miry  ;  the  ground  for  some  distance 
 on  each  side  is  low  and  marshy  ;  and  the  fords 
 during  winter  are  always  difficult,  and  often,  after 
 heavy  rain,  impassable  ;  yet  in  summer,  even  here, 
 the  whole  plain  and  the  river  bed  are  dry  and 
 hard  (Robinson,  ii.  364;  Thomson,  I.e.)  These 
 facts  strikingly  illustrate  the  narrative  of  the  defeat 
 of  Sisera.  The  battle  was  fought  on  the  south 
 bank  of  the  Kishon,  at  Megiddo  (Judg.  iv.  13  ; 
 V.  19).  While  the  battle  raged  a  violent  storm 
 of  wind  and  rain  came  on  (Judg.  v.  4,  20 ;  cf. 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  v.  5.  4).  In  a  short  time  the 
 hard  plain  was  turned  into  a  marsh,  and  the  dry 
 river-bed  into  a  foaming  torrent.  The  Canaanites 
 were  driven  back  on  the  river  by  the  fiery  attack 
 of  Barak,  and  the  fury  of  the  storm  ;  for  '  the 
 earth  trembled,  the  heavens  dropped  .  .  .  the 
 stars  in  their  courses  fought  against  Sisera.'  The 
 war-horses  and  chariots  dashing  madly  through 
 the  marshy  ground  made  it  much  worse  ;  and  the 
 soldiers,  in  trying  to  cross  the  swollen  torrent, 
 were  swept  away.  '  The  river  Kishon  swept  them 
 away,  that  ancient  river,  the  river  Kishon'  (Judg. 
 V.  21). 
 
 From  this  place  the  river  flows  through  a  tortu- 
 ous bed  to  a  narrow  pass  between  the  base  of 
 Carmel  and  a  projecting  spur  from  the  hills  of 
 Galilee,  where  it  passes  from  the  plain  of  Esdraelon 
 to  that  of  Acre.  Here  was  the  scene  of  another 
 of  the  most  memorable  incidents  in  sacred  history. 
 High  up  on  the  brow  of  Carmel,  above  the  stream, 
 
 is  a  spot  called  liluhrakah,  '  the  sacrifice'  (ii  >5y<, 
 
 Holocaustiim  ;  Freitag,  Lex.  Aral>.)  ;  it  is  the  place 
 where  Elijah  offered  his  sacrifice  ;  and  on  the  banks 
 of  the  Kishon  beneath,  the  eight  hundred  and  fifty 
 prophets  of  Baal  were  slain  by  his  command 
 (I  Kings  xviii.  ;  Handbook,  ii.  371  ;  Van  de 
 Velde,  Travels,  i.  321  ;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  347). 
 The  river  continues  to  flow  close  along  the  rocky 
 base  of  Carmel,  in  a  tortuous  bed,  cut  to  the  depth 
 of  fifteen  or  twenty  feet  in  the  loamy  soil.  The 
 writer  forded  it  in  the  month  of  May,  on  his  way 
 from  the  convent  to  Nazareth  ;  the  stream  was 
 about  three  feet  deep  and  thirty  wide,  with  a  very 
 easy  current,  but  the  soft  mud  made  th°  passage 
 difficult  (cf.  Robinson,  ii.  p.   365).     The  largest 
 
 perennial  source  of  the  Kishon  is  the  fountain  oi 
 Saadiyeh,  which  springs  from  the  base  of  Carmel, 
 about  three  miles  east  of  Haifa  (Thomson,  p.  435  ; 
 Handbook,  ii.  383).  From  this  point  to  the  sea 
 the  river  winds  through  marshes.  At  its  mouth 
 are  banks  of  fine  sand,  which  any  unusual  swell  in 
 the  river  converts  into  dangerous  quicksands  (Van 
 de  Velde,  i.  289). 
 
 Such  is  the  river  Kishon,  'that  ancient  river.' 
 Its  modern  name  is  Nahr  el-Miihitta,  which  some 
 have  thought  means  '  the  river  of  slaughter,'  hi 
 allusion  to  the  slaughter  of  the  prophets  of  Baal  on 
 its  banks.     It  may  have  this  meaning,  from  the 
 
 root  .  U',  '  to  cut,'  or  'slay  ;'  but  the  name  may 
 
 also  signify  '  river  of  the  ford,'  from  another  mean- 
 ing of  the  same  root  (Freytag,  Lex.  Arab.,  s.  v.  ; 
 cf.  Robinson,  ii.  365)  ;  the  latter  is  the  interpre- 
 tation given  of  the  name  by  the  people  of  the 
 cinmtry  (but  see  Schwarze,  pp.  49,  seq.  ;  Stanley, 
 S.  and  P. ,  p.  347  ;  Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible, 
 ii.  86).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 KISHUIM  (CSl^'p)  is  translated  encumbers  in 
 
 our  A.  v.,  and  the  correctness  of  this  render- 
 ing has  been  almost  universally  admitted.  It 
 first  occurs  in  Num.  xi.  5,  in  the  verse  already 
 quoted  in  Abattichim,  where  the  Israelites,  when 
 in  the  desert,  express  their  longings  for  the  melons 
 and  the  Kishitini  or  cucumbers  of  Egypt.  Re- 
 duced from  the  plural  form,  the  word  kisha  is  so 
 
 similar  to  the  Arabic  ^  .^'^  kissa,  that  there  can 
 
 be  very  little  doubt  of  their  both  meaning  the  same 
 
 thing.  Celsius  gives  keta,  kati,  and  knsaia,  as  dif- 
 ferent pronunciations  of  the  same  word  in  different 
 Oriental  languages.  It  does  not  follow  that  these 
 names  always  indicate  exactly  the  same  species  ; 
 since  in  the  different  countries  they  would  probably 
 be  applied  to  the  kinds  of  cucumber  most  common, 
 or  perhaps  to  those  which  were  most  esteemed  in 
 particular  localities.  Thus  in  Egypt  the  name  kati 
 appears  to  be  applied  to  the  species  which  is  called 
 Ciiciiinis  chafe  by  botanists,  and  '  queen  of  cucum- 
 bers' by  Hasselquist,  who  describes  it  as  the  most 
 highly  esteemed  of  all  those  cultivated  in  Egypt 
 [Abattichim].  In  India  the  n'^imt  kissa  is  applied 
 by  the  Mohammedans  to  the  Ciicuniis  utilissimns, 
 or  the  common  knkrce  of  the  natives  ;  while  in 
 Persia  and  Syria  the  same  name  would  probably 
 be  applied  only  to  the  common  cucumber,  or  Cn- 
 cnmis  sativus,  as  the  two  preceding  species  are  not 
 likely  to  be  much  knov*'n  in  either  country.  All 
 travellers  in  the  East  notice  the  extensive  cultiva- 
 tion and  consumption  of  cucumbers  and  other  herbs 
 of  the  same  tribe,  especially  where  there  is  any 
 moisture  of  soil,  or  the  possibility  of  irrigation. 
 Thus  even  in  the  driest  parts,  the  neighbourhood 
 of  a  well  is  often  occupied  by  a  field  of  cucurbita- 
 ceous  plants,  generally  with  a  man  or  boy  set  to 
 guard  it  from  plunder,  perched  up  on  a  temporary 
 scaffolding,  with  a  slight  protection  from  the  sun, 
 where  he  may  himself  be  safe  from  the  attacks  of 
 the  more  powerful  wild  animals.  That  such  plants 
 appear  to  have  been  similarly  cultivated  among  the 
 Hebrews  is  evident  from  Is.  i.  8,  'The  daughter  of 
 Zion  is  left  like  a  cottage  in  a  vineyard,  like  a  lodge 
 in  a  garden  of  cucumbers  ;'  as  well  as  from  Baruch 
 vi.  70,  '  As  a  scarecrow  in  a  garden  of  cucumbers 
 keepeth  nothing,  so  are  their  gods  of  wood ' 
 [Abattichim]. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
KISS 
 
 753 
 
 KISSOS 
 
 KISS.  Originally  the  act  of  kissing  had  a  sym- 
 bolicalcharacter,  and,  though  this  import  may  now 
 be  lost  sight  of,  yet  it  must  be  recognised  the 
 moment  we  attempt  to  understand  or  explain  its 
 signification.  Acts  speak  no  less,  sometimes  far 
 more  forcibly,  than  words.  In  the  early  period  of 
 society,  when  the  foundation  was  laid  of  most  even 
 of  our  Western  customs,  action  constituted  a  large 
 portion  of  what  we  may  term  human  language,  or 
 the  means  of  intercommunication  between  man  and 
 man ;  because  then  words  were  less  numerous, 
 books  unknown,  the  entire  machinery  of  speaking, 
 being  in  its  rudimental  and  elementary  state,  less 
 developed  and  called  into  play  ;  to  say  nothing  of 
 that  peculiarity  of  the  Oriental  character  (if,  indeed, 
 it  be  not  a  characteristic  of  all  nations  in  primitive 
 ages)  which  inclined  men  to  general  taciturnity, 
 with  occasional  outbreaks  of  fervid,  abrupt,  or 
 copious  eloquence.  In  this  language  of  action,  a 
 kiss,  inasmuch  as  it  was  a  bringing  into  contact  of 
 parts  of  the  body  of  two  persons,  was  naturally  the 
 expression  and  the  symbol  of  affection,  regard,  re- 
 spect, and  reverence  ;  and  if  any  deeper  source  of 
 its  origin  were  sought  for,  it  would,  doubtless,  be 
 found  in  tli,e  fondling  and  caresses  with  which  the 
 mother  expresses  her  tenderness  for  her  babe.  That 
 the  custom  is  of  very  early  date  appears  from  Gen. 
 xxix.  13,  where  \\  e  read — '  When  Laban  heard 
 the  tidings  of  Jacob,  his  sister's  son,  he  ran  to 
 meet  him,  and  embraced  him  and  kissed  him,  and 
 brought  him  to  his  house  ;'  the  practice  was  even 
 then  established  and  recognised  as  a  matter  of 
 course.  In  Gen.  xxvii.  26,  27,  a  kiss  is  a  sign  of 
 affection  between  a  parent  and  child.  It  was  also, 
 as  with  some  modern  nations,  a  token  of  friendship 
 and  regard  bestowed  when  friends  or  relations  met 
 or  separated  (Tobit.  vii.  6  ;  x.  12  ;  Luke  vii.  45  ; 
 XV.  20  ;  Acts  XX.  37  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  48  ;  2  Sam.  xx. 
 9).  The  church  of  Epliesus  wept  sore  at  Paul's 
 departure,  and  fell  on  his  neck  and  kissed  him. 
 When  Orpah  quitted  Naomi  and  Ruth  (Ruth  i.  14), 
 after  the  three  had  lifted  up  their  voice  and  wept, 
 she  '  kissed  her  mother-in-law,  but  Ruth  clave  unto 
 her.'  It  was  usual  to  kiss  the  mouth  (Gen.  xxxiii. 
 4;  Exod.  iv.  27  ;  xviii.  7  ;  I  Sam.  xx.  41  ;  Prov. 
 xxiv.  26),  or  the  beard,  which  was  then  taken  hold 
 of  by  the  hand  (2  Sam.  xx.  9).  Kissing  of  the  feet 
 was  an  expression  of  lowly  and  tender  regard  (Luke 
 vii.  38).  Kissing  of  the  hand  of  another  appears 
 to  be  a  modern  practice  :  the  passage  of  Job  xxxi. 
 27,  '  Or  my  mouth  hath  kissed  my  hand,'  is  not  in 
 point,  and  refers  to  idolatrous  usages,  namely,  the 
 adoration  of  the  heavenly  bodies.  It  was  the  cus- 
 tom to  throw  kisses  towards  the  images  of  the  gods, 
 and  towards  the  sun  and  moon  (i  Kings  xix.  18  ; 
 Hosea  xiii.  2  ;  Minuc.  Felix,  ii.  5  ;  Tac.  Hist.  iii. 
 24.  3  ;  Lucian,  De  Salt.  c.  17  ;  Plin.  Hist.  Nat. 
 xxviii.  5).  The  kissing  of  princes  was  a  token  of 
 homage  (Ps.  ii.  12  ;  i  Sam.  x.  i  ;  Xenoph.  C_vrof>. 
 vii.  5.  32).  Xenophon  says  {Agesil.  v.  4)  that  it 
 was  a  national  custom  with  the  Persians  to  kiss 
 whomsoever  they  honoured  ;  and  a  curious  passage 
 to  this  effect  may  be  found  in  the  Cyropcvdia  (1.  4. 
 27).  Kissing  the  feet  of  princes  was  a  token  of 
 subjection  and  obedience  ;  which  was  sometmies 
 carried  so  far  that  the  print  of  the  foot  received  the 
 kiss,  so  as  to  give  the  impression  that  the  very  dust 
 had  become  sacred  by  the  royal  tread,  or  that  the 
 subject  was  not  worthy  to  salute  even  the  prince's 
 foot,  but  was  content  to  kiss  the  earth  itself  near 
 or  on  which  he  trod  (Is.  xlix.  23  ;  Micah  vii.  17  ; 
 
 VOL.   II. 
 
 Ps.  Ixxii.  9  ;  Dion  Cass.  lix.  27  ;  Seneca,  De  Benef. 
 ii.  12).  The  Rabbins  did  not  permit  more  than 
 three  kinds  of  kisses,  the  kiss  of  reverence,  of  re- 
 ception, and  of  dismissal  (Breschith  Rabba  on  Gen. 
 xxix.  II). 
 
 The  peculiar  tendency  of  the  Christian  religion 
 to  encourage  honour  towards  all  men,  as  men  ;  to 
 foster  and  develope  the  softer  affections ;  and,  in 
 the  trying  condition  of  the  early  church,  to  make 
 its  members  intimately  known  one  to  another,  and 
 unite  them  in  the  closest  bonds^led  to  the  observ- 
 ance of  kissing  as  an  accompaniment  of  that  social 
 worship  which  took  its  origin  in  the  very  cradle  of 
 our  religion.  Hence  the  exhortation- — '  Salute  each 
 other  with  a  holy  kiss  '  (Rom.  xvi.  16;  see  also  i 
 Cor.  xvi.  20;  2  Cor.  xiii.  12  ;  I  Thess.  v.  26;  in 
 I  Peter  v.  14,  it  is  termed  '  a  kiss  of  charity ').  The 
 observance  was  continued  in  later  days,  and  has 
 not  yet  wholly  disappeared,  though  the  peculiar 
 circumstances  have  vanished  which  gave  propriety 
 and  emphasis  to  such  an  expression  of  brotherly 
 love  and  Christian  friendship. 
 
 On  the  subject  of  this  article  consult  Pfanner, 
 De  Osculis  Christianor.  Veter.  ;  M.  Kempius,  De 
 Osculis,  Francof.  i58o;  Jac.  Herrenschmidius, 
 Osciilogia,  Viteb.  1630 ;  P.  Muller,  De  Osculo 
 Sancto,  1674;  Boberg,  De  Osculis Hcbr.—].  R.  B. 
 
 KISSOS  (Gr.  Kiacoi),  'ivy,'  is  mentioned  only 
 once,  and  that  in  the  Apocrypha  (2  Maccab.  vi.  7), 
 where  the  Temple  is  described'as  being  desecrated 
 by  the  Gentiles,  and  the  Jews  forced  to  depart  from 
 the  laws  of  their  fathers  :  '  And  when  the  feast  of 
 
 ^A^vir, 
 
 301.  Hedera  helix. 
 
 Bacchus  was  kept,  the  Jews  were  compelled  to  go 
 in  procession  to  Bacchus,  carrying  ivy.'  The  term 
 KKjabs  or  KLTrb'i  seems  to  have  been  applied  by  the 
 Greeks  in  a  general  sense,  and  to  have  included 
 
 3C 
 
KITE 
 
 KLEUKER 
 
 many  plants,  and,  among  tliem,  some  climbers,  as 
 the  convolvulus,  besides  the  common  ivy,  which 
 was  especially  dedicated  to  Bacchus,  and  which 
 was  distinguished  by  the  name  of  '  Hedera  poetica, 
 Dionysia  aut  Bacchica,  quod  ex  ea  poetarum 
 coronas  consuerentur.'  It  is  well  known  that  in 
 the  Dionysia,  or  festivals  in  honour  of  Dionysus, 
 and  in  the  processions  called  diacroi,  with  which 
 they  were  celebrated,  women  also  took  part,  in  the 
 disguise  of  Bacchas,  Naiades,  Nymphce,  etc., 
 adorned  with  garlands  of  ivy,  etc.  :  thus  Ovid 
 (Fasti,  iii.  766)  : — 
 
 Cum   hedera   cincta   est  ?    hedera    est    gratissima 
 Baccho. 
 
 Bacchus  is  generally  thought  to  have  been  edu- 
 cated in  India,  and  the  Indian  Baghes  has  been 
 supposed  to  be  the  original  of  the  name.  The  fact 
 of  Baghes  being  a  compound  of  two  words  signify- 
 ing tiger  and  master  or  lord,  would  appear  to  con- 
 firm the  identity,  since  Bacchus  is  usually  repre- 
 sented as  drawn  in  his  chariot  by  a  tiger  and  a 
 lion,  and  tigers,  etc. ,  are  described  as  following 
 him  in  his  Indian  journey.  As  the  ivy,  however, 
 is  not  a  plant  of  India,  it  might  be  objected  to  its 
 being  characteristic  of  an  Indian  god.  But  in  the 
 mountains  which  bound  India  to  the  north,  both 
 the  ivy  and  the  vine  may  be  found,  and  the  Greeks 
 were  acquainted  with  the  fact  that  Mount  Mero  is 
 the  only  part  of  India  where  ivy  was  produced. 
 Indeed,  Alexander  and  his  companions  are  said  to 
 have  crowned  themselves  with  ivy  in  honour  of 
 Bacchus.  The  ivy,  Hedera  Helix,  being  a  native 
 of  most  parts  of  Europe,  is  too  well  known  to  require 
 special  notice. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KITE.     [AjAH;  Daah.] 
 
 KITHLISH  {^■hV)'^  ;  Maaxcis;  Alex.  Xa^Xcis; 
 
 Cethlis),  a  town  of  Judah,  situated  in  the  She- 
 phelah  or  plain  of  Philistia,  and  grouped  with 
 Lachish  and  Eglon  (Josh.  xv.  33-40).  It  appears 
 to  have  stood  in  the  plain  between  Eglon  and 
 Eleutheropolis,  but  the  site  has  not  been  dis- 
 covered.— ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 KITRON  (fnOp;  Sept.  \UZp^v;  Alex.  XePpdji^; 
 
 Cetron),  one  of  the  places  from  which  the  children 
 of  Zebulun  did  not  drive  out  the  Canaanites  (Judg. 
 i.  30).  This  place  is  not  mentioned  in  Josh.  xix. 
 as  among  the  possessions  of  Zebulun.  Bertheau  sug- 
 gests [Exeget.  Hdh.,  in  loc.)  that  the  word  may  be  an 
 erroneous  reading  for  j'llOK',  mentioned  Josh.  xix. 
 
 15,  and  Rosenmiiller  proposes  to  identify  it  with 
 the  DtSp  of  the  same  passage  ;  but  all  this  is  purely 
 
 conjectural.  '  In  the  Talmud  [Megillah,  as  quoted 
 by  Schwarz,  173),  it  is  identified  with  Zippori,  i.e., 
 Sepphoris,  now  Seffurieh '  (Smith's  Did.  of  the 
 Bible,  ii.  47).  We  can  find  no  trace  of  any  such 
 identification  in  the  tract  referred  to. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KITTIM.     [Chittim.] 
 
 KITTO,  John,  was  born  at  Plymouth,  4th 
 November  1804.  The  circumstances  of  his  birth 
 were  very  unfavourable  to  his  education,  and  at 
 the  age  of  twelve  he  met  with  an  accident  which 
 destroyed  his  hearing  for  life,  and  reduced  blm 
 almost  to  the  condition  of  a  deaf  msre.  Though 
 he  was  the  inmate  of  a  poor  and  unhappy  home, 
 his  juvenile  energy  rose  above  adversity ;  and  the 
 
 poor,  hungry,  and  ragged  boy  strove  to  maintain 
 iiimself,  and  pay  for  a  few  books  from  a  small  cir- 
 culating library,  by  groping  for  old  ropes  and  iron 
 in  Sutton-pool  and  selling  them,  and  by  painting 
 rude  labels  for  shop  windows.  On  the  15th  ol 
 November  1S19  he  was  seized  and  sent  to  the 
 Plymouth  Workhouse  for  pity's  sake.  In  this 
 place  his  powerful  will  soon  asserted  his  position 
 against  older  and  stronger  boys,  and  here  he  began 
 a  diary  which  is  still  preserved,  and  large  excerpts 
 from  which  have  been  printed  in  his  life.  It  con- 
 tains many  self-poitraits,  physical  and  mental,  and 
 shows  the  awakening  of  his  mind  to  literary  tastes 
 and  ambition.  He  learned  shoemaking  ;  but  was 
 often  so  dull  and  dispirited  that  he  called  himself 
 'John  the  Comfortless,'  and  twice  had  thoughts 
 of  bringing  his  life  to  a  premature  end.  Some 
 gentlemen  at  length  took  notice  of  him,  and  he 
 removed  to  Exeter  to  work  as  a  dentist  with  Mr. 
 Groves.  His  spirit  was  now  growing  in  pious 
 fervour,  and,  disabled  though  he  was,  he  longed 
 to  be  a  missionaiy.  In  July  1825  he  removed  for 
 this  purpose  to  the  missionary  college  at  Islington, 
 and  having  learned,  among  other  things,  to  print, 
 he  was  sent  out  to  Malta,  but  returned  to  England 
 in  infirm  health  in  1829.  Mr.  Groves,  who  was 
 now  preparing  to  go  as  a  missionaiy  to  the  East, 
 took  Kitto  with  him  as  a  tutor  to  his  boys,  and  the 
 party  arrived  at  Bagdad  in  December  of  the  same 
 year.  During  his  residence  in  this  city  Kitto  had 
 experience  of  the  sad  results  of  war,  plague, 
 and  inundation  in  succession.  After  four  years' 
 absence,  and  having  passed  through  Trebizond  and 
 Constantinople  on  his  return,  he  arrived  in  England 
 in  June  1833.  Through  the  influence  of  friends, 
 he  at  once  set  to  work  as  a  regular  contributor  to 
 the  Fenny  Magazine.  One  set  of  his  papers  bore 
 the  suggestive  title  of  the  '  Deaf  Traveller.'  The 
 Fictorial  Bible  was  commenced  in  the  end  of 
 1835.  His  experiences  in  the  East  gave  him  great 
 delight  in  the  work  and  some  qualification  for 
 it,  and  it  has  passed  through  several  editions. 
 The  Pictorial  Bible  was  followed  by  the  Fictorial 
 History  of  Falestine  and  tlie  Holy  Land.  After 
 other  smaller  works  had  passed  through  his  hands, 
 the  Cyclopadia  of  Biblical  Literature  was  begun  by 
 him  as  editor,  and  brought  to  a  conclusion  in  1848. 
 The  present  edition  of  it,  formally  the  third  edi- 
 tion, is,  however,  to  a  great  extent  a  new  work. 
 Then  Kitto  projected  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Litera- 
 tm-e,  which,  having  passed  through  the  hands  of 
 various  editors,  still  holds  its  vi'ay.  His  last  and 
 most  popular  work  was  the  Daily  Bible  Lllusti-a- 
 tions,  completed  in  eight  volumes.  During  its 
 progress  his  health  gave  way,  and  through  the 
 kind  assistance  of  some  friends,  he  was  enabled  to 
 retire  to  Canstatt,  in  Germany,  where  he  died  on 
 the  25th  of  November  1S54.  Dr.  Kitto's  services 
 to  the  cause  of  Scripture  learning  were  great  in  his 
 own  sphere.  He  revived  and  freshened  the  study 
 of  Eastern  manners,  and  his  origination  of  this 
 Cyclopaedia  marks  an  epoch  in  the  Biblical  litera- 
 ture of  our  country.  His  life  itself,  with  his  physi- 
 cal defect  and  early  privations,  v\-as  a  marvel  of 
 self-education  and  heroic  perseverance.  The  Uni- 
 versity of  Giessen  in  1844  gave  him  a  theological 
 diploma,  though  he  was  a  layman.  An  interest- 
 ing autobiography  is  contained  in  \i\s  Lost  Senses. — 
 J.  E. 
 
 KLEUKER,  JoH.  Fried.,  was  born  at  Oster* 
 
KNxVPP 
 
 755 
 
 KNIFE 
 
 ode  29th  Oct.  1749,  and  died  at  Kiel  31st  May 
 1827.  He  was  successively  prorector  of  the  gym- 
 nasium at  Lemgo,  rector  of  a  school  at  Osnabriick, 
 and  professor  of  Theology  at  Kiel.  He  devoted 
 himself  chiefly  to  Oriental  studies.  His  works  in 
 the  department  of  Biblical  literature  are — i.  Sa- 
 lomds  Schriften,  3  vols.,  1777-1785  ;  and  2.  Aits- 
 fiibrl.  Untetsitchnng.  der  Giiiitde  fiir  d.  Aechtheit 
 und  Glaub^oiiniigkeit  d.  Schriftl.  Urknndeti  des 
 Ckrisient/mms,  5  vols.,  1794- 1800.  These  are  in- 
 ferior in  importance  to  his  works  on  Oriental  litera- 
 ture and  philosophy.  His  German  translation  of 
 the  Zendavesta,  3  vols.  4to,  Riga  1776-78;  his 
 abridgment  of  the  same,  with  relative  essays  and 
 illustrations,  Riga  1789  ;  and  his  treatises  l/eb.  die 
 Natur  u.  d.  Ursprung  der  Emanatio)islchre  bei  der 
 Kabbalisteii,  1 786,  and  Ucb.  das  Brahmaiiische  Re- 
 ligionsystem,  1797,  have  placed  his  name  high  in 
 the  list  of  Orientalists. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KNAPP,  Georg  Christian,  was  born  Sept. 
 17,  1753,  at  Glaucha,  near  Halle,  his  father  being 
 director  of  the  celebrated  orphan  asylum  and 
 educational  institute  founded  in  this  town  by  A. 
 H.  Francke.  *  His  studies  were  carried  on  first  in 
 the  schools,  and  afterwards  in  the  university  of  his 
 native  town.  During  a  single  session  he  studied  at 
 Gottingen.  In  1777  he  was  appointed  professor 
 extraordinary  of  theology  at  Halle,  and  in  1782 
 was  placed  on  the  staff  of  ordinai-y  professors.  In 
 1 785  he  was  also  appointed,  along  with  Niemeyer, 
 to  the  directorate  of  the  institution  at  Glaucha,  and 
 in  the  division  of  labour  the  superintendence  of  the 
 Bible  and  Missionary  department  fell  to  his  lot.  The 
 duties  of  these  several  offices  he  discharged  with 
 honour  to  himself  and  to  the  credit  of  his  university 
 during  nearly  half  a  century.  He  died  Oct.  14, 
 1825.  In  theology  he  ranks  amongst  the  ex- 
 pounders and  defenders  of  a  Biblical  supranatu- 
 ralism  in  opposition  to  the  doctrines  of  the  ration- 
 alistic school.  Tholuck  has  described  him  as  the 
 latest  offshoot  of  the  old  theological  school  of 
 Halle.  His  Biblical  works  are — i.  A  translation 
 of  the  book  of  Psalms,  with  comments.  Die  Psal- 
 men  iiberscizt  tind  mit  Anmerkiingeu,  Halle  177^1 
 8vo,  3d  ed.  1789.  2.  A  very  carefully  edited  and 
 useful  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament,  Novum 
 Testat7ientum  grace  recogiiavit  atqiie  insignioris  lec- 
 tiomim  varieiatis  et  argnmentorum  notitiam  sub- 
 junxit  G.  Ch.  Knapp,  Halle  1797,  4to  ;  the  last 
 edition  in  1829,  2  vols.  8vo.  3.  Scripia  varii 
 argunienli  maximatu  partem  exegetica  aiqiie  his- 
 torica,  Halle  1S05,  8vo ;  a  second  and  enlarged 
 edition  in  1823,  2  vols.  8vo.  4.  The  following 
 dissertations — Advaticiniitmjacobi,  \Tl^',  Dever- 
 sione  Alexandrina  in  emendejtda  lectione  exempli 
 Hebraici  caute  adhibenda,  HaUe  1773,  1776. — 
 S.  N. 
 
 KNATCHBULL  (Sir  Norton),  Bart,  the 
 representative  of  an  ancient  family  settled  at  Mer- 
 sham  Hatch,  in  Kent,  bom  1601,  inherited  his 
 uncle's  estates  1636,  created  a  baronet  1641.  He 
 was  a  man  of  considerable  erudition,  and  devoted 
 himself  with  some  success  to  the  exposition  of  the 
 N.  T.  In  1659  he  gave  to  the  world  Animadver- 
 siones  in  Libra  Novi  Test.,  which  speedily  went 
 through  a  considerable  number  of  editions — a  trans- 
 lation by  himself,  or  under  his  superintendence. 
 
 *  For  an  account  of  these  institutions  see  Am. 
 Bib.  Rep.,  ist  series,  vol.  i.  p.  30. 
 
 appearing  at  Cambridge,  1693.  The  original  work 
 was  reprinted  both  at  Amsterdam  and  Frankfort, 
 at  which  latter  place  it  formed  part  of  the  supple- 
 ment to  N.  Gurtler's  edition  of  Walton's  Polyglot, 
 1695-1701.  Knatchbull's  remarks  are  sensible,  and 
 shew  very  fair  learning  ;  but  they  are  entirely  want- 
 ing in  depth,  and  we  cannot  read  them  without 
 wonder  at  the  small  amount  of  knowledge  which 
 procured  for  their  author  such  a  wide-spread  repu- 
 tation. He  died  in  1684,  and  was  buried  at  Mer- 
 sham,  his  epitaph  styling  him  '  Criticorum  Cory- 
 phffius  et  Oraculum,'  and  attributing  to  him  the 
 eloquence  of  Cicero  and  Chrysostom,  and  the  judg- 
 ment of  Varro  and  Jerome. — E.  V. 
 
 KNEADING-TROUGH    (nnXC'D).       The 
 
 word  occurs  four  times  in  the  Bible,  Exod.  viii.  3  ; 
 xii.  34;  Deut.  xxviii.  5,  17.  In  the  two  former 
 places  it  is  translated  'kneading-trough'  (margin, 
 *  dough) ;'  in  the  two  latter  (where  it  is  joined  with 
 NJD=  'basket')    'store.'     The   LXX.  render  it 
 
 (pvpafia,  in  which  they  are  followed  by  Kimchi,  and 
 €yKaTd\eifj./xa,  as  if  from  "INtJ',  '  to  remain  over,' 
 in  which  the  Targum  of  Jerusalem,  Jonathan,  and 
 Rashi,  and  the  Vulgate,  '  reliquiae  cibonun  tuorum,' 
 agree.  There  can,  however,  be  little  doubt  that 
 our  version  is  substantially  correct,  and  that  the 
 word  signifies  the  small  wooden  bowl  still  used  by 
 the  Arabs  for  kneading  and  serving  up  their  cakes, 
 and  which  they  carry  about  with  them  wrapped 
 up  in  the  long  flowing  haik  or  plaid  worn  by  the 
 Bedouins.  Large  kneading-troughs,  such  as  are  in 
 use  among  ourselves,  were  unnecessary  then  as  now 
 in  the  East,  where  every  family  bakes  the  needful 
 supply  of  cakes  every  day  (Thevenot,  Shaw, 
 quoted  by  Harmer,  Obs.,  vol.  iv.,  pp.  366-370, 
 Clarke's  edition).  Harmer,  u.  s.,  inclines  to  a 
 kind  of  bag  described  by  Pococke  and  Niebuhr, 
 Voyage,  i.  171,  consisting  of  a  piece  of  leather, 
 drawn  together  by  rings  and  chains,  with  a  hook 
 to  hang  it  by,  used  by  the  Bedouins  both  as  a 
 table-cloth  and  as  a  wallet.  But  a  wooden  bowl 
 was  certainly  used  for  kneading  in  Egypt— Wilkin- 
 son, Ancie7it  Egyptians,  ii   386  [Bread].— E.  V. 
 
 KNIFE.  The  purposes  for  which  knives  are 
 mentioned  in  Scripture  as  being  used  are — for  the 
 slaying  of  sacrifices  (Gen.  xxii.  6),  for  circumcision 
 and  other  ritual  purposes  (Exod.  iv.  25  ;  Josh.  y. 
 2,  3  ;  I  Kings  xviii.  28 ;  Ezra  i.  9),  for  cutting  in 
 pieces  a  body  (Judg.  xbc.  29),  for  shaving  off  the 
 hair  (Ezek.  v.  i),  and  for  mending  pens  and  other 
 purposes  of  the  scribe  (Jer.  xxxvi.  23).  Knives 
 were  also  doubtless  used  in  dividing  into  portions 
 the  animals  sacrificed  (Lev.  viii.  15,  20,  25;  ix. 
 13  ;  Num.  xviii.  18;  I  Sam.  ix.  24,  etc.)  In  the 
 Talmudic  Tract  Tamid  (4.  3)  are  detailed  instruc- 
 tions for  the  cutting  up  of  the  victims.  That  they 
 were  also  used  at  meals  may  be  inferred — i.  from 
 the    primary   meaning    of   the    common    Hebrew 
 
 word  for  knife  D^^frJO,  from  ^DX  to  eat;  2.  from 
 
 the  allusions  in  Prov.  xxx.  14  ;  xxiii.  2  ;  and  3. 
 from  the  statement  of  Josephus  {Antiq.  xvii.  7  , 
 Bell.  Jud.  i.  33.  7)  concerning  the  use  of  a  knife 
 for  the  paring  of  apples. 
 
 Of  the  shape  and  material  of  the  knives  used  by 
 the  Hebrews  we  know  little.  The  earliest  knives 
 were  probably  of  flint  or  some  other  species  of 
 hard  stone;  hence  the  name  i^  (Exod.  iv.  25), 
 
KNITTEL 
 
 756 
 
 KOA 
 
 and  the  combination  iif  3"!  PI  (Josh.  v.  2 ;  LXX., 
 
 jaaxaipas  Trerplvas  iK  Tr^rpas  aKpordfJ-ov)  and  "I'lV 
 3~in  (Ps.  Ixxxix.  44).     But  that  metal  knives  were 
 
 also  used  by  them  cannot  be  doubted.  That  the 
 3"in,  which  signifies  botla  sword  and  hiz/e,  was  of 
 metal,  is  shewn  both  from  the  uses  to  which  it  was 
 put,  and  from  the  allusions  to  its  shining  (Nah. 
 iii.  3  ;  comp.  Gen.  iii.  24). 
 
 The  probable  form  of  the  knives  of  the  Hebrews 
 will  be  best  gathered  from  a  comparison  of  those 
 of  other  ancient  nations,  both  Eastern  and  Wes- 
 tern, which  have  come  down  to  us.  No.  i  re- 
 presents the  Roman  cither  used  in  sacrificing, 
 which  may  be  compared  with  No.  2,  an  Egyptian 
 sacrificial  knife.  Nos.  3,  4,  and  5  are  also  Egyptian 
 knives,  of  which  tlie  most  remarkable,  No.  3,  is 
 from  the  Louvre  collection  ;  the  others  are  from 
 the  Mouumenti  Reali  of  Roseliini.  Nos.  6-9  are 
 Roman  from  Barthelemy.  In  No.  7  we  have  pro- 
 bably the  form  of  the  pruning-hook  of  the  Jews 
 
 (mOTD,  Is.  xviii.  5),  though  some  rather  assimi- 
 late this  to  the  sickle  (<520).      It  was  probably 
 
 with   some  such   instrument  as   No.   9  that  the 
 priests  of  Baal  cut  themselves. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KNITTEL,  Franz  Anton,  successively  archi- 
 diaconus,  general  superintendent,  and  consistorial- 
 rath  at  Wolfenbiittel,  was  born  at  Salzdahlum,  3d 
 April  1721,  and  died  at  his  residence,  13th  April 
 1792.     In   1756  he  discovered  in  the  library  at 
 
 Wolfenbiittel  a  MS.  containing  some  fragments  of 
 the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  in  the  Gothic  version  of 
 Ulfilas.  The  MS.  is  a  palimpsest,  the  newer  sur- 
 face being  occupied  with  the  Origines  and  some 
 letters  of  Isidorus  Hispalensis.  The  portions  of 
 the  Gothic  version  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
 contained  in  it  are  ch.  xi.  33-36  ;  xii.  1-5,  17-21  ; 
 xiii.  1-5;  xiv.  9-20;  XV.  3-13.  These  Knittel 
 printed  in  a  volume  entitled  Ulphila:  Versionem  Go- 
 thkam  nonmilloinim  capitum  Ep.  ad  Rom.  vener- 
 andum  antiquiiatis  viontimenttim  .  .  .  e  latiiia  codi- 
 cis  cjijiisd.  AlSti  rescripti  .  .  .  inia  aim  variis 
 varicE  littcratiirtE  vionimeniis  hue  tisqiie  iiicditis, 
 etc.  The  text  is  printed  on  one  side  of  the  page  in 
 Gothic  letters  ;  under  each  word  is  Knittel's  read- 
 ing of  it  in  italics  ;  and  under  that  a  Latin  transla- 
 tion of  each.  On  the  other  side,  there  is  a  Latin 
 version  found  in  the  Codex,  under  that  the  reading 
 in  the  Vulgate,  and  under  that  the  Greek  text. 
 The  volume  contains  also  two  fragments  from 
 ancient  Greek  codices  of  the  N.  T.  in  the  Wolfen- 
 biittel library,  and  a  copious  critical  commentary 
 by  Knittel.  There  are  twelve  plates,  containing 
 admirably-executed  fac-similes  of  different  codices; 
 and  among  the  notes  is  found  an  extract  of  con- 
 siderable length  from  Otfried's  Gospel-Harmony. 
 The  book  is  altogether  a  splendid  one ;  but  its 
 literary  merits  are  not  quite  equal  to  its  sumptuous 
 appearance.  Knittel  was  not  a  man  of  large  en- 
 dowments, his  knowledge  of  Gothic  was  imperfect, 
 and  he  was  too  fond  of  the  '  varia  litteratura'  (to 
 use  his  own  expression)  to  be  very  profound  or 
 exact  in  any  one  department  of  knowledge.  He 
 deserves,  however,  the  praise  of  great  laborious- 
 ness,  and  his  honest  endeavours  to  make  his  work 
 worthy  of  the  acceptance  of  scholars  have  enabled 
 him  to  collect  a  vast  amount  of  curious  matter  not 
 elsewhere  to  be  found.  The  volume  bears  no  date, 
 but  it  is  usually  referred  to  the  year  1762  or  1763. 
 It  is  now  rare,  and  of  the  copies  in  the  shops  few 
 have  all  the  plates. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KNOP,  in  the  A.  V.,  is  the  translation  of  two 
 Hebrew  words — I.   IIDDS  ;    LXX.   ff<paipu}Trjp€S  ; 
 
 Vulg.  SphcEndcE ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  iii.  6.  7,  <J<})aLLpla. 
 Ornaments  on  the  stem  and  branches  of  the  golden 
 candlestick,  Exod.  xxv.  31,  36;  xxxvii.  17-22. 
 Their  precise  form  is  unknown,  but  it  is  evident 
 that  they  were  of  a  globular  form,  perhaps  resem- 
 bling pomegranates  ( Josephus  speaks  of  pd'CaKoi  as 
 well  as  a<pa(.pLa),  or,  with  Bahr  {Synibolik,  i.  416), 
 apples. 
 
 The  word  occurs  again,  Amos  ix.  i  ;  Zeph.  ii. 
 14,  where  it  is  commonly  rendered  'lintel;'  the 
 marginal  reading,  '  chapiter  or  knop,'  being  more 
 correct.  It  probably  means  the  capital  of  a  pillar 
 in  the  form  of  a  pomegranate  or  its  flower. 
 
 2.   CypS,    I    Kings   vi.     18 ;    vii.    24 ;    margin 
 
 'gourds,'  architectural  ornaments  of  a  gourd  shape 
 (cf  niypB,  2  Kings  iv.  39,  ciccumeres  asiniiii),  on 
 
 the  cedar  panelling  of  Solomon's  temple,  and 
 beneath  the  brim  of  the  '  molten  sea.' — E.  V. 
 
 KOA  (yip),  a  word  occurring  along  with  Pekod 
 
 (HIpS)  and  Shoa  (J?1ti')  in  the  prophet's  description 
 of  the  lovers  of  Aholibah  (Ezek.  xxiii.  23).  The 
 versions  here  differ  very  much.  The  LXX. ,  accord- 
 ing to  the  Vat.  Codex.,  has  $aKoi)/c  koL  "Zovk  koI 
 'Txovi  (in  the  last  word  uniting  the  preposition  with 
 the  name)  ;  but  the  Cod.  Alex,  has  koI  (poiiS  /caJ 
 
KOECHER 
 
 757 
 
 KOPH 
 
 o-oi'S  Kal  Xoi55.  The  Chald.  gives  •'XVIC'I,  ''XTlpS, 
 ''Xyipl ;  the  Syr.  ViOTDO  50^0  i^OSJO,  /'«/, 
 and  Lud,  atid  Kna.  In  these  the  words  are  taken 
 as  the  names  of  places  or  peoples  ;  and  this  view 
 has  been  followed  by  Grotius,  Junius,  Ewald,  and 
 others.  The  Vulg.,  on  the  other  hand,  translates 
 them  as  appellatives,  '  nobiles  tyrannosque  et  prin- 
 cipes ; '  and  this  view  most  recent  interpreters  have 
 followed.  There  is,  however,  some  difference  of 
 opinion  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words.  Accord- 
 ing to  J^rchi,  they  are  to  be  explained  as  D^T'pD 
 
 D"'^vt^'1  D"'"lt'j  chiefs^  princes,  and  ritlcrs,  which 
 does  not  greatly  differ  from  the  rendering  of  Jerome ; 
 Rosenmiiller  gives  '  prrefectos,  nobiles  et  duces '  as 
 the  proper  rendering ;  Havernick,  'ahndung,  macht 
 und  Getiimmel  [vengeance,  power,  and  uproar] ; ' 
 and  Hitzig,  '  edier,  fiirst,  und  herr  [noble,  prince, 
 and  lord].'  The  word  Pckod  occurs  elsewhere 
 (Jer.  1.  2l),  as  applied  to  Babylon  ;  and  Shoa 
 stands  connected  with  t^'lti'.  to  lay  luaste  or  destroy, 
 
 or  yiti',  to  be  rich,  optilent,  powerful ;    but   Koa 
 
 occurs  here  only,  and  has  no  affiinity  with  any 
 Hebrew  word,  unless  it  be  Hip,  to  be  strong  or  robust. 
 
 Michaelis(^«///d'w.rt'^/Z^jr.  Heb.,\).  2175)  compares 
 the  Arab.  J?Sp  (for  yip),  a  stallion  ;  Havernick,  the 
 
 Syr.    j  V  O  to  cry,  and   |/  V  <-i  shout,  uproar ;  and 
 
 Hitzig  the  Sansc.  hara,  lord,  and  the  Turk.  khan. 
 There  is  something  to  be  said  in  favour  of  the  old- 
 est opinion,  that  these  words  are  names  of  ]ilaces. 
 In  the  Talmud  and  other  Jewish  writings,  mention 
 is  made  of  a  town,  TlpD~"inj,  Nhar-P'qod,  in  Baby- 
 lonia, where  there  was  a  great  Jewish  school,  and 
 the  inhabitants  of  which  are  characterised  by  Rab 
 in  some  verses  (Fiirst,  Hcb.  u.  Chald.  H.-IV.-B. 
 s.  v.)  This  may  be  the  Pekod  or  P'qod  of  our 
 passage.  Tlien,  in  i  Kings  x.  28,  it  is  said,  that 
 '  Solomon  had  horses  brought  out  of  Egypt,  and 
 linen  yarn,'  etc.  The  word  rendered  '  linen  yarn' 
 here  is  mpD,  a  word  which  nowhere  else  occurs  in 
 this  sense,  and  regarding  the  meaning  of  which 
 here  the  greatest  uncertainty  prevails.  Gesenius 
 translates  the  passage,  '  And  a  company  of  the 
 king's  merchants  brought  [from  Egypt]  a  company 
 [of  horses]  at  a  price,'  taking  Hlpb  in  the  sense  of 
 troop  or  company ;  but  the  arrangement  of  the 
 words  in  the  parallel  passage,  2  Chron.  i.  16,  is 
 not  favourable  to  this  translation.  The  ancient 
 versions  regard  this  word  as  naming  the  place 
 whence  the  horses  were  brought  ;  the  LXX.    kK 
 
 eeKovi ;  Vulg.  de  Coa ;  Syr.  "UXs]  Al  .Kn 
 city  of  the  Aphelites,  Arab,  cities  of  the  South.  The 
 Vulg.  may  be  right  here,  and  Coa  or  Koa  may  be  the 
 name  of  some  place  known  to  the  Jews. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KOECHER,  JoHANN  Christoph,  D.D.,  suc- 
 cessively rector  of  the  Gymnasium  at  Osnabriick, 
 superintendent  at  Brunswick,  and  professor  of  theo- 
 logy at  Jena,  was  born  23d  April  1699,  at  Loben- 
 stein,  and  died  21st  September  1772,  at  Jena. 
 Koecher  published  a  continuation  of  Wolf's  Cures 
 Philologicce,  under  the  title  Analecta  Philologica  et 
 Exegctica  in  Quatuor  EvangeUa,  4to,  Altenburg 
 1766.  '  It  supplies,'  says  Orme,  '  some  of  the 
 desiderata  of  Wolf's  work,  and  brings  down  the 
 account  of  the  sentiments  of  the  modern  writers  on 
 the  gospels  to  the  period  of  its  publication'  {Bib- 
 lioth.  Bib.,  p.  276).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 KOHATH  (nnp,  assembly;  Sept.   l\aa.Q),  son 
 
 of  Levi,  and  father  of  Amram,  Izhar,  Hebron,  and 
 Uzziel  (Gen.  xlvi.  11  ;  Exod.  vi.  18-22;  i  Chron. 
 xxiii.  12).  The  descendants  of  Kohath  formed  one 
 of  the  three  great  divisions  of  the  Levitical  tribe. 
 This  division  contained  the  priestly  family  which 
 was  descended  from  Aaron,  the  son  of  Amram. 
 In  the  service  of  the  tabernacle,  as  settled  in  the 
 wilderness,  the  Kohathites  had  the  distinguished 
 charge  of  bearing  the  ark  and  the  sacred  vessels 
 (Exod.  vi.  16;  Num.  iv.  4-6). — J.  K. 
 
 KOPH  (lip ;  Gr.  /c^ttos,  (c^/3os  ;  whence  the 
 Latinized  name  Ccphus).  In  the  Hebrew  and 
 Semitic  cognate  tongues,  and  in  the  classical  lan- 
 guages, these  names,  under  various  modifications, 
 designate  the  Simiadre,  including,  no  doubt,  species 
 of  Cercopithecus,  Macacus,  and  Cynocephalus,  or 
 Guenons,  apes,  and  baboons ;  that  is,  all  the 
 animals  of  the  quadrumanous  order  known  to 
 the  Hebrews,  Arabs,  Egyptians,  and  the  classical 
 writers.  Accordingly,  we  find  Pliny  and  Solinus 
 speaking  of  Ethiopian  Cephi  exhibited  at  Rome : 
 and  in  the  upper  part  of  the  celebrated  Pra;nestine 
 mosaic  representing  the  inundation  of  the  Nile, 
 figures  of  Simiadre  occur  in  the  region  which  indi- 
 cates Nubia ;  among  others,  one  in  a  tree,  with  the 
 name  KHIIIEN  beside  it,  which  may  be  taken  for 
 a  Cercopithecus  of  the  Guenon  group.  But  in  the 
 tiiumphal  procession  of  Thothmes  III.  at  Thebes, 
 nations  from  the  interior  of  Africa,  probably  from 
 Nubia,  bear  curiosities  and  tribute,  among  which 
 the  Camelopardalis  or  Giraffe  and  six  quadrumana 
 may  be  observed.     The  smallest  and  most  effaced 
 
 303.  Apes  from  Rosellini's  Monumenti  dell'  Egitto. 
 
 animals  may  be  apes,  but  the  others,  and  in  par- 
 ticular the  three  figured  and  coloured  from  careful 
 drawings,  in  Plate  xxi.  of  Rosellini's  work,  are  un- 
 doubtedly Macaci  or  Cynocephali,  that  is,  species 
 of  the  genus  baboon,  or  baboon-like  apes.  Natu- 
 ralists and  commentators,  not  deterred  by  the 
 interminable.  ILst  of  errors  which  the  practice  hsui 
 
KOPH 
 
 758 
 
 KOPH 
 
 occasioned,  are  often  unnecessarily  anxious  to 
 assign  the  names  of  animals  noticed  in  Scripture 
 and  in  the  ancient  classics,  to  species  characterised 
 by  the  modems ;  although  the  original  designations 
 are  to  be  taken  in  a  familiar  sense,  and  often  extend 
 even  beyond  a  generical  meaning.  In  the  instance 
 before  us  we  have  the  futility  of  this  practice  fully 
 exemplified;  for  Buffon  presumed  his  Mona  (Cer- 
 copithecus  Mona)  to  be  the  Kebos  of  the  Greeks, 
 and  not  without  plausibihty,  since  the  western 
 Arabs,  it  seems,  apply  the  word  Moune  to  all 
 long-tailed  apes.  Linnaeus  referred  Cephus  to  his 
 Simla  Cephus,  now  Cercopithecus  Cephus,  or 
 Moustache  Guenon,  of  a  different  group  ;  while 
 Lichtenstein  referred  it  to  his  Simla,  or  rather,  as 
 now  arranged,  Cercopithecus  Diana.  But  as  none 
 of  these  are  known  to  inhabit  eastern  Africa,  it  is 
 more  probable  that  the  Keipen  of  the  Praenestine 
 mosaic  is  in  reality  the  Cercopithecus  Griseovirides, 
 or  Grivet  of  Cuvier,  which,  with  equal  pretensions 
 in  regard  to  form,  has  the  advantage  of  being  a 
 native  of  Ethiopia  and  Nubia,  and  belongs,  with 
 the  two  last  mentioned,  to  the  group  which  has 
 been  called  Callitrix. 
 
 But  these  considerations  do  not  serve  to  point 
 out  the  Koph  of  Scripture;  for  that  animal, named 
 only  twice  (l  Kings  x.  22,  and  2  Chron.  ix.  2l), 
 is  in  both  cases  associated  with  D''''D"iri,  Tkoukiim, 
 perhaps  erroneously  rendered  'peacocks.'  Now 
 neither  peacocks  nor  pheasants  are  indigenous  in 
 Africa:  they  belong  to  India  and  the  mountains 
 of  high  Asia,  and  therefore  the  version  '  peacocks,' 
 if  correct,  would  decide,  without  doubt,  not  only 
 that  Koph  denotes  none  of  the  Simiadas  above 
 noticed,  but  also  that  the  fleet  of  Tarshish  *  visited 
 India  or  the  Australasian  islands.  Thoukiim,  ap- 
 parently meaning  crested,  indicates  birds,  perhaps 
 parrots,  but  cannot  refer  to  the  pintado  or  Guinea 
 hen,  the  Numidia  of  naturalists  and  the  Meleagris 
 of  the  ancients ;  nor  to  the  Pterocles  or  Sandgrouse, 
 both  being  familiarly  known  in  Upper  Egypt,  and 
 the  last  mentioned,  in  particular,  abundant  in 
 Arabia  and  Palestine.  The  interpretation  pro- 
 posed by  Hase,  which  would  convert  Kophim  into 
 Succim — dwellers  in  caves — is  inadmissible,  such  a 
 description  being  quite  inapplicable  to  long-tailed 
 monkeys.  Like  the  whole  order  of  quadrumana, 
 they  are  constituted  not  for  troglodyte,  but  arboreal 
 life,  or  to  be  dwellers  in  trees  ;  baboons  alone  ven- 
 turing beyond  woody  covers  in  steep  rocky  situa- 
 tions, and  sometimes  finding  shelter  in  clefts.  For 
 these  reasons  we  conclude  that  the  Hebrew  koph, 
 and  names  of  the  same  root,  were,  by  the  nations 
 in  question,  used  generically  in  some  instances  and 
 specifically  in  others,  though  the  species  were  not 
 thereby  defined,  nor  on  that  account  identical. 
 
 Baboons,  we  have  already  shewn,  were  known 
 to  the  Egyptians,  and  cannot  well  have  escaped 
 observation  among  the  people  of  Palestine,  since 
 they  resided  close  upon  the  great  caravan-routes, 
 which,  as  is  well  known,  were  frequented  from  the 
 earliest  antiquity  by  showmen  exhibiting  wild 
 beasts.  In  Egypt,  however,  a  baboon  was  the 
 type  of  some  abstract  power  in  nature  or  in  meta- 
 physics ;  as  such  the  animal  was  idolized,  and 
 figures  of  a  cynocephalus  were  invariably  placed 
 
 *  If  the  voyage  extended  to  the  Spice  Islands, 
 then,  indeed,  botli  peacocks  and  ourang-outans 
 were  at  hand.     [See  Emerson's  Ceylon,  vol.  i.] 
 
 on  the  summit  of  weighing-scales,  where  they  still 
 appear  on  the  monuments. 
 
 If  there  be  truth,  as  the  following  authorities 
 show,  in  the  existence  of  a  large  ape  or  baboon  in 
 
 304.  Macacus  Arabicus. 
 
 Yemen,  and  even  in  Mesopotamia,  the  untractable 
 and  brutal  character  of  the  whole  genus  would  be 
 sufficient  to  sanction  the  Arabic  name  Saadan, 
 and  the  Hebrew  D''^t^',  Sadim ;  M-hich  indicate  the 
 satyrs  of  the  desert,  noticed  in  Mr.  Rich's  Memoir 
 on  ike  Ruins  of  Babylon,  p.  30,  where  they  are  de- 
 nominated Sied  Assad,  and  described  as  found  in 
 wcody  places  near  Semana,  on  the  Euphrates. 
 Thus  we 'have  the  W^yV^,  Se'irim,  or  'hairy  ones' 
 of  Lev.  xvii.  7,  in  accordance  with  Pliny,  who 
 conceived  satyrs  to  be  large  apes.  In  the  Pras- 
 nestine  mosaic,  before  quoted,  a  baboon  is  figured 
 which,  we  are  assured,  had  the  name  Catypoc,  or 
 Satyrus,  by  its  side.*  The  only  species  of  ape  of 
 the  baboon  form  known  in  Arabia  is  the  Mocko 
 of  Edwards,  noticed  in  our  illustrated  series  of 
 drawings  as  Macacus  Arabicus,  a  species  nearly 
 allied  to  Cynocephalus  Hamadryas  on  the  one 
 hand,  and  to  Mac.  Silenus  on  the  other — all  three 
 powerful,  fierce,  and  libidinous  animals.  Mac. 
 Arabicus  may  ultimately  prove  to  be  a  true  baboon, 
 and  the  same  as  Simla  cynomolgus  of  Hasselquist. 
 It  is  a  remarkable  species  for  stature  and  aspect, 
 having  the  dog-like  nose  and  approximating  eyes 
 of  baboons ;  the  skin  of  the  face  of  a  reddish 
 colour ;  the  snout,  lips,  and  chin  black  ;  the  fore- 
 head low,  and  the  sides  of  the  head  furnished  with 
 bushy,  long,  white  hair ;  the  breast,  arms,  and 
 shoulders  similarly  covered,  but  the  loins  and  lower 
 extremities  of  a  fine  chestnut  ;  the  tail  of  the  same 
 colour,  of  no  great  length,  tufted  at  the  end,  and  all 
 the  hands  black.  It  is  found  from  the  straits  of  Bab- 
 el-Mandeb,  through  Southern  Arabia  to  the  Eu- 
 phrates, and  even  beyond  the  junction  of  that  river 
 with  the  Tigris.  Like  other  large  and  formidable 
 Simiadas,  it  is  less  solicitous  about  the  vicinity  of 
 trees,  because  it  is  armed  with  powerful  canines  ; 
 holds  its  enemy  firmly  grasped,  and  fights,  not 
 singly,  but  assisted  by  the  whole  troop  :  it  frequents 
 scrubby  underwood  near  water,  but  becomes  more 
 rare  eastward  of  Yemen.  +     Comparing  the  charac- 
 
 *  This  name  does  not  occur  in  the  copies  in  our 
 possession,  and,  we  fear,  was  lost  in  the  breaking 
 up  of  the  mosaic,  which  is  now  preserved  fragmen- 
 tally  in  different  museums. 
 
 +  See  Edwards's  Gleanings,  and  Pennant's 
 History  of  Qiiadrufeds,  4to,  vol.  i.  p.  195.      The 
 
KOPHER 
 
 759 
 
 KOPPE 
 
 ters  of  this  species,  we  find  it  by  configuration, 
 colours,  and  manners,  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  pur- 
 poses of  idolatry  in  its  grossest  and  most  debasing 
 aspect.  The  Hebrew  people,  already  familiar  with 
 a  similar  worship  in  Egypt,  may  have  copied  the 
 native  tribes  m  the  wilderness,  and  thus  drawn 
 upon  themselves  the  remonstance  in  Lev.  xvii. 
 7,  where  the  allusion  to  these  animals  is  very  de- 
 scriptive, as  is  that  in  Is.  xiii.  21  ;  and  again, 
 xxxiv.  14,  where  the  image  is  perfect,  when  we  pic- 
 ture to  ourselves  the  '  hairy  ones'  lurking  about 
 the  river  in  the  juniper  and  liquorice  jungle,  as 
 described  by  Mr.  Rich. 
 
 It  is  not  unlikely  that  the  baboon  idol  may  have 
 had  goat's  horns,  since  we  find  the  same  attribute 
 on  rams'  heads  in  Egypt  ;  on  lions'  heads  on  coins 
 of  Tarsus,  and  on  horses'  and  elephants'  heads  on 
 medals  of  Syrian  kings.  The  Greek  mythologists, 
 ignorant  of  the  baboon  figure,  may  have  preferred 
 an  imaginary  compound  of  man  and  goat  to  that 
 of  the  cynocephalus,  which  they  confounded  with 
 the  hyaena,  or,  in  their  love  of  ideal  beauty,  may 
 have  considered  it  too  disgusting  even  for  an  idol. 
 Perhaps  the  most  ancient  form  of  the  Arabian 
 Urolalt  was  that  of  a  baboon,  male  or  female,  the 
 name  apparently  having  some  reference  to  red,  and 
 to  the  Indian  monkey- worship  (see  Gesner,  s.  v. 
 '  Hyrena').  Urolalt  and  monkey-worship  are  con- 
 nected with  a  solar  my  thus. — C.  H.  S. 
 
 KOPHER,  or  Gopher  (ISb),  occurs  twice  in 
 
 the  Song  of  Solomon  (i.  14  ;  iv.  13),  and  is  in 
 both  places  translated  cainphire  in  the  A.  V.  It 
 has  been  supposed  to  indicate  a  bunch  of  grapes 
 (Botnts  kopher),  also  camphor.  The  word  cam- 
 phire  is  the  old  mode  of  spelling  camphor,  but  this 
 substance  does  not  appear  to  have  been  known  to 
 ancient  commerce  ;  at  least  we  cannot  adduce  any 
 proof  that  it  was  so.  The  word  Kopher  is  cer- 
 tainly very  like  Kafoor,  the  Eastern  name  for  cam- 
 phor, but  it  also  closely  resembles  the  Greek 
 /ci^Trpos,  or  Kiipros,  usually  written  Cypres.  In- 
 deed, as  has  been  observed,  it  is  the  same  word, 
 with  the  Greek  pronunciation  and  termination. 
 The  Kinrpos  of  the  Greeks  is,  no  doubt,  the  La7u- 
 sonia  inermis  of  botanists,  and  is  described  by 
 Dioscorides  (i.  125)  and  by  Pliny  (xii.  24).  There 
 is  reason  to  regard  the  Cyprus  as  the  plant  called 
 by  the  Arabs  hintia,  and  as  this  is  known  to  be 
 the  Lawsonia  inermis,  we  conclude  the  Cyprus  to 
 be  the  same.  This  identity  is  now  universally 
 acknowledged  :  the  Knpros,  therefore,  must  have 
 been  Lawsoitia  inermis,  as  the  Hiiina  of  the  Arabs 
 is  well  known  to  be.  If  we  examine  the  works  of 
 Oriental  travellers  and  naturalists,  we  shall  find 
 that  this  plant  is  universally  esteemed  in  Eastern 
 countries,  and  appears  to  have  been  so  from  the 
 earliest  times,  both  on  account  of  the  fragrance  of 
 its  flowers,  and  the  colouring  properties  of  its 
 leaves. 
 
 Thus  Rauwolff,  when  at  Tripoli  [Travels,  iv.), 
 '  found  there  another  tree,  not  unlike  unto  our 
 privet,  by  the  Arabians  called  Alcana,  or  Henna, 
 and  by  the  Grecians,  in  their  vulgar  tongue, 
 Schenna,  which  they  have  from  Egypt,  where,  but 
 above  all  in  Cayre,  they  grow  in  abundance.  The 
 Turks  and  Moors  nurse  these  up  with  great  care 
 
 information  in  the  text  is  derived  from  an  officer 
 who  was  in  the  Honourable  East  India  Company's 
 surveying  service. 
 
 and  diligence,  because  of  their  sweet-smelling 
 flowers.  They  also,  as  I  am  informed,  keep  their 
 leaves  all  winter,  which  leaves  they  powder  and 
 
 305.  Lawsonia  inermis. 
 
 mix  with  the  juice  of  citrons,  and  stain  therewith 
 against  great  holidays  the  hair  and  nails  of  their 
 children  of  a  red  colour,  which  colour  may  perhaps 
 be  seen  with  us  on  the  manes  and  tails  of  Turkish 
 horses  :'  see  also  Belon  (ii.  74).  This  custom  of 
 dyeing  the  nails  and  the  palms  of  the  hands  and 
 soles  of  the  feet,  of  an  iron-rust  colour,  with  henna, 
 exists  throughout  the  East,  from  the  AJediterranean 
 to  the  Ganges,  as  well  as  in  Northern  Africa.  In 
 some  parts  the  practice  is  not  confined  to  women 
 and  children,  but  is  also  followed  by  men,  especially 
 in  Persia.  In  dyeing  the  beard,  the  hair  is  turned 
 to  red  by  this  application,  which  is  then  changed 
 to  black  by  a  preparation  of  indigo.  In  dyeing 
 the  hair  of  children,  and  the  tails  and  manes  of 
 horses  and  asses,  the  process  is  allowed  to  stop  at 
 the  red  colour  which  the  henna  produces.  In  re- 
 ference to  this  universal  practice  of  the  East,  Dr. 
 Harris  observes  that  '  the  expression  in  Deut.  xxi. 
 12,  'pare  her  nails,'  may  perhaps  rather  mean 
 'adorn  her  nails,'  and  imply  the  antiquity  of  this 
 practice.  This  is  a  universal  custom  in  Egypt,  and 
 not  to  conform  to  it  would  be  considered  indecent. 
 It  seems  to  have  been  practised  by  the  ancient 
 Egyptians,  for  the  nails  of  the  mummies  are  most 
 commonly  of  a  reddish  hue.'  Seeing,  then,  that 
 the  henna  is  so  universally  admired  in  the  East, 
 both  on  account  of  the  fragrance  of  its  flowers  and 
 the  dye  yielded  by  its  leaves,  and  as  there  is  no 
 doubt  that  it  is  the  Kvirpos  of  the  Greeks,  and  as 
 this  word  is  so  similar  to  the  kopher  of  the  Hebrews, 
 there  is  every  probability  of  this  last  being  the 
 henna  of  the  Arabs,  Lawsonia  alba  of  botanists. — 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 KOPPE,  JOHANN  Benjamin,  was  born  at  Dant- 
 zig,  Aug.  19,  1750.  He  received  his  early  educa- 
 tion in  the  gymnasium  of  his  native  city,  and 
 distinguished  himself  there  by  his  rapid  progress 
 
KORAH 
 
 760 
 
 KORAH 
 
 In  Greek  and  Hebrew.  During  the  two  years 
 1769-71  he  studied  at  Leipzig,  and  during  the  fol- 
 lowing two  years  at  Gbttingen.  In  the  former 
 university  he  was  aided  by  Ernesti,  and  in  the 
 latter  by  Heyne,  in  the  study  of  the  Greek  language. 
 In  1774  he  was  appointed,  at  the  recommendation 
 of  Heyne,  to  the  chair  of  Greek  in  the  recently 
 formed  gymnasium  of  Mittau.  In  1776  he  was 
 called  to  a  chair  of  theology  in  Gottingen,  to  which 
 were  shortly  afterwards  added  the  offices  of  preacher 
 to  the  university,  and  director  of  the  seminary  for 
 preachers  (Prediger-seminarium).  In  1784  he  was 
 invited  to  Gotha,  and  to  the  high  offices  of  super- 
 intendent-general, counsellor  of  the  superior  con- 
 sistory, and  chief  pastor.  In  1 788  he  was  appointed 
 preacher  to  the  Court,  and  counsellor  of  the  con- 
 sistory at  Hanover.  He  died  in  his  forty-first  year, 
 Feb.  12,  1791.  Koppe  is  chiefly  known  by  the  edi- 
 tion of  the  N.  T.,  which  he  projected  under  the 
 title  :  Novum  Testamentum  grcEce perpetiia  anno/a- 
 tiotie  ilhistrahtm.  The  first  volume,  containing  the 
 epistles  to  the  Galatians,  Ephesians,  and  Thessa- 
 lonians,  was  published  in  1778,  and  was  intended 
 to  exhibit  the  plan  of  the  entire  work.  It  contained 
 a  corrected  text,  the  more  important  various  read- 
 ings, prolegomena,  philological  notes,  and  excursus 
 on  those  passages  and  phrases  which  needed  a 
 more  lengthened  discussion.  His  purpose,  as  ex- 
 plained in  the  preface,  was  to  supply  the  Biblical 
 student  with  the  same  kind  of  assistance  towards 
 the  determmation  of  the  grammatical  sense  of  the 
 writings  of  the  N.  T.,  as  was  provided  for  the  clas- 
 sical student  in  the  better  editions  of  the  Greek  and 
 Roman  authors.  Accordingly,  he  abstained  from 
 all  doctrinal  discussions,  and  laboured  chiefly  to 
 illustrate  the  phraseology,  to  explain  historical  and 
 archaeological  references,  and  to  exhibit  the  order 
 di  the  writer's  thoughts.  Koppe's  early  death  pre- 
 vented the  completion  of  his  purpose.  A  second 
 volume,  containing  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  ap- 
 peared in  1783.  This  was  intended  to  be  the 
 fourth  volume,  and  the  former  the  sixth  of  the 
 entire  work,  which  he  purposed  to  complete  in 
 eight  volumes.  Since  the  death  of  Koppe  new 
 editions  of  these  two  volumes  have  been  published, 
 that  on  Galatians,  Ephesians,  and  Thessalonians, 
 in  1823,  under  the  editorship  of  T.  C.  Tychsen, 
 ar.d  that  on  the  Romans  in  1824,  by  C.  F.  Am- 
 mon.  In  both  cases  the  additional  notes  are  care- 
 fully distinguished.  Several  other  volumes  have  at 
 different  periods  been  contributed  towards  the  com- 
 pletion of  the  work  by  J.  H.  Heinrichs  and  D.  J. 
 Pott,  those  edited  by  the  former  containing  the 
 Acts  of  the  Apostles,  Philippians,  Colossians, 
 Timothy,  Titus,  Philemon,  Hebrews,  and  the 
 Apocalypse  ;  those  pulilished  by  the  latter  con- 
 taining I  Corinthians,  chap,  i.-x.,  and  the  Catholic 
 Epistles.  Koppe  was  also  the  author  of  a  transla- 
 tion, with  notes,  of  Lowth  on  Isaiah  :  D.  Robeit 
 Lcnut/i's  yesais  tteu  iibersetzi  ;  nebst  einer  Einleitung 
 U7id kritisclien,  philologische7i  und  erlaittenide7i  An- 
 merkiotgoi.  Aits  dem  £ngl.  mit  Zusdtzen  und 
 Anmerkiingen,  Leipzig  1779-90,  3  vols.  8vo  ;  and 
 of  several  dissertations  and  programmata,  most  of 
 which  are  contained  in  the  Sylloge  Coinvientl. 
 Theoll.  of  Pott  and  Ruperti.— S.  N. 
 
 KORAH  (mp,  ice;  Sept.  Kope',  in  the  A.  V, 
 
 of  Jude  II,  Core),  a  Levite,  son  of  Izhar,  the 
 brother  of  Amram,  the  father  of  Moses  and  Aaron, 
 who  were  therefore  cousins  to  Korah  (Exod.  vu 
 
 21).  From  this  near  relationship  we  may,  with 
 tolerable  certainty,  conjecture,  that  the  source  of 
 the  discontent  which  led  to  the  steps  afterwai-ds 
 taken  by  this  unhappy  man,  lay  in  his  jealousy 
 that  the  high  honours  and  privileges  of  the  priest- 
 hood, to  which  he,  who  remained  a  simple  Levite, 
 might,  apart  from  the  divine  appointment,  seem  to 
 have  had  as  good  a  claim,  should  have  been  exclu- 
 sively appropriated  to  the  family  of  Aaron.  When 
 to  this  was  added  the  civil  authority  of  Moses,  the 
 whole  power  over  the  nation  would  seem  to  him 
 to  have  been  engrossed  by  his  cousins,  the  sons  of 
 Amram.  Under  the  influence  of  these  feelings  he 
 organized  a  conspiracy,  for  the  purpose  of  redress- 
 ing what  appeared  to  him  the  evil  and  injustice  of 
 this  arrangement.  Dathan,  Abiram,  and  On,  the 
 chief  persons  who  joined  him,  were  of  the  tribe  of 
 Reuben  ;  but  he  was  also  supported  by  many  more 
 from  other  tribes,  making  up  tlie  number  of  250, 
 men  of  name,  rank,  and  influence,  all  who  may 
 be  regarded  as  representing  the  families  of  which 
 they  were  the  heads.  The  private  object  of  Korah 
 was  apparently  his  own  aggrandizement,  but  his 
 ostensible  object  was  the  general  good  of  the 
 people  ;  and  it  is  perhaps  from  want  of  attention 
 to  this  distinction  that  the  transaction  has  not  been 
 well  understood.  The  design  seems  to  have  been 
 made  acceptable  to  a  large  body  of  the  nation,  on 
 the  ground  that  the  first-born  of  Israel  had  been 
 deprived  of  their  sacerdotal  birthright  in  favour  of 
 the  Levites,  while  the  Levites  themselves  announced 
 that  the  jiriesthood  had  been  conferred  by  Moses 
 (as  they  considered)  on  his  own  brother's  family, 
 in  preference  to  those  who  had  equal  claims ;  and 
 it  is  easy  to  conceive  that  the  Reubenites  may  have 
 considered  the  opportunity  a  favourable  one  for  the 
 recovery  of  their  birthright — the  double  portion 
 and  civil  pre-eminence — which  had  been  forfeited 
 by  them  and  given  to  Joseph.  These  are  the  ex- 
 planations of  Aben-Ezra,  and  seem  as  reasonable 
 as  any  which  have  been  offered. 
 
 The  leading  conspirators,  having  organized  their 
 plans,  repaired  in  a  body  to  Moses  and  Aaron, 
 boldly  charged  them  with  their  usurpations,  and 
 required  them  to  lay  down  their  ill-gotten  power. 
 Moses  no  sooner  heard  this  than  he  fell  on  his  face, 
 confounded  at  the  enormity  of  so  outrageous  a 
 revolt  against  a  system  framed  so  carefully  for  the 
 benefit  of  the  nation.  He  left  the  matter  in  the 
 Lord's  hands,  and  desired  them  to  come  on  the 
 morrow,  provided  with  censers  for  incense,  that 
 the  Lord  himself,  by  some  manifest  token,  might 
 make  known  his  will  in  this  great  matter.  As  this 
 order  was  particularly  addressed  to  the  rebellious 
 Levites,  the  Reubenites  left  the  place,  and  when 
 afterwards  called  back  by  Moses,  returned  a  very 
 insolent  refusal,  charging  him  with  having  brought 
 them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  under  false  pretences, 
 'to  kill  them  in  the  wilderness.' 
 
 The  next  day  Korah  and  his  company  appeared 
 before  the  tabernacle,  attended  by  a  multitude  of 
 people  out  of  the  general  body  of  the  tribes.  Then 
 the  Shekinah,  or  symbol  of  the  divine  presence, 
 which  abode  between  the  cherubim,  advanced  to 
 the  entrance  of  the  sacred  fabric,  and  a  voice 
 therefrom  commanded  Moses  and  Aaron  to  stand 
 apart,  lest  they  should  share  in  the  destruction 
 which  awaited  the  whole  congregation.  On  hear- 
 ing these  awful  words  the  brothers  fell  on  their 
 faces,  and,  by  strong  intercession,  moved  the  I^ord 
 to  confine  his  wrath  to  the  leaders  in  the  rebellion. 
 
KORAHITE 
 
 761 
 
 KREBS 
 
 and  spare  their  unhappy  dupes.  The  latter  were 
 then  ordered  to  separate  themselves  from  their 
 leaders,  and  from  the  tents  in  which  they  dwelt. 
 The  terrible  menace  involved  in  this  direction  had 
 its  weight,  and  the  command  was  obeyed ;  and 
 after  Moses  had  appealed  to  what  was  to  happen 
 as  a  proof  of  the  authority  by  which  he  acted,  the 
 earth  opened,  and  received  and  closed  over  the 
 tents  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram.  The 
 Reubenite  conspirators  were  in  their  tents,  and 
 perished  in  them  ;  and  at  the  same  instant  Korah 
 and  his  250,  who  were  offering  incense  at  the  door 
 of  the  tabernacle,  were  destroyed  by  a  fire  which 
 •came  out  from  the  Lord  ;'  that  is,  most  probably, 
 in  this  case,  from  out  of  the  cloud  in  which  his 
 presence  dwelt.  The  censers  which  they  had  used 
 were  afterwards  made  into  plates,  to  form  an  outer 
 covering  to  the  altar,  and  thus  became  a  standing 
 monument  of  this  awful  transaction  (Num.  xvi.) 
 On,  although  named  in  the  first  instance  along 
 with  Dathan  and  Abiram,  does  not  further  appear 
 either  in  the  rebellion  or  its  punishment.  It  is 
 hence  supposed  that  he  repented  in  time  :  and 
 Abendana  and  other  Rabbinical  writers  allege  that 
 his  wife  prevailed  upon  him  to  abandon  the  cause. 
 It  might  be  supposed  from  the  Scripture  narra- 
 tive that  the  entire  families  of  the  conspirators 
 perished  in  the  destruction  of  their  tents.  Doubt- 
 less all  who  were  in  the  tents  perished  ;  but  as  the 
 descendants  of  Korah  afterwards  became  eminent 
 in  the  Levitical  service,  it  is  clear  that  his  sons 
 were  spared.  They  were  probably  living  in  sepa- 
 rate tents,  or  were  among  those  who  sundered 
 themselves  from  the  conspirators  at  the  command 
 of  Moses.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the 
 sons  of  Korah  were  children  when  their  father 
 perished. — ^J.  K. 
 
 KORAHITE,  koRHITE,  or  KORATHITE 
 Cmp ;  Sept.    vioi   [5t}/j.os,   yeueaeis]   Kope ;    Vulg. 
 
 Co7-itcE),  a  descendant  of  Korah,  used  of  those  who 
 are  usually  called  sons  of  Korah.  To  them  was 
 assigned  an  important  part  in  the  conducting  of  the 
 temple  music,  Heman  himself  being  a  descend- 
 ant of  Korah  (i  Chron.  vi.  31-37).  They  had  also 
 the  office  of  keeping  the  door  in  the  temple  as- 
 signed to  them  (i  Chron.  ix.  17-19,  22-29;  J^^- 
 XXXV.  4).  Theappointment  of  theKorahites  to  this 
 office  dated  from  the  time  of  David  (i  Chron.  xxvi. 
 I,  ff. )  One  of  their  number,  Mattithiah,  had  charge 
 over  the  things  that  were  made  in  the  pans  (i 
 Chron.  ix.  31). 
 
 Of  the  Psalms,  several  (xlii. ,  xlix. ,  Ixxxiv.,  Ixxxv., 
 Ixxxvii.,  Ixxxviii.)  are  inscribed  'for  the  sons  of 
 Korah.'  Whether  this  implies  that  they  were 
 the  composers  of  these  Psalms,  or  merely  that  they 
 received  them  to  set  them  to  music,  or  to  sing  them 
 in  the  temple  service,  is  matter  of  dispute  [PsALMs]. 
 These  Psalms  are  marked  by  peculiar  elevation  of 
 sentiment  and  poetical  power. — W.  L.  A, 
 
 KOTZ  or  KOZ  ()^p)  occurs  in  several  passages 
 of  Scripture  ;  in  two  of  which  it  is  mentioned  along 
 with  dardar,  where  koz  and  dardar  may  be  con- 
 sidered equivalent  to  the  English  thorns  and  thistles. 
 The  Septuagint  translates  it  in  all  the  passages  by 
 H.Kavda,  and  it  probably  was  used  in  a  general  sense 
 to  denote  plants  which  were  thorny,  useless,  and 
 indicative  of  neglected  culture  or  deserted  habita- 
 tions, growing  naturally  in  desert  situations,  and 
 useful  only  for  fuel.     But  if  any  particular  plant  be 
 
 meant,  the  Ononis  spinosa  or  '  Rest-harrow,'  men- 
 tioned by  Hasselquist,  may  be  selected  as  fully 
 characteristic.       '  Spinosissima  ilia  et   perniciosa 
 
 306.   Ononis  spinosa. 
 
 planta,  campos  integros  tegit  yEgypti  et  Palestince. 
 Non  dubitandum  quin  banc  indicaverint  in  aliquo 
 loco  scriptores  sacri.' — J.  F.  R. 
 
 KRAUSE,  Fried.  Aug.  Wilh.,  doctor  in 
 philosophy  and  private  teacher  at  Vienna,  was 
 born  at  Dobrilugk  in  1767,  and  died  24th 
 March  1827.  He  published  Paidi  ad  CorinthitS 
 episiolce  Gr.,  perpetna  annotatione  tlhistratce,  vol. 
 i..  Franc,  ad  Moen.  1792  ;  intended  as  a  continua- 
 tion of  Koppe's  New  Testament,  but  never  carried 
 further.  He  had  previously  published  Die  Bi'iefe 
 an  die  Philipp.  loid  Thessal.  iibersetz  nnd  niit  An- 
 t?ie7-k.  begleitit,  Frankf.  1790. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 KRAUSE,  JoH.  Fried.,  D.D.,  successively 
 diakonus  in  Reichenbach,  domprediger  at  Naum- 
 burg,  and  professor  of  theology  at  Konigsberg, 
 was  born  nf  Reichenbach  26th  October  1770,  and 
 died  31st  March  1820.  His  Biblical  writings  con- 
 sist of  several  academical  programmes,  two  on  the 
 epistle  of  the  Philippians,  one  on  the  1st  epistle  of 
 Peter,  and  four  on  the  2d  epistle  to  the  Corinth- 
 ians. These,  with  some  discussions  pertaining  to 
 philosophy  and  theology,  were  collected  by  him  and 
 issued  together  under  the  title  Opnscida  Theolo- 
 gica,  sparsim  editd  collegit,  ineditisque  aiixit,  etc., 
 Regiom.  1818.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 KREBS  ( JoH.  Fred.),  born  at  Bayreuth,  March 
 5,  1651;  studied  at  Jena;  became  rector  of  the 
 gymnasium  at  Heilsbrunn  in  1675,  where  he  after- 
 wards filled  the  posts  of  professor  of  theology  and 
 Hebrew,  and  Inspector  ;  and  died  August  16,  1721. 
 He  was  a  copious  writer,  his  works  filling  five 
 closely -printed  columns  in  Adelung.  They  embrace 
 natural  and  moral  philosophy,  historical  and  poli- 
 tical science,  and  theology.  His  only  direct  con- 
 tribution to  Biblical  literature  is  a  work  on  the  first 
 five  chapters  of  Genesis,  illustrated  from  the  Synac, 
 Chaldee,  Persic,  ^thiopic,  and  other  Oriental  lan- 
 guages.— E.  V. 
 
 KREBS  (JoH.  Tobias),  born  at  Buttelstadt  in 
 1 7 18.     From  his  twentieth  year  he  studied  Iheo* 
 
KRINON 
 
 762 
 
 KRINON 
 
 logy  and  philology  under  J.  A.  Emesti  at  Leipsic, 
 where,  in  1 740,  he  became  Magister,  and  read  lec- 
 tures on  the  N.  T.  He  died  in  1782,  rector  of  the 
 Furstenschule  at  Grimma.  He  was  the  compiler 
 of  two  works  of  considerable  value  for  the  illustra- 
 tion of  the  facts  and  language  of  the  N.  T.,  De 
 usu  et  pycEstaittia  Romana  Historice  in  N.  T.  inter- 
 pretatione.  Lips.  1745  ;  Observatioues  in  N.  T.  e 
 Flavio  Joseph.,  Lips.  1755.  The  latter  contains  a 
 rich  collection  of  examples  of  the  peculiarities  of 
 N.  T.  phraseology. — E.  V. 
 
 KRINON  {Kplvov).  This  plant  is  mentioned  in 
 the  well-known  and  beautiful  passage  (Matt.  vi.  28)  : 
 '  Consider  the  lilies  of  the  field,  how  they  grow  ; 
 they  toil  not,  neither  do  they  spin,  and  yet  I  say 
 unto  you,  that  even  Solomon,  in  all  his  glory,  was 
 not  arrayed  like  one  of  these  ; '  so  also  in  Luke  xii. 
 27.  Here  it  is  evident  that  the  plant  alluded  to 
 must  have  been  indigenous  or  grown  wild,  in  the 
 vicinity  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  must  have  been 
 of  an  ornamental  character,  and,  from  the  Greek 
 term  Kpivov  being  applied  to  it,  of  a  liliaceous 
 nature.  The  name  Kp'ivov  occurs  in  the  old  Cireek 
 writers.  Theophrastus  uses  it,  and  is  supposed  by 
 Sprengel  to  apply  it  to  species  of  Narcissus  and  to 
 Liliuni  candidiun.  Dioscorides  indicates  two  spe- 
 cies, but  veiy  imperfectly  :  one  of  them  is  supposed 
 to  be  the  Lilimn  candidum,  and  the  other,  with  a 
 reddish  flower,  may  be  L.  martagon,  or  L.  chalce- 
 donicum.  He  alludes  more  particularly  to  the 
 lilies  of  Syria  and  of  Pamphylia  being  well  suited  for 
 making  the  ointment  of  lily.  Pliny  enumerates 
 three  kinds — a  white,  a  red,  and  a  purple-coloured 
 lily.  Travellers  in  Palestine  mention  that  in  the 
 month  of  January  the  fields  and  groves  every^vhere 
 abound  with  various  species  of  lily,  tulip,  and  nar- 
 
 307.   Lilium  chalcedonicum. 
 
 cissus.  Eenard  noticed,  near  Acre,  on  Jan.  iSth, 
 and  about  Jaffa,  on  the  23d,  tulips,  white,  red, 
 blue,  etc.  Gumpenberg  saw  the  meadows  of 
 Galilee  covered  with  the  same  flowers  on  the  31st. 
 Tulips  figure  conspicuously  among  the  flowers  of 
 Palestine,  varieties  probably  of  Tulipa  gesneriana 
 (Kitto's  Palestine,  p.  ccxv.)  So  Pococke  says,  '  I 
 saw  many  tulips  growing  wild  in  the  fields  (in 
 March),  and  any  one  who  considers  how  beautiful 
 those  flowers  are  to  the  eye,  would  be  apt  to  con- 
 
 jecture that  these  are  the  lilies  to  which  Solomon 
 in  all  his  glory  was  not  to  be  compared.'  This  is 
 much  more  likely  to  be  the  plant  intended  than 
 some  others  which  have  been  adduced,  as,  for  in- 
 stance, the  scarlet  amaryllis,  having  white  flowers 
 with  bright  purple  streaks,  found  by  Salt  at  Adowa. 
 Others  have  preferred  the  Crown  irjiperial,  which 
 is  a  native  of  Persia  and  Cashmere.  Most  authors 
 have  united  in  considering  the  white  lily,  Lilium 
 cafididum,  to  be  the  plant  to  which  our  Saviour  re- 
 ferred ;  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  has  ever  been 
 found  in  9.  wild  state  in  Palestine.  Some,  indeed, 
 have  thought  it  to  be  a  native  of  the  new  world. 
 Dr.  Lindley,  however,  in  the  Gardeners''  Chroniclt 
 (ii.  744),  says,  '  This  notion  cannot  be  sustained, 
 because  the  white  lily  occurs  in  an  engraving  of  the 
 Annunciation,  executed  somewhere  about  1480  by 
 Martin  Schongauer ;  and  the  first  voyage  of  Col- 
 umbus did  not  take  place  till  1492.  In  this  very 
 rare  print  the  lily  is  represented  as  growing  in  an 
 ornamental  vase,  as  if  it  were  cultivated  as  a  curious 
 object.'  This  opinion  is  confirmed  by  a  corre- 
 spondent at  Aleppo  {Gardeners''  Chronicle,  iii.  429), 
 who  has  resided  long  in  Syria,  but  is  acquainted 
 only  with  the  botany  of  Aleppo  and  Antioch  :  '  I 
 never  saw  the  white  lily  in  a  wild  state,  nor  have  I 
 heard  of  its  being  so  in  Syria.  It  is  cultivated  here 
 on  the  roofs  of  the  houses  in  pots  as  an  exotic 
 bulb,  like  the  daffodil.'  In  consequence  of  this 
 difficulty,  the  late  Sir  J.  E.  Smith  was  of  opinion 
 that  the  plant  alluded  to  under  the  name  of  lily 
 was  the  Amaryllis  Itttea  (now  Oporanthiis  hcteus), 
 '  whose  golden  liliaceous  flowers  in  autumn  afford 
 one  of  the  most  brilliant  and  gorgeous  objects  in 
 nature,  as  the  fields  of  the  Levant  are  overrun  with 
 them  ;  to  them  the  expression  of  Solomon,  in  all 
 his  glory,  not  being  arrayed  like  one  of  them,  is 
 peculiarly  appropriate.'  Dr.  Lindley  conceives,  'it 
 to  be  much  more  probable  that  the  plant  intended 
 by  our  Saviour  was  the  Ixiolirion  montanum,  a 
 plant  allied  to  the  atnarylUs,  of  very  great  beauty, 
 with  a  slender  stem,  and  clusters  of  the  most  deli- 
 cate violet  flowers,  abounding  in  Palestine,  where 
 Col.  Chesney  found  it  in  the  most  brilliant  pro- 
 fusion' (/.  c,  p.  744).  In  reply  to  this,  a  corre- 
 spondent furnishes  an  extract  of  a  letter  from  Dr, 
 Bowring,  which  throws  a  new  light  upon  the 
 subject :  '  I  cannot  describe  to  you  with  botanical 
 accuracy  the  lily  of  Palestine.  I  heard  it  called  by 
 the  title  of  Lilia  syriaca,  and  I  imagine  under  this 
 title  its  botanical  characteristics  may  be  hunted  out. 
 Its  colour  is  a  brilliant  red  ;  its  size  about  half  that 
 of  the  common  tiger  lily.  The  white  lily  I  do  not 
 remember  to  have  seen  in  any  part  of  Syria.  It 
 was  in  April  and  May  that  I  observed  my  flower, 
 and  it  was  most  abundant  in  the  district  of  Galilee, 
 where  it  and  the  Rhododendron  (which  grew  in  rich 
 abundance  round  the  paths)  most  strongly  excited 
 my  attention.'  On  this  Dr.  Lindley  observes,  'It 
 is  clear  that  neither  the  white  lily,  nor  the  Oporan- 
 thiis luteus,  nor  Ixiolirion,  will  answer  to  Dr. 
 Powring's  description,  which  seems  to  point  to  the 
 Chalcedonian  or  scarlet  martagon  lily,  formerly 
 called  the  lily  of  Byzantium,  found  from  the 
 Adriatic  to  the  Levant,  and  which,  with  its  scarlet 
 turban-like  flowers,  is  indeed  a  most  stately  and 
 striking  object'  (Gardeners'  Chronicle,  ii.  854).  As 
 this  lily  (the  Lilium  chalcedonicum  of  botanists)  is 
 in  flower  at  the  season  of  the  yea^  when  the  sermon 
 on  the  Mount  is  supposed  to  have  been  spoken,  is 
 indigenous  in  the  very  locahty,  and  is  conspicuous, 
 
KROCIIMAL 
 
 763 
 
 KUSSEMETH 
 
 even  in  the  garden,  for  its  remarkable  showy 
 flowers,  there  can  now  be  little  doubt  that  it  is  the 
 plant  alluded  to  by  our  Saviour. — ^J.  F.  R. 
 
 KROCHMAL,  Nachman  b.  Shalmon,  born 
 in  Brody,  Feb.  l8,  1780,  and  died  in  Tarnopol, 
 July  31,  1840.  This  erudite  critic  and  eminent 
 Hebraist  was  the  first  among  the  Jews  who,  with 
 a  rare  sagacity  and  independency  of  mind,  investi- 
 gated the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  in  order  to  ascertain 
 the  origin,  unity,  and  date  of  each  book,  as  well  as 
 to  characterise  its  peculiarity  of  style  and  language, 
 irrespective  of  the  fixed  traditional  opinions  held 
 alike  by  the  synagogue  and  the  church  about  the 
 authors  and  ages  of  the  respective  canonical  volumes. 
 He,  however,  published  very  little  in  his  lifetime, 
 but  immediately  after  his  death  four  treatises  of  his 
 appeared  in  the  Hebrew  Annual,  called  Kerem 
 Cketned,  vol.  v..  Frag  1841,  p.  51  ff. ,  on  The  Sa- 
 cred A  ntiquilies  and  their  Import  (t^lp  nVJIOlp 
 Jri33ni).  /.  On  the  age  of  the  comforting  promises 
 in  the  second  part  of  Isaiah,  chap.  xl. -Ixvi.    (jDT 
 
 r\'W  -iDDo  ''i^  \hnyy  ninnin  nisn:),  in  which 
 
 he  tries  to  demonstrate  the  late  date  of  this  part  of 
 the  volume,  and  to  show  that  Ibn  Ezra  was  of  the 
 same  opinion,  only  that  he  veiled  it  in  enigmatical 
 language  [Ibn  Ezra],  ii.  On  the  date  and  compo- 
 sition of  Ezra  and  Chronicles,  with  an  investigation 
 of  the  ancient  statement  on  this  subject  contained 
 
 in  the  Talmud,  Baba  Bathra,  14,  b  (XDnn  "131  ^J? 
 mp''1  nVJIDlp)  ;  which  is  very  important.  He 
 tries  to  trace  and  analyse  the  different  parts  of  which 
 these  books  are  composed,  and  to  shew  that  they 
 extend  to  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  empire.  Hi. 
 On  the  date  and  composition  of  Ezekiel,  the  Minor 
 Prophets,  Daniel,  and  Esther,  with  an  examination 
 of  the  ancient  statement  on  this  subject  contained  in 
 the  same  passage  of  the  Talmud  (NpDS  "11X33 
 mi3Tn  Nnn33  r\'!iS,ir\  mnS),  which  is  still  more 
 important,  inasmuch  as  Krochmal  shews  here  what 
 is  meant  by  the  Great  Synagvgice,  and  tries  to  de- 
 monstrate, that  some  portions  of  the  Minor  Pro- 
 phets belong  to  the  period  of  the  Greek  empire. 
 
 iv.  On  Origin  and  date  of  Ecclesiastes  (n?np  "ISD 
 *|J1  "lianD  nnn  IOT),  in  which  he  shews,  that  it 
 is  the  latest  composition  in  the  canon.  The  learned 
 Dr.  Leopold  Zunz,  to  whom  Hebrew  scholars  are 
 so  much  indebted  for  some  of  the  most  masterly 
 treatises  on  Hebrew  literature,  has  edited  a  work 
 which  Krochmal  has  left  behind  him,  entitled.  More 
 Neboche  Ha-Seman,  Leopoli  1851,  which  is  a  trea- 
 sury of  criticisms  on  Jewish  philosophy.  Biblical 
 literature,  and  sacred  antiquities. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 ^KUINOEL,  ChristianusTheophilus  (Kuh- 
 NOL,  Christian  Gottlieb),  was  born  at  Leip- 
 zig, Jan.  2,  1768.  His  father  was  archdeacon 
 of  the  church  of  St.  Thomas.  His  education  was 
 commenced  in  the  school  of  St.  Thomas,  and  from 
 thence  he  proceeded  to  the  university  of  his  native 
 city.  After  taking  the  double  degree  of  D.D.  and 
 Ph.  D.,  he  commenced,  by  the  advice  of  Wolf,  to 
 deliver,  as  a  privat-docent,  courses  of  lectures  on 
 Greek  and  Latin  Philosophy,  and  on  Biblical  Exe- 
 gesis. In  1790  he  was  appointed  extraordinary  pro- 
 fessor of  philosophy,  and  in  1796  preacher  at  St. 
 Paul's,  the  university  church.  His  reputation  as 
 a  Hellenist  brought  him,  in  1799,  an  invitation  to 
 the  Greek  chair  in  Copenhagen,  but  not  wishing  to 
 leave  Germany,  he  declined  to  accede  to  it.     Two 
 
 years  afterwards  he  was  appointed  to  the  chair  of 
 Poetry  and  Eloquence  in  the  university  of  Giessen, 
 and  in  1806  to  one  of  the  theological  chairs.  He 
 died  at  Giessen,  Oct.  15,  1841.  He  was  a  man 
 greatly  beloved  by  his  students,  and  distinguished 
 by  the  power  of  securing  the  strong  attachment  of 
 persons  of  various  sentiments.  His  published  works 
 are  numerous.  Of  those  which  are  devoted  to  the 
 elucidation  of  the  Scriptures,  the  following  are  the 
 most  important  : — i.  Comtrientarius  in  Libros  Nai'i 
 Testamenti  Historicos,  Lips.  1807-18,  4  vols.  8vo. 
 A  fourth  edition  of  vol.  i.  was  published  in  1837, 
 and  of  vol.  ii.  in  1843  ;  of  vol.  iii.  the  last  edition 
 (the  third)  appeared  in  1825,  and  of  vol.  iv.  a 
 second  edition  in  1827.  2.  Hosece  Oracula  Hebr. 
 et  Lat.  perpetita  annotatione  illnstrata.  Lips.  1792, 
 8vo.  Kuinoel  had  previously  published  in  1789 
 a  translation  of  Hosea  into  German.  3.  Messian- 
 ische  Weissagiingen  des  Alien  Testaments  iibirsetzt 
 und  erliintert,  Leip.  1792,  8vo.  4.  Observationes 
 ad  Novum  Testavtentum  ex  libris  Apocryphis  Ve- 
 teris  Testamenti,  Lips.  1794,  8vo.  5.  Periccpis 
 Evangeliccr,  Lips.  1796-97,  2  vols.  8vo.  6.  Die 
 Psalmen  mctrisch  iibersel'^t  mit  Anmerkungen,  Leip. 
 1799,  8vo.  7.  Spicilegium  observaiioniun  in  Epis- 
 tolatn  Jacobi,  Lips.  1807.  8.  Commentariiis  in 
 Epistolam  ad  Hebrccos,  Lips.  1831,  Svo.  Kuinoel's 
 Commentaries  are  still  valuable  for  the  stores  of 
 philological  learning  which  they  contain,  but  are 
 wanting  in  spiritual  insight. — S.  N. 
 
 KUSSEMETH  (nOE!3)  occurs  in  three  places 
 
 of  Scripture.  In  the  A.  V.  it  is  translated  rye 
 in  Exod.  ix.  32 ;  Is.  xxviii.  25  ;  and  fitches  in 
 Ezek.  iv.  9  ;  but  its  true  meaning  still  remains 
 uncertain.  It  was  one  of  the  cultivated  grains 
 both  of  Egypt  and  of  Syria,  and  one  of  those  em- 
 ployed as  an  article  of  diet.  It  was  also  sown 
 along  with  wheat,  or,  at  least,  its  crop  was  in  the 
 same  state  of  forwardness  ;  for  we  learn  from,  Exod. 
 ix.  32,  that  in  the  seventh  plague  the  hail-storm 
 smote  the  barley  which  was  in  the  ear,  and  the 
 flax  which  was  boiled ;  but  that  the  wheat  and  the 
 kussemeth  were  not  smitten,  for  they  were  not 
 grown  up.  Respecting  the  wheat  and  the  barley, 
 we  know  that  they  are  often  sown  and  come  to 
 maturity  in  different  months.  Thus  Forskal  says, 
 '  Hordeum  cum  mense  Februario  maturatur,  triti- 
 cum  ad  finem  Martii  persistit'  {Flora  ^Egypt., 
 p.  43).  The  events  above  referred  to  probably 
 took  place  in  February  (vid.  Pict.  Bible).  That 
 kussei7ieth  was  cultivated  in  Palestine  we  learn  from 
 Is.  xxviii.  25,  where  it  is  mentioned  along  with 
 ketzah  (nigella)  and  cumin,  wheat  and  barley  ;  and 
 sown,  according  to  some  translators,  'on  the  extreme 
 border  of  the  fields,'  as  a  kind  of  fence  for  other 
 kinds  of  corn.  This  is  quite  an  Oriental  practice, 
 and  may  be  seen  in  the  case  of  flax  and  other 
 grains  in  India,  at  the  present  day.  The  rye  is 
 a  grain  of  cold  climates,  and  is  not  cultivated 
 even  in  the  south  of  Europe.  Korte  declares 
 {Travels,  p.  168)  that  no  rye  grows  in  Egypt  ; 
 and  Shaw  states  (p.  351)  that  rye  is  little  known 
 in  Barbaiy  and  Egypt  (Rosenmiiller,  p.  76).  That 
 the  kiisserjieth  was  employed  for  making  bread  by 
 the  Hebrews  we  know  from  Ezek.  iv.  9,  where 
 the  prophet  is  directed  to  '  take  wheat,  and  bar- 
 ley, and  beans,  and  lentiles,  and  millet,  and  kusse- 
 meth, and  put  them  in  a  vessel,  and  make  bread 
 thereof.' 
 
 Though  it  is  very  unlikely  that  kussemeth  can 
 
KUSSEMETH 
 
 764 
 
 KUSTER 
 
 mean  rye,  it  is  not  easy  to  say  what  cultivated 
 grain  it  denotes.  The  principal  kinds  of  grain,  it 
 is  to  be  observed,  are  mentioned  in  the  same  pas- 
 sages with  the  kussenieth.     Celsius  has,  as  usual, 
 
 308.  Triticum  spelta. 
 
 with  great  learning  and  laliour,  collected  together 
 the  different  translations  which  have  been  given  of 
 this  difficult  word.  In  the  Arabic  translation  of 
 Exod.  ix.  32,  it  is  rendered //^//'(Z/i  .•  '  cicercula,  non 
 circula,  ut  perperam  legitur  in  versione  Latina.' 
 By  other  Arabian  writers  it  is  considered  to  mean 
 peas,  and  also  beans.  Many  translate  it  vicia,  or 
 vetches,  as  in  the  A.  V.  of  Exod.  ix.  32  ;  for  ac- 
 cording to  Maimonides  {ad  Tr.  Shabh.,  xx.  3), 
 carschinin  is  a  kind  of  legume,  which  in  the  Arabic 
 is  called  kirsana,  but  in  the  sacred  language  kiisse- 
 meth.  Both  jidbait  and  kirsana  mean  species  of 
 pulse,  but  it  is  not  easy  to  ascertain  the  specific 
 kinds.  The  majority,  however,  instead  of  a  legume, 
 consider  ktissemeth  to  indicate  one  of  the  cereal 
 grains,  as  the  rye  [seoale],  or  the  oat  {avena),  neither 
 of  which  is  it  likely  to  have  been.  These  have  pro- 
 bably been  selected  because  commentators  usually 
 adduce  such  grains  as  they  themselves  are  ac- 
 quainted with,  or  have  heard  of  as  commonly  cul- 
 tivated. Celsius,  however,  informs  us  that  in  the 
 Syriac  and  Chaldee  versions  kussenieth  is  translated 
 kii7ita  ;  far  in  the  Latin  Vulgate  ;  far  adoreian, 
 Guisio,  Tract.  Peak,  viii.  5,  and  Tract.  Chilaim, 
 i.  I ;  fe'a  in  the  Septuagint,  Is.  xxviii.  Aquila, 
 Symmachus,  and  others,  render  it  spelta.  So  Ben 
 Melech,  on  Exod.  ix.,  and  Ezek.  iv.,  says  "■  kysse- 
 met/i,  vulgo  spelta,''  and  the  Septuagint  has  6\vpa. 
 Upon  which  Celsius  remarks  :  '  all  these — that  is, 
 kunta,  far,  ador,  ff'a,  spelta,  and  6\vpa  —  are  one 
 and  the  same  thing.'  This  he  proves  satisfactorily 
 by  quotations  from  the  ancient  authors  (/.  c.  ii.  100). 
 Dr.  Harris  states  that  the  word  kussenieth  seems 
 to  be  derived  from  casam,  '  to  have  long  hairs  ;' 
 and  that  hence  a  bearded  grain  must  be  intended  ; 
 
 which  confirms  the  probability  of  Spelt  being  the 
 true  meaning. 
 
 Dioscorides  has  stated  (ii.  Ill),  that  there  are 
 two  kinds  of  Zetd,  one  simple,  and  the  other  called 
 dicoccos.  Sprengel  concludes  that  this  is,  without 
 doubt,  the  Triticiini  Spelta  of  botanists  ;  that  the 
 olyra  was  a  variety  which  Host  has  called  Triti- 
 cum Zea ;  and  also  that  the  simple  kind  is  the 
 lyiticnm  monococcon.  That  these  grains  were 
 cultivated  in  Egypt  and  Syria,  and  that  they 
 were  esteemed  as  food  in  those  countries,  may  also 
 be  satisfactorily  proved.  Thus  Herodotus  states 
 that  the  Egyptians  employ  olyra,  which  others 
 call  sea,  as  an  article  of  diet.  Pliny  {Hist.  Nat. 
 xviii.  8)  mentions  it  as  found  both  in  Egypt 
 and  in  Syria  :  '  ^gypto  autem  ac  Syrias,  Cili- 
 cireque  et  Asice,  ac  Grascias  peculiares,  zea,  olyra, 
 tiphe.'  So  in  more  modern  times  :  '  In  ^gypto 
 zeam  abunde  nasci  refert  Dapperus  descriptione 
 Asise,  p.  130.  Et  Monachos  circa  Jordanem, 
 pane  dXyplrri  vesci,  scribit  Johannes  Phocas  de 
 Locis  Syr.  et  Paltestinas,  p.  34'  (Cels.  /.  c.  100). 
 That  it  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  ancients  is 
 evident  from  Dioscorides  describing  it  as  more 
 nourishing  than  barley,  and  grateful  in  taste.  Pliny 
 also  (xviii.  Ii)  says:  '  Ex  zea  pulcrius,  quam  ex 
 tritico  fit  granum  ;'  and  Salmasio  :  '  quod  lautior 
 panis  ex  zea  quam  ex  tritico  fieret.'  The  goodness 
 of  this  grain  is  also  implied  from  the  name  of 
 semen  having  been  especially  applied  to  it  (C. 
 Bauhin,  Fiuox,  p.  22). 
 
 Triticum  Spelta,  or  Spelt,  is  in  many  respects 
 so  closely  allied  to  the  common  wheats  as  to  have 
 been  thought  by  some  old  authors  to  have  been 
 the  original  stock  of  the  cultivated  kinds  ;  but  for 
 this  there  is  no  foundation,  as  the  kind  cultivated 
 for  ages  in  Europe  does  not  differ  from  specimens 
 collected  in  a  wild  state.  These  were  found  by  a 
 French  botanist,  Michaux,  in  Persia,  on  a  moun- 
 tain four  days'  journey  to  the  north  of  Hamadan. 
 It  is  cultivated  in  many  parts  of  Germany,  in 
 Switzerland,  in  the  south  of  France,  and  in  Italy. 
 It  is  commonly  sown  in  spring,  and  collected  in 
 July  and  August.  Though  some  circumstances 
 seem  to  point  to  this  species  as  the  kussenieth  of 
 Scripture,  the  subject  is  still  susceptible  of  further 
 investigation,  and  can  only  be  finally  determined 
 by  first  ascertaining  the  modern  agriculture  of 
 eastern  countries,  and  comparing  it  with  the 
 ancient  accounts  of  the  agriculture  of  Syria  and 
 Egypt. -J.  F.  R. 
 
 KiJSTER,  LuDOLPH,  one  of  the  ablest  Greek 
 scholars  of  his  day,  born  at  Blomberg  in  West- 
 phalia, Feb.  1670,  and  educated  by  his  elder 
 brother  at  the  Joachim  College  at  Berlin.  His 
 ability  as  a  student  attracted  the  notice  of  Span- 
 heim,  who  became  his  patron,  and  by  whose 
 influence  he  obtained  the  reversion  of  a  professor- 
 ship in  the  college.  "While  waiting  for  a  vacancy 
 he  visited  many  of  the  chief  seats  of  learning  in 
 Europe,  consulting  libraries,  examining  and  col- 
 lating MSS.,  and  cultivating  the  society  of 
 scholars.  His  long-expected  chair  proved  any- 
 thing but  a  position  of  comfort,  so  after  holding  it 
 about  a  year  he  gave  up  the  post  in  disgust,  and 
 retired  to  Amsterdam.  Having  removed  to  Paris, 
 where  he  joined  the  Romish  Church,  he  was 
 brought  to  the  notice  of  Louis  XIV.  by  the  Abbe 
 Bignon,  and  was  rewarded  with  a  handsome 
 pension  and  admission  into  the  Academy  of  In- 
 
KYPKE 
 
 765 
 
 LAT^AN 
 
 scriptions.  He  was  planning  new  and  important 
 works  when  he  was  carried  off  by  an  abscess  in 
 the  liver,  October  12,  1716,  before  he  had  com- 
 pleted his  forty-seventh  year.  Besides  his  edition 
 of  Siiidas,  which  though  able  was  too  hasty,  and 
 left  much  for  future  editors,  and  his  contributions 
 to  the  Thesaitritses  of  Gravius  and  Gronovius  under 
 the  homonym  of  Neocorus  (the  Greek  translation 
 of  Kiister  =  Sacristan),  he  was  the  author  of  many 
 classical  treatises,  especially  that  on  the  Middle  Verb. 
 His  claim  to  a  place  in  a  Biblical  cyclopaedia 
 rests  on  his  edition  of  Mill's  Greek  Testament, 
 published  at  Rotterdam  1 7 10.  The  title-page 
 describes  his  part  in  the  work,  '  Collectionem 
 Miilianam  recensuit,  meliori  ordine  disposuit,  novis- 
 que  accessionibus  locupletavit'  His  additions 
 consist  of  the  various  readings  of  twelve  MSS. ,  of 
 which  the  most  important  is  the  Codex  Boerne- 
 rianus,  afterwards  admirably  edited  by  Matthrei. 
 The  edition  also  contains  a  preface  by  Kiister, 
 and  a  letter  of  Le  Clerc's,  discussing  a  number  of 
 various  readings,  of  some  historical  interest.  Ac- 
 cording to  Tregelles,  it  is  usually  considered 
 inferior  in  accuracy  to  Mill's  original  edition. — 
 E.  V. 
 
 KYPKE,  Georg  David,  a  learned  German 
 Orientalist,  was  born  at  Neukirk,  in  Pomerania, 
 Oct.  23,  1724.  He  studied  at  Konigsberg  and 
 Halle,  and  at  the  latter  university  took  a  degree  in 
 philosophy  in  1744.  In  1746  he  was  appointed 
 professor  extraordinary  of  Oriental  languages  at 
 Konigsberg,  and  in  1755  ordinary  professor  of  the 
 same.  He  died  May  2S,  1779.  He  was  the  author 
 of  several  works  intended  to  aid  in  the  study  of  the 
 Hebrew  and  Chaldee  languages,  and  published  at 
 different  times  numerous  programmata  on  various 
 passages  of  the  O.  T.  In  addition  to  these  he  was 
 the  author  of  the  following  useful  work  :  Observa- 
 tiones  Sacrce  i7t  Novi  Foederis  libi-os  ex  aiictoribus 
 grcBcis  et  aiitiquitatibus,  Vratislav  1755,  2  vols.  8vo. 
 — S.  N. 
 
 L. 
 
 LAANAH  (njyP),  translated  ivormwood,  occurs 
 
 in  several  passages  of  Scripture,  in  most  of  which 
 it  is  employed  in  a  figurative  sense.  Thus,  in 
 Deut.  xxix.  18,  '  Lest  there  be  among  you  a  root 
 that  beareth  gall  and  wormwood,^  is  applied  to 
 such  Israelites  as  should  worship  foreign  gods. 
 Prov.  v.  4,  '  But  her  end  is  bitter  as  wormwood.' 
 Jar.  ix.  15,  '  Behold  I  will  feed  them,  even  this 
 people,  with  wormwood,  and  give  them  gall  to 
 drink.'  So  in  Jer.  xxiii.  13,  and  in  Lam.  iii.  15 
 and  19,  '  Remember  mine  affliction  and  my  misery, 
 the  wormwood  and  gall,'  where  it  is  applied  to 
 public  and  private  calamities,  and  in  Amos  v.  '],  it 
 is  said  of  unrighteous  judges,  '  Ye  who  turn  judg- 
 ment to  wormwood  :'  so  in  vi.  12,  but  here  the 
 word  laanah  is  translated  hemlock.  That  laanah 
 was  a  plant  of  an  extreme  degree  of  bitterness,  is 
 evident  from  the  various  passages  in  which  it  oc- 
 curs ;  and  it  has  hence,  as  Celsius  observes,  been 
 adopted  to  indicate  both  the  sins  and  the  punish- 
 ments of  men.  Some  translators,  as  the  Septua- 
 gint,  substitute  the  proper  terms  which  they  con- 
 ceive the  plant  to  denote,  as  avdyKri,  dSvvTj,  TriKpia, 
 and  x°^V-     So  the  Arab  translator  uses  words  sig- 
 
 nifying dolores,  advejsa.,  calamitates,  aniaritudo. 
 The  Hebrew  word  laanah  is  supposed  by  lexico- 
 graphers to  have  been  originally  derived  from  the 
 
 same  root  as  the  Arabic  ,k)0  laan,  '  he  was  ac- 
 cursed ;'    from   which    comes    the   Arabic      i^^ 
 
 laana,  signifying  'execration'  or  'malediction;' 
 and  as  the  Hebrews  accounted  bitter  plants  as  per- 
 nicious and  poisonous,  so  they  typified  what  was 
 disagreeable  or  calamitous  by  a  bitter  plant.  Thus, 
 as  Celsius  remarks,  Talmudical  writers,  in  speak- 
 ing of  the  blessings  and  maledictions  of  Moses, 
 say,  '  Illae  mel,  hce  absinthium  erant.'  The 
 Chaldee,  and  other  Oriental  translations,  as  the 
 Syriac  and  Arabic,  in  Prov.  v.  4  ;  Lam.  iii.  19, 
 with  the  Rabbins,  translate  laanah  by  words  sig- 
 nifying wormwood.  This  is  adopted  in  the  Vul- 
 gate, as  well  as  in  the  English  translation.  In 
 Revelations  viii.  II,  we  have  the  Greek  word 
 dtpiudoi  employed  ;  '  And  the  name  of  the  star 
 is  called  wormwood,  and  the  third  part  of  the 
 waters  became  wormwood  {&\pi.vdos),  and  many 
 men  died  of  the  waters,  because  they  were  bitter.' 
 Some  other  plants  have  been  adduced,  as  the  colo- 
 cynth  and  the  oleander,  but  without  anything  to 
 support  them  ;  while  different  kinds  of  artemisia, 
 and  of  wormwood,  are  proverbial  for  their  bitter- 
 ness, and  often  used  in  a  figurative  sense  by  ancient 
 authors  : — 
 
 '  Parce,  precor,  lacerare  tuum,  nee  amara  paternis 
 Admiscere  velis,  ceu  melli  absinthia,  verbis.' 
 
 Paulin.  Ep.  ad  Ausonium. 
 
 Celsius  has  no  doubt  that  a  species  of  artemisia  or 
 wormwood  is  intended  :  '  Hanc  plantam  amaram 
 in  Judffia  et  Arabia  copiose  nascentem,  et  inter- 
 pretum  auctoritate  egregie  suffultam,  ipsam  esse 
 Ebrreorum  njy!?,  pro  indubitato  habemus.'  That 
 species  of  artemisia  are  common  in  Syria  and  Pales- 
 tine is  well  known,  as  all  travellers  mention  their 
 abundance  in  particular  situations  ;  but  as  many  of 
 them  resemble  each  other  very  closely  in  properties, 
 it  is  more  difficult  to  determine  what  particular  species 
 is  meant.  It  is  probable,  indeed,  that  the  name  is 
 used  in  a  generic  rather  than  a  specific  sense.  _  The 
 species  found  in  Syria  have  already  been  mentioned 
 under  Absinthium.  The  species  most  celebrated 
 in  Arabian  works  on  Materia  Medica  is  that  called 
 ^  ^Jli  sheeh,  which  is  conspicuous  for  its  bitter- 
 
 ness,  and  for  being  fatal  to  worms ;  hence  it  has 
 been  commonly  employed  as  an  anthelmintic  even 
 to  our  own  times.  This  seems  to  be  the  same 
 species  which  was  found  by  Rauwolff  in  Palestine, 
 and  which  he  says  the  Arabs  call  scheha.  It  is  his 
 '  Absinthium  Santonicum,  scheha  Arabum,  unde  se- 
 men lumbricorum  colligitur  ;'  theAbsinthiu?n  San- 
 tonictim  Jiidaiciun  of  Caspar  Bauhin,  in  his  Pinax, 
 now  Artemisia  Jiidaica  ;  though  it  is  probable  two 
 or  three  species  yield  the  Sononi  Santonutim,  or 
 wormwood  of  commerce,  which,  instead  of  seed, 
 consists  of  the  top  of  the  plants,  and  in  which  the 
 peduncles,  calyx  flowers,  and  young  seeds  are  in- 
 termixed. Artemisia  Maritima  and  Jiidaica  are 
 two  of  the  plants  which  yield  it. — J.  F.  R. 
 
 LABAN  (p!?,  '  white ;'  LXX.  k6.QavS,  an  Ara- 
 mzean  pastoraV  chief,  son  of  Bethuel,  brother  ol 
 Rebecca,  and  grand-nephew  of  Abraham.    In  Gen- 
 
LABAN 
 
 766 
 
 LABAN 
 
 xxix.  5  he  is  called  '  the  son  of  Nahoi,'  bv  a  common 
 extension  in  meaning  of  the  word  |3.      He  is  first 
 
 mentioned  in  Gen.  xxiv.  29,  where  Rebecca  intro- 
 duces him  to  Eliezer,  Abraham's  steward.  Al- 
 though it  appears  that  Bethuel  his  father  was  alive 
 (xxiv.  50),*  Laban  takes  by  far  the  most  prominent 
 part  in  the  reception  of  Eliezer,  and  the  arrange- 
 ments respecting  his  sister's  marriage.  This  fact 
 has  led  to  numerous  conjectures,  and  especially  to 
 a  suspicion  on  the  part  of  R.  Sol.  Jarchi,  that 
 Laban  was  unfilial  in  his  behaviour,  which  we  only 
 mention  as  a  specimen  of  the  harsh  judgments 
 wdiicli  have  been  [assed  on  Laban's  character.  The 
 fact  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the  Oriental  custom 
 which  makes  a  grown-up  brother  the  chief  guardian 
 of  his  sister's  happiness  and  honour  (Gen.  xxxiv.  13  ; 
 Judg.  xxi.  22 ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  ;  Niebuhr,  Beschr.  von 
 Arab.,  p.  31).  A  charge  of  cupidity  has  been 
 brought  against  Laban,  because,  '  ivheii  he  saw 
 the  ear-ring  and  the  bracelets  upon  his  sister^s 
 hands^ — '  he  said,  come,  thou  blessed  of  the  Lord.' 
 It  would  not,  indeed,  be  surprising,  if  the  splendour 
 of  these  presents  added  somewhat  to  the  emphasis 
 of  Laban's  greeting ;  but  to  any  one  who  will  read 
 the  context  of  this  passage  (Gen.  xxiv.  29,  30),  it 
 will  be  obvious  that  an  invidious  importance  has 
 been  attached  to  these  words.  The  impulse  of 
 Laban's  hospitality /;-twc/^^(ver.  29)  all  knowledge 
 of  his  guest's  wealth,  and  throughout  the  narrative 
 he  appears  as  an  affectionate  and  God-fearing  man 
 (vers.  32,  55-60). 
 
 After  the  unfortunate  breach  which  Jacob's  fraud 
 caused  between  himself  and  his  brother  Esau,  the 
 mind  of  Rebecca  naturally  recurred  to  her  old  home 
 as  a  refuge  for  her  favourite  son,  and,  by  the  wish 
 of  both  his  parents,  Jacob  set  forth  to  '  take  a  wife 
 of  the  daughters  of  Laban'  (xxviii.  2).  We  may 
 observe  in  passing,  that  this  would  hardly  have 
 been  the  case,  if  Laban  had  been  the  base  person 
 he  is  generally  represented  to  have  been.  His  re- 
 ception of  his  destitute  nephew  was  characterised 
 by  that  generous  warmth  and  impulsiveness  which 
 has  been  most  unjustly  attributed  to  hypocrisy  and 
 self-interest.  After  a  month  had  elapsed,  Laban 
 himself  proposed  that  the  active  services  rendered 
 to  him  by  Jacob  should  receive  their  just  wages, 
 and  Jacob  offered  to  serve  seven  years  for  Rachel, 
 Laban's  youngest  daughter.  In  a  country  where  it 
 is  the  universal  custom  that  the  husband  should 
 pay  a  dowry  to  the  parents  of  his  wife  (Exod.  xxii. 
 16,  17;  Gen.  xxxiv.  12;  Hos.  iii.  I,  2 ;  i  Sam. 
 xviii.  25  ;  Rosenmidler,  Morgenl.,  i.  132),  it  would 
 probably  have  not  been  consonant  to  Jacob's  feel- 
 ings that  he  should  marry  as  a  penniless  stranger, 
 dependent  on  his  father-in-law's  beneficence.  The 
 implied  dissatisfaction  of  Laban's  daughters  (xxxi. 
 15)  does  not  therefore  seem  to  have  had  any  just 
 grounds,  nor  must  Laban  be  severely  condemned 
 for  an  arrangement  which  finds  its  daily  and  un- 
 blamed  parallel  in  modern  life,  when,  after  years 
 
 *  Josephus  is  therefore  mistaken  in  saying.  Ba- 
 Oovr\Ko%  .  .  'aXX'  6  /xh  ijor]  redvTjKs,  Antiq.  i.  16.  2. 
 There  is  no  shadow  of  reason  for  conjecturing  that 
 '  Bethuel'  is  an  interpolation  in  xxiv.  50  ;  still  less 
 that  it  is  the  name  of  a  younger  brother  of  Laban. 
 The  'undesigned  coincidence'  which  Blunt  finds 
 in  the  '  consistent  insignificance'  of  Bethuel,  is  one 
 of  the  many  instances  of  over-refinement  in  his  in- 
 genious and  interesting  book. 
 
 of  service,  some  inferior  is  admitted  into  partner- 
 ship and  connection  by  marriage  with  the  princi- 
 pals of  the  business.  No  defence,  however,  can  be 
 offered  for  the  mean  treachery  which  induced  Laban 
 to  practice  the  fraud — rendered  so  easy  by  the  mar- 
 riage-ceremonies of  the  East — of  palming  off  the 
 dim-eyed  Leah,  in  the  place  of  her  beautifid  sister. 
 It  is  no  excuse  for  him  to  say,  that  he  was  herein 
 the  divine  instrument  to  punish  Jacob  for  his  own 
 similar  and  still  more  disgraceful  deceit  ;  and 
 although  the  popular  feeling  and  prevailing  custom* 
 to  which  he  appealed  undoubtedly  existed,  and  was 
 in  all  probabihty  sufficiently  notorious  to  be  known 
 to  Jacob,  yet  Laban  ought  to  have  insisted  before- 
 hand on  its  observance,  and  not  to  have  carried 
 his  point  by  a  trick  discreditable  even  to  a  heathen 
 nomad.  All  that  can  be  said  in  extenuation  of  this 
 is,  that  a  week  after  he  gave  Rachel  also  to  Jacob, 
 and  that  he  probably  viewed  polygamy  with  favour 
 rather  than  otherwise.  That  Jacob  did  not  wait 
 till  the  end  of  the  fourteen  years  before  manying 
 Rachel,  is  clear,  both  from  the  narrative  itselt 
 (xxix.  28),  and  from  the  fact  that  Jacob,  even  when 
 he  first  fled  to  Laban,  was  no  less  than  seventy- 
 eight  years  old  (cf.  xxxi.  41  ;  xxxvii.  2  ;  xlvii.  9). 
 The  exaction  of  seven  years'  further  service  was,  on 
 any  plea,  wholly  unwarrantable,  and  forms  the 
 darkest  stain  on  Laban's  character. 
 
 When  fourteen  years  were  ended,  Jacob  pro- 
 posed to  return,  feeling  that  the  treatment  which  he 
 had  received  was  neither  generous  nor  just.  For 
 a  moment  Laban's  better  feelings  won  the  day,  and 
 in  requesting  Jacob  to  stay  with  him  he  left  him  to 
 name  his  own  compensation  (xxx.  28,  31).  Jacob 
 made  a  proposal  that  sounded  equitable,  t  and  then, 
 by  a  threefold  artifice,  in  accordance  with  all  which 
 was  most  contemptible  in  his  character,  took  means 
 to  render  it  most  unfair  and  prejudicial  to  the  in 
 terests  and  reasonable  expectations  of  his  master. 
 For  six  years  this  systematic  fraud  was  continued, 
 and  the  cunning  seems  to  have  been  all  on  "Jacobs 
 side.  We  do  not  therefore  agree  with  Ewald  [Geseh. 
 d.  Volkes  Isr.,  i.  401,  seq.)  in  seeing  throughout 
 this  melancholy  passage  a  contest  of  opposing 
 frauds  ;  for  it  was  most  natural  that  Laban  should, 
 from  time  to  time,  change  his  retainer's  wages, 
 when  he  saw  that  Jacob  was  prospering  beyond  his 
 just  measure,  by  means  which  (being  apparently 
 unsuspicious)  he  could  not  discover.  The  expo- 
 sure seems  to  have  come  from  Laban's  sons,  who 
 
 *  A  provision  in  the  Gentoo  laws  renders  it 
 criminal  for  a  man  to  give  his  younger  daughter  in 
 marriage  before  the  elder. 
 
 +  The  artifices,  obscurely  described  in  Gen. 
 X.XX.  37-42,  are  clearly  explained  (on  slightly  dif- 
 ferent hypotheses)  by  Rosenmiiller  and  Kalisch. 
 They  consisted,  i.  In  '  pilling  certain  wands'  to 
 influence  the  animals  by  the  sight  of  tmusual 
 objects ;  2.  In  mixing  the  parti-coloured  cattle 
 thus  obtained  with  Laban's  cattle ;  3.  In  secur- 
 ing to  himself  all  the  strongest  births.  Shakes- 
 peare, in  putting  a  defence  of  Jacob  into  Antonio's 
 mouth — 
 
 '  This  was  a  venture.  Sir,  that  Jacob  served  for ; 
 A  thing  not  in  his  power  to  bring  to  pass. 
 But  swayed  and  fashioned  by  the  hand  of 
 Heaven.' — Merch.  of  Venice,  i.  3. 
 
 only  alludes  to  the  least  objectionable  of  these  dis- 
 honest acts,  namely,  the  use  of  the  wands. 
 
LABAN 
 
 707 
 
 LABOUR 
 
 first  woke  their  father's  envy  by  denouncing  Jacob's 
 dishonesty,  and  pointing  out  ifs  consequences  (Gen. 
 xxxi.  1-2)  ;  and  Jacob,  feehng  that  he  could  no 
 longer  face  Laban's  just  displeasure,  took  advantage 
 of  the  sheep-shearing  festival  (xxxviii.  12  ;  I  Sam. 
 XXV.  7  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  23),  (to  which  the  breach  be- 
 tween them  had  probably  prevented  him  iVoni  being 
 invited),  to  fly  towards  Canaan  with  his  family  and 
 all  his  possessions.  On  occasion  of  this  flight, 
 Rachel,  whose  character  appears  to  have  been 
 superstitious  (cf.  xxx.  14),  stole  the  'gods'  (Tera- 
 phim,  Tovs  Tt/Trous  twv  OtOiv,  Joseph.  Antiq.  i.  19. 
 8)  of  her  father.  The  mere  possession  of  Teraphim, 
 which  the  Jews  at  no  time  consistently  condemned 
 (cf.  Judg.  xvii.,  -ssm.,  passiDi ;  i  Sam.  xix.  13; 
 Hos.  iii.  4),  does  not  piove  Laban  to  have  been  an 
 idolater ;  but  that  he  must  have  been  so  appears 
 with  some  probability  from  xxxi.  53  ('  the  gods  of 
 Nahor')  and  from  the  expression  int^nj,  nichash- 
 
 thi,  in  xxx.  27  ;  A.  V.,  '  /  have  learnt  by  expe- 
 rience,'' but  properly,  '  I  have  divined'  or  '  learnt 
 by  an  augury'  (cf.  xliv.  15  ;  i  Kings  xx.  33),  shew- 
 ing that  he  was  addicted  to  pagan  superstitions. 
 Learning  the  flight  of  Jacob,  which  naturally 
 roused  his  indignation,  Laban  started  in  pursuit 
 (A.  v.,  '  on  the  third  day,'  but  Joseph.  /.  c.,  fj.ed' 
 rifiipav  fxlav),  and  overtaking  him  on  the  seventh 
 day,  appears  to  have  intended  either  to  punish  or  to 
 bring  him  liack  by  force.  From  this  course  he  was 
 diverted  by  a  dream,  and  contented  himself  with  a 
 demand  for  his  stolen  property,  and  an  impetuous 
 yet  high-toned  rebuke  of  Jacob's  clandestine  depar- 
 ture. Li  the  scene  of  stormy  recrimination  which 
 followed  upon  his  failure  to  find  the  stolen  house- 
 hold-gods, the  forbearance  and  generosity  are 
 mostly  on  the  side  of  Laban,  who,  conscious  that 
 he  had  not  treated  his  nephew  well,  and  that  he 
 had  set  the  first  fatal  example  of  deceit,  reminds 
 him  of  the  close  ties  between  them,  and  proposes 
 a  sacred  reconciliation,  testified  by  the  cairn  and 
 pillar,  which  Jacob,  in  Hebrew,  called  Gilead,  and 
 Laban,  in  Chaldee,  called  Jagar-sahadutha.  After 
 this  Laban  kissed  and  blessed  his  daughters  and 
 their  children,  and  departed.  He  is  not  again 
 mentioned  or  alluded  to.  He  was  not  free  from 
 the  cunning  and  cupidity  which  too  frequently  dis- 
 grace the  character  of  the  Oriental  nomad  ;  but  his 
 character  has  been  drawn  in  colours  wholly  unwar- 
 ranted by  the  Scriptural  history ;  and  if  we  com- 
 pare his  conduct  with  that  of  his  nephew  and  son- 
 in-law,  it  has  nothing  to  lose  by  the  contrast  and 
 everything  to  gain. — F.  W.  F. 
 
 LABAN  (jn? ;  Ao/36»'),  a  place  mentioned  Deut.  i. 
 
 I,  as  one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israelites  after  cross- 
 ing the  Red  Sea.  It  has  been  suggested  that  it  is 
 the  same  as  Libnah,  which  was  three  days'  journey 
 north  of  Hazeroth  (Num.  xxxiii.  20) ;  but  this, 
 Knobel  (in  loc.)  remarks,  can  hardly  be,  because  no 
 mention  is  made  of  any  discourses  delivered  at 
 Libnah  by  Moses  during  the  passage  from  Sinai  to 
 Kadesh  (Num.  x.  13),  and  after  reaching  Kadesh 
 the  Israelites  did  not  return  to  Libnah.  Knobel 
 thinks  it  more  probable  that  it  is  identical  with  the 
 Aiia/5a  of  Ptolemy  (v.  17.  5),  and  the  Hauarra  of 
 the   Tab.  Peutitig.  ix.  e. ,  a  name  which,  from  the 
 
 Arab.    tl>.,  he  was  white,  has  the  same  meaning 
 
 as  the  Heb.  np;  comp.  Steph.  Byzant.  s.  v.  Aiapa. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LABOUR  (nSN^D,  mny),  or  the  exercise  of 
 the  limbs,  both  for  obtaining  subsistence  and  for 
 the  benefit  of  health,  was  ordained  by  God  as  soon 
 as  man  was  created.  We  are  told  that  even  before 
 his  fall  Adam  was  to  work  in  Paradise  (Gen.  ii. 
 5,  15)-  After  the  fall,  however,  pain  and  exhaus- 
 tion were,  as  a  consequence  of  sin,  to  be  connected 
 with  the  labour  which  from  the  beginning  was 
 designed  to  be  a  pleasant  pastime  and  healthy 
 exercise  {ibid.,  iii.  19).  It  is,  therefore,  the  pro- 
 stration of  strength,  wherewith  is  also  connected 
 the  temporary  incapacity  of  sharing  in  the  enjoy- 
 ments of  life,  and  not  labour  itself,  which  consti- 
 tutes the  curse  pronounced  on  the  fallen  man. 
 Hence  we  find  that,  in  primitive  times,  manual 
 labour  was  neither  regarded  as  degrading  nor  con- 
 fined to  a  certain  class  of  society,  but  was  more  or 
 less  prosecuted  by  all.  It  was  enjoined  on  all 
 Israelites  as  a  sacred  duty  in  the  fourth  command- 
 ment (Exod.  XX.  9;  Deut.  v.  13);  and  the  Bible 
 entertains  so  high  a  respect  for  the  diligent  and 
 skilful  labourer,  that  we  are  told  in  Prov.  xxii.  29, 
 '  Seest  thou  a  man  skilled  in  his  work,  he  shall 
 stand  before  kings'  (comp.  also  ibid.,  x.  4;  xii. 
 24,  27).  Among  the  beautiful  features  which 
 grace  an  excellent  house-wife,  it  is  prominently  set 
 forth  that  '  she  worketh  willingly  with  her  own 
 hands'  (Prov.  xxxi.  13).  With  sudi  an  honourable 
 regard  for  labour,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that 
 when  Nebuchadnezzar  carried  the  Jews  away  into 
 captivity,  he  found  among  them  a  thousand  crafts- 
 men and  smiths  (2  Kings  xxiv.  14-16  ;  Jer.  xxix.  2). 
 The  ancient  Rabbins,  too,  regarded  manual  labour 
 as  most  honourable,  and  urged  it  upon  every  one 
 as  a  duty;  as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  say- 
 ings in  the  Talmud  : — '  He  who  does  not  teach  his 
 son  a  craft  is,  as  it  were,  bringing  him  up  to 
 robbery'  [Cholin,  105).  '  Labour  is  greatly  to  be 
 prized ;  for  it  elevates  the  labourer,  and  maintains 
 him'  (Chagiga,  5;  Neda7-ini  49,  b;  Baba  Bathra 
 no,  a).  To  inculcate  the  dignity  of  all  honest 
 labour,  however  low  the  work  might  seem,  the 
 Talmud  relates  the  following  story :  '  A  man 
 named  Simon,  whose  business  it  was  to  clean  the 
 pits  and  reservoirs,  said  once  to  the  celebrated  R. 
 Jochanan  b.  Zakkai  (flor.  30  B.C.)  [Education], 
 I  am  as  great  as  you  are,  and  accomplish  as  much 
 as  you.  How  so?  the  Rabbi  asked  modestly. 
 Behold,  you  make  public  affairs  your  business,  and 
 my  labours  too  are  devoted  to  the  public  benefit  ; 
 I  clean  the  pits,  the  wells,  and  the  cisterns,  in  order 
 that  you  may  be  able  to  recommend  the  inquirer 
 such  and  such  a  pit  for  baptisms,  and  such  and 
 such  a  well  for  drinking.  Truly  you  are  right,  said 
 the  Rabbi,  for  it  is  better  to  be  attentive  than  to 
 have  to  pronounce  fools  guilty  of  a  sacrifice,  for 
 they  know  not  to  do  evil'  {Midrash  Rabbi  on 
 Ecclesiastes  iv.  17,  p.  95).  Hence  the  greatest 
 Jewish  Rabbins  learned  a  craft,  and  laboured  with 
 their  own  hands  for  maintenance  [Education]. 
 The  great  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  honoured  and 
 sanctified  labour  by  engaging  in  it  with  his  own 
 hands  ;  and  he  could  boast  that  he  worked  hard  day 
 and  night  for  maintenance,  even  when  a  preacher 
 of  the  gospel,  rather  than  be  dependent  upon  any 
 one  (2  Cor.  xii.  13,  14;  i  Thess.  ii.  9).  He  could 
 therefore  teach  others,  by  example,  how  to  labour 
 with  their  hands,  and  to  use  the  wages  of  labour 
 for  holy  purposes  (Acts  xx.  33-35 ;  i  Thess.  iv. 
 II,  12).  For  the  different  kinds  of  labour  in 
 which  the   Hebrews  were   engaged,    see   articles 
 
LACHISH 
 
 768 
 
 LACHISH 
 
 Education,  Handicraft,  of  this  Cyclopedia. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 LACHISH  {]y'':b,  perhaps  =  (^,  'obsti- 
 nate; Sept.  Aaxi's ;  Alex.  Aa^ffs ;  Lachis),  an 
 ancient  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites,  whose  king,  at 
 the  request  of  Adonizedec,  king  of  Jerusalem,  joined 
 the  alliance  against  Joshua  and  the  Israelites  (Josh. 
 X.  3).  The  allied  forces  having  been  conquered  at 
 Bethhoron,  and  the  five  kings  slain  at  Makkedah 
 (ver.  16,  etc.),  Joshua  proceeded  with  the  conquest 
 of  the  land.  Makkedah  was  first  taken,  then 
 Libnah,  and  then  Lachish  (ver.  31,  32)  though  it 
 received  aid  from  Horam,  king  of  Gezer  (ver.  33). 
 Afterwards  the  Israelites  marched  on  Eglon,  which 
 was  only  a  very  short  distance  from  the  former,  as 
 they  were  able  to  capture  it  the  same  day  (ver.  35). 
 Lachish  was  situated  in  the  Shephelah,  or  plain  of 
 Philistia  bordering  on  the  mountains  of  Judah 
 (Josh.  XV.  33),  and  was  allotted,  along  with  Eglon 
 and  others,  to  the  tribe  of  Judah  (ver.  39).  The 
 situation  of  Lachish  on  the  south-western  frontier, 
 within  the  borders  of  the  warlike  Philistines, 
 exposed  to  the  first  assaults  of  the  powerful  Egypt- 
 ians, and  on  the  line  of  march  between  that  country 
 and  Syria,  made  it  a  strategic  post  of  great  import- 
 ance. It  was  fortified  by  Rehoboam  (2  Chron. 
 xi,  9),  and  was  then,  and  afterwards,  considered 
 one  of  the  principal  strongholds  of  Judah.  It 
 would  seem  also,  from  an  incidental  remark  of 
 Micah  (i.  13),  that  it  was  a  station  for  chariots, 
 which  might  be  employed  with  great  effect  in  the 
 open  level  plain,  but  could  not  be  used  among  the 
 rugged  mountrins  round  Jerusalem.  When  the 
 conspiracy  was  organized  in  Jerusalem  against  the 
 unfortunate  king  Amaziah,  he  fled  to  Lachish, 
 probably  in  the  hope  of  escaping  to  Egypt ;  but  he 
 was  pursued  and  slain  (2  Kings  xiv.  19  ;  2  Chron. 
 XXV.  27). 
 
 Lachish  was  chiefly  celebrated  from  its  connec- 
 tion with  the  campaigns  of  Sennacherib.  Ahaz, 
 king  of  Judah,  being  hard  pressed  by  the  Syrians, 
 applied  for  aid  to  Assyria,  and  became  tributary  to 
 that  great  kingdom  (2  Kings  xvi.  7  ;  B.C.  740). 
 Hezekiah,  his  successor,  threw  off  the  foreign  yoke 
 (xviii.  7) ;  consequently  in  the  fourteenth  year  of 
 his  reign,  Sennacherib,  king  of  Assyria,  marched 
 against  Judah,  captured  many  of  its  strongholds, 
 and  besieged  Lachish.  Hezekiah  was  afraid,  and 
 appeased  the  conqueror  by  a  large  present  (ver. 
 14-16) ;  he  also  made  vigorous  preparations  for  the 
 defence  of  Jerusalem,  and  entered  into  an  alliance 
 with  Egypt  (2  Chron.  xxxii. ;  Is.  xxxvi.,  seq.)  It 
 would  seem  that,  after  the  submission  of  Heze- 
 kiah, Sennacherib  captured  Lachish,  and  marched 
 in  force  against  the  Egyptians  (Joseph.  Aniiq.  x. 
 I.  I;  cf.  Is.  XX.  1-4;  see  also  Rawlinson's  Hero- 
 dotus, i.  477).  A  second  time  Sennacherib  attacked 
 Lachish  ;  but  whether  on  his  return  from  his  Egypt- 
 ian campaign,  or  after  he  had  paid  a  visit  to  Nine- 
 veh, cannot  now  be  determined.  While  pressing 
 the  siege  in  person,  he  detached  three  of  his  officers 
 with  a  large  force  to  Jerusalem,  to  demand  its  sur- 
 render (2  Kings  xviii.  17;  2  Chron.  xxxii.  9,  seq.) 
 The  terms  they  proposed  were  so  humiliating,  and 
 the  letter  they  bore  was  so  lilasphemous,  that  the 
 Lord  promised  to  deliver  his  people  by  a  miracle 
 from  the  proud  conqueror.  Before  the  return  of 
 the  officers  the  siege  of  Lachish  was  raised  (2  Kings 
 Kix.   8),    and    Sennacherib    marched   on   Libnah. 
 
 There  he  suddenly  heard  that  Tirhakah,  king  of 
 Ethiopia,  was  advancing  against  him  (\er.  9);  but 
 before  a  battle  was  fought  the  terrible  calamity 
 predicted  by  Isaiah  came  upon  him  :  '  The  angel 
 of  the  Lord  smote  in  the  camp  of  the  Assyrians 
 an  hundred  fourscore  and  five  thousand '  (Is. 
 xxxvii.  36).  Sennacherib  immediately  fled,  and 
 the  Egyptians  represented  the  miraculous  destruc- 
 tion as  the  work  of  their  own  deities,  and  com- 
 memorated the  event  in  their  own  way  (Herod, 
 ii.  141  ;  Rawlinson's  Hei-od.,  \.  480).  It  is  a  re- 
 markable fact  that  on  the  tablets  and  sculptures 
 discovered  by  Layard  in  the  palace  of  Sennacherib 
 at  Nineveh,  there  is  a  full  delineation  and  description 
 of  the  siege  of  Lachish.  The  city  is  represented  as 
 having  double  walls,  with  battlements,  towers,  and 
 outworks.  Round  it  mounds  are  thrown  up,  and 
 the  whole  force  of  Assyria — -archers,  spearmen, 
 slingers,  with  a  reserve  of  cavalry  and  chariots — is 
 drawn  up  in  order  of  battle.  A  part  of  the  c?ty 
 has  fallen,  and  the  conquerors  are  employed  im- 
 paling prisoners  and  dividing  the  spoil ;  while  the 
 chiefs  of  the  conquered  city  are  brought  before  the 
 victorious  monarch.  Above  the  king's  head  is 
 the  following  inscription  in  cuneiform  characters  : 
 '  Sennacherib,  the  mighty  king,  king  of  the  country 
 of  Assyria,  sitting  on  the  throne  of  judgment  before 
 the  city  of  Lachish  —  I  give  permission  for  its 
 slaughter'  (Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  pp. 
 148-152).  This  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  and 
 important  confirmations  of  Scripture  history  result- 
 ing from  modern  research. 
 
 Lachish  again  rose  from  its  ashes,  and  was  among 
 the  chief  of  Judah's  fortresses  when  Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, king  of  Babylon,  invaded  Palestine  (Jer. 
 xxxiv.  1-7).  It  existed  still,  and  was  re-occupied 
 by  the  Israelites  after  the  return  from  captivity 
 (Neh.  xi.  30).  Eusebius  describes  Lachish  as,  in  his 
 day,  a  village  '  seven  miles  distant  from  Eleuthero- 
 polis  southward  as  you  go  to  Darom'  (tt/dos  vbrov 
 diribvTiiiv  els  to  Aapoifxav  ;  Onomast. ,  s.  v.  Lachis) ; 
 and  Darom  was  a  small  province  south  of  Gaza, 
 near  the  coast.  Eleven  miles  from  Eleutheropolis, 
 on  the  road  to  Gaza,  are  the  ruins  of  Um  Ldkis, 
 consisting  of  heaps  of  stones  and  mounds  of  rub- 
 bish, with  here  and  there  a  few  broken  fragments 
 of  marble  and  granite  columns,  strewn  over  a 
 low  hill  in  the  midst  of  a  great  undulating  plain. 
 At  the  southern  base  of  the  hill  is  an  ancient 
 well,  round  whose  mouth  are  numbers  of  sarco- 
 phagi and  other  relics  of  the  wealth  and  taste 
 of  former  ages.     The  name  at  once  suggests  the 
 
 royal  city  of  Lachish  (loJi^  and  ti^'^P  ;  the  word 
 
 m\,  'mother,'  is  often  prefixed  to  Arabic  names); 
 
 and  the  situation  corresponds  exactly  with  the  inci- 
 dental notices  in  the  Bible.  It  is  in  the  plain  of 
 Philistia,  on  the  southern  border  towards  Egypt, 
 and  only  three  miles  distant  from  Ajlan,  the  ancient 
 Eglon  {Handbook  for  S.  and  P. ,  p.  260).  Dr. 
 Robinson  objects  to  this  identification  chiefly 
 because  Lachish  was  a  place  of  great  strength, 
 and  there  are  no  traces  of  fortifications  now  ;  and 
 because  Eusebius  and  Jerome  place  Lachish  seven 
 miles  from  Eleutheropolis,  whereas  Um  Lakis  is 
 eleven.  But  to  this  it  may  be  answered  that  for 
 two  thousand  years  and  more  Um  Lakis  has  been 
 a  ruin,  and  it  has  long  been  the  practice  in  Pales- 
 tine to  carry  away  the  stones  from  ruined  sites  for 
 the  construction  of  new  buildings.     There  can  he 
 
LACHMANN 
 
 769 
 
 LAHAI-ROI 
 
 no  doubt  about  the  identity  of  Ashdod;  and  though 
 It  stood  the  longest  siege  on  record,  it  lias  not  a 
 trace  of  fortifications  now  (see,  however,  Robinson 
 B.  R.,  ii.  46;  Raumer,  166;  Van  de  Velde,  ii.  188). 
 And  farther,  the  distances  given  in  the  Oitomasticon 
 cannot  always  be  relied  upon.  There  can  scarcely 
 be  a  doubt  that  in  the  desolate  ruin  of  Urn  Lakis 
 we  have  all  that  remains  of  the  Canaanitish  city 
 and  Jewish  stronghold.  — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LACHMANN,  Ka.rl  Konr.  Fr.  Wilh.,  was 
 bom  at  Brunswick  4th  March  1798.  His  early 
 education  he  received  in  his  native  city.  His  aca- 
 demical career  began  at  Leipsic,  but  was  princi- 
 pally pursued  at  Gottingen.  During  the  disturb- 
 ances of  1 8 14,  he  for  a  season  forsook  study  for 
 warfare,  but  soon  returned  to  his  former  pursuits 
 without  having  had  an  opportunity  of  signalising 
 his  prowess  on  the  field.  In  1816  he  was  appointed 
 to  a  professorship  at  Konigsberg,  where  he  re- 
 mained till  1S25,  when  he  removed  to  Berlin.  In 
 this  city  the  rest  of  his  life  was  spent.  He  died 
 13th  March  185 1.  The  studies  to  which  Lach- 
 mann  chiefly  devoted  himself  belong  to  the  de- 
 partment of  philology  ;  but  in  this  his  range  was 
 wide.  Besides  editions  of  classical  authors,  he 
 edited  some  of  the  remains  of  early  Teutonic  litera- 
 ture. In  1 83 1  he  issued  an  edition  of  the  Greek 
 N.  T.  in  a  small  form,  intended  to  present  the  text 
 authorised  by  the  most  ancient  codices.  This  was 
 followed,  in  1842,  by  the  first  volume  of  his  larger 
 critical  edition  of  the  original  text,  the  result  of  the 
 united  labours  of  himself  and  the  younger  Butt- 
 mann.  In  this  he  aimed  at  presenting,  as  far  as 
 possible,  the  text  as  it  was  in  the  authorised  copies 
 of  the  4th  century,  his  design  being,  not  to  compare 
 various  readings  with  the  received  text,  but  to  sup- 
 ply a  text  derived  from  ancient  authorities  directly 
 and  exclusively.  Relinquishing  the  possibility  of 
 ascertaining  what  was  the  exact  text  of  the  original 
 as  it  appeared  in  the  autographs  of  the  authors,  he 
 set  himself  to  determine  the  oldest  attainable  text 
 by  means  of  extant  codices.  For  this  purpose  he 
 made  use  of  only  a  very  few  MSS.,  viz..  A,  B,  C, 
 P,  Q,  T,  Z  for  the  Gospels;  D,  G,  H  for  the 
 Epistles,  the  Ante-Hieronymian  Latin  versions,  and 
 the  readmgs  of  Origen,  Irenseus,  Cyprian,  Hilary  of 
 Poitiers,  Lucifer,  and,  for  the  Apocalypse,  Prima- 
 rius.  Under  the  Greek  te.xt  the  editor  cites  his 
 authorities,  and  at  the  bottom  of  the  page  he  gives 
 the  Vulgate  version  edited  from  two  codices  of  the 
 6th  century,  the  Fuldensis  and  the  Amiantinus,  pre- 
 served in  the  Laurentian  libraiy  at  Florence.  The 
 second  volume  appeared  in  1850.  Lachmann  ex- 
 pounded the  principles  on  which  his  edition  was 
 based  in  the  Stiidien  uud  Kritiken  for  1830,  p.  817- 
 845.  On  its  first  appearance,  his  work,  and  the 
 principles  on  which  it  was  based,  were  subjected 
 to  much  hostility  ;  but  his  great  services  to  the 
 cause  of  N.  T.  criticism  are  now  universally  ad- 
 mitted. That  he  narrowed  unreasonably  the  sphere 
 of  legitimate  authority  for  the  sacred  text,  that  he 
 was  sometimes  capricious  in  his  selection  of  autho- 
 rities, and  that  while  he  did  not  always  follow  his 
 authorities,  he  at  other  times  followed  them  even 
 in  their  manifest  errors  and  blunders,  may  be  ad- 
 mitted. But,  after  every  deduction  from  the  merits 
 of  his  work  is  made  which  justice  demands,  there 
 will  still  remain  to  Lachmann  the  high  praise  of 
 having  been  the  fir.st  to  apply  to  the  editing  of  the 
 Greek  N.   T.   those   sound  principles   of  textual 
 
 VOL.    II. 
 
 criticism  which  can  alone  secure  a  correct  and  trust- 
 worthy  text.  In  this  he  followed,  to  a  considerable 
 extent,  the  counsel  of  the  illustrious  Bentley,  utter- 
 ed more  than  a  century  before  (whence  some,  who 
 sought  to  discredit  his  efforts,  unworthily  mocked 
 him  as  '  Simia  Bentleii ')  ;  but  he  owed  nothing  to 
 Bentley  beyond  the  suggestion  of  the  principles  he 
 has  followed  ;  and  he  possessed,  and  has  ably  used, 
 materials  which  in  Bentley's  time  were  not  to  be 
 had  (Hertz,  K.  Lac/uiiaini,  Eine  Biographie,  Berl. 
 1851  ;  Tregelles,  Printed  Text  of  the  Greek  N.  T., 
 p.  97,  ff.)— W.  L.  A. 
 
 LADDER  OF  TYRE.  Josephus,  in  describ- 
 ing the  plain  of  Ptolemais,  states  that  it  is  encom- 
 passed by  mountains — Carmel  on  the  south,  Galilee 
 on  the  east,  and  that  on  the  north,  the  highest  of 
 them  all,  is  called  by  the  people  of  the  country 
 The  Ladder  of  the  Tyrians  (KXT/xa^  Tvpiuv,  Bell. 
 Jiid.,  ii.  10.  2),  and  is  100  stadia  from  the  city.  In 
 I  Maccab.  xi.  59,  we  also  read  that  '  Simon  was 
 made  governor  of  the  country  from  the  Ladder  of 
 Tyre  (ciTro  ttjs  KXi/xaKos  Tvpov)  to  the  borders  of 
 Egypt.'  The  rendering  of  the  Vulgate  is  here 
 manifestly  erroneous  (a  tertninis  Tyri,  '  from  the 
 borders  of  Tyre').  Such  as  have  visited  the  plain 
 of  Ptolemais  can  have  no  difficulty  in  identifying 
 the  '  Ladder  of  Tyre.'  The  rich  plain  is  bounded 
 on  the  north  by  a  rugged  mountain-ridge  which 
 shoots  out  fi-om  Lebanon  and  dips  perpendicularly 
 into  the  sea,  forming  a  bold  promontory  about  300 
 feet  in  height  (Russegger,  3,  143,  262  ;  Ritter, 
 Pal.  tend  Syr.,  iii.  727,  814,  seq.)  The  waves  beat 
 against  the  base  of  the  cliff,  leaving  no  passage  be- 
 low. In  ancient  times  a  road  was  carried,  by  a 
 series  of  zigzags  and  staircases,  over  the  summit,  to 
 connect  the  plain  of  Ptolemais  with  Tyre, — hence 
 the  origin  of  the  name  Scala  Tyrioriun,  '  Ladder 
 of  Tyre.'  It  was  the  southern  pass  into  Phoenicia 
 proper,  and  formed  the  boundary  between  that 
 country  and  Palestine  (Kenrick,  Plicenicia,  p.  20  ; 
 Reland,  p.  544).  The  road  still  remains,  and  is 
 the  only  one  along  the  coast.  A  short  distance 
 from  it  is  a  little  village  called  Ahiktirah,  and  the 
 pass  is  now  called  Rds  en-N'akurah,  '  the  excavated 
 
 promontory' (from  Jjj^  'excavavit saxHtn''),Ao\\ht- 
 
 less  from  the  road  which  has  been  '  hewn  in  the 
 rock'  {Handbook,  p.  389  ;  see  also  Pococke,  i.  79  ; 
 Robinson,  B.  R.,  iii.  89 ;  Stanley,  260,  262).  Some 
 writers  suppose  that  the  promontory  called  luis  el- 
 Abiad  {_\\\&  Promontoriutn  Album  of  Pliny,  v.  17), 
 '  White  Cape,'  is  the  true  Ladder  of  Tyre  (Van  de 
 Velde,  Memoir,  346  ;  Wilson,  Lands  of  the  Bible, 
 ii.  231)  ;  but  this  is  at  variance  with  the  statement 
 of  Josephus,  that  the  Ladder  of  Tyre  is  the  north- 
 ern boundary  of  the  plain  of  Ptolemais.  Ras  el- 
 Abiad  is  eight  miles  north  of  the  plain,  and  is  not 
 visible  from  any  part  of  it ;  and  besides  Ras  en- 
 Nakiirah  is  just  about  100  stadia  from  Ptolemais, 
 as  stated  by  Josephus.  The  writer,  on  visiting  the 
 spot,  and  clambering  over  the  difficult  pass,  was 
 particularly  struck  with  the  appropriateness  of  the 
 name  'Ladder.'— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LAHAI-ROI,  the  well  OXT  "'vh  "iXn  ;   <}>pia.p 
 
 oi5  ivicTTiov  ddov,  and  t6  (ppiap  rrjs  opdaeus  ;  pnteiim 
 nomine  viventis  et  videntis,  and  pnteitm  viventis  el 
 videntis  me).  The  incident  which  gave  this  well  its 
 name  is  one  of  those  graphic  episodes  in  the  history 
 of  the  early  patriarchs  which  serve  at  once  to  throw 
 
LAHMAM 
 
 770 
 
 LAKUM 
 
 a  clear  light  on  their  lives  and  characters,  and  to 
 illustrate  the  genius  of  their  language,  and  the  pecu- 
 liarities of  their  modes  of  thought  and  expression. 
 Hagar  fled  from  her  imperious  mistress,  and  took 
 refuge  in  the  desert.  She  sat  down,  as  all  travel- 
 lers are  wont  to  do,  by  a  well.  The  LORD  ap- 
 peared to  her  there,  and  foretold  the  birth  and 
 future  history  of  her  son.  She  knew  that  she  had 
 seen  Jehovah,  and  yet  she  still  lived  ;  though  it  was 
 then  the  general  belief  that  no  man  could  see  God 
 and  live.  With  joy  and  fear  struggling  in  her  heart 
 she  called  the  Lord,  w^ho  spoke  to  her,   '  The  God 
 
 of  seeing^  CiXI  ?S),  for  she  said,  '  Do  I  even  still 
 see  {i.  ^.,  do  I  live,  TT^KI)  after  seeing'  OK"!  ""inX  ; 
 i.  e.,  '  after  seeing'  God  ;  or  '  after  my  vision'  of 
 God).  And  then,  as  an  expression  of  profound 
 gratitude,  she  named  the  well  Beer-Lahai-roi,  that 
 is,  '  The  well  of  seeing  (God)  and  living,'  or  '  the 
 well  where  God  was  seen  by  one  who  still  lives.' 
 The  Hebrew  will  not  bear  the  interpretation  given 
 to  it  by  Clarke,  '  A  well  to  the  Living  One  who 
 seeth  me  ;'  and  by  such  a  rendering,  besides,  we 
 miss  the  spirit  and  point  of  the  passage.  Equally 
 untenable  is  the  conjecture  of  Gesenius  in  his  The- 
 saurus (see  Kalisch,  Clarke,  and  Murphy,  ad  loc.) 
 The  well  was  situated  '  between  Kadesh  and  Bered,' 
 '  in  the  way  to  Shur. '  The  exact  site  is  not  known, 
 but  it  was  probably  south  of  Kadesh,  in  or  near 
 the  great  valley  of  Arabah,  and  not  far  distant  from 
 the  borders  of  Edom.  It  afterwards  became  a 
 favourite  camping-ground  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxiv.  62  ; 
 XXV.  II) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LAHMAM  (D^n^  ;  Max^s ;  Alex.  Aa/xds ;  Le- 
 
 hemaii),  a  town  of  Judah  situated  in  the  She- 
 phelah,  and  apparently  not  far  distant  from  Eglon 
 (Josh.  XV.  40).  It  is  only  once  mentioned  in  the 
 Bible,  and  was  probably  a  small  village.  The 
 name  does  not  occur  in  any  other  writer,  and  the 
 site  is  unknown.  The  close  similarity  of  final  0 
 and  D  has  given  rise  to  a  various  reading  in  this 
 
 name,  some  MSS.  having  QJ^nP  and  others  DOPI?- 
 De  Rossi  says,  '  Veteres  omnes  interpretes  legunt 
 per  D,  uno  Vulgato  excepto,  qui  habet  Lehe?nan. 
 Sed  in  Cod.  meo  650  legit  is  Leemas''  {Var.  Led. 
 Vet.  Test.,  ad  loc.)  Lahmas  may  be  the  true  read- 
 ing.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LAHMI   ^"Orh;    Sept.    rhv   Aax^i;    Alex.    r. 
 
 Aeeyuel),  the  brother  of  Goliath  of  Gath,  slain  by 
 Elhanan  (i  Chron.  xx.  5).     [Elhanan.] 
 
 LAISH  i^'h;   'strong,'  or  '  a  lion,'  as  in  Is. 
 
 XXX.  6  ;  Aaurd,  also  in  Alex.  Actets  or  Aais ;  Lais). 
 I.  An  ancient  Phoenician  city,  occupied  by  a  colony 
 of  Sidonians,  situated  in  the  rich  valley  between 
 Hermon  and  Lebanon,  and  at  one  of  the  great 
 fountains  of  the  Jordan.     The  earliest  name  given 
 
 to  it  is  Leshem  (QK*? ;  Aaxis ;  Alex.  Aeo-^/i),  which 
 
 is  probably  a  different  form  or  inflection  of  Laish 
 (Josh.  xix.  47).  The  occupation  of  this  place  by 
 the  Sidonians  is  easily  accounted  for.  Sidon  was  a 
 commercial  city.  Situated  on  the  coast,  with  only 
 a  narrow  strip  of  plain  beside  it,  and  the  bare  and 
 rocky  side  of  Lebanon  impending  over  it,  a  large 
 and  constant  supply  of  food  had  to  be  brought 
 from  a  distance.  The  plain  around  Laish  is  one 
 of  the  richest  in  Syria,  and  the  enterprising  Phoe- 
 nicians took  possession  of  it,  built  a  town,  and 
 
 placed  in  it  a  large  colony  of  labourers,  expecting 
 to  draw  from  it  an  unfailing  supply  of  corn  and 
 fiTiit.  Josephus  calls  this  plain  '  the  great  plain 
 of  the  city  of  Sidon'  {Antiq.  v.  3.  l).  A  road 
 was  made  across  the  mountains  to  it  at  an  im- 
 mense cost,  and  still  forms  one  of  the  main  roads 
 Irom  the  sea-coast  to  the  interior.  Strong  castles 
 were  built  to  protect  the  road  and  the  colony. 
 Kulat  esh-Shukif,  one  of  the  strongest  fortresses  in 
 Syria,  stands  on  a  commanding  hill  over  the  place 
 where  the  ancient  road  crosses  the  river  Leontes  ; 
 and  it  is  manifestly  of  Phoenician  origin.  So  also 
 the  great  castles  of  Banias,  four  miles  east  of 
 Laish,  and  Hunin,  about  six  miles  west  of  it,  were 
 founded  by  the  Phoenicians,  as  is  evident  from  the 
 character  of  their  architecture  {Handbk.,  pp.  447, 
 444;  Robinson,  B.R.,  iii.  50,  52,  403,  371).  It 
 is  most  interesting  to  discover,  after  the  lapse  of 
 more  than  three  thousand  years,  distinct  traces  of 
 the  wealth  and  enterprise  of  the  Phoenicians  around 
 the  site  and  fertile  plain  of  Laish.  For  an  ac- 
 count of  the  capture  of  the  city  by  the  Danites,  its 
 subsequent  history  and  present  state,  see  the  article 
 Dan.  Laish  became  chiefly  celebrated,  under  its 
 new  name  '  Dan,'  as  the  northern  border  city  of 
 Palestine  ;  and  one  of  the  two  seats  of  Jeroboam's 
 idolatrous  worship  (Deut.  xxxiv.  i  ;  i  Ivings  xii. 
 29). 
 
 2.  (Aal'o-d ;  Laisa.)  A  place  mentioned  in  Is. 
 x.  30.  Isaiah,  in  describing  the  advance  of  the 
 Assyrian  host  upon  Jerusalem,  enumerates  Laish 
 with  a  number  of  other  towns  on  the  north  of  the 
 city.  It  is  not  quite  certain  whether  the  writer  is 
 here  relatmg  a  real  event,  or  detailing  a  prophetic 
 vision,  or  giving  a  solemn  warning  under  a  striking 
 allegory  ;  but  however  this  may  be,  the  descrip- 
 tion is  singularly  graphic,  and  the  line  of  march  is 
 pointed  out  with  remarkable  minuteness  and  pre- 
 cision. Aiath,  Migron,  and  Michmash  are  passed  ; 
 the  deep  ravine  which  separates  the  latter  from 
 Geba  is  then  crossed  ;  Ramah  sees  and  is  afraid, 
 '  Gibeah  of  Saul  is  fled.'  The  writer  now,  with, 
 great  dramatic  effect,  changes  his  mode  of  descrip- 
 tion. To  terror  and  flight  he  appends  an  exclama- 
 tion of  alarm  ;  representing  one  place  as  crying, 
 another  as  listening,  and  a  third  as  responding— 
 '  Lift  up  thy  voice  daughter  of  Gallim  !  Hearken 
 Laishah  !  Alas  poor  Anathoth !'    The  words  iri''{i'pn 
 
 nt^ V  are  rendered  in  the  A.  V. ,  and  by  Grotius, 
 
 '  Cause  it  (thy  voice)  to  be  heard  unto  Laish ' — 
 that  is,  apparently,  to  the  northern  border  city  of 
 Palestine ;  but  the  Hebrew  word  will  scarcely 
 bear  tliis  interpretation,  and  the  beauty  of  the 
 passage  is  marred  by  it.  Laishah  was  doubtless  a 
 small  town  on  the  line  of  march  near  Anathoth 
 (see  Lowth,  Umbreit,  Alexander,  Gesenius,  ad 
 loc.)  The  name  appears  to  have  disappeared 
 entirely,  and  the  site  is  unknown.  There  is  a 
 Laisa  ('EXeao-d)  mentioned  in  I  Maccab.  ix.  5, 
 where  Judas  encamped  ;  but  we  cannot  tell  whe- 
 ther it  was  identical  with  that  of  Isaiah,  nor  where 
 it  was  situated. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LAKES.     [Palestine.] 
 
 LAKUM  (D^p?;  AwZdfi;  Alex.  AaKovfj,,  and  ^wi 
 
 dKpov  ;  Lecum),  a  town  of  Naphtali,  near  the 
 Jordan,  but  its  exact  position  is  not  defined  (Josh, 
 xix.  2,i)'  The  name  may  perhaps  indicate  that  it 
 was  a  fortress  so  placed  as  to  defend  some  import- 
 
LAxMB 
 
 771 
 
 LAMECH 
 
 ant  road  or  pass,  if  we  derive  it  from  the  Arabic 
 root  Ja^,  '  to  stop  up  a  way.'  One  reading  of  tlie 
 Cod.  Alex,    might  be  understood   to    favour  this 
 
 view ;  it  renders  the  Hebrew  D1p<'"^y  by  'iia% 
 &Kpov.  Perhaps  some  place  near  or  at  the  im- 
 portant pass  of  Jacob's  Bridge  may  be  referred 
 to.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LAMB.  This  term  is  employed  in  the  A.  V.  to 
 express  various  Hebrew  words. 
 
 1.  njj'.    Used  to   denote   the  young  either   of 
 
 sheep  or  of  goats.  Thus,  in  Deut.  xiv.  4,  Ye 
 shall  eat  the  ox,  the  sheep  D"'3C^3  nb,  and  the 
 
 goat  D''^y  nCJ*  {dfxvbi'  iK  irpo^drwi',  Kal  xl/ttapov  e| 
 
 alyQv,  LXX.)  In  i  Sam.  xv.  3  it  is  used  collect- 
 ively, '  slay  ox  and  sheep,^  A.  V.  The  marginal 
 reading  of  the  A.  V.  is  frequently  kid.  Gen.  xxii. 
 7  ;  Exod.  xii.  3  ;  xiii.  13  ;  I  Sam.  xvii.  34.  In  Is. 
 vii.  25  it  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  ^lesser  cattle.'' 
 
 2.  n^ti,  a  lamb  under  a  year  old,  occurs  only  in 
 Is.  Ixv.  25;  and  i  Sam.  vii.  9,  'a  sucking  lamb,' 
 3?n  nbtD  ;   &pva.  •yaXa'^Tjubf. 
 
 3.  '^2'2,  nba3,  also  nb'a  n^tra,  a  iamb,  male 
 
 or  female,  from  one  to  three  years  old.  Lambs  of 
 this  age  were  generally  used  for  sacrifice.  In  the 
 case  of  a  sin  offering,  a  female  without  blemish 
 (Lev.  iv.  32)  ;  for  cleansing  a  leper,  two  he- 
 Iambs  and  one  ewe-lamb  (Lev.  xiv.  10)  ;  at  the 
 morning  and  evening  sacrifice  (Exod.  xxix.  38), 
 and  at  all  the  great  feasts  (Num.  xxviii.  1 1 ;  .xxix. 
 2,  13-37  ;  Lev.  xxiii.  19).  On  extraordinary  occa- 
 sions they  were  sacrificed  in  large  numbers,  as  at 
 the  dedication  of  Solomon's  Temple  (l  Chron. 
 xxix.  21),  'a  thousand  lambs;'  at  Hezekiah's 
 purification  of  the  Temple  (2  Chron.  xxix.  32), 
 '  two  hundred  lambs ;'  at  Josiah's  passover  (2 
 Chron.  xxxv.  7),  'lambs and  kids,  thirty  thousand.' 
 
 4-  13.  Often  connected  in  the  plural  with  D''p''X, 
 
 rams  (Deut.  xxxii.  14  ;  Is.  xxxiv.  6  ;  2  Kings  iii.  4  ; 
 Ezek.  xxxix.  18),  and  probably  means  'wethers.' 
 
 5.  IDS.  The  Chaldee  term  used  in  Ezra  vi.  9, 
 17;  vii.  17.  In  the  Targums  ^<^0''K  is  used  for 
 the  Hebrew  ^33.— J.  E.  R. 
 
 LAMECH  nof? ;  Sept.  Aa/iix)-  i-  The  son 
 of  Methusael,  fifth  in  descent  from  Cain  (Gen.  iv. 
 18-24).  He  is  recorded  as  having  married  two 
 wives,  Adah  and  Zillah,  and  in  this  we  have  probably 
 a  note  of  the  origin  of  polygamy.  In  his  family  the 
 arts  flourished  ;  for,  though  one  of  his  sons  followed 
 the  nomadic  pastoral  life,  two  others,  Jubal  and 
 Tubalcain,  are  mentioned,  the  one  as  the  inventor  of 
 two  musical  instnmients,  the  Kinnor  and  the  Ugab 
 [Musical  Instruments],  the  other  as  the  introdu- 
 cer of  the  metallurgic  arts.  Jewish  tradition  increases 
 the  number  of  his  sons  to  seventy-seven  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  1.  2.  2)  ;  and  makes  his  daughter  Naamah 
 '  the  mistress  of  lamentations  and  songs'  (P3"'p  n"ID 
 P"1DT1,  Targ.  Jon.  in  loc),  after  whom  all  the 
 world  wondered,  yea,  even  the  sons  of  God,  and 
 from  whom  evil  spirits  were  born  {Midrash  Ruth 
 and  Zohar).  In  Lamech,  also,  we  have  to  recog- 
 nise the  Father  of  Poetry  ;  for  his  chant,  which 
 the  sacred  writer  has  preserved,  is  the  oldest  piece 
 
 of  rythmical  composition  in  the  world.  It  may  be 
 rendered  thus  : 
 
 And  Lamech  said  to  his  wives  : — - 
 
 Adah  and  Zillah  hear  my  voice. 
 
 Wives  of  Lamech  give  ear  to  my  speech 
 
 A  man  for  my  wounding  I  slay 
 
 And  a  youth  for  my  bruise. 
 
 For  sevenfold  shall  Cain  be  avenged, 
 
 But  Lamech  seventy  times  seven. 
 
 We  regard  this  as  the  chant  of  a  fierce  and  law- 
 less spirit  exulting  in  the  possession  of  arms,  the 
 preparation  of  which  from  iron  had  been  discovered 
 in  his  family,  and  boasting  of  the  terrible  vengeance 
 which  he  would  take  on  all  who  should  injure  him. 
 It  seems  to  be  generally  held  by  interpreters  :hat 
 the  possessive  affix  '  my,'  in  ver.  24,  is  to  be  taken 
 objectively,  so  that  '  my  wounding'  is  equivalent 
 to  '  the  wounding  of  me,'  and  '  my  bruise,'  to 
 '  the  bruising  of  me.'  There  is  a  difference  of 
 opinion  as  to  whether  the  verb  TUin,  rendered 
 
 slay,  should  be  taken  as  a  preterite  or  as  a  future. 
 If  it  be  taken  as  the  former,  the  meaning  will  be 
 that  Lamech  had  already  avenged  himself  on  the 
 person  who  had  wounded  him  ;  so  the  LXX.,  the 
 Vulg.  and  the  .Syr.  versions,  which  are  closely  fol- 
 lowed by  the  English  of  the  A.  V.  If  it  be  taken 
 as  the  latter,  the  language  is  that  of  boastful  threat- 
 ening as  to  what  Lamech  would  do  if  any  should 
 dare  even  to  lay  a  stroke  on  him.  This  latter  is 
 preferred  by  the  great  mass  of  recent  commenta- 
 tors, as  well  as  by  Calvin,  Piscator,  and  Le  Clerc, 
 amongst  the  older,  and  Ibn  Ezra  among  the  Jewish 
 interpreters.  Calvin  says,  '  Mihi  vera  et  simplex 
 videtur  esse  eorum  sententia,  qui  verbum  prseteriti 
 temporis  in  futurum  resolvunt,  et  indefinite  acci- 
 piunt  :  ac  si  jactaret  sibi  satis  esse  roboris  et  vio- 
 lentia;  ad  fortissimum  quenque  hostem  occidendum. ' 
 On  this  ground  Calvin  translates  the  word  by  '  occi- 
 dtro,^  I  will  slay.  It  seems  more  in  accordance, 
 however,  with  the  idiom  of  our  language,  to  render 
 it  in  the  definite  present,  as  expressive  of  what  was 
 the  fixed  resolution  and  purposed  habit  of  the 
 speaker.  That  the  Heb.  preterite  (so-called)  may 
 be  legitimately  so  rendered,  the  following  remarks 
 of  Ewald  will  sufficiently  show  : — '  The  perfect  is 
 used  .  .  .  (3.)  Of  actions  which  in  reality  are 
 neither  past  nor  present,  but  which  the  intention 
 or  the  imagination  of  the  speaker  contemplates  as 
 being  already  as  good  as  done,  therefore  as  per- 
 fectly unconditional  and  certain,  when,  in  modern 
 languages,  at  least,  the  more  energetic  definite  pre- 
 sent would  be  used  instead  of  the  future.' — Heb.  Gr., 
 sec.  262,  Nicholson's  Transl. ,  p.  136. 
 
 As  this  passage  appears  in  the  A.  V.  it  is  so 
 rendered  as  to  convey  the  idea  that  Lamech's  lan- 
 guage is  that  of  penitence  or  of  remorseful  feai. 
 But  this  seems  entirely  alien  from  the  spirit  of  the 
 passage.  The  language  is  not  that  of  a  man  who 
 has  been  betrayed,  through  sudden  passion,  into  an 
 act  of  murderous  violence  which  he  deplores,  and 
 the  vengeance  due  to  which  he  dreads  :  rather  is  it 
 that  of  one  who  neither  fears  God  nor  regards  man, 
 and  who,  confident  in  his  strength  and  his  arms, 
 boasts,  that  if  any  shall  dare  to  touch  him,  he  will 
 take  upon  him  a  summary  vengeance  seventy  times 
 greater  than  that  by  which  the  life  of  Cain  was  pro- 
 tected. Whether  this  was  uttered  in  the  prospect 
 of  some  danger  which  his  irregular  habits  had 
 brought  on  him,  and  of  which  his  wives  were  afraid, 
 as  Vatablus,  Munster,    Rivet,    and  some   others, 
 
LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 think;*  or  whether,  as  good  old  Ainsworth  sug- 
 gests, '  that  for  violating  the  law  of  marriage  by 
 taking  two  wives,  God  vexed  him  with  a  disquiet 
 life  between  them  ;  that  they  lived  in  discontent 
 and  emulation  one  with  another,  and  both  of  them 
 with  their  husband,  so  in  his  wrath  he  uttered 
 these  words  unto  them  to  repress  their  strife' 
 [Annot.  in  ioc.)  ;  or  whether  these  are  merely  a 
 '  Thrasonic  jactation'  (to  use  rn  expression  of 
 Rivet's)  called  fortli  by  his  savage  delight  at  finding 
 himself  possessed  of  deadly  weapons,  as  Herder 
 suggests  {Gcist  d.  Heh.  Foes.,  part  i.  p.  344),  and  as 
 Rosenmliller,  Knobel,  and  others,  approve,  may  be 
 left  to  the  judgment  of  each  reader. 
 
 2.  The  son  of  Methuselah,  and  father  of  Noah 
 (Gen.  V.  25,  29). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LAMENTATIONS,  Book  of,  in  the  Hebrew 
 Canon  n3''S,  '  O  how  .  .'  (a  plaintive  exclam- 
 ation)^ ;  in  the  Talmud  and  later  authorities  ni3''p,+ 
 elegies,  dirges ;  LXX.  QprjvoL  ^lepefilov ;  Vulg. 
 '  Threni,  id  est  Lameiitationcs  Jeremia;  Prophetce ; 
 Jerome,  Lamentatioiies  qua:  Cynoth  hebraice  iiiscri- 
 
 biuihir ;  Syr.  |j_CU  j-»JiD5J5  mA  >  Vn]    etc.: 
 
 one  of  the  Hagiographa  (D''2ini3)  in  the  Masoretic 
 Code  (the  third  of  the  five  Megilloth,  between  Ruth 
 and  Ecclesiastes),  but  in  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and 
 our  Bibles — which  follow  their  example — placed 
 after  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.  It  is  a  collection  of 
 five  elegies  sung  on  the  ruins  of  Zion;  and  the  fall 
 of  Judpea,  the  destruction  of  the  Sanctuary,  the 
 exile  of  the  people,  and  all  the  terrors  of  sword, 
 fire,  and  famine  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem  are  the 
 principal  themes  upon  which  they  turn  in  ever  new 
 variations. 
 
 The  first  chapter  opens,  in  th6  most  striking 
 manner,  with  the  picture  of  Jerusalem,  the  widowed 
 queen  herself,  bereft  of  her  inhabitants  and  of  her 
 crown,  sitting  alone  in  the  vast  stillness  of  night,  § 
 and  weeping,  bitterly  weeping  :  without  comfort, 
 without  friends — for  these  have  turned  foes.  Her 
 children  are  far  away,  in  exile,  ever  hunted,  ever 
 
 *  Vatablus  paraphrases  the  passage  thus  : — 'Si 
 a  quoquam  etiam  fortissimo  viro,  vel  adolescente 
 qui  viribus  valet,  vulnus  acciperem,  ilium  interfi- 
 cerem  ;  valeo  enim  viribus.  Non  est,  igitur,  quod 
 mihi  aut  liberis  vestris  timeatis,  O  vosuxores  mea;' 
 and  adds,    '  Videbat  enim  uxores  suas  tristes.' 
 
 +  'Three  prophets  have  used  the  word  HD'^X  with 
 reference  to  Israel :  Moses,  Isaiah,  and  Jeremiah.  To 
 what  are  tliey  to  be  likened?  To  three  bridesmen 
 ''''^''^L^'ltJ'  =  ^ivpTri(p6poi)  who  have  seen  tlie  after- 
 wards widowed  wife  in  three  different  stages.  The 
 first  has  seen  her  in  her  opulence  and  her  pride, 
 and  he  said,  '  Oh,  how  shall  I  bear  alone  your  over- 
 bearing and  your  strife?'  (Deut.  i.  2).  The  second 
 has  seen  her  in  her  dissipation  and  dissoluteness, 
 and  he  said,  'Oh,  how  has  she  become  a  harlot  !' 
 (Is.  i.  21).  And  the  third  has  seen  her  in  her  utter 
 desolation,  and  he  said,  '  Oh,  how  does  she  sit  soli- 
 tary!' (Lam.  i.  i).'    Introdiidiim  to  Echa  Rabathi. 
 
 X  Cf.  2  Sam.  i.  17-18  ;  2  Chron.  xxxv.  25  ;  Jer. 
 ix.  9,  etc.,  the  name  subsequently  given  to  the  body 
 of  liturgical  poems  said  and  sung  in  the  synagogue 
 on  the  9th  of  Ab,  the  double  anniversary  of  the 
 destruction  of  the  Temple. 
 
 §  '  When  zvailing  sounds  loudest  and  goes  furthest, 
 and  luhosoever  hears  it  nitist  needs  weep  with  them 
 who  waiP  (Talmud  and  Midrash  to  this  v.) 
 
 overtaken.  And  she  remembers  all  her  former 
 glory  now  in  the  depths  of  her  woe  (1-7).* — Yet, 
 it  was  her  own  sin  that  brought  her  down  so 
 'wondrously.'  .  .  '  Behold,  O  God,  my  woe,' she 
 bursts  out  suddenly  (9) :— The  enemy  is  in  the  very 
 Sanctuary,  famine  stares  in  her  face,  she  humbles 
 herself  before  the  chance  passers  by,  appeals  to 
 them  for  pity,  asks  them  whether  they  saw  in  the 
 wide  wide  world  a  grief  like  unto  hers,  which 
 the  Lord  has  wrought  in  the  fulness  of  His  day  of 
 ire.  Fire  above,  a  snare  below,  a  yoke  on  her 
 neck.  .  .  .  '  Over  these  things  do  I  weep. 
 .  .  .  my  children  are  destroyed  .  .  .  and 
 no  comforter'  (10-16).  She  wrings  her  nands  in 
 vain — foes  all  around  (17).  But  '  the  Lord  is  just, 
 she  has  rebelled, f  she  does  not  complain  of  His 
 judgment ;  only  let  '  all  the  peoples  hear  her 
 pitiful  wail.'  But  nay  : — even  her  beloved  friends 
 '  mock  her'  (18,  19).  And  in  the  bitterness  of  her 
 upheaved  heart,  and  in  the  darkness  of  her  woe,  she 
 turns  to  Him  who  has  caused  all  this — '  sword  with- 
 out, death  within.'  She  does  not  ask  for  mercy, 
 but  she  cries  out  for  vengeance.  .  .  .  '  For  many 
 are  my  groans,  and  my  heart  is  faint'  (20-22). 
 Commiseration  for  her  own  state — the  saddest  phase 
 of  suffering — confession  of  her  own  guilt,  and  the 
 appeal  to  God's  justice  in  avenging  her  on  her  foes 
 on  the  score  of  their  sins  : — these  form  the  loosely- 
 connected  but  leading  thoughts  of  the  first  chapter. 
 
 Chap.  ii.  again  intones  the  H^'^S,  asking  in 
 sad  wonderment  how  the  Lord  could  have  thus 
 laid  low  the  splendour  of  Zion  ?  .  .  .  for- 
 getful of  '  His  own  footstool  on  the  day  of  Hrs 
 wrath'  (i).  The  strongholds  are  fallen,  His  very 
 tabernacle  is  sunken  to  the  ground  ;  king  and  priest 
 in  exile — no  law,  no  prophet  ;  old  men  and  young 
 maidens  sit  on  the  ground  in  silence,  ashes  on  their 
 heads,  and  the  babes  pour  out  their  young  souls  on 
 their  mothers' breasts  (S-12).  To  what — the  writer 
 suddenly  breaks  the  weird  description — shall  I  com- 
 pare thee,  O  daughter  of  Jerusalem,  to  what  liken 
 thee,  how  comfort  thee  ?  ,  .  .  '  For  deep  as 
 the  sea  is  thy  wound;  who  shall  heal  thee?  (13). 
 And  the  cause — false  prophets'  false  burdens,  to 
 which  thou  foolishly  hast  lent  thine  ear  (14).  Oh, 
 see  how  the  passers-by  clap  their  hands,  shake  their 
 heads,  mock  and  scoff!  .  .  .  But  Up,  thou 
 widowed  city  of  sorrows !  Up  and  cry  unto  Him 
 whose  hand  has  wrought  all  this  shame  and  all  this 
 miseiy  .  .  .  cry  unto  Him  in  the  night,  and 
 rest  not  and  cease  not,  and  cry  out  thy  whole  heart 
 before  Him,  lift  up  thy  hands  and  show  Him  the 
 corpses  of  the  suckling  babes  slain  by  hunger  at 
 the  top  of  eveiy  street !  (19).  Let  him  behold — oh 
 horror  !  — tender  mothers  feasting  on  the  offspring 
 that  has  lain  under  their  own  hearts.  Show  Him 
 His  own  Sanctuary  .  .  .  and  amid  its  ashes 
 and  broken  stones  lie  slain  His  priest  and  His 
 prophet,  and  the  streets  run  red  with  the  blood  of 
 iDoy  and  grayhead  (20).  In  truth  He  has  called 
 together,  as  to  a  solemn  assembly,  every  terror  and 
 every  horror.  He  has  slaughtered  and  not  spai-ed. 
 No  remnant,  no  fugitive,  not  one  of  the  precious 
 cliildren  saved — no  comfort,  no  hope  .  .  .  the 
 enemy  has  consumed  them  all — all. — 
 
 It  would  perhaps  be  more  difficult  to  indicate  a 
 
 *  Dante's  '  A^essun  fnaggior  dolore  che  ricordarsi 
 del  tempio  felice nella  niiseria''  {Inf.,  canto  v.),  reads 
 almost  like  a  reflection  on  this  passage. 
 
 +  '  Mea  culpa,  mea  maxima  culpa^ 
 
lAMENTATIOJNfS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 773 
 
 LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 '  running  thought '  in  this  than  in  any  other  elegy. 
 The  most  heartrending,  most  desperate  pictures  of 
 terror  and  woe  are  conjured  up  one  after  the  other, 
 without  any  perceptible  logical  sequence  ;  and  the 
 ideas,  as  Ihey  come  and  go  and  return  almost  un- 
 controlled, have  something  of  the  ghastly,  mechani- 
 cal rocking  to  and  fro  of  the  body,  which  at  times 
 accompanies  the  wild  wail  or  the  tearless  sorrow 
 of  women.  The  only  new  features  of  this  section 
 consist  in  the  direct  charge  against  the  false  pro- 
 phets, and  in  the  utterly  crushed  state  of  mind, 
 which  does  not  ask  for  vengeance  any  longer —  but 
 for  meixy. 
 
 Chap.  iii.  brings  us  face  to  face  with  the  writer 
 himself.  In  sentences  broken,  abrupt,  like  sharp 
 pangs,  or  as  a  man  would  speak  in  the  midst  of  a 
 shipwreck  or  a  battlefield,  he  tells  us  his  own  tale  of 
 woe ;  his  fluctuations  between  despair  and  hope ; 
 his  cries  and  his  prayers  mixed  up  in  wild  confusion. 
 '  I  am  the  man  who  has  scoi  the  mise)y,^  he  intones 
 his  song.  His  flesh  and  his  bone  have  been  made 
 old  in  his  sufferings  (4) ;  he  has  been  set  in  dark 
 places  (6) ;  laden  with  chains  (7) ;  and  his  prayer 
 was  'shut  out'  (S) ;  Then  he  said  in  the  fulness  of 
 his  affliction,  and  of  his  wormwood,  and  of  his 
 gall  :  Lost  is  the  hope  and  the  strength  in  the 
 Lord  (18,  19).  .  .  .  Yet  once  more  he  rouses 
 himself,  '  Thus  do  I  answer  unto  mine  heart,  and 
 therefore  do  I  hope  again.  The  loving-kindness 
 of  God  has  not  ceased.  His  mercies  are  not  over 
 altogether — they  are  new  eveiy  morning.'  .  .  . 
 Let  me  bear  it  in  silence  ;  the  evil  comes  from 
 Him  who  also  sends  the  good.  He  sent  punish- 
 ments— just  punishments;  for  we  have  sinned. 
 Let  us  investigate  our  ways,  and  let  us  'lift  up  our 
 hands  imto  God  in  the  heavens'  (18-41). 
 But  verily,  if  we  were  sinning  men — Thou  hast 
 not  been  a  forgiving  God ;  for  Thou  hast  slain  and 
 hast  not  pitied  (42,  43).  Through  Thee  our  eyes 
 run  down  unceasingly,  like  unto  rivers  (48). — And 
 in  the  midst  of  the  sights  around  him  his  own  suf- 
 ferings rush  again  upon  his  mind  with  increased 
 power.  How  the  dungeon  closed  upon  him,  water 
 flowed  over  his  head  : — Buried  alive.  But  he  called 
 upon  the  Lord  from  out  his  darkness,  and  He  said, 
 '  Fear  not.'  He  has  fought  his  fight,  and  freed  him 
 from  the  cruel  hands  of  his  adversaries  and  his  ene- 
 mies !  (60).  And  the  milder  mood  into  which  his 
 mind  was  softening  down,  vanishes  suddenly  at  the 
 vivid  recollection  of  what  they  did  to  him,  and  his 
 whole  soul  presses  itself  into  one  glowing,  passionate 
 curse  upon  their  heads.  .  .  .  '  Pursue  them 
 with  ire,  and  destroy  them  from  under  the  heavens 
 of  God!'     .     .     . 
 
 Chap.  iv.  recommences  with  a  sad  survey,  as 
 it  were,  of  the  scene  all  around — the  place  of 
 desolation  and  ruin,  where  the  precious  holy 
 stones,  together  with  the  more  precious  children, 
 lie  strewed  about  like  vile  pottery  (i,  2).  The 
 ghastly  sights  before  described  :  the  babes  dying 
 for  want  of  food  and  drink  ;  those  fed  on  dainties 
 once,  feeding  on  the  refuse  of  the  street  (3-9). 
 ('  Better  for  them  that  fell  through  the  sword  than 
 those  that  fell  through  famine');  babes  stretch 
 out  their  little  hands  for  bread,  and  there  is 
 none  to  give  it  them;  women,  'pitiful  women,' 
 boiling  their  own  children — the  only  food  left  ! 
 The  foundations  of  Zion  are  burnt.  Who  of  all 
 kings  and  peoples  had  ever  even  hoped  to  enter 
 triumphantly  into  the  gates  of  Jerusalem?  Through 
 the  sins,  the  overwhelming  sins,  of  her  prophets 
 
 and  priests  has  all  this  come  to  pass  (13).  And  all 
 is  over  now.  The  king  led  away  in  fetters,  the 
 last  ray  of  national  existence  gone  ;  and  you  re- 
 joice, daughter  of  Edom  !  (21).  But  remember 
 this:  ^  the  sin  of  Zion  is  expiated.'  Her  cup  was 
 full  to  the  brim,  and  she  has  emptied  it  to  the 
 dreg«.    .    .    .    Edom,  thy  turn  next !   (22).    .    .    . 
 
 A  new  and  most  remarkable  feature  is  presented 
 in  this  elegy.  The  king,  '  the  anointed  of  God,' 
 under  whose  shadow  '  we  had  hoped  to  live  among 
 the  peoples,'  is  mentioned  here  most  emphatically. 
 This  seems  to  express  the  last  stage  of  transactions 
 with  the  Babylonians.  The  proposal  to  submit  to 
 the  sovereignty,  but  to  retain  their  own  national 
 ruler,  subject  and  tributary  to  the  conquei^or,  like 
 other  small  satraps  of  his  wide  realm,  had  very 
 likely  been  made  at  the  last  mohient,  as  the  last 
 possible  means  to  avert  further  hostilities.  That  it 
 was  answered  by  the  king's  being  taken  prisoner 
 and  carried  away,  the  writer  does  not  seem  to  re- 
 gret so  much  on  the  king's  account — of  whom  he 
 says  as  little  as  possible  throughout — as  on  that  of 
 the  now  utterly  trodden-out  nationality.  Yet  there 
 is  one  weird  comfort.  Juda;a  has  lost  everything, 
 '  she  has  emptied  her  cup  ;'  not  even  any  more 
 is  exile  to  be  dreaded — for  there  is  none  left  to  be 
 e.xiled.  Her  sins  were  visited  most  terribly  and 
 most  fully  upon  her  ;  her  enemies'  turn  must  come 
 now.  If  she  has  sinned,  her  enemy  has  sinned 
 worse.  .  .  .  Daughter  of  Uz,  rejoice  and  be 
 glad,  the  cup  is  going  round,  '  and  thou  shalt 
 drink  and  be  drunken,  and  thou  shalt  be  sick. ' 
 
 Chap.  V.  [Oratio  JeremiiE prophcta:,  Vulg.)  differs 
 from  the  rest  considerably  in  tone  and  style.  A 
 certain  collected  calm,  to  which  the  horror  in  the 
 midst  of  the  catastrophe  has  given  way,  pervades 
 it.  There  are  no  more  outbursts  of  mad  despair, 
 no  more  cries  for  vengeance,  no  more  heartrend- 
 ing wails  for  mercy ;  but  only  a  mournful  enu- 
 meration of  all  that  the  nation  has  to  undergo 
 as  the  hated  slave  of  the  conqueror,  interspersed 
 with  a  few  brief  notices  of  the  scenes  that  ac- 
 companied the  downfall  of  the  '  crown  of  our 
 head'  (10-15).  -^11  the  splendour  of  the  days 
 of  yore  is  now  gone  from  Zion.  There  are  no 
 old  men  in  the  gates,  no  young  men  with  their 
 
 songs  : — '  Woe  unto  us  (IJp  X3  ''IN  =  °'^  M"^  !)>  we 
 have  sinned.'  On  the  Mount  of  Zion,  which  is 
 desolate,  jackals  walk  about  (15-18);*  and  from 
 
 *  We  cannot  refrain  from  adding  one  of  the 
 most  striking  talmudical  passages  in  reference  to 
 this  verse.  '  One  day  the  doctors  (R.  Gamliel,  R. 
 Eliezer  ben  Asaryah,  R.  Joshua,  and  R.  Akiba) 
 went  up  to  Jerusalem.  When  they  arrived  at 
 the  Mount  of  Zophim  they  tore  their  garments. 
 When  they  arrived  at  the  RIount  of  the  Temple, 
 they  saw  a  jackal  come  out  from  the  Holy  of 
 Holies,  and  they  all  began  to  weep — except  R. 
 Akiba,  who  smiled.  They  asked  him  why  he 
 smiled  ?  He  replied  by  asking  them  why  they 
 wept  ?  Why,  they  told  him,  upon  the  place  of 
 which  it  is  said,  '  the  stranger  which  approacheth 
 it  shall  die'  (Num.  iii.  38),  we  see  fulfilled  the 
 passage  (Lam.  v.  18),  'On  the  Mount  of  Zion 
 which  is  desolate,  jackals  walk  about  : — and  we 
 shall  not  weep  ?'  And  he  replied,  'This  is  why  I 
 smile  :  it  is  written  (Is.  xviii.  2),  '  I  take  just  wit- 
 nesses, Uriah  the  priest,  and  Zechariah.'  What 
 connection  is   there   between    Uriah   of  the  first 
 
LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 774 
 
 LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 out  the  midst  of  that  vast  stillness  of  ruin  the  poet's 
 heart  yearns  towards  God.  The  epilogue — half 
 hope,  half  plaint — is  addressed  to  Him  who  is  ever- 
 lasting, beyond  all  earthly  changes  (19).  He  may 
 yet  renew  the  days  of  yore  {20).  '  Unless ' — and  with 
 this  shrill  discord,  in  accordance,  however,  with 
 the  tenor  of  the  entire  cycle,  the  book  concludes 
 — 'unless  thou  hast  utterly  rejected  us,  and  art 
 wroth  against  us  in  the  extreme.'* 
 
 The  contents  of  the  five  elegies  before  us  are 
 briefly  this  : — The  desolation  of  the  city  and  its 
 mournful  silence  in  the  first ;  the  destruction  of  the 
 city  and  the  Temple  in  the  second  ;  the  individual 
 miseries  of  the  writer  in  the  third  ;  once  more  the 
 whole  calamity  compressed  into  one  loud  cry  in 
 the  fourth  ;  and  the  sighs  and  the  hopes  of  the 
 now  rejected  people  in  the  fifth.  These  are  the 
 sounds  and  images  impressed  upon  our  minds  ;  and 
 tlirough  the  whole  goes  one  deep,  wailing  melody, 
 which  in  the  different  chapters  appears  as  in  dif- 
 ferent, although  not  exactly  definable,  symphonic 
 movements,  over  all  that  is  lost — and  all  is  lost. 
 
 There  can  hardly  be  any  doubt  as  to  the  time  to 
 which  these  threnodies  refer.  A  brief  glance  at  the 
 corresponding  portions  in  the  books  of  Kings  and 
 Chronicles  demonstrates  to  evidence  that  they  speak, 
 one  and  all,  of  the  whole  period  from  the  beginning 
 of  the  last  siege  by  Nebuchadnezzar  to  its  terrible 
 end.  This  has  also,  from  the  LXX.  and  the 
 Midrash  downwards,  been  the  almost  unanimous 
 opinion  of  investigators  (Carpzov,  Eichhom,  Jahn, 
 Bertholdt,  Bormelius,  Horrer,  Riegler,  Pareau, 
 etc.,  etc.)  It  would  seem  to  be  equally  clear  that 
 these  poems  belong,  broadly  speaking,  to  no  parti- 
 cular phase  of  the  great  epoch  of  terrors,  but  that, 
 written  probably  within  a  very  brief  space  of  time 
 (more  especially  does  this  appear  to  be  the  case 
 with  the  first  four),  they  portray  indiscriminately 
 some  woeful  scene  that  presented  itself  '  at  the 
 head  of  every  street,'  or  give  way  to  a  wild 
 passionate  outcry  of  terror,  misery,  despair,  hope, 
 prayer,  revenge,  as  these  in  vehement  succession 
 swept  over  the  poet's  soul. 
 
 Yet  it  has  been  suggested  (and  the  text  has  been 
 strained  to  the  utmost  to  prove  it)  that  the  succes- 
 sive elegies  are  the  pictures  of  successive  events 
 portrayed  in  song  ;  that,  in  fact,  the  Lamenta- 
 tions are  a  dcscriptk)e  threnody — a  drama  in  which, 
 scene  after  scene,  the  onward  march  of  dread  fate 
 is  described,  intermixed  with  plaints,  reflections, 
 prayers,  consolations,  such  as   the   chorus  would 
 
 and  Zechariah  of  the  second  Temple  ?  But  it  is 
 also  written  (Zech.  viii.  4),  '  Again  will  old  men 
 and  old  women  sit  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem.' 
 As  long  as  the  prophecy  about  the  first  Temple 
 was  not  accomplished,  I  feared  lest  that  of  the 
 second  might  likewise  not  come  to  pass  ;  now  I 
 have  seen  the  first  part  fulfilled  unto  the  last  letter, 
 I  doubt  no  longer  that  the  second  also  will  be 
 accomplished  in  its  day.  And  his  companions 
 said  unto  him,  '  Akiba,  thou  hast  comforted  us  ! 
 Akiba,  thou  hast  comforted  us  !  May  God  com- 
 fort us  !     Amen ' '  (Maccoth  xxiv.  a). 
 
 *  In  the  Hebrew  Bible  (MSS.  and  printed),  the 
 last  verse  but  one  is  found  repeated  at  the  end,  in 
 order  that  the  book  might  not  close  with  the  dire 
 sentence  of  condemnation.  The  same  pious  dread 
 of  closing  with  ominous  words  has  caused  the 
 repetition  of  the  penultimate  verse  in  Isaiah, 
 Malachi,  and  Ecclesiastes. 
 
 utter  in  grave  and  measured  rhythms,  accompanied 
 by  the  sighs  and  tears  to  which  the  spectators 
 would  be  moved  by  the  irredeemably  doomed 
 heroes  and  actors  Thus,  for  instance,  it  has  been 
 maintained  that  the  first  chapter  speaks  of  Jehoia- 
 chin's  capture  and  exile  (Horrer,  Jahn,  Riegler, 
 etc.),  upon  which  there  is  this  to  be  observed,  that 
 a  mere  glance  at  I  Kings  xxiv.  shews  that  such 
 scenes  as  are  described  in  this  first  elegy  (famine, 
 slaughter  of  youths,  etc.)  do  not  in  the  least  agree 
 with  the  time  and  circumstances  of  Jehoiachin, 
 while  they  do  exactly  correspond  with  the  follow- 
 ing chapter  of  Kings,  in  which  the  reign  under 
 Zedekiah,  with  all  its  accompanying  horrors,  to  the 
 downfall  of  the  city  and  empire,  are  related  with 
 the  severe  calmness  of  the  historian,  or  rather  the 
 dry  minuteness  of  the  annalist.  Neither  can  we, 
 for  our  own  part,  see  that  'gradual  change  in  the 
 state  of  the  city'  which  De  Wette  sees  in  the  con- 
 secutive chapters  ;  nor  can  we  trace  the  gradual  pro- 
 gress in  the  mind  of  the  people — that  is,  in  the  first 
 two  chapters,  heaviest,  for  ever  inconsolable,  grief; 
 in  the  third,  the  turning-point  (the  classical  peri- 
 pety) ;  in  the  fourth  and  fifth,  the  mind  that  gradu- 
 ally collects  itself,  and  finally  finds  comfort  in 
 fervent  prayer  : — which  is  Ewald's  ingenious  sug- 
 gestion, to  which  Keil  assents,  as  far  as  '  a  general 
 inner  progress  of  the  poems'  goes.  To  our,  and, 
 we  take  it,  to  every  unbiassed  view,  every  one  of 
 the  elegies  is  complete,  as  far  as  it  goes,  in  itself, 
 each  treating  the  same,  or  almost  the  same,  scenes 
 and  thoughts  in  ever  new  modes.  In  this  respect 
 they  might  to  a  certain  degree  be  likened  to  the 
 '  In  Memoriam'  and  the  second  movement  of  the 
 'Eroica' — the  highest  things  to  which  we  can  at 
 all  compare  them  in  the  varied  realms  of  song. 
 The  general  state  of  the  nation,  as  well  as  of  the 
 poet,  seem  not  much  different  from  the  first  to  the 
 last,  or,  at  all  events,  the  fourth  poem.  It  would 
 certainly  appear,  moreover,  as  if,  so  far  from  form- 
 ing a  consistent  and  progressive  whole,  consciously 
 leading  onward  to  harmony  and  supreme  peace, 
 they  had  not  even  been  composed  in  the  order  in 
 which  they  are  before  us  now.  Thus,  e.g.,  the 
 fourth  chapter  is  certainly  more  akin  to  the  second 
 than  to  the  third.  Accident,  more  than  a  settled 
 plan,  must  have  placed  them  in  their  present  order. 
 But  the  history  of  this  collection  and  redaction  is 
 one  so  obscure  that  we  will  not  even  venture  on  a 
 new  speculation  on  it. 
 
 And  here  it  is  necessary  to  notice  a  peculiar  state- 
 ment of  Jerome,  which,  though  a  '  crassus  error' 
 (Calvin),  palpable  at  first  sight,  has  yet  found  its 
 stout  defenders  until  very  recently.  We  speak  of 
 his  notion  (ad  Zach.  xii.  11)  that  this  Book  of  La- 
 mentations on  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, was  the  lament  which  Jeremiah  is  said, 
 in  2  Chron.  xxxv. ,  to  have  lamented  on  the  death 
 of  Josiah,  and  which  was  sung  by  all  the  singing 
 men  and  singing  women  in  their  DIJ^p  or  lamen- 
 tations, and  which  are  written  n"l3''pn  ?'^i  among 
 the  Elegies,  i.e.,  among  the  collection  of  national 
 threnodies  extant  at  the  time  of  Chronicles.  Jose- 
 phus  relates,  in  his  account  of  Josiah's  death  {An- 
 tiq.  X.  5.  i),  in  a  similar  manner,  that  Jeremiah 
 composed  imKriS^wv  /xiXos,  'a  dirge'  on  the  king's 
 death,  6  Kal  /x^x/"  ''C''  Siafi&ei,  '  which  is  still 
 extant.'  What,  indeed,  is  more  natural  than  that 
 Jeremiah,  the  '  Prophet  of  Wailings,'  should  have 
 composed  many  mourning  songs  in  the  dark  times 
 
LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 775 
 
 LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 in  which  his  lot  was  cast,  and  that  he  should,  more 
 especially  as  a  kind  of  laureate,  have  composed  a 
 dirge  on  the  death  of  his  king  ?  Nothing,  indeed, 
 but  over-hastiness  (though  we  are  loth  to  charge  the 
 writer  with  it)  could  have  caused  Jerome  so  to  mis- 
 understand either  Josephus'  AtexP^  "'J''^  ^i^d  to  over- 
 step, by  an  ill-advised  addition  of  his  own,  the 
 boundaries  of  the  traditional  illustration  embodied 
 in  the  Targum,  ad  loc.  {'■and  as  the  lament  over 
 Josiah*'),  to  such  a  degree  as  to  identify  a  single 
 dirge  on  the  death  of  a  king — who,  be  it  well  re- 
 membered, was  buried  in  the  sepulchres  of  his 
 fathers  with  all  regal  honours — with  our  five  elegies 
 wailing  over  the  terrors  to  which  the  conquered 
 city  is  a  prey,  the  fire  and  famine  that  rage  in  the 
 streets,  the  sanctuary  that  is  razed  to  the  ground, 
 the  whole  nation  that  is  nearly  destroyed,  and  the 
 king  who  is  in  exile. 
 
 How  men  like  Ussher,  Dathe,  Michaelis,  De 
 Wette,  could  even  for  one  moment  have  defended 
 so  obvious  a  mistake,  we  are  utterly  unable  to 
 comprehend.  The  wish  to  find  all  documents 
 mentioned  in  Scripture  in  our  canon  ought  not  to 
 have  been  father  to  such  a  monstrosity.  True,  it 
 is  given  up  now  by  the  foremost  of  its  former  de- 
 fenders ;  and  only  a  few  minor  writers  still  hold 
 that  although  our  book  does  not  exactly  seem  to 
 befit  the  occasion  of  Josiah's  death,  yet  it  was 
 written  at  that  time  as  a  prophecy  on  the  future 
 fate  of  Jerusalem — ''  cj7iod  minime  probabile  est,''  we 
 can  only  add  with  Calvin  {Prcel.  ad  Lam. ) 
 
 We  may  be  brief  on  the  question  of  authorship, 
 which,  in  fact,  has  been  touched  upon  already  in 
 some  degree  in  the  foregoing.  It  is  by  common 
 consent  assigned  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet.  The 
 Talmud,  embodying  the  earliest  traditions,  has  : 
 '  Jei-emiah  wrote  his  Book,  the  Book  of  Kings,  and 
 the  Lamentations'  (Baba  Bathra  15,  a).1"    Follow- 
 
 +  Thenius,  an  otherwise  estimable  writer,  has, 
 in  his  Introduction  to  Lamentations,  inaugurated  a 
 new  and  improved  system  of  quoting  from  the  Tal- 
 mud, viz.,  '  Tahmid  Baby  Ionic.  p^DT  DTlSpJISn, 
 
 Tract.  Nnnn  Xnn  in  der  "01  zu  J''p^in  PX  Fol. 
 'T*  b.'  Considering  that  the  veriest  tyro  in  tal- 
 mudical  literature  is  aware  that  the  current  editions 
 of  the  Talmud,  wherever  and  whenever  printed,  are 
 invariably  printed  with  exactly  the  same  number  of 
 pages  in  every  tome,  and  exactly  the  same  words 
 on  every  side  of  every  page,  the  inventor  of  the 
 new  system  has  only  succeeded  in  reducing  him- 
 self ad  absurdiim.  To  quote  in  any  other  way 
 than  by  the  mere  indication  of  the  page  (as  may 
 be  learned  from  the  very  commentaries  on  both 
 margins),  betrays  about  the  same  knowledge  of  so- 
 called  rabbinical  literature  as  Henricus  Seynensis 
 did  with  his  '■  Rabbiniis  Talmud.''  Yet  this  is  not 
 all.  Thenius  goes  so  far  as  to  charge  Wette, 
 Havernick,  and  Keil,  with  having,  in  their  quota- 
 tion of  the  same  passage,  suppressed  [i.  e.,  not  ex- 
 pressly stated)  the  fact  of  the  Babyl.  Talm.  having 
 been  first  redacted  at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century. 
 We  protest  against  the  notion  that  every  writer  is 
 bound  to  enlarge  upon  the  literary  history  of  every 
 book  he  is  quoting  from  ;  especially  if  this  book  be 
 the  Talmud,  the  date  of  which  may  be  learned 
 in  every  common  manual.  Whether  De  Wette, 
 Havernick,  and  Keil,  know  how  to  read  the  Tal- 
 mud or  not,  we  do  not  know,  and  it  does  not  con- 
 
 ing these  same  traditions,  the  LXX.  write,  '  And 
 it  came  to  pass,  after  Israel  was  led  captive  and 
 Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  Jeremiah  sat  weeping 
 and  lamented  the  lamentation  over  Jerusalem, 
 and  said.'  The  Vulg.  has,  '  And  it  came  to 
 pass  that  after  Israel  was  led  into  exile  and  Jeru- 
 salem was  deserted,  the  Prophet  Jeremiah  sat 
 weeping,  and  lamented  his  lamentation  on  Jeru- 
 salem, and  sighing  with  a  bitter  heart  and  sorely 
 crying  said.'*  Echa  Rabathi  uses  in  its  intro- 
 duction, as  a  kind  of  refrain,  toe  words,  'And 
 when  they  sinned  they  were  driven  into  exile,  and 
 when  they  were  driven  into  exile  Jeremiah  began 
 to  lament  over  them  n3"'X.'  The  Targum  to 
 Lamentations  begins,  '  Said  Jeremiah  the  prophet 
 and  high-priest.'  The  Midrash,  by  a  fanciful  inter- 
 pretation of  Isaiah  x.  30,  even  finds  a  reference  to 
 Jeremiah  in  that  passage,  which  it  explains  in  this 
 wise  :  '  '  Lift  up  thy  voice' — tliat  is,  in  the  word  of 
 the  Torah,  in  the  houses  of  solemn  assembly — •'  thou 
 daughter  of  waves ' — of  those  thrown  about  in  the 
 world  like  waves  in  the  sea ;— '  listen ' — to  the  Law, 
 to  the  words  of  the  Torah,  to  the  words  of  pro- 
 phecy, to  piety  and  virtuous  deeds  ;  or  '  Laisha,' 
 the  lion  Nebuchadnezzar  will  come  over  thee ; 
 '  thou  poor ' — in  good  works,  '  poor '  in  prophecy, 
 '  poor '  in  righteousness ;  and  if  thou  wilt  not 
 hear — '  Anatoth  .•'  he  from  Anatoth — ^Jeremiah — 
 will  come  over  thee,  and  will  prophecy  against 
 thee  ;  and  when  the  punishment  did  come,  he  la- 
 mented over  them  Hi'^N'  (Introd.  to  Echa  Rabb.) 
 Besides  this  outer  evidence,  the  inner  evidence 
 for  Jeremiah's  authorship  is  so  striking  that,  for 
 aught  we  know,  it  may  have  given  rise  to  those 
 veiy  traditions.  The  elegies  are  written  in  his  time 
 by  one  who  has  lived  through  all  the  misery  which 
 they  describe.  The  personal  references  to  Jere- 
 miah's own  fate,  such  as  we  know  it  from  his  book 
 of  prophecies  and  kings,  are  not  wanting,  t  What 
 is  more,  his  poetical  and  prophetical  individuality 
 
 cern  us  here.  But  they  are  perfectly  authorised  to 
 use  an  authenticated  and  vety  common  talmudical 
 dictum  bearing  on  their  subject ;  everybody  being 
 agreed  that  the  Talmud,  whatever  the  date  of  its 
 final  redaction,  embodies  some  of  the  earliest  and 
 most  genuine  traditions.  Thenius  evidently  con- 
 founds writing  with  redacting.  He  does  not  surely 
 hold  that  certain  books  of  the  Canon  were  first 
 written  at  the  time  when  they  were  first  redacted ! 
 The  terms  "l"n  and  ^"J?  moreover,  which  occur  in 
 the  other  passage  (wixjngly  quoted  by  him  as  '  a.  a. 
 6>.,'  since  it  is  not  to  be  found  "V,  b,  but  "ID,  a), 
 have  a  very  different  meaning  from  the  one  upon 
 which  he  bases  his  final  conclusions.    See  Talmud. 
 
 *  This  agreement  and  disagreement  between 
 LXX.  and  Vulg.  is  easily  explained  by  their  having 
 both  had  one  and  the  same  current  oral  Haggadistic 
 tradition  before  their  minds'  eye,  and  having  ren- 
 dered it  according  to  their  individual  recollections. 
 
 t  Cf.  Lam.  ii.  11,  andiii.,  with  Jer.  xv.  15,  seq.; 
 xvii.  13,  seq.;  xx.  7  ;  Lam.  iii.  14  with  Jer.  xx.  7: 
 iii.  64-66  with  Jer.  xvii.  18  ;  v.  with  iv.  17-20.  As 
 in  the  prophecies,  so  here  the  iniquities  of  the 
 people  are  given  as  the  cause  of  the  exile  and  the 
 destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple,  cf.  i.  5,  8, 
 14,  22  ;  iii.  39,  42  ;  iv.  6,  22,  v.  16  with  Jer.  xiii. 
 22-26  ;  xiv.  7  ;  xvi.  lO,  ff. ;  xvii.  i,  ff.,  their  sinful 
 trust  in  false  prophets  and  iniquitous  priests,  tlieii 
 relying  on  the  safety  of  Jerusalem,  and  on  the  aid 
 ol  powerless  and  treacherous  allies,  etc.  etc. 
 
LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 77(3 
 
 LAMENTATIONS,  BOOK  OF 
 
 pervades  the  whole  so  unmistakeably,  that  it  seems 
 hardly  necessary  to  refer  to  the  numerous  parallel 
 passages,  adduced  by  Eichhorn,  Bertholdt,  Keil, 
 De  Wette,  Jahn,  Bleek,  and  others.  If  contents, 
 spirit,  manner,  individuality,  are  any  guarantee  at 
 all,  then  Jeremiah  is  the  author,  and  sole  author  of 
 the  book  before  us.  He  even  seems  to  refer  to 
 his  other  book  (cf.  ii.  14  ;  Jer.  xiv.  13).  But  were 
 any  further  proof  needed,  we  would  certainly  find 
 it  in  the  very  diction  and  phraseology  common  to 
 both  works,  and  peculiar  to  them  alone.*  Indeed, 
 not  one  investigator  in  ancient  or  modern  times 
 has  doubted  the  fact  upon  which  tradition  speaks 
 with  such  rare  unanimity.  Except  Hardt,  who, 
 for  reasons  of  his  own,  ascribed  the  five  different 
 elegies  to  Daniel,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  Abednego, 
 and  king  Jehonja  respectively,  and,  in  our  own  time, 
 Conz  and  Thenius.  The  latter  holds  that  only 
 Lam.  ii.  and  iv.  belong  to  Jeremiah  (the  former 
 written  in  Palestine,  the  latter  in  Egypt),  tlie  three 
 others,  however,  to  have  been  written  by  Jere- 
 miah's contemporaries  and  disciples.  His  reasons 
 for  this  assumption  are,  that  Jeremiah  could  not 
 have  treated  the  same  subject  five  times  ;  that  2 
 and  4  are  different  from  I,  3,  5,  which  are  less 
 worthy  of  Jeremiah's  pen  ;  that  the  three  latter  do 
 not  quite  fit  Jeremiah's  own  circumstances ;  and, 
 finally,  because  there  is  a  difference  in  the  alpha- 
 betical structure  (see  below)  of  i ,  and  of  2-4.  These 
 objections  to  Jeremiah's  exclusive  authorship  seem 
 about  as  tenable  as  Hardt's  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
 Abednego,  and  consorts.  The  first  two  points 
 are  not  worth  consideration ;  the  third  is  answered 
 by  the  simple  proposition  that  they  are  poems,  and 
 not  a  historical  narrative  which  we  have  before  us, 
 and  that  therefore  a  certain  license  must  be  given 
 to  the  poet  in  the  use  of  broad  smiiles  in  his  gene- 
 ralisings,  and  in  his  putting  himself  sometimes  in 
 the  place  of  the  whole  people  as  its  spokesman  and 
 chief  mourner.  And  if,  finally,  the  structure  differs 
 in  I  from  2  and  4,  then  it  may  as  well  be  asked 
 why  3,  which  is  not  supposed  to  be  written  by 
 Jeremiah,  is  like  2  and  4,  which  are  allowed 
 to  be  written  by  him  ?  If  somebody  has  imitated 
 the  structure  in  3,  why  has  it  not  been  also  imi- 
 tated in  I  and  5  ?  A  further  refutation  of  this 
 attempt  to  take  away  two-fifths  of  Jeremiah's  author- 
 ship— supported  by  no  investigator  as  we  said — 
 has  been  given  by  Ewald,  and  we  have  indeed 
 only  mentioned  it  for  the  sake  of  completeness. — 
 It  has  likewise  been  urged  that  the  book  is  found 
 placed  among  the  Kethubim  and  not  among  the 
 prophets,  and  that  it  bears  no  name  ;  that  con- 
 sequently there  seems  to  have  been  a  doubt  in 
 the  minds  of  the  redactors  of  the  Canon  as  to 
 the  authorship.  But  the  fact  is  that  this  Book  of 
 Lamentations,  which  nowhere  pretends  to  be  a 
 book  of  prophecy,  which  nowhere  predicts  events 
 which  will  happen,  but  describes  those  which  have 
 happened — in  words,  it  is  true,  well  worthy  of  the 
 
 *  Cf.  '•n,  Lam.  i.   22,  and  Jer.  viii.    18  ;   IDD 
 
 nnSI,  Lam.  iii.  47,  and  Jer.  xxiv.  17,  xlviii.  43  ; 
 ■•DV  n^  "I3t^,  Lam.  ii.  11,  and  Jer.  vi.  14,  and 
 viii.  1 1  ;  3''3DD  IIJfD,  Lam.  ii.  22,  and  Jer.  vi. 
 25,  and  frequently  the  very  frequent  use  of  T'llH 
 "I3E',  D''K),  nyon,  in  both  ;  phrases  like,  '  I  became 
 
 a  mockery  all  day  long,'  Lam.  iii.  14,  and  Jer.  xx. 
 7  ;  etc.  etc.  :  the  use  of  tiie  ^  parag.,  and  other 
 grammatical  peculiarities. 
 
 'inspired'  writer,*—  and  nowhere  speaks  in  the 
 name,  or  reports  a  message  of,  God,  belongs  by 
 rights  to  the  Hagiographa.  That,  further,  the 
 redactors  of  the  Canon  did  not  think  fit  to  inscribe 
 the  book  with  Jeremiah's  name,  proves  less  than 
 nothing.  There  is  not  the  remotest  doubt  about 
 the  unanimous  belief  before,  during,  and  after  their 
 time,  in  Jeremiah's  authorship  (cf.,  e.g.,  quite 
 apart  from  the  express  statements,  the  ingenious 
 Haggadistic  parallels  between  Isaiah's  verses  of 
 comfort  and  Jeremiah's  verses  of  woe,  alphabeti- 
 cally arrayed  in  Echa  Rabbathi  and  elsewhere) ; 
 and  it  might  as  well  be  called  in  question  whether 
 they  believed  in  Moses'  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
 teuch, since  they  did  not  state  this  as  their  opinion 
 expressly  at  the  beginning  of  the  book. 
 
 Whether  Jeremiah  himself  or  Earuch  (as  Bun- 
 sen,  after  Rashi,  assumes)  wrote  out  the  different 
 chapters,  and  whether  Jeremiah,  or  his  disciples 
 (Ewald),  finished  it  in  Palestine  or  Egypt,  are 
 questions  on  which  we  cannot  enlarge  here,  nor 
 will  it  be  of  very  much  consequence  for  Biblical 
 criticism,  if,  as  probably  will  be  the  case,  they 
 remain  unsettled  for  ever. 
 
 Respecting  the  outward  form  of  these  elegies, 
 as  far  as  style  is  concerned,  we  can  only  endorse 
 the  enthusiastic  encomiums  of  the  Lowths,  Eich- 
 horns.  Herders.  There  seems  in  the  whole  realm 
 of  human  mourning  put  into  words,  from  the  most 
 tragic  lament  of  classical  Hellas  to  Ossian's  wail 
 and  the  Nibelungen-Klage,  hardly  anything  to  be 
 compared  in  depth  of  heartrending  pathos,  and  in 
 grandeur  and  nobleness  of  language,  to  these  sacred 
 elegies — though  certainly  our  translations,  however 
 faithful,  do  not  quite  convey  this  idea.  Neither  the 
 symphonic  character  of  the  whole,  nor  the  varying 
 metres  of  the  single  parts,  nor  even  that  wonderful 
 tenderness  imparted  to  the  whole  by  the  constant 
 recurrence  of  the  feminine  suffixes  and  .termina- 
 tions of  verbs  and  adjectives,  the  H  ,  T*   ,  '^~,  etc., 
 
 which,  with  a  melancholy  charm  of  their  own, 
 constantly  remind  us  that  it  is  a  woman,  the 
 daughter  of  Zion  herself,  whose  plaintive  song 
 resounds  through  the  stilly  night,  can  be  imagined 
 by  the  reader  of  any  European  version  whatsoever. 
 The  more  genuine  and  sublime,  however,  the 
 poetry,  the  more  surprising  it  would  seem  at  first 
 sight  that  the  four  first  elegies  should  be  arranged 
 'alphabetically'  —  that  is,  that  i.,  ii.,  iv.  should 
 consist  of  twenty-two  verses,  each  beginning  with 
 the  twenty-two  letters  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet  in 
 alphabetical  order,  while  iii.  has  sixty-six  verses, 
 commencing  with  each  letter  of  the  alphabet  re- 
 peated three  times. +  It  is  a  grave  error,  how- 
 ever, for  this  reason  alone,  to  call  the  time  in 
 which  they  were  composed  barbarous,  or,  at  all 
 events,  a  time  of  poetical  decline  and  vitiated 
 taste.  What  more  barbarous,  it  would  appear, 
 than  rhyme,  '  the  swaddling-clothes  of  unborn 
 thought'  {Bettina  von  Arnivi),  to  find  which  does 
 certainly  give  the  poet  at  times  more  trouble  than 
 the  beginning  of  a  new  sentence — not  exactly  logi- 
 
 *  Jeremiah  did  not  write  this  book  '  in  pro- 
 phecy,' but  under  the  influence  of  the  '  Holy 
 Ghost,'  is  the  poignant  remark  of  the  early  com- 
 mentators— misunderstood  by  the  later  ones. 
 
 +  The  fifth,  though  likewise  in  twenty-two  verses, 
 each  beginning  with  a  different  alphabetical  letter, 
 does  not  tie  itself  to  the  alphabetical  arrangement 
 
LAMENTATIONS.  BOOK  OF 
 
 777 
 
 LAMP 
 
 cally  linked  to  its  predecessor — witli  a  certain  letter. 
 '  Coldness,  languor  of  feeling,  low  and  mechani- 
 cal phraseology,'' — all  these  charges  have  been 
 brought  against  the  like  Biblical  alphabetical  com- 
 position, but  have  not  been  substantiated.  It  was 
 simply  a  fashion  of  the  time,  into  which  even  the 
 most  genuine  outburst  of  grief,  when  clad  in  poeti- 
 cal garb,  fell  naturally.  Artificial  forms,  like  the 
 Sonnet,  the  Terze  Rime,  Madrigals,  Ghazels,  Ma- 
 kamat,  do  not  imply  want  of  real  poetry  in 
 Dante,  Shakspere,  Hariri,  Riickert,  Gothe;  not  to 
 mention  yEschylus,  Euripides,  Aristophanes,  and 
 their  sometimes  unfathomable  metres.  And  are 
 the  24th  and  35th  Psalms  less  grand  because  they 
 are  in  acrostics  ?  The  Samaritan,  Syriac,  and 
 Hebrew  Liturgies  of  the  Middle  Ages  contain 
 some  of  the  rarest  poetical  gems  in  this  same 
 form,  and  we  cannot  but  emphatically  protest 
 against  an  a  priori  reason  which  is  so  flagrantly 
 contrary  to  facts. — The  peculiarity  noticeable  in 
 the  second,  third,  and  fourth  chapters,  that  the  D 
 precedes  the  J?,  we  can  no  more  explain  than  any 
 of  the  former  investigators.  But  we  shall  not 
 trouble  the  reader  with  a  new  hypothesis.  Suffice 
 it  to  add  that  nothing  in  the  least  degree  satisfac- 
 tory has  been  brought  forward  in  explanation  of 
 this  apparent  irregularity. — In  i.-iii.  (except  ii.  19) 
 every  verse  seems  to  form  a  sort  of  Tricolon, 
 indicated  by  distinctive  accents  (Imperatores  or 
 Reges)  Soph  Pasuk,  Ethnachta,  Sakeph  Katon  ;  the 
 subdivisions  of  which,  however,  are  of  very  unequal 
 number  and  length  ;  while  iv.  and  v.  appear  to  fall 
 more  naturally  into  Disticha.  Another  division  has 
 been  suggested  somewhat  according  to  the  follow- 
 ing scheme  : — 
 
 How  does  the  city  sit  solitary,  once  full  of  people  ! 
 
 —  is  she  become  as  a  widow — • 
 
 —  is  the  great  among  nations  become  tribu- 
 
 tary— 
 How  does  the  Princess  among  provinces  sit  soli- 
 tary ! 
 
 But  on  these  points  we  must  not  further  enlarge  ; 
 any  more  than  we  can  do  full  justice  to  the  mani- 
 fold extraordinary  theories  of  strophe  and  anti- 
 strophe,  of  Sapphic  metre  and  trimeter,  brought 
 forward  by  investigators  from  Jerome  to  Saalschiitz. 
 That  they  were  expressly  composed  by  Jeremiah 
 for  Choruses,  we  do  not  know,  and  do  not  be- 
 lieve. '  En  de  telles  calamites,'  says  a  French 
 writer,  '  le  coeur  humain  se  resserre  ou  se  fond  ; 
 il  devient  insensible  ou  s'abandonne  au  deses- 
 poir.  L'intention  du  prophete  est  de  premunir 
 ses  compatriotes  contre  I'un  et  I'autre  de  ces  ex- 
 ces.  II  veut  qu'ils  pleurent  avec  lui,  mais  co77irne 
 lui.^  And  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  not 
 have  been  sung  by,  without  being  '  expressly  writ- 
 ten for,'  those  who  sat  by  the  rivers  of  Babylon, 
 as  they  are  still  chanted  in  the  Synagogues,  both 
 on  the  eve  and  the  morning  of  the  9th  of  Ab.* 
 The  prophet  probably  sent  them  to  his  exiled 
 brethren,  as  he  may  have  sent  them  part  of  his 
 
 *  The  Neginah  (accent  and  note  at  the  same 
 time)  has  on  that  occasion  a  different  tune  from 
 that  generally  used  in  the  Pericopes,  somewhat 
 resembling  that  in  which  it  is  sung  sometimes  in 
 the  Roman  'Tenebrse,'  in  Passion- week  (Mendels- 
 sohn-Bartholdy's  Reisebriefe,  vol.  i). — Chanted  in 
 a  very  low  tone  of  voice,  it  produces  a  strikingly 
 mournful  impression. 
 
 prophetical  book  ;  and  from  Bahy'on  they  were 
 brought  back  when  the  House  of  God  was  reared 
 again  on  the  sacred  ground.  The  position  of  the 
 Lamentations  in  the  Canon  appears  to  have  been 
 uncertain  at  first,  since  it  was  sometimes  put  to- 
 getherwith  Jeremiah's  prophecies  (see  above),  some- 
 times treated  as  a  special  work.  In  a  talmudical 
 enumeration  of  the  Hagiographa  (Bab.  Bathra  14. 
 b),  we  find  it  between  the  Song  of  Songs  and  Daniel. 
 With  respect  to  the  early  versions  of  the  book, 
 it  is  noticeable,  that  the  translation  in  the  LXX. 
 of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  is  done  by  a  different 
 hand  from  that  which  translated  the  Lamentations, 
 and  that  the  Vulgate  follows,  in  its  version, 
 rather  the  Hebrew  text  than  the  LXX.  The  Tar- 
 gum  to  Lamentations  is  of  a  late  and  very  uncertain 
 date  ;  and  though  of  little  value  for  exegetical  pur- 
 poses, and  containing  more  legendary  by-work 
 than  most  of  the  Targums,  is  yet  highly  useful,  as 
 containing  both  the  early  traditions  and  the  floating 
 theological  notions.  *  Of  the  principal  writers 
 on  Lamentations  we  mention  Calvin,  Grotius, 
 Clericus,  Horrer,  Leusden,  Lowth,  Herder,  Eich- 
 horn,  Meier,  Pareau,  Otto,  Rosenmiiller,  Maurer, 
 Kalkar,  Thenius.  The  most  valuable  translations 
 (into  German)  are  by  Dathe,  Wolfsohn,  De  Wetle, 
 Meier,  Thenius.  + — E.  D. 
 
 LAMP   (T'S?,   whence,    perhaps,    Gr.   \afj.7rds, 
 
 the  fj.  being  introduced  in  place  of  the  Hebrew  S, 
 Lat.  lampas,  and  our  lamp).  Lamps  are  very 
 often  mentioneil  in  Scripture  ;  but  there  is  nothing 
 to  give  any  notion  of  their  form.  Almost  the  only 
 fact  we  can  gather  is,  that  vegetable  oils  were 
 burnt  in  them,  and  especially,  if  not  exclusively, 
 olive-oil.  This,  of  the  finest  quality,  was  the  oil 
 used  in  the  seven  lamps  of  the  Tabernacle  (Exod. 
 xxvii.  20).  It  is  somewhat  remarkable,  that  while 
 the  golden  candlestick,  or  rather  candelabrum,  is 
 so  minutely  described,  not  a  word  is  said  of  the 
 shape,  or  even  the  material,  of  the  lamps  (Exod. 
 xxv.  37).  This  was,  perhaps,  because  they  were 
 to  be  of  the  common  forms,  already  familiarly 
 known  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  same  probably 
 which  were  used  in  Egypt,  which  they  had  just 
 quitted.  They  were  in  this  instance  doubtless  of 
 gold,  although  metal  is  scarcely  the  best  substance 
 for  a  lamp.  The  golden  candlestick  may  also 
 suggest,  that  lamps  in  ordinary  use  were  placed  on 
 stands,  and  where  more  than  one  was  required,  on 
 stands  with  two  or  more  branches.  The  modem 
 Orientals,  who  are  satisfied  with  very  little  light  in 
 their  rooms,  use  stands  of  brass  or  wood,  on  which 
 to  raise  the  lamps  to  a  sufficient  height  above  the 
 floor  on  which  they  sit.  Such  stands  are  shaped 
 not  unlike  a  tall  candlestick,  spreading  out  at  the 
 top.  Sometimes  the  lamps  are  placed  on  brackets 
 against  the  wall,  made  for  the  purpose,  and  often 
 
 *  The  Midrash  to  Lamentations  {Midrash  Echo) 
 is  a  very  remarkable  book.  Besides  its  very  high 
 poetical  value,  it  contains  a  great  deal  of  historical 
 and  philological  material,  which  still  awaits  the 
 spade  of  the  competent  excavator.  Only  a  few 
 scraps  have  as  yet  been  turned  to  use. 
 
 f  We  have  not  considered  it  necessary  to  prove 
 from  parallels,  as  has  been  done  by  some  writers 
 on  the  subject,  that  these  Lamentations  are  not 
 the  only  instances  of  elegiac  poetry  either  in  ancient 
 times  or  in  the  East. 
 
I,AMP 
 
 778 
 
 LAMP 
 
 upon   stools.      Doubtless    the   same   contrivances 
 were  employed  by  the  Hebrews, 
 
 309.   Egyptian  Lamps. 
 
 From  the  fact  that  lamps  were  carried  in  the 
 pitchers  of  Gideon's  soldiers,  from  which,  at  the 
 end  of  the  march,  they  were  taken  out,  and  borne 
 in  the  hand  (Judg.  vii.  16,  20),  we  may  with  cer- 
 tainty infer  that  they  were  not,  like  many  of  the 
 classical  lamps,  entirely  open  at  top,  but  so  shaped 
 that  the  oil  could  not  easily  be  spilled.     This  was 
 
 310.  Classical  Lamps. 
 
 remarkably  the  case  in  the  Egyptian  specimens, 
 and  is  not  rare  in  the  classical.  Gideon's  lamps 
 must  also  have  had  handles  ;  but  that  the  Hebrew 
 lamps  were  always  furnished  with  handles  we  are 
 not  bound  to  infer:  in  Egypt  we  find  lamps  both 
 with  and  without  handles. 
 
 Although  the  lamp-oils  of  the  Hebrews  were 
 exclusively  vegetable,  it  is  probable  that  animal 
 fat  was  used,  as  it  is  at  present  by  the  Western 
 Asiatics,  by  being  placed  in  a  kind  of  lamp,  and 
 burnt  by  means  of  a  wick  inserted  in  it.  This  we 
 have  often  witnessed  in  districts  where  oil-yielding 
 plants  are  not  common. 
 
 Cotton  wicks  are  now  used  throughout  Asia ; 
 but  the  Hebrews,  like  the  Egyptians,  probably  em- 
 ployed the  outer  and  coarser  fibre  of  flax  (Pliny, 
 
 Hist.  N'at.  xix.  i) ;  and  perhaps  linen  yarn,  if  the 
 Rabbins  are  correct  in  alleging  that  the  linen 
 dresses  of  the  priests  were  unravelled  when  old, 
 to  furnish  wicks  for  the  sacred  lamps.  [Candle- 
 stick.] 
 
 It  seems  that  the  Hebrews,  like  the  modem 
 Orientals,  were  accustomed  to  burn  lamps  over- 
 night in  their  chambers ;  and  this  practice  may 
 appear  to  give  point  to  the  expression  of  '  oiiter- 
 darkness,'  which  repeatedly  occurs  in  the  New 
 Testament  (Matt.  viii.  12;  xxii.  13);  the  force  is 
 greater,  however,  when  the  contrast  implied  in  the 
 term  outer  is  viewed  with  reference  to  the  effect 
 produced  by  sudden  expulsion  into  the  darkness 
 of  night  from  a  chamber  highly  illuminated  for  an 
 entertainment.  This  custom  of  burning  lamps  at 
 night,  with  the  effect  produced  by  their  going  out 
 or  being  extinguished,  supplies  various  figures  to 
 the  sacred  writers  (2  Sam.  xxi.  17;  Prov.  xiii.  9; 
 XX.  20).  And,  on  the  other  hand,  the  keeping  up 
 of  a  lamp's  light  is  used  as  a  symbol  of  enduring 
 and  unbroken  succession  (i  Kings  xi.  36;  xv.  4; 
 Ps.  cxxxii.  17). 
 
 It  appears  from  Matt.  xxv.  i,  that  the  Jews  used 
 lamps  and  torches  in  their  marriage-ceremonies,  or 
 rather  when  the  bridegroom  came  to  conduct  home 
 the  bride  by  night.  This  is  still  the  custom  in 
 those  parts  of  the  East  where,  on  account  of  the 
 heat  of  the  day,  the  bridal  procession  takes  place 
 in  the  night-time.  The  connection  of  lamps  and 
 torches  with  marriage-ceremonies  often  appears  also 
 in  the  classical  poets  (Homer,  Iliad,  xviii.  492; 
 Eurip.  Phceniss.  346;  Medea,  1027;  Virg.  Ecio^. 
 viii.  29) ;  and  indeed  Hymen,  the  god  of  marriage, 
 was  figured  as  bearing  a  torch.  The  same  con- 
 nection, it  may  be  observed,  is  still  preserved  in 
 Western  Asia,  even  where  it  is  no  longer  usual  to 
 bring  home  the  bride  by  night.  During  two,  or 
 three,  or  more  nights  preceding  the  wedding,  the 
 street  or  quarter  in  which  the  bridegroom  lives  is 
 illuminated  with  chandeliers  and  lanterns,  or  with 
 lanterns  and  small  lamps  suspended  from  cords 
 drawn  across  from  the  bridegroom's  and  several 
 other  houses  on  each  side  to  the  houses  opposite ; 
 and  several  small  silk  flags,  each  of  two  colours, 
 generally  red  and  green,  are  attached  to  other  cords 
 (Lane's  Afod.  Egypt.,  i.  201).  A  modern  lantern 
 much  used  on  these  occasions,  with  lamps  hung 
 about  it  and  suspended  from  it,  is  represented  in 
 the  following  cut  (No.  31 1).  The  lamps  used 
 separately  on  such  occasions  are  represented  in  the 
 following  cut  (No.  312).  Figs.  I,  3,  and  5,  show 
 veiy  distinctly  the  shape  of  these  lamps,  with  the 
 conical  receptacle  of  wood  which  serves  to  protect 
 the  flame  from  the  wind.  Lamps  of  this  kind  are 
 sometimes  hung  over  doors.  The  shape  in  fig.  3 
 is  also  that  of  a  much-used  in-door  lamp.  It  is  a 
 small  vessel  of  glass,  having  a  small  tube  at  the 
 bottom,  in  which  is  stuck  a  wick  formed  of  cotton 
 twisted  round  a  piece  of  straw :  some  water  is 
 poured  in  first,  and  then  the  oil.  Lamps  very 
 nearly  of  this  shape  appear  on  the  Egyptian  monu- 
 ments, and  tliey  seem  also  to  be  of  glass  (Wilkin- 
 son's Ancietit  Egyptians,  iii.  loi  ;  v.  376).  If  the 
 Egyptians  had  lamps  of  glass,  there  is  no  reason 
 why  the  Jews  also  might  not  have  had  them,  espe- 
 cially as  this  material  is  more  proper  for  lamps  in- 
 tended to  be  hung  up,  and  therefore  to  cast  their 
 light  down  from  above.  The  Jews  certainly  used 
 lamps  in  other  festivals  besides  those  of  marriage. 
 The  Roman  satirist  (Persius,  Sat.  v.  179)  expressly 
 
LAMP  779 
 
 describes  them  as  making  illuminations  at  their 
 festivals  by  lamps  hung  up  and  arranged  in  an 
 orderly  manner;  and  the  Scriptural  intimations,  so 
 
 LAMY  OR  LAMI 
 
 far  as  they  go,  agree  with  this  description.  If  this 
 custom  had  not  been  so  general  in  the  ancient  and 
 modem  East,  it  might  have  been  supposed  that  the 
 Jews  adopted  it  from  the  Egyptians,  who,  accord- 
 ing to  Herodotus  (ii.  62),  had  a  '  Feast  of  Lamps,' 
 
 which  was  celebrated  at  Sais,  and,  indeed,  through- 
 out the  country  at  a  certain  season  of  the  year. 
 The  description  which  the  historian  gives  of  the 
 lamps  employed  on  this  occasion  strictly  applies 
 to  those  in  modern  use  already  described,  and  the 
 concurrence  of  both  these  sources  of  illustration 
 strengthens  the  probable  analogy  of  Jewish  usage. 
 He  speaks  of  them  as  '  small  vases  filled  with  salt 
 and  olive-oil,  in  which  the  wick  floated,  and  burnt 
 during  the  whole  night.'  It  does  not,  indeed, 
 appear  of  what  materials  these  vases  were  made  j 
 
 but  we  may  reasonably  suppose  them  to  have  been 
 of  glass. 
 
 The  later  Jews  had  even  something  like  this 
 feast  among  themselves.  A  'Feast  of  Lamps'  was 
 held  every  year  on  the  twenty-fifth  of  the  month 
 Chisleu.  It  was  founded  by  Judas  Maccabsus  in 
 celebration  of  the  restoration  of  the  temple-worship 
 (Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  7.  7),  and  has  ever  since  been 
 observed  by  the  lighting  up  of  lamps  or  candles  on 
 that  day  in  all  the  countries  of  their  dispersion 
 (Maimon.  Jlfosk.  Hashanah,  fol.  8).  Other  Orien- 
 tals have  at  this  day  a  similar  feast,  of  which  the 
 'Feast  of  Lanterns'  among  the  Chinese  is,  per- 
 haps, the  best  known  (Davis's  Chinese,  p.  138). — • 
 J.  K. 
 
 LAMPE,  Friedrich  Adolph,  a  distinguished 
 divine  of  the  Reformed  Church  in  the  18th  cen- 
 tury. He  was  born  Feb.  19,  1683,  at  Detmold, 
 the  capital  of  the  small  principality  of  Lippe-Det- 
 mold.  He  studied  first  at  Bremen,  then  at  Frane- 
 ker,  and  afterwards,  for  a  short  time,  at  Utrecht. 
 At  Franeker  the  leading  professors  were  followers 
 of  J.  Cocceius,  and  Lampe's  theological  tenden- 
 cies are  those  of  the  Cocceian  school.  After 
 labouring  as  pastor  at  Weeze  (near  Cleves),  Duis- 
 burg,  and  Bremen,  successively,  he  was  invited  in 
 1720  to  a  chair  of  theology  at  Utrecht.  In  1726 
 he  was  appointed  professor  of  ecclesiastical  history 
 in  the  same  university.  In  the  following  year  he  re- 
 turned to  Bremen,  being  invited  to  the  joint  offices 
 of  professor  of  theology  and  pastor  of  the  church. 
 He  died  Dec.  8,  1729.  His  exegetical  works 
 are — I.  Exercitatiotnim  Sacronim  Diwdecas,  quihtis 
 Psabmis  XL  K  perpetuo  coinnientario  explanaiiir, 
 immissis  variis  ad  sensitm  SacrcS  Scriptune  Iliero- 
 glyphic^wi  et  Antiqiiitates  Sacras speetantibits,  Brem. 
 1715,  4to.  2.  A  dissertation  on  Sacred  Chrono- 
 logy and  on  Jewish  and  Christian  Chronologists, 
 published  in  1723  as  a  preface  to  Hottinger's 
 Pentas  dissertationum  biblico-chroiiologicarum.  3. 
 Comnien/arins  analytieo-exegeticiis  E7<aitgelii  se- 
 cundum Johanuein,  Amst.  1724-25,  3  vols.  4to. 
 4.  A  posthumous  work  published  by  D.  Gerdes, 
 entitled,  F.  A.  Lantpe  nieditatiotium  exegeticaruni 
 opera  anecdota,  GroningtB  1741,  4to  ;  Basil  1742, 
 4to.  This  work  contains  a  commentary  on  the 
 Songs  of  Degrees,  a  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes, 
 and  annotations  on  the  Apocalypse.  5.  A  series 
 of  dissertations  in  further  elucidation  (chiefly)  of 
 the  Gospel  of  John,  contained  in  the  work,  also 
 posthumous,  entitled,  F.A.Lampe,  dissertationum 
 philologico-theologicarimi  Syntagma,  Amstel.  1737, 
 2  vols.  4to.  The  titles  of  these  dissertations  are — 
 De  titulo  evangelii  Johannis ;  De  Scala  yacobi ; 
 De  sinu  Patris  ;  De generatione  ex  aqua  et  Spiritu  ; 
 De  locis  N.  T.  quie  de  A6yi()  viroaraTiKi^  agere 
 videntur ;  De  loco  Ps.  xxxiii.  6  ;  De  locis  V.  T. 
 qucB  de  Aoyqi  inrocTT.  agere  dubitatur  ;  De  descensu 
 Christi  in  injeriores  partes  terrce. — S.  N. 
 
 LAMY  or  LAMI  (Bernard),  a  learned  Roman 
 Catholic  divine,  born  at  Mans  in  1640,  commenced 
 his  education  at  the  college  of  his  native  place,  and 
 completed  it  under  the  Fathers  of  the  Oratory  in 
 Paris.  He  speedily  gained  a  considerable  reputa- 
 tion, and  became  successively  Professor  of  Belles- 
 lettres  at  Vendome  and  Juilly,  and  of  philosophy 
 at  Saumur  and  Angers.  In  the  latter  city  Lamy's 
 zealous  advocacy  of  the  Cartesian  philosophy  raised 
 most  violent  opposition  from  the  Thomists,  who 
 were  then  in  the  ascendency,  and  who  procured  an 
 
LANGUAGE 
 
 (80 
 
 LANTERN 
 
 '  arret  du  conseil,'  condemnatory  of  his  teaching 
 (August 6, 1675),  and  prohibitinghim  from  exercising 
 any  ecclesiastical  or  educational  function  in  France. 
 Abandoned  by  the  superiors  of  the  Oratory,  who 
 weakly  yielded  to  the  storm,  Lamy  retreated  first 
 to  St.  Martin  in  Dauphigny,  and  then  to  Grenoble, 
 where  he  found  an  enlightened  protector  in  the 
 bishop,  Cardinal  de  Camus,  by  whose  influence, 
 at  the  end  of  eight  months,  liis  sentence  was  par- 
 tially revoked,  and  he  was  permitted  to  preach 
 theology  in  that  city.  In  1686  he  was  recalled  to 
 Paris,  where  he  passed  a  tranquil  life,  until  the  con- 
 troversy with  M.  de  Harlay,  Archbishop  of  Paris, 
 caused  by  the  publication  of  his  Harmony,  forced 
 him  to  retire  to  Rouen,  where  he  spent  the  re- 
 mainder of  his  life  in  study  and  devotion.  He 
 died  January  29,  1715.  Lamy  lived  an  asceticlife, 
 and  was  as  remarkable  for  his  piety  as  for  his  ex- 
 tensive learning,  nor  did  the  controversies  in  which 
 he  engaged  impair  the  gentleness  and  humility  of 
 his  character.  His  range  of  knowledge  was  very 
 wide,  as  his  printed  works,  embracing  rhetoric, 
 geometiy,  arithmetic,  mechanics,  perspective,  etc., 
 testify,  and  his  contributions  to  theology,  in  spite 
 of  defective  arrangement  and  some  ill-founded 
 theories,  long  sustained  a  well-deserved  reputation. 
 The  following  are  the  principal  : — (i.)  Apparatus 
 ad  Biblia  sacra,  Grenoble  1687,  originally  no  more 
 than  tables  of  the  chief  facts  of  Scripture,  with  rules 
 for  its  study,  compiled  for  his  pupils  at  Grenoble  ; 
 published  in  a  much  enlarged  form  at  Lyons  in 
 1696,  under  the  title  Apparatus  Biblicus.  This, 
 which  in  its  day  was  perhaps  the  best  '  introduc- 
 tion '  to  the  Bible  extant,  was  more  than  once  trans- 
 lated, into  French  (by  Bellegarde,  and  by  Boyer,  at 
 the  request  of  the  Bishop  of  Chalons,  Lyons  1699) 
 and  English  (London  1728).  (2.)  Demonstration 
 de  la  verite  et  de  la  saintcte  de  la  morale  Chretie)ine, 
 Paris  1688,  ed.  2,  1706- 1 711,  an  answer  to  the 
 sceptical  objectors  of  the  day.  (3.)  Harmonia 
 quatuor  Evangehstarum,  Paris  1689,  a  work  which 
 gave  rise  to  much  controversy,  and  many  objec- 
 tions, to  which  he  replied  in  (4)  Conanentarius  in 
 Harinoniam,  to  which  was  annexed,  Apparatus 
 Chronol.  et  Geograph.,  Paris  1699,  a  work  more 
 generally  esteemed  than  the  Harmony  itself  The 
 theories  which  provoked  the  most  vehement  oppo- 
 sition, and  finally  drove  Lamy  from  Paris,  were  («) 
 that  our  Lord  did  not  celebrate  the  Jewish  Passover 
 with  his  disciples  (now  generally  accepted  by  the 
 soundest  scholars)  ;  (/')  that  John  the  Baptist  was 
 imprisoned  twice  ;  by  the  Sanhedrim  and  by  Herod ; 
 and  {c)  that  the  three  Marys  mentioned  in  the  Gos- 
 pels are  identical.  Lamy's  last  work,  De  Taber- 
 iiaculo  fo;deris,  de  Sand,  civitat.  yeriis.  et  de  templo 
 ejus,  Paris  1720,  to  which  he  had  devoted  more 
 than  thirty  years  of  assiduous  labour  and  research, 
 and  for  which  he  had  had  illustrations  prepared  by 
 the  most  skilful  artists,  did  not  appear  till  after  his 
 death,  under  the  editorship  of  Pere  Desmolins. — 
 E.  V. 
 
 LANGUAGE.     [Tongues,  Confusion  of.] 
 
 LANIADO,  Abraham  b.  Isaac,  an  Italian 
 Rabbi  and  commentator,  flourished  1580- 1620.  He 
 wrote — (i.)  A  work  on  the  mysteries  of  the  Mosaic 
 Law,  entitled  OmiX  pD,  The  Shield  of  Abraham, 
 which  consists  of  seventeen  treatises  and  discourses 
 on  circumcision,  marriage,  almsgiving,  confession 
 of  sins,  repentance,  and  mourning  for  the  dead. 
 It  was  printed  in  Venice  1603,  and  is  very  highly 
 
 esteemed  by  the  Jews.  (2.)  A  commentaiy  on  the 
 Song  of  Songs,  entitled  IDDH  niTpJ,  Studs  oj 
 Silver,  which  was  edited  by  Moses  Laniado,  with 
 the  Hebrew  text,  the  Commentary  of  Rashi,  the 
 Chaldee  Paraphrase,  with  a  Spanish  translation  by 
 the  editor,  printed  in  Hebrew  characters,  Venice 
 1619.  He  also  wrote  (3.)  A  commentary  on  the 
 Pentateuch,  and  (4.)  A  commentary  on  Ruth, 
 Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Esther,  which 
 have  not  as  yet  been  published. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 LANIADO,  Samuel  b.  Abraham,  flourished 
 about  1580.    He  wrote — (i.)  A  commentary  on  the 
 
 Pentateuch,  entitled  mon  ''^3,  Delightful  Vessel, 
 which  was  first  published  in  Venice  1594-1595- 
 He  explains  the  Pentateuch  according  to  the  Sab- 
 batic Lessons  [Haphtara]  in  the  Midrashic  manner. 
 (2.)  A   commentary  on  Joshua,   Judges,   Samuel, 
 
 and  Kings,  entitled  Ip''  '•73,  Precious  l-'essel,  which 
 was  first  published  in  Venice  1603,  and  excerpts  of 
 it  are  printed  in  Frankfurter's  Rabbinic  Bible 
 [Franfurter].  It  consists  chiefly  of  extracts 
 from  the  expositions  of  Rashi,  Ibn  Ezra,  Ralbag, 
 
 etc.  (3.)  A  commentary  on  Isaiah,  called  173 
 TD,  y4  Vessel  of  Pure  Gold,  Venice  1657.  It  is  a 
 very  lengthy  commentaiy,  and,  like  the  former,  is 
 chiefly  made  up  from  the  expositions  of  Rashi,  Ibn 
 Ezra,  Ralbag,  etc.  Comp.  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca 
 Hebraica,  ii.  p.  222  ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogia 
 Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col.  2433. — 
 C.  D.  G. 
 
 LANTERN  {<pa.vo<i).  This  word  occurs  only 
 in  John  xviii.  3,  where  the  party  of  men  which 
 went  out  of  Jerusalem  to  apprehend  Jesus  in  the 
 garden  of  Gethsemane  is  described  as  being  pro- 
 vided 'with  lanterns  and  torches.'  In  the  article 
 Lamp  it  has  been  shown  that  the  Jewish  lantern, 
 or,  if  we  may  so  call  it,  lamp-frame,  was  similar 
 
 wmmw 
 
 to  that  now  in  use  among  the  Orientals.  Another 
 of  the  same  kind  is  represented  in  the  annexed 
 engraving  (No.  313,  fig.  i). 
 
LANTERN 
 
 781 
 
 LAODICEA 
 
 As  the  streets  of  eastern  towns  are  not  lighted 
 at  night,  and  never  were  so,  lanterns  are  used  to  an 
 
 extent  not  known  among  us.  Such,  doubtless, 
 was  also  formerly  the  case  ;  and  it  is  therefore 
 remarkable  that  the  only  trace  of  a  lantern  which 
 
 the  Egyptian  monuments  offer,  is  that  contained 
 in  the  present  engraving  (No.  314).  In  this  case 
 it  seems  to  be  borne  by  the  night-watch,  or  civic 
 guard,  and  is  shaped  like  those  in  common  use 
 among  ourselves.  A  similar  lantern  is  at  this  day 
 used  in  Persia,  and  perhaps  does  not  materially 
 differ  from  those  mentioned  in  Scripture.  More 
 common  at  present  in  Western  Asia  is  a  large 
 folding  lantern  of  waxed  cloth  strained  over  rings 
 of  wire,  with  a  top  and  bottom  of  tinned  copper 
 (No.  313,  figs.  2,  3).  It  is  usually  about  two  feet 
 long  by  nine  inches  in  diameter,  and  is  carried  by 
 servants  before  their  masters,  who  often  pay  visits 
 to  their  friends  at  or  after  supper-time.  In  many 
 Eastern  towns  the  municipal  law  forbids  any  one 
 to  be  in  the  streets  after  nightfall  without  a  lantern. 
 -J.  K. 
 
 LAODICEA  (AaoSiVeta).  There  were  several 
 places  of  this  name,  four  of  which  it  may  be  well  to 
 distinguish,  in  order  to  prevent  them  from  being 
 confounded  with  one  another.  The  first  was  in  the 
 western  part  of  Phiygia,  on  the  borders  of  Lydia  ; 
 the  second,  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  same  country, 
 denominated  Laodicea  Combusta ;  the  third,  on 
 the  coast  of  Syria,  called  Laodicea  ad  Mare,  and 
 
 315.   Laodicea. 
 
 serving  as  the  port  of  Aleppo  ;  and  the  fourth,  in  i 
 the  same  country,   called   Laodicea  ad  Libanum,  | 
 from  its  proximity  to  that  mountain.     The  third  I 
 of  these,  that  on  the  coast  of  Syria,  was  destroyed  I 
 by    the   great    earthquake   of  Aleppo    in    August 
 1822,  and  at  the  time  of  that  event  was  supposed 
 by  many  to  be  the  Laodicea  of  Scripture,  although 
 in  fact  not  less  than  four  hundred  miles  from  it. 
 But    the    first   named,    lying   on    the    confines    of 
 Phrygia    and    Lydia,    about    forty   miles   east   of 
 Ephesus,  is  the  only  Laodicea  mentioned  in  Scrip- 
 ture,  and  is  that   one  of  the   'seven  churches  in 
 .\sia,'   to  which   St.    John  was  commissioned   to 
 deliver  the  awful  warning  contained  in   Rev.   iii. 
 
 14-19.  The  fulfilment  of  this  warning  is  to  be 
 sought,  as  we  take  it,  in  the  history  of  the  Chris- 
 tian church  which  existed  in  that  city,  and  not  in 
 the  stone  and  mortar  ot  the  city  itself;  for  it  is 
 not  the  city,  but  'the  church  of  the  Laodiceans,' 
 which  is  denounced.  It  is  true  that  the  city  is 
 utterly  ruined  ;  but  this  is  the  case  with  innumer- 
 able other  towns  in  Asia  Minor.  It  is  the  pre- 
 cise reference  to  the  seven  churches  as  such,  without 
 any  other  reference  to  the  cities  than  as  giving 
 them  a  name,  which  imparts  a  marked  distinction 
 to  the  Apocalyptic  prophecies.  But  this  has  been 
 little  heeded  by  writers  on  the  subject,  who  some- 
 what unaccountably  seek,  in  the  actual  and  mate- 
 
LAPIDE 
 
 782 
 
 LAPIDOTH 
 
 rial  condition  of  these  cities,  the  accomplislament 
 of  spiritual  warnings  and  denunciations.  At  the 
 present  day,  would  an  authorised  denunciation  of 
 'the  cliurch  in  London,'  as  in  danger  of  being  cast 
 forth  for  its  lukewarmness,  be  understood  to  imply 
 tliat  London  itself  was  destined  to  become  a  heap 
 of  ruins,  with  its  bridges  broken  down,  and  its 
 palaces  and  temples  overthrown  ? 
 
 Laodicea  was  the  capital  of  Greater  Phrygia, 
 and  a  very  considerable  city  at  the  time  it  was 
 named  in  Scripture  (Strabo,  p.  57S)  ;  but  the  fre- 
 quency of  earthquakes,  to  which  this  district  has 
 always  been  liable,  demolished,  some  ages  after, 
 great  part  of  the  city,  destroyed  many  of  the  in- 
 habitants, and  eventually  obliged  the  remainder  to 
 abandon  the  spot  altogether.  Smith,  in  his  yoiir- 
 ney  lo  the  Seven  Churches  {167 1),  was  the  first  to 
 describe  the  site  of  Laodicea.  He  was  followed 
 by  Chandler  and  Pococke  ;  and  the  locality  has, 
 within  the  present  century,  been  visited  by  Mr. 
 Hartley,  Mr.  Arundell,  and  Col.  Leake. 
 
 Laodicea  is  now  a  deserted  place,  called  by  the 
 Turks  Eski-hissar  {Old  Castle),  a  Turkish  word 
 equivalent  to  Paleo-kastro,  which  the  Greeks  so 
 frequently  apply  to  ancient  sites.  From  its  ruins, 
 Laodicea  seems  to  have  been  situated  upon  six  or 
 seven  hills,  taking  up  a  large  extent  of  ground. 
 To  the  north  and  north-east  runs  the  river  Lycus, 
 about  a  mile  and  a  half  distant ;  but  nearer  it  is 
 watered  by  two  small  streams,  the  Asopus  and 
 Caprus,  the  one  to  the  west,  and  the  other  to  the 
 south-east,  both  passing  into  the  Lycus,  which  last 
 flows  into  the  Meander  (Smith,  p.  85). 
 
 Laodicea  preserves  great  remains  of  its  import- 
 ance as  the  residence  of  the  Roman  governors  of 
 Asia  under  tlie  emperors ;  namely,  a  stadium,  in 
 uncommon  preservation,  three  theatres,  one  of 
 which  is  450  feet  in  diameter,  and  the  ruins  of 
 several  other  buildings  {Antiq.  of  Ionia,  pt.  ii.,  p. 
 32 ;  Chandler's  Asia  Minoj;  c.  67).  Col.  Leake 
 says  :  '  There  are  few  ancient  sites  more  likely 
 than  Laodicea  to  preserve  many  curious  remains 
 of  antiquity  beneath  the  surface  of  the  soil ;  its 
 opulence,  and  the  earthquakes  to  which  it  was 
 subject,  rendering  it  probable  that  valuable  works 
 of  art  were  often  there  buried  beneath  the  ruins  of 
 the  public  and  private  edifices  (Cicero,  Epist.  ad 
 Amic.,  ii.  17;  iii.  5;  v.  20;  Tacit.  A7inal.  xiv. 
 27).  And  a  similar  remark,  though  in  a  lesser 
 degree,  perhaps,  will  apply  to  the  other  cities  of 
 the  vale  of  the  Mseander,  as  well  as  to  some  of 
 those  situated  to  the  north  of  Mount  Tmolus  ;  for 
 Strabo  (pp.  579,  628,  630)  informs  us  that  Phila- 
 delphia, Sardis,  and  Magnesia  of  Sipylus,  were, 
 not  less  than  Laodicea  and  the  cities  of  the  Maean- 
 der  as  far  as  Apameia  at  the  sources  of  that  river, 
 subject  to  the  same  dreadful  calamity'  {Geography 
 of  Asia  Minor,  p.  253). 
 
 LAPIDE,  Cornelius  a,  is  the  Latin  designa- 
 tion usually  given  to  CoRNEiLLE  de  la  Pierre, 
 which  is  itself  the  translation  of  his  native  name. 
 Van  DEii  Steen.  This  eminent  commentator 
 was  born  in  the  year  1567,  at  Boehaff  or  Bucold, 
 in  the  diocese  of  Liege,  in  Belgium.  In  1592  he 
 entered  the  Society  of  the  Jesuits,  and  gave  him- 
 self up  to  the  study  of  Holy  Scripture.  For 
 twenty  years  he  was  Divinity  Professor  at  Louvain, 
 after  which  he  pursued  the  same  avocation  with 
 extreme  assiduity  at  Rome,  where  he  died  greatly 
 respected  for  his  unaffected  piety  and  profound 
 
 learning,  March  12,  1637.  His  commentaries, 
 which  were  published  at  first  in  separate  portions  at 
 Antwerp  and  Paris,  1616-1639,  have  been  since  is- 
 sued in  more  than  one  collective  edition  ;  at  Venice, 
 1740,  in  eleven  folio  volumes;  at  Lyons,  1838,  in 
 the  same  number  of  quarto  volumes  ;  and  very 
 recently,  1861,  at  Paris,  in  twenty-one  imperial- 
 octavos.  This  last  edition  is  enriched  with  copious 
 and  well-selected  notes  from  Rosenmiiller,  Maurer, 
 Michaelis,  Munk,  Renan,  Franck,  Patritius, 
 Kuinoel,  Allioli,  and  others,  by  the  help  of  whom 
 the  learned  editors  (the  Abbes  Crampon  and 
 Peronne)  have  to  a  great  extent  supplemented  the 
 defects  and  corrected  the  inaccuracies  of  the  origi- 
 nal work.  The  author's  devotion  to  his  church 
 has  strongly  coloured  his  comment  ;  this  fact, 
 added  to  the  prolixity  wherewith  he  investigates 
 what  he  considers  the  various  senses  of  the  sacred 
 text  (the  mystical,  anagogical,  and  allegorical 
 being  no  less  conspicuous  than  the  literal,  histori- 
 cal, and  grammatical)  has  raised  a  prejudice 
 against  a  Lapide's  great  work  in  some  quarters 
 (see  Herzog,  Real-Encykl.,  iii.  153).  It  must, 
 however,  in  justice  be  admitted  that,  after  all  de- 
 ductions on  this  score,  this  commentary  justifies 
 the  popularity  which  it  has  always  commanded  in 
 the  Church  of  Rome.  The  convenient  method 
 and  perspicuity  with  which  the  author  has  care- 
 fully arranged  his  abundant  materials,  and  the 
 promptitude  with  which  he  has  invariably  decided 
 what  he  thinks  to  be  the  true  meaning  of  the  text, 
 go  far  to  obviate  the  evils  of  his  prolixity  and  mul- 
 tiplicity of  senses.  Nowhere  else  can  the  student 
 find  collected  so  rich  a  treasury  of  patristic  and 
 scholastic  exegesis,  and  the  general  value  of  this 
 honest  and  pious  commentator  is  proved  by  the 
 frequency  with  which  he  is  quoted  by  authors 
 beyond  his  own  communion,  of  unmistakeable  im- 
 partiality,  such  as  De  Wette  and  Meyer.  Corn, 
 a  Lapide  did  not  live  to  complete  his  annotations 
 on  Job  and  the  Psalms.  In  the  older  editions 
 Pineda  {on  Job)  and  Le  Blanc  {071  the  Psalms)  used 
 to  supplement  these  wanting  portions.  In  the 
 reissue  of  the  work  from  the  press  of  M.  Louis 
 Vives,  the  editors  have  done  wisely  in  substituting 
 the  compacter  commentaries  of  the  learned  Jesuit 
 Corder,  on  Job,  and  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  on  the 
 Psalms.  These  works,  in  three  extra  volumes, 
 complete  the  entire  circle  of  the  Canonical  and 
 Apocryphal  Scriptures  —  presenting  the  student 
 with  the  marrow  of  ancient  exegesis,  embellished 
 moreover  with  the  best  criticism  of  modern  writers 
 of  the  greatest  merit.  Some  portions  of  Cornelius 
 a  Lapide  (especially  on  the  Pentateuch,  the  His- 
 torical Books,  and  the  Hagiographa)  have  been 
 included  in  the  Abbe  Migne's  Scriptune  Sacra 
 Cursiis  Completiis.  In  the  24th  and  25th  volumes 
 of  this  Cursiis  is  reprinted  the  valuable  Epitome 
 Comtnent.  Estii  et  Cornelii  d.  Lapide  in  omnes  D. 
 Paiili  Epistolas,  which  Gorcomius  (Johannes  a 
 Gorcum)  carefully  prepared  at  the  beginning  of 
 the  17th  century.  This  abridgment  of  what  has 
 often  been  deemed  the  best  part  of  a  Lapide's 
 work,  is  a  useful  work. — P.  H. 
 
 LAPIDOTH  (niTQ^ ;  LXX.  Aa<pi5d.e),  men- 
 tioned in  Judg.  iv.  4,  and  supposed  to  be  the  name 
 of  Deborah's  husband.     The  expression,  however, 
 
 is  ambiguous,  since  "7  T\'C'ii  may  as  well  mean 
 '  a  woman  of  Lapidoth'  (cf.  Tennyson,   '  Like  that 
 
LAPWING 
 
 783 
 
 LASHA 
 
 great  dame  of  Lapidoth'),  but  no  place  of  such  a 
 name  is  known  tb  have  existed.     Others  again, 
 
 since  Lapidoth  is  the  plural  of  *T'Q7,   '  a  lamp' 
 
 (although  in  the  Bible  only  the  form  D^''^?  occurs), 
 
 do  not  consider  it  as  a  proper  name  at  all,  but 
 render  it  '  a  woman  of  splendours,'  /'.  e.,  noble  and 
 divinely  inspired  ;  or  '  woman  of  lamps,'  since  the 
 Rabbis  say  that  she  had  the  charge  of  the  Taber- 
 nacle lamps.  Setting  aside  these  idle  conjectures, 
 it  remains  nearly  certain,  that  Lapidoth  is  the  name 
 of  the  unknown  husband  of  the  great  prophetess. 
 The  feminine  form  of  the  word  is  no  difficulty  ;  cf 
 
 ni7pD,  I  Chron.   xxvii.   4 ;  01010,  Ezra  viii.   33 
 
 (Bertheau,  Buc/i  d.  Richter,  p.  76)".— F.  W.  F. 
 
 LAPWING.       [DUKHIPHATH.] 
 
 LARDNER,  Nathaniel,  D.D.,  a  learned 
 nonconformist  author  and  preacher,  was  born  in 
 1684,  at  Hawkhurst,  in  Kent.  He  studied  first  in 
 London,  next  in  Utrecht,  where  his  studies  were 
 pursued  under  the  direction  of  the  celebrated  pro- 
 fessors Ciraevius  and  Burman,  and  also  in  Leyden. 
 He  commenced  preaching  at  Stoke-Newington  in 
 1709,  but  failing,  from  his  cold  manner  and  feeble 
 utterance,  to  gain  scce]7tance,  he  entered  the  family 
 of  Lady  Treby  as  chaplain  and  tutor.  Still  cherish- 
 ing a  strong  desire  to  be  useful  as  a  preacher,  he 
 was  appointed  in  1724  to  deliver  the  Tuesday 
 Evening  lecture  at  the  Old  Jewry.  To  this  ap- 
 pointment we  owe  his  great  work  on  the  Credi- 
 bility of  the  Gospel  IIisto7y,  in  five  quarto  volumes, 
 the  preparation  of  which  extended  from  1727  to 
 1743.  The  work  is  unequalled  for  the  extent  and 
 accuracy  of  its  investigations  into  the  credibility 
 of  the  gospel  history.  No  greater  work  has  ever 
 been  produced  on  the  same  subject.  Recent  re- 
 searches supplement  it,  but  it  is  not  likely  that 
 they  will  ever  supersede  it.  Lardner's  doctrinal 
 sentiments  inclined  to  Unitarianism.  In  1729  he 
 published  his  Vindication  of  Three  of  our  Blessed 
 Lord^s  Miracles  in  answer  to  Woolston,  and  in 
 1759  his  celebrated  Letter  on  the  Logos.  His  col- 
 lected works,  with  a  Memoir  by  Dr.  Kippis,  were 
 published  in  1788  in  11  vols.  8vo,  and  republished 
 in  6  vols.  4to  in  181 5.  After  preaching  for  several 
 years  to  a  congregation  in  Crutched  Friars,  Dr. 
 Lardner  died  at  Hawkhurst  on  the  24th  of  July 
 1768.— W.  J.  C. 
 
 LASEA  (Aacrat'a  ;  N,  Aaffaaia  ;  A,  'AXaffcra  ; 
 B,  Aaaia ;  Thalassa).  When  the  Apostle  Paul, 
 on  his  eventful  voyage  to  Rome,  'was  passing  under 
 Crete,  over  against  Salmone,'  the  historian  tells  us 
 that,  'hardly  passing  it  (the  vessel)  came  into  a 
 place  which  is  called  the  Fair  Havens,  ni^h  where- 
 unto  was  the  city  Lasea '  (Acts  xxvii.  8).  The 
 Peutinger  Table  marks  a  town  called  Lisia  in 
 Crete,  and  Pliny  (iv.  12)  mentions  Lasos  (or  Alos, 
 as  it  is  in  some  copies)  as  one  of  the  cities  of  that 
 island.  These  may  probably  be  identical  with 
 Lasea  (Conybeare  and  Howson,  vol.  ii.,  p.  330, 
 1st  ed.)  Until  very  recently  the  site  of  this  town 
 was  altogether  unknown.  It  was  discovered  in 
 1856,  and  the  site  carefully  examined  by  the  Rev. 
 G.  Brown.  It  lies  about  the  middle  of  the 
 southern  coast  of  Crete,  some  five  miles  east  of 
 Fair  Havens,  and  close  to  Cape  Leonda.  Mr. 
 Brown  describes  the  ruins  as  follows  : — '  Inside 
 the  cape,  to  the  eastward,  the  beach  is  lined  with 
 
 masses  of  masonry.  These  were  formed  of  small 
 stones  cemented  together  with  mortar  so  firmly 
 that  even  where  the  sea  had  undermined  them 
 huge  fragments  lay  on  the  sand.  This  sea-wall 
 extended  a  quarter  of  a  mile  along  the  beach  from 
 one  rocky  face  to  another,  and  was  evidently  in- 
 tended for  the  defence  of  the  city.  Above  we 
 found  the  ruins  of  two  temples.  The  steps  which 
 led  up  to  the  one  remain,  though  in  a  shattered 
 state.  Many  shafts,  and  a  few  capitals  of  Grecian 
 pillars,  all  of  marble,  lie  scattered  about,  and  a 
 gully  worn  by  a  torrent  lays  bare  the  substructions 
 down  to  the  rock.  To  the  east  a  conical  rocky 
 hill  is  girdled  by  a  wall ;  and  on  a  platform  be- 
 tween this  hill  and  the  sea,  the  pillars  of  another 
 edifice  lie  level  with  the  ground.  Some  peasants 
 came  down  to  see  us  from  the  hills  above,  and  I 
 asked  them  the  name  of  the  place.  They  said  at 
 once  '  Lasea ' '  (Smith's  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  oj 
 St.  Paul,  app.  iv.,  p.  262,  2d  ed.)  This  interest- 
 ing and  important  discovery  throws  much  light  on 
 this  part  of  the  apostle's  voyage,  and  affords  addi- 
 tional proof  of  the  minute  accuracy  of  Luke's 
 topographical  notices  (see  Alford,  Greek  Test., 
 Prolegomena  to  Acts,  Excursus  I.,  3d  ed. ) — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 LASHA  (yc'i' ;  Aao-d  ;  Lesa,  and  Za^a),  a  place 
 
 mentioned  in  Gen.  x.  19  as  marking  the  utmost 
 border  of  the  ancient  Canaanites.  Their  border 
 was  '  from  Sidon  unto  Gaza ;  towards  (H^NZl) 
 Sodom,  and  Gomorrah,  and  Admah,  and  Zeboim, 
 unto  Lasha.'  Lasha  thus  appears  to  have  been 
 situated  east,  or  north-east,  of  the  cities  of  the  Plain, 
 and  consequently  beyond  the  Dead  Sea.  The  name 
 is  only  casually  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon  of 
 Eusebius  ;  but  upon  the  passage  in  Genesis,  Jerome 
 says,  'hoc  tantum  annotandum  videtur,  quod  Lise 
 (sic)  ipsa  sit,  quse  nunc  Callirhoe  dicitur,  ubi  aquje 
 calid^  prorumpentes  in  mare  Mortuum  defluunt' 
 {Qnast.  in  Gen.,  Opp.,  iii.  321  ;  ed.  Migne).  This 
 conjecture  is  highly  probable.  The  position  of 
 Callirhoe  agrees  in  all  respects  with  the  Mosaic 
 narrative  ;  and  the  name  would  seem  to  favour  the 
 
 view,  yti^b  appears  to  be  equivalent  to  the  Arabic 
 -^,  'a  fissure,'  'perhaps  used  of  chasms  in  the 
 
 earth,  and  fountains'  (Gesenius,  Thes.,  s.  v.)  Cal- 
 lirhoe is  situated  in  a  narrow  wild  ravine  which 
 falls  into  the  Dead  Sea,  near  its  north-eastern 
 angle.  The  scenery  is  veiy  romantic.  The  cliffs 
 rise  up  in  jagged  frowning  masses,  variously 
 coloured — red,  grey,  and  black — while  the  whole 
 bottom  of  the  ravine  is  densely  filled  with  foliage. 
 Canes,  aspens,  tamarisks,  and  palms  are  inteiTnixed 
 with  the  bright  and  beautiful  oleander.  A  copious 
 stream  of  hot  water,  fed  by  numerous  hot  springs, 
 dashes  along  a  rocky  torrent-bed,  throwing  up 
 clouds  of  white  steam,  and  tinging  every  stone  and 
 cliff-side  in  its  track  with  the  bright  yellow  of  the 
 sulphur  with  which  it  is  largely  impregnated. 
 Around  the  springs,  which  are  about  three  miles 
 from  the  lake,  are  some  ruins,  strewn  all  over  with 
 broken  potteiy.  Here  stood  the  baths  once  so 
 famous  for  their  medicinal  properties,  where  Herod 
 the  Great  went,  by  the  advice  of  his  physicians, 
 during  his  last  illness  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvii.  6.  5  ; 
 cf  Pliny,  V.  16).  The  water  at  the  fountain  has  a 
 temperature  of  about  96°  Fahr. ;  the  stream  is  about 
 
LASHARON 
 
 784 
 
 latinism:; 
 
 twelve  feet  wide  and  one  foot  deep,  with  a  very 
 rapid  current ;  and  the  chasm  is  not  more  than 
 thirty  yards  across  (Irby  and  Mangles,  p.  467,  1st 
 ed. ;  Lynch,  Official  Report, 'hl'X'j  \;  Handbk.,f^'^. 
 201,  300;  Reland,  Pal.,  302;  Ritter,  Pal.  iirid 
 Syr.,  ii.  572).  A  short  distance  south  of  this 
 ravine  (which  is  now  called  WadyZurka  Main)  are 
 other  warm  springs,  and  beside  them  a  ruined 
 town  called  Sara  (Ritter,  /.  c. ;  Seetzen,  Reise,  ii. 
 336).  Dean  Stanley  suggests  that  Callirrhoe  may 
 be  identical  with  the  En-eglaim  of  Ezek.  xlvii.  10 
 (S.  and  P.,  p.  289).  This,  however,  is  mere  con- 
 jecture. We  have  no  data  by  which  to  fix  the  site 
 of  En-eglaim. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LASHARON  (p"lE'^ ;   wanting  in  the  Sept. ; 
 
 Saron).  This  obscure  name  has  given  rise  to 
 considerable  discussion  among  critics.  It  is  only 
 found  in  Josh.  xii.  18,  where,  in  the  list  of  the  old 
 Canaanitish  kings  conquered  by  the  Israelites,  we 
 read,  '  The  king  of  Lasharon  one.'  Verses  18-22 
 are  wanting  in  the  Vatican  Codex  of  the  Septua- 
 gint ;  and  this  name,  with  a  few  others,  is  also  left 
 out  in  the  Alexandrine.  They  are  now  found  in 
 all  Hebrew  MSS.  Jerome  renders  the  clause, 
 Rex  Saron  uniis,  from  which  it  appears  that  he 
 
 considered  the  7  to  be  a  preposition  prefixed  (with 
 the  art.  T\,  represented  by  the  dagesh  in  ^)  to  the 
 proper  name  plti' ;  and  in  this  view  he  is  followed 
 by  a  number  of  scholars,  as  Clericus,  Michaelis, 
 etc.  {Cridci  Sacri,  ad  loc.)     In  the  same  manner 
 
 it  is  said  7S"lt^v  1?JD  means  '  king  of  Israel.' 
 This,  however,  is  contrary  to  the  usage  of  the  con- 
 text,  where  every  other  town  is  connected  with 
 
 1??D,  'king,'  in  the  ordinary  construct  state,  with- 
 out any  such  prefix.  We  conclude,  therefore,  that 
 LasJiaron  is  the  real  name.     The  Targum  reads 
 
 |1'^t^'P^  SOPO,  and  the  Arabic  version  also     ,,^1 
 
 (see  Keil,  Coinineiif.  on  yosJma ;  Rosenm tiller,  ad 
 loc.)  The  highest  authorities  are  in  favour  of  the 
 ordinary  reading,  notwithstanding  the  argument  of 
 Gesenius  (see,  liowever,  Thesaurus,  p.  642  ;  and 
 compare  Bochart,  0pp.  ii.  307).  The  site  of 
 Lasharon  is  unknown.  Masius  supposes  it  to  be 
 the  place  mentioned  in  Acts  ix.  35,  where  the 
 reading  of  some  MSS.  is  'Ao-ffapwra,  instead  of 
 "Lapijiva. ;  but  there  is  no  evidence  to  support  such 
 a  view. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LASTHENES  (Aao-^eVr??),  the  minister  of  De- 
 metrius II.  Nicator.  He  appears  to  liave  been  a 
 Cretan,  and  was  general  of  the  Cretan  forces  who 
 assisted  Demetrius  with  a  number  of  mercenaries 
 to  regain  his  kingdom  from  Alexander  Balas  in 
 B.C.  148  or  147  (cf  1  Maccab.  x.  67  ;  Joseph. 
 Andq.  xiii.  4.  3).  His  arbitraiy  government, 
 added  to  his  persuading  Demetrius  to  disband  the 
 regular  troops  and  only  employ  Cretans,  is  sup- 
 posed to  have  alienated  the  subjects  from  the 
 king,  and  caused  great  dissatisfaction  to  the  sol- 
 diers. This  conduct  led  to  the  downfall  of  Deme- 
 trius, for  it  enabled  Tryplion  (Diodotus)  to  set  up 
 Antiochus,  the  young  son  of  Alexander  Balas 
 (Diod.  Rcliq.,  lib.  xxxiii.  4,  ed.  Didot,  vol.  ii.  p. 
 522). 
 
 What  became  of  Lasthenes  is  not  known,  and 
 he  must  not  be  identified  with  the  Cnidian  in- 
 structor of  the  sons  of  Demetrius  I.  Soter  (Just. 
 lixxv,  2  ;   cf   Livy,  Epit.  52).     There  is  a  later 
 
 Lasthenes,  also  a  Cretan,  who  took  a  prominent 
 part  against  the  Romans  in  B.C.  70-6S  (Smith's 
 Diet,  of  B log.,  s.  V.  Lasthenes,  No.  3). 
 
 Lasthenes  is  described  as  '  cousin'  {av^'^evr\i,  i 
 Maccab.  xi.  31 ;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiii.  4.  9)  and 
 'father'  (l  Maccab.  xi.  32;  Joseph.  Antiq.,  I.e.) 
 Both  are  honourable  titles,  and  the  latter  is  more 
 especially  equivalent  to  '  friend,'  or  '  supreme 
 counsellor'  (Gesen.  Tkes.,  s.v.  3K  ;  cf.  Grimm  on 
 
 I  Maccab.  x.  89,  and  i  Maccab.  xi.  32). — F.  W.  M. 
 LATCHET    (Tj'nb';   a<pvpo3T-f,p,    ifids).      The 
 
 thong  used  to  fasten  the  shoes  or  sandals  of  the 
 ancients  ;  in  modern  terms,  a  shoe-tie  or  boot- 
 lace. The  earliest  mention  of  it  is  in  Gen.  xiv. 
 23,  wheie  it  is  employed  to  express  a  thing  of  the 
 least  possible  value,  '  I  will  not  take  from  a  thread 
 
 (Din)  even  to  a  shoe  latchet'  (?y3  Tl'llb).  It  oc- 
 curs also  in  Is.  v.  47.  In  the  N.  T.  it  is  found  in 
 a  remarkable  declaration  of  John  the  Baptist,  in 
 which  he  expresses  his  inferiority  to  the  Messiah 
 (Mark  i.  7  ;  Luke  iii.  16  ;  John  i.  27).  In  Matt, 
 iii.  1 1  the  same  sentiment  is  expressed  rather  dif- 
 ferently, '  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  bear  ; ' 
 in  both  cases  the  allusion  is  to  slaves,  who  were 
 employed  to  loosen  and  carry  their  master's  shoes, 
 the  habits  of  Orientals  requiring  this  article  of  dress 
 to  be  taken  oft  before  entering  an  apartment  (Thom- 
 son, T//e  Land  and  the  Book,  pt.  i.  ch.  9).  This 
 saying  of  the  Baptist,  as  reported  by  Matthew,  is 
 repeated  by  Paul  in  his  address  to  the  Jews  at 
 Antioch,  in  Pisidia  (Acts  xiii.  25).  Chrysostom, 
 on  John  i.  27,  remarks,  t6  7dp  inr6ST]/j.a  XOcrat  ttjs 
 ^crXaTiys  dcaKovias  iarl. — J.  E.  R. 
 
 LATINISMS.  This  word,  which  properly  sig- 
 nifies idioms  or  phraseology  peculiar  to  the  Latin 
 tongue,  is  extended  by  Biblical  critics  so  as  to  in- 
 clude also  the  Latin  words  occumng  in  the 
 Greek  Testament.  It  is  but  reasonable  to  ex- 
 pect the  existence  of  Latinisms  in  the  language 
 of  every  country  subdued  by  the  Romans.  The  in- 
 troduction of  their  civil  and  military  officers,  of 
 settlers,  and  merchants,  would  naturally  be  followed 
 by  an  infusion  of  Roman  terms,  etc. ,  into  the  lan- 
 guage of  their  new  subjects.  There  would  be  many 
 new  things  made  known  to  some  of  them,  for  which 
 they  could  find  no  corresponding  word  in  their  own 
 tongues.  The  circumstance  that  the  proceedings  in 
 courte  of  law  were,  in  every  part  of  the  Roman 
 empire,  conducted  in  the  Latin  language,  would 
 necessarily  cause  the  introduction  of  many  Roman 
 words  into  the  department  of  law,  as  might  be 
 amply  illustrated  from  the  present  state  of  the  ju- 
 ridical language  in  every  country  once  subject  to  the 
 Romans,  and,  among  others,  our  own.  Valerius 
 Maximus  (ii.  2.  2),  indeed,  records  the  tenacity  of 
 the  ancient  Romans  for  their  language  in  their 
 intercourse  with  the  Greeks,  and  their  strenuous  en- 
 deavours to  propagate  it  through  all  theirdominions. 
 The  Latinisms  in  the  N.  T.  are  of  three  kinds, 
 consisting  (i)  of  Latin  words  in  Greek  letters  ;  (2) 
 of  Latin  senses  of  Greek  words  ;  and  (3)  of  tliose 
 forms  of  speech  which  are  more  properly  called 
 Latinisms.  The  following  may  suffice  as  examples 
 of  each  of  these  :  First,  Latin  words  in  Greek  cha- 
 racters :  daadpiov,  'farthing,'  from  the  Latin  assa- 
 rins  (Matt.  x.  29).  This  word  is  used  likewise  by 
 Plutarch,  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  and  Athe- 
 nseus,  as  may  be  seen  in  Wetstein,  in  loc.    K^ycor, 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 785 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 (enstis  (Matt.  xvii.  25) :  KevTvpiwv,  cettturio  (Mark 
 XV.  39),  etc. :  \eyewv,  Ugio,  '  legion '  (Matt.  xxvi. 
 53).  Polybius  (B.C.  150)  has  also  adopted  the 
 Roman  military  terms  (vi.  17,  ff.)  ZireKovXarcop, 
 speculator,  '  a  spy,'  from  speciilor,  '  to  look  about ;' 
 or,  as  Wahl  and  Schleusner  think,  from  spictilutn, 
 the  weapon  carried  by  the  speculator.  The  word 
 describes  the  emperor's  life-guards,  who,  among 
 other  duties,  punished  the  condemned ;  hence 
 'an  executioner'  (Mark  vi.  27),  margin,  'one  of 
 his  guard  ;'  (comp.  Tacitus,  Hist.  i.  25  ;  Joseph. 
 De  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  33.  7  ;  Seneca,  De  Ird,  i.  16). 
 Ma/ceXXoj',  from  jnacelluni,  'a  market-place  for 
 flesh'  (l  Cor.  x.  25).  As  Corinth  was  now  a 
 Roman  colony,  it  is  only  consistent  to  find  that  the 
 inhabitants  had  adopted  this  name  for  their  public 
 market,  and  that  Paul,  writing  to  them,  should 
 employ  it.  WCkiov  (Matt.  v.  41).  This  word  is 
 also  used  by  Polybius  (xxxiv.  Ii.  8)  andStrabo  (v. 
 p.  332).  Secondly,  Latin  senses  of  Greek  words  : 
 as  Kapirds  (Rom.  xv.  28),  'fruit,'  where  it  seems  to 
 be  used  in  the  sense  of  emoliwientiim,  '  gain  upon 
 money  lent,'  etc. :  ^Tratcoj,  '  praise,'  in  the  juridical 
 sense  of  elogiiim,  a  testimonial  either  of  honour  or 
 reproach  (i  Cor.  iv.  5).  Thirdly,  those  forms  of 
 speech  which  are  properly  called  Latinisms  :  as 
 /Soi/Xo/uez'os  t(j3  Sx^V  t6  iKavov  woirjcrai,  'willing  to 
 content  the  people'  (Mark  xv.  15),  which  corre- 
 sponds to  the  phrase  satisfacere  alicui:  Xa^eiv  to 
 iKavbv  Tvapd,  '  to  take  security  of,'  satis  accipere  ab 
 (Acts  xvii.  9):  56s  epyajiav,  'give  diligence,'  t/a 
 operam  (Luke  xii.  58) ;  the  phrase  remittere ad alitwi 
 jtidicem  is  retained  in  Luke  xxiii.  15  :  aht^n,  'see 
 thou  to  that,'  tu  videris  (Matt,  xxvii.  4)  (Arigler, 
 He7-menent.  Biblica,Yiermx  1813,  p.99;  Michaelis' 
 Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  by  Marsh,  Cambridge 
 1793,  vol.  i.  parti,  p.  163,  sqq.)  The  importance 
 of  the  Latinisms  in  the  Greek  Testament  consists 
 in  this,  that,  as  we  have  partly  shown  (and  the 
 proof  might  be  much  extended),  they  are  to  be 
 found  in  the  best  Greek  writers  of  the  sa7ne  era. 
 Their  occurrence,  therefore,  in  the  N.  T.  adds  one 
 thread  more  to  that  complication  of  probabilities 
 with  which  the  Christian  history  is  attended.  Had 
 the  Greek  Testament  been  free  from  them,  the  ob- 
 jection, though  recondite,  would  have  been  strong. 
 At  the  same  time  the  subject  is  intricate,  and  ad- 
 mits of  much  discussion.  Dr.  Marsh  disputes  some 
 of  the  instances  adduced  by  Michaelis  {tit  supra,  p. 
 431,  sqq.)  Dresigius  even  contends  that  there  are 
 no  Latinisms  in  the  N.  T.  {De  Latinismis,  Leipsig 
 1726  ;  and  see  his  Vindicicz  Disseitationis  de  Latin- 
 ismis). Even  Arigler  allows  that  some  instances 
 adduced  by  him  may  have  a  purely  Greek  origin. 
 Truth,  as  usual,  lies  in  the  middle,  and  there  are, 
 no  doubt,  many  irrefragable  instances  of  Latinisms, 
 which  will  amply  repay  the  attention  of  the  student 
 (see  Georgii  Hierocrit.  de  Latinis?nis  Novi  Test., 
 Witteberg  1733  ;  Kypke,  Obsei-v.  Sacr.,  ii.  219, 
 Wratis.  1755;  Vr'iiW  Int)-oductio  in  Led.  Nov.  Test., 
 p.  207,  sqq..  Lips.  1722.  Winer  refers  also  to 
 Wernsdorf,  De  Christo  Latine  loquente,  p.  19 ; 
 Jahn's  ^;r/i/z'.  ii.  iv. ;  Olearius,  De  Stylo  Nov.  Test., 
 p.  368,  sqq.  ;  Jnchofer,  Sacrce  Latiiiitatis  IListoria, 
 Frag.  1 742 ;  see  Bibl.  Real-  Wdrterbnch,  art.  Riitner, 
 Romischcs,  etc.) — ^J.  F.  D. 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS.      Under  this  head  we 
 
 shall  give  some  account  of — i.  The  versions  of  the 
 
 sacred  Scriptures  in  the  Latin  tongue  anterior  to 
 
 that  of  Jerome;  2.  The  version  of  Jerome  com- 
 
 VOL.  n. 
 
 monly  called  the  Vulgate  ;  and  3.  Those  which 
 have  been  executed  in  later  times. 
 
 I.  Ante-Hieronymian  Versions. — The  early 
 and  extensive  diffusion  of  Christianity  among  the 
 Latin-speaking  people,  renders  it  probable  that 
 means  would  be  used  to  supply  the  Christians  who 
 used  that  language  with  versions  of  the  Scriptures 
 in  their  own  tongue,  especially  those  resident  in 
 countries  where  the  Greek  language  was  less  gene- 
 rally known.  That  from  an  early  period  such 
 means  were  used  cannot  be  doubted  ;  but  the  in- 
 formation which  has  reached  us  is  so  scanty,  that 
 we  are  not  in  circumstances  to  arrive  at  certainty 
 on  many  points  of  interest  connected  with  the  sub- 
 ject. It  is  even  matter  of  debate  whether  there 
 were  several  translations  or  one  translation  variously 
 corrupted  or  emended. 
 
 The  first  writer  by  whom  reference  is  supposed 
 to  be  made  to  a  Latin  version  is  Tertullian,  in  the 
 words  :  '  Sciamus  plane  non  sic  esse  in  grseco 
 authentico,  quomodo  in  usum  exiit  per  duarum 
 syllabarum  aut  callidam  aut  simplicem  eversionem,' 
 etc.  {De  Monogamia,  c.  il).  It  is  possible  that 
 Tertullian  has  in  view  here  a  version  in  use  among 
 the  African  Christians  ;  but  it  is  by  no  means  cer- 
 tain that  such  is  his  meaning,  for  he  may  refer 
 merely  to  the  manner  in  which  the  passage  in  ques- 
 tion had  come  to  be  usually  cited,  without  intend- 
 ing to  intimate  that  it  was  so  written  in  any  formal 
 version.  The  probability  that  such  is  really  his 
 meaning  is  greatly  heightened,  when  we  compare 
 his  language  here  with  similar  expressions  in  other 
 parts  of  his  writings.  Thus,  speaking  of  the  Logos, 
 he  says,  '  Hanc  Grasci  Kbyov  dicunt,  quo  vocabulo 
 etiam  sermonem  appellamus.  Ideoque  in  usu  est 
 nostrorum  per  simplicitatem  interpretationis,  Ser- 
 monem, dicere,  in  primordio  apud  Deum  esse' 
 {Adv.  Prax.,  c.  5) ;  where  he  seems  to  have  in  view 
 simply  the  colloquial  usage  of  his  Christian  compa- 
 triots (comp.  also  Adv.  Marx.,  c.  4  and  c.  9).  The 
 testimony  of  Augustine  is  more  precise.  He  says 
 {De  Doct.  Christ.,  ii.  11)  :  '  Qui  Scripturas  in  He- 
 brffia  lingua  in  Grsecam  verterunt  numerari  possunt, 
 latini  autem  interpretes  nullo  modo.  Ut  enim 
 cuiquam  primis  fidei  temporibus  in  manus  venit 
 codex  graecus  et  aliquantulum  facultatis  sibi  utri- 
 usque  linguse  Latine  videbatur,  ausus  est  interpre- 
 tari.'  A  few  sentences  before  he  speaks  of  the 
 '  Latinorum  interpretum  infinita  varietas;'  and  he 
 proceeds  to  give  instances  how  one  of  these  ver- 
 sions elucidates  another,  and  to  speak  of  the  defects 
 attaching  to  all  of  them.  This  testimony  not  only 
 clearly  establishes  the  fact  of  the  existence  of  Latin 
 versions  in  the  beginning  of  the  4th  century,  but 
 goes  to  prove  that  these  were  numerous  ;  for  that 
 Augustine  has  in  view  a  number  of  interpreters, 
 and  not  merely  a  variety  of  recensions,  is  evident 
 from  his  statement  in  this  same  connection,  '  in 
 ipsis  interpretationibus  itala  cseteris  preeferatur,  nam 
 est  verborum  tenacior  cum  perspicuitate  sententiee  ;' 
 and  from  his  speaking  elsewhere  {Cent.  Faiistnm, 
 ii.  2)  of  '  codices  aliarum  regionum.'  On  the  other 
 hand,  the  testimony  of  Hilary  is  in  favour  of  only 
 one  Latin  version  :  '  Latma  translatio  dum  virtutem 
 dicti  ignorat  magnam  intulit  obscuritatem,  non  dis- 
 cemens  ambigui  sermonis  proprietatem  (in  Ps.  clviii. ) 
 On  the  same  side  is  the  declaration  of  Jerome  :  '  Si 
 latinis  exemplaribus  fides  est  adhibenda  responde- 
 bunt  Quibus  ?  tot  sunt  enim  exemplaria  pene  quot 
 codices. '  That  by  '  exemplaria'  here  Jerome  refers 
 to  what  would  now  be  called  editions  or  7-ecensionSf 
 
 3E 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 786 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 is  evident  from  the  nature  of  his  statement,  for  it 
 cannot  be  supposed  that  he  intends  to  say  that 
 almost  every  codex  presented  a  distinct  translation  ; 
 and  is  rendered  still  more  so  by  what  follows  :  '  Si 
 autem  Veritas  est  qusrenda  de  pluribus,  cur  non  ad 
 (jraecam  originem  revertentes  ea  quje  vel  a  vitiosis 
 interpretibusmale  reddita,  vel  a  prsesumptoribus  im- 
 peritis  emendata  perversius,  vel  a  librariis  dormi- 
 tantibus  addita  sunt  aut  mutata  corrigamus'  {Prcrf. 
 in  Evangg.  Ad.  Danias.)  Elsewhere  {Praf.  in 
 Josuam)  he  says  also  :  '  Apud  Latinos  tot  exem- 
 jilaria  quot  codices  et  unusquisque  pro  suo  arbitrio 
 vel  addidit  vel  subtraxit  quod  ei  visum  est ;'  where 
 there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  his  meaning.  Jerome 
 frequently  uses  the  expression  communis  or  vidga/a 
 editio,  but  by  this  he  intends  the  LXX.,  or  the  old 
 Latin  translation  of  the  LXX.  In  reference  to  the 
 Latin  N.  T.  he  uses  the  expressions,  latinus  inter- 
 prcs,  latini  codices,  or  simply  in  latino. 
 
 The  statement  of  Augustine,  that  of  the  interpre- 
 tations the  I/ala  was  preferred,  has  been  supposed  to 
 indicate  decidedly  the  existence  of  several  national 
 Latin  versions  known  to  him.  For  this  title  can 
 only  indicate  a  translation  prepared  in  Italy,  or 
 used  liy  the  Italian  churches,*  and  presupposes  the 
 existence  of  other  versions,  which  might  be  known 
 as  the  Africana,  the  Hispanica,  etc.  On  the  other 
 liand,  however,  if  there  was  a  version  known  by 
 this  name,  it  seems  strange  that  it  should  never  be 
 mentioned  again  by  Augustine  or  by  any  one  else  ; 
 and  further,  it  is  remarkable,  that  to  designate  an 
 Italian  version,  he  should  use  the  word  Itala  and 
 not  Italica.  This  has  led  to  the  suspicion  that  this 
 word  is  an  error,  and  different  conjectural  emenda- 
 tions have  been  proposed.  Bentley  suggested  that 
 for  itala  .  .  .  na??i  there  should  be  read  ilia  .  .  . 
 qiue,  a  singularly  infelicitous  emendation,  as  Hug 
 has  shewn  {Introd.,  E.  T. ,  p.  267).  As  Augustine 
 elsewhere  speaks  of  '  codicibus  ecclesiasticis  in- 
 terpretationisusitatDe'  [Deccnsetisn  Evangg.,  ii.  66), 
 it  has  been  suggested  by  Potter  that  for  Itala 
 should  be  read  tisitata,  the  received  reading  having 
 probably  arisen  from  the  omission,  in  the  first  in- 
 stance, of  the  recurrent  syllable  tis  between  inter- 
 pretationibus  and  usitata  (thus  Intekpretationi- 
 BUSITATa),  and  then  the  change  of  the  unmeaning 
 itata  into  itala.  Of  this  emendation  many  have 
 approved,  and  if  it  be  adopted,  the  testimony  of 
 Augustine,  in  this  passage,  as  for  a  plurality  of 
 Latin  versions,  will  be  greatly  enfeebled,  for,  by 
 the  versio  usitata,  he  would  doubtless  intend  the 
 version  in  common  use  as  opposed  to  the  unautho- 
 rised interpretations  of  private  individuals.  As  tend- 
 ing to  confirm  this  view  of  his  meaning,  it  has  been 
 observed,  that  it  is  extremely  improbable  that  if 
 there  was  an  acknowledged  versio  Africana,  the 
 Christians  in  Africa  would  be  found  jireferring  to 
 that  a  version  made  for  the  use  of  the  Italians. 
 A  new  suggestion,  relating  to  this  passage,  has 
 laeen  offered  by  Reuss  {Gescli.  d.  Schr.  d.  N.  T., 
 p.  436),  '  Is  it  not  possible,'  he  asks,  '  that  Au- 
 gustine may  refer,  in  this  passage  (written  about 
 the  year  397),  to  a  work  of  Jerome,  viz.,  his  version 
 of  Origen's  Hexapla,  which  Augustine,  in  one  of 
 his  letters  {Ep.  xxviii.,   torn.  ii.  p.  6i)  to  Jerome 
 
 *  The  supposition  of  Wiseman  and  Lachmann, 
 <liat  the  Itala  of  Augustine  was  a  corrected  codex 
 of  the  one  Latm  version,  written  in  Italy,  cannot 
 be  reconciled  with  Augustine's  words  in  their  con- 
 nection. 
 
 prefers  to  his  making  a  new  translation  from  the 
 original?  '  At  any  rate,'  he  adds,  '  it  is  remark- 
 able that  Isidore  of  Spain  {Etyinol.,  vi.  5)  charac- 
 terises the  translation  of  Jerome  (the  last)  as  ver- 
 borum  tenaciorein  et  perspicititate  sententice  clario- 
 rem.  May  one  venture  to  suggest,  that  he  has 
 taken  this  phrase  from  Augustine,  regarding  him 
 as  using  it  of  Jerome?'  To  this,  however,  it  may 
 be  replied,  that  whilst  it  is  not  improbable  that 
 Isidore  took  the  passage  from  Augustine,  he  may 
 have  done  so  without  regarding  Augustine's  words 
 as  referring  to  any  work  of  Jerome.  That  they  do 
 so  refer  seems  to  us  very  improbable.' 
 
 An  effort  has  been  made  to  obtain  a  decision  for 
 this  question  from  a  collation  of  the  extant  remains 
 of  the  ancient  Latin  texts,  but  without  success. 
 Eichhorn  [Einleit.  ins.  N.  T.,  iv.  337,  ff.)  has  com- 
 pared several  passages  found  in  the  writings  of  the 
 early  Latin  fathers  with  certain  extant  codices  of 
 the  early  Latin  text ;  and  from  the  resemblance 
 which  these  bear  to  each  other,  he  argues  that  they 
 have  all  been  taken  from  one  common  translation. 
 In  this  conclusion  many  scholars  have  concurred 
 both  before  and  since,  the  time  of  Eichhorn  (Wet- 
 stein,  Hody,  Sender,  Lachmann,  Tregelles,  Tis- 
 chendorf),  but  others  have,  on  the  other  side, 
 pointed  to  serious  differences  of  rendering,  which, 
 in  their  judgment,  indicate  the  existence  of  distinct 
 translations  (Michaelis,  Hug,  De  Wette,  Bleek, 
 etc.) 
 
 As  the  evidence  stands,  it  seems  impossible  either 
 to  hold  by  the  existence  of  only  one  accredited 
 Latin  version  before  the  time  of  Jerome,  the  cor- 
 ruption of  which,  from  various  causes,  is  sufficient 
 to  account  for  all  the  discrepancies  to  be  found  in 
 the  extant  remains  ;  or  to  maintain  with  certaint} 
 that  there  were  several  independent  versions,  th( 
 work  of  persons  in  different  parts  of  the  Latin, 
 church.  Tiiere  is,  however,  a  third  supposition 
 which  may  be  advanced  :  There  may  at  an  early 
 period,  and  probably  in  Africa,  have  been  made  a 
 translation  of  the  Bible  from  the  Greek  into  Latin, 
 and  this  may  have  formed  the  groundvi^ork  of  other 
 translations,  intended  to  be  amended  versions  of 
 the  original.  In  this  case  a  certain  fundamental 
 similarity  would  mark  all  these  translations  along 
 with  considerable  variety ;  but  this  variety  would 
 be  traceable  not  to  undesigned  corruption,  but  to 
 purposed  attempts,  more  or  less  skilfully  directed, 
 to  produce  a  more  adequate  version.  This  suppo- 
 sition meets  all  the  facts  of  the  case,  and  so  far  has 
 high  probability  in  its  favour.  Proceeding  upon  it, 
 we  may  further  suppose  that  these  different  revised 
 or  amended  translations  might  have  their  origin  in 
 different  parts  of  the  western  world  ;  and  in  this 
 case  the  meaning  of  Augustine's  statement  in  the 
 passage  (Cont.  Fatisturn,  ii.  2)  where  he  speaks  of 
 '  codices  aliarum  regionum,'  becomes  manifest.  In 
 this  case,  also,  if  the  reading  Itala  be  retained  (and 
 most  critics  incline  to  retain  it)  in  the  famous  pas- 
 sage above  cited,  it  will  indicate  the  revision  pre- 
 pared in  Italy  and  used  by  the  Italian  churches  ;  of 
 which,  it  is  natural  to  suppose,  that  it  would  be 
 both  more  exact  and  more  polished  than  the  others  ; 
 and  with  which  Augustine  would  become  familial 
 during  his  residence  in  Rome  and  Milan. 
 
 Of  this  ancient  Latin  version  in  its  various 
 amended  forms,  all  of  which  it  has  become  cus- 
 tomary to  include  under  the  general  designation 
 Itala,  we  have  remains  partly  in  the  citations  of 
 the  Latin  fathers,  partlv  in  the  Grseco-Latin  codi- 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 ces,  and  partly  in  special  MSS.  A  copious  collec- 
 tion from  the  first  of  these  sources  (which  yet 
 admits  of  being  augmented)  has  been  supplied  by 
 Sabatier,  Bibliorum  SS.  Latino:  Vers.  antiqiuE  sen 
 Vetus  Itala,  etc.,  quaciinqiie  rcpcriri  po/ueruiit, 
 Remis  1743,  3  vols,  fol.,  ed.  2,  1749.  For  the 
 Apocalypse  we  depend  entirely  on  this  source, 
 namely  the  quotations  made  by  Primasius.  The 
 Grteco- Latin  codices  are  the  Caiitabridgian  or 
 Codex  BezcE,  the  Laiidian,  the  Claromontane,  and 
 the  Boertierian  [Manuscripts].  Of  the  known 
 special  codices  containing  portions  of  the  N.  T., 
 the  following  have  been  printed  or  collated  : — 
 
 I.  Cod.  Vercelknsis,  written  apparently  by  Euse- 
 bius  the  martyr,  in  the  4th  century;  it  embraces 
 the  four  gospels,  though  with  frequent  laatitcc. 
 It  is  mentioned  by  Montfaucon  in  his  Diariinn 
 Italiaan,  p.  445  ;  and  it  has  been  edited  by  Blan- 
 chinus  (Bianchini)  in  Evangcliarium  quadrnplex 
 latince  vers,  antiq.  sai  Vet.  Icnlica:,  etc.,  Rom. 
 1749,  4  vols,  fol.;  previously  and  still  more  care- 
 fully by  J.  A.  Irici,  SS.  Evangeliormu  Cod.  S. 
 Eiisebii  maim  exarafus,  ex  auiographo  ad  iingitcm 
 exhibitits.,  etc..  Medio!.  1748,  2  parts,  4to.  In 
 this  codex  the  gospels  are  arranged  in  the  order 
 Matthew,  John,  Luke  [Lucanus],  Mark.  As  a 
 specimen  of  the  style  of  this  codex,  and  the  imper- 
 fect state  in  which  some  parts  of  it  are,  we  give 
 the  following  passage  (John  iv.  4S-52)  from  the 
 edition  of  Irici : — ■ 
 
 AIT  ERGO  AD  ILLV 
 IHS  NISI  SIG 
 NA  ET  PRODIG 
 --VIDERITIS 
 
 NON 
 
 TIS  DIGIT  ILLI 
 REG  -  -  -  S  DME 
 L E 
 
 AIT  -  -  IHS  -  ADE 
 FILIVS  TVVS 
 VIVIT  ET  ORE 
 DIDIT  HOMO 
 VERBO  QVOD 
 DIXIT  ILLI  IHS 
 
 ET  IBAT  JAM 
 
 IPSO  DESCEN 
 DENTE  SERVI 
 OCCVRER-- 
 ILLI  ET  NVNT-- 
 VERVNT  EI-- 
 CENTES  QVO 
 NIAM  FILIVS 
 TVVS  VIVIT 
 INTER  -  - GA 
 BAT  H 
 
 MELIVS  HABVIT 
 ET  DIXERVNT 
 HERI  HORA  SEP 
 TIMA  -  -  LIQVID 
 ILLVM  FEBRIS. 
 
 2.  Cod.  Veronensis,  a  MS.  of  the  4th  or  5th 
 century,  in  the  library  at  Verona,  containing  the 
 gospels,  but  with  many  lacuna: ;  printed  by  Bian- 
 chini. 
 
 3.  Cod.  Brixionns,  of  about  the  6th  century,  at 
 Brixen  in  the  Tyrol,  containing  the  gospels,  with 
 the  exception  of  some  parts  of  Mark ;  printed  by 
 Bianchini. 
 
 4.  Cod.  Corbeijensis,  a  veiy  ancient  MS.,  from 
 which  Martianay  edited  Matthew's  gospel,  the  Ep. 
 of  James,  etc..  Par.  1695.  The  gospel  appears 
 also  in  Bianchini's  work,  and  in  the  appendix  to 
 Calmet's  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse.  There 
 is  another  MS.  of  the  old  Latin  text  at  Corbey, 
 from  which  various  readings  have  been  collected 
 on  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  by  Bianchini,  and 
 on  the  four  gospels  (partially)  by  Sabatier. 
 
 5.  Cod.  Colbertiniis,  of  the  nth  centuiy,  in  the 
 Parisian  library;  edited  entire  by  Sabatier. 
 
 6.  Cod.  Palatinus,  of  the  5  th  century,  in  the 
 library  at  Vienna,  con  taming  about  the  whole  of 
 
 Luke  and  John  and  the  greater  part  of  Matthew 
 and  Mark;  edited  by  Tischendorf,  Leip.  1847, 
 4to. 
 
 7.  Cod.  Bobbiensis,  of  the  5th  century,  now  at 
 Turin,  formerly  in  the  monastery  of  Bobbio,  con- 
 taining portions  of  Matthew  and  Mark;  fragments 
 of  Acts  xxiii.,  xxvii.  28;  and  of  the  Epistle  of 
 James,  i.  1-5;  iii.  13-18;  iv.  I,  2;  v.  19,  20;  i 
 Pet.  i.  I-12;  edited  by  Fleck,  in  Anecdota  Sacra, 
 Lips.  1837,  and  more  fully  by  Tischendorf,  in  the 
 Wiener  Jahrbiicher  1847. 
 
 8.  Cod.  Clarornontamis,  of  the  4th  or  5th  cen- 
 tury, now  in  the  Vatican  library,  containing  the 
 four  gospels,  Matthew  in  an  ante-hieronymian  ver- 
 sion (wanting  i.  i-iii.  15;  xiv.  33-xviii.  12),  the 
 other  three  according  to  the  Vulgate ;  collated  by 
 Sabatier,  edited  by  Mai,  Scriptorr.  Vett.  N^ova 
 Collectio  a  Vatican,  codd.  edita,  iii.  p.  257,  ff 
 
 9.  Fragments  of  Mark  and  Luke,  contained  in 
 a  MS.  of  about  the  5th  century,  belonging  to  the 
 imperial  library  at  Vienna,  have  been  printed  by 
 Alter,  in  Paulus  Repertor.  fiir  Bibl.  und  Morgen- 
 Id ltd  Litter.,  iii.  1 1 5- 1 70,  and  in  Paulus  Memora- 
 bilien,  part  7,  58-96. 
 
 10.  A  MS.  of  the  7th  century,  now  at  Breslau, 
 containing  the  synoptic  gospels,  with  lacuna;  and 
 part  of  John's  gospel;  described  by  Dr.  D.  Schulz, 
 Be  Cod.  4  Evangg.  JBihlioth.  J\/tediqeriancE,  BresL 
 1814. 
 
 11.  A  fragment  of  Luke  (xvii.-xxi.)  from  a 
 palimpsest  of  the  6th  century,  in  Ceriani,  Momi- 
 menta  Sac.  et  Frof.  pra:serti7n  Bibl.  Atnbrosiana. 
 Mil.  1861,  vol.  i..  Ease.  i.  p.  1-8. 
 
 12.  Cardinal  Mai  has  given,  in  his  Spicilegium 
 Romanum,  torn.  ix.  p.  61-86,  various  readings  "from 
 a  veiy  ancient  codex  of  the  Speculum  Augustini, 
 and  he  has  since  edited  the  Speculum  entire  in  his 
 PP.  Nov.  Bibl.;  comp.  Tregelles,  p.  239. 
 
 13.  14,  15.  In  the  monasteiy  of  St.  Gall  are  three 
 codices,  the  first  of  the  4th  or  5th  century,  contain- 
 ing fragments  of  Matthew;  the  second  a  Gallic  MS. 
 of  the  7th  century,  containing  Mark  xvi.  14-20 ;  the 
 third,  an  Irish  MS.  of  the  7th  or  8th  centuiy,  con- 
 taining John  xi.  14-44. 
 
 16.  Cod.  Monacensis,  of  the  6th  century,  con- 
 taining the  four  gospels,  with  lacima: ;  transcribed 
 by  Tischendorf. 
 
 17.  A  fragment  containing  Matt.  xiii.  13-25,  on 
 purple  vellum,  of  the  5th  centuiy,  in  the  library  at 
 Dublin,  printed  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Royal 
 Irish  Academy,  iii.  374,  by  Dr.  Todd. 
 
 18.  Cod.  Guelferbytanus,  of  the  6th  century,  con- 
 taining some  fragments  of  Rom.  xi.  15,  published 
 by  Knittel  in  1762  [Knittel],  and  more  correctly 
 by  Tischendorf,  Anecdot.  Sac.  et  Prof.,  p.  153. 
 
 19.  Fragments  of  the  Pauline  epistles  discovered 
 by  Schmellerat  Munich,  and  transcribed  by  Tischen- 
 dorf, who  has  described  them  in  the  Deutsche  Zeit- 
 schriftfiir  Christl.  Wisscjischaft,  for  1857,  No.  8. 
 
 Besides  these,  there  are  several  MSS.  known  to 
 exist  chiefly  in  the  British  libraries.  Some  of  these 
 are  noticed  in  Bentley's  Critica  Sacra,  edited  by 
 Ellis,  1S62,  and  in  Westwood's  Palaographia  Sacr" 
 Pictoria.  See  also  Betham's  Ajitiquarian  Re- 
 searches,  Petrie  On  the  Ecclesiastical  Antiq,  of 
 Ireland,  O'Connor  Renim  Hibern.  Scriptores. 
 
 These  codices  palaographists  and  critics  profess 
 to  be  able  to  allot  to  different  recensions  or  re- 
 visions. Nos.  I,  2,  4,  5,  7,  8,  9,  II,  13,  and  17, 
 they  pronounce  to  be  African;  3,  6,  12,  16,  Italic; 
 and  14,  1 5,  Irish  ;  though  Tischendorf  expresses 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 788 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 doubt  as  to  the  African  character  of  No.  9,  and  the 
 Italic  of  No.  6. 
 
 Of  the  O.  T.,  only  a  few  fragments  have  been 
 discovered  in  special  codices.  These  have  been 
 printed  by  Sabatier  {Lib.  cit. ),  by  Vercellone  ( Varia: 
 Lcctiofus  Vul,^;.  Lat.  Bibliorum,  2  vols.,  Rom. 
 1860-62),  by  MUnter  {Miscell.  Hafn.  1821),  and  by 
 Ranke  (Fragmenla  Has.  Am.  Alich.  1856,  1858). 
 The  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate  preserve  the  old  Latin 
 version  of  those  books  of  the  Apocrypha  which 
 were  not  retranslated  by  Jerome,  and  the  Psalter. 
 Our  principal  source  of  information,  however,  is  in 
 the  citations  made  by  the  Latin  fathers  from  the 
 version  in  their  hands. 
 
 From  these  various  sources  we  possess  in  the 
 old  Latin  version  of  the  O.  T.,  the  Psalter,  Esther, 
 and  some  of  the  Apocryphal  books  entire,  the  rest 
 only  in  fragments  ;  whilst  of  the  N.  T.  we  possess 
 nearly  the  whole. 
 
 The  value  of  these  remains  in  regard  to  the 
 cnticism  of  the  sacred  text  is  very  considerable. 
 They  afford  important  aid  in  determining  the  con- 
 dition of  the  Greek  text  in  the  early  centuries. 
 This,  which  Bentley  was  the  first  to  perceive,  or 
 at  least  to  announce,  has  been  fully  recognised  by 
 Lachmann,  Tregelles,  and  Tischendorf,  though 
 they  have  not  all  followed  it  out  with  equal  discre- 
 tion (see  Tischendorf's  strictures,  Pt-olcgg.  in  ed. 
 Sept.  N.   T.,  p.  ciii.,  ff.  ;  ccxlii.) 
 
 The  general  character  of  the  Itala  is  close  literal 
 adherence  to  the  original,  so  as  often  to  trans- 
 gress the  genius  of  the  Latin  language  ;  its  phrase- 
 ology being  marked  by  solecisms  and  improprieties 
 which  may  be  due  to  its  having  been  originally 
 produced  either  in  a  region  remote  from  the 
 centre  of  classical  culture,  or  among  the  more  illi- 
 terate of  the  community.  Thus  Swrrjp  is  rendered 
 by  sahdaris,  8Lacp6pei.v  by  sitperpotiere  (e.g.,  '  quanto 
 ergo  superponit  homo  ab  ove,'  Matt.  xii.  12),  irpoeX- 
 iri^iiv  by  pr (US per  are.,  KoaixoKparopes  by  vnmdite- 
 nentes,  etc.  ;  and  we  have  such  constructions  as 
 stellam  quam  viderant  in  orientem  (Matt.  ii.  9)  ; 
 ut  ego  veniens  adorem  ei  (Matt.  ii.  8)  ;  qui  autem 
 audientes  (ii.  9) ;  pressuris  quibus  sustinetis  (2 
 Thess.  i.  4)  ;  habitavit  in  Capharnaum  maritimam 
 (Matt.  iv.  13)  ;  terra  Naphthalim  viam  maris  (iv. 
 15) ;  verbum  audit  et  continuo  cum  gaudio  accipit 
 eum  (xiii.  20)  ;  dominantur  eorum,  principantur 
 eorum  (xx.  25),  etc.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind, 
 however,  that  the  current  text  was  exposed  to  in- 
 numerable corruptions,  and  that  we  can  hardly, 
 from  the  specimens  that  have  come  down  to  us, 
 form  any  veiy  accurate  judgment  of  the  state  in 
 which  it  was  at  first.  One  can  hardly  suppose 
 that  by  any  Latin-speaking  people,  the  following 
 version,  which  is  that  presented  by  the  Colber- 
 tina  MS.,  of  Col.  ii.  18,  19,  could  have  been  ac- 
 cepted as  idiomatic,  or  even  intelligible  : — Nemo 
 vos  convincat  volens  in  humilitate  et  religione  an- 
 gelorum,  quae  vidit  ambulans,  sine  causa  inflatus 
 sensu  carnis  suse,  et  non  tenens  caput  Christum, 
 ex  quo  omne  corpus  connexum  et  conductione  sub- 
 ministratum  et  provectum  crescit  in  incrementum 
 Dei.  If  this  be  (to  borrow  the  remark  of  Eich- 
 hom,  from  whose  Einleitiing  ins  N.  T.,  iv.  354  ff., 
 we  have  taken  these  specimens)  '  verborum  tenax,' 
 where  is  the  '  perspicuitas  sententios '  of  which 
 Augustine  speaks  ? 
 
 II.   HiERONYMIAN   OR  VULGATE  VERSION.  —  I. 
 
 Labours  of  jferotne. — To  such  an  extent  had  igno- 
 rance, carelessness,  and  unskilful  emendation  cor- 
 
 rupted the  copies  of  the  Itala  in  use,  that  it  became 
 generally  and  strongly  felt  that  something  must  be 
 done  to  rescue  the  Latin  churches  from  the  evils 
 to  which  this  exposed  them,  and  to  secure  to  them 
 a  settled  correct  version  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
 To  this  feeling,  effect  was  given  at  the  right  time 
 by  the  duty  being  laid  by  the  Romish  Bishop 
 Damasus  upon  Jerome,  the  man  of  all  others  then 
 living  most  competent  to  discharge  it  ;  the  man 
 most  skilled  in  the  original  tongues  of  Scripture, 
 one  whose  zeal  in  the  cause  of  Biblical  learning 
 gave  the  best  omen  of  success,  and  who  possessed 
 abundant  leisure  to  give  himself  wholly  to  the 
 work.  To  the  request  of  Damasus,  Jerome,  after 
 some  hesitation,  acceded.  He  first  addressed  him- 
 self, about  the  year  382,  to  the  revision  of  the 
 existing  version  of  the  gospels,  which  he  sought  to 
 bring  into  accordance  with  the  Greek  original — 
 Novum  Testamentum  grrecas  fidei  reddidi,  says  he 
 {Catal.  Scriptt.  EccL,  135)  ;  a  work  which  he  de- 
 scribes as  at  owcQ  pious  and  perilous,  for  he  foresaw 
 that  people  accustomed  from  their  infancy  to  a 
 particular  translation  would  regard  him  as  nothing 
 better  than  a  sacrilegious  falsifier,  should  he  alter, 
 add  to,  or  correct  the  old  version  (Pnrf.  in 
 Evangg.  ad  Daniasiwi).  Resolved,  therefore,  to 
 proceed  with  great  caution,  he  selected  Greek 
 codices  which  did  not  differ  much  from  the  Latin 
 usage,  and  he  so  restrained  his  pen  that  only  where 
 he  found  the  translation  misrepresenting  the  sense 
 did  he  venture  to  correct  it.  He  next  took  up  the 
 Psalter,  at  first  following  the  common  text  of  the 
 LXX.,  but  afterwards  that  in  Origen's  Hexapla, 
 with  his  critical  marks  {Prol.  ii. ,  in  Pss.  ;  Ep.  ad 
 S!ifiia??t  et  Fretelam  de  emend.  Ps. ;  Apol.  adv. 
 Puffin,  ii.  24).  Both  recensions  are  extant,  the 
 former  known  as  the  Psalteritan  Romaiium,  the 
 latter  as  the  Psalt.  GallicaJitun  ;  and  both  have 
 been  repeatedly  printed.  An  edition  of  the  two 
 was  issued  at  Paris  as  early  as  1509  by  the  fore- 
 runner of  the  Reformation  in  France,  Jacques  Le 
 Fevre  d'Estaples,  under  the  title  Psalterium  Quin- 
 C2iplex  Gallic.  Poman.  Hebr.  Vet  us  conciliatum  ;  of 
 which  a  second  edition  appeared  in  15 18,  and  a  third 
 at  Caen  in  1515,  in  one  vol.  folio.  Pursuing  this 
 course,  Jerome  set  himself  to  revise  all  the  books 
 of  the  O.  T.,  and  emend  them  according  to  the 
 Hexaplar  text,  but  it  is  not  ascertained  to  what 
 extent  this  design  was  executed.  That  he  fulfilled 
 it  in  reference  to  Job,  the  writings  of  Solomon,  and 
 Chronicles,  is  attested  by  himself  {Apol.  Cont. 
 Puffin,  ii.  24)  ;  but  it  would  appear  that  of  the 
 result  of  his  labours  in  this  department  he  was  by 
 some  means  defrauded  {Ep.  xciv.  ad  Augiistin.) 
 
 These  efforts  led  on  to  his  undertaking  what  was 
 for  his  time  a  gigantic  work,  the  translation  of  the 
 entire  O.  T.  from  the  Hebrew.  Commencing 
 with  the  books  of  Kings,  he  issued  in  succession, 
 and  in  the  following  order,  the  Prophets,  the  writ- 
 ings of  Solomon,  Job,  the  Psalms,  Ezra,  Nehe» 
 miah,  Chronicles,  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua,  Judges, 
 Ruth,  and  Esther.  He  also  translated  from  the 
 Chaldee  the  Apocryphal  books  of  Judith  and 
 Tobit,  the  latter  in  one  day  with  the  aid  of  a  Jew, 
 the  former  by  his  own  unaided  effort  after  he  had 
 acquired  a  competent  knowledge  of  the  language. 
 To  the  books  of  Esther,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  he  re- 
 tained the  Apocryphal  additions,  though  he  did 
 not  himself  approve  them.  In  these  labours  he 
 was  occupied  about  twenty  years,  from  A.  D.  385 
 to  405.    In  executing  this  translation  Jerome  some- 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 789 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 times  adhered  closely  to  the  LXX.  and  other  Greek 
 versions,  when  he  perceived  that  they  were  in  ac- 
 cordance with  the  Hebrew  ;  at  other  times  he 
 translated  directly  from  the  Hebrew,  using  the  aid 
 of  his  Jewish  masters  (Hody,  p.  350,  ff.)  Jerome 
 introduced  into  his  version  the  practice  of  distin- 
 guishing by  'cola'  and  '  commata,'  a  practice 
 previously  not  in  use  among  the  Latins  {Prof,  in 
 Esai.  ;  in  Paralip. ,  etc.) 
 
 In  one  of  his  writings  [Proem,  ad  Lib.  Hi.  Com- 
 ment, in  Galat.)  he  laments  the  effect  of  his  He- 
 brew studies  in  spoiling  his  Latin  style.  This 
 would  seem  to  indicate  a  greater  devotedness  to 
 these  studies,  and  a  greater  familiarity  with  their 
 object  than  can  probably  be  justly  admitted.  At 
 the  same  time  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Jerome 
 was  a  diligent  student  of  Hebrew,  and  used  the 
 best  means  within  his  reach  to  acquire  proficiency 
 in  that  language  (cf.  Ep.  ad  Kiisticum,  c.  6 ; 
 Epitaph.  Paiilce  ;  Prof,  in  Daniel.  ;  Ep.  ad  Da- 
 viasum  ;  Proem,  in  Job.,  etc.  ;  Hody,  p.  359,  ff) 
 His  linguistic  attainments  have  been  ridiculously 
 exalted  by  some,  but  we  may  safely  allow  him  the 
 praise  which  he  himself  claims  (Adv.  Rnffin.^,  of 
 being  '  Hebrseus,  Grtecus,  Latinus,  trilinguis,'  and 
 which  Augustine  freely  concedes  to  him,  designat- 
 ing him  'homo  doctissimus  et  omnium  trium  lin- 
 guarum  peritus'  {De  Civit.  Dei,  1.  xviii.,    c.  43). 
 
 2.  Reception  of  Jeromes  Version. — Tiiough  com- 
 menced and  carried  on  under  the  sanction  and 
 encouragement  of  some  of  the  most  eminent  autho- 
 rities in  the  church,  the  work  of  Jerome  was  far 
 from  being  cordially  accepted  by  the  Christian 
 community.  Jerome  himself  is  constantly  com- 
 plaining, in  his  prefaces  as  well  as  in  other  parts  of 
 his  writings,  of  the  obloquy  to  which  his  under- 
 taking was  exposed,  and  of  the  injurious  treatment 
 to  which  he  was  himself  subjected.  He  was  vio- 
 lently attacked  by  Ruffinus,  presbyter  of  Aquileia, 
 who,  amongst  other  charges,  asserts  that  he  was 
 misled  by  one  of  his  Hebrew  teachers,  whose  name, 
 Barhanina,  he  corrupts  into  Barabbas  ('  Plautino 
 sale,' says  Jerome  in  his  reply),  and  compares  Jerome 
 to  the  Jews,  who  preferred  Barabbas  to  Jesus.  To 
 this  attack  Jerome  replied  in  his  Apologia  contra 
 Ruffinnm.  At  first,  also,  Augustine  looked  un- 
 favourably on  the  new  version  ;  but  afterwards  he 
 acknowledged  its  merits,  and  himself  used  it  in  his 
 citations  of  Scripture  [Epp.  ad  Hieron.,  28,  71,  82, 
 89;  De  Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  48;  Ep.  ad  Atidacet?i ; 
 De  Doct.  Christ. ,  iv.  7  ;  Qucest.  in  Dent. ,  20,  24  ; 
 in  jfos.,  7,  15,  19,  24,  25  ;  in  Jud.,  16,  37,47,  56). 
 By  others  it  was  from  the  first  cordially  welcomed, 
 and  even  during  Jerome's  lifetime  it  was  in  some 
 churches  publicly  read.  After  his  death  the  preju- 
 dices which  had  impeded  its  reputation  gradually 
 subsided,  and  in  the  time  of  Gregoiy  the  Great, 
 about  the  end  of  the  6th  century,  it  was  in  use, 
 along  with  the  old  version,  in  the  church  of  Rome, 
 and  was  gradually  rising  above  the  latter  in  pubhc 
 esteem  (jMoral.  in  Job.,  Prsef)  Somewhat  later, 
 Isidore  of  Seville  attests  that  it  was  in  general  use 
 in  all  the  churches,  because  it  was  more  true  to  the 
 meaning  and  clearer  in  expression  than  the  other 
 {De  off.  eccles.,  i.  12) ;  and  from  the  middle  of  the 
 7th  century  it  may  be  regarded  as  the  authorised 
 version  of  the  Western  Church,  though  it  was  at  no 
 time  indicated  as  such  by  any  authoritative  declara- 
 tion. The  Psalter,  however,  m  the  older  version, 
 as  corrected  by  Jerome  {PsaUeritim  Gallicamim), 
 continued  to  be  used,  it  being  more  difficult  to 
 
 introduce  a  new  book  for  psalmody  than  one  for 
 reading.  Some  of  the  apocryphal  books,  as  already 
 mentioned,  were  also  retained  from  the  old  version, 
 and  the  N.  T.  remained  as  it  was  left  by  Jerome 
 after  simply  revising  the  old  translation.  From  its 
 general  reception  this  somewhat  composite  work 
 came  to  be  known  as  the  editio  Vid^i^ata,  i.  e.  (to 
 use  the  words  of  Jerome  in  reference  to  the  LXX.), 
 editio  toto  orbe  P^nlgala,  the  received  and  common 
 text  of  Scripture,  a  title  answering  to  the  kolvt] 
 ^Kdoais  of  the  Greek  Scriptures.  This,  which  wa, 
 at  first  used  of  the  LXX.,  or  the  translation  of  the 
 O.  T.  made  from  the  LXX.,  was  readily  transferred 
 thence  to  that  of  Jerome  when  it  became  current 
 in  the  churches. 
 
 3.  Histoiy  of  Jeromis  version  till  the  invention  op 
 printing. — The  circumstances  under  which  this 
 version  came  into  use  could  hardly  fail  to  expose 
 it  to  serious  corruption,  beyond  that  to  which  all 
 unprinted  documents  are  exposed  from  the  ignor- 
 ance or  presumption  of  copyists.  The  use  along 
 with  it  of  the  old  version  supplied  a  constant 
 temptation  to  alter  the  one  from  the  other,  and 
 from  this  cause  the  version  of  Jerome  became  in 
 course  of  time  largely  corrupted,  especially  in  the 
 parts  of  Scripture  used  for  liturgical  purposes. 
 Roger  Bacon  asserts  that  it  was  corrupted  also  by 
 the  interpolation  of  passages  taken  from  the  offices 
 of  the  church — Ab  officio  ecclesite  multa  accipiunt 
 et  ponunt  in  textu  (Hody,  p.  428).  Parallel 
 passages  further  offered  an  inducement  to  altera- 
 tion, and  in  this  way  many  changes  were  made  on 
 the  later  version.  It  is  even  alleged  that  it  was 
 altered  to  make  it  agree  better  with  Josephus 
 (Hody,  /.  c.)  Sometimes  also  it  was  deemed 
 proper  to  introduce  what  seemed  necessary  to  pre- 
 serve the  orthodoxy  of  the  translation  ;  thus,  after 
 the  words  '  videbo  Deum '  (Job  xix.  26)  some  one 
 inserted  '  salvatorem  meum,'  because  '  videtur 
 facere  ad  fidem,  et  quia  cantatur  in  ecclesia' 
 (Hugo,  Correctoriiim  ;  comp.  Doederlein,  Littera- 
 risches  Museum,  St.  i.  35). 
 
 From  these  various  causes  the  text  had  become 
 so  corrupt  that  even  in  the  time  of  Charlemagne  it 
 was  felt  to  be  necessary  to  make  an  attempt  to 
 revise  it,  so  as  to  secure  greater  accuracy.  This 
 task  was  committed  by  that  enlightened  and  mag- 
 nanimous prince  to  Alcuin,  who,  somewhere  about 
 the  year  802,  undertook  it,  and  by  comparing,  it  is 
 said,  the  existing  text  with  the  originals,  and  pro- 
 bably also  collating  different  MSS.,  sought  to  pro- 
 duce a  correct  edition  of  the  Latin  Bible  (Hody, 
 p.  409).  Alcuin  says  that  he  corrected  all  the 
 books  of  the  O.  and  N.  T.  '  examussim,'  but  under 
 his  idea  of  '  correcting  '  was  included  the  rectifying 
 of  the  version  itself  where  it  seemed  to  him  not  ade- 
 quately to  represent  the  original  ;  and  the  result  of 
 this  was  that  under  his  hands  the  Vulgate  was  still 
 further  perverted  from  its  original  condition.  We 
 may  doubt  also  how  far  his  collation  of  MSS. 
 was  conducted  on  critical  grounds,  nor  do  we 
 know  how  far  it  extended.  Certain  it  is  that  the 
 text  of  the  Vulgate  remained  still  so  unsettled,  that 
 in  the  lith  century  it  became  necessary  to  subject 
 it  to  another  revision.  This  was  undertaken  by 
 Lanfranc  with  the  aid  of  other  learned  men  ;  but 
 though  a  writer  of  the  time  says,  'multa  ad 
 unguem  emendavit'  (Rob.  de  Monte,  ap.  Hody,  p. 
 416),  his  work  was  not  much  known  out  of  Eng- 
 land, and  accordingly  in  the  next  century  anothei 
 revision  was  undertaken  by   Cardinal   Nicolaus. 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 790 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 Others  engaged  in  the  same  work,  and  after  the 
 I2th  century  there  began  to  be  formed  the  so-called 
 EpanorthdiE  or  Corredoria  Biblica.  Of  these  the 
 earliest  was  that  of  the  Abbot  Stephanus,  about 
 the  year  1150.  Then  followed  that  which  the 
 doctors  of  the  Sorbonne  issued  for  the  use  of  their 
 students,  in  which  reference  is  made  to  an  ancient 
 MS.  cited  as  Parisius,  and  sometimes  Corredio 
 Parisiensis,  from  which  corrected  readings  are 
 taken  (Simon,  Hist.  CriL,  c.  9,  p.  I15);  a  copy 
 of  this  Correctorium,  consisting  of  four  volumes 
 folio,  was  in  the  library  of  the  Abbey  of  Citeaux 
 till  the  time  of  the  Revolution.  The  attempt  of 
 the  Archbishop  of  Sens  to  introduce  this  Correc- 
 torium into  general  use  called  forth  an  interdict  of 
 it  from  the  Dominicans  (A.  D.  1256),  who  issued 
 Correctoria  of  their  own.  Of  these,  that  of  Hugo 
 a  Sto,  Caro  is  the  one  best  known  ;  a  copy  of  it 
 exists  in  the  library  at  Niimberg ;  and  in  the 
 Pauline  Library  at  Leipzig  there  is  another  Domi- 
 nican Correctorium,  specimens  from  which  are 
 given  by  Carpzov  {Crii.  Sac,  p.  686).  Other 
 religious  bodies,  the  Carthusians  and  the  Francis- 
 cans, had  also  their  special  Correctoria  (Hug,  p. 
 278)  ;  a  copy  of  one  of  the  latter  is  in  the  library 
 of  the  University  of  Freiburg,  of  which  Hug  (/.  c.) 
 gives  an  account.  These  Correctoria  were  prepared 
 by  noting  on  the  margin  of  some  MS.  readings  in 
 which  other  MSS.  differed  from  it,  and  appending 
 short  notes  in  which  the  readings  were  criticised. 
 In  determining  which  to  prefer,  the  authors  were 
 guided  rather  by  exegetical  and  dogmatical  rea- 
 sons than  by  those  of  a  critical  kind  ;  and  as  they 
 sometimes  introduced  the  translations  which  they 
 found  in  the  Latin  fathers,  and  also  made  new 
 translations  from  the  original,  their  labours  often 
 tended  rather  to  deform  than  to  correct  the  text  of 
 the  Vulgate. 
 
 The  corruptions  to  which  the  text  of  the  Vulgate 
 has  been  exposed  have  caused  it  to  be  regarded 
 with  considerable  suspicion  ;  and  some  have  even 
 gone  the  length  of  asserting  that  we  no  longer 
 possess  the  translation  of  Jerome  (see  Pfeiffer,  CrU. 
 Sac,  0pp.  p.  790 ;  and  Carpzov,  Crit.  Sac,  p. 
 680).  The  reasons  adduced  by  these  writers  are 
 not  without  weight ;  but  the  general  opinion  of 
 scholars  is,  that  they  have  failed  to  estabhsh  their 
 position  to  the  extent  they  have  desired. 
 
 4.  History  of  the  prmted  text. — Among  the 
 earliest  uses  to  which  the  discovery  of  printing  was 
 put,  was  the  multiplying  of  copies  of  the  Latin 
 Bible  ;  the  first  edition  which  has  the  place  and 
 year  of  publication  noted  is  that  of  Mentz,  1462  ; 
 for  earlier  editions,  see  Le  Long,  ii.  2,  58,  ff.,  ed. 
 Masch.  As  the  MSS.,  however,  from  which 
 these  were  executed  were  in  a  corrupt  state,  it  is 
 not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  earliest  printed 
 editions  were  sadly  incorrect.  The  diffusion  of 
 copies,  indeed,  only  made  the  corrupt  state  of  the 
 text  more  apparent  and  more  generally  known. 
 Hence  attempts  began  to  be  made  at  a  critical  re- 
 vision of  the  text,  and  editions  having  critical 
 apparatus  appended  were  issued.  Of  this  class 
 are  the  editions  of  Gumelli,  Paris  1504  ;  of  Cas- 
 tellan, Venet.  151 1;  of  the  Complutensian  Poly- 
 glott,  1517;  of  Colinseus,  Paris  1525;  of  Rob. 
 Stephen,  Paris  1527,  and  especially  the  fourth 
 edition,  1540,  and  following  editions  ;  of  Benedic- 
 tus  (Benoist),  Paris  1541  ;  and  of  Isid.  Clarius, 
 Venet.  1542  (Le  Long,  /.  c.)  As  the  emendations 
 in  these  editions,  however,  were  often  arbitrarily 
 
 made,  and  in  some  cases  were  really  new  trans- 
 lations, the  condition  of  the  text  was  still  such  as 
 to  give  occasion  for  serious  complaint. 
 
 During  the  fourth  session  of  the  Council  of 
 Trent,  a  commission  under  the  presidency  of  Arch- 
 bishop Filhol  was  appointed  to  report  on  the  state 
 of  the  text  of  the  Vulgate.  Their  report  was  given 
 in  on  the  17  th  of  March  1546,  and  was  to  the 
 effect  that  the  text  was  so  corrupt,  that  only  the 
 Pope  could  restore  it  to  its  original  integrity.  Hot 
 debates  ensued,  in  the  course  of  which  it  was  pro- 
 posed that  a  new  translation  should  be  made  from 
 the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  pronounced 
 to  be  alone  authentic.  Others  contended  that  all 
 that  was  required  was  an  amended  Vulgate  ;  but 
 much  discussion  arose  as  to  the  merits  of  Jerome's 
 translation,  and  doubts  were  cast  by  some  on  the 
 claims  of  the  existing  Vulgate  to  be  regarded  as 
 Jerome's  work  at  all.  The  result  was  a  resolution, 
 adopted  on  the  8th  of  April,  declaring  that  the 
 '  vetus  et  Vulgata  editio'  was  alone  to  be  held 
 authentic,  '  in  publicis  lectionibus,  disputationibus, 
 prasdicationibus  et  expositionibus  ; '  and  discharg- 
 ing all  persons  from  presuming  on  any  pretext  to 
 reject  it.  Some  doubt  has  arisen  as  to  whether 
 this  decree  was  intended  to  preclude  in  all  cases  an 
 appeal  to  the  original  Scriptures  as  the  final  autho- 
 rity. Such  seems  unquestionably  to  be  its  obvious 
 meaning ;  for  if  not  even  in  controversy  may  any 
 one  presume  to  set  aside  the  translation,  there  can 
 in  no  case  be  a  legitimate  appeal  to  the  original 
 from  the  translation.  'But  Hug  says  that  '  the 
 meaning  is  plainly  this  :  As  in  civil  affairs  an 
 authentic  instrument  is  valid  evidence,  so  in  public 
 religious  matters  the  Vulgate  is  a  document  from 
 which  valid  argument  may  be  drawn,  without  pre- 
 judice, however,  to  other  documents'  {Introd.,  p. 
 279).  If  this  was  all  the  Council  meant,  it  is  a 
 pity  they  said  so  much  more  than  this,  and  bound 
 their  church  by  an  edict  which  undoubtedly  has 
 o[)erated  to  the  discouragement  of  all  true  Biblical 
 exegesis  within  her  pale. 
 
 Whilst  thus  asserting  the  supremacy  of  the  Vul- 
 gate, the  Tridentine  divines  did  not  attempt  to 
 decide  which  of  the  differing  editions  was  the  one 
 to  be  preferred  ;  they  only  enacted  that  henceforth 
 the  Vulgate  should  be  imprinted  in  the  most 
 emended  form  possible  (Sep.  4  ;  Deer.  2).  They 
 appointed,  however,  a  commission  to  effect  a 
 correct  edition  of  the  Vulgate  ;  but  this  was  sud- 
 denly suspended  by  order  of  the  Pope  Paul  III. 
 An  attempt  was  also  made  by  Hentenius,  under 
 the  auspices  of  the  theologians  of  Louvain,  to  pro- 
 duce a  correct  text  by  printing  a  revised  edition  of 
 the  fourth  Stephanie  impression,  Louvain  1547. 
 The  proceedings  in  this  matter  of  the  Council  ex- 
 cited derision  at  Rome,  and  provoked  displeasure 
 among  scholarly  men  in  the  Romish  Church,  of 
 whom  such  men  as  Maffei  and  Famesi  openly  sig- 
 nified their  dissatisfaction.  The  Court  of  Rome, 
 however,  seized  the  occasion  for  exerting  its  autho- 
 rity, and  assumed  the  prerogative  of  issuing  the 
 authentic  Scriptures.  This  work,  begun  under  the 
 auspices  of  Pius  IV.  and  V.,  was  hastily  completed 
 by  Sixtus  V.  who  fitted  up  a  press  in  the  Vatican 
 for  the  purpose  of  printing  it,  and  himself  cor- 
 rected the  press.  It  appeared  under  the  title 
 Biblia  Sacra  Vulgata  editionis  tribus  tomis  distincta, 
 Romse  ex  Typogr.  Apostol.  Vat.,  1590,  fol.  ;  a 
 second  title  page  announces  that  this  edition  is  '  ad 
 Concilii   Tridentini   prsescriptum   emendata,  et  a 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 791 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 Sixto  v.,  P.  M.,  recognita  et  approbata.'  The 
 manifold  deficiencies  of  tliis  edition  were  apparent 
 even  before  it  was  issued,  and  an  attempt  was 
 made  to  remedy  or  conceal  them  by  erasing,  past- 
 ing corrections  over  the  errors,  or  correcting  by 
 the  pen  ;  nevertheless  the  work  was  sent  forth 
 with  the  highest  pretensions,  all  other  editions 
 were  interdicted,  and  the  alteration  of  the  minutest 
 particle  was  prohibited.  Pope  Gregory  XIV., 
 however,  saw  it  necessary  to  send  forth  a  more 
 worthy  edition  of  the  Vulgate  text,  and  the  work 
 which  he  began  was  completed  by  Clement  VIII. 
 This,  which  appeared  in  1592,  though  professing 
 to  be  '  Sixti  V.  jussu  recognita  et  Clementis  auc- 
 toritate  edita,'  differed  very  much  from  the  Sixtine 
 edition,  copies  of  which  the  popes  endeavoured  to 
 buy  up  and  destroy,  so  that  it  is  now  one  of  the 
 rarest  of  books.  In  1593  Clement  sent  forth 
 another  edition,  which  contained  many  alterations. 
 The  errors  of  the  Clementine  recension,  and  the 
 discrepancies  between  it  and  that  of  Sixtus,  though 
 both  issued  under  the  supreme  papal  sanction, 
 have  been  fully  exposed  by  James  in  his  Belliim 
 Papale,  sine  concordia  discors  Sixti  quinti  et  Cle- 
 mentis octavi  circa  Hierony7nianam  editioiie?n, 
 Lond.  1600 ;  and  Prosper  Marchand,  in  Schel- 
 horn's  Amcenitates  LitteraritE,  iv.  p.  433,  ff.  ;  see 
 also  Hody,  p.  505  ;  and  Amama,  Censura  vuli^. 
 vers,  quinqiie  libb.  ]\Ios.,  Franeq.  1 620.  In  1593 
 an  edition  in  4to  of  the  Clementine  text  was 
 issued  from  the  Vatican  press,  and  another  in 
 1598,  sm.  4to.  Both  the  folio  and  quarto  editions 
 contain  the  preface  of  Bellarmin,  in  which  he 
 describes  the  design  of  the  editors,  and  the  rules 
 by  which  they  were  guided.  The  quarto  editions 
 have  marginal  references,  explanations  of  the 
 Hebrew  names,  and  an  index  rerum  ;  both  are 
 very  incorrectly  printed,  and  the  text  they  present 
 differs  considerably  from  that  of  the  edition  of 
 1592.  A  reprint  of  this  edition  in  4to  and  8vo 
 was  issued  from  the  Plantine  press,  Antwerp 
 1599;  which,  however,  in  many  places  differs  from 
 its  original.  Almost  all  subsequent  editions  have 
 slavishly  followed  that  of  Clement,  copying  even 
 its  manifest  errors  (see  a  list  m  Le  Long — Masch 
 ii.  3,  p.  249,  ff.)     Recent  editions  are  those  of  L. 
 
 van  Ess,  3  vols.,  Tiib.  1822;  Kistemciter,  3  vols., 
 Miinster  1823  ;  an  edition  published  by  authority 
 of  Leo  XII.  at  Frankfort -on -the -Maine,  8vo, 
 1826  ;  one  in  sm.  folio,  published  at  Besan9on  and 
 Pans  1839;  and  that  of  Fleck,  Lips.  1840.  An 
 attempt  to  produce  a  correcter  text  has  recently 
 been  made  by  Vercellone  in  an  edition  published 
 by  him  at  Rome  in  1861.  Of  great  value  also  are 
 his  Varice  Lectioites  VidgatiE  Lat.  Bib.  editionis, 
 tom.  i.,  ii.,  part  i  (Pent — i  Regg.),  Rom.  1860- 
 62,  4to.  The  earlier  work  of  Bukentop  (Ltix  de 
 luce,  etc.,  Colon.  Agripp.  17 10,  4to),  in  which  the 
 doubtful  and  various  readings  of  the  Clementine 
 edition  are  illustrated  from  the  original  texts,  and 
 the  Sixtine  edition  is  discussed,  possesses  also 
 much  utility.  A  critical  edition  of  the  Vulgate 
 text  yet  remains  a  desideratum. 
 
 5.  Principal  codices  of  the  Vjdgate. —  I.  Cod. 
 Ainiantinus,  of  the  middle  of  the  6th  century,  the 
 oldest  and  best  extant ;  in  the  Laurentian  library 
 at  Florence  ;  it  contains  the  O.  T.,  except  Baruch, 
 and  the  N.  T. ;  the  latter  has  been  edited  from  it 
 by  Tischendorf,  Lips.  1850,  4to. 
 
 2.  Biblia  Got/lira  Tolctana  Eccksiie,  of  the  8th 
 century,  containing  all  the  books  except  Baruch 
 (Vercellone,  Var.  Lectt.,  i.  p.  84). 
 
 3.  Cod.  Cavensis,  of  the  Sth  century,  if  not 
 earlier;  contains  the  O.  and  N.  T.;  belongs  to  the 
 monastery  of  La  Cava,  near  Salerno ;  examined  by 
 Tischendorf. 
 
 4.  Cod.  Paulliniis,  of  the  9th  century,  wants 
 Baruch;  at  Rome  (Vercellone,  /.  c.) 
 
 5.  Cod.  Statianus  hod.  Vallicellamis,  of  the  9th 
 century ;  at  Rome  [Ibid. ) 
 
 6.  Cod.  Ottobonianns,  of  the  Sth  century,  con- 
 tains the  Octateuch ;  in  the  Vatican  {Ibid.) 
 
 7.  Biblia  Carolina,  of  the  9th  century;  wants 
 Baruch,  and  the  two  last  leaves  are  by  a  later 
 hand ;  in  the  cantonal  library  at  Zurich. 
 
 8.  Biblia  Bambnrgensia,  of  the  9th  century, 
 wants  the  Apocalypse  ;  it  has  Jerome's  Epistle  to 
 Paulinus  prefixed  in  large  uncials,  the  rest  of  the 
 MS.  is  minuscular  ;  in  this  MS.  i  John  v.  7  ap- 
 pears thus  (Kopp,  Bilder  u.  Schriften  der  Vor%.'it 
 i.  184) : 
 
 uemrtcf-  qnmrr-ei^runr  quitch  mo  mam  da^n-c^-ipi^ 
 
 316. 
 
 9-  Cod.  Alcuini,  of  the  9th  century,  containing 
 the  O.  and  N.  T.  (except  Baruch) ;  supposed  to  be 
 that  offered  to  Charlemagne  at  his  coronation ; 
 formerly  in  the  possession  of  the  recluses  at  Moutier 
 de  Grandval,  now  in  the  British  Museum  (Addit., 
 10,  546). 
 
 10.  A  MS.  on  very  clean  parchment,  probably 
 of  the  13th  century;  formerly  at  Altdorf,  now  at 
 Erlangen  (Niederer,  Nachrichten  ziir  Kirchen-Ge- 
 lehrien-und Biicher-Geschichte,  x.  125). 
 
 11.  A  MS.,  of  the  13th  century,  described  in 
 Eichhorn's  Repertorium,  xvii.  183,  ff. 
 
 12.  Cod.  Fuldensis,  ot  the  6th  century,  contains 
 the  N.  T.,  with  the  gospels  in  the  form  of  a 
 harmony ;  used  by  Lachmann  in  his  edition  of  the 
 Latin  subjoined  to  hi?  G-eek  N.  T.  ;  a  specimen 
 was  pubhshed  by  Ranke,  Marb.  1S60,  4to. 
 
 13.  Cod.  Forojuliensis ;  contains  the  four  gos- 
 pels ;  edited  along  with  fragments  of  Mark's  gos- 
 pel from  the  Prague  MS.  (previously  edited  by 
 Dobrowski,  Fragnienti/tn  Prageiise  Ev.  S.  Marci, 
 etc.,  Prag.  1778,  4to),  and  other  remains  of  the 
 same  gospel  from  MSS.  preserved  at  Venice,  by 
 Bianchini,  Append,  ad  Eva7igel.  qtiadrupl. 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 792 
 
 LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 14.  Cod.  Sangallensis ;  a  Grseco-Latin  MS.  of 
 the  9th  century ;  contains  the  four  gospels  in  Greek, 
 with  an  interlineary  translation ;  edited  in  fac-simile 
 by  Rettig,  Turici  1836,  4to.  There  is  another 
 Cod.  Sangallensis  containing  fragments  of  the 
 gospels,  of  the  6th  century,  described  by  Tischen- 
 dorf  in  the  Deutsche  Zeitschrift fur  Christl.  Wisseu- 
 schaft,  1857,  No.  7,  and  esteemed  by  him  of  great 
 value  for  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  (Tischendorf,  Pro- 
 legg.  249,  ff.) 
 
 Besides  these,  many  codices  exist  both  in  British 
 and  Continental  libraries.  The  Edinburgh  Uni- 
 versity Library  possesses  some  fine  examples,  of 
 seme  of  which  we  have,  by  the  courtesy  of  the 
 librarian,  been  permitted  to  give  a  specimen  in 
 facsimile. 
 
 inJSr«t£  «^  *l  C^BtSMlf  1  n  tiles  una  fuiit 
 auburn.  oYjf:  &  JTyti^csum^tfe 
 
 318. 
 
 ^tief  (^qwtellanotttttm  emu?  ui^jt* 
 
 The  value  of  the  Vulgate  for  the  criticism  attd 
 exegesis  of  the  sacred  texts  cannot  be  rated  very  high. 
 It  certainly  proves  that  the  existing  Masoretic  text 
 of  the  O.  T.  has  undergone  no  serious  alteration 
 since  the  time  of  Jerome ;  and  it  presents  varieties 
 of  reading  some  of  which  are  supported  by  extant 
 codices  of  the  Hebrew  text ;  but  beyond  this,  its 
 value  for  the  O.  T.  in  a  critical  point  of  view  hardly 
 extends  (Eichhorn,  Einleit.  ins  A.  T.,  i.,  sec.  127, 
 b).  The  dubious  state  of  the  text  must  always 
 diminish  its  value  for  critical  purposes. 
 
 As  to  the  exegetical  value  of  the  Vulgate  little 
 can  be  said.  Sometimes  it  supplies  a  rendering 
 of  a  Hebrew  word,  the  meaning  of  which  might 
 have  otherwise  remained  doubtful,  as,  e.  g.,  jlQ^DtJ' 
 
 cerastes  (Gen.  xlix.  17),  D"'£<5nD  cidt7-i  (Ezra  i.  9), 
 etc.;  and  in  some  cases  the  rendering  given  by 
 Jerome  is  more  felicitous  apparently  than  that 
 given  by  other  versions  (Davidson,  Hertnenetitics, 
 p.  626) ;  but  in  the  general  we  possess  other  and 
 better  helps  for  arriving  at  the  meaning  of  the 
 original  than  this  version  affords  (see  Campbell,  On 
 the  Gospels,  Prelim.  Dissertation,  x.,  p.  3). 
 
 It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Vulgate  has  very 
 materially  influenced  many  of  the  vernacular  ver- 
 sions of  Europe.  Not  a  few  of  the  earliest  of  these 
 were  made  immediately  from  it  [Anglo-Saxon 
 Versions  ;  English,  German,  French,  Italian 
 Versions]  ;  and  the  renderings  adopted  by  them 
 have  continued  through  subsequent  translations. 
 For  a  large  portion  of  our  theological  nomenclature, 
 
 and  much  of  our  religious  terminology,  we  are  iii 
 debted  to  the  Latin  version. 
 
 III.  Later  Latin  Versions.  —  Both  before 
 and  since  the  invention  of  printing,  attempts  have 
 been  made  to  present,  through  the  medium  oi 
 Latin,  a  correcter  version  of  the  original  texts  than 
 that  found  in  the  more  ancient  Latin  versions.  Oi 
 these  we  have  space  only  for  a  bare  catalogue. 
 (See  notices  of  the  authors,  under  their  names  in 
 this  work.) 
 
 1.  Adam  Eston,  a  monk  of  Norwich,  and  Car- 
 dinal (died  1397),  seems  to  have  been  the  first 
 who  thought  of  a  new  version ;  he  translated  the 
 O.  T.,  with  the  exception  of  the  Psalter,  from  the 
 Hebrew ;  his  work  is  lost  (Hody,  p.  440  j  Le 
 Long — Masch  ii.  3.  p.  432). 
 
 2.  Giannozzo  Manetti,  who  died  in  1459,  began 
 a  translation  of  the  Bible,  of  which  he  finished 
 only  the  Psalms  and  the  N.  T.  ;  this  is  lost 
 (Tiraboschi,  Storia  delta  Lett.  Ital.,  vi.  2,  p. 
 109,  ff.) 
 
 3.  Erasmus  translated  the  N.  T.,  and  published 
 the  translation  along  with  the  Greek  text,  Basil. 
 15 16,  fol. 
 
 4.  Th.  Beza  issued  his  translation  of  the  N.  T. 
 in  1556  ;  it  appeared  along  with  the  Vulgate  ver- 
 sion. Four  other  editions  followed  during  the 
 author's  lifetime  ;  and  these  present  the  Greek 
 text  as  well  as  the  Vulgate  and  Beza's  own  trans- 
 lation ;  many  other  editions  have  since  followed. 
 Beza  aimed  at  presenting  a  just  rendering  of  the 
 original,  without  departing  more  than  necessary 
 from  the  Vulgate.  His  renderings  are  sometimes 
 affected  by  his  theological  views. 
 
 5.  Sanctes  Pagninus,  a  learned  Dominican  from 
 Lucca,  produced  a  translation  of  the  whole  Bible, 
 Lugd.  1528,  4to ;  and  Colon.  1541,  fol.  Later 
 editions  of  this  work,  with  considerable  alterations, 
 appeared ;  one  edited  by  the  famous  Mich.  Ser- 
 vetus,  under  the  name  of  Villanovanus,  Lugd. 
 1542  ;  another  revised  and  edited  by  R.  Stephen, 
 Paris  1557,  2  vols.  fol.  (with  a  new  title,  1577). 
 This  latter  has  been  often  reprinted.  The  version 
 of  Arias  Montanus  printed  in  the  Antwerp,  Paris, 
 and  London  Polyglotts,  is  a  revision  of  this  ver- 
 sion. 
 
 6.  Cardinal  Cajetan  employed  two  Hebrew 
 scholars,  a  Jew  and  a  Christian,  to  supply  him 
 with  a  literal  version  of  the  O.  T.  This  they 
 accomplished,  and  the  work  appeared  in  parts,  the 
 whole  being  published  in  5  vols,  fol.,  Lugd.  1639. 
 The  N.  T.,  translated  on  the  same  principle  of 
 striot  literality,  appeared  in  2  vols,   fol.,   Venet. 
 
 1530,  1531- . 
 
 7.  Sebastian  Miinster  added  to  his  edition  of  the 
 Hebrew  Scriptures  a  Latin  translation,  which 
 a]ipeared  at  Basle  in  1534-35,  and  again  in  a 
 second  edition  in  1546,  2  vols.  fol.  This  transla- 
 tion is  faithful  without  being  slavishly  literal  ;  and 
 is  executed  in  clear  and  correct  Latin.  Portions  of 
 it  have  been  published  separately. 
 
 8.  The  Ziirich  version,  begun  by  Leo  Judae,  and 
 completed  by  Bibliander  and  others,  was  printed 
 in  1543,  fol.,  and  again  in  4to  and  8vo  in  1544. 
 This  version  is  much  esteemed  for  its  ease  and 
 fluency  ;  it  is  correct,  but  somewhat  paraphrastic. 
 It  has  been  frequently  reprinted  ;  there  is  one  edi- 
 tion by  R.  Stephen,  Paris  1845. 
 
 9.  Sebastian  Castellio  produced,  in  what  he  in- 
 tended to  be  purely  classical  Latin,  a  translation  ol 
 
LATIN  VERSIONS 
 
 793 
 
 LAURENCE 
 
 the  O.  and  N.  T.,  Basil.   1551,  again  1573,  and 
 at  Leipz.  1738. 
 
 10.  The  version  of  Junius  and  TremelHus  ap- 
 peared at  Frankfort  in  parts  between  1575  and 
 1579,  and  in  a  collected  form  in  1579,  2  vols.  fol. 
 Tremellius  took  the  principal  part  in  this  work  ; 
 his  son-in-law  Junius  rather  assisting  him  than 
 sharing  the  work  with  him.  Tremellius  translated 
 the  N.  T.  from  the  Syriac,  and  this,  along  with 
 Beza's  translation,  appeared  in  an  edition  of  Tre- 
 mellius's  Bible,  published  at  London  in  1585. 
 The  translation  of  Piscator  is  only  an  amended 
 edition  of  that  of  Tremellius. 
 
 11.  Thomas  Malvenda,  a  Spanish  Dominican, 
 engaged  in  a  '  nova  ex  Hebrreo  translatio,'  which 
 he  did  not  live  to  finish.  What  he  accomplished 
 was  published  along  with  his  commentaries,  5 
 vols.,  Lugd.  1650,  fol.  ;  but  the  extreme  bar- 
 barism of  his  style  has  caused  his  labours  to  pass 
 into  oblivion.      He  died  in  1628. 
 
 12.  Cocceius  has  given  a  new  translation  of 
 most  of  the  Biblical  books  in  his  commentaries. 
 Opera  Omnia,  tom.  i.-vi.,  Amsterdam  1701. 
 
 13.  Sebastian  Schmid  executed  a  translation  of 
 the  O.  and  N.  T.,  which  appeared  after  his  death 
 in  4to,  Argentor.  1696  ;  it  has  been  repeatedly  re- 
 printed, and  is  esteemed  for  its  scholarly  exactness, 
 though  in  some  cases  its  adherence  to  the  original 
 is  over  close. 
 
 14.  The  version  of  Jean  le  Clerc  (Clericus)  is 
 found  along  with  his  commentaries  ;  it  appeared 
 in  portions  from  1693  to  1731. 
 
 15.  Charles  Fr.  Houbigant  issued  a  translation 
 of  the  O.  T.  and  the  Apocrypha,  along  with  his 
 edition  of  the  Hebrew  text.  Par.  1753,  4  vols.  fol. 
 
 16.  A  new  translation  of  the  O.  T.  was  under- 
 taken by  J.  A.  Dathe  ;  it  appeared  between  1773 
 and  1789.  At  one  time  much  admired,  this  ver- 
 sion has  of  late  ceased  perhaps  to  receive  the  atten- 
 tion to  which  it  is  entitled. 
 
 17-19.  Versions  of  the  Gospels  by  Ch.  Wilh. 
 Thalemann  (Berl.  1781)  ;  of  the  Epistles,  by  Godf 
 Sigism.  Jaspis  (2  vols..  Lips.  1793- 1797)  >  ^'""^l  of 
 the  whole  N.  T.  by  H.  Godf.  Reichard  (Lips. 
 1799),  belong  to  the  school  of  Castellio. 
 
 20.  H.  A.  Schott  and  F.  Winzer  commenced  a 
 translation  of  the  Bible,  of  which  only  the  first  vol. 
 has  appeared,  containing  the  Pentateuch,  Alton, 
 et  Lips.  1816.  Schott  has  also  issued  a  translation 
 of  the  N.  T.,  appended  to  his  edition  of  the  Greek 
 text.  Lips.  1805.  This  has  passed  into  four  edi- 
 tions, of  which  the  last  (1839)  was  superintended 
 by  Baumgarten-Crusius. 
 
 Translations  of  the  N.  T.  have  also  been  issued 
 by  F.  A.  Ad.  Naebe  (Lips.  1831),  and  Ad. 
 Goeschen  (Lips.  1832).  (Carpzov,  Crit.  Sac,  p. 
 707,  ff.  ;  Fritzsche,  Art.  Vulgata,  in  Herzog's 
 Encyc;  Bible  of  Every  Latid,  p.  210,  etc.) 
 
 Literature.— S'\mor\,  Hist.  Crit.  des  Versions  dii 
 N.  T.  1690  ;  Hody,  De  Bibliorum  textibus  origiji- 
 alibits,  versionibus  Gracis  et  Latina  Vulgata,  Libri 
 iv.,  Oxon.  1705,  fol.  ;  Martianay,  Hierouymi  0pp. , 
 Par.  1693  ;  Blanchinus,  VindicicE  Canonis  SS. 
 Vulg.  Lat.  ed. ,  Rom.  1 740  ;  Riegler,  J^rit.  Gesch . 
 der  Vulgata,  Sulzb.  1820;  L.  van  Ess,  Prag- 
 matisch-Krit.  Gesch.  der  Vulgata,  Tub.  1824 ; 
 Wiseman,  Two  Letters  on  i  John  v.  7,  reprinted 
 in  his  Essays,  vol.  i.  The  Introductiojis  of  Eich- 
 horn,  Michaelis,  Hug,  De  Wette,  Havernick, 
 Bleek,  etc.  Davidson's  Biblical  Criticism  ;  Reuss, 
 Gesch.  der  Heil.  Sch.  A.  T.,  sec.  448-457  ;  Herzog, 
 
 Ettcycl.  Art.  Vulgata;  etc.  The  copious  and 
 valuable  Art.  Vulgate  in  Smith's  Dictionary  oj  the 
 Bible,  the  writer  had  an  opportunity  of  consulting 
 only  after  his  own  Article  was  prepared  for  the 
 press. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LATTICE.  This  word  represents  in  the  A.  V. 
 three  Hebrew  words. 
 
 1.  3Jt^'X•  This  occurs  Judg.  v.  28,  and  Prov. 
 vii.  6,  in  the  latter  of  which  places  it  is  rendered 
 casement.  In  both  places  it  is  in  parallelism  with 
 i  vD,  window.  In  all  probability  it  denotes  the 
 latticed  opening  which  in  Oriental  houses  serves 
 the  purpose  at  once  of  allowing  a  cooling  breeze  to 
 enter  the  house,  and  permitting  the  inmates  to  look 
 out  on  the  outer  world  without  being  themselves 
 seen  [House  ;  cut  273].  Gesenius  derives  it  from 
 SJCJ*,    to    be   cool ;    and   Lee    compares   the   Ar, 
 
 L,_  ^^jk.^*.'  ashnabon,  having  a  cool  mouth.  Fiirst 
 finds  in  it  rather  the  idea  of  interlacing  or  pegging 
 one  into  another  (ineinanderzapfen);  and  connects  it 
 
 with  W'2h^>  (I  Kings  vii.  28,  29).  The  LXX.  ren- 
 ders by  To^LKov,  which,  according  to  Jerome,  is  a 
 window  widening  inwards  from  a  narrow  aperture 
 like  the  barb  of  an  arrow ;  according  to  others,  a 
 slit  in  the  wall  through  which  the  archers  might 
 discharge  their  arrows,  such  as  we  still  see  in  old 
 castles  and  kee]")S. 
 
 2.  CSin  (Song  of  Sol.  ii.  9),  latticed  or  reticu- 
 lated openings ;  LXX.  Zib.  tSjv  diKTvwv.  The 
 Targ.  gives  NSIPI  as  the  equivalent  word  both 
 here  and  of  23CX  in  Prov.  vii.  6. 
 
 3.  n23ti'.     This  word  means  primarily  a   net 
 
 (Job  xviii.  8)  ;  thence  the  net-work  used  in  balus- 
 trades, or  on  the  capital  of  pillars  (i  Kings  vii.  17, 
 20,  42;  2  Kings  XXV.  17;  Jer.  lii.  22,  23.  etc.); 
 and  finally,  the  lattice-work  of  a  window  (2  Kings 
 i.  2).— W.  L.  A. 
 
 LAURENCE,  Richard,  D.C.L.,  was  bom  at 
 
 Bath  in  the  year  1760.  He  matriculated  in  the 
 University  of  Oxford,  July  14,  1778,  as  an  exhibi- 
 tioner of  Corpus  Christi  College,  took  the  degree 
 of  B.A.  April  10,  1782,  that  of  M.A.  July  9, 
 1785,  and  those  of  B.  and  D.  C.  L.  June  27,  1794. 
 Upon  the  appointment,  in  1796,  of  his  brother, 
 Dr.  French  Laurence,  to  the  regius-professorship 
 of  civil  law,  he  was  made  deputy  professor,  and 
 took  up  his  residence  in  Oxford.  He  was  the 
 preacher  of  the  Bampton  Lectures  in  1804,  and  in 
 consequence  of  the  reputation  he  thence  acquired, 
 he  was  presented  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
 bury to  the  rectory  of  Mersham,  Kent.  In  1814 
 he  was  appointed  to  the  chair  of  regius-professor 
 of  Hebrew,  and  to  the  canonry  of  Christchurch, 
 Oxford,  and  in  1822  was  elevated  to  the  archiepis- 
 copal  see  of  Cashel.  He  died  suddenly  in  Dublin, 
 December  28,  1838.  His  most  important  contri- 
 butions to  Biblical  literature  are  his  translations  of 
 certain  Apocryphal  books  of  the  O.  T.  from  the 
 Ethiopic,  and  the  critical  investigations  with  which 
 they  wei-e  accompanied.  These  are,  i.  Ascensio 
 IsaicB  Vatis,  optisctdum  pseudepigraphum,  multis 
 abhinc  seculis,  ut  videtur,  deperditU7n,  nunc  autem 
 apud  Ethiopas  compertum  et  cum  versione  La- 
 tina Anglicanaque  pzcblici  Juris  factum,  Oxon. 
 1819,  8vo.  2.  Primi  Ezra  Libri,  qui  apicd  vidga 
 tutn    appellatur   quartus,    versio    Ethiopica    nuiK 
 
LAYER 
 
 794 
 
 LAW 
 
 prima  in  medium  prolata  et  Latine,  Ayigliccqiie 
 7'eddiia,  Oxoii.  1820,  8vo.  The  translation  is  fol- 
 lowed by  general  remarks  upon  the  difterent  ver- 
 sions of  this  book,  its  apocryphal  character,  the 
 creed  of  its  author,  and  the  probable  period  of  its 
 composition,  which  he  places  between  the  years 
 B.C.  28  and  B.C.  25.  3.  The  Book  0/  Enoch  the 
 Prophet,  an  apocryphal  production,  supposed  to 
 have  been  lost  for  ages,  but  discovered  at  the  close  of 
 the  last  ccjitury  in  Abyssinia,  ?io7u  first  published 
 from  an  Ethiopic  MS.  in  the  Bodleian  Library, 
 Oxf.  1 82 1,  8vo  ;  3d.  ed.  1838.  In  addition  to 
 these.  Dr.  Laurence  is  the  author  of  the  following 
 critical  or  exegetical  works — 4.  Remarks  on  the 
 Systematical  Classification  of  MSS.  adopted  by 
 Griesbach  in  his  edition  of  the  Greek  Testament, 
 Oxf  1 8 14,  8vo.  5.  A  dissertation  071  the  Logos  of 
 St.  yolui,  Oxf  1808,  8vo.  6.  Critical  refections 
 upon  some  important  misrepresentations  contained 
 in  the  Unitarian  version  of  the  N.  T.,  Oxf  181 1, 
 8vo.  7.  The  book  of  fob  in  the  words  of  the 
 A.  v.,  arranged  and  printed  in  cojiformity  with 
 the  Massoretic  text,  Dublin  1828,  8vo.  8.  On  the 
 existence  of  the  Soul  after  death ;  a  dissertation 
 opposed  to  the  principles  of  Priestley,  Law,  and 
 their  respective  folloivers.  By  R.  C.  Lond.  1834, 
 8vo.  This  work  discusses  the  usage  of  the  terms 
 Koi/xdcr^ai  and  Sheol,  and  enters  into  the  critical 
 examination  of  various  Scriptural  narratives. — S.  N. 
 
 LAVER  ("I1'2  ;  Xovrrjp).     i.  A  vessel  made  by 
 
 divine  command  (Exod.  xxx.  iS),  of  the  brazen 
 mirrors  of  the  women  that  served  —  7narg.  'as- 
 sembled by  troops  ' — at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
 (xxxviii.  8),  and  set  up  between  the  altar  of  burnt- 
 offerings  and  the  curtain  of  the  sanctuary  (xl. 
 30).  Its  shape  is  unknov/n,  but  is  thought  to 
 have  been  circular.  It  contained  water  wherewith 
 the  priests  were  to  wash  their  hands  and  their  feet 
 whenever  they  entered  the  tabernacle,  or  came 
 near  to  the  altar  to  minister  (xl.  32).  It  had  a 
 *  foot '  (}3,  ^dffis),  which  seems,  from  the  distinct 
 
 mention  constantly  made  of  it — '  and  his  foot ' — 
 to  have  been  something  more  than  a  mere  stand  or 
 support.  Probably  it  formed  a  lower  basin  to 
 catch  the  water  which  tlowed,  through  taps  or 
 otherwise,  from  the  Javer.  The  priests  could  not 
 have  washed  in  the  laver  itself,  as  all  the  water 
 would  have  been  thereby  defiled,  and  so  would 
 have  had  to  be  renewed  for  each  ablution.  It  has 
 been  suggested  that  they  held  their  hands  and  feet 
 under  streams  that  flowed  from  the  laver,  and  that 
 the  '  foot '  caught  the  water  that  fell.  As  no  men- 
 tion is  made  of  a  vessel  whereat  to  wash  the  parts 
 of  the  victims  offered  in  sacrifice,  it  is  presumed 
 that  the  laver  served  this  purpose  also. 
 
 2.  In  Solomon's  Temple,  besides  a  very  large 
 vessel,  called  from  its  size  the  molten  sea  [Sea, 
 Molten],  and  used  for  the  ablutions  of  the  priests 
 (then  become  very  numerous),  there  were  ten 
 lavers  of  brass  for  washing  the  sacrifices.  These 
 were  doubtless  very  elaborate  and  ornamental.  A 
 minute  description  is  given  of  the  bases  on  which 
 they  stood,  and  their  several  parts  and  ornaments 
 (i  Kings  vii.  27-39)  ;  but  it  is  so  difficult  to  under- 
 stand, that  hardlv  two  writers  on  Bible  antiquities 
 agree  about  its  interpretation.  Each  base  would 
 seem  to  have  been  a  hollow  chest,  four  cubits  in 
 length,  four  in  width,  and  three  in  height  (LXX., 
 sue  cubits  high).     The  four  sides  cast  of  brass  had 
 
 'borders'  (panels  it  is  supposed)  in  ledges  or 
 mouldings,  on  which  were  bas-reliefs  of  lions, 
 oxen,  and  cherubim,  and,  beneath  these,  garlands 
 or   festoons — '  certain   additions    of  light    work' 
 
 (niv,  corolltz  pensiles).  The  base  stood  upon  the 
 brazen  axles  of  four  cast  wheels  (each  one  and 
 a  half  cubit  in  diameter),  after  the  manner  of  ordi- 
 nary chariots — not  immediately  on  the  axles  them- 
 selves, but  on  four  feet  which  were  fastened  to  the 
 axles — so  that  the  sides  adorned  with  bas-reliefs 
 were  raised  above  the  circumference  of  the  wheels, 
 and  the  wheels  stood  under  the  panels  (Keil). 
 Upon  the  ledges  '  was  a  base  above.'  This  seems 
 to  have  been  a  hollow  basin,  standing  half  a  cubit 
 in  height,  to  receive  the  water  that  fell  from  the 
 laver.  It,  too,  was  ornamented  with  carved 
 figures  —  cherubim,  lions,  and  palm-trees,  and 
 'addition  round  about.'  Above  this  basin  stood 
 the  laver  on  cast  shoulder-pieces,  rising  from  the 
 four  corners  of  the  base.  Each  laver  contained 
 forty  baths,  and  was  four  cubits  in  diameter.  The 
 shape  is  not  given,  it  was  probably  circular.  The 
 wheels  under  the  bases  were  doubtless  intended  to 
 facilitate  removal  from  one  spot  to  another ;  but 
 the  appointed  place  of  the  lavers  was  five  on  the 
 right  hand  and  five  on  the  left  of  the  court  of  the 
 priests  (2  Chron.  iv.  6).  King  Ahaz  cut  off  the 
 borders  of  the  bases,  and  removed  the  lavers  from 
 off  them  (2  Kings  xvi.  17),  and  gave  them  to  the 
 king  of  Assyria ;  and  the  bases  themselves  were 
 ultimately  broken  in  pieces  by  the  Chaldoeans,  and 
 the  brass  of  them  carried  to  Babylon  (2  Kings 
 XXV.  13). -J.  G.  C. 
 
 LAW  (rrnn  ;  Gr.  vbfxoi]  means  a  rule  of  con- 
 duct enforced  by  an  authority  superior  to  that  of 
 the  moral  beings  to  whom  it  is  given.  The  word 
 law  is  sometmies  also  employed  in  order  to  express 
 not  only  the  moral  connection  between  free  agents 
 inferior  and  superior,  but  also  in  order  to  express 
 the  nexus  causalis,  the  connection  between  cause 
 and  effect  in  inanimate  nature.  The  expression, 
 however,  laiv  of  jiature,  is  improper  and  figurative. 
 The  term  laiv  implies,  in  its  strict  sense,  spontaneity, 
 or  the  power  of  deciding  between  right  and  wrong, 
 and  of  choosing  between  good  and  evil,  as  well  on 
 the  part  of  the  lawgiver  as  on  the  part  of  those 
 who  have  to  regulate  their  conduct  according  to 
 his  dictates.     It  frequently  signifies  not  merely  an 
 
 individual  rule  of  conduct,  as  nPiyil  miD,  Ihe  law 
 
 of  burnt  offeriiig ;  mPVil  Dlin  (Lev.  xii.  2),  the 
 law  concerning  the  conduct  of  women  after  child- 
 birth ;  yn^'DH  miD,  the  law  concerning  the  con- 
 duct of  persons  afflicted  with  leprosy  (Lev.  xiv.  2) ; 
 n''3n  min,  the  description  of  a  building  to  be 
 erected  by  an  architect  : — but  it  signifies  also  a 
 whole  body  of  legislation  ;  as  nCJ'D  miD  (l  Kings 
 ii.  3  ;  2  Kings  xxiii.  25  ;  Ezra  iii.  2),  the  law  given 
 by  Moses,  which,  in  reference  to  its  divine  origin, 
 is  called  nin^  JTlin,  the  law  of  Jehoz'ah  (Ps.  xix. 
 8;  xxxvii.  31  ;  Is.  v.  24;  xxx.  9).  In  the  latter 
 sense  it  is  called,  by  way  of  eminence,  minn,  THE 
 law  (Deut.  i.  5  ;  iv.  8,  44  ;  xvii.  18,  19  ;  xxvii.  3, 
 8).  If  not  the  substance  of  legislation,  but  rather 
 the  external  written  code  in  which  it  is  contained 
 is  meant,  the  following  terms  are  employed  :  ^SD 
 nti'D  min  (2  Kings  xiv.  6 ;  Is.  viii.  l6 ;  xxiv.  5) : 
 
 nin""  min  "idd  or  DNni>K  mm  lao  (Josh.  xxiv. 
 26). 
 
LAW 
 
 795 
 
 LAWYER 
 
 In  a  wider  sense,  the  word  v6^os  is  employed  in 
 the  N.  T.  to  express  any  guidin";  or  directing 
 power,  originating  from  the  nature  of  anything  ex- 
 isting. The  apostolic  use  of  the  word  lias  been 
 well  expressed  by  Claudius  Guilliaud  in  his  work, 
 In  Omnes  Paitli  Episiolas  CoUatio,  p.  21.  Law  is 
 a  certain  power  restraining  from  some,  and  im- 
 pelling to  other  things  or  actions.  Whatever  has 
 such  a  power,  and  exercises  any  sway  over  man, 
 may  be  called  law,  in  a  metaphorical  sense.  Thus 
 the  apostle  (Rom.  vii.  23)  calls  the  right  impulses 
 and  the  sanctified  will  of  the  mind,  v6/xos  tov  poos, 
 the  laiv  of  the  ?ni>id ;  and  the  perverse  desire  to  sin 
 which  is  inherent  in  our  members,  v6ij,os  ev  rois 
 fjiiXecri,  the  law  in  the  members.  In  the  same 
 manner  he  calls  that  power  of  faith  which  certainly 
 governs  the  whole  man,  since  the  actions  of  every 
 man  are  swayed  by  his  convictions,  vbixos  iriaTeus, 
 the  Imv  of  faith.  So,  the  power  and  value  as- 
 cribed to  ceremonies,  or  rather  to  all  outward 
 acts,  he  designates,  vbjxos  tCov  ivroXicv,  the  law  of 
 precepts. 
 
 Similar  expressions  are,  vbfxos  t7}s  afiaprias,  the 
 law  of  sin  (Rom.  vii.  23) ;  j'6/ios  to\)  wveufxaTos,  the 
 law  of  the  Spirit  (viii.  2) ;  vi)ixo%  StKaioavvris,  the  laiv 
 of  righteousness  (ix.  31) ;  co/^os  rod  dvdpos,  the  autho- 
 rity of  the  husband  over  his  wife  (vii.  2) ;  v6/j.os 
 iXevdepias  (James  i.  25  ;  ii.  12),  the  holy  impulse 
 created  by  the  sense  of  spiritual  liberty. 
 
 If,  however,  the  word  vdfios  alone  is  used,  it  is 
 almost  invariably  equivalent  to  6  vd/xos  Mcovcrews : 
 and  ol  if  ry  j'6/iy  are  the  subjects  of  the  Mosaical 
 theocracy,  viz.,  the  Jews,  who  practise  the  dvd- 
 yvucTLs  Tov  vSiMov,  the  reading  of  the  law  (Acts  xiii. 
 15),  are  ZiyXwrai  rov  vbp.ov  (xxi.  20),  rrjpeiv  (xv.  5) 
 24.),  or  (pvXdaaeip,  ironlv  (Rom.  ii.  14),  Trpdaaeiv 
 (ii.  25),  rbv  vbfxov  (Acts  xxi.  24),  zealots  for  the 
 observance  and  performance  of  the  la7u,  although 
 they  debate  often  Trept  i^TjTijfiaTwv  ttov  vbp.ov  avrwv, 
 about  mere  legal  quibbles ;  so  that,  as  mere  hearers, 
 they  cannot  expect  the  blessings  promised  to  the 
 doers  of  the  law. 
 
 D'^LDDC'DI  Wpn  niVO  nny,  fiaprvpia,  diKai. 
 dmara,  ivrdkai,  Kplp-ara,  Kplaets,  irpoffTdypLaTa,  are 
 the  various  precepts  contained  in  the  law,  min, 
 vbfios. 
 
 The  Mosaic  law  is  especially  embodied  in  the 
 last  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch.  In  Exodus, 
 Leviticus,  and  Numbers,  there  is  perceptible  some 
 arrangement  of  the  various  precepts,  although  they 
 are  not  brought  into  a  system.  In  Deuteronomy 
 the  law  or  legislation  contained  in  the  three  pre- 
 ceding books  is  repeated  with  slight  modifications. 
 The  whole  legislation  has  for  its  manifest  object 
 to  found  a  theocratical  hierarchy,  the  manifest  aim 
 of  which  is  to  make  that  which  is  really  holy  (rb 
 lepbv)  prevail  [Moses,  Law  of]. 
 
 The  Jews  divide  the  whole  Mosaical  law  into 
 613  precepts,  of  which  248  are  afifirmative  and 
 365  negative.  The  number  of  the  affirmative  pre- 
 cepts corresponds  to  the  248  members  of  which, 
 accoi-ding  to  Rabbinical  anatomy,  the  whole  human 
 body  consists.  The  number  of  the  negative  pre- 
 cepts corresponds  to  the  365  days  of  the  solar  year ; 
 or,  according  to  the  Rabbinical  work  Brandspiegel 
 (which  has  been  published  in  Jewish -German  at 
 Cracow  and  in  other  places),  the  negative  precepts 
 agree  in  number  with  the  365  veins  which,  they 
 say,  are  found  in  the  human  body.  Hence  their 
 logic  concludes  that  if  on  each  day  each  member 
 of  the  human  body  keeps  one  affirmative  precept 
 
 and  abstains  from  one  thing  forbidden,  the  whole 
 law,  and  not  the  decalogue  alone,  is  kept.  The 
 whole  law  is  sometimes  called  by  Jewish  writers, 
 Theriog,  which  word  is  formed  from  the  Hebrew 
 letters  that  are  emjiloyed  to  express  the  number 
 613  ;  viz.,  400=n-f-200=1+  io=:''-t-3  =  3-  Hence 
 6l3  =  nri  theriog.  Women  are  subject  to  the 
 negative  precepts  or  prohibitions  only,  and  not  to 
 the  affirmative  precepts  or  injunctions.  This  ex- 
 ception arises  partly  from  their  nature,  and  partly 
 from  their  being  subject  to  the  authority  of  hus- 
 bands. According  to  some  Rabbinical  statements 
 women  are  subject  to  loo  precepts  only,  of  which 
 64  are  negative  and  36  affirmative.  The  number 
 613  corresponds  also  to  the  number  of  letters  in 
 the  decalogue.  Others  are  inclined  to  find  that 
 there  are  620  precepts  according  to  the  numerical 
 value  of  the  word  "iriD  =  crown  ;  viz. ,  400  =  T\->r  200 
 =  "l-t-20  =  I3;  and  others,  again,  observe  that  the 
 numerical  value  of  the  letters  iTlin,  law,  amounts 
 only  to  611. 
 
 The  Jews  assert  that,  besides  the  written  law, 
 2r\22^  min,  vb/xos  ^yypafpos,  which  may  be  trans- 
 lated into  other  languages,  and  which  is  contained 
 in    the    Pentateuch,    there  was   communicated   to 
 
 Moses  on  Mount  Sinai  an  oral  Imv,  7^3 tJ'  ITlin 
 no,  vbpLos  dypacpos,  which  was  subsequently  written 
 down,  together  with  many  Rabbinical  observations, 
 and  is  contained  in  the  twelve  folio  volumes  which 
 now  constitute  the  Talmud,  and  which  the  Jews 
 assert  cannot  be,  or  at  least  ought  not  to  be,  trans- 
 lated [Talmud]. 
 
 In  the  O.  T.  we  do  not  read  of  a  learned  pro- 
 fession of  the  law.  Lawyers  (vofiiKol)  are  men- 
 tioned only  after  the  decline  of  the  Mosaical  insti- 
 tutions had  considerably  advanced.  It  is,  indeed, 
 very  remarkable,  that  in  a  nation  so  entirely 
 governed  by  law,  there  were  no  lawyers  forming 
 a  distinct  profession,  and  that  the  vo/jlikol  of  a  later 
 age  were  not  so  much  remarkable  for  enforcing  the 
 spirit  of  the  law,  as  rather  for  ingeniously  evading 
 its  injunctions,  by  leading  the  attention  of  the 
 people  from  its  spirit  to  a  most  minute  literal  fulfil- 
 ment of  its  letter  [Lawyer]. — C.  H.  F.  B. 
 
 [Miinster  Seb.,  Prcecepta  Mosaica  613  cum  sue- 
 cincta  et  plernnqiie  mirabili  et  snpersticiosa  Rabi- 
 riorum  expositione,  Heb.  and  Lat.,  Basil  1533  ; 
 Hottinger,  Juris  Heb.  Leges  261  dttctu  R.  Levi 
 BarzelonitiS,  Tig.  1655;  Selden,  De  Jure  Naturah 
 et  Gentium  juxta  Heb.  disciplinam.  Argent.  1665  ; 
 Michaelis,  Commentaries  on  the  laws  of  Moses ; 
 Staudlini,  Commentationes  II.  de  Legum  Mosaic- 
 arum,  GottingEe  1796;  Purmann,  De  fontibus  et 
 aconomia  Legum  Mosaicarum,  Francofurti  1789; 
 T.  G.  Erdmann,  Leges  Mosis  prccstatttiores  esse 
 legibus  Lycurgi  et  Solonis,  Vitebergse  1788;  Hart- 
 mann,  Verbindung  des  Alien  und  Neuen  Testa- 
 tnentes;  Heeren,  Jdeen,  ii.  430,  seq.,  Beilage  iv. ; 
 De  Wette,  Sittenlehre,  ii.  21,  seq.  ;  Creizenach, 
 Schulcha7i  Aruch,  oder  Darstellung des Mos.  Gesetzes, 
 4  parts,  Frankf.  1833.  On  the  abolition  of  the 
 law,  see  several  dissertations  and  programmata  of 
 the  elder  Witsch,  published  in  Wittenberg,  and 
 De  Legis  Mosaicce  Abrogatione,  scripsit  C.  H.  F. 
 Bialloialotzky,  Gottingse  1824.] 
 
 LAWYER  {vop.LKb%).  This  word,  in  its  general 
 sense,  denotes  one  skilled  in  the  law,  as  in  Tit.  iii. 
 13.  When,  therefore,  one  is  called  a  lawyer,  this 
 is  understood  with  reference  to  the  laws  of  the 
 land  in  which  he  lived,  or  to  which  he  belonged. 
 
LAW  AND  PROPHETS 
 
 796 
 
 LAZARUS 
 
 Hence  among  the  Jews  a  lawyer  was  one  versed  in 
 the  laws  of  Moses,  which  he  taught  in  the  schools 
 and  synagogues  (Matt,  xxviii.  35 ;  Luke  x.  25). 
 The  same  person  who  is  called  '  a  lawyer '  in  these 
 texts,  is  in  the  pai-allel  passage  (Mark  xii.  28)  called 
 a  scribe  (ypafj.fxaT€ijs) ;  whence  it  has  been  inferred 
 that  the  functions  of  the  lawyers  and  the  scribes  were 
 identical.  The  individual  may  have  been  dot/i  a 
 lawyer  and  a  scribe ;  but  it  does  not  thence  follow 
 that  all  lawyers  were  scribes.  Some  suppose,  how- 
 ever, that  the  '  scribes '  were  the  public  expounders 
 of  the  law,  while  the  'lawyers'  were  the  private 
 expounders  and  teachers  of  it.  But  this  is  a  mere 
 conjecture  ;  and  nothing  more  is  really  known  than 
 that  the  '  lawyers '  were  expounders  of  the  law, 
 whether  publicly  or  privately,  or  both. — ^J.  K. 
 
 I,AW  AND  PROPHETS,  Reading  of. 
 [Haphthara.] 
 
 LAZARUS  (Adj^apos;  Za2ar?/j),  the  Greek  con- 
 tracted form  of  the  Hebrew  proper  name  "lTy?S, 
 
 Eleazar,  '  God  aids.'  It  is  applied  to  two  persons 
 in  the  N.  T. — Lazarus  of  Bethany,  and  Lazarus 
 the  beggar. 
 
 I.  Lazarus  of  Bethany. — The  story  of  Lazarus 
 is  a  fragment — one  of  those  wonderful  episodes  we 
 sometimes  meet  with  in  the  Bible.  It  is  told 
 by  only  one  evangelist.  It  is  brief,  simple,  and 
 graphic  ;  and  there  is  a  dramatic  power  in  it  not 
 surpassed  in  sacred  history.  The  story  is  intro- 
 duced abruptly,  and  the  characters  are  all  grouped 
 before  the  reader's  mind  without  a  word  of  pre- 
 face, except  a  single  note  to  identify  Mary.  It  is 
 evident  the  narrator  takes  it  for  granted  that 
 Lazarus  was  well  known  to  his  readers,  and  that 
 his  sisters,  Mary  and  Martha,  were  distinguished 
 persons.  The  disciples  of  our  Lord  must  all  have 
 been  intimately  acquainted  with  the  family  of 
 Bethany,  and,  like  their  Master,  deeply  attached 
 to  them  (John  xi.  16) ;  and  the  churches  planted 
 by  them  had,  no  doubt,  often  heard  from  their 
 lips  the  account  of  the  miracle.  The  notoriety  of 
 the  miracle,  and  the  public  attention  directed  by  it 
 to  Lazarus  and  his  sisters,  may  account  for  the  ab- 
 rupt way  in  which  the  story  is  introduced  by  John. 
 Possibly,  too,  in  his  day — after  the  other  disciples 
 had  passed  away  from  the  scene  of  their  labours — 
 doubts  had  begun  to  be  cast  on  the  reality  of  the 
 miracle,  or  some  legendary  details  to  be  added  ; 
 John  consequently  relates,  in  a  brief  but  singularly 
 striking  manner,  the  whole  facts  and  circumstances, 
 thus  leaving  the  authentic  narrative  on  the  perma- 
 nent inspired  record.  The  name  of  Lazarus  is 
 not  mentioned  except  in  connection  with  the 
 miracle.  We  have  no  direct  information  regard- 
 ing his  social  status,  the  sect  or  party  to  which  he 
 belonged,  the  events  of  his  previous  life,  or  the 
 way  in  which  he  had  become  acquainted  with 
 Jesus  ;  nor  are  we  told  what  effect  the  miracle 
 produced  upon  him,  or  how  the  life  so  wonder- 
 fully prolonged  was  employed.  It  appears  that 
 his  history,  with  the  exception  of  this  one  event, 
 was  unimportant  so  far  as  the  divine  purpose  in 
 Revelation  was  concerned.  The  facts  related  are 
 simply  these  : — He  resided  at  Bethany  with  his 
 sisters  Mary  and  Martha.  While  Jesus  was  in 
 Persea,  during  the  third  year  of  his  public  ministry 
 (see  Robinson's  Harmony  of  the  Gospels),  Lazarus 
 was  taken  with  a  dangerous  disease.  His  sisters 
 sent  a  special  messenger  to  inform  Jesus,  who  re- 
 
 plied, '  This  sickness  is  not  unto  death,  but  foi 
 the  glory  of  God,  that  the  Son  of  God  might  be 
 glorified  thereby.'  He  remained  in  Peraea  two 
 days  longer,  and  then  told  his  disciples  that  Lazarus 
 was  dead.  It  is  probable  that  he  died  just  about 
 the  time  the  messenger  reached  Jesus  ;  for  Bethany 
 of  Peraea  (A.  V.  Bethabara  ;  see  Lachmann,  Tisch- 
 endorf,  Alford,  etc.,  in  loc.)  was  about  two  days' 
 journey  from  Jerusalem  ;  the  messenger  took  two 
 days  to  go  ;  Jesus  remained  two  days  in  Pera;a 
 after  his  arrival  ;  he  spent  two  more  on  the  journey 
 to  Bethany,  and  when  he  reached  the  village 
 Lazarus  had  already  been  in  the  grave  '  four  days.' 
 In  consequence  of  the  rapid  progress  of  decomposi- 
 tion in  that  climate,  it  was,  and  still  is,  customary 
 to  bury  on  the  day  of  death.  Jesus,  after  an  inter  • 
 esting  and  affecting  interview  with  the  sisters  out- 
 side the  village,  is  taken  to  the  grave.  '  It  was  a 
 cave  ((TTT^XatOT'),  and  a  stone  lay  upon  it'  Jesus 
 said,  'Take  away  the  stone.'  Martha  remon- 
 strated :  '  Lord,  by  this  time  he  stinketh'  (^5rj 
 6fet — spokeu  evidently  not  as  a  tnere  stipposition, 
 but  as  a  fact — Alford,  Stier),  for  it  is  the  fourth 
 day.'  This  made  the  miracle  all  the  more  won- 
 derful. Jesus  said  to  her,  '  Did  I  not  tell  thee, 
 that  if  thou  wouldest  believe  thou  shouldest  see 
 the  glory  of  God?'  Then  they  removed  the 
 stone,  and  Jesus  said,  '  Father,  I  thank  thee  that 
 thou  hast  heard  me' — words  uttered  for  the  benefit 
 of  those  standing  around,  that  they  might  have 
 visible  demonstration  of  the  truth  of  his  Divine 
 mission.  Having  finished  his  short  prayer,  '  He 
 cried  with  a  loud  voice  ((puivfj  /xeydXr] — which  all 
 could  distinctly  hear),  Lazarus,  come  forth.''  '  And 
 he  that  was  dead  came  forth,  bound  hand  and  foot 
 with  grave-clothes  :  and  his  face  was  bound  about 
 with  a  napkin'  (cf.  Matt,  xxvii.  59  ;  Mark  xv.  46 ; 
 John  xix.  40 ;  xx.  6,  7 — see  article  Burial). 
 '  Jesus  saith  unto  them.  Loose  him,  and  let  him 
 go.'  And  so  the  story  of  Lazarus  ends  as  abruptly 
 as  it  began  (John  xi.  1-46). 
 
 A  little  later  in  the  gospel  narrative  Lazarus' 
 name  is  again  incidentally  mentioned,  but  still  in 
 connection  with  the  great  miracle.  After  the 
 miracle  Jesus  was  compelled  to  retire  to  the  city  of 
 Ephraim  (John  xi.  54),  and  thence  he  went  to 
 Galilee  and  Peraea  (cf.  Matt.  xix.  I  ;  Mark  x.  I  ; 
 Robinson,  Hartnouy  of  the  Gospels).  From  Persea 
 he  returned  (six  days  before  the  Passover,  i.e.,  on 
 Saturday,  John  xii.  i)  'to  Bethany,  where  Lazarus 
 was,  whom  he  had  raised  from  the  dead.'  A  great 
 supper  was  there  prepared  in  his  honour,  and 
 '  Lazarus  was  one  of  them  that  sat  at  the  table 
 with  him'  (ver.  2).  Lazarus  was  now  the  en- 
 grossing subject  of  interest  to  the  Jews,  and  the 
 cause  of  intense  excitement.  The  minds  of  the 
 populace  were  so  powerfully  influenced  by  the 
 miracle  wrought  upon  him  that  the  nders  resolved 
 to  put  him  to  death  as  well  as  Jesus  (ver.  Il), 
 The  result  of  their  schemes,  so  far  as  Lazarus  is 
 concerned,  are  not  recorded,  and  we  hear  no  more 
 of  him. 
 
 This  is  the  whole  amount  of  direct  information 
 concerning  Lazarus  contained  in  the  sacred  narra- 
 tive. There  are  a  few  incidental  expressions  and 
 allusions,  however,  which  when  thoughtfully  con- 
 sidered cannot  fail  to  invest  the  story  with  addi- 
 tional interest,  and  to  shed  upon  it  new  light, 
 Lazarus  was  '  of  Bethany  (d7r6  'Brf^avla's),  of  the 
 village  of  Mary  and  Martha  '  {iK  rm  Kihp.r\s,  k.t.X.) 
 Some  critics  say  that  the  6.ir6  signifies  present  rest- 
 
LAZARUS 
 
 797 
 
 LAZARUS 
 
 deuce,  and  ^k  nativity.  Lazarus  was  thus  a  i-esi- 
 dent  in  Bethany  at  the  time  of  the  miracle,  but  a 
 native  of  the  village  of  Mary,  which  is  supposed  to 
 have  been  in  Galilee  (Gresswell,  Dissertations,  ii. 
 481,  sci].;  Wahl,  Clavis  N.  T.)  This  distinction 
 has  been  rejected  by  the  best  modern  critics  (Al- 
 ford,  Kuinoel,  Liicke).  Bethany  is  called  '  the 
 village  of  Mary  and  Martha,'  who  thus  appear  to 
 have  been  better  known  than  Lazarus.  Probably 
 Martha  possessed  property  (Lampius),  and  was 
 the  proprietor  of  the  house  in  which  Jesus  had 
 lodged  ;  so  we  might  conclude  from  the  statement 
 of  Luke,  who  says  '  she  received  Jesus,  ei's  rhv  oIkov 
 avTTJi,  into  her  house '  (x.  38)  ;  and  Mary  had, 
 perhaps,  by  her  devoted  attachment  to  Jesus,  ac- 
 quired distinction  among  his  followers  [Mary]. 
 This  view  appears  to  be  confirmed  by  the  remark 
 — '  It  was  Mary  who  anointed  the  Lord  with 
 ointment  and  wiped  his  feet  with  her  hair,  whose 
 brother  Lazarus  was  sick '  (John  xi.  2).  Our  Lord 
 had  known  the  family  for  some  time.  It  is  appa- 
 rently the  first  introduction  which  Luke  describes 
 (x.  38-42) — '  It  came  to  pass  that  he  entered  into 
 a  certain  village,  and  a  certain  woman  named 
 Martha  (Trench  suggests  '  perhaps  an  early  widow 
 with  whom  her  sister  and  Lazarus,  a  younger 
 brother,  resided,'  Miracles,  p.  391,  note,  6th  ed  ) 
 received  him  into  her  house.'  Mary  sat  at  his  feet 
 and  heard  his  word  ;  but  Lazarus  is  not  then  men- 
 tioned at  all.  From  that  time  Jesus  appears  to 
 have  made  the  house  his  home  whenever  he  visited 
 Jerusalem  (Mark  xi.  11-19;  Matt.  xxi.  17).  The 
 sweet  repose  he  enjoyed  there  after  the  exciting 
 and  jarring  scenes  in  the  city,  the  delicate  atten- 
 tions and  singular  attachment  of  the  gentle  Mary, 
 and  the  warm  generous  hospitality  of  Martha,  as 
 contrasted  with  the  coldness  and  scorn  of  the 
 world,  and  the  unnatural  enmity  of  his  own  kin- 
 dred, touched  the  heart  of  the  Saviour,  and  con- 
 tributed no  doubt  to  awaken  those  feelings  so 
 simply  and  yet  so  beautifully  expressed  by  John, 
 '  Now  Jesus  loved  Martha,  and  her  sister,  and 
 Lazarus'  (xi.  5).  These  explain,  too,  that  pas- 
 sionate burst  of  grief  (ive^pL/mTiaaTo  Ty  irvev/nari 
 Kal  irdpa^ev  eavrbv  ....  ebaKpvaev,  Maldonatus 
 and  Stier,  in  loc. )  which  com]ielled  even  the  scoff- 
 ing Pharisees  to  exclaim,  '  Behold  how  he  loved 
 him!'  (John  xi.  33,  35).  The  family  of  Lazarus 
 seems  to  have  been  rich  and  influential  (see  Faber 
 Stapul. ,  Evang.  Joan.,  p.  604).  The  perfume 
 with  which  Mary  anointed  Jesus,  which  is  de- 
 scribed as  TTicTTtKijy  ttoXvtI/xov,  'genuine  and  ex- 
 ceeding costly'  —  value  for  about  /'lo  of  o;ir 
 money ;  the  private  rock-hewn  sepulchre  which 
 none  but  the  wealthy  could  afford  to  excavate  (Is. 
 xxii.  16)  ;  and  the  numbers  of  Jews  who  came 
 from  Jerusalem  to  condole  with  them,  were  all  in- 
 dications of  wealth  and  influence.  The  family  was 
 doubtless  among  the  elite  of  Bethany,  freely  asso- 
 ciating, too,  even  with  the  chief  men  of  Jerusalem. 
 Lazarus  was  present  at  the  feast  given  to  our 
 Lord  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  Leper.  Some 
 critics  affirm  that  the  feast  mentioned  in  John  xii. 
 2-8  is  not  the  same  as  that  of  which  we  read  in 
 Matt.  xxvi.  6-13,  and  Mark  xiv.  3-9  (Origen, 
 Chrysostom,  Lightfoot,  Wolf,  etc.),  but  the  cir- 
 cumstances related  are  too  numerous  and  minute 
 to  admit  of  such  a  view  (Alford,  Meyer,  Lange). 
 John  does  not  name  Simon,  nor  does  he  tell  us 
 where  the  feast  was  : — '  There  (in  Bethany)  they 
 made  him  a  supper'  (xiL  2).     The  supper  appears 
 
 to  have  been  given  on  account  of  the  miracle 
 wrought  on  Lazarus,  and  not,  as  Lange  thinks, 
 because  Jesus  had  healed  Simon.  It  is  not  known 
 who  Simon  was  ;  but  from  the  fact  that  '  Martha 
 served,'  and  from  the  expression  '  they  made  him 
 a  supper'  [eirol-qaav  odv  avrOi),  we  might  infer  that 
 Martha  was  at  home,  and  that  Simon  was  her  hus- 
 band, though  separated  from  her  and  from  society 
 on  account  of  his  disease.  John  does  not  say  who 
 made  the  supper ;  yet  the  context  seems  to  connect 
 the  plural  verb  with  the  three  parties  mentioned, 
 Martha,  Mary,  and  Lazarus  (see  in  Alford ;  Gress- 
 well, Dissert,  ii.  554,  scq.;  Ellicott,  Lecttn-es  on  Life 
 of  our  Lord,  p.  283).  Some  suppose  that  Simon  was 
 Lazanis'  father,  and  there  was  a  very  old  tradition 
 to  this  effect  (Nicephorus,  Hist.  Ec.  i.  27  ;  Theo- 
 phylact,  in  Matt.  xxxi.  ;   Ewald,  Gesch.   Christits). 
 
 No  miracle  hitherto  performed  by  Jesus  was  so 
 stupendous  in  its  character,  and  had  so  greatly 
 excited  the  Jewish  mind,  both  for  good  and  evil, 
 as  the  resurrection  of  Lazarus.  We  cannot  wonder 
 at  what  Bayle  {Diet.,  s.  v.  Spinoza)  relates  of  the 
 leader  of  modern  infidelity,  Spinoza :  '  On  m'a 
 assure,  qu'il  disait  a  ses  amis,  que  s'il  eiat  pu  se 
 persuader  la  resurrection  de  Lazare,  il  auroit  brise 
 en  pieces  tout  son  systeme,  il  auroit  embrasse  sans 
 repugnance  la  foi  ordinaire  des  Chretiens.'  In 
 fact,  if  this  miracle  can  be  proved,  it  establishes 
 on  an  indestructible  basis  the  divine  power  and 
 mission  of  our  Lord.  No  thoughtful  man  could 
 resist  such  evidence.  Therefore,  as  might  be  anti- 
 cipated, the  enemies  of  Christianity  have  exhausted 
 philosophy  and  fancy  alike  in  their  efforts  to  over- 
 throw its  authenticity.  The  coarse  assertions  of 
 Woolston  are  not  now  worth  notice  ;  they  were  dis- 
 posed of  long  since  by  Lardner  ( Vuidicatio7i,  in 
 Works,  vol.  X.,  ed.  1838).  The  rationalistic  views 
 of  Paulus  ( Kritisch.  Kommentar. )  and  Gabler 
 {yournal  fiir  Auserl.  Theol.  Lit.,  iii.  235)  have 
 been  successfully  refuted  by  Strauss  {Leben  Jesti; 
 see  also  Kuinoel,  in  John  xi. ) ;  and  the  mythologi- 
 cal dreams  of  the  latter  have  been  dissipated  by  a 
 host  of  later  German  writers,  and  the  reality  of 
 the  story  triumphantly  established  (see  especially 
 Neander,  Das  Leben  Jesti  Christi ;  Stier,  and 
 Olshausen,  ad  loc.)  The  views  of  Paulus  have 
 just  been  revived  in  the  lively  romance  of  M.  E. 
 Renan,  entitled  Vie  de  yesus.  He  confesses  that 
 there  is  an  appearance  of  circumstantiality  in  the 
 narrative  of  this  miracle  which  distinguishes  it  from 
 others.  He  says,  indeed,  that  at  this  distance  of 
 time,  and  with  one  version  of  it  only,  it  is  impos- 
 sible absolutely  to  decide  whether  all  is  fiction,  or 
 whether  there  is  a  basis  of  truth  ;  yet  he  proceeds, 
 '  II  est  done  vraisemblable  que  le  prodige  dont  il 
 s'agit  ne  fut  pas  un  de  ces  miracles  completement 
 legendaires  et  dont  personne  n'est  responsable. 
 En  d'autres  termes,  nous  pensons  qu'il  se  passa  a 
 Bethanie  qiielqiie  chose  qtn  fut  regarde  comme  tine 
 resurrection''  (p.  360).  Renan's  account  is,  that 
 the  friends  of  Jesus,  anxious  to  give  sceptical  Jews 
 some  convincing  proof  of  his  divine  mission,  took 
 advantage  of  the  sickness  of  Lazarus,  laid  him  in 
 the  family  tomb,  led  Jesus  to  the  sepulchre  imme- 
 diately on  his  arrival  at  Bethany  ;  and  then,  when 
 he  expressed  a  wish  to  see  the  corpse  of  his  friend, 
 the  stone  was  removed,  and  Lazarus  rose  !  AU 
 thought  it  was  a  miracle,  Jesus  himself  was  deceived. 
 The.  pious  fraud  of  the  devoted  family  was  success- 
 ful. Such  is  the  monstrous  opinion  advanced  with 
 all  seriousness  by  this  philosophical  French  critic. 
 
LAZARUS 
 
 798 
 
 LAZARUS 
 
 Nothing  could  be  more  unlikely;  in  more  direct 
 antagonism  to  the  whole  circumstances  of  the 
 narrative.  If  there  be  any  truth  in  the  words  of 
 John,  such  a  fraud  was  impossible.  There  is  a 
 precision  and  minuteness  of  detail,  conversational, 
 psychological,  and  topographical,  in  the  story, 
 which  separates  it  entirely  from  the  domain  of 
 legend.  The  evangelist  is  evidently  telling  what 
 he  saw  and  heard,  and  what  left  an  indelible  im- 
 press on  his  mind.  Every  sentence  of  the  narrative 
 demands,  and  will  amply  repay,  a  thoughtful  study ; 
 and  such  a  study  cannot  fail  to  carry  with  it  the 
 conviction  of  its  reality.  We  note  the  simple 
 message  of  the  sisters  to  Jesus  concerning  their  sick 
 brother,  '  He  whom  thou  lovest  is  sick.'  Christ's 
 deliberate  delay  that  he  might  work  out  the  glory  of 
 God  (ver.  4).  The  way  in  which  he  tells  his  disciples 
 of  Lazarus'  death  ;  their  misunderstanding  of  his 
 meaning  at  first,  and  their  passionate  e.xpression  of 
 sorrow  at  last,  '  Let  us  also  go,  tliat  we  may  die 
 with  him  '  (16).  The  great  concourse  of  people  to 
 condole  with  the  sisters,  as  was  the  custom  of  the 
 Jews  (Lightfoot,  ad  loc;  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  399). 
 The  meeting  of  Jesus  and  the  sisters ;  each  of  the 
 latter  giving  utterance  to  the  feeling  which  had  filled 
 l)Oth  their  minds,  and  formed  the  subject  of  their 
 united  lamentations  during  the  '  four  days,'  '  Lord, 
 if  thou  hadst  been  here,  my  brother  had  not  died ' 
 (vers.  21,  32).  Christ's  words  of  comfort  and 
 hope,  which  the  sisters  cannot  fully  comprehend 
 (vers.  23-27).  The  outward  manifestations  of  grief 
 on  the  part  of  tiie  crowd  that  had  gathered  round 
 them,  so  characteristic  of  Eastern  customs  (33). 
 The  approach  to  and  description  of  the  tomb  (38). 
 The  painful  remonstrance  of  Martha,  practical 
 Martha  (cf.  Luke  x.  40),  '  Lord,  by  this  time  he 
 stinketh,'  which  must  have  been  literally  true, 
 unless  we  suppose  a  continuous  miracle  in  opera- 
 tion from  the  moment  of  death ;  for  in  the  East 
 decomposition  sets  in  in  a  few  hours  (cf.  Au- 
 gustine, Hilary,  TertuUian,  and  others,  cited  by 
 Trench,  p.  413).  Then,  finally,  the  account  of 
 the  resurrection — so  simple,  and  yet  so  grand. 
 One  almost  thinks  he  sees  it.  If  ever  there  was 
 a  narrative  of  facts,  this  is  one.  The  publicity 
 of  the  miracle  made  deception  impossible.  In 
 the  East  a  death  is  known  to,  and  excites,  the 
 whole  community  in  such  a  village  as  Bethany. 
 We  may  well  suppose,  too,  that  the  entire  popula- 
 tion saw  the  miracle  performed.  A  large  number 
 from  the  neighbouring  city  were  there  also  (John 
 xi.  19) — learned,  fanatical,  sceptical  men— prepared 
 to  scrutinize  every  act  of  Jesus,  and  expose  any  at- 
 tempt at  deception.  It  ought  not  to  be  forgotten 
 that  the  word  yt-rOT,  oriouSaTot,  with  John,  designates 
 the  chiefs  of  the  ftivish  people,  the  memljers  of  the 
 Sanhedrim — the  dominant  and  learned  party  who 
 were  characterised  by  bitter  hostility  to  Jesus  (i.  19  ; 
 vii.  12,  13  ;  viii.  22 ;  ix.  22  [Jews]  ;  Alford,  i)i  loc. ; 
 Bleek,  Beitrdge ;  Trench,  Miracles,  pp.  400,  411). 
 The  momentous  effects  of  the  miracle,  too,  tend  to 
 show  its  reality.  The  moment  the  report  of  it  was 
 carried  to  Jerusalem,  a  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrim 
 was  summoned.  The  members  of  that  august 
 council  assembled  in  alarm.  '  What  do  we?'  was 
 the  question  they  addressed  to  each  other,  '  for  this 
 man  doeth  many  miracles.  If  we  let  him  alone, 
 all  men  will  believe  on  him  '  (John  xi.  46-48).  They 
 determinedthat  Jesus  should  die  (ver.  53).  He  knew 
 their  plans,  and  he  retired  for  a  time  from  the  holy 
 city  (ver.  54).    On  his  return  to  Bethany,  the  rebuke 
 
 he  gave  to  Judas  for  his  unseemly  attack  on  the  de- 
 voted Mary,  when  she  anointed  him  at  the  supper, 
 was  the  immediate  cause  of  the  betrayal  ( Joha  xii. 
 4-8.  with  Matt.  xxvi.  8-14;  Alford,  in  loc.)  The 
 fame  of  the  miracle  spread  through  the  surround- 
 ing country  ;  and  the  popular  ovation  at  the  tri- 
 umphal entry  into  Jerusalem  was  another  of  its 
 results,  which  fully  justified  the  excitement  and 
 alarm  created  among  the  Pharisees,  and  led  them 
 to  remark  to  each  other,  '  Perceive  ye  how  ye  pre- 
 vail nothing  ?  Behold,  the  world  is  gone  after  him' 
 (John  xii.  19).  The  miracle  causing  such  a  sensa- 
 tion must  have  been  a  reality.  Any  attempt  at  fraud 
 could  not  have  escaped  detection  and  exposure. 
 
 The  raising  of  Lazarus  is  related  by  John  alone. 
 None  of  the  other  Evangelists  mention  his  name, 
 or  even  allude  to  the  miracle.  This  has  been  a 
 puzzle  to  commentators,  and  a  ground  of  cavil  and 
 attack  to  infidels  and  sceptics.  But  why  should  it 
 be  so  ?  It  is  not  the  only  miracle  of  our  Lord 
 which  has  a  single  historian  among  the  Evangelists ; 
 nor  is  it  the  only  great  event  in  his  life  of  which 
 John  is  the  sole  witness  (cf.  John  ii.  1-12;  iii.  i- 
 21  ;  iv.  46-54;  V.  I  sec/.;  ix.  I  scq.)  It  is  a  fact 
 that  the  synoptic  Gospels  relate  chiefly  to  the  mira 
 cles  wrought  in  Galilee,  while  John  gives  those  of 
 which  the  scene  was  in  Judsea.  Why  this  was 
 we  cannot  tell.  It  is  vain  to  inquire.  Who  can 
 fathom  the  motives  and  objects  of  the  Divine  Spiri' 
 in  the  plan  and  structure  of  revelation  ?  Various 
 attempts  have  been  made  to  account  for  the  silence 
 of  the  three  Evangelists  in  this  case  (see  Trench, 
 Miracles,  p.  3S9  ;  also  Lightfoot,  Grotius,  Kuinoel, 
 Olshausen,  in  loc);  but  Neander  has  truly  said 
 that  •  to  seek  a  special  reason  for  the  omission  of 
 the  miracle  can  lead  to  nothing  but  arlaitrary  hypo- 
 thesis'  {Das  Leben  yesn,  234  ;  cf.  Alford,  Prolegom. 
 to  Gospels,  i.  sec.  5.  i).  It  would  have  been  inter- 
 esting to  know  something  of  the  after-life  of  Lazarus. 
 What  effect  did  the  great  miracle  produce  on  his 
 character?  Was  his  faith  shaken  by  the  crucifixion, 
 or  did  the  fulness  of  his  own  experience  keep  him 
 firm  in  the  belief  that  Jesus  was  '  the  resuri'ection 
 and  the  life?'  Did  he  meet  and  follow  Christ  after 
 his  resurrection  ?  Did  he  go  and  preach  to  the 
 churches  in  Palestine  or  elsewhere  the  life-giving 
 doctrines  of  the  Gospel — showing  himself  at  the 
 same  time  as  the  most  wonderful  monument  of 
 Jesus'  divine  power  and  divine  mission  ?  Or  did 
 he,  awed  and  solemnized  by  his  brief  view  of  the 
 world  of  spirits,  shrink  from  publicity,  and  meditate 
 in  silence  and  retirement  on  subjects  hid  from  mortal 
 eyes  ?  .  .  .  But  nothing  has  been  revealed  in  God's 
 word,  and  the  fables  of  Apocryphal  tradition  are 
 not  worth  recording  [Epist.  Pil.  ad  Tiberiam,  in 
 Giles'  Cod.  Apoc.  N.  T.,  p.  457 ;  Epiphanius, 
 Adv.  Hiereses,  i.  652). 
 
 Literature. — In  addition  to  the  works  named,  the 
 following  may  be  consulted.  The  commentaries 
 of  Origen,  Chrysostom,  Cyril  Alex.,  and  Augus- 
 tine in  foan.  Tract,  xlix ;  Lannoy,  Varia  de  Com- 
 ment. Lazari,  etc.,  Opp.  ii.  202,  seq.;  Heubner, 
 Miraciilorn?nab  Evang.  Nar?-at. Interpret. ;  Ebrard, 
 The  Gospel  History;  EUicott,  Lectures  on  the  Life 
 of  our  Lord. 
 
 2.  The  name  of  the  beggar  in  our  Lord's  beautiful 
 parable  recorded  in  Luke  xvi.  19-31.  The  intro- 
 duction of  a  proper  name  into  this  parable  makes  it 
 possible,  and  perhaps  probable,  that  the  stoi-y  had 
 a  foundation  in  fact,  as  is  stated  in  an  old  tradi- 
 tion (Theophylact,  ««/(7^.;  Chrysostom,  De  Lazarv). 
 
LEAD 
 
 799 
 
 LEAVEN 
 
 Some  have  thought  that  our  Lord  may  have  had 
 Lazarus  of  Bethanyhere  before  his  mind  (Oosterzee, 
 ad  loc. )  But  however  this  may  be,  it  must  be  ad- 
 mitted that  there  is  embodied  in  this  parable  some- 
 thing far  higher  than  an  isolated  historical  fact,  or 
 an  incidental  and  touching  allusion  to  a  friend — it 
 contains  a  sublime  truth,  and  it  presents  it  before 
 the  mind's  eye  with  wonderful  vividness.  The 
 name  Lazarus  is  appropriate,  in  whatever  way  it 
 came  to  be  selected.     It  signifies  either  '•  God  aids,'' 
 
 from  the  Hebrew  ~lTi??K,  and  thus  contemplates  the 
 
 beggar  from  a  divine  stand-point  (Lightfoot,  Meyer, 
 
 Alford).       Or  it  may  mean    '■the  helpless,''  -|fy  ^, 
 
 regarding  him  from  a  human  stand-point  (Olshau- 
 sen,  Lange).  For  expositions  of  the  parable,  see 
 Trench,  Parables ;  Stier,  Reden ;  Kuinoel,  ad  loc; 
 Chrysostom,  /.  c. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEAD  (nnsy ;  Sept.  M6Xi/35os),  a  well-known 
 
 metal,  the  first  Scriptural  notice  of  which  occurs  in 
 the  triumphal  song  in  which  Moses  celebrates  the 
 overthrow  of  Pharaoh,  whose  host  is  there  said  to 
 have  '■sunk  like  lead''  in  the  waters  of  the  Red  Sea 
 (Exod.  xv.  lo). 
 
 Before  the  use  of  quicksilver  was  known,  lead 
 was  used  for  the  purpose  of  purifying  silver,  and 
 separating  it  from  other  mineral  substances  (Plin. 
 Hist.  Nat.,  xxxii.  31).  To  this  Jeremiah  alludes 
 where  he  figuratively  describes  the  corrupt  condi- 
 tion of  the  people :  '  In  their  fire  the  lead  is  con- 
 sumed (in  the  crucible) ;  the  smelting  is  in  vain,  for 
 the  evil  is  not  separated'  (Jer.  vi.  29).  Ezekiel 
 (xxii.  18-22)  refers  to  the  same  fac',  and  for  the 
 same  purpose,  but  amplifies  it  with  greater  minute- 
 ness of  detail.     Compare  also  Mai.  iii.  2,  3. 
 
 Job  (xix.  23,  24)  expresses  a  wish  that  his  words 
 were  engraven  '  with  an  iron  pen  and  lead.'  These 
 words  are  commonly  supposed  to  refer  to  engraving 
 on  a  leaden  tablet ;  and  it  is  undeniable  that  such 
 tablets  were  anciently  used  as  a  writing  material 
 (Pausan.  ix.  31 ;  Plin.  Hist.  Nat.,  xiii.  11).  But 
 our  authorized  translators,  by  rendering  '  an  iron 
 pen  and  lead  in  the  rock  for  ever,'  seem  to  have 
 entertained  the  same  view  with  Rosenmiiller,  who 
 supposes  that  molten  lead  was  to  be  poured  into 
 letters  sculptured  on  stone  with  an  iron  chisel,  in 
 order  to  raise  the  inscription.  The  translator  of 
 Rosenmiiller  (in  Bib.  Cabinet,  xxvii.  64)  thinks  that 
 the  poetical  force  of  the  passage  has  been  over- 
 looked by  interpreters:  'Job  seems  not  to  have 
 drawn  his  image  from  anything  he  had  actually 
 seen  executed  :  he  only  wishes  to  express  in  the 
 strongest  possible  language  the  durability  due  to 
 his  words  ;  and  accordingly  he  says,  '  May  the 
 pen  be  iron,  and  the  ink  of  lead,  with  which  they 
 are  written  on  an  everlasting  rock,'  i.  e..  Let  them 
 not  be  written  with  ordinary  perishable  materials.' 
 This  explanation  seems  to  be  suggested  by  that  of 
 the  Septuagint,  which  has  'Ey  ypacpe'u^  cn^yjpQ  Kai 
 /xoXi/35y,  7)  iv  TT^Tpais  iyyXixpTivaL,  i.e.,  'that  they 
 were  sculptured  by  an  iron  pen  and  lead,  or  hewn 
 into  rocks.' 
 
 Although  the  Hebrew  weights  were  usually  of 
 stone,  and  are  indeed  called  'stones,'  a  leaden 
 weight  denominated  "JJS  anach,  which  is  the 
 Arabic  word  for  lead,  occurs  in  Amos  vii.  7,  8. 
 In  Acts  xxvii.  28,  a  plummet  for  taking  soundings 
 at  sea  is  mentioned,  and  this  was  of  course  of  lead. 
 
 The  ancient  uses  of  lead  in  the  East  seem  to  have 
 
 been  very  few,  nor  are  they  now  numerous.  One 
 may  travel  far  in  Western  Asia  without  discovering 
 any  trace  of  this  metal  in  any  of  the  numerous  use- 
 ful applications  which  it  is  made  to  serve  in  Euro- 
 pean countries. 
 
 We  are  not  aware  that  any  trace  of  lead  has  been 
 yet  found  within  the  limits  of  Palestine.  But 
 ancient  lead-mines,  in  some  of  which  the  ore  has 
 been  exhausted  by  working,  have  been  discovered 
 by  Mr.  Burton  in  the  mountains  between  the  Red 
 Sea  and  the  Nile ;  and  lead  is  also  said  to  exist  at 
 a  place  called  Sheff,  near  Mount  Sinai. — J.  K. 
 
 LEAF,  LEAVES.     The  word  so  translated  in 
 
 the  A.  V.  in  reference  to  foliage  is  Tw'^,  (pvXXov,  with 
 
 the  exception  of  Ezek.  xvii.  9,  where  ^S"1D  is  used, 
 
 meaning  fresh  leaves,  such  as  are  easily  torn  off, 
 derived  from  the  verb  ^~\0,  which  occurs  in  Gen. 
 
 viii.  II,  'In  her  mouth  an  olive  leaf  plucked  off' 
 ^"ID  riTHPy.     In  two  passages,  Prov.  xi.  28,  Neh. 
 
 viii.   15,  TV]}  is  translated  braiich.     In  Dan.  iv.  9, 
 
 II   (12,  14,  A.  v.),  the  word  iQj;,   from  HSy,  to 
 
 sprout  or  bloom,  is  rendered  leaf,  but  in  Ps.  civ. 
 12,  branch.     For  leaves  of  doors,  or  folding  doors, 
 
 the  Hebrew  term  is  Q^fli'T  (Deut.  iii.  5  ;  Josh.  ii. 
 9,  etc.),  or  nin^T  (i  Kings  vi.  32,  34 ;  Ezek.  xli. 
 24) ;  in  one  passage,  Jer.  xxxvi.  23,  this  word  is  also 
 used  for  the  leaves  (A.V. ),  or  rather  cohtnins  {ae\L- 
 6a J,  LXX.)  of  a  manuscript  roll.  In  the  Scriptures 
 the  green  leaf  is  an  emblem  of  vigour  and  prosperity, 
 Ps.  i.  3  ;  Jer.  xvii.  8  ;  and  the  faded  or  fallen  leaf  ot 
 weakness  and  ruin.  Lev.  xxvi.  36  ;  Job  xiii.  25  ;  Is. 
 i.  30  ;  xxxiv.  4.  The  medicinal  virtues  of  leaves  are 
 alluded  to  in  Ezek.  xlvii.  12;  Rev.  xxii.  2. — J.  E.  R. 
 
 LEAH,  one  of  the  two  daughters  of  Laban  who 
 became  the  wives  of  Jacob  [Jacob]. 
 
 LEATHER.    [Skins;  Tanner.] 
 
 LEAVEN.     Two  Hebrew  words  are  thus  trans- 
 lated in  the  A.  V.,  i.  -lj<c^»,  Sept.  ^{iix-q  (Exod.  xii. 
 
 15,  19;  Lev.  ii.  II  ;  Deut.  xvi.  4).  The  primary 
 meaning  of  this  word  the  lexicons  derive  from  "INK^, 
 an  unused  word  kindred  with  "iKt^,  to  boil,  to  swell 
 up  ;  comp.  Arab.    .Ll,  shdra,  to  boil  up  ;  Gr.  ^vm, 
 
 from  f^w  ;  Lat.  fermentum,  from  fervio  ;  Eng. 
 leaven,  from  Fr.  lever,  to  raise,  or  rather  the  A.  S. 
 hlefian.  2.  }^pn,  Sept.  fiyytiij  (Lev.  ii.  11  ;  vi.  10 
 [A.V.  17];  xxiii.  17;  Amos  iv.  5).  This  word, 
 from  }*pn,  to  be  sharp,  sour,  Tnea.ns  anything  soured, 
 
 and  hence  anything  fermented  or  leavened;  it  is 
 properly  an  adjective,  and  is  so  used  (Exod.  xii. 
 15  ;  comp.  ver.  19,  where  nVDHO  is  used  as 
 its  equivalent.  Lev.  vii.  13,  etc.)  Opposed  to 
 these  is  ilSfD,  Sept.  di^vfios  scil.  (Jpros,  unleav- 
 ened {withot{t  leaven,  Lev.  x.  12),  pi.  nii'D,  to. 
 8.^vixa. 
 
 That  S^or  and  Chamefs  are  synonymous  is  clear 
 from  Exod.  xii.  15,  where  they  are  both  used  of 
 the  same  object.  It  is  probable,  however,  that 
 the  latter  has  a  more  general  significancy  than  the 
 fonner,   so   as  to  be  applicable  to  both  kinds  of 
 
LEAVEN 
 
 800 
 
 LEBANON 
 
 fermentation,  vinous  and  acetous.      Tlie  cognate 
 word  J^Dh,  is  the  word  for  vinegar  (Num.  vi.  3 ; 
 
 Ruth  ii.  II  ;  Ps.  Ixix.  22  ;  Prov.  x.  26). 
 
 '  The  usual  leaven  in  the  East  is  dough  kept 
 till  it  becomes  sour,  and  which  is  kept  from  one 
 day  to  another  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  leaven 
 in  readhiess.  Thus,  if  there  should  be  no  leaven 
 in  all  the  country  for  any  length  of  time,  as  much 
 as  might  be  required  could  easily  be  produced  in 
 twenty-four  hours.  Sour  dough,  however,  is  not 
 exclusively  used  for  leaven  in  the  East,  the  lees  of 
 %viue  being  in  some  parts  employed  as  yeast '  {Pic- 
 torial Bible,  vol.  i.,  p.  161).  In  the  Talmud  men- 
 tion is  made  of  leaven  foi-med  of  the  ptJ'  'h\\> 
 D"'"iS1D,  bookmakas''  paste  (Pesach.  iii.  i). 
 
 The  process  of  fermentation  is  one  simply  of 
 corruption  It  was  probably  on  this  account  that 
 fermented  hread  was  forbidden  to  be  used  in  the 
 Passover,  and  that  all  leaven  was  to  be  purged 
 out  of  the  houses  of  the  Israelites  for  the  seven 
 days  of  that  festival  (Exod.  xii.  15,  ff);  and 
 that  in  all  offerings  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord, 
 unleavened  bread  alone  was  to  be  used  (Lev. 
 <i.  4.,  II;  vii.  12;  viii.  2;  Num.  vi.  15);  though 
 wnere  the  offering  was  not  to  be  consumed  uj^- 
 on  the  altar,  but  eaten  by  the  priests,  it  might 
 contain  bread  that  was  leavened  (Lev.  vii.  13 ; 
 xxiii.  17).  It  is  to  be  presumed,  also,  that  the 
 shewbread  was  unleavened;  both,  a  fortiori,  from 
 the  prohibition  of  leaven  in  the  bread  offered 
 on  the  altar,  and  because  in  the  directions  given 
 for  the  making  of  the  shewbread  it  is  not  specified 
 that  leaven  should  be  used  (Lev.  xxiv.  5  9)  ;  for,  in 
 all  such  cases,  what  is  not  enjoined  is  prohibited. 
 Jewish  tradition  also  asserts  that  the  shewbread 
 was  without  leaven  (Joseph.  Antiq.  iii.  6.  6 ;  Talm. 
 Minchoth  v.  2,  3).  As  all  corruption  implies  im- 
 purity, it  was  not  fitting  that  anything  in  which 
 corraption  was  going  on  should  be  presented  to 
 the  Lord  or  before  him ;  and  as  Israel  had  been 
 delivered  out  of  Egj^pt  that  they  might  be  a  pure 
 people  unto  the  Lord,  it  was  proper  that  in  cele- 
 brating that  event  they  should  put  away  from  their 
 houses  whatever  was  a  symbol  of  corruption.  For 
 the  same  reason,  honey  was  prohibited  to  be  offered 
 to  the  Lord,  because  of  its  tendency  to  ferment. 
 Traces  of  the  same  belief  and  feeling  may  be  found 
 among  heathen  nations  (comp.  Plutarch,  Qiurst. 
 Horn.,  109;  Aul.  Gell.,  x.  15,  19).  The  command 
 to  purge  all  leaven  out  of  their  houses  during  the 
 Passover  festival,  and  the  zeal  of  the  Jews  to  ob- 
 serve that  injunction  (comp.  Misluiah,  Pesach.  ii.  i ; 
 Schottgen,  Hor.  Hebr.  i.  598),  have  afforded  to  the 
 apostle  a  striking  figm-e  by  which  to  enforce  purity 
 of  communion  in  the  church  of  Christ  (i  Cor.  v. 
 7).  The  diffusive  power  of  leaven,  and  its  tendency 
 to  assimilate  to  itself  that  on  which  it  acts,  are  laid 
 hold  of  by  our  Saviour  to  illustrate  the  character 
 of  his  kingdom  as  a  progressive  power  in  the  mass 
 of  humanity  (Matt.  xiii.  33;  Luke  xiii.  21),  and  by 
 him  and  St.  Paul  as  illustrative  of  the  diffusive 
 influence  of  evil  (Matt.  xvi.  6,  12;  Mark  viii.  15; 
 Luke  xii.  i;  i  Cor.  v.  6;  Gal.  v.  9).  The  idea 
 seems  to  have  been  familiar  to  the  Jews ;  comp. 
 Otho,  Lex  Rabbin.  Phil.,  p.  227.  They  even  em- 
 ployed leaven  as  a  figure  of  the  inherent  corruption 
 of  man.  '  R.  Alexander,  when  he  had  finished  his 
 prayers,  said.  Lord  of  the  universe,  it  is  clearly  mani- 
 fest before  thee  that  it  is  our  will  to  do  thy  will : 
 what  hinders  that  we  do  not  tliy  will  ?     The  leaven 
 
 which  is  in  the  mass  {Gl.,  The  evil  desire  which  is 
 in  the  heart)'  {Babyl.  Berachoth,  17.  X;  ap.  Meu- 
 schen  N.  T.  ex  Tahmideill. )  We  find  the  same  allu- 
 sion in  the  Roman  poet  Persius  [Sat.  i.  24 ;  comp. 
 Casaubon's  note,  Cotftmeitt  p.  74). — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LEBANON,  the  loftiest  and  most  celebrated 
 mountain-range  in  Syria,  forming  the  northern 
 boundary  of  Palestine,  and  running  thence  along 
 the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean  to  the  great  pass 
 which  opens  into  the  plain  of  Hamath.  The  range 
 of  Anti-leba7ion,  usually  included  by  geographers 
 under  the  same  general  name,  lies  parallel  to  the 
 other,  commencing  on  the  south  at  the  fountains  of 
 the  Jordan,  and  terminating  in  the  plain  of  Hamath. 
 
 I.  The  Name. — In  the  O.  T.  these  mountain 
 
 ranges  are  always  called  ji33p,  Lebanon,  to  which  ii: 
 
 prose  the  art.  is  constantly  prefixed  )iJ3,pn ;  in  poetry 
 
 the  art.  is  sometimes  prefixed  and  sometimes  not, 
 as  in  Is.  xiv.  8,  and  Ps.  xxix.  5-  The  origin  of 
 the  name  has  been  variously  accounted  for.     It  is 
 
 derived   from   the    root   p7,    'to   be  white.'     "IH 
 
 IiJ3?n  is  thus  emphatically   '  The  White  Moun 
 
 tain '  of  Syria.  It  is  a  singtilar  fact  that  almost 
 uniformly  the  names  of  the  highest  mountains  in 
 all  countries  have  a  like  meaning — Mont  Blanc, 
 Himalayah  (in  Sanscrit  signifying  '  snowy '),  Ben 
 Nevis,  Snowdon,  perhaps  also  Alps  (from  alb 
 'white,'  like  the  Latin  albiis,  and  not,  as  com- 
 monly thought,  from  fli^,  'high').  Some  suppose 
 the  name  originated  in  tne  white  snow  by  which 
 the  ridge  is  covered  a  great  part  of  the  year  (Bo- 
 chart,  Opera,  i.  678  ;  Gesenius,  Thcsatn-ns,  p. 
 741  ;  Stanley,  S.  and  P.,  p.  395).  Others  derive 
 the  name  from  the  whitish  colour  of  the  limestone 
 rock  of  which  the  great  body  of  the  range  is  com- 
 posed (Winer,  Realwoerterbuch,  s.  v.  Libation ; 
 Schidzii  Leiiungen  des  Hochsten,  v.,  p.  471 ;  Robin- 
 son, B.R.,  ii.  493).  The  former  seems  the  more 
 natural  explanation,  and  is  confirmed  by  several  cir- 
 curiistances.  Jeremiah  mentions  the  '  snow  of  Le- 
 banon '  (xviii.  14)  ;  in  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  "l^lD 
 
 ^<J^^,  'snow  mountain,'  is  the  name  given  to  it, 
 
 and  this  is  equivalent  to  a  not  uncommon  modem 
 
 Arabic  appellation  ^^Jjjl    /L\:>-j  Jebel eth-T/ielJ 
 
 (Gesenius,  Thes.,  1.  c.  ;  Abulfeda,  Tab.  Syr.,  p. 
 18).  Others  derive  the  name  Lebanon  from  At- 
 ^avuiTos,  '  frankincense,'  the  gum  of  a  tree  called 
 Xl^avos  (Reland,  Pal.,  p.  312  ;  Herodot.  i.  183), 
 which  is  mentioned  among  the  gifts  presented  by 
 the   magi    to  the   infant    Saviour    (Matt.    ii.    II). 
 
 This,    however,    is   in    Hebrew    nji^A    Lebonah 
 
 (Exod.  XXX.  34 ;  Is.  Ix.  6).  The  Greek  name  of 
 Lebanon,  both  in  the  Septuagint  and  classic 
 authors,  is  uniformly  Ai^avos  (Strabo,  xvi.  p.  755  > 
 Ptol.  v.  15).  The  Septuagint  has  sometimes 'Avrt- 
 Xi'jSavos  instead  of  Ai'/Sacos,  but  for  what  reason  it 
 is  impossible  to  tell  (Deut  i.  7  ;  iii.  25  ;  Josh.  i. 
 4;  ix.  i).  The  Latin  name  is  Libanns  (Pliny,  v. 
 17),  which  is  the  reading  of  the  Vulgate.  It 
 would  appear  that  the  Greek  and  Roman  geogra- 
 ]5hers  regarded  the  name  as  derived  from  the  snow. 
 Tacitus  speaks  of  it  as  a  remarkable  phenomenon 
 that  snow  should  lie  where  there  is  such  intense 
 heat  —  '  Prtecipuum  montium  Libanum  erigit, 
 mirum  dictu,  tantos  inter  ardores  opacum  fidumque 
 
LEBANON 
 
 801 
 
 LEBANON 
 
 nivihus'  [H:sforia,  v.  6).  And  so  Jerome  writes, 
 '  Libanus  \evKacrix6s — id  est,  candor  interpretatur' 
 {Adversus  Jovianiim,  Opera,  ii.  2S6,  ed.  Migne)  ; 
 he  also  notes  the  identity  of  the  name  of  this 
 mountain  and  '  frankincense  '  —  bjxwvviuj^  apud 
 Graecos  et  Hebrreos  et  7nons  appellatur,  et  l/uts'' 
 {in   Osee,  0pp.  vi.    160).      Arab  geographers  call 
 
 the  range  Jc-bdl  Libiuin,  j^lAjJ  ^^i^S^-  (Abulfeda, 
 
 Tab.  Syr.,  p.  163;  Edrisi,  p.  336,  ed.  Jaubert). 
 This  name,  however,  is  now  seldom  heard  among 
 the  people  of  Syria,  and  when  used  it  is  confined 
 to  the  western  range.  Different  parts  of  this  range 
 have  distinct  names — the  northern  section  is  called 
 Jebel  Akkdr,  the  central  Suiiui/i,  and  the  southern 
 ^.  ed-Dntze.     Other  local  names  are  also  used. 
 
 The  eastern  range,  as  well  as  the  western, 
 is  frequently  included  under  the  general  name 
 Lebanon  in  the  Bible  (Josh.  i.  4  ;  Judg.  iii. 
 3) ;  but  in  Josh.  xiii.  5  it  is  correctly  distinguished 
 
 as    '  Lebanon    touiard    the    sun  -  rising  '     (pJ^'TI 
 
 CJ'DE'n  n"l?D  ;    Sept.  Ai^avov  dwo  dvaroXuv  r/\toi/ ; 
 
 and  translated  in  the  Vulgate,  '  Libani  quoque 
 regio  contra  orientem').  The  southern  section  of 
 this  range  was  well  known  to  the  sacred  writers  as 
 Hermon,  and  had  in  ancient  times  several  de- 
 scriptive titles  given  to  it — Sirion,  Shenir,  Sion  ; 
 just  as  it  has  in  modern  days — Jebei  esh-Sheikh, 
 y.  eth-Thelj,  J.  ^«/(fr  [Hermon].  Greek  writers 
 called  the  whole  range 'A^riXi^afos  (Strabo,  xvi., 
 p.  754;  Ptolemy,  v.  15),  a  word  which  is  some- 
 times found  in  the  Septuagint  as  the  rendering  of 
 the  Hebrew  Lebanon  (1.  c. )  Latin  authors  also 
 uniformly  distinguish  the  eastern  range  by  the 
 name  Antilibamis  (Plin.  v.  20).  The  name  is  ap- 
 propriate, describing  its  position,  lying  '  opposite ' 
 or  'over  against'  Lebanon  (Strabo,  /.  c.)  Yet  it 
 does  not  seem  to  have  been  known  to  Josephus, 
 who  uniformly  calls  the  eastern  as  well  as  the 
 western  range  AijSavos ;  thus  he  speaks  of  the  foun- 
 tains of  the  Jordan  as  being  near  to  Libanus  {Antiq. 
 v.  3.  i),  and  of  Abila  as  situated  in  Libanus  (xix. 
 5.  l).    The  range  of  Anti-lebanon  is  now  called  by 
 
 all  native   geographers    Jebel  esh-Shurky    (.  Ijcs- 
 
 JijAil,  'East  mountain'),  to  distinguish  it  from 
 Lebanon  proper,  which  is  sometimes  termed  Jebel 
 el-Ghiirby\  ^'  Jul  jLic^,  'West  mountain  ;'  Ro- 
 binson, B.  R.,  ii.  437 ;  Burckhardt,  Travels  in 
 Syria,  p.  4). 
 
 To  insure  greater  definiteness,  and  to  prevent 
 repetition,  the  name  Lebanon  will  be  applied  in 
 this  article  to  the  western  range,  and  Anti-lebanon 
 to  the  easiei-n. 
 
 2.  Physical  Geography — Lebanon.  —  The 
 mountain  -  chain  of  Lebanon  commences  at  the 
 great  valley  which  connec^ts  the  plain  of  Hamath 
 with  the  Mediterranean  (and  which  was  anciently 
 called  'the  entrance  of  Hamath,'  Num.  xxxiv.  8), 
 in  lat.  34°  40' ;  and  runs  in  a  south-western  direc- 
 tion along  the  coast,  till  it  sinks  into  the  plain  of 
 Acre  and  the  low  hills  of  Galilee,  in  lat.  33°.  Its 
 extreme  length  is  no  geographical  miles,  and  the 
 average  breadth  of  its  base  is  about  20  miles. 
 The  highest  peak,  called  Dakar  el-Kiidtb,  is  about 
 25  miles  from  the  northern  extremity,  and  just 
 over  the  little  cedar  grove  ;  its  elevation  is  10,051 
 feet  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  170).  From  this 
 VOL.  IL 
 
 point  the  range  decreases  in  height  toward  the 
 south.  The  massive  rounded  summit  of  Sunnin, 
 23  miles  from  the  former,  is  S500  feet  high.  Jebel 
 Keniseh,  the  next  peak,  is  6824'feet ;  and  Tomat 
 Niha,  '  the  Twin -peaks,'  the  highest  tops  of 
 southern  Lebanon,  are  about  6500  feet.  From 
 these  the  fall  is  rapid  to  the  ravine  of  the  river 
 Litany,  the  ancient  Leontes. 
 
 Some  writers  regard  the  Litany  as  marking  the 
 southern  hmit  of  Lebanon ;  and  it  would  seem 
 that  the  ancient  classical  geographers  were  of  this 
 opinion  (Smith's  Diet,  of  G.  and  R.  Geog.,  s.  v. 
 Libanus;  Kitto,  Physical  Hist,  of  Pal.,  p.  32). 
 Diodorus  Siculus  describes  Lebanon  as  extending 
 along  the  coast  of  Tripolis,  Byblus,  and  Sidon 
 {Hist.  xix.  58)  ;  and  the  Litany  falls  into  the  sea 
 a  few  miles  south  of  Sidon.  The  notices  of 
 Ptolemy  are  somewhat  indefinite,  and  represent 
 the  two  chains  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-lebanon  as 
 commencmg  at  the  Mediterranean — the  former  on 
 the  north,  the  latter  on  the  south  {Geog.  v.  15). 
 Strabo  is  more  definite  and  less  accurate — '  There 
 are  two  mountains  which  enclose  Ccele- Syria, 
 lying  parallel  to  each  other.  The  commencement 
 of  both  these  mountains,  Libanus  and  Anti-libanus, 
 is  a  little  way  above  the  sea.  Libanus  rises  from 
 the  sea  near  Tri]ioIis  and  Theoprosopon ;  and 
 Anti-libanus  from  the  sea  near  Sidon.  They  ter- 
 minate somewhere  near  the  Arabian  mountains, 
 which  are  above  the  district  of  Damascus  and  the 
 Trachones.  ...  A  hollow  plain  hes  between 
 them,  whose  breadth  toward  the  sea  is  200  stadia, 
 and  its  length  from  the  sea  to  the  interior  about 
 twice  as  much.  Rivers  flow  through  it,  the  largest 
 of  which  is  the  Jordan'  (xvi.,  p.  754).  According 
 to  Pliny  the  chains  begin  at  the  sea,  but  they  run 
 from  south  to  north  (//.  N.,  v.  17;  cf.  Ammian. 
 Marcel,  xiv.  26).  Cellarius  merely  repeats  these 
 ancient  authors  {Geog.  ii.  439).  Reland  shews 
 their  errors  and  contradictions,  but  he  cannot 
 solve  them,  though  he  derived  some  important  in- 
 formation from  Maundrell  {Pal.,  pp.  317,  seq.;  cf. 
 Parly  Trav.  in  Pal.,  Bohn,  p.  483).  Rosen- 
 miiller  {Bib.  Geog.,  ii.  207,  Clark),  Wells  {Geog.  i. 
 239),  and  others,  only  repeat  the  old  mistakes. 
 
 The  source  of  these  errors  may  be  seen  by  an 
 examination  of  the  physical  geography  of  the  dis- 
 trict east  of  Tyre  and  Sidon.  There  can  be  no 
 doubt  that  the  range  of  Lebanon,  viewed  in  its 
 physical  formation,  extends  from  the  entrance  of 
 Hamath  to  the  plain  of  Acre.  But  between  the 
 parallels  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  it  is  cut  through  by  the 
 chasm  of  the  Litany,  which  drains  the  valley  of 
 Coele-syria.  That  river  enters  the  range  obliquely 
 on  the  eastern  side,  turns  gradually  westward,  and 
 at  length  divides  the  main  ridge  at  right  angles 
 Here,  therefore,  it  may  be  said,  in  one  sense,  that 
 the  chain  terminates  ;  and  though  on  the  south 
 bank  of  the  Litany  another  chain  rises,  and  runs 
 in  the  line  of  the  former,  it  is  not  so  lofty,  its 
 greatest  height  scarcely  exceeding  3000  feet.  An- 
 cient geographers  thought  Lebanon  terminated  on 
 the  north  bank  of  the  Litany  ;  and  as  that  river 
 drains  the  valley  of  Coele-syria,  which  lies  between 
 Lebanon  and  Anti-lebanon,  they  naturally  sup- 
 posed that  the  chain  on  the  south  bank  of  the 
 Litany  was  the  commencement  of  the  latter  range. 
 Here  lies  the  error,  which  tlie  writer  of  this  article 
 was  among  the  first  to  detect,  by  an  examination 
 of  the  general  conformation  of  the  mountain-ranges 
 from  the  summit  of  Hermon  (see  Bibliotheca  Sacra, 
 
 3  F 
 
LEBANON 
 
 802 
 
 LEBANON 
 
 vol.  xi.  52  ;  Porter's  Damascus,  i.  296).  Anti- 
 lebanon  is  completely  separated  from  this  western 
 range  by  a  broad  and  deep  valley.  The  great 
 valley  of  the  Jordan  extends  northward  to  the 
 western  base  of  Hermon,  in  the  parallel  of  the  chasm 
 of  the  Litany.  From  this  point  a  narrower  valley, 
 called  Wady  el-Teim,  runs  northward,  till  it  meets 
 an  eastern  branch  of  Coele-syria.  These  three 
 valleys,  forming  a  continuous  line,  constitute  the 
 western  boundary  of  Anti-lebanon.  No  part  of 
 that  chain  crosses  them  (Robinson,  ii.  43S).  The 
 southern  end  of  the  plain  of  Coele-syria  is  divided 
 by  a  low  ridge  into  two  branches.  Down  the 
 eastern  branch  runs  Wady  el-Teim,  conveying  a 
 tributary  to  the  Jordan  [Bib.  Sac,  I.e.  ;  Robinson, 
 iii.  428-30)  ;  down  the  western  runs  the  Litany. 
 The  latter  branch  soon  contracts  into  a  wild  chasm, 
 whose  banks  are  in  some  places  above  a  thousand 
 feet  high,  of  naked  rock,  and  almost  perpendicular. 
 At  one  spot  the  ravine  is  only  60  feet  wide,  and  is 
 spanned  by  a  natural  bridge,  at  the  height  of  about 
 100  feet  above  the  stream.  Over  it  rise  jagged 
 walls  of  naked  limestone,  pierced  with  numerous 
 caves.  The  scenery  is  here  magnificent ;  as  one 
 stands  on  this  arch  of  nature's  own  building,  he  can 
 scarcely  repress  feelings  of  alarm.  The  cliffs  almost 
 meeting  overhead  ;  rugged  masses  of  rock  shooting 
 out  from  dizzy  heights,  and  appearing  as  if  about 
 to  plunge  into  the  chasm  ;  the  mad  river  far  be- 
 low dashing  along  from  rapid  to  rapid  in  sheets  of 
 foam.  Lr  wild  grandeur  this  chasm  has  no  equal 
 in  Syria,  and  few  in  the  world.  Yet,  from  a  short 
 distance  on  either  side,  it  is  not  visible.  The 
 mountain-chain  appears  to  run  on  in  its  course,  de- 
 clining gradually,  but  without  any  interruption. 
 The  ridge,  in  fact,  has  been  cleft  asunder  by  some 
 terrible  convulsion  ;  and  through  the  cleft  the 
 waters  of  Coele-syria  have  forced  their  way  to  the 
 Mediterranean  instead  of  the  Jordan,  which  is  the 
 natural  outlet.  It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  ridge 
 on  the  south  bank  of  the  Litany  is  the  prolonga- 
 tion of  that  on  the  north,  and  is  a  part  of  Lebanon 
 (Robinson,  ii.  438) ;  and  that  the  chasm  of  the 
 Litany,  though  the  drain  of  Coele-syria,  is  no  part 
 of  that  valley.  Neither  Coele-syria,  therefore,  nor 
 Anti-lebanon,  at  any  point,  approaches  within  many 
 miles  of  the  Mediterranean  (Handbook  for  S.  and 
 P.,  571;  Robinson,  iii.  420,  seq. ;  Van  de  Velde, 
 Travels,  i.  145,  seq!) 
 
 The  view  of  Lebanon  from  the  Mediterranean 
 's  exceedingly  grand.  The  writer  saw  its  glittering 
 summits  from  the  shores  of  Cyprus.  On  ajiproach- 
 ing,  it  appears  to  rise  from  the  bosom  of  the  deep 
 like  a  vast  wall ;  the  wavy  top  densely  covered  with 
 snow  during  winter  and  spring ;  and  the  two 
 highest  peaks  capped  with  crowns  of  ice  on  the 
 sultriest  days  of  summer.  The  western  slopes  are 
 long  and  gradual,  furrowed  from  top  to  bottom  with 
 deep  rugged  ravines,  and  broken  everywhere  by 
 lofty  cliffs  of  white  rock,  and  rugged  banks,  and 
 tens  of  thousands  of  terrace  walls,  rising  like  steps 
 of  stairs  from  the  sea  to  the  snow-wreaths.  '  The 
 whole  mass  of  the  mountain  consists  of  whitish 
 limestone,  or  at  least  the  rocky  surface,  as  it  reflects 
 the  light,  exhibits  everywhere  a  whitish  aspect. 
 The  mountain  teems  with  villages,  and  is  cultivated 
 more  or  less  almost  to  the  top.  Yet  so  steep  and 
 rocky  is  the  surface,  that  the  tillage  is  carried  on 
 chiefly  by  means  of  terraces,  built  up  with  great 
 labour,  and  covered  above  with  soil.  When  one 
 looks  upward  trom  below,  the  vegetation  on  these 
 
 terraces  is  not  seen,  so  that  the  whole  mountain 
 side  appears  as  if  composed  of  immense  rugged 
 masses  of  naked  whitish  rock,  severed  by  deep  wild 
 ravines,  running  down  precipitously  to  the  plain. 
 No  one  would  suspect  among  these  rocks  the  exist- 
 ence of  a  vast  multitude  of  thrifty  villages,  and  a 
 numerous  population  of  mountaineers,  hardy,  in- 
 dustrious, and  brave '  (Robinson,  ii.  493 ;  cf. 
 Volney,    Travels,  i.    272,  seq.) 
 
 On  looking  down  the  western  slopes  from  the 
 brow  of  one  of  the  projecting  bluffs,  or  through  the 
 vista  of  one  of  the  glens,  the  scenery  is  totally 
 different ;  it  is  now  rich  and  picturesque.  The  tops 
 of  the  little  stair-like  terraces  are  seen,  all  green 
 with  corn,  or  straggling  vines,  or  the  dark  foliage 
 of  the  mulberry.  The  steeper  banks  and  ridge- 
 tops  have  their  forests  of  pine  and  oak  ;  while  far 
 away  down  in  the  bottom  of  the  glens,  and  round  the 
 villages  and  castellated  convents,  are  large  groves 
 of  gray  olives.  The  aspect  of  the  various  sections 
 of  the  mountains  is,  however,  very  different ;  the 
 rocks  and  strata  often  assuming  strange  fantastic 
 shapes.  At  the  head  of  the  valley  of  the  Dog  river 
 are  some  of  the  most  remarkable  rock  formations 
 in  Lebanon.  Here  numbers  of  little  ravines  fall 
 into  the  main  glen,  and  their  sides,  with  the  inter- 
 vening ridges,  are  thickly  covered  with  higli  peaks 
 of  naked  limestone,  sometimes  rising  in  solitary 
 grandeur  like  obelisks ;  but  generally  grouped 
 together,  and  connected  by  narrow  ledges  like 
 arched  viaducts.  In  one  place  the  horizontal 
 strata  in  the  side  of  a  lofty  cliff  ai-e  worn  away  at 
 the  edges,  giving  the  whole  the  appearance  of  a 
 large  pile  of  cushions.  In  other  places  there  are 
 tall  stalks,  with  broad  tops  like  tables.  In  many 
 places  the  cliffs  are  ribbed,  resembling  the  pipes  of 
 an  organ,  or  columnar  basalt.  A  single  perch  of 
 clear  soil  can  scarcely  be  found  in  one  spot  through- 
 out the  whole  region,  but  eveiy  minute  patch  is  cul- 
 tivated. In  more  than  one  place  the  writer  has 
 seen  wheat  growing  in  grottoes,  and  under  natural 
 arches  (Porter's  Dainasais,  ii.  289).  The  highest 
 peaks  of  the  range  are  naked,  white,  and  barren. 
 A  line  drawn  at  the  altitude  of  about  6000  feet 
 would  mark  the  limits  of  cultivation.  Above  that 
 line  the  shelving  sides  and  rounded  tops  are  covered 
 with  loose  limestone  debris,  and  are  almost  entirely 
 destitute  of  vegetable  life. 
 
 The  western  base  of  Lebanon  does  not  corre- 
 spond with  the  shore-line.  In  some  cases  bold  spurs 
 shoot  out  from  the  mountains,  and  dip  perpen- 
 dicularly into  the  sea,  forming  bluff  promontories, 
 such  as  the  'Ladder  of  Tyre,'  Promontoriuni 
 Album  or  '  White  Cape,'  the  well-known  pass  of 
 the  Dog  river,  and  Theoprosopon,  now  called  Ras 
 esh-Shuk'ah.  In  other  places  the  mountains  retire, 
 or  the  shore-line  advances  (as  at  Beyrout  and  Tri- 
 polis),  leaving  little  sections  of  fertile  plain,  varying 
 from  half  a  mile  to  three  miles  in  width.  This  was 
 the  territory  of  the  old  Phoenicians,  and  on  it  still 
 lie  the  scattered  remains  of  their  once  great  cities 
 [Phoenicia].  From  tlie  promontoiy  of  Theopro- 
 sopon a  low  ridge  strikes  northward  along  the 
 shore  past  TripoHs,  separated  from  the  main  chain 
 by  a  narrow  valley.  When  it  terminates,  the 
 coast-plain  becomes  much  wider,  and  gradually  ex- 
 pands, till  it  opens  at  the  northern  base  of  Lebanon 
 into  the  'entrance  of  Hamath'  (Robinson,  iii.  385). 
 
 Eastern  declivities. — From  the  east  Lebanon  pre- 
 sents a  totally  different  aspect.  It  does  not  seera 
 much  more  than  half  as  high  as  when  seen  from 
 
LEBAISCN 
 
 805 
 
 LEBANON 
 
 the  west.  This  is  chiefly  owing  to  the  plain  of 
 Ccele-syria  (now  called  el-BtikcVa,  CcELE-SYRiA), 
 which  extends  along  its  base,  and  has  an  average 
 elevation  of  about  3000  feet  (Van  de  Velde,  Me- 
 moir, 175).  The  ridge  resembles  a  colossal  wall, 
 Its  sides  precipitous,  and  thinly  covered,  in  most 
 places,  with  oak  forests.  There  are  very  few — 
 only  some  two  or  three — glens  furrowing  them. 
 The  summit  of  the  ridge,  or  backbone,  is  much 
 nearer  the  eastern  than  the  western  side  ;  and  ex- 
 tending in  gentle  undulations,  white  with  snow,  far 
 as  the  eye  can  see  to  the  right  and  left,  it  forms  a 
 grand  object  from  the  ruins  of  Ba'albek,  and  still 
 more  so  from  the  heights  of  Anti-lebanon.  A 
 nearer  approach  to  the  chain  reveals  a  new  feature. 
 A  side  ridge  runs  along  the  base  of  the  central 
 chain  from  the  town  of  Zahleh  to  its  northern  ex- 
 ti-emity ;  and  is  thinly  covered  throughout  with 
 forests  o^f  oak  intermixed  with  wild  plum,  haw- 
 thorn, juniper,  and  other  trees.  A  little  south  of 
 the  parallel  of  Sunnin  this  ridge  is  low  and  narrow, 
 and  the  Buka'a  is  there  widest.  Advancing  north- 
 ward the  ridge  increases  in  height,  and  encroaches 
 on  the  plain,  until,  at  the  fountain  of  the  Orontes 
 ('Ain  el-'Asy),  it  attains  its  greatest  elevation,  and 
 there  the  plain  is  narrowest.  From  this  point  south- 
 wards to  where  the  road  crosses  from  Ba'albek  to  the 
 Cedars,  the  central  chain  is  steep,  naked,  and  desti- 
 tute of  vegetation,  except  here  and  there  a  solitary 
 oak  or  blasted  pine  clinging  to  the  rocks  (Porter's 
 Damasais,  ii.  303,  seq.  ;   Robinson,  iii.  530,  scq.) 
 
 The  northern  extremity  of  Lebanon  is  clearly  de- 
 fined. The  side  ridge  above  described  sinks  down 
 in  graceful  wooded  slopes  into  Wady  Khaled,  which 
 drains  a  part  of  the  plain  of  Hums,  and  falls  into 
 Nahr  el-Kebir.  The  main  chain  also  terminates 
 abruptly  a  little  farther  west,  and  its  base  is  swept 
 by  the  waters  of  the  Kebir,  the  ancient  river  Eleu- 
 therus  (Robinson,  iii.  558-60). 
 
 Rivers. — Lebanon  is  rich  in  rivers  and  fountains, 
 fed  by  the  eternal  snows  that  crown  its  summit, 
 and  the  vapours  which  they  condense.  The 
 '  streams  from  Lebanon'  were  proverbial  for  their 
 abundance  and  beauty  in  the  days  of  the  Hebrew 
 prophets  (Cant.  iv.  15),  and  its  '  cold-flowing  wa- 
 ters' were  types  of  richness  and  luxury  (Jer.  xviii. 
 14).  Some  of  them,  too,  have  obtained  a  classic 
 celebrity  (see  Reland,  Pal.,  437,  269).  They  are 
 all  small  mountain- torrents  rather  than  rivers. 
 The  following  are  the  more  important  : — ^The 
 Eleutherus  (now  Nahr  el  -  Kebir),  rising  in  the 
 plain  of  Emesa,  west  of  the  Orontes,  sweeps  round 
 the  northern  base  of  Lebanon,  through  the  '  en- 
 trance of  Hamath,'  and  falls  mto  the  Mediterranean 
 midway  between  Tripolis  and  Aradus.  Strabo 
 states  that  it  formed  the  northern  border  of  Phoe- 
 nicia and  Ccele-syria  (xvi.  p.  753  ;  Robinson,  iii. 
 576).  The  Kadisha,  or  '  sacred  river,'  now  gene- 
 rally called  Nahr  Abu  Aly,  has  its  highest  sources 
 around  the  little  cedar  grove,  and  descends  through 
 a  sublime  ravine  to  the  coast  near  Tripolis.  At 
 one  spot  its  glen  has  perpendicular  walls  of  rock  on 
 each  side  nearly  1000  feet  high.  Here,  on  oppo- 
 site banks,  are  two  villages,  the  people  of  which 
 can  converse  across  the  chasm,  but  to  reach  each 
 other  requires  a  toilsome  walk  of  two  hours.  In  a 
 wild  cleft  of  the  ravine  is  the  convent  of  Kanobin, 
 the  chief  residence  of  the  Maronite  patriarch  {Hand- 
 book for  S.  and  P.,  586).  The  Adonis  (Nahr  Ibra- 
 him), famous  in  ancient  fable  as  the  scene  of  the 
 romantic  story  of  Venus  and  Adonis.     Killed  by  a 
 
 boar  on  its  banks,  the  blood  of  Adonis  dyed  the 
 waters,  which  have  ever  since,  on  the  anniversr«-y 
 of  his  death,  run  red  to  the  sea  (Lucien,  De  Syria 
 Dea,  6  ;  Strabo,  xv.  p.  170).  Adonis  is  supposed 
 to  be  identical  with  Tammuz,  for  whom  Ezekiel 
 represents  the  Jewish  women  as  weeping  (viii.  14). 
 The  source  is  a  noble  fountain  beside  the  ruins  of  a 
 temple  of  Venus,  and  near  the  site  of  Apheca,  now 
 marked  by  the  little  village  of  Afka  (Eusebius, 
 Vit.  Const,  iii.  55  ;  Porter,  Da/naseus,  ii.  297  ; 
 Ritter,  Pal.  und  Syr.,  iv.  558).  The  Adonis  falls 
 into  the  sea  a  few  miles  south  of  the  Biblical  Ge- 
 bal.  The  Lycus  flimien,  now  A'a/ir  el  Kelb,  or 
 '  Dog  river,'  rises  high  up  on  the  flank  of  Sunnin, 
 and  breaks  down  through  a  picturesque  glen.  At 
 its  mouth  is  that  famous  pass  on  whose  sculptured 
 rocks  Assyrian,  Egyptian,  Roman,  and  French  (!) 
 generals  have  left  records  of  their  expeditions  and 
 victories  (Robinson,  iii.  618;  Handbook,  407,  seq.; 
 Strabo,  xvi.  p.  755).  The  il/c^j^n^raj  of  Pliny  (v.  17), 
 is  probably  the  modern  Nahr  Beyrout.  The 
 Taviyras  or  Daniouras  (Strabo,  xvi.  p.  756  ;  Poly- 
 bius,  V.  68)  rises  near  Deir  el-Kamr,  the  capital  of 
 Lebanon.  It  is  now  called  Nahr  ed-Dammur. 
 The  Bostreniis  of  ancient  authors  appears  to  be 
 identical  with  Nahr  el-Awaley,  though  some  doubt 
 this.  The  Leontes  has  already  been  mentioned. 
 The  lower  section  of  it  is  now  generally  teiTned 
 Kasimiyeh,  and  the  upper  section  Litany.  Its 
 chief  sources  are  at  Chalcis  and  Ba'albek  ;  but  a 
 large  tributary  flows  down  from  the  ravine  of  Zah- 
 leh, and  is  the  only  stream  which  descends  the 
 eastern  slopes  of  Lebanon. 
 
 Anti-lebanon. — The  centre  and  culminating 
 point  of  Anti-lebanon  is  Hermon.  From  it  a 
 number  of  ranges  radiate,  like  the  ribs  of  a  half- 
 open  fan.  The  first  and  loftiest  runs  north-east, 
 parallel  to  Lebanon,  and  separated  from  it  by  the 
 valley  of  Coele-syria,  whose  average  breadth  if 
 about  six  miles.  This  ridge  is  the  back-bone  of 
 Anti-lebanon.  Where  it  joins  Hermon  it  is  broad, 
 irregular,  intersected  by  numerous  valleys  and  little 
 fertile  plains,  and  covered  with  thin  forests  of  dwarf 
 oak.  Its  elevation  is  not  more  than  4500  feet. 
 Advancing  northward  its  features  become  wilder 
 and  grander,  oak  trees  give  place  to  juniper,  and 
 the  elevation  increases  until,  above  the  beautiful 
 plain  of  Zebedany — which  lies  embosomed  in  its 
 very  centre — it  attains  a  height  of  about  7000  feet 
 (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  175).  From  this  point 
 to  the  parallel  of  Ba'albek  there  is  little  change  in 
 the  elevation  or  scenery.  Beyond  the  latter  it 
 begins  to  fall,  and  declines  gradually  until  at  length 
 it  sinks  down  into  the  great  plain  of  Hamath,  eight 
 miles  east  of  Riblah,  and  sixteen  south  of  Emesa. 
 With  the  exception  of  the  little  upland  plains,  and 
 a  few  of  the  deeper  valleys,  this  ridge  is  incapable 
 of  cultivation.  The  sides  are  steep  and  rugged,  in 
 many  places  sheer  precipices  of  naked,  jagged  rock, 
 nearly  looo  feet  high.  They  are  not  so  bare  or 
 bleak,  however,  as  the  higher  summits  of  Lebanon. 
 Vegetation  is  abundant  among  the  rocks ;  and 
 though  the  inhabitants  are  few  and  far  betvi-een, 
 immense  flocks  of  sheep  and  goats  are  pastured 
 upon  the  mountains,  and  wild  beasts — bears,  boars, 
 wolves,  jackals,  hyaenas,  foxes — are  far  more  abun- 
 dant than  in  any  other  part  of  Syria  or  Palestine 
 ^oxi&x\  Damascus,  ii.  315). 
 
 The  lowest  and  last  of  the  ridges  that  radiate 
 from  Hermon  runs  nearly  due  east  along  the  mag- 
 nificent plain  of  Damascus,  and  continues  onward 
 
LEBANON 
 
 804 
 
 LEBANON 
 
 to  Palmyra.  Its  average  elevation  is  not  more  than 
 3000  feet,  and  it  does  not  rise  more  than  about  700 
 feet  above  the  plain,  though  some  of  its  peaks 
 are  much  higher.  Its  rock  is  chalky,  almost  pure 
 white,  and  entirely  naked— not  a  tree,  or  shrub,  or 
 patch  of  verdure,  is  anywhere  seen  upon  it.  It 
 thus  forms  a  remarkable  contrast  to  the  rich  green 
 of  the  plain  of  Damascus.  From  the  central  range 
 to  this  ridge,  there  is  a  descent,  by  a  series  of  broad 
 bare  terraces  or  plateaus,  supported  by  long  conti- 
 nuous walls  of  bare  whitish  limestone,  varying  from 
 100  to  1000  feet  in  height.  Nothing  could  be  more 
 dreary  or  desolate  than  the  scenery  on  these  steppes, 
 Tha  gravelly  soil,  in  many  places  thickly  strewn 
 with  flints,  is  as  bare  as  the  cliffs  that  bound  them. 
 Yet  they  are  intersected  by  several  rich  and  beauti- 
 ful glens,  so  deep,  however,  that  their  verdure  and 
 foliage  cannot  be  seen  from  a  distance.  Towards 
 the  east  these  steppes  gradually  expand  into  broad 
 upland  plains,  and  portions  of  them  are  irrigated 
 and  tilled.  On  them  stand  the  small  but  ancient 
 towns  of  Yabrud,  Nebk,  Jeriid,  etc.,  around  which 
 madder  is  successfully  cultivated. 
 
 Rivers. — Anti-lebanon  is  the  source  of  the  four 
 great  rivers  of  Syria.  The  Oroufes,  springing  from 
 the  western  base  of  the  main  ridge,  beside  the  ruins 
 of  Lybo,  flows  away  northward  through  a  broad 
 rich  vale,  laving  in  its  course  the  walls  of  Emesa, 
 llamath,  Apamea,  and  Antioch.  The  Jordan, 
 Palestine's  sacred  river,  bursting  from  the  side  of 
 Ilermon,  rolls  down  its  deep  mysterious  valley 
 into  the  Sea  of  Death.  The  Ahana,  the  '  golden- 
 flowing'  stream  of  Damascus  {Chrysorrhoas,  Pliny, 
 v.  16;  also  called  Baniines,  Steph.  Byz. ;  see 
 Abana)  rises  on  the  western  side  of  the  main 
 ridge,  cuts  through  it  and  the  others,  and  falls  into 
 the  lake  east  of  the  city.  The  Leontes,  Phoenicia's 
 nameless  stream,  has  its  two  principal  fountains  at 
 the  western  base  of  Anti-lebanon,  beside  Chalcis 
 and  Ba'albek  (Porter,  Damascus,  i.  1 1 ;  Robinson, 
 iii.  498,  506).  The  only  other  streams  of  Anti- 
 lebanon  are  the  Pharpar,  now  called  el-'Awaj, 
 rising  on  the  eastern  flank  of  Hermon  [Pharpar]  ; 
 and  the  torrent  which  flows  down  the  fertile  glen 
 of  Helbon  [Helbon]  into  the  plain  of  Damascus. 
 
 3.  Geology  and  Botany. — The  geology  of 
 Lebanon  has  never  been  thoroughly  investigated. 
 Dr.  Anderson,  who  accompanied  the  United  States 
 Expedition  under  Lieut.  Lynch,  is  the  only  man 
 who  has  attempted  anything  like  a  scientific  ex- 
 amination of  the  mountains.  We  are  much  in- 
 debted to  his  Rccoinaissance,  embodied  in  Lynch's 
 Official  Report.  The  German  traveller  Russegger 
 also  supplies  some  facts  in  his  Reisen  (vol.  iii.) 
 
 The  main  ridges  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-lebanon 
 are  composed  of  Jura  limestone  ;  hard,  partially 
 crystallized,  and  containing  few  fossils.  The  strata 
 have  been  greatly  disturbed.  In  some  places  they 
 are  almost  perpendicular ;  in  others  tilted  over,  lay- 
 ing bare  veins  and  detached  masses  of  trap.  In 
 the  southern  part  of  Lebanon,  near  Kedesh  and 
 Safed,  are  many  traces  of  recent  disturbance.  From 
 the  earliest  ages  earthquakes  have  been  frequent, 
 and  most  destructive  in  that  region.  The  earth- 
 quake of  1837  buried  thousands  of  the  inhabitants 
 of  Safed  beneath  the  ruins  of  their  houses  (Robin- 
 son, ii.  422,  scq.;  Haiidbk.  438).  In  the  upper 
 basin  of  the  Jordan,  and  along  the  eastern  flank  of 
 Hermon,  trap  rock  abounds ;  the  latter  is  the  com- 
 mencement of  the  great  trap -fields  of  Hauran 
 (Porter,  Damascus,  ii.  240,  seq.') 
 
 Over  the  Jura  limestone  there  is  in  many  places 
 a  more  recent  cretaceous  deposit ;  its  colour  is  gray, 
 and  sometimes  pure  white.  It  is  soft,  and  abounds 
 in  flints  and  fossils,  ammonites,  echinites,  ostrsea, 
 chenopus,  nerinea,  etc.,  often  occurring  in  large 
 beds,  as  at  Bhamdiin  above  Beyrout.  Fossil  fish 
 are  also  found  embedded  in  the  rock  near  the 
 ancient  Gebal  (Reland,  Pal.,  p.  321).  These 
 cretaceous  deposits  occur  along  the  whole  western 
 flank  of  Lebanon;  and  the  lower  eastern  ranges 
 of  Anti-lebanon  are  wholly  composed  of  them 
 (D'Arvieux,  Mhnoires,  ii.  393;  Elliot,  Travels,  ii. 
 257  ;  Volney,  ii.  280). 
 
 Extensive  beds  of  soft,  friable  sandstone  are  met 
 with  both  in  Lebanon  and  Anti-lebanon.  Accord- 
 ing to  Anderson,  the  sandstone  is  of  a  more  recent 
 period  than  the  cretaceous  strata.  This  change  in 
 the  geological  structure  gives  great  variety  to  the 
 scenery  of  Lebanon.  The  regular  and  graceful 
 outlines  of  the  sandstone  ridges  contrast  well  with 
 the  bolder  and  more  abrupt  limestone  cliffs  and 
 peaks ;  while  the  ruddy  hue  and  sombre  pine  forests 
 of  the  former  relieve  the  intense  whiteness  of  the 
 latter. 
 
 Coal  has  been  found  in  the  district  of  Metn,  east 
 of  Beyrout ;  but  it  is  impure,  and  the  veins  are  too 
 thin  to  repay  mining.  Iron  is  found  in  the  central 
 and  southern  portions  of  Lebanon ;  and  there  is  an 
 extensive  salt-marsh  on  one  of  the  eastern  steppes 
 of  Anti-lebanon  (Porter,  Damasczis,  i.  161 ;  Band- 
 book,  363 ;  Volney,  i.  281 ;  Burckhardt,  27). 
 
 The  Botany  of  Lebanon,  like  the  geology,  is  to 
 a  great  extent  unknown.  It  appears  to  be  very 
 rich.  The  writer  during  his  residence  in  the 
 country  was  often  struck  with  the  abundance,  the 
 variety,  and  the  beauty  of  the  trees,  shrubs,  and 
 flowers  of  these  noble  mountains.  The  great 
 variety  of  climate,  from  the  tropical  heat  of  the 
 Jordan  valley  at  the  base  of  Hermon,  to  the  eternal 
 snows  on  its  summit,  affords  space  and  fitting 
 home  for  the  vegetable  products  of  nearly  every 
 part  of  the  globe.  The  forests  of  Lebanon  were 
 celebrated    throughout    the    ancient   world.       Its 
 
 320.   Cedars  ul  Lcbaiiun. 
 
 cedars  were  used  in  the  temples  and  palaces  of 
 Jerusalem  (i  Kings  vi.;  2  Sam.  v.  II;  Ezra  iii.  7-, 
 Is.  xiv.  8;  Josephus,  Bell.  Jnd.  v.  5.  2),  Rome 
 (Pliny,  //.  N.,  xiii.  11),  and  Assyria  (Layard,  Nin. 
 and  Bab.,  pp.  356,  644);  and  the  pine  and  oak 
 were  extensively  employed  in  ship-building  (Ezek. 
 xxvii.  4-6).  On  these  mountains  we  have  still  the 
 cedar,    pine,    oak  of  several   varieties,    terebinth, 
 
LEBANON 
 
 805 
 
 LEBANON 
 
 iuniper,  walnut,  plane,  poplar,  willow,  arbutus, 
 olive,  mulberry,  carob,  fig,  pistachio,  sycamore, 
 hawthorn,  apricot,  plum,  pear,  apple,  quince, 
 pomegranate,  orange,  lemon,  palm,  and  banana. 
 The  vine  abounds  everywhere.  Oleanders  line  the 
 streams,  and  rhododendrons  crown  the  peaks  higher 
 up,  with  the  rock-rose,  ivy,  berbeiy,  and  honey- 
 suckle. (The  loftiest  summits  are  almost  bare, 
 owing  to  the  cold  and  extreme  dryness.  There  are 
 even  here,  however,  some  varieties  of  low  prickly 
 shrubs,  which  lie  on  the  ground  like  cushions,  and 
 look  almost  as  sapless  as  the  gravel  from  which 
 they  spring.  Many  of  the  flowers  are  bright  and 
 beautiful — the  anemone,  tulip,  pink,  ranunculus, 
 geranium,  crocus,  lily,  star  of  Bethlehem,  convol- 
 volus,  etc.  Thistles  abound  in  immense  variety. 
 The  cereals  and  vegetables  include  wheat,  barley, 
 maize,  lentils,  beans,  peas,  carrots,  turnips,  pota- 
 toes, melons,  pumpkins,  cucumbers,  tobacco,  cot- 
 ton, and  numerous  others.  Irrigation  is  exten- 
 sively practised,  and  wherever  water  is  abundant 
 the  crops  are  luxuriant.  Probably  in  no  part  of 
 the  world  are  there  more  striking  examples  of  the 
 triumph  of  industiy  over  rugged  and  intractable 
 nature  than  along  the  western  slopes  of  Lebanon. 
 The  steepest  banks  are  terraced  ;  every  little  shelf 
 and  cranny  in  the  cliffs  is  occupied  by  the  thrifty 
 husbandman,  and  planted  with  vine  or  mulberry 
 (Robinson,  iii.  14,  21,  615;  Porter,  Damascus,  ii. 
 283;  Handbk.  410,  413). 
 
 Zoology.  —  The  zoology  of  Lebanon  does  not 
 differ  from  that  of  Palestine,  and  will  be  treated 
 of  under  that  article. 
 
 4.  Climate. —There  are  great  varieties  of 
 climate  and  temperature  in  Lebanon.  In  the 
 plain  of  Dan,  at  the  fountain  of  the  Jordan,  the 
 heat  and  vegetation  are  almost  tropical ;  and  the 
 exhalations  from  the  marshy  plain  render  the  whole 
 region  unhealthy.  The  semi-nomads  who  inhabit 
 it  are  as  dark  in  complexion  as  Egyptians.  The 
 writer  has  seen  the  thermometer  stand  at  98°  Fahr. 
 in  the  shade  on  the  site  of  Dan,  while  the  day 
 before  it  did  not  rise  above  32°  on  the  top  of  Iler- 
 mon.  The  coast  along  the  western  base  of  Leba- 
 non, though  very  sultiy  during  the  summer  nionths, 
 is  not  unhealthy.  The  fresh  sea-breeze  which  sets 
 in  in  the  evening,  keeps  the  night  comparatively 
 cool,  and  the  air  is  dry  and  free  from  miasma. 
 Snow  never  falls  on  the  coast,  and  it  is  very  rarely 
 seen  at  a  lower  elevation  than  2000  feet.  Frost  is 
 unknown.  In  the  plains  of  Coele-syria  (3000  feet) 
 and  Damascus  (about  2300  feet),  snow  falls  more 
 or  less  eveiy  winter,  and  the  writer  has  seen  it 
 eight  inches  deep  on  the  streets  and  terraced  roofs 
 of  Damascus,  while  the  roads  were  so  hard  with 
 frost  that  horses  could  not  walk  on  them.  The 
 main  ridges  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-lebanon  are 
 generally  covered  with  snow  from  December  to 
 March,  sometimes  so  deeply  that  the  roads  are  for 
 weeks  together  impassable.  During  the  whole 
 summer  the  higher  parts  of  the  mountains  are  cool 
 and  pleasant,  the  air  is  extremely  dry,  and  malaria 
 is  unknown.  From  the  beginning  of  June  till 
 about  the  20th  of  September  rain  never  falls,  and 
 clouds  are  rarely  seen.  At  the  latter  date  the 
 autumn  rains  begin,  generally  accompanied  with 
 storms  of  thunder  and  vivid  lightning.  January 
 and  February  are  the  coldest  months.  The  barley 
 harvest  begins,  on  the  plain  of  Phoenicia,  about 
 the  end  of  April,  but  in  the  upper  altitudes  it  is 
 not  gathered  in  till  the  beginning  of  August.     The 
 
 writer  spent  a  summer  in  the  village  of  Shumlan, 
 on  the  western  declivity  of  Lebanon.  Its  elevation 
 is  2000  feet.  He  kept  a  careful  register  of  the 
 thermometer  and  barometer.  During  the  hottest 
 part  of  the  day  the  thermometer  did  not  rise  above 
 83"  Fahr.,  and  in  the  night  it  usually  went  down 
 to  76°.  In  two  months  (June  20th  to  August  20th) 
 the  barometer  did  not  vary  a  quarter  of  an  inch  ; 
 there  were  only  two  cloudy  days,  and  one  very 
 slight  shower  of  rain  (August  12th).  At  Bludan, 
 in  Anti-lebanon,  the  writer  spent  several  summers. 
 Its  elevation  is  4S00  feet  ;  the  air  is  extremely  dry, 
 and  the  thermometer  never  rose  above  82°  Fahr. 
 in  the  shade.  The  nights  were  cool  and  pleasant. 
 The  sirocco  wind  is  severely  felt  along  the  coast 
 and  on  the  western  slopes  of  Lebanon,  but  not  so 
 much  in  Anti-lebanon.  It  blows  occasionally 
 during  March  and  April.  Dezv  is  almost  unknown 
 along  the  mountain  ridges,  but  in  the  low  plains, 
 and  especially  at  the  base  of  Hermon,  it  is  very 
 abundant  (Ps.  cxxxiii.  3). 
 
 5.  Historical  Notices.  —  Lebanon  is  first 
 mentioned  as  a  boundary  of  the  country  given  by 
 the  Lord  in  covenant  promise  to  Israel  (Dent.  i. 
 7  ;  xi.  24).  To  the  dwellers  in  the  parched  and 
 thirsty  south,  or  on  the  sultry  banks  of  the  Nile, 
 the  snows,  and  streams,  and  verdant  forests  of 
 Lebanon  must  have  seemed  an  earthly  paradise. 
 By  such  a  contrast  we  can  understand  Moses' 
 touching  petition — •'  I  pray  thee  let  me  go  over 
 and  see  the  good  land  that  is  beyond  Jordan,  that 
 goodly  mountain,  and  Lebanon '  (Deut.  iii.  25). 
 The  mountains  were  originally  inhabited  by  a 
 number  of  warlike,  independent  tribes,  some  of 
 whom  Joshua  conquered  on  the  banks  of  Lake 
 Merom  (xi.  2-18).  Farther  north  were  the  Hi- 
 vites  (Judg.  iii.  3),  and  the  Giblites,  and  Arkites, 
 whose  names  still  cling  to  the  ruins  of  their  ancient 
 strongholds  [Giblites  ;  Arkites].  The  Israelites 
 never  completely  subdued  them,  but  the  enterpris- 
 ing Phoenicians  appear  to  have  had  them  under 
 their  power,  or  in  their  pay,  for  they  got  timber 
 for  their  fleets  from  the  mountains,  and  they  were 
 able  to  supply  .Solomon  from  the  same  forests 
 when  building  the  temple  (i  Kings  v.  9-1 1  ;  Ezek. 
 xxvii.  9,  seq.)  During  the  conquests  of  David  and 
 the  commercial  prosperity  of  the  nation  under 
 Solomon,  the  Jews  became  fully  acquainted  with 
 the  richness,  the  grandeur,  and  the  luxuriant  foliage 
 of  Lebanon  ;  and  ever  after  that  mountain  was  re- 
 garded as  the  emblem  of  wealth  and  majesty.  Thus 
 the  Psalmist  says  of  the  Messiah's  kingdom,  '  The 
 fruit  thereof  shall  shake  like  Lebanon'  (Ixxii.  16). 
 And  Solomon,  praising  the  beauty  of  the  Bride- 
 groom, writes,  '  His  countenance  is  as  Lebanon, 
 excellent  as  the  cedars'  (Cant.  v.  15).  Isaiah  also 
 predicts  of  the  church,  '  The  glory  of  Lebanon  shall 
 be  given  to  it'  (xxxv.  2  ;  cf.  Ix.  13  ;  Hos.  xiv.  5,  6). 
 
 Anti-lebanon  seems  to  have  been  early  brought 
 under  the  sway  of  Damascus,  though  amid  its 
 southern  strongholds  were  some  fierce  tribes  who 
 preserved  their  independence  down  to  a  late  period 
 (i  Chron.  v.  19-23;  Joseph.  Anliq.  xiii.  11.  3; 
 Strabo,  xvi.  pp.  755,  756). 
 
 During  the  reign  of  the  Seleucidee  several  large 
 cities  were  founded  or  rebuilt  in  these  mountains  ; 
 as  Laodicea  at  the  northern  end  of  Anti-lebanon, 
 Chalcis  at  its  eastern  base,  Abila  in  the  wild  glen 
 of  the  Abana  (Luke  iii.  I  ;  Abila).  At  the  com- 
 mencement of  our  era,  Lebanon,  with  the  rest  ol 
 Syria,  passed  into  the  hands  of  Rome  ;  and  un- 
 
LEBAOTH 
 
 806 
 
 LEBONAIl 
 
 iler  its  fostering  rule  great  cities  were  built,  and 
 beautiful  temples  erected.  The  heights  on  which 
 Baal-fires  had  burned  in  primeval  times,  and  the 
 groves  where  the  rude  mountain-tribes  worshipped 
 their  idols,  became  the  sites  of  noble  buildings, 
 whose  ruins  to  this  day  excite  the  admiration  of 
 every  traveller.  Greece  itself  cannot  surpass  in 
 grandeur  the  temples  of  Ba'albek  and  Chalcis. 
 The  writer  has  visited  more  than  thirty  temples  in 
 Lebanon  and  Anti-lebanon  {Handbk.,  pp.  454, 
 457,  557,  411  ;  cf.  Robinson,  iii.  438,  625). 
 
 During  the  wars  of  the  Seleucidas,  the  Romans, 
 and  the  Saracens,  the  inhabitants  of  Lebanon  pro- 
 bably remained  in  comparative  security.  When, 
 under  the  Muslem  rule,  Christianity  was  almost 
 extirpated  from  the  rest  of  Syria,  it  retained  its 
 hold  here ;  and  the  Maronites,  who  still  occupy 
 the  greater  part  of  the  range,  are  doubtless  the 
 lineal  descendants  of  the  old  Syrians.  The  sect 
 originated  in  the  7th  century,  when  the  monk 
 Maroti  taught  them  the  Monothelitic  heresy.  In 
 the  I2th  century  they  submitted  to  the  Pope,  and 
 have  ever  since  remained  devoted  Papists.  They 
 number  about  200,000.  The  Dritzes,  their  heredi- 
 tary foes,  dwell  in  the  southern  section  of  the 
 range,  and  number  about  80,000.  The  jealousies 
 and  feuds  of  the  rival  sects,  fanned  by  a  cruel  and 
 corrupt  government,  often  desolate  '  that  goodly 
 mountain '  with  fire  and  sword.  Anti-lebanon  has 
 a  considerable  Christian  population,  but  they  are 
 mixed  with  Mohammedans,  and  have  no  political 
 status.  The  whole  range  is  under  the  authority  of 
 the  Pasha  of  Damascus. 
 
 Literature. — The  fullest  accounts  of  Lebanon 
 ire  found  in  Ritter's  Pal.  unci  Syr.  ;  Robinson, 
 B.  R.  ;  Van  de  Velde's  Travels.,  and  Mejnoir ; 
 Churchhill's  Mount  Lebanon  ;  Buckhardt's  Syria. 
 
 Anti-lebanon  was  almost  a  terra  incognita  until 
 the  writer  of  this  article  began  his  researches  in 
 1850  (see  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  33).  The 
 general  topography,  statistics,  etc.,  are  given  in 
 Porter's  Damascus ;  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  vol.  xi.  ; 
 Handbk.forS.  atid P.—].  L.  P. 
 
 LEBAOTH    (niSn^;    'lions;'    Aa/3tis ;   Alex. 
 
 AajSciS-;  Lebaot/i),  a  town  on  the  southern  border  of 
 Judah,  only  mentioned  in  Josh.  xv.  32.  It  was 
 manifestly  unknown  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  as 
 they  just  state  it  to  have  been  a  town  of  Simeon 
 {Ono>?iast. ,  s.  v.  Labaotli).  It  was  probably  a  small 
 desert  village,  or  place  of  permanent  encampment, 
 in  a  region  infested  by  wild  beasts.     It  is  called 
 
 by  the  fuller  name  Beth-lebaoth  ( 7  IT'S ;  BaS^aptia- ; 
 
 Alex.  BatS-aX^d^ ;  BetJilebaoth)  in  Josh.  xix.  6,  where 
 it  is  enumerated  among  the  towns  allotted  out  of 
 Judah  to  Simeon.  Keil  suggests  that  it  is  the 
 same  place  which,  in  i  Chron.  iv.  31,  is  called  BetJi- 
 hirei  (''X12  "2,  oikov  Bapovaewpifx  [combining  two 
 
 names] ;  Alex.  Bapoviu.) ;  and  Gesenius  says  the  latter 
 name  is  a  corruption  of  Beth-lebaoth  (T/iesaur., 
 p.  194;  see  Beth-Birei).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEBB^US  (Ae/3i3aTos),  a  surname  of  the 
 Apostle  Jude  (Matt.  x.  3).  In  Mark  iii.  18  he  is 
 called  Thaddseus,  and  this  has  led  to  variations 
 of  reading  in  the  MSS.  from  a  desire  to  reconcile 
 the  two  passages.  Thus  in  Matt.  x.  3  the  cod.  B. 
 and  some  minuscular  codd.  read  Kal  OaddoLos ;  so 
 cod.  X  without  the  Kal,  cod.  D.  simply  Ae/3- 
 8ahs,  while  the  Text.  Rec.  with  A.  and  C"  has  A. 
 
 6  iTTiKX'rjdeis  Q.  Lachmann  has  adopted  the  formei 
 of  these  readings.  It  is  probable  that  Judas-Jacob; 
 had  both  these  as  surnames,  as  they  have  the  same 
 
 signification    substantially,    Lebbseus    (''2?)    being 
 
 derived  from  2?,  heai-t,  and  Thaddseus  ("''^n)  from 
 
 *in,  breast  (Winer,  R.   IV.  B.,  i.   632),   though  as 
 
 in  means  mamma  rather  than  pectus,  this  latter 
 etymology  is  somewhat  suspicious.  Meyer  con- 
 tends that  Thadda?us  is  ''NlD,  an  independent 
 proper  name,  while  Lebbseus  is  a  by-name  com- 
 mon among  the  Jews.  On  this  ground  Fritzsche 
 would  read  with  some  MSS.  in  Matt.  x.  3,  0a5- 
 Satos  6  i-KLKk.  Ae^^oLos. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LEBONAH  (njin^,    'frankincense;'    Ae^uvd; 
 
 Alex.  Tov  Ai^dvov  ttjs  Al^wvo.  ;  Lebona).  In  de- 
 scribing the  situation  of  Shiloh,  the  author  of  the 
 book  of  Judges  says  it  is  north  of  Bethel,  east  of 
 the  road  leading  from  Bethel  to  Shechem,  '  and  on 
 the  south  of  Lebonah''  (Judg.  xxi.  19).  The  site 
 of  Shiloh  is  well  known,  and  about  three  miles  west 
 of  it  is  the  little  village  of  Lubbdn  ;  which  is  doubt- 
 less identical  with  Lebonah.  The  identity  appears 
 to  have  been  first  discovered  by  R.  Parchi  in  the 
 14th  century  [Benj.  of  Jud.  by  Asher,  ii.  435).  The 
 place  is  also  mentioned  by  Maundrell  and  others 
 [Early  Travels,  p.  436  ;  Robinson,  ii.  272).  The 
 village  stands  on  the  lower  declivity  of  a  hill,  on 
 the  west  of  a  little  fertile  plain,  to  which  it  gives 
 its  name.  It  is  still  inhabited,  and  its  old  gray 
 houses  have  a  venerable  aspect.  Above  them,  in 
 the  sides  of  the  cliffs  and  rocks,  are  numbers  of 
 sepulchral  caves,  shewing  that  this  was  a  place  of 
 wealth  and  importance  in  the  days  of  Israel's  glory 
 {Handbk.,  p.  330).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEBONAH  (njia^  ;  Sept.  \l^a.vo%,  Xc^avwrSs ; 
 
 Lat.  t/itis ;  A.  V.  /ran/ciucense),  a  species  of  fra- 
 grant resin  that  exudes  from  a  tree.  It  is  a  native 
 product  of  Arabia  Felix,  and  hence  called  Odor 
 Arabic2ts  (Dioscorid.  i.  82;  Plant.,  Mil.  Glor., 
 ii.  4).  From  Cant.  iv.  6,  14,  it  has  appeared  to 
 some  that  the  tree  was  to  be  found  in  Palestine  ; 
 but  the  allusion  there  may  be  merely  poetical,  the 
 term  being  used  as  a  synonym  of  what  is  pleasant 
 and  delightful.  There  is  some  uncertainty  as  to 
 the  particular  kind  of  tree  from  which  the  lebonah 
 was  drawn.  Pliny  even  in  his  day  says,  '  nee 
 arboris  ipsius  qure  sit  facies  constat'  (A^.  H.  xii. 
 31)  ;  and  Thophrastus  also  attests  that  different 
 descriptions  of  the  mother  plant  were  given  {De 
 Plant,  ix.  4).  The  Arabian  botanist  Abulfadli 
 says  it  is  a  vigorous  shrub,  growing  only  in  Yemen 
 and  on  hills,  and  in  respect  of  its  leaves  and  fruit 
 resembling  the  myrtle  ;  a  description  which  has 
 been  thought  to  apply  very  well  to  the  Amyris 
 kataf,  or  the  Amyris  kafal  (Sprengel,  Hist,  rei 
 ILerb.,  i.  12,  257  ;  Gesch.  der  Botanik,  i.  16). 
 From  the  bad  quality  of  the  frankincense  now  ob- 
 tained in  Arabia  (called  there  ,.,bJ),  it  has  been 
 
 supposed  that  the  finer  kind  in  use  among  the 
 Hebrews  must  have  been  brought  from  India, 
 The  Arabs  themselves  use  for  the  best  sort  the 
 
 name     ,\k  '^.  kundur,  from  the  Sanscrit  kundu  ; 
 
 and  according  to  Colebrooke  [Asiat.  Res.  ix.  377) 
 this  comes  from  a  tree  known  to  botanists  as  the 
 Boswelli'i  serrata  or  thurifcra,  and  which  grows  on 
 
LECAH 
 
 807 
 
 LEE 
 
 the  hills  in  India,  abundantly  near  Nagpure. 
 When  the  bark  is  pierced,  there  exudes  a  gum  of 
 a  whitish  or  yellowish  colour,  externally  powdery 
 from  friction,  but  internally  pellucid,  very  brittle, 
 with  a  balsamic  or  resinous  smell,  and  a  somewhat 
 acrid  taste ;  it  burns  with  a  clear  flame  and  an 
 agreeable  odour.  It  is  the  olibamini  of  the  Phar- 
 macopeia. As  the  Indian  frankincense  would 
 come  to  the  western  nations  through  Arabia,  this 
 mav  account  for  all  the  ancient  writers  making  it  a 
 product  of  that  countiy  alone.  In  the  Mosaic 
 ceremonial  frankincense  was  used  as  an  ingredient 
 in  the  perfume  or  incense  that  was  to  be  placed 
 before  the  Lord  (Exod.  xxx.  34,  ff.)  ;  and  as  an 
 accompaniment  to  the  meat-ofiferiiig  (Lev.  ii.  i, 
 16;  vi.  15;  xxiv.  7;  Num.  v.  15).  Its  use  in 
 these  cases  arose  from  its  fragrant  odour  when 
 burnt ;  in  which  respect  the  incense  was  a  symbol 
 of  the  divine  name,  and  its  diffusion  an  emblem  of 
 the  publishing  abroad  of  that  name  (Mai.  i.  11  ; 
 comp.  Song  i.  3) ;  and  from  this,  as  prayer  is  a 
 calling  on  God's  name,  the  incense  came  to  be  an 
 emblem  of  prayer  (Ps.  cxli.  2  ;  Luke  i.  10  ;  Rev. 
 V.  8  ;  viii.  3,  4).  In  this  symbolical  representation 
 the  frankincense  especially  set  forth  holiness  as 
 characteristic  of  the  divine  name,  so  that  the  burn- 
 ing of  it  was  a  celebration  of  the  holiness  of  Jeho- 
 vah (Bahr,  Synibolik  d.  Mos.  Ctdiiis,  i.  466  ;  ii.  329, 
 etc.)     In  this  respect  its  whiteness,  from   which 
 
 it  received  its  name  (11313?,  from  p?,  to  be 
 white),  became  significant.  It  was  used  also  in 
 the  religious  services  of  the  heathen  (Herod,  i. 
 183  ;  Ovid,  Trist.  v.  5.  11  ;  Metam.  vi.  164; 
 Arnob.  adv.  Genies,  vi.  3  ;  vii.  26,  etc.)  On  the 
 altars  of  Mylitta  and  the  Paphian  Venus  only 
 incense  was  burnt  (Miinter,  Relig:  der  Babylouier, 
 p.  55  ;  Der  tempel  d.  hi  in  nil.  Gottin  zu  Paphos, 
 p.  20 ;  Hom.,  Od.  viii.  363  ;  see  Damm  on  S^DT7e£s; 
 Tacit.,  Hist.  ii.  3).  This  was  quite  foreign  from 
 the  Mosaic  institute. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LECAH  (na^  ;  k-qxo.^  ;  Alex.  Atjx^S  ;  Lecha). 
 In  enumerating  the  sons  of  Shelah,  the  son  of  Judah, 
 '■  Er,  the  father  of  Lecah,^  is  mentioned  (i  Chron.  iv. 
 21).  Lecah  was  a  town  or  \'illage  colonized  or  oc- 
 cupied by  the  family  of  Er.  The  name  is  not 
 found  in  any  other  place,  nor  is  its  site  known.  It 
 appears  to  have  been  near  Mareshah. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LE  CLERC,  Jean  (Clericus  Joannes),  was 
 born  at  Geneva  in  1657.  He  became  professor  of 
 Hebrew,  and  afterwards  of  church  history  to  the 
 Remonstrants  at  Amsterdam.  In  this  office  he 
 continued  till  his  death,  which  took  place  in  1736. 
 Le  Clerc  was  a  man  of  indefatigable  industry,  and 
 his  writings  are  very  numerous.  The  following  are 
 the  more  important  of  his  works  on  Biblical  sub- 
 jects: —  Translatio  Libroriim  V.  T.  cutn paraphrasi 
 perpetua,  Conunent.  philoL,  dissertt.  critt.  etc.,  4 
 vols,  fol.,  Amst.  1693,  1696,  1708,  1731;  Nm. 
 Test,  ex  versione  Vulg.,  ciuii  paraphr.  et  adnott.  H. 
 Hamviondi ;  exAngl.ling.  iiilat.  transtnlit,  suisqiie 
 afiimadd.  aiixit,  2  vols,  fol.,  Amst.  1698,  Frank. 
 1 7 14;  Hai-tnonia  Evangelica  cui  stdfcda  est  Hist. 
 Christi  ex  qiiatiior  Evv.  cojteinnata,  fol.,  Amst. 
 1699  ;  Ars  critica  in  qua  ad  studia  Lingg.  Lat. 
 Gr.  et  Heb.  via  munitnr,  2  vols.  8vo,  Amst.  1696, 
 Lond.  1699,  Amst.  1712.  Le  Clerc's  supplement 
 to  Hammond's  Notes  was  translated  into  English, 
 4to,  Lond.  1699  ;  his  Harmony  of  the  Gospels  was 
 also  translated,  Lond.  1 700,  but  very  inadequately. 
 
 Some  of  his  minor  writings  also  appeared  in  an 
 English  garb  under  the  title.  Twelve  Dissertations 
 out  of  M.  Le  Clerc's  Genesis,  etc.,  8vo,  Lond.  1696  ; 
 and  Parrhasiana,  or  thoughts  on  several  subjects, 
 etc.,  Lond.  1700.  Le  Clerc  was  a  man  of  varied 
 talents,  and  of  great  acuteness  and  perspicacity  ; 
 his  learning  was  extensive  and  accurate  ;  lais  spirit 
 bold  and  free  ;  and  his  tendency  somewhat  scepti- 
 cal and  destructive.  His  exegesis,  though  scholarly, 
 wants  depth,  earnestness,  and  sympathy  with  the 
 sacred  writers. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LEE,  Samuel,  D.D.,  a  distinguished  oriental- 
 ist and  Biblical  scholar,  was  born  at  Longnor,  in 
 Shropshire,  May  14,  1783.  After  receiving  the 
 elements  of  education,  he  was  apprenticed  to  a  car- 
 penter, but  his  native  aptitude  for  learning  having 
 been  accidentally  stimulated  by  a  desire  to  under- 
 stand some  Latin  quotations  and  the  sight  of  some 
 Latin  books,  he  procured  a  Latin  grammar,  and 
 taught  himself  that  language.  He  next  acquired 
 a  knowledge  of  Greek,  and  from  that  advanced  to  He- 
 brew, Chaldee,  Syriac,  and  Samaritan,  all  of  which 
 he  acquired  by  his  own  unaided  efforts  before  he 
 was  twenty-five  years  of  age.  By  this  time  he  had 
 married,  and  exchanged  his  former  occupation  for 
 that  of  a  schoolmaster.  Having  attracted  the 
 notice  of  Archdeacon  Corbett,  and  Dr.  Jon.  Scott, 
 he  was,  by  their  aid,  enabled  to  add  to  his  other 
 acquisitions  a  knowledge  of  Arabic,  Persic,  and 
 Hindustanee,  as  well  as  some  European  and  other 
 tongues.  In  1815  he  accepted  an  engagement  with 
 the  Church  Missionary  Society,  and  became  a 
 student  of  Queen's  College,  Cambridge,  where 
 he  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in  1817.  At  this 
 time  he  edited  portions  of  the  Scriptures,  and  of 
 the  Prayer  Book,  in  several  Oriental  languages.    In 
 
 1818  he  took  orders,  and  preached  at  Shrewsbury, 
 still  carrying  on  his  Oriental  studies  ;  at  this  time 
 he  is  said  to  have  known  eighteen  languages.     In 
 
 1819  he  became  professor  of  Arabic,  and  in  1834 
 Regius  professor  of  Hebrew  at  Cambridge ;  besides 
 receiving  some  pieces  of  Church  preferment,  and 
 the  title  of  D.D.,  first  from  the  University  of  Plalle, 
 and  then  from  that  of  Cambridge.  Shortly  before 
 his  death,  which  took  place  December  16,  1852,  he 
 had  become  Rector  of  Barley,  in  Somersetshire, 
 where  he  died.  Besides  the  editions  of  the  Scrip- 
 tures vv'hich  he  carried  through  the  press,  he  pub- 
 lished several  works  bearing  on  Biblical  literature. 
 The  most  important  are,  A  Granunar  of  the  Hebrem 
 Language,  compiled  from  the  best  authorities,  chiefly 
 Oriental,  which  has  passed  through  several  editions ; 
 A  Lexicon,  Heb.,  Chald.,  and  Eng.,  Lond.  1840; 
 The  Book  of  the  Patriarch  yob  translated,  with  Ln- 
 troduction  and  Commentary,  Lond.  1837  ;  An  Ln- 
 quiiy  into  the  Nature,  Progress,  aiid  End  oj 
 Prophecy,  Camb.  1849 ;  Prolegomena  in  Bib.  Polygl. 
 Londinens.  Minora,  Lond.  1828.  That  Dr.  Lee  \\as 
 a  great  scholar  cannot  be  doubted  ;  perhaps  he  was 
 the  greatest  British  orientalist  of  his  day ;  and  his 
 writings  bear  evident  traces  of  a  vigorous,  earnest, 
 and  independent  mind,  loving  truth,  and  boldly 
 pursuing  it.  But  he  never  wholly  surmounted  the 
 want  of  early  training,  and  his  works  display  that 
 deficiency  in  mental  discipline,  that  lack  of  sound 
 judgment,  and  that  tendency  to  confidence  and  self- 
 assertion  which  are  incident  to  the  self-educated  and 
 the  6\j/iixa6i)s.  His  influence  would  have  been 
 greater  had  his  dogmatism  and  pugnacity  been  less. 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
I.EECH 
 
 803 
 
 LEHABIM 
 
 LEECH.     [Alukah.] 
 
 LEEK.     [Chatzir.] 
 
 LEES.     [Shemarim.] 
 
 LE  FEVRE,  Jacques,  surnamed  from  the  place 
 of  his  birth  D'Etaples  (Faber  Stapulensis),  was 
 born  about  the  year  1455.  He  was  of  humble 
 birth  and  had  received  but  a  poor  education,  but 
 such  was  his  diligence,  and  such  his  ability,  that 
 he  rose  to  the  foremost  place  among  the  learned 
 men  of  his  day.  In  1493  he  became  a  teacher  of 
 theology  at  the  Sorbonne;  but  his  zeal  for  the 
 restored  learning,  and  especially  his  endeavours  to 
 promote  the  study  of  the  Greek  N.  T.,  excited  the 
 jealous  fears  of  his  superiors,  and  he  had  to  leave 
 his  post.  He  retired  to  the  court  of  Margaret  of 
 Navarre  at  Nerac,  where  he  enjoyed  a  peaceful 
 retreat  till  his  death  in  1537.  Though  he  himself 
 never  openly  left  the  communion  of  the  Romish 
 Church,  his  entire  working  was  in  the  direction  of 
 the  Reformation  movement ;  and  to  him  Farel 
 and  others  of  the  Reformers  were  indebted  for 
 much  instruction  and  stimulus  in  the  early  part  of 
 their  career.  Calvin  also  visited  him,  in  1533,  at 
 Nerac,  and  was  welcomed  by  the  old  man,  who 
 predicted  that  he  would  be  ^  insigne  calestis  in 
 Gallia  instaiirandi  7-egni  instriimentu77i''  (Beza,  J. 
 Calvini  Vit. )  Le  Fevre  wrote  Co?7ivientarii  Iniiia- 
 iorii  in  iv.  Evangelia,  Meaux  1522,  Colon.  1541 ; 
 Pauli  Epistola  14  cum  Conimentariis,  Par.  1515; 
 Coninientarii  in  Epp.  Caikol.,  Bas.  1527,  Antw. 
 1 540.  Le  Fevre  also  edited  Psaltei-ium  Quincnplex 
 videlicet  Gallic.  Roman.  Hcb.  Vet.  Conciliatnm,  cum 
 Cotnment.,  Paris  1508,  1513;  and  to  him  also  is 
 due  the  honour  of  producing  the  first  French  ver- 
 sion of  the  Scriptures  from  the  Vulgate  [French 
 Versions]. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LEGION  (Xe7etii' ;  legio),  a  division  of  the 
 Roman  army  containing  at  first  3000,  afterwards 
 4000,  then  5000  or  5200,  and  in  the  time  of  Christ 
 
 disciplined  and  officered  like  an  army.  Thus 
 Christ  speaks  of  the  '  legions  of  angels '  which  his 
 Father  would  readily  send  to  fight  for  him  (Matt. 
 
 321.   Legionary  Soldiers. 
 
 about  6000  infantry,  besides  horsemen.  In  the 
 N.  T.  the  term  is  applied  to  an  indefinitely  large 
 number  of  spiritual  beings  acting  in  concert,  and 
 
 322.   Legionary  Soldiers. 
 
 xxvi.  53),  and  the  interrogated  unclean  spirit 
 replies,  '  My  name  is  legion,  for  we  are  many ' 
 (Mark  v.  9).— J.  G.  C. 
 
 LEHABIM  (D-nni?;  Aa^ielfi;  Laabiiu.      The 
 
 passage  in  i  Chron.  i.  1 1  containing  this  word  is 
 omitted  in  the  Cod.  Vat.  of  the  Sept. ;  but  the 
 Alex,  reads  both  Aoi;5t€i,u  and  A  w5tet'/i).  The  tenth 
 chapter  of  Genesis  gives  an  outline  of  the  genealogy 
 of  all  the  ancient  nations,  tracing  them  up  to  Noah. 
 Mizraim  was  the  second  son  of  Ham,  and  from 
 Mizraim  sprung  the  Lehabim.  The  word  is  in  the 
 plural,  and  evidently  signifies  a  tribe,  doubtless 
 taking  the  name  of  Lehab,  Mizraim's  third  son 
 (Gen.  X.  13).  Bochart  affirms  that  the  Lehabim 
 are  not,  as  is  generally  supposed,  identical  with  the 
 Libyans.  His  reasons  are  :  That  Lybia  was  much 
 too  large  a  countiy  to  have  been  peopled  by  one 
 son  of  Mizraim  ;  and  that  in  other  parts  of  Scripture 
 Lybia  is  either  called  Phut  (t313,  Jer.  xlvi.  9 ;  Ezek. 
 
 XXX.  5),  or  Lubim  (C^l?,  2  Chron.  xii.  3  ;  Nahum 
 iii.  9),  and  Phut  was  a  brother,  and  not  a  son  of 
 Mizraim  (Gen.  x.  6 ;  Bochart,  Opera,  i.  279). 
 These  arguments  do  not  stand  the  test  of  historical 
 criticism.  Phut  and  Lubim  are  not  identical  (Nahum 
 iii.  9) ;  and  the  Lehabim  may  have  been  joined  by 
 other  tribes  in  colonizing  Libya.  It  is  quite  true 
 there  is  no  direct  evidence  to  identify  the  Lehabim 
 and  Lubim ;  yet  there  seems  a  high  probability  that 
 the  words  are  only  different  forms  of  the  same 
 name — the  fomier  being  the  more  ancient,  the 
 middle  radical  H  was  afterwards  softened  (as  is  not 
 unusual  in  Hebrew,   Gesen.   Thes.,  pp.  743,  360) 
 
 into  1  quiescent.     Thus  Lehabim  (Cin?)  became 
 
 Lubim  (D''3v).  The  Lehabim  are  not  again  men- 
 tioned in  Scripture,  but  we  find  the  Lubim 
 connected  with  Mizraim  (2  Chron.  xii.  3),  and  the 
 Kushites  or  Ethiopians  (xvi.  8 ;  see  Art.  Lubim). 
 We  may  therefore  safely  infer  that  the  Lehabim 
 were  the  ancient  Lubim  or  Libyans,  who  perhaps 
 first  settled  on  the  borders  of  the  Nile,  among  or 
 beside  the  Mizraim  ;  but,  as  they  increased  in  num- 
 ber, migrated  to  the  wide  regions  south-west,  and 
 occupied  the  vast  territory  known  to  classic  geogra- 
 
LEHI 
 
 809 
 
 T,E  LONG 
 
 phers  as  Lybia  (Kalisch  Oti  Gen.  x.  13  ;  see  also 
 Micliaelis,  Spicilcg.  Geos^r. ;  Knobel,  die  Volker- 
 iafel  des  Pent.)  Dr.  Beke  maintains  that  the 
 Lehabim,  as  well  as  the  Mizraim,  were  a  people  of 
 north-western  Arabia  ;  but,  as  he  states  himself, 
 his  views  are  opposed  alike  to  the  opinions  of  ancient 
 and  modem  geographers ;  and  his  arguments  do 
 not  appear  of  sufficient  weight  to  command  ac- 
 ceptance {On'giiies  Bibliae,  pp.  167,  198,  scq.) — 
 J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEHI  (Tl?,  the  'cheek,'  or  'jaw-bone  ;'  Aex', 
 
 Judg.  XV.  9  ;  ew5  litaybvos,  ver.  14  ;  Alex,  in  ver. 
 9,  Aevl ;  Lecki,  id  est,  maxilla).  The  story  of  Lehi 
 is  a  romantic  episode  in  the  history  of  Samson. 
 After  the  slaughter  of  the  Philistines,  in  revenge 
 for  the  murder  of  his  wife,  the  warriors  of  that 
 nation  '  went  up,  and  pitched  in  Judah,  and  spread 
 themselves  in  Lehi''  (Judg.  xv.  9).  The  Israelites 
 afraid,  bound  Samson,  and  gave  him  up  to  his 
 enemies  at  Lehi  (ver.  14).  There,  however,  he 
 bi'ake  his  bonds,  seized  the  faw-lwne  {Lehi)  of  an 
 ass,  and  slew  a  thousand  of  them.  Having  dis- 
 persed the  Philistines,  '  he  cast  aivay  'Ca.s.  jaw-bone, 
 and  called  that  place  Ramath-Lehi''  (17,  which 
 may  be  rendered  '  the  casting  away  of  the  jaw- 
 bone ').  After  the  fatigue,  Samson  was  almost 
 fainting  with  thirst,  and  prayed  for  water ;  and  'God 
 
 clave  an  hollow  place,  which  is  in  Lehi  (TIPQ  "^t^*^? ; 
 A.  v.,  'that  was  in  the  jaw'),  and  there  came 
 water  thereout  ;  wherefore  he  called  the  name 
 thereof  En-hakkore  (NllpH  py,  '  the  fountain  of 
 the  caller,'  or  'of  him  who  called'),  which  is  in 
 
 Lehi  Cn^a  nC^ts)  unto  this  day.'  Our  A.  V.  gives 
 an  appearance  of  improbability  to  one  part  of  the 
 story  which  does  not  exist  in  the  Hebrew.  It 
 represents  the  fountain  as  opened  in  the  jazv-bone, 
 whereas  it  ought  to  be  in  Lehi.  The  same  words 
 rendered  in  the  first  clause  of  the  verse,  '  that  was 
 
 in  the  jaw '  (Tlp^'IC'N),  are  rendered  in  the  last 
 clause,  '  which  is  in  Lehi.'  The  latter  is  the  correct 
 rendering  for  both. 
 
 The  name  of  the  place  before  the  conflict  was 
 evidently  Lehi,  as  appears  from  verses  9  and  14  ; 
 perhaps  so  called  from  the  form  of  some  hill  or 
 rock  (Gesen. ,  Thesaur. ,  p.  752).  After  the  slaughter 
 of  the  Philistines,  Samson,  with  a  characteristic 
 play  upon  the  name,  makes  it  descriptive  of  his 
 signal  and  singular  victory  (cf.  GiLGAL ;  Gilead). 
 It  is  remarkable  that  in  the  Septuagint  the  word 
 Lehi  (in?)  is  uniformly  translated  {aia.'^i^v),  except 
 in  ver.  9 ;  whether  applied  to  the  place  or  to  the 
 jaw-bone.  This  makes  the  whole  passage  very 
 obscure.  The  rendering  of  the  Vulg.  is  even  worse 
 (see,  for  instance,  ver.  19).  Josephus  says  the 
 place  was  called  'Zia.-^ii^v,  'Jaw-bone,'  on  account 
 of  Samson's  deed, '  though  before  it  had  no  name  ' 
 {Antiq.  v.  8.  8). 
 
 The  site  of  Lehi  is  unknown.  Jerome  states 
 that  Paula,  when  on  her  way  from  Bethlehem  to 
 Egypt,  passed  from  Sochoth  to  the  fountain  of 
 Samson  {Opera,  i.  705,  ed.  Migne).  Later  writers 
 locate  it  beside  Eleutheropolis  {Anton.  Mar.,  /tin. 
 30;  Reland,  p.  872);  but  the  tradition  appears  to 
 have  been  vague  and  uncertain  (Robinson,  ii.  64, 
 seq. )  The  writer  could  not  hear  of  any  fountain  at 
 Eleutheropolis,  nor  was  Dr.  Robinson  more  suc- 
 cessful. There  is  a  deep  old  well ;  but,  of  course, 
 it  would  not  answer  to   the  Scripture   narrative 
 
 (Robinson,  ii.  26,  seq.)  Van  de  Velde  tries  to 
 identify  Lehi  with  a  hill  called  Tel  el-Lekiyeh 
 about  five  miles  north  of  Beersheba ;  but  this  is 
 alike  opposed  to  Scripture  topography  and  to  tra- 
 dition (see,  however,  Me/noir,  p.  342).  Tobler 
 found  a  Beit-Likieh  near  Beth-horon  {Dritte  Wan- 
 dening) ;  but  this  seems  too  far  north. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEIGHTON,  Robert,  was  bom  in  the  year 
 161 1,  and  probably  in  London,  where  his  father 
 resided.  Being  of  Scottish  descent,  he  was  edu- 
 cated at  Edinburgh,  and  took  his  degree  of  M.  A. 
 at  the  university  there  in  163 1.  After  leaving  the 
 university  he  spent  some  years  on  the  Continent, 
 chiefly  in  France.  On  his  return  to  Scotland  he 
 was  licensed  by  the  Presbytery  of  Edinburgh,  and 
 became  in  1641  minister  of  the  parish  of  New- 
 battle,  where  he  remained  till  1653.  Of  events 
 during  his  incumbency  some  curious  notices, 
 from  the  records  of  the  Presbytery  of  Dalkeith 
 and  the  kirk-session  books  of  Newbattle,  have 
 been  published  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Society 
 of  Antiquaries  of  Scotland,  vol.  iv.  p.  463,  ff. 
 In  1653,  Leighton  became  principal  of  the  Uni- 
 versity of  Glasgow,  which  office  he  held  till  after 
 the  Restoration.  On  the  re-establishment  of 
 Episcopacy  in  Scotland,  he  became  Bishop  of 
 Dunblane,  to  which  office  he  was  consecrated  at 
 Westminster,  15th  December  1661;  and  in  1669  he 
 became  Archbishop  of  Glasgow.  In  1674  he  re- 
 signed this  office  and  retired  to  England,  where  he 
 resided  for  several  years,  and  died  at  London  25th 
 June  1684.  Leighton's  great  work  is  his  Practical 
 Commentary  npon  the  First  General  Epistle  of  St. 
 Peter.  This  is  not  a  learned  exposition  ;  the  writer 
 hardly  notices  questions  of  philology  at  all ;  but 
 perhaps  no  more  remarkable  instance  is  extant  of 
 the  power  which  sympathy  with  the  writer  gives  in 
 enabling  an  expositor  to  bring  out  and  elucidate 
 his  meaning.  Leighton  wrote  also  Pmlectiones 
 TheologiccE,  of  which  an  edition  was  published  a 
 few  years  ago  by  the  late  Prof.  Scholefield  of 
 Cambridge  ;  also  some  sermons  and  charges. 
 There  is  an  edition  of  his  work  in  4  vols.  8vo, 
 Lond.  1819  ;  but  the  best  edition  is  that  of  Pear- 
 son, Lond.  1828.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 LE  JAY,  Guy  Michel,  was  born  in  Paris,  158S, 
 and  died  loth  July  1675.  He  was  the  editor  of 
 the  Paris  Polyglott,  which  appeared  in  10  vols,  fob, 
 Par.  1629-45.  The  first  four  vols,  contain  the 
 Heb.,  Chald.,  LXX.,  and  Vulg.  texts  of  the 
 O.  T.;  vols.  5  and  6,  the  N.  t.  in  Gr.,  Syr., 
 Arab.,  and  Lat. ;  vol.  7,  the  Heb.  Samar.  Pent., 
 the  Sam.  vers.,  with  translation  by  Morinus,  the 
 Arab,  and  Syr.  Pent.;  vols.  8-10,  the  rest  of  the 
 books  of  the  O.  T.  in  Syr.  and  Arab.  Lejay  lost 
 largely  by  this  publication  ;  but  as  a  reward  for  his 
 labour  and  cost  he  was  ennobled.  The  work  was  the 
 best  of  its  kind  till  the  London  Polyglott  appeared, 
 by  which  it  was  soon  superseded. — \V.  L.  A. 
 
 LE  LONG,  Jacques,  was  bom  at  Paris  in 
 1665.  Having  finished  his  studies,  he  became 
 librarian  first  of  the  Seminary  at  Aubervilliers,  and 
 then  of  the  Oratoire  at  Paris,  an  office  which  he 
 held  till  his  death  in  1721.  He  devoted  himself 
 chiefly  to  bibliography.  His  great  work  is  his 
 Bibliotheca  Sacra  sat  syllables  omnium  ferme  sac. 
 Script,  editiojinm  ac  versioniim,  etc.,  2  vols.,  1709. 
 This  was  but  the  first  part  of  a  larger  work  which 
 he  designed  to  prepare ;  the  second  was  to  have 
 
LE  MAISTRE 
 
 810 
 
 LEO  JUD^ 
 
 been  devoted  to  the  authors  who  had  written  on 
 the  Scriptures.  Le  Long  issued  two  other  editions 
 of  his  Bibliotheca,  with  corrections  and  additions  ; 
 still  further  improvements  were  introduced  in  the 
 edition  of  C.  F.  Boerner,  Lips.  1709,  and  in  that 
 of  Desmalets,  Par.  1723;  but  the  recasting  of  the 
 work  by  A.  G.  Masch,  2  vols.  4to,  177S,  gave  it 
 the  form  in  which  it  has  best  suljserved  the  wants 
 of  the  ]]iblical  student.  To  such  it  is  invaluable. — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 LE  MAISTRE.     [Saci  De.] 
 
 L'EMPEREUR,  Constantine,  was  born  at 
 Oppyck  in  the  Netherlands;  and  was  successively 
 professor  of  Hebrew  at  Harderwyk,  and  professor 
 of  theology  at  Leyden,  where  he  died  in  1648.  He 
 edited  the  Commentary  of  Ibn  Ezra  and  Mos. 
 Alschech  on  Is.  Hi.  13-liii.  12,  with  notes,  Leyd. 
 1633  ;  and  the  Paraphrase  of  Joseph  ben  Jachja  on 
 Daniel,  with  translation  and  notes,  Amst.  1633. 
 He  published  also  Clavis  Talinudica  complectcns 
 formulas,  loca  diakdica  et  lo^ica  p7-iscontin  Jjida- 
 ontm,  Leyd.  1634  ;  and  Dc  Icgg.  Heb.  forens., 
 Leyd.  1637.— W.  L.  A. 
 
 L'ENFANT,  Jacques,  a  minister  of  the  French 
 Protestant  Church,  was  born  13th  April  1661,  at 
 Bazoche,  in  the  district  of  Beauce  in  France.  He 
 was  educated  at  Saunnir,  Geneva,  and  Heidelberg. 
 In  the  last-named  place  he  officiated  as  minister 
 of  the  French  church ;  he  afterwards  repaired  to 
 Berlin,  where  he  was  associated  with  Beausobre. 
 He  died  7th  August  1728.  Besides  his  Histories 
 of  the  Council  of  Constance  and  that  of  Nice,  lie  is 
 known  for  the  share  he  had,  along  with  Beausobre, 
 in  the  French  translation  of  the  N.  T.  which  ap- 
 peared in  1 7 18  [Beausobre]. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LEMUEL  6x10^;    LXX.,  inrh  Beov'i  Aquila, 
 
 Aa/j.fiovv ;  Symmachus,  TafifioiriX ;  Theodotion,  Pe- 
 ^oue\),  a  king,  to  whom  his  mother  addressed  the 
 lessons  of  chastity  and  temperance  contained  in 
 Prov.  xxxi.  2-9.  As  we  are  told  nothing  else  re- 
 specting him,  and  his  name  does  not  occur  else- 
 where, a  wide  field  has  been  opened  to  the  conjec- 
 tures of  the  learned  : — I.  The  Jews  in  general,  and 
 the  fathers,  both  Greek  and  Latin,  identify  Lemuel 
 with  Solomon.  According  to  the  Jews,  Solomon 
 had  ei^/i^  names,  of  which  this  was  one.  The  name 
 means  either  '  (created)  by  God,'  like  Lael  in  Num. 
 iii.  24  (Gesen.  T/ies.  s.  v.),  or  '  (dedicated)  to  God' 
 (J.  Simonis,  Onomast.  V.  T.,  p.  503)  ;  (a),  Simonis 
 
 thinks  that  PS1D?  is  equivalent  to  PX'lD?  (ver.  4, 
 
 and  of.  Samuel)  ;  and  that  \typ  is  the  same  as  7 
 
 (as  it  is  in  Job  xxvii.  14),  that  fonn  being  chosen 
 for  the  sake  of  the  alliteration  which  it  furnished 
 
 with  TVo^V ;  (/3)  Schultens  thinks  that  the  name 
 
 Lemuel  was  used  as  a  mere  synonym  of  Jedidiah, 
 one  of  the  names  of  Solomon  (2  Sam.  xii.  25) ;  (7), 
 M.  Geier  regards  it  as  a  pet  name  given  to  Solo- 
 mon  in   his  infancy  by  Bathsheba,   to  avoid  the 
 
 harsher  ^]^,  and  J.  F.  Schelling  also  looks  upon  it 
 
 as  a  diminutive.  2.  Grotius  first  suggested  that 
 Lemuel  was  Hezekiah,  referring  to  Prov.  xxv.  i,  and 
 giving  to  Lemuel,  which  he  derives  from  the  Arabic, 
 the  same  meaning  as  Hezekiah,  which  he  interprets 
 to  be  '  a  Deo  prehensus.'  3.  The  purely  arbitrary 
 coniecture  of  Hitzig,  Ziegler,  and  others  (Hitzig, 
 
 Die  SpriicJie  Sal.,  ad  loc. ;  Rosenmiiller,  SchoL,  ad 
 loc. )  is,  that  Lemuel  was  an  Arab  or  Edomite  emir, 
 celebrated  (as  the  Arabs  often  were)  for  skill  in 
 proverbs.  To  support  this  view  Hitzig,  both  in 
 XXX.  I,  and  xxxi.  i,  takes  Nti'D  (A-.  V.  '■prophecy'') 
 
 as  a  proper  name,  '  Massa,'  in  which  opinion  Bun- 
 sen  partly  agrees.      The  absence  of  the  article  with 
 
 "^/O,  renders  it,  however,  inadmissible  to  translate 
 
 the  verse,  '  Lemuel,  king  of  Massa,''  in  xxxi.  I  ; 
 although  Davidson,  by  altering  the  reading  in  xxx. 
 I,  makes  Massa  a  proper  name  in  l/ial  verse  (Inlrod. 
 ii.  33S).  Hitzig  ingeniously  compares  Lemuel  with 
 Nemuel,  Simeon's  first-born  (i  Chron.  iv.  24)  ;  and 
 then  shews  that  Massa  fnay  have  been  founded  by 
 those  500  Simeonites  who  smote  the  remnant  of 
 the  Amalekites  in  Mount  Seir  (i  Chron.  iv.  39- 
 43).  He  therefore  conchides  that  Agur  and  Lem- 
 uel were  both  sons  of  the  queen  of  Massa  ('her 
 obeyed  in  Massa,'  as  he  renders  xxx.  i),  but  that 
 they  were  of  Israelite  descent.  4.  Eichhorn  {Eiiil., 
 v.  105),  Ewald  (Spriiche  Sal.,  173),  Keil  {Einl., 
 sec.  120),  and  others,  regard  Lemuel  as  a  merely 
 poetic  and  imaginary  name,  chosen  to  represent 
 some  ideal  king,  who  may  well  be  supposed  to  have 
 been  addressed  in  the  moral  precepts  contained  in 
 xxxi.  2-9.  It  is,  in  the  absence  of  all  trustworthy 
 data,  impossible  to  decide  between  these  conflicting 
 theories.  The  LXX.  give  us  no  assistance  what- 
 ever, since  they  render  xxxi.  i,  ot  e/xot  X67ot  Apt]vra.\ 
 xj-Ko  deov  jSacrtA^ws,  and  in  ver.  4  they  wander  so 
 widely  from  the  Hebrew  as  to  leave  us  hopelessly 
 in  the  dark  as  to  the  reading  they  may  have  fol- 
 lowed. If  we  are  to  choose  between  the  theories 
 mentioned,  it  is  obvious  that  the  first  and  the  fourth 
 are  less  arbitrary  than  the  others.  The  first  is  sup- 
 ported by  the  authority  of  Jewish  tradition  ;  the 
 fourth  is  in  accordance  with  a  practice  very  preva- 
 lent among  the  Jews  during  the  later  period  of  their 
 literature.  We  would,  however,  prefer  to  class 
 Lemuel  with  Agur,  Ithiel,  Ucal,  Darda,  Ethan, 
 and  many  other  persons  mentioned  incidentally  in 
 Scripture,  of  whom  all  further  record  and  memoiy 
 have  been  lost. — F.  W.  F. 
 
 LENTILES.     [Adashim.] 
 
 LEO  JUD^,  one  of  the  Swiss  Reformers,  and 
 the  early  friend  of  Zuingli,  was  born  at  Germar  in 
 Alsace,  in  1482.  His  father's  name  was  John  Jud ; 
 but  whether  this  arose  from  his  family  being  of 
 Jewish  descent,  Leo  himself  tells  us  he  was  unable 
 to  say.  The  name,  however,  exposed  him  to  re- 
 proach, and  perhaps  for  this  reason  we  find  him 
 sometimes  designating  himself  Leo  Keller;  in 
 Zurich  he  was  known  as  Meister  Low,  and  this 
 name  his  descendants  adopted.  He  was  educated 
 for  the  medical  profession ;  but  through  the  influence 
 of  Zuingli  he  forsook  this  for  the  clerical,  and  in 
 1522  became  minister  of  St.  Peter's  Church  at 
 Zurich.  Here  he  laboured  till  his  death,  and  had 
 an  important  share  in  the  reformatory  movements 
 of  the  time  and  the  doctrinal  controversies  which 
 divided  the  Reformers.  He  died  19th  June  1542. 
 At  the  time  of  his  death  he  was  engaged  on  a 
 translation  of  the  Bible  into  Latin,  which  he  left 
 unfinished :  it  was  completed  by  Bibliander,  who 
 translated  what  was  left  of  the  O.  T. ;  Bet.  Choli, 
 who  translated  the  Apociyphal  books  ;  and  Rud. 
 Gualter,  who  translated  the  N.  T.  on  the  basis  of 
 the  version  of  Erasmus,    The  work  was  revised  by 
 
LEO  DI  MODENA 
 
 811 
 
 LEOPARD 
 
 Pellican,  and  appeared  in  1543.  This  translation 
 is  marked  by  adherence  to  the  meaning  rather 
 than  the  words  of  the  original ;  it  is  consequently 
 somewhat  paraphrastic ;  but  it  is  fair  and  true, 
 and  the  Latinity  is  good.  It  has  been  often  re- 
 printed. Leo  translated  also  into  German  Eras- 
 mus' Paraphrases  of  the  N.  T.  ;  Augustine's  tract 
 De  Spiritu  d  Litera,  and  edited  several  of  the 
 works  of  Zuingli.  He  also  translated  the  Prophets 
 in  the  Deutsche  Bibel  which  appeared  at  Ziirich  in 
 1529  [German  Versions]. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LEO  DI  MODENA,  b.  Isaac  b.  Mordecai, 
 also  called  Jehudah  Arje  Modanese,  was  born  in 
 Venice,  April  23,  157 1,  of  an  ancient  and  literary 
 family  who  emigrated  from  France  into  Italy. 
 Leo  displayed  his  talents  at  so  extraordinarily 
 tender  an  age  that  he  read  the  Sabbatic  lesson 
 [Haphtara]  before  the  whole  congregation  in  the 
 synajTogue  when  he  was  two  and  a  half  years  old, 
 and  appeared  as  preacher  (|Ei'"lT)  when  he  was  ten 
 years  old.  This  thirst  for  learning  and  devoted- 
 ness  to  Biblical  literature  and  exegesis,  constituted 
 the  most  prominent  features  of  his  long  and 
 chequered  life,  as  may  be  seen  from  his  numerous 
 poetical,  liturgical,  ethical,  doctrinal,  polemical, 
 and  exegetical  works.  Those  of  his  productions 
 which  relate  to  Biblical  literature  and  exegesis  are 
 as  follows  : — (i)   A    Hebrew   and    Italian  lexicon 
 
 called  miri''  ni^J,  The  Captivity  of  Jiidah,  or 
 ^31  ~m'Q,  Explanation  of  IVords,  in  which  he 
 explains  in  Italian  all  the  difficult  expressions  in 
 the  Hebrew  Bible,  and  which  is  preceded  by 
 grammatical  rules,  Venice  1612,  Padua  1640.  It 
 has  also  been  printed  in  the  margin  of  the  Hebrew 
 Bibles  published  for  the  use  of  the  Italian  Jews, 
 following  the  order  of  the  Canonical  books,  and 
 thus  being  equivalent  to  an  Italian  translation.  (2) 
 A  Rabbinical  and  Italian  vocabulary,  called  "'D 
 rmS,  The  Lion's  Mouth,  of  which  the  Italian  title 
 is  Raccolta  delle  voci  Rabin,  non  Hebr.  ni  CItald. , 
 itc. ,  Padua  1640;  appended  to  the  preceding 
 work,  afterwards  printed  separately,  in  Venice 
 1648.  (3)  A  polemical  treatise  on  the  genuineness 
 of  the  celebrated  Kabbalistical  interpretation  of 
 the  Pentateuch  called  the  Sohar,  entitled  "IQD 
 Dm3  """IX,  Leipzig  1840.  (4)  Historia  de'  Rite 
 Hebraici,  or  the  history  of  the  rites,  customs, 
 and  manner  of  life  of  the  Jews,  consisting  of 
 thirteen  chapters,  and  written  in  Italian,  Venice 
 1638.  This  celebrated  and  most  useful  Manual 
 was  translated  into  English  by  Edmund  Chilmead, 
 London  1650;  and  also  edited  by  Simon  Ockley, 
 under  the  title  Histoiy  of  the  Present  Jews 
 throughout  the  World,  London  1707,  in  Picard's 
 Ceremonies  and  Rehgious  Customs  of  the  Various 
 Nations  of  the  Known  World,  vol.  i. ,  London  1 733  ; 
 into  French  by  Father  Simon,  who  prefaced  it  with 
 an  elaborate  account  of  the  Karaites  and  Sama- 
 ritans, Paris  1674  ;  into  Dutch,  Amsterdam  1683 ; 
 and  into  Latin  by  Grosgebauer,  Historia  ritiniin 
 yuditortim,  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1693.  Leo 
 also  wrote  (5)  A  commentary  on  the  books  of 
 Samuel ;  (6)  A  commentary  on  the  five  Megilloth, 
 i.  c.,  the  Song  of  Songs,  Ruth,  Lamentations, 
 Ecclesiastes,  and  Esther ;  (7)  A  commentary  on 
 the  Psalms  ;  (8)  A  commentary  on  Proverbs ;  (9) 
 A  commentary  on  the  Sabbatic  lessons  ;  and  (10)  A 
 polemical  work  against  Christianity,  entitled  pD 
 mm,  but  these  works  have  not  as  yet  been  pub- 
 lished.    Leo  died  in  Venice,  where  he  was  chief 
 
 rabbi,  in  1648,  in  the  seventy-seventh  year  of  his 
 age  ;  comp.  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Judaica,  ii.  p.  383, 
 ff. ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogus  Libr.  Hebr.  in  Biblio- 
 theca Bodleiana,  col.  1345-1356  ;  Der  Israelitische 
 Volkslehrer,  vol.  iv.,  Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1854, 
 pp.  91,  ff.  ;  123,  fif.  ;  1S6,  ff.  ;  247,  ff.  ;  vol.  v., 
 i8S5>  P-  396,  ff.— C.  D.  G. 
 LEOPARD    003,     namer;    Sept.     TrdpSaXts ; 
 
 Cant.  iv.  8 ;  Is.  xi.  6 ;  Jer.  v.  6  ;  xiii.  23  ;  Hos. 
 xiii.  7  ;  Hab.  i.  8 ;  Dan.  vii.  6  ;  Rev.  xiii.  2  ;  Ec- 
 clus.  xxviii.  23).  Though  zoologists  differ  in 
 opinion  respecting  the  identity  of  the  leopard  and 
 the  panther,  and  dispute,  supposing  them  to  be  dis- 
 tinct, how  these  names  should  be  respectively 
 applied,  and  by  what  marks  the  animals  should  be 
 distinguished,  nevertheless  there  can  be  no  doubt 
 that  the  ni7nr  of  the  Bible  is  that  great  spotted 
 feline  which  anciently  infested  the  Syrian  moun- 
 tains, and  even  now  occurs  in  the  wooded  ranges 
 
 of  Libanus ;  for  the  Arabs  still  use  ^    nimr, 
 
 the  same  word  slightly  modified,  to  denote  that 
 animal.  The  Abyssinian  name  differs  scarcely  from 
 either ;  and  in  all  these  tongues  it  means  spotted. 
 Pigikris,  according  to  Kirscher,  is  the  Coptic  name ; 
 and  in  English,  '  leopard  '  has  been  adopted  as 
 the  most  appropriate  to  represent  both  the  He- 
 brew word  and  the  Greek  TrdpoaXis,  although  the 
 Latin  leopardiis  is  not  found  in  any  author  an- 
 terior to  the  3d  century,  and  is  derived  from  a 
 gross  mistake  in  natural  history.  The  variety  of 
 leopard,  or  rather  panther,  of  Syria,  is  consider- 
 ably below  the  stature  of  a  lioness,  but  very  heavy 
 in  proportion  to  its  bulk.  Its  general  foim  is  so 
 well  known  as  to  require  no  description  beyond 
 stating  that  the  spots  are  rather  more  irregular,  and 
 
 the  colour  more  mixed  with  whitish,  than  in  the 
 other  pantherine  felinse,  excepting  the  Felis  Uncia, 
 or  Felis  Irbis,  of  High  Asia,  which  is  shaggy  arid 
 almost  white.  It  is  a  nocturnal  cat-like  animal  in 
 habits,  dangerous  to  all  domestic  cattle,  and  some- 
 times even  to  man.  In  the  Scriptures  it  is  con- 
 stantly placed  in  juxtaposition  with  the  lion  or  the 
 wolf  ;  which  last,  if  the  hysena  be  intended,  forms 
 a  natural  association.  There  is  in  Asia  Minor  a 
 species  or  variety  of  panther,  much  larger  than  the 
 Syrian,  not  unfrequent  on  the  borders  of  the  snowy 
 tracts  even  of  Mount  Ida,  above  ancient  Troy ;  and 
 the  group  of  these  spotted  animals  is  spread  over 
 the  whole  of  Southern  Asia  to  Africa.  From 
 several  names  of  places,  it  appears  that,  in  the 
 earlier  ages  of  Israelitish  dominion,  it  was  suffi- 
 ciently numerous  in  Palestine.    Leopard  skins  were 
 
LEPROSY 
 
 812 
 
 LEPROSY 
 
 worn  as  a  part  of  ceremonial  costume  by  the  su- 
 periors of  the  Egyptian  priesthood,  and  by  other 
 personages  in  Nubia  ;  and  tlie  animal  itself  is  repre- 
 sented in  the  processions  of  tributary  nations. — 
 C.  H.  S. 
 
 LEPROSY    (nj?"]^;    Xiirpa,    XevK-n),    that   foul 
 
 cutaneous  disease,  the  description  of  which,  as 
 well  as  the  regulations  connected  therewith,  are 
 given  in  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv.  ;  comp.  also  Exod.  iv.  6, 
 7;  Num.  xii.  10-15;  2  Sam.  iii.  29;  2  Kings  v. 
 27 ;  vii.  3  ;  xv.  5  ;  Matt.  viii.  2  ;  x.  8,  a/. 
 Whether  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv.,  speaks  of  one  distemper, 
 or  a  group  of  diseases  having  mutually  a  mere 
 superficial  resemblance,  or  a  real  affinity  ;  or 
 whether  the  malady  here  spoken  of  can  be  iden- 
 tified with  tlie  leprosy  of  modern  Syria,  Greece, 
 Spain,  etc.,  will  best  be  decided  by  an  analysis  of 
 the  Scriptural  description  of  this  distemper.  The 
 leprosy  of  the  Bible  consists  of  three  general 
 classes,  viz.,  leprosy  of  man,  leprosy  of  garments 
 and  vessels,  and  leprosy  of  houses,  which  we  shall 
 discuss  seriaiiin. 
 
 I.  Leproiis  man. — I>ev.  xiii.  2-44,  which  describes 
 this  distemper  as  laying  hold  of  man,  gives  six  dif- 
 ferent circumstances  under  which  it  may  develope 
 itself.     They  are  as  follows  : — 
 
 i.  The  first  circumstance  mentioned  in  Lev. 
 xiii.  2-6  is  that  it  may  develope  itself  without  any 
 apparent  cause.  Hence  it  is  enjoined  that  if  any 
 one  should  notice  a  rising  or  swelling  (^Xt^*),  an 
 eruption  or  scab  (DriDD),  or  a  glossy  pimple 
 (mnQ)  in  the  skin  of  his  flesh,  which  may  termi- 
 nate in  leprosy  (0^"^),  he  is  at  once  to  be  taken 
 to  the  priest,  who  is  to  examine  it  and  pronounce 
 it  leprosy,  and  the  man  unclean,  if  it  exhibits  these 
 two  symptoms — viz.,  a,  the  hair  of  the  affected 
 spot  changed  from  its  natural  black  colour  to 
 white  ;  and  l>,  the  spot  deeper  than  the  general 
 level  of  the  skin  of  the  body  (2,  3).  But  if  these 
 two  symptoms  do  not  appear  in  the  bright  pimple, 
 the  priest  is  to  shut  him  up  for  seven  days,  exa- 
 mine him  again  on  the  seventh  day,  and  if  the 
 disease  appears  to  have  made  no  progress  during 
 this  time,  he  is  to  remand  the  patient  for  another 
 seven  days  (4,  5),  and  then,  if  on  inspecting  it 
 again  he  finds  that  the  bright  spot  has  grown 
 darker  (Hn^),  and  that  it  has  not  spread  on  the 
 skin,  he  is  to  pronounce  it  a  simple  scab  (nn2D, 
 nnSDD),  and  the  person  clean  after  washing  his 
 garments  (6).  If,  however,  the  pustule  spreads 
 over  the  skin  after  it  has  been  pronounced  a 
 simple  scab  and  the  individual  clean,  the  priest  is 
 to  declare  it  leprosy,  and  the  patient  unclean  (7, 
 8).  It  is  thus  evident  that  the  symptoms  which 
 indicated  Scriptural  leprosy,  as  the  Mishna  rightly 
 remarks  (A^egaiin  iii.  3),  are  bright  pimples,  a  little 
 depressed,  turning  the  hair  white,  and  spreading 
 over  the  skin. 
 
 As  the  description  of  these  symptoms  is  very 
 concise,  and  requires  to  be  specified  more  minutely 
 for  practical  purposes,  the  spiritual  guides  of  Israel 
 defined  them  as  follows  : — Both  the  bright  pimple 
 (n~in3)  and  the  swelling  spot  (HNK'),  when  indi- 
 cative of  leprosy,  assume  respectively  one  of  two 
 colours,  a  principal  or  a  subordinate  one.  The 
 principal  colour  of  the  bright  pimple  is  as  white  as 
 
 snow  (P'JO  HTy),  and  the  subordinate  resembles 
 plaster  on  the  wall  (f)3Mn  T'DD)  ;  whilst  the 
 principal  colour  of  the  rising  spot  is  like  that  of  an 
 
 egg-shell    (nV3  D"l"lpD),   and   the   secondary  one 
 
 resembles  white  wool  (|2?  "10V3  ;  Mishna,  Negaim 
 i.  i)  ;  so  that  if  the  affected  spot  in  the  skin  is  in- 
 ferior in  whiteness  to  the  film  of  an  egg  it  is  not 
 leprosy,  but  simply  a  gathering  (Maimonides  On 
 Leprosy,  i.  i).  Any  one  may  examine  the  disease, 
 except  the  patient  himself  or  his  relatives,  but  the 
 priest  alone  can  decide  whether  it  is  leprosy  or  not, 
 and  accordingly  pronounce  the  patient  unclean  or 
 clean,  because  Deut.  xxi.  5  declares  that  the 
 priest  must  decide  cases  of  litigation  and  disease. 
 But  though  the  priest  only  can  pronounce  the  de- 
 cision, even  if  he  be  a  child  or  a  fool,  yet  he  must 
 act  upon  the  advice  of  a  learned  layman  in  those 
 matters  (Mishna,  Negaim  iii.  I  ;  Maimonides, 
 ibid.  ix.  I,  2).  If  the  priest  is  blind  of  one  eye,  or 
 is  weak-sighted,  he  is  disqualified  for  examining 
 the  distemper  {Mishna,  1.  c,  X.  3).  The  inspec- 
 tion must  not  take  place  on  the  Sabbath,  nor  early 
 in  the  morning,  nor  in  the  middle  of  the  day,  nor  in 
 the  evening,  nor  on  cloudy  days,  because  the  colour 
 of  the  skin  cannot  properly  be  ascertained  in  these 
 hours  of  the  day  ;  but  in  the  third,  fourth,  fifth, 
 seventh,  eighth,  and  ninth  hours  {Negaim  ii.  2)  ; 
 and  the  same  priest  who  inspected  it  at  first  must 
 examine  it  again  at  the  end  of  the  second  seven 
 days,  as  another  one  could  not  tell  whether  it  has 
 spread.  If  he  should  die  in  the  interim,  or  be 
 taken  ill,  another  one  may  examine  him,  but  not 
 pronounce  him  unclean  (Maimonides  On  Leprosy, 
 ix.  4).  There  must  at  least  be  two  hairs  white  at 
 the  root  and  in  the  body  of  the  bright  spot  before 
 the  patient  can  be  declared  unclean  (Maimonides, 
 /.  c.,  ii.  i).  If  a  bridegroom  is  seized  with  this 
 distemper  he  must  be  left  alone  during  the  nuptial 
 week  {Mishna,  Negaim  iii.  2). 
 
 ii.  The  second  case  is  of  leprosy  reappearing 
 after  it  has  been  cured  (Lev.  xiii.  9-17),  where  a 
 somewhat  different  treatment  is  enjoined.  If  a 
 person  who  has  once  been  healed  of  this  disease  is 
 brought  again  to  the  priest,  and  if  the  latter  finds 
 
 a  white  rising  in  the  skin  (n33?  ■^Xt^'))  which  has 
 changed  the  hair  into  white  and  contains  live  flesh 
 en  "1C3),  he  is  forthwith  to  recognise  therein  the 
 reappearance  of  the  old  malady,  and  declare  the 
 patient  unclean  without  any  quarantine  whatever, 
 since  tlie  case  is  so  evident  that  it  requires  no  trial 
 (9-1 1).  There  were,  however,  two  phases  of  this 
 returned  distemper  whicli  exempted  the  patient 
 from  uncleanness.  If  the  leprosy  suddenly  covered 
 the  whole  body  so  that  the  patient  became  per- 
 fectly white,  in  which  case  there  could  be  no  ap- 
 pearance of  live  flesh  (12,  13),  or  if  the  whiteness, 
 after  having  once  diminished  and  allowed  live 
 flesh  to  appear,  covers  again  the  whole  body,  then 
 the  patient  was  clean  (14-17).  This  most  pro- 
 bably was  regarded  as  indicative  of  the  crisis, 
 as  the  whole  evil  matter  thus  brought  to  the  sur- 
 face formed  itself  into  a  scale  which  dried  and 
 peeled  off.  The  only  other  feature  which  this 
 case  represents  besides  the  symptoms  already  de- 
 scribed, is  that  leprosy  at  times  also  spread  over 
 the  whole  skin  and  rendered  it  perfectly  white. 
 As  to  the  live  flesh  (Tl  "^t^a),  the  Sept.,  the 
 Chaldee,  the  Mishna,  and  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  in 
 accordance  with  ancient  tradition,  take  it  to  de- 
 note sound  flesh,  or  a  spot  in  the  flesh  assuming 
 the  appearance  of  life  after  it  had  been  paled  by 
 the  whiteness  overspreading  the  whole  surface. 
 The  size  of  this  spot  of  live  flesh  which  renders 
 
LEPROSY 
 
 813 
 
 LEPROSY 
 
 the  patient  unclean  must,  according  to  tradition, 
 be  at  least  that  of  a  lentil  (Maimonides,  /.  c,  iii. 
 
 1-3)- 
 
 in.  The  third  case  is  of  leprosy  developing  itself 
 from  an  inflammation  (priK^)  or  a  burn  (Ci'X  HIDD), 
 which  is  to  be  recognised  by  the  same  symptoms 
 (Lev.  xiii.  18-28).  Hence  when  these  suspicious 
 signs  were  discernible  in  that  part  of  the  skin 
 which  was  healed  of  an  inflammation,  the  patient 
 was  to  go  to  the  priest,  who  is  at  once  to  pro- 
 nounce it  leprosy  developed  from  an  inflamma- 
 tion, if  the  symptoms  are  unmistakeable  (19,  20). 
 If  the  priest  found  these  marks,  he  remanded  the 
 patient  for  seven  days  (21),  and  if  tlie  disorder 
 spread  over  the  skin  during  the  time  the  patient 
 was  declared  leprous  and  unclean  (22) ;  but  if  it  re- 
 mained in  the  same  condition,  he  ]ironounced  it  the 
 cicatrix  of  the  inflammation  (JTIE^TI  n2")V)  and  the 
 patient  clean  (23).  The  same  rules  applied  to  the 
 suspicious  appearance  of  a  burn  (24-28).  Accord- 
 ing to  the  Hebrew  canons  pDJi^  is  defined  inflamma- 
 tion arising  from  '  an  injury  received  from  the 
 stroke  of  wood  or  a  stone,  or  from  hot  olive 
 husks,  or  the  hot  Tiberian  water,  or  from  any- 
 thing, the  heat  of  which  does  not  come  from  fire  ; 
 whilst  m^D  denotes  a  burn  from  live  coals,  hot 
 ashes,  or  from  any  heat  which  proceeds  from  fire ' 
 {Mishna,  A\'gaim  ix.  i ;  Maimonides  On  Leprosy, 
 V.  I). 
 
 It  will  be  seen  that  there  is  a  difference  in  the 
 treatment  of  the  suspicious  symptoms  in  /.  and  iii. 
 In  the  former  instance,  where  there  is  no  apparent 
 cause  for  the  symptoms,  the  suspected  invalid  has 
 to  undergo  two  remands  of  seven  days  before  his 
 case  can  be  decided  ;  whilst  in  the  latter,  where  the 
 inflammation  or  the  burn  visibly  supplies  the  reason 
 for  this  suspicion,  he  is  only  remanded  for  one  week, 
 at  the  end  of  which  his  case  is  finally  determined. 
 
 iv.  The  fourth  case  is  leprosy  on  the  head  or 
 chin  (Lev.  xiii.  29-37),  which  is  to  be  recognised 
 by  the  affected  spot  being  deeper  than  the  general 
 level  of  the  skin,  and  by  the  hair  thereon  having 
 become  thin  and  yellowish.  Wlien  these  symp- 
 toms exist,  the  priest  is  to  pronounce  it  a  scall 
 (pnj),  which  is  head  or  chin  leprosy,  and  declare 
 the  patient  unclean  (30).  But  if  this  disorder  on 
 the  head  or  chin  does  not  exhibit  these  symptoms, 
 the  patient  is  to  be  remanded  for  seven  days,  when 
 the  priest  is  again  to  examine  it,  and  if  he  finds 
 that  it  has  neither  spread  nor  exhibits  the  required 
 criteria,  he  is  to  order  the  patient  to  cut  off  all  the 
 hair  of  his  head  or  chin,  except  that  which  grows 
 on  the  afflicted  spot  itself,  and  remand  him  for 
 another  week,  and  then  pronounce  him  clean  if  it 
 continues  in  the  same  state  at  the  expiration  of 
 this  period  (31-34)  ;  and  if  it  spreads  after  he  has 
 been  pronounced  clean,  the  priest  is  forthwith  to 
 declare  him  unclean  without  looking  for  any  yellow 
 hair  (35,  36).  The  Jewish  canons  define  pnj  by 
 '  an  affection  on  the  head  or  chin  which  causes  the 
 hair  on  these  affected  parts  to  fall  off  by  the  roots, 
 so  that  the  place  of  the  hair  is  quite  bare'  (Mai- 
 monides On  Leprosy,  viii.  i).  The  condition  of 
 the  hair,  constituting  one  of  the  leprous  symptoms, 
 is  described  as  follows  :  '  pi  is  small  or  short,  but 
 if  it  be  long,  though  it  is  yellow  as  gold,  it  is  no 
 sign  of  uncleanness.  Two  yellow  and  short  hairs, 
 whether  close  to  one  another  or  far  from  each 
 other,  whether  in  the  centre  of  the  Nethek,  or  on 
 the  edge  thereof,  no  matter  whether  the  Nethek 
 orecedes  the  yellow  hair   or  the    yellow  hair  the 
 
 Nethek,  are  symptoms  of  uncleanness'  (Maimon- 
 ides, /.  c,  viii.  5).  The  manner  of  shaving  is  thus 
 described  :  '  The  hair  round  the  scall  is  all  shaved 
 off  except  two  hairs  which  are  close  to  it,  so  that 
 it  might  be  known  thereby  whether  it  spread' 
 (^Mishna,  Negaim  x.  5). 
 
 V.  The  fifth  case  is  leprosy  which  shews  itself  in 
 white  polished  spots,  and  is  not  regarded  as  un- 
 clean (Lev.  xiii.  38,  39).  It  is  called  Bohak  (pHH, 
 from  pHB,  to  be  white),  or  as  the  Sept.  has  it,  d\- 
 
 0OS,  vitiligo  alba,  white  scurf 
 
 vi.  The  sixth  case  is  of  leprosy  either  at  the 
 back  or  in  the  front  of  the  head  (Lev.  xiii.  40-44). 
 When  a  man  loses  his  hair  either  at  the  back  or 
 in  the  front  of  his  head,  it  is  a  simple  case  of  bald- 
 ness, and  he  is  clean  (40,  41).  But  if  a  whitish 
 red  spot  forms  itself  on  the  bald  place  at  the  back 
 or  in  the  front  of  the  head,  then  it  is  leprosy, 
 which  is  to  be  recognised  by  the  fact  that  the 
 swelling  or  scab  on  the  spot  has  the  appearance  of 
 leprosy  in  the  skin  of  the  body ;  and  the  priest  is  to 
 declare  the  man's  head  leprous  and  unclean  (42-44). 
 Though  there  is  only  one  symptom  mentioned 
 whereby  head  leprosy  is  to  be  recognised,  and 
 nothing  is  said  about  remanding  the  patient  if  the 
 distemper  should  appear  doubtful,  as  in  the  other 
 cases  of  leprosy,  yet  the  ancient  Rabbins  inferred 
 from  the  remark,  '  it  is  like  leprosy  in  the  skin  of 
 the  flesh,'  that  all  the  criteria  specified  in  the  latter 
 are  implied  in  the  former.  Hence  the  Hebrew 
 canons  submit  '  there  are  two  symptoms  which 
 render  baldness  in  the  front  or  at  the  back  of  the 
 head  unclean,  viz.,  live  or  sound  flesh,  and  spread- 
 ing ;  the  patient  is  also  shut  up  for  them  two  weeks, 
 because  it  is  said  of  them  that  '  they  are  [and  there- 
 fore must  be  treated]  like  leprosy  in  the  skin  of  the 
 flesh'  (Lev.  xiii.  43).  Of  course,  the  fact  that  the 
 distemper  in  this  instance  develops  itself  on  bald- 
 ness, precludes  white  hair  being  among  the  criteria 
 indicating  uncleanness.  The  manner  in  which  the 
 patient  in  question  is  declared  unclean  by  two 
 symptoms  and  in  two  weeks,  is  as  follows—'  If 
 live  or  sound  flesh  is  found  in  the  bright  spot  on 
 the  baldness  at  the  back  or  in  the  front  of  the 
 head,  he  is  pronounced  unclean  ;  if  there  is  no  live 
 flesh  he  is  shut  up  and  examined  at  the  end  of  the 
 week,  and  if  live  flesh  has  developed  itself,  and  it 
 has  spread,  he  is  declared  unclean,  and  if  not  he  is 
 shut  up  for  another  week.  If  it  has  spread  during 
 this  time,  or  engendered  live  flesh,  he  is  declared 
 unclean,  and  if  not  he  is  pronounced  clean.  He 
 is  also  pronounced  unclean  if  it  spreads  or  engen- 
 ders sound  flesh  after  he  has  been  declared  clean' 
 {Mishna,  Negaiin  x.  10 ;  Maimonides  On  Leprosy, 
 V.  9,  10). 
 
 2.  Regulations  about  the  conduct  and  purification 
 of  leprous  men. — Lepers  were  to  rend  their  garments, 
 let  the  hair  of  their  head  hang  down  dishevelled, 
 cover  themselves  up  to  the  upper  lip,  like  mourners, 
 and  warn  off  every  one  whom  they  happened  to  meet 
 by  calling  out  unclean  !  unclean  !  since  they  defiled 
 everyone  and  everything  they  touched.  For  this 
 reason  they  were  also  obliged  to  live  in  exclusion 
 outside  the  camp  or  city  (Lev.  xiii.  45,  46  ;  Num. 
 v.  1-4;  xh.  10-15  ;  2  Kings  vii.  3,  etc.)  '  The  very 
 entrance  of  a  leper  into  a  house,'  according  to  the 
 Jewish  canons,  '  renders  everything  in  it  unclean' 
 {Mishna,  Negaim  xii.  1 1  ;  Kelitn,  i.  4).  '  If  he 
 stands  under  a  tree  and  a  clean  man  passes  by,  he 
 
LEPROSY 
 
 814 
 
 LEPROSY 
 
 renders  him  unclean.  In  the  synagogue  which  he 
 wishes  to  attend  they  are  obliged  to  make  him  a 
 separate  compartment,  ten  handbreadths  high  and 
 four  cubits  long  and  broad  ;  he  has  to  be  the  first 
 to  go  in,  and  the  last  to  leave  the  synagogue' 
 {Mishna,  Negaim  xii.  12  ;  Maimonides  On  Lep- 
 rosy, X.  12) ;  and  if  he  transgressed  the  prescribed 
 boundaries  he  was  to  receive  forty  stripes  [Fessachim 
 67,  a).  All  this  only  applies  to  those  who  had 
 been  pronounced  lepers  by  the  priest,  but  not  to 
 those  who  were  on  quarantine  {Negai»i,  i.  7).  The 
 Rabbinic  law  also  exempts  women  from  the  obliga- 
 tion to  rend  their  garments  and  letting  the  hair  of 
 their  head  fall  down  (So(a,  iii.  8).  It  is  therefore 
 no  wonder  that  the  Jews  regarded  leprosy  as  a 
 living  death  (comp.  Joseph.  Antic/,  iii.  11.  3,  and 
 the  well-known  Rabbinic  saying  HD^  IVi^n  yilVD), 
 and  as  an  awful  punishment  from  the  Lord  (2  Kings 
 V.  7  ;  2  Chron.  xxvi.  20),  which  they  wished  all 
 their  mortal  enemies  (2  Sam.  iii.  29 ;  2  Kings 
 V.  27). 
 
 The  healed  leper  had  to  pass  through  two  stages 
 of  purification  before  he  could  be  received  back 
 into  the  community.  As  soon  as  the  distemper 
 disappeared  he  sent  for  the  priest,  who  had  to  go 
 outside  the  camp  or  town  to  convince  himself  of 
 the  fact.  Whereupon  the  priest  ordered  two  clean 
 and  live  birds,  a  piece  of  cedar  wood,  crimson  wool 
 and  hyssop  ;  killed  one  bird  over  a  vessel  contain- 
 ing spring  water,  so  that  the  blood  might  run  into 
 it,  tied  together  the  hyssop  and  the  cedar  wood 
 with  the  crimson  wool,  put  about  them  the  tops  of 
 the  wings  and  the  tip  of  the  tail  of  the  living  bird, 
 dipped  all  the  four  in  the  blood  and  water  which 
 were  in  the  vessel,  then  sprinkled  the  hand  of  the 
 healed  leper  seven  times,  let  the  bird  loose,  and 
 pronounced  the  restored  man  clean  (Lev.  xiv.  1-7  ; 
 Mishna,  Negaitn  xii.  i).  The  healed  leper  was  then 
 to  wash  his  garments,  cut  off  all  his  hair,  be  im- 
 mersed, and  return  to  the  camp  or  city,  but  remain 
 outside  his  house  seven  days,  which  the  Mishna 
 [Negaitn  xiv.  2),  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase,  Mai- 
 monides {On  Leprosy,  xi.  l),  etc.,  rightly  regard  as 
 a  euphemism  for  exclusion  from  connubial  inter- 
 course during  that  time  (8),  in  order  that  he  might 
 not  contract  impurity  (comp.  Lev.  xv.  18).  With 
 this  ended  the  first  stage  of  purification.  According 
 to  the  Jewish  canons,  the  birds  are  to  be  '  free,  and 
 not  encaged,'  or  sparrows  ;  the  piece  of  cedar  wood 
 is  to  be  'a  cubit  long,  and  a  quarter  of  the  foot  of 
 the  bed  thick  ;'  the  crimson  wool  is  to  be  a  shekel's 
 weight  i.e.,  320  grains  of  barley  ;  the  hyssop  must 
 at  least  be  a  handbreath  in  size,  and  is  neither  to 
 be  the  so-called  Greek,  nor  ornamental,  nor  Ro- 
 man, nor  wild  hyssop,  nor  have  any  name  what- 
 ever ;  the  vessel  must  be  an  earthen  one,  and  new  ; 
 and  the  dead  bird  must  be  buried  in  a  hole  dug 
 before  their  eyes  {Mishna,  Negaim  xiv.  1-6;  Mai- 
 monides O71  Leprosy,  xi.  l). 
 
 The  second  stage  of  purification  began  on  the 
 seventh  day,  when  the  leper  had  again  to  cut  off  the 
 hair  of  his  head,  his  beard,  eyebrows,  etc.,  wash  his 
 garments,  and  iDe  immersed  (Lev.  xiv.  9).  On  the 
 eighth  day  he  had  to  bring  two  he-lambs  without 
 blemish,  one  ewe-lamb  a  year  old,  three -tenths  of 
 an  ephah  of  fine  flour  mixed  with  oil,  and  one  log 
 of  oil ;  the  one  he-lamb  is  to  be  a  trespass  offering, 
 and  the  other,  with  the  ewe-lamb,  a  burnt  and  a  sin 
 offering  ;  but  if  the  man  was  poor  he  was  to  bring 
 two  turtle  doves,  or  two  young  pigeons,  for  a  sin 
 offering  and  a  burnt  offering,  instead  of  a  he-lamb 
 
 and  a  ewe-Iamb  (10,  ii,  21).  With  these  offerings 
 the  priest  conducted  the  healed  leper  before  the 
 presence  of  the  Lord.  What  the  offerer  had  to  do, 
 and  how  the  priest  acted  when  going  through  these 
 ceremonies,  cannot  be  better  described  than  in  the 
 following  graphic  language  of  the  Jewish  tradition. 
 '  The  priest  approaches  the  trespass  offering,  lavs 
 both  his  hands  on  it,  and  kills  it,  when  two  priests 
 catch  its  blood,  one  into  a  vessel,  and  the  other  in 
 his  hand  ;  the  one  who  caught  it  into  the  vessel 
 sprinkles  it  against  the  wall  of  the  altar,  the  other 
 goes  to  the  leper,  who,  having  been  immersed  in 
 the  leper's  chamber  [which  is  in  the  women's 
 court],  is  waiting  [outside  the  court  of  Israel,  or 
 the  men's  court,  opposite  the  eastern  door]  in  the 
 porch  of  Nicamor  [with  his  face  to  the  west].  He 
 then  puts  his  head  into  [the  court  of  Israel],  and 
 the  priest  puts  some  of  the  blood  upon  the  tip  of 
 his  right  ear  ;  he  next  puts  in  his  right  hand,  and 
 the  priest  puts  some  blood  upon  the  thumb  thereof ; 
 and  lastly,  puts  in  his  right  leg,  and  the  priest  puts 
 some  blood  on  the  toe  thereof  The  priest  then 
 takes  some  of  the  log  of  oil  and  puts  it  into  the 
 left  hand  of  his  fellow -priest,  or  into  his  own  lef: 
 hand,  dips  the  finger  of  his  right  hand  in  it,  and 
 sprinkles  it  seven  times  towards  the  holy  of  holies, 
 dipping  his  finger  every  time  he  sprinkles  it  ; 
 whereupon  he  goes  to  the  leper,  puts  oil  on  those 
 parts  of  his  body  on  which  he  had  previously  put 
 blood  [i.e.,  the  tip  of  the  ear,  the  thumb,  and  the 
 toe],  as  it  is  wi'itten,  '  on  the  place  of  the  blood  of 
 the  trespass-offering '  [Lev.  xiv.  28],  and  what  re- 
 mains of  the  oil  in  the  hand  of  the  priest  he  puts 
 on  the  head  of  him  who  is  to  be  cleansed  for  an 
 atonement'  {Mishna,  Negaim  xiv.  8-10;  Maimo- 
 nides, Hikhoth  Mechosrei  A'epoixx,  iv. )  It  is  in 
 accordance  with  this  prerogative  of  the  priest,  who 
 alone  could  pronounce  the  leper  clean  and  readmit 
 him  into  the  congregation,  that  Christ  commanded 
 the  leper  whom  he  had  healed  to  shew  himself  to 
 this  functionary  (Matt.  viii.  2,  etc.) 
 
 II.  Lep7-ons  garments  and  vessels. — Leprosy  in 
 garments  and  vessels  is  indicated  by  three  symp- 
 toms, g)-een  and  reddish  spots,  and  spreading.  If  a 
 green  or  reddish  spot  shows  itself  in  a  woollen  or 
 linen  garment,  or  in  a  leather  vessel,  it  is  indicative 
 of  leprosy,  and  must  be  shown  to  the  priest,  who 
 is  to  shut  it  up  for  a  week.  If,  on  inspecting  it  at 
 the  end  of  this  time,  he  finds  that  the  spot  has 
 spread,  he  is  to  pronounce  it  inveterate  leprosy 
 (hlKDlD  ny"lV),  and  unclean,  and  bum  it  (Lev. 
 xiii.  47-52)  ;  if  it  has  not  spread  he  is  to  have  it 
 washed,  and  shut  it  up  for  another  week,  and  if  its 
 appearance  has  then  not  changed,  he  is  to  pro- 
 nounce it  unclean  and  burn  it,  though  it  has  not 
 spread,  since  the  distemper  rankles  in  the  front  or 
 at  the  back  of  the  material  (53-55).  But  if,  after 
 washing  it,  the  priest  sees  that  the  spot  has  become 
 weaker,  he  is  to  cut  it  out  of  the  material ;  if  it  re- 
 appears in  any  part  thereof  then  it  is  a  developed 
 distemper,  and  the  whole  ofitmustbe  burned,  and 
 if  it  vanishes  after  washing,  it  must  be  washed  a 
 second  time,  and  is  clean  (56-59).  The  Jewish 
 canons  define  the  colour  green  to  be  like  that  of 
 herbs,  and  red  like  that  o^  fair  cri?nson,  and  take  this 
 enactment  literally  as  referring  strictly  to  wool  of 
 sheep  and  flax,  but  not  to  hemp  and  other  materials. 
 A  material  made  of  camel's  hair  and  sheep's  wool  is 
 not  rendered  unclean  by  leprosy  if  the  camel's  hair 
 preponderate,  but  is  unclean  when  the  sheep's  wool 
 prejjonderates,  or  when  both  are  equal,  and  this 
 
LEPROSY 
 
 815 
 
 LEPROSY 
 
 also  applies  to  mixtures  of  flax  and  hemp  ;  dyed 
 skins  and  garments  are  not  rendered  unclean  by 
 leprosy  {Mishna,  N'egaini  xi.  2.  3  ;  Maimonides 
 On  Leprosy,  xii.  10;  xiii.  I-3).  Nor  are  vessels 
 made  of  skins  of  aquatic  animals  exposed  to  leprous 
 uncleanness  (Maimonides,  ibid.,  xi.  i). 
 
 IIL  Leprous  houses. — Leprosy  in  houses  is  in- 
 dicated by  the  same  three  symptoms,  viz.,  spots  of  a 
 deep  green  or  reddish  hue,  depressed  beyond  the 
 general  level,  and  spreading  (Lev.  xiv.  33-48).  On 
 its  appearance,  the  priest  was  at  once  to  be  sent 
 for,  and  the  house  cleared  of  everything  before  his 
 arrival.  If,  on  inspecting  it,  he  found  the  first  two 
 symptoms  in  the  walls,  viz. ,  a  green  or  red  spot  in  the 
 wall,  and  depressed,  he  shut  the  house  up  for  seven 
 days  (34-38),  inspected  it  again  on  the  seventh  day, 
 and  if  the  distemper  spread  in  the  wall  he  had  the 
 affected  stones  taken  out,  the  inside  of  the  house 
 scraped  all  round,  the  stones,  dust,  etc.,  cast  into  an 
 unclean  place  without  the  city,  and  other  stones  and 
 plaster  put  on  the  wall  (39-42).  If,  after  all  this, 
 the  spot  re-appeared  and  spread,  he  pronounced  it 
 inveterate  leprosy,  and  unclean,  had  the  house 
 pulled  down,  and  the  stones,  timber,  plaster,  etc., 
 cast  into  an  unclean  place  without  the  city,  declared 
 every  one  unclean,  till  evening,  who  had  entered 
 it,  and  ordered  every  one  who  had  either  slept  or 
 eaten  in  it  to  wash  his  garments  (43-47). 
 
 As  to  the  purification  of  the  houses  which  have 
 been  cured  of  leprosy,  the  process  is  the  same  as 
 that  of  healed  men,  except  that  in  the  case  of  man 
 the  priest  sprinkles  seven  times  upon  his  hand, 
 whilst  in  that  of  the  house  he  sprinkles  seven  times 
 on  the  upper  door-post  without.  Of  course  the 
 sacrifices  which  the  leprous  man  had  to  bring  in  his 
 second  stage  of  purification  are  precluded  in  the 
 case  of  the  house  (Maimonides  On  Leprosy,  xv.  8). 
 
 3.  Prevalence,  contagion,  and  cicrableness  of 
 leprosy. — Though  the  malicious  story  of  Manetho 
 that  the  Egyptians  expelled  the  Jews  because  they 
 were  afflicted  with  leprosy  (Joseph.  Cont.  Ap.  i.  26), 
 which  is  repeated  by  Tacitus  (lib.  v.,  c.  3),  is  re- 
 jected by  modern  historians  and  critics  as  a  fabri- 
 cation ;  yet  Michaelis  {Laws  of  Moses,  art.  209), 
 Thomson  {The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  652),  and 
 others,  still  maintain  that  this  disease  was  'ex- 
 tremely prevalent  among  the  Israelites.'  Against 
 this,  however,  is  to  be  urged  that — I.  The  very 
 fact  that  such  strict  examination  was  enjoined,  and 
 that  every  one  who  had  a  pimple,  spot,  or  boil 
 was  shut  up,  shews  that  leprosy  could  not  have 
 been  so  wide  spread,  inasmuch  as  it  would  require 
 the  imprisonment  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people. 
 2.  In  cautioning  the  people  against  the  evil  of 
 leprosy,  and  urging  on  them  to  keep  strictly  to  the 
 directions  of  the  priest,  Moses  adds,  '  Remember 
 what  the  Lord  thy  God  did  to  Miriam  on  the  way 
 when  you  came  out  of  Egypt'  (Deut.  xxiv.  9). 
 Now  this  allusion  to  a  single  instance  which 
 occurred  on  the  way  from  Egypt,  and  which, 
 therefore,  was  an  old  case,  naturally  implies  that 
 leprosy  was  of  rare  occurrence  among  the  Jews,  else 
 there  would  have  been  no  necessity  to  adduce  a 
 bygone  case  ;  and  3.  Wherever  leprosy  is  spoken 
 of  in  later  books  of  the  Bible,  which  does  not  often 
 take  place,  it  is  only  of  isolated  cases  (2  Kings  vii. 
 3 ;  XV.  5),  and  the  regulations  are  strictly  carried 
 out,  and  the  men  are  shut  up  so  that  even  the  king 
 himself  formed  no  exception  (2  Kings  xv.  5). 
 
 That  the  disease  was  itot  contagious  is  evident 
 from  the  regulations  themselves.     Th£  priests  had 
 
 to  be  in  constant  and  close  contact  with  lepers,  had 
 to  examine  and  handle  them  ;  the  leper  who  was 
 entirely  covered  was  pronounced  clean  (Lev.  xiii. 
 12,  13) ;  and  the  priest  himself  commanded  that  all 
 things  in  a  leprous  house  should  be  taken  out  before 
 he  entered  it,  in  order  that  they  might  not  be  pro- 
 nounced unclean,  and  that  they  might  be  used  again 
 (Lev.  xiv.  36),  which  most  unquestionably  implies 
 that  there  was  no  fear  of  contagion.  This  is,  more- 
 over, corroborated  by  the  ancient  Jewish  canons 
 which  were  made  by  those  very  men  who  had  per- 
 sonally to  deal  with  this  distemper,  and  according  to 
 which  a  leprous  minor,  a  heathen,  and  a  proselyte,  as 
 well  as  leprous  garments,  and  houses  of  non-Israel- 
 ites, do  not  render  any  one  unclean  ;  nor  does  a 
 bridegroom,  who  is  seized  with  this  malady  during 
 the  nuptial  week,  defile  any  one  during  the  first  seven 
 days  of  his  marriage  (comp.  Mishna,  A^egaim  iii. 
 I,  2 ;  vii.  I  ;  xi.  I  ;  xii.  I  ;  Maimonides  On  Leprosy, 
 vi.  I ;  vii.  i,  etc.)  These  canons  would  be  utterly 
 inexplicable  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  distemper 
 in  question  was  contagious.  The  enactments, 
 therefore,  about  the  exclusion  of  the  leper  from 
 society,  and  about  defilement,  were  not  dictated 
 by  sanitaiy  caution,  but  had  their  root  in  the  moral 
 and  ceremonial  law,  like  the  enactments  about  the 
 separation  and  uncleanness  of  menstruous  women, 
 of  those  who  had  an  issue  or  touched  the  dead, 
 which  are  joined  with  leprosy.  Being  regarded  as 
 a  punishment  for  sin,  which  God  himself  inflicted 
 upon  the  disobedient  (Exod.  xv.  26;  Lev.  xiv.  35), 
 this  loathsome  disease,  with  the  peculiar  rites  con- 
 nected therewith,  were  especially  selected  as  a 
 typical  representation  of  the  pollution  of  sin,  in 
 which  light  the  Jews  always  viewed  it.  Thus  we 
 are  told,  that  '  Leprosy  comes  upon  man  for  seven, 
 ten,  or  eleven  things ;  for  idolatry,  profaning  the 
 name  of  God,  unchastity,  theft,  slander,  false 
 witness,  false  judgment,  perjury,  infringing  the 
 borders  of  a  neighbour,  devising  malicious  plans, 
 or  creating  discord  between  brothers'  {Erachi7i 
 16,  17;  Baba  Bathra  164;  Aboth  de  R.  Nathan  ix.; 
 Midrash  Rabba  on  Levit.  xiv. )  '  Cedar  wood  and 
 hyssop,  the  highest  and  the  lowest,  give  the  leper 
 purity.  Why  these  ?  Because  pride  was  the  cause 
 of  the  distemper,  which  cannot  be  cured  till  man 
 becomes  humble,  and  keeps  himself  as  low  as 
 hyssop '  {Midrash  Rabba,  Cohelelh,  p.  104). 
 
 As  to  the  cnrableness  of  the  disease,  this  is  un- 
 questionably implied  in  the  minute  regulations 
 about  the  sacrifices  and  conduct  of  those  who  were 
 restored  to  health.  Besides,  in  the  case  of  Miriam, 
 we  find  that  shutting  her  up  for  seven  days  cured 
 her  of  leprosy  (Num.  xii.  11 -13). 
 
 4.  The  identity  of  the  Biblical  leprosy  with  the 
 rnodern  distemper  bearing  this  name. — It  would  be 
 useless  to  discuss  the  different  disorders  which  have 
 been  palmed  upon  the  Mosaic  description  of 
 leprosy.  With  the  Scriptural  symptoms  before 
 us,  let  us  compare  the  most  recent  description  of 
 modern  leprosy  given  by  an  eye-witness  who 
 examined  this  subject, — '  The  scab  comes  on  by 
 degrees,  in  different  parts  of  the  body;  the  hair 
 falls  from  the  head  and  eyebrows  ;  the  nails  loosen, 
 decay,  and  drop  off;  joint  after  joint  of  the  fingers 
 and  toes  shrink  up,  and  slowly  fall  away.  The 
 gums  are  absorbed,  and  the  teeth  disappear.  The 
 nose,  the  eyes,  the  tongue,  and  the  palate  are  slowly 
 consumed ;  and,  finally,  the  wretched  victim  shrinks 
 into  the  earth  and  disappears,  while  medicine  has 
 no  power  to  stay  the  ravages  of  tliis  fell  disease, 
 
LEPROSY 
 
 816 
 
 LETAAH 
 
 or  even  tc  mitigate  sensibly  its  tortures '  (Thomson, 
 The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  653,  etc.);  and  again, 
 '  Sauntering  down  tire  Jaffa  road,  on  my  approach 
 to  tire  holy  city,  in  a  kind  of  dreamy  maze,  .  .  . 
 I  was  startled  out  of  my  reverie  by  the  sudden 
 apparition  of  a  crowd  of  beggars  '  sans  eyes,  sans 
 nose,  sans  hair,  sans  everytliing.'  They  held  up 
 towards  me  their  handless  arms,  unearthly  sounds 
 gurgled  through  throats  without  palates'  [ibid. 
 p.  651).  We  merely  ask  by  what  rules  of  inter- 
 pretation can  we  deduce  from  the  Biblical  leprosy, 
 which  is  described  as  consisting  in  a  rising  scab,  or 
 bright  spot  deeper  than  the  general  level  of  the 
 skin,  and  spreading,  sometimes  exhibiting  live 
 flesh,  and  which  is  non-contagious  and  curable,  that 
 loathsome  and  appalling  malady  described  by  Dr. 
 Thomson  and  others  ?  Dr.  Mason  Good,  with 
 equal  violation  of  the  simple  phrases  of  the  te.xt, 
 has  attempted  to  force  on  them  modern  specific 
 significations,  and  has  drawn  out  a  comparative 
 table  of  parallel  terms  as  used  in  Lev.  xiii.,  by 
 Hippocrates  and  Celsus,  e.  g.,  DNt^,  herpes  or 
 tetter;  yjj,  ictus,  blow  or  bruise,  etc. 
 
 mni,  Lev.,      Xewpa,  Hippo-  Vitiglio,  Celsus, 
 comprehending     crates,  comp.      comprehending 
 
 1.  pr]2  )       I.  dX<p6s  ]       I.   Albida. 
 
 2.  njH?  mn3  [•  =^2.  XevKt]  ^  =2.    Candida. 
 
 3.  nni)  mm  )      3.  yU^Xas  )      3.  Nigrescais, 
 
 or  umbra  simiiis. 
 
 But  as  Mr.  Hayman,  the  writer  of  the  article 
 Leper  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  justly 
 remarks,  'the  Hebrew  of  (i)  is  in  Lev.  xiii.  39 
 predicated  of  a  subject  compounded  of  the  phrase- 
 ology of  (2)  and  (3),  whereas  the  (l)  (2)  and  (3)  of 
 Hippocrates  and  of  Celsus  are  respectively  distinct, 
 and  mutually  exclusive  of  one  another.'  Besides 
 TWCZ  simply  means  languid,  expiring,  depress iiig. 
 
 As  to  the  leprosy  of  garments,  vessels,  and 
 houses,  Michaelis  says,  that  wool  of  sheep  which 
 died  from  a  particular  disease  might  fret  into  holes, 
 and  exhibit  an  appearance  in  the  garments  of  which 
 they  were  made,  like  that  described  in  Lev.  xiii. 
 47-59 ;  and  that  the  attack  on  the  walls  with  what 
 the  Germans  call  saltpetre,  and  what  we  call  mural 
 salt,  which  corrodes  and  consumes  them,  may  be 
 meant  by  leprous  houses  described  in  Lev.  xiii. 
 33-48.  But  he  has  no  theory  for  the  leprosy  of 
 leather  vessels  [Laws  of  Moses,  art.  ccxl.)  Calmet, 
 however,  thinks  that  this  disorder  is  caused  by 
 animalcules  which  erode  the  garments  and  the 
 stones,  and  is  called  leprosy  because  it  is  produced 
 in  much  the  same  manner  as  leprosy  in  man 
 (Dissertation  prefixed  to  his  Comment,  on  Leviti- 
 cus) i  and  those  who  follow  this  theory  submit  that 
 '  the  analogy  between  the  insect  which  frets  the 
 human  skin  and  that  which  frets  the  garment  that 
 covers  it  ;  between  the  fungous  growth  that  lines 
 the  crevices  of  the  epidermis  and  that  which  creeps 
 in  the  interstices  of  masonry  ;  is  close  enough  for 
 the  purpose  of  a  ceremonial  law.'  We  must  con- 
 fess that  these  fine-spun  theories  cannot  be  deduced 
 Irom  the  simple  description  of  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv., 
 which  exhibits  the  symptoms  and  working  of 
 leprous  garments,  vessels,  and  houses,  and  those 
 of  leprous  men  as  so  identical ;  without  doing  the 
 greatest  violence  to  the  text.  We  could  more  easily 
 espouse  the  ancient  Jewish  tradition,  that  'leprosy 
 of  gannents  and  houses  was  not  be  found  in  the 
 world  generally,  but  was  a  sign  and  a  miracle  in 
 Israel  to  guard  them  against  an  evil  tongue'  (Mai- 
 
 monides  On  Leprosy,  xvi.  10),  than  such  laws  oi 
 exegesis,  whereby  anything  and  everything  might 
 be  introduced  into  the  Bible. 
 
 5.  Literature. — Very  important  notices  and 
 canons  on  leprosy  are  given  in  the  Mishna  Tract 
 Negaim,  by  Maimonides  ;  lod  Ha-Chezaka  Hil- 
 choth  Mechosse  Kapara,  cap.  iv.,  and  Hilchoth 
 Tamath  Tzoroath ;  and  by  Rashi  and  Rashbam, 
 Commentaries  on  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv.  Of  modern  writers 
 are  to  be  mentioned — Mead,  Medica  Sacra,  Medical 
 Works,  Edinburgh  1765,  vol.  iii.,  p.  160,  etc.; 
 Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  English  translation,  vol. 
 iii.,  London  1814,  pp.  257-305;  Mason  Good,  The 
 Study  of  Medicine,  2d  ed.,  vol.  v.,  London  1825,  p. 
 5851  scq.  ;  Schilling,  De  lepra  Commentationes,  sec. 
 j.  D.  Halm,  Lugd.  Bat.  1778;  Hensler,  Vomabend- 
 Idndischcn  Aussatzeim  Mittelalter,  Hamburg  1790; 
 Jahn,  Biblische  Archdologie,  i.  Theil,  ii.  Band, 
 Vienna  1818,  p.  355,  ff. ;  Bahr,  Symbolik  des 
 Mosaischen  Cultus,  vol.  ii.,  Heidelberg  1839,  pp. 
 459  ff. ,  512  ff. ;  Sommer,  Biblische  Abhandlungen, 
 vol.  i. ,  Bonn  1846;  Pruner,  Die  Ivrankheiten  des 
 Orients,  Erlangen  1847,  P-  '63,  ff.  ;  Trusen,  Die 
 Sitten,  Gebrduche  und  Krankheiten  der  alien  He- 
 brder,  2d  ed.,  Breslau  1833;  Saalschiitz,  Das 
 Mosaische  Rccht,  vol.  i.,  Berlin  1853,  p.  217,  ft"; 
 Keil,  LLandbuch  der  Biblischen  Archdologie,  vol.  i., 
 Frankfort-on-the-Maine  1858,  pp.  270  ff.,  288  ff. 
 — C.  D.  G. 
 
 LESHEM.     [Laish.] 
 
 LESHEM    (Dki'P),    a    precious    stone    (Exod. 
 
 x.Kviii.  19  ;  xxxix.  12).  The  LXX.  render  it  by 
 XiyvpLov,  the  Vulg.  by  ligurius ;  A.  V.  ligure.  It 
 is  uncertain  what  stone  is  hitended  by  these  ap- 
 pellations. The  prevailing  opinion  is  that  it  is 
 the  jacinth  that  is  meant,  and  this  is  supported 
 by  Rev.  xxi .  20,  where  the  jacinth  occupies  the 
 place  of  the  leshem,  and  by  Epiphanius,  who  says 
 that  the  ligure  is  the  hyacinth.  This  view,  how- 
 ever, is  rejected  by  some,  who  think  the  opal 
 is  intended  by  leshem,  while  others  contend  for  the 
 tourmaline  or  rubellite.  The  ligurion  or  linkurion 
 of  the  ancients  was  a  hard  stone,  a  gem  on  which 
 seals  were  sometimes  cut,  and  according  to  Theo- 
 phrastus  it  possessed  the  magnetic  or  electric 
 quality  of  attracting  small  bodies.  The  former 
 quality  is  possessed  by  the  opal  and  the  jacinth  alike; 
 but  neither  of  these  possesses  the  latter  quality. 
 Tourmaline,  again,  has  a  magnetic  power  when 
 heated  ;  but  it  is  not  much  valued  as  a  gem,  and 
 there  is  no  evidence  that  it  was  found  in  countries 
 accessible  by  the  Israelites  at  the  time  when  the 
 high-priest's  breast-plate  was  made.  The  deriva- 
 tion of  the  Hebrew  word  U'v?  is  uncertain  ;  Gese- 
 
 nius  compares  the  root  W^?  with  the  Arabic   j^mI, 
 
 lasama,  to  lick;  while  Fiirst,  with  more  reason, 
 conrparing  it  with  Ddl  and  DH^,  finds  in  it  the 
 notion  of  glancing,  shimmering — a  notion  which 
 will  apply  well  to  the  ruddy  lustre  of  the  jacinth. 
 
 LESSONS,     Proper,     read    in    Svnagoguc. 
 [Haphtara  :  SvNAConuE,] 
 
 LETAAH   (HNL:^),  a  species  of  lizard,  Sept. 
 
 XaXapdiTTjs,   Vulg.    stellio ;  Targ.    Jon.    ND'DIOtJ-*, 
 
 shemamiiha    {stellio)  ;    Syr.    JAj5o5»,    tseruritko 
 
 {salamander).  What  species  of  lizard  this  word 
 denotes    is    not    certain.       In    the    only   passage 
 
LETUSHIM 
 
 817 
 
 LEUSDEN 
 
 where  it  occurs  in  the  Bible  (Lev.  xi.  30)  there  is 
 nothing  to  guide  us  to  a  decision  on  this  point. 
 
 Bochart   derives    the    word   from  the   Arab.    Uj, 
 
 lataa,  to  adim-e  to  the  ground,  and  from  this  argues 
 its  identity  with  the  Arabian  wachra  or  wachara  ; 
 but  this  carries  us  little  way,  inasmuch  as  the  de- 
 scription will  apply  to  most  lizards,  and  it  is  uncer- 
 tain to  what  species  the  Arabs  applied  this  term. 
 As  the  Letaah  frequented  houses,  it  is  most  pro- 
 bable that  it  was  the  House-Gecko  (Ptyodactylus 
 Gecko),  a  species  which  abounds  in  Egypt,  and  is 
 found  also  in  Syria  and  Arabia.  It  is  poisonous, 
 and  mere  contact  with  it  produces  a  fiery  eruption 
 like  that  caused  by  the  sting  of  a  nettle-  From 
 this  probably  has  arisen  the  feeling  prevalent  in 
 Egypt  that  this  reptile  causes  leprosy,  whence  it  has 
 the  name  oiAbii  biireys,  fatherof  leprosy — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LETUSHIM  (D"'^!|0^,  'sharpened,'  from  ^'D^', 
 
 aciiit ;  Aarovcrul/j. ;  Latusini).  Jokshan,  Abra- 
 ham's second  son  by  Keturah,  had  two  sons,  Sheba 
 and  Dedan  ;  '  and  the  sons  of  Dedan  were  Asshu- 
 rim,  and  Letitshim,  and  Leummim'  (Gen.  xxv.  3). 
 These  are  plural  forms,  and  consequently  Letu- 
 shim  must  be  regarded  as  the  name  of  the  tribe  or 
 nation.  It  does  not  again  occur  in  either  sacred  or 
 profane  history,  nor  have  we  any  means  of  identi- 
 fying the  people.  Forster  supposes  that  the  Letu- 
 shim  were  absorbed  in  the  generic  appellation  of 
 Dedanim,  several  times  mentioned  in  the  prophets 
 (Jer.  xxv.  23  ;  Ezek.  xxv.  13  ;  Is.  xxi.  13).  They 
 dwelt  in  the  desert  eastward  from  Edom  (Foster, 
 Geogr.  of  Arabia,  i.  334). — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEUMMIM  (D''BX^,  '  peoples,'  from  DX^ ;  Aaw- 
 
 /ue/yu,  LaotnJm),  a  tribe  descended  from  the  third 
 son  of  Dedan  (Gen.  xxv.  3).  The  name  does  not 
 occur  in  the  later  books  of  the  Bible,  but  Ptolemy 
 mentions  a  tribe  in  Arabia  Felix  called  AllunuToti 
 (^ AWovfj-aLdirai),  which  appears  to  be  a  corruption 
 of  the  old  Hebrew  Leummim  with  the  Arabic 
 article  prefixed  (Geog.  vi.  7).  He  also  enumerates 
 Luma  among  the  towns  of  Arabia  Deserta  (v.  19), 
 and  Forster  suggests  that  this  may  have  been  an 
 ancient  settlement  of  the  same  tribe  {Geogr.  of 
 Arabia,  i.  335).— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LEUSDEN,  John,  was  born  at  Utrecht  in 
 1624,  and  died  in  1699.  For  nearly  fifty  years  he 
 sustained  a  veiy  high  reputation  as  professor  of 
 Hebrew  in  the  recently  founded  university  of  his 
 native  city.  He  had  well  qualified  himself  for  the 
 duties  of  this  office  by  careful  study  of  theology  and 
 the  Oriental  languages  at  Utrecht,  and  afterwards 
 of  the  sacred  original  of  the  O.  T.  under  the  tuition 
 of  a  very  learned  Rabbi  of  Amsterdam.  Few 
 writings  have  descended  to  us  from  the  Biblical 
 scholars  of  former  days  of  more  solid  utility  than 
 Leusden's.  If  they  are  defective  in  originality  of 
 genius  (the  amount  of  which  quality,  however,  it  is 
 impossible  rightly  to  determine  in  works  like  our 
 author's),  they  undoubtedly  afford  evidence  of  their 
 author's  varied  resources  of  learning,  adorned  by 
 clearness  of  method  and  an  easy  style  ;  character- 
 istics which  made  Leusden  one  of  the  most  re- 
 nowned and  successful  teachers  of  his  age.  His 
 immerous  works  were  all  Biblical,  and  may  be 
 classed  as  (i)  Critical,  (2)  Introductory,  and  (3) 
 Exegetical.  Under  the  first  head  we  have  his 
 valuable   Biblia  Hebraa   accuratissima   notis  He- 
 
 VOL.   II. 
 
 braids  et  lemmatibus  illnstrata:  typis  fosephi 
 Athias.,  Amstel.  1617  [2d  edit.  1667].  This  was 
 the  first  critical  edition  by  a  Christian  editor 
 ['  .(^stimatissima  primum  numeratis  versibus,  pri- 
 maque  a  Christiano  adhibitis  MSS.  facta.'  Stein- 
 schneider,  Catal.  Bodl.l  In  1694  he  joined  Eisen- 
 menger  in  publishing  a  Hebrew  Bible  without 
 points.  The  Greek  Scriptures  also  received  his 
 careful  attention,  as  is  proved  by  his  editions  ot 
 the  Greek  Test,  in  1675,  1688,  1693,  1698,  1701, 
 and  by  his  edition  of  the  Septuagint,  Amster.  1683. 
 After  his  death,  Schaaf  completed  a  valuable  edition 
 of  the  Syriac  New  Test,  (with  Tremellius'  version), 
 which  Leusden  had  begun.  Under  this  first  head 
 we  may  also  place  his  Hebrew  Lexicon  (1688) ; 
 Elementary  Hebr.  Gram.,  which  was  translated 
 into  English,  French,  and  German  (1668);  his 
 Compendia  of  the  O.  T.  and  the  N.  T.  (comprising 
 selections  of  the  originals,  with'  translations  and 
 grammatical  notes  in  Latin),  frequently  reprinted ; 
 his  Onomasticon  Sacr.  (1665,  1684),  and  his  still 
 useful  Clavis  Hebr.  Vet.  Test,  (containing  the  Maso- 
 retic  notes,  etc.,  besides  much  grammatical  and 
 philological  information),  first  published  in  1683, 
 and  his  Clavis  Gnec.  N.  T.  (1672).  His  contribu- 
 tions to  the  second  head  of  Introduction  {Einleit- 
 uttg)  and  sacred  archosology  were  not  less  valuable 
 than  the  works  we  have  already  commended.  Of 
 these  we  mention  three  (sometimes  to  be  met  with  in 
 one  vol. )  as  very  useful  to  the  Biblical  student:  Philo- 
 logiis  Hebr.  coitfineiis  Qiiastioites  Hebr.  qua:  circa 
 v.  Test.  Hebr.  fere  moveri  solent  (the  best  editions 
 contain  his  edition  and  translation  of  Maimonides' 
 Precepts  of  Moses,  p.  56) ;  Philologits  Hebriro-mix- 
 tus,  una  cum  Spicileg.  Philol.  (containing  treatises 
 on  several  interesting  points  of  Hebrew  antiquities 
 and  Talmudical  science) ;  Philologus  Hebrceo-Gm:- 
 cus  gena-alis,  in  which  questions  relating  to  the 
 sacred  Greek  of  the  Christian  Scriptures,  its  He- 
 braisms, the  Syriac  and  other  translations,  its  in- 
 spired authors,  etc.  etc  ,  are  well  and  succinctly 
 handled  (with  this  work  occurs  Leusden's  transla- 
 tion into  Hebreiv  of  all  the  Chaldee  portions  of  the 
 O.  T. )  Under  the  last,  or  Exegetical  head,  we 
 have  less  to  record.  In  1656  (reprinted  in  1692) 
 Leusden  published  in  a  Latin  translation,  David 
 Kimchi's  Commentary  on  the  prophet  Jonah  {Jonas 
 illustratus),  and  in  the  following  year  a  similar 
 work  (again  after  David  Kimchi)  on  Joel  and 
 Obadiah  {Joel  explicatus,  adjunctus  Obadjas*  illus- 
 tratus). We  must  not  conclude  the  list  of  the 
 learned  labours  of  this  diligent  scholar  and  worthy 
 man  without  mentioning  his  editions  (with  the  help 
 of  Villemandy  and  Morinus)  of  Bochart's  Works, 
 and  the  works  of  our  own  learned  countrymen, 
 Lightfoot  (whose  works  he  published  in  Latin,  in 
 3  vols,  folio,  in  the  last  year  of  his  life)  and  Poole 
 (whose  Synopsis  occurs  in  its  very  best  form  in 
 Leusden's  edition,  5  vols,  folio,  1684).  Justice, 
 on  the  whole,  has  been  done  to  this  ornament  of 
 the  church  of  Holland.  Much  infonnation  re- 
 specting his  life  and  writings  is  contained  in  Bur- 
 mann  {Traject.  o'lidit.),  Fabricius  {Hist.  Biblioth. 
 Fabric,  i.  244),  Walch  {Biblioth.  Theol.  Selecta, 
 vols.  iii. ,  iv. ),  Biographie  universelle  anc.  et  tnod. 
 (1819),  xxiv.  357,  Kalisch  {Hebr.  Gram.,  part  ii. 
 [Historical  Introd.],  p.  37),  and  in  Arnold  {Herzog., 
 viii.  345,  346).— P.  H. 
 
 *  The    Obadiah  was   unaccompanied  with   the 
 I-atin  translation. 
 
 30 
 
LEVI 
 
 K!8 
 
 LEVIATHAN 
 
 LEVI  Cv,  a  Joining;  Sept.  Kevei),  the  third  son 
 
 of  Jacob  and  Leah,  born  in  Mesopotamia  B.  c. 
 1750  (Gen.  xxix.  34).  No  circumstance  is  re- 
 corded of  him  save  the  part  which  he  and  his  full 
 brother  Simeon  took  in  the  massacre  of  the  She- 
 chemites,  to  avenge  the  wrong  done  to  their  sister 
 Dinah  (Gen.  xxxiv.  25,  26).  This  transaction  was 
 to  his  last  hour  regarded  by  Jacob  with  abhorrence, 
 and  he  failed  not  to  allude  to  it  in  his  dying  declara- 
 tion. As  Simeon  and  Levi  were  united  in  that  act, 
 so  the  patriarch  couples  them  in  his  prophecy  : 
 '  Accursed  be  their  anger,  for  it  was  fierce ;  and 
 their  wrath,  for  it  was  cruel !  I  will  divide  them 
 in  Jacob,  and  disperse  them  in  Israel.'  And,  ac- 
 cordingly, their  descendants  were  afterwards,  in 
 different  ways,  dispersed  among  the  other  tribes ; 
 although,  in  the  case  of  Levi,  this  curse  was 
 eventually  turned  into  a  benefit  and  blessing. 
 
 [Two  other  persons  of  the  name  of  Levi  are 
 mentioned  in  the  genealogy  of  Jesus  Christ,  viz.,  the 
 son  of  Malchi,  a  near  ancestor  of  our  Lord  (Luke 
 iii.  24),  and  a  more  remote  ancestor,  son  of  Simeon 
 (ver.  29).  The  Evangelist  Matthew  also  bore  the 
 name  of  Levi  (Mark  ii.  14;  Luke  v.  27,  29), 
 [Matthew]. 
 
 LEVI  B.  GERSHON.     [Ralbag.] 
 
 LEVIATHAN    (iH'')!';    LXX.  t6  ix^ya.  k^tos, 
 
 SpdKuv;  Compl.  Xe^iaddu),  an  aquatic  animal, 
 which,  though  only  five  times  mentioned  by  name 
 in  the  Bible  (Job  iii.  8  ;  xli.  i,  Heb.  xl.  25  ;  Ps. 
 Ixxiv.  14;  civ.  26;  Is.  xxvii.  l),  is  described  in 
 detail  in  the  Book  of  Job  (xli.)  Its  name  is 
 supposed   to  be   derived  from  H^l?,   '  a  garland, 
 
 wreath,'  hence  an  animal  wreathed  or  twisted  in 
 folds. 
 
 There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  description  in 
 Job  applies  to  the  crocodile,  but  in  other  passages 
 leviathan  is  held  to  signify  a  large  serpent,  and  a 
 whale  or  other  large  marine  animal.  To  decide 
 how  far  the  latter  suppositions  are  probable,  it  will 
 be  necessary  to  examine  the  several  passages  relat- 
 ing to  it,  taking  first  those  which  certainly  refer  to 
 the  crocodile. 
 
 It  will  be  well  to  notice  the  chief  characteristics 
 of  leviathan  in  the  description  in  Job,  to  render  its 
 identity  with  the  crocodile  in  that  place  beyond 
 doubt.  The  animal  is  first  spoken  of  as  not  to 
 be  taken,  like  any  small  aquatic  creature,  with  a 
 hook  ;  as  not  to  be  tamed,  whether  as  a  plaything 
 or  an  object  of  merchandise.  Yet,  more,  he  is  im- 
 penetrable to  pikes  or  fish-spears.  The  subject 
 then  changes.  No  longer  to  be  assailed,  leviathan 
 is  to  be  feared  as  an  assailant  whom  none  is  so 
 fierce  as  to  stir  up.  His  description  then  follows. 
 His  teeth  are  dreadful ;  his  back  is  coated  with 
 shield-like  armour,  closely  fastened  together,  '  so 
 that  a  breath  entereth  not  between'  the  plates, 
 '  his  eyes  [are]  as  the  eyelids  of  [the]  dawn,'  his 
 breath  is  fiery,  his  neck  strong,  his  muscles  fast 
 fixed  together,  his  heart  '  firm  as  a  stone,  yea  hard 
 as  [the]  nether  millstone.'  None  can  approach  him 
 with  any  weapon.  Iron  and  brass  are  powerless 
 against  him,  so  are  sling-stones  and  the  spear. 
 The  sea  boils  where  he  swims,  and  a  path  of  foam 
 shines  after  him.  '  He  is  sovereign  over  all  the 
 children  of  pride'  (|*riC'"\33) ;  that  is,  the  animals 
 of  prey  (see  xxviii.  8).  It  is  marvellous  that  any 
 scholar  can  have  imagined  that  these  characteristics 
 
 denote  the  whale,  or  water -monsters  in  general, 
 for,  if  applied  to  the  crocodile,  there  is  little,  even 
 in  a  passage  full  of  vivid  images,  that  is  figurative. 
 On  the  other  hand,  several  points  shew  a  minute 
 agreement  ;  it  has  been  suggested  by  Col.  Hamil- 
 ton Smith,  that  the  comparison  of  the  eyes  of 
 leviathan  to  '  the  eyelids  of  [the]  dawn'  may  be 
 due  to  the  contractile  cat-like  pupils'  having  in  some 
 crocodiles  '  a  luminous  gi'eenish  tinge'  [Croco- 
 dile, i.  p.  589,  «],  and  this  is  curiously  illustrated 
 by  a  passage  in  the  '  Hieroglyphics'  of  HorapoUo 
 Nilous,  where  the  eyes  of  a  crocodile  are  said  to 
 denote  a  rising  or  sunrise,  because  they  alone  shine 
 from  the  deep  i^Xvarokriv  di  Xeyovres,  Svo  6<pda\- 
 /J.OVS  KpoKodeiXov  ^ioypaipovaiv.  eireL^rjirep  [1.  eTreidr] 
 wpb  ?]  TTavrbs  aib/uLaros  fwou  ol  6(f)6a\/ji,oL  Ik  toD 
 jSvdov  dvacpaivovrai,  i.  sec.  Ixvii.  ed.  Cory,  pp.  85, 
 86. 
 
 The  use  of  the  word  '  sea'  to  describe  the  crea- 
 ture's abode  does  not  militate  against  the  crocodile, 
 for  this  term  describes  the  Nile  in  the  account  of 
 the  grandeur  and  sack  of  Thebes  in  Nahum  (iii.  8), 
 and  its  Arabic  equivalent,  '  bahr,'  is  the  name  of 
 both  Nile  and  sea  in  modern  Egypt ;  besides  that, 
 it  may  be  that  a  lake  of  Lower  Egypt  is  intended. 
 Certainly  '  sea,'  for  the  Nile,  is  a  very  rare  use  in 
 the  Bible,  of  which  no  certain  instance  but  that  in 
 Nahum  can  be  cited  ;  yet  the  grandeur  of  the  whole 
 description  in  Job  would  account  for  a  preference 
 for  the  most  dignified  terms.  The  reference  in  an 
 earlier  passage  in  the  same  book  is  evidently  to  the 
 same  creature.  Desperate  men  are  there  described 
 as  those  '  who  are  ready  to  stir  up  leviathan '  (Job 
 iii.  8).  This  should  be  compared  with,  '  [There  is] 
 none  [so]  fierce  as  to  stir  him  up'  (xli.  10,  A.  V.  2). 
 Yet  Gesenius  imagines  that  a  serpent  is  meant  in 
 the  former  passage. 
 
 In  Ps.  Ixxiv.  the  terms   '  dragons'  (D''J''iin)   and 
 
 leviathan  are  used  to  designate  the  Pharaoh  of  the 
 Exodus.  The  Psalmist  begins  with  a  prayer  for 
 the  deliverance  of  the  Israelites  and  Zion  from  their 
 oppressors.  He  then  recalls  God's  wonders  of 
 old,  '  Thou  didst  divide  the  sea  by  thy  might  : 
 thou  didst  break  utterly  the  heads  of  the  dragons  in 
 the  waters.  Thou  didst  break  the  heads  of  levia- 
 than in  pieces,  [and]  gavest  him  [to  be]  meat  to  the 
 people  dwelling  in  the  wilderness'  (D^'V,  the  wild 
 
 beasts),  vers.  13,  14.  With  this  passage  must  be 
 compared  the  parallel  one  of  Isaiah,  where  the  arm 
 of  the  Lord  is  thus  addressed  :  'Art  not  [thou]  it 
 that  hath  hewed  Rahab,  [and]  pierced  through  the 
 dragon?  Art  not  [thou]  it  that  hath  dried  up  the 
 sea,  the  waters  of  the  great  deep  ;  that  hath  made 
 the  depths  of  the  sea  a  path  for  the  ransomed  to 
 pass  over?'  (li.  9,  10,  comp.  15).  With  these  again 
 should  be  compared  the  mention  of  the  Exodus  in 
 Job,  'By  his  might  he  restrained  [or  'rebuked'] 
 the  sea,  and  by  his  wisdom  he  smote  through  Ra- 
 hab' [or  '  pride']  (xxvi.  12).  These  passages  con- 
 nect the  special  name  leviathan  with  the  general 
 term,  tannin,  dragon,  as  symbols  of  the  Pharaoh 
 of  the  Exodus,  who  could  be  thus  represented  by  a 
 water  creature  with  especial  fitness  in  the  relation 
 of  the  miracle  of  dividing  the  sea.  Tannin,  though 
 certainly  a  general  term,  is  used  for  the  crocodile 
 where  Ezekiel  describes  the  pride  and  overthrow 
 of  Pharaoh  Hophra,  with  an  apparent  retrospect 
 of  the  Exodus  (xxix.  3,  4,  5).  Such  a  retrospect 
 would  not  only  be  appropriate,  as  Egypt  was  again 
 to  be  humbled  to  the  dust,  but  also  from  the  proba- 
 
LEVIATHAN 
 
 819 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 bility  that  the  river  ('  rivers,'  pi.   of  IX'')  spoken 
 
 of  as  the  dragon's  abode,  his  own,  made  by  him  for 
 himself,  was  not  the  Nile,  but  (at  least  primarily) 
 as  Mr.  Stanley  Poole  has  argued  with  high  proba- 
 bility, the  Canal  of  the  Red  Sea  (Smith's  Z'/<r/w««;'V 
 of  the  Bible,  Red  Sea,  iii.  pp.  loio,  ion),  com- 
 menced for  the  second  time  but  a  few  years  before 
 the  date  of  this  prophecy  by  Hophra's  grandfather 
 Pharaoh  Necho.* 
 
 The  Egyptian  monuments  do  not  throw  any 
 positive  light  upon  this  subject.  The  crocodile  was 
 one  of  the  sacred  animals,  but  was  not  worshipped 
 throughout  the  country,  being  hated  and  destroyed 
 in  some  of  the  nomes.  It  was  sacred  to  the  god 
 Sebak,  a  divinity  of  minor  importance,  represented 
 with  this  animal's  head.  The  use  of  the  crocodile 
 as  a  symbol  of  the  king  of  Egypt  seems  therefore 
 to  be  Shemite,  not  Egyptian. 
 
 Two  mentions  of  leviathan  remain  to  be  noticed, 
 as  to  both  of  which  there  has  been  a  general  agree- 
 ment of  commentators  against  the  crocodile.  In 
 Ps.  civ.  the  abode  of  leviathan  seems  to  be  the  sea. 
 '  The  earth  is  full  of  thy  riches.  [So  is]  this  sea, 
 great  and  large  on  every  side,  wherein  [are]  things 
 creeping  innumerable,  both  small  and  great  beasts. 
 There  go  the  ships  :  [there  is]  that  leviathan  [whom] 
 thou  hast  created  to  take  his  pastime  therein'  (24, 
 25,  26).  We  have  already  shewn  that  .'he  Nile  is 
 certainly  once  called  the  sea,  and  probably  twice, 
 in  Scriptui-e.  The  vastness  of  the  river,  with  its 
 abunda^it  inliabitants,  as  in  ^schylus, — 
 
 —  6  fj.^yas  Kal  woKvOp^fifMUP 
 NeZXos — •  (Fers.  33,  34.) 
 
 in  whichever  of  its  two  possible  senses  we  take 
 woXvdpi/j./j.wi',  as  abounding  in  monsters,  compar- 
 ing the  still  more  pointedly-aj^propriate  iroXvKrjrea 
 NeiXov  of  Theocritus  (xvii.  98),  or  much-nourish- 
 ing— and  the  many  vessels  which  anciently  voyaged 
 on  its  surface,  accord  with  this  description,  and 
 neither  ships  nor  whales  would  be  as  accustomed 
 sights  from  the  shore  of  Palestine,  or  the  coasts 
 of  Arabia,  as  boats  and  crocodiles  in  the  Nile,  the 
 Canal  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  perhaps  one  or  more 
 lakes  connected  with  that  canal.  The  idea  of 
 pastime  may  seem  to  suit  the  whale  rather  than 
 the  crocodile,  but  the  notion  implied  seems  to  be 
 space  enough  for  the  free  movements  of  so  great  an 
 animal,  and  if  so,  the  Nile  would  be  preferable  to 
 the  sea. 
 
 In  Is.  xxvii.  i,  leviathan  is  used  as  a  sjanbol  of 
 an  enemy,  or  the  enemies  of  God's  people  :  '  In 
 that  day  the  Lord  with  his  hard,  and  great,  and 
 strong  sword,  shall  punish  [or  '  fall  upon']  leviathan 
 the  fleeing  [?]  serpent,  even  leviathan  the  tortuous 
 serpent;  and  slay  the  dragon  that  [is]  in  the  sea.' 
 Here  Gesenius  supposes  a  great  serpent  to  be 
 meant,  and  the  kingdom  of  Babylon  to  be  sym- 
 bolized by  it.  But  it  is  evident  that  the  prophecy, 
 if  it  have  a  primaiy  reference  to  the  return  from 
 the  captivity  at  Babylon,  has  a  wider  import,  and 
 
 *  The  ancient  Egyptian  atur,  AUR,  signifies 
 river,  the  Nile,  as  the  river,  the  inundation,  lake 
 of  temple?  canal?  (M.  de  Horrack  in  Rrjite 
 Archeologique,  N.  S.,  1864,  pp.  45,  46,  48-50). 
 The  Hebrew  word  yeor  is  generally  used  for  a 
 stream  or  streams  of  Egypt ;  by  Amos  for  the,  or 
 an,  inundation  (viii.  7,  8 ;  see  ix.  5),  and  also  for 
 channels. 
 
 there  is  at  least  as  much  reason  to  think  that  the 
 reference  is  to  Egypt,  a  future  exodus  from  which 
 is  foretold,  as  well  as  a  like  deliverance  from 
 Assyria  (12,  13).  How  then  are  we  to  account  for 
 the  parallel  use  of  leviathan  and  serpent?  In  a 
 passage  where  symbols  are  accumulated,  probably 
 to  designate  a  distant  object  or  objects,  there  seems 
 no  need  to  suppose  that  all  must  be  of  the  same 
 signification.  Dragon  indeed  includes  leviathan, 
 but  it  seems,  certainly,  to  have  a  more  general 
 sense.  We  therefore  do  not  see  that  in  this  case 
 it  is  necessary  to  suppose  that  leviathan  is  used  in 
 any  sense  but  that  of  crocodile,  as  the  symbol  of 
 Pharaoh,  and  so  of  any  enemy  of  the  true  Israel. — 
 R.  S.  P. 
 
 LEVIRATE.     [Marriage.] 
 
 LEVISON,  MoRDECAi  GuMPEL,  a  learned 
 Jewish  physician  and  commentator,  and  fellow- 
 student  of  the  celebrated  philosopher  Moses  Men- 
 delssohn in  Berhn.  He  afterwards  came  over  to 
 London  and  was  physician  in  one  of  the  hospitals 
 (1790),  was  then  nominated  by  Gustavus  III.  of 
 Sweden  to  the  professional  chair  in  Upsal,  which 
 office  he  held  for  several  years;  returned  to  his 
 native  place,  Beriin,  in  1781,  thence  went  to 
 Hamburg  in  1784,  where  he  died  Feb.  10,  1797. 
 His  works  which  illustrate  the  Bible  are — (i.) 
 A  commentary  on  Ecclesiastes,  called  nn^lH 
 n?30,  dedicated  to  Gustavus  HI.,  Hamburg  1784. 
 This  elaborate  work  is  preceded  by  five  introduc- 
 tions, which  respectively  treat  on  the  import  of 
 the  book,  the  appropriateness  of  its  name,  Hebrew 
 synonyms,  roots,  the  verb  and  its  inflexions,  the 
 names  of  the  deity,  on  the  design  of  the  Bible,  etc. 
 etc.;  whereupon  follows  the  Hebrew  text  with  a 
 double  commentary,  one  explains  the  words  and 
 
 their  connection  (DH'^yjyi  ni^OH  "l1S''a),  and  the 
 other  gives  an  exposition  of  the  argument  of  the 
 book.  It  is  one  of  the  most  important  commentaries 
 which  have  appeared  on  this  difficult  volume  of  the 
 O.T.,  and  must  be  added  to  the  history  of  the  inter- 
 pretation of  Ecclesiastes  given  by  Ginsburg,  Histori- 
 cal and  Critical  Commentaty  on  Ecclesiastes.  (2.) 
 A  treatise  on  Holy  Scripture,  published  at  the  re- 
 quest of  the  king  of  Sweden,  London  1770.  (3. )  A 
 treatise  on  the  Pentateuch,  the  Prophets,  and  the 
 
 Talmud,  entitled  rh'h^.  nnjD  n^D,  Hamburg 
 .1797.  (4.)  A  Hebrew  Lexicon,  called  D''t^1C-'n. 
 (5.)  A  work  on  Hebrew  Synonyms,  entitled  "IDD 
 □"•STi:!!;  and  (6.)  A  Hebrew  Grammar,  called 
 nE:nnn  ^^pr]  im,  the  last  three  works  have  not 
 as  yet  been  published.  Comp.  Fiirst,  Biblioihcca 
 Jiidaica,  ii.  238,  ff.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 LEVITA.     [Elias  Levita.] 
 
 LEVITES,  or  Sons  of  Levi  (l1''1P  ;  Aevlrai, 
 
 vlolKevl;  Lmitie,  filii  Levi),  besides  denoting  all 
 the  descendants  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  (Exod.  vi.  25  ; 
 Levit.  XXV.  32,  etc.  ;  Num.  xxxv.  2  ;  Josh.  xxi.  3, 
 41),  is  the  distinctive  title  of  that  portion  of  it 
 which  was  set  apart  for  the  subordinate  offices  of 
 the  sanctuary,  to  assist  the  other  and  smaller  por- 
 tion of  their  own  tribe,  who  are  denominated  the 
 i07is  of  Aaron,  Aaronites,  or  Pj'iests,  and  were 
 unvested  with  the  superior  functions  of  the  hierarchy 
 [Priests].  In  describing  the  institution  and  de- 
 velopment of  the  Levitical  order,  we  shall  have  to 
 distinguish  three  periods;  viz. — I.  From  the  insti- 
 
LEVITES 
 
 820 
 
 I.EVITES 
 
 tution  of  this  order  by  Moses  till  the  commence- 
 ment of  the  monarchy  ;  II.  From  the  changes 
 introduced  in  this  order  by  David  till  the  exile ; 
 and  III.  The  post-exile  period. 
 
 I.  From  the  institution  of  the  Levitical  order  till 
 the  monarchy. — This  is  the  most  interesting  and 
 important  period  in  the  history  of  the  Levitical 
 order,  and  in  describing  it  we  must  first  of  all  trace 
 the  cause  which  called  it  into  existence. 
 
 I.  Origin  and  institution  of  the  Levitical  order. — 
 The  Tabernacle,  with  its  extensive  and  regular  sacri- 
 ficial service,  which  required  a  special  priestly  order 
 regularly  to  perform  the  higher  functions  of  the 
 sanctuary,  also  called  into  being  the  Levitical  staff 
 to  aid  the  priests  in  their  arduous  task  ;  inasmuch  as 
 the  primitive  and  patriarchal  mode  of  worship  which 
 obtained  till  the  erection  of  the  Tabernacle,  and 
 according  to  which  the  first-born  of  all  Israelites 
 perfonned  the  priestly  offices  (comp.  Exod.  xxiv. 
 5  with  xix.  24,  and  Art.  First-born),  could  not  be 
 perpetuated  under  the  newly-organised  congrega- 
 tional service,  without  interfering  with  the  do- 
 mestic relations  of  the  people.  It  was  for  this 
 reason,  as  well  as  to  secure  greater  efficiency  in  the 
 sacred  offices,  that  the  religious  primogeniture  was 
 conferred  upon  the  tribe  of  Levi,  which  were  hence- 
 forth to  give  their  undivided  attention  to  the  re- 
 quirements of  the  sanctuaiy  (Num.  iii.  II-13). 
 The  tribe  of  Levi  were  selected  because  they  had 
 manifested  a  very  extraordinary  zeal  for  the  glory 
 of  God  (Exod.  xxxii.  26,  etc.),  had  already  obtained 
 a  part  of  this  religious  primogeniture  by  the  insti- 
 tution of  the  hereditary  priesthood  in  the  family  of 
 Aaron  (Exod.  xxviii.  i),  and  because,  as  the  tribe 
 to  which  Moses  and  Aaron  belonged,  they  would 
 most  naturally  support  and  promote  the  institutions 
 of  the  lawgiver.  To  effect  this  transfer  of  office, 
 both  the  first-born  males  of  all  the  other  tribes,  and 
 the  Levites,  were  ordered  to  be  numbered,  from 
 the  age  of  one  month  and  upwards  ;  and  when  it 
 was  found  that  the  former  were  22,273  ^^^  the 
 latter  22,000,*  it  was  arranged  that  22,000  of  the 
 first-born  should  be  replaced  by  the  22,000  Le- 
 vites, that  the  273  first-born  who  were  in  excess  of 
 the  Levites  should  be  redeemed  at  the  rate  of  five 
 
 *  There  is  a  discrepancy  between  the  total  num- 
 ber of  the  Levites,  which  is  given  in  Num.  iii.  39 
 as  22,000,  and  the  separate  number  of  the  three 
 civisions  which  is  given  in  verses  22,  28,  and  34,  as 
 follows — Gershonites  7500,  -f  Kohathites  8600,  -f 
 and  Merarites  6200  =  22,300.  Compare  also  ver. 
 46,  where  it  is  said  that  the  22,273  first-born  ex- 
 ceeded the  total  number  of  Levites  by  273.  The 
 Talmud  [Bcchoroth,  5  a)  and  the  Jewish  com- 
 mentators, who  are  followed  by  most  Christian  ex- 
 positors, submit  that  the  300  surplus  Levites  were 
 the  first-born  of  this  tribe,  who,  as  such,  could 
 not  be  substituted  for  the  first-born  of  the  other 
 tribes,  and  therefore  were  omitted  from  the  total. 
 To  this,  however,  it  is  objected,  that  if  such  an 
 exemption  of  first-born  had  been  intended,  the 
 text  would  have  contained  some  intimation  of  it, 
 whereas  there  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  context 
 to  indicate  it.      Houbigant  therefore  suggests  that 
 
 a  7  has  crept  into  the  word  t/'C'  in  ver.  28,  making 
 
 it  U^^,  and  that  by  retaining  the  former  word  we 
 obtain  8300  instead  of  8600,  which  removes  all  the 
 difficulty.  Philippson,  Keil,  and  others,  adopt  this 
 explanation. 
 
 shekels  each,  being  the  legal  sum  for  the  redemp- 
 tion of  the  firsL-born  child  (Num.  xviii.  16),  and 
 that  the  1365  shekels  be  given  to  Aaron  and  his 
 sons  as  a  compensation  for  the  odd  persons  who, 
 as  first-born,  belonged  to  Jehovah.  As  to  the 
 difficulty  how  to  decide  which  of  the  first-born 
 should  be  redeemed  by  paying  this  money,  and 
 which  should  be  exchanged  for  the  Levites,  since 
 it  was  natural  for  every  one  to  wish  to  escape  this 
 expense,  the  Midrash  {on  Num.  iii.  17)  and  the 
 Talmud  relate  that  '  Moses  wrote  on  22,000  tickets 
 
 Levite  (''"I?   p),    and  on  273    Five  Shekels   {^"QT] 
 
 Q  vpC'),  mixed  them  all  up,  put  them  into  a  ves- 
 sel, and  then  bid  every  Israelite  to  draw  one.  He 
 who  took  out  one  with  Levite  on  it  was  redeemed 
 by  a  Levite,  and  he  who  drew  one  with  Five 
 Shekels  on  it  had  to  be  redeemed  by  payment  of 
 this  sum'  {Sanhedrin  17,  a).  And  there  is  no 
 reason  to  doubt  this  ancient  tradition.  It  was 
 farther  ordained,  that  the  cattle  which  the  Levites 
 then  happened  to  possess,  should  be  considered  as 
 equivalent  to  all  the  first-born  cattle  which  all  the 
 Israelites  had,  without  their  being  numbered  and 
 exchanged,  one  for  one,  as  in  the  case  of  the  human 
 beings  (Num.  iii.  41-51),  so  that  the  firstlings 
 should  not  now  be  given  to  the  priest,  or  be  re- 
 deemed, which  the  Israelites  were  hereafter  required 
 to  do  (Num.  xviii.  15). 
 
 2.  L)ivision  of  the  tribe  of  Levi. — As  different 
 functions  were  assigned  to  the  separate  houses  of 
 the  Levitical  branch  of  the  tribe,  to  which  frequent 
 references  are  made,  we  subjoin  the  following 
 Table  from  Exod.  vi.  16-25,  italicising  the  Aaronic 
 or  priestly  branch,  in  order  to  facilitate  these  refe- 
 rences. 
 
 rGERSHONJLjb^n^. 
 
 (  Amram 
 
 LEVI 
 
 KOHATH 
 
 Merari 
 
 Aaron    . 
 
 Moses 
 Korah 
 Nepheg 
 Zithri 
 
 Mishael 
 
 Elzaphan 
 
 Zithri 
 
 Eleazar 
 Ithamar 
 
 Mahali 
 Mushi* 
 
 *  Those  mentioned  in  the  above  list  are  by 
 no  means  the  only  descendants  of  Levi  in  their 
 respective  generations,  as  is  evident  from  the  fact, 
 that  though  no  sons  of  Libni,  Shimei,  Hebron, 
 etc.,  are  here  given,  yet  mention  is  made  in  Num. 
 iii.  21,  of  '  the  family  of  the  Libnites  and  the 
 family  of  the  Shimeites ;'  in  Num.  xxvi.  58,  of 
 '  the  family  of  the  Libnites  ;'  and  in  Num.  iii.  27  ; 
 xxvi.  58,  of  'the  family  of  the  Hebronites;'  whilst 
 in  I  Chron.  xxiii.  several  sons  of  these  men  are 
 mentioned  by  name.  Again,  no  sons  of  Mahali  and 
 Mushi  are  given,  and  yet  they  appear  in  Num.  iii. 
 as  fathers  of  families  of  the  Levites.  The  design 
 of  the  genealogy  in  question  is  simply  to  give  the 
 pedigrees  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  some  other 
 principal  heads  of  the  family  of  Levi,  as  is  expressly 
 stated  in  Exod.  vi.  25  :  '  these  are  the  heads  of  the 
 fathers  of  the  Levites  according  to  their  families.' 
 In  these  heads  all  the  other  members  of  their  fami- 
 
LEVITES 
 
 821 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  Levitical  order  com- 
 prises the  whole  of  the  descendants  of  Gershon  and 
 Merari,  and  those  of  Kohath  through  Izhar  and 
 Uzziel,  as  well  as  through  Amram's  second  son, 
 Moses ;  whilst  Aaron,  Amram's  first  son,  and  his 
 issue,  constitute  the  priestly  order.  It  must  here 
 be  remarked,  that  though  Kohath  is  the  second  in 
 point  of  age  and  order,  yet  his  family  will  be  found 
 to  occupy  the  first  position,  because  they  are  the 
 nearest  of  kin  to  the  priests. 
 
 3.  A,^c'  and  qualifications  for  Levitical  service. — 
 The  only  qualification  for  active  service  specified  in 
 the  Mosaic  law,  is  mature  age,  which  in  Num.  iv. 
 3,  23,  30,  39,  43,  47,  is  said  to  be  from  thirty  to 
 fifty  ;  whilst  in  Num.  viii.  24,  25,  it  is  said  to  com- 
 mence at  twenty-five.  Various  attempts  have  been 
 made  to  reconcile  these  two  apparently  contradic- 
 tory injunctions.  The  Talmud  {Cholin  24,  a), 
 Rashi  [Comment.,  in  loco),  and  Maimonides  [lod 
 
 Ha-Chezaka,  Hilchoth  Kele  Ha-Mikdash,  iii.  7.  3), 
 who  are  followed  by  some  Christian  commentators, 
 affirm  that  from  twenty-five  to  thirty  the  Levites 
 attended  in  order  to  be  instructed  in  their  duties, 
 but  did  not  enter  upon  actual  duties  until  they 
 were  full  thirty  years  of  age.  But  this  explanation, 
 as  Abravanel  rightly  remarks,  'is  at  variance  w^ith 
 the  plain  declaration  of  the  text,  that  the  Levites 
 were  called  at  twenty-five  years  of  age  to  ivait  upon 
 the  service  of  the  Tabernacle,  which  clearly  denotes 
 not  instruction  for  their  ministry,  but  the  ministry 
 itself  {Comment,  on  Num.  viii.  24).  Besides,  the 
 text  itself  does  not  give  the  slightest  intimation  that 
 any  period  of  the  Levitical  life  was  devoted  to  in- 
 struction. Hence  Rashbam,  Ibn  Ezra,  and  Abra- 
 vanel, who  are  followed  by  most  modern  expositors, 
 submit  that  the  twenty-five  years  of  age  refers  to  the 
 Levites'  entering  upon  the  lighter  part  of  their  ser- 
 vice, such  as  keeping  watch  and  performing  the 
 
 The  Kohathites. 
 
 lighter  duties  in  the  Tabernacle ;  whilst  the  thirty 
 years  of  age  refers  to  their  entering  upon  the  more 
 onerous  duties,  such  as  carrying  heavy  weights, 
 when  the  tabernacle  was  moved  about  from  place  to 
 place,  which  required  the  full  strength  of  a  man  (pD 
 
 Dniii'yi  c'DH  jnm  ^?E^lD  mny^  Nin  njc*  u'^^h^ 
 
 ?nsn  mi2y?) ;  maintaining  that  this  distinction 
 
 is  indicated  in  the  text  by  the  words  ^{EJ>07'|  "713^?, 
 for  labour  and  burdens,  when  the  thirty  years'  work 
 
 lies  were  included,  according  to  the  principle  laid 
 down  in  i  Chron.  xxiii.  1 1  :  '  therefore  they  were 
 in  one  reckoning,  according  to  their  father's  house.' 
 Some  names  are  also  mentioned  for  a  special  pur- 
 pose, e.  g.,  the  sons  of  Izhar,  on  account  of  Korah, 
 who  was  the  leader  of  the  rebellion  against  Moses. 
 These  observations  afford  an  answer,  to  a  consider- 
 able extent,  to  the  conclusions  of  Bishop  Colenso 
 upon  the  number  of  the  Levites  (comp.  The  Penta- 
 teuch and  the  Book  of  Joshua  critically  examined, 
 part  i.,  p.  107-112). 
 
 is  spoken  of  (Num.  iv.  30,  31),  and  by  the  omis- 
 sion of  the  word  ^sE^'D,  bu?-den,  when  the  twenty- 
 five  years'  work  is  spoken  of  (Num.  viii.  24,  etc.) 
 But  it  may  fairly  be  questioned,  whether  man  is 
 more  fitted  for  arduous  work  from  thirty  to  thirty- 
 five  than  from  twenty-five  to  thirty.  Besides  the 
 Gershonites  and  the  Merarites,  who  had  the  charge 
 of  the  heavier  burdens,  did  not  carry  them  at  all 
 (comp.  Num.  vii.  3-9,  and  infra,  sec.  4).  Accord- 
 ing to  another  ancient  Jewish  interpretation  given 
 in  the  Siphri,  and  adopted  by  Bahr  {Symbolik,  ii. 
 41)  and  others,  Num.  iv.  treats  of  the  necessary 
 age  of  the  Levites  for  the  immediate  requirements 
 in  the  wilderness ;  whilst  Num.  viii.  gives  their  age 
 for  the  promised  land,  when  they  shall  be  divided 
 among  the  tribes  and  a  larger  number  shall  be 
 wanted  {Siphri  on  Num.  viii.)  Somewhat  similar 
 is  Philippson's  explanation,  who  affirms  that  at  the 
 first  election  of  the  Levitical  order  the  required  age 
 for  service  was  from  thirty  to  fifty,  but  that  all 
 futtwe  Levites  had  to  commence  service  at  t-cventy- 
 five.  Whilst  the  Sept.  solves  the  difficulty  by  uni- 
 formly reading  twenty-five  instead  of  thirty. 
 
LEVITES 
 
 822 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 4.  Duties  and  classification  of  the  Leintes. — The 
 Levites  were  given  as  a  gift  (□''JTlJ)  to  Aaron  and 
 his  sons,  the  priests,  to  wait  upon  them,  and  to  do 
 the  subordinate  work  for  them  at  the  service  of  the 
 sanctuary  (Num.  viii.  19;  xvii.  2-6).  They  had 
 also  to  guard  the  tabernacle  and  take  charge  of 
 certain  vessels,  whilst  the  priests  had  to  watch  the 
 altars  and  the  interior  of  the  sanctuary  (i.  50-53 ; 
 viii.  19;  xviii.  1-7).  To  carry  it  out  effectually,  the 
 charge  of  certain  vessels  and  portions  of  the  Taber- 
 nacle, as  well  as  the  guarding  of  its  several  sides, 
 were  assigned  to  each  of  the  three  sections  into 
 which  the  tribe  was  divided  by  their  respective 
 descent  from  the  three  sons  of  Levi,  i.  e. ,  Gershon, 
 Kohath,  and  Merari,  as  follows : — 
 
 The  Kohathites,  who  out  of  8600  persons  yielded 
 2750  qualified  for  active  service  according  to  the 
 prescribed  age,  and  who  were  under  the  leadership 
 of  Elizajjhan,  had  to  occupy  the  south  side  of  the 
 Tabernacle ;  and,  as  the  family  to  whom  Aaron  the 
 high-priest  and  his  sons  belonged,  had  to  take 
 charge  of  the  holy  things  (C^li5^n  mJD^O)— viz., 
 the  ark,  the  table  of  shew-bread,  the  candlestick, 
 the  two  altars  of  incense  and  burnt-offering,  as  well 
 as  of  the  sacred  vessels  used  at  the  service  of  these 
 holy  things,  and  the  curtains  of  the  holy  of  holies. 
 All  these  things  they  had  to  carry  on  their  own 
 shoulders  when  the  camp  was  broken  up  (Num. 
 iii.  27-32;  iv.  5-15;  vii.  9).  Eleazar,  the  head  of 
 the  priests,  who  belonged  to  the  Kohathites,  and 
 was  the  chief  commander  of  the  three  Levitical 
 divisions,  had  the  charge  of  the  oil  for  the  candle- 
 stick, the  incense,  the  daily  meat-offering,  and  the 
 nnointing  oil  (Num.  iii.  32;  iv.  16).  (See  wood- 
 cut, page  821.) 
 
 The  Gershonites,  who,  out  of  7500  men  yielded 
 2630  for  active  service,  and  who  were  under  the 
 leadership  of  Eliasaph,  had  to  occupy  the  west 
 side  of  the  tabernacle,  and  to  take  charge  of  the 
 tapestry  of  the  tabernacle,  all  its  curtains,  hang- 
 ings, and  coverings,  the  pillars  of  the  tapestiy 
 hangings,  the  implements  used  in  connection  there- 
 with, and  to  perform  all  the  work  connected  with 
 the  taking  down  and  putting  up  of  the  articles 
 over  which  they  had  the  charge  (Num.  iii.  21-26  ; 
 iv.  22-28).     (See  woodcut,  page  824.) 
 
 The  Merarites,  who  out  of  6200  yielded  3200 
 active  men,  and  who  were  under  the  leadership  of 
 Zuriel,  had  to  occupy  the  north  side  of  the  taber- 
 nacle, and  take  charge  of  the  boards,  bars,  pillars, 
 sockets,  tent-pins,  etc.  (Num.  iii.  33-37  ;  iv.  39,  40). 
 The  two  latter  companies,  however,  were  allowed 
 to  use  the  six  covered  waggons  and  the  twelve  oxen 
 which  were  offered  as  an  oblation  to  Jehovah  ;  the 
 Gershonites,  having  the  less  heavy  portion,  got 
 two  of  the  waggons  and  four  of  the  oxen ;  whilst 
 the  Merarites,  who  had  the  heavier  portions,  got 
 four  of  the  waggons  and  eight  of  the  oxen  (Num. 
 vii.  3-9).  (See  woodcut,  page  825.)  Thus  the 
 total  number  of  active  men  which  the  three  divi- 
 sions of  the  Levites  yielded  was  8580.  When 
 encamped  around  the  tabernacle,  they  formed,  as 
 it  were,  a  partition  between  the  people  and  the 
 sanctuary  ;  they  had  to  guard  that  the  children  of 
 Israel  should  not  come  near  it,  since  those  who 
 ventured  to  do  so  incurred  the  penalty  of  death 
 (Num.  i.  51  ;  iii.  38;  xviii.  22);  nor  were  they 
 themselves  allowed  to  come  near  the  vessels  of 
 the  sanctuary  and  the  altar,  lest  they  die,  together 
 v/ith  the  priests  (Num.  xviii.  3-6).  Israelites  of 
 any  other  tribe  were  strictly  forbidden  to  perform 
 
 the  Levitical  office,  in  order  '  that  there  might  be 
 no  plague  when  the  children  of  Israel  approach 
 the  sanctuary'  (Num.  iii.  10;  viii.  19;  xviii.  5); 
 and  according  to  the  ancient  Hebrew  canons,  even 
 a  priest  was  not  allowed  to  do  the  work  assigned 
 to  the  Levites,  nor  was  one  Levite  permitted  to 
 perform  the  duties  which  were  incumbent  upon  his 
 fellow  Levite  on  the  penalty  of  death  (Maimonides, 
 HilcJwth  Kele  Ha-Mikdash,  iii.  10). 
 
 5.  Consecration  of  the  Levites. — The  first  act  in 
 the  consecration  of  the  Levites  was  to  sprinkle 
 them  with  the  water  of  purifying  (n^it^PI  ^O), 
 which,  according  to  tradition,  was  the  same  used 
 for  the  purification  of  persons  who  became  defiled 
 by  dead  bodies,  and  in  which  were  mingled  cedar 
 wood,  hyssop,  scarlet,  and  ashes  of  the  red  heifer 
 (Num.  xix.  6,  9,  13),  and  was  designed  to  cleanse 
 them  from  the  same  defilement  (comp.  Rashi  on 
 Num.  viii.  7).  They  had,  in  the  next  place,  as  an 
 emblem  of  further  purification,  to  shave  off  all  the 
 hair  from  their  body,  '  to  teach  them  thereby,'  as 
 Ralbag  says,  '  that  they  must  renounce  as  much  as 
 was  in  their  power  all  worldly  things,  and  devote 
 themselves  to  the  service  of  the  most  high  God,' 
 and  then  wash  their  garments.  After  this  triple 
 form  of  purification,  they  were  brought  before  the 
 door  of  the  tabernacle,  along  with  two  bullocks 
 and  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil,  when  the  whole 
 congregation,  through  the  elders  who  represented 
 them,  laid  their  hands  upon  the  heads  of  the 
 Levites,  and  set  them  apart  for  the  sei-vice  of  the 
 sanctuary,  to  occupy  the  place  of  the  first-born  of 
 the  whole  congregation ;  whereupon  the  priests 
 waved  them  before  the  Lord  (Num.  viii.  5-14), 
 which  in  all  probability  was  done,  as  Abravanel 
 says,  by  leading  them  forward  and  backward,  up 
 and  down,  as  if  saying,  behold  these  are  henceforth 
 the  servants  of  the  Lord  instead  of  the  first-born 
 
 of  the   children  of  Israel  (HT'-l''  nK3ini  rO^ni 
 
 nni3n  nnn  innyp  ^"''  naiy  'h^  nn  -idins  n^^yi 
 
 pXICi'''  ''J3).  The  part  which  the  whole  congrega- 
 tion took  in  this  consecration  is  a  very  important 
 feature  in  the  Hebrew  constitution,  inasmuch  as  it 
 most  distinctly  shews  that  the  Levitical  order  ^xo- 
 ce^AeAfrom  the  midst  of  the  people  {^y.oA.  xxviii.  i), 
 was  to  be  regarded  as  essentially  identical  with  it, 
 and  not  as  a  sacred  caste  standing  in  proud  eminence 
 above  the  rest  of  the  nation.  This  principle  of 
 equality,  which,  according  to  the  Mosaic  law,  was 
 not  to  be  infringed  by  the  introduction  of  a  priest- 
 hood or  monarchy  (Deut.  xvii.  14-20),  was  recog- 
 nised throughout  the  existence  of  the  Hebrew 
 commonwealth,  as  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  the 
 representatives  of  the  people  took  part  in  the  coro- 
 nation of  kings  and  the  instalment  of  high-priests 
 (i  Kings  ii.  35  ;  with  i  Chron.  xxix.  22),  and  even 
 in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees  we  see  that  it  is  the 
 people  who  installed  Simon  as  high -priest  (i 
 Mac  cab.  xiv.  35). 
 
 6.  Revenues  of  the  Levites. — Thus  consecrated 
 to  the  service  of  the  Lord,  it  was  necessary  that 
 the  tribe  of  Levi  should  not  be  engaged  in  the 
 temporal  pursuits  of  the  rest  of  the  people,  to 
 enable  them  to  give  themselves  wholly  to  their 
 spiritual  functions,  and  to  the  cultivation  of  the 
 arts  and  sciences,  as  well  as  to  preserve  them  from 
 contracting  a  desire  to  amass  earthly  possessions. 
 For  this  reason  they  were  to  have  no  territorial 
 possessions,  but  Jehovah  was  to  be  their  inheritance 
 (Num.  xviii.  20  i  xxvi.   62  ;  Deut.   x  9  ;  xviii.    I, 
 
LEVITES 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 2  ;  Josh,  xviii.  7).  To  reward  their  labour,  which 
 they  had  henceforth  to  perform  instead  of  the  first- 
 horn  of  the  whole  people,  as  well  as  to  compensate 
 the  loss  of  their  share  in  the  material  wealth  of  the 
 nation,  it  was  ordained  that  they  should  receive  from 
 the  other  tribes  the  tithes  of  the  produce  of  the  land, 
 from  which  the  non-priestly  portion  of  the  Levites 
 in  their  turn  had  to  offer  a  tithe  to  the  priests  as 
 a  recognition  of  their  higher  consecration  (Num. 
 xviii.  21-24,  26-32;  Neh.  x.  37).  But  though 
 they  were  to  have  no  territorial  possessions,  still 
 they  required  a  place  of  abode.  To  secure  this, 
 and  at  the  same  time  to  enable  the  Levites  to  dis- 
 seminate a  knowledge  of  the  law  and  e.xercise  a 
 refined  and  intellectual  influence  among  the  people 
 at  large,  upon  whose  conscientious  payment  of  the 
 tithes  they  were  dependent  for  subsistence,  forty- 
 eight  cities  were  assigned  to  them,  six  of  which 
 were  to  be  cities  of  refuge  for  those  who  had  in- 
 advertently killed  any  one  (Num.  xxxv.  1-8). 
 From  these  forty-eight  cities,  which  they  obtained 
 immediately  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  and 
 which  were  made  up  by  taking  four  cities  from  the 
 district  of  every  tribe,  thirteen  were  allotted  to  the 
 priestly  portion  of  the  Levitical  tribe.  Which 
 cities  belonged  to  the  priestly  portion  of  the  tribe, 
 and  which  to  the  non-priestly  portion,  and  how 
 they  were  distributed  among  the  other  tribes,  as  re- 
 corded in  Josh,  xxi.,  will  be  seen  from  the  follow- 
 ine  Table  : — 
 
 common  or  suburb,  and  the  space  measured  '  from 
 without  the  city  on  the  east  side,  etc.,'  was  a  further 
 tract  of  land  of  2000  cubits,  used  for  fields  and 
 
 KOHATHITES 
 
 a  Priests 
 
 b  Not  Priests 
 
 ii.  Gershonites 
 
 ili.  Merarites 
 
 Judah  and  Simeon    .  9 
 
 Benjamin  .         .  4 
 
 Ephraira  .         .  4 
 
 Dan  ...  4 
 
 Half  Manasseh  (west)  2 
 
 Half  Manasseh  (east)  2 
 
 I  Issachar  .  .  4 
 
 I  Asher       ...  4 
 
 ,  Naphtali  .  .  3 
 
 Zebulun  .         .  4 
 
 Reuben    ...  4 
 
 Gad  .         .         .  4 
 
 Each  of  these  cities  was  required  to  have  an  out- 
 lying suburb  (ti'lJD,  TrpodcrTeia)  of  meadow-land 
 for  the  pasture  of  the  flocks  and  herds  belonging 
 to  the  Levites,  the  dimensions  of  which  are  thus  de- 
 scribed in  Num.  xxxv.  4,  5,  '  And  the  suburb  [or 
 pasture-ground]  of  the  cities  which  ye  shall  give  unto 
 the  Levites,  are  from  the  wall  of  the  city  to  the  out- 
 side a  thousand  cubits  round  about ;  and  ye  shall 
 measure  from  without  the  city  the  east  corner  two 
 thousand  cubits,  and  the  south  corner  two  thousand 
 cubits,  and  the  west  corner  two  thousand  cubits,  and 
 the  north  corner  two  thousand  cubits,  and  the  city 
 in  the  centre.'  These  dimensions  have  occasioned 
 great  difficulty,  because  of  the  apparent  contradic- 
 tion in  the  two  verses,  as  specifying  first  looo  cubits 
 and  then  2000.  The  LXX.,  Josephus  {Atitiq.  iv. 
 4.  3),  Philo  {De  Sacerd.  honoribies),  get  over  the 
 difficulty  by  reading  2000  in  both  verses,  as  ex- 
 hibited in  diagram  L  a.,  whilst  ancient  and  modern 
 commentators,  who  rightly  adhere  to  the  text, 
 have  endeavoured  to  reconcile  the  two  verses  by 
 advancing  different  theories,  of  which  the  following 
 are  the  most  noticeable  :  I.  According  to  the  Tal- 
 mud {Enibin  51,  a),  the  space  'measured  from 
 tlie  wall  1000  cubits  round  about,'  was  used  as  a 
 
 [I.  «.] 
 
 vineyards,  the  former  being  'the  suburbs'  properly 
 so-called,  and  the  latter  'the  fields  of  the  suburbs,' 
 as  represented  in  diagram  L  b.     Against  this  view, 
 
 however,  which  is  the  most  simple  and  rational, 
 and  which  is  adopted  by  Maimonides  {Hilchoth 
 Shemila  Ve-Jobel,  xiii.  2),  Bishop  Patrick,  and  most 
 English  expositors,  it  is  urged,  that  it  is  not  said 
 that  the  2000  cubits  are  to  be  measured  in  all  direc- 
 tions, but  only  in  the  east,  south,  etc.,  direction, 
 or,  as  the  Hebrew  has  it,  east,  south,  etc. ,  corner 
 (HXD).  2.  It  means  that  a  circle  of  1000  cubits 
 radius  was  to  be  measured  from  the  centre  of  the 
 city,  and  then  a  square  circumscribed  about  that 
 circle,  each  of  whose  sides  was  2000  cubits  long, 
 
 as  exhibited  in  diagram  II.  But  the  objection  to 
 this  is  that  the  lOOO  cubits  were  to  be  measured 
 '  from  the  wall  of  the  city,'  and  not  from  the  centre. 
 
LEVITES 
 
 824 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 3.  The  1000  cubits  were  measured  perpendicularly 
 to  the  wall  of  the  city,  and  then  perpendicular 
 to  these  distances,  i.e.,  parallel  to  the  walls  of  the 
 city,  the  2000  cubits  were  measured  on  the  north, 
 south,  east,  and  west  sides,  as  shown  in  diagram 
 III.  This,  however,  is  obviously  incorrect,  be- 
 cause the  sides  would  not  be  2000  cubits  long  if 
 the  city  were  of  finite  dimensions,  but  plainly 
 longer.  4.  It  is  assumed  that  the  city  was  built  in 
 a  circular  form,  with  a  radius  of  1500  cubits,  that  a 
 circle  was  then  described  with  a  radius  of  2500 
 
 cubits  from  the  centre  of  the  city,  i.  e.,  at  a  dis- 
 tance of  1000  cubits  from  the  walls  of  the  city, 
 and  that  the  suburbs  were  enclosed  between  the 
 circumferences  of  the  two  circles,  and  that  the 
 corner  of  the  circumscribed  square  was  1000  cubits 
 from  the  circumference  of  the  outer  circle.  Com- 
 pare diagram  IV.  But  the  objection  to  this  is,  that 
 by  Euclid,  i.  47,  the  square  of  the  diagonal  equals 
 the  sum  of  the  square  of  the  sides,  whereas  in  this 
 figure  3500^  does  not  equal  2500"  -h  2500-.  The 
 assigned  length  of  the  diagonal  varies  about  35 
 
 329.  The  Gershonites. 
 
 cubits  from  its  actual  value.  5-  ^^^  ^i^y  is  sup- 
 posed to  be  of  a  circular  form  ;  round  it  a  circle  is 
 described  at  a  distance  of  1000  cubits  from  its  walls ; 
 
 "%         ^ — 
 
 i   ~'~^^      ^/ 
 
 v^^ 
 
 ^       ^\.  ^/ 
 
 ^         ^/\ 
 
 /     ^^'y^ 
 
 ~~~~^\V^  \ 
 
 /             /X" 
 
 ■^\      \ 
 
 /          /     ^vi? 
 
 ^/    \       \ 
 
 /         X^ 
 
 y         \         \ 
 
 1             ^z 
 
 (fv 
 
 y  v^ 
 
 ^%l        1 
 
 \          <!^\^ 
 
 y^   J 
 
 \  ^^           ^ 
 
 =-^    x<^/ 
 
 ^C 
 
 -                            X<2> 
 
 V        ^^^^ 
 
 \^^        X 
 
 [IV.]  330- 
 
 then  from  the  walls  2000  cubits  are  measured  to  the 
 north,  south,  east,  and  west  corners — the  whole 
 forming  a  starlike  figure,  as  exhibited  in  diagram 
 
 V.  This  view,  which  is  somewhat  fanciful,  strictly 
 meets  the  requirements  of  the  Hebrew  text.  6. 
 The  1000  cubits  are  measured  from  the  centre  in 
 
 four  directions  at  right  angles  to  one  another,  and 
 perpendicular  to  each  of  these  a  side  of  2000  cubits 
 long  is  drawn,  the  whole  forming  a  square.     But  in 
 
LEVITES 
 
 825 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 this  case  the  condition  of  '  looo  cubits  round  about' 
 is  not  fulfilled,  the  distance  of  the  centre  from  the 
 corners  of  the  square  being  plainly  more  than  lOOO 
 cubits.  7.  The  '  1000  cubits  round  about '  is 
 equivalent  to  1000  cubits  square,  or  305  English 
 acres.  8.  The  city  is  supposed  to  be  square,  each 
 side  measuring  1000  or  500  cubits,  and  then,  at  a 
 distance  of  1000  cubits  in  all  directions  from  the 
 square,  another  square  is  described,  as  represented 
 in  diagrams  VI.  a.  and  VI.  l>.  But  this  incurs  the 
 objection  urged  against  6,  that  the  1000  cubits  can- 
 not be  said  to  be  measured  'round  about,'  the 
 distance  from  the  corner  of  the  city  to  the  corner 
 
 of  the  precincts  being  plainly  more  than  1000  cubits. 
 Upon  a  review  of  all  these  theories,  we  incline  to 
 the  ancient  Jewish  view,  which  is  stated  first,  and 
 against  which  nothing  can  be  said,  if  we  take  '  on 
 the  south,  east,  etc.,'  simply  to  mean,  as  it  often 
 does,  iti  all  directions,  instead  of  four  distinct  points. 
 It  pre-supposes  that  the  cities  were  built  in  a  cir- 
 cular form,  which  was  usual  in  the  cities  of  anti- 
 quity, both  because  the  circle  of  all  figures  comprises 
 the  largest  area  within  the  smallest  periphery,  and 
 because  the  inhabitants  could  reach  every  part  of 
 the  walls  in  the  shortest  time  from  all  directions, 
 if  necessary,  for  purposes  of  defence. 
 
 332.   The  INIerarites. 
 
 These  revenues  have  been  thought  exorbitant 
 beyond  all  bounds  ;  for,  discarding  the  unjustifiable 
 
 w 
 
 1000  culHs              soao  cuhlis 
 
 N 
 S 
 
 E 
 
 [VI.  a]  333- 
 
 conclusion   of   Bishop   Colenso,    that    '  forty-four 
 people  [Levites],  with  the  two  priests,  and  their 
 
 families,  had  forty-eight  cities  assigned  to  them' 
 {The  Pentateuch,  etc.,  part  i.,  p.  112),  and  adher- 
 ing to  the  Scriptural  numbers,  we  still  have  a  tribe 
 which,  at  the  second  census,  numbered  23,000 
 males,  with  no  more  than  12,000  arrived  at  man's 
 estate,  receiving  the  tithes  of  600,000  people  ; 
 '  consequently,'  it  is  thought  '  that  each  individual 
 Levite,  vnthout  having  to  de- 
 duct seed  and  the  charges  of 
 husbandry,  had  as  much  as  five 
 Israelites  reaped  from  their 
 fields,  or  gained  on  their  cattle' 
 (Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  i., 
 p.  252).  Add  to  this  that, 
 though  so  small  in  number, 
 the  Levites  received  forty-eight 
 cities,  whilst  other  tribes  which 
 consisted  of  more  than  double 
 the  number  of  men  received  less  cities,  and  some 
 did  not  get  more  than  twelve  cities.  But  in  all  these 
 calculations  the  following  facts  are  ignored  : — i.  The 
 tithes  were  not  a  regular  tax,  but  a  religious  duty, 
 which  was  greatly  neglected  by  the  people  ;  2. 
 Even  from  these  irregular  tithes  the  Levites  had  to 
 give  a  tithe'  to  the  priests ;  3.  The  tithes  never 
 
 [VI.  b.-\ 
 
LEVITES 
 
 82f5 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 increased,  whereas  the  Levites  did  increase.  4. 
 Thirteen  of  the  forty-eight  cities  were  assigned  to 
 the  priests,  and  six  were  cities  of  refuge  ;  and  5- 
 Of  the  remaining  twenty-nine  cities,  the  Levites 
 were  by  no  means  the  sole  occupants  or  proprie- 
 tors, they  were  simply  to  have  in  them  those  houses 
 which  they  required  as  dwellings,  and  the  fields 
 necessary  for  the  pasture  of  their  cattle.  This 
 is  evident  from  the  fact  that  the  Levites  were 
 allowed  to  sell  their  houses,  and  that  a  special 
 clause  bearing  on  this  subject  was  inserted  in  the 
 Jubilee  law  [Jubilee]  ;  inasmuch  as  Lev.  xxv. 
 32-34  would  have  no  meaning  unless  it  is  pre- 
 sumed that  other  Israelites  lived  together  with  the 
 Levites. 
 
 Such  was  the  Mosaic  organisation  of  the  Leviti- 
 cal  order  vvhicli  Joshua  faithfully  endeavoured  to 
 carry  into  effect.  But  so  deeply  rooted  was  the 
 patriarchal  mode  of  worship  in  the  nation,  accord- 
 ing to  which  the  head  of  the  family,  or  the  first- 
 born son,  performed  the  sacerdotal  functions,  that 
 even  in  the  lifetime  of  Moses  this  innovation  of 
 substituting  the  tribe  of  Levi  and  offering  the 
 sacrifices  '  before  the  door  of  the  Tabernacle  be- 
 fore the  Lord,'  instead  of  on  any  altar  erected  by 
 private  individuals,  created  a  revolt  (Num.  xvi.  3). 
 It  will  therefore  not  be  surprising  to  find  that 
 the  primitive  system  of  worship  could  not  easily 
 be  superseded  between  the  days  of  Joshua  and  the 
 rise  of  the  monarchy,  that  the  people  recurred  to 
 it  again  and  again,  that  the  Levites  were  without 
 functions,  influence,  and  means  of  subsistence,  and 
 were  glad  to  seek  refuge  in  any  town,  whether  holy 
 or  not,  and  be  maintained  by  the  benevolence  of 
 pious  individuals  (Judg.  ii.  5;  vi.  11-20 ;  xiii.  19, 
 20;  xvii.  7-12  ;  xviii.  1-31  ;  i  Sam.  vi.  15  ;  vii. 
 1-5;  X.  17;  xxxi.  1-6).  Asa  striking  illustration 
 of  this  state  of  things,  may  be  specified  the  conduct 
 of  Micah,  a  man  of  Mount  Ephraim,  who  had  in 
 his  own  residence  '  a  house  of  God,  and  made  an 
 ephod  and  teraphim. '  This  man  first  consecrated 
 one  of  his  sons  as  a  priest,  and  then  got  a  homeless 
 and  breadless  Levite,  supposed  to  be  the  grandson 
 of  Moses  himself,  to  dwell  with  him  as  '  a  father 
 and  a  priest'  for  little  more  than  his  food  and 
 raiment  (Judg.  xvii.  1-13).  During  the  whole  of 
 Saul's  reign,  the  Levites  who  had  the  charge  of 
 the  ark  of  the  covenant  left  this  sacred  trust  to 
 be  profaned  in  the  house  of  a  private  indi- 
 vidual at  Kirjath-jearim  (i  Sam.  vii.  2  ;  I  Chron. 
 xiii.  2). 
 
 //.  From  the  comtnencemetit  of  the  monarchy  to 
 the  exile. —  The  deplorable  condition  and  disorgani- 
 sation of  the  Levitical  order  were  not  much  im- 
 proved in  the  reign  of  the  first  Hebrew  monarch. 
 The  self-willed  Saul,  who  arrogated  to  himself 
 the  priestly  functions,  and  massacred  the  priests  at 
 Nob  (l  Sam.  xxii. ),  was  not  likely  to  recognise  the 
 Levitical  order  and  improve  their  circumstances. 
 It  was  resei-ved  for  David  to  reorganise  the  great 
 Levitical  body.  As  soon  as  his  kingdom  was 
 established,  he  immediately  betook  himself  to  the 
 reconstruction  of  the  divine  worship,  when  he  at 
 once  recognised  the  Mosaic  ordinances  about  the 
 priesthood  and  the  Levitical  order,  and  assigned 
 to  them  their  proper  share  of  work  in  the  sanc- 
 tuary. When  the  ark  was  carried  to  Zion  the 
 Levites  were  the  bearers  of  it  (i  Chron.  xiii.  2  ; 
 XV.,  xvi.,  with  vi.  16,  etc.)  The  Levites  engaged 
 in  conveying  the  ark  to  Jerusalem  were  divided 
 into  six  father's  houses,  headed  by  six  chiefs,  four 
 
 belonging  to  Kohath,  one  to  Gershon,  and  one  to 
 Merari  (i  Chron.  xv.  5,  etc.)  The  most  remark- 
 able feature  in  the  Levitical  duties  of  this  period  is 
 their  being  employed  for  the  first  time  in  choral 
 service  (i  Chron.  xv.  16-24;  xvi.  4-36);  others 
 again  were  appointed  as  door-keepers  {ibid.  xv.  23, 
 24).  Still  the  thorough  reorganisation  of  the 
 whole  tribe  was  effected  by  the  shepherd-king  in 
 the  last  days  of  his  eventful  life,  that  the  Levites 
 might  be  able  at  the  erection  of  the  Temple  '  to 
 wait  on  the  sons  of  Aaron  for  the  service  of  the 
 house  of  Jehovah,  in  the  courts  and  the  chambers, 
 and  the  purifying  of  all  holy  things,  and  the  work 
 of  the  service  of  the  house  of  God'  (i  Chron. 
 xxiii.  28).  This  reorganisation  may  be  described 
 as  follows  : — 
 
 I.  Number  of  Levites  and  age  for  service. — The 
 Levites  from  thirty  years  of  age  and  iipwards  were 
 first  of  all  numbered,  when  it  was  found  that  they 
 were  38,000  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  2,  3) ;  this  being  about 
 29,500  more  than  at  the  first  Mosaic  census.  It 
 will  be  seen  that,  according  to  this  statement,  the 
 Levites  were  to  commence  service  at  thirty  years 
 of  age,  in  harmony  with  the  Mosaic  institution 
 (Num.  iv.  3,  23,  30) ;  whilst  in  ver.  27  of  the 
 same  chapter  {i.  e.,  1  Chron.  xxiii.  27)  it  is  said 
 that  they  were  to  take  their  share  of  duty  at  twenty 
 years  of  age.  Kimchi,  who  is  followed  by  Bishop 
 Patrick,  Michaelis,  and  others,  tries  to  reconcile 
 this  apparent  contradiction  by  submitting  that  the 
 former  refers  to  a  census  which  David  made  at  an 
 earlier  period,  which  was  according  to  the  Mosaic 
 law  (Num.  iv.  3) ;  whilst  the  latter  speaks  of  a 
 second  census  which  he  made  at  the  close  of  his 
 life,  when  he  found  that  the  duties  of  the  fixed 
 sanctuary  were  much  lighter  and  more  numerous, 
 and  could  easily  be  performed  at  the  age  of  twenty, 
 but  at  the  same  time  required  a  larger  staff  of  men. 
 Against  this,  however,  Bertheau  rightly  urges,  that 
 ■ — I.  The  38,000  Levites  of  thirty  years  of  age  given 
 in  the  census  of  ver.  3,  are  the  only  persons  ap- 
 pointed for  the  different  Levitical  offices ;  and  that 
 it  is  nowhere  stated  that  this  number  was  insuf- 
 ficient, or  that  the  arrangements  based  thereupon, 
 as  recorded  in  vers.  4  and  5,  were  not  carried  out ; 
 and  2.  The  chronicler  plainly  indicates,  in  ver.  25, 
 etc.,  that  he  is  about  to  impart  a  different  state- 
 ment from  that  communicated  in  ver.  3 ;  for  he 
 mentions  therein  the  reason  which  induced  Davio 
 not  to  abide  by  the  Mosaic  institution,  which  pr<c 
 scribes  the  age  of  service  to  commence  at  thirty, 
 and  in  ver.  27  expressly  points  out  the  source  from 
 which  he  derived  this  deviating  account.  The  two 
 accounts  are,  therefore,  entirely  different ;  the  one 
 records  that  the  Levites,  in  David's  time,  were 
 numbered  from  their  thirtieth  year ;  whilst  the  other, 
 which  appears  to  the  chronicler  more  trustworthy, 
 states  that  David  introduced  the  practice  which 
 afterwards  obtained  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  17;  Ezra  iii. 
 8)  of  appointing  Levites  to  office  at  the  age  of 
 twenty. 
 
 2.  Division  of  the  Levites  according  to  the 
 three  great  farnilies.  —  Having  ascertained  their 
 number,  David,  following  the  example  of  the 
 Mosaic  institution,  divided  the  Levitical  fathers' 
 houses,  according  to  their  descent  from  the  three 
 sons  of  Levi,  when  it  was  ascertained  that 
 these  three  sons  Gershon,  Kohath,  and  Merari, 
 were  represented  by  twenty-four  heads  of  fathers' 
 houses  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  6-23  ;  xxiv.  20-31),  as  fol- 
 lows : — 
 
LEVITES 
 
 827 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 Gershon   ' 
 
 Laadan 
 
 ,  Shimei 
 
 r  Am  ram 
 Izhar    . 
 
 KOHATH     - 
 
 Hebron 
 
 Mbrari 
 
 LUzziel 
 
 f  Jaaziah 
 
 j  Mahli 
 '  Mushi 
 
 rjehiel 
 
 Zetham 
 J  Joel 
 I  Shelomith  or  Shelomoth 
 
 Haziel 
 I,  Haran 
 {  Jahath 
 )  Zina  or  Ziza 
 
 I  Jeush  and  Beriah,  counted 
 (      as  one 
 J  Shubael 
 (  Rehabiah 
 
 Shelomith  or  Shelomoth 
 (  Jeriah 
 )  Amariah 
 I  Jahaziel 
 (  J  ek  am  earn 
 {  Michah 
 I  Isshiah 
 
 iShoham 
 Zaccur 
 Ibri 
 
 Kish-Jeremeel 
 (  Eder 
 I  Jeremoth 
 
 3 .  Classification  and  duties  of  the  Levites.  — These 
 twenty-four  father's  houses,  numbering  38,000  men 
 qualified  for  active  service,  were  then  divided  into 
 four  classes,  to  each  of  which  different  duties  were 
 assigned. 
 
 a.  The  first  class  consisted  of  24,000  Levites. 
 These  were  appointed  to  assist  the  priests  in  the 
 work  of  the  sanctuary  (Xetroup^oOi'Tes).  They  had 
 the  custody  of  the  official  garments  and  sacred 
 vessels,  had  to  deliver  them  when  wanted,  and  col- 
 lect and  lock  them  up  again  after  they  had  been 
 used ;  to  replenish  the  sacrificial  storehouse  with 
 cattle,  flour,  wine,  oil,  incense,  and  other  articles 
 used  as  sacrifices,  and  mete  out  each  time  the  re- 
 quired quantity  ;  to  provide  the  different  spices  from 
 which  the  priests  compounded  the  incense  (i  Chron. 
 ix.  30)  ;  to  prepare  the  shewbread  and  the  other 
 baked  things  used  at  sacrifices  ;  to  assist  the  priests 
 in  slaughtering  the  victims,  and  to  attend  to  the 
 cleaning  of  the  Temple,  etc.  (i  Chron.  xxiii.  2S-32; 
 ix.  29).  They  had  most  probably,  also,  the  charge 
 of  the  sacred  treasury  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  20-28).  Like 
 the  priests,  they  were  subdivided  into  twenty-four 
 courses  or  companies,  according  to  the  above- 
 named  twenty-four  Levitical  fathers'  houses,  and 
 were  headed  respectively  by  one  of  the  twenty-four 
 representatives  of  these  houses.  Each  of  these 
 courses  was  a  week  on  duty,  and  was  relieved  on 
 the  Sabbath  (2  Kings  xi. )  by  the  company  whose 
 turn  it  was  to  serve  next ;  so  that  there  were  always 
 a  thousand  men  of  this  class  on  duty,  and  each  man 
 had  to  serve  two  weeks  during  the  year.  The 
 menial  work  was  done  by  the  Nethinivi,  who  were 
 appointed  to  assist  the  Levites  in  these  matters 
 [Nethinim]. 
 
 b.  The  second  class  consisted  of  4000,  who  were 
 the  musicians  {v/xvipdol,  D"'"l~l1ti'D).  They  too  were 
 subdivided  into  twenty-four  courses  or  choirs,  each 
 headed  by  a  chief  (i  Chron.  xxv. ),  and  are  to  be 
 traced  back  to  the  three  great  families  of  Levi,  in- 
 asmuch as  four  of  the  chiefs  were  sons  of  Asaph,  a 
 descendant  of  Gershon  (i  Chron.  vi.  24-28);  six 
 were  sons  of  Jeduthan,  also  called  Ethan  (i  Chron. 
 XV.  17),  a  descendant  of  Merari  (i  Chron.  vi.  28); 
 and  fourteen  were  sons  of  Haman,  a  descendant 
 
 of  Kohath  (i  Chron.  vi.  18).  Each  of  these  chiefs 
 had  eleven  assistant  masters  from  his  own  sons  and 
 brothers,  thus  making  together  288  (i  Chron.  xxv. 
 7).  Hence,  when  these  are  deducted  from  the  4000, 
 there  remain  for  each  band  consisting  of  twelve 
 chief  musicians,  154  or  155  subordmate  musicians. 
 As  twelve  musicians  were  required  to  be  present 
 at  the  daily  morning  and  evening  service,  thus 
 demanding  168  to  be  on  duty  every  week,  the 
 twenty-four  courses  which  relieved  each  other  in 
 hebdomadal  rotation  must  have  consisted  of  4032, 
 and  4000  given  by  the  chronicler  is  simply  to  be 
 regarded  as  a  round  number.  Of  this  class,  there- 
 fore, as  of  the  former,  each  individual  had  to  serve 
 two  weeks  during  the  year. 
 
 c.  The  third  class  also  consisted  of  4000.  They 
 were  the  gate-keepers  {wvXwpoi,  D"'~iyiC,  i  Chron. 
 xxvi.  I-19),  and  as  such  bore  arms  (Ifiid.  ix.  19  ; 
 2  Chron.  xxxi.  2).  They  had  to  open  and  shut 
 the  gates,  to  keep  strangers  and  excommunicated 
 or  unclean  persons  from  entering  the  courts,  and 
 to  guard  the  storehouse,  the  temple,  and  its  courts, 
 at  night.  They,  too,  were  subdivided  into  twenty- 
 four  courses,  and  were  headed  by  twenty-four  chiefs 
 from  the  three  great  families  of  Levi ;  seven  were 
 sons  of  Meshelmiah,  a  descendant  of  Kohath  ; 
 thirteen  were  from  Obededom,  a  descendant  of 
 Gershon  ;  and  four  were  sons  of  Hosah,  a  descend- 
 ant of  Merari.  These  three  families,  including  the 
 twenty-four  chiefs,  consisted  of  ninety-three  mem- 
 bers, who,  together  with  the  three  heads  of  the 
 families,  viz.,  Meshelmiah,  Obededom,  and  Hosah, 
 made  ninety-six,  thus  yielding  four  chiefs  for  each 
 course.  We  thus  obtain  a  watch -course  every 
 week  of  162  or  163  persons,  under  the  command 
 of  four  superior  watches,  one  of  whom  was  the 
 commander-in-chief.  As  twenty-four  sentinel  posts 
 are  assigned  to  these  guards,  thus  making  168  a 
 week,  it  appears  that  each  person  only  served  one 
 day  in  the  week  (i  Chron.  xxvi.) 
 
 d.  The  fourth  class  consisted  of  6000  who  were 
 
 appointed  for  outward  affairs  (njlVnn  nSSPDH), 
 as  scribes  and  judges  (i  Chron.  xxvi.  29-32),  in 
 contradistinction  to  the  work  connected  with  the 
 service  of  the  sanctuary.  It  appears  that  this  class 
 was  subdivided  into  three  sections  ;  Chenaniah  and 
 his  sons  were  for  the  outward  business  of  Israel 
 (l  Chron.  xxvi.  29)  ;  Hashabiah  of  Hebron  and 
 his  brethren,  numbering  1 700,  were  officers  west  of 
 Jordan,  '  in  all  the  business  of  the  Lord  and  in  the 
 service  of  the  king'  (ver.  30) ;  whilst  Jerijah,  also  of 
 Hebron,  and  his  brethren,  numbering  2700  active 
 men,  were  rulers  east  of  Jordan,  '  for  every  matter 
 pertaining  to  God  and  affairs  of  the  king'  (vers. 
 31,  32).  It  will  thus  be  seen  that  this  class  con- 
 sisted of  Kohathites,  being  descendants  of  Izhar 
 and  Hebron. 
 
 This  reorganisation  effected  by  David,  we  are 
 told,  was  adopted  by  his  son  Solomon  when  the 
 Temple  was  completed  (2  Chron.  viii.  14,  etc.) 
 After  the  division  of  the  kingdom,  the  Levites  resi- 
 dent in  the  territory  of  the  ten  tribes  had  to  emi- 
 grate into  the  land  of  Judah,  in  consequence  of 
 their  refusing  to  take  part  in  the  illegitimate  pro- 
 vincial worship  established  by  Jeroboam  (2  Chron. 
 xi.  13,  14  ;  xiii.  9)  ;  and  though  comparatively  little 
 is  recorded  of  them  in  the  annals  of  the  kingdom  of 
 Judah,  yet  we  find  Levitical  musicians  accompany- 
 ing Jehoshaphat  m  his  journey  {ibid.  xx.  19,  etc.) 
 The  Levites  v/ere  sent  out  by  the  same  monarch  as 
 
LEVITES 
 
 828 
 
 LEVITES 
 
 teachers  and  judges  of  the  people  {ibid.  xix.  8-10) ; 
 they  took  part  in  the  counter-revolution  effected  by 
 Jehoiadah  (2  Chron.  xxiii.  l-ii);  in  restoring  the 
 temple  to  its  former  stateliness  under  Joash  {ibid. 
 xxiv.  5) ;  in  cleansing  and  repairing  the  sanctuary 
 under  Hezekiah  {ibid.  xxix.  12-15)  ;  and  regained 
 their  tithes  under  Ahaz,  where  we  also  hear  of  their 
 old  classification  {ibid.  xxxi.  4-17).  In  the  reign  of 
 Josiah  they  are  still  mentioned  as  '  the  teachers  of 
 all  Israel,'  and  the  singers  are  found  'in  their  place 
 according  to  the  commandment  of  David'  (2  Chron. 
 XXXV.  3,  15).  During  the  Egyptian  and  Chaldrean 
 invasions,  however,  and  in  the  last  days  of  the  king- 
 dom of  Judah,  the  Levites  apostatised  from  the 
 God  of  their  fathers,  and  shared  in  the  idolatry  of 
 the  people,  as  is  seen  from  the  denunciations  of  the 
 prophet  Ezekiel  (xliv.  10-14;  xlviii.  II). 
 
 III.  The  post-exile  Period. — The  apostasy  of  the 
 Levites  before  the  exile,  and  their  rites  of  idolatry, 
 which  they  carried  with  them  into  captivity,  made 
 them  amalgamate  with  the  heathen,  and  greatly 
 diminished  their  number.  Hence,  amongst  the 
 l^ody  of  returning  exiles  under  Zerubbabel,  which 
 numbered  42S9  priests,  there  were,  according  to 
 Ezra  ii.  40-42,  only  341  Levites,  of  whom  74 
 belonged  to  the  first  class,  i.e.,  to  those  who  were 
 appointed  over  the  work  of  the  temple  ;  1 28  to 
 the  second  class,  or  to  the  singers  ;  and  139  to 
 the  third  class,  or  gate-keepers  :  whilst,  accord- 
 ing to  Neh.  vii.  43-45,  there  were  360,  as  follows — 
 74  of  those  who  were  appointed  over  the  work  of 
 the  temple,  148  singers,  and  138  gate-keepers. 
 Still  more  marked  is  the  paucity  of  their  number 
 in  the  second  return  of  the  exiles  under  Ezra, 
 when  there  were  only  38  Levites  to  be  found,  and 
 their  place  had  to  be  filled  up  by  220  Netldnim 
 (Ezra  vii.  7  ;  viii.  15,  20).  Tradition  tells  us  that 
 Ezra  was  so  displeased  with  the  conduct  of  the 
 Levites  that,  as  a  punishment,  he  deprived  them  of 
 their  tithes,  and  gave  them  to  the  priests  (comp. 
 Bartenora  On  Soia,  ix.  10).  Those,  however,  that 
 did  return,  resumed  their  functions  as  they  were 
 anciently  assigned  to  the  respective  classes.  How 
 strictly  these  duties  were  enforced,  and  how 
 severely  any  neglect  in  performing  them  was 
 punished,  may  be  gathered  from  the  following 
 description  in  the  Mishua :  '  The  Levites  had  to 
 guard  twenty-four  places,  five  were  stationed  at  the 
 five  gates  of  the  Mountain  of  the  House  ("IH  ''"lyE^ 
 ri'3n),  four  at  the  four  corners  inside,  five  at  the 
 five  gates  of  the  outer  court,  four  at  its  four  corners 
 inside,  one  at  the  sacrificial  storehouse,  one  at  the 
 curtain  depositary,  and  one  behind  the  holy  of 
 holies.  Tire  inspector  of  the  mountain  of  the  house 
 went  round  through  all  the  guards  [every  night] 
 with  burning  torches  before  him.  If  the  guard  did 
 not  immediately  stand  up,  the  inspector  of  the 
 Mountain  of  the  House  called  out  to  him,  '  Peace  be 
 with  thee  ! '  and  if  he  perceived  that  he  was  asleep, 
 he  struck  him  with  his  stick,  and  even  had  the 
 liberty  of  setting  his  garments  on  fire ;  and  when  it 
 was  asked,  'What  is  that  noise  in  the  court?'  they 
 were  told  it  is  the  noise  of  a  Levite  who  is  beaten, 
 or  whose  clothes  have  been  burnt,  because  he  slept 
 when  on  duty'  {Midoth,  i.  i,  2).  It  is  thought  that 
 allusion  is  made  to  the  fact  in  the  Apocalypse,  when 
 it  is  said  '  Blessed  is  he  that  ivatcheth  and  keepeth 
 his  garments''  (Rev.  xvi.  15).  As  for  the  Levites 
 who  were  the  singers,  they  were  summoned  by  the 
 blast  of  the  trumpet  after  the  incense  was  kindled 
 upon   the   altar,   when   they  assembled   from   all 
 
 parts  of  the  spacious  Temple  at  the  orchestra 
 which  was  joined  to  the  fifteen  steps  at  the  en- 
 trance from  the  women's  outer  court  to  the  men's 
 outer  court.  They  sung  Psalms  in  antiphonies,  ac- 
 companied by  three  musical  instruments — the  harp, 
 the  cithern,  and  cimbals — whilst  the  priests  were 
 pouring  out  on  the  altar  the  libation  of  wine.  On 
 Sunday  they  sung  Ps.  xxiv.,  on  Monday  Ps.  xlviii., 
 on  Tuesday  Ps.  ixxxii.,  on  Wednesday  Ps.  xciv., 
 on  Thursday  Ps.  Ixxxi.,  on  Friday  Ps.  xciii.,  and 
 on  the  Sabbath  Ps.  xcii.  Each  of  these  Psalms  was 
 sung,  in  nine  sections,  with  eight  pauses  (D''p"lQ), 
 and  at  each  pause  the  priests  blew  trombones,  when 
 the  whole  congregation  fell  down  every  time  wor- 
 shipping on  their  faces  ( Taniid  vii.  3,  4). 
 
 The  Levites  had  no  prescribed  canonical  dress 
 like  the  priests,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  fact 
 which  Josephus  narrates,  that  the  singers  requested 
 Agrippa  '  to  assemble  the  Sanhedrim,  in  order  to 
 obtain  leave  for  them  to  wear  linen  garments  like 
 the  priests  ....  contrary  to  the  laws'  {Antiq. 
 XX.  9.  6).  But  though  they  wore  no  official  gar- 
 ments at  the  service,  yet  the  Talmud  says  that 
 they  ordinarily  wore  a  linen  outer-gaiTnent  with 
 sleeves,  and  a  head-dress  ;  and  on  journeys  were 
 provided  with  a  staff,  a  pocket,  and  a  copy  of  the 
 Pentateuch  {loma  122,  a).  Some  modifications 
 were  at  this  period  introduced  in  what  was  consi- 
 dered the  necessary  quahfication  for  service.  The 
 Mosaic  law,  it  will  be  remembered,  regarded  age 
 as  the  only  qualification,  and  freed  the  Levite  from 
 his  duties  when  he  was  fifty  years  old ;  now  that 
 singing  constituted  so  essential  a  part  of  the  Levi- 
 tical  duties,  any  Levite  who  had  not  a  good  voice 
 was  regarded  as  disqualified,  and  if  it  continued 
 good  and  melodious,  he  was  retained  in  service  all 
 his  lifetime,  irrespective  of  age,  but  if  it  failed  he 
 was  removed  from  that  class  which  constituted  the 
 choristers  to  the  gate-keepers  (Maimonides,  Hil- 
 choth  Kele  Ha-Kodesh,  iii.  8).  During  the  period 
 of  mourning  a  Levite  was  exempt  from  his  duties 
 in  the  Temple. 
 
 Though  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  and  the 
 dispersion  of  the  Jews  have  necessarily  done  away 
 with  the  Levitical  duties  which  were  strictly  local, 
 yet  the  Levites,  like  the  priests,  still  exist,  have  to 
 this  day  certain  functions  to  perform,  and  continue 
 to  enjoy  certain  privileges  and  immunities.  On 
 those  festivals  whereon  the  priests  pronounce  the 
 benediction  on  the  congregation  of  Israel  during 
 the  morning  service,  as  prescribed  in  Num.  vi.  22- 
 27,  the  Levites  have  '  to  wait  on  the  priests,'  and 
 wash  their  hands  prior  to  the  giving  of  the  said 
 blessing.  At  the  reading  of  the  Law  in  the  syna- 
 gogue, the  Levite  is  called  to  the  second  section, 
 the  first  being  assigned  to  the  priest  [Haphtara]. 
 Moreover,  like  the  priests,  the  Levites  are  exempt 
 from  redeeming  their  first-born,  and  this  exemp- 
 tion even  extends  to  women  of  the  tribe  of  Levi 
 who  marry  Israelites,  i.e.,  Jews  of  any  other  tribe. 
 
 Literature. — Mishna,  Erachii:,  ii.  3-6  ;  Taniid, 
 vii.  3,  4  ;  Sueca,  v.  4 ;  Bikknrim,  iii.  4 ;  Maimo- 
 nides, lod  Ha-Chezaka,  Hilchoth  Kele Ha-Mikdash, 
 iii.  l-ii  ;  Michaelis,  Commentaries  on  the  Laws  oj 
 Moses,  vol.  i.,  sec.  52,  p.  251-262,  English  transla- 
 tion ;  Bahr,  Symlwlik  des  Alosaischen  Cultus,  ii. 
 pp.  3,  ff  ;  39,  ff.  ;  165,  ff.  ;  342,  ff  ;  428,  ff  ; 
 Herzfeld,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel  von  der 
 Zerstorung  des  ersten  Tempels,  Bronswig  1847, 
 pp.  126,  204,  387-424;  by  the  same  author,  Ge' 
 schichte  des   Volkes  Israel  voti  der  Vollendiing  da 
 
LEVITICUS 
 
 8?i9i 
 
 LEVITICUS 
 
 Z7vei/f>[  Tcinpels,  vol.  i.,  Nordhausen  1855,  pp. 
 55-58,  63-66,  141  ;  Saalschiitz,  Das  Mosaische 
 Kecht,  vol.  i.,  Berlin  1853,  p.  89-106;  by  the 
 same  author,  Archiiologie  der  Hebiiiei',  vol.  ii. , 
 Konigsberg  1856,  cap.  78,  p.  342,  ff.  ;  Keil, 
 Handbuch  der  biblischen  Arckdologie,  vol.  i.,  Frank- 
 fort-on -the -Maine  1858,  p.  160,  ff.  ;  Kalisch, 
 Historical  and  Critical  Conunentary  on  Genesis, 
 London  1858,  pp.  735-744.— C.  D.  G. 
 
 LEVITICUS,  in  the  Hebrew  canon,  is  called 
 N"lp*1,  and  is  the  third  book  of  Moses. 
 
 Contents.  —  Leviticus  contains  the  further 
 statement  and  development  of  the  Sinaitic  legis- 
 lation, the  beginnings  of  which  are  described  in 
 Exodus.  It  exhibits  the  historical  progress  of 
 this  legislation  ;  consequently  we  must  not  expect 
 to  find  the  laws  detailed  in  it  in  a  systematic  form. 
 There  is,  nevertheless,  a  certain  order  observed, 
 which  arose  from  the  nature  of  the  subject,  and  of 
 which  the  plan  may  easily  be  perceived.  The 
 whole  is  intimately  connected  with  the  contents  of 
 Exodus,  at  the  conclusion  of  which  book  that 
 sanctuary  is  described  with  which  all  external 
 worship  was  connected  (Exod.  xxxv. -xl.)  Leviti- 
 cus begins  by  describing  the  worship  itself  First 
 are  stated  the  laws  concerning  sacrifices  (ch.  i.-vii.) 
 In  this  section  is  Jirst  described  the  general 
 quality  of  the  sacrifices,  which  are  divided  into 
 BLOODY  and  unbloody  ;  secondly,  their  aim  and 
 OBJECT,  according  to  which  they  are  either  THANK- 
 OFFERINGS  or  SIN-OFFERINGS  ;  and  lastly,  the 
 TIME,  place,  and  manner  in  which  they  should 
 be  made. 
 
 Then  follows  a  description  of  the  manner  in 
 which  Aaron  and  his  sons  were  consecrated  as 
 priests,  and  how,  by  the  manifestation  of  the 
 divine  glory,  they  were  ordained  to  be  mediators 
 between  God  and  his  people  (ch.  viii. ,  ix. )  As 
 formerly  the  ingratitude  of  the  people  had  been 
 severely  punished  (Exod.  xxxii.  scq.)  so  now  the 
 disobedience  of  the  priests  was  visited  with  signal 
 marks  of  the  divine  displeasure  (Lev.  x.)  On  this 
 occasion  were  given  several  laws  concerning  the 
 requisites  of  the  sacerdotal  office. 
 
 The  theocratical  sanctity  of  the  nation  was  inti- 
 mately connected  with  the  existence  of  the  sanc- 
 tuary. Every  subject,  indeed,  connected  with  the 
 sanctuary  was  intended  to  uphold  a  strict  separa- 
 tion between  holy  and  UNHOLY  things.  The 
 whole  theocratical  life  was  based  on  a  strict  sepa- 
 ration of  things  UNCLEAN  from  things  CLEAN, 
 which  alone  were  offered  to  God  and  might  ap- 
 proach the  sanctuary.  The  whole  creation,  and 
 especially  all  animal  life,  should,  like  man  himself, 
 bear  testimony  to  the  defilement  resulting  from  sin, 
 and  to  its  opposite,  viz.,  the  holiness  of  the  Lord 
 (ch.  xi.-xv.) 
 
 The  great  feast  of  atonement  formed,  as  it  were, 
 the  central  point  of  the  national  sanctity,  this  feast 
 being  appointed  to  reconcile  the  whole  people  to 
 God,  and  to  purify  the  sanctuary  itself  All  pre- 
 ceding institutions,  all  sacrifices  and  purifications, 
 receive  their  completion  in  the  great  feast  of  Israel's 
 atonement  (ch.  xvi.) 
 
 Thus  we  have  seen  that  the  sanctuary  was  made 
 the  POSITIVE  central  point  of  the  whole  nation,  or 
 of  national  holiness  ;  but  it  was  to  be  inculcated 
 NEGATIVELY  also,  that  all  worship  should  be  con- 
 nected with  the  sanctuary,  and  that  no  sacrifices 
 should    be    offered    elsewhere,    lest    any    pagan 
 
 abuses  should  thereby  strike  root  again  (ch. 
 xvii.) 
 
 The  danger  of  deserting  Jehovah  and  his  wor- 
 ship would  be  increased  after  the  conquest  of 
 Canaan,  when  the  Israelites  should  inhabit  a 
 country  surrounded  by  pagans.  The  following 
 chapters  (xviii. -xx. )  refer  to  the  very  important 
 relation  in  which  Israel  stood  to  the  surrounding 
 tribes,  and  the  positive  motive  for  separating  them 
 from  all  other  nations  ;  to  the  necessity  of  extir- 
 pating the  Canaanites  ;  and  to  the  whole  position 
 which  the  people  of  the  Lord  should  occupy  with 
 reference  to  paganism.  Chapter  xviii.  begins  with 
 the  description  of  those  crimes  into  which  the 
 people  might  easily  be  misled  by  the  influence  of 
 their  pagan  neighbours,  viz.,  fornication,  contempt 
 of  parents,  idolatry,  etc. 
 
 The  priests  were  specially  appointed  to  lead  the 
 nation  by  their  good  example  scrupulously  to  avoid 
 everything  pagan  and  unclean,  and  thus  to  tes- 
 tify their  faithful  allegiance  to  Jehovah  (ch.  xxi.- 
 xxii.  16).  It  is  particularly  inculcated  that  the 
 sacrifices  should  be  without  blemish  ;  and  this  is 
 made  a  means  of  separating  the  Israelites  from  all 
 pagan  associations  and  customs  (ch.  xxii.  17-33). 
 But  the  strongest  bulwark  erected  against  pagan 
 encroachments  was  the  appointment  of  solemn 
 religious  meetings,  in  which  the  attention  of  the 
 people  was  directed  to  the  central  point  of  national 
 religion,  and  which  theocratically  consecrated  their 
 whole  proceedings  to  the  worship  of  God.  This 
 was  the  object  of  the  laws  relating  to  fasts  (ch. 
 xxiii.)  These  laws  divided  the  year  into  sacred 
 sections,  and  gave  to  agricultural  life  its  bearing 
 upon  the  history  of  the  works  of  God,  and  its 
 peculiarly  theocratic  character,  in  contradistinction 
 to  all  pagan  worship,  whicli  is  merely  bent  upon 
 the  symbolisation  of  the  vital  powers  of  nature. 
 
 In  ch.  xxiv.  1-9  follows  the  law  concerning  the 
 preparation  of  the  sacred  oil,  and  the  due  setting 
 forth  of  the  shew-bread.  Although  this  is  in  con- 
 nection with  ch.  xxii.  17,  seg.,  it  is  nevertheless 
 judiciously  placed  after  ch.  xxiii.,  because  it  refers 
 to  the  agricultural  relation  of  the  Israelites  to 
 Jehovah  stated  in  that  chapter.  The  Mosaical 
 legislation  is  throughout  illustrated  by  facts,  and 
 its  power  and  significance  are  exhibited  in  the 
 manner  in  which  it  subdues  all  subjective  arbitraiy 
 opposition.  So  the  opposition  of  the  law  to 
 paganism,  and  the  evil  consequences  of  every 
 approach  to  pagans,  are  illustrated  by  the  history 
 of  a  man  who  sprang  from  a  mixed  marriage,  who 
 cursed  Jehovah,  and  was  stoned  as  Jehovah  directed 
 (ch.  xxiv.  10-23). 
 
 The  insertion  of  this  fact  in  its  chronological 
 place  slightly  interrupts  the  order  of  the  legal 
 definitions.  The  laws  concerning  the  Sabbath 
 and  the  year  of  Jubilee,  which  follow  it,  ai-e  inti- 
 mately connected  with  the  laws  which  precede. 
 For  the  Sabbatical  law  completes  the  declaration 
 that  Jehovah  is  the  real  proprietor  and  landlord 
 of  Canaan,  to  whom  belong  both  the  territory 
 and  its  inhabitants  ;  and  whose  right  is  opposed 
 to  all  occupation  of  the  country  by  heathens  (ch. 
 
 XXV.) 
 
 This  section  is  concluded  with  the  fundamental 
 position  of  the  law,  viz.,  that  Jehovah,  the  only 
 true  and  living  God,  will  bless  his  faithful  people 
 who  heartilv  keep  his  law  ;  and  will  curse  all  who 
 despise  him  and  transgress  his  law  (ch.  xxvi.) 
 
 After  it  has  thus  been  explained  how  the  people 
 
LEVITICUS 
 
 830 
 
 LEVITICUS 
 
 might  be  considered  to  be  the  owners  of  the 
 country,  there  appropriately  follows  the  law  con- 
 cerning several  possessions  which  were  more  ex- 
 clusively consecrated  to  Jehovah,  or  which,  like 
 the  first-born,  belonged  to  him  without  being 
 specially  offered.  The  whole  concludes  with  an 
 appendix  embracing  the  law  concerning  vows  and 
 tithes,  with  a  manifest  reference  to  the  preceding 
 parts  of  the  legislation  (ch.  xxvii.  17-24). 
 
 Authenticity. — The  arguments  by  which  the 
 unity  of  Leviticus  has  been  attacked  are  very  feeble. 
 Some  critics,  however,  such  as  De  Wette,  Gram- 
 berg,  Vatke,  and  others,  have  strenuously  endea- 
 voured to  prove  that  the  laws  contained  in  Leviticus 
 originated  in  a  period  much  later  than  is  usually 
 supposed.  But  the  following  observations  suffi- 
 ciently support  their  Mosaical  origin,  and  show 
 tliat  the  whole  of  Leviticus  is  historically  genuine. 
 The  laws  in  ch.  i. -vii.  contain  manifest  vestiges  of 
 the  Mosaical  period.  Here,  as  well  as  in  Exodus, 
 when  the  priests  are  mentioned,  Aaron  and  his 
 sons  are  named ;  as,  for  instance,  in  ch.  i.  4,  7,  8, 
 II,  etc.  The  tabernacle  is  the  sanctuary,  and  no 
 other  place  of  worship  is  mentioned  anywhere. 
 
 Expressions  like  the  following  constantly  occur,  ""JSp 
 
 ^]})'0  PnX,  ^v/ore  the  tabernacle  of  the  cong)'egation, 
 
 ^'' nyiD  ?nX  nnS,  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
 congregation  (ch.  i.  3  ;  iii.  8,  13,  etc.)  The 
 Israelites  are  always  described  as  a  congregation 
 (ch.  iv.  13,  seq.),  under  the  command  of  the  ''Jpf 
 rnyn,  eiders  of  the  congregation  (ch.  iv.  15),  or  of 
 a  N''kJ'J,  7'iiler  (ch.  iv.  22).  Everything  has  a  refer- 
 ence to  life  in  a  camp,  and  that  camp  commanded 
 by  Moses  (ch.  iv.  12,  21  ;  vi.  11  ;  xiv.  8  ;  xvi.  26, 
 28).  A  later  writer  could  scarcely  have  placed 
 himself  so  entirely  in  the  times,  and  so  completely 
 adopted  the  modes  of  thinking  of  the  age,  of 
 Moses  ;  especially  if,  as  has  been  asserted,  these 
 laws  gradually  sprung  from  the  usages  of  the 
 people,  and  were  written  down  at  a  later  period 
 with  the  object  of  sanctioning  them  by  the  author- 
 ity of  Moses.  They  so  entirely  befit  the  Mosaical 
 age,  that,  in  order  to  adapt  them  to  the  require- 
 ments of  any  later  period,  they  must  have  under- 
 gone some  modification,  accommodation,  and  a 
 peculiar  mode  of  interpretation.  This  inconveni- 
 ence would  have  been  avoided  by  a  person  who 
 intended  to  forge  laws  in  favour  of  the  later  modes 
 of  Levitical  worship.  A  forger  would  have  endea- 
 voured to  identify  the  past  as  much  as  possible 
 with  the  present. 
 
 The  section  in  ch.  viii.  -x.  is  said  to  have  a  my- 
 thical colouring,  This  assertion  is  grounded  on 
 the  miracle  narrated  in  ch.  ix.  24.  But  M'hat 
 could  have  been  the  inducement  to  forge  this 
 section  ?  It  is  said  that  the  priests  invented  it  in 
 order  to  support  the  authority  of  the  sacerdotal 
 caste  by  the  solemn  ceremony  of  Aaron's  conse- 
 cration. But  to  such  an  intention  the  narration 
 of  the  crime  committed  by  Nadab  and  Abihu  is 
 strikingly  opposed.  Even  Aaron  himself  here 
 appears  to  be  rather  remiss  in  the  obsei"vance  of 
 the  law  (comp.  x.  16,  seq.,  with  iv.  22,  scq.) 
 Hence  it  would  seem  that  the  forgeiy  arose  from 
 an  opposite  or  anti-hierarchical  tendency.  The 
 fiction  would  thus  appear  to  have  been  contrived 
 without  any  motive  which  could  account  for  its 
 origin. 
 
 In  ch.   xvu.  occurs  the  law  which  forbids  the 
 
 slaughter  of  any  beast  except  at  the  sanctuaiy. 
 This  law  could  not  be  strictly  kept  in  Palestine, 
 and  had  therefore  to  undergo  some  modification 
 (Deut.  xii.)  Our  opponents  cannot  shew  any 
 rational  inducement  for  contriving  such  a  fiction. 
 The  law  (ch.  xvii.  6,  7)  is  adapted  to  the  nation 
 only  while  emigrating  from  Egypt.  It  was  the 
 object  of  this  law  to  guard  the  Israelites  from  fall- 
 ing into  the  temptation  to  imitate  the  Egyptian 
 rites  and  sacrifices  offered  to  he-goats,  D'''i''ytJ'  ; 
 which  word  signifies  also  demons  represented 
 under  the  form  of  he-goats,  and  which  were  sup- 
 posed to  inhabit  the  desert  (comp.  Jablonsky, 
 Pantheon  yEgyptiacion,  i.  272,  seq. ) 
 
 The  laws  concerning  food  and  purifications 
 appear  especially  important  if  we  remember  that 
 the  people  emigrated  from  Egypt.  The  funda- 
 mental principle  of  these  laws  is  undoubtedly  Mosai- 
 cal, but  in  the  individual  application  of  them  there 
 is  much  which  strongly  reminds  us  of  Egypt. 
 This  is  also  the  case  in  Lev.  xviii. ,  seq.,  where  the 
 lawgiver  has  manifestly  in  view  the  two  opposites, 
 Canaan  and  Egypt.  That  the  lawgiver  was  inti 
 mately  acquainted  with  Egypt,  is  proved  by  sucK 
 remarks  as  those  about  the  Egyptian  marriages 
 with  sisters  (ch.  xviii.  3) ;  a  custom  which  stands 
 as  an  exception  ariong  the  prevailing  habits  of 
 antiquity  (Diodorus  Siculus,  i.  27  ;  Pausanias, 
 Attica,  i.  7). 
 
 The  book  of  Leviticus  has  a  prophetical  cha- 
 racter. The  lawgiver  represents  to  himself  the 
 future  history  of  his  people.  This  prophetical 
 character  is  especially  manifest  in  chs.  xxv. ,  xxvi., 
 where  the  law  appears  in  a  truly  sublime  and 
 divine  attitude,  and  when  its  predictions  refer  to 
 the  whole  futurity  of  the  nation.  It  is  impossible 
 to  say  that  these  were  vaticinia  ex  eventii,  unless 
 we  would  assert  that  this  book  was  written  at  the 
 close  of  Israelitish  history.  We  must  rather  grant 
 that  passages  like  this  are  the  real  basis  on  which 
 the  authority  of  later  prophets  is  chiefly  built.  Such 
 passages  prove  also,  in  a  striking  manner,  that  the 
 lawgiver  had  not  merely  an  external  aim,  but  that 
 his  law  had  a  deeper  purpose,  which  was  clearly 
 understood  by  Moses  himself  That  purpose  was 
 to  regulate  the  national  life  in  all  its  bearings,  and 
 to  consecrate  the  whole  nation  to  God.  See  espe- 
 cially ch.  xxv.  18,  seq. 
 
 But  this  ideal  tendency  of  the  law  does  not  pre- 
 clude its  applicability  to  matters  of  fact.  The  law 
 had  not  merely  an  ideal,  but  also  a  real  character, 
 evidenced  by  its  relation  to  the  faithlessness  and 
 disobedience  of  the  nation.  The  whole  future 
 histoiy  of  the  covenant  people  was  regulated  by 
 the  law,  which  has  manifested  its  eternal  power 
 and  truth  in  the  history  of  the  people  of  Israel. 
 Although  this  section  has  a  general  bearing,  it  is 
 nevertheless  majiifest  that  it  originated  in  the  times 
 of  Moses.  At  a  later  period,  for  instance,  it  would 
 have  been  impracticable  to  promulgate  the  law 
 concerning  the  Sabbath  and  the  year  of  Jubilee  : 
 for  it  was  soon  sufficiently  proved  how  far  the 
 nation  in  reality  remained  behind  the  ideal  Israel 
 of  the  law.  The  Sabbatical  law  bears  the  impress 
 of  a  time  when  the  whole  legislation,  in  its  fulness 
 and  glory,  was  directly  communicated  to  the 
 people,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  attract,  penetrate, 
 and  command. 
 
 The  Drincipal  works  to  be  consulted  with  refer- 
 ence to  Leviticus  will  be  found  under  the  article 
 Pentateuch. — H.  A.  C.  H. 
 
1,EYDEKKER 
 
 n 
 
 LIBNAH 
 
 LEYDEKKER  (Melchior)  was  born  at 
 Middleburg  in  Holland,  in  the  year  1642.  From 
 1679  to  his  death  in  1721,  he  zealously  discharged 
 his  duties  of  professor  of  divinity  at  Utrecht,  in 
 defence  of  the  Reformed  Religion  against  all 
 comers.  The  Cartesian  philosophy,  the  theology 
 of  Cocceius,  the  writings  of  Drusius,  and  the 
 Lutheran  tendencies  of  Hermann  Witsius,  were  all 
 in  their  turn  objects  of  his  strenuous  opposition. 
 His  polemical  temper,  which  produced  many 
 works  unsuitable  for  mention  here,  characterised 
 even  his  great  archaeological  treatise,  which  entitles 
 him  to  a  place  in  our  Cycloptvdia.  This  work, 
 entitled  De  Repziblica  Hebrcronim,  was  published 
 at  Amsterdam  in  1704  in  a  thick  folio  volume,  and 
 is  one  of  the  largest  repertories  ever  written  on  the 
 wide  subject  of  Hebrew  antiquities.  In  his  treat- 
 ment of  it  the  author  has  exhibited  vast  stores  of 
 Scriptural,  Rabbinical,  and  historical  learning.  It 
 adds  to  the  interest  of  the  subject  that  his  disserta- 
 tions on  the  Hebrew  laws  and  customs,  both 
 political  and  religious,  are  inwoven  in  an  historical 
 narrative,  in  which  the  Sacred  History  is  developed, 
 by  epochs,  from  the  earliest  period  to  the  latest. 
 The  author  in  his  progress  learnedly  investigates 
 the  history,  fari  passu,  of  the  leading  Gentile 
 nations,  very  much  after  the  manner  of  Shuckford 
 md  Russell,  in  their  Connections.  This  valuable 
 work,  on  which  Leydekker's  fame  deserves  mainly 
 CO  depend,  is  singularly  enough  ignored  in  Schwei- 
 zer's  sketch  of  the  author  (Herzog's  Real-EncykL, 
 viii.  360,  361).  Leydekker's  academical  duties 
 recalled  his  attention  from  polemical  and  clerical 
 pursuits  to  the  Biblical  studies  which  his  early 
 years  had  been  devoted  to.  At  the  age  of  seven- 
 teen he  had  made  considerable  advance  in  Rabbi- 
 nical literature  under  the  guidance  of  a  learned 
 Rabbi.  He  found  no  difficulty  therefore  in  after- 
 life in  turning  his  attention  to  his  youthful  studies. 
 Attempting  to  fit  the  works  of  Godwin  {Moses  and 
 Aaron)  and  Cunteus  {De  Repitblica  Hebr.)  to  his 
 academical  purposes,  he  soon  discovered  their  in- 
 sufficiency. To  this  discoveiy  we  owe  his  own 
 more  copious  treatise,  which  is  everywhere  marked 
 by  a  vigorous  and  independent  judgment.  While 
 he  conceals  not  his  aversion  to  the  'futilities' 
 of  the  Talmud,  he  quotes  the  great  Rabbins  with 
 respect.  He  moreover  keeps  a  sharp  eye  on 
 the  extravagancies  of  Christian  writers,  and  his 
 work  censures  with  even-handed  justice  the  well- 
 known  Rabbinism  of  the  Buxtorffs  and  the  Es^yptisni 
 of  our  Spencer  {De  legibus  Hebr.')  It  is  only  cha- 
 racteristic of  this  unsparing  criticism  of  the  ortho- 
 dox author,  that  he  adds  an  appendix  of  severe 
 animadversion  against  the  cosmogony  of  our 
 Thomas  Burnet,  to  whose  Tkeoria  telluris  he  pre- 
 fixes the  predicate  profana.  The  six  dissertations 
 of  tliis  appendix,  whatever  may  be  thought  of  the 
 author's  views,  are  valuable  for  their  learning,  and 
 interesting  as  closely  bearing  on  the  questions  now 
 raised  on  the  Mosaic  cosmogony. — P.  H. 
 
 LIBANUS.     [Lebanon.] 
 
 LIBERTINES  {kSeprlvoi).  '  Certain  of  the 
 synagogue,  which  is  called  (the  synagogue)  of  the 
 Libertines,  and  Cyrenians,  and  Alexandrians,'  etc., 
 are  mentioned  in  Acts  vi.  9.  There  has  been 
 much  diversity  in  the  interpretation  of  this  word. 
 Since  Libertini  here  occurs  among  the  names  of 
 nations,  and  Josephus   {Antiq.    xii.    I,  and  CoiU. 
 
 Apion.  ii.  4)  has  told  us  that  many  Jews  were 
 removed  by  Ptolemy,  and  placed  in  the  cities  ot 
 Libya ;  Beza,  Le  Clerc,  and  others  conclude  that 
 the  word  must  have  been  Ki^vurlvuiv,  i.  e.,  '  sprung 
 from  Libya.'  But  there  is  no  authority  of  MSS. 
 or  versions  for  this  reading.  Others,  on  the  same 
 premises,  conceive  that  the  word  Libertini  denotes 
 the  inhabitants  of  some  town  called  Libertum,  in 
 Africa  Proper,  or  Carthage  ;  but  they  fail  to  show 
 that  any  town  of  this  name  existed  in  that  quarter. 
 The  most  probable  opinion,  and  that  which  is  now 
 generally  entertained,  is,  that  the  Libertini  were 
 Jews,  whom  the  Romans  had  taken  in  war  and 
 conveyed  to  Rome,  but  afterwards  freed  ;  and  that 
 this  synagogue  had  been  built  at  their  expense. 
 Libertini  is,  therefore,  to  be  regarded  as  a  word  of 
 Roman  origin,  and  to  be  explained  with  reference 
 to  Roman  customs.  We  know  that  there  were  in 
 the  time  of  Tiberius  many  libertini,  or  '  freed-men,' 
 of  the  Jewish  religion  at  Rome  (Tacit.  Aiuial.  ii. 
 85  ;  comp.  Suet.  Tib.  36 ;  and  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Cainni, 
 p.  1014  ;  see  Bloomfield,  Alford,  Kuinoel,  Wet- 
 stein,  etc.,  on  Acts  vi.  9  ;  and  comp.  Gerdes,  De 
 Synag.  Libertinonun,  Gron.  1736;  Scherer,  De 
 Sytiag.  Liberlin.,  Argent.  1754)- — ^J-  K- 
 
 LIBNAH     (Hjnb,     '  whiteness  ;'     Ae^oovci,    in 
 
 Num.  xxxiii.  20  ;  Ae^vd  and  Ao^vd  ;  Alex.  At^/xva 
 and  Aoixvd  ;  Libna,  Lobna).  I.  A  station  of  the 
 Israelites  in  the  desert,  the  third  in  order  after 
 Hazeroth  as  enumerated  in  Num.  xxxiii.  20.  The 
 site  is  unknown. 
 
 2.  An  ancient  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites  (Josh, 
 xii.  15),  situated  in  the  plain  of  Philistia  (xv.  42), 
 between  Makkedah  and  Lachish  (x.  29).  Libnah 
 was  one  of  the  cities  captured  by  Joshua  after  the 
 defeat  of  the  confederate  kings  at  Gibeon.  Mak- 
 kedah was  the  first  fenced  city  taken ;  from  it  he 
 marched  on  Libnah,  and  from  Libnah  on  Lachish, 
 Consequently,  Libnah  stood  in  the  plain,  to  the 
 north-west  of  Lachish  (Josh.  x.  28,  seq.)  It  was 
 given  to  Judah  and  assigned  to  the  Levites  (xxi. 
 13).  It  revolted  in  the  days  of  King  Joram,  appa- 
 rently at  the  instigation  of  the  Edomites,  who  were 
 then  extending  their  conquests  over  the  southern 
 borders  of  Palestine  (2  Kings  viii.  20,  seq.)  The 
 city  was  besieged  by  Sennacherib  during  his  great 
 expedition  against  Israel ;  and  it  was  while  his  army 
 was  encamped  before  it  that  the  '  angel  of  the 
 Lord  went  forth  and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the 
 Assyrians  a  hundred  and  fourscore  and  five  thou- 
 sand' (Is.  xxxvii.  8-36;  2  Kings  xix.  8,  seq.)  We 
 hear  no  more  of  it  in  Scripture,  except  the  inci- 
 dental note  that  Zedekiah's  mother  was  a  native  of 
 that  place  (Jer.  Hi.  l).  Eusebius  and  Jerome  seem 
 to  have  known  the  site,  for  they  say,  '  it  is  now  a 
 village  in  the  province  of  Eleutheropolis,  and  called 
 Lobona'  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Lebna).  The  name  has 
 disappeared.  The  writer  of  this  article  traversed 
 the  whole  of  that  region,  but  could  hear  of  no  name 
 that  would  suggest  identity.  Libnah  doubtless 
 occupied  a  site  naturally  strong,  like  all  the  primi- 
 tive cities  of  the  Canaanites.  The  suggestion  of 
 Van  de  Velde  is  therefore  of  some  weight,  that  it 
 stood  on  the  conspicuous  isolated  hill  called  '  Arak 
 el-Menshieh,  five  miles  west  of  Eleutheropolis,  and 
 on  the  direct  route  from  Makkedah  to  Eglon.  There 
 is  a  little  village  on  the  hill,  and  there  are  some 
 ruins,  showing  that  it  was  once  a  place  of  strength 
 (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  330;  Handbk.  260).- 
 T.  L.  P. 
 
LIBNATH 
 
 832 
 
 LIGHT 
 
 LTBNATH.     [Shihor-Libnath.] 
 LIBNEH  (mh)  occurs  in  two  places  of  Scrip- 
 ture, viz.   Gen.   xxx.    37  ;  Hosea   iv.    13,    and   is 
 supposed    to   indicate  either  the  wMe  poplar   or 
 the  storax  tree. 
 
 Libneh,  in  the  passage  of  Hosea,  is  translated 
 Aeii/c?;,  '  white  poplar,'  in  the  Septuagint,  and  this 
 translation  is  adopted  by  the  majority  of  inter- 
 preters. The  Hebrew  name  libneh,  being  sup- 
 posed to  be  derived  from  \'p  {album  esse),  has 
 been  considered  identical  with  the  Greek  \evK7], 
 which  both  signifies  'wliite,'  and  also  the  'white 
 poplar,'  Popjilits  alba.  This  poplar  is  said  to  be 
 called  white,  not  on  account  of  the  whiteness  of  its 
 bark,  but  of  that  of  the  under  surface  of  its  leaves. 
 It  may  perhaps  be  so  designated  from  the  white- 
 ness of  its  hairy  seeds,  which  have  a  remarkable 
 appearance  when  the  seed -covering  first  bursts. 
 The  poplar  is  certainly  common  in  the  countries 
 where    the    scenes   are   laid    of    the    transactions 
 
 335.   Storax. 
 
 related  in  the  above  passages  of  Scripture  (Belon, 
 Obs.  ii.  106).  Rauwolf  mentions  the  white  poplar 
 as  abundant  about  Aleppo  and  Tripoli,  and  still 
 called  by  the  ancient  Arabic  name  haur  or  hor 
 (  i»5^)>  which   is  the  word  used  in  the  Arabic 
 
 translation  of  Hosea.  That  poplars  are  common 
 in  Syria  has  already  been  mentioned  under  the 
 head  of  Baca. 
 
 Others,  however,  have  been  of  opinion  that 
 libneh  denotes  the  storax  tree  rather  tlian  the 
 white  poplar.  Thus,  in  Gen.  xxx.  37,  the  Sep- 
 tuagint has  papSov  (TTVpaKiv-qv,  'a  rod  of  styrax;' 
 and^  the  Greek  translation  of  the  Pentateuch,  ac- 
 cordino-  to  Rosenmiiller,  is  more  ancient  and  of  far 
 greate?authority  than  that  of  Hosea.  So  R.  Jonah, 
 as  translated  by  Celsius,  says  of  libneh,  Dicitur 
 lingua  Arabum  Liibna  ;  and  in  the  Arabic  trans- 
 lation of  Genesis  (    j,  J)  lubne  is  employed  as  the 
 
 representative  of  the  Hebrew  libneh.  Ltibne,  both 
 in  Arabic  and  in  Persian,  is  the  name  of  a  tree, 
 and  of  the  fragrant  resin  employed  for  fumigating, 
 which  exudes  from  it,  and  which  is  commonly 
 known  by  the  name  of  Storax.  This  resin  was  well 
 known  to  tlie  ancients,  and  is  mentioned  by  Hip- 
 pocrates and  Theophrastus.  Dioscorides  describes 
 several  kinds,  all  of  which  were  obtained  from  Asia 
 
 Minor ;  and  all  that  is  now  imported  is  believed 
 to  be  the  produce  of  that  country.  But  the  tree 
 is  cultivated  in  the  south  of  Europe,  though  it 
 does  not  there  yield  any  storax.  It  is  found  in 
 Greece,  and  is  supposed  to  be  a  native  of  Asia 
 Minor,  whence  it  extends  into  Syria,  and  probably 
 farther  south.  It  is  therefore  a  native  of  the 
 country  which  was  the  scene  of  the  transaction 
 related  in  the  above  passage  of  Genesis. 
 
 From  the  description  of  Dioscorides,  and  his 
 comparing  the  leaves  of  the  styrax  to  those  of  the 
 quince,  there  is  no  doubt  of  the  same  tree  being 
 intended  :  especially  as  in  early  times,  as  at  the 
 present  day,  it  yielded  a  highly  fragrant  balsamic 
 substance  which  was  esteemed  as  a  medicine,  and 
 employed  in  fumigation.  From  the  similarity  of 
 the  Hebrew  name  libneh  to  the  Arabic  lubne,  and 
 from  the  Septuagint  having  in  Genesis  translated 
 the  former  by  styrax,  it  seems  most  probable  that 
 this  was  the  tree  intended.  It  is  capable  of  yield- 
 ing white  wands  as  well  as  the  poplar  ;  and  it  is 
 also  well  qualified  to  afford  complete  shade  under 
 its  ample  foliage,  as  in  the  passage  of  Hosea  iv. 
 13.  We  may  also  suppose  it  to  have  been  more 
 particularly  alluded  to  from  its  being  a  tree  yield- 
 ing incense.  '  They  sacrifice  upon  the  tops  of  the 
 mountains,  and  burn  incense  upon  the  hills,  under 
 the  terebinth  and  the  storax  trees,  because  the 
 shadow  thereof  is  good.' — J.  F.  R. 
 
 LIBYA  (In  Ezek.  xxx.  5,  and  .xxxviii.  5,  tDlQ ; 
 Aleves ;  Libyes;  in  Acts  ii.  10,  Ki^v-r]).  For  Libya 
 of  the  O.  T.,  see  Phut  ;  and  for  Libya  of  the  N. 
 T.,  see  LuBiM. 
 
 LIBYANS  (In  Jer.  xlvi.  9,  t2^3 ;  in  Dan.  xi. 
 43,  CB/)-  It  would  have  prevented  much  ob- 
 scurity had  uniformity  been  observed  in  rendering 
 the  proper  names  in  our  noble  English  Version  of 
 the  Bible.  We  find  the  same  Hebrew  name  t31£3 
 {Pitt)  rendered  '  Phut '  in  Gen.  x.  6,  and  Ezek. 
 xxvii.  10;  '  Put'  in  i  Chron.  i.  8,  and  Nahum  iii, 
 9  ;  '  Libyans '  in  Jer.  xlvi.  9  ;  and  '  Libya '  in  Ezek. 
 xxx.  5,  and  xxxviii.  5-  (For  all  these,  see  art. 
 Phut.  ) 
 
 Again,  we  find  the  name  D''^!'  [Lubbini)  rendered 
 
 '  Libyans '  in  Dan.  xi.  43  ;  while  the  full  form  of 
 
 the  same  word,  D"'3^?  {Li'ibim),  is  rendered  '  Lu- 
 
 bims '  in  2  Chron.  xii.  3,  and  xvi.  8 ;  and  '  Lubim ' 
 in  Nahum  iii.  9.     (For  these,  see  art.  LuBIM. ) 
 
 The  '  Libyans '  of  Jer.  xlvi.  9,  and  the  '  Libya ' 
 of  Ezek.  xxx.  5,  are  totally  distinct  from  the 
 '  Libyans '  of  Dan.  xi.  43 ;  while  the  latter  are 
 doubtless  identical  with  the  Lubim.  Our  transla- 
 toi-s  have  been  too  much  influenced  by  the  Vulgate 
 and  Septuagint  in  these  cases. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LICE.       [KiNNIM.] 
 
 LIGHT  is  represented  in  the  Scriptures  as  the 
 immediate  result  and  offspring  of  a  divine  com- 
 mand (Gen.  i.  3).  The  earth  was  void  and  dark, 
 when  God  said,  '  Let  light  be,  and  light  was. 
 This  is  represented  as  having  preceded  the  placing 
 of  '  lights  in  the  firmament  of  heaven,  the  greater 
 light  to  rule  the  day,  and  the  lesser  light  to  rule 
 the  night :  he  made  the  stars  also'  (Gen.  i.  14,  seq.) 
 Whatever  opinion  may  be  entertained  as  to  the 
 facility  with  which  these  two  separate  acts  may  be 
 reconciled,  it  cannot  be  questioned  that  the  origin 
 
LIGHT 
 
 LIGPITFOOT 
 
 of  fight,  as  of  every  other  part  of  the  universe,  is 
 llius  referred  to  the  exertion  of  the  divine  will  :  as 
 little  can  it  be  denied  that  the  narrative  in  the 
 original  is  so  simple,  yet  at  the  same  time  so 
 majestic  and  impressive,  both  in  thought  and  dic- 
 tion, as  to  fill  the  heart  with  a  lofty  and  pleasurable 
 sentiment  of  awe  and  wonder. 
 
 The  divine  origin  of  light  made  the  subject  one 
 of  special  interest  to  the  Biblical  nations — the 
 rather  because  light  in  the  East  has  a  clearness,  a 
 brilliancy,  is  accompanied  by  an  intensity  of  heat, 
 and  is  followed  in  its  influence  by  a  largeness  of 
 good,  of  which  the  inhabitants  of  less  genial  climes 
 can  have  no  conception.  Light  easily  and  naturally 
 became,  in  consequence,  with  Orientals,  a  repre- 
 sentative of  the  highest  human  good.  All  the 
 more  joyous  emotions  of  the  mind,  all  the  pleasing 
 sensations  of  the  frame,  all  the  happy  hours  of 
 domestic  intercourse,  were  described  under  ima- 
 gery derived  from  light  (i  Kings  xi.  36;  Is.  Iviii. 
 8;  Esther  viii.  16;  Ps.  xcvii.  11).  The  transition 
 was  natural  from  earthly  to  heavenly,  from  corpo- 
 real to  spiritual  things  ;  and  so  light  came  to 
 typify  true  religion  and  the  felicity  which  it  im- 
 parts. But  as  hght  not  only  came  from  God,  but 
 also  makes  man's  way  dear  before  him,  so  it  was 
 employed  to  signify  moral  truth,  and  pre-eminently 
 that  divine  system  of  truth  which  is  set  forth  in 
 the  Bible,  from  its  earliest  gleamings  onward  to 
 the  perfect  day  of  the  Great  Sun  of  Righteousness. 
 The  application  of  the  term  to  religious  topics  had 
 the  greater  propriety  because  the  light  in  the  world, 
 being  accompanied  by  heat,  purifies,  quickens, 
 enriches  ;  which  effects  it  is  the  peculiar  province 
 of  true  religion  to  produce  in  the  human  soul  (Is. 
 viii.  20 ;  Matt.  iv.  16  ;  Ps.  cxix.  105  ;  2  Pet.  i. 
 19  ;  Eph.  v.  8  ;  2  Tim.  i.  10 ;   I  Pet.  ii.  9). 
 
 It  is  doubtless  owing  to  the  special  providence 
 under  which  the  divine  lessons  of  the  Bible  were 
 delivered,  that  the  views  which  the  Hebrews  took 
 on  this  subject,  while  they  were  high  and  worthy, 
 did  not  pass  into  superstition,  and  so  cease  to  be 
 truly  religious.  Other  Eastern  nations  beheld  the 
 sun  when  it  shined,  or  the  moon  walking  in  bright- 
 ness, and  their  hearts  were  secretly  enticed,  and 
 their  mouth  kissed  their  hand  in  token  of  adora- 
 tion (Job  xxxi.  26,  27).  This  'iniquity'  the 
 Hebrews  not  only  avoided,,  but  when  they  con- 
 sidered the  heavens  they  recognised  the  work  of 
 God's  fingers,  and  learnt  a  lesson  of  humility  as 
 well  as  of  reverence  (Ps.  viii.  3,  set/.)  On  the  con- 
 traiy,  the  entire  residue  of  the  East,  with  scarcely 
 any  exception,  worshipped  the  sun  and  the  light, 
 primarily  perhaps  as  symbols  of  divine  power  and 
 goodness,  but,  in  a  more  degenerate  state,  as  them- 
 selves divine;  whence,  in  conjunction  with  dark- 
 ness, the  negation  of  light,  arose  the  doctrine  of 
 dualism —  two  principles,  the  one  of  light,  the  good 
 power;  the  other  of  darkness,  the  evil  power:  a 
 corruption  which  rose  and  spread  the  more  easily 
 because  the  whole  of  human  life,  being  a  chequered 
 scene,  seems  divided  as  between  two  conflicting 
 agencies,  the  bright  and  the  dai'k,  the  joyous  and 
 the  sorrowful,  what  is  called  prosperous  and  what 
 is  called  adverse. 
 
 When  the  tendency  to  corruption  to  which  we 
 have  just  alluded  is  taken  into  account,  we  cannot 
 but  feel  both  gratified  and  surprised  that,  while 
 the  Hebrew  people  employed  the  boldest  personi- 
 fications when  speaking  of  light,  they  in  no  case, 
 nor  in  any  degree,  fell  into  the  almost  universal 
 VOU  II. 
 
 idolatry.  That  individuals  among  them,  and  even 
 large  portions  of  the  nation,  did  from  time  to  time 
 down  to  the  Babylonish  captivity  forget  and  desert 
 the  living  God,  is  veiy  certain ;  but  then  the 
 nation,  as  such,  was  not  misled  and  corrupted ; 
 witnesses  to  the  truth  never  failed ;  recovery  was 
 never  impossible  —  nay,  was  more  than  once 
 effected  ;  till  at  last  afiiiction  and  suffering  brought 
 a  changed  heart,  which  never  again  swerved  from 
 the  way  of  truth. 
 
 Among  the  personifications  on  this  point  which 
 Scripture  presents  we  may  specify — i.  God.  The 
 Apostle  James  (i.  17)  declares  that  '  every  good 
 and  perfect  gift  cometh  down  from  the  Father  of 
 lights,  with  whom  is  no  variableness,  neither 
 shadow  of  turning;'  obviously  referring  to  the 
 faithfulness  of  God  and  the  constancy  of  his  good- 
 ness, which  shine  on  undimmed  and  unshadowed. 
 So  Paul  (i  Tim.  vi.  16) :  '  God  who  dwelleth  in 
 the  light  which  no  man  can  approach  unto.' 
 Here  the  idea  intended  by  the  imagery  is  the  in- 
 comprehensibleness  of  the  self-existent  and  eternal 
 God. 
 
 2.  Light  is  also  applied  to  Christ :  '  The  people 
 who  sat  in  darkness  have  seen  a  great  light'  (Matt, 
 iv.  16;  Luke  ii.  32);  'The  light  of  men;'  'He 
 was  the  trae  light;'  'I  am  the  light  of  the  world' 
 (John  i.  4,  SA/.  ;  viii.  12  ;  xii.  35,  36). 
 
 3.  It  is  further  used  of  angels,  as  in  2  Cor.  xi. 
 14  :  '  Satan  himself  is  transformed  into  an  angel  of 
 light.'  4.  Light  is  moreover  employed  of  men  : 
 John  the  Baptist  '  was  a  burning  and  a  shining 
 light'  (John  V.  35);  'Ye  are  the  light  of  the 
 world'  (Matt.  v.  14;  see  also  Acts  xiii.  47;  Eph. 
 V.  8).— J.  R.  B. 
 
 LIGHTFOOT,  John,  was  born  at  Stoke-upon- 
 Trent  in  the  year  1602.  He  was  early  imbued 
 with  the  elements  of  sound  learning.  He  was  edu- 
 cated first  at  a  grammar  school  at  Morton  Green,  in 
 Cheshire,  and  afterwards  at  Cambridge.  He  was 
 remarkable  both  at  Cambridge,  and  afterwards  as 
 assistant  at  the  well-known  school  of  Repton  in 
 Derbyshire,  for  his  '  ])regnant  wit,'  his  proficiency 
 and  continued  improvement  in  Greek  and  Latin, 
 and  his  amiable  disposition  ;  but  it  was  not  till  he 
 had  taken  orders,  and  settled  at  Norton-under- 
 Hales,  in  Staffordshire,  that  he  began  that  acquaint- 
 ance with  Hebrew  which  ripened  into  the  most 
 familiar  and  consummate  knowledge  of  the  whole 
 range  of  Biblical  and  Rabbinical  literature.  He 
 was  first  led  to  embrace  this  line  of  study  by  the 
 friendly  recommendation  and  example  of  Sir  Row- 
 land Cotton,  a  pious  and  learned  country  gentle- 
 man, who  resided  at  Bellaport,  in  the  neighbour- 
 hood, and  took  Lightfoot  into  his  house  as  his 
 chaplain.  Lightfoot  continued  with  Sir  Rowland 
 Cotton  till  the  latter  left  Bellaport  for  London, 
 after  which  he  settled  on  a  sphere  of  ministerial 
 labour  at  Stone,  in  Staffordshire,  where  he  con- 
 tinued for  two  years,  and  married  at  the  age  of 
 twenty-six.  From  Stone  he  removed  to  Hornsey, 
 in  order  to  be  near  the  library  of  Sion  College,  and 
 from  thence  to  the  rectory  of  Ashford,  in  Stafford- 
 shire, which  was  presented  to  him  by  his  worthy 
 friend  Sir  Rowland  Cotton.  Here,  that  he  might 
 devote  himself  more  uninterruptedly  to  his  learned 
 labours,  he  bought  a  piece  of  ground  not  far  from 
 his  parsonage,  and  built  upon  it  a  small  house,  with 
 a  study  below  and  a  sleeping-room  above,  where 
 he  spent  most  of  his  time,  visiting  his  family  once 
 
 3H 
 
LIGHTFOOT 
 
 834 
 
 LILITH 
 
 a  day,  for  the  single  meal  to  which  he  restricted 
 himself.  And  here  he  remained  in  the  quiet  dis- 
 charge of  his  professional  duties  during  the  turbulent 
 years  which  led  to  the  death  of  Charles  I.,  the 
 establishment  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  tem- 
 porary subversion  of  the  Church  of  England. 
 Lightfoot  was  one  of  those  good  naen  who,  in  those 
 days  of  trouble  and  uncertainty,  thought  it  best  to 
 follow  the  course  of  events  ;  and  it  was  natural  for 
 those  in  power  to  seek  the  assistance  of  his  learn- 
 ing and  soundness  of  mind  in  framing  a  new 
 religious  system  for  the  country.  Thus  he  be- 
 came one  of  the  assembly  of  divirtes  at  Westminster 
 (1643),  where  his  solid  learning  and  independent 
 spirit  was  often  the  corrective  of  crude  and  hasty 
 deductions  drawn  from  fanciful  interpretations  of 
 Holy  Scripture.  While  in  London,  he  was  the 
 minister  of  St.  Bartholomew's,  behind  the  Ex- 
 change, where  he  felt  himself  to  be  in  a  kind  of 
 '  exile  from  his  own,'  but  was  soon  rewarded  for 
 his  services  in  the  assembly  of  divines  by  the  gift 
 of  the  rectory  of  Great  Munden,  in  Hertfordshire, 
 and  was  appointed  in  the  same  year  to  the  master- 
 ship of  Catherine  Hall  at  Cambridge.  He  became 
 D.D.  in  1652,  and  was  vice-chancellor  of  the 
 University  in  1653.  The  living  of  Great  Munden 
 is  in  the  gift  of  the  Crown,  and  had  been  given  suc- 
 cessively to  two  eminent  divines  by  the  Kings  James 
 and  Charles.  Lightfoot  received  it  from  the  Par- 
 liament, and  Charles  H.  was  no  sooner  restored 
 than  another  person  apphed  for  and  obtained  the 
 living.  Lightfoot,  on  hearing  this,  acted  with 
 promptness  and  decision.  Sheldon,  then  Bishop 
 of  London,  afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbuiy, 
 and  the  munificent  donor  of  the  Sheldonian  theatre 
 to  the  University  of  Oxford,  had  been  a  devoted 
 adherent  to  the  Royal  cause.  Lightfoot,  personally 
 unknown  to  him,  sought  his  presence,  and  so  repre- 
 sented his  claims,  that  Sheldon  exerted  himself 
 actively  in  his  favour,  and  procured  his  re-instate- 
 ment  in  his  living,  as  well  as  his  confirmation  in 
 the  mastership  of  Catherine  Hall,  which  he  had 
 offered  to  resign.  Through  the  influence  of  Sir 
 Orlando  Bridgeman  he  was  appointed  to  a  preben- 
 dal  stall  in  the  cathedral  of  Ely,  where  he  died 
 peaceably,  after  a  life  full  of  labours,  in  the  year 
 
 1675- 
 
 The  idea  with  which  Lightfoot  commenced  his 
 learned  labours  was  to  produce  one  great  and  per- 
 fect work — a  harmony  of  the  four  Evangelists,  with 
 a  commentary,  and  prolegomena.  But  the  little 
 probability  of  his  being  able  to  pubhsh  at  once  so 
 vast  a  work  as  he  saw  it  would  become,  were  he  to 
 carry  out  the  idea  in  its  completeness — in  an  age 
 when  brevity  was  essential  to  everything  which 
 issued  from  the  press — determined  him  to  give  to 
 the  world  from  time  to  time  the  result  of  his  labours, 
 in  separate  treatises.  The  subject-matter  of  these 
 treatises  may  be  classed  under  the  general  beads  of 
 chronology,  chorography,  investigation  of  original 
 texts  and  versions,  examination  of  Rabbinical  com- 
 ments and  paraphrases.  We  conclude  with  a  list 
 of  Lightfoot's  works,  with  the  date  of  their  original 
 publication,  where  the  date  is  stated  in  the  work  itself. 
 Ertibhin,  or  Miscellanies,  Christian  and  yudaieal, 
 pemied for  recreation  at  vacant  hours,  dedicated  to 
 Sir  Rowland  Cotton,  Hornsey  1629.  A  few  and 
 new  Observations  upon  the  Book  of  Genesis :  The 
 most  of  them  certaiti,  the  rest  probable,  all  harmless, 
 strange,  and  rarely  heard  of  before,  1642.  Alsoa« 
 handful  of  gleanings  out  of  the  Book  of  Exodus, 
 
 1643.  The  Harmony  of  the  Four  Evangelists 
 among  themselves,  and  with  the  0.  T.  The  first 
 part :  From  the  beginning  of  the  Gospels  to  the  bap- 
 tism of  our  Saviour,  with  an  explanation  of  the 
 chiefest  difficulties,  both  in  languai;e  and  sense,  daXed 
 Westminster  1644.  A  Commentary  upon  the  Acts 
 of  the  Apostles,  Chronical  and  Critical.  The  Diffi- 
 ctdties  of  the  Text  explained,  and  the  times  of  the 
 story  cast  into  Annals.  The  first  part :  FroiTt  the 
 beginning  of  the  Book  to  the  end  of  the  Tvelfih 
 chapter,  with  a  brief  survey  of  the  contetnporary 
 story  of  the  yews  a7id  Romans,  1645.  The  Har- 
 mony, etc.  The  second  part :  From  the  Baptism  oj 
 our  Saviour  to  the  first  Passover  after,  etc.  No 
 date.  The  Temple  Service,  as  it  stood  in  the  days 
 of  our  Saviour,  described  out  of  the  Scripttires  and 
 the  Eminentcst  Antiquities  of  the  Jews,  London 
 1649.  The  Harmony,  etc.  The  third  part :  From 
 the  First  Passover  after  our  Saviotcr's  Baptism  to  the 
 seco7id,  etc.  Dedication  to  William  Cotton,  Esq., 
 Bellaport,  dated  Much-Mundon  i6f§.  The 
 Temple,  especially  as  it  stood  in  the  days  of  our 
 Saviour,  dated  Much-Mundon  1650.  HorcB  Heb- 
 raicce  et  Tahnudicce ,  Hebrew  and  Talmudic  Exerci- 
 tations,  I.  Upon  the  Chorography  of  the  Land  of 
 Israel ;  2.  Upon  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  1658. 
 Horai,  etc.,  tipon  the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark.  Together 
 zvith  a  Chorographical  Decad.  Remarkable  In- 
 scription 'to  God  and  the  King,'  and  Dedication 
 to  Gilbert,  Bishop  of  London,  1661.  Jeivish  and 
 Talmudical  Exercitatio7is  upon  the  Eva?igelist  St. 
 Luke,  to  which  ai-e  pretnised  some  Chorographical 
 notes.  Dedication  to  Gilbert,  Archbishop  of  Can- 
 terbury, undated,  yewish,  etc.,  upon  St.  yohn,  to 
 which  is  premised  a  Chorographical  inquiry,  etc. 
 Dedication  to  Sir  Orlando  Bridgeman,  undated. 
 HorcE  Hebraicir,  etc..  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  some 
 Chapters  of  the  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Rotnans. 
 No  dedication,  preface,  or  date.  Horce,  etc. ,  upon 
 the  First  Epistle  to  the  Coi'inthians,  to  which  is 
 added  a  discourse  concerning  what  Bibles  were  used 
 to  be  read  in  the  relis.ious  Assemblies  of  the  Jeuis. 
 Dedication  to  Sir  William  Morice,  knight,  princi- 
 pal Secretary  of  State,  1664.  Semions  on  various 
 occasions  from  1655  to  1674.  An  edition  of  his 
 collected  works,  with  a  preface  by  Dr.  Bright,  and 
 a  life  by  the  editor,  was  published  in  2  vols,  foho, 
 by  John  Strype,  M.A.,  in  1684.  Another  edition, 
 in  folio,  was  published  at  Utrecht  m  1699,  another 
 in  London  1822-25,  edited  by  Pitman,  in  13  vols., 
 and  his  Hora  Hebraica;  et  Talmudica:  at  Oxford, 
 edited  by  Rev.  R.  Gandell,  in  4  vols.,  1859. 
 During  the  latter  years  of  his  life  he  contributed 
 the  most  valuable  assistance  to  the  authors  of 
 Walton's  Polyglott  Bible,  Castell's  ILeptaglot  LexU 
 con,  and  Pool's  Syjiopsis  Criticorum. — M.  H. 
 
 LIGN  ALOES.     [Ahalim.] 
 
 LTGURE.     [Leshem.] 
 
 LILITH  (n  vy),  a  term  which  occurs  only  once 
 
 in  Scripture  (Is.  xxxiv.  14).  Derived  from  7^7, 
 night,  it  means  simply  nocturnal ;  and,  standing  as 
 it  does  in  a  list  of  animals,  it  must  be  regarded  as 
 either  the  name  of  some  particular  nocturnal  crea- 
 ture, or  as  a  generic  name  for  such.  The  A.  V, 
 renders  it  by  screech-owl,  and  this  is  the  rendering 
 adopted  by  most  modern  interpreters.  Many,  how- 
 ever, prefer  following  the  example  of  Aquila  and  re- 
 taining the  original  word  (so  De  Wette,  Henderson, 
 Zunz,  and  the  version  of  Joseph  Athias  in  the  Biblia 
 
LILY 
 
 835 
 
 LINTEL 
 
 Pentapla).  The  LXX.  render  the  w^rd  by  hvoKev- 
 ravpoi,  which  is  in  keeping  with  their  other  render- 
 ings in  tliis  verse,  all  of  which  ascribe  characters  of 
 monstrosity  to  the  objects  enumerated  by  the  pro- 
 phet. The  Vulg.  renders  by  Lamia,  a  word  which 
 has  much  the  same  meaning  as  our  witch,  but 
 which  was  originally  the  name  of  a  Libyan  queen 
 who,  having  lost  her  child,  was  said  to  prey  on  the 
 children  of  others.  These  renderings  are  in  ac- 
 cordance with  Jewish  superstition,  which  supposed 
 the  Lilith  to  be  a  female  spectre  that  was  wont  to 
 lie  in  wait,  elegantly  dressed,  for  children  at  night. 
 Some  recent  German  interpreters  have  eagerly 
 adopted  this  interpretation,  and  have  compared 
 the  Jewish  fable  on  which  it  is  founded  to  the  Arab 
 tales  of  ghuls,  and  to  the  Greek  belief  in  the  "E,a- 
 irovija.  (cf.  Aristoph.,  A'a7i.  293,  ff. ;  Philostr. ,  vit. 
 Apolloii.  ii.  4 ;  M.  de  Sainte  Croix,  Sur  Ics  tnysteres 
 du  Paganisme,  i. ,  p.  191,  2d  ed.) ;  but  all  this,  be- 
 sides being  purely  gratuitous,  is  opposed  to  the  text 
 of  the  prophet,  who  places  the  Lilith  among  ani- 
 viah,  and  who  represents  it  as  finding  a  place  of 
 rest  in  the  desert,  which  is  precisely  what  a  spectre 
 or  a  ghul  never  finds  any  more  than  the  Hecatean 
 Empusa.  Bochart  (Hieroz.,  1.  vi.,  c.  9,  ii.  p.  831) 
 seems  inclined  to  account  for  the  fabulous  interpre- 
 tation by  calling  attention  to  the  representations 
 given  by  the  poets  of  the  sti-ix  or  screech-owl,  as  a 
 woman  who,  under  this  guise,  sought  the  cradles 
 of  infants  by  night  (comp.  Ovid,  Fast.  vi.  130,  ff. ) 
 — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LILY.     [Krinon;  Shooshan.] 
 
 LIMBORCH,  Philip  a,  was  born  at  Amster- 
 dam 19th  June  1633,  and  died  there  30th  April 
 1 717.  He  was  a  distinguished  professor  of  theo- 
 logy among  the  Remonstrants,  and  in  his  Theologia 
 Christiana  is  presented  the  clearest  and  ablest  ex- 
 position of  the  theological  views  of  that  body 
 extant.  He  published  also  Commentariiis  in  Acta 
 Apostolorjmi,  et  in  Episiolas  ad  Romanos  et  He- 
 hrcEos,  fob,  Roterod.  1711.  This  commentary, 
 though  written  in  the  interest  of  the  author's  theo- 
 logical views,  is  deserving  of  attention  for  the  good 
 sense,  clear  thought,  and  acute  reasoning  by  which 
 it  is  pervaded. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LIME  (*T'{i>;  Kovia;  calx)  was  one  of  the  few 
 
 compacting  substances  made  use  of  by  the  Jews. 
 It  is  first  mentioned  in  Deut.  xxvii.  i,  2,  3,  '  where 
 Moses  with  the  elders  of  Israel  commanded  the 
 people  to  set  up  great  stones,  and  to  plaister  them 
 with  plaister; '  a  direction  which  has  been  variously 
 interpreted.  Some  suppose  that  it  simply  implied 
 that  the  plaister  should  be  used  as  cement,  joining 
 the  sides  of  the  stones  firmly  together.  The  com- 
 mon opinion,  however,  and  that  which  the  text 
 itself  most  obviously  suggests,  is  that  the  surfaces 
 of  the  stones  were  to  be  covered  with  plaister,  and 
 the  law  written  or  inscribed  thereon.  This  is  the 
 opinion  which  the  Jews  themselves  entertain.  It 
 is  more  than  likely  that  the  process  was  similar  to 
 that  which  the  Jews  had  often  seen  used  in  Egypt 
 for  receiving  bas-reliefs  (Kitto's  Fid.  Bib. ;  Deut. 
 xxvii.  2). 
 
 In  Is.  xxxiii.  12,  the  sudden  and  utter  destruc- 
 tion of  the  'people'  (D^BJ?),  or  different  races  com- 
 posing the  Assyrian  army,  is  compared  to  the 
 '  burnings  of  lime,'  a  proof  that  the  Jews  were 
 familiar  with  the  use  of  the  lime-kiln.     The  only 
 
 other  mention  of  lime  in  Scripture  is  in  Amos  ii.  I. 
 where  Moab  is  charged  with  the  wanton  violation 
 of  the  tomb  of  one  of  the  kings  of  Edom,  inasmuch 
 as  '  he  burned  the  bones  of  the  king  of  Edom  into 
 lime,'  to  plaister  his  palace  with,  according  to  the 
 interpretation  suggested  by  the  Targum  and  some 
 of  the  Rabbins.  A  similar  act  of  indignity  is  men- 
 tioned in  2  Kings  xxiii.  16. — W.  J.  C. 
 
 LINEN.     [Bad.] 
 
 LINTEL.  The  headpiece  of  a  door  frame,  or 
 window  frame.  In  the  A.  V.  three  Hebrew  words 
 are  thus  rendered  : — 
 
 (i.)  ^^X  (i  Kings  vi.  31/,  translated  'post'  in 
 Ezek.  xl.,  xli.  A  technical  architectural  term,  of 
 which  the  exact  meaning,  in  our  present  ignorance 
 of  Semitic  architecture,  it  is  difficult  to  determine. 
 The  LXX.  [cod.  Alex.  ]  render  it  0Xiai  in  Kings,  and 
 in  Ezekiel  leave  it  untranslated  ;  at'XeO  (sometimes 
 confounded  with  aiXd/x,  A.  V.  'arches')  in  which 
 they  are  followed  by  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac  ver- 
 sions. It  is  omitted  by  the  Vulgate  in  Kings,  and  in 
 Ezekiel  rendered  '  frons.'    Jarchi  renders  the  word, 
 
 'a  round  column  like  a  tree,'  as  if  from  n?X  = 
 |i?X  querciis  ;  and  Aquila,  led  astray  by  the  resem- 
 blance of  the  volutes  of  the  classical  orders  to 
 rams'  horns,  Kplo}fj.a,  yii  elsewhere  always  mean- 
 ing  'a  ram.'     The   word,   however,    is   probably 
 
 connected  with  the  obsolete  root  piiX,  and  signi- 
 fies a  projecting  architectural  member,  probably, 
 according  to  Gesenius,  the  whole  door-case,  with 
 its  side-posts,  lintel,  threshold,  and  structural  de- 
 corations. This  sense  would  suit  the  passage  in 
 Kings,  describing  the  entrance  to  the  holy  of  holies 
 (where  Michaelis,  Siippl.,  p.  70,  would  explain  it 
 of  the  triangular  pediment  above  the  doorway), 
 as  well  as  the  passages  in  Ezekiel  in  which  it  is 
 used  in  connection  with  a  doorway,  e.g.,  xl.  9,  21, 
 etc. ;  xli.  3.  In  the  plural,  Gesenius  considers  that 
 the  word  signifies  projecting  members  along  the 
 front  wall  of  a  building  ornamented  with  pillars 
 or  pilasters,  with  windows  between  (xl.  10,  14,  16  ; 
 xli.  I).  Ewald  {Proph.  dcs  Alt.  Bund.,  ii.  362) 
 adopts  the  same  view,  rendering  it  '  Vorspriinge,' 
 i.e.,  '  vorspringendes  Mauerwerk.'  So  also  Coc- 
 ceius,  '  projecturae  parietis  in  imo  prominentis.' 
 Bottcher  (apud  Rosenmiiller,  SchoL,  in  loc.)  very 
 happily  adopts  the  rendering  '  antse,'  which  appears 
 to  come  as  near  to  its  meaning  as  any  term  derived 
 from  classical  architecture  can  do. 
 
 (2.)    "linSS,    Amos   ix.    i    (iXaoTTypiov,    LXX.  ; 
 
 cardo,  Vulg.);  Zeph.  ii.  14  {(pdrvup-a,  LXX.; 
 limen,  Vulg.),  in  the  margin  'chapiter'  or  'knop,' 
 a  rendering  which  is  unquestionably  more  correct  ; 
 the  latter  is  adopted  where  the  word  occurs  in  the 
 description  of  the  golden  candlestick,  Exod.  xxv. 
 31,  etc.  [Knop].  Rosenmiiller  (Schol.,  in  loc), 
 however,  defends  the  rendering  'superliminare,' 
 because  the  frieze  over  a  doorway  was  often  orna- 
 mented with  carvings  of  the  cups  of  flowers  or  fruit. 
 (3.)  «lipK^p  (Exod.  xii.  22,  23)  ;  LXX.  ^Xtd ; 
 Vulg.  sttp'erliminare,  translated  '  upper  doorpost ' 
 (Exod.  xii.  7).  There  is  little  doubt  of  the  correct- 
 ness of  this  rendering,  the  word  being  derived  from 
 IpE',  '  to  overlay,'  especially  '  timber,'  e.g.,  I  Kings 
 viu  5.     Other  meanings  and  derivations  are  given 
 
LINUS 
 
 83B 
 
 LION 
 
 in  Rosenmliller,  Sckol.,  in  loc,  e.g.,  that  of  Jarchi, 
 who  derives  it  from  the  Chaldee  ^\>^',  '  to  beat,' 
 
 because  the  door  when  it  shuts  strikes  the  hntel, 
 and  Ibn  Esra,  who  connects  it  with  another  mean- 
 ing of  the  Hebrew  root,  '  to  look  down  from 
 above'  (cf,  Ps.  xiv.  2;  Ixxxv.  12),  and  translates 
 it  'window,'  such  as  the  Arabs  have  over  their 
 house  doors.  Bochart,  adopting  this  view  (p. 
 679),  refers  it  to  the  lattice-work  above  the  door 
 through  which  those  who  knocked  could  be  in- 
 spected.— E.  V. 
 
 LINUS  (Ati-os),  one  of  the  Christians  at  Rome 
 whose  salutations  Paul  sent  to  Timothy  (2  Tim.  iv. 
 21).  He  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  bishop  of 
 Rome  after  the  martyrdom  of  Peter  and  Paul 
 (Irensus,  Adv.  ffceres.  iii.  3;  Euseb.,  Hist.  Eccles. 
 iii.  2,  4;  V.  6). 
 
 LION  (nx  ari'  n-IS  arjeh;  Sept.  X^H,  the 
 most  powerful,  daring,  and  impressive  of  all  car- 
 nivorous animals,  the  most  magnificent  in  aspect 
 and  awful  in  voice.  Being  very  common  in  Syria 
 in  early  times,  the  lion  naturally  supplied  many 
 forcible  images  to  the  poetical  language  of  Scrip- 
 ture, and  not  a  few  historical  incidents  in  its  narra- 
 tives. This  is  shewn  by  the  great  number  of 
 passages  where  this  animal,  in  all  the  stages  of 
 existence— as  the  whelp,  the  young  adult,  the  fully 
 mature,  the  lioness— occurs  under  different  names, 
 exhibiting  that  multiphcity  of  denominations  which 
 always  results  when  some  great  image  is  constantly 
 present  to  the  popular  mind.  Thus  we  have — i. 
 ^IJ  gor,  a  lion's  whelp,  a  very  young  lion  (Gen. 
 xlix.  9;  Deut.  xxxiii.  20;  Jer.  \\.  38;  Ezek.  xix.  2; 
 Nahum  ii.  11,  12,  eta)  2.  T'DD  chephir,  a  young 
 lion,  when  first  leaving  the  protection  of  the  old 
 pair  to  hunt  independently  (Ezek.  xix.  2,  3  ;  Ps. 
 xci.  13;  Prov.  xix.  12,  etc.)  3.  "ilX  ar/,  an  adult 
 and  vigorous  lion,  a  lion  having  paired,  vigilant 
 and  enterprising  in  search  of  prey  (Nahum  ii.  12 ; 
 2  Sam.  xviL    10 ;  Num.   xxiii.   24).      This  is  the 
 
 common  name  of  the  animal.  4.  ^ntJ*  sackal,  a 
 mature  Hon  in  full  strength;  a  black  lion?  (Job  iv. 
 10;  X.  16;  Ps.  xci.  13;  Prov.  xxvi.  13;  Hosea  v. 
 14  ;  xiii.  7).  This  denomination  may  very  possibly 
 refer  to  a  distinct  variety  of  lion,  and  not  to  a 
 black  species  or  race,  because  neitlier  black  nor 
 white  lions  are  recorded,  excepting  in  Oppian  (De 
 Venat.  iii.  43) ;  but  the  term  may  be  safely  referred 
 to  the  colour  of  the  skin,  not  of  the  fur ;  for  some 
 lions  have  the  former  fair,  and  even  rosy,  while  in 
 other  races  it  is  perfectly  black.  An  Asiatic  lioness, 
 formerly  at  Exeter  Change,  had  the  naked  part  of 
 the  nose,  the  roof  of  the  mouth,  and  the  bare  soles 
 of  all  the  feet  pure  black,  though  the  fur  itself  was 
 very  pale  buff.  Yet  albinism  and  melanism  are 
 not  uncommon  in  the  felinas;  the  former  occurs 
 in  tigers,  and  the  latter  is   frequent  in  leopards, 
 
 panthers,  and  jaguars.  5.  K'v  laish,  a  fierce  lion, 
 one  in  a  state  of  fury  (Job  iv.  1 1 ;  Prov.  xxx.  30 ; 
 
 Is.  xxx.  6).  6.  X''^!'  labia,  a  lioness  (Job.  iv.  11, 
 where  the  lion's  whelps  are  denominated  '  the  sons 
 of  Labiah,'  or  of  the  lioness). 
 
 The  lion  is  the  largest  and  most  formidably 
 armed  of  all  carnassier  animals,  the  Indian  tiger 
 alone  claiming  to  be  his  equal.  One  full  grown, 
 of  Asiatic  race,  weighs  above  450  pounds,  and 
 those  of  Africa  often  above  500  pounds.  The  fall 
 of  a  fore  paw  in  striking  has  been  estimated  to  be 
 
 equal  to  twenty-five  pounds'  weight,  and  the  grasp 
 of  the  claws,  cutting  four  inches  in  depth,  is  suffi- 
 ciently powerful  to  break  the  vertebrje  of  an  ox. 
 The  huge  laniary  teeth  and  jagged  molars  worked 
 by  powerful  jaws,  and  the  tongue  entirely  covered 
 with  homy  papillee,  hard  as  a  rasp,  are  all  subser- 
 vient to  an  immensely  strong,  muscular  structure, 
 capable  of  prodigious  exertion,  and  minister  to  the 
 self-confidence  which  these  means  of  attack  inspire. 
 In  Asia  the  lion  rarely  measures  more  than  nine 
 feet  and  a  half  from  the  nose  to  the  end  of  the  tail, 
 though  a  tiger-skin  of  which  we  took  the  dimen- 
 sions was  but  a  trifle  less  than  thirteen  feet.     In 
 
 Africa  they  are  considerably  larger,  and  supplied 
 with  a  much  greater  quantity  of  mane.  Both  tiger 
 and  lion  are  furnished  with  a  small  horny  apex  to 
 the  tail — a  fact  noticed  by  the  ancients,  but  only 
 verified  of  late  years,  because  this  object  lies  con- 
 cealed in  the  hair  of  the  tip  and  is  veiy  liable  to 
 drop  off.  All  the  varieties  of  the  lion  are  spotted 
 when  whelps  ;  but  they  become  gradually  buff  or 
 pale.  One  African  variety,  very  large  in  size,  per- 
 haps a  distinct  species,  has  a  peculiar  and  most 
 ferocious  physiognomy,  a  dense  black  mane  ex- 
 tending half  way  down  the  back,  and  a  black  fringe 
 along  the  abdomen  and  tip  of  the  tail ;  while  those 
 of  southern  Pereia  and  the  Dekkan  are  nearly 
 destitute  of  that  defensive  ornament.  The  roaring 
 voice  of  the  species  is  notorious  to  a  proverb,  but  the 
 warning  cry  of  attack  is  short,  snappish,  and  sharp. 
 If  lions  in  primitive  times  were  as  numerous  in 
 Western  Asia  and  Africa  as  tigers  still  are  in  some 
 parts  of  India,  they  must  have  been  a  serious  im- 
 pediment to  the  extension  of  the  human  race;  for 
 Colonel  Sykes  relates  that  in  less  than  five  years, 
 in  the  Dekkan  alone,  during  his  residence  there, 
 above  1000  of  the  latter  were  shot.  But  the 
 counterbalancing  distribution  of  endowments  some- 
 what modifies  the  dangerous  vicinity  of  these 
 animals  :  like  all  the  felinas,  they  are  more  or  less 
 nocturnal,  and  seldom  go  abroad  to  pursue  their 
 prey  till  after  sunset.  When  not  pressed  by 
 hunger,  they  are  naturally  indolent,  and,  from 
 their  habits  of  uncontrolled  superiority,  perhaps 
 capricious,  but  often  less  sanguinary  and  vindictive 
 than  is  expected. 
 
TJON 
 
 837 
 
 LIPMANN 
 
 Lions  are  monogamous,  the  male  living  con- 
 stantly with  the  lioness,  both  hunting  together,  or 
 for  each  other  when  there  is  a  litter  of  whelps ;  and 
 the  mutual  aftection  and  care  for  their  offspring 
 which  they  display  are  remarkable  in  animals  by 
 nature  doomed  to  live  by  biood  and  slaughter. 
 It  is  while  seeking  prey  for  their  young  that  they 
 are  most  dangerous ;  at  other  times  they  bear 
 abstinence,  and  when  pressed  by  hunger  will  some- 
 times feed  on  carcases  found  dead.  They  live  to 
 more  than  fifty  years ;  consequently,  having  annual 
 litters  of  from  three  to  five  cubs,  they  multiply 
 rapidly  when  not  seriously  opposed.  After  the 
 conquest  of  Egypt  by  the  Arabs  the  lion  soon 
 spread  again  into  Lower  Egypt ;  and  Fidelio,  a 
 European  traveller,  in  the  begiiming  of  the  eighth 
 century,  saw  one  slain  at  the  foot  of  the  pyramids, 
 after  killing  eight  of  his  assailants.  Lately  they 
 have  increased  again  on  the  Upper  Nile;  and  in 
 ancient  times,  when  the  devastations  of  Eg}'ptian, 
 Persian,  Greek,  and  Roman  armies  passed  over 
 Palestine,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  these  de- 
 stroyers made  their  appearance  in  great  numbers. 
 The  fact,  indeed,  is  attested  by  the  impression 
 which  their  increase  made  upon  the  mixed  heathen 
 population  of  Samaria,  when  Israel  was  carried 
 away  into  captivity  (2  Kings  xvii.  25,  26). 
 
 The  Scriptures  present  many  striking  pictures  of 
 lions,  touched  with  wonderful  force  and  fidelity : 
 even  where  the  animal  is  a  direct  instrument  of 
 the  Almighty,  while  true  to  his  mission,  he  still  re- 
 mains so  to  his  nature.  Thus  nothing  can  be  more 
 graphic  than  the  record  of  the  man  of  God  (l 
 Kings  xiii.  28),  disobedient  to  his  charge,  struck 
 
 337.   Assyrian  Lion. 
 
 down  from  his  ass,  and  lying  dead,  while  the  lion 
 stands  by  him,  without  touching  the  lifeless  body, 
 or  attacking  the  living  animal,  usually  a  favourite 
 prey.  See  also  Gen.  xlix.  9 ;  Job  iv.  10,  1 1 ; 
 Nahum  ii.  11,  12.  Samson's  adventure  also  with 
 the  young  lion  (Judg.  xiv.  5,  6),  and  the  picture 
 of  the  young  lion  coming  up  from  the  underwood 
 cover  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan — all  attest  a  perfect 
 knowledge  of  the  animal  and  its  habits.  Finally, 
 the  lions  in  the  den  with  Daniel,  miraculously 
 leaving  him  unmolested,  still  retain,  in  all  other 
 respects,  the  real  characteristics  of  their  nature. 
 
 The  lion,  as  an  emblem  of  power,  was  symbolical 
 of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Gen.  xlix.  9).  The  type  re- 
 curs in  the  prophetical  visions,  and  the  figure  of 
 this  animal  was  among  the  few  which  the  Hebrews 
 admitted  in  sculpture,  or  in  cast  metal,  as  exempli- 
 fied in  the  throne  ol  Solomon.  The  heathen 
 assumed  the  lion  as  an  emblem  of  the  sun,  of  the 
 god  of  war,  of  Aries,  Ariel,  Arioth,  Re,  the  Indian 
 Seeva,  of  dominion  in  general,  of  valour,  etc. ,  and 
 it  occurs  in  the  names  and  standards  of  many 
 nations.  Lions,  in  remote  antiquity,  appear  to  have 
 been  trained  for  the  chase,  and  are,  even  now,  oc- 
 casionally domesticated  with  safety.  Placability 
 and  attachment  are  displayed  by  them  even  to  the 
 
 degree  of  active  defence  of  their  friends,  as  was  ex- 
 emplified at  Birr,  in  Ireland,  in  1839,  when  'a 
 keeper  of  wild  beasts,  being  within  the  den,  had 
 fallen  accidentally  upon  a  tiger,  who  immediatelv 
 caught  the  man  by  the  thigh,  in  the  presence  of  nu- 
 merous spectators  ;  but  a  lion,  being  in  the  same 
 compartment,  rose  up,  and  seizing  the  tiger  by  the 
 neck,  compelled  it  to  let  go,  nud  the  man  was 
 saved.'  Numerous  anecdotes  of  a  similar  character 
 are  recorded  both  by  ancient  and  modern  writers. 
 
 Zoologists  consider  Africa  the  primitive  abode  of 
 lions,  their  progress  towards  the  north  and  west 
 having  at  one  time  extended  to  the  forests  of  Mace- 
 donia and  Greece  ;  but  in  Asia,  never  to  the  south 
 of  the  Nerbudda,  nor  east  of  the  lower  Ganges. 
 Since  the  inventic^n  of  gunpowder,  and  even  since 
 the  havoc  which  the  ostentatious  barbarism  of 
 Roman  grandees  made  among  them,  they  have 
 diminished  in  number  exceedingly,  although  at  the 
 present  day  individuals  are  not  unfrequently  seen  in 
 Barbary,  within  a  short  distance  of  Ceuta. — 
 C.  H.  S. 
 
 LIPMANN,  JoMTOB,  of  Miihlhausen,  also 
 called  MUHLHAUSEN  after  his  native  place,  and 
 Tabjomi  {''DVIO  =  21L2  DV),  author  of  the  cele- 
 brated polemical  work  against  Christianity  called 
 Nitzachcm  (pnVJ,  Victory),  flourished  13S0.  Very 
 little  is  known  of  the  history  of  this  remarkable 
 man.  His  contemporary  Stephen,  the  learned 
 Bishop  of  Brandeburg,  who  undertook  to  refute 
 his  work,  says  that  he  lived  in  Cracow,  whilst 
 others  will  have  it  that  he  lived  in  Prague.  The 
 Nitzachon,  which  was  finished  about  1399,  consisLs 
 of  seven  parts,  'according,'  as  he  tells  us,  'to  the 
 seven  days  of  the  week,  and  three  hundred  and 
 fifty-four  sections,  according  to  the  number  of  days 
 in  the  lunar  year,  which  is  the  Jewish  mode  of 
 calculation  to  indicate  that  every  Israelite  is 
 bound  to  study  his  religion  every  day  of  his  life, 
 and  to  remove  every  obstruction  from  the  boun- 
 daries of  his  faith'  (comp.  the  end  of  the  prefac'\ 
 He  does  not  adopt  any  systematic  plan,  but  dis- 
 cusses and  explains  every  passage  of  the  Hebrew 
 Bible  which  is  either  adduced  by  Christians  as  a 
 Messianic  prophecy  referring  to  Christ,  or  is  used 
 by  sceptics  and  blasphemers  to  support  their  scep- 
 ticism and  contempt  for  revelations,  or  is  appealed 
 to  by  rationalistic  Jews  to  corroborate  their  rejec- 
 tion of  the  doctnne  of  creation  out  of  nothing,  the 
 resurrection  of  the  body,  etc.,  etc.,  beginning  with 
 Genesis  and  ending  with  Chronicles,  according  to 
 the  order  of  the  books  in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  so 
 that  any  passage  in  dispute  might  easily  be  found. 
 It  was  largely  transcribed  and  circulated  in  MS. 
 among  the  Jews  throughout  the  world  ;  and  in  the 
 numerous  attacks  which  they  had  to  sustain  both 
 from  Christians  and  rationalists  during  the  time  of 
 the  Reformation,  this  book  constituted  their  chief 
 arsenal,  supplying  them  with  weapons  to  defend 
 themselves.  The  copyists,  however,  not  unfre- 
 quently made  some  additions  of  their  own.  The 
 book,  though  so  widely  circulated  among  the  Jews, 
 was  not  printed  till  1644,  when  Hacspan  published 
 it  under  the  following  circumstances.  This  erudite 
 professor  in  the  Bavarian  University  at  Altorf  was 
 engaged,  about  1642,  in  a  controversy  on  the 
 questions  at  issue  between  Judaism  and  Chris- 
 tianity with  a  neighbouring  rabbi  residing  in 
 Shneitach,  who  in  his  dissertations  frequently  re 
 ferred  to  this   Nitzachon,  a  MS.   copy  of  which. 
 
LITTER 
 
 838 
 
 LITTER 
 
 made  in  1589,  he  possessed,  and  which  he  refused 
 to  show  to  his  Christian  opponent.  The  learned 
 Hacspan,  however,  was  determined  to  see  it,  and, 
 according  to  a  prearranged  plan,  called  with  three  of 
 his  students  on  the  rabbi,  when  he  pressed  him  in 
 such  a  manner  to  produce  the  MS.  that  he  could 
 not  refuse.  He  pretended  to  examine  it,  and 
 when  the  students  had  fairly  surrounded  the  rabbi, 
 the  professor  made  his  way  to  the  door,  got  into  a 
 conveyance  which  was  waiting  for  him,  had  the 
 MS.  speedily  transcribed  and  printed,  with  exten- 
 sive notes  and  an  index,  and  then,  after  much 
 earnest  solicitation,  returned  it  to  the  rabbi.  This 
 is  the  dastardly  manner  in  which  the  Christian 
 world  first  got  to  see  the  famous  iVitzachon,  and  it 
 needs  hardly  to  be  said  that  such  disgraceful  pro- 
 ceedings produced  no  favourable  impression  upon 
 the  mind  of  the  rabbi  whom  the  professor  was 
 anxious  to  bring  over  to  Christianity.  It  was  now 
 rapidly  reprinted,  translated  into  Latin,  corrected 
 and  refuted  by  Blendinger,  Lipmanni  Nizzachon  iti 
 Christianos,  etc.,  latine  convers2i??i,  Altdorf  1645  ; 
 Wagenseil,  Tela  ignea  Sataiice,  Altdorf  1681  ;  by 
 the  same  author,  Sota,  Liber  Mischnicits  de  Uxore 
 AJidterii  Suspecia,  Altdorf  1674,  Appendix.  The 
 importance  of  this  famous  work  to  the  Bibli- 
 cal student  can  hardly  be  overrated,  inasmuch  as 
 it  is  a  running  commentary  on  all  the  most  im- 
 portant Messianic  prophecies  and  difficult  portions 
 of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  Comp.  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca 
 Judaica,  vol.  ii.  p.  403,  ff  ;  Steinschneider,  Cata- 
 logiis  Libr.  Hcbr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiatia,  col. 
 1410-1414;  Geiger,  Proben  Jiid.  Vertheidigiing 
 gegett  Christliche  Angriffe  in  Mittelalter  in  Lieber- 
 manti's  Deutscher  Volks-Kalender,  Brieg  1854,  pp. 
 9,  ff.  ;  47,  ff--C.  D.  G. 
 
 LITTER.  The  word  translated  litter  in  Is. 
 Ixvi.  20,  is  3V  tzab ;  and  is  the  same  which,  in 
 Num.  vii.  3,  denotes  the  wains  or  carts  drawn  by 
 oxen,  in  which  the  materials  of  the  tabernacle  were 
 i-emoved  from  place  to  place.  The  tzab  was  not, 
 therefore,  a  litter,  which  is  not  drawn,  but  carried. 
 This  is  the  only  place  in  which  the  word  occurs  in 
 the  Authorized  translation.  We  are  not,  however, 
 to  infer  from  this  that  the  Hebrews  had  no  vehicles 
 of  the  kind.  Litters,  or  palanquins,  were,  as  we 
 know,  in  use  among  the  ancient  Egyptians.  They 
 were  borne  upon  the  shoulders  of  men  (No.  338), 
 and  appear  to  have  been  used  for  carrying  persons 
 of  consideration  short  distances  on  visits,  like  the 
 sedan-chairs  of  a  former  day  in  England.  We 
 doubt  if  the  Hebrews  had  this  kind  of  litter,  as  it 
 scarcely  agrees  with  their  simple,  unluxurious 
 habits  ;  but  that  they  had  litters  borne  by  beasts, 
 such  as  are  still  common  in  Western  Asia,  seems 
 in  the  highest  degree  probable. 
 
 In  Cant.  iii.  9  we  find  the  word  (1''^DX  aphir- 
 yon;  Sept.  'ope'iov;  Vulg.  fercidiim,  which  occurs 
 nowhere  else  in  Scripture,  and  is  applied  to  a 
 vehicle  used  by  king  Solomon.  This  word  is  ren- 
 dered '  chariot '  in  our  A.  V.,  although  unlike  any 
 other  word  so  rendered  in  that  version.  It  literally 
 means  a  moving  couch,  and  is  usually  conceived  to 
 denote  a  kind  of  sedan,  litter,  or  rather  palanquin, 
 in  which  great  personages  and  women  were  borne 
 from  place  to  place.  The  name,  as  well  as  the 
 object,    immediately  suggests   that    it   may   have 
 
 been  nearly  the  same  thing  as  the    .  \ 
 
 uV 
 
 Lll^jssJ 
 
 takht-ravan,  the  moving  throne,  or  scat,  of  the  Per- 
 
 sians. It  consists  of  a  light  frame  fixed  on  two 
 strong  poles,  like  those  of  our  sedan-chair.  The 
 frame  is  generally  covered  with  cloth,  and  has  a 
 
 door,  sometimes  of  lattice  work,  at  each  side.  It 
 is  carried  by  two  mules,  one  between  the  poles  be- 
 fore, the  other  behind.  These  conveyances  are 
 used  by  great  persons,  when  disposed  for  retirement 
 or  ^ase  during  a  journey,  or  when  sick,  or  feeble 
 from  age.  But  they  are  chiefly  used  by  ladies  of 
 consideration  in  ther  journeys  (No.  339). 
 
 The  popular  illustrators  of  Scripture  do  not 
 appear  to  have  been  acquainted  with  this  and  the 
 other  litters  of  Western  Asia  ;  and  have,  therefore, 
 resorted  to  India,  and  drawn  their  illustrations  from 
 the  palanquins  borne  by  men,  and  from  the  lunvdahs 
 of  elephants.  This  is  unnecessary,  as  Western  Asia 
 still  supplies  conveyances  of  this  description  more 
 suitable  and  more  likely  to  have  been  anciently  in 
 use,  than  any  which  the  further  east  can  produce. 
 If  the  one  already  described  should  seem  too 
 humble,  there  are  other  takht-ravans  of  more  im- 
 posing appearance.  Some  readers  may  remember 
 the  '  litter  of  red  cloth,  adorned  with  pearls  and 
 jewels,'  together  with  ten  mules  (to  bear  it  by  turns), 
 which  king  Zahr- Shah  prepared  forthe  journey  of  his 
 daughter  (Lane's  Arab.  Nights,  i.  528).  This  was, 
 doubtless,  of  the  kind  which  is  borne  by  four  mules, 
 two  behind  and  two  before.     In  Arabia,  or  in  the 
 
 countries  where  Arabian  usages  prevail,  two  camels 
 are  usually  employed  to  bear  the  takht-ravan,  and 
 
LIVER 
 
 839 
 
 LIVER 
 
 sometimes  two  horses.  When  borne  by  camels, 
 the  head  of  the  hindmost  of  the  animals  is  bent 
 painfully  down  under  the  vehicle.  This  is  the  most 
 comfortable  kind  of  litter,  and  two  light  persons 
 may  travel  in  it. 
 
 The  shibreeyeh  is  another  kind  of  camel-litter, 
 resembling  the  Indian  /lowdah,  by  which  name  (or 
 rather  hSdaj)  it  is  sometimes  called.  It  is  composed 
 of  a  small  square  platform  with  a  canopy  or  arched 
 covering.     It  accommodates  but  one  person,  and  is 
 
 placed  upon  the  back  of  a  camel,  and  rests  upon 
 two  square  camel-chests,  one  on  each  side  of  the 
 animal.  It  is  very  evident,  not  only  from  the  text 
 in  view,  but  from  others,  that  the  Hebrews  had 
 litters  ;  and  there  is  little  reason  to  doubt  that  they 
 were  the  same  as  those  now  employed  in  Palestine, 
 and  the  neighbouring  countries,  where  there  are 
 still  the  same  circumstances  of  climate,  the  same 
 domestic  animals,  and  habits  of  life. 
 
 LIT U RG Y,  A NCiENT  Hebrew,  [vol.  iii.  p.  906.] 
 LIVER  033)  occurs  in   Exod.  xxix.   13,   22  ; 
 
 Lev.  iii.  4,  10,  15  ;  iv.  9  ;  vii.  4  ;  viii.  16,  25  ;  ix. 
 10,  19;  Prov.  vii.  23;  Lam.  ii.  11  ;  Ezek.  xxi.  21. 
 The  Hebrew  word  is  generally  derived  from  133, 
 to  he  heavy,  in  reference  to  the  weight  of  the  liver 
 as  the  heaviest  of  all  the  viscera,  just  as  in  English 
 the  lungs  are  called  '  the  lights,'  from  their  compara- 
 tive lightness.       Gesenius,  however,    adduces  the 
 
 Arabic  Ju^,  meaning,  probably,  'the  most  pre- 
 cious,' which,  indeed,  suits  the  notions  of  the 
 ancient  Orientals,  who  esteemed  the  liver  to  be  the 
 most  valuable  of  all  the  viscera,  because  they 
 thought  it  most  concerned  in  the  formation  of  the 
 blood,  and  held  that  'in  the  blood  is  the  life.'  In 
 all  the  instances  where  the  word  occurs  in  the  Pen- 
 tateuch, it  forms  part  of  the  phrase  py  mnTI 
 133n,  or  n33n  mn\  or  n33n-p,  translated  in 
 the  A.  V.  'the  caul  that  is  above  the  liver,'  but 
 which  Gesenius,  reasoning  from  the  root,  under- 
 stands to  be  the  great  lobe  of  the  liver  itself,  rather 
 than  the  caul  over  it ;  which  latter  he  terms 
 omentum  tnmiis  hepaticogastriciim,  and  which,  he 
 observes,  is  inconsiderable  in  size,  and  has  but  little 
 fat.  Jahn  thinks  the  smaller  lobe  to  be  meant. 
 The  phrase  is  also  rendered  in  the  Sept.  rhv  \oj3bv 
 Tov  TJTaros,  or  rbv  sttI  tov,  etc. ,  '  the  lobe  or  lower 
 pendant  of  the  liver,'  the  chief  object  of  attention  in 
 the  art  of  hepatoscopy,  or  divination  by  the  liver 
 among  the  ancients.  ( Jerome  gives  rdicidum  je- 
 coris,  '  the  net  of  the  liver,'  and  arvina,  '  the  suet,' 
 z.\\d  adeps,  'the  fat;'  see  Bochart,  Hicroz.  i.  498.) 
 It  appears  from  the  same  passages  that  it  was  burnt 
 upon  the  altar,  and  not  eaten  as  sacrificial  food 
 
 (Jahn,  Biblisches  Archdol.,  sec.  378,  n.  7).  The 
 liver  was  supposed  by  the  ancient  Jews,  Greeks, 
 and  Romans,  to  be  the  seat  of  the  passions,  pride, 
 love,  etc.  Thus,  Gen.  xlix.  6,  '  with  their  assem- 
 bly let  not  ^33  (literally,  'my  liver')  be  united  ;' 
 Sept.  TO,  Tjirara ;  see  also  Heb.  of  Ps.  xvi.  9  ;  Ivii. 
 9  ;  cviii.  2  ;  and  Anacreon,  Ode  iii.  fin.  ;  Theocri- 
 tus, Idy//.  xi.  16  ;  Horace,  Carm.  i.  13.  4  ;  25.  15  ; 
 iv.  I.  12  ;  and  the  Notes  of  the  Delphin  edition  : 
 comp.  also  Persius,  Sat.  v.  129  ;  Juvenal,  Sat.  vi. 
 647.  Wounds  in  the  liver  were  supposed  to  be 
 mortal ;  thus  the  expressions  in  Prov.  vii.  23,  '  a 
 dart  through  his  liver,'  and  Lam.  ii.  il,  'my  liver 
 is  poured  out  upon  the  earth,'  are  each  of  them  a 
 periphrasis  for  death  itself.  So  also  /Eschylus  uses 
 the  words  dr/ydveL  irpos  ^irap  to  describe  a  heart 
 wound  (Agamt'/nnoi,  432).  The  passage  in  Eze- 
 kiel  contains  an  interesting  reference  to  the  most 
 ancient  of  all  modes  of  divination,  by  the  inspection 
 of  the  viscera  of  animals  and  even  of  mankind 
 sacrificially  slaughtered  for  the  purpose.  It  is  there 
 said  that  the  king  of  Babylon,  among  other  modes 
 of  divination  referred  to  in  the  same  verse,  '  looked 
 upon  the  liver. '  The  Cambridge  manuscript  of  the 
 Sept.  gives  ijwaTi  crKoirriaaa 6 ai ;  other  copies  use 
 the  precise  technical  term  TjiraTocfKOTrrjaaadat.  The 
 liver  was  always  considered  the  most  important 
 organ  in  the  ancient  art  of  Extispicium,  or  divina- 
 tion by  the  entrails.  Philostratus  felicitously  de- 
 scribes it  as  '  the  prophesying  tripod  of  all  divina- 
 tion' {Life  0/  Apollonius,  viii.  7.  5).  The  rules  by 
 which  the  Greeks  and  Romans  judged  of  it  are 
 amply  detailed  in  Adam's  Roman  Antiquities,  p. 
 261,  etc.,  Lond.  1834;  2,x\Ci'v!x'2o\XQx\ Archaologia 
 Gnvca,  i.  316,  Lond.  1775.  It  is  an  interesting 
 inquiry  how  this  regard  to  it  originated.  Vitru- 
 vius  suggests  a  plausible  theory  of  the  first  rise  of 
 hepatoscopy.  He  says  the  ancients  inspected  the 
 livers  of  those  animals  which  frequented  the  places 
 where  they  wished  to  settle  ;  and  if  they  found  the 
 liver,  to  which  they  chiefly  ascribed  the  process  of 
 sanguification,  was  injured,  they  concluded  that  the 
 water  and  nourishment  collected  in  such  localities 
 were  unwholesome  (i.  4).  But  divination  is  coeval 
 and  co-extensive  with  a  belief  in  the  divinity.  We 
 accept  the  argument  of  the  Stoics,  '■  sjint  Di :  ergo 
 est  Divinatio.''  We  know  that  as  early  as  the  days 
 of  Cain  and  Abel  there  were  certain  means  of  com- 
 munication between  God  and  man,  and  that  those 
 means  were  connected  with  the  sacrifice  of  animals ; 
 and  we  prefer  to  consider  those  means  as  the  source 
 of  divination  in  later  ages,  conceiving  that  when  the 
 real  tokens  of  the  divine  interest  with  which  the 
 primitive  families  of  man  were  favoured  ceased,  in 
 consequence  of  the  multiplying  of  human  transgres- 
 sions, their  descendants  endeavoured  to  obtain 
 counsel  and  mformation  by  the  same  external  ob- 
 servances. We  believe  that  thus  only  will  the 
 minute  resemblances  be  accounted  for,  which  we 
 discover  between  the  different  methods  of  divina- 
 tion, utterly  untraceable  to  reason,  but  which 
 have  prevailed  from  unknown  antiquity  among 
 the  most  distant  regions.  Cicero  ascribes  divina- 
 tion by  this  and  other  means  to  what  he  calls 
 '  the  heroic  ages,'  by  which  term  we  know  he 
 means  a  period  antecedent  to  all  historical  Aozm- 
 ■m&nis  [De  Divinatione).  Prometheus,  in  the  play 
 of  that  title  {474,  etc.),  lays  claim  to  having 
 taught  mankind  the  different  kinds  of  divination, 
 and  that  of  extispicy  among  the  rest  ;  and  Prome- 
 theus, according  to  Servius  [ad  Virg.  Eel.  vi.  42), 
 
LIZARD 
 
 840 
 
 LOAN 
 
 instructed  the  Assyrians ;  and  we  know  from  sacred 
 record  that  Assyria  was  one  of  the  countries  first 
 peopled.  It  is  further  important  to  remark  that 
 the  first  recorded  instance  of  divination  is  that 
 of  the  teraphim  of  Laban,  a  native  of  Padan- 
 aram,  a  district  bordering  on  that  country  (l 
 Sam.  xix.  13,  16),  but  by  which  teraphim  both 
 the  Sept.  and  Josephus  understood  ijirap  tQv 
 alyCov,  '  the  lizurr  of  goats'  {Antiq.  vi.  11.  4)  ;  nor 
 does  Whiston,  perhaps,  in  his  note  on  that  passage, 
 unreasonably  complain  that,  '  since  the  modem 
 Jews  have  lost  the  signification  of  the  word  "1^23, 
 and  since  this  rendering  of  the  Sept.,  as  well  as 
 the  opinion  of  Josephus,  are  here  so  much  more 
 clear  and  probable,  it  is  unaccountable  that  our 
 commentators  sliould  so  much  hesitate  as  to  its 
 true  interpretation'  (Whiston's  Josephus,  p.  169, 
 note,  Edin.  1828  ;  Bochart,  i.  41,  De  Capraruin 
 Noffiinibits ;  Encyclopcedia  Metropolitana,  art.  '  Di- 
 vination ; '  Rosenmiiller's  Scholia  on  the  several 
 passages  referred  to ;  Perizonius,  ad  yElian.  ii.  3 1  ; 
 Peucer,  De  PrcEcipuis  Divinatmium  Geneyibus, 
 etc.,  Witteberg  1560).     [Divination.]— J.  F.  D. 
 
 LIZARD.  Under  this  denomination  the  modern 
 zoologist  places  all  the  cold-blooded  animals  that 
 have  the  conformation  of  serpents  with  the  addi- 
 tion of  four  feet.  Thus  viewed,  as  one  great 
 family,  they  constitute  the  Saurians,  Lacertinse, 
 and  Lacertid?e  of  authors  ;  embracing  numerous 
 generical  divisions,  which  commence  with  the 
 largest,  that  is,  the  crocodile  group,  and  pass 
 through  sundry  others,  a  variety  of  species,  for- 
 midable, disgusting,  or  pleasing  in  appearance — 
 some  equally  frequenting  the  land  and  water, 
 others  absolutely  confined  to  the  earth  and  to  the 
 most  arid  deserts  ;  and  though  in  general  harm- 
 less, there  are  a  few  with  disputed  properties,  some 
 being  held  to  poison  or  corrode  by  means  of  the 
 exudation  of  an  ichor,  and  others  extolled  as 
 aphrodisiacs,  or  of  medical  use  in  pharmacy ;  but 
 these  properties  in  most,  if  not  in  all,  are  unde- 
 termined or  illusory.  For  those  mentioned  in  the 
 Bible,  see  Chameleon  ;  Cuocodile  ;  Dragon  ; 
 Leviathan  ;  Anakah  ;  Chomet  ;  Coach  ;  Le- 
 
 TAAH  ;     SeMMAMITH  J     THINSEMETH  ;     TZAB. — 
 
 C.  H.  S. 
 
 LOAN.  The  Mosaic  laws  which  relate  to  the 
 subject  of  borrowing,  lending,  and  repaying,  are  in 
 substance  as  follows  : — If  an  Israelite  became  poor, 
 what  he  desired  to  borrow  was  to  be  freely  lent  to 
 him,  and  no  interest,  either  of  money  or  produce, 
 could  be  exacted  from  him ;  interest  might  be 
 taken  of  a  foreigner,  but  not  of  an  Israelite  by 
 another  Israelite  (Exod.  xxii.  25  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  19, 
 20 ;  Lev.  xxv.  35-38).  At  the  end  of  every 
 seven  years  a  remission  of  debts  was  ordained ; 
 every  creditor  was  to  remit  what  he  had  lent  : 
 of  a  foreigner  the  loan  might  be  exacted,  but  not 
 of  a  brother.  If  an  Israelite  wished  to  borrow,  he 
 was  not  to  be  refused  because  the  year  of  remis- 
 sion was  at  hand  (Deut.  xv.  i-ii).  Pledges 
 might  be  taken,  but  not  as  such  the  mill  or  the 
 upper  millstone,  for  that  would  be  to  take  a  man's 
 life  in  pledge.  If  the  pledge  was  raiment,  it  was 
 to  be  given  back  before  sunset,  as  being  needful 
 for  a  covering  at  night.  The  widow's  garment 
 could  not  be  taken  in  pledge  (Exod.  xxii.  26, 
 27  ;  Deut  xxiv.  6,  17).  A  part  of  the  last  pas- 
 sage we  must  cite  entire,  as  showing  a  most  ami- 
 able and  considerate  spirit  on  the  part  of  Moses 
 
 towards  the  poor :  '  When  thou  dost  lend  thv 
 brother  anythihg,  thou  shalt  not  go  into  his  house 
 to  fetch  his  pledge  ;  thou  shalt  stand  abroad,  and 
 the  man  to  whom  thou  dost  lend  shall  bring  out 
 the  pledge  abroad  unto  thee  ;  and  if  the  man  be 
 poor  thou  shalt  not  sleep  with  his  pledge  :  in  any 
 case  thou  shalt  deliver  him  the  pledge  again  when 
 the  sun  goeth  down,  that  he  may  sleep  in  his  own 
 raiment,  and  bless  thee ;  and  it  shall  be  righteous- 
 ness unto  thee  before  the  Lord  thy  God.'  The 
 strong  and  impressive  manner  in  which  the  duty 
 of  lending  is  enjoined,  is  worthy  of  being  exhibited 
 in  the  words  of  Scripture  :  '  If  there  be  among 
 you  a  poor  man  of  one  of  thy  brethren,  thou  shalt 
 not  harden  thy  heart  nor  shut  thine  hand  from 
 thy  poor  brother,  but  thou  shalt  open  thine  hand 
 wide  unto  him,  and  shalt  surely  lend  him  suffi- 
 cient for  his  need.  Beware  that  there  be  not  a 
 thought  in  thy  wicked  heart,  saying,  the  year  of 
 release  is  at  hand,  and  thine  eye  be  evil  against 
 thy  poor  brother,  and  thou  givest  him  nought, 
 and  he  cry  unto  the  Lord  against  thee,  and  if  be 
 sin  unto  thee  :  thou  shalt  surely  give  him,  and 
 thine  heart  shall  not  be  grieved  when  thou  givest 
 unto  him  ;  because  that  for  this  thing  the  Lord 
 thy  God  shall  bless  thee  in  all  thy  works  and  in 
 all  that  thou  puttest  thy  hand  unto.' 
 
 These  laws  relating  to  loans  may  wear  a  strange 
 and  somewhat  repulsive  aspect  to  the  mere  modem 
 reader,  and  <annot  be  understood,  either  in  their 
 bearing  or  their  sanctions,  unless  considered  from 
 the  Biblical  point  of  view.  The  land  of  Canaan 
 (as  the  entire  world)  belonged  to  its  Creator,  but 
 was  given  of  God  to  the  descendants  of  Abraham 
 under  certain  conditions,  of  which  this  liberahty 
 to  the  needy  was  one.  The  power  of  getting  loans 
 therefore  was  a  part  of  the  poor  man's  inheritance. 
 It  was  a  hen  on  the  land  (the  source  of  all  property 
 with  agricultural  people),  which  was  as  valid  as  the 
 tenure  of  any  given  portion  by  the  tribe  or  family 
 to  whose  lot  it  had  fallen.  This  is  the  light  in 
 which  the  Mosaic  polity  represents  the  matter,  and 
 in  this  light,  so  long  as  that  polity  retained  its  force, 
 would  it,  as  a  matter  of  course,  be  regarded  by  the 
 owners  of  property.  Thus  the  execution  of  this 
 particular  law  was  secured  by  the  entire  force  with 
 which  the  constitution  itself  was  recommended  and 
 sustained.  But  as  human  selfishness  might  in  time 
 endanger  this  particular  set  of  laws,  so  Moses  ap- 
 plied special  support  to  the  possibly  weak  part. 
 Hence  the  emphasis  with  which  he  enjoins  the 
 duty  of  lending  to  the  needy.  Of  this  emphasis  the 
 very  essence  is  the  sanction  supplied  by  that  special 
 providence  which  lay  at  the  very  basis  of  the 
 Mosaic  commonwealth  ;  so  that  lending  to  the  des- 
 titute came  to  be  enforced  with  all  the  power  de- 
 rivable from  the  express  will  of  God,  of  the 
 Almighty  Creator,  of  the  Redeemer  of  Israel,  of 
 Him  whose  favour  was  life,  and  whose  frown  was 
 dismay  and  ruin. 
 
 It  is  impossible  not  to  admire  the  benevolence 
 which  runs  through  the  entire  of  this  piece  of  legis- 
 lation ;  and  when  the  age  to  which  its  origin  is 
 referred,  and  the  peculiar  circumstances  under 
 which  it  was  produced,  are  considered,  our  admi- 
 ration rises  to  a  very  high  pitch,  and  we  feel  that  it 
 is  most  insufficient  praise  to  say  that  nothing  so 
 benign  in  spirit  had  been  previously  conceived  : 
 nothing  more  beneficent  and  humane  has  been 
 carried  into  effect,  even  since  Jesus  came  to  seek 
 and  to  save   the  lost.     The   conduct   which  the 
 
LOAN 
 
 841 
 
 LOCK 
 
 Romans  observed  towards  the  debtor  affords  a 
 striking  contrast  to  what  is  thus  required  by 
 Moses.  Insolvent  debtors  might  be  compelled  to 
 serve  their  creditors,  and  oiten  had  to  endure  treat- 
 ment as  bad  as  that  of  slaves  (Liv.  ii.  23  ;  A.  Cell. 
 XX.  I,  19  ;  Appian,  Ilal.  p.  40).  In  Athens  also  the 
 creditor  had  a  claim  to  the  person  of  the  debtor 
 (Plut.  Vit.  Sol.  15).  Moses  himself  seems  to  have 
 admitted  some  restrictions  to  his  benevolent  laws  ; 
 for  from  Lev.  xxv.  39,  seq. ,  it  appears  that  a  poor 
 Israelite  might  be  sold  to  one  possessed  of  substance : 
 he  was,  however,  to  serve,  not  as  a  bond,  but  as  a 
 hired  servant,  who  at  the  jubilee  was  restored  with 
 his  children  to  entire  liberty,  so  that  he  might  re- 
 turn unto  the  possession  of  his  fathers. 
 
 That  the  system  of  law  regarding  loans  was  car- 
 ried into  effect  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt.  It 
 formed  an  essential  part  of  the  general  constitution, 
 and  therefore  came  recommended  with  the  entire 
 sanction  which  that  system  had  on  its  own  behalf; 
 nor  were  there  any  predominant  antagonist  prin- 
 ciples at  work  which  would  prevent  this  from 
 proceeding  step  by  step,  in  its  proper  place  and 
 time,  with  the  residue  of  the  Mosaic  legislation. 
 Nor  do  the  passages  of  Scripture  (Job  xxii.  6;  xxiv. 
 3  ;  Matt,  xviii.  28  ;  Prov.  xxviii.  8  ;  Ezek.  xviii.  8  ; 
 Ps.  XV.  5  ;  cix.  11)  which  give  us  reason  to  think 
 that  usury  was  practised  and  the  poor  debtor  op- 
 pressed, shew  anything  but  those  breaches  to  which 
 laws  are  always  liable,  especially  in  a  period  when 
 morals  grow  corrupt  and  institutions  in  consequence 
 decline  ;  on  the  contrary,  the  stem  reproofs  wliich 
 such  violations  called  forth  forcibly  demonstrate 
 that  the  legislation  in  question  had  taken  effect, 
 and  had  also  exerted  a  powerful  influence  on  the 
 national  character,  and  on  the  spirit  with  which  the 
 misdeeds  of  rich  oppressors  and  the  injuries  of  the 
 needy  were  regarded. 
 
 While,  however,  the  benign  tendency  of  the  laws 
 m  question  is  admitted,  may  it  not  be  questioned 
 whether  they  were  strictly  just  ?  Such  a  doubt 
 could  arise  only  in  a  mind  which  viewed  the  subject 
 from  the  position  of  our  actual  society.  A  modern 
 might  plead  that  he  had  a  right  to  do  what  he 
 pleased  with  his  own  ;  that  his  property  of  every 
 kind — land,  food,  money — was  his  own  ;  and  that 
 he  was  justified  to  turn  all  and  each  part  to  account 
 for  his  own  benefit.  Apart  from  religious  consi- 
 derations this  position  is  impregnable.  But  such  a 
 view  of  property  finds  no  support  in  the  Mosaic 
 institutions.  In  them  property  has  a  divine  origin, 
 and  its  use  is  intrusted  to  man  on  certain  conditions, 
 which  conditions  are  as  valid  as  is  the  tenure  of  pro- 
 perty itself.  In  one  sense,  indeed,  the  entire  land 
 — all  property — was  a  great  loan,  a  loan  lent  of 
 God  to  the  people  of  Israel,  who  might  well  there- 
 fore acquiesce  in  any  arrangement  which  required  a 
 portion — a  small  portion — of  this  loan  to  be  under 
 certain  circumstances  accessible  to  the  destitute. 
 This  view  receives  confirmation  from  the  fact  that 
 interest  might  be  taken  of  persons  who  were  not 
 Hebrews,  and  therefore  lay  beyond  the  sphere  em- 
 braced by  this  special  arrangement.  It  would  open 
 too  wide  a  field  did  we  proceed  to  consider  how  far 
 the  Mosaic  system  might  be  applicable  in  the  world 
 at  large  ;  but  this  is  very  clear  to  our  mind,  that 
 the  theory  of  property  on  which  it  rests — that  is, 
 making  property  to  be  divine  in  its  origin,  and 
 iherefore  tenable  only  on  the  fulfilment  of  such  con- 
 ditions as  the  great  laws  of  religion  and  morality 
 enforce- -is  more  true  and  more  philosophical  (ex- 
 
 cept in  a  college  of  Atheists)  than  the  narrow  and 
 baneful  ideas  which  ordinarily  prevail. 
 
 Had  the  Hebrews  enjoyed  a  free  intercourse  with 
 other  nations,  the  permission  to  take  usury  of 
 foreigners  might  have  had  the  effect  of  impoverish- 
 ing Palestine  by  affording  a  strong  inducement  for 
 employing  capital  abroad  ;  but,  under  the  actual 
 restrictions  of  the  Mosaic  law,  this  evil  was  impos- 
 sible. Some  not  inconsiderable  advantages  must 
 have  ensued  from  the  observance  of  these  laws. 
 The  entire  alienation  and  loss  of  the  lent  property 
 were  prevented  by  that  peculiar  institution  which 
 restored  to  every  man  his  property  at  the  great  year 
 of  release.  In  the  interval  between  the  jubilees  the 
 system  under  consideration  would  tend  to  prevent 
 those  inequalities  of  social  condition  which  always 
 arise  rapidly,  and  which  have  not  seldom  brought 
 disaster  and  ruin  on  states.  The  affluent  were  re- 
 quired to  part  with  a  portion  of  their  affluence  to 
 supply  the  wants  of  the  needy,  without  exacting 
 that  recompense  which  would  only  make  the  rich 
 richer  and  the  poor  more  needy  ;  thus  superinduc- 
 ing a  state  of  things  scarcely  more  injurious  to  the 
 one  than  to  the  other  of  these  two  parties.  There 
 was  also  in  this  system  a  strongly  conservative  in- 
 fluence. Agriculture  was  the  foundation  of  the 
 constitution.  Had  money-lending  been  a  trade, 
 money -making  would  also  have  been  eagerly 
 pursued.  Capital  would  be  withdrawn  from  the 
 land  ;  the  agriculturist  would  pass  into  the  usurer  ; 
 huge  inequalities  would  arise  ;  commerce  would 
 assume  predominance,  and  the  entire  common- 
 wealth be  overturned — changes  and  evils  which 
 were  prevented,  or,  if  not  so,  certainly  retarded  and 
 abated,  by  the  code  of  laws  regarding  loans.  As  it 
 was,  the  gradually  increasing  wealth  of  the  country 
 was  in  the  main  laid  out  on  the  soil,  so  as  to  aug- 
 ment its  productiveness  and  distribute  its  bounties. 
 
 These  views  may  prepare  the  reader  for  con- 
 sidering the  doctrine  of  '  the  Great  Teacher'  on  the 
 subject  of  loans.  It  is  found  forcibly  expressed  in 
 Luke's  Gospel  (vi.  34,  35)  :  '  If  ye  lend  to  them  ot 
 whom  ye  hope  to  receive,  what  thank  have  ye  ?  for 
 sinners  also  lend  to  sinners,  to  receive  as  much 
 again  :  but  love  ye  your  enemies,  and  do  good,  and 
 lend,  hoping  for  nothing  again ;  and  your  reward 
 shall  be  great,  and  ye  shall  be  the  children  of  the 
 Highest ;  for  he  is  kind  unto  the  unthankful  and 
 to  the  evil.'  The  meaning  of  the  passage  is  distinct 
 and  full,  unmistakeable,  and  not  to  be  evaded.  He 
 commands  men  to  lend,  not  as  Jews  to  Jews,  but 
 even  to  enemies,  without  asking  or  receiving  any 
 return,  after  the  manner  of  the  Great  Benefactor 
 of  the  Universe,  who  sends  down  his  rains  and  bids 
 his  sun  to  shine  on  the  fields  of  the  unjust  as  well 
 as  of  the  just.  To  attempt  to  view  this  command 
 in  the  light  of  reason  and  experience  would  require 
 space  which  cannot  here  be  given  ;  but  we  must 
 add,  that  any  attempt  to  explain  the  injunction 
 away  is  most  unworthy  on  the  ]3art  of  professed 
 disciples  of  Christ ;  and  that,  not  impossibly  at 
 least,  fidelity  to  the  behests  of  Him  whom  we  call 
 Lord  and  Master  would  of  itself  answer  all  doubts 
 and  remove  all  misgivings,  by  practically  shewing 
 that  this,  as  every  other  doctrine  that  fell  from  His 
 lips,  is  indeed  of  God  (John  vii.  17). — ^J.  R.  B. 
 
 LOAVES.     [Bread.] 
 
 LOCK.  i?1J?J0 ;  KkeWoov,  sera  (Neh.  iii.  3,  13, 
 14,    15 ;    Cant    v.    ij).      Details  of  tlie   mode   oi 
 
LOCUST 
 
 842 
 
 LOD 
 
 fastening  gates  and  doors  in  tlie  East  have  been 
 already  given  [DooR ;  Key].  The  locks  are  com- 
 monly huge  clumsy  things  of  wood  (Dr.  Thomson, 
 Land  and  Book,  p.  317,  speaks  of  one  to  a  castle 
 door,  which, with  its  key,  was  almost  a  load  for  a 
 camel),  of  which  the  accompanying  sketch  shews 
 the  nature.  They  consist  of  a  bar  {a)  hollowed  at 
 one  end  to  admit  the  key  {b),  and  passing  horizon- 
 tally through  a  groove  {c)  in  a  strong  piece  of  wood 
 [a)  attached  vertically  to  the  inside  of  the  door, 
 into  a  hole  in  the  door-post.  In  {d)  are  a  number 
 of  movable  metal  pins  (e)  corresponding  to  holes 
 drilled  in  the  bar  (/)  into  which  they  drop,  and 
 render  it  fast  (fig.  2).  The  key  {b)  is  a  flat  piece 
 of  wood  with  the  same  number  of  fixed  metal  pegs 
 (,o-)  projecting  from  its  upper  surface,  which  when 
 introduced  into  the  end  of  the  bar  (as  in  fig.  3) 
 raises  the  movable  pegs  {e),  and  allows  the  bar  to  be 
 drawn  back.  These  locks  are  placed  on  the  in- 
 side of  doors  of  gardens  and  courts,  and  sometimes 
 
 y 
 
 i 
 
 0 
 
 \.L 
 
 ii 
 
 ^  ii|ii 
 
 ii 
 
 y      /iiiiii 
 
 0  1 
 
 ^Ls: 
 
 ^0 
 
 even  of  inner  rooms.  A  hole  is  cut  in  the  door  to 
 allow  the  arm  to  be  introduced  to  insert  the  key, 
 which  explains  Cant.  v.  4.  The  locks  being  easily 
 picked,  are  sometimes,  as  an  additional  safeguard, 
 plastered  over  with  clay,  on  which  a  seal  is  im- 
 pressed (cf.  Job  xxxviii.  14). — E.  V. 
 
 LOCUST.  [ArbeH;  Chagab  ;  Chanamal; 
 Chargol;  Chasil;  Gazam;  Gob;  Salam;  Tze- 
 
 LATZAL  ;  YeLEK.] 
 
 LOD,  and  in  the  N.  T.  Lydda  (i?,  perhaps 
 'strife;'  Ac65,  Ao5a5/;  Alex.  A65,  AiySSwc;  Lod; 
 in  N.  T.  Ay55ci).  We  read  in  i  Chron.  viii.  12, 
 that  Shamed,  a  Benjamite,  built  Ono  and  Lod,  with 
 the  towns  thereof  Probably  it  was  rebuilt,  like 
 most  other  towns  in  Canaan,  upon  an  ancient  site. 
 The  site  is  a  noble  one — a  gentle  eminence  in  the 
 midst  of  the  vast  and  fertile  plain,  which  extends 
 to  the  sea  on  the  west,  to  the  mountains  of  Judah 
 on  the  east,  and  north  and  south  far  as  the  eye  can 
 see.  It  is  twelve  miles  from  Joppa,  on  the  road  to 
 Jerusalem,  and  about  two  and  a  half  miles  north  of 
 Ramleh.  The  site  of  Ono,  which  was  founded  at 
 the  same  time,  is  four  miles  across  the  plain  to  the 
 north-west.  Lod  was  again  occupied  immediately 
 after  the  captivity  (Ezra  ii.  33 ;  Neh.  vii.  37) ;  but 
 we  hear  no  more  of  it  in  O.  T.  history.  About  the 
 year  B.  C.  145  the  district  of  Lydda,  with  two 
 others  adjoining,  was  separated  from  Samaria  and 
 annexed    to  Judaea,    on  account  of  the  respect 
 
 entertained  for  the  Jewish  leader,  Jonathan,  by 
 Demetrius  Nicator  (i  Maccab.  xi.  30,  seq.;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xiii.  4.  9;  Reland,  pp.  178,  seq.)  After  the 
 death  of  Julius  Csesar,  Cassius  Longinus,  one  of 
 his  mui-derers,  commanded  in  Palestine,  and  was 
 guilty  of  many  acts  of  cruelty.  Among  others,  he 
 sold  to  slavery  the  whole  people  of  Lydda  (Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xiv.  II.  2);  a  short  time  afterwards,  how- 
 ever, they  were  set  at  liberty  and  restored  to  their 
 homes  by  order  of  Antony  (/</.,  xiv.  12.  5 ;  Robin- 
 son, B.  R.,  ii.  245). 
 
 But  Lydda  derives  its  chief  and  undying  interest 
 from  the  miracle  wrought  by  Peter  upon  the  para- 
 lytic Eneas  (Acts  ix.  33).  The  glad  and  wondrous 
 tidings  soon  sped  to  Joppa,  '  forasmuch  as  Lydda 
 was  nigh  to  Joppa;'  and  thither  the  apostle  was 
 soon  summoned  to  perform  a  miracle  still  more 
 wonderful  (ver.  38,  seq.)  Lydda  suffered  severely 
 during  the  wars  between  the  Jews  and  Romans. 
 It  was  burned  to  ashes  by  Cestius  Gallus  (Joseph. 
 Bell.  yud.  ii.  19.  I ) ;  and  being  captured  by  Ves- 
 pasian at  a  later  period,  was  colonized  by  his  ad- 
 herents {Ld.,  iv.  8.  i).  But,  notwithstanding  these 
 calamities,  it  was  a  large  and  flourishing  town,  and 
 famous  as  a  seat  of  Jewish  learning  (Lightfoot, 
 Opei'a,  ii.  145 ;  Edersheim,  Hist,  of  the  yews,  p. 
 176).  Like  many  other  towns  in  Palestine  which 
 were  rebuilt  or  adorned  during  the  Roman  rule, 
 Lydda  got  a  new  name.  The  Hebrew  Lod,  and 
 the  Greek  corruption  Lydda,  were  both  set  aside, 
 and  the  official  designation  became  Diospolis.  This 
 name  first  appears  on  coins  of  Septimius  Severus, 
 in  the  beginning  of  the  third  centuiy  (Eckhel, 
 Nummor.  Doctr.,  iii.  432;  cf  Jerome,  Opei-a,\. 
 696 ;  ed.  Migne).  From  this  time  the  town  became 
 one  of  the  most  important  places  in  western  Pales- 
 tine (Reland,  p.  877).  It  was  made  the  seat  of  a 
 bishopric  at  an  early  period,  and  continues  so 
 down  to  the  present  time  {Ld.,  pp.  215,  227;  Le 
 Quien,  Oriens  Chr.,  iii.)  Very  early  traditions 
 affirm  Lydda  to  be  the  birthplace  of  St.  George ; 
 and  in  some  of  the  Notiticv  Ecclesiastica:,  we  find  it 
 mentioned  as  '  Diospolis  or  City  of  George  (Teixtpyiov 
 7r6Xecjs;  Reland,  p.  220).  A  splendid  church  was 
 there  erected  in  honour  of  the  saint,  some  say  by 
 the  emperor  Justinian  (Will.  Tyr. ,  JList.  vii.  22; 
 cf  Anton.  A/art.,  Ltin.  30).  In  the  beginning  of 
 the  eighth  century  Lydda  was  laid  in  ruins  by  the 
 Saracens ;  but  the  church  escaped,  only  to  be  de- 
 stroyed, however,  by  the  Mohammedans  on  the  ap- 
 proach of  the  Crusaders  (Will.  Tyr.,  vii.  22).  It  is 
 worthy  of  note  that  at  this  time  the  new  name,  Dios- 
 polis, had  disappeared,  and  the  old  Hebrew  name, 
 Lod,  which  had  probably  been  always  used  by  the 
 inhabitants,  appears  again  in  history.  The  Crusa- 
 ders paid  great  respect  to  Lydda,  and  adopted 
 George  as  their  patron-saint  (Heylin,  History  of  St, 
 George).  The  church  was  rebuilt  by  them  ;  but 
 after  the  evacuation  of  Palestine  it  gradually  fell  to 
 ruin,  and  Lydda  dwindled  down  to  a  small  and 
 poor  village.  A  part  of  the  church  was  converted 
 into  a  mosque,  and  to  that  circumstance  we  are 
 indebted  for  the  beautiful  fragment  of  it  which  still 
 remains. 
 
 The  village  of  Lydda,  now  called  Lvd,  contains 
 about  a  thousand  inhabitants ;  and  though  its  houses 
 are  small  and  poor,  and  its  lanes  dirty,  yet  there  is 
 an  air  of  thrift  and  prosperity  about  the  place  not 
 often  seen  in  Palestine.  The  orchards  which  sur- 
 round it  are  rich  and  beautiful,  and  the  plain 
 beyond  them  is  well  cultivated.     Of  St.  George's 
 
LO-DEBAR 
 
 843 
 
 LONGEVITY 
 
 Church  only  the  walls  and  part  of  the  vault  of  the 
 chancel  remain.  The  capitals  of  the  pilasters  and 
 the  cornice  are  marble,  and  profusely  ornamented. 
 One  lofty  pointed  arch  stands  on  the  south  side  of 
 the  aisle,  and  has  a  very  striking  appearance.  Full 
 descriptions  of  Lydda  may  be  seen  in  Robinson, 
 vol.  ii. ;  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book ;  Hand- 
 book, 278,  seq.  Its  history  is  sketched  in  Reland 
 and  Le  Quien  ;  and  the  story  of  St.  George  is  given 
 at  great  length  in  Acta  Sancionati,  torn.  iii.  p.  100, 
 seq.,  and  in  Heylin's  History. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LO-DEBAR  (-|2"J  Sh  and  "T  ih,  '  without  pas- 
 ture ;'  Ao5d/3ap  and  AcoSa^dp ;  Alex.  Aa5a/3ap ; 
 Lodabar),  a  town  of  Gilead,  where  Mephibosheth, 
 the  deformed  son  of  Jonathan,  found  a  home  after 
 the  death  of  his  father  and  grandfather  (2  Sam.  ix. 
 5).  When  David  fled  from  Jerusalem  to  Maha- 
 naim  on  the  rebellion  of  Absalom,  Machir  of  Lo- 
 debar,  who  had  previously  sheltered  Mephibosheth, 
 was  among  the  first  to  supply  the  wants  of  the 
 royal  refugee  (xvii.  27).  Gilead  was  a  pastoral 
 country;  and  its  people,  simple  and  primitive  in 
 their  habits,  exercised  a  generous  and  profuse 
 hospitality  to  strangers.  The  site  of  Lo-debar 
 appears  to  have  been  unknown  to  Eusebius  and 
 Jerome  [Onoviast.,  s.  v.  La-dabar  and  Lo-dabar). 
 It  must  have  been  near  Mahanaim,  for  there 
 Ishbosheth  M'as  crowned  by  Abner,  and  we  may 
 suppose  the  relatives  of  Saul  would  gather  round 
 it  (2  Sam.  ii.  9) ;  there,  too,  David  had  taken 
 refuge  when  Machir  supplied  him  with  furniture 
 and  provisions.      Reland  suggests  that  this  town 
 
 may  be  identical   with   Lidbir  ("I^IP),   or  Debir 
 
 nQT,  Debir)  of  Josh.  xiii.  26.  Although  Lidbir 
 may  be  the  real  form  of  the  latter  word,  yet  it 
 seems  very  doubtful  whether  Lo-debar  could  be  so 
 contracted  (Reland,  p.  875;  Keil,  0)i  Josh.  xiii. 
 26).-J.  L.  P. 
 
 LOESNER,  Christoph  Friedrich,  a  Ger- 
 man philologist,  was  bom  in  Leipzig  in  1734)  ^r^d 
 died  there  in  1803,  as  professor  of  philology 
 at  the  university.  His  principal  works  relating 
 to  Biblical  literature  are — Specitnen  lectionn?n  philo- 
 logicarum,  Leipzig  1758,  4to ;  Observationes  in 
 reliquias  versionis  proverbiormn  Salomonis  gmccs 
 AqicilcE,  Symmachi  ct  Theodotionis  (contained  in 
 the  3d  tom.  of  the  Commentationes  iheolog.)  ;  Cal- 
 limachi  Hymni  et  Epigram mata,  Leipzig  1774, 
 8vo  ;  Observationes  in  N.  T.  a  Fhilone  Alexan- 
 drine, ib.  I'JIT,  8vo. — E.  D. 
 
 LOG.     [Weights  and  Measures.] 
 
 LOIS  (Awts),  the  grandmother  of  Timothy,  not 
 by  the  side  of  his  father,  who  was  a  Greek ,  but  by 
 that  of  his  mother.  Hence  the  Syriac  has  'thy 
 mother's  mother.'  She  is  commended  by  St.  Paul 
 for  her  faith  (2  Tim.  i.  5) ;  for  although  she  might 
 not  have  known  that  the  Christ  was  come,  and 
 that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  he,  she  yet  believed 
 in  the  Messiah  to  come,  and  died  in  that  faith. — 
 J.  K. 
 
 LOMBROSO,  Jacob,  a  very  distinguished 
 physician,  grammarian,  and  commentator.  He  was 
 Rabbi  of  the  Jewish  community  at  Venice,  where  he 
 published  in  1638-39  a  very  valuable  edition  of  the 
 Hebrew  Bible,  with  an  elaborate  introduction,  a 
 grammatical  and  critical  commentary,  ana  a  Spanish 
 
 translation  of  the  difficult  expressions  entitled  ^^70 
 nnj  13,  A  Handful  of  Quiet.  Comp.  Masch; 
 Bibliotheca  Sacra,  \.  114;  Steinschneider,  Catalogue 
 Libr.  Hebr.  in  Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col.  80,  1230; 
 Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Hebraica,  ii.  254. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 LONGEVITY.  Longevity  is  a  compound  of 
 two  Latin  words,  and  signifies  prolongation  of  life. 
 The  lengthened  ages  of  some  of  the  ante  and  post- 
 diluvian fathers,  as  given  by  Moses  in  the  Hebrew 
 text,  are  as  follows  : — 
 
 Years. 
 Adam    .  .  .    Gen.  v.     5  930 
 
 Seth      .  .  .         ,,         8  912 
 
 Enos      .  .  .         ,,       II  905 
 
 Cainan  .  .  .         ,,        14  910 
 
 Mahalaleel         .  .         ,)       17  895 
 
 Jared      .  .  .         ,,       20  962 
 
 Enoch  .  .  .         ,,       23  365 
 
 Methuselah        .  .         ,,27  969 
 
 Lamech  .  .         ,,       31  777 
 
 Noah     .  .  .  ,,  ix.  29  950 
 
 Shem     .  .  .         ,,  .\i.  10,  11     600 
 
 Arphaxad  .  .         ,,       12,  13     438 
 
 Salah     .  .  .         „        14,  15     433 
 
 Eber     .  .  .         ,,       16,  17    464 
 
 Peleg    .  .  .         „       18,  19     239 
 
 Reu       .  .  ,         ,,       20,  21     239 
 
 Serug    .  .  .         ,,       22,  23     230 
 
 Nahor  .  .  •         ,,       24,  25     148 
 
 Terah    .  .  .  ,,       32  205 
 
 Abraham  .  ,         ,,xxv.  7  175 
 
 Infidelity  has  not  failed,  in  various  ages,  to 
 attack  revelation  on  the  score  of  the  supposed  ab- 
 surdity of  assigning  to  any  class  of  men  this 
 lengthened  term  of  existence.  In  reference  to  this, 
 Josephus  (Antiq.  i.  3.  9)  remarks  : — '  Let  no  one 
 upon  comparing  the  lives  of  the  ancients  with  our 
 lives,  and  with  the  few  years  which  we  now  live, 
 think  that  what  we  say  of  them  is  false  ;  or  make 
 the  shortness  of  our  lives  at  present  an  argument 
 that  neither  did  they  attain  to  so  long  a  duration 
 of  life. '  When  we  consider  the  compensating  pro- 
 cess which  is  going  on,  the  marvel  is  that  the 
 human  frame  should  not  last  longer  than  it  does. 
 Some,  however,  have  supposed  that  the  years 
 above  named  are  lunar,  consisting  of  about  thirty 
 days  ;  but  this  supposition,  with  a  view  to  reduce 
 the  lives  of  the  antediluvians  to  our  standard,  is  re- 
 plete with  difficulties.  At  this  rate  the  whole 
 time  from  the  creation  of  man  to  the  Flood  would 
 not  be  more  than  about  140  years ;  and  Methu- 
 selah himself  would  not  have  attained  to  the  age 
 which  many  even  now  do,  whilst  many  must  have 
 had  children  when  mere  infants  !  Besides,  if  we 
 compute  the  age  of  the  postdiluvians  by  this 
 mode  of  calcidation — and  why  should  we  not  ? — 
 we  shall  find  that  Abraham,  who  is  said  to  have 
 died  in  a  good  old  age  (Gen.  xxv.  8)  could  not  have 
 been  more  than  fifteen  years  old  !  Moses  must 
 therefore  have  meant  solar,  not  lunar  years — not, 
 however,  exactly  so  long  as  ours,  for  the  ancients 
 generally  reckoned  twelve  months,  of  thirty  days 
 each,  to  the  year.  '  Nor  is  there,'  observes  St. 
 Augustine  {De  Civ.  Dei,  xv.  12),  'any  care  to  be 
 given  unto  those  who  think  that  one  of  our  ordi- 
 nary years  would  make  ten  of  the  years  of  these 
 times,  being  so  short  ;  and  therefore,  say  they, 
 900  years  of  theirs  are  90  of  ours— their  10  is  oui 
 I  and  their  lOO  our  10.  Thus  think  they,  that 
 Adam  was  but  20  years  old  when  he  begat  Seth, 
 
LONGEVITY 
 
 844 
 
 LONGEVITY 
 
 and  he  but  20g  when  he  begat  Enos,  whom  the 
 Scriptures  call  (the  Sept.  ver.)  205  years.  For, 
 as  these  men  hold,  the  Scripture  divided  one  year 
 into  ten  parts,  calHng  each  part  a  year ;  and  each 
 part  had  a  six-fold  quadrate,  because  in  six  days 
 God  made  the  world.  Now  6  times  6  is  36,  which 
 multiplied  by  10  makes  360 — i.e.,  twelve  lunar 
 months.'  Abarbanel,  in  his  Comment,  on  Gen.  v., 
 states  that  some,  professing  Christianity,  had  fallen 
 into  the  same  mistake,  viz.,  that  Moses  meant 
 lunar,  and  not  solar  years.  Ecclesiastical  history 
 does  not  inform  us  of  this  fact,  except  it  be  to  it 
 that  Lactantius  refers  (ii.  13)  when  he  speaks  of 
 one  Varro  : — 'The  life  of  man,  though  temporary, 
 was  yet  extended  to  1000  years  ;  of  this  Varro  is 
 so  ignorant  that,  though  known  to  all  from  the 
 sacred  writings,  he  would  argue  that  the  1000 
 years  of  Moses  were,  according  to  the  Egyptian 
 mode  of  calculation,  only  1000  months  !' 
 
 That  the  ancients  computed  time  differently  we 
 learn  from  Pliny  {Hist.  Nat.  vii.),  and  also  from 
 Scaliger  {De  Emend.  Temportitn,  i. )  ;  still  this 
 does  not  alter  the  case  as  above  stated  (see  Heideg- 
 gerus,  De  Anno  Patriarchaj-uni). 
 
 But  it  is  asked,  if  Moses  meant  solar  years,  how 
 came  it  to  pass  that  the  patriarchs  did  not  begin  to 
 beget  children  at  an  earlier  period  than  they  are 
 reported  to  have  done?  Seth  was  105  years  old, 
 on  the  lowest  calculation,  when  he  begat  Enos  ; 
 and  Methuselah  187  when  Lamech  was  born  !  St. 
 Augustine  (i.  15)  explains  this  difficulty  in  a  two- 
 fold manner,  by  supposing — 
 
 1.  Either  that  the  age  of  puberty  was  later  in 
 proportion  as  the  lives  of  the  antediluvians  were 
 longer  than  ours  ;  or 
 
 2.  That  Moses  does  not  record  the  first-born 
 sons  but  as  the  order  of  the  genealogy  required, 
 his  object  being  to  trace  the  succession  from  Adam, 
 through  Seth,  to  Abraham.  The  learned  Heideg- 
 gerus  {De  ALtate  Ante-Dihiv)  thus  confiiTns  this 
 latter  view  :  '  Consilium  fuit  Mosi,  uti  cuilibet  con- 
 fectu  proclive  est.  Noas  et  Abrahami  genealogiam 
 pertexere,  tum  quia  illi  duo  inter  cseteros  fide  et 
 pietate  eminebant  et  uterque  divinitus  insigni  do- 
 natus  est  prarogativa.' 
 
 Whilst  the  Jews  have  never  questioned  the 
 longevity  assigned  by  Moses  to  the  patriarchs, 
 they  have  yet  disputed,  in  many  instances,  as  to 
 whether  it  was  common  to  all  men  who  lived  up 
 to  the  period  when  human  life  was  contracted. 
 Maimonides  {More  Nevochim,  ii.  47)  says — 
 
 '  Longaevitatem  hanc  non  fuisse  nisi  quorundam 
 singularium  commemoratorum  in  lege ;  reliquos 
 illorum  seculorum  annos  attigisse  non  plures,  quam 
 hodie  adhuc  communiter  fieri  solet.' 
 
 With  this  opinion  Abarbanel,  on  Gen.  v.,  agrees  ; 
 Nachmanides,  however,  rejects  it,  and  shews  that 
 the  life  of  the  descendants  of  Cain  must  have  been 
 quite  as  long  as  that  of  the  Sethites,  though  not  no- 
 ticed by  Moses  ;  for  only  seven  individuals  of  the 
 former  filled  up  the  space  which  intervened  be- 
 tween the  death  of  Abel  and  the  Flood,  whereas 
 ten  of  the  latter  are  enumerated.  We  have  reason 
 then  to  conclude,  that  longevity  was  not  confined 
 to  any  peculiar  tribe  of  the  ante  or  post-diluvian 
 fathers,  but  was  vouchsafed,  in  general,  to  all. 
 Irenseus  {Adversus  Hares,  v.)  informs  us  that  some 
 supposed  that  the  fact  of  its  being  recorded  that  no 
 one  of  the  antediluvians  named  attained  the  age 
 of  1000  years,  was  the  fulfilment  of  the  declaration 
 (Gen.  iii. ),   '  in  the  day  thou  eatest  thereof  thou 
 
 shalt  surely  die  ;'  grounding  the  opinion,  or  rather 
 conceit,  upon  Ps.  xc.  4,  namely,  that  God's  day  is 
 1000  years. 
 
 As  to  the  probable  reasons  why  God  so  pro- 
 longed the  life  of  man  in  the  earlier  ages  of  the 
 world,  and  as  to  the  subordinate  means  by  which 
 this  might  have  been  accomplished,  Josephus  says 
 {Antiq.  i.  3)  :  '  For  those  ancients  were  beloved 
 of  God,  and  lately  made  by  God  himself ;  and  be- 
 cause their  food  was  then  fitter  for  the  prolonga- 
 tion of  life,  they  might  well  live  so  great  a  number 
 of  years  :  and  because  God  afforded  them  a  longer 
 time  of  life  on  account  of  their  virtue  and  the  good 
 use  they  made  of  it  in  astronomical  and  geometri- 
 cal discoveries,  which  would  not  have  afforded  the 
 time  for  foretelling  the  periods  of  the  stars  unless 
 they  had  lived  600  years  ;  for  the  great  year  is 
 completed  in  that  interval.'  To  this  he  adds  the 
 testimony  of  many  celebrated  profane  historians, 
 who  affirm  that  the  ancients  lived  1000  years. 
 
 In  the  above  passage  Josephus  enumerates  four 
 causes  of  the  longevity  of  the  earlier  patriarchs. 
 As  to  the  first,  viz.,  their  being  dearer  to  God  than 
 other  men,  it  is  plain  that  it  cannot  be  maintained, 
 for  the  profligate  descendants  of  Cain  were  equally 
 long-lived,  as  mentioned  above,  with  others.  Neither 
 can  we  agree  in  the  second  reason  he  assigns,  be- 
 cause we  find  that  Noah  and  others,  though  born 
 so  long  subsequently  to  the  creation  of  Adam,  yet 
 lived  to  as  great  an  age,  some  of  them  to  a  greater 
 age,  than  he  did.  If,  again,  it  were  right  to  attri- 
 bute longevity  to  the  superior  quality  of  the  food 
 of  the  antediluvians,  then  the  seasons,  on  which 
 this  depends,  must  about  Moses's  time — for  it  was 
 the7i  that  the  term  of  human  existence  was  reduced 
 to  its  present  standard — have  assumed  a  fixed  cha- 
 racter. But  no  change  at  that  time  took  place  in 
 the  revolution  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  by  which  the 
 seasons  of  heat,  cold,  etc.,  are  regulated  ;  hence 
 we  must  not  assume  that  it  was  the  nature  of  the 
 fruits  they  ate  which  caused  longevity.  How  far 
 the  antediluvians  had  advanced  in  scientific  re- 
 search generally,  and  in  astronomical  discovery 
 particularly,  we  are  not  informed ;  nor  can  we 
 place  any  dependence  upon  what  Josephus  says 
 about  the  two  inscribed  pillars  which  remained 
 from  the  old  world  (see  Antiq.  i.  2.  3).  We  are 
 not,  therefore,  able  to  determine,  with  any  confi- 
 dence, that  God  permitted  the  earlier  generations 
 of  man  to  live  so  long,  in  order  that  they  might 
 arrive  at  a  high  degree  of  mental  excellence.  From 
 the  bf-ief  notices  which  the  Scriptures  afford  of  the 
 character  and  habits  of  the  antediluvians,  we 
 should  rather  infer  that  they  had  not  advanced 
 very  far  in  discoveries  in  natural  and  experimental 
 philosophy  (see  Antediluvians).  We  must 
 suppose  that  they  did  not  reduce  their  language  to 
 alphabetical  order,  nor  was  it  necessary  to  do  so 
 at  a  time  when  human  life  was  so  prolonged,  that 
 the  tradition  of  the  creation  passed  through  only 
 two  hands  to  Noah.  It  would  seem  that  the  book 
 ascribed  to  Enoch  is  a  work  of  postdiluvian  origin 
 (see  Jurieu,  Crit.  Hist.,  i.  41).  Possibly,  a  want  of 
 mental  employment,  together  with  the  labour  they 
 endured  ere  they  were  able  to  extract  from  the 
 earth  the  necessaries  of  life,  might  have  been  some 
 of  the  proximate  causes  of  that  degeneracy  which 
 led  God  in  judgment  to  destroy  the  old  world.  II 
 the  antediluvians  began  to  bear  children  at  the 
 age  on  an  average  of  100,  and  if  they  ceased  to  do 
 so  at  600  years  (see  Shuckford's  Connect.,  i.  36), 
 
LONGEVITY 
 
 8« 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 the  worlil  might  then  have  been  far  more  densely 
 populated  than  it  is  now.  Supposing,  moreover, 
 that  the  earth  was  no  more  productive  antecedently 
 than  it  was  subsequently  to  tl>e  flood  ;  and  that  the 
 antediluvian  fathers  were  ignorant  of  those  me- 
 chanical arts  which  so  much  abridge  human  labour 
 now,  we  can  easily  understand  how  difficult  they 
 must  have  found  it  to  secure  for  themselves  the 
 common  necessaries  of  life,  and  this  the  more  so 
 if  animal  food  was  not  allowed  them.  The  pro- 
 longed life,  then,  of  the  generations  before  the 
 flood,  would  seem  to  have  -been  rather  an  evil 
 than  a  blessing,  leading  as  it  did  to  the  too  rapid 
 peopling  of  the  earth.  We  can  readily  conceive 
 how  this  might  conduce  to  that  awful  state  of 
 things  expressed  in  the  words,  '  And  the  whole 
 earth  was  filled  with  violence.'  In  the  absence  of 
 any  well-regulated  system  of  government,  we  can 
 imagine  what  evils  must  have  arisen  :  the  unprin- 
 cipled would  oppress  the  weak  ;  the  crafty  would 
 outwit  the  unsuspecting  ;  and,  not  having  the  fear 
 of  God  before  their  eyes,  destruction  and  misery 
 would  be  in  their  ways.  vStill  we  must  admire  the 
 providence  of  God  in  the  longevity  of  man  imme- 
 diately after  the  creation  and  the  flood.  After  the 
 creation,  when  the  world  was  to  be  peopled  by 
 one  man  and  one  woman,  the  age  of  the  greatest 
 part  of  those  on  record  was  900  and  upwards. 
 But  after  the  flood,  when  there  were  three  couples 
 to  re-people  the  earth,  none  of  the  patriarchs  ex- 
 cept Shem  reached  the  age  of  500 ;  and  only  the 
 three  first  of  his  line,  viz.,  Arphaxad,  Selah,  and 
 Eber,  came  near  that  age,  which  was  in  the  first 
 century  after  the  flood.  In  the  second  century  we 
 do  not  find  that  any  attained  the  age  of  240  ;  and  in 
 the  third  century  (about  the  latter  end  of  which  Abra- 
 ham was  born)  none  except  Terah  arrived  at  200  ; 
 by  which  time  the  world  was  so  well  peopled,  that 
 they  had  built  cities,  and  were  formed  into  distinct 
 nations  under  their  respective  kings  (see  Gen.  xv.  ; 
 see  also  Usher  and  Petavius  on  the  increase  of 
 mankind  in  the  three  first  centuries  after  the  flood). 
 That  the  common  age  of  man  has  been  the 
 same  in  all  times  since  the  world  was  peopled,  is 
 manifest  from  profane  as  well  as  sacred  history. 
 Plato  lived  to  the  age  of  81,  and  was  accounted 
 an  old  man  ;  and  those  whom  Pliny  reckons  up 
 (vii.  48)  as  rare  examples  of  long  life,  may,  for  the 
 most  part,  be  equalled  in  modern  times.  We  can- 
 not, then,  but  see  the  hand  of  God  in  the  propor- 
 tion that  there  is  between  births  and  deaths  ;  for 
 by  this  means  the  population  of  the  world  is  kept 
 up.  If  the  fixed  standard  of  human  life  were  that 
 of  Methuselah's  age,  or  even  that  of  Abraham's, 
 the  world  would  soon  be  overstocked  ;  or  if  the 
 age  of  man  were  limited  to  that  of  divers  other 
 animals — to  10,  20,  or  30  years  only — the  decay  of 
 mankind  would  then  be  too  fast.  But  on  the  pre- 
 sent scale  the  balance  is  nearly  even,  and  life  and 
 death  keep  an  equal  pace  !  In  thus  maintaining 
 throughout  all  ages  and  places  these  proportions  of 
 mankind  and  all  other  creatures,  God  declares  him- 
 self to  be  indeed  the  ruler  of  the  world.  We  may, 
 then,  conclude  in  the  language  of  the  Psalmist 
 (Ps.  civ.  29,  30),  '  Thou  hidest  thy  face,  all  crea- 
 tures are  troubled  ;  thou  takest  away  their  breath, 
 they  die  and  return  to  their  dust.  Thou  sendest 
 forth  thy  spirit,  they  are  created  ;  and  thou  re- 
 newest  the  face  of  the  earth.' — ^J.  W.  D. 
 
 LOOKING-GLASSES.     [Mirrors.] 
 
 LORD,  a  Saxon  word  signifying  ruler  or  gover 
 nor.  In  its  original  form  it  is  Jilaford  (hlafopb), 
 which,  by  dropping  the  aspiration,  became  laford, 
 and  afterwards,  by  contraction,  lord.  In  the  autho- 
 rised translation  of  the  Scriptures  it  is  used,  with- 
 out much  discrimination,  for  all  the  names  applied 
 to  God — which  cannot  be  helped,  as  our  language 
 does  not  afibrd  the  same  number  of  distinguishing 
 titles  as  the  Hebrew.  When,  however,  the  word 
 represents  the  dread  name  of  Jehovah  it  is  printed 
 in  small  capitals,  Lord,  and  is  by  this  contrivance 
 made  a  distinguishing  term.  Having  already  ex- 
 plained the  different  names  of  God  which  the 
 term  Lord  is  made  to  represent  [Adonai  ;  God  ; 
 Jehovah],  no  further  statement  on  the  subject  is 
 here  necessaiy.  It  also,  however,  represents  the 
 Greek  Ki'pios,  which,  indeed,  is  used  in  much  the 
 same  way  and  in  the  same  sense  as  Lord.  It  is 
 from  KOpos,  authority,  and  signifies  '  master'  or 
 '  possessor.'  In  the  Septuagint  this,  like  Lord  in 
 our  version,  is  invariably  used  for  '  Jehovah '  and 
 '  Adonai;'  while  Geos,  like  GoD  in  our  transla- 
 tion, is  generally  reserved  to  represent  the  Hebrew 
 '  Elohim.'  Ki^ptof  in  the  Greek  Testament,  and 
 Lord  in  the  authorised  version  of  it,  are  used  much 
 in  the  same  manner  as  in  the  Septuagint  ;  and  so 
 also  is  the  corresponding  title,  Dominus,  in  the  Latin 
 versions.  As  the  Hebrew  name  Jehovah  is  one 
 never  used  with  reference  to  any  but  the  Almighty, 
 it  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  Septuagint,  imitated 
 by  our  own  and  other  versions,  has  represented  it 
 by  a  word  which  is  also  used  for  the  Hebrew 
 '  Adonai'  when  applied  to  angels  (Gen.  xix.  2  ; 
 Dan.  X.  16,  17);  for  Adoiiim  and  Adoti  when 
 used  of  men  in  authority  (Gen.  xlii.  30,  33  ;  Is. 
 xix.  4),  and  of  proprietors,  owners,  masters  (Gen. 
 xlv.  8).  In  the  N.  T.  Ki^pios,  representing 
 '  Adonai,'  and  both  represented  by  Lord,  the 
 last,  or  human  application  of  the  term,  is  fre- 
 quent. In  fact,  the  leading  idea  of  the  Hebrew, 
 the  Greek,  and  the  English  words,  is  that  of  an 
 owner  or  proprietor,  whether  God  or  man  ;  and 
 it  occurs  in  the  inferior  application  with  great  fre- 
 quency in  the  N.  T.  This  application  is  either 
 literal  or  complimentary  :  literal,  when  the  party 
 is  really  an  owner  or  master,  as  in  Matt.  x.  24  ; 
 XX.  8;  xxi.  40;  Acts  xvi.  16,  19;  Gal.  iv.  i, 
 or  as  having  absolute  authority  over  another  (Matt, 
 ix.  38  ;  Luke  x.  2),  or  as  being  a  supreme  lord  or 
 sovereign  (Acts  xxv.  26);  a.ndco/nplitnentary,  when 
 used  as  a  title  of  address  to  superiors,  like  the 
 English  Master,  Sir,  French  Sieur,  German  Herr, 
 as  in  Matt.  xiii.  27  ;  xxi.  30 ;  Mark  vii.  28 ;  Luke 
 ix.  54. 
 
 It  cannot  but  be  deemed  desirable  that,  instead 
 of  the  extensive  use  of  the  word  Lord  which  we 
 have  described,  discriminating  terms  should  be 
 adopted  in  translations.  Apart  from  the  Jewish 
 j  superstitions  which  influenced  the  Seventy  in  their 
 '  translation,  there  can  be  no  good  reason  why  the 
 name  Jehovah  should  not  be  retained  wherever 
 it  occurs  in  the  Hebrew.  Then  Lord  might  re- 
 present Adotiai ;  or  Sir,  or  Master,  might  be  used 
 when  applied  to  creatures ;  and  GoD  would  pro- 
 perly represent  Elohim. — ^J.  K. 
 
 LORD'S  DAY.  [CHRisTiAi>i  Sabbath,  vol.  iii. 
 p.  716;  Jesus  Christ,  vol.  ii.  pp.  555,  581; 
 Synagogue,  vol.  iii.  pp.  904,  909.] 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER,  The  {KvpiaKov  Mvvov.  i 
 
LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 846 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 Cor.  xi.  20).  By  the  phrase  the  Lord's  Supper, 
 most  Protestant  commentators  agree  that  St.  Paul 
 designated  the  rehgious  service  by  which  the  apos- 
 toHc  cliurches  commemorated  the  death  of  the 
 Lord  Jesus.  Whatever  may  be  the  correct  inter- 
 pretation of  the  whole  verse,  '  When  ye  come 
 together  to  the  same  place,  it  is  not  to  eat  the 
 Lord's  Supper,' — whether  it  be  that  the  Corin- 
 thians did  not  intend  'to  eat  the  Lord's  Supper,' 
 or  that  it  was  not  right  for  them  '  to  eat  the  Lord's 
 Supper'  in  their  disorderly  meetings,  or  that  their 
 perversion  of  the  sacred  service  ought  not  to  be 
 called  the  eating  of  'the  Lord's  Supper;' — the 
 scope  and  connection  of  the  passage  shew  that  the 
 apostle  could  have  referred  to  nothing  else  than 
 the  sacramental  commemoration  of  the  death  of 
 Jesus.  Were  there  any  doubt  respecting  his 
 meaning,  the  account  of  the  institution  of  the 
 service  (ver.  23-26),  evidently  given  as  a  directory 
 for  its  continued  observance,  would  be  sufficient  to 
 satisfy  any  unprejudiced  reader. 
 
 Catholic  commentators,  however,  deny  that  the 
 apostle  so  designates  the  Eucharistic  service.  '  The 
 Lord's  Supper'  is  so  inappropriate  a  name  for  '  the 
 offering  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  a  propi- 
 tiatoiy  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the  living  and  the 
 dead,'  that  we  do  not  wonder  Catholics  refuse  to 
 acknowledge  it.  The  person  for  whose  sins  the 
 sacrifice  is  offered  on  the  altar  of  the  church  need 
 not  partake  of  it.  He  may  be  absent ;  he  may  be 
 dead  ;  he  may  have  been  in  purgatoiy  for  ages, 
 like  the  founders  of  many  charities  and  chantries, 
 for  whose  souls  the  mass  has  been  said  at  regular 
 intervals  for  centuries.  To  the  absent  or  dead  it 
 cannot  be  '  a  supper. '  Even  if  the  person  for  whom 
 the  sacrifice  is  offered  be  living  and  present,  the 
 consecrated  bread  is  put  in  his  mouth,  as  a  sign 
 that  the  sacrifice  is  offered  for  him.  Nor,  unless 
 he  be  a  priest,  can  he  communicate  in  both  parts 
 of  the  Eucharist. 
 
 Catholics,  therefore,  say  that  the  apostle,  in 
 speaking  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  intended  to  desig- 
 nate the  charity  feast  of  the  primitive  churches, 
 and  that  the  subsequent  reference  to  the  institution 
 of  the  Eucharist  may  be  explained  by  the  ancient 
 custom  of  observing  the  charity  feast  on  the  occa- 
 sion of  meeting  to  celebrate  the  Eucharist.  In  the 
 Rheims  version  of  the  N.  T.,  it  is  said  (note  to  i 
 Cor.  xi.  20),  '  The  LorcVs  Supper.  So  the  apostle 
 calls  the  cliarity  feasts  observed  by  the  primitive 
 Christians,  and  reprehends  the  abuses  of  the 
 Corinthians  on  these  occasions,  which  were  the 
 more  criminal  because  these  feasts  were  accom- 
 panied with  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharistic 
 sacrifice  and  sacrament.'     [Agape,  vol.  i.  p.  79.] 
 
 As  we  have  distinct  accounts  of  the  institution 
 of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  first  three  gospels, 
 and  also  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
 we  may  take  them  for  our  guide  in  considering  the 
 nature  of  the  service,  and  the  several  controversies 
 to  which  it  has  given  rise.    Qesus  Christ,  p.  ■572.1 
 
 In  Matthew  xxvi.  26-28  we  read,  '  And  as  they 
 were  eating,  Jesus  having  taken  the  bread  and 
 blessed,  brake,  and  gave  to  his  disciples,  and  said, 
 Take,  eat,  this  is  my  body.  And  having  taken  the 
 cup  and  given  thanks,  he  gave  to  them,  saying,  Drink 
 ye  all  of  it,  for  this  is  my  blood,  that  of  the  new 
 covenant,  which  is  shed  for  many,  for  the  remis- 
 sion of  sins.'  In  Mark  xiv.  22-24,  the  words  are, 
 '  And  as  they  were  eating,  Jesus  having  taken 
 bread,  and  blessed,  brake,  and  gave  to  them,  and  1 
 
 said,  Take,  this  is  my  body.  And  having  taker 
 the  cup  and  given  thanks,  he  gave  to  them,  and 
 they  all  drank  of  it.  And  he  said  to  them.  This 
 is  my  blood,  that  of  the  new  covenant,  which  is 
 shed  for  many.'  In  Luke  xxii.  19,  20,  we  read, 
 '  And  having  taken  bread  and  given  thanks,  he 
 brake,  and  gave  to  them,  saying,  This  is  my  body, 
 which  is  given  for  you,  do  this  for  the  remem- 
 brance of  me.  In  like  manner  the  cup,  after  the 
 supper,  saying,  This  cup  is  the  new  covenant  in 
 my  blood  :  this  do,  as  often  as  ye  drink  it,  for  the 
 remembrance  of  me.'  The  words  of  Paul,  which, 
 as  may  be  expected  from  his  intimate  connection 
 with  Luke,  correspond  more  nearly  with  those  of 
 that  evangelist  than  with  those  of  either  of  the 
 other  two,  are  (l  Cor.  xi.  23-25),  '  For  I  received 
 from  the  Lord  that  which  I  delivered  to  you,  that 
 the  Lord  Jesus,  in  the  night  in  which  he  was  be- 
 trayed, took  bread,  and  having  given  thanks,  he 
 brake,  and  said.  This  is  my  body  which  is' 
 [broken,  uncertain  reading]  '  for  you.  This  do  for 
 the  remembrance  of  me.  In  like  manner  also  the 
 cup,  after  the  supper,  saying.  This  cup  is  the  new 
 covenant  in  my  blood :  this  do,  as  often  as  ye 
 drink  it,  for  the  remembrance  of  me.' 
 
 We  have  given  a  bald  and  literal  translation  of 
 these  several  accounts,  that  the  reader  unaccus- 
 tomed to  consult  the  original  text  may  easily 
 observe  wherein  they  agree,  and  how  far  they 
 differ. 
 
 With  these  Scriptural  statements  we  may  com- 
 pare the  account  which  Justin  Martyr  gives  of  the 
 manner  in  which  the  Lord's  Supper  was  celebrated 
 in  the  earlier  part  of  the  2d  century.  In  his  first 
 Apology  he  says,  '  After  we  have  concluded  the 
 prayers,  we  salute  one  another  with  a  kiss.  After 
 this,  bread  and  a  cup  of  wine  and  water  are 
 brought  to  the  president,  who  having  taken  them, 
 offers  with  a  loud  voice  praise  and  glory  to  the 
 Father  of  all,  through  the  name  of  his  Son  and 
 Holy  Spirit,  and  offers  thanksgiving  for  the  gifts 
 received  from  him.  When  this  prayer  and  thanks- 
 giving are  ended,  all  the  people  express  theii 
 assent  by  saying  Amen.  Those  who  are  called 
 deacons  distribute  this  bread  and  wine,  which  is 
 Eucharistic,  to  those  who  are  present,  and  cany  it 
 away  to  those  who  are  absent.  Of  this  Eucharistic 
 food  none  are  allowed  to  partake  who  do  not  be- 
 lieve our  teaching  to  be  true,  and  have  not  been 
 washed  with  the  laver  for  the  remission  of  sins, 
 and  do  not  live  as  Christ  has  commanded  us.  For 
 we  do  not  receive  it  as  common  bread  and  common 
 drink  ;  but  in  what  manner  Jesus  Christ,  our 
 Saviour,  became  incarnate  by  the  word  of  God, 
 and  had  flesh  and  blood  for  our  salvation,  in  that 
 manner  also  we  have  been  taught  that  the  Eucha- 
 ristic food,  through  the  prayer  of  the  Word  by 
 which  our  flesh  and  blood  are  nourished  according 
 to  a  transmutation,  is  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the 
 incarnate  Jesus.  For  the  apostles,  in  the  merrro- 
 rials  composed  by  them,  which  are  called  Gospels, 
 have  thus  delivered,  that  Jesus,  having  taken 
 bread  and  given  thanks,  said.  Do  this  for  the 
 remembrance  of  me.  And  in  the  same  manner 
 having  taken  the  cup  and  given  thanks,  said. 
 This  is  my  blood,  and  distributed  it  to  them 
 only.'  In  another  passage  of  the  same  Apo- 
 logy, Justin  says  : — '  On  the  day  called  Sunday, 
 all  who  live  in  the  same  city  or  country  as- 
 semble in  one  place,  where  the  memorials  of 
 the  apostles  or  writings  of  the  prophets  are  read, 
 
LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 847 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 and  when  the  reader  has  finished  the  presi- 
 dent makes  a  discourse,  in  which  he  admonishes 
 and  exhorts  to  the  practice  of  all  good  things,  at 
 the  conclusion  of  which  all  rise  and  pray,  and  the 
 bread  and  wine  and  water  are  brought,  and  the 
 president  solemnly  offers  prayers  and  thanksgivings, 
 and  the  people  respond  Amen.  Then  distribution 
 is  made  to  eveiy  one  of  that  over  which  thanks 
 have  been  offered,  and  it  is  sent  to  the  absent  by 
 the  deacons.  And  the  rich  contribute  according 
 as  they  are  willing,  and  whatever  is  collected  is  in- 
 trusted to  the  president,  and  from  it  he  relieves  the 
 widows  and  orphans,  and  those  who  suffer  from 
 sickness  or  other  causes,  as  well  as  those  who  are 
 in  bonds,  and  strangers,  and,  indeed,  all  who  are 
 in  need  of  assistance.' 
 
 We  have  now  briefly  to  notice  the  several  parti- 
 culars which  are  mentioned  in  these  different 
 accounts,  as,  unhappily,  almost  every  one  of  them 
 has  given  rise  to  some  dissension  and  controversy 
 which  it  is  our  purpose  to  indicate  rather  than  to 
 determine.     [Passover,  vol.  iii.  p.  425.] 
 
 *  As  they  were  eating '  the  passover,  '  yesics  took 
 bread.^  That  bread  was  undoubtedly  unleavened, 
 for  no  other  could  have  been  obtained  at  the  pass- 
 over.  From  this  circumstance  has  arisen  a  long 
 and  apparently  fruitless  controversy,  dpTo/xaxl-a,  the 
 bread-fight,  whether  the  bread  used  at  the  Sacra- 
 ment ought  to  be  leavened  or  unleavened?  The 
 only  Scriptural  argument  that  can  be  adduced  on 
 the  one  side  is,  '  Christ  made  use  of  unleavened 
 bread ;'  and  on  the  other,  '  He  could  not  have  ob- 
 tained leavened  bread  even  if  he  preferred  it.' 
 Furnished  with  such  a  store  of  argument,  which, 
 though  small,  seems — like  the  widow's  cruise  of  oil — 
 inexhaustible,  the  Latin  church  and  the  Greek,  the 
 Lutherans  and  the  Calvinists,  have  taken  opposite 
 sides,  and  continued  a  controversy  of  nine  hundred 
 years'  standing. 
 
 ^Having  blessed,^  says  Mark.  ^  Having  given 
 thanks,^  say  Luke  and  Paul.  In  Matthew  the 
 reading  is  doubtful.  That  the  same  act  is  denoted 
 by  the  '  having  blessed  '  (ei^Xcry^tras)  of  Mark,  and 
 the  '  having  given  thanks  '  (ivx^-pi-ffr-i-iaa^^  of  Luke 
 and  Paul,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt.  In 
 Mark's  account  of  the  miracle  of  the  loaves  and 
 fishes  the  same  words  are  used,  but  in  reversed 
 order.  Jesus  'gave  thanks'  (e!}xapt(Tn}(ras )  on 
 breaking  the  seven  loaves,  and  'blessed'  {evXo-yrjaas) 
 on  distributing  the  small  fishes  (Mark  viii.  6,  7). 
 Here  surely  the  same  act  is  denoted  by  the  thanks- 
 giving and  the  blessing.  This  particular  would  be 
 scarcely  worthy  of  notice  were  it  not  for  the  frequency 
 with  which  we  hear  of  Jesus  blessing  the  bread. 
 But  Jesus  blessed  God,  not  the  bread  ;  that  is,  gave 
 thanks  to  God  for  it.  To  bless  {evKoyelv)  has  for 
 its  object  persons,  not  things.  To  bless  may  de- 
 note to  wish  well  to  a  person,  as  when  we  bless 
 them  that  curse  us ;  or  to  give  a  blessing  to  a  per- 
 son, as  when  God  blesses  a  man ;  or  to  ascribe 
 thanks  and  praise  to  a  person,  as  when  we  bless 
 the  Lord.  The  cup  which  we  bless,  is  a  Scriptural 
 phrase  ;  but,  explained  by  other  passages,  it  must 
 denote  the  cup  for  which  we  bless  God.  The  sacra- 
 mental elements  were  no  more  blessed  or  conse- 
 crated than  were  the  loaves  and  fishes  with  which 
 Jesus  fed  the  multitude  in  the  desert.  The  blessing 
 for,  not  of,  the  bread  of  the  passover,  according  to  the 
 Rabbinical  writers,  was,  '  Blessed  be  thou,  O  Lord 
 God,  who  hast  commanded  us  concerning  the  eat- 
 ing of  the  unleavened  bread,'     In  accordance  with 
 
 this  mode  of  blessing  is  the  statement  of  Justin 
 Martyr,  who  says,  that  before  the  distribution  of 
 the  bread,  the  president  offered  praise  and  thanks- 
 giving, and  the  people  responded  Amen.  He 
 makes  no  reference  to  any  other  blessing  or  conse- 
 cration of  the  elements. 
 
 'Jesus  brake  the  breads  The  breaking  of  the 
 bread  is  distinctly  mentioned  in  every  one  of  the 
 Scriptural  accounts,  and  was  so  general  in  the 
 apostolic  times  as  to  suggest  one  of  the  names  by 
 which  the  Lord's  Supper  was  commonly  designated, 
 '  the  breaking  of  bread'  (Acts  ii.  42  ;  xx.  7).  The 
 apostle  seems  to  have  attributed  some  import- 
 ance to  the  practice  when  he  said,  '  The  bread 
 which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body 
 of  Christ  V  a  question  which  can  scarcely  be  asked 
 by  those  who  observe  the  Lord's  Supper  without 
 breaking  the  bread.  Although  the  practice  is  not 
 mentioned  by  Justin,  yet  the  fractus  panis  of 
 Irenaeus  and  the  Latin  fathers,  shews  that  it  was 
 preserved  in  the  Western  churches  for  some  three 
 or  four  centuries.  By  the  use  of  consecrated  wafers, 
 placed  upon  the  tongue  of  the  communicant,  in  the 
 Romish  church,  and  by  similar  expedients  employed 
 in  other  churches,  the  broken  bread  as  a  symbol  of 
 the  broken  body  of  our  Lord  has  been  long  for- 
 gotten in  almost  all  the  churches  of  Christendom. 
 Although  in  the  Lutheran  church  the  consecrated 
 bread  is  put  into  the  mouths  of  the  communicants, 
 the  ancient  practice  has  been  restored  in  the  Church 
 of  England,  and  generally  in  the  Reformed  Churches 
 of  Europe.  The  bread  is  usually  broken  by  the 
 officiating  minister  ;  but  in  some  churches  the  com- 
 municants severally  break  from  the  bread  small 
 portions  for  themselves. 
 
 '■  And  gave  it  to  tJietn.''  This  is  said  by  each  of 
 the  three  Evangelists.  When  the  communicants 
 became  numerous,  as  in  the  time  of  Justin,  '  those 
 called  deacons  distributed  the  eucharistic  bread  and 
 wine,  and  then  they  carried  it  to  the  absent.'  It 
 was  not  the  ancient  custom  for  the  communicants 
 to  approach  the  table  and  receive  the  elements  from 
 the  officiating  minister. 
 
 According  to  Matthew,  Jesus  said,  '  Take,  eat, 
 this  is  my  body  ;'  according  to  Mark,  '  Take,  this  is 
 7Tiy  body''  (<f>dyeTe  is  wanting  in  the  best  MSS. )  ; 
 according  to  Luke,  '  This  is  my  body  which  is  given 
 for  you  ;^  according  to  St.  Paul,  '  This  is  my  body 
 which  is  broken  '  (or  given  ;  a  various  reading)  ^for 
 yon  :  this  do  for  the  reniembrance  of  me. '  It  is 
 evident  that  the  exact  sayings  of  our  Lord  are  not 
 preserved  ;  though  as  the  words  '  This  is  my  body,' 
 to  which  words  so  awfully  mysterious  a  power  is 
 attributed  by  the  advocates  of  transubstantiation, 
 are  contained  in  every  one  of  the  Scriptural  ac- 
 counts, we  may  conclude  that  they  were  certainly 
 spoken  by  our  Lord.  This  meaning  has  been  the 
 subject  of  many  angry  and  apparently  interminable 
 controversies. 
 
 Romanists  say  that  they  teach  and  prove  the 
 doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  Cardinal  Wiseman, 
 in  his  Lectures  on  the  Eucharist  (lect.  v.),  contends 
 that  if  our  Lord  had  intended  to  teach  that  the 
 bread  represented  his  body,  he  would  have  said 
 'This  bread  is  my  body:'  just  as  it  is  said,  '  The 
 seven  good  kine  are  seven  years,'  and  'The  seven 
 horns  are  seven  kings.'  But  Jesus  said,  'This'  (not 
 this  bread,  but  '■this,^  whatever  it  be)  'is  my  body.' 
 He  intentionally  avoided  calling  it  bread,  because 
 when  he  spake  it  was  not  bread,  but  his  own  body. 
 '  This^  says  the  Cardinal,  '  is  nothmg,  and  it  repre- 
 
LORD'S  SUPI'FR 
 
 848 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 sents  nothing,  it  means  nothing  until  it  is  identified 
 &.t  the  close  of  the  sentence  with  the  substance 
 named.'  The  Cardinal  should  have  explained  how 
 it  was  that,  if  our  Lord  carefully  avoided  calling 
 that  substance  bread  which  was  not  bread,  St. 
 Paul  did  not  follow  his  example  when  he  said,  '  As 
 often  as  ye  eat  this  bi-ead ;^  and  again,  '  Whosoever 
 shall  eat  this  bread  of  the  Lord  unworthily ;'  words 
 which,  if  literally  interpreted,  are,  according  to  the 
 Cardinal's  own  argument,  subversive  of  the  doc- 
 trine of  transubstantiation.  Considering,  moreover, 
 how  great  respect  Romanists  pay  to  the  au- 
 thority of  the  fathers,  he  might  have  offered  some 
 sort  of  explanation  of  the  language  of  the  Latin 
 fathers,  as  of  Tertullian,  who  says,  '  Christ  called 
 the  bi-ead  his  body  '  {Adv.  Jud.)  ;  of  Cyprian,  who 
 says,  '  The  Lord  called  the  bread,  which  is  consti- 
 tuted of  many  grains,  his  body'  {Ep.  ad  Mag. 
 Ixix.);  and  of  Augustine,  who  uses  the  same  lan- 
 guage, '  The  Lord  calls  the  bread  his  body. '  These 
 venerable  men  never  thought  of  the  reason  which 
 the  Cardinal  has  discovered  for  the  words  of  our 
 Lord,  '  This'  (not  this  bread)  '  is  my  body.' 
 
 Christ's  words,  literally  interpreted,  seem  less 
 appropriate  to  the  Romish  doctrine  of  transub- 
 stantiation than  to  some  other  forms  in  which  the 
 doctrine  of  the  real  presence  has  been  propounded. 
 Dr.  Wiseman  says,  in  his  Lectures  on  the  Catholic 
 Church  (lect.  xiv.,  p.  136) — '  The  blessed  Eu- 
 charist, which  was  originally  bread  and  wine,  is 
 by  the  consecration  changed  into  the  substance  of 
 the  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  together  with  his 
 soul  and  divinity,  in  other  words,  his  complete  and 
 entire  person.'  See  also  the  notes  to  the  Rheinis 
 Testament  on  John  vi.  54,  and  the  Acts  of  the 
 Council  of  Trent,  Sess.  xiii.,  c.  4.  The  doctrine 
 of  the  Catholic  Church  is,  that  the  priest,  on  pro- 
 nouncing with  a  good  intention  the  words  '  Hoc 
 est  corpus  7neum,^  transubstantiates  the  bread  not 
 only  into  the  body,  but  also  into  the  soul  and 
 divinity  of  Christ,  that  is,  into  his  whole  and  com- 
 plete person,  human  and  divine.  If  it  be  so,  why 
 did  our  blessed  Lord  call  that  substance  his  body 
 which  included  his  soul  and  divinity  ?  The  priest 
 who  can  change  bread  into  the  spiritual  and  divine 
 nature  of  Christ  has  certainly  marvellous  power; 
 but  the  authorities  by  which  the  Latin  Church  is 
 bound  for  ever,  distinctly,  and  in  express  language, 
 attribute  this  power  to  the  officiating  priest,  and 
 repudiate  in  the  strongest  terms  any  other  explana- 
 tion or  modification  of  the  doctrine.  However 
 Catholics  may  differ  on  almost  all  other  subjects — 
 as  on  the  authority  and  power  of  the  Pope,  the 
 immaculate  conception  of  the  Virgin,  worship  of 
 saints  and  angels,  the  doctrines  of  predestination 
 and  grace,  on  the  entire  transubstantiation  of  the 
 bread  into  the  whole  person,  human  and  divine, 
 of  Christ — there  can  be  no  difference  between 
 Dominicans  and  Franciscans,  Jansenists  and  Je- 
 suits, or  Cismontanists  and  Ultramontanists.  The 
 authority  of  the  Council  of  Trent  is  here  de- 
 cisive. 
 
 Our  purpose  is  not  controversy.  If  it  were,  we 
 might  propose  the  inquiry  how  and  when  the  great 
 and  mysterious  power  of  transubstantiation  left  the 
 original  Syriac  or  Greek  words  of  our  Lord  and 
 came  to  belong  to  the  Latin  words  '  Hoc  est 
 corpus  7neH7n  r  Whether  on  that  occasion  Jesus 
 spake  Syriac  or  Greek  is  an  inquiry  we  may  not  be 
 able  to  answer  ;  but  certainly  those  Latin  words 
 are  no  more  like  the  words  he  used  than  are  the 
 
 corresponding  words  of  the  French,  German,  01 
 English  language. 
 
 The  words  '  This  is  my  body '  have  been 
 thought  by  some  more  appropriate  to  the  Lutheran 
 doctrine  of  consubstantiation,  or  to  the  old  notion 
 of  impanition,  according  to  which  the  consecrated 
 bread  becomes  by  incorporation  a  new  body  for 
 the  Spirit  of  Christ,  or  to  the  undefined  form  of  a 
 real  presence,  which  is  held  by  some  Episcopalians, 
 who  renounce  transubstantiation  as  being,  in  the 
 words  of  the  twenty-ninth  article,  '  repugnant  to 
 the  plain  words  of  Scripture.' 
 
 The  reformed  churches  interpret  the  words  oi 
 our  Lord  as  figurative,  that  is,  just  as  the  Latin 
 fathers  interpreted  them.  They  say,  as  Tertullian, 
 Cyprian,  and  Augustine  said  long  before  them, 
 'The  Lord  called  the  bread  his  body.'  The 
 passover  was  a  commemorative  service  by  appro- 
 priate emblems ;  and  so  was  '  the  Lord's  Supper 
 instituted  in  connection  with,  or  immediately  after, 
 its  celebration.  As  the  paschal  lamb,  the  un- 
 leavened  bread,  the  bitter  herbs,  the  cups  of  wine, 
 were  significant  memorials,  so  is  '  the  cup  of  bless- 
 ing which  we  bless  the  communion  of  the  blood  of 
 Christ,'  and  the  bread  which  we  break  the  com- 
 munion of  the  body  of  Christ.'  According  to 
 this  interpretation  the  words  of  our  Lord  mean 
 '  This  represents  my  body  which  is  given  for 
 you. ' 
 
 In  the  extract  from  Justin  Martyr  a  sentence 
 occurs  of  considerable  importance,  if  theologians 
 could  agree  about  its  meaning,  in  enabling  us  to 
 ascertain  the  prevalent  opinion  of  Christians  in 
 the  second  century  respecting  the  change  which 
 was  supposed  to  be  wrought  in  the  bread  and  wine 
 of  the  Eucharist.  '  We  do  not  receive  these  as 
 common  bread  and  common  drink ;  but  in  what 
 manner  Jesus  Christ,  having  become  incarnate  by 
 the  Word  of  God,  had  flesh  and  blood  for  our 
 salvation,  in  that  manner  also  we  have  been 
 taught  that  the  Eucharistic  food,  by  the  prayer  of 
 the  word,  from  which  our  flesh  and  blood  are 
 nourished  by  transmutation  {Kara  fj.€Ta€o\7}v),  is  also 
 the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  incarnate  Jesus.'  Is 
 this  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  ?  Or  is  it 
 consubstantiation  ?  Or  is  it  impanition  ?  Or  is 
 it  highly  figurative  language  ?  Or  is  it  absolute 
 nonsense  ? 
 
 The  last  inquiry  is  that  of  the  late  Principal 
 Cunningham,  who  boldly  answers  it  in  the  affir- 
 mative, and  assures  us  that  '  if  we  could  call  up 
 its  author,  and  interrogate  him  on  the  subject,  he 
 would  be  utterly  unable  to  tell  us  what  he  meant 
 when  he  wrote  it '  ( Theology  of  the  Reformation, 
 p.  232).  As  we  cannot  call  him  before  us,  and 
 are  not  bold  enough  to  dismiss  him  in  quite  so 
 summary  a  manner,  we  must  be  content  to  let 
 every  party  make  what  it  can  of  his  somewhat 
 obscure  language. 
 
 As  he  speaks  of  a  transmutation,  Roman  Catho- 
 lics universally  claim  the  sanction  of  his  venerable 
 authority.  But  the  words,  by  a  transmutation  (/i-arct 
 /j.eTaSo\rjv),  refer  not  to  any  transmutation  of  the 
 bread  and  wine  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
 but  to  the  change  which  takes  place  by  the  assimi- 
 lation of  bread  and  wine  in  the  nourishment  of  our 
 bodies.  This  being  considered,  the  passage  does 
 not  appear  so  favourable  as  many  think  to  the 
 doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  It  should  also  be 
 observed,  that  Justin  calls  the  Eucharistic  elements 
 bread  and  wine,  when  he  distinguishes  them  from 
 
LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 849 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 coir!TYi<'>n  bread  and  wine  ;  but  Dr.  Wiseman  says, 
 that  to  call  the  elements  bread  and  wine  after  they 
 are  ccnsecmted  is  subversive  of  transubstantiation. 
 
 As  Justin  calls  the  Eucharistic  elements,  as  they 
 are  after  the  thanksgiving,  bread  and  wine,  and  also 
 the  flesh  and  blood  of  Jesus,  Lutheran  divines  have 
 very  confidently  claimed  his  testimony  as  being 
 decidedly  in  favour  of  consubstantiation. 
 
 Others,  with  some  plausibility,  have  maintained 
 that  Justin  is  to  be  understood  as  meaning  that  in 
 the  Eucharistic  service  there  is  a  repetition  of  the 
 incarnation  of  Christ  when  the  divine  nature  is  in- 
 corporated with  the  bread  and  wine,  which  thus 
 become  the  true  body  of  Christ,  though  not  the 
 same  body  as  that  which  was  crucified.  The 
 particles  of  Christ's  body  thus  becoming  by  assimi- 
 lation united  to  the  bodies  of  the  communicants, 
 are  the  germs  of  immortality  and  the  principles  of 
 their  resurrection  bodies.  This  form  of  the  doc- 
 trine of  the  real  presence,  apparently  held  by 
 several  of  the  Fathers,  has  been  called  impanition. 
 It,  or  something  very  like  it,  seems  to  have  been 
 held  by  Irenjeus,  who  says,  'As  bread  taken  from 
 the  earth  is,  on  the  invocation  of  God,  no  longer 
 common  bread  but  Eucharist,  consisting  of  two 
 substances,  the  earthly  and  the  heavenly  ;  so  our 
 bodies  partaking  of  the  Eucharist  are  no  longer 
 corruptible,  but  have  the  hope  of  the  everlasting 
 resurrection'  {Adv.  Hares.,  lib.  iv. ,  c.  34). 
 
 From  this  root  grew,  though  slowly,  the  doctrine 
 of  transubstantiation,  although  in  the  middle  ages 
 it  was  strenuously  opposed  by  some  of  the  greatest 
 theologians  of  Europe,  as  in  the  ninth  century  by 
 Raban  Maurus,  archbishop  of  IMentz,  and  Ber- 
 tram, abbot  of  Corbey;  in  the  tenth  century,  by 
 ..^ilfric  the  grammarian,  whose  letters  to  Wulf- 
 stan,  archbishop  of  York,  and  Wulfsin,  bishop  of 
 Sherbourn,  have  been  preserved  in  the  cathedral 
 libraries  of  Worcester  and  Exeter ;  and  in  the 
 eleventh  century  by  Berenger,  archdeacon  of  An- 
 gers. AH  controversy  was  for  ever  closed  on  this 
 subject  in  the  Romish  Church  by  the  decree  of  the 
 Council  of  Trent,  which  declares  that  'by  the 
 consecration  of  the  bread  and  wine  a  conversion  is 
 made  of  the  whole  substance  of  the  bread  into  the 
 substance  of  the  body  of  Christ  our  Lord,  and  of 
 the  whole  substance  of  the  wine  into  the  substance 
 of  his  blood'  (Sess.  xiii.,  c.  4). 
 
 '  This  do  for  the  remctnbrance  of  me.^ — These 
 words,  preserved  by  Luke  and  Paul,  teach  us  the 
 meaning  and  intention  of  the  service.  It  is  a 
 commemorative  observance,  the  authorised  com- 
 memoration of  the  death  of  Christ.  This  most 
 Christians  admit,  though  many  contend  that  it  is 
 also  something  more  than  a  commemoration. 
 
 Roman  Catholics  assert  that  in  the  sacrament  of 
 the  Eucharist  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 
 offered  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the 
 living  and  the  dead.  It  is  understood  that  they 
 are  offered  especially  for  the  sins  of  the  person  on 
 whose  behalf  the  mass  is  said,  whether  he  be 
 a  living  man  or  soul  in  purgatory.  As  Catholics 
 cannot  believe  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  put  to 
 death  in  the  Eucharistic  service,  we  may  inquire 
 how  it  is  sacrificed  upon  the  altar  ?  or  how  '  an 
 unbloody  sacrifice,'  as  they  call  it,  of  a  human 
 body  can  be  any  saci-ifice  at  all  ? 
 
 In  support  of  this  doctrine,  the  only  argument 
 we  can  discover  independent  of  the  authority  of  the 
 church,  is  the  frequent  mention  of  sacramental  obla- 
 tions and  sacrifices  in  the  writings  of  the  Fathers, 
 VOL.  II. 
 
 Justin  Martyr  speaks  of  the  Eucharist  as  an 
 offering  and  sacrifice — '  Concerning  the  sacrifices 
 which  are  offered  by  us  in  eveiy  place,  that  is  the 
 bread  of  the  Eucharist'  {Dial.  c.  Tryph.,  c.  117). 
 But  '  the  offering  of  the  bread  of  the  Eucharist '  is 
 very  different  from  the  offering  of  the  body  of 
 Christ  for  sin.  On  these  words  Justin  himself 
 supplies  the  best  commentary  in  the  words  already 
 cited,  '  When  the  bread  and  a  cup  of  wine  and 
 water  are  brought  to  the  president,  he  offers  praise 
 and  thanksgiving  to  the  Father  of  all.'  In  the 
 Dialogue  he  also  says  (c.  1 17),  'That  prayer  and 
 thanksgivings  offered  by  the  worthy  are  the  07ily 
 perfect  and  acceptable  sacrifices  {Oualai).  For  them 
 only  Christians  have  received  a  command  to  offer 
 at  the  commemoration  of  their  dry  and  wet  food 
 (bread  and  wine),  in  which  they  commemorate  the 
 sufferings  that  the  Son  of  God  endured  for  them.' 
 
 Irenaeus  and  Tertullian  used  the  words  '  obla- 
 tion '  and  '  sacrifice '  in  reference  to  the  Eucharist 
 in  the  same  manner  as  did  Justin,  and  as  they 
 designated  other  acts  of  religious  worship.  In 
 doing  so,  they  followed  the  example  not  only  of 
 Justin,  but  of  the  inspired  writers,  '  Let  us  offer 
 the  sacrifice  of  praise  to  God  continually.'  No 
 one  can  suppose  that  by  the  sacrifice  of  praise  is 
 intended  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  for  sin. 
 
 A  different  signification  of  the  words  oblation 
 and  sacrifice  is  found  in  Cyprian  {Tract,  x.  12), 
 '  Think  you  that  you  celebrate  the  Lord's  Supper 
 who  entirely  neglect  the  offering,  who  come  into 
 the  Lord's  house  without  a  sacrifice,  and  take  part 
 of  that  sacrifice  which  the  poor  have  offered  ?' 
 By  the  offering  and  sacrifice  Cyprian  intended  the 
 offering  of  bread,  wine,  or  other  things  needful  to 
 the  church  at  the  communion,  without  reference 
 to  any  official  act  of  a  priest.  This  sense  of  the 
 words  may  be  found  in  later  writers,  though 
 gradually  a  more  literal  and  unevangelic  spirit  was 
 given  to  them,  until  the  table  became  an  altar,  the 
 president  a  priest,  and  the  bread  the  host  or  sacri- 
 fice offered  for  sin,  and  given  to  the  communicant 
 in  assurance  that  the  propitiatory  sacrifice  had  been 
 offered  for  his  sins. 
 
 The  Lutherans,  though  maintaining  the  real 
 presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  the 
 sacrament,  do  not  represent  them  as  offered  a  propi- 
 tiatory sacrifice  for  sin.  Some  high  Lutherans 
 have  on  this  subject,  as  on  some  others,  used 
 language  not  unlike  that  of  Catholic  divines,  but 
 they  generally  regard  the  benefit  of  the  Eucharist 
 to  consist  in  eating  the  flesh  of  Christ  and  drinking 
 his  blood.  It  would  not  be  right  to  charge  them 
 with  holding  the  old  notion  of  some  of  the  fathers 
 that  by  our  eating  the  body  of  Christ  some  par- 
 ticles of  it  become  incorporated  with  our  bodies, 
 and  so  make  them  immortal,  though  it  is  not  easy 
 to  say  what  other  than  some  such  physical  benefit 
 can  be  attributed  to  the  actual  eating  of  the  true 
 body  or  drinking  of  the  true  blood  of  Christ. 
 
 The  doctrine  of  the  Greek  church  respecting 
 the  Eucharist,  with  which  corresponds  generally 
 the  doctrine  of  the  Eastern  churches,  is  thus 
 stated  in  The  Orthodox  Docti'ine  of  the  Apostolic 
 Eastern  Church,  translated  by  A.  Coray,  and  re- 
 commended by  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  of  the 
 Greek  Church  in  England,  'The  Holy  Eucharist 
 is  a  sacrament  in  which  the  believer  receives,  under 
 the  form  of  bread,  the  body  itself  of  Christ ;  and 
 under  the  form  of  wine,  the  blood  itself  of  Christ, 
 to  the  remission  of  sins  and  eternal  life '  (Article 
 
 31 
 
LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 850 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 xxxiv.)  In  the  exposition  of  this  article  is  the 
 following  account  of  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist 
 in  the  Greek  Church  : — '  As  soon  as  the  community 
 of  the  Lord  are  assembled,  the  Psalms  are  sung  to 
 the  glory  of  the  Highest ;  the  priest  then,  after 
 reciting  several  prayers  from  Scripture,  begins,  in 
 conformity  with  the  example  of  Christ,  to  glorify 
 and  thank  the  heavenly  Father,  to  relate  his 
 benefits  to  mankind,  and  especially  his  having  sent 
 on  earth  for  our  salvation  his  only  begotten  Son 
 to  die  for  our  sins,  thanking  God  most  heartily,  in 
 the  name  of  the  whole  Church,  for  all  these  privi- 
 leges. After  this  he  blesses  the  holy  gifts,  invokes 
 the  Holy  Ghost,  partakes  himself  first  of  the  Holy 
 Eucharist,  and  then  administers  it  to  all  the  other 
 communicants  in  both  kinds. '  In  the  same  expo- 
 sition the  benefits  of  communicating  are  thus  stated, 
 '  The  Holy  Eucharist  causes  our  obtaining  Christ. 
 Accordingly  the  communicant  becomes  spiritually 
 one  with  Christ,  as  he  himself  saith.  He  that 
 eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  dwelleth  in 
 me,  and  I  in  him.' 
 
 The  doctrine  of  Zwingle  is  sufficiently  plain, 
 though  wherein  it  differed  from  that  of  Calvin  is  not 
 so  obvious.  According  to  him  the  Lord's  Supper 
 is  the  authorised  commemoration  of  the  death  of 
 Christ,  in  which  the  bread  and  wine  are  appro- 
 priate emblems  of  his  body  broken  for  us  and  his 
 blood  shed  for  us,  suggesting  to  the  devout  com- 
 municant profitable  thoughts  of  evangelical  truth, 
 and  so  strengthening  the  divine  life  within  him. 
 Of  Calvin's  views  of  the  sacrament.  Dr.  Hill  in  his 
 '  Theological  Lectures '  says,  '  He  (Calvin)  thought 
 that  the  system  of  Zwinglius  did  not  come  up  to 
 the  force  of  the  expressions  used  in  Scripture,  and 
 although  he  did  not  approve  of  the  manner  in 
 which  the  Lutherans  explain  those  expressions,  it 
 appeared  to  him  that  there  was  a  sense  in  which 
 the  full  significance  of  them  might  be  preserved, 
 and  a  great  part  of  the  Lutheran  language  might 
 continue  to  be  used.  As  he  agreed  with  Zwinglius 
 in  thinking  that  the  bread  and  wine  were  the  signs 
 of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  which  were  not 
 locally  present,  he  renounced  both  transubstantia- 
 tion  and  consubstantiation.  He  agreed  further 
 with  Zwinglius  in  thinking  that  the  use  of  these 
 signs,  being  a  memorial  of  the  sacrifice  once  offered 
 on  the  cross,  was  intended  to  produce  a  moral 
 effect.  But  he  taught  that,  to  all  who  remember 
 the  death  of  the  Saviour  in  a  proper  manner, 
 Christ  is  by  the  use  of  these  signs  spiritually  pre- 
 sent— present  to  their  minds  ;  and  he  considered 
 this  spiritual  presence  as  giving  a  significancy  that 
 goes  far  beyond  the  Socinian  sense  to  the  words.' 
 
 In  this  statement  of  Calvin's  doctrine  there 
 appears  nothing  which  Zwingle  would  not  readily 
 have  acknowledged.  If  Calvin  thought  with 
 Zwingle  that  the  body  of  Christ  was  not  locally 
 present,  Zwingle  would  quite  as  readily  have 
 agreed  with  Calvin  that  it  was  '  spiritually  present 
 to  the  minds '  of  devout  communicants — that  is, 
 it  was  the  object  of  their  devout  contemplations. 
 It  is  very  true  that  Calvin  sometimes  spoke  as  if 
 he  attributed  to  the  emblems  of  the  sacrament  a 
 real  presence  of  Christ's  body  in  a  more  literal 
 sense  than  Zwingle  and  Carlostadt,  as  when  he 
 says,  '  a  spiritual  presence  may  be  as  real  as  a  cor- 
 foreal  presence.'  But  the  real  presence  of  a  body 
 must  be  a  corporeal  presence  ;  and  if  the  body  be 
 not  corporeally  present,  it  is  present  only  spiritually, 
 in  which  Zwingle  would  cordially  have  agreed  with 
 
 Calvin,  although  he  would  not  have  called  it  a  real 
 presence. 
 
 As  to  the  coincidence  of  the  opinions  of  Zwingle 
 with  those  of  the  Socinians,  while  he  and  they 
 differed  so  widely  respecting  the  evangelical  truth, 
 they  could  have  maintained  very  little  agreement 
 in  their  interpretation  of  the  emblems  by  which  it 
 is  represented.  With  regai-d  to  the  benefits  de- 
 rived from  devout  communion  in  the  Eucharist,  the 
 difference  between  Zwingle  and  Calvin  seems  to 
 have  been  more  defined  and  certain.  Zwingle  was 
 disposed  to  regard  the  sacraments  chiefly,  if  not 
 exclusively,  as  emblems  of  evangelical  truth  ;  Calvin 
 looked  rather  to  their  spiritual  influence,  by  which 
 they  wrought  as  means  of  grace  upon  the  hearts  of 
 devout  communicants.  With  Zwingle  they  were 
 signs  of  truth  ;  with  Calvin  seals  of  grace.  But 
 even  here  the  difference  between  them  has  been 
 often  exaggerated,  especially  by  Lutheran  writers. 
 Thus  Mosheim  says,  '  Zwingle  asserted  that  all 
 Christians  without  distinction,  regenerate  or  unre- 
 generate,  could  be  partakers  of  the  body  and  blood 
 of  Christ ;  Calvin  confined  the  privilege  to  the 
 pious  and  regenerate  alone.'  What  can  these 
 words  mean  more  than  an  assertion,  on  the  part 
 of  Zwingle,  that  all  men  could  partake  of  the  sacra- 
 mental emblems,  and  another  assertion  on  the  parj 
 of  Calvin  that  only  the  pious  could  derive  any 
 benefit  from  the  participation?  In  the  two  appa- 
 rent counter-statements  there  is  no  real  contrariety. 
 
 In  an  interesting  article  of  the  late  Principal 
 Cunningham,  on  '  Zwingle  and  the  Doctrine  of 
 the  Sacraments,'  reprinted  from  the  Brit,  and  For. 
 Evaui:::.  Revinv,  Oct.  i860,  he  notices  three  great 
 general  principles  which  guided  Zwingle  in  the 
 formation  of  his  doctrine  of  the  sacraments.  1st, 
 '  That  great  care  should  be  taken  to  avoid  any- 
 thing which  may  appear  to  trench  upon  the  grace 
 of  God,  the  meritorious  efficacy  of  Christ's  work, 
 and  the  almighty  agency  of  his  Spirit,  in  bestowing 
 upon  men  all  spiritual  blessings.'  2d,  '  That 
 whatever  external  means  of  grace  may  have  been 
 appointed,  and  in  whatever  way  those  means  may 
 operate,  God  must  not  be  held  to  be  tried  or  re- 
 stricted in  the  communication  of  spiritual  benefits 
 to  the  use  of  anything  of  an  external  kind,  though 
 he  has  himself  appointed  and  prescribed  it.'  3d, 
 '  That  the  most  important  matter  connected  with 
 the  subject  of  the  sacraments  is  the  state  of  mind 
 and  heart  of  the  recipient ;  and  that  with  respect 
 to  this  the  essential  thing  is,  that  the  state  of  mind 
 and  heart  of  the  recipient  should  correspond  with 
 the  outward  act  which,  in  participating  of  the 
 sacrament,  he  performs.' 
 
 Of  these  several  views,  it  will  probably  be  ac- 
 knowledged that  Presbyterians  generally  adhere  to 
 the  doctrine  of  Calvin ;  that  Congregationalists 
 more  generally  incline  to  the  views  of  Zwingle ; 
 while  in  the  formularies  of  the  E]->iscopal  churches 
 several  expressions  may  be  attributed  to  the  in- 
 fluence of  Melancthon  and  other  Lutheran  divines. 
 
 The  remarks  which  we  have  made  in  reference 
 to  the  nature  and  design  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  as 
 they  are  taught  by  the  words  '  This  do  for  the 
 i-ememb ranee  of  me ;'  will  enable  us  to  notice 
 more  briefly  the  part  of  the  evangelists'  account 
 which  refers  to  the  communion  in  the  cup  of  wine. 
 '  He  took  the  cup. '  Although  Matthew,  Mai'k, 
 Luke,  and  Paul  say,  Jesus  'took  the  cup;'  no 
 one  of  them  tells  us  what  liquid  it  contained.  That 
 it   contained  wine    there   can    be   no   reasonable 
 
LORD'S  b  UPPER 
 
 851 
 
 LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 doubt ;  but  whether  it  was  fermented  or  unfer-  [ 
 mented,  undiluted  or  mingled  with  water,  has  been 
 the  subject  of  frequent  controversy.  We  may  with  I 
 good  reason  suppose  that  our  Lord  took  a  cup  of 
 the  wine  which  was  usually  drunk  at  the  passover, 
 and  that  we  have  no  doubt  was  fermented  wine 
 diluted  with  water.  That  it  was  fermented  we 
 infer  from  the  frequent  references  of  Jewish  autho- 
 rities to  the  reason  for  introducing  it  at  the  paschal 
 feast,  to  cheer  and  exhilarate  the  company  in  re- 
 membrance of  their  possession  of  the  promised 
 land  ;  which  exhilaration,  we  presume,  could  not 
 be  got  out  of  water  in  which  raisins  had  been 
 steeped,  though  in  later  times  it  has  been  the 
 Jewish  practice  to  provide  unfermented  wine. 
 The  later  practice  has  arisen  from  the  excessive 
 scrupulosity  of  the  Jews  about  the  presence  of 
 leaven  in  the  wine  of  the  passover. 
 
 So  customary  was  it  for  the  Jews  to  '  f)i!ngle 
 their  cup,'  when  they  '  furnished  their  taVjle,' 
 that  we  should  expect  to  find  the  custom  observed 
 at  the  passover.  The  rabbinical  authorities  con- 
 firm such  expectation,  as  they  give  very  particular 
 directions  about  the  due  proportions  of  the  mingled 
 water  and  wine.  That  this  was  the  practice  of  the 
 early  Christians  in  celebrating  the  Eucharist,  is  evi- 
 dent from  many  citations  of  the  fathers.  Thus  in 
 the  account  of  Justin  we  read,  '  Bread  and  a  cup 
 of  wine  and  water  are  brought  to  the  president.' 
 Irenseus  speaks  of  the  diluted  cup  (temperameittiiin 
 calicis),  and  of  the  mingled  cup  {mistus  calix). 
 Reference  is  made  to  the  mingled  drink  (the  Kpajjia 
 of  the  Greeks  and  mistum  of  the  Latins)  by  Cyprian, 
 Clement  of  Alexandria,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nyssa, 
 Ambrose,  Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Theodoret,  and 
 many  other  Greek  and  Latin  writers.  In  the 
 Romish  Church,  the  mingling  of  wine  and  water 
 is  not  only  retained,  but  elevated  into  a  great  mys- 
 tery and  symbol  of  the  blood  and  water  which 
 flowed  from  the  wounded  side  of  Jesus.  An 
 ancient  sect  mentioned  by  Epiphanius  used  only 
 water,  and  another  milk  instead  of  wine. 
 
 '  He  gave  thanks;''  as  he  did  before  the  break- 
 ing of  the  bread. 
 
 '  He  gave  it  to  them,  saying.  Drink  ye  all  of  it? 
 In  Mark  it  is  said,  'And  they  all  drank  of  it.' 
 In  the  Corinthian  church  the  people,  even  the  un- 
 worthy communicants,  drank  of  the  cup  as  well  as 
 ate  of  the  bread.  According  to  Justin  Martyr, 
 distribution  was  made  to  all  present  of  the  euchar- 
 istic  bread  and  wine,  after  which  the  deacons 
 carried  them  to  the  absent.  Reference  is  so  fre- 
 quently made  by  the  early  Christian  writers  to  the 
 communion  of  'the  cup  of  the  Lord,'  'the  cup 
 of  life,'  'the  cup  of  blessing,'  'the  cup  of  mix- 
 ture,' that  Romish  writers  readily  admit  that  in 
 refusing  the  cup  to  the  laity  they  have  departed 
 from  the  primitive  practice,  and  they  plead  the 
 authority  of  the  church  to  do  so  on  account  of  its 
 frequent  abuse.  In  the  middle  ages  considerable 
 variety  of  usage  may  be  observed.  At  one  time 
 the  practice  prevailed  to  a  considerable  extent  of 
 dipping  the  bread  in  the  wine  and  then  giving  it  to 
 the  communicants ;  at  another,  of  giving  the  wine 
 without  the  bread,  when  infants  were  allowed  to 
 communicate.  Before  the  denial  of  the  cup  to  the 
 people  became  the  general  practice  of  the  Latin 
 church,  a  usage  arose  in  many  places  of  consecrat- 
 ing two  cups  of  wine,  one  for  the  priests,  the  other 
 for  the  laity.  The  cup  of  the  priests  represented 
 but  too  faithfully  their  arrogant  assumption  of  ex- 
 
 clusive honour  and  privilege  in  the  Church  of 
 Christ.  The  Greek  and  Eastern  Churches  strenu- 
 ously maintain  the  right  of  the  people  to  partici- 
 pate in  the  cup.  So  strong  is  the  feeling  in  favour 
 of  the  communion  in  both  kinds  in  the  East,  that 
 the  pope  has  under  certain  circumstances  been  in- 
 duced to  concede  the  cup  to  the  people  in  the 
 congregations  which  have  been  gathered  by  Romish 
 missionaries  in  Eastern  countries. 
 
 '  For  this  is  my  blood,  that  of  the  Ne%v  Coveftant, 
 which  is  shed  for  many  for  the  remission  of  sins, ^ 
 are  the  words  of  Matthew.  Mark  omits  the  clause 
 'for  the  remission  of  sins.'  According  to  Luke 
 and  Paul,  our  Lord  said,  'This  cup  is  the  new 
 covenant  in  my  blood.'  As  the  several  writers  do 
 not  profess  to  give  the  precise  words  of  our  Lord, 
 who  probably  spoke  in  a  different  language,  it  is 
 not  possible  for  us  to  determine  the  exact  formula 
 which  was  used  by  him.  In  reply  to  an  objection 
 which  has  been  brought  against  the  hteral  interpre- 
 tation of  the  words,  '  This  is  my  blood,'  from  the 
 parallel  passage,  '  This  cup  is  the  new  covenant 
 in  my  blood,'  Cardinal  Wiseman  very  ingeniously 
 says,  '  A  cup  cannot  be  a  covenant,  and,  therefore, 
 the  phrases  are  not  parallel'  It  is  not  said, 
 '  This  is  the  new  covenant,'  but  '■this  cup  is  the 
 new  covenant;'  but  it  is  said,  'This  (not  this 
 bread)  is  my  body,'  and  '  This  (not  this  cup)  is 
 my  blood.'     (See  his  Lectures  on  the  Sacrament.) 
 
 Did  Jesus  himself  partake  of  the  bread  and 
 wine  at  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist  ?  Romanists 
 strenuously  contend  that  he  did  not ;  for  if  he  did, 
 he  must,  according  to  their  doctrine,  have  eaten 
 and  drunken  himself,  his  whole  person,  human  and 
 divine.  This  is  startling,  though  it  seems  to  us  no 
 more  incredible  than  that  he  held  himself  in  his 
 own  hand,  brake  himself  to  pieces,  and  gave  him- 
 self, his  whole  and  undivided  person,  to  every  one 
 of  his  disciples  separately.  As  to  the  inference 
 which  has  been  deduced  in  favour  of  this  opinion 
 from  the  words  of  our  Lord,  'I  will  not  drink 
 henceforth  of  this  fruit  of  the  vine  until  that  day 
 when  I  drink  it  new  with  you  in  my  Father's  king- 
 dom ;'  we  do  not  see  how  these  words  can  prova 
 that  our  Lord  did  not  drink  of  that  cup,  when  the 
 similar  words  respecting  the  passover,  '  I  will  not 
 any  more  eat  thereof  until  it  be  fulfilled  in  the  king- 
 dom of  God,'  certainly  do  not  prove  that  Jesus  did 
 not  eat  of  that  passover. 
 
 Matthew  and  Mark  say,  '  When  they  had  snng 
 a  hym7i  they  -went  out!'  What  connection,  if  any, 
 this  singing  of  a  hymn  had  with  the  sacramental  in- 
 stitution it  may  not  be  easy  to  say,  as  it  is  not  possi- 
 ble to  ascertain  how  much  of  the  interesting  con- 
 versation of  the  evening  occurred  between  the  supper 
 and  the  singing,  or  between  the  singing  and  the 
 going  out.  The  hymn  was  probably  one  of  the 
 Psalms  which  constituted  the  hallelujah  of  the 
 Paschal  service  as  it  was  observed  by  the  Jews  of 
 the  later  times.  A  hymn  of  praise  seems  to  be  an 
 appropriate  close  of  the  Eucharistic  feast,  and  in 
 many  churches  it  is  sung  in  imitation  of  our  Lord's 
 example.  Among  the  ancient  Christians  the  sing- 
 ing seems  to  have  preceded  the  communion  service, 
 '  Ye  hear  the  chanter  with  a  sacred  tune  calling  you 
 to  the  communion  of  the  holy  mysteries,  and  saying, 
 O  taste,  and  see  that  the  Lord  is  good'  (Cyril, 
 Led.  in  Myst.  v.  17).  The  thirty-fourth  Psalm  is 
 prescribed  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions,  but  other 
 Psalms  were  sung  in  different  churches.  Appro- 
 priate as  is  the  song  of  praise,  we  cannot  but  feel 
 
LORD'S  SUPPER 
 
 852 
 
 LOT 
 
 how  strange  is  the  desecration  of  this  solemn  rite, 
 when  it  is  converted  into  a  musical  service,  as  it 
 often  is  by  the  Latin  and  Greek  church,  in  honour 
 of  some  event  of  national  interest,  as  a  royal  mar- 
 riage, a  signal  victory,  or  a  successful  revolution. 
 
 Of  the  names  of  this  institution  we  may  observe 
 that  it  is  called  in  Scripture  '  the  breaking  of  bread,' 
 as  well  as  the  Lord's  Supper  (Acts  ii.  42).  If  not 
 Scriptural,  yet  very  early  names  of  the  service  were, 
 'the  Communion,'  and  'the  Eucharist.'  The  for- 
 mer may  claim  apostolic  sanction.  '  The  cup  of 
 blessing  which  we  bless,  is  it  not  the  communion  of 
 the  blood  of  Christ  ?  The  bread  which  we  break, 
 is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ'  (i 
 Cor.  X.  16)?  The  latter  is  appropriate,  as  it  is 
 especially  a  thanksgiving  service.  At  the  institu- 
 tion, Jesus  '  gave  thanks'  over  both  the  bread  and 
 the  wine.  Justin  Martyr  calls  the  bread  and  wine 
 '  Eucharistic  food,'  and  the  early  Christians  named 
 the  whole  service  the  Eucharist  or  thanksgiving, 
 and  occasionally  the  Eulogia  or  blessing. 
 
 As  to  the  time  and  frequency  of  the  observance, 
 it  was  daily  observed  by  the  first  Christians,  as  it 
 is  now  every  morning  in  the  Catholic  churches. 
 Some  Christians  observe  it  regularly  on  the  first 
 day  of  the  week,  and  contend  tliat  they  follow  the 
 practice  of  the  apostolic  churches,  who  '  came 
 together'  on  '  the  first  day  of  the  week'  '  to  break 
 bread.'  This  M'as  the  custom  of  Christians  in  the 
 time  of  Pliny,  when  they  assembled  for  the  pur- 
 pose in  the  early  morning  of  Sunday.  Some  scru-  1 
 pulously  communicate  on  the  great  church  festivals,  j 
 especially  at  Christmas  and  Easter.  No  good  Ca- 
 tholics, except  171  extremis,  commune  on  Good 
 Friday.  Some  foreign  Protestants  solemnise,  by 
 its  observance,  the  most  interesting  events  of  do- 
 mestic and  social  life,  as  on  coming  of  age,  mar- 
 riage, and  the  birth  of  a  child.  Many  assert  that 
 Christian  churches  are  left  to  regulate,  on  con- 
 siderations of  expediency  and  mutual  improvement, 
 the  time  and  frequency  of  observing  the  commu- 
 nion, for  '  as  ojteii^  whether  it  be  once  a  week,  or 
 once  a  month,  or  once  a  year,  as  they  '  eat  of  this 
 bread,  and  drink  of  this  cup,  they  shew  the  Lord's 
 death  mitil  he  come.' 
 
 Some  few  Christians,  generally,  though  not 
 always,  belonging  to  the  Society  of  Friends,  deny 
 the  obligation  of  the  continued  observance  of  the 
 Lord's  Supper.  They  do  so,  asserting  that  under 
 the  gospel  all  ritual  observances  are  abolished,  and 
 that,  without  ceremonial  or  emblem,  God  is  to  be 
 worshipped  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  To  account  for 
 '  the  breaking  of  bread'  in  the  apostolic  churches, 
 it  is  sometimes  said,  that  like  the  continued  prac- 
 tice of  circumcision  for  a  time,  and  the  distinction 
 of  certain  meats,  it  was  a  temporary  concession  to 
 Jewish  prejudice.  (See  a  pamphlet  entitled.  The 
 Eucharist  not  ail  Oi'diiiatice  of  the  Chrisiiati 
 C/utrch).  But  the  reply  is  obvious.  Circumcision 
 and  the  distinction  of  meats  belonged  to  Judaism, 
 and  therefore  for  some  time  were  conceded  to 
 Jewish  Christians,  but  the  Lord's  Supper  was  no 
 part  of  the  Jewish  ritual,  but  a  new  institute  pecu- 
 liarly Christian  in  its  nature  and  design.  Another 
 explanation  is  offered  by  J.  J.  Gurney,  in  his  Ob- 
 servations Oft  the  Piciiliarities  of  the  Society  of 
 Friends,  p.  126,  '  Our  Lord's  injunction  may  be 
 understood  as  intended  to  give  a  religious  direction 
 to  the  more  common  social  repasts  of  his  disciples.' 
 In  reply,  it  is  said,  The  Lord's  Supper  was  not  a 
 common  social  repast :  the  disciples  came  together 
 
 to  break  bread  ;  the  hungry  were  to  eat  at  home,  foi 
 they  had  houses  to  eat  and  drhik  in  ;  they  were  tc 
 tarry  for  one  another. 
 
 With  regard  to  the  Christian  profession  and 
 character  of  the  communicants,  we  shall  only  say, 
 '  Whosoever  shall  eat  this  bread  and  drink  this  cup 
 of  the  Lord  unworthily,  shall  be  guilty  of  the  body 
 and  blood  of  the  Lord'  (i  Cor.  xi.  29). 
 
 As  Justin  speaks  of  a  contribution  made  on  the 
 occasion  for  the  poor  and  destitute,  so  in  many 
 churches  there  is  connected  with  the  service  an 
 offertory  or  collection  for  the  poor,  the  distribution 
 of  which  is  intrusted  to  the  minister,  elders,  dea- 
 cons, or  other  officers  of  the  church. — R.  H. 
 
 LOT  (tDv,  a  covering ;  Sept.  Ac6r),  son  of 
 Haran  and  nephew  of  Abraham,  who  by  the  early 
 death  of  his  father  had  already  come  into  posses- 
 sion of  his  property  when  Abraham  went  into  the 
 land  of  Canaan  (Gen.  xi.  31).  Their  xmited  sub- 
 stance, consisting  chiefly  in  cattle,  was  not  then 
 too  large  to  prevent  them  from  living  together  in 
 one  encampment.  Eventually,  however,  their  pos- 
 sessions were  so  greatly  increased,  that  they  were 
 obliged  to  separate  ;  and  Abraham  with  rare  gene- 
 rosity conceded  the  choice  of  pasture-grounds  to 
 his  nephew.  Lot  availed  himself  of  this  liberality 
 of  his  uncle,  as  he  deemed  most  for  his  own  advan- 
 tage, by  fixing  his  abode  at  Sodom,  that  his  flocks 
 might  pasture  in  and  around  that  fertile  and  well- 
 watered  neighbourhood  (Gen.  xiii.  5-13).  He  had 
 soon  very  great  reason  to  regret  this  choice ;  for 
 although  his  flocks  fed  well,  his  soul  was  starved 
 in  that  vile  place,  the  inhabitants  of  which  were 
 sinners  before  the  Lord  exceedingly.  There  'he 
 vexed  his  righteous  soul  from  day  to  day  with  the 
 filthy  conversation  of  the  wicked'  (2  Pet.  ii.  7). 
 
 About  eight  years  after  his  separation  from 
 Abraham  (B.C.  1913),  Lot  was  carried  away  pri- 
 soner by  Chedorlaomer,  along  with  the  other  in- 
 habitants of  Sodom,  and  was  rescued  and  brought 
 back  by  Abraham  (Gen.  xiv.),  as  related  under 
 other  heads  [Abraham  ;  Chedorlaomer].  This 
 exploit  procured  for  Abraham  much  celebrity  in 
 Canaan  ;  and  it  ought  to  have  procured  for  Lot 
 respect  and  gratitude  from  the  people  of  Sodom, 
 who  had  been  delivered  from  hard  slaveiy  and  re- 
 stored to  their  homes  on  his  account.  But  this 
 docs  not  appear  to  have  been  the  result. 
 
 'At  length  the  guilt  of  '  the  cities  of  the  plain' 
 brought  down  the  signal  judgments  of  Heaven. 
 The  avenging  angels,  after  having  been  entertained 
 by  Abraham,  repaired  to  Sodom,  where  they  were 
 received  and  entertained  by  Lot,  who  was  sitting 
 in  the  gate  of  the  town  when  they  arrived.  While 
 they  were  at  supper  the  house  was  beset  by  a 
 number  of  men,  who  demanded  that  the  strangers 
 should  be  given  up  to  them,  for  the  unnatural 
 purposes  which  have  given  a  name  of  infamy  to 
 Sodom  in  all  generations.  Lot  resisted  this  de- 
 mand, and  was  loaded  with  abuse  by  the  vile 
 fellows  outside  on  that  account.  They  had  nearly 
 forced  the  door,  when  the  angels,  thus  awfully  by 
 their  own  experience  convinced  of  the  righteousness 
 of  the  doom  they  came  to  execute,  smote  them  with 
 instant  blindness,  by  which  their  attempts  were 
 rendered  abortive,  and  they  were  constrained  to 
 disperse.  Towards  morning  the  angels  apprised 
 Lot  of  tlie  doom  which  hung  over  the  place,  and 
 urged  him  to  hasten  thence  with  his  family.  He 
 was  allowed  fo  extend  the  benefit  of  this  deliver- 
 
LOT 
 
 sr>:\ 
 
 LOT 
 
 ance  to  the  families  of  his  daughters  who  had 
 married  in  Sodom  ;  but  the  warning  was  received 
 by  those  families  with  incredulity  and  insult,  and 
 he  therefore  left  Sodom  accompanied  only  by  his 
 wife  and  two  daughters.  As  they  went,  being 
 hastened  by  the  angels,  the  wife,  anxious  for  those 
 who  had  been  left  behind,  or  reluctant  to  remove 
 from  the  place  which  had  been  long  her  home,  and 
 where  much  valuable  property  was  necessarily  left 
 behind,  lingered  behind  the  rest,  and  was  suddenly 
 involved  in  the  destruction,  by  which — smothered 
 and  stiffened  as  she  stood  by  saline  incrustations — 
 she  became  'a  pillar  of  salt.' 
 
 Lot  and  his  daughters  then  hastened  on  to  Zoar, 
 the  smallest  of  the  five  cities  of  the  plain,  which 
 had  been  spared  on  purpose  to  afford  him  a  refuge ; 
 but  being  fearful,  after  what  had  passed,  to  remain 
 among  a  people  so  corrupted,  he  soon  retired  to  a 
 cavern  in  the  neighbouring  mountains,  and  there 
 abode.  After  some  stay  in  this  place,  the  daughters 
 of  Lot  became  apprehensive  lest  the  family  of  their 
 father  should  be  lost  for  want  of  descendants,  than 
 which  no  greater  calamity  was  known  or  appre- 
 hended in  those  times ;  and  in  the  belief  that,  after 
 what  had  passed  in  Sodom,  there  was  no  hope  of 
 their  obtaining  suitable  husbands,  they,  by  a  con- 
 trivance which  has  in  it  the  taint  of  Sodom,  in 
 which  they  were  brought  up,  made  their  father 
 drunk  with  wine,  and  in  that  state  seduced  him 
 into  an  act  which,  as  they  well  knew,  would  in 
 soberness  have  been  most  abhorrent  to  him.  They 
 thus  became  the  mothers,  and  he  the  father,  of 
 two  sons,  named  Moab  and  Ammon,  from  whom 
 sprung  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  so  often 
 mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  history  (Gen.  xix. )  This 
 circumstance  is  the  last  which  the  Scripture  records 
 of  the  history  of  Lot ;  and  the  time  and  place  of 
 his  death  are  unknown. 
 
 The  difficulties  which  the  narrative  that  we  have 
 sketched  has  been  supposed  to  involve  may  be 
 reduced  to  two — the  death  of  Lot's  wife,  and  the 
 conduct  «f  his  daughters.  With  respect  to  the 
 former  of  these,  whatever  difficulty  has  been  con- 
 nected with  the  subject  has  arisen  from  the  ridicu- 
 lous notions  which  have  been  connected  with  it, 
 for  which  no  authority  is  found  in  the  Scriptural 
 narrative.  It  has  been  supposed  that  the  woman 
 was  literally  turned  into  a  pillar  of  salt,  and  that  this 
 pillar  stood  for  many  ages,  if  it  does  not  still  exist, 
 as  a  standing  monument  of  the  transaction.  Indeed, 
 sundry  old  travellers  have  averred  that  they  had 
 seen  it ;  and  no  doubt  they  did  see  something  which 
 they  supposed  to  be  the  pillar  into  which  Lot's 
 wife  was  turned,  or  were  told  to  be  such.  This 
 notion  originated  with  the  author  of  the  Wisdom 
 of  Solomon,  which  was  regarded  by  the  Roman 
 Catholics  as  Scriptural  authority  that  might  not  be 
 disputed.  Therefore  old  pilgrims  and  travellers 
 sought  for  this  monument ;  and,  from  their  example, 
 more  modern  travellers  have  done  the  same :  al- 
 though, if  Protestants,  they  could  attach  no  par- 
 ticular weight  to  the  authority  which  alone  justified 
 their  predecessors  in  their  hopes  of  finding  it.  The 
 passage  referred  to  is  that  in  which  the  author,  after 
 alluding  to  the  punishment  of  Sodom  and  the  de- 
 liverance of  Lot,  adverts  to  the  existing  evidence  of 
 the  former,  and  then  adds,  somewhat  vaguely,  diricr- 
 T0V(T7)S  i/'i'X^s  fjivrj/iieiov  icTijKvia  arrfK-q  d\6s,  '  a 
 Standing  pillar  of  salt  is  a  monument  of  an  unbe- 
 lieving soul.'  This  was  no  doubt  the  authority 
 relied  upon :  indeed,  we  find  it  expressly  quoted 
 
 by  some  old  travellers  as  the  ground  of  their  ex- 
 pectation. But  the  testimony  of  Josephus  is  still 
 more  explicit,  and  with  us  would  be  quite  as  autho- 
 ritative. He  expressly  says  not  only  that  the 
 monument  existed,  but  that  he  had  seen  it  (Antiq. 
 i.  II.  4).  His  contemporary,  Clement  of  Rome, 
 makes  a  similar  statement  {Epist.  i.  sec.  11);  and 
 so,  in  the  next  century,  does  Irenseus  (iv.  51,  64). 
 But  their  evidence  is  of  little  original  value  on  a 
 pomt  like  this.  Josephus  and  the  author  of  Wis- 
 dom no  doubt  believed  what  they  stated  :  and  their 
 testimony  amounts  to  this,  that  in  their  day  an 
 object  existed  which  was  said  to  be  the  pillar  into 
 which  Lot's  wife  was  turned,  and  which  they  be- 
 lieved to  be  such.  But  in  the  present  day,  when 
 the  sources  of  historical  evidence  are  more  carefully 
 investigated  than  in  former  times,  we  regard  these 
 authorities,  2000  years  after  the  event,  as  having 
 no  particular  weight,  unless  so  far  as  they  may  be 
 supported  by  anterior  probabilites  and  documents, 
 which  in  this  case  do  not  exist.  Further,  it  is  all 
 but  impossible  that  if  so  strange  a  monument  had 
 existed  on  the  borders  of  the  Dead  Sea,  it  should 
 not  have  been  noticed  by  the  sacred  historians,  and 
 alluded  to  by  the  poets :  and  we  may  be  almost 
 certain  that  if  it  had  remained  when  the  book  of 
 Genesis  was  written,  the  frequent  formula,  that  it 
 was  there  'unto  this  day,'  would  not  have  been 
 omitted.  Indeed  there  is  eveiy  probability  that,  if 
 such  a  monument  had  then  existed,  the  Canaanites 
 would  have  made  it  one  of  their  idols.  The  ex- 
 pression of  our  Lord,  '  Remember  Lot's  wife ' 
 (Luke  xvii.  32),  appears  from  the  context  to  be 
 solely  intended  as  an  illustration  of  the  danger  of 
 going  back  or  delaying  in  the  day  of  God's  judg- 
 ments. From  this  text,  indeed,  it  would  appear 
 as  if  Lot's  wife  had  gone  back,  or  had  tarried  so 
 long  behind,  in  the  desire  of  saving  some  of  their 
 property.  Then,  as  it  would  seem,  she  was  struck 
 dead,  and  became  a  stiffened  corpse,  fixed  for  the 
 time  to  the  soil  by  saline  or  bituminous  incrusta- 
 tions. The  particle  of  similitude  must  here,  as  in 
 many  other  passages  of  Scripture,  be  understood — 
 '  like  a  pillar  of  salt.' 
 
 With  respect  to  Lot's  daughters,  Whiston  and 
 others  are  unable  to  see  any  wicked  intention  in 
 them.  He  admits  that  the  incest  was  a  horrid 
 crime,  except  under  the  unavoidable  necessity 
 which  apparently  rendered  it  the  only  means  of 
 preserving  the  human  race :  and  this  justifying 
 necessity  he  holds  to  have  existed  in  their  minds, 
 as  they  appear  to  have  believed  that  all  the  inhabi- 
 tants of  the  land  had  been  destroyed  except  their 
 father  and  themselves.  But  it  is  incredible  that  they 
 could  have  entertained  any  such  belief.  The  city 
 of  Zoar  had  been  spared,  and  they  had  been  there. 
 The  wine  also  with  which  they  made  their  father 
 drunk  must  have  been  procured  from  men,  as  we 
 cannot  suppose  they  had  brought  it  with  them 
 from  Sodom.  The  fact  would  therefore  seem  to 
 be  that,  after  the  fate  of  their  sisters,  who  had 
 married  men  of  Sodom  and  perished  with  them, 
 they  became  alive  to  the  danger  and  impropriety 
 of  marrying  with  the  natives  of  the  land,  and  of 
 the  importance  of  preserving  the  family  connection. 
 The  force  of  this  consideration  was  afterwards  seen 
 in  Abraham's  sending  to  the  seat  of  his  family  in 
 Mesopotamia  for  a  wife  to  Isaac.  But  Lot's 
 daughters  could  not  go  there  to  seek  husbands; 
 and  the  only  branch  of  their  own  family  withm 
 many  hundred  miles  was  that  of  Abraham,  whose 
 
LOT 
 
 854 
 
 LOWE 
 
 only  son,  Ishmael,  was  then  a  child.  This,  there- 
 fore, must  have  appeared  to  them  the  only  prac- 
 ticable mode  in  which  the  house  of  their  father 
 could  be  preserved.  Their  making  their  father 
 dnmk,  and  their  solicitous  concealment  of  what 
 they  did  from  him,  shew  that  they  despaired  of 
 persuading  him  to  an  act  which,  under  any  circum- 
 stances, and  with  every  possible  extenuation,  must 
 have  been  veiy  distressing  to  so  good  a  man. 
 That  he  was  a  good  man  is  evinced  by  his  deliver- 
 ance from  among  the  guilty,  and  is  affirmed  by  St. 
 Peter  (2  Pet.  ii.  7) ;  his  preservation  is  alluded  to 
 by  our  Saviour  (Luke  xvii.  28,  etc.);  and  in  Deut. 
 ii.  9,  19,  and  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  8,  his  name  is  used  to 
 designate  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  his  de- 
 scendants.— J.  K. 
 
 LOT  (u^,  sometimes  written  t3 v)  is  mentioned 
 in  two  passages  of  Scripture,  in  both  of  which  it  is 
 erroneously  translated  myn-rh  in  the  A.  V.  In 
 Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  '  Behold  a  company  of  Ishmeehtes 
 came  from  Gilead,  with  their  camels  bearing  spicer}' 
 {necoth),  and  balm  (tzeri),  and  myrrh  {lot),  going 
 to  carry  it  down  to  Egypt.'  Again,  in  chap,  xliii. 
 II,  Jacob  directs  his  sons  to  take  into  Egypt  'of 
 the  best  fruits  in  the  land  in  your  vessels,  and  carry 
 down  the  man  a  present,  a  little  balm  {tzeri)  and 
 a  little  honey,  spices  {tiecoih)  and  myrrh  {lot), 
 nuts  {botnini)  and  almonds  {shakadim).  In  this 
 enumeration,  in  one  case,  of  merchandise,  and  in 
 the  other,  of  several  articles  intended  for  a  present, 
 and  both  destined  for  Egypt,  at  that  time  a  highly 
 civilized  nation,  it  is  evident  that  we  are  to  look 
 only  for  such  substances  as  were  likely  to  be  accept- 
 able in  that  country,  and  therefore  not  such  as  were 
 pioduced  there,  or  as  were  more  easily  procurable 
 from  elsewhere  than  from  Syria,  as  was  the  case 
 with  myrrh,  which  was  never  produced  in  Syria, 
 and  could  not  have  been  an  article  of  export  from 
 thence.  This  difficulty  has  been  felt  by  others, 
 and  various  translations  of  lot  have  been  proposed, 
 as  lotus,  chestnuts,  mastiche,  stacte,  balsam,  tur- 
 pentine, pistachio  nuts.  Junius  and  TremeUius 
 render  it  ladanum,  which  is  suitable,  and  appears 
 to  be  correct. 
 
 Ladanum,  or  gum  ladanum,  as  it  is  often  called, 
 was  known  to  the  Greeks  as  early  as  the  times  of 
 Herodotus  and  Theophrastus,  and  bore  the  names 
 of  ledon  and  ladanon,  which  are  very  closely  allied 
 to  ladun,  the  Arabic  name  of  the  same  drug.  It 
 has  been  well  observed  by  Rosenmiiller  that  the 
 proper  root  and  origin  of  these  names  is  led,  but 
 that  the  Hebrew  has  the  hard  consonant  t  instead 
 of  the  softer  d,  of  which  letters  many  permutations 
 are  to  be  found  in  these,  as  well  as  in  other  lan- 
 guages. A  Hebrew  author,  as  quoted  by  Celsius 
 {Hierobot.'x.  p.  281),  says,  'Est  aroma,  ex  succo 
 arboris  cujusdam  proveniens.'  Ladanum  is  de- 
 scribed by  Herodotus  as  particularly  fragrant, 
 though  gathered  from  the  beards  of  goats,  where 
 it  is  found  sticking.  This  is  explained  by  referring 
 to  the  description  of  Dioscorides,  from  which  we 
 learn  that  goats,  after  browsing  upon  the  leaves  of 
 the  ladanum  plants,  necessarily  have  this  viscid 
 substance  adhering  to  their  hair  and  beards,  whence 
 it  is  afterwards  scraped  off.  Tournefort,  in  modern 
 times,  has  given  a  detailed  description  of  the  mode 
 of  obtaining  ladanum,  and  relates  that  it  is  now 
 gathered  by  means  of  a  kind  of  rake  with  whip- 
 like thongs,  which  is  passed  over  fhe  plants. 
 When  these  thonjis  are  loaded  with  the  odoriferous 
 
 and  sticky  resin,  they  are  scraped  with  a  knife, 
 and  the  substance  rolled  into  a  mass,  in  which 
 state  it  is  called  lada7ium  or  labdanum.  It  con- 
 sists of  resin  and  volatile  oil,  and  is  highly  fra- 
 grant, and  stimulant  as  a  m-jdicine,  but  is  often 
 
 343.  Ladanum  Cistus. 
 
 adulterated  with  sand  in  commerce.  The  lada- 
 num  which  is  used  in  Europe  is  collected  chiefly 
 in  the  Greek  isles,  and  also  in  continental  Greece. 
 It  is  yielded  by  species  of  the  genus  Cistus  (espe- 
 cially by  C.  creticus),  which  are  known  in  this 
 countiy  by  the  name  of  Rock  Rose.  They  are 
 natives  of  the  south  of  Europe,  the  Mediterranean 
 islands,  and  the  north  of  Africa.  Species  are  also 
 found  in  Judaea ;  and  C.  creticus  in  some  parts  of 
 Syria.  Some  authors  have  been  of  opinion  that 
 one  species,  the  Cistus  roseus,  is  more  likely  than 
 any  other  to  be  the  Rose  of  Sharon,  as  it  is  very 
 common  in  that  locality,  while  nothing  like  a  true 
 rose  is  to  be  found  there.  Ladanum  seems  to  have 
 been  produced  in  Judaea,  according  to  writers  in 
 the  Talmud  (Cels.  loc.  cit.  p.  286).  It  is  said  by 
 Pliny,  as  long  before  by  Herodotus,  to  be  a  pro- 
 duce of  Arabia,  though  this  has  not  been  proved 
 to  be  the  case  in  modern  times.  Sufficient,  how- 
 ever, has  been  adduced  to  show  that  ladanum  was 
 known  to,  and  esteemed  by,  the  ancients,  and  as 
 its  Greek  and  Arabic  names  are  similar  to  the 
 Hebrew,  and  as  it  is  stated  to  have  been  a  produce 
 of  Syria,  it  was  very  likely  to  have  been  sent  to 
 Egypt  both  as  a  present  and  as  merchandise.— 
 J.  F.  R. 
 
 LOTS,  FEAST  OF.     [Purim.] 
 
 LOVE-FEASTS.    [Agape.] 
 
 LOWE,  Joel  b.  Jehudah  Loeb,  also  called 
 
 Bril  ^'"'-13  from  the  initials  n"-^  miH"'  '•21  p  Ben 
 R.  Jehudah  Loeb,  was  born  about  1 740,  and  died  in 
 Breslau,  Feb.  11,  1802.  He  was  a  distinguished 
 disciple  of  Moses  Mendelssohn,  and  professor  in 
 the  William  school  at  Breslau,  where  he  wrote  most 
 of  his  numerous  works  which  are  such  valuable 
 contributions  to  Biblical  exegesis  and  literature. 
 Those  of  his  productions  which  bear  on  the  Bible 
 
LOWTH 
 
 855 
 
 LOWTH 
 
 are  as  follows— (i.)  A  commentary  on  the  Song  of 
 Songs  with  an  elaborate  introduction,  which  he 
 wrote  conjointly  with  Wolfssohn  to  Mendelssohn's 
 German  translation  of  this  book,  Berlin  1788, 
 republished  in  Prague  1803,  Lemberg  1817.  (2.) 
 Annotations  on  Ecclesiastes,  which  he  wrote  con- 
 jointly with  Wolfssohn,  and  which  were  published 
 with  Mendelssohn's  commentaiy  on  this  book  and 
 Friedlanders'  German  translation,  Berlin  1 788.  (3. ) 
 A  commentaiy  on  the  book  of  Jonah,  with  a  German 
 translation,  Berlin  1788.  (4.)  A  commentary  on 
 the  Psalms,  with  an  extensive  introduction  (nn"'DT 
 
 "11X3  Cy  PSItJ'''))  in  which  he  gives  an  elaborate 
 treatise  on  the  musical  instruments  of  the  ancient 
 Hebrews  as  well  as  on  Hebrew  poetry,  and  which 
 was  published  with  Mendelssohn's  German  trans- 
 lation of  this  book,  Berlin  1785-91.  (5.)  A  Ger- 
 man translation  and  Hebrew  commentary  on  the 
 Sabbatic  and  Festival  Lessons  from  the  Pentateuch 
 and  the  Prophets  [Haphtara],  Berlin  1790-91. 
 (6. )  A  literal  German  translation  of  the  Pentateuch 
 for  beginners,  preparatory  to  Mendelssohn's  ver- 
 sion,   Breslau   181S.      (7.)   A   Hebrew   grammar, 
 
 entitled  pK'i'n  moy,  the  Elements  of  the  Hebrew 
 language  developed  according  to  logical  principles, 
 a  Handbook  for  teachers,  Berlin  1794,  republished 
 in  Prague  1803.  He  also  wrote  a  number  of  articles 
 on  Biblical  subjects,  both  in  Hebrew  and  German, 
 which  are  published  in  various  quarterlies,  and  of 
 which  the  following  are  the  most  important  —  a. 
 Notes  on  Joshua  and  the  Song  of  Songs,  in  Eich- 
 horn's  AUgemeine  Bibiiolhek,  vol.  ii. ,  Leipzig  1789, 
 p.  183,  ff.  b.  A  treatise  on  Personification  of  the 
 Deity  and  the  Sephiroth,  ibid.,  vol.  v.,  Leipzig  1793, 
 p.  378,  ff  Comp.  Fiirst,  Bibliotheca  Hebraica,  ii. 
 268 ;  Steinschneider,  Catalogics  Libr.  Hebr.  in 
 Bibliotheca  Bodleiana,  col.  1627,  ff. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 LOWTH,  Robert,  was  born  at  Boriton,  or,  as 
 some  will  have  it,  in  the  Close  of  Winchester,  No- 
 vember 27,  1710.  He  was  educated  on  the  foun- 
 dation of  Winchester  College,  where  he  displayed 
 his  poetical  talent  at  a  very  early  age,  and  from 
 whence  he  was  elected  to  a  scholarship  at  New 
 College  in  1730,  and  took  his  degree  of  M.A.  in 
 1737.  He  became  professor  of  poetry  in  1741, 
 was  presented  to  the  rectory  of  Ovington  in 
 Hampshire  in  1744,  was  appointed  to  the  arcli- 
 c'eaconry  of  Winchester  in  1750,  and  to  the  rectory 
 of  East-Woodhay  in  Hampshire  in  1753.  It  was 
 in  this  year  that  Lowth  published  his  famous  PrcB- 
 lectiones  Academicts  de  Sacra  Poesi  Ilebi'tzorum, 
 O.xon.  1753,  comprising  thirty-four  lectures,  which 
 he  had  previously  read  to  the  students  at  Oxford 
 when  poetical  professor.  In  these  masterly  and 
 classical  dissertations  he  not  only  evinces  a  deep 
 knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language,  but  philoso- 
 phically exhibits  the  true  spirit  and  characteristics 
 of  that  poetry  in  which  the  prophets  of  the  O.  T. 
 clothed  the  lively  oracles  of  God.  It  does  not  at 
 all  detract  from  Lowth's  merits  that  both  Abravanel 
 and  Azariah  de  Rossi  had  pointed  out,  two  centu- 
 ries before  him,  the  same  features  of  Hebrew 
 poetiy  [Rossi]  upon  which  he  expatiates,  inasmuch 
 as  the  enlarged  views  and  the  invincible  arguments 
 displayed  in  his  handling  of  the  subject  are  pecu- 
 liarly his  own  ;  and  his  work  is  therefore  justly 
 regarded  as  marking  a  new  epoch  in  the  treatment 
 of  the  Hebrew  poetry.  The  greatest  testimoxiy 
 to  the  extraordinary  merits  of  these  lectures  is  the 
 
 thorough  analysis  which  the  celebrated  philosopher 
 Mendelssohn,  to  whom  the  Hebrew  was  almost 
 vernacular,  gives  of  them  in  the  Bibliothek  der 
 schdnen  Wissenschafleji  iind  der  frcyen  Kiitiste, 
 vol.  i.,  1756.  A  second  edition,  enlarged  with 
 annotations  by  Michaelis,  appeared  in  Gottingen, 
 1758.  Other  editions  were  published  in  Oxford 
 1763,  Gottingen  1768,  Oxford  1775,  1810  ; 
 with  notes  by  Rosenmiiller,  Leipzig  181 5,  Ox- 
 ford 1 82 1.  An  English  translation  of  the  first 
 eighteen  lectures,  by  Dr.  Dodd,  appeared  in  the 
 Christian  Magazine  iox  1766-67,  and  an  excellent 
 version  of  the  whole  by  Dr.  Gregory  was  pub- 
 Hshed  in  London  1787,  i8i6,  1835,  1839,  1847, 
 So  rapidly  did  the  fame  of  this  work  spread  over 
 Europe,  that  it  was  translated  into  German  by 
 Schmidt,  Danzig  1793  ;  and  into  French  by  Sicard, 
 Lyon  1812.  Twelve  months  after  the  appear- 
 ance of  the  Prcelectiones  the  University  of  Ox- 
 ford conferred  upon  their  author  the  degree  ol 
 doctor  of  divinity.  Lowth  subjoined  to  the  Pralec- 
 tiones  A  short  Confutation  of  Bishop  Hare's  System 
 of  Hebreiu  Metre,  which  had  appeared  in  a  new 
 edition  of  the  Psalms  by  Bishop  Hare  (1736),  and 
 was  afterwards  translated  into  English  in  1755. 
 The  Harian  metre  was,  however,  defended  by  Dr. 
 Edwards,  both  in  his  Prolegomena  in  Libros  Veteris 
 Tcstamcnti  Poeticos,  1 762,  and  in  a  Latin  epistle, 
 1765.  To  this  Lowth  replied  the  following  year 
 in  a  pamphlet  addressed  to  Dr.  Edwards,  entitled 
 A  larger  Confutation  of  Bishop  Harems  System  oj 
 Hebrew  Meti-e,  London  1766,  reprinted  in  his 
 Memoir  and  Remains,  by  the  Rev.  Peter  Hall, 
 London  1834,  which  is  also  a  very  important 
 contribution  to  Biblical  Literature.  The  same  year 
 (1766)  he  was  promoted  in  June  to  the  see  of  St. 
 David's  ;  was  translated  about  four  months  after  to 
 that  of  Oxford,  and  thence  to  the  see  of  London 
 in  1777.  He  had  hardly  been  twelve  months  in 
 the  metropolis  when  he  published  his  last  and 
 greatest  w'ork,  entitled  Isaiah  ;  a  new  Translation 
 tvith  a  Preliminary  Dissei-tation,  and  Azotes,  Criti- 
 cal, Philological,  aiid  Explanatory,  in  which  he 
 aimed  '  not  only  to  give  an  exact  and  faithful  re- 
 presentation of  the  words  and  sense  of  the  prophet 
 by  adhering  closely  to  the  letter  of  the  text,  and 
 treading  as  nearly  as  may  be  in  his  footsteps  ;  but, 
 moreover,  to  imitate  the  air  and  manner  of  the 
 author,  to  express  the  fonn  and  fashion  of  the 
 composition,  and  to  give  the  English  reader  some 
 notion  of  the  peculiar  turn  and  cast  of  the  original.' 
 In  the  elaborate  and  valuable  Preliminary  Disser- 
 tation where  Lowth  states  this,  he  enters  more 
 minutely  than  in  his  former  production  into  the 
 form  and  construction  of  the  poetical  compositions 
 of  the  O.  T. ,  lays  down  principles  of  criticism  for 
 the  improvement  of  all  subsequent  translations, 
 and  frankly  alludes  to  De  Rossi's  view  of  Hebrew 
 poetry,  which  is  similar  to  his  own  [Rossi].  This 
 masterly  work  soon  obtained  an  European  fame, 
 and  was  not  only  rapidly  reprinted  in  England,  but 
 was  translated  into  German  by  Professor  Koppe, 
 who  added  some  valuable  notes  to  it,  Gottingen 
 1779-81,  4  vols.  8vo.  But  notwithstanding  the 
 great  merit.-,  of  his  truly  classical  and  erudite  contri- 
 butions to  "Siblical  literature,  it  must  be  said  that 
 Lowth  indulged  too  freely  in  conjectural  emenda- 
 tions, that  he  often  proceeded  veiy  rashly  and  un- 
 warrantably with  the  sacred  text,  and  that  if 
 succeeding  commentators  had  followed  his  example 
 in  this  respect,  and  taken  similar  liberties  wfth  tiic 
 
LOWTH 
 
 856 
 
 LUBIM,  LUBIMS 
 
 respective  volumes  of  the  O.  T. ,  we  should  now 
 have  had  a  different  Bible.  Lowth  died  Novem- 
 ber 3,  1787,  in  the  seventy-seventh  year  of  his  age, 
 full  of  years  and  full  of  honours.  Comp.  The  In- 
 trodiiciory  Memoir  to  the  Sermons  and  other  Remains 
 of  Bishop  Lo-ioth,  by  the  Rev.  Peter  Hall,  M.  A., 
 London  1834. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 LOWTH,  William,  D.D.,  was  born  in  Lon- 
 don in  1661.  He  was  educated  at  Merchant 
 Taylors'  School,  whence  he  was  elected  to  a 
 scholarship  at  St.  John's  College,  Oxford,  in 
 1675,  before  he  had  completed  his  fourteenth 
 year.  He  became  M.  A.  in  1683,  and  B.  D.  in 
 1688.  His  first  publication  was  a  Vindication  of 
 the  Divine  authority  of  the  0.  aini  N.  T.,  Lond. 
 1692,  in  answer  to  Le  Clerc's  attacks  on  the  in- 
 spiration of  Scripture.  This  brought  him  to  the 
 notice  of  Bisliop  Mew  of  Winchester,  who  made 
 him  his  chaplain,  and  presented  him  with  a  pre- 
 bendal  stall  at  Winchester  in  1696,  and  the  living 
 of  Buriton  with  Petersfield  in  1699,  which  prefer- 
 ments he  held  till  his  death  in  1732.  He  was  less 
 eminent  than  his  son,  the  Bishop  of  London,  but 
 he  was  believed  to  have  been  the  profounder 
 scholar ;  though  such  was  his  modesty  that  it  is 
 rather  from  his  contributions  to  the  works  of  others 
 than  from  his  own  that  the  extent  and  depth  of  his 
 reading  are  to  be  estimated.  He  had  carefully  read 
 and  annotated  upon  almost  every  Greek  and  Latin 
 author,  whether  profane  or  ecclesiastical,  and  he 
 dispensed  his  stores  with  a  most  liberal  hand. 
 The  edition  of  Clemens  Alexandiiiitis,  by  Dr. 
 (afterwards  Archbishop)  Potter  ;  that  of  yosephns, 
 by  Hudson  ;  and  the  Ecclesiastical  Historians,  by- 
 Reading,  were  enriched  with  valuable  notes  from 
 his  pen,  and  many  other  scholars  were  indebted 
 to  his  labours  for  important  aid.  In  addition  to 
 the  Vindication,  of  which  a  second  edition  ap- 
 peared in  1699,  with  an  admirable  dissertation  on 
 the  objections  against  the  Pentateuch  then  current, 
 Lowth  published  in  1708  Directions  for  the  pro- 
 fitable reading  of  Holy  Scripture,  an  excellent 
 little  work  which  has  gone  through  many  editions. 
 The  work  with  which  his  name  is  chiefly  connected 
 is  his  Commentary  on  the  Prophets,  originally  pub- 
 lished in  separate  portions,  between  17 14  and 
 1725,  and  afterwards  collected  in  a  folio  volume 
 as  a  continuation  of  Bishop  Patrick's  commentary 
 on  the  earlier  portion  of  the  O.  T.,  in  which  form 
 it  has  been  frequently  reprinted,  together  with 
 Whitby,  Arnald,  and  Lowman  on  the  N.  T.  The 
 merits  of  his  commentary  were  never  very  great, 
 and  it  has  been  long  since  entirely  superseded. 
 Its  tone  is  pious  but  cold,  and  he  entirely  fails  to 
 grasp  the  high  spiritual  and  poetical  character  of 
 the  prophetical  writings.  Besides,  his  knowledge 
 of  Hebrew  was  far  too  small  for  such  a  work,  his 
 critical  discernment  was  feeble,  and  in  his  zeal  for 
 Messianic  interpretations  he  too  often  neglects  the 
 first  historical  sense  of  a  passage.  His  method  of 
 unfolding  the  meaning  of  a  passage,  however,  is 
 simple,  direct,  and  brief;  and  his  interpretations, 
 if  not  always  satisfactory,  and  often  shallow,  have 
 the  merit  of  being  uniformly  intelligible,  and 
 characterised  by  good  sense. — E.  V. 
 
 LUBIM,  LUBIMS,  and  in  Dan.  xi.  43  Libyans 
 (D''3v  ;  but  in  Dan.  D''3^ ;  Aleves ;  Libyes,  Libya) ; 
 in  the  N.  T.  Libya  {Ki^vri).  When,  during  the 
 reign  of  Rehoboam,  Shishak  king  of  Egypt  invaded 
 
 Judah,  he  was  accompanied  by  '  the  Licbims,  the 
 Sukkims,  and  the  Ethiopians '  (2  Chron.  xii.  3)  ; 
 and  in  all  the  other  passages  in  which  the  Lubim 
 are  mentioned,  they  appear  as  the  allies  or  com- 
 panions in  war  of  the  Ethiopians  {Ciishim)  and 
 Egyptians  (2  Chron.  xvi.  8  ;  Dan.  xi.  43  ;  Nahum 
 iii.  9).  From  these  circumstances,  and  from  the 
 radical  identity  in  name,  we  infer  that  they  were 
 the  inhabitants  of  the  great  province  of  Libya  in 
 northern  Africa,  and  that  they  were  identical  with 
 the  Lehabim  who  sprung  from  Mizraim  (Gen.  x. 
 13  ;  see  Lehabim). 
 
 Origmally  the  Lubims  appear  to  have  been  de- 
 pendent on,  or  under  the  command  of,  the  Mizraim 
 (Egyptians).  In  fact,  they  were  just  a  tribe  or 
 family  of  Mizraim,  who,  for  the  sake  of  distinction, 
 took  the  name  of  their  more  immediate  progeni- 
 tor, and  settled  down  in  a  district  of  their 
 own.  They  appeared  to  have  multiplied  with 
 amazing  rapidity,  and  to  have  early  become  a 
 powerful  nation.  Less  civilized  than  the  Egyptians, 
 more  addicted  to  the  arts  of  war  than  peace, 
 being,  besides,  mainly  a  pastoral  people,  they 
 roamed  far  and  wide  over  the  arid  plains  of  north- 
 ern Africa,  and  gave  their  name  to  a  region  sup- 
 posed by  ancient  geographers  to  extend  from  the 
 banks  of  the  Nile  to  the  Atlantic,  and  from  the 
 shores  of  the  Mediterranean  to  the  equator. 
 
 Early  geographers  employed  the  name  Libya  m 
 a  somewhat  vague  sense.  Sometimes  they  make  it 
 include  all  Africa  ;  sometimes  all  except  Egypt ; 
 and  sometimes  that  region  which  lies  immediately 
 on  the  west  side  of  Egypt.  The  truth  seems  to  be 
 that  the  Greeks  were  best  acquainted  with  two 
 African  nations — the  Egyptians  and  the  Libyans. 
 The  boundaries  of  Egypt  were  known  to  them,  and 
 they  gave  the  name  Libya  vaguely  to  the  rest  of 
 the  continent,  just  as  they  called  the  whole  of 
 southern  Syria  Palestine  from  the  Philistines 
 (Homer,  Od.  iv.  87,  seq. ;  cf  Strabo,  book  i.  gene- 
 rally). Herodotus  was  the  first  to  give  definite 
 information  about  Libya.  He  applied  the  name  to 
 all  Africa,  except  Egypt.  '  As  for  Libya,  we  know 
 it  to  be  washed  on  all  sides  by  the  sea,  except 
 where  it  is  attached  to  Asia  ;'  and  he  then  tells  the 
 manner  in  which  Phoenician  mariners  sailed  round 
 the  continent  from  the  Red  Sea  to  the  mouth  of  the 
 Nile  (iv.  41,  42).  He  describes  the  vast  deserts  of 
 the  interior  (ii.  32),  and  the  nomad  and  warlike 
 character  of  the  people  (iv.  182,  seq.)  He  classes 
 the  Ethiopians  and  Libyans  together,  as  the  sacred 
 writers  do  (iv.  197).  The  accounts  of  Strabo  and 
 Ptolemy  agree  in  the  main  with  Herodotus  (Strabo, 
 i.  ;  Ptolemy,  iv.  4).  The  physical  geography  of 
 Libya  is  remarkable.  The  country  consists  of  two 
 great  belts  (Herodotus  says  th^'ee,  iv.  181)  :  I.  A 
 belt  of  dese)-t  running  across  the  whole  interior,  from 
 east  to  west,  appropriately  called  Sahara,  '  the 
 Desert.'  It  is  covered  with  loose  shifting  sand,  or 
 dry  gravelly  soil ;  it  is  without  water  ;  its  pastures 
 are  very  scanty  ;  in  some  places  for  scores  of  miles 
 there  is  not  a  blade  of  grass.  But  here  and  there  it 
 is  dotted  with  little  tracts  of  fertile  ground,  green 
 with  herbs  and  trees  (Bruce,  Travels  ;  Burckhardt, 
 Nubia).  This  vast  and  dreary  region,  with  the 
 mountain-ranges  along  portions  of  its  northern  and 
 southern  borders,  was  the  home  of  the  warlike  and 
 nomad  Lubim,  as  it  still  is  of  numerous  and  power- 
 ful Arab  tribes.  2.  A  belt  of  cultivated  ground, 
 in  some  places  narrow,  in  others  stretching  far  into 
 the  interior.     At  favourable   positions  along  the 
 
LUCAS 
 
 857 
 
 LUCIFER 
 
 coast,  the  Greeks  and  Phoenicians  formed  settle- 
 ments at  a  veiy  early  period.  The  most  celebrated 
 of  these  colonies  was  Cyrene,  founded  by  Greeks 
 about  600  years  B.  c.  A  large  province  was  in  time 
 attached  to  the  city,  and  took  its  name  [Cyrene]. 
 To  this  province  those  belonged  who  were  present 
 at  the  miraculous  gift  of  tongues  on  the  day  of  Pen- 
 tecost, and  who  are  correctly  described  by  Luke  as 
 'dwellers  in  the  parts  of  Libya  about  Cyrene'  (Acts 
 ii.  10).  For  full  accounts  of  Libya,  see  Ritter, 
 Africa;  Mannert,  Gcographie;  Heeren,  African 
 N'ations ;  Smith,  Diet,  of  G.and R.  Geog.,  s.  v.;  and 
 the  works  cited  above. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LUCAS.     [Luke.] 
 
 LUCAS,  Franciscus  (Brugensis),  one  of  the 
 ablest  of  the  Roman  Catholic  commentators,  was 
 born  at  Bruges  in  1549.  He  studied  under  Arias 
 Montanus,  was  a  licentiate  of  theology  of  Louvain, 
 and  Dean  of  St.  Omers,  and  died  at  the  age  of 
 seventy,  Feb.  19,  1619.  He  was  celebrated  for 
 his  knowledge  of  the  sacred  languages,  and  their 
 cognate  dialects  ;  and  was  appointed  to  superin- 
 tend the  edition  of  the  Bihlia  Regia,  brought  out 
 by  Plantin,  the  famous  printer  of  Antwerp,  wnder 
 the  auspices  of  Philip  H.  of  Spain.  The  work  by 
 which  he  is  principally  known  is  his  Commentariiis 
 in  Qtiatuor  Evangelia,  Antw.  1606,  which  was 
 completed  by  Siipplemetiium  Conuncntar.  in  Lite, 
 etjoann.,  Antw.  1612,  i6i6.  The  commentary  is 
 preceded  by  a  harmony  of  the  gospels  under  the 
 title  of  Itiiierarium  f.  Ch.,  and  has  appended  to 
 it  a  dissertation  on  the  Chaldee  paraphrase.  This 
 work  originated  in  his  compliance  with  a  request 
 of  Plantin  that  Lucas  would  compile  Sc/io/ia  on  the 
 N.  T.  similar  to  those  of  Vatablus  on  the  O.  T. 
 The  work  grew  on  his  hands  and  became  a  com- 
 mentary, and  one  of  no  ordinary  merit.  Entirely 
 passing  by,  or  alluding  in  the  briefest  manner  to 
 the  mystical  sense,  and  omitting  all  doctrinal  dis- 
 cussions, he  explains  clearly  and  concisely  the 
 literal  meaning,  illustrating  it  frequently  from  the 
 Greek  and  Latin  fathers,  as  well  as  from  later 
 writers  of  authority,  though  never  burdening  his 
 pages  with  lists  of  conflicting  authorities.  His 
 plan  is  a  simple  one,  and  judiciously  carried  out. 
 He  chooses  one  sense,  and  that  the  one  which  the 
 sacred  writer  appeared  to  have  had  in  view,  and 
 briefly  expounds  and  illustrates  that,  never  distract- 
 ing his  readers  with  varying  interpretations  only 
 mentioned  to  be  rejected.  Lucas  had  no  mean 
 critical  ability,  and  his  knowledge  of  Greek,  He- 
 brew, and  Syriac,  was  exact  and  trustworthy.  A 
 truly  devotional  spirit  breathes  through  the  whole. 
 He  was  also  the  compiler  of  N'otatio7ies  in  Sacr. 
 Bibl.,  Amst.  1581,  with  a  careful  summary  of  the 
 various  readings,  which  were  also  appended  to  the 
 edition  of  the  Vulgate  that  appeared  from  the 
 press  of  Plantin  with  Emman.  Sa's  notes,  Antw. 
 1624,  under  the  title  Fr.  Lucce,  Roman,  correct,  in 
 Bibl.  Latiji.  loc.  insigtiiora.  He  also  produced  a 
 Co}icordance  of  the  Vulgate,  corrected  and  aug- 
 mented by  Herbert  Phalesius  and  Benedict  of 
 Affhghem,  Antw.  1606  (best  edition,  Antw.  1642). 
 — E.  V. 
 
 LUCIFER  ^^T^;  Sept.  6  'Ewcr06/3os),  a  word 
 
 that  occurs   once   in  the  English  Version  in  the 
 lines — 
 
 '  How  art  thou  fallen  from  heaven, 
 Ijiicifer,  son  of  the  inorningl 
 
 How  art  thou  felled  to  the  ground, 
 That  didst  weaken  the  nations  ! ' 
 
 (Is.  xiv.  12).  It  is  taken  from  the  Vulgate,  which 
 understood  the  Hebrew  word  ppT!  heylel,  to  be  the 
 jia)ne  of  the  morning  star,  and  therefore  rendered 
 it  by  the  Latin  name  of  that  star,  Lucifer,  i.  e. 
 'light-bringing.'  This,  the  popular  sense,  is  con- 
 veyed in  the  note  in  Barker's  Bible  :  '  Thou  that 
 thoughtest  thyselfe  most  glorious,  and  as  it  were 
 placed  in  the  heaven ;  for  the  morning  starre  that 
 goeth  before  the  sunne  is  called  Lucifer,  to  which 
 Nebuchadnezzar  is  compared.' 
 
 7pin  heylel,  the  word  translated  '  Lucifer,'  how- 
 ever, occurs  also  in  Ezek.  xxi.   12  (Heb.   17),  as 
 
 the  imperative  oiyp^ yalal,  'to  howl,'  'to  lament,' 
 and  is  there  rendered  '  howl.'  Some  take  it  in  the 
 same  acceptation  in  the  above  passage,  and  would 
 translate,  '  Howl,  son  of  the  morning ! '  But  to 
 this  the  structure  of  the  verse  is  entirely  opposed; 
 for  the  parallelism  requires  the  second  line  to  refer 
 entirely  to  the  condition  of  the  star  before  it  had 
 fallen,  as  the  parallel  member — the  fourth  line — 
 does  to  the  state  of  the  tree  before  it  was  cut  down. 
 This  necessity  is  apparent  even  in  the  English  ver- 
 sion, where  the  word  'lament,'  in  the  place  which 
 '  Lucifer'  occupies,  would  not  agree  with  the  con- 
 text, nor  make  good  sense,  or  indeed,  any  sense. 
 Any  imperative  interjected  would  spoil  the  beauty 
 and  impair  the  force  of  the  language.  It  is  from 
 this  consideration  that  we  must  concur  with  those 
 
 who  refer  the  source  of  the  word  not  to  ^^Ji  yalal, 
 
 but  to  77n  halal,  'to  shine,'  and  regard  it  as  a 
 verbal  noun  designed  to  be  intensive  in  its  significa- 
 tion. Hence  it  would  mean  'brilliant,'  'splendid,' 
 '  illustrious,"  or,  as  in  the  Septuagint,  Vulgate,  the 
 Rabbinical  commentators,  Luther,  and  others, 
 'brilliant  star;'  and  if  7p\n,  in  this  sense,  was  the 
 proper  name  among  the  Hebrews  of  the  morning 
 star,  then  '  Lucifer '  is  not  only  a  correct  but 
 beautiful  interpretation,  both  as  regards  the  sense 
 and  the  application.  And  that  it  was  such  is  pro- 
 bable from  the  fact  that  the  proper  name  of  the 
 morning  star  is  formed  by  a  word  or  words  ex- 
 pressive of  brilliance,  in  the  Arabic  and  Syriac,  as 
 well  as  in  the  Greek  and  Latin.  Tertullian  and 
 Gregory  the  Great  understood  this  passage  of 
 Isaiah  in  reference  to  the  fall  of  Satan;  in  conse- 
 quence of  which  the  name  Lucifer'  has  since  been 
 applied  to  Satan;  and  this  is  now  the  usual  accep- 
 tation of  the  word.  But  Dr.  Henderson,  who  in 
 his  Lsaiah  renders  the  line,  '  Illustrious  son  of  the 
 morning  !'  justly  remarks  in  his  annotation  :  '  The 
 application  of  this  passage  to  Satan,  and  to  the 
 fall  of  the  apostate  angels,  is  one  of  those  gross 
 perversions  of  Sacred  Writ  which  so  extensively 
 obtain,  and  which  are  to  be  traced  to  a  proneness 
 to  seek  for  more  in  any  given  passage  than  it 
 really  contains,  a  disposition  to  be  influenced  by 
 sound  rather  than  sense,  and  an  implicit  faith  in 
 received  interpretations.  '  Quum,'  says  Calvin, 
 '  temere  arripiuntur  Scripturas  loci,  nee  attenditur 
 contextus,  hos  errores  passim  oboriri  mirum  non 
 est"  {Comtnent.  in  loc.)  The  scope  and  connec- 
 tion shew  that  none  but  the  king  of  Babylon  is 
 meant.  In  the  figurative  language  of  the  Hebrews, 
 HDI^,  a  star,  signifies  an  illustrious  king  or  prince 
 (Num.  xxiv.  17;  comp.  Rev.  ii.  28;  xxii.  16).  The 
 monarch  here   referred    to   having  surpassed  all 
 
LUCIUS 
 
 858 
 
 LUCIUS 
 
 other  kings  in  royal  splendour,  is  compared  to  the 
 harbinger  of  day,  whose  brilliancy  surpasses  that 
 of  the  surrounding  stars.  Falling  from  heaven 
 denotes  a  sudden  political  overthrow — a  removal 
 from  the  position  of  high  and  conspicuous  dignity 
 formerly  occupied  (comp.  Rev.  vi.  13;  viii.  10). — 
 J.  K. 
 
 LUCIUS.  I.  (LXX.  AeiKLos;  AkL  AotVtos ; 
 Vulg.  Litchis),  a  Roman  consul  (fiTraros  'Pw^aiwi'), 
 v/ho  is  recorded  as  having  written  a  letter  to  King 
 Ptolemee  (Euergetes  II.,  Pliyscon),  in  which  the 
 old  friendship  and  league  was  to  be  renewed  with 
 Simon,  and  the  protection  of  the  Romans  accorded 
 to  him  («>.  B.C.  139-138;  I  Maccab.  xv.  10, 
 16-21).  Letters  of  the  same  purport  were  also 
 written  by  Lucius  to  other  kings  and  to  several 
 nations  (i  Maccab.  xv.  22-24).  Though  the  letter 
 cannot  be  altogether  rejected  as  spurious,  there  are 
 many  circumstances  connected  with  it  which  lay  it 
 open  to  suspicion,  and  it  is  probable  that  it  is  not 
 a  true  copy  of  the  original  document.  The  Romans 
 never  wrote  their  letters  in  the  name  of  one  consul, 
 but  in  the  name  of  the  senate,  nor  was  a  consul 
 ever  designated  by  Yivs,  prcEuomen.  The  date  is  also 
 wanting,  and  the  whole  tenor  of  the  language  and 
 the  gist  of  the  letter  is  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the 
 time  (cf  Wernsdorff,  De  fid.  libr.  Maccab.,  sec. 
 cxix.)  In  the  account  of  Simon  by  Josephus  {Antiq. 
 xiii.  6.  7  ;  7.  1-4)  no  mention  is  made  of  this  letter, 
 though  there  is  a  decree  of  the  senate  very  similar 
 in  its  contents,  made  on  the  motion  of  a  Lucius 
 Valerius  during  the  reign  of  Hyrcanus  II.  (Antiq. 
 xiv.  8.  5).  There  is  evidently  a  mistake  in  this 
 latter  passage  of  Josephus,  for  the  decree  should 
 have  spoken  about  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem  (cf. 
 the  decree,  Antiq.  xiv.  10.  5).  It  has  been  sup- 
 posed (Hudson,  Joseph.  /.  c.)  that  Josephus  has 
 confused  the  names  of  the  two  Hyrcani,  and  that 
 tne  decree  should  apply  to  the  first,  though,  if  an 
 error  be  allowed,  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt, 
 as  Mr.  Westcott  (Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  s.  v. 
 Lucius)  already  observes,  that  Josephus  must  have 
 removed  the  incident  from  its  proper  place. 
 
 Lucius  has  been  identified  with  three  distinct 
 personages;  (i.)  L.  [Lucius]  Junius  Philus  (not  P. 
 [Publius]  Junius  Philus,  as  given  in  Clinton,  F.  II., 
 vol.  iii.  p.  112,  from  Cassiod.  and  Cic.  ad  Atl.  xii. 
 5.  3  ;  cf.  Obseq.  25,  and  Sigonius,  Comment,  in 
 Fast.  p.  199),  who  was  consul  in  B.  C.  136  with 
 Sex.  Atilius  Serranus.  This  date  is  too  late.  (2.) 
 Lucius  Csecilius  Metellus  Calvus,  who  was  consul 
 in  B.C.  142,  with  Q.  Fabius  Maximus  Servilianus. 
 This  was  immediately  after  the  accession  of  Simon, 
 and  as  the  Romans  then  renewed  the  league  which 
 they  had  made  with  Judas  and  Jonathan  (i  Maccab. 
 xiv.  18,  19),  there  may  be  a  connection  between 
 this  decree  and  the  later  embassy  of  Numenius 
 (l  Maccab.  xiv.  24  ;  xv.  18).  (3.)  Cn.  or  L.  Cal- 
 purnius  Piso,  who  was  consul  in  B.  C.  139  with  M. 
 Popillius  La:nas.  This  identification  is  in  all  pro- 
 bability correct,  as  the  date  exactly  corresponds. 
 There  is,  however,  a  difficulty  about  the  prrenomen 
 of  Calpurnius  Piso.  Cassiodorus  (C/zww. ),  as  edited, 
 gives  Cn.  Piso,  whilst  the  Fasti  Capitolini,  which 
 are  defective,  only  record  the  name  of  Popillius, 
 the  fellow-consul  of  Calpurnius.  Valerius  Maxi- 
 mus (lib.  i.  3),  as  quoted  from  the  best  (?)  printed 
 texts,  also  gives  the  same  prsenomen.  This  latter 
 quotation  is  incorrect,  as  the  passage  in  which  the 
 name  of  these  consuls  appears,  seems  not  to  be 
 
 part  of  Valerius  Maximus,  but  a  portion  of  the 
 abridgment  of  an  epitomizer,  which  has  been  in- 
 serted in  the  text.  This  portion  of  the  first  book 
 of  Valerius  Maximus,  extending  from  cap.  I  to 
 cap.  5,  '  Milesia  Ceres — suffecttiram  urbem,'  was 
 first  inserted  in  the  text  by  Aldus  (ed.  Ven.  1502) 
 from  a  very  ancient  MS.  of  Valerius  Maximus 
 {Valerium  antiquissimntn.  Aid.  Prsef )  at  Vienna,* 
 and  not  as  Mai  {Script.  Vet.  Nova  Coll.,  vol.  iii., 
 Prsef.  p.  xxi.)  supposes,  from  a  copy  of  the  epitome 
 of  Julius  Paris  now  lost.  Aldus  states  that  this 
 portion  was  missing  in  all  the  MS.S.  he  had  seen  in 
 Italy,  as  appears  also  to  be  the  case  with  the  majority 
 of  MSS.  in  all  the  European  libraries.  Mr.  West- 
 cott {I.e.)  examined  eleven  MSS.  of  Valerius,  and 
 found  only  one  containing  it  (Mus.  Brit.  Burn.  209), 
 and  the  present  writer  has  examined  all  the  MSS.  of 
 Valerius  in  the  British  Museum  (22),  and  the  inseited 
 portion  occurs  only  in  two  (Mus.  Brit.  Burti.  209, 
 15th  cent.  ;  and  Harl.  2759,  15th  cent.)  In  the 
 former  the  name  is  given  as  L  [Lucio^  Calp!trno 
 {sic),  and  in  the  latter  as  Lucio  Cabsurino  (sic). 
 Aldus  gave  the  name  as  L.  [Lucio]  Calp.,  and  Mai, 
 in  his  edition  of  Julius  Paris  {Script  Vet.,  etc.,  vol. 
 iii.  lib.  i.  3,  11),  also  gives  the  name  L.  [Lucio]. 
 It  has  been  questioned  on  good  grounds  whether 
 this  portion  is  really  in  the  words  of  Valerius,  or 
 has  been  borrowed  from  his  epitomizer  Julius  Paris, 
 and  the  latter  opinion  seems  to  be  preferable.  It 
 is,  however,  certain,  that  it  must  have  originally 
 formed  part  of  the  text,  since  it  is  not  only  found 
 in  the  epitome  of  Paris  (end  of  4th  or  beginning  of 
 5th  cent.),  but  also  in  that  of  a  somewhat  later 
 writer,  Januarius  Nepotianus  (6th  cent.),  but  in 
 different  words,  which  affords  a  sufficient  proof  that 
 they  both  abstracted  from  an  earlier  prototype  (see 
 Kempf's  ed.  of  Valerius,  1854,  prjef ,  p.  93).  Mai, 
 who  first  published  the  epitome  of  Paris,  assigns  the 
 MS.  to  the  loth  century,  but  it  is  doubtless  much 
 earlier,  since  the  most  ancient  MS.  existing  of 
 Valerius  Maximus  (the  one  formerly  belonging  to 
 P.  Daniel,  and  now  in  the  Public  Library  at  Berne, 
 Kempf.,  p.  78)  can  be  ascribed  to  the  close  of  the 
 9th  century  ;  and  it  is  in  this  MS.  that  a  second 
 hand  (but  nearly  coeval  with  the  original)  has  sup- 
 plied the  missing  portion  from  the  abbreviator  of 
 Maximus,  whom  he  names  C.  Titus  (or  Titius)  Pro- 
 bus — a  name,  it  must  be  remarked,  which  occurs  in 
 the  Vatican  MS.  published  by  Mai.  There  can  be 
 little  doubt  that  from  this  early  copy  are  derived 
 the  later  transcripts  which  retain  the  missing  portion. 
 They  are  not  numerous,  probably  not  exceeding 
 eight  or  nine.  It  is  evident  that  this  lacuna  must 
 have  occurred,  at  a  very  early  date,  by  the  care- 
 lessness of  the  transcriber  or  by  accident,  and 
 hence  it  is  that  the  majority  of  the  MS?,  in  all  the 
 European  libraries,  which  are  chiefly  of  the  14th  or 
 15  th  centuries,  omit  it.f 
 
 *  This  information  was  supplied  to  Aldus  by 
 Cuspinian.  It  is  highly  probable  that  the  very 
 ancient  MS.  seen  by  Cuspinian  at  Vienna,  with  the 
 additional  portion  at  the  beginning,  is  the  MS.  of 
 P.  Daniel  now  at  Berne. 
 
 +  There  is  a  MS.  in  the  British  Musetim  {Add. 
 19,  835),  of  the  I2th  century,  containing  Excerpts 
 of  Valerius  Maximus,  which  also  omits  the  portion 
 in  question.  These  Excerpts  were  probably  made 
 by  Fulbert,  bishop  of  Chartres,  who  died  in  1027 
 or  1 03 1  {Opera  ovinia,  ed.  Car.  Le  Villiers,  Paris 
 1608). 
 
LUCIUS 
 
 859 
 
 LUD 
 
 The  reading  Cn.,  as  far  as  1  have  been  able  to 
 ascertain,  was  first  introduced  into  the  text  by 
 Pighius  (8vo,  Antw.  1574).  It  is  again  repeated 
 in  the  Frankfort  edition  of  1601,  by  Coler,  who, 
 whilst  copying  the  text  of  Pighius,  professes  to  col- 
 late it  with  the  MS.  of  P.  Daniel  above  alluded  to. 
 This  reading  has  been  followed  by  Torrenius  (410, 
 Leid.  1726)  and  Kappius  (8vo,  Lips.  1782).  It  ap- 
 pears, however,  that  Coler  omitted  to  collate  the 
 passage  in  question,  for,  thanks  to  the  kindness  of 
 M.  Chs.  Ls.  de  Steigez,  the  principal  librarian  of 
 the  Public  Library  at  Berne,  through  whom  I  have 
 been  able  to  examine  the  MS.  itself,  I  find  that 
 the  correct  reading  is  L.  Calpurnio,  as  was  already 
 given  by  Aldus  in  1502,  and  it  is  more  than  likely 
 that  all  the  MSB.  read  Lucius*  Sigonius  {Com- 
 ment, in  Fast.,  p.  197)  has  justly  said  (but  incor- 
 rectly quoted  jy  Mr.  Westcott),  '  Cassiodorus  in 
 hunc  annum  prodit  consules  Cn.  Pisonem  cum  M. 
 Popillio  :  M.  POPILLIUM  [read  m.  povillius,  see 
 Corpus  Inscript.  Lat.  Vet.,  ed.  Mommsen  1863, 
 vol.  i.  p.  438,  cf  p.  532]  Capitolinum  fragmentum : 
 M.  Popillium  Lrenatem  Appianus  et  Epitoma  : 
 L.  Calpumium  Valerius  \read  Julius  Paris]  libro 
 primo.    ..." 
 
 It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  Fasti  Capitolini  are 
 defective  ;  and  the  authority  of  Cassiodorus,  whose 
 statements  are  known  to  be  full  of  errors,  can 
 hardly  be  held  as  conclusive  against  that  of  the 
 MSS.  of  Valerius.  In  any  case,  the  authority  of 
 I  Maccab.  might  be  held  as  affording  another  argu- 
 ment in  favour  of  the  prsenomen  of  Calpurnius 
 being  Lucius. — F.  W.  M. 
 
 2.  (Aoi5/ctos  ;  Lucius),  a  kinsman  {(jv^^jtvrj'i)  or 
 fellow-countryman  of  St.  Paul,  to  whom,  as  to 
 Jason  and  Sosipater,  St.  Paul  sent  salutations 
 (Rom.  xvi.  21).  The  Apostolical  Constitutions 
 (vii.  46)  make  the  first  bishop  of  Cenchrese  to  have 
 been  Lucius,  and  state  that  he  was  consecrated  by 
 St.  Paul  himself.  Others  identify  him  with  Lucius 
 of  Cyrene  {q.  v)—Y.  W.  M. 
 
 3.  Of  Cyrene  (Aoi/zctos  6  \\.vpriva2o'i)  was  a 
 native  of  the  town  of  Africa  from  which  he  takes 
 his  name,  and  which  was  noted  for  the  number 
 of  Jews  there  resident  (cf.  Acts  ii.  10 ;  vi.  9  ;  xi. 
 20 ;  Simon  the  Cyrenian,  Matt,  xxvii.  32  ;  Mark 
 XV.  21  ;  Luke  xxiii.  26  ;  Jason  of  Cyrene,  2  Mac- 
 cab,  ii.  23).  He  is  first  mentioned  in  the  N.  T. 
 with  Barnabas,  Simeon  called  Niger,  Manaen,  and 
 Saul,  who  are  entitled  '  teachers  and  prophets  in 
 the  chuixh  of  Antioch'  (Acts  xiii.  i).  It  is  very 
 probable  that  he  was  one  of  the  '  men  of  Cyrene' 
 who  '  were  scattered  abroad  upon  the  persecution 
 that  arose  about  Stephen,'  and  who,  when  they  had 
 come  to  Antioch,  preached  '  the  Lord  Jesus'  (Acts 
 xi.  19,  20).  He  may  also  have  been  among  the 
 Cyrenians  who  assembled  together  on  the  day  of 
 Pentecost  to  hear  the  words  of  St.  Peter  (Acts  ii. ) 
 
 There  is  every  reason  to  suppose  that  Lucius  of 
 Cyrene  is  the  same  person  as  Lucius  the  avyytvi]^ 
 of  St.  Paul  [Lucius,  2].  He  must  not,  however, 
 be  confounded  with  St.  Luke  (AoukSs),  who,  though 
 mentioned  three  times  by  St.  Paul  in  his  Epistles 
 (Col.  iv.  14;  2  Tim.  iv.  Ii  ;  Philem.  24),  is  no- 
 where called  (Tiry7ei'T?s.     The  name  Luke  (Lucas) 
 
 *  Kempf  (p.  126,  note),  though  allowing  that 
 all  the  MSS.  of  Valerius  read  Z««>«,  supposes  that 
 it  is  an  error,  and  that  we  should  read  Ci^ceus  as  in 
 the  Fasti.     What  Fasti  ? 
 
 is  an  abbreviated  form  of  Lucanus.  In  the  Colos- 
 sians  he  is  described  as  '  the  beloved  physician,' 
 whilst  he  is  designated  as  '  a  fellow-labourer '  by 
 St.  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  Philemon.  Wetstein, 
 who  believes  that  Lucius  of  Cyrene  and  St.  Luke 
 are  one  and  the  same  person,  has  ingeniously  quoted 
 a  passage  from  Herodotus  (iii.  131),  in  which  '  two 
 physicians'  are  mentioned,  and  both  '  Cyrenians.' 
 Various  traditions  make  Lucius  bishop  of  Cen- 
 chrete  (see  Lucius,  2),  of  Cyrene,  and  of  Laodicea 
 in  Syria  (Winer,  Eealworterbuck,  s.  v.  Lucius.) — • 
 F.  W.  M. 
 
 LUD  (lib ;  Aoi)5,  and  Kvhoi ;  Liid,  and  Lydii), 
 the  fourth  son  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  22  ;  i  Chron.  i. 
 17).  The  names  recorded  in  Gen.  x.  are  intended 
 to  denote  not  simply  individuals,  but  especially  those 
 nations  which  they  founded,  and  to  which  they  gave 
 their  names  (ver.  31).  Lud,  therefore,  must  be  re- 
 garded as  the  founder  of  a  nation,  like  Elam,  • 
 Asshur,  and  Aram.  Nothing  is  said  of  this  nation 
 in  the  writings  of  Moses.  The  countries  peopled 
 by  the  other  Shemitic  nations  are  indicated  with 
 more  or  less  clearness,  but  the  Ludim  are  omitted. 
 We  are  fortunately  enabled  to  supply  this  omission 
 from  other  sources.  Josephus  states  '  those  who 
 are  now  called  Lydians  (Au5ot),  but  anciently 
 Ludim  (Aoi;5oi),  sprung  from  Lud '  (AouSa,  Antiq. 
 i.  6.  4 ;  cf.  Bochart.  Opera,  \.  83,  and  the  authori- 
 ties cited  there).  Lydia,  however,  lay  on  the  west 
 coast  of  Asia  Minor,  and  was  thus  far  removed 
 from  the  other  possessions  of  the  Shemitic  nations. 
 Greek  writers  inform  us  that  Lydia  was  origin- 
 ally peopled  by  a  Pelasgic  race  called  Maonians 
 (Homer,  //.  ii.  866  ;  x.  431),  who  received  their 
 name  from  Maeon,  an  ancient  king  (Bochart,  /.  c.) 
 They  also  state  that  the  name  Lybians  was  derived 
 iVom  a  king  who  ruled  them  at  a  later  period 
 (Herod,  i.  7).  About  eight  centuries  B.  C.  a  tribe 
 of  another  race  migrated  from  the  east,  and  sub- 
 dued the  Mieonians.  These  were  the  Lydians.  For 
 some  time  after  this  conquest  both  nations  are 
 mentioned  promiscuously,  but  the  Lydians  gradu- 
 ally obtained  power,  and  gave  their  name  to  the 
 country  (Kalisch  Oji  Gen.  x.  ;  Dionysius,  i.  30 ; 
 Pliny,  v.  30  ;  cf  Strabo,  xii.  572  ;  xiv.  679).  The 
 best  and  most  recent  critics  regard  these  Lydians 
 as  a  Shemitic  tribe,  and  consequently  the  descend- 
 ants of  Lud  (Movers,  Die  Phmnizier,  i.  475).  This 
 view  is  strengthened  by  the  description  of  the  cha- 
 racter and  habits  of  the  Lydians.  They  were 
 warlike  (Herod,  i.  79),  skilled  in  horsemanship  {id.), 
 and  accustomed  to  serve  as  mercenaries  under 
 foreign  princes  (vii.  71).  Now,  in  Is.  Ixvi.  19,  a 
 warlike  people  called  Lud  is  mentioned  in  connec- 
 tion with  Tarshish  and  Pul  ;  and  again  in  Ezek. 
 xxvii.  10,  the  prophet  says  of  Tyre,  'They  of  Persia, 
 and  of  Lud,  and  of  Phut,  were  in  thine  army,  thy 
 men  of  war.'  There  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt  that 
 this  is  the  Shemitic  nation  mentioned  in  Genesis, 
 and  which  migrated  to  western  Asia,  and  gave  the 
 province  of  Lydia  its  name.  The  identity  has  re- 
 cently been  called  in  question  by  Professor  and  Sir 
 Henry  Rawlinson,  but  their  arguments  do  not  seem 
 sufficient  to  set  aside  the  great  mass  of  circumstan- 
 tial evidence  in  its  favour  (Rawlinson's  Herodotus, 
 i.  160,  659,  667 ;  cf  Kalisch,  /.  c.  ;  Prichard, 
 Physical  LListory  of  Mankind,  iv.  562,  seq.  ;  Nie- 
 buhr.  Lectures  on  And.  Hist,  i.  87  ;  Gesenius, 
 Thesaurus,  p.  745)- 
 
 Originally  Lydia  \\-as  a  small  province,  but   it 
 
LUDIM 
 
 860 
 
 LUKE 
 
 extended  at  length,  until,  in  the  time  of  Croesus,  it 
 included  all  Asia  Minor,  as  far  as  the  river  Halys, 
 except  Cilicia  and  Lycia.  During  the  Roman  age 
 it  was  again  reduced,  and  was  bounded  on  the  north 
 by  Mysia,  on  the  east  by  Phrygia,  and  on  the  south 
 by  Caria  (Smitli's  Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Rom.  Gcog.  ; 
 and  the  authorities  quoted  there).  The  province  is 
 not  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.,  but  Paul  traversed  it, 
 and  visited  some  of  its  principal  cities,  as  Thyatira, 
 Sardis,  and  Philadelphia. 
 
 This  Lud  or  Lydia  must  be  carefully  distin- 
 guished from  the  Hamitic  Liid  or  Ludim.  See  next 
 article.— J.  L.  P. 
 
 LUDIM  (Dni^,  Gen.   x.  13  ;  Qin^^,  l   Chron. 
 
 i,  II;  AovSielfi  ;  Licdim ;  H7,  Ezek.  xxx.  5  i 
 AuSo/,  Lydi).  Of  Mizraim,  the  second  son  of 
 Ham,  we  read  (Gen.  x.  13),  that  '  he  begat 
 Ltidim,  and  Anamim,  and  Lehabim,'  etc.  These 
 are  all  in  the  plural,  and  denote  tribes  or  nations 
 springing  from  the  several  sons  (ver.  20).  Jere- 
 miah (xlvi.  9),  in  predicting  the  downfall  of  Egypt 
 (Mizraim),  says,  '  Let  the  mighty  men  come  forth; 
 the    Ethiopians    (Gush),    and    the    Libyans   (Put), 
 
 and  the  Lydians  {W^TO,  Ludi/ii)  that  handle  and 
 
 bend  the  bow.'  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this 
 warlike  tribe  is  identical  with  the  Mizraite  Ludim 
 of  Genesis.  Again,  the  prophet  Ezekiel  thus  writes, 
 '  And  the  sword  shall  come  upon  Egypt,    .... 
 
 Ethiopia  (Gush),  and  Libya  (Phut) ;  and  Lydia  (l!)? 
 
 the  sing,  of  D''nv))    •    •    •    shall  fall  with  them  by 
 
 the  sword  '  (xxx.  5).  Lydia  here  should  have  been 
 translated  'Lud'  or  'Ludim,'  for  the  same  Miz- 
 raite people  ai-e  unquestionably  meant.  They  are 
 distinct,  however,  from  the  Shemitic  tribe  of  Lud 
 mentioned  in  conneciion  with  Tarshish  (Is.  Ixvi. 
 19),  and  Persia  (Ezek.  xxvii.  10),  and  which  are 
 treated  of  in  the  preceding  article. 
 
 The  country  of  Ludim  has  not  been  satisfactorily 
 identified.  Some  have  supposed  that  it  lay  south 
 of  Morocco,  near  the  west  coast  of  Africa,  because 
 Pliny  (v.  i)  mentions  a  river  Laud  in  that  region 
 (Michaelis,  Spicil.  i.  259,  and  Suppl.  141 7).  Bo- 
 chart  attempts  to  prove  that  the  Ludim  were  the 
 Ethiopians,  though  it  is  generally  supposed  that 
 Gush  is  the  Biblical  name  of  Ethiopia.  He  argues 
 the  point  at  great  length,  and  displays  both  learn- 
 ing and  ingenuity.  But  his  arguments  scarcely 
 bear  searching  criticism.  They  are  more  inge- 
 nious than  convincing  {Opera,  i.  263-274).  Hitzig 
 would  identify  the  Ludim  and  the  Libyans,  which 
 is  still  more  improbable  {Der  Proph.  Jesaia,  Ixvi. 
 19  ;  and  Jereniia  xlvi.  9).  It  seems  that  the  Ludim 
 were  a  tribe  of  Egyptians  forming  part  of  that  great 
 nation,  though  perhaps  concentrated  in  some  one 
 section  of  the  country,  and  retaining  to  some  ex- 
 tent a  distinct  name,  and  certain  distinctive  pecu- 
 liarities in  laws  and  mode  of  life,  like  the  Maronites 
 or  Druzes  in  modern  Syria.  This  seems  to  be 
 indicated  in  Jer.  xlvi.  9  and  Ezek.  xxx.  5)  where 
 the  Ludim  are  included  in  the  curse  pronounced 
 upon  Egypt.  The  name  appears  to  have  entirely 
 disappeared,  and  we  do  not  meet  with  it  in  any 
 classic  author. — J.  L.  P. 
 
 LUEGKE,  Gottfried  Ghristian  Fried- 
 rich,  a  celebrated  German  theologian,  was  bom 
 at  Egehi,  near  Magdeburg,  in  1792,  and  died, 
 1855,  at  Gottingen.     In  1816  he  went,  after  hav- 
 
 ing passed  his  university  career,  chiefly  in  Halle 
 and  Gottingen,  and  having  filled  the  office  of  Re- 
 petitor  at  the  latter  place  for  several  years,  to  Ber- 
 lin, where  he  became  intimate  with  De  Wette  and 
 Schleiermacher,  and  lectured  on  N.  T.  exegesis. 
 In  1818  he  was  called  to  fill  a  chair  at  the  newly 
 founded  university  at  Bonn,  which,  in  1827,  he 
 left  for  another  professorship  at  Gottingen.  His 
 principal  works  are: — Commentatio  de  Ecclesia 
 Ckristianornm  Apostolica,  Gottingen  1813,  4to  ; 
 Uebei-  den  Nentcsiamentlichen  Canon  des  Eiisebius 
 von  CcBsarea,  Berlin  1816,  8vo ;  Gru7idi'iss  einer 
 NeiUestarnentlichen  Her77ie?ieutik  und  ihrer  Ge- 
 schiclite,  Gottingen  181 7  ;  Conimentar  iiber  die 
 Schriften  des  Evangelisien  yohannes,  Bonn  1820- 
 32,  4  vols.  ;  Quasiiofies  ac  vindicicE  Didy?niana:, 
 Gottingen  1S29,  etc.,  4  pts.  Besides  these  works 
 he  published,  together  with  De  Wette,  a  Synopsis 
 of  the  Gospels,  1818,  8vo  ;  he  further  edited  with 
 De  Wette  and  Schleiermacher  the  Theologischt 
 Zeitschj'ift,  and  with  Gieseler  the  Zeitschrift  fiir 
 gebildeete  Christeti,  and  contributed  several  papers 
 in  the  Theologische  Studien  tind  Kritiken,  in  the 
 Gottinger  Gelehrte  Angeigen,  etc.  Of  his  minor 
 Gelegenheiissciiri/ien  may  be  mentioned  Stj-auss  in 
 der  Ziiricherkirche  (Bas.  1839);  Narratio  de  J. 
 Lanr.  Mosheniio ;  Alonographs  on  Plank,  Schleier- 
 macher, etc. — E.  D. 
 
 LUHITH    {T\''r\h;    AoyetS- ;    in  Jer.    'AXciS^ ; 
 
 Alex.  'AXacoS- ;  Luilh).  In  pronouncing  the  pro- 
 phetic curse  on  Moab,  both  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
 mention  '  the  ascent  of  Liihith  '  (Is.  xv.  5  >  Jer. 
 xlviii.  5).  It  appears  to  have  been  some  famous 
 pass  either  on  the  way  up  to  Moab  from  the  great 
 valley  of  Arabah,  or  across  some  of  its  deep  and 
 wild  ravines.  It  is  closely  connected  with  Horo- 
 naim  by  Jeremiah,  and  with  Zoar  by  Isaiah  ;  per- 
 haps, however,  neither  connection  is  to  be  under- 
 stood geographically.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  state 
 that  Luhith  is  a  village  situated  between  Areopolis 
 and  Zoar  {Onomast.,  s.  v.  Luith).  Between  these 
 two  places — the  latter  on  the  shore  of  the  Dead 
 Sea,  near  the  mouth  of  Wady  Kerak,  and  the 
 former  on  the  summit  of  the  mountain -ridge — 
 there  is  a  steep  and  very  difficult  pass  ;  but  the 
 name  has  not  been  discovered,  and  the  exact  place 
 of  ascent  is  unknown.  The  country  in  that  neigh- 
 bourhood has  not  been  fully  explored.  De 
 Saulcy's  attempt  to  identify  the  site  is  of  no  im- 
 portance {Journey,  i.  296  ;  English  ed. ) — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LUKE.  The  name  AoukSs  is  abbreviated  from 
 AoDKayos,  Lucanus,  or  AoiiKtXi6s,  Luciliiis  (Meyer) ; 
 cf.  Silas  for  Silvanus  ;  Annas  for  Annanus  ; 
 Zenas  {o\  Zenodortts  ;  Winer,  Gratn.  p.  115.  The 
 contraction  of  avbs  into  as  is  said  to  be  charac- 
 teristic of  the  names  of  slaves  (see  Lobeck,  De  Sub- 
 stantiv.  in  as  exeiintibus ;  Wolf,  Analect.  iii.  49), 
 and  it  has  been  inferred  from  this  that  St.  Luke 
 was  of  heathen  descent  (which  may  also  be  gathered 
 from  the  implied  contrast  between  those  mentioned 
 Col.  iv.  12-14,  ^""1  l^he  ol  iK  TrepiTO/xTJs,  ver.  11), 
 and  a  libertus.  This  latter  idea  has  found  con- 
 firmation in  his  profession  of  a  physician  (Col.  iv. 
 14)  ;  the  practice  of  medicine  among  the  Romans 
 having  been  in  great  measure  confined  to  persons 
 of  servile  rank  (Middleton,  De  Medicortim  apud 
 Roman,  degent.  Cotidiiione).  To  this,  however, 
 there  were  many  exceptions  (cf.  Smith,  Diet,  oj 
 Antiq.,  '  Medicus'),  and  it  is  altogether  an  insuffi- 
 
LUKE 
 
 861 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 cient  basis  on  which  to  erect  a  theory  as  to  the 
 evangehst's  social  rank.  So  much,  however,  we 
 may  probably  safely  infer  from  his  profession,  that 
 he  was  a  man  of  superior  education  and  mental 
 culture  to  the  generality  of  the  apostles,  the  fisher- 
 men and  tax-gatherers  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee. 
 
 All  that  can  be  with  certainty  known  of  St. 
 Luke  must  be  gathered  from  the  Acts  of  the 
 Apostles,  and  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul.  The  result 
 is  but  scanty.  His  name  does  not  once  occur  in 
 the  Acts,  and  we  can  only  infer  his  presence  or 
 absence  from  the  sudden  changes  from  the  third  to 
 the  first  person,  and  v/ce  versa,  of  which  pheno- 
 menon, notwithstanding  all  that  has  of  late  been 
 urged  against  it,  this,  which  has  been  accepted 
 since  the  time  of  Irenreus  (cf.  Contr.  Har.,  iii.  14), 
 is  the  only  satisfactory  explanation.  Rejecting 
 the  reading  crwecrTpa/j.fi^i'uv  5k  VfJ-i^f,  Acts  xi.  28 
 (which  only  rests  on  D. ,  and  Augustine,  De  Serm. 
 Dom.  ii.  17),  which  would  bring  St.  Luke  into 
 connection  with  St.  Paul  at  a  much  earlier  period, 
 as  well  as  the  identification  of  the  evangelist  with 
 Lucius  of  Gyrene  (Acts  xiii.  i  ;  Rom.  xvi.  21), 
 which  was  current  in  Origen's  time  {ad  Rom.  xvi. 
 39  ;  cf.  Lardner,  Credibility,  vi.  124 ;  Marsh, 
 Michaelis,  iv.  234),  which  would  make  him  a  kins- 
 man of  St.  Paul,  we  first  find  St.  Luke  in  St.  Paul's 
 company  at  Troas,  and  sailing  with  him  to  Mace- 
 donia (Acts  xvi.  10,  11).  Of  his  previous  history, 
 and  the  time  and  manner  of  his  conversion,  we 
 know  nothing,  but  Ewald's  supposition  {Gesch.  d. 
 V.  Isr.,  vi.  35,  44S)  is  not  at  all  improbable,  that 
 he  was  a  physician  residing  in  Troas,  converted  by 
 St.  Paul,  and  attaching  himself  to  the  apostle 
 with  all  the  ardour  of  a  young  convert.  He  may 
 also,  as  Ewald  thinks,  have  been  one  of  the  first 
 uncircumcised  Christians.  He  accompanied  St. 
 Paul  as  far  as  Philippi,  but  did  not  share  in  the 
 imprisonment  of  his  master  and  his  companion 
 Silas,  nor,  as  the  third  person  is  resumed  (xvii.  i), 
 did  he,  it  would  seem,  take  any  further  part  in 
 the  apostle's  missionary  journey.  The  first  person 
 appears  again  on  St.  Paul's  third  visit  to  Philippi, 
 A.  D.  58  (Acts  XX.  5,  6),  from  which  it  has  been 
 gathered  that  St.  Luke  had  spent  the  whole  inter- 
 vening time — a  period,  according  to  Wieseler,  of 
 seven  or  eight  years — in  Philippi  or  its  neighbour- 
 hood. If  any  credit  is  to  be  given  to  the  ancient 
 opinion  that  St.  Luke  is  referred  to  in  2  Cor.  viii. 
 18,  as  'the  brother  whose  praise  is  in  the  gospel 
 throughout  all  the  churches'  (a  view  adopted  by 
 the  Church  of  England  in  the  collect  for  St. 
 Luke's  day),  as  well  as  the  early  tradition  em- 
 bodied in  the  subscription  to  that  epistle,  that  it 
 was  sent  from  Philippi  '  by  Titus  and  Lucas,''  we 
 shall  have  evidence  of  the  evangelist's  missionary 
 zeal  during  this  long  space  of  time  ;  the  word 
 '  gospel '  being  of  course  to  be  understood,  not  as 
 Jerome  and  others  erroneously  interpret  it,  of  St. 
 Luke's  written  gospel,  but  of  his  publication  of  the 
 glad  tidings  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  mistaken  inter- 
 pretation of  the  word  'gospel'  in  this  place  has 
 led  others  to  assign  the  composition  of  the  gospel 
 of  St.  Luke  to  this  period  ;  a  view  which  derives 
 some  support  from  the  Arabic  version  published 
 by  Erpenius,  in  which  its  writing  is  placed  '  in  a 
 city  of  Macedonia  twenty-two  years  after  the  As- 
 cension,' A.  D.  52.  From  their  reunion  at  Philippi, 
 St.  Luke  remained  in  constant  attendance  on  St. 
 Paul  during  his  journey  to  Jerusalem  (Acts  xx.  6- 
 xxi.    iS),    and    disappearing   from   the    narrative 
 
 during  the  apostle's  imprisonment  at  Jerusalem 
 and  Caesarea,  reappears  again  when  he  sets  out  for 
 Rome  (Acts  xxvii.  1).  He  was  shipwrecked  with 
 Paul  (xxviii.  2),  and  travelled  with  him  by  Syracuse 
 and  Puteoli  to  Rome  (vers.  12-16),  where  he 
 appears  to  have  continued  as  his  fellow-labourer 
 (ffvvepybs,  Philem.  24  ;  Col.  iv.  4)  till  the  close  of 
 his  first  imprisonment.  The  Second  Epistle  to 
 Timothy  (iv.  11)  gives  us  the  latest  glimpse  of  the 
 '  beloved  physician,'  and  our  authentic  information 
 regarding  him  beautifully  closes  with  a  testimony 
 from  the  apostle's  pen  to  his  faithfulness  amidst 
 general  defection. 
 
 The  above  sums  up  all  we  really  know  about  St. 
 Luke;  but,  as  is  often  the  case,  in  proportion  to 
 the  scantiness  of  authentic  information  is  the 
 copiousness  of  tradition — increasing  in  definiteness, 
 be  it  remarked — as  it  advances.  His  Gentile  descent 
 being  taken  for  granted  (cf.  Col  iv.  11, 14),  his  birth- 
 place was  appropriately  enough  fixed  at  Antioch, 
 '  the  centre  of  the  Gentile  church,  and  the  birthplace 
 of  the  Christian  name'  (EuselD.,  //.  E.  iii.  4,  rb 
 fxev  yivos  wv  tuv  (xtt'  'Airioxeias,  Jerome,  De  Vir, 
 Ilhist.  7;  '  Antiochensis,'  In  Matt.,  Prtef,  '  na- 
 tione  Syrus  Antiochensis ') ;  though  it  is  to  be 
 observed  that  Chrysostom,  when  dwelling  on  the 
 historical  associations  of  the  city,  appears  to  know 
 nothing  of  such  a  tradition.  He  was  believed  to  have 
 been  a  Jewish  proselyte,  ignorant  of  Hebrew  ('licet 
 plerique  tradant  Lucam  Evangelistam,  ut  prose- 
 lytum,  Hebraeas  literas  ignorasse,'  Jerome,  Qua-st. 
 i9i  Gen.,  c.  xlvi. ),  and  probably^because  he  alone 
 mentions  their  mission,  but  in  contradiction  to  his 
 own  words  (Luke  i.  23) — one  of  the  seventy  dis- 
 ciples who,  having  left  our  Lord  in  offence  (John 
 vi.  60-66),  was  brought  back  to  the  faith  by  the 
 ministry  of  St.  Paul  (Epiphan.,  Har.  h.  11);  one 
 of  the  Greeks  who  desired  to  '  see  Jesus,'  John  xii. 
 20,  21  (Lange),  and  the  companion  of  Cleopas  on 
 the  journey  to  Emmaus  (Theophyl.  Proem  in  Luc). 
 An  idle  legend  of  Greek  origin,  which  first  appears 
 in  the  late  and  credulous  historian  Nicephorus  Cal- 
 lisus  (died  1450),  Llist.  Eccl.  ii.  43,  and  was  uni- 
 versally accepted  in  the  middle  ages,  represents  St. 
 Luke  as  well  acquainted  with  the  art  of  painting, 
 S.Kpws  T7]v  ^wypdcpov  rex"''!''  €^iiri<ndfievo%,  and  as- 
 signs to  his  hand  the  first  portraits  of  our  Lord, 
 His  mother,  and  His  chief  apostles. 
 
 Nothing  is  known  of  the  place  or  manner  of  his 
 death,  and  the  traditions  are  inconsistent  with  one 
 another.  Gregoiy  Naz.  reckons  him  among  the 
 martyrs,  and  the  untrustworthy  Nicephorus  gives 
 us  full  details  of  the  time,  place,  and  mode  of  his 
 martyrdom;  viz.,  that  he  was  crucified  to  a  live 
 olive-tree  in  Greece,  in  his  eightieth  year.  Accord- 
 ing to  others,  he  died  a  natural  death  after  preach- 
 ing (according  to  Epiphanius)  in  Dalmatia,  Gallia, 
 Italy,  and  Macedonia ;  was  buried  in  Bithynia, 
 whence  his  bones  were  translated  by  Constantius  to 
 Constantinople  (Isid.  Hispal. ,  c.  82;  Philostorg, 
 vol.  iii.  c.  xxix. )  Here,  as  everywhere,  as  soon  as 
 we  leave  the  solid  ground  of  Holy  Scripture,  we 
 are  lost  in  a  quagmire  of  shifting  and  baseless  tradi- 
 tions, which  scarcely  deserve  even  to  be  enumerated. 
 — E.  V. 
 
 LUKE,  Gospel  according  to. 
 
 I.  Author — Genuineness. — The  universal  tradi- 
 tion of  Christendom,  reaching  up  at  least  to  the 
 latter  part  of  the  2d  century,  has  assigned  the  third 
 member  of  our  gospel   collection    to   Luke,   the 
 
LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 862 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 trusted  companion  and  fellow-lal)ourer,  avvep-ybs,  of 
 St.  Paul,  who  alone  continued  in  attendance  on  his 
 beloved  master  in  his  last  imprisonment  (Col.  iv. 
 14;  Philem.  24;  2  Tim.  iv.  11).  Its  authorship 
 has  never  been  questioned  until  comparatively  re- 
 cent times,  when  the  unsparing  criticism  of  Ger- 
 many— the  main  object  of  which  appears  to  be  the 
 demolishing  of  every  ancient  belief  to  set  up  some 
 new  hypothesis  in  its  stead — has  been  brought  to 
 bear  upon  it,  without,  however,  effectually  disturb- 
 ing the  old  traditionary  statement.  The  investiga- 
 tions of  Semler,  Hilgenfeld,  Ritschl,  Baur,  Schleier- 
 macher,  Ewald,  and  others,  have  failed  to  overthrow 
 the  harmonious  assertion  of  the  early  church,  that 
 the  third  gospel,  as  we  have  it,  is  the  genuine  work 
 of  St.  Luke.  It  is  well  known,  that  though  the 
 '  gospels'  are  'referred  to  by  Justin  Martyr  as  a 
 collection  already  used  and  accepted  by  the  church 
 {ApoL  i.  66  ;  Dial.  c.  Dyph.,  c.  10),  and  his  works 
 supply  a  very  considerable  number  of  quotations, 
 enabling  us  to  identify,  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt, 
 these  ei}a77Ata  with  the  first  three  gospels,  we  do 
 not  find  them  mentioned  by  the  names  of  their 
 authors  till  the  end  of  the  2d  century.  In  the  Mura- 
 torian  fragment,  which  can  hardly  be  placed  later 
 than  170  A.  D.,  we  read,  '  Tertium  Evangelii  librum 
 secundum  Lucam  Lucas  iste  medicus  post  ascensum 
 Christi  cum  eum  Paulus  quasi  ut  juris  (roO  diKaiov) 
 studiosum  ('  itineris  socium,'  Buuseii)  secum  ad- 
 sumsisset  nomine  suo  ex  ordine  ('opinione,'  Ci-ed- 
 ner)  conscripsit  (Dominum  tamen  nee  ipse  vidit  in 
 carne),  et  idem  prout  assequi  potuit,  ita  et  a  nativi- 
 tate  Johannis  incepit  dicere'  (Westcott,  Hist,  of 
 Can.,  p.  559)-  The  testimony  of  Irenteus,  cii-ca 
 180,  is  equally  definite,  Aou/cas  6^  6  a.KbXovdo's 
 Ilai^Xou  t6  vtt'  {Keivov  Krjpvaabixevov  evayyeXLOu  iv 
 ^L^X'ufi  KarideTo  {Coittr.  Hcrr.  iii.  I.  l)  ;  while  from 
 his  enumeration  of  the  many  particulars,  phirima 
 evangelii  (lb.  iii.  14.  3),  recorded  by  Luke  alone,  it 
 is  evident  that  the  gospel  he  had  was  the  same  we 
 now  possess.  Tatian's  Diatessaroi  is  an  unim- 
 peachable evidence  of  the  existence  of  four  gospels, 
 and  therefore  of  that  by  St.  Luke,  at  a  somewhat 
 earlier  period  in  the  same  century.  The  writings 
 of  Tertullian  against  Marcion,  circa  207,  abound 
 with  references  to  our  gospel,  which,  with  Irenaeus, 
 he  asserts  to  have  been  written  under  the  immediate 
 guidance  of  St.  Paul,  Adv.  Marc,  iv.  2  ;  iv.  5.  In 
 Eusebius  we  find  both  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts 
 specified  as  debirvevara  j3i.j3Xla,  while  his  knowledge 
 of  the  sacred  narrative  is  ascribed  to  information 
 received  from  St.  Paul,  aided  by  his  intercourse 
 with  the  other  apostles,  rr^s  r!hv  dWuiv  dirocrToXoiv 
 6fj.i\w  uj<^)€XTj/j.ivos  (//.  £.,  iii.  4  and  24).  Euse- 
 bius indeed  tells  us,  that  in  his  day  the  erroneous 
 view  which  interpreted  ei/ayyiXLov  (Rom.  ii.  16, 
 cf  2  Cor.  viii.  18)  of  a  written  document  was  ge- 
 nerally received,  and  that  in  the  words  '  according 
 to  my  gospel,'  St.  Paul  was  supposed  to  refer  to  the 
 work  of  the  evangelist.  This  is  also  mentioned  by 
 Jerome  {De  Fir.  llliist.  7),  and  accepted  by  Origen 
 (Euseb.  //.  E.  vi.  25)  :  one  among  many  proofs  of 
 the  want  of  the  critical  faculty  among  the  fathers 
 of  that  age. 
 
 Additional  evidence  of  the  early  acceptance  of 
 St.  Luke's  Gospel  may  be  derived  from  the  vexata 
 quastio  of  its  relation  to  the  gospel  of  Marcion. 
 This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  this  subject, 
 which  has  led  critics  to  the  most  opposite  con- 
 clusions ;  for  a  full  account  of  which  the  reader 
 may  be  referred  to  De  Wette,  Einleit.  in  N.  T., 
 
 pp.  1 19- 137,  as  well  as  to  the  treatises  of  Ritschl, 
 Baur,  Hilgenfeld,  Hahn,  and  Volckmar.  It  will 
 be  enough  for  our  purpose  to  mention,  that  the 
 Gnostic  teacher  Marcion,  in  pursuit  of  his  pro- 
 fessed object  of  restoring  the  purity  of  the  gospel, 
 which  had  been  corrupted  by  Judaizing  teachers, 
 rejected  all  the  books  of  the  canon  with  the  ex- 
 ce]ition  of  ten  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  a  gospel, 
 which  he  called  simply  a  gospel  of  Christ.  We 
 have  the  express  testimony  of  Irenjeus  [Contr 
 Hcer.,  i.  27.  2;  iii.  12.  12,  etc.),  Tertullian  {Coni. 
 Marc,  iv.  I,  2,  6),  Origen  {Cont.  Cels.,  ii.  27), 
 Epiphanius  [Hcer.  xlii.  11),  that  the  basis  of  Mar- 
 cion's  gospel  was  that  of  St.  Luke,  abridged  and 
 altered  by  him  to  suit  his  peculiar  tenets  (for  the 
 alterations  and  omissions — the  chief  being  its  cur- 
 tailment by  the  first  two  chapters,  see  De  Wette, 
 pp.  123-132) ;  though  we  cannot  assert,  as  was  done 
 by  his  enemies  among  the  orthodox,  that  all  the 
 variations  are  due  to  Marcion  himself,  many  of  them 
 having  no  connection  with  his  heretical  views,  and 
 being  rather  various  readings  of  great  antiquity  and 
 high  importance.  Of  late  years,  however,  the 
 opposite  view,  which  was  first  broached  by  Semler, 
 Griesbach,  and  Eichhorn,  has  been  vigorously 
 maintained  among  others  by  Ritschl  and  Baur, 
 who  have  endeavoured  to  prove  that  the  Gospel  ot 
 St.  Luke,  as  we  have  it,  is  interpolated,  and  that  the 
 portions  Marcion  is  charged  with  having  omitted 
 were  really  unauthorised  additions  to  the  original 
 document.  Volckmar,  in  his  exhaustive  treatise 
 Das  Evang.  Marcions,  Leipz.  1852,  has  satisfac- 
 torily disposed  of  this  theoiy,  and  has  demon- 
 strated that  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  as  we  now  have  it, 
 was  the  material  on  which  Marcion  worked ;  and 
 therefore,  that  before  he  began  to  teach,  the  date 
 of  which  may  be  fixed  about  139  A.  D.,  it  was 
 already  known  to  and  accepted  by  the  church. 
 
 2.  Sources. — The  sources  from  which  St.  Luke 
 derived  his  gospel  are  clearly  indicated  by  him  in 
 the  introduction  (i.  1-4).  He  does  not  claim  to 
 have  been  eye-witness  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  or  to 
 have  any  personal  knowledge  of  the  facts  he  records, 
 but,  as  an  honest  compiler,  to  have  gone  to  the 
 best  sources  of  information  then  accessible,  and 
 having  accurately  traced  the  whole  course  of  the 
 apostolic  tradition  from  the  very  first,  in  its  every 
 detail  (TraptjKoXovdriKOTL  8.vw6ev  waaiv  d/c/oi/SaJs),  to 
 have  written  an  orderly  narrative  of  the  facts  {irpay- 
 fidroiv)  already  fully  believed  (■n-eTrX-qporpop-qixivuiv)  in 
 the  Christian  church,  and  which  Theophilus  had 
 already  learnt,  not  from  books,  but  from  oral  teach- 
 ing {KarrixvG'n^  ;  cf.  Acts  xviii.  25  ;  Gal.  vi.  5). 
 These  sources  were  partly  the  '  oral  tradition' 
 {■Kape^ocrav)  of  those  '  who  from  the  beginning 
 were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word  ;'  and 
 partly  the  written  records  (to  which  Ewald,  vi. 
 40,  on  unexplained  grounds,  dogmatically  assigns 
 a  non-Judean  origin)  which  even  then  '  many' 
 (ttoXXoi)  had  attempted  to  draw  up ;  of  which, 
 though  the  evangelist's  words  do  not  necessarily 
 bear  that  meaning,  we  may  well  suppose  that  he 
 would  avail  himself.  Though  we  thankfully  believe 
 that,  as  well  in  the  selection  of  his  materials  as  in 
 the  employment  of  them,  .St.  Luke  was  acting  under 
 the  immediate  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  will 
 be  remarked  that  he  lays  claim  to  no  such  super- 
 natural guidance,  but  simply  to  the  care  and  accu- 
 racy of  an  honest,  painstaking,  and  well-informed 
 editor,  not  so  consciously  under  the  inspiration  of 
 the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  supersede  the  use  of  his  own 
 
LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 863 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 mental  powers.  His  use  of  his  sources  is  not  me- 
 chanical ;  though  often  incorporating,  apparently 
 with  little  alteration,  large  portions  of  the  '  oral 
 tradition,'  especially  in  the  case  of  the  words  of  our 
 Lord,  or  those  witii  whom  He  conversed,  and  adopt- 
 ing narratives  already  current  (of  wliich  the  first 
 two  chapters,  with  their  harsh  Hebraistic  phraseo- 
 logy, immediately  succeeding  the  comparatively 
 pure  Greek  of  the  dedication,  are  an  example),  the 
 free  handling  of  his  pen  is  everywhere  to  be  recog- 
 nised. The  connecting  links,  and  the  passages  of 
 transition,  evidence  the  hand  of  the  author,  which 
 may  again  be  recognised  in  the  greater  variety  of 
 his  style,  the  more  complex  character  of  his  sen- 
 tences, and  the  care  he  bestows  in  smoothing  away 
 harshnesses,  and  imparting  a  more  classical  air  to 
 the  synoptical  portions. 
 
 Notwithstanding  the  almost  unanimous  consent 
 of  the  fathers  as  to  the  Pauline  origin  of  St.  Luke's 
 Gospel  (Tert.  adv.  Alarc.  iv.  5,  '  Lticce  digestum 
 Paulo  adscribeye  solent ; '  Iren.  Cont.  Har.  iii.  i ; 
 Origen  apud  Euseb.  H.  E.  vi.  25  ;  Euseb.  H.  E. 
 iii.  4 ;  Jerome,  De  Vir.  Illust.  7),  there  is  little  or 
 nothing  in  the  gospel  itself  to  favour  such  a  hypo- 
 thesis, and  very  much  to  contradict  it.  It  is  true 
 that  the  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's 
 Supper,  I  Cor.  xi.  23-25,  displays  an  almost  ver- 
 bal identity  with  Luke  xxii.  19,  20  ;  and  as  St. 
 Paul  afiirms  that  he  received  his  'from  the  Lord,' 
 it  is  highly  probable  that  the  evangelist  has  in  this 
 instance  incorporated  a  fragment  of  the  direct 
 teaching  of  his  master.  But  this  is  a  solitary  ex- 
 ample (Luke  xxiv.  34,  comp.  with  i  Cor.  xv.  5,  is 
 too  trifling  to  deserve  mention),  and  it  is  impossible 
 that  the  evangelist  should  have  expressed  himself 
 as  he  has  done  in  his  preface,  if  he  had  derived  the 
 facts  of  his  narrative  from  one  who  was  neither 
 '  an  eye-witness  '  nor  '  a  minister  of  the  word  from 
 the  beginning.'  Nor  again  in  the  general  tone 
 and  character  in  the  gospel,  when  impartially 
 viewed,  is  there  much  that  can  be  fairly  considered 
 to  bear  out  the  hypothesis  of  a  Pauline  origin. 
 Those  who  have  sifted  the  gospel  with  this  object 
 have,  it  is  true,  gathered  a  number  of  passages 
 which  are  supposed  to  have  a  Pauline  tendency 
 (see  Hilgenfeld,  Evang.,  and  the  ingenious  essay 
 prefixed  to  this  gospel  in  Dr.  Wordsworth's  Greek 
 Testament),  e.g.,  Luke  iv.  25,  seg. ;  ix.  52,  seq.  ;  x. 
 30,  seq.  ;  xvii.  16-18;  and  the  parables  of  the 
 '  Prodigal  son,'  the  '  Unprofitable  servant,'  and 
 the  '  Pharisee  and  publican,'  which  have  been  in- 
 stanced by  De  Wette  as  bringing  out  the  apostle's 
 teaching  on  justification  by  faith  alone  ;  but,  as 
 Dean  Alford  has  ably  shewn  {Greek  Test.,  i.  44, 
 note  b),  such  a  list  may  be  easily  collected  from  the 
 other  gospels,  while  the  entire  absence  of  any  de- 
 finite statement  of  the  doctrinal  truths  which  come 
 forward  with  the  greatest  prominence  in  the 
 apostle's  writings,  and,  with  very  scanty  excep- 
 tions, of  his  peculiar  theological  phraseology,  is  of 
 itself  sufficient  to  prove  how  undue  has  been  the 
 weight  assigned  to  Pauhne  influence  in  the  compo- 
 sition of  the  gospel.  It  is  certainly  true  that,  in 
 the  words  of  Bishop  Thirlwall  (Schleiermacher  on 
 St.  Luke,  Introd.,  p.  cxxviii.),  'St.  Luke's  Gospel 
 contains  numerous  indications  of  that  enlarged 
 view  of  Christianity  which  gave  to  trie  gospel,  as 
 preached  by  St.  Paul,  a  form  and  an  extent  very 
 different  from  the  original  tradition  of  the  Jews,' 
 but  no  more  can  be  legitimately  inferred  than  that 
 St.  Luke  was  St.  Paul's  disciple,  instructed  by  the 
 
 apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  and  naturally  sharing  in  his 
 view  of  the  gospel  as  a  message  of  salvation  foi 
 all  nations  ;  not  that  his  gospel  was  in  any  sense 
 derived  from  him,  or  rested  on  the  apostolic  basis 
 of  St.  Paul. 
 
 The  question  naturally  arises  whether  the  Gospels 
 of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  were  among  the  l<.-r]-^y]- 
 ffeis  to  which  St.  Luke  refers.  The  answers  to 
 this  have  been  various  and  contradictory — the 
 same  data  leading  critics  to  the  most  opposite  con- 
 clusions. Meyer  {Comment,  ii.  217)  is  of  opinion 
 that  St.  Luke  availed  himself  both  of  St.  Matthew 
 and  St.  Mark,  though  chiefly  of  the  latter,  as 
 the  'primitive  gospel;'  while  De  Wette,  on  the 
 other  baud  {Einleit.,  sec.  94,  p.  185),  considers 
 St.  Mark's  Gospel  the  latest  of  the  three,  and 
 based  upon  them  as  authorities.  In  the  face  of 
 these  and  other  discordant  theories,  of  which  a 
 list  may  be  seen  (De  Wette,  Einleit,  sec.  88,  pp. 
 162-168),  it  will  be  wise  not  to  attempt  a  categori- 
 cal decision.  A  calm  review  of  tlie  evidence  will, 
 however,  lead  most  unbiassed  readers  to  the  con- 
 clusion that  all  three  wrote  in  perfect  independence 
 of  one  another  ;  each,  under  the  guidance  of  the 
 Holy  Spirit,  giving  a  distinct  view  of  the  great 
 complex  whole,  the  reflex  of  the  writer's  own  indi- 
 vidual imj^ressions,  and  that  least  of  all  is  St.  Luke 
 to  be  considered  as  a  mere  redactcur  of  the  prior 
 writings  of  his  brother  synoptists — a  theory,  the  im- 
 probabilities and  absurdities  of  which  have  been 
 well  pointed  out  by  Dean  Alford  in  the  Pi'olego- 
 fnena  to  his  Greek  Testatment,  i.,  pp.  2-6,  41. 
 
 3.  Relation  to  St.  Mattheii)  and  St.  Mark.— Be- 
 lieving  that  no  one  of  the  three  synoptical  gospels 
 is  dependent  on  the  others,  and  that  the  true  ex- 
 planation of  this  striking  correspondence,  not  only 
 in  the  broad  outline  of  our  Lord's  life  and  work, 
 and  the  incidents  with  which  this  outline  is  filled 
 up,  but  also,  to  a  considerable  extent,  in  the  para- 
 bles and  addresses  recorded,  and  even  in  the 
 language  and  forms  of  expression,  is  to  be  sought 
 in  the  same  apostolical  oral  tradition  having  fomied 
 the  original  basis  of  each,  a  very  interesting  point 
 of  inquiry  presents  itself  in  tracing  the  correspon- 
 dence and  divergence  of  the  several  narratives. 
 In  particular,  a  comparison  of  St.  Luke  with  the 
 other  synoptists  furnishes  many  striking  and  im- 
 portant results.  With  the  general  identity  of  the 
 body  of  the  history,  we  at  once  notice  that  there 
 are  two  large  portions  peculiar  to  this  evangelist, 
 containing  events  or  discourses  recorded  by  him 
 alone.  These  are  the  first  two  chapters,  narrating 
 the  conception,  birth,  infancy,  and  early  develop- 
 ment of  our  Lord  and  His  forerunner,  and  the  long 
 section  (ix.  51-xviii.  14)  devoted  to  our  Lord's  final 
 journey  to  Jerusalem,  and  comprising  some  of  His 
 most  beautiful  parables.  We  have  also  other 
 smaller  sections  supplying  incidents  passed  over  by 
 Matthew  and  Mark — the  questions  of  the  people 
 and  the  Baptist's  replies  (iii.  10- 14)  ;  Simon  and 
 the  woman  that  was  a  sinner  (vii.  36-50)  ;  the 
 raising  of  the  widow's  son  (viii.  11-17)  ;  the  story 
 of  Zaccheus  (xix.  l-io);  our  Lord's  weeping  over 
 Jerusalem  (xix.  39-44) ;  the  journey  to  Emmaus 
 (xxiv.  13-35)-  In  other  parts  he  follows  a  tradi- 
 tion at  once  so  much  fuller  and  so  widely  at  vari- 
 ance with  that  of  the  others,  as  almost  to  suggest 
 the  idea  that  a  different  event  is  recorded  (iv.  16-30, 
 cf  ;  Matt.  xiii.  54-58 ;  Mark  vi.  1-6  ;  v.  I-II,  cf  ; 
 Matt.  iv.  18-22;  Mark  i.  16-20).  Even  where  the 
 language  employed  so  closely  corresponds  as  to 
 
LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 864 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 remove  all  question  of  the  identity  of  the  events, 
 fresh  details  are  given,  often  of  the  greatest  interest, 
 e.g.,  7rpo(r€vxofJ.€vov  (iii.  2l);  aiOfiariKiS  ei'Sei  (iii. 
 22);  irXrjp.  irvevfi.  0,7'  (iv.  l);  6'rt  s/jloI  TrapadeSorai, 
 K.  T.  X.  (iv.  6) ;  dxpi-  Kaipov  (iv.  13) ;  duvapis  Kvplov 
 9jv,  K.  T.  \.  (v.  17)  ;  KaraXLTTojv  dwavra,  and  the  Soxv 
 fiey  (v.  28,  29);  the  comparison  of  old  and  new 
 wine  (v.  39);  iirXrjaO'  dvoias  (vi.  11);  dvuap-Ls  irap' 
 avTou  e^rjpx'  (vi.  19) ;  the  cures  in  the  presence  of 
 fohn's  disciples  (vii.  21),  and  the  incidental  re- 
 marks (vers.  29,  30)  ;  many  additional  touches  in 
 the  narratives  of  the  Gadarene  demoniac  (viii. 
 26-39),  and  the  transfiguration,  especially  the  fact 
 of  His  '  praying'  (St.  Luke  records  at  least  six  in- 
 stances of  our  Lord  having  prayed  omitted  by  the 
 other  evangelists),  and  the  subject  of  the  conversa- 
 tion with  Moses  and  Elijah  (ix.  28-36) ;  notices 
 supplied  (xx.  19  ;  xxi.  37,  38),  all  tending  to  con- 
 vince us  that  we  are  in  the  presence  not  of  a  mere 
 copyist,  but  of  a  trustworthy  and  independent 
 witness.  St.  Luke's  account  of  the  passion  and 
 resurrection  is  to  a  great  extent  his  own,  adding 
 much  of  the  deepest  significance  to  the  synoptical 
 narrative,  particularly  the  warning  to  Simon  in  the 
 name  of  the  twelve  (xxii.  31-32) ;  the  bloody  sweat 
 (ver.  44);  the  sending  to  Herod  (xxiii.  7"I2);  tlie 
 words  to  the  women  (vers.  27-31);  the  prayer  for 
 forgiveness  (ver.  34)  ;  the  penitent  thief  (vers. 
 39-43  ;  the  walk  to  Emmaus  (xxiv.  13-35)  ;  and 
 the  ascension  (vers.  50-53). 
 
 It  has  been  remarked  that  there  is  nothing  in 
 which  St.  Luke  is  more  characteristically  distin- 
 guished from  both  the  Evangelists  than  in  his  selec- 
 tion of  our  Lord's  parables.  There  are  no  less 
 than  eleven  quite  peculiar  to  him — (i.)  The  two 
 debtors  ;  (2.)  Good  Samaritan  ;  (3.)  Friend  at 
 midnight  ;  (4.)  Rich  fool  ;  (5.)  Barren  fig-tree;  (6.) 
 Lost  silver  ;  (7.)  Prodigal  son  ;  (8.)  Unjust 
 steward;  (9.)  Rich  man  and  Lazarus;  (10.)  Un- 
 just judge  ;  (II.)  Pharisee  and  publican;  and  two 
 others,  the  Great  Supper,  and  the  Pounds,  which, 
 with  many  points  of  similarity,  differ  very  decidedly 
 from  those  found  in  St.  Matthew. 
 
 Of  our  Lord's  miracles,  six  omitted  by  St. 
 Matthew  and  St.  Mark  are  recorded  by  St.  Luke  — 
 (i.)  Miraculous  draught;  (2.)  The  son  of  the 
 widow  of  Nain  ;  (3.)  The  woman  with  a  spirit  of 
 infirmity;  (4.)  The  man  with  a  dropsy;  (5.)  The 
 ten  lepers  ;  (6.)  The  healing  of  Malchus'  ear.  Of 
 the  seven  not  related  by  him,  the  most  remarkable 
 omission  is  that  of  the  Syrophoenician  woman,  for 
 which  a  priori  reasoning  would  have  claimed  a 
 special  place  in  the  so-called  Gospel  of  the  Gentiles. 
 We  miss  also  the  walking  on  the  sea,  the  feeding 
 of  the  four  thousand,  the  cure  of  the  blind  men,  and 
 of  the  deaf  and  dumb,  the  stater  in  the  fish's  mouth, 
 and  the  cursing  of  the  fig-tree. 
 
 The  chief  omissions  in  narrative  are  the  whole 
 section.  Matt,  xiv.-xvi.  12,  Mark  vi.  45-viii.  26  ; 
 Matt.  xix.  2-12  ;  xx.  1-16,  20-28  ;  cf  Mark  x.  35- 
 45  ;  the  anointing,  Matt.  xxvi.  6-13,  Mark  xiv.  3-9. 
 
 With  regard  to  coincidence  of  language,  a  most 
 important  remark  was  long  since  made  by  Bishop 
 Marsh  (Michaelis,  v.  317),  that  when  St.  Matthew 
 and  St.  Luke  agree  verbally  in  the  common  synop- 
 tical sections,  St.  Mark  always  agrees  with  them 
 also  ;  and  that  there  is  not  a  single  instance  in  these 
 sections  of  verbal  agreement  between  St.  Matthew 
 and  St.  Luke  alone.  A  close  scrutiny  will  discover 
 that  the  verlial  agreement  between  St.  Luke  and 
 St.  Mark  is  greater  than  that  between  St.  Luke  and 
 
 St.  Matthew,  while  the  mutual  dependence  of  the 
 second  and  third  Evangelists  on  the  same  source  is 
 rendered  still  more  probable  by  the  observation  of 
 Reuss,  that  they  agree  both  in  excess  and  defect 
 when  compared  with  St.  Matthew  :  that  when  St. 
 Mark  has  elements  wanting  in  St.  Matthew,  St. 
 Luke  usually  has  them  also ;  while  when  St 
 Matthew  supplies  more  than  St.  Mark,  St.  Luke 
 follows  the  latter  ;  and  that  where  St.  Mark  fails 
 altogether,  St.  Luke's  narrative  often  represents  a 
 different  TrapdSocris  from  that  of  St.  Matthew. 
 
 4.  Character  and  General  Purpose. — The  chief 
 characteristic  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  vi'hich  distin- 
 guishes it  from  those  of  the  other  synoptists,  espe- 
 cially St.  Matthew,  is  its  universality.  The 
 message  he  delivers  is  not,  as  it  has  sometimes  been 
 mistakenly  described,  for  the  Gentiles  as  such,  as 
 distinguished  from  the  Jews,  but  for  men.  As  we 
 read  his  record,  we  seem  to  see  him  anticipating  the 
 time  when  all  nations  should  hear  the  gospel  mes- 
 sage, when  all  distinctions  of  race  or  class  should 
 be  done  away,  and  all  claims  based  on  a  fancied 
 self-righteousness  annulled,  and  the  glad  tidings 
 should  be  heard  and  received  by  all  who  were  united 
 in  the  bonds  of  a  common  humanity,  and  felt  their 
 need  of  a  common  Saviour,  '  the  light  to  lighten 
 the  Gentiles,  and  the  glory  of  His  people  Israel.' 
 It  is  this  character  which  has  given  it  a  right  to  the 
 title  of  the  Pauline  gospel,  and  enables  us  to  under, 
 stand  why  Marcion  selected  it  as  the  only  true  ex- 
 ponent of  Christ's  gospel.  This  universalism, 
 however,  is  rather  interwoven  with  the  gospel  than 
 to  be  specified  in  definite  instances  ;  and  yet  we 
 cannot  but  feel  how  completely  it  is  in  accordance 
 with  it  that  St.  Luke  records  the  enrolment  of  the 
 Saviour  of  the  world  as  a  citizen  of  the  world-em- 
 bracing Roman  empire — that  he  traces  his  gene- 
 alogy back  to  the  head  of  the  human  race — that  his 
 first  recorded  sermon  (iv.  16-27)  gives  proof  of 
 God's  wide-reaching  mercy,  as  displayed  in  the 
 widow  of  Sarepta  and  Naaman — that  in  the  mission 
 of  the  twelve,  the  limitation  to  the  '  cities  of  Israel ' 
 should  have  no  place,  while  he  alone  records  the 
 mission  of  the  seventy  (a  number  symbolical  of  the 
 Gentile  world) — that  in  the  sermon  on  the  mount 
 all  references  to  the  Law  should  be  omitted,  while 
 all  claims  to  superior  holiness  or  national  preroga- 
 tive are  cut  away  by  his  gracious  dealings  with,  and 
 kindly  mention  of,  the  despised  Samaritans  (ix.  52, 
 ff.  ;  x.  30,  ff.  ;  xvii.  II,  ff) 
 
 And  as  with  the  race  in  general,  so  with  its  indi- 
 vidual members.  St.  Luke  delights  to  bear  witness 
 that  none  are  shut  out  from  God's  mercy — nay,  that 
 the  outcast  and  the  lost  are  the  especial  objects  of 
 His  care  and  search.  As  proofs  of  this,  we  may 
 refer  to  the  narratives  of  the  woman  that  was  a 
 sinner,  the  Samai~;tan  leper,  Zaccheus,  and  the 
 penitent  thief;  and  the  parables  of  the  lost  sheep 
 and  lost  silver,  the  Pharisee  and  publican,  the  rich 
 man  and  Lazarus,  and,  above  all,  to  that  '  which  has 
 probably  exercised  most  influence  on  the  mind  of 
 Christendom  in  all  periods '  (Maurice,  Unity  of  the 
 Gospel,  p.  274),  the  prodigal  son. 
 
 Most  naturally  also  is  it  in  St.  Luke  that  we  find 
 the  most  frequent  allusions  to  that  which  has  been 
 one  of  the  most  striking  distinctions  between  the 
 old  and  modern  world — the  position  of  woman  as 
 a  fellow-heir  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  sharing 
 in  the  same  responsiVjilities  and  hopes,  and  that 
 woman  comes  forward  most  prominently  (the  Syro- 
 phoenician, as  already  noticed,  is  a  single  marked 
 
LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 865 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 exception)  as  the  object  of  our  Lord's  sympathy 
 and  love.  Commencing  with  the  Virgin  Mary 
 as  a  type  of  the  purity  and  lowly  obedience  which 
 is  the  true  glory  of  womanhood,  we  meet  in  suc- 
 cession with  Anna  the  prophetess,  the  pattern  of 
 holy  widowhood  (cf.  I  Tim.  v.  5) ;  the  woman 
 that  was  a  sinner  ;  the  widow  of  Nain  ;  the  minis- 
 tering women  (viii.  2,  3)  ;  Mary  and  Martha  ;  the 
 'daughter  of  Abraham'  (xiii.  11);  and  close  the 
 list  with  the  words  of  exquisite  tenderness  and 
 sympathy  to  the  'daughters  of  Jerusalem'  (xxiii. 
 28). 
 
 This  universal  character  is  one,  the  roots  of  which 
 lie  deep  in  St.  Luke's  conception  of  the  nature  and 
 work  of  Christ.  With  him,  more  thaii  in  the 
 other  gospels,  Jesus  is  '  the  second  man,  the  Lord 
 from  heaven'  (Lange),  and  if  in  his  pages  we  see 
 more  of  His  divine  nature,  and  have  in  the  more 
 detailed  reports  of  His  Conception  and  Ascension 
 clearer  proofs  that  He  was  indeed  the  Son  of  the 
 Highest,  it  is  here  too,  in  '  the  life-giving  sympathy 
 and  intercourse  with  the  inner  man,  in  the  human 
 fellowship  grounded  on  not  denying  the  divine  con- 
 descension and  compassion'  (Maurice,  u.  s.),  that 
 we  recognise  the  perfect  ideal  man. 
 
 St.  Luke,  it  has  been  truly  remarked,  is  the 
 gospel  of  contrasts.  Starting  with  the  contrast 
 between  the  doubt  of  Zacharias  and  the  trustful 
 obedience  of  Mary,  we  find  in  almost  every  page 
 proofs  of  the  twofold  power  of  Christ's  word  and 
 work  foretold  by  Simeon  {ii.  34).  To  select  a  few 
 of  the  more  striking  examples.  He  alone  presents 
 to  our  view  Simon  and  the  sinful  woman,  Martha 
 and  Mary,  the  thankful  and  thankless  lepers,  the 
 tears  and  hosannas  on  the  brow  of  Olivet ;  he  alone 
 adds  the  'woes'  to  the  '  Ijlessings'  in  the  sermon 
 on  the  mount,  and  carries  on  in  the  parables  of  the 
 rich  man  and  Lazarus,  the  pharisee  and  publican, 
 and  the  good  Samaritan,  that  series  of  strong  con- 
 trasts which  finds  so  appropriate  a  close  in  the 
 penitent  and  blaspheming  malefactois. 
 
 Once  more,  St.  Luke  is  the  hymn  writer  of  the 
 N.  T.  '  Taught  by  thee,  tlie  church  prolongs  Her 
 hymns  of  high  thanksgiving  still'  (Keble,  Chris- 
 tian Year).  But  for  his  record  the  Mag7iificat, 
 Benedictus,  and  hhinc  Dimitlis,  would  have  been 
 lost  to  us  ;  and  it  is  he  who  has  preserved  to  us  the 
 Ave  Maria,  identified  with  the  religious  life  of  so 
 large  a  part  of  Christendom,  and  the  Gloria  in 
 Excelsis,  which  forais  the  culminating  point  of  its 
 most  solemn  ritual. 
 
 And  now  to  turn  from  the  internal  to  the  ex- 
 ternal characteristics  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel.  These 
 we  shall  find  no  less  marked  and  distinct.  His 
 narrative  is,  as  he  promised  it  should  be  {Ka6i^rj% 
 i.  3),  an  orderly  one  :  but  the  order  is  one  rather 
 of  subject  than  of  time.  As  to  the  other  synop- 
 tists,  though  maintaining  the  principle  of  chrono- 
 logical succession  in  the  main  outline  of  his  narra- 
 tive, '  he  is  ever  ready  to  sacrifice  mere  chronology 
 to  that  order  of  events  which  was  the  fittest  to  de- 
 velope  his  purpose  according  to  the  object  proposed 
 by  the  inspiring  Spirit,  grouping  his  incidents  ac- 
 cording to  another  and  deeper  order  than  that  of 
 mere  time'  (Maurice,  ti.s.)  It  is  true  that  he  fur- 
 nishes us  with  the  three  most  precise  dates  in  the 
 whole  gospel  narrative  (ii.  2  ;  iii.  i,  23 — each  one, 
 be  it  remarked,  the  subject  of  vehement  contro- 
 versy), but  in  spite  of  the  attempts  made  by 
 Wieseler  and  others  to  force  a  strict  chronological 
 character  upon  his  gospel,  an  unprejudiced  perusal 
 
 will  convince  us  that  his  narrative  is  loose  and 
 fragmentary,  especially  in  the  section  ix.  49-xviii. 
 14,  and  his  notes  of  time  vague  and  destitute  of 
 precision,  even  where  the  other  synoptists  are  more 
 definite  (v.  12  cf.  Matt.  viii.  i ;  viii.  4  cf.  Matt, 
 xiii.  I ;  viii.  22  cf.  Mark  iv.  35,  etc.) 
 
 In  his  narrative  we  miss  the  graphic  power  of 
 St.  Mark,  though  in  this  he  is  superior  to  St. 
 Matthew,  e.g.,  vii.  i-io  cf.  Matt.  viii.  5-13  ;  viii. 
 41-56  cf.  Matt.  ix.  18-26.  His  object  is  rather  to 
 record  the  facts  of  our  Lord's  life  than  his  dis- 
 courses, while,  as  Olshausen  remarks  (i.  19,  Clark's 
 ed.),  '  He  has  the  peculiar  power  of  exhibiting 
 with  great  clearness  and  truth  our  Lord's  conversa- 
 tions, with  all  the  incidents  that  gave  rise  to  them  ; 
 the  remarks  of  the  bystanders,  and  their  results. ' 
 
 We  may  also  notice  here  the  passing  reflections, 
 or,  as  Bishop  Ellicott  terms  them  [Hist.  Led.  p.  28), 
 '  psychological  comments,'  called  up  by  the  events 
 or  actors  which  appear  in  his  gospel,  interpolated 
 by  him  as  obiter  dicta  in  the  body  of  the  narrative. 
 We  may  instance  ii.  50,  51 ;  iii.  15;  vi.  11 ;  vii. 
 29?  3O)  39  ;  xvi.  14  ;  XX.  20  ;  xxii.  3  ;  xxiii.  12. 
 
 5.  Style  and  Language. — St.  Luke's  style  is 
 more  finished  than  that  of  St.  Matthew  or  St. 
 Mark.  There  is  more  of  composition  in  his  sen- 
 tences. His  writing  displays  greater  variety,  and 
 the  structure  is  more  complex.  His  diction  is 
 substantially  the  same,  but  purer,  and,  except  in 
 the  first  two  chapters,  less  Hebraized,  as  remarked 
 by  Jerome  {Comment,  in  J£s.) :  '' Lucam  tradiint 
 veferes  .  .  .  niagis  Grcecas  literas  scisse  quani  He- 
 braas.  Unde  et  sermo  ejus  .  .  .  comptior  est  et  sacu- 
 larem  redolet  eloquentiatn''  (cf.  ad  JDamas.  Ep.  20). 
 It  deserves  special  notice  how,  in  the  midst  of  close 
 verbal  similarity,  especially  in  the  report  of  thewords 
 of  our  Lord  and  others,  slight  alterations  are  made 
 by  him  either  by  the  substitution  of  another  word 
 or  phrase  {e.g.,  Luke  xx.  6  cf  Matt.  xxi.  26,  Mark 
 xi.  32  ;  Luke  vii.  25,  Mark  xi.  8  ;  Luke  ix.  14, 
 Mark  vL  39,  40  ;  Luke  xx.  28,  29,  Mark  xii.  20. 
 22  ;  Luke  viii.  25,  Maik  viii.  27),  the  supply  (Luke 
 XX.  45,  Mark  xii.  38  ;  Luke  vii.  8,  Matt.  viii.  9), 
 or  the  omission  of  a  word  (Luke  ix.  25,  Matt.  xvi. 
 26,  Mark  viii.  36),  by  which  harsh  constructions 
 are  removed,  and  a  more  classical  air  given  to  the 
 whole  composition. 
 
 The  Hebraistic  character  is  more  perceptible  in 
 the  hymns  and  speeches  incorporated  by  him  than 
 in  the  narrative  itself.  The  following  are  some  of 
 the  chief  Hebraisms  that  have  been  noticed — (i.) 
 eyivero  iv  Ty,  with  the  accusative  and  infinitive, 
 corresponding  to  "3  TT'l,  twenty-three  times,  not 
 
 once  in  Matt.,  only  twice  in  Mark  ;  (2.)  the  same 
 idiom,  without  iyhero,  e.g.,  ix.  34,  36;  x.  35; 
 xi.  37  ;  (3.)  iyiviTO  Cos,  or  Cos  alone  of  time,  the 
 Hebrew  3,  e.g.,  ii.  15  ;  v.  4,  only  once  apiece  in 
 Matt,  and  Mark;  (4.)  "T^to-ros,  used  for  GoD  = 
 
 jVpy,  five  times,   once  in  Mark  ;    (5.)  or/coy,  for 
 
 family  =  tVH ;    (6.)    airb   rod   vvv  =  T\r\]3'0,   four 
 
 times,  not  once  in  the  other  gospels  ;  (7.)  adiKia 
 in  the  genitive  as  an  epithet,  e.g.,  olKovofiof  ttjs 
 ddiKias,  Kpi.Tr}s  T7)s  ddiKias ;  (8.)  irpoaedeTo  iri/j-xpai, 
 
 XX.    II,    12. 
 
 On  the  other  hand,  we  find  certain  classical 
 words  and  phrases  peculiar  to  St.  Luke  taking  the 
 place  of  others  less  familiar  to  his  Gentile  readers, 
 e.g.,  etriffTciT-qs  for  pa^^i,  six  times;  vo/jlckoI  for 
 ypafifiareis,  six  times  ;  vol,  dXridQs  or  iw'  d\7)6elai 
 
 3K 
 
LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 866 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 for  an-fjv,  which  only  occurs  seven  times  to  thirty  in 
 Matt. ,  and  fourteen  in  Mark ;  d-rrreLv  Mxvov  for 
 KaUiv  X. ,  four  times ;  \ifxvri  of  tlie  Lake  of  Genes- 
 saret  for  ddXacraa,  five  times ;  TrapaXeXv/jLivos  for 
 irapaXvTtKds ;  k\Ii>i8iov  for  /Cyod/SjSaros ;  ^6pos  for 
 KTJvaos. 
 
 The  style  of  St.  Luke  has  many  peculiarities 
 both  in  construction  and  in  diction  ;  indeed,  it  lias 
 been  calculated  that  the  number  of  words  used 
 only  by  him  exceeds  the  aggi-egate  of  the  other 
 three  gospels.  Full  particulars  of  these  are  given 
 by  Credner  {Einleit.)  (copied  by  Davidson,  Inirod. 
 to  N.  T.)  and  Reuss  [Geschickt.  d.  H.  Schrift.) 
 The  following,  the  result  of  independent  examina- 
 tion, are  some  of  the  most  noteworthy.  Of  pecu- 
 liar constructions  we  may  remark — (i.)  the  infinitive 
 with  the  genitive  of  the  article  (Winer,  Gr.  Gr.,  i. 
 340)  to  indicate  design  or  result,  e.g.,  Luke  ii.  27  ; 
 v.  7;  xxi.  22;  xxiv.  29;  i.  9;  i.  57;  ii.  21.  (2.) 
 The  substantive  verb  with  the  participle  instead  of 
 the  finite  verb,  iv.  31 ;  v.  10  ;  vi.  12  ;  vii.  8  ;  xxiii. 
 12  (Winer,  365-67).  (3.)  The  neuter  participle 
 with  tlie  article  for  a  substantive,  iv.  16  ;  viii.  34  ; 
 xxii.  22  ;  xxiv.  14.  (4.)  rb,  to  substantivise  a  sen- 
 tence or  clause,  especially  in  indirect  questions, 
 i.  63  ;  vii.  II;  ix.  46,  etc.  (5.)  dTrelv  7rp6s,  sixty- 
 seven  times  ;  Xiyeiv  irpbs,  ten  times  ;  XaXdv  -rrpos, 
 4  times,  the  first  being  used  once  by  Matt.,  and 
 the  other  not  at  all  by  him  or  Mark.  (6.)  Parti- 
 ciples are  copiously  used  to  give  vividness  to  the 
 narrative,  dvacrTas,  seventeen  times ;  ffTpa<peh,  seven 
 times  ;  ireaihv,  etc.  (7.)  avrip  used  with  a  sub- 
 stantive, e.g.,  d/xapTwX6s,  v.  8  ;  xix.  7  ;  andTrpo^??- 
 
 TTJi,   xxiv.    19. 
 
 Of  the  words  peculiar  to,  or  occuning  much 
 more  frequently  in,  St.  Luke,  some  of  the  most 
 remarkable  are,  the  use  of  Kvpios  in  the  narrative 
 as  a  synonym  for  'Irja-ovs,  which  occurs  fourteen 
 times  (e.g.,  vii.  13  ;  x.  i  ;  xiii.  15,  etc.),  and  no- 
 where else  in  the  synoptical  gospels,  save  in  the 
 addition  to  St.  Mark,  xvi.  19,  20 ;  awr-qp,  (rwr-qpia, 
 ao}T7)pwv,  not  found  in  the  other  gospels,  except  the 
 first  two  once  each  in  John  ;  x<^P'J,  eight  times  in 
 gospel,  sixteen  in  the  Acts,  and  only  thrice  in  John, 
 Xapi^o/j.aL,  xo-pi-rboj  ;  eva-yyeXl^ofxai,  very  frequent, 
 while  evayyeXtov  does  not  occur  at  all ;  vTroaTpi<pu, 
 twenty-one  times  in  the  gospel,  ten  in  the  Acts,  and 
 only  once  in  Mark  ;  virdpxu,  seven  times  in  gos- 
 pel, twenty-six  in  Acts,  but  nowhere  in  the  other 
 gospels,  and  to.  vwdpxovra,  eight  times  in  gosj>eI 
 to  three  in  Matt,  alone  ;  fiTras,  twenty  times  in 
 gospel,  sixteen  in  Acts,  to  thrice  in  Matt,  and  four 
 times  in  Mark  ;  'lepovcraXriiJ,,  instead  of  the  'lepo- 
 crdXvfia  of  the  other  gospels  ;  ipunriou,  twenty-two 
 times  in  gospel,  fourteen  times  in  Acts,  once  be- 
 sides in  St.  John  ;  a^v,  twenty-four  times  in  gospel, 
 fifty-one  in  Acts,  and  only  ten  times  in  the  other 
 gospels  ;  the  particle  re,  which  hardly  appears  in 
 the  other  gospels,  is  very  frequent  in  St.  Luke's 
 writings.  The  words  drei'lfaj,  drowos,  ^ovXri,  j3pi- 
 <pos,  Seo/nat,  S^rjcris,  Sox'ri,  SpdxjJ-Vi  S-d/x/3os,  ^e/x^Xiov, 
 taais,  Kadbri,  KaOoXov,  KaOe^ijs,  KaKovpyo?,  nbpa^, 
 Xelo'S,  XvTp6(i},  Xi'irpuffCi,  oiKdvo/nos-ia-^co,  Tracdevca, 
 waiu),  irXiii},  wXijOoi,  ttXtjOw,  ttXtjc,  irpdccrui,  aiydw, 
 ffKiprdu},  Tiippd^o/xai,  XVPO-i  iixm,  Kadws,  are  almost, 
 or  quite,  peculiar  to  him  ;  he  is  very  partial  to  Kal 
 aiirdi  and  Kal  avroi,  el,  Si,  fir},  ye,  and  abounds 
 in  verbs  compounded  with  prepositions,  where  the 
 other  evangelists  use  the  simple  verb. 
 
 Some  omissions  are  to  be  noted  :  dXiy^^s  does  | 
 not  occur  once,   d\ijtfiy6r  only  once,    evayyiXiov,  I 
 
 SiaKovos,  Saijxovi^hfievos,  not  once ;  Saifiovicrdeli 
 only  once  :  and  wcrre,  which  is  found  fifteen  times 
 in  Matt.,  and  thirteen  in  Mark,  occurs  only  thrice 
 in  the  whole  gospel. 
 
 A  few  Latin  words  are  used  by  St.  Luke — aaad- 
 piov,  xii.  6 ;  brjvdpws,  vii.  41  ;  Xeyiwv,  viii.  30 ; 
 fj.6dLov,  xi.  33  ;  ffovSapiov,  xix.  20  ;  Acts  xix.  12, 
 but  no  Hebrew  or  Syriac   forms,  except  clKepa, 
 
 6.  Quotations  from  the  O.  T. — It  is  a  striking 
 confirmation  of  the  view  propounded  above  of  the 
 character  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  and  the  object  of 
 its  composition,  that  the  references  to  the  O.  T., 
 the  authority  of  which  with  any  except  the  Jews 
 would  be  but  small,  are  so  few — only  twenty-four 
 in  the  one,  against  sixty-five  in  the  other — when 
 compared  with  their  abundance  in  .St.  Matthew. 
 Only  eight  out  of  the  whole  number  are  peculiar 
 to  our  evangelist  (marked  with  an  asterisk  in  the 
 annexed  list),  which  occur  in  the  portions  where 
 he  appears  to  have  followed  more  or  less  com- 
 pletely a  irapciSocrts  of  his  own  ;  the  history  of  the 
 birth  and  childhood  of  our  Lord,  the  visit  to 
 Nazareth  (c.  iv. ),  and  that  of  the  passion.  The 
 rest  are  found  in  the  common  synoptical  sections. 
 We  may  also  remark  that,  with  tlie  most  trifling 
 exceptions,  St.  Luke  never  quotes  the  O.  T.  him- 
 self, nor  speaks  on  his  own  authority  of  events 
 occurring  in  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  and  that  his 
 citations  are  only  found  in  the  sayings  of  our  Lord 
 and  others.  The  following  list  is  tolerably  com- 
 plete,  exclusive  of  the  hymns  which  are  little  more 
 than  a  cento  of  phrases  from  the  O.  T. 
 
 *  i.  17,  Mai.  iv.  6  x.  27,  Deut.  vi.  5 
 
 *  25,  Gen.  xxx.  23  Lev.  xix.  18 
 *ii.  23,  Exod.  xiii.  2  xiii.  27,  Ps.  vi.  8 
 
 *  24,  Lev.  v.  II  35,  Ps.  cxvii.  26 
 iii.  4-6,  Is.  xl.  3-5  xviii.  20,  Exod.  xx.  13-15 
 
 iv.    4,  Deut.  viii.  3  xix.  46,  Is.  Ivi.  7 
 
 8,  Deut.  vi.  13  XX.  17,  Ps.  cxvii.  22 
 
 lO-li,  Ps.  xc.  II -12  28,  Deut.  XXV.  5 
 
 12,  Deut.  vi.  16  37,  Exod.  iii.  6 
 
 *i8-i9.  Is.  Ixi.  1-2  42-43,  Ps.  cix.  I 
 
 Is.  Iviii.  6  *xxii.  37,  Is.  liii.  12 
 
 vii.  27,  Mai.  iii.  i  *  xxiii.  30,  Hos.  x.  8 
 
 viii.  10,  Is.  vi.  9  *        46,  Ps.  xxx.  5 
 
 7.  Tivie  and  place  of  the  Composition. — In  the 
 complete  silence  of  Scripture,  our  only  sources  for 
 deteniiining  the  above  points  are  tradition  and  in- 
 ternal evidence.  The  statements  of  the  former, 
 though  sufficiently  definite,  are  inconsistent  and  un- 
 trustworthy. Jerome  {Praf.  in  Matth.)  asserts 
 that  it  was  composed  '  in  Achaia  and  the  regions 
 of  Boeotia,'  an  opinion  which  appears  to  have  been 
 generally  received  in  the  4th  century  (Gregory 
 Nazianz.,  'Ei'  'AxamSt),  and  has  been  accepted  by 
 Lardner  (Credibility),  who  fixes  its  date  63  or  64 
 A.  D. ,  after  the  release  of  St.  Paul.  An  Arabic  ver- 
 sion, published  by  Erpenius,  places  its  composition 
 '  in  a  city  of  Macedonia,  twenty-two  years  after  the 
 ascension,'  52  A.  D. ;  a  view  to  which  Hilgenfeld 
 and  Wordsworth  {Gr.  Test.,  i.  p.  170)  give  in  their 
 adherence.  A  still  earlier  date,  thirteen  years  after 
 the  ascension,  is  assigned  by  the  subscription  in 
 some  ancient  MSS.  Other  statements  as  to  the 
 place  are  Alexandria  Troas,  Alexandria  in  Egypt 
 (the  Peschito  and  Persian  versions,  Abulfeda, 
 accepted  by  Mill,  Grabe,  and  Wetstein),  Rome 
 (Ewald  vi.  40,  Olshausen),  and  Csesarea  (Eertholdt, 
 Scliott,  Thiersch,  Alford,  Abp.  Thomson). 
 
LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 9G1 
 
 LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 
 
 Amidst  this  uncertainty,  it  will  be  well  to  see  if 
 there  is  any  internal  evidence  which  will  help  us  in 
 determining  these  points.  We  are  here  met  at  the 
 outset  by  those  who  are  determined  to  see  in  every 
 clear  prophecy  a  vaticinium  post  ei'cntum,  and  who 
 find  in  the  predictions  of  the  overthrow  of  Jeru- 
 salem (xiii.  34,  35;  xix.  43,  44;  xxi.  20-24),  ^nd 
 the  persecutions  of  our  Lord's  followers  (xii.  52, 
 53  ;  xxi.  12),  and  the  nearness  of  the  irapovcrla  (xxi. 
 25-33)1  a  clear  proof  that  the  gospel  was  composed 
 after  70  A.  D.  This  has  come  to  be  regarded  as  a 
 settled  point  by  a  certain  school  of  criticism  (Ewaid 
 V.  134;  De  Wette,  Einlcit.,  p.  298;  Credner, 
 Einleit.;  Reuss,  Gesch.  d.  Heil.  Schr.,  195  ;  Meyer; 
 Kenan,  Vie  de  Jesus,  xvi. ;  Nicolas,  Etudes,  N.  T., 
 etc.),  though  there  is  no  small  diversity  among  its 
 representatives  as  to  the  time  and  place  of  its  publi- 
 cation of  the  gospel  and  the  sources  from  which  it 
 was  derived.  Those,  on  the  other  hand,  who, 
 brought  up  in  a  sounder  and  more  reverent  school 
 see  no  d,  priori  impossibility  in  a  future  event  being 
 foretold  by  the  Son  of  God,  will  be  led  by  the  same 
 data  to  a  very  different  conclusion,  and  will  discover 
 sufficient  grounds  for  dating  the  gospel  not  later 
 than  A.  D.  63.  It  is  certain  that  the  gospel  was 
 written  before  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  (Acts  i.  l). 
 This  latter  could  not  have  been  composed  before  63 
 A.  D.,  when  the  writer  leaves  St.  Paul  in  'his  own 
 hired  house '  at  Rome ;  nor  probably  long  aftei", 
 since,  otherwise,  the  issue  of  the  apostle's  imprison- 
 ment and  appeal  to  Caesar  must  naturally  have 
 been  recorded  by  him.  How  long  the  composition 
 of  the  gospel  preceded  that  of  the  Acts  it  is  impos- 
 sible to  determine ;  but  we  may  remark  that  the 
 different  tradition  followed  in  the  reports  of  the 
 ascension  in  the  two  books,  renders  it  probable 
 that  the  interval  was  not  very  small,  or,  at  any  rate, 
 that  the  two  were  not  contemporaneous.  If  we 
 foUow  the  old  tradition  given  above,  we  may  find 
 reason  for  supposing  that  the  interval  between  St. 
 Luke's  being  left  at  Philippi  (Acts  xvi.  12;  xvii.  i) 
 and  his  joining  the  apostle  there  again  (xx.  5),  was 
 employed  in  writing  and  publishing  his  gospel. 
 This  view  is  accepted  by  Alford,  Prcleg.  p.  47,  and 
 is  ably  maintained  by  Dr.  Wordsworth,  Gr.  Test. 
 i.  168-170,  though  he  weakens  his  argument  by 
 referring  ivar^-fekiov  (2  Cor.  viii.  18)  to  a  written 
 gospel,  a  later  sense  never  found  in  the  N.  T. 
 Another  and  more  plausible  view,  adopted  by 
 Thiersch,  which  has  found  very  wide  acceptance, 
 is  that  the  gospel  was  written  under  the  guidance 
 and  superintendence  of  St.  Paul  during  his  im- 
 prisonment at  Caesarea,  A.D.  58-60.  Olshausen, 
 among  others,  places  it  a  few  years  later,  during  St. 
 Paul's  captivity  at  Rome,  whei^e  he  may  have  made 
 the  acquaintance  of  Theophilus,  if,  as  Ewald  (vi. 
 40)  maintains,  the  latter  was  a  native  of  Rome. 
 
 8.  For  whom  written. — On  this  point  we  have 
 certain  evidence.  St.  Luke  himself  tells  us  that 
 the  object  he  had  in  view  in  compiling  his  gospel 
 was  that  a  certain  'Theophilus'  'might  know  the 
 certainty  of  those  things  wherein  he  had  been 
 (orally)  instructed.'  Nothing  more  is  known  of 
 this  Theophilus,  and  it  is  idle  to  repeat  the  vague 
 conjectures  in  which  critics  have  indulged ;  some 
 even  denying  his  personal  existence  altogether,  and 
 arguing,  from  the  meaning  of  the  name,  that  it 
 stands  merely  as  the  representative  of  a  class  (see 
 Theophilus).  One  or  two  inferences  may,  how- 
 ever, be  made  with  tolerable  certainty  from  St. 
 Luke's  words.    He  was  doubtless  a  Christian,  and, 
 
 from  his  name  and  the  character  of  the  gospel,  a 
 Gentile  convert;  while  the  epithet  KpartcrTos,  gene- 
 rally employed  as  a  title  of  honour  (Acts  xxiii.  26 ; 
 xxiv.  3 ;  xxvi.  25),  indicates  that  he  was  a  person 
 of  official  dignity.  The  topographical  details,  so 
 plentifully  given  by  St.  Luke  in  his  Gospel  and  the 
 Acts,  for  Palestine,  Asia  Minor,  and  Greece,  but 
 which  cease  when  the  writer  comes  to  speak  of 
 places  with  which  an  inhabitant  of  Italy  might  be 
 supposed  to  be  familiar — a  line  of  argument  well 
 developed  by  Archbishop  Thomson  (Smitk''s  Diet, 
 of  Bible,  ii.  155) — lead  to  the  belief  that  he  was  an 
 Italian,  and  perhaps,  as  Ewald  holds,  a  native  of 
 Rome.  But  though  the  gospel  is  inscribed  to  him, 
 we  must  not  consider  that  it  was  written  for  him 
 alone,  but  that  Theophilus  stands  rather  as  the 
 representative  of  the  whole  Christian  world;  not, 
 as  we  have  already  seen,  of  the  Gentiles,  as  such, 
 to  the  exclusion  of  the  Jews,  but  the  whole  race  of 
 man,  whom  St.  Luke  had  in  his  eye  ;  and  for  whom, 
 under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  work 
 was  adapted  '  as  the  gospel  of  the  nations  {rots  airb 
 tQiv  idvSiv  ireiroirjKdTa,  Orig.  apud  Euseh.  vi.  25), 
 full  of  mercy  and  hope  assured  to  the  whole  world 
 by  the  love  of  a  suffering  Saviour '  (Westcott,  Study 
 of  Gospel,  p.  218). 
 
 9.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — After  the  brief  preface 
 — the  value  of  which  it  is  difficult  to  over-estimate 
 as  throwing  light  on  the  history  of  the  composi- 
 tion of  the  gospels  in  general,  and  the  true  theory 
 of  scriptural  inspiration — the  narrative  of  the  gospel 
 may  be  distinguished  into  four  portions  :  i.  The 
 time  preceding  our  Lord's  public  life,  including  the 
 conception  and  birth  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  of 
 Christ,  His  circumcision,  presentation  in  the  temple, 
 and  the  single  incident  recorded  of  His  childhood, 
 ii.  41-51,  comprised  in  the  first  two  chapters.  On 
 the  authenticity  of  these  two  chapters,  which  has 
 been  vehemently  attacked,  Meyer's  note,  and 
 Volckmar's  work  on  Marcion's  gospel  (from  which 
 they  were  absent)  may  be  consulted.  The  whole 
 of  this  portion  is  in  form,  and  to  a  considerable 
 extent  in  substance,  peculiar  to  our  evangelist.  2. 
 A  large  number  of  originally  detached  and  inde- 
 pendent narratives,  comprising  our  Lord's  bap- 
 tism, temptation,  and  Galilean  ministry  ;  almost 
 the  whole  being  common  to  Luke  with  the  other 
 synoptists  (iii.  l-ix.  49).  3.  A  large  section,  some- 
 times but  improperly  termed  the  gnoinology,  con- 
 taining narratives  of  events,  and  reports  of  dis- 
 courses belonging  to  the  period  from  the  close  of 
 our  Lord's  direct  Galilean  ministry  to  His  visit  to 
 Jericho  a  few  days  before  His  royal  entrance  into 
 Jerusalem,  and  mostly  occurring  during  the  actual 
 journey  (ix.  50-xviii.  14).  The  whole  of  this,  in 
 its  present  form,  is  peculiar  to  St.  Luke.  4.  The 
 last  days  of  Christ ;  His  entry  into  Jerusalem,  dis- 
 courses in  the  temple.  His  sufferings  and  death. 
 His  resurrection  and  ascension,  common  to  St. 
 Luke  and  the  other  evangelists  in  substance  ; 
 though  there  are  considerable  differences  in  detail 
 in  the  narratives  of  the  passion  and  resurrection 
 (especially  the  journey  to  Emmaus),  and  that  of 
 the  ascension  is  entirely  St.  Luke's  own  (xviii.  15- 
 xxiv.  53). 
 
 Commentaries. — In  addition  to  the  commentaries 
 on  the  four  gospels,  the  following  works,  specially 
 devoted  to  St.  Luke,  may  be  specified  :  Ambrose, 
 Expos.  Evang.  Luc. ;  Fr.  Lambert,  Comm.  in  divt 
 Luc.  Ev.  1524;  Jo.  Agricola,  Comm.  in  Luc, 
 1525  :  Erasm.  Sarcerius,  in  Luc.  Ev.  justa  schol,. 
 
LUNATIC 
 
 868 
 
 LUZ 
 
 1 539.  Commentaries  by  Hofmeister,  1 562 ;  Logen- 
 hagen,  from  the  writings  of  Augustine,  1574;  Soaris, 
 1574;  Stella,  1575  (a  favourite  commentary  with  the 
 Romish  Church,  which  has  gone  through  many 
 editions);  Fr.  Toletus,  l6i2;  Winckelman,  1601; 
 and  Piscator,  Analys.  logic.  Ev.  secimd.  Luc.  1608; 
 Car.  Segaar.,  Obs.  philol.  et  theol.  in  cap.  i.-ix., 
 1766;  Morus,  Pralect.  in  Ev.  Luc,  1795;  Pape, 
 Coniment.,  1777-81 ;  Bolten,  Berichid.  Luc,  1796; 
 Schleiermacher,  Critical  Essay,  1817,  translated  by 
 Thirlwall,  1825;  Bornemann,  Schol.  in  Luc,  1830 ; 
 Stein,  Comment,  zd.  Ev.  d.  Luc,  1830;  Baumgarten 
 Ci-usius,  Comme7it.,  1845  ;  Kuinoel,  Comment,  in 
 Ev.  Luc,  ed.  4,  1843  ;  Oosterzee  in  Lange's  Bibel- 
 werk,  translated  in  Clarke's  For.  Theol.  Lib. — E.  V. 
 
 LUNATIC  {ui\-r\vio.ibii.evoC).  This  term  occurs 
 only  twice  in  the  N.  T.,  viz.,  Matt.  iv.  24,  andxvii. 
 15.  From  the  latter  passage  it  may  be  inferred 
 that  the  disease  with  which  such  were  afflicted  was 
 a  species  of  epilepsy  (comp.  Mark  ix.  17  ;  Luke  ix. 
 39).  Though  in  Matt.  iv.  24  the  ai\y]via.^i»xivoi 
 are  distinguished  from  the  Sat^oi'tj'oMei'oc,  it  appears 
 from  the  other  passages  that  the  affliction  of  the 
 former  was  regarded  as  the  effect  of  demoniac  in- 
 fluence. Perhaps  the  point  of  distinction  lay  in  the 
 periodicity  of  the  attacks  in  the  one  case,  and  the 
 continuity  of  the  disease  in  the  other.  As  this 
 periodicity  in  the  case  of  epilepsy  was  supposed  to 
 be  determined  by  the  changes  of  the  moon  (see 
 Wetstein  in  loc),  those  thus  afflicted  were  called 
 (re\T]VLa^6fj.€Poi,  lunatic,  or  moonstruck.  In  the 
 classical  writers  this  term  is  applied,  not  to  such 
 as  are  now  usually  called  lunatics,  but  to  epileptic 
 patients  (see  Bloomfield's  note  on  Matt.  iv.  24).- — 
 W.  L.  A. 
 
 LUTHER,  Martin,  the  great  German  Re- 
 former, whose  world-fame  renders  it  superfluous  to 
 give  here  more  than  the  barest  outline  of  his  his- 
 toiy,  was  born  at  Eisleben  loth  November  1483  ; 
 became  a  monk  of  the  Augustinian  order  at  Er- 
 furt in  1505  ;  was  appointed  professor  of  dialectic 
 and  physics  at  Wittenberg  in  1508  ;  became 
 D.D.  in  1512;  published  his  Theses  against  In- 
 dulgences in  1517  ;  burned  the  Pope's  Bull  in 
 1 520 ;  and  after  a  life  of  incessant  labour  to  promote 
 the  cause  of  the  Reformation  and  evangelical  re- 
 ligion, died  at  Wittenberg  1 8th  February  1546. 
 Luther  is  in  an  important  sense  the  father  of  modern 
 Biblical  exegesis,  for  not  only  by  precept  and 
 example  did  he  maintain  that  the  Bible  in  the 
 original  tongues  is  the  ultimate  authority  in  all  re- 
 ligious questions,  and  that  as  such  it  is  to  be 
 expounded  to  the  community,  but  by  his  assertion 
 of  the  right  of  private  judgment  in  the  interpreta- 
 tion of  the  Bible,  and  his  advocacy  of  a  grammati- 
 cal and  philological  method  of  interpretation  in 
 preference  to  one  which  would  submit  the  inspired 
 word  to  the  influence  of  preconceived  dogmatical 
 theories,  he  boldly  opened  the  path  which  alone  a 
 true  exegesis  can  pursue,  and  in  the  steady  pursuit  of 
 which  all  the  successes  of  subsequent  investigation 
 into  the  meaning  of  Scripture  have  been  secured. 
 Luther's  own  contributions  to  Biblical  literature, 
 besides  his  immortal  translation  of  the  Scriptures 
 into  German  [German  Versions],  are,  in  chrono- 
 logical order,  as  follows  : — Ln  Ep.  ad  Galaias  Com- 
 ment., 4to  1519  ;  Ena7-rationes  epistolarum  etevan- 
 s;eliorum,  1521  ;  Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Galatas  ab 
 auctorerecog.,  1524  ;  Deuteronoinium  Mosis  ex  Heb. 
 castigatwn  cum  annott.,  1524;  Annott.  in  Eccles. 
 
 Salomonis,  1532  ;  Breves  enarrationes  Esaicz 
 proph.,  1534;  Eiiarr.  Ps.  xlv.  ex  prcelectionibia 
 Collect.,  do.  ;  Enarr.  in  Pr.  yoelem  ex  pralectt., 
 in  Pr.  Amos,  in  Pr.  Abdiam,  ex  prcelectt., 
 1536;  Co77unent.  in  ep.  ad  Gal.  demio  diligenter 
 recogn.  1538;  Enarr.  in  Cant.  Cantic,  do.  ;  in 
 aliquot capp.  Matthcei  (i.  -vi. ,  viii.  -xviii.),  do.  ;  Enarr. 
 ill  Ps.  li.,  do.  ;  Enarr.  in  Pss.  graduum,  1 540  ; 
 Enarr.  Ps.  xc,  1541  ;  Comm.  in  Micham  Pr.^ 
 1542  ;  Enarr.  in  Hoseam  Pr.,  1545  >  Ln  Ps.  ii., 
 1546;  Com.  in  Joel  Pr.,  1547;  Enarr.  in  Gene- 
 sim,  1 563.  An  edition  of  Luther's  exegetical  works 
 by  Elsperger,  Schmid,  and  Irmischer  has  been  com- 
 menced, of  which  20  vols,  have  appeared,  Erlang. 
 1829-49.  English  translations  of  his  commentaries 
 on  the  Galatians  (by  Middleton),  on  the  Psalms 
 (by  Cole),  and  on  Genesis  (by  Cole),  have  appeared. 
 The  best  edition  of  his  collected  works  is  that  by 
 Walch,  24  vols.  4to,  Halle  1737-53. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LUZ  (n?,  'almond  tree;'  Oi'XayOiXoiyf,  combin- 
 ing two  words  ;  Kov'^o. ;  Liiza),  a  very  ancient  city 
 of  Canaan,  better  known  by  the  name  which 
 Jacob  gave  it — Bethel  [Bethel].  It  would  seem 
 from  the  sacred  narrative  that  the  teiTn  Beth-el, 
 '  House  of  God,'  the  place  of  Jacob's  pillar,  of  the 
 Israelitish  sanctuary,  and  of  Jeroboam's  idol- 
 temple,  was  not  w  Luz.  On  his  way  from  Beer- 
 sheba  to  Haran,  Jacob  '  arrived  at  a  place  (DIpM), 
 and  stayed  there  over  night,  for  the  sun  had  set ; 
 and  he  took  one  of  the  stones  oi  the  place,  and  put 
 it  under  his  head,  and  lay  down  in  that  place'' 
 (Gen.  xxviii.  il).  'The  place'  was  certainly  in 
 the  open  country.  But  the  city  of  Luz  must  have 
 been  close  to  it,  for  we  read,  '  He  called  the  name 
 of  that  place  Bethel,  but  the  name  of  the  tow7i  ("DtJ^ 
 
 T'yn,  not  '  that  town ')  was  originally  Luz '  (ver. 
 
 19).  The  same  distinction  between  Beth-el  and 
 Luz  is  afterwards  observed.  On  his  return  from 
 Padan-aram  Jacob   came  again   '  to   Luz,   that   is 
 
 Bethel And  he  built  there  an  altar,  and 
 
 called  the  place  El-beth-el '  (xxxv.  6,  7).  The  altar 
 could  not  have  been  m  Luz.  It  seems  probable 
 that  at  and  after  this  period  buildings  began  to  be 
 erected  around  the  sanctuary,  and  a  village  was 
 formed  distinct  from  Luz.  On  the  occupation  of 
 Palestine  by  the  Israelities,  Bethel  and  Luz  are 
 spoken  of  as  separate  places.  Thus,  in  describing 
 the  southern  border  of  Ephraim,  Joshua  says, 
 '  The  lot  of  the  children  of  Joseph  went  forth 
 from  Jordan  by  Jericho  ....  to  the  wilderness 
 that  goeth  up  from  Jericho  by  Mount  Bethel,  and 
 goeth  owi  from  Bethel  to  Luz''  (xvi.  i,  2).  Luz 
 thus  lay  west  of  Bethel,  and  the  latter  appears  to 
 have  been  situated  on  a  mount.  Keil's  rendering 
 of  this  passage  is  not  satisfactory.  He  would 
 interpret  '  from  Bethel '  as  meaning  '  from  the 
 7noii7ttai7is  of  Bethel,'  not  from  the  city  or  sanc- 
 tuary (see,  however,  Cotiiment.  o/i  Josh.,  ad  loc.) 
 
 Others  regard  the  phrase  Bethel-Luzah   (?S"n''3 
 
 ntlP)  as  a  composite  name  (Winer,  P.  W.,  s.  v. 
 Bethel ;  Clericus,  ad  loc.)  This,  however,  is 
 scarcely  admissible,  and  is  unnecessary.  It  seems 
 probable  that  the  two  places  were  so  close  to  each 
 other  that  their  suburbs  met,  and  eventually  the 
 Canaanitish  name  Luz  was  superseded  by  the 
 more  distinguished  Hebrew  Beth-el.  We  hear 
 no  more  of  Luz  after  the  conquest  of  the  city  by 
 the  Ephraimites  (Judg.   i.  24,  25).     The  city  ^\as 
 
LUZ 
 
 869 
 
 LYRA 
 
 betrayed  into  their  hands  by  one  of  the  inhabi- 
 tants, who  was  spared  by  the  conquerors,  and 
 founded  another  Luz. 
 
 2.  A  city  '  in  the  land  of  the  Hittites '  whose 
 origin  is  thus  recorded — 'The  man  (who  had  be- 
 trayed the  ancient  Luz  to  the  Ephraimites)  went 
 into  the  land  of  the  Hittites,  and  built  a  city,  and 
 called  the  name  thereof  Liiz,  which  is  the  name 
 thereof  unto  this  day  (Judg.  i.  26).  Rosenmiiller 
 would  identify  it  with  the  Ltiza  {kov^o),  which 
 Eusebius  locates  three  miles  from  Neapolis  ;  but 
 Winer  naturally  asks  how  could  that  district  have 
 been  called  '  the  land  of  the  Hittites '  in  the  time 
 of  the  Judges  (Oiiomast.,  s.  v.  ;  Wfner,  R.  W., 
 s.  V.  Lus)  ?  The  Hittites  appear  to  have  retired 
 before  the  Israelities  to  northern  Syria,  and  settled 
 in  the  mountains  and  on  the  banks  of  the  Orontes 
 [Hittites].  Probably  Luz  was  situated  some- 
 where in  that  region. — ^J.  L.  P. 
 
 LUZ  (fv)  occurs  only  once  in  the  O.  T.,  namely, 
 in  Gen.  xxx.  37  (a  passage  already  adduced  in  the 
 article  Libneh),  where  it  indicates  one  of  the 
 kinds  of  rod  from  which  Jacob  peeled  the  bark, 
 and  which  he  placed  in  the  water-troughs  of  the 
 cattle.  Luz  is  translated  hazel  in  the  A.  V.,  as 
 well  as  in  several  others ;  in  some  it  is  rendered  by 
 words  equivalent  to  'walnut,'  but  'almond'  ap- 
 pears to  be  its  true  meaning.     For  in  the  Arabic 
 
 we  have  ',  J  lonz,  which  is  indeed  the  same  word, 
 
 and  which  denotes  the  almond.  Thus  Abu'l  Fadli, 
 as  quoted  by  Celsius  {Hierobot.  i.  254),  says,  ''  Louz 
 est  arbor  nota,  et  magna,  foliis  mollibus.  Species 
 dure,  hortensis  et  silvestris.  Hortensis  quoque  duce 
 sunt  species,  dulcis  et  amara;'  where  reference  is 
 evidently  made  to  the  sweet  and  bitter  almond. 
 Other  Arab  authors  also  describe  the  almond  under 
 the  name  of  lonz.  But  this  name  was  well  known 
 to  the  Hebrews  as  indicating  the  almond ;  for  R. 
 Saadias,  in  Ibn  Esra's  Comnient.,  as  quoted  by 
 Celsius  (p.  253),  remarks:  ^ Lus  est  amygdalus, 
 quia  ita  earn  appellant  Arabes ;  nam  hce  duas 
 linguae,  et  Syriaca,  ejusdem  sunt  familije.'  Al- 
 monds have  been  always  produced  in  Syria  and 
 Palestine,  and  extend  from  thence  into  Affghan- 
 istan.  But  as  there  is  another  word  by  which  the 
 almond  was  known  to  the  Hebrews,  we  shall  re- 
 serve our  further  remarks  for  that  head  [Shakad]. 
 -J.  F.  R. 
 
 LYCAONIA  {KvKaovid),  a  province  of  Asia 
 Minor,  having  Cappadocia  on  the  east,  Galatia 
 on  the  north,  Phiygia  on  the  west,  and  Isauria 
 and  Cilicia  on  the  south.  It  extends  in  length 
 about  twenty  geographical  miles  from  east  to  west, 
 and  about  thirteen  in  breadth.  It  was  an  undulat- 
 ing plain,  involved  among  mountains,  which  were 
 noted  for  the  concourse  of  wild  asses.  The  soil 
 was  so  strongly  impregnated  with  salt  that  few  of 
 the  brooks  supplied  drinkable  water,  so  that  good 
 water  was  sold  for  money.  But  sheep  throve  on 
 the  pasturage,  and  were  reared  with  great  advan- 
 tage (Strabo,  xii.  p.  568;  Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  viii. 
 69).  It  was  a  Roman  province  when  visited  by 
 Paul  (Acts  xiv.  6),  and  its  chief  towns  were 
 Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe,  of  which  the  first 
 was  the  capital.  '  The  speech  of  Lycaonia'  (Acts 
 xiv.  11)  is  supposed  by  some  to  have  been  the 
 ancient  Assyrian  language,  also  spoken  by  the 
 Cappadocians  (Jablonsky,  Disquis.  de  Lingua  Lyca- 
 onica,  Opusc.  iii.  3,  seq.);  but  it  is  more  usually 
 
 conceived  to  have  been  a  corrupt  Greek,  inter- 
 mingled with  many  Syriac  words  (Guhling,  Dissert, 
 de  Lingua  Lycaon. ) — J.  K. 
 
 LYCIA  (AnK^a),  a  province  in  the  south-west 
 of  Asia  Minor,  having  Pamphylia  on  the  east, 
 Phrygia  on  the  north,  Caria  on  the  west,  and  the 
 Mediterranean  on  the  south.  Great  part  of  the 
 country,  however,  consists  of  a  peninsula  project- 
 ing south  into  the  Mediterranean.  It  is  moun- 
 tainous, and  is  watered  by  numerous  small  rivers 
 which  flow  from  the  mountains.  Its  inhabitants 
 were  believed  to  be  descendants  of  Cretans,  who 
 came  thither  under  Sarpedon,  brother  of  Minos. 
 One  of  their  kings  was  Bellerophon,  celebrated  in 
 mythology.  The  Lycians  were  a  warlike  people, 
 powerful  on  the  sea,  and  attached  to  their  inde- 
 pendence, which  they  successfully  maintained 
 against  Croesus,  king  of  Lydia,  and  were  after- 
 wards allowed  by  the  Persians  to  retain  their  own 
 kings  as  satraps.  Lycia  is  named  in  i  Maccab.  xv. 
 23,  as  one  of  the  countries  to  which  the  Roman 
 senate  sent  its  missive  in  favour  of  the  Jews.  The 
 victory  of  the  Romans  over  Antiochus  (b.  c.  189) 
 gave  Lycia  rank  as  a  free  state,  which  it  retained 
 till  the  time  of  Claudius,  when  it  was  made  a 
 province  of  the  Roman  empire  (Suet,  Claud.  25  ; 
 Vespas.  8).  Lycia  contained  many  towns,  two  of 
 which  are  mentioned  in  the  N.  T. ;  Patara  (Acts 
 xxi.  I,  2);  Myra  (Acts  xxvii.  5);  and  one,  Phaselis, 
 in  the  Apocrypha  (i  Maccab.  xv.  23). — J.  K. 
 
 LYDDA.     [LoD.] 
 
 LYDIA,  a  woman  of  Thyafira,  'a  seller  of 
 purple,'  who  dwelt  in  the  city  of  Philippi  in  Mace- 
 donia (Acts  xvi.  14,  15).  The  commentators  are 
 not  agreed  whether  '  Lydia  '  should  be  regarded  as 
 an  appellative,  or  a  derivative  from  the  country  to 
 which  the  woman  belonged,  Thyatira,  her  native 
 place,  being  in  Lydia.  There  are  examples  of  this 
 latter  sense  ;  but  the  preceding  word  ovbixari  seems 
 here  to  support  the  former,  and  the  name  was  a 
 common  one.  Lydia  was  not  by  birth  a  Jewess, 
 but  a  proselyte,  as  the  phrase  '  who  worshipped 
 God '  (ae^oix.evr\  rbv  Qeov)  imports.  She  was 
 converted  by  the  preaching  of  Paul ;  and  after 
 she  and  her  household  had  been  baptised,  she 
 pressed  the  use  of  her  house  so  earnestly  upon  him 
 and  his  associates,  that  they  were  constrained  to 
 accept  the  invitation.  The  Lydians  were  famous 
 for  the  art  of  dyeing  purple  vests,  and  Lydia,  as  *  a 
 seller  of  purple,'  is  supposed  to  have  been  a  dealer 
 in  vests  so  dyed,  rather  than  in  the  dye  itself  (see 
 Kuinoel  on  Acts  xvi.  14). — ^J.  K. 
 
 LYDIA.     [LuD.] 
 
 LYDIA,  Ezek.  xxx.  5 ;  and  Lydians,  Jer. 
 xlvi.  9 — see  Ludim. 
 
 LYRA,  Nicholas  De,  or,  when  Latinized, 
 Lyranus.  This  celebrated  commentator  and  fore- 
 runner of  the  Reformation,  was  born  about  1270, 
 of  Jewish  parents,  at  Lyre,  a  small  town  in  Nor- 
 mandy, in  the  diocese  of  Eurecca,  from  which  he 
 took  his  surname.  Having  embraced  Christianity 
 when  young,  he  entered  the  order  of  the  Francis- 
 cans at  Verneuil  in  1291,  whence  he  was  sent  to 
 the  Franciscan  convent  at  Paris  to  complete  his 
 studies.  Here  he  applied  himself  with  great  dili- 
 gence and  success  to  his  studies,  was  admitted  to 
 the  degree  of  Doctor,   and  became   a  most  dis- 
 
I-YRA 
 
 870 
 
 LYSANIAS 
 
 tinguished  lecturer  on  the  Bible.  His  great 
 learning,  refined  taste,  and  eminent  worth,  raised 
 him  to  the  principal  offices  of  his  order,  and  secured 
 him  the  friendship  of  the  most  illustrious  persons  of 
 his  age.  So  highly  was  he  esteemed  by  Queen 
 Jane,  Countess  of  Burgundy,  and  the  wife  of 
 Philip  v.,  called  the  Long,  that  she  appointed  him 
 one  of  her  executors  in  1325.  He  died  at  Paris 
 October  23,  1340.  He  wrote  (i)  a  treatise  in  de- 
 fence of  Christianity,  and  against  Judaism,  entitled 
 Tractatics  fratris  Nicolai  de  Ly7'a  de  Messia  ejiisqiie 
 advenlu,  una  aim  responsione  ad  yudaoi'tim  argti- 
 vienta  qiiatnordecim  contra  veritateni  Evangelioriim, 
 which  he  finished  in  1309,  and  is  directed  against 
 some  Rabbis  who  made  use  of  the  N.  T.  to  assail 
 Christianity.  It  is  generally  appended  to  his 
 commentary,  and  is  also  given  in  the  polemical 
 work  entitled  the  Hebrccornastix  of  Hieronymus  de 
 Sancta-fide,  Frankfort  1602,  p.  148,  ff.  (2.)  Pos- 
 tilla;  perpelncE  in  nnh'crsa  Biblia,  printed  at  first  at 
 Rome  1471-72,  5  vols,  folio.  It  is  this  work  which 
 has  immortalised  De  Lyra,  and  conferred  upon 
 its  author  the  title  of  Docto7-  planus  et  utilis.  The 
 great  merit  of  this  commentary  consists  in  its  em- 
 bodying the  sober-spirited  and  ingenious  explana- 
 tions of  Rashi,  whose  mode  of  interpretation  he 
 regarded  as  his  model,  as  he  frankly  states,  '  Shnili- 
 ier  intendo  non  solum  dicta  doctoj-nm  Catholiconim,  scd 
 etiam  Hebnvorum  maxime Rabbi  Salonionis,  qui  inter 
 docto7-es  Hebrccos  locutus  est  rationalibus,  ad  declaj-a- 
 tionem  sensiis  literalis  indticere.^  De  Lyra  even 
 adopts  the  well-known  Jewish  four  modes  of  inter- 
 pretation denominated  DTlS  =  TlD,  mystical ; 
 t^m,  allegorical ;  \t2~\,  spiritual ;  LD^i'S,  literal, 
 which  he  thus  expresses  in  verses  in  the  same  pro- 
 logue (/.  e.,  the  first),  from  which  the  former 
 quotation  is  made. 
 
 Litera  gesta  docet,  quid  credas  allegoria, 
 Moralis  quid  agas,  quo  tendas  anagogia. 
 
 He  gives,  however,  the  preference  to  the  literal 
 sense.  '  All  of  them,'  says  he  in  the  second  pro- 
 logue, '  presuppose  the  literal  sense  as  the  founda- 
 tion. As  a  building  declining  from  the  foundation 
 is  likely  to  fall,  so  the  mystic  exposition  which 
 deviates  from  the  literal  sense  must  be  reckoned 
 unbecoming  and  unsuitable.'  Even  in  the  interpi-e- 
 tation  of  the  N.  T.,  where  Rashi  failed  him, 
 acquaintance  with  the  Rabbinical  writings  and 
 Jewish  antiquities  enabled  him  to  illustrate  largely 
 allusion  to  the  manners  and  customs  of  the  Hebrews. 
 How  much  Luther  and  the  Reformation  were  in- 
 debted to  De  Lyra,  may  be  seen  from  a  compari- 
 son of  the  respective  commentaries,  and  from  the 
 couplet  of  the  Reformer's  enemies. 
 
 Si  Lyra  non  lyrasset, 
 Lutherus  non  saltasset. 
 
 That  De  Lyra  was  of  Jewish  extraction,  is,  among 
 others,  most  emphatically  declared  by  Chajim  Ibn 
 Musa,  who  composed,  in  1456,  a  refutation  of  his 
 polemical  treatise,  entitled  HOITl  pO"~lDD  T/ie 
 Book  of  the  Shield  and  the  Spears,  in  which  he  says, 
 
 103  n'^:^  'rh  hti  mn^i  nmnNi  y-iro  mn  '•ivi: 
 
 D"'"lV13n  D''"i01J<C*.  De  Lyra's  statement  that  he 
 had  little  intercourse  with  the  Jews,  at  the  end 
 of  his  polemical  treatise,  and  his  modest  plea  in 
 the  prologue  to  his  commentary  for  indulgence, 
 '  because,'  he  says,  '  I  am  not  so  well  skilled  in  the 
 
 Hebrew  or  Latin  language  as  to  prevent  me  from 
 failing  in  many  particulars,'  which  are  urged  by 
 Graetz  and  others  against  his  Jewish  origin,  must  be 
 rejected  in  the  face  of  the  ancient  testimonies  to  the 
 contrary.  For  the  different  editions  of  De  Lyra's 
 works,  and  translation  into  French  and  German, 
 comp.  Groesse,  Tresor  de  Livres  rares  et  precieux, 
 s.v.  See  also  Davidson,  Sacred Henneneittics,  Edin 
 1843,  p.  175,  etc.  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der  jhiden, 
 vol.  vii.,  Leipzig  1863,  pp.  350,  513. — C.  D.  G. 
 
 LYSANIAS  (Aua-aw'as)  is  mentioned  by  St. 
 Luke,  in  chap.  iii.  i,  as  tetrarch  of  Abilene  on  the 
 eastern  slope  of  the  Anti-lebanon,  near  Damascus. 
 Amidst  the  obscurity  which  surrounds  this  name, 
 conjectures  have  been  indulged  in,  two  of  which 
 we  will  here  notice.  According  to  Eusebius  (whom 
 others  have  followed,  such  as  Bede  and  Adri- 
 chomius,  see  Corn,  a  Lapid.  /«  Lite,  iii.  i),  Lysa- 
 nias  was  a  son  of  Herod  the  Great.  This  opinion 
 (the  untenableness  of  which  is  shewn  by  Valesius, 
 on  Euseb.,  Hist.  Eccl.,  i.  9,  and  by  Scaliger, 
 A7iimadver.  07t  Enseb.  Chro7i.,  p.  178)  has  no 
 other  foundation  than  the  fact  that  the  evangelist 
 mentions  Lysanias  with  Herod  Antipas  and  Philip ; 
 we  dismiss  it,  therefore,  and  proceed  to  notice 
 another  opinion  which  has  excited  more  serious 
 discussion,  especially  in  recent  times.  Josephus 
 {Antiq.  xiv.  13.  3,  and  Bell.  Jiid.  i.  13.  i)  men- 
 tions a  Lysanias,  the  son  of  Ptolemy,  the  son  of 
 Mennceus  ;  and  in  other  passages,  also,  he  speaks  of 
 ^  Abila  of  Lysa7iias^*  (A7itiq.  xix.  5.  i)  and  ^  the 
 tetrarchy  of  Lysanias''  (xviii.  6.  10),  and,  more  fully 
 still,  oi  "■  Abile/ie,  the  tet7-a7'chy  of  Lysa7iias''  (xx.  7. 
 i).  Now  Lysanias,  the  son  of  Ptolemy,  was  put  to 
 death  by  Marcus  Antonius  at  the  instigation  of 
 Cleopatra  (Joseph.  A7ttiq.  xv.  4.  i;  Dion.  Cass., 
 xlix.  32).  This  took  place  B.C.  34,  or  about  sixty- 
 four  years  before  the  period  which  St.  Luke  refers 
 to  in  the  passage  before  us  (iii.  i).  To  the  older 
 commentators,  such  as  Casaubon  [On  Ba7-07tiiis, 
 A7171.  xxxi. ,  Num.  4),  Scaliger  {loc.  cit.),  and  others 
 (see  Corn,  a  Lap.  and  Grotius,  i/i  loc),  this  dif- 
 ference of  dates  presented  no  difficulty.  Allowing 
 historical  credit  to  St.  Luke  (on  which  subject  see 
 Dr.  Mill,  Pa7itheistic  Fii/icip.,  pt.  ii.  p.  16,  seq.), 
 no  less  than  to  Josephus,  they  at  once  concluded 
 that  two  different  princes  of  the  same  name,  and 
 possibly  of  the  same  family,  were  referred  to  by  the 
 two  writers.  (See  also  Kuinoel,  07i  Luke  iii.  i ; 
 Krebsius,  Obsei-vv.,  pp.  no- 113;  and  Robinson, 
 Biblioth.  Sacr.,  v.  81.)  This  reasonable  solution, 
 however,  was  unsatisfactory  to  the  restless  critics 
 of  Germany.  Strauss  and  others  (whose  names 
 are  mentioned  by  Bleek,  Sy7iopt.  E7-kl.,  i.  156,  and 
 Meyer,  Kom/ncnt.,  ii.  289)  charge  the  evangelist 
 with  'a  gross  clironological  error;'  a  charge  which 
 they  found  on  the  assumption  that  the  Lysanias  of 
 Chalcis,  mentioned  by  Josephus,  is  identical  with 
 the  Lysanias  of  Abilene,  whom  St.  Luke  mentions. 
 This  assumption  is  supported  by  an  hypothesis 
 which  is  incapable  of  proof;  that  Abilene,  being 
 contiguous  to  Chalcis,  was  united  to  the  latter 
 under  the  rule  of  Lysanias,  the  son  of  Ptolemy.  It 
 must,  however,  be  borne  in  mind  that  Josephus  no- 
 where speaks  of  Abilene  in  connection  with  this 
 Lysanias ;  nor,  indeed,   does  he  mention  it  at  all 
 
 *  Similarly,  the  geographer  Ptolemy  mentions  an 
 '  Abila,  which  bears  the  surname  of  Lysanias, '"A  jStXa 
 iTTiKXri^eiaa  Avaaviov  {v.  iS). 
 
LYSANIAS 
 
 871 
 
 LYSIAS 
 
 until  ten  years  after  the  notice  by  St.  Luke.  He 
 calls  Antony's  victim  simply  ruler  of  Chalcis. 
 Moreover,  it  is  of  importance  to  observe,  that  the 
 tdra>xhkiil  division  of  Palestine  and  neighbour- 
 ing districts  was  not  made  until  after  the  death  of 
 Herod  the  Great ;  so  that,  in  his  haste  to  inculpate 
 the  evangelist,  Strauss,  in  effect,  attributes  to  the 
 historian,  whom  he  invidiously  opposes  to  St. 
 Luke  as  a  better  authority,  an  amount  of  inaccu- 
 rate statement  which,  if  true,  would  destroy  all 
 reliance  on  his  history;  for  we  have  already  seen 
 that  Josephus  more  than  once  speaks  of  a  '  tetrarchy 
 of  Lysanias ; '  whereas  there  were  no  '  teirarchies ' 
 until  more  than  thirty  years  after  the  death  of 
 Ptolemy's  son,  Lysanias.  It  is,  therefore,  a  juster 
 criticism  to  conclude  (against  Strauss,  and  with  the 
 earlier  commentators)  that  in  such  passages  as  we 
 have  quoted  above,  wherein  the  historian  speaks 
 of  '  Abila  of  Lysattias,'  and  '  The  tetrarchy  of  Ly- 
 sanias,''  that  a  later  I^ysanias  is  certainly  meant ; 
 and  that  Josephus  is  not  only  accurate  himself,  but 
 a  voucher  also  for  the  veracity  of  St.  Luke.  But 
 there  is  yet  stronger  evidence  to  be  found  in 
 Josepluis  of  the  untenableness  of  Strauss'  objection 
 and  theory.  In  his  Je^-vish  Wars  (ii.  12.  8)  the 
 historian  tells  us,  that  the  emperor  Claudius  '  re- 
 moved Agrippa  [the  second]  from  Chalets  [the 
 kingdom,  be  it  remembered,  of  Strauss'  Lysanias] 
 to  a  greater  kingdom,  giving  him  in  addition 
 the  kingdom  of  Lysanias''  (e/c  5^  r^s  XaXKi'Sos 
 ^Aypiirirav  els  fiei^ova.  ^aciXeiav  fieraTi'^riai  .  .  . 
 irpoaedjfKe  de  r-qv  re  Avcravlov  paffCKeiav).  Ebrai"d 
 exposes  the  absurdity  of  Strauss'  argument,  by 
 drawing  from  these  words  of  Josephus  the  fol- 
 lowing conclusion  —  inevitable,  indeed,  on  the 
 terms  of  Strauss — that  Agrippa  was  deprived  of 
 Chalcis,  receiving  in  exchange  a  larger  kingdom, 
 and  also  Chalcis!  (See  Ebrard's  Gospel  Hist. 
 [Clark],  pp.  145,  146).  The  effect  of  this  rediictio 
 ad  absurdum  is  well  put  by  Dr.  Lee  [Inspiration 
 [l  ed.],  p.  394,  note),  'Hence,  therefore,  Josephus 
 does  make  mention  of  a  later  Lysanias  [on  the 
 denial  of  which  Strauss  has  founded  his  assault  on 
 St.  Luke] ;  and  by  doing  so,  fully  corroborates  the 
 fact  of  the  evangelist's  intimate  acquaintance  with 
 the  tangled  details  of  Jewish  history  in  his  day.' 
 Many  eminent  writers  have  expressly  accepted 
 Ebrard's  conclusion,  including  Meyer  [loc.  cit.) 
 and  Bleek  [loc.  cit.)  Patritius  concludes  an  elabo- 
 rate examination  of  the  entire  case  with  the  dis- 
 covery, that  '  the  later  Lysanias,  whom  Luke 
 mentions,  was  known  to  Josephus  also ;  and  that, 
 so  far  from  any  difficulty  accruing  out  of  Josephus 
 to  the  evangelist's  chronology,  as  alleged  by  ob- 
 jectors to  his  veracity,  the  historian's  statements 
 rather  confirm  and  strengthen  it '  [De  Evangeliis, 
 iii.  42,  25).  It  is  interesting,  also,  to  remark  that, 
 if  the  sacred  writer  gains  illustration  from  the 
 Jewish  historian  in  this  matter,  he  also  repays  him 
 the  favour,  by  helping  to  clear  up  what  would 
 otherwise  be  unintelligible  in  his  statements ;  for  in- 
 stance, when  Josephus  [Aniiq.  xvii.  17.  4)  mentions 
 '  BatauEea,  with  Trachonitis  and  Auranitis,  and  a 
 certain  part  of  what  was  called  '  the  house  of  Zeno- 
 dorus,'  as  paying  a  certain  tribute  to  Philip '  {avv 
 rwi  iiipei  o'Ckov  tov  Zrivodupov  Xeyofxivov) ;  and  when 
 it  is  remembered  that  '  the  house  of  Zenodorus ' 
 included  other  territory  besides  Abilene  (comp. 
 Antiq.  xv.  lo.  3,  with  Bell.  Jtid.  i.  20.  4) ;  we 
 cannot  but  admit  the  force  of  the  opinion  ad- 
 vanced by  Grotius  (as  quoted  by  Dr.  Hudson,  on 
 
 the  Antiq.,  xvii.  11.  4),  that  '  when  Josephus  says, 
 some  part  of  the  house,  or  possession,  of  Zenodorus 
 was  allotted  to  Philip,  he  thereby  declares  that  the 
 larger  part  of  it  belonged  to  another.  This  other 
 was  Lysanias,  whom  Luke  mentions'  (see  also 
 Krebsius,  Ohservatt.,  p.  112).  It  is  not  irrelevant 
 to  state  that  other  writers,  besides  .Strauss  and  his 
 party,  have  held  the  identity  of  St.  Luke's  Lysanias 
 with  Josephus'  son  of  Ptolemy,  and  have  also 
 believed  that  Josephus  mentioned  but  one  Lysanias. 
 But  (unlike  Strauss)  they  resorted  to  a  great  shift 
 rather  than  assail  the  veracity  of  the  holy  evan- 
 gelist. Valesius  (on  Eusebius,  Hist.  EccL,  i.  10), 
 and,  more  recently,  Paulus  [Comfnent.  in  loc),  sug- 
 gested an  alteration  of  St.  Luke's  text,  either  by  an 
 erasure  of  TerpapxovvTos  after  'AjSiA?;;'-^?,  or  retaining 
 the  participle  and  making  it  agree  with  ^LXiinrov 
 as  its  subject  (getting  rid  of  Avaaviov  as  a  leading 
 word,  by  reducing  it  to  a  mere  genitive  of  designa- 
 tion by  its  transposition  with  t^s — q.  d.,  t^s  Ad- 
 (xavlov  ^ k^CKr]vr)s  TerpapxovvTos),  as  if  Philip  had 
 been  called  by  the  evangelist  '  Tetrarch  of  Iturcea, 
 Trachonitis,  aM  the  Abilene  of  Lysanias.'  This 
 expedient,  however^  of  saving  St.  Luke's  veracity  by 
 the  mutilation  of  his  words  is  untenable,  not  having 
 any  support  from  MS.  authority.  In  conclusion, 
 it  is  worth  adding,  that  in  modern  times  a  coin  has 
 been  discovered  bearing  the  inscription  Avaaviov 
 Terpdpxov  Kal  apxi-ipecos,  and  Pococke  also  found 
 an  inscription  on  the  remains  of  a  Doric  temple, 
 called  A'ebi  Abel,  the  ancient  Abila,  fifteen  Englisli 
 miles  from  Damascus^  which  makes  mention  of 
 Lysanias,  tetrarch  of  Abilene.  Both  the  coin  and 
 the  inscription  refer  to  a  period  subsequent  to  the 
 death  of  Herod  (Pococke's  Description  of  the  East, 
 vol.  ii.,  pt.  I,  pp.  115,  Ii6;  and  Sestini,  Lettere  et 
 Dissertationi  niunismatiche,  tom.  vi.,  p.  loi,  tab. 
 2,  as  quoted  by  Wieseler,  Chronolog.  Synops.  183). 
 These  discoveries,  therefore,  certainly  lend  confir- 
 mation to  the  view  we  have  taken,  that  the  Lysa- 
 nias whom  JosephiTS  mentions  in  connection  with 
 events  in  the  reigns  of  Caius  and  Claudius  is  in 
 fact  identical  with  the  Lysanias  of  St.  Luke's  Gos- 
 pel (see  Davidson's  I'ntrod.  N.  T.,  p.  218). — 
 P.  H. 
 
 LYSIAS  [Avalas).  i.  A  Syrian  '  nobleman  of 
 the  blood  royal'  whom  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
 when  setting  out  for  Persia,  appointed  guardian  of 
 his  son,  and  regent  of  that  part  of  his  kingdom 
 which  extended  from  the  Euphrates  to  the  borders 
 of  Egj'pt  (I  Maccab.  iii.  32;  2  Maccab.  x.  Ii  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xiL  7.  2;  Appian,  De  reb.  Syr., 
 46).  Acting  under  the  special  orders  of  the  king, 
 Lysias  collected  a  large  force  for  the  purpose  of 
 carrying  on  a  war  of  extermination  against  the 
 Jews.  This  army,  under  the  command  of  the 
 generals  Ptolemy,  Nicanor,  and  Gorgias,  was  sur- 
 prised and  put  to  flight  by  Judas  Maccabseus  near 
 to  Emmaus  (i  Maccab.  iii.  38— iv.  18  ;  Joseph. 
 Antiq.  xii.  7.  3,  4).  In  the  following  year,  B.C. 
 165,  Lysias  himself  invaded  Judrea  with  a  still 
 larger  army,  and  joined  battle  with  Judas  in  the 
 neighbourhood  of  Bethsura.  The  Syrians  were 
 again  defeated,  and  so  decisively  that  Judas  was 
 able  to  accompHsh  his  great  purpose,  the  purifica- 
 tion of  the  Temple,  and  the  re-establishment  of 
 divine  worship  at  Jerusalem  (i  Maccab.  iv.  28-61  ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  7.  5-7).  Lysias  retires  to 
 Antioch,  and  while  preparing  for  a  fresh  campaign, 
 the  death  of  Epiphanes  leaves  liim  in  virtual  pos- 
 
 3  K2 
 
LYSIMACHUS 
 
 S7-2 
 
 LYSTRA 
 
 session  of  the  supreme  power.  Shortly  afterwards 
 (in  the  year  probably  B.C.  163),  with  an  army 
 equal  in  number  to  the  former  two  combined,  with 
 three  hundred  war  chariots  and  two-and-thirty 
 elephants,  and  accompanied  by  the  young  king 
 Antiochus  Eupator,  he  again  enters  Judssa  from 
 the  side  of  Idumsea.  Having  taken  the  fortified 
 city  of  Bethsura,  he  advances  to  Jerusalem  and 
 lays  siege  to  the  temple.  Meeting  here  with  a 
 stouter  resistance  than  he  had  anticipated,  and 
 hearing  that  Philip,  a  rival  -claimant  to  the  guar- 
 dianship of  the  king,  was  returning  from  Persia, 
 he  hastily  concludes  a  peace  with  the  Jews,  and 
 sets  out  for  Antioch.  On  reaching  this  city  he 
 finds  it  in  the  possession  of  his  rival.  In  the  en- 
 gagement which  followed,  Philip  was  defeated  and 
 slain.  Another  and  more  formidable  opponent, 
 however,  soon  appeared,  in  the  person  of  Demet- 
 rius Soter,  first  cousin  of  the  king,  who,  escaping 
 from  Rome,  lands  at  Tripolis,  and  lays  claim  to 
 the  throne.  The  people  rise  in  his  favour,  and 
 Antiochus  and  Lysias  are  seized  and  put  to  death 
 (l  Maccab.  vi.-vii.  2 ;  2  Maccab.  xiii.-xiv.  2 ; 
 Joseph.  Antiq.  xii.  9.  lO ;  Appian,  De  reb.  Syr., 
 47).  In  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  an  account 
 is  given  at  some  length  of  an  invasion  of  Judasa 
 by  Lysias,  made  before  the  final  invasion  but  -after 
 the  death  of  Epiphanes  (2  Maccab.  xi.)  It  is 
 scarcely  possible  to  reconcile  this  with  the  more 
 trustworthy  narratives  of  the  first  book,  and  it  is 
 clear  from  2  Maccab.  ix.  28-x.  10,  that  the 
 writer  is  not  following  a  strictly  chronological 
 order  in  this  part  of  his  history.  Internal  evidence 
 seems  to  us  to  favour  the  opinion  that  this  narra- 
 tive has  been  compiled  from  separate  and  partial 
 accounts  of  the  two  invasions  referred  to  in  i 
 Maccab.  iv. -vi. ,  the  writer  too  hastily  inferring 
 that  they  described  the  same  event. 
 
 2.  Claudius  Lysias,  the  military  tribune  who 
 commanded  the  Roman  troops  in  Jerusalem  during 
 the  latter  part  of  the  procuratorship  of  Felix  (Acts 
 xxi.  31-38  ;  xxii.  24-30  ;  xxiii.  17-30;  xxiv.  7,  22). 
 Nothing  more  is  known  of  him  than  what  is  stated 
 in  these  passages.  From  his  name,  -and  from 
 Acts  xxii.  28,  it  may  be  inferred  that  he  was  pro- 
 bably a  Greek. — S.  N. 
 
 LYSIMACHUS.  i.  'The  son  of  Ptolemasus 
 of  Jerusalem,'  Kvalti.a;xpv  JlToXefiaiov  rbv  iv  'lepov- 
 ffoKrjfj..  He  is  commonly  supposed  to  be  the 
 translator  into  Greek  of  the  Book  of  Esther  (see 
 the  close  of  the  LXX.  version).  The  Apocryphal 
 '  rest  of  the  Book  of  Estlier,'  A.  V.,  says,  '  In  the 
 fourth  year  of  the  reign  of  Ptolemaeus  and  Cleo- 
 patra, Dositheus,  who  said  he  was  a  priest  and 
 Levite,  and  Ptolemaeus  his  son,  brought  this 
 epistle  of  Phurim,  which  they  said  was  the  same, 
 and  that  Lysimachus,  the  son  of  Ptolemaeus  that 
 was  at  Jerusalem,  had  interpreted  it  (xi.  i). 
 
 2.  A  brother  of  the  Menelaus  whom  Antiochus 
 appointed  high-priest  («>.  B.C.  171).  Menelaus 
 left  him  temporarily  '  in  his  stead  in  the  priest- 
 hood,' and  encouraged  him  to  commit  many  sacri- 
 leges. Thus  he  roused  the  indignation  of  the  com- 
 mon people,  who  rose  against  him  and  killed  him 
 (2  Maccab.  iv.  29,  39).  The  Vulgate  erroneously 
 makes  him  the  successor  of  Menelaus. — ^J.  G.  C. 
 
 LYSTRA  {AvcTTpa),  a  city  of  Lycacnia,  in  Asia 
 Minor,  mentioned  in  connection  with  Derbe. 
 When  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  persecuted  at 
 Iconium  'they  fled  unto  Lystra  and  Derbe,  and 
 unto  the  region  that  lieth  round  about '  (Acts  xiv. 
 6).  These  two  towns  must  have  been  close  to 
 each  other.  The  site  of  Iconium  is  known  [Ico- 
 nium], and  the  boundaries  of  Lycaonia  are  also 
 known  [Lycaonia].  Lystra  and  Derbe  stood  on 
 the  great  road  leading  from  Cilicia  to  Iconium, 
 and  consequently  south  of  the  latter,  and  on  the 
 northern  side  of  the  Taurus  range  which  separated 
 Cilicia  from  Lycaonia.  Derbe  lay  next  Cilicia, 
 for  when  Paul  was  on  his  way  from  Cilicia  he 
 reached  Derbe  first  (Acts  xvi.  i)  ;  and  when  re- 
 turning at  another  time  from  Derbe  to  Iconium  he 
 passed  through  Lystra  (xiv.  21).  The  relative 
 situation  of  the  two  is  thus  clear.  Lystra  is  men- 
 tioned by  Strabo  and  Ptolemy,  but  its  position  is 
 not  defined.  Leake  suggests  that  it  stood  at  the 
 western  extremity  of  the  plain  of  Lycaonia,  about 
 twenty  miles  south  of  Iconium.  That  site,  how- 
 ever, is  far  removed  from  the  public  road,  and  it 
 is  uncertain  whether  there  be  ruins  there  ( T7-avels, 
 p.  103).  South-east  from  Iconium,  near  the  centre 
 of  the  plain,  stands  a  lofty  isolated  mountain  called 
 Kara-dagh,  and  on  its  eastern  declivity  are  exten- 
 sive ruins.  To  these  the  name  Bin-bir-Kilissi 
 (the  '  Thousand-and-one  Churches ')  is  now  given 
 on  account  of  the  great  number  of  ecclesiastical 
 edifices  among  them.  Here  Mr.  Hamilton  would 
 locate  Lystra,  and  the  identity  may  be  admitted. 
 Another  traveller  ascended  the  mountain,  and  says, 
 '  On  looking  down  I  perceived  churches  on  all 
 sides  of  the  mountain  scattered  about  in  various 
 
 positions Including  those  on  the  plain, 
 
 there  are  about  two  dozen  in  tolerable  preservation, 
 and  the  remains  of  perhaps  forty  may  be  traced 
 altogether '  (Falkner,  in  Conybeare  and  Howson's 
 Life  of  St.  Paul,  i.  202).  Some  ruins  a  few  miles 
 eastward,  on  the  line  of  the  ancient  road,  are  sup- 
 posed to  mark  the  site  of  Derbe. 
 
 At  Lystra,  Paul,  having  miraculously  cured  a 
 cripple,  was  about  to  receive  divine  honours  along 
 with  Barnabas.  Afterwards,  however,  at  the  in- 
 stigation of  Jews  from  Iconium,  he  was  stoned  and 
 left  for  dead  (Acts  xiv.  8-19).  The  healing  power 
 which  he  had  been  able  to  exert  for  the  relief  of 
 others,  was  now  put  forth  by  God  on  his  own 
 behalf,  and  he  suddenly  rose  up,  went  into  the 
 city,  and  next  day  visited  Derbe.  From  thence  he 
 returned  again  to  Lystra  on  his  way  to  Iconium 
 (vers.  20,  21).  Timothy  appears  to  have  been  a 
 native  of  Lystra.  He  was  perhaps  converted 
 during  Paul's  first  visit,  and  on  his  second  visit  he 
 took  him  with  him  on  his  missionaiy  tour  (xvi. 
 1-4).  From  this  fact  we  can  understand  the 
 pointed  reference  of  Paul  in  2  Tim.  iii.  lO,  II, 
 '  But  tJiou  hast  fully  known  {Trap-t]KoKo{fifi)Ka%)  my 
 doctrine,  manner  of  life,  purpose,  faith,  long-suf- 
 fering, charity,  patience,  persecutions,  afflictions, 
 which  came  unto  me  at  Antioch,  at  Iconium,  at 
 Lystra  ;  what  persecutions  I  endured  :  but  out  of 
 them  all  the  Lord  delivered  me.'  Timothy  had 
 apparently  been  an  eye-witness  both  of  the  miracle 
 performed  by,  and  that  performed  on,  Paul  at 
 Lystra  (Alford  and  Ellicott,  ad  loc.)—].  1..  P. 
 
SUPPLEMENT    TO    VOL.    11. 
 
 ARTICLES    OMITTED. 
 
 GAIUS 
 
 GAIUS  (rdtbs),  the  Grecised  form  of  the  Latin  Caius, 
 the  name  of  several  persons  mentioned  in  the  N.  T. 
 
 1.  A  Macedonian  who  had  accompanied  St.  Paul  to 
 Ephesus,  and  who  was  seized  by  the  mob  when  the  uproar 
 was  made  by  Demetrius  (Acts  xix.  29).  Nothing  more  is 
 known  of  him. 
 
 2.  A  native  of  Derbe  who,  along  with  Timothy  and 
 others,  accompanied  St.  Paul  from  Asia  on  the  occasion  of 
 his  second  visit  to  Europe  (Acts  xx.  4).  This  Gains  is  often 
 confounded  with  the  former  ;  but  the  one  is  expressly  called 
 a  Macedonian,  the  other  was  from  Derbe  (see  Meyer's  or 
 Alford's  note  on  Acts  xx.  4). 
 
 3.  A  Christian  famed  for  his  hospitality,  resident  in 
 Corinth  (Rom.  xvi.  23 ;  i  Cor.  i.  15). 
 
 4.  A  Christian  to  whom  St.  John's  third  epistle  is  ad- 
 dressed, also  noted  for  his  hospitality  to  the  Christians. 
 Whether  he  was  identical  with  any  of  the  above  is  uncertain. 
 Lucke  thinks  he  was  the  same  as  No.  2,  but  for  this  he 
 assigns  no  reason.  Wolf  identifies  him  with  No.  3.  Accord- 
 ing to  the  Apostolic  Constitutions  (vii.  46),  he  was  made 
 bishop  of  Pergamos  by  St.  John. — W.  L.  A. 
 
 GOTHIC  VERSION.  The  Gothic  version  is  the  work 
 of  Ulfila,  bishop  of  the  Goths,  who  was  born  in  313,  and 
 died  383.  Whether  he  was  the  first  or  second  bishop 
 ordained  to  labour  among  that  rude  people,  is  uncertain. 
 The  most  probable  opinion  is,  that  he  was  consecrated  to 
 his  office  by  certain  Arian  bishops  in  council,  at  Philippo- 
 polis  in  Thrace,  in  the  year  343.  But  the  accounts  of  his 
 life  are  confused,  and,  that  of  Philostorgius  in  particular, 
 unreliable.  The  most  trustworthy  statement  is  his  disciple's 
 Auxentius — which  Waitz  has  followed — though  it  is  not  cer- 
 tain in  some  particulars. 
 
 This  apostolic  missionary  left  an  enduring  and  precious 
 monument  of  his  zeal  in  his  version  of  the  Bible,  a  work  for 
 which  he  was  well  qualified.  According  to  Philostorgius,  he 
 translated  the  entire  Bible  except  the  books  of  Kings, 
 omitting  the  latter  lest  they  might  add  fuel  to  the  military 
 propensities  of  his  people,  already  excessive.  There  is  no 
 good  reason  for  doubting  this  statement,  though  Knittel  has 
 vainly  endeavoured  to  confute  it ;  and  Mr.  Home,  anxious 
 to  find  an  accusation  against  Gibbon,  calls  it  an  idle  tale  re- 
 peated by  the  historian — asserting  that  Mai  discovered  frag- 
 ments of  the  books  of  Kings,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah,  in  the  re- 
 script MS.  of  Milan,  marked  G  82.  This,  however,  is  an 
 error,  as  no  trace  of  the  Kings  has  been  discovered.  I'he 
 version  was  made  from  the  Greek  throughout,  i.e.  the  LXX 
 in  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  original  in  the  New.  Ulfila 
 also  invented  a  Gothic  alphabet,  the  letters  of  which  were 
 borrowed  from  the  Greek  and  Latin,  five  of  them  from  the 
 latter.  By  this  means  he  put  his  countrymen  into  a  position 
 for  understanding  the  Scriptures,  the  source  of  divine  truth, 
 and  deriving  their  knowledge  of  divine  things  from  the 
 fouTitAin.     The  benefit  conferred  upon  them  by  these  works 
 
 GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 IS  mcalculable.  The  man  who  prepared  the  way  for  the  re- 
 ception of  Christianity  by  a  numerous  race,  bridging  over  the 
 gulf  between  the  new  religion  and  a  rude  heathen  spirit,  was 
 a  benefactor  whose  memory  they  might  well  cherish  with 
 pride.  The  crown  of  his  missionary  life  was  the  translation 
 of  the  sacred  books. 
 
 The  time  when  he  was  engaged  in  making  this  version  can- 
 not be  precisely  determined.  It  seems  to  have  been  after  370, 
 when  Fritigern's  conversion  led  to  that  of  large  numbers 
 among  the  Goths.  Ulfila  was  then  about  sixty  years  old, 
 mature  in  knowledge  and  piety,  with  large  experience  of 
 human  nature — intimately  acquainted  both  with  the  wants 
 and  capabilities  of  his  nation. 
 
 The  version  is  of  no  use  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  ; 
 but  it  is  a  valuable  document  in  the  criticism  of  the  text,  i.e. 
 the  text  of  the  New  Testament  only,  because  the  Old  Testa- 
 ment part  was  made  from  the  LXX.,  and  is  now  lost  with  the 
 exception  of  some  insignificant  fragments.  The  greater 
 portion  of  the  New  Testament  is  extant.  No  part  of  the 
 Acts,  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  Apocalypse,  or  general  epistles, 
 has  yet  been  discovered. 
 
 The  following  is  a  Hst  of  the  extant  portions  : — 
 
 Matthew  iii.  11.  Luke  iii.  1-38. 
 
 V.  8,  15-48.  iv.  1-44. 
 
 vi.  1-32.  V.  1-39. 
 
 vii,  12-29.  vi.  1-49. 
 
 viii.  1-34.  vii.  1-50. 
 
 ix.  1-38.  viii.  1-56. 
 
 X.  I,  23,  24-42.  ix.  1-62. 
 
 xi.  1-25.  X.  1-30. 
 
 XXV.  38-46.  xiv.  9-35. 
 
 xxvi.  1-3,  65-75.  XV.  1-32. 
 
 xxvii.  1-19,  42-66.  xvi.  1-24. 
 
 xvii.  3-37. 
 
 John  1.  29.  xviii.  1-43. 
 
 iii.  3-5,  23-26,  29-32.  xix.  1-48. 
 
 v.  21,  22,  35-38,  45-47-  ^^-  1-46. 
 
 vi.  1-71,  except  verse  39. 
 
 vii.  1-52.  Mark  i.  1-45. 
 
 viii.  12-59.  "•  i"28. 
 
 ix.  1-41.  iii.  1-35. 
 
 X.  1-42.  iv.  1-41. 
 
 xi.  1-47.  V.  1-43. 
 
 xii.  1-49.  vi.  1-30,  53-56. 
 
 xiii.  12-38.  vii.  1-37. 
 
 xiv.  1-31.  viii.  1-38. 
 
 XV   1-27.  ix.  i-so 
 
 xvi.  1-33.  X.  1-52. 
 
 xvii.  1-26.  xi.  1-33. 
 
 xviii.  1-40.  xii.  1-38. 
 
 xix.  1-13.  xiii.  16-29. 
 
 xiv.  4-16,  41-72. 
 Luke  i.  1-80.  XV.  1-47. 
 
 ii.  1-52.;  JtL  1-12. 
 
GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 874 
 
 GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 Romans  vi. 
 
 23. 
 
 vii. 
 
 viii. 
 
 i-io,  34-39- 
 
 ix. 
 
 X. 
 
 xi. 
 
 I,  11-36. 
 
 xii. 
 
 1-21. 
 
 xiii. 
 
 xiv. 
 
 i-S,  9-20. 
 
 XV. 
 
 3-13- 
 
 xvi. 
 
 21  24. 
 
 I  Cor.  i. 
 
 12-25. 
 
 iv. 
 
 2-12. 
 
 V. 
 
 3-13- 
 
 vi. 
 
 I. 
 
 vii. 
 
 5-28. 
 
 viii. 
 
 9-13. 
 
 ix. 
 
 1-9,  19-27. 
 
 X. 
 
 1-4.  15-33- 
 
 xi. 
 
 1-6,  21-31. 
 
 xii. 
 
 10-22. 
 
 xiii. 
 
 1-12. 
 
 xiv. 
 
 20-27. 
 
 XV 
 
 1-35,  46-58 
 
 xvi 
 
 1-24. 
 
 2  Cor.  i. 
 
 1-24. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1-17. 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-18. 
 
 iv. 
 
 1-18. 
 
 V. 
 
 1-21. 
 
 vi. 
 
 1-18. 
 
 vii 
 
 1-16. 
 
 viii. 
 
 1-24. 
 
 ix 
 
 1-15- 
 
 X 
 
 1-18. 
 
 xi 
 
 1-33- 
 
 xii 
 
 I-2I. 
 
 xiii 
 
 I-I3. 
 
 Ephes.  i. 
 
 1-23. 
 
 ii 
 
 1-22. 
 
 iii 
 
 1-21. 
 
 Ephes.  V. 
 
 i-ii,  17-29. 
 
 vi. 
 
 8-24. 
 
 Gal.  i. 
 
 1-7,  20-24. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1-21. 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-6,  27-29. 
 
 iv. 
 
 I-3I- 
 
 V. 
 
 1-26. 
 
 vi. 
 
 i-iS. 
 
 Philip,  i. 
 
 14-30. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1-8,  22-30. 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-21. 
 
 iv. 
 
 1-17. 
 
 Col.  i. 
 
 7-29. 
 
 ii. 
 
 11-23. 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-25. 
 
 iv. 
 
 1-19. 
 
 1  Thes.  ii. 
 
 10-20. 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-13- 
 
 iv 
 
 1-18. 
 
 v. 
 
 1-28. 
 
 2  Thes.  i. 
 
 1-12. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1-4,  16,  17. 
 
 iii. 
 
 1-18. 
 
 1  Tim.  i 
 
 1-20. 
 
 ii 
 
 1-15. 
 
 iii 
 
 1-16. 
 
 iv. 
 
 1-16. 
 
 V 
 
 1-14,  16,  18-25 
 
 vi 
 
 1-16. 
 
 2  Tim.  i 
 
 1-18. 
 
 ii 
 
 1-26. 
 
 iii 
 
 1-17. 
 
 iv 
 
 1-16. 
 
 Titus  i 
 
 1-16. 
 
 ii 
 
 I. 
 
 Philem 
 
 .  11-23. 
 
 IV.  1-32. 
 
 Of  the  Old  Testament  there  have  been  preserved  Ezra  ii. 
 8-42,  mostly  parts  of  verses  ;  and  Nehemiah  v.  13-18,  vi.  14- 
 19,  vii.  1-3,  ix.  15,  only  six  words  of  the  verse.  In  addition 
 to  these  fragments,  a  considerable  number  of  verses  and 
 parts  of  verses — belonging  to  most  of  the  Old  Testament 
 books— have  been  collected  by  Massmann  out  of  the  New 
 Testament  version.* 
 
 For  the  gospels  we  are  indebted  to  the  celebrated  Silver 
 MS.  of  Upsala,  whose  history  is  a  curious  one.  It  was  dis- 
 covered in  the  abbey  of  Werden  in  Westphalia,  at  the  com- 
 mencement of  the  13th  century,  whence  it  was  brought  to 
 Prague,  and  fell  as  booty  into  the  hands  of  the  Swedes 
 when  they  got  possession  of  Little  Prague,  A.  D.  1648.  After 
 being  for  some  time  in  the  library  of  Queen  Christina,  it 
 suddenly  disappeared,  and  was  found  in  the  Netherlands  in 
 the  possession  of  Isaac  Vossius.  How  this  scholar  got  it  is 
 matter  of  conjecture ;  the  more  charitable  opinion  is  that 
 the  queen  presented  it  to  him,  not  that  he  appropriated  it 
 by  stealth.  Sweden,  however,  soon  regained  the  treasure, 
 for  Count  Magnus  Gabriel  de  la  Gardie  purchased  it  from 
 Vossius  for  400  Swedish  dollars,  and  gave  it  as  a  present  to 
 the  University  of  Upsala  in  1669,  where  it  has  remained 
 since  that  time. 
 
 This  remarkable  MS.  bears  internal  evidence  of  the 
 country  where  it  was  written.     It  was  made   in  Italy,  as 
 
 Hug  and  others  have  shown,  not  later  than  the  beginning 
 of  the  6th  century,  probably  at  the  end  of  the  5th.  The  name 
 Silver  MS.  (codex  argeutejis)  refers  to  the  letters,  which 
 are  large  uncial  characters  of  silver,  on  purple-coloured 
 vellum.  The  initial  lines  of  the  gospels  and  the  first  line  of 
 every  section  are  in  gold  letters.  Below  are  the  canons  of 
 Eusebius.  The  order  of  the  gospels  is  peculiar  : — Matthew, 
 John,  Luke,  Mark.  As  to  the  way  in  which  the  letters 
 were  made,  opinions  differ.  Michaelis  supposes  that  the 
 deep  impression  of  the  strokes  shows  the  letters  to  have 
 been  either  imprinted  with  a  warm  iron,  or  cut  with  a  graver 
 and  afterwards  coloured.  This  is  improbable.  John  ab 
 Ihre  thinks  that  they  were  impressed  by  carved  or  cast 
 stamps,  as  bookbinders  put  titles  on  the  backs  of  books  in 
 gold  or  silver ;  and  refers  to  the  perfect  uniformity  of  the 
 letters,  their  indentations  on  each  page,  and  the  traces  of 
 paste  sometimes  observable  between  the  silver  and  parch- 
 ment.* It  is  unlikely  that  the  letters  were  written  with  a 
 pen  or  reed.  The  MS.  is  defective,  having  but  187  folios, 
 whereas  it  had  at  first  330.  It  is  a  mistake  to  say  that  it 
 consists  of  1S8  folios. 
 
 I.  No  proof  is  required  to  show  that  this  version  was 
 made  from  the  Greek  te.xt.  If  it  were,  we  should  point  to 
 mistakes  arising  from  a  manifest  misreading  of  the  original, 
 such  as,  tQ>v  K^Ljxivwv  of  the  Gothic  (Matt,  xxvii.  52)  for 
 tQ)V  K€K0LiX7}iJLiv<iiP  ',  Tpo^TJ  (Luke  vii.  25)  for  Tpv<j>y  ; 
 7r€7rt6pa)/cev  ( John  xvi.  6)  for  ireTrXi^pcoKev ;  TrpotrSex  Vfw 
 (Luke  i.  id)  for  irpoaevxbtJ-evov  \  crvvi)VT7}aav  (Luke  ix. 
 i8)  for  awriaav  ;  fiepibas  (Luke  xix.  25)  for  /xcSs,  as  if  the 
 latter  were  an  abbreviation  ;  in  Mark  vii.  3,  TrvKva,  instead  of 
 TTvy/J-ri ;  in  Philip,  iv.  8,  dyia  instead  of  d^J'ti ;  in  Mark  i.\. 
 18,  pLTrrei  (or prjaffei.;  in  Luke  iii.  14,  &pxeaBeior  apKelaOe. 
 Again,  the  article  sa,  so,  tkaia,  is  commonly  put  where  it  is 
 in  the  Greek,  though  the  Gothic  does  not  need  it,  as  in 
 John  vii.  16,  7)  i/J-rj  didaxv  is  rendered  so  meina  laiseins. 
 Still  further,  the  translator  strives  to  exhibit  the  etymological 
 sense  of  words  by  rendering  6XoKaiiTW/J.dTOjv,  aiabruns- 
 tiin,  Mark  xii.  33 ;  eyKaivia,  i'nniujiiha,  John  x.  22  ; 
 aKTjvoTTTjyla,  hlctlirastakeins,  John  vii.  2 ;  dx^i-poiroiijrov, 
 wihatidicvajirhta,  Mark  xiv.  58.  'EXa;;^io'rOT^pw,  in 
 Ephes.  iii.  8  is  well  imitated  by  the  comparative  iindarleijin 
 "less  than  the  least."  t 
 
 2.  Eichhorn  and  Hug  assert  that  the  Constantinopolitan 
 or  Lucian  recension  is  the  basis  of  the  version  ;  the  former 
 critic  adding  that  it  is  strongly  mixed  with  the  Hesychian 
 recension  also.  These  recensions  are  imaginary.  The 
 proof  that  Hesychiusand  Lucian,  in  their  respective  spheres, 
 undertook  revisions  of  the  New  Testament  MSS.  is  wanting. 
 Lucian  revised  the  LXX.  ;  and  it  does  not  appear  that  his 
 critical  labour  extended  to  the  New  Testament.  Hence 
 the  lists  of  examples  which  Hug  and  Eichhorn  give  in  proof 
 of  their  opinion  are  liable  to  mislead.  Assuming  the  exist- 
 ence of  a  Constantinopolitan  recension,  we  affirm  that  the 
 version  as  a  whole  does  not  present  its  characteristic  read- 
 ings. The  Asiatic-Byzantine  text  is  not  the  basis.  The 
 te.xt  of  the  version  agrees  more  nearly  with  D  of  the  Gospels 
 and  Acts,  than  any  other  document ;  and  D  belongs,  accord- 
 ing to  Griesbach,  to  the  Western  recension — not  the  Con- 
 stantinoplitan.  We  admit,  however,  that  the  Greek  copies 
 in  Asia  and  Thrace  began  to  pass  out  of  their  ancient  form 
 in  the  course  of  the  4th  century,  settling  into  what  is  called 
 the  Constantinopolitan  in  the  5th  and  6th  centuries. 
 
 It  is  best  to  look  at  the  point  apart  from  recension-schemes. 
 Are  the  readings  which  the  Gothic  represents  those  of 
 the  oldest  and  best  authorities,  or  those  of  later  and  in- 
 ferior ones  ?  Or  does  the  version  show  that  the  Greek 
 te.xt  from  which  it  was  made  was  in  a  transition  state, 
 passing  from  its  oldest  Jcnown  form  into  a  more  corrupt  one  ; 
 in  other  words,  does  it  represent  a  mixed  Greek  text,  one 
 
 *  Ulfilas,  die  heiligen  Schriften  alien  undneiien  Bundcs, 
 etc.,  p.  I,  etc. 
 
 *  See  the  Praifatio  to  his  Ulphilas  lUustratus,  p.  3,  etc., 
 ed.  Biisching. 
 t  Uppstrom's  Codices  Gotici  Ambrosiani,  p.  106. 
 
GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 S75 
 
 GOTHIC.  VERSION 
 
 agreeing  with  the  oldest  critical  authorities,  but,  at  the 
 same  time,  interspersed  with  later  or  so-called  Constantino- 
 politan  readings?  These  are  the  questions  with  which  the 
 critic  has  to  do — questions  of  a  difficult  nature,  and  demand- 
 ing, towards  their  right  solution,  an  extensive  collation  of 
 MSS.  with  the  Gothic  text. 
 
 3.  A  difference  of  diction  has  been  observed  in  the  various 
 fragments  of  the  version  which  have  been  preserved.  To 
 what  is  this  owing  ?  Two  causes  are  assigned.  Some  sup- 
 pose that  Ulfila  consulted  Latin  as  well  as  Greek  copies 
 while  he  made  his  translation  ;  others,  that  the  work  was 
 altered  and  partially  adapted  to  the  Latin  by  later  hands. 
 The  latter  view  is  adopted  by  Gabelentz,  Loebe,  and  Krafft, 
 who  think  that  the  version  was  subjected  to  a  revision,  in 
 which  Gothic  words  were  exchanged  for  others  more  usual, 
 or  for  others  that  seemed  to  give  the  sense  better,  after  the 
 original  had  been  diligently  examined  and  Latin  copies  in 
 Italy  compared.  This  explains,  it  is  said,  the  traces  of  two 
 recensions,  noticed  by  critics  in  such  parts  of  the  version  as 
 exist  in  more  MSS.  than  one.  In  the  Gospel  of  Matthew 
 is  foimd  the  evidence  of  two  such  recensions — an  older  and 
 a  younger ;  the  former  adhering  more  closely  to  the  Greek 
 text,  the  latter  altered  in  many  places,  but  so  that  the  ori- 
 ginal reading  is  still  in  the  margin.  The  Gospel  of  Luke 
 presents  the  greatest  diversity.  It  agrees  more  frequently 
 with  the  Latin,  besides  employing  forms  and  words  that 
 occur  very  seldom,  or  never,  in  the  other  Gospels.  It  has 
 many  readings  and  marginal  glosses,  proceeding  from  re- 
 visers, or  from  copyists  who  had  compared  other  MSS. 
 Some  of  these  readings  have  got  into  the  te.xt  from  the  mar- 
 gin. The  Pauline  Epistles  show  more  traces  of  a  later 
 hand.  New  forms  of  words  and  sentences  indicate  that  they 
 were  the  object  of  continued  study  among  the  Goths  in 
 Italy  and  Spain.* 
 
 It  is  impossible  not  to  admire  the  ingenuity  with  which 
 Loebe  pursues  this  topic,  and  collects  numerous  particulars 
 to  support  it.  But  he  has  not  proved  his  position.  It  is 
 pushed  too  far.  The  problem  still  remains.  Why  did  Ulfila 
 ignore  the  Latin  version  ?  Is  it  probable  that  he  would  ? 
 We  cannot  think  so,  and  would  therefore  unite  the  two 
 views. t  Ulfila  consulted  the  old  Latin  version ;  and  that 
 work  furnished  subsequent  individuals  with  marginal  read- 
 ings, several  of  which  found  their  way  into  the  text,  and  with 
 various  corrections  more  consonant  with  the  original.  But 
 such  revision  and  alteration  must  have  been  comparatively 
 slight.  The  traces  of  recensions  in  the  four  Gospels,  as 
 well  as  the  Pauline  Epistles,  are  not  strongly  marked. 
 Ulfila  should  not  be  confined  to  the  same  phrases  or  con- 
 structions. If  he  has  translated  the  same  Greek  word 
 variously,  what  supposition  more  natural  than  that  his 
 orthography  varied  when  he  was  reducing  a  new  language 
 to  form?  But  while  admitting  the  fact  that  the  Gothic  re- 
 ceived additions  from  the  Latin,  and  that  collation  gave  rise 
 to  marginal  notes  which  were  afterwards  inserted  in  the 
 text,  the  separation  of  the  additions  from  the  genuine  text 
 cannot  be  effected  as  easily  as  Hug  thinks,  because  he 
 seems  to  have  neglected — after  the  example  of  Gabelentz 
 and  Loebe — an  important  point,  the  probability  that  Ulfila 
 consulted  the  old  Latin. 
 
 Nor  has  this  critic  good  ground  for  believing  that  Ulfila 
 had  nothing  but  a  MS.  or  MSS.  presenting  the  genuine 
 Constantinopolitan  form  of  the  text.  On  the  contrary,  that 
 recension  or  family  is  scarcely  so  early  as  the  middle  of  the 
 4th  century,  the  age  of  B  and  K,  even  though  these  two 
 MSS.  were  written  in  Africa.  The  form  of  the  Greek  text, 
 commonly  called  Constantinopolitan,  did  not  appear  before 
 
 *  Ulfilas,  ed.  Gabelentz  and  Loebe.  Prolegomena,  p. 
 xviii.  et  seg. 
 
 t  E  Graeco  autem  in  Gothicum  sermonem,  consultis  inter- 
 dum  interpretationibus  Latinis,  vertisse  Ulphilum,  com- 
 paratis  inter  se  versionibus  et  archetypo  optima  coUiges. 
 Uppstrom,  preface  to  the  Codex  argenteus,  p.  iv 
 
 the  5th  century  at  the  earliest.  We  are  inclined  to  believe 
 that  the  copies  current  in  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  and  Constan- 
 tinople, when  Ulfila  flourished,  were  not  much  inferior  to 
 those  of  Alexandria ;  for  an  earher  and  later  Constantino- 
 politan family  may  be  distinguished,  the  latter  representing 
 a  more  corrupt  form  of  the  text. 
 
 These  observations  tend  to  show  that  most  of  the  readings 
 which  the  Gothic  has  in  common  with  the  old  Latin  were 
 not  the  addition  of  scribes,  but  should  be  assigned  to  the 
 MS.  or  MSS.  which  Ulfila  used  as  the  basis  of  his  versiom 
 together  with  the  Latin  itself.  They  are  original.  Some 
 readings  are  certainly  posterior  to  Ulfila.  No  valid  proof  of 
 the  statement,  that  the  Gothic  was  extensively  altered  from 
 the  old  Latin,  has  been  produced  ;  such  as  undervalue  the 
 Greek  MSS.  current  at  Constantinople  and  in  Greece  during 
 the  4th  century,  may  think  so  ;  others  will  refuse  assent. 
 The  heterogeneous  character  attributed  to  the  Gothic  does 
 not  arise  so  much  from  its  reception  of  Latin  readings  by 
 subsequent  copyists,  as  from  the  nature  of  the  MSS.  em- 
 ployed by  Ulfila.  Long  additions  from  the  Latin  are  easily 
 detected  where  they  are  confined  almost  entirely  to  it  and 
 the  Gothic,  besides  their  internal  improbabihty.  Thus  it  is 
 easy  to  see  that  the  addition  after  Trdai-U  ots  eTToieL  in 
 Luke  ix.  43 — viz.  "  Peter  said  to  him.  Lord,  why  could  not 
 we  cast  him  out  ?  but  Jesus  said.  Because  this  kind  does 
 not  go  out  except  by  prayers  and  fastings," — comes  from  the 
 old  Latin.     But  siic/i  additions  are  not  common. 
 
 We  have  now  answered  the  question.  Does  the  version 
 abound  in  readings  found  in  the  mass  of  the  later  copies  ? 
 w-hich  is  almost  as  pertinent  as  another.  Does  it  abound  in 
 readings  found  in  the  oldest  copies?  since  both  admit  of  a 
 similar  reply.  The  version  is  not  characterised  by  an  over- 
 whelming abundance  of  late  readings,  any  more  than  are  D 
 of  the  Gospels,  or  f  of  the  same — i.e.  the  Brescian  MS.  of 
 the  old  Latin.  It  does  not  present  the  purest  readings 
 throughout,  but  a  mixed  text,  or  a  transition  state  of  the 
 Greek  te.xt  passing  out  of  the  ^{,  B,  C,  a,  b,  c,  form  into 
 another  and  less  genuine  one.  Yet  it  is  far  from  what  is 
 called  the  Constantinopolitan  recension  of  Griesbach,  having 
 greater  affinity  to  the  oldest  than  the  youngest  text  of  the 
 New  Testament.  It  often  agrees  with  D,  E,  F,  G,  and  the 
 old  Latin,  especially  the  Italian  or  revised  form  of  the  latter. 
 Next  to  them,  it  coincides  with  S.  B,  C,  A — more  with  A 
 than  C,  and  with  C  than  N,  B,  or  Z  in  Matthew.  This  is 
 tantamount  to  the  assertion,  that  its  text  is  a  little  younger 
 than  that  of  K,  B,  C,  A,  and  somewhat  inferior.  The 
 difference,  however,  is  not  great. 
 
 (a)  It  has  most  resemblance  to  D  (the  Gospels  and  the 
 Epistles),  as  well  as  the  old  Latin,  especially  d,  e,  f,  g  (the 
 Gospels  and  the  Epistles).  Thus,  in  Matthew  xi.  16,  it  has 
 Ev  ayopa,  which  is  not  original,  but  iv  rais  dyopai^. 
 In  2  Cor.  ii.  3,  it  has  Vfiiv  after  iypaipa.  In  Ephes.  ii.  12, 
 iv  is  prefi-xedto  rw  KaLpai  •  2  Cor.  xi.  3,  iJlvav  i^rjTraTrjcrev  • 
 Gal.  iii.  I,  iv  vfJ.iP  ;  Gal.  vi.  15,  iaTLV  for  laxvei  ;  Ephes. 
 iv.  16,  fiepovs  not  fieXovs  ;  Ephes.  iv.  19,  aTrrjXTrtKOTes  ; 
 Ephes.  iv.  28,  rais  iSiats  xepcrtJ'  ;  Philip,  iii.  3,  0na  ; 
 avXoTTjTL,  2  Cor.  i.  12,  for  dy lottjtl  the  older  and  better 
 reading ;  in  Matt.  v.  22,  eiKT}  is  added  to  to)  adeXfpu  avTov ; 
 ivoT7]TOS,  Col.  iii.  14,  instead  of  reXetOTTjTOS. 
 
 (b)  It  often  agrees  with  the  oldest  and  best  MSS.,  sup- 
 ported by  the  ancient  Latin  and  other  versions.  Thus,  in 
 Mark  i.  2,  for  iv  TOts  Trpocprjrais,  it  has  iv  tcj  Hffaia  to 
 irpo4>-qTri,  with  X,  B,  D,  L,  A,  the  old  Latin,  the  Vul- 
 gate, Coptic,  Syriac,  and  other  versions  ;  in  Matt.  xi.  2,  Sid, 
 for  5uo,  with  X,  B,  C*,  D,  P,  Z,  A,  the  Peshito,  Philo- 
 xenian,  etc.  ;  in  Gal.  iv.  26,  it  omits  wavrwv  before  Tjfiwv, 
 with  X,  B,  C*,  D,  E,  F,  G,  the  old  Latin,  Vulgate 
 Coptic,  two  Syriac  versions,  etc. ;  in  Romans  vii.  6,  it  has 
 dirodavovTes  with  X,  A,  B,  C,  K,  L,  and  various  version.s, 
 not  the  Latin  ones  ;  in  Romans  x.  i,  it  omits  icTTLV  before  els, 
 with  X>  A,  B,  D,  E,  F,  G,  the  old  Latin,  Syriac,  and 
 Coptic  versions  ;  in  Romans  xiii.  i,  it  has  ai  5e  ovaai  with- 
 
GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 876 
 
 GOTHIC  VERSION 
 
 out  i^ovffiai,  with  X,  A,  B,  D*,  F,  G,  the  old  Latin  (gue), 
 Vulgate,  and  other  versions ;  in  i  Thes.  v.  3,  it  has  orav 
 without  yap,  with  N,  A,  F,  G,  d,  e,  f,  g,  the  Syriac  version  ; 
 in  Matt.  v.  47  it  has  TO  aiiTO  with  S,  B,  D,  M,  U,  Z,  and 
 several  versions ;  2  Cor.  viii.  8,  tt]S  erepoiv  criroi/Sr/s,  with 
 N,  B,  C,  G,  f,  the  Vulgate,  etc.  ;  in  Matt.  xi.  16,  TOiS 
 erepois  with  X,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F,  Z,  and  others,  also  most 
 copies  of  the  old  Latin. 
 
 (c)  Its  readings  are  often  junior  ones,  as  in  Mark  i.  5, 
 iraiTcs  after  i^aTTTi^om-o  ;  Mark  xi.  2,  Xvaaures  avTOV 
 dyayere ;  Mark  xi.  10,  the  insertion  of  iv  dvofxari  ;  the 
 doxology  of  the  Lord's  prayer,  except  Amen,  in  Matt. 
 vi.  13  ;  Matt.  viii.  13,  the  addition  of  avTOV  to  Trats  ; 
 the  addition  in  Mark  vi.  11,  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,"  etc. 
 etc. ;  eKeye  de  in  Mark  vi.  4,  instead  of  /cat  iXeyev.  It 
 has  T7]P  KKrjpovofuav  in  Romans  xi.  i,  instead  of  rov 
 Xaov.  The  former  is  evidently  a  later  and  Latin  reading, 
 being  found  only  in  F,  G,  g,  Ambros.  Hilar.  Ambrosiast. 
 and  Sedulius. 
 
 (d)  It  has  readings  differing  from  D  (Gospels)  and  the 
 old  Latin,  inferior  to  theirs  and  incorrect.  In  Luke  vi.  20, 
 TW  TTvevfiart  is  added  to  iTTWXOh  contrary  to  most  copies 
 of  the  old  Latin  as  well  as  D.  In  the  same  verse  it  has  Tii>l> 
 ovpavuiv  for  TOV  deov,  manifestly  derived  from  Matthew. 
 In  Luke  vi.  23  it  has  TOtS  ovpavois,  the  plural,  instead  of  the 
 singular.  In  Luke  viii.  47  avTU  is  inserted  after  dwqyyeLXev. 
 
 (e)  Latin  additions  are,  ei  spiHtui  sancto,  Luke  i.  3,  which 
 is  in  b  and  g* ;  in  Luke  ix.  50,  nemo  est  enim  qui  non  faciat 
 virtutem  in  nojnine  meo,  which  is  in  a  b  c  e  1 ;  in  Mark  xiv. 
 65,  gabaiirjaba,  i.e.  cum  voluntate  or  libctiter,  "  they  smote 
 him  with  the  palms  of  their  hands  with  good  will."  The 
 marginal  remarks  or  glosses  found  in  MSS.  consist  of  «</<//- 
 iions,  as — 
 
 To  haithivisk  is  added  vilthi,  Mark  i.  6,  both  meaning 
 wild. 
 
 Of  Synonymous  words,  as  bokos  for  7nela,  Mark  xii.  24. 
 
 Of  a  different  rendering  of  the  Greek  text,  as  nitnitk,  Galat. 
 ii.  6,  which  is  better  than  the  textual  andsitith,  for  Xafx^dvei.. 
 
 Sometimes  they  refer  to  two  Latin  readings.  Thus,  in 
 Ephes.  ii.  3,  viljans  is  in  the  text  and  Ivstuns  in  the  margin, 
 alluding  to  the  two  Latin  readings  votuntates  and  voluptates. 
 
 These  glosses  are  sometimes  taken  into  the  text,  as  in 
 Luke  xix.  7,  in  gard. 
 
 A  comparison  of  two  MSS.  containing  the  same  parts  of 
 the  New  Testament,  as  A  and  B,  shows  more  variations  in 
 orthography  than  in  other  particulars.  I'hus,  in  2  Corinth. 
 ii.  2,  niba  in  A  ;  nibai  in  B ;  ii.  6,  andabet  in  A,  which  is 
 wrong,  andabeit  in  B  ;  ii.  14,  aviliuth  A,  aviliud  B  ;  xiii.  i, 
 gastandith  A,  gastandai  B.  ;  Gal.  vi.  i,  andsaiwatids  A, 
 atsaiwands  B  ;  Colos.  iii.  s,  vinna  A,  vinnon  B ;  i  Tim. 
 i.  3,  galeithands  A,  galeithans  B  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  2,  frijotidatis 
 A,/riondans  B. 
 
 (f )  It  has  been  supposed  that  Ulfila  himself  added  certain 
 marks  of  punctuation,  because  they  are  found  to  be  the  same 
 both  in  the  Silver  MS.  and  the  Ambrosian  copies.  This 
 would  facilitate  the  reading  and  understanding  of  his  version 
 by  his  countrymen.  But  there  is  good  reason  for  doubting 
 the  correctness  of  this  opinion.  The  marks  consist  of  a  dot 
 and  two  dots  { .  : ).  The  former  is  commonly  at  the  end  of 
 a  sentence  ;  the  latter  is  said  to  denote  the  end  of  a  series  of 
 sentences,  or  a  paragraph.  The  Silver  MS.  of  the  Gospels 
 seems,  at  first  sight,  to  favour  this  explanation,  but  it  will 
 not  stand  the  test  of  inspection.  In  the  majority  of  instances 
 it  may  be  said  to  hold  good  ;  in  not  a  few  it  is  at  fault.  Thus, 
 in  John  viii.  52,  a  dot  occurs  after  praufeteis,  the  prophets, 
 where  no  sentence  ends  ;  and  also  after  githis,  sayest.  Two 
 dots  are  not  found  between  John  viii.  21  and  x.  15.  A  para- 
 graph begins  at  x.  15,  with  a  single  dot  preceding.  The 
 Ambrosian  MSS.  show  more  clearly  that  the  single  and 
 double  dots  occur  arbitrarily.  No  dot  appears  between  i 
 Tim.  iv.  8, 9.  In  i  Tim.  iv.  12  a  dot  occurs  after  KaratppoveiTO 
 which  does  not  finish  a  sentence  ;  two  dots  after  ev  X07W  ; 
 
 and  two  after  each  of  the  nouns  that  follow.  In  the  next 
 ver.se  no  dot  is  put  after  SiSacr/caXta,  the  end  of  the  sen- 
 tence. Whole  chapters  are  without  either  the  single  or 
 double  dot,  as  Romans  ix.  in  the  Ambrosian  MS.  A.  The 
 seventh  chapter  of  the  same  epistle  has  not  the  double ; 
 nor  does  the  single  one  occur  in  that  chapter  after  its  being 
 appended  to  the  word  nis-sijai  in  the  13th  verse.  Hence  it 
 is  hardly  credible  that  the  translator  himself  placed  dots  so 
 arbitrarily.  They  belong  to  the  copyists  ;  and  as  they  are 
 of  two  kinds  only,  no  argument  for  Ulfila-authorship  can  be 
 based  on  their  similarity  in  the  copies. 
 
 (g)  Though  the  version  is  usually  literal  and  exact,  the 
 author  sometimes  renders  a  generic  word  more  specific.  So 
 in  John  vii.  12,  where  dyados  is  translated  sunjeitis,  equi- 
 valent to  dXyjdrjs.  The  same  is  in  f,  which  has  verax. 
 Perhaps,  however,  Ulfila  followed  the  Latin  here.  Hug 
 incorrectly  supposes  that  one  or  other  of  the  translators 
 made  the  mistake  of  substituting  one  Greek  word  for  an- 
 other. 
 
 (h)  Sometimes  Ulfila  uses  additional  words  and  clauses 
 to  make  the  narrative  more  striking  as  well  as  emphatic. 
 Thus,  in  Matthew  ix.  8,  sildaleikjandans  is  inserted  after 
 ohtedun ;  "  when  the  people  saw  it  they  were  afraid  ana 
 wondered."  This  is  especially  the  case  in  narratives  of 
 miracles. 
 
 It  is  universally  admitted,  that  the  version  is  faithful  to 
 the  original,  and  admirably  executed.  The  author  had 
 complete  mastery  over  the  Gothic  tongue  ;  and  though  he 
 was  not  equally  conversant  with  the  Greek,  he  seldom  failed 
 to  give  the  sense  of  the  original.  His  ability  and  judicious- 
 ness are  indisputable.  The  task  he  had  to  perform  was  very 
 difficult :  to  transfuse  tbe  ideas  and  terms  of  a  new  religion 
 into  a  new  language,  so  as  to  make  them  intelligible  to  his 
 Gothic  countrymen.  Whether  his  peculiar  creed  be  per- 
 ceptible in  the  mode  of  rendering  is  doubtful.  It  is  certainly 
 less  observable  than  the  Calvinism  of  the  authorised  English 
 version.  CastigHone  refers  to  one  passage  in  which  Ulfila's 
 Arianism  is  said  to  peep  out,  i.e.  Philip,  ii.  6,  where  Xaa. 
 Oiip  is  rendered  galeiko  gutha,  like  or  similar  to  God,  not 
 equal;  an  opinion  endorsed  by  Gabelentz,  Loebe,  and  De 
 Wette.  But  Massmann  denies  the  fact,  asserting  that  his 
 creed  has  never  influenced  his  version,  and  that  the  passage 
 in  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  is  corrupt.*  If  the 
 term  galeiko  be  genuine,  the  probability  is  that  it  was 
 not  selected  on  purpose,  becau.se  Ulfila  denied  the  Son's 
 like7iess  as  well  as  his  equality  to  the  Father.  Rejecting 
 homoiousiatiisin  as  well  as  homoousianism,  he  asserted 
 that  the  Son  was  not  similis  to  the  Father.  The  point  is 
 of  no  importance,  even  if  CastigHone  be  correct  ;  the 
 general  fidelity  of  the  translation  is  unaffected  by  a  single 
 word,  while  Ulfila's  integrity  and  honesty  cannot  be 
 questioned.  No  version  of  the  New  Testament  can  be 
 theologically  colourless. 
 
 The  best  editions  of  Ulfila's  version  are  Uppstrom's  Code.x 
 Argenteus  (1854) ;  to  which  should  be  added  Decern  Cod. 
 A  rgent.  redivivafolia  (1857);  *nd  the  same  author's  Codices 
 Gotici  A  7nbrosiani  (1868).  These  contain  all  known  frag 
 ments  of  the  Gothic  version,  and  are  edited  most  accurately 
 
 Next  in  value  is  Staram's, '  Ulfilas,  oderdie  utis  erhaltetien 
 Denkmdler  der  Gothischer  Spracke,'  etc.,  third  edition  by 
 Hejme  (1865).  This  has  the  Skeireins,  a  sort  of  catena  on 
 John's  Gospel,  or  rather  a  polemical  book  against  Marcellus, 
 Sabellius,  and  others,  based  on  the  gospel,  first  published 
 by  Massmann,  who  thinks  that  the  entire  work  consisted 
 of  about  a  hundred  leaves,  and  that  it  was  written  by 
 Ulfila  about  351  A.D.  Small  as  the  fragment  now  is, 
 it  supplies  some  missing  verses  in  the  Gospels,  such  as 
 Matt.  iii.  11  ;  v.  8 ;  John  i.  29  ;  iii.  3-5,  29-32  ;  v.  21-23, 
 35-38- 
 
 Next  in  importance  is  Massmann's  '  Ulfilas,  die  heiligen 
 Sckriften  alten  und  neuen  Bundes  in  Gothischer  Sprache,' 
 
 *  Ulfilas,  die  heiligen  Schriften  alten  und  neuen  Bundes 
 in  Gothische  Spraclu,  Einleitting,  p.  23. 
 
JUDICATURE 
 
 877 
 
 LICE,  PLAGUE  OF 
 
 (1855-1857),  which  contains  much  useful  matter,  with  many 
 inaccuracies  and  evidences  of  carelessness. 
 
 The  edition  of  Gabelentz  and  Loebe,  '  Ulfilas  Veieris  et 
 novi  Testamenti  versionis  Gothicce  fragmenta  guce  suj>er- 
 iunt^  (1843-1846),  may  still  be  consulted  with  advantage, 
 bf  cause  it  is  a  scholarly  book.  Older  editions,  such  as 
 Zahn's  '  Uifila^  Gothische  Bibeluebersetzu>tg'  (1805),  are 
 wholly  superseded  by  the  preceding  ones.  None,  indeed, 
 prior  to  that  of  Gabelentz  and  Loebe,  incorporated  all  the 
 known  fragments  ;  since  Castiglione,  who  edited  most  of  the 
 epistolary  ones  from  rescript  MSS.  at  Milan,  had  not  com- 
 pleted his  labours  in  that  department  till  1839.  The 
 editions  of  Gabelentz  and  Loebe,  Ma.ssmann,  and  Stamm, 
 contain  a  Gothic  grammar  and  glossary.  Stamm's  is  the 
 best  in  this  respect. — S.  D. 
 
 JUDICATURE.  In  the  patriarchal  times  the  office  of 
 judge  was  naturally  vested  in  the  head  of  the  house  ;  and  in 
 his  hands  was  the  power  even  of  capital  punishment  (Gen. 
 xx.\viii.  24-26).  When  the  people  of  Israel  became  an 
 organised  nation  the  judicial  power  rested  with  the  chief  of 
 the  state,  and  was  by  him  delegated  to  inferior  officers. 
 Thus  Moses  at  first  had  this  duty  exclusively  on  his  own 
 shoulders,  but  by  the  advice  of  his  father-in-law,  both  for 
 his  own  relief  and  for  the  expediting  of  justice,  he  afterwards 
 selected  certain  upright,  wise,  and  skilful  men,  whom  he 
 appointed  to  act  as  judges  under  him.  The  number  of  these 
 was  seventy-two,  and  they  were  set  over  the  larger  and  the 
 smaller  divisions  of  the  people,  so  as  probably  to  form  a 
 gradation  of  courts  in  which  an  appeal  lay  from  the  lower 
 to  the  higher.  Moses  reserved  in  his  own  hands  the  adjudica- 
 tion of  the  weightier  cases  (Exod.  xviii.  13-26;  Deut.  i.  9-18). 
 
 When  Israel  was  settled  in  Canaan  an  arrangement  took 
 effect  for  which  provision  had  been  made  in  the  law.  In  all 
 places  large  enough  to  have  walls  and  gates  judges  were 
 appointed,  who  were  to  judge  the  people  with  just  judgment 
 and  decide  impartially  between  man  and  man.  The  persons 
 selected  were  doubtless  from  among  the  elders  of  the  place 
 (Deut.  xix.  12;  xxi.  19;  x.\ii.  18;  Job  xxix.  7-17),  and  with 
 them  were  associated,  probably  for  advice,  some  members 
 of  the  Levitical  order.  Above  these  local  judges  stood  a 
 supreme  judge,  to  whom  difficult  cases  or  disputed  decisions 
 were  to  be  referred.  Failing  hijn,  or  at  the  option  of  the 
 parties,  the  matter  might  be  decided  by  the  high-priest, 
 with  probably  other  priests  as  his  assessors,  forming  a  college 
 of  justice  (Deut.  xvii.  8-13).  Of  these  supreme  judges  a 
 series  of  thirteen  ruled  Israel  between  the  time  of  Joshua 
 and  that  of  Saul.  [Judges.]  Under  the  monarchy  the  king 
 was  supreme  judge  (i  Sam.  viii.  5  ;  2  Sam.  xv.  2-4  ;  i  Kings 
 iii.  16,  etc.);  but  it  would  appear  that  he  too  had  the  aid  of 
 a  company  of  assessors  (Ps.  cxxii.  5).  In  the  reign  of 
 Jehoshaphat  a  more  systematic  and  complete  organisation  of 
 the  judicial  order  seems  to  have  been  instituted  ;  judges 
 were  placed  in  all  the  walled  towns  of  Judah,  and  a  central 
 court  of  appeal,  and  for  the  adjudication  of  the  weightier 
 matters,  was  established  at  Jerusalem,  composed  of  persons 
 selected  from  among  the  priests,  the  Levites,  and  the  chiefs 
 of  the  families  of  Israel  (2  Chron.  xix.  5-11).     This  scheme, 
 
 which  had  been  disturbed  by  the  captivity,  was  restored  by 
 Ezra  (Ezra  vii.  25).  An  appeal  probably  lay  from  the 
 central  court  to  the  high-priest,  but  this  is  not  quite  certain. 
 At  a  later  date  arose  the  court  of  the  Sanhedrim,  mentioned 
 for  the  first  time  under  Hyrcanus  II.  (Joseph.  Antig.  xiv. 
 9.  3),  which  became  the  supreme  tribunal  of  the  Jews.  Two 
 lesser  councils  (crwe'Spia),  are  said  by  the  Talmudical 
 writers  to  have  existed  at  Jerusalem,  and  in  every  town  of 
 120  inhabitants  one  similar  to  these  was  found  (Otho,  Lex. 
 Rabbin.  Pliilolog.  p.  723).  It  is  probably  to  these  lesser 
 courts  that  our  Lord  alludes  when  he  speaks  of  ths  jiuiginent 
 as  distinguished  from  and  subordinate  to  the  council  (Matt. 
 V.  22).  They  were  also  intended  in  Matt.  x.  17  ;  Mark  xiii. 
 9.     [Sanhedrim.] 
 
 The  place  where  justice  was  administered  was  in  the 
 earlier  times  the  gate  of  the  town,  by  which  publicity  was 
 secured  (comp.  Gen.  xxiii,  10 ;  Ruth  iv.  i ;  2  Kings  vii.  3, 
 etc.) ;  hence  the  specification  of  'gates'  in  Deut.  xvi.  18.  It 
 would  appear  that  it  was  usual  to  hear  cases  in  the  morning 
 (Jer.  xxi.  12);  according  to  the  Talmud,  capital  causes 
 could  not  be  heard  during  the  night,  they  must  be  begun 
 and  ended  within  the  day,  nor  could  sentence  be  executed 
 on  the  same  day  on  which  it  was  pronounced  {Mishna,  Tr. 
 Sanhedrim,  iv.  i).  The  Talmud  also  says  that  a  capital 
 trial  could  not  be  conducted  on  the  eve  of  the  Sabbath  or  of 
 a  feast-day,  because  in  case  of  its  ending  with  the  condem- 
 nation of  the  accused  the  sentence  could  not  be  executed 
 next  day  without  violating  the  Sabbath,  nor  could  it  be 
 deferred,  pin  ''13''y  '•JEO,  propter  affliciionem  [i.e. 
 suspensionem)  judicii  \Gemara  quoted  by  Cocceius,  Duo 
 Tituli  Thalinud.  Sanhedrim  et  Alaccoth,  etc.,  p.  36).  In 
 the  early  times  judicial  procedure  was  usually  summary  ; 
 each  person  pleaded  his  own  cause  (comp.  Deut.  i.  16 ;  xxv. 
 I ;  I  Kings  iii.  16-28) ;  the  judge  decided  after  hearing 
 witnesses  examined  on  oath  [Witness;  Oath];  and  the 
 sentence  was  usually  carried  into  execution  forthwith  (Deut. 
 xxv.  2  ;  Josh.  vii.  19-25),  save  when  by  appeal  the  case 
 might  be  carried  to  a  superior  court. 
 
 The  judge  was  bound  by  the  most  solemn  sanctions  to  do 
 equal  justice  between  man  and  man,  and  to  administer  the 
 law  without  respect  of  persons  (Deut.  i.  16,  17  ;  xvi.  19  ; 
 xxvii.  19,  etc. )  He  was  forbidden  to  receive  gifts,  to  show 
 favour  to  the  rich,  or  pervert  justice  through  pity  for  the 
 poor,  and  to  allow  the  opinion  or  will  of  the  multitude  to 
 sway  his  decision  (Deut.  xvi.  19  ;  Lev.;xix.  15  ;  Exod.  xxiii. 
 2).  As  acting  for  God  and  under  his  authority,  judges  were 
 to  have  regard  only  to  what  was  right  and  just  before  Him 
 (Deut.  i.  17;  xix.  17  ;  2  Chron.  xix.  6).  [See  Adultery, 
 Trial  of  ;  Advocate  ;  Deposit  ;  Loan  ;  Moses,  Laws 
 of;  Property;  Punishment,  etc.] — W.  L.  A. 
 
 LICE  [KiNNiM],  PLAGUE  OF.  Much  light  is  thrown  on 
 this  subject  in  Sir  Samuel  Baker's  most  interesting  work, 
 The  Nile  Tributaries  0/ A  byssinia,  page  122.  His  opinion 
 is,  that  the  insects  thus  inflicted  upon  the  population  were 
 not  lice,  but  ticks  (Exodus  viii.  16).  The  same  work  affiards 
 interesting  illustrations  of  the  manners  and  customs  oi 
 patriarchal  times.     See,  for  example,  page  126. 
 
 KND   OF  VOL.   II. 
 
r;^' 
 
r*6wys<vwW^y!fl<*Wff?T?•^>n!•?r?'■''*^t»^!.^f•^^^^^ 
 
 >(>mw\^Wi'^iy'}'r\'v^)-